Skip to main content

Full text of "A commentary on the Greek text of the epistle of Paul to the Colossians"

See other formats 


f^^yrt':!''^---"'- '■-''•'■'  »'R-' 


■,^^v.,:P-^m,.y,,,^,*,^,,,:,....  .  ..v^. ^:.^^^;^^^ 


Cibrarjp  of  Che  t:heolo3ical  ^emmarjp 

PRINCETON    •    NEW  JERSEY 

'Hi    VvX* 

PRESENTED  BY 

Estate  of  the  Rev. 
Charles  Ben.^amin  Segelken,  D.D. 

.El  I 


A  COMMENTARY 


THE  COLOSSIANS. 


PRINTED  BY  MORRISON  AND  GIBB, 
FOB 

T.    &  T.   CLARK,   EDINBURGH. 

LONDON,        .  .  .  HAMILTON,    ADAMS,   AND   CO. 

DUBLIN,         .  .  .  GEORGE   HERBERT. 

NEW   YORK,  .  .  SCRIBNER   AND  'WELrORn. 


A  COMMENTAEY 


GEEEK  TEXT  OF  THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL 


TO 


THE    COLOSSIANS. 


-    BY   THE   LATE 

JOHN  EADIE,   D.D,   LL.D., 

PROFESSOR   OF  BIBLICAL   LITERATURE  AXD  EXEGESIS   TO  THE  UNITED 
PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH. 


SECOND  EDITION. 


Edited  by  the  Eev.  W.  YOUNG,  M.A.,  Glasgow, 


EDINBURGH: 
T.    &    T.    CLAEK,     38     GEORGE    STREET. 

1884. 


nATA02 — fiiyocs     Tri;     aX*ih'iccs    -r^uayuviffTri;    xa)   %ihdi.ffita,>.o;. — rPHrOPIOS    o 
HloXoyos. 

Noil  est  cujusvis  hominis  Paulinum  pectus  effingere.     Tonat,  fulgurat,  ineras 
flammas  loquitur. — Erasmus,  Annot.  ad  Colos.  iv.  16. 

Omnis  bonus  Theologus  et  fidelis  interpres  doctrinae  coelestis,  necessario  esse 
dobet,  prinmm  gi-ammaticus,  deinde  dialecticus,  denique  testis. — Melancthon. 


PREFACE. 


This  volume  has  been  composed  on  the  same  principles  as 
those  which  guided  me  in  my  previous  Commentary  on  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  My  aim  has  again  been  to  trace 
and  illustrate  the  thoughts  of  the  inspired  writer ;  to  arrive 
at  a  knowledge  of  the  truths  which  he  has  communicated,  by 
an  analysis  of  the  words  which  he  has  employed.  I  have 
used  every  means  in  ray  power  to  ascertain  the  mind  of  the 
Spirit ;  and  my  eye  being  single,  if  I  have  not  enjoyed  fulness 
of  light,  my  hope  is  that  some  at  least  of  its  beams  have  been 
diffused  over  my  pages.  As  the  purity  of  exegesis  depends 
on  the  soundness  of  grammatical  investigation,  I  have  spared 
no  pains  in  the  prior  process,  so  that  I  might  arrive  at  a 
satisfactory  result.  One  may,  indeed,  compile  a  series  of 
grammatical  annotations  without  intruding  far  into  the  pro- 
vince of  exegesis,  but  it  is  impossible  to  write  an  exegetical 
commentary  without  basing  it  on  a  thorough  grammatical 
inquiry.  The  foundation  must  be  of  sufficient  depth  and 
breadth  to  support  the  structure.  Nay,  after  the  expositor 
has  discovered  what  meaning  the  word  or  clause  may  bear  by 
itself,  and  as  the  Grammar  or  Lexicon  may  warrant,  he  has 
then  to  determine  how  far  the  connection  and  development  of 
ideas  may  modify  the  possible  signification,  and  finally  deter- 
mine the  actual  or  genuine  sense.  For  the  only  true  sense 
is   that  which  the  author   intended   his  words   should   bear. 

^  In  making  these  remarks,  I  refer  to,  but  certainly  find  no  fault  with,  the 
following  two  treatises,  A  Critical  and  Grammatical  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  A  Critical  and  Grammatical  Commentary  on  St.  PauV-H 


\i  PKEFACE. 

Now  there  is  ample  wealth  of  grammatical  assistance.  Apart 
from  formal  grammatical  treatises  and  dictionaries,  one  might 
almost  compile  a  Grammar  and  Lexicon  from  such  works  as 
Schweighiiuser  on  Herodotus,  Stallbaum  on  Plato,  Poppo  on 
Thucydides,  Kiihner  on  Xenophon,  and  other  productions  of 
similar  scholarship.  Still,  when  all  this  labour  has  been  gone 
through,  the  higher  art  of  the  exegete  must  be  brought  into 
requisition.  The  dry  bones  must  not  only  be  knitted,  but 
they  must  live.  Successful  exposition  demands,  on  the  part 
of  its  writer,  such  a  psychological  oneness  with  the  author 
expounded,  as  that  his  spirit  is  felt,  his  modes  of  conception 
mastered,  and  his  style  of  presenting  consecutive  thought 
penetrated  and  realized.  And  there  is  need,  too,  of  that 
Divine  illumination  which  the  "Interpreter,  one  among  a 
thousand,"  so  rejoices  to  confer  on  him  who  works  in  the 
spirit  of  the  prayer,  "  Open  Thou  mine  eyes,  that  I  may 
behold  wondrous  things  out  of  Thy  law."  May  I  venture  to 
hope  that,  to  some  extent,  I  have  come  up  to  my  own  theory  ? 
What  others  have  written  before  me  on  the  epistle  I  have 
carefully  studied.  Neither  ancient  nor  modern  commentators 
in  any  language  have  been  neglected.  But  I  have  not  been 
so  lavish,  as  on  my  last  appearance,  in  the  citation  of  names. 

Epistle  to  the  Ephesiam,  by  C.  J.  Ellieott,  M.A.,  Rector  of  Pilton,  Piutland,  and 
late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge.  London,  1854-55.  Mr.  Ellieott 
is  an  excellent  Greek  scholar,  but  in  many  of  his  corrections  of  myself,  and  on 
points  of  Greek  Grammar  too,  I  cannot  acquiesce,  though  in  a  few  I  admit  his 
modifications.  I  hope  he  is  aware,  at  the  same  time,  that  in  Scotland  every 
Greek  scholar  is  and  must  be  self-taught,  since  at  our  northern  Universities  we 
get  little  Latin  and  less  Greek,  and  enjoy  no  leisurely  Fellowships.  Yet  with 
all  the  necessary  apparatus  of  German  scholarship  in  our  hands,  why  should  we 
really  be  behind  England,  save  in  the  privilege  of  early  and  minute  tuition  ? 
Indeed,  English  scholarship,  in  two  of  its  latest  efforts  in  this  direction,  does 
but  give  an  English  dress  to  continental  erudition.  Jelf  has  not  absorbed  the 
individuality  of  Kiihner  in  his  improved  translation.  Liddell  and  Scott  have 
modestly  avowed  the  sources  out  of  which,  to  a  great  extent,  their  very  useful 
liBxicon  has  been  wrought  out.  However,  we  wait  hopefully  for  the  New 
Testament  of  Tregelles,  and  for  the  Lexicon  believed  to  be  in  preparation  by  the 
Master  of  Balliol.  Mr.  Ellieott  has  unconsciously  misnamed  our  last  work,  in 
a  point  of  view  against  which  we  protested  in  our  preface,  and  somewhat 
extraordinarily  and  in  opposition  to  what  Prof.  John  Brown  himself  has  said, 
he  hastily  ascribes  his  Exposition  of  Galatians  to  a  collegiate  authorship. 


PREFACE.  VU 

except  in  cases  of  momentous  difficulty,  or  wliere  some 
peculiar  interpretation  has  been  adduced.  Names,  I  well 
know,  are  not  authorities ;  and  such  a  complete  enumeration 
of  them  as  I  attempted  has,  I  find,  been  sometimes  misunder- 
stood in  its  principle,  and  sometimes  misrepresented  in  its 
purpose. 

If  my  labours  shall  contribute  to  a  clearer  understanding 
of  this  portion  of  the  New  Testament,  I  shall  be  amply 
rewarded.  I  believe  that  the  writings  of  the  apostle,  whatever 
their  immediate  occasion  and  primary  purpose,  were  intended 
to  be  of  permanent  and  universal  utility ;  and  that  the  purity 
and  prosperity  of  the  church  of  Christ  are  intimately  bound 
up  with  an  accurate  knowledge  of,  and  a  solid  faith  in,  the 
Pauline  theology.  I  dare  not,  therefore,  in  the  spirit  of 
modern  rationalism,  say  in  one  breath  what  the  apostle 
means,  and  then  say,  in  another  breath,  that  such  an 
acknowledged  meaning,  though  fitted  for  the  meridian  of  the 
first  century,  is  not  equally  fitted  for  that  of  the  nineteenth ; 
but  must  be  modified  and  softened  down,  according  to  each 
one's  predilections  and  views.  The  privilege  of  individual 
deduction  from  inspired  statement  is  not  questioned — the 
attempt  to  glean  and  gather  general  principles  from  counsels 
and  descriptions  of  a  temporary  and  special  phasis  is  not 
disallowed ;  but  this  procedure  is  totally  different  from  that 
ingenious  rationalism  which  contrives  to  explain  away  those 
distinctive  truths  which  an  honest  interpretation  of  the 
apostle's  language  admits  that  he  actually  loved  and  taught. 

I  have  still  to  bespeak  indulgence,  on  account  of  the  con- 
tinuous and  absorbing  duties  of  a  numerous  city  charge  ;  and. 
for  a  careful  revisal  of  the  sheets,  and  the  compilation  of  the 
useful  index  which  accompanies  this  volume,  I  am  indebted 
to  my  esteem,ed  friend  the  Kev.  John  Eussell,  Buchlyvie, 
Stirlingshire. 


13  Lansdowne  Crescen't,  Glasgow, 
October  1855. 


THE  LITERATURE  OF  THE  EPISTLE. 


I. COLOSSE,   LAODICEA,    AND    HIERAPOLIS. 

CoLOSSE  was  a  city  of  the  greater  Phrygia,  or  that  province 
which,  under  Constantius,  was  called  Phrygia  Pacatiana,  and 
was  situated  on  the  river  Lycus,  about  five  furlongs  above  the 
point  where  it  joins  the  Maeander.  The  spelling  of  the  name 
has  been  disputed.  The  common  appellation,  KoXoaaal,  has, 
in  the  inscription  of  the  epistle,  the  support  of  Codices  D,  E,  F, 
G,  the  Vulgate,  and  several  of  the  Fathers,  among  whom  are 
the  Greek  Chrysostom  and  Theophylact,  and  the  Latin 
Tertullian  and  Ambrosiaster.  Some  ancient  coins  exhibit  the 
same  spelling,^  and  it  occurs  also  in  Herodotus,^  Xenophon,^ 
Strabo,*  Diodorus  Siculus,^  and  Pliny.^  It  appears  to  be  the 
correct  and  original  form  of  the  word.  On  the  other  hand, 
KoXacrcral  has  the  high  authority  of  A,  B,  C,  of  the  Syriac 
and  Coptic  Versions,  and  not  a  few  of  the  Fathers  and 
classical  writers/  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf  adopt  it.  This 
form,  therefore,  was  also  a  current  one.  It  seems  to  have 
been  in  common  use  among  the  people,  and  was  probably 
the  spelling  employed  by  the  apostle  himself.  Among  the 
subscriptions  to  the  Acts  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  held 
in  A.D.  451,  occurs  that  of  the  metropolitan  of  Laodicea,  who, 
speaking  of  the  bishops  under  him,  mentions — 'EirKpavLov 
TToXeo)?  KoXaaaayv. 

^  Eckhel,  Doctr.  Niimis.  iii.  p.  147,  who  cites  the  terms  KoX(«rir»vo/and  SiJ^of 

KoXoo'ff'Jiva'V. 

'  vii.  30.  ^  Anabasis,  p.  6,  ed.  Hutchinson,  Glasgow,  1817. 

*  Geographia,  vol.  ii.  p.  580,  ed.  Kramer,  Berlin,  1847. 
5  Histor.  xiv.  80,  8.  «  Hist.  Nat.  v.  32. 

'  It  stands  as  a  various  reading  in  Xenophon  and  Herodotus,  and  also  in 
Polyaenus,  viii.  16. 


X  THE  LITERATURE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

The  city  was  of  some  note  in  its  early  days.  Herodotus 
calls  it  fjbeyaXT}  7ro\t9;  and  Xenophon  bestows  upon  it  the 
epithet  evhaljicav.  Strabo,  however,  while  he  classes  Apameia 
and  Laodicea  among  the  greatest  cities  of  Phrygia,  ranks 
Colosse  only  among  the  irokla-fjiaTa,  as  if  its  ancient  greatness 
had  already  been  eclipsed  by  the  prosperity  of  the  neighbour- 
ing towns.  Ptolemy  takes  no  notice  of  it.  Laodicea  and 
Hierapolis,  mentioned  in  the  second  chapter  of  the  epistle, 
were  but  a  few  miles  from  it,  and  all  three  in  the  year  60 
A.D.  suffered  terribly  from  an  earthquake.-^  Indeed,  as  Strabo 
observes,  the  whole  district  or  valley  of  the  Maeander  was 
volcanic,  and  liable  to  earthquakes — evaeLo-To^. 

In  the  middle  ages,  Colosse  was  known  by  the  name  of 
Chonae,  as  is  stated  by  Theophylact"  in  the  commencement  of 
his  commentary,  and  by  the  Byzantine  Nicetas,^  who,  after 
his  birth-place,  surnamed  himself  Choniates.  A  village  named 
Chonas  still  remains,  and  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city  have 
been  discovered  and  identified  by  the  modern  travellers 
Hamilton  and  Arundell.  The  lofty  range  of  Mount  Cadmus 
rises  abruptly  behind  the  village,  presenting  that  remarkable 
phenomenon  *  which  seems  to  have  given  its  second  name  to 
the  town,  and  was  connected  with  one  of  its  singular  super- 
stitions. The  legend  is,  that,  during  a  period  of  sudden  and 
resistless  inundation,  Michael,  descending  from  heaven,  opened 
a  chasm,  into  which  the  waters  at  once  disappeared,  and  the 
fact  is,  that  a  church  was  built  in  honour  of  the  archangel,  in 
which  he  received  Divine  honours.  This  subsequent  idolatr}^ 
affords  a  curious  illustration  of  the  tendency  which,  under 
the  clause  "worshipping  of  angels,"  the  apostle  formally 
notices  and  rebukes  in  the  18th  verse  of  the  second  chapter 
of  his  epistle. 

The  other  towns  mentioned  in  the  epistle  are  Laodicea  and 
Hierapolis.  The  former  had  often  attached  to  it  the  appella- 
tion— 57  iirl  AvKu>,  or  77  TT/ao?  tco  Avkw — that  is,  "Laodicea  on 
the  Lycus,"  to  distinguish  it  from  other  towns  of  similar  name, 

'  The  statement  of  Orosius  on  this  subject  must  not  be  taken  as  correct  in  all 
points.  Orosius,  Hist.  vii.  7.  Winer,  suh  voce.  Tacitus,  Annal.  xiv.  27. 
Wieseler,  Clironol.  455. 

'^  niKis  'P^uyias  eel  KoXoirffa.]  at  vZv  Xsyi/xivai  XiJva;. 

^  Xuiias  .  .  .  ^ciXcii  TO.;  K.<iXa.ir(Tcc;.     Chroji.  p.  230,  Bonn. 
"*  Herodotus,  loc.  cit. 


LAODICEA   AND   HIEEAPOLIS.  XI 

one  in  the  same  region,  another  forming  the  port  of  Aleppo, 
and  a  third  close  to  Mount  Lebanon,  Its  original  name  was 
Diospolis,  and  it  received  its  later  designation  from  Laodice, 
the  wife  of  Antiochus  II.,  by  whom  it  was  patronized  and 
considerably  enlarged.  As  the  metropolis  of  the  Greater 
Phrygia,  it  was  a  city  of  some  size,  splendour,  and  trade, 
covering  several  hills  with  its  buildings,  having  a  rich  and 
active  population  within  it,  and  a  fertile  country  round  about 
it,  watered  by  the  Lycus,  and  two  other  and  smaller  streams.^ 
But  the  scourge  of  the  place  was  the  frequency  and  severity 
of  the  earthquakes.  On  being  devastated  by  the  earthquake 
referred  to,  it  soon  rose  to  its  former  grandeur — ^ropriis 
opihus  rcvaluit ;~  but  after  many  a  convulsion  and  overthrow, 
the  place  was  at  length  abandoned.  Its  ruins  attest  its 
ancient  grandeur.  Eemains  of  two  theatres  may  yet  be  seen, 
with  many  of  their  marble  seats ;  temples  may  be  traced  by 
their  foundations ;  but  of  the  architecture  and  ornaments  of 
churches  almost  no  trace  can  be  found.  "  Vast  silent  walls," 
about  the  purpose  of  which  there  is  considerable  doubt,  are 
striking  objects  amidst  the  desolation.  The  Turks  now  call 
it  Eski-hissa,  or  old  castle,  a  translation  of  the  common  Greek 
term  applied  to  old  sites,  Paleo-castro.^ 

East  of  Colosse,  and  to  the  north  of  Laodicea  and  visible 
from  its  theatre,  lay  Hierapolis.  It  was  famous  for  its  mineral 
springs,  which  produced  beautiful  stalactites,  and  all  forms  of 
encrustations,  and  for  the  mephitic  vapours  which  filled  a 
cavern  on  the  hill-side.^  These  peculiarities  may  have 
originated  its  sacred  name.  It  has  been  visited  and  described 
by  several  travellers,  such  as  Smith,  Pococke,  Chander, 
Arundell,  Leake,  and  Fellows.  The  remains  of  three  Christian 
churches  are  visible,  and  the  theatre  and  gymnasium  are 
prominent  among  the  ruins.  Fellows  has  the  following  entry 
in  his  Joicrnalf  pp,  283,  284: — "Up  the  valley  towards  the 
south-east  stands  Mount  Cadmus,  and  I  heard  that  at  its  foot, 
about  twelve  miles  from  Laodicea,  there  were  considerably 
ruins,  probably  of  the  ancient  city  of  Colossae.     Descending 

^  Strabo  speaks  of  ii  rJis  x'"i'^'  aotTri,  and  adds  also  rut  -ffoXiTuv  rdn;  ihrux- 
wavTts,  xii.  8,  16,     Rev.  iii.  17. 
2  Tacitus,  Annal.  xiv.  27.  ^  Kitto's  Cyclop,  suh  voce. 

*  Called  the  Plutoneum.     Strabo,  lib.  xiii.     Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  v.  29. 

*  Journal  written  during  an  Excursion  to  Asia  Minor,  London,  1839. 


Xll  THE  LITEEATURE   OF   THE  EPISTLE. 

rapidly  into  the  flat  and  swampy  valley  of  the  Lycus,  we 
crossed  in  a  diagonal  line  to  the  city  of  Hierapolis,  six  or 
seven  miles  from  Laodicea.  My  attention  had  been  attracted 
at  twenty  miles'  distance  by  the  singular  appearance  of  its 
hill,  upon  which  there  appeared  to  be  perfectly  white  streams 
poured  down  its  sides ;  and  this  peculiarity  may  have  been 
the  attraction  which  first  led  to  the  city  being  built  there. 
The  waters,  which  rise  in  copious  streams  from  several  deep 
springs  among  the  ruins,  and  are  also  to  be  found  in  small 
rivulets  for  twenty  miles  around,  are  tepid,  and  to  appearance 
perfectly  pure.  This  pure  and  warm  water  is  no  sooner 
exposed  to  the  air  than  it  rapidly  deposits  a  pearly  white 
substance  upon  the  channel  through  which  it  flows,  and  on 
every  blade  of  grass  in  its  course ;  and  thus,  after  filling  its 
bed,  it  flows  over,  leaving  a  substance  which  I  can  only  com- 
pare to  the  brain-coral,  a  kind  of  crust  or  feeble  crystallization; 
again  it  is  flooded  by  a  fresh  stream,  and  again  is  formed 
another  perfectly  white  coat.  The  streams  of  water,  thus 
leaving  a  deposit  by  which  they  are  choked  up,  and  over 
which  they  again  flow,  have  raised  the  whole  surface  of  the 
ground  fifteen  or  twenty  feet,  forming  masses  of  this  shelly 
stone  in  ridges,  which  impede  the  paths,  as  well  as  conceal 
and  render  it  difficult  to  trace  out  the  foundations  of  buildings. 
The  deposit  has  the  appearance  of  a  salt,  but  it  is  tasteless, 
and  to  the  touch  is  like  the  shell  of  a  cuttle-fish.  These 
streams  have  flowed  on  for  ages,  and  the  hills  are  coated  over 
with  their  deposit  of  a  filmy  semi-transparent  appearance, 
looking  like  half-melted  snow  suddenly  frozen."  From  this 
whiteness  of  the  southern  and  western  declivities  of  the  rocky 
terrace  on  which  the  city  stands,  a  whiteness  consisting 
probably  of  a  deposit  of  carbonate  of  lime,  it  is  now  called 
Pambuk-Kaleh,  or  Cotton  Castle. 

The  inhabitants  of  Phrygia  boasted  of  a  high  antiquity,  and 
the  Egyptians  confessed  their  own  posteriority.  Herodotus 
tells  at  length  the  absurd  story  of  the  experiment  of  King 
Psammetichus,  by  which  was  discovered  the  priority  of  the 
Phrygian  language.^  It  is  certain  that  they  were  inclined  to 
wild  superstitions.  Their  religious  worship  was  a  species  of 
delirious  fanaticism.     The  self-mutilated  Corybantes  were  the 

'  ii.  2. 


RELIGIOUS   CHARACTERISTICS   OF  PHRYGIA.  Xlll 

priests  of  Cybele,  who  under  the  sacred  paroxysm  cut  and 
gashed    themselves,  as    they  reeled,  whirled,  and   danced  in 
frantic  glee  to  the  braying  of  horns  and  clashing  of  cymbals, 
while  the  forests  and  mountains  echoed  the  wild  clamour  of 
their  orgies.     The  national  propensity  of  the  Phrygians  was 
towards    the    dark    and    mystical,  and  they    were    specially 
attracted  to  any  mania  or  extravagance  that  claimed  a  near 
knowledge  of,  or    a  maddening    fellowship  with,  the  spirit- 
world,     Eavings  and  convulsions  were  the  sure  tokens  to  them 
of  inspiration.     Deficiency  of  intellectual  culture  left  them  the 
more  the  creatures  of  whim  and  impulse,  so  that  the  errors 
mentioned  by  the  apostle  in  his  letter  to  the  Colossians,  and 
characterized  as  "  intruding    into  those    things  he    hath  not 
seen,  will-worship,  and  neglecting  of  the  body,"  were  pecu- 
liarly fitted  to  such  a  temperament,  and  calculated  to  exert 
a  strong  fascination  upon  it.     The  knowledge  of  this  corre- 
spondence between  the  errors  propounded  and  the  eccentric 
propensities  of  the  people,  must  have  deepened  the  fears  and 
anxieties  of  the  apostle,  and  led  to  that  stern  and  thorough 
exposure  which  characterizes  the  second  chapter  of  the  epistle. 
We  know  that  at  a  subsequent  period  similar  delusions  pre- 
vailed in  the  province.     The  reveries  of  Montanus  originated 
there  about    the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and   spread 
rapidly  and  extensively.     The  leading  features  of  Montanism 
were  a  claim  to  ecstatic  inspiration,  the  gift  of  prophecy,  the 
adoption  of  a  transcendental  code  of  morality,  and  the  exercise 
of  an  austere  discipline.     Its  votaries  were  often  named  Kata- 
phrygians,  from  the  region  of  their  popularity.     The  heresiarch 
himself  was  born  on  the  confines  of  Phrygia,  and  his  first 
disciples,  as  might  be  expected,  were  natives  of  that  country, 
nay,  two  of  its  towns  were  fondly  supposed  to  be  the  New 
Jerusalem  predicted  in  the  Apocalypse. 


II. THE    CHURCH    IN    COLOSSE. 

But  who  originated  the  Christian  community  at  Colosse  ? 
Was  it  the  apostle  himself,  or  some  other  missionary  ?  The 
question  has  not  yet  been  answered  beyond  dispute.  The 
early  Greek   commentator  Theodoret    held    that    the  apostle 


XIV  THE   LITERATUKE   OF  THE   EPISTLE, 

planted  the  church,  though  he  indicates  that  even  in  his  day 
there  was  a  diversity  of  opinion  on  the  subject.  In  later 
times,  Dr.  Lardner  has  formally  stated  sixteen  arguments  in 
defence  of  his  belief,  that  the  author  of  the  epistle  was  the 
founder  of  the  church.  Dr.  Wiggers,  in  the  Studien  und 
Kritiken  for  1838,  has  espoused  the  theory  of  Lardner,  and 
it  had  been  previously  advocated  by  the  reviewer  of  Junker's 
Commentary,  in  the  ninth  volume  of  Eohr's  Kritischer  Pre- 
diger-Bibliothek.  In  express  opposition  to  these  views, 
Dr.  Davidson  has  written  at  length  with  great  candour  and 
precision.^ 

The  arguments  for  and  against  the  Pauline  origin  of  the 
church  are  of  two  kinds — inferential  and  critical. 

1.  It  is  stated  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  xvi.  6,  that  Paul 
and  his  companion  "  had  gone  throughout  Phrygia,"  and  then, 
xviii.  23,  that  "he  went  over  all  the  country  of  Galatia  and 
Phrygia  in  order,  strengthening  all  the  disciples."  There 
arises  a  strong  presumption  from  these  accounts,  that  during 
this  first  or  second  visit  the  apostle  must  surely  have  reached 
Colosse.  This  is  Theodoret's  argument — that  as  Colosse  was 
in  Phrygia,  and  Laodicea  the  capital  of  the  province  was  in 
its  vicinity,  it  could  scarcely  happen  that  the  apostle  should 
not  visit  both  places'.  Dr.  Lardner  endorses  this  judgment, 
and  says,  "  This  argument  alone  appears  to  me  to  be  con- 
clusive." Now,  it  is  beyond  doubt  that  the  apostle  made 
extensive  journeys  in  the  province  of  Phrygia,  but  it  is  no- 
where stated  that  he  was  either  in  Colosse,  or  even  near  it. 
In  the  first  instance  referred  to,  the  route  was  from  Antioch  to 
Syria,  Cilicia,  Derbe,  Lystra,  Phrygia,  Galatia,  Mysia,  Troas, 
and  thence  over  to  Europe.  The  record  of  the  tour  is  vague. 
True,  indeed,  Colosse  lay  on  the  great  road  from  Iconium  to 
Ephesus,  but  the  apostle  did  not  visit  Ephesus  till  after  his 
return  from  Europe,  and  then  he  sailed  to  it  directly  from  the 
port  of  Cenchrea,  and  after  a  brief  visit  took  shipping  again 
for  Caesarea.  The  term  Phrygia,  as  has  been  remarked  by 
Conybeare  and  Howson  (i.  291) — "was  merely  a  geographical 
expression,  denoting  a  debatable  country  of  doubtful  extent." 
The  journey  performed  in  reaching  Mysia,  for  the  purpose  of 
going  into  Bithynia,  and  then  through  Mysia  down  to  the 

■^  Introduction^  vol.  ii.  p.  396,  etc. 


JOUKNEYS   OF  THE  APOSTLE.  XV 

coast  at  Troas,  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  apostle's  route 
lay  greatly  to  the  north  of  the  city  of  Colosse. 

With  regard  to  the  apostle's  second  journey,  the  language 
is  also  indeterminate.  Only  it  was  a  journey  of  visitation, 
and  if  there  was  no  previous  sojourn  in  Colosse,  and  no 
existing  church  in  it,  then  the  apostle  was  under  no  induce- 
ment to  turn  his  steps  towards  it.  He  came  from  Antioch 
into  Phrygia  and  Galatia,  and  thence  down  to  Ephesus.  If 
he  had  taken  the  great  road  to  the  ^gean,  through  the  valley 
of  the  Maeander,  he  must  have  come  near  Colosse ;  but  the 
probability  is,  that  he  passed  again  farther  to  the  north — for 
he  passed,  in  fact,  through  "  the  upper  coasts,"  or  table  land. 

The  apostle  was  for  more  than  three  years  at  Ephesus,  and 
we  may  be  assured  that  evangelizing  influence  would  be 
diffused  through  the  surrounding  country.  Qualified  preachers 
would  visit  the  various  districts,  proclaim  the  gospel,  and 
gather  together  small  communities.  Probably  by  one  of  such 
disciples  might  the  truth  be  carried  a  hundred  miles  eastward 
to  Colosse,  during  the  period  "  when  all  they  which  dwelt  in 
Asia  heard  the  word  of  the  Lord,  both  Jews  and  Greeks." 
There  is  nothing  in  the  brief  allusions  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  to  warrant  the  supposition  that  Paul  himself  had 
preached  in  Colosse.  His  apostolic  journeys  never  approached 
it.  We  know  not  his  proximate  reasons  for  not  visiting  it, 
nor  can  we  tell  from  what  or  how  many  motives,  apart  from 
direct  revelation,  his  route,  in  any  case,  was  originally  chalked 
out,  and  afterwards  modified  or  departed  from  altogether. 
The  course  we  may  venture  to  propose  for  him  might,  for 
anything  we  can  know,  have  presented  insuperable  difficulties, 
even  though  we  should  be  able  to  defend  it  by  a  reference  to 
geography  and  itineraries,  based  on  the  researches  and  dis- 
coveries of  modern  travel.  And  we  are  sure  that  if,  when  in 
Phrygia,  the  apostle  did  not  visit  Laodicea — its  capital,  it  was 
because  there  was  more  pressing  work  for  him  elsewhere, 
while  a  higher  power  and  wisdom  were  guiding  him  in  all  the 
points  of  his  busy  and  sublime  career. 

The  second  class  of  arguments  in  favour  of  the  notion  that 
Paul  himself  founded  the  church  in  Colosse,  is  drawn  from  a 
critical  estimate  of  the  general  spirit  and  occasional  sentiments 
of  the  epistle  itself 


XVI  THE   LITERATURE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

Dr.  Lardner  adduces  the  apostle's  earnest  belief,  that  the 
Colossians  rightly  knew  the  truth  (i.  6),  as  evidence  that  pro- 
bably himself  had  taught  them.  But  the  inference  is  strained, 
and  the  context  disallows  it ;  for  the  proper  translation  is — 
"  which  bringeth  forth  fruit,  as  it  does  also  in  you,  from  the 
day  ye  heard  it,  and  knew  the  grace  of  God  in  truth,  just  as 
ye  learned  it  from  Epaphras."  The  proof  based  upon  /cat,  in 
the  phrase  Kadcb'i  koI  ifidOeje  airo  'Eira^pa,  is  not  valid,  for 
the  best  MSS.  exclude  Kal,  though  Wiggers  contends  that  the 
theory  we  espouse  and  are  now  defending  may  have  led  to  its 
exclusion.     See  our  commentary  on  the  place. 

Nor  is  there  tangible  evidence  in  the  declaration  made  in 
i.  8,  where  the  apostle  tells  how  Epaphras  had  declared  to 
him  and  his  companions  their  love  in  the  spirit.  Even  taking 
Dr.  Lardner's  interpretation  of  the  phrase  as  meaning  their 
affection  for  the  apostle  himself,  how  can  it  prove  a  prior  and 
personal  acquaintance  I  For  surely  Christian  love  does  not 
depend  on  personal  interview  or  recognition,  else  it  would  be 
impossible  for  any  one  to  love  the  whole  "  household  of  faith." 
Nor  can  the  presence  of  Epaphras  at  Eome,  his  intimacy  with 
the  apostle,  and  the  accounts  which  he  brought  of  the  spiritual 
condition  of  the  Colossian  believers,  be  any  presumption  that 
they  were  the  apostle's  own  converts  ;  for  who  that  has  seen 
the  workings  of  his  large  heart  would  limit  Paul's  interest  to 
those  churches  gathered  by  his  own  preaching  ? 

The  apostle,  indeed,  says  to  the  Colossian  church, — "  If  ye 
continue  in  the  faith  grounded  and  settled,  and  be  not  moved 
away  from  the  hope  of  the  gospel,  which  ye  have  heard,  and 
which  was  preached  to  every  creature  which  is  under  heaven ; 
whereof  I  Paul  am  made  a  minister :  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 ;  whereof  I  am  made  a  minister,  according  to  the 
dispensation  of  God  which  is  given  to  me  for  you,  to  fuliil  the 
word  of  God."  But  no  part  of  this  language  will  warrant  the 
inference  which  some  would  put  upon  it.  He  does  not  say 
that  he  had  ever  preached  to  the  Colossians,  he  only  says  that 
he  was  suffering  for  them.  And  those  sufferings  arose  purely 
from  his  being  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  as  indeed  he 
indicates  in  a  subsequent  clause.     There  he  intimates  to  them 


LARDNERS   ARGUMENT.  '  xvii 

that  the  persecutions  which  harassed  him  arose  from  his 
special  relation  to  the  Gentile  churches.  In  no  other  sense 
than  in  this  general  one,  could  he  be  suffering  for  the 
Colossians,  for  personally  they  were  in  no  way  instrumental 
in  causing  his  incarceration  and  appeal.  The  charges  against 
him  involved  nothing  said  or  done  at  Colosse,  the  church  there 
was  not  implicated  in  the  least  degree.  But  for  their  evan- 
gelical liberty  and  that  of  all  the  churches  of  heathendom  the 
apostle  v/as  bound  in  fetters. 

No  stress  can  be  laid  on  the  use  of  the  word  aireifii,  in 
ii.  5,  though  Lardner,  and  Wiggers  after  him,  appeal  to  it,  as 
implying  that  the  apostle  had  once  been  present  in  Colosse. 
His  language  simply  is, — "  For  though  I  be  absent  in  the 
flesh,  yet  am  I  with  you  in  the  spirit,  joying  and  beholding 
your  order,  and  the  steadfastness  of  your  faith  in  Christ." 
The  apostle,  however,  does  not  say  I  am  novj  absent,  as  if  he 
referred  by  such  a  contrast  to  a  previous  period.  The  con- 
trast is  of  another  nature.  It  is  such  an  absence  as  brings  out 
the  idea  of  presence  in  spirit — "  I  am  away  from  you,  and 
yet  I  am  with  you — personally  at  a  great  distance,  but  still 
in  spirit  in  the  very  midst  of  you." 

It  is  also  said,  iii.  16, — "Let  the  word  of  Christ  dwell  in 
you  richly  in  all  wisdom ;  teaching  and  admonishing  one 
another  in  psalms,  and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,  singing 
with  grace  in  your  hearts  to  the  Lord."  It  puzzles  us  to 
understand  how  Dr.  Lardner  could  extract  from  this  admoni- 
tion any  proof  "  that  the  Colossians  were  endued  with 
spiritual  gifts."  The  descriptive  counsel  refers  not  to  any 
extraordinary  endowment,  nor  yet  to  the  composition  of  sacred 
melodies ;  but  merely  to  the  chanting  of  them.  That 
"grace"  which  was  in  their  hearts  is  the  gift  of  God  to  all 
believers. 

Again,  if,  as  we  have  seen,  the  record  of  the  affection  which 
the  Colossian  believers  bore  to  the  apostle  be  no  evidence 
of  personal  intimacy,  neither  can  any  "  full  proof "  of  it  be 
discovered  in  the  brief  note — "all  my  state  shall  Tychicus 
declare  unto  you."  If,  as  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  Paul 
encountered  such  persecutions,  would  not  they  for  whom  he 
so  nobly  suffered  be  deeply  interested  in  him,  and  would  not 
he  respond  to  such  natural  anxiety,  and  inform  them,  through 

B 


XVm  THE   LITEEATUKE   OF   THE  EPISTLE. 

Tychicus,  of  many  things  with  which  he  did  not  choose  to 
cumber  an  epistle  ? 

The  salutations  sent  by  him  to  Colosse  are  neither  in 
number  nor  familiarity  any  additional  argument,  and  certainly 
do  not  bear  out  Lardner's  affirmation,  that  "  Paul  was  well 
acquainted  with  the  state  of  the  churches  in  Colosse  and 
Laodicea."  For  might  not  the  names  of  the  six  men  who 
send  their  Christian  greetings  be  well  known  to  the  Colos- 
sians  ?  The  apostle  might  know  that  Nymphas  had  a  church 
in  his  house  without  his  ever  being  in  it  himself;  and  being 
'  such  an  one  as  Paul  the  aged,"  he  surely  needed  not  the 
formality  of  a  personal  introduction  to  Archippus,  in  order 
to  take  the  liberty  of  sending  him  the  brief  and  emphatic 
charge — "  Take  heed  to  the  ministry  which  thou  hast  received 
in  the  Lord,  that  thou  fulfil  it."  On  the  other  hand,  how 
many,  various,  tender,  and  special  are  his  salutations  sent  to 
the  church  in  Ptome,  where  he  had  never  been ! 

Dr.  Lardner  argues,  again,  for  a  personal  intimacy  from  Col. 
iv.  3,  4,  a  passage  which  contains  the  apostle's  earnest  request 
for  the  prayers  of  the  Colossian  believers,  and  that  they  would 
remember  his  bonds  ;  but  Dr.  Lardner  also  supplies  the  answer 
himself,  when  he  admits  that  "  such  demands  may  be  made 
of  strangers."  Nor  can  his  theory  be  sustained  by  his  appeal 
to  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  Philemon  was  a  convert  of  the 
apostle's  own,  but  Dr.  Lardner  candidly  allows  that  his  con- 
version, though  "  it  might  as  well  have  been  done  at  home," 
yet  "might  have  been  done  at  some  other  place."  It  is 
certainly  a  very  slender  ground  of  argument  which  Wiggers 
adopts,  when  he  appeals  to  the  conjunction  of  Timothy's  name 
with  the  apostle's  in  the  inscription  of  the  epistle.  For  surely 
as  a  special  companion  of  the  apostle,  and  engaged  so  often 
in  missionary  work  and  travel,  Timothy  must  have  been  well 
known  at  Colosse  ;  and,  as  Dr.  Davidson  well  remarks,  "among 
the  various  disciples  of  the  apostle  who  were  at  Colosse,  it  is 
not  improbable  that  Timothy  had  a  part  in  instructing  the 
church."     Indeed,  some  regard  him  as  probably  its  founder. 

But,  lastly,  a  principal  ground  of  dispute  is  the  passage 
occurring  in  Col.  ii.  1,  2, — "For  I  would  that  ye  knew  what 
great  conflict  I  have  for  you,  and  for  them  at  Laodicea,  and 
for  as  many  as  have  not  seen  my  face  in   the   flesh ;    that 


THEODORET  S   AKGUMENT.  xix 

their  hearts  might  be  comforted,  being  knit  together  in  love, 
and  unto  all  riches  of  the  full  assurance  of  understanding,  to 
the  acknowledgment  of  the  mystery  of  God,  and  of  the 
Father,  and  of  Christ."  Theodoret  based  his  theory  upon 
one  interpretation  of  the  words.  "  Some,"  says  he,  "  are  of 
the  opinion,  that  when  the  divine  apostle  wrote  this  epistle, 
he  had  not  seen  the  Colossians.  And  they  attempt  to  support 
their  arguments  by  those  words.  .  .  .  But  they  should  reflect, 
that  the  meaning  of  the  words  is  this — I  have  not  only  a 
concern  for  you,  but  I  have  likewise  great  concern  for  those 
who  have  not  seen  me.^  And  if  he  is  not  understood  in  this 
sense,  he  expresses  no  concern  for  those  who  had  seen  him 
and  been  taught  by  him."  That  is  to  say,  Theodoret  supposes 
two  classes  of  persons  to  be  referred  to — the  Colossians  and 
Laodiceans  who  had  seen  the  apostle's  face,  and  another 
indiscriminate  class  who  had  never  enjoyed  his  personal 
ministry.  The  words  may  of  themselves  bear  such  an 
interpretation.  But  it  is  objectionable  on  various  grounds. 
The  adjective  oaoc  may  refer  back  to  the  persons  mentioned, 
and  may  thus  introduce  a  common  characteristic  —  for  you 
and  them  in  Laodicea,  and  indeed  not  only  you,  but  all  in  the 
same  category,  who  have  never  seen  my  face  in  the  flesh. 
The  clause — "  and  for  as  many  as  have  not  seen  my  face  in 
the  flesh,"  has  no  harmonious  connection,  if  it  stand  so  dis- 
joined from  the  previous  clause  as  to  point  out  in  sharp 
contrast  other  believing  communities.  With  this  exegesis  one 
might  infer  from  the  language  of  the  following  verses,  that  all 
who  had  not  seen  the  apostle's  face  in  the  flesh  were  beset 
with  the  same  dangers  as  the  church  in  Colosse.  For  the 
virtual  prayer  is,  that  they  might  be  fortified  against  that  false 
philosophy  which  was  raising  its  head  in  Phrygia,  by  the  full- 
assured  understanding  of  that  gospel  in  which  are  deposited 
"  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge."  But  surely 
among  the  many  churches  who  had  not  seen  Paul,  there 
must  have  been  many  to  whom  the  prayer  in  its  specialty 
was  not  and  could  not  be  adapted,  and  for  whom  this  "con- 
flict "  was  not  necessary.  That  "  conflict "  was  excited  by  the 
danger  which  menaced  Colosse  ;  but  all  the  churches  unvisited 
by  the  apostle  could  not  be  in  similar  jeopardy,  so  as  to  create 

^"Oti  oh  //.ovev  u/nuv  aXXa  xa.)  ruv  fitiiivu  rihaf^'ivuv  f^t  rroyxhy  £%w  (p^ovTiia, 


XX  THE   LITERATURE   OF  THE   EPISTLE. 

a  similar  solicitude  and  prayer.  It  is  true  that  the  care  of 
all  the  churches  came  upon  him  daily,  and  all  of  them 
shared  in  his  intense  and  prayerful  anxiety.  Yet  it  was  his 
pride  (if  the  expression  may  be  pardoned)  to  originate  Chris- 
tian societies.  He  thus  speaks — "Not  boasting  of  things 
without  our  measure,  that  is,  of  other  men's  labours  ;"^  "  Yea," 
says  he  again,  "  so  have  I  strived  to  preach  the  gospel,  not 
where  Christ  was  named,  lest  I  should  build  upon  another 
man's  foundation."  ^  This  distinction,  so  boldly  drawn  by 
the  apostle,  brought  the  churches  founded  by  himself  into  a 
very  special  relationship  with  him.  Is  it  at  all  likely,  then, 
that  if  he  had  founded  the  churches  of  Colosse  and  Laodicea, 
and  had  occasion  to  tell  them  what  a  conflict  he  had  for  them, 
he  would  modify  and  weaken  the  statement,  by  adding,  that 
his  feeling  for  them  was  quite  the  same  with  that  he  enter- 
tained for  churches  with  which  he  had  never  had  any  personal 
connection  ?  Would  not  the  sentiment  just  quoted  from  the 
epistles  to  Eome  and  Corintli  be  somewhat  at  variance  with 
that  supposed  to  be  so  expressed  to  Colosse  ?  Would  it  have 
been  a  source  of  peculiar  comfort  to  the  churches  of  Colosse 
and  Laodicea,  if  Paul  had  founded  them,  to  tell  them,  tliat 
notwithstanding  his  personal  intimacy  with  them  and  their 
imminent  danger,  they  were  not  a  whit  nearer  his  heart  than 
the  remotest  Christian  community  of  which  he  had  but  the 
slightest  intelligence  ?  The  apostle  possessed  too  much  of  our 
common  nature  thus  to  dissipate  his  friendships  in  vagueness, 
and  he  had  too  much  knowledge  of  human  nature  to  attempt 
to  create  a  response  to  his  own  anxieties  by  so  expressing 
himself.  No,  he  had  not  visited  these  churches ;  but  special 
circumstances  gave  him  a  tender  interest  in  them.  His 
peculiar  interest  in  the  churches  planted  by  himself  might  be 
matter  of  notoriety  in  the  district,  and  they  of  Colosse  and 
Laodicea  might  be  disposed  to  feel  that  they  had  not  such  a 
claim  on  the  apostle  as  the  churches  of  Galatia  in  their 
vicinity.  But  the  crisis  which  had  occurred  roused  the 
apostle  to  a  sense  of  their  danger ;  that  danger  gave  them  a 
warm  place  in  his  bosom,  and  to  assure  them  of  this,  he 
declares  his  anxiety  that  they  knew  what  a  conflict  he  had 
for  them,  and  for  all  around  them,  indeed,  as  many  as  had 
1  2  Cor.  X.  15.  "  Rom.  xv.  20. 


CHURCH  IN  COLOSSE   NOT   FOUNDED   BY  PAUL.  xxi 

not  seen  his  face  in  the  flesh.  Tlie  reference  in  o<joi  is 
plainly  to  their  own  neighbourhood,  particularly  including 
Hierapolis,  which  is  afterwards  mentioned,  and  which  might 
be  menaced  by  the  same  form  of  error.  They  had  not 
enjoyed  his  teaching,  and  they  had  the  more  need  of  his 
prayers.  If  he  had  seen  them  in  the  flesh  he  might  have 
warned  them ;  or,  as  in  the  case  of  Ephesus,  uttered  his 
presentiment  of  danger,  aud  endeavoured  to  fortify  them 
against  it.  The  translation  of  Wiggers,  "  also  for  them,  to 
wit  in  Colosse  and  Laodicea,  who  have  not  seen  my  face 
in  the  flesh,"  is  too  restrictive,  and  takes  for  granted  that 
Paul  had  been  in  both  those  places,  but  had  not  been  brought 
into  personal  contact  with  all  the  members  of  the  churches. 
We  give  the  words  a  wider  significance.  We  doubt  not  that 
several  members  of  those  churches  may  have  seen  the  apostle 
during  his  long  stay  at  Ephesus.  The  apostle,  however,  does 
not  contrast  them  with  others  who  had  not  enjoyed  the  same 
precious  opportunity.  He  speaks  not  to  individiials  but  to 
communities,  and  classes  with  them  others  around  them 
similarly  circumstanced.  In  the  following  verse,  he  mentions 
all  the  parties  in  the  third  person,  as  if  they  all  stood  in  the 
same  category. 

It  is  also  to  be  specially  observed  that  the  apostle,  though 
he  combats  error,  never  refers  to  his  own  personal  teaching,  or 
hints  at  what  himself  had  delivered  on  these  subjects  of  con- 
troversy at  Colosse.  Tliough  the  introduction  of  the  gospel 
seems  to  be  referred  to,  the  apostle  in  no  sense  or  shape  con- 
nects it  with  himself.  Very  different  is  his  style  in  the  other 
epistles  when  he  recalls  the  scenes  and  circumstances  in  which 
the  churches  had  been  planted  or  watered  by  his  personal 
ministrations. 

The  probability  is  that  the  church  in  Colosse  was  founded  by 
Epaphras,  of  whom  the  apostle  says,  "who  is  for  you  a  faithful 
minister  of  Christ;"  and  of  whom  he  also  testifies  :  "  Epaphras, 
who  is  one  of  you,  a  servant  of  Christ,  saluteth  you,  always 
labouring  fervently  for  you  in  prayers,  that  ye  may  stand 
perfect  and  complete  in  all  the  will  of  God.  Eor  I  bear 
him  record,  that  he  hath  a  great  zeal  for  you,  and  them  that 
are  in  Laodicea,  and  them  in  Hierapolis." 

In  conclusion,  the  view  which  we  have  advocated  is  gene- 


xxii  THE   LITEKATURE   OF  THE   EPISTLE. 

rally  that  of  the  writers  of  Introduction,  with  the  exception 
of  Schott,  Borger,  and  Neudecker ;  and  with  the  exception  of 
Theodoret,  Macknight,  Adam  Clarke,  Barnes,  and  Koch  on 
Pliilemon,  it  is  also  the  view  of  the  great  body  of  commen- 
tators upon  the  epistle,  such  as  Calvin,  Suicer,  Flatt,  Bahr, 
Huther,  De  Wette,  Junker,  Steiger,  Olshausen,  Bohmer, 
Meyer,  Schrader,  Bloomfield,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius. 

III. THE    GENUINENESS   OF    THE    EPISTLE. 

In  the  early  church  the  genuineness  of  this  epistle  was 
universally  acknowledged.  No  misconception  of  its  contents 
or  prejudice  against  them,  led  to  any  suspicions  about  its 
authorship.  No  inquisitive  spirit  found  anything  in  it  un- 
worthy of  the  apostle,  or  unlike  his  usual  modes  of  thought 
and  style.  No  heretic  seems  to  have  been  bold  enough  to 
exclude  it  from  his  canon,  though  in  the  first  centuries  it  must 
have  often  confronted  some  prevalent  forms  of  error  and  super- 
stition. Eusebius  therefore  placed  it  among  the  'OfioXoyov- 
fxeva,  or  books  which  were  confessed  on  all  sides  to  be  of 
apostolical  origin.  Tertullian  has  quoted  this  epistle  about 
thirty  times,  and  in  such  a  way  as  clearly  to  evince  his  belief 
in  its  Pauline  origin.  The  nineteenth  chapter  of  his  fifth  book 
against  Marcion,  is  a  summary  of  its  contents,  so  far  as  they 
served  his  polemical  purpose.^  His  great  authority  throughout 
is  Paul,  whom  he  simply  names  aiwstohis. 

At  a  prior  date,  Clement  of  Alexandria  has  also  many 
allusions  to  it.  For  example,  in  the  sixth  book  of  his  Stromata, 
after  maintaining  that  Paul  does  not  condemn  all  philosophy, 
he  quotes  Col.  ii.  8,  with  the  preface — oiaavTcot;  apa  kol  Toh 
KoXaaaaevai.^  In  the  fourth  book  of  the  same  Miscellany 
lie  quotes  that  section  of  this  epistle^  which  enjoins  the  duties 
of  domestic  life,  and  ascribes  it  to  Paul,  who  was  the  prime 
authority  to  him  as  to  Tertullian.  It  is  found  also  in  the 
anonymous  canon  publislied  by  Muratori,* — a  document  of 
the  beginning  of   the  third  century.     The    Syrian  churches 

^  Opera,  ed.  Oeliler,  vol.  ii.  p.  330,  etc. 

-  Opera,  p.  645,  eci.  Colonife,  1688. 

•''  Do.  p.  499. 

*  Antiq.  Ital,  Med.  Mvi,  torn.  iii.  p.  854. 


i 


PROOFS   FKOM   THE   FATHERS.  XXlll 

had  it  in  their  collection,  as  is  evident  from  the  old  Syrian 
translation.  Origen,  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  fifth  book 
of  his  reply  to  Celsus,  has  a  quotation  from  Col.  ii.  18,  19, 
prefaced  by  the  remark — irapa  he  t&5  Havkw  aKpi^M<;  ra 
'lovSaicov  TracSevOevTL  .  .  .  roiavr  iv  rfj  Trpo?  KoXo(Tcrae2<i 
XeXeKTai} 

In  Justin's  dialogue  with  Trypho,  no  less  than  four  times 
is  Col.  i.  15,  16  referred  to  or  quoted,  the  point  of  the 
quotation  being  the  term  TrpcorcroKo^;.''  The  same  term  is 
also  cited  by  Theophilus  ^  of  Antioch,  who  wrote  toward  the 
latter  end  of  the  second  century,  and  is  found  in  his  three 
books  to  Autolycus. 

Many  distinct  and  lengthened  quotations  are  found  in 
Irenaeus,  who  flourished  about  the  same  period  as  Theophilus.* 
Thus,  in  the  third  chapter  of  his  first  book  Against 
Heresies,  he  says  the  following  things  are  spoken  plainly  by 
Paul — vTTo  Tov  HavXov  he  <^avepoi<i,  and  he  cites  first  Col.  iii. 
11,  and  then  Col.  ii.  9.  Or,  again,  the  quotation  of  Col.  i. 
21,  22,  is  introduced  with  the  words — et  propter  hoc  apostolus 
in  epistola  quae  est  ad  Colosscnses  ait.  Indisputable  citations 
or  allusions  cannot  be  brought  from  the  apostolical  Fathers. 
Marcion  included  the  book  in  his  canon,  giving  it  the  eighth 
place  in  his  catalogue.  There  can  be  no  doubt  at  all  of  the 
unanimous  opinion  of  the  primitive  church  on  the  subject ;  in 
Italy,  Africa,  Syria,  Asia  Minor,  and  Egypt,  there  was  no 
conflicting  testimony. 

Through  the  intervening  centuries,  and  up  to  a  very  recent 
period,  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle  was  also  acknowledged 
to  be  beyond  dispute.  Indeed,  when  Bahr  wrote  his 
commentary  on  it  in  1832,  he  says,  in  his  Introduction,  "it 
has  been  hitherto  universally  acknowledged,  and  has  been 
called  in  question  by  nobody,  not  even  by  De  Wette."  A 
few  years  later,  however,  Germany  began  to  present  an 
exception.  Schrader,  in  his  note  on  Col.  iv.  10,  took  occasion, 
from  the  message  sent  by  the  apostle  about  Mark,  to  find  a 
difficulty,  and  out  of  it  to  raise  a  suspicion  that  the  epistle 

1  P.  236,  ed.  Spencer,  Cantab.  1677. 

2  Opera,  ed.  Otto,  vol.  ii.  p.  286,  336,  418,  452. 
'  Lib.  ii.  p.  100,  ed.  Coloniae,  1686. 

*  Adver.  Haereses.     Opera,  vol.  i.  p.  41,  ed.  Stieren,  1853.     Do.  p.  756. 


XXIV  THE   LITERATUEE   OF   THE   EPISTLE, 

might  not  be  Paul's,  as  it  wants  the  individuality  found  in 
some  other  of  his  epistolary  compositions.^  Mayerhoff,  in 
1838,  made  a  bold  and  formal  assault,  and  he  has  been  fol- 
lowed up  by  Baur  and  his  disciple  Schwegler.  Mayerhoff's  '^ 
posthumous  treatise,  edited  by  his  brother,  is  certainly  far 
from  being  conclusive.  Proceeding  on  very  vague  and 
unsatisfactory  principles,  it  abounds  with  a  somewhat 
mechanical  selection  of  words  and  phrases,  picks  out  uTra^ 
Xeyo/xeva,  and  gives  prominence  to  what  are  reckoned  un- 
Pauline  forms  of  expression  and  thought. 

But  the  course  of  criticism  is  thoroughly  defective.  For 
if  the  apostle  have  a  special  end  in  view,  he  must  employ 
special  diction.  If  that  end  be  peculiar,  the  style  must 
necessarily  share  in  the  peculiarity.  If  in  one  epistle  he 
explain  his  system  and  in  another  defend  it,  the  expository 
style  may  surely  be  expected  to  differ  from  the  polemical  style. 
If  in  one  composition  he  combats  one  form  of  error,  and  one 
set  of  adversaries,  can  you  anticipate  identical  phraseology  in 
another  letter  in  which  he  assaults  a  very  different  shape  of 
heresy,  patronized  by  a  wholly  diverse  band  of  opponents  ? 
Individuality  would  be  lost  in  proportion  to  such  sameness, 
and  the  absence  of  it  would  be  the  surest  proof  of  spuriousness. 
No  sound  critic  would  test  the  style  of  Colossians  by  that  of 
1st  Thessalonians,  or  throw  suspicion  on  the  former  because 
it  does  not  reveal  the  same  aspects  of  thought  and  allusion. 
Nor  would  he  place  it  side  by  side  with  Galatians,  and 
roughly  say  that  both  are  polemical,  and  that  therefore  the 
same  topics  of  controversy  and  trains  of  thought  should  be 
found  in  both.  Who  would  reject  1st  Corinthians  because 
the  favourite  and  almost  essential  term  acoTTjpia  is  not  to  be 
found  in  it,  or  throw  Philippians  out  of  the  canon  because 
words  so  significant  and  Pauline  as  crco^eiv  and  KoKetv  do  not 
occur  in  it  ? 

Mayerhoff's  first  argument  is  that  of  lexical  difference,  and 
he  instances  the  want  of  crto^a)  and  its  derivatives,  and  of 
KoXeco  and  its  derivatives  used  with  reference  to  the  Divine 
kingdom.     But  in  this  epistle  the  apostle  has  no  occasion  to 

^  Der  Apostd  Paulu.%  vol.  iv.  p.  176,  1836. 

'^  Der  Brief  an  die  Colos-^er,   mit    vornehmlicher  Beriicksichtigung  der  drei 
Pastoralbriefe ;  kritisch  gepriift  von  Dr.  Ernst  Theodor  Mayerhotf,  Berlin,  1838. 


MAYERHOFFS   OBJECTIONS.  XXV 

employ  these  terms,  for  his  primary  object  is  not  to  expound 
salvation  or  our  calling  to  it,  but  to  defend  the  personal  and 
official  glory  of  its  great  author  and  finisher — Christ.  No 
wonder  that  the  expressive  term  XpiaT6<;  occurs  by  itself  at 
least  twenty  times  in  the  epistle.  Again,  the  words  v6fio<; 
and  TTiara  do  not  occupy  a  prominent  place ;  and  no  wonder, 
for  the  object  of  the  writer  is  not,  as  in  Eomans  and  Galatians, 
to  explain  the  nature  and  relations  of  faith  and  law.  "  The 
particle  yap,"  says  Mayerhoff,  "  occurs  only  six  times ;  but 
in  PhilijDpians  seventeen,  and  in  Eomans  one  hundred  and 
fifty  times."  But  surely,  if  the  adverb  be  so  prominent  a 
feature  of  the  apostle's  other  writings,  he  must  be  a  very 
bungling  forger  who  would  not  plentifully  sprinkle  his  pages 
with  it.  An  imitator  would  not  venture  a  copy  with  so  few 
instances  of  the  characteristic  yap.  The  use  of  such  a  term 
would  rather  lead  a  forger  to  multiplication,  till  its  very 
frequency  detected  him.  We  agree  with  Olshausen,  who  says, 
in  the  first  section  of  the  Introduction  to  his  Commentary, 
"  he  that  can  take  account  of  such  mere  accidents,  and  that 
so  seriously  (crnstlich),  that  he  reckons  how  often  yap  occurs 
in  each  epistle,  decides  his  own  incapacity  for  judging  on 
similarity  and  dilference  of  style."  In  opposition  to  the 
scantiness  of  <ydp,  Mayerhoff  produces  the  frequency  of  eV, 
which  occurs  in  the  first  two  chapters  sixty  times ;  and  in 
the  whole  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  only  fifty  times.  But 
would  an  impostor  hazard  such  a  profusion  of  this  mono- 
syllable ?  Besides,  a  very  large  number  of  the  instances  refer 
formally  or  by  implication  to  union  with  Christ — a  darling 
idea  of  the  apostle,  and  one  which  in  this  epistle  he  is  so 
naturally  led  to  insert.  When  the  apostle  combats  a  system 
of  proud  and  false  philosophy,  need  we  wonder  at  the  recur- 
rence of  yvMo-iq,  or  the  emphatic  form  eirLyvwaL'i  1 

And  then  as  to  aira^  Xeyofieva.  Where  now  should  one 
expect  them  ?  Certainly  when  a  writer  is  busied  with  some 
imusual  theme.  And  so  it  is  in  Colossians.  Out  of  above 
thirty  distinct  uttu^  Xeyofieva  which  we  have  noted  in  the 
course  of  our  study  of  this  epistle,  no  less  than  eighteen  occur 
in  the  second  chapter,  where  the  novel  form  of  error  is  dis- 
cussed and  refuted,  and  the  majority  of  them  are  characteristic 
terms.      Such   are    the  distinctive  words,  indavo\oy[a,  (piXo- 


XXVI  THE   LITKRATUKE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

(TO<pia,  ')(eLpo>ypa<^ov,  6eoTT]<t,  crcofjLarLKco<;,  eiprjvoTroLeo),  iOeXo- 
OprjaKeia,  vov/xT)via,  aTro'^prjai';,  a^eihia,  ifk'qcT p,ovr} ;  with  other 
terms  associated  with  them,  as  arepew/jLa,  d7riKSvai<i,  avXajw- 
<yo)V,  KaTa^pa/Sevco,  7rpoar]\docra<;,  Boy/xaTi^o),  i/ji/3ar€V(i}.  Now, 
if  the  apostle  be  under  the  necessity  of  describing  a  system 
of  error  which  he  has  described  nowhere  else,  may  we  not 
expect  words  which  occur  nowhere  else,  or  must  his  free  spirit 
limit  itself  to  vocables  already  employed  by  him  on  former 
occasions  ?  Is  the  new  conception  to  be  deprived  of  a  new 
expression  ?  Must  the  apostle,  for  the  purpose  of  authenti- 
cating his  writings,  bind  himself  to  a  meagre  and  worn-out 
vocabulary  ?  Shall  we  refuse  to  this  master  of  language  what 
we  freely  yield  to  every  other  author  ?  If  in  a  writing  of 
one  age  we  discover  some  terms  which  belonged  to  an  earlier 
one,  but  had  faded  into  disuse,  or  some  which  came  into 
currency  only  during  a  later  epoch,  we  justly  look  upon  it 
with  suspicion.  But  every  author  has  surely  liberty  to  range 
among  the  terms  of  his  own  period,  and  to  employ  the  most 
fitting  of  them  to  embody  his  thoughts.  If  he  never  wrote 
so  before,  you  infer  that  he  never  thought  so  before.  If 
Mayerhoff  had  set  himself  to  describe  the  symbols  of  the 
Apocalypse,  he  must  have  used  many  phrases  not  found  in 
this  treatise,  and  therefore  with  equal  propriety,  and  on  the 
same  evidence,  might  some  reviewer  argue  that  the  author  of 
such  a  production  could  not  be  the  author  of  this  attack  on 
the  genuineness  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  and  the  three 
pastoral  epistles. 

Nor  is  there  any  greater  force  in  Mayerhoff's  objections, 
based  on  grammatical  differences.  Of  his  charge  of  tautology 
we  find  no  proof.  When  he  stumbles  on  phrases  very  like 
the  apostle's  usual  style,  he  affirms  they  are  not  really  resem- 
blances at  all.  He  complains  of  the  absence  of  anakolutha; 
and  when  he  does  meet  them,  he  detects  something  wrong  or 
un-Pauline  in  them.  Some  connective  particles  are  absent  in 
this  epistle ;  but  dpa,  one  of  them  referred  to  by  him,  is  not 
found  in  Philippians,  nor  does  Bco,  another  of  them,  occur  in 
Galatians ;  while  ov'^t,  which  occurs  fourteen  times  in  1  st 
Corinthians,  is  not  found  in  Philippians,  nor  here,  nor  in 
Galatians.  On  such  irregularities  no  argument  can  be 
founded.       Thus,    the     particle    re,    which    occurs    often    in 


ACCIDENTAL   IRREGULARITIES   NO    OBJECTION.  XXVll 

Eomans,  is  found  neither  in  Galatians  nor  1st  Thessalonians. 
The  conjunction  iav,  occurring  twenty  times  in  Eomans,  is 
found  forty -five  times  in  1st  Corinthians,  but  is  absent  from 
I'hilippians ;  and,  again,  ij  is  met  with  fifty-two  times  in  1st 
Corinthians,  but  only  twice  in  Philippians.^ 

There  is  nothing  peculiar  in  the  forms  of  construction 
adduced  by  Mayerhoff.  He  next  accuses  the  writer  of  this 
epistle  of  hunting  after  synonyms,  but  the  examples  which  he 
selects  are  in  no  case  synonymous.^  Who  but  IMayerhoff 
would  lay  any  stress  on  the  various  diction  in  the  formula  of 
salutation  ?  If  the  apostle,  in  such  a  prominent  place,  had 
been  in  the  habit  of  using  a  uniform  formula,  then  the  least 
cunning  of  impostors  would  have  been  sure  to  copy  it  with 
slavish  correctness, 

Not  less  futile  are  Mayerhoff's  criticisms  on  differences  of 
idea  or  expression  to  be  found  in  the  epistle.  He  discovers  a 
host  of  parallel  repetitions,  which  in  reality  are  either  not  re- 
petitious at  all,  or  repetitions  for  an  avowed  object.  Col.  i.  1, 
9,  10,  13,  14,  18,  etc. 

Another  objection,  based  on  a  gross  misconception,  takes  up 
the  very  different  aspect  under  which  the  vofio^i  is  viewed 
here,  from  the  representations  given  of  it  in  the  other  epistles. 

^  Huther,  Commentar,  p.  423. 

^  We  present  those  which  he  has  given  out  of  the  first  and  third  chapters,  and 
we  refer  to  the  following  exposition  for  the  distinctive  meaning  of  the  terms  : — 
I.,  6.  xcc^'Ta'fo^oijf/ivov  x.ai  ctv%avofii)io\i — L,  6.  ottouiiv  xai  i^iyivao'Kiiv — I.,  7.  o'uvoouXos 
et  oiaKDVos — I.,  9.  •^^fKriu^o/j.ivoi  xai  aiTovfiivai — iv  •Xtt,ay\  ffo(pla  xa)  avAffit — I.,  10. 
xa^'TTo^po^ouvri;  xaci  a.li,avaf/.ivoi — I.,  11.  il;  -xaaai  'j'X'o//,otriv  xai  fiax^o^v/aiav — I.,  18. 
a-^X^  et  TocdTOTOxos  vtuv  tixeut — L,  21.  v//.ag,  Tori  ovtus  aTriXXoT^iufiii/Du;  xa.) 
'^X^?""' — !•>  22.  ctyiov;  xa]  a/jt,ik/fi/>v;  xai  aviyxXnTov; — I.,  23.  Ti6if/,iXiu[iivoi  xai 
ii^aioi  xa)  fjt,ri  fiiTaxivov/iivoi — I.,  24.  Ta6rif/.aTa  et  6x'i\pii; — I.,  26.  ocro  tuv  aliovav 
xa)  a-ro  Tuv  yiviut — I.,  28.  ^ovhravvns  -ravra  avS^uvov  xa)  ^iSdirxovTis  Tavra 
avf^wrov — III.,  2.  r«  ava  l^nnln,  to,  avu  (p^oviin — III.,  5.  To^viia  et  axafa^crla 
— "Xa^oi  et  iTi^vftia  xaxri — III.,  8.  l^yh  xa)  SvfyLos — (iXaaipri/xia  et  alff^^oXoyia — 
III.,  10.  i)iOu(rdfji.ivt)i  TOv  »£«»  (avP ^oiTom)  xa)  dvaxaitii>if^.ivov — III.,  12.  ixXixro)  rov 
6ioZ  aymi  xa)  fiyaTti/^ivoi — (rvrXdyx»a  olxTi^fioZ  et  ;^;j>!»'to7'»); — TaTuvoffoiruvti  et 
•JT^aoTr,; — //.ax^o^tifcia  et    dvix,''f-^'">'  dXXriXuv — III.,  16.   iv    "xdan  trof)ia  ^iSdtrxovTis    xa) 

vovhTovfTis — \]/aX/u.oTs,  vf/.vo7;,  tula7i,  etc. — Mayerhoff",  pp.  35,  36.  Hiither,  in 
reply,  presents  the  following  similarities  out  of  Philippians  i.  : — y.  3.  iv)  ^a<r>» 

Tfi  f/,viia  hfiut —  — £v  ■rairri  Ss^CE/  fJ^ou  vTi^  hfJLZv t>iv   iivfiv  •niovf/.itios  ;    V.   7.   iv  rv 

axoXoyia  xa)  fiifiaiuini  rov  luayyiX'tov  ;  V.  9.  £v  iTiytuffu  xa)  •sdain  alir^tiffii  ;  V.  10. 
ilXixBdViTs  xa)  d-r^oa-xo-rci  ;  v.  11.  si;  5o|av  xa)  'i-raivov  6iov ',  V.  15.  oia  (pSotov  xa) 
sj/v  ;  V.  20.  Kara  r-/iv  k-xoxa^ahoxiai  xa)  iXTila  fiou  ;  V.  24.  fittai  xa)  trvAfra^afi.iiu  ; 
V.  25.  si;  rh*  Vf/.aJv  T^oxoThv  xa)  ;^«jav  rij;  Tiirriu;. — Huther,  pp.  427,  428. 


XXVIU  THE   LITER ATUEE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

Now,  not  to  say  that  v6fio<i  does  not  occur  in  this  epistle  at 
all,  it  may  be  relied,  that  it  is  not  law  as  a  Divine  institute 
which  is  here  referred  to,  or  the  law  which  is  spoken  of  so 
often  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans.  What  is  spoken  of  here 
is  the  ceremonial  law,  which  was  abrogated  by  being  fulfilled 
in  the  death  of  Christ,  and  not  the  moral  law,  which  is  as 
immutable  as  the  legislator.  What  total  ignorance  of  the 
object  of  the  apostle  to  say,  that  because  he  speaks  of  "  ele- 
ments of  the  world,"  "  commandments  and  doctrines  of  men," 
and  "  traditions  of  men,"  he  gives  these  names  to  the  Divine 
law,  and  then  to  infer  that  such  doctrine  cannot  be  Paul's,  since 
he  always  looks  upon  the  law  as  Divine,  holy,  and  spiritual ! 
It  is  surely  one  thing  to  speak  thus  of  the  law,  and  quite 
another  thing  to  reprobate  human  additions  to  it. 

There  is  no  doubt,  as  Mayerhoff  says,  that  in  Colossians 
some  acts,  which  are  often  ascribed  to  Christ,  are  ascribed  to 
God ;  but  such  a  variation  not  being  confined  to  the  epistle 
is  no  mark  of  un- Pauline  peculiarity.  And  lastly,  Mayerhoff's 
objection  to  its  Christology  cannot  be  sustained.  For  the 
form  which  it  has  assumed  has  most  evidently  a  reference  to 
such  shapes  of  error  as  were  propounded  at  Colosse,  and  the 
terms  which  the  errorists  used  may  have  been  selected  by  the 
apostle  and  sanctified  by  their  legitimate  application  to  the 
Divine  Eedeemer.  Baur^  and  Schwegler^  also  adduce  the 
doctrine  of  Christ's  pre-existence  taught  in  Ephesians  and 
Colossians,  as  proof  that  the  two  epistles  were  not  written 
by  Paul.      The  objection  carries  its  own  refutation. 

In  fact  this  whole  process  of  assault  is  one  of  capricious  sub- 
jectivity. One  writer  decides  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
is  spurious,  because  it  is  only  a  verbose  expansion  of  that  to 
the  Colossians  ;  and  another,  with  equal  taste  and  correctness, 
affirms  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  spurious,  because 
it  is  an  unskilful  abstract  of  that  to  the  Ephesians  ;  Mdiile, 
according  to  the  judgment  of  Baur,  both  epistles  must  stand 
or  fall  together. 

To  gain  his  purpose,  Mayerhoff  has   compared   throughout 

the  two  Epistles  of  Colossians  and  Ephesians.     But  surely  the 

real  similarity  which  they  present  may  be   easily  accounted 

for, — that  similarity  being  found   chiefly  in   the  concluding 

'  Der  Apostel  Paulun,  p.  422.  *  Nachap.  Zf.lt.  ii.  p.  289. 


COMPARISON   OF   THE   TWO    EPISTLES.  Xxix 

and  practical  portions.  Schneckenburger  has  pronounced 
this  similarity — a  similarity  in  unimportant  things — to  be 
"  a  mechanical  use  of  materials."  But  the  one  epistle  is  very 
far  from  being  a  copy  of  the  other.  There  is  a  distinctness  of 
aim  with  occasional  identity  of  thought.  The  great  body  of 
each  epistle  is  different,  nor  do  they  slavishly  agree  even  in 
what  may  be  termed  commonplaces.  There  is,  indeed,  far 
less  similarity  than  is  commonly  supposed — all  that  is  special 
about  each  of  them  is  wholly  different,  and  even  in  the  para- 
graphs where  there  is  similarity,  there  is  seldom  or  never 
sameness,  some  new  turn  being  mingled  with  the  thought,  or 
some  new  edge  being  given  to  the  admonition.  As  is  noticed 
in  our  Commentary,  even  where  the  apostle  addresses  spouses, 
children,  and  slaves,  and  refers  to  the  same  duties,  there  is 
yet  variety  in  the  form  and  reasons  of  advice.  The  one  letter 
is  general,  the  other  is  special ;  the  one  is  didactic,  the  other 
controversial.  The  one  presents  truth  in  itself,  the  other 
developes  the  truth  in  conflict  with  parallel  error.  And  there 
is  no  servile  imitation,  no  want  of  life  and  freshness. 

Mayerhoff's  last  argument  is  based  on  the  date  of  the  errors 
which  he  imagines  to  be  refuted  in  this  epistle.  He  holds  that 
the  heresy  of  Cerinthus  is  aimed  at  and  exposed  by  the  writer, 
and  he  infers  that  as  the  false  doctrine  of  Cerinthus  was  not 
developed  till  after  the  apostle's  time,  therefore  the  apostle 
could  not  be  the  writer.  The  truth  of  his  chronolocrical  state- 
ment  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  prove.  It  would  seem  that 
Cerinthus  was  soon  after  this  in  Ephesus,  and  in  antagonism 
with  the  Apostle  John  ;  so  that,  even  though  it  could  be 
proved  that  Cerinthus  was  the  person  the  writer  had  in  his 
eye,  it  would  not  follow  that  he  could  not  be  the  apostle  of 
the  Gentiles.  Mayerhoff's  view  of  the  nature  of  the  false 
doctrines  condemned  is  not  very  different  from  our  own,  but 
there  is  no  necessity  to  identify  them  thus  with  Cerinthus, 
and  then  to  assign  his  era  to  post-Pauline  times.  Olshausen 
says  that  Cerinthus  may  have  been  by  this  time  in  Colosse, 
though  he  adds,  that  he  could  hardly  have  that  influence 
which  should  mark  him  out  as  the  leader  of  a  formidable 
party. 

Baur  and  Schwegler  subscribe  to  not  a  few  of  Mayerhoff's 
critical  objections  based  upon  the   style  of  the   epistle.      But 


XXX  THE   LITERATUKE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

Baiir  holds  it  to  have  had  its  origin  in  the  Gnosticism  of  the 
second  century.  Mayerhoff  admits  that  Baumgarten  has 
shown  that  such  a  hypothesis  is  untenable  against  the  pastoral 
epistles,  though  he  himself  is  bold  enough  to  attack  them  on 
other  grounds.  But  the  Gnosticism  of  the  second  century  iu 
its  theosophy  and  angelology  presupposes,  in  fact,  the  existence 
of  those  apostolic  documents.  The  citations  from  Hippolytus 
have  sadly  perplexed  those  critics  of  Tubingen — as  they  show- 
that  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  quoted  by  him  fully  half 
a  century  before  those  German  scholars  allowed  their  existence. 
(See  our  Introduction  to  Commentary  on  Ephesians,  p.  xlv.) 

The  attacks  on  this  epistle  are  therefore  of  no  formidable 
nature,  and  the  opinion  of  the  c?mrch  of  Christ,  in  so  many 
countries  and  for  so  many  centuries,  may  be  acquiesced  in 
without  hesitation. 

IV. THE    FALSE    TEACHERS    IX    COLOSSE. 

There  has  been  no  small  amount  of  erudition  and  research 
expended  upon  the  question,  as  to  what  party  or  parties  in 
Colosse  held  the  errors  condemned  by  the  apostle.  The 
attempt  has  often  been  made  to  identify  these  errorists  with 
some  formed  and  well-known  sect.  But  there  is  not  sufficient 
foundation  for  such  minuteness.  All  that  we  know  of  the 
false  teachers  is  contained  in  the  few  and  brief  allusions  to 
their  heresies.  And  these  allusions  are  not  systematically 
given  as  an  analysis  of  their  system,  but  only  as  occasion 
required,  and  for  the  purposes  of  confirming  the  opposite 
truths.  The  probability  is,  that  the  false  teachers  had  at  that 
period  no  fully  developed  system — that  they  held  only  a  few 
prominent  tenets,  such  as  those  which  the  apostle  condemns ; 
and  that  they  were  rather  the  exponents  of  certain  prevailing 
tendencies,  than  the  originators  of  a  defined  and  formal  heresy. 
They  were  thrown  up  by  the  current,  and  they  indicated  at 
once  its  direction  and  its  strength.  Many  ages  in  the  church 
have  exhibited  a  similar  phenomenon,  when  the  errors  which 
certain  men  promulgate  appear,  from  their  seductive  power 
and  immediate  success,  to  be  but  the  expression  of  those 
sentiments  which  had  already  taken  a  deep  and  latent  hold  of 
the  general  mind. 


EEROrJSTS   IN'    COLOSSE,   NOT   JEWS.  XXXI 

The  errors  in  Colosse  rose  witliin  the  church,  and  were 
produced  by  a  combination  of  influences.  Had  they  grown  up 
without  the  church,  they  would  have  appeared  with  a  hostile 
front,  inviting  an  instant  and  a  sturdy  resistance.  If  Jew 
or  heathen  had  announced  his  creed,  none  would  have  listened 
to  it,  save  as  to  the  challenge  of  an  avowed  enemy.  It  is 
only  when  error  is  nursed  in  the  bosom  of  the  church  itself, 
not  like  a  poisonous  weed  transplanted  from  the  desert,  but 
like  the  tares  among  the  wheat,  that  truth  is  in  the  greatest 
danger.  If  we  reflect  for  a  moment  on  the  mental  tendencies 
of  those  early  times,  as  seen  both  in  the  Phrygian  tempera- 
ment and  in  the  Jewish  characteristics ;  if  we  remember  how 
strongly  the  Oriental  spirit  was  leavened  with  the  desire  to 
enter  the  spirit-world  by  theosophic  speculation,  and  attain 
to  sanctity  by  ascetic  penance,  we  need  not  wonder  at  the 
indications  of  error  contained  in  the  epistle  to  the  church 
in  Colosse. 

Our  inference  therefore  is,  that  the  theory  which  holds  that 
those  false  teachers  were  Jews  without  even  a  profession  of 
Christianity,  is  utterly  untenable.  The  arguments  of  Eichhorn,^ 
Schultess,  and  Schoettgen,  in  vindication  of  this  view,  are  very 
unsatisfactory.  Nowhere  in  the  epistle  are  they  branded  as 
unbelievers,  or  spoken  of  as  unconverted  antagonists  of  the 
gospel.  Their  error  was  not  in  denyin^^,  but  in  dethroning 
Christ — not  in  refusing,  but  in  undervaluing  his  death,  and  in 
seeking  peace  and  purity  by  means  of  ceremonial  distinctions 
and  rigid  mortifications.  Such  a  nimbus  of  external  sanctitj'' 
as  Eichhorn  ascribes  to  them  would  not  have  dazzled  the 
Colossians,  if  it  had  surrounded  a  Jewish  brow;  nor  would  ritual 
observances  have  possessed  any  seductive  power,  if  inculcated 
by  Jewish  doctors,  as  Schoettgen  names  them.  ISTeither 
Pharisaic  nor  Essenic  rigorists  would  have  been  spoken  of  by 
the  apostle  in  the  style  in  which  he  describes  the  false  teachers 
at  Colosse.  Stern  denunciations  would  have  been  heaped 
upon  them  as  the  rejecters  of  the  Messiah,  and  disturbers  of 
the  church.  But  the  errors  promulgated  in  Colosse  were 
wrapt  up  with  important  truths,  and  were  therefore  possessed 
of  dangerous  attractions.  They  were  not  a  refutation  of  the 
gospel,  but  a  sublimation  of  it.     The  Colossian  errorists  did 

'  EinUlt.  vol  iii.  p.  288. 


XXXU  THE  LITERATURE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

not  wish  to  subvert  the  new  religion,  but  only  to  perfect  it  ; 
(lid  not  even  under  the  mere  mantle  of  a  Christian  profession 
strive  to  win  the  church  over  to  Judaism,  as  Schneckenburger  ^ 
and  Feilmoser "  think ;  but  to  introduce  into  the  church  cer- 
tain mystic  views,  and  certain  forms  of  a  supereminent  pietism, 
which  had  grown  up  with  a  spiritualized  and  theosophic  system. 
In  other  words,  they  were  not  traitors,  but  they  were  fanatics. 
They  did  not  counterfeit  so  as  to  surrender  the  citadel,  but 
only  strove  to  alter  its  discipline  and  supplant  its  present 
armour.  In  the  Apocalyptic  epistles,  the  pseudo-apostles 
at  Ephesus,  the  synagogue  of  Satan  at  Smyrna,  the  woman 
Jezebel,  the  prophetess  at  Thyatira,  and  the  Nicolaitans  or 
Balaamites  in  Pergamos,  whatever  their  errors  and  immoralities, 
were  all  within  the  church,  and  wore  at  least  the  mask  of 
Christianity.  Neither  could  the  errorists  at  Colosse  be  the 
mere  disciples  of  Apollos,  or  of  John  the  Baptist,  as  extra- 
ecclesiastical  sects.  Heinrichs  and  Michaelis  want  a  historical 
basis  for  such  an  assertion,  for  we  cannot  tell  how  long  Apollos 
taught  ere  the  apostle  imparted  to  him  full  instruction ;  and 
there  is  no  doubt  that  he  would  at  once  communicate  his  more 
perfect  knowledge  to  all  his  brethren.  His  teaching  was  but 
a  preparatory  step  to  Christianity.  The  false  teaching  at 
Colosse  is  not  spoken  of  by  the  apostle  as  a  rude  and  unde- 
veloped scheme  which  stopped  short  of  Christianity;  but  a 
system  which  brought  into  Christianity  elementary  practices, 
vain  superstitions,  and  attempts  at  an  unearthly  and  sancti- 
monious lile.  If  it  was  pleased  with  the  unfinished,  it  also 
soared,  by  means  of  it,  into  the  transcendental.  Apollos  was 
indeed  a  Jew  of  Alexandria,  and  tliere  is  little  doubt  that 
some  elements  of  Alexandrian  or  Philonic  Judaism  were  to  be 
found  in  Colosse,  but  found  in  connection  with  Christian 
belief,  or  were  combined  with  such  views,  feelings,  and  pro- 
fessions, as  had  warranted  admission  into  the  church. 

These  errors  did  not  involve  of  themselves,  though  they 
might  soon  lead  to,  inmioral  practices.  It  was  not,  as  in 
Corinth,  where  debauchery  prevailed,  and  impurity  had  been 
associated  with  the  pagan  worship,  where  the  Lord's  Supper 

1  Beitr.  zur  Elnl.  p.  146. 

"^  Einl.  p.  149.    See,  on  the  other  hand,  the  well-known  treatise  of  Eheinwald, 
De  Pseudo-Bodoribtis  Coloss.,  Bonn.,  1834. 


SPECIAL  FORMS   OF  EKROR.  XXXlii 

had  been  profaned,  and  the  idea  of  a  resurrection  had  been 
more  than  called  in  question.  Nor  was  it  as  in  Thessalonica, 
where  a  vital  doctrine  had  been  seriously  misunderstood,  and 
sundry  minor  evils  had  begun  to  show  themselves.  In  Galatia 
tliere  had  been  a  bold  and  open  attempt  to  uphold  systematic- 
ally the  authority  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  enforce  its  observ- 
ance on  the  churches  as  essential  to  salvation  ;  but  the  apostle 
meets  the  crisis  with  a  stern  and  uncompromising  opposition. 
And  there  was  in  Eome,  too,  a  proud  and  self-righteous 
Jewish  spirit,  that  relied  on  illustrious  Abrahamic  descent  and 
conformity  to  the  letter  of  the  law  for  justification.  Therefore 
the  apostle  formally  proves  by  a  lengthened  argument,  that  to 
guilty  and  helpless  humanity  the  only  refuge  is  in  the  grace 
of  God  and  the  righteousness  of  Christ. 

But  the  case  was  somewhat  different  at  Colosse.  The 
teaching  was  of  a  more  refined  nature.  It  does  not  seem  to 
have  insisted  on  circumcision  as  a  positive  Mosaic  rite,  but 
as  the  means  of  securing  spiritual  benefit.  It  was  not  dog- 
matically said,  "Except  ye  be  circumcised  and  keep  the 
whole  law  of  Moses,  ye  cannot  be  saved ; "  but  circumcision 
appears  to  have  been  connected  with  those  ascetic  austerities 
by  which  purity  of  heart  was  sought  for,  symbolized,  and 
expected  to  be  reached.  The  apostle's  argument  is.  Ye  are 
circumcised  already — ye  have,  through  faith  in  Jesus,  all 
the  blessings  which  that  ordinance  typifies — ye  have  been 
circumcised  with  the  circumcision  of  Christ.  Distinctions  in 
meats  and  drinks,  the  observance  of  holidays,  "  the  show  of 
wisdom  in  humility,  will-w^orship,  and  neglecting  of  the 
body,"  were  not  haughtily  imposed  as  a  Pharisaic  yoke,  but 
were  regarded  and  cherished  as  elements  of  a  discipline  which 
hoped  to  attain  religious  elevation  by  a  surer  and  speedier 
way  than  that  which  the  gospel  presented.  The  theoretic 
portion  of  the  error  was  somewhat  similar  in  origin  and  pur- 
pose. Its  object  was  to  secure  spiritual  protection,  by  com- 
muning with  the  world  of  spirits.  It  aimed  to  have  what 
the  gospel  promised,  but  without  the  assistance  of  the  Christ 
which  that  gospel  revealed.  It  took  Christ  out  of  His  central 
Headship,  and  dethroned  Him  from  His  mediatorial  eminence. 
It  was  a  philosophy  which  longed  to  uncover  the  unseen 
and  climb  to  heaven  by  homage  done  to  the  angelic  hierarchy. 

c 


XXXIV  THE   LITERATURE   OF  THE  EPISTLE. 

That  such  tendencies  should  coalesce  in  one  and  the  same 
party  is  not  strange,  for  self-emaciation  has  been  usually 
connected  with  reverie  and  visions. 

We  may  scarcely  put  the  question  whether  those  errors  had 
a  heathen  or  a  Jewish  source.  That  they  sprang  up  within 
the  church  we  have  seen  already,  but  some  suppose  them 
traceable  to  a  foreign  influence.  Clement  ascribed  them  to 
Epicureanism ;  but  indulgence  and  not  self-restraint  was  its 
character.  It  might  indeed  covet  festivals,  that  it  might 
enjoy  a  surfeit ;  but  if  it  made  a  distinction  among  meats  and 
drinks,  it  would  be  only  to  abstain  from  some  of  them,  not 
for  sanctity's  sake  but  for  palate's  sake,  and  to  prefer  others 
not  as  lean  and  scanty  fare  to  the  neglect  of  the  body,  but  as 
luxuries  to  revel  in  under  the  motto,  "  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for 
to-morrow  we  die."  Tertullian  again  vaguely  thought  that 
philosophy  in  general  with  its  theory  and  ethics  was  con- 
demned. But  the  apostle  needed  to  guard  the  Colossians 
only  against  such  forms  of  philosophic  falsehood  as  were 
taught  among  them,  and  most  likely  to  enthral  them.  See  our 
comment  on  ii.  8.  Grotius  has  contended  that  the  Pythagorean 
system  is  referred  to,  and  Macknight  has  found  it  in  the 
maxims,  "  Touch  not,  taste  and  handle  not "  (that  is,  as  he 
means),  anything  the  eating  of  which  involves  the  previous 
taking  away  of  its  life.  But  Pythagoreanism  could  only  in 
Colosse  have  an  indirect  influence  throusrh  Plato  and  his 
Alexandrian  imitators.  That  the  lanouacfe  of  Paul  has  some 
resemblance  to  that  of  Philo  is  well  known,  for  modes  of 
expression  which  at  length  were  common  among  the  Hellen- 
istic Jews  may  have  originated  in  the  studies  and  speculations 
of  Alexandria.  Yet  any  one  who  carefully  reads  Gfrorer's 
Essay  on  this  subject,  or  the  virtual  review  of  it  by  Jowett,^ 
cannot  fail  to  perceive,  that  with  many  features  of  likeness, 
there  are  very  numerous  points  of  dissimilarity.  The  spirit  of 
the  two  writers  is  in  perfect  contrast ;  nay,  the  same  words 
even  have  a  difference  of  meaning  in  their  respective  produc- 
tions. Yet  witli  all  his  mysticism,  Philo  has  much  that  every 
intelligent   and   pious   Jew   must    have    believed — forms    of 

1  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  and  Romans,  with 
Critical  Notes  and  Dissertations.  By  Benjamin  Jowett,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of 
Balliol  College,  Oxford,  vol.  i.  p.  363. 


PAUL  AND   PHILO.  XXXV 

thought  and  faith  that  Paul  did  not  need  to  renounce  when  he 
became  a  Christian.  But  to  build  much  on  mere  verbal 
similarity  is  very  unsatisfactory,  for  Koster  has  shown,  in  an 
ingenious  Essay/  how  much  the  apostle's  diction  resembles 
that  of  Demosthenes ;  and  Bauer  and  Kaphelius  had  before  him 
pointed  out  similar  instances  from  Thucydides  and  Xenophon. 

Heumann,  again,  pleads  for  the  Stoic  and  Platonic  philo- 
sophies as  the  object  of  apostolic  warning,  but  with  no  pro- 
bability. When  we  remember  the  numbers  of  Jews  colonized 
in  those  portions  of  Asia  Minor,  and  how  so  many  of  them 
that  passed  over  into  the  church  were  still  zealous  for  the  law, 
and  when  we  see  what  nomenclature  the  apostle  employs  in 
describing  these  errors  —  "  circumcision,"  "  handwriting  of 
ordinances,"  "  festivals,  new  moons  and  Sabbaths,"  "  a  shadow 
of  things  to  come," — we  are  forced  to  the  conclusion,  that  the 
false  teaching  pointed  out  and  reprobated  must  have  had  a 
Jewish  source,  having  grown  up  among  those  who  had  once 
observed  the  Levitical  ritual,  and  who  carried  with  them 
into  the  church  many  of  those  predilections  and  tendencies 
which  the  idealized  Mosaism  of  that  age  had  originated  and 
ripened.  The  application  of  the  term  "  philosophy  "  to  these 
errors,  and  the  accusation  of  the  "worshipping  of  angels," 
form  no  argument  against  our  hypothesis,  for  the  Jewish 
writers  apply  the  name  to  their  own  religious  system,  and 
traces  of  the  strange  idolatry  may  be  found  in  later  Jewish 
books.^ 

The  tendencies  or  teachings  described  by  the  apostle  seem 
to  be  allied  fully  as  much  to  the  Essenic  as  to  the  Pharisaic 
school.  Formality,  ostentation,  censoriousness,  hypocrisy,  and 
a  righteousness  satisfied  with  obeying  the  mere  letter  of  the 
law,  are  not  hinted  at  by  the  apostle — the  demure  face  on  the 
day  of  fast,  prayer  in  stentorian  voice  at  the  corner  of  the 
streets,  and  the  trumpet  which  heralded  almsgiving,  are  no 
portion  of  the  picture.  Eather  does  the  description  harmonize 
with  what  we  know  of  the  Essenes,  and  with  what  they 
might  be  if  they  embraced  Christianity.  If  the  Christianized 
Pharisees  were  apt  to  become  Judaizers,  the  Christianized 
Essenes  were  as  likely  to  become  mystics  in  doctrine  and 

^  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1854. 

^  See  our  Commentary  on  ii.  8,  18. 


XXXVi  THE   LITERATUEE   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

ascetics  in  practice.  Eecoiling  from  the  precise  formality  of 
Pharisaism,  they  glided  into  impalpable  speculations.  The 
Pharisee  might  boast  of  his  sanctity  in  the  outer  court,  but 
the  Essene  strove  to  pass  the  vail  into  the  inner  chamber  and 
commune  with  its  invisible  inhabitant.  What  the  Pharisee 
laboured  to  attain  by  the  punctilious  minutise  of  a  cumbrous 
ritual,  the  Essene  hoped  to  reach  by  severe  meditation  and 
self-denying  discipline.  In  short,  the  Essenes  were  philo- 
sophic Jews,  who  in  trying  to  get  at  the  spirit  of  their  system, 
and  to  .  reach  its  hidden  nature  and  esoteric  teachings, 
wandered  as  far  from  its  real  purpose  as  did  the  sensual  and 
pompous  Pharisee.  The  Pharisee  overlaid  the  law  with 
traditions,  so  that  it  grew  into  an  unshapen  mass,  and  this 
tendency  may  be  described  under  the  phrases  "  elements  of 
the  world,"  and  "  tradition  of  men."  The  Essene,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  noted  for  his  mystic  aspirations,  theosophic  studies, 
and  self-subduing  modes  of  life,  and  these  characteristics 
appear  to  be  marked  in  the  clauses,  "philosophy  and  vain 
deceit,"  "  worshipping  of  angels,"  and  intruding  into  the  invi- 
sible ;  while  both  the  Pharisaic  and  Essenic  leanings  combined 
may  be  thus  glanced  at :  "  Let  no  man  judge  you  in  meat,  or 
in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  an  holiday,  or  of  the  new  moon,  or 
of  the  sabbath  days ;  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come ; 
but  the  body  is  of  Christ," — ii.  16,  17.  Now,  while  the  Jews 
remained  in  Palestine,  the  two  rival  sects  might  maintain  their 
separate  creeds  with  proverbial  tenacity;  but  when  they  were 
thrown  together  in  foreign  countries,  their  change  of  position 
must  have  brought  them  into  more  familiar  contact,  and  led 
to  the  modification  of  their  more  distinctive  tenets.  Away 
from  the  hallowed  soil  and  the  temple,  Pharisaism,  unable  to 
obey  the  ritual,  must  have  lost  somewhat  of  its  love  of 
externals,  and  been  more  ready  to  yield  to  the  quiet  speculations 
and  self-restrictions  of  the  Essene.  Such  modifications  we 
may  not  be  able  to  trace,  though  we  cannot  doubt  of  their 
existence,  and  therefore  we  need  not  wonder  that  a  form  of 
Christianized  Judaism  at  Colosse  should  exhibit  in  combina- 
tion some  of  those  features  which  in  Palestine  characterized 
respectively  Pharisee  and  Sadducee.  Nor  is  it  to  be  forgotten 
that  while  their  peculiarities  were  mutually  modified  between 
themselves,  both  might  receive  another  modification  from  the 


ESSENIC   JUDAISM.  XXXVU 

external  world.  The  Jewish  mind  had  come  into  contact 
with  the  East  during  the  Babylonish  captivity,  and  probably 
retained  some  permanent  impressions.  We  may  therefore 
surmise  that  it  was  infected  with  the  atmosphere  of  Phrygia, 
and  that  as  it  met  in  that  province  with  speculations  kindred 
to  its  own,  it  would  both  impart  and  borrow.  This  appears, 
then,  to  be  the  true  state  of  the  case.  While  the  errors  seem 
to  have  sprung  up  with  the  Jewish  converts,  and  to  have 
retained  not  a  little  that  belonged  to  the  Mosaic  ceremonial, 
they  were  at  the  same  time  in  harmony  with  feelings  and 
practices  widely  spread  over  the  East,  and  of  special  attraction 
to  the  province  of  Phrygia.  One  might  almost  thus  describe 
the  heresy,  that  it  was  Essenic  Judaism  modified  by  introduc- 
tion to  the  church ;  widening  itself  from  a  national  into  an 
Oriental  system  through  sympathy  with  similar  views  around 
it ;  in  the  act  of  identifying  its  angels  with  Emanations,  and 
placing  Christ  among  them ;  and  admitting  or  preparing  to 
admit  the  sinfulness  of  what  is  material  in  man.  We  need 
not,  therefore,  with  Hug,^  ascribe  the  origin  of  the  Colossian 
errors  to  the  Magian  philosophy  directly :  for  it  was  rather 
the  Jewish  spirit  influenced  to  some  extent  by  this  and 
other  forms  of  theosophy  with  which  it  has  been  placed  in 
juxtaposition.  Nor  should  we,  with  Osiander,  Kleuker,  and 
Herder,  deem  the  false  teaching  wholly  Kabbalistic,  though 
the  germ  of  what  was  afterwards  found  in  the  Kabbala  may  be 
here  detected.  It  is  also  a  onesided  view  of  Chemnitz,  Storr, 
Credner,  and  Thiersch  to  regard  the  errorists  simply  as  Chris- 
tian Essenes,  though  in  the  Essene  there  was  a  strong  and 
similar  tendency.  Nor  can  we,  with  Hammond  and  others, 
simply  call  them  Gnostics,  though  there  is  no  doubt  that  what 
was  afterwards  called  Gnosticism  appears  here  in  its  rudiments 
— especially  that  aspect  of  it  which  may  be  called  Ceriuthian 
Gnosticism.  Similar  errors  are  referred  to  in  the  Epistles  to 
Timothy,  who  laboured  in  a  neighbouring  region.  Cerinthus 
was  but  the  creature  of  his  age,  bringing  together  into  shape 
and  system  errors  which  were  already  showing  themselves  in 
the  various  Christian  communities,  so  that  he  soon  became 
identified  with  them,  and  now  stands  out  as  an  early  and 
great  heresiarch.  But  it  would  seem  to  be  beyond  historic 
1  Einleit.  Part  ii.  §  130,  4th  edit. 


XXXVlll  THE   LITERATURE   OF  THE   EPISTLE. 

evidence  to  fix  on  any  precise  party  as  holding  those  tenets. 
For  the  parties  which  afterwards  did  hold  them  were  not  then 
organized ;  nor  were  they  known  then  by  the  names  which 
they  afterwards  bore  in  the  annals  of  the  church.  The  errors 
which  in  a  century  became  so  prominent  as  elements  of  an 
organized  system,  were  at  this  time  only  in  germ.  The 
winged  seeds  were  floating  in  the  atmosphere,  and  falling  into 
a  soil  adapted  to  them,  and  waiting  as  if  to  receive  them ;  in 
course  of  years  they  produced  an  ample  harvest. 

The  apostle  in  the  second  chapter  uniformly  employs  the 
singular  number  in  speaking  of  the  party  holding  the  errors 
condemned  by  him.  Either  he  marks  out  one  noted  leader, 
or  he  merely  individualizes  for  the  sake  of  emphasis.  The 
apostle  in  Galatians  generally  uses  the  plural;  but  in  v.  10 
he  employs  the  singular  o  rapdaacov,  "  he  that  troubleth  you," 
where  the  reference  may  not  be  to  some  special  heretic,  but 
to  any  of  those  whom  the  apostle's  imagination  singles  out 
for  the  moment  as  engaged  in  the  act  of  disturbing  the  church. 
But  the  plural  is  never  employed  in  the  epistle  before  us ; 
though  the  invariable  use  of  the  singular  may  not  fully  or 
grammatically  warrant  the  idea  of  one  person  being  specially 
before  the  apostle's  mind,  since  the  singular  occurs  in  ad- 
monitions, and  these  are  rendered  yet  more  pointed  by  its 
use. 

V. CONTENTS    OF    THE    EPISTLE. 

We  present  the  contents  of  the  epistle  in  the  form  of  a 
translation,  arranged  under  separate  heads.  Our  translation 
is  simply  an  easy  rendering,  claiming  neither  the  exegetical 
lucidness  of  a  free  version  nor  the  grammatical  accuracy  and 
purity  of  a  literal  one. 

The  Salutation. 

Paul,  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ  by  the  will  of  God,  and 
Timothy  the  brother,  to  the  saints  in  Colosse,  and  believing 
brethren  in  Christ :  Grace  to  you,  and  peace  from  God  our 
Father. 


CONTENTS   OF   THE   EPISTLE.  XXXIX 


The  Introduction. 

Having  heard  of  your  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the  love 
which  ye  have  to  all  the  saints,  we  thank  God,  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  always,  when  we  pray  for  you ;  on  account 
of  the  hope  laid  up  for  you  in  heaven,  of  which  ye  heard 
already  in  the  word  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  which  has  come 
to  you,  as  it  has  also  in  all  the  world  ;  and  is  bearing  fruit,  and 
growing,  as  indeed  among  you,  from  the  day  ye  heard  it  and 
knew  the  grace  of  God  in  truth,  just  as  ye  learned  it  from 
Epaphras,  our  beloved  fellow-servant,  who  is  for  your  sakes  a 
faithful  minister  of  Christ,  who  has  besides  reported  to  us  your 
love  in  the  Spirit. 

The  Prayer. 

On  this  account  we  indeed,  since  the  day  we  heard  (such 
a  report),  cease  not  praying  for  you  and  asking  that  ye  may  be 
filled  with  the  full  knowledge  of  His  will  in  all  wisdom  and 
spiritual  insight,  so  as  to  walk  worthy  of  the  Lord  in  order  to 
all  well-pleasing^ — being  fruitful  in  every  good  work,  and 
growing  by  means  of  the  knowledge  of  God ;  strengthened 
with  all  strength  after  the  measure  of  the  might  of  His  glory, 
in  order  to  the  possession  of  patience  and  long-suffering  with 
joy  ;  giving  thanks  to  the  Father,  who  has  fitted  us  for  sharing 
the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  the  light ;  who  rescued  us  out 
of  the  power  of  darkness  and  transported  us  into  the  kingdom 
of  the  Son  of  His  Love,  in  whom  we  have  this  redemption, — 
the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

Doctrine  introduced. — The  Glory  of  Christ. 

Who  is  the  image  of  the  Invisible  God,  the  First-born  of 
the  whole  creation.  For  in  Him  were  created  all  things — 
those  in  the  heavens  and  those  on  the  earth,  the  seen  and  the 
unseen,  whether  thrones  or  lordships,  principalities  or  powers, 
the  WHOLE  by  Him  and  for  Him  was  created,  and  He  is  before 
all  things,  and  all  things  in  Him  are  upheld.  And  He  is  the 
Head  of  the  Body,  the  church;   He  who  is  the  Source,  the 

^  "  For  "eneral  conciliation  !  "  Turnbnll's  translation,     London,  1854. 


xl  THE   LITERATURE    OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

rirst-begotten  from  the  dead ;  in  order  that  in  all  things  He 
might  show  Himself  the  First.  Yea,  God  was  pleased  that 
all  fulness  should  dwell  in  Him ;  and  by  Him  having  made 
peace  by  the  blood  of  His  cross ;  by  Him  (I  repeat)  to  recon- 
cile all  things  to  himself,  whether  the  things  on  earth,  or  the 
thincrs  in  the  heavens. 

The  A2Jplication  of  it. 

And  you,  who  were  formerly  alienated  and  enemies  in  your 
mind  by  wicked  works,  yet  now  has  He  reconciled  in  the  body 
of  His  (Christ's)  flesh  through  death,  so  as  to  present  you  holy, 
and  blameless,  and  unreprovable  before  Him.  If,  as  is  the 
case,  ye  continue  in  the  faith  grounded  and  fast,  and  not  moved 
away  from  the  hope  of  the  gospel  which  you  have  heard,  which 
has  been  preached  to  every  creature  under  heaven,  of  which  I, 
Paul,  was  made  a  prisoner. 

Tlie  Apostle's  own  feelings  and  functions  towards  them. 

I  now  rejoice  in  my  sufferings  for  you,  and  I  fill  up  what  is 
wanting  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ  in  my  flesh  for  His  Body's 
sake,  which  is  the  church;  of  which  I  was  made  a  minister 
according  to  the  dispensation  of  God  committed  to  me  for 
you,  to  fulfil  the  word  of  God ;  to  wit,  the  mystery  which 
has  been  hid  from  ages  and  generations,  but  it  is  now  revealed 
to  his  saints,  to  whom  God  wished  to  make  known  what  are 
the  riches  of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  in  the  Gentiles,  which 
is  Christ  in  you,  the  hope  of  glory ;  whom  we  preach,  remind- 
ing every  man  and  teaching  every  man  in  all  wisdom;  in 
order  that  we  may  present  every  man  perfect  in  Christ.  To 
attain  which  end,  I  indeed  labour,  intensely  struggling  accord- 
ing to  His  inworking,  which  works  mightily  within  me. 
For  I  would  that  ye  knew  what  a  struggle  I  have  about 
you  and  those  in  Laodicea,  and  as  many  as  have  not  seen 
my  face  in  the  flesh ;  that  their  hearts  might  be  comforted, 
being  knit  together  in  love  and  unto  the  whole  wealth  of  the 
full  assurance  of  understanding,  to  the  full  knowledge  of  the 
mystery  of  God ;  in  which  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge  are  laid  up. 


CONTENTS   OF  THE  EPISTLE.  xli 


First  and  General  Advice. 

Now  this  I  say,  lest  any  one  should  beguile  you  with 
enticing  words.  For  though,  indeed,  in  the  flesh  I  am  absent, 
yet  in  the  spirit  with  you  am  I,  joying  and  beholding  your 
order  and  the  steadiness  of  your  faith  on  Christ.  As  then  ye 
have  received  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  walk  in  Him,  having 
been  rooted  in  Him,  and  being  built  up  in  Him,  and  established 
in  the  faith  as  ye  were  taught,  abounding  in  thanksgiving. 


Second  and  Special  Warning  and  Argument. 

Beware  lest  there  be  any  one  who  may  make  a  prey  of  you 
through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit,  after  the  tradition  of  men, 
after  the  rudiments  of  the  world,  and  not  after  Christ.  For  in 
Him  dwells  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily;  and  ye 
are  filled  up  in  Him,  who  is  the  Head  of  all  principality  and 
power.  In  whom  also  ye  were  circumcised  with  a  circumcision 
not  made  with  hands  in  the  off-putting  of  the  body  of  the 
flesh  in  the  circumcision  of  Christ ;  having  been  buried  with 
Him  in  baptism,  in  whom  too  you  have  been  raised  together 
by  faith  in  the  operation  of  God,  who  raised  Him  from  the 
dead.  And  -yon.  being  dead  in  the  trespasses  and  the  uncir- 
cumcision  of  your  flesh,  you  hath  He  brought  to  life  together 
with  Him,  having  forgiven  us  all  our  trespasses;  having 
blotted  out  the  handwriting  of  ordinances  which  was  against 
us,  which  was  hostile  to  us,  and  He  has  taken  it  out  of  the 
way,  having  nailed  it  to  the  cross ;  having  spoiled  principalities 
and  powers,  He  made  a  show  of  them  openly,  having  triumphed 
over  them  in  it.  Let  no  one,  therefore,  judge  you  in  eating  or 
in  drinking,  or  in  the  particular  of  a  festival,  or  of  a  new  moon, 
or  of  Sabbath  days,  ■which  are  a  shadow  of  the  things  to  come, 
but  the  body  is  Christ's.  Let  no  one  rob  you  of  your  reward, 
wishing  to  do  it  by  his  humility  and  worshipping  of  angels, 
penetrating  into  things  which  he  has  not  seen,  puffed  up  with- 
out reason  by  his  fleshly  mind,  and  not  holding  the  Head,  from 
whom  the  whole  body  through  joints  and  bands  supplied  and 
compacted  groweth  the  growth  of  God. 


xlii  THE  LITERATURE   OF  THE  EPISTLE. 


The  consequent  Reproof. 

Since  with  Christ  ye  have  died  off  from  the  rudiments  of 
the  world,  why,  as  yet  living  in  the  world,  do  ye  suffer  such 
ordinances  to  be  published  among  you  as  "  touch  not,  taste  not, 
handle  not,"  in  reference  to  things  which  are  meant  to  perish  in 
the  use — ordinances  which  have  no  higher  authority  than  the 
commandments  and  the  doctrines  of  men ;  which  procedure, 
indeed,  having  a  show  of  wisdom  in  will- worship,  and  humility, 
and  neglecting  of  the  body,  not  in  any  thing  of  value,  only 
ministers  to  the  gratification  of  the  flesh  ^  (or  corrupt  human 
nature). 

Practical  Portion. — Their  Position  and  its  Lessons. 

If,  then,  ye  have  been  raised  together  with  Christ,  seek  those 
things  which  are  above,  where  Christ  is,  sitting  on  the  right 
hand  of  God.  Set  your  mind  on  things  above,  not  on  things 
on  the  earth  ;  for  you  died,  and  your  life  has  been  hidden  with 
Christ  in  God.  When  Christ,  our  Life,  shall  be  manifested, 
then  ye  too  shall  be  manifested  with  Him  in  glory. 

Sins  to  he  ahandoned. 

Mortify,  therefore,  your  members  which  are  upon  the  earth, 
fornication,  impurity,  lust,  evil  concupiscence,  and  covetous- 
ness,  which  indeed  is  idolatry,  on  account  of  which  sins 
Cometh  the  wrath  of  God,  in  which  sins  ye  verily  once  walked, 
when  ye  lived  in  them.  But  now  do  ye  also  put  off  all  these 
— anger,  rage,  malice,  calumny,  scurrility — out  of  your  mouth. 
Lie  not  to  one  another,  having  put  off  the  old  man  with  his 
deeds,  and  having  put  on  the  new  man,  who  is  renewed  unto 
knowledge,  after  the  image  of  Him  who  created  him ;  where 
(in  which  sphere  of  renewal)  there  is  not  Greek  and  Jew, 
circumcised  and  uncircumcised,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  and 
free,  but  Christ  is  all  and  in  all. 

Virtues  to  he  assumed. 
Put  on,  as  the  elect  of  God,  holy  and  beloved,  bowels  of 

'  "  Not  to  the  credit  of  any  one  for  personal  appearance  !  " — Turnbull. 


INCULCATION    OF   DUTIES.  xliii 

mercy,  obligingness,  humility,  meekness,  long-suffering,  for- 
bearing one  another  and  forgiving  one  another,  if  any  one  has 
a  fault  against  any,  like  as  indeed  Christ  forgave  you,  so  also 
do  ye ;  and  over  and  above  all  these,  put  on  that  love  which 
is  the  bond  of  perfection. 

WTiat  should  he  the  Tenor  of  the  Christian  Life. 

And  let  the  peace  of  Christ  rule  in  your  hearts,  to  which 
too  ye  were  called  in  one  body,  and  be  thankful.  Let  the 
word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly ;  in  all  wisdom  teaching 
and  counselling  one  another ;  in  psalms,  hymns,  spiritual 
songs,  singing  with  grace  in  your  heart  to  God ;  and  whatever 
ye  do  in  word  or  deed,  do  all  of  it  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  giving  thanks  to  God  the  Father  by  Him. 

Inculcation  of  Domestic  Duties. 

Wives,  submit  you  to  your  husbands,  as  is  fitting  in  the 
Lord.  Husbands,  love  your  wives,  and  be  not  bitter  against 
them.  Children,  obey  your  parents  in  all  things,  for  this  is 
well-pleasing  in  the  Lord.  Fathers,  chafe  not  your  children, 
lest  they  be  disheartened.  Servants,  in  all  things  obey  your 
masters  according  to  the  flesh,  not  with  eye-service  as  men- 
pleasers,  but  with  simplicity  of  heart,  fearing  the  Lord. 
Whatever  you  are  engaged  in,  work  at  it  from  the  soul  as  to 
the  Lord,  and  not  to  men,  knowing  that  from  the  Lord  you 
shall  receive  the  reward  of  the  inheritance :  the  Lord  Christ 
serve  ye :  for  the  wrong-doer  shall  receive  what  he  has 
wronged ;  and  there  is  no  respect  of  persons.  Masters,  afford 
ye  on  your  part  what  is  right  and  equal  to  your  servants,  in 
the  knowledge  that  ye  too  have  a  master  in  heaven. 

Parting  Counsels. 

Continue  in  prayer,  and  watch  in  it  with  thanksgiving ; 
praying  at  the  same  time  also  for  us,  that  God  would  open  to 
us  a  door  of  discourse  to  speak  the  mystery  of  Christ,  for 
which  yea  I  am  bound,  in  order  that  I  may  make  it  manifest 
as  it  becomes  me  to  speak  it.  Walk  in  wisdom  toward  those 
without,    redeeming    the    time.      Let    your    conversation    be 


xliv  THE   LITERATURE    OF   THE    EPISTLE. 

always  with  grace,  seasoned  with  salt,  that  ye  may  know  how 
you  ought  to  answer  every  one. 

Private  Matte7's. 

Of  all  that  concerns  me,  Tychicus  shall  inform  you,  the 
beloved  brother  and  faithful  minister  and  fellow-servant  in  the 
Lord,  whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for  this  very  purpose,  that 
ye  might  know  our  affairs,  and  that  he  might  comfort  your 
hearts  ;  along  with  Onesimus,  the  faithful  and  beloved  brother, 
one  of  yourselves ;  they  shall  inform  you  of  all  matters  here. 

Concluding  Salutations  and  Signature. 

There  salutes  you  Aristarchus  my  fellow-prisoner,  and 
Mark,  the  cousin  of  Barnabas  (about  whom  ye  received 
instruction) ;  if  he  come  to  you,  receive  him ;  and  Jesus, 
surnamed  Justus — who  are  of  the  circumcision :  these  alone 
(of  their  race)  are  my  fellow-workers  unto  the  kingdom  of 
God,  who  have  been  an  encouragement  to  me.  Epaphras,  one 
of  yourselves,  a  servant  of  Christ,  salutes  you,  always  striving 
for  you  in  his  prayers,  that  ye  may  stand  perfect  and  full 
assured  in  tlie  whole  will  of  God.  For  I  bear  him  record 
that  he  has  a  great  travail  for  you  and  them  in  Laodicea  and 
them  in  Hierapolis.  There  salutes  you  Luke  the  beloved 
physician,  and  Demas.  Salute  the  brethren  in  Laodicea,  and 
Nymphas,  and  the  church  in  his  house.  And  when  this 
epistle  has  been  read  among  you,  arrange  that  it  be  read  also 
in  the  church  of  the  Laodiceans,  and  that  ye  read  too  the 
epistle  from  Laodicea.  And  say  to  Archippus,  See  to  the 
ministry  which    thou  hast  received  in  the  Lord,  that  thou 

fulfil  it.    Etje  salutation  bg  i^i^^  oton  tanH  of  ^aiil 
i^ememljcr  mg  tontis.    ffirace  ic  Ijjtti)  gou* 

VI. — TIME    AND    PLACE    OF    WRITING   THE    EPISTLE. 

What  we  have  already  said  in  Chapter  V.  of  our  Introduc- 
tion to  Ephesians  may  suffice.  The  arguments  of  Schulz, 
Bottger,  "Wiggers,  Thiersch,  and  Meyer,  do  not  convince  us 
that  the  old  and  general  opinion  is  wrong,  and  that  this  epistle 


WORKS   ON   THE   EPISTLE.  xlv 

was  written  at  Cffisarea,  not  at  Eome,  Peter  Lombard  and 
others  dream  of  an  imprisonment  at  Epliesus,  at  which  place 
they  suppose  that  this  epistle  was  written.  The  probability 
is  that  it  was  composed  in  Eome,  and  about  the  year  62. 
On  its  relation  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  the  reader  may 
also  consult  the  fifth  chapter  of  our  Introduction  to  Commentary 
on  the  latter  Epistle. 

YII. WORKS    ON    THE    EPISTLE. 

The  patristic  and  medigeval  commentaries  on  Colossians 
are,  with  the  exception  of  Jerome,  the  same  as  those  we  have 
enumerated  under  Ephesians.  So  it  is  with  the  expositors  of 
the  Reformation  period  and  that  which  succeeded  it.  So  it  is 
with  the  editors  of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  collectors  of 
illustrations  from  the  classics,  Philo  and  Josephus.  Among 
the  more  characteristic  expositions,  we  have  the  French  dis- 
course of  Daille  and  the  more  academic  Latin  prelections  of 
Davenant,  the  paraphrase  and  notes  of  Pierce,  the  sermons  of 
Byfield  (1615),  Elton  (1620),  and  the  more  recent  popular 
volumes  of  Bishop  Wilson,  Gisborne,  and  Watson. 

Among  continental  writers  we  may  refer  to  Calvin,  Melanc- 
thon,  Beza,  Erasmus,  Zanchius,  Zwingie,  Crocius,  Piscator, 
Hunnius,  Baldwin,  the  Catholic  Estius  and  a-Lapide  (van 
Stein),  and  to  Grotius,  Heumann,  Suicer,  Eoell,  Bengel,  Storr, 
Flatt,  and  Heinrichs. 

Among  later  expositors  we  have  the  following: — 

Historisch-kritischer  und  philologischer  Commentar  uber  den 
Brief  Pauli  an  die  Colosser ;  bearbeitet  von  Dr.  Friederich 
Junker;  Mannheim,  1828.  Commentar  iiber  den  Brief  Pauli 
an  die  Kolosser,  mit  steter  Beritcksichtigung  der  dltern  und 
neuern  Ausleger ;  von  Karl  C.  W.  F.  Bahr ;  Basel,  1833. 
Theologische  Auslegung  des  paulinischen  Sendschreihens  an  die 
Colosser;  herausgegeben  von  Wilhelm  Bohmer;  Breslau,  1835. 
Ber  Brief  Pauli  an  die  Kolosser ;  Uebersetzung,  Erkliirung,  ein- 
leitende  und  epikritische  Abhandlungen  von  Wilhelm  Steiger ; 
Erlangen,  1835.  Commentar  iiber  den  Brief  Pauli  an  die 
Colosser;  von  Joh.  Ed.  Huther;  Hamburg,  1841.  Kurze 
Erkldrung  der  Briefe  an  die  Colosser,  an  Philemon,  an  die 
Epheser    und    Philipper ;     von    Dr.    W.    M.    L.     de    Wette ; 


xlvi  THE  LITERATURE   OF  THE   EPISTLE. 

Leipzig,  1843.  Biblischer  Commentar  iiher  sdmmtliche  Schriften 
des  Neuen  Testaments  zundchst  fur  Prediger  und  Stitdirende; 
von  Dr.  Hermann  Olshausen ;  Vierter  Band ;  Konigsberg, 
1844.  Commentar  ilher  den  Brief  Pauli  an  die  Bpheser  und 
Kolosser ;  von  L.  F.  0.  Baumgarten-Crusius ;  Jena,  1847. 
Kritisch  exegetisches  Handhuch  ilber  den  Brief  an  die  Kolosser 
und  an  PJiilemo7i ;  von  Hein.  A.  W.  Meyer;  Gottingen,  1848. 
Auslegung  der  Bpistel  Pauli  an  die  Colosser  m  36  Betracht- 
ungen ;  von  C.  N.  Kiihler;  Eisleben,  1853. 


NOTE. 

In  the  following  pages,  when  Buttmann,  Matthiae,  Klihner, 
Winer,  Eost,  Alt,  Stuart,  Green,  Trollope,  and  Jelf  are 
simply  quoted,  the  reference  is  to  their  respective  Greek  gram- 
mars ;  and  when  Suidas,  Passow,  Eobinson,  Pape,  Wilke, 
Wahl,  Bretschneider,  Liddell  and  Scott,  are  named,  the  refer- 
ence is  to  their  respective  lexicons.  If  Hartung  be  found 
without  any  addition,  we  mean  his  Lehre  von  den  Partikcln 
der  griechischen  Sprache,  2  vols.;  Erlangen,  1832.  In  the 
same  way,  the  mention  of  Bernhardy  without  any  supplement 
represents  his  Wissenschaftliche  Syntax  der  griechischen  Sprache  ; 
Berlin,  1829.  The  majority  of  the  other  names  are  those  of 
the  commentators  or  philologists  enumerated  in  the  previous 
chapter.  The  references  to  Tischendorf s  New  Testament  are 
to  the  second  edition. 


COMMENTARY  ON  COLOSSIANS. 


CHAPTEK  I. 

The  Epistle  begins  according  to  ancient  custom.  The  writer 
introduces  himself  by  name,  and  then  salutes  those  to  whom 
his  letter  is  addressed,  thus — 

(Ver,  1.)  ITaOXo9,  airoaToXo'i  ^Irjaov  Xpcarov  Sia  deX^fiaro^; 
©eov,  Kol  Tifiodeo'^  6  a8eX(^o<? — "  Paul,  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ 
by  the  will  of  God,  and  Timothy  the  brother."  [Eph.  i.  1, 
iv.  11.]  Paul  was  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  he  bore  His 
commission,  enjoyed  His  inspiration,  did  His  work,  and  in  all 
things  sought  His  acceptance.  His  call  to  the  apostleship 
was  by  a  signal  and  unmistakeable  summons  of  the  Divine 
will.  Since  he  uses  similar  phraseology  in  so  many  of  his 
epistles,  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  conjecture  of  Chrysostom, 
and  some  of  his  Greek  imitators,  that  the  apostle  in  here  assert- 
ing his  relation  to  Christ  so  decidedly,  disclaims  all  mission  from 
the  inferior  spirits  that  occupied  so  prominent  place  in  the 
angelology  of  the  false  teachers  who  attempted  to  corrupt  the 
Colossian  church.  The  addition  of  the  name  of  Timothy  is 
found  in  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  in  that  to  the 
Philippians,  and  to  Philemon,  while  it  stands  along  with  that 
of  Silvanus  in  the  salutations  of  both  letters  addressed  to  the 
church  in  Thessalonica.  Though  Timothy  may  have  been 
the  writer  of  this  epistle,  neither  his  name  nor  his  pen  gave 
any  warrant  or  authority  to  the  document,  for  he  is  only 
joined  with  the  apostle  in  brotherly,  but  unofficial  congratula- 
tions and  prayers  over  the  welfare  of  the  Colossian  believers. 
It  is  certainly  rash  on  the  part  of  Chrysostom  and  Theophy- 
lact^  to  infer  that  Timothy  was  to  be  honoured  as  an  apostle, 
^  The  conclusion  of  Theophylact  is  i'oa  oZv  Ka)  alrh  amaroXoi. 


2  COLOSSIANS   I.   2. 

because  his  name  stands  in  this  connection.  Were  such  an 
argument  tenable,  then  Sosthenes  and  Silvanus  might  both  be 
elevated  to  the  apostolate.  Paul  styles  him,  however,  "  a 
minister  of  God,  and  our  fellow-labourer  in  the  gospel  of 
Christ,"  1  Thess.  iii.  2. 

Timothy,  who  received  this  Greek  name  from  his  father, 
though  his  mother  was  a  Jewess,  was  in  all  probability  a 
native  of  Lystra.^  That  he  was  one  of  the  apostle's  own 
converts  is  highly  probable,  as  he  has  so  fondly  named  him 
"  son,"  "  my  own  son,"  "  my  beloved  son,"  "  my  dearly  beloved 
son,"  1  Tim.  i.  18,  i.  2;  1  Cor.  iv.  17;  2  Tim.  i.  2.  The 
young  disciple  was  "  well  reported  of  by  the  brethren,"  had 
enjoyed  an  early  and  sound  religious  education,  the  result  of 
maternal  and  grand-maternal  anxiety,  and  he  possessed  a 
"  gift,"  so  that  Paul,  after  circumcising  him,  in  order  to  allay 
Jewish  prejudice,  selected  him  to  be  his  colleague,  fellow- 
traveller,  and  work-fellow.  At  a  later  period  the  apostle  bore 
him  this  high  testimony — "  he  worketh  the  work  of  the  Lord, 
as  I  also  do  "  ^ — affirms  at  another  time  that  both  of  them 
preached  the  same  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God ;  ^  nay,  so  much 
of  a  kindred  spirit  reigned  within  them,  that  he  says  to  the 
church  in  Philippi,  "  I  have  no  man  like-minded,  who  will 
naturally  care  for  your  state,"  Phil.  ii.  19,20.  Indications 
of  Timothy's  busy  and  ubiquitous  career  occur  again  and 
again,  and  he  received  himself,  from  his  spiritual  father,  two 
solemn  epistolary  communications.  In  short,  so  well  known 
was  he  as  "  the  Brother,"  doing  the  apostle's  work,  carrying 
his  messages,  bringing  correspondence  to  him,  endeared  to  him 
in  so  many  ways  and  representing  him  in  his  absence,  that 
the  church  of  Colosse  could  not  wonder  at  his  name  bein" 
associated  with  that  of  Paul. 

(Ver.  2.)  Tol<i  iv  Ko\ocr(TaL<i  a'yiot<i  koX  iricrTol'i  aBe\.(f)oi<i  iv 
Xpiarw — "to  the  saints  in  Colosse  and  believing  brethren  in 
Christ."  For  the  various  forms  of  spelling  the  name  of  the 
city,  see  Introduction.  According  to  the  versions  of  Chrysos- 
tom,  QEcumenius,  De  Wette,  and  others,  the  apostle  thus 
addresses  his  letter :  "  to  those  in  Colosse  who  are  saints  and 
believing  brethren  in  Christ ; "  but,  according  to  Meyer,  "  to 
the  saints  in  Colosse,  to  wit,  the  believing  brethren  in  Christ." 

J  Acts  xvi.  1.  2  1  Cor.  xvi.  10,  ^  2  Cor.  i.  19. 


COLOSSIANS  I.   2.  3 

We  incline  to  the  latter  interpretation,  as  the  epithet  07^0? 
came  to  have  something  of  the  force  of  a  proper  name,  and  did 
not  need  eV  X.  to  qualify  it.  It,  indeed,  often  stands  by  itself, 
as  in  Acts  ix.  13,  32,  41,  xxvi.  10  ;  in  Eom.  i.  7,  xii.  13, 
XV.  25,  26,  31,  and  in  a  great  variety  of  instances  in  the 
other  epistles.  True,  in  Phil.  i.  1,  the  words  ev  X.  'I.  are 
added  to  it,  and  that  probably  because  no  other  epithet  is 
there  subjoined.  When  these  early  disciples  are  named  or 
referred  to,  the  term  ayco<i,  like  the  English  "  saint,"  was 
almost  invariably  used,  not  as  an  adjective,  but  as  a  noun. 
For  the  meaning  of  the  word,  and  its  application  to  members 
of  the  church,  see  under  Eph.  i.  1.  The  other  terms  of  the 
clause  are  explanatory  and  supplemental.  The  adjective 
TTtcTTot?,  which  occurs  by  itself  in  the  twin  epistle,  is  here 
joined  to  d^eX(f)oU,  and  has  the  sense  of  believing,  as  we  have 
shown  it  to  have  in  the  similar  salutation,  Eph.  i.  1.  The 
concluding  words,  ei^  Xptarw,  belonging  to  the  entire  clause, 
describe  the  origin  and  circuit  of  the  believing  brotherhood. 
Their  union  to  Him  created  this  tender  and  reciprocal  con- 
nection in  Him.  Out  of  Him  there  was  neither  faith  nor 
fraternity,  for  He  is  the  object  of  the  one  and  the  centre  of  the 
other.  Thus  iria-roU  is  not  superfluous,  as  Steiger  erroneously 
says,  if  it  mean  "  believing ; "  for  this  faith  was  the  very 
means  of  bringing  them  into  a  filial  relation  to  God,  and 
therefore  into  a  brotherly  relation  with  one  another.  (Gal.  iii. 
26.)  Children  of  one  Eather  by  belief  in  Christ,  the  entire 
family  are  rightly  named  "  believing  brethren  "  in  Him. 

Xdpi,<i  vfiiv  Kal  elprjvt)  airo  Qeov  TIaTpo<i  rjjjuoiv — "  grace  to 
you,  and  peace,  from  God  our  Eather."  Tiae  additional  clause 
of  the  Eeceived  Text,  Kal  Kvpiov  'I.  X.,  is  not  fully  sustained 
by  good  authority,  as  it  is  wanting  in  B,  D,  E,  J,  K,  while  it  is 
found  in  A,  C,  E,  G.  Many  of  the  old  versions  also  want  it 
— as  the  Syriac,  Ethiopic,  and  Vulgate.  Chrysostom  formally 
says  :  Kalroc  iv  ravTrj  to  tov  X.  ov  Tbdrjcrtv  ovofia — "  yet  in 
this  place  he  does  not  insert  the  name  of  Christ."  Theophy- 
lact,  on  repeating  the  sentiment,  adds — kuctol  €lo}do<;  avrw  ov 
— "although  it  is  his  usual  way  to  insert  it ;"  but  he  subjoins  a 
silly  reason  for  the  omission,  to  wit,  "  Lest  the  apostle  should 
revolt  them  at  the  outset,  and  turn  their  minds  from  his  forth- 
coming   argument."      The    clause    is    common  in    the    other 

D 


4  COLOSSIANS   I.   3. 

opening  benedictions.  We  can  account  for  its  insertion  in 
some  Codices  as  being  taken  from  these  corresponding  pas- 
sages, but  we  cannot  so  well  give  a  reason  for  its  general 
omission,  except  on  the  suspicion  that  it  was  no  portion  of  the 
original  salutation.  We  dare  not  dictate  to  the  apostle  how 
he  shall  greet  a  church,  nor  insist  that  he  shall  send  all  his 
greetings  in  uniform  terms.     [Eph.  i.  2.] 

The  apostle  now  expresses  his  thanks  to  God  for  the 
Colossian  church,  for  their  faith,  love,  and  hope — the  fruits  of 
that  gospel  which  Epaphras  had  so  successfully  taught  them. 
Then  he  repeats  the  substance  of  that  prayer  which  he  had 
been  wont  to  offer  for  them,  a  prayer  that  designedly  cul- 
minates in  a  statement  of  their  obligation  to  Christ  and  their 
connection  with  Him.  But  that  Blessed  Name  suggests  a 
magnificent  description  of  the  majesty  of  His  person,  and  the 
glory  of  His  work  as  Creator,  Preserver,  Eedeemer,  and 
Governor.  The  paragraph  is  without  any  formal  polemical 
aspect,  but  under  its  broad  and  glowing  statement  of  the  truth 
error  was  detected  and  refuted.  It  was  so  placed  in  sunshine, 
that  its  hideousness  was  fully  exposed,  and  it  was  seen  to  be 
"  a  profane  medley."  ^ 

(Ver.  3.)  Ev')(^apL(TT0Vfiev  too  ©ecu  Kal  Tlarpl  rov  Kvpiov 
rjiMUiV  'Ir)(Tov  Xptarov  irdvTore,  irepl  v/xociv  Trpoaevx^o/jbevoi — 
"  We  bless  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  always, 
when  praying  for  you."  There  are  variations  in  the  text, 
some  of  which  may  be  noted.  Some  read  toj  Trarpc  on  no 
great  authority,  and  the  Eeceived  Text  inserts  Kal  without 
conclusive  evidence.  Other  MSS.  read  as  if  by  correction 
ev'^apiaTo!)  in  the  singular,  and  Trepl,  found  in  A,  C,  D^,  E",  J, 
K,  appears  to  have  higher  warrant  than  vTrep,  which  is  pre- 
ferred by  Lachmann  and  Griesbach.  The  distinctive  meaning 
of  virep  and  Trepl  in  such  a  connection  may  be  seen  under 
Eph.  vi.  19.  We  cannot  agree  with  Bahr,  Steiger,  Baum- 
garten-Crusius,  and  Conybeare,  who  imagine  that  Paul  simply 
means  himself  in  the  plural  evxapio-Toi/jiev.  That  he  may 
occasionally  use  this  style  we  do  not  deny.  The  apostle  in 
the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  joins  Sosthenes  with 
himself  in  the  salutation,  but  formally  excludes  him  from 
any  share  in  the  communication,  for  he  immediately  subjoins 

'  ' '  3l6lanrje  profane. " — Daillc^. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   3.  5 

the  singular  ev^apiajM.  Tlie  same  avowed  distinction  is 
made  with  regard  to  Timothy  himself  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians  i.  1-3.  May  we  not  infer,  that  if  Paul  had  wished 
to  exclude  Timothy  here,  he  would  have  done  so  by  a  similar 
use  of  the  singular ;  and  as  he  does  afterwards  employ  the 
singular  in  sharp  contrast,  may  not  the  plural  here  have  been 
chosen  to  represent  the  share  which  Timothy  had  in  those 
good  reports,  and  the  consequent  prayers  ?  There  is  no 
sentiment  in  the  verses  in  which  the  plural  is  used,  peculiar 
to  inspiration.  And  we  are  the  more  confirmed  in  this  view, 
because  Paul  formally  disconnects  himself  from  Timothy  in 
verse  23,  and  by  the  emphatic  words,  iyo)  IlavXoq;  and 
again  a  similar  distinction  occurs  in  verse  29,  and  in  iv.  3. 
The  phraseology  of  these  three  verses  implies,  that  when  he 
says  "  we,"  he  means  himself  and  Timothy,  but  that  in  cases 
where  he  states  something  special  to  himself,  and  not  common 
to  him  and  his  colleague,  he  says  "  I,"  to  prevent  mistake.  If 
the  plural  simply  represented  himself,  he  did  not  need  to 
change  the  idiom.  [Ev^xapLcrTovixev,  Eph.  i.  16.]  Under 
Eph.  i.  3  we  have  shown  that  the  genitive  Kvptov  'I.  is 
governed  as  well  by  6e6<i  as  by  iraTrjp.  And  if  we  read  rco 
6ea)  KoX  irarpi,  as  in  the  Textus  Eeceptus,  the  same  con- 
struction would  be  vindicated  here.  But  as  the  reading  is 
either  tw  6e(p  tm  irarpi,  or  rather  roS  6eu>  iraTpi,  it  would 
seem  that  Trarpt  alone  governs  the  following  genitive.  We 
thank  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  [TlaTpl 
Tov  K.  Eph.  i.  3.]  Beza  well  says,  neqjie  vero  aliter  a  nohis 
considerari  potest  Deus  in  saltUem  nisi  quatenus  est  Pater  Christi. 
It  is  God,  in  the  character  of  the  Father  of  Christ,  that  we 
thank,  for  He  is  in  this  relation  our  Father-God.  The  grateful 
heart  pours  itself  forth  in  praises.  Paul  and  Timothy,  on 
hearing  of  the  spiritual  progress  of  the  Colossians,  did  not 
congratulate  one  another,  but  both  gave  the  glory  to  God. 
.So  much  had  Timothy  of  Paul's  own  spirit,  that  the  apostle 
had  no  hesitation  in  saying,  "We  thank  God." 

