f^^yrt':!''^---"'- '■-''•'■' »'R-' 
 
■,^^v.,:P-^m,.y,,,^,*,^,,,:,.... . ..v^. ^:.^^^;^^^ 
 
 Cibrarjp of Che t:heolo3ical ^emmarjp 
 
 PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY 
 
 'Hi VvX* 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 
 Estate of the Rev. 
 Charles Ben.^amin Segelken, D.D. 
 
 .El I 
 

 A COMMENTARY 
 
 THE COLOSSIANS. 
 
PRINTED BY MORRISON AND GIBB, 
 FOB 
 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 LONDON, . . . HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. 
 
 DUBLIN, . . . GEORGE HERBERT. 
 
 NEW YORK, . . SCRIBNER AND 'WELrORn. 
 
A COMMENTAEY 
 
 GEEEK TEXT OF THE EPISTLE OF PAUL 
 
 TO 
 
 THE COLOSSIANS. 
 
 - BY THE LATE 
 
 JOHN EADIE, D.D, LL.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AXD EXEGESIS TO THE UNITED 
 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 Edited by the Eev. W. YOUNG, M.A., Glasgow, 
 
 EDINBURGH: 
 T. & T. CLAEK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
 1884. 
 
nATA02 — fiiyocs Tri; aX*ih'iccs -r^uayuviffTri; xa) %ihdi.ffita,>.o;. — rPHrOPIOS o 
 HloXoyos. 
 
 Noil est cujusvis hominis Paulinum pectus effingere. Tonat, fulgurat, ineras 
 flammas loquitur. — Erasmus, Annot. ad Colos. iv. 16. 
 
 Omnis bonus Theologus et fidelis interpres doctrinae coelestis, necessario esse 
 dobet, prinmm gi-ammaticus, deinde dialecticus, denique testis. — Melancthon. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This volume has been composed on the same principles as 
 those which guided me in my previous Commentary on the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians. My aim has again been to trace 
 and illustrate the thoughts of the inspired writer ; to arrive 
 at a knowledge of the truths which he has communicated, by 
 an analysis of the words which he has employed. I have 
 used every means in ray power to ascertain the mind of the 
 Spirit ; and my eye being single, if I have not enjoyed fulness 
 of light, my hope is that some at least of its beams have been 
 diffused over my pages. As the purity of exegesis depends 
 on the soundness of grammatical investigation, I have spared 
 no pains in the prior process, so that I might arrive at a 
 satisfactory result. One may, indeed, compile a series of 
 grammatical annotations without intruding far into the pro- 
 vince of exegesis, but it is impossible to write an exegetical 
 commentary without basing it on a thorough grammatical 
 inquiry. The foundation must be of sufficient depth and 
 breadth to support the structure. Nay, after the expositor 
 has discovered what meaning the word or clause may bear by 
 itself, and as the Grammar or Lexicon may warrant, he has 
 then to determine how far the connection and development of 
 ideas may modify the possible signification, and finally deter- 
 mine the actual or genuine sense. For the only true sense 
 is that which the author intended his words should bear. 
 
 ^ In making these remarks, I refer to, but certainly find no fault with, the 
 following two treatises, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul's 
 Epistle to the Galatians, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. PauV-H 
 
\i PKEFACE. 
 
 Now there is ample wealth of grammatical assistance. Apart 
 from formal grammatical treatises and dictionaries, one might 
 almost compile a Grammar and Lexicon from such works as 
 Schweighiiuser on Herodotus, Stallbaum on Plato, Poppo on 
 Thucydides, Kiihner on Xenophon, and other productions of 
 similar scholarship. Still, when all this labour has been gone 
 through, the higher art of the exegete must be brought into 
 requisition. The dry bones must not only be knitted, but 
 they must live. Successful exposition demands, on the part 
 of its writer, such a psychological oneness with the author 
 expounded, as that his spirit is felt, his modes of conception 
 mastered, and his style of presenting consecutive thought 
 penetrated and realized. And there is need, too, of that 
 Divine illumination which the "Interpreter, one among a 
 thousand," so rejoices to confer on him who works in the 
 spirit of the prayer, " Open Thou mine eyes, that I may 
 behold wondrous things out of Thy law." May I venture to 
 hope that, to some extent, I have come up to my own theory ? 
 What others have written before me on the epistle I have 
 carefully studied. Neither ancient nor modern commentators 
 in any language have been neglected. But I have not been 
 so lavish, as on my last appearance, in the citation of names. 
 
 Epistle to the Ephesiam, by C. J. Ellieott, M.A., Rector of Pilton, Piutland, and 
 late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. London, 1854-55. Mr. Ellieott 
 is an excellent Greek scholar, but in many of his corrections of myself, and on 
 points of Greek Grammar too, I cannot acquiesce, though in a few I admit his 
 modifications. I hope he is aware, at the same time, that in Scotland every 
 Greek scholar is and must be self-taught, since at our northern Universities we 
 get little Latin and less Greek, and enjoy no leisurely Fellowships. Yet with 
 all the necessary apparatus of German scholarship in our hands, why should we 
 really be behind England, save in the privilege of early and minute tuition ? 
 Indeed, English scholarship, in two of its latest efforts in this direction, does 
 but give an English dress to continental erudition. Jelf has not absorbed the 
 individuality of Kiihner in his improved translation. Liddell and Scott have 
 modestly avowed the sources out of which, to a great extent, their very useful 
 liBxicon has been wrought out. However, we wait hopefully for the New 
 Testament of Tregelles, and for the Lexicon believed to be in preparation by the 
 Master of Balliol. Mr. Ellieott has unconsciously misnamed our last work, in 
 a point of view against which we protested in our preface, and somewhat 
 extraordinarily and in opposition to what Prof. John Brown himself has said, 
 he hastily ascribes his Exposition of Galatians to a collegiate authorship. 
 
PREFACE. VU 
 
 except in cases of momentous difficulty, or wliere some 
 peculiar interpretation has been adduced. Names, I well 
 know, are not authorities ; and such a complete enumeration 
 of them as I attempted has, I find, been sometimes misunder- 
 stood in its principle, and sometimes misrepresented in its 
 purpose. 
 
 If my labours shall contribute to a clearer understanding 
 of this portion of the New Testament, I shall be amply 
 rewarded. I believe that the writings of the apostle, whatever 
 their immediate occasion and primary purpose, were intended 
 to be of permanent and universal utility ; and that the purity 
 and prosperity of the church of Christ are intimately bound 
 up with an accurate knowledge of, and a solid faith in, the 
 Pauline theology. I dare not, therefore, in the spirit of 
 modern rationalism, say in one breath what the apostle 
 means, and then say, in another breath, that such an 
 acknowledged meaning, though fitted for the meridian of the 
 first century, is not equally fitted for that of the nineteenth ; 
 but must be modified and softened down, according to each 
 one's predilections and views. The privilege of individual 
 deduction from inspired statement is not questioned — the 
 attempt to glean and gather general principles from counsels 
 and descriptions of a temporary and special phasis is not 
 disallowed ; but this procedure is totally different from that 
 ingenious rationalism which contrives to explain away those 
 distinctive truths which an honest interpretation of the 
 apostle's language admits that he actually loved and taught. 
 
 I have still to bespeak indulgence, on account of the con- 
 tinuous and absorbing duties of a numerous city charge ; and. 
 for a careful revisal of the sheets, and the compilation of the 
 useful index which accompanies this volume, I am indebted 
 to my esteem,ed friend the Kev. John Eussell, Buchlyvie, 
 Stirlingshire. 
 
 13 Lansdowne Crescen't, Glasgow, 
 October 1855. 
 
THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 I. COLOSSE, LAODICEA, AND HIERAPOLIS. 
 
 CoLOSSE was a city of the greater Phrygia, or that province 
 which, under Constantius, was called Phrygia Pacatiana, and 
 was situated on the river Lycus, about five furlongs above the 
 point where it joins the Maeander. The spelling of the name 
 has been disputed. The common appellation, KoXoaaal, has, 
 in the inscription of the epistle, the support of Codices D, E, F, 
 G, the Vulgate, and several of the Fathers, among whom are 
 the Greek Chrysostom and Theophylact, and the Latin 
 Tertullian and Ambrosiaster. Some ancient coins exhibit the 
 same spelling,^ and it occurs also in Herodotus,^ Xenophon,^ 
 Strabo,* Diodorus Siculus,^ and Pliny.^ It appears to be the 
 correct and original form of the word. On the other hand, 
 KoXacrcral has the high authority of A, B, C, of the Syriac 
 and Coptic Versions, and not a few of the Fathers and 
 classical writers/ Lachmann and Tischendorf adopt it. This 
 form, therefore, was also a current one. It seems to have 
 been in common use among the people, and was probably 
 the spelling employed by the apostle himself. Among the 
 subscriptions to the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, held 
 in A.D. 451, occurs that of the metropolitan of Laodicea, who, 
 speaking of the bishops under him, mentions — 'EirKpavLov 
 TToXeo)? KoXaaaayv. 
 
 ^ Eckhel, Doctr. Niimis. iii. p. 147, who cites the terms KoX(«rir»vo/and SiJ^of 
 
 KoXoo'ff'Jiva'V. 
 
 ' vii. 30. ^ Anabasis, p. 6, ed. Hutchinson, Glasgow, 1817. 
 
 * Geographia, vol. ii. p. 580, ed. Kramer, Berlin, 1847. 
 5 Histor. xiv. 80, 8. « Hist. Nat. v. 32. 
 
 ' It stands as a various reading in Xenophon and Herodotus, and also in 
 Polyaenus, viii. 16. 
 
X THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The city was of some note in its early days. Herodotus 
 calls it fjbeyaXT} 7ro\t9; and Xenophon bestows upon it the 
 epithet evhaljicav. Strabo, however, while he classes Apameia 
 and Laodicea among the greatest cities of Phrygia, ranks 
 Colosse only among the irokla-fjiaTa, as if its ancient greatness 
 had already been eclipsed by the prosperity of the neighbour- 
 ing towns. Ptolemy takes no notice of it. Laodicea and 
 Hierapolis, mentioned in the second chapter of the epistle, 
 were but a few miles from it, and all three in the year 60 
 A.D. suffered terribly from an earthquake.-^ Indeed, as Strabo 
 observes, the whole district or valley of the Maeander was 
 volcanic, and liable to earthquakes — evaeLo-To^. 
 
 In the middle ages, Colosse was known by the name of 
 Chonae, as is stated by Theophylact" in the commencement of 
 his commentary, and by the Byzantine Nicetas,^ who, after 
 his birth-place, surnamed himself Choniates. A village named 
 Chonas still remains, and the ruins of the ancient city have 
 been discovered and identified by the modern travellers 
 Hamilton and Arundell. The lofty range of Mount Cadmus 
 rises abruptly behind the village, presenting that remarkable 
 phenomenon * which seems to have given its second name to 
 the town, and was connected with one of its singular super- 
 stitions. The legend is, that, during a period of sudden and 
 resistless inundation, Michael, descending from heaven, opened 
 a chasm, into which the waters at once disappeared, and the 
 fact is, that a church was built in honour of the archangel, in 
 which he received Divine honours. This subsequent idolatr}^ 
 affords a curious illustration of the tendency which, under 
 the clause "worshipping of angels," the apostle formally 
 notices and rebukes in the 18th verse of the second chapter 
 of his epistle. 
 
 The other towns mentioned in the epistle are Laodicea and 
 Hierapolis. The former had often attached to it the appella- 
 tion — 57 iirl AvKu>, or 77 TT/ao? tco Avkw — that is, "Laodicea on 
 the Lycus," to distinguish it from other towns of similar name, 
 
 ' The statement of Orosius on this subject must not be taken as correct in all 
 points. Orosius, Hist. vii. 7. Winer, suh voce. Tacitus, Annal. xiv. 27. 
 Wieseler, Clironol. 455. 
 
 '^ niKis 'P^uyias eel KoXoirffa.] at vZv Xsyi/xivai XiJva;. 
 
 ^ Xuiias . . . ^ciXcii TO.; K.<iXa.ir(Tcc;. Chroji. p. 230, Bonn. 
 "* Herodotus, loc. cit. 
 
LAODICEA AND HIEEAPOLIS. XI 
 
 one in the same region, another forming the port of Aleppo, 
 and a third close to Mount Lebanon, Its original name was 
 Diospolis, and it received its later designation from Laodice, 
 the wife of Antiochus II., by whom it was patronized and 
 considerably enlarged. As the metropolis of the Greater 
 Phrygia, it was a city of some size, splendour, and trade, 
 covering several hills with its buildings, having a rich and 
 active population within it, and a fertile country round about 
 it, watered by the Lycus, and two other and smaller streams.^ 
 But the scourge of the place was the frequency and severity 
 of the earthquakes. On being devastated by the earthquake 
 referred to, it soon rose to its former grandeur — ^ropriis 
 opihus rcvaluit ;~ but after many a convulsion and overthrow, 
 the place was at length abandoned. Its ruins attest its 
 ancient grandeur. Eemains of two theatres may yet be seen, 
 with many of their marble seats ; temples may be traced by 
 their foundations ; but of the architecture and ornaments of 
 churches almost no trace can be found. " Vast silent walls," 
 about the purpose of which there is considerable doubt, are 
 striking objects amidst the desolation. The Turks now call 
 it Eski-hissa, or old castle, a translation of the common Greek 
 term applied to old sites, Paleo-castro.^ 
 
 East of Colosse, and to the north of Laodicea and visible 
 from its theatre, lay Hierapolis. It was famous for its mineral 
 springs, which produced beautiful stalactites, and all forms of 
 encrustations, and for the mephitic vapours which filled a 
 cavern on the hill-side.^ These peculiarities may have 
 originated its sacred name. It has been visited and described 
 by several travellers, such as Smith, Pococke, Chander, 
 Arundell, Leake, and Fellows. The remains of three Christian 
 churches are visible, and the theatre and gymnasium are 
 prominent among the ruins. Fellows has the following entry 
 in his Joicrnalf pp, 283, 284: — "Up the valley towards the 
 south-east stands Mount Cadmus, and I heard that at its foot, 
 about twelve miles from Laodicea, there were considerably 
 ruins, probably of the ancient city of Colossae. Descending 
 
 ^ Strabo speaks of ii rJis x'"i'^' aotTri, and adds also rut -ffoXiTuv rdn; ihrux- 
 wavTts, xii. 8, 16, Rev. iii. 17. 
 2 Tacitus, Annal. xiv. 27. ^ Kitto's Cyclop, suh voce. 
 
 * Called the Plutoneum. Strabo, lib. xiii. Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 29. 
 
 * Journal written during an Excursion to Asia Minor, London, 1839. 
 
Xll THE LITEEATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 rapidly into the flat and swampy valley of the Lycus, we 
 crossed in a diagonal line to the city of Hierapolis, six or 
 seven miles from Laodicea. My attention had been attracted 
 at twenty miles' distance by the singular appearance of its 
 hill, upon which there appeared to be perfectly white streams 
 poured down its sides ; and this peculiarity may have been 
 the attraction which first led to the city being built there. 
 The waters, which rise in copious streams from several deep 
 springs among the ruins, and are also to be found in small 
 rivulets for twenty miles around, are tepid, and to appearance 
 perfectly pure. This pure and warm water is no sooner 
 exposed to the air than it rapidly deposits a pearly white 
 substance upon the channel through which it flows, and on 
 every blade of grass in its course ; and thus, after filling its 
 bed, it flows over, leaving a substance which I can only com- 
 pare to the brain-coral, a kind of crust or feeble crystallization; 
 again it is flooded by a fresh stream, and again is formed 
 another perfectly white coat. The streams of water, thus 
 leaving a deposit by which they are choked up, and over 
 which they again flow, have raised the whole surface of the 
 ground fifteen or twenty feet, forming masses of this shelly 
 stone in ridges, which impede the paths, as well as conceal 
 and render it difficult to trace out the foundations of buildings. 
 The deposit has the appearance of a salt, but it is tasteless, 
 and to the touch is like the shell of a cuttle-fish. These 
 streams have flowed on for ages, and the hills are coated over 
 with their deposit of a filmy semi-transparent appearance, 
 looking like half-melted snow suddenly frozen." From this 
 whiteness of the southern and western declivities of the rocky 
 terrace on which the city stands, a whiteness consisting 
 probably of a deposit of carbonate of lime, it is now called 
 Pambuk-Kaleh, or Cotton Castle. 
 
 The inhabitants of Phrygia boasted of a high antiquity, and 
 the Egyptians confessed their own posteriority. Herodotus 
 tells at length the absurd story of the experiment of King 
 Psammetichus, by which was discovered the priority of the 
 Phrygian language.^ It is certain that they were inclined to 
 wild superstitions. Their religious worship was a species of 
 delirious fanaticism. The self-mutilated Corybantes were the 
 
 ' ii. 2. 
 
RELIGIOUS CHARACTERISTICS OF PHRYGIA. Xlll 
 
 priests of Cybele, who under the sacred paroxysm cut and 
 gashed themselves, as they reeled, whirled, and danced in 
 frantic glee to the braying of horns and clashing of cymbals, 
 while the forests and mountains echoed the wild clamour of 
 their orgies. The national propensity of the Phrygians was 
 towards the dark and mystical, and they were specially 
 attracted to any mania or extravagance that claimed a near 
 knowledge of, or a maddening fellowship with, the spirit- 
 world, Eavings and convulsions were the sure tokens to them 
 of inspiration. Deficiency of intellectual culture left them the 
 more the creatures of whim and impulse, so that the errors 
 mentioned by the apostle in his letter to the Colossians, and 
 characterized as " intruding into those things he hath not 
 seen, will-worship, and neglecting of the body," were pecu- 
 liarly fitted to such a temperament, and calculated to exert 
 a strong fascination upon it. The knowledge of this corre- 
 spondence between the errors propounded and the eccentric 
 propensities of the people, must have deepened the fears and 
 anxieties of the apostle, and led to that stern and thorough 
 exposure which characterizes the second chapter of the epistle. 
 We know that at a subsequent period similar delusions pre- 
 vailed in the province. The reveries of Montanus originated 
 there about the middle of the second century, and spread 
 rapidly and extensively. The leading features of Montanism 
 were a claim to ecstatic inspiration, the gift of prophecy, the 
 adoption of a transcendental code of morality, and the exercise 
 of an austere discipline. Its votaries were often named Kata- 
 phrygians, from the region of their popularity. The heresiarch 
 himself was born on the confines of Phrygia, and his first 
 disciples, as might be expected, were natives of that country, 
 nay, two of its towns were fondly supposed to be the New 
 Jerusalem predicted in the Apocalypse. 
 
 II. THE CHURCH IN COLOSSE. 
 
 But who originated the Christian community at Colosse ? 
 Was it the apostle himself, or some other missionary ? The 
 question has not yet been answered beyond dispute. The 
 early Greek commentator Theodoret held that the apostle 
 
XIV THE LITERATUKE OF THE EPISTLE, 
 
 planted the church, though he indicates that even in his day 
 there was a diversity of opinion on the subject. In later 
 times, Dr. Lardner has formally stated sixteen arguments in 
 defence of his belief, that the author of the epistle was the 
 founder of the church. Dr. Wiggers, in the Studien und 
 Kritiken for 1838, has espoused the theory of Lardner, and 
 it had been previously advocated by the reviewer of Junker's 
 Commentary, in the ninth volume of Eohr's Kritischer Pre- 
 diger-Bibliothek. In express opposition to these views, 
 Dr. Davidson has written at length with great candour and 
 precision.^ 
 
 The arguments for and against the Pauline origin of the 
 church are of two kinds — inferential and critical. 
 
 1. It is stated in the Acts of the Apostles, xvi. 6, that Paul 
 and his companion " had gone throughout Phrygia," and then, 
 xviii. 23, that "he went over all the country of Galatia and 
 Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples." There 
 arises a strong presumption from these accounts, that during 
 this first or second visit the apostle must surely have reached 
 Colosse. This is Theodoret's argument — that as Colosse was 
 in Phrygia, and Laodicea the capital of the province was in 
 its vicinity, it could scarcely happen that the apostle should 
 not visit both places'. Dr. Lardner endorses this judgment, 
 and says, " This argument alone appears to me to be con- 
 clusive." Now, it is beyond doubt that the apostle made 
 extensive journeys in the province of Phrygia, but it is no- 
 where stated that he was either in Colosse, or even near it. 
 In the first instance referred to, the route was from Antioch to 
 Syria, Cilicia, Derbe, Lystra, Phrygia, Galatia, Mysia, Troas, 
 and thence over to Europe. The record of the tour is vague. 
 True, indeed, Colosse lay on the great road from Iconium to 
 Ephesus, but the apostle did not visit Ephesus till after his 
 return from Europe, and then he sailed to it directly from the 
 port of Cenchrea, and after a brief visit took shipping again 
 for Caesarea. The term Phrygia, as has been remarked by 
 Conybeare and Howson (i. 291) — "was merely a geographical 
 expression, denoting a debatable country of doubtful extent." 
 The journey performed in reaching Mysia, for the purpose of 
 going into Bithynia, and then through Mysia down to the 
 
 ■^ Introduction^ vol. ii. p. 396, etc. 
 
JOUKNEYS OF THE APOSTLE. XV 
 
 coast at Troas, would seem to indicate that the apostle's route 
 lay greatly to the north of the city of Colosse. 
 
 With regard to the apostle's second journey, the language 
 is also indeterminate. Only it was a journey of visitation, 
 and if there was no previous sojourn in Colosse, and no 
 existing church in it, then the apostle was under no induce- 
 ment to turn his steps towards it. He came from Antioch 
 into Phrygia and Galatia, and thence down to Ephesus. If 
 he had taken the great road to the ^gean, through the valley 
 of the Maeander, he must have come near Colosse ; but the 
 probability is, that he passed again farther to the north — for 
 he passed, in fact, through " the upper coasts," or table land. 
 
