Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Colossians 3:5 - 3:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Col_3:5-17
a) Exhortation to put off the old fleshly nature
(Col_3:5-11.)
Col_3:5. Mortify therefore your members, which are upon the earth.—“Mortify therefore” is joined to Col_3:1-4, containing an inference from “were raised together” (Col_3:1) and “died” (Col_3:3). Their being dead has as its result a new life, in which a “making dead” ( íåêñïῦí ) is possible and necessary. The verb (only here and Rom_4:19; Heb_11:12) is reddere íåêñüí , i. e, cadaver omnibus viribus privatum ( ðôῶìá ), stronger than èáíáôïῦí (Rom_8:13). See Tittmann, Syn. I. p. 168. [The aorist denotes a definite act, which Ellicott thus expresses: “kill at once;” Alford: “put to death.”—R.] After the Christian died (Col_3:3), he has as quickened (Col_3:1), with the newly gained vital power, to kill the “members which are upon the earth.” This expression corresponds with the context, and refers in its sense to “putting off the body of the flesh” (Col_2:11). There the whole organism was brought into view, here the individual members; there “of the flesh” describes what here, in accordance with Col_3:3, is described by “which are upon the earth” (Bengel: where is found the sustenance of those members, of which collectively the body of sin consists). Because they are “fleshly,” there is a motive for putting them to death. This must be understood in an ethical, not a physical sense (Huther, Unger and others), not of the Church members as the vital activities of the body of the Church (Schenkel); for the Christian is not required to mutilate his body, nor are members or masses of members “who are on the earth,” organs of the Church and its activity, since it is a creation of God; the words might be applied to Christians, who are worldly minded, but, as regards these, íåêñïῦí , putting to death, is a duty only in the view of fanatics.
[Ellicott thus aptly paraphrases: “As you died, and your true life is hidden with Christ, and hereafter to be developed in glory, act conformably to it—let nothing live inimical to such a state, kill at once the organs and media of a merely earthly life.” Put to death the portions of your body, which are the instruments of sin, as respects the sphere (on the earth) of these sinful activities, and the actions and desires below specified: a duty very different from and more difficult than asceticism, or obedience to “the commandments of men” (Col_2:21-22).—R.]
The substantives, which follow in appositional relation to “members,” show more specifically what is meant: fornication, uncleanness, lustfulness, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry.—Bengel: “these ( ìÝëç , members) are enumerated.” There is no metonymy here (De Wette), nor are these the ethical ingredients inhering in the members (Meyer, Winer’s Gram. p. 494). On the first two and the last substantives, see on Eph_5:3. “Lustfulness” ( ðÜèïò ) [not limited to unnatural lust, as Rom_1:26.—R.] and “evil concupiscence” ( ἐðéèõìßá êáêÞ ) are to be referred, according to the context, to sexual sin; the former denoting rather the formal eagerness, the latter the intrinsic unworthiness, determined by the object; the former is always the latter also, but not vice versa (1Th_4:5 : “in the lust of concupiscence,” ἐí ðÜèåé ἐðéèõìßáò ). [The latter being more general.—R.] The category introduced by “fornication,” on account of its manifold and frequent manifestations (Gal_5:19), is prominently set forth in detail; unnatural uncleanness is included in the last two substantives, but not specially described (Erasmus and others).
By the side of “fornication” thus specified, the Apostle puts “covetousness” as a second category, indicated by the article. Bengel: articulus facit ad epitasin et totum genus vitii a genere enumeratarum modo specierum diversum complectitur. He gives prominence to this by means of the relative clause, which characterizes it and gives a motive for mortifying it. “Which” (quippe quæ, “which indeed;” Winer’s Gram. pp. III, 157). See on Eph_5:5. It is incorrect to apply it to insatiable voluptuousness (Estius and others) or to “gains from lust” (Baehr and others). [Braune in the parallel passage extends the application of the relative clause to all the preceding forms of sin, which application is grammatically inadmissible here, though allowable there. Ðëåïíåîßá , “covetousness,” is marked by the article as the notorious form of sin, not merely introduced thus as forming a new category; for while it is another form of sin, there is an intimate connection in point of fact, “monsters of covetousness have been also monsters of lust.” Covetousness has as its primary object—wealth—but there is no objection to expanding its meaning here, as Trench does. He intimates that the Greek Fathers use this word to designate both the sins of impurity and avarice, “even as the root out of which they alike grow; namely, the fierce and ever fiercer longing of the creature which has turned from God, to fill itself with the inferior objects of sense is one and the same.” Syn. N. T. § 24. This is idolatry. It is worthy of notice too that idolatry and lust are connected historically, as well as in the O. T. passim.—R.]
