Difference between revisions of "Epistle To The Colossians"

        <p> Was written by Paul, from Rome, A. D. 62. The occasion of the letter was the intelligence brought him by Epaphras, Colossians 1:6-8 , respecting the internal state of the church, which apparently he himself had not yet visited, Colossians 2:1 , though familiar with their history and affairs, Acts 16:6 18:23 . Some [[Jewish]] philosopher professing Christianity, but mingling with it a superstitious regard for the law and other errors, seems to have gained a dangerous ascendancy in the church. Paul shows that all our hope of salvation is in [[Christ]] the only mediator, in whom all fullness dwells; he cautions the Colossians against the errors introduced among them, as inconsistent with the gospel, and incites them by most persuasive arguments to a temper and conduct worthy of their [[Christian]] character. The epistle was written at the same time with that to the Ephesians, and was sent by the same bearer. The two closely resemble each other, and should be studied together. </p>

        <li> The practical part of the epistle (3-4) enforces various duties naturally flowing from the doctrines expounded. They are exhorted to mind things that are above (3:1-4), to mortify every evil principle of their nature, and to put on the new man (3:5-14). Many special duties of the [[Christian]] life are also insisted upon as the fitting evidence of the Christian character. [[Tychicus]] was the bearer of the letter, as he was also of that to the Ephesians and to Philemon, and he would tell them of the state of the apostle (4:7-9). After friendly greetings (10-14), he bids them interchange this letter with that he had sent to the neighbouring church of Laodicea. He then closes this brief but striking epistle with his usual autograph salutation. There is a remarkable resemblance between this epistle and that to the Ephesians (q.v.). The genuineness of this epistle has not been called in question. <p> </p> <div> <p> [[Copyright]] StatementThese dictionary topics are from M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated [[Bible]] Dictionary, [[Third]] Edition, published by [[Thomas]] Nelson, 1897. Public Domain. </p> <p> Bibliography InformationEaston, Matthew George. Entry for 'Colossians, [[Epistle]] to the'. Easton's Bible Dictionary. https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/ebd/c/colossians-epistle-to-the.html. 1897. </p> </div> </li>

        <p> <strong> COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE </strong> </p> <p> 1. [[Authenticity]] . This [[Epistle]] is one of the ten [[Epistles]] of St. Paul included in Marcion’s collection (a.d. 140). It appears to have been accepted without question as genuine both by Churchmen and by heretics, and is referred to by the Muratorian Fragment, by Irenæus, and by [[Clement]] of Alexandria. Its authenticity remained undisputed till the early part of last century, and was then contested only on internal grounds of style and subject-matter. </p> <p> As to the first objection, the Epistle is marked, to a greater degree than St. Paul’s earlier writings, by ‘a certain ruggedness of expression, a want of finish that borders on obscurity.’ The vocabulary also differs in some respects from that of the earlier writings, but this is amply accounted for by the difference of subject. As a matter of fact, the resemblances in style to St. Paul’s other writings are as marked as the differences; and in any case arguments from style in disproof of authenticity are very unreliable. The later plays of Shakespeare, as compared with those of his middle period, show just the same condensation of thought and want of fluency and finish. </p> <p> The argument from subject-matter is more important. The Epistle was regarded by earlier German critics as presupposing a fully developed system of Gnostic teaching, such as belongs to the middle of the 2nd cent., and a correspondingly developed Christology. But a more careful study of the Epistle has shown that what St. Paul has in view is not a system of teaching, but rather a tendency. Words like <em> plçrôma </em> , to which later [[Gnosticism]] gave a technical sense, are used in this Epistle with their usual non-technical signification. And our study of early [[Christian]] and [[Jewish]] thought has shown that Gnostic tendencies date from a much earlier time than the great Gnostic teachers of the 2nd cent., and are, indeed, older than Christianity. The [[Christology]] of the Epistle certainly shows an advance on that of St. Paul’s earlier Epistles, especially in the emphasis laid on the cosmical activity of the pre-incarnate Christ. This may be accounted for in part by the special purpose of the Epistle (see below), and in part by a development in St. Paul’s own Christological ideas. It is irrational to deny the authenticity of an Epistle claiming to be St. Paul’s, merely because it shows that the mind of the [[Apostle]] had not remained stagnant during a period of imprisonment that must have given him special opportunities for thought. (See Ephesians.) </p> <p> Many German critics, such as Harnack and Jülicher, are now in agreement with the leading British scholars in accepting the Epistle as St. Paul’s. The authenticity of the Epistle is sustained by its close relation to the Epistle to Philemon, the [[Pauline]] authorship of which is hardly seriously disputed. (On the relation of our Epistle to the Epistle to the Ephesians see Ephesians.) </p> <p> <strong> 2. [[Integrity]] and Text </strong> . The integrity of the Epistle is now generally admitted, though certain obscurities in the text have given rise to some conjectural emendations. Holtzmann attempted to prove that this Epistle and the Epistle to the Ephesians are recensions of one original Epistle of St. Paul’s, which he tried to reconstruct by extracting a Pauline nucleus of about forty verses; but his conclusions have not been accepted by later scholars. More recently, von Soden has proposed the rejection of about nine verses, but not on any adequate grounds. It would have been no easy task to interpolate a genuine Epistle of St. Paul’s, jealously guarded as it would have been by the [[Church]] to which it was sent. </p> <p> <strong> 3. Time and Place of Writing </strong> . The Epistle to the Colossians belongs to the group of four Epistles written by St. Paul in captivity ( Colossians 4:3; Colossians 4:18 ). Of this group three the Epistles to ‘the Ephesians,’ to the Colossians, and to Philemon were written at the same time and sent by the same messenger, Tychicus. The remaining Epistle of the group that to the Philippians was almost certainly written from Rome towards the end of St. Paul’s two years’ imprisonment there. The other three Epistles were