Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Colossians 1:18 - 1:18
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Col_1:18. Second part (see on Col_1:15) of the exhibition of the exaltedness of Christ. To that which Christ is as πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως (Col_1:16-17) is now added what He is as πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν , namely, the Head of the Church, and thus His πρωτεύειν has its consummation ( ἐν πᾶσιν ). The latter, namely, ἵνα γένηται … πρωτεύων , embraces also a retrospect to that πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως , and includes it in ἐν πᾶσιν , without its being necessary, however, to attach Col_1:18 to the carrying out of the relation to the world expressed in πρωτότοκ . π . κτίσ . (Hofmann, comp. Rich. Schmidt). The perspective proceeds from the dignity of the original state of our Lord to that of His state as Saviour, from His cosmical to His soteriological glory, and so at length exhibits Him to view as the ἐν πᾶσι πρωτεύων .
That Col_1:18, with its confirmation in Col_1:19 f., has an apologetic reference to the Gnostic false teaching, must be assumed from its connection with what goes before. The passage is to be looked upon as antagonistic to the worship of angels (Col_2:18), which disparaged Christ in His dignity as Head of the Church, but not (in opposition to Bähr and Huther) as antagonistic to a theological dogma, such as is found in the Cabbala, according to which the body of the Messiah (the Adam Kadmon) is the aggregate of the emanations. For the emphasis of the passage and its essential point of doctrine lie in the fact that Christ is the Head of the church, and not in the fact that He is the head of the church; it is not the doctrine of another σῶμα , but that of any other πρωτεύων , which is excluded.
καὶ αὐτός ] stands again, as κ . αὐτός in Col_1:17, in significant reference to τὰ πάντα : et ipse, in quo omnia consistunt, est caput, etc., so that the passage continues to divide itself as into the links of a chain.
τοῦ σώματος τῆς ἐκκλησ .] to be taken together; the second genitive is that of apposition (Winer, p. 494 [E. T. 666]), which gives to the word governing it concrete definiteness; comp. Müller in the Luther. Zeitschr. 1871, p. 611 ff. On the familiar Pauline mode of considering the church of believers, livingly and actively ruled by Christ as the head (Eph_3:10; Php_3:6; Act_9:31), as His body, [40] comp. 1Co_10:17; 1Co_12:12 ff., 1Co_10:27; Eph_1:23; Eph_4:12; Eph_5:23; Eph_5:30; Rom_12:5.
ὅς ἐστιν κ . τ . λ .] epexegetical relative clause (as in Col_1:15), the contents of which are related by way of confirmation to the preceding statement (Matthiae, p. 1061 f.; Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. i. 2. 64; Stallbaum, ad Phil. p. 195 f.), like our: he, who, etc., which might be expressed, but not necessarily, by ὅστις (or ὍΣΓΕ ). Comp. on Eph_1:14. If Christ had not risen, He would not be Head of the church (Act_2:24-36; 1 Corinthians 15; Rom_1:4, et al.).