 The apostle was for more than three years at Ephesus, and 
 we may be assured that evangelizing influence would be 
 diffused through the surrounding country. Qualified preachers 
 would visit the various districts, proclaim the gospel, and 
 gather together small communities. Probably by one of such 
 disciples might the truth be carried a hundred miles eastward 
 to Colosse, during the period " when all they which dwelt in 
 Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks." 
 There is nothing in the brief allusions in the Acts of the 
 Apostles to warrant the supposition that Paul himself had 
 preached in Colosse. His apostolic journeys never approached 
 it. We know not his proximate reasons for not visiting it, 
 nor can we tell from what or how many motives, apart from 
 direct revelation, his route, in any case, was originally chalked 
 out, and afterwards modified or departed from altogether. 
 The course we may venture to propose for him might, for 
 anything we can know, have presented insuperable difficulties, 
 even though we should be able to defend it by a reference to 
 geography and itineraries, based on the researches and dis- 
 coveries of modern travel. And we are sure that if, when in 
 Phrygia, the apostle did not visit Laodicea — its capital, it was 
 because there was more pressing work for him elsewhere, 
 while a higher power and wisdom were guiding him in all the 
 points of his busy and sublime career. 
 
 The second class of arguments in favour of the notion that 
 Paul himself founded the church in Colosse, is drawn from a 
 critical estimate of the general spirit and occasional sentiments 
 of the epistle itself 
 
XVI THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Dr. Lardner adduces the apostle's earnest belief, that the 
 Colossians rightly knew the truth (i. 6), as evidence that pro- 
 bably himself had taught them. But the inference is strained, 
 and the context disallows it ; for the proper translation is — 
 " which bringeth forth fruit, as it does also in you, from the 
 day ye heard it, and knew the grace of God in truth, just as 
 ye learned it from Epaphras." The proof based upon /cat, in 
 the phrase Kadcb'i koI ifidOeje airo 'Eira^pa, is not valid, for 
 the best MSS. exclude Kal, though Wiggers contends that the 
 theory we espouse and are now defending may have led to its 
 exclusion. See our commentary on the place. 
 
 Nor is there tangible evidence in the declaration made in 
 i. 8, where the apostle tells how Epaphras had declared to 
 him and his companions their love in the spirit. Even taking 
 Dr. Lardner's interpretation of the phrase as meaning their 
 affection for the apostle himself, how can it prove a prior and 
 personal acquaintance I For surely Christian love does not 
 depend on personal interview or recognition, else it would be 
 impossible for any one to love the whole " household of faith." 
 Nor can the presence of Epaphras at Eome, his intimacy with 
 the apostle, and the accounts which he brought of the spiritual 
 condition of the Colossian believers, be any presumption that 
 they were the apostle's own converts ; for who that has seen 
 the workings of his large heart would limit Paul's interest to 
 those churches gathered by his own preaching ? 
 
 The apostle, indeed, says to the Colossian church, — " If ye 
 continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved 
 away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and 
 which was preached to every creature which is under heaven ; 
 whereof I Paul am made a minister : who now rejoice in my 
 sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the 
 afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is 
 the church ; whereof I am made a minister, according to the 
 dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fuliil the 
 word of God." But no part of this language will warrant the 
 inference which some would put upon it. He does not say 
 that he had ever preached to the Colossians, he only says that 
 he was suffering for them. And those sufferings arose purely 
 from his being the apostle of the Gentiles, as indeed he 
 indicates in a subsequent clause. There he intimates to them 
 
LARDNERS ARGUMENT. ' xvii 
 
 that the persecutions which harassed him arose from his 
 special relation to the Gentile churches. In no other sense 
 than in this general one, could he be suffering for the 
 Colossians, for personally they were in no way instrumental 
 in causing his incarceration and appeal. The charges against 
 him involved nothing said or done at Colosse, the church there 
 was not implicated in the least degree. But for their evan- 
 gelical liberty and that of all the churches of heathendom the 
 apostle v/as bound in fetters. 
 
 No stress can be laid on the use of the word aireifii, in 
 ii. 5, though Lardner, and Wiggers after him, appeal to it, as 
 implying that the apostle had once been present in Colosse. 
 His language simply is, — " For though I be absent in the 
 flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding 
 your order, and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ." 
 The apostle, however, does not say I am novj absent, as if he 
 referred by such a contrast to a previous period. The con- 
 trast is of another nature. It is such an absence as brings out 
 the idea of presence in spirit — " I am away from you, and 
 yet I am with you — personally at a great distance, but still 
 in spirit in the very midst of you." 
 
 It is also said, iii. 16, — "Let the word of Christ dwell in 
 you richly in all wisdom ; teaching and admonishing one 
 another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing 
 with grace in your hearts to the Lord." It puzzles us to 
 understand how Dr. Lardner could extract from this admoni- 
 tion any proof " that the Colossians were endued with 
 spiritual gifts." The descriptive counsel refers not to any 
 extraordinary endowment, nor yet to the composition of sacred 
 melodies ; but merely to the chanting of them. That 
 "grace" which was in their hearts is the gift of God to all 
 believers. 
 
 Again, if, as we have seen, the record of the affection which 
 the Colossian believers bore to the apostle be no evidence 
 of personal intimacy, neither can any " full proof " of it be 
 discovered in the brief note — "all my state shall Tychicus 
 declare unto you." If, as the apostle of the Gentiles, Paul 
 encountered such persecutions, would not they for whom he 
 so nobly suffered be deeply interested in him, and would not 
 he respond to such natural anxiety, and inform them, through 
 
 B 
 
XVm THE LITEEATUKE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Tychicus, of many things with which he did not choose to 
 cumber an epistle ? 
 
 The salutations sent by him to Colosse are neither in 
 number nor familiarity any additional argument, and certainly 
 do not bear out Lardner's affirmation, that " Paul was well 
 acquainted with the state of the churches in Colosse and 
 Laodicea." For might not the names of the six men who 
 send their Christian greetings be well known to the Colos- 
 sians ? The apostle might know that Nymphas had a church 
 in his house without his ever being in it himself; and being 
 ' such an one as Paul the aged," he surely needed not the 
 formality of a personal introduction to Archippus, in order 
 to take the liberty of sending him the brief and emphatic 
 charge — " Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received 
 in the Lord, that thou fulfil it." On the other hand, how 
 many, various, tender, and special are his salutations sent to 
 the church in Ptome, where he had never been ! 
 
 Dr. Lardner argues, again, for a personal intimacy from Col. 
 iv. 3, 4, a passage which contains the apostle's earnest request 
 for the prayers of the Colossian believers, and that they would 
 remember his bonds ; but Dr. Lardner also supplies the answer 
 himself, when he admits that " such demands may be made 
 of strangers." Nor can his theory be sustained by his appeal 
 to the Epistle to Philemon. Philemon was a convert of the 
 apostle's own, but Dr. Lardner candidly allows that his con- 
 version, though " it might as well have been done at home," 
 yet "might have been done at some other place." It is 
 certainly a very slender ground of argument which Wiggers 
 adopts, when he appeals to the conjunction of Timothy's name 
 with the apostle's in the inscription of the epistle. For surely 
 as a special companion of the apostle, and engaged so often 
 in missionary work and travel, Timothy must have been well 
 known at Colosse ; and, as Dr. Davidson well remarks, "among 
 the various disciples of the apostle who were at Colosse, it is 
 not improbable that Timothy had a part in instructing the 
 church." Indeed, some regard him as probably its founder. 
 
 But, lastly, a principal ground of dispute is the passage 
 occurring in Col. ii. 1, 2, — "For 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 ; that 
 
THEODORET S AKGUMENT. xix 
 
 their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, 
 and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to 
 the acknowledgment of the mystery of God, and of the 
 Father, and of Christ." Theodoret based his theory upon 
 one interpretation of the words. " Some," says he, " are of 
 the opinion, that when the divine apostle wrote this epistle, 
 he had not seen the Colossians. And they attempt to support 
 their arguments by those words. . . . But they should reflect, 
 that the meaning of the words is this — I have not only a 
 concern for you, but I have likewise great concern for those 
 who have not seen me.^ And if he is not understood in this 
 sense, he expresses no concern for those who had seen him 
 and been taught by him." That is to say, Theodoret supposes 
 two classes of persons to be referred to — the Colossians and 
 Laodiceans who had seen the apostle's face, and another 
 indiscriminate class who had never enjoyed his personal 
 ministry. The words may of themselves bear such an 
 interpretation. But it is objectionable on various grounds. 
 The adjective oaoc may refer back to the persons mentioned, 
 and may thus introduce a common characteristic — for you 
 and them in Laodicea, and indeed not only you, but all in the 
 same category, who have never seen my face in the flesh. 
 The clause — " and for as many as have not seen my face in 
 the flesh," has no harmonious connection, if it stand so dis- 
 joined from the previous clause as to point out in sharp 
 contrast other believing communities. With this exegesis one 
 might infer from the language of the following verses, that all 
 who had not seen the apostle's face in the flesh were beset 
 with the same dangers as the church in Colosse. For the 
 virtual prayer is, that they might be fortified against that false 
 philosophy which was raising its head in Phrygia, by the full- 
 assured understanding of that gospel in which are deposited 
 " all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." But surely 
 among the many churches who had not seen Paul, there 
 must have been many to whom the prayer in its specialty 
 was not and could not be adapted, and for whom this "con- 
 flict " was not necessary. That " conflict " was excited by the 
 danger which menaced Colosse ; but all the churches unvisited 
 by the apostle could not be in similar jeopardy, so as to create 
 
 ^"Oti oh //.ovev u/nuv aXXa xa.) ruv fitiiivu rihaf^'ivuv f^t rroyxhy £%w (p^ovTiia, 
 
XX THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 a similar solicitude and prayer. It is true that the care of 
 all the churches came upon him daily, and all of them 
 shared in his intense and prayerful anxiety. Yet it was his 
 pride (if the expression may be pardoned) to originate Chris- 
 tian societies. He thus speaks — "Not boasting of things 
 without our measure, that is, of other men's labours ;"^ " Yea," 
 says he again, " so have I strived to preach the gospel, not 
 where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another 
 man's foundation." ^ This distinction, so boldly drawn by 
 the apostle, brought the churches founded by himself into a 
 very special relationship with him. Is it at all likely, then, 
 that if he had founded the churches of Colosse and Laodicea, 
 and had occasion to tell them what a conflict he had for them, 
 he would modify and weaken the statement, by adding, that 
 his feeling for them was quite the same with that he enter- 
 tained for churches with which he had never had any personal 
 connection ? Would not the sentiment just quoted from the 
 epistles to Eome and Corintli be somewhat at variance with 
 that supposed to be so expressed to Colosse ? Would it have 
 been a source of peculiar comfort to the churches of Colosse 
 and Laodicea, if Paul had founded them, to tell them, tliat 
 notwithstanding his personal intimacy with them and their 
 imminent danger, they were not a whit nearer his heart than 
 the remotest Christian community of which he had but the 
 slightest intelligence ? The apostle possessed too much of our 
 common nature thus to dissipate his friendships in vagueness, 
 and he had too much knowledge of human nature to attempt 
 to create a response to his own anxieties by so expressing 
 himself. No, he had not visited these churches ; but special 
 circumstances gave him a tender interest in them. His 
 peculiar interest in the churches planted by himself might be 
 matter of notoriety in the district, and they of Colosse and 
 Laodicea might be disposed to feel that they had not such a 
 claim on the apostle as the churches of Galatia in their 
 vicinity. But the crisis which had occurred roused the 
 apostle to a sense of their danger ; that danger gave them a 
 warm place in his bosom, and to assure them of this, he 
 declares his anxiety that they knew what a conflict he had 
 for them, and for all around them, indeed, as many as had 
 1 2 Cor. X. 15. " Rom. xv. 20. 
 
CHURCH IN COLOSSE NOT FOUNDED BY PAUL. xxi 
 
 not seen his face in the flesh. Tlie reference in o<joi is 
 plainly to their own neighbourhood, particularly including 
 Hierapolis, which is afterwards mentioned, and which might 
 be menaced by the same form of error. They had not 
 enjoyed his teaching, and they had the more need of his 
 prayers. If he had seen them in the flesh he might have 
 warned them ; or, as in the case of Ephesus, uttered his 
 presentiment of danger, aud endeavoured to fortify them 
 against it. The translation of Wiggers, " also for them, to 
 wit in Colosse and Laodicea, who have not seen my face 
 in the flesh," is too restrictive, and takes for granted that 
 Paul had been in both those places, but had not been brought 
 into personal contact with all the members of the churches. 
 We give the words a wider significance. We doubt not that 
 several members of those churches may have seen the apostle 
 during his long stay at Ephesus. The apostle, however, does 
 not contrast them with others who had not enjoyed the same 
 precious opportunity. He speaks not to individiials but to 
 communities, and classes with them others around them 
 similarly circumstanced. In the following verse, he mentions 
 all the parties in the third person, as if they all stood in the 
 same category. 
 
 It is also to be specially observed that the apostle, though 
 he combats error, never refers to his own personal teaching, or 
 hints at what himself had delivered on these subjects of con- 
 troversy at Colosse. Tliough the introduction of the gospel 
 seems to be referred to, the apostle in no sense or shape con- 
 nects it with himself. Very different is his style in the other 
 epistles when he recalls the scenes and circumstances in which 
 the churches had been planted or watered by his personal 
 ministrations. 
 
 The probability is that the church in Colosse was founded by 
 Epaphras, of whom the apostle says, "who is for you a faithful 
 minister of Christ;" and of whom he also testifies : " Epaphras, 
 who is one of you, a servant of Christ, saluteth you, always 
 labouring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand 
 perfect and complete in all the will of God. Eor I bear 
 him record, that he hath a great zeal for you, and them that 
 are in Laodicea, and them in Hierapolis." 
 
 In conclusion, the view which we have advocated is gene- 
 
xxii THE LITEKATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 rally that of the writers of Introduction, with the exception 
 of Schott, Borger, and Neudecker ; and with the exception of 
 Theodoret, Macknight, Adam Clarke, Barnes, and Koch on 
 Pliilemon, it is also the view of the great body of commen- 
 tators upon the epistle, such as Calvin, Suicer, Flatt, Bahr, 
 Huther, De Wette, Junker, Steiger, Olshausen, Bohmer, 
 Meyer, Schrader, Bloomfield, and Baumgarten-Crusius. 
 
 III. THE GENUINENESS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 In the early church the genuineness of this epistle was 
 universally acknowledged. No misconception of its contents 
 or prejudice against them, led to any suspicions about its 
 authorship. No inquisitive spirit found anything in it un- 
 worthy of the apostle, or unlike his usual modes of thought 
 and style. No heretic seems to have been bold enough to 
 exclude it from his canon, though in the first centuries it must 
 have often confronted some prevalent forms of error and super- 
 stition. Eusebius therefore placed it among the 'OfioXoyov- 
 fxeva, or books which were confessed on all sides to be of 
 apostolical origin. Tertullian has quoted this epistle about 
 thirty times, and in such a way as clearly to evince his belief 
 in its Pauline origin. The nineteenth chapter of his fifth book 
 against Marcion, is a summary of its contents, so far as they 
 served his polemical purpose.^ His great authority throughout 
 is Paul, whom he simply names aiwstohis. 
 
 At a prior date, Clement of Alexandria has also many 
 allusions to it. For example, in the sixth book of his Stromata, 
 after maintaining that Paul does not condemn all philosophy, 
 he quotes Col. ii. 8, with the preface — oiaavTcot; apa kol Toh 
 KoXaaaaevai.^ In the fourth book of the same Miscellany 
 lie quotes that section of this epistle^ which enjoins the duties 
 of domestic life, and ascribes it to Paul, who was the prime 
 authority to him as to Tertullian. It is found also in the 
 anonymous canon publislied by Muratori,* — a document of 
 the beginning of the third century. The Syrian churches 
 
 ^ Opera, ed. Oeliler, vol. ii. p. 330, etc. 
 
 - Opera, p. 645, eci. Colonife, 1688. 
 
 •'' Do. p. 499. 
 
 * Antiq. Ital, Med. Mvi, torn. iii. p. 854. 
 
 i 
 
PROOFS FKOM THE FATHERS. XXlll 
 
 had it in their collection, as is evident from the old Syrian 
 translation. Origen, in the eighth chapter of the fifth book 
 of his reply to Celsus, has a quotation from Col. ii. 18, 19, 
 prefaced by the remark — irapa he t&5 Havkw aKpi^M<; ra 
 'lovSaicov TracSevOevTL . . . roiavr iv rfj Trpo? KoXo(Tcrae2<i 
 XeXeKTai} 
 
 In Justin's dialogue with Trypho, no less than four times 
 is Col. i. 15, 16 referred to or quoted, the point of the 
 quotation being the term TrpcorcroKo^;.'' The same term is 
 also cited by Theophilus ^ of Antioch, who wrote toward the 
 latter end of the second century, and is found in his three 
 books to Autolycus. 
 
 Many distinct and lengthened quotations are found in 
 Irenaeus, who flourished about the same period as Theophilus.* 
 Thus, in the third chapter of his first book Against 
 Heresies, he says the following things are spoken plainly by 
 Paul — vTTo Tov HavXov he <^avepoi<i, and he cites first Col. iii. 
 11, and then Col. ii. 9. Or, again, the quotation of Col. i. 
 21, 22, is introduced with the words — et propter hoc apostolus 
 in epistola quae est ad Colosscnses ait. Indisputable citations 
 or allusions cannot be brought from the apostolical Fathers. 
 Marcion included the book in his canon, giving it the eighth 
 place in his catalogue. There can be no doubt at all of the 
 unanimous opinion of the primitive church on the subject ; in 
 Italy, Africa, Syria, Asia Minor, and Egypt, there was no 
 conflicting testimony. 
 
 Through the intervening centuries, and up to a very recent 
 period, the genuineness of the epistle was also acknowledged 
 to be beyond dispute. Indeed, when Bahr wrote his 
 commentary on it in 1832, he says, in his Introduction, "it 
 has been hitherto universally acknowledged, and has been 
 called in question by nobody, not even by De Wette." A 
 few years later, however, Germany began to present an 
 exception. Schrader, in his note on Col. iv. 10, took occasion, 
 from the message sent by the apostle about Mark, to find a 
 difficulty, and out of it to raise a suspicion that the epistle 
 
 1 P. 236, ed. Spencer, Cantab. 1677. 
 
 2 Opera, ed. Otto, vol. ii. p. 286, 336, 418, 452. 
 ' Lib. ii. p. 100, ed. Coloniae, 1686. 
 
 * Adver. Haereses. Opera, vol. i. p. 41, ed. Stieren, 1853. Do. p. 756. 
 
XXIV THE LITERATUEE OF THE EPISTLE, 
 
 might not be Paul's, as it wants the individuality found in 
 some other of his epistolary compositions.^ Mayerhoff, in 
 1838, made a bold and formal assault, and he has been fol- 
 lowed up by Baur and his disciple Schwegler. Mayerhoff's '^ 
 posthumous treatise, edited by his brother, is certainly far 
 from being conclusive. Proceeding on very vague and 
 unsatisfactory principles, it abounds with a somewhat 
 mechanical selection of words and phrases, picks out uTra^ 
 Xeyo/xeva, and gives prominence to what are reckoned un- 
 Pauline forms of expression and thought. 
 
 But the course of criticism is thoroughly defective. For 
 if the apostle have a special end in view, he must employ 
 special diction. If that end be peculiar, the style must 
 necessarily share in the peculiarity. If in one epistle he 
 explain his system and in another defend it, the expository 
 style may surely be expected to differ from the polemical style. 
 If in one composition he combats one form of error, and one 
 set of adversaries, can you anticipate identical phraseology in 
 another letter in which he assaults a very different shape of 
 heresy, patronized by a wholly diverse band of opponents ? 
 Individuality would be lost in proportion to such sameness, 
 and the absence of it would be the surest proof of spuriousness. 
 No sound critic would test the style of Colossians by that of 
 1st Thessalonians, or throw suspicion on the former because 
 it does not reveal the same aspects of thought and allusion. 
 Nor would he place it side by side with Galatians, and 
 roughly say that both are polemical, and that therefore the 
 same topics of controversy and trains of thought should be 
 found in both. Who would reject 1st Corinthians because 
 the favourite and almost essential term acoTTjpia is not to be 
 found in it, or throw Philippians out of the canon because 
 words so significant and Pauline as crco^eiv and KoKetv do not 
 occur in it ? 
 
 Mayerhoff's first argument is that of lexical difference, and 
 he instances the want of crto^a) and its derivatives, and of 
 KoXeco and its derivatives used with reference to the Divine 
 kingdom. But in this epistle the apostle has no occasion to 
 
 ^ Der Apostd Paulu.% vol. iv. p. 176, 1836. 
 
 '^ Der Brief an die Colos-^er, mit vornehmlicher Beriicksichtigung der drei 
 Pastoralbriefe ; kritisch gepriift von Dr. Ernst Theodor Mayerhotf, Berlin, 1838. 
 