most probably written from Rome, though some critics have dated them from the period of St. Paul’s imprisonment at Cæsarea. </p> <p> <strong> 4. [[Occasion]] and Purpose </strong> . Most of St. Paul’s Epistles were written under some definite external stimulus. In the case of this Epistle two events seem to have led to its composition. (1) Epaphras, who had been the first evangelist of the Colossians, and who seems to have held at Colossæ a position somewhat similar to that which Timothy is represented in the Pastoral Epistles as holding in Ephesus, had come to Rome bringing information as to the special needs and dangers of the Colossian Church. As he elected to remain at Rome, and apparently shared for a time the Apostle’s imprisonment ( Philippians 1:23 ), [[Tychicus]] was sent to Asia, taking with him this letter. (2) Onesimus, a runaway slave from Colossæ, had found his way to Rome and had there come under the influence of St. Paul. The Apostle took advantage of Tychicus’ journey to send [[Onesimus]] back to his master at Colossæ, with a letter of commendation (see Philemon). </p> <p> The special purpose of the Epistle, as distinct from its general purpose as a message of goodwill, was to warn the Colossian [[Christians]] against a danger of which [[Epaphras]] had no doubt informed St. Paul. The exact nature of the so-called Colossian heresy is a matter of some uncertainty. On its doctrinal side it was probably a blend of Jewish Kabbalistic ideas with floating Oriental speculations. It appears to have denied the direct agency of God in the work of creation, and to have inculcated the worship of angels and other mysterious powers of the unseen world ( Colossians 2:18 ). On its practical side it combined rigorous asceticism ( Colossians 2:23 ) and strict observance of Jewish ceremonial ( Colossians 2:18 ) with an arrogant claim to special enlightenment in spiritual things ( Colossians 2:18 ). Its special danger lay in the fact that it tended to obscure, or even to deny, the unique grandeur of the ascended Lord, the one Mediator, through faith in whom the life of the Christian was lifted into the new atmosphere of liberty. On one side, therefore, this Epistle may be compared with He I, where the supremacy of the Son over all angels is strongly insisted on, while on the other side it takes up the line of thought of the Epistle to the Galatians the relation of the Christian life to external ordinances. The way in which St. Paul deals with the question can best be seen by a short summary of the Epistle. </p> <p> <strong> 5. Summary </strong> . After the usual salutation, thanksgiving, and prayer, in which St. Paul associates Timothy with himself (perhaps because he was known personally to the Colossian Church), he plunges at once into a doctrinal statement ( Colossians 1:13 to Colossians 2:3 ) of the [[Person]] and Work of Christ, who is the image of the invisible God, the origin and goal of all created things, in whom all the fulness ( <em> plçrôma </em> ) of the [[Godhead]] abides. After a personal reference to his own commission and to his sufferings for the Church, he passes to the directly controversial part of the Epistle ( Colossians 2:4 to Colossians 3:4 ), warning the Colossians against being led astray by strange philosophies. The fulness of the Godhead is in Christ; He is over all principalities and powers; the life of externally imposed ordinances ‘Touch not, taste not, handle not’ is a life to which the Christian has died in Christ. He has risen to a new life whose centre and secret are in heaven. He must still mortify the deeds of the flesh, but from a new motive and in the power of a new life. The third section of the Epistle ( Colossians 3:5 to Colossians 4:6 ) applies this principle to various relations of life the mutual relation of Christians, husbands and wives, children and fathers, slaves and masters; and lastly, to the relation of St. Paul to them, and to their relation with the world. The closing section ( Colossians 4:7-18 ) deals with personal matters with the mission of Tychicus, with whom St. Paul tactfully associates Onesimus; with St. Mark’s proposed visit, in connexion with which St. Paul writes a word of special commendation, showing how completely the former discord has been healed. Then follow a warm commendation of Tychicus, greetings from Luke and Demas, instructions for exchanging letters with the neighbouring Church of Laodicea, and a final message for Archippus, who had apparently succeeded, in Epaphras’ absence, to the supervision of the Colossian Church. </p> <p> J. Howard B. Masterman. </p>

        <p> This is generally believed to have been written by Paul during his two years' imprisonment at Rome, A.D. 61-2, notwithstanding that Meyer and other critics refer it to the imprisonment of Paul at Caesarea. The personal glory of [[Christ]] as head of the body, the church, is specially brought out. The hope before the saints is in heaven: they are viewed as risen, but not seated in the heavenlies in Christ, as in the [[Epistle]] to the Ephesians. The life of the new man is dwelt on, but the Holy [[Spirit]] is only once mentioned: 'your love in the Spirit.' </p> <p> After the salutation, and thanking God for what Paul had <i> heard </i> of their faith (for apparently he had not been to Colosse) he at once prays for them that they might be filled with the full knowledge of God's will; might walk worthy of the Lord, pleasing Him in all things; and might be strengthened with all power. Colossians 1:9-11 . Then he gives thanks for what God <i> had done </i> for them, which is true of all Christians. Colossians 1:12-14 . The glories of Christ follow: as man, and as the Creator-God: He is head of the body, the church. Colossians 1:15-19 . All fulness was pleased to dwell in Him, and by Him, to reconcile all things to Himself (or itself), having made peace through the blood of His cross: the saints were already reconciled if they continued in the faith (which would prove their reality). Colossians 1:20-24 . Paul had a double ministry: in the gospel, Colossians 1:23; and in the church, Colossians 1:25 . His sufferings in his body filled up the (non-atoning) sufferings of Christ; and the revelation he had, concerning the mystery of the church, filled up the word of God (not as to time, for some portions were added afterwards, but as to the circle of subjects). Paul laboured to present every man perfect (that is, full grown) in Christ. </p> <p> Colossians 2 : Paul was deeply anxious for the welfare of the saints, that they might be rooted, built up, and established in the faith, lest they should be led astray by the philosophy of the world and the deceitful teaching of men, which would in no way minister Christ to them. In Him dwelt 'all