It  is  a  matter  of  dispute  whether  iravroTe  should  be  joined 
to  ev'^apLorTov/xev,  or  to  'Trpocrev')(op.evoi.  Chrysostom,  Theo- 
phylact,  Grotius,  Piscator,  Beza,  Luther,  Calvin,  Bengel,  Suicer, 
Grotius,  Bohmer,  and  Olshausen,  hold  the  second  view,  and 
render  with  the  English  version,  "  praying  always  for  you." 


6  COLOSSIANS   I.    3. 

But  if  we  follow  the  analogy  of  1  Cor.  i.  4,  1  Tliess.  i. 
2  Tliess.  i.  3,  Pbileni.  4,  Eph.  i.  16,  we  shall  join  nravTOTe 
to  the  first  verb.  So  think  Biihr,  Pierce,  Meyer,  De  Wette, 
and  Bamngarten-Crusius,  The  Syriac  version  follows  the 
same  exegesis — for  it  reads,  "  "We  give  thanks  for  you  always, 
and  pray  for  you;"  and  Cranmer's  Bible  of  1539 — "We  give 
thanks  to  God  alwayes  for  you  in  oure  prayers."  Besides, 
the  declaration  is,  that  the  intelligence  which  he  had  received 
filled  his  heart  with  gratitude,  and  impelled  him  to  give 
thanks.  The  Colossians  did  not  need  to  be  told  that  he 
prayed  for  them,  but  it  was  some  comfort  to  be  assured  by 
him,  that  when  he  did  pray  for  them  such  was  his  opinion  of 
them,  based  on  reports  which  he  had  received  about  them, 
that  he  gave  thanks  to  God  for  them.  He  would  have  prayed 
for  them,  whatever  their  spiritual  state,  and  the  worse  it  was, 
the  more  importunate  would  have  been  his  supplications,  but 
he  would  not  have  given  thanks  for  them  unless  he  had  been 
persuaded  of  their  spiritual  purity  and  progress.  Therefore 
he  adduces  these  reports  as  the  grounds  of  his  thanksgivings  ; 
and  the  spirit  of  his  language  is — "  Whenever  we  pray  about 
you,  we  always  give  thanks  for  you."  So  cheering  was  the 
intelligence  communicated  by  Epaphras,  that  thanksgiving 
w^as  uniformly  mingled  with  his  prayers  for  them,  and  the 
special  contents  of  those  prayers  are  mentioned  for  the  first 
time  in  verse  9.  This  exegesis  is  far  more  natural  than  that 
of  Olshausen,  who  says  that  the  thanksgiving  is  offered  at  the 
moment,  but  the  intercession  is  supposed  to  be  going  on,  and 
to  be  based  on  the  tidings  which  he  had  received.  Now, 
those  tidings  did  not  create  the  prayer,  but  being  so  good, 
they  naturally  induced  the  tiianksgiving.  "  We  always  give 
thanks  to  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  often 
as  we  pray  for  you,  because  we  have  heard  of  your  faith  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  love  to  all  the  saints." 

Uepl  vfiwv  irpoaev^ofievoi,  — "  praying  for  you."  The 
apostle  prayed  for  them — such  was  his  interest  in  them,  and 
sympathy  with  them,  that  he  bore  their  names  on  his  heart  at 
the  throne  of  grace.  Nor  could  such  an  "  effectual  fervent 
prayer  of  a  righteous  man  "  be  without  its  rich  results.  The 
suppliant  in  his  far-off  prison  was  like  the  prophet  on  Carmel, 
and  as  he  prayed,  the  "  little  cloud  "  might  be  descried,  which, 


I 


COLOSSIANS   I.   4,5.  7 

as  it  gradually  filled  and  darkened  the  horizon,  brought  with 
it  the  "  sound  of  abundance  of  rain." 

(Ver.  4.)  'AKovcravTe<i  rrjv  TrtcrTtv  vfiow  ev  XpiaTOi  'Irjaov, 
Kol  rr/u  dyciTrrjv  rjv  e')(eT€  eh  irdvTa'i  tov<;  djiovi.  The  words 
fjv  €')(eTe  are  introduced  into  the  text  on  the  concurrent 
authority  of  A,  C,  D,  E  \  F,  G,  the  Vulgate,  and  other  versions, 
with  many  of  the  Fathers.  The  apostle  now  expresses  the 
reason  why  he  gave  thanks,  the  participle  having  a  causal 
sense,  Kiihner,  ^  667;  Stuart,  ^  169.  Similar  phraseology 
occurs  in  Eph.  i.  15,  The  article  is  omitted  before  the 
proper  names  X.  'I.  Winer,  §19,2.  In  Ephesians,  the  apostle 
adds  Kvpio^,  and  prefixes  the  article  to  the  official  epithet ; 
but  here  the  simple  name  X.  'I.  from  common  usage,  occurs 
without  it.  Gal.  iii.  26.  A  different  form  of  construction, 
inserting  the  article  before  the  preposition — iria-rei  rfj  ev  X.  'I. 
— occurs  1  Tim.  iii.  13,  and  similarly  2  Tim.  i.  13.  That 
faith  reposed  in  Christ  Jesus — fixed  and  immoveable — for  it 
felt  satisfied  in  Him  as  a  Divine  Saviour.  [Eph.  i.  1.]  Paul's 
heart  had  been  gladdened  by  the  news  of  their  consistency  and 
spiritual  advancement,  and  in  the  fulness  of  his  joy  he  offered 
thanks  to  God.  It  is  not  necessary,  with  Locke  and  Pierce, 
to  take  TTto-Tt?  in  the  sense  of  fidelity,  "  sticking  to  the  grace 
of  God."  And  their  love  was  universal  in  its  sweep,  not 
toward  all  men,  but  toward  all  the  saints.  [d'yio<;,  Eph.  i.  1.] 
In  itself,  this  love  is  really  only  a  form,  or  manifestation  of 
love  to  the  Divine  object  of  their  faith,  for  it  is  affection  to 
Christ's  image  in  the  saints.  As,  though  a  mirror  is  broken,  each 
fragment  will  still  throw  out  the  same  reflection  in  miniature, 
and  that  perfectly,  so  the  saints,  as  a  body  and  individually, 
exhibit  the  same  blessed  and  divine  image  of  Christ  enshrined . 
with  them,  and  are  therefore  the  objects  of  Christian  love. 
Wlio  is  not  acquainted  with  the  language  of  Tertullian  ? — 
Sed  ej'usmodi  vel  maxime  dilcctionis  operatio  notam  nobis  inurit 
penes  quosdam,  vide,  inquiunt,  ut  invicem  se  diligant} 

(Ver.  5.)  Aid  rrjv  iX'n-iSa  ttjv  diroiceLjxevTf^v  v/xlv  ev  roi? 
ovpavoU — "  On  account  of  the  hope  laid  up  for  you  in 
heaven."  It  is  not  easy  to  fix  precisely  on  the  connection 
between  this  clause  and  the  preceding  statement.  It  is  a 
lame  and  superficial  exegesis  simply  to  say  that  the  apostle 
1  Apolojetkum,  xxxix.  p.  260,  Opera,  Tom.  1  ;  ed.  Oehler,  Lipsicae,  1853. 


8  COLOSSIANS   I.   5. 

merely  alludes  to  his  three  favourite  graces,  faith,  love,  and 
hope. 

But  1.  Grotius,  Wolf,  Davenant,  Estius,  Pierce,  Olshausen, 
De  Wette,  Bahr,  Heinrichs,  and  the  Socinian  expositors,  Crellius 
and  Slichting,  connect  it  with  the  two  preceding  clauses,  as  if 
it  told  the  reason  why  faith  and  love  were  formed  and 
cherished  within  them — your  faith  in  Christ,  and  love  to  all 
the  saints — graces  possessed  and  nurtured  "  in  consequence 
of  the  hope  laid  up  for  you  in  heaven."  With  such  a  view, 
the  connection  appears  to  be  elliptical,  and  not  very  clearly 
expressed  in  the  language  before  us.  Nor  do  we  think  it  a 
Pauline  sentiment.  The  apostle's  references  to  future  glory 
are  not  of  this  nature,  and  we  cannot  regard  him  as  placing 
faith  and  love  on  so  selfish  a  basis  as  the  mere  hope  of  a 
coming  recompense ;  for  Christ  is  worthy  of  that  faith,  and 
saints,  from  their  very  character,  elicit  that  love.  The  evan- 
gelical expositors  who  hold  this  view  have  to  maintain  a  stout 
protest  against  the  idea  that  they  favour  the  Popish  doctrine 
of  merit.  Davenant  formally  proposes  the  question,  "  whether 
it  be  lawful  to  do  good  works  with  a  view  to,  or  for  the  reward 
laid  up  in  heaven  ?  " 

2.  A  modified  and  more  tenable  view  is  held  by  Chrysos- 
tom,  and  some  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  as  well  as  Estius,  Calvin, 
Macknight,  Meyer,  and  Steiger,  who  refer  Bia  rrjv  iXirlSa 
solely  to  ayaTrrjv,  as  if  the  meaning  were,  This  love  is  not 
-  cherished  under  the  expectation  of  any  immediate  return,  but 
in  the  hope  of  ultimate  remuneration.  Still,  under  this 
hypothesis,  the  connection  appears  strained.  If  the  apostle 
had  said  that  they  loved  one  another  on  account  of  the 
common  hope  which  they  had  in  heaven,  or  that  the  prospect 
of  a  joint  inheritance  deepened  their  attachments  on  their 
journey  towards  it,  then  the  meaning  might  have  been  easily 
apprehended.  But  why  the  hope  in  itself  should  be  selected 
as  the  prop  of  such  love,  we  know  not.  Was  their  love  to 
all  the  saints  so  selfish,  that  it  could  live  only  in  expectation 
of  a  future  reward  ?  We  do  not  deny  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  rewards,  but  we  cannot  put  so  selfish  a  valuation  on  Christian 
love  as  this  exegesis  implies ;  for  of  all  the  graces,  it  has  the 
least  of  self  in  its  nature,  and  its  instinctive  gratification  is  its 
own  disinterested  reward. 


COLOSSIANS  I.   5.  3 

3.  We  incline,  then,  to  take  the  words  Sta  rr]v  iX-rrlSa  with 
the  initial  verb  euxaptcrTovfjiev.  "  Having  heard  of  your  faith 
in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the  love  which  ye  have  to  all  the  saints, 
as  often  as  we  pray  for  you,  we  thank  God,  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  on  account  of  the  hope  laid  up  for  you  in 
heaven,"  That  is  to  say,  the  report  of  their  faith  and  love 
prompted  him  to  give  thanks  ;  but  as  he  gave  thanks,  the  final  / 
issue  and  crown  of  those  graces  rose  into  prominence  before 
him,  and  he  adds,  "  on  account  of  the  hope  laid  up  for  you  in 
heaven."  Their  faith  and  love,  viewed  not  merely  in  present 
exercise,  but  also  in  their  ultimate  consummation  and  bliss, 
were  the  grounds  of  his  thanksgiving.  The  hope,  as  Bengel 
suggests,  shows  quanta  sit  causa  gratias  agendi  'pro  dono  fidei 
et  amoris.  The  fourth  verse  can  scarcely  be  called  a  paren- 
thesis. This  view  is,  generally,  that  of  Athanasius,  Bullinger, 
Calixtus,  Eisner,  Cocceius,  Storr,  Zanchius,  Bengel,  Schrader, 
Peile,  and  Conybeare.  Meyer  objects  that  in  the  other 
epistles  the  foundations  of  thanksgiving  are  subjective  in  their 
nature.  Nor  is  this  phraseology,  when  properly  viewed,  any 
exception.  For  faith  and  love  are  not  excluded  from  the 
grounds  of  thanksgiving,  and  hope  laid  up  is  not  wholly 
objective,  as  it  signifies  a  blessing  so  sure  and  attainable 
that  it  creates  hope.  Had  the  apostle  said,  "  for  the  happiness 
laid  up,"  the  objection  of  Meyer  might  have  applied,  but  he^ 
calls  it  "  hope  laid  up  " — a  reality  which  excites  and  sustains 
the  emotion  of  hope  in  the  present  state.  It  is  further  argued 
that  ev^apta-reiv  is  never  used  in  the  New  Testament  with 
Sid  to  express  the  ground  of  thanksgiving.  It  is  so;  but 
unless  the  objector  can  produce  a  parallel  place  to  this,  there  ^ 
is  really  no  difficulty.  If  a  writer  means  to  express  a  different 
shade  of  idea,  he  will  use  a  different  preposition.  Neither 
vTrep  nor  eVt  conveyed  the  precise  idea  of  the  clause  before 
us.  These  prepositions  would  have  denoted  that  the  hope 
was  in  itself  the  great  ground  of  gratitude ;  but  the  apostle, 
in  using  Sid,  says  that  the  hope,  while  it  is  so  noble  and  ^ 
promising,  has  a  special  and  ultimate  connection  with  the  faith 
and  love,  the  report  of  which  so  cheered  his  heart.  The  hope 
was  present  to  his  mind  when  he  said  euxapKrrovfMev,  but^^ 
other  and  subordinate  thoughts  intervene,  and  his  idea  is  so 
far  modified,  that  when  he  came  to  write  ekTrlSa,  he  prefixes  Sid. 


10  COLOSSIANS   I.  5. 

'£"X,7r/9  is  the  object  hoped  for — to  iX-jn^o/jievov.  [Eph.  i. 
18.]  In  Tr)v  aTTOK€Lfievr}v  is  the  idea  of  reservation  and 
security.  (Luke  xix.  20  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  8  ;  1  Pet.  i.  4.)^  It  is 
not  enjoyed  now — but  it  exists  now  ;  it  is  kept  in  store,  and 
will  certainly  be  possessed.  And  it  is  laid  up  ev  toU  ovpavoh, 
"  in  the  heavens " — in  that  high  region  of  felicity  and 
splendour — at  God's  right  hand,  which  guards  it,  and  in  the 
presence  of  Christ,  who  won  it,  and  will  bestow  it.  And  this 
heavenly  glory  is  an  object  of  hope  to  them  who  possess  this 
faith  and  love  for  these  good  reasons  : — 1.  It  is  future — as  it 
is  not  yet  enjoyed,  but  it  is  lying  over;  "hope  that  is  seen  is 
not  hope."  2.  It  is  future  good,  for  it  is  in  heaven,  the  scene 
of  all  that  is  fair  and  satisfying.  Coming  evil  excites  terror, 
but  distant  good  creates  hopeful  desire  and  anticipation.  For 
it  is  the  unimagined  glory  of  spiritual  perfection,  of  living  in 
the  unshaded  radiance  of  God's  face,  and  in  uninterrupted 
fellowship  with  Him,  and  the  thronging  myriads  round  about 
Him — the  signet  of  eternity  stamped  on  every  enjoyment.  3. 
Such  future  good  is  attainable.  Were  it  completely  beyond 
reach,  it  might  excite  a  romantic  wish  in  one  heart,  and  cover 
another  with  despair.  But  the  apostle  says  it  is  laid  up/or 
you.  It  will  therefore  be  enjoyed,  for  Christ  has  given  His 
pledge.  This  faith,  too,  will  elevate  the  spirit  to  heaven,  and 
that  love  will  prepare  it  for  those  supreme  enjoyments, 

"For  love  is  heaven,  and  heaven  is  love." 

'  Hv  TTporjKovaare  iv  raJ  Xoyay  t?}?  aXrjOeLa^  tov  evayyeXlov — 
"  Of  which  ye  have  already  heard  in  the  word  of  the  truth  of 
tlie  gospel."  The  verb  occurs  only  in  this  place  of  the  New 
Testament,  but  it  is  found  in  Herodotus,  Xenophon,  and  Jose- 
phus.^  In  the  irpo  compounded  with  the  verb,  De  Wette  and 
Olshausen  think  that  the  meaning  is — they  had  heard  of  the 
hope  in  promise  befo7'e  the  enjoyment  of  it.  Such  an  exegesis 
is  a  species  of  truism,  since  they  must  have  heard  before  they 
could  cherish  it.  Therefore  the  interpretation  of  Meyer  is 
equally  objectionable — before  ye  had  this  hope,  it  was  made 
I^nown  to  you,  it  was  communicated  to  you  as  a  novelty.  Nor 
can  we  say,  generally,  that  the  sense  is — ye  have  heard  of  it 

^  Loesner,  Ohserv.  ad  N.  T.  p.  360. 

^  Robinson,  Lexicon,  suh  voce.     Raphelius,  Annot.  Sac.  vol.  ii.  p.  525. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   5.  11 

'before  I  now  write  it.  But  the  meaning  seems  to  be — that 
the  hope  laid  up  in  heaven  was,  and  had  been,  a  prominent 
topic  of  preaching,  and  therefore  an  invariable  topic  of 
hearing  in  the  Christian  church.  That  izpo  has  the  sense  of 
"already"  we  have  shown  fully  under  Eph.  i.  12.  It  is  as 
if  he  meant  to  say — I  need  not  expatiate  on  this  hope,  bright 
and  glorious  though  it  be ;  you  are  not  unacquainted  with  it, 
for  in  the  earliest  teachings  of  the  gospel  when  it  came  to 
you,  ye  heard  of  it — heard  of  it — 

'£y  Tft)  X070J  T779  aXr]deia<i.  We  cannot  agree  with  Chrysos- 
tom,  Erasmus,  Heinrichs,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Storr,  and  others, 
in  giving  the  genitive  an  adjectival  sense,  as  if  the  meaning 
were  "  the  true  and  genuine  gospel."  The  noun  akrjOeia'i  is 
made  prominent  by  the  article  prefixed  to  it,  and  the  idiom  de- 
notes that  "  the  truth  "  was  the  sum  and  substance  of  the  X0709, 
or  oral  communication  made  to  them  by  the  first  teachers  of 
Christianity.  ^4070?  refers  to  the  fact  that  their  first  teaching 
was  oral,  and  not  epistolary,  or  by  inspired  manuscript ;  and 
this  "  word,"  or  verbal  tuition,  had  the  truth  for  its  pith  and 
marrow.  But  the  form  of  truth  which  had  been  presented  to 
their  minds  was  no  common  aspect  of  it.  It  belonged,  not 
to  philosophy  or  human  speculation — it  was  the  truth  tov 
evayyeXiov,  "  of  the  gospel."  This  genitive  is  not  in  apposition 
with  T^9  a\7]deLa<i,  as  Calvin,  Beza,  Olshausen,  De  Wette, 
Bohmer,  and  Huther  suppose,  but  it  has  its  distinctive  meaning 
— the  truth  which  belongs  to  the  gospel,  or  is  its  peculiar  and 
characteristic  message.  [akriOeia,  evayyeXiov,  Eph.  i.  13.] 
"  The  word  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel "  could  alone  reveal  the 
nature  and  tlie  certainty  of  future  and  celestial  blessedness. 
The  idea  and  expectation  of  spiritual  felicity  and  glory  in 
heaven  are  not  connected  with  the  sciences  of  earth,  which 
deal  so  subtly  with  the  properties  and  relations  of  mind  and 
matter.  These  forms  of  knowledge  and  discovery  lead  but  to 
the  lip  of  the  grave,  and  desert  us  amidst  the  dreary  wail  of 
dust  to  dust  and  ashes  to  ashes,  but  the  truth  contained  in  the 
gospel  throws  its  radiance  beyond  the  sepulchre,  unvails  the 
portals  of  eternity,  and  discloses  the  reality,  magnitude,  and 
cliaracter  of  "  the  hope  laid  up  in  heaven."  And,  therefore, 
every  blessing  which  the  gospel  makes  known  has  futurity  in 
its  eye — an  eye  that  pierces  beyond  the  present  horizon ;  and 


12  COLOSSIANS  I.   6. 

the  Christian  life,  in  the  meantime,  is  one  as  much  of  expec- 
tation as  of  positive  enjoyment. 

(Ver.  6.)  Tov  irapovro'i  eh  viia<;  Ka6cb<;  Koi  iv  Travrl  t&j 
Koa-fio) — "Which  has  come  to  you,  as  it  has  come  in  all  the 
world."  ^  The  verb  is  used  with  7r/po9  in  Acts  xii.  20;  2 
Cor.  xi.  9  ;  Gal.  iv.  18,  20,  in  which  instances  the  presence 
of  persons  is  referred  to,  both  in  subject  and  object.  Here 
it  is  followed  by  eh  in  the  first  clause,  and  iv  in  the 
second  clause.  In  the  one,  by  ek,  the  idea  of  travel  prior 
to  advent  is  implied  ;  in  the  other,  by  iv,  the  notion  of  simple 
presence  is  affirmed,  Klihner,  §  622,  The  gospel  had  come  to 
them,  was  brought  to  them,  and  was  now  with  them,  or  in 
their  possession.  (2  Pet.  i.  9.)  Or,  as  Theophylact  says,  ov 
irapeyevero,  (^tjctlv,  '7rpb<;  v/j,a<i,  koi  airearr)^  aXka  irdpeaTi  koI 
Kparel  iv  vjjiiv.  This  idea  suggested  the  Coptic  rendering 
{Phai  etsJiop) — "  which  abideth  or  dwelleth."  And  surely 
such  a  gift  they  would  keep  as  their  own,  prize  highly,  love 
dearly,  and  never  suffer  it  to  be  contaminated  with  popular 
errors,  or  exchange  it  for  those  mystical  reveries  which  were 
broached  among  them.  For  while  the  errors  which  the  apostle 
is  about  to  reprobate  were  limited  in  their  origin  and  popu- 
larity, this  gospel  was  "in  all  the  world."  We  see  no 
necessity  for  choosing  a  new  verb,  and  supplying  the  simple 
eartv,  while  Trdpecm  is  suggested  at  once  by  the  preceding 
clause.  It  was  in  all  the  world,  because  it  had  come  to  it. 
It  was  not  indigenous  in  any  country,  but  was  there  merely 
because  it  had  been  carried  there.  This  expression  is  not  to 
be  scanned  with  narrow  minuteness.  We  cannot,  with  j 
Olshausen  and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  look  upon  it  as  a  pro-  | 
phetic  or  ideal  statement ;  nor  can  we,  with  Michaelis,  limit 
it  to  the  Pioman  empire.  The  phrase  is  similarly  used  by 
Paul  in  Piom.  i.  8.  That  world  which  lay  all  round  about 
them — those  countries  which  to  them  were  the  world,  and 
were  by  them  so  named,  had  been  brought  into  contact 
with  the  gospel.  It  arose  in  Judtea,  but  burst  its  narrow 
barriers,  and  came  forth  with  world-wide  adaptation,  offers, 
and  enterprise.     The    labours    of   the    other    apostles    in   so 

^  Raphelius,  Annotat.  ii.  525,  526  ;  Krebs,  Ohservat.  333  :  the  former  showing 
from  the  classics,  and  the  latter  from  Josephus,  that  in  -raau/ui  is  the  notion  of 
arrival.     Passow,  sub  voce. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   6.  13 

many  countries  of  the  east  and  west  warranted  the  phrase- 

Kal  €<TTiv  KapTTO^opov/xevov  KoX  av^avo/xevov. 

Kai  is  omitted  by  Lachmann,  and  Griesbach  is  virtually  of 
the  same  opinion.  It  is  wanting  in  A,  B,  C,  D^,  E\  in  several 
Minuscules,  and  in  the  Coptic  and  Sahidic  versions  ;  but  it  is 
found  in  D^,  E^,  F,  Gr,  J,  K,  the  Vulgate,  and  Syriac,  and  in  the 
Greek  Fathers.  The  authority  of  Codices  against  it  is  almost 
balanced  by  that  of  Codices  in  its  favour.  The  words  koI 
av^av.  are  added  to  the  Stephanie  text  on  the  evidence  of  A, 
B,  C,  D\  E\  F,  G,  J,  and  many  other  concurrent  witnesses, 
such  as  almost  all  the  Versions.  Were  the  first  Kat  not 
genuine,  there  would  be  a  vital  change  of  syntax.  But  with  it 
there  is  only  a  common  change.  Ktihner,  §  863;  Winer,  §  64.^ 
The  reading  we  adopt  frees  the  text  from  much  entangle- 
ment of  thought  and  diction.  That  gospel  in  all  the  world 
was  no  idle  and  barren  speculation — a  tinted  cloud  without 
rain,  or  a  polished  cistern  without  water.  Or  rather,  it  was  as 
a  tree — yielding  his  fruit  in  his  season :  whose  leaf  never 
fadeth.  The  gospel  bore  choice  and  noble  clusters  of  fruit. 
It  is  not  a  ceremonial  to  be  gazed  at,  or  a  congeries  of  opinions 
to  be  discussed.  It  is  essentially  a  practical  system,  for  its 
ethics  are  involved  in  its  creed  and  worship.  It  makes  the 
heart  its  home,  and  diffuses  its  control  and  its  impulses  over 
thought  and  action,  over  motive  and  life.  That  fruit  is  the 
assemblage  of  graces  which  adorn  the  Christian  character. 

The  reference  in  koX  av^av.  is  variously  understood.  Gro- 
tius,  Olshausen,  and  Steiger  refer  it  to  internal  growth,  or  the 
growing  and  ripening  of  the   fruits  themselves.     We  prefer 

^  Olshausen  thus  states  the  case  : — "  Here  the  connection  of  the  words  is  dis- 
putable, in  consequence  of  the  different  readings  ;  St.  Paul's  discourse  proceeds 
with  Kx&us  Kai  thrice  repeated  :  it  is  true  the  xal  is  wanting  in  the  third,  in  very 
many  and  important  MSS. ,  but  the  omission  is  far  more  explicable  because  it  had 
already  been  put  twice  before,  than  the  addition  of  it.  But  then  A,  C,  D,  read  in 
the  beginning  of  verse  6  kcc^m;  xxi  Iv  -ravri  to!  xitrfnu  'ifn  xa^'ro(pt>^ou/icit/».  By  that 
reading  the  proposition  xct^as — xoV^*  is  separate  from  what  precedes,  and  joined 
with  what  follows,  which  brings  with  it  the  great  inconvenience  that  then  the 
words  xa^Ms  xai  iv  bfjuu  do  not  fit  the  beginning  of  the  proposition  xaiu;  xai  h 
ranri  TM  x'offfta,  since  the  Colossians  are  to  be  conceived  as  included  of  course  with 
the  rest  in  the  whole  world.  It  is  with  reason,  therefore,  that  Steiger,  Biihr,  and 
)thers  have  retained  xa)  'iim  x'/.p-rofopouf/.-^/n,  and  supplied  eVt/  at  xa(oj;  xa)  e»  Tavrl 
rat  xivfiti)." 


14  COLOSSIANS    I.   6. 

the  idea  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  for  Theodoret  explains  it  thus. 
— av^rjaiv  he  twv  TncrTevovroiv  to  7r\rj6o<;,  that  is,  the  growth 
is  the  external  diffusion  of  the  gospel.  That  fruit-bearing 
gospel  was  extending  itself.  To  keep  the  figure  of  the  apostle, 
it  was  like  a  tree,  whose  fruit,  falling  to  the  earth,  germinated, 
so  that  there  sprang  up  a  youthful  and  healthy  forest  on  all 
sides  of  it,  or  like  the  Eastern  banyan,  whose  tall  boughs,  as 
they  bend  themselves  in  a  graceful  curve  to  the  ground,  enter 
it,  and  fastening  into  it  a  new  root,  rise  up  again  in  verdure, 
and  on  reaching  the  requisite  height,  stoop  as  before  and  repeat 
the  same  process  of  self -plantation  till  field  upon  field  is 
covered  with  the  progeny  of  its  arches  and  alcoves.  Thus 
did  the  gospel  make  progress — the  disciples  preached  it  around 
them,  and  their  converts  becoming  preachers  in  turn, 
widened  the  circle  of  its  influence  and  conquests.  Acts  xii. 
24,  xix.  20.  KaOoi'^  kuI  iv  v/xiv — "as  indeed  among  you." 
What  the  gospel  produced  and  achieved  in  the  world,  it 
produces  and  achieves  among  you.  It  exhibited  the  same 
vitality,  fruitfulness,  and  power  of  self-diffusion  in  Colosse, 
as  in  the  regions  round  about  it.  And  those  elements 
of  the  gospel  had  not  been  of  slow  production,  or  periodical 
manifestation — it,  says  Paul,  had  been  so  among  you — 

A^  rj<i  r]iMepa<i  rfKovaare  Kol  iire'yvwTe  tt]v  y^dpiv  tov  Qeov 
iv  uXTjOela — "  From  the  day  ye  heard  it,  and  knew  the 
grace  of  God  in  truth."  This  peculiar  form  of  elliptical 
construction  by  the  incorporation  of  the  noun  into  the  rela- 
tive clause  is  not  uncommon ;  Winer,  §  24  ;  Bernhardy,  p. 
302.  The  accusative  to  the  first  verb  rjKova-are  is  eva'yye.Xtov. 
It  was  the  gospel  which  they  had  heard.  This  was  the 
external  and  audible  form  of  that  grace  which  they  had  been 
privileged  to  know.  It  was  by  hearing  it,  or  by  verbal  in- 
struction about  it,  that  they  had  become  acquainted  with  it. 
The  preposition  eVt,  with  jLvdoaKO),  has  an  intensive  sense,  as 
has  been  proved  by  us  under  Eph.  i.  17.  By  hearing  the 
gospel  they  had  come  to  know  fully  the  grace  of  God — for 
the  grace  of  God  is  the  essence  of  the  gospel,  or  the  glorious 
fact  which  it  communicates.  It  is  the  good  news  that  God 
has  in  His  sovereign  favour  pitied  and  blessed  the  world,  and 
conferred  upon  it  an  unmerited  and  unexpected  salvation — 
that  while  He  have  might  punished.  He  resolved  to  pardon — 


COLOSSIA.NS   I.   6.  15 

that  when  He  might  have  permitted  the  law  to  take  its  course, 
He  has  founded  an  economy  of  grace  which  man  had  no  right 
to  anticipate,  and  Himself  was  under  no  obligation  to  intro- 
duce. In  every  element  of  the  gospel,  in  its  pardon  and 
purity,  in  its  hope  and  life,  in  its  means  as  well  as  in  its 
offers  of  deliverance,  in  its  application  no  less  than  its  pro- 
vision of  saving  blessings,  in  its  precepts  as  much  as  in  its 
privileges,  there  is  felt  and  known  in  its  peculiar  ascendancy 
and  fulness,  "  the  grace  of  God."   [%«pi9,  Eph.  ii.  8.] 

The  last  words,  e'v  dXrjd.,  are  connected  in  various  ways. 
1.  Some  give  the  phrase  the  force  of  an  adjectival  epithet,  and 
join  it  to  %a/3t? — "  the  true  grace  "  of  God.  Such  is  the  view 
of  Storr,  Homberg,  Pierce,  Barnes,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius. 
This  interpretation  is  without  point.  2,  Grotius  and  Musculus 
depart  still  farther  from  the  true  syntax  by  their  paraphrase 
— "the  grace  of  God  revealed  in  the  word  of  truth."  3. 
Beza,  Crocius,  Olshausen,  Steiger,  Hutlier,  De  Wette,  Meyer, 
and  Winer,  join  the  phrase  to  the  verb,  "  and  truly  or  really  " 
knew  the  grace  of  God.  The  knowledge  possessed  by  the 
Colossians  is  thus  supposed  to  be  distinguished  from  a  false  or 
fictitious  knowledge  of  the  Divine  grace.  4.  We  prefer,  with 
Bahr  and  Calvin,  a  different  shade  of  the  same  exegesis,  givino- 
to  the  phrase  an  objective  meaning,  as  if  the  apostle  meant 
to  say — the  grace  which  they  knew  had  been  presented  to 
them  "  in  its  truth,"  for  they  had  learned  it  from  Epaphras. 
The  preceding  forms  of  exegesis  are  inferences  from  this.  It 
was  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  scheme  of  grace  which  they 
had  learned,  or  they  possessed  a  true  knowledge  of  the  plan  of 
mercy,  because,  as  the  next  verse  shows,  Epaphras  had  taught 
them  the  gospel  in  its  fulness  and  purit}^  This  is  also  the 
idea  of  CEcumenius,  though  Theophylact  and  Chrysostom 
erroneously  include  the  notion  of  miracles  as  confirming  the 
truth.  We  understand  the  apostle  to  write  thus — since  the 
day  ye  heard  it,  and  fully  knew  the  grace  of  God  in  truth, 
!  as  indeed  in  that  true  and  complete  form  ye  learned  it 
from  Epaphras ;  or,  as  Calvin  explains,  testatus  est  sincere  illis 
fuisse  tradituin.  The  words  iv  aXr)6.  describe  the  teaching  of 
Epaphras,  or  represent  that  genuine  form,  in  which,  by  his 
preaching,  the  grace  of  God  had  been  exhibited  at  Colosse. 
It  is  probable  that  in  this  statement  there  are  various  points 


16  COLOSSIANS   I.   7. 

of  implied  contrast  with  those  corrupt  representations  which' 
are  mentioned  and  refuted  in  the  subsequent  chapter,  Thus- 
the  grace  of  God  had  been  taught  them  without  mutilation 
or  admixture,  but  false  philosophy  shaded  or  curtailed 
its  doctrines.  The  gospel  was  oecumenical,  but  the  error 
which  menaced  them  was  only  provincial  in  its  sphere. 
The  truth  exhibited  the  basis  and  objects  of  a  blessed  hope, 
but  falsehood  darkened  the  horizon,  and  while  the  gospel 
yielded  great  abundance,  such  fictitious  dogmas  were  barren 
and  empty — a  tree  with  leaves,  but  without  fruit. 

The  apostle  says — "since  ye  knew  the  grace  of  God  in 
truth,"  or  in  its  true  form,  "just  as  ye  learned  it  from 
Epaphras  " — 

(Ver.  7.)  KaOcb'i  ifjuaOere  diro  ^Eirai^pa.  The  Kal  found 
in  the  Received  Text  after  Ka6a)<;,  is  justly  excluded  on  the 
authority  of  A,  B,  C,  D^,  F,  G,  17,  23,  etc.  It  may  have  come 
into  the  text  from  its  frequent  employment  in  such  an  idiom 
by  the  apostle.  It  might  be  replied,  however,  that  as,  from 
an  old  tradition,  Epaphras  was  supposed  to  be  the  only 
founder  of  the  church,  the  kuI  was  omitted,  as  seeming  to 
militate  against  such  a  belief.  Wiggers,  indeed,  has  formally 
raised  such  an  argiiment.^  But  even  were  Kal  genuine,  might 
it  not  mean  "  really,"  or  "  indeed  " — "  as  ye  indeed  learned  of 
Epaphras "  ?  The  teaching  of  Epaphras  is  thus  sealed  and 
sanctioned  by  inspired  authority.  The  apostle  had  no  mean 
jealousy  of  a  colleague  who  is  further  characterized  as  "  our 
beloved  fellow-servant " — 

Tov  dyaTrrjTov  avvhovXov  rjf^cov.  The  noun  occurs  again  in 
iv.  7.  Like  6/x.oSou\o9,  the  old  Attic  form,  it  signifies  "fellow- 
servant,"  Conybeare  and  Macknight  are  found  at  opposite 
extremes  about  the  term ;  the  former  rendering  it  "  fellow- 
bondsman,"  with  unnecessary  emphasis,  and  the  latter  uttering 
the  sentimental  conjecture  that  Paul  used  the  word  because 
he  did  not  wish  to  grieve  the  Colossian  church  by  telling 
them  that  their  Epaphras  was  in  prison  with  him.  Timothy, 
Paul,  and  Epaphras  not  only  served  a  common  master,  but 
were  engaged  in  the  same  service ;  and  therefore  this  com- 
munity of  labour  begat  a  special  attachment.  The  heart  of 
the  apostle  was  knit  in  cordial  affection  to  all  his  fellow- 

'  Shidien  und  Kritiken,  1838,  j).  185. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   7.  17 

labourers.  He  had  none  of  that  ignoble  rivalry  which  just 
"  hints  a  fault  and  hesitates  dislike."  He  felt  no  envy  at 
their  success,  but  was  so  identified  with  their  work,  that 
whatever  gladdened  them  gladdened  him ;  he  shared  in  their 
triumphs  and  was  saddened  at  their  reverses.  Still  more,  it 
is  testified  of  Epaphras — 

"0<i  icrrc  TrtcrTOf  virep  Vficov  BidKovo<;  tov  Xpiarou — "  who  is 

for  you  a  faithful  minister  of  Christ."     The  noun  Siukovo^  is 

used  in  a  general  sense,  as  may  be  seen  under  Eph.  iii.  7. 

[TTtcTTo?  SidKovo<;,  Eph.  vi.  21.]     The  reading  vTrep  v/xayv  has 

been  called  in  question,  and  virep  rjfiaiv  is  adopted  by  Lach- 

mann,  Bengel,  Olshausen,  and  Steiger.     In  favour  of  this  last 

reading  are  A,  B\  D,  G ;  and  in  favour  of  the  former  are  C, 

D^,  E,  F,  G,  K,  and  others,  with  almost  all  the  versions  and 

Fathers.     Where  external  testimony  is  so  decided,  we  cannot 

accede  to  Olshausen's  pleading  of  any  internal  evidence.     And 

the  meaning  attached  to    vTrep  rifiMV — vice  apostoli,  in   our 

stead — can  scarcely  be  correct,  since  Epaphras  was  not  simply 

an  apostolical  representative,  for  in  Tjfjuwv  Timothy  is  included 

along  with  Paul.     Nor  is  it  necessary  to  give  virep  the  sense 

of  "in  room  of,"  in  Luke  ix.  50,  for  there  the  phrase  means 

'  on  our  side."     The  phrase  then  virep  v/jlcov  means  "  on  your 

behalf."  2  Cor.  iv.  5.     The  faithful  labours  of  Epaphras  were 

directed  to  the  spiritual  benefit  of  the  Colossian  church.     For 

them  he  served,  and  served  faithfully,  in  the  gospel  of  Christ. 

A  brief  but  noble  eulogy.     As  he  had  devoted  to  them  every 

energy,  kept  among  them,  and  prayed  with  and  for  them,  as 

he  had  presented  to  them  a  complete  and  symmetrical  view 

of  the  gospel,  and  as  their  correct  knowledge  of  Divine  grace 

was  based  upon  his  teaching,  and  their  spiritual  eminence  and 

fertility  were  the  result  of  his  patient  and  painstaking  efforts, 

therefore  were  they  to  love  him  in  his  absence,  and  surely 

bhey  would  allow  no  false  teacher  to  supplant  him  in  their 

iffection.     Probably   the    encomium  was    a  virtual  warning, 

br,  as  Theodoret  says,  ttoXXoZ?  Be  avrov  iKo/xiaev  iyK(t)/jbLoi<i — 

■va  avToh  7r\elovo<;   alSov<i  d^tcorepo'i   'yepTjrac.      It  is  a  faint 

dew  of  Chrysostom  to  imagine  that  the  faithful  service  here 

'eferred  to,  is  but  the  truthful  report  of  the  spiritual  condition 

)f  the   Colossians,  which    Epaphras    had    brought  to  Eome. 

5uch  a  slight  message  could  scarce  be  called  a  service,  and  it 


18  COLOSSIANS   I.   8. 

is  therefore  to  fidelity  of  ministerial  labour  at  Colosse  that 
the  apostle  refers.  It  is  wholly  a  caricature  of  the  words 
to  suppose,  with  Calixtus,  Michaelis,  and  Bohmer,  that  as 
Epaphras  was  the  apostle's  fellow-prisoner,  he  alludes  to 
personal  services  done  by  the  Colossian  pastor  to  himself,  as 
if  he  had  said — "  who  is,  in  your  room,  a  faithful  servant  of 
Christ  to  me." 

(Ver.  8.)  'O  koI  Sr]\ooaa<i  r/fuv  rrjv  vjxoiv  ayaTTTjv  ev  Trvev/jbari 
— "Who  has  besides  made  known  to  us  your  love  in  the 
Spirit."  It  narrows  the  meaning  too  much  to  restrict  this 
love  to  the  apostle  himself  and  Timothy — "  your  love  to  us." 
Yet  this  is  the  view  of  the  great  majority  of  expositors,  from 
Chrysostom  in  early  times,  and  Erasmus  and  Grotius  in  later 
days,  down  to  Bahr,  Bohmer,  Steiger,  Huther,  and  Baumgarten- 
Crusius.  But  the  language  of  the  apostle  does  not  warrant 
such  a  sense  except  by  inference.  Nor  may  the  phrase  be 
applied  solely  to  brother-love,  but,  with  Meyer,  Theodoret, 
Heinrichs,  and  De  Wette,  we  take  it  in  a  general  sense  as 
denoting  the  Christian  grace  of  love.  And  the  reason  why 
this  grace  is  selected  and  eulogized  is  evident  from  the  con- 
cluding words — it  was  love  "  in  the  Spirit " — 

'Ev  irveviiaTL.  To  give  this  phrase,  as  in  the  opinion  of 
Eosenmiiller,  a-Lapide,  TroUope,  and  others,  the  mere  sense  of 
true  Christian  love,  is  a  weak  dilution.  Nor  can  we  with 
"Wolf  and  others  regard  it  as  in  tacit  contrast  to  ev  aapKt,  a 
love  based  on  domestic  or  national  ties ;  or  as  if  the  mean- , 
ing  were — a  love  to  the  absent  apostle  which  must  be  spiritual,  \ 
as  they  had  never  seen  his  face  in  the  flesh.  The  words,  as 
in  Pauline  usage,  refer  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  point  out  the 
source  and  sphere  of  this  gracious  affection.  Thus,  Eom,  xiv. 
17,  %a/3a  iv  TTvev/xari.  Gal.  v.  22  ;  Eom.  xv.  13.  'Ev  will 
not  stand  for  Btd,  as  Grotius  renders  it.  Not  as  if  Epaphras 
had  spoken  only  of  their  love,  and  had  made  no  mention  of 
their  other  spiritual  attainments.  But  love  is  regarded  as  the 
crown  and  consequence  of  all  the  other  graces,  and  the  men- 
tion of  it  presupposed  their  lively  and  effective  exercise.  For 
this  love  is  no  affection  based  on  common  relations — such  as 
human  friendship  or  social  instincts.  It  is  the  offspring  o£ 
spiritual  influence  in  a  heart  so  full  of  antagonism  by  nature 
to  what  is  good  and  pure.     The  Spirit  of  Him  who  is  Love 


COLOSSIANS   I.   9.  19 

takes  possession  of  the  believing  bosom,  and  exerts  upon  it 
His  own  assimilating  power.  And  as  love  is  at  the  same  time 
the  combined  product  or  resulting  fervour  of  the  other  graces, 
as  it  gives  man  his  closest  resemblance  to  God,  as  it  is  the 
life  and  glory  of  heaven ;  and  as  it  is  the  great  object  of  the 
gospel  to  create  and  perfect  it  in  the  church,  it  may  be  safely 
taken  as  the  index  of  spiritual  advancement.  The  more  it  is 
seen  in  its  vivid  sympathies  with  all  that  is  fair  and  God-like, 
the  more  its  genial  harmonies  pervade  the  churches,  the 
more  its  chivalrous  impulses  are  felt,  the  more  token  is  there 
that  the  Spirit  of  God  has  been  in  powerful  and  characteristic 
operation,  and  therefore  as  the  true  summation  or  totality  of 
its  various  spiritual  gifts,  a  Christian  community  may  be 
congratulated  on  its  love.  When  Epaphras  declared  their 
"  love  in  the  Spirit,"  he  spoke  of  the  result,  and  from  such  a 
result  it  was  at  once  inferred  what  a  Divine  change  had  been 
wrought,  and  how  the  elements  of  that  change  had  been 
surely  and  successively  developed  and  matured.  "  He  that 
dwelleth  in  love,  dwelleth  in  God,  and  God  in  him." 

The  reader  will  easily  mark  the  course  of  thought.  In 
verse  3,  the  apostle  intimates  that  as  he  prayed,  he  gave  thanks 
for  them.  Then  naturally  he  tells  the  reason,  but  the  telling 
of  the  reason  in  full  prevents  him  from  recording  at  once 
what  formed  the  theme  of  his  prayer.  Now,  however,  in 
verse  9,  he  reverts  to  the  contents  of  his  supplications,  and 
he  says  that  he  asked  from  God,  for  the  Colossians,  blessings 
fitted  for  mind,  heart,  and  conduct, — a  higher  degree  of 
knowledge,  holiness,  usefulness,  persistence,  and  strength — all 
of  them  at  once  gifts  of  present  possession,  and  elements  of 
preparation  too  for  future  blessedness — all  of  them  provided 
by  the  Father,  and  enjoyed  by  those  who  have  been  translated 
into  the  kingdom  of  His  Son. 

(Ver.  9.)  Aia  rovro  koI  rjfiel^,  d(j)  rj^  r][iepa<i  rjKovcraixev,  ov 
iravofieOa  virep  vfjbwv  Trpoaev^ofxei'ot,  Kol  alrovfjLevoi — "  On  this 
account,  we  too,  since  the  day  we  heard  of  it,  cease  not 
praying  and  asking."  Aca  tovto — on  this  account,  because  ye 
know  the  grace  of  God  in  truth — because  such  are  your  con- 
dition and  prospects — because  of  the  faith  which  sustains  you, 
the  love  which  glows  within  you,  the  blessed  hope  laid  up  for 
you,  and  the   verdant  fertility   which  characterizes   you,  and 

E 


20  COLOSSIANS  I.   9. 

sets  its  seal  on  the  genuineness  of  your  Christianity.  Kal 
r)ixeh — "  we  too,"  we  on  our  part.  There  is  no  reason,  with 
I)e  Wette,  for  subjoining  the  Kai  to  hia  tovto  and  rendering 
"  on  this  account,  indeed."  The  plirase  a^'  ?^9  ri/xepa<i  not 
only  refers  to  verse  8,  but  carries  us  back  to  verse  4.  The 
receipt  of  the  intelligence  produced  immediate  result,  and  led 
to  prayer.  The  report  did  not  lie  in  dormancy,  or  slowly 
wake  up  the  reciprocal  love  of  Paul  and  Timothy.  The  effect 
was  instant — and  it  was  not  spent  witli  a  single  impulse. 
From  the  day  we  heard  it  down  to  the  period  of  our  writing 
this  letter — "  we  cease  not."  This  continuous  prayer  is 
explained  by  the  beautiful  remark  of  Augustine  on  Psalra 
xxxvii. — ips'um  dcsiderium  tuum  oratio  hia  est,  si  continuuni 
est  desiderium — continua  est  oratio. 

The  verb  TravofxeOa  is  here  followed  by  a  participle, 
irpoa-ev^o/xevoL  Kal  acTov/xevoi,,  and  not  by  the  infinitive.  There 
is  indeed  a  difference  of  meaning  in  the  two  usaijes,  as  the 
participle  expresses  an  action  which  already  exists.  Winer,  § 
45,  4;  Bernhardy,  p.  477.  [Eph.  i.  16.]  The  distinction 
between  the  two  participles  has  been  variously  understood. 
But  the  best  mode  of  characterizino-  the  difference  is  to  regard 
the  one  as  general,  and  the  other  as  special ;  the  first  is  prayer 
in  its  ordinary  aspect,  and  the  second  is  direct  request.  But 
it  is  an  error  on  the  part  of  Baumgarten-Crusius  to  say  that 
iva  depends  upon  the  last  participle — for  Trpoa-ev-^o/jiaL  is 
lollowed  by  the  conjunction  in  Matt,  xxiv.  20  ;  Mark  xiii. 
18;  1  Cor.  xiv.  13.  The  phrase  vvep  v/jlcov  belongs  also  to 
both  participles.  What  the  special  object  of  supplication  was 
is  now  made  known.      Praying — 

"Iva  irXrjpoidT^Te  rijv  eTTiyvcoaLV  rov  OeXi^fiaio^i  avrou — 
"  that  ye  may  be  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  His  will."  [As 
to  this  use  of  iva,  see  Eph.  i.  17.]  The  verb  irXTjpovv,  like 
the  correspondent  term  in  Hebrew,  governs  two  accusatives 
in  the  active  conjugation,  and  may  therefore  govern  one  of 
them  in  the  passive.  The  genitive  is  the  case  oftenest 
employed  in  the  New  Testament  to  denote  the  complement — 
that  with  which  the  action  of  the  verb  is  realized.  In  this 
use  of  the  accusative  there  is  no  need,  with  Beza  and  Erasmus, 
to  supply  Kara.  Winer,  ^  32,  5.^  We  cannot  agree  Avith 
1  Moulton,  p.  287,  note  2. 


COLOSSIANS  I.   9.  21 

Olshausen,  that  'yvwca  and  i'iTl<yv(oai<;  have  no  distinction  in 
the  diction  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  We  have  shown  the  true 
difference  under  Eph.  i.  17.  The  vague  definition  of  Steiger 
cannot  be  sustained  ;  it  is  wrapt  in  uncertainty,  and  is  at 
best  but  a  metaphysical  subtlety.  The  idea  of  Bahr,  that 
eTrlyvcoafi  is  subjective,  and  yvwcrc^  is  also  objective,  is  only 
a  partial  view.  'Ettljv.  is  full  knowledge  exhaustive  of  its 
object,  and  is  especially  meant  for  those  who  have  already 
some  little  yva}(rL<i.  The  Colossians  had  <yvojo-i<;,  but  the  apostle 
M'ished  them  to  be  filled  with  additional  and  supplemental 
knowledge,  not  new  knowledge,  or  a  different  form  or  section 
of  Christian  science,  but  a  fuller  development  of  the  partial 
theological  information  which  they  already  possessed.  Had 
he  gently  wished  them  somewhat  more  of  knowledge,  he 
might  have  used  yvcoaa,  but  as  he  prayed  that  they  might  be 
filled  with  more  of  that  insight  which  they  already  enjoyed, 
such  an  accumulation  was  naturally  expressed  by  iirlyvwa-L^. 

That  augmentation  of  knowledge  had  for  its  theme  the 
Divine  will.  We  apprehend  that  the  principal  fault  of 
commentators  has  been  to  restrict  too  much  the  meaning  of 
the  phrase,  "  His  will,"  Chrysostom,  and  the  Greek  Fathers 
fficumenius  and  Theophylact,  followed  by  Huther,  refer  it  to 
the  plan  of  redemption — especially  salvation  by  Christ,  not  by 
angels — TouTeVrt  to  tov  v'thv  hodrjvaL  inrep  7]fia>v.  Others 
refer  it  to  the  secret  purpose  of  God — such  as  Suicer  and 
Bahr,  and  that  because  it  is  elsewhere  accompanied  by 
fjLvarrrjpiov.  A  third  and  numerous  party  understand  the 
legislative  will  of  God — the  ethical  feature  of  the  Divme 
counsel,  such  as  Theodoret,  De  Wette,  and  Meyer.  We  are 
inclined  to  take  the  phrase  without  any  restriction — the 
Divine  will  as  well  in  creed  as  in  moral  obligation ;  the  one 
basis  alike  of  what  we  ought  to  believe  and  of  what  we  ought 
to  do  ;  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  manners.  1  Cor.  i.  4,  5,  7, 
ii.  12,  xii.  8;  Eph.  i.  17.  The  apostle  implored  for  them 
a  complete  knowledge  of  the  Divine  Will  in  all  its  revealed 
aspects  and  elements — 

'Ev  Trdcrrj  <ro(pla,  koI  crvveaet  TrvevfMaTLKrj — "  in  all  wisdom 
and  spiritual  insight."  Some  join  the  clause  to  the  following 
verse,  but  without  any  necessity.  The  preposition  does  not 
signify  "  along  with,"  nor  does  it,  as   Boehmer   thinks,  define 


22  COLOSSIANS  I.   9. 

the  result.  Nor  does  it  mean,  as  Biihr  takes  it,  "  by  means 
of ; "  nor  does  it,  as  Huther  supposes,  point  out  the  quality  of 
the  knowledge.  It  seems  to  refer  us  to  the  mode  of  its 
acquisition — "  in  all  wisdom  and  understanding."  The  prayer 
was  not  one  for  plenary  inspiration — nor  that  God  would  by 
some  dazzling  self-discovery  imbue  them  with  a  knowledge  of 
His  will,  but  that  He  would  give  them  this  higher  spiritual 
science  in  the  way  of  giving  them  all  spiritual  wisdom  and 
understanding.  These  two  nouns  are  not  easily  comprehended 
in  their  specific  shades  of  difference.  As  a  specimen  of  the 
scholastic  forms  of  definition,  we  present  that  of  Peter  Lombard 
— Sapientia  est  habitus  infusus  ad  solius  actcrnae  veritatis 
contemplationem  ct  delectationem.  Intclligentia  ad  Creatoris  ct 
creaticrarum  invisihilium  speculationem}      But, — 

1.  Not  a  few,  such  as  Michaelis,  Storr,  Flatt,  and  Heinrichs, 
regard  them  as  synonymous ;  a  mode  of  interpretation  too 
easy  to  be  correct — too  slovenly  to  be  in  accordance  with 
accurate  philology. 

2.  Many  give  ao<f)ia  the  sense  of  theoretic  wisdom,  and 
avveai'i,  the  meaning  of  practical  discernment — such  as  Bahr, 
Heinsius,  and  Calvin. 

3.  Bengel,  Meyer,  and  Baumgarten  -  Crusius,  think  the 
nouns  related  in  the  sense  of  general  and  special,  while  De 
Wette  thinks  the  first  term  to  be  practical  and  general,  and 
the  second  theoretical  and  special.  We  are  inclined  to  take 
cro(f>La  in  a  general  sense,  and  to  regard  avvecrt^  irvev^aTLK-q  as 
its  characteristic  form  or  peculiarity.  For  if  God  fill  men  with 
the  knowledge  of  His  will,  it  is  usually  by  clearing  their 
spiritual  apprehension,  and  enlarging  the  sphere  of  their 
spiritual  vision.  The  mind  is  trained  and  tutored  to  the  study 
of  Divine  things ;  and  as  the  horizon  of  its  view  is  gradually 
expanded  in  such  an  exercise,  it  gathers  in  "  wisdom  " — and 
what  is  this  wisdom  but  "  spiritual  insight "  ?  Let  there  be 
intense  practical  application  of  the  mental  powers  ;  prolonged 
reflection ;  devout  and  pensive  contemplation ;  the  inspection 
and  comparison  of  premises ;  the  solution  of  doubts ;  tlie 
ascent,  step  by  step,  slowly  and  surely,  to  first  principles ;  the 
glimpse  of  ulterior  relations  based  upon  present  realities,  and 
conclusions   drawn  from  recognized  truths ;    and  surely  the 

'  Lib.  iii.  Distinctio,  xxxv.  2,  ii.  318.     Opera,  ed.  Migne,  Paris,  1841. 


I  COLOSSIANS  I.  10.  23> 

nnnd  so  interested  and  occupied  must  feel  all  such  acquisitions 
to  be  wisdom — wisdom,  and  not  mere  theory  to  be  tested — 
wisdom,  and  not  simple  hypothesis  that  may  be  dismissed. 
And  those  fruits  of  diligent  investigation  are  not  like  the 
coloured  glimpses  of  a  distant  reverie  which  may  be  dimmed 
or  exchanged,  or  may  wholly  fade  away,  as  the  whim  of  such 
imaginational  pastime  may  lazily  will  it ;  but  they  bear  at 
orice  upon  the  nearest  of  interests,  and  evince  their  immediate 
connection  with  the  most  momentous  of  relations.  Of  all 
forms  of  intellectual  operation  and  enlightenment,  this  is  the 
most  practical — it  is  "  wisdom."  God  fills  the  mind,  not  by 
the  passive  inpouring  of  transcendental  truths,  but  by  direct- 
ing and  upholding  its  energies,  and  so  enabling  it  to  work 
out  the  result  which  it  makes  its  own,  and  recognizes  as  "all 
wisdom." 

And  this  wisdom  is  really  avveaa  Trvev/jbaTiKi] — spiritual 
insight.  As  we  have  shown  at  length  under  Eph.  i.  3,  the 
prevailing  meaning  of  irvev^iaTiKO';  in  the  New  Testament,  is 
"  of,  or  belonging  to  the  Holy  Spirit."  Spiritual  is  not 
opposed  to  carnal,  and  means  not — in  connection  with  the 
human  spirit,  but  the  phrase  signifies  discernment  conferred 
and  quickened  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  enjoyment  of  the 
Spirit  of  Light  is  the  special  privilege  of  believers.  He  dispels 
the  mists  which  obscure  the  inner  vision,  fills  the  soul  with  an 
ardent  relish  for  Divine  truth  and  a  fuller  perception  of  it, 
enables  it  to  see  through  a  perfect  medium,  and  thus  confers 
upon  it  that  power  and  perspicacity  termed  by  the  apostle 
"spiritual  understanding."  And  where  this  purity  and  pene- 
tration of  discernment  are  possessed,  and  the  fruits  of  such 
wisdom  are  gleaned  and  garnered  up,  the  mind,  in  the  use  of 
such  a  faculty,  and  the  enjoyment  of  such  acquisitions,  cannot 
but  be  conscious  that  it  has  risen  to  an  ampler  knowledge  of 
the  Divine  will.  The  apostle  prefixes  trdari — "  all."  This 
-wisdom  and  spiritual  understanding  are  not  limited  or 
shrivelled,  but  may  be  enjoyed  to  their  utmost  bounds. 

(Ver.  10.)  IlepciTaTijcrat  vfjbd<i  a|ia)9  rov  Kvpcov — "So  that 
ye  walk  worthy  of  the  Lord."  'Tixd<;  appears  to  be  a  spurious 
but  natural  supplement,  and  is  omitted  by  A,  B,  C,  D  \  Y,  G, 
though  the  authorities  for  it  are  of  no  mean  value.  The 
Syriac  has  a  peculiar  rendering.     It  reads  in  the  last  clause  of 


24  COLOSSIANS   I.  10. 

the  preceding  verse — that  ye  walk  "  according  to  what  is 
just,"  *^?1?  5^1,  and  then  adds — that  ye  may  please  God  in  all 
good  works.  The  apostle,  after  the  verb  of  prayer,  first  uses 
iW  with  the  subjunctive,  as  indicating  the  prime  petition; 
then  follows  irepiTraTrjaai  as  denoting  a  contemporaneous 
result,  and  this  infinitive  is  succeeded  by  a  series  of  dependent 
and  explanatory  participles.  The  figure  implied  in  the  verb 
is  a  common  one,  and  is  of  Hebrew  origin.  It  describes  the 
general  tenor  of  one's  life,  his  peculiar  gait  and  progress  in  his 
spiritual  journey,  what  are  his  companions,  and  what  are  his 
haunts ;  whether  he  hold  on  his  way  with  steady  step,  or  is 
seduced  into  occasional  aberrations.  By  Kvpio<i  is  meant 
Christ,  and  not  God,  as  Anselm  and  Erasmus  imagine  ;  and  the 
meaning  and  reasons  of  the  name  are  fully  detailed  under 
Eph.  i.  2.  The  adverb  a^lay'^  signifies  "  becomingly."  [Eph. 
iv.  1.]  Eom.  xvi.  2  ;  Pliik  i.  27  ;  1  Thess.  ii.  12.  To  walk 
worthy  of  the  Lord,  is  to  feel  the  solemn  bond  of  redeeming 
blood,  to  enshrine  the  image  of  Him  who  shed  it,  to  breathe 
His  spirit  and  act  in  harmony  with  His  example,  to  exhibit 
His  temperament  in  its  elements  of  purity,  piety,  and  love,  to 
be  in  the  world  as  He  was  in  the  world,  to  be  good  and  to  do 
good,  and  to  show  by  the  whole  demeanour  that  His  law  is 
the  rule  which  governs,  and  His  glory  the  aim  which  elevates 
and  directs.  No  meritum  condigni  can  be  inferred  from  the 
passage,  as  Cameron  shows  against  Bellarmine.^ 

El<i  iraaav  dpeaKeiav  —  "  In  order  to  all-pleasing."  The 
noun  ape(TK6ia  has,  in  classic  Greek,  a  bad  sense,  and  means 
obsequiousness,  but  it  has  a  purified  meaning  in  Philo  and  in 
the  JSTew  Testament.^  The  Lord  is  to  be  pleased  and  highly 
pleased  in  everything,  for  again  the  apostle  prefixes  Traaav. 
This  well-pleasing  is  not  to  be  sectional,  but  uniform  and 
unbounded  ;  and  it  is  not  difficult  to  please  Him.  Men  are 
not  left  in  uncertainty  to  study  the  best  method  of  ensuring 
His  complacency,"  nor  are  there  any  moods  or  forms  of  caprice 
with  Him.  His  highest  pleasure  is  to  see  His  own  likeness  in 
those  who  own  His  Lordship :  in  all  their  thoughts,  purposes, 
and  actions,  there  should  be  a  pervading  and  paramount 
desire  to  walk  so  worthily  of  Him,  as  to  secure  His  approval. 
Nor  does  this  statement  involve  any  subtle  casuistry.  What- 
^  Myrothec'nim,  p.  263.  ^  Atheiiaeus,  Deipnos.  lib.  vi. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   10.  25 

ever  is  good  in  design,  generous  in  sentiment,  or  noble  in 
result,  meets  at  once  with  His  approbation.  Whatever 
proximate  motive  leads  the  heart,  this  should  be  its  pole  star, 
the  bright,  prominent,  and  ultimate  guide  and  director. 

^Ev  iravTi  epyo)  ayaOu)  Kap7ro(f>opovvT€^.  The  participles  are 
in  the  nominative,  and  not  accusative,  as  in  Eph.  iii.  18. 
Kiihner,  §  863  ;  Winer,  §  63,  I.  2  a;  Vigerus,  De  Idiotismis, 
p.  340.  "Fruit-bearing  in  every  good  work."  This  clause  is 
joined  by  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  Steiger,  to  et?  iracrav 
dpia-Keiav.  But  such  a  view  is  too  narrow.  It  is  an  element  of 
the  worthy  walk — and  the  first  of  four  elements,  each  specified 
by  a  participle,  KapirocfiopovvTe'i — au^avofxevoc — Bvvafj,ovp.evoL 
— evxaptarovvre'i ;  two  of  the  participles  preceded  by  a 
qualifying  noun  with  iv ;  and  two  of  them  followed  by  ek, 
denoting  purpose  or  result.  The  first  two  participles  occur 
together  in  verse  6.  Spiritual  fruitfulness  is  the  first  cha- 
racteristic. And  those  fruits  are  good  works.  2  Cor.  ix. 
8  ;  2  Thess.  ii.  17  ;  Heb.  xiii.  21 ;  Gal.  v.  22  ;  Phil.  i.  11. 
[epya  dyaOd,  Eph.  ii.  10.]  Barrenness  is  deadness.  The 
tree  with  sapless  trunk  and  leafless  branches  is  a  melancholy 
object.  The  figure  before  us  is  that  of  a  tree  covered  with 
dense  foliage,  and  laden  with  goodly  produce — its  boughs 
bent  with  heavy  clusters,  its  crops  perennial — buds  always 
bursting  into  blossoms,  and  blossoms  forming  into  fruit.  But 
the  apostle  says  "every  good  work."  For  a  third  time  he 
employs  Travrl.  It  is  the  want  of  this  universality  that  is  the 
chief  mark  of  imperfection.  This  unique  tree  is  omniferous. 
Other  trees  produce  each  only  after  its  kind,  unless  altered  by 
the  artificial  process  of  grafting.  But  this  tree  presents  every 
variety  of  spiritual  fruit  without  confusion  or  rivalry,  as  if  it 
contained  the  stateliness  of  the  palm,  the  fatness  of  the  olive, 
and  the  exuberant  fecundity  of  the  vine.  The  graces  of 
Christianity  are,  each  in  its  place,  adorning  and  adorned — 
none  absent  and  none  sickly,  but  the  entire  assemblage  in 
perfect  order  and  symmetry.  Superabundance  of  one  kind  of 
fruit  is  no  compensation  for  the  absence  of  another.  "  Every 
good  work "  is  inculcated  and  anticipated.  It  may  be  noble 
philanthropy,  or  more  lowly  beneficence — it  may  be  the  selt- 
denial  of  a  martyr,  or  the  gift  of  a  cup  of  water  to  the  humble 
wayfarer — it  may  be  a  deed  of  magnanimity  which  startles  the 


2G  COLOSSIANS   I.   10. 

nations,  or  it  may  be  the  washing  of  a  beggar's  feet — teaching 
its  first  letters  to  a  ragged  orplian,  or  repeating  the  story  of  the 
cross  in  the  hovel  of  poverty  and  distress.  There  is  no  excep- 
tion— "  every  good  work  "  which  Christ  did,  and  in  which  any 
of  His  disciples  may  imitate  Him — every  good  work  which 
the  age  needs,  or  circumstances  warrant,  or  would  benefit  the 
church  or  the  world.  Such  fruitfulness  is  not  exhaustive. 
The  tree  grows  healthfully  while  its  fertility  is  so  great.  Its 
life  is  not  spent,  and  its  wealth  is  not  impoverished  in  a  single 
autumn,  but  other  twigs  are  preparing  for  their  burden,  and 
other  shoots  are  evincing  the  vitality  of  the  parent  stock — for 
the  apostle  adds — 

Kal  au^avofxevoc  et?  rr]v  iirLjvcocrLv  tov  Oeov — "  And  growing 
up  to  the  knowledge  of  God."  Other  forms  of  reading  are — 
ev  rfi  iiriyvcoaeL  and  rf}  iirfyvcoaet.  The  last  seems  to  be  the 
best  supported  by  MSS. ;  the  Versions  seem  to  countenance  the 
second  ;  but  the  first  is  the  most  difficult  form,  and  therefore 
has  been  preferred  by  Tischendorf.  Meyer  says  that  et?  is 
necessary,  because  each  of  the  two  succeeding  participles  is 
followed  by  this  preposition,  and  analogy  demands  it  here. 
But  what  if  we  should  reply — that  to  secure  uniformity  some 
have  been  tempted  to  write  ek  where  another  preposition 
originally  stood  ?  A,  B,  C,  D\  E,  F,  G,  and  some  Minuscules, 
with  the  Syriac  and  Coptic  versions,  support  the  simple  dative 
rfj  iTTiyvooo-ei.  If  the  accusative,  with  et9,  be  retained,  various 
forms  of  exegesis  may  be  proposed.  Meyer  renders  et? 
hinsichtlich,  in  regard  to.  Theophylact  paraphrases  Kara  to 
fierpov — "  according  to  the  measure  "  of  the  knowledge  of  God, 
an  interpretation  virtually  adopted  by  Heinrichs  and  Bohmer. 
If  the  dative  with  eV  be  received,  then  the  meaning  may  be, 
as  Theodoret,  the  Peschito  and  Vulgate,  Beza,  Luther,  and 
Junker,  intimate — growing  in  the  knowledge  of  God,  that  is, 
acquiring  more  and  more  of  the  knowledge  of  God.  But 
with  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  and  Huther,  we  regard  the  simple 
dative  as  instrumental — growing  "  by  means  of  the  knowledge 
of  God," — the  knowledge  of  His  essence,  character,  will,  and 
dispensations.  [See  under  Eph.  i.  17.]  This  knowledge  of 
God,  the  purest  and  loftiest  of  human  acquisitions,  is  the 
only  pabulum  of  spiritual  growth.  A  God  in  shadow  creates 
superstition,  and  the  view  of  Him  in  only  one  phasis  of  His 


COLOSSIANS   I.   11.  27 

character,  will,  according  to  its  colour,  lead  either  to  fanaticism 
or  to  mysticism.  The  more  we  know  of  His  tenderness  and 
majesty,  the  more  conversant  we  are  with  His  Divine  pro- 
cedure, either  as  we  find  Him  in  creation,  or  meet  Him  in 
providence ;  and  especially  the  deeper  the  experience  we  have 
of  the  might  of  His  arm  and  sympathy  of  His  bosom  in  redemp- 
tion, the  more  will  the  spirit  confide  in  Him,  and  the  more 
will  it  love  the  object  of  its  living  trust — in  short,  the  more 
spiritual  growth  will  it  enjoy.  This  fruit-bearing  and  increase 
are  the  first  features  of  the  worthy  and  pleasing  walk. 

(Ver.  11.)  The  first  clause,  though  its  purpose  is  designated 
by  the  following  etV,  has  a  close  connection  with  the  preceding. 
It  describes  that  peculiar  spiritual  condition  in  which  believers 
bring  forth  fruit,  and  grow,  and  thus  walk  worthy  of  Christ. 
The  power  is  not  indigenous ;  the  fertility  is  not  the  outburst 
of  innate  and  essential  vitality.  It  comes  from  imparted 
strength — the  might  of  God  lodged  within  us.  As  His  own 
nature  is  for  ever  outworking  in  ceaseless  acts  of  beneficence, 
so  His  strength,  lodged  in  a  believer,  loses  not  its  original  and 
distinctive  energy. 

'Ev  irdcrr]  8vvd/jbet  BvvafMovjuevoc.  This  verb  occurs  only 
here  in  the  New  Testament,  though  it  is  found  in  the  Septua- 
gint  as  the  representative  of  two  Hebrew  verbs,  Ps.  Ixviii.  2  9  ; 
Eccles.  X.  10.  Neither  does  it  occur  in  the  classical,^  though  it 
is  used  by  the  ecclesiastical  writers.  The  common  form  in 
the  New  Testament  is  ivhvva^iow.  The  use  of  the  correlate 
noun  and  participle  intensifies  the  meaning.  The  apostle 
,  refers  to  the  impartation  of  the  Divine  strength  to  believers. 
Fallen  humanity  is  feeble,  but  rises  under  this  gift  into  prowess 
and  majesty.  The  semblance  of  moral  omnipotence  is  com- 
municated to  it,  and  it  easily  surmounts  frailty,  pain,  sorrow, 
and  death,  for  the  apostle  a  fourth  time  employs  Trda-rj.  Phil. 
iv,  13.     And  the  measure  of  this  gift  is — 

Kara  to  KpdTo<i  Tr]<i  80^7;?  auTov — "  according  to  the  might 
of  His  glory,"  that  is,  the  might  which  is  characteristic  of  His 
glory.  Retaining  with  Meyer  and  others  the  full  force  of  the 
syntax,  we  cannot,  with  Luther,  Junker,  Beza,  Storr,  Flatt, 
Bahr,  and  Davenant,  resolve  the  idiom  thus — His  glorious  or 
highest  might ;  nor  can  we  with  Bohmer  make  the  clause 
'  Phryniclius,  ed.  Lobeck,  Parerga,  p.  605. 


28  COLOSSIANS   I.   11. 

mean — that  might  which  is  His  glory  ;  nor  can  we  with  Grotius 
and  Valpy  identify  t?}?  So^t;?  with  the  T779  icr^j^vo?  of  Eph.  i. 
19  ;  nor,  finally,  can  we  with  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Peter 
Lombard  understand  by  His  glory  "  His  Son  Christ  Jesus." 
The  glory  of  God  possesses  a  peculiar  might,  and  that  might 
is  not  love  simply,  as  Huther  imagines.  [Eph.  i.  19.]  If 
we  survey  the  glory  of  God  in  creation,  the  immensity  of  its 
architectural  power  overwhelms  us ;  or  in  providence,  its  ex- 
haustless  and  versatile  energy  perplexes  us ;  or  in  redemption, 
its  moral  achievements  delight  and  amaze  us.  If  the  spiritual 
strength  given  to  believers  be  after  the  measure  of  the  might 
of  this  glory,  with  what  courage  and  ability  shall  they  be 
armed  ?  Will  they  not,  with  so  much  of  God  in  them,  realize 
the  God-like  in  spiritual  heroism,  so  as  to  resist  evil,  overcome 
temptation,  banish  fear,  surmount  difficulties,  embrace  oppor- 
tunities of  well-doing,  obtain  victory  over  death,  and  prove 
that  they  are  able  to  rise  above  everything  before  which 
unaided  humanity  sinks  and  succumbs.     "  Strengthened  " — 

Eh  nraaav  vTro/xovrjv  kuI  fjuaKpoOvfjulav — "  in  order  to  all 
patience  and  long-suffering."  These  two  nouns  have  been 
variously  distinguished.  The  early  definition  of  Chrysostom 
is  fanciful — fxaKpoOvfiel  yap  xi?  7rpo9  eKelvov^  0&9  Bvvarov  koI 
a/jivvaaOai,  vTTo/xeveL  Se  0&9  ov  Svvarat  a/xvvaadat — "  Long- 
suffering  is  exercised  toward  those  whom  we  can  punish, 
patience  toward  those  whom  we  are  unable  to  punish,"  where- 
fore he  adds,  "  patience  is  never  ascribed  to  God,  but  long- 
suffering  often."  Others  refer  the  first  noun  to  feeling  under 
what  God  sends ;  and  the  second,  to  feeling  under  what  man 
inflicts.  A  third  class  understand  by  the  one  term  the  state 
of  temper  under  difficulties ;  and,  by  the  other,  mental  calm- 
ness under  suffering.  But,  not  to  notice  other  varieties  of 
opinion,^  we  incline  to  give  the  words  a  more  extended  signi- 
fication than  to  resignation,  or  quietness  under  injury.  Both 
of  them  and  their  correspondent  verbs  are  used  not  simply 
in  reference  to  the  pressure  of  present  evil,  but  also  to  the 
prospect  of  coming  deliverance,  and  as  adjuncts  or  qualities 
of  faith,  or  the  life  of  faith.  The  following  examples  may 
suffice: — "Bring  forth  fruit,"  ev  viro/jLovrj,  Luke  viii.  15; 
"Possess  ye  your  souls,"  ev  virofi.,  Luke  xxi.  19;  "Well- 
1  Tittmann,  De  Synon.  N.  T.  p.  194. 


1 

1 


C0L0SSIAN3   I.   11.  29 

doing,"  Ka9'  utto/j,.,  Eom.  ii.  7  ;  "  Let  us  run  the  race,"  8l'  i'tto/x., 
Heb.  xii.  1  ;  or  again,  Heb.  x.  36,  "  Ye  have  need  of  patience." 
The  word  in  such  places  denotes  that  tenacity  of  spirit  which 
still  holds  on,  and  perseveres,  and  waits  God's  time  for  reward 
or  dismissal.  There  is  similar  usage  also  of  the  second  noun. 
Its  verb  is  used  to  denote  the  same  exercise  of  mind,  Matt, 
xviii.  26,  29,  Heb,  vi.  15,  Jas.  v.  7,  8;  and  the  substan- 
tive in  Heb.  vi.  12,  2  Tim.  iv.  2.  There  is  no  reference  in 
this  epistle  either  to  persecution  or  to  coming  calamity.  But 
believers  in  the  present  state  are  not  perfect,  they  have  not 
arrived  at  the  ultimate  goal.  Impatience  would  lead  to  defec- 
tion, and  fretfulness  to  apostasy.  There  is  rest  set  before 
them,  but  they  have  not  readied  it ;  hopes  held  out,  but  their 
fruition  has  not  come.  It  is  more  trying  to  virtue  to  bear 
than  to  act :  or,  as  a-Lapide  says,  fortia  agcre  Bomanum.  est, 
aiehat  Scaevola,  scd  fortia  pati  Christiannm  est.  Now,  Chris- 
tians are  apt  to  faint  under  such  discouragements,  to  lose  heart 
and  despond.  Therefore  do  they  need  "  patience  and  long- 
mindedness ; "  and  because  these  graces  dAvell  not  in  their 
unassisted  nature,  the  apostle  prays  that  the  strength  of  God 
be  for  this  purpose  imj)arted  to  them.  Even  in  their  beneficent 
fruitfulness  there  may  be  a  long  and  trying  process  ere  the 
result  be  witnessed.  In  the  midst  of  apparent  anomaly  and 
contradiction,  with  so  much  to  distress  and  disappoint,  so 
much  to  try  and  provoke,  so  much  to  tempt  a  prayer  for  the 
immediate  substitution  of  sight  for  faith,  there  is  surely  great 
necessity  for  perseverance  and  unruffled  equanimity ;  and  be- 
cause temper  fails  under  such  irritation,  as  it  did  with  Moses 
and  Elisha,  and  there  are  dark  and  inconsistent  questionings 
and  surmises,  as  if  He  were  "  slack  concerning  His  promise," 
a  higher  power  is  vouchsafed,  even  the  strength  of  Him 
whose  patience  and  long-suffering  transcend  all  measurement 
and  description.  And  thus  "  all  patience  and  long-suffering  " 
are  possessed,  and  for  a  fifth  time,  in  the  fulness  of  his  heart, 
the  apostle  writes  iraaav.  As  the  Colossian  church  was 
pestered  with  insidious  errorists,  whose  speculations  might 
occasionally  perplex  and  confound  them,  immobility  was  the 
more  requisite  for  them ;  and  such,  therefore,  is  the  apostle's 
supplication  in  common  with  the  sentiment  of  the  prophet — 
"  In  quietness  and  confidence  shall  be  your  strength." 


30  COLOSSIAXS   I.   12. 

Mera  xapa^ — "  with  joy."  A  large  number  of  expositors 
join  these  words  to  the  following  participle — ev'^apLarovvTe';. 
Of  this  opinion  are  Chrysostom,  CEcumenius,  and  Theophylact, 
Estius,  Bohmer,  Huther,  and  Meyer,  the  Syriac  version,  and 
the  editors  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf.  But  we  do  not  see 
any  propriety  in  such  a  connection,  for  the  participle  carries 
the  idea  of  joy  along  with  it.  The  preposition,  moreover, 
indicates  a  connection  with  the  preceding  nouns,  or  shows  the 
concomitant  of  this  imparted  power ;  and  therefore,  with 
Luther,  Grotius,  Zanchius,  Hyperius,  Gomarus,  De  Wette, 
Bahr,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Junker,  Steiger,  and  Olshausen, 
we  keep  the  words  as  they  stand  in  the  Eeceived  Text.  This 
joy  characterizes,  or  rather  accompanies,  as  the  preposition 
implies/  the  graces  of  patience  and  long-suffering.  That 
peculiar  position  which  necessitates  the  exercise  of  patience 
and  long-suffering  should  not  induce  despondency,  or  cast  a 
gloom  over  the  heart  as  if  it  were  inevitable  fate,  to  be  sul- 
lenly submitted  to,  but  rather  should  there  be  joy  that  this 
Divine  power  is  communicated,  and  that  the  mind  is  upborne 
in  triumph,  and  enabled  to  hope  and  wait  in  quiet  expectation. 
And  there  are  abundant  reasons  of  joy. 

(Ver.  12.)  EvxapcaTovvTe<;  to5  iraTpt.  There  are  some 
variations  of  reading  which  need  not  be  noted  or  analyzed. 
Codices  D^  and  G  read  KoXecravTi  instead  of  iKavoiaavrt, 
perhaps  from  1  Thess.  ii.  12  ;  while  B  reads  KokiaavTi  ical 
UavcaaavTc,  a  form  erroneously  adopted  by  Lachmann. 

But  with  what  portion  of  the  previous  context  should  this 
verse  be  connected  ?  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Calvin,  Calo- 
vius,  Bohmer,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  refer  the  connection 
to  ou  iravofieda,  as  if  ev-^ap.  referred  to  Paul  and  Timothy, 
the  writers  of  this  epistle  and  the  offerers  of  this  prayer. 
"  Since  the  day  we  heard  it  we  cease  not  to  pray  for  you  .  .  . 
giving  thanks  to  the  Father."  But  such  a  connection  is 
wholly  capricious  and  unwarranted,  and  would  make  the  two 
preceding  verses  a  species  of  parenthesis.  The  natural  order 
is  to  regard  ev'^aptarovvre-i  as  co-ordinate  with  the  preceding 
participles  KapirocpopovvTe^;,  av^avofxevoi,  Swafiovfievoc,  and  as 
all  four  dependent  on  the  infinitive  ireptTraTrjaai, — that  ye  may 
walk,  fruit-beariug,  growing,  strengthened,  and  giving  thanks. 
'  Commentary  on  Ephesians,  vi.  23. 


COLOSSIANS   I.    12.  31 

And  there  is  a  beautiful  sequence  of  tliouglit.  Tlie  apostle 
prayed  that  they  might  walk  in  immediate  spiritual  fertility 
and  growth ;  amidst  difficulties,  strengthened  into  patience 
with  joy ;  and  such  joy  is  no  romantic  enthusiasm,  for  it  is 
based  upon  experience,  inasmuch  as  even  during  this  imper- 
fect and  unsatisfactory  state,  they  were  warranted  to  thank 
Him  who  was  qualifying  them  all  the  while  for  the  heavenly 
inheritance.  From  the  visible  and  outward  manifestation  of 
fruit  as  a  present  and  characteristic  duty,  the  apostle  ascends 
to  internal  and  sustaining  sentiment,  and  rises  yet  higher  to 
that  gratitude,  which,  based  upon  a  growing  maturity  for 
heavenly  blessedness,  expresses  its  ardour  in  thanksgiving  to 
the  Father.  The  future  is  thus  linked  with  the  present,  and 
sheds  its  lustre  over  it ;  and  though  the  believer  be  now  in  a 
condition  whose  intermediate  nature  necessitates  the  possession 
of  patience  and  long-suffering,  his  mind  feels  at  the  same 
time  within  it  the  elements  of  accelerating  preparation  for  a 
nobler  and  purer  state  of  existence. 

In  the  participle  iKavdoaavrt,  connected  with  ikco — "  I  reach, 
or  arrive  at,"  is  the  idea  of  fitness — "  who  hath  fitted  us," 
2  Cor.  iii.  6.  The  pronoun  rjfid^  includes  the  writer  of  the 
epistle  and  his  readers,  and  the  aorist  may  denote  repeated 
action,  continued  during  a  past  period.  The  object  to  which 
this  fitness  relates  is  described — 

^t9  Tiju  fxepiha  rod  KXrjpov  tcov  dyccov  iv  rat  ^wrl — "  For 
the  share  of  the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light."  The  noun 
/Ltep/?  denotes  a  portion  or  share  which  one  is  to  enjoy,  and 
that  share  is  in  the  KXypo^,  or  inheritance,  so  designated  from 
an  allusion  to  the  division  and  allotment  of  the  land  of 
Canaan.  [Eph.  i.  11.]  Both  words  represent  a  Hebrew 
phrase — p)*.^,  ^^^.,  Deut.  xxxii.  9.  That  inheritance  has  a 
peculiar  proprietary,  or  population — it  belongs  to  the  saints.^ 
The  saints  are  neither  Jews  nor  believers  of  an  early  date,  but 
the  company  of  those  who  are  Christ's.      [Eph.  ii.  19,  iii.  18.] 

The  meaning  and  connection  of  the  remaining  phrase  have 
been  variously  understood.     We  merely  notice,  without  dwell- 

1  As  specimens  of  eccentric  etymology  may  be  quoted  two  attempts  to  theolo- 
gize upon  ciyio}  and  sanctus — the  former,  according  to  Adam  Clarke,  being 
compounded  of  a,  privative,  and  7?,  "the  earth;"  and  of  the  latter,  Isidore 
the  Pelusiot  says — sanctum  did  quasi  sanguine  tinctum. 


32  COLOSSIANS   I.   12. 

iiig  on  it,  the  opinion  of  some  of  the  Fathers,  that  by  (^w?  is 
meant  baptism ;  that  of  Are  tins,  that  Christ  Himself  is  indicated 
by  the  term ;  that  of  Grotius,  that  the  syntax  may  be  thus 
filled — a^Lwv  r(ov  ev  (peoTt;  that  of  Bengel,  that  iv  tcS  ^wtl 
should  be  joined  to  /xepiSa — participation  in  the  kingdom  of 
light,  in  hoc  regno  partem  heatam. 

1.  Meyer  and  others,  after  Chrysostom,  CEcumenius,  and 
Theophylact,  with  Vatablus  and  Schrader,  take  eV  as  instru- 
mental, and  join  it  to  iKavcocravTi,,  and  then  the  meaning  will 
be — who  fits  us  by  means  of  the  light — the  illumination  of 
the  gospel,  ttj  'yvco-jet. 

2.  Others,  as  Macknight,  give  the  same  meaning  to  the 
term  (^w?,  but  with  a  different  connection,  the  inheritance  of 
the  saints  which  consists  of  light,  to  wit,  their  present  evan- 
gelical state  as  in  contrast  with  the  darkness  of  their  previous 
condition. 

To  both  these  forms  of  exegesis  we  have  objections.  1. 
The  position  of  iv  tw  (pcoTi  at  the  end  of  the  verse  seems 
to  connect  it  with  the  /cXtJ/jo?,  as  descriptive  of  it.  2.  The 
language  of  the  next  verse  speaks  of  a  kingdom  of  darkness, 
out  of  which  the  Colossians  had  been  translated.  Now,  the 
appropriate  contrast  is,  out  of  a  kingdom  of  darkness  into  one 
of  light — light  not  being  the  instrument  of  translation,  but  the 
special  property  of  the  second  realm.  3.  K\r}po>;  is  often 
followed  by  iv  to  signify  what  it  consists  in.  Thus,  in  the 
Septuagint — Wisd.  v.  5,  o  KXrjpo'i  iv  0-7/04?;  also  Job  xxx.  19, 
■)]  fiepU  iv  <yf] ;  and  in  the  New  Testament,  Acts  viii.  21,  xxvi. 
18  ;  Eev.  xx.  6.  This  "light,"  however,  though  enjoyed  here, 
is  not  meant  to  describe  their  present,  but  their  future  state. 
For  the  inheritance,  though  given  on  earth,  is  finally  enjoyed 
in  heaven,  and  therefore  in  Eph.  i.  14  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
called  the  "  earnest  of  our  inheritance ; "  and  in  the  same 
chapter,  the  apostle  prays  that  the  Ephesians  may  comprehend 
the  riches  of  the  glory  of  God's  inheritance  among  His  saints. 
Again  he  specifies,  in  the  same  epistle,  v,  5,  certain  classes  of 
men  who  have  no  inheritance  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ  and 
God.  In  Acts  xx.  32,  xxvi.  18,  1  Pet.  i.  4,  the  inheritance 
is  future  glory.  We  apprehend,  then,  that  the  apostle  means 
to  say,  that  God  has  fitted  them  for  the  future  inheritance  of 
the  saints,  which  consists  in  light.      It  is  too  restricted  a  view 


COLOSSIANS   I.    12.  33 

of  Bohmer  and  Huther,  to  find  in  </)co?  simply  the  glory 
of  heaven — and  of  Beza  and  Storr,  to  confine  it  to  the  happi- 
ness of  heaven.  The  expressive  epithet  suggests  both  the  one 
and  the  other,  suggests  that  knowledge  is  the  concomitant  of 
happiness,  and  purity  the  basis  of  glory. 

For  heaven  is  a  region  of  light.  The  radiance  of  Him  who 
is  Light  streams  through  it  and  envelopes  all  the  children  of 
the  light  who  live  and  walk  in  its  lustre.  A  happy  and  un- 
failing intuition,  sustained  by  its  vicinity  to  the  Uncreated 
Mind,  is  the  source  of  unchequered  and  perfect  knowledge. 
Intellectual  refinement  is  robed  "  in  the  beauty  of  holiness." 
The  brilliancy  of  the  Divine  image  is  reflected  from  every 
stainless  heart,  and  the  material  glory  of  the  residence  is  only 
surpassed  by  its  spiritual  splendour.  That  "  light "  is  liable  to 
no  revolution  and  suffers  no  eclipse ;  it  glows  with  unchanging 
permanence,  and  meeting  with  no  obstruction  creates  no 
sliadow.  For  they  are  "  saints  "  who  dwell  in  this  kingdom — 
adorned  with  purity  and  perfection.  Now  such  being  the  nature 
of  the  inheritance,  it  is  not  difficult  to  discover  what  are  the 
elements  of  meetness  for  it.  Man  is  incapable  of  enjoying  it 
by  nature ;  for  darkness  covers  his  mind,  and  impurity  has 
seized  upon  his  heart,  and  he  must  needs  be  changed.  John 
iii.  3.  He  has  no  loyalty  to  its  God,  no  love  to  its  Saviour,  no 
relish  for  its  pursuits,  and  no  sympathy  with  its  inhabitants. 
His  nature  must  be  brought  into  harmony  with  the  scene,  and 
into  congeniality  with  the  occupations  of  such  a  world  of  light. 
So  that  every  element  of  mental  obscurity,  all  that  tends  to  the 
dark  and  dismal  in  temperament,  and  all  that  vails  the  nobility 
of  an  heir  of  God,  is  dissolved,  and  fades  away  in  the  superior 
glory.  The  "  saints  "  possess  it — therefore  their  sanctification 
is  complete.  No  taint  of  sin  remains,  no  trace  of  previous 
corruption  can  be  discerned.  The  language  of  prayer  is 
superseded  by  that  of  praise,  and  the  tongue  shall  be  a  stranger 
for  ever  to  moaning  and  confession.  None  but  the  saints,  as 
being  "  light  in  the  Lord,"  can  dwell  in  that  light.  An  unre- 
generate  spirit  would  feel  itself  so  solitary  and  so  unhappy, 
especially  as  it  saw  its  hideousness  mirrored  in  that  sea  of 
glass  which  sleeps  before  the  throne,  that  it  would  rather 
plunge  for  relief  into  the  gloom  of  hell,  and  there  for  a  moment 
feel  itself  at  ease  amongothers  so  likeit  in  punishment  and  crime. 


34  COLOSSIANS  I.   12. 

Again,  the  one  inheritance  is  shared  by  many  participants, 
and  they  who  are  to  enjoy  it  are  made  meet  for  social  inter- 
course. Selfishness  vanishes  before  universal  love,  the  intense 
yearnings  of  a  spiritual  brotherhood  are  developed  and  per- 
fected, for  the  entire  assemblage  is  so  united  as  if  only  one 
heart  thrilled  in  their  bosom,  while  one  song  bursts  from 
their  lips. 

In  fine,  all  this  moral  fitness  is  a  paternal  process,  the  work 
of  the  Father,  qualifying  His  children  for  their  patrimony. 
They  do  not  infuse  this  maturity  into  themselves — this  trans- 
formation is  not  a  natural  process,  nor  do  they  ripen  of 
necessity  into  purity  and  love.  The  Father  meetens  them : 
and  from  Him  are  the  blood  that  pardons,  the  Spirit  that 
purifies,  the  truth  which  nourishes,  the  hope  which  sustains,  the 
charter  which  secures — the  whole  preparation  which  meetens 
for  the  heavenly  inheritance.  He,  therefore,  is  to  be  thanked, 
by  all  whose  experience  assures  them  of  this  auspicious  train- 
ing. If  they  are  sensible  of  growth  in  truth,  holiness,  and  affec- 
tion— if  they  feel  that  they  are  travelling  from  stage  to  stage  of 
spiritual  assimilation — if  their  sanctified  instincts  and  suscepti- 
bilities are  finding  congruous  satisfaction  and  luxury  in  spiritual 
exercises,  then,  in  spite  of  every  drawback  which  is  inseparable 
from  their  present  condition  in  its  trials  and  wants — they  are 
only  giving  utterance  to  irrepressible  emotion  when  they  are 
giving  thanks  "unto  the  Father."^  Nay,  more,  the  very  fact 
that  a  renewal  is  requisite,  and  that  the  present  state,  by  its 
ills  and  emptiness,  renders  imperative  the  exercise  of  patience 
and  long-suffering,  gives  a  purer  relish  to  celestial  enjoyments. 
So  sudden  and  vast  is  the  change  from  expectation  to  enjoy- 
ment, and  from  pain  to  rapture,  that  the  translated  saint  will 
feel  a  zest  on  entering  heaven  which  cannot  be  tasted  by  those 
who  have  never  had  experience  of  any  other  state  or  sphere 
of  existence.  Nor  do  we  deny  that  in  the  present  state  the 
inheritance  of  light  is  partially  enjoyed,  for  heaven  begins  on 
earth,  or  as  Chrysostom  says,  the  apostle  speaks  "  of  things 
present  and  things  to  come."  The  translation  out  of  darkness 
is  effected  here,  and  the  dawning  of  the  perfect  day  is 
already  enjoyed,  though   cloud   and  gloom   are   often   inter- 

^  Chrysostom  well  says — Ol  f^'ovov  -/if^Tv  s'Sanii  tJjv  rif^nv,  aXXa  xa)  'nr^vpovs  vpo;  TO 


.    COLOSSIANS  I.   13.  35 

mingled  with  it,  and  vail  its  beams.  And  when  the  inheritance 
is  reached,  the  spirit  of  this  thanksgiving  shall  still  rule  the 
Jieart.  Conscious  of  its  meetness,  it  shall  pour  itself  out  in 
hearty  and  prolonged  halleluiahs.  The  world  of  perfection  is 
a  world  of  universal  happiness  and  song,  for  no  tongue  is 
ever  mute,  no  harp  ever  unstrung,  and  the  harmony  is  never 
disturbed  by  the  mournful  echo  of  a  plaintive  strain. 

The  apostle  glides  insensibly  out  of  the  language  of  prayer 
into  that  of  direct  theological  statement.  Still,  the  statement 
is  virtually  a  portion  of  the  prayer,  as  it  describes  Him  who 
in  His  redeeming  love  and  power  imparts  the  knowledge 
of  Himself  and  His  revealed  will,  who  confers  His  own 
might  upon  His  people,  and  prepares  them  for  glory — 
the  very  God  who  has  delivered  us  out  of  the  kingdom  of 
darkness. 

(Ver.  13.)  "O?  ippvcraro  ■^fxa.'i  eK  Tr]<?  e^ovcrLa<;  tov  ctko- 
Tou? — "  Who  rescued  us  out  of  the  kingdom  of  darkness." 
This  verse  does  not  describe  the  entire  process  of  prepara- 
tion, as  Meyer  seems  to  think  ;  it  rather  gives  us  a  vivid 
glance  of  the  two  termini — the  one  of  departure,  and  the 
other  of  arrival.  The  unregenerate  state  is  described  as  the 
kingdom  of  darkness.^  It  is  one  of  spiritual  gloom  in  its 
government,  essence,  pursuits,  and  subjects.  In  its  adminis- 
tration it  is  named — "  the  power  of  Satan,"  in  itself  it  is 
darkness — its  actions  are  "  works  of  darkness,"  and  its  popula- 
tion are  "  children  of  disobedience  and  wrath."  Luke  xxii.  53  ; 
Acts  xxvi.  18.  It  is  needless,  with  Augustine,^  Zanchius, 
Bloomfield,  and  others,  to  regard  e^ovcia  as  personified,  and  as 
meaning  Satan.  [^/coto9,  Eph.  iv.  18,  v.  8.1  This  princi- 
pality is  named  "  darkness "  on  account  of  its  prevailing 
ethical  element.  Above  it  the  heaven  is  shrouded  in  dismal 
eclipse,  around  it  lies  dense  and  impervious  gloom,  and  before 
it  stretches  out  the  shadow  of  death.  What  men  should 
believe  and  what  they  should  do,  what  they  should  rest  on 
and  what  they  should  hope  for,  what  the  mind  shoidd  fasten 

'  Blackwall,  Sacred  Classics,  vol.  ii.  134,  proposes  to  read  verses  9-12  in  a 
parenthesis,  and  as  the  result  of  such  an  arrangement,  he  exclaims — "  How 
round  the  period,  how  vigorous  and  Divine  the  sense  ! "  But  such  a  paren- 
thesis would  be  a  miserable  invention,  as  it  leaves  JV  without  an  antecedent  at 
all,  or  absurdly  gives  it  ■ttviu/^xti  in  verse  8. 

Yol.  ii.  p.  1216,  Op.  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  1836. 

F 


36  COLOSSIANS  I.   13. 

on  as  truth  and  what  the  heart  should  gather  in  upon  itself  as 
a  portion,  what  the  spirit  should  present  as  acceptable  worship 
and  what  the  conscience  should  venerate  as  a  rule  of  duty — 
all  had  been  a  matter  of  deep  perplexity  or  hopeless  uncertainty 
to  the  Colossians  prior  to  their  spiritual  translation.  There 
were  occasionally  in  the  heathen  world  shrewd  guesses 
at  truth  —  incidental  approximations,  when  some  brighter 
intellect  unfolded  its  cogitations  and  longings.  But  the 
masses  were  involved  in  obscurity,  and  scarcely  observed 
the  fitful  glimmer  of  the  meteor  which  had  shot  over  them. 
Ignorance,  vice,  and  misery,  the  triple  shades  of  this  darkness, 
lield  possession  of  them.  This  "  kingdom  of  darkness  "  stands 
in  contrast  to  the  sainted  heritage  in  light.  The  deponent 
verb,  from  an  obsolete  Ibrm,^  signifies,  first,  to  draw  to  oneself, 
then  to  rescue,  to  pluck  out  of  danger.  The  act  of  deliverance 
is  still  ascribed  to  the  Father,  for  He  alone  can  achieve  the 
spiritual  transportation  described  in  the  following  clause. 

Kal  /jLerearrjo-ev  el<i  rrjv  ^acrtXeiav  tov  viov  t^9  djd7r7j<; 
avTov — "And  translated  us  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Son  of 
His  love."  The  verb  is  often  employed  by  the  classical 
writers  to  signify  the  deportation  of  a  body  of  men,  or  the 
removal  of  them  to  form  a  colony.^  The  term  is  therefore  an 
expressive  one.  The  Colossians  had  been  lifted  out  of  the 
realm  of  darkness,  their  original  seat  and  habitation,  and  they 
had  been  carried  into  the  kingdom  of  His  Son,  and  colonized 
in  it.  They  were  not  as  emigrants  in  search  of  a  home,  nor 
as  a  company  of  dissatisfied  exiles,  but  they  were  marched 
out  of  the  one  territory  and  settled  in  the  other  expressly  by 
Divine  guidance.  fiaaiXeia  stands  in  contrast  with  i^ovaia, 
but  there  appears  to  be  no  ground  for  Wetstein's  affirmation, 
that  in  such  a  contrast  the  latter  word  means  a  tyranny,^  for 
in  Eev.  xii.  10  the  one  term  is  referred  to  God,  and  the  other 
to  Christ.  "The  kingdom  of  His  Son  "  is  plainly  that  kingdom 
which  has  Christ  for  its  Head  and  Founder — which  is  partially 
developed  on  earth,  and  shall  be  finally  perfected  in  heaven. 
[Eph.  V.  5.]  The  word  "kingdom"  is  used  in  harmony 
with  the  action  indicated  by  the  verb.  As  a  church,  men 
meet  together  in  its  sacred  assemblies ;  as  a  kingdom,  they 

^  V&ssow,  sub  voce  ;  Buttmann,  Lcxilogu.i,Y).  305,  ed.  Fislilake,  London,  1840. 
*  Josephus,  A?itiq.  ix.  2,  1.  ^  Kapliel.  Annot.  ii.  p.  527. 


COLOSSIANS   I.    13.  37 

:ire  located  as  citizens  in  it.  It  belon(:;s  of  ri^ht  to  "  His 
Son."  He  founded  it,  organized  it,  and  rules  over  it — pre- 
scribes its  laws,  regulates  its  usages,  protects  its  subjects,  and 
crowns  them  with  blessings.  It  is  therefore  a  kingdom  of 
light,  whose  prismatic  rays  are  truth,  purity,  and  happiness. 
We  cannot  say,  with  Olshausen,  that  the  kingdom  is  regarded 
in  its  subjective  aspect,  for  the  language  is  that  of  objective 
transference — change  of  condition,  implying,  however,  change 
of  character.  This  kingdom  is  one  in  which  the  Colossians 
Avere,  at  the  period  of  Paul's  writing  to  them.  It  is  not  the 
future  heaven,  ideally,  as  Meyer  takes  it,  and  in  which  they 
were  placed  only  spe  d  jure,  as  Gesner,  Keil,  Koppe,  and  others 
have  it.  It  is  a  present  state — but  one  which  is  intimately  con- 
nected with  futurity.  The  one  kingdom  of  God  has  an  earthly 
and  a  celestial  phasis.  It  resembles  a  city  divided  by  a  river, 
but  still  under  the  same  municipal  administration,  and  having 
one  common  franchise.  The  head  of  this  kingdom  is  named— 
Tov  vlov  Trj<i  aya.Tnj';  avrov — "  The  Son  of  His  love."  This 
is  a  solitary  appellation.  The  apostle  is  about  to  descant 
upon  tlie  glory  of  the  Saviour,  and  therefore  he  here  intro- 
duces Him  as  the  Son.  [Eph.  i,  3.]  The  phrase  itself 
does  not  really  differ  from  vto?  ayaTrrjTo^;,  Matt.  iii.  17, 
xii.  18,  xvii.  5  ;  or  from  the  similar  idiom  in  Eph,  i.  6, 
vl6<;  ?77a7r7//zeVo9.  It  signifies  the  Son  who  possesses  His  love 
— or  who  excites  it  in  the  Divine  heart.  The  meaning  is  the 
same  in  either  case,  for  He  who  possesses  the  love  is  the  cause 
of  it  towards  Himself.  Sustaining  such  a  relation  to  the 
Father,  He  is  the  object  of  boundless  and  unchanging  affection. 
This  love  corresponds  to  the  nature  at  once  of  Him  who 
manifests  it  and  Him  who  enjoys  it.  The  love  of  God  to  one 
who  is  His  own  Image  will  be  in  harmony  with  the  Divine 
nature  of  both — infinite  as  its  object,  and  eternal  and  majestic 
as  the  bosom  in  which  it  dwells.  This  love  of  the  Father 
to  the  Son  prompted  Him  to  give  that  Son  as  Saviour,  and 
then  to  exalt  Him  to  Universal  Empire.  John  iii.  35.  Two 
metaphysical  and  antagonistic  deductions  from  this  clause 
may  be  noted.  The  first  extreme  is  that  of  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,^  who  affirm^  that  we  are  here  taught  that  Christ 

^   "0^£v   xai    "  viov   ayirrns  '    avToy   IxdXiriv'  ug   oh  Ifvrii   <tiv    Tlarps;  avra   viov  aXX 
aya.'Kn  Tns  viofftviai  a^iu^ivTa  tovtuv,  — Catena,  ed.  Cramer,  p.  302. 


38  COLOSSI ANS   I.   14. 

is  Son,  not  by  nature,  but  by  adoption.  But  the  apostle  is 
not  speaking  of  the  essential  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father, 
but  of  the  emotion  which  such  a  relationship  has  created.  He 
does  not  say  how  He  became  the  Son ;  he  only  says,  that  as 
the  Son,  He  is  the  object  of  intense  affection  on  the  part  of 
the  Father.  The  other  extreme  is  that  of  Augustine,^  who 
argues  that  love  indicates  the  essence  or  substance  of  Deity, 
out  of  which  the  Son  sprang.  But  Love  is  an  attribute,  and 
not  an  essence ;  it  belongs  to  character,  and  not  to  substance  ; 
it  prompts,  and  does  not  produce.  It  is  the  radiance  of  the 
sun,  but  not  the  orb  itself — the  current  of  the  stream,  but  not 
the  water  which  forms  it.  Olshausen's  modification  of  the 
same  hypothesis  is  liable  to  similar  objections.  Nor  do  we 
tind  sufficient  ground  for  the  inference  deduced  by  Huther 
and  De  Wette,  that  the  phrase  "  kingdom  of  His  Son " 
implies  that  the  blessing  of  sonship,  or  adoption,  is  conferred 
on  all  its  members,  or  that  they  become  sons  ;  for  believers 
are,  in  the  context,  and  in  harmony  with  its  imagery,  regarded 
as  subjects,  and  not  as  children.  Nor  is  God  named  our 
Father  in  verse  12.  Lastly,  our  rescue  and  subsequent 
settlement  are  ascribed  to  God  the  Father,  for  His  sovereign 
grace  and  power  alone  are  equal  to  the  enterprise — and  thanks 
again  are  due  to  Him. 

(Ver.  14.)  'Ev  m  €')(ofji,ev  rrjv  airokvjpwaLV,  ttjv  a(f)e(Tiv  rcov 
afiapTLwu — "  In  whom  we  have  redemption — the  forgiveness 
of  sins."  The  words  Bta  tov  aLfjbaTo<i  avrov  of  the  Received 
Text  rest  on  no  good  authority,  for  the  entire  preponderance 
of  authorities,  manuscripts,  versions,  and  quotations,  is  against 
them.  The  phrase  is  an  imitation  of  Eph.  i.  7.  Lachmann 
reads  ea^o/jiev  in  the  aorist,  without  sufficient  grounds.  The 
apostle  could  not  speak  of  the  Son  without  a  reference  to  His 
redeeming  work.  The  work  of  the  Father  has  its  own  aspect, 
and  so  has  the  work  of  the  Son.  Our  direct  change  of  condi- 
tion is  ascribed  to  the  Father,  as  the  almighty  and  powerful 
dispenser  of  blessing ;  but  we  are  said  to  be  united  to  the 

^  Quod  autem  dictum  est  filii  caritatis  suae,  nihil  aliud  intelligatur,  quam  filii 
sui  dilecti  quam  filii  postremo  substantise  suae.  Caritas  quippe  patris,  quae  in 
iiatura  ejus  est  ineffabiliter  simplici,  nihil  aliud  est,  quam  ejus  ipsa  natura,  atque 
substantia.  Ac  per  hoc  filius  caritatis  ejus  nuUus  alius  est,  quam  qui  de 
substantia  est  genitus. — Opera,  ed.  Beued.  vol.  viii.  p.  1501,  Paris,  1836. 


COLOSSIAXS   I.   14.  30 

Son,  and  so  to  be  iu  Him  as  to  obtain  redemption  in  the  union 
— for  by  the  price  He  paid  forgiveness  of  sins  is  secured  and 
conferred.  This  verse,  then,  does  not  merely  describe  a 
blessing — the  enjoyment  of  which  is  indispensable  to  our 
preparation  for  heaven,  and  our  removal  from  the  realm  of 
darkness,  but  it  also  and  especially  characterizes  a  continuous 
gift  enjoyed  by  those  who  are  settled  in  the  kingdom  of  the 
Son.  The  subjects  of  His  kingdom  are  in  vital  union  with 
Him — in  Him  they  are  having  redemption.  Their  translation 
out  of  the  tyranny  of  darkness — their  place  in  the  new  king- 
dom, and  their  growing  maturity  for  heavenly  bliss,  are  im- 
plied in  this  redemption,  though  its  special  element  is  the 
forgiveness  of  sins.  Their  first  condition  was  one  of  guilt  as 
well  as  gloom,  and  forgiveness  was  enjoyed  in  their  emigra- 
tion from  it.  Nor  are  they  perfect  under  the  benign  reign  of 
the  Son,  and  as  a  state  of  imperfection  is  so  far  one  of  sin,  it 
is  in  daily  need  of  repeated  pardon.  The  results  of  Christ's 
work  are  fully  enjoyed  only  in  heaven — the  process  of  re- 
demption is  there  completed,  and  thus  we  are  said  still  to  be 
having  it  as  long  as  we  are  on  earth.  The  entire  verse  has 
been  fully  illustrated  under  Eph.  i.  7.  The  difference  of 
diction  is  unessential,  d/jiapriwv  being  employed  in  Colossians, 
and  irapaTTTw/jidToov  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  One 
question  not  alluded  to  there  may  be  here  noticed,  and  that 
is,  why  forgiveness  occupies  in  both  places  so  prominent  a 
place  ?  It  stands  as  an  explanation  of  redemption,  not  as  if  it 
included  the  whole  of  it,  but  because — 

1.  It  is  a  first  and  prominent  blessing.  So  soon  as  faith 
springs  up  in  the  heart  the  pardon  of  sin  is  enjoyed — the 
results  of  expiation  are  conferred.  This  doctrine  was  placed 
in  the  front  of  apostolic  preaching:  Acts  v.  31,  xiii.  38, 
xxvi.  1 8  ;  and  among  the  Divine  declarations  and  promises 
of  the  Old  Testament,  it  occurs  with  cheering  emphasis  and 
repetition :  Ex.  xxxiv.  7  ;  Isa.  xl.  2,  Iv.  7  ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  8  ; 
Mic.  vii.  18;  Ps.  Ixxxv.  2,  ciii.  3;  and  again  and  again 
it  is  announced  as  the  result  of  accepted  sacrifice  in  tlie 
Levitical  law.  And  no  wonder.  So  deep  is  man's  guilt,  and 
so  tremendous  is  the  penalty ;  so  agonized  is  his  conscience, 
and  so  terrible  are  his  forebodings ;  so  utterly  helpless  and 
hopeless  is  his  awful  state  without  Divine  interposition,  that 


40  COLOSSIANS  I.   14. 

a  free  and  perfect  absolution  from  the  sentence  stands  out 
]iot  only  as  a  blessing  of  indescribable  grandeur  and  necessity, 
but  as  the  first  and  welcome  offer  and  characteristic  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ.  And  it  is  no  sectional  or  partial  blessing. 
It  makes  no  distinction  among  sins,  no  discrimination  among 
transgressors.  Its  circuit  is  complete,  for  every  sin  is  included, 
and  it  is  offered  with  unbounded  freedom  and  invitation.  No 
previous  qualification  is  requisite,  and  no  subsequent  merit  is 
anticipated.  And  as  it  is  the  act  of  the  sovereign  judge,  who 
shall  arraign  its  equity,  or  by  what  other  authority  can  it  be 
revoked  or  cancelled?     Eom.  viii.  33,  34. 

2.  Forgiveness  is  more  closely  connected  with  redemption 
than  any  other  blessing,  as  it  is  the  only  blessing  enjoyed 
immediately  from  Christ,  and  as  the  direct  result  of  His  expia- 
tion. It  springs  at  once  from  the  \vrpov  which  forms  the 
centre  and  basis  of  the  diroXvTpaxji'i.  Other  blessings 
obtained  for  Christ's  sake  are  given  through  some  appointed 
and  dependent  medium.  Thus,  peace  is  the  effect  of  pardon  ; 
and  holiness  is  the  product  of  the  Spirit  and  the  word,  as 
agent  and  instrument.  But  forgiveness  passes  through  no  inter- 
vention— it  comes  at  once  from  the  cross  to  the  believing  soul. 

3.  It  is  essentially  bound  up  with  subsequent  gifts.  For- 
giveness precedes  purity — there  is  change  of  state  before  there 
is  change  of  heart.  The  Holy  Ghost  did  not  come  down  till 
Christ  was  glorified — till  His  expiatory  oblation  had  been 
accepted.  Being  justified,  believers  are  sanctified.  The 
imputation  of  righteousness  is  a  necessary  pre-requisite  to  the 
infusion  of  holiness.  The  Spirit  will  not  take  up  His  abode 
in  an  unpardoned  soul,  and  the  sinner's  relation  to  the  law 
must  be  changed  ere  his  nature  be  renovated.  At  the  same 
time,  pardon  and  holiness  are  inseparably  associated,  and  the 
remission  of  trespasses  is  the  precursor  of  peace  and  joy,  hope 
and  life.  So  that,  such  being  its  nature,  origin,  and  results, 
the  apostle  naturally  places  "  forgiveness  of  sins  "  in  apposition 
with  redemption  in  Christ  Jesus. 

Having  now  spoken  of  Christ  and  the  blessings  secured  by 
union  to  Him,  the  apostle,  for  obvious  reasons,  lingers  on  that 
Name  round  which  crystallized  all  the  doctrines  he  taught 
— all  the  truths  of  that  theology  which  it  was  the  one  business 
of  his  life  to  proclaim. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   14.  41 

The  next  verse  begins  a  lofty  and  comprehensive  paragraph, 
in  which  the  dignity  and  rank  of  Christ  are  described  in 
linked  clauses  of  marvellous  terseness  and  harmony.  The 
apostle  introduces  the  name  of  the  Son  on  purpose,  and  then 
details  in  sweeping  completeness  the  glory  of  His  person  and 
work.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  verses  were  composed  in 
reference  to  modes  of  error  prevalent  at  Colosse,  and  the 
forms  of  expression  have  their  special  origin,  shape,  and  edge 
in  this  polemical  reference.  While  the  writer  states  absolute 
truth  in  rich  and  glowing  accumulation  of  sentences,  still,  the 
thought  and  diction  are  so  moulded  as  to  bear  against  false 
dogmas  wliich  were  in  circulation.  It  is  strange  that  in  any 
system  of  theology  the  person  of  Christ  should  be  depreciated, 
and  His  mediatorial  work  vailed  and  slighted.  The  spectacle, 
however,  is  not  an  uncommon  one.  Yet  the  apostles  can 
scarcely  find  language  of  sufficient  energy  and  lustre  to  tell  in 
it  the  honour  and  majesty  of  the  Hedeemer.  The  sentences 
in  which  Paul  describes  the  rank  and  prerogative  of 
Christ  are  like  a  bursting  torrent,  dashing  away  every 
barrier  in  its  impetuous  race.  How  he  exults  in  the 
precious  theme,  and  how  his  soul  swells  into  impassioned 
panegyric ! 

We  do  not  know  in  what  precise  way  the  dignity  of  Jesus 
was  vilified  by  the  Colossian  errorists.  It  would  seem,  indeed, 
that  the  germs  of  Gnosticism  and  Ebionitism  were  to  be  found 
in  Colosse — denial  of  Christ's  actual  humanity,  and  of  His 
supreme  divinity.  The  apostle,  therefore,  holds  Him  out  as  the 
one  Supreme  Creator,  not  only  of  the  world,  but  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  declares  that  reconciliation  is  secured  in  the  body 
of  His  flesh  through  death.  Confused  notions  of  the  spirit- 
world  appear  also  to  have  prevailed.  Jesus  was  discrowned. 
The  Lord  of  the  angels  was  placed  among  the  angels,  as  if 
he  had  been  a  selected  delegate  out  of  many  illustrious  com- 
peers. That  He  was  superhuman  may  not  have  been  denied — 
but  that  He  was  truly  human  was  more  than  questioned. 
That  there  had  been  a  being  of  superior  order  upon  earth  was 
allowed,  but  whether  as  a  veritable  man  he  had  blood  to  shed, 
and  a  soul  and  body  to  be  severed  in  death  and  re-united  in 
resurrection,  appears  to  have  been  doubted  or  denied.  Ascetic 
austerities,    and     mystical    speculations,    took    the   place    of 


42  COLOSSIANS  I.  15. 

reliance  on  an  objective  atonement.^  The  gospel  was  sliorn 
of  its  simplicity,  and  mutilated  in  its  adaptations,  in  order  to 
be  fitted  in  to  the  dogmas  and  announced  in  the  specious 
nomenclature  of  a  vain  theosophy.  That  Jesus,  as  a  celestial 
being,  stood  in  a  certain  relation  to  God,  and  bore  some 
similitude  to  Him,  might  be  granted — but  the  likeness  was 
thought  to  be  faint  and  distant.  The  apostle  affirms  of  Him 
in  choice  and  expressive  terms,  on  the  other  hand,  "  Who  is 
the  image  of  the  invisible  God" — 

(Ver.  15.)  "0<i  iarcv  eiKcbv  rov  &gov  tov  dopdrov.  2  Cor. 
iv.  4.  The  clause  dazzles  by  its  brightness,  and  awes  by  its 
mystery.  We  feel  the  warning — "  Draw  not  nigh  hither,  for 
the  place  is  holy  ground."  One  trembles  to  subject  such  a 
declaration  to  the  scrutiny  of  human  reason,  and  feels  as  if  he 
were  rudely  profaning  it  by  the  appliances  of  earthly  erudition. 
The  invisible  God — how  dark  and  dreadful  the  impenetrable 
vail !  Christ  His  image — how  perfect  in  its  resemblance, 
and  overpowering  in  its  brilliance  !  We  must  worship  whilst 
we  construe ;  and  our  exegesis  must  be  penetrated  by  a  pro- 
found devotion. 

The  relative  o?  carries  us  back  at  once  to  vi6<t,  in  verse  13, 
and  in  its  connection  with  the  intermediate  verse  it  may  bear 
a  causal  signification,  "  inasmuch  as  He  is,"  etc.  Bernhardy,  p. 
292.  The  noun  eoKcov  does  not  require  the  article,  being 
clearly  defined  by  the  following  genitive.  Winer,  ^  19,  2,  (b)} 
That  this  term  was  a  current  one  in  the  Jewish  theosophy,  is 
plain  from  many  citations.^  Hesychius  defines  elKcov  by 
XapaKT^p  and  tvtto^.  Chrysostom  speaks  of  it  as  to  Kara 
Trdv  taov  kol  ofjuoiov,  "  a  faithful  likeness  in  every  thing  ; "  and 
Theophylact  describes  it  as  dirapaXkaKTO'i,  "  without  change." 

The  epithet  dopaTo<i,  as  applied  to  God,  refers  not,  perhaps, 
to  the  fact  that  He  is  and  has  been  unseen,  but  to  His  invisi- 
bility, or  to  the  fact  that  He  cannot  and  will  not  be  seen. 
John  i.  18  ;  Eom.  i.   20;   1   Tim.  i.  17.     Perhaps  the  Great 

1  See  Introduction.  *  Moulton,  p.  155,  note  6. 

^  Philo,  De  Opificio,  xiyov  tUova  had,  p.  12,  Opera  i.  ed.  Pfeifl'er,  Xoyos  St  Iffnv 
uKUDi  haZ,  De,  Monarch.  Similar  expressions  are  found  among  the  Kabbalists, 
and  among  oriental  theosophists,  and  seem  to  embody  in  various  forms  of  disguise 
and  error  a  truth  which  appears  to  have  descended  with  other  fragments  of  an 
early  patriarchal  time.  Kleuker,  Zendavesta,  i.  p.  4.  Usteri,  Paulin.  Lehrb- 
p.  308. 


COLOSSIANS  I.   15.  43 

God  remains  concealed  for  ever  in  the  unfathomable  depths  of 
His  own  essence  which,  to  every  created  vision,  is  so  dazzling 
as  to  be  "  dark  with  excess  of  light."  There  needs,  therefore, 
a  medium  of  representation,  which  must  be  His  exact  similitude. 
But  where  shall  this  be  found  ?  Can  any  creature  bear  upon 
him  the  full  impress  of  Divinity,  and  shine  out  in  God's  stead 
to  the  universe  without  contraction  of  person  or  diminution  of 
splendour  ?  Could  the  Infinite  dwarf  itself  into  the  finite,  or 
the  Eternal  shrink  into  a  limited  cycle  ?  May  we  not,  there- 
fore, anticipate  a  medium  in  harmony  with  the  original  ?  The 
lunar  reflection  is  but  a  feeble  resemblance  of  the  solar  glory. 
So  that  the  image  of  God  must  be  Divine  as  well  as  visible — 
must  be  ofioova-io^ — of  the  same  essence  with  the  original.  A 
visible  God  can  alone  be  the  image  of  God,  possessing  all  the 
elements  and  attributes  of  His  nature.  The  Divine  can  be 
fully  pictured  only  in  the  Divine.  The  universe  mirrors  the 
glory  of  God,  but  does  not  circumscribe  it.  His  "  invisible 
things  "  assume  a  palpable  form  and  aspect  in  the  objects  and 
laws  of  creation.  Man  is  made  in  the  image  of  God — in  his 
headship  over  the  earth  around  him,  he  is  "  the  image  and 
glory  of  God  " — but  he  was  only  a  faint  and  fractional  minia- 
ture, even  in  his  first  and  best  estate,  and  now  it  is  sadly 
dimmed  and  effaced.  But  Christ  is  the  image  of  God — not 
(TKia — a  shadowy  or  evanescent  sketch  which  cannot  be 
caught  or  copied,  but  clkcov,  a  real  and  perfect  likeness — no 
feature  absent,  none  misplaced,  and  none  impaired  in  fulness 
or  dimmed  in  lustre.      The  very  counterpart  of  God  He  is. 

Now,  this  Image  of  God  is  not  Christ  in  His  Divine  nature, 
or  as  the  eternal  Logos,  as  Olshausen,  Huther,  Biihr,  Usteri, 
and  Adam  Clarke,  and  many  of  the  Fathers,  suppose,  for  the 
apostle  is  speaking  of  the  Son,  and  of  that  Son  as  the  author 
of  redemption  and  forgiveness  of  sin.  It  is  therefore  Jesus 
in  His  mediatorial  person  that  the  apostle  characterizes  as 
being  the  image  of  God.  For  it  is  a  strange  notion  of  Chry- 
sostom,  and  some  of  his  followers,  such  as  Clarius,  that  as 
invisibility  is  a  property  of  God,  it  must  also  be  a  property  of 
His  image,  if  that  image  be  an  undeviating  similitude.^  Our 
Lord  Himself  said,  even  when  He  dwelt  upon  earth  robed  in 

^  Bengel  says — Invisbilis  imago  secundum  naturam  divtnavi ;  visibilis  secun- 
dum humanam. 


44  COLOSSIANS   I.   15. 

no  mantle  of  light,  and  with  no  nimbus  surrounding  His 
brow,  "  He  who  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father."  Visibility 
is  implied  in  the  very  notion  of  an  image.  The  spirit  of  the 
statement  is,  that  our  only  vision  or  knowledge  of  the  Father 
is  in  His  Son.  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  but  the  Son, 
and  he  to  whom  the  Son  shall  reveal  Him."  The  Socinian 
hypothesis,  advocated  even  by  Grotius  and  Heinrichs,  that 
only  because  He  revealed  so  fully  the  will  of  God  is  He 
called  the  image  of  God,  is  far  short  of  the  full  meaning,^ 
though  as  the  "  image  "  shines  upon  us  we  look  and  learn.  To 
Him,  as  "  Angel  of  the  Presence,"  we  are  indebted  for  those 
glimpses  of  the  "  eternal  power  and  Godhead  "  which  creation 
discloses — those  glimpses  of  sovereignty  throned  upon  bound- 
less power,  fathomless  wisdom,  and  unwearying  goodness, 
which  are  presented  by  the  universe  above  us  and  around  us. 
The  elements  of  the  Divine  nature  and  character  which  are 
mirrored  out  to  us  in  providence  are  derived  from  the  same 
source.  Christ,  as  Creator  and  Preserver,  is  the  palpable 
image  of  God.  In  this  aspect,  it  is  not  visibility  of  person 
that  can  be  maintained,  but  the  embodiment  of  attribute  in 
visible  result,  as  in  Eom.  i.  20,  where  it  is  said,  "  the  invisible 
things  "  of  the  Creator  are  "  clearly  seen." 

But  especially  in  Himself  and  as  Eedeemer  is  He  the 
representative  of  God.  His  prophetic  epithet  was  "Immanuel, 
God  with  us."  In  His  incarnate  state  He  brought  God  so 
near  us  as  to  place  Him  under  the  cognizance  of  our  very 
senses — men  saw,  and  heard,  and  handled  Him — a  speaking, 
acting,  weeping,  and  suffering  God  ;  He  was,  as  Basil  terms 
it,  elK(t}v  ^waa'^  a  living  image.  He  held  out  an  image  of 
God  in  the  love  He  displayed,  which  was  too  tender  and 
fervent,  too  noble  and  self-denying,  to  have  had  its  home  in 
any  created  bosom — in  the  power  He  put  forth,  which  was 
too  vast  to  be  lodged  in  other  than  a  Divine  arm,  and  also  in 
His  wisdom  and  holiness,  and  in  those  blessed  results  which 
sprang  from  His  presence.  When  he  moved  on  the  surface 
of  the  billows,  did  not  the  disciples  see  a  realization  of  the 
unapproachable  prerogative  of  Him  "  who  treadeth  upon  the 

1  Dr.  Owen  says — -"Were  He  not  the  essential  image  of  the  Father  in  His  own 
Divine  person,  He  could  not  be  the  representative  image  of  God  unto  us  as  He  is 
incarnate." — Christologia,  p.  78,   IVorks,  vol.  i.  Edin.  1850. 

^  Contra  Eunom.  p.  28. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   15.  45 

waves  of  tlie  sea"?  When  the  crested  waves  were  hushed 
into  quiet,  as  He  looked  out  upon  the  storm  and  spoke  to  it, 
His  fellow-voyagers  felt  that  they  had  heard  the  voice  of 
Divinity.  When  the  dead  were  evoked  by  His  touch  and 
word  from  their  slumbers,  the  spectators  beheld  the  energy 
and  prerogative  of  Him  who  says  of  Himself,  "  1  kill,  and  I 
make  alive ;  I  wound,  and  I  heal."  When  the  hungry  were 
satisfied  with  an  immediate  banquet  in  the  desert,  the  abun- 
dance proved  the  presence  of  the  Lord  of  the  Seasons,  who, 
in  the  process  of  vegetation,  multiplies  the  seed  cast  into  the 
furrow  "  in  some  thirty,  in  some  sixty,  and  in  some  an 
hundred  fold."  In  those  daily  miracles  of  healing  was  there 
not  manifest  the  soft  and  effective  hand  of  Him  who  is 
"abundant  in  goodness"?  and  in  those  words  of  wondrous 
penetration  which  touched  the  heart  of  the  auditor  was  there 
not  an  irresistible  demonstration  of  the  Divine  omniscience  ? 
Still,  too,  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high,  is  He  the 
visible  administrator  and  object  of  worship.  Thus,  "  the  Son 
of  His  love  "  is  a  visible  image  of  the  invisible  Father,  not 
the  "copy  of  an  image"' — distinct  from  Him,  and  yet  so 
like  Him,  making  God  in  all  His  glorious  fulness  apparent  to 
us — showing  us  in  Himself  and  His  works  the  bright  contour 
and  likeness  of  the  invisible  Jehovah.  This  glory  is  not 
merely  official,  but  it  is  also  essential,  not  won,  but  possessed 
from  eternity.  0  the  grandeur  of  that  redemption  of  which 
He  is  the  author,  and  the  magnificence  of  that  kingdom  of 
which  He  is  head !  Not  only  is  He  the  image  of  God — but 
the  apostle  adds — 

J7pft)TOTo/co?  TTctcTT;?  «Ttcretu<f  — "  The  first-born  of  every 
creature."  [irdarj'i,  Eph.  ii.  21.]  The  meaning  of  this 
remarkable  phrase  is  not  easily  discovered  to  our  entire 
-satisfaction.  Only,  it  is  clear,  from  the  previous  clause,  and 
from  the  succeeding  verse,  that  the  apostle  cannot  mean  to 
class  Jesus  Himself  among  created  thino;s.  It  is  an  awkward 
expedient  on  the  part  of  Isidore,^  Erasmus,  Fleming,^  and 
Michaelis,  to   propose    to    change    the    accentuation    tt/jwto- 

'  Uapdhiy/xit  uxivoi,  Epiphanius,  Haeres.,  Ixv.     See  also  Dorner,  Lehre  von 
der  Person  Christi,  etc.,  Berlin,  1852. 

^    Ep.      iii.      31 OU       TfUITOV      TJjj       KTlViUi     .      .      .      OlWo.     ffUTOt     TiTOICSVXl     .      ,      .      <V«     » 

"*  Christology,  i.  p.  216. 


46  COLOSSIANS   I.   15. 

t6ko<;,  and  by  making  it  a  paroxyton,  to  give  it  the  sense  of 
first-producer.  But  the  term,  with  such  a  meaning,  has  only 
a  feminine  application/  and  it  cannot  bear  such  a  sense  in 
the  eighteenth  verse. 

1.  Many  of  the  Fathers,  and  not  a  few  of  the  moderns, 
understand  the  epithet  as  denotive  of  the  generation  of  the 
Logos,  or  Divine  Son.  Thus,  in  QEcumenius  occurs  the 
phrase  lyevvrjOeU  crvvaiZio'^,  "  begotten  co  -  eternally,"  and 
Chrysostom  says  of  Him — ^eo9  ^ap  koX  Oeov  uio?.  Athanasius 
describes  Him — aTpeTrro?  e^  arpeTTTov,  "  the  unchangeable 
from  the  unchangeable,"  a  statement  preceded  by  another  to 
this  effect — 6  Se  vl6<i  vo/xo'i  e/c  tov  irarpo'i  dtBto<;  t'yevqOrj.z 
Theophylact  puts  the  question — "  first-born  of  every  creature, 
how  ? "  and  Bca  >yevv^aeco<i  is  his  reply.  Tertullian,  too,  uses 
similar  phraseology — primogenitus  ut  ante  omnia  genitus  ;  and 
again,  primogenitus  conditionis,  i.e.  conditorum  a  Deo?  Ambrose 
writes — primogenitus,  quia  nemo  ante  ipsum,  unigenitus  quia 
nemo  post  ipsum.'^  We  cannot  readily  accept  the  interpreta- 
tion, though  defended  by  Calovius,  Aretius,  Bahr,  Bohmer, 
von  Gerlach,  and  Bloomfield,  etc.  As  Bengel  admits,  it 
makes  the  genitive  Tracr?;?  Krlaeca  depend  on  Trpwro'i  in 
composition.  The  syntax  is  not  impossible,  as  with  the 
simple  adjective,  John  i.  15,  30,  but  the  following  similar 
phrase — Trpwroro/fo?  e/c  tcop  veKpwv,  shows  that  such  an 
exegesis  cannot  here  be  adopted,  for  it  is  plain  that  it  cannot 
mean  "  begotten  before  all  the  dead."  The  comparison  there 
is  not  one  of  time  even,  as  Meyer  erroneously  takes  it — 
but  one  of  rank.  The  sense  assigned  by  this  class  of  critics  is, 
that  Christ  was  the  begotten  of  the  Father,  and  became  His 
Son  prior  to  the  work  of  creation.  But  we  doubt  if  this  be 
the  form  of  truth  intended  by  the  apostle,  for  we  should  have 
expected  the  noun  vl6<i,  or  some  other  term  denoting  rela- 
tionship, to  have  occurred  in  the  clause.  Christ  is  called 
TrpoiTOTOKO'i  in  reference  to  His  mother,  but  never  in  connec- 
tion with  His  Divine  Father,  in  any  place  where  any  semblance 

'  Homer,  Iliad,  xvii.  5.  So  Thomas  Magister — UpuroroKo;  o  TrpuTu;  nx^'-U, 
TptuToroxcs  Ti  lartrnp,  h  ^fetiTus  ri^aira. 

'^  Expositi )  fidei,  i.  p.  242.     Vide  Suicer's  Thesaurus,  sub  voce  TpuTOTOKas, 

^  AdversuH  Prax.  c.  7  ;  Adversus  Marc.  v.  19,  pp.  660,  330,  vol.  ii.  Opera, 
cil.  Oehler,  Lipsiae,  1854. 

*  De  Fide,  xiv.  89,  Opera,  vol.  ii.  p.  550,  eJ.  Migue,  Paris,  1845. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   15.  47 

of  the  doctrine  of  eternal  filiation  is  referred  to,  and  in  such  a 
word  derived  from  tlktw,  the  reference  is  to  maternal,  not  to 
paternal  origin. 

2.  The  antagonist  exegesis  is  that  of  the  Arians  and  So- 
cinians,  which  presumes  that  Christ  is,  in  this  phrase,  classed 
as  a  portion  of  creation.  Even  Athanasius,  in  his  second 
discourse  against  the  Arians,  admits  that  Christ  has  got  the 
name  Zia  rrjv  ttoWwv  ahek^^oirolrjaiv.  A  common  argument 
in  favour  of  this  exegesis  is,  that  where  this  epithet  is  used, 
it  is  implied  that  he  who  bears  it  is  not  only  compared  with 
others,  but  is  one  of  them.  Thus,  in  the  phrase  "  first-born 
among  many  brethren,"  the  inference  is,  that  the  first-born 
is  one  of  the  family,  though  his  rank  be  pre-eminent ;  and 
in  the  phrase  "first-born  from  the  dead,"  Jesus  is  plainly 
regarded  as  having  been  one  of  the  dead  Himself,  though  He 
now  be  exalted  above  them.  So  that  the  deduction  is,  if  He 
is  called  the  "  first-born  of  every  creature,"  then  He  is,  in  the 
comparison,  and  from  a  necessary  oixoiyiveta,  regarded  as  one 
of  the  creatures.  Why  then,  it  is  confidently  asked,  shrink 
from  such  a  conclusion  ? 