MAYERHOFFS OBJECTIONS. XXV 
 
 employ these terms, for his primary object is not to expound 
 salvation or our calling to it, but to defend the personal and 
 official glory of its great author and finisher — Christ. No 
 wonder that the expressive term XpiaT6<; occurs by itself at 
 least twenty times in the epistle. Again, the words v6fio<; 
 and TTiara do not occupy a prominent place ; and no wonder, 
 for the object of the writer is not, as in Eomans and Galatians, 
 to explain the nature and relations of faith and law. " The 
 particle yap," says Mayerhoff, " occurs only six times ; but 
 in PhilijDpians seventeen, and in Eomans one hundred and 
 fifty times." But surely, if the adverb be so prominent a 
 feature of the apostle's other writings, he must be a very 
 bungling forger who would not plentifully sprinkle his pages 
 with it. An imitator would not venture a copy with so few 
 instances of the characteristic yap. The use of such a term 
 would rather lead a forger to multiplication, till its very 
 frequency detected him. We agree with Olshausen, who says, 
 in the first section of the Introduction to his Commentary, 
 " he that can take account of such mere accidents, and that 
 so seriously (crnstlich), that he reckons how often yap occurs 
 in each epistle, decides his own incapacity for judging on 
 similarity and dilference of style." In opposition to the 
 scantiness of <ydp, Mayerhoff produces the frequency of eV, 
 which occurs in the first two chapters sixty times ; and in 
 the whole Epistle to the Philippians only fifty times. But 
 would an impostor hazard such a profusion of this mono- 
 syllable ? Besides, a very large number of the instances refer 
 formally or by implication to union with Christ — a darling 
 idea of the apostle, and one which in this epistle he is so 
 naturally led to insert. When the apostle combats a system 
 of proud and false philosophy, need we wonder at the recur- 
 rence of yvMo-iq, or the emphatic form eirLyvwaL'i 1 
 
 And then as to aira^ Xeyofieva. Where now should one 
 expect them ? Certainly when a writer is busied with some 
 imusual theme. And so it is in Colossians. Out of above 
 thirty distinct uttu^ Xeyofieva which we have noted in the 
 course of our study of this epistle, no less than eighteen occur 
 in the second chapter, where the novel form of error is dis- 
 cussed and refuted, and the majority of them are characteristic 
 terms. Such are the distinctive words, indavo\oy[a, (piXo- 
 
XXVI THE LITKRATUKE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 (TO<pia, ')(eLpo>ypa<^ov, 6eoTT]<t, crcofjLarLKco<;, eiprjvoTroLeo), iOeXo- 
 OprjaKeia, vov/xT)via, aTro'^prjai';, a^eihia, ifk'qcT p,ovr} ; with other 
 terms associated with them, as arepew/jLa, d7riKSvai<i, avXajw- 
 <yo)V, KaTa^pa/Sevco, 7rpoar]\docra<;, Boy/xaTi^o), i/ji/3ar€V(i}. Now, 
 if the apostle be under the necessity of describing a system 
 of error which he has described nowhere else, may we not 
 expect words which occur nowhere else, or must his free spirit 
 limit itself to vocables already employed by him on former 
 occasions ? Is the new conception to be deprived of a new 
 expression ? Must the apostle, for the purpose of authenti- 
 cating his writings, bind himself to a meagre and worn-out 
 vocabulary ? Shall we refuse to this master of language what 
 we freely yield to every other author ? If in a writing of 
 one age we discover some terms which belonged to an earlier 
 one, but had faded into disuse, or some which came into 
 currency only during a later epoch, we justly look upon it 
 with suspicion. But every author has surely liberty to range 
 among the terms of his own period, and to employ the most 
 fitting of them to embody his thoughts. If he never wrote 
 so before, you infer that he never thought so before. If 
 Mayerhoff had set himself to describe the symbols of the 
 Apocalypse, he must have used many phrases not found in 
 this treatise, and therefore with equal propriety, and on the 
 same evidence, might some reviewer argue that the author of 
 such a production could not be the author of this attack on 
 the genuineness of the Epistle to the Colossians and the three 
 pastoral epistles. 
 
 Nor is there any greater force in Mayerhoff's objections, 
 based on grammatical differences. Of his charge of tautology 
 we find no proof. When he stumbles on phrases very like 
 the apostle's usual style, he affirms they are not really resem- 
 blances at all. He complains of the absence of anakolutha; 
 and when he does meet them, he detects something wrong or 
 un-Pauline in them. Some connective particles are absent in 
 this epistle ; but dpa, one of them referred to by him, is not 
 found in Philippians, nor does Bco, another of them, occur in 
 Galatians ; while ov'^t, which occurs fourteen times in 1 st 
 Corinthians, is not found in Philippians, nor here, nor in 
 Galatians. On such irregularities no argument can be 
 founded. Thus, the particle re, which occurs often in 
 
ACCIDENTAL IRREGULARITIES NO OBJECTION. XXVll 
 
 Eomans, is found neither in Galatians nor 1st Thessalonians. 
 The conjunction iav, occurring twenty times in Eomans, is 
 found forty -five times in 1st Corinthians, but is absent from 
 I'hilippians ; and, again, ij is met with fifty-two times in 1st 
 Corinthians, but only twice in Philippians.^ 
 
 There is nothing peculiar in the forms of construction 
 adduced by Mayerhoff. He next accuses the writer of this 
 epistle of hunting after synonyms, but the examples which he 
 selects are in no case synonymous.^ Who but IMayerhoff 
 would lay any stress on the various diction in the formula of 
 salutation ? If the apostle, in such a prominent place, had 
 been in the habit of using a uniform formula, then the least 
 cunning of impostors would have been sure to copy it with 
 slavish correctness, 
 
 Not less futile are Mayerhoff's criticisms on differences of 
 idea or expression to be found in the epistle. He discovers a 
 host of parallel repetitions, which in reality are either not re- 
 petitious at all, or repetitions for an avowed object. Col. i. 1, 
 9, 10, 13, 14, 18, etc. 
 
 Another objection, based on a gross misconception, takes up 
 the very different aspect under which the vofio^i is viewed 
 here, from the representations given of it in the other epistles. 
 
 ^ Huther, Commentar, p. 423. 
 
 ^ We present those which he has given out of the first and third chapters, and 
 we refer to the following exposition for the distinctive meaning of the terms : — 
 I., 6. xcc^'Ta'fo^oijf/ivov x.ai ctv%avofii)io\i — L, 6. ottouiiv xai i^iyivao'Kiiv — I., 7. o'uvoouXos 
 et oiaKDVos — I., 9. •^^fKriu^o/j.ivoi xai aiTovfiivai — iv •Xtt,ay\ ffo(pla xa) avAffit — I., 10. 
 xa^'TTo^po^ouvri; xaci a.li,avaf/.ivoi — I., 11. il; -xaaai 'j'X'o//,otriv xai fiax^o^v/aiav — I., 18. 
 a-^X^ et TocdTOTOxos vtuv tixeut — L, 21. v//.ag, Tori ovtus aTriXXoT^iufiii/Du; xa.) 
 '^X^?""' — !•> 22. ctyiov; xa] a/jt,ik/fi/>v; xai aviyxXnTov; — I., 23. Ti6if/,iXiu[iivoi xai 
 ii^aioi xa) fjt,ri fiiTaxivov/iivoi — I., 24. Ta6rif/.aTa et 6x'i\pii; — I., 26. ocro tuv aliovav 
 xa) a-ro Tuv yiviut — I., 28. ^ovhravvns -ravra avS^uvov xa) ^iSdirxovTis Tavra 
 avf^wrov — III., 2. r« ava l^nnln, to, avu (p^oviin — III., 5. To^viia et axafa^crla 
 — "Xa^oi et iTi^vftia xaxri — III., 8. l^yh xa) SvfyLos — (iXaaipri/xia et alff^^oXoyia — 
 III., 10. i)iOu(rdfji.ivt)i TOv »£«» (avP ^oiTom) xa) dvaxaitii>if^.ivov — III., 12. ixXixro) rov 
 6ioZ aymi xa) fiyaTti/^ivoi — (rvrXdyx»a olxTi^fioZ et ;^;j>!»'to7'»); — TaTuvoffoiruvti et 
 •JT^aoTr,; — //.ax^o^tifcia et dvix,''f-^'">' dXXriXuv — III., 16. iv "xdan trof)ia ^iSdtrxovTis xa) 
 
 vovhTovfTis — \]/aX/u.oTs, vf/.vo7;, tula7i, etc. — Mayerhoff", pp. 35, 36. Hiither, in 
 reply, presents the following similarities out of Philippians i. : — y. 3. iv) ^a<r>» 
 
 Tfi f/,viia hfiut — — £v ■rairri Ss^CE/ fJ^ou vTi^ hfJLZv t>iv iivfiv •niovf/.itios ; V. 7. iv rv 
 
 axoXoyia xa) fiifiaiuini rov luayyiX'tov ; V. 9. £v iTiytuffu xa) •sdain alir^tiffii ; V. 10. 
 ilXixBdViTs xa) d-r^oa-xo-rci ; v. 11. si; 5o|av xa) 'i-raivov 6iov ', V. 15. oia (pSotov xa) 
 sj/v ; V. 20. Kara r-/iv k-xoxa^ahoxiai xa) iXTila fiou ; V. 24. fittai xa) trvAfra^afi.iiu ; 
 V. 25. si; rh* Vf/.aJv T^oxoThv xa) ;^«jav rij; Tiirriu;. — Huther, pp. 427, 428. 
 
XXVIU THE LITER ATUEE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Now, not to say that v6fio<i does not occur in this epistle at 
 all, it may be relied, that it is not law as a Divine institute 
 which is here referred to, or the law which is spoken of so 
 often in the Epistle to the Eomans. What is spoken of here 
 is the ceremonial law, which was abrogated by being fulfilled 
 in the death of Christ, and not the moral law, which is as 
 immutable as the legislator. What total ignorance of the 
 object of the apostle to say, that because he speaks of " ele- 
 ments of the world," " commandments and doctrines of men," 
 and " traditions of men," he gives these names to the Divine 
 law, and then to infer that such doctrine cannot be Paul's, since 
 he always looks upon the law as Divine, holy, and spiritual ! 
 It is surely one thing to speak thus of the law, and quite 
 another thing to reprobate human additions to it. 
 
 There is no doubt, as Mayerhoff says, that in Colossians 
 some acts, which are often ascribed to Christ, are ascribed to 
 God ; but such a variation not being confined to the epistle 
 is no mark of un- Pauline peculiarity. And lastly, Mayerhoff's 
 objection to its Christology cannot be sustained. For the 
 form which it has assumed has most evidently a reference to 
 such shapes of error as were propounded at Colosse, and the 
 terms which the errorists used may have been selected by the 
 apostle and sanctified by their legitimate application to the 
 Divine Eedeemer. Baur^ and Schwegler^ also adduce the 
 doctrine of Christ's pre-existence taught in Ephesians and 
 Colossians, as proof that the two epistles were not written 
 by Paul. The objection carries its own refutation. 
 
 In fact this whole process of assault is one of capricious sub- 
 jectivity. One writer decides that the Epistle to the Ephesians 
 is spurious, because it is only a verbose expansion of that to 
 the Colossians ; and another, with equal taste and correctness, 
 affirms that the Epistle to the Colossians is spurious, because 
 it is an unskilful abstract of that to the Ephesians ; Mdiile, 
 according to the judgment of Baur, both epistles must stand 
 or fall together. 
 
 To gain his purpose, Mayerhoff has compared throughout 
 
 the two Epistles of Colossians and Ephesians. But surely the 
 
 real similarity which they present may be easily accounted 
 
 for, — that similarity being found chiefly in the concluding 
 
 ' Der Apostel Paulun, p. 422. * Nachap. Zf.lt. ii. p. 289. 
 
COMPARISON OF THE TWO EPISTLES. Xxix 
 
 and practical portions. Schneckenburger has pronounced 
 this similarity — a similarity in unimportant things — to be 
 " a mechanical use of materials." But the one epistle is very 
 far from being a copy of the other. There is a distinctness of 
 aim with occasional identity of thought. The great body of 
 each epistle is different, nor do they slavishly agree even in 
 what may be termed commonplaces. There is, indeed, far 
 less similarity than is commonly supposed — all that is special 
 about each of them is wholly different, and even in the para- 
 graphs where there is similarity, there is seldom or never 
 sameness, some new turn being mingled with the thought, or 
 some new edge being given to the admonition. As is noticed 
 in our Commentary, even where the apostle addresses spouses, 
 children, and slaves, and refers to the same duties, there is 
 yet variety in the form and reasons of advice. The one letter 
 is general, the other is special ; the one is didactic, the other 
 controversial. The one presents truth in itself, the other 
 developes the truth in conflict with parallel error. And there 
 is no servile imitation, no want of life and freshness. 
 
 Mayerhoff's last argument is based on the date of the errors 
 which he imagines to be refuted in this epistle. He holds that 
 the heresy of Cerinthus is aimed at and exposed by the writer, 
 and he infers that as the false doctrine of Cerinthus was not 
 developed till after the apostle's time, therefore the apostle 
 could not be the writer. The truth of his chronolocrical state- 
 ment it is impossible for him to prove. It would seem that 
 Cerinthus was soon after this in Ephesus, and in antagonism 
 with the Apostle John ; so that, even though it could be 
 proved that Cerinthus was the person the writer had in his 
 eye, it would not follow that he could not be the apostle of 
 the Gentiles. Mayerhoff's view of the nature of the false 
 doctrines condemned is not very different from our own, but 
 there is no necessity to identify them thus with Cerinthus, 
 and then to assign his era to post-Pauline times. Olshausen 
 says that Cerinthus may have been by this time in Colosse, 
 though he adds, that he could hardly have that influence 
 which should mark him out as the leader of a formidable 
 party. 
 
 Baur and Schwegler subscribe to not a few of Mayerhoff's 
 critical objections based upon the style of the epistle. But 
 
XXX THE LITERATUKE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Baiir holds it to have had its origin in the Gnosticism of the 
 second century. Mayerhoff admits that Baumgarten has 
 shown that such a hypothesis is untenable against the pastoral 
 epistles, though he himself is bold enough to attack them on 
 other grounds. But the Gnosticism of the second century iu 
 its theosophy and angelology presupposes, in fact, the existence 
 of those apostolic documents. The citations from Hippolytus 
 have sadly perplexed those critics of Tubingen — as they show- 
 that books of the New Testament are quoted by him fully half 
 a century before those German scholars allowed their existence. 
 (See our Introduction to Commentary on Ephesians, p. xlv.) 
 
 The attacks on this epistle are therefore of no formidable 
 nature, and the opinion of the c?mrch of Christ, in so many 
 countries and for so many centuries, may be acquiesced in 
 without hesitation. 
 
 IV. THE FALSE TEACHERS IX COLOSSE. 
 
 There has been no small amount of erudition and research 
 expended upon the question, as to what party or parties in 
 Colosse held the errors condemned by the apostle. The 
 attempt has often been made to identify these errorists with 
 some formed and well-known sect. But there is not sufficient 
 foundation for such minuteness. All that we know of the 
 false teachers is contained in the few and brief allusions to 
 their heresies. And these allusions are not systematically 
 given as an analysis of their system, but only as occasion 
 required, and for the purposes of confirming the opposite 
 truths. The probability is, that the false teachers had at that 
 period no fully developed system — that they held only a few 
 prominent tenets, such as those which the apostle condemns ; 
 and that they were rather the exponents of certain prevailing 
 tendencies, than the originators of a defined and formal heresy. 
 They were thrown up by the current, and they indicated at 
 once its direction and its strength. Many ages in the church 
 have exhibited a similar phenomenon, when the errors which 
 certain men promulgate appear, from their seductive power 
 and immediate success, to be but the expression of those 
 sentiments which had already taken a deep and latent hold of 
 the general mind. 
 
EEROrJSTS IN' COLOSSE, NOT JEWS. XXXI 
 
 The errors in Colosse rose witliin the church, and were 
 produced by a combination of influences. Had they grown up 
 without the church, they would have appeared with a hostile 
 front, inviting an instant and a sturdy resistance. If Jew 
 or heathen had announced his creed, none would have listened 
 to it, save as to the challenge of an avowed enemy. It is 
 only when error is nursed in the bosom of the church itself, 
 not like a poisonous weed transplanted from the desert, but 
 like the tares among the wheat, that truth is in the greatest 
 danger. If we reflect for a moment on the mental tendencies 
 of those early times, as seen both in the Phrygian tempera- 
 ment and in the Jewish characteristics ; if we remember how 
 strongly the Oriental spirit was leavened with the desire to 
 enter the spirit-world by theosophic speculation, and attain 
 to sanctity by ascetic penance, we need not wonder at the 
 indications of error contained in the epistle to the church 
 in Colosse. 
 
 Our inference therefore is, that the theory which holds that 
 those false teachers were Jews without even a profession of 
 Christianity, is utterly untenable. The arguments of Eichhorn,^ 
 Schultess, and Schoettgen, in vindication of this view, are very 
 unsatisfactory. Nowhere in the epistle are they branded as 
 unbelievers, or spoken of as unconverted antagonists of the 
 gospel. Their error was not in denyin^^, but in dethroning 
 Christ — not in refusing, but in undervaluing his death, and in 
 seeking peace and purity by means of ceremonial distinctions 
 and rigid mortifications. Such a nimbus of external sanctitj'' 
 as Eichhorn ascribes to them would not have dazzled the 
 Colossians, if it had surrounded a Jewish brow; nor would ritual 
 observances have possessed any seductive power, if inculcated 
 by Jewish doctors, as Schoettgen names them. ISTeither 
 Pharisaic nor Essenic rigorists would have been spoken of by 
 the apostle in the style in which he describes the false teachers 
 at Colosse. Stern denunciations would have been heaped 
 upon them as the rejecters of the Messiah, and disturbers of 
 the church. But the errors promulgated in Colosse were 
 wrapt up with important truths, and were therefore possessed 
 of dangerous attractions. They were n ot a refutation of the 
 gospel, but a sublimation of it. The Colossian errorists did 
 
 ' EinUlt. vol iii. p. 288. 
 
XXXU THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 not wish to subvert the new religion, but only to perfect it ; 
 (lid not even under the mere mantle of a Christian profession 
 strive to win the church over to Judaism, as Schneckenburger ^ 
 and Feilmoser " think ; but to introduce into the church cer- 
 tain mystic views, and certain forms of a supereminent pietism, 
 which had grown up with a spiritualized and theosophic system. 
 In other words, they were not traitors, but they were fanatics. 
 They did not counterfeit so as to surrender the citadel, but 
 only strove to alter its discipline and supplant its present 
 armour. In the Apocalyptic epistles, the pseudo-apostles 
 at Ephesus, the synagogue of Satan at Smyrna, the woman 
 Jezebel, the prophetess at Thyatira, and the Nicolaitans or 
 Balaamites in Pergamos, whatever their errors and immoralities, 
 were all within the church, and wore at least the mask of 
 Christianity. Neither could the errorists at Colosse be the 
 mere disciples of Apollos, or of John the Baptist, as extra- 
 ecclesiastical sects. Heinrichs and Michaelis want a historical 
 basis for such an assertion, for we cannot tell how long Apollos 
 taught ere the apostle imparted to him full instruction ; and 
 there is no doubt that he would at once communicate his more 
 perfect knowledge to all his brethren. His teaching was but 
 a preparatory step to Christianity. The false teaching at 
 Colosse is not spoken of by the apostle as a rude and unde- 
 veloped scheme which stopped short of Christianity; but a 
 system which brought into Christianity elementary practices, 
 vain superstitions, and attempts at an unearthly and sancti- 
 monious lile. If it was pleased with the unfinished, it also 
 soared, by means of it, into the transcendental. Apollos was 
 indeed a Jew of Alexandria, and tliere is little doubt that 
 some elements of Alexandrian or Philonic Judaism were to be 
 found in Colosse, but found in connection with Christian 
 belief, or were combined with such views, feelings, and pro- 
 fessions, as had warranted admission into the church. 
 
 These errors did not involve of themselves, though they 
 might soon lead to, inmioral practices. It was not, as in 
 Corinth, where debauchery prevailed, and impurity had been 
 associated with the pagan worship, where the Lord's Supper 
 
 1 Beitr. zur Elnl. p. 146. 
 
 "^ Einl. p. 149. See, on the other hand, the well-known treatise of Eheinwald, 
 De Pseudo-Bodoribtis Coloss., Bonn., 1834. 
 
SPECIAL FORMS OF EKROR. XXXlii 
 
 had been profaned, and the idea of a resurrection had been 
 more than called in question. Nor was it as in Thessalonica, 
 where a vital doctrine had been seriously misunderstood, and 
 sundry minor evils had begun to show themselves. In Galatia 
 tliere had been a bold and open attempt to uphold systematic- 
 ally the authority of the Mosaic law, and enforce its observ- 
 ance on the churches as essential to salvation ; but the apostle 
 meets the crisis with a stern and uncompromising opposition. 
 And there was in Eome, too, a proud and self-righteous 
 Jewish spirit, that relied on illustrious Abrahamic descent and 
 conformity to the letter of the law for justification. Therefore 
 the apostle formally proves by a lengthened argument, that to 
 guilty and helpless humanity the only refuge is in the grace 
 of God and the righteousness of Christ. 
 
 But the case was somewhat different at Colosse. The 
 teaching was of a more refined nature. It does not seem to 
 have insisted on circumcision as a positive Mosaic rite, but 
 as the means of securing spiritual benefit. It was not dog- 
 matically said, "Except ye be circumcised and keep the 
 whole law of Moses, ye cannot be saved ; " but circumcision 
 appears to have been connected with those ascetic austerities 
 by which purity of heart was sought for, symbolized, and 
 expected to be reached. The apostle's argument is. Ye are 
 circumcised already — ye have, through faith in Jesus, all 
 the blessings which that ordinance typifies — ye have been 
 circumcised with the circumcision of Christ. Distinctions in 
 meats and drinks, the observance of holidays, " the show of 
 wisdom in humility, will-w^orship, and neglecting of the 
 body," were not haughtily imposed as a Pharisaic yoke, but 
 were regarded and cherished as elements of a discipline which 
 hoped to attain religious elevation by a surer and speedier 
 way than that which the gospel presented. The theoretic 
 portion of the error was somewhat similar in origin and pur- 
 pose. Its object was to secure spiritual protection, by com- 
 muning with the world of spirits. It aimed to have what 
 the gospel promised, but without the assistance of the Christ 
 which that gospel revealed. It took Christ out of His central 
 Headship, and dethroned Him from His mediatorial eminence. 
 It was a philosophy which longed to uncover the unseen 
 and climb to heaven by homage done to the angelic hierarchy. 
 
 c 
 
XXXIV THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 That such tendencies should coalesce in one and the same 
 party is not strange, for self-emaciation has been usually 
 connected with reverie and visions. 
 