Col_3:6. For which things’ sake the wrath of God Cometh.—Thus he adds a motive for the necessity of the exhortation, “mortify:” you must either kill or be killed. The relative refers to the sins mentioned above, on account of which “the wrath of God Cometh.” See on Eph_5:6. [Also for notes upon: on the children of disobedience, which Braune rejects here.—R.] The absence of “on the children of disobedience” denotes a reference to God’s judgment on earth, under which the saints also suffer. The expression, which is to be distinguished from “the day of wrath” (Rom_2:5), and the context which is to be distinguished from 1Th_1:10, “the wrath to come,” does not refer to the future judgment (Meyer, Bleek and others). [Ellicott, following Theophilus, refers it to punishment here and hereafter. There is this strong objection to Braune’s view, that the New Testament does not represent the wrath of God as coming in any sense upon the saints. If the longer reading be adopted, his remark is also grammatically incorrect. Whatever interpretation be put upon ἐí ïἷò , the following verse excludes the Colossian Christians from the threatened wrath.—R.]
Col_3:7. Among whom ye also once walked.—If “on the children of disobedience” be retained, the relative must be joined to that antecedent; otherwise it refers as äé ’ ἄ to the enumerated sins. “Once walked” denotes their conduct in different relations. See on Eph_2:2.—When ye were living in them.—[That is, in these sins, as the sphere of life. There is no tautology if the personal reference of the last clause be adopted.—R.] The verb, in emphatic position, marks the internal life with undisturbed gratification, while “walk” denotes the manifestations of it in thought, word and deed; the imperfect (“were living”) refers to a continued state, the aorist (“walked”) to the individual acts, corresponding thus with the meaning of the verbs. Their sinful walk was conditioned by their sinful nature, not merely by habit and circumstance. Bengel: Vivebatis tanquam in veslro principio, origins, elemento (Gal_5:25). Hence ἐíôïýôïéò and ἐíïἷò refer to the same antecedent. This is not tautological (Meyer) but emphatic: the first is not merely walking in heathenism, and the other a vicious life (Schenkel); the former is rather the “act” and the latter the “power” of sin (Calvin) or the one “energy,” ἐíåñãåßá , the other “habit of nature” (Estius).—[It is obvious how much is gained in the exegesis of this verse, by retaining “on the children of disobedience.” It then means: “Among which children of disobedience ye also walked, when ye wore living in these sins.” Surely with preponderant uncial authority, this exegetical advantage should decide in favor of retaining it, instead of being used to support the omission as lectio difficilior.—R.]
The second exhortation concerning their social relations to each other. Col_3:8-11.
Col_3:8. But now ye also put off all these.—“But now” ( íõíὶäÝ ), in contrast with “once,” ( ðïôÝ , ὄôå ), is the present Christian state, which begins with conversion. Hence “put off” corresponds with “mortify” (Col_3:5), or “put away from you” (Eph_4:31), and “ye also” puts the readers here beside other Christians, as in Col_3:7 by other heathen. “All these” ( ôὰðÜíôá ) refers to what follows (Winer’s Gram. p. 102); not to all those (Col_3:5) and these also which follow (Meyer, Schenkel). [Ellicott, Alford follow Meyer, but Braune’s view is more strictly grammatical. Eadie unfortunately makes the verb indicative instead of imperative.—R.]—Anger, wrath, malice, evil-speaking, abusive communication out of your mouth.—See on Eph_4:31. The last substantive is wanting there, but corresponds to áßó÷ñüôçò êáὶ ìùñïëïãßá (Eph_5:4). It describes shameful speech in-general, which, according to the context injures the neighbor, who hears it or of whom it is spoken, as “evil speaking” ( âëáóöçìßá ). It is not to be applied to lewd speaking (Huther and others), at least not exclusively, though it may include it. The first three substantives form a climax, describing the internal condition, from perceptible excitement to passionateness which is its basis, then to deep-seated malicious nature; the other two refer to speech, hence to both is significantly added: “out of your mouth.” It might be joined with “put off,” but without any reference to the first three, since it would not be enough that among Christians these never found expression in words (Schenkel); they should not be found at all.