the fulness of the [[Godhead]] bodily,' and they were 'complete in Him': nothing must be allowed to come between them. In Christ they had the reality of the things signified in the ordinances of circumcision and baptism. They had died and were risen with Christ. The saints were warned in Colossians 2:16,17 against being entangled with the [[Jewish]] things; and with the occult philosophy of the fleshly mind of the Gentile: all of which <i> </i> was <i> </i> in contrast and in opposition to holding Christ as Head. Having died with Christ they were set free from all the ordinances of men. This has been called the <i> negative </i> side. </p> <p> Colossians 3 : This gives the <i> positive </i> side, being 'risen with Christ.' Their mind was to be set on things above, as heavenly people walking on earth. When the Lord appeared they would appear with Him in glory. Christ was their life, and in consistency therewith they were to mortify — put to death — all that sprang from the motions of the flesh. A catalogue of things is given which were to be practically <i> put off </i> , because the old man had been <i> put off </i> with his deeds. Then having <i> put on </i> the new man, a catalogue of things is given which in consistency therewith were to be <i> put on </i> (the display of Christ, who is 'in each one'): above all things was <i> love. </i> [[Peace]] was to <i> rule </i> their hearts, and the word of Christ to <i> dwell </i> in them; helping one another with their songs. Exhortations follow to wives, husbands, children, fathers, and servants. Practical [[Christianity]] should be manifest in every station of life. </p> <p> Colossians 4 : Exhortations to masters, and then to all. [[Tychicus]] and [[Onesimus]] would declare to them the affairs of Paul. Salutations follow. The epistle was to be read to the church of the Laodiceans, and some epistle coming to them from [[Laodicea]] was to be read at Colosse. (Perhaps the epistle to the Ephesians was being circulated from church to church.) A message to Archippus: the salutation by the hand of Paul, and a request to remember his bonds close the epistle with "Grace be with you. Amen." </p>

        <p> '''''kō̇''''' -'''''losh´ans''''' , '''''kō̇''''' -'''''los´i''''' -'''''anz''''' : This is one of the group of Paul's epistles known as the [[Captivity]] [[Epistles]] (see Philemon , [[Epistle]] To , for a discussion of these as a group). </p> <h4> I. [[Authenticity]] </h4> <p> 1. External Evidence </p> <p> The external evidence for the Epistle to the Colossians, prior to the middle of the 2nd century, is rather indeterminate. In Ignatius and in [[Polycarp]] we have here and there phrases and terminology that suggest an acquaintance with Colossians but not much more (Ignat., <i> Ephes </i> ., x.3, and Polyc. x.1; compare with Colossians 1:23 ). The phrase in <i> Ep [[Barnabas]] </i> , xii, "in him are all things and unto him are all things," may be due to Colossians 1:16 , but it is quite as possibly a liturgical formula. The references in [[Justin]] Martyr's <i> Dialogue </i> to [[Christ]] as the firstborn ( <i> '''''prōtótokos''''' </i> ) are very probably suggested by Colossians 1:15 , "the firstborn of all creation" ( <i> Dial </i> ., 84, 85, 138). The first definite witness is Marcion, who included this epistle in his collection of those written by Paul (Tert., <i> Adv. Marc </i> ., Colossians 1:19 ). A little later the Muratorian [[Fragment]] mentions Colossians among the Epistles of Paul (10 <i> b </i> , l. 21, <i> Colosensis </i> ). [[Irenaeus]] quotes it frequently and by name ( <i> Adv. haer </i> ., iii.14, 1). It is familiar to the writers of the following centuries (e.g. Tert., <i> De praescrip </i> ., 7; [[Clement]] of Alexandria, <i> Strom </i> ., I, 1; Orig., <i> Contra Celsum </i> , v. 8). </p> <p> 2. Internal Evidence </p> <p> The authenticity was not questioned until the second quarter of the 19th century when Mayerhoff claimed on the ground of style, vocabulary, and thought that it was not by the apostle. The [[Tübingen]] school claimed, on the basis of a supposed Gnosticism, that the epistle was the work of the 2nd century and so not Pauline. This position has been thoroughly answered by showing that the teaching is essentially different from the [[Gnosticism]] of the 2nd century, especially in the conception of Christ as prior to and greater than all things created (see V below). The attack in later years has been chiefly on the ground of vocabulary and style, the doctrinal position, especially the [[Christology]] and the teaching about angels, and the relation to the [[Ephesian]] epistle. The objection on the ground of vocabulary and style is based, as is so often the case, on the assumption that a man, no matter what he writes about, must use the same words and style. There are thirty-four words in Colossians which are not in any other New [[Testament]] book. When one removes those that are due to the difference in subject-matter, the total is no greater than that of some of the acknowledged epistles. The omission of familiar [[Pauline]] particles, the use of genitives, of "all" ( <i> '''''pás''''' </i> ), and of synonyms, find parallels in other epistles, or are due to a difference of subject, or perhaps to the influence on the language of the apostle of his life in Rome (von Soden). The doctrinal position is not at heart contradictory to Paul's earlier teaching (compare Godet, <i> Introduction to the New Testament </i> ; <i> Paul's Epistles </i> , 440 f). The Christology is in entire harmony with Phil (which see) which is generally admitted as Pauline, and is only a development of the teaching in 1 Cor ( 1 Corinthians 8:6; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 ), especially in respect of the emphasis laid on "the cosmical activity of the preincarnate Christ." Finally, the form in which Paul puts the Christology is that best calculated to meet the false teaching of the Colossian heretics (compare V below). In recent years H. Holtzmann has advocated that this epistle is an interpolated form of an original Pauline epistle to the Colossians, and the work of the author of the Epistle to the Ephesians (which see). A modification of this theory of interpolation has recently been suggested by J. Weiss ( <i> Theologische Literaturzeitung </i> , September 29, 1900). Both these theories are too complicated to stand, and even von Soden, who at first followed Holtzmann, has abandoned the position (von Soden, <i> Einleitung. </i> , 12); while Sanday ( <i> DB </i> 2) has shown how utterly untenable it is. Sober criticism today has come to realize that it is impossible to deny the Pauline authorship of this epistle. This position is strengthened by the close relationship between Colossians and