 We may scarcely put the question whether those errors had 
 a heathen or a Jewish source. That they sprang up within 
 the church we have seen already, but some suppose them 
 traceable to a foreign influence. Clement ascribed them to 
 Epicureanism ; but indulgence and not self-restraint was its 
 character. It might indeed covet festivals, that it might 
 enjoy a surfeit ; but if it made a distinction among meats and 
 drinks, it would be only to abstain from some of them, not 
 for sanctity's sake but for palate's sake, and to prefer others 
 not as lean and scanty fare to the neglect of the body, but as 
 luxuries to revel in under the motto, " Let us eat and drink, for 
 to-morrow we die." Tertullian again vaguely thought that 
 philosophy in general with its theory and ethics was con- 
 demned. But the apostle needed to guard the Colossians 
 only against such forms of philosophic falsehood as were 
 taught among them, and most likely to enthral them. See our 
 comment on ii. 8. Grotius has contended that the Pythagorean 
 system is referred to, and Macknight has found it in the 
 maxims, " Touch not, taste and handle not " (that is, as he 
 means), anything the eating of which involves the previous 
 taking away of its life. But Pythagoreanism could only in 
 Colosse have an indirect influence throusrh Plato and his 
 Alexandrian imitators. That the lanouacfe of Paul has some 
 resemblance to that of Philo is well known, for modes of 
 expression which at length were common among the Hellen- 
 istic Jews may have originated in the studies and speculations 
 of Alexandria. Yet any one who carefully reads Gfrorer's 
 Essay on this subject, or the virtual review of it by Jowett,^ 
 cannot fail to perceive, that with many features of likeness, 
 there are very numerous points of dissimilarity. The spirit of 
 the two writers is in perfect contrast ; nay, the same words 
 even have a difference of meaning in their respective produc- 
 tions. Yet witli all his mysticism, Philo has much that every 
 intelligent and pious Jew must have believed — forms of 
 
 1 The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, Galatians, and Romans, with 
 Critical Notes and Dissertations. By Benjamin Jowett, Fellow and Tutor of 
 Balliol College, Oxford, vol. i. p. 363. 
 
PAUL AND PHILO. XXXV 
 
 thought and faith that Paul did not need to renounce when he 
 became a Christian. But to build much on mere verbal 
 similarity is very unsatisfactory, for Koster has shown, in an 
 ingenious Essay/ how much the apostle's diction resembles 
 that of Demosthenes ; and Bauer and Kaphelius had before him 
 pointed out similar instances from Thucydides and Xenophon. 
 
 Heumann, again, pleads for the Stoic and Platonic philo- 
 sophies as the object of apostolic warning, but with no pro- 
 bability. When we remember the numbers of Jews colonized 
 in those portions of Asia Minor, and how so many of them 
 that passed over into the church were still zealous for the law, 
 and when we see what nomenclature the apostle employs in 
 describing these errors — " circumcision," " handwriting of 
 ordinances," " festivals, new moons and Sabbaths," " a shadow 
 of things to come," — we are forced to the conclusion, that the 
 false teaching pointed out and reprobated must have had a 
 Jewish source, having grown up among those who had once 
 observed the Levitical ritual, and who carried with them 
 into the church many of those predilections and tendencies 
 which the idealized Mosaism of that age had originated and 
 ripened. The application of the term " philosophy " to these 
 errors, and the accusation of the "worshipping of angels," 
 form no argument against our hypothesis, for the Jewish 
 writers apply the name to their own religious system, and 
 traces of the strange idolatry may be found in later Jewish 
 books.^ 
 
 The tendencies or teachings described by the apostle seem 
 to be allied fully as much to the Essenic as to the Pharisaic 
 school. Formality, ostentation, censoriousness, hypocrisy, and 
 a righteousness satisfied with obeying the mere letter of the 
 law, are not hinted at by the apostle — the demure face on the 
 day of fast, prayer in stentorian voice at the corner of the 
 streets, and the trumpet which heralded almsgiving, are no 
 portion of the picture. Eather does the description harmonize 
 with what we know of the Essenes, and with what they 
 might be if they embraced Christianity. If the Christianized 
 Pharisees were apt to become Judaizers, the Christianized 
 Essenes were as likely to become mystics in doctrine and 
 
 ^ Studien und Kritiken, 1854. 
 
 ^ See our Commentary on ii. 8, 18. 
 
XXXVi THE LITERATUEE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 ascetics in practice. Eecoiling from the precise formality of 
 Pharisaism, they glided into impalpable speculations. The 
 Pharisee might boast of his sanctity in the outer court, but 
 the Essene strove to pass the vail into the inner chamber and 
 commune with its invisible inhabitant. What the Pharisee 
 laboured to attain by the punctilious minutise of a cumbrous 
 ritual, the Essene hoped to reach by severe meditation and 
 self-denying discipline. In short, the Essenes were philo- 
 sophic Jews, who in trying to get at the spirit of their system, 
 and to . reach its hidden nature and esoteric teachings, 
 wandered as far from its real purpose as did the sensual and 
 pompous Pharisee. The Pharisee overlaid the law with 
 traditions, so that it grew into an unshapen mass, and this 
 tendency may be described under the phrases " elements of 
 the world," and " tradition of men." The Essene, on the other 
 hand, was noted for his mystic aspirations, theosophic studies, 
 and self-subduing modes of life, and these characteristics 
 appear to be marked in the clauses, "philosophy and vain 
 deceit," " worshipping of angels," and intruding into the invi- 
 sible ; while both the Pharisaic and Essenic leanings combined 
 may be thus glanced at : " Let no man judge you in meat, or 
 in drink, or in respect of an holiday, or of the new moon, or 
 of the sabbath days ; which are a shadow of things to come ; 
 but the body is of Christ," — ii. 16, 17. Now, while the Jews 
 remained in Palestine, the two rival sects might maintain their 
 separate creeds with proverbial tenacity; but when they were 
 thrown together in foreign countries, their change of position 
 must have brought them into more familiar contact, and led 
 to the modification of their more distinctive tenets. Away 
 from the hallowed soil and the temple, Pharisaism, unable to 
 obey the ritual, must have lost somewhat of its love of 
 externals, and been more ready to yield to the quiet speculations 
 and self-restrictions of the Essene. Such modifications we 
 may not be able to trace, though we cannot doubt of their 
 existence, and therefore we need not wonder that a form of 
 Christianized Judaism at Colosse should exhibit in combina- 
 tion some of those features which in Palestine characterized 
 respectively Pharisee and Sadducee. Nor is it to be forgotten 
 that while their peculiarities were mutually modified between 
 themselves, both might receive another modification from the 
 
ESSENIC JUDAISM. XXXVU 
 
 external world. The Jewish mind had come into contact 
 with the East during the Babylonish captivity, and probably 
 retained some permanent impressions. We may therefore 
 surmise that it was infected with the atmosphere of Phrygia, 
 and that as it met in that province with speculations kindred 
 to its own, it would both impart and borrow. This appears, 
 then, to be the true state of the case. While the errors seem 
 to have sprung up with the Jewish converts, and to have 
 retained not a little that belonged to the Mosaic ceremonial, 
 they were at the same time in harmony with feelings and 
 practices widely spread over the East, and of special attraction 
 to the province of Phrygia. One might almost thus describe 
 the heresy, that it was Essenic Judaism modified by introduc- 
 tion to the church ; widening itself from a national into an 
 Oriental system through sympathy with similar views around 
 it ; in the act of identifying its angels with Emanations, and 
 placing Christ among them ; and admitting or preparing to 
 admit the sinfulness of what is material in man. We need 
 not, therefore, with Hug,^ ascribe the origin of the Colossian 
 errors to the Magian philosophy directly : for it was rather 
 the Jewish spirit influenced to some extent by this and 
 other forms of theosophy with which it has been placed in 
 juxtaposition. Nor should we, with Osiander, Kleuker, and 
 Herder, deem the false teaching wholly Kabbalistic, though 
 the germ of what was afterwards found in the Kabbala may be 
 here detected. It is also a onesided view of Chemnitz, Storr, 
 Credner, and Thiersch to regard the errorists simply as Chris- 
 tian Essenes, though in the Essene there was a strong and 
 similar tendency. Nor can we, with Hammond and others, 
 simply call them Gnostics, though there is no doubt that what 
 was afterwards called Gnosticism appears here in its rudiments 
 — especially that aspect of it which may be called Ceriuthian 
 Gnosticism. Similar errors are referred to in the Epistles to 
 Timothy, who laboured in a neighbouring region. Cerinthus 
 was but the creature of his age, bringing together into shape 
 and system errors which were already showing themselves in 
 the various Christian communities, so that he soon became 
 identified with them, and now stands out as an early and 
 great heresiarch. But it would seem to be beyond historic 
 1 Einleit. Part ii. § 130, 4th edit. 
 
XXXVlll THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 evidence to fix on any precise party as holding those tenets. 
 For the parties which afterwards did hold them were not then 
 organized ; nor were they known then by the names which 
 they afterwards bore in the annals of the church. The errors 
 which in a century became so prominent as elements of an 
 organized system, were at this time only in germ. The 
 winged seeds were floating in the atmosphere, and falling into 
 a soil adapted to them, and waiting as if to receive them ; in 
 course of years they produced an ample harvest. 
 
 The apostle in the second chapter uniformly employs the 
 singular number in speaking of the party holding the errors 
 condemned by him. Either he marks out one noted leader, 
 or he merely individualizes for the sake of emphasis. The 
 apostle in Galatians generally uses the plural; but in v. 10 
 he employs the singular o rapdaacov, " he that troubleth you," 
 where the reference may not be to some special heretic, but 
 to any of those whom the apostle's imagination singles out 
 for the moment as engaged in the act of disturbing the church. 
 But the plural is never employed in the epistle before us ; 
 though the invariable use of the singular may not fully or 
 grammatically warrant the idea of one person being specially 
 before the apostle's mind, since the singular occurs in ad- 
 monitions, and these are rendered yet more pointed by its 
 use. 
 
 V. CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 We present the contents of the epistle in the form of a 
 translation, arranged under separate heads. Our translation 
 is simply an easy rendering, claiming neither the exegetical 
 lucidness of a free version nor the grammatical accuracy and 
 purity of a literal one. 
 
 The Salutation. 
 
 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and 
 Timothy the brother, to the saints in Colosse, and believing 
 brethren in Christ : Grace to you, and peace from God our 
 Father. 
 
CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. XXXIX 
 
 The Introduction. 
 
 Having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and the love 
 which ye have to all the saints, we thank God, the Father of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ always, when we pray for you ; on account 
 of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which ye heard 
 already in the word of the truth of the gospel, which has come 
 to you, as it has also in all the world ; and is bearing fruit, and 
 growing, as indeed among you, from the day ye heard it and 
 knew the grace of God in truth, just as ye learned it from 
 Epaphras, our beloved fellow-servant, who is for your sakes a 
 faithful minister of Christ, who has besides reported to us your 
 love in the Spirit. 
 
 The Prayer. 
 
 On this account we indeed, since the day we heard (such 
 a report), cease not praying for you and asking that ye may be 
 filled with the full knowledge of His will in all wisdom and 
 spiritual insight, so as to walk worthy of the Lord in order to 
 all well-pleasing^ — being fruitful in every good work, and 
 growing by means of the knowledge of God ; strengthened 
 with all strength after the measure of the might of His glory, 
 in order to the possession of patience and long-suffering with 
 joy ; giving thanks to the Father, who has fitted us for sharing 
 the inheritance of the saints in the light ; who rescued us out 
 of the power of darkness and transported us into the kingdom 
 of the Son of His Love, in whom we have this redemption, — 
 the forgiveness of sins. 
 
 Doctrine introduced. — The Glory of Christ. 
 
 Who is the image of the Invisible God, the First-born of 
 the whole creation. For in Him were created all things — 
 those in the heavens and those on the earth, the seen and the 
 unseen, whether thrones or lordships, principalities or powers, 
 the WHOLE by Him and for Him was created, and He is before 
 all things, and all things in Him are upheld. And He is the 
 Head of the Body, the church; He who is the Source, the 
 
 ^ " For "eneral conciliation ! " Turnbnll's translation, London, 1854. 
 
xl THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 rirst-begotten from the dead ; in order that in all things He 
 might show Himself the First. Yea, God was pleased that 
 all fulness should dwell in Him ; and by Him having made 
 peace by the blood of His cross ; by Him (I repeat) to recon- 
 cile all things to himself, whether the things on earth, or the 
 thincrs in the heavens. 
 
 The A2Jplication of it. 
 
 And you, who were formerly alienated and enemies in your 
 mind by wicked works, yet now has He reconciled in the body 
 of His (Christ's) flesh through death, so as to present you holy, 
 and blameless, and unreprovable before Him. If, as is the 
 case, ye continue in the faith grounded and fast, and not moved 
 away from the hope of the gospel which you have heard, which 
 has been preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, 
 Paul, was made a prisoner. 
 
 Tlie Apostle's own feelings and functions towards them. 
 
 I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and I fill up what is 
 wanting of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for His Body's 
 sake, which is the church; of which I was made a minister 
 according to the dispensation of God committed to me for 
 you, to fulfil the word of God ; to wit, the mystery which 
 has been hid from ages and generations, but it is now revealed 
 to his saints, to whom God wished to make known what are 
 the riches of the glory of this mystery in the Gentiles, which 
 is Christ in you, the hope of glory ; whom we preach, remind- 
 ing every man and teaching every man in all wisdom; in 
 order that we may present every man perfect in Christ. To 
 attain which end, I indeed labour, intensely struggling accord- 
 ing to His inworking, which works mightily within me. 
 For I would that ye knew what a struggle I have about 
 you and those in Laodicea, and as many as have not seen 
 my face in the flesh ; that their hearts might be comforted, 
 being knit together in love and unto the whole wealth of the 
 full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the 
 mystery of God ; in which all the treasures of wisdom and 
 knowledge are laid up. 
 
CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. xli 
 
 First and General Advice. 
 
 Now this I say, lest any one should beguile you with 
 enticing words. For though, indeed, in the flesh I am absent, 
 yet in the spirit with you am I, joying and beholding your 
 order and the steadiness of your faith on Christ. As then ye 
 have received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in Him, having 
 been rooted in Him, and being built up in Him, and established 
 in the faith as ye were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. 
 
 Second and Special Warning and Argument. 
 
 Beware lest there be any one who may make a prey of you 
 through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, 
 after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in 
 Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; and ye 
 are filled up in Him, who is the Head of all principality and 
 power. In whom also ye were circumcised with a circumcision 
 not made with hands in the off-putting of the body of the 
 flesh in the circumcision of Christ ; having been buried with 
 Him in baptism, in whom too you have been raised together 
 by faith in the operation of God, who raised Him from the 
 dead. And -yon. being dead in the trespasses and the uncir- 
 cumcision of your flesh, you hath He brought to life together 
 with Him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; having 
 blotted out the handwriting of ordinances which was against 
 us, which was hostile to us, and He has taken it out of the 
 way, having nailed it to the cross ; having spoiled principalities 
 and powers, He made a show of them openly, having triumphed 
 over them in it. Let no one, therefore, judge you in eating or 
 in drinking, or in the particular of a festival, or of a new moon, 
 or of Sabbath days, ■which are a shadow of the things to come, 
 but the body is Christ's. Let no one rob you of your reward, 
 wishing to do it by his humility and worshipping of angels, 
 penetrating into things which he has not seen, puffed up with- 
 out reason by his fleshly mind, and not holding the Head, from 
 whom the whole body through joints and bands supplied and 
 compacted groweth the growth of God. 
 
xlii THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The consequent Reproof. 
 
 Since with Christ ye have died off from the rudiments of 
 the world, why, as yet living in the world, do ye suffer such 
 ordinances to be published among you as " touch not, taste not, 
 handle not," in reference to things which are meant to perish in 
 the use — ordinances which have no higher authority than the 
 commandments and the doctrines of men ; which procedure, 
 indeed, having a show of wisdom in will- worship, and humility, 
 and neglecting of the body, not in any thing of value, only 
 ministers to the gratification of the flesh ^ (or corrupt human 
 nature). 
 
 Practical Portion. — Their Position and its Lessons. 
 
 If, then, ye have been raised together with Christ, seek those 
 things which are above, where Christ is, sitting on the right 
 hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things 
 on the earth ; for you died, and your life has been hidden with 
 Christ in God. When Christ, our Life, shall be manifested, 
 then ye too shall be manifested with Him in glory. 
 
 Sins to he ahandoned. 
 
 Mortify, therefore, your members which are upon the earth, 
 fornication, impurity, lust, evil concupiscence, and covetous- 
 ness, which indeed is idolatry, on account of which sins 
 Cometh the wrath of God, in which sins ye verily once walked, 
 when ye lived in them. But now do ye also put off all these 
 — anger, rage, malice, calumny, scurrility — out of your mouth. 
 Lie not to one another, having put off the old man with his 
 deeds, and having put on the new man, who is renewed unto 
 knowledge, after the image of Him who created him ; where 
 (in which sphere of renewal) there is not Greek and Jew, 
 circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, bond and 
 free, but Christ is all and in all. 
 
 Virtues to he assumed. 
 Put on, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of 
 
 ' " Not to the credit of any one for personal appearance ! " — Turnbull. 
 
INCULCATION OF DUTIES. xliii 
 
 mercy, obligingness, humility, meekness, long-suffering, for- 
 bearing one another and forgiving one another, if any one has 
 a fault against any, like as indeed Christ forgave you, so also 
 do ye ; and over and above all these, put on that love which 
 is the bond of perfection. 
 
 WTiat should he the Tenor of the Christian Life. 
 
 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which 
 too ye were called in one body, and be thankful. Let the 
 word of Christ dwell in you richly ; in all wisdom teaching 
 and counselling one another ; in psalms, hymns, spiritual 
 songs, singing with grace in your heart to God ; and whatever 
 ye do in word or deed, do all of it in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father by Him. 
 
 Inculcation of Domestic Duties. 
 
 Wives, submit you to your husbands, as is fitting in the 
 Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against 
 them. Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is 
 well-pleasing in the Lord. Fathers, chafe not your children, 
 lest they be disheartened. Servants, in all things obey your 
 masters according to the flesh, not with eye-service as men- 
 pleasers, but with simplicity of heart, fearing the Lord. 
 Whatever you are engaged in, work at it from the soul as to 
 the Lord, and not to men, knowing that from the Lord you 
 shall receive the reward of the inheritance : the Lord Christ 
 serve ye : for the wrong-doer shall receive what he has 
 wronged ; and there is no respect of persons. Masters, afford 
 ye on your part what is right and equal to your servants, in 
 the knowledge that ye too have a master in heaven. 
 
 Parting Counsels. 
 
 Continue in prayer, and watch in it with thanksgiving ; 
 praying at the same time also for us, that God would open to 
 us a door of discourse to speak the mystery of Christ, for 
 which yea I am bound, in order that I may make it manifest 
 as it becomes me to speak it. Walk in wisdom toward those 
 without, redeeming the time. Let your conversation be 
 
xliv THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how 
 you ought to answer every one. 
 
 Private Matte7's. 
 
 Of all that concerns me, Tychicus shall inform you, the 
 beloved brother and faithful minister and fellow-servant in the 
 Lord, whom I have sent unto you for this very purpose, that 
 ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your 
 hearts ; along with Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother, 
 one of yourselves ; they shall inform you of all matters here. 
 
 Concluding Salutations and Signature. 
 
 There salutes you Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner, and 
 Mark, the cousin of Barnabas (about whom ye received 
 instruction) ; if he come to you, receive him ; and Jesus, 
 surnamed Justus — who are of the circumcision : these alone 
 (of their race) are my fellow-workers unto the kingdom of 
 God, who have been an encouragement to me. Epaphras, one 
 of yourselves, a servant of Christ, salutes you, always striving 
 for you in his prayers, that ye may stand perfect and full 
 assured in tlie whole will of God. For I bear him record 
 that he has a great travail for you and them in Laodicea and 
 them in Hierapolis. There salutes you Luke the beloved 
 physician, and Demas. Salute the brethren in Laodicea, and 
 Nymphas, and the church in his house. And when this 
 epistle has been read among you, arrange that it be read also 
 in the church of the Laodiceans, and that ye read too the 
 epistle from Laodicea. And say to Archippus, See to the 
 ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou 
 
 fulfil it. Etje salutation bg i^i^^ oton tanH of ^aiil 
 i^ememljcr mg tontis. ffirace ic Ijjtti) gou* 
 
 VI. — TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING THE EPISTLE. 
 
 What we have already said in Chapter V. of our Introduc- 
 tion to Ephesians may suffice. The arguments of Schulz, 
 Bottger, "Wiggers, Thiersch, and Meyer, do not convince us 
 that the old and general opinion is wrong, and that this epistle 
 
WORKS ON THE EPISTLE. xlv 
 
 was written at Cffisarea, not at Eome, Peter Lombard and 
 others dream of an imprisonment at Epliesus, at which place 
 they suppose that this epistle was written. The probability 
 is that it was composed in Eome, and about the year 62. 
 On its relation to the Epistle to the Ephesians the reader may 
 also consult the fifth chapter of our Introduction to Commentary 
 on the latter Epistle. 
 
 YII. WORKS ON THE EPISTLE. 
 
 The patristic and medigeval commentaries on Colossians 
 are, with the exception of Jerome, the same as those we have 
 enumerated under Ephesians. So it is with the expositors of 
 the Reformation period and that which succeeded it. So it is 
 with the editors of the New Testament, and the collectors of 
 illustrations from the classics, Philo and Josephus. Among 
 the more characteristic expositions, we have the French dis- 
 course of Daille and the more academic Latin prelections of 
 Davenant, the paraphrase and notes of Pierce, the sermons of 
 Byfield (1615), Elton (1620), and the more recent popular 
 volumes of Bishop Wilson, Gisborne, and Watson. 
 
 Among continental writers we may refer to Calvin, Melanc- 
 thon, Beza, Erasmus, Zanchius, Zwingie, Crocius, Piscator, 
 Hunnius, Baldwin, the Catholic Estius and a-Lapide (van 
 Stein), and to Grotius, Heumann, Suicer, Eoell, Bengel, Storr, 
 Flatt, and Heinrichs. 
 
