Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Colossians 4:10 - 4:17
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(Col_4:10-17.)
Col_4:10. Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner saluteth you.—According to Act_19:29; Act_20:4; Act_27:2, he was a Macedonian from Thessalonica, who had not shared the imprisonment in Csesarea, but seems to have joined Paul on his departure for Italy, since when first mentioned again, according to Phm_1:24, he was a “fellow-laborer” with the Apostle, hence not exactly in bonds (Chrysostom and others), but a voluntary companion of Paul in his imprisonment, as Epaphras is there called “fellow-prisoner,” but not here.—Both seemed to have shared alternately the imprisonment of Paul. The word is further applied to captives in war, and corresponds with “fellow soldier” (Php_2:25; Phm_1:2). “Nothing better than this encomium” (Chrysostom). [This conjecture of Meyer respecting voluntary imprisonment is the most probable one. They may have undergone actual trial and thus exchanged places, but the reference to a bygone imprisonment (Steiger) is unsatisfactory.—R.]
And Marcus, cousin to Barnabas.—This was the Evangelist; ἀíåøéïò is Geschwisterkind [the relation between children of brothers and sisters], hence not cousin in the most extended sense, nor nephew (Luther). Bengel: “Barnabas was better known than Mark; hence the latter is named from the former.” [Perhaps better esteemed also.—R.] Theophylact: “he praises this one from his kindred; for Barnabas was great.” On Mark, See Lange’s Comm. Mark, [p. 4–7, Am. ed., where he is represented as the nephew of Barnabas, however.—R.]—Touching whom ye received commandments.—“Touching whom,” Mark, not Barnabas (Theophylact): “ye received commandments” refers to a fact of earlier date, of which they are reminded. What, from whom, when and how? is and remains undetermined. Bengel incorrectly takes ἐëÜâåôå as meaning accipetis after the manner of letter writing, and supposes it took place with this letter through Tychicus and Onesimus; ἐíôïëÜò forbids our referring it to letters of commendation (Grotius) [from Paul (Davenant) or the church of Rome (Estius).—P]; the plural and the omission of the article forbid our finding the command in what follows (Calvin, Bengel, and others). It is possible that there is a reference to the collections for the church at Jerusalem. We cannot infer from this, that there was art Epistle of Paul, since lost (Reuss). [In all probability these “commandments” had been written, and were of a commendatory nature, yet this is only conjecture.—R.]
If he come unto you, receive him.—A parenthesis, referring to a journey of Mark from Rome to Asia [ ἐὰíἤëèῃ implying that he would come.—R.], agreeable intelligence to the Colossians. We cannot accept the view of Wieseler, that Paul had anxiety lest Mark might not be well received on account of Act_15:38-39, since all closer definition which would support this, is wanting. [Yet the thought is naturally suggested and is adopted by most English commentators. Wordsworth: “There would be something very graceful and affecting to their minds, on St. Paul’s part, to St. Barnabas and to St. Mark. It would seem to say, Barnabas was tender-hearted to St. Mark his kinsman; he did for him a kinsman’s part; and Mark, though he faltered for a time, has profited by his kinsman’s kindness, and by my severity; and he has now returned to me, and to the service which he quitted for a time; never to leave it more. You may have heard of the separation which took place between Barnabas and me; you may have heard of Mark’s dereliction of me. You will therefore rejoice to hear that now he is with me; I send you his greetings. I have given you commandments concerning him; and if he comes to you, I desire you to receive him.”—-R.]