Philemon, of which Renan says: "Paul alone, so it would seem, could have written this little masterpiece" (Abbott, <i> International Critical [[Commentary]] </i> , lviii). If Philemon (which see) stands as Pauline, as it must, then the authenticity of Colossians is established beyond controversy. </p> <h4> II. Place and Date </h4> <p> The Pauline authorship being established, it becomes evident at once that the apostle wrote Colossians along with the other Captivity Epistles, and that it is best dated from Rome (see Philemon , Epistle To ), and during the first captivity. This would be about 58 or, if the later chronology is preferred, 63 or 64. </p> <h4> III. Destination </h4> <p> The epistle was written, on the face of it, to the church at [[Colossae]] (which see), a town in the [[Lycus]] valley where the gospel had been preached most probably by [[Epaphras]] (Col 17; Colossians 4:12 ), and where Paul was, himself, unknown personally ( Colossians 1:4 , Colossians 1:8 , Colossians 1:9; Colossians 2:1 , Colossians 2:5 ). From the epistle it is evident that the Colossian [[Christians]] were [[Gentiles]] ( Colossians 1:27 ) for whom, as such, the apostle feels a responsibility ( Colossians 2:1 ). He sends to them [[Tychicus]] ( Colossians 4:7 ), who is accompanied by Onesimus, one of their own community ( Colossians 4:9 ), and urges them to be sure to read another letter which will reach them from [[Laodicea]] ( Colossians 4:16 ). </p> <h4> IV. Relation to Other New Testament Writings </h4> <p> [[Beyond]] the connection with Ephesians (which see) we need notice only the relation between Colossians and Rev. In the letter to Laodicea ( Revelation 3:14-21 ) we have two expressions: "the beginning of the creation of God," and "I will give to him to sit down with me in my throne," in which we have an echo of Colossians which "suggests an acquaintance with and recognition of the earlier apostle's teaching on the part of John" (Lightfoot, <i> Colossians </i> , 42, note 5). </p> <h4> V. The Purpose </h4> <p> The occasion of the epistle was, we may be sure, the information brought by Epaphras that the church in [[Colosse]] was subject to the assault of a body of Judaistic Christians who were seeking to overthrow the faith of the Colossians and weaken their regard for Paul (Zahn). This "heresy," as it is commonly called, has had many explanations. The Tübingen school taught that it was gnostic, and sought to find in the terms the apostle used evidence for the 2nd century composition of the epistle. <i> '''''Plḗrōma''''' </i> and <i> '''''gnō̇sis''''' </i> ("fullness" and "knowledge") not only do not require this interpretation, but will not admit it. The very heart of Gnosticism, i.e. theory of emanation and the dualistic conception which regards matter as evil, finds no place in Colossians. The use of <i> '''''plērōma''''' </i> in this and the sister epistle, Eph, does not imply Gnostic views, whether held by the apostle or by the readers of the letters. The significance in Colossians of this and the other words adopted by Gnosticism in later years is quite distinct from that later meaning. The underlying teaching is equally distinct. The Christ of the Colossians is not the aeon Christ of Gnosticism. In Essenism, on the other hand, Lightfoot and certain Germans seek the origin of this heresy. Essenism has certain affinities with Gnosticism on the one side and [[Judaism]] on the other. Two objections are raised against this explanation of the origin of the Colossian heresy. In the first place Essenism, as we know it, is found in the neighborhood of the Dead Sea, and there is no evidence for its establishment in the Lycus valley. In the second place, no references are found in Colossians to certain distinct Essene teachings, e.g. those about marriage, washings, communism, [[Sabbath]] rules, etc. </p> <p> The Colossian heresy is due to Judaistic influences on the one hand and to native beliefs and superstitions on the other. The Judaistic elements in this teaching are patent, circumcision ( Colossians 2:11 ), the Law ( Colossians 2:14 , Colossians 2:15 ), and special seasons ( Colossians 2:16 ). But there is more than Judaism in this false teaching. Its teachers look to intermediary spirits, angels whom they worship; and insist on a very strict asceticism. To seek the origin of angel worship in Judaism, as is commonly done, is, as A. L. Williams has shown, to miss the real significance of the attitude of the Jews to angels and to magnify the bitter jeers of Celsus. [[Apart]] from phrases used in exorcism and magic he shows us that there is no evidence that the Jew ever worshipped angels ( <i> JTS </i> , X, 413 f). This element in the Colossian heresy was local, finding its antecedent in the worship of the river spirits, and in later years the same tendency gave the impulse to the worship of [[Michael]] as the patron saint of Colosse (so too Ramsay, Hastings, <i> Dictionary of the [[Bible]] </i> (five volumes), under the word "Colossae"). The danger of and the falsehood in this teaching were twofold. In the first place it brought the gospel under the bands of the Law once more, not now with the formality of the [[Galatian]] opponents, but none the less surely. But as the apostle's readers are Gentiles ( Colossians 1:27 ) Paul is not interested in showing the preparatory aspect of the Law. He simply insists to them that they are quite free from all obligations of the Law because Christ, in whom they have been baptized ( Colossians 2:12 ), has blotted out all the Law ( Colossians 2:14 ). The second danger is that their belief in and worship of the heavenly powers, false ideas about Christ and the material world, would develop even further than it had. They, because of their union with Him, need fear no angelic being. Christ has triumphed over them all, leading them as it were captives in His train ( Colossians 2:15 ), as He conquered on the cross. The spiritual powers cease to have any authority over the Christians. It is to set Christ forward, in this way, as Head over all creation as very God, and out of His relation to the church and to the universe to develop the [[Christian]] life, that the apostle writes. </p> <h4> VI. Argument </h4> <p> The argument of the Epistle is as follows: </p> <p> Colossians 1:1 , Colossians 1:2 </p> <p> Salutation. </p> <p> Colossians 1:3-8 </p> <p> [[Thanksgiving]] for their faith in Christ, their love for the saints, their hope laid up in heaven, which they had in and through the gospel and of which he had heard from Epaphras. </p> <p> Colossians 1:9-13 </p> <p> [[Prayer]] that they might be filled with the full knowledge of God's will so as to walk worthy of the Lord and to be fruitful in good works, thankful for their inheritance of the kingdom of His