 Among later expositors we have the following: — 
 
 Historisch-kritischer und philologischer Commentar uber den 
 Brief Pauli an die Colosser ; bearbeitet von Dr. Friederich 
 Junker; Mannheim, 1828. Commentar iiber den Brief Pauli 
 an die Kolosser, mit steter Beritcksichtigung der dltern und 
 neuern Ausleger ; von Karl C. W. F. Bahr ; Basel, 1833. 
 Theologische Auslegung des paulinischen Sendschreihens an die 
 Colosser; herausgegeben von Wilhelm Bohmer; Breslau, 1835. 
 Ber Brief Pauli an die Kolosser ; Uebersetzung, Erkliirung, ein- 
 leitende und epikritische Abhandlungen von Wilhelm Steiger ; 
 Erlangen, 1835. Commentar iiber den Brief Pauli an die 
 Colosser; von Joh. Ed. Huther; Hamburg, 1841. Kurze 
 Erkldrung der Briefe an die Colosser, an Philemon, an die 
 Epheser und Philipper ; von Dr. W. M. L. de Wette ; 
 
xlvi THE LITERATURE OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 Leipzig, 1843. Biblischer Commentar iiher sdmmtliche Schriften 
 des Neuen Testaments zundchst fur Prediger und Stitdirende; 
 von Dr. Hermann Olshausen ; Vierter Band ; Konigsberg, 
 1844. Commentar ilher den Brief Pauli an die Bpheser und 
 Kolosser ; von L. F. 0. Baumgarten-Crusius ; Jena, 1847. 
 Kritisch exegetisches Handhuch ilber den Brief an die Kolosser 
 und an PJiilemo7i ; von Hein. A. W. Meyer; Gottingen, 1848. 
 Auslegung der Bpistel Pauli an die Colosser m 36 Betracht- 
 ungen ; von C. N. Kiihler; Eisleben, 1853. 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 In the following pages, when Buttmann, Matthiae, Klihner, 
 Winer, Eost, Alt, Stuart, Green, Trollope, and Jelf are 
 simply quoted, the reference is to their respective Greek gram- 
 mars ; and when Suidas, Passow, Eobinson, Pape, Wilke, 
 Wahl, Bretschneider, Liddell and Scott, are named, the refer- 
 ence is to their respective lexicons. If Hartung be found 
 without any addition, we mean his Lehre von den Partikcln 
 der griechischen Sprache, 2 vols.; Erlangen, 1832. In the 
 same way, the mention of Bernhardy without any supplement 
 represents his Wissenschaftliche Syntax der griechischen Sprache ; 
 Berlin, 1829. The majority of the other names are those of 
 the commentators or philologists enumerated in the previous 
 chapter. The references to Tischendorf s New Testament are 
 to the second edition. 
 
COMMENTARY ON COLOSSIANS. 
 
 CHAPTEK I. 
 
 The Epistle begins according to ancient custom. The writer 
 introduces himself by name, and then salutes those to whom 
 his letter is addressed, thus — 
 
 (Ver, 1.) ITaOXo9, airoaToXo'i ^Irjaov Xpcarov Sia deX^fiaro^; 
 ©eov, Kol Tifiodeo'^ 6 a8eX(^o<? — " Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ 
 by the will of God, and Timothy the brother." [Eph. i. 1, 
 iv. 11.] Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ, as he bore His 
 commission, enjoyed His inspiration, did His work, and in all 
 things sought His acceptance. His call to the apostleship 
 was by a signal and unmistakeable summons of the Divine 
 will. Since he uses similar phraseology in so many of his 
 epistles, there is no foundation for the conjecture of Chrysostom, 
 and some of his Greek imitators, that the apostle in here assert- 
 ing his relation to Christ so decidedly, disclaims all mission from 
 the inferior spirits that occupied so prominent place in the 
 angelology of the false teachers who attempted to corrupt the 
 Colossian church. The addition of the name of Timothy is 
 found in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, in that to the 
 Philippians, and to Philemon, while it stands along with that 
 of Silvanus in the salutations of both letters addressed to the 
 church in Thessalonica. Though Timothy may have been 
 the writer of this epistle, neither his name nor his pen gave 
 any warrant or authority to the document, for he is only 
 joined with the apostle in brotherly, but unofficial congratula- 
 tions and prayers over the welfare of the Colossian believers. 
 It is certainly rash on the part of Chrysostom and Theophy- 
 lact^ to infer that Timothy was to be honoured as an apostle, 
 ^ The conclusion of Theophylact is i'oa oZv Ka) alrh amaroXoi. 
 
2 COLOSSIANS I. 2. 
 
 because his name stands in this connection. Were such an 
 argument tenable, then Sosthenes and Silvanus might both be 
 elevated to the apostolate. Paul styles him, however, " a 
 minister of God, and our fellow-labourer in the gospel of 
 Christ," 1 Thess. iii. 2. 
 
 Timothy, who received this Greek name from his father, 
 though his mother was a Jewess, was in all probability a 
 native of Lystra.^ That he was one of the apostle's own 
 converts is highly probable, as he has so fondly named him 
 " son," " my own son," " my beloved son," " my dearly beloved 
 son," 1 Tim. i. 18, i. 2; 1 Cor. iv. 17; 2 Tim. i. 2. The 
 young disciple was " well reported of by the brethren," had 
 enjoyed an early and sound religious education, the result of 
 maternal and grand-maternal anxiety, and he possessed a 
 " gift," so that Paul, after circumcising him, in order to allay 
 Jewish prejudice, selected him to be his colleague, fellow- 
 traveller, and work-fellow. At a later period the apostle bore 
 him this high testimony — " he worketh the work of the Lord, 
 as I also do " ^ — affirms at another time that both of them 
 preached the same gospel of the Son of God ; ^ nay, so much 
 of a kindred spirit reigned within them, that he says to the 
 church in Philippi, " I have no man like-minded, who will 
 naturally care for your state," Phil. ii. 19,20. Indications 
 of Timothy's busy and ubiquitous career occur again and 
 again, and he received himself, from his spiritual father, two 
 solemn epistolary communications. In short, so well known 
 was he as " the Brother," doing the apostle's work, carrying 
 his messages, bringing correspondence to him, endeared to him 
 in so many ways and representing him in his absence, that 
 the church of Colosse could not wonder at his name bein" 
 associated with that of Paul. 
 
 (Ver. 2.) Tol<i iv Ko\ocr(TaL<i a'yiot<i koX iricrTol'i aBe\.(f)oi<i iv 
 Xpiarw — "to the saints in Colosse and believing brethren in 
 Christ." For the various forms of spelling the name of the 
 city, see Introduction. According to the versions of Chrysos- 
 tom, QEcumenius, De Wette, and others, the apostle thus 
 addresses his letter : " to those in Colosse who are saints and 
 believing brethren in Christ ; " but, according to Meyer, " to 
 the saints in Colosse, to wit, the believing brethren in Christ." 
 
 J Acts xvi. 1. 2 1 Cor. xvi. 10, ^ 2 Cor. i. 19. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 2. 3 
 
 We incline to the latter interpretation, as the epithet 07^0? 
 came to have something of the force of a proper name, and did 
 not need eV X. to qualify it. It, indeed, often stands by itself, 
 as in Acts ix. 13, 32, 41, xxvi. 10 ; in Eom. i. 7, xii. 13, 
 XV. 25, 26, 31, and in a great variety of instances in the 
 other epistles. True, in Phil. i. 1, the words ev X. 'I. are 
 added to it, and that probably because no other epithet is 
 there subjoined. When these early disciples are named or 
 referred to, the term ayco<i, like the English " saint," was 
 almost invariably used, not as an adjective, but as a noun. 
 For the meaning of the word, and its application to members 
 of the church, see under Eph. i. 1. The other terms of the 
 clause are explanatory and supplemental. The adjective 
 TTtcTTot?, which occurs by itself in the twin epistle, is here 
 joined to d^eX(f)oU, and has the sense of believing, as we have 
 shown it to have in the similar salutation, Eph. i. 1. The 
 concluding words, ei^ Xptarw, belonging to the entire clause, 
 describe the origin and circuit of the believing brotherhood. 
 Their union to Him created this tender and reciprocal con- 
 nection in Him. Out of Him there was neither faith nor 
 fraternity, for He is the object of the one and the centre of the 
 other. Thus iria-roU is not superfluous, as Steiger erroneously 
 says, if it mean " believing ; " for this faith was the very 
 means of bringing them into a filial relation to God, and 
 therefore into a brotherly relation with one another. (Gal. iii. 
 26.) Children of one Eather by belief in Christ, the entire 
 family are rightly named " believing brethren " in Him. 
 
 Xdpi,<i vfiiv Kal elprjvt) airo Qeov TIaTpo<i rjjjuoiv — " grace to 
 you, and peace, from God our Eather." Tiae additional clause 
 of the Eeceived Text, Kal Kvpiov 'I. X., is not fully sustained 
 by good authority, as it is wanting in B, D, E, J, K, while it is 
 found in A, C, E, G. Many of the old versions also want it 
 — as the Syriac, Ethiopic, and Vulgate. Chrysostom formally 
 says : Kalroc iv ravTrj to tov X. ov Tbdrjcrtv ovofia — " yet in 
 this place he does not insert the name of Christ." Theophy- 
 lact, on repeating the sentiment, adds — kuctol €lo}do<; avrw ov 
 — "although it is his usual way to insert it ;" but he subjoins a 
 silly reason for the omission, to wit, " Lest the apostle should 
 revolt them at the outset, and turn their minds from his forth- 
 coming argument." The clause is common in the other 
 
 D 
 
4 COLOSSIANS I. 3. 
 
 opening benedictions. We can account for its insertion in 
 some Codices as being taken from these corresponding pas- 
 sages, but we cannot so well give a reason for its general 
 omission, except on the suspicion that it was no portion of the 
 original salutation. We dare not dictate to the apostle how 
 he shall greet a church, nor insist that he shall send all his 
 greetings in uniform terms. [Eph. i. 2.] 
 
 The apostle now expresses his thanks to God for the 
 Colossian church, for their faith, love, and hope — the fruits of 
 that gospel which Epaphras had so successfully taught them. 
 Then he repeats the substance of that prayer which he had 
 been wont to offer for them, a prayer that designedly cul- 
 minates in a statement of their obligation to Christ and their 
 connection with Him. But that Blessed Name suggests a 
 magnificent description of the majesty of His person, and the 
 glory of His work as Creator, Preserver, Eedeemer, and 
 Governor. The paragraph is without any formal polemical 
 aspect, but under its broad and glowing statement of the truth 
 error was detected and refuted. It was so placed in sunshine, 
 that its hideousness was fully exposed, and it was seen to be 
 " a profane medley." ^ 
 
 (Ver. 3.) Ev')(^apL(TT0Vfiev too ©ecu Kal Tlarpl rov Kvpiov 
 rjiMUiV 'Ir)(Tov Xptarov irdvTore, irepl v/xociv Trpoaevx^o/jbevoi — 
 " We bless God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ always, 
 when praying for you." There are variations in the text, 
 some of which may be noted. Some read toj Trarpc on no 
 great authority, and the Eeceived Text inserts Kal without 
 conclusive evidence. Other MSS. read as if by correction 
 ev'^apiaTo!) in the singular, and Trepl, found in A, C, D^, E", J, 
 K, appears to have higher warrant than vTrep, which is pre- 
 ferred by Lachmann and Griesbach. The distinctive meaning 
 of virep and Trepl in such a connection may be seen under 
 Eph. vi. 19. We cannot agree with Bahr, Steiger, Baum- 
 garten-Crusius, and Conybeare, who imagine that Paul simply 
 means himself in the plural evxapio-Toi/jiev. That he may 
 occasionally use this style we do not deny. The apostle in 
 the First Epistle to the Corinthians joins Sosthenes with 
 himself in the salutation, but formally excludes him from 
 any share in the communication, for he immediately subjoins 
 
 ' ' ' 3l6lanrje profane. " — Daillc^. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 3. 5 
 
 the singular ev^apiajM. Tlie same avowed distinction is 
 made with regard to Timothy himself in the Epistle to the 
 Philippians i. 1-3. May we not infer, that if Paul had wished 
 to exclude Timothy here, he would have done so by a similar 
 use of the singular ; and as he does afterwards employ the 
 singular in sharp contrast, may not the plural here have been 
 chosen to represent the share which Timothy had in those 
 good reports, and the consequent prayers ? There is no 
 sentiment in the verses in which the plural is used, peculiar 
 to inspiration. And we are the more confirmed in this view, 
 because Paul formally disconnects himself from Timothy in 
 verse 23, and by the emphatic words, iyo) IlavXoq; and 
 again a similar distinction occurs in verse 29, and in iv. 3. 
 The phraseology of these three verses implies, that when he 
 says " we," he means himself and Timothy, but that in cases 
 where he states something special to himself, and not common 
 to him and his colleague, he says " I," to prevent mistake. If 
 the plural simply represented himself, he did not need to 
 change the idiom. [Ev^xapLcrTovixev, Eph. i. 16.] Under 
 Eph. i. 3 we have shown that the genitive Kvptov 'I. is 
 governed as well by 6e6<i as by iraTrjp. And if we read rco 
 6ea) KoX irarpi, as in the Textus Eeceptus, the same con- 
 struction would be vindicated here. But as the reading is 
 either tw 6e(p tm irarpi, or rather roS 6eu> iraTpi, it would 
 seem that Trarpt alone governs the following genitive. We 
 thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. [TlaTpl 
 Tov K. Eph. i. 3.] Beza well says, neqjie vero aliter a nohis 
 considerari potest Deus in saltUem nisi quatenus est Pater Christi. 
 It is God, in the character of the Father of Christ, that we 
 thank, for He is in this relation our Father-God. The grateful 
 heart pours itself forth in praises. Paul and Timothy, on 
 hearing of the spiritual progress of the Colossians, did not 
 congratulate one another, but both gave the glory to God. 
 .So much had Timothy of Paul's own spirit, that the apostle 
 had no hesitation in saying, "We thank God." 
 
 It is a matter of dispute whether iravroTe should be joined 
 to ev'^apLorTov/xev, or to 'Trpocrev')(op.evoi. Chrysostom, Theo- 
 phylact, Grotius, Piscator, Beza, Luther, Calvin, Bengel, Suicer, 
 Grotius, Bohmer, and Olshausen, hold the second view, and 
 render with the English version, " praying always for you." 
 
6 COLOSSIANS I. 3. 
 
 But if we follow the analogy of 1 Cor. i. 4, 1 Tliess. i. 
 2 Tliess. i. 3, Pbileni. 4, Eph. i. 16, we shall join nravTOTe 
 to the first verb. So think Biihr, Pierce, Meyer, De Wette, 
 and Bamngarten-Crusius, The Syriac version follows the 
 same exegesis — for it reads, " "We give thanks for you always, 
 and pray for you;" and Cranmer's Bible of 1539 — "We give 
 thanks to God alwayes for you in oure prayers." Besides, 
 the declaration is, that the intelligence which he had received 
 filled his heart with gratitude, and impelled him to give 
 thanks. The Colossians did not need to be told that he 
 prayed for them, but it was some comfort to be assured by 
 him, that when he did pray for them such was his opinion of 
 them, based on reports which he had received about them, 
 that he gave thanks to God for them. He would have prayed 
 for them, whatever their spiritual state, and the worse it was, 
 the more importunate would have been his supplications, but 
 he would not have given thanks for them unless he had been 
 persuaded of their spiritual purity and progress. Therefore 
 he adduces these reports as the grounds of his thanksgivings ; 
 and the spirit of his language is — " Whenever we pray about 
 you, we always give thanks for you." So cheering was the 
 intelligence communicated by Epaphras, that thanksgiving 
 w^as uniformly mingled with his prayers for them, and the 
 special contents of those prayers are mentioned for the first 
 time in verse 9. This exegesis is far more natural than that 
 of Olshausen, who says that the thanksgiving is offered at the 
 moment, but the intercession is supposed to be going on, and 
 to be based on the tidings which he had received. Now, 
 those tidings did not create the prayer, but being so good, 
 they naturally induced the tiianksgiving. " We always give 
 thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, as often 
 as we pray for you, because we have heard of your faith in 
 Christ Jesus, and love to all the saints." 
 
 Uepl vfiwv irpoaev^ofievoi, — " praying for you." The 
 apostle prayed for them — such was his interest in them, and 
 sympathy with them, that he bore their names on his heart at 
 the throne of grace. Nor could such an " effectual fervent 
 prayer of a righteous man " be without its rich results. The 
 suppliant in his far-off prison was like the prophet on Carmel, 
 and as he prayed, the " little cloud " might be descried, which, 
 
 I 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 4,5. 7 
 
 as it gradually filled and darkened the horizon, brought with 
 it the " sound of abundance of rain." 
 
 (Ver. 4.) 'AKovcravTe<i rrjv TrtcrTtv vfiow ev XpiaTOi 'Irjaov, 
 Kol rr/u dyciTrrjv rjv e')(eT€ eh irdvTa'i tov<; djiovi. The words 
 fjv €')(eTe are introduced into the text on the concurrent 
 authority of A, C, D, E \ F, G, the Vulgate, and other versions, 
 with many of the Fathers. The apostle now expresses the 
 reason why he gave thanks, the participle having a causal 
 sense, Kiihner, ^ 667; Stuart, ^ 169. Similar phraseology 
 occurs in Eph. i. 15, The article is omitted before the 
 proper names X. 'I. Winer, §19,2. In Ephesians, the apostle 
 adds Kvpio^, and prefixes the article to the official epithet ; 
 but here the simple name X. 'I. from common usage, occurs 
 without it. Gal. iii. 26. A different form of construction, 
 inserting the article before the preposition — iria-rei rfj ev X. 'I. 
 — occurs 1 Tim. iii. 13, and similarly 2 Tim. i. 13. That 
 faith reposed in Christ Jesus — fixed and immoveable — for it 
 felt satisfied in Him as a Divine Saviour. [Eph. i. 1.] Paul's 
 heart had been gladdened by the news of their consistency and 
 spiritual advancement, and in the fulness of his joy he offered 
 thanks to God. It is not necessary, with Locke and Pierce, 
 to take TTto-Tt? in the sense of fidelity, " sticking to the grace 
 of God." And their love was universal in its sweep, not 
 toward all men, but toward all the saints. [d'yio<;, Eph. i. 1.] 
 In itself, this love is really only a form, or manifestation of 
 love to the Divine object of their faith, for it is affection to 
 Christ's image in the saints. As, though a mirror is broken, each 
 fragment will still throw out the same reflection in miniature, 
 and that perfectly, so the saints, as a body and individually, 
 exhibit the same blessed and divine image of Christ enshrined . 
 with them, and are therefore the objects of Christian love. 
 Wlio is not acquainted with the language of Tertullian ? — 
 Sed ej'usmodi vel maxime dilcctionis operatio notam nobis inurit 
 penes quosdam, vide, inquiunt, ut invicem se diligant} 
 
 (Ver. 5.) Aid rrjv iX'n-iSa ttjv diroiceLjxevTf^v v/xlv ev roi? 
 ovpavoU — " On account of the hope laid up for you in 
 heaven." It is not easy to fix precisely on the connection 
 between this clause and the preceding statement. It is a 
 lame and superficial exegesis simply to say that the apostle 
 1 Apolojetkum, xxxix. p. 260, Opera, Tom. 1 ; ed. Oehler, Lipsicae, 1853. 
 
8 COLOSSIANS I. 5. 
 
 merely alludes to his three favourite graces, faith, love, and 
 hope. 
 
 But 1. Grotius, Wolf, Davenant, Estius, Pierce, Olshausen, 
 De Wette, Bahr, Heinrichs, and the Socinian expositors, Crellius 
 and Slichting, connect it with the two preceding clauses, as if 
 it told the reason why faith and love were formed and 
 cherished within them — your faith in Christ, and love to all 
 the saints — graces possessed and nurtured " in consequence 
 of the hope laid up for you in heaven." With such a view, 
 the connection appears to be elliptical, and not very clearly 
 expressed in the language before us. Nor do we think it a 
 Pauline sentiment. The apostle's references to future glory 
 are not of this nature, and we cannot regard him as placing 
 faith and love on so selfish a basis as the mere hope of a 
 coming recompense ; for Christ is worthy of that faith, and 
 saints, from their very character, elicit that love. The evan- 
 gelical expositors who hold this view have to maintain a stout 
 protest against the idea that they favour the Popish doctrine 
 of merit. Davenant formally proposes the question, " whether 
 it be lawful to do good works with a view to, or for the reward 
 laid up in heaven ? " 
 
 2. A modified and more tenable view is held by Chrysos- 
 tom, and some of the Greek Fathers, as well as Estius, Calvin, 
 Macknight, Meyer, and Steiger, who refer Bia rrjv iXirlSa 
 solely to ayaTrrjv, as if the meaning were, This love is not 
 - cherished under the expectation of any immediate return, but 
 in the hope of ultimate remuneration. Still, under this 
 hypothesis, the connection appears strained. If the apostle 
 had said that they loved one another on account of the 
 common hope which they had in heaven, or that the prospect 
 of a joint inheritance deepened their attachments on their 
 journey towards it, then the meaning might have been easily 
 apprehended. But why the hope in itself should be selected 
 as the prop of such love, we know not. Was their love to 
 all the saints so selfish, that it could live only in expectation 
 of a future reward ? We do not deny the Christian doctrine 
 of rewards, but we cannot put so selfish a valuation on Christian 
 love as this exegesis implies ; for of all the graces, it has the 
 least of self in its nature, and its instinctive gratification is its 
 own disinterested reward. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 5. 3 
 
 3. We incline, then, to take the words Sta rr]v iX-rrlSa with 
 the initial verb euxaptcrTovfjiev. " Having heard of your faith 
 in Christ Jesus, and the love which ye have to all the saints, 
 as often as we pray for you, we thank God, the Father of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, on account of the hope laid up for you in 
 heaven," That is to say, the report of their faith and love 
 prompted him to give thanks ; but as he gave thanks, the final / 
 issue and crown of those graces rose into prominence before 
 him, and he adds, " on account of the hope laid up for you in 
 heaven." Their faith and love, viewed not merely in present 
 exercise, but also in their ultimate consummation and bliss, 
 were the grounds of his thanksgiving. The hope, as Bengel 
 suggests, shows quanta sit causa gratias agendi 'pro dono fidei 
 et amoris. The fourth verse can scarcely be called a paren- 
 thesis. This view is, generally, that of Athanasius, Bullinger, 
 Calixtus, Eisner, Cocceius, Storr, Zanchius, Bengel, Schrader, 
 Peile, and Conybeare. Meyer objects that in the other 
 epistles the foundations of thanksgiving are subjective in their 
 nature. Nor is this phraseology, when properly viewed, any 
 exception. For faith and love are not excluded from the 
 grounds of thanksgiving, and hope laid up is not wholly 
 objective, as it signifies a blessing so sure and attainable 
 that it creates hope. Had the apostle said, " for the happiness 
 laid up," the objection of Meyer might have applied, but he^ 
 calls it " hope laid up " — a reality which excites and sustains 
 the emotion of hope in the present state. It is further argued 
 that ev^apta-reiv is never used in the New Testament with 
 Sid to express the ground of thanksgiving. It is so; but 
 unless the objector can produce a parallel place to this, there ^ 
 is really no difficulty. If a writer means to express a different 
 shade of idea, he will use a different preposition. Neither 
 vTrep nor eVt conveyed the precise idea of the clause before 
 us. These prepositions would have denoted that the hope 
 was in itself the great ground of gratitude ; but the apostle, 
 in using Sid, says that the hope, while it is so noble and ^ 
 promising, has a special and ultimate connection with the faith 
 and love, the report of which so cheered his heart. The hope 
 was present to his mind when he said euxapKrrovfMev, but^^ 
 other and subordinate thoughts intervene, and his idea is so 
 far modified, that when he came to write ekTrlSa, he prefixes Sid. 
 
