Pulpit Commentary - Colossians 2:1

Pulpit Commentary - Colossians 2:1 - 2:23

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Pulpit Commentary - Colossians 2:1 - 2:23

(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

2:1 - 2:23

EXPOSITION

Col_2:1-7

SECTION IV. THE APOSTLE'S CONCERN FOR THE COLOSSI. AN CHURCH. So far the contents of the letter have been of a general and preparatory character. New the writer begins to indicate the special purpose he has in view by declaring, in connection with his concern for the welfare of the Gentile Churches at large (Col_1:24-29), the deep anxiety which he at present feels respecting the Colossian and neighbouring Churches.

Col_2:1

For I would have you know how great a strife I have on behalf of you and those in Laodicea (Col_4:12, Col_4:13; 2Co_11:28, 2Co_11:29; Rom_1:9-13; Php_1:8, Php_1:25-30; 1Th_2:17,1Th_2:18; Gal_4:20). The apostle has dwelt at such length and so earnestly upon his own position and responsibilities (Col_1:24-29), that the Colossians may feel how real and strong is his interest in their welfare, though personally strangers to him (see next clause). His solicitude for them is in keeping with the toil and strife of his whole ministry. "I would have you know;" a familiar Pauline phrase (1Co_11:3; Php_1:12; Rom_1:13, etc.). Ηλίκον ("how great') has, perhaps, a slightly exclamatory force, as in Jas_3:5 (only other instance of the word in the New Testament), and in classical Greek. For "strife," see note on "striving" (Col_1:29): the energy and abruptness of language characterizing this second chapter bear witness in the inward wrestling which the Colossian difficulty occasioned in the apostle's mind. (On the close connection of Colossae with Laodicea, comp. Col_4:13-17, notes; also Introduction, § 1.) The danger which had come to a head in Colassae was doubtless threatening its neighbours. The words, and as many as have not seen my face in (the) flesh (Jas_3:5; Col_1:8; Rom_1:11; Gal_1:22; Act_20:25), raise the question whether St. Paul had ever visited Colossae. The language of Col_1:7 (see note) raises a strong presumption against his being the founder of this Church, and the narrative of the Acts scarcely admits of any visit to this region in former missionary journeys. Theodoret amongst the Greeks, followed by our own Lardner and a few recent critics, contended that the apostle distinguishes here between Colossians and Laodiceans (or at least the former), and those who had not seen His face. But the disjunction is grammatically harsh and improbable (see Ellicott). (On the general question, see Introduction, § 2.) The apostle is the more anxious for this endangered Church, as the gifts that his presence might have conveyed (Rom_1:11) were wanting to them. He says, "in flesh," for "in spirit" he is closely united with them. The object of his strife on their behalf is—

Col_2:2

That their hearts may be encouraged (Col_4:8; Eph_6:22; 1Th_3:2; 1Th_4:18; 2Th_2:17; 2Co_13:11). For the mischief at work at Colossae was at once unsettling (Col_2:6, Col_2:7; Col_1:23) and discouraging (Col_1:23; Col_2:18; Col_3:15) in its effects, Παρακαλῶ , a favourite word of St. Paul's, means "to address," "exhort," then more specially "to encourage," "comfort," (2Co_1:4), "to beseech" (Eph_4:1; 2Co_6:1),or "to instruct" (Tit_1:9). The heart, in Biblical language, is not the seat of feeling only, but stands for the whole inner man, as the "vital centre" of his personality. While they are (literally, they having been) drawn together in love, and into all (the) riches of the full assurance of the understanding, unto (or, into) (full) knowledge of the mystery of God, (even) Christ (Col_2:19; Col_1:9; Col_3:10, Col_3:14; Col_4:12; Eph_1:17, Eph_1:18; Eph_3:17-19; Eph_4:2, Eph_4:3, Eph_4:15, Eph_4:16; Php_1:9; Php_2:2; 1Co_1:10; 2Co_13:11). In the best Greek copies "drawn together" is nominative masculine, agreeing with "they," the logical subject implied in "their hearts" (feminine). Συμβιβάζω has the same sense in Col_2:19 and Eph_4:16; in 1Co_2:16 it is quoted from the LXX in another sense; and it has a variety of meanings in the Acts. "Drawn together" expresses the double sense which accrues to the verb in combination with the two prepositions "in" and "into:" "united in love," Christians are prepared to be "led into all the wealth of Divine knowledge." This combination of "love and knowledge" appears in all St. Paul's letters of this period (comp. Eph_4:12-16; Php_1:9; and contrast 1Co_8:1-3; 1Co_13:1, 1Co_13:2, 1Co_13:8-13). "The riches of the full assurance," etc., and "the knowledge of the mystery" are the counterpart of "the riches of the glory of the mystery," of Col_1:27; the fulness of conviction and completeness of knowledge attainable by the Christian correspond to the full and satisfying character of the revelation he receives in Christ (comp. Eph_1:17-19). (On "understanding," see note, Col_1:9.) "Full assurance," or "conviction" ( πληροφορία ), is a word belonging to St. Luke and St. Paul (with the Epistle to the Hebrews) in the New Testament (not found in classical Greek), and denotes radically "a bringing to fall measure or maturity." Combined with "understanding," it denotes the ripe, intelligent persuasion of one who enters into the whole wealth of the "truth as it is in Jesus" (comp. Col_4:12, R.V.; also Rom_4:21 and Rom_14:5, for corresponding verb). In this inward "assurance," as in a fortress, the Colossians were to entrench themselves against the attacks of error (Col_1:9; Col_3:15, and notes). Εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν is either in explanatory apposition to the previous clause, or rather donors the further purpose for which this wealth of conviction is to be sought: "knowledge of the Divine mystery, knowledge of Christ"—this is the supreme end, ever leading on and upward, for the pursuit of which all strengthening of heart and understanding are given (Col_3:10; Eph_3:16-19; Php_3:10). The Revisers have corrected the erroneous "acknowledgment" by their paraphrastic rendering, "that they may know." (On ἐπίγνωσις (comp. γνῶσις , verse 3), see note, Col_1:6.) The object of this knowledge is the great manifested mystery of God, namely Christ (Col_1:27). We confidently accept here the Revised reading, that of nearly all recent textual critics, which omits the words found in the Received Text between "God" and "Christ." There are extant eleven distinct variations of this reading, and that of the Textus Receptus is, to all appearance, the latest and worst; "the passage is altogether an instructive lesson on textual criticism". The words thus read have been interpreted mystery of the God Christ" (the Latin Hilary, and a few moderns); of the God of Christ" (Meyer, quoting Eph_1:17; Joh_20:17; Mat_27:46);—both interpretations grammatically correct, but unsuitable here, even if in harmony with Pauline usage elsewhere. Alford omits "of Christ" altogether, distrusting the textual evidence. Meyer objects to the rendering we have followed (that of Ellicott, Lightfoot, Revisers), that the apostle, if this be his meaning, has expressed himself ambiguously; but comp. Col_1:27 (see note); also 1Ti_3:16, "The mystery, who was manifested in flesh."