ἀρχή ] beginning; which, however, is not to be explained either as “initium secundae et novae creationis” (Calvin), progenitor of the regenerate (Bisping), or “author of the church” (Baumgarten-Crusius), or even “ruler of the world” (Storr, Flatt); but agreeably to the context in such a way, as to make it have with the appositional πρωτότοκος its definition in ἘΚ ΤῶΝ ΝΕΚΡῶΝ , just as if the words ran: ἈΡΧῊ ΤῶΝ ΝΕΚΡῶΝ , ΠΡΩΤΌΤΟΚΟς ἘΞ ΑὐΤῶΝ , although Paul did not express himself thus, because at once upon his using the predicate ἀρχή in and by itself the exegetical ΠΡΩΤΌΤΟΚΟς suggested itself to him. Accordingly Christ is called ἈΡΧῊ ( ΤῶΝ ΝΕΚΡῶΝ ), inasmuch as He is among all the dead the first arisen to everlasting life. It is arbitrary to discover in ἀρχή an allusion to the offering of first-fruits sanctifying the whole mass (Chrysostom, Beza, Ewald, and others); especially as the term ἀπαρχή , which is elsewhere used for the first portion of a sacrifice (Rom_11:16), is not here employed, although it has crept in from 1Co_15:20; 1Co_15:23, in a few minusculi and Fathers, as in Clement also, Cor. I. 24, Christ is termed ἀπαρχὴ τῆς ἀναστάσεως . To assume a reminiscence of 1 Corinthians 15 (Holtzmann) is wholly unwarranted, especially as ἈΠΑΡΧΉ is not used. On ἈΡΧΉ , used of persons, denoting the one who begins the series, as the first in order of time, comp. Gen_49:3, where ἀρχὴ τέκνων μου is equivalent to ΠΡΩΤΌΤΟΚΟς ΜΟΥ , as also Deu_21:17. In what respect any one is ἀρχή of those concerned, must be yielded by the context, just as in this case it is yielded by the more precisely defining ΠΡΩΤΌΤΟΚΟς ἘΚ Τ . ΝΕΚΡῶΝ ; hence it has been in substance correctly explained, following the Fathers: ἀρχή , φησίν , ἐστι τῆς ἀναστάσεως , ποὸ πάντων ἀναστάς ,[41] Theophylact. Only τῆς ἀναστάσεως is not to be mentally supplied, nor is it to be conjectured (de Wette) that Paul had intended to write ἀρχὴ τ . ἀναστάσεως , but, on account of the word πρωτότοκος presenting itself to him from Col_1:15, did not complete what he had begun. It follows, moreover, from the use of the word πρωτότοκος , that ἀρχή is to be taken in the temporal sense, consequently as equivalent to primus, not in the sense of dignity (Wetstein), and not as principle (Bähr, Steiger, Huther, Dalmer, following earlier expositors).
πρωτότοκος ἐκ τ . νεκρ .] ἐκ τ . νεκρ . is conceived in the same way as in ἀναστῆναι ἐκ τ . νεκρ . (Eph_5:14), so that it is the dead in Hades among whom the Risen One was, but from whom He goes forth (separates Himself from them, hence also ἀπὸ τ . νεκρ ., Mat_14:2; Mat_27:64; Mat_28:7), and returning into the body, with the latter rises from the tomb. Comp. πρῶτος ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν , Act_26:23, also 1Co_15:22 f. This living exit from the grave is figuratively represented as birth; comp. Rev_1:5, where the partitive genitive τῶν νεκρ . (not ἐκ . τ . ν .) yields a form of conceiving the matter not materially different. Calvin takes πρωτότοκος ἐκ . τ . ν . as specifying the ground for ἀρχή : “principium (absolutely), quia primogenitus est ex mortuis; nam in resurrectione est rerum omnium instauratio.” Against this it may be urged, that ἀρχή has no more precise definition; Paul must have written either ἀρχὴ τῆς καινῆς κτίσεως , or at least ἧς instead of ὅς . Calvin was likewise erroneously of opinion (comp. Erasmus, Calovius) that Christ is called Primogenitus ex mortuis, not merely because He was the first to rise, but also “quia restituit aliis vitam.” This idea is not conveyed either by the word or by the context, however true may be the thing itself; but a belief in the subsequent general resurrection of the dead is the presupposition of the expression πρωτότοκος ( αἰνίττεται δὲ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὴν πάντων ἡμῶν ἀνάστασιν , Theodoret). This expression is purposely chosen in significant reference to Col_1:15, as is intimated by Paul himself in the following ἵνα γένηται ἐν πᾶσιν κ . τ . λ . But it is thus all the more certain, that πρωτότοκος ἐκ τ . νεκρ . is to be taken independently, and not adjectivally together with ἀρχή (Heinrichs, Schleiermacher, Ewald), which would only amount to a tautological verboseness (first-born beginning); and, on the other hand, that ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν may not be separated from πρωτότοκος in such a way as to emphasize the place, issuing forth from which Christ is what He is, namely, ἀρχή , πρωτότοκος ; the former, “as the personal beginning of what commences with Him;” the latter, “in the same relation to those who belong to the world therewith coming into life as He held to the creation” (Hofmann). In this way the specific more precise definition, which is by means of ἐκ τ . νεκρῶν in significant reference to Col_1:15 attached to the predicates of Christ, ἀρχή and πρωτότοκος , would be groundlessly withdrawn from them, and these predicates would be left in an indefiniteness, in which they would simply be open vessels for receiving a gratuitously imported supplement.