We  might  give  the  reply  of  Basil  to  Eunomius,^  who  had 
adopted  such  an  exegesis — "  if  He  be  called  the  first-born  of 
the  dead,  because  He  is  the  cause  of  their  resurrection,  then, 
by  parity  of  argument,  he  is  the  First-born  of  the  whole 
creation,  because  He  is  the  cause  of  its  existence."  Theodoret 
puts  the  question — if  He  is  only-begotten,  how  can  He  be 
first-begotten :  and  if  first-begotten,  how  can  He  be  only- 
begotten  ?  And  he  guards  against  the  Arian  inference  by 
adding — irpcoTOTOKo^  ov'^  co?  aSeX^^v  ^X'wt'  ttjv  Krlcnv,  that  is. 
He  cannot  have  a  brotherly  relation  to  the  creation,  and  be  at 
the  same  time  its  maker.  The  ancient  critics  also  observe 
that  the  epithet  employed  by  the  apostle  is  not  TrpwroKTia-ro'i, 
first-created.  Besides,  in  the  cases  in  which  the  term  irpcoro- 
T0/C09  marks  him  who  bears  it,  as  one  of  a  class  referred  to, 
such  a  class  is  usually  expressed  in  the  plural  number,  as  in 
the  10th  verse,  and  Eom,  viii.  29,  Eev.  i.  5,  but  the  apostle 
does  not  here  say  rwv  KTicrfiaTOiv. 

^  Ei    OS   irpeoTOToxos    vixpcuv   i'/pfirai,    dia    to    alrioi    iivai    rn;    ix,    vixpav    onctffTciffius, 
o'liro)  »a)  TpuTOTOKos  XTiffiuii,  oia   to   kItios   iivxi  tou  tj  oi/K  otTuv  I'li  TO  tivxi  -rapayayuv 

Thi  xTtffn, — Lib.  iv.  Opera  ii.  p.  204. 


48  COLOSSIANS   I.   15, 

Yet,  even  assuming  for  a  moment  the  Socinian  hypothesis, 
we  would  not  be  nonplussed.  We  reckon  it  very  wrong  on 
the  part  of  Usteri^  to  translate  the  Pauline  term  by  Erst- 
geschaffene,  "  first-created,"  and  it  is  easy  to  see  what  must 
be  the  theological  conclusions  drawn  from  such  a  rendering. 
Anselm  explains  that  the  words  apply  to  Jesus  only  as  man, 
for  as  God  He  is  unige7hitus  non  primogenitits.  N(5W,  we  have 
shown  that  the  preceding  clause,  "  image  of  the  invisible 
God,"  implies  Christ's  divinity,  and  we  might  say  with  Anselm 
that  this  refers  to  His  humanity.  That  body  was  created  by 
the  Holy  Ghost — it  was  a  creature,  and  still  is  so,  as  we 
believe.  Though  on  the  throne,  it  is  not  deified — is  not  so 
covered  nor  interpenetrated  with  divinity  as  to  cease  to  be  a 
humanity.  Nay,  the  last  and  loftiest  prerogative  is  to  be  exer- 
cised by  the  "  man  whom  He  hath  ordained,"  so  that  even  with 
this  construction  we  are  under  no  necessity  to  adopt  the  Arian  or 
Socinian  hypothesis.  If  in  the  former  clause  there  is  express 
proof  of  Christ's  divinity,  in  the  latter  there  is  no  less  assertion  of 
His  real  humanity,  a  humanity  which  stands  out  in  special  pre- 
eminence over  the  entire  creation,  as  its  Lord  and  proprietor. 

3.  Our  own  view  is  a  modified  form  of  that  which  takes 
TrptoToroKO'i  in  its  figurative  meaning  of  chief  or  Lord — 
"  begotten  before  all  creation."  This  view  is  held  by 
Melancthon,  Cameron,  Piscator,  Hammond,  Eoell,  Suicer, 
Cocceius,  Storr,  Flatt,  De  Wette,  Pye  Smith,  Piobinson,  and 
Whitby.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia'^  held  the  same  opinion — 
ovK.  eVt  '^povov  Xeyerai  fiovov'  aWa  yap  Kal  eVt  irpoTL^'qcrew^ 
— but  he  understood  by  KTiaL<i  the  new  creation.  The  famous 
Photius,  of  the  ninth  century,  in  the  192nd  question  of  his 
Amphilochia,  has  given  a  similar  view,  referring,  however,  the 
phrase  to  His  human  nature,  and  His  resurrection  from  the 
dead.^  Some  critics  conjoin  both  the  first  and  second  views. 
We  apprehend  that  the  apostle  selects  the  unusual  word  for  a 
special  reason.  It  seems  to  have  been  a  prime  term  in  the 
nomenclature  of  the  Colossian  errorists,  and  the  apostle  takes 
the  epithet  and  gives  it  to  Him  to  whom  alone  it  rightfully 
belongs.     Traces  of  the  same  idiom  are  found  in  the  Jewish 

'  Lehrb.  p.  315,  Holzhausen,  in  his  reply  to  Sclileiermacher  in  the  Tubing. 
Zp'tts^rhrlft,  1833,  uses  similar  unguarded  language 

*  Catena,  ed,  Cramer,  p.  306.  -  AVolf,  Curae,  vol.  v.  800. 


COLOSSIANS   I.    15.  49 

Kabbala — in  which  Jehovah  Himself  is  called  the  "  first-born 
of  the  world,"  that  is,  in  all  probability,  the  Divine  represen- 
tative of  essential  and  immanent  perfection  to  the  world.^ 
Thus  the  first  heavenly  man  was  called  Adam  Kadmon — the 
first-begotten  of  God — He  who  is  Messiah  and  the  Metatron 
of  the  burning  bush.  Not  that  Paul  merely  borrowed  his 
language,  but  the  terms  which  the  errorists  were  perverting 
he  refers  to  Jesus  in  their  full  truth  and  legitimate  application. 
In  a  similar  theological  dialect,  Philo  names  the  X070?  by  the 
epithet  irpwToyovo'i.^  The  diction  of  the  Old  Testament  in 
reference  to  the  Hebrew  "ii33  is  in  harmony,  and  is  based  upon 
the  familiar  rights  and  prerogatives  of  human  primogeniture. 
The  Hebrew  adjective  is  applied  to  what  is  primary,  prominent, 
and  the  most  illustrious  of  its  classis,  Job  xviii.  13;  "first- 
born of  death" — alarming  and  fatal  malady,  Isa.  xiv.  30; 
"  first-born  of  the  poor  " — a  pauper  of  paupers.  Still  more, 
we  find  the  term  in  the  Messianic  oracle  of  the  89th  Psalm — 
"  I  will  make  him  my  first-born  " — will  invest  him  with  royal 
dignity,  and  clothe  him  M-ith  pre-eminent  splendour,  so  as 
that  he  shall  tower  in  majesty  above  all  his  kingly  compeers. 
Israel  elevated  above  the  other  nations,  brought  into  a 
covenant  relation,  and  reflecting  so  much  of  the  Divine  glory,  is 
Jehovah's  first-born,  Ex.  iv.  22,  Jer.  xxxi.  9.  The  church  of 
Christ,  blessed  and  beloved,  and  placed  nearer  the  throne  than 
angels,  is  the  "church  of  the  first-born,"  Heb.  xii.  23.  And 
when  believers  are  regarded  as  sons — as  a  vast  and  happy 
brotherhood — He  who  loved  them,  and  died  for  them,  who  has 
won  for  Himself  special  renown  in  their  adoption,  and  has 
imprinted  His  image  on  all  the  children,  stands  out  as  chief  in 
the  family,  and  is  "  the  first-born  among  many  brethren," 
Eom.  viii.  29.  Again,  in  Heb  i.  6,  Jesus  receives  the  same 
appellation,  inasmuch  as  the  spirits  of  the  heavenly  world  are 
solemnly  summoned  to  do  Him  homage  as  His  Father's  repre- 
sentative.^    Moreover,  when  He  is  styled,  as  in  the  18th  verse, 

1  Schoettgen,  Horae  Htb.  i.  922. 

"  De  Confusione  Ling.  p.  381,  vol.  ii.  Opera,  ed.  Pfeiffer. 

^  Bleek,  in  loc.  Der  Brief  an  die  Ilebrder  erldutert,  Berlin,  1836.  It  inity 
be  added  that  under  the  Roman  law,  haeres  and  dominus  were  interchangeable 
terms,  and  to  compare  great  things  with  small,  in  one  of  the  Hebrides  it  was  the 
rnstom  for  the  head  of  the  clan  to  abdicate  when  his  son  came  of  age. — Boswell's 
Tour,  p.  261. 


50  COLOSSIANS   I.   15. 

and  in  Kev.  i.  5,  "  the  first-born  of  the  dead,"  the  reference  is 
not  to  mere  time  or  priority,  but  to  prerogative,  for  He  is  not 
simply  the  first  who  rose,  "  no  more  to  return  to  corruption," 
but  His  immortal  primogeniture  secures  -the  resurrection  of  His 
people,  and  is  at  once  the  pledge  and  the  pattern  of  it.  The 
genitive  then  may  be  taken  as  that  of  reference.  Bernhardy, 
p.  139.  The  meaning  therefore  is,  "first-born  in  reference  to 
the  whole  creation."  The  phrase  so  understood  is  only  another 
aspect  of  the  former  clause.  The  first-born  was  his  father's 
representative,  and  acted  in  his  father's  name.  Christ  stands 
out  as  the  First-born,  all  transactions  are  with  Him,  and  they 
are  equivalent  to  transactions  with  the  Sovereign  Father. 
The  Father  is  invisible,  but  the  universe  is  not  left  without 
a  palpable  God.  Its  existence  and  arrangements  are  His, 
and  the  supervision  of  it  belongs  to  Him.  He  is  the  God  who 
busies  Himself  in  its  affairs,  and  with  whom  it  has  to  do.  He 
is  its  First-born,  its  chief  and  governor.  As  the  first-born  of 
the  house  is  he  to  whom  its  management  is  entrusted,  so  the 
First-born  of  the  whole  creation  is  He  who  is  its  governor  and 
Lord,  and  whose  prerogative  it  is  to  exhibit  to  the  universe 
the  image  and  attributes  of  the  unseen  Jehovah.  He  is 
manifested  Deity,  appearing,  speaking,  working,  ruling,  as  in 
patriarchal  times  when  He  descended  in  a  temporary  humanity, 
and  held  familiar  discourse  with  the  world's  "  grey  fathers," 
and  as  under  the  Mosaic  economy,  of  whose  theocracy  He  was 
the  head,  of  whose  temple  He  was  the  God,  and  of  whose 
oracles  He  was  the  inspirer.  ISTow  He  is  exalted  to  unbounded 
sovereignty,  as  "  Lord  of  all,"  rolling  onwards  the  mighty  and 
mysterious  wheels  of  a  universal  providence,  without  halting 
or  confusion ;  seated  as  His  Father's  deputy  on  a  throne  of 
unbounded  dominion,  which  to  this  world  is  its  tribunal  of 
judgment — wearing  the  name  at  which  every  knee  bows,  "  of 
tilings  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and  things  under  the 
earth" — the  acting  President  of  the  universe,  and  therefore 
"  the  First-born  of  every  creature."  His  Father's  love  to  Him 
has  given  Him  this  pre-eminence,  this  "double  portion,"^  "Thou 
art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  Thee."  It  is  plainly 
implied  at  the  same  time  that  He  existed  before  all  creatures, 
for  He  has  never  stood  in  any  other  or  secondary  relation 
1  Deut.  xxi.  17. 


COLOSSIANS  I.   16.  51 

to  the   universe  —  to    the  many   mansions   of  His  Father's 
liouse. 

(Ver.  16.)  "On  ev  avro)  eKriaOr]  ra  iravra,  to,  ev  rots" 
ovpavoU  Koi  ra  iirl  T779  7?}9.  The  conjunction  on  assigns  the 
reason  of  the  preceding  statement.  He  is  first-born  of  the  whole 
creation,  for  by  Him  "all  things"  were  created — and  He  is  the 
image  of  God,  for  as  Creator  He  shines  out  in  the  "  brightness 
of  His  Father's  glory,"  so  that  we  apprehend  it  to  be  a  narrow 
and  confined  view  to  restrict  the  reference  of  on  to  the  last 
clause  of  the  previous  verse.  The  phrase  ra  trdvra  means 
"  the  all " — the  universe,  the  whole  that  exists.  Winer,  ^ 
18,  8.  The  aorist  characterizes  creation  as  a  past  and  perfect 
work.  Creation  is  here  in  the  fullest  and  most  unqualified 
sense  ascribed  to  Christ,  and  the  doctrine  is  in  perfect  harmony 
with  the  theology  of  the  beloved  disciple,  John  i.  3.  The 
work  of  the  six  days  displayed  vast  creative  energy,  but  it  was 
to  a  great  extent  the  inbringing  of  furniture  and  population 
to  a  planet  already  made  and  in  diurnal  revolution,  for  it 
comprehended  the  formation  of  a  balanced  atmosphere,  the 
enclosure  of  the  ocean  within  proper  limits,  the  clothing  of 
the  soil  with  verdure,  shrubs,  trees,  and  cereal  grasses — the 
exhibition  of  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  as  lights  in  the  firmament 
— the  introduction  of  bird,  beast,  reptile,  and  fish,  into  their 
appropriate  haunts  and  elements — and  the  organization  and 
endowment  of  man,  with  Eden  for  his  heritage,  and  the 
world  for  his  home.  But  this  demiurgical  process  implied 
the  previous  exercise  of  Divine  omnipotence,  for  "  in  the 
beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth."  It  is 
not,  therefore,  the  wise  and  tasteful  arrangement  of  pre- 
existent  materials  or  the  reduction  of  chaos  to  order,  beauty, 
and  life,  which  is  here  ascribed  to  Jesus,  but  the  summoning 
of  universal  nature  into  original  existence.  What  had  no 
being  before  was  brought  into  being  by  Him.  The  universe 
was  not  till  He  commanded  it  to  be.  "  He  spake  and  it  was 
done."  Every  form  of  matter  and  life  owes  its  origin  to  the 
Son  of  God,  no  matter  in  what  sphere  it  may  be  found,  or 
with  what  qualities  it  may  be  invested.  "  In  heaven  or  on 
earth."  Christ's  creative  work  was  no  local  or  limited  operation  ; 
it  was  not  bounded  by  this  little  orb ;  its  sweep  surrounds 
the  universe  which  is  named  in  Jewish  diction  and  according 

G 


52  COLOSSIANS   I.   16. 

to  a  natural  division — "  heaven  and  earth."  Every  form  and 
kind  of  matter,  simple  or  complex — the  atom  and  the  star,  the 
sun  and  the  clod — every  grade  of  life  from  the  worm  to  the 
angel — every  order  of  intellect  and  being  around  and  above 
us,  the  splendours  of  heaven  and  the  nearer  phenomena  of 
earth,  are  the  product  of  the  First-born.-^ 

Ta  opara  koI  ra  aopara — "  The  visible  and  the  invisible." 
This  distinction  seems  to  have  been  common  in  the  Eastern 
philosophy :  ^  the  latter  epithet  being  referred  to  the  abode  of 
angels  and  blessed  spirits.  The  meaning  is  greatly  lowered 
by  some  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  who  thought  the  term  was 
applicable  to  the  souls  of  men,  and  by  not  a  few  of  the 
moderns,  who  include  under  it  the  souls  of  the  dead.  The 
meaning  is,  what  exists  within  the  reach  of  vision,  and  what 
exists  beyond  it.  The  object  of  which  the  eye  can  take 
cognizance,  and  the  glory  which  "  eye  hath  not  seen,"  are 
equally  the  "  handiwork  "  of  Jesus.  The  assertion  is  true,  not 
only  in  reference  to  the  limited  conceptions  of  the  universe 
current  in  the  apostle's  days,  but  true  in  the  widest  sense. 
The  visible  portion  of  the  creation  consisting  of  some  myriads 
of  stars,  is  but  a  mere  section  or  stratum  of  the  great  fabric. 
In  proportion  as  power  is  given  to  the  telescopic  glass,  are 
new  bodies  brought  into  view.  Nothing  like  a  limit  to  crea- 
tion can  be  descried.  The  farther  we  penetrate  into  space, 
the  luminaries  are  neither  dimmer  nor  scarcer,  but  worlds  of 
singular  beauty  and  variety  burst  upon  us,  and  the  distant 
star-dust  is  found  to  consist  of  orbs  so  dense  and  crowded  as 
to  appear  one  blended  mass  of  sparkling  radiance.  Eays  of 
light  from  the  remotest  nebulfe  must  have  been  two  millions 
of  years  on  their  inconceivably  swift  journey  to  our  world. 
The  nearest  fixed  star  is  twenty-one  billions  of  miles  from  us, 
so  that  between  it  and  us  there  is  room  in  one  straight  line 
for  12,000  solar  systems,  each  as  large  as  our  own.  From  the 
seraph  that  burns  nearest  the  throne,  through  the  innumerable 
suns  and  planets  which  are  so  thickly  strewn  in  the  firmament, 
and  outwards  to  the  unseen  orbs  which  sentinel  the  verge  of 
space — all  is  the  result  of  Christ's  omnipotence  and  love. 

It  is  probable,  however,  that  the  apostle  thought  of  heaven 
proper  when  he  spoke  of  things  invisible,  for  he  adds,  as  if  in 

*  See  also  on  p.  54.  ^  Gesenius,  de  Theolog.  Samaritana,  p.  20. 


COLOSSI  AN  S   I.   16.  53 

special  reference  to  its  population — "  whether  they  be  thrones, 
or  dominions,  or  principalities,  or  powers  " — 

EtT€  dpovoi  eire  KvpiorrjTef;  etVe  dp'^m  et're  e^ovaiai.  Tliese 
epithets  refer  to  celestial  dignities.  In  Eph.  i.  21,  he  says 
— V7repdv(0  irdaij^i  dp')(rj<;  koI  i^ovaia<i  koL  Bvvdfjb€a)<;  Kai  Kvpto- 
T7JT09.  The  arrangement  is  different — the  two  last  terms  of 
the  one  are  the  two  first  in  the  other,  and  Kvpi,6Trj<i,  wliich 
is  second  here,  is  last  in  Ephesians.  Qpovot  occurs  here,  but 
hwdfiew^  is  excluded.  The  "thrones"  appear  to  be  the  highest, 
— chairs  of  state  in  humble  and  distant  imitation  of  the  Divine 
imperial  throne.  We  need  not  repeat  our  remarks  made  on 
this  subject  under  Eph.  i.  21.  If  we  may  credit  Ireneeus,^ 
the  Gnostics  held  that  another  power  than  Divine  created 
the  celestial  hierarchy.  Simon  Magus  said — Ennoian  generarc 
angelos  et  potestates,  a  quibus  et  mundum  hunc  factum.  The 
object  of  the  apostle  is  to  show  that  Jesus  is  the  creator,  not 
simply  of  lower  modes  of  being,  but  of  the  higher  Essences 
of  the  Universe.  Yes,  those  Beings,  so  illustrious  as  to  be 
seated  on  "  thrones  ;  "  so  noble  as  to  be  styled  "  dominions  ; " 
so  elevated  as  to  be  greeted  with  the  title  of  "  principalities ; " 
and  so  mighty  as  to  merit  the  appellation  of  "  powers  : "  these, 
so  like  God  as  to  be  called  "  gods  "  themselves,^  bow  to  the 
Son  of  God  as  the  one  author  of  their  existence,  position,  and 
prerogative.  As  no  atom  is  too  minute,  so  no  creature  is  too 
gigantic  for  His  plastic  hand.  What  a  reproof  to  that 
"  worshipping  of  angels  "  afterwards  reprobated  by  the  apostle 
— beings  who  are  only  creatures,  and  who  themselves  are 
summoned  to  do  suit  and  service  to  the  First-born.  The  sen- 
tence is  at  this  point  concluded,  but  the  apostle  reiterates — 

Td  Trdvra  Si  avrov  Kol  el<i  avrov  cKTicrrat — "  All  things  by 
Him  and  for  Him  were  created."  Already  the  apostle  had 
said — iv  avro)  iKTia-drj  rd  irdvTa.  The  change  of  preposition 
and  tense  can  scarcely  be  regarded  as  accidental,  or  as  intro- 
duced for  the  mere  sake  of  varied  diction.  Chrysostom, 
indeed,  and  many  after  him,  regard  iv  and  Sid  as  synonymous. 
Indeed,  this  Father  says,  to  iv  avrm,  Si  avrov  eVrt ;  and 
Usteri  repeats  the  blunder;  while  De  Wette  finds  compacted  into 
iv  the  double  sense  of  Bt  avrov  and  etV  avrov.      The  old  school 

1  Cont.  Haer.  i.  23,  §  2  ;  vol.  i.  238,  ed.  Stieren. 
^  Ps.  xcvii.  7. 


64  COLOSSIANS   I.   16. 

of  Jewish  interpretation,  represented  by  Philo  and  some  of  the 
Kabbalists,  held  a  theory  which  was  adopted  by  several  of  the 
Fathers,  as  Origen,  Athanasius,  and  Hilary ;  by  the  mediaeval 
divines ;  and  virtually  by  Neander,  Bahr,  Bohmer,  Kleuker, 
Olshausen,  and  Kahler.  Their  notion  is,  that  in  the  Logos, 
and  by  Him,  was  the  world  created — the  idea  was  in  Him, 
and  its  working  out  was  by  Him.  He  is  both  causa  exem- 
plaris  and  coMsa  cffectiva.  "  In  Him,"  says  Olshausen,  "  are 
all  things  created,  i.e.  the  Son  of  God  is  the  intelligible 
world,  the  Koa-fio^  z/ot^to?,  i.e.  things  themselves  according  to 
the  idea  of  them.  He  carries  their  essentiality  in  Himself; 
in  the  creation  they  come  forth  from  Him  to  an  indepen- 
dent existence,  in  the  completion  of  all  things  they  return  to 
Him."  We  cannot,  with  Cocceius  and  others,  take  ev  as 
bringing  out  the  idea  that  the  universe  was  created  by  the 
Father,  in  the  Son.  No  mention  is  made  of  the  Father  in 
the  context.  We  rather  hold,  with  Meyer,  "that  the  act 
of  creation  rests  in  Christ  originally,  and  its  completion  is 
grounded  in  Him."  He  is  not  simply  instrumental  cause,  but 
He  is  also  primary  cause.  The  impulse  to  create  came  upon 
Him  from  no  co-ordinate  power  of  which  He  was  either  the 
conscious  or  the  passive  organ.  All  things  were  created  in 
Him — the  source  of  motive,  desire,  and  energy  was  in  Him. 
He  was  not,  as  a  builder,  working  out  the  plans  of  an  architect 
— but  the  design  is  His  own  conception,  and  the  execution  is 
His  own  unaided  enterprise.  He  did  not  need  to  go  beyond 
Himself,  either  to  find  space  on  which  to  lay  the  foundation 
of  the  fabric,  or  to  receive  assistance  in  its  erection.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  extrinsic  aspect  is  represented  by  Bid 
— the  universe  is  the  result  of  the  exercise  of  His  omnipo- 
tence, or  as  the  Syriac  renders,  "  by  His  hand."  It  still  stands 
out  as  having  been  brought  into  existence  by  Him.  The 
aorist  carries  us  back  to  the  act  of  creation,  which  had  all  its 
elements  in  Him,  and  the  perfect  tense  exhibits  the  universe 
as  still  remaining  the  monument  and  proof  of  His  creative 
might.  The  first  clause  depicts  creation  in  its  origin,  and 
the  second  refers  to  it  as  an  existing  effect.  In  the  former,  it 
is  an  act  embodying  plan  and  power,  which  are  alike  "in 
Him " — in  the  latter,  it  is  a  phenomenon  caused  and  still 
continued  "  by  Him."     Winer,  §  50,  6. 


COLOSSIAXS   I.    IG.  5o 

Kal  etf  avrop.  Not  in  ipso,  as  the  Vulgate  renders,  but 
"  and  for  Him."  This  clause  marks  out  His  final  purpose  in 
creation.  It  means  not  "  for  Him  "  as  the  middle  point  of 
creation,  as  Biihr  and  Huther  imagine ;  nor  simply  "  for  His 
plan,"  as  Baumgarten-Crusius  holds ;  nor  merely  "  for  His 
glory,"  as  Bohmer  explains  it ;  nor  with  a  main  view  to  His 
Incarnation,  as  Melancthon  regards  it ;  nor  yet  with  an 
express  reference  to  His  Universal  Headship,  as  Grotius  and 
Storr  have  maintained.  The  phrase  "  for  Him "  seems  to 
mean  for  Him  in  every  aspect  of  His  Being,  and  every  pur- 
pose of  His  Heart.  He  is,  as  Clement  of  Alexandria  says, 
TeXo'i  as  well  as  dp)(i].  Not  only  is  the  universe  His  sole  and 
unhelped  work,  but  it  is  a  work  done  by  Himself,  and  especially 
for  Himself, — for  every  end  contemplated  in  His  infinite 
wisdom  and  love.  A  man  of  taste  and  skill  may  construct 
a  magnificent  palace,  but  it  is  for  His  sovereign  as  a  royal 
habitation.  On  the  contrary,  Christ  is  uncontrolled,  meeting 
with  no  interference,  for  His  is  no  subordinate  agency  defined 
and  guided  by  a  superior  power  for  which  it  labours  and  to 
which  it  is  responsible.  No  licence  of  this  nature  could  be 
permitted  to  any  creature,  for  it  would  be  ruinous  to  the 
universe  and  fatal  to  himself.  Such  a  path  of  uncurbed 
operation  would  astonish  all  heaven,  and  soon  surprise  all  hell. 
He  only  "  of  whom,  to  whom,  and  for  whom  are  all  things," 
can  have  this  freedom  of  action  in  Himself  and  for  Himself. 

Had  the  Divine  Being  remained  alone.  His  glory  would  have 
been  unseen  and  His  praises  unsung.  But  He  longed  to 
impart  of  His  own  happiness  to  creatures  fitted  to  possess  it — 
to  fill  so  many  vessels  out  of  that  "  fountain  of  life "  which 
wells  out  from  His  bosom.  Therefore  Christ  fitted  up  these 
"  all  things "  "  for  Himself,"  in  order  that  He  might  exhibit 
His  glory  while  He  diffused  happiness  through  creatures  of 
innumerable  worlds,  and  enabled  them  to  behold  His  mirrored 
brightness  and  reflect  it ;  that  He  might  occupy  a  throne  of 
supreme  and  unapproachable  sovereignty ;  and  show  to  the 
universe  His  indescribable  grace,  which,  in  stooping  to  save 
one  of  its  worlds,  has  thrown  a  new  lustre  over  the  Divine 
holiness,  and  proved  the  unshaken  harmony  and  stability  of 
the  Divine  administration.  For  this  Creator  is  He  "in  whom 
we  have  redemption,"  and  this  noblest  of  His  works  was  in 


5G  COLOSSI ANS   I.   17. 

certain  prospect  when  for  Himself  all  things  were  created — a 
platform  of  no  stinted  proportions  prepared  for  Him  and  by 
Him.  Creation  in  itself  presents  an  imperfect  aspect  of  God, 
opens  up  a  glimpse  of  only  one  side  of  His  nature — His 
brightest  and  holiest  phase  lying  under  an  eclipse ;  but 
redemption  exhibits  Him  in  His  fulness  of  essence  and 
symmetry  of  character.  And  did  not  Christ  contemplate  such 
a  manifestation  when  He  brought  into  existence  so  vast  an 
empire  to  enjoy  and  adore  the  august  and  ennobling  spectacle  ? 
Thus  His  all-sided  relation  to  the  universe  is  depicted — it  is  "in 
Him,"  "  by  Him,"  and  "  for  Him."  Let  no  one  say.  He  is  an 
inferior  agent  — the  universe  was  created  "  in  Him  ; "  let  no 
one  surmise,  He  is  but  a  latent  source — it  is  "  by  Him  ; "  let 
no  one  look  on  Him  as  another's  deputy — it  is  "  for  Him," 
In  every  sense  He  is  the  sovereign  creator — His  is  the  con- 
ception, and  Himself  the  agent  and  end. 

(Ver.  17.)  Kal  avT6<i  eariv  irpo  irdvTwv — "And  He  is 
before  all."  The  pronoun  in  the  nominative  has  an  emphatic 
sense — "  and  this  one  " — the  creator  of  all,  is  before  all.  Two 
meanings  have  been  assigned  to  the  preposition  irpo. 

1.  Many  take  it  in  the  sense  of  order,  or  eminence — such 
as  Noesselt,  Heinrichs,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Schleiermacher, 
and,  of  necessity,  the  Socinian  expositors.  There  is  no  need 
of  this  secondary  meaning,  and  the  phrase  as  it  occurs  in 
Jas.  v.  12,  1  Pet.  iv.  8,  does  not  warrant  such  an  exegesis, 
for  it  occurs  in  those  places  as  a  kind  of  adverbial  emphasis. 

2.  It  naturally  means  "  before  all "  in  point  of  time — as 
Bohmer,  Meyer,  De  Wette,  and  Huther  take  it.  John  i.  30. 
When  connected  with  persons,  tt/jo  bears  such  a  primary 
meaning  always  in  the  New  Testament,  John  v.  7  ;  Eom.  xvi. 
7;  Gal.  i.  17.  Priority  of  existence  belongs  to  the  great 
First  Cause.  He  who  made  all  necessarily  existed  before  all. 
Prior  to  His  creative  work.  He  had  filled  the  unmeasured 
periods  of  an  unbeginning  eternity.  Matter  is  not  eternal — 
is  not  the  dark  and  necessary  circumference  of  His  bright 
Essence.  He  pre-existed  it,  and  called  it  into  being.  Every- 
thing is  posterior  to  Him,  and  nothing  coeval  with  Him.  And 
the  present  tense  is  employed — "  He  is,"  not  "  He  was." 
John  viii.  58,  His  is  unchanging  being.  At  every  point  of 
His  existence  it  may  be  said  of  Him,  He  is.     He  is  all  that 


COLOSSIANS  I.   17.  57 

He  was,  and  all  that  He  will  be — and  comprises  iu  Him  the 
birth  and  end  of  time.  Were  His  existence  measured  by 
human  epochs,  you  might  say  of  Him  at  some  bygone  period, 
"  He  was  " — but  the  apostle,  glancing  at  His  immutability  of 
nature,  simply  says,  "  He  is."  OEcumenius  rightly  remarks, 
that  the  apostle  writes  not  iyevero  irpb  iravrcov,  aX.V  eaTi  irpo 
irdvTOiv. 

Kal  ra  irdvra  ev  avTu>  avvearrjKe — "  And  all  things  in 
Him  are  upheld."  Not  only  is  He  the  creator,  but  He  is 
also  preserver.  Heb.  i.  3.  The  verb  sometimes  signifies  to 
arrange,  to  constitute,  to  create,  but  it  also  denotes  to  main- 
tain in  existence  what  has  been  created.  2  Pet.  iii,  5.^  Such 
is  the  view  of  the  Fathers ;  as  CEcumenius  paraphrases — St' 
avTou  TYjv  yeveatv  Kal  rrjv  Siufiovrjv  e^et.  UpofirjdelTai  ayu 
iTTolrjae,  The  perfect  tense  seems  to  point  us  to  this  signifi- 
cation. What  has  been  created  has  still  been  preserved.  The 
two  meanings  of  the  verb  meet  and  merge  in  its  perfect  tense. 
The  rd  iravra,  in  this  verse,  are  those  of  the  preceding  clauses, 
and  not  simply  the  church,  as  some  in  timidity  and  error 
restrict  it.  All  things  were  brought  together,  and  are  still 
held  together  in  Him.  The  energy  which  created  is  alone 
competent  to  sustain,  every  successive  moment  of  providence 
being,  as  it  were,  a  successive  act  of  creation.  In  Him  this 
sustentation  of  all  things  reposes.  He  is  the  condition  of  their 
primary  and  prolonged  being.  Wliat  a  vast  view  of  Christ's 
dignity !  His  arm  upholds  the  universe,  and  if  it  were  with- 
drawn, all  things  would  fade  into  their  original  non-existence. 
His  great  empire  depends  upon  Him  in  all  its  provinces — 
life,  mind,  sensation  and  matter ;  atoms  beneath  us  to  which 
geology  has  not  descended,  and  stars  beyond  us  to  which 
astronomy  has  never  penetrated.  He  feeds  the  sun  with  fuel, 
and  vails  the  moon  in  beauty.  He  guides  the  planets  on  their 
journey,  and  keeps  them  from  collision  and  disorder.  Those 
secret  forms  of  existence  which  the  unaided  eye  cannot  detect 
are  receiving  from  Him  "  their  meat  in  due  season."    The  rain 

'  Thus  we  find — Herodotus,  vii.  225,  aT^anvfio,  ffuvurrnxis,  a  standing  army  ;  rat 
(runffTr,Kora,  things  as  at  present.  Again,  Aristotle,  de  Mund.  6,  Ix  tou  hau  ra. 
vaira  »ai  lia  hou  iif/.7v  (Tvviirrtix'..  So  Plato,  Pol.  7,  etc.  ;  Timaeus,  p.  29.  In 
Philo,  too,  the  same  meaning  is  often  found,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  collected 
examples  of  Eisner,  Krebs,  Loesner,  and  Kypke. 


58  COLOSSIANS   I.   17. 

out  of  His  reservoirs  nourishes  "  grass  for  the  cattle,  and  herl) 
for  the  service  of  man."  The  vitiated  atmosphere  discharged 
from  animal  lungs  becomes  in  His  laboratory  the  source  of 
special  nutrition  to  vegetable  life,  and  the  foul  breathings  of 
forges  and  manufactories  supply  with  strength  and  colour  the 
tall  and  gorgeous  plants  of  the  torrid  zone.  Thus  that  universal 
balance  is  preserved,  the  derangement  of  which  would  throw 
around  the  globe  the  pall  of  death.  Order  is  never  violated, 
the  tree  yields  fruit  "  after  his  kind,"  and  according  to  the 
original  edict.  Evening  and  morning  alternate  in  sure  and 
swift  succession.  The  mighty  and  minute  are  alike  to  Him 
whose  supervision  embraces  the  extinction  of  a  world  and  the 
fall  of  a  sparrow.  The  "  creeping  things  innumerable  in  the 
great  and  wide  sea  "  look  up  to  Him,  and  He  opens  His  hand 
and  "  they  are  filled  with  good ; "  as  well  the  leviathan  who  is 
"  made  to  play  therein,"  as  the  insect  that  builds  its  coral  cell — 
first  its  dwelling  and  then  its  tomb.  Every  pulsation  of  our 
heart  depends  on  His  sovereign  beneficence  who  feeds  us 
and  clothes  us.  The  intellect  of  the  cherub  reflects  His  light, 
and  the  fire  of  the  seraph  is  but  the  glow  of  His  love.  All 
things  which  He  has  evoked  into  being  have  their  continued 
subsistence  in  Him. 

Are  we  not  entranced  with  the  dignity  of  our  Eedeemer,  and 
are  we  not  amazed  at  His  condescension  and  love  ?  That  the 
creator  and  upholder  of  the  universe  should  come  down  to 
such  a  world  as  this,  and  clothe  Himself  in  the  inferior  nature 
of  its  race,  and  in  that  nature  die  to  forgive  and  save  it,  is  the 
most  amazing  of  revelations.  Dare  we  lift  our  hearts  to  con- 
template and  credit  it  ?  And  yet  it  is  truth,  most  glorious 
truth  ;  truth  sealed  with  the  blood  of  Calvary.  What  sublimity 
is  shed  around  the  gospel  !  The  God  of  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis  is  the  babe  of  the  first  chapter  of  Matthew.  He  whom 
Isaiah  depicts  as  "  the  Lord  God,  the  creator  of  the  ends  of  the 
earth,"  "  who  hath  measured  the  waters  in  the  hollow  of  His 
liand,  and  meted  out  heaven  with  the  span,"  is  the  Christ 
crucified  of  evangelical  story  and  apostolic  preaching.  He  who, 
in  the  pages  of  Jeremiah,  is  "  the  true  God,  the  living  God, 
and  an  everlasting  King,"  is  in  the  pages  of  John  the  Word 
made  flesh — the  weeping  Jesus — the  master  girded  with  a 
towel  and  washing  His  disciples'  feet — the  sufferer  crowned 


COLOSSIANS   I.   17.  59 

with  thorns  and  nailed  in  nakedness  to  the  cross.  He  who  is 
depicted  in  Ezekiel  as  seated  on  the  sapphire  throne,  with  the 
rainbow  for  its  canopy,  and  the  cherubim  for  its  bearers  and 
i^uardians,  is  none  other  than  He  whose  garments  were 
divided  by  His  executioners,  yea,  whose  corpse  was  pierced  by 
the  barbarous  arm  of  a  Eoman  soldier,  and  probed  to  the  very 
lieart  to  prove  the  reality  of  His  death.  He  who  warned  the 
ancient  people  that  they  "  saw  no  manner  of  similitude  in  the 
day  when  He  spake  to  them  in  Horeb,"  says  at  length  to  a 
group  standing  around  Him,  "  Behold  my  hands  and  my  feet, 
that  it  is  I  myself,  handle  me  and  see."  He  by  whom  all 
things  were  made  had  not  "  where  to  lay  His  head."  What 
faith  in  power  and  extent  should  not  be  reposed  in  such  a 
Saviour-God !  Surely  He  who  made  and  who  sustains  the 
universe  is  able  to  keep  that  we  "  have  committed  to  Him," 
and  will  not,  from  inability  or  oversight,  suffer  a  confiding 
spirit  to  sink  into  perdition. 

We  have  not  chosen  to  interrupt  the  course  of  exegesis  by 
taking  notice  of  the  non-natural  interpretation  which  has  been 
sometimes  put  upon  these  verses.  The  deniers  of  theEedeemer's 
deity,  and  of  necessity  such  as  Crellius,  Slichting,  and  the 
editors  of  the  "  Improved  Version,"  ^  hold  that  the  creation  re- 
ferred to  is  not  the  physical,  but  a  moral  creation, — an  exegesis 
acquiesced  in,  in  some  of  its  parts,  by  Grotius,  Wetstein, 
Ernesti,  Noesselt,  Heinrichs,  Schrader,  Baumgarten-Crusius, 
and  Schleiermacher.  But,  as  Whitby  remarks,  it  is  a  "  flat 
and  mean  "  exposition  ;  or,  as  Daille  calls  it,  "  cMcancuse  glosse." 
For — 

1.  It  is  contradicted  by  the  paragraph  which  afterwards, 
and  that  formally,  introduces  the  new  or  spiritual  creation,  and 
connects  it  as  a  sequel  with  that  other  creation  which  in  these 
verses  the  apostle  ascribes  to  Christ.  This  mode  of  connection 
is  a  plain  proof  that  two  distinct  acts,  or  provinces  of  operation 
and  government,  are  referred  to  Christ. 

2.  The  obvious  meaning  of  the  terms  employed  is  against 
the    Socinian    hypothesis.     Had  the  words  occurred  in    any 

^  The  views  of  Photiiius,  a  disciple  of  Marcellus,  in  the  fourth  century,  were 
.similar,  and  were  condemned  even  by  an  Arian  Council  at  Sirmiiim,  in  351.  It 
is  strange  to  find  Lampe  adopting  the  Socinian  exegesis,  as  in  his  Commentary 
bn  the  45th  Psalm,  p.  573. 


60  COLOSSI AXS   I.   17. 

common  paragraph,  their  meaning  would  never  have  been 
doubted.  Had  the  Father  been  spoken  of,  the  reference  to 
creation,  in  its  proper  sense,  would  never  have  been  impugned. 
Why  then,  when  the  reference  is  to  the  Son,  should  not  the 
first  and  most  natural  interpretation  be  put  upon  the  lan- 
guage ?  Pierce  remarks,  that  the  exegesis  which  adopts  the 
notion  of  a  spiritual  creation  would  never  have  been  espoused 
"  but  for  the  sake  of  an  hypothesis."  The  language  in  its 
words  and  spirit — its  minuteness  and  universality — leads  us  to 
the  first  or  physical  creation.  It  is  a  miserable  shift  of  the 
editors  of  the  Improved  Version  to  argue  "  the  apostle  does 
not  say  by  Him  were  created  heaven  and  earth,  but  things  in 
heaven  and  things  on  earth."  The  inspired  language  is,  the 
universe — "  the  all "  was  created  by  Him  without  exception  ; 
"  things  in  heaven,"  comprising  heaven  and  its  population ;  and 
"  things  on  earth,"  meaning  earth  and  all  that  it  contains.  One 
is  apt  to  wonder  at  the  hardihood  of  such  an  exegesis,  and  to 
pause  and  ask  with  Whitby,  "  Do  the  angels  need  this  moral 
creation,  or  are  they  a  part  of  this  spiritual  creation  ? "  And 
how  jejune  to  say,  that  by  "  things  in  heaven  "  are  meant  the 
Jews,  and  by  "  things  on  earth,"  the  Gentiles  !  Besides,  if  we 
adopt  the  hypothesis,  that  a  moral  renovation  is  described  by 
these  words,  the  paragraph  would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  it 
had  been  already  effected,  and  that  it  still  subsisted,  whereas 
in  reality  it  had  only  commenced. 
/  3.  Such  phraseology  cannot  signify  a  moral  creation.  The 
'  verb  KTL^co  has  sometimes  a  secondary  sense,  and  refers  to 
the  new  creation.  In  such  cases  not  only  is  the  meaning 
obvious  from  the  context,  as  in  Eph.  ii.  10,  2  Cor.  v.  17, 
Eph.  iv.  24,  Col.  iii.  10,  but  also  the  subjects  of  the  renova- 
tion are  living  men  already  in  physical  existence ;  and  there 
can  be  therefore  no  mistake  in  calling  the  mighty  moral  change 
that  passes  over  them  a  creation.  In  the  paragraph  before  us, 
on  the  other  hand,  no  such  previous  condition  exists  ;  all  things 
are  said  to  be  created,  that  is,  brought  into  existence,  by 
Christ  Jesus.  The  passages  of  similar  meaning  in  the  Old 
Testament,  as  Ps.  li.  10,  Isa.  xlv.  8,  Jer.  xxxi.  22,  etc., 
present  no  difficulty,  for  they  carry  with  them  the  prin- 
ciple of  their  own  solution.  Such  phraseology  as  that  before 
us  occurs  not  in  any  of  these  places ;  and  in   one  of  them 


COLOSSIANS   I.   17.  61 

where  there  is  simihir  diction,  ambiguity  is  guarded  against  by 
the  addition  of  the  epithet  "  new," — "  I  create  new  heavens 
and  a  new  earth." 

Lastly,  as  Whitby,^  Dr.  Pye  Smith,"  and  Burton  ^  have  shown, 
the  early  Greek  Fathers  unanimously  understood  the  passage 
of  a  "  proper  and  physical  creation."  The  Sociuian  interpreta- 
tion, in  short,  is  as  repugnant  to  sound  exegesis  as  the  trans- 
parent trick  of  Marcion  was  to  ordinary  honesty,  when,  according 
to  Tertullian,  he  omitted  in  his  edition  the  verses  altogether. 
The  perversion  of  them  is  not  better  than  the  exclusion  of 
them  ;  nay,  the  latter  has  the  merit  of  a  direct  avowal  of 
inability  or  reluctance  to  explain  them.  They,  however, 
survive  as  a  bright  and  glorious  testimony  to  Him  who  is  the 
"  true  God  and  eternal  life." 

A  similar  assault  upon  the  natural  meaning  of  the  paragraph, 
and  which  created  no  small  stir,  was  made  by  Schleiermacher  * 
in  the  third  number  of  the  Studien  unci  Kritiken,  1832.  His 
exegesis  in  its  general  principles  and  minute  details  is  opposed 
alike  to  sound  philology  and  to  the  context.  His  affirmation 
that  ktI^glv  is  never  used  in  Hellenistic  Greek  of  creation 
proper,  is  contradicted  by  Wisd.  i.  14,  etc.;  Eev.  iv.  11, 
x.  6.  His  attempt  to  connect  irpcoTO'foKO'i  as  an  adjective  with 
the  preceding  ecKcov  is  another  failure  clearly  proved  by  the 
verbal  arrangement.  How  frigid  to  confine  the  phrase,  "  visible 
and  invisible,"  to  the  last  half  of  the  previous  clause — "  things 
on  earth  "  !  Somewhat  more  spiritual  and  ingenious  than  the 
Socinian  hypothesis,  this  exegesis  of  Schleiermacher  leads  to 
the  same  unsatisfactory  result.  It  was  answered  by  Osiander 
in  the  same  journal,  1833 ;  and  by  Holzhausen  in  the 
Tubing.  Zeitschrift,  1833;  by  Bahr  in  an  appendix  to  his 
Commentary ;  and  by  Bleek  in  his  Exposition  of  Hebreius, 
i.  3. 

^  See  alao  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  p.  156,  vol.  i.  ed.  Oxford,  1847. 

2  Script/ure  Testimony,  iii.  273. 

^  Testimony  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers  to  the  Divinity  of  Christ  (passim), 
Oxford,  1837. 

*  Thus  lie  says,  "  Christus  ist  in  dem  gesammten  Umfang  der  geistigen  Men- 
schenwelt  das  erstgeborne  Bild  Gottes,  das  ursprungliche  Abbild  Gottes  ;  alia 
Gliiubigea  soUten  in  das  Bild  Christi  gestaltet  werden,  woraus  ebenfalls  das  Bild 
Gottes  in  ihnen  entstehen  miisse,  ein  Bild  zweiter  Ordaung." — Stud.  u.  Krit. 
1832,  3,  S.  521  tf. 


02  COLOSSIANS   I.   18. 

(Ver.  18.)  Kal  avro^  iartv  rj  K6(f)d\r]  tov  aa}fji,aro<;  t?}? 
iKK\7)(rLa<;. — "  And  He  is  the  head  of  the  body — the  Church.' 
The  latter  genitive  is  in  apposition.  The  apostle  now  com- 
mences the  second  portion  of  the  paragraph,  and  portrays 
Christ's  relation  to  the  Church.  As  Theodoret  says,  He  passes 
diro  rrji;  d6o\ojla<;  el<;  rrjv  oltcovofiiav.  Still  He  stands  out 
supreme — the  one  guardian  and  benefactor — the  one  Saviour 
and  president — koL  avT6<; — He  and  none  other.  The  meaning 
of  the  phrase,  "  head  of  the  body — the  church,"  has  been  given 
under  Eph.  i.  22,  23,  and  iv.  15,  16.  The  probability 
is  that  Christ's  headship  was  impugned  by  the  false  teachers, 
in  consequence  of  their  theory  of  emanations  and  other 
fantastic  reveries  about  the  spirit-world.  The  church  is  not, 
as  Noesselt  ^  says,  the  whole  family  in  heaven  and  in  earth, 
— nor  yet  the  human  race,  one  of  whom  Christ  became  ; — 
but  the  company  of  the  redeemed,  the  body  of  the  faithful 
in  Christ  Jesus.  The  previous  verses  show  His  qualification 
for  such  a  headship, — His  possession  of  a  Divine  nature — His 
supremacy  over  the  universe,  and  His  creation  and  support  of 
all  things.  Any  creature  would  be  deified  were  he  so  highly 
exalted ;  for  he  would,  from  his  position,  become  the  god  of 
the  Christian  people,  as  their  blesser,  protector,  and  object 
of  worship.  But  the  church  and  the  universe  are  under  one 
administration,  that  of  Him  who  is  "  King  of  kings  and  Lord 
of  lords."  The  king  of  the  universe  is  able  to  be  Head  of  the 
church,  and  He  has  won  the  Headship  in  His  blood.  It  is 
no  eminence  to  which  he  is  not  entitled,  no  function  which 
he  cannot  worthily  discharge.  For  the  apostle  subjoins  the 
following  statement  as  proof — 

"O9  ia-Tcv  dp')(rj — "  Who  is  the  beginning."  This  term  has 
been  variously  understood.  Storr  and  Flatt  reduce  its  signifi- 
cance by  making  it  mean  governor  of  the  world  ;  Calvin  comes 
near  the  true  view  in  his  paraphrase — initium  sccundac  et  novae, 
creationis ;  Baumgarten,  nearer  still,  when  he  defines  it  by 
Urhebcr,  originator.  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Huther,  Biihr,  Steiger, 
and  others,  join  it  to  the  following  words,  as  if  the  full  clause 
were — a/3%^;  .  •  .  tcov  veKpwv.  Meyer  and  De  Wette  take  it 
simply  in  a  temporal  sense  {irpo  iravTcov  dvaard^,  as  Theophylact 
has  it),  and  as  if  it  were  equivalent  to  dirap-)(r],  which  some 
■^  Opxiscula,  vol.  ii.  \}.  231. 


COLOSSI ANS   I.   18.  Go 

Mss,  even  have/  while  the  other  expositors  give  the  sense  of 
lyrincipium.  Such  a  construction  is  certainly  very  strange, 
especially  when  we  consider  that  Ik  precedes  roiv  veKpwv.  We 
incline  to  keep  the  word  by  itself,  and  to  regard  it  as  being 
much  the  same  as  in  the  phrase,  Eev.  iii.  14 — rj  ap'xrj  t^<? 
KTLaewi  Tov  ©eou — the  cause  or  source  of  the  creation  of  God. 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  xii.  16,  xiv.  27.  The  noun,  standing  by 
itself,  would  seem  to  point  out  Christ  in  His  solitary  grandeur 
as  the  prime  source  of  all  the  blessings  and  honours  detailed  in 
the  subsequent  verses.  The  relative  has  plainly  a  causal  sense, 
so  that  the  connection  is  "  He  is  Head  of  the  body, — the 
church, — inasmuch  as  He  is  the  one  source  of  its  existence 
and  blessings  ;"  and  He  is  so,  as  being  "  the  first-begotten  from 
the  dead,"  and,  as  verse  20  shows,  the  Eeconciler  of  men  to 
God  by  the  blood  of  His  cross.  This  exegesis  gives  a  special 
dignity  to  the  epithet — Christ,  the  first  source  of  existence 
and  blessing.  But  for  His  gracious  intervention,  no  church 
had  ever  existed,  and  no  salvation  been  ever  enjoyed.  Having 
ransomed  the  church  by  His  blood,  may  He  not  rule  it  by  His 
power,  and  be  "  the  Head  "  ? 

And  no  matter  what  blessing  is  enjoyed,  what  its  kind  or 
amount.  He  is  its  author.  There  may  be  subordinate  supplies 
— wells  of  water ;  but  His  rain  from  heaven  fills  them.  Con- 
viction of  sin  and  repentance  unto  life  are  produced  by  a 
glimpse  of  Christ.  "  They  shall  look  on  me  whom  they  have 
pierced,  and  mourn."  The  pardon  of  guilt  comes  directly  from 
Him  ;  and  His  death  provides  for  the  sanctification  of  the  heart ; 
His  Spirit  the  agent,  and  His  word  the  instrument.  Every 
grace  may  be  traced  to  Him,  and  it  bears  the  heart  away  to 
Him  as  the  source  of  saving  influence.  He  has  originated 
salvation,  and  He  gives  it.  He  is  in  the  most  unlimited  sense 
— "'PXV — "  t^6  beginning."  And  we  are  the  more  confirmed  in 
this  view  of  keeping  a/3%?;  separated  from  the  following  clause 
and  giving  it  an  absolute  meaning,  from  the  fact  that,  in  the 
Philonic  vocabulary,^  it  is  the  name  of  Logos,  and  was  pro- 

^  Such  as  17,  46,  63  ;  Chrysostom's  text,  and  that  of  (Ecumenius. 

2  Kai  yag  ".^x^  •  •  •  **'  >-oyo;.  De  Confus.  Lijig.  p.  380,  vol.  iii.  ed.  Pfeiifer. 
The  first  source  of  all  was  named  by  Cerinthus,  as  in  the  Latin  of  Irenaeus, 
principalitas.  Adver.  Haeres.  p.  253,  Opera,  vol.  i.  ed.  Stieren,  1853.  As  to 
the  question  whether  the  Logos  of  Philo  be  a  person,  or  only  the  personification 
of  an  attribute,  a  question  both  sides  of  which  are  discussed  by  Gfrorer,  Liicke, 


64  COLOSSIANS  I.   18. 

bably  introduced  by  the  apostle  with  a  special  reference  to 
current  and  insidious  errors.     The  description  proceeds — 

JT/owTOTo/co?  6/c  ra)v  veKpcov — "  First-begotten  from  the  dead." 
In   Kev.   i.     5    we  find    but     the    simple    genitive.      It    is 
out  of   the  question,  on  the  part  of    Bullinger,  Keuchenius, 
Aretius,  Erasmus,  and  Schleiermacher,  to  connect  dpxv  with      j 
TrpcoTOTo/co? — an  abstract  with  a  concrete.     We  must  take  this       ' 
word  as  in    the   former    clause  — "  first  -  begotten   of  every 
creature,"  and  regard  it  as  referring,  not  to  the  priority  of  time, 
but  to  dignity  and  station.     He  was  not  the  first  that  rose  in 
absolute  priority,  nor  simply  the  first  who  rose,  no  more  to  die. 
But  He  was  among  the  dead ;  and  as  He  rose  from  the  midst 
of  them,  He  became  their  chief,  or  Lord — "  the    first-fruits 
of  them  that  sleep."     From  Him  the  dead  will  get  deliverance, 
for  He  rose  in  their  name,  and  came — eV — out  from  among 
them  as  their  representative.      In  this  character  He  destroyed 
"  him  that  had  the  power  of  death."     Not  only  when  He  was 
"  cut  off,  but  not  for  Himself,"  did  He  "finish  transgression  and 
make  an  end  of  sin,"  but  He  "  abolished  death."     Nay,  He 
has  the  keys  of  death  and  Hades.     His  people  rise  in  virtue 
of  His  power.     The  instances  of  resurrection  prior  to  His  own 
were    only  proofs    that  the  dead    might  be   raised,  but  His 
Tesurrection  was  a  pledge  that  they  should  be  raised.     The 
Lord  Himself   shall    descend ;    the   trump  shall    sound,  and 
myriads  of  sleepers  shall  start  into  life ;  no  soul  shall  lose,  and 
none  mistake  its  partner  ;  neither  earth  nor  sea  shall  retain  one 
occupant.     But  He  is  not  only  the  pledge.  He  is    also  the 
pattern.     His  people  shall  be  raised  in  immortal  youth  and 
beauty ;  their  vile  bodies    fashioned    like  unto  His  glorious 
body,  and  therefore  no  longer  animal    frames,  but  so  ethe- 
realized  and  attempered  as  to  be  able  to  dwell  in  a  world  which 

Dorner,  Dahne,  Pye  Smith,  and  other  distinguished  scholars,  we  quite  agree  with 
the  view  of  Scha.ff  {Church  History,  i.  p.  213),  that  Philo  himself  vibrated 
between  the  two  opinions,  and  took  each  as  it  served  his  turn.  There  is  no 
doubt,  that  when  he  calls  his  Logos,  archangel,  interpreter,  High  Priest,  the 
first-born  Son  of  God,  he  seems  to  give  Him  a  personal  existence  ;  and  there  is 
little  doubt  that  he  appears  to  regard  Him  only  as  a  species  of  personification, 
when  he  names  Him  the  reflection  of  God,  the  ideal  world,  the  medium  of  the 
sensible  world,  the  summation  of  those  ideas  which  are  the  archetypes  of  all 
being. — Dorner,  JUntwickelungeschichte  der  Lehre  von  der  Person  Christi,  2nd  ed. 
vol.  i.  pp.  24,  25,  Also,  Liicke,  Commtntar  ilber  das  Evang.  Joluinnis,  i.  249 
e<  seq.,  Bonn,  1840. 


COLOSSIANS   I.    18.  65 

"  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit " — to  see  God  and  yet  live, 
to  bear  upon  them  without  exhaustion  the  exceeding  weight 
of  glory,  and  to  serve,  love,  and  enjoy  the  unvailed  Divinity 
without  end. 

"Iva,  jevrjTac  iv  iraa-Lv  avTO<i  Trpoarevonv — "  In  order  that  in 
all  things  He  should  have  the  pre-eminence."  The  conjunc- 
tion appears  to  be  telic,  and  not  merely  ecbatic,  as  Biihr 
supposes.  It  indicates,  not  the  result,  but  the  final  purpose 
of  the  entire  economy.  And  we  cannot,  with  Meyer  and 
others,  connect  this  clause  solely  with  the  one  that  goes  before 
it,  as  if  His  pre-eminence  rested  merely  upon  the  fact  that  He 
was  the  first-born  from  the  dead.  The  clause  has  its  root  in  the 
entire  paragraph,  as  we  shall  immediately  endeavour  to  show. 
The  emphatic  verb  irpwrevoi  does  not  occur  anywhere  else  in 
the  New  Testament,  but  we  find  it  in  the  Septuagint,  2  Mace, 
vi.  18  ;  Esth.  v.  11  ;  Xenophon,  Cyrop.  8,  2,  28  ;  Joseph,  Antiq. 
9,  8,  3  ;  Plutarch,  De  Educat.  lib.  c,  13,  where  this  very  phrase 
occurs ;  ^  Plato,  Leges,  692,  p.  54,  vol,  vii.  Opera,  ed,  Bekker, 
1826,  Two  distinct  meanings  have  been  assigned  to  iv  iraaiv. 
1.  It  maybe  taken  as  mascuKne,  "among  all  persons,"  as  is 
the  opinion  of  Anselm,  Beza,  Cocceius,  Heinrichs,  Piscator, 
and  Usteri.  If  the  clause  referred  simply  to  the  veKpoi,  of 
which  Jesus  is  the  first-born,  then  we  should  have  expected 
the  article — iv  toU  irdaiv.  That  iv  following  irpoarevai  may 
refer  to  persons,  Kypke  has  shown  in  his  note  on  this  verse, 
though  'H-apd  is  the  preposition  as  frequently  employed,  and  more 
usually  the  simple  genitive.  2.  The  phrase  iv  iraatv  is  more 
naturally  taken  by  the  majority  in  a  neuter  sense,  "  in  every 
thing,"  or  "  in  all  respects."  This  is  the  ordinary  meaning  of 
the  phrase  in  the  New  Testament.  2  Cor.  xi.  6  ;  Eph.  i, 
23  ;  1  Tim.  iii.  11  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  7  ;  Tit,  ii.  9  ;  1  Pet.  iv.  11. 
The  usus  loquendi  is  therefore  in  favour  of  this  interpretation, 
"first  in  all  points  ; "  or  as  Theophylact  says,  in  all  things — toU 
irepl  avTov  6eo)povfi6voL<; — "  in  all  things  which  have  refer- 
ence to  Himself; "  as  Chrysostom  has  it,  'Travra-^ov  tt/jwto?. 
The  verb  yivTjrac  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  verb  of 
simple  existence.  The  meaning  is  not  that  He  might  be,  but 
that  "He  might  become,"  Acts  x,  4;  Eom.  iii.  19  ;  Heb. 
V.     12.     The  verb  in   such  cases  denotes  the  manifestation 

1  See  Wetstein,  in  loc. 


66  COLOSSI ANS   I.   18. 

of  result — that  He  may  show  Himself  to  be  in  all  things  First. 
"We  do  not  say,  with  Meyer  and  Huther,  that  this  pre-eminence 
is  looked  upon  as  wholly  future,  and  as  only  to  be  realized 
at  the  resurrection.  If  we  held  the  close  and  sole  connection 
of  7rp(OTevQ)v  with  TrpwroTOKO'i,  we  should  be  obliged  to  keep 
this  view  partially,  but  not  to  its  full  extent ;  for,  in  respect 
to  the  dead,  as  now  dead,  Jesus  stands  out  as  the  First  who 
has  so  risen  from  a  similar  state.  The  meaning,  then, 
is,  that  in  consequence  of  His  being  what  the  apostle  has  just 
described  Him  to  be.  He  has  in  all  things  the  primacy ;  that 
He  stands  out  as  First  to  the  universe,  for  He  is  its  visible 
God,  its  Creator  and  Preserver ;  and  He  is  the  Head  of  the 
Church,  the  fount  of  spiritual  blessing,  the  "  Resurrection  and 
the  Life." 

As  the  image — elKonv — of  the  invisible  God  He  has  the 
pre-eminence.  For  He  is  without  date  of  origin  or  epoch  of 
conclusion.  No  eclipse  shall  sully  the  splendours  of  His 
nature.  What  He  has  been.  He  is,  and  He  shall  be.  JSTor  is 
His  essence  bounded  by  any  circumference,  but  it  is  every- 
where, undiluted  by  boundless  extension.  His  mind  com- 
prises all  probabilities,  and  has  decided  all  certainties.  His 
power  knows  no  limit  of  operation,  and  is  unexhausted  by 
effort.  His  truth  is  pure  as  the  solar  beam,  and  the  fulness  of 
infinite  love  dwells  in  His  heart.  But  such  Divine  glory  is 
common  to  the  Godhead,  and  He  shares  it  equally  with  Father 
and  Spirit.  Even  here,  however.  He  is  First ;  for  He  has 
visibility,  which  the  Father  and  Spirit  have  not ;  and  He  is 
the  God  of  the  universe  whom  it  sees,  recognizes,  and  adores. 
Nay,  more.  He  has  cast  a  new  lustre  over  His  original  glory 
by  His  incarnation  and  death.  He  has  won  for  Himself  an 
imperishable  renown.  This  dignity  so  earned  by  Him  is 
specially  called  His  own,  in  contradistinction  from  His  prior 
and  essential  glory,  and  it  is  His  peculiar  and  valued  posses- 
sion. Eobed  in  His  native  majesty,  which  has  been  aug- 
mented by  the  mediatorial  crown,  is  He  not  the  most  glorious 
being  in  the  universe  ?     Matt.  xxv.  31  ;  John  xvii.  24. 

And  He  has  pre-eminence  as  Creator,  for  creation  is  His 
special  work.  It  existed  in  idea  in  the  mind  of  God,  but  it 
was  brought  into  existence  by  the  power  of  Christ.  These 
worlds  on  worlds,  which  in  their  number  and  vastness  con- 


COLOSSIANS   I.   18.  67 

found  US,  have  Him  as  artificer,  for  He  "  telleth  the  number  of 
the  stars,  and  calleth  them  by  their  names."  Creation  owns 
Him  as  Lord.  The  natural  impulse  is  to  reason  from  effect 
upwards  to  cause — "  from  nature  up  to  nature's  God  : "  but  the 
God  whom  such  instinctive  logic  discovers,  and  whose  might 
and  wisdom,  science  and  philosophy  illustrate  with  rich,  varied, 
profound,  and  increasing,  nay,  interminable  examples,  is  none 
other  than  this  "First-born  of  every  creature."  On  His  arm 
hangs  the  universe,  and  He  receives  its  homage.  Above  all, 
there  is  matchless  grandeur  in  the  constitution  of  His  person 
as  the  Head  of  the  Church.  The  Father  is  pure  Divinity,  and 
so  is  the  Spirit :  the  wisest,  greatest,  and  best ;  infinite, 
eternal,  and  unchangeable  in  essence,  attributes,  and  character. 
But  the  Son  has  another  nature,  one  in  person  with  His 
Deity.  The  divine  is  not  dwarfed  into  the  human,  nor  has 
the  human  been  absorbed  into  the  divine,  but  both  co-exist 
without  mixture  or  confusion.  The  incarnation  of  Jesus 
illuminates  the  Old  Testament  as  a  promise,  and  fills  the  New 
Testament  as  a  fact.  Possessed  of  this  composite  nature, 
Christ  is  distinguished  from  every  being :  none  like  Him  in 
unapproachable  mystery — as  the  God-man  who  has  gained 
His  capital  supremacy  by  His  agony  and  cross.  Was  ever 
suffering  like  His  in  origin,  intensity,  nature,  or  design  ? 

Again,  as  the  source  of  blessing,  has  He  not  primal  rank  ? 
These  spiritual  gifts  possess  a  special  value,  as  springing  from 
His  blood,  and  as  being  applied  by  His  Spirit.  He  is  seated 
in  eminence  as  the  dispenser  of  common  gifts  to  His  universe, 
but  He  is  throned  in  pre-eminence  as  the  provider  and 
bestower  of  spiritual  blessings  to  His  Church,  Are  not  His 
instructions  without  a  rival  in  adaptation,  amount,  and  power  ? 
What  parallel  can  be  found  to  His  example,  so  perfect  and  so 
fascinating,  that  of  a  man  that  men  may  see,  and  admire,  and 
imitate ;  while  it  contains  in  itself,  at  the  same  time,  the 
secret  might  of  Divinity  to  mould  into  its  blessed  resemblance 
the  heart  of  all  His  followers  who  are  "  changed  into  the  same 
image  from  glory  to  glory  "  ?  In  short,  there  is  such  wondrous 
singularity  in  the  glory  of  Christ's  person  and  work,  so  much 
that  gives  Him  a  radiance  all  His  own,  and  an  elevation  high 
and  apart,  that  it  may  be  truly  said,  that  in  all  things  He  has 
the  pre-eminence.     None  like  Christ  is  the  decision  of  faith : 

H 


68  COLOSSIANS   I.    19. 

none  but  Christ  is  the  motto  of  love.  The  apostle  assigns 
another  or  additional  reason — 

(Ver.  19.)'''0Tt  ev  avroj  evSoKtjcrev.  A  different  spelling  of 
the  word  is  exhibited  in  some  of  the  MSS.  such  as  A,  D,  E, 
— yvSoKTiaev,  but  without  authority.  Schniid  supposes  that 
TrXrjpwixa  is  the  nominative;  and  he  understands  it  thus — the 
entire  Godhead  was  pleased  to  dwell  in  Christ.  We  believe, 
with  the  majority  of  expositors,  that  6  ^eo9  is  to  be  supplied  as 
the  nominative,  and  not  tw  Oeo),  in  the  dative.  Matt.  iii.  17; 
Luke  iii.  22.  The  full  syntax  is  found  in  1  Cor.  i.  21  ;  Gal. 
i.  15.  But  we  cannot  hold,  with  some,  that  the  pronoun  avrw 
refers  to  God,  for  we  take  it  as  still  pointing  to  Him  who  has 
been  the  prime  subject  of  discourse.  To  make  o  Xptaro^  the 
nominative,  as  Conybeare  does,  implies  the  sense  that  Christ  is 
not  only  the  means,  but  the  end  in  this  reconciliation,  for  the 
reading  would  plainly  be  in  the  next  verse — "  and  by  Himself 
to  reconcile  all  things  unto  Himself,"  a  mode  of  speech  not 
in  accordance  with  Pauline  usage.  Christ  reconciles,  not  to 
Himself,  but  to  God.  We  incline  also  to  connect  the  clause 
immediately  with  the  preceding  one,  and  not  generally  with  the 
previous  paragraph.  "That  in  all  things  He  might  have  the 
pre-eminence  ; "  for,  in  order  to  this,  "  it  pleased  God — it  was 
His  good  purpose — that  in  Him  should  all  fulness  dwell."  The 
pre-eminence,  therefore,  could  not  but  be  His.  The  verb  does 
not  mean  that  it  was  God's  desire  that  all  fulness  should  dwell 
in  Christ,  but  that  it  was  His  resolve,  as  being  His  pleasure.-^ 

Udv  TO  ifXrjpwpLa  KaroiKrj(Tai.  On  the  meaning  of  TrXrjpcofia 
we  have  spoken  at  length  under  Eph.  i.  23.  In  the  verb 
the  idea  of  past  and  continued  residence  is  presented.  We 
see  no  reason  to  deviate  here  from  the  meaning  assigned  to 
the  noun  in  the  place  referred  to,  so  that  we  must  hold,  against 
Biihr  and  Steiger,  that  the  word  has  a  passive,  and  not  an 
active  signification,  denoting,  not  that  which  fills  up,  but  the 
state  of  fulness,  or  the  contents  of  it.  But  to  what  does  this 
fulness  refer  ? 

1.  It  is  a  most  extraordinary  exegesis  of  Theodoret  and 
Severianus,^  followed  by  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Heinrichs,  Wahl, 

'  In  reference  to  the  meaning  and  derivation  of  the  verb,  there  is  an  elaborate 
note  of  Fritzsche,  Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Roman,  ii.  369.  See  also  Sturz,  p.  168  ; 
Lobexk  ad  Phryn.  p.  456.  ^  Catena,  p.  310. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   19.  69 

and  Schleiermacher,  that  TrXi^pwfia  signifies  the  multitude 
which  compose  the  church.  This  view  has  been  exposed  by 
us  under  Eph.  i.  23.  Here  it  would  yield  no  tolerable 
meaning,  and  would  not  be  in  harmony  at  all  with  the  context. 
Pierce  follows  the  rendering  of  Castalio — "  it  seemed  good  to 
God  the  Father  to  inhabit  all  fulness  by  Christ." 

2.  Some  limit  the  meaning  of  the  clause  by  basing  their 
interpretation  of  it  on  a  following  verse  in  ii.  9,  "  all  the 
fulness  of  the  Godhead."  But  there  is  no  reason  to  subjoin 
the  genitive  Tr)^  OeoT'qTO'i  in  this  place,  the  meaning  here 
being  more  general  and  sweeping  in  its  nature. 

3.  This  fulness  is  referred  by  Q^^cumenius,  Huther,  and 
others,  to  the  Divine  essence.  Servetus  based,  according  to 
Beza,  a  species  of  Pantheism  on  this  declaration.  But  such 
an  idea  cannot  be  entertained,  because  the  Divine  essence 
dwelt  in  Christ  unchangeably,  and  not  by  the  Father's  con- 
sent or  purpose.  It  is  His  in  His  own  right,  and  not  by 
paternal  pleasure.  Whatever  dwells  in  Christ  by  the  Father's 
pleasure  is  official,  and  not  essential ;  relational,  and  not 
absolute  in  its  nature. 

4.  The  proper  exegesis,  then,  is,  that  all  fulness  of  grace,  or 
saving  blessings,  dwells  in  Christ — a  species  of  fulness,  the 
contents  of  which  are  described  in  the  following  verse.  John 
i.  14-16.  We  do  not  exclude  the  work  of  creation  as  a 
result  of  this  fulness  laid  up  in  the  Image  and  First-born,  but 
the  apostle  seems  to  connect  it  more  with  the  process  and 
results  of  redemption.  Whatever  is  needed  to  save  a  fallen 
world,  and  restore  harmony  to  the  universe,  is  treasured 
up  in  Him — is  in  Him.  It  was  indispensable  that  the 
law  should  be  magnified  while  its  violators  were  forgiven, 
lest  the  circuit  of  the  Divine  jurisdiction  should  be  narrowed, 
or  its  influence  counteracted ;  and  there  is  a  fulness  of 
merit  in  the  sufferings  of  Jesus  which  has  shed  an  imperish- 
able lustre  on  the  nature  and  government  of  God.  That 
copious  variety  of  gifts  connected  with  the  Christian  economy 
has  its  source  in  Jesus.  Knowledge  and  faith,  pardon  and 
life,  purity  and  hope,  comfort  and  strength,  impulse  and 
check,  all  that  quickens  and  all  that  sustains,  each  in 
its  place  and  connection,  is  but  an  emanation  of  this  unex- 
hausted plenty.     And  there  is  "  all "  fulness ;  abundance  of 


70  COLOSSIANS   I.   19. 

blessing,  and  of  every  species  of  blessing,  in  proper  time  and 
order.  As  the  bounties  of  providence  are  scattered  around  us 
with  rich  niuniiicence,  and  consist  not  of  one  kind  of  gift 
which  might  become  fatal  in  its  monotony,  but  of  an  immense 
variety,  which  is  essential,  singly  and  in  combination,  to  the 
sustenance  of  life ;  so  the  blessings  which  spring  out  of  this 
fulness  are  not  only  vast  in  number  and  special  in  adaptation, 
by  themselves,  but  in  their  mutual  relations  and  dependence 
they  supply  every  necessity,  and  fill  the  entire  nature  with 
increasing  satisfaction  and  delight.  The  impartation  of  know- 
ledge, though  it  grew  to  the  "  riches  of  the  full  assurance  of 
■understanding,"  could  not  of  itself  minister  to  every  want ; 
nor  yet  could  the  pardon  of  sin  severed  from  the  benefits 
which  flow  from  it.  Therefore  there  is  secured  for  us  peace 
as  well  as  enlightenment ;  renovation  along  with  forgiveness  : 
condition  and  character  are  equally  changed  ;  the  tear  of 
penitence  glistens  in  the  radiance  of  spiritual  joy,  and  the 
germs  of  perfection  ingrafted  now  are  destined  for  ever  to 
mature  and  expand.  Provision,  moreover,  would  be  inade- 
quate without  application.  Man  is  not  merely  informed  that 
God  is  merciful,  and  that  he  may  come  to  Him  and  live ;  or 
that  Christ  has  died,  and  that  he  may  believe  and  be  saved ; 
or  that  heaven  is  open,  and  that  he  may  enter  and  be  happy. 
Not  only  is  provision  ample,  but  in  this  fulness  appliance  is 
,'secured.  Not  only  has  salvation  been  purchased,  but  it  is 
placed  within  an  available  reach,  for  while  the  cross  is 
erected,  the  eye  is  opened,  and  the  vision  carried  towards 
its  bleeding  victim ;  not  only  has  atoning  blood  been  shed, 
but  it  is  sprinkled  upon  the  heart ;  not  only  is  there  the 
promise  of  a  heavenly  inheritance,  but  the  soul  is  purified, 
yea,  and  "  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith."  In  short, 
every  grace,  as  it  is  needed,  and  when  it  is  needed,  in  every 
variety  of  phasis  and  operation ;  every  grace,  either  to  nurse 
the  babe  or  sustain  the  perfect  man,  to  excite  the  new  life  or 
to  foster  it,  to  give  pardon  and  the  sense  of  it,  faith  and  the 
full  assurance  of  it,  purity  and  the  felt  possession  of  it ;  every 
blessing,  in  short,  for  health  or  sickness,  for  duty  or  trial,  for 
life  or  death,  for  body  or  soul,  for  earth  or  heaven,  for  time  or 
eternity,  is  wrapt  up  in  that  fulness  which  dwells  in  Christ. 
It  may  be  that  TfKrjpw^a  was  a  term  employed  by  the  heretics 


COLOSSI  AN  S   I.   20.  71 

who  disturbed  the  Colossian  church,  but  we  cannot  lay  sucli 
stress  upon  this  circumstance  as  is  done  by  Biihr  and  Steiger, 
nor  safely  deduce  from  it  an  inevitable  exegesis.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  irXripwixa  was  a  distinctive  epithet  in  the  vocabu- 
lary of  the  heretics  of  a  later  age,  such  as  Valentinus,  and  in 
the  teaching  ascribed  to  Cerinthus.  It  is  found  also  among 
the  peculiar  terms  of  the  Kabbalists.  But  it  would  be  rash  to 
affirm  that  the  apostle  used  the  word  because  these  heretics 
abused  it,  for  in  his  days  the  germ  of  that  theosophy  and 
mysticism  had  only  found  existence,  and  neither  the  system 
nor  the  nomenclature  was  fully  developed. 

(Ver.  20.)  Kat  hi  avrov  aTTOKaraWd^at  ra  Trdvra  et? 
avTov — "  And  by  Him  to  reconcile  all  things  to  Himself." 
This  sentence  still  hangs  upon  the  verb  euSoKrjae.  Elprjvo- 
7roL7]aa<i  agrees  with  6e6<;,  the  understood  nominative  to 
evhoKTjae.  God  having  made  peace  by  the  blood  of  His  cross 
(Christ's),  was  pleased  to  reconcile  by  Him  (Christ)  all 
things  to  Himself.  If  the  participle  elprjvo.  referred  to  Jesus, 
we  should  have  expected  it  to  be  in  the  accusative  before  the 
infinitive.  The  instances  adduced  by  Steiger,  who  holds  this 
view,  to  prove  the  occurrence  here  of  a  species  of  anacoluthon, 
are  not  in  point.  On  the  meaning  of  diroKaraX.  we  have 
spoken  under  Eph.  ii.  16,  and  need  not  repeat  our  remarks. 
The  phrase  to,  irdvTa,  in  this  verse,  must  be  identical  in 
meaning  with  ra  irdvTa  in  the  16th  verse — created  by  Jesus 
and  for  Him ;  and  ra  Trdvra  in  the  1 7th  verse — preserved 
by  Him.  The  meaning  is  further  developed  and  specified  in 
the  last  clause — elVe  ra  eVl  t?}?  7779,  etVe  ra  ev  rol<;  oupavol<i — 
all  things,  "  whether  they  be  things  on  earth,  or  things  in 
heaven."  The  apostle  seems  thus  to  refer  to  the  universe — 
specially  the  intelligent  universe.  The  reconciliation  is 
eff'ected  through  Christ,  an  idea  repeated  by  the  apostle  in 
the  22nd  and  23rd  verses. 

1.  It  is  surely  a  low  and  pointless  interpretation  of  the 
words  to  refer  them,  with  Junker,  Heinrichs,  Schleusner,  and 
others,  to  Jew  and  Gentile,  for  the  passage  is  widely  different 
from  the  paragraph  in  the  2nd  chapter  of  Ephesians  ;  or  with 
Beza,  Crocius,  and  Wolf,  to  understand  "  things  in  heaven " 
of  the  happy  souls  of  the  departed ;  or  with  Schleiermacher, 
to  suppose  the  apostle  to  refer  to  earthlj^  and  ecclesiastical 


72  COLOSSIANS  I.   20. 

relationships.  The  previous  context  plainly  condemns  such  a 
narrow  and  groundless  interpretation. 

2.  On  the  ether  hand,  it  is  going  beyond  the  record  to  base 
upon  the  words  the  dogma  of  universal  restoration.  Evil 
spirits,  and  finally  impenitent  men,  are  left  in  unrelieved 
gloom.  Those  who  reject  this  reconciliation,  and  depart  from 
the  world  in  unbelief,  fall  into  the  hands  of  a  God  "  who  is 
clear  when  He  judges." 

On  this  passage,  Davenant  says  truly — torquct  i7iterpretcs  et 
vicissim  ah  illis  torquetur.  De  Wette,  indeed,  referring  to  Job 
iv,  18  and  xv.  15,  imagines  that  angels  need  some  process  of 
peacemaking,  or  rather  of  perfecting  —  a  notion  akin  to 
Calvin's,^  that  they  were  in  want  of  confirmation. 

But  supposing  that  by  "  things  in  heaven  "  we  understand 
angels  and  all  other  holy  intelligences,  in  what  sense  can  it  be 
said  that  they  need  or  receive  reconciliation  ?  Some  elude 
the  diflQculty,  and  argue  that  the  reconciliation  is  not  between 
God  and  perfect  spirits,  but  between  them  and  redeemed 
humanity.  Thus  Theodoret — cvvrj-^e  Tol<i  iiri'yelot.'i  ra  iirov- 
pdvta :  and  such  is  the  view  of  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  and 
Pelagius,  of  Cameron,  Dickson,  and  perhaps  the  majority. 
This  is  a  truth,  but  perhaps  not  the  whole  truth  intended. 
The  language  implies  more  than  this  exegesis  contains,  for  all 
things  in  heaven  are  not  merely  reconciled  to  all  things  on 
earth,  but  both  are  at  the  same  time  reconciled  to  God.  And 
we  cannot  espouse  the  opinion  of  Huther,  Biihr,  and 
Olshausen,  who  make  the  reference  in  et?  avrov  to  Christ, 
refrardincj  Him  as  both  means  and  end.     The  idea  is  not  in 

1  Inter  Deum  et  Angelos  longe  diversa  ratio,  illic  enim  nulla  defectio,  nullum 
peccatum,  ideoque  nullum  divortium.  Sed  tamen  duabus  de  causis  Angelos 
quoque  oportuit  cum  Deo  pacificari :  nam  quum  creaturae  sint,  extra  lapsus 
periculum  uon  erant,  nisi  Cliristi  gratia  fuissent  confirmati.  Hoc  autem  non 
parvum  est  momentum  ad  pacis  cum  Deo  perpetuitatem,  fixum  habere  statum 
in  iustitia,  ne  casum  aut  defectionem  amplius  timeat.  Deinde  in  hac  ipsa 
obedientia,  quam  praestant  Deo,  non  est  tam  exquisita  perfectio,  ut  Deo  omni 
ex  parte  et  citra  veniam  satisfaciat.  Atque  hue  procul  dubio  spectat  sententia 
ista  ex  libro  lob  (4,  IS.),  In  Angelis  suis  reperiet  iniquitatem :  nam  si  de 
diabolo  exponitur,  quid  magnum  ?  pronuntiat  autem  illic  Spiritus  summam 
puritatem  sordere,  si  ad  Dei  iustitiam  exigatur.  Constituendum  igitur,  non 
esse  tantum  in  Angelis  iustitiae,  quod  ad  plenam  cum  Deo  coniunctionem 
sufficiat,  itaijue  pacificatore  opus  habent,  per  cuius  gratiam  penitus  Deo 
adhaereant.     In  loo. 


COLOSSIANS   I,   20.  73 

unison  with  Pauline  phraseology,  for  God  is  usually  regarded 
as  the  ultimate  end.  But  the  idea  in  this  case  would  be,  that 
all  beings  are  brought  by  the  death  of  Christ  to  obey  Him, 
and  to  find  in  Him  their  common  centre.  The  dative,  indeed, 
is  commonly  employed,  as  in  Eph.  ii.  16,  Eom.  v.  10;  but 
the  employment  here  of  the  accusative  with  eh  may  indicate 
something  unusual  in  the  verb — may  denote  to  reconcile  for, 
or  in  reference  to  Himself,  that  is,  God,  He  being  regarded 
generally  as  the  end  of  this  reconciliation.  Eeconcihation  to 
God  is  thus  predicated  of  the  "  things  in  heaven,"  though  they 
had  never  revolted.  Nor  can  w^e  simply  declare,  with 
Melancthon,  Cameron,  and  Bahr,  that  the  sentiment  of  this 
verse  is  identical  with  that  found  in  Eph.  i.  10,  and  that 
aTTOKaraXKa^ai,  is  of  the  same  meaning  as  avaKecpaXaico- 
aaadai.  Indeed,  as  Meyer  well  suggests,  the  bringing 
together  under  one  head  is  the  result  of  the  reconciliation 
which  is  here  described.  The  verb  diroKar.  is  defined  by 
Suidas  as  meaning  (^CkoTroiria-aL  —  to  make  friends ;  and 
Fritzsche  renders  it  prorsus  reconciliare.^  The  cltto,  in  com- 
position, does  not  signify  "  again,"  as  Passow  erroneously 
gives  it.  [Eph.  ii.  16.]  This  reconciliation  we  understand 
in  its  result — et? — and  as  denoting  unalterable  union, — that 
lie  mis^lit  reconcile  all  things  and  unite  them  so  reconciled  to 
Himself.  Such  a  pregnant  meaning  of  verbs  is  no  uncommon 
occurrence.  2  Tim.  iv.  18 — a-waet  eh  ttjv  ^aacXeiav,  will 
save  and  translate  us  to  His  kingdom.  Mark  viii.  19 — ore 
Tov<i  irevre  aprovi  eKkaaa  eh  tov<;  TreyTa/ctcr^iXiou?,  when  I 
broke  and  distributed  the  five  loaves  to  the  five  thousand. 
Acts  xxiii.  24,  etc.;  Winer,  ^  66,  2,  d;  Xenophon,  Anah.  11, 
3,  11;  Polyh.  8,  11;  Odyss.  ii.  14.  There  needed  no 
atonement  for  innocent  creatures,  but  they  must  have  felt  the 
disruption  of  sin,  and  seen  the  terrible  anger  of  God  against 
it.  May  they  not  have  trembled  at  the  bare  idea  of  apostasy, 
and  may  not  the  very  suspicion  of  it  have  made  them  stand 
before  God  with  more  of  awe  than  love  ?  When  the  angels 
beheld  their  fellows  sin  so  grievously,  when  they  mourned 
over  the  tarnished  brightness  of  their  lost  and  exiled  natures, 
might  not  the  memory  of  the  melancholy  spectacle  fill  them 
with  terror,  and  as  they  felt  themselves  placed  in  a  jeopardous 

'  Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.  i.  278. 


74  COLOSSIANS  I.   20. 

crisis,  might  they  not  shrink  as  they  gazed  upon  the  imsullied 
justice  and  inexorable  vengeance  of  Jehovah-king  ?     Might 
not  holiness  unrelieved  by  an  act  of  grace,  be  ever  impressing 
the  conviction  that  "  it  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands 
of  the  living  God  "  ?     For  sin  was  possible  to  them,  and  what 
had  happened  might  again  take  place,  while  the  penalty  of 
sin  was  as  swift  in  its  descent  as  it  was  unspeakable  in  its 
burden,  and  irremediable  in  its  effects.     The  flashing  majesty 
of  the  throne  might  still  the  pulse  of  the  universe,  or  cause  it 
to  throb    in  subdued    and    solemn  alarm.      The  radiance  of 
grace  had  not  been  seen  to  play  upon  the  sceptre  of  righteous- 
ness.      Acquiescence    in    the    Divine    rectitude    might    not 
conquer  trepidation,  and  the  love  which  encircled  them  might 
not  cast  out  all  fear  of  lapse  and  punishment.      Bat  when 
they  found  out  the  ineffable  stores  of  the  Divine  benignity 
towards   man — in   the   mission  and   death   of  Jesus,  in  the 
untold  abundance  and  fulness  of  blessings  conferred  upon  him, 
in  a  vast  salvation  secured  at  a  vast  expense,  and  in  a  happy 
alliance  concluded  between  them  and  the  ransomed  church — 
did  they  not  share  in  the  same  reconciliation  and  feel  them- 
selves drawn  nearer  a  God  of  grace,  whom  they  can  now  love 
with  a  higher  thrill  and  praise  with  a  more  rapturous  halle- 
lujah ?     In  being  re-united  with  man  they  feel  themselves 
brought  closer  to  God,  and  though  they  sing  of  a  salvation 
which  they  did  not  require,  still  they  experience  the  Saviour's 
tenderness,  and  are  charmed  with  the  reign  of  His  crowned 
humanity.     The  gloom  that  sin   had    thrown  over  them  is 
dispelled;  and  creation  as  one  united  whole  rejoices  in  the 
presence  of  God.     The  one  Eeconciler  is  the  head  of  these 
vast  dominions,  and  in  Him  meet  and  merge  the  discordant 
elements  which  sin  had  introduced.     The  breach  is  healed. 
Gabriel  embraces  Adam,  and  both  enjoy  a  vicinity  to   God, 
which  but  for  the  reconciliation  of  the  cross  would  never  have 
been  vouchsafed  to  either.      The  humanity  of  Jesus  bringing 
all  creatures  around  it,  unites  them  to  God  in  a  bond  which 
never  before  existed — a  bond  which  has  its  origin  in  the 
mystery  of  redemption.      Thus  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth 
feel  the  effect  of  man's  renovation ;  unnumbered   worlds,  so 
thickly  strewn  as  to  appear  but  dim  and  nebulous  masses,  are 
pervaded  by  its  harmonizing  influence  ;  a  new  attraction  binds 


COLOSSIANS  I.   20.  75 

them  to  the  throne.  Blessings  which  naked  Deity  might  not 
be  able  to  bestow  are  poured  out  upon  them  by  the  incarnate 
Lord  "  who  filleth  all  in  all ; "  and  the  exhibition  of  love  in 
the  agonies  of  Christ  may  have  secured  what  unalloyed  equity 
could  not,  may  have  placed  the  universe  for  ever  beyond  the 
reach  of  apostasy  and  revolt.  Then  at  length  starts  into  view 
the  blessed  kingdom — "the  new  heavens  and  new  earth, 
wherein  dwelleth  righteousness." 

Nor  need  we  wonder  at  the  infinite  results  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  when  we  reflect  that,  as  the  apostle  has  described  Him, 
He  is  Creator,  Preserver,  and  End  of  all  things.  Creation,  to 
its  farthest  verge,  could  not  but  be  affected  by  the  grace  and 
the  death  of  Him  who  gave  to  it  its  original  being  and  still 
supplies  the  means  of  its  continued  existence.  When  He  laid 
aside  the  splendours  of  the  Godhead,  and  walked  a  man  upon 
the  footstool,  and  died  on  a  world  and  for  a  world  which  He 
had  made,  to  satisfy  Divine  justice,  and  glorify  the  principles 
of  the  Divine  administration,  it  might  be  anticipated  that  the 
effect  of  that  stupendous  enterprise  should  be  felt  everywhere, 
diffusing  the  attractive  power  of  a  new  spiritual  gravitation 
among  all  things,  "  whether  they  be  things  on  earth  or  things 
in  heaven." 

Elpi]vo7roi,7](ra<i  Bia  tov  aifjuaro^  rov  crravpov  avrov — "  Hav- 
ing made  peace  by  the  blood  of  His  cross."  We  understand 
the  participle  to  be  in  agreement  with  ^eo<?,  as  the  nominative 
to  evSoKTjae,  and  not  with  Xpcaro'i,  as  the  Greek  Fathers,  and 
even  Storr  and  Steiger,  construe  the  clause.  The  aorist  par- 
ticiple here  is  of  the  same  tense  with  the  aorist  infinitive  in 
the  preceding  clause,  and  it  points  out  the  method  by  which 
reconciliation  has  been  secured.  The  blood  of  His,  that  is, 
Christ's  cross,  was  the  source  of  peace — the  reference  being 
to  the  atoning  sacrifice  presented  on  Calvary.  Blood  shed  on 
earth  creates  feuds  to  be  extinguished  only  by  other  blood ; 
it  calls  up  the  avenging  kinsman  to  wait,  watch,  pursue,  and 
retaliate ;  but  the  blood  of  Christ's  violent  and  vicarious  death 
brings  peace,  restores  alliance  between  heaven  and  earth. 
While  we  look  on  the  paternal  aspect  of  God's  character,  we 
must  not  overlook  His  position  as  moral  governor — bound  to 
inflict  the  penalty  annexed  to  the  violation  of  His  statutes. 
[Eph.  ii.    16.]     He  must  visit  the  sinner  with    His  judicial 


76  COLOSSIANS   I.   20. 

displeasure ;  or  as  the  scholastic  theology  of  Bede  phrased  it, 
"  in  every  one  of  us  He  hated  what  we  had  done,  He  loved 
what  He  Himself  had  done."  The  justice  of  God,  as  Mtzsch  ^ 
says,  is  a  necessary  and  inseparable  idea  of  His  love.  The 
antithesis  of  mercy  and  justice  is  no  longer  unresolved,  nor  do 
they  neutralize  one  another.  Sin  at  the  same  time  creates 
enmity  in  the  human  heart  towards  God,  an  enmity  removed 
also  by  faith  in  the  great  propitiation.  Thus  the  cross  is  the 
symbol  of  peace.  He  who  died  on  it  possessed  God's  nature, 
the  offended  party,  and  man's  nature,  the  offending  party ;  and 
thus  being  qualified  to  mediate  between  them.  His  blood  was 
poured  out  as  a  peace-offering.  The  law  is  satisfied,  and 
guilty  sinners  are  freed  from  the  curse :  an  amnesty  is  pro- 
claimed ;  God  reconciles  the  world  unto  Himself,  and  justified 
man  has  peace  with  God. 

The  apostle  repeats  St'  avrou  to  give  prominence  to  the 
efficacious  agency  of  His  Son.  "  By  Him,"  that  is,  by  His 
blood,  and  by  all  the  work  which  His  mediatorial  person  is  so 
well  fitted  to  carry  on  and  consummate.  The  last  clause 
explains  the  preceding  irdvra.  As  if  there  might  be  doubt  in 
some  minds ;  or  as  if  some  ascribed  a  limited  influence  to  a 
Jewish  death  upon  Jewish  soil,  the  apostle  exclaims  "  all " — 
"  whether  they  be  things  in  earth,"  which  is  first  and  specially 
interested  ;  or  whether  they  be  "  things  in  heaven."  Chrysos- 
tom,  to  support  his  view,  erroneously  and  ungrammatically 
connects  this  clause  with  the  one  immediately  before  it,  as  if 
the  peace  made  by  the  blood  of  the  cross  was  simply  and 
solely  peace  between  things  in  heaven  and  things  on  earth. 
In  fine,  the  entire  process,  as  the  connection  of  this  verse  with 
the  preceding  one  shows,  springs  from  the  Divine  pleasure — 
it  so  "  pleased  "  Him. 

Now,  if  there  was  a  tendency  among  the  false  teachers  in 
Colosse  to  depreciate  Jesus,  lower  the  value  and  restrict  the 
extent  of  His  saving  work ;  if  they  derogated  either  from  His 
personal  dignity  or  official  prerogative,  the  apostle  applies  a 
mighty  and  sufficient  counteractive.  That  Saviour  whom  the 
apostles  preached  was  no  creature,  but  Himself  the  Creator ; 
was  invested  with  no  provincial  government,  but  ruled  and 
preserved  the  wide  realms  of  space ;  was  no  subordinate  spirit 

^  System  der  Christlichen  Lehre,  §  80,  5th  Auflage,  Bonn,  1844. 


COLOSSI ANS   I.    21.  77 

in  the  celestial  crowd,  but  one  who  is  the  end  as  well  as  author 
of  all  things ;  is  supreme  Lord  of  His  Church,  as  is  most  due ; 
and  as  He  possesses  all  fulness  within  Himself,  and  has  by  the 
shedding  of  His  blood  restored  harmony  to  the  universe,  there- 
fore, now,  in  every  point  He  has  an  unchallenged  pre-eminence. 
On  the  dark  background  of  an  old  theosophic  heresy  there 
shines  out  this  starry  halo  of  mediatorial  merit  and  renown. 

(Ver.  21.)  Kal  vfids,  irore  6vTa<i  dTrrjWorpicofxevovi}  koi 
i-^dpov^;  rr)  Siavoia  ev  Tol<;  ep'yoi'i  roc<i  Trovrjpocf;,  vvvl  Be 
uTTOKaTriXka^ev — "  And  yet  now  He  has  reconciled  you  who 
were  once  alienated  and  enemies  in  your  mind  by  wicked 
works."  The  apostle  turns  directly  to  the  Colossians,  and 
applies  to  their  experience  the  results  of  these  more  general 
statements.  And  he  does  not  disguise  the  truth  when  he 
describes  their  past  condition — •wore.  Kal  vixa<i,  "  you  even." 
Hartung,  p.  125.  The  participle  6vTa<i  occurs  before  airrjXX. 
Jelf,  §  375,  4.  l^AiTTfsXoT.  Eph.  ii.  12,  iv.  18.]  It 
here  denotes  that  spiritual  alienation  from  God  which  cha- 
racterized the  heathen  world.  Though  the  term  God  is  not 
expressed,  the  idea  is  plainly  implied.  They  had  strayed  so 
far  from  God,  that  they  had  lost  all  view  of  His  unity  and 
spirituality.  His  holiness  and  His  love,  and  felt  no  longer  the 
hallowing  influence  of  His  existence,  majesty,  and  government. 
This  severance  from  God  was  the  early  fruit  of  sin,  for  when 
the  Divine  Being  descended  to  paradise,  as  was  His  wont,  the 
guilty  Adam  acknowledged  the  impulse  of  this  alienation 
when  he  attempted  to  "  hide  himself  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  God  among  the  trees  of  the  garden."  So  severed,  they 
needed  re-union.  Nay,  not  only  were  they  aliens,  but  enemies 
— i^OpoiK;.  We  see  no  reason  to  adopt  Meyer's  view,  and  take 
the  adjective  in  a  passive  sense — objects  of  the  Divine  enmity, 
a  meaning  which  it  does  not  bear  in  Eom.  v.  10.  We  prefer 
the  usual  and  active  sense,  as  seen  in  the  common  phrase 
6  e'xPpo'i  ;  and  it  is  superfluous  on  the  part  of  Calovius  to  unite 
both  acceptations.  That  enmity  had  its  seat  ry  BiavoLa,  which 
Meyer  is  obliged  to  render,  with  Luther,  "  on  account  of  your 
mind  " — hated  on  account  of  your  corrupt  mind.  This  enmity 
toward  God  was  in  the  mind.  [Sidvoia,  Eph.  ii.  3.]  The 
noun  represents  the  seat  of  thought,  or  rather  of  disposition. 
Luke  i.  51  ;   1  Chron.  xxix.  18. 


78  COLOSSIANS   I.   21. 

The  connection  of  this  with  the  next  clause  has  been 
variously  understood.  Michaelis  gratuitously  renders  "  en- 
mity in  consequence  of  pre-eminence  in  evil  works."  Eras- 
mus is  as  wide  of  the  mark  in  his  explanation — inimici,  cui  ? 
menti,  etenim  qui  carni  scrvit,  repugned  rationi.  Bahr,  relying 
on  the  usage  of  Siavoelv  being  followed  by  iv,  connects  the 
two  clauses  very  closely — operibus  malis  intenta,  peccatorum 
studiosa.  We  incline  to  take  the  clauses  as  separate  statements 
in  order,  the  first  as  describing  the  seat  of  enmity,  and  the 
second  as  marking  the  sphere  of  its  development.  It  is  lodged 
in  the  mind,  but  it  embodies  itself  in  deeds ;  and  those  deeds 
are  "  wicked,"  are  in  harmony  with  the  source  of  activity.  The 
apostle  charges  them  not  merely  with  spiritual  and  latent 
hostility  to  God,  but  with  the  manifestation  of  that  hostility 
in  open  acts  of  unnatural  rebellion.  It  is  not  a  neutral 
alienation,  but  one  characterized  by  positive  enmity.  The 
charge  may  be  easily  substantiated.  No  thoughts  are  more 
unwelcome  to  men,  none  less  frequently  in  their  mind,  than 
God.  Men  may  like  an  ideal  God  of  their  own  creation,  such 
an  one  as  themselves  have  invested  with  a  fictitious  divinity, 
but  the  God  of  the  gospel  stirs  up  opposition ;  His  holiness 
alarms  them  ;  and  their  heart  is  filled  with  prejudice  against 
His  scheme  of  salvation,  because  it  so  humbles  the  creature 
by  pressing  on  him  as  a  ruined  and  helpless  sinner  a  gratuitous 
pardon  which  he  could  never  win  ;  and  because,  in  urging  him 
to  the  possession  of  holiness,  it  necessitates  a  total  revolution 
in  all  his  habits  and  desires.  It  is  a  melancholy  indictment : 
antagonism  to  infinite  purity  and  love:  sins  committed  in 
violation  of  a  law  "  holy,  and  just,  and  good."  It  was  true  of 
the  heathen  world,  and  it  is  true  generally  of  fallen  humanity, 
that  there  is  alienation,  that  such  alienation  creates  enmity, 
and  that  this  enmity  proves  its  virulence  and  disloyalty  in 
repeated  transgressions.^  Some  of  the  Fathers,  such  as 
TertuUian,  Ambrose,  and  Jerome,  following  an  unwarranted 
reading  found  in  D\  E\  tj}?  8iavoLa<i  avrov,  render — enemies 
to  His,  that  is,  God's  mind. 

ISvvi  Se  aTTOKaTrjWa^ev.  This  reading  of  the  verb  has  the 
high  authority  of  A,  C,  D^^\  E,  J,  K,  almost  all  the  Versions, 

'  As  Photius  says,  they  were  enemies,  for  they  were  seen — ra  Ix^f"^  ■/rpa.TTovTts 
Apud  Qicumen.  in  he. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   22.  79 

and  many  of  the  Fathers,  Codex  B  has  airoKaTrfkXd^T^re, 
a  form  which  Lachmann  follows  ;  while  D\  F,  G,  and  some  of 
the  Latin  Fathers,  have  the  participle  d7roKaTaXX.ayevT€<i.  The 
peculiarity  of  construction  has  apparently  given  rise  to  these 
various  lections,  but  the  Textus  Pieceptus  is  best  supported. 
The  order  adopted  by  Lachmann  gives  us  this  connection 
— "  It  pleased  God  that  in  Him  should  all  fulness  dwell,  and 
that  He  should  reconcile  all  things  to  Himself ;  and  even  you, 
once  aliens  and  enemies  (but  ye  are  now  reconciled),  even  you 
it  pleased  Him  to  present,  holy  and  perfect,  before  Him."  The 
same  parenthetical  connection  might  be  maintained  by  keep- 
ing the  verb  in  the  active.  Or  the  first  clause  may  form  a 
pendant  to  the  preceding  verse — "  It  pleased  Him  to  reconcile 
all  things  to  Himself,  and  you  too,  though  ye  were  enemies  in 
your  mind  by  wicked  works."  But  these  forms  of  construc- 
tion are  intricate  and  needless.  We  prefer  beginning  a  new 
sentence  with  kuI  vixd^  irore,  and  then  Trapaarr^aai,  in  the 
following  verse,  becomes  the  infinitive  of  design.  ISTor  do 
we  perceive  any  grounds  for  changing  the  nominative,  God 
being  still  the  subject,  as  is  the  view  of  Zanchius,  Bengel, 
Bahr,  Boehmer,  Huther,  Meyer,  against  that  of  the  Greek 
Fathers,  with  Beza,  Calvin,  Crocius,  Estius,  Heinrichs,  and 
De  Wette,  which  refers  the  nominative  to  Christ.  The 
work  of  reconciliation  is  God's.  Man  does  not  win  his 
way  back  to  the  Divine  favour  by  either  costly  offering  or 
profound  penitence.  God  reunites  him  to  Himself ;  has 
not  only  provided  for  such  an  alliance,  but  actually  forms 
and  cements  it. 

The  apostle  has  dwelt  at  length  on  the  dignity  and  majesty 
of  Jesus,  but  without  hesitation  he  speaks  here  of  His  incar- 
nate state,  for  in  Him  there  was  a  union  of  extremes,  of  God 
and  man — of  earth  and  heaven.  Indeed,  the  incarnation, 
rightly  understood,  enhances  the  Eedeemer's  greatness.  The 
spiritually  sublime  is  truly  seen  in  His  condescension  and 
death.      So,  he  adds — 

(Ver.  22.)  'Ev  ra>  (jcofxaTC  T779  aapKo<;  avrov  Bid  rov  Oavdrov 
— "In  the  body  of  His  (Christ's)  flesh  through  death." 
Sirach  xxiii.  16.  The  clause  has  a  remarkable  distinctness. 
Eeconciliation  is  effected  in  His  body  ;  that  body  is  a  genuine 
physical  frame,  for  it  is  the  body  of  His  flesh ;  and  there  was 


80  COLOSSIANS   I.   22. 

an  actual  decease,  as  by  His  death  peace  was  secured.  They 
were  reconciled  in  His  body  and  by  His  death,  a  difference  of 
relation  being  indicated  by  the  prepositions  iv  and  hid ;  the 
latter  pointing  out  the  instrumental  cause,  and  the  former 
describing  the  inner  sphere  of  uniting  operation  which  pre- 
ceded that  death.  Without  that  fleshly  body  there  could  have 
been  no  death,  and  the  assumption  of  humanity  brought  Jesus 
into  a  fraternal  relationship  with  all  His  people.  The  apostle 
thus  cautions  against  a  spurious  spiritualism,  which  seems  to 
have  endangered  the  Colossian  church — as  if  without  an 
atonement  man  could  be  redeemed.  Marcion,  in  his  quotation 
of  the  verse,  omitted  the  words  t?)?  crap/co?. 

We  need  not  say,  with  Bengel,  Schrader,  and  Olshausen,  that 
the  apostle  writes  "  the  body  of  His  flesh,"  lest  any  one  should 
imagine  that  He  might  mean  His  body,  the  church  ;^  nor  need 
we  suppose,  with  Beza,  Huther,  Bohmer,  and  Steiger,  that 
there  is  an  express  polemical  reference  to  Doketism,  or  the 
denial  of  a  real  humanity  to  our  Lord,  though  the  germs  of  such 
a  heresy  might  be  in  existence.  Jerome,  in  one  of  his  letters 
to  Pammachius,  says  of  the  apostle  and  the  language  of  this 
verse  —  apostolus  volcns  corpus  Christi  carncum  et  non 
spirituale,  a'ereum,  tenue,  demonstrare.  There  is  no  such 
emphasis  in  the  phrase  as  Estius  and  Grotius  find  when 
they  speak  of  such  vast  results  flowing  from  so  feeble  an 
instrument,  nor  is  there  that  contrast  between  the  earthly 
and  glorified  body  of  Christ  as  is  suggested  by  Flatt,  Eoell, 
and  von  Gerlach.  The  purpose  of  reconciliation  is  next 
described. 

JJapacTTriaai,  vfia<;  dyiov<i  Kal  dfjbcofjbov^  koX  dve'yKXr]rov<i  Kare- 
vdoTTiov  avTov. — "  To  prcscut  you  holy  and  blameless,  and  unre- 
proveable  before  Him."  This  is  the  infinitive  of  design.  Winer, 
§  44, 1 ;  Matthiae,  ii.  p.  1 2 34.  [Eph.  i.  3.]  The  three  adjectives 
express  generally  the  same  idea,  but  in  different  and  consecu- 
tive aspects.  ['Aylovi;  koI  dfj,(Ofji,ov<;  KaTevccTriov  avrov,  Eph. 
i.  4.]  There  is  no  ground  for  the  hypothesis  of  Biihr  and 
Bengel,  that  the  three  epithets  may  be  thus  characterized — 
the  first  as  having  reference  to  God,  the  second  to  ourselves,  and 
the  third  to  our  fellow-men.     The  first  term  refers  to  inner 

'  Yet  Pierce  inclines  to  such  a  notion,  though  he  says,  "I  am  not  positive  in 
this  interpretation. " 


COLOSSIANS   I.   23.  81 

consecration,  and  the  purity  which  it  creates  and  fosters ;  the 
second  shows  the  development  of  tliis  purity  in  the  life ;  and 
the  third  expresses  the  result,  that  heart  and  life  are  therefore 
alike  unchallengeable,  and  that  neither  against  the  one  nor  the 
other  can  any  charge  be  preferred.  It  cannot  be  alleged  against 
the  life  that  its  holiness  is  but  hypocrisy,  since  that  has  its 
root  in  the  sanctified  spirit ;  neither  can  the  sanctity  of  the 
heart  be  arraigned  as  inoperative  and  dead,  for  it  exhibits 
itself  in  actions  of  heavenly  worth  and  resemblance.  God 
presents  them  before  Himself,  not  before  Christ,  as  Meyer 
supposes,  eavTov  not  being  required.  This  we  take  to  be 
the  connection,  though  some  connect  the  words  Karevwinov 
avTov  with  the  three  epithets,  as  if  it  described  their  genuine- 
ness or  reality.  Such  is  the  connection  in  Eph.  i.  4,  but 
here  the  phrase  seems  most  naturally  connected  with  the  verb 
— to  present  before  Him.  The  allusion  is  to  the  ultimate 
consummation :  to  no  period  on  earth,  but  to  final  acceptance 
before  the  throne — when  the  saint  shall  have  come  to  maturity, 
and  his  spiritual  development  shall  have  been  crowned  and 
perfected.  [Eph.  v,  27.]  The  question  has  been  raised, 
whether  the  apostle  refers,  in  this  last  clause,  to  the  righteous- 
ness of  justification,  or  the  holiness  of  sanctification ;  to  jus- 
titia  im'putata,  as  Huther  supposes  ;  or  to  justitia  inhaerens,  as 
Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  Calvin  maintain ;  or  to  both, 
as  is  held  by  Theodoret,  Zanchius,  Crocius,  Calovius,  De 
Wette,  and  Meyer.  [Eph.  i.  4.]  Besides  that  the  terms 
employed  by  the  apostle  are  inapplicable  to  justifying  right- 
eousness, it  may  be  remarked  that  the  reconciliation  which 
the  apostle  represents  as  having  already  taken  place  is  but 
another  form  of  expressing  the  blessing  of  justification — 
pardon,  and  acceptance  with  God.  This  privilege  was  past,  but 
the  ultimate  result  which  flows  from  it  was  still  to  come. 
Therefore,  as  this  change  of  state  is  only  a  prelude  to  a  change 
of  character — as  this  justification  is  a  step  towards  such  an 
end,  it  follows  that  the  holiness  realized  in  that  end  is  that  of 
sanctification,  the  maturity  of  which  is  acknowledged  in  the 
presentation  of  the  saint  to  God.  1  Cor.  i.  8  ;  1  Thess.  iii. 
13,  V.  23. 

(Ver.   23.)      EX  <ye  i'jnfievere  rfj  nrLcneL  reOefieXicofjievot   Kal 
eSpaooi,  fcal  fMr]  fxeraKivovfievoL  diro  t?}?  e/\,7r/So9  rov  svaj^/eXiov 


82  COLOSSIANS   I.   23. 

ov  r)Kovaare^ — "  If  ye  continue  in  the  faith,  grounded  and  fast, 
and  not  moved  away  from  the  hope  of  the  gospel  which  ye 
have  heard."  The  clause  depends,  not,  as  Bengel  intimates, 
on  aTroKarrjXKa^ev,  but  on  the  nearer  verb  Trapao-rrjaai.  The 
attainment  of  spiritual  perfection,  and  the  honour  of  presenta- 
tion to  God,  are  dependent  on  the  fact  specified  in  this 
verse.  Eoye  does  not  imply  doubt  [Eph.  iii.  2],  and  so  far 
differs  from  elVep,  but  there  is  no  reason  to  render  it,  with 
Pierce,  "  because."  "  If,  as  is  the  case,  ye  continue  in  the  faith;" 
for  T7}  TTia-Tet  is  connected  with  eTrifieveTe,  as  in  Eom.  vi.  1,  xi. 
23,  1  Tim.  iv.  16  ;^  whereas  reOefieX  would  require  iirl,  as 
in  Matt  vii.  25,  or  iv,  as  in  Eph.  iii.  18.  Continuance  in 
the  faith  is  essential  to  salvation  :  loss  of  faith  would  be  for- 
feiture of  life.  The  blessings  of  Christianity  are  given  without 
interruption  only  to  continuous  belief.  And  that  perpetuity  of 
faith  was  not  to  be  a  vibratory  and  superficial  state.  They 
were  to  remain  in  the  faith,  or  saving  belief  of  the  truth, 
ehpaloi  Kol  TeOefieXtoy/xevoi — "  grounded  and  settled."  [Eph. 
iii.  18.]  1  Pet.  v.  10;  1  Cor.  vii.  37,  xv.  58.  The  first 
epithet  alludes  to  the  cause,  and  the  second  to  its  effect,  for 
what  is  founded  becomes  fixed  :  while  the  third  clause  depicts  a 
general  result — koX fir) fiejaKLvovfievoL,  "and  therefore  not  shaken 
away,"  as  the  use  of  jxr]  seems  to  indicate.  The  adverb  firj 
has  such  a  connection  of  dependence,  Klihner,  §  708  ;  Hartung, 
ii.  pp.  113,  114;  Winer,  §  55,  1,  a.  If  they  were  founded, 
they  were  fixed,  and  if  both  they  could  not  be  moved — airo 
Trj<;  eXTTtSo?  tov  evayyeXiou  ov  r)KovaaTe.  [Eph.  i.  18.] 
See  also  verse  fifth  of  this  chapter.  The  hope  is  that  blessed 
life  revealed  by  the  gospel  as  its  distinctive  prospect.  That 
gospel  is  further  characterized  as  "  having  been  preached  to 
every  creature  which  is  under  heaven  " — 

Toil  KTjpv'^OevTO'i  iv  irdar]  KTiaet  rfj  viro  tov  ovpavov.  The 
article  rfi  before  irda-r]  is  probably  to  be  expunged,  on  the 
authority  of  A,  B,  C,  D\  F,  G.  The  general  meaning  of  this 
hyperbole  will  be  found  under  verse  6.  Thomas  Aquinas  was 
so  hard  pressed^  as  to  propose  a  future  rendering — praedica- 

1  'YlKovffaTi  is  spelt,  by  an  oversight,  with  a  spiritus  asper  in  Tischendorf's 
second  edition. 
'^  Aelian,  Hist.  var.  x.  15.     Joseph.  Antiq.  viii.  7,  5. 
^  De  Praescrip.  Haer.  iii.  vol.  ii.  p.  5,  Opera,  ed.  Oehler,  1754. 


COLOSSIAKS   I.    23.  83 

litur.  Perhaps,  as  Meyer  proposes,  these  words  arc  a  species 
of  confirmation.  Apostasy  was  all  the  more  Llameable,  for 
they  had  heard  the  gospel — a  gospel  of  no  narroiv  diffusion 
and  value — a  gospel,  also,  which  numbered  among  its  ad- 
herents and  preachers,  the  great  name  of  Paul.  There  is  thus 
a  warning  in  these  words  of  coming  danger  and  seductive 
influence.  It  is  an  extraordinary  reason  which  Anselm,  after 
Gregory,  proposes — that  every  creature  must  mean  man, 
because  man  has  something  in  common  with  every  creature ; 
existence  with  stones,  living  growth  with  trees,  sense  and 
motion  with  the  lower  animals,  and  reason  and  intellect  with 
the  angels. 

Thus  a  life  of  faith  is  one  of  hope,  and  leads  to  glory. 
This  belief  has  a  conservative  power ;  for  it  keeps  in  a  jus- 
tified state,  and  it  secures  augmenting  holiness.  While, 
therefore,  the  perseverance  of  the  saints  is  a  prominent  doc- 
trine of  Scripture,  and  a  perennial  source  of  consolation,  it  is 
inconsistent  with  exhortations  to  permanence  of  faith,  and  not 
warnings  of  the  sad  results  of  deviation  and  apostasy.  He 
who  stops  short  in  the  race,  and  does  not  reach  the  goal,  cannot 
obtain  the  prize.  He  who  abandons  the  refuge  into  which 
he  fled  for  a  season,  is  swept  away  when  the  hurricane  breaks 
upon  him.  The  loss  of  faith  is  the  knell  of  hope.  "  There  is 
a  way  to  hell  even  from  the  gate  of  heaven."  As  Tertullian 
says  :  "  While  the  straws  of  light  faith  fly  away,  the  mass  of 
corn  is  laid  up  the  purer  in  the  garden  of  God."  For  man  is 
not  acted  on  mechanically  by  the  grace  of  God,  but  his  whole 
spiritual  nature  is  excited  to  earnest  prayer  and  anxious 
effort.  Its  continuance  in  the  faith  is  not  the  unconscious 
impress  of  an  irresistible  law,  but  the  result  of  a  diligent  use 
of  every  means  by  which  belief  may  be  fostered  and  deepened. 
The  fact  that  God  keeps  believers  makes  them,  therefore, 
distrustful  of  themselves  and  dependent  upon  Him.  And  the 
confidence  of  success  inspirits  them.  "  Many  a  man,  from 
having  been  persuaded  that  he  is  destined  to  attain  some  great 
object,  instead  of  being  lulled  into  carelessness  by  this  belief, 
has  been  excited  to  the  most  laborious  and  unwearied  efforts, 
such  as  perhaps,  otherwise,  he  would  not  have  thought  of 
making  for  the  attainment  of  his  object."^     Thus,  as  rational 

^  Whately,  quoted  in  Wood's  Theology,  iii.  238. 
I 


84  COLOSSIANS   I.   24. 

"beings  are  wrought  upon  by  motives,  so  warnings  and 
appeals  are  addressed  to  them,  and  these  appliances  form 
a  special  feature  of  God's  plan  of  preserving  them.  The 
apostle  thus  shows  them  how  much  is  suspended  on  their 
perseverance. 

Ov  eyevofiTjv  ijoD  UavXa  8idKovo<; — "  Of  which  I  Paul  was 
constituted  a  minister."  [Eph.  iii.  7.]  The  apostle  reverts 
to  his  solemn  inauguration,  his  past  course  of  active  service, 
and  the  authority  under  which  he  had  acted.  This  brief  and 
distinct  intimation  forms  a  special  introduction  to  the  second 
section  of  the  epistle,  and  the  warning  against  seduction  by 
false  teachers. 

(Ver.  24.)  Nvv  X^^P^  ^^  '''°*^  TraOtJixaatv  virep  v/hmv — "  Now 
I  rejoice  in  my  sufferings  for  you."     The  MSS.  D^,  E\  F,  G, 
with  the  Vulgate,  and  many  of  the  Latin  Fathers,  prefix  6'?. 
The  reading  probably  arose  from   a  homoioteleuton  or  repe- 
tition of  the  last  syllable  of  the  previous  word — oiaKov  09  09. 
Nvv  is  not  a  particle  of  transition,  as  Bahr  and  Liicke^  make 
it,  but  means  "at  the  present  time;"  with  the  chain  upon  my 
wrist,  I  rejoice  ;  not,  however,  as  if  he  had  been  sorrowful  at 
a  previous  period.     The  apostle  felt  that  his  sufferings  had 
their  source  in  his  diaconate,  and  therefore  he  gloried  in  them. 
The  simple  dative,  or  a  participial  nominative,  is  more  fre- 
quently used  to  express  the  cause  of  joy ;  the  preposition  eVt 
sometimes   employed,  and    occasionally  iv,  as  in  Phil  i.    18, 
Luke  X.  20,  and  in  the  clause  before  us.     To  rejoice  in  them 
is  not  very  dififerent  from  to  rejoice  over,  or  upon,  or  for  them, 
only,  that  in  the  latter  case,  the  afflictions  are  regarded  as 
external  causes  of  joy,  whereas,  in  the  former  case,  the  writer 
represents   himself  as   immersed  in   them,   and   rejoicing   in 
them.     The  Stephanie  Text  adds  fiov  after  iraOrjixaaLv,  but  on 
no  great  authority.      The  words  virep  v/jlwv,  which  we  connect 
with  iv  iraO.  and  not  with  %aip(a,  have  been  variously  inter- 
preted.    They  cannot  mean  "  in  your  stead,"  though  Steiger 
adopts  such  a  view ;  and  yet  in  some  sense  Paul  might  be 
regarded  as  the  representative  of  the  churches  in  heathendom. 
Nor   can   the   words  mean,  on  the  other  hand,  merely  "for 
your  good,"  as  Meyer,  De  Wette,  and  Huther  suppose ;  or  as 
fficumenius  gives  it,  Xva  vfia'^  oi^eXrjcraL  SvvrjOco,  for  this  was 
^  Programm,  1833. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   24.  85 

an  ultimate  effect,  and  not  the  immediate  cause  of  the  apostle's 
sufferings.  We  prefer,  with  Heinrichs  and  Stolz,  the  ordinary- 
sense  of  "  on  your  account,"  as  we  may  suppose  the  apostle 
to  refer  especially  to  the  Gentile  portion  of  the  church.  His 
preaching  to  the  Gentiles  was  the  real  and  proximate  cause  of 
his  incarceration.  He  had,  in  Jerusalem,  declared  his  mission 
to  the  Gentiles,  but  the  mob  broke  upon  him  in  fury.  He 
was  confined  for  safety,  and  having  on  his  trial  appealed  to 
Cffisar,  he  was  carried  to  Eome,  and  pending  the  investigation 
kept  a  prisoner  there.  Paul  does  sometimes  refer  to  the  good 
results  of  his  sufferings,  as  in  Phil.  i.  12,  but  he  here  alludes 
to  the  cause  of  them. 

Kal  dvravaifkripS)  ra  varep'^/xaTa  rcbv  OXl-^ecov  rov  Xpiarov 
— "  And  fill  up  what  is  wanting  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ." 
Kat  is  simply  connective,  not  aWd,  as  Bengel  imagines ;  nor 
Kal  yap,  as  Bahr  explains  it.  It  does  not  render  a  reason,  as 
Calvin  supposes,  but  simply  begins  an  explanatory  statement. 
This  is  peculiar  language,  and  its  peculiarity  has  given  rise 
to  many  forms  of  exegesis.  Chrysostom  says  : — "  It  appears 
a  great  thing  which  he  utters,  but  not  one  of  arrogance " 
— aXk'  ovK  dirovoia'i.  The  noun  va-reprj/xa  denotes  what  is 
yet  lacking,  1  Cor.  xvi.  17,  1  Thess.  iii.  10,  Phil.  ii.  30; 
and  is  rendered  by  Theodoret  Xetirofievov ;  and  ^Xt-i/rt?  is 
pressure  from  evil,  violent  suffering.  The  general  sense  of 
the  verb  is  to  fill  up ;  and  the  question  is,  in  what  sense 
did  the  apostle  fill  up  what  was  wanting  of  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  ? 

1.  Many  of  the  mediaeval  Catholic  interpreters  understood 
the  clause  as  referring  to  the  atonement,  and  that  its  defects 
may  be  supplied  by  the  sufferings  of  the  saints.  This  was  a 
proof-text  for  the  doctrine  of  indulgences  which  Bellarmine, 
Cajetan,  Salmeron,  Suarez,  the  Ehemish  annotators,  and  others, 
laid  hold  of,  as  if  the  merits  of  Paul's  sufferings  supplemented 
those  of  Christ,  and  were  to  be  dispensed  so  as  to  procure  the 
remission  of  penalty.  This  inference,  which  a-Lapide  charac- 
terizes as  no7i  male,  is  in  direct  antagonism  to  the  whole  tenor 
of  Scripture,  which  represents  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus  as  perfect 
in  obedience  and  suffering,  so  perfect  as  to  need  neither 
supplement  nor  repetition. 

2.  Not  a  few  get  rid  of  the  difficulty  by  giving  the  genitive 


86  COLOSSIANS   I.   24. 

Xpicnov  an  unwonted  and  unwarrantable  meaning,  and 
rendering  the  phrase — "  sufferings  on  account  of  Christ."  The 
idea  may  be  in  itself  a  correct  one,  but  it  is  not  the  shade  of 
idea  which  the  genitive  expresses.  This  exegesis  is  supported 
by  Tertullian,  Schoettgen,  Eisner,  Storr,  Pierce,  Eosenmliller, 
riatt,  Bohmer,  Burton,  and  Trollope,  but  it  cannot  be 
grammatically  defended. 

3.  Calovius,  Carpzovius,  and  Seb.  Schmid,  understand  the 
phrase  as  signifying  "  sufferings  meted  out  to  His  people  by 
Christ ; "  a  meaning  not  very  different  from  that  adopted  by 
Liicke — aflictiones,  quae  Paulo  apostolo,  Christo  auctore  et 
auspice  Christo,  perferendae  erant  This  mode  of  explanation 
does  not  fix  upon  the  pointed  meaning  of  the  genitive,  which, 
when  following  ^Xt-^/rt?,  denotes  the  suffering  person;  Eph. 
iii.  13;  2  Cor.  i.  4;  Jas.  i.  27. 

4.  Yet  more  remote  is  the  view  of  Photius,  adopted  by 
Junker  and  Heinrichs,  that  the  clause  denotes  such  sufferings 
as  Christ  would  have  endured,  had  He  remained  longer  on 
the  earth.  The  words  of  Photius  are — dW  oaa  .  .  .  eiraOev 
&v  Kol  vTrecnri,  Ka6'  ov  Tpbirov  Kol  irplv  Krjpvaacov  Kol  evajyeXt- 
^6fievo<i  TTjv  ^acnXelav  tmv  ovpavSiv} 

5.  Some  able  and  accomplished  scholars  take  this  view — 
that  the  sufferings  of  Paul  are  styled  by  him  the  afflictions  of 
Christ,  because  they  were  similar  in  nature.  Such  is  the 
view  of  Theodoret,  Meyer,  Schleiermacher,  Huther,  and  Winer. 
Fergusson  says — "  the  great  wave  of  affliction  did  first  beat  on 
Him,  and  being  thereby  broken,  some  small  sparks  of  it  only 
do  light  upon  us."  The  idea  is  a  striking  one,  yet  it  is  not 
universally  true.  The  distinctive  element  in  Christ's  suffer- 
ings had  and  could  have  no  parallel  in  those  of  the  apostle 
— to  wit,  vicarious  agony :  Divine  infliction  and  desertion — 
endurance  of  penalty  to  free  others  from  bearing  it.  There 
were  general  points  of  similarity,  indeed,  between  the  suffer- 
ings of  Christ  and  those  of  the  apostle,  so  that  he  might, 
though  at  an  awful  distance,  compare  his  afflictions  to  those 
of  his  Divine  Master.  Both  suffered  at  the  hand  of  man, 
and  both  suffered  in  innocence.  Eom.  viii.  17;  1  Pet. 
iv.  13.  But  though  such  a  thought  may  occur  in  other 
parts  of  Scripture,  it  does  not  occur  in  connection  with  such 

'  Amphiiockia,  143. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   24.  87 

phraseology  as  is  found  in  the  clause  before  us.  An  apostle 
may  say  that  he  endures  afflictions  like  those  of  Christ ;  but 
here  Paul  says  that  he  supplements  the  afflictions  of  Christ. 
There  is  an  idea  in  the  phrase  above  and  beyond  that  of  mere 
similarity.  Similarity  is  not  of  itself  supplement,  nor  does  it 
of  necessity  imply  it. 

And  thus,  in  the  last  place,  we  are  brought  to  the  common 
interpretation — that  these  sufferings  are  named  the  afflictions 
of  Christ  because  He  really  endured  them  ;  they  were  His,  for 
He  really  felt  them.  The  genitive  is  naturally  that  of  posses- 
sion. Such  is  the  view  of  Chrysostom  and  Theophylact, 
Augustine  and  Auselm,  of  Calvin  and  Beza,  Luther  and 
Melancthon,  Zanchius  and  Grotius,  Vitringa  ^  and  Michaelis, 
of  Biihr  and  Steiger,  of  the  Catholics  Estius  and  a-Lapide, 
Davenant,  Whitby,  Conybeare,  Doddridge,  De  Wette  and 
Olshausen.  Thus,  Augustine  on  Ps.  Ixi.  exclaims  of  Christ — 
qui  2y(issits  est  in  capite  nostra  et  patititr  in  memh'is  suis,  id  est 
nobis  ipsis.  And  Leo,  quoted  by  Bohmer,  says — passio 
Christi  perducitur  ad  finetn  mundi,  in  omnibus  qui  pro  justitia 
adversa  tolerant,  ipse  covipatitur.  Christ's  personal  sufferings, 
which  are  past,  and  his  sympathetic  sufferings,  which  are  still 
endured,  have  been  distinguished  thus  in  the  old  Lutheran 
theology  of  Gerhard  ;  that  the  former  are  suffered  vTroo-raTt/cco?, 
the  latter  a-'^eriKm.  The  Rabbins,  in  their  special  dialect, 
attached  a  similar  meaning  to  the  phrase  n^B'D  ''i'nn  ^ — sufferings 
of  Messiah — distributing  them  through  various  generations. 
The  church  is  in  the  next  clause  called  the  body  of  Christ : 
and  the  Head  suffers  in  all  His  members.  The  apostle's 
suffering's  were  those  of  Christ,  for  Christ  is  identified  with  all 
His  people.  The  scene  of  the  apostle's  conversion  impressed 
this  truth  upon  his  mind  too  deeply  ever  to  be  forgotten  by 
him  :  the  startling  challenge  yet  rang  in  his  ear — "  Saul,  Saul, 
why  persecutest  thou  me  ? "  The  Eedeemer  was  one  with  the 
poor  flock  at  Damascus,  so  soon,  in  Saul's  imagination,  to  be 
"  scattered  and  peeled ; "  for  the  errand  of  blood  was  directed 
against  Him  as  really  as  against  them.  On  the  other  hand, 
but  in  accordance  with  this  truth,  apostates  who  resile  from 
their  profession,  and  virtually  proclaim  that  they  have  dis- 
covered faith  in  Christ  to  be  a  dream  and  a  delusion,  are  said 
*  Ohservat.  Sacrae,  p.  144.  "  Bu.xtorf,  Lex.  Tal.  p.  700. 


88  COLOSSI ANS  I.   24. 

to  "  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put  Him 
to  an  open  shame."  Again,  in  2  Cor.  i.  5,  the  apostle  says 
— "  The  sufferings  of  Christ  abound  in  us,"  that  is,  sufferings 
endured  by  Christ  in  us ;  and  therefore,  such  being  the 
sympathetic  affinity  between  us,  our  consolation  also  aboundeth 
by  Christ.-^  Again,  in  Heb.  xiii.  13,  Christians  are  exhorted 
to  "  go  forth  unto  Him  without  the  camp,  bearing  His 
reproach;"  not  reproach  on  His  account,  but  the  reproach 
which  is  His,  and  which  He  still  bears  in  us,  through  our 
living  connection  with  Him.  2  Cor.  ii.  10.  Nay,  more,  we 
are  informed  in  Heb.  xi.  26,  that  Moses  esteemed  "the 
reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches  than  the  treasures  in  Egypt." 
Now,  according  to  the  Old  Testament,  the  God  of  the  theocracy, 
the  Jehovah  of  the  burning  bush,  the  Angel  of  the  covenant, 
is  none  other  than  He  who  became  incarnate ;  so  that,  while 
Moses,  as  His  representative,  incurred  special  and  ungrateful 
obloquy,  that  obloquy  is  termed  the  reproach  of  Christ,  of 
Him  who  sent  him,  and  who  was  personated  by  him.  And 
there  is  ample  foundation  laid  for  the  language  before  us  in 
our  Lord's  pathetic  and  solemn  discourse,  recorded  in  Mathew, 
in  which  He  declares  His  oneness  with  His  people,  that  He  lives 
in  them,  endures  in  them  the  pangs  of  hunger  and  thirst,  and 
in  them  is  fed  and  refreshed,  is  shut  up  when  they  are  im- 
prisoned, and  welcomes  the  step  of  benevolence — is  conscious, 
with  them,  when  they  are  in  a  foreign  land,  of  the  desolation 
and  solitude  of  a  stranger,  and  is  thankful  for  the  shelter  and 
fellowship  of  hospitality — feels  the  shame  of  their  nakedness 
when  they  are  bereft  of  clothing,  and  accepts  with  joy  the 
proffered  gift  of  a  compassionate  friend — suffers  in  them  in 
their  sickness,  and  enjoys  a  kind  look  and  deed. 

The  personal  sufferings  of  Jesus  are  over,  but  His  sufferings 
in  His  people  still  continue.  They  are  still  defective ;  for  much 
remains  to  be  endured  in  this  world.  The  apostle,  in  sufi'ering 
for  the  sake  of  the  church,  felt  that  he  was  filling  up  the 
measure  of  those  afflictions. 

The  double  compound  verb  avravaifk'qpSi  denotes  "to  fill 
up  in  relation  to."  Some,  like  Olshausen^  and  Eisner,  lay 
no  peculiar  stress  on  the  preposition ;  but  we  cannot  suppose 

^  Alford,  in  loc. 

'  Fisclier,  Animadver.  ad  Welleri  Gram.  p.  369. 


COLOSSIANS   I.   24.  89 

it  to  be  used  without  some  special  purpose.  The  verb  ava-nXripo) 
has  a  simple  sense,  but  avTavairXrjpo)  has  a  relative  one. 
What  the  relation  is,  has  been  disputed.  Winer  explains  the 
first  compound — qui  vaTeprjfia  a  se  relidum,  ipse  explet ;  and 
the  second — qui  alterius  varepn^fjui  de  suo  explet.  E-obinson 
and  Schrader  give  avrt  a  reference  to  the  Colossians — who 
"  in  your  room  fill  up  ; "  while  Fritzsche,  in  a  note  under 
Eom.  XV.  19,  suggests  the  notion  of  accumulation — m  incdis 
joerferendis  aemidans.  Some  give  the  first  preposition  the 
sense  of  vicissim — "  in  turn,"  as  is  done  by  E.  Schmid,  Beza, 
Macknight,  and  Le  Clerc,^  who  render — ille  ego  qui  olviio 
ccclesiam  Christi  vexaveram,  nunc  vicissim  in  ejus  utilitateni 
pergo  multa  mcda  perpeti.  Others,  as  CEcumenius,  give  it  the 
sense  of  equivalent  repayment  for  the  sufferings  which  Jesus 
endured  for  us ;  or,  as  Gerhard  has  it,  quoted  in  Bahr — "  as 
Christ  suffered  for  my  redemption,  it  is  but  fitting  that  I 
should,  in  my  turn,  vicissim,  suffer  for  the  advancement  of  His 
glory."  This  view  is  also  held  by  Bahr,  Bohmer,  and  Titt- 
mann.^  We  cannot  adopt  this  view,  for  we  do  not  see  it  fully 
sustained  by  the  passages  adduced  in  support  of  it.  The 
passages  from  Dio  Cassius,  Apollonius  Alexandrinus,  and 
Demosthenes,  do  not  bear  it  out ;  for  in  them  the  dvrC  of 
the  verb  may  bear  an  objective  sense — may  denote  the  corre- 
spondence between  the  supplement  and  the  defect.  So  Cony- 
beare,  in  the  passage  before  us — "  the  avTi  is  introduced  into 
uvravaTrXrjpco,  by  the  antithesis  between  the  notions  of 
7r\7)pova6ac  and  varepela-Oai,."  Meyer's  view  is  similar,  and  it 
is,  we  believe,  the  correct  one.  The  verb  denotes  to  fill  up  with 
something  which  meets  the  exigence,  or  is  equivalent  to  the 
want.  The  apostle  filled  up  the  sufferings  of  Christ  not  with 
some  foreign  agony  that  had  no  reloMon  to  the  defect ;  but  the 
process  of  supplement  consisted  of  sufferings  which  met  the 
deficiency,  in  quality  and  amount.  It  was  not  a  piece  of  new 
cloth  on  an  old  garment,  or  new  wine  in  old  bottles — an 
antagonism  which  would  have  happened  had  Paul  suffered  "  as 
a  murderer,  or  as  a  thief,  or  as  an  evil-doer,  or  as  a  busybody 
in  other  men's  matters ; "  but  the  apostle  filled  up  what  was 
yet  wanting  in  the  Saviour's  sympathetic  sorrows,  for  he  adds, 
they  were  endured — 

1  Ars.  Crit.  p.  134,  London,  1698.  *  De  Synon.  p.  230. 


90  COLOSSIANS   I.   25. 

^Ev  rfi  aapKL  /xov  inrep  rod  crajyu.aT09  avrov — "  In  my  flesh 
for  his  body's  sake."  Storr,  Bahr,  Bohmer,  Steiger,  and 
Huther,  connect  the  first  clause  with  rwf  OXl-ylrecov  tov  X. — 
sufferings  which  are  in  my  flesh.  But  more  naturally,  with 
Meyer  and  De  Wette,  we  join  the  words  to  the  verb,  and 
believe  them  to  represent  the  mode  or  circumstances  in  which 
the  apostle  filled  up  what  was  left  of  the  aftlictions  of  Christ. 
It  was  in  his  present  fleshly  state,  and  as  a  suffering  man. 
2  Cor.  iv.  11;  Gal.  iv.  1 4.  The  next  clause  points  out  the 
cause  of  suffering — "  for  his  body's  sake  ;  "  and  this  fact  gave 
his  sufferings  their  mysterious  and  supplemental  value.  Suffer- 
ing for  His  body,  implies  the  fellow-suffering  of  the  Head. 
Steiger  and  Liicke's  cofniection — "  sufferings  of  Christ  for  His 
body's  sake" — is  whoUy^^ainst  the  spirit  of  the  inter- 
pretation. [Tov  aco/MaTO^;  avrov  6  icniv  rj  eKK\.7]<jia.  Eph. 
i.  23.] 