Col_4:11. And Jesus, who is called Justus: unknown, not the one mentioned Act_18:7 (Theophylact), who being described as “one that worshipped God” could not have belonged to the Jews.—Of those who are of the circumcision.—These three were Jews, who were attached to the Apostle to the Gentiles.—Only these are my fellow workers unto the kingdom of God.—He thus gives a motive for the last clause; Jewish Christian teachers were mostly anti-Pauline in their labors (Php_1:15; Php_1:17), hence he adds as a result for himself, and to distinguish them from such as were indeed fellow laborers for the kingdom of God, but not such as he could find comfort in: which have been a comfort unto me.—[Alford and Ellicott render: “which have proved a comfort unto me.”—R.] Ðáñáãïñßá , comfort, is found only here in the New Testament. He did not need a confirmation of the correctness of his doctrine; but comfort thus came to him. Bengel: ðáñáìõèßá is in private grief, ðáñáãïñßá is in public danger. [Ellicott objects, intimating that the latter admits of physical references, while the former is more ethical. There is some difference of opinion as to the punctuation of this verse, whether the stop should come after “circumcision” as in E. V. or after “Justus” (Meyer, Lachmann, Alford). The meaning plainly is: that these three were Jews, and that these three alone of the Jewish Christians co-operated with him. Braune implies that others are here called “fellow-workers,” but these three, distinguished by the last clause as having been a comfort, while Eadie, Alford and others think that he means to distinguish these alone as “fellow-workers unto the kingdom of God,” i. e., in its wide sense, as including the bringing in of the Gentiles. The former is preferable. Wordsworth remarks: “Therefore it does not seem probable that St. Peter Was now at Rome.”—R.]
Col_4:12. Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ Jesus, saluteth you.—See Col_1:7; also above, Col_4:9. Affection and sympathy were demanded by his place of nativity, recognition and regard by his office. Then follows the description of his devoted activity: always striving for you in prayers.—Comp. Rom_15:30. “For you” answers to “of you,” the external union is not without internal sympathy. The verb denotes the ardor and zeal of Epaphras, as well as the danger of the Church.
That ye may stand perfect and fully assured in all the will of God—“That” marks the purpose of the prayer; “stand” renders prominent the constancy and firmness (Eph_6:11; Php_1:27). “Perfect,” more fully defined by “and fully assured” [perfect participle] as a fact of experience and continued efficiency, and by “in all the will of God” i.e., in all directions (Winer’s Gram. p. 105), as the vital sphere in which the “perfectness” and “fulness” were to move, limits. the standing fast to the ethical department of the Christian’s life. [On ðå ðëçñïö ., see Col_2:2, ðëçñïöïñßá ; also 1Th_1:6.—R.] “In all” etc., is not to be joined with “stand” (Bengel, Meyer, Bleek); nor does ἐí mean “in virtue of,” and “will” the decree of God (Baehr).
Col_4:13. For I bear him record.—Attesting witness—That he hath much labor for you.—This refers to the trouble which he had in spirit, as “striving” (Col_4:12), and also to the time and vital energy consumed for them. Hence not merely labor of the spirit (Bleek), though proceeding from this. [Ellicott: “labor, not such as attends a combat (Eadie) but such as implies a putting forth all one’s strength.” Wordsworth: The sentence is like a reply to those at Colosse who might have misinterpreted the absence of Epaphras from his flock, into a sign of indifference to their welfare. This absence was not voluntary. Phm_1:23.—R.]—And them that are in Laodicea and them in Hierapolis—On Laodicea, see Introd. § 4, 1. Hierapolis, also a Phrygian city on the Meander, near to and east of Colosse, famous for its warm baths. The place is now called Pambuk Kulasi. The activity of Epaphras was wide-reaching. [Meyer: “Certainly Epaphras had labored also in these neighboring cities as founder of the churches, or at least as an eminent teacher.”—R.]
Col_4:14. Luke, the physician, the beloved.—This was the Evangelist; the first phrase defines his station, the second his relation to Paul and to the Church. He attended the Apostle from Cesarea to Rome (Act_27:1, Winer’s Realwörterbuch, II p. 34), but must not be confounded with Lucius (Act_13:1). Lucas from Lucanus (Winer’s Gram. p. 97). [Wordsworth: “It would seem that St. Luke was known to the Colossians as a Physician. The neighboring city of Laodicea was a great medical school (Strabo. 12. p. 580). It may have had professional attractions for him.” The suggestion that he may have been known through his Gospel implies that it had been already written, a point which cannot be discussed here. See Lange’s Commentary, Luke p. 6, where Schaff favors the view that it was written during Paul’s imprisonment at Cæsarea.—R.]
