Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Colossians 1:7 - 1:7
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Col_1:7 f. Καθώς ] not quandoquidem (Flatt, comp. Bähr), but the as of the manner in which. So, namely, as it had just been affirmed by ἐν ἀληθείᾳ that they had known the divine grace, had they learned it (comp. Php_4:9) from Epaphras. Notwithstanding this appropriate connection, Holtzmann finds in this third καθώς a trace of the interpolator.
Nothing further is known from any other passage as to Epaphras the Colossian (Col_4:12); according to Phm_1:23, he was συναιχμάλωτος of the apostle. That the latter circumstance is not mentioned in our Epistle is not to be attributed to any special design (Estius: that Paul was unwilling to make his readers anxious). See, on the contrary, on Col_4:10. Against the identity of Epaphras with Epaphroditus, see on Php_2:25. The names even are not alike (contrary to the view of Grotius and Ewald, who look upon Epaphras as an abbreviation); Ἐπαφρᾶς and the corresponding feminine name Ἐπαφρώ are found on Greek inscriptions.
συνδούλου ] namely, of Christ (comp. Php_1:1). The word, of common occurrence, is used elsewhere by Paul in Col_4:7 only.
ὅς ἐστιν κ . τ . λ .] This faithfulness towards the readers, and also, in the sequel, the praise of their love, which Epaphras expressed to the apostle, are intended to stir them up “ne a doctrina, quam ab eo didicerant, per novos magistros abduci se patiantur,” Estius. The emphasis is on πιστός .
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ] for, as their teacher, he is the servant of Christ for them, for their benefit. The interpretation, instead of you (“in prison he serves me in the gospel,” Michaelis, Böhmer), would only be possible in the event of the service being designated as rendered to the apostle ( διάκονός μου ἐν Χριστῷ , or something similar). Comp. Phm_1:13. Even with Lachmann’s reading, ὑπ . ἡμῶν (Steiger, Olshausen, Ewald), it would not be necessary to take ὑπέρ as instead; it might equally well be taken as for in the sense of interest, as opposite of the anti-Pauline working (comp. Luk_9:50). The present ἐστί (Paul does not put ἦν ) has its just warrant in the fact, that the merit, which the founder of the church has acquired by its true instruction, is living and continuous, reaching in its efficacy down to the present time. This is an ethical relation, which is quite independent of the circumstance that Epaphras was himself a Colossian (in opposition to Hofmann), but also makes it unnecessary to find in ἐστι an indirect continuance of Epaphras’ work for the Colossians (in opposition to Bleek).
ὁ καὶ δηλώσας κ . τ . λ ] who also (in accordance with the interest of this faithful service) has made us to know; comp. 1Co_1:11. The ἀγάπη is here understood either of the love of the Colossians to Paul (and Timothy), as, following Chrysostom, most, including Huther, Bleek, and Hofmann,[15] explain it, or of the brotherly love already commended in Col_1:4 (de Wette, Olshausen, Ellicott, and others). But both these modes of taking it are at variance with the emphatic position of ὑμῶν (comp. 1Co_9:12; 2Co_1:6; 2Co_7:7; 2Co_8:13, et al.), which betokens the love of the readers to Epaphras as meant. There had just been expressed, to wit, by ὑ̔ πὲρ ὑμῶν , the faithful, loving position of this servant of Christ towards the Colossians, and correlative to this is now the love which he met with from them, consequently the counter-love shown to him, of which he has informed the apostle. A delicate addition out of courtesy to the readers.
ἐν πνεύματι ] attaches itself closely to ἈΓΆΠΗΝ , so as to form one idea, denoting the love as truly holy—not conditioned by anything outward, but divinely upheld—which is in the Holy Spirit as the element which prompts and animates it; for it is the fruit of the Spirit (Gal_5:22; Rom_15:30), οὐ σαρκικὴ , ἀλλὰ πνευματική (Oecumenius). Comp. ΧΑΡᾺ ἘΝ ΠΝ ., Rom_14:17.
[15] Who, at the same time, makes the ἐν πνεύματι suggest the reference, that the ἁγάπη took place in a manner personally unknown—which must have been conveyed in the context.
REMARK.
Since ἀφʼ ἧς ἡμέρας ἠκούσατε κ . τ . λ ., Col_1:6, refers the readers back to the first commencement of their Christianity, and καθὼς ἐμάθετε ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρᾶ κ . τ . λ ., Col_1:7, cannot, except by pure arbitrariness, be separated from it as regards time and regarded as something later, it results from our passage that Epaphras is to be considered as the first preacher of the gospel at Colossae, and consequently as founder of the church. This exegetical result remains even if the Recepta καθὼς καί is retained. This καί would not, as Wiggers thinks (in the Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 185), place the preaching of Epaphras in contradistinction to an earlier one, and make it appear as a continuation of the latter (in this case καθὼς καὶ ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρ . ἐμάθετε or καθὼς ἐμάθετε καὶ ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρ . would have been employed); but it is to be taken as also, not otherwise, placing the ἐμάθετε on a parity with the ἐπέγνωτε . This applies also in opposition to Vaihinger, in Herzog’s Encykl. iv. p. 79 f.