(Ver.  25.)  '"H?  ijevo/xrjv  iyco  8{aKovo<; — "Of  which  church 
I  was  made  a  minister."  [Aiukovo^,  Eph.  iii.  7.]  In  the 
passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  apostle  speaks  of 
his  diaconate  in  reference  to  the  gospel ;  but  here  in  connec- 
tion with  the  church.  And  truly  the  church  never  had  such 
a  servant  as  Paul  —  of  such  industry  and  heroism  —  such 
enthusiasm  and  perseverance — such  sufferings  and  travels — 
such  opposition  and  success.  He  had  no  leisure  even  when 
in  chains.  The  artistic  beauties  of  Athens  served  but  to  give 
point  to  his  orations ;  and  the  Prastorium  at  Eome  furnished 
hira  with  occasion  to  describe  the  armour  and  weapons  of  the 
sacramental  host  of  God's  elect.  His  service  stands  out  in 
superlative  eminence,  whether  you  measure  it  by  the  miles 
he  journeyed,  by  the  sermons  he  preached,  by  the  stripes 
and  stonings  he  endured,  by  the  privations  he  encountered, 
— "in  hunger  and  thirst,  in  cold  and  nakedness,"  and  by 
the  shipwrecks  he  suffered,  or  by  the  souls  he  converted, 
the  churches  he  planted  or  watered,  the  epistles  he  wrote, 
and  the  death  which  crowned  a  life  of  such  earnestness  and 
triumph. 

Kara  ttjv  olKOVOfiiav  rov  Seov,  rrjv  hoOdcrdv  /juoc  et?  vfia<i — 
"  According  to  the  dispensation  of  God  committed  to  me  for 
you."  [OiKovo/jLia,  etc.,  Eph.  i.  10,  iii.  2.]  In  the  Divine 
arrangement  of  the  spiritual  house,  the  apostle  held  a  function 


COLOSSIANS   I.    25.  91 

which  had  special  reference  to  the  members  of  the  Gentile 
churches.  Paul  regarded  this  as  his  distinctive  office, 
and  how  he  gloried  in  it !  It  had  a  breadth  which  suited 
his  mighty  mind,  and  it  necessitated  the  preaching  of  an 
unconditioned  gospel,  which  specially  delighted  his  ample 
heart.  He  would  not  be  confined  within  the  narrow  circuit 
of  Judaism ;  the  field  on  which  his  soul  set  itself  was  the 
world. 

UXrjpcbaat  rov  \6yov  rov  Oeov  —  "  To  fulfil  the  word  of 
God."  Eom.  XV.  19.  The  meaning  is  not  altered,  whether 
you  connect  these  words  with  the  first  or  second  clause  of  the 
verse,  either — "  of  which  I  was  made  a  servant,  to  fulfil  the 
word  of  God,"  or — "  according  to  the  dispensation  given  in 
charge  to  me,  to  fulfil  the  word  of  God."  The  last  is  the 
more  natural,  and  is  in  accordance  with  the  usual  style  of  the 
apostle.  In  either  case  TrXrjpoxTai  is  the  infinitive  of  design. 
The  verb  has  various  meanings  in  the  New  Testament,  and  has 
therefore  been  variously  understood  here. 

Vitringa,^  as  was  natural  to  such  a  Hebraist,  seeks  the 
meaning  of  the  term  from  Jewish  usage,  and  compares  ifKrjpow 
to  "IJ??,  which  signified  to  teach.  Flatt  and  Bahr  follow  him 
in  their  exegesis ;  but  such  a  method  has  no  warrant,  and 
we  are  not  forced  to  it  by  the  impossibility  of  discovering 
another.  Cornelius  a-Lapide  ekes  out  a  meaning  in  this 
way — to  fulfil  what  Christ  began ;  Steiger,  following  Tholuck,^ 
adopts  the  subjective  idea  —  to  realize  and  experience  its 
fulness.  One  class  of  interpreters,  represented  by  Calixtus 
and  Heinrichs,  apply  it  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  Divine  promises 
and  prophecies  of  the  admission  of  Gentiles  into  the  church ; 
and  another  class,  headed  by  Theodoret,  regard  the  clause 
as  pointing  out  the  diffusion  of  the  gospel — the  filling  of  all 
places  with  its  preaching.  Calvin  takes  the  special  idea  of 
fulfilling  or  giving  effect  to  the  gospel — ut  efficax  sit  Dei 
sermo,  virtually  the  interpretation  of  some  of  the  Greek 
Fathers ;  while  Luther  renders  reichlich  predigen,  to  preach 
fully — a  notion  adopted  by  Olshausen,  that  is,  to  declare  the 
gospel  in  all  its  fulness  and  extent.  Fritzsche  has  a  con- 
jecture of  his  own — that  the  apostle  uses  this  term  as  if  his 
instructions  were  a  supplementary  continuation  of  those  of 
1  Obaervni.  i.  p.  207.  ^  Berg-pred.  p.  135. 


92  COLOSSIANS   I.   26. 

their  teacher  Epaphras ;  -^  and  De  Wette,  by  a  metonj'my, 
regards  the  gospel  as  a  service  or  decree  which  Paul  wrought 
out,  a  notion  also  held  by  some  of  the  Lexicographers.  In 
assigning  a  meaning  to  the  verb,  much  depends  on  the  signifi- 
cation given  to  the  noun.  Now,  we  regard  the  following  verse 
as  explanatory — the  X070?  being  the  mystery  hid  from  ages 
and  generations — not  the  gospel  in  itself,  but  that  gospel  in 
its  adaptation  to  the  Gentiles,  and  its  reception  by  them.  The 
apostle  says  of  himself  that  he  did  not  preach,  but  that  he 
fulfilled  the  gospel.  He  carried  out  its  design — held  it  up  as 
the  balm  of  the  world — proclaimed  it  without  distinction  of 
blood  or  race.  He  did  not  narrow  its  purpose,  or  confine  it 
to  a  limited  sphere  of  influence ;  but,  as  the  apostle  of  the 
Gentiles,  he  opened  for  it  a  sweep  and  circuit  adapted  to  its 
magnificence  of  aim,  and  its  universality  of  fitness  and  suffi- 
ciency. He  carried  it  beyond  the  frontiers  of  Jud^a,  lifted 
it  above  the  walls  of  the  synagogue,  and  held  it  up  to  the 
nations.  The  gospel,  since  the  apostle's  time,  has  received 
no  fuller  expansion,  nor  have  any  wider  susceptibilities  been 
detected  or  developed  in  it.  As  an  instrument  of  human 
regeneration,  he  brought  it  to  perfection.  Whether  you 
regard  the  purpose  of  its  author,  its  own  genius  or  adequacy, 
its  unlimited  offers,  indiscriminate  invitations,  and  tested 
efficacy ;  the  apostle,  in  preaching  it  everywhere,  and  to  all 
classes  without  reserve,  laboured  "  to  fulfil  the  word  of  God," 
Luke  vii.  1,  ix.  31  ;  Acts  xiii,  25,  xiv.  26, 

(Ver.  26.)  To  fivcrr^piov  to  airoKeKpv^fxevov  airo  rwv 
av(t)V03v  Koi  airo  rail'  yevecop,  vvvl  Se  icf)av€pQ)6r]  roc<i  dyiot,^ 
avTov.  This  verse,  as  we  have  said,  defines  what  is  meant  by 
the  "word"  which  Paul  fulfilled.  The  meaning  of  "the  mystery 
hid  from  ages  and  from  generations,"  has  been  explained  under 
Eph.  iii,  3,  6.  [fjuva-T-^piov,  Eph,  i,  9,  alcov,  yeved,  Eph.  iii,  9, 
21,]  Alcov  is  age  or  lifetime,  and  yeved  is  the  space  of  one 
generation.  In  all  past  time,  this  mystery  was  concealed. 
The  apostle  does  not  say,  as  has  been  remarked — Trpb  rcov 
aloovojv,  as  if  the  mystery  had  been  hidden  from  eternity ; 
but  only  that  it  was  wrapt  in  obscurity  during  the  entire  past 
historical  epoch.  It  is  a  strange  conceit  of  Bengel — Aeones 
referuntur  ad  angclos,  generationes  ad  homines.  The  mystery 
^  Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.  vol.  iii,  257, 


COLOSSI  AN  S  I.   27.  93 

is  not  the  gospel  generally,  as  Calvin  and  Davenant  errone- 
ously suppose ;  but  the  preaching  of  it  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
their  incorporation  into  the  church,  or,  as  the  apostle  here 
describes  it — "  Christ  in  you,  the  hope  of  glory."  Nay,  so  little 
was  it  understood,  that  it  required  a  special  revelation  to  make 
it  known  to  the  reluctant  mind  of  the  Apostle  Peter, 

In  the  next  clause  the  syntax  is  changed,  and  therefore,  as 
might  naturally  be  expected,  we  find  various  readings  devised 
to  amend  the  grammar,  such  as  (pavepcoOev  in  D  and  E,  and 
0  vuu  e(^avepdodr}  in  other  Codices.  The  participial  construc- 
tion is  suddenly  departed  from,  and  the  verb  is  employed. 
The  anacoluthon  gives  a  sharpness  to  the  contrast.  Winer, 
§  64;  Bernhardy,  p.  473.  [Eph.  i.  20.]  The  adverb  vvvi, 
supported  by  A,  D,  E,  J,  K,  is  the  strengthened  form  of  vvv, 
Buttmann,  §  80;  and  he  points  out  the  contrast.  The  verb 
employed  to  denote  the  disclosure  of  a  mystery  is  aTroKoXviTTco 
in  Eph.  iii.  5  ;  but  this  verb  occurs  in  a  similar  connection, 
Eom.  xvi.  26;  Tit.  i.  3;  Mark  iv.  22.  The  word  denotes 
manifestation  by  Divine  power,  as  the  inspired  history  so 
plainly  relates.  But  what  is  meant  by  roi?  djloL'i  ?  Because 
the  apostle,  in  the  parallel  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  adds  airoaTokoL'i  koI  irpo^rjTac^,  many  think  that 
the  same  addition  is  to  be  understood  here.  Such  is  the  view 
of  Theodoret,  Estius,  Bjihr,  Bohmer,  Steiger,  Olshausen,  and 
others.  F,  G,  add,  without  warrant,  airocrroXofi  to  the  text. 
There  is  no  reason  to  depart  from  the  meaning  which  the 
epithet  bears  in  the  first  verse  of  the  epistle ;  and  so  Chrysos- 
tom,  Calvin,  Meyer,  and  De  Wette  rightly  take  it. 

(Ver.  27.)  or?  rjdeXrjaev  o  0eo9  'yvcoplaai,  T19  0  irXovro'i 
Trj<i  B6^r)<;  rov  fivarrjpiov  rovrov  iv  Tot9  edvecnv — "  To  whom," 
or,  as  beiug  persons,  "  to  whom  God  wished  to  make  known 
what  are  the  riches  of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  among  the 
Gentiles."  Some  suppose  that  ^^voipiaai  has  a  broader  and 
more  definite  meaning  than  e^avepwdr],  though  without  good 
foundation,  [ryveoplaai,  Eph.  i.  9.]  It  is  wrong  on  the  part  of 
many  expositors  to  press  a  theological  meaning  upon  the  verb 
rjde\r)o-€v,  as  if  it  contained  a  special  reference  to  free  grace. 
It  merely  intimates  that  the  Divine  intention  was  not  neces- 
sitated, and  that  it  was  God's  pleasure  to  instruct  His  people 
in  the  full  bearings  and  adaptation  of  the  gospel.     The  saints 


94  COLOSSIANS  I.   27. 

did  not  discover  the  mystery :  the  development  of  Christianity 
sprang  neither  from  their  philanthropy  nor  their  ingenuity, 
but  it  was  God  who  unfolded  the  mystery  in  all  wisdom  and 
prudence.     The  apostle  now  illustrates  the  character  of  the 
disclosure — rt  ro  TrX-oyro?  t?}?  80^779  (for  such  seems  to  be 
the  preferable  reading) — "  what  is  the  wealth  of  the  glory  " 
of  this  mystery.      There  is  no  ground  for  resolving  the  phrase 
into  a  Hebraism,  and   rendering  it  with  Chrysostom,  iroWr] 
So^a ;    nor  with  Erasmus,  gloriosa  opulentia ;    or  with  Beza 
and  Davenant,  gloriosae  divitiae.     [Eph.  i.  6.]      Both  terms, 
ifKovTO'i  and   ho^a,   are   favourites   of   the    apostle,   and    are 
employed  to  represent  what  is  bright,  substantial,  and  per- 
manent.    That  mystery  is  enveloped  in  glory,  and  that  glory 
has  at  once  a  solid  basis  and  an  unfading  lustre.     It  is  no  halo 
which  glimmers  and  disappears — no  gilding  which  is  easily 
effaced ;  but  it  is  rich,  having  the  weight,  value,  and  brilliancy  of 
gold.     There  is  no  authority  for  rendering,  with  Vatablus  and 
Heinrichs,  the  interrogative  by  quantus.     And  that  such  wealth 
of  glory  may  be  appreciated,  the  apostle  adds,  in  explanation — 
"0<i  ecmv  X.pL(n6<i  iv  vfuv,  r]  iX7rl<i  rrj^  Bo^r]^ — "Which  is 
Christ  in  you,  the  hope  of  glory."     There  are  various  readings 
— the  neuter   o  being   found  in   A,   B,   F,  G,   the  Vulgate, 
and  Latin  Fathers — a    reading  suggested   by  the  gender   of 
the    preceding    noun.      The    masculine    is  preferable  —  the 
gender   being   caused  by  that  of   the   following    substantive 
Xpiaro^.      Winer,  §   24;  Kiihner,  §   786,  3  ;  Mark   xv.  16  ; 
Gal.  iii.  16.     The  meaning  depends  very  much  on  precision 
of  view  as  to  the  antecedent.      It  is  not  /xvarrjpiov,  as  Chry- 
sostom, a-Lapide,  Kistmacher,   Junker,  and  others  suppose — 
a  supposition  which  yields  but  a  bald  interpretation ;  for   it 
is  not  the   mystery  in  itself,  but  the  wealth   of  the  glory  of 
the  mystery  which  God  had  disclosed  to  the  saints.     It  is  not 
the  fact  that  Christ  was  among  the  Gentiles,  but  the  character 
and  relations  of  that  fact  that  the  apostle  dwells  on.      Kor  is 
the   antecedent   merely  7r\ovTo<;,  as    many   maintain,  among 
whom  are  Theodoret  and  (Ecumenius,  Meyer  and  Bohmer ; 
nor   simply    Bo^a,    as    Schmid    holds  ;  for    the    reference   is 
not  to  the  riches  of  the  glory  by  themselves,  but   to  those 
riches  possessed  and  enjoyed  by  the  Gentile  converts.     The 
one  idea  is  at  the  same  time  involved  in  the  other ;  the  glory 


COLOSSIANS   I.   27.  95 

is  not  an  abstraction,  for  it  resides  in  the  mystery,  and  the 
mystery  cannot  appear  in  nakedness,  for  it  always  exhibits 
this  pure  and  imperishable  lustre.  The  antecedent  is  rather 
the  complex  idea  of  the  entire  clause — not  Christ  in  Himself, 
but  in  His  novel  and  gracious  relation  to  the  Gentile  world, 
as  a  developed  and  illustrious  mystery.  The  term  Christ  is 
not  to  be  explained  away,  as  if  it  merely  meant  the  doctrine 
of  Christ,  as  is  proved  by  the  subsequent  clause — "  whom  we 
preach."  The  words  ev  vfilv  are  rendered  by  many  "  amon'T 
you,"  that  is,  in  the  midst  of  you,  as  in  the  preceding  clause 
and  in  the  margin  of  our  English  Bibles.  But  the  meaning 
"  in  you "  is  virtually  implied ;  for  Christ,  as  the  hope  of 
glory,  was  not  contemplated  merely,  but  possessed.  He  was 
not  merely  before  them  to  be  beheld,  but  in  them  to  be  felt. 
Pierce  and  Macknight  render,  loosely  and  incorrectly — Christ 
to  you  the  hope  of  glory.  This  frequent  allusion  to  the 
Redeemer  by  name — to  His  power  and  work,  as  the  Divine 
source  of  blessing,  seems  to  have  had  a  reference  to  the  views 
of  some  among  the  Colossians,  who  would  have  had  a  church 
without  a  Christ  and  salvation  without  a  Saviour. 

The  clause  r]  iXTrU  Tr]<;  B6^r]<;  is  in  apposition  with  XptaT6<;. 
It  is  out  of  all  rule,  on  the  part  of  Erasmus,  Menochius,  and 
others,  apparently  following  Theophylact,  to  render  t%  B6^7]<; 
by  the  adjective  €vSo^o<;.  Nor  is  this  glory  simply  that  of 
God,  nor  is  it  the  moral  worth  and  dignity  of  Christians,  nor 
yet  the  glory  obtained  in  disclosing  the  mystery.  The 
"  glory  "  is  the  future  blessedness  of  believers,  as  in  Eom.  ii.  7, 
10,  viii.  18;  1  Cor.  ii.  7;  2  Cor.  iv.  17;  1  Thess.  ii.  12; 
Heb.  ii.  10;  Eom.  v.  2.  The  noun  eXTrtV  is  not  hope  as 
an  emotion,  but  the  foundation  of  it,  as  in  1  Tim.  i.  1,  and  it  is 
followed  by  the  genitive  of  the  thing  hoped  for,  or  the  object 
of  hope.  The  clause  is  well  explained  by  Theophylact — Store 
Si  avTov  iX7ri^o/M€v  t^9  80^779  rv^^etv  alwvLov.  The  life  of 
glory  rests  on  Christ  as  its  author  and  basis — such  is  the 
blessed  statement  of  the  apostle.  Let  us  pause  for  a  moment 
over  this  glory,  and  its  connection  with  Christ,  and  then  we 
shall  be  able  to  know  with  the  saints — "  what  are  the  riches 
of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  among  the  Gentiles." 

The  glory  of  Christians  is  yet  to  come,  but  it  is  certain. 
"What   they  so  earnestly  pray  for,  and  so  heartily  long   and 


96  COLOSSIANS  I.   27. 

labour  for,  shall  be  revealed  over  and   beyond  their  anticipa- 
tions.    Deliverance  from  all  evil  is  followed  by  introduction 
into  all  good.     What  is  partially  and  progressively  enjoyed 
in  time,  is  fully  and  for  ever  possessed  in  heaven.     The  spirit 
in  its  present   feebleness  would  bow  and  faint  beneath  the 
pressure  of  it,  nay,  it  might  die  in  delirious  agony ;  but  then 
it  shall  have  power  and  stateliness  not  only  to  bear,  but  to 
enjoy  the  "  far  more  exceeding  and  eternal  weight  of  glory." 
Now,  no  man  can  see  Him   and  live — our  frail    humanity 
would  be  consumed  by  the  terrible  vision ;  but  the  saint  is 
prepared  to  gaze  with  unmingled  rapture  on  His  majesty,  and 
to  live,  walk,  and  be  happy  in  its  lustre.       The  mind  shall  be 
filled  with  light  from  the  face  of  God,  and  the  heart  shall 
pulsate   with  love   in   eternal   and    undivided  empire.      The 
ima^e  of  God,  in  all  its   loveliness  and   brilliance,  shall   be 
restored  to  every  heart,  and  that  heart  shall  enjoy  uninter- 
rupted   fellowship    with    Him    who    sits    upon    the    throne. 
Nothing  can  happen  to  mar  or   modify  this    communion ;  for 
though  an  angel  were  to  pass  between  him  and  the  throne, 
he  could  cast  no  shadow  upon  the  rapt  and  adoring   saint. 
Every  man  shall  be  as  perfect  as  Christ — in  soul,  body,  and 
spirit,  and  beyond  the  possibility  of  forfeit  or  relapse.     The 
burden  of  sin  is  removed,  and  to  the  sense  of  oppression  there 
shall  succeed  the  consciousness  of  spiritual  buoyancy  and  eleva- 
tion; the  taint  of  depravity  is  wiped  away,  and  the  joy  of  salva- 
tion shall  mingle  its  aromatic  fragrance  with  the  "  new  wine  " 
in  the  kingdom  of  our  Father.     The  body,  too,  shall  be  raised 
an  ethereal  vehicle,  no  longer  the  prey  of  disease,  languor, 
and  death,  but  clothed  in  immortal  youth  and  vigour,  and  so 
assimilated  to  the  blessed  spirit  within  it,  as  neither  to  cramp 
its  movements  nor  confine  its  energies.      No  pain  there — no 
throbbing   brow    there — no    tear    on    the    cheek    there — no 
sepulchre  there — no  symbol  of  mourning  there — no  spectacle 
like  the  apparition  of  Eachel  weeping  for  her  children — or 
like  the  widow  of  Nain  following  the  bier  of  a  lost  and  loved 
one.      "  Death  is  swallowed  up  of  life" — the  graves  have  been 
opened — they  that  dwell  in  the  dust  have  awakened  to  endless 
minstrelsy.       Nor    do  they    dwell    in    a    paradise    restored 
amidst  the  lovely  bowers,  shady  groves,  and  exuberant  fruits 
of  a  second  Eden.     Such  glory  is  too  bright  for  earth,  and  is 


COLOSSIANS   I.   27.  97 

therefore  to  be  enjoyed  in  a  scene  which  shall  be  in  harmony 
with  it.     See  under  verse  12. 

Now,  Christ  is  the   hope  of  this  glory.      Glory  had  been 
forfeited,  but  Jesus  interposed  for  its  restoration.     When  the 
Saviour  is  received  by  faith,  the  hope  of  glory  springs  up  in 
the  bosom — a  hope  as  strange  aforetime  to  it  as  the  pine  and 
the  box-tree  in  the  desert.      Christians  are  by  nature  sinners 
doomed  to  die,  yet,  tlirough  Christ,  they  exult  in  the  promise 
of  life.     Though,  in  their  physical  frame,  they  are  of  the  earth 
earthy,  their  treasure  is  in  heaven.      They  can  look  on  the 
Divine    Judge,  who  must,  but   for    Christ,  have    condemned 
them,  and  call  him,  in  Jesus,  their  Father-God ;  and  they  can 
gaze  on  the  home  of  angels,  so  far  above  them,  and  say  of  it, 
in  confidence — that,  too,  is  our  home.     The  basis  of  this  life 
is  Jesus.      If  it  be  asked,  why  have  his  sins  not  borne  down 
the  evil-doer,  and  crushed  him  beneath  the  intolerable  load  ? 
why  has  the  lightning  slumbered  beneath  the  throne,  and  not 
swiftly  descended  on  his  head  ?  why  are  the  angry  passions 
within    him    hushed,  and   his    gloomy    thoughts    dissipated  ? 
whence  such  a   change  in  relation  and  character  ? — the  pro- 
blem is  solved  by  the  statement — "  Christ  within  you,"     This 
hope  rests  on  His  objective  work — for  "  it  was  Christ  that 
died."     Who   shall  reverse  the  sentence  of  our  justification, 
or  pronounce  it    inconsistent    with  sovereign   equity  ?     And 
who  shall  condemn  us  ?     Shall  sin  raise  its  head  ? — He  has 
made  an  end  of  it.      Shall  Satan  accuse  ? — he  has  been  cast 
out.      Shall  conscience  alarm  ? — it  has  been  purged  from  dead 
works.     Or  shall  death  frown  horribly  on  us  ? — even  it  has 
been  abolished.      The  basis  of  this  hope  of  glory  is  also  the 
subjective  work  of  Christ — by  His  Spirit  within  the  saint.     Not 
only  has  he  the  title  to  heaven,  but  he  gets  maturity  for  it. 
The  process  of  sanctification  begets  at  once  the  idea  and  the 
hope  of  perfection.      If  one  sees  the  block  of  marble  assuming 
gradually,  under  the  chisel,  the   semblance  of  humanity,  he 
infers  at  once  what  form  of  sculpture  the  artist  intends.     So, 
if  there  be  felt  within  us  the  transforming  influence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  bringing  out  the  Divine  image  with  more  and 
more   fulness  and   distinctness,   can   we   doubt   the   ultimate 
result?     Eom.  xv.    13.     Such    consciousness    inspires    vivid 
expectation.      In  short,  in  whatever  aspect  the  saints  view  their 


98  COLOSSIANS   I.   28. 

hope,  they  see  it  in  connection  with  Christ.  If  they  look 
behind  them,  the  earliest  dawning  of  it  sprang  from  faith  in 
His  cross ;  if  they  look  around  them,  it  is  sustained  by  the 
promises  of  Him  who  sealed  these  pledges  in  His  blood ;  if 
they  look  forward  and  upward,  it  is  strengthened  by  the 
nearing  proximity  of  realization  in  Him  who  is  "  in  the  midst 
of  the  throne."  What  a  blessed  change  to  the  Gentile  world ! 
They  had  been  described  as  once  "  without  Christ,"  but  now 
Christ  was  in  them ;  once  they  had  no  hope,  but  now,  they 
had  in  them  Him  who  was  the  hope  of  glory.  No  wonder 
that  the  apostle  rejoiced  in  suffering  for  the  Gentile  churches, 
and  thanked  God  for  that  arrangement  which  enabled  him  to 
carry  out  the  gospel  to  its  widest  susceptibility  of  application, 
and  thus  develop  a  doctrine  which  had  been  concealed  for 
ages.  Is  his  language  too  gorgeous,  when,  surveying  the 
wondrous  process  and  the  stupendous  results,  he  speaks  of 
the  "  riches  of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  among  the  Gentiles 
— Christ  in  you,  the  hope  of  glory  "  ?  And  that  glory  is  not 
to  be  under  eclipse — that  Saviour  is  not  to  be  selfishly  con- 
cealed. No;  the  apostle  adds,  as  characteristic  of  his  grand 
commission  and  daily  labour — 

(Ver.  28.)  ^Ov  rjfxel';  KarayyeWofiev — "Whom  we  preach." 
Acts  xvii.  3  ;  PhiL  i.  1 7.  Chrysostom  and  Theophylact  lay 
undue  stress  on  the  kuto.,  as  if  the  idea  of  down — deorsum,  were 
implied  in  the  verb,  and  the  inference  were,  that  they  delivered 
a  message  which  had  descended  from  heaven.  This  Christ,  so 
glorious  in  person  and  perfect  in  work — the  incarnate  God — 
the  bleeding  peacemaker — the  imperial  governor  of  the  uni- 
verse— it  is  He,  none  else,  and  none  besides  Him,  whom  we 
preach.  Not  simply  His  doctrine,  but  Himself;  and  He  was 
preached,  not  by  Paul  alone,  but  by  all  his  colleagues.  This 
Christ  is  the  one  and  undivided  object  of  proclamation ;  and 
if  He  be  the  hope  of  glory,  no  wonder  that  they  rejoice  to  pro- 
claim Him  wide  and  far,  and  on  every  possible  occasion.  The 
apostolic  preaching  was  precise  and  definite.  It  contained  no 
reveries  about  the  heavenly  hierarchy.  It  was  overlaid  by  no 
tasteless  and  tawdry  declamation  about  invisible  and  worthless 
mysteries.  It  dealt  not  in  ascetic  distinctions  of  meats  and 
drinks.  There  was  about  it  none  of  those  abstruse  transcen- 
dentalisms in  which  the  Colossian  heresiarchs  seem  to  have 


COLOSSIANS  I.   28.  99 

indulged.  It  did  not  gratify  the  morbid  and  curious,  by 
prying  into  celestial  arcana.  It  did  not  nourish  a  carnal  pride 
under  the  delusion  of  a  "  voluntary  humility."  Nor  did  it  de- 
throne a  Saviour-God,  and  substitute  the  worshipping  of  angels 
for  the  faith,  love,  and  homage  due  to  Him.  The  one  theme 
was  Christ — "  Him  first.  Him  last.  Him  midst."  Christ,  as  the 
one  deliverer,  conferring  pardon  by  His  blood,  purity  by  His 
Spirit,  and  perfection  by  His  pledge  and  presence,  securing 
defence  by  His  power,  comfort  by  His  sympathy,  and  the 
hope  of  glory  by  His  residence  in  the  believing  heart ; 
this  Christ,  as  the  only  source  of  such  multifarious  and 
connected  gifts,  we  preach,  and  we  preach  with  special  tender- 
ness and  anxiety.  For  he  characterizes  his  preaching  thus — 
IS  ovd6Tovvre<f  iravja  avOpwiTOV,  Koi  8i8do-KOVT6<i  irdvra 
avOpcoTTov  iv  irda-r)  aro(f>ia — "  Reminding  every  man,  and 
teaching  every  man  in  all  wisdom."  iii.  16,  The  two  parti- 
ciples, as  might  be  expected,  have  been  variously  distinguished. 
[NouOeaia,  Eph.  vi.  4.]  There  is  no  warrant  in  the  context 
for  translating  this  first  term  by  the  Latin  corripientcs — as  in 
the  Vulgate ;  as  if  the  apostle  meant  to  say,  either  that  men 
in  sin  needed  to  be  rebuked,  or  that  false  teachers  were 
subjected  by  himself  to  severe  and  merited  castigation. 
Theophylact,  followed  by  De  Wette  and  Olshausen,  refers  the 
first  term  to  practice — hrX  t?}9  irpd^eo)^,  and  the  second  to 
doctrine — eirl  SoyfidTcov.  According  to  Steiger,  the  one  marks 
tlie  early  communication  of  Christian  truth,  and  the  latter 
chai'acterizes  fuller  instruction.  By  Huther  the  heart  is 
supposed  to  be  concerned  in  vovOeTovvre'i,  and  the  intellect  in 
hchdcncovre^.  Meyer  affirms  that  the  two  words  correspond  to 
the  cardinal  injunction  of  the  gospel — /xeravoelre  and  TnareveTe 
— repent  and  believe.  We  are  inclined  to  be  somewhat 
eclectic  among  these  opinions,  and  to  regard  the  first  term 
as  the  more  general,  and  the  second  as  the  more  special — the 
one  as  describing  the  means  employed  to  arouse  the  soul  and 
stimulate  it  to  reflection,  and  the  other  as  the  definite  form  of 
instruction  which  was  communicated  to  the  anxious  and 
inquiring  spirit.^     The  apostle  warned  every  man — any  one, 

^  Thus  Clement  says, — n  voufirtun;  oZv  ohvu  Vmctra  IffTi  vairouffti;  ^u^n;,  etc. — 
"Counsel  is  the  prescribed  diet  of  a  diseased  soul,  advising  it  to  take  what  is 
salutary,  and  warning  it  against  what  is  pernicious." 

K 


100  COLOSSIANS   I.   28. 

every  one, — urged  him  as  a  sinner  to  bethink  himself,  to 
consider  his  danger,  as  the  victim  of  a  broken  law — and 
apprehending  the  certainty  of  safety  alone  in  Christ,  to  look 
at  the  adaptation  of  the  gospel  and  the  glory  of  its  evidence, 
and  to  submit  to  its  paramount  claims.  And  he  taught 
"  every  man " — gave  him  full  instruction — left  him  in  no 
dubiety,  but  presented  him  with  a  correct  and  glowing  sketch 
of  redemption  by  the  cross.     And  this  was  done — 

^Ev  irda-rj  (TO(f)La — "  In  all  wisdom."  Estius  and  Eosen- 
miiller.  Pierce  and  A.  Clarke,  following  the  Latin  Fathers, 
blunder  when  they  take  these  words  to  denote  the  object  of 
the  teaching  ;  for  in  the  New  Testament  that  object  is 
governed  in  the  accusative.  Mark  vi.  30,  xii.  14;  Luke  xx. 
21  ;  John  xiv.  26  ;  1  Tim.  iv.  11  ;  Tit.  i.  11.  Eoell  com- 
bines both  this  view  and  the  following  one.  Chrysostom 
rightly  renders  eV  by  /xeTa.  See  the  phrase  explained  under 
Eph.  i.  8.  It  is  probably  to  be  joined  to  the  latter  or 
principal  participle,  and  points  out  the  mode  or  spirit  of  the 
apostle's  teaching.  ICor.  iii.  10.  The  apostle  rejects,  indeed, 
one  species  of  wisdom — that  which  so  often  assumed  the  self- 
satisfied  name  of  philosophy ;  but  still  he  felt  the  necessity  of 
employing  the  highest  skill  and  prudence  in  discharging  the 
duties  of  his  office.  1  Cor.  ii.  4.  To  preach  the  gospel  so  as 
to  guide  the  wandering  sinner  to  Christ — to  drive  him  from 
all  refuges  of  lies,  and  urge  him  to  embrace  a  free  and  full 
salvation — to  enlighten,  comfort,  strengthen,  and  refresh  the 
children  of  God,  is  seen  to  be  a  task  demanding  consummate 
wisdom,  when  we  consider  the  endless  varieties  of  character 
and  temperament,  the  innumerable  sophistries  of  the  human 
heart,  and  the  ever-changing  condition  and  events  of  our  brief 
existence.  Yet,  while  Christ  crucified  is  the  theme  of  every 
address,  such  uniformity  of  doctrine  does  not  imply  sameness 
of  argument  or  tedious  monotony  of  imagery  and  illustration. 
There  may  be,  and  there  will  be,  in  this  wisdom,  circumstantial 
variety  in  the  midst  of  essential  oneness — for  the  truth,  though 
old,  is  ever  new. 

And  the  apostle  dwells  on  the  individualizing  character  of 
the  gospel,  and  repeats  the  words  "  every  man."  There  is  in 
this  probably  a  special  reference  to  the  partial  views  of  those 
who   were    disturbing    the    Colossian    church.       The    apostle 


COLOSSIANS   I.   29.  lOt 

felt  an  undying  interest  in  every  man,  whatever  his  character 
or  creed — every  man,  whatever  his  race  or  lineage — every 
man,  whatever  his  colour  or  language — every  man,  whatever 
his  class  or  station ;  every  living  man  on  earth  shared  in  his 
sympathies,  had  a  place  in  his  prayers,  and,  so  far  as  the 
sphere  of  his  personal  teaching  extended,  might  receive  the 
impress  of  his  counsels,  and  the  benefit  of  his  instructions. 
The  motive  of  his  effort  is  then  described — 

"Iva  Trapaar^acofxev  iravTa  avOpwTTOv  reXetov  iv  Xpia-Tco — 
"  In  order  that  we  may  present  every  man  perfect  in  Christ." 
A  glorious  aim — tva — the  noblest  that  can  stimulate  enthu- 
siasm, or  sustain  perseverance  in  suffering  or  toil.  The  'Irjaov 
of  the  Textus  Eeceptus  is  not  supported  by  full  authority. 
The  phrase  "  perfect  in  Christ "  does  not  simply  mean  perfect 
in  knowledge,  because  of  this  previous  teaching,  as  Chrysostom 
and  Calvin  supposed  ;  for  the  effect  of  such  knowledge  is 
moral  in  its  nature,  and  sanctifying  in  its  effect.  John  xvii.  3. 
Such  perfection  is  "  in  Christ,"  in  fellowship  with  Him,  is 
derived  from  Him,  and  consists  in  likeness  to  Him.  The 
verb  occurs  in  verse  22,  and  in  a  clause  of  similar  import. 
The  time  of  presentation  is  described  under  Eph.  v.  27. 
The  object  of  his  preaching  was  to  save  every  man.  He  was 
contented  with  nothing  less  than  this,  and  nothing  else  than 
this  was  his  absorbing  motive.  Not  that  every  man  was 
perfected  whom  he  had  endeavoured  to  instruct,  but  such  was 
his  avowed  object.  Theophylact  thus  writes — ri  \eyei<; ;  irdvTa 
avOpoiTTov  ;  val,  <f>7}(Ti,  rouro  (nrovSd^ofjbev  el  Be  firj  yivrjTai, 
ouSev  7r/309  rjfjid<i.  Clement  of  Alexandria  takes  Trdvra  in  the 
sense  of  6\ov — the  man  entire — soul,  body,  and  spirit.  And 
the  gaining  of  that  object  cost  the  apostle  no  small  pains  and 
labour,  for  he  adds — 

(Ver.  29.)  EU  o  koX  kottiw — "For  which  I  also  labour." 
To  attain  this  blessed  end,  I  also  toil  —  dycovi^op^evo^  — 
"  intensely  struggling,"  or  as  Wycliffe  renders — /  traueile 
in  stri/uynge.  It  was  no  light  work,  no  pastime ;  it  made  a 
demand  upon  every  faculty  and  every  moment.  1  Tim.  iv.  10. 
Since  the  apostle  had  many  adversaries  to  contend  with,  as  is 
evident  from  numerous  allusions  in  his  epistles,  Phil.  i.  29, 
30,  1  Tim.  vi.  5,  2  Thess.  iii.  2,  many  suppose  that  such 
struggles  are  either  prominently  alluded  to  here,  or  at  least 


102  COLOSSI ANS   I.   29. 

are  distinctly  implied  in  the  use  of  the  participle.  But  the 
context  does  not  favour  such  a  hypothesis.  It  would  seem 
from  the  following  yerses,  that  it  is  to  an  agony  of  spiritual 
earnestness  that  the  apostle  refers — to  that  profound  yearning 
which  occasioned  so  many  wrestlings  in  prayer,  and  drew 
from  him  so  many  tears ;  fiera  7roXkr]<i  Trj<;  (tttovS)]^,  as  Chry- 
sostom  paraphrases  it.  When  we  reliect  upon  the  motive — 
the  presentation  of  perfect  men  to  God,  and  upon  the 
instrument — the  preaching  of  the  cross,  we  cease  to  wonder 
at  the  apostle's  zeal  and  toils.  For  there  is  no  function  so 
momentous, — not  that  wliich  studies  the  constitution  of  man, 
in  order  to  ascertain  his  diseases  and  remove  them ;  nor  that 
which  labours  for  social  improvement,  and  the  promotion  of 
science  and  civilization ;  nor  that  which  unfolds  the  resources 
of  a  nation,  and  secures  it  a  free  and  patriotic  government — 
far  more  important  than  all,  is  the  function  of  the  Christian 
ministry.  What  in  other  spheres  is  enthusiasm,  is  in  it  but 
sobriety.  Barnes  well  says — "  In  such  a  work  it  is  a  privilege 
to  exhaust  our  strength ;  in  the  performance  of  the  duties  of 
such  an  office,  it  is  an  honour  to  be  permitted  to  wear  out  life 
itself." 

It  was,  indeed,  no  sluggish  heart  that  beat  in  the  apostle's 
bosom.  His  was  no  torpid  temperament.  There  was  such  a 
keenness  in  all  its  emotions  and  anxieties,  that  its  resolve  and 
action  were  simultaneous  movements.  But  though  he  laboured 
so  industriously,  and  suffered  so  bravely  in  the  aim  of  winning 
souls  to  Christ  and  glory,  still  he  owned  that  all  was  owing 
to  Divine  power  lodged  within  him — 

The  work  to  be  perform'd  is  ours, 
The  strength  is  all  His  own  ; 

'Tis  He  that  works  to  will, 
'Tis  He  that  works  to  do  ; 
His  is  the  power  by  which  we  act, 
His  be  the  glory  too. 

Therefore  the  apostle  thus  concludes — 

Kara  rrjv  evepyeiav  avrov  Tr]v  evep'yovfiivrjv  iu  e/xol  ev 
BwdfieL — "  According  to  His  working,  that  worketh  in  me 
with  might."  The  preposition  Kara  expresses  the  measure  of 
Paul's  apostolical  labour.     He  laboured  not  only  under  the 


COLOSSI ANS   I.   29.  103 

prompting  of  the  Divine  energy,  but  he  laboured  just  so  far  as 
that  imparted  energy  enabled  him,  1  Cor.  xv.  1 0.  "  By 
the  grace  of  God  I  am  what  I  am :  and  His  grace  which  was 
bestowed  upon  me  was  not  in  vain ;  but  I  laboured  more 
abundantly  than  they  all :  yet  not  I,  but  the  grace  of  God 
which  was  with  me."  Tlie  pronoun  avTov  refers  not  to  God, 
as  many  imagine,  but  to  Christ.  The  participle  is  not  in  the 
passive,  but  the  middle  voice,  as  in  Gal.  v.  6.  [Eph.  iii.  20.] 
Winer,  §  38,  6.  The  phrase  eV  hvvd^eo  does  not,  as  Vatablus 
and  Michaelis  suggest,  refer  to  miracles,  but  has  an  adverbial 
sense,  specifying  the  mode  of  operation.  Eom.  i.  4  ;  2  Thess. 
i.  11.  The  occurrence  of  the  noun  and  a  correlate  verb  inten- 
sifies the  meaning.  Winer,  §  32,  2.  [Eph.  i.  5,  6.]  It 
was  no  feeble  manifestation  of  Divine  power  that  showed 
itself  in  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  Its  ample  energies 
clothed  him  with  a  species  of  moral  omnipotence.  Phil, 
iv.  13.  The  sublime  motive  to  present  every  man  perfect  in 
Christ,  through  the  preaching  of  Christ,  could  only  be  realized 
by  the  conferment  of  Divine  qualification  and  assistance. 
Mere  human  influence  cannot  reach  it,  though  the  faculties 
be  kept  in  full  tension,  and  the  mind  be  disciplined  into 
symmetrical  operation.  Learning,  industry,  and  genius,  are  of 
little  avail,  without  piety  and  spiritual  support.  "  Our  suffi- 
ciency is  of  God."     2  Cor.  iii.  5,  6. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  apostle  had  just  spoken  of  his  sufferings  for  the  church, 
and  his  conflicts  for  the  realization  of  the  one  grand  aim  of 
the  Christian  ministry.  That  aim  filled  his  spirit  and  nerved 
his  energies.  It  made  him  what  he  was — a  preacher,  and  at 
length  a  martyr.  The  value  of  souls  and  the  glory  of  Christ 
wrapt  tliemselves  up  in  one  burning  thought,  and  created  and 
sustained  one  dominant  and  living  impulse  within  him.  It 
was  his  heart's  desire  that  the  gospel  should  be  preserved  in 
its  purity  and  simplicity,  Iree  from  all  admixtures  of  Judaism 
and  false  philosoply.  He  knew  that  the  introduction  of  error 
imperilled  the  salvation  of  sinners,  hindered  the  diffusion  of 
the  word,  and  robbed  the  cross  of  its  special  adaptations  to  a 
lost  world.  And  his  affection  was  not  wholly  set  upon 
churches  where  he  had  preached  in  person.  He  had  no  little 
jealousies  and  no  favouritism,  but  all  the  believing  communi- 
ties, whatever  their  age,  place,  or  origin,  found  in  him  imme- 
diate sympathy  and  co-operation.  The  churches  which  he  had 
not  visited  in  person  might  scarcely  be  inclined  to  believe  this 
fully,  and  might  naturally  imagine  that  their  neighbours  which 
had  been  honoured  by  his  presence  had  a  deeper  hold  on  his 
affection.  But  the  apostle  seeks  to  dispel  this  illusion,  and 
says  in  earnest  exhortitude  ^ — 

(Ver.  1.)  ©eXo)  yap  v/xd^  elBevat,  rfkUov  aywva  e^a>  irepi 
vfiatv  Kai  roiv  iv  AaohiKeia,  Kal  ocrot,  oy^  ecopaKaat  to  irpoawirov 
fiov  iv  aapKL — "  For  I  wish  that  you  knew  what  a  great  con- 
flict I  have  about  you  and  them  in  Laodicea,  and  as  many  as 
have  not  seen  my  face  in  the  flesh."  It  is  disputed  whether 
TrepL  or  virip  be  the  better  reading — A,  B,  C,  D^^^  declare  for 

1  "  From  the  construction  of  this  Exordium,  I  venture  to  assert,  that  there  is 
no  rule  laid  down  by  Aristotle,  Cicero,  and  other  masters  of  eloquence,  concern- 
ing the  framing  of  introductions,  which  is  not  adhered  to  in  this  brief  opening. 
For  three  things  are  required  by  them  in  a  legitimate  Exordium  :  That  it  be 
adapted  to  render  the  hearer  attentive,  and  docile,  and  to  conciliate  hia  affection." 
— Davenant,  in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   1.  105 

tlie  latter ;  while  the  former  is  supported  by  D\  E,  F,  G,  J,  K, 
and  the  Greek  Fathers ;  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf  are 
divided.  Perhaps  irepi.  is  the  right  reading,  and  virep  was 
suggested  from  iv.  12  and  i.  24.  The  reading  kwpaKav — the 
Alexandrian  form — is  also  preferable  to  that  of  the  Textus 
Receptus — kwpaKacn.     "Winer,  §  13,  2  c. 

The  division  of  chapters  is  here  unhappy,  for  this  verse  is 
but  a  supplementary  explanation  of  the  preceding  one.  "  I 
am  in  an  agony,"  he  had  said,  and  now  he  adds,  "  I  would  ye 
knew  what  an  agony  I  am  in  about  you."  The  noun  a'^tav 
means  deep  and  earnest  solicitude,^  accompanied  with  toil  and 
peril  Phil.  i.  30  ;  1  Thess.  ii.  2  ;  1  Tim.  vi.  12.  It  points 
out  that  intense  and  painful  anxiety  which  preyed  upon  him, 
now  in  occasional  terror,  and  now  in  reviving  hopes — that 
ceaseless  conflict  which  filled  his  waking  hours  with  effort,  and 
relieved  with  prayer  the  watches  of  the  night.  His  soul  was 
in  a  perpetual  distress  for  them  :  every  suspicion  about  them 
left  a  pang  behind  it — the  bare  possibility  of  their  relapse  or 
apostasy  brought  with  it  unutterable  dismay  and  sorrow. 
Therefore  he  says,  rj\,iKov  a^wva — "  How  great  a  struggle." 
Hesychius  gives,  as  synonyms  for  the  adjective,  oirolov, 
TTOTairov.  Jas.  iii.  5.  It  was  no  easy  or  supine  struggle. 
He  knew  what  was  at  stake.  They  were  in  danger,  and  he 
could  not  be  in  the  midst  of  them.  The  seducer  might  have 
been  pictured  out  to  him,  but  he  was  not  privileged  to  con- 
front him.  How  the  Colossians  stood  he  knew  not.  He  was 
aware  of  the  hazard  they  were  in  generally — but  the  shiftings 
of  the  crisis  and  its  individual  results  could  only  be  faintly 
apprehended.  Like  the  caged  bird  beating  its  bared  and 
bleeding  breast  against  the  wires  of  its  prison,  as  it  hears  the 
repeated  cry  of  its  unseen  young  ones,  the  apostle  turned  ever 
and  anon  toward  those  churches,  painted  to  himself  their 
danger  and  their  need  of  help,  and  strained  his  eager  spirit  to 
the  utmost  as  he  sighed  over  the  possible  desolation  which  might 
come  upon  them.  Nor  did  he  idly  chafe  in  his  confinement, 
— but  he  wrote  this  letter,  and  he  wished  them  to  know  the 
depth  of  the  love  which  he  cherished  toward  them.  "  I  would 
that  ye  knew."  Similar  construction  is  found  in  1  Cor.  xi.  3  ; 
Phil.  112;  Rom.  xi.  25.     If  they  knew  it,  they  would  listen 

'  Uoxxh  (pfo'vT/f— as  Theodoret  explains  it. 


106  COLOSSIANS   II.  2. 

all  the  more  readily  to  his  suggestions  and  counsels.  Laodicea 
is  also  mentioned,  from  its  proximity  to  Colosse,  and  perhaps 
because  it  was  exposed  to  similar  seductions.  A  few  Codices, 
with  the  Philoxenian  Syriac,  add  kuI  tcov  iv  'lepairoXei,  a  gloss 
evidently  taken  from  iv.  13.  The  apostle  says,  besides,  "and 
as  many  as  have  not  seen  my  face  in  the  flesh."  This  mode  of 
expression  is  a  popular  one,  and  is  not  therefore  to  be  pressed 
as  if  "  in  the  flesh  "  was  opposed  to  "  in  the  Spirit,"  or  as  if, 
as  Olshausen  suggests,  it  put  "  the  bodily  countenance  in  con- 
trast to  the  spiritual  physiognomy."  The  reference  in  oaoL 
has  been  keenly  disputed — whether  it  alludes  to  a  class  dif- 
ferent from  the  Christians  in  Colosse  and  Laodicea ;  or  whether 
it  characterizes  them  also  as  persons  unknown  to  the  apostle 
and  unvisited  by  him.  This  question  has  been  fully  treated 
in  the  Introduction,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred.  The 
point  of  the  apostle's  agony  is  thus  described — 

(Ver.  2.) '  Iva  7rapaK\r]6ooaiv  al  Kaphiat  uvtSv — "  That  their 
hearts  miglit  be  comforted."  In  the  violent  effort  described 
in  aycov,  there  is  implied  a  definite  design  expressed  by  iW. 
The  pronoun  avrutv,  in  the  third  person,  comprehends  all  the 
classes  of  persons  mentioned  in  the  preceding  verse.  We 
agree  with  Meyer  that  there  is  no  reason  to  depart  from  the 
ordinary  sense  of  the  verb,  which  plainly  means  to  comfort,  in 
1  Thess.  iii.  2;  2  Thess.  ii.  17;  Eph.  vi.  22;  Matt.  ii.  18, 
V,  4 ;  2  Cor.  i.  4.  The  addition  of  KupSla  renders  such  a 
meaning  more  certain.  It  appears  to  us  that  there  is  in  this 
earnest  wish  an  allusion  to  that  discomfort  which  the  intro- 
duction of  error  creates,  as  indeed  is  more  plainly  shown  by 
the  concluding  phraseology  of  the  verse.  The  conflict  of  error 
with  truth  could  not  but  lead  to  distraction  and  mental  tur- 
moil ;  and  in  proportion  to  their  misconception  of  the  gospel, 
or  their  confusion  of  idea  with  regard  to  its  spirit,  contents, 
and  aim,  would  be  their  loss  of  that  peace  and  solace  which 
the  new  religion  had  imparted  to  them. 

^v^^i^aaOevre^  iv  djaTrr)  — "  United  together  in  love." 
[Eph.  iv.  16.]  The  Elzevir  Text  reads  avfi^i^aaOevTcov  on 
very  sliglit  authority.  The  reading  is  an  evident  emendation 
with  reference  to  the  preceding  avrojv.  The  masculine  form 
and  nominative  case  of  the  participle  presents  no  real  difficulty. 
[Eph.  iv.  2.J      The    Vulgate  translation — instructi — is   based 


COLOSSIANS   II.   2.  107 

upon  the  usage  of  the  Septuagint,  in  which  this  verb  represents 
several  Hebrew  verbs,  the  principal  of  which  are  portions  of 
either  Vl)  or  ^11,  and  signifying  to  instruct.^  Isa.  xl.  13  ; 
Ex.  xviii.  16;  Lev.  x.  11,  etc.  It  is  used  with  a  similar 
secondary  sense  in  Acts  xvi.  10,  ix.  22,  where  it  means  to 
gather  up  the  lessons  presented,  and  knit  them  together  in 
the  form  of  inference  or  demonstration.  Hesychius  defines 
(Tv/x^cfid^6C  by  et?  ^iXiav  a^ei ;  and  the  Scholiast,  quoted  by 
Wetstein,  has  it,  (rv/jbj3i/3acr0evTe'i,  olov  ev(o9evr€<i ;  this  last 
term  being  that  also  employed  in  explanation  by  Theophylact.^ 
But  the  natural  sense  here  is,  "  being  compacted  together," 
love  being  the  element  of  union ;  iv  pointing  not  simply  to 
its  bond,  as  if  it  were  hta.  In  the  peculiar  condition  of  the 
Colossian  church,  this  virtual  prayer  was  very  necessary.  The 
entrance  of  error  naturally  begets  suspicion  and  alienation. 
One  wonders  if  his  neighbour  be  infected,  and  how  far ;  and 
that  neighbour  reciprocates  similar  curiosity  and  doubts. 
Expressions  are  too  carefully  weighed,  and  a  man  is  made 
"  an  offender  for  a  word."  A  sinister  construction  is  apt  to 
be  put  upon  the  slightest  actions;  nay,  caution  defeats  its 
very  purpose,  and  fails  to  secure  good  understanding.  But 
the  apostle  was  anxious  that  these  churches  should  feel  no 
such  disaster,  should  be  shivered  into  repellent  fragments  by 
none  of  those  evil  influences,  but  that  they  should  remain  in 
inutual  and  affectionate  oneness — bound  together  in  love — 
proof  alike  against  the  invasion  of  heresy,  and  the  secret 
upspringing  of  internal  mistrusts  and  dislikes. 

Kai  et?  Trdvra  ttKovtov  tt}?  'TrXr}po(f)opLa<;  ri]^  avveaeco^ — 
"  And  unto  the  whole  wealth  of  the  full  assurance  of  under- 
standing." But  with  which  of  the  preceding  clauses  is  this 
one  to  be  joined  ?  It  seems  preferable  to  connect  it  with  the 
last — "  knit  together " — iv  .  .  .  koX  el<i — "  in  love  and  in 
order  to  the  wealth."  The  two  prepositions  are  closely  united 
by  Kai — iv  pointing  out  the  element  of  union,  and  et?  denoting 
its  purpose.  This  syntax  seems  preferable  to  connecting  the 
phrase  with  the  rjXiKov  dywva  of  the  first  verse,  as  is  done  by 

'  So  also  Ambrosiaster  and  Hilary,  as  well  as  Bretschneider,  who,  in  liis 
Lexicon,  suh  voce,  renders  this  clause  hene  edocti  ad  amorem  tmituum. 

^  Herodotus,  i.  74,  and  Thucydides,  ii.  29,  where  it  is  said  of  Nymphodorus, 
that  he  reconciled  Perdiccas  to  the  Athenians — |£/vs/3//3a«. 


108  COLOSSIANS   II.   2. 

Calovius,  or  even  with  7rapaK\r)9toatv  of  the  first  clause  of 
this  verse,  as  is  proposed  by  Storr  and  Flatt ;  for  in  this  last 
connection  Kai  would  seem  to  be  superfluous,  or  it  must  begin 
a  new  clause  and  receive  another  than  its  merely  copulative 
signification.  Luther,  in  his  version,  wrongly  omits  /cat,  and 
renders — in  der  Liehe  zu  allem  Reichthum ;  and  this  is  also 

the    rendering    of   the    Peschito    "JjZcll    mV'-^V    l^o.KK.ii. 

The  two  things  have,  indeed,  a  close  connection.  Pascal  remarks, 
"  In  order  to  love  human  things,  it  is  necessary  to  know  them ; 
in  order  to  know  those  that  are  divine,  it  is  necessary  to  love 
them."  The  conjunction  KaC  is  simply  copulative,  and  eh 
points  out  the  purpose  or  design,  which  might  have  been 
expressed  by  Xva,  with  a  verb.  The  noun  'irXrjpocpopia  is  full 
certainty  or  assurance.  1  Thess.  i.  5;  Heb.  vi.  11,  x.  22. 
"  The  full  assurance  of  understanding  "  is  the  fixed  persuasion 
that  you  comprehend  the  truth,  and  that  it  is  the  truth  which 
you  comprehend.  It  is  not  merely  the  vivid  belief,  that  what 
occupies  the  mind  is  the  Divine  verity,  but  that  this  verity  is 
fully  understood.  The  mind  which  has  reached  this  elevation, 
is  confident  that  it  does  not  misconceive  the  statements  of  the 
gospel,  or  attach  to  them  a  meaning  which  they  do  not  bear. 
Believing  them  to  be  of  God,  it  is  certain  that  it  apprehends 
the  mind  of  God  in  His  message.  If  a  man  possesses  not 
this  certainty — if  the  view  he  now  cherishes  differ  from  that 
adopted  by  him  again — if  what  he  holds  to-day  be  modified 
or  explained  away  to-morrow — if  new  impressions  chase  away 
other  convictions,  and  are  themselves  as  rapidly  exiled  in  turn 
— if,  in  short,  he  is  "  ever  learning  and  never  able  to  come  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth,"  then  such  dubiety  and  fluctuation 
present  a  soil  most  propitious  to  the  growth  and  progress  of 
error.  And  as  the  mental  energy  is  frittered  away  by  such 
indecision,  the  mind  becomes  specially  susceptible  of  foreign 
influence  and  impression.  It  was  the  apostle's  earnest  desire 
that  the  Colossian  church,  and  the  members  of  the  other 
churches  referred  to,  should  assuredly  understand  the  new 
religion — its  facts  and  their  evidence — its  doctrines  and  their 
connections — its  promises  and  their  basis — its  precepts  and 
their  adaptation — its  ordinances  and  their  simplicity  and 
power.     The  fixed  knowledge  of  those  things  would  fortify 


COLOSSIANS   II.   2.  109 

their  minds  against  the  seductive  insinuations  of  false  teachers, 
who  mix  just  so  much  truth  with  their  fallacies  as  often  to 
give  them  the  fascinations  of  honesty  and  candour,  and  who 
impose  them  as  the  result  of  superior  enlightenment,  and  of 
an  extended  and  advantageous  research.  The  mind  most 
liable  to  be  seduced  is  that  which,  having  reached  only  an 
imperfect  and  onesided  view,  is  continually  disturbed  and 
perplexed  by  opposite  and  conflicting  ideas  which  from  its 
position  it  is  unable  to  reconcile,  but  is  forced  to  wonder 
whether  really  it  has  attained  to  just  conceptions  of  the  truth. 
The  traveller  who  has  already  made  some  progress,  but  who 
begins  gradually  to  doubt  and  debate,  to  lose  faith  in  himself, 
and  wonder  whether  he  be  in  the  right  way  after  all,  is  pre- 
pared to  listen  to  the  suggestions  of  any  one  who,  under 
semblance  of  disinterested  friendship,  may  advise  to  a  path  of 
danger  and  ruin.  No  wonder  that  the  apostle  describes  the 
value  of  the  full  assurance  of  understanding  by  his  favourite 
term — "  riches " — for  it  is  a  precious  form  of  intellectual 
wealth,  and  no  wonder  that  he  yearns  for  the  Colossian 
Christians  to  possess  it  in  no  scanty  measure,  but  in  all  its 
opulence,      ^vveo-f;  has  been  explained  under  i.  9. 

JEt?  iTTLyvcoaiv  tov  fivaTTjpiov  tov  &€ov  koX  IIaTpo<s  Koi  rov 
Xpia-Tov — "  To  the  full  knowledge  of  the  mystery  of  God,  and 
of  the  Father,  and  of  Christ."  So  reads  the  Received  Text. 
The  connection  of  this  clause  has  been  variously  understood. 
It  is  needless  to  make  the  preceding  clause  a  parenthesis,  and 
join  this  one  to  irapaKk'qdaxnv.  Bahr  takes  it  as  denoting  the 
end,  while  the  clause  before  it  specifies  the  means — "  unto  all 
riches  of  the  full  assurance  of  understanding,  so  that  ye 
may  know  the  mystery."  But  perhaps  the  clause  is  merely 
parallel  with  the  preceding  one,  or  rather,  is  a  farther  develop- 
ment of  it.  The  noun  iTriyvaai^  is  plainly  shown  here  to  mean 
"  full  knowledge,"  as,  indeed,  we  have  argued  under  Eph. 
i.  18,  and  in  this  epistle,  i.  9.  The  idea  of  a  mystery  is  taken 
from  verses  26  and  27  of  the  former  chapter.  The  mystery, 
he  says,  had  been  long  hid ;  but  God  had  chosen  to  reveal 
the  riches  of  its  glory,  and  therefore  he  desires  that  his 
readers  should  not  only  distinctly  recognize  it,  and  highly 
value  it,  but  specially,  that  they  should  fully  comprehend  its 
contents  and  lessons.     The  reading  of  the  concluding  portion 


110  COLOSSI ANS   II.   3. 

of  the  clause  is  sadly  perplexed  and  uncertain.  The  difficulty 
relates  to  the  words  of  the  Eeceived  Text — koX  Trarpo?  Kal  rod 
XpLCTTov.  These  have  on  their  side  D^^^  E,  J,  K,  and  several 
of  the  Fathers;  Codices  47,  73,  with  Chrysostom  and  Pela- 
gius,  who  have — Trarpo?  koX  rod  Xpiarov,  followed  by  the 
Syriac,  Vulgate,  and  Coptic  Versions.  Codices  A,  C,  4,  read 
—  rou  Oeov  irarpo-i  rov  Xpiarov,  while  Codices  41  and  61 
have — rov  Geov  Kal  7rarp6<;  rov  Xpiarov.  The  word  rrarpo^; 
is  omitted  by  some  MSS.,  while  Codex  17  reads — rov  Geov 
rod  ev  Xpiarm.  D^  presents  the  clause  thus — rov  &€ov  6  iari 
Xpiarov,  but  B  has — rov  ©eov  Xpiarov.  Hilary  follows  the 
last  reading,  but  Clement  and  Ambrosiaster  quote — rov  ©eov 
iv  Xpiaro).  The  shorter  reading,  ending  with  Qeov,  is  found 
in  37,  67^  71,  80\  and  116.  For  the  short  reading  without 
the  clause,  Tischendorf,  in  his  second  edition,  Griesbach,  Scholz, 
Heinrichs,  Bahr,  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  and  Einck,  have  de- 
clared themselves.  The  reading  —  rov  ©eov  Xpiarov  has 
advocates  in  Lachmann,  Meyer,  and  Steiger.  It  is  plain,  on 
the  one  hand,  that  many  of  these  readings  are  nothing  but 
glosses  to  escape  or  solve  a  difficulty ;  and  it  is  as  clear,  on 
the  other,  that  none  of  them  possesses  preponderating  authority. 
For  A,  B,  and  D  read  differently,  and  the  older  Fathers  and 
Versions  agree  with  none  of  them,  since  Cyril  has,  for  example 
— rov  ©eov  Kal  Xpiarov,  and  Theophylact  cites — rov  ©eov 
'Trarpo<i  ev  Xpiaru),  while  Hilary  explains,  by  adding,  Devs 
Christus  sacrament lun  est. 

(Ver.  3.)  Ev  a>  elai  rrdvre^  ol  Orjaavpol  rrj<;  ao(f)ia<;  Kal  t^9 
<yva)aeci)<i  airoKpv^oi — "  In  which  are  hidden  all  the  treasures 
of  wisdom  and  knowledge."  The  reference  in  the  relative  is 
supposed,  by  the  great  majority  of  interpreters,  from  Chry- 
sostom down  to  Baumgarten-Crusius,  to  be  to  Christ.  The 
margin  of  our  English  version  gives  "  wherein,"  that  is,  in 
which  mystery ;  and  this,  we  apprehend,  is  the  right  construc- 
tion. Such  is  the  view  of  Suicer,  Cocceius,  Eoel,  Lange, 
Grotius,  Bengel,  Huther,  Bahr,  Bohmer,  De  Wette,  etc.  If  the 
short  reading  of  the  previous  clause  be  adopted,  then  there  is 
no  mention  of  Christ  in  the  last  verse  at  all.  But  especially 
the  apostle  is  speaking  of  the  mystery,  and  he  here  eulogizes 
it  as  worthy  of  fuller  and  farther  insight.  Nay,  he  places  it 
in  sharp  contrast  with  the  false  and  hollow  error  which  was 


COLOSSIANS   11.   3.  Ill 

insinuating    itself   among    them.      That    system    which    was 
"  not  after  Christ,"  might  boast  of  its  stores  of  philosophy,  but 
they  were  not  to  be  captivated  by  its  pretences.     They  needed 
not  to  go  in  quest  of  higher  truth  and  loftier  science  ;  for  in^ 
that  mystery  proclaimed  among  them  were  deposited  all  the 
treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge.     The  nouns  aoc^ia  and 
ryvMaa  are,  perhaps,  not  to  be  carefully  distinguished,  as  the 
words  seem,  to  be  used  in  reference  to  the  terminology  of  the 
false   teachers.     The   words   appear   to   have    been   favourite 
epithets  with  them — were,  in  fact,  a  sample  of  the  enticing 
words  referred  to  in  the  next  verse,  for  they  imagined  them- 
selves in  possession  of  the  only  genuine  wisdom  and  knowledge. 
]iut    the    apostle    affirms,  in    opposition,    that    only  in    this 
mystery  are  they  to  be  discovered  in  reality,  and  that  all  else 
bearing  the  name  is  but   hollow  semblance  and  counterfeit. 
Whatever  distinction  may  be  made,  as  in  Rom,  xi.  33,  1   Cor. 
xii.  8,  such  seems  to  us  the  preferable  exegesis  in  the  verse 
before  us.     Augustine  makes  a  distinction,  by  referring  to  the 
Vulgate    translation    of   Job    xxviii.   28 — "Behold,  piety   is 
wisdom — sapientia,  and  to  abstain  from  evil  is  knowledge — 
scientia."  ^     Calvin  says — inter  sapientiam  et  intelligentiam  non 
porro  magnum  discrimen,  quia  duplicatio  ad  augendum  valet ; 
but  this  statement  is  scarcely  correct.     The  two  substantives 
may  refer  to  the  same  thing,  but  under  different  aspects.     Not 
that  the  first  comprehends  res  humanae,  and  the  other  res 
divinae ;  or,  that  the  one  is  practical  sagacity,  and  the  other 
theoretic  knowledge  of  God.     This  latter  distinction,  though  it 
be  commonly  held,  and  may  be  true  of  the  English  terms 
wisdom  and  knowledge,  is  not  warranted  by  Scripture  usage. 
Col.  i.  9  ;   1   Cor.  i.  17,  21,  ii.  6,  viii.  1.     Meyer  says  ao^ia 
is  the  more  general,  and  'yvwai'^  the  more  special.     The  latter 
term  is  divine  science,  and  the  first  is  that  enlightenment  which 
springs  from  it.      So   that  the  first  noun  is  subjective,  and 
the  second  objective.     The  study  of  the  ^v6}ai<{  brings  the 
a-o(f)ta.     Wisdom  results  from  penetration  into  this  knowledge. 
Knowledge  is  the  study,  and  wisdom  its  fruit. 

The  verse  before  us  is  thus  a  high  encomium  on  the  mystery, 
and  an  inducement  to  the  apostle's  readers  to  value  it,  to  cling- 
to  it,  to  study  it,  and  to  enthrone  it  in  a  niche  so  lofty  and 
'  Enarratio  in  Psal.  cxxxv.  Op.  vol.  4,  eJ.  Paris,  1835. 


112  COLOSSIANS   II.   3. 

inaccessible,  that  it  could  neither  be  rivalled  nor  dethroned. 
We  quite  agree,  with  Eobinson,  that  airoKpy^oi  does  not 
denote  "  hid  "  in  its  literal  sense,  for  the  apostle  says  that  God 
had  made  known  the  mystery ;  but  "  hid "  in  the  secondary 
sense  of  being  laid  or  treasured  up,  as  in  Septuagint,  Isa.  xlv.  3  ; 
1  Mace.  i.  23.  So  that  there  is  no  need  to  adopt  the  sug- 
gestion of  Bengel  and  Meyer,  which  denies  that  a7r6Kpv(f>oi 
is  the  predicate,  and  would  render — "  in  whom  all  the  hidden 
treasures  are  laid  up."  Bahr  objects  to  the  same  mode  of 
construction,  that  the  article  should  precede  airoKpv^oL ;  but 
the  objection  is  not  based  upon  an  invariable  rule  or  practice. 
And  we  are  also,  by  the  exegesis  which  we  propose,  saved  all 
the  perplexity  which  the  idea  of  concealment  originates.  Eor 
those  treasures  are  hidden,  according  to  Bohmer  and  Dave- 
nant,  from  the  unbelieving  world ;  according  to  Olshausen, 
from  the  unassisted  intellect ;  and,  according  to  Calvin,  they 
are  said  to  be  hidden  because  the  preaching  of  the  cross  is 
always  foolishness  to  the  world.  Ahditam  sapientiam,  says 
Melancthon,  quia  mundus  non  earn  intelligit,  as  is  said  in  1  Cor. 
ii.  7,  8  ;  Matt.  xi.  25  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  3,  4.  ©rjaavpo^  has  a 
similar  tropical  meaning,  as  well  in  the  classics  as  in  the  New 
Testament.  Xenophon,  Memor.  i.  6,  14;  Hesiod,  Op.  715; 
Eurip.  Io7i,  923;  Plato,  Phil.  15,  e;  Matt.  vi.  20;  Mark  x. 
2 1 ;  2  Cor.  iv.  7.  The  meaning  of  the  apostle  then  is,  that 
in  this  mystery  are  stored  up  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge  ;  not  a  few  scanty  fragments  of  faded  wealth,  but 
the  entire  amount  without  alloy  or  defalcation.  Here,  and  not 
in  the  vaunted  theosophy  of  the  false  teachers,  might  a  man 
become  wise,  by  being  initiated  into  the  true  knowledge.  Let 
it  be  the  knowledge  of  God  which  he  yearns  after — the  com- 
prehension of  the  essence,  character,  attributes,  and  works  of 
the  invisible  Majesty — then  he  will  obtain  full  satisfaction 
neither  from  the  palpable  limnings  of  nature — for  they  present 
but  a  shaded  profile,  nor  yet  from  the  subtleties  of  a  spiritual- 
istic philosophy — for  it  can  only  bring  out  a  dim  and  imper- 
sonal abstraction.  But  God  as  He  is — in  every  element  and 
relation — in  the  fulness  of  His  being  and  glory — is  revealed 
in  the  gospel,  and  there  may  we  find  Him  out,  not  by  search- 
ing, but  by  looking  on  Him  as  portrayed  not  only  in  His 
power  and  wisdom,  His  eternity  and  infinitude,  but  also  in 


COLOSSIANS  11.   3.  113 

His  grace  and  love,  His  condescension  and  mercy — those  pro- 
perties of  His  nature  which  creation  could  not  have  disclosed, 
nor  human  ingenuity  have  either  imagined  or  anticipated. 

The  highest  conceptions  of  the  Divine  polity  are  to  be 
learned,  also,  from  this  mystery.  By  means  of  the  atonement, 
it  achieves  what  to  human  administration  is  utter  impos- 
sibility. It  pardons  without  weakening  the  authority  of  law, 
or  bringing  prerogative  in  conflict  with  enactment.  Earthly 
governments  proclaim  the  ordinance,  and  then  apprehend, 
convict,  and  punish  offenders ;  and  when  they  do  commute 
a  sentence  or  grant  a  respite,  they  are  usually  prompted  to 
such  clemency  because  the  penalty  is  felt  to  be  too  severe  in 
the  circumstances,  and  then  so-called  mercy  is  only  equity 
correcting  inequalities  of  law.  Were  they  not  to  punish, 
they  would  dissolve  the  bonds  of  society  and  speed  their  own 
extinction.  The  sphere  of  the  tribunal  is  that  of  indictment 
and  proof,  and  according  to  the  evidence  so  are  the  verdict 
and  sentence.  But  God,  the  Legislator,  is  not  under  such 
restraint,  for  while  He  proclaims  a  universal  amnesty  to  all  who 
will  avail  themselves  of  it,  He  neither  by  this  anomaly  repeals 
the  code,  nor  declares  it  superseded  for  the  crisis,  nor  suffers 
it  to  fall  into  contempt ;  but,  charging  sinners  with  their 
atrocious  guilt,  and  convincing  them  that  they  are  most  justly 
liable  to  the  menaced  punishment.  He  at  once  absolves  them, 
without  encouraging  them  to  sin  with  hope  of  impimity,  or 
weakening  the  allegiance  of  the  universe  by  the  apparent 
reversal  of  those  righteous  principles  which  are  the  habitation 
of  His  throne,  and  which  have  guided  and  glorified  His  past 
procedure.  By  the  dignity  of  His  nature  and  the  extent  of 
His  humiliation,  the  perfection  of  His  obedience  and  the  sub- 
stitutionary efficacy  of  His  death,  that  Christ  whom  the  false 
teachers  depreciated  had  glorified  the  law  more  than  if  man 
had  never  sinned,  or  having  fallen,  had  himself  suffered  the 
unmitigated  penalty.  No  philosophy  ever  dreamed  of  such 
an  awful  expedient  as  God  robed  in  humanity,  and  in  that 
nature  dying  to  redeem  His  guilty  creatures — whose  name, 
nature,  and  legal  liabilities  He  had  assumed ;  and  such  a 
scheme  never  found  a  place  in  any  system  of  jurisprudence. 
Such  knowledge  was  too  wonderful  for  them,  it  was  high,  they 
could  not  attain  unto  it. 


114  COLOSSIANS   II.   3. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  false  preachers  laboured  in  incul- 
cating asceticism,  penance,  and  neglect  of  the  body,  as  a 
means  of  weaning  the  spirit  from  earth,  and  bringing  it  into 
fellowship  with  God.  They  also  gave  unwarranted  functions 
to  angels  and  higher  spirits,  as  if  they  could  shield  the  soul 
from  guilt,  and  as  if  contact  with  them  spiritualized  it,  and 
helped  to  raise  it  to  blessedness.  They  put  mysticism  in 
room  of  the  atonement,  and  ascribed  to  the  hosts  of  God  that 
guardian  power  which  belongs  to  faith  and  the  Divine  Spirit. 
Theirs  was  a  temple  without  an  altar  or  a  propitiation,  though 
it  was  crowded  with  genii  and  tutelar  subordinates.  It  was 
vain  philosophy  and  out  of  place ;  for  it  fell  short  of  heaven, 
and  could  secure  no  benefit  upon  earth.  It  was  wrong  about 
God,  and  erring  about  man — it  gave  him  a  stone  for  bread. 

But  "  wisdom  and  knowledge "  were  in  the  evangelical 
mystery — the  veritable  and  coveted  yvMaa  was  there.  There 
might  be  discovered  the  truest  theosophy — no  gaudy  vision, 
but  blessed  fact — God  in  Christ,  and  our  God ;  there  would 
also  be  found  the  richest  philosophy,  in  which  antagonisms 
were  reconciled,  and  all  the  relations  of  the  universe  were 
harmonized  by  the  cross,  the  mystery  of  man's  origin, 
nature,  and  destiny,  cleared  up ;  while  the  noblest  ethics  were 
propounded,  in  unison  with  all  our  aspirations  and  spiritual 
instincts — plainly  showing  what  man  may  be,  ought  to  be, 
and  will  be,  through  the  influence  and  operations  of  the  Holy 
Ghost — the  crowning  and  permanent  gift  of  the  Christian 
dispensation.  What  men  have  sought  in  deep  and  perplexing 
speculations  on  the  order  and  origin  of  all  things,  they  will 
find  in  this  mystery.  What  they  have  striven  in  daring 
adventure  to  reach  about  the  existence  and  issue  of  evil,  they 
will  get  here  laid  to  their  hand.  The  intricacies  and  anomalies 
of  their  own  mental  and  moral  nature,  on  which  they  have 
constructed  so  many  conflicting  and  self-destructive  theories — 
which  still  have  repeated  themselves  in  successive  generations, 
are  here  solved  by  Him  who  knows  our  frame.  The  inter- 
minable discussions  on  man's  chief  end,  which  ended  only  in 
fatigue  and  disappointment,  are  silenced  here  by  the  "  still 
small  voice."  "  Where  is  the  wise  ?  where  is  the  scribe  ? 
where  is  the  disputer  of  this  world  ?"  Let  them  come  and 
see,  and  learn,  and  they  will  find  that,  in  the  Divine  plan  of 


COLOSSIAXS   II.   4.  115 

redemption  are  manifested  the  noblest  elements  of  reflection, 
and  the  purest  objects  of  spiritual  faith  and  attachment.  For 
theology  transcends  all  the  sciences  in  circuit  and  splendour. 
It  brings  us  into  immediate  communion  with  Infinitude  and 
Eternity.  Its  theme  is  the  Essence  and  Attributes  of  Jehovah, 
with  the  truth  He  has  published,  and  the  works  He  has 
wrought.  It  tells  us  of  the  unity  and  spirituality  of  His 
nature,  the  majesty  of  His  law,  the  infinitude  of  His  love,  and 
the  might  and  triumph  of  His  Son,  as  the  conqueror  of  sin 
and  death.  The  intellect  is  unable  to  comprehend  all  its 
mysteries  by  superior  subtlety  and  penetration,  and  the 
imagination  only  fatigues  itself  in  the  attempt  to  grasp  and 
realize  its  destiny.  Its  fields  of  thought  can  never  be 
exhausted,  even  though  the  slower  processes  of  understanding 
were  superseded  by  the  eager  and  rapid  discoveries  of 
unwearied  intuition.  "  Who  can,  by  searching,  find  out 
God ;  who  can  find  out  the  Almighty  unto  perfection  ?" 
And  after  those  combinations  of  wisdom,  power,  and  love, 
which  characterize  the  counsels  and  government  of  God,  have 
attracted  and  engaged  the  inquiring  soul  through  innumerable 
ages,  there  will  still  remain  heights  to  be  scanned,  and  depths 
to  be  explored,  facts  to  be  weighed,  and  wonders  to  be 
admired.     [Eph.  iii.  10.] 

The  apostle  approaches  nearer  and  nearer  his  subject — the 
seductions  of  a  false  and  pretentious  philosophy. 

(Ver.  4.)  TovTo  Be  Xeyw — "  Now,  this  I  say."  This  present 
tense  some  regard  as  future  in  its  look,  as  if  the  apostle  meant 
— "  what  I  am  about  to  utter  is  intended  to  prevent  your  being 
led  astray."  But  the  clause  has  evidently  a  retrospective 
reference  to  the  preceding  statement,  and  not  exclusively 
either  to  the  first  or  third  verse.  "  What  I  am  saying,  or 
have  just  said,  as  to  my  anxiety  for  you,  and  as  to  the  treasury 
of  genuine  science  in  the  gospel,  has  this  purpose — to  put  you 
on  your  guard.  Do  not  listen  to  those  specious  harangues 
about  their  boasted  possession  of  the  only  or  the  inner  ao(J3ia 
and  ryvSxn^.  It  is  all  a  delusion  intended  to  impose  upon  you 
Purest  wisdom  and  loftiest  knowledge  are  not  in  their  keeping 
but  in  yours ;  for  in  that  mystery  into  wnich  you  have  been 
now  so  fully  initiated,  are  hidden  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom 
and  of  knowledge."      Quaercndum  est,  says  TertuUian,  donee 

L 


116  COLOSSIANS  II.   4. 

invenias,  et  credenduon  uhi  inveneris,  et  nihil  amplius,  nisi  ats- 
todiendum  quod  credidisti} 

"Iva  ixrj  Tfc?  u/ia?  TrapaXoyi^rjTaL  iv  TridavoXoyia — "  Lest  any 
man  should  beguile  you  with  enticing  words."  The  reading 
fjbr)B€L<;,  though  unusual,  is  supported  by  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  while 
the  reading  /i?;  rt?  of  the  Stephanie  Text  rests  on  inferior 
authorities.  The  deponent  verb  used  by  the  apostle  occurs 
only  again  in  Jas.  i.  22 ;  but  is  found  in  the  Seventy, 
1  Sam.  xix.  17.  It  is  found  also  in  Demosthenes,^  where 
it  signifies  to  miscount.  Here  it  denotes  to  delude  by  false 
reasoning,  as  in  ^Eschines,  p.  53  (ed.  Dobson,  vol.  xii.) ; 
Polyb.  16,  10,  3;  Gen.  xxix.  25;  Josh.  ix.  22  (28).  The 
means  of  deception  are  characterized  by  one  pithy  and 
expressive  compound — inOavoXo^ia.  The  word  occurs  only 
in  this  place.  The  cognate  verb  which  is  found  in  the  classical 
writers,^  is  defined  by  Passow  to  mean — to  bring  forward 
reasons  in  order  to  prove  anything  likely  or  probable ;  or,  as 
we  might  say  in  English — "to  talk  so  as  to  talk  one  over." 
The  substantive  occurs  in  Plato  ;^  and  the  word,  in  its  separate 
parts,  TTidavol  Xoyot,  is  found  in  Josephus  and  Philo.^  The 
term  is  here  employed  in  a  bad  sense, — to  characterize  that 
teaching  which  aimed  to  fascinate  their  mind  and  debauch 
their  conscience,  by  its  specious  sophistry.  This  is  a  com- 
mon accompaniment  of  heretical  novelty.  It  professes,  by  a 
process  of  dilution  or  elimination,  to  simplify  what  is  obscure, 
unravel  what  is  intricate,  reconcile  what  is  involved  in  dis- 
crepancy, or  adapt  to  reason  what  seems  to  be  above  it.  Or  it 
deals  in  mystery,  and  seeks  to  charm  by  a  pretence  of  occult 
wisdom,  and  the  discovery  of  recondite  senses  and  harmonies. 
It  was  a  form  of  similar  mysticism,  priding  itself  in  intimate 
communion  with  the  invisible  and  the  spiritual,  that  seems  to 

'  De  Praescrip.  Haeret.  cap.  ix.  Oppra,  vol.  ii.  p.  12,  ed.  Oehler. 

2  822,  25  ;  1037, 15,  ed.  Reisk  ;  or  vol.  vii.  p.  413  ;  vol.  viii.  p.  43,  of  Oratores 
Attici,  ed.  Dobson. 

3  Arist.  Eth.  i.  1.  Diodorus  Sic.  i.  39,  xiii.  95.  Diogenes  L.  10,  87,  ed. 
Hiibner. 

*  Theaet.  §  52,  vol.  iii.  p.  440,  ed.  Bekker,  London.  In  this  place  it  is 
joined  with  ukos,  and  denotes  deception  ;  probability  being  opposed  to  avihi^iv 
Koci  ocvayxYiv — conclusive  demonstration.     Fabric.  Cod.  Apoc.  iii.  694. 

*  Joseph.  Antiq.  viii.  9.  Philo,  de  Migratione  Ah.  vol.  iii.  p.  490,  ed. 
Pfeiffer. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   5.  "  117 

have  been  introduced  at  Colosse.  How  much  need,  therefore, 
they  had  of  that  "  full  assurance  of  understanding  "  which  the 
apostle  so  earnestly  wished  them  to  possess.  Such  illumina- 
tion was  a  perfect  shield  against  this  delusive  rhetoric,  with 
which  they  might  be  so  artfully  and  vigorously  plied, 

(Ver.  5.)  El  yap  koX  ttj  crapKl  aTreLfii,  dWa  rep  irvevfiari  <tvv 
vfitv  elfit — "  Tor  though  indeed  in  the  flesh  I  be  absent,  yet  in 
the  spirit  with  you  am  I."  Tap  gives  the  reason  why  the 
writer  so  warns  them.  It  is  refinement  on  the  part  of 
Theophylact  to  make  the  sense — "  I  see  in  spirit  the  false 
teachers,  and  therefore  bid  you  be  on  your  guard."  The 
meaning  is  very  plain.  Personally  the  apostle  was  not,  and 
could  not  be,  at  Colosse ;  but  mentally  he  was  there.  In 
1  Cor.  v.  3,  4,  the  apostle  employs  rw  a-cofiaTi — a  more  Hel- 
lenic phrase.  It  is  in  opposition  to  the  plain  sense  to  refer 
TTvevfxa,  with  Ambrosiaster,  Grotius,  and  Lord  Barrington, 
to  the  Holy  Spirit ;  as  if  a  special  inspiration  had  kept  the 
apostle  cognizant  of  what  was  transacting  at  Colosse.  When 
one  takes  a  very  deep  and  continuous  interest  in  a  distant 
community,  he  is  not  only  ever  picturing  them  to  his  imagina- 
tion, but  he  so  transports  himself,  in  idea,  to  their  locality, 
that  he  walks  and  speaks  with  them,  is  an  inmate  of  their 
dwellings  and  a  guest  at  their  table,  is  engaged  in  all  their 
occupations,  and  feels  himself  for  the  moment  to  be  one  of 
themselves.  So  it  was  with  the  apostle  and  the  absent  church 
in  Asia  Minor.  Xvv  is  similarly  employed  in  Phil.  i.  23  ; 
1  Thess.  iv.  17.  That  this  language  does  not  by  any  means 
imply  a  previous  residence  in  Colosse,  as  Wiggers  supposes, 
has  been  shown  in  the  Introduction  to  this  volume.  The 
particle  aXkd  is  rendered  "  yet " — doch,  by  Huther ;  attamen, 
by  Bahr — a  translation  which  it  may  often  bear  after  el  or 
idv}  There  is  no  need  at  all  for  supposing  such  an  e  lipsis 
as  the  following, — I  am  absent,  still  not  wholly  ignorant  of 
you,  or  uninterested  in  you,  dXkd,  but  I  am  with  you  in 
spirit.  Hartung,  ii.  p.  40 ;  Kiihner,  §  741,  1,  3  ;  Klotz, 
Devarius,  vol.  ii.  18  ;  and  Devarius,  vol.  i.  7. 

Xalpayv  koI  ^Xeirwv  vficov  rrjv  rd^cv — "  Joying  and  behold- 
ing your  order."  One  would  naturally  expect  the  apostle  to 
say — seeing  and  rejoicing ;  that  is,  rejoicing  because  he  saw. 
^  See  Bahr,  in  loc.     Kypke,  aioud  1  Cor.  iv.  15. 


118  COLOSSIANS  II.   5. 

Bahr  adduces  Josephus  as  expressing  himself  similarly — u/^a? 
ev  'i'^ovra'i  %(xtpa)  koI  /SXeVa).  But  the  German  commentator 
misquotes  the  Jewish  historian,  or  rather  the  best  MSS.  show 
that  he  uses  the  participle  ^Xe-rroiv,  as  does  the  apostle,  and 
not  the  verb.  De  Wette  adopts  this  form — "with  joy  seeing 
your  order."  Calvin  and  Estius  have  it — "  rejoicing  because 
I  see  your  order,"  and  others  —  "  gaudeo  videns."  Winer, 
followed  by  Olshausen,  takes  Kat  in  the  sense  of  scilicet — 
"  I  am  with  you  rejoicing,  inasmuch  as  I  see  your  order."  ^ 
Fritzsche  is  nearer  our  view  when  he  solves  the  difficulty 
thus — rejoicing  over  you,  i<j>  vfiiv — laetans  de  vobis — and  seeing 
your  array .^  Dismissing  the  idea  of  a  hendiadys  and  a  zeugma 
— taking  kul  in  its  ordinary  sense,  and  neither  as  causal  nor 
explicative ;  and  seeing  rd^tv  can  belong  only  to  one  of  the 
verbs  ^Xeiro),  we  come  to  the  conclusion  of  Meyer,  that  the 
first  participle  qualifies  the  clause — "  present  with  you."  The 
meaning  is — I  am  present  with  you  in  spirit,  rejoicing  in  this 
ideal  fellowship,  and  viewing  your  order.  His  spiritual  pre- 
sence with  them  was  a  source  of  joy,  and  it  enabled  him  to 
see  their  orderly  array  and  consistency.  The  sentiment  is 
somewhat  similar  to  that  contained  in  i.  3,  4.  There  he  says, 
that  the  accounts  which  he  had  received  about  them  prompted 
him,  as  often  as  he  prayed,  to  thank  God  for  them ;  here  he 
tells  them  that  his  being  with  them  in  spirit  was  a  source  of 
joy,  and  neither  of  doubt,  disquietude,  nor  sorrow.  And  the 
verb  ^XeTTcov  is  used  with  special  appropriateness,  as  the  apostle 
supposes  himself  to  be  among  them,  looking  around  him  and 
taking  a  survey  of  their  condition.  2  Cor.  vii.  8 ;  Eom.  vii. 
23.  Schleusner,  referring  to  a  common  trope,  indeed  says 
quaintly,  of  the  verb  —  de  omnibus  reliquis  sensibus  corporis 
usurpatur,  ut  adeo  ^Xeireiv  saepe  sit  audire,  as  in  Matt.  xv.  31, 
where  it  is  said  that  the  people  saw  the  dumb  speak.  But 
the  meaning  there  is  not,  that  they  heard  them  speak,  but  that 
they  saw  the  whole  phenomenon  of  the  restoration  of  hearing. 
The  Lexicographer  instances  also  the  verse  before  us,  as  if  the 
apostle  meant  to  say,  that  he  knew  of  their  order  from  hearing 
the  reports  of  others.  But  such  an  exegesis  is  truly  bathos, 
and  robs  the  sentiment  of  its  spirit  and  beauty. 

While  the  noun  rd^c^,  among  its  other  uses,  is  often  found 
^  §  54,  5.  *  Comm.  in  Ep.  ad  Bom.  ii.  p.  425. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   5.  119" 

as  a  military  term,-^  denoting  the  result  of  that  discipline  to 
which  an  army  is  subjected,  and  also  sometimes  describing  tlie 
symmetry  and  arrangement  of  society ;  ^  it  has  besides  the 
emphatic  signification  of  good  order.^  Thus  Chrysostom  uses, 
in  explanation,  evra^la.  In  the  latter  significant  sense,  the 
apostle  here  employs  the  term — "  seeing  your  good  order." 
What  the  writer  refers  to,  we  may  learn  from  his  own  usage. 
And  first,  the  apostle  accuses  certain  members  of  the  church  of 
Thessalonica  of  a  breach  of  order — that  they  walked  aTa/cT&)9 — 
"  disorderly  ; "  whereas  of  himself  and  coadjutors  he  says — ort 
ovK.  r)TaKTr]craiJiev  iv  vfilv — "  for  we  were  not  disorderly  among 
you,"  and  again,  he  adds — aKouofiev  jdp  Ti,va<i  TrepLTrarovvra<i 
iv  viuv  araKTO)'!; — "  for  we  hear  that  some  among  you  walk 
disorderly."  2  Thess.  iii.  6,  7,  11.  The  disorder  referred  to 
in  this  passage,  was  the  strong  and  vicious  tendency  to  idle- 
ness which  had  been  manifested  in  Thessalonica — some  refusing 
to  work  and  earn  a  subsistence,  and  aimingj  to  throw  them- 
selves  on  the  liberality  of  the  richer  brethren  in  the  church. 
This  breach  of  order  was  private  and  personal.  1  Thess.  v.  14. 
And  secondly,  after  rebuking  the  church  in  Corinth,  for  the 
turbulence  and  confusion  caused  by  the  display  of  spiritual 
gifts,  he  sums  up  by  saying — "  let  all  things  be  done  decently 
and  in  order, — koI  Kara  ra^iv."  There  had  been  a  social  or 
ecclesiastical  breach  of  order.  Perhaps  to  both  kinds  of  order 
does  the  apostle  here  refer.  In  their  individual  consistency 
and  purity  of  character,  in  their  unshaken  attachment  to  the 
truth  in  the  midst  of  seduction,  and  in  all  the  arrangements 
and  forms  of  their  worship  and  discipline,  such  good  order  was 
observed,  as  that  error  was  excluded,  unity  preserved,  and 
edification  promoted.  It  is  a  meagre  explanation  of  Michaelis 
and  Heinrichs,  to  represent  this  order  in  the  vulgar  sense  of 
subjection  to  the  ofiice-bearers,  and  as  opposed  to  insubordina- 
tion. Theophylact  and  Huther  are  more  correct  in  referring  it 
to  love,  which  at  least  was  the  bond  of  union,  and  one  principal 
support  of  order. 

Ka\  TO  a-repem/Ma  t?}?  6t<?  XpicrTov  Trto-Tew?  vfiwv — "  And  the 
solidity  of  your  faith  in  Christ."     The  noun  o-Tepeiofia  is  not 

^  Suidas,  sm6  voce.     Josephus,  B.  Jud.  iii.  9,  2.     Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  3,  6. 

2  Dem.  200,  Orat.  At.  vol.  v.  p.  308,  ed.  Dobson.     Plato,  Crit.  109. 

3  Plato,  Gorg.  504,  Leg.  875.     Polybius,  i.  4. 


120  COLOSSIANS  II.  5. 

found  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament.  Eepresentmg,  in  the 
first  chapter  of  Genesis,  the  Hebrew  y"*!?"],  and  rendered  in  the 
Vulgate  firmamentum,  it  signifies  something  solid  or  compact, 
such  as  the  foundation  of  a  building.  It  naturally  came  to 
signify  not  the  object,  but  the  quality  which  characterizes  it — 
firmness  or  hardness.  Ps.  Ixxiii.  4.  So  that  it  here  points 
out  that  feature  in  the  faith  of  the  Colossians  which  specially 
commended  it  to  the  notice  and  eulogy  of  the  apostle,  to  wit, 
its  unyielding  nature,  or  the  stiffness  of  its  adherence  to  its 
one  object — Christ.  In  such  a  crisis  as  that,  when  fluctuation 
would  have  been  incipient  ruin,  it  was  not  the  elevation  of 
their  faith,  nor  its  growth,  nor  any  of  its  fruits,  but  this  one 
feature  of  it — its  unshaken  constancy — which  the  watchful  eye 
of  the  apostle  so  carefully  noted,  and  so  joyously  recorded. 
Acts  xvi.  5  ;  1  Pet.  v.  9.  The  very  position  of  the  words  is 
emphatic — t?)?  eU  Xpiarov  Tr/o-reo)?,  as  if  et?  X.  distinguished 
and  glorified  the  faith.  [Eph.  i.  1.]  It  reposed  on  Christ 
— as  unshaken  as  its  object.  His  love  never  wavers.  His 
power  never  fails.  His  fidelity  never  resiles  from  its  pledge. 
And  those  unseen  blessings  which  faith  surveys  are  unchang- 
ing in  their  certainty  and  glory.  The  portals  of  heaven  are 
never  barred — its  living  stream  is  never  dried  up ;  the  pearls 
of  its  gates  are  unsoiled,  nor  is  the  gold  of  its  pavement  ever 
•worn  through.  Surely,  then,  faith  ought  to  be  as  stedfast  as 
the  foundation  on  which  it  rests,  and  the  object  which  it 
contemplates  and  secures.  It  is  out  of  place,  with  Bengel  and 
others,  to  make  this  noun  a  species  of  adjective  to  TTLcrrew^i,  as 
if  the  meaning  were  jirma  fides  non  patitur  quicquam  ex  ordine 
suo  moveri.  Nor  is  it  warrantable  on  the  part  of  Olshausen 
and  Meyer,  to  take  raft?  in  its  military  sense,  and  to  make 
crrepecofjia  the  power  which  strengthens  for  the  fight,  or  a  spe- 
cies of  fortification  by  which  they  were  defended.  ^Tepecofia 
is,  indeed,  employed  to  represent  the  Hebrew  V?o  in  Ps.  xviii.  2, 
but  the  Greek  translation  is  according  to  the  general  sense 
of  the  Hebrew  term, — the  proverbial  firmness  of  a  rock.  In 
1  Mace.  ix.  14,  quoted  by  Meyer,  a-Tepiwfia  t^9  Trapefifiokrj'^ 
is  not  the  fortification  of  the  camp,  but  the  strength  of  the 
army,  that  portion  which  could  be  relied  upon  for  its  prowess. 
In  the  Version  of  Symmachus,  Isa.  xxvi.  1,  it  represents  the 
Hebrew  ?n,  which  the  Seventy  render  irepirei'^o^ ;  the  prin- 


COLOSSIANS  II.   6.  121 

cipal  idea  of  the  original  term  being  strength,  while  bulwark, 
antemurale,  is  only  a  secondary  and  technical  application.  It  is 
a  curious  reading  of  the  clause  which  occurs  in  Augustine  and 
Ambrosiaster — the  former  having  id  quod  deest  fidei  vestrae 
in  CliristOy  and  the  latter,  supplens  id  quod  deest  utilitati  fidei 
vestrae  in  Christum — implying  that  they  both  read  va-reprj/xa 
for  (TTepicofia. 

(Ver.  6.)  '/2?  ovv  irapekd^ere  tov  Xpicrov  'Irjcrovv  rov 
Kvpiov,  iv  avTM  irepnraTeiTe  —  "  As  then  ye  have  received 
Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  walk  in  Him."  The  particle  ovv  turns4- 
us  to  the  preceding  verse,  and  to  the  fact  of  their  order  and 
stedfast  faith.  Calvin  rightly  says  —  laudi  attexit  exhorta- 
tionem.  He  has  commended  them  for  their  order  and  sted- 
fast faith,  and  he  now  adds  a  word  of  warning  and  counsel. 
Gradually  does  he  approach  the  main  end  of  his  writing. 
Ever  as  he  comes  near  it  does  he  utter  some  sentiment  which 
delays  his  full  admonition.  He  wishes  by  his  previous  allu- 
sions and  warnings  to  prepare  their  minds  for  the  final  and 
thorough  exposure  and  condemnation.  And  thus  he  has 
intimated — what  thanks  he  offers  for  them,  what  prayers  he 
presents  for  their  deeper  illumination  and  persistency  in  the 
truth — what  sufferings  he  has  endured  for  them,  and  what  sym- 
pathies he  has  with  them — what  joy  he  felt  in  being  mentally 
present  with  them,  and  surveying  their  good  order  and  un- 
swerving faith.  And  he  has  eulogized  that  gospel  which  they 
had  received — as  the  truth — as  a  fruit-bearing  principle — as 
a  disclosure  of  the  Divine  person,  exalted  dignity,  and  saving 
work  of  the  Son  of  God ;  and  as  a  mystery  long  hidden,  but 
at  length  revealed,  and  comprising  in  it  the  deep  and  inex- 
haustible treasures  of  all  spiritual  science.  Since,  therefore, 
they  had  received  Christ  Jesus,  the  Lord,  the  giver  and  subject 
of  that  gospel,  it  surely  became  them  to  walk  in  Him. 

The  verb  trapaXapb^dvw,  signifying  to  take  to  oneself,  is 
used  emphatically  to  appropriate  wisdom  or  instruction — ' 
much  as  in  Scotland  the  faculty  of  acquiring  knowledge  is 
termed  uptake.  1  Cor.  xi.  23,  xv.  1,  3  ;  Gal.  i.  9,  12  ; 
Phil.  iv.  9  ;  1  Thess.  ii.  13.  They  had  received  him,  in  the 
way  of  being  taught  about  Him — verse  7.  They  had  been 
instructed,  and  they  had  apprehended  the  lesson.  It  is  a 
superficial  exegesis  on  the  part  of  Theophylact,  Grotius,  and 


122  COLOSSIANS   II.   6. 

others,  to  make  the  proper  name  X.  'I.  mean  merely  the  doctrine 
of  Christ.  For  it  was  Christ  Himself  whom  they  had  received 
— the  sum  and  life  of  all  evangelical  instruction.  Nay,  more, 
the  repetition  and  structure  of  the  sentence  show  that  the  full 
meaning  is — ye  have  received  Christ  Jesus  as  the  Lord.  In 
the  character  of  Lord  they  had  accepted  Him.  This  was  the 
testing  element  of  their  reception.  The  Anointed  Jesus  is 
now  "  Lord  of  all,"  and  to  acknowledge  His  Lordship  is  to 
own  the  success  of  His  atoning  work  as  well  as  to  bow  to  His 
sovereign  authority.  Thus  we  understand  the  apostle  when 
he  says,  1  Cor.  xii.  3,  "  Wherefore  I  give  you  to  understand, 
that  no  man  speaking  by  the  Spirit  of  God  calleth  Jesus 
accursed ;  and  that  no  man  can  say  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord, 
but  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  On  the  special  meaning  and  use  of 
the  terms  see  Eph.  i.  2.  The  form  of  error  introduced 
among  them,  which  would  rob  the  Saviour  of  His  dignity,  led 
to  the  denial  of  the  Messiahship  in  its  true  sense ;  and  in  its 
spiritualism,  it  would,  at  the  same  time,  explain  away  His 
humanity. 

These  expressive  terms  are  thus  the  symbols  of  a  vast 
amount  of  instruction.  Whatever  men  receive  in  the  gospel, 
it  is  Christ.  He  is  the  soul  of  doctrine — for  prophets  foretold 
Him,  and  apostles  preached  Him  ;  and  the  oracles  of  the  one 
and  the  sermons  of  the  other  had  no  splendour  but  from  Him, 
and  no  vitality  but  in  Him.  Ethical  teaching  has  as  close  a 
connection  with  Him,  for  it  expounds  His  law,  defers  to 
His  authority,  and  exhibits  the  means  of  obedience  and  fer- 
tility in  His  imparted  Spirit  and  strength.  Promise  is  based  upon 
His  veracity,  and  sealed  in  His  blood,  and  suffering  looks  for 
sympathy  to  Him  who  bled  and  wept.  The  great  mystery  of  the 
Divine  government  is  solved  in  Him,  and  in  Him  alone  is  the 
enigma  of  man's  history  and  destiny  comprehended.  Spiritual 
life  has  its  root  in  Him — the  growth  of  the  Divine  image,  and 
the  repose  of  the  soul  in  the  bosom  of  Him  who  made  it.  In 
believing  the  gospel,  men  receive  no  impersonal  abstraction, 
but  Christ  Himself — light,  safety,  love,  pattern,  power,  and 
life.  And  they  receive  Him  as  "  the  Lord."  He  won  the  Lord- 
ship by  His  death.  He  rose  from  the  sepulchre  to  the  throne. 
To  Him  the  universe  bends  in  awful  homage,  and  the  church 
worships   Him   in   grateful   allegiance.     The   Colossians   had 


COLOSSIANS   II.   6.  123 

received  Him  as  the  Lord,  and  surely  no  seduction  would  ever 
lead  them  to  discrown  Him,  and  transfer  their  fealty  to  one  of 
the  crowded  and  spectral  myriads  which  composed  the  celestial 
hierarchy — one  of  a  dim  and  cloudy  mass  which  was  indistinct 
from  its  very  number,  surrounding  the  throne,  but  never  daring 
to  depute  any  of  its  members  to  ascend  it. 

"  As  ye  have  received  Him,  walk  in  Him."  The  particle  co? 
denotes  something  more  than  a  reason,  for  it  indicates  manner 
— "  according  as."  Matt.  viii.  1 3  ;  Luke  xiv.  2  2  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  5  ; 
Tit.  i.  5.  The  demonstrative  adverb  which  follows  0)9,  in  sense, 
is  here  as  often  omitted.  ^Ev  avrm  TrepLTrarelre — "  Walk  in 
Him."  The  verb  is  often  used  to  describe  manner  of  life,  or 
visible  conduct;  and  that  life  is  to  be  enjoyed  in  union  with 
Christ.  If  reception  of  Christ  the  Lord  refer  to  inner  life, 
then  this  walk  refers  to  its  outer  manifestation.  It  was  to  be 
no  inert  or  latent  principle.  Christ  was  not  merely  a  theme 
to  be  idly  contemplated  or  admired  in  a  supine  and  listless 
reverie ;  nor  a.  creed  to  be  carelessly  laid  up  as  in  a  distant 
and  inaccessible  deposit ;  nor  an  impulse  which  might  produce 
a  passing  and  periodical  vibration,  and  then  sink  into  abeyance 
and  exhaustion;  but  a  power,  which,  in  diffusing  itself  over 
mind  and  heart,  provided  for  its  own  palpable  manifestation 
and  recognition  in  the  daily  life.  For  there  could  be  no 
walking  in  Him,  without  the  previous  reception  of  Him.  The 
outer  life  is  but  the  expression  of  the  inner.  Ability  to  walk 
is  the  result  of  communicated  animation.  Nay,  more,  if  they 
received  Him,  they  could  not  but  walk  in  Him.  The  recep- 
tion of  such  truth  necessitates  a  change  of  heart.  It  is  a 
belief  which,  from  its  very  nature,  produces  immediate  results. 
In  Him,  and  in  Him  according  to  the  character  in  which  they 
had  received  Him,  were  they  to  walk.  And  they  would  not 
walk  in  Him  as  they  received  Him,  if  they  were  tempted  to 
reject  His  functions  and  qualifications  as  the  Christ,  or  in  any 
form,  or  on  any  pretext,  to  modify,  depreciate,  or  set  aside 
His  claims ;  or  if  they  were  prompted  to  deny  or  explain 
away  His  true  humanity  as  Jesus — taking  from  His  life  its 
reality,  and  from  His  death  its  atoning  value ;  or  if  they  were 
induced  to  withhold  their  allegiance  from  Him  as  Lord,  the 
one  rightful  governor,  proprietor,  and  judge.  There  must 
therefore  be  faith  in  Him  as  the  Christ,  the  consciousness  of 


124  COLOSSIANS  II.  7. 

a  near  and  living  relation  to  Him  as  Jesus,  the  kinsman,  the 
brother-man ;  and  deep  and  loyal  obedience  to  Him  as  Lord. 
"  He  is  thy  Lord,  worship  thou  Him."  "  In  Him "  pre- 
supposes the  reception  of  Him ;  and  to  "  walk  in  Him,"  is  to 
have  life  in  Him  and  from  Him,  with  thought  and  emotion 
shaped  and  inspired  by  His  presence.  The  hallowed  sphere 
of  walk  is  in  Him,  but  beyond  this  barrier  are  sin  and  danger, 
false  philosophies,  and  mazy  entanglements.  If  they  walked 
in  Christ,  they  would  be  fortified  against  those  doubts  which 
the  pernicious  teachings  of  error,  with  their  show  of  wisdom, 
were  so  apt  to  superinduce. 

(Ver.  7.)  ^Eppi^cofievoc  kol  iiroiKoSo/Moufxevoc  iv  av7u> — 
"  Having  been  rooted,  and  being  built  up  in  Him,"  ['Eppi- 
^(ofiivoc,  Eph.  iii,  17.  'EttolkoB.  Eph.  ii.  20,]  The  par- 
ticiples are  used  in  a  tropical  sense,  and  are  connected  with 
the  preceding  clause — "  walk  in  Him."  The  figures,  as  Meyer 
'T\  remarks,  neither  agree  with  the  preceding  verb,  nor  with  one 
another.  But  the  main  ideas  are  stability  and  growth — the 
root,  "  in  Him,"  beyond  the  possibility  of  eradication ;  and 
the  growth  that  of  a  symmetrical  structure,  which,  "  in  Him," 
has  its  unshaken  foundation.  The  first  participle,  by  its  tense, 
indicates  a  previous  state,  and  the  second  a  present  condition. 
They  had  already  been  rooted,  but  they  were  still  to  be 
making  progress.  Were  such  their  character,  were  they 
rooted  in  Christ,  and  not  simply  adhering  to  Him  by  some 
superficial  tie,  and  were  they  being  built  up,  or  growing  in 
gracious  attainment,  then  might  they  defy  all  the  efforts  of  the 
false  teachers  to  detach  them  from  the  truth, 

Kal  ^€/3aiovjjb€voi  iv  rrj  iriaTet  Kadoi<i  iSiSd'x^OrjTe — "  And 
stablished  in  the  faith,  as  ye  have  been  taught."  The  pre- 
'  position  is  omitted  in  some  Codices,  and  by  Lachmann  and 
Tischendorf.  If  this  reading  be  adopted,  we  should  be 
inclined,  with  Meyer,  to  take  the  dative  in  an  instrumental 
sense — "  stablished  by  means  of  the  faith ;"  but  if  iv  be 
retained,  perhaps  the  common  rendering  is  preferable.  See 
under  i.  7.  They  were  to  be  confirmed  in  the  faith  which  had 
been  taught  them — that  system  of  belief  which  Epaphras  had 
preached  to  them.  We  should  agree  with  Olshausen,  against 
Meyer,  that  7r/crTt<?  is  faith  in  the  objective  sense,  were  it  not 
for  iv  avrfi  in  the  following  clause,  which  we  believe  to  be 


COLOSSIANS   II.  7.  125 

genuine,  thougli  it  is  wanting  in  A  and  C.  Tor  the  apostle 
says — Trepiao-evovre^i  iv  avrr}.  This  abounding  bids  us  take 
faith  in  a  subjective  sense — the  conscious  belief  of  the  truth 
— and  in  that  belief  they  were  not  to  be  stinted,  cautious,  or 
timid,  but  they  were  to  abound.  Their  faith  was  not  to  be 
scanty  as  a  rivulet  in  summer,  but  like  the  Jordan  in  harvest, 
overflowing  its  banks.     And  they  were  to  abound  in  it — 

'Ev  €v^apiaTLa — "  With  thanksgiving."  A  similar  con- 
struction is  found  in  Eom.  xv.  13  ;  2  Cor.  iii,  9,  viii.  7.  They 
could  not  but  be  thankful  that  the  truth  had  been  brought  to 
them,  and  that  by  the  Divine  grace  they  had  been  induced 
fully  and  unreservedly  to  believe  it.  Two  other  and  opposing 
forms  of  construction  have  been  proposed.  Grotius  renders 
per  gratiarum  actionem  crescentes  in  fide,  as  if  the  thanks  were 
the  means  of  abounding  in  faith ;  while  Storr,  Flatt,  Bohmer, 
and  Huther  take  it  thus  —  abounding  by  means  of  the  same  in 
thanksgiving,  as  if  faith  were  the  means  of  thanksgiving.  But 
the  connection,  as  we  have  first  given  it,  is  more  in  harmony 
with  the  sequence  and  position  of  the  words.  The  entire 
verse  is  at  once  a  precept  and  a  warning,  and  were  the  pre- 
cept obeyed  and  the  warning  listened  to,  then  "  philosophy 
and  vain  deceit "  would  ply  their  machinations  in  vain. 

Having  again  and  again  approached  his  subject  by  indirect 
allusions,  the  apostle  now  boldly  and  fully  brings  it  out. 
"  Beware  lest  any  man  spoil  you  through  philosophy  and  vain 
deceit."  And  we  may  remark  in  introduction,  that  the  senti- 
ment of  the  verse  has  been  sometimes  greatly  abused.  The 
apostle  has  been  quoted  in  condemnation  of  philosophy  in 
general,  though  he  expressly  identifies  the  philosophy  which 
he  reprobates  with  "  vain  deceit."  Philosophy,  science,  or 
the  pursuit  and  love  of  wisdom,  cannot  be  stigmatized,  as  in 
itself  hostile  to  faith.  The  apostle  himself  has  employed 
philosophy  to  prove  the  existence  of  the  Creator,  and  show 
the  sin  and  folly  of  polytheism  and  idolatry.  Eom.  i.  19-23. 
The  attributes  of  the  Divine  nature — not  in  themselves  cogniz- 
able by  the  senses — have  assumed  a  visible  embodiment  in 
the  works  of  creation,  and  he  who  fails  to  discover  the  one 
God  in  His  productions  is  "  without  excuse."  ^     So  that  the 

^  "God,  whom  the  wisest  men  acknowledgfi  to  bee  a  Power  uneffaWe,  and 
Vertue  infinite,  a  Light  by  abundant  claritie  invisible  ;  and  Understanding  which 


126  COLOSSIANS  11.   7. 

teaching  of  Natural  Theology  is  not  erroneous,  but  defective 
— it  needs  not  to  be  corrected,  but  only  to  be  supplemented. 
Why  should  the  love  of  wisdom  be  reckoned  vanity,  when  the 
page  on  which  man  is  invited  to  study  is  wide  as  the  universe, 
and  rolls  back  to  creation  ?  Wherever  he  turns  his  eye,  on 
himself  or  beyond  himself — above,  around,  or  beneath  him, 
ten  thousand  things  invite  his  examination.  Earth  and  heaven, 
mind  and  matter,  past  and  present,  summon  him  to  wake  up 
his  faculties,  and  scrutinize  and  reflect  on  the  universe  around 
him.  Let  him  look  down  on  the  sands  and  rocks  of  his  home, 
and  he  enters  into  Geology.  Let  him  know  this  ball  to  be 
one  of  many  similar  orbs  in  the  sky,  and  Astronomy  entrances 
him.  Let  him  gaze  at  the  munificent  plenty  around  him, 
spread  over  zone  and  continent  in  the  shape  of  trees,  flowers, 
and  animals,  and  he  is  introduced  into  Geography,  Botany, 
and  Zoology.  Let  him  survey  the  relations  of  matter — its 
forms,  quantities,  and  laws  of  mixture  and  motion,  and  at  once 
he  finds  himself  among  Mathematics,  Optics,  Mechanics,  and 
Chemistry.  Let  him  turn  his  vision  upon  himself,  and  observe 
the  attributes  and  functions  of  his  physical  life,  and  he  dips 
into  the  mysteries  of  Anatomy  and  Physiology.  Let  him 
strive  to  learn  what  has  happened  before  him,  and  in  what 
connection  he  stands  to  brethren  of  other  tongues  and  countries, 
and  he  is  brought  into  acquaintanceship  with  History, 
Philology,  and  Political  Economy.  And,  in  fine,  let  his  own 
conscious  mind  make   itself  the  theme  of  reflection — in  its 

it  selfe  can  onely  comprehend,  an  Essence  eternall  and  spirituall,  of  absolute 
purenesse  and  simplicity  :  was,  and  is  pleased  to  make  himselfe  knowne  by  the 
worke  of  the  World  :  in  the  wonderfuU  magnitude  whereof,  (all  which  He  im- 
braceth,  iilleth  and  sustaineth)  we  behold  the  Image  of  that  glory,  which  cannot 
be  measured,  and  withall  that  one,  and  yet  universall  Nature,  which  cannot  be 
defined.  In  the  glorious  Lights  of  Heaven,  we  perceive  a  shadow  of  his  divine 
Countenance  ;  in  his  merciful!  provision  for  all  that  live,  his  manifold  goodnesse  : 
and  lastly,  in  creating  and  making  existent  the  World  universall,  by  the  absolute 
Art  of  his  owne  Word,  his  Power  and  Almightinesse  ;  which  Power,  Light, 
Vertue,  Wisdome,  and  Goodnesse,  being  all  but  attributes  of  one  simple  Essence, 
and  one  God,  we  in  all  admire,  and  in  part  discerne  'per  speculum  creaturarum, 
that  is,  in  the  disposition,  order,  and  variety  of  Celestiall  and  Terrestriall  bodies  : 
Terrestriall,  in  their  strange  and  manifold  diversities  ;  Celestiall,  in  their  beauty 
and  magnitude  ;  which  in  their  continual!  and  contrary  motions,  are  neither 
repugnant,  intermixt,  nor  confounded.  By  these  potent  effects,  we  approach  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  Omnipotent  cause,  and  by  these  motions,  their  Almighty 
Mover." — Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  p.  1,  History  of  the  World,  London,  1614. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   7.  127 

powers  and  aspirations,  its  faculties  and  emotions,  its  obligations 
and  destiny,  and  he  is  initiated  into  the  subtleties  and  wonders 
of  Metaphysics  and  Morals,  Legislation  and  Theology.  Thus, 
Strabo,  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  Geography}  says — "  That 
acquaintance  with  Divine  and  human  things  constitutes  what 
is  called  philosophy." 

Again,  not  only  is  philosophy  a  necessary  result  of  our 
being  and  condition,  but  it  is  full  of  benefit,  for  the  more  a 
man  knows  his  own  nature,  the  more  will  he  feel  the  adapta- 
tion of  Christianity  to  it,  and  be  persuaded  of  its  Divine 
origin.  The  inner  nature  has  its  religious  instincts  and 
susceptibilities,  which  are  not  grafted  upon  it,  but  are  of  its 
very  essence.  As  the  eye  is  fitted  for  the  reception  of  light, 
and  light  alone  can  enable  it  to  fulfil  its  functions — as  it  is 
made  for  the  light  and  the  light  for  it — so  religious  truth 
alone  is  fitted  to  satisfy  those  yearnings  and  aspirations. 
There  is  a  perfect  harmony  between  God's  inner  revelation  of 
Himself  in  man,  and  His  external  revelation  of  Himself  in 
Scripture.  Wrong  belief  may  be  against  reason,  but  unbelief 
is  against  nature.  A  sound  philosophy  comes  to  this  con- 
clusion— that  Christianity  fulfils  every  condition — that  in  its 
God  and  its  incarnate  Jesus — its  revelation  and  its  atonement 
— its  sanctifying  agency  and  its  future  heaven — it  responds 
to  every  want  and  hope  of  humanity.  Man  must  have  some 
God — it  gives  him  the  true  one.  He  seeks  to  some  revelation, 
and  it  sends  him  the  genuine  oracle.  He  relies  on  some 
sacrifice,  and  it  shows  the  perfect  atonement.  He  anticipates 
a  heaven,  and  it  provides  him  with  such  a  home,  and  enables 
him  to  reach  it.  This  philosophy  develops  what  Tertullian 
has  happily  called  testwionium  animae  naturaliter  Christianae. 

But  it  is  not  such  philosophy,  or  such  use  of  philosophy, 
that  the  apostle  condemns — "  Philosophy  was,  in  its  first 
descent,  a  generous,  noble  thing ;  a  virgin  beauty,  a  pure  light, 
born  of  the  Father  of  lights."  ^  At  the  same  time,  it  is  not 
to  be  denied  that  the  greater  portion  of  heresies  have  been 

^  "H  too  Ta  h7a  xoci  roc  avSpcd-jriia  i'TnfiXii'ovTos  dvTrip  t»)v  (pi^o^ixpiav  iTicrTrif/,n)i 
(paaiv.  Vol.  i.  p.  4,  ed.  Cramer,  Berlin,  1844.  Justin  also  characterizes  philoso- 
phers thus — KaJ   o't   (ptX'o<ro(poi   ol  rnv   aXnin   xa.)    hiav   tl^ivai   iTayyiXXofinioi   yvuirit. 

Cohort,  ad  Graecos,  p.  14,  vol.  i.  Opera,  ed.  Otto,  1842. 

^  Gale,  Court  of  the  Gentiles,  Part  ii.  Preface.     Clement,  Strom,  i.  p.  282. 


128  COLOSSIANS   II.   7. 

allied  to  a  false  philosophy.  Tertullian,  in  the  seventh  chapter 
of  his  De  Praescriptione  Haereticorum,  says — ipsae  denique 
haereses  a  pldlosopliia  suhornantur}  Platonism  and  Aristo- 
telianism  had  each  in  turn  the  ascendency,  and  Christianity 
has  suffered  from  the  four  great  forms  of  philosophy — Sen- 
sationalism, Idealism,  Scepticism,  and  Mysticism,  the  error  of 
each  of  which  lies  in  pushing  to  extravagance  some  important 
truth.  And  in  modern  times,  has  not  Hegelian  Pantheism 
clothed  itself  in  biblical  phraseology  ?  Its  doctrine,  that  "  the 
consciousness  which  man  has  of  himself  is  the  consciousness 
which  God  has  of  Himself,"  finds  its  appropriate  mythical 
representation  in  the  mediatorial  person  of  the  God-man ; 
while  "  eternal  life "  is  but  the  symbol  of  an  immortality 
without  individual  existence.  Have  not  men  in  their  wildness 
invoked  "  the  stars  in  their  courses  "  to  light  against  Him  who, 
enthroned  above  them,  has  not  forgotten  that  distant  and 
insignificant  planet  on  which  sin  and  misery  dwell  ?  Have 
they  not  called  to  them  the  rocks  and  fossils  of   the  early 

^  The  Father  justifies  his  accusation  in  the  following  strains  : — Inde  aeones, 
et  formae  nescio  quae  infinitae,  et  trinitas  hominis  apud  Valentinuna  ;  Platonicus 
fuerat  :  inde  Marcionis  deus  melior  de  tranquillitate  ;  a  Stoicis  venerat :  et  ut 
anima  interire  dicatur,  ab  Epicureis  observatur  :  et  ut  carnis  restitutio  negetur, 
de  una  omnium  philosophorum  schola  sumitur  :  et  ubi  materia  cum  deo  aequatur, 
Zenonis  disciplina  est :  et  ubi  aliquid  de  igneo  deo  allegatur,  Heracletus  inter- 
venit.  Eadem  materia  apud  haereticos  et  philosophos  volutatur,  idem  retracta- 
tiis  implicantur  :  unde  malum,  et  quare  ?  et  unde  homo,  et  quomodo  ?  et,  quod 
proxime  Valentinus  proposuit,  unde  deus  ?  scilicet  de  enthymesi  et  ectromate. 
Miserum  Aristotelem !  qui  illis  dialecticam  instituit,  artificem  struendi  et 
destruendi,  versipellem  in  sententiis,  coactam  in  coniecturis,  duram  in  argumentis, 
operariam  contentionum,  molestam  etiam  sibi  ipsi,  omnia  retractantem,  ne  quid 
omnino  tractaverit.  Hinc  illae  fabulae  et  genealogiae  intei-minabiles,  et 
quaestiones  infructuosae,  et  sermones  serpentes  velut  cancer,  a  quibus  nos 
apostolus  refrenans  nominatim  philosophiam  contestatur  caveri  oportere,  scribens 
ad  Colossenses,  Videte,  ne  qui  sit  circumveniens  vos  per  philosophiam  et  inanem 
seductionem,  secundum  traditionem  hominum,  praeter  providentiam  spiritus 
sancti.  Fuerat  Athenis,  et  istam  sapientiam  humanam,  affectatricem  et 
interpolatricem  veritatis,  de  congressibus  noverat,  ipsam  quoque  in  suas 
haereses  multipartitam  varietate  sectarum  invicem  repugnantium.  Quid  ergo 
Athenis  et  Hierosolymis  ?  quid  academiae  et  ecclesiae  ?  quid  haereticis  et 
Christianis  ?  Nostra  institutio  de  porticu  Solomonis  est,  qui  et  ipse  tradlderat 
dominum  in  simplicitate  cordis  esse  quaerendum.  Viderint  qui  Stoicum  et 
Platonicum  et  dialecticum  Christianismum  protulerunt.  Nobis  curiositate  opus 
uon  est  post  Christum  lesum,  nee  inquisitione  post  evangelium.  Cum  credimus, 
nihil  desideramus  ultra  credere.  Hoc  enim  prius  credimus,  non  esse  quod  ultra 
credere  debeamus. — De  Praescr.  Hacret.  p.  8,  Opera,  vol.  ii.,  Lipsiae,  1854. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   7.  129 

infancy  of  the  globe  to  prove  that  the  record  of  creation  M-as 
not  furnished  by  the  Creator  ?  Are  there  not  those  at  the 
present  time  who  regard  inspiration  as  but  the  "  fine  frenzy  " 
of  an  Oriental  temperament,  or  look  upon  it  as  being  "  as 
wide  as  the  world,  as  common  as  God,"  and  who,  therefore, 
take  from  the  biblical  records  their  sole,  infallible,  and  supreme 
authority,  leaving  us  an  Old  Testament  without  prophecies, 
and  a  New  Testament  without  miracles  and  redemption  ? 
These  are,  verily,  abuses  of  philosophy — "  oppositions  of 
science,  falsely  so  called."  "VVe  do  not,  therefore,  object  to 
philosophy,  or  to  the  philosophical  treatment  of  Christianity. 
We  can  have  no  horror  at  free  thoughts  and  bold  inquiry,  so 
long  as  men  indicate  their  desire  to  submit  to  the  decisions  of 
Evidence.  There  is  a  legitimate  province  for  philosophy  to 
work  in,  and  "faith  is  the  synthesis  of  reason  and  the 
individual  will."  ^ 

But  tlie  system  condemned  by  the  apostle  was  something 
which  assumed  the  name  of  philosophy,  yet  had  nothing  of 
its  spirit.  It  sprang  from  a  wrong  motive.  So  far  from 
being  the  love  of  wisdom,  it  was  the  fondness  of  folly.  It 
was  nursed  in  a  fantastic  imagination,  and  intruded  into  a 
supersensuous  sphere.  It  did  not  deal  with  nature  around  it, 
but  with  the  supernatural  beyond  it.  It  did  not  investigate 
its  own  constitution,  but  it  pryed  into  the  arcana  of  the  spirit- 
world.  It  was  wholly  spectral  and  baseless.  It  developed 
superstition  and  crossed  the  path  of  the  gospel.  It  lived  in 
a  cloud-land  which  it  had  created,  and  withdrew  itself  from 
the  influence  and  faith  of  apostolical  Christianity.  The 
plain  truths  of  redemption  did  not  satisfy  its  prurient  appetite, 
nor  could  it  content  itself  with  the  "  manifold  wisdom  "  of  the 
cross.  It  longed  for  something  more  ethereal  than  historical 
facts,  something  more  recondite  than  the  mystery  of  godliness. 
It  forestalled  the  Eosicrucian  vanities.  It  peopled  the 
spheres  with  imaginary  Essences,  to  which  it  assigned  both 
names  and  functions.  It  laboured  to  purge  itself  from  the 
vulgarities  of  physical  life,  in  order  to  enter  this  spiritual 
circle.  It  battled  with  the  flesh,  till  the  crazy  nerves  gave 
it  such  sights  and  sounds  as  it  longed  to  enjoy.  The 
ordinances  of  the  New  Testament  were  too  tame  for  it,  and  it 
^  "Essay  on  Faith,"  in  Coleridge's  Confessions  of  an  Inquiring  Spirit,  p,  120. 


130  COLOSSIANS   II.   8, 

created  a  new  and  emaciating  ritual  for  itself.  It  was,  in 
short,  an  eccentric  union  of  Judaism  with  the  Gnostic 
Theosophy — a  mixture  of  Jewish  ritualism  with  Oriental 
mysticism.  It  took  from  Moses  those  special  parts  of  his 
economy,  which  "  sanctified  to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh,"  and 
it  seems  to  have  deepened  and  exaggerated  them.  It  selected 
from  the  Eastern  Theosophy  its  armies  of  vEons,  its  array  of 
principalities  and  powers,  whom  it  marshalled  as  its  mediators, 
and  to  whom  it  inculcated  homage.  It  was  smitten  with  the 
disease  of  him  who  will  look  into  the  sun,  and  who  soon 
mistakes  for  realities  the  gaudy  images  that  float  before  him. 
Such  was  the  visionary  science  which  had  special  charms  for 
the  inhabitants  of  Phrygia,  and  which  in  after  years  produced 
unmistakeable  results.  That  the  apostle  means  such 
philosophy  is  evident,  for  in  no  other  way  could  his  warning 
be  appropriate.  It  was  of  a  present,  and  not  a  future 
danger — a  real,  and  not  an  imaginary  jeopardy  that  he  so 
earnestly  cautioned  them.  It  was  not,  as  TertulKan  imagines, 
the  whole  Greek  philosophy,  for  that  lay  not  in  his  way ;  nor 
yet  any  special  form  of  it,  as  Grotius  and  others  have  held, 
for  the  philosophy  of  the  Academy  and  the  Porch,  of  Epicurus 
and  Pythagoras,  was  not  the  source  of  immediate  danger  to 
the  Colossian  church. 

(Ver.  8.)  BXeirere,  fi^  Tt9  t'/ia?  earat  6  avkaycoyayv  Slu  t^? 
<j)iXoao^La<;  koX  Kevri<i  airaTTj'i — "  Be  on  your  guard  lest  any 
one  make  a  spoil  of  you  through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit." 
The  verb  /SXeTrw,  in  this  sense,  is  sometimes  followed  by  the 
accusative  of  the  persons  to  be  guarded  against,  occasionally 
by  the  genitive  preceded  by  am-o,  sometimes  also  by  'iva ;  but 
most  usually  by  ^rj,  and  its  compounds  with  the  aorist 
subjunctive.  Here,  however,  we  have  the  future  indicative, 
earai,  as  in  Heb.  iii.  12.  The  apostle  therefore  does  not  say 
that  the  evil  had  happened,  but  he  expresses  his  fear  that  it 
would  happen — his  misgiving,  that  what  he  apprehended 
would  take  place.  Winer,  §  56,  2  (b),  a;  Bernhardy,  p. 
402  ;  Hartung,  vol.  ii.  139.  He  saw  the  attractive  subtlety, 
and  he  could  not  withhold  the  warning  and  pre-intimation. 
The  expression,  too,  is  pointed  and  emphatic — rt?  o  avXaycoycjv 
— more  so  than  if  he  had  employed  the  subjunctive,  avXaycoyfj. 
It  individualizes  the  spoiler — represents  him  as  at  his  work 


COLOSSIANS  II.   8.  131 

— associates  vividly  the  actor  with  the  action.  Gal.  i.  7. 
When  some  infer  from  the  language  that  the  apostle  had  only 
one  person  specially  in  his  eye — one  restless  and  attractive 
heresiarch,  we  would  not  contradict,  though  we  are  not 
prepared  to  come-  decidedly  to  the  same  conclusion.  The 
participle,  which  occurs  only  here,  belongs  to  the  later  Greek,^ 
and  denotes — making  a  prey  of — driving  off  as  booty,  though 
it  is  finical  on  the  part  of  Meyer  to  base  the  latter  significa- 
tion upon  the  expression  of  the  6th  verse,  walk  in  Him,  as 
if  they  might  be  caught  when  not  in  that  walk,  and  forced 
away  as  a  spoil.  The  expression  shows  the  strong  feeling 
of  the  apostle,  and  how  he  regarded  their  capture  by  that 
philosophy  as  fatal,  almost  beyond  recovery,  to  their  faith  and 
peace.  It  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  language  to  think 
of  the  false  teacher  or  teachers  taking  faith,  mind,  or  purity, 
or  anything  else  as  a  prey  from  the  Colossians,  for  the 
Colossians  themselves  are  the  booty.  The  means  employed 
were — 

^La  tt}?  ^i\,oao(j>ia<i  Kot  K6vrj<i  airdrr]'; — "  By  philosophy  and 
empty  delusion."  This  philosophy  is  none  other  than  the 
theme  of  the  TriOavoXoyia  of  verse  4,  and  is  nothing  else'  in 
essence  than  "vain  deceit."  For  the  second  clause,  where 
neither  preposition  nor  article  is  repeated,  explains  the  first 
— philosophy  which  was  expressed  in  "  vain  words,"  is 
identical  with  "vain  deceit."  There  is  no  reality  about  it. 
It  is  out  and  out  a  delusion,  a  tissue  of  airy  figments.  The 
term  philosophy  was  a  favourite  one  in  the  Greek  world,  but 
it  was  extended  in  course  of  time  to  portions  and  objects  of 
Jewish  study  by  the  affectation  of  Philo^  and  Josephus.^ 
Tittmann,  in  his  very  one-sided  essay ,^  restricts  the  term 
solely  to  Jewish  doctrine,  and  Heinrichs  no  less  narrowly  to 
Jewish  worship.  Perhaps  the  apostle  would  not  have  given 
any  mere  Jewish  system  such  an  appellation,  but  he  uses  the 
term  because  there  might  be  in  it  some  mixture  of  Gentile 


1  Heliodorus,  10,  p.  512.     Aristaenet.  ii.  ep.  22. 

2  De  Somniis,  Opera,  vol.  v.  p.  160,  ed.  Pfeitfer.  ^  Cont.  Ap.  ii.  4. 

*  De  Vestigiis  Gnost.  inN.  T.  frustra  quaesitis,  etc.,  Lipsiae,  1773.  Compare, 
on  the  other  hand,  Neander,  Geschichte  der  Pjlanzung,  etc.,  vol.  i.  p.  512. 
Vaughan's  Causes  of  the  Corruption  of  Christianity,  p.  167,  etc.  Brucker, 
Histor.  Crit.  Phil.  ii.  p.  40,  etc, 

M 


132  COLOSSIANS  II.   8. 

lore,  and  especially  because  the  false  teachers  dignified  their 
views  by  such  a  title. 