Col_3:9. Lie not one to another.—See Eph_4:25. Åἰò denotes the direction: belie not one another. [The practice is thus stamped as a social wrong (Ellicott). Michaelis observes that it is only in this Epistle and that to the Ephesians, that the Apostle warns his readers against lying (Barnes).—R.] The aorist participles which follow (Col_3:9 b–11) give a motive for the injunction in Col_3:8-9 a.—Seeing that ye have put off the old man.—[The E. V. thus admirably expresses the force of the aorist participle ἀðåêäõóÜìåíïé .—R.] The aorist requires this as the Apostle’s view: first, the experienced death and rising, then the active mortification of the members, first the experienced putting off the old man and putting on the new, then the active removal of what is contrary thereto, here a motive, drawn from what has preceded, is pre-supposed. Hence the Vulgate: exspoliantes, and Bengel: “putting off,” as if it were contemporaneous, are incorrect; Luther also: put off, as though it were an injunction. The verb is to be taken according to the parallel expression (Eph_4:22 : ἀðüèåóèå ) like the substantive Col_2:11, and its object as in Eph_4:22. The old man, the sinful nature as it is before conversion and regeneration is to be laid off as a garment that has become useless, with all its peculiarities, hence: with his deeds.—Here is the stringent conclusion that what was detailed above must of course be put away. Comp. Rom_8:13; Gal_5:24 : “the flesh with the affections ( ðáèÞìáóéí ) and lusts.”
Col_3:10. And have put on the new man.—The putting off and on, connected by êáß , are to be regarded as contemporaneous, according to the principle: natura et gratia non patiuntur vacuum (nature and grace do not tolerate a vacuum); only in the domain of grace in distinction from the physical, the initiative is with the new man and in virtue of the divine power creating him. In contrast with ðáëáéüò , old, we have in Eph_4:24, êáéíüò , new, as not yet present, here íÝïò ; ðáëáéüò being therefore old, superannuated, senile; both are found in Eph_4:23-24 [ ἀíáíåïῦóèáé — êáéíüí ) and here in the adjective and added participle. The motive drawn from íÝïí , recent, young, as it were [newly entered and fresh state. Ellicott.—R.], lies in the danger prepared by the false teachers for Christians, who had been just now or not long converted.
The condition of the new man and his immediate task is more closely defined: which is being renewed, ôὸí ἀíáêáéíïýìåíïí .—The present participle denotes what is to go on in the present. The context requires the middle sense to denote the self-exertion, the active life. The new man is not anything complete at once, but in a state of vital growth, of further development, and that by the Holy Spirit (Tit_3:5). [This seems to contradict the last opinion that the participle is middle. Alford, Ellicott, Wordsworth all regard it as passive. The latter naturally suggests: “the new man was born in you at your regeneration in baptism, but needs the daily renewal of the Holy Ghost.” Omit “in baptism,” and the explanation will be generally received as correct. The passive or middle interpretation will be adopted as the stress is laid upon the divine or human side of the progressive work of sanctification, and yet as the Apostle is speaking of the new man, of our becoming holy, which lies back of active holiness, the passive is to be preferred. The new man is being renewed, rather than renewing himself.—R.] Comp. 2Co_4:16. The preposition ἀíÜ marks the further, upward, onward striving, which is then more closely defined:
Unto knowledge, after the image of him that created him.—“Unto knowledge” denotes the end, “after the image of Him that created him,” the norm. According to Col_2:2; Col_1:9, “knowledge” is not further characterized as a knowledge corresponding to the image of the Creator, for by thus regarding both clauses as one (Hoffmann, Meyer), no natural sense is given. In this knowledge, which cannot be supplied by worldly wisdom, the new man must grow according to the image of his Creator, God; this image is Christ, since the Christian is a “new creature” (2Co_5:17). There is an unmistakable allusion and reference to the first creation” (Gen_1:26-27). The second new creation is not to be separated from the first, the Christian is the genuine man, Christianity is true, God-willed humanity. [The latter clause is to be joined with “being renewed” (Alford, Ellicott). The final word “him” refers to the “new man.” The passage means more than the restoration of the image of God lost by Adam. “It is certain that the image of God, in which Christ’s Spirit re-creates us, will be as much more glorious than that, as the second man is more glorious than the first” (Alford). So Eadie in loco. Compare Eph_4:24.—R.]