And Demas (Phm_1:24; 2Ti_4:10), who had not yet forsaken him. On account of the absence of any further description, Bengel groundlessly supposes that the Epistle was dictated to him, and Schenkel, that the Apostle had already some disagreement with him, although in the cotemporaneous Epistle to Philemon (Phm_1:24) he is reckoned before Luke as a fellow laborer. [Meyer also deems this probable.—R.]
Messages. Col_4:15-17.
Col_4:15. Salute the brethren who are in Laodicea.—This shows the proximity and close union of the two Churches.—And Nymphas, and the church which is in his house.—“And” joins one person of Laodicea, giving him prominence, viz., Nymhas, adding also, as the motive, this distinction: “and the church which is in his house.” Comp. Phm_1:2; Rom_16:6; 1Co_16:19. Such churches included not only the members of the family and intimate acquaintances (Greek fathers, Erasmus and others), as if the reading were ôῆò ïἰêßáò , but all those who assembled together there for worship. It is incorrect to understand by this the whole Church at Laodicea (Baehr)=“which are in Laodicea. Grotius improperly places Nymphas and his house in the neighborhood of Laodicea.
Col_4:16. And when this epistle is read among you.—Undoubtedly he means the Epistle to the Colossians lying before them (see Winer’s Gram. p. 102). The verb ( ἀíáãíùóèῇ ) marks the reading as an understanding on the part of the readers answering to that of the author, referring to the meaning of what was written, while “legere” refers merely to the form, the letters taken together. “Reading it aloud to others” (vorlesen) is not implied in the word, but in the circumstances, as 1Th_5:27, in the dative; 2Co_3:15; Act_15:21, in the times and the object.—Cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans—“Cause that” gives prominence to the purpose as in Joh_11:27. This injunction grows out of the similar circumstances, explained and conditioned by the proximity and connection of the two Churches.
And that ye likewise read that from Laodicea.—“That from Laodicea” is placed first for emphasis to mark the antithesis. See Winer’s Gram. p. 511. “Ye likewise” places the Colossians beside the Laodiceans, after whom they also should read the Epistle. Evidently-then a letter written to the Laodiceans is meant, which the Colossians should cause to be forwarded to them from Laodicea. See Winer’s Gram. p. 584. The context indicates that Paul had written it, since otherwise he would not have known that the Laodiceans had one, and what its contents were. He had probably written and sent it at the same time, counting upon the oral information of Tychicus (Col_4:9), and was certainly induced to do so by Epaphras (Col_4:13). But nothing further is known save the admission that it is lost, as indeed the Canon of Muratori cites an Epistle to the Laodiceans (comp. Introd. to Ephesians, § 5, 1). [As usual, where nothing is known, conjectures are abundant.—R.] The following opinions are inadmissible: that it was a letter written from Laodicea to Paul (Erasmus, Calvin) [so A. Alexander, Canon, p. 296—R.]; or one written thence by Paul, as 1 Tim. (Theophylact); or the Epistles to Philemon (Wieseler, Thiersch); that it was a purely private letter without appropriate doctrinal contents, a mere note, though of great value for the social relations and personal apprehension of those receiving it; that it was 1 John (Lightfoot), or Hebrews (Stein), or even Ephesians (Baehr, Meyer, Bleek) [Conybeare and Howson, I., 394–8, where this view is advocated at length—R,.]. The Apocryphal Latin Epistle to the Laodiceans, first translated into Greek by Elias Huther (1699), and inserted in German Bibles before that of Luther, a poor bungling affair of twenty verses, cannot be the one referred to. [Macknight’s conjecture, deemed probable by Middleton, Blunt and Wordsworth, is “that the Apostle sent the Ephesians word by Tychicus, who carried their letter, to send a copy of it to the Laodiceans, with an order to them to communicate it to the Colossians.” Wordsworth remarks: that all St. Paul’s Epistles were designed for general circulation. Ellicott in loco, after a clear statement, inclines to the view “that an actual Epistle to the Laodiceans is here alluded to, which possibly, from its similarity to its sister Epistle, it has not pleased God to preserve to us.” Eadie: “Probably it was wholly of a temporary and local nature. An inspired writing is not necessarily a canonical one.” The two leading hypotheses are: a) That it was the Epistle to the Ephesians , 1) regarded as an encyclical letter; 2) or, as addressed to the Laodiceans originally; 3) or circulating as Macknight suggests; all of which are open to great objections). b) An Epistle now lost, for on exegetical grounds we must believe that it was a letter which the Laodiceans had or would have received, to come to Colosse from them. The latter is most probable, and does not involve the loss of a canonical book. (So Barnes.)—R.]