Col_2:3

In whom (or, which) are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden(ly) (Eph_1:8, Eph_1:9; Eph_3:8; Rom_11:33; 1Co_1:5, 1Co_1:6, 1Co_1:30; 1Co_2:7; 2Co_4:3). Bengel, Meyer, Alford, and others make the relative pronoun neuter, referring to "mystery;" but "Christ," the nearer antecedent, is preferable (Col_2:9, Col_2:10; Col_1:16, Col_1:17, Col_1:19). In him the apostle finds what false teachers sought elsewhere, a satisfaction for the intellect as well as for the heart—treasures of wisdom and knowledge to enrich the understanding, and unsearchable mysteries to exercise the speculative reason. "Hidden" is, therefore, a secondary predicate: in whom are these treasures,—as hidden treasures" (Ellicott, Lightfoot). (For a similar emphasis of position, compare "made complete," Col_2:10, and "seated," Col_3:1.) Meyer and Alford, with the Vulgate, make "hidden" an attributive: "in whom are hidden treasures." Chrysostom and leading versions make it primary predicate: "in whom are hidden," etc., against the order of the words. This word also belongs to the dialect of the mystic theosophists. (On "wisdom," see note, Col_1:9.) Knowledge ( γνῶσις , not ἐπίγνωσις , Col_2:2; Col_1:9; Col_3:10; for this phrase is more comprehensive) is the more objective and purely intellectual side of wisdom (comp. Rom_11:33).

Col_2:4

In this verse the apostle first definitely indicates the cause of his anxiety, and the Epistle begins to assume a polemic tone. This verse is, therefore, the prelude of the impending attack on the false teachers (Col_2:8-23). This I say, that no one may be deluding you in persuasive speech (Col_2:8, Col_2:18, Col_2:23; Eph_4:14; 1Co_2:1, 1Co_2:4,1Co_2:13; 1Ti_6:20; Psa_55:21). This was the danger which made a more adequate comprehension of Christianity so necessary to the Colossians (verses 2, 3). Πιθανολογία , one of the numerous hapax logo-menu of this Epistle (words only used here in the New Testament), compounds into one word the πειθοῖ λόγοι ("persuasive words") of 1Co_2:4 (compare "word of wisdom," verse 23). In classical writers it denotes plausible, ad captandum reasoning. Παραλογίζομαι (only here and Jas_1:22 in the New Testament) is "to use bad logic," "to play off fallacies (paralogisms)." The new teachers were fluent, specious reasoners, and had a store of sophistical arguments at command. The tense of the verb indicates an apprehension as to what may be now going on (1Co_2:8, 1Co_2:16, 18, 20; Col_1:23). We shall see afterwards (1Co_2:8 -23) what was the doctrine underlying this "persuasive speech."

Col_2:5

For if indeed I am absent in the flesh, yet in the spirit I am with you (1Th_2:17; 1Co_5:3, 1Co_5:4). The connection of this verse with the last is not obvious. Ellicott, following Chrysostom, makes St. Paul's spiritual presence the reason for his being able to give the Colossians this warning; Meyer, his bodily absence the reason for their needing it. It is better, with Lightfoot, to see here a general explanatory reference to the previous context, a renewed declaration (verse 1) of watchful interest in these distant brethren and a hearty acknowledgment of their Christian loyalty. The tone of authoritative warning just assumed (verse 4) is thus justified, and yet softened (compare the apologetic tone of Rom_15:14, Rom_15:15). The phrase, "if I am absent," does not imply a previous presence (see note, verse 1). Rejoicing and beholding your order, and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ (Php_1:4-8, Php_1:27; 1Co_1:5-8; 1Th_2:13; 2Th_1:4). St. Paul dos not say, "rejoicing in beholding." The consciousness of union with brethren far away, whom he has never seen (verse 1), is itself a joy; and this joy is heightened by what he sees through the eyes of Epaphras of the condition of this Church. Τάξις and στερέωμα are military terms, denoting the "ordered array" and "solid front" of an army prepared for battle (Lightfoot, Hofmann): comp. Eph_6:11, etc.; Php_1:27. Others find the figure of a building underlying the second word—Vulgate, firmamentum ("solid basis")—and this is its more usual meaning, and agrees with Php_1:7 and Col_1:23. The precise expression, "faith in Christ" (literally, into— εἰς , not ἐν , as in Col_1:4, see note) occurs only here in the New Testament; in Act_24:24 read "in Christ Jesus." In such passages as Rom_3:22, Rom_3:26 (where πίστις is followed by the genitive), Christ appears as object of faith; in such as Col_1:4 and Col_2:5 he is its ground or substratum, that in which it rests and dwells, into which it roots itself.