Son. </p> <p> Colossians 1:14-23 </p> <p> Statement of the Son's position, from whom we have redemption. He is the very image of God, Creator, pre-existent, the Head of the church, preëminent over all, in whom all the fullness ( <i> '''''plērōma''''' </i> ) dwells, the Reconciler of all things, as also of the Colossians, through His death, provided they are faithful to the hope of the gospel. </p> <p> Colossians 1:24 Through 2:5 </p> <p> By his suffering he is filling up the sufferings of Christ, of whom he is a minister, even to reveal the great mystery of the ages, that Christ is in them, the Gentiles, the hope of glory, the object of the apostle's preaching everywhere. This explains Paul's interest in them, and his care for them, that their hearts may be strengthened in the love and knowledge of Christ. </p> <p> Colossians 2:6 Through 3:4 </p> <p> He then passes to exhortation against those who are leading them astray, these false teachers of a vain, deceiving philosophy based on worldly wisdom, who ignore the truth of Christ's position, as One in whom all the [[Divine]] <i> '''''plērōma''''' </i> dwells, and their relation to Him, united by baptism; raised through the faith; quickened and forgiven; who teach the obligation of the observance of various legal practices, strict asceticisms and angel worship. This exhortation is closed with the appeal that as Christ's they will not submit to these regulations of men which are useless, especially in comparison with Christ's power through the Resurrection. </p> <p> Colossians 3:5-17 </p> <p> Practical exhortations follow to real mortification of the flesh with its characteristics, and the substitution of a new life of fellowship, love and peace. </p> <p> Colossians 3:18 Through 4:1 </p> <p> [[Exhortation]] to fulfill social obligations, as wives, husbands, children, parents, slaves and masters. </p> <p> Colossians 4:2-6 </p> <p> Exhortation to devout and watchful prayer. </p> <p> Colossians 4:7-18 </p> <p> Salutations and greeting. </p> <h4> Literature </h4> <p> Lightfoot, <i> Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon </i> ; Abbott, <i> Ephesians and Colossians </i> , <i> International Critical Commentary </i> ; Peake, <i> Colossians </i> , <i> Expositor </i> 's <i> [[Greek]] Testament </i> ; Maclaren, <i> Colossians </i> , <i> Expositor's Bible </i> ; Alexander, <i> Colossians and Ephesians </i> , <i> Bible for Home and School </i> ; Moule, <i> Colossians </i> , <i> [[Cambridge]] Bible </i> ; Haupt, <i> Meyer's Krit. u. Exeg. Kom </i> .; von Soden, <i> Hand-Kom. zum New Testament </i> . </p>

        <p> the seventh of the [[Pauline]] epistles in the New Test. (see Davidson's Introd. to the N.T. 2:394 sq.). (See [[Epistle]]). </p> <p> I. Authorship. — That this epistle is the genuine production of the apostle Paul is proved by the most satisfactory evidence, and has never, indeed, been seriously called in question. The external testimonies (Just. M. Trypho, p. 311 b; Theophil. ad Autol. 2, p. 100, ed. Colossians 1686; Irenaeus, Haer. 3. 14, 1; Clem. Alex. Strom. 1, p. 325; 4, p. 588, al., ed. Potter; Tertull. de Praescr. ch. 7; de Resurr. ch. 23; Origen, contra Cels.v. 8) are explicit, and the internal arguments, founded on the style, balance of sentences, positions of adverbs, uses of the relative pronoun, participial anacolutha, unusually strong and well defined. It is not right to suppress the fact that Mayerhoff (Der [[Brief]] an die Kol. Berl. 1838) and Baur (Der Apostel Paulus, p. 417) have deliberately rejected this epistle as claiming to be a production of the apostle Paul. The first of these critics, however, has been briefly, but, as it would seem, completely answered by Meyer (Komment. p. 7); and to the second, in his subjective and anti-historical attempt to make individual writings of the N.T. mere theosophistic productions of a later Gnosticism, the intelligent and critical reader will naturally yield but little credence (see Rabiger, De Christologia Paulina, etc. Vratisl. 1852; Klopper, De origine Epp. ad Ephesios et Collossenses, Gryph. 1853). It is, indeed, remarkable that the strongly-marked peculiarity of style, the nerve and force of the arguments, and the originality that appears in every paragraph, should not have made both these writers pause in their ill-considered attack on this epistle (see Tregelles, in Horne's Introd. new edit. vol. 3). </p> <p> II. It is less certain, however, when and where it was composed. The common opinion is that Paul wrote it at Rome during his imprisonment in that city ( Acts 28:16; Acts 28:30). Erasmus, followed by others, supposes that [[Ephesus]] was the place at which it was composed; but this suggestion is obviously untenable from its incompatibility with the allusions ‘ contained' in the epistle itself to the state of trouble and imprisonment in which the apostle was whilst composing it ( Colossians 1:24; Colossians 4:10; Colossians 4:18). In Germany, the opinions of theologians have been divided of late years between the common hypothesis and one proposed by Schulz in the Theologische Studien und Kritiken for 1829 (p. 612 sq.), viz., that this epistle, with those to the Ephesians and Philemon, was written during the apostle's (two years') imprisonment at [[Caesarea]] previous to his being sent to Rome. This opinion has been adopted and defended by Schott, Bottger, and Wiggers, whilst it has been opposed by Neander, Steiger, Harless, Ruckert, Credner, and others. In a more recent number of the same periodical, however, the whole question has been subjected to a new investigation by Dr. Wiggers, who comes to the conclusion that, of the facts above appealed to, none can be regarded as decisive for either hypothesis ( Stud. u. Krit. 1841, p. 436). The above opinion that this epistle and those to the Ephesians and to Philemon were written during the apostle's imprisonment at Caesarea ( Acts 21:27 to Acts 26:32), has been recently advocated by several writers of ability, and stated with such cogency and clearness by Meyer (Einleit. z. Ephes. p. 15, sq.), as to deserve some consideration. It will be found, however, to rest on ingeniously-urged plausibilities; whereas, to go no further into the present epistle, the notices of the apostle's imprisonment in Colossians 4:3-4; Colossians 4:11, certainly seem historically inconsistent with the nature of the imprisonment at Caesarea. The permission of [[Felix]] ( Acts 24:23) can scarcely be strained into any degree of liberty to teach or preach the Gospel, while the facts recorded of Paul's imprisonment at Rome ( Acts 28:23; Acts 28:31) are such as to harmonize admirably with the freedom in this respect which our present epistle represents to have been accorded both to the apostle and his companions (see