Col_3:11. Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond, free.—“Where” refers to the region of the new creation in Christ, in contrast with the domain of creation without Christ; in the latter there is division, contrariety and discord; in the former union, fraternity. Just as in the parallel passage (Eph_4:25 : “for we are members one of another”), this fellowship of the regenerate, the converted, requires truth and friendship among each other. It is incorrect to join “where,” as =qua in se, to the yet remote “knowledge” alone, finding here its object now brought in (Schenkel). ̓́ Åíé means, as in Homer: there is there, therein; ïὐê ἔíé denies division as respects nationality (“Greek and Jew”), as respects religion (“circumcision and uncircumcision”), culture (“Barbarian, Scythian”), social status (“bond, free”). It is worthy of note, that, in nationality, the Greek who ruled in language is put before the Roman who held empire; in religion, Israel honored with revelation takes precedence; in culture, the step is from the uncultivated to the extreme savage (Bengel: “Scythians, more barbarous than the Barbarians;” âáñâáñþôáôïé ), as in Rom_1:14, the polished Greek not being again mentioned, while the summary is indicated by the omission of the conjunction; in the social category, the slave stands before the freeman to note the receptivity of the insignificant, and the exalting power of the gospel. Comp. Gal_3:28. [Lange’s Com. pp. 88, 91.—R.]
But Christ is all and in all.—“But” presents the contrast to the condition in the region of the natural life; hence within the Church there is not difference, divisions; in spite of the distinctions, there is no schism there, but union, concord on the ground of unity; in all these four directions ( ôὰðἀíôá ), and in all the individual persons, the Christians (“in all,” êáὶἐíðᾶóé ) is the same ( ×ñéóôüò ), “who alone occupies the whole, as the saying is, between stem and stern, and is both beginning and end” (Calvin). Comp. 1Co_15:28; Gal_6:15. Bengel: “Scythian is not Scythian, but Christ’s; Barbarian is not Barbarian, but Christ’s. Christ is all things, and that in all who believe. In Christ are new creatures.” [Meyer: “The subject is placed at the end, for the greatest emphasis, He, the all determining principle of the new life and activity ( ôἁ ðÜíôá ) in all his believers ( ἐí ðᾶóé ), forms the higher unity, in which all those old divisions and antitheses become without significance and as if no longer existing.” Ellicott: “Christ is the aggregation of all things, distinctions, prerogatives, blessings, and moreover is in all, dwelling in all, and so uniting all in the common element of Himself.”—R.]
2. The world in and about the Christian. With respect to its pleasure, sensual, especially sexual pleasure, he must strive after purity; with respect to its possessions, after contentment, in order not to fall away from God and under His wrath. [For the sin of sensuality is not only intimately connected with that of covetousness, but both are essentially idolatrous. Those “without God” (Eph_2:12) are “in the world,” and the world’s pleasures and possessions are put by them in the place of God.—R.]
3. Towards his neighbor, especially the brethren, there must be friendliness in disposition, word and truth.
4. All sin must be repelled. All that is opposed to what is required, both in its various shades from coarser to finer and finest, and in its different manifestations in act, word, thought, perception, from external to internal and inmost, must be contended against and repelled. Only what is sinful, yet all that is sinful, is contrary to Christianity and Christian character.