Col_2:6

As therefore ye received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in him (Php_1:27; Php_2:9-11; 1Th_4:1; 2Th_2:13-15; 1Co_15:1, 1Co_15:2; Gal_3:2-4; Gal_5:1; Heb_3:6; Heb_4:14; Heb_10:23; Joh_7:17; Joh_15:5-10; Rom_3:11). Such a walk will be consistent with their previous steadfastness, and will lead them to larger spiritual attainments (Col_1:10; see note). "Ye received" reminds the Colossians of what they had received (compare" ye were taught," verse 7 and Col_1:7) rather than of the way of their receiving it. "Christ Jesus the Lord," is literally, the Christ Jesus, the Lord—an expression found besides only in Eph_3:11 (Revised Text). The prefixed article points out Christ Jesus in his full style and title as the Person whom the Colossians had received, and received as the Lord. "The Lord" has a predicative force, as in 1Co_12:3 (R.V.); 2Co_4:5; Php_2:11. "Jesus is Lord" was the testing watchword applied in the discerning of spirits; "Jesus Christ is Lord" is to be the final confession of a reconciled universe; and "Christ Jesus is Lord" is the rule of faith that guides all conduct and tests all doctrine within the Church (comp. Php_2:19; Rom_16:18). It is "a summary of the whole Christian confession" (Meyer). To vindicate this lordship, on which the Colossian error trenched so seriously, is the main object of the Epistle (Col_1:13-20). We must not, therefore, with Alford, Lightfoot, Hofmann, analyze "the Christ Jesus:" "Ye received the Christ, (namely) Jesus, who is the Lord." The writer has already used "Christ Jesus" as a single proper name at the outset (Col_1:1, Col_1:4); and it was the lordship of Christ Jesus, not the Messiahship of Jesus, that was now in question. In Act_18:5, Act_18:28 the situation is entirely different. In the following clause, "in him" is emphatic, as in Act_18:7 (compare the predominant αὐτός of Col_1:16-22; Col_2:9-15). Hence the contradiction of figure, "walk, rooted, and builded up," does not obtrude itself. (On "walk," see note, Col_1:10; and on "in Christ" in this connection, see notes, Col_1:4; Col_2:10; and comp. Rom_6:3-11; Rom_8:1; 2Co_5:17; Joh_15:1-7.)

Col_2:7

Rooted and builded up in him (Col_1:23; Col_2:5; Eph_2:20, Eph_2:21; Eph_3:18; Eph_4:16; 1Co_3:9-12; Jud 1Co_1:20; Luk_6:47, Luk_6:48). "Rooted" is perfect participle, in, plying an abiding fact ("fast rooted"); while "builded up" (literally, upon or unto) is in the present tense of a continued process, the prefix ἐπὶ also implying growth and gain (Col_1:6, Col_1:10; Col_2:19). Meyer and Ellicott view ἐν αὐτῷ as a mere complement of the latter participle: "being builded in him." This weakens the force of both prepositions ( ἐπὶ and ἐν ), and the emphasis of the repeated "in him." The ideas of planting and building are similarly combined in 1Co_3:9; Eph_3:18; and rooted is a figure applied to buildings in ether Greek writers (Lightfoot). "Christ is the ground for the roots below, and the foundation for the building above" (Meyer). And stablished in (or, by) your faith, according as ye were taught (Col_1:5-7, Col_1:23; 1Co_1:6-8; 1Th_3:2; 1Th_4:1; 2Th_2:13-15; 1Pe_5:9, 1Pe_5:10). Ἑν before πίστει ("faith") is struck out in the Revised Text, and is probably a correct gloss. The instrumental dative, preferred by Meyer and Lightfoot, does not accord so well with Eph_3:5 and Col_1:23 (comp. Php_1:27; 1Co_16:13; 1Ti_5:8; 2Ti_4:7; 1Pe_5:9). "Stablished" ( βεβαιούμενοι , being kept firm) is present in tense, like "builded up" (Col_1:6, see note): comp. Rom_4:16; Php_1:7; Heb_3:6; Heb_6:19; Heb_13:9; and distinguish from στηρίζω , to make stable, fix firmly. In "as ye were taught" the apostle reminds his readers again of their first lessons in the gospel (Col_1:5-7, see notes; 2Th_2:15). Abounding in it, with thanksgiving; or, abounding in thanksgiving (Col_1:3, Col_1:12; Col_3:15, Col_3:17; Col_4:2; Eph_5:4, Eph_5:20; 1Th_5:18; Heb_13:15). The Revisers relegate "in it (your faith)" to the margin, following the judgment of Tischendorf and Tregelles; while Westcott and Hort, Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, retain the words in the text. The reading "in him," found in the Vulgate and leading Western documents, throws doubt on these words; but it is difficult to see why they should have been inserted if not authentic, and they might easily be confused by a copyist with the foregoing "in him." The second ἐν , if ἐν αὐτῇ be retained, becomes ἐν of accompaniment, and may be rendered "with," as in Col_1:29; Eph_6:2. (On "thanksgiving," see note, Col_1:12.)

Col_2:8-15

SECTION V. THE CHRISTIAN'S COMPLETENESS IN CHRIST. The apostle has first defined his own doctrinal position in the theological deliverance of Col_1:15-20, and has then skilfully brought himself into suitable personal relations with his readers by the statements and appeals of Col 1:23-2:7. And now, after a general indication in Col_2:4 of the direction in which he is about to strike, he unmasks the battery he has been all the while preparing, and delivers his attack on the Colossian error, occupying the rest of this second chapter, he denounces

(1) its false philosophy of religion (Col_2:8-15);

(2) its arbitrary and obsolete ceremonialism (Col_2:16, Col_2:17);

(3) its visionary angel worship (Col_2:18, Col_2:19);

(4) its ascetic rules (Col_2:20-22; Col_2:23)

reviewing the whole system in a brief characterization of its most prominent and dangerous features. It will be convenient to treat separately the first of these topics, under the heading already given, which indicates the positive truth developed by St. Paul in antagonism to the error against which he contends—a truth which is the practical application of the theological teaching of the first chapter.