Kara  rrjv  TrapdSoatv  tmv  av9pco7r(ov — "  After  the  tradition 
of  men."     The  preposition    does   not  connect  this  with  the 
first  clause  of  the  verse,  as  Meyer    construes,  and  as  if   it 
showed  the  direction  in  which  they  were  seduced,  but  it  is  to 
be  joined  with  the  immediately  preceding  words.     It  points 
out,  not  so  much,  as  Storr  supposes,  the    authority  of  that 
philosophy,    as    its    general    source   and    character.       It    is 
according  to  the  tradition  of  men,  and  not  according  to  Divine 
revelation.     In    2    Thess.    iii.    6,  the    construction    is    fully 
expressed.     Elements  of   the    tradition  here  referred  to  are 
found  in  Matt.  xv.  2  ;  Mark  vii.   3,  5,  8,  9,  13  ;  Gal.  i.  14. 
It  is  not  simply  doctrine,  as  Olshausen  and  Huther  take  it; 
nor  perhaps  Gr?eco- Jewish  doctrine,  as  others  supposed.      It 
was,  to  a  great  extent,  that  tangled   mass   of  oral  teaching, 
which,  age  after  age,  the  Jews  had  unwarrantably  engrafted  on 
the  written  law.     That  farrago  of  unwritten  statute  and  ritual 
is  contrasted  by  Jesus  with  the  "  commands  of  God."     It  was 
solely  of  man,  and  partook  largely  of  his  vanity  and  weakness. 
As  in  the  instance  adduced  by  Christ,  it  explained  away  the 
obligation  of  tlie  fifth  commandment  by  a  mean  quibble,  which 
added  impiety  to  filial  neglect,  and  permitted  a  son  to  starve  his 
parent  under  a  pretence  of  superior  liberality  to  God.      It  taught 
the  payment  "  of  mint,  anise,  and  cumin,"    but  forgot  "  the 
weightier  matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy,  and  faith."     It 
scrupled  to  eat  with  unwashed  hands,  but  was  forward  to 
worship  with  an  unregenerate  heart.     It  was  eloquent  and 
precise  about  cleaning   of  cups,  but  vague  and  dumb  about 
the   purifying   of  conscience.      It   converted   religion   into   a 
complicated  routine,  with  a  superstitious  and  perplexing  ritual, 
as  if  man  were  to  be  saved  by  the  observance  of  ceremonies 
as  puerile    as    they   were    cumbrous — a    series    of  postures, 
ablutions,  amulets,  and  vain  repetitions.     It  lost  sight  of  the 
spirituality  of  worship,  but  enjoined  a  careful  genuflexion.      It 
buried  ethics  under  a  system  of  miserable  and  tedious  casuistry. 
It  attempted  to  place  everything  under  formal  regulation,  and 
was  now  busied   in   solemn  trifling,   and  now  lost  in   utter 
indecency.     It  was  mighty  about  the  letter,  and  oblivious  of 
the  spirit.     It  rejoiced  in  the  oblation  of  a  ram,  but  had  no 


COLOSSIANS  II.   8.  133 

sympathy  with  the  "  sacrifice  of  a  broken  and  contrite  heart." 
It  drew  water  every  year  from  the  well  at  Siloam  with  a 
pompous  procession,  but  had  no  thirst  for  the  living  stream 
which  its  prophets  had  predicted  and  described.  It  would 
drill  man  into  a  fatiguing  devotion.  It  trained  to  the  mere 
mummery  of  worship  when  it  prescribed  the  movement  of  eye 
and  foot,  of  head  and  arm.  It  intruded  its  precepts  into 
every  relation,  and  attempted  to  fill  out  the  Divine  law  by 
laying  down  directions  for  every  supposable  case.  It  was  not 
content  with  leading  principles,  but  added  innumerable  supple- 
ments. It  surrounded  the  rite  of  circumcision  with  many 
ridiculous  minutiae.  It  professed  to  guard  the  sanctity  of  the 
Sabbath  by  a  host  of  trifling  injunctions,  descending  to  the 
needle  of  the  tailor,  the  pen  of  the  scribe,  and  the  wallet  of 
the  beggar.  The  craftsman  was  told  that  he  was  guilty  if  he 
tied  a  camel-driver's  knot,  or  a  sailor's  knot,  on  that  day,  but 
not  guilty  if  he  merely  tied  a  knot  which  he  could  loose  with 
one  of  his  hands ;  and  that  he  might  leap  over  a  ditch,  but 
not  wade  through  the  water  that  lay  in  it.  It  declared  by 
what  instrument  the  paschal  lamb  should  be  roasted,  and  how 
a  jar  of  wine  must  be  carried  during  a  festival ;  with  what 
gestures  a  phylactery  was  to  be  put  on,  and  with  what 
scrupulous  order  it  was  to  be  laid  aside.  It  left  nothing  to 
the  impulse  of  a  living  piety.  It  was  ignorant  that  a  sanctified 
spirit  needed  no  such  prescriptions ;  that  the  "  due  order " 
could  only  be  learned  from  the  inner  oracle ;  and  that 
obedience  to  all  its  ramified  code,  apart  from  the  spirit  of 
genuine  faith  and  devotion,  was  only  acting  a  part  in  a  heart- 
less pantomime. 

And  these  traditions  proved  that  they  were  from  man,  not 
only  from  their  character,  but  from  their  verbiage  and  ap- 
pended sanctions.  If  the  Mishna  be,  as  we  believe  it  to  be, 
on  the  whole,  a  faithful  record  of  many  such  traditions,  then, 
that  they  were  of  men  is  a  fact  inscribed  on  their  very  front. 
The  recurring  formula  is — Eabbi  Eleazar  said  this,  but  Eabbi 
Gamaliel  said  that ;  this  was  the  opinion  of  Eabbi  Meir,  but 
that  of  Eabbi  Jehudah  ;  Hillel  was  of  this  mind,  but  Beth 
Shammai  of  that;  Eabbi  Tarphon  pronounced  in  this  way, 
but  Eabbi  Akivah  in  that ;  thus  thought  Ben  Azai  on  the 
one  hand,  but  thus  thought   Eabbi   Nathan   on   the   other ; 


134  COLOSSIANS   II.   8. 

such  was  the  decision  of  Jochanan  Ben  Saacchai,  bat  such  was 
the  opposite  conclusion  of  Matthias  Ben  Harash.  It  never 
rose  above  a  mere  human  dictum,  and  it  armed  its  jurists  with 
supreme  authority.  It  never  shook  the  mire  off  its  wings,  or 
soared  into  that  pure  and  lofty  empyrean  which  envelopes  the 
Divine  tribunal,  so  that  in  His  light  it  might  see  light.  What 
had  been  thus  conceived  in  the  dry  frivolity  of  one  age,  was 
handed  down  to  another,  and  the  mass  was  swiftly  multiplied 
in  its  long  descent.  The  Pharisee  selected  one  portion  and 
practised  it,  and  the  Essene  chose  another  and  made  it  his 
rule  of  life.  It  was  carried  in  one  or  other  of  these  shapes 
to  other  lands,  and  though  it  commingled  with  other  opinions 
of  similar  source  and  tendency,  it  never  belied  its  parentage 

as  the  TRADITIONS  OF  MEN. 

Kara  ra  aroi'^ela  tov  Koa/Mov — "  After  the  rudiments  of  the 
world."  The  reference  is  somewhat  obscure.  The  noun 
(Troi)(elov  is  employed  in  2  Pet.  iii.  10,  12,^  to  denote  the 
elements  of  physical  nature,  while  in  Heb.  v.  12  it  signifies 
the  simple  lessons  and  truths  of  Christianity,  and  is  opposed 
to  TeXeLOTT]^.  In  the  former  sense  it  frequently  occurs  in  the 
ancient  philosophy,  as  comprising  fire,  air,  earth,  and  water. 
It  is  amusing  to  observe  with  what  ingenuity  some  of  the 
Greek  Fathers  2  give  it  such  a  sense  in  the  passage  before  us, 
because,  forsooth,  all  the  elements  are  employed  in  the 
Jewish  service — water  for  purification  and  fire  for  sacrifice, 
earth  for  the  erection  of  altars,  and  the  revolution  of  the 
aerial  bodies  for  the  determination  of  the  sacred  festivals. 
The  noun  sometimes  signifies  an  elementary  sound,  or  a  letter, 
and  so  came  to  denote  what  is  rudimentary — what  is  suited  to 
the  tuition  of  infancy.  In  this  sense  we  understand  the 
apostle  to  use  it  in  Gal.  iv.  3,  9,  and  with  special  reference  to 
the  Jewish  ritual  and  worship.  The  churches  in  Galatia  had 
a  strong  and  wayward  tendency  to  revert  to  Judaism,  or  at 
least  to  incorporate  it,  or  a  portion  of  it,  into  the  new  religion. 
And  as  they  had  embraced  a  system  which  was  spiritual  and 
mature — which  was  not  embodied  in  types  and  ceremonies, 
but  in  pure,  simple,  universal  truths — the  apostle  wonders 
why,  with  their  higher  and  manly  privilege,  they  should  go 

1  Wisdom  vii.  17,  xix.  17.      Plato,  Timaeus,  48.     Yitruvius,  1,  4. 

2  Especially  Genadius,  quoted  by  CEcumenius,  in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   8.  135 

back  to  "  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements ; "  why,  when  they 
had  been  reading  the  book  of  Divine  instruction  with  its  com- 
plete and  lasting  lessons,  they  should  revert  and  descend  again 
to  the  mere  alphabet.  It  was  as  if  one  who  was  able  to  sweep 
the  heavens,  and  tell  the  sizes,  distances,  and  revolutions  of 
its  luminaries,  should  forswear  this  noble  exercise,  and  seat 
himself  in  an  infant  school,  and  find  the  highest  pleasure 
among  the  first  and  trite  axioms  and  diagrams  of  geometry. 

The  term  /cocr/xo9  marks  the  nature  of  these  elements.  It  is 
said  that  the  Jewish  economy  had  a^^iov  Koa-fitKov — "  a  worldly 
sanctuary,"  an  epithet  placed  in  contrast  with  ra  iirovpavLa, 
and  with  o-ktjvt)  ov  'yetpoTrolrjTo^;.  Our  opinion  is,  that  in  the 
clause  under  discussion,  the  apostle  refers  to  the  Jewish  wor- 
ship. Some  interpreters,  such  as  Meyer  and  Bohmer,  think 
this  exposition  too  restricted,  and  give  the  meaning  as  refer- 
ring both  to  the  ritual  of  the  Jewish  and  the  heathen  world, 
supposing  the  "  world  "  to  signify,  as  it  often  does,  the  non- 
Christian  portion  of  its  population.  Huther  also  gives  it  a 
similar  extension  of  meaning — Elemenie  des  ethischen  Lebens 
in  cler  Welt.  His  objections  to  the  common  interpretation 
are  fully  set  aside  by  De  Wette,  and  are  not  in  themselves  of 
any  weight.  But  the  phrase  before  us  has  a  definite  meaning 
affixed  to  it  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and  there  it 
denotes  simply  the  Jewish  system.  There  was  in  the  Galatian 
churches  no  attempt  to  heathenize,  but  only  to  Judaize ;  no 
endeavour  to  engraft  heathenism,  but  only  Judaism  on  the 
new  dispensation. 

That  the  Mosaic  economy  should  receive  the  name  of  ele- 
ments is  easily  understood,  but  why  should  such  a  genitive 
as  Koa/jbov  be  added  ?  It  belonged  to  the  world  in  a  special 
sense,  not  to  the  world  or  age  in  the  Jewish  sense  of  the  term, 
as  if,  as  Wahl  supposes,  the  meaning  were — adapted  to  the 
men  of  this  age.  It  was  of  the  world,  as  being  like  it,  evident 
to  the  senses,  visible,  and  material,  in  contrast  with  what  is 
spiritual  and  invisible.  In  this  sense,  the  whole  economy  was 
mundane,  for  it  was  sensuous ;  it  pictured  itself  to  the  eye  in 
the  stones  of  its  edifice,  the  robes  of  its  priests,  the  victims  of 
its  altars,  its  restrictions  on  diet,  its  frequent  washings,  the 
blood  of  its  initiatory  rite,  and  the  periods  of  its  sacred  festi- 
vals.    It  was  a  worldly  panorama,  and  it  portrayed  but  the 


136  COLOSSIANS  11.   8. 

elements  of  spiritual  truth.  It  set  before  its  votaries  the 
merest  first  principles,  which  were  indeed  often  expounded 
and  developed  by  its  prophets.  It  was  "  a  shadow  of  things 
to  come,"  not  even  a  full  and  vivid  picture.  Under  the  l7th 
verse  the  exposition  will  be  more  fully  given.  The  party  at 
Colosse,  who  attempted  to  seduce,  presented  some  elements  of 
the  Mosaic  ritual  and  worship  as  a  special  instrument  of 
spiritual  elevation  and  ascetic  discipline.  They  inculcated  a 
philosophy  which,  whatever  might  be  its  mysticism  or  its 
metaphysical  or  heathen  features,  was  in  essence  an  adaptation 
of  Judaism,  not  as  found  in  the  Mosaic  writings,  but  as  over- 
laid and  disfigured  by  a  mass  of  accumulated  traditions. 

Kal  ov  Kara  Xpiarov — "And  not  after  Christ."  That 
philosophy  was  not  according  to  Christ.  It  is  a  needless 
dilution  of  the  sense,  on  the  part  of  Erasmus  and  Eoell,  etc., 
to  render — "  not  according  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ."  It  was 
not  based  upon  Christ,  but  was  in  contrariety  to  His  person 
and  work.  It  depreciated  Him,  and  undervalued  His  media- 
tion. But  true  Christian  science  has  Him  for  its  centre,  and 
Him  for  its  object.  It  bows  to  His  authority,  and  ever  seeks 
to  exalt  Him.  Any  new  doctrine  may  be  safely  tested  by  the 
estimation  in  which  it  holds  Christ ;  for  all  that  is  false  and 
dangerous  in  speculation,  invariably  strives  to  lower  His  rank 
and  official  dignity,  and  therefore  is  neither  in  source,  spirit, 
substance,  nor  tendency,  according  to  Him.^  And  they  were 
to  be  on  their  guard  against  such  dangerous  deceptions,  which 
were  not  according  to  Christ.  Though  the  apostle  says — 
"  not  after  Christ " — it  must  not  be  inferred  that  the  errorist 
or  errorists  made  no  profession  of  Christianity,  or  were  openly 
hostile  to  it.  Had  this  been  the  case,  their  non-Christian 
character  would  have  been  boldly  and  distinctly  pointed  out 
by  the  apostle.  They  seem  to  have  been  disciples  in  name. 
Nor  did  they  come  like  mere  Judaizers  and  make  an  open 
assault,  or  insist  in  plain  terms  that  Christian  Gentiles  should 
be  circumcised  and  keep  the  law.  Then  they  would  have 
been  confronted  like  the  Judaizers  in  Galatia.      But  they  were 

^  "My  design  all  alongst  this  discourse,  butts  at  this  one  principle,  that 
speculations  in  religion  are  not  so  necessarj',  and  are  more  dangerous  tlian 
sincere  practice.  It  is  in  religion  as  in  heraldry,  the  simpler  the  bearing  be, 
it  is  so  much  the  purer  and  ancienter." — Six  George  Mackenzie's  Beligio  Stoici, 
p.  141,  Edinburgh,  1605. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   9.  137 

more  insidious  in  their  attack — boasted  the  possession  of  an 
inner  and  a  higher  knowledge,  and  preached  an  ideal  system 
of  specious  pretensions,  and  made  up  apparently  of  Judaism 
and  Gnosticism,  ^  —  or  Judaism  deeply  imbued  with  that 
mysticism  which  distinguished  the  Essenes,  and  that  kind 
of  theosophy  which  is  found  in  Philo.^ 

(Ver.  9.)  "On  ev  avru)  KaroiKei  irav  to  irXrjpcofia  Tr}<j  OeoTrj- 
T09  (TwiJbartKoi<i.  This  is  an  irresistible  argument.  Any 
system  not  after  Christ  must  be  human  and  wrong — "  for  in 
Him  dwells  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily."  The 
noun  irX-^pcofia  has  been  fully  explained  under  Eph.  i.  23. 
The  substantive  6e6Tr)<i  is  an  abstract  term,  like  Deity,  in  which 
God  is  viewed  in  essence  rather  than  personality.  The  word 
is  quite  different  in  meaning  from  detorr]^,  Eom.  i.  2  0 — a  term 
which  describes  quality  rather  than  being.  The  words  differ 
as  divinitas  and  deltas — divineness  and  Deity ;  or,  as  the 
Germans    express  it — Gottlichkeit  and   Gottheit.     The  Syriac 

uses    the    expressive    term  IZooililj.       The    fulness    of   the 

Godhead  is  a  fulness  filled  up  by  it — is  that  Godhead  in  all 
its  native  attributes  and  prerogatives.  And  it  is  the  whole 
fulness — not  one  cycle  of  Divine  perfections — a  single  cluster 
of  Divine  properties — not  a  partial  possession  of  isolated 
glories — nor  a  handful  of  meted  and  fractional  resources,  but 
the  entire  assemblage  of  all  in  existence  and  character  that 
constitutes  the  Divinity.  What  He  is,  and  as  He  is,  in  being, 
mode,  and  manifestation,  dwells  in  Christ.  See  under  i.  15. 
One  blushes  to  mention  the  Socinian  misinterpretation,  which 
so  reduces  this  sublime  statement  as  to  make  it  signify  merely, 
that  the  whole  will  of  God  was  manifested  by  Him — an 
attempt  which  Calovius  well  names  detorsio  mera.  Nor  are 
we  less  confounded  with  the  capricious  and  baseless  exposition 
of  Heinrichs,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Schleusner,  Gerhard,  and 
Junker,  that  ifKrjpwixa  can  mean  the  church  gathered  without 
distinction  from  all  nations,  and  that  the  apostle  intends  to 
say — that  the  whole  church  has  its  existence,  wellbeing,  or 

'  See  also  Matter,  Histoire  Critique  du  Gnosticisme,  etc.,  Paris,  1828  ;  Burton, 
An  Inquirij  into  the  Heresies  of  the  Apostolic  Age,'W  orks,  vol.  iii.  ;  the  Bampton 
Lecture  for  1829. 

-  Davidson,  Introduction,  vol.  ii.  p.  411. 


L 


138  COLOSSIANS  11.   9. 

instruction  in  Christ.  Nor  is  the  singularly  ungrammatical 
exegesis  of  some  early  expositors  less  wonderful — that  "  in 
Him  "  means  in  the  church,  and  that  in  this  church  dwells  the 
fulness  of  the  Godhead.  Bahr  ably  refutes  the  view  of 
Noesselt,  which,  though  a  little  more  ingenious  than  the 
Socinian  hypothesis,  does  not  essentially  differ  from  it  in 
result.  The  sense  naturally  suggested  by  the  terms  is  the 
correct  one.  Nor  are  we  to  search  for  any  recondite  meaning, 
as  if  irXtjpcofia  must  be  taken  in  a  Gnostic  sense  ;  or  as  if  in  the 
verb  KaroLKcl  there  were  a  necessary  allusion  to  the  so-named 
Shechinah — in  which  dwelt  the  Divinity.  Whatever  be  the 
polemical  reference,  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the  verb  cannot 
be  set  aside,  as  denoting  actual  and  prolonged  habitation. 

The  mode  of  this  mysterious  inhabitation  is  declared  to  be 
a-Q}fjLaTLKa)<; — "  in  a  bodily  form,"  for  such  is  the  first  and  plain 
meaning  of  the  adverb.  Other  and  vaguer  ideas  have  been 
attached  to  it.  It  is  a  necessary  result  of  the  interpretation 
which  takes  'rfkrjpwixa  to  signify  the  church,  that  it  must 
regard  aeofiaTiKco'i  as  intense  and  hyperbolical,  and  therefore 
we  have  the  dilution  of  a  quasi.  The  church  dwells  in  Christ, 
as  if  in  a  bodily  form — as  if  it  formed  His  body.     But — 

1.  The  least  plausible  hypothesis  is  that  of  Capellus  and 
Heumann,  who  look  upon  the  term  as  equivalent  to  oXct)?,  and 
as  signifying  "altogether."  Such  a  translation  makes  the 
clause  tautological,  for  Trdv  is  already  employed,  and  besides 
it  cannot  be  borne  out  by  any  legitimate  examples.  Why 
resort  to  a  rare  and  technical  use  of  the  word,  as  peculiar  as 
in  our  familiar  phrase,  a  tody  of  divinity,  meaning  a  full  course 
of  theological  instruction  ? 

2.  Others,  again,  under  the  influence  of  the  previous  con- 
trast between  the  law  and  the  gospel,  imagine  an  antithesis  in 
the  word,  as  if  it  stood  in  antagonism  to  rfTrt/cw?.  There  was 
a  symbolical  residence  in  the  temple,  but  an  actual  one  in 
Christ  Jesus.  The  polemical  Augustine  first  broached  the 
idea.  Non  ideo  corporalitcr  quia  corporcus  est  Deus,  sed  aut 
verbo  translato  usus  est.,  tanquam  in  tcmplo  manufacto  non 
corjooraliter  scd  timhratiliter  hahitavcrit,  id  est,  praefigurantihus 
signis,  nam  illas  omnes  olservationcs  umhras  fiduromm  vocat, 
etiam  ipso  translato  vocahulo,  ....  aut  certe  corporaliter 
dictum  est,  quia  et  in  Christi  corpore,  quod  assumpsit  ex  virgine, 


'  COLOSSIANS   II.   9.  139 

tanquam  in  tcmplo  liabitat  Dens}  Augustine  has  been 
followed  by  Vatablus,  a-Lapide,  Grotius,  Glassius,  Hackspann, 
Vitringa,  Eoell,  Crellius,  Schoettgen,  Noesselt,  Michaelis, 
Bengel,  and  Bretschneider.  But  there  is  no  such  implied 
contrast  in  this  verse  as  between  cra5//.a  and  aKid  in  verse  17, 
and  there  is  therefore  no  just  ground  of  departure  from  the 
common  and  absolute  signification.  Christ  is  held  up  as  the 
grand  centre  and  source  of  true  philosophy,  and  the  reason  is 
that  Godhead  was  incarnate  in  Him,  and  that  therefore  His 
claims  are  paramount,  both  in  person  and  function.  He  is 
not  only  the  Wonder  of  wonders  in  Himself,  but  creation  and 
redemption — the  two  prime  books  of  study — trace  themselves 
to  Him  as  their  one  author. 

3.  A  large  number  of  critics  give  to  croo/xaTiKm  the  meaning 
of  essentialitcr,  that  is,  the  Godhead  dwells  in  Christ  really, 
or  in  substance  —  ouo-itySw?.  Names  of  high  authority  are 
leagued  in  favour  of  this  interpretation.  Theophylact  and 
Q^cumenius,  and  Isidore  the  Pelusiot,  among  the  "Fathers ; 
Calvin,  Beza,  and  Melancthon,  among  the  reformers ;  with 
Steiger,  Huther,  Olshausen,  and  Usteri,^  among  the  more 
recent  expositors.  The  ground  of  this  interpretation  lies 
again  in  a  supposed  polemical  contrast,  which  certainly  does 
not  appear  in  the  context.  Melancthon  says — est  oppositum 
inJiabitationi  separahili  lit  habitat  Deus  in  Sanctis,  that  is,  the 
union  of  Divinity  with  Christ  is  a  personal  union — not  like 
the  influential  indwelling  of  God  in  a  believing  heart. 
Huther  supposes  such  a  contrast  as  this,  that  the  Deity  did 
not  dwell  in  Christ  as  it  dwelt  in  the  old  prophets  who 
preceded  Him.  Olshausen  again  gives  prominence  to  a 
Gnostic  antagonism,  as  if  the  apostle  meant  to  distinguish 
between  a  merely  temporary  influence  of  a  higher  spirit,  and 
a  permanent  union  of  the  Godhead — an  idea  as  naturally 
brought  out  by  giving  to  the  adverb  its  usual  signification. 
To  fall  back  for  defence  upon  any  uses  of  the  Hebrew  word 
QVJ?,  is  all  but  to  surrender  the  cause.  The  Hebrew  noun 
does  signify  ipjse,  but  never  in  connection  with  persons — de 
rebus  tantummodo,  as  Gesenius,  sub  voce,  remarks.  The  noun 
o-ftj/ia  does  signify  person  in  the  New  Testament,  though  Biihr 

1  Ep.  187,  vol.  ii.  r-  1036,  ed.  Ben.,  Paris,  1836. 
^  Lehrb.  p.  234.     See  also  Hammond,  in  loc. 


1-10  COLOSSIANS   II.   9. 

denies  it.  Daveuant  says — "  the  Hebrew  put  souls  for 
persons,  and  the  Greek  put  bodies  ; "  but  the  instances  of  the 
latter  usage  adduced  by  him  M'ill  not  bear  him  out ;  for  in 
them  tliere  is  usually  distinct  reference  to  the  corporeal  part 
of  the  person.  In  those  instances  in  the  New  Testament  in 
which  awfjua  appears  to  signify  person,  it  is  not  only  followed 
with  a  genitive  of  person,  but  there  is  always  some  special 
reason  why  the  term  should  be  so  employed — some  implied 
contrast,  some  contextual  point,  or  some  tacit  reference  to  the 
body  or  external  person.  Thus,  among  the  classics,  it  is 
appropriately  used  of  soldiers  and  slaves,  whose  bodies  are  in 
special  request.  As  in  the  New  Testament  it  is  used  in 
connection  with  the  eye.  Matt,  vi,  22;  with  marriage — a 
union  characterized  as  "one  flesh,"  Eph.  v.  28;  with  the 
idea  of  death,  Phil.  i.  20;  and  the  notion  of  a  living 
sacrifice,  in  which  the  dead  bodies  of  victims  were  offered, 
Eom.  xii.  1.  Indeed,  in  Homeric  usage  crco/za  always  denotes 
a  corpse.  So  that,  absolutely,  the  noun  does  not  signify 
person ;  and  such  a  sense  is  never  given  to  the  cognate 
adjective  or  adverb.  This  exegesis  seems  to  have  arisen  from 
an  attempt  to  define  by  it  the  nature  of  that  union  which 
subsisted  between  Divinity  and  humanity  in  the  person  of 
Christ. 

4.  The  last  and  best  interpretation  is  that  which  takes 
ao)/MaTLKo)'i  in  its  literal  and  only  meaning — in  a  bodily  shape, 
and  not  as  Theodoret  paraphrases — to?  iv  aoofiart,.  Such  is 
also  the  view  of  Calovius,  Estius,  Storr,  De  Wette,  Bahr, 
Bohmer,  and  Meyer.  Yet  Steiger  calls  it — abgeschmacht — 
insipid,  and  Olshausen  regards  it  as  tautological,  because  the 
words  "  in  Him  "  occur  in  the  same  clause.  But  the  words 
"  in  Him  "  are  the  general  reference,  and  the  adverb  specifies 
the  mode  in  which  He  possessed  the  Divine  fulness.  The 
fulness  of  the  Godhead  was  embodied  in  Him,  or  dwelt  in 
Him — in  no  invisible  shape,  and  by  no  unappreciable  contact. 
It  assumed  a  bodily  form.  It  abode  in  Him  as  a  man.  It 
made  its  residence  the  humanity  of  Jesus.  Divinity  was 
incarnated  in  Christ.  It  shrank  not  from  taking  upon  it  our 
nature,  and  realizing  the  prophetic  title — "  Immanuel,  God 
with  us."  The  same  idea  is  contained  in  John  i.  14 — "the 
Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us."     The  Logos,  yet 


COLOSSIANS   II.   9.  141 

unfleshed,  was  God,  and  was  with  God,  Divine  and  yet  distinct 
from  the  Fatlier;  but  the  fulness  of  Godhead  was  only  spiritually 
within  Him,  Now,  it  has  made  its  abode  in  his  humanity 
without  consuming  it  or  deifying  it,  or  changing  any  of  its 
essential  properties.  It  hungered  and  it  ate,  it  thirsted  and 
it  drank,  it  grieved  and  it  wept,  it  watched  and  prayed,  it 
wearied  itself  and  it  lay  down,  it  was  exhausted  and  it  slept, 
it  bled  and  it  died.  That  body  so  filled  and  honoured  was  no 
phantom,  as  many  even  in  the  apostolic  age  imagined,  for  it 
had  "  flesh  and  bones,"  and,  after  its  resurrection,  it  bore  the 
scar  of  its  recent  wounds.  It  was  therefore  no  vehicle  which 
Divinity  assumed  by  any  singular  process,  but  in  the  same 
way  as  the  children  become  "  partakers  of  flesh  and  blood,"  so 
did  Christ  partake  of  them.  He  was  born  as  children  are 
born,  and  the  infant  was  wrapt  "  in  swaddling  bands."  He 
was  nursed  as  children  are  nursed,  for  "  butter  and  honey 
should  he  eat."  His  young  soul  grew  in  wisdom  as  His 
physical  frame  grew  in  stature.  It  was  easily  seen  that 
Godhead  dwelt  in  that  humanity,  for  glimpses  of  its  glory 
flashed  again  and  again  through  its  earthly  covering.  The 
radiance  was  vailed,  but  never  entirely  eclipsed.  His  disciples 
"  beheld  His  glory,  the  glory  indeed  of  the  only  begotten  of 
the  Father."  Peter  felt  impressed  by  it,  and  urged  his  own 
sinfulness  as  the  reason  why  intercourse  should  be  suspended ; 
while  Thomas,  under  the  impulse  of  wonder  and  faith,  cried 
out — "  My  Lord,  and  my  God."  Jesus  prayed  for  others, 
and  bade  others  pray  on  their  own  behalf;  but  He  never 
solicited  their  prayers  for  Himself.  When  suppliants  bowed 
the  knee  to  Him,  He  never  said — "  See  thou  do  it  not ; " 
never  thought  it  to  be  idolatry  on  their  part  to  offer  Him 
homage,  or  felt  it  to  be  "  robbery  "  on  His  part  to  accept  it. 
His  second  coming  is  "  the  glorious  appearing  of  the  great 
God."  At  His  baptism  and  transfiguration,  the  voice  from  the 
excellent  glory  hailed  Him  as  God's  beloved  Son.  He  detected 
the  inmost  thoughts  and  enmities  of  the  multitude,  for  he 
possessed  a  species  of  intuition  which  lies  far  above  humanity. 
"  He  knew  what  was  in  man."  "  The  wind  blovveth  where  it 
listeth,"  but  it  listened  to  Him ;  and  He  who  trod  upon  the 
waves  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  made  them  a  23ath  which  God 
marks  as  His  own.     He  wrought  miracles  at  discretion,  and 


142  COLOSSIANS   II.   9. 

wielded  at  pleasure  the  prerogative  of  forgiving  sins.  He 
assumed  a  co-ordinate  power  with  the  Father,  and  claimed 
with  Him  an  equal  right  of  dispensing  with  those  obligations 
of  the  sabbatic  law,  which  had  been  enacted  for  men  by 
Divine  authority.  The  most  ordinary  eye  discovered  something 
extraordinary  about  Him.  The  crowd  that  heard  Him  said — 
"  He  speaketh  as  one  having  authority ; "  for  He  spoke  in  the 
tones  of  conscious  Divinity.  "  We  have  seen  strange  things 
to-day,"  shouted  the  spectators ;  and  no  wonder,  those  strange 
things  were  the  characteristic  acts  of  the  strangest  of  Beings 
— the  only  Being  who  is  God-man.  A  perfection  not  of  earth 
belonged  to  His  nature ;  for  "  the  prince  of  this  world,"  who 
finds  so  much  to  work  upon  in  common  humanity,  could  find 
nothing  in  Him ;  and  the  demons,  whose  appetite  for  evil  leads 
them  ever  to  detect  it  and  vaunt  over  it,  acknowledged  Him 
to  be  "  the  Holy  One  of  God."  Eeferring  to  His  death  as  the 
destruction  of  a  temple,  He  asserted  Himself  able  in  three 
days  to  raise  it  again — a  task  that  could  be  achieved  only  by 
the  Divine  Creator  and  Life-giver.  While  He  walked  on 
earth.  He  spoke  of  Himself  as  one  "  who  is  in  heaven."  Born 
centuries  after  Abraham,  He  yet  pre-existed  the  great  father 
of  His  nation.  Lowly  and  humble — the  son  of  Mary,  He 
was  the  Image  of  the  invisible  God ;  and  so  close  was  His 
likeness  to  Him  who  sent  Him,  that  He  said — "  He  who  hath 
seen  me,  hath  seen  ■  the  Father."  And  the  apostle  uses  the 
present  tense — the  Divine  fulness  still  "  dwells  "  in  Him.  It 
was  no  temporary  union,  but  an  abiding  possession.  His 
glorious  body  has  in  it  the  same  fulness  of  the  Godhead,  as 
had  the  body  of  His  humiliation.  The  mode  of  inhabitation 
the  apostle  does  not  specify.  What  may  be  inferred  is,  that 
the  union  is  a  personal  union  of  His  natures — not  a  simjDle 
concord  of  will,  so  that  there  are  two  persons ;  nor  such  an 
absorption  of  the  one  element  into  the  other,  that  there  is  only 
one  nature.  We  know  not  whether  Docetic  views  prevailed 
at  that  early  period  in  the  Colossian  church,  but  it  is  certain 
that  Christ  was  undervalued  and  His  person  misunderstood, 
in  the  false  philosophy.  Therefore  the  apostle  affirms,  in  this 
brief  but  weighty  clause,  the  great  mystery  of  His  mediatorial 
nature — the  personal  union  in  Him  of  Divinity  and  manhood. 
Any    philosophy   not    "  after    Christ,"   must   be    earthly   and 


COLOSSIA^S  II.  10.  143 

delusive.  It  has  missed  the  central  truth — is  amused  with 
the  stars,  but  forgetful  of  the  sun.  "  For  in  Him  dwells  all 
the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily ; "  and,  with  singular 
congruity,  the  apostle  adds — 

(Ver.  10.)  K.ai  irrre  iv  avTw  TreTrXrjpcofMevoc — "And  ye  are 
made  full  in  Him."  The  clause  is  still  in  continuation  of  the 
warning,  and  crowns  the  argument.  It  is  in  entire  opposition 
to  the  tcsus  loquencU  of  the  New  Testament,  on  the  part  of 
Grotius,  Bos,  and  Heumann,  to  make  eVre  an  imperative,  for 
it  emphasizes  their  present  state.  The  phrase  iv  avTu>  has 
a  meaning  found  with  peculiar  frequency — in  Him — in  union 
with  Him ;  and  it  is  wrong  in  Erasmus  to  render  it — "  by,  or 
by  means  of  Him."  The  participle  TreirXrjpco/xevoi  is  evidently 
used  with  a  reference  to  the  irXr^pcofia  of  the  preceding  verse 
— ^ye  are  filled  out  of  Christ's  fulness,  or  are  full  in  His  fulness. 

Opinions  on  the  sense  or  reference  of  the  participle  are 
modified  by  the  view  entertained  of  the  meaning  of  the  pre- 
ceding verse.  Schoettgen  narrows  the  meaning  by  far  too 
much,  and  gives  but  one  aspect  of  the  sense,  which  he  renders 
— per  istum  estis  perfecte  cclocti ;  for  though  the  apostle  has 
been  referring  to  instruction,  yet  far  more  is  here  implied. 
The  exegesis  of  Grotius  is  rather  an  inference — illo  contenti 
estate ;  for  if  they  were  complete  in  Jesus,  it  followed  that 
they  needed  no  supplemental  endowments  from  any  other 
quarter.  The  meaning  of  the  clause  is  much  the  same  as  that 
found  in  Eph.  iii.  19,  to  the  exposition  of  which  the  reader 
may  turn.  Meyer  says  that  nothing  is  to  be  supplied  after 
•jreirXrjp.,  neither  tt}?  6e6Tr]To<i  with  Theophylact,  nor  rov 
'7r\r]p(o/xaro<;  rfji;  Oeortjro'i  with  De  Wette.  But  the  question 
recurs,  of  what  elements  is  this  fulness  composed  ?  or,  if  the 
participle  be  rendered  "  perfect " — "  ye  are  perfect  in  Him," 
of  what  elements  is  this  perfection  made  up  ?  The  clause 
has  a  very  close  connection  with  the  foregoing  verse,  and  with 
the  phrase — "  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead,"  It  is  because 
that  fulness  dwells  in  Christ  that  they  are  filled  up  in  Him. 
Being  in  Him,  they  are  brought  into  contact  with  what  is  in 
Him  ;  and  that  fulness  of  God  contains  a  life  whose  pulsations 
create  a  responsive  throbbing  within  them.  There  is  in  Christ 
complete  provision,  and  what  is  so  furnished  is  pledged  to  be 
conferred.     There  needs,  therefore,  be  no  want,  and  no  casting 


144  COLOSSIANS   II.   10. 

about  for  any  other  source  of  supply.  Believers  have  actual 
and  present  completeness  of  provided  blessing,  and  there  is 
the  guaranteed  completeness  of  prospective  gifts.  "Ye  are 
complete  in  Him,"  for  the  scriptural  view  of  Christ's  person 
meets  the  deepest  necessities  of  our  spiritual  nature.  "  What 
does  it  mean  ? "  asks  Chrysostom,  "  that  you  have  nothing 
less  than  Him  " — tI  ovv  iartv  ;  otl  ovSh  eXarrou  e^ere  avrov. 
The  apostle  adds  another  and  striking  clause — 

"O9  ianv  rj  Kecf^aXr/  Tracr^?  '^PX'}?  '^'^^  e^ovcria<i — "  Who  is 
the  head  of  all  principality  and  power."  On  the  authority  of 
B,  D,  E,  F,  G,  Lachmann  reads  0,  but  09  is  retained  on  the 
authority  of  A,  C,  J,  K,  and  that  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  Lach- 
mann's  choice  is  vindicated  by  Steiger  and  Bohmer,  though  it 
appears  to  have  sprung  from  a  grammatical  fondness  for 
7r\T]pco/j,a  as  the  principal  preceding  noun.  If  this  reading  be 
adopted,  the  foregoing  clause  must  be  placed  in  a  parenthesis. 
"  In  Him,  and  that  bodily,  dwells  all  tlie  Godhead's  fulness 
.  .  .  which  is  the  Head  of  all  principalities  and  powers." 
The  authorities  are  nearly  balanced,  but  the  reading  09  is  most 
in  analogy  with  the  apostle's  style  of  thought  and  expression. 
Besides,  with  the  reading  o,  the  words  eV  o5  in  verse  11  must 
refer  also  to  irX-^pcofjia,  and  no  tolerable  sense  could  be  extracted 
from  such  a  connection.  The  terms  apxv  and  i^ovcria  are 
abstract  ones,  having  reference  to  celestial  dignities,  and  to 
such  as  were  unfallen.  The  relative,  as  in  i.  18,  may  be 
rendered — "  as  being  He  who  is  ; "  or,  perhaps,  "  inasmuch  as 
He  is."  Jelf,  §  836,  3.  The  Head  of  principalities  and 
powers.  Eph.  i.  21.  There  is  no  exception;  the  entire 
hierarchy,  even  its  mightiest  and  noblest  chieftains  and 
dignities,  own  submission  to  Christ,  and  form  a  portion  of  His 
spiritual  dominions,  i.  16.  There  was  some  special  reason 
why  he  intimates  Christ's  headship  not  generally  over  the 
church  or  the  universe,  but  specially  over  the  angelic  hosts. 
If  we  can  rely  on  accounts  of  the  teaching  ascribed  to  Simon 
Magus,  we  might  find  in  them  an  illustration  of  the  apostle's 
statement.  Epiphanius  relates,  that  Simon  Magus  invented 
names  of  principalities  and  powers,  and  insisted  that  the 
learning  of  such  names  was  essential  to  salvation.  Similar 
bizarrerie  is  ascribed  to  Cerinthus.  See  Whitby,  in  loc. 
Whatever  be  its  source,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  apostle 


COLOSSIANS  II.   11.  145 

alludes  to  some  prevalent  error — which  interposed  angels,  in 
some  sense,  as  mediators — and  so  far  derogated  from  the 
personal  glory  and  saving  merit  of  Christ.  That  theosophy 
which  was  invading  them  seems  to  have  dealt  largely 
in  idle  and  delusive  speculation  on  the  rank  and  office  of 
angels — assigning  to  them  provinces  of  operation  which  belong 
to  the  Son  of  God — looking  to  them  as  guardians  or  saviours, 
and  forgetting  that  they  are  but  His  servants,  executing  His 
commission  and  doing  Him  homage.  Why  rely  upon  the 
courtiers,  when  access  may  be  had  at  once  to  the  King  ? 
why  be  taken  up  with  our  fellow-servants,  who  are  only 
stewards  of  limited  resources,  when  the  Master  has  not  only 
the  fulness  of  Divinity,  but  has  it  in  a  human  shape — has  tlie 
heart  of  a  brother  to  love  you,  and  the  arm  of  a  God  to 
protect  and  bless  you  ?  Alas  !  that  saints  so  called  have 
the  usurped  place  of  principalities  and  powers  in  the  Cliurch 
of  Eome. 

If  they  were  complete  in  Christ,  they  had  no  need  to  go 
beyond  Christ,  and  to  resort  to  any  ceremonies  imposed  upon 
them  by  the  Judaizers.  They  had  everything  which  it  was 
alleged  they  wanted,  and  everything  already  in  Christ.  The 
heretical  preceptors  had  enjoined  upon  them  the  rite  of  cir- 
cumcision, but  the  apostle  shows  that  it  would  be  really  a 
superfluous  ceremony,  since  they  had  already  experienced  a 
nobler  circumcision  than  that  of  the  knife — for  it  was  executed 
by  no  material  hand.  They  were,  in  short,  the  "  true  circum- 
cision " — for  the  apostle  proceeds — 

(Ver.  11.)  ''Ev  cS  Kal  ire  pier /jbrjdrjre  Treptrofxfj  a^etpo7rot»7Tft> 
— "  In  whom,  too,  ye  were  circumcised  with  a  circumcision 
not  made  with  hands."  There  is  no  need  to  suppose,  with 
Olshausen,  that  in  these  words  there  is  expressed  an  ideal 
unity  of  all  His  people  in  Christ  in  His  death  and  resurrec- 
tion. Though  such  an  idea  may  be  found  in  other  parts  of 
Scripture,  it  cannot  be  found  here — save  in  the  exercise  of  a 
refined  ingenuity,  For,  first,  the  formula  ev  tp  has  its  usual 
significance — union  with  Him — union  created  by  the  Spirit, 
and  effected  by  faith ;  and,  secondly,  the  blessing  described 
in  the  verse  had  been  already  enjoyed,  for  they  were  and  had 
been  believers  in  Him  in  whom  they  are  complete.  Through 
their  living  union  with  Christ,  they  had  enjoyed  the  privilege. 


146  COLOSSIANS   IL   11. 

and  were  enjoying  the  results   of   a    spiritual    circumcision. 
Why  then  should  they  suffer  the  incision  of  a  sharp  flint  or 
a  glittering  knife — in  itself,  at  best,  but  a  sign — when  they 
had  already  experienced  the  blessing  of  a  circumcision  that 
drew  no  blood,  and  gave  no  pain  — a  circumcision  "  not  made 
with  hands "  ?     The  meaning  of  the  adjective  d'^eipo7roL7]TO'i 
is  very  apparent.     Mark  xiv,  58,  and  2  Cor.  v.  1.     The  cir- 
cumcision made  without    hands  is  plainly  opposed    to    that 
which    is    made   with    hands — ^€cpo7roLr]To<i.      [Eph.   il   11.] 
)  This  idea  of  a  spiritual  circumcision  was  no  novel  one,  for  it 
occurs    in    the    Old    Testament    in   different  forms.'^     When 
Israel  was  yet  in  the  wilderness,  the  Divine  command  was 
given — "  Circumcise  the  foreskin  of  your  heart,"  and  at  the 
same  period  the  Divine  promise  was  made — "  And  the  Lord 
thy  God  will  circumcise    thine   heart  and  the  heart  of  thy 
seed,  to  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thine  heart  and  with 
all  thy  soul,  that  thou  mayest  live."     The  prophet  Jeremiah 
repeats  the  injunction — "  Circumcise  yourselves  to  the  Lord, 
and  take  away  the  foreskins  of  your  heart,  ye  men  of  Judah 
and  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem."     He  also  describes  a  part  of 
the  population  thus — "  Behold,  their  ear  is  uncircumcised  ; " 
nay,  he  declares  that  the  whole  house  of  Israel  are  "  uncir- 
cumcised in  the  heart."     Ezekiel  speaks  of  men  "  uncircumcised 
in  heart  and  uncircumcised  in  flesh."      Stephen,  in  his  address, 
used  this  ancient  phraseology,  and  calls  his  audience  "  uncir- 
cumcised in  hearts  and  ears."  ^     The  Apostle  Paul  in  other 
places    has    similar    ideas    and    language.^       Schoettgen    lias 
adduced  like  quotations  from  the  Eabbis,  and  Philo,  as  is  his 
wont,  spiritualizes  the  ordinance  * — as  rjBovcov  eKTO/xijv ;  iraOaiv 
iravToav  ^KTOfirjv.     So  that  the  kind  of  circumcision  referred 
to  was  easily  understood,  and  could  not  be    misinterpreted. 
It  was  besides  an  invaluable  blessing,  for  it  lay — 

'Ey  rfi  aiTCKhvaeL  ^  rov  cr(o/xaTo<i  t^?  (xapKO'i — "  In  the 
putting  off  of  the  body  of  the  flesh."  The  noun  aireKhva-fi 
occurs  only  here — the  verb  is  found  in  the  15th  verse.  The 
MSS.,  A,  B,  C,  D^,  E\  F,  G,  etc.,  omit  the  words  Ta>v  d/jLapricov, 
found  in  the  Eeceived  Text.     Elesh  is  corrupted  humanity, 

1  Deut.  X.  16,  XXX.  6  ;  Jer.  iv.  4,  vi.  10,  ix.  26  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  7. 

«  Acts  vii.  51.  *  Rom.  ii.  29. 

*  De  Migrat,  Abr.  Oper.  vol.  iii.  p.  454.     ''  WiK'iCirti  erroueously  in  Tischendorf. 


COLOSSIANS  II.  11.  147 

Eom.  vii.  23;  Gal.  v.  16.  [Eph.  ii.  3.]  We  cannot  take 
(Twfia  in  any  other  than  its  usual  signification,  though  Calvin, 
Grotius,  Zanchius,  Crocius,  Bahr,  and  Steiger,  take  it  in  the 
sense  of  totality  or  mass.  See  under  verse  9.  But  the 
spirit  of  this  exegesis  is  plainly  implied.  It  is  in  harmony 
with  the  idea  of  circumcision,  that  the  peculiar  phrase — "  body 
of  the  flesh,"  is  used ;  and  the  contrast  seems  to  be  this,  that 
in  the  manual  circumcision  only  a  portion  of  one  member  of 
the  material  body  was  cut  off,  but  in  the  spiritual  circumcision, 
the  whole  flesh  which  is  the  seat  and  habitation  of  sin  is  cast 
away  and  laid  aside.  The  entire  slough  which  encircles  the 
spirit  and  enslaves  it  is  rolled  off,  newness  of  life  is  felt,  and 
the  believer  walks  no  longer  after  the  flesh,  is  no  longer 
carnal,  or  does  its  deeds.  As  Meyer  well  says,  "  He  who  is  so 
circumcised  is  no  more  eV  Ty  capKi,  as  heretofore,  when 
concupiscence  ivrjpyecTO  iv  toU  fieXeaiv ;  he  is  no  longer 
adpKLvo<i,  ire'jrpafiei/o'i  vtto  rrjv  d/juapriav,  and  walks  no  longer 
Kara  adpica,  but  in  newness  of  spirit."  It  is  plain  that  the 
spiritual  circumcision  is  not  different  from  regeneration,  or  the 
putting  off  the  old  man  and  putting  on  the  new  man.  The 
apostle  adds  a  further  explanation  of  this  marvellous  change, 
when  he  says — 

^Ev  rfj  TrepiTo/xfj  tov  Xptcrrov — "  In  the  circumcision  of 
Christ."  Some  have  regarded  the  genitive  as  that  of  agent, 
as  if  the  apostle  meant  —  the  circumcision  which  Christ 
performs.  Such  is  the  virtual  view  of  Theophylact,  when 
he  says  of  Christ — o\ov  dvdpwirov  TrepLTe/jLveL.  Schoettgen, 
again,  regards  the  phrase  as  an  allusion  to  the  personal 
circumcision  of  Jesus,  as  if  that  sufficed  for  all  His  people. 
Neither  view  is  in  harmony  with  the  language  and  context. 
The  circumcision  of  Christ  is  that  circumcision  which  belongs 
to  Him,  in  contradistinction  to  that  which  belonged  to  Moses 
or  to  the  law.  The  spiritual  circumcision  is  a  blessing  which 
specially  belongs  to  Christ — is  of  His  providing,  and  is  to  be 
enjoyed  only  in  fellowship  with  Him.  That  of  Moses  was 
made  with  hands,  and  was  a  seal  of  the  Abrahamic  or 
national  covenant — that  of  Christ  is  no  chirurgical  process, 
but  is  spiritual  and  effectual  in  its  nature.  The  mark  in  the 
foreskin  was  the  token  of  being  a  Jew,  but  the  off-thrown 
body  of  the  flesh  was  the  index   of  one's  being  a  Christian. 

N 


148  COLOSSIANS  II.  12. 

Though  the  scar  of  circumcision  might  attest  a  nationality,  it 
was  no  certificate  of  personal  character — "  all  are  not  Israel 
who  are  of  Israel ;"  but,  wherever  "  the  flesh "  was  parted 
with,  there  was  the  guarantee  of  individual  purity  and 
progress.  The  charter  of  Canaan  was  limited  to  the  manual 
circumcision,  but  the  "  true  circumcision  "  are  thereby  infefted 
in  a  heavenly  inheritance.  The  Hebrew  statute  was  for  the 
man-child  eight  days  old,  but  the  Christian  privilege  has  no 
distinction  of  age,  or  sex,  or  nation ;  for  it  belongs  to  every 
one  in  Christ.  And  it  was,  and  is,  a  chief  blessing — the 
death  of  sinful  principle  and  the  infusion  of  a  higher  life — the 
possession  of  a  new  nature,  which  has  Christ  for  its  source, 
ay,  and  Christ  for  its  pattern.  Thus  the  flesh  is  thrown  off, 
and  the  spirit  assumes  the  predominance,  with  its  quickened 
susceptibilities,  its  healthful  activities,  and  its  intense  aspira- 
tions— thinking,  feeling,  and  acting,  in  harmony  with  its  sphere 
and  destiny.  And  if  such  a  collection  of  spiritual  blessings 
has  been  received,  why  be  subjected  to  a  legal  ceremony 
which  could  be  at  best  but  a  faint  type  of  them  ?  Surely  if 
they  had  received  the  thing  signified,  they  need  not  now 
degrade  themselves  by  submitting  to  a  sign,  which  was  in 
itself  only  a  painful  and  bloody  symbol  of  the  Hebrew  nation- 
ality and  covenant.     For  a  new  sign  has  been  appointed — 

(Ver.  12.)  ^vvTa(f)6VTe<i  avTO)  iv  rat  iSairTia/jbarL — "Having 
been  buried  with  Him  in  baptism."  The  state  described  in 
this  past  participle  precedes  or  is  coincident  with  the  action 
of  the  verb  TrepieTfi-qdijre.  "  Having  been  buried,  they  were 
circumcised."  The  burial  and  the  circumcision  only  differ  in 
form  and  circumstance.  The  circumcision  was  seen  to  be 
effected  when  the  burial  was  completed.  Burial  implies  a 
previous  death ;  and  what  is  that  death,  but  the  off- casting  of 
the  body  of  the  flesh  ?  The  reality  of  death  is  evinced  by 
burial,  for  this  body  of  sin  which  once  lived  with  us  is  slain 
and  sepulchred.  This  point  of  burial  they  had  reached — when 
they  were  baptized — for  then  they  personally  professed  a  faith 
which  implied  the  death  of  sin  within  them.  Why  then  does 
the  apostle  use  the  figure  of  a  burial  ?  for  the  burial  is  as 
really  without  hands  as  is  the  circumcision — since  no  knife 
was  employed  at  the  one,  and  no  bier  or  shroud  was  deposited 
in  the  other.     The  apostle  employs  the  figure,  first,  to  show 


COLOSSIANS   II.   12.  149 

the  reality  of  the  death  which  the  old  man  had  undergone ; 
and,  secondly,  to  connect  the  process  by  harmony  of  symbol 
or  parallel  with  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  which  was  at  once 
a  sign  and  pledge  of  the  resuscitation.  Those  two  ideas,  the 
excision  of  the  body  of  the  flesh,  which  is  equivalent  to  its 
death,  and  the  raising  of  Christ  as  the  typal  life  and  the  Life- 
giver,  seem  to  have  suggested  to  the  apostle  the  notion  of  an 
intervening  process — a  burial  with  Christ.  AVhen  you  were 
baptized,  you  were  so  placed  as  if  you  had  been  laid  with 
Christ  in  His  tomb — "  all  old  things  passed  away  ;"  you  were 
in  respect  to  the  old  man  what  the  dead  Clirist  was  in  respect 
to  His  first  physical  life — dead  to  it  and  done  with  it.  Only, 
He  died  for  sin,  and  you  die  to  it ;  He  died  for  it  in  His  body, 
while  you  die  to  it  in  your  souls.  But  this  burial  is  not  a  final 
state,  it  is  simply  one  of  transition — "  In  whom  also  ye  are 
raised  by  faith." 

The  reference  is  plainly  to  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  and 
to  its  spiritual  meaning.  We  scarcely  suppose  that  there  is 
any  reference  to  the  mode  of  it ;  for  whatever  may  be  other- 
wise said  in  favour  of  immersion,  it  is  plain  that  here  the 
burial  is  wholly  ideal — not  a  scenic  and  visible  descent  into 
an  earthy  or  a  watery  tomb,  but  of  such  a  nature  entirely  as 
the  circumcision  with  which  it  is  identified,  and  the  resurrec- 
tion which  invariably  succeeds  it.  Thus,  in  the  apostolic 
conception,  men  may  be  buried  in  baptism  without  being 
suhmerged  in  water,  in  the  same  way  as  they  may  be  circum- 
cised without  the  spilling  of  blood.  The  entire  statement  is 
spiritual  in  its  nature — the  death,  the  burial,  and  the  resurrec- 
tion ;  the  circumcision,  and  the  off-putting  of  the  body  of  the 
flesh.  The  apostle  looks  on  circumcision  and  baptism  as  being 
closely  connected — the  spiritual  blessing  symbolized  by  both 
])eing  of  a  similar  nature ;  though,  probably,  it  would  be 
straining  this  connection  to  allege  it  as  a  proof  that  baptisjn 
has  been  in  all  points  ordained  for  the  church  in  room  of 
circumcision. 

It  is  not  within  our  province  to  enter  on  the  question 
whether  apostolical  baptism  was  by  immersion,  sprinkling,  or 
affusion.  What  we  say  is, — granting  that  immersion  had  been 
the  early  and  authorized  form  of  baptism,  we  are  not  prepared 
to  admit  any  allusion  to  that  form  in  the  clause  before  us. 


150  COLOSSIANS  II.   12. 

It  does  not  advance  the  opposite  argument  to  say,  that  the 
immersion  of  a  believer  resembles  a  burial.  This  has  been  a 
favourite  idea  from  very  early  times.  And  not  only  so,  but 
trine  immersion  was  often  practised — one  reason  assigned 
being  a  reference  to  the  Trinity,  but  another  argument  being 
that  it  was  a  symbolic  allusion  to  the  three  days — rrjv 
rpLrjjjiepov — of  Christ's  abode  in  the  tomb.^  Still,  to  many 
minds  there  is  manifest  incongruity  in  the  symbol.  Where, 
in  Scripture,  is  water  the  symbol  of  the  world  of  death,  or 
of  the  grave?  It  is  always  the  means  of  washing — the 
instrument  of  purification.  At  what  point  of  baptism  is  death 
symbolized — for  it  precedes  burial  ?  Means  of  imitating  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  could  be  easily  devised — for 
they  were  physical  facts  that  could  with  no  difficulty  be 
pictured  out.  But  a  believer's  death  and  resurrection  with 
Christ  are  spiritual  events ;  and  the  same  process  cannot 
surely  be  the  emblem  of  both  classes  of  truths — cannot  be  at 
the  same  time  the  figure  of  a  fact,  and  the  figure  of  a  figure. 
Death,  burial,  and  resurrection,  are  truths  not  portrayed  by 
gesture  and  position  in  baptism,  but  only  recognized  in  it — 
not  acted  out,  or  represented  in  visible  form,  but  only 
experienced  and  professed.  Believers  are  buried  in  baptism, 
but  even  in  immersion  they  do  not  go  through  a  process 
having  any  resemblance  to  the  burial  and  resurrection  of 
Christ.  The  Colossians  did  not  personate  death  and  burial  in 
baptism  any  more  than  they  imitated  the  circumcision  of 
Moses.  In  a  similar  sense,  though  without  reference  to  any 
sacramental  institute,  believers  are  crucified  with  Christ, 
though  no  nail  pierce  their  hands ;  they  are  enthroned  with 
Him,  while  they  wear  no  symbol  of  royalty ;  and  they  have 
an  unction  from  the  Holy  One,  but  no  material  oil  is  poured 
upon  their  heads. 

'JEy  c5  Ka\  auvT]yepdi]T€ — "  In  whom  too  ye  were  raised 
together."  Beza,  and  after  him  Calixtus,  Suicer,  Steiger, 
Bohmer,  De  Wette,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  refer  the  relative 
to  ^airria-fiart,.  But  the  language  would,  in  such  a  case,  be 
inapt,  as  "  out  of  baptism  "  would  appear  to  be  the  natural 

^  Gregor.  Nyss.  Opera,  vol.  iii.  p.  372.  Cyril.  Hieros.  Catech.  ii.  4.  Joannes 
Damas.  Expositio  fidei  Ortho.  10.  The  works  of  Vossius,  Gale,  Wall,  Carson, 
Wilson,  Beecher,  and  Halley,  may  also  be  referred  to. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   12.  151 

expression.  There  appears  to  be  no  formal  resemblance 
between  baptism  and  burial  in  the  apostle's  mind,  and  so  he 
says  not  i^  ov,  but  simply  iv  u> — "  in  whom,"  that  is,  in  Christ. 
Justinian  and  Davenant,  Meyer  and  Huther,  thus  refer  the 
pronoun — "  With  Him  "  they  are  buried — "  in  Him  "  they  rise 
again ;  for  union  with  Him  is  the  one  efficacious  principle. 
The  verb  is  explained  and  its  meaning  defended  under  Eph. 
ii.  6.  It  is  not  an  ideal  or  potential  spiritual  resurrection 
secured  for  them,  but  one  now  and  actually  enjoyed  by 
believers.  The  vivification  of  the  soul  involves  in  it,  as  a 
necessary  result,  the  resurrection  of  the  body — a  result  essential 
to  the  development  of  the  new  life  in  its  highest  sphere ;  but 
it  is  wrong  in  Theophylact  to  give  this  aorist  verb  a  future 
meaning,  or  rather  to  mix  up  the  two  significations.  While 
union  with  Christ  is  the  bond  of  security,  the  instrumental 
cause  is  next  described — 

Aia  Trj<i  iri<new<i — "  By  the  faith."  A  similar  use  of  iv  and 
hid  is  found  in  Eph.  i.  7,  each  preposition  retaining  its  dis- 
tinctive signification.  It  is  faith  which  achieves  this  spiritual 
resurrection — belief  in  the  Divine  testimony  is  the  vehicle 
which  the  Divine  resurrectionary  power  employs.  The  apostle, 
Eph.  i.  19,  20,  prays  that  the  Ephesians  might  know  "what 
is  the  exceeding  greatness  of  God's  power  to  us-ward  v^ko 
helieve"  and  the  kind  of  power  referred  to  is,  as  here,  tliat 
which  raised  Christ  from  the  dead,  and  which  also  quickens 
and  raises  up  believers  who  had  been  "dead  in  trespasses 
and  sins."     Thus  it  is  faith — 

Tr]<i  ip€pjeLa<;  tov  &eov  rod  i'yelpavTo<;  avrov  e/c  veKpwv 
— "  Of  the  operation  of  God  who  raised  Him  from  the  dead." 
Many  interpreters  take  the  genitive  as  that  of  agency — "  faith 
inwrought  by  God."  Such  is  the  view  of  Flacius,  Calixtus,  the 
older  interpreters,  Luther,  Melancthon,  as  also  of  Storr,  Flatt, 
Bengel,  Bahr,  Bohmer,  De  Wette,  Huther,  Olshausen,  and 
Conybeare.  Luther  renders — den  Gott  loirket;  and  Melancthon 
draws  the  lesson — non  igitur  potest  suis  virihus  ratio  fidem  in 
nobis  efficere.  Whatever  truth  may  be  in  this  doctrine,  and 
whatever  may  be  the  proof  of  it  in  other  parts  of  Scripture, 
it  is  not  the  doctrine  which  the  apostle  here  delivers.  For 
according  to  usage  in  such  a  case,  the  genitive  is  that  of  object. 
So  with  regard  to  ©eoO,  Mark  xi.  22  :  'OvofxaTo^,  Acts  lii.  16  ; 


152  COLOSSIANS   II.   12. 

'Irjaov  X.,  etc.,  Eom.  iii.  22 ;  Gal.  ii.  16,  20,  iii.  22  ;  Eph.  iii. 
12  ;  Phil.  iii.  9  ;  Jas.  ii.  1  ;  Eev.  ii.  13  :  EvayjeXiov,  Pliil.  i. 
27  :  'AXrjdela'i,  2  Thess.  ii.  13.  The  genitive  thus  denotes 
the  object  of  faith,  or  the  thing  believed.  Such  is  the  view 
of  the  mass  of  interpreters,  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  of  Calvin 
and  Beza,  of  Grotius  and  Erasmus,  of  Meyer,  Bloomfield,  etc. 
The  object  of  this  vivifying  faith  is  the  Divine  power  which 
raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead.  The  construction  which  the 
apostle  employs  in  Eph.  i.  19 — et?  ri/xa.<;  tou?  'TriarevovTWi 
Kara  rr)v  ivipyetav  K-r-a,  is  no  argument  against  this  view, 
for,  as  we  have  there  said,  Kara  does  not  point  out  the  source 
of  faith,  but  turns  attention  to  the  model  after  which  the 
Divine  power  operates  in  quickening  the  spiritually  dead.  A 
description  of  the  Divine  power,  as  showing  itself  in  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  more  naturally  allies  itself  with  the 
idea  of  spiritual  resuscitation,  which  it  resembles,  than  with 
that  of  the  production  of  faith. 

The  sinner  is  raised  out  of  death.  United  to  Christ  by  the 
Spirit,  and  exercising  a  belief  in  God,  he  is  justified  and 
obtains  legal  life — exemption  from  the  penalty  of  law  ;  and  he 
is  also  sanctified,  or  is  endowed  with  spiritual  life — comes  to 
the  conscious  enjoyment  of  God's  favour,  and  the  possession 
of  His  image.  This  faith  has  special  reference  to  the  Divine 
power  in  one  of  its  manifestations,  the  raising  of  Jesus  Christ 
from  the  dead.  Power  is  evinced  most  strikingly  in  a  resur- 
rection— the  restoration  of  a  dead  body  to  life  is  the  work  of 
Omnipotence.  Love  may  pity,  but  power  restores — a  power 
which  the  apostle  calls  exceeding  great  and  mighty.  Eph.  i. 
19.  Faith  lays  hold  on  this  phasis  of  omnipotence,  and  on 
this  act  of  its  achievement,  because  it  feels  that  spiritual 
quickening  is  at  once  the  result  which  springs  from  the  one 
and  is  pledged  by  the  other.  The  nature  of  this  power  and 
its  relation  to  believers  have  been  fully  explained  under  a 
similar  passage — Eph.  i.  20.  The  resurrection  of  Christ 
proves  the  acceptance  of  his  atonement  on  the  part  of  the 
Father,  "  who  raised  His  Son  from  the  dead,  and  gave  Him 
glory  that  our  faith  and  hope  might  be  in  God."  It  therefore 
showed  that  the  way  of  salvation  was  open,  that  the  majesty 
of  the  law  had  been  vindicated,  and  that  the  blessings  of 
redemption  might  therefore  be  conferred  in   all  their  fulness 


COLOSSIANS   II.   13.  153 

and  without  restraint.  Blood  had  been  shed,  and  might  now 
be  sprinkled ;  and  the  Saviour  being  glorified,  the  Spirit 
might  now  descend.  If  I  believe  in  that  power  which  raised 
Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead,  I  believe  in  a  power  which  might 
righteously  have  crushed  me,  but  is  now  mercifully  wielded 
to  save  me ;  which  has  set  its  seal  on  the  work  of  Christ, 
and  will  now  distribute  and  apply  its  rich  results  ;  and  which, 
having  exalted  the  Redeemer,  has  placed  itself  under  a  solemn 
stipulation  to  reward  Him  with  a  numerous  seed,  so  that  He 
shall  "  see  of  the  travail  of  His  soul  and  shall  be  satisfied." 
Thus,  this  power  working  out  the  purposes  of  Divine  Love 
and  the  devices  of  Infinite  Wisdom,  stands  out  so  employed  as 
the  object  of  saving  faith. 

But  the  apostle  now  appeals  to  the  Colossian  believers. 

(Ver.  13.)  Kal  vfj,d<i  v€Kpov<i  ovTa<i  iv  rot?  irapaTrrcofiaaLV 
KoX  T7}  aKpo^vcnla  ri]<i  aapKO'?  vjxoiv,  (rvve^cooTTOtrjaev  vfid<i 
(Tvv  avTcp — "  And  you,  being  dead  in  trespasses  and  the  uncir- 
cumcision  of  your  flesh,  you  He  quickened  with  Him."  Any 
differences  of  reading  are  too  trivial  to  be  noted  save  that 
which  repeats  vp,d<i  on  the  authority  of  A,  C,  J,  K.  The 
apostle  still  continues  the  general  thought  without  any  formal 
and  specific  connection.  The  connection  proposed  by  Steiger, 
namely,  to  join  the  first  clause  to  the  participle  iy€ipavTo<i,  is 
utterly  untenable.  It  would  create  tautology,  and  the  repeti- 
tion of  vfid^  does  not  render  it  necessary.  Bernhardy,  p.  275. 
We  far  prefer  connecting  veKpov<i  with  the  verb  avvei^wo- 
iroiTjcrev.  Though  we  admire  the  acuteness  and  general 
soundness  of  Meyer,  yet  we  wonder  how  here,  and  in  Eph. 
ii.  1,  he  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  v€Kp6<i  refers  to  physical 
death.  For  the  dead  condition  was  one  of  reality,  though  it 
be  past.  It  was  not  a  liability  to  death  ;  they  were  not,  as 
he  phrases  it — so  gut  ivie  todt — certo  morituri,  they  were  mortui. 
Besides,  the  liability  to  physical  death  is  not  removed  by  faith 
in  Christ.  And  the  quickening  and  upraising  are  already 
experienced,  they  are  not  blessings  to  be  enjoyed  uncounted 
years  afterwards.  The  apostle  does  not  surely  say — that 
believers  were  soon  and  certainly  to  die,  and  that  when  the 
Saviour  came  again,  they  should  all  be  summoned  out  of  their 
graves  to  the  possession  of  eternal  life.  But  he  appeals  to 
present  enjoyments  already  conferred — to  a  death  which  had 


154  C0L03SIANS  II.   13 

bound  them,  and  a  life  which  the  Divine  energy  had  infused 
into  them.  Meyer  argues  for  the  ideal  possession  of  life  now, 
and  its  full  realization  at  the  second  coming.  But  if  such 
ideal  possession  leave  the  dreadful  reality  untouched,  it  brings 
with  it  no  good.  If,  instead  of  ideal  possession,  he  had  said 
partial  possession,  he  would  have  come  nearer  the  truth.  For 
the  life  now  enjoyed  is,  alas,  too  often  faint  and  languid  in  its 
pulsations,  and  the  fulness  of  its  strength  is  a  future  bestow- 
ment.  We  therefore  take  the  tenses  in  their  simple  signifi- 
cance, and  not  in  any  proleptic  sense,  as  even  Chrysostom 
takes  them,  and  we  regard  the  preposition  ev  before  irapair- 
Tcofiaa-iv,  as  denoting  that  condition  in  which  spiritual  death 
exists.  When  Meyer  insists  that  the  life  to  which  believers 
are  raised  is  eternal  life,  and  that  nothing  less  can  be  meant 
by  the  apostle,  he  forgets  that  present  spiritual  life  precedes 
— that  glory  is  only  the  consummation  of  grace,  and  that 
eternal  life  is  but  the  crown  and  perfect  development  of  emo- 
tions already  felt,  occupations  already  begun,  and  pleasures 
already  experienced.  The  life  implanted  now  is  brought  to 
maturity  in  a  sphere  where  all  is  congenial  to  its  tastes  and 
instincts,  its  susceptibilities  and  powers.  The  Colossians  had 
been  really  and  spiritually  dead,  they  were  now  as  really  and 
spiritually  alive.  They  had  been  not  only  exposed  to  death  on 
account  of  sin,  but  had  been  dead  in  sin.  Now  they  are  not 
simply  gifted  with  the  charter  of  a  life  yet  to  be  reached,  but 
they  are  actually  living  in  faith  and  holiness.  The  nature  of 
this  death,  and  its  connection  with  sin,  along  with  the  mean- 
ing of  7rapa7rT(o/ia<Tt,v,  will  be  found  explained  in  the  parallel 
place,  Eph.  ii.  1,  etc.  There  is  no  ground  for  Olshausen's 
notion,  that  the  prior  clause  has  a  general  meaning,  and  that 
this  verse  begins  a  practical  application  ;  for  the  same  appeal 
runs  throughout,  only  it  may  be  more  pointed  and  intense  in 
the  verse  before  us. 

Kal  TTj  aKpo^varia  t?)9  aapKo<i  vfiwv — "  And  in  the  uncir- 
cumcision  of  your  flesh."  The  apostle  here  alludes  to  their 
Gentile  extraction.  They  wanted  in  their  flesh  the  seal  of  the 
Abrahamic  covenant.  We  incline  to  take  the  words  in  their 
literal  sense.  Uncircumcision  had,  indeed,  sometimes  a  spiritual 
meaning.  Deut.  x.  1 6  ;  Jer.  iv.  4.  Theodoret  adopts  such  a 
sense  here — a/c/joyS.  r.  aapKo<i  rrjv  nrovrjpiav  iKoXeaev ;   so  also 


COLOSSIANS  II.   13.  155 

Beza,  Grotiiis,  Biihr,  Steiger.  But  such  an  interpretation 
ratlier  takes  np  the  result  than  gives  the  meaning.  Thus, 
the  Gentiles  were  uncircumcised,  and  in  consequence  "vvere 
"  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  strangers  from 
the  covenants  of  promise,  having  no  hope,  and  without  God." 
Their  degraded,  miserable,  idolatrous,  and  dead  state  was  the 
effect  of  their  uncircumcision.  Calvin  says — scd  tamen  Paulus 
hie  loqueretur  de  contumacia  cordis  humani  adversus  Beum,  et 
natura  pravis  affedionihus  inqiiinata.  But  there  is  no 
occasion  to  take  o-dp^  in  other  than  its  physical  meaning. 
Beza  takes  the  genitive  as  one  of  apposition — flesh,  which  is 
uncircumcision,  a  thing  abominable  to  God ;  while  others 
render  it — praeputiiim  nempe  vitiositas.  That  "  uncircum- 
cision "  and  "  flesh  "  are  to  be  taken  in  their  ordinary  physical 
sense,  is  also  apparent  from  the  change  of  person  in  the  last 
clause.  Did  the  term  simply  signify  natural  corruption,  then 
the  apostle  himself  was  once  in  such  a  state.  But  he  does 
not  feel  or  say  so.  On  the  contrary,  he  makes  the  distinction 
you  Gentiles  were  dead  in  the  uncircumcision  of  your  flesh — 
but  ive,  Jew  and  Gentile  alike,  are  forgiven  our  tre^asses. 
See  under  next  clause.  Uncircumcision  of  the  flesh  was  the 
physical  mark  of  a  heathen  state,  and  that  heathen  state  was 
in  consequence  of  this  want,  and  in  itself,  one  of  degradation, 
impurity  and  death.  The  flesh  which  had  not  the  seal  was 
truly  corrupted  and  sinful.  It  is  pressing  the  clause  too 
much  to  bring  out  of  it  a  proof  of  original  sin,  as  is  done  by 
Zanchius  and  Bengel ;  the  latter  calls  it — exquisita  appellatio 
peecati  originalis.  The  false  teachers  insisted  strenuously  on 
the  necessity  of  circumcision — a  theory  very  common  in  those 
times,  for  believing  Jews  were  zealous  of  the  law.^  But  the 
apostle  naturally  says — True,  ye  were  uncircumcised ;  your 
flesh  had  not  been  wounded  so  as  to  bear  the  sign  of  the 
Divine  covenant,  but  ye  have  been  circumcised,  not  with  a 
manual  operation,  but  with  the  circumcision  of  Christ.  The 
apostle  admits  that  they  were  uncircumcised,  for  they  did  not 
belong  to  Israel,  but  he  has  already  contended  that  such  a 

■^  In  a  pamphlet  named  IsraeVs  Ordinances,  the  late  Charlotte  Elizabeth, 
addressing  a  Jewish  convert,  Bishop  Alexander  of  Jerusalem,  rebukes  him  for 
not  circumcising  his  sons — "Call  you  what  we  will,  my  Lord,  you  are  a  Jew — 
a  circumcised  Jew.  My  dear  Lord,  bear  with  me,  while  I  respectfully  and 
affectionately  put  once  more  the  (^uery — why  are  not  your  sons  also  Jews  ?  " 


156  COLOSSIANS   II.   13. 

circumcision  as  that  which  of  old  disabled  the  Shechemites 
from  self-defence,  and  kept  the  Israelites  after  they  crossed 
the  Jordan  from  commencing  the  conquest,  did  not  become 
them,  and  was  in  their  case  wholly  superfluous,  for  they  had 
been  spiritually  initiated,  and  had  put  off  the  body  of  flesh. 
They  had  been  dead  in  sins — this  was  their  real  moral  state ; 
dead  too  in  the  uncircumcision  of  their  flesh,  and  this  was 
their  external  and  heathen  condition.  Looking  at  them  as 
men,  they  were  dead  in  sins — looking  at  them  as  heathen 
men,  they  were  dead  also  in  the  uncircumcision  of  their  flesh. 
Xvue^oooTrolrjaev  v/jlo.';  avv  avrat — "  You  He  brought  to  life 
together  with  Him."  The  nominative  is  still  God — not 
Christ,  as  Heinrichs  would  have  it.  The  work  of  quickening 
is  God's  prerogative.  This  process  of  life-giving  is  not  simply 
redemption,  as  De  Wette  gives  it,  but  rather  one  special  aspect 
or  blessing  of  it.  It  is  used  with  perfect  propriety,  for  life 
is  the  blessing  appropriate  to  the  dead.  Some  wonder  why 
(7vvr)yep6r]Te  should  have  occurred  before  it,  since  the  idea  of 
resurrection  so  naturally  follows  that  of  life-giving.  But  in 
both  places  the  verbs  are  in  harmony  with  the  flgure ;  the 
apostle,  in  verse  1 2,  speaks  of  burial,  and  therefore  he  employs 
the  term  resurrection,  while  here  he  speaks  simply  of  death, 
and  so  he  places  life  in  correspondence  and  contrast  with  it. 
But  not  only  so,  there  is  also  a  difference  of  allusion  and 
meaning.  The  burial  there  is  a  voluntary  renunciation  of  sin, 
and  off-casting  of  its  body — the  completing  point  of  the 
process  of  death  to  sin ;  but  here  it  is  a  death  in  sin  which 
the  apostle  describes,  and  out  of  which  the  Colossians  had 
been  raised  by  the  power  of  God,  and  through  their  union 
with  Christ.  The  former  is  a  series  of  acts  in  which  the 
believer  in  the  enjoyment  of  vivifying  energy  dies  unto  sin — 
and  puts  off  the  flesh.  Nay,  the  more  he  lives,  the  more  he 
dies ;  and  in  proportion  to  the  growth  and  development  of  life 
are  the  extent  and  progress  of  death.  It  is  a  special  view  of 
the  work  of  sanctification,  in  which,  according  to  the  measure 
of  life  to  God,  there  is  death  to  sin.  But  the  death  described 
in  this  verse  is  very  different.  It  is  a  death  which  pre-exists 
life,  and  does  not  co-exist  with  it — death  in  sin — in  conse- 
quence of  its  fatal  reign  and  power.  The  one  is  dying — a 
conscious  state ;  the  other  is  death — a  condition  of  insensi- 


COLOSSIANS  II.  13.  157 

bility  and  danger.  In  the  one,  the  decay  of  love  to  sin  may 
be  registered ;  in  the  other,  the  mastery  of  sin  is  spiritual 
paralysis  and  death.  The  nature  of  this  life,  and  its  con- 
nection with  Christ,  are  illustrated  under  Eph.  ii.  5. 

Xapca-dfievo'i  r]p,lv  iravra  ra  irapairrdo^aTa — "  Having 
forgiven  us  all  our  trespasses."  The  reading  rjpA,v  is  on  largely 
preponderant  authority  preferred  to  the  vfiiv  of  the  Keceived 
Text.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  viitv  should  have  been  inserted, 
as  u/ia?  precedes.  Nor  is  it  difficult  to  apprehend  why  the 
apostle  should  say  "  us  "  instead  of  "  you."  He  speaks  in  one 
clause  of  a  distinctive  feature  of  their  past  spiritual  state — 
"  dead  in  the  uncircumcision  of  your  flesh."  That  was 
peculiar  to  them,  but  death  in  sin  was  common  both  to  him 
and  to  them,  and  they  were  now  both  partakers  of  the  "  common 
salvation."  They  both  had  enjoyed  forgiveness,  and  so  he 
says — "  having  forgiven  us  our  trespasses."  The  aorist  par- 
ticiple points  to  forgiveness  as  something  past,  and  yet  preceding 
the  act  of  life-giving.  Having  forgiven  your  trespasses.  He 
has  quickened  you.  The  pardoning  and  life-giving  are  scarcely 
synonymous,  as  some  would  argue.  But  this  dead  state  is 
a  guilty  state,  for  it  is  a  sinful  state,  and  all  sin  brings  down 
upon  ItseK  the  Divine  displeasure  and  penalty.  Having 
forgiven  them  these  trepasses,  which  were  the  source  and 
means  of  death,  He  brings  them  out  of  it.  To  have  given 
them  spiritual  life,  and  yet  kept  them  under  the  penalty  of 
sin,  which  is  legal  death,  would  have  been  a  process  in  which 
one  gift  neutralized  its  fellow.  The  restoration  to  life  is  thus 
the  token  and  result  of  a  prior  forgiveness.  The  welcome  to 
the  prodigal  son  was  a  proof  that  he  had  been  pardoned. 
The  death  was  one  in  trespasses ;  and  those  very  trepasses, 
yea  "  all "  of  them,  are  blotted  out.  The  reader  is  requested 
to  turn  to  what  is  said  under  chap.  i.  14,  and  under  Eph. 
i.  7.  The  life  is  not,  as  Bohmer  imagines,  subsequent  to  this 
forgiveness,  because  the  pardon  is  God's  special  act,  whereas 
the  life  originates  in  man's  co-operation  and  response.  This 
doctrine  is  neither  stated  nor  implied.  Nor  is  it  true.  For 
all  life  is  God's  immediate  gift,  from  its  lowest  to  its  highest 
forms.  No  human  chemistry  can  produce  it  beneath  us — no 
suasion  nor  art  can  create  it  within  us.  It  is  a  drop  out  of 
the  Fountain  of  Life.     [Eph.  i.  20.]     The  apostle  proceeds  to 


158  COLOSSIANS  II.   14. 

describe  the  process  through  which  sin  was  forgiven — or  that 
work  which  God  had  done,  the  result  of  which  had  been  to 
them  life  and  forgiveness. 

( Ver.  1 4.)  'E^aXei^^a^  to  Kad'  rj/xwv  '^eipoypa^ov — "  Having 
blotted  out  the  handwriting  against  us."  This  verse  is  so  curt 
and  compact,  that  its  analysis  is  not  without  difficulty.  It  is 
to  be  borne  in  mind  that  "  God  "  is  still  the  subject,  and  the 
alteration  for  which  Heinrichs  contends  cannot  for  a  moment 
be  admitted.  It  will  not  do  to  say,  with  Trollope,  that  "  the 
apostle,  in  the  ardour  of  his  mind,  has  not  attended  to  the 
syntax."  What  in  other  places  is  ascribed  to  Christ,  may  be 
here  without  any  impropriety  ascribed  to  God ;  for  Christ's 
suffering  and  death  were  of  His  sanction,  and  with  His  co- 
operation. What  Christ  did,  God  did  by  Him.  Nor  is  there 
any  argument  here,  as  Bahr  insirmates,  against  the  satisfactio 
vicaria.  For  the  satisfaction  was  offered  by  Christ,  and  God, 
having  accepted  it,  did  the  act  described  in  the  participle 
ef aXei-^/ra?.  This  verb  ^  signifies  to  smear,  or  plaster  over,  and 
then  it  is  used  to  denote  the  act  by  which  a  law  or  deed  of 
obligation  is  cancelled.  It  is  found  with  another  signification, 
Eev.  vii.  17,  xxi.  4.  It  occurs  also  in  Eev.  iii.  5  ;  but  it  is 
used  in  a  sense  not  very  different  from  what  it  bears  in  this 
verse  in  Acts  iii.  19;  and  in  Sept.  Ps.  1.  1,  9,  cviii.  13; 
Isa.  xliii.  25.  In  these  places  it  describes  the  forgiveness 
of  sin,  where  sin  as  a  debt  is  supposed  to  be  wiped  out.  The 
word  occurs  in  Demosthenes  ^ — a-KoireiaOe  el  'xpr)  tovtov 
[yoiJLov]  e^aXely^ai.  Its  technical  signification  may  be  gathered 
from  the  fact  that  it  stands  opposed  to  avaypdifxo,  and  some- 
times to  iyypdcjja.  Liddell  and  Scott,  sub  voce.  The  word, 
then,  means  here,  to  expunge.  That  to  which  the  process  of 
obliteration  is  applied  is  appropriately  termed  a  handwriting 
— X^tpoypacpov,  a  note  of  hand,  a  written  bond.  The  term 
occurs  only  here  in  the  New  Testament,  but  is  found  in  Tobit 
V.  3,  ix.  5  ;  Josephus  xvii.  14,  2  ;  Polybius,  Exccrpta  Legal. 
98.  Schoettgen  and  Vitringa  take  it  as  corresponding  to  the 
Hebrew  nin  "iDtr,  and  as  denoting  tabula'  debiti.     But  as  it 

^  From  the  root  Xiv  that  ruus  through  so  many  of  the  Indo-Germanic  tongues. 
— Benfey,  Wurzel-Lex.  ii.  122. 

*  Oratores  Altici,  vol.  vi.  p.  429,  ed.  Dobson  ;  also  vol.  vii.  p.  378,  viii.  p. 
15,  etc.  Also  Lysias,  do.  vol.  ii.  p.  182,  and  p.  588.  ^Atttifui  is  more  frequently 
used  with  x^'P'y-  or  auyypa^ri. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   14.  159 

signifies  a  claim  of  unpaid  debt,  it  is  therefore  also  one  of 
punishment,  for  it  was  Ka&  rj^Siv — "  against  us." 

Both  the  connection  and  meaning  of  roh  SojfiaaLv  have 
been  variously  taken.  That  it  is  to  be  joined  with  '^eipo'ypa^ov 
we  have  no  manner  of  doubt. 

1.  Some,  such  as  Erasmus,  Storr,  Flatt,  Conybeare,  and 
Olshausen,  divide  the  verse  thus — to  KaB*  rjfjbwv  %eipo7.  toU 
Boyfiaacv,  o  rjv  virevavTiov  rj/juv — "  The  handwriting,  which, 
by  its  ordinances,  was  against  us."  Olshausen  admits  that, 
with  such  a  construction,  the  position  of  the  dative  is  not 
quite  natural,  and  he  quotes,  along  with  Winer,  Acts  i.  3, 
with  which  this  verse  has  little  analogy.  The  admittedly 
natural  reference  of  the  dative  is  to  ')(eip6<ypa<l>ov. 

2.  Others  attach  SojfjLacrtv  to  the  participle  e^a\ei^a<i,  and 
understand  it  as  describing  the  means  by  which  the  blotting 
has  been  effected.  This  is  the  view  of  the  Greek  expositors, 
of  Grotius,  Estius,  Bengel,  Fritzsche,^  and  Bohmer.  The 
explanation  of  Soy/xaaiv,  by  Theodoret,  is  77  evajy€XiKr} 
BtSaaKoXia  ;  and  by  Theophylact — rovriart  jy  irlareL.  To 
this  we  answer  as  we  have  done  to  the  similar  exegesis  of 
Eph.  ii.  15,  that  such  a  sense  given  to  Bojfia  is  wholly  unbiblical 
— that  the  declaration  of  Scripture  is,  that  the  handwriting 
against  man,  which  we  here  understand  to  be  the  Mosaic  law, 
is  abrogated,  not  by  any  opposing  or  modifying  enactments, 
but  by  the  death  of  Christ.  Besides,  and  more  convincingly 
still,  we  learn  from  verse  2  0  that  these  Boy/xara  are  no  longer 
law,  for  the  apostle  says — rt  8o<y/jLaTi^ea6e ;  why  do  ye  suffer 
such  Soyfiara  to  be  published  or  imposed  ?  That  is — these 
ordinances  are  abolished,  and  it  is  now  the  height  of  folly  for 
others  to  re-enact  them,  or  for  you  to  observe  them.  The 
cognate  verb  of  the  20th  verse  is  used  with  special  reference 
to  the  noun  of  this  verse.  Whatever  these  ordinances  are, 
they  belong  to  an  obsolete  economy,  and  are  no  longer  of  any 
obligation,  for  they  were  on  the  handwriting  which  has  been 
wiped  out. 

3.  Steiger  joins  Bojfiaaiv  with  the  participle  in  this  verse. 
He  understands  the  phrase  as  defining  one  special  phase  of 
the  handwriting — "  the  handwriting  in   respect  of   its  ordi- 
nances."    Having  blotted  out  the  handwriting  in  this  aspect 
'  Dissert,  ii.  p.  1()8. 


IGO  COLOSSI ANS  II.   14. 

of  it,  viz.  its  enactments —  plainly  implying  that  in  some  other 
aspect  of  it  it  still  stands  unrepealed.  See  on  this  view,  also, 
our  comment  on  Eph.  ii.  15. 

4.  Bahr,  Huther,  and  De  Wette  understand  Soy/xaaiv  as 
belonging  to  the  whole  clause,  or  rather  as  explaining  how  it 
came  that  the  handwriting  was  against  us.  It  is  because  of 
its  ho^fiara  that  it  is  against  us ;  De  Wette  renders — durcli 
die  Satzungen.  Calovius  and  Gieseler  supply  the  participle 
6v — the  handwriting  which  is,  or  being  in  its  ordinances 
against  us. 

5.  But  keeping  the  words  in  their  natural  position  and 
connection  with  '^eipoypa^ov,  there  is  variety  of  view.  Calvin, 
Beza,  Vitringa,  Wolf,  Camerarius,  Heinsius,  and  others,  eke 
out  the  construction  from  the  parallel  passage  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Ephesians,  and  would  supply  at  discretion  either  iv 
or  o-vp  ^ — the  handwriting  consisting  in  ordinances,  or  the 
handwriting  along  with  its  ordinances ;  or  taking  the  dative 
for  the  genitive,  the  handwriting  of  ordinances. 

6.  Meyer  takes  the  dative  as  that  of  instrument.  The 
Boyfiara,  in  his  view,  as  a  constituent  portion  of  the  law,  are 
that  with  which  the  handwriting  is  made  out.  We  prefer 
calling  the  simple  dative  that  of  form,  that  distinctive  and 
well-known  form  which  the  handwriting  assumed.  In  this 
way,  the  dative  is  governed  by  the  verbal  portion  of  the  noun, 
lypacfiov — that  is  'yeypa/jL/xevov.  The  apostle  thus  describes 
the  handwriting  as  of  a  special  shape,  it  assumed  the  form  of 
ordinances.  Had  the  apostle  said  iv  Boyfiaaiv,  the  meaning 
would  have  been — which  consisted  of  ordinances;  a  meaning 
which,  however,  is  not  materially  different  from  that  to  which 
we  incline,  as  the  form  is  but  the  index  to  the  substance. 
Our  view  also  embraces  inferentially  that  given  under  No.  4. 
We  do  not  say  that  the  handwriting  is  against  us  because  of 
its  Boy/jLara,  but  we  say  more  largely,  that  the  handwriting 
whose  form  of  structure  was  that  of  Boy/xaTa,  is  against  us. 
For  the  meaning  of  Boy/xara,  see  under  Eph.  ii.  15.  This 
handwriting  was  kuO'  rj/mwv — "  directed  against  us."  After 
verbs,  and  in  phrases  implying  hostility  in  word  or  action,  kuto, 
denotes  against,  and  points  out  the  direction  of  the  hostility. 
And  to  explain  more  fully  his  meaning,  the  apostle  adds — 

^  Bishop  Middleton  on  Greek  article,  in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS   II,   14.  IGl 

'^O  rjv  virevavTiov  rjfuv — "  Which  was  inimical  to  lis."  It 
is  a  needless  refinement  on  the  part  of  Beza,  Bohmer,  and 
Eobinson,  to  lay  stress  upon  the  viro,  as  if  a  covert  or  imder- 
hand  hostility  were  implied,  or  as  if  it  had  been  unnoticed,  or 
as  if,  as  Suicer  and  Witsius  think,  it  is  only  in  some  sense 
contrary  to  us,  because  in  another  sense  it  was  a  symbol  of 
coming  grace.  None  of  these  meanings  are  sustained  by 
biblical  usage.  Sept.  Gen.  xxii.  17;  Lev.  xxvi.  17;  Ex, 
xxiii,  27 ;  Num.  x,  9  ;  Deut.  xxxii,  27  ;  Josh.  v.  13  ;  in  which 
places  it  represents  one  or  other  of  the  two  Hebrew  terms — 
Tis,  or  "!>*.  The  word  is  one  of  those  frequent  compounds 
which  characterize  the  later  Greek,  and  mark  it  as  a  period 
of  decay.  Thus  we  do  not,  like  many  expositors,  take  KaB"" 
rjiJLwv  and  virevavrlov  rjixlv  as  synonyms,  or  the  latter  as 
explanatory  of  the  former,  but  we  regard  the  two  statements 
as  giving  two  distinct  ideas.  Bengel  compares  the  first  to  a 
status  belli,  and  the  second  to  ipsa  pugna.  It  has  a  hostile 
attitude — it  has  also  in  it  a  deep  and  active  antagonism. 
The  question  then  recurs,  what  is  the  hostile  handwriting  ? 

1,  A  strange  exposition  is  found  in  ancient  times — that 
the  handwriting  is  man's  corporeal  frame,  Theodoret  expressly 
says — ruovfiat  tolvvv  kuI  to  cruifxa  ■^/xcov  KokeiaOai  '^eip6'ypa(f)ov. 
That  is,  probably,  our  body,  as  represented  by  Christ's 
humanity,  which  was  nailed  to  the  cross.  This  is,  to  some 
extent,  the  view  of  Steiger,  given  both  in  his  Commentary  on 
1  Pet.  ii.  24,  and  in  this  place.  In  the  first  comment  referred 
to,  he  says — "  Our  sin  adhered  to  Him  until  it  was  legally 
destroyed  in  His  body,  and  His  body  was  in  this  respect  like 
a  handwriting  over  our  guilt."  Again,  he  adds,  "  That  by  the 
appointment  of  His  Son  to  be  our  sacrifice,  God  set  out  a 
corporeal  document  of  our  guilt,"  On  the  verse  before  us  he 
writes  : — "  The  body  of  Christ,  as  a  body,  is  no  handwriting ; 
but  it  is  that  body,  destined  to  be  a  sin-offering,  which  is  at 
once  a  document  exhibiting  our  guilt,  and  representing  the 
law,  in  so  far  as  the  latter  serves  the  purpose  of  an  indictment." 
The  image,  however,  is  not  very  distinct,  and  the  sacrificial 
body  of  the  Lord  was  rather  a  witness  of  our  sin,  than  a 
handwriting  against  us.  But  the  idea  is,  that  something 
different  from  Christ,  and  yet  closely  associated  with  Him, 
was  obliterated  in  His  death.     Steiger's  notion  is  evidently 


162  COLOSSIANS  II.   14. 

based  upon  a  literal  interpretation  of  the  last  clause  of  the 
verse,  yet  it  is  wholly  out  of  harmony  Ivith  the  entire 
phraseology.  And  in  what  sense  does  a  body  resemble  a 
handwriting  ?  or  how  could  it  be  hostile  to  us  ?  or  how  has  it 
been  taken  out  of  the  way  ? 

2.  An  opinion  as  ancient  as  the  preceding  supposes  the 
handwriting  to  be  the  broken  covenant  which  God  originally 
made  with  Adam.  This  opinion  is  found  in  Chrysostom, 
Theophylact  and  QEcumenius,  Ambrose  and  Anselm.  Bahr, 
and  others,  trace  this  opinion  to  Irenaius.  Speaking  of  the 
handwriting  of  our  debt  as  affixed  to  the  cross,  he  says — 
quemadmodum  per  lignum  fadi  sumus  dehitores  Deo,  per  lignum 
accipiamus  nostri  debiti  remissionem}  The  use  of  this  fanciful 
analogy  can  scarce,  perhaps,  be  taken  as  a  formal  exegesis, 
though  he  regards  the  handwriting  generally  as  sin.  TertuUian 
is  said  to  hold  a  similar  notion,  but  his  opinion  will  be 
seen  to  be  more  in  unison  with  our  own.  Bahr  well  objects 
to  this  view,  that  errors  on  this  subject  are  not  among  those 
alleged  to  be  held  by  the  false  teachers,  and  that  this  Adaraic 
covenant,  containing  principally  one  prohibition,  could  in  no 
appropriate  sense  have  such  a  descriptive  plural  noun  as 
Sojixara  attached  to  it.  The  whole  paragraph  refers  to  a 
later  transaction  altogether  than  the  covenant  of  Eden. 

3.  The  reformers  Melancthon,  Luther,  and  Zuingli  thought 
the  reference  to  be  to  the  accusations  of  conscience.  The 
guilty  conscience  resembles  a  guilt-book,  or  an  indictment.^ 
Besides  replying,  with  Bahr,  that  this  exegesis  does  not  tally 
with  the  purpose  of  the  paragraph,  nor  with  the  idea  implied 
in  Soyfjiara,  we  may  add,  that  the  notion  of  the  Eeformers  is 
wholly  of  a  subjective  nature,  whereas  the  verse  presents  an 
objective  view  of  the  work  of  God  in  Christ.  It  tells  us  what 
God  has  done  as  the  means  of  enabling  Him  to  forgive  sins, 
but  their  interpretation  points  to  a  blessing  which  follows  only 
from  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  The  act  of  God  is  prior  to  for- 
giveness— is  external  in  its  nature  ;  while  pardon,  with  a  quieted 
conscience,  is  one  of  the  results  of  the  believing  reception  of 
it.  An  inner  conviction,  also,  cannot  be  well  figured  as  an 
outer  and  written  record  of  many  heads  against  us.     These 

'  Adversus  Haeres.  v.  17,  3. 

^  Unser  Gewissen  gleich  als  ein  Schuldbuch  ist. — Luther. 


COLOSSI ANS   II.   14.  163 

critics  confound  what  follows  from  faith  in  the  cross,  with  what 
was  done  upon  the  cross  that  faith  might  secure  such  a  result. 
It  is  one  thing  to  expunge  an  indictment,  and  quite  another 
thing  to  have  the  blessed  consciousness  that  we  actually  share 
in  the  indemnity. 

4.  Not  a  few  understand  the  apostle  to  refer  to  the  cere- 
monial law,  or  the  Mosaic  law  in  its  ritual  part  or  aspect. 
Such  is  the  view  of  Calvin,  Beza,  Crocius,  van  Till,  Gomar, 
Vorstius,  Grotius,  Deyling,  Schoettgen,  Wolf,  Biihr,  and 
others.  This  is,  no  doubt,  the  common  view,  and  it  is  true  so 
far  as  it  goes.  The  entire  ritual,  with  its  lustrations  and  sacri- 
fices, had  a  close  and  constant  connection  with  sin — "  in  them 
was  a  remembrance  of  sin  every  year."  It  is  true  that  it  was 
abrogated  by  the  death  of  Christ  on  the  cross,  and  it  is  also 
true  that  one  special  error  of  the  false  teachers  was  the  incul- 
cation of  ceremonial  distinctions  and  observances,  and  that  the 
apostle  has  such  mischievous  teaching  specially  in  view.  But 
it  is  not  the  less  true  that  the  apostle  makes  no  such  distinc- 
tion between  one  part  of  the  Mosaic  law  and  another.  In  the 
parallel  passage  in  the  twin  epistle  the  apostle  speaks  of  the 
"  enmity  "  produced  by  the  ceremonial  law,  but  that  was  an 
enmity  of  races — between  Israel  who  possessed  it,  and  Non- 
Israel  which  wanted  it.  So  that,  in  order  to  their  union,  the 
cause  of  separation  and  mutual  dislike  must  be  taken  out  of 
the  way.  But  here  the  apostle  speaks  not  of  race  and  race — 
nor  of  Jew  and  Gentile  as  separated  in  blood  and  creed,  but 
of  both  as  being  in  the  same  condition — having  a  handwriting 
against  them.  He  does  not  specify  separate  parties,  he  says 
"  us,"  whether  Jew  or  Gentile.  Nay,  more,  it  is  to  Gentiles, 
distinguished  by  the  uncircumcision  of  their  flesh,  and  never 
placed  under  the  ceremonial  law,  that  the  apostle  is  speaking. 
That  law  spoke,  indeed,  of  sin,  but  it  spoke  intelligibly  only 
to  those  who  understood  its  symbols,  and  obeyed  its  pre- 
scriptions. Still  the  ceremonial  law  was  against  the  Gentiles, 
as  it  kept  them  out  of  the  Divine  covenant.  Moreover, 
the  apostle  is  writing  of  a  blessing  not  determined  in  its 
distribution  by  race  or  blood,  but  enjoyed  by  all  the 
members  of  the  church — the  forgiveness  of  sin.  But  the 
forgiveness  of  sin  was  not  secured  by  the  simple  abrogation 
of  the  Levitical  law,  for  its  abrogation  is  only   one,  though 

0 


164  COLOSSIANS  II.   14. 

an    important    one,    of    the    many  results   of  the   death   on 
Calvary. 

5.  Therefore  we  are  inclined,  with  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Dave- 
nant,  Neander,  Bohmer,  Huther,  and  others,  to  understand  the 
reference  of  the  apostle  to  the  entire  Mosaic  law.  That  law 
presents  a  condemnation  of  the  whole  human  race — "  that  all 
the  world  may  become  guilty  before  God."  Davenant  says — 
"  I  accordingly  explain  the  handwriting  in  ordinances  to  mean 
the  force  of  the  moral  law  binding  to  perfect  obedience,  and 
condemning  for  any  defect  in  it,  laden  with  the  ceremonial 
rites  as  skirts  and  appendages."  But  lest  this  opinion  should 
imply  that  the  moral  law  was  abolished,  he  adds — "the  law  as 
to  the  power  of  binding  and  condemning  is  abrogated,  and 
its  rites  and  ceremonies  are  at  the  same  time  abolished." 
But  whatever  the  handwriting,  with  its  ordinances,  is,  it 
undergoes  only  one  process — it  is  blotted  out.  The  distinc- 
tion referred  to,  however  true  in  result,  cannot  therefore  be 
sustained  as  an  interpretation.  So  that  we  talvC  ^x^eipojpacfiov, 
not  as  denoting  the  Mosaic  law  absolutely  and  in  itself,  but 
rather  in  its  indictment.  It  is  against  us,  at  once  in  direction 
and  operation.  It  is  the  Jinding  of  the  law  which  is  against 
us,  as  well  as  its  dogmatic  form.  And  this,  especially,  is  a 
bond,  a  writing  which  pronounces  our  sentence  of  death.  This 
is  Chrysostom's  view  in  its  result,  and  also  that  of  TertuUian, 
who  writes — chirographuni  mortis,^  syinholuni  mortis?  Schoett- 
gen,  in  loc,  adduces  a  similar  rabbinical  expression  ;  when  one 
sins,  God  dooms  him  to  die,  but  when  he  repents,  the  hand- 
writing is  abolished — i?t:3nD  ansn.^  It  is  not,  therefore,  so  much 
the  law  with  the  authority  of  legislation,  as  the  law  with  its 
power  of  punishment.  It  is  not  the  code  prescribing  duty,  but 
rather  as  at  the  same  time  authorizing  the  infliction  of  merited 
penalty,  which  becomes  the  'x^eipoypacpov.  In  this  view,  the 
SojfjLaTa  are  a  handwriting,  or  a  bond  which  exhibits  and 
warrants  our  liability  to  punishment.  But  the  liability  to 
penalty  is  expunged,  the  handwriting  is  wiped  out.  The  law 
in  itself  is  not,  and  cannot  be  contrary  to  men,  but  it  has 
become  so  because  they  have  failed  to  obey  it.  Its  precepts 
are  not  hostile  to  them,  for  obedience  to  them  would  secure 
our  welfare.     The  law  has  been  given,  both  moral  and  cere- 

^  De  jnuUcitia,  xix.  ^  De  poenitentia,  vi.  ^  Tanchuma,  fol,  44,  2. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   14,  165 

monial ;  the  first  has  been  universally  brokeu,  and  therefore 
every  man  is  exposed  to  its  curse;  the  second  presents  this 
melancholy  truth  in  its  ritual  bloodshedding  and  expiation ; 
but  what  the  one  charged,  and  the  other  confessed,^  has  been 
obliterated.  The  claim  of  condemnation  exhibited  by  the 
moral  law,  and  traced  in  the  blood  and  read  by  the  fires  of 
the  Levitical  law  has  now  been  blotted  out ;  not  the  moral 
law  itself,  as  it  must  be  eternal  and  immutable — having  its 
origin  in  the  Divine  nature,  and  forming  an  obligation  under 
which  every  creature  is  placed  by  the  fact  of  his  existence. 
"  Do  we  make  void  the  law  through  faith  ? "  asks  the  apostle, 
and  his  reply  is,  "Nay,  God  forbid,  we  establish  the  law." 
If  the  death  of  Christ  was  necessary  to  cancel  the  indictment 
which  the  law  presented,  it  only  strengthens  and  ratifies  its 
preceptive  authority.  It  follows,  however,  that  if  the  sj^ecial 
purpose  of  the  ceremonial  law  was  to  confess  the  fact  of  man's 
exposure  to  the  curse,  and  portrays  the  mode  of  his  deliver- 
ance from  it,  then,  surely,  the  curse  being  borne,  and  the 
condemning  sentence  expunged,  the  Levitical  code  has  served 
its  purpose,  and  ceases  to  exist.  What  it  taught  in  symbol, 
is  now  enforced  in  reality ;  what  it  foreshadowed  in  type,  has 
now  become  matter  of  history.  And  this  it  is  the  special 
object  of  the  apostle  to  show  as  a  lesson  and  caution  to  the 
Colossians.^ 

This  handwriting  had  assumed  the  form  of  "  ordinances." 
In  Eph.  ii.  14,  the  apostle  uses  the  term  expressly  of  the 
ceremonial  law  and  its  positive  institutions.  But  the  two 
places  are  not  entirely  analogous.  There  the  apostle  describes 
the  ceremonial  code  as  a  hedge  between  Jew  and  Gentile,  and 
shows  how,  through  its  abolition  by  Christ  in  His  death,  the 
union  of  the  two  races  was  secured,  both  being,  at  the  same 
time,  and  by  the  same  event,  reconciled  to  God.  Here,  how- 
ever, as  the  apostle  speaks  specially  of  the  spiritual  results  of 
Christ's  death,  and  of  these  as  effected  by  God  the  Father,  he 
seems,  as  we  have  said,  to  refer  to  the  entire  Mosaic  Institute, 
but  especially  to  the  ceremonial  law,  as  it  was  so  palpable  and 

^  The  xt'poy.  bore  upon  it  the  signature  or  acknowledgment  of  the  debtor, 
and  so  differed  from  avyypcKfn,  which  contained  the  signatures  of  both  contract- 
ing parties. 

^  Also  Lucian,  Prometh.,  Opera,  vol.  ii.  p.  2,  ed.  Bipont. — Toirourov  xp'*"*  ''V 

Kavzairi^  wpo(rtiXcii/it>icf, 


166  COLOSSIANS   II.  14. 

prominent   a   portion  of  the  system,  and    contained  sucli   a 
number  of  minute  and  peremptory  enactments. 

Kai  avro  rjpKev  e/c  rov  fxeaov — "  And  He  has  taken  it  out 
of  the  way."  The  use  of  the  perfect  tense  adds  emphasis  to 
the  verb — he  took  it  out  of  the  way,  and  still  it  remains  out 
of  the  way.  The  apostle  says,  Kal  avro — this  very  document, 
terrible  as  it  is ;  that  is  to  say.  He  not  only  blotted  out  the 
writing  upon  it,  but  He  has  taken  out  of  the  way  the  parch- 
ment itself  ;  or,  as  Theophylact  says — eirolif^ae  /xTjBe  (paiveadat. 
The  idiom  e«  rov  fieaov  (the  contrast  being  iv  tw  fieat^  is  no 
uncommon  one.  On  the  change  of  construction  from  participle 
to  verb  marking  emphasis,  see  under  i.  6.  Winer,  §  63,  I.  2,  b. 
How  God  has  taken  it  so  effectually  out  of  the  way  is  next 
told  us — 

n poa7]\(oaa^  avro  tu)  aravpui — "  Having  nailed  it  to  the 
cross."  The  participle  occurs  only  here  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  is  similarly  found  in  3  Mace.  iv.  9.  The  allusion  is  not 
to  the  tablet  nailed  to  the  cross  above  the  sufferer,  as  Gieseler 
assumes,  but  to  the  crucifixion  of  the  Eedeemer  Himself. 
There  seems  to  be  no  historical  ground  for  the  illustration  of 
Grotius,  that  it  was  customary  to  thrust  a  nail  through  papers 
— declaring  them  old  and  obsolete,  much  in  the  same  way  as 
a  Bank  of  England  note  is  punched  through  the  centre  when 
declared  to  be  no  longer  of  value,  and  no  longer  to  be  put  into 
circulation.  The  idea  of  the  apostle  is,  that  when  Christ  was 
nailed  to  the  cross,  the  condemning  power  of  the  law  was 
nailed  along  with  Him,  and  died  with  Him — "  Now  we  are 
delivered  from  the  law,  that  being  dead  in  which  we  were 
held."  Eom.  vii.  6.  In  other  words,  God  exempts  sinners 
from  the  sentence  which  they  merit,  through  the  sufferings 
and  death  of  Jesus.  The  implied  doctrine  is,  that  the  guilt 
of  men  was  borne  by  Christ  when  he  died — -was  laid  on  Him 
by  that  God  who  by  this  method  took  the  handwriting  out  of 
the  way.  Jesus  bore  the  sentence  of  the  handwriting  in 
Himself,  and  God  now  remits  its  penalty ;  having  forgiven 
you  all  your  trespasses,  inasmuch  as  He  has  blotted  out  the 
hostile  handwriting  and  taken  it  out  of  the  way,  for  He  nailed 
it  to  the  cross  of  His  Son.  Meyer  remarks,  that  i^a\eL(p6iv 
and  atpeiv  e/c  rov  fieaov  are  not  two  really  distinct  acts,  but 
represent  the  same  thing.     We   would  rather  say,  that  the 


COLOSSIANS   II.  15.  167 

first  term  characterizes  the  act,  and  the  second  refers  to  the 
completed  result ;  while  the  third  participle — irpoa-rjXdacra'i — 
defines  the  external  mode  of  accomplishment. 

(Ver.  15.)  ' A7reK8v<Tdfi€vo<;  ra?  o,p'^a<i  koX  Ta<;  e'^oucr/a? — 
"  Having  spoiled  the  principalities  and  powers."  We  should 
have  expected  «at  to  be  placed  between  the  two  clauses ;  but 
its  absence  indicates  the  close  connection,  nay,  the  identity  of 
the  two  acts  ;  or,  perhaps,  of  the  process  in  which  the  two 
acts  were  completed.  In  blotting  out  the  handwriting,  God 
at  the  same  time  vanquished  Satan.  If  ever  there  was  bathos 
in  exegesis,  it  is  in  that  of  Kosenmiiller — that  when  Jesus 
rose  again  from  the  dead,  it  was  seen  how  vain  were  the 
efforts  of  the  Jewish  magistrates  against  Him.  Suicer,  Junker, 
and  others,  take  a  similar  view.  The  terms  have  been  explained 
under  i.  16,  and  under  Eph.  i.  21,  vi.  12.  We  cannot  agree 
with  Pierce  that  good  angels  are  meant ;  they  needed  not  to 
be  spoiled  or  triumphed  over  openly.  Hostile  spiritual 
powers  are  plainly  designated.  Their  reign  over  man  had  its 
origin  in  his  sin ;  and  their  usurpation  lasted  till  sin  was 
atoned  for,  and  its  power  destroyed.  Hence  Satan  is  called 
the  "  god  "  and  "  prince  of  this  world."  [Eph.  ii.  2  ;]  Luke 
xi.  22. 

The  verb  aTreKSvo/aat,  which  means  literally  to  cast  off  any- 
thing, such  as  clothing,  has  been  taken  by  many  as  referring 
to  Christ's  own  death,  as  if  he  had  cast  off  the  flesh  in  dying 
— an  idea  which  seems  to  have  originated  the  reading  rrjv 
adpKa,  in  F,  G,  seen  too  in  the  Syriac,  and  followed  by  some 
of  the  Latin  Fathers.  Augustine  has — spolians  se  came.  So 
that  the  figure  has  been  supposed  to  be  that  of  a  naked  wrestler. 
But  the  diction  of  the  verse  is  that  of  avowed  and  open  war- 
fare, and  the  participle  direKS.  must  have  the  sense  of  spoiling  ; 
conquering,  and  then  making  the  vanquished  a  spoil,  as  is 
done  when  a  fallen  foe  is  stript  of  his  armour.  This  last  is 
the  idea  and  image  of  Meyer,  which  perhaps  is  too  minute, 
for  the  general  figure  is,  that  He  stript  them  of  all  power  and 
authority.  The  compound  form  of  the  verb  indicates  how 
completely  this  was  done ;  e/cSueti/  ^  is  used  in  the  sense  of 
sjpoliare,  and  the  Vulgate  here  renders  exspolians. 

'EBeiyfidriaev   iv   irapprjaLa — "  He  made   a   show  of  them 
1  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  24. 


168  COLOSSIANS  II.  15. 

openly."  The  allusion  is  plainly  to  the  triumph  which  is 
celebrated  after  a  battle.  His  spiritual  foes,  on  being  van- 
quished, were  exhibited  as  a  public  spectacle.  The  meaning 
is  not  that  He  exposed  their  weakness — ttjv  aaOevetav  eSei^e, 
as  Theodoret  understands  it.  That  is  certainly  implied,  but 
the  idea  is.  He  has  shown  the  fact  of  their  complete  subjuga- 
tion in  His  triumph  over  them.  There  is  no  ground  to  give 
the  simple  verb  the  sense  of  the  compound — irapaSeLyfiari^eLv, 
and  add  the  idea  of  shame,  as  is  done  by  Theophylact,  Beza, 
Eoell,  Storr,  and  Conybeare.  Such  an  idea,  as  well  as  that 
of  weakness,  may  be  indeed  inferred  from  the  humiliating 
exposure.  And  it  was  no  private  parade,  it  was  done  iv 
irapprjo-ia — "  openly."  John  vii.  4.  Theophylact  gives  it 
rightly — Brj/jLoaia,  iravTcov  opoiVTwv — "  openly,  in  the  eyes  of 
all  ;" — Ixulmlich,  frei  und  frank,  as  Meyer  paraphrases  it. 

©piap/3ev(xa<;  iv  avrai — "  Having  triumphed  over  them  in 
it."  The  participle  is  used  in  2  Cor.  ii.  14,  with  a  hiphil 
sense,  and  it  here  occurs  with  the  accusative,  like  the  Latin — 
triuonphare  aliqucm.  Adhering  to  the  hiphil  sense — "  maketh 
or  causeth  to  triumph,"  some  would  supply  i^/ia? — maketh  us 
to  triumph  over  them.  Such  an  idea  only  encumbers  the 
sense.  The  three  verbs  in  the  verse  do  not  form  a  climax.  But 
the  spiritual  foes  are  spoiled,  and  then  they  are  exposed  ;  while 
the  last  participle  defines  the  manner  and  purpose  of  the 
exposure — it  formed  a  public  triumph.  The  truth  expressed 
is,  that  there  has  been  complete  and  irretrievable  subjugation. 
But  the  meaning  and  reference  of  the  last  words  iv  avrS  are 
doubtful.  The  Syriac  and  Vulgate,  with  Theodoret,  and  the 
editors  Griesbach  and  Scholz,  read  iv  avrS — "  in  Himself." 
If  the  reference  be  made  to  Christ,  then  it  is  wrong,  for  God 
is  the  nominative ;  and  if  to  God,  then  the  phrase  is  not  very 
intelligible.  Meyer  takes  the  reference  to  be  to  the  principal 
noun  of  the  preceding  verse — x^cpojpacfiov.  His  meaning  is, 
that  the  expunged  and  perforated  handwriting  was  a  proof  of 
Satan's  overthrow.  This  exegesis,  however,  gives  a  fulness  of 
meaning  to  iv  avTw,  which  the  words  will  not  bear.  They 
simply  mean  "  in  it,"  that  is,  in  the  handwriting.  Now  it  was 
not  in  the  handwriting  simply  that  God  obtained  His  victory, 
but  in  obliterating  it,  and  nailing  it  to  the  cross — an  idea  that 
could  not  be  expressed  by  the  bare  iv  avrw.     "  In  the  cheiro- 


COLOSSIANS  II.   15.  169 

graph,"  and  in  what  he  did  with  the  cheirograph,  are  very 
different  ideas,  requiring  very  different  forms  of  diction. 

Opinions  are  nearly  divided  as  to  whether  ev  avTM  refers 
to  Christ  or  to  the  cross.  Wolf,  Musculus,  Bengel,  Storr, 
Flatt,  Roseurniiller,  Biihr,  Huther,  and  De  Wette,  hold  the 
first  view.  Our  objection  to  this  view  is,  that  in  the  two 
verses  no  mention  is  made  of  Christ.  The  work  is  wholly 
ascribed  to  God — not  formally  to  God  in  Christ. 

And  therefore  we  incline  to  the  other  opinion,  that  iv  avrw 
carries  us  back  to  aravpS.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  Greek 
Fathers,  Theophylact  and  CEcumenius,  of  Calvin,  Beza,  Gro- 
tius,  Crocius,  Steiger,  Bohmer,  and  Olshausen.  Origen  has  no 
less  than  eight  times  for  iv  avrai  the  phrase  iv  rat  ^vKm. 
Epij)hanius,  Macarius,  and  Athanasius,  read  either  so,  or  iv 
aTuvpo).  The  reading  is  a  gloss,  but  it  shows  the  general 
opinion.  In  the  cross  God  achieved  His  victory  over  the 
infernal  powers — "  through  death,"  he  "  that  had  the  power 
of  death "  was  destroyed.  Through  the  agency  of  fallen 
spirits  sin  was  introduced,  and  it  was  the  sphere  of  their 
dominion  ;  they  could  rule  in  a  condemned  world,  but  not  in 
a  redeemed  one  ;  and  when  that  world  was  released  from  death 
by  the  death  of  Christ,  the  instrument  of  His  death  was 
the  weapon  of  conquest  and  symbol  of  victory  over  them. 
Most  strong  is  the  prevailing  opinion  of  the  mediseval  Latin 
church,  as  seen  in  Aquinas,  Anselm,  and  others,  that  this 
spoiling  was  in  the  nether  world,  and  over  the  daemons  who 
held  the  souls  of  the  patriarchs  in  captivity,  and  that  the 
triumphal  procession  was  the  march  of  the  imprisoned  spirits 
out  of  the  limhus  patrum.  [Eph.  iv.  8,  9.]  The  subject 
throughout  the  previous  context  is  God,  not  Christ ;  and  the 
whole  notion  is  an  idle  chimera. 

Most  glorious  is  the  thought  that  the  church  is  released 
from  the  bond  that  held  it,  and  delivered  from  the  hellish 
powers  that  tyrannized  over  humanity — a  deliverance  achieved 
for  it  by  Him  alone  "  whose  right  hand  and  holy  arm  "  could 
get  Him  the  victory.  Eedemption  is  a  work  at  once  of  price 
and  power,  of  expiation  and  conquest.  On  the  cross  was  the 
purchase  made;  on  the  cross  was  the  victory  gained.  The 
blood  that  wipes  out  the  sentence  was  there  shed,  and  the 
death  which  was  the  death-blow  of  Satan's  kingdom  was  there 


170  COLOSSIANS   II.   IG. 

endured.  Those  nails  which  killed  Christ  pierced  the  sentence 
of  doom — gave  egress  to  the  blood  which  cancelled  it,  and 
inflicted  at  the  same  time  a  mortal  wound  on  the  hosts  of 
darkness.  That  power  which  Satan  had  exercised  was  so 
prostrated,  that  every  one  believing  on  Christ  is  freed  from 
his  vassalage.  Christ's  death  was  a  battle,  and  in  it  God 
achieved  an  immortal  victory.  The  conflict  was  a  furious 
one,  mighty  and  mysterious  in  its  struggle.  The  combatant 
died ;  but  in  dying  He  conquered.  Hell  might  be  congratu- 
lating itself  that  it  had  gained  the  mastery,  and  might  be 
wondering  what  should  be  the  most  fitting  commemoration 
and  trophy,  when  He  who  died  arose  the  victor — no  enemy 
again  daring  to  dispute  His  power  or  challenge  His  right,  and 
then  God  exhibited  His  foes  in  open  triumph.  "  The  prince 
of  this  world  is  cast  out." 

All  this  teaching  bore  upon  the  Colossian  church  and  its 
crisis.  Let  not  the  ritual  law — which  exhibits  the  condemn- 
ing power  of  the  whole  law — be  enacted  among  you,  for  it 
has  been  fully  and  formally  abrogated.  Let  not  your  minds 
be  dazzled  or  overawed  by  esoteric  teaching  about  the  spirit- 
world.  All  those  spirits  are  beneath  the  Divine  Master;  if 
good,  they  are  His  servants ;  if  evil,  they  are  conquered 
vassals. 

Now  follows  the  pointed  and  practical  lesson.  Already 
had  they  been  warned  against  one  phasis  of  error — "  philosophy 
and  vain  deceit,"  and  a  sufficient  reason  is  given.  Next  is 
rehearsed  their  privilege  of  circumcision  and  baptism,  their 
death  to  sin  and  their  life  to  God.  Here  their  forgiveness  is 
stated  along  with  the  means  which  had  been  taken  to  secure 
it;  and  this  process,  so  decided  and  characteristic,  lays  the 
foundation  for  the  warning  in  the  verse  which  we  are  novi'  to 
consider. 

(Ver.  16.)  Mr}  ovv  Tt9  v^a'^  KpiveTO)  ev  /3pu>a6L  tj  iv  iroaet, 
— "  Let  no  one,  therefore,  judge  you  in  eating  or  in  drinking," 
— test  your  piety  by  such  a  criterion.  The  participle  ovv 
refers  back  to  the  preceding  statement,  especially  to  the 
first  clause  of  the  14th  verse.  The  verb  may  be  followed  by 
the  accusative,  intimating  who  are  the  objects  of  judgment, 
while  ev  accompanying  it  sometimes  specifies  its  period,  as  in 
John  xii.  48,  and  sometimes  its  quality,  as  in  Acts  xvii.   31, 


C0L0S3IAN3   II.   16.  171 

but  here  it  denotes  the  basis  on  which  judgment  is  passed,  or 
rather,  the  sphere  in  which  it  is  exercised.  According  to 
Meyer,  ^pa)<7i<;,  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  is  uni- 
formly actio  edendi,  and  so  distinct  from  /Bpcbfxa — cihis,  though 
in  other  portions  of  the  New  Testament,  and  among  the 
classics,  that  distinction  is  not  observed.  Some  of  the  lexico- 
graphers do  not  admit  the  statement,  as  is  manifest  by  their 
citations,  neither  does  Fritzsche — but  we  believe  Meyer  to  be 
correct.  ITocrt?  is  also  the  act  of  drinking,  in  contrast  with 
TTo/ia,  the  draught.  Though  the  Mosaic  law  did  not  dwell  so 
much  on  drinks  as  meats,  yet,  as  we  shall  see,  it  included  some 
statutes  about  drinks  and  drinking  vessels,  and  therefore  we 
cannot  agree  with  De  Wette  tliat  Troo-t?  was  inserted  "  for 
the  sake  of  the  alliteration  " — dcs  GleichUangcs  wcgcn.  The 
eating  and  drinking  are,  therefore,  a  reference  to  the  dietetic 
injunctions  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Lev.  vii.  20-27,  xi.  Certain 
kinds  of  animal  food  were  prohibited.  The  Jews  were 
allowed  the  flesh  of  ruminant  quadrupeds  with  a  cloven  hoof, 
of  fishes  with  scales  and  fins,  and  of  such  insects  as  the  locust, 
while  unclean  birds  were  specified  in  a  separate  catalogue. 
The  priests  on  the  eve  of  ministration  were  solemnly  for- 
bidden the  use  of  wine.  Certain  kinds  of  vessels  that  had 
contained  water,  and  been  defiled,  were  to  be  broken,  but  others 
were  only  to  be  rinsed.  The  Nazarites  did  not  taste  any 
product  of  the  vine.  No  doubt  the  pride  of  sanctity  was 
strong  in  the  Jewish  mind,  and  the  tendency  was,  both  in 
Essenes  and  Pharisees,  to  multiply  such  prohibitions,  and  to 
place  around  meats  and  drinks  a  finical  array  of  minute  and 
complex  regulations.  The  party  at  Colosse  had  strong  ascetic 
tendencies,  and  were  apt  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  those  who 
felt  that  "  every  creature  of  God  is  good,  and  nothing  to  be 
refused."  The  errorists  forgot  that  the  spirituality  of  Chris- 
tianity rose  far  above  such  physical  restraints  and  distinctions, 
and  that  the  new  kingdom  was  "  not  meat  and  drink,  but 
righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost." 

''JI  iv  fjbepei  koprrj'i  rj  vovfirivla<i  rj  aa^fidruiv — "  Either  in  the 
particular  of  a  festival,  or  of  a  new  moon,  or  of  Sabbath-days." 
The  phrase  iv  pLepei,  as  in  classic  use,^  signifies  not  simply  in 

^  See  "Wetstein,  in  loc;  Aelian,  v.  8,  3.     Krebs  regards  h  /u-ipu  as  an  elegant 
redundancy,  but  his  examples  do  not  sustain  his  opinion. 


172  COLOSSIANS   II.   16. 

respect  of,  as  Beza,  Flatt,  Biilir,  and  Hutlier  give  it.  It 
gives  a  specialty  to  the  theme  or  sphere  of  judgment, 
by  individualizing  the  topic  or  occasion.  Melancthon  and 
Zanchius  render — vicibus  festorum.  The  Greek  Fathers 
Chrysostom  and  Theophylact  take  it  as  denoting  a  partial 
observance,  as  if  the  heretics  did  not  retain  the  whole  of  the 
original  rule ;  and  Calvin  supposes  iv  fjiipec  to  intimate  that 
they  made  unwarranted  distinctions  between  one  day  and 
another.  "Feast,"  or  Festival,  refers,  as  is  plain  from  the 
contrast,  to  the  three  great  annual  feasts  of  the  Passover, 
Pentecost,  and  Tabernacles.  The  "  new  moon "  ushered  in 
certain  monthly  celebrations,  while  the  sabbaths  were  weekly 
in  their  periods.  Some,  indeed,  such  as  Neumann,  suppose 
the  allusion  to  be  to  the  grand  sabbatic  periods  of  the  seventh 
day,  the  seventh  year,  and  the  fiftieth  year.  But  there  is  no 
warrant  or  necessity  for  such  a  reference  here,  though  the 
apostle  says  to  the  Galatians,  "  ye  observe  days  and  months, 
and  times  and  years."  Eom,  xiv.  5,  6.  The  term  a-d^^arov 
often  occurs  in  a  plural  form  in  the  New  Testament,  as  if, 
as  Winer  supposes,  the  Syro-Chaldaic  form — ^n^t:' — had  been 
transferred  into  the  Greek  tongue.  Matt.  xii.  1  ;  Luke  iv.  16; 
Acts  xiii.  14,  xvi.  13,  Allusions  to  these  feasts,  collectively, 
will  be  found  in  1  Chron.  xxiii.  31  ;  2  Chron.  ii.  4,  xxxi.  3. 
The  observances  of  the  Jewish  rubric,  whether  in  its  original 
form,  or  with  the  multiplied  and  ascetic  additions  which  it 
presented  in  those  days,  laid  believers  no  longer  under  obliga- 
tion. They  belonged  to  an  obsolete  system,  which  had 
"  decayed  and  waxed  old."  Christianity  inculcated  no  such 
periodical  holidays.  For  it  did  not  bid  men  meet  thrice 
a  year  to  feast  themselves,  but  each  day  to  "  eat  their  bread 
with  gladness  and  singleness  of  heart."  It  did  not  summon 
them  to  any  tumultuous  demonstration  with  "trumpets  at 
new  moon,"  since  every  division  of  the  month  was  a  testimony 
of  Divine  goodness,  and  the  whole  kalendar  was  marked  by 
Divine  benefactions — every  day  alike  a  season  of  prayer  and 
joy.  Nor  were  they  to  hallow  the  "  sabbaths,"  for  these  had 
served  their  purpose,  and  the  Lord's  day  was  now  to  be  a 
season  of  loftier  joy,  as  it  commemorates  a  more  august  event 
than  either  the  creation  of  the  universe  or  the  exodus  from 
Egypt.      Every  period  is  sanctified — "  day  unto  day  uttereth 


COLOSSI ANS  II.  17.  173 

speech,  and  night  unto  night  tcacheth  knowledge."  Sensations 
of  spiritual  joy  are  not  to  be  restricted  to  holy  days,  for  they 
thrill  the  spirit  every  moment,  and  need  not  wait  for  expression 
till  there  be  a  solemn  gathering,  for  every  instant  awakes  to 
the  claims  and  the  raptures  of  religion.  The  new  religion  is 
too  free  and  exuberant  to  be  trained  down  to  "  times  and 
seasons  "  like  its  tame  and  rudimental  predecessor.  Its  feast 
is  daily,  for  every  day  is  holy ;  its  moon  never  wanes,  and  its 
serene  tranquillity  is  an  unbroken  Sabbath.  The  Jewish 
Sabbath  was  kept,  however,  by  the  early  Christians  along 
with  their  own  Lord's  day  for  a  considerable  period ;  till  at 
length,  in  3G4  a.d.,  the  Council  of  Laodicea  condemned  the 
practice  as  Judaizing. 

(Ver,  17.)  "A  iariv  cklcl  jwv  /xeWovrcov — "Which  are  a 
shadow  of  things  to  come."  The  plural  form  of  the  relative 
has  higher  authority  than  the  singular,  which  is  adopted  by 
Lachmann,  and  is  found  in  B,  F,  G,  and  in  several  of  the  Latin 
Fathers.  The  relative  is  not  to  be  restricted  to  aa^^droiv, 
as  Eichter  argues ;  nor  does  it  simply  connect  itself  with 
those  festive  days,  as  Flatt  takes  it.  The  entire  ritual  is 
alluded  to — the  ritual  as  God  appointed  it,  and  not  as  over- 
loaded by  its  self-willed  votaries. 

The  noun  a  Kid  may  bear  two  different  meanings.  It  may 
either  signify  a  shadow  projected  from  a  body  by  its  intercep- 
tion of  the  light ;  or  it  may  signify,  as  here,  a  6.\m  and  shadowy 
sketch  of  an  object,  in  contrast  not  only  with  a  full  and 
coloured  likeness,  but  with  the  object  itself.  Meyer  contends 
strenuously  for  the  former,  viz.  that  aKid  is  not  <xKia<ypa^[a, 
but  simply  "  shadow,"  as  if  the  Christian  economy  threw  its 
shadow  back,  and  this  shadow  was  ritual  Mosaism.  This 
idea  brings  out,  indeed,  the  typical  relation  which  Judaism 
bore  to  Christianity.  But  perhaps  the  apostle  had  the  figure 
before  his  mind  which  he  has  elsewhere  employed ;  "  the  law," 
he  says,  "  had  a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,"  and  not  the 
"very  image  of  the  things."  In  this  expression  he  distin- 
guishes a  Kid  and  eUcov,  as  being  both  likenesses,  though  of  a 
different  kind ;  and  in  the  passage  before  us,  he  distinguishes 
o-Kid  from  the  reality  or  substance — aco/xa — which  it  repre- 
sents. The  nouns  a-Kid  and  acofia  are  thus  also  contrasted  by 
Josephus,  when  he  makes  Antipater  say  of  Archelaus — aKiav 


174  COLOSSIANS  II.   17. 

avTr]aofi€vo<;  (3acn\e[a^,  rj<i  rjp-jTadev  eavTw  to  acofxa}  Pliotius 
vaguely  renders  crcofia  by  dXijdeia.  The  "  things  to  come " 
are  the  spiritual  blessings  of  the  Christian  dispensation,  not  as 
Meyer,  in  accordance  with  his  favourite  theory,  supposes, 
blessings  to  be  enjoyed  at  the  Parousia,  or  second  coming. 
Heb,  X.  1.  The  apostle  employs  ecrrt  in  the  present,  not 
because,  as  Meyer  argues,  the  blessings  are  yet  future  to  the 
present  point  of  time ;  but  either  because,  as  Davenant  sup- 
poses, he  gives  a  definition,  or  because  the  apostle  transports 
himself  ideally  to  a  period  when  ritual  Judaism  was  of 
Divine  obligation,  and  when  it  was  really  the  shadow  of 
things  yet  to  come.  The  connection  of  a-Kid  with  the  genitive 
Tcov  fieX.  forbids  the  notion  of  Zanchius  and  Suicer,  that  the 
reference  may  be  to  the  comparative  darkness  of  the  former 
economy. 

To  8e  cTMfxa  XpicTTov — "  But  the  body  is  Christ's."  A  few 
Codices  change  the  passage  by  a  glaring  amendment,  and 
read  o  Xptaro'i,  while  A,  B,  C  prefix  the  article  toO,  a  read- 
ing which  Lachmann  prefers.  "  But  the  body  is  Christ's," 
that  is,  of  Christ's  provision  and  possession.  Meyer,  taking 
acofjLa  in  the  sense  of  body,  that  is,  the  concrete  reality  of  those 
things  to  come,  supposes  that  Christ  is  here  supposed  to  be 
its  head.  But  the  term  body,  with  its  correlative  organ — 
head,  invariably  refers  in  Paul's  writings  to  the  church — a 
meaning  which  cannot  in  this  place  be  admitted.  Chrysostom 
adopted  this  sense,  and  to  support  it,  altered  the  connection, 
and  clumsily  joined  this  clause  to  the  following  verse — "  You 
who  are  the  body  of  Christ,  let  no  man  deceive  you  of  your 
reward."  The  same  construction  is  approved  by  Photius,  and 
also  by  Augustine,  who  has  corpus  atitem  Christi,  nemo  vos 
convincat.  The  meaning  is  not  that  Christ  is  the  body,  but 
that  He  possesses  it.  The  realities  so  long  shadowed  out  arc 
His — all  that  composes  them  belongs  to  Him. 

The  clause  then  contains  the  great  truth  that  the  Mosaic 
economy  was  no  empty  congeries  of  useless  and  meaningless 
observances  —  infantine  in  character  and  design;  but  an 
organism  at  once  Divine  in  its  origin,  and  fraught  with 
lessons  of  striking  form.  It  was  a  dim  outline — a-Kcd — of 
those  substantial  blessings  which  are  of  Christ,  and  it  served 
^  De  Bell.  Jml.  ii.  2,  5.     Also  Cicero,  de  Officih,  3,  17. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   17.  175 

a  gracious  purpose  during  its  existence.  It  was  a  rudimentary 
sketch.  Its  temple  with  its  apartments,  vessels,  and  furniture ; 
its  priesthood,  in  their  imposing  robes  and  duties ;  its  altar, 
with  the  fire  on  its  hearth,  and  the  cloud  of  smoke  resting 
over  it ;  its  victims,  in  their  age,  kind,  and  qualifications ;  its 
rubric,  with  its  holidays,  and  their  special  observances ;  its 
minute  ritual  in  reference  to  diet,  dress,  and  disease — all  were 
the  faint  lines  of  a  sketch  which  was  limned  by  the  Divine 
pencil  for  the  guidance  and  government  of  Hebrew  faith  and 
worship.  The  eye  of  faith  might,  as  it  gazed,  be  able  to  fill 
in  the  picture,  and  see  in  distant  perspective  the  sublime 
group  of  a  tabernacle  filled  and  inhabited  by  the  Great  Spirit ; 
a  Priest  offering  the  most  costly  of  victims — the  God-man 
presenting  Himself;  an  altar  consecrated  by  blood  precious 
beyond  all  parallel ;  and  a  sabbatism  not  only  serene  and 
joyous  on  earth,  but  stretching  away  into  eternity  as  a  "rest 
remaining  to  the  people  of  God."  Thus  the  hieroglyph  and 
substance  exactly  correspond,  though  the  former  be  only  an 
adumbration  and  a  miniature. 

