Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Colossians 2:3 - 2:3
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Col_2:3. Ἐν ᾧ ] is to be referred to τοῦ μυστηρίου —a remark which applies also in the case of every other reading of the foregoing words—not to Christ,[81] as is commonly done with the Recepta, and by Böhmer, Dalmer, and Hofmann even with our reading. The correct reference is given, in connection with the Recepta, by Grotius (against whom Calovius contends), Hammond, Bengel, and Michaelis; and in connection with our reading, by Huther, Schenkel, and Bleek; its correctness appears from the correlation in which ἀπόκρυφοι stands to τοῦ μυστηρ . The destination of this relative clause is to bring out the high value of the ἐπίγνωσις τοῦ μυστηρίου (since in Him, etc.), and that in contrast to the pretended wisdom and knowledge of the false teachers; hence also the emphatic πάντες οἱ θησ . κ . τ . λ .
The σοφία and γνῶσις are here conceived objectively, and the genitives indicate wherein the treasures consist. The distinction between the two words is not, indeed, to be abandoned (Calvin: “duplicatio ad augendum valet;” comp. Huther and others), but yet is not to be defined more precisely than that γνῶσις is more special, knowledge, and σοφία more general, the whole Christian wisdom, by which we with the collective activity of the mind grasp divine relations and those of human morality, and apply them to right practice. Comp. on Col_1:9.
On θησαυροί , comp. Plato, Phil. p. 15 E: ὥς τινα σοφίας εὑρηκὼς θησαυρόν , Xen. Mem. iv. 2. 9, i. 6. 14; Wis_7:14; Sir_1:22; Bar_3:15.
ἀπόκρυφοι ] is not the predicate to εἰσί (so most writers, with Chrysostom and Luther), as if it were ἀποκεκρυμμένοι εἰσιν instead of εἰσὶν ἀπόκρυφοι ; for, as it stands, the unsuitable sense would be conveyed: “in whom all treasures … are hidden treasures.” But neither is it a description of the qualitative how of their being in Him,[82] in so far, namely, as they do not lie open for ordinary perception (Hofmann); for this adverbial use of the adjective (see Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. i. 4. 12, 2:2. 17; Krüger, § 57. 5) would be without due motive here, seeing that the apostle is concerned, not about the mode of the ἐν ᾧ εἰσι , but about the characterizing of the treasures themselves, whereupon the how in question was obvious of itself. We must therefore take ἀπόκρυφοι simply as an attributive adjective to ΘΗΣΑΥΡΟΊ , placed at the end with emphasis: in whom the collective hidden treasures … are contained. Comp. LXX. Isa_45:3; 1Ma_1:23; Mat_13:44. The treasures, which are to be found in the mystery, are not such as lie open to the light, but, in harmony with the conception of the secret, hidden (comp. Matt. l.c.), because unattainable by the power of natural discernment in itself, but coming to be found by those who attain εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ μυστηρίου , whereby they penetrate into the domain of these secret riches and discover and appropriate them. The objection to this view of ἈΠΟΚΡ . as the adjective to ΘΗΣ ., viz. that there must then have been written ΟἹ ἈΠΟΚΡ . (Bähr, Bleek, Hofmann), is erroneous; the article might have been (1Ma_1:23), but did not need to be, inserted. With the article it would mean: quippe qui absconditi sunt; without the article it is simply: “thesauri absconditi” (Vulgate), i.e. ἀπόκρυφοι ὄντες , not ΟἹ ὌΝΤΕς ἈΠΌΚΡΥΦΟΙ .
[81] Older dogmatic expositors (see especially Calovius) discover here the omniscience of Christ.
[82] In connection with which Bähr, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Bleek convert the notion of being hidden into that of being deposited for preservation ( ἀποκεϊσθαι , Col_1:5).