Col_2:8

Beware lest there shall be some one who maketh you his spoil through his philosophy and empty deceit (Col_2:4, Col_2:18, Col_2:23; Eph_4:14; 1Ti_6:20; 1Co_2:1, 1Co_2:4; Gal_1:7; Act_20:30). "Beware;" literally, see (to it), a common form of warning (Col_4:17). The future indicative" shall be," used instead of the more regular subjunctive "should be," implies that what is feared is too likely to prove the case (comp. Heb_3:12 and (with another tense) Gal_4:11). "Some one who maketh (you) his spoil ( ὁ συλαγωγῶν )" is an expression so distinct and individualizing that it appears to single out a definite, well known person. The denunciations of this Epistle are throughout in the singular number (Gal_4:4, Gal_4:16, Gal_4:18), in marked contrast with the plural of Gal_1:17, and that prevails in the apostle's earlier polemical references. It is in harmony with the philosophical, Gnosticizing character of the Colossian heresy that it should rest on the authority of some single teacher, rather than on Scripture or tradition, as did the conservative legalistic Judaism. Συλαγωγῶν , a very rare word, hapax legomenon in the New Testament, bears its meaning on its face. It indicates the selfish, partisan spirit, and the overbearing conduct of the false teacher. Against such men St. Paul had forewarned the Ephesian elders (Act_20:29, Act_20:30). "And empty deceit" stands in a qualifying apposition to "philosophy:" "His philosophy, indeed! "It is no better than a vain deceit." This kind of irony we shall find the writer using with still greater effect in Gal_1:18. Deceit is empty ( κενός : comp. Eph_5:6; 1Th_2:1; 1Co_15:14; distinguish from μάταιος , fruitless, vain), which deceives by being a show of what it is not, a hollow pretence. From the prominence given to this aspect of the new teaching, we infer that it claimed to be a philosophy, and made this its special distinction and ground of superiority. And this consideration points (comp. Introduction, § 4), to some connection between the system of the Colossian errorists and the Alexandrine Judaism, of which Philo, an elder contemporary of St. Paul, is our chief exponent. The aim of this school, which had now existed for two centuries at least, and had diffused its ideas far and wide, was to transform and sublimate Judaism by interpreting it under philosophical principles. Its teachers endeavoured, in fact, to put the "new wine" of Plato into the old bottles" of Moses, persuading themselves that it was originally there (comp. note on "mystery," Col_1:27). In Philo, philosophy is the name for true religion, whose essence consists in the pursuit and contemplation of pure spiritual truth. Moses and the patriarchs are, with him, all "philosophers;" the writers of the Old Testament" philosophize;" it is" the philosophical man" who holds converse with God. This is the only place where philosophy is expressly mentioned in the New Testament; in 1Co_1:21 and context it is, however, only verbally wanting. According to the tradition of men, according to the rudiments of the world, and not according to Christ. This clause qualifies "making spoil" (Meyer, Ellicott) rather than "deceit;" human authority and natural reason furnish the principles and the method according to which the false teacher proceeds. "Tradition'' does not necessarily imply antiquity; "of men" is the emphatic part of the phrase. These words are characteristic of St. Paul, who was so profoundly conscious of the supernatural origin of his own doctrine (see Gal_1:11-17; 1Co_11:23; 1Th_4:15 : comp. Joh_3:31-35; Joh_8:23; 1Jn_4:5). Similarly, "the rudiments of the world" are the crude beginnings of truth, the childishly faulty and imperfect religious conceptions and usages to which the world had attained apart from the revelation of Christ (comp. Gal_4:3, Gal_4:9; also Heb_5:12, for this use of στοιχεῖα ). It is not either Jewish or non-Jewish elements specifically that are intended. Jew and Greek are one in so far as their religious ideas are "not according to Christ." Greek thought had also contributed its rudiments to the world's education for Christ: hence, comprehensively, "the rudiments of the world ". The blending of Greek and Jewish elements in the Colossian theosophy would of itself suggest this generalization, already shadowed forth in Gal_4:3. Neander, Hofmann, and Klopper (the latest German commentator), have returned to the view that prevailed amongst the Fathers, from Origen downwards, reading this phrase, both here and in Galatians, in a physical sense, as in 2Pe_3:10, 2Pe_3:12; the elementa mundi, "the powers of nature," "heavenly bodies," etc., worshipped by the Gentiles as gods, and which the Jews identified with the angels (2Pe_3:18; Heb_1:7) as God's agents in the direction of the world. This interproration has much to recommend it, but it scarcely harmonizes with the parallel "tradition of men," still less with the context of verse 20, and is absolutely at variance, as it seems to us, with the argument involved in Gal_4:3. Not the doctrine of Christ, but Christ himself is the substitute for these discarded rudiments (Gal_4:17, Gal_4:20). His Person is the norm and test of truth (1Co_12:3; 1Jn_4:1-3). The views combatted were "not according to Christ," for they made him something less and lower than that which he is.

Col_2:9

Because in him dwelleth all the fulness (or, completeness) of the Godhead bodily (Col_1:19; Php_2:6-8; Rom_1:3, Rom_1:4; Rom_9:5; Joh_1:1, Joh_1:14). In Col_1:18-20 we viewed a series of events; here we have an abiding fact. The whole plenitude of our Lord's Divine-human person and powers, as the complete Christ, was definitively constituted when, in the exercise of his kingly prerogative, "he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." "From henceforth" that fulness evermore resides in him (comp. note, Col_1:19). The undivided plē of Col_1:19 now reveals its twofold nature: it is "the fulness of the Godhead," and yet "dwells corporeally in him." "Godhead" ( θεότης ) is the abstract of "God" ( θεός ), not of the adjective "Divine" ( θεῖος : the Vulgate therefore, wrongly, divinitatis: comp. Rom_1:20; Act_17:29; Wis. 18:9), and denotes,"not Divine excellences, but the Divine nature" (Bengel); see Trench's 'Synonyms.' Schenkel and others, guided by a conjecture of Theodoret, have found here the Church, supporting their view by a very doubtful interpretation of Eph_1:23. Still more groundless is the identification of this plē with the created world. The apostle unmistakably affirms that the Divine nature, in its entirety, belongs to the Church's Christ. The literal sense of "bodily" (maintained by Meyer, Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Hofmann, after Chrysostom and Athanasius) has been avoided by those who render it "wholly" (Jerome); "essentially, substantially" (Cyril, Theophylact, Calvin, Klopper), as opposed to "relatively" or "partially;" "truly", as opposed to "figuretively" (Eph_1:17). The adverb σωματικῶς (always literal in classical usage, along with its adjective) occurs only here in the New Testament; the adjective "bodily" in 1Ti_4:8; Luk_3:22. "The body of his flesh" in Col_1:22 affords a truer parallel than the language of Col_1:17, where σῶμα , bears an exceptional sense (see note). Elsewhere St. Paul balances in similar fashion expressions relating to the twofold nature of Christ (see parallels). The assertion that "all the fulness of Deity" dwells in Christ negatives the Alexandrine "philosophy,'' with its cloud of mediating angel powers and spiritual emanations; the assertion that it dwells in him bodily equally condemns that contempt for the body and the material world which was the chief practical tenet of the same school (comp. notes on Col_1:22 and Col_2:23).