chap. Acts 4:11, and comp. De Wette, Einleit. z. Coloss. p. 12, 13; Wieseler, Chronol. p. 420). </p> <p> Finally, the foundation for this opinion is taken away by the fact that the imprisonment of Paul at Cesarea was not so long as commonly supposed. See PAUL. It is most likely, therefore, that it was written during Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, probably in the spring of A.D. 57, and apparently soon after the [[Epistle]] to the Ephesians, with which it contains numerous and striking coincidences. In support of this date the following facts may be adduced: Timothy was with Paul at the time ( Colossians 1:1; comp. Philippians 2:19); [[Epaphroditus]] (Epaphras) had lately come from Asia Minor (1, 4, 7, 9; comp. Philippians 2:25; Philippians 4:18), and was now with Paul ( Colossians 4:2); Paul was in prison, and had been preaching in his confinement ( Colossians 4:3; Colossians 4:18; see Acts 28:30-31); various friends were at this time with him ( Colossians 4:7-14; these had therefore had time to gather about him, and it was not a season of danger); [[Tychicus]] (on his second journey) and [[Onesimus]] carried the letter ( Colossians 4:7-8; and subscription; comp. Ephesians 6:21; Philemon 1:12). From this last circumstance, it would appear that the epistle could not have been written very early in his imprisonment, as the letter to Philemon (doubtless written not long after) speaks confidently of a speedy release (see Conybeare and Howson's Life and [[Epistles]] of St. Paul. 2:384). </p> <p> "The striking similarity between many portions of this epistle and of that to the Ephesians has given rise to much speculation, both as to the reason of this studied similarity, and as to the priority of order in respect to composition. These points cannot here be discussed at length, but must be somewhat briefly dismissed with the simple expression of an opinion that the similarity may reasonably be accounted for, </p> <p> (1) by the proximity in time at which the two epistles were written; </p> <p> (2) by the high probability that in two cities of Asia, within a moderate distance from one another, there would be many doctrinal prejudices, and many social relations, that would call forth and need precisely the same language of warning and exhortation. The priority in composition must remain a matter for a reasonable difference of opinion." (See Ephesians) and (See Philemon) ( Epistles to). </p> <p> III. Design. — The Epistle to the Colossians was written, apparently, in consequence of information received by Paul through [[Epaphras]] concerning the internal state of their church ( Colossians 1:6-8). Whether the apostle had ever himself before this time visited Colossa is matter of uncertainty and dispute. From Colossians 2:1, where he says, "I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh," etc., it has by some been very confidently concluded that he had not. It has been urged, however, that when, in Colossians 2:5, the apostle says, "though I am absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit," etc., his language is strongly indicative of his having formerly been amongst the Colossians, for the ἄπειμι is used properly only of such absence as arises from the person's having gone away from the place of which his absence is predicated. In support of the same view have been adduced Paul's having twice visited and gone through [[Phrygia]] ( Acts 16:6; Acts 18:23), in which [[Colossae]] was a chief city; his familiar acquaintance with so many of the Colossian Christians, Epaphras, Archippus, Philemon (who was one of his own converts, Philippians 13, 19), and Apphia, probably the wife of Philemon; his apparent acquaintance with Onesimus, the slave of Philemon, so that he recognized him again at Rome; the cordiality of friendship and interest subsisting between the apostle and the Colossians as a body ( Colossians 1:24-25; Colossians 2:1; Colossians 4:7, etc.); the apostle's familiar acquaintance with their state and relations ( Colossians 1:6; Colossians 2:6-7, etc.); and their knowledge of so many of his companions, and especially of Timothy, whose name the apostle associates with his own at the commencement of the epistle, a circumstance which is worthy of consideration from this, that Timothy was the companion of Paul during his first tour through Phrygia, when probably the [[Gospel]] was first preached at Colossae. </p> <p> Of these considerations it must be allowed that the cumulative force is very strong in favor of the opinion that the [[Christians]] at Colossa had been privileged to enjoy the personal ministrations of Paul. At the same time, if the Colossians and Laodiceans are not to be included among those of whom Paul says they had not seen his face, it seems unaccountable that in writing to the Colossians he should have referred to this class at all: If, moreover, he had visited the Colossians, was it not strange that he should have no deeper feeling towards them than he had for the multitudes of Christians scattered over the world whose faces he had never seen? In fine, as it is quite possible that Paul may have been twice in Phrygia without being once in Colossae, is it not easy also to account for his interest in the church at Colossae, his knowledge of their affairs, and his acquaintance with individuals among them, by supposing that members of that church had frequently visited him in different places, though he had never visited Colossae? (See Laodiceans (Epistle To).) </p> <p> A great part of this epistle is directed against certain false teachers who had crept into the church at Colossae (see Rheinwald, De pseudo doctoribus Colossensibus, Bonnae, 1834). To what class these teachers belonged has not been fully determined. Heinrichs (Nov. Test. Koppian. VII, 2:156) contends that they were disciples of John the Baptist. Michaelis and Storr, with more show of reason, conclude that they were Essenes. Hug (Introd. 