10 COLOSSIANS I. 5. 
 
 '£"X,7r/9 is the object hoped for — to iX-jn^o/jievov. [Eph. i. 
 18.] In Tr)v aTTOK€Lfievr}v is the idea of reservation and 
 security. (Luke xix. 20 ; 2 Tim. iv. 8 ; 1 Pet. i. 4.)^ It is 
 not enjoyed now — but it exists now ; it is kept in store, and 
 will certainly be possessed. And it is laid up ev toU ovpavoh, 
 " in the heavens " — in that high region of felicity and 
 splendour — at God's right hand, which guards it, and in the 
 presence of Christ, who won it, and will bestow it. And this 
 heavenly glory is an object of hope to them who possess this 
 faith and love for these good reasons : — 1. It is future — as it 
 is not yet enjoyed, but it is lying over; "hope that is seen is 
 not hope." 2. It is future good, for it is in heaven, the scene 
 of all that is fair and satisfying. Coming evil excites terror, 
 but distant good creates hopeful desire and anticipation. For 
 it is the unimagined glory of spiritual perfection, of living in 
 the unshaded radiance of God's face, and in uninterrupted 
 fellowship with Him, and the thronging myriads round about 
 Him — the signet of eternity stamped on every enjoyment. 3. 
 Such future good is attainable. Were it completely beyond 
 reach, it might excite a romantic wish in one heart, and cover 
 another with despair. But the apostle says it is laid up/or 
 you. It will therefore be enjoyed, for Christ has given His 
 pledge. This faith, too, will elevate the spirit to heaven, and 
 that love will prepare it for those supreme enjoyments, 
 
 "For love is heaven, and heaven is love." 
 
 ' Hv TTporjKovaare iv raJ Xoyay t?}? aXrjOeLa^ tov evayyeXlov — 
 " Of which ye have already heard in the word of the truth of 
 tlie gospel." The verb occurs only in this place of the New 
 Testament, but it is found in Herodotus, Xenophon, and Jose- 
 phus.^ In the irpo compounded with the verb, De Wette and 
 Olshausen think that the meaning is — they had heard of the 
 hope in promise befo7'e the enjoyment of it. Such an exegesis 
 is a species of truism, since they must have heard before they 
 could cherish it. Therefore the interpretation of Meyer is 
 equally objectionable — before ye had this hope, it was made 
 I^nown to you, it was communicated to you as a novelty. Nor 
 can we say, generally, that the sense is — ye have heard of it 
 
 ^ Loesner, Ohserv. ad N. T. p. 360. 
 
 ^ Robinson, Lexicon, suh voce. Raphelius, Annot. Sac. vol. ii. p. 525. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 5. 11 
 
 'before I now write it. But the meaning seems to be — that 
 the hope laid up in heaven was, and had been, a prominent 
 topic of preaching, and therefore an invariable topic of 
 hearing in the Christian church. That izpo has the sense of 
 "already" we have shown fully under Eph. i. 12. It is as 
 if he meant to say — I need not expatiate on this hope, bright 
 and glorious though it be ; you are not unacquainted with it, 
 for in the earliest teachings of the gospel when it came to 
 you, ye heard of it — heard of it — 
 
 '£y Tft) X070J T779 aXr]deia<i. We cannot agree with Chrysos- 
 tom, Erasmus, Heinrichs, Baumgarten-Crusius, Storr, and others, 
 in giving the genitive an adjectival sense, as if the meaning 
 were " the true and genuine gospel." The noun akrjOeia'i is 
 made prominent by the article prefixed to it, and the idiom de- 
 notes that " the truth " was the sum and substance of the X0709, 
 or oral communication made to them by the first teachers of 
 Christianity. ^4070? refers to the fact that their first teaching 
 was oral, and not epistolary, or by inspired manuscript ; and 
 this " word," or verbal tuition, had the truth for its pith and 
 marrow. But the form of truth which had been presented to 
 their minds was no common aspect of it. It belonged, not 
 to philosophy or human speculation — it was the truth tov 
 evayyeXiov, " of the gospel." This genitive is not in apposition 
 with T^9 a\7]deLa<i, as Calvin, Beza, Olshausen, De Wette, 
 Bohmer, and Huther suppose, but it has its distinctive meaning 
 — the truth which belongs to the gospel, or is its peculiar and 
 characteristic message. [akriOeia, evayyeXiov, Eph. i. 13.] 
 " The word of the truth of the gospel " could alone reveal the 
 nature and tlie certainty of future and celestial blessedness. 
 The idea and expectation of spiritual felicity and glory in 
 heaven are not connected with the sciences of earth, which 
 deal so subtly with the properties and relations of mind and 
 matter. These forms of knowledge and discovery lead but to 
 the lip of the grave, and desert us amidst the dreary wail of 
 dust to dust and ashes to ashes, but the truth contained in the 
 gospel throws its radiance beyond the sepulchre, unvails the 
 portals of eternity, and discloses the reality, magnitude, and 
 cliaracter of " the hope laid up in heaven." And, therefore, 
 every blessing which the gospel makes known has futurity in 
 its eye — an eye that pierces beyond the present horizon ; and 
 
12 COLOSSIANS I. 6. 
 
 the Christian life, in the meantime, is one as much of expec- 
 tation as of positive enjoyment. 
 
 (Ver. 6.) Tov irapovro'i eh viia<; Ka6cb<; Koi iv Travrl t&j 
 Koa-fio) — "Which has come to you, as it has come in all the 
 world." ^ The verb is used with 7r/po9 in Acts xii. 20; 2 
 Cor. xi. 9 ; Gal. iv. 18, 20, in which instances the presence 
 of persons is referred to, both in subject and object. Here 
 it is followed by eh in the first clause, and iv in the 
 second clause. In the one, by ek, the idea of travel prior 
 to advent is implied ; in the other, by iv, the notion of simple 
 presence is affirmed, Klihner, § 622, The gospel had come to 
 them, was brought to them, and was now with them, or in 
 their possession. (2 Pet. i. 9.) Or, as Theophylact says, ov 
 irapeyevero, (^tjctlv, '7rpb<; v/j,a<i, koi airearr)^ aXka irdpeaTi koI 
 Kparel iv vjjiiv. This idea suggested the Coptic rendering 
 {Phai etsJiop) — " which abideth or dwelleth." And surely 
 such a gift they would keep as their own, prize highly, love 
 dearly, and never suffer it to be contaminated with popular 
 errors, or exchange it for those mystical reveries which were 
 broached among them. For while the errors which the apostle 
 is about to reprobate were limited in their origin and popu- 
 larity, this gospel was "in all the world." We see no 
 necessity for choosing a new verb, and supplying the simple 
 eartv, while Trdpecm is suggested at once by the preceding 
 clause. It was in all the world, because it had come to it. 
 It was not indigenous in any country, but was there merely 
 because it had been carried there. This expression is not to 
 be scanned with narrow minuteness. We cannot, with j 
 Olshausen and Baumgarten-Crusius, look upon it as a pro- | 
 phetic or ideal statement ; nor can we, with Michaelis, limit 
 it to the Pioman empire. The phrase is similarly used by 
 Paul in Piom. i. 8. That world which lay all round about 
 them — those countries which to them were the world, and 
 were by them so named, had been brought into contact 
 with the gospel. It arose in Judtea, but burst its narrow 
 barriers, and came forth with world-wide adaptation, offers, 
 and enterprise. The labours of the other apostles in so 
 
 ^ Raphelius, Annotat. ii. 525, 526 ; Krebs, Ohservat. 333 : the former showing 
 from the classics, and the latter from Josephus, that in -raau/ui is the notion of 
 arrival. Passow, sub voce. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 6. 13 
 
 many countries of the east and west warranted the phrase- 
 
 Kal €<TTiv KapTTO^opov/xevov KoX av^avo/xevov. 
 
 Kai is omitted by Lachmann, and Griesbach is virtually of 
 the same opinion. It is wanting in A, B, C, D^, E\ in several 
 Minuscules, and in the Coptic and Sahidic versions ; but it is 
 found in D^, E^, F, Gr, J, K, the Vulgate, and Syriac, and in the 
 Greek Fathers. The authority of Codices against it is almost 
 balanced by that of Codices in its favour. The words koI 
 av^av. are added to the Stephanie text on the evidence of A, 
 B, C, D\ E\ F, G, J, and many other concurrent witnesses, 
 such as almost all the Versions. Were the first Kat not 
 genuine, there would be a vital change of syntax. But with it 
 there is only a common change. Ktihner, § 863; Winer, § 64.^ 
 The reading we adopt frees the text from much entangle- 
 ment of thought and diction. That gospel in all the world 
 was no idle and barren speculation — a tinted cloud without 
 rain, or a polished cistern without water. Or rather, it was as 
 a tree — yielding his fruit in his season : whose leaf never 
 fadeth. The gospel bore choice and noble clusters of fruit. 
 It is not a ceremonial to be gazed at, or a congeries of opinions 
 to be discussed. It is essentially a practical system, for its 
 ethics are involved in its creed and worship. It makes the 
 heart its home, and diffuses its control and its impulses over 
 thought and action, over motive and life. That fruit is the 
 assemblage of graces which adorn the Christian character. 
 
 The reference in koX av^av. is variously understood. Gro- 
 tius, Olshausen, and Steiger refer it to internal growth, or the 
 growing and ripening of the fruits themselves. We prefer 
 
 ^ Olshausen thus states the case : — " Here the connection of the words is dis- 
 putable, in consequence of the different readings ; St. Paul's discourse proceeds 
 with Kx&us Kai thrice repeated : it is true the xal is wanting in the third, in very 
 many and important MSS. , but the omission is far more explicable because it had 
 already been put twice before, than the addition of it. But then A, C, D, read in 
 the beginning of verse 6 kcc^m; xxi Iv -ravri to! xitrfnu 'ifn xa^'ro(pt>^ou/icit/». By that 
 reading the proposition xct^as — xoV^* is separate from what precedes, and joined 
 with what follows, which brings with it the great inconvenience that then the 
 words xa^Ms xai iv bfjuu do not fit the beginning of the proposition xaiu; xai h 
 ranri TM x'offfta, since the Colossians are to be conceived as included of course with 
 the rest in the whole world. It is with reason, therefore, that Steiger, Biihr, and 
 )thers have retained xa) 'iim x'/.p-rofopouf/.-^/n, and supplied eVt/ at xa(oj; xa) e» Tavrl 
 rat xivfiti)." 
 
14 COLOSSIANS I. 6. 
 
 the idea of the Greek Fathers, for Theodoret explains it thus. 
 — av^rjaiv he twv TncrTevovroiv to 7r\rj6o<;, that is, the growth 
 is the external diffusion of the gospel. That fruit-bearing 
 gospel was extending itself. To keep the figure of the apostle, 
 it was like a tree, whose fruit, falling to the earth, germinated, 
 so that there sprang up a youthful and healthy forest on all 
 sides of it, or like the Eastern banyan, whose tall boughs, as 
 they bend themselves in a graceful curve to the ground, enter 
 it, and fastening into it a new root, rise up again in verdure, 
 and on reaching the requisite height, stoop as before and repeat 
 the same process of self -plantation till field upon field is 
 covered with the progeny of its arches and alcoves. Thus 
 did the gospel make progress — the disciples preached it around 
 them, and their converts becoming preachers in turn, 
 widened the circle of its influence and conquests. Acts xii. 
 24, xix. 20. KaOoi'^ kuI iv v/xiv — "as indeed among you." 
 What the gospel produced and achieved in the world, it 
 produces and achieves among you. It exhibited the same 
 vitality, fruitfulness, and power of self-diffusion in Colosse, 
 as in the regions round about it. And those elements 
 of the gospel had not been of slow production, or periodical 
 manifestation — it, says Paul, had been so among you — 
 
 A^ rj<i r]iMepa<i rfKovaare Kol iire'yvwTe tt]v y^dpiv tov Qeov 
 iv uXTjOela — " From the day ye heard it, and knew the 
 grace of God in truth." This peculiar form of elliptical 
 construction by the incorporation of the noun into the rela- 
 tive clause is not uncommon ; Winer, § 24 ; Bernhardy, p. 
 302. The accusative to the first verb rjKova-are is eva'yye.Xtov. 
 It was the gospel which they had heard. This was the 
 external and audible form of that grace which they had been 
 privileged to know. It was by hearing it, or by verbal in- 
 struction about it, that they had become acquainted with it. 
 The preposition eVt, with jLvdoaKO), has an intensive sense, as 
 has been proved by us under Eph. i. 17. By hearing the 
 gospel they had come to know fully the grace of God — for 
 the grace of God is the essence of the gospel, or the glorious 
 fact which it communicates. It is the good news that God 
 has in His sovereign favour pitied and blessed the world, and 
 conferred upon it an unmerited and unexpected salvation — 
 that while He have might punished. He resolved to pardon — 
 
COLOSSIA.NS I. 6. 15 
 
 that when He might have permitted the law to take its course, 
 He has founded an economy of grace which man had no right 
 to anticipate, and Himself was under no obligation to intro- 
 duce. In every element of the gospel, in its pardon and 
 purity, in its hope and life, in its means as well as in its 
 offers of deliverance, in its application no less than its pro- 
 vision of saving blessings, in its precepts as much as in its 
 privileges, there is felt and known in its peculiar ascendancy 
 and fulness, " the grace of God." [%«pi9, Eph. ii. 8.] 
 
 The last words, e'v dXrjd., are connected in various ways. 
 1. Some give the phrase the force of an adjectival epithet, and 
 join it to %a/3t? — " the true grace " of God. Such is the view 
 of Storr, Homberg, Pierce, Barnes, and Baumgarten-Crusius. 
 This interpretation is without point. 2, Grotius and Musculus 
 depart still farther from the true syntax by their paraphrase 
 — "the grace of God revealed in the word of truth." 3. 
 Beza, Crocius, Olshausen, Steiger, Hutlier, De Wette, Meyer, 
 and Winer, join the phrase to the verb, " and truly or really " 
 knew the grace of God. The knowledge possessed by the 
 Colossians is thus supposed to be distinguished from a false or 
 fictitious knowledge of the Divine grace. 4. We prefer, with 
 Bahr and Calvin, a different shade of the same exegesis, givino- 
 to the phrase an objective meaning, as if the apostle meant 
 to say — the grace which they knew had been presented to 
 them " in its truth," for they had learned it from Epaphras. 
 The preceding forms of exegesis are inferences from this. It 
 was a correct interpretation of the scheme of grace which they 
 had learned, or they possessed a true knowledge of the plan of 
 mercy, because, as the next verse shows, Epaphras had taught 
 them the gospel in its fulness and purit}^ This is also the 
 idea of CEcumenius, though Theophylact and Chrysostom 
 erroneously include the notion of miracles as confirming the 
 truth. We understand the apostle to write thus — since the 
 day ye heard it, and fully knew the grace of God in truth, 
 ! as indeed in that true and complete form ye learned it 
 from Epaphras ; or, as Calvin explains, testatus est sincere illis 
 fuisse tradituin. The words iv aXr)6. describe the teaching of 
 Epaphras, or represent that genuine form, in which, by his 
 preaching, the grace of God had been exhibited at Colosse. 
 It is probable that in this statement there are various points 
 
16 COLOSSIANS I. 7. 
 
 of implied contrast with those corrupt representations which' 
 are mentioned and refuted in the subsequent chapter, Thus- 
 the grace of God had been taught them without mutilation 
 or admixture, but false philosophy shaded or curtailed 
 its doctrines. The gospel was oecumenical, but the error 
 which menaced them was only provincial in its sphere. 
 The truth exhibited the basis and objects of a blessed hope, 
 but falsehood darkened the horizon, and while the gospel 
 yielded great abundance, such fictitious dogmas were barren 
 and empty — a tree with leaves, but without fruit. 
 
 The apostle says — "since ye knew the grace of God in 
 truth," or in its true form, "just as ye learned it from 
 Epaphras " — 
 
 (Ver. 7.) KaOcb'i ifjuaOere diro ^Eirai^pa. The Kal found 
 in the Received Text after Ka6a)<;, is justly excluded on the 
 authority of A, B, C, D^, F, G, 17, 23, etc. It may have come 
 into the text from its frequent employment in such an idiom 
 by the apostle. It might be replied, however, that as, from 
 an old tradition, Epaphras was supposed to be the only 
 founder of the church, the kuI was omitted, as seeming to 
 militate against such a belief. Wiggers, indeed, has formally 
 raised such an argiiment.^ But even were Kal genuine, might 
 it not mean " really," or " indeed " — " as ye indeed learned of 
 Epaphras " ? The teaching of Epaphras is thus sealed and 
 sanctioned by inspired authority. The apostle had no mean 
 jealousy of a colleague who is further characterized as " our 
 beloved fellow-servant " — 
 
 Tov dyaTrrjTov avvhovXov rjf^cov. The noun occurs again in 
 iv. 7. Like 6/x.oSou\o9, the old Attic form, it signifies "fellow- 
 servant," Conybeare and Macknight are found at opposite 
 extremes about the term ; the former rendering it " fellow- 
 bondsman," with unnecessary emphasis, and the latter uttering 
 the sentimental conjecture that Paul used the word because 
 he did not wish to grieve the Colossian church by telling 
 them that their Epaphras was in prison with him. Timothy, 
 Paul, and Epaphras not only served a common master, but 
 were engaged in the same service ; and therefore this com- 
 munity of labour begat a special attachment. The heart of 
 the apostle was knit in cordial affection to all his fellow- 
 
 ' Shidien und Kritiken, 1838, j). 185. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 7. 17 
 
 labourers. He had none of that ignoble rivalry which just 
 " hints a fault and hesitates dislike." He felt no envy at 
 their success, but was so identified with their work, that 
 whatever gladdened them gladdened him ; he shared in their 
 triumphs and was saddened at their reverses. Still more, it 
 is testified of Epaphras — 
 
 "0<i icrrc TrtcrTOf virep Vficov BidKovo<; tov Xpiarou — " who is 
 
 for you a faithful minister of Christ." The noun Siukovo^ is 
 
 used in a general sense, as may be seen under Eph. iii. 7. 
 
 [TTtcTTo? SidKovo<;, Eph. vi. 21.] The reading vTrep v/xayv has 
 
 been called in question, and virep rjfiaiv is adopted by Lach- 
 
 mann, Bengel, Olshausen, and Steiger. In favour of this last 
 
 reading are A, B\ D, G ; and in favour of the former are C, 
 
 D^, E, F, G, K, and others, with almost all the versions and 
 
 Fathers. Where external testimony is so decided, we cannot 
 
 accede to Olshausen's pleading of any internal evidence. And 
 
 the meaning attached to vTrep rifiMV — vice apostoli, in our 
 
 stead — can scarcely be correct, since Epaphras was not simply 
 
 an apostolical representative, for in Tjfjuwv Timothy is included 
 
 along with Paul. Nor is it necessary to give virep the sense 
 
 of "in room of," in Luke ix. 50, for there the phrase means 
 
 ' on our side." The phrase then virep v/jlcov means " on your 
 
 behalf." 2 Cor. iv. 5. The faithful labours of Epaphras were 
 
 directed to the spiritual benefit of the Colossian church. For 
 
 them he served, and served faithfully, in the gospel of Christ. 
 
 A brief but noble eulogy. As he had devoted to them every 
 
 energy, kept among them, and prayed with and for them, as 
 
 he had presented to them a complete and symmetrical view 
 
 of the gospel, and as their correct knowledge of Divine grace 
 
 was based upon his teaching, and their spiritual eminence and 
 
 fertility were the result of his patient and painstaking efforts, 
 
 therefore were they to love him in his absence, and surely 
 
 bhey would allow no false teacher to supplant him in their 
 
 iffection. Probably the encomium was a virtual warning, 
 
 br, as Theodoret says, ttoXXoZ? Be avrov iKo/xiaev iyK(t)/jbLoi<i — 
 
 ■va avToh 7r\elovo<; alSov<i d^tcorepo'i 'yepTjrac. It is a faint 
 
 dew of Chrysostom to imagine that the faithful service here 
 
 'eferred to, is but the truthful report of the spiritual condition 
 
 )f the Colossians, which Epaphras had brought to Eome. 
 
 5uch a slight message could scarce be called a service, and it 
 
 
18 COLOSSIANS I. 8. 
 
 is therefore to fidelity of ministerial labour at Colosse that 
 the apostle refers. It is wholly a caricature of the words 
 to suppose, with Calixtus, Michaelis, and Bohmer, that as 
 Epaphras was the apostle's fellow-prisoner, he alludes to 
 personal services done by the Colossian pastor to himself, as 
 if he had said — " who is, in your room, a faithful servant of 
 Christ to me." 
 