Col_2:10

And (because) ye are in him made complete; or fulfilled (Eph_1:3, Eph_1:7-11, Eph_1:23; Eph_3:18, Eph_3:19; Eph_4:13; Php_4:19; Gal_3:14, Gal_3:24; Gal_5:1, Gal_5:4; 1Co_1:30; 1Co_2:2). A complete Christ makes his people complete; his plē is our plē. Finding the whole fulness of God brought within our reach and engaged in our behalf (Php_2:7; Mat_20:28) in him, we need not resort elsewhere to supply our spiritual needs (Php_4:19). "In him" is the primary predicate (see Alford, Ellicott, against Meyer: comp. Col_2:3): "Ye are in him" is the assumption (Rom_8:1; Rom_16:7); "(ye are) made complete" is the inference. (On the verb πληρόω (the basis of plē), used in perfect participle of abiding result, see notes, Col_1:9, Col_1:19.) This completeness includes the furnishing of men with all that is required for their present and final salvation as individuals (Col_1:11-15; Col_1:21, Col_1:22, Col_1:28), and for their collective perfection as forming the Church, the body of Christ (Col_1:2, Col_1:19; Col_1:19; Eph_1:23; Eph_5:26, Eph_5:27); for this twofold completeness, comp. Eph_4:12-16. Who is the Head of all principality and dominion (Eph_4:15, Eph_4:18; Col_1:16; Eph_1:21; Php_2:10, Php_2:11; 1Co_15:24; Heb_1:6, Heb_1:14; 1Pe_3:22). (On "principality," etc., see note, Col_1:16.) The Colossians were being taught to replace or supplement Christ's offices by those of angel powers (see notes, verses 15, 18). Philo ('Concerning Dreams,' 1. §§ 22, 23) writes thus of the angels: "Free from all bodily encumbrance, endowed with larger and diviner intellect, they are lieutenants of the All ruler, eyes and ears of the great King. Philosophers in general call them demons ( δαίμονες ); the sacred Scripture angels, for they report ( διαγγέλλουσι ) the injunctions of the Father to his children, and the wants of the children to their Father.… Angels, the Divine words, walk about [comp. 2Co_6:16] in the souls of those who have not yet completely washed off the (old) life, foul and stained through their cumbersome bodies, making them bright to the eyes of virtue." In such a strain the Colossian "philosopher" may have been talking. But if Christ is the Maker and Lord of these invisible powers—(Col_1:15, Col_1:16), and we are in him, then we must no longer look to them as our saviours.

Col_2:11

In whom also ye were circumcised, with a circumcision not wrought by hands (Eph_2:11; Php_3:3; Gal_5:2-6; Gal_6:12-15; Rom_2:25-29; Rom_4:9-12; 1Co_7:18; Act_15:1-41 :l, 5; Deu_30:6). Circumcision was insisted on by the new "philosophical" teacher as necessary to spiritual completeness; but from a different standpoint, and in a manner different from that of the Pharisaic Judaizers of Galatia and of Act_15:1. By the latter it was preached as matter of Law and external requirement, and so became the critical point in the decision between the opposing principles of "faith" and "works." By the philosophical school it was enjoined as matter of symbolic moral efficiency. So Philo speaks of circumcision ('On the Migration of Abraham,' § 16) as "setting forth the excision of all the pleasures and passions, and the destruction of impious vain opinion" (see also his treatise 'On Circumcision'). From this point of view, baptism is the Christian circumcision, the new symbolic expression of the moral change which St. Paul and his opponents alike deemed necessary, though they understood it in a different sense from him (see Act_15:20-23). In this respect the Christian is already complete, for his circumcision took place in the stripping off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ (Col_3:5, Col_3:8, Col_3:9; Eph_4:22-25; Rom_6:6; Rom_7:18-25; Rom_13:12; 1Pe_2:1; 1Pe_4:1, 1Pe_4:2). The inserted "of the sins" is an ancient Απ έκ δυσις , a double compound, gloss. Ἁπ έκ δυσις found only in this Epistle (see corresponding verb in Act_15:15; ColCol_3:9), denotes both "stripping off" and "putting away." "The stripping off of the body" was the ideal of the philosophical ascetics (see note on "body," Act_15:23, and quotations from Philo). The apostle adds "of the flesh;" i.e. of the body in so far as it was the body of the flesh (Act_15:13, Act_15:18, Act_15:23; Col_3:5). "The flesh" (in Col_1:22 that which Christ had put on; here that which the Christian puts off: comp. Rom_8:3) is "the flesh of sin," of Rom_8:3; Gal_5:19; Eph_2:3, etc. "The body," while identified with this "flesh," is "the body of sin" and "of death" (Rom_6:6; Rom_7:24; see Meyer, Godet, or Beet); sin inhabits it, clothes itself with it, and presents itself to us in its form; and this being the normal condition of unregenerate human nature, the sinful principle is naturally called the flesh. So "the (bodily) members" become "the members that are upon the earth," employed in the pursuit of lust and greed, till they become practically one with these vices (Col_3:5, see note; also Rom_7:5, Rom_7:23). Yet "the body" and "the (sinful) flesh," while in the natural man one in practice, are in principle distinguishable. The deliverance from the physical acts and habits of the old sinful life, experienced by him who is "in Christ" (Col_1:10; Rom_8:1-4; 2Co_5:17), is "the circumcision according to the Christ," or here more pointedly "of Christ"—a real and complete, instead of a partial and symbolic, putting away of the organic life and domination of sin which made the body its seat and its instrument. The genitive" of Christ "is neither objective ("undergone by Christ"), nor subjective ("wrought by Christ"), but stands in a mere general relation—"belonging to Christ," "the Christian circumcision." The occasion of this new birth in the Colossians was their baptism—