2:449) traces their system to the Magian philosophy, of which the outlines are furnished by Iamblichus. But the best opinion seems to be that of Neander (Planting and Training, 1:374 sq.), by whom they are represented as a party of speculatists who endeavored to combine the doctrines of Oriental theosophy and asceticism with Christianity, and promised thereby to their disciples a deeper insight into the. spiritual world, and a fuller approximation to heavenly purity and intelligence than simple [[Christianity]] could yield. (See below.) Against this party the apostle argues by reminding the Colossians that in [[Jesus]] Christ, as set before them in the Gospel, they had all that they required; that he was the image of the invisible God; that he was before all things; that by him all things consist; that they were complete in him, and that he would present them to God holy, unblamable, and unreprovable, provided they continued steadfast in the faith. He then shows that the prescriptions of a mere carnal asceticism are not worthy of being submitted to by Christians, and concludes by directing their attention to the elevated principles which should regulate the conscience and conduct of such, and the duties of social and domestic life to which these would prompt. (See Jour. Sac. Lit. vol. 3) (See [[Philosophy]]). </p> <p> What these dangerous tendencies therefore were that had appeared in the doctrine and practice of the Colossian [[Church]] we discover more particularly from three specifications: </p> <p> 1. A pretentious philosophy, which affected an esoteric knowledge, received through tradition, and which, abandoning [[Christ]] the Head, indulged in unhallowed speculations on the number and nature of the spiritual beings with which the invisible world is peopled ( Colossians 2:8; Colossians 2:18). </p> <p> 2. The observance, if not the asserted obligation (for this does not appear), of [[Jewish]] ordinances ( Colossians 2:16; Colossians 2:20-22). </p> <p> 3. The practice of ascetic regulations ( Colossians 2:23). A question here at once arises, Were these various errors found united in the same party or individual? At first sight they seem mutually to exclude each other. The pharisaic [[Judaizers]] exhibited no proneness either to a speculative gnosis or to asceticism; the Gnostic ascetics, on the other hand, were usually opposed to a rigid ceremonialism. It is so improbable, however, that, in a small community like that of Colossae, three distinct parties should have existed, that we are driven to the conclusion that the corrupt tendencies in question did really exist in combination in the same persons; and the difficulty will perhaps be alleviated if we bear in mind that in the apostolic age two classes of Judaizing teachers, equally opposed to the simplicity of the apostolic message, though in different ways, busied themselves in sowing tares among the wheat in the visible Church. The former consisted of the rigid formalists, chiefly Pharisees, who occupy so prominent a place in the history of the Acts and in several of Paul's epistles, and who contended for the continued obligation of the law of [[Moses]] upon [[Gentile]] converts; the latter were speculative adherents of the [[Alexandrian]] school, whose principle it was to subordinate the letter to the spirit, or rather to treat the former as a mere shell, which the initiated were at liberty to cast away as worthless, or intended only for the vulgar. With this false spiritualism was usually combined an element of Oriental theosophy, with its doctrine of the essential evil of matter, and the ascetic practices by which it was supposed that the soul is to be emancipated from the material thraldom under which it at present labors. </p> <p> To angelology, or the framing of angelic genealogies, the Jews in general of that age were notoriously addicted; in the pastoral epistles (see 1 Timothy 1:4) we again meet this idle form of speculation. That persons imbued with these various notions should, on becoming Christians, attempt an amalgamation of them with their new faith is but natural; and the ill-assorted union seems to have given birth to the [[Gnosticism]] of a subsequent age, with its monstrous tenets, the product of an unbridled imagination. Teachers then, or perhaps a single teacher ( Colossians 2:16), of this cast of [[Judaism]] had effected an entrance into the Colossian Church, and seems to have there experienced a favorable reception. In a Gentile community like this, pharisaic Judaism could not so easily have gained a footing; but the mixture of mystical speculation and ascetic discipline, which distinguished the section of the Alexandrian school alluded to, was just adapted to attract the unstable, especially in Phrygia, from time immemorial the land of mystic rites, such as those connected with the worship of Cybele, and of magical superstition. From this congenial soil, in a subsequent age, [[Montanism]] sprang; and, as Neander remarks (Apostelgeschichte, 1:442), it is remarkable that in the 4th century the [[Council]] of [[Laodicea]] was compelled to prohibit a species of angel-worship, which appears to have maintained its ground in these regions (Can. 35). We must not, however, suppose that these tendencies had worked themselves out into a distinct system, or had brought forth the bitter practical fruits which were their natural consequence, and which, at a later period, distinguished the heresiarchs alluded to in the pastoral epistles, and the followers of Cerinthus. The corrupt teaching was as yet in its bud. The apostle therefore recommends no harsh measures, such as excommunication: he treats the case as one rather of ignorance and inexperience; as that of erring but sincere Christians, not of active opponents; and seeks by gentle persuasion to win them back to their allegiance to Christ. (See [[Gnosticism]]). </p> <p> IV. Contents. — Like the majority of Paul's epistles, that to the Colossians consists of two main divisions, one of which contains the doctrinal, the other the practical matter. </p> <p> After his usual salutation ( Colossians 1:1-2), the apostle returns thanks to God for the faith of the Colossians, the spirit of love they had shown, and the progress which the Gospel had made among them as preached by Epaphras ( Colossians 1:3-8). This leads him to pray without ceasing that they may be fruitful in good works, and especially thankful to the Father, who gave them an inheritance with his saints, and translated them into the kingdom of his Son — his Son, the image of the invisible God, the first-born before every creature, the [[Creator]] of all things earthly and heavenly, the Head of the Church, He in whom an things subsist, and by whom all things have been reconciled to the eternal Father ( Colossians 1:9-20). This reconciliation, the apostle reminds them, was exemplified in their own cases; they were once alienated, but now so reconciled as to be presented holy and blameless before God, if only they continued firm in the faith, and were not moved from the hope of which the Gospel was the source and origin ( Colossians 1:21-24). </p> <p> Of this Gospel the apostle declares himself the minister; the mystery of salvation was that for which he toiled and for which he suffered ( Colossians 1:24-29). Nor were his sufferings only for the Church at large, but also for them and others whom he had not personally visited, even that they might come to the full knowledge of Christ, and might not fall victims to plausible sophistries; they were to walk in Christ and to be built on him ( Colossians 2:1-7). Here the