5. Christ the point of unity. Upon the absolute dignity of Christ and His central position toward the world (Col_1:17 : “in Him all things subsist”), which points to His Divine Fulness (Col_1:19; Col_2:9), to Him as the image of the Creator, rests the fact that He is the absolute point of unity, the central and terminal point for men. What He is for the macrocosm He is also for the microcosm; He is the Second Adam, “a quickening spirit” (1Co_15:45). Hence the requirement to become a Christian and be a Christian must be deemed absolute for every man. Union with Christ is absolutely right, but it alone; contrasted with it all diversities as to nationality, confession, culture and station (Col_3:11) are only relatively right; this they are, in so far as that absolute right remains unimpaired. Cosmopolitism in political and social life, union in denominational life are fruitless, or stunted products of the natural man working within the Church, when and where they do not recognize and maintain union with Christ, established above all unions. This is then the rule: one with Christ, united with one another. By this every Christian, that is every evangelical Christian, and every age, such as that of the Reformation, must be tested. [By it too must be tested many human organizations, which aim at uniting selfish men so as to contribute to the common good. Many social and political problems remain to be solved, but social science has not always remembered that “the putting on of the new man” alone brings man “where there is neither Greek nor Jew—bond nor free, but Christ all and in all.”—R.] Compare the notes on Eph_4:22 sq.; Eph_5:25; Eph_5:5-6.
Starke:—Improvement of the sinful life is as difficult for the flesh, as if the man should go to his death; for he is as much in love with fleshly lusts, as if this were his life. One of the chiefest members of the old man is “the lust of the flesh;” this secret poison hides in all. Though this fire be at once quenched in believers, yet, if they do not take care, the ever-glowing cinders may easily and quickly burst into a flame again. 2Sa_11:2 sq.—Covetousness breaks not only the eighth and tenth commandments of the second table, but the first and second of the other also; hence the covetous are idolaters too.—Old rags we throw away; sin, which makes us so old and deformed and ugly before God, the Christian must so put away, that he not only restrains its outbreak, but also exhausts the spring itself, draining it more and more, even if he does not dry it up entirely.—[What a mark of our great corruption, that the tongue, which should be the means of doing our neighbor good, is so often the instrument to injure him.—R.]—The state of the regenerate is a putting off the old and a putting on the new man. Hence in a believer there are as it were, two men or a double nature. Spirit and flesh, which contend against each other. Gal_5:17. The one from its corrupt propensity wills what is evil, the other from divine operation what is good.
Rieger:—With all that belongs to the old nature, we are never done; yet we should not be grieved by the, way: the quietest plan is with childlike mind to learn, and to regard the matter as ever in progress.—Gerlach:—The capacity for knowing and loving God is that alone wherein man excels the rest of creation, whereby he rules it. Is he a mirror of the Most High, then there is in him an image of God, which sin has not obliterated, but so polluted and marred that his own power can never more restore it.—When the image of God is restored in the soul, the partition-walls among men fall down.
Schleiermacher:—When Christians seem to us to be not yet permeated entirely by the new life in Christ, we may not thence infer an entire lack of the Spirit.—Paul admonishes them to put off their old members, not by virtue of the old man itself, but by virtue of the new and because the vital strength of the new man in them is presupposed.—This work of putting off the old man and putting on the new is a common one, and we should not believe in the fancy that somewhere it is wanting altogether.
Passavant:—[Col_3:15. Covetousness which is idolatry can be found among Christians, in men who rejoice in a Christian education, and bow before the cross of Christ as the tree of life. The life of the covetous man is hid with his hoards in iron chests; the life of the Christian is “hid with Christ in God.”
Col_3:7. It is better, if one has never walked in these things, if they have never been the elements of our life, for then our sanctification is easier. On this account we should learn the fear of God from our youth.]
Col_3:8. A single word, slipping from the mouth of the Christian can pollute the whole God-sanctified new man.—[Col_3:9. It is long before a tongue, hitherto unaccustomed to lie, becomes accustomed to the truth; this is the work of the Spirit of God, which is the Spirit of truth.