But  not  only  was  there  this  close  and  preordained  relation 
between  the  shadow  and  the  substance,  there  was  also  a 
predictive  correspondence.  The  sketch  is  taken  from  the 
reality,  and  implies  the  existence  of  it.  The  shadow  is  the 
intended  likeness  of  the  substance.  In  other  words,  Chris- 
tianity was  not  fashioned  to  resemble  Judaism,  but  Judaism 
was  fashioned  to  resemble  Christianity.  The  antitype  is 
not  constructed  to  bear  a  likeness  to  the  type,  but  the 
type  is  constructed  to  bear  a  likeness  to  the  antitype.  It 
is,  in  short,  because  of  the  antitype  that  the  type  exists. 
The  Mosaic  economy  being  a  rude  draught  of  Christianity, 
presupposed  its  future  existence.  If  it  had  been  an  institute 
without  ulterior  object,  if  its  rites  had  contained  no  prospec- 
tive delineations,  or  if  its  whole  design  had  terminated  in 
present  observance,  then  it  could  not  have  received  the 
apostolic  designation.  But  it  was  a  typical  system.  Now,  a 
type  not  only  pictured  out  the  nature  of  a  future  reality,  but 
it  foretold  its  certainty.  It  showed,  and  it  foreshowed.  The 
sacrifice  not  only  showed  that  the  offerer  was  under  sentence 
of  death,  and  that  only  by  the  substitutionary  shedding  of 
blood  the  awful  sentence  could  be  repealed ;  but  it  also  fore- 


176  COLOSSIANS   II.   17. 

showed  that  the  great  and  final  oblation  of  infinite  efficacy 
would  assuredly  be  presented  in  "  the  fulness  of  the  time."  It 
not  only  portrayed  the  mode,  but  it  gave  assurance  of  the 
fact — it  was  at  once  a  symbol  and  a  prophecy.  The  entire 
Jewish  ritual  was  so  organized,  as  not  only  to  exhibit  a  faint 
and  distant  likeness  to  Christianity,  but  it  estabhshed  the 
certainty  that  the  new  dispensation  of  which  it  was  an  early 
and  elementary  copy  should  be  at  length  organized  in  perfec- 
tion and  symmetry.  The  "  figure  for  the  time  then  present " 
guaranteed  the  introduction  of  the  figured  reality  in  the  time 
to  come.  The  sign  not  only  preceded,  but  certified  the 
advent  of  the  thing  signified. 

Still,  the  shadow  is  in  itself  nothing — it  is  empty,  baseless, 
and  indistinct.  The  Hebrew  ceremonial  could  not  give  full 
instruction  by  its  symbols,  and  it  could  only  purge  "  as  per- 
taining to  the  flesh."  It  had  no  power  to  enter  into  the  con- 
science, and  impart  peace  and  the  sense  of  forgiveness.  The 
blood  of  an  animal  could  not  secure  Divine  favour.  The  thief, 
after  restoring  fourfold  to  the  man  whom  he  had  wronged,  and 
so  satisfying  him,  must  also  offer  a  victim  on  the  altar  to  God, 
in  order  that  the  penalty  incurred  from  Him  might  be  remitted. 
The  man  who  had  been  contaminated  by  any  ceremonial  impurity, 
who  had  touched  a  corpse,  or  come  into  accidental  contact  with 
a  leper,  was  by  means  of  an  appointed  ordeal  of  ablution  and 
sacrifice  restored  to  his  previous  status.  But  the  whole  appa- 
ratus was  wanting  in  spiritual  power,  and  its  only  virtue  was 
in  its  connection  with  the  substance  to  come.  That  it  was  a 
shadow  so  designed,  and  not  a  fortuitous  and  unmeaning 
system,  is  plain  from  its  correspondence  with  the  body  which 
is  Christ's,  and  its  consequent  fulfilment  in  Him.  The  harmony 
is  universal  and  complete.  The  great  High  Priest  has  come 
and  clothed  Himself  in  humanity — a  living  vestment  far  more 
costly  than  the  robes  of  Aaron,  "made  for  glory  and  for 
beauty ; "  and  all  other  victims  have  been  superseded  by  His 
oblation  of  Himself.  Omniscience  is  His,  and  therefore  no 
formal  Urim  and  Thummim  glitters  on  His  breast.  The  Self- 
sacrifice  He  presented  was  pure  as  the  fire  from  God  by  which 
it  was  consumed,  and  it  has  been  visibly  accepted.  He  has 
gone  through  the  starry  vail,  and  into  heaven  itself,  with  the 
names  of  all  His  clients  inscribed  upon  His  heart ;  and  He 


COLOSSIANS   II.   18.  177 

pleads  the  merit  of  His  blood  before  a  mercy-seat  not  cano- 
pied by  a  cloud,  but  enveloped  in  the  Majesty  of  Him  who  sits 
upon  it.  The  woven  and  metallic  cherubim  disappear  in  the 
reality,  for  the  angels  having  performed  their  allotted  parts 
in  the  mystery  of  redemption,  are  "  ministering  spirits  to 
them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation."  There  is  no  need, 
now  that  the  law  be  engraved  on  stone,  for  it  is  written  in- 
delibly on  "  the  fleshy  tables  of  the  heart."  It  is  no  longer 
required  that  there  be  a  bath,  or  a  "  sea  of  brass,"  for  believers 
are  washed  in  the  laver  of  regeneration.  The  golden  lamp- 
stand  has  been  extinguished,  for  the  lustre  of  the  Enlightening 
Spirit  fills  the  House  of  God.  Nay,  the  entire  church  on 
earth  is  a  spiritual  priesthood,  engaged  in  appropriate  minis- 
trations, serving  now,  indeed,  in  the  outer  court,  but  soon  to 
be  called  up  into  the  inner  sanctuary. 

The  argument  of  the  apostle,  then,  is — why  go  down  to 
"  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements  "  ?  Who  would  listen  to  any 
sophistry  urging  him  to  prefer  the  shadow  to  the  substance  ? 
Such  a  relapse  would  be  an  attempt  to  roll  back  the  Divine 
purpose,  and  impede  that  religious  progress  which  Chris- 
tianity had  introduced ;  an  effort  to  restore  an  intolerable 
yoke,  and  rob  the  new  religion  of  its  spirituality  and  vigour. 
The  result  would  be  to  stifle  devotion  by  a  periodical  mechan- 
ism, and  degrade  obedience  into  a  service  of  trifles.  And 
therefore  the  apostle  solemnly  warns  the  Colossians  not  to  be 
imposed  upon  by  such  pretences,  and  not  for  a  moment  to  sub- 
mit to  teaching  which  would  supplant  the  real  by  the  ritual, 
and  give  them  a  religion  of  obsolete  externalities  for  one  of 
vital  freedom  and  spiritual  jurisdiction. 

(Ver.  18.)  MrjSeU  vfxd<i  Kara^pa^eveTO) — "Let  no  man  rob 
you  of  your  reward."  Theodoret  explains  the  peculiar  verb 
as  meaning  to  aZlK(o<i  jBpa^eveiv — to  confer  a  reward  unjustly. 
Zonaras,  on  the  35th  canon  of  the  Laodicean  Council,  has 
usually  been  adduced,  and  he  says  that  the  action  of  the  verb  is 
done  when  this  takes  place — to  fir)  tov  viKijaavTa  a^covv  tov 
/SpafSeiov,  aXX  erepw  StSovat  avTO,  "  not  to  reckon  one  who  has 
conquered  worthy  of  the  prize,  but  to  give  it  to  another." 
Suidas  says  more  distinctly — to  aXXov  drycovi^ofxevov  dXXov 
(TTe(f}avova6aL  \ejei  6  airoaToXo';  KaTa^ pa/Seveadai.  The  other 
figure,  adopted  by  Beza,  from  one  of  the  exceptional  meanings 


178  COLOSSIANS   II.   18. 

of  ^pa/Sevoi,  is  not  sustained  by  any  certain  examples.  His 
idea  is,  let  no  one  usurp  the  office  of  a  ^pa^evrt]-?  against 
you ;  while  in  a  similar  way  a-Lapide,  Crocius,  and  Bengel, 
generally  adopt  this  meaning — let  no  one  assuming  such  an 
office  domineer  over  you,  and  so  prescribe  to  you  how  you  are 
to  act  in  order  to  obtain  the  prize.  Such  an  interpretation 
has  more  in  derivation  to  recommend  it  than  the  notion  of 
Luther,  Castalio,  and  Calvin — let  no  one  intercept  the  prize, 
or  get  it  before  you.  The  apostle  warns  them  to  listen  to 
none  of  these  instructors,  for  their  design  was  to  rob  them  of 
that  prize,  which,  as  the  result  of  their  spiritual  victory,  Chris- 
tianity set  before  them.  If  they  yielded  to  any  of  the  practices 
referred  to  in  this  verse,  then  they  followed  the  solicitation  of  one 
who  would  rob  them  of  that  "  prize  of  their  high  calling  "  for 
which  they  had  been  pressing  forward.  It  is  thus  a  term  of 
far  deeper  import  than  the  preceding  Kpivero),  though  Photius, 
Hesychius,  Eisner,  Storr,  Huther,  Biihr,  and  Olshausen  vir- 
tually identify  them.  For  there  is  in  it  not  merely  the  giving 
of  a  wrong  judgment,  but  a  judgment  which  involves  in  it  the 
loss  of  all  that  the  gospel  promises  to  the  winner,  a  life  of 
glory  on  higli.  It  is  a  tame  idea  of  De  Wette,  to  suppose  that 
the  prize  is  the  true  worship  of  God,  for  it  is  here  looked  upon 
not  as  a  prize,  but  as  the  means  of  obtaining  the  prize.  It 
may  be  remarked  in  passing,  that  Jerome  regards  the  verb 
as  a  Cilicism,  or  a  provincialism  of  the  apostle,  but  others 
have  shown  that  the  word  occurs  among  the  classics,  as  in 
Demosthenes  and  Polybius. 

The  true  connection  and  meaning  of  the  following  word, 
6e\(ov,  are  not  easily  ascertained.  The  agitated  question  is, 
whether  it  should  be  joined  to  Kara^pa/SeveTO),  or  to  the  follow- 
ing words,  iv  Ta7reivo(ppoavi>r).  If  it  be  joined  to  the  former, 
the  meaning  will  be  "  willingly  " — let  no  one  willingly  seduce 
you ;  but  this  would  be  a  counsel  to  the  false  teachers  as  well 
as  to  the  Colossians.  Or  it  may  be,  as  Grotius  gives  it — etiamsi 
id  maxime  velit,  "  let  no  one,  although  he  should  set  his  heart 
iipon  it,  rob  you  of  your  reward."  Beza  finds  in  the  term  a 
support  to  the  sense  which  he  attached  to  the  verb — let  no  one 
assume  voluntarily  the  office  of  a  prize-distributor  over  you, 
and  thus  wrong  you.  Erasmus  gives  the  term  an  adverbial 
sense  of  ciqndc,  studiose  ;  and  others  render  it  ultro.     Steiger 


COLOSSIANS   II.   18.  179 

inclines  to  a  similar  opinion,  and  Tittmann  translates — consulto 
vel  ultro}  But  the  usage  is  not  well  sustained  in  the  Ncav 
Testament,  and  the  participle  is,  as  Bengel  remarks,  the  first 
of  a  series,  OeKwv,  i/x^arevcov,  (f)vatov/j.evo<i,  Kparoiv,  and  each 
of  the  participles  has  its  independent  construction.  It  must 
therefore  be  joined  to  iv  TaTrecvocpp. — but  how  ?  Olshausen, 
Wahl,  Bahr,  Bohmer,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  and  Bretschneider, 
preceded  by  Hesychius,  Phavorinus,  Augustine,  Estius,  Eisner, 
Storr,  and  Flatt,  take  6e\(ov  in  the  sense  of  evSoKwv,  "  delight- 
ing in " — affectans  humilitatem.  Thus  they  regard  it  as  a 
Hebraism  formed  upon  the  usage  3  |*Dn — 1  Sam.  xviii.  22  ; 
2  Sam.  XV.  26;  2  Chron.  ix.  8;"  Ps!  cxi.  2,  cxlvii.  10. 
Though  this  usage  may  be  regarded  as  established  in  the 
Septuagint,  yet  it  is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament,  nor 
does  it  suit  here.  For  the  apostle  is  not  wishing  to  paint  the 
character  of  the  false  teacher,  but  to  warn  against  his  wiles. 
He  does  not  mean  to  say  that  the  false  teacher  has  a  special 
pride  in  his  own  humility,  but  he  means  to  say,  that  the 
Colossians  must  be  on  their  guard  against  him,  for  he  will 
seek  to  entrap  them  by  means  of  that  humility. 

We  give  dekwv  its  common  meaning.  Let  no  man  beguile 
you — wishing  to  do  it  by  his  humility.  This  is  the  natural 
view  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  of  Theodoret,  and  of  Theophylact 
who  says — on  OeKovaiv  vfj,d<;  Kara/Spa^ evetv  Bia  Ta7r€cvo(f)p. 
BoKovat]^.  So  Photius,  Calvin,  Huther,  Meyer,  and  De 
Wette.  The  preposition  iv  denotes  the  means  of  deception,  or 
the  sphere  in  which  the  deceiver  moves.  The  humility  referred 
to,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  last  verse  of  the  chapter,  is  a 
spurious  humility.  Fanatical  pride  is  often  associated  with 
this  humility,  as  when,  for  show,  the  beggar's  feet  are  washed ; 
and  the  friar  in  his  coarse  rags  walks  barefooted  and  begs. 
And  men  become  proud  of  their  humility — glory  in  the  feel- 
ing of  self-annihilation.  The  spirit  of  the  false  teacher,  with 
all  its  professed  lowliness,  would  not  bend  to  the  Divine  reve- 
lation, but  nursed  its  fallacies  with  a  haughty  tenacity,  and 
preached  them  with  an  impious  daring,  for  he  was  "vainly 
puffed  up  by  his  fleshly  mind." 

Kal  6pr}(Ticeiq  twv  ajjeXcov — "  And  adoration  of   angels." 
This  is  another  of  the  instruments  of  seduction.     The  genitive 
1  De  Synon.  p.  130. 
P 


180  COLOSSIANS   II.   18. 

T(Jov  ayyekcov  cannot  be  that  of  subject,  as  if  the  meaning 
were,  a  worship  like  that  which  angels  present,  or  such  as  man 
may  learn  from  them — OprjaKeia  ayjeXiKT].  Such  a  view  is  held 
by  Schoettgen  and  Wolf,  and  in  its  spirit  by  Noesselt,  Eosen- 
mliller,  Luther,  and  Schrader.  TertuUian  says — aliqiws  taxat, 
qui  ex  visionihus  angelicis  dicebant,  cihis  cibstinendum,  etc. 
Adver.  Mar  don,  v.  19. 

The  genitive  is  that  of  object.  The  attempt  of  the  false 
teacher  was  not  to  get  them  into  an  ecstasy  such  as  that  felt 
by  the  "rapt  seraph,  who  adores  and  burns,"  but  it  was  a 
positive  inculcation  of  angel-worship.  OprjaKela  is  often 
followed  by  the  genitive  of  object.^  Winer,  §  30,  1.  The 
term,  whatever  its  derivation,  denotes  devotional  service. 
How  angels  came  to  be  worshipped  we  may  not  precisely 
know,  though,  certainly,  it  might  not  be  difficult  to  account 
for  it,  when  one  sees  how  saint- worship  has  spread  itself  so 
extensively  in  one  section  of  Christendom.  The  angels 
occupied  the  highest  place  which  creatures  could  occupy 
under  the  Theocracy.  They  held  lofty  station  and  dis- 
charged important  functions.  The  law  was  "  ordained  by 
angels,  in  the  hands  of  a  mediator,"  nay,  the  apostle  calls 
it  "  the  word  spoken  by  angels."  Jehovah  descended 
with  ten  thousand  of  His  holy  ones,  when  "  from  His  right 
hand  went  a  fiery  law."  The  Jews,  said  Stephen,  in  his 
address,  "  received  the  law  by  the  disposition  of  angels." 
Whatever  be  the  meaning  of  these  declarations,  there  is 
no  doubt  that  they  indicate  some  special  and  important 
province  of  angelic  operation.  Josephus  expresses  the 
same  opinion — the  current  one  of  his  nation.^  No  wonder 
that  those  beings,  so  sublimely  commissioned  by  God,  and 
burning  in  the  reflection  of  His  majesty,  command  human 
reverence,  and  are  therefore  themselves  called  "gods."  Ps. 
xcvii.  7,  compared  with  Heb.  i.  6. 

Now,  the  step  from  respect  to  worship  is  at  once  short  and 
easy,  for  it  is  but  an  exaggeration.  The  heart,  not  content 
with  feeling  that  a  being  so  near  God  and  so  like  Him 
should  be  held  in  esteem  and  admiration,  passes  into  excess, 

^  Herodian,  v.  7,  3.     Joseph.  Ant'iq.  iv.  4,  1  ;  iv.  8,  44,  etc.  etc.     Wisdom 
xiv.  27  ;  Clement,  Strom,  vi.  566.     Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.  vi.  4. 
"  Antiq.  xv.  5.     Eisenmenger,  Entdecktes  Jud.  vol.  i.  p.  808. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   18.  ISl 

and  worships  where  it  had  honoured.  And  to  fortify  itself 
in  the  practice,  it  perverted  the  angelic  office.  It  raised 
those  creatures  from  attendants  to  mediators — from  mes- 
sengers to  interested  protectors.  It  would  seem  that  in 
the  days  of  the  patriarch  Job  ^  such  a  feeling  existed  in  the 
early  world.  "  Call  now,"  is  the  challenge  of  Eliphaz,  "  if 
there  be  any  that  will  answer  thee  ;  and  to  which  of  the  saints 
wilt  thou  turn  ? "  and  in  another  chapter  mention  is  made  of 
an  angel  interpreter.  In  the  book  of  Tobit,"^  the  Jewish 
belief  is  incidentally  brought  out — that  angels  formally  pre- 
sent prayers  to  God.  In  the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse,  we 
find  an  angel  at  the  altar,  having  in  his  hand  a  golden  censer 
and  much  incense,  that  he  should  offer  it  with  "the  prayers  of 
all  saints."  In  the  Testimony  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  and  in 
the  book  of  Enoch,  the  same  notion  is  prominently  exhibited. 
And  thus  the  prayer  offered  through  the  angel,  was  by  and  by 
presented  to  him.  It  was  first  offered  to  him  that  he  might 
carry  it  to  God,  and  then  it  was  offered  to  him  without  such 
ulterior  reference  or  prospect.  Again,  that  angels  were  en- 
trusted with  the  presidency  of  various  countries  and  nations, 
was  another  Jewish  opinion ;  and  it  was  with  a  superstitious 
people  a  matter  of  extreme  facility  to  pass  from  that  obeisance, 
which  might  be  yielded  to  a  representative  of  Divinity,  to  that 
veneration  which  is  due  to  Jehovah  alone.  If  a  man  bent 
one  knee  in  loyalty,  he  soon  bent  both  knees  in  worship  ; 
and  asked  from  the  substitute  what  should  be  solicited  from 
the  principal. 

That  the  worship  of  created  spirits  was  widespread,  thus 
admits  of  no  doubt.  The  Fathers  abundantly  testify  to  it. 
Origen  affirms  it  of  the  Jews,  and  Clement  makes  the  same 
assertion  ;  both  of  them,  as  well  as  the  treatise  called  the 
"  Preaching  of  Peter,"  describing  the  Jews  as  XarpevovTa 
a<y>y6\oL<i.  An  old  Jewish  liturgy  distinctly  contains  angel- 
worship,  and  exhibits  one  form  of  it.  Celsus  also  avers  it. 
The  Platonic  idea  of  demons — itself,  in  all  probability,  a  relic 
of  Eastern  Theosophy — spread  itself,  in  Asia  Minor,  and  com- 
bined with  the  Jewish  superstition.     That  such  practices  should 

1  V.  1  ;  xxxiii.  23.     Hirzel  and  Prof.  Lee  on  Job,  in  Joe. 

^  xii.  12.     Bcihmer,  Isagoge  in  Epist.  ad  Coloss.  p.  281.     Neander,  Geschichte 
der  PJlanzung,  etc.,  p.  508.     Suicer,  suh  voce  ILyytXo;. 


182  coLossiANS  ir.  is. 

take  root  in  Plirygia  is  no  marvel,  for  there  they  found  a 
congenial  soil.  Theodoret  testifies  to  their  existence,  and  that 
they  remained  in  Phrygia  and  Pisidia  for  a  long  time.  The 
thirty-fifth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  a  city  in  the 
vicinity,  solemnly  interdicted  the  practice,  but  did  not  wholly 
eradicate  it.  In  the  days  of  Theodoret,  the  archangel  Michael 
was  worshipped  at  Colosse ;  and  a  vab<;  dp'^^ayyeXiKo^  was  built 
in  his  honour,  and  for  a  miracle  alleged  to  be  wrought  by  him. 
Though  those  historical  quotations  refer  to  post- apostolic  periods, 
still  they  appear  to  describe  the  remnants  of  earlier  practices, 
and  they  afford  at  least  some  analogies  that  help  us  to  judge 
of  the  superstitions  which  the  apostle  mentions  and  reprobates. 
The  Catholic  interpreters,  Estius  and  a-Lapide,  make  a  strong 
effort  to  exclude  this  passage,  from  such  as  might  be  brought 
against  the  worship  of  saints. 

The  two  nouns,  "humility  and  worship  of  angels,"  are  closely 
connected,  and  mean  a  species  of  humility  connected  with 
angel-worship.  It  was  out  of  a  fanatical  humility  that  service 
was  offered  to  angels.  It  was  thought  that  the  great  God  was 
too  majestic  and  distant  to  be  addressed,  and  they  therefore 
invented  these  internuncii.  That  the  heretical  party  thought 
the  glory  of  the  Only-Begotten  too  dazzling  for  approach,  and 
therefore  took  refuge  in  angel-worship,  is  an  opinion  of  Chry- 
sostom  and  Theophylact,  but  in  opposition  to  the  whole  tenor 
of  the  rebuke  generally,  and  of  the  following  clause  particu- 
larly, for  it  contains  the  accusation  of  "  not  holding  the  Head." 
The  true  reason  and  connection  are  given,  as  we  have  given 
them,  by  Theodoret. 

'^A  fir]  kdopaKev  i/jL^aTevcov.  This  clause  presents  a  very 
strange  difference  of  reading,  for  the  negative  is  omitted  in 
some  MSS.  of  high  authority,  such  as  A,  B,  D\  and  by  several 
of  the  Latin  Fathers.  It  is  therefore  rejected  by  Lachmann, 
and  his  reading  is  approved  of  by  Olshausen,  Steiger,  Huther, 
and  Meyer.  Olshausen  says  that  fx')]  was  added  because 
critics  thought  that  they  were  obliged  to  insert  a  negative. 
His  assertion  may  be  turned  against  himself;  for  we  might 
reply  that  the  copyists  could  not  discover  the  propriety  of  /jli] 
according  to  their  finical  notions  of  grammar  ;  since  some,  as 
in  P,  G,  changed  it  into  ovk,  and  others  omitted  it  altogether. 
The  meaning  of  the  clause  is  not  materially  different  which- 


COLOSSIANS  II.   18.  183 

ever  reading  be  adopted.  If  the  negative  be  omitted,  the 
clause  must  be  an  ironical  description.  The  words  "  which 
he  has  seen  "  will  mean,  visions  which  he  professes  or  imagines 
to  have  seen — visions  which  are  the  result  of  a  morbid  ima- 
gination or  a  distempered  brain.  We  prefer  the  common 
reading  found  in  C,  D^^^,  E,  J,  K,  in  the  A^ulgate,  Gothic,  and 
Syriac  Versions,  and  in  so  many  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  The 
negative  firj,  and  not  ovk,  is  rightly  employed.  "Winer,  §  55,  3.^ 
The  participle  efi^arevcov,  found  only  here  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, but  occurring  several  times  in  the  Apocrypha,  and  allied 
in  origin  to  the  similar  term  ifx^aivco,  is  wrongly  supposed 
by  some,  such  as  Erasmus,  to  signify,  to  walk  in  state — as  if 
the  expression  were  taken  a  tragicis  cothurnis.  It  sometimes 
denotes,  to  go  into  the  possession  of,  as  in  Josh.  xix.  49.  And 
then  it  is  usually  followed  by  etV  Buddaeus,  Zanchius,  and 
Huther  assign  it  such  a  meanincf  here.  It  also  has  the  sense 
of — to  go  into,  to  penetrate  into,  or  to  intrude.  It  is  so  used 
of  God,^  and  often  of  man,  both  in  a  literal  and  tropical 
sense,  and  is  followed  sometimes  by  the  dative  and  sometimes, 
as  here,  by  the  accusative.^  Phavorinus  defines  it — to  evSov 
€^€pevvr]<Tac  rj  crKoirria-ai,  and  Hesychius  explains  it  by  the 
less  intense  term  ^T/TT^o-a?.  The  compound  Keve/x^arevetv  is 
employed,  in  Plato,  to  denote  senseless  speculation.  From  the 
verb  ecopuKev,  there  is  no  need  to  deduce  the  idea  of  mental 
perception  or  knowledge,  as  Heinrichs  and  Flatt  incline  to  do 
— quae  intelhdu  percipere  nemo  potest.  The  word  is  often 
used  of  visions  and  visionary  representations — Acts  xi.  17, 
ix.  10-12,  x.  3;  Piev.  ix.  17;  and  of  a  supersensuous  view 
of  God— John  i.  18,  vi.  46,  xiv.  7  ;   1  John  iv.  12. 

The  reference  in  the  clause — "  intruding  into  what  he  has 
not  seen  " — appears  to  be  the  worship  of  angels.  The  current 
theosophy  spent  no  little  of  its  ingenuity  upon  the  spirit-world. 
It  wandered  not  only  beyond  the  regions  of  sense,  but  even  that 
of  Scripture.  It  mustered  into  troops  the  heavenly  orders. 
[Eph.  i.  21.]  This  oriental  propensity  was  a  prevalent  one. 
The  inquisitive  spirit  pryed  into  the  invisible  world  around  it 
and   above  it.      It  loved  such  phantasms,  and  lost  itself  in 

'  Moulton,  p.  603,  note  4.  -  Chrysos.  2  Horn,  in  Philip. 

^  Philo,  de  Plant.  Noe,  vol.  iii.  p.  120,  ed  Pfeiffer.     ^schylus,  Persae,  419. 
Eurip.  Electra,  595.     Josephus,  Antiq.  xii.  1. 


184  COLOSSIANS  II.   18. 

transcendental  reveries.  The  creed  of  tlie  Zendavesta  had  its 
Ornmzd,  its  six  Amshaspands,  its  eight-and-twenty  Izeds,  and 
hosts  of  Teruers — all  of  them  objects  of  worship  and  prayer. 
Augustine  says,  with  justice,  that  many  had  tried  the  interces- 
sion of  angels,  but  had  failed  ;  and  not  only  so,  but — inciderunt 
in  dcsidcriwm  curiosarum  visionum}  How  the  Jewish  fancy 
strove  to  penetrate  the  curtain  that  conceals  the  unseen,  may 
be  learned  from  the  following  quotation  from  a  rabbinical 
treatise.^  "  As  there  are  ten  Sephiroth,  so  there  are  ten  troops 
of  angels,  as  follows : — the  Erellim,  Ishim,  Benei-haelohim, 
Malachim,  Hashmalim,  Tarshishim,  Shinanim,  Cherubim, 
Ophanim,  and  the  Seraphim.  Captains  are  set  over  each  of 
them — Michael  over  the  Erellim,  Zephaniah  over  the  Ishim, 
Hophniel  over  the  Benei-haelohim,  Uzziel  over  the  Malachim, 
Hashmal  over  the  Hashmalim,  Tarshish  over  the  Tarshishim, 
Zadkiel  over  the  Shinanim,  Cherub  over  the  Cherubim, 
Eaphael  over  the  Ophanim,  and  Jehuel  over  the  Seraphim." 
Tertullian  mentions  some  who  professed  to  divine  their  asceti- 
cism from  angelic  revelation,^  a  remark  which  serves  at  least 
for  illustration. 

Some,  such  as  Steiger,  have  proposed  to  join  the  following 
adverb  elKi)  to  ifM^arevcov,  and  give  it  the  sense  of  "  rashly  " 
or  "  uselessly."  This  notion,  however,  is  already  contained  in 
the  reproof.  But  the  idea  with  our  exegesis  is,  that  the 
mental  inflation  of  the  errorists,  which  co-exists  with  his 
humility  and  his  angel-worship,  and  prompts  him  to  pry  into 
what  is  concealed  from  him,  is  ei«>} — it  is  without  ground. 
It  has  no  warrant.     Matt.  v.  2  2 ;  Eom.  xiii.  4. 

The  following  clause  discovers  one  prime  ground  of  the 
heresy,  and  shows  the  principal  reason  why  the  gospel 
was  not  cordially  received.  It  was  not  intricate  enough, 
it  did  not  deal  in  any  vain  speculations,  but  it  claimed 
and  commanded  attention  to  the  real  and  practical,  and  it 
showed  not  the  way  into  the  abstruse  and  recondite.  It 
did  not  harmonize  with  current  notions  of  angelology  and 
asceticism,  and  it  was  outdone  in  those  respects  by  Essene 
Gnosticism.      It  did   not  forbid  the    humble  spirit    to  raise 

^  Confess,  x.  42. 

2  Berith  -Dienucha  in  Eisenmenger,  Entd.  Jud.  vii.  p.  374. 

^  Adverstis  Marc.  v. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   18.  185 

itself  to  the  Diviue  throne ;  for  it  taught  that  the  inter- 
vening distance  was  spanned  by  the  mediatorial  nature  of 
Christ.  It  exhibited  the  angels  as  "  ministering  spirits,"  or 
fellow-servants ;  but  it  held  up  no  eccentric  array  of  visions 
and  phantasms,  which  might  beguile  men  into  fanatical  wor- 
ship and  conceited  contrition.  In  the  fulness  of  its  revelation 
it  left  to  no  man  the  claim  of  discovery,  or  the  merit  of  inven- 
tion. He,  then,  who  did  not  receive  it  as  presented  to  him, 
but  wished  to  change  its  nature  and  supplement  its  oracles, 
so  that  it  might  have  the  air  and  the  aspect  of  a  transcendental 
theosophy,  was  "puffed  up  by  his  fleshly  mind," — thought 
himself  possessed  of  a  higher  knowledge,  and  favoured  with 
profounder  instruction  than  our  Lord  and  His  apostles. 

The  participle  (pvaiovfjuevo^;, — not  from  ^vaa,  which,  in  the 
classical  writers,  makes  (f>uai,d(o,  but  from  cpvoy,  —  signifies 
inflated.  1  Cor.  iv.  6,  18,  19,  v.  2,  viii.  1.  The  heretic 
was  blown  up  with  his  delusion,  verifying  the  remark — 
-))  yvcbaa  cf)vaLot — "  knowledge  puffeth  up."  He  was  too 
proud  to  learn — too  wise  to  acknowledge  any  instruction 
beyond  himself.  The  source  of  inflation  was  a  "fleshly 
mind,"  "he  was  puffed  up." 

'Ttto  rov  vo6<i  tt}?  aapKo^i  avrov — "By  the  mind  of  his 
flesh."  The  expression  is  peculiar,  but  darkly  emphatic. 
Nou<i  is  mind — not  simply  intellect,  but  mind  as  the  region 
of  thought  and  susceptibility ;  while  crdp^  is,  as  in  so  many 
other  places,  the  name  of  unregenerate  humanity.  The  ex- 
pression denotes  something  more  than  7nens  imhecilla.  Nor 
is  it  enough  to  resolve  the  two  genitives  into  the  phrase — 
aapKiKrj<i  Stavola'i,  or  with  Usteri,  into  vo^fxara  aap/ctKa.  The 
genitive  is  not  a  mere  predicate,  but  is  the  genitive  of  pos- 
session. The  "flesh"  possesses  and  governs  the  "mind."  The 
mind  did  not  struggle  with  the  carnal  principle,  but  succumbed 
to  it.  It  was  wholly  under  the  sway  of  a  nature  unchanged 
by  the  grace  of  God,  and  which  therefore  exercised  its  pre- 
dominance to  serve  and  please  itself.  In  all  these  mental 
efforts  and  sentiments  concerning  Christianity,  the  false 
teacher  was  guided  not  by  any  pure  regard  to  the  Divine 
revelation,  or  by  a  simple  desire  to  bow  to  the  Divine  will ; 
but  his  "  mind  "  was  influenced  by  motives,  and  determined 
by  reasonings,  which  sprung  from  a  nature  wholly  under  the 


186  COLOSSIANS   II.   19. 

empire  of  sense  and  fancy ;  a  nature  which  was  satisfied  with 
an  array  of  external  puerilities — which  preferred  ascetic  dis- 
tinctions to  spiritual  self-denial — revelled  in  imaginations 
that  at  once  sprung  from  it  and  lorded  over  it — and,  in 
short,  acting  like  itself  and  for  itself,  coveted  and  set  up  a 
religion  of  man,  but  spurned  and  thrust  away  that  religion 
which  is  of  God.  And  thus,  in  a  later  century,  and  in  the 
same  country,  it  was  believed  that  the  Holy  Spirit  communi- 
cated to  Montanus  more  and  nobler  revelations  than  Christ 
had  delivered  in  the  gospel.  The  "flesh"  could  not  but  have  a 
sensuous  system — one  resembling  itself;  and  the  "mind,"  acting 
under  its  sway,  could  not  but  devise  a  scheme  in  keeping 
with  such  governing  and  prompting  influence.  1  Cor.  ii.  14. 
And,  by  this  means,  the  abettor  of  error  was  "  vainly  puffed 
up"^  that  he  possessed  a  deeper  enlightenment  than  the  apostles, 
and  a  purer  sanctity  than  the  churches ;  and,  in  his  vanity,  he 
dreamed  of  being  able,  by  his  unhallowed  reveries,  to  supply 
the  defects  and  multiply  the  attractions  of  the  gospel.  The 
three  participles  of  this  verse,  and  that  of  the  first  clause  of 
the  following  verse,  have  a  close  connection — OeKoav  express- 
ing the  desire  of  the  heresiarch  to  make  converts  by  a  specious 
snare — i/x^arevcov  portraying  one  special  source  and  feature 
of  his  system — (f)vaiovijL€vo<i  indicating  his  moral  temperament 
— and,  lastly,  Kparwv  pointing  to  the  lamentable  accompani- 
ment and  necessary  result — "  not  holding  the  Head  " — 

(Ver.  19.)  Kal  ou  Kparcov  ttjv  Ke^akrjv.  The  participle 
describes  a  firm  grasp — a  tenacious  hold.  Song  of  Sol.  iii.  4  ; 
Acts  iii.  1 1  ;  Matt.  xiv.  3  ;  Mark  ix.  2  7.  The  term  Ke<^aXrj, 
applied  to  Christ  as  Head  of  His  church,  has  been  explained 
under  Eph.  i,  22,  and  alluded  to  Col.  i.  18.  Those  errorists 
did  not  hold  the  Head,  and,  indeed,  the  greater  portion  of 
their  errors  tended  to  this  result.  If  they  worshipped  angels, 
they  could  not  adore  His  person.  If  they  insisted  on  circum- 
cision and  ascetic  penances,  they  depreciated  the  merit  of  His 
work.  If  they  preached  the  permanence  of  Mosaic  ceremonies, 
they  mistook  the  spirit  and  lost  the  benefit  of  the  system 
which  He  had  founded.  They  did  not  hold  the  truth  as  to 
His  person  or  His  work,  His  government  or  His  dispensation. 

^  Miiller  renders — der  vonseinem  uiujottUchen  Wellsinne  avfgeblasene. — Lehre 
von  der  Sunde,  p.  452. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   19.  187 

Those  errors  on  vital  points  were  fatal.  So  long  as  cardinal 
truths  are  held,  many  minor  misconceptions  may  be  tolerated  ; 
but  when  the  former  are  lost,  Christianity  becomes  a  worth- 
less and  nominal  profession.  Bengel  says  truly,  qui  own  itnice 
Christum  tenet,  plane  non  tenet. 

^E^  ov  nrav  to  acofxa,  Sta  tmv  a(f)cov  Kal  crvvSea/xcov,  eTri'^opT]- 
>yovfMevov  koX  av[xj3i,^a^o[JbiVOV,  av^ei  ttjv  av^rjaiv  tou  Oeov — 
"  From  whom  the  whole  body,  through  joints  and  bands, 
supplied  and  compacted,  groweth  the  growth  of  God."  The 
similar  passage  is  Eph.  iv.  16.  The  first  words — t^  ov,  mean, 
from  which  Head  as  the  source  of  life  and  growth.  We 
should  expect  the  relative  in  such  a  case  to  agree  in  gender 
with  its  antecedent — e'^  ^9,  and  for  this  reason  some  copies 
add  Xpiarov.  The  words  are  taken  by  some  as  masculine, 
the  pronoun  being  supposed  to  refer  to  Him  who  is  the  Head 
— Christ.  But  though  this  be  the  common  interpretation,  as 
of  Bahr,  Huther,  and  De  Wette,  we  cannot  agree  with  it.  It 
would  destroy  the  harmony  of  the  figure,  which  has  its  basis 
not  in  Christ  as  person,  but  in  Christ  as  Head.  Some  take 
the  relative  as  neuter,  and  in  a  special  sense.  Thus  Bengel 
— ex  quo,  ex  tenendo  caput.  We  agree,  however,  with  Meyer, 
that  the  neuter  form  refers  to  the  Head — not  personally  as 
Jesus,  but  really  or  objectively — niclit  2)C'i'sdnlich  sondern 
sdcJdich.      Kiihner,  ii.  §  785  ;  Jelf,  ^820. 

Ildv  TO  acj/Mi  .  .  .  av^et  Tr]v  av^rjaiv  tov  Qeov.  Such  is 
the  construction  and  ending  of  the  sentence — "groweth  the 
growth  of  God."  The  form  av^eu  occurs  only  elsewhere  in 
Eph.  ii.  21.  There  is  no  ellipse  here  needing  the  supply  of 
KaTci,  as  Piscator  and  others  suppose  ;  but  the  verb  governs  its 
correlate  noun — no  uncommon  form  of  syntax.  Eph.  i.  3, 
20,  ii.  4,  iv.  1;  John  xvii.  26;  Jelf,  §  552;  Buttmann, 
§  131,  4,  5  ;  Kiihner,  §  547,  a.  There  is  in  such  an  idiom  an 
extension  of  the  meaning  of  the  verb.  Often,  in  such  a  case, 
when  a  relative  does  not  intervene,  the  accusative  has  a  dis- 
tinctive or  intensive  epithet  connected  with  it.  John  vii.  24  ; 
1  Tim.  i.  18  ;  Bernhardy,  p.  106  ;  Winer,  §  32,  2.  Here  we 
have  a  genitive  for  a  similar  purpose.  Luke  ii.  8.  Now 
this  genitive  is  not  to  be  explained  away  as  a  mere  Hebrew 
superlative,  as  in  Storr's  paraphrase — mirifice  crcscit.  Nor  is 
the  exegesis  of  Calvin,  Biihr,  and  Winer  in  the  third  edition 


188  COLOSSIANS   II.   19.  ' 

ot  Lis  grammar,  up  to  the  full  sense — mcremenhcm  quod  Deus  ' 
vult  d  probed ;  nor  yet  is  Kara  deov  correct,  as  Chrysostom 
renders  it.  It  means,  as  Winer  gives  it,  in  his  fifth  edition 
— "an  increase  wrought  by  God."  Winer,  §  36,  3  (h).  The 
growth  of  that  spiritual  body  corresponds  with  its  nature — is 
the  result  of  Divine  influence  and  power.  And  the  means  of 
growth  are  stated  in  the  intermediate  clause.  For  the  body 
is  not  only  connected  with  the  head,  but  is  also — 

Aicb  Tcov  dcf^cov  Kol  avvSeaficou  eTn'^opTjyov/xevoi'  kol  cru/iySt- 
^a^ojMevov.  The  first  participle  iTn-yopr)'^.  is  in  the  middle 
voice,  and,  in  an  absolute  sense,  means,  "  furnished  with  re- 
ciprocal aid."  2  Cor.  ix.  10;  Gal.  iii.  5.  Xvvap^ioko^ovjxevov 
is  the  word  used  in  the  parallel  verse  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  but  the  substantive  iTnyopr^^ia  occurs  in  the  same 
verse.  The  next  participle  avfx^L^.  signifies  "  brought 
and  held  together  in  mutual  adaptation."  (See  under  the 
second  verse.)  And  this  is  done  Sta  Twy  a<^o)v  koI  crvvBea- 
fiwv — "  by  joints  and  ligatures."  The  noun  aj)r)  signifies  a 
joint,  and  so  it  is  generally  understood.  Meyer  supposes 
it  to  mean  nervous  energy  or  sensibility — Lebensthatigheit 
— what  the  Greek  Fathers  understand  by  ataOrja-L^;.  We 
may,  perhaps,  understand  it  not  merely  of  joints  in  the  strict 
anatomical  sense,  but  generally  of  all  these  means,  by  which 
none  of  the  parts  or  organs  of  the  body  are  found  in  isola- 
tion. The  other  anarthrous  noun,  crvvhea^o<;,  has  a  mean- 
ing not  dissimilar,  and  perhaps  refers  to  those  visible  and 
palpable  ligatures  of  flesh  and  sinew  which  give  to  the  body 
unity  of  organization.^  Dan.  v.  6.  Some  would  assign  a 
noun  to  each  participle — "  furnished  by  the  joints  and  com- 
pacted by  the  ligatures."  There  appears,  however,  to  be  no 
necessity  for  this  refinement.  The  apostle  describes  that 
unity  of  the  body  which  is  dependent  upon  its  head,  and  is 
essential  to  its  growth.  The  expression  e|  ov  is  neither  to 
be  confined  to  the  participles  nor  restricted  to  the  verb ;  for 
the  apostle  has  said,  emphatically,  "  the  whole  body."  It  is 
not  this  or  that  organ  that  grows  from  its  vital  connection  with 
the  head,  while  others  unconnected  perish  and  die ;  but  the 
living  energy  of  the  head  pervades  the  entire  body — pervades 

E5  IffTou  lis  IfTTovv   \fi,ipuof/,iva  am1%irf/.o;   a.(i.ipo7)i   yiyvirai   xoivo;.      Galen,  quoted 
by  Balir,  in  loc.      Theodoret  says — lia  ruv  viu^av  'ixu  'ra.;  a]ff/}r,ini;  TO  (TUfia. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   19.  189 

it  because  it  is  an  organic  unity,  supplied  with  conductors, 
and  bound  together  by  joints.  Means  are  provided  for  dis- 
tributing through  it  this  vitality  ;  there  is  no  barrier  to  impede 
it — no  point  at  which  it  stops.  The  body,  so  connected  with 
the  head,  and  so  supplied  and  knit  by  internal  structure  and 
external  bands,  grows,  and  all  grows,  by  Divine  influence 
and  blessing.  The  whole  church  of  Christ  depends  on  Him 
as  its  head — "  out  of  Him  "  are  derived  organization,  life,  and 
growth.     The  idea  is  well  expanded  by  Theophylact. 

The  "joints  and  bands"  have  been  differently  understood,  and 
so  have  the  supply  and  the  symmetry.  Bengel  understands 
the  first  noun  and  participle  of  faith,  and  the  second  noun  and 
participle  of  love  and  peace ;  this  last  view  being  held  also 
by  Zanchius,  who  gives  it  as — charitas  inter  membra.  This  is 
also  Davenant's  notion — "  the  first  substantive  represents  what 
unites  us  to  Christ,  and  the  second  what  binds  ns  to  one 
another."  It  is  a  strange  idea  of  Theodoret,  that  the  "joints 
and  bands "  are  prophets,  apostles,  and  teachers.  Bohmer 
adds,  in  modification,  "  but  yet  as  little  do  we  exclude  the 
laity  " — "  ahcr  eben  so  wenig  excliidiren  wir  die  Laicn!'  Such 
an  idea  destroys  the  harmony  of  the  figure.  For  teachers  and 
taught  compose  the  church,  or  the  body  and  its  organs,  and 
they  are  held  together  by  what  the  apostle  calls  joints  and 
bands.  To  characterize  minutely  the  spiritual  elements  of 
unity  represented  by  these  terms,  would  be  pressing  too 
much  on  the  figure.  The  question  is,  what  power  gives 
vitality  and  union  to  the  mystical  body  of  Christ  ?  The  reply 
must  be,  Divine  influence  communicated  by  the  Spirit,  and 
using  as  its  instruments  faith  and  love.  The  last  grace  is 
specially  mentioned  in  the  correspondent  passage  of  the  twin 
epistle.  The  whole  body,  so  pervaded  and  united,  grows — 
all  grows  in  perfect  synmietry,  and  in  connection  with  its 
Head.  Without  the  head  it  dies— without  "joints  and  bands  " 
it  falls  into  pieces,  and  each  dissevered  organ  wastes  away. 
The  application  is  obvious.  The  church  can  enjoy  neither 
life  nor  growth,  if,  misunderstanding  Christ's  person  or  under- 
valuing His  work,  it  have  no  vital  union  with  Him.  If  the 
creed  of  any  community  supplant  His  mediatorship,  and  find 
no  atoning  merit  in  His  blood;  if  its  worship  look  up  to 
angels,  and  not  to  Him  to  whom  "  all  power  is  given  in  heaven 


190  COLO  SSI  ANS   II.   20. 

and  in  earth ;"  if  it  place  its  trust  in  ritual  observances  and 
bodily  service,  it  cannot  be  one  either  with  Him  or  with  other 
portions  of  His  church.  Severed  alike  from  head  and  trunk — 
from  the  vitality  of  the  one  and  the  support  and  sympathies 
of  the  other — it  dies  in  isolation.  So  it  was  or  would  be 
with  him  or  with  them  who  threatened  to  disturb  the  Colossian 
Church.  The  entire  figure  and  description  are  more  fully  pre- 
sented in  Eph.  iv.  15,  16,  where  we  have  given  a  lengthened 
exegesis. 

The  apostle  still  presses  home  his  doctrine.  It  was  no 
abstract  truth  which  he  had  enunciated,  and  he  winds  up  the 
paragraph  by  a  reference  to  its  pervading  lesson — exhibiting 
the  care  and  caution  which  should  prevent  any  ordinances  of 
an  ascetic  nature — such  as  those  which  belonged  to  the 
Jewish  ritual — from  being  superinduced  on  Christianity. 

(Ver.  20.)  El  aireOdveTe  avv  XpiaTw  airo  twv  crrot^e/coy  tov 
Koa-fiov.  The  ovv  of  the  Eeceived  Text  has  no  authority, 
neither  has  the  article  r&J  before  the  proper  name.  "  Since  ye 
died  off  with  Christ  from  the  rudiments  of  the  world,"  or, 
have  been  separated  by  such  a  death  from  the  rudiments  of 
the  world.  The  phrase  "  rudiments  of  the  world  "  has  been 
already  explained  under  the  eighth  verse.  To  be  dead  to 
them  is  to  be  done  with  them,  or,  to  be  in  such  a  state  that 
they  have  no  longer  any  authority  over  us.  Thus  in  Eom.  vii. 
3,  4,  the  wife  by  the  death  of  her  husband  is  said  to  be  so 
free  from  conjugal  law,  that  she  may  marry  another  man.  In 
Gal.  ii.  19,  the  apostle  speaks  of  being  "  dead  to  the  law." 
The  dative  is  used  in  those  two  cases,  as  if  there  was  a 
consciousness  of  complete  deliverance.  The  preposition  airo  is 
here  employed  to  intensify  the  idea,  as  if  death  were  followed 
by  distance  or  removal.  Winer,  §  47,  b.  They  had  nothing 
more  to  do  with  the  rudiments  of  the  world — and  the  rudi- 
ments of  the  world  had  nothing  more  to  do  with  them.  The 
apostle  again  introduces  his  favourite  idea  of  union  with  Christ. 
The  death  of  Christ  abrogated  the  ritual  law ;  and  being  one 
with  Him  in  that  death,  they  had  died  to  that  law — the  airo 
denoting  consequent  separation.  We  cannot  agree  with 
Huther,  in  inferring  from  this  passage,  that  the  phrase  "  rudi- 
ments of  the  world"  expresses  something  more  than  the 
Mosaic  law,  and  denotes  the  ethical  life  of  the  heathen  world. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   20.  191 

He  says — "  the  language  implies  that  the  Colossians  had 
served  the  elements  of  the  world ;  and  if  so,  then,  if  you 
mean  the  ritual  institute  by  these  elements,  you  must  hold 
what  you  can  never  prove,  that  the  majority  in  this  church 
were  of  Jewish  extraction."  ^  But  the  argument  is  not  con- 
clusive. In  Gal.  iv.  9,  the  apostle  may  refer  to  heathen 
elements,  so  far  as  they  had  a  ceremonial  and  sensuous  aspect ; 
but  the  rites  of  the  heathen  world — its  a-roc^eia,  never  had 
any  Divine  claim  or  obligation,  so  that  the  death  of  Christ 
did  not  formally  annul  them ;  whereas  the  Mosaic  law  was 
an  ordinance  of  God's  appointment,  and  only  by  yielding  to  it 
could  religious  privilege  and  blessing  be  enjoyed  prior  to  the 
death  on  Calvary.  It  was  by  initiation  into  this  rudimentary 
and  worldly  system,  that  the  worship  of  the  one  God  could  be 
engaged  in.  Heathenism  never  had  any  authority  over  them, 
whatever  might  be  its  actual  power.  If  its  ordinances  be  meant, 
then  the  apostle  warns  against  a  return  to  them.  This  is  not 
the  case,  for  the  ordinances  against  which  he  cautions  were 
remnants  of  a  system  not  wholly  unlawful  like  Gentilism,  but 
of  one  which  had  enjoyed  Divine  sanction.  In  short,  the  whole 
paragraph  has  special  reference  to  Jewish  customs.  After 
speaking,  in  the  eighth  verse,  of  the  rudiments  of  the  world,  he 
describes  the  glory  of  Christ,  and  affirms  that  the  Colossian 
believers  are  circumcised  in  Him — a  reference  to  the  Jewish 
ritual.  Then,  having  said  that  the  handwriting  of  ordinances 
had  been  blotted  out,  he  adds,  as  a  warranted  inference  from, 
and  application  of  the  doctrine — let  no  man  judge  you  in 
eating  and  drinking,  or  in  respect  of  new  moons  and  Sabbath 
days — another  direct  allusion  to  Mosaic  institutions.  And  in 
fine,  as  a  sample  of  those  rudiments  of  the  world,  he  quotes — 
"  touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not."  There  were  among  them,  it 
is  true,  other  practices  than  such  as  had  been  originally  Jewish  ; 
— an  asceticism  which  was  foreign  to  the  Mosaic  system,  and  an 
angel- worship  which  was,  perhaps,  based  upon  a  misrepresenta- 
tion of  traditions  connected  with  it ;  but  still  the  central 
error  of  the  false  teachers  was  an  attempt  to  impose  the 
ceremonial  yoke,  in  some  of  its  aspects,  on  the  members  of  the 
Christian  church,  as  something  which  would  ensure  them  a 
transcendental  purity,  and  bring  them  into  a  magical  connec- 
^  On  the  other  band,  see  Baur,  Paulus,  p.  594. 


192  COLOSSIANS  11.   20. 

tion  with  the  powers  of  the  spirit-world.     The  apostle  then 
asks — 

Tl  ft)?  i^(M)vre<i  ev  KoafjiW  BoyfiaTi^eaOe,  /xr]  ayp-rj,  fXTjSe  jevcrr], 
firjBe  6l<yr)<i : — "  Why,  as  living  in  the  world,  do  ye  suffer  such 
ordinances  to  be  published  among  you  as  '  touch  not,  taste  not, 
handle  not '  V "  Bahr  is  wrong  in  saying  that  rt  stands  for 
Sia  Tt,  though  the  one  phrase  may  explain  the  other.  The  word 
K6afio<;  cannot  here  mean  the  physical  world,  as  Schnecken- 
burger  maintains,^  for  it  must  have  the  ethical  meaning  which 
it  bears  in  the  previous  clause  and  in  verse  eighth.  It  is  the 
sphere  of  the  "  weak  and  beggarly  elements."  But  the  Colos- 
sians  had  been  translated  into  the  kingdom  of  God's  dear 
Son,  therefore  the  code  of  the  realm  which  they  had  left 
had.  no  more  force  upon  them.  A  Eussian  naturalized  in 
Britain  need  not  trouble  himself  about  any  imperial  ukase,  as 
if  he  yet  lived  under  the  Autocrat. 

The  verb  Soy/jbari^etv,  which  occurs  only  here  in  the  New 
Testament,  but  sometimes  in  the  Septuagint  and  Apocrypha, 
signifies  in  the  classics  to  pronounce  an  opinion,  as  well  as 
to  enforce  or  publish  a  decree.  The  latter  meaning  prevails 
in  the  Septuagint,  Esth.  iii.  9,  etc.;  2  Mace.  x.  8,  xv.  o6. 
Some  look  on  the  verb  as  active.  Thus  Melancthon  has  de- 
crcta  facitis  ;  Ambrosiaster,  decernitis  ;  and  Olshausen,  "  why 
do  ye  again  set  up  worldly  ordinances  ? "  The  majority  of 
commentators  take  the  word  in  a  middle  sense,  though  Beza, 
Wolf,  and  Meyer  give  it  a  passive  significance.  Buttmann, 
§  135,  8.  But  we  cannot  see  how  the  use  of  the  middle 
would  imply  a  censure,  any  more  than  the  employment  of  the 
passive.  The  middle  brings  out  rather  a  pointed  caution — 
"  why  should  ye  permit  the  preaching  of  dogmas  ?  or  why 
should  ye  allow  such  dogmas  to  be  imposed  on  you  ? "  They 
could  not  suppress  the  teaching  of  the  errorists,  but  they 
needed  not  to  listen  to  it,  and  far  less  to  yield  to  it.  The 
strong  form  of  the  verb  almost  says,  that  the  apostle  suspected 
a  latent  tendency  in  their  temperament  to  listen  and  be 
charmed.  The  apostle,  in  Eph.  ii.  15,  calls  the  Mosaic  law, 
in  one  aspect  of  it,  by  the  name  Soy/xara,  and  he  here  uses 
the  cognate  verb  referring  to  the  same  institute.  The  argu- 
ment is  a  cogent  one.     They  were  dead  to  such  ordinances — 

1  Theolog.  Jahrb.  1848. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   20.  193 

why  then  should  they  act  cas  if  they  lived  under  them  ?  They 
did  not  belong  to  that  /coc/io?,  of  the  character  of  which  such 
ordinances  partook.  They  belied  their  entire  position,  and 
reversed  all  their  relations,  if,  after  being  freed  by  Christ,  they 
again  sunk  themselves  into  bondage — if  they  allowed  the 
handwriting  to  be  reinscribed,  and  taking  the  nail  out  of  it, 
laid  it  up  among  their  solemn  archives  as  an  instrument  of 
revived  and  extended  authority.  To  submit  to  the  ritual 
which  they  had  believed  to  be  obsolete,  was  in  direct 
antagonism  to  all  that  Jesus  had  done  for  them,  and  to  all 
which  they  had  willingly  acknowledged  as  His  achievement 
on  their  behalf.  Some  of  the  S6<y/u,aTa  to  which  the  apostle 
alludes  are  now  given,  and  they  are  ascetic  in  nature.  But 
ere  we  advance  to  them,  we  shall  take  up  the  clause  which  we 
believe  to  be  joined  closely  with  Soyfiari^ecrde,  viz.,  the  last 
clause  of  verse  22. 

Kara  ra  ivraX/xaTa  koI  SiSaa-KaXlwi  rdov  avOpcoTroiv.  Matt. 
XV.  9  ;  Mark  vii.  7  ;  Isa.  xxix.  13.  Our  reasons  for  adopting 
this  view  will  be  afterwards  stated.  This  clause  describes  the 
source  of  such  Boy/xaTa,  and  virtually  contains  another  reason 
why  they  should  not  be  submitted  to.  The  prime  reason  is, 
that  believers  are  dead  with  Christ  to  them ;  but  the  sub- 
ordinate reason  is,  that  the  edicts  are  wholly  human  in  their 
origin.  "Why  should  ye  for  a  moment  suffer  them  to  be 
imposed  upon  you  according  to — kutu — or  having  no  higher 
authority  than,  the  commandments  and  doctrines  of  men  ? " 
The  two  nouns  differ  not,  as  Grotius  supposes,  that  the 
former  is  enacted  by  law,  and  the  latter  enjoined  by 
philosophers ;  but  rather,  as  Olshausen  says,  the  first  is  enact- 
ment— the  second,  the  principles  on  which  it  is  based.  The 
first — evraX.,  is  the  dogma  in  its  preceptive  and  practical  form, 
of  which  there  is  a  specimen  in  the  preceding  part  of  the 
verse — "  touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not ; "  and  the  second 
— SiBaa-KoXLa,  is  the  doctrine  out  of  which  it  arises — the 
convictions  and  theories  by  which  it  is  illustrated  and 
defended.  The  same  general  idea  has  been  stated  under  the 
eighth  verse,  Christ  is  Head,  and  to  Him  alone  do  we  owe 
subjection.  Whatever  authority  ordinances  had  when  the 
Mosaic  economy  stood,  they  have  none  now — the  institute 
being  abolished  in  the  death  of  Him  who  is  the  one  Legislator. 


194  COLOSSIANS   II.   21. 

And  all  extra-biblical  additions  to  it   were   human  in  their 
very  origin. 

(Ver.  21.)  Mr]  ayfrrj  firjBe  <yevcrr]  firjhe  Oi'yr)'; — "Touch  not, 
taste  not,  handle  not."  These  curt  dogmas  are  not  the 
apostle's  own  teaching,  but  the  mottoes,  or  prominent  lessons, 
or  watchwords  of  the  false  teachers.^  In  all  probability,  the 
three  terms  refer  to  the  same  general  object — abstinence  from 
certain  meats  and  drinks.  It  is  therefore  excessive  refinement 
to  distribute  them  according  to  certain  distinctions,  either 
with  Flatt,  Bohmer,  Hammond,  and  Homberg,  referring  the 
first  verb — or,  with  Grotius,  the  last  verb — to  marriage  ;  or, 
with  Estius,  Zanchius,  and  Erasmus,  giving  the  first  verb  an 
allusion  to  Levitical  uncleanness,  special  or  general.  The  two 
critics  last  named  refer  the  last  term  to  Levitical  sacred  things, 
but  Michaelis  and  Storr  refer  it  to  impurities.  Bohmer,  with 
a  strange  caprice,  finds  a  reference  in  ^^777?  to  the  holy  oil 
which  the  Essenes  specially  regarded  as  lobes.  But  though 
the  words  refer  generally  to  diet,  and  are  so  used  by  the 
classics,^  there  may  be  a  distinction  among  them,  as  they 
seem  to  be  repeated,  along  with  the  negative,  for  the  sake  of 
emphasis.  The  first  and  last  verbs  are  somewhat  similar,  and 
both  represent  in  the  Septuagint  the  Hebrew — VJJ.  But  the 
first  term  may  here  denote  that  handling  which  is  necessary 
to  eating — the  touch  which  precedes  taste ;  while  the  last,  a 
sister-term,  with  tango  and  touchy  may  signify  the  slightest 
contact.  In  Heb.  xii.  20,  the  contrast  seems  to  be  this — a 
beast  was  not  only  not  to  graze  on  Sinai,  but  not  even  for 
a  moment  to  set  a  hoof  upon  it.  Thus  in  Eurip.  Bacchae,  617, 
where  a  similar  contrast  obtains — "  he  did  not  come  in  contact, 
far  less  handle  me^ — there  was  neither  touch  nor  grasp."  The 
last  verb  is  the  most  dogmatic — you  are  not  to  take  certain 
meats  into  your  hand,  nor  are  you  to  taste  them ;  nay,  you 
are  not  even  to  touch  them,  though  in  the  slightest 
degree — you  are  to  keep  from  them  hand,  tongue,  and 
even  finger-tip.  The  apostle  does  not  specify  the  objects 
to  be  abstained  from,  for  they  were  so  well  known  to  his 
readers. 

^  The  words  would,  in  modern  usage,  have  the  marks  of  quotation  assigned  to 
them. 

^  Xenophon,  Cyrop.  i.  3,  5  ;  i.  11.  ^  0^7-'  'i^iyi^  0I6''  H'^a.f  ri/iuv. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   22.  195 

The  connection  and  meaning  of  the  next  clause  are  matter 
of  various  opinion. 

(Ver.  22.)  "A  ea-Tiv  Trdvra  et?  (f)6opav  rfj  aTro-^pi'iaei.  The 
idea  of  Macknight  is  altogether  unsupported.  He  supposes 
the  reference  of  the  apostle  to  be  to  Pythagorean  abstinence 
from  animal  food,  and  he  connects  this  and  the  previous  verse 
in  the  following  way.  Touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not  what- 
ever things  tend  to  the  destruction  of  life  in  the  using.  He 
takes  the  maxim  of  the  false  teachers  condemned  by  the 
apostle  to  be  this — abstain  from  everything  the  eating  of 
•vvhich  involves  the  taking  away  of  life.  The  idea  itself  is 
foreign  to  the  argument,  nor  can  it  be  supported  by  the 
apostle's  diction. 

The  question  turns  upon  the  meaning  assigned  to  (pOopd, 
and  the  supposed  antecedent  to  the  relative. 

I,  A  large  party  take  (f)6opd  in  a  spiritual  sense,  and 
suppose  the  relative  to  refer  to  the  precepts  contained  in  the 
preceding  verse,  as  if  the  warning  were — all  which  maxims 
tend  by  their  observance  to  spiritual  ruin — lead  to  the  eternal 
destruction  of  such  as  are  influenced  by  them.  Some  of  those 
who  hold  this  view,  give  d7r6xpT]<n<;  the  sense  of  abuse,  as 
if  the  apostle  wished  to  say — the  law  did  make  distinctions 
of  meats  and  drinks,  but  the  unwarranted  abuse  of  such  a 
distinction  is  a  fatal  course.  Others,  again,  connect  the  last 
clause  of  the  verse  with  the  first — all  which  precepts  tend  to 
your  own  ruin,  by  your  observance  of  them,  for  they  are  an 
observance  based  upon  the  doctrines  and  commandments  of 
men.  Such,  generally,  are  the  views  of  Ambrosiaster  and 
Augustine,  a-Lapide,  Heumann,  Suicer,  and  Junker. 

II.  Others  suppose  the  antecedent  to  be  not  the  maxims, 
but  the  things  forbidden  in  them,  and  amonfr  such  critics 
there  are  two  classes. 

1.  Some  suppose  the  apostle  to  be  still  further  showing  the 
opinion  of  the  false  teachers.  According  to  them,  the  mean- 
ing is,  either,  all  which  meats  and  drinks  lead  to  ruin  in  the 
use  of  them,  according  to  the  commandments  and  teachings 
of  those  men ;  or,  all  these  meats  and  drinks  to  be  abstained 
from,  tend  to  destruction  by  the  use  of  them,  if  you  are  to  be 
judged  by  their  opinions  and  doctrines.  The  verse,  then, 
would  contain  this  idea — the  false  teachers  forbade  the  touch- 

Q 


196  COLOSSIANS  II.   22, 

ing  and  tasting  of  certain  things,  because,  in  their  opinion, 
the  use  of  them  brought  certain  pernicious  results.  Tliis 
opinion  is  concurred  in  by  Kypke,  Storr,  De  Wette,  Bohmer, 
and  Baumgarten-Crusius.  There  is  nothing  in  the  words 
themselves  to  contradict  it ;  it  may  be  grammatically  defended, 
and  the  noun  (f)dopd  may  bear  the  meaning  of  spiritual 
hurt,  as  in  GaL  vi.  8.  But  it  does  not  appear  to  us  to  be  in 
so  complete  harmony  with  the  context  as  is  the  following 
exegesis. 

2.  The  opinion  which  we  prefer  is  that  which  gives  the 
same  antecedent  to  the  relative,  but  understands  the  clause 
to  be  an  exposure  of  the  absurdity  of  such  asceticism — "  all 
which  things  are  meant  for  destruction  through  the  use  of 
them."  The  meats  and  drinks  about  which  the  errorist  ex- 
claimed— "  touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not,"  are  meant  to  be 
consumed  by  use.  They  perish  or  cease  to  exist,  because 
they  are  eaten  and  drunk  for  the  support  of  life.  They  are 
intended  for  this  destiny — eVrtV  et? — exist  for  it ;  God  created 
them  to  be  consumed,  and  they  meet  this  destiny  by  being 
used  to  the  full — utto — used  to  the  complete  satisfaction  of 
appetite.  The  verb  iariv  is  more  than  a  copula.  It  means — 
exists — which  things  exist.  The  noun  (f)dopd  is  often  used  in 
a  physical  sense — in  the  Seventy,  Ex.  xviii.  18  ;  Isa.  xxiv. 
3  ;  Jonah  ii.  7  ;  and  in  the  New  Testament,  1  Cor.  xv.  42, 
50  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  12;  Josephus,  Antiq.  \ii.  13,  3.  The  term 
a7ro;^p77o-t?  is  not  abuse  in  the  English  sense  of  the  word — but, 
"  full  use."  The  Latin  ahutor  has  this  meaning  also — to  use 
up ;  as  often  in  Cicero,  and  also  in  Terence  and  Suetonius. 
It  is  this  using  up  or  consuming  of  a  thing  by  use  contained 
in  the  dnro  and  cib,  that  gave  the  term  in  Latin,  Greek,  and 
English,  the  secondary  signification  of  misuse. 

The  apostle  thus  states  two  objections  to  the  Colossian 
asceticism.  First.  It  contradicts  the  design  of  Providence, 
which  created  such  meats  and  drinks  for  man's  use  and  satis- 
faction. The  apostle,  as  we  have  said,  uses  dTro-^prja-i^i,  which 
does  not  signify  abuse,  but  full  use.  The  maxims  of  the 
false  teachers  are — "  touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not ; "  but  the 
things  from  which  he  sternly  enjoins  this  abstinence  are,  in 
their  own  nature,  utterly  harmless,  and  not  only  is  the  use  of 
them  unaccompanied  with  spiritual  damage,  but  that  use  is 


COLOSSIANS   II.   22.  197 

enjoined  by  Him  whose  providence  has  so  liberally  furnished 
them  for  the  stay  and  support  of  life.  The  meats  and  drinks 
so  frowned  upon  have  been  created  for  the  very  purpose  of 
being  consumed,  and  having  served  their  purpose  in  this  con- 
sumption they  perish.  A  religion  of  asceticism  is  therefore  a 
libel  upon  Providence — a  surly  and  superstitious  refusal  of  the 
Divine  benignity.  It  believes  that  the  eating  and  drinking 
of  some  gifts  of  Divine  goodness  is  fraught  with  unspeakable 
danger,  and  therefore  it  makes  its  selections  among  them  in  its 
"  show  of  wisdom."  Strange  conviction,  that  what  is  physically 
nutritious  may  be  spiritually  poisonous  ;  and  that  what  gives 
strength  to  the  body  may  send  "  leanness  to  the  soul "  I  No 
wonder  that  such  a  self-righteous  and  ungrateful  practice  led 
by  a  swift  path  to  a  dark  and  Manicha^an  theology. 

And,  secondly,  things  which  are  meant  to  perish  in  being 
used  up,  can  have  little  connection  with  genuine  piety  ;  it  does 
not,  and  cannot  depend  on  abstinence  from  them.  Our  Lord 
Himself  said — "  not  that  which  goeth  into  the  mouth  defileth 
a  man  ; "  and  the  apostle  declares — "  every  creature  of  God  is 
good,  and  nothing  to  be  refused ; "  and  he  speaks  of  meats 
"  which  God  hath  created  to  be  received  with  thanksgiving." 
1  Cor.  vi.  13.  It  degrades  Christianity  to  make  it  a  system 
of  physical  or  ascetic  distinctions.  Spirituality  is  not  based 
on  such  external  and  ceremonial  forms.  The  error,  as  01s- 
hausen  says,  "  was  in  looking  for  holiness  in  the  outward 
rather  than  the  inward."  Such  an  error  has  been,  alas  !  too 
common  in  the  church,  and  is  the  result  of  superstitious 
indolence  and  vanity.  Men  seek  to  be  acted  on  from  with- 
out, and  to  be  sanctified  as  if  by  the  secret  and  unconscious 
charm  of  an  amulet ;  misunderstanding,  forgetting,  or  shun- 
ning the  mighty  work  or  change  which  should  be  going  on 
within.  That  change  is  from  the  centre  to  the  outer  life,  not 
from  the  outer  life  to  the  seat  of  motive  and  thought.  What 
the  lips  receive  or  refuse  from  "  cup  and  platter,"  has  neither 
propitiatory  merit  nor  demerit,  nor  can  it  exercise  a  hidden 
power  over  heart  and  mind.  The  palate  may  be  ungratified 
and  yet  the  conscience  be  defiled ;  the  anchorite,  while  he 
starves  himself,  may  roll  many  a  vice,  as  a  sweet  morsel,  under 
his  tongue ;  for  self-denial  in  corporeal  appetite  usually  takes 
ample  revenge  or   compensation  in  spiritual  indulgence  and 


198  COLOSSIANS   II.  23. 

pride.     And  thus  it  has  been  often  found,  that  men  attach  a 

higher   sanctity  to  abstinence  from  certain  kinds  of  food  and 

physical  refreshment,  than  to  abstinence  from  sin  ;  and  would 

rather  violate  a  Divine  statute,  than   break    a    self-inflicted 

fast. 

What  mean  they  ?     Canst  thou  dream  there  is  a  power 
In  lighter  diet  at  a  later  hour 
To  charm  to  sleep  the  threatenings  of  the  skies, 
And  hide  past  folly  from  all-seeing  eyes  ?  ^ 

Several  things  concur  in  justifying  the  view  we  have  taken, 
which  is  that  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and  Beza, 
of  Grotius,  Meyer,  Steiger,  and  Bahr.  The  apostle  is  speaking 
of  physical  things,  as  eating  and  drinking,  and  it  is  natural  to 
understand  <p6opd  and  airoxpvf^''^  ^^  their  physical  sense,  and 
in  connection  with  those  elements  of  forbidden  sustenance. 
Again,  the  writer  places  no  substantive  after  the  three  verbs, 
and  the  ellipse  imparts  a  certain  emphasis.  The  objects  to  be 
abstained  from  were  yet  present  to  his  mind,  and  it  was 
natural  for  him  to  allude  to  them,  and  to  show  that  they  were 
designed  for  use,  nay,  were  of  so  little  permanence  and  value 
that  they  perished  in  this  use.  The  mimetic  clause — "  touch 
not,"  etc.,  is  inserted,  or  rather  rapidly  interjected,  as  the 
apostle  passes  on.  It  will  therefore  be  best  read  in  a  paren- 
thesis. The  swiftness  of  the  apostle's  thoughts  interferes  so  far 
with  the  order  of  them.  He  first  shows  the  inconsistency  of 
yielding  to  ordinances  after  they  had  become  dead  to  them ; 
and  he  meant  to  point  out  the  source  of  such  ordinances,  but 
the  mention  of  them  suggests  the  pointed  quotation  of  some 
of  them,  and  then  he  cannot  refrain,  in  a  brief  underthought, 
from  exposing  their  absurdity,  ere  he  formally  carries  out  his 
purpose  of  showing  their  origin  and  inutility.  Lastly,  the 
Greek  Fathers  understand  the  phrase  in  this  way.  They  do 
not  mince  the  matter,  but  give  cfiOopd  its  coarsest  meaning. 
Chrysostom,  followed  by  Theodoret,  says — et?  Koirpov  yap 
diravra  fjueTajBaXKerai.  (Ecumenius  uses  this  language — 
viroKeiraL  iv  tm  dcfieSpMvt ;  while  Theophylact  is  yet  more 
explicit — (ji9eip6fX€va  <yap  iv  rfj  yaa-rpl  Blo,  tov  d(f)€Bpcovo<i 
vTToppei. 

(Ver.  23.)  "Atlvci  iarcv  \6yov  /juev  e^ovra  <TO(f)ia<i — "  Which 
^  Cowper. 


COLOSSIANS   II.   23.  199 

things  indeed  having  a  show  of  wisdom."     The  antecedent  to 
anva  is  the  preceding  clause — "  doctrines  and  commandments 
of  men."     Kiihner,  §  431,  2.     The  peculiar  form  anva  repre- 
sents this  idea — all  which  things,  that  is,  the  entire  class  of 
them.     Kiihner,  §  781,  4,  5.     We  do  not  connect  eariv  with 
the  participle  exovra,  as  some    do  ;  but  specially  with    the 
concluding  clause  of    the  verse.     ,40709   signifies  sometimes 
report  or   rumour — then   mere   rumour — then   mere  talk  or 
pretext — words  and  only  words — \6yov  ov  irpdyfjbara.      It  is 
thus  opposed  to  akrjdeia.     Diodorus  Siculus,  13,  4;  Polybius, 
17    (18),  14,  5.     The  word  thus  means  a  certain  kind  of 
semblance,  which  in  Scotch  is  called  a  so^igh — sound  without 
reality.     These  precepts  and  commandments  had  the  air,  aspect, 
nomenclature,  and  pretensions  of  wisdom.      The  particle  fiev 
might   imply  the   contrast,  the  apodosis  not  being  formally 
expressed.    Kiihner,  §  734,  2  ;  Winer,  §  63, 1.  2,  e.     This  last 
critic  says — the  parallel  member  of  the  sentence  is  included 
in  the  one  with  fiiv.     Thus,  Heb.  vi.   16, — men,  indeed — ^lev 
— swear  by  the  greater,  and  the  implied  contrast  is,  but  God 
can  only  swear  by  Himself.      These  teachings  have  a  show  of 
wisdom,  ixev — but  none  in  reality.      Or,  Eom.  iii.  2,  "  What 
advantage,  then,  hath  the  Jew  ? — much  every  way  " — irpcoTov 
fiiv — "  chiefly  indeed,"  but   not  wholly,  "  because  that  unto 
them  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God."     Thus  Acts  xix.  4, 
*I(odvvT]<i  fiev  i^aTTTiaev — "  John  indeed  baptized  "  the  baptism 
of  repentance ;  the  implied  contrast  being — but  not  so  Jesus. 
So,  in  the  clause  before  us,  the  same  construction  has  been 
found  by  some, — there  is  the  semblance,  indeed,  of  wisdom, 
but  not  the  reality.     We  are  inclined,  however,  to  regard  the 
apodosis  as  existing  in  ovk  iv  Tififj  rivi ;  but  Se  is  not  expressed, 
because  the  construction  is  changed  into  the  dative,  following 
up  the  case  of  the  preceding  nouns,  and  because  the  word  ovk, 
to  which  Bi  would  be  attached,  has  in  it  a  palpable  adversative 
power.      It  was  worse  than  hypercriticism  on  the  part   of 
Jerome    to    say,    that     the    particle    was    omitted — propter' 
imperitiani  artis  grammaticae.     The  apostle  particularizes  and 
adds,  this  verbiage  of  wisdom  consists  "  in  will-worship  " — 

'Ev  iOekoOprjcTKeia.  This  is  worship  not  enjoyed  by  God, 
but  springing  out  of  man's  own  ingenuity — unauthorized 
devotion,  OprjcrKeia  being  religious  service — the  outer  mani- 


200  COLOSSIANS   II.   23. 

festation  of  inner  feeling.  Thus,  tOekoBovKo^;  is  one  who  is 
wilfully  a  slave ;  idekoKtvBvvo'i  is  one  who  is  wilfully  in 
danger.  The  worship  referred  to  is  unsolicited  and  unaccepted. 
It  is  superstition,  and  probably  is  the  homage  paid  to  angels. 
Such  worship  had  the  feint  of  wisdom,  as  it  professed  to  base 
itself  on  invisible  arcana  ;  and  to  ask  and  receive  blessings 
and  protection  from  creatures,  whose  agency  comes  not  within 
the  range  of  observation,  but  who  were  supposed  to  be  the 
patrons  and  defenders  of  those  who  could  name  them  in 
erring  and  extravagant  devotion. 

Kal  raireivo^pocrvvri — "And  humility."  This  has  been 
already  explained  under  the  18  th  verse.  The  humility  re- 
ferred to  is  plainly  of  that  spurious  kind,  that,  in  its  excess 
and  affectation,  could  not  look  up  to  God,  but  deemed  it 
wondrous  wisdom  to  invoke  angels  on  its  behalf. 

KaX  d<j)€LSLa  a(t)fiaTo<;.  The  term  a(})€tSla  is  unsparingness, 
and  here  unsparingness  in  the  form  of  severity,  or  that  austere 
asceticism  which  the  apostle  has  already  reprimanded.  In 
this  sense  it  often  occurs  among  the  classical  writers.^  The 
body  is  not  only  kept  under,  that  is,  kept  in  its  proper  and 
subordinate  position,  but  it  is  hated,  lacerated,  and  tormented 
into  debility.  The  appetites  are  looked  upon  as  sinful,  and 
are  checked — not  supplied  in  healthful  moderation.  Every 
species  of  support  is  grudged — "  to  back  and  belly  too."  The 
physical  constitution  is  thus  enervated  and  sickened.  Yet  its 
sinful  tendencies  are  only  beaten  down,  not  eradicated.  Job 
made  a  covenant  with  his  eyes,  but  those  fanatics  would  dim 
theirs  by  fasting.  The  whole  process  was  a  cardinal  mistake, 
for  it  was  a  system  of  externals,  both  in  ceremonial  and  ethics. 
The  body  might  be  reduced,  but  the  evil  bias  might  remain 
unchecked.  A  man  might  whip  and  fast  himself  into  a 
walking  skeleton,  and  yet  the  spirit  within  him  might  have 
all  its  lusts  unconquered,  for  all  it  had  lost  was  only  the 
ability  to  gratify  them.  To  place  a  fetter  on  a  robber's  hand 
will  not  cure  him  of  covetousness,  though  it  may  disqualify 
him  from  actual  theft.  To  seal  up  a  swearer's  mouth  will  not 
pluck  profanity  out  of  his  heart,  though  it  may  for  the  time 
prevent  him  from  taking  God's  name  in  vain.  To  lacerate 
the  flesh  almost  to  suicide,  merely  incapacitates  it  for  indul- 
1  Diodorus  Sic.  13,  60.     Thucyd.  ii.  51. 


COLOSSIANS  II.   23.  201 

gence,  but  does  not  extirpate  sinful  desire.  Its  air  of  superior 
sanctity  ^  is  only  pride  in  disguise — it  has  but  "  a  show  of 
wisdom,"  and  is  not — 

OvK,  iv  TLjjifi  Tivl,  Trpo?  7r\r]a/jLovr)v  rrj<;  crapKo^.  There  is 
difficulty  in  arriving  at  a  correct  interpretation  of  these  clauses, 
and  one  reason  is,  that  we  have  first  to  solve  whether  they 
should  be  joined  or  disconnected.  It  is  quite  plain  that  the 
apostle  intends  a  contrast,  and  the  preposition  iv  is  repeated. 

1.  Very  many  interpreters  supply  a-(io/jLaro<i  to  Ti/xfj.  The 
Greek  interpreters  held  this  view,  followed  by  Pelagius,  Calvin, 
Luther,  and  other  reformers ;  by  Estius,  and  a-Lapide  in  the 
Popish  Church  ;  by  Daille,  Davenant,  and  Macknight ;  and  in 
later  times  by  the  lately  deceased  critics,  De  Wette  and 
Baumgarten-Crusius.  The  meaning,  then,  is — "  which  things 
have  a  show  of  wisdom  in  will- worship,  humility,  and  neglect- 
ing of  the  body,  not  in  any  honour  shown  to  the  body  in 
reference  to  such  things  as  satisfy  corporeal  appetite."  This 
is  a  favourite  interpretation,  but  we  cannot  receive  it.  For, 
as  Meyer  remarks,  it  gives  adp^  the  meaning  of  o-cofia,  which 
had  just  been  previously  used — a  meaning  which  it  cannot 
bear.  Then,  too,  this  exegesis  supplies  <7(t)/jiaro<;  without  any 
reason,  and  it  restricts  the  contrast  introduced  by  ovk  to  only 
one  member  of  the  sentence.  That  contrast  seems  to  refer  to 
all  the  manifestations  of  this  specious  wisdom,  and  not  simply 
to  one  of  them.  Besides,  this  interpretation  gives  a  very 
feeble  ending  to  the  verse  ;  austerity  towards  the  body,  is 
M'eakly  characterized  as  not  giving   honour   to  the  body  in 

^  Car  je  vous  prie  quelle  ombre  de  sagesse  y  a-t-il  en  ee  caresme  par  exemple, 
qu'ils  commencerent  I'autre  jour,  apres  la  preface  ordinaire  de  leur  carneval  ? 
Ou  est  la  raison  ?  ou  le  sens  commun,  qui  puisse  avoiier,  s'il  est  litre,  que  ce  soit 
sagesse,  apres  s'estre  licentie  a  toute  sorte  de  debauches,  et  de  folies,  de  penser 
effacer  tout  cela  avec  une  poign^e  de  ceudres  ?  Que  ce  soit  sagesse  de  croire, 
que  c'est  jeusner,  de  manger  du  poisson  ?  Que  ce  soit  sagesse  d'estimer,  que 
c'est  se  sanctifier,  de  manger  des  lierbes,  ou  du  saumon,  ou  de  la  moulue  ? 
ct  que  c'est  soiiiller  son  ^me  d'un  pech^  mortel,  et  digne  du  feu  eternel,  de 
gouter  d'un  morceau  de  beuf,  ou  de  niouton,  ces  quarante  jours  durant?  comme 
si  toute  la  nature  des  choses  s'^toit  chang^e  en  un  moment,  et  que  les 
animaux  de  la  terre  fussent  tons  devenus  contagieux,  et  mortel  s,  de  bons  et 
salutaires,  qu'ils  ^to3'ent,  il  n'y  a  que  quatre  jours  ?  Est-ce  sagesse  d'attacher 
le  Christianisme  k  une  observation  si  peu  raisonnable,  et  de  dire,  comme  ils 
font,  que  ceux,  qui  mangent  de  la  chair  en  ce  temps,  ne  sont  pas  Chretiens  ?  II 
n'y  a  point  d'esprit  si  mediocre,  qui  ne  juge  aistiment,  qu'il  n'y  a  nuUe  apparence 
de  sagesse  en  tout  cela  ;  pour  ne  rien  dire  de  pis. — Daill6,  pp.  548-550. 


202  COLOSSIANS  II.   23. 

things  which  satisfy  its  physical  appetites,  as  if  the  Colossians 
needed  such  a  definition.  And  lastly,  this  irXija-fiom]  is 
something  more  than  the  gratification  of  corporeal  desire,  for 
in  the  Pauline  vocabulary,  acofia  is  only  a  portion  of  adp^. 

2.  Another  view,  which  holds  the  same  connection,  is  that 
which  gives  rifjn]  the  sense  of  value,  and  brings  out  this 
exegesis — which  are  not  of  any  value,  inasmuch  as  they  are 
concerned  with  things  which  serve  only  to  the  gratification  of 
the  flesh.  These  are  useless  prohibitions,  and  have  but  a 
show  of  wisdom,  for  they  are  concerned  with  matters  which 
minister  only  to  appetite — quum  ad  ca  spectent  quibus  farciUir 
caro.  The  participle  ovra  is  thus  supposed  to  stand  before 
7rpo9.  This  is  the  idea  of  Beza  and  Crocius,  and  that  of 
Heinrichs  is  only  a  worse  modification  of  it.  It  restricts  the 
meaning  of  a-dp^,  and  needs  considerable  eking  out  in  its 
construction. 

3.  Others  take  the  word  a-dp^  in  its  full  sense,  and  suppose 
the  apostle  to  mean  that  all  prohibitions  which  bear  especially 
against  the  body  are  of  little  worth,  for  they  minister  all  the 
while  to  the  pride  of  corrupted  humanity.  The  last  clause  is 
thus  nearly  equivalent  to  an  earlier  one — "  vainly  puffed  up 
by  his  fleshly  mind."  With  some  varieties,  this  is  the 
exegesis  of  Hilary,  Bengel,  Storr,  Flatt,  Bohmer,  Steiger, 
Biihr,  and  Huther.  Meyer,  in  taking  the  same  view,  places 
aapKo^i  in  contrast  with  aoiixaro<i,  and  ifK'qa^iovr]  with  d^eihla. 
He  also  lays  the  principal  stress  of  the  contrast  on  the  words 
ovK  ii>  rtfif]  TLvl,  as  if  they  stood  in  antagonism  to  the  \6yov 
ao(J3la<;.  That  wisdom  is  all  a  pretence — it  has  no  honour  in 
reality  or  basis.  Still,  with  this  otherwise  good  interpretation, 
the  connection  of  the  last  clause  appears  to  be  hard,  for  Trpo? 
must  signify  um  dadurcJi,  or  "  all  of  them  tend  to."  A  modi- 
fication of  this  view  is  adopted  by  Conybeare,  who  gives  the 
clause  a  pregnant  sense — "  not  of  any  value  to  check  the 
indulgence  of  the  flesh."  His  reviewer  in  the  North  British 
Rcvieiv  applauds  the  exegesis.^  We  do  not  accept  the  sense 
of  fleshly  passion  for  adp^,  and  we  cannot  believe  7r/3o<?  to 
be  so  utterly  indifferent  in  its  meaning.     In  the   proposed 

'  Vol.  XX.  p.  336.  "  There  is  really  no  difSeulty  in  the  vp'o;.  As  a  jocose 
philologer  of  cm-  acquaintance  observed — '  Poor  ■rp'o;  is  morally  indifferent,  and 
flexible  either  to  checking  or  promoting. '  " 


COLOSSIANS  II.  23.  203 

exegesis,  tt/oo?  must  signify  "against."  It  sometimes  is  so 
translated,  still  the  idea  of  hostility  is  found,  not  in  the 
particle,  but  in  its  adjuncts,  as  fid^eardai,  ^dWeiv,  or  as  in 
the  New  Testament,  Acts  vi.  1,  where  the  idea  of  antagonism 
is  found  in  yoyyva-fioii,  Acts  xxiv.  19,  where  the  clause  is 
preceded  by  KaTTjyopeiv,  and  in  Eph.  vi.  11,  where  there  is 
the  idea  of  combat.  In  all  such  cases  the  idea  of  hostility  is 
implied  in  the  clause,  and  the  preposition  only  expresses  the 
reference — but  there  is  no  such  idea  implied  in  the  verse 
before  us.  The  same  principle  explains  the  anay  of  classical 
instances  adduced  by  Peile 

4.  While  we  take  this  general  view,  we  are  inclined  to 
regard  the  verse,  from  \6yov  to  tivi,  as  participial ;  and  with 
Bahr,  closely  to  connect  icniv  with  tt/jo?.  "  Which  things 
having,  indeed,  a  show  of  wisdom  in  superstition,  humility, 
and  corporeal  austerity,  not  in  any  thing  of  value,  are  for,  or 
minister  to  the  gratification  of  the  flesh."  H/do?  after  et/*/ 
denotes  result.  John  xi.  4.  There  needs,  with  this  view, 
the  insertion  of  no  explanatory  terms,  or  connecting  ideas 
taken  for  granted.  The  verb  stands  at  a  distance  from  the 
preposition,  but  is  not  on  that  account  the  less  emphatic. 
The  apostle  means  to  condemn  those  precepts  and  teachings, 
and  he  is  about  to  pronounce  the  sentence ;  but  to  make  it 
the  more  emphatic  he  briefly  enumerates  what  they  chiefly 
consist  of,  and  then  his  censure  is,  that  they  produce  an  effect 
directly  the  opposite  to  their  professed  design.  Their  avowed 
purpose  is  to  loM'er  and  abase  humanity,  and  he  gives  them 
epithets  all  showing  this  object ;  while  he  adds  with  sternness 
and  force,  that  their  only  result  is  to  rouse  up  and  inflate 
imregenerate  humanity.  That  Tr'Kijajj.ov^  can  bear  this 
tropical  meaning  there  is  no  doubt,  as  in  Hab,  ii.  16,  where 
the  word  occurs  with  art/im?;  Sirach  i.  16,  where  it  is  used 
with  o-o0ta9;  and  Isa.  Ixv.  15,  where  it  stands  absolutely, 
but  with  a  spiritual  sense.  The  phrase  ovk  iv  rifijj  tlvI,  then 
brings  out  this  contrast — those  doctrines  have  in  sooth  a 
show  of  wisdom,  in  their  will- worship,  humility,  and  corporeal 
austerity,  but  they  have  really  nothing  of  value. 

The  paragraph  therefore  reprobates  superstitious  asceticism. 
The  religious  history  of  the  world  shows  what  fascination  there 
is  to  many  minds  in  voluntary  suffering.     Such  asceticism 


204  COLOSSIANS   II.   23. 

threw  its  eclipse  over  the  bright  and  lovely  spirit  of  Pascal. 
The  oriental  temperament  feels  powerfully  the  fatal  charm.  As 
if  the  Divine  Being  might  fail  to  subject  them  to  a  sufficient 
amount  of  discipline,  men  assume  the  labour  of  disciplining 
themselves,  but  choose  a  mode  very  unlike  that  which  God 
usually  employs. 

The  Brahmin  kindles  on  his  own  bare  head 

The  sacred  fires,  self-torturing  his  trade. 

Which  is  the  saintlier  worthy  of  the  two  ? 

Past  all  dispute  yon  anchorite,  say  you. 

Your  sentence  and  mine  differ.     What's  a  name  ? 

I  say  the  Brahmin  has  the  fairer  claim, 

If  sufferings  Scripture  nowhere  recommends, 

Devised  by  self  to  answer  selfish  ends. 

Give  saintship,  then,  all  Europe  must  agree 

Ten  starveling  hermits  suffer  less  than  he. 

Such  delusions  are  not  confined  to  religious  follies,  for  their 
origin  lies  deep  in  human  nature.  Men  glory  in  being  what 
their  fellows  dare  not  aspire  to,  and  there  is  no  little  self- 
aggrandizement  in  this  self-annihilation.  When  Diogenes 
lifted  his  foot  on  Plato's  velvet  cushion  and  shouted,  "  Thus  I 
trample  on  Plato's  pride,"  the  Athenian  sage  justly  replied, 
"  But  with  still  greater  pride."  The  apostle  utters  a  similar 
sentiment ;  the  carnal  nature  is  all  the  while  gratified,  even 
though  the  body,  wan  and  wasted,  is  reduced  to  the  point  of 
bare  existence.  There  is  more  pride  in  cells  and  cloisters 
than  in  courts  and  palaces,  and  oftentimes  as  gross  sensuality. 
The  devotee  deifies  himself,  is  more  to  himself  than  the  object 
of  his  homage.  The  whole  of  these  fanatical  processes,  so  far 
from  accomplishing  their  ostensible  object,  really  produce  the 
reverse ;  such  will- worship  is  an  impious  invention ;  such 
humility  is  pride  in  its  most  sullen  and  offensive  form ;  and 
these  corporeal  macerations,  so  far  from  subduing  and 
sanctifying,  only  gratify  to  satiety  the  coarse  and  selfish 
passions ;  nay,  as  history  has  shown,  tend  to  nurse  licentious- 
ness in  one  age,  and  a  ferocious  fanaticism  in  another.  The 
entire  phenomenon,  whatever  its  special  aspect,  is  a  huge  self- 
deception,  and  a  reversal  of  that  moral  order  which  God  has 
established. 

In  the  course  of  expounding  this  chapter,  we  have  found 
several  illustrations  in  post- apostolic  times.     We  now  present 


COLOSSIANS   II.   23.  205 

another,  which  shows  how  the  practices  described  in  this  sec- 
tion were  viewed  in  themselves,  and  condemned  at  a  very 
early  period.  The  unknown  author  of  that  very  precious 
document,  the  letter  to  Diognetus,  and  now  rightly  included 
by  Hefele  among  the  remains  of  the  apostolical  Fathers, 
speaks  in  a  style  worthy  of  an  apostle.  He  says  of  the  Jews, 
"  But  indeed  I  think  that  you  have  no  need  to  learn  from  me 
their  ridiculous  and  senseless  alarms  about  their  food,  their 
superstition  about  the  Sabbath,  their  boasting  of  circumcision, 
and  their  pretexts  of  fasting,  and  the  observance  of  new 
moons.  How  is  it  right  to  receive  some  of  the  things  which 
God  has  created  for  the  use  of  man  as  fitly  ^  created,  and  to 
reject  others  of  them  as  useless  and  superfluous  ?  How  can  it 
be  else  than  impious  to  libel  God,  as  if  He  had  forbidden  any 
good  action  to  be  done  on  the  Sabbath  day  ?  How  worthy  of 
ridicule  their  exultation  about  the  curtailment  of  the  flesh 
as  a  witness  of  their  election,  as  though  on  this  account  they 
were  the  peculiar  objects  of  God's  complacency  !  Who  will 
regard  as  a  sign  of  piety,  and  will  not  much  more  regard  as  a 
mark  of  folly,  their  scrupulous  study  of  the  ^  stars,  and  their 
watching  of  the  moon,  in  order  to  procure  the  observance  of 
months  and  days,  and  to  arrange  the  Divine  dispensations  and 
changes  of  the  seasons — some  into  feasts  and  others  into  fasts, 
according  to  their  inclination  ?  I  imagine  that  you  are  suf- 
ficiently informed,  that  the  Christians  rightly  abstain  from 
the  prevailing  emptiness  of  worship  and  delusion,  and  from 
the  fussiness^  and  vainglory  of  the  Jews." 


Our  readers  will  pardon  us  for  inserting  in  a  note  a  modern  instance  of  this 
pride  of  sanctity  covered  with  a  robe  of  revolting  humility.  Last  year  (1854),  a 
new  saint  was  added  to  the  Popish  calendar,  by  name  Benedetto  Giuseppe  Labre, 
who  had  made  his  residence  in  the  Coliseo  for  many  years,  and  was  noted  by 
travellers  for  his  craziness  and  filth.  At  the  usual  mock  trial  which  takes  place 
at  a  canonization,  the  pleading  of  the  so-called  Devil's  advocate  against  him 
was  rebutted  by  the  so-called  God's  advocate  in  the  following  terms,  literally 
translated  from  the  paper  : — "He  was  a  model  of  humility,  abstinence,  and 
mortification,  taking  only  for  food  remains  of  cabbage,  lemon  peel,  or  lettuce 
leaves,  which  he  picked  up  in  the  streets.     He  even  ate,  once,   some  spoiled 

••  KaXus.  *  HapiSpiiovTtic;. 

2  ni>>.vri>ayfiiiffijyr.s.     Opera,  Justini  Mart.  vol.  ii.  pp.  474-476,  ed.  Otto. 


206  COLOSSI ANS   II.   23. 

soup  which  he  found  on  a  dunghill,  where  it  had  been  thrown.  All  these  facts 
are  fully  proved  by  the  juridical  documents  laid  before  the  tribunah"  .  .  .  . 
Having  spoken  at  length  of  the  wooden  cup,  all  broken  and  rotten,  in  which  he 
received  his  soup  at  the  door  of  the  houses,  "  eternal  monument  of  his  volun- 
tary privations,"  the  advocate  proceeds  :  "What  more  shall  I  say?  A  glance 
cast  upon  him  was  sufficient  to  discover  in  him  a  perfect  model  of  poverty.  His 
hair  and  beard  were  neglected,  his  face  pale,  his  garments  ragged,  his  body 
livid  ;  a  rosary  hung  from  his  neck  ;  he  wore  no  stockings  ;  his  shirt  was  dirty 
and  disgusting  ;  and  to  give  of  him  a  full  idea,  let  us  add,  that  he  was  so  com- 
pletely covered  with  vermin  (pidocchi),  that  in  the  churches  many  persons  kept 
away  from  him  for  fear  of  catching  them  !  " 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  apostle  leaves  his  scornful  flagellation  of  the  false 
teachers,  and  comes  to  a  more  congenial  occupation.  For 
though  it  is  needful  to  refute  error,  it  is  more  pleasant  to 
inculcate  truth.  If  the  Colossian  believers  should  act  iu 
accordance  with  their  privileges — if  they  understood  how  the 
charge  preferred  against  them  by  the  law  had  been  met  with 
a  discharge  on  the  cross  of  Calvary — if  the  process  of  sanc- 
tification  beginning  in  their  hearts  should  work  outward,  and 
hallow  and  adorn  their  lives — if  they  felt  that  whatever  bless- 
ings they  enjoyed  in  part,  or  anticipated  in  fulness,  sprang 
from  union  with  Christ,  then  should  they  be  fortified  against 
every  effort  to  induce  them  to  sever  themselves  from  the 
Head,  and  against  every  attempt  to  substitute  reveries  for 
truth,  or  human  inventions  for  Divine  enactments.  Then, 
too,  should  they  learn  that  worship  does  not  consist  of 
superstitious  invocations,  and  that  sanctification  is  not  identi- 
cal with  fanatical  austerities.  Let  them  move  in  a  spiritual 
region  lifted  far  above  those  earthly  vanities,  and  let  them 
look  down  on  them  as  the  offspring  of  a  morbid  and  self- 
deceived  imagination,  or  the  craving  and  the  nutriment  of  a 
self-satisfied  pride. 

(Ver.  1.)  El  ovv  avvrj^epOrjTe  r<p  Xpicnm — "If,  then,  ye 
have  been  raised  together  with  Christ,"  or  are  in  a  risen  state. 
The  particle  ovv  is  illative,  and  el  does  not  mean  "if,"  as  if  it 
betokened  uncertainty,  but  it  introduces  a  premiss  on  which  a 
conclusion  is  to  be  based.  It  is  somewhat  of  a  syllogistic 
form,  as  Fritzsche,  Klihner,  and  Meyer  suppose,  but  the  notion 
appears  to  be  a  needless  refinement.  There  are  few  forms  of 
reasoning  or  inference  based  upon  fact  or  hypothesis,  which 
cannot  be  moulded  into  a  syllogism.  There  is  no  doubtful- 
ness in  the  statement,  it  asserts  an  actual  condition,  as  in 
many  parts  of  the  New  Testament  too  numerous  to  quote. 
Hartung,  ii.  p.   202.     The  same  meaning  must  be  given  to 


208  COLOSSIANS   III.    1. 

it  as  in  ii.  20.  They  had  been  dead  in  sins,  but  they  had 
been  quickened  together  with  Christ,  There  may  be  a  refer- 
ence, as  many  suppose,  to  the  phrase,  "buried  in  baptism," 
though  there  the  allusion  is  to  death  to  sin,  not  death  in  it. 
Now,  the  restoration  of  life  implies  resurrection,  for  the  dead 
on  being  quickened  do  not  lie  in  their  sepulchres.  The  power 
that  reanimated  Lazarus  immediately  cried  to  him,  "  Come 
forth."  The  nature  and  results  of  this  spiritual  resurrection 
are  detailed  under  Eph.  ii.  6.  Union  with  Christ  enjoys  a 
peculiar  and  merited  prominence — "  risen  with  Christ."  Their 
new  position  laid  them  under  a  special  obligation,  and  they 
are  thus  enjoined — "  seek  those  things  which  are  above  " — 

Ta  avco  ^7]Telre.  The  reference  in  avco  is  here,  as  is  proved 
by  the  concluding  clause,  to  heaven — "  seek  things  in  heaven." 
There  is  no  occasion  to  supply  dyaOd,  for  it  is  implied.  The 
expression  is  used  in  contrast  with  Karco,  and  with  rd  iirl  t?}? 
yfj^  in  the  following  verse.  The  same  idea  is  often  expressed,  as 
in  Phil.  iii.  14,  20  ;  Matt.  vi.  20,  33  ;  Gal.  iv.  26.  The  region 
of  spiritual  death  is  a  nether-world,  that  of  life  is  an  elevated 
realm — the  living  not  only  rise,  but  they  sit  with  Christ  "  in 
the  heavenly  places."     The  precise  locality  is  now  indicated — 

Ov  6  Xpi(TT6<i  icrrtv  iv  Se^ca  rov  ©eov  KaOij/xevo'; — "  Where 
Christ  is,  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God."  The  ideas  of 
honour,  power,  and  felicity,  implied  in  the  declaration  will  be 
found  under  Eph.  i.  20.  Illustrations  or  allusions  occur  in 
1  Kings  ii.  19;  1  Sam.  xx.  2  5  ;  Ps.  ex.  1  ;  Eev.  iii.  2 1  ; 
Ptom.  viii.  34  ;  Heb.  vii.  25  ;  Phil.  ii.  9. 

The  clause  presents  inducements  to  obey  the  injunction, 
"  Seek  those  things  which  are  above."  And  these  inducements 
lie  in  the  statement  of  two  facts.  Fii^st,  they  have  been  raised 
up  with  Christ,  and  therefore  they  ought  to  seek  things  above. 
Any  other  search  or  desire  would  be  very  inconsistent.  The 
image  seems  to  be — the  region  of  the  dead  is  beneath ;  they 
are  let  down  to  their  final  resting-place.  Should,  then,  a  man 
rise  from  this  dark  and  deep  receptacle,  and  ascend  to  the 
living  world,  would  he  set  his  desires  on  the  gloom,  and  chill, 
and  rottenness,  he  had  left  behind  him  ?  Would  he  place  the 
objects  of  his  search  among  the  coffins,  and  the  mean  and 
creeping  things  that  live  on  putrefaction  ?  Would  he  still 
seek  for  things  below  ?     At  the  very  idea  and  memory  of  that 


COLOSSIANS   III.   2.  209 

locality  would  not  his  spirit  shudder  ?  And  if  the  Christians 
at  Colosse  had  been  raised  from  a  yet  lower  condition,  and  by 
a  still  nobler  resurrection,  should  not  similar  feelings  and 
associations  rule  their  minds  ?  Why  should  they  be  gazing 
downwards  from  their  position,  and  groping  amidst  things  so 
far  beneath  them  ?  Their  past  state,  with  its  sin  and  guilt,  its 
degradation  and  misery,  could  surely  have  no  attractions  for 
them.  Having  been  brought  up,  they  must  still  look  up ;  and 
what  they  seek  must  be  in  harmony  with  their  own  pure  and 
elevated  position — Su7'stnn  corda.  And,  secondly,  Christ  is 
above  in  a  station  of  glory.  Their  union  with  Him  will  lead 
their  thoughts  to  Him.  Whatever  the  character  of  the  things 
to  be  sought  may  be,  they  are  to  be  found  with  Christ.  Truth 
and  blessing  are  from  Him — promise  and  hope  centre  in  Him. 
Whether  the  "  things  above  "  be  a  fuller  glimpse  of  heaven,  a 
higher  preparation  for  it,  or  a  sweeter  foretaste  of  it ;  whether 
it  be  to  learn  its  songs,  reach  a  deeper  sympathy  with  its 
enjoyments,  or  realize  a  living  unity  with  its  population ;  still, 
Christ  at  God's  right  hand  enjoys  a  special  pre-eminence,  as 
those  attainments  are  from  Him,  and  the  song,  the  service, 
and  the  inhabitants  of  heaven  have  Him  as  object,  or  as  Lord. 
As  the  salvation  which  they  experience  comes  from  that 
blood  by  the  shedding  of  which  He  rose  to  His  glorious 
position — as  there  He  intercedes  so  effectually,  and  governs  so 
graciously,  by  word,  providence,  and  Spirit — as  there  He 
holds  heaven  in  their  name,  and  prepares  them  for  it — as  their 
present  life  and  peace  originate  in  union  with  Him — a  union 
to  be  realized  yet  more  vividly  when  He  shall  bid  them 
"  come  up  hither  ; "  therefore  should  their  desire  stretch  away 
upward  and  onward  towards  Him  and  the  scene  he  occupies 
"  on  the  right  hand  of  the  glorious  majesty."  "  An  high  look," 
though  it  be  sin  in  ordinary  things,  and  be  the  index  of  a 
proud  heart,  is  yet  the  true  aspect  of  a  humble  believer. 

The  form  of  expression,  "  things  above,"  while  it  has  a 
distinctive  meaning  in  Christianity,  and  is  not  a  mere  image, 
is  one  that  is  also  based  on  our  moral  nature.  Local  elevation 
is  the  instinctive  symbol  of  spiritual  aspiration  and  refine- 
ment. Hence  the  origin  of  the  phrases  collected  by  some 
commentators  from  the  classics. 

(Ver.  2.)  Ta  avco  (ppoveire,  fj,r]  to,  eVt  t?}?  7^9 — "  Set  your 


210  COLOSSIANS  III.   2. 

mind  on  things  above,  not  on  things  on  the  earth."  The 
verb  in  this  verse  differs  so  far  from  that  employed  in  the 
preceding,  that  it  refers  more  to  inner  disposition,  while  the 
former  is  rather  practical  pursuit.  The  sure  safeguard 
against  seeking  things  below,  is  not  to  set  the  mind  upon 
them.  The  "  things  above  "  have  been  already  glanced  at. 
The  things  "  on  the  earth  "  are  not,  as  Huther  and  Schrader 
suppose,  the  meat  and  drinks  and  other  elements  of  the 
ascetic  system  which  the  apostle  condemns,  but  such  things 
as  are  the  objects  of  usual  and  intense  search  among  men. 
Phil.  iii.  19.  The  apostle  does  not  urge  any  transcendental 
contempt  of  things  below,  but  simply  asks  that  the  heart  be 
not  set  upon  them  in  the  same  way,  and  to  the  same  extent, 
in  which  it  is  set  upon  things  above.  The  pilgrim  is  not  to 
despise  the  comforts  which  he  may  meet  with  by  the  way, 
but  he  is  not  to  tarry  among  them,  or  leave  them  with  regret. 
"  Things  on  earth  "  are  only  subordinate  and  instrumental — 
"  things  above  "  are  supreme  and  final.  Attachment  to  things 
on  the  earth  is  unworthy  of  one  who  has  risen  with  Christ, 
for  they  are  beneath  him,  and  the  love  of  them  is  not  at  all 
in  harmony  with  his  position  and  prospects.  What  can  wealth 
achieve  for  him  who  has  treasure  laid  up  in  heaven  ?  Or 
honour  for  him  who  is  already  enthroned  in  the  heavenly 
places  ?  Or  pleasure  for  him  who  revels  in  "  newness  of 
life "  ?  Or  power  for  him  who  is  endowed  with  a  moral 
omnipotence  ?  Or  fame  for  him  who  enjoys  the  approval  of 
God  ?  Nay,  too  often,  when  the  "  things  on  earth "  are 
possessed,  they  concentrate  the  heart  upon  them,  and  the 
"look  and  thoughts  are  downward  bent."  Bishop  Wilson  on 
this  place  observes — "  for  things  on  earth  too  naturally  draw 
us  down,  attract  us,  fix  us.  Esau's  red  pottage  prevails  over 
the  birthright.  The  guests  in  the  parable  turn  away  to  their 
land,  or  oxen,  or  families.  The  Gadarene  mind  wishes  Christ 
to  depart  from  its  coasts."  ^  The  things  on  earth  are  seen, 
therefore  they  are  temporal ;  the  things  in  heaven  are  unseen, 
and  therefore  they  are  eternal.  If  the  mind  be  fully  occupied 
with  things  above,  things  on  earth  will  be  barred  out.  The 
apostle  adduces  another  reason,  not  indeed  essentially  different, 
but  exhibiting  another  phasis  of  the  argument — 

'  Lectures  on  Colossians,  p.  282,  3rd  ed. 


COLOSSIANS  .  III.   3.  211 

(Ver.  3.)  'AireOdveTe  yap — "  For  ye  died."  The  expression 
is  general,  and  the  apostle  does  not  simply  say,  ye  died  to  the 
world — TOi?  KUTco,^  or  mundo  ^ — and  should  have  no  more 
concern  with  it,  but  he  says,  ye  died,  that  is,  with  Christ,  and 
all  that  is  out  of  Christ,  or  hostile  to  Him,  should  cease  to 
excite  your  attention  or  engross  your  industry.  The  apostle 
had  said  in  the  first  verse  that  they  had  risen  with  Christ,  here 
he  resorts  to  a  previous  point  in  their  spiritual  career,  and  says 
they  had  already  died.  ii.  20.  Neither  "  seek  nor  savour  "  the 
things  of  earth ;  for  having  died,  and  having  been  even  buried 
with  Christ,  your  sphere  of  being,  action,  and  enjoyment,  is 
totally  different  from  your  former  state.  As  Luther  says — 
Wir  leben  nicht  im  Fleisch,  sondern  luir  loohncn  im  Fleisch — 
"  we  live  not  in  the  flesh,  but  we  dwell  in  the  flesh."  When 
they  did  die,  their  death  was  but  a  birth  into  a  new  life,  for 
he  adds — 

Kal  7]  ^wrj  vficov  KeKpvmaL  avv  tu>  XpccrrS  iv  tm  0eo3 — "  And 
your  life  has  been  hidden  with  Christ  in  God."  The  death  is 
past  and  over,  but  the  life  has  been  hid,  and  still  is  in  that 
hidden  state — KeKpvirrat.  The  peculiar  phraseology  of  the 
clause  has  suggested  a  variety  of  interpretations.  There  are 
many  who  regard  this  life  as  future  or  eternal  life,  laid  up  for 
Christians  with  Christ  in  God.  So  the  Greek  Fathers,  and 
many  who  partly  follow  them,  such  as  Erasmus,  Eosenmiiller, 
Barnes,  and  Meyer.  We  apprehend  that  the  apostle  speaks 
not  of  the  resurrection,  as  Theodoret  supposes,  but  of  a  spiritual 
life  enjoyed  now,  though  not  in  the  meantime  fully  developed. 
That  life  which  we  now  live  in  the  flesh  has  a  hidden  source 
with  Christ  in  God — its  infinite  fountain.  The  idea  of 
Olshausen  is  somewhat  different,  for  he  places  the  notion  of 
concealment  in  the  nature  of  the  life  more  than  in  its  source. 
He  says — "  the  life  of  believers  is  called  hidden,  inasmuch 
as  it  is  inward,  and  the  outward  does  not  correspond 
with  it."  Von  Gerlach  says — "his  life  is  not  in  him,  but 
it  is  in  Christ."  The  exegesis  of  De  Wette  is  similar.  This 
life,  he  says,  is  hidden,  being  inner  as  opposed  to  being 
visible — inncrliclmicht  avf  das  siclitbarc  gcrichtd  ist — and  as 
being  ideal,  not — real  oder  offenhar.  Barnes,  again,  lays 
too  much  stress  on  the  idea  of  security  :  eternal  life  is  "  safely 

'  Theopliylact.  "  Bengel. 

R 


212  COLOSSIANS   III,   3. 

deposited  "  ^  with  Christ  in  God.  a-Lapide  finds  his  choicest 
illustration  of  the  phrase  in  the  seclusion  of  monastic  life. 
We  cannot  agree  witli  such  as  hold  that  the  apostle  calls  this 
a  hidden  life,  as  being  concealed  from  the  world,  inasmuch 
as  he  counsels  them  to  make  the  results  of  it  more  apparent, 
and  to  show  their  vitality  in  their  modes  of  action.  The 
mortification  of  the  members  which  is  enjoined  in  the  following 
verse,  is  but  the  fruit  and  expansion  of  this  life.  As  it  diffuses 
itself,  it  carries  death  with  it  to  all  sinful  propensities.  ISTow, 
of  this  life  God  is  the  source,  and  Christ  the  channel ;  and 
when  it  is  said  to  be  hid  "  with  Christ  in  God,"  the  mean- 
ing is  not  only  that  channel  and  fountain  are  both  super- 
sensuous  and  invisible,  but  that  our  connection  with  them  is 
also  a  matter  of  inner  experience — not  as  yet  of  full  and 
open  manifestation. 

This  life  is  hidden  avv  tco  Xpicrrw — "  with  Christ,"  for  He 
is  its  medium,  and  our  union  with  Him  gives  us  life ;  and  it 
is  hidden  with  Him  iv  t&I  ©ew — "  in  God,"  not  merely  as 
He  is  now  removed  from  view  and  exalted  to  God's  right 
hand,  but  as  He  enjoys  supreme  repose  and  fellowship  in  the 
bosom  of  His  Father.  Bohmer's  connection  of  ^co?;  at  once 
with  avv  T&)  XpLaro)  is  forbidden  by  the  position  of  the  words; 
and  the  eccentric  and  baseless  interpretation  of  Calixtus  and 
Heinrichs  needs  not  be  mentioned.  The  idea  of  concealment, 
and  not  that  of  security,  seems  to  be  principally  contained  in 
the  verb,  for  it  is  placed  in  contrast  with  open  manifestation 
at  Christ's  appearance.  If  the  apostle  had  meant  our  future 
life,  then  the  idea  of  security  might  naturally  be  found  in  this 
concealment.  But  he  speaks  of  present  life — life  really, 
though  partially  enjoyed,  life  giving  a  palpable,  though  feeble, 
demonstration  of  its  health  and  vigour.      The  prepositions  avi^ 

'  "Ac  ne  molesta  sit  exspectatio,  notemus  istas  particulas,  in  Deo,  et  cum 
Chrisio:  quae  significant,  extra  periculumessevitamnostram,  tametsinon  apparent. 
Nam  et  Deus  fidelis  est,  ideoque  uon  abnegabit  depositum,  nee  fallct  in  suscepta 
custodia  :  et  Christi  societas  maiorem  etiamnum  securitatem  affert.  Quid  enim 
magis  expetendum,  quam  vitam  nostram  manere  cum  ipso  vitae  fonte  ?  Quare 
non  est,  quod  terreamur,  si  undique  circumspicientes  vitam  uusquam  cernamus. 
Spe  enim  salvi  sumus.  Ea  vero,  quae  iam  patent  oculis,  non  sperantur.  Neque 
vero  tantum  mundi  opinione  vitam  absconditam  esse  docet,  sed  etiam  quoad 
sensum  nostrum  :  quia  hoc  verum  et  necessarium  est  spei  nostrae  experimentum, 
ut  tanquam  morte  circumdati  vitam  alibi  quaeramus  quam  in  mundo. " — Calvin 
in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS  III.   4.  213 

and   €v  express,  as   Meyer  remarks,  the  first  coherence,  and 
the  second  inherence. 

This  life  is  at  once  divine  and  mediatorial — God's  gift  to 
believers  through  Christ ;  and  the  gift,  along  with  its  medium 
and  its  destiny,  are  hidden  in  the  Giver,  as  the  infinite  source. 
But  this  concealment  is  no  argument  against  present  and 
partial  enjoyment ;  for  one  may  drink  of  the  stream  and  be 
unable  either  to  detect  its  source,  which  hides  itself  far  away 
and  high  among  the  mountains,  or  conjecture  at  what  distant 
point  its  deepening  current  pours  itself  into  the  ocean.  The 
life  is  not  said,  by  the  apostle,  to  be  hidden  in  itself,  either 
from  the  world  or  from  believers  themselves,  as  so  many  com- 
mentators suppose.  True,  indeed,  it  is  mysterious.  It  is  not 
among  things  of  vulgar  gaze.  It  is  a  strange  experience ; 
none  can  know  it  save  he  who  has  it.  For  Christians  die 
and  yet  live  ;  nay,  the  moment  of  death  is  that  of  life — the 
instant  of  expiry  is  that  of  birth.  Yet  this  life  is  now 
enjoyed — is  therefore  now  a  matter  of  secret  consciousness, 
though  much  about  it  is  beyond  inquiry  and  analysis.  No 
one  can  lay  bare  the  principle  of  physical  life  ;  the  knife  of 
the  anatomist  cannot  uncover  the  cord  which  binds  the 
conscious  thinking  essence  to  its  material  organ  and  habita- 
tion. But  the  special  thought  of  the  apostle  is,  that  the 
ethereal  nature  of  spiritual  life  eludes  research,  alike  in  its 
origin  and  destiny.  Its  source  is  too  high  for  us  to  climb  to 
it,  and  its  destiny  is  too  noble  to  be  written  in  human 
language.  As  to  the  former,  it  is  hidden  with  Christ  in  God; 
and  as  to  the  latter,  it  shall  not  be  fully  revealed  till  Christ 
come  the  second  time  in  glory.  But  it  shall  be  ultimately 
disclosed.  For  Christ,  with  whom  our  life  is  hidden,  shall 
reveal  Himself,  and  we  whose  life  is  so  hidden  with  Him 
shall  also  appear  with  Him  in  glory.  When  its  medium  is 
revealed,  its  character  and  destiny  shall  also  be  laid  bare. 

(Ver.  4.)  "Orav  6  Xpi(TTO<;  (jjavepcodj]  r)  Kwrj  i^fjuoiv,  rore  koI 
vfjbel<i  crvv  avrw  (fjavepoid/jaeade  iv  86^r) — "  When  Christ,  who 
is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then,  too,  shall  ye  with  Him  be 
revealed  in  glory."  The  form  v/j^mv  appears,  on  good 
authority,  to  be  preferable  to  the  -tj/j^mv  of  the  Eeceived  Text. 
The  verb  (pavepcoOfj  is  opposed  to  the  KeKpvTrrai  of  the 
previous  verse.     There  is  concealment  now,  but  there  shall  be 


214  COLOSSIANS   III.    4. 

ultimate  and  glorious  disclosure.  1  John  i.  2,  iii.  2,  5 ; 
Eom.  viii.  18;  1  Tim.  iii.  16;  1  Pet.  v.  4.  Christ  is 
termed  "  our  life ; "  and  in  the  former  verse  our  life  is  said 
to  be  hid  with  Him.  He  is  our  life,  not  simply  because  he 
reveals  it,  and  He  alone  has  "  the  words  of  eternal  life ; "  nor 
yet  because  coming  that  we  "  might  have  life,  and  that  we 
might  have  it  more  abundantly,"  He  "  died  that  we  might 
live,"  and  has  given  us  this  blessed  pledge — "  as  I  live,  ye 
shall  live  also ; "  but  specially,  because  by  His  Spirit,  as  His 
representative.  He  enters  into  the  heart  and  gives  it  life — fans 
and  fosters  it  by  his  continuous  abode — gratifies  all  its 
instincts,  and  evokes  all  its  susceptibilities  by  His  word  and 
His  presence.  "  If  Christ  be  in  you,  the  body  is  dead 
because  of  sin,  but  the  spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness." 
When  it  is  said — "  Christ  our  life  shall  appear,"  the  mean- 
ing is,  that  He  shall  appear  in  the  character  of  our  life.  In 
this  peculiar  aspect  of  His  operation  shall  He  make  Himself 
manifest.  To  appear  as  our  life,  implies  our  relation  to  Him 
as  His  living  ones ;  and  the  unveiling  of  the  Fountain  shall 
allow  the  eye  to  discover  the  myriads  of  rivulets  which  issue 
out  of  it ;  or,  as  our  life  is  hid  with  Christ,  so,  when  Christ 
comes  out  of  His  hiding-place,  our  life  shall  accompany  Him 
into  openness  and  light.  ISTay  more,  as  our  life,  He  appears 
to  perfect  it,  and  to  give  it  fulness  and  finality  of  develop- 
ment. At  present  it  is  checked  by  a  variety  of  causes.  It 
exists  in  a  body  "  dead  because  of  sin,"  and  it  feels  the  chill 
of  a  mortality  that  so  closely  envelops  it.  The  distance,  too, 
implied  in  the  fact — that  it  is  hidden  with  Christ  in  God — 
keeps  it  from  its  perfect  strength,  and  induces  occasional 
debility  and  lassitude ;  but  the  revelation  of  Christ  brings  it 
into  nearness  and  vigour.  Nay  more,  at  that  period,  the 
body  is  to  be  brought  into  harmony  with  it,  and  "  mortality 
shall  be  swallowed  up  of  life."  For  He  who  is  our  life  shall 
diffuse  life  through  us — "  change  our  vile  body,  and  fashion  it 
like  unto  His  own  glorious  body."  The  physical  frame  then 
to  be  raised,  spiritualized,  and  imbued  vt'ith  life,  shall  be  a  fit 
receptacle  for  the  living  soul  within  it,  which  shall  then 
indulge  its  tastes  without  hindrance,  feeling  no  barrier  to 
activity  in  any  of  its  occupations — no  stint  to  capacity  in 
any  of  its  enjoyments.     Hiems  nostra,  says  Augustine,  Christi 


COLOSSIANS   III.   4.  215 

occidtatio,  aestas  nostra,  Christi  rcvelatio.  Siiicer  remarks — 
gloria  cajjitis  est  gloria  coriooris  et  memhrorum.  For  the 
apostle  describes,  as  the  consequence  of  the  appearance  of 
Christ  our  life,  that  "we,  too,  shall  appear  with  Him  in  glory." 
Eom.  viii.  1 7  ;  1  John  iii.  2.  Since  He  appears  as  our  life, 
so  to  appear  with  Him  is,  on  our  part,  to  appear  as  partakers 
of  His  life.  The  source,  progress,  and  maturity  of  our  life 
shall  then  be  fully  apparent — how  it  originated,  and  how  it 
was  sustained — what  course  it  took,  and  what  obstacles  it 
encountered — how  it  was  still  supported,  and  still  maintained 
its  hold — how  it  was  felt  in  our  own  consciousness,  and  yet 
had  its  hidden  spring  "  with  Christ  in  God  " — and  what  shall 
be  now  its  high  crown  and  its  magnificent  destiny — all  shall 
be  seen  in  the  living  and  life-filling  brightness  of  "  Christ  our 
life."  The  followers  of  Christ  shall  surround  Him  in  triumpli, 
a  dense  and  glorious  retinue — "  ye,  too,  shall  appear  with 
Him,"  and  that — ev  So^rj, 

It  would  be  wrong  to  restrict  this  "  glory  "  to  any  special 
aspect  of  final  perfection.  It  consists,  as  Davenant,  after  the 
schoolmen,  says,  of  the  "  robe  of  the  soul  and  the  robe  of  the 
body."  It  is  here  the  result  of  life — vita  gloriosa}  of  life  in 
its  highest  form  and  fullest  manifestation  —  life  diffused 
through  "  spirit,  soul,  and  body."  Nor  is  our  appearance  in 
glory  with  Christ  a  momentary  gleam  ;  it  is  rather  the  first 
burst  of  unending  splendour.  And  it  has,  or  shall  have,  for 
its  elements — final  freedom  from  the  sins  and  sorrows  of 
earth  ;  perfect  holiness  beyond  the  possibility  of  loss,  with 
unmingled  felicity  beyond  the  reach  of  forfeit ;  an  endless 
abode  in  heaven,  and  in  the  brightest  province  of  it ;  the 
rapturous  adoration  of  God,  and  unbroken  fellowship  with 
Christ;  the  exalted  companionship  of  angels  and  genial  spirits 
of  human  kindred ;  and  the  successful  pursuit  of  Divine 
knowledge  in  a  realm  where  no  shadow  ever  falls,  but  where 
is  chanted  the  high  halleluiah,  welling  out  of  the  conscious- 
ness that  all  this  ecstasy  is  of  sovereign  grace,  ay,  all  of  it 
sealed  to  us  for  eternity,  in  connection  with  "  Christ  our  life." 

The  apostle  now  descends  to  particularize  certain  forms  of 
sins  which  were  very  prevalent  in  heathendom — in  which 
they  themselves   had    revelled    during  their    prior    state    of 

1  Beza. 


216  COLOSSIANS   III.   5. 

gloom  and  degradation,  but  which  they  must  now  and  for 
ever  abandon. 

(Ver.  5.)  NeKpcoaaTe  ovv  ra  fieki]  vjxwv  ra  iirl  r?}?  jrj<i — 
"  Mortify,  therefore,  your  members  which  are  upon  the  earth," 
"  Therefore,"  since  such  are  the  peculiarities  and  prospects  of 
your  spiritual  state,  act  in  harmony  with  them ;  and  since 
you  have  died,  diffuse  the  process  of  death  through  all  your 
members.  If  the  heart  is  dead,  let  all  the  organs  which  it 
once  vivified  and  moved  die  too — nay,  put  them  to  death. 
Let  them  be  killed  from  want  of  nutriment  and  exercise. 
Similar  language  is  found  in  Eom.  viii.  13,  where  Oavarovre 
is  employed;  and  in  Gal.  v.  24,  where  occurs  the  modal  verb 
(TTavprna-are.  In  ra  fiekr],  the  allusion  is  to  members  of  the 
body,  taken  not  in  a  physical,  but  in  a  spiritual  sense.  Hilary, 
Grotius,  Bengel,  and  others,  destroy  the  point  of  the  allusion 
in  regarding  sin  itself  as  a  body,  and  its  special  parts  as 
members.  The  apostle  had  strongly  condemned  asceticism, 
and  declared  it  in  the  conclusion  of  the  preceding  chapter 
to  be  an  absolute  failure,  and  he  now  shows  how  the  end  it 
contemplated  is  to  be  secured.  There  is  no  reason  for  Meyer 
to  deny  that  the  apostle  regards  "  the  old  man  "  as  the  body 
to  which  such  members  belong.  It  is  not,  indeed,  the  eye, 
foot,  and  hand,  as  these  are  in  themselves,  or  as  they  belong 
to  the  physical  frame,  but  as  they  belong  to,  and  are  in 
subjection  to  the  "  old  man."  The  phrase  is  to  be  understood 
in  the  same  spirit  as  our  Lord's  emphatic  declaration  about 
the  plucking  out  of  the  right  eye,  and  the  cutting  off  of  the 
right  arm.  Matt.  v.  29.  The  lust  that  uses  and  debases 
these  organs  or  members  as  its  instruments,  is  to  be  ex- 
tirpated. 

And  the  "  members  "  are  characterized  as  being  ra  eVt  r?}? 
yt]<; — "  upon  the  earth."  The  allusion  is  to  the  previous 
phraseology — "  set  your  affections  not  on  things  on  the  earth." 
That  is  to  say,  earth  is  the  sphere  of  their  existence  and 
operation ;  and  as  they  belong  to  it,  they  are  to  be  killed,  for 
they  are  in  utter  antagonism  with  that  higher  life  which  is 
hid  with  Christ  in  God.  They  are  "  of  the  earth,  earthy  " — 
their  essence  is  earthy,  and  so  are  their  temptations,  sources, 
and  forms  of  enjoyment.  The  man  who  possesses  a  life  that 
has  its  spring  in  heaven,  and  seeks  and  relishes  things  above, 


COLOSSIANS   III.   5.  217 

will  not  stoop  to  gratifications  which  are  so  far  beneath  him 
in  nature,  so  utterly  opposed  to  that  new  and  spiritual  exist- 
ence which  he  cherishes  within  him,  and  which  grows  in  power 
and  health  in  proportion  to  the  thoroughness  and  universality 
of  the  death  wdiicli  is  executed  on  the  "  members  which  are 
on  the  earth."  The  apostle  then  enumerates  some  of  these 
forms  of  sensuality. 

Uopveiav,  aKaOapcriav,  7rddo<i,  i7n6vfxiav  KaKTqv — "  Fornica- 
tion, impurity,  lust,  and  evil  concupiscence."  These  accusatives 
are  in  apposition  to  to,  /xeXr].  The  first  two  terms  are  found 
in  Eph.  V.  3,  and  denote  fornication  and  lewdness.  2  Cor. 
xii.  21  ;  Gal.  v.  19.  See  especially  under  Eph.  iv.  19, 
where  the  second  occurs,  and  is  described.  But,  in  fact,  the 
shapes  and  kinds  of  lewdness,  to  be  found  not  only  in  the 
pagan  worship,  and  in  the  symbols  carried  in  religious  pro- 
cessions, but  also  in  common  life,  as  depicted  on  tables  and 
furniture,  are  beyond  description.^  The  term  Tra^o?  is  too 
lightly  understood  by  Grotius  and  Chrysostom,  as  signifying 
— motus  vitiosi,  such  as  anger  and  hatred ;  and  perhaps  too 
darkly  by  such  as  refer  it  wholly  to  unnatural  lust.  The 
noun  does  not  seem  of  itself  to  have  this  last  sense,  but  it 
occurs  with  a  special  adjunct  in  Eom.  i.  26 ;  and  the 
adjective,  Tra^t/co?,  has  an  indescribable  baseness.  It  seems 
here  to  denote  the  state  of  mind  that  urges  and  excites  to 
impurity — to  ipcoriKov  rrdOo^;,^  that  condition  in  which  man 
is  mastered  by  unchastity,  and  the  imagination  being  defiled, 
is  wholly  at  the  mercy  of  obscene  associations.  It  is  morlus 
libidinis,  as  Bengel  says.  The  next  terra,  eiriOvixla  kukt],  refers 
to  the  same  circle  of  vices,  and  is  more  general  in  its  nature. 
The  four  words  may  be  regarded  as  in  two  pairs.  The  prior 
pair  refers  to  act,  the  first  term  more  particular,  and  the 
second  more  comprehensive ;  the  second  pair  to  impulse,  the 
first  again  more  special,  and  the  second  more  sweeping  in  its 
nature.  They  were  no  longer  to  be  guilty  of  fornication,  or 
any  similar  deed  of  lewdness ;  they  were  no  longer  to  be 
filled  with  libidinous  thoughts,  or  any  other  prurient  feelings, 
having  their  issue  in  lecherous  indulgences. 

Kal  rrjv  ifKeove^lav  riTi<i  iarlv   elBcoXoXarpeCa — "  And  that 
covetousness    which   is   idolatry."       The  form  T^rt?  may  cor- 
»  Juvenal,  Sat.  ii.  «  Plato,  Phaedrus,  vol.  i.  p.  153,  Op.  ed.  Bekker. 


218  COLOSSIANS  III.   6. 

respond  to  the  Latin  quippe  quae — since  indeed.  The  reader 
may  turn  for  the  meaning  of  ifKeove^ta,  and  its  occurrence  in 
this  connection,  to  our  comment  on  Eph.  iv.  19,  v.  3-5.  The 
noun  irXeov.  has  the  article,  which  none  of  the  preceding  sub- 
stantives have,  and  it  alone  is  the  antecedent  to  77x69.  Winer, 
§  24,  3.  We  believe  that  it  does  not  characterize  any  form 
of  sensuality,  or  quaestum  niereiricium,  as  the  Greek  expositors, 
and  others  after  them,  suppose,  though  it  denotes  a  vice  that 
has  its  origin  in  the  same  selfish  or  self-seeking  depravity. 
Trench,  in  his  New  Testament  Synonyms,  §  24,  has  some 
excellent  observations  on  this  word,  remarking  that  the 
'K\eoveKT7)<i  is  as  free  in  scattering  and  squandering  as  he  was 
eager  and  unscrupulous  in  getting ;  that  monsters  of  covet- 
ousness  have  been  also  monsters  of  lust;  and  that  irXeove^ld 
is  a  far  deeper  passion  than  mere  miserliness  or  avarice,  as 
being  "  the  fierce  and  ever  fiercer  longing  of  the  creature 
which  has  turned  from  God  to  fill  itself  with  the  inferior 
objects  of  sense."  This  desire  of  having  more,  and  yet  more, 
is  idolatry.  What  it  craves  it  worships,  what  it  worships  it 
makes  its  portion.  To  su(;li  a  god  there  is  given  the  first 
thought  of  the  morning,  the  last  wish  of  the  evening,  and  the 
action  of  every  waking  hour. 

(Ver.  6.)  At  a  ep'^erat  -q  6p<yr)  tov  Oeov — "On  account  of 
which  sins  cometh  the  wrath  of  God."  The  reading  Zl  6  has 
also  several  authorities  in  its  favour.  On  the  meaning  of  the 
clause  see  our  exposition  of  Eph.  v.  5.  This  special  wrath 
is  often  suffered  on  earth,  and  it  is  not  wholly  reserved  for  the 
other  world.  Meyer,  as  in  the  correspondent  place  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  denies  that  the  op'yrj  is  manifested 
here,  and  justifies  his  opinion  by  pointing  to  Paul's  certain 
conviction  of  the  near  approach  of  the  day  of  judgment.  The 
sins  mentioned  in  the  previous  verse  are,  as  we  have  shown 
on  Eph.  V.  6,  often  visited  by  penalty  on  earth.  The  next 
clause  of  the  Textus  Eeceptus — eirl  tov^  vlov<i  tj}?  aTreiOeiaf 
— is  excluded  by  Tischendorf,  but  without  sufficient  authority. 
It  is  wanting  in  B,  certainly,  but  this  is  a  solitary  MS.  witness. 
The  clause  occurs  in  Eph.  v.  6,  and  is  there  explained,  as 
also  under  Eph.  ii.  2,  3.  They  who  indulge  in  such  vices, 
not  only  disobey  the  Divine  statute,  but  also  violate  the  laws 
of  their  own  constitution.      This  opyrj  is  more  than  chastise- 


COLOSSIANS   III.  7.  219 

ment,  or  KoXaai^i,  it  is  direct  and  punitive  indignation  fre- 
quently inflicted  here  in  the  form  of  physical  debility  and 
disease,  remorse  and  stupefaction. 