 (Ver. 8.) 'O koI Sr]\ooaa<i r/fuv rrjv vjxoiv ayaTTTjv ev Trvev/jbari 
 — "Who has besides made known to us your love in the 
 Spirit." It narrows the meaning too much to restrict this 
 love to the apostle himself and Timothy — " your love to us." 
 Yet this is the view of the great majority of expositors, from 
 Chrysostom in early times, and Erasmus and Grotius in later 
 days, down to Bahr, Bohmer, Steiger, Huther, and Baumgarten- 
 Crusius. But the language of the apostle does not warrant 
 such a sense except by inference. Nor may the phrase be 
 applied solely to brother-love, but, with Meyer, Theodoret, 
 Heinrichs, and De Wette, we take it in a general sense as 
 denoting the Christian grace of love. And the reason why 
 this grace is selected and eulogized is evident from the con- 
 cluding words — it was love " in the Spirit " — 
 
 'Ev irveviiaTL. To give this phrase, as in the opinion of 
 Eosenmiiller, a-Lapide, TroUope, and others, the mere sense of 
 true Christian love, is a weak dilution. Nor can we with 
 "Wolf and others regard it as in tacit contrast to ev aapKt, a 
 love based on domestic or national ties ; or as if the mean- , 
 ing were — a love to the absent apostle which must be spiritual, \ 
 as they had never seen his face in the flesh. The words, as 
 in Pauline usage, refer to the Holy Spirit, and point out the 
 source and sphere of this gracious affection. Thus, Eom, xiv. 
 17, %a/3a iv TTvev/xari. Gal. v. 22 ; Eom. xv. 13. 'Ev will 
 not stand for Btd, as Grotius renders it. Not as if Epaphras 
 had spoken only of their love, and had made no mention of 
 their other spiritual attainments. But love is regarded as the 
 crown and consequence of all the other graces, and the men- 
 tion of it presupposed their lively and effective exercise. For 
 this love is no affection based on common relations — such as 
 human friendship or social instincts. It is the offspring o£ 
 spiritual influence in a heart so full of antagonism by nature 
 to what is good and pure. The Spirit of Him who is Love 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 9. 19 
 
 takes possession of the believing bosom, and exerts upon it 
 His own assimilating power. And as love is at the same time 
 the combined product or resulting fervour of the other graces, 
 as it gives man his closest resemblance to God, as it is the 
 life and glory of heaven ; and as it is the great object of the 
 gospel to create and perfect it in the church, it may be safely 
 taken as the index of spiritual advancement. The more it is 
 seen in its vivid sympathies with all that is fair and God-like, 
 the more its genial harmonies pervade the churches, the 
 more its chivalrous impulses are felt, the more token is there 
 that the Spirit of God has been in powerful and characteristic 
 operation, and therefore as the true summation or totality of 
 its various spiritual gifts, a Christian community may be 
 congratulated on its love. When Epaphras declared their 
 " love in the Spirit," he spoke of the result, and from such a 
 result it was at once inferred what a Divine change had been 
 wrought, and how the elements of that change had been 
 surely and successively developed and matured. " He that 
 dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him." 
 
 The reader will easily mark the course of thought. In 
 verse 3, the apostle intimates that as he prayed, he gave thanks 
 for them. Then naturally he tells the reason, but the telling 
 of the reason in full prevents him from recording at once 
 what formed the theme of his prayer. Now, however, in 
 verse 9, he reverts to the contents of his supplications, and 
 he says that he asked from God, for the Colossians, blessings 
 fitted for mind, heart, and conduct, — a higher degree of 
 knowledge, holiness, usefulness, persistence, and strength — all 
 of them at once gifts of present possession, and elements of 
 preparation too for future blessedness — all of them provided 
 by the Father, and enjoyed by those who have been translated 
 into the kingdom of His Son. 
 
 (Ver. 9.) Aia rovro koI rjfiel^, d(j) rj^ r][iepa<i rjKovcraixev, ov 
 iravofieOa virep vfjbwv Trpoaev^ofxei'ot, Kol alrovfjLevoi — " On this 
 account, we too, since the day we heard of it, cease not 
 praying and asking." Aca tovto — on this account, because ye 
 know the grace of God in truth — because such are your con- 
 dition and prospects — because of the faith which sustains you, 
 the love which glows within you, the blessed hope laid up for 
 you, and the verdant fertility which characterizes you, and 
 
 E 
 
20 COLOSSIANS I. 9. 
 
 sets its seal on the genuineness of your Christianity. Kal 
 r)ixeh — " we too," we on our part. There is no reason, with 
 I)e Wette, for subjoining the Kai to hia tovto and rendering 
 " on this account, indeed." The plirase a^' ?^9 ri/xepa<i not 
 only refers to verse 8, but carries us back to verse 4. The 
 receipt of the intelligence produced immediate result, and led 
 to prayer. The report did not lie in dormancy, or slowly 
 wake up the reciprocal love of Paul and Timothy. The effect 
 was instant — and it was not spent witli a single impulse. 
 From the day we heard it down to the period of our writing 
 this letter — " we cease not." This continuous prayer is 
 explained by the beautiful remark of Augustine on Psalra 
 xxxvii. — ips'um dcsiderium tuum oratio hia est, si continuuni 
 est desiderium — continua est oratio. 
 
 The verb TravofxeOa is here followed by a participle, 
 irpoa-ev^o/xevoL Kal acTov/xevoi,, and not by the infinitive. There 
 is indeed a difference of meaning in the two usaijes, as the 
 participle expresses an action which already exists. Winer, § 
 45, 4; Bernhardy, p. 477. [Eph. i. 16.] The distinction 
 between the two participles has been variously understood. 
 But the best mode of characterizino- the difference is to regard 
 the one as general, and the other as special ; the first is prayer 
 in its ordinary aspect, and the second is direct request. But 
 it is an error on the part of Baumgarten-Crusius to say that 
 iva depends upon the last participle — for Trpoa-ev-^o/jiaL is 
 lollowed by the conjunction in Matt, xxiv. 20 ; Mark xiii. 
 18; 1 Cor. xiv. 13. The phrase vvep v/jlcov belongs also to 
 both participles. What the special object of supplication was 
 is now made known. Praying — 
 
 "Iva irXrjpoidT^Te rijv eTTiyvcoaLV rov OeXi^fiaio^i avrou — 
 " that ye may be filled with the knowledge of His will." [As 
 to this use of iva, see Eph. i. 17.] The verb irXTjpovv, like 
 the correspondent term in Hebrew, governs two accusatives 
 in the active conjugation, and may therefore govern one of 
 them in the passive. The genitive is the case oftenest 
 employed in the New Testament to denote the complement — 
 that with which the action of the verb is realized. In this 
 use of the accusative there is no need, with Beza and Erasmus, 
 to supply Kara. Winer, ^ 32, 5.^ We cannot agree Avith 
 1 Moulton, p. 287, note 2. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 9. 21 
 
 Olshausen, that 'yvwca and i'iTl<yv(oai<; have no distinction in 
 the diction of the Apostle Paul. We have shown the true 
 difference under Eph. i. 17. The vague definition of Steiger 
 cannot be sustained ; it is wrapt in uncertainty, and is at 
 best but a metaphysical subtlety. The idea of Bahr, that 
 eTrlyvcoafi is subjective, and yvwcrc^ is also objective, is only 
 a partial view. 'Ettljv. is full knowledge exhaustive of its 
 object, and is especially meant for those who have already 
 some little yva}(rL<i. The Colossians had <yvojo-i<;, but the apostle 
 M'ished them to be filled with additional and supplemental 
 knowledge, not new knowledge, or a different form or section 
 of Christian science, but a fuller development of the partial 
 theological information which they already possessed. Had 
 he gently wished them somewhat more of knowledge, he 
 might have used yvcoaa, but as he prayed that they might be 
 filled with more of that insight which they already enjoyed, 
 such an accumulation was naturally expressed by iirlyvwa-L^. 
 
 That augmentation of knowledge had for its theme the 
 Divine will. We apprehend that the principal fault of 
 commentators has been to restrict too much the meaning of 
 the phrase, " His will," Chrysostom, and the Greek Fathers 
 fficumenius and Theophylact, followed by Huther, refer it to 
 the plan of redemption — especially salvation by Christ, not by 
 angels — TouTeVrt to tov v'thv hodrjvaL inrep 7]fia>v. Others 
 refer it to the secret purpose of God — such as Suicer and 
 Bahr, and that because it is elsewhere accompanied by 
 fjLvarrrjpiov. A third and numerous party understand the 
 legislative will of God — the ethical feature of the Divme 
 counsel, such as Theodoret, De Wette, and Meyer. We are 
 inclined to take the phrase without any restriction — the 
 Divine will as well in creed as in moral obligation ; the one 
 basis alike of what we ought to believe and of what we ought 
 to do ; the only rule of faith and manners. 1 Cor. i. 4, 5, 7, 
 ii. 12, xii. 8; Eph. i. 17. The apostle implored for them 
 a complete knowledge of the Divine Will in all its revealed 
 aspects and elements — 
 
 'Ev Trdcrrj <ro(pla, koI crvveaet TrvevfMaTLKrj — " in all wisdom 
 and spiritual insight." Some join the clause to the following 
 verse, but without any necessity. The preposition does not 
 signify " along with," nor does it, as Boehmer thinks, define 
 
22 COLOSSIANS I. 9. 
 
 the result. Nor does it mean, as Biihr takes it, " by means 
 of ; " nor does it, as Huther supposes, point out the quality of 
 the knowledge. It seems to refer us to the mode of its 
 acquisition — " in all wisdom and understanding." The prayer 
 was not one for plenary inspiration — nor that God would by 
 some dazzling self-discovery imbue them with a knowledge of 
 His will, but that He would give them this higher spiritual 
 science in the way of giving them all spiritual wisdom and 
 understanding. These two nouns are not easily comprehended 
 in their specific shades of difference. As a specimen of the 
 scholastic forms of definition, we present that of Peter Lombard 
 — Sapientia est habitus infusus ad solius actcrnae veritatis 
 contemplationem ct delectationem. Intclligentia ad Creatoris ct 
 creaticrarum invisihilium speculationem} But, — 
 
 1. Not a few, such as Michaelis, Storr, Flatt, and Heinrichs, 
 regard them as synonymous ; a mode of interpretation too 
 easy to be correct — too slovenly to be in accordance with 
 accurate philology. 
 
 2. Many give ao<f)ia the sense of theoretic wisdom, and 
 avveai'i, the meaning of practical discernment — such as Bahr, 
 Heinsius, and Calvin. 
 
 3. Bengel, Meyer, and Baumgarten - Crusius, think the 
 nouns related in the sense of general and special, while De 
 Wette thinks the first term to be practical and general, and 
 the second theoretical and special. We are inclined to take 
 cro(f>La in a general sense, and to regard avvecrt^ irvev^aTLK-q as 
 its characteristic form or peculiarity. For if God fill men with 
 the knowledge of His will, it is usually by clearing their 
 spiritual apprehension, and enlarging the sphere of their 
 spiritual vision. The mind is trained and tutored to the study 
 of Divine things ; and as the horizon of its view is gradually 
 expanded in such an exercise, it gathers in " wisdom " — and 
 what is this wisdom but " spiritual insight " ? Let there be 
 intense practical application of the mental powers ; prolonged 
 reflection ; devout and pensive contemplation ; the inspection 
 and comparison of premises ; the solution of doubts ; tlie 
 ascent, step by step, slowly and surely, to first principles ; the 
 glimpse of ulterior relations based upon present realities, and 
 conclusions drawn from recognized truths ; and surely the 
 
 ' Lib. iii. Distinctio, xxxv. 2, ii. 318. Opera, ed. Migne, Paris, 1841. 
 
I COLOSSIANS I. 10. 23> 
 
 nnnd so interested and occupied must feel all such acquisitions 
 to be wisdom — wisdom, and not mere theory to be tested — 
 wisdom, and not simple hypothesis that may be dismissed. 
 And those fruits of diligent investigation are not like the 
 coloured glimpses of a distant reverie which may be dimmed 
 or exchanged, or may wholly fade away, as the whim of such 
 imaginational pastime may lazily will it ; but they bear at 
 orice upon the nearest of interests, and evince their immediate 
 connection with the most momentous of relations. Of all 
 forms of intellectual operation and enlightenment, this is the 
 most practical — it is " wisdom." God fills the mind, not by 
 the passive inpouring of transcendental truths, but by direct- 
 ing and upholding its energies, and so enabling it to work 
 out the result which it makes its own, and recognizes as "all 
 wisdom." 
 
 And this wisdom is really avveaa Trvev/jbaTiKi] — spiritual 
 insight. As we have shown at length under Eph. i. 3, the 
 prevailing meaning of irvev^iaTiKO'; in the New Testament, is 
 " of, or belonging to the Holy Spirit." Spiritual is not 
 opposed to carnal, and means not — in connection with the 
 human spirit, but the phrase signifies discernment conferred 
 and quickened by the Holy Ghost. This enjoyment of the 
 Spirit of Light is the special privilege of believers. He dispels 
 the mists which obscure the inner vision, fills the soul with an 
 ardent relish for Divine truth and a fuller perception of it, 
 enables it to see through a perfect medium, and thus confers 
 upon it that power and perspicacity termed by the apostle 
 "spiritual understanding." And where this purity and pene- 
 tration of discernment are possessed, and the fruits of such 
 wisdom are gleaned and garnered up, the mind, in the use of 
 such a faculty, and the enjoyment of such acquisitions, cannot 
 but be conscious that it has risen to an ampler knowledge of 
 the Divine will. The apostle prefixes trdari — " all." This 
 -wisdom and spiritual understanding are not limited or 
 shrivelled, but may be enjoyed to their utmost bounds. 
 
 (Ver. 10.) IlepciTaTijcrat vfjbd<i a|ia)9 rov Kvpcov — "So that 
 ye walk worthy of the Lord." 'Tixd<; appears to be a spurious 
 but natural supplement, and is omitted by A, B, C, D \ Y, G, 
 though the authorities for it are of no mean value. The 
 Syriac has a peculiar rendering. It reads in the last clause of 
 
24 COLOSSIANS I. 10. 
 
 the preceding verse — that ye walk " according to what is 
 just," *^?1? 5^1, and then adds — that ye may please God in all 
 good works. The apostle, after the verb of prayer, first uses 
 iW with the subjunctive, as indicating the prime petition; 
 then follows irepiTraTrjaai as denoting a contemporaneous 
 result, and this infinitive is succeeded by a series of dependent 
 and explanatory participles. The figure implied in the verb 
 is a common one, and is of Hebrew origin. It describes the 
 general tenor of one's life, his peculiar gait and progress in his 
 spiritual journey, what are his companions, and what are his 
 haunts ; whether he hold on his way with steady step, or is 
 seduced into occasional aberrations. By Kvpio<i is meant 
 Christ, and not God, as Anselm and Erasmus imagine ; and the 
 meaning and reasons of the name are fully detailed under 
 Eph. i. 2. The adverb a^lay'^ signifies " becomingly." [Eph. 
 iv. 1.] Eom. xvi. 2 ; Pliik i. 27 ; 1 Thess. ii. 12. To walk 
 worthy of the Lord, is to feel the solemn bond of redeeming 
 blood, to enshrine the image of Him who shed it, to breathe 
 His spirit and act in harmony with His example, to exhibit 
 His temperament in its elements of purity, piety, and love, to 
 be in the world as He was in the world, to be good and to do 
 good, and to show by the whole demeanour that His law is 
 the rule which governs, and His glory the aim which elevates 
 and directs. No meritum condigni can be inferred from the 
 passage, as Cameron shows against Bellarmine.^ 
 
 El<i iraaav dpeaKeiav — " In order to all-pleasing." The 
 noun ape(TK6ia has, in classic Greek, a bad sense, and means 
 obsequiousness, but it has a purified meaning in Philo and in 
 the JSTew Testament.^ The Lord is to be pleased and highly 
 pleased in everything, for again the apostle prefixes Traaav. 
 This well-pleasing is not to be sectional, but uniform and 
 unbounded ; and it is not difficult to please Him. Men are 
 not left in uncertainty to study the best method of ensuring 
 His complacency," nor are there any moods or forms of caprice 
 with Him. His highest pleasure is to see His own likeness in 
 those who own His Lordship : in all their thoughts, purposes, 
 and actions, there should be a pervading and paramount 
 desire to walk so worthily of Him, as to secure His approval. 
 Nor does this statement involve any subtle casuistry. What- 
 ^ Myrothec'nim, p. 263. ^ Atheiiaeus, Deipnos. lib. vi. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 10. 25 
 
 ever is good in design, generous in sentiment, or noble in 
 result, meets at once with His approbation. Whatever 
 proximate motive leads the heart, this should be its pole star, 
 the bright, prominent, and ultimate guide and director. 
 
 ^Ev iravTi epyo) ayaOu) Kap7ro(f>opovvT€^. The participles are 
 in the nominative, and not accusative, as in Eph. iii. 18. 
 Kiihner, § 863 ; Winer, § 63, I. 2 a; Vigerus, De Idiotismis, 
 p. 340. "Fruit-bearing in every good work." This clause is 
 joined by Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Steiger, to et? iracrav 
 dpia-Keiav. But such a view is too narrow. It is an element of 
 the worthy walk — and the first of four elements, each specified 
 by a participle, KapirocfiopovvTe'i — au^avofxevoc — Bvvafj,ovp.evoL 
 — evxaptarovvre'i ; two of the participles preceded by a 
 qualifying noun with iv ; and two of them followed by ek, 
 denoting purpose or result. The first two participles occur 
 together in verse 6. Spiritual fruitfulness is the first cha- 
 racteristic. And those fruits are good works. 2 Cor. ix. 
 8 ; 2 Thess. ii. 17 ; Heb. xiii. 21 ; Gal. v. 22 ; Phil. i. 11. 
 [epya dyaOd, Eph. ii. 10.] Barrenness is deadness. The 
 tree with sapless trunk and leafless branches is a melancholy 
 object. The figure before us is that of a tree covered with 
 dense foliage, and laden with goodly produce — its boughs 
 bent with heavy clusters, its crops perennial — buds always 
 bursting into blossoms, and blossoms forming into fruit. But 
 the apostle says "every good work." For a third time he 
 employs Travrl. It is the want of this universality that is the 
 chief mark of imperfection. This unique tree is omniferous. 
 Other trees produce each only after its kind, unless altered by 
 the artificial process of grafting. But this tree presents every 
 variety of spiritual fruit without confusion or rivalry, as if it 
 contained the stateliness of the palm, the fatness of the olive, 
 and the exuberant fecundity of the vine. The graces of 
 Christianity are, each in its place, adorning and adorned — 
 none absent and none sickly, but the entire assemblage in 
 perfect order and symmetry. Superabundance of one kind of 
 fruit is no compensation for the absence of another. " Every 
 good work " is inculcated and anticipated. It may be noble 
 philanthropy, or more lowly beneficence — it may be the selt- 
 denial of a martyr, or the gift of a cup of water to the humble 
 wayfarer — it may be a deed of magnanimity which startles the 
 
2G COLOSSIANS I. 10. 
 
 nations, or it may be the washing of a beggar's feet — teaching 
 its first letters to a ragged orplian, or repeating the story of the 
 cross in the hovel of poverty and distress. There is no excep- 
 tion — " every good work " which Christ did, and in which any 
 of His disciples may imitate Him — every good work which 
 the age needs, or circumstances warrant, or would benefit the 
 church or the world. Such fruitfulness is not exhaustive. 
 The tree grows healthfully while its fertility is so great. Its 
 life is not spent, and its wealth is not impoverished in a single 
 autumn, but other twigs are preparing for their burden, and 
 other shoots are evincing the vitality of the parent stock — for 
 the apostle adds — 
 
 Kal au^avofxevoc et? rr]v iirLjvcocrLv tov Oeov — " And growing 
 up to the knowledge of God." Other forms of reading are — 
 ev rfi iiriyvcoaeL and rf} iirfyvcoaet. The last seems to be the 
 best supported by MSS. ; the Versions seem to countenance the 
 second ; but the first is the most difficult form, and therefore 
 has been preferred by Tischendorf. Meyer says that et? is 
 necessary, because each of the two succeeding participles is 
 followed by this preposition, and analogy demands it here. 
 But what if we should reply — that to secure uniformity some 
 have been tempted to write ek where another preposition 
 originally stood ? A, B, C, D\ E, F, G, and some Minuscules, 
 with the Syriac and Coptic versions, support the simple dative 
 rfj iTTiyvooo-ei. If the accusative, with et9, be retained, various 
 forms of exegesis may be proposed. Meyer renders et? 
 hinsichtlich, in regard to. Theophylact paraphrases Kara to 
 fierpov — " according to the measure " of the knowledge of God, 
 an interpretation virtually adopted by Heinrichs and Bohmer. 
 If the dative with eV be received, then the meaning may be, 
 as Theodoret, the Peschito and Vulgate, Beza, Luther, and 
 Junker, intimate — growing in the knowledge of God, that is, 
 acquiring more and more of the knowledge of God. But 
 with Olshausen, De Wette, and Huther, we regard the simple 
 dative as instrumental — growing " by means of the knowledge 
 of God," — the knowledge of His essence, character, will, and 
 dispensations. [See under Eph. i. 17.] This knowledge of 
 God, the purest and loftiest of human acquisitions, is the 
 only pabulum of spiritual growth. A God in shadow creates 
 superstition, and the view of Him in only one phasis of His 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 11. 27 
 
 character, will, according to its colour, lead either to fanaticism 
 or to mysticism. The more we know of His tenderness and 
 majesty, the more conversant we are with His Divine pro- 
 cedure, either as we find Him in creation, or meet Him in 
 providence ; and especially the deeper the experience we have 
 of the might of His arm and sympathy of His bosom in redemp- 
 tion, the more will the spirit confide in Him, and the more 
 will it love the object of its living trust — in short, the more 
 spiritual growth will it enjoy. This fruit-bearing and increase 
 are the first features of the worthy and pleasing walk. 
 
 (Ver. 11.) The first clause, though its purpose is designated 
 by the following etV, has a close connection with the preceding. 
 It describes that peculiar spiritual condition in which believers 
 bring forth fruit, and grow, and thus walk worthy of Christ. 
 The power is not indigenous ; the fertility is not the outburst 
 of innate and essential vitality. It comes from imparted 
 strength — the might of God lodged within us. As His own 
 nature is for ever outworking in ceaseless acts of beneficence, 
 so His strength, lodged in a believer, loses not its original and 
 distinctive energy. 
 