Col_4:17. And say to Archippus.—(Phm_1:2, “our fellow soldier”). He was doubtless a Colossian.—Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord.—An exhortation corresponding with the recognition in the other Epistle (Phm_1:2), hence not a reproof, as though great attention were needful (Schenkel). Comp. 1Co_1:26; 1Co_10:18 Php_3:2. “Which thou hast received in the Lord” describes the kind of ministry meant; as to its origin, it was delivered to him (Bengel: vocatione mediata), for the Church indeed, but not more closely described. It is arbitrary to regard it as the diaconate or administration of the episcopate during the absence of Epaphras (Estius) [Ellicott and Wordsworth deem this not improbable—R.]; so also the opinion that he was a young man (Ewald), or now feeble from age (Bengel). “In the Lord” is not=“from the Lord” (Baehr), nor “for the sake of the Lord” (Flatt), not “according to the precepts of the Lord” (Grotius, who joins it with “fulfil”); it simply denotes the sphere in which the ministry moved, marking a responsible position. Comp. Act_20:24. [Alford: “The sphere of the reception of the ministry; in which the recipient lived and moved and promised at his ordination; not of the ministry itself.” This is more accurate.—R.]
The purpose of taking heed to the ministry that thou fulfil it.—It is not trajection: “that thou fulfil the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord” (Grotius and others). See 2Jn_1:8. Comp. Act_12:25; 2Ti_4:5. Nor is there any reproof here, only exhortation, the circumstances of the Church being a motive for it; the service must be fully rendered to guard the Church from corruption. It must be noticed that the Church should thus speak to Archippus, in the words of the Apostle, however. [Eadie: “It was an admonition of Paul to Archippus through the Church.” Theophylact finds in it also a command to the flock, to recognize and obey the Pastor. This may be implied, but this interpretation belongs to a later age. See Alford, Meyer. Also Wordsworth, who quotes Theophylact with approval.—R.]
2. Hospitality has now an entirely different form from that of earlier times, owing to the total change in circumstances. The character of this duty and custom remains unchanged in this respect, that to the poor and distressed as well as to friends and brethren, our house offers a place of friendly reception and hospitable help, according to the circumstances and needs of the case. Our house should not at times become a public house, but in the privacy of home we should still be good hosts for Christian sociality and Christian beneficence.
3. Firmness and constancy are, naturally, fundamental traits of the character of the Christian and the Christian Church, but their foundation and element must be the will of God in the various relations of life. The Christian should yield to no human opinion, to no thought of time, not to worldly wisdom or to the lust of his flesh and self-will. In God’s “Will” we find our “Ought,” and to this our “Can” must reach. [In Gottes Wollen liegt unser Sollen, und darauf muss unser Können gehen.]
4. Fervent supplication is a duty and important work, not without labor. In it not only is the heart elevated with its love, but it extends itself, it strengthens and nerves itself for skilful action. Epaphras, who approached God in supplication for his Colossians, journeyed also to Rome to see Paul, and was interested in the neighboring churches.
5. Every Church has its heads and leaders, as well as its members, those known and esteemed and of wide reputation, and those unknown, un thought of, hidden ones. The former are not without the latter, are for them, and these too are with the former and for them also.
6. What was then said to one Church was of value to another, is of value to all, to the whole Church. The “form of a servant” in which single writings of the Bible appear, as occasional letters, as shared by the whole Scripture; in this we perceive the glory of the Lord, for such means suffice for His work.
7. Independency. Paul does not address his words to an Independent congregation of Christians. He places three congregations: Colosse, Laodicea and Hierapolis, together in union with himself and with each other.
8. Nor does Paul foster the hierarchical spirit of the clergy: the latter constitute a member of the body of the Church, to which the whole should furnish the impulse. The Apostle points from the Romish or Jewish Church of the clergy, to the evangelical Church of the people.