Col_2:12

When ye were (literally, having been) buried with him in your baptism (Col_2:20; Col_3:3; Rom_6:1-11; Gal_3:26, Gal_3:27; Eph_4:5; Eph_5:26; Tit_3:5; 1Pe_3:21). Βαπτισμός , the rarer form of the word, is preferred by Tregelles, Alford, Lightfoot (see his note), being found in Codex B, with other good authorities; it indicates the process ("in your baptizing"). Βάπτισμα , the usual form of the word, is retained by Revisers, after Tischendorf, Ellicott, Westcott and Herr. Baptism stands for the entire change of the man which it symbolizes and seals (Rom_6:3-5; Gal_3:27). The double aspect of this change was indicated by the twofold movement taking place in immersion, the usual form of primitive baptism—first the κατάδυσις , the descent of the baptized person beneath the symbolic waters, figuring his death with Christ as a separation from sin and the evil past (Col_2:20),—there for a moment he is buried, and burial is death made complete and final (Rom_6:2-4); then the ἀνάδυσις , the emerging from the baptismal wave, which gave baptism the positive side of its significance. In which (or, whom) also ye were raised with (him), through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead (Col_3:1; Col_1:18; Eph_2:6, Eph_2:8; Rom_6:4; Rom_4:24, Rom_4:25; 1Pe_1:21). We refer the relative pronoun to the immediately antecedent "baptism," although the previous ἐν ᾧ refers to "Christ" (Col_2:11 : comp. Eph_2:6) and some good interpreters follow the rendering "in whom." For the Christian's being raised with Christ is not contrasted with his circumcision (Col_2:11)—that figure has been dismissed—but with his burial in baptism (Col_2:12 a); so Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Revisers. "Having been buried" is replaced in the antithesis by the more assertive "ye were raised" (comp. Col_2:13, Col_2:14; Col_1:22, Col_1:26). "With" points to the "him" (Christ) of the previous clause (comp. Eph_2:6; Rom_6:6). Faith is the instrumental cause of that which baptism sets forth (comp. Gal_3:26, Gal_3:27), and has for its object (not its cause: so Bengel) "the working" ( ἐνεργεία : see note, Col_1:29; also Eph_1:20; Eph_3:20) "of God." And the special Divine work on which it rests is "the resurrection of Christ" (Rom_4:24, Rom_4:25; Rom_10:9; 1Co_15:13-17): comp. note on "Firstborn out of the dead," Col_1:19. Rising from the baptismal waters, the Christian convert declares the faith of his heart in that supreme act of God, which attests and makes sure all that he has bestowed upon us in his Son (Col_1:12-14 : comp. Rom_1:4; also 1Pe_1:21; Act_2:36; Act_13:33, Act_13:38, etc.). Baptism symbolizes all that circumcision did, and more. It expresses more fully than the older sacrament our parting with the life of sin; and also that of which circumcision knew nothing—the union of the man with the dying and risen Christ, which makes him "dead unto sin, and alive unto God." How needless, then, even if it were legitimate, for a Christian to return to this superseded rite! To heighten his readers' sense of the reality and completeness of the change which as baptized (i.e. believing) Christians they bad undergone, he describes it now more directly as matter of personal experience.

Col_2:13

And you, being dead by reason of (or, in) your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he made you alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses (Eph_2:1-5; Eph_1:7; Rom_5:12-21; Rom_6:23; Rom_7:9-13, Rom_7:24; Rom_8:1, Rom_8:2, Rom_8:6, Rom_8:10; 1Co_15:56; Joh_5:24; Joh_6:51; 1Jn_3:14; Gen_2:17). (For the transition from "having raised" (Col_2:12) to this verse, comp. Eph 1:20—2:1; also Col_1:20, Col_1:21.) Again the participle gives place to the finite verb: a colon is a sufficient stop at the end of Col_1:12. Death, in St. Paul's theology, is "a collective expression for the entire judicial consequences of sin" (see Cromer's ' Lexicon,' on θάνατος and νεκρόζς ), of which the primary spiritual element is the sundering of the soul's fellowship with God, from which flew all other evils contained, in it. Life, therefore, begins with justification, (Rom_5:18). "Trespasses" are particular acts of sin (Eph_1:7; Eph_2:1, Eph_2:5; Rom_5:15-20; Rom_11:11); "uncircumcision of the flesh" is general sinful impurity of nature. The false teachers probably stigmatized the uncircumcised state as unholy. The apostle adopts the expression, but refers it to the pro-Christian life of his readers (see Col_1:11, Col_1:12), when their Gentile uncircumcision was a true type of their moral condition (Rom_2:25; Eph_2:11). These sinful acts and this sinful condition were the cause of their former state of death (Rom_5:12). The Revisers rightly restore the second emphatic "you"—"you, uncircumcised Gentiles" (comp. Col_1:21, Col_1:22, Col_1:27; Eph_1:13; Eph_2:11-18; Rom_15:9). It is God who "made you alive" as he "raised him (Christ)," (Col_1:12); the second act being the consequence and counterpart of the first, and faith the subjective link between them. Χαρίζομαι to show grace, used of Divine forgiveness only in this and the Ephesian Epistle (Col_3:13; Eph_4:32 : comp. Luk_7:42, Luk_7:43; 2Co_2:7, 2Co_2:10; 2Co_12:13), points to the cause or principle of forgiveness in the Divine grace (Eph_2:4, Eph_2:5; Rom_3:26; Rom_5:17). In "having forgiven us" the writer significantly passes from the second to the first person: so in Eph_2:1-5 (comp. Rom_3:9, Rom_3:30; 1Ti_1:15). The thought of the new life bestowed on the Colossians with himself in their individual forgiveness calls to his mind the great act of Divine mercy from which it sprang (the connection corresponds, in reverse order, to that of Col_1:20, Col_1:21; 2Co_5:19, 2Co_5:20), and he continues—