apostle brings in the particular theme of the epistle. Especially were the Colossians to be careful that no philosophy was to lead them from Him in whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead, who was the Head of all spiritual powers, and who had quickened them, forgiven them, and in his death had triumphed over all the hosts of darkness ( Colossians 2:8; Colossians 2:15). Surely with such spiritual privileges they were not to be judged in the matter of mere ceremonial observances or beguiled into creature-worship. Christ was the head of the body; if they were truly united to him, what need was there of bodily austerities? ( Colossians 2:16-23.) </p> <p> In the latter half of the epistle the apostle enforces the practical duties flowing from these truths. The Colossians were, then, to mind things above — spiritual things, not carnal ordinances, for their life was hidden with Christ ( Colossians 3:1-4): they were to mortify their members and the evil principles in which they once walked; the old man was to be put off, and the new man put on, in which all are one in Christ ( Colossians 3:5-12). Furthermore, they were to give heed to special duties; they were to be forgiving and loving, as was Christ. In the consciousness of his abiding word were they to sing; in his name were they to be thankful ( Colossians 3:13-17). Wives and husbands, children and parents, were all to perform their duties; servants were to be faithful, masters to be just ( Colossians 3:18 to Colossians 4:1). </p> <p> In the last chapter the apostle gives further special precepts, strikingly similar to those given to his [[Ephesian]] converts. They were to pray for the apostle, and for his success in preaching the Gospel; they were to walk circumspectly, and to be ready to give a seasonable answer to all who questioned them ( Colossians 4:2-7). Tychicus, the bearer of the letter, and Onesimus would tell them all the state of the apostle ( Colossians 4:7-9): [[Aristarchus]] and others sent them friendly greetings ( Colossians 4:10-14). With an injunction to interchange this letter with that sent to the neighboring church of Laodicea ( Colossians 4:16), a special message to [[Archippus]] ( Colossians 4:17), and an autograph salutation, this short but striking epistle comes to its close. (See [[Epistle]]). </p> <p> V. Commentaries. — The following are expressly on this Epistle (including, in some instances, one or more of the other Pauline letters), the most important being designated by an asterisk (*) prefixed: Jerome, Commeint. (in Opp. [ Suppos.] 2); Chrysostom, Hoan. (in Opp. 2:368); Zuingle, Annotationes (in Opp. 4:512); Melancthon, Enarrationes (Wittenb. 1559, 4to); Zanchius, Comment. (in Opp. vi); Musculus, Commentarius (Basil. 1565, 1578, 1595, fol.); Aretius, Commentarii (Morg. 1580, 8vo); Olevianus, Notae (Genesis 1580, 8vo); Grynaeus, Explicatio (Basil. 1585, 8vo); Rollock, Commentarius (Edinb. 1600, 8vo; Genev. 1602); also Lectures (Lond. 1603, 4to); Cartwright, [[Commentary]] (Lond. 1612, 4to); *Byfield, [[Exposition]] (Lond. 1615, fol.; also 1627, 1649); Elton, Exposition (Lond. 1615, 4to; 1620, 1631, fol.); Quiros, Commentarius (in Disput., Lugd. B. 1623); Crellius, Commentarius (in Opp. 1:523); Cocceius, In Ep. ad Colossians (in Opp. 12:213); Alting, Analysis (in Opp. iv); *Davenant, Expositio (Cantab. 1627, fol.; also 1630, 1639, fol.; Genev. 1655, 4to; in English, London, 1831, 2 vols. 8vo); Calixtus, Expositio (Brunsw. 1654, 4to); Daille, Sermons (in French, [[Genesis]] 1662, 2d ed. 3 vols. 8vo; in English, Lond. 1672, fol.); and Exposition (Lond. 1841, 8vo); Fergusson, Commentarius (Lord. 1658, 8vo); Martin, Analysis (in Opp. 4:389); *D'Outrein, Sendbrief, etc. (Amst. 1695, 4to; in German, Frankfort, 1696, 4to); Schmid, Commentarius (Hamb. 1696, 4to; also 1704).; Suicer, Commentarius (Tiguri. 1699, 4to); Streso, Meditationes (Amst. 1708, 8vo); Gleich, Predigten (Dresden, 1717, 4to); Lutken, Predigten (Gardel. 1718, 1737, 4to); Hazevoet, Verklaering (Lugd. B. 1720, 4to); Van Til, Commentarius (Amst. 1726, 4to); Roell, [[Exegesis]] (Traj. 1731, 4to); Peirce, [[Paraphrase]] (London, 1733, 4to); Koning, Openlegging (L. B. 1739, 4to); Storr, Interpretatio (in his Opusc. Acad. 2:120-241); Boysen, Erklarung (Quedlb. 1766-1781); Jones, Version (London, 1820,12mo); Junker, Commentar (Mannheim, 1828, 8vo); Bohmer, Auslegwng (8vo, Berl. 1829; Breslau, 1835); Flatt, Erklar. ed. by Kling (Tub. 1829, 8vo); *Blhr, Commentar (Basel, 1833, 8vo); Watson, Discourses (Lond. 1834, 8vo; also 1838); Steiger, Uebers. u. Erklar. (Erlang. 1835, 8vo); Schleiermacher, Predigten (Berlin, 1835, 2 vols. 8vo); Lange, Homilien (Barmen, 1839); Decker, Bearbeitung (Hamb. 1848, 8vo); Hither, Commentar (Hamb. 1841, 2 vols. 8vo); *De Wette, Erklarung (Lpz. 1843, 1847, 8vo); Wilson, Lectures (London, 1845, 8vo; also 1846); Baumgarten-Crusius, Commentar (Jena, 1847, 8vo); Meyer, Handbuch (Gott. 1848, 8vo, pt. ix); Kahler, Auslegung (Eisleb. 1853, 8vo); Bisping, Erklarung (Munst. 1855, 8vo); *Eadie, Commentary (Glasg. 1856, 8vo); Dalmer, Auslegung (Gotha, 1858, 8vo); *Ellicott, Commentary (London, 1858, 1861, 8vo; Andover, 1865, 8vo); Gisborne, Exposition (Lond. 1860, 12mo); Messmer, Erklarung (Brixen, 1863, 8vo); Passavant, Auslegung (Basel, 1865, 8vo); *Bleek, Vorlesungen (Berlin, 1865, 8vo). (See [[Commentary]]). </p>

        <ref name="term_15811"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/american-tract-society-bible-dictionary/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from American Tract Society Bible Dictionary]</ref>

        <ref name="term_31003"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/easton-s-bible-dictionary/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from Easton's Bible Dictionary]</ref>

        <ref name="term_50317"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-bible/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible]</ref>

        <ref name="term_55322"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-new-testament/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament]</ref>

        <ref name="term_65623"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/morrish-bible-dictionary/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from Morrish Bible Dictionary]</ref>

        <ref name="term_2693"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/international-standard-bible-encyclopedia/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia]</ref>

        <ref name="term_33984"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/cyclopedia-of-biblical-theological-and-ecclesiastical-literature/colossians,+epistle+to+the Epistle To The Colossians from Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature]</ref>