9. The ministerial office has a great responsibility on account of Him who imparts it, on account of Him in whom it is to be accomplished and on account of those for whom it is to be fulfilled.
Starke:—Every father should have and hold in his family a proper household church. That brings edification and blessing. Whoever tries it will find it so.—Reading the Word of God is not an especial privilege for this and that one alone, but for each and every Christian.—Rieger:—We have children, households, entangling connections; and we ever say: to these too we must take heed. But “to the ministry,” however, first and foremost.—Schleiermacher:—All associations of Christians in a society of personal friendship, which involve a dissimilarity to others, should end in such an understanding that each one, in his own place and in his own spirit, but joined in common love to the others, will forward the great work of blessing men through Christ.
Passavant:
Col_4:10. Mark had struggled through and out of the old nature, and become a faithful servant in the gospel; we never go further in God’s ways in vain.
Col_4:15. It was no slight evidence of the faith and love of this householder to Christ and His cause, that he received into his house the assembly of first Christians, these heathen converted out of darkness into light; such an one must assuredly anticipate many a pain and persecution.
[Henry:
Col_4:10. We must forget as well as forgive.
Col_4:12. They who would succeed in prayer, must take pains in prayer.
Col_4:14. Luke was both a physician and an evangelist. Christ Himself both taught and healed, and was the great Physician as well as Prophet of the Church.—R.]
[Eadie:
Col_4:12. Love so pure and spiritual as that of Epaphras will produce an agony of earnestness.
Col_4:14. “Honor a physician with the honor 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_38:1-2). It was indeed a common saying,—ubi tres medici, duo athei. Luke might have been an example to the profession.—R.]
[Wordsworth:
Col_4:14. This special mention (“the beloved”) may have been designed by St. Paul to impart a Christian dignity to the medical profession, which was not held in high repute by the polite nations of antiquity; and to remind its practitioners, particularly those of Laodicea, to whom this Epistle was to be sent (Col_4:16), of the honor and holiness of the medical calling, as ministering to the human body, which had been ennobled and consecrated by the Incarnation of Christ. Though special and supernatural gifts of healing were vouchsafed to the Church in those days, even then the ordinary means were not superseded, which were provided and bestowed by Almighty God for alleviating the sufferings of humanity through the art and skill of the Physician.—R.]
Footnotes:
Col_4:10.—[ Ἀíåøéüò , cousin. Edie and Ellicott suggest that the E. V. probably means this, i.e., Geschwisterkind. See Exeg. Notes.—R.]
Col_4:10.—[The clause immediately following “Barnabas” is included in the parenthesis of the E. V., this is unnecessary.—R.]
Col_4:12.—[ à . A. B. C. L. insert Ἰçóïῦ ; Lachmann, Tischendorf, most modern editors.—R.]
Col_4:12.— à . A. B. C. and others read ðåðëçñïöïñçìÝíïé instead of ðåðëçñùìÝíïé . [So modern editors, Lachmann, Tischendorf and other. Braune renders it “erfüilt;” Eadie, Alford, Ellicott, Wordsworth: “fully assured” or “fully persuades.”—R.]
Col_4:13.— à . A. B. C. and other read ðüíïí instead of æῆëïí . [Others êüðïí , ðüèïí , ἀãῶíá . Modern editors have generally adopted ðüíïí , multum laborem. The word is rare in New Testament. hence the variety of readings.—R.]
Col_4:15.— Áὐôïῦ is well attested by D. E. F. G. K. L. and other; à . [A. C.] have áὐôῶí . B. reads Íýìöáí — áὐôῆò . The context requires the first, since Íõìöᾶí , the masculine name, is to be retained, and the explanation that the plural refers to Nymphas and family, is unnatural. [Lachmann follows B.; Meyer, Alford adopt the plural; Rec. Tischendorf, Eadie, Ellicott, Wordsworth: Íõìöᾶí — áὐôïῦ . The variation is of little importance, has probably arisen from a desire to identify the whole church of Laodicea with that in the house of Nymphas (Ellicott).—R.]
[Comp. Alford III. Prolegg. pp. 17, 18, against 1) and 2), and Ellicott in loco against 3), which is by far the least improbable conjecture.—R.]