Col_2:14

Having blotted out the bond (that was) against us with (or, written in) decrees, which was opposed to us (Eph_2:14-16; Rom_3:9-26; Rom_7:7-14; 2Co_5:19; Gal_3:10-22; 1Co_15:56; Act_13:38, Act_13:39). The ancients commonly used wax tablets in writing, and the flat end of the pointed stylus drawn over the writing smeared it out (expunged) and so cancelled it (comp. Act_3:19; Psa_51:9; Isa_43:25, LXX). "God," not "Christ," is the subject of this verb, which stands in immediate sequence to those of Col_2:12, Col_2:13. It is the receiver rather than the offerer of satisfaction who cancels the debt: in Eph_2:15 (comp. Col_1:22) a different verb is used. Χειρόγραφον ("handwritten;" a word of later Greek, only here in the New Testament) is used specially of an account of debt, a bond signed by the debtor's hand (see Meyer and Lightfoot). This bond can be nothing other than "the law" (Eph_2:14-16; Act_13:38, Act_13:39; Rom_3:20; Rom_7:25; Gal_3:21, Gal_3:22, etc.); not, however, the ritual law, nor even the Mosaic Law as such (as Meyer contends), but law as law, the Divine rule of human life impressed even on Gentile hearts (Rom_2:14, Rom_2:15), to which man's conscience gives its consent (Rom_7:16, Rom_7:22), and yet which becomes by his disobedience just a list of charges against him (so Neander and Lightfoot; see the latter on Gal_2:19). Exo_24:3 and Deu_27:14-26, indeed, illustrate this wider relation of Divine law to the human conscience generally. Τοῖς δόγμασιν is dative of reference either to καθ ἡμῶν or to the verbal idea contained in χειργόραφον . The former explanation (that of Winer and Ellicott) is preferable. The Greek Fathers made it instrumental dative to ἐξαλείψας , understanding by these δόγματα the doctrines (dogmas) of the gospel by which the charges of the Law against us are expunged. But this puts on δόγμα a later theological sense foreign to St. Paul, and universally rejected by modern interpreters. In the New Testament (comp. Luk_2:1; Act_16:4; Heb_11:23), as in classical Greek, dogma is a decree, setting forth the will of some public authority (comp. note on δογματίζω , Deu_27:20). The added clause, "which was opposed to us," affirms the active opposition, as "against us" the essential hostility of the decrees of God's law to our sinful nature (Rom_4:15; Gal_3:10 : comp. Rom_7:13, Rom_7:14). The emphasis with which St. Paul dwells on this point is characteristic of the author of Romans and Galatians. Ψπενάντιος occurs besides only in Heb_10:27; the prefix ὑπὸ implies close and persistent opposition (Lightfoot). And he hath taken it out of the midst, having nailed it to the cross (Col_1:20-22; Eph_2:18; 2Co_5:19; Rom_3:24-26; Rom_5:1, Rom_5:2; Gal_3:13; Heb_1:3; Joh_1:29; 1Jn_4:10). A third time in these three verses (12-14) we note the transition from participle to coordinate finite verb; and here, in addition, the aorist tense passes into the perfect ("hath taken"), marking the finality of the removal of the Law's condemning power (Rom_8:1; Act_13:39): comp. the opposite transition in Col_1:26, Col_1:27. The moral deliverance of Col_1:11 is traced up to this legal release, both contained in our completeness in Christ (Col_1:10). The subject is still "God." Cancelling the bond which he held against us in his Law, God has forver removed the barrier which stood between mankind and himself (2Co_5:19). Christ's place in this work, already shown in Col_1:18-23 (in its relation to himself), is vividly recalled by the mention of the cross. And the abolition of the Law's condemnation is finally set forth by a yet bolder metaphor—"having nailed it to the cross." The nails of the cross in piercing Christ pierced the legal instrument which held us debtors, and nullified it; see Gal_3:13 (comp. Gal_2:19, Gal_2:20); Rom_7:4-6. Προσηλώσας may suggest the further idea of nailing up the cancelled document, by way of publication. At the cross all may read, "There is now no condemnation" (compare the "making a show" of Rom_7:15; also Rom_3:25; Gal_3:1). (For Rom_7:11-14, compare concluding remark on Col_1:14.)