ἵνα γένηται κ . τ . λ .] not to be restricted to the affirmation ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν (Hofmann),[42] but to be referred to the whole sentence that Christ is ἀρχή , πρωτότοκος ἐκ τ . νεκρ ., expressing the divine teleology of this position of Christ as the Risen One: in order that He may become, etc.; not: in order “that He may be held as” (Baumgarten-Crusius), nor yet “that He may be” (Vulgate, and so most expositors), as γίγνεσθαι and εἶναι are never synonymous. The ἐν πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύει is looked upon by Paul as something which is still in course of development (comp. Steiger and Huther), and is only to be completed in the future, namely, when the Risen One shall have conquered all the power of the enemy (1Co_15:25 f.) and have erected the kingdom of the Messiah—but of this result His resurrection itself was the necessary historical basis, and hence the future universal πρωτεύειν is the divinely intended aim of His being risen.
ἐν πᾶσιν ] in all points, without excepting any relation, not, therefore, merely in the relation of creation (Col_1:15-17). Comp. Php_4:12; 1Ti_3:11; 1Ti_4:15; 2Ti_2:7; 2Ti_4:5; Tit_2:9; Heb_13:4; Heb_13:18. Ἐν παντί is more commonly used by Paul (1Co_1:5; 2Co_4:8, et al.). According to Beza, πᾶσιν is masculine: “inter omnes, videlicet fratres, ut Rom_8:29.” So also Kypke and Heinrichs. But this would be here, after the universal bearing of the whole connection, much too narrow an idea, which, besides, is self-evident as to the Head of the church. According to Pelagius, it denotes: “tam in visibilibus quam in invisibilibus creaturis.” At variance with the text; this idea was conveyed by Col_1:16-17, but in Col_1:18 another relation is introduced which does not refer to created things as such.
αὐτός ] emphatic, as in Col_1:17-18.
πρωτεύων ] having the first rank, not used elsewhere in the N. T., but see Est_5:11; 2Ma_6:18; 2Ma_13:15; Aquila, Zec_4:7; Plat. Legg. iii. p. 692 D, Dem. 1416. 25: πρωτεύειν ἐν ἅπασι κράτιστον . Xen. Cyr. viii. 2. 28; Mem. ii. 6. 26. This precedence in rank is to be the final result of the condition which set in with the πρωτότοκον εἶναι ἐκ τ . νεκρ .; but it is not contained in this πρωτότοκον εἶναι itself,—an idea against which the very ἵνα γένηται is logically decisive (in opposition to de Wette’s double signification of πρωτότοκ .).
[40] In which is expressed the idea of the invisible church. Comp. Julius Müller, Dogmat. Abh. p. 316 ff. And this conception and representation belong quite to the apostle’s general sphere of ideas, not specially to that of the Epistle to the Ephesians, into which the interpolator is supposed by Holtzmann again to enter here, after he has manifested a comparative independence in vv. 15–18.
[41] The Fathers have already correctly judged that even in regard to the isolated cases of rising from the dead, which have taken place through Christ and before Him, Christ remains the first-risen. Theophylact: εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἄλλοι πρὸ τούτου ἀνέστησαν , ἀλλὰ πάλιν ἀπέθανον · αὐτὸς δὲ τὴν τελείαν ἀνάστασιν ἀνέστη . Comp. on 1Co_15:20.
[42] So that it would express the design, which Christ Himself had in His coming forth from the dead.