(Ver.  7.)  ^Ep  oh  kuI  vfieL<;  irepieTraWjcrari  irore  ore  i^-rjre  ev 
rovTOL<i.  The  relative  oh  may  be  either  masculine  or  neuter, 
as  it  is  referred  to  vLov<i,  or  to  the  a  of  the  previous  verse. 
Each  construction  has  been  vindicated.  With  Olshausen  and 
Bahr,  we  prefer  the  neuter,  not  only  because  irepLTrarelv  is 
usually  employed  in  connection  with  things,  and  not  persons, 
but  because  the  believers  in  Colosse  are  said,  in  the  next 
clause,  to  have  lived  in  them,  and  in  the  8th  verse,  to  have 
thrown  them  all  off.  Calvin  says — male  Erasmus  vcrtit,  inter 
quos.  Meyer  prefers  the  masculine  in  this  first  clause,  but  is 
obliged  to  change  the  gender  in  reference  to  royrof?  in  the 
second  clause.  "In  which  lusts  ye  too  once  walked;" 
"  walked "  having,  of  course,  its  common  tropical  meaning. 
But  that  period  was  now  over — a  new  era  had  dawned  ; 
and  their  walk  was  in  a  widely  different  sphere,  one  in 
which,  by  the  assistance  of  the  Spirit,  they  copied  the  example 
of  Jesus,  and  sought,  and  were  acquiring  a  growing  preparation 
for  the  purity  and  bliss  of  heaven. 

"Ore  i^7]T€  iv  TovToi<i.  TovTOL<i,  and  not  avmh,  on  the 
evidence  of  A,  B,  C,  D^,  E\  though  avroh  has  in  its  favour 
D,  E^,  F,  G,  J,  K.  Elatt,  Bohmer,  Huther,  and  others,  take 
TovToi<i  to  be  masculine ;  an  exegesis  which  does  not  give 
any  tolerable  meaning.  In  e'^T^re  there  is  an  allusion  by 
contrast  to  the  aTreddveTe.  They  once  lived  in  such  sins. 
Life  is  here  used  in  a  spiritual,  and  not  in  its  physical  sense, 
as  in  1  Thess.  iii.  8.  Other  instances  may  be  found  in  the 
classics — posscmne  vivcre,  says  Cicero,  nisi  in  litteris  viverem  ?  ^ 
Libanius  describes  Alexander  as  iv  ^Ohvaaua  ^cov ;  Aelian 
(Hist.  Var.  iii.  13)  speaks  of  a  people  so  fond  of  wine— wo-re 
i^rfv  avTov'i  iv  oXvw ;  and  we  have  the  phrase  ol  ^coyre? — they 
who  enjoy  life.  They  had  felt  supreme  enjoyment  in  such 
indulgences.  So  much  had  they  been  engrossed  with  them, 
and  such  fancied  gratification  did  they  find  in  them,  that  they 
might  be  said  to  "  live  in  them."  The  difference  of  meaning 
between  the  two  verbs  has  been  variously  understood,  but 
there  needs  no  special  definition.     They  once  walked  in  such 

*  Ep.  9,  26. 


220  COLOSSIANS   III.   8. 

lusts,  when  they  lived  in  them ;  that  is,  they  were  utterly 
addicted  to  them,  for  they  believed  tliat  life  or  happiness  was 
to  be  found  in  them.  Calvin  says  the  verbs  differ,  as  do 
2wtentia  ct  actus. 

(Ver.  8.)  Nvvl  he  a-Trodeade  koL  vfi£c<i  ra  irdvTa — "  But 
now  do  ye  also  put  off  the  whole."  The  words  kuc  viiei^  here 
correspond  to  koL  vjjbeh  in  the  preceding  verse,  and  vvvi  stands 
out  in  contrast  with  Trore.  The  verb  is  found  in  Eph.  iv.  25. 
Wolf  is  wrong  in  referring  Travra  to  /ieX?/,  which  is  so  far 
distant  from  it.  The  phrase  ra  Travra  is  the  entire  circle 
of  vices ;  not,  as  Winer  says,  this  or  that  all  (intensive),  but 
"the  all  which  is  immediately  adduced,"  §  18,  1.  A  radical 
and  extensive  change  had  taken  place ;  but  (^e  adversative) 
they  were  to  "  cast  off "  that  slough  in  which  were  lodged  all 
degrading  sins.      The  catalogue  or  class  of  sins  is  subjoined. 

'Opjrjv,  Ovfjbov,  KUKiav,  ^Xacrcfjij/xlav,  ala^poXoyiav  e'/c  tov 
cTTo/LtaTo?  vfiojv  — "  Augcr,  indignation,  malice,  calumny, 
abusive  discourse  out  of  your  mouth,"  The  apostle  observes 
a  different  order,  and  uses  some  other  terms  in  Eph.  iv.  31. 
Under  that  place  the  first  four  terms  repeated  here  have  been 
explained.  Bahr  and  Trench  take  0^7?;  in  distinction  from 
6vfi6<;,  as  denoting  settled  indignation  bordering  on  revenge. 
This  is  the  Stoical  definition — €7ridv/jiia  rt/utup/a? ;  and  it  is 
also  the  opinion  of  Origen,  as  brought  out  in  his  exposition  of 
the  second  Psalm.  Still,  we  think  that  though  opyj]  charac- 
terizes a  habit  or  state,  the  idea  of  visible  display  is  usually 
associated  with  it,  as  indeed  the  phrase  opyrj  6vp,ov  often 
found  in  the  Septuagint  plainly  implies ;  and,  as  is  manifest 
from  the  diction  of  the  previous  verse,  "  the  wrath  of  God 
Cometh."  'Opyrj  is  the  outburst,  or  the  vice  in  a  palpable 
form  ;  Bvfio^  is  the  violent  emotion  that  boils  within ;  while 
KaKia  points  to  the  state  of  heart  in  which  malice  originates, 
and  /SXaacprjfiia  is  that  calumnious  denunciation  to  which 
anger  so  often  prompts.  As  regards  ala'^poXoyla,  which 
occurs  only  here,  we  agree  with  De  Wette  and  Trench,  that 
its  meaning  is  not  to  be  confined  to  obscene  speech.  That  it 
has  this  express  meaning  is  beyond  any  doubt,  but  it  also 
often  denotes  generally  foul  or  abusive  language,^  and  as  it 
is  so  closely  connected  with  the  passion  of  anger,  such  may 
•  Polybius,  viii.  13,  8  ;  Plut.  de  lib.  Ethu:.  14. 


COLOSSIANS  III.   9.  221 

be  its  meaning  here.  It  is  therefore  a  more  comprehensive 
term  than  ^XaacprjfjLia,  as  the  first  refers  to  what  especially 
injures  character,  and  the  second  to  what  offends  in  any 
sense,  not  only  to  what  hurts  the  ear  of  modesty,  but  to 
whatever  in  any  form  is  scurrilous  and  indecent — that  mix- 
ture of  ribaldry  and  profanity  which  too  often  escapes  from 
the  burning  lips  of  passion.  The  addition,  e'/c  rov  aroixaro^ 
vfioov,  may  belong  to  both  ^Xaacf).  and  alcr^p.  with  the  verb 
airoOeade  mentally  repeated.  Nor  can  we  give  the  words  the 
emphasis  which  Theophylact  attaches  to  them.  "  See,"  says 
he,  "  how  he  recounts  the  members  of  the  old  man,"  that  is, 
shows  how  each  sins,  as  "  the  mind  by  falsehood,  the  heart 
by  anger,  the  mouth  by  blasphemy,  eyes  and  hidden  members 
by  fornication,  the  liver  by  evil  concupiscence,  the  hands  by 
covetousness." 

From  sins  of  malignity,  the  apostle  passes  to  sins  of 
falsehood. 

(Ver.  9.)  Mr]  -v/reu8ecr^e  et?  dXX,i]\ov<; — "  Do  not  lie  to  one 
another."  As  one  of  the  Greek  Fathers  says,  falsehood  ill 
became  them  who  avowed  themselves  disciples  of  Him  who 
said,  "  I  am  the  truth."  The  apostle,  in  writing  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  adds  as  a  reason  why  they  should  adhere  to  the  truth 
— "we  are  members  one  of  another."  He  does  not  here  say, 
as  some  suppose,  lie  not  against  or  about  one  another,  that  is, 
to  the  damage  of  one  another ;  but  his  meaning  is,  in  all  your 
communications  among  yourselves,  never  depart  from  the 
truth. 

The  connection  of  the  following  clause  is  best  ascertained 
by  adherence  to  the  literal  meaning  of  the  participle,  d-jreK- 
Bvadfievoi, — "having  put  off  the  old  man  with  his  deeds." 
The  Vulgate  gives  cxucntes  in  the  present  time,  and  is  followed 
by    Luther,    Bengel,    Storr,  De  Wette,    and    Huther.^      Tlie 

'  We  had  forgotten  to  mention  an  extraordinary  interpretation  of  this  verb, 
aviKhvof^ai,  as  it  occurs  in  ii.  15.  Dr.  Donaklson,  in  his  book  of  capricious  and 
destructive  criticism,  called  "Jashar  "  (London,  1855),  in  vindication  of  certain 
views  which  he  entertains  of  the  character  of  humanity  in  general,  and  of  Christ 
in  particular,  to  wit,  His  liability  to  temptation,  justifies  his  theology  by  quot- 
ing the  verse  referred  to,  pp.  70,  71.  After  affirming,  with  no  little  vaunt,  that 
all  interpreters  up  to  himself  have  misunderstood  it,  he  says  that  it  must  have 
the  same  meaning  as  in  iii.  9.  He  gives  the  following  exegesis — "the  princi- 
palities and  powers  "  are  the  potent  lords  of  lust — duces  libidinum — which  rule 
in  our  members,  and  stuck  to  Christ  like  the  poisoned  shirt  of  Nessus,  and  these 


222  COLOSSIANS   III.  10. 

putting  off  of  tlie  old  man,  as  described  by  the  aorist,  cannot 
be  contemporary  with  the  foregoing  imperatives,  but  it  pre- 
cedes them.  It  is  a  process  consummated,  and  so  Calvin, 
Bahr,  Bohmer,  and  Meyer  rightly  understand  it.  Beza  says 
correct!}^,  that  the  participles  are  used  alnoXoyLKco^.  These 
participles  are  not  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  imperatives,  as 
the  first  class  of  expositors  virtually  regards  them,  but  they 
unfold  a  reason  why  the  sins  condemned  should  be  uniformly 
abstained  from.  Lie  not  one  to  another,  as  being  persons 
who  have  put  off  the  old  man ;  or,  as  the  participle  has  often 
a  causal  sense — since  ye  have  put  off  the  old  man  with  his 
deeds.  De  Wette  says  that  such  an  argument  is  superfluous, 
but  surely  the  paragraph  may  conclude  as  it  began,  with  an 
argument.  The  first  argument  is,  ye  are  dead ;  and  the 
second  contains  one  of  the  results  of  that  spiritual  death  wdth 
Christ. 

'ATreKSvadfievot  rov  iraXaiov  dvOpcoirov  avv  tol^  irpd^eatv 
avrov — "  Since  ye  have  put  off  the  old  man  with  his  deeds." 
The  expressive  personality — "  old  man  " — has  been  explained 
under  Eph.  iv.  22.  It  is  a  bold  personification  of  our  first 
nature  as  derived  from  Adam,  the  source  and  seat  of  original 
and  actual  transgression,  and  called  "  old,"  as  existing  prior 
to  our  converted  state.  This  ethical  person  is  to  be  put  off 
from  us  as  one  puts  off  clothes,  and  with  all  his  deeds — all 
the  practices  which  characterized  him,  and  the  sins  to  which 
he  excited.  This  was  a  change  deeper  by  far  than  asceticism 
could  ever  reach.  For  it  was  a  total  revolution.  Self-denial 
in  meats  and  drinks,  while  it  prunes  the  excrescence,  really 
helps  the  growth  of  the  plant,  but  this  uproots  it. 

(Ver.  10.)   Kal  ivSuadfievoc    rbv    veov,    top   dvuKaivovfievov. 

He  conquered  and  led  in  triumph.  Not  to  say,  with  Mr.  Perowne,  that  the 
exegesis  is  "sheer  nonsense,"  and  contrary  to  the  entire  meaning  of  the  terms, 
the  strain  and  spirit  of  the  context,  and  to  Paul's  theology,  we  simply  reply, 
that  the  acute  and  learned  autlior  of  the  New  Cratylus  may  see  that  God,  and 
not  Christ,  is  the  subject,  and  that  if  a'nx.'Svo/u.ai  must  there  denote  "  the  putting 
oft'  from  himself  "  something  which  clings  to  the  agent,  the  affirmation  of  the 
verse  is  at  utter  variance  with  the  purity  and  spirituality  of  the  Divine  Being. 
Nay,  more,  Dr.  Donaldson  sa3-s,  that  "the  principalities  and  powers, "  those 
lords  of  lust  which  so  clung  to  Christ  that  they  were  only  flung  oft'  by  Him 
wlien  He  died,  were  and  must  have  been  in  Christ,  for  they  were  "  created  in 
Him,"  according  to  Col.  i.  16.  Is  there  any  wonder  that  previous  commentators 
never  came  to  such  conclusion  ? 


COLOSSIANS   III.   10.  223 

As  the  old  man  is  thrown  off  the  new  man  is  assumed.  In 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  apostle  inserts  between  the 
off-putting  and  the  on-putting  a  clause  in  reference  to  re- 
newal "  in  the  spirit  of  the  mind,"  and  there  using  a  different 
adjective  he  calls  the  new  man  rov  Katvov  avOpodirov,  but  he 
Iiad  previously  used  the  verb  avaveovadai.  Here,  he  says 
Tov  veov  \avdpai'irov\,  but  he  adds  tov  uva/caivov/jievov.  So 
that  though  it  be  in  different  forms,  both  terms  are  employed 
in  both  places.  If  the  verbal  term  from  veo'i  be  followed  by 
the  epithet  Kaiv6<;  in  Ephesians,  and  if  in  Colossians  the 
epithet  veo<i  be  followed  by  the  verbal  term  from  Kaiv6<i,  it  is 
plain  that  the  same  general  meaning  is  intended  by  the 
apostle.  Though  yeo9  and  /catz/09  may  be  distingu  shed,  their 
meaning  is  thus  blended.  If  V60<;  be  "  recent,"  and  in  this 
sense  be  opposed  to  iTakai6<;,  then  this  recency  springs  from 
renewal.  The  one  man  is  old,  for  he  belonged  to  a  past  and 
former  state  ;  and  the  other  is  new,  for  his  assumption  was 
to  them  but  a  novelty,  a  matter  of  yesterday  in  their  spiritual 
experience. 

This  man  is  new  not  only  in  point  of  time,  but  of  quality 
or  character,  for  he  is  renewed — et?  eTrlyvcoacu.  It  is  not 
the  idea  of  Paul  in  this  expression,  that  the  new  man,  still 
renewing,  never  grows  old,  iJTa  ov  iraXaiovTaL — as  the  Greek 
expositors  imagine.  Eather  would  we  say,  with  Calovius, 
that  he  is  called  "  re-novatus,  because  he  was  once  novus  at 
his  first  creation,"  and  as  the  preposition  ava  would  fairly 
seem  to  imply.  Man  must  be  brought  back  to  his  original 
purity,  but  the  process  of  renovation  is  continuous,  as  the  use 
of  the  present  participle  indicates.  Bahr  quotes  Augustine 
as  saying — in  ipso  animo  renati  non  est  perfcda  novitas.  We 
cannot  take  the  participle  to  be  simply  a  predicate  of  avOpoiTrov, 
for  the  construction  points  out  its  connection  with  veov.  The 
new  man  (the  present  participle  being  used)  is  renewing,  as 
the  apostle  affirms — '7/iepa  kol  rj/xepa — in  2  Cor.  iv.  6  ;  or, 
as  Theophylact  says,  del  ical  del. 

In  the  phrase  et?  enruyvwaiv,  the  preposition  cannot  signify 
the  instrumental  cause  of  the  renewal,  but  it  denotes  the  final 
purpose.  The  new  man  is  renewed  "  unto  knowledge."  The 
meaning  of  eTTLyv(0(n<;  may  be  seen  under  Eph.  i.  17;  and 
in  this  epistle,  i.  9  ;  ii.  2.     And  that  perfect  knowledge  has 


224  COLOSSIANS   III.   10. 

a    close    connection    with    God,    for    it    is    characterized    as 
being — 

Kar  eiKova  tov  KTiaavro<;  avrov — "  After  the  image  of  Him 
who  created  him."  A  large  nnmber  of  expositors  connect  the 
clause  directly  with  the  participle  avanaivovixevov,  the  image 
of  God  being  the  pattern  after  which  the  believer  is  renewed. 
Meyer  joins  it  more  closely  to  et9  eirl'yvwaiv,  but  the  meaning 
is  not  materially  different.  The  likeness  is  renewed  after  the 
image  of  God,  and  the  special  feature  of  that  image  selected 
by  the  apostle  is  knowledge.  The  knowledge  of  the  renewed 
man  corresponds  in  certain  elements  to  that  of  God.  Other 
features  of  resemblance  of  a  moral  nature  are  referred  to  in 
the  parallel  passage,  Eph.  iv.  24.  That  image  is  said  to 
belong  to  God  the  creator,  not  Christ,  as  was  supposed  in  the 
early  church,  and  as  is  understood  by  Miiller.  A  peculiar 
exegesis  is  adopted  by  a-Lapide  and  Schleiermacher,  the 
former  making  tov  Kria-avTo<i  the  object  of  the  knowledge ; 
and  the  latter  thus  explaining  the  image — so  erneuct,  class  man 
an  iJim  das  Uhcnhild  Gottes  erkennen  hann. 

But  what  creation  is  referred  to  ?  Is  it  the  first  or  the 
second  creation  ?  Many  incline  to  the  first  view,  as  if  the 
apostle  meant  that  man  is  brought  back  to  that  likeness  which 
God  gave  him  on  the  day  of  creation.  So  Calovius,  Heinsius, 
Estius,  Schoettgen,  and  De  Wette.  But  though  this  be  a 
truth,  it  is  not  that  precise  form  of  truth  conveyed  by  the 
apostle's  language.  It  is  not  of  man  generally,  but  of  the 
new  man  that  he  speaks — the  new  man  renewed  unto  know- 
ledge after  the  image  of  Him  who  created  him,  to  wit,  the 
new  man.  The  apostle  does  not  say — who  created  you.  The 
new  man  is  the  converted  spiritual  nature,  not  the  man  himself 
in  proper  person.  It  is  this  creation  of  the  new  man,  not  that 
of  the  man  himself,  which  is  ascribed  to  God.  Thus,  the 
parallel  passage  in  Eph.  iv.  24  says  expressly — "  the  new  man 
which  after  God  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness." 
This  new  nature  is  of  God,  and  not  of  self-development.  All 
creation  is  indeed  from  God,  and  this  new  creation  is  no 
exception.  The  new  man  is  not  the  ethical  symbol  of  a  mere 
reformation  which  a  strong  will  may  achieve  ;  nor  is  it  any 
change  of  creed,  party,  or  opinions,  which  is  the  result  of 
personal    examination    and    conviction.       These    are    but    as 


COLOSSIANS  III.   10.  225 

statuary,  compared  with  living  humanity ;  for  however  close 
the  resemblance,  there  is  always,  in  spite  of  highest  art,  the 
still  eye  and  the  motionless  lip.  Yes,  God's  work  is  a  living 
power,  something  so  compact  and  richly  endowed,  so  fitted 
to  our  nature,  and  so  much  a  part  of  us  as  to  be  called  a  man, 
but  at  the  same  time  so  foreign  to  all  previous  powers  and 
enjoyments  as  to  be  called  the  ncio  man. 

As  the  first  man  was  made  by  God,  and  in  His  image,  so  is 
this  new  man.  The  special  point  of  resemblance  stated  is 
knowledge.  This  may  have  been  selected,  as  an  allusion  to 
the  boasted  knowledge  and  proud  philosophy  of  the  false 
teachers  in  Colosse.  ii.  2.  There  are,  it  is  true,  many  points 
in  which  our  relative  knowledge  shall  never,  and  can  never, 
resemble  the  absolute  Divine  omniscience.  But  as  the  Spirit 
is  the  source  of  our  knowledge,  no  one  can  predict  what 
amount  of  it,  or  what  forms  of  it.  He  may  communicate 
when  the  mind  is  freed  from  every  shadow  and  bias,  and  is 
surrounded  with  an  atmosphere  of  universal  truth.  Human 
language  is  necessarily  an  imperfect  vehicle  of  thought,  and  it 
may  then  be  dispensed  with.  "Now  we  see  through  a  glass 
darkly,  but  then  face  to  face," — our  conceptions  shall  resemble 
God's  in  fulness  and  truth ;  for  no  dim  medium  of  intellectual 
vision  shall  shade  or  disturb  our  views.  Immediate  cognition 
shall  also  be  our  privilege — "  now  we  know  in  part,  but  then 
shall  we  know,  even  as  we  are  known." 

In  accordance  wdth  that  strange  theory  by  which  Miiller 
would  account  for  the  origin  of  sin — a  theory  at  once  above 
the  domain  of  consciousness  and  beyond  the  limits  of  Scrip- 
ture, he  denies  that  there  is  any  biblical  warrant  for  the  idea 
that  man,  having  lost  the  image  of  God  by  the  fall,  has  it 
restored  to  him  under  the  gospel  by  the  renovating  influence 
of  the  Spirit  of  God.  His  notion  of  a  pre-temporal  state,  in 
which  man  fell,  when,  how,  or  where,  he  does  not  say,  neces- 
sitates him  to  the  conclusion,  that  when  Adam  fell,  man  lost 
nothing,  but  that  there  was  only  awakened  in  him  the 
consciousness  of  a  previous  want  and  deficiency,  so  that  sinful 
principles  already  within  him  acquired  universal  dominion 
over  the  human  race.  A  transition,  on  the  part  of  Adam, 
from  an  absolutely  pure  state  into  one  of  sin,  is  not,  he  holds, 
necessarily  contained  in  the  inspired  record.     "  The  narrative 


22G  COLOSSIANS   III.   10. 

of  the  first  sin,  as  well  as  the  description  of  that  condition 
which  preceded  it,  does  not  of  necessity  lead  us  to  any  further 
idea  than  that  of  an  initial  state  in  which  sin  has  not  yet  made 
its  appearance,"  and  does  not  imply,  "  that  Adam  through  his 
fall  implanted  in  human  nature  a  principle  previously  foreign 
to  it."  ^  Miiller's  inference,  of  course,  is,  that  it  cannot  he 
properly  said  that  the  Divine  image  is  restored  to  man,  seeing 
that  on  earth,  at  least,  he  never  possessed  it.  The  passage 
before  us,  and  the  parallel  passage  in  Eph.  iv.  24,  certainly 
affirm  that  the  new  man  is  the  reflection  of  the  Divine  image 
in  some  of  its  features.  They  do  not  indeed  affirm,  in  as 
many  words,  that  he  becomes  possessed  of  the  same  Divine 
image  which  he  once  enjoyed.  But  the  statement  is  virtually 
implied.  Had  man  never  this  Divine  image,  and  does  he 
enjoy  it  for  the  first  time  through  faith  in  Christ  ?  "  The  new 
man,"  Miiller  says,  "  is  the  holy  form  of  human  life  which 
results  from  redemption."  Now,  not  to  say  that  the  very  idea 
of  redemption,  reconciliation,  or  renewal,  implies  a  restoration 
to  some  previous  state  in  which  none  of  them  was  needed, 
there  being  in  that  state  no  penalty  to  be  ransomed  from,  no 
enmity  to  be  subdued,  and  no  impurity  to  be  cleansed  away 
— let  us  see  what  revelation  teaches  as  to  man's  primeval 
condition  and  his  possession  of  the  Divine  image. 

The  idea  of  "  non-temporal  sinfulness  "  we  must  discard  as 
a  speculation  about  which  Scripture  is  completely  silent,  and 
which,  putting  the  lapse  of  ideal  humanity  beyond  the  period 
of  paradise,  only  shifts  back  the  difficulty  in  proportion,  but 
does  not  explain  it.  In  Gen.  i.  26,  27,  and  v.  1,  we  are 
told  that  man  was  created  in  the  image  and  likeness  of  God, 
but  no  formal  explanation  of  the  phraseology  is  attached. 
Opinions  have  varied  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  peculiar 
phrase  ;  some,  like  Pott,  Eosenmiiller,  and  von  Bohlen,  placing 
it  almost  in  physical  form,  rising  scarcely  as  high  as  the 
heathen  Ovid ;  ^  some  regarding  it  as  a  general  expression  of 

1  Lehre  von  der  S'unde,  vol.  ii.  p.  483,  etc.,  3rd  ed.,  Breslau,  1849. 

^  Animal  mentisque  capacius  altae,  et  quod  dom'mari  in  caetera  posset.  Also 
Cicero,  De  natura  Beorum,  i.  32.  Pythagoras  could  say,  as  reported  by 
Diogenes  Laertius,  that  there  is  a  relationship  between  men  and  the  gods, 
because  men  are  partakers  of  the  Divine  principle.  Dio.  L.  p.  584,  ed.  Is. 
Casaubon.     Xenophon,  Mem.  i.  4,  14. 


C0L0SSIA2;S   IIL   10.  227 

the  dignity  of  the  race,  like  Herder,  Schumann,  Delitzsch, 
and  Knobel;^  others  finding  in  it  the  idea  of  dominion  over 
the  lower  creatures — like  Ephrem,  Grotius,  and  Tuch ;  and 
others,  as  Calvin,  and  the  majority  of  the  Eeformers  and 
Theologians,  regarding  it  too  exclusively  as  the  symbol  of 
spiritual  capacities  and  powers. 

But  what  do  we  gather  from  Scripture  ?  In  the  edict 
against  murder.  Gen.  ix.  6,  the  atrocity  of  the  crime  is  taught 
by  the  doctrine,  that  "  in  the  image  of  God  made  He  man." 
On  this  express  account  the  life  of  animals  formally  delivered 
into  man's  hand  for  meat,  has  not  the  sacredness  of  human 
life.  Further,  the  Apostle  James  (iii.  9)  exposes  the  rashness 
and  inconsistency  of  sins  of  the  tongue,  blessing  God  in  one 
breath,  and  in  another  cursing  man  "  made  after  the  simili- 
tude of  God."  If  man  did  not  still  retain  this  image  of  God, 
there  would  be  no  sin  either  in  killing  or  cursing  him. 
Therefore  this  image  referred  to  is  something  altogether 
independent  of  the  fact  or  development  of  sin  in  man's 
nature,  for  it  is  still  possessed,  and  ought  to  shield  him  from 
violence  and  anathema. 

This  image,  so  unaffected  by  the  fall,  plainly  results  from 
man's  position  as  a  creature.  His  physical  formation  is  not 
only  noble  and  supreme,  but  as  a  rational  and  immortal 
creature,  and  as  God's  representative  to  the  lower  creation,  he 
bears  the  image  of  God.  These  endowments  yet  remain  to 
him.  He  has  not  been  degraded  from  the  erectness  of  his 
mien,  nor  have  reason  and  immortality  been  penally  wrested 
from  him.  And  thus  through  himself  he  still  learns  what 
God  is,  or  rather,  is  enabled  to  comprehend  lessons  on  the 
nature  and  attributes  of  God  by  the  analogies  of  his  own 
mental  and  spiritual  constitution.  For,  when  he  is  told  that 
God  knows  or  loves,  he  naturally  and  necessarily  forms  his 
ideas  of  the  Divine  knowledge  or  affection,  by  feeling  what 
these  properties  are  within  himself,  and  by  inferring  what 
they  must  be  when  resident  in  an  infinite  and  unchanging 
essence.  Or  if  he  be  informed  that  God  is  a  person,  his  own 
conscious  and  unmerging  individuality  leads  him  at  once  to 
attach  a  correct  and  definite  meaning  to  the  term,  and  he  is  in 
himself  a  living  witness  against  Pantheistic  folly  and  delusion. 
^  Als  beseelle  Elnheit.     Knobel,  die  Genesis  erkldrt,  p.  18. 


228  COLOSSIANS   III.   10. 

But  is  tins  all  that  is  meant  by  the  Divine  image  ? 
Miiller  says,  that  it  simply  consists  in  "  personal  essence,"  ^ 
and  that  man  is  thereby  distinguished  from  other  classes  of 
existences.  But  we  apprehend  that  the  expression  reaches 
deeper  than  this.  There  are  certain  properties  or  privileges 
which  man  has  forfeited  by  the  fall,  and  which  are  affh^med 
to  have  been  originally  possessed  or  enjoyed  by  him.  Ignor- 
ance and  spiritual  death  now  characterize  him.  But  is  not 
spiritual  intelligence  a  portion  of  the  Divine  image — the 
reflection  of  God's  own  light  ?  There  is  also  what  the  apostle, 
Eph.  iv.  18,  calls  "the  life  of  God,"  and  from  that  we  are 
now  alienated ;  but  would  that  mere  personal  essence  on 
which  Miiller  insists,  bear  any  resemblance  to  God  at  all,  if 
such  vitality  did  not  fill  it  ?  A  personal  essence  with  the 
gloom  of  ignorance  within  it,  and  the  eclipse  of  death  upon  it, 
could  not  be  recognized  as  bearing  the  Divine  image.  There- 
fore a  mere  personality  devoid  of  such  intelligence  and  life, 
could  scarcely  be  called  the  image  of  God,  or  regarded  as 
constituting  the  whole  of  it.  And  yet,  though  they  formed  a 
portion  of  that  image,  they  have  been  lost  by  the  fall,  and 
are  reconferred  only  in  Christ.  Besides,  can  any  one  bear 
the  moral  image  of  God  and  not  be  happy — not  be  a  partaker 
of  His  immortal  blessedness  ?  But  dissatisfaction  and  misery 
are  the  doom  of  fallen  humanity,  everywhere,  and  at  all 
times. 

That  man  was  once  filled  with  wisdom,  purity,  life,  and 
happiness,  appears  to  be  the  repeated  statement  of  Scripture. 
The  theory  of  Miiller  consistently  says,  man  never  had  these 
on  earth,  and  therefore  could  not  lose  them.  But  the  narra- 
tive of  Genesis,  though  it  do  not  treat  the  subject  dogmatic- 
ally, presents  the  picture  of  an  innocent  creature,  tempted  by 
the  serpent,  and  doomed  for  his  apostasy  to  toil  and  death. 
Does  Prof.  Miiller  believe  that  the  sin  of  man  in  an  ideal 
ante-creational  state  was  followed  by  no  penalty  ?  Or  was 
the  penalty  of  this  kind,  that  the  sinner  was  only  subjected 
to  another  trial  in  another  sphere,  with  the  sad  certainty 
that  the  germs  of  evil  would  ripen  into  fatal  action  ?  The 
narrative  in  Genesis  must  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  the 
other  and  subsequent  Scriptures,  and  they  plainly  teach  that 

^  Personliches  Wesen. 


COLOSSIANS   IIL   10.  229 

Adam's    transgression    is    the    primary   source  of   prodigious 
spiritual  loss. 

Our  belief  therefore  is,  that  the  Divine  image,  in  which 
man  was  made,  consists  of  more  than  personal  essence,  or 
dominion  over  the  inferior  creatures.  These,  indeed,  belong 
to  it,  and  are  still  retained  by  man.  The  gospel,  therefore, 
has  no  effect  upon  them  save  to  hallow  them.  Man  did  not 
forfeit  manhood  by  his  fall,  and  of  necessity,  what  is  essential 
to  his  manhood  and  his  position  still  belongs  to  him.  For 
his  creational  relationship  to  the  God  above  him  and  the 
existences  beneath  him,  could  not  be  impaired,  or  his  anni- 
hilation or  metamorphosis  would  have  been  the  result.  But 
wliile  manhood  has  not  been  lost,  its  nobler  characteristics, 
without  which  the  original  image  would  have  been  imperfect, 
have  been  obliterated.  What  belongs  to  constitution,  fallen 
man  has  retained ;  what  belongs  to  quality  and  character  has 
gone  from  him.  The  latter  is  a  portion  of  the  image  as 
much  as  the  former ;  the  image,  not  of  a  Divine  essence,  but 
of  an  intelligent,  holy,  and  blessed  Divine  person.  And  those 
features  of  the  image  which  have  been  lost  through  the  fall, 
are  given  back  to  the  disciples  of  Christ. 

We  do  not  base  any  argument  on  the  statement  that  the 
fallen  Adam  begat  a  son  in  his  own  image,  whereas  the 
Creator  made  man  in  His  image.  Nor  do  we  imagine  that 
any  such  notion  of  a  double  image  of  God,  one  essential 
and  incapable  of  loss,  and  another  moral  and  liable  to  be 
erased,  can  be  found  at  all  in  the  use  of  the  two  terms  ^2): 
and  ri^^l,  as  they  are  both  separated  and  interchanged  in  the 
sacred  record.  Nor  have  we  begged  the  question  by  arguing 
back  from  the  verse  before  us,  and  assuming  from  the  image 
of  the  new  man  created  by  God,  what  the  image  of  the  first 
man  created  by  Him  must  have  been.  For  the  apostle  does 
not  say  that  the  new  man  is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  Him 
who  originally  created  humanity,  but  after  the  image  of  Him 
who  creates  himself — the  new  man.  Indeed,  the  image  con- 
ferred in  renovation,  though  generically  the  same,  cannot  be 
in  all  points  identical  with  that  given  in  creation.  It  is 
fuller  and  lovelier,  a  richer  intelligence  with  nobler  objects  of 
cognition ;  a  higher  form  of  life,  having  its  type  in  the 
normal  man — the  second  Adam ;  both  reaching  forward  to  a 


230  COLOSSIANS  III.   11. 

development  to  which  neither  means  nor  scope  could  have 
been  found  in  Eden,  or  in  simple  connection  with  the  first 
man,  who  is  "  of  the  earth,  earthy."  In  fine,  we  are  not  sure 
if  Miiller's  theory  does  not  contain,  by  implication,  what  we 
have  advanced.  In  illustrating  the  declaration  of  Paul,  that 
'  in  God  we  live,  move,  and  have  our  being,"  he  says — "  God 
has  willed  man  to  be  like  Himself,  in  order  that  there  might 
be  a  being  which  should  be  capable  of  fellowship  with  Him." 
But  surely  mere  personality  could  not  of  itself  constitute  such 
a  likeness,  or  lead  inherently  to  such  a  communion.  It  must 
possess  other  qualities  than  simple  consciousness  to  give  it 
this  resemblance,  and  fit  it  for  this  enjoyment  of  Him. 
Therefore  these  qualities,  as  we  have  contended,  did  and  must 
belong  to  this  first  image,  and  being  lost  in  the  fall,  are  and 
must  be  restored  to  the  second  image,  which  characterizes  and 
beautifies  the  "  new  man." 

(Ver.  11.)  "Ottov  ouK  evi  "EX\r]v  koI  'IovSalo<i — "Where 
there  is  neither  Greek  nor  Jew."  The  first  adverb  refers  to 
the  preceding  clause,  "  in  which  sphere  of  renewal,"  or  simply, 
the  idea  of  locality  being  so  far  sunk,  "  in  which  thing ; "  as 
in  2  Pet.  ii.  11  ;  Prov.  xxvi.  20.  The  peculiar  term  eve  is 
supposed  by  many  to  be  the  contracted  form  of  evea-ri. 
Phavorinus  defines  it  by  Icriv,  vTrdp-^ec.  Others  regard  it  as 
the  simple  preposition  in  the  Ionic  form  ;  "  the  notion  of  the 
verb,"  as  Kiihner  says,  "  being  so  subordinate  that  it  is  dropt." 
Such  is  the  view  of  Eobinson,  Buttmann,  and  Winer,  etc. 
But  in  this  place  the  idea  of  the  preposition  is  already 
expressed  by  ottov.  There  is  also  the  analogy  of  other 
prepositions  similarly  used,  such  as  eVt  and  irdpa.  Perhaps 
the  supposition  of  the  Etymologicum  Magnum  is  correct,  that 
evt  is  elliptical,  leaving  the  reader  to  supply  wliat  part  of 
the  verb  the  syntax  requires.  In  all  the  places  of  the  New 
Testament  where  it  is  used  it  is  preceded  by  ovk,  and 
expresses  a  strong  negation.  Gal.  iii.  28;  Jas.  i.  1 7.  There 
is  probably  in  the  phrase  the  idea  also  of  inner  existence — 
where  there  does  exist  any  inner  distinction  of  Greek  or 
Jew. 

The  apostle  now  specifies  various  mundane  distinctions. 

"EWrjv  Koi  ^lovBaiO'i,  irepiTOfir]  Koi  aKpo^vcTTia,  j3dp^apo<;, 
X'cu6r)<;,    Bov\o<;,   iXevOepo^;.       The   first    pair   is   the  natural 


COLOSSIANS  III.  11.  231 

distinction  of  "  Greek  and  Jew."  Tiie  noun  eWrjv,  as 
opposed  to  ^dpl3apo<;,  means  a  Greek  proper,  and  as  opposed 
to  'IovSaio<i,  signifies  one  belonging  to  the  Greek  world,  and 
perhaps  viewing  that  world  as  the  representative  of  that 
civilized  heathenism  which  was  brought  into  close  and  ex- 
tensive correspondence  with  Palestine.  Eom.  i.  14,  16,  ii.  9  ; 
Gal.  iii,  28.  The  noun  'lovSaio^;  means  a  Jew,  originally 
and  merely  one  of  the  tribe  of  Judah ;  but  latterly,  as  that 
tribe  on  its  return  from  Babylon  was  so  ascendant,  it  came  to 
denote  any  one  of  the  Hebrew  race.  There  is  no  ground  for 
the  idea  of  the  Greek  expositors  that  eWrjp  means  a  prose- 
lyte, and  'IovSaLo<i  a  native  Jew — e/c  irpoyovtov,  as  Chrysostom 
has  it.  The  second  couple  of  epithets  points  out  a  religious 
distinction — irepcTOfMr]  koI  aKpo^vaTia,  "  circumcision  and 
uncircumcision."  The  "  circumcision  "  is  the  Jewish  world,  as 
Abraham's  progeny,  with  the  seal  of  the  covenant  in  its  flesh, 
and  distinguished  by  its  theocratic  privileges,  while  the 
"  uncircumcision "  is  non-Israel,  or  all  the  world  beyond  the 
chosen  seed,  and  destitute  of  religious  blessing.  It  has  been 
said  that  the  apostle  uses  four  pairs  of  terms,  but  he  drops 
the  use  of  the  /cat,  and  there  is  no  contrast  between  ^dp^apo<i 
— XicvOrj^ — "  barbarian — Scythian."  While  the  epithet  aKpo- 
/Bvaria  applied  to  the  whole  world  beyond  Israel,  there 
were  various  distinctions  in  that  world  itself.  The  Hellenic 
section  was  elevated  by  refinement  and  culture,  but  other 
portions  were  debased  and  wretched.  The  two  terms  now 
under  review  appear  to  differ  only  in  intensity.  The  Scythian 
is  one  at  the  lowest  point  of  barbarism,  as  we  might  say 
— a  negro,  or  even  a  Hottentot — a  savage,  or  even  a  Bushman. 
The  Scythian  races,  represented  by  the  modern  Tartar  or 
Cossack  races  of  Asia  and  Eastern  Europe,  were  regarded  as 
at  the  bottom  of  the  scale.  Scythians,  according  to  Josephus, 
were  ^pax^  '^^^  drjplwv  Sia(})€povre<;^ — while  Herodotus  calls 
them  cannibals — dv6pco7ro(f>dyoL.  Cicero  against  Piso  uses  a 
similar  climax — quod  nullus  in  Barbaria.  Quis  hoc  facit  ulla 
in  Scytliia  tyrannus  ?  The  next  two  terms  represent  a  social 
distinction,  S0OX09,  eKev6epo<i — "  bond,  free,"  a  distinction 
very  common  in  those  countries  and  times.  Some  manu- 
scripts, and  those  of  high  authority,  insert  a  Kai  before  ekev- 
1  Contra  Ap.  2,  37. 


232  coLossiANs  ni.  n. 

6epo<;,  such  as  A,  D\  E,  F,  G.  It  might  be  used  as  in  the 
two  first  couples,  for  there  is  a  contrast.  There  are  thus 
three  forms  of  distinction  expressed,  and  one  implied — 
national  distinction,  religious  distinction,  and  social  distinction  ; 
and  there  is  also  implied  the  secular  distinction  between 
civilization  and  savagism.  The  apostle  completes  his  thoughts 
by  adding — 

'AWa  TCL  TTCLvra  koI  iu  iraaiv  XpLcrro'; — "  But  Christ  is  all 
and  in  all."  The  phrase  is  idiomatic.  Christ  is  everything 
to  all  of  them  having  the  new  man.  To  one  and  all  of  them 
He  is  everything,  so  far  as  the  sufficiency,  offer,  and  enjoy- 
ment of  salvation  are  concerned,  or  as  the  apostle  says  in  the 
similar  passage  in  Galatians,  "  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus." 

Now,  the  meaning  of  the  apostle  is  not  that  a  man  loses 
nationality  on  becoming  a  Christian ;  or  that  social  rank  is 
obliterated  by  admission  into  the  church.  The  blood  of 
Javan  was  not  changed  in  a  Greek,  nor  the  blood  of  Abraham 
in  a  Jew,  when  both  met  in  a  spiritual  kingdom.  The  rude 
manners  of  the  Scythian  might  be  refined  by  his  faitli,  but  he 
did  not  lose  his  peculiarity  of  colour  or  configuration.  The 
chain  of  the  slave  was  not  broken  by  his  religion,  any  more 
than  the  circumcision  of  the  Jew  was  erased.  But  the 
meaning  of  the  apostle  is — 

First,  That  such  distinctions  do  not  prevent  the  on-putting 
of  the  new  man.  In  other  words,  such  differences  of  nation, 
religion,  culture,  and  social  position,  do  not  interfere  with  the 
adaptation,  the  offer,  or  the  reception  and  the  results  of  the 
gospel.  It  is  fettered  by  no  geographical  limits,  by  no  local 
or  lineal  peculiarities.  The  Greek  is  not  nearer  Christ  for 
his  philosophy,  nor  the  Scythian  more  distant  for  his  want  of 
it.  The  incision  of  the  ceremonial  knife  gave  no  preference 
to  the  Jew,  nor  was  the  absence  of  it  any  drawback  to  the 
Gentile.  The  slave  was  as  welcome  as  the  freeman — the 
wandering  nomade  as  the  polished  citizen.  Whatever  a 
man's  descent  or  race,  his  creed  or  rites ;  whatever  his 
language  or  pursuits,  his  colour  or  climate,  his  dwelling  or 
usages,  his  position  or  character — the  gospel  comes  to  him 
with  special  offer,  and  adaptation,  and  completeness,  and 
having  embraced  it  he  will  feel  its  renewing  power.  It  does 
not  insist  on  the  Gentile  submitting  to  the   Abrahamic  rite. 


C0L0S8IANS  III.   11.  233 

nor  require  the  Jew  to  be  initiated  into  the  wisdom  of  the 
Greek ;  it  does  not  stand  aloof  from  the  slave  till  he  burst  Ids 
chain,  nor  does  it  command  the  barbarian  to  master  an 
alphabet  or  win  the  civic  franchise  ere  it  can  save  and  change 
him.  No ;  it  comes  alike  to  the  synagogue  and  to  the 
temple,  with  equal  fitness  to  freedom  and  to  servitude ;  with 
equal  fulness,  freeness,  and  tenderness  to  the  citizen  in  the 
forum  and  to  the  wanderer  on  the  wide  and  solitary  steppe. 
All  adventitious  distinctions  are  levelled  at  its  just  and 
loving  glance. 

Secondly,  It  is  taught  by  the  apostle,  tliat  in  the  church, 
the  sphere  of  the  new  man's  activity  and  enjoyments,  prior 
and  external  distinctions,  do  not  modify  the  possession  of 
spiritual  privilege  and  blessing.  In  the  spiritual  common- 
wealth, no  partition  is  erected  between  Jew  and  Greek ;  the 
barbarian  is  not  degraded  to  a  lower  seat,  nor  is  any  outer 
court  appropriated  for  the  Scythian.  The  slave  does  not 
obtrude  though  he  mingle  his  voice  in  the  same  song  of 
spiritual  freedom  with  his  master,  and  drink  out  of  the  same 
sacramental  cup.  The  Tartar  in  his  sheepskin  may  kneel 
with  the  citizen  in  his  mantle,  and  each  break  with  the  other 
that  bread  which  is  "  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ." 
Nay,  the  faith  of  the  untutored  savage  may  be  more  earnest, 
childlike,  and  fearless  in  its  reliance ;  may  be  a  fuller  source 
of  gladness  and  triumph  than  the  faith  of  him  whose 
philosophy  may  have  prompted  him  to  ask  other  reasons  than 
Scripture  may  have  given,  and  to  fortify  his  belief  with 
arguments  which  the  simple  disciple  did  not  want,  and  could 
not  understand. 

Oh,  it  needs  not  that  one  enjoy  the  erudition  of  the  schools 
in  order  to  be  taught  of  God  !  The  graces  of  civilization  are 
not  the  necessary  soil  for  the  graces  of  the  Spirit.  Secular 
enfranchisement  is  not  indispensable  to  fellow-citizenship  with 
the  saints.  In  the  sphere  of  the  new  man,  those  distinctions 
which  obtain  in  the  world  exercise  no  disturbing  or  preventive 
influence.  That  new  man  has  broken  all  the  ties  of  the  old 
man,  and  is  not  more  akin  to  one  race  than  to  another,  has 
no  affinities  of  blood,  is  not  circumscribed  by  national  bound- 
aries, or  forbidden  by  the  inequalities  of  social  rank,  and  by 
whomsoever  assumed,  he  may  be  fully  possessed.     This  is  the 


234  COLOSSIANS  III.   12. 

glory  of  Christianity,  that  as  it  is  developed  in  the  church,  it 
has  none  of  the  barriers  or  predilections  which  the  epithets  of 
this  verse  indicate  as  obtaining  in  the  world,  and  dividing  it 
into  jealous  and  exclusive  ranks  and  castes,  but  is  at  once  and 
fully  enjoyed  by  all  the  believing  possessors  of  our  common 
humanity.  The  idea  of  Theophylact,  that  the  verse  refers  to 
the  absence  of  distinctions  in  the  other  world,  is  wholly  opposed 
to  the  scope  and  context. 

The  apostle  now  particularizes  certain  graces  which  they 
were  to  assume.  He  had  specified  the  sins  which  marked 
the  old  man,  and  now  he  signalizes  those  virtues  which  are 
connected  with  the  new  man.  Ye  have  put  on  the  new  man, 
and  ye  enjoy  the  all-sufficiency  of  Christ — therefore,  ovv,  ye 
must  manifest  your  possession  of  the  following  elements  of 
Christian  character — 

(Ver.  12.)  ^EvBvaaade  ovv,  w?  iKXeKTol  tov  0€ov,  a<yioi  /cal 
rj'yaTrr^fievQL — "  Put  on,  therefore,  as  the  chosen  of  God,  holy 
and  beloved."  While  ovv  refers  back  to  one  argument,  tw? 
carries  the  mind  forward  to  another.  In  the  epithet  cKkeKToi 
we  recognize  the  fact  of  their  separation  from  the  world,  or 
the  realization  in  their  present  state  of  God's  eternal  and 
gracious  choice.  We  incline,  with  Meyer  and  Lachmann,  to 
regard  e/cXe/cTot  as  the  substantive,  and  the  other  two  epithets 
as  its  predicates.  Others,  as  Luther,  Calvin,  Bahr,  Huther, 
and  De  Wette,  reverse  this  exegesis,  and  take  the  two  follow- 
ing words  as  co-ordinate  substantives.  But  it  is  better  to 
take  eKkeKTOL  as  describing  their  present  position,  and  ar^iot 
and  T)<yaT7r]fxevoi  as  specifying  its  character,  for  election  is  not 
determined  by  character,  but  determines  it.  [Eph.  i.  4,  5.] 
The  meaning  of  a'ytoL  is  consecrated,  set  apart  to  God,  this 
consecration  necessarily  producing  holiness  of  life.  This  is 
an  appeal  to  their  character,  and  not  simply  to  their  position 
in  the  visible  church.  [Eph.  i.  1,]  They  were  also  the 
objects  of  God's  special  complacency — "  beloved."  His  eternal 
and  sovereign  love  did  elect  them,  and  now,  that  election 
having  taken  effect.  He  has  special  complacency  in  them. 
Their  assumption  of  these  graces  would  certify  to  themselves 
their  election,  would  be  a  happy  develojDment  of  their  conse- 
cration, as  well  as  a  proof  of  its  genuineness,  and  would  also 
endear  them  yet  more  to  Him,  who  in  love  had  predestinated 


COLOSSI ANS  III.   12.  235 

them  to  the  adoption  of  children.  These  thoughts  formed  a 
convincing  appeal  to  them,  and  could  not  but  induce  them  to 
feel  and  act  as  the  apostle  recommends.  And  so  they  are 
enjoined  to  put  on — 

^7r\dy^va  OLKTcpfMov.  The  singular  of  the  last  word  is 
preferred  to  the  plural  on  the  authority  of  A,  C,  D^,  E,  F,  G. 
The  singular  is  also  found  in  several  places  of  the  Septuagint. 
Dan.  ix.  18  ;  Zech.  i.  16.  The  phrase  is  a  Hebraism,  cor- 
responding to  the  Hebrew — ^V^?..  Gcsen.  Lehrg.  p.  671. 
The  following  genitive,  oltcripixov,  gives  a  specific  intensity  to 
the  clause ;  it  makes  it  ificparcKOTepov,  as  Chrysostom  says  ; 
since  the  first  word  of  itself  might  denote  kind  or  merciful 
emotion.  Luke  i.  78.  The  Colossians  were  not  to  cherish 
a  hard  and  unrelenting  disposition,  that  was  slow  to  remit 
punishment,  but  forward  ever  to  inflict  it. 

OlKTt,pfi6<;,  from  o'i — oIkto<;  has  more  reference  to  feeling, 
or  commiseration ;  while  the  second  term,  ■^(^prjaTorrjra,  kind- 
ness, is,  as  the  word  really  implies,  that  form  of  kindness 
which  is  serviceable  to  others.  Jerome  describes  it  as — 
invitans  ad  familiaritatem  sui,  dulcis  alloquio,  moribus  tem- 
perata}  "  To  do  good "  is  the  injunction,  and  disciples  are 
to  cherish  the  habit,  and  to  create  opportunities  for  it. 
Christians  are  to  be  obliging  in  their  general  demeanour. 
The  last  three  terms  are  found  in  the  same  order  in  Eph.  iv.  2. 
Taireivo^poavvTj  is  lowliness  of  mind,  opposed  to  haughtiness 
and  conceit.  The  adjective,  raTreii/o?,  is  used  often  in  the 
classics  to  denote  "  mean-spirited."  Trench  has  the  excellent 
remark,  that  "  Chrysostom  is  bringing  in  pride  under  the  dis- 
guise of  humility,  when  he  characterizes  humility  as  the 
making  of  ourselves  small  when  we  are  great,  for  it  is  the 
esteeming  of  ourselves  small  because  we  are  so."  ^  As  the 
same  writer  well  remarks,  "  the  idea  of  such  a  grace  is 
wholly  Christian,^  for  the  gospel  leads  man  to  a  feeling  of 

1  Com.  in  Ep.  ad  Gal.  v.  22.  '  New  Testament  Syjioiipns,  §  42. 

^  The  statement  may  not  at  first  sight  appear  to  be  correct  to  its  full  extent. 
iEschylus,  Prometh.  Vinct.,  makes  Oceanus  bring  the  following  charge  against 
Prometheus — <ru  S'  oul'fru  TCfruvos — not  even  yet  are  you  humble  ;  that  is,  thou 
hast  not  learned  submission  by  thy  punishment.  A  similar  result,  viz.  that  of 
submissiveuess,  is  said  by  Plutarch  to  be,  in  fact,  the  end  of  Divine  chastise- 
ment— TXTuvis  Kcci  xa,ra.(p<ilii)s  ■z-^o;  tov  Siit — De  sera  numinis  vindicatioTie,  cap.  iii. 
Instances  also  may  be  found  in  Plato — ^vvi-rirai  Tctfum  ku'i  KiKitrfivf^iyo; — Leges, 


236  COLOSSIANS  III.   12. 

entire  and  unalterable  dependence  upon  God."  Augustine 
eulogizes  this  grace  by  saying,  that  if  asked  quae  via  sit  ad 
obtinendam  vcritatem .?  he  will  reply,  primum  est  humilitas, 
quid  secundum,  humilitas,  quid  tertium,  humilitas,  etc.  Calvin 
remarks  on  the  connection,  that  the  graces  previously  mentioned 
cannot  be  cherished  without  it. 

The  next  term  is  irpaonr^,  meekness.  We  cannot  fully 
acquiesce  in  Mr.  Trench's  idea,  that  this  word  describes 
"exercises  of  mind  which  are  first  and  chiefly  toward  God, 
or  is  that  temper  of  spirit  in  which  we  accept  His  dealings 
with  us  without  disputing  or  resisting."  Neither  he,  nor 
Ellicott,-^  who  follows  him,  has  produced  any  direct  scriptural 
instance  of  such  a  sense,  though  certainly  he  who  is  truly 
meek  will  always  bow  to  God  in  serene  resignation.  He 
who,  under  the  influence  of  Divine  grace,  does  not  resent  a 
human  injury,  will  not  quarrel  with  any  Divine  allotment. 
But  irpaoTT]';  is  here  ranked  among  graces  which  have  specially 
human  relations,  such  as  mercy  and  long-suffering.  Even  in 
raireivoc^poavvr],  the  idea  is  man-w^ard  fully  as  much  as  God- 
ward.  In  the  place  it  here  occupies  in  the  range  of  virtues, 
it  denotes  that  want  of  arrogance  or  insolence  in  reference  to 
our  fellow-men,  which  lowliness  before  God  ever  tends  to 
produce  and  increase.  MaKpoOufila  is  literally  "  long-minded- 
ness,"  and  is  opposed  to  what  we  often  call  shortness  of 
temper.  All  the  terms  of  the  text  receive  further  illustration 
in  the  subsequent  clauses. 

Now,  these  virtues  certainly  suit — &>? — "  the  elect  of  God, 
holy  and  beloved."  They  are  in  source  and  essence  an 
imitation  on  the  part  of  the  saint  of  what  God  has  felt 
towards  him,  and  they  indicate  a  consciousness  of  the  relation 
which  he  sustains  to  the  Divine  benefactor.  For  he  has 
experienced  the  Divine  mercy  in  its  sweep  and  fulness — 
there  was  no  frown  on  the  Divine  countenance,  when  he  so 

iv.  p.  113,  vol.  viii.  ed.  Bekker,  and  in  other  places  ;  Ast,  Lex.  Platon.  sub  voce. 
Still,  the  idea  in  these  places  seems  to  be  that  of  a  sense  of  lowliness  inwrought 
by  some  depressing  event,  and  forced  upon  the  mind  by  some  painful  contrast. 
This  is  not  the  habitual  grace  of  Christian  humility,  for  a  man  who  may  feel 
himself  to  be  deeply  humiliated,  will  yet  only  recoil  into  a  fiercer  pride,  and  be 
far,  far  indeed,  from  being  humble. 

^  Grammatical  Commentary  on  Ephesians,  iv.  2.    London,  1855.  [See  Ellicott 
on  the  present  passage.] 


COLOSSIANS  m.  13.  237 

abject,  insignificant,  and  withal  so  provoking  and  guilty,  drew 
near.  God  has  crowned  him  "  with  loving-kindness  and  tender 
mercy ; "  and  though  he  be  daily  sinning,  daily  coming  short 
of  duty,  nay,  ever  committing  positive  faults,  he  is  borne 
with,  and  he  has  been  long  borne  with,  as  "  sentence  against 
an  evil  work  has  not  been  speedily  executed."  Must  he  not 
therefore  act  toward  his  fellows  on  the  same  level  with  him- 
self, as  God  from  the  heights  of  His  glory  has  acted  towards 
him  ?  And  there  is  need  for  the  exercise  of  such  virtues,  for 
"  offences  must  come ; "  or,  as  the  apostle  intimates  in  the 
next  clause — 

(Ver.  13.)  ^Ave')(oiJievot  dWrjXcov,  koI  -^api^o/jievoc  eavrot'?, 
edv  Ti<i  Trpof  nva  exj]  fiofj,cf)7]v — "  Forbearing  one  another,  and 
forgiving  one  another,  if  any  one  have  a  complaint  against 
any  other."  The  meaning  of  the  first  participle  has  been 
illustrated  under  Eph.  iv.  2,  and  we  need  not  in  this  place 
repeat  the  illustration.  The  sense  is,  having  patience  with 
one  another — waiting  with  composure  under  injury  or  provo- 
cation, till  those  who  so  offend  may  come  to  a  better  mind. 
The  other  participle,  'x^api^o/xevoc,  carries  forward  the  sense — 
not  only  are  we  to  forbear,  but  we  are  also  to  forgive.  Not 
only  are  we  to  show  humility,  meekness,  and  long-suffering  as 
we  forbear,  but  we  are  also  to  manifest  bowels  of  mercy  and 
goodness  in  forgiving.  The  second  participle,  '^api^oixevoL,  is 
found  in  a  passage  almost  parallel,  in  Eph.  iv.  32,  and  it  also 
occurs  in  the  same  sense  in  ii.  13  of  this  epistle.  The  pro- 
noun €avTol<;  is  simply  for  a\Xi]\oi<; ;  and  the  noun  fMOficpr) 
denotes  "  ground  of  offence  or  complaint,"  explained  in  some 
of  the  Codices  by  the  substitution  of  0/3777.  There  may  be 
just  ground  of  offence,  but  it  is  not  to  excite  to  resentment  or 
retaliation.  And  the  apostle  proposes  for  imitation  the  highest 
of  examples. 

Ka6(o<i  Koi  6  Xpi,(TTo<;  i'^apiaaTo  vfilv,  ovTa><i  kul  vfiefi. 
Xapt^ofievoi  is  to  be  supplied,  and  not  the  imperative, 
'XjcLpil^eaOe,  with  some,  nor  yet  irotdre,  as  is  found  in  some 
MSS.,  such  as  D\  E^  F,  G.  The  conjunction  occurs  twice, 
for  the  sake  of  intensity  (Klotz,  ad  Devar.  635),  and  Ka6w<i 
Kai  introduces  an  argumentative  illustration.  In  a  corre- 
sponding passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  apostle 
makes   reference   to   God — "  forgiving   one  another,  even  as 


238  COLOSSIANS  III.   13. 

God  for  Christ's  sake  has  forgiven  you."  iv.  32.  This  differ- 
ence of  person  in  the  two  places  seems  to  have  suggested  the 
various  readings  which  occur  in  the  old  copies.  Not  a  few 
of  them  have  Kvpio<;,  such  as  A,  B,  D^,  F,  G,  and  those  appear 
to  be  almost  equal  in  authority  to  C,  D^,  E,  J,  K,  which 
have  Xptcrro?,  a  reading  supported,  however,  by  many  of  the 
Versions  and  Fathers.  But  here  forgiveness  is  specially 
ascribed  to  Christ.  If  Christ  forgive  sin,  the  inference  is, 
that  He  is  Divine.  Pardon  is  a  Divine  prerogative,  yet 
Christ  exercises  it.  And  it  is  not  on  His  part  a  venturesome 
act,  nor  one  which  is  provisional,  and  cannot  take  effect  till 
it  receive  the  sanction  of  the  Father,  but  it  is  at  once  full, 
decided,  and  final.  The  Saviour  gave  the  paralytic  patient  a 
complex  benefit  in  a  single  act,  when  He  said  to  him  as  he 
lay  helpless  on  a  couch  at  His  feet,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee."  And  if  Christ  forgive  sin.  He  is  entitled  to  do  so,  for 
He  has  made  provision  for  it  in  His  sufferings  and  death. 
May  He  not  Himself  dispense  the  fruits  of  His  atonement, 
and  pardon  those  for  whom  He  died  ?  The  general  idea  is 
the  same  as  that  of  Eph.  iv.  32.  Christians  are  to  forgive 
one  another  because  Christ  has  forgiven  them,  for  His 
example  has  all  the  force  of  a  formal  command.  They  are 
also  to  forgive  one  another  as  He  has  forgiven  them — fully 
and  freely,  at  once  and  for  ever ;  not  pardoning  seven  times, 
but  demurring  to  the  seventy  times  seven ;  not  insulting  him 
who  has  injured  them  by  the  rigid  exaction  of  a  humiliating 
apology,  or  stinging  him  by  a  sharp  and  unexpected  allusion 
to  his  fault ;  not  harbouring  antipathy,  but  forgetting  as  well 
as  forgiving;  not  indulging  a  secret  feeling  of  offence,  and 
waiting  for  a  moment  of  quiet  retaliation;  but  expelling 
every  grudge  from  their  hearts  by  an  honest  and  thorough 
reconciliation.  Meyer  expressly  condemns  the  reference, 
found  by  Chrysostom  and  Theophylact,  to  the  medium  by 
which  Christ  forgives,  to  wit.  His  own  death,  their  inference 
being,  that  we  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives  for  others.  "We 
should  also  demur  to  this  full  form  of  expression  on  the  part 
of  these  Fathers  as  being  a  necessary  deduction  here.  The 
doctrine  is  found,  however,  in  other  parts  of  Scripture,  as  in 
1  John  iii.  16.  But  perhaps  we  may  be  warranted  to  say, 
that  as  in  tlie  case  of  Christ's  pardoning  us,  there  was  a  self- 


COLOSSIANS  III.   1^-  239 

denial  even  unto  death — so  with  us,  there  should  be  self-denial 
too.  There  may  be  a  painful  effort,  but  it  should  be  made — 
the  forgiveness  may  cost  us  no  little  sacrifice,  but  we  must 
not  shrink  from  it.  Such  a  doctrine  seems  to  be  implied, 
though  we  cannot  say  as  firmly  as  Chrysostom,  that  the 
proper  interpretation  of  Ka6(o<i  demands  it — to  yap,  Ka6(o<;, 
ravTa  airairel. 

(Ver.  14.)  ^EttI  iraai  Be  TovTOi<i  ttjv  ayaTrijv.  The  con- 
struction still  depends  on  ivBvcraa-de  of  the  12tli  verse. 
Looking  at  the  figure  implied  in  the  verb,  some,  such  as 
Gataker  and  Meyer,  give  to  eVi  the  sense  of  "  over,"  as  if  the 
meaning  were — on  those  other  parts  of  spiritual  raiment 
throw  this,  as  an  over-dress.  But  such  an  exegesis  appears 
to  press  the  figure.  Nor  can  the  preposition  bear  the  sense 
which  Calvin  puts  upon  it  of  propter,  that  is,  ye  cannot 
exhibit  these  graces  unless  ye  have  love.  ^Eiri  means  "  in 
addition  to,"  with  the  idea  implied,  that  what  follows  is  chief 
or  best.  Luke  xvi.  26.  In  addition  to  all  these,  as  last  and 
best,  "  put  on  love."  'Aydirrj  is  the  grace  of  love,  on  the 
beauty,  propriety,  and  excellence  of  which  the  apostle  so  often 
insists.  [Eph.  i.  1,  4.]  We  take  the  next  clause  in  its 
plain  sense — 

"O  ian  crvvBea ixo<i  t?}?  TeXetoT7;T09 — "  Which  is  the  bond 
of  perfectness,"  that  bond  which  unites  all  the  graces  into 
completeness  and  symmetry.  "Htl<;  is  the  reading  of  the 
Received  Text,  but  o  is  found  in  such  high  authorities  as  A, 
B,  C,  F,  G.  It  weakens  the  sense  to  regard  the  claiise  as  a 
species  of  Hebraism,  as  if  it  meant  "  a  perfect  bond  ;  "  or  as 
Erasmus  renders  it  in  his  paraphrase — perfedum  et  indissoluhile 
vinculum.  Such  is  the  view  of  Melancthon,  Vatablus,  Balduin, 
Michaelis,  Calovius,  Estiiis,  Grotius,  Wolf,  Eosenmiiller,  and 
Flatt.  The  apostle  here  calls  love,  not  perfection,  but  its 
bond,  or  that  which  holds  together  all  the  graces  which 
constitute  it.  Some,  indeed,  as  Bretschneider,  Bengel,  Usteri, 
Bohmer,  De  Wette,  and  Olshausen,  take  the  term  in  the  sense 
oi  fasciculus,  Inhcgriff — not  that  which  binds,  but  that  which 
is  bound  up.  In  a  similar  sense,  Calvin  and  Bohmer  take  it 
for  suinma.  The  two  interpretations  differ,  as  do  the  German 
words  Band  and  Btcnd  (Biindel),  or  the  English  bond  and 
bundle.     There  is  one  passage  of  Herodian  appealed  to,  where 


240  COLOSSIAITS   III.   14. 

the  word  has  such  a  meaning — iravra  rov  avvSea/iov  rwv 
eiTLaTokoiv,  the  whole  package  or  bundle  of  letters.  But  that 
is  not  the  common  meaning  of  the  term,  either  in  the  classics 
or  the  New  Testament.  The  noun  reXetoxT;?,  as  an  abstract 
term  with  the  article,  describes  moral  perfection  as  a  whole. 
Perfection  consists  of  many  graces,  each  in  its  own  place  and 
relations,  each  in  its  own  circle  and  sphere — but  they  are 
held  together  by  love.  Did  they  exist  singly,  or  in  separate 
clusters,  perfection  would  not  be  enjoyed ;  were  they  fragmen- 
tary, and  not  coalescent,  symmetry  of  character  would  be  lost. 

For  love  is  the  product  of  the  other  graces,  the  fruit  of  their 
ripe  development,  so  that  in  their  perfect  state  they  should 
throw  around  them  this  preserving  cincture.  Love  itself  is, 
at  the  same  time,  the  highest  element  of  this  perfection,  and 
forms  the  nearest  resemblance  to  Him  of  whom  it  is  said — 
"  God  is  love."  It  creates  perfection,  but  here  it  is  specially 
represented  as  a  bond  which  sustains  it.  No  grace  is  com- 
plete without  it.  Without  it,  knowledge  is  but  a  selfish 
acquisition,  purity  an  attempted  personal  gain,  and  zeal  a 
defective  struggle  ;  uninspired  by  it,  faith  is  but  an  abortive 
and  monopolizing  grasp,  and  hope  an  exclusive  anticipation. 
Sin  is  essentially  selfishness  in  a  variety  of  forms,  and  not  till 
such  selfishness  be  fully  put  down,  can  the  semblance  of  per- 
fection be  enjoyed.  Love  to  God  and  to  every  one  that  bears 
His  image,  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  imparting  fervour  and 
breadth  to  every  grace,  giving  odour  to  the  blossom,  and  being 
itself  the  fruit,  is  the  bond  of  perfectness.  A  heart  replete 
M'ith  this  love  maintains  all  its  spiritual  acquirements  in 
health  and  vigour.  Bound  up  in  this  zone,  every  Christian 
excellence  fills  its  own  place,  and  keeps  it,  and  the  whole 
character  is  sound,  does  not  distort  itself  by  excess,  nor 
enfeeble  itself  by  defect.     [Eph.  iv.  15,  v.  2.] 

Love  is  thus  regarded  here,  not  as  a  congeries  of  graces, 
which  make  up  perfection — as  Bengel  says — amor  complectihcr 
virtutum  U7iiversitatem.  It  is  more  its  oflEice  than  itself  which 
the  apostle  regards.  It  is  not  looked  upon  here  as  containing 
perfection  within  itself,  but  as  so  uniting  the  other  graces 
that  it  gives  them  perfection  and  keeps  them  in  it.  Meyer 
shrewdly  says,  that  if  love,  as  a  bundle,  contained  all  the 
other  graces  in  it  already,  how  could  the  apostle  bid  them 


COLOSSIANS   III.   14.  241 

assume  love  in  addition  to  them  ?—  cttI  iraa-i,  tovtol'^.  If 
they  were  to  put  on  all  its  parts,  how  could  they  assume  it 
as  something  still  distinct  ?  Huther  takes  the  neuter  6  as 
referring  to  the  preceding  clause, — love,  the  putting  on  of 
which  is  the  bond  of  perfection.  But  the  apostle's  idea  is, 
not  that  the  putting  on  of  the  love,  but  that  the  love,  when 
put  on,  is  the  bond  of  perfectness.  Our  view  is  not  unlike 
that  of  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret.  Some  of  the  older  in- 
terpreters labour  to  reconcile  the  statement  of  the  apostle 
with  his  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  and  Eomish  writers 
pressed  them  hard  on  the  subject.  Crocius  and  Schmid 
refer  this  perfection  simply  to  the  unity  or  integrity  of  the 
church,  which  love  creates  and  preserves.  But  though  this 
be  not  the  precise  meaning  of  the  apostle,  it  is  certainly 
included  under  his  statement,  and  this  idea,  coupled  with  the 
phraseology  of  Eph.  iv.  3,  may  have  led  one  of  the  copyists 
to  insert  ivoTijro';.  What  is  the  bond  of  perfectness  to  an 
individual  is  also  the  bond  of  perfectness  to  a  church.^  [Eph. 
iv.  3,U4,  15,  V.  2];   1  Pet.  iii.  8. 

^  "  Let  us  consider  that  charity  is  a  right  noble  and  worthy  thing  ;  greatly  per- 
fective of  our  nature  ;  much  dignifying  and  beautifying  our  soul.  It  rendereth 
a  man  truly  great,  enlarging  his  mind  unto  a  vast  circumference,  and  to  a 
capacity  near  infinite  ;  so  that  it  by  a  general  care  doth  reach  all  things,  by  an 
universal  affection  doth  embrace  and  grasp  the  world.  By  it  our  reason  ob- 
taineth  a  field  or  scope  of  employment  worthy  of  it,  not  confined  to  the  slender 
interests  of  one  person  or  one  place,  but  extending  to  the  concerns  of  all  men. 
Charity  is  the  imitation  and  copy  of  that  immense  love,  which  is  the  fountain 
of  all  being  and  all  good  ;  which  made  all  things,  which  preserveth  the  world, 
which  sustaineth  every  creature  ;  nothing  advanceth  us  go  near  to  a  resemblance 
of  Him,  who  is  essential  love  and  goodness  ;  who  freely  and  purely,  without  any 
regard  to  his  own  advantage  or  capacity  of  finding  any  beneficial  return,  doth 
bear  and  express  the  highest  good-will,  with  a  liberal  hand  pouring  down 
showers  of  bounty  and  mercy  on  all  His  creatures  ;  who  daily  putteth  up  num- 
berless indignities  and  injuries,  upholding  and  maintaining  those  who  offend 
and  provoke  Him.  Charity  rendereth  us  as  angels,  or  peers  to  those  glorious 
and  blessed  creatures,  who,  without  receiving  or  expecting  any  requital  from  us, 
do  heartily  desire  and  delight  in  our  good,  are  ready  to  promote  it,  do  willingly 
serve  and  labour  for  it.  Nothing  is  more  amiable,  more  admirable,  more  vener- 
able, even  in  the  common  63^6  and  opinion  of  men  ;  it  hath  in  it  a  beauty  and  a 
majesty  apt  to  ravish  every  heart ;  even  a  spark  of  it  in  generosity  of  dealing 
breedeth  admiration,  a  glimpse  of  it  in  formal  courtesy  of  behaviour  procureth 
much  esteem,  being  deemed  to  accomplish  and  adorn  a  man  :  how  lovely,  there- 
fore, and  truly  gallant,  is  an  entire,  sincere,  constant,  and  uniform  practice 
thereof,  issuing  from  pure  good-will  and  affection  ! " — Barrow's  Works,  vol.  i. 
pp,  250,  251,  Edinburgh,  1841. 


242  COLOSSIANS  III.   15. 

The  apostle  still  continues  his  exhortation — 
(Ver.  15.)  Kal  r]  elprjvq  tov  Xpiarov  ^pa^everw  iv  ral<; 
KaphiaL<i  vfi(ov — "  And  let  the  peace  of  Christ  rule  in  your 
hearts."  The  reading  Xpucnov  is  preferred  to  the  common 
one  of  ©€ov,  on  good  authority,  such  as  A,  B,  C\  D\  F,  G, 
and  various  Versions  and  Fathers.  Some  regard  this  peace  as 
the  result  of  the  preceding  admonitions — the  peace  of  mutual 
concord.  Such  is  the  view  of  no  less  distinguished  critics 
than  the  Greek  expositors,  and  of  Calvin,  Grotius,  Vatablus, 
Calovius,  and  Meyer.  Chrysostom's  illustration  is  as  follows: 
— "  Suppose  a  man  to  have  been  unjustly  insulted,  two 
thoughts  are  born  of  the  insult,  the  one  nrging  him  to 
vengeance,  and  the  other  to  patience,  and  these  wrestle  with 
one  another.  If  the  peace  of  God  stand  as  umpire,  it  bestows 
the  prize  on  that  which  calls  to  endurance,  and  puts  the  other 
to  shame."  We  cannot  embrace  this  exegesis,  for  we  regard 
it  as  narrow  and  unusual.  "  Peace  "  is  commonly  with  the 
apostle  a  far  higher  blessing  than  mere  harmony  with  others, 
or  the  study  of  Christian  union.  It  is  with  him  synonymous 
with  happiness,  that  calm  of  mind  which  is  not  ruffled  by 
adversity,  overclouded  by  sin  or  a  remorseful  conscience,  or 
disturbed  by  the  fear  and  the  approach  of  death.  Isa. 
xxvi.  3.  This  view  is,  generally,  that  of  Luther,  Bengel,  De 
Wette,  Biihr,  Olshausen,  and  Huther.  Nor  is  it  out  of 
harmony  with  the  context.  For  nothing  is  more  fatal  to  such 
"  peace  "  than  the  indulgence  of  those  foul  and  angry  passions 
wliich  the  apostle  warns  them  to  abandon  in  the  preceding 
verses  (5  to  9),  and  there  is  nothing  so  conducive  to  its 
purity  and  permanence  as  the  cultivation  of  those  serene  and 
genial  graces  which  are  enjoined  in  verses  12,  13,  and  14. 
It  is  almost  as  if  he  had  said — those  vices  being  dropt,  and 
those  virtues  being  assumed,  the  peace  of  Christ  shall  there- 
fore reign  within  you,  and  its  happy  sensations  you  will  be 
led  naturally  to  express  "  in  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual 
songs." 

It  is  called  "  the  peace  of  Christ,"  a  phrase  not  essentially 
different  in  meaning  from  the  common  one,  "  peace  of  God." 
It  is  given  by  Christ,  or  produced  and  perpetuated  by  His 
Spirit.  It  is  the  Eedeemer's  own  legacy — John  xiv.  27, 
"  My  peace  I  give  unto  you ;  let  not  your  hearts  be  troubled. 


COLOSSIANS  III.   15.  243 

neither  let  them  be  dismayed."  Christ  has  secured  this 
peace  in  His  blood  as  Mediator,  and  He  has  the  right  to 
dispense  it  as  the  result  of  the  reconciliation  or  atonement. 

And  such  tranquillity,  which  in  its  highest  aspect  is 
Christian  felicity,  was  not  simply  to  be  in  their  hearts,  but  it 
was  to  "  rule  "  in  them ;  it  was  not  merely  to  have  existence, 
but  it  was  to  exercise  supreme  command.  For  such  is  the 
meaning  of  ^pa^everw,  as  it  naturally  comes  from  its  original 
and  literal  signification  of  presiding  at  the  games,  and  then 
of  distributing  the  rewards  of  victory.  Both  senses  have, 
however,  been  separately  maintained  by  critics ;  Chrysostom 
adhering  to  the  idea  of  adjudication — Kpirr}<i  koX  d<yo)vodeTr](; ; 
and  (Ecumenius  employing  in  explanation  the  verb  ^leaneveiv. 
Calvin,  Erasmus,  and  Vatablus  look  upon  it  as  the  figure  of  a 
wrestler  who  himself  wins  the  prize — let  this  peace  obtain 
the  prize  and  keep  it ;  but  the  view  is  against  sound  philo- 
logy, for  the  word  is  never  used  of  the  combatant,  but  only  of 
the  umpire.  Nor  can  we  accept  the  view  of  Huther,  Wahl, 
and  Bretschneider,  who  refer  generally  to  the  idea  of  IBpa^elov 
implied  in  ii.  18,  and  understand  the  apostle  to  say,  "  let  the 
peace  of  God  confer  its  rewards  upon  you."  Nor  is  there 
more  foundation  for  the  opposite  idea  of  Kypke,  who  supposes 
it  to  mean  specially,  "let  the  peace  of  God  distribute  the 
prize  of  love  in  your  hearts."  The  general  and  very  frequent 
sense  we  have  already  assigned  to  the  verb  is  preferable,  and 
such  is  the  opinion  of  many  commentators,  supported  by 
numerous  examples.  Diodorus  Sic.  13,  53,  etc.;  Wisdom  x. 
12.  Loesner  has  collected  many  examples  from  Philo.  This 
peace  was  to  possess  undisputed  supremacy — was  to  be  uncon- 
trolled president  in  their  hearts. 

'Ev  raU  KapSlai^  vfiMv.  Let  it  not  be  a  state  of  mind 
admired  or  envied,  but  one  actually  possessed ;  let  it  not  be 
hovering  as  a  hoped-for  blessing  on  the  outskirts  of  your 
spirits,  but  let  it  be  within  you ;  let  it  not  be  an  occasional 
visitant,  often  scared  away  by  dominant  and  usurping  passion, 
but  a  central  power,  exercising  a  full  and  unlimited  adminis- 
tration. Let  it  so  govern,  and  happiness  will  be  the  result, 
every  source  of  disquietude  and  element  of  turbulence  being 
destroyed.  The  apostle  thus  wished  the  Colossians  highest 
spiritual  welfare,  that  their  souls  might  enjoy  unbroken  quiet. 


244  COLOSSIANS  III.   15. 

A  peace,  which  is  not  the  peace  of  Christ,  is  often  rudely  dis- 
turbed, for  it  is  but  a  dream  and  a  slumber  in  the  midst  of 
volcanic  powers,  which  are  employing  the  time  in  gathering 
up  their  energies  for  a  more  awful  conflict.  There  is  no 
question,  if  a  man  possessed  and  cherished  the  ripe  conscious- 
ness of  his  interest  in  Christ,  if  he  had  full  assurance,  and 
felt  that  God  was  for  him — if  the  elements  of  sinful  passion, 
either  in  its  fouler  forms  of  sensuality,  or  its  darker  aspects  of 
malignity,  were  subdued;  and  if  "the  gentleness  of  Christ" 
were  at  home  within  him,  and  all  the  graces  which  possess  a 
kindred  character  were  aroimd  him,  bound  and  held  together 
by  that  "  love  which  is  the  bond  of  perfectness,"  that  then 
he  would  enjoy  a  peace  or  a  bliss  second  only  to  the  eleva- 
tion and  felicity  of  heaven.  Phil.  iv.  7.  And  it  was  no 
audacity  in  them  to  seek  or  cultivate  that  peace^  for  to  it  they 
had  been  called. 

El<i  fjv  Kul  eKKrj6r}Te — "  To  which  ye  were  also,  or  indeed 
were,  called."  This  verb  is  often  used  by  the  apostle. 
Eph.  iv.  1.  The  possession  of  this  peace  was  a  prime  end 
of  their  Christianity.  The  gospel  summons  a  man,  not  to 
misery,  but  to  happiness — not  to  internal  discord,  but  to 
ultimate  peace.  And  they  were  called  to  the  possession  of 
it — 

'Ev  evl  awfiari — "  In  one  body ; "  not  et?  ev  awjia — "  into 
one  body,"  that  is,  so  as  to  form  one  body.  But  the  meaning 
is,  that  they  already  formed  one  body,  or  that  unitedly  they 
had  been  called  to  the  possession  of  peace.  And  the  apostle 
adds — 

Kal  ev')(api(TTOL  <yive(T6e — "  And  be  ye  thankful."  [Eph. 
V.  4,  20.]  Not  a  few  take  the  adjective  in  the  sense  of 
friendly,  as  if  the  apostle  bade  them  cherish  amicable  feelings 
to  one  another.  This  is  the  view  of  Jerome,  of  Calvin, 
Suicer,  a-Lapide,  Biihr,  Steiger,  and  Olshausen,  who  give  ev'^d- 
ptaroi  the  sense  of  'x^prjarol  in  Eph.  iv.  32.  Calvin  renders 
amahihs  sitis ;  and  Conybeare  "  be  thankful  one  to  another." 
With  Huther,  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  and  Meyer,  we  prefer 
the  meaning  "  thankful "- — that  is,  towards  God.  The  former 
sense  abounds  in  the  classics,  and  though  the  latter  is  found 
there  too,  yet  it  seems  to  be  wholly  contrary  to  the  usage  of 
the  kindred  terms  in  the  New  Testament.     For  there  is  every 


COLOSSIANS   III.    IG.  245 

cause  of  thankfulness  to  Him  who  had  called  them  to  the 
possession  of  such  peace.  If  that  peace  dwelt  within  them, 
and  reigned  within  them — if  Christ  had  at  once  provided  it 
for  them,  and  summoned  them  unitedly  to  its  enjoyment, 
surely  profound  gratitude  was  due  to  such  a  benefactor. 

(Ver.  16.)  'O  A0709  rov  XpiaTov  ivoiKetTO)  iv  vfuv  ifkov- 
(Tico<i — "  Let  the  word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly."  Lach- 
mann  and  Steiger  propose  to  read  this  clause  parenthetically, 
and  to  join  the  previous  yivea-de  to  the  following  participles — 
Bi8daKovr€<;,  etc.  But  nothing  is  gained  by  such  a  distribu- 
tion. For  Xpcarov,  a  few  authorities  and  Fathers  read 
Oeov  ;  and  the  Coptic  and  Clement  read  Kvpiov.  "  The  word 
of  Christ"  is  the  gospel,  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  or  the  truth 
which  has  Christ  for  its  subject.  In  fact,  Christ  is  both  the 
giver  of  the  oracle  and  its  theme.  By  ev  vfuv  is  meant,  not 
simply  among  you — unter  euch,  as  Luther  translates,  or  as  De 
Wette  contends.  Let  the  Christian  truth  have  its  enduring 
abode  "  within  you " — let  it  be  no  stranger  or  occasional 
guest  in  your  hearts.  Let  it  not  be  without  you,  as  a  lesson 
to  be  learned,  but  within  you,  as  the  source  of  cherished  and 
permanent  illumination.  Let  it  stay  within  you — irXovo-ico'i, 
abundantly.  That  is,  let  it  be  completely  understood,  or  let 
the  soul  be  fully  under  its  influence.  Let  it  dwell  not  with  a 
scanty  foothold,  but  with  a  large  and  liberal  occupancy. 

Different  ideas  have  been  formed  of  the  best  mode  of 
dividing  the  following  clauses  of  the  verse.  Our  translators, 
following  the  Peschito,  Chrysostom,  and  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
Beza,  add  the  words  "  in  all  wisdom  "  to  the  clause  which  we 
have  already  considered.  But  the  idea  of  wisdom  is  better 
joined  to  the  following  clause,  which  refers  to  mutual  teach- 
ing— "in  all  wisdom  teaching  and  admonishing  one  another." 
Our  translators,  too,  so  point  the  verse  as  to  make  psalms  and 
hymns  the  material  of  instruction,  whereas  it  seems  better, 
and  more  appropriate,  to  keep  the  clause  distinct,  thus — "  Let 
the  word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly ;  in  all  wisdom  teach- 
ing and  admonishing  one  another:  in  psalms,  hymns,  and 
spiritual  songs,  singing  with  grace  in  your  hearts  unto  the 
Lord."  ^ 

^  T('j  ifTi*  0  Xo'yt;  rav  X^imu  ;  ra  Xiyia  t'lfi  rev  ay'tau  iua.yyiX.iau  xa)  rut  fit- 
Ifo^/uti  QfTorriXw  xxi   Tut   hiut   r^oiftiTtit'      Vlas   "i'i   itcimT  tt   fifi.7t  i   Xiyoi   rev  ticu   %t 


246  COLOSSIANS   III.   16. 

The  words  ev  Trday  ao^ta  are  thus  connected  as  they  are  in 
i.  28,  and  such  is  the  view,  among  others,  of  Bengel,  Storr, 
Bahr,  Steiger,  Olshausen,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius.  See  under 
i,  28,  where  the  participles — SiSacr/coi^re?,  koI  vov66TovvTe<; — 
occur,  though  in  reverse  order,  and  where  they  are  also  ex- 
plained. The  anakoluthon  which  occurs  in  the  construction 
is  almost  necessary,  and  gives  special  prominence  to  the  ideas 
expressed  by  the  participles.  The  duty  enjoined  in  this  clause 
has  a  very  close  connection  with  that  enjoined  in  the  preceding 
one.  Unless  the  word  of  Christ  dwelt  richly  within  them, 
they  could  not  fulfil  this  duty ;  for  they  could  not  teach  and 
admonish  unless  they  knew  what  lessons  to  impart,  and  in 
what  spirit  to  communicate  them  ;  but  the  lessons  and  the 
spirit  alike  were  to  be  found  in  the  gospel.  Mutual  exhorta- 
tion must  depend  for  its  fitness  and  utility  on  mutual 
knowledge  of  the  Christian  doctrine.  Sj^aring  acquaintance 
with  Divine  revelation  would  lead  to  scanty  counsel  and 
ineffective  tuition. 

Wa\fiol<;,  vfMvoi<;,  a)Bai<;  TTvevixaTiKai'^,  ev  rrj  ■^dpirt  aSovre^:  ev 
rai?  KaphlaL<i  vfiwv  tq)  Qea>.  Both  the  conjunctions  ^Kal) 
which  appear  in  the  Eeceived  Text  seem,  on  good  authority, 
to  be  mere  euphonistic  insertions.  Some  take  the  words 
down  to  ')(apiTi,  as  connected  with  the  preceding  participles — 
"  admonishing  one  another  in  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual 
songs."  Our  objection  is,  that  while  metrical  or  musical 
compositions  are  not  the  common  vehicle  of  instruction  or 
admonition,  they  are  specially  connected  with  sacred  song. 
The  datives,  without  the  preposition,  denote  the  materials  of 
song.     The  phrase  ev  ry  ^dpiri,  according  to  Huther  and  De 

*««■>)  ffo^'iX  \  "ilk  Ttjs  ocx^eaffius  xai  avayvanrius  xai  fiiXir))!  t*»  itieav  'y^a(pu)i'  "Orav 
Tttvra,  (Tu^vu;  ti  x,tt,i  l-Tnf/.iXcas  fitXiru/itv,  Ton  xai  n  iiiiyifj,n  ^Xn^eivTai,  xcci  o  vous 
vrXouriX,iTai,  xai  ii  xa^oia  i^i^ivyirai,  xai  to  ar'of/.a  Ix^iti  vXoviria  rris  h'lat  ^iiar- 
xaXias  7a  vafiara'  'E^e/S/i  li  tivis  fjcira  i/Ti^yilpavi'ias  xai  i^ioyvai/u.ixnjvris  fiiXiTuvTi; 
ra;  hias  y^a^a;  •ri'TrouiTiv  li;  reuv  ai^'iffiiuv  toj  (id^a^^a,  aXXei  Ss  af/,a6ais  xa\ 
a'jripiax'i.'TrTwi  abra;  ava.yi\ia'(rxov7is,  xa)  //.yi  diax^ivovns  rriv  iyroXhv  aTo  rij;  irvf^^ovXyis, 
yivovTai  "iiiffi^aii^ovii  xai  xixatiTn^ia(rf/,'ivoi  "  T«v  lo'iav  <runi^ticriv'"  S/a  roZre  uvi  ro, 
"'E»  '^affn  ffoipia"  fiyouv,  "va  fiira  Vuvroi  I'l^ous  ffoplag,  xai  rrj;  Tytvf^arixr,!  S»- 
Xov'.ri  xai  tTi;  r^oXarnxv!;,  xa)  r»s  luXafitiTix^s  "iiaS'iffius  xai  Tits  o^6ris  ^lax^lfftu; 
xai  avayivuffxufitv,  xai  faXlTeHf^iv  Ta;  hiag  y^alpas,  xai  ^i^affxufMv  J/'  auTuy  xai 
tavTdvs  xai  Tovi  aXXovi'  NIKH^OPOT  OEOTOKOT  TOT  A2TPAXANIOT  KAI 
2TATPOTnOAEn2  APXlEni2KOnOr  KrPIAKOAPOMION,  T0M02  npnTos, 
p.  155,  EN   AeHNAI2,  1840. 


COLOSSIANS   III.  16.  247 

Wette,  means  "  with  a  grateful  spirit."  1  Cor.  x.  30.  It  appears 
to  us  wholly  out  of  the  question  on  the  part  of  Calvin,  Beza, 
a-Lapide,  Biihr,  and  many  others,  to  take  the  words  as  denoting 
eua-')(7)fx6vco'i,  "  gracefully  " — sine  confusione.  We  prefer,  with 
Estius,  Steiger,  and  Meyer,  to  regard  the  phrase  as  meaning 
by  the  influence  of  grace,  given,  as  Chrysostom  remarks,  by 
the  Spirit.  Luther  joins  the  phrase  erroneously  to  the 
preceding  term.  The  following  dative,  tm  ©eo),  indicates  Him 
in  honour  of  whom  this  sacred  minstrelsy  is  raised,  and  the 
formula  iv  rat?  KapSiaa  describes  the  sincerity  of  the  service, 
— the  silent  symphony  of  the  heart.  Tischendorf  appears  to 
us  to  have  forsaken  his  own  critical  principles  in  retaining  the 
singular  form  rfj  KapBia,  for  he  has  confessedly  against  him 

A,  B,  C  \  D  \  F,  G,  the  Syriac  which  reads  ^ZonNn,  and 

the  Vulgate,  which  has — in  cordihus  vestris.  For  remarks  on 
the  different  terms,  and  their  distinction,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  what  has  been  said  by  us  under  Eph.  v.  19.  We  have 
there  said  that  probably  by  Psalms  may  be  understood  the 
Hebrew  book  of  that  name,  so  commonly  used  in  the  syna- 
gogues ;  that  the  hymns  might  be  other  compositions  divested 
of  Jewish  imagery  and  theocratic  allusions,  and  more  adapted 
to  the  heathen  mind  ;  while  the  spiritual  odes  were  freer  forms 
of  song,  the  effusion  of  personal  experience  and  piety,  and  do 
not  simply  point  out  the  genus  to  which  the  entire  class  of 
such  compositions  belonged. 

Still  the  sentiment  hangs  on  the  first  clause — "  let  the 
word  of  Christ  dwell  within  you  nobly."  These  sacred  songs, 
whether  in  the  language  of  Scripture,  or  based  upon  it,  could 
be  sung  in  the  right  spirit  only  when  the  indwelling  "  word  " 
pressed  for  grateful  utterance.  When  the  gospel  so  possessed 
the  heart  as  to  fill  it  with  a  sense  of  blessing,  then  the  lips 
might  be  tuned  to  song.  Experimental  acquaintance  with 
Christianity  could  only  warrant  the  chanting  of  the  sacred 
ode.^ 

^  The  following  is  a  portion  of  Basil's  encomium  on  the  Psalms,  referred  to 
by  us  in  Ephesians  : — "Psalmody  is  the  calm  of  the  soul,  the  repose  of  the 
spirit,  the  arbiter  of  peace  :  it  silences  the  wave,  and  conciliates  the  whirlwind 
of  our  passions,  soothing  that  which  is  impetuous,  and  tempering  that  which  is 
unchaste.  Psalmody  is  an  engenderer  of  friendship,  a  healer  of  dissension,  a 
reconciler  of  those  who  were  inimical ;  for  who  can  longer  account  that  man  his 


248  COLOSSIANS   III.  17. 

(Ver.  l7.)  Kal  Trap  o  rt,  av  iroitjre,  iv  Xoyo)  rj  iv  epyw, 
iravra  iv  ovofiart  Kvpiov  'Iijaov — "  And  whatever  ye  do  in 
word  or  in  deed,  do  all  of  it  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus," 
or  "  Whatever  ye  are  in  the  custom  of  doing,"  etc.  On  the 
use  of  dv  with  the  present,  see  Winer,  §  42,  3,  h,  {/S).  This 
concluding  precept  is  general  in  its  nature.  Some  take  ttuv, 
with  riatt  and  Biihr,  in  an  absolute  case,  others  think  it 
better  to  regard  it  as  repeated  in  the  plural  form  iravra. 
Meyer  takes  the  whole  clause,  as  far  as  ep^yw,  as  an  absolute 
nominative.  There  is  an  earnest  rapidity  in  the  composition 
which  may  easily  excuse  any  rhetorical  anomaly.  The  rule 
laid  down  by  Kiihner  is,  that  a  word  of  special  importance  is 
placed  at  the  beginning  of  a  sentence  in  the  nominative,  to 
represent  it  emphatically  as  the  fundamental  subject  of  the 
whole  sentence,  §  508.  ISTo  doubt,  special  emphasis  is  laid 
on  irav,  for  the  apostle's  idea  is,  that  while  some  things  are 
done  formally  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  everything 
should  be  done  really  in  it.      The  imperative  irocetTe  is  to  be 

enemy,  with  whom  to  the  throne  of  God  he  hath  raised  the  strain  ?  Wherefore 
that  first  of  blessings.  Christian  love,  is  diffused  by  psalmody,  which  devises  tlie 
harmonious  concert  as  a  bond  of  union,  and  connects  the  people  in  choral 
symphonies.  Psalmody  repels  the  demons  ;  it  lures  the  ministry  of  angels  ;  a 
weapon  of  defence  in  nightlj'  terrors,  a  respite  from  daily  toil  ;  to  the  infant  a 
presiding  genius,  to  manhood  a  resplendent  crown,  a  balm  of  comfort  to  the 
aged,  a  congenial  ornament  to  women.  It  renders  the  desert  populous,  and 
appeases  the  forum's  tumult ;  to  the  initiated  an  elementary  instruction,  to 
proficients  a  mighty  increase,  a  bulwark  unto  those  who  are  perfected  in  know- 
ledge. It  is  the  church's  voice.  This  exhilarates  the  banquet  ;  this  awakens 
that  pious  sorrow  which  has  reference  to  God.  Psalmody,  from  a  heart  of 
adamant  can  excite  the  tear :  psalmody  is  the  employment  of  angels,  the  delight 
of  Heaven,  and  spiritual  frankincense.  Oh !  the  sapient  design  of  our 
Instructor,  appointing  that  at  once  we  should  be  recreated  by  song,  and 
informed  by  wisdom.  Thus,  the  precepts  of  instruction  are  more  deeply 
engraven  on  our  hearts :  for  the  lessons  which  we  receive  unwillingly  have  a 
transient  continuance  ;  but  those  which  charm  and  captivate  in  the  hearing, 
are  permanently  impressed  upon  our  souls. — From  hence  may  not  everything  be 
acquired  ?  Hence  mayest  thou  not  be  taught  whatever  is  dignified  in  fortitude, 
whatever  is  consujnmate  in  justice,  whatever  is  venerable  in  temperance,  what- 
ever is  sublime  in  wisdom  ?  Here  the  nature  of  penitence  is  unfolded  ;  patience 
is  here  exemplified.  Is  there  a  blessing  to  be  named,  which  here  resides  not  ? 
The  splendours  of  theology  beam  eflTulgent ;  Jesus  is  predicted  ;  the  resurrection 
is  announced  ;  judgment  is  proclaimed  ;  the  sword  of  vengeance  is  unsheathed  ; 
crowns  of  glory  glitter  ;  speechless  mysteries  astonish.  All  these  are  treasured 
up  in  the  book  of  Psalms,  as  in  a  common  treasury  of  the  soul." — Boyd's 
translation,  London,  1834. 


COLOSSIANS   III.  17.  249 

supplied.  The  plural  irdvTa  individualizes  what  has  been  put 
collectively  under  the  singular  irav.  As  for  the  whole  of 
what  you  do  in  word  or  in  act,  let  every  part  or  separate 
element  of  it  be  done  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  The 
apostle  has  just  spoken  of  formal  religious  service,  and  surely 
it  is  to  be  done  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  But  not  it  alone 
— all  speech  and  action  must  be  imbued  with  the  same  spirit. 
But  what  is  meant  by  the  phrase — "  in  the  name  of "  ? 
[Eph.  V.  20.]  The  Greek  Fathers  explain  it  widely — avrov 
KaXelv  j3or]d6v.  Jerome  is  farther  in  error  when  he  renders 
it — ad  honorem,  for  that  would  represent  eh  with  the  accusa- 
tive. Vitringa,  Observat.  Sac.  p.  327,  says  that  the  phrase 
corresponds  to  d'it?.  It  rather  corresponds  to  D??'3,  and  strictly 
means — by  his  authority,  or  generally,  in  recognition  of  it. 
To  speak  in  His  name,  or  to  act  in  His  name,  is  to  speak  and 
act  not  to  His  honour,  but  under  His  sanction  and  with  the 
conviction  of  His  approval.  This  is  the  highest  Christian 
morality,  a  vivid  and  practical  recognition  of  Christ  in  every- 
thing said  or  done.  Not  simply  in  religious  service,  but  in 
the  business  of  daily  life ;  not  merely  in  psalms,  hymns,  and 
spiritual  songs,  but  in  the  language  of  friendship  and  of 
bargain,  of  the  forum  and  the  fireside  ;  not  simply  in  deeds 
which,  in  their  very  aspect,  are  a  Christian  compliance,  such 
as  almsgiving,  or  sacramental  communion,  but  in  every  act,  in 
solitude  and  in  society,  in  daily  toil,  in  the  occupations  of 
trade,  or  negotiations  of  commerce.  This  is  a  high  test.  It 
is  comparatively  easy  to  engage  in  religious  discourse,  but  far 
more  difficult  to  discourse  on  everything  in  a  religious  spirit ; 
comparatively  easy  to  do  a  professedly  Christian  act,  but  far 
more  difficult  to  do  every  act  in  a  Christian  spirit.  In  the 
one  case  the  mind  sets  a  watch  upon  itself,  and  speaks  and 
acts  under  the  immediate  consciousness  of  its  theme  and 
purpose,  but  in  the  other,  the  heart  is  so  influenced  by 
religious  feeling,  that  without  an  effort  it  acknowledges  the 
name  of  Christ.  Men  may  for  the  occasion  solemnize  them- 
selves, and  word  and  act  may  be  in  direct  homage  to  Christ, 
but  the  season  of  such  necessity  passes  away,  and  the  sensa- 
tions it  had  created  lose  their  hold.  Thus  the  associations  of 
the  Sabbath  fade  during  the  week,  and  the  emotions  of  the 
sanctuary  lose  themselves  in  the  market-place. 


250  COLOSSIANS   III.   17. 

Still,  tlie  apostle  does  not  inculcate  any  familiar  or  fanatical 
use  of  Christ's  name,  it  is  not  to  be  mixed  up  with  the 
phrases  of  colloquial  life.  A  man  is  not  to  say,  in  Christ's 
name  I  salute  thee,  or  in  Christ's  name  I  buy  this  article  or 
sell  that  one,  charter  this  vessel,  or  engage  in  that  speculation. 
But  the  apostle  means,  that  such  ought  to  be  the  habitual 
respect  to  Christ's  authority,  such  the  constant  and  practical 
influence  of  His  word  within  us,  that  even  without  reference 
to  Him,  or  express  consultation  of  Him,  all  we  say  and  do 
should  be  said  and  done  in  His  spirit,  and  with  the  persuasion 
that  He  approves.  Christianity  should  ever  guard  and  regulate 
amidst  all  secular  engagements,  and  its  influence  should  hallow 
all  the  relations  and  engagements  of  life.  This  is  the  grand 
desideratum,  the  universal  reign  of  the  Christian  spirit.  The 
senator  may  not  discuss  Christian  dogmas  in  the  midst  of 
national  interests,  but  his  whole  procedure  must  be  regulated, 
not  by  faction  or  ambition,  but  by  that  enlightened  patriotism, 
which,  based  on  justice,  is  wise  enough  to  know  that  true 
policy  can  never  contravene  morality,  and  is  benignant  enough 
to  admit  that  other  states  are  interlinked  with  out  progress, 
and  that  the  world  is  one  vast  brotherhood.  The  merchant 
is  not  to  digress  into  a  polemical  dispute  while  he  is  conclud- 
ing a  sale,  but  love  of  profit  is  not  to  supersede  rectitude,  nor 
is  the  maxim,  that  there  is  no  friendship  in  trade,  ever  to  lead 
him  to  take  undue  advantage,  or  accomplish  by  dexterity  what 
equity  would  scarcely  permit.  The  tradesman,  as  he  lifts  his 
tool,  is  not  to  say,  in  Christ's  name  I  strike ;  but  in  the  spirit 
of  Him  who  was  among  His  disciples,  "  as  one  that  serveth  " 
is  he  faithfully  to  finish  the  labour  assigned  him,  ever  feeling 
himself  to  be  under  the  "great  taskmaster's  eye."  Art, 
science,  literature,  politics  and  business,  should  be  all  baptized 
into  the  spirit  of  Christ. 

Ev'^aptarovvTe<i  ra>  0ec3  Kal  JJarpl  St  avrov — "  Giving 
thanks  to  God  even  the  Father  by  Him."  The  sentiment  is 
found  in  Eph.  v.  20,  more  pointedly  and  fully  expressed,  and 
in  almost  the  same  connection.  As  ye  give  thanks  to  God 
by  Christ,  so  think  all  and  speak  all  in  Christ's  name,  who  is 
the  medium  of  thanksgiving.  Blessings  come  through  Him, 
and  through  Him  thanks  are  to  be  rendered.  With  this 
clause,  Kypke  wrongly  connects   the    previous    one,  thus — 


COLOSSUNS  III.  17.  251 

"  always  in   the   name  of  the  Lord  Jesus   giving  thanks  to 
God." 

The  apostle  now  comes  to  the  inculcation  of  some  special 
duties  belonging  to  social  and  domestic  life.  Steiger,  after 
Chrysostom  and  Theophylact,  has  remarked,  that  only  in 
Epistles  addressed  to  Asiatic  churches  do  such  formal  exhorta- 
tions occur,  and  he  endeavours  to  account  for  it  by  the  sup- 
position that  the  liberty  proclaimed  by  the  false  teachers  had 
developed  a  dangerous  licentiousness  and  taught  a  kind  of 
Antinomian  exemption  from  the  rules  and  obligations  of  mo- 
rality. It  is  true,  as  Meyer  replies,  that  no  direct  polemical 
tendency  is  discernible  in  this  section :  still  there  must  have 
been  some  reason  why,  in  his  letters  to  Asiatic  communities, 
Paul  dwells  so  strongly  on  this  important  branch  of  ethics. 
We  may  have  little  more  than  conjecture,  yet  we  know  that 
the  apostle  penned  no  paragraph  in  vain,  and  that  there  must 
have  been  more  than  accident  in  the  fact  that  conjugal  duty  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  Epistles  to  Home,  Philippi,  and  Thes- 
salonica,  but  is  specially  dwelt  upon  in  those  to  Ephesus  and 
Colosse,  as  also  in  the  Apostle  Peter's  epistles  to  churches  in 
the  same  region.  The  exhortations  tendered  by  Paul  to  Titus 
as  a  Cretan  pastor,  when  he  touches  on  the  same  subject,  have 
more  of  a  general  character,  and  those  found  in  the  epistle  to 
the  church  in  Corinth  were  called  forth  by  peculiar  queries. 
But  here,  and  in  the  twin  epistle,  the  apostle  places  special 
stress  on  the  conjugal  relationship,  and  its  reciprocal  obliga- 
tions ;  as  also  on  the  relative  duties  of  parents  and  children, 
of  masters  and  slaves.  Chrysostom  gives,  as  the  reason,  that 
in  such  respects  these  churches  were  deficient,  though  he  does 
not  specify  the  source  of  such  deficiency.  His  own  homilies 
supply  one  form  of  illustration,  for  they  abound  in  severest 
reproofs  against  the  indecencies,  luxuries,  and  immoralities  of 
wedded  life,  and  the  picture  is  evidently  taken  from  the  state 
of  manners  that  prevailed  in  the  Byzantine  capital,  in  which 
the  discourses  seem  to  have  been  delivered.  It  would  thus 
appear  that  in  the  Asiatic  cities  there  was  great  need  to  enforce 
the  duties  originated  by  the  marriage  tie^  and  it  may  be,  that 
forms  of  false  doctrine  had  a  tendency  to  excite  spurious 
notions  of  so-called  Christian  liberty.  It  is  easy  to  conceive 
how  a  creed  of  boastful  freedom  would  speedily  work  its  way 


252  COLOSSIANS   III.   18. 

among  slaves.  The  reader  will  not  forget  how,  at  the  period 
of  the  Eeformation,  the  principles  of  a  licentious  liberty  were 
not  only  received,  but  to  a  great  extent  acted  out  by  the 
Anabaptists  of  Munster. 

(Ver.  18.)  At  <yvvaiK€S,  vTrordcraecrOe  Tot9  avSpdaiv — 
"  Wives,  submit  yourselves  to  your  husbands."  The  tS/ot9  of 
the  Keceived  Text  has  no  good  authority,  and  some  manu- 
scripts, such  as  D^,  E^,  F,  G,  add  vficov,  an  evident  gloss. 
The  injunction  has  been  fully  considered  under  Eph.  v. 
25-33,  where  it  is  enforced  by  a  special  argument,  and  a 
tender  analogy  derived  from  the  conjugal  relation  of  Christ 
and  His  church.  The  submission  which  is  inculcated  on  the 
part  of  the  wife  is  wholly  different  in  source  and  form  from 
that  slavery  which  is  found  in  heathen  lands,  for  it  is  the 
willing  acquiescence  which  springs  out  of  social  position  and 
wedded  love,  and  is  dictated  at  once  by  a  wife's  affection, 
and  by  her  instinctive  tendency  to  lean  on  her  husband  for 
support.  The  very  satire  which  is  heaped  upon  a  wife  who 
governs,  or  who  attempts  it,  is  a  proof  that  society  expects 
that  fitting  harmony  of  the  hearth  which  the  gospel  recom- 
mends. The  early  and  biblical  idea  of  a  wife  as  that  of  a 
"  help  meet,"  implies  that  she  was  to  be  auxiliary — second, 
and  not  principal  in  the  household.  Thus  unity  of  domestic 
administration  was  to  be  secured  by  oneness  of  headship. 

The  apostle  subjoins  as  a  reason — co?  dvrjKev  iv  Kvplcp. 
Adopting  a  different  punctuation,  many,  from  Chrysostom  to 
Winer  and  Schrader,  join  ev  Kvpicp  to  the  verb  vTroTuaa-eaOe, 
as  if  the  meaning  were — "  be  submissive  in  the  Lord."  The 
order  of  the  words  seems  to  forbid  such  an  exegesis,  and 
€v  Kvpicp  is  united  by  its  position  to  dvfJKev — "  as  is  fitting 
in  the  Lord."  In  the  imperfect  form  or  time  of  the  verb  is 
implied,  according  to  Winer,  an  appropriate  hint  that  it  had 
not  been  so  with  them  at  all  times.  §  40,  3  ;  Bernhardy, 
373.  The  translation  then  is — -"as  it  should  be  in  the 
Lord."  This  obligation  of  submission  commenced  with  their 
union  to  the  Lord,  sprang  out  of  it,  and  had  not  yet  been 
fully  discharged.  It  is  therefore  not  a  duty  which  had  only 
newly  devolved  upon  them,  but  its  propriety  reached  back 
to  the  point  of  their  conversion.  Their  union  with  the  Lord 
not    only   expounded    the   obligation,   but    also    enforced    it. 


COLOSSIANS   III.   19.  2o3 

Though  the  general  strain  of  these  exhortations  be  the  same 
as  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  there  is  usually  some 
specific  difference.  In  the  other  epistle  he  says,  "  wives,  be 
obedient  to  your  own  husbands  as  to  the  Lord,"  where  co?  points 
out  the  nature,  and  not  simply,  as  Ellicott  thinks,  the  aspect  of 
the  obedience  enjoined.  Tlie  spirit  of  the  obedience  is  referred 
to  in  Ephesians,  and  the  becoraingness  of  that  spirit  in  the 
clause  before  us.  How  different  from  heathen  principles,  either 
that  of  Aristotle — mores  viri  lex  vitae  ;  or  that  of  Cato,  as 
repeated  by  Livy,  that  wives  are  simply  in  tnanu  viroricm. 

(Ver.  19.)  Oi  dvSpe<;,a<yaTrdTe  Ta<i  yvvalKa^,Kal  jx-q  TTLKpalveade 
TTjoo?  avTd<;  —  "  Ye  husbands,  love  your  wives."  The  duty  is 
touchingly  illustrated  in  Eph.  v.  25,  26.  The  implication 
is,  that  the  submission  of  the  wife  is  gained  by  the  love  of 
the  husband.  Though  the  husband  is  to  govern,  he  must 
govern  in  kindness.  This  duty  is  so  plain  that  it  needs  no 
enforcement.  The  apostle  then  specifies  one  form  in  which 
the  want  of  this  love  must  have  often  shown  itself — "  and  be 
not  bitter  against  them."  The  tropical  use  of  the  verb  is  as 
obvious  as  is  that  of  the  noun  in  Eph.  iv.  3 1.  The  verb,  which  is 
sometimes  followed  by  eVt  in  the  Septuagint,  is  here  followed 
by  'irp6<i}  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  inconsistency  here 
condemned  was  a  common  occurrence  in  heathen  life,  where 
a  wife  was  but  a  legal  concubine,  and  matrimony  was  not 
hallowed  and  ennobled  by  the  Spirit  of  Him  who  wrought 
His  first  miracle  to  supply  the  means  of  enjoyment  at  a 
marriage  feast.  The  apostle  forbids  that  sour  and  surly 
objurgation  which  want  of  love  will  necessarily  create  ;  all 
that  hard  treatment  in  look  and  word,  that  unkind  and 
churlish  temper  which  defective  attachment  so  often  leads  to. 
Wives  are  to  submit,  not  indeed  to  guard  against  a  frown  or 
a  chiding,  but  to  ensure  a  deeper  love.  So  that  if  this  love 
is  absent,  such  obedience  will  not  be  secured  by  perpetual 
irritation  and  fault-finding,  followed  by  the  free  use  of  op- 
probrious and  degrading  epithets. 

In  Ephesians,  the  apostle  proposes  as  the  example  Christ's 
love  to  the  church  in  its  fervour,  self-sacrifice,  and  holy  pur- 
pose, and  also  enjoins  the  husband  to  love  his  wife  as  himself, 

1  The  verb  occurs  in  the  same  sense  in  Philo,  and  is  to  some  extent  explained 
by  Plutarch.     See  Kypke,  in  loc. 


254  COLOSSIANS  III.   19. 

as  being  in  truth  a  portion  of  himself  (&)?  containing  in  it  a 
species  of  argumentative  comparison),  but  here  the  injunction 
is  curt  and  uniUustrated,  followed   only  by  the  prohibition  of 
a  sin  which  a  husband's  indifference  will  most  certainly  induce. 
It  would  almost  seem,  however,  as  if  the  phrase,  "  as  is  fitting 
in  the  Lord,"  enforced  both  the   duty  recorded   before  it,  and 
that  which  stands  after  it.     Tertullian,  in   his  address  to  his 
wife,  w^ritten   before  he  became  a   Montanist,   describes   the 
happiness  of  a  marriage  in  the  Lord  in  the  following  glowing 
terms : — "  How  can  we  find  words   to   express  the  happiness 
of  that  marriage  which  the  church   effects,  and   the  oblation 
confirms,  and   the  blessing  seals,  and  angels  report,  and  the 
Father  ratifies  ?     What  a  union  of  two   believers,  with  one 
hope,  one  discipline,  one    service,  one  spirit,  and   one   flesh ! 
Together   they  pray,  together  they  prostrate  themselves,  and 
together  keep  their  fasts,  teaching  and  exhorting  one  another, 
and  sustaining  one  another.     They  are  together  at  the  church 
and  at   the   Lord's   supper ;  they  are   together  in   straits,  in 
persecutions,  and   refreshments.      Neither  conceals  anything 
from  the  other ;  neither  avoids  the  other ;  neither  is  a  burden 
to  the  other ;  freely  the  sick  are  visited,  and  the  needy  re- 
lieved ;    alms    without    torture ;    sacrifices    without   scruple ; 
daily  diligence  without  hindrance ;  no  using  of  the  sign  by 
stealth  ;  no  hurried  salutation  ;  no  silent  benediction  ;  psalms 
and  hymns  resound  between  the  two,  and  they  vie  with  each 
other  which  shall  sing  best  to  their  God.     Christ  rejoices  on 
hearing  and  beholding  such  things ;  to  such  persons  He  sends 
His  peace.     Where  the  two  are.  He  is  Himself;  and  where 
He  is,  there  the  Evil  One  is  not."  ^ 

^  "  Quale  jugum  fidelium  duonim  unins  spei,  unius  disciplinpe,  ejusdem 
servitutis !  Ambo  fratres,  ambo  conservi,  nulla  spiritus  carnisve  discretio. 
Atrjuin  vere  duo  in  came  una ;  ubi  caro  una,  unus  et  spiritus.  Simul  orant, 
simul  Tolutantur,  et  simul  jejunia  transigunt,  alterutro  docentes,  alterutro 
hortantes,  alterutro  sustinentes.  In  ecclesia  Dei  pariter  utrique,  pariter  in  con- 
vivio  Dei,  pariter  in  augustiis,  in  persecutionibus,  in  refrigeiiis  ;  neuter  alteruni 
celat,  neuter  alteruni  vitat,  neuter  alteri  gravis  est ;  libere  seger  visitatur, 
indigens  sustentatur  ;  eleemosynfe  sine  torniento,  sacrificia  sine  scrupulo,  quoti- 
diana  diligentia  sine  impediniento  ;  non  furtiva  signatio,  non  trepida  gratulatio, 
non  muta  bcnedictio  ;  sonant  inter  duos  psalmi  et  hymni,  et  mutuo  provocant, 
quis  melius  Deo  suo  cantet.  Talia  Christus  videns  et  audiens  gaudet,  his  pacem 
suam  mittit  ;  ubi  duo,  ibi  et  ipse  ;  ubi  et  ipse,  ibi  et  malus  non  est." — TertuU. 
ad  Uxorem,  ii.  9. 


COLOSSIANS   III.  20,21.  255 

From  conjugal  the  apostle  naturally  passes  to  parental 
duty. 

(Ver.  20.)  Ta  reKva,  v7ra/cov€Te  rot?  yovevat  Kara  iravTU — 
"  Children,  obey  your  parents  in  all  things."  The  wife  is 
generally  to  be  submissive,  but  children  are  to  be  obedient, 
to  listen  and  execute  parental  commands,  and  to  exemplify  a 
special  form  of  submission  for  which  the  filial  relation  affords 
so  many  opportunities.  [Eph.  vi.  1-3.]  The  love  of  the 
child's  heart  naturally  leads  it  to  obedience.  Only  an  un- 
natural child  can  be  a  domestic  rebel.  Where  the  parents 
are  Christians,  and  govern  their  children  in  a  Christian  spirit, 
obedience  should  be  without  exception,  or — Kara  irdvra. 
The  apostle,  speaking  in  reference  to  Christian  parents,  for 
his  epistle  could  reach  none  but  children  of  that  class,  takes 
no  heed  of  any  exception.  The  principle  involved  in  his 
admonition  is,  tliat  children  are  not  the  judges  of  what  they 
should  or  should  not  obey  in  parental  precepts. 

The  best  reading  of  the  following  clause  is  rovro  jap  evdpearov 
icrrtv  iv  Kvplw — "For  this  is  well-pleasing  in  the  Lord," 
not  as  the  older  form  had  it,  "  well-pleasing  to  the  Lord." 
The  construction  is  similar  to  that  of  the  19  th  verse,  the 
specific  difference  of  thought  being,  that  in  the  former  case 
submission  is  an  appropriate  thing  in  the  Lord ;  while  in  this 
case  filial  obedience  is  marked  with  special  approbation,  as 
being  well-pleasing  in  the  Lord.  Eesting  on  Christian  prin- 
ciple and  motive,  it  meets  Divine  approbation.  In  Eph.  vi.  1, 
the  apostle  calls  it — SUacov,  a  thing  right  in  itself,  and  then 
he  quotes  the  fifth  commandment  to  show  that  such  a  duty  is 
also  inculcated  in  Scripture,  but  here  he  regards  it  simply  in 
a  religious  aspect,  and  awards  to  it  Christ's  approval. 

(Ver.  21.)  01  7raTepe<i  firj  ipedl^ere  ra  reKva  vjJbSiv — "Ye 
fathers,  do  not  provoke  your  children."  [Eph.  vi.  4.] 
Authorities  of  no  mean  note  give  us  irapopjl^ere,  a  reading 
adopted  by  Griesbach,  Scholz,  and  Lachmann,  but  which 
might  slip  into  the  text  from  Eph.  vi.  4,  though,  certainly, 
it  is  found  in  A,  C,  D\  E\  F,  G.  The  verb,  as  in  1  Mace.  xv. 
40,  Deut.  xxi.  20,  is  to  irritate,  to  fret,  to  rouse  to  anger,  and 
not,  as  in  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  to  stir  up  to  emulation.  Fathers  are 
spoken  to  since  training  is  their  duty,  and  because  this 
peculiar  sin  which  the  apostle  condemns  is  one  to  which  they. 


256  COLOSSI ANS   III.   21. 

and  not  mothers,  are  peculiarly  liable.  The  paternal  govern- 
ment must  be  one  of  kindness,  without  caprice  ;  and  of  equity, 
without  favouritism.  The  term  includes  greatly  more  than 
what  Burton  understands  by  it — "  do  not  carry  their  punish- 
ment too  far."  The  child,  when  chastised,  should  feel  that 
the  punishment  is  not  the  result  of  fretful  anger ;  and  when  it 
obeys,  its  obedience  should  not  be  prompted,  or  rather  forced, 
by  menaced  infliction.  If  children,  let  them  do  what  they 
can,  never  please  their  father,  if  they  are  teazed  and  irritated 
by  perpetual  censure,  if  they  are  kept  apart  by  uniform  stern- 
ness, if  other  children  around  them  are  continually  held  up  as 
immeasurably  their  superiors,  if  their  best  efforts  can  only 
moderate  the  parental  frown,  but  never  are  greeted  with  the 
parental  smile,  then  their  spirit  is  broken,  and  they  are 
discouraged. 

Against  this  sad  result  the  apostle  warns — 
"Iva  fi7]  advjxoiaiv — "  Lest  they  be  disheartened."  The  com- 
position of  the  verb  shows  its  strong  signification.  Children 
teazed  and  irritated  lose  heart,  renounce  every  endeavour  to 
please,  or  render  at  best  but  a  soulless  obedience.  The  verb 
occurs  only  here  in  the  New  Testament,  but  is  found  in  the 
Septuagint,  1  Kings  i.  16,  etc.,  and  in  several  of  the  classical 
authors.  What  the  apostle  guards  against  has  been  often 
witnessed,  with  its  deplorable  consequences.  In  the  Epistle  to 
the  Ephesians,  he  speaks  more  fully,  and  enjoins  the  positive 
mode  of  tuition — "but  bring  them  up  in  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord,"  The  young  spirit  is  to  be  carefully 
and  tenderly  developed,  and  not  crushed  by  harsh  and  un- 
generous treatment.  Too  much  is  neither  to  be  demanded  nor 
expected.  The  twig  is  to  be  bent  with  caution,  not  broken  in 
the  efforts  of  a  rude  and  hasty  zeal.  Approbation  is  as  necessary 
to  the  child  as  counsel,  and  promise  as  indispensable  as  warning 
and  reproof.  Gisborne  on  this  place  well  says — "  To  train  up 
children  as  servants  of  God,  as  soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  a 
future  existence  in  preference  to  the  present  life ;  to  instruct 
and  habituate  them,  in  conformity  with  their  baptismal  vow,  to 
renounce  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil,  and  to  live  not 
unto  themselves  but  to  that  Eedeemer  who  died  for  them  ;  this 
is  universally  the  grand  duty  of  a  parent.  This  well-known 
duty  the  apostle,  though  he  does  not  name  it,  presupposes  as 


COLOSSIANS  III.   21.  257 

acknowledged  and  felt  by  the  Colossians.  lu  the  discharge  of 
this  duty,  and  in  every  step  of  their  proceedings,  he  directs 
them  to  beware,  as  parents,  of  provoking  their  children  to  anger  ; 
that  is  to  say,  as  the  original  term  evidently  implies,  of  exer- 
cising their  own  authority  with  irritating  unkindness,  with 
needless  and  vexatious  severity ;  of  harassing  their  children 
by  capricious  commands  and  restrictions  ;  of  showing  ground- 
less dissatisfaction,  and  scattering  unmerited  reproof.  To  act 
thus,  the  apostle  declares,  would  be  so  far  from  advancing  the 
religious  improvement  of  children,  that  it  would  discourage 
them.  It  would  not  only  deaden  their  affections  towards  their 
parents,  but  would  dispirit  their  exertions,  and  check  their 
desires  after  holiness."  ^ 

Following  the  same  order  of  thought  as  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  the  apostle  next  turns  him  to  the  other  members  of 
the  household,  the  slaves.  It  is  probable  that  the  false  philo- 
sophy inculcated,  with  regard  to  them,  certain  notions  of 
freedom  which  were  not  merely  unattainable,  but  the  belief  of 
which  might  only  aggravate  the  essential  hardness  of  their  lot. 
Steiger  has  referred  to  the  fact  that  the  Pharisees  gave  a 
special  prominence  to  political  freedom  (John  viii.  33),  and 
he  says,  drawing  his  authority  from  Philo,  that  the  Essenes 
held  a  doctrine  which  would,  if  carried  out  to  practice,  lead 
to  a  philanthropic  revolution.  At  all  events,  they  condemned 
slave-masters  as  not  only  unjust,  but  impious,  and  destroyers 
of  a  law  of  nature — Oeafiov  (^vaew<;  avaipovvTcov.  The  false 
teachers,  if  they  held  similar  views,  might  inculcate  this 
abstract  doctrine,  which,  whatever  its  inherent  truth,  could 
not  in  those  days  lead  to  anything  but  discord  and  blood- 
shed. The  apostle,  on  the  other  hand,  applied  himself  to 
things  as  they  were,  and  while  he  attempted  to  moderate  an 
evil  which  he  could  not  subvert,  he  laid  down  those  principles, 
by  the  spread  of  which  social  bondage  first  was  shorn  of  its 
grievances,  and  then  lost  its  very  existence.  We  have  already 
stated,  under  Eph.  vi.  5-8,  the  relation  in  which  the  gospel 
stood  to  the  slaves,  how  it  raised  them  to  spiritual  brother- 
hood, and  gave  them  a  conscious  freedom  which  chains  and 
oppression  could  not  subvert.  It  so  trained  them,  and  so 
tutored  their  Christian  masters,  that  slavery  in  a  Christian 
1  Familiar  Exposition  of  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Colossians,  London,  1816. 


258  COLOSSIANS   III,   22. 

household  must  have  existed  only  in  name,  and  the  name 
itself  was  ready  to  disappear  as  soon  as  society  was  leavened 
with  the  spirit  of  Christianity. 

The  injunctions  here  delivered  are  much  the  same  as  those 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  The  reader  is  invited  to 
turn  to  the  prefatory  remarks  to  our  comment  on  Eph.  vi.  5. 
The  apostle  does  not  speak  vaguely,  but  hits  upon  those  vices 
which  slavery  is  so  apt  to  engender — indolence,  eye-service, 
and  reluctance  in  labour. 

(Ver.  22.)  01  BovXot  vTraKovere  Kara  irdvra  rot?  Kara 
aapica  Kvploiq.  [Eph.  vi.  5.]  The  master  of  the  slave  is 
only  so — Kara  aapKa,  the  relationship  is  but  corporeal  and 
external,  the  contrast  being — the  real  master  is  the  Lord 
Christ.  No  distinction  can  be  established  between  Kvpio<; 
and  Secr7roT779  in  the  New  Testament,  either  in  their  Divine  or 
human  application.  The  principle  of  the  obedience  is  Kara 
irdvTa,  as  in  verse  20.  Refractoriness  on  the  part  of  the 
slave  would  at  once  have  embittered  his  life,  and  brought 
discredit  on  the  new  religion  which  he  professed,  but  active 
and  cheerful  discharge  of  all  duty  would  both  benefit  himself, 
promote  his  comfort,  and  recommend  Christianity. 

M.r)  iv  ocjiOaXfioBovXeta  cb?  dvOpwirdpecTKOL — "  Not  with 
eye-service,  as  men-pleasers."  [Eph.  vi.  6.]  The  plural  form 
of  the  first  noun  is  preferred  by  some,  as  being  the  more 
difficult  reading,  but  the  singular  has  A,  B,  D,  E,  F,  Gr,  in  its 
favour.  Yet  Tischendorf  has  rejected  it  in  spite  of  all  this 
testimony.  The  Codices  D,  E,  F,  G,  have  another,  and  per- 
haps more  correct  spelling — 6<^9a\pLohov\ia.  In  Eph.  vi.  6,  the 
apostle  uses  Kara,  but  here  iv.  In  the  former  place  they  are 
enjoined  to  obey  in  singleness  of  heart,  as  unto  Christ — "  not 
according  to  eye-service " — that  is,  not  in  the  style  of  eye- 
service  ;  here  they  are  asked  not  to  serve  in  eye-service, 
that  is,  in  the  spirit  of  it.  Slaves  have  usually  but  the  one 
motive,  and  that  is,  to  avoid  punishment,  and  therefore  they 
only  labour  to  please  the  master  when  his  eye  is  on  them. 
They  are  disposed  to  trifle  when  he  is  absent,  in  the  hope 
that  their  indolence  may  not  be  detected.  But  Christian 
slaves  were  to  work  on  principle,  were  to  do  their  duty  at  all 
times,  and  from  a  higher  motive,  conscious  that  another  eye 
was  upon  them,  and  that  their  service  was  really  rendered  to 


COLOSSIANS  III.   23.  259 

another  master.  Such  a  conviction  would  prevent  them 
being  avOpcoTrdpeaKot.  See  under  Eph.  vi.  6,  where  we 
have  noticed  the  necessary  connection  of  this  vice  with 
slavery. 

'AW  iv  aTrXoTrjTL  KapSia<;  <f)OJ3ovfMevot  rov  Kvpcov — "  But 
in  singleness  of  heart  fearing  the  Lord "  (Christ).  Kvpcov 
is  preferred  to  @eov  on  undoubted  authority.  [Eph.  vi.  5.] 
Singleness  of  heart  (1  Chron.  xxix.  17)  is  that  sincerity 
which  the  heathen  slave  could  scarcely  possess,  for  he  would 
often  seem  to  work,  and  yet  contrive  to  enjoy  his  ease  under 
the  semblance  of  activity.  Duplicity  is  the  vice  which  the 
slave  uses  as  his  shield.  He  professes  anxiety  when  he  feels 
none,  and  he  exhibits  a  show  of  industry  without  the  reality. 
For  this  singleness  of  heart  could  only  be  secured  by  such  a 
motive  as  the  gospel  presents — "  fearing  the  Lord  " — standing 
in  awe  of  His  authority  over  them.  They  would  not  be 
men-pleasers  if  they  bowed  to  Christ's  authority,  for  then 
their  aim  would  be  to  please  Him;  nor  would  there  be 
eye-service,  if  they  wrought  in  singleness  of  heart,  for 
such  a  feeling  would  lead  them  to  conclude  the  task 
in  hand,  irrespectively  of  every  minor  and  personal  con- 
sideration. 

(Ver.  23.)  In  this  verse  the  common  reading  is  /cat  irav  o, 
ri  iav  iroirjTe,  but  the  better  reading  is  o  eav  irotTJre,  ck  '^v^T]<i 
ipyd^eade,  ct)9  t&>  Kvpla>  Koi  ovk  dvdpcoiroi'; — "  Whatever  ye 
are  in  the  way  of  doing,  work  it  heartily  as  to  the  Lord,  and 
not  to  men."  They  were,  in  any  task  that  might  be  assigned 
them,  to  labour  at  it,  to  work  it  out,  and  that  without 
grumbling  or  reluctance,  not  only  doing  it  honestly  but 
cheerfully,  as  Chrysostom  says — firj  fxerd  8ov\i.Krj<;  dvdjKT]';. 
[Eph.  vi.  6.]  The  heathen  slave  might  do  everything  with  a 
grudge,  for  he  had  no  interest  in  his  labour,  but  the  believing 
slave  was  to  act  with  cordiality,  plying  his  toil  with  alacrity, 
for  he  was  serving  in  all  this  industry  no  human  master,  but 
the  Lord,  who  had  bought  him  with  His  precious  blood.  Let 
this  be  the  feeling,  and  there  would  be  no  temptation  to  fall 
into  eye-service,  men-pleasing,  and  duplicity  of  heart  or 
conduct.  The  apostle  says  without  reservation — "  as  to  the 
Lord,  and  not  to  men."  There  is  no  necessity  to  take  ovk  as 
meaning  ov    fiovop.     The    immediate    object   of   the   service 

u 


2C0  COLOSSIAXS   III.    24. 

must  be  man,  but  the  ultimate  object  is  the  Lord ;  the 
negative,  though  absolute  in  form,  being  relative  in  sense. 
Winer,  S  55,  I.-'  The  service,  whatever  its  nature,  or  its 
relation  to  man,  was  ever  to  be  felt  and  viewed  as  an  act  of 
obedience  done  to  Christ.  See  under  verse  1 7.  In  doing  it 
to  others,  they  did  it  to  Him ;  and  to  Him,  with  such  claims 
upon  their  love  and  fealty,  they  could  not  but  give  suit  and 
service  heartily.  As  usual,  in  the  parallel  place  in  Ephesians, 
the  thought  is  given  more  fully,  and  the  relationship  of  the 
slave's  labour  to  Christ  is  twice  noted.  Besides,  not  only  was 
the  servant  to  work  as  here — e/c  ■^vj(rj<; — "  from  the  heart," 
pointing  out  his  relation  to  his  work,  but  he  is  enjoined  also 
to  labour — /act'  evvoia^ — that  is,  "  with  good  will "  to  his 
master.     The  apostle  adds  yet  further — 

(Ver.     24.)     ElSoTef    on     airo    Kvpiov     airdXri-y^ea-Qe     rrjv 
avTairohocTiv  Tr)<i  KXrjpovofiia^ — "  Knowing  that  from  the  Lord 
ye  shall  receive  the  reward  of  the  inheritance."     "With  this 
persuasion  within  them,  they  should  be  able  to  follow  out  the 
inspired    admonition,    and    such    knowledge    w^ould    form    a 
motive  of  sufficient  energy  and  life.      Serving  the  Lord  in 
serving  man,   they   would   receive   their   reward   from   Him. 
Winer,  §  47,^  represents  utto  as  denoting  that  the  recompense 
comes  immediately  from  Christ,  its  possessor.      Their  masters 
are  in  no  sense  to  be  the  dispensers  of  that  reward.      Christ 
Himself  shall  bestow  it.      The  compound  noun,  avTa7r68oai<;, 
is  found  only  here  in  tlie  New  Testament.^     That  remunera- 
tion is   the     "inheritance."      [Eph.    i.     11-14.]      Also    Col. 
i.  12.     The  genitive  is  that  of  apposition,  such  as  is  found  in 
Eph.     iv.     9  ;     2    Cor.    v.    25.      See    our    Commentary     on 
Ephesians,  iv.  9.     The  inheritance  is  heavenly  glory,  1  Pet. 
i.  4,  and  that  is  their  prospective   blessing.     They  had  no 
inheritance  on   earth,  nothing   which   they   could   call   their 
own ;  they  could  not  even  realize  property  in  themselves — 
but  an  inheritance  rich  and  glorious  awaited  them.      In  the 
hope   of  it — and  the   enjoyment   of  it   could   not    be    very 
distant — they  were   to  work,  and  suffer  and  wait,  and  in  the 
possession    of   it    they    would     find     immediate     and    ample 
compensation.      [Eph.  vi.   8.]      There  is  no  room  here   for 

1  Moulton,  p.  594.  ^  jn^^  p^  4^3^  note. 

^  But  sometimes  in  the  classics,     Eisner,  in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS   III.   25.  2G1 

the  Popish  doctrine  of  merit.  Nota  lioc,  says  a-Lapide,  'pro 
meritis  honorum  operum,  cotitra  Novantes ;  but  Bahr  adduces 
the  terse  reply  of  Calovius — filiis  haereditas  non  confcrtur 
ex  obedientiae  merito,  sed  jure  filiationis. 