Col_2:15

Having stripped off the principalities and the dominions (Co Col_1:16; Col_2:10; Act_7:38, Act_7:53; Gal_3:19; Heb_1:5, Heb_1:7, Heb_1:14; Heb_2:2, Heb_2:5; Deu_33:2; Psa_68:17). Απεκδυσάμενος has been rendered, from the time of the Latin Vulgate, "having spoiled" (exspolians), a rendering which is "not less a violation of St. Paul's usage (Col_3:9) than of grammatical rule" (Lightfoot; so Alford, Ellicott, Wordsworth, Hofmann, Revisers). It is precisely the same participle that we find in Col_3:9, and the writer has just used the noun ἀπέκδυσις (Col_3:11) in a corresponding sense (see note in loc. on the force of the double compound). He employs compounds of δύω in the middle voice seventeen times elsewhere, and always in the sense of "putting off [or, 'on'] from one's self;" and there is no sure instance in Greek of the middle verb bearing any other meaning. Yet such critics as Meyer, Eadie, Klopper, cling to the rendering of the Vulgate and our Authorized Version; and not without reason, as we shall see. The Revised margin follows the earlier Latin Fathers and some ancient versions, supplying "his body" as object of the participle, understanding "Christ" as subject. But the context does not, as in 2Co_5:3, suggest this ellipsis, and it is arbitrary to make the participle itself mean "having disembodied himself." Nor has the writer introduced any new subject since 2Co_5:12, where" God" appears as agent of each of the acts of salvation set forth in 2Co_5:12-15. Moreover, "the principalities and the dominions" of this verse must surely be those of 2Co_5:10 and of Col_1:16 (compare the "angels" of Col_1:18). We understand St. Patti, therefore, to say "that God [revealing himself in Christ; 'in him,' 15 b] put off and put away those angelic powers through whom he had previously shown himself to men." The Old Testament associates the angels with the creation of the world and the action of the powers of nature (Job_38:7; Psalm cir. 4), and with its great theophanies generally (Psa_68:7; Deu_33:2; 2Ki_6:17, etc.); and its hints in this direction were emphasized and extended by the Greek translators of the LXX. Act_7:38, Act_7:53 (St. Stephen); Gal_3:19; Heb_2:2, ascribe to them a special agency in the giving of the Law. Heb_1:1-14. and it. show how large a place the doctrine of the mediation of angels filled in Jewish thought at this time, and how it tended to limit the mediatorship of Christ. The mystic developments of Judaism among the Essenes and the Ebionites (Christian Essenes), and in the Cabbala, are full of this belief. And it is a cornerstone of the philosophic mysticism of Alexandria. In Philo the angels are the "Divine powers," "words," "images of God," forming the court and entourage of the invisible King, by whose means he created and maintains the material world, and holds converse with the souls of men (see quotation, Heb_1:10). This doctrine, we may suppose, was a chief article of the Colossian heresy. Theodoret's note on verse 18 is apposite here: "They who defended the Law taught men to worship angels, saying that the Law was given by them. This mischief continued long in Phrygia and Pisidia." The apostle returns to the point from which he started in Heb_1:10. He has just declared that God has cancelled and removed the Law as an instrument of condemnation; and now adds that he has at the same time thrown off and laid aside the veil of angelic mediation under which, in the administration of that Law, he had withdrawn himself. Both these acts take place "in Christ." Both are necessary to that "access to the Father" which, in the apostle's view, is the special prerogative of Christian faith (Eph_2:18; Eph_3:12; Rom_5:2), and which the Colossian error doubly barred, by its ascetic ceremonialism and by its angelic mediation. We are compelled, with all deference to its high authority, to reject the view of the Greek Fathers, to which Ellicott, Lightfoot, and Wordsworth have returned, according to which "Christ in his atoning death [in it; 'the cross,' verse 15 b] stripped off from himself the Satanic powers." For it requires us to bring in, without grammatical warrant, "somewhere" (Lightfoot), "Christ" as subject; it puts upon" the principalities and the dominions" a sense foreign to the context, and that cannot be justified by Eph_6:12, where the connection is wholly different and the hostile sense of the terms is most explicitly defined; and it presents an idea harsh and unfitting in itself, the incongruity of which such illustrations as those of the Nessus robe and Joseph's garment only make more apparent. It is one thing to say that the powers of evil surrounded Christ and quite another thing to say that he wore them as we have worn "the body of the flesh" (Eph_6:11; Col_3:9). He made a show (of them) openly, having led them in triumph in him; or, it (Eph_1:21, Eph_1:22; Php_2:10; 1Pe_3:22; Heb_1:5, Heb_1:6; Joh_1:1-51 :52; Mat_25:31; Mat_26:53; Rev_19:10; Rev_22:9). In this, as in the last verse, we have a finite verb between two participles, one introductory ("having stripped off"), the other explanatory, Δειγματίζω , to make a show or example, occurs in the New Testament besides only in Mat_1:17, where it is compounded with παρα (Revised Text), giving it a sinister meaning of not belonging to the simple verb. With the angelic "principalities," etc., for object, the verb denotes, not a shameful exposure, but "an exhibition of them in their true character and position," such as forbids them to be regarded superstitiously (Mat_1:18). God exhibited the angels as the subordinates and servants of his Son. "Openly" ( ἐν παρρησίᾳ : literally, in freedom of speech, a favourite word of St. Paul s) implies the absence of reserve or restraint, rather than mere publicity (comp. Eph_6:19; Php_1:20). Θριαμβεύσας ("having triumphed;" 2Co_2:14 only other instance of the verb in the New Testament; its use in classical Greek confined to Latinist writers, referring, historically, to the Roman triumph) presents a formidable difficulty in the way of the interpretation of the verse followed so far. For the common acceptation of the word "triumph" compels us to think of the "principalities," etc., as hostile (Satanic); and this, again, as Meyer strongly contends, dictates the rendering "having spoiled" for ἀπεκδυσάμενος . So we are brought into collision with two fixed points of our former exegesis. If we are bound lexically to abide by the reference to the Roman military triumph, then the angelic principalities must be supposed to have stood in a quasi-hostile position to "the kingdom of God and of Christ," in so far as men had exaggerated their powers and exalted them at Christ's expense, and to have been now robbed of this false pre-eminence. The writer however, ventures to question whether, on philological grounds, a better, native Greek sense cannot be found for this verb. The noun thriambos ("triumph"), on which it is based, is used, indeed, in the Latin sense as early as Polybius, a writer on Roman history. But it is extant in a much earlier classical fragment as synonymous with dithyrambos, denoting "a festal song;" and again in Plutarch, contemporary with St. Paul, it is a name of the Greek god Dionysus, in whose honour such songs were sung, and whose worship was of a choral, processional character. This kinder triumph was, one may imagine, familiar to the eyes of St. Paul and of his readers, while the spectacle of the Roman triumph was distant and foreign (at least when he wrote 2 Corinthians). We suggest that the apostle's image is taken, beth here and in 2Co_2:14, from the festal procession of the Greek divinity, who leads his worshippers along as witnesses of his power and celebrants of his glory. Such a figure fittingly describes the relation and the attitude of the angels to the Divine presence in Christ. Let this suggestion, however, be regarded as precarious or fanciful, the general exposition of the verse is not thereby invalidated. The Revisers omit the marginal "in himself" of the Authorized Version, which correctly, as we think, refers the final