Col_3:11. God regards in us only His Son and His image, as He hates only the old man and his corruption.—R.]
[Burkitt:
Col_3:7. No argument will prevail more with a Christian to follow on the work of mortification closely for the time to come, than the remembrance of his long continuance in sin. in time past.
Col_3:9. Lying makes a man like the devil, who was a liar as well as a murderer from the beginning.
Col_3:11. O blessed Jesus! Art thou thus all to me? I will labor to be all to thee; to give thee all that I am.—R.]
[Henry:
Col_3:5. It is very observable, that among all the other instances of sin which good men are recorded in the Scripture to have fallen into; (and there is scarcely any but some or other in one or other part of their life, have fallen into;) there is no instance in all the Scripture of any good man charged with covetousness.
Col_3:9. Lying makes us like the devil (who is the father of lies), and is a prime part of the devil’s image upon our souls.
Col_3:10. The-new man is said to be renewed in knowledge; because an ignorant soul cannot be a good soul. Light is the first thing in the new creation, as it was in the first.—R,]
[Eadie:
Col_3:5. 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.—This desire of having more, and yet more, is idolatry. What it craves it worships, what it Worships it makes its portion.
Col_3:11. 1. Such distinctions do not prevent the on-putting of the new man. 2. In the church, prior and external distinctions do not modify the possession of spiritual privilege and blessing.—Wordsworth:
Col_3:5. You must be dead to earth, in order to life in heaven. While we mortify our members upon the earth, we quicken our members in heaven.—R.]
Footnotes:
Col_3:5.— Ὑìῶí is wanting in à . A. B. and others. [It is omitted by Tischendorf (ed. 2, not 7), Alford, and by Braune; retained however by Rec. Lachmann. Meyer, De Wette, Wordsworth. Ellicott; the latter remarks: “The great preponderance of MSS. and the accordant testimony of so many versions seem to render this otherwise not improbable omission here very doubtful.”—R.]
Col_3:5.—[Alford and Ellicott thus render ðÜèïò ; not merely “just,” but the disposition toward it.—R.]
Col_3:5.—[“Evil concupiscence” is correct, but “shameful desire” would be more generally understood.—R.]
Col_3:6.— Äé ʼ ἅ on the authority of à . B. C. and others, is better supported than äé ʼ ὅ . [The former reading is adopted by Lachmann. Tischendorf, Ellicott: the latter by Meyer and Alford.—R.]
Col_3:6.—The clause ἐðὶ ôïὺò õἱïὺò ôῆò ἀðåéèåßáò , “on the children of disobedience,” is wanting in B.; apparently taken from Eph_5:6, where it is supported by all. [Rejected by Tischendorf and Alford. The uncial authority, à . A. C. D. E. K. L., in support of it is so preponderant, that it cannot safely be omitted. The two Epistles might well contain expressions exactly alike. Meyer retains it.—R.]
Col_3:7.—[ Ἐíïἷò refers to “the children of disobedience,” if that clause be retained. If it be rejected, the E. V. is correct, but is incorrect as it now stands. (Braune, Ellicott.)—R.]
Col_3:8.—[“Evil-speaking” or “calumny” is evidently the meaning of âëáóöçìßáí here, as in Eph_4:31, where the E. V. reads: “evil-speaking.”—R.]
Col_3:8.—[“Abusive,” perhaps “foul-mouthed communication,” is better than “filthy;” the idea of obscenity is not necessarily included in áἰó÷ñïëïãßáí .—R.]
Col_3:10.—[The present participle here denotes a process going on. See Exeg. Notes.—R.]
Col_3:11.—Before ἐëåýèåñïò , A. and others read êáß , a few also before Óêýèçò , but both weakly supported. [“Nor” is unnecessarily supplied in the E. V.—R.]
[Alford, reading äé ʼ ὅ , refers it to “idolatry” alone, and hence in his exegesis, make it “the all-comprehending and crowing sin.” Meyer, adopting the same reading, refers it to the whole immoral character just named.—R.]
[The E. V. places the negation in the conjunctions. A more literal rendering would be: “There is not Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision,” etc.—R.]