 'Ev irdcrr] 8vvd/jbet BvvafMovjuevoc. This verb occurs only 
 here in the New Testament, though it is found in the Septua- 
 gint as the representative of two Hebrew verbs, Ps. Ixviii. 2 9 ; 
 Eccles. X. 10. Neither does it occur in the classical,^ though it 
 is used by the ecclesiastical writers. The common form in 
 the New Testament is ivhvva^iow. The use of the correlate 
 noun and participle intensifies the meaning. The apostle 
 , refers to the impartation of the Divine strength to believers. 
 Fallen humanity is feeble, but rises under this gift into prowess 
 and majesty. The semblance of moral omnipotence is com- 
 municated to it, and it easily surmounts frailty, pain, sorrow, 
 and death, for the apostle a fourth time employs Trda-rj. Phil. 
 iv, 13. And the measure of this gift is — 
 
 Kara to KpdTo<i Tr]<i 80^7;? auTov — " according to the might 
 of His glory," that is, the might which is characteristic of His 
 glory. Retaining with Meyer and others the full force of the 
 syntax, we cannot, with Luther, Junker, Beza, Storr, Flatt, 
 Bahr, and Davenant, resolve the idiom thus — His glorious or 
 highest might ; nor can we with Bohmer make the clause 
 ' Phryniclius, ed. Lobeck, Parerga, p. 605. 
 
28 COLOSSIANS I. 11. 
 
 mean — that might which is His glory ; nor can we with Grotius 
 and Valpy identify t?}? So^t;? with the T779 icr^j^vo? of Eph. i. 
 19 ; nor, finally, can we with Thomas Aquinas and Peter 
 Lombard understand by His glory " His Son Christ Jesus." 
 The glory of God possesses a peculiar might, and that might 
 is not love simply, as Huther imagines. [Eph. i. 19.] If 
 we survey the glory of God in creation, the immensity of its 
 architectural power overwhelms us ; or in providence, its ex- 
 haustless and versatile energy perplexes us ; or in redemption, 
 its moral achievements delight and amaze us. If the spiritual 
 strength given to believers be after the measure of the might 
 of this glory, with what courage and ability shall they be 
 armed ? Will they not, with so much of God in them, realize 
 the God-like in spiritual heroism, so as to resist evil, overcome 
 temptation, banish fear, surmount difficulties, embrace oppor- 
 tunities of well-doing, obtain victory over death, and prove 
 that they are able to rise above everything before which 
 unaided humanity sinks and succumbs. " Strengthened " — 
 
 Eh nraaav vTro/xovrjv kuI fjuaKpoOvfjulav — " in order to all 
 patience and long-suffering." These two nouns have been 
 variously distinguished. The early definition of Chrysostom 
 is fanciful — fxaKpoOvfiel yap xi? 7rpo9 eKelvov^ 0&9 Bvvarov koI 
 a/jivvaaOai, vTTo/xeveL Se 0&9 ov Svvarat a/xvvaadat — " Long- 
 suffering is exercised toward those whom we can punish, 
 patience toward those whom we are unable to punish," where- 
 fore he adds, " patience is never ascribed to God, but long- 
 suffering often." Others refer the first noun to feeling under 
 what God sends ; and the second, to feeling under what man 
 inflicts. A third class understand by the one term the state 
 of temper under difficulties ; and, by the other, mental calm- 
 ness under suffering. But, not to notice other varieties of 
 opinion,^ we incline to give the words a more extended signi- 
 fication than to resignation, or quietness under injury. Both 
 of them and their correspondent verbs are used not simply 
 in reference to the pressure of present evil, but also to the 
 prospect of coming deliverance, and as adjuncts or qualities 
 of faith, or the life of faith. The following examples may 
 suffice: — "Bring forth fruit," ev viro/jLovrj, Luke viii. 15; 
 "Possess ye your souls," ev virofi., Luke xxi. 19; "Well- 
 1 Tittmann, De Synon. N. T. p. 194. 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
C0L0SSIAN3 I. 11. 29 
 
 doing," Ka9' utto/j,., Eom. ii. 7 ; " Let us run the race," 8l' i'tto/x., 
 Heb. xii. 1 ; or again, Heb. x. 36, " Ye have need of patience." 
 The word in such places denotes that tenacity of spirit which 
 still holds on, and perseveres, and waits God's time for reward 
 or dismissal. There is similar usage also of the second noun. 
 Its verb is used to denote the same exercise of mind, Matt, 
 xviii. 26, 29, Heb, vi. 15, Jas. v. 7, 8; and the substan- 
 tive in Heb. vi. 12, 2 Tim. iv. 2. There is no reference in 
 this epistle either to persecution or to coming calamity. But 
 believers in the present state are not perfect, they have not 
 arrived at the ultimate goal. Impatience would lead to defec- 
 tion, and fretfulness to apostasy. There is rest set before 
 them, but they have not readied it ; hopes held out, but their 
 fruition has not come. It is more trying to virtue to bear 
 than to act : or, as a-Lapide says, fortia agcre Bomanum. est, 
 aiehat Scaevola, scd fortia pati Christiannm est. Now, Chris- 
 tians are apt to faint under such discouragements, to lose heart 
 and despond. Therefore do they need " patience and long- 
 mindedness ; " and because these graces dAvell not in their 
 unassisted nature, the apostle prays that the strength of God 
 be for this purpose imj)arted to them. Even in their beneficent 
 fruitfulness there may be a long and trying process ere the 
 result be witnessed. In the midst of apparent anomaly and 
 contradiction, with so much to distress and disappoint, so 
 much to try and provoke, so much to tempt a prayer for the 
 immediate substitution of sight for faith, there is surely great 
 necessity for perseverance and unruffled equanimity ; and be- 
 cause temper fails under such irritation, as it did with Moses 
 and Elisha, and there are dark and inconsistent questionings 
 and surmises, as if He were " slack concerning His promise," 
 a higher power is vouchsafed, even the strength of Him 
 whose patience and long-suffering transcend all measurement 
 and description. And thus " all patience and long-suffering " 
 are possessed, and for a fifth time, in the fulness of his heart, 
 the apostle writes iraaav. As the Colossian church was 
 pestered with insidious errorists, whose speculations might 
 occasionally perplex and confound them, immobility was the 
 more requisite for them ; and such, therefore, is the apostle's 
 supplication in common with the sentiment of the prophet — 
 " In quietness and confidence shall be your strength." 
 
30 COLOSSIAXS I. 12. 
 
 Mera xapa^ — " with joy." A large number of expositors 
 join these words to the following participle — ev'^apLarovvTe';. 
 Of this opinion are Chrysostom, CEcumenius, and Theophylact, 
 Estius, Bohmer, Huther, and Meyer, the Syriac version, and 
 the editors Lachmann and Tischendorf. But we do not see 
 any propriety in such a connection, for the participle carries 
 the idea of joy along with it. The preposition, moreover, 
 indicates a connection with the preceding nouns, or shows the 
 concomitant of this imparted power ; and therefore, with 
 Luther, Grotius, Zanchius, Hyperius, Gomarus, De Wette, 
 Bahr, Baumgarten-Crusius, Junker, Steiger, and Olshausen, 
 we keep the words as they stand in the Eeceived Text. This 
 joy characterizes, or rather accompanies, as the preposition 
 implies/ the graces of patience and long-suffering. That 
 peculiar position which necessitates the exercise of patience 
 and long-suffering should not induce despondency, or cast a 
 gloom over the heart as if it were inevitable fate, to be sul- 
 lenly submitted to, but rather should there be joy that this 
 Divine power is communicated, and that the mind is upborne 
 in triumph, and enabled to hope and wait in quiet expectation. 
 And there are abundant reasons of joy. 
 
 (Ver. 12.) EvxapcaTovvTe<; to5 iraTpt. There are some 
 variations of reading which need not be noted or analyzed. 
 Codices D^ and G read KoXecravTi instead of iKavoiaavrt, 
 perhaps from 1 Thess. ii. 12 ; while B reads KokiaavTi ical 
 UavcaaavTc, a form erroneously adopted by Lachmann. 
 
 But with what portion of the previous context should this 
 verse be connected ? Chrysostom, Theodoret, Calvin, Calo- 
 vius, Bohmer, and Baumgarten-Crusius, refer the connection 
 to ou iravofieda, as if ev-^ap. referred to Paul and Timothy, 
 the writers of this epistle and the offerers of this prayer. 
 " Since the day we heard it we cease not to pray for you . . . 
 giving thanks to the Father." But such a connection is 
 wholly capricious and unwarranted, and would make the two 
 preceding verses a species of parenthesis. The natural order 
 is to regard ev'^aptarovvre-i as co-ordinate with the preceding 
 participles KapirocpopovvTe^;, av^avofxevoi, Swafiovfievoc, and as 
 all four dependent on the infinitive ireptTraTrjaai, — that ye may 
 walk, fruit-beariug, growing, strengthened, and giving thanks. 
 ' Commentary on Ephesians, vi. 23. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 12. 31 
 
 And there is a beautiful sequence of tliouglit. Tlie apostle 
 prayed that they might walk in immediate spiritual fertility 
 and growth ; amidst difficulties, strengthened into patience 
 with joy ; and such joy is no romantic enthusiasm, for it is 
 based upon experience, inasmuch as even during this imper- 
 fect and unsatisfactory state, they were warranted to thank 
 Him who was qualifying them all the while for the heavenly 
 inheritance. From the visible and outward manifestation of 
 fruit as a present and characteristic duty, the apostle ascends 
 to internal and sustaining sentiment, and rises yet higher to 
 that gratitude, which, based upon a growing maturity for 
 heavenly blessedness, expresses its ardour in thanksgiving to 
 the Father. The future is thus linked with the present, and 
 sheds its lustre over it ; and though the believer be now in a 
 condition whose intermediate nature necessitates the possession 
 of patience and long-suffering, his mind feels at the same 
 time within it the elements of accelerating preparation for a 
 nobler and purer state of existence. 
 
 In the participle iKavdoaavrt, connected with ikco — " I reach, 
 or arrive at," is the idea of fitness — " who hath fitted us," 
 2 Cor. iii. 6. The pronoun rjfid^ includes the writer of the 
 epistle and his readers, and the aorist may denote repeated 
 action, continued during a past period. The object to which 
 this fitness relates is described — 
 
 ^t9 Tiju fxepiha rod KXrjpov tcov dyccov iv rat ^wrl — " For 
 the share of the inheritance of the saints in light." The noun 
 /Ltep/? denotes a portion or share which one is to enjoy, and 
 that share is in the KXypo^, or inheritance, so designated from 
 an allusion to the division and allotment of the land of 
 Canaan. [Eph. i. 11.] Both words represent a Hebrew 
 phrase — p)*.^, ^^^., Deut. xxxii. 9. That inheritance has a 
 peculiar proprietary, or population — it belongs to the saints.^ 
 The saints are neither Jews nor believers of an early date, but 
 the company of those who are Christ's. [Eph. ii. 19, iii. 18.] 
 
 The meaning and connection of the remaining phrase have 
 been variously understood. We merely notice, without dwell- 
 
 1 As specimens of eccentric etymology may be quoted two attempts to theolo- 
 gize upon ciyio} and sanctus — the former, according to Adam Clarke, being 
 compounded of a, privative, and 7?, "the earth;" and of the latter, Isidore 
 the Pelusiot says — sanctum did quasi sanguine tinctum. 
 
32 COLOSSIANS I. 12. 
 
 iiig on it, the opinion of some of the Fathers, that by (^w? is 
 meant baptism ; that of Are tins, that Christ Himself is indicated 
 by the term ; that of Grotius, that the syntax may be thus 
 filled — a^Lwv r(ov ev (peoTt; that of Bengel, that iv tcS ^wtl 
 should be joined to /xepiSa — participation in the kingdom of 
 light, in hoc regno partem heatam. 
 
 1. Meyer and others, after Chrysostom, CEcumenius, and 
 Theophylact, with Vatablus and Schrader, take eV as instru- 
 mental, and join it to iKavcocravTi,, and then the meaning will 
 be — who fits us by means of the light — the illumination of 
 the gospel, ttj 'yvco-jet. 
 
 2. Others, as Macknight, give the same meaning to the 
 term (^w?, but with a different connection, the inheritance of 
 the saints which consists of light, to wit, their present evan- 
 gelical state as in contrast with the darkness of their previous 
 condition. 
 
 To both these forms of exegesis we have objections. 1. 
 The position of iv tw (pcoTi at the end of the verse seems 
 to connect it with the /cXtJ/jo?, as descriptive of it. 2. The 
 language of the next verse speaks of a kingdom of darkness, 
 out of which the Colossians had been translated. Now, the 
 appropriate contrast is, out of a kingdom of darkness into one 
 of light — light not being the instrument of translation, but the 
 special property of the second realm. 3. K\r}po>; is often 
 followed by iv to signify what it consists in. Thus, in the 
 Septuagint — Wisd. v. 5, o KXrjpo'i iv 0-7/04?; also Job xxx. 19, 
 ■)] fiepU iv <yf] ; and in the New Testament, Acts viii. 21, xxvi. 
 18 ; Eev. xx. 6. This "light," however, though enjoyed here, 
 is not meant to describe their present, but their future state. 
 For the inheritance, though given on earth, is finally enjoyed 
 in heaven, and therefore in Eph. i. 14 the Holy Ghost is 
 called the " earnest of our inheritance ; " and in the same 
 chapter, the apostle prays that the Ephesians may comprehend 
 the riches of the glory of God's inheritance among His saints. 
 Again he specifies, in the same epistle, v, 5, certain classes of 
 men who have no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and 
 God. In Acts xx. 32, xxvi. 18, 1 Pet. i. 4, the inheritance 
 is future glory. We apprehend, then, that the apostle means 
 to say, that God has fitted them for the future inheritance of 
 the saints, which consists in light. It is too restricted a view 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 12. 33 
 
 of Bohmer and Huther, to find in </)co? simply the glory 
 of heaven — and of Beza and Storr, to confine it to the happi- 
 ness of heaven. The expressive epithet suggests both the one 
 and the other, suggests that knowledge is the concomitant of 
 happiness, and purity the basis of glory. 
 
 For heaven is a region of light. The radiance of Him who 
 is Light streams through it and envelopes all the children of 
 the light who live and walk in its lustre. A happy and un- 
 failing intuition, sustained by its vicinity to the Uncreated 
 Mind, is the source of unchequered and perfect knowledge. 
 Intellectual refinement is robed " in the beauty of holiness." 
 The brilliancy of the Divine image is reflected from every 
 stainless heart, and the material glory of the residence is only 
 surpassed by its spiritual splendour. That " light " is liable to 
 no revolution and suffers no eclipse ; it glows with unchanging 
 permanence, and meeting with no obstruction creates no 
 sliadow. For they are " saints " who dwell in this kingdom — 
 adorned with purity and perfection. Now such being the nature 
 of the inheritance, it is not difficult to discover what are the 
 elements of meetness for it. Man is incapable of enjoying it 
 by nature ; for darkness covers his mind, and impurity has 
 seized upon his heart, and he must needs be changed. John 
 iii. 3. He has no loyalty to its God, no love to its Saviour, no 
 relish for its pursuits, and no sympathy with its inhabitants. 
 His nature must be brought into harmony with the scene, and 
 into congeniality with the occupations of such a world of light. 
 So that every element of mental obscurity, all that tends to the 
 dark and dismal in temperament, and all that vails the nobility 
 of an heir of God, is dissolved, and fades away in the superior 
 glory. The " saints " possess it — therefore their sanctification 
 is complete. No taint of sin remains, no trace of previous 
 corruption can be discerned. The language of prayer is 
 superseded by that of praise, and the tongue shall be a stranger 
 for ever to moaning and confession. None but the saints, as 
 being " light in the Lord," can dwell in that light. An unre- 
 generate spirit would feel itself so solitary and so unhappy, 
 especially as it saw its hideousness mirrored in that sea of 
 glass which sleeps before the throne, that it would rather 
 plunge for relief into the gloom of hell, and there for a moment 
 feel itself at ease amongothers so likeit in punishment and crime. 
 
34 COLOSSIANS I. 12. 
 
 Again, the one inheritance is shared by many participants, 
 and they who are to enjoy it are made meet for social inter- 
 course. Selfishness vanishes before universal love, the intense 
 yearnings of a spiritual brotherhood are developed and per- 
 fected, for the entire assemblage is so united as if only one 
 heart thrilled in their bosom, while one song bursts from 
 their lips. 
 
 In fine, all this moral fitness is a paternal process, the work 
 of the Father, qualifying His children for their patrimony. 
 They do not infuse this maturity into themselves — this trans- 
 formation is not a natural process, nor do they ripen of 
 necessity into purity and love. The Father meetens them : 
 and from Him are the blood that pardons, the Spirit that 
 purifies, the truth which nourishes, the hope which sustains, the 
 charter which secures — the whole preparation which meetens 
 for the heavenly inheritance. He, therefore, is to be thanked, 
 by all whose experience assures them of this auspicious train- 
 ing. If they are sensible of growth in truth, holiness, and affec- 
 tion — if they feel that they are travelling from stage to stage of 
 spiritual assimilation — if their sanctified instincts and suscepti- 
 bilities are finding congruous satisfaction and luxury in spiritual 
 exercises, then, in spite of every drawback which is inseparable 
 from their present condition in its trials and wants — they are 
 only giving utterance to irrepressible emotion when they are 
 giving thanks "unto the Father."^ Nay, more, the very fact 
 that a renewal is requisite, and that the present state, by its 
 ills and emptiness, renders imperative the exercise of patience 
 and long-suffering, gives a purer relish to celestial enjoyments. 
 So sudden and vast is the change from expectation to enjoy- 
 ment, and from pain to rapture, that the translated saint will 
 feel a zest on entering heaven which cannot be tasted by those 
 who have never had experience of any other state or sphere 
 of existence. Nor do we deny that in the present state the 
 inheritance of light is partially enjoyed, for heaven begins on 
 earth, or as Chrysostom says, the apostle speaks " of things 
 present and things to come." The translation out of darkness 
 is effected here, and the dawning of the perfect day is 
 already enjoyed, though cloud and gloom are often inter- 
 
 ^ Chrysostom well says — Ol f^'ovov -/if^Tv s'Sanii tJjv rif^nv, aXXa xa) 'nr^vpovs vpo; TO 
 
. COLOSSIANS I. 13. 35 
 
 mingled with it, and vail its beams. And when the inheritance 
 is reached, the spirit of this thanksgiving shall still rule the 
 Jieart. Conscious of its meetness, it shall pour itself out in 
 hearty and prolonged halleluiahs. The world of perfection is 
 a world of universal happiness and song, for no tongue is 
 ever mute, no harp ever unstrung, and the harmony is never 
 disturbed by the mournful echo of a plaintive strain. 
 
 The apostle glides insensibly out of the language of prayer 
 into that of direct theological statement. Still, the statement 
 is virtually a portion of the prayer, as it describes Him who 
 in His redeeming love and power imparts the knowledge 
 of Himself and His revealed will, who confers His own 
 might upon His people, and prepares them for glory — 
 the very God who has delivered us out of the kingdom of 
 darkness. 
 
 (Ver. 13.) "O? ippvcraro ■^fxa.'i eK Tr]<? e^ovcrLa<; tov ctko- 
 Tou? — " Who rescued us out of the kingdom of darkness." 
 This verse does not describe the entire process of prepara- 
 tion, as Meyer seems to think ; it rather gives us a vivid 
 glance of the two termini — the one of departure, and the 
 other of arrival. The unregenerate state is described as the 
 kingdom of darkness.^ It is one of spiritual gloom in its 
 government, essence, pursuits, and subjects. In its adminis- 
 tration it is named — " the power of Satan," in itself it is 
 darkness — its actions are " works of darkness," and its popula- 
 tion are " children of disobedience and wrath." Luke xxii. 53 ; 
 Acts xxvi. 18. It is needless, with Augustine,^ Zanchius, 
 Bloomfield, and others, to regard e^ovcia as personified, and as 
 meaning Satan. [^/coto9, Eph. iv. 18, v. 8.1 This princi- 
 pality is named " darkness " on account of its prevailing 
 ethical element. Above it the heaven is shrouded in dismal 
 eclipse, around it lies dense and impervious gloom, and before 
 it stretches out the shadow of death. What men should 
 believe and what they should do, what they should rest on 
 and what they should hope for, what the mind shoidd fasten 
 
 ' Blackwall, Sacred Classics, vol. ii. 134, proposes to read verses 9-12 in a 
 parenthesis, and as the result of such an arrangement, he exclaims — " How 
 round the period, how vigorous and Divine the sense ! " But such a paren- 
 thesis would be a miserable invention, as it leaves JV without an antecedent at 
 all, or absurdly gives it ■ttviu/^xti in verse 8. 
 
 Yol. ii. p. 1216, Op. ed. Bened. Paris, 1836. 
 
 F 
 
36 COLOSSIANS I. 13. 
 
 on as truth and what the heart should gather in upon itself as 
 a portion, what the spirit should present as acceptable worship 
 and what the conscience should venerate as a rule of duty — 
 all had been a matter of deep perplexity or hopeless uncertainty 
 to the Colossians prior to their spiritual translation. There 
 were occasionally in the heathen world shrewd guesses 
 at truth — incidental approximations, when some brighter 
 intellect unfolded its cogitations and longings. But the 
 masses were involved in obscurity, and scarcely observed 
 the fitful glimmer of the meteor which had shot over them. 
 Ignorance, vice, and misery, the triple shades of this darkness, 
 lield possession of them. This " kingdom of darkness " stands 
 in contrast to the sainted heritage in light. The deponent 
 verb, from an obsolete Ibrm,^ signifies, first, to draw to oneself, 
 then to rescue, to pluck out of danger. The act of deliverance 
 is still ascribed to the Father, for He alone can achieve the 
 spiritual transportation described in the following clause. 
 
 Kal /jLerearrjo-ev el<i rrjv ^acrtXeiav tov viov t^9 djd7r7j<; 
 avTov — "And translated us into the kingdom of the Son of 
 His love." The verb is often employed by the classical 
 writers to signify the deportation of a body of men, or the 
 removal of them to form a colony.^ The term is therefore an 
 expressive one. The Colossians had been lifted out of the 
 realm of darkness, their original seat and habitation, and they 
 had been carried into the kingdom of His Son, and colonized 
 in it. They were not as emigrants in search of a home, nor 
 as a company of dissatisfied exiles, but they were marched 
 out of the one territory and settled in the other expressly by 
 Divine guidance. fiaaiXeia stands in contrast with i^ovaia, 
 but there appears to be no ground for Wetstein's affirmation, 
 that in such a contrast the latter word means a tyranny,^ for 
 in Eev. xii. 10 the one term is referred