Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Colossians 1:26 - 1:26
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Col_1:26. Appositional more precise definition of the λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ , and that as regards its great contents.
As to τὸ μυστήριον κ . τ . λ ., the decree of redemption, hidden from eternity in God, fulfilled through Christ, and made known through the gospel, see on Eph_1:9. It embraces the Gentiles also; and this is a special part of its nature that had been veiled (see Eph_3:5), which, however, is not brought into prominence till Col_1:27. Considering the so frequent treatment of this idea in Paul’s writings, and its natural correlation with that of the γνῶσις , an acquaintance with the Gospel of Matthew (Mat_13:11) is not to be inferred here (Holtzmann).[70]
ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων κ . ἀπὸ τῶν γενεῶν ] This twofold description, as also the repetition of ἀπό , has solemn emphasis: from the ages and from the generations. The article indicates the ages that had existed (since the beginning), and the generations that have lived. As to ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων , comp. on Eph_3:9. Paul could not write πρὸ τῶν αἰών ., because while the divine decree was formed prior to all time (1Co_2:7; 2Ti_1:9), its concealment is not conceivable before the beginning of the times and generations of mankind, to whom it remained unknown. Expressions such as Rom_16:25, χρόνοις αἰωνίοις ,[71] and Tit_1:2 (see Huther in loc.), do not conflict with this view. ἀπὸ τ . γενεῶν does not occur elsewhere in the N. T.; but comp. Act_15:21. The two ideas are not to be regarded as synonymous (in opposition to Huther and others), but are to be kept separate (times—men).
νυνὶ δὲ ἐφανερώθη ] A transition to the finite tense, occasioned by the importance of the contrast. Comp. on Col_1:6. Respecting ΝΥΝΊ , see on Col_1:21. The ΦΑΝΈΡΩΣΙς has taken place differently according to the different subjects; partly by ἀποκάλυψις (Eph_3:5; 1Co_2:10), as in the case of Paul himself (Gal_1:12; Gal_1:15; Eph_3:3); partly by preaching (Col_4:4; Tit_1:3; Rom_16:26); partly by both. The historical realization (de Wette; comp. 2Ti_1:10) was the antecedent of the φανέρωσις , but is not here this latter itself, which is, on the contrary, indicated by ΤΟῖς ἉΓΊΟΙς ΑὐΤΟῦ as a special act of clearly manifesting communication.
τοῖς ἉΓΊΟΙς ΑὐΤΟῦ ] i.e. not: to the apostles and prophets of the N. T. (Flatt, Bähr, Böhmer, Steiger, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, following Estius and. older expositors, and even Theodoret, who, however, includes other Christians also),—a view which is quite unjustifiably imported from Eph_3:5,[72] whence also the reading ἀποστόλοις (instead of ἉΓΊΟΙς ) in F G has arisen. It refers to the Christians generally. The mystery was indeed announced to all (Col_1:23), but was made manifest only to the believers, who as such are the κλητοὶ ἅγιοι belonging to God, Rom_1:7; Rom_8:30; Rom_9:23 f. Huther wrongly desires to leave ΤΟῖς ἉΓΊΟΙς indefinite, because the μυστήριον , so far as it embraced the Gentiles also, had not come to be known to many Jewish-Christians. But, apart from the fact that the Judaists did not misapprehend the destination of redemption for the Gentiles in itself and generally, but only the direct character of that destination (without a transition through Judaism, Act_15:1, et al.), the ἐφανερώθη τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ is in fact a summary assertion, which is to be construed a potiori, and does not cease to be true on account of exceptional cases, in which the result was not actually realized.
[70] Just as little ground is there for tracing κατὰ τὰ ἐντάλματα κ . τ . λ ., in Col_2:22, to Mat_15:9; οὐ κρατῶν , in Col_2:19, to Mat_7:3-4; ἀπάτη , in Col_2:8, to Mat_13:22; and in other instances. The author, who manifests so much lively copiousness of language, was certainly not thus confined and dependent in thought and expression.
[71] According to Holtzmann, indeed, p. 309 ff., the close of the Epistle to the Romans is to be held as proceeding from the post-apostolic auctor ad Ephesios,—a position which is attempted to be proved by the tones (quite Pauline, however) which Rom_16:15-27 has in common with Col_1:26 f.; Eph_3:20; Eph_3:9-10; Eph_5:21; and in support of it an erroneous interpretation of διὰ γραφῶν προφητικῶν , in Rom_16:26, is invoked.
[72] Holtzmann also, p. 49, would have the apostles thought of “first of all.” The resemblances to Eph_3:3; Eph_3:5 do not postulate the similarity of the conception throughout. This would assume a mechanical process of thought, which could not be proved.