The  ^dp  of  the  next  clause,  as  found  in  the  Textus  Eecep- 
tus,  cannot  be  received,  as  it  is  only  an  interpolated  gloss — 
Tft>  Kvptw  Xpia-Tw  Bov\eveT€ — which  the  Vulgate  renders, 
Domino  Christo  servite,  "  serve  ye  the  Lord  Christ."  Perhaps, 
as  Meyer  says,  the  imperative  is  preferable,  'yap  being  spurious. 
It  is  thus  a  summation  of  the  whole — "  the  master,  Christ, 
serve  ye."  The  use  of  the  indicative  is  foreign  to  the 
passage,  which  is  injunctive.  Since  the  Lord  gives  such  a 
reward  so  rich  and  blessed,  serve  ye  Him.  Look  above  and 
beyond  human  service,  and  with  such  a  bright  prospect  in 
view,  serve  the  Lord  Christ.  Your  masters  on  earth  have  no 
absolute  right  over  you :  the  shekels  they  may  have  paid  for 
you  can  only  give  them  power  over  your  bodies,  your  time 
and  your  labour  ;  but  the  Lord  has  bought  you  with  His  blood, 
and  has  therefore  an  indefeasible  claim  to  your  homage  and 
service. 

(Ver.  25.)  'O  fyap  ahcKwv  Kopbiaerat  o  rjBiKrja-ev.  The  Se 
of  the  Stephanie  is  rightly  replaced  by  yap,  on  the  evidence 
of  A,  B,  C,  D\  F,  G,  and  many  of  the  Versions.  The  con- 
struction of  the  clause  is  idiomatic — "  the  wrong-doer  shall 
receive  what  he  has  wronged."  Winer,  §  66,  b,  says  it  can 
scarcely  be  called  a  brachylogy,  for  it  is  somewhat,  as  is  said 
in  German, — er  wird  das  Unrecht  erndten — that  is,  he  does 
not  receive  the  wrong  itself,  but  the  fruit  of  it,  or  the  wrong, 
in  the  form  of  punishment.  He  shall  be  paid,  as  we  say,  in 
his  own  coin.  The  wrong-doer  shall  bear  the  penalty  of  the 
wrong. 

The  question  is,  to  whom  does  the  apostle  refer  ?  1.  Some 
suppose  him  to  mean  the  slave,  as  if  to  warn  him,  that  if  he 
failed  in  his  duty  he  must  expect  to  be  punished.  This  is  the 
notion  of  Theophylact,  Bengel,  Storr,  Flatt,  Heinrichs,  and  De 
Wette.  This  exegesis  may  have  the  support  of  the  mere 
words,  but  it  does  not  tally  with  the  concluding  clause — 
"  there  is  no  respect  of  persons  with  Him."  Is  the  fact  that 
the  Judge  has  no  respect  of  persons  an  argument  that  an  un- 
just slave  shall  not  escape  punishment  ?     The  phrase, "  respect 


2C2  COLOSSIANS   III.   25. 

of  persons,"  usually  implies  that  an  offender,  simply  for  his 
rank  and  station,  escapes  the  penalty — a  mode  of  partiality 
not  at  all  applicable  to  slaves.  The  argument  of  Bengel  is 
only  ingenious — tenues  saepe  putant,  sihi  propter  tenuitatem 
ipsoriim  esse  parcendum. 

2.  Others  regard  the  verse  as  indicating  a  great  general 
principle,  applicable  alike  to  the  master  and  his  slave.  Such 
is  the  view  of  Jerome  and  Pelagius,  Bahr,  Huther,  Baumgarten- 
Crusius,  and  Trollope.  Jerome  says,  quicumque  injuriam 
inhderit,  sive  do7iiinus  sive  servus,  uterque.  .  .  .  But  the  same 
objection  applies  to  this  view  as  to  the  former.  So  that  we 
incline  to  the  third  opinion,  which  is,  that  the  words  refer  to 
the  master,  the  view  of  Theodoret,  Ansel m,  Aquinas,  Erasmus, 
Beza,  Calvin,  Estius,  and  Meyer,  while  De  Wette  allows  its 
possibility.  The  connection  of  the  thought  seems  to  be — 
"you  are  Christ's  servants,  and  you  shall  receive  the  reward 
from  Him.  Injustice  you  may  in  the  meantime  receive  from 
your  earthly  masters,  but  they  shall  be  judged  for  it,  not  at  a 
human  tribunal,  where  their  rank  may  protect  them,  but 
before  Him  who  in  His  decisions  has  no  respect  of  persons. 
Therefore,  ye  masters,  give  your  slaves  what  is  just  and  equal." 
There  is,  besides,  a  strong  tendency  in  any  one  who  owns 
slaves,  and  exercises  irresponsible  power  over  them,  to  treat 
them  with  capricious  and  heedless  tyranny.  The  statement 
of  the  apostle,  then,  contains  a  general  truth,  with  a  special 
application  to  the  proprietors  of  slaves,  and  is  therefore  the 
basis  of  the  following  admonition.  Meyer  rests  another 
argument  on  the  current  meaning  of  the  participle  aSiKcov  in 
the  New  Testament,  which,  he  says,  with  the  exception  of 
E,ev.  xxii.  11,  denotes  Unrecht  zufilgen,  not  Unrecht  thun. 
In  fact,  our  translators  have  given  the  word  at  least 
eight  different  renderings.  Ten  times  have  they  rendered 
it  "  hurt,"  eight  times  have  they  rendered  by  "  do  wrong," 
as  in  the  case  before  us,  twice  simply  by  "  wrong,"  twice  by 
"  suffer  wrong,"  once  by  "  injure,"  once  by  "  take  wrong,"  once 
by  "  offender,"  and  once  by  "  unjust."  The  predominant  idea  is 
not,  to  act  unjustly,  but  to  injure,  and  refers  therefore  more 
probably  not  to  the  slave  forgetting  his  duty,  but  to  his 
master,  tempted  by  his  station  and  power  to  do  an  act  of 
injury  towards  his  servile  and  helpless  dependants. 


COLOSSIANS   IV.  1.  263 

Kal  ovK  can  TTpoa-ooTroXrf^ia — "  And  there  is  no  respect  of 
persons."  [Eph.  vi.  9.]  Eom.  ii.  11;  Acts  x,  34;  Jas.  ii. 
1,  9. 

(Chap.  IV.  Ver.  1.)  The  division  of  chapters  is  here  very- 
unfortunate.  The  apostle,  while  he  stooped  to  counsel  tlie 
slave,  was  not  afraid  to  speak  to  his  master. 

01  KVfiLOL,  TO  hUaiov  Kal  rrjv  laorrjTa  rol'^  Sov\ot<i 
nrapi'^ea-de — "Ye  masters,  afford  for  your  part  to  your 
servants  what  is  just  and  equal,"  or  rather  "  reciprocal." 
[Eph.  vi.  9.]  The  verb  in  the  middle  voice,  has  in  it  the 
idea,  "as  far  as  yovi  are  concerned."  Acts  xix.  24.  The 
principal  term,  and  the  one  about  which  there  is  any  dispute, 
is  la-oTTjTa.  What  does  the  apostle  mean  precisely  by  it  ? 
Not  a  few  understand  by  it  equity  in  general.  Such  is  the 
view  of  Robinson,  Wahl,  Bretschneider,  and  Wilke,  in  their 
respective  lexicons,  and  also  of  Steiger,  Huther,  and  De  Wette, 
in  their  respective  commentaries.  Others,  again,  like 
Erasmus,  a-Lapide,  and  Bohmer,  look  on  the  words  as  denot- 
ing impartiality — do  not  in  your  treatment  of  your  slaves 
prefer  one  to  another,  give  them  the  like  usage.  In  the  only 
other  passage  of  the  New  Testament  where  the  word  occurs, 
it  denotes  not  equity,  but  equality.  2  Cor.  viii.  14:  "But 
by  an  equality,  that  now  at  this  time  your  abundance  may  be 
a  supply  for  their  want,  that  their  abundance  also  may  be  a 
supply  for  your  want ;  that  there  may  be  equality."  In  this 
verse  equality  is  the  idea — your  abundance  and  their  want, 
their  abundance  and  your  want,  being  in  reciprocal  adjustment. 
In  the  passage  before  us,  we  incline  to  foUow  the  older 
expositors,  Calvin,  Zanchius,  Crocius,  as  also  Meyer,  who  give 
it  such  a  sense. 

The  meaning  is  not  very  different  from  that  of  the  cor- 
responding passage  in  Eph.  vi.  9 — "  ye  masters,  do  the  same 
things  unto  them,"  which  we  have  explained  as  meaning  what 
Calvin  has  called  the  jus  analogu7ii.  While  we  agree  with 
the  general  view  of  Meyer,  we  think  him  wrong  in  his  special 
application  of  it.  He  regards  the  laorijra  as  involving  that 
spiritual  parity  which  Christian  brotherhood  creates.  Slaves 
are  your  equals,  and  they  should  be  treated  with  such  equality. 
This  exegesis  is  based  on  the  supposition  that  Christian  slaves 
only  are    meant,  a  supposition   which,  we  think,  cannot  be 


264  COLOSSIANS  IV.   1. 

admitted.  The  slaves  are  told  how  to  behave  toward  their 
masters,  whether  these  masters  are  Christians  or  not;  and 
the  master  is  admonished  how  to  conduct  himself  toward  his 
slaves,  whether  these  slaves  be  Christians  or  not.  The  apostle 
speaks  to  Christian  slaves  and  Christian  masters;  but  such 
slaves  might  have  heathen  masters,  and  such  masters  might 
have  unconverted  slaves.  There  is  no  warrant,  then,  for 
saying,  that  the  apostle  only  teaches  the  duty  of  masters 
towards  Christian  servants.  Whatever  the  religious  creeds 
of  their  serfs,  they  were  to  give  them  what  is  just  and  equal. 
The  equality  lay  in  reciprocal  duty ;  if  the  slave  is  bound  to 
serve  the  master,  the  master  is  bound  equally  to  certain  duties 
to  the  slave.  The  elements  of  service  have  a  claim  on  equal 
elements  of  mastership.  Equality  demands  this,  that  he  shall 
give  the  slave  all  to  which  he  is  entitled,  not  with  a  view  to 
please  men,  but  to  please  God — "  doing  it  heartily  as  unto 
the  Lord."  Such  property  had  its  duties  as  well  as  its  rights, 
and  the  equality  lay  between  the  exercise  of  such  duties  and 
the  enforcement  of  such  rights.  The  phrase  to  BcKaLov  means 
what  is  right,  irrespective  of  all  considerations,  that  is,  what 
the  position  of  the  slave  as  a  man  and  a  servant  plainly 
involves.  Eight  and  duty  should  be  of  equal  measurement. 
The  apostle  did  not  bid  the  masters  demit  their  mastership, 
for  he  does  not  mean  by  laorrjii,  equality  of  rank  with  them- 
selves, for  such  an  elevation  would  imply  greatly  more  than 
the  bestowal  of  personal  freedom.  Masters  are  still  called  so, 
as  they  still  stood  in  that  relationship,  but  Christianity  was 
to  regulate  all  their  transactions  with  those  placed  under 
them  and  owned  by  them.  And  with  regard  to  their  Christian 
slaves — the  equality  wliich  Meyer  contends  for  was  certainly 
to  guide  them — the  equality  so  well  explained  in  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon. 

One  powerful  reason  the  apostle  adds — 

ElSore^;,  on  kuI  uytiet?  e'^exe  Kvpiov  iv  ovpavoi<i — "  Knowing 
that  ye  too  have  a  master  in  heaven."  The  participle  has  its 
common  causal  sense.  It  is  not  material  to  our  purpose 
whether  the  reading  be  ovpava>  or  ovpavol<i.  The  sense  is — 
ye  are  under  law  yourselves  to  the  highest  of  masters — you 
are  in  the  position  of  servants  to  the  heavenly  Lord.  As  ye 
would  that  your  ]\Iaster  should  treat  you,  so  do  you  as  masters 


COLOSSIANS  IV.  1.  265 

treat  theiu.  Let  the  great  Master's  treatment  of  yoa  be  the 
model  of  your  treatment  of  them.  If  the  masters  realized 
this  fact,  that  in  this  higher  service  their  slaves,  if  Christians, 
and  themselves  were  colleagues,  ransomed  by  the  same  price, 
the  same  service  appointed  to  them,  and  the  same  prospect 
set  before  them,  a  tribunal  before  which  they  should  stand  on 
the  same  level,  and  an  inheritance  in  which  they  should  equally 
share,  irrespective  of  difference  in  social  rank  upon  earth,  then 
would  they  be  kept  from  all  temptations  to  harshness  and 
injury  towards  their  dependants.  Who  does  not  recollect  the 
touching  language  of  Job  ?  "  If  I  did  despise  the  cause  of 
my  man-servant,  or  of  my  maid-servant,  when  they  contended 
with  me ;  what  then  shall  I  do  when  God  riseth  up  ?  and 
when  He  visiteth,  what  shall  I  answer  Him  ?  Did  not  He 
that  made  me  in  the  womb  make  him  ?  and  did  not  one 
fashion  us  in  the  womb?"  xxxi.  13-15. 

That  the  apostle  in  such  admonitions  pursued  the  wisest 
course,  the  Servile  wars  of  Eome  are  abundant  evidence.  The 
principles  inculcated  by  him  lightened  the  burden,  and  their 
practical  development  in  course  of  time  removed  it.  So 
numerous  were  the  slaves,  that  in  very  many  cases  they  far 
outnumbered  the  freemen — as  in  Attica,  where  the  proportion 
was  at  least  four  to  one.  Probably  very  many  of  them  were 
to  l)e  found  in  all  the  early  churches. 

Tlie  apostle  lays  down  three  positions  fatal  to  slavery. 
First,  he  denies  a  common  theory  of  the  times,  which  seems 
to  have  regarded  slaves  as  an  inferior  caste,  either  born  so,  as 
Aristotle  atfirms,  or  brought  into  servitude,  as  Homer  sings, 
from  mental  imbecility.^  For  he  pleads  for  reciprocity,  and 
thereby  admits  no  distinction  but  the  one  of  accidental  rank. 
And,  secondly,  he  declares  that  certain  duties  to  slaves  spring 
from  natural  right,  an  idea  the  admission  of  which  would  not 
only  at  once  have  put  an  end  to  the  incredible  cruelties  of 
Spartan  and  Eoman  slave-owners,  but  which  did  also,  by  and 
by,  as  it  leavened  society,  prompt  Christian  men  to  give  liberty 
to  their  servants,  made  like  themselves  in  God's  image,  and  as 
entitled  as  themselves  to  a  free  personality.  Thirdly,  he  avows 
that  in  the  Cliristian  church  there  is  neither  "  bond  nor  free," 
and  thus  provides  and  opens  a  spiritual  asylum,  within  which 
^  Euripides,  too,  says  of  the  slave  race — ol^  o'/if ;  JVov  xa»o'». 


266  COLOSSIANS  IV.   1. 

equality  of  the  highest  kind  was  enjoyed,  and  master  and 
slave  were  not  in  such  a  relationship  recognized.  For  master 
and  slave  were  alike  the  free  servants  of  a  common  Lord  in 
heaven.  In  the  meantime,  as  Chrysostom  says,  Christianity 
gave  freedom  in  slavery,  and  this  was  its  special  distinction.^ 
The  same  Father  tells  what  spiritual  benefit  Christian  servants 
had  often  imparted  to  their  masters'  households,  and  Neander 
states  that  a  Christian  female  slave  was  the  means  of  bringing 
the  province  of  ancient  Georgia  to  the  knowledge  of  Christ.'^ 

■*  Toiourov  0  ^piffTiavKrfios,      In  loc.   1  CoF.  xix. 

'  Memorials,  p.  306.     Bohn,  London. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

The  apostle  now  passes  to  more  general  admonitions.  But 
he  places  prayer  in  front,  and  he  delights  to  contemplate  it  as 
the  "  ladder  "  which  connects  earth  with  heaven,  by  which  the 
soul  rises  to  highest  communion,  and  spiritual  blessings,  like 
descending  angels,  come  down  to  our  world. 

(Ver.  2.)  Tfj  Trpoaev^fj  Trpoa-KaprepelTe  —  "Continue  in 
prayer."  The  apostle  knew  the  benefit  of  prayer  from  his 
own  experience,  and  he  is  therefore  anxious  that  they  should 
pray  with  persevering  energy,  and  give  himself  a  prominent 
place  in  their  intercessions.  [Eph.  vi.  18.]  Eom.  xiii.  12  ; 
1  Thess.  V.  17.  They  prayed,  and  the  apostle  was  well  aware 
of  it,  but  he  exhorts  them  to  "  continue  in  prayer."  They 
were  never  to  suppose  that  prayer  was  needless,  either  because 
their  desires  had  been  gratified,  or  God  had  bestowed  upon 
them  all  His  gifts.  But  as  they  were  still  needing,  and  God 
was  still  promising,  they  were  still  to  persist  in  asking.  This 
perseverance  was  a  prime  element  of  successful  prayer,  as  it 
proved  their  sincerity,  and  evinced  the  power  of  their  faith. 
They  were  to  pray  and  wait,  not  to  be  discouraged,  but  still 
to  hold  on  — wrestling  in  the  spirit  of  him  who  said,  "  I  will 
not  let  thee  go  except  thou  bless  me." 

rp7]yopovvr€<i  ev  avrfj  ev  ev-^apiaTLa.  The  phrase  iv  eu^a- 
pLaTia  is  not  connected  with  the  preceding  ttj  Trpoaev^r} 
Trpoa-KaprepecTe,  but  with  the  words  last  quoted — "  watching  in 
it  with  thanksgiving."  The  present  form  belongs  only  to  the 
later  Greek.  Phryniclius,  ed.  Lobeck,  pp.  118,  119 — iypi]yopa 
perfect  of  iyeipo)  being  employed.  Eustathius,  ad  Odyss.  1880; 
Sturz,  p.  157  ;  Buttmann,  §  .343.  It  would  be  an  unworthy 
view  to  refer  this  language  to  the  practice  of  ancient  Chris- 
tianity, which  was  compelled  by  persecution  to  spend  so  many 
hours  of  the  night  in  devotional  exercises.  Such  tame  for- 
mality is  not  involved,  but  it  still  clings  to  humanity,  and  is 
found   not   only  "  in   the  confusion  of  Paternoster  and  Ave 


268  COLOSSIANS  IV.   3. 

Marias  among  the  Catholics,"  but  also  "in  the  no  less  pious 
babbling  of  many  a  pietist  keeper  of  the  hours."  ^  The  apostle 
enjoins,  not  physical,  but  spiritual  wakefulness,  as  in  Eph.  vi. 
18,  where  he  employs  aypvjrvovvTe';.  They  were  to  be  ever 
on  their  guard  against  remissness.  If  a  man  refuses  to  sleep 
that  his  attention  may  not  be  interrupted,  his  watching  argues 
the  value  he  places  on  the  end  desired.  To  prayer,  Christians 
are  to  give  themselves  with  sleepless  anxiety,  and  are  ever  to 
watch  against  all  slackness  or  supineness  in  it,  and  against  all 
formality  and  unbelief.  1  Thess.  v.  6  ;  1  Pet.  v.  8.  They 
were  not  to  become  torpid  or  careless,  but  were  to  beware  of 
spiritual  sleepiness  in  their  devotions.  And  along  with  prayer, 
they  were  to  be  wakeful  "  in  thanksgiving."  Olshausen  lays 
too  great  stress  upon  the  phrase  when  he  says  that  by  ev 
ev^apiarca  the  more  general  irpoa-ev^rj  is  more  accurately 
defined.  He  adds,  "  that  the  prayer  of  a  Christian,  in  the 
consciousness  of  his  experienced  grace,  can  never  be  anything 
else  than  a  thanksgiving."  But  the  apostle  in  no  sense  nor 
form  identifies  prayer  with  thanksgiving,  he  only  classes 
thanksgiving  along  with  prayer.  See  under  ii.  7.  Still  there 
are  so  many  grounds  for  thanksgiving  that  it  cannot  be 
omitted  in  any  approach  to  the  throne  of  grace.  While  we 
ask  for  so  much,  there  is  also  much  for  which  we  ought  to 
give  thanks.  We  must  give  Him  credit  for  what  He  has 
done  already,  while  we  ask  Him  to  do  more.  There  are  many 
reasons  of  thanksgiving,  and  not  the  least  of  them  is  the 
privilege  of  prayer  itself.  Prayer  and  thanksgiving  co-exist 
only  on  earth.  They  shall  be  separated  in  the  other  world, 
for  in  the  region  of  woe  there  is  only  wailing,  and  in  that  of 
glory  there  is  only  melody. 

(Ver.  3.)  The  apostle  wished  himself  to  be  specially  in- 
cluded in  their  suppHcations. 

Ilpocrev^o/jbevoc  afia  koi  'rrepl  r,pL(vv — "Praying  at  the  same 
time  also  for  us."  We  cannot  suppose,  Mdth  some  critics,  that 
Paul  means  only  himself  when  he  uses  ?7/i<wz/.  True,  indeed, 
he  immediately  uses  the  singular,  still  he  seems  first  to  include 
others  with  himself.  But  we  cannot  say  that  Timothy  is  the 
only  person  meant  besides  himself.  These  others  may  have 
been  persons  circumstanced  like  the  apostle,  and  probably 
'  Stier,  Reden  Jesu,  Matt.  vi.  7. 


COLOSSIANS   IV.   3.  2G9 

comprised  at  least  those  whose  names  are  mentioned  in  the 
concluding  salutations.  The  Greek  expositors  dwell  on  the 
apostle's  humility  in  asking  the  prayers  of  the  Colossian 
church,  Theophylact  adding  that  the  circumstance  also  shows 
— TTjv  hvvafiLv  TTj'i  (f)i,\aBeX(f)ov  eL'^%.  Yes,  and  it  also  shows 
that  the  apostle  was  no  Stoic,  that  he  felt  the  need  of  those 
prayers,  and  set  a  high  value  on  them.  For  the  circumstances 
in  which  he  was  placed  had  a  depressing  tendency,  and  he 
seems,  not  indeed  to  have  lost  confidence  in  himself,  but  to 
have  had  some  apprehension  that  from  age  and  infirmity  he 
might  yield,  or  appear  to  yield  before  them.  But  he  knew 
the  power  of  prayer.  "  Human  entreaty  has  shut  up  heaven, 
and  has  again  opened  it.  At  the  voice  of  a  man  the  sun 
stood  still.  Prayer  has  sweetened  the  bitter  fountain,  divided 
the  sea,  and  stilled  its  waves.  It  has  disbanded  armies,  and 
prevented  conflict ;  it  has  shortened  battle,  and  given  victory 
to  right.  It  has  conferred  temporal  abundance,  as  in  the  case 
of  Jabez ;  and  given  effect  to  medical  appliances,  as  in  the 
case  of  Hezekiah.  It  has  quenched  the  mouths  of  lions,  and 
opened  the  gates  of  the  prison-house.  As  Jesus  prayed  by 
the  river,  the  dove  alighted  on  Him ;  and  as  He  prayed  on 
the  hill.  He  was  transfigured.  The  glory  of  God  was  mani- 
fested to  Moses  when  he  asked  it,  and  the  grace  of  Christ  to 
Paul  when  he  besought  it.  Not  a  moment  elapsed  between 
the  petition  of  the  crucified  thief  and  its  glorious  answer. 
Ere  Daniel  concluded  his  devotion,  the  celestial  messenger 
stood  at  his  side.  The  praying  church  brought  down  upon 
itself  the  Pentecostal  effusion."  ^  The  prayer  which  he  wished 
to  be  offered  for  them  was  this — 

"Iva  6  0609  avoL^rj  r)iuv  dvpav  rod  Xoyov — "  That  God  would 
open  to  us  a  door  of  discourse  " — that  is,  an  opportunity  of 
preaching.  Mr.  Ellicott,  on  Eph.  i.  17,  assigns  to  lua  three 
meanings  in  the  Xew  Testament — a  telic,  hypotelic,  and 
ecbatic  meaning,  and  he  adds,  that  "  our  criticism,  admitting 
the  third  and  denying  the  second  after  verbs  of  entreaty,  is 
somewhat  illogical."  He  prefers  the  second,  or  covert  telic 
sense.  But  surely  our  admission  of  an  ecbatic  sense  of  ipa 
in  the  New  Testament,  does  not  compel  us  to  admit  in  such  a 
construction  as  the  one  before  us,  a  hypotelic  sense.  Nor  do 
'  Eadie,  The  Divine  Love,  etc.,  p.  184,  1855. 


270  COLOSSIANS  IV.   3. 

we  feel  the  harshness  which  Winer  alleges  to  be  in  the  telic 
sense  of  Xva  after  verbs  of  entreating.  In  short,  the  hypotelic 
sense  is  more  ingenious  than  sound.  The  result,  as  future, 
and  as  the  effect  of  conscious  instrumentality,  is  subjectively 
regarded  under  the  aspect  of  design.  The  subject  of  a  prayer 
is  rarely  so  blended  with  its  design  as  to  obscure  it  when  it 
is  prefaced  by  Xva,  for  that  subject  still  assumes  to  the  writer's 
mind  the  idea  of  purpose,  and  therefore  there  is  no  need  to 
drop  or  modify  the  proper  telic  sense  of  the  conjunction. 
Here  the  opening  of  the  door  of  utterance  was  to  be  the 
subject  of  prayer,  and  they  were  to  pray  in  order  that  it  might 
be  granted.  While  the  theme  was  on  their  tongue,  the 
j)rompting  of  a  final  purpose  was  felt  in  their  hearts.  The 
suppliants  naturally  looked  at  the  end,  while  they  repeated 
the  theme,  and  thus  the  apostle  proposes  this  theme  to  them 
under  the  aspect  of  an  end  which  they  were  to  keep  steadily 
before  them  at  a  throne  of  grace. 

We  cannot  agree  with  those  who  think  that  by  Ovpav  rov 
Xoyov  is  meant  simply  "  the  mouth,"  as  the  medium  of  speech. 
Yet  a  great  number  hold  this  view,  such  as  Thomas  Aquinas 
and  Anselm,  Calvin  and  Beza,  Cajetan  and  Estius,  a-Lapide, 
Zanchius,  and  Bengel.  In  the  New  Testament  we  find  dvpa 
used  in  the  secondary  sense  of  occasion,  or  opportunity.  Acts 
xiv.  27;  1  Cor.  xvi.  9;  2  Cor.  ii.  12;  Eev.  iii.  8.  The 
figure  is  so  natural  and  apparent,  that  it  occurs  frequently 
among  classical  writers,  both  Greek  and  Latin.  While  the 
exegesis  referred  to  does  not  come  up  to  the  meaning  of  the 
words,  that  of  Chrysostom  and  his  followers  goes  beyond  it, 
when  they  thus  explain  Ovpav  as — eccroSov  Kal  Trapprjaiav,  an 
idea  borrowed  from  Eph.  vi.  19.  The  apostle  longed  for 
liberty,  not  for  itself,  but  for  the  opportunity  which  it  gave 
him  of  preaching  the  gospel.  He  might,  indeed,  in  his  cap- 
tivity, find  some  opportunity  of  preaching,  but  he  longed  for 
uninterrupted  licence.  Nay,  his  own  personal  liberty  was 
nothing  to  him  but  in  so  far  as  it  gave  him  an  unhampered 
sphere  of  evangelical  labour.  The  opening  of  the  door  of  his 
prison  would  be  the  opening  of  a  door  of  discourse  to  them, 
and  specially  to  him,  for  his  design  was — 

AaXrjcraL  to  fivarijpiov  rod  Xpiarov — "  To  speak  the 
mystery  of  Christ."     The  infinitive  is  that  of  result.     Winer, 


COLOSSIANS   IV.   3.  271 

§  44.  On  the  meaning  of  fivaTijptov,  see  under  Eph.  i.  9, 
iii.  4,  and  especially  vi.  19.  Christ  is  the  subject  of  that 
mystery,  it  has  Him  for  its  theme.  See  also  under  i.  2G. 
It  was  the  apostle's  special  function  to  act  as  a  hierophant,  or 
to  make  it  known.  It  was  by  the  proclamation  of  it  that  its 
blessings  were  to  be  enjoyed,  and  the  apostle  longed  to  speak 
it.  His  attachment  to  the  mystery  was  in  no  way  weakened 
by  the  persecution  which  for  his  disclosure  of  it  had  come 
upon  him. 

At'  o  Koi  SeSe/xai — "  For  which  yea  I  am  bound."  Winer, 
§  58,  4,  2.  The  form  6  is  preferred  to  6v,  as  being  the  read- 
ing of  A,  C,  D,  E,  J,  K,  etc.  See  under  i.  24.  These  chains 
lay  upon  him  because  he  unveiled  the  mystery  in  its  full 
extent.  He  had  been  imprisoned  for  preaching  it,  but  still,  if 
liberated,  would  he  preach  it  again.  Thus,  at  length,  the 
apostle  converges  those  prayers  upon  himself.  In  praying 
for  the  others,  as  he  requested  them,  particular  reference  was 
to  be  made  to  himself,  and  his  inability,  through  his  bonds, 
to  proclaim  the  mystery  of  Christ.  These  bonds  had  not 
deadened  his  love  to  it,  and  he  longed  to  proclaim  it  in  this 
aspect  of  it  as  a  mystery,  viz.  its  adaptation  to  the  Gentile 
races.  Eph.  iii.  8,  The  special  cause  of  his  imprisonment 
was  his  proclamation  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles,  and  his 
admission  of  converted  heathens  into  the  church  without 
respect  to  the  Mosaic  law.  They  had,  therefore,  special  reason 
to  remember  him  in  their  prayers.  Hallet  ^  says  well,  "  that 
we  Gentiles  are  indebted  inconceivably  more  to  the  Apostle 
Paul  than  we  are  to  any  man  that  ever  lived  in  the  world. 
He  was  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  and  gloried  in  that  cha- 
racter. While  Peter  went  too  far  toward  betraying  our 
privileges,  our  Apostle  Paul  stood  up  with  a  courage  and  zeal 
becoming  himself.  Eor  us  in  particular,  as  for  the  Gentiles 
in  general,  our  invaluable  friend  laboured  more  abundantly 
than  all  the  apostles.  For  us  he  suffered.  He  was  persecuted 
for  this  very  reason,  because  he  laboured  to  turn  us  from 
darkness  to  light,  and  to  give  to  us  the  knowledge  of  salva- 
tion upon  our  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  in  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  How  dear,  then,  should  his  memory  ever  be  to 
us ! " 

1  Notes,  etc.,  vol.  i,  p.  382. 


272  COLOSSIAXS   IV.   4. 

(Ver.  4.)  "Iva  (pavepcoaco  avro,  oo?  hel  fie  XaXrjarat — "  That 
I  may  make  it  manifest  as  I  ought  to  speak."  Quite  peculiar 
is  the  connection  invented  by  Bengel — "  SiSefiai,  iva  (pavepwaco, 
vindus  sum  ut  patcfaciam.  Farad oxon."  We  do  not  agree 
with  Beza,  Bahr,  and  De  Wette,  that  the  two  conjunctions 
(tm)  are  parallel,  and  both  depending  on  irpoo-ev^ofievot,  for 
the  last  one  appears  simply  to  develop  the  order  of  thought. 
They  were  to  pray  in  order  that  God  would  open  a  door  of 
utterance  for  him,  and  this  in  order  that  he  might  preach  the 
gospel  with  all  his  original  boldness  and  freedom.  The  one 
'iva,  therefore,  depends  upon  the  otlier — "  praying  in  order 
that  God  would  open  a  door  of  utterance  for  me  to  speak  the 
mystery  of  Christ,  in  order  that  this  being  granted  I  may 
make  it  manifest  as  I  ought  to  speak."  Some  understand  by 
the  phrase,  "  as  I  ought  to  speak,"  the  moral  qualities  of 
preaching — but  Meyer  thinks  that  the  apostle  refers  simply 
to  freedom  of  speech,  to  absence  of  physical  restraint,  or  to 
unlimited  power  of  travel  from  land  to  land.  But  the  com- 
prehensive phrase,  "  as  I  ought  to  speak,"  may  comprehend 
both  sets  of  ideas,  and  certainly  the  context  does  not  limit  it 
to  the  latter.  It  is  true  that  imprisonment  deprived  the 
apostle  of  the  power  of  preaching  at  all,  but  when  he  says, 
"  as  I  ought,"  the  pregnant  phrase  refers  not  simply  to  his 
commission,  as  the  world's  apostle,  and  to  the  licence  of  travel 
which  it  involved,  but  also  to  the  spirit  in  which  such  duty 
should  be  discharged.  For  it  might  be  surmised  that  what 
Paul  had  suffered  for  the  gospel  had  lessened  his  love  for  it, 
or  modified  his  views  of  the  office  which  he  held.  And  may 
we  not  suppose  that  the  apostle  wished  the  world  to  under- 
stand, that  if  he  were  liberated,  there  would  be  no  abatement 
of  his  zeal,  no  subduedness  of  tone  in  his  speech,  no  mutila- 
tion of  his  message,  and  no  accommodation  of  it  so  as  to 
avoid  a  recurrence  of  the  penalty,  but  all  his  old  fervour  and 
power,  all  his  former  breadth  of  view,  and  all  his  uncompro- 
mising hostility  to  Jewish  narrowness  and  bigotry — "  that  I 
may  make  it  manifest  as  I  ought  to  speak."  The  form  of 
request  presented  to  the  Ephesians  is  more  pointed.  He 
twice  asks  them  to  pray  for  him,  that  he  may  speak  with 
boldness,  and  he  graphically  depicts  himself  as  an  ambassador 
in  chains. 


COLOSSIANS  IV.  5.  273 

The  exhortations  of  the  two  following  verses  refer  to  the 
outer  aspects  of  Christian  conduct,  or  such  aspects  of  it  as 
present  themselves  to  the  world.  While  they  were  to  set 
their  affections  on  things  above,  and  mortify  their  "  members 
which  are  upon  the  earth ; "  while  they  were  to  put  off  cer- 
tain vices,  and  assume  certain  virtues,  culminating  in  love  ; 
while  they  were  to  be  exemplary  in  every  social  relation — as 
husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children,  masters  and  ser- 
vants ;  and  while  they  were  to  be  instant  in  prayer  for  them- 
selves and  for  the  apostle,  all  this  ethical  code  referred  to 
personal  and  mutual  spiritual  duties  within  the  church. 
They  must,  however,  in  ordinary  circumstances,  come  in  con- 
tact with  unbelieving  heathenism  around  them.  If  they 
shrank  entirely  from  such  company,  the  inference  of  the 
apostle  would  be  realized — "  for  then  must  ye  needs  go  out 
of  the  world."  But  they  were  not  to  go  out  of  the  world 
because  it  was  bad,  they  were  to  remain  in  it  for  the  purpose 
of  making  it  better.  And  that  their  conduct  might  exercise 
such  a  beneficial  influence  they  were  thus  enjoined — 

(Ver.  5.)  ^Ev  aocjjla  irepiirarelTe  irpo^  Tov<i  e'^to — "Walk 
in  wisdom  towards  them  which  are  without."  The  verb 
TrepnraTelv,  when,  as  here,  it  has  an  ethical  sense,  is  some- 
times followed  by  Kara,  as  in  Eom.  viii.  4,  xiv.  15,  1  Cor. 
iii.  3,  but  more  usually  by  eV;  the  shade  of  difference  being, 
that  in  the  former  case,  the  ideas  of  source  and  similarity 
are  implied,  and  in  the  latter  the  character  or  sphere  of  walk 
is  principally  indicated.  The  phrase  ol  e^co — "  those  who 
are  without,"  is  found  in  1  Cor.  v,  12,  and  in  1  Thess.  iv.  12, 
and  points  to  persons  beyond  the  pale  of  the  church,  and  not 
simply  or  prominently  the  false  teachers,  as  Junker  supposes. 
Those  without  should  be  surrounded  with  every  inducement 
to  come  in.  No  barrier  should  be  thrown  in  their  way,  but 
the  attractive  nature  of  Christianity  should  be  wisely  ex- 
hibited to  them.  And  as  the  life  and  practice  of  those  within 
the  church  is  what  they  especially  look  at  and  learn  from,  so 
the  apostle  says,  "  walk  in  wisdom — tt/jo?,"  in  reference  to 
them.  The  admonition,  as  contained  in  Eph.  v.  15,  is  more 
general,  and  wants  the  pointed  application  which  it  bears 
here. 

The  "  wisdom  "  here  enforced  is  more  than  mere  prudence. 


274  COLOSSIANS  IV.   5. 

[Eph.  V.  15.]      It  means  that  while  Christians  are  to  abstain 
from  such  sins  as  disgrace  their  profession,  and  are  to  preserve 
a    holy    consistency,    adorning    the    doctrine    of    God    their 
Saviour ;  they  are  also  to  exhibit,  at  the  same  time,  not  only 
the  purity  of  the  gospel,  but  its  amiability,  its  strictness  of 
principle  in  union  with  its  loveliness  of  temper,  its  generosity 
as  well  as  its   rectitude,   and   its   charity  no   less    than    its 
devoutness   and  zeal.     Let  "  those  without "  not  be  told  of 
Christian  self-possession  in  a  tone  of  irritation,  or  of  Christian 
happiness  w^hile  uneasiness  sits  on  the  brow  of  the  speaker. 
Let  no  one  wrangle  about  the  duty  of  peacemaking,  or  bow 
his  face  to  the  earth  as  he  tries  to  expatiate  on  the  hope  of 
the  gospel.      The  world's  Bible  is  the  daily  life  of  the  church, 
every  page  of  which  its  quick  eye  minutely  scans,  and  every 
blot  on  wliich  it  detects  with  gleeful  and  malicious  exactness. 
The  same  wisdom  will  assume  the  form  of  discretion  in  refer- 
ence to  time  and  place.      Unwise  efforts  at  proselytism  defeat 
their  own  purpose ;  zeal  without  knowledge  is  as  the  thunder 
shower  that  drenches   and   injures,   not   the   rain   that  with 
noiseless  and  gentle  descent  softens  and  fertilizes.     The  great 
Teacher  Himself  has  said,  "  Give  not  that  which  is  holy  unto 
the  dogs,  neither  cast  ye  your  pearls  before  swine,  lest  they 
trample  them  under  their  feet,  and  turn  again  and  rend  you." 
Matt.  vii.  6. 

Tbv  Kaipov  i^ayopa^ofievot — "  Eedeeming  the  time."  Cony- 
beare  renders — "  and  forestall  opportunity."  The  clause  has 
been  explained  under  Eph.  v.  16.  The  general  meaning  is 
"  purchasing,  or  seizing  on  the  opportunity."  The  preposition 
e/c,  in  composition,  according  to  EUicott,  directs  the  thought 
to  the  undefined  times  or  circumstances  out  of  w^hich,  in  each 
particular  case,  the  Katpo^  was  to  be  bought ;  a  notion  different 
only  in  aspect  from  our  view  given  under  Eph.  v.  16,  which 
takes  e'/c  to  represent  "  out  of  another's  possession,"  a  view 
which  appears  to  us  to  be  more  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of 
the  figure.  The  immediate  reference  is  to  the  injunction  of 
the  preceding  clause.  Every  season  for  exercising  such 
wisdom  is  to  be  eagerly  improved,  or  no  opportunity  for  its 
display  is  to  be  trifled  with  or  lost.  The  idea  of  the  Greek 
expositors  is  foreign  to  the  purpose — "  the  time  is  not  yours, 
but  belongs  to  those  who  are  without,  for  whose  good  you 


COLOSSIANS  IV.  6.  275 

must  employ  it."  So  Theodoret — ovic  earcv  vfi6T£po<i  6  irapiav 
al(ov,  '^prjcraade  avrtp  eh  to  Biov.  Not  less  away  from  the 
point  is  the  definition  of  Aiigustine — Q^iid  estredimere  tempiis, 
nisi  cum  opus  est,  etiam  detrimento  temporalium  commodorum, 
ad  aeterna  qiiaerenda  et  capessenda  spatia  temporis  comparare. 
The  reason  annexed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  "  because 
the  days  are  evil,"  is  not  found  in  the  passage  before  us. 

The  next  verse,  though  it  contains  a  sentiment  which  is  of 
great  moment  by  itself,  is  yet  closely  connected  with  this 
which  goes  before  it. 

(Ver.  6.)  'O  \o<yo<i  vficov  iravroTe  iv  '^dptTC,  aXart  rjprv- 
fievo<i — "  Let  your  conversation  be  always  with  grace,  seasoned 
with  salt."  The  phrase  X070?  iv  %aptTt  is,  according  to 
Eobinson,  equivalent  to  X0709  '^aplei'i.  But  the  noun  %a/3t9 
signifies,  perhaps,  that  gracious  spirit  which  rules  the  tongue, 
and  prompts  it  both  to  select  the  fittest  themes,  and  to  clothe 
them  in  the  most  agreeable  and  impressive  form.  Sirach  xxi. 
16  ;  Luke  iv.  22  ;  Sept.  Ps.  xlv.  3.  It  is  not  that  %a/3i9  tov 
\6jov  which  Plutarch  ascribes  to  the  courtly  Alcibiades,  or 
that  graciousness  or  blandness  of  tongue  which  is  but  mere 
politeness.  It  is  vastly  higher  than  what  Bloomfield  under- 
stands by  it — "  terseness  of  thought  and  smartness  of  expres- 
sion." Chrysostom  says  well,  "  it  is  possible  to  be  simply 
agreeable — ■xapievTil^eaOaL — but  we  are  to  beware  that  this 
agreeableness  fall  not  into  indifference."  In  Eph.  iv.  29,  the 
apostle  gives  a  different  and  negative  form  of  advice,  but  adds 
as  the  needed  characteristic  of  Christian  conversation — "  that 
which  is  good  to  the  use  of  edifying." 

To  show  his  meaning  yet  more  fully,  the  apostle  employs  a 
strong  metaphor — "  seasoned  with  salt."  The  participle  em- 
ployed is  the  ordinary  culinary  term.  The  figure  represents 
speech  as  liable  to  become  insipid,  or  to  lose  spiritual  piquancy 
unless  it  be  seasoned  with  salt.  The  form  aXari,  from  aka<i, 
seems  to  have  belonged  to  the  popular  speech.^  Salt  has 
various  applications  in  Scripture,  such  as  the  salt  of  the  cove- 
nant and  the  salt  of  the  sacrifice,  and  appears  to  be  the 
symbol  of  what  is  quickening  and  conservative  in  its  nature. 

1  Suidas  affirms  that  it  is  used  only  in  the  phrase  uXaffiy  vu.  Buttmann, 
however,  says  that  the  word  is  only  a  euphonious  form  for  aXan,  §  58.  See  also 
Suicer,  sub  voce,  where  there  is  much  curious  information.  . 

Z 


276  COLOSSIANS   IV.    6. 

We  therefore  demur  to  the  notion  of  many  commentators, 
that  the  term  here  refers  principally,  if  not  wholly,  to 
wisdom.  The  Attic  salt,  indeed,  was  that  wit  which  gave 
zest  and  sparkle  to  Athenian  conversation.  But  it  was  not 
wisdom  in  any  special  sense.  Nor  can  we  agree  with  Meyer 
and  Bohmer,  that  salt  is,  in  Matt.  v.  13,  Mark  ix.  49,  50, 
or  Luke  xiv.  34,  the  symbol  of  wisdom.  It  is  rather  the 
symbol  of  that  spiritual  conservative  power  which  Christianity 
exerts  on  society  and  the  world.  Here  it  stands  in  explana- 
tion of  %a/3i9,  not  specifically  of  ao(jiLa.  True,  indeed,  %api9 
involves  aocpla,  gracious  words  must  be  always  wise  words, 
but  wisdom  is  here  employed  to  characterize  the  walk,  and 
grace  to  describe  the  "  fruit  of  the  lips."  The  conversation 
which  X0709  denotes  is  to  be  seasoned  with  this  condiment, 
that  it  may  be  in  itself  free  from  every  pernicious  taint  and 
quality,  that  it  may  be  relished  by  those  who  hear  it,  and 
that  on  them  it  may  exercise  a  beneficial  influence.^  In  Eph. 
iv.  2  9  the  apostle  says,  "  let  no  corrupt  speech  proceed  out  of 
your  mouth."  Christian  speech  is  not  to  be  insipid,  far  less 
to  be  corrupt,  but  it  is  to  possess  that  hallowed  pungency 
which  shall  excite  interest  in  the  inquirer,  and  that  preser- 
vative flavour  which  may  influence  for  good  the  mind  and 
heart  of  those  who,  being  without,  are  disposed  to  put 
questions  to  the  members  of  the  church.  For  the  apostle 
subjoins  as  a  reason — 

Elhevat  7r&J9  Set  i'/xa9  evl  eKaaro)  aTroKplvecrdai, — "  That  ye 
may  know  how  it  becomes  you  to  answer  each  one."  Though 
in  certain  cases  the  infinitive  may  stand  for  the  imperative 
among  the  classical  writers,  there  is  no  reason  to  adopt  such 
a  supposition  here.     Winer,  §  43,  5,  f?.     Tremellius  and  Storr, 

1  Baldwin  (Professor  Witebergensis,  1624)  has  a  most  extraordinary  comment 
on  this  place.  He  understands  the  apostle  to  refer  to  wit — "  De  salibus,  et 
jocis  in  sermone  hie  est  quaestio. "  And  he  subjoins  the  following  permissions 
and  regulations: — "Modus  tamen  in  jocis  homine  gravi  ac  prudenti,  multo 
magis  Christiano  dignus  est,  qui  et  si  praecise  et  secundum  ornnes  circumstantias 
praescribi  non  potest,  ex  his  tamen  regulis  dignosci  potest.  1.  Joci  sint  docti 
qui  moralia  qusedam  sua  urbanitate  tacite  iustillant.  2.  Ad  jocandum  non 
abutaraur  sacris  scripturis.  3.  Jocantes  omnes  non  seipsos  tantum  sed  et  aliorum 
sales  libenter  audiant.  4.  Obscura  si  qua  forte  excidunt,  ambitu  verborum 
tegenda  sunt.  5.  Non  jocemur  semper  in  aliorum  gratiam,  ne  nos  ipsos  pro- 
stituamus.  6.  Jocemur  in  tempore  :  nam  apud  tristes  jocari  intempestivum 
est,  ut  et  in  re  seria.     7.  Joci  non  sint  affectati." — P.  240. 


COLOSSIANS  IV.   6.  277 

however,  translate  by  scitote,  while  Grotius,  Bengel,  and 
Huther  regard  the  verb  as  a  kind  of  ablative  gerund,  sciendo. 
But  the  infinitive,  as  in  other  places,  denotes  the  object, 
Matthiae,  §  532.  The  Greek  expositors  commit  a  blunder, 
we  think,  in  giving  the  phrase  "  every  one "  too  extensive  a 
meaninjT,  and  including  in  it  the  members  of  the  church. 
Thus  Theodoret,  aWco?  ^yap  tm  aTriarw  koX  aXX&)?  tw  irtaTw, 
etc.  Chrysostom  lays  too  much  stress  on  external  condition, 
for  he  says  "  a  prince  must  be  answered  in  one  way,  and  a 
subject  in  another,  a  rich  man  in  one  way,  and  a  poor  man  in 
another,"  and  he  adds  a  sarcastic  reason,  that  the  minds  of 
rich  and  powerful  men  are  feebler,  more  inflammable,  and 
undecided  —  acrdevecyrepat,  fxaXKov  <^\e<yiMaLvovaaL,  fiaWov 
hiappeova-ai.  Ambrosiaster  has  a  similar  train  of  illustration. 
That  of  Primasius  is  better — aliter  paganis,  aliter  Judaeis,  aliter 
haereticis,  aliter  astrologis,  d  caeferis  est  respondendum. 

For  it  is  of  those  without  that  the  apostle  speaks,  and  each, 
as  he  puts  his  question,  is  to  have  a  gracious  and  effective 
answer.  "  Death  and  life  are  in  the  power  of  the  tongue."  ^ 
Prov.  xviii.  21,  One  kind  of  answer  will  not  suffice  for  all, 
but  each  one  is  to  be  answered  as  he  should  be.  Therefore 
the  necessity  of  the  "  grace  "  and  of  the  "  salt."  The  question 
might  refer  to  various  things.  It  might  refer  to  evidence  or 
to  doctrine,  to  ritual  or  to  ethics.  It  might  embody  an  objec- 
tion, suggest  a  difficulty,  or  contain  a  peculiar  solution.  It 
might  be  a  query,  in  which  lurked  a  satire,  or  one  that  argued 
a  humble  and  inquiring  mind.  It  might  be  as  aimless  as 
Pilate's  interrogation,  "  what  is  truth  ? "  or  it  might  be  the 

^  "And  we  may  generally  observe,  that  men  of  the  weakest  minds  are  often- 
times the  most  garrulous  ;  they  unconsciously  try  to  make  up  in  number  of 
Words  what  is  obviously  wanting  in  weight  and  wisdom  :  whereas  men  of  much 
grace  and  sound  intellect  try  to  say  much  in  few  words :  they  bring  massive 
thoughts  within  small  compass  :  there  is  hardly  anything  they  dread  more  than 
to  seem  to  be  talking  much,  and  yet  to  be  really  saying  nothing.  And  it  is  well 
worthy  of  remark  also,  that  he  never  speaks  much  to  edification  who  knows  not 
when  to  cease  to  speak.  It  is  one  thing  to  speak  much,  and  another  to  speak 
with  effect.  Much  talkativeness  and  much  grace  seldom  go  together.  Speak- 
ing and  thinking  aright  are  widely  different  operations  of  the  mind  ;  and  the  one 
is  often  possessed  in  an  eminent  degree,  while  the  other  is  almost  entirely  want- 
ing. We  may  generally  lay  it  down  as  a  rule,  that  there  is  far  the  most  depth 
ivhere  there  is  the  least  noise." — Watson's  Discourses  on  the  Colossians,  pp.  370, 
371. 


278  COLOSSIANS    IV.    6 

result  of  such  an  idle  curiosity  as  that  which  moved  the 
Athenian  gossips  on  Mars'  hill  to  say,  "  we  would  know  there- 
fore what  those  things  mean."  Or  it  might  indicate  a  state 
of  mind  in  which  mingled  feelings  were  in  operation,  as  when 
the  Jews  at  Rome  came  to  the  apostle's  lodging  to  hear  of 
him  what  he  thought.  The  tone  of  one  querist  might  be  that 
of  scorn,  of  another  that  of  earnest  inquiry.  One,  as  he  asked 
information,  might  show  that  conviction  had  made  some  pro- 
gress ;  another,  that  his  previous  thoughts  had  been  gross 
misconceptions.  But  each  was  to  be  answered  as  was  becom- 
ing— according  to  the  contents,  the  spirit,  and  the  object  of 
his  question — answered  so  that  he  might  at  once  receive 
enlightenment  and  impression,  be  charmed  out  of  his  hostility, 
reasoned  out  of  his  misunderstanding,  guided  out  of  his  diffi- 
culty, awakened  out  of  his  indifference,  and  won  over  to  the 
new  religion  under  the  solemn  persuasicit  that  it  was  foolish 
to  triile  any  longer  with  Christianity,  and  dangerous  any  more 
to  oppose  the  claims  of  a  Divine  revelation,  enriched  with 
such  materials,  fortified  with  such  proofs,  and  commended  by 
such  results  to  universal  reason  and  reception.  1  Pet.  iii.  1, 15; 
2  Tim.  ii.  25,  26.  According  to  those  passages,  meekness  is 
one  special  element  of  the  Christian  answer. 

In  fine,  wholly  out  of  place  is  the  notion  of  Pierce,  that 
the  answer  here  referred  to  is  that  which  Christians  were 
often  obliged  to  make  to  heathen  rulers  when  summoned  to 
appear  before  them.  Elton,  in  his  exposition  of  this  epistle 
(1620,  London),  makes  the  following  pithy  application: — 
"  Wouldest  thou  then  be  able  to  speak  fitly,  and  to  good 
purpose  on  euery  occasion,  as  in  one  particular  case,  in  time 
of  distresse,  in  time  of  trouble,  and  vexation  of  body  or 
minde,  wouldest  thou  be  able  to  speake  a  word  of  comfort, 
and  as  the  Prophet  saith,  Isa.  i.  4,  know  to  minister  a  word 
in  time  to  him  that  is  weary  ?  Oh  then  let  thy  tong  be  euer 
poudred  with  the  salt  of  grace,  haue  in  thy  mouth  at  all  other 
times  gracious  speeches,  and  certainly  then  thou  shalt  not  be 
to  seeke  of  sweete  and  comfortable  words  in  time  of  neede. 
Many  come  to  their  friends  whom  they  loue  well,  and  wish 
well  vnto,  in  time  of  their  trouble,  haply  lying  on  their  sicke 
beds,  and  are  not  able  to  affoord  them  one  word  of  spirituall 
comfort,  onely  they  can  vse  a  common  forme  of  speech,  aske 


COLOSSIANS   IV.    7.  279 

them  how  they  doe,  and  say,  they  are  sorry  to  see  them  so, 
and  then  they  haue  done :  here  is  one  speciall  cause  of  it, 
their  mouthes  are  not  seasoned  with  gracious  speaches  at 
other  times;  they  vse  not  to  season  their  speech  with  grace 
at  other  times,  and  so  it  comes  to  passe  that  when  they 
should,  and  (it  may  hee)  would  vse  gracious  and  comfortable 
words,  they  cannot  frame  themselues  to  them,  but  euen  then 
also,  they  are  out  of  season  with  them  ;  learne  thou  therefore 
to  acquaint  thy  selfe  with  holy  and  religious  speeches,  let  tliy 
mouth  at  other  times  be  exercised  in  speaking  graciously,  and 
then  (doubtlesse)  though  thou  canst  not  speake  so  eloquently, 
as  some  that  foame  out  nothing  but  goodly  speaches,  yet  thou 
shalt  be  able  to  speake  to  better  purpose,  because  (indeede)  it 
is  not  mans  wit,  but  Gods  grace,  that  seasons  speach,  and 
makes  it  profitable  and  comfortable." 

The  apostle  did  not  wish  to  burden  the  epistle  with  any 
lengthened  or  minute  account  of  his  private  affairs.  There 
was  much  which  all  interested  in  him  would  naturally  wish 
to  know — his  health,  his  means,  his  prospects  and  plans. 
But  the  bearer  of  the  epistle  would  make  all  necessary  com- 
munications, and  one  so  recommended  as  Tychicus  was,  would 
be  eagerly  listened  to  as  he  spoke  to  them  of  the  aged  prisoner 
at  Eome. 

(Ver.  7.)  Ta  Kar  i/jue  iravra  <yvwpLcret,  v/jlcv  Tv^iko^  6  aya- 
7r7/To<?  aSeXc^o?,  Kol  7ncrT0<;  BcaKovo^,  ical  avu8ovXo<i  iv  Kvpiat 
— "  Of  all  that  concerns  me  Tychicus  shall  inform  you — the 
beloved  brother  and  faithful  minister  and  fellow-servant  in 
the  Lord."  The  phrase  ra  kut  ifie  is  a  common  one  in 
Greek,  as  Eisner  and  Wetstein  have  abundantly  shown. 
Tychicus  is  honoured  with  three  appellations.  Firsi,  he  is 
called  "  the  beloved  brother,"  one  of  the  sacred  brotherhood, 
bound  together  by  the  tie  of  a  common  fatherhood  in  God. 
His  apostolic  dignity  did  not  fill  Paul  with  reserve  toward  any 
fellow-believer,  but  he  owned  and  loved  as  a  brother  every 
one  who  was  with  himself  in  Christ.  Besides  this  common 
spiritual  relationship,  Tychicus  must  have  endeared  himself 
to  the  apostle,  and  therefore  possessed  his  entire  confidence. 
See  under  Eph.  vi.  21.  He  was,  secondly," &  trusty  servant," 
and  as  such  carried  this  epistle,  and  was  charged  with  these 
oral  messages  to  Colosse  and  to  Ephesus.     The  term  ZidKovot 


280  COLOSSIANS  IV.   8. 

may  mean,  generally,  one  who  has  spent  his  thue  and  energies 
in  connection  with  the  church  and  that  apostle  who  was  one 
of  its  ornaments  and  bulwarks.  In  Eph.  vi.  2 1  he  is  called, 
as  here,  "  the  beloved  brother  and  trusty  servant,"  but  the 
apostle  adds  in  this  place  a  third  epithet — koI  (tvvBov\o<; — 
"  and  fellow-servant."  Official  service  of  a  general  nature  is 
implied  in  BtaKovo^,  but  under  this  term  the  apostle  speaks  of 
him  as  a  colleague.  See  under  i.  7.  The  words  iv  Kvpia  are 
referred  by  De  Wette  to  all  the  three  epithets,  and  by  Meyer 
to  the  last  two  of  them.  The  meaning  is  not  different  which- 
ever view  be  adopted.  But  as  the  first  two  names  have 
distinct  and  characteristic  epithets  attached  to  them,  and  the 
last  has  none,  perhaps  iv  Kvplw  is  to  be  specially  joined  to  it, 
for  the  fellowship  in  service  is  marked  by  the  common  object 
and  sphere  of  it — "the  Lord." 

(Yev.  8.)  There  are  in  this  verse  two  marked  differences  of 
reading.  The  Textus  Eeceptus,  followed  by  Tischendorf,  reads 
%va  yvoi  ra  irepl  vficov — "That  he  might  know  your  affairs;" 
but  the  other  reading  is  Iva  yvwre  ra  irepl  'q/juwv — "  That  ye 
might  know  our  affairs."  The  last  appears  to  be  the  most 
natural.  The  apostle  had  just  said,  "All  about  me  shall 
Tychicus  tell  you,  whom  I  have  sent  for  this  purpose,  that  ye 
might  know  how  it  fares  with  us,"  and  then  he  adds  of  him 
and  Onesimus,  "  they  will  inform  you  of  all  things  here." 
Whereas,  if  the  reading  of  the  Eeceived  Text  be  adopted,  a 
new  idea  is  introduced — "  that  he  might  know  your  affairs  " — 
and  one  out  of  harmony  with  the  twice  expressed  design  of 
the  mission.  The  common  reading  has  the  support  of  C,  D'% 
E,  J,  K,  the  Syriac  and  Vulgate  Versions,  and  many  of  the 
Fathers.  The  other  reading  has,  however.  A,  B,  D\  F,  G, 
the  text  of  Theodoret  and  Jerome.  The  phrase,  et?  avTo 
rovTo,  refers  to  what  has  been  said,  viz.  "  all  my  state  shall 
Tychicus  declare  unto  you ; "  and  he  adds,  "  I  have  sent  him 
for  this  very  purijose."  Is  it  conceivable  that  now  the  apostle 
should  introduce  another  and  very  different  purpose  after  this 
strong  assertion  ?  It  is  objected  to  this  reading  that  it  is 
copied  from  Eph.  vi.  22.  But  surely,  in  two  epistles  written 
at  the  same  time,  and  carried  by  the  same  bearer,  might  not 
the  same  commission  be  given  to  him  for  both  churches,  and 
in  the  same  words  ?     If  the  other  clauses  of  the  commission 


COLOSSIANS  IV.   9.  281 

are  the  same,  why  should  this  clause  vary  t  The  declared 
result  is  the  same  in  both  places,  and  for  both  churches — 
"  that  he  might  comfort  your  hearts  " — and  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  any  difference  in  the  process,  for  their  hearts  were 
to  be  comforted  by  a  direct  and  full  knowledge  of  the  apostle's 
condition.  The  various  lections  may  have  arisen  from  omit- 
ting the  syllable  re  before  rd,  from  their  resemblance.  One 
ancient  Father  has  7^03  re  rd.  Bengel  takes  yvo)  for  the  first 
person.  The  new  reading  is  adopted  by  Scholz  and  Lachmann 
as  editors,  recommended  by  Griesbach,  vindicated  by  Einck, 
and  followed  by  Meyer,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Olshausen,  and 
Huther.     The  reading  then  is — 

'  Ov  eirefiylra  7rpo<?  vfid<;  eh  avrb  rovro  iva  yvwre  ra  irept 
rj/jLMv — "  Whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for  this  very  purpose, 
that  ye  might  know  our  affairs."  In  the  verb  eTrefiyfra  is  a 
common  idiom.  Tychicus  could  not  be  sent  off  till  the  letter 
was  finished,  and  yet  he  says,  forestalling  the  act,  "  I  have 
sent  him."  The  Colossians  were  in  distress  at  the  apostle's 
condition,  and  in  sorrow  for  his  imprisonment;  but  when 
Tychicus  should  tell  them  how  he  was  circumstanced,  and 
what  his  views  and  feelings  were,  how  his  mind  was  unruffled 
and  his  courage  unsubdued,  he  would  comfort  their  hearts — 
Kal  TrapaKoXearj  Ta?  KapSia^  vficov. 

Tychicus  was  not  to  be  despatched  on  this  errand  by  him- 
self. He  had  a  companion  whose  history  and  change  had 
been  striking  and  peculiar  in  their  nature. 

(Ver.  9.)  ^vv  ^Ovrjcrifia)  rw  iriCTU)  Kal  dyaTnjroi  d.SeX(})a> — 
"  Along  with  Onesimus,  the  faithful  and  beloved  brother." 
Onesimus  carried  with  him  another  and  more  special  testi- 
monial and  introduction  to  his  master,  Philemon.  Onesimus 
had  been  a  slave — had  fled  from  his  owner,  and  had,  during 
his  exile,  been  converted  by  the  apostle.  He  was  sent  back 
in  his  new  character,  "not  now  as  a  servant,  but  above  a 
servant — a  brother  beloved,  especially  to  me,  but  how  much 
more  to  thee,  both  in  the  flesh  and  in  the  Lord."  On  being 
converted  he  had  become,  and  is  now  eiilogized  as,  "a  brother;" 
and  whatever  may  have  been  his  delinquencies  as  a  slave 
of  Philemon,  he  is  now  commended  as  a  faithful  brother — 
one  the  genuineness  of  whose  Christianity  might  be  safely 
trusted.      He   was    also   "  one    of    themselves " — 'E|    vfxcoi^, 


282  COLOSSIANS   IV.   19. 

Colosse  being  either  the  place  of  his  birth  or  his  ordinary 
abode. 

JJavra  v/xlv  yvtoptovac  ra  a)Se — "  They  shall  inform  you  of 
all  matters  here."  The  phrase  is  of  much  the  same  meaning 
as  ra  kut  i/xe  irdvra  in  verse  7,  only  the  last  is  more  per- 
sonal, and  the  one  before  us  more  general  in  its  nature.  The 
apostle  knew  well  the  anxiety  of  the  Colossians  about  him, 
and  he  wished  them  to  be  amply  gratified. 

The  epistle  is  now  brought  to  a  conclusion  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  few  salutations.  Those  who  send  their  greetings  to 
Colosse,  were  either  personally,  or  at  least  by  name,  known 
to  the  church.  The  Syriac  translator,  in  rendering  the  Greek 
term  "  salute,"  reverts  to  the  old  Hebrew  form,  and  makes  it 
— "  ask  for  the  peace  of." 

(Ver,  10.)  Aaird^eTaL  vfia^;  Apiarap'yo'i  o  avvai'^aXoyro'; 
fiov — "  Aristarchus  my  fellow-prisoner  saluteth  you."  Aris- 
tarchus  was  a  Macedonian,  and  a  native  of  Thessalonica. 
Acts  xix.  29,  XX.  4,  xxvii.  2  ;  Philem.  24.  He  had  been 
much  in  Paul's  society — was  with  him  during  the  riot  at 
Ephesus,  and  several  of  his  journeys  in  Syria  and  Greece — 
was  with  him  too  when  he  sailed  for  Italy,  in  order  to  follow 
out  his  appeal  to  Cajsar,  and  seems  to  have  remained  with 
him  in  Rome.  He  is  here  termed  a  "  fellow-prisoner,"  but  in 
Philemon  only  a  fellow-labourer ;  whereas  in  this  epistle 
Epaphras  is  named  a  fellow-servant,  but  in  Philemon  a  fellow- 
prisoner.  From  such  an  exchange  of  those  epithets,  it  has 
been  inferred  that  the  imprisonment  of  Aristarchus  was  not 
compelled  but  voluntary.  There  was  no  charge  against  him, 
and  no  prosecution.  He  seems  to  have  attached  himself  to 
Paul,  and  he  willingly  shared  his  imprisonment,  that  the 
apostle  might  enjoy  his  service  and  sympathy.  Probably,  as 
Meyer  suggests,  his  friends  shared  in  his  confinement  by 
turns.  It  was  Aristarchus  who  was  with  him  when 
he  wrote  to  the  Colossians;  but  Epaphras  had  taken 
his  place  when,  about  the  same  period,  he  wrote  to 
Philemon. 

Kal  MdpKQ<i  0  dveyjrio'i  Bapvd^a.  By  dve^jno'?,  allied  to 
nepos — nephew — is  to  be  understood  not  nephew  but  cousin 
— geschwisterkind — "  sister's  son,"  by  which  term  our  trans- 
lators   themselves  probably  meant  cousin.     Num.  xxxvi.  11. 


COLOSSIANS   IV.   10.  283 

HesycLius  defines  it  thus — avey^toi,  aBeXcfycov  vloC}  There 
seems  no  good  reason  to  doubt  that  Mark  is  the  John  Mark 
referred  to  in  Acts  xii.  12,  25,  xiii.  5,  13,  xv.  37-39.  He 
was  the  occasion  of  the  well-known  dispute  and  separation 
between  Paul  and  Barnabas.  On  a  former  missionary  tour, 
he  had  left  them,  and  "  went  not  with  them  to  the  work." 
Paul,  therefore,  thought  it  not  good  to  take  him, — "  and  the 
contention  was  so  sharp  between  them,  that  they  parted 
asunder  the  one  from  the  other."  Whether  Paul  or  Barnabas 
was  right  in  his  opinion  about  Mark  we  know  not.  His  de- 
sertion of  a  former  enterprise  seemed  to  justify  Paul's  opinion, 
and  perhaps  Barnabas  thought  too  kindly  of  a  near  relation. 
Yet  his  subsequent  conduct  seems  to  warrant  the  substantial 
soundness  of  the  judgment  of  Barnabas.  Mark  was  apparently 
reconciled  to  Paul  afterwards,  and  may  have  given  the  apostle 
ample  reason  to  retract  his  censure.  It  may  be,  too,  that  the 
very  dispute  about  him  awakened  within  him  renewed  energy 
and  perseverance.  Again  does  Paul  mention  him  with  high 
commendation,  2  Tim.  iv.  11, — "Only  Luke  is  with  me. 
Take  Mark,  and  bring  him  with  thee  :  for  he  is  profitable  to 
me  for  the  ministry." 

The  name  of  Barnabas  seems  to  be  presented  by  Paul  as  a 
kind  of  passport  to  Mark.  Barnabas  must  have  been  a  name 
familiar  to  the  Colossian  church.  His  character  must  have 
endeared  him  to  all  who  knew  him,  or  had  heard  of  his  hearty 
evangelical  labours.  By  birth  a  Levite,  of  the  island  of 
Cyprus,  he  was  at  a  very  early  stage  of  its  history  converted 
to  Christianity.  At  once  he  disencumbered  himself  of  his 
worldly  possessions,  and  devoted  himself  to  the  spread  of  the 
gospel.  It  was  he  who  introduced  Paul  to  the  church  in 
Jerusalem,  and  such  was  the  confidence  reposed  in  him,  that 
he  was  sent  as  the  deputy  of  the  mother-church  to  Antioch, 
to  bring  back  a  faithful  report  of  the  progress  of  the  gospel 
in  that  city.  On  his  visit  to  the  Syrian  capital,  the  sacred 
historian  says  of  him,  Acts  xi.  23,  24,  "Who,  when  he  came, 
and  had  seen  the  grace  of  God,  was  glad,  and  exhorted  them 

^  Lobeck,  ad  Phrynich. ,  says — "Pollux  dicit  filiosfiliasquefratrum  etsororum 
did  ivt^pious,  ex  his prognatos  uvf^^ialou;,  avi^^ia.'ia.s."  It  is  thus  the  same  with 
i|aStX(p<)'s — "first-cousin."  The  word  rendered  "  nephews,"  1  Tim.  v.  4,  as  the 
translation  of  'ixytva,  signifies,  as  it  often  does  in  Old  English,  not  brothers'  and 
sisters'  cliildren,  but  nepotes — descendants  generally,  and  especially  TiKva  r't»>at. 


284  COLOSSI ANS  IV.   10. 

all,  that  with  purpose  of  heart  they  would  cleave  unto  the 
Lord.  For  he  was  a  good  man,  and  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  of  faith :  and  much  people  was  added  unto  the  Lord." 
Barnabas,  finding  the  field  so  ample  and  so  inviting,  went  at 
once  to  Tarsus,  and  brought  Saul  with  him  to  Antioch,  and 
such  was  the  great  success  of  their  joint  labours  in  preaching 
Christ,  that  "  the  disciples  were  called  Christians  first  in 
Antioch."  Barnabas  next  went  up  to  Jerusalem  with  funds 
to  relieve  the  poor  saints,  and  then  Paul  and  he  visited  many 
places  in  company.  He  is  found  soon  again  at  Antioch,  and 
he  was  delegated  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  secure  a  settlement 
of  the  angry  controversy  as  to  the  observance  by  Christians 
of  the  Mosaic  law.  Eeturning  to  Antioch  with  the  apostolic 
finding,  he  continued  some  time  there  "  teaching  and  preach- 
ing the  word  of  the  Lord."  It  was  after  this  period  that 
Paul  and  he  had  the  sharp  contention  about  the  fitness  of 
Mark  for  the  missionary  tour  which  they  had  sketched  for 
themselves.  The  last  account  of  him  is  in  these  words — 
"  and  so  Barnabas  took  Mark  and  sailed  unto  Cyprus."  There 
seems  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  society  of  Barnabas 
had  a  salutary  effect  on  the  mind  of  Paul,  and  at  a  period, 
too,  when  he  might  not  be  fully  conscious  of  his  powers  and 
r[ualifications,  nor  be  able  to  realize  the  high  destiny  which 
lay  before  him.  Barnabas  thus  stood  on  the  confines  of  the 
apostolic  college,  though  he  was  not  within  it,  and  next  to  its 
members,  he  occupies  a  distinguished  place  in  the  early 
church.  Such,  in  fine,  was  the  zeal  and  success  of  this  "  Son 
of  Consolation,"  such  his  prominence  among  the  brethren, 
and  so  identified  was  he  with  the  apostles,  that  he  seems  to 
be  classed  among  them.  Acts  xiv.  4.  So  that  we  are  dis- 
posed to  infer  that  the  mention  of  him  here  was  not  simply 
to  point  out  Mark  from  others  bearing  the  same  name,  but 
also  to  secure  for  him,,  through  his  relationship  to  Barnabas, 
a  cordial  welcome  and  reception  at  Colosse. 

Ilepl  ov  iXdlSere  ivroXd^ — "  Concerning  whom  ye  received 
instructions."  The  antecedent  is  not  Barnabas,  as  Theophy- 
lact  supposes,  but  Mark.  What  these  commands  were,  or  by 
whom  enjoined,  what  they  contained,  or  when  they  were 
delivered,  we  know  not.  Some  suppose  that  they  were  sent 
at  this  period  by  Tychicus — a  supposition  which  the  tense  of 


COLOSSIANS  IV.   11.  285 

the  verb  will  not  warrant.  Vain  is  all  conjecture,  such  as 
that  of  Anselm  and  Schrader,  who  think  that  the  apostle 
alludes  to  previous  advices  of  an  opposite  nature,  which  are 
here  recalled  ;  or  that  of  Grotius,  who  refers  the  missive  to 
Barnabas  ;  or  Huther,  who  ascribes  it  to  some  Christian  com- 
munity— von  irgend  einer  Gevicinde  ;  or  Estius,  who  so  natu- 
rally assigns  its  origin  to  the  Church  of  Eome.^  Not  a  few 
imagine  that  the  following  clause  contains  the  instructions — 

'Kav  eXOy  tt/oo?  vfid'i,  Be^aaOe  avTov — "  If  he  come  to  you, 
receive  him."  But  against  this  view  is  to  be  noticed  the 
plural  form  €VTo\d<;,  implying  that  there  was  a  variety  of 
commands ;  and  the  omission  of  the  article  shows  that  it  has 
no  reference  to  what  follows.  This  view,  adopted  by  Calvin 
and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  seems,  however,  to  have  originated 
a  various  reading — he^aaOat,  found  in  D\  F,  G,  and  in  the 
Syriac  Version  and  Ambrosiaster  — "  concerning  whom  ye 
have  received  commandment  to  receive  Jiim,  should  he  come 
to  you."  Such  a  reading  at  once  betrays  its  exegetical  origin. 
The  present  reading  cannot  be  disturbed.  We  are  therefore 
ignorant  of  these  evroXal,  in  their  origin  and  purpose.  But 
the  apostle  adds,  parenthetically,  for  himself,  concerning 
Mark,  "if  he  come  to  you,  receive  him."  Mark  evidently 
purposed  a  journey  which  might  lead  him  to  Colosse,  and  the 
Colossians  were  to  give  him,  should  he  come  among  them,  a 
kind  reception.  The  verb  Be^ofiat  is  used,  both  in  the  classics 
and  New  Testament,  to  denote  the  welcome  which  one  gives 
to  an  honoured  guest — a  guest-friend,  as  the  Germans  translate 
the  Greek  feVo?.  Matt.  x.  14,  40,  41  ;  Luke  ix.  5,  48.  The 
apostle  continues  the  list  of  salutations — 

(Ver.  11.)  KaVl7)(Tov'i  6  Xejofievo'i^Iovcrro'i — "And  Jesus, 
wdio  is  named  Justus."  Of  this  Jesus  Justus  we  know  nothing. 
Chrysostom  and  others  would  identify  him  with  the  Justus 
mentioned  in  Acts  xviii.  7.  That  appears  to  have  been  a 
proselyte — this  was  a  born  Jew. 

The  proper  punctuation  of  the  remaining  clause  is  matter 
of  doubt.  It  has  been  commonly  read — ol  ovre'i  eK  irepu- 
Tofir]<i,  with  a  stop,  "  who  were  of  the  circumcision,"  namely, 

'  The  view  of  Reuss,  in  his  GescJuchte  der  Neutest.  Schri/ten,  is  both  unneces- 
sary and  extreme,  for  he  supposes  by  this  language  that  there  had  been  sent  a 
previous  epistle  to  the  Colossians,  which  has  been  lost. 


286  COLOSSIANS  IV.   11. 

Aristarclius,  Mark,  and  Jesus  Justus.  And  then  the  apostle 
adds — "  these  only  are  my  fellow-workers  to  the  kingdom  of 
God."  But  it  is  plain  that  the  apostle  had  many  other  fellow- 
workers,  and  that  he  means,  that  among  the  believing  Jews 
these  only  had  co-operated  with  him.  Such  a  necessary 
limitation  of  meaning  has  suggested  another  form  of  punctua- 
tion, which  puts  a  stop  after  'IoOo-to?,  and  commences  with 
01  6vT€<;  e/c  irepiTofi^<;  a  new  sentence — "  these  being  of  the 
circumcision,  they  alone  were  my  fellow- workers ; "  or, "  of  them 
of  the  circumcision,  these  alone  were  my  fellow- workers."  This 
construction  is  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Steiger,  Huther,  and 
Meyer.  In  such  a  case  the  phrase  ol  oVre?  e'/c  Tre/jiTo/i?}?,  is 
a  species  of  anacoluthon.  Such  a  construction,  however,  seems 
awkward.  Indeed,  by  the  first  form  of  construction,  the  same 
result  is  obtained ;  for  it  is  plain  that  in  ovtoi  fiovoi,  the 
writer  limits  himself  to  the  circumcision.  By  "  the  kingdom 
of  God,"  the  apostle  means  the  church — as  a  divine  institute  ; 
and  they  were  his  colleagues  not  in  the  kingdom,  but  "  unto 
the  kingdom,"  that  is,  unto  its  furtherance  and  consolidation. 
The  preposition  et?  has  often  such  a  signification.  To  con- 
solidate and  extend  this  kingdom  was  the  end  of  his  apostolical 
mission.  These  three  Jews  were  the  only  parties  of  their 
race  who  lent  him  any  assistance  for  this  purpose  at  Eome, 
and  of  whom  therefore  he  adds — 

OiTivef    iyev^Orjaav   jjloi    7rap7)<yopca — "  Who  indeed  have 
been  an  encouragement  to  me."     The  Syriac  renders — "  and 

these  only,"  ^n  .■-\«-^  ^qjcjio.  The  noun  occurs  only  here. 
It  signifies  originally  an  address  or  exhortation,  then  it  came 
to  denote  the  result  of  such  exhortation — comfort.^  Still  we 
apprehend  it  is  comfort  in  the  form  of  encouragement.  The 
other  believing  Jews  plagued  the  apostle,  and  he  complains 
of  them  in  the  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  that  they  preached 
Christ  "  even  of  envy  and  strife — of  contention,  not  sincerely, 
supposing  to  add  affliction  to  my  bonds."  Phil.  i.  15,  16.  As 
the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  zealous  maintainor  of  the 
free  and  unconditioned  admission  of  men  to  the  church,  without 
any  reference  to  the  law,  Paul  was  an  object  of  bitter  prejudice 
to  many  Christian  Hebrews.  The  names  which  follow  are, 
therefore,  those  of  persons  of  heathen  birth. 
^  Kypke,  in  loc. 


COLOSSIANS  IV.  12.  287 

(Ver.  12.)  ^Aa-7rd^6Tai  v/j,a<i  'JETra^pa?  o  e^  vficov — "There 
salutes  you  Epaphras,  one  of  you."  i.  7.  As  a  Colossian 
himself,  Epaphras  had  a  deep  interest  in  them,  and  sends 
them  his  affectionate  greeting.  The  apostle  further  characterizes 
Epaphras  as  a  servant  of  Christ — BovXo'i  Xpia-rov.  Some 
insist  on  putting  no  comma  between  vixoiv  and  S0OX09.  The 
reading  of  highest  authority  seems  to  be  XpccrTou  'Irja-ov — 
"  a  servant  of  Christ  Jesus."  This  good  man,  probably  the 
founder  of  the  Colossian  church,  could  not  forget  them — for 
he  was  one  of  them  by  birth ;  and,  as  a  servant  of  Christ 
Jesus,  and  one  of  their  pastors,  he  had  also  a  deep  spiritual 
affinity  with  them.  And  not  only  so,  but  the  apostle  describes 
him  further — as 

TIdvroTe  dy(ovi,^ofievo<i  virep  vficov  iv  Tai<i  7rpocr€V'xa,i<; — 
"  Always  striving  for  you  in  his  prayers."  Though  he  was 
absent,  he  did  not  forget  them.  The  best  scene  of  memory 
is  at  the  throne  of  grace.  In  proportion  to  the  fervour  of 
one's  affection  will  be  the  importunity  of  his  petition.  Love 
so  pure  and  spiritual  as  that  of  Epaphras  will  produce  an 
agony  of  earnestness.  There  will  be  no  listless  or  fitful  asking 
— but  a  mighty  and  continual  wrestling  of  heart.  And  the 
apostle  witnesses  that  for  this  end  Epaphras  supplicated — 

"Iva  aTTjTe  TekeioL  koI  ireirXrjpocfiopTjfievot  iv  iravrl  deXijfjLarL 
rov  ©eov — "  That  ye  may  stand  perfect  and  full-assured  in  all 
the  will  of  God."  ^  The  Stephanie  reading  ireirXrjpcofiivoi  is 
not  based  on  sufficient  authority.  The  language  of  the  clause 
is  very  expressive.  Epaphras  prayed  that  they  might  stand, 
and  neither  wander  nor  fall — stand  perfect  and  full  assured — 
every  grace  of  the  Spirit  within  them,  and  their  minds  pos- 
sessing an  undoubting  and  imperturbable  persuasion  on  every 
point  of  Divine  instruction,  or  of  "  the  whole  will  of  God."  It 
is  a  needless  refinement  on  the  part  of  Meyer  to  connect  iv 
iravrl  deXtjfiaTt  so  closely  with  o-t^t6,  as  the  Local-hestimmung ; 
and  to  take  rek.  koX  ireirX.  as  the  Modal-hestimmung.  For  the 
words  iv  OeXrjp^ari  are,  in  our  view,  closely  allied  to  reXetoc 
Kol  TreirXr). — that  they  might  be  perfect  and  fully  assured  in 
the  whole  will  of  God.  And  we  are  the  more  confirmed  in 
our  view  when  we  turn  to  ii.  2,  where  the  noun  'irXr}po(popLa 

^  Ulphilas  lias  here   the  expressive  term  allavauratvana — all-doing— orono- 
perantes. 


288  COLOSSIANS  IV.    13. 

occurs  in  the  phrase — "full  assurance  of  understanding." 
And  the  allusion  is  plainly  to  the  dangers  which  beset  the 
Colossian  church,  and  against  which  they  are  warned  in  the 
second  chapter, — dangers  in  the  form  of  seductive  spiritualism 
and  false  philosophy,  and  against  which  the  grand  preservative 
was  a  perfect  and  full  assured  knowledge  of  the  whole  will  of 
God.  An  imperfect  or  dubious  acquaintanceship  with  that 
will  would  at  once  lay  them  open  to  the  stratagems  of  the 
false  teachers, '  who  headed  their  errors  with  the  title  and 
varnished  them  with  the  semblance,  of  the  "  Divine  will,"  and 
claimed  for  their  theosophic  dreams  and  ascetic  statutes  Divine 
authority.  See  under  ii.  2.  The  preposition  iv  is  not  to  be 
taken  as  eh,  with  Grotius ;  nor  secunditni,  with  Storr ;  nor  yet 
durch — through,  with  Bahr.  The  apostle  subjoins  a  further 
testimony  to  Epaphras  in  the  following  verse.  But  there  is 
no  little  variety  of  reading  as  to  the  quality  or  virtue  ascribed 
to  him.      The  Eeceived  Text  reads — 

(Ver.  13.)  MapTvpo)  yap  avrm  on  e^ei  ^y]\ov  nroXvv  virep 
vjjbwv — "  For  I  certify,  in  his  favour,  that  he  has  great  zeal  for 
you."  This  verse  is  confirmatory  {'yap)  of  the  preceding. 
Instead  of  t^rfKov  ttoXvv,  A,  B,  C,  etc.,  have  ttoXvv  itovov  ; 
while  D\  F,  G  have  iroXvv  kottov.  Some,  again,  read  iroOov, 
and  some  wywva.  The  best  reading  appears  to  be  irovov — 
the  Vulgate  rendering  it  multum  laborew,.  The  other  readings 
— ^rjXov,  irodov,  and  wyoiva — may  have  been  so  many  glosses 
on  the  more  difficult  term  irovov,  which  occurs  only  else- 
where in  the  Apocalypse.  IIovo<i  is  toil  or  travail — such  as 
that  which  attends  a  combat.^  Hesychius  defines  it  by  ctttouSt;, 
eircraai'i.  It  occurs  several  times  in  the  Septuagint.  This 
7roi>o9  led  to  the  previous  prayerful  aycov.  This  stress  of 
spirit  begat  the  anxious  solicitude  in  prayer  which  the  apostle 
has  described  in  the  former  verse.  But  the  pains  and  prayers 
of  Epaphras  were  not  confined  to  Colosse,  for  the  apostle  adds — 

^  An  old  commentator  on  Colossians  thus  defines  righit  zeal : — "  1.  Let  it  not 
be  a  pretended  zeale  as  in  loash.  2.  Nor  a  superstitious  zeale  as  in  Paule. 
3.  Nor  a  passionate  zeale,  only  for  a  fit,  as  in  lohn  at  his  first  entrance.  4.  Nor 
a  malitious  zeale  as  in  persecutors,  that  thinke  they  doe  God  good  seruice  in 
vexing  men  wrongfully.  5.  Nor  a  wrong  intended  zeale,  such  as  is  the  zeale  of 
merit-mongers.  6.  Nor  a  contentious  zeale,  such  as  theirs  that  make  needlesse 
rents  in  the  church.  7.  Nor  a  secure  zeale  that  is  a  zeale  not  raised  by  godly 
sorrow,  or  that  is  carried  without  care  or  feare  of  falling  away.     8.  Nor  an  idle 


COLOSSIANS   IV.   14.  289 

Kal  ruiv  iv  AaohtKeia  Kal  toov  iv  'lepairoXei — "  And  for 
them  in  Laodicea,  and  for  them  in  Hierapolis."  Laodicea  and 
Hierapolis  were  cities  of  the  same  region  as  Colosse.  See 
Introduction,  chap.  i.  All  the  three  towns  were  in  Phrygia, 
and  Epaphras  was  well  known  to  the  churches  in  them.  He 
bore  their  names  on  his  heart  before  the  Lord  in  fervent  and 
uninterrupted  intercession. 

(Ver.  1-4.)  ^A<T7rd^€Tat  vfia^  AovKd<;  6  larpo^  6  arya7n]T6<i, 
Ka\  Arj^a^i — "  There  salutes  you  Luke,  the  beloved  physician, 
and  Demas."  That  this  Luke  was  Paul's  companion  does  not 
appear  to  admit  of  any  doubt;  nor  is  there  any  reason  for 
denying  the  old  opinion,  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  third 
Gospel.  He  is  styled  "  the  beloved  physician,"  either  to  dis- 
tinguish him  from  others  of  the  same  name,  or  to  specify 
the  peculiar  office  in  which  he  had  endeared  himself  to  the 
apostle.  The  health  of  the  apostle,  as  they  might  know,  had 
been  signally  benefited  by  his  medical  skill,  and  that  this 
might  be  at  all  times  available  to  his  patient,  Luke  attached 
himself  to  his  person,  accompanied  him  in  several  of  his 
missionary  tours,  was  with  him  in  his  voyage  to  Pome,  and 
remained  with  him  in  the  Italian  metropolis.  Luke  is 
mentioned  in  Philem.  24  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  11.  It  is  said 
in  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  1,  2,  "  Honour  a  physician  with  the 
honour  due  unto  him  for  the  uses  which  ye  may  have  of 
him,  for  the  Lord  hath  created  him,  for  of  the  Most  High 
cometh  healing."  Sir  Thomas  Browne,  however,  in  the  first 
chapter  of  his  Religio  Medici,  says,  that  "  several  circumstances 
might  persuade  the  world  he  had  no  religion,"  and  among  them 
he  mentions — "  the  general  scandal  of  my  profession."  It  was, 
indeed,  a  common  saying, — uhi  ires  fnedici,  duo  aihei.  Luke 
might  have  been  an  example  to  the  profession.  His  physico- 
spiritual  character  is  happily  delineated  in  the  following 
epigram : 

zeale  that  is  all  words  without  workes  :  the  word  is  reiidred  labour  sometimes, 
and  it  is  certaine  true  zeale  is  spent  about  good  workes.  9.  Nor  an  ouercurious 
zeale,  shewed  either  by  sticking  too  much  to  the  letter  of  scripture,  or  by  prying 
into  or  harsh  censureing  of  the  lesser  faults  of  others.  10.  Or  a  bitter  zeale, 
that  spends  it  selfe  in  rayling  and  fiery  reproches,  railers  seldome  stand  long.  ' 
11.  Or  an  ignorant  bold  zeale  such  as  was  in  the  lewes.  Or  lastly  a  selfe  con- 
ceited zeale,  when  men  trust  too  much  to  themselues,  and  their  owne  iudgi-ments. " 
—By  field.     London,  1615. 


290  COLOSSIANS  IV.   15,16. 

"  Pandit  evangelii  et  medicinae  munera  Lucas 

Artibus  hinc,  illinc  religione  valens. 

Utilis  ille  labor,  per  quern  vixere  tot  aegri 

Utilior  per  quem  tot  didicere  mori."  ^ 

Who  Demas  was,  we  know  not.  He  seems  to  have  been 
the  person  who  afterwards  left  the  apostle  on  account  of  his 
love  of  the  world ;  and  the  name  has  no  distinctive  or 
eulogistic  epithet  added  to  it,  as  if  the  apostle  had  suspected 
this  future  estrangement — an  estrangement  which  we  are 
perhaps  not  warranted  to  identify  with  absolute  apostasy. 
2  Tim.  iv.  10.  The  word  itself,  as  has  been  remarked,  is 
Greek,  and  not  Hebrew,  as  Schoettgen  thought;  for  he 
supposes  it  to  be  a  Greek  form  of  idh,  ending  in  a?,  and 
not  to9 — as  BqfiLO'i  would  mean  carnifex.  It  is  probably  a 
contraction  of  Arj/M^rpiof;. 

(Ver.  15.)  ^ AcTTrdaaaOe  rov<i  iv  AaoBiKeia  aSeX</)ov?,  Kal 
NvfKpdv,  Kol  rrjv  kut  oIkov  avrov  eKKXijaiav.  The  various 
readings  in  the  verse  are  not  very  important.  Some  read 
Nvjju(f)av  as  a  female  name,  and  write  avrrji;,  like  B,  in  agree- 
ment of  gender.  Others,  for  the  opposite  reason,  support  the 
form  avrov;  while  A,  C,  and  others,  read  avrwv,  but  avrov 
seems  to  have  highest  authority.  "  Salute  the  brethren  in 
Laodicea,  and  Nymphas,  and  the  church  in  his  house."  The 
Colossian  church  was,  in  the  apostle's  name,  to  salute  the 
sister  church  in  Laodicea,  especially  not  forgetting  in  such  a 
greeting  Nymphas,  and  the  church  in  his  house.  The  first 
Kal  points  out  Nymphas  as  worthy  of  distinction,  and  probably 
the  last  Kal  introduces  the  explanation.  The  church  in  his 
house  could  not,  as  Bahr  supposes,  be  the  whole  Laodicean 
church;  nor  can  the  words,  as  some  of  the  Greek  Fathers 
opine,  mean  simply  the  family  of  Nymphas,  all  of  whom  were 
Christians.  Some  portion  of  the  Laodicean  believers,  for  what 
reason  we  know  not,  statedly  met  for  worship  in  the  house  of 
Nymphas  ;  and  Meyer  has  shown  that  if  avrwv  were  the  right 
reading,  as  he  thinks  it  is,  such  a  use  of  the  plural  is  not  against 
Greek  usage. 

(Ver.    16.)    K.aX   orav    avayvcoadfj   Trap'    vfiiv    17   eincnoXri, 
iroiT^a-are  Xva  Kal   iv  rfj  AaoSiKecov  iKKXrjcria   avayvcoadfj,  Kal 
rrjv  eK  AaoBtKeiaf;  'iva  Kal   vfi€l<;   dvayvSre — "  And  when  this 
^  "Webster  and  "Wilkinson's  New  Testament,  p.  206. 


COLOSSI  AN  S   IV.   16.  291 

epistle  has  been  read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also  in 
the  church  of  the  Laodiceans ;  and  that  ye  too  read  that  from 
Laodicea."  The  construction  iroirja-are  'iva  belongs  to  the 
later  Greek.  Matthiae,  §  531,  1.  Nor  should  we  say  that 
in  such  a  case  tW  is  ecbatic,  for  though  result  be  described 
in  the  clause  which  follows  it,  design  is  clearly  expressed  by 
the  verb  which  precedes  it.  The  apostle  alludes  to  the  public 
reading  of  his  letter  in  the  churches,  and  recommends  an 
exchange  of  epistles.  The  epistle  sent  to  Colosse  and  read 
there  was  to  be  sent  to  Laodicea,  and  read  there  too.  The 
words  Trap  vfuv  signify  "  among  you,"  not  by  you ;  and 
17  iina-roKri  is  the  one  which  the  apostle  was  at  that  moment 
writing.  But  the  difficulty  lies  in  determining  what  the 
Colossians  were  to  read  in  turn,  or  what  document  is  meant 
by  the  phrase  rr]v  e'/c  AaohiKelaii — "  that  from  Laodicea."  The 
apostle's  language  is  not  explicit,  inasmuch  as  the  Colossians 
would  understand  at  once  the  reference  made  by  him.  But 
the  question  is,  does  e/c  point  to  the  origin  or  authorship  of 
the  epistle,  or  only  to  its  present  localit}^  ?  Was  it  an  epistle 
which  had  come  to  Paul  from  Laodicea,  or  would  it  need  only 
to  be  brought  out  of  Laodicea  in  order  to  be  read  at  Colosse  ? 

The  expression  is  pregnant  and  idiomatic. 

1.  Many  have  taken  it  to  mean  a  letter  which  Paul 
himself  had  received  from  the  church  in  Laodicea.  Theodoret, 
Photius,  Calvin,  Estius,  Erasmus,  Beza,  van  Til,  Baumgarten- 
Crusius,  and  others,  hold  this  view,  though  they  can  only 
conjecture  as  to  the  nature  and  contents  of  such  a  document. 
But  the  principal  support  of  such  a  view  is  the  assumed 
meaning  of  e/c,  in  the  phrase  e/c  .^aoSt/ce/a?.  It  is  argued 
that  e'/c  denotes  origin.  True,  but  the  texture  of  the  verse 
shows  that  the  epistle  is  supposed  to  be  in  Laodicea,  when 
they  were  to  try  and  get  it  oiit  of  that  city.  It  was  to  be 
brought  from  Laodicea  to  them,  and  by  their  own  endeavour. 
Besides,  as  Dr.  Davidson  remarks,  "  It  is  difficult  to  conceive 
of  the  mode  in  which  the  apostle's  injunction  could  have  been 
carried  into  effect.  It  is  very  unlikely  that  the  Laodiceans 
kept  a  copy,  or  that  Paul  knew  of  it.  Or  if  it  be  conjectured 
that  Tychicus  and  Onesimus,  the  bearers  of  the  Colossian 
letter,  carried  that  which  the  apostle  had  received  from  tlie 
Laodiceans,  the  idea  is  inconsistent   with  iroi^aare  Xva  kqI 

z 


292  COLOSSI ANS  IV.  16. 

u/iet?  avayvwre  rrjv  ix  AaoBiKeLa<; ;  implying  endeavour  to  get 
the  Laodicean  epistle."  ^  Nor  is  there  any  hint  in  the  epistle 
to  the  Colossians,  that  it  is  a  reply  to  any  queries  or  com- 
munications, the  reading  of  which  might  cast  light  on  those 
of  its  statements  which  served  the  purpose  of  an  answer. 

2,  Others  take  it  for  some  epistle  written  at  Laodicea, 
either  supposing  it,  like  Theophylact,  to  be  the  First  Epistle 
to  Timothy,  according  to  the  common  subscription  ;  or  like 
Lightfoot,  the  First  Epistle  of  John ;  or  as  Jablonsky  opined, 
an  epistle  written  to  the  Colossian  pastors  generally ;  or  as 
Storr  and  Flatt  would  think,  one  specially  addressed  to 
Epaphras.  Such  suppositions  are  as  easily  refuted  as  they 
are  made.  Philastrius  of  Brescia,  Schultess,  Stein,  in  his 
appendix  to  his  commentary  on  Luke,  and  Schneckenburger, 
suppose  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  be  intended.  It  cannot 
be  the  early  uncanonical  production  now  known  by  the  title 
of  the  Epistle  of  Laodicea,  a  document  which  Hutter  translated 
out  of  Latin  into  Greek,  and  of  which  Jerome  said — ah 
omnibus  exploditur.  Marcion,  in  his  canon,  according  to  Ter- 
tullian,  gave  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  the  title  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans.  [Commentary  on  Ephesians, 
Introduction,  p.  xxv.] 

3.  The  more  probable  opinion  is,  that  it  is  an  epistle  sent 
by  Paul  to  Laodicea  at  this  very  period.  The  epistles  were 
to  be  interchanged.  And  the  interchange  is  naturally  this — 
that  the  Laodiceans  read  the  epistle  which  had  been  sent  to 
Colosse,  and  the  Colossians  the  epistle  which  had  been  sent 
to  Laodicea.^  Wieseler  argues  that  the  epistle  meant  is  that 
to  Philemon.  But  it  is  hard  to  prove  that  either  Archippus 
or  Philemon  was  a  Laodicean.  It  would  certainly  be  strange 
for  the  Colossian  church  to  send  Paul's  charge  to  the  minister 
of  another  church,  when,  according  to  Wieseler,  there  was  an 
epistle  destined  for  individuals  in  the  same  community.  Then, 
again,  as  has  been  observed,  what  is  there  in  the  private  letter 
to  Philemon  to  make  it  of  general  use  at  Colosse  ?  Again, 
many,  as  Biihr,  Steiger,  Bohmer,  and  Anger,  who  hold  that 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  a  circular  letter,  believe  it  to 
be  here  meant,  while  some  maintain  that  its  original  destina- 


'  Introduction,  vol.  ii.  p.  134. 

^  Chronologie  des  Jpost.  Zeitalters,  p. 


452. 


COLOSSI ANS  IV.  16.  293 

tion  was  Laodicea.  But  how,  it  might  be  asked,  how  did  the 
apostle  know  that  the  encyclical  epistle  should  have  reached 
Laodicea  just  at  the  time  when  his  letter  should  arrive  at 
Colosse  ?  The  spirit  of  the  injunction  in  verse  16,  seems 
plainly  to  imply  that  both  letters  were  despatched  at  once, 
and  the  same  might  be  inferred  from  the  apostle's  desire 
expressed  in  ii.  1,  that  the  Laodiceans  as  well  as  the  Colos- 
sians  should  be  aware  of  his  intense  solicitude  for  them. 
Tychicus,  as  Meyer  suggests,  would  travel  through  Laodicea 
to  Colosse,  and  he  would  there  impart  the  oral  confirmation 
that  the  letter  referred  to  by  the  apostle  was  lying  at  Lao- 
dicea. This  arrangement  being  known  to  the  apostle  gave 
precision  to  his  language.  One  difficulty  in  our  way  is  the 
fact  that  Paul  bids  the  Colossian  church  salute  the  brethren 
in  Laodicea.  Why  do  so,  it  is  asked,  if  he  himself  despatched 
a  letter  at  the  same  time  to  Laodicea  ?  But  the  salutation 
sent  through  the  Colossians  would  manifest  the  apostle's 
desire  that  both  churches  should  cherish  a  sisterly  attachment, 
and  the  transmission  of  the  apostle's  salutation  to  Laodicea 
would  be  a  fitting  occasion  for  the  interchange  of  epistles. 

But  will  the  phrase  rrjv  ck  AaoSiKcla^  bear  such  a  meaning? 
There  is  no  doubt  that  it  may,  the  preposition  showing  that 
the  letter  was  there,  and  to  be  brought  out  of  that  city.  The 
idiom  means  that  the  letter  was  there,  or  would  be  found 
there,  and  was  to  be  carried  thence.  Thus,  Bahr  refers  to 
Luke  xi.  13 — 6  irarrjp  6  i^  ovpavov  Baxret  irvevfia  aytov — 
where  the  particle  i^  characterizes  the  descent  of  a  gift  out  of 
heaven,  and  from  One  who  is  in  heaven.  Matt.  xxiv.  17  has 
also  been  referred  to — apat,  ra  eK  t?}9  olKiat  avTov — but  the 
similarity  of  construction  is  not  so  close.  The  case  of  airo, 
in  Heb.  xiii.  24,  and  the  reverse  one  of  et9  in  Luke  ix.  61, 
come  under  a  similar  law.  Compare  2  Cor.  ix.  2 ;  Phil.  iv. 
22.  The  law  is  based  on  what  is  called  the  attraction  of 
prepositions,  when,  for  example,  instead  of  a  preposition  denot- 
ing rest  being  used,  the  idea  of  motion  is  attracted  from  the 
verb,  which  either  expresses  it  or  implies  it,  and  a  preposition 
signifying  such  motion  is  employed.  Kiihner,  §623;  Winer, 
§  66,  6.  The  idea  of  fetching  the  epistle  out  of  the  city  of 
Colosse  was  present  to  the  writer's  mind,  and  so  he  says  e/c — 
the  epistle  to  be  gotten  out,  and  not  iv — the  epistle  now  lying 


294 


COLOSSIANS  IV.   16. 


in  Laodicea.  This  ascertained  usage  puts  an  end  to  the 
objections  of  the  Greek  expositors,  who  aflfirm  that  this  view 
would  necessitate  such  a  phrase  as  ttjv  •rrpo'i  AaoBLK€a<;. 

The  inference,  of  course,  is  that  this  epistle  is  lost,  like 
many  others  of  the  apostle's  writings.  Probably  it  was  wholly 
of  a  temporary  and  local  nature,  and  therefore  has  not  been  pre- 
served.^    An  inspired  writing  is  not  necessarily  a  canonical  one. 


We  subjoin  a  copy  of  the  spurious  epistle  referred  to  on  p.  292  : — 


1.  Paulus  apostolus,  non  ab  homini- 
bus,  neque  per  hominem,  sed  per  Jesum 
Christum,  fratribus  qui  estis  Laodicese. 

2.  Gratia  vobis,  et  pax  a  Deo  Patre 
et  Domino  nostro  Jesu  Christo. 

3.  Gratias  ago  Christo  per  omnem 
orationem  meam,  quod  permanentes 
estis  et  perseverantes  in  operibus  bonis, 
promissionem  expectantes  in  die 
judiciL 

4.  Neque  disturbent  vos  quorundam 
vaniloquia  insimulantium  veritatem,  ut 
vos  avertant  a  veritate  Evangelii,  quod 
a  me  prsedicatur. 

5  Et  nunc  faciet  Deus,  ut  qui  sunt 
ex  me,  perveniant  ad  perfectum  veri- 
tatis  Evangelii,  sint  deservientes,  et 
beuignitatem  operum  facientes,  quae 
sunt  salutis  vitse  seternse. 

6.  Et  nunc  palam  sunt  vincula  mea, 
quae  patior  in  Christo,  in  quibus  laetor 
et  gaudeo. 

7.  Scio  enim  quod  hoc  mihi  est  ad 
salutem  perpetuam,  quod  factum  est 
orationibus  vestris,  administrante 
Spiritu  Sancto. 

8.  Sive  per  vitam,  sive  per  mortem, 
est  mihi  vivere  vita  in  Christo,  et  mori 
gaudium. 

9.  Et  ipse  Dominus  noster  in  nobis 
faciet  misericordiam  suam,  ut  eandem 
dilectionem  habeatis  et  sitis  unanimes. 

10.  Ergo,  dilectissimi,  ut  audistis 
praesentiam  Domini,  ita  sentite,  et 
faeite  in  timore  ;  et  erit  vobis  vita  in 
seternum. 

11.  Est  enim  Deus,  qui  operatur  in 
vobis ; 


1.  Paul  an  apostle,  not  of  men,  neither 
by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ,  to  the 
brethren  which  are  at  Laodicea. 

2.  Grace  be  to  you,  and  peace  from 
God  the  Father,  and  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

3.  I  thank  Christ  in  every  prayer  of 
mine,  because  ye  continue  and  per- 
severe in  good  works,  looking  for  that 
which  is  promised  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. 

4.  Let  not  the  vain  speeches  of  any 
trouble  you,  who  pervert  the  truth, 
that  they  seduce  you  from  the  truth  of 
the  gospel  which  is  preached  by  me. 

5.  And  now  may  God  effect  it,  that 
my  converts  may  attain  to  a  perfect 
knowledge  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel, 
be  beneficent,  and  doing  good  works 
which  are  connected  with  the  salvation 
of  eternal  life. 

6.  And  now  my  bonds  which  I  suffer 
in  Christ,  are  manifest,  in  which  I 
rejoice  and  am  glad. 

7.  For  I  know  that  this  shall  turn 
to  my  salvation  for  ever,  which  is 
secured  through  your  prayer,  and  the 
supply  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

8.  Whether  by  life  or  by  death;  [for] 
to  me  shall  be  a  life  in  Christ,  to  die 
will  be  joy. 

9.  And  our  Lord  Himself  will  grant 
us  His  mercy,  that  ye  may  have  the 
same  love  and  be  like-minded. 

10.  Wherefore,  my  beloved,  as  ye 
have  heard  of  the  coming  of  the  Lord, 
so  tlunk  and  act  in  fear,  and  it  shall 
be  to  you  life  eternal  ; 

11.  For  it  is  God,  who  worketh  in 
you; 


COLOSSIANS  IV.   17.  295 

This  interchange  of  epistles  was  a  salutary  custom ;  it 
made  an  epistle  sent  to  one  church  to  become,  in  reality,  the 
common  property  of  all  the  churches,  and  it  led  in  no  very 
long  period  to  the  formation  of  the  canon  of  the  New 
Testament. 

(Ver.  1 7.)  Kal  elTrare  'Ap'^LTnroi.  BXeTre  rrjv  ZiaKoviav  fjv 
irapeka^e'i  iv  Kvplo),  Xva  avrrjv  7rX.7)poU — "  And  say  to  Arch- 
ippus.  Take  heed  to  the  ministry  which  thou  hast  received  in 
the  Lord,  that  thou  fulfil  it."  Archippus  is  mentioned  also 
in  Philemon.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  opinion  of  Michaelis, 
Storr,  Wieseler,  and  Theodoret,  based  on  the  Apostolic  Con- 
stitutions, vii.  46,^  that  Archippus  was  a  Laodicean.  Philem.  2. 
What  the  motive  of  the  apostle  in  sending  him  this  exhorta- 
tion was,  we  do  not  know.  It  would  be  an  unwarranted 
suspicion,  on  the  one  hand,  to  suppose  that  Archippus  was  in 
danger  of  proving  unfaithful ;  and  it  is  no  less  a  baseless 
notion  of  Bengel,  on  the  other  hand,  that  he  was  either  in 
sickness  or  old  age,  and  not  far  from  the  end  of  his  career. 
The  form  elirare.  is  peculiar.  Winer,,  §15-  ^^  construing 
the  exhortation,  it  serves  no  purpose  to  take  back  'iva 
from  its  place,  and  read  ^SXeVe  Xva,  for  what  then  should 
come  of  avrr]v  ?  2  John  8.  The  phrase  "  in  the  Lord  "  has 
not  the  same  meaning  as  "  from  the  Lord,"  with  which  some 

12.  Et  facite  sine  peccato  qusecunque  12.  And  do  without  sin  whatever 
facitis.  things  ye  do. 

13.  Et  quod  optimum  est,  dilectis-  13.  And  what  is  best,  my  beloved, 
simi,  gaudete  in  Domino  Jesu  Christo,  rejoice  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
et  cavete  omnes  sordes  in  omni  lucro.       avoid  all  filthy  lucre. 

14.  Omnes  petitiones  vestrae  sint  14.  Let  all  your  requests  be  made 
palam  apud  Deum ;  estote  firmi  in  known  before  God,  and  be  firm  in  the 
sensu  Christi.  doctrine  of  Christ. 

15.  Et  quse  integra,  et  vera,  et  15.  Andwhatsoever  things  are  sound, 
pudica,  et  casta,  et  justa,  et  amabilia  and  true,  and  of  good  report,  and  chaste, 
sunt,  facite.  and  just,  and  lovely,  these  things  do.  . 

16.  Et  quoe  audiistis  et  accepistis,  in  16.  And  those  things  which  ye  have 
corde  retinete,  et  erit  vobis  pax.                 heard,   and    received,   keep    in    your 

hearts,  and  peace  shall  be  with  you. 

17.  Salutant  vos  omnes  sancti.  17.  All  the  saints  salute  you. 

18.  Gratia  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi  18.  The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
cum  spiritu  vestro.     Amen.  Christ  be  with  your  spirit.     Amen. 

19.  Hanc  facite  legi  Colossensibus,  19.  Cause  that  this  Epistle  be  read 
et  earn,  quae  est  Colossensium,  vobis.         among  the  Colossians,  and  the  Epistle 

of  the  Colossians  to  be  read  among  you. 

1  Tra  Ss  sv  ifvy'io.  KaaliKuoa  " Apx''^'^"i,  P-  IST',  ed.  Ueltzeu,  1852. 


296  COLOSSIANS  IV.   18. 

would  identify  it.     It  points  out  the  source  of  the  ministry, 
not   simply,  but  by  describing  the   sphere   in  which   it  was 
given  and  received.     It  was  "in   the  Lord" — the  recipient 
was   in  union  with  the   Lord  himself,   and    the    ministerial 
function  was  conferred  upon  him,  and  accepted  by  him  under 
no  foreign  influence,  obligation,  or  motive.     Whatever   this 
ministry  was,  and  we  cannot  determine  its  nature,  whether  it 
be  the  diaconate  specially  or  the  pastorate  generally,  it  was 
therefore   a  divine   office   which    Archippus    held.     He    had 
"  received  it  in  the  Lord,"  and  the  charge  was,  that  he  was 
to  see  to  it  "  that  he  fulfilled  it."     Acts  xii.   25.     This  was 
to  be  his  solicitude,  to  discharge  all  the  duties  which  such  an 
office  laid  upon  him,  and   to  fill  up  with   holy  activity  that 
sphere  which  the  Lord  had  marked  out  for  him.     There   is 
no  occasion  to  adopt  the  idea  of  Grotius,  that  the  verb  '7r\r}pol<i 
is  any  imitation  of  the  Hebrew  xbo,  as  applied  to  the  conse- 
cration of  a  priest,  for  the  word  is  found  with  a  similar  sense 
in  the  classics  and  in  Philo.     Some  suppose  that  Archippus 
was  holding  office  in  the  absence  of  Epaphras,  others  that  he 
was  a  son  of  Philemon,  and  deacon  under  his  father  as  pastor. 
It  has  been  said,  that  it  marks  the  free  intercourse  of  the 
early  churches,  when  such  an  address   should   be   made  by 
a  church  to  one  of  its  ministers.     Only  it  should  be  borne  in 
mind,  that  the  church  was  simply  the  vehicle  of  communica- 
tion.    It  was  an  admonition  of  Paul  to  Archippus  through 
the  church.     The  idea  of  Theophylact  is,  that  Paul  sends  him 
the  admonition  so  openly,  for  this  purpose,  that  when  he  had 
occasion  to  rebuke  any  members  of  the  church,  they  might 
not  deem  him  bitter  or  censorious,  for  they  would  recall  the 
apostle's    charge    to   him,   and   esteem  him  for   so  faithfully 
obeying  it. 

(Ver.   18.)    'O   ao-7rao-/xo9    rrj   e/xfj   ■xetpl   HavXov — "  ^TfjC 

salutation  of  ^aul  Initij  mine  oton  ijanti."  Having  em- 
ployed an  amanuensis  in  writing  the  previous  portion  of  the 
epistle,  the  apostle  authenticates  it  by  adding  his  salutation 
in  his  own  hand.  1  Cor.  xvi.  21;  2  Thess.  iii.  17.  What 
associations  and  feelings  that  handwriting  would  excite ! 
Many  an  eye  would  be  moistened  as  it  gazed  upon  it.  Not 
only  does  he  write  the  salutation  himself,  but  he  adds,  with 
his  own  hand  too,  the  remaining  clauses. 


COLOSSIANS  IV.  18.  297 

Mvr)fiov€veTe  fiov  to>v  Seafiwv — "  iElenieittftCr  Ttig  IJOlttlS,"  a 
brief  but  pathetic  request.  The  alternative  view  of  Heinrichs 
is  a  very  miserable  one — stipendio  mihi  mitfendo.  Nor  can 
we,  with  Olshausen  and  others,  confine  the  mode  of  remem- 
brance craved  by  the  apostle  simply  to  supplication  for  him. 
As  Meyer  says — -Jede  Beschrdnkung  ist  unlefugt — "  every 
limitation  is  unwarranted."  Every  possible  form  of  remem- 
brance they  were  besought  to  cherish.  With  every  mention 
of  his  name,  or  allusion  to  his  work,  his  chain  was  to  be 
associated.  Every  picture  which  their  mind's  eye  formed  of 
him  was  to  be  that  of  a  prisoner.  When  they  felt  their 
obligations  to  him  as  an  apostle,  they  were  to  think  of  his 
captivity.  Their  freedom  of  religious  observance  was  to 
suggest  to  them,  by  the  contrast,  his  incarceration.  When 
they  asked  a  blessing  on  their  spiritual  benefactors,  they  were 
not  to  forget  the  fetters  of  him — the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 
"  Remember  my  bonds."  When  his  right  hand  penned  the 
salutation  of  the  previous  clause,  no  wonder  he  felt  his  bonds 
so  keenly,  and  spoke  of  them,  for  at  the  same  moment  his  left 
hand  was  chained  to  the  right  arm  of  the  Roman  soldier  who 
kept  him.^     And  now  he  bids  them  farewell — 

'H  %a/3t9  ixed'  vjxoiv — "  (&XU.it  ie  tOltfj  ^Q\X."  The  adieu 
is  brief,  but  expressive.  The  apostle  concludes  as  he  began, 
with  an  earnest  benediction,  a  prayer  for  fulness  of  blessing, 
alike  for  their  present  and  eternal  welfare.  The  'Afi'^v  of 
the  Received  Text  is  not  well  authenticated,  and  the  sub- 
scription, though  correct,  is  necessarily  spurious. 

'  [ "  The  remark  of  Eadie  is  just,  that  as  the  apostle  used  his  hand  to  write, 
he  felt  his  bonds  yet  more  keenly  ;  but,  in  all  probability,  it  was  not  the  k/t, 
but  the  right  hand  that  was  bound  to  the  soldier  that  guarded  him.  Smith, 
Diet.  Antiq.,  s.v.  'Catena,' p.  207."— Ellicott.] 


INDEX. 


"Absent  in  the  flesh,  but  present  in 

the  Spirit,"  meaning  of,  117 
Abstinence  from  meats  and  drinks,  no 

test  of  genuine  piety,  197 
Acting  "in  the  name  of  Christ"  the 

highest  morality,  248 
Aim  of  the  preacher  should  be  to  reach 

every  individual,  99 
Alienation  from  God  characteristic  of 

mankind,  77 
Angels  drawn  nearer  to  God  and  man 

by  the  work  of  redemption,  74 
"Answering    every  one,"   illustrated, 

277   _ 
Asceticism,  a  libel  on  Providence,  197 
Assurance,  the  blessedness  of,  243 
Atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ,  the  source 

of  peace,  75 

Barnabas,  notices  of  his  history,  283 

Basil's  encomium  on  the  Psalms,  247 

"Beholding  your  order,"  explained, 
117-119 

Believers  "  complete  in  Christ,"  143 

Benefits  of  "full  assurance  of  under- 
standing," 109,  287 

Blessedness  of  heaven,  96 

Blessing,  Divine  forgiveness  a  first 
and  prominent,  39 

"  Blotting  out  the  handwriting  against 
us,"  meaning  of  the  phrase,  158 

Bonds  of  Paul  suffered  for  the  sake  of 
the  Gentiles,  271,  297 

"Buried  in  baptism,"  no  allusion  to 
the  mode  of  that  ordinance,  148 

Children,  duties  of,  to  their  parents, 
255 

Christ  the  Creator  of  "thrones,  and 
dominions,  and  principalities,  and 
powers,"  54;  pre-eminent  as  Creator, 
66  ;  pre-eminent  as  the  fountain  of 
blessing,  67 ;  pre-eminent  in  the 
constitution  of  His  person,  67;  "the 
image  of  God  "  in  His  Divine  works, 
44  ;  "  the  image  of  God  "  in  His 
Mediatorial  person,  43;  "the  image 
of  God "  in  perfection,  43  ;  the 
essence  of  the  gospel,  122  ;  the  hope 


of  glory  subjectively  and  objectively, 
97  ;  the  pattern  after  which  His 
followers  are  to  forgive  one  another, 
238 

"  Christ  our  life  "  explained,  214  ;  not 
simply  the  instrumental,  but  prim- 
ary cause,  of  creation,  54 

Christ's  body,  though  on  the  throne, 
not  deified,  48  ;  qualifications  for 
being  Head  of  the  church,  62 

Christian  truth  in  the  heart,  the  source 
of  comfort  and  guidance,  245 ;  union, 
love  the  prime  element  of,  107 

Christian's  life  "  hidden, "  the,  because 
on  earth  not  openly  manifested,  211 

Church  defined,  62  ;  Christ  the  source 
of  its  existence  and  blessing,  62 

"Circumcision  of  Christ,"  spiritual, 
147  ;  the,  "not  made  with  hands," 
146 

Colosse,  city  of,  ix ;  church  of,  xiv  ; 
epistle  to,  its  genuineness,  xxii  ; 
contents  of,  xxxix  ;  time  and  place, 
xliv  ;  works  on,  xlv  ;   errorists   in, 

XXX 

"Commandments  and  doctrines  of 
men"  of  no  authority  in  religion, 
193 

"Conversation  seasoned  with  salt," 
explained,  275 

Covetousness,  how  styled  idolatry,  217 

Creation,  work  of,  ascribed  in  its  full- 
est sense  to  Christ,  51,  60  ;  univer- 
sally affected  by  the  death  of  Christ, 
75 

Cross,  the  symbol  of  peace,  76 

"Dead  in  trespasses,"  death  spiritual, 
153  ;  "dead  with  Christ"  infers 
mortification  of  the  sensuous  mem- 
bers, 216 

Death  to  sin,  and  death  in  sin,  dis- 
tinguished, 156  ;  to  the  world, 
separation  from  the  elements  of  the 
world,  192 

Dietetic  regulations  of  the  Law  laid 
aside  under  the  Gospels,  171 

Disunity  and  rank  of  Christ  described, 
41 


INDEX. 


299 


Divine  forgiveness  daily  needed,  39 

Divine  polity,  highest  conceptions  of, 
in  the  gospel,  113 

Divinity  and  humanity  personally 
united  in  Christ,  140 

Divinity  of  Christ  proved  by  His  for- 
giving sin,  238 

Doctrine,  to  be  tested  by  the  estima- 
tion in  which  it  holds  Christ,  136 

Dogmas  of  the  false  teachers  of  Colosse, 
41,  114 

"Door  of  utterance,"  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  270 

Efficacy  of  prayer,  269 

Election  not  determined  by  character, 

but  determines  it,  234 
Epaphras,  earnest  prayers  of,   for  the 

Colossians,  287 
Epaphras,   teaching  of,  sanctioned  by 

apostolic  authority,  17,  287 
"  E]>istle  from  Laodicea,"  what  it  was, 

291 
Epistles,  interchange  of,    among  the 

early  Christians  useful,  295 
Errorists  of  Colosse  did  not  "hold  the 

head,"  186 
Errors  existing  in  Colosse,  41 
Eternity  of  Christ,  66 

Faith  established  and  abounding,  125 

Faith,  the  instrumental  means  in  the 
spiritual  resurrection,  151 

Falsehood  unworthy  of  men  spiritually 
renewed,  222 

Fellow-labourers,  Jewish,  present  with 
Paul,  286 

"Filling  up  what  is  wanting  of  the 
afflictions  of  Christ, "  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  85 

Final  glory  illustrated,  33,  95,  214 

Final  purpose  contemplated  by  Christ  in 
creation,  55 

"First-born  of  every  creature," 
meaning  of  the  phrase,  46  ;  probably 
a  fundamental  term  with  the  Colos- 
sian  errorists,  48 

Forgiveness  bound  up  with  subsequent 
Divine  gifts,  40  ;  more  closely  con- 
nected with  redemption  than  any 
other  blessing,  40  ;  of  sin  a  necessary 
accompaniment  of  spiritual  life,  157 

Formal  allusions  to  religion  in  daily 
business,  abuse  of  piety,  250 

Fountain  of  every  blessing  is  in  Christ, 
64 

Fruit-bearing  in  the  believer,  illus- 
trated, 25 

"Fulfilling  the  word  of  God,"  mean- 
ing of  the  phrase,  92 

"Full  assurance  of  understanding," 
meaning  of  the  expression,  109 


"Fulness  of  the  Godhead  dwelling 
bodily  "  in  Christ,  137  ;  of  saving 
blessing  in  Christ,  69 

Gentiles  especially  indebted  to  Paul, 

271  ;  Paul  especially  a  minister  of 

them,  90 
God,  the  source  of  meetness  for  the 

inheritance  of  the  saints,  34 
"God's  glory,"  the  phrase  explained, 

28 
God's  love   to  the  Son,    37  ;  pleasure 

that   "all  fulness  should   dwell   in 

Christ,"  69 
Gospel,  the,  fruit-bearing  and  diffusive, 

13 
"  Grace  in  truth,"  grace  in  its  genuine 

form,  15 
Grace  the  grand  characteristic  of  the 

gospel,  14 
Graces  becoming  the  "elect  of  God,  "235. 
Gratitude,    profound,    due   to    Christ, 

244  ;  why  a  duty  of  believers,  31 
Grounds  of  thanksgiving  on  behalf  of 

the  Colossians,  9 

"Head  of  principality  and  power," 
Christ  the,  144 

Heavenly  glory,  why  an  object  of 
hope,  10 

Hebrew  ceremonial  wanting  in  spiritual 
power,  176 

Heresies,  allied  to  false  philosophy,  126 

"Hope  of  glory,"  the  future  blessed- 
ness of  believers,  96 

Hierapolis,  xi. 

Humility,  necessary  in  considering  the 
relations  of  the  Divine  nature,  42  ; 
spurious,  179 

Husbands,  duties  of,  to  their  wives,  253 

"Image  of  God"  marks  Christ's  pre- 
eminence, 66 

"  Image  of  God "  the  model  of  man 
spiritually  renewed,  224 

Inducements  to  seek  ' '  the  things  which 
are  above,"  208 

"Inheritance  of  the  saints,"  allusion 
to  the  allotment  of  Canaan,  31 

Intense  earnestness  of  Paul,  101 

Joy,  accompanying  patience  and  long- 
suffering,  30  ;  of  the  apostle  from 
being  present  with  the  Colossians  in 
spirit,  118 

Judaism  fashioned  to  resemble  Chris- 
tianity, 176 

Kalendar,  Jewish,   abrogated  under 

Christianity,  172 
"Kingdom   of  Christ"   is  present  as 

well  as  future,  37 


300 


INDEX. 


"  Kingdom  of  darkness,"  why  so 
designated,  35 

Knowledge  of  God,  aliment  of  spiritual 
growth,  26  ;  possessed  by  man,  may 
be  indeiinitely  enlarged,  225 

Labours    of  Paul    on  behalf  of  the 

church  unceasing,  91 
Laodicea,  city  of,  x 
Law,  the  moral,  in  its  condemnation, 

and    the    ceremonial    in    its    rites, 

expunged  by  Christ's  death,  164 
Life,  God's  immediate  gift,  157  ;  "of 

faith,"    the,    a    life  of    hope,    83  ; 

spiritual,  as  it  shall  be  developed  at 

Christ's  second  coming,  214 
Light  characteristic   of  the   heavenly 

glory,  32 
"  Likeness  to  God  "  in  regeneration, 

higher  than  that  in  creation,  229 
Love,  exhibited  by  the  Colossians,  18  ; 

"  in  the  Spirit "  is  love  in  the  Holy 

Spirit,  19 
Love,  of  the  Father  towards  the  Son, 

37  ;  the  perfection  of  the  Christian 
•    character,  240  ;  the  crown  and  result 

of  the  other  graces,  1 9  ;  to  the  saints, 

love  to  Christ,  7 
Luke,  a  companion  of  the  apostle,  289 

Mark,  from  whom  Paul  separated,  re- 
conciled to  him,  283 

Masters  and  servants  are  alike  under 
Christ,  265 

Masters,  duties  of,  to  their  servants, 
263 

Medium  of  spiritual  life,  union  with 
Christ,  212 

"Meetness  for  the  inheritance  of  the 
saints,"  why  necessary,  34 

"Mind,  the  fleshly,"  capacitated  only 
for  sensuous  objects,  1 86 

Mosaic  economy,  the,  only  rudimental, 
135  ;  observances,  full  of  meaning, 
175 

"Mystery  hid  from  ages  and  genera- 
tions, "  meaning  of,  92 

"Name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  everything 

to  be  done  in  the,  248 
National    distinctions    immaterial    in 

regeneration,  230 
"New  man,"  descriptive  of  humanity 

renewed,  223 
Nouns  with  correlative  verbs  intensify 

the  meaning,  27,  103 

"Old  man,"  personification  of  de- 
praved humanity,  222 

Onesimus,  a  converted  slave  sent  back 
to  Colosse,  281 


Origin  of  sin,  Miiller's  theory,  225 

Parental  training,  quotation  from  Gis- 
borne,  256 

Paternal  kindness  enjoined,  255 

"Patience  and  long-suffering,"  ad- 
juncts of  faith,  28 

Paul,  why  named  an  apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ,  1 

"  Peace  of  Christ,"  what  it  is,  242 

Peace  resulting  from  Christ's  sacrifice, 
75 

"Perfect  in  Christ,"  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  101 

Perseverance  in  faith,  essential  to  sal- 
vation, 83  ;  of  the  saints  a  distinct 
doctrine  of  Scripture,  83 

Personal  essence,  not  the  image  of  God 
in  man,  228 

Philosophy,  advantages  of  true,  in 
studying  religion,  127 

Prayer,  false,  prevalent  among  the 
Colossians,  130  ;  efficacy  of,  269  ; 
on  behalf  of  himself,  besought  by 
Paul,  268  ;  of  the  apostle  on  behalf 
of  the  Colossians,  7  ;  and  thanksgiv- 
ing not  to  be  confounded,  268 

Preaching,  subject  of,  Christ,  98  ;  wis- 
dom needed  in,  99 

Pre-eminence  in  all  things  belongs  to 
Christ,  65 

Pride  in  disguise,  the  natural  result  of 
asceticism,  200,  204 

"  Principalities  and  powers  "  spoiled  in 
Christ's  death,  167 

"Putting  off"  the  body  of  the  flesh," 
regeneration,  147 

"  Quickened  with  Christ,"  a  blessing 
enjoyed  even  on  earth,  156 

Race  and  social  rank  not  lost  on  pro- 
fessing Christianity,  232 

Reality  and  fulness  of  the  gospel,  the 
cause  why  it  is  often  rejected,  184 

"  Receiving  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,"  is 
to  receive  Christ  as  Lord,  121 

Reconciliation,  final  design  of,  81  ; 
work  of  God,  79 

"Reconciling  all  things,"  meaning  and 
reference  of  the  expression,  72 

Redemption  exhibits  Christ  in  the  ful- 
ness of  His  essence,  56  ;  obtained  by 
virtue  of  union  with  Christ,  39 

Regeneration  not  restricted  to  class, 
rank,  or  nation,  232 

Resurrection  of  Christ,  results  of  the,  64 

Reward  of  faithful  service,  259 

Ritual  of  Moses,  a  shadow  of  future 
blessings,  175 

"Rudiments  of  the  world,"  meaning 
of  the  expression,  135,  190 


INDEX. 


301 


Salutation  of  Paul  peculiarly  affect- 
ing, 296 

Satan  vanquished  by  the  death  of 
Christ,  169 

Science  and  philosopliy  not  hostile  to 
faith,  125 

Science,  the  highest,  found  in  the 
gospel,  114 

Sensuality  often  visited  with  its  appro- 
priate penalty  on  earth,  218 

Servants,  duties  of,  to  their  masters,  258 

Sinners  exempted  from  condemnation 
through  the  Cross,  166 

Sins  of  malignity  defined,  220 

Social  duties,  specially  urged  on  the 
Asiatic  churches,  251 

Socinian  hypothesis  of  Christ  as  Creator 
unnatural  and  contradictory,  60 

Spiritual  characteristics  of  the  heathen 
world,  78;  "spiritual  knowledge" 
conferred  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  23 

Steadfast  faith,  its  advantages  and 
reasonableness,  120 

Success  in  winning  souls  to  be  traced 
to  Divine  power,  103 

Thanksgivixg  on  behalf  of  the  Colos- 

sians,   4  ;    rendered   to  God  as  the 

Father  of  Christ,  5 
"Things    above"    supreme,    "things 

below"  subordinate,  210 
Timothy,    how  associated  with    Paul 

in  writing  the  Epistle,  2;  joined  with 

Paul  in  expressing  the  sentiments  of 

the  Epistle,  5 
Traditions  of  men,  132,  193 
Translation  into  the  kingdom  of  Christ 

described,  36 
Tychicus,  the  bearer  of  the  Epistle  to 

the  Colossians,  279 


Union  to  Christ,  the  efficacious  prin- 
ciple in  the  spiritual  resurrection, 
151 

Unity  and  nourishment  of  the  Church, 
Christ  the  source  of,  188 

Universal  being,  Christ  the  preserver 
of,  57 


Visible  and  invisible,  a  common  ex- 
pression in  Eastern  philosophy,  52 

Voluntary  suffering  intensely  fascinat- 
ing to  many  minds,  204 


Walking,  figuratively  descriptive  of  a 
person's  tenor  of  life,  24,  219  ;  in 
Christ,  the  result  of  receiving  Him, 
123  ;  worthy  of  the  Lord,  explained, 
24  ;  "in  wisdom  toward  them  that 
are  without,"  meaning  of,  273 

Warnings  against  being  misled  by  false 
teachers,  116 

Watchwords  of  the  errorists  of  Colosse, 
194 

"Will  of  God,"  often  too  much  re- 
stricted, 21 

"  Wisdom  and  knowledge,"  genuine, 
revealed  in  the  gospel.  111  ;  needed 
in  preaching,  100 

Wives,  duties  of,  to  their  husbands,  252 

"  Word  of  the  gospel,"  the  oral  com- 
munications of  the  first  Christian 
teachers,  11 

"World,  all  the,"  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  12 

"Worshipping  of  angels,"  origin  of 
the,  180 

Wrong-doing  will  be  requited  at  the 
final  judgment,  261 


INDEX  OF  GREEK  TERMS  MORE  PARTICULARLY  REFERRED  TO. 


PAGE 

PAGE 

"Ayie;,           .....           3 

'Sauhrav,   Ai^airxuv,       ...         99 

'AXfihia  liayyiXlov, 

11 

Ua^nfiara  ii'^ip  vfiui/,    . 

.       84 

Avrava-TXt^^u, 

89 

napaXafifidya, 

.     121 

'  A-rixpupo;, 

112 

Xlapdiy  lis,   Uapav 

", 

.       12 

AvroXXeTpioiti, 

77 

YlXvpou, 

.       91 

'^PX'l, 

63 

UXripufia,    .           . 

68,  137 

VvofffiSj  i'TT'iyvojfftyy 

;i,  10 

9,  11 

],  223 

Tlpaaicauio,     . 

.       11 

Aoyfiara,,     , 

159 

TlpUTOTOKOS, 

.       46 

Aoyfx.ariZ,u, 

192 

'S,o(p'ta,  fwiai;, 

22,  111 

ElKUV, 

42 

'SiT-piufia,     . 

.     120 

'E*.    . 

293 

^TOI^ilOy, 

.     134 

'EX-rls, 

10 

'SvXecyayait, 

.     130 

"Evi,    . 

230 

'Sufi^ifia^o), 

.     106 

Ey  avTU,   A/    auTHUj 

53,  55 

2uvoavXou;,  , 

.       16 

E'3'tyvutrx-My 

14 

lufLO.,  iri.p'i,. 

.       80 

e'sku, 

93 

Itofta.nx.oii, 

,     138 

"Iv«,    , 

269 

T«|;j, 

.     119 

\\.aTa^faJ3iuu, 

177 

't'Ttip  Ifiut  iiaxovo;, 

.       17 

Kr'tX,a, 

60 

T?ro/*ov>)  Ka)  fi,ax,po6viJ.i 

X, 

.       28 

Aoyes, 

.     199 

^avipoco, 

.       93 

Aiyo;  aXrJiia;,     , 

.       11 

Xtipoypaifiv, 

.     158 

Mi,,     . 

.     199 

MORRISON  AND  OIBB,  EDINBURGH, 

PRINTEIW  TO  HER   MAJESTY'S  STATIONERY  OFFICB. 


f  0 


Date  Due                         i 

''•*"."                .  ■ '  - 

^^^^^ttm 

-N.— ^ 

1* 

1^ 

^>m»mmmi^ 

^pitl00'm 

Ifc 

p  A  riLU^^s^ 

t^^iraii^-r-w 

h^ 

^^^^^^k 

'"•'^^-SfiSSlI 

'$7B 

jWrHT-m 

^ttSSSiSSSSSu 

ir 

-.-■-■^ 

iT'i     -iii-»iu^iiffr 

iiw^ 

.smmmm 

IJPPMWMmMI 

M«r.' 

jintrm^'^ 

»,■ 

^      'T^'ift* 

m^ 

j^in-'  -.'      ^ 

f) 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

BS2715 .Ell  1884 

A  commentary  on  the  Greek  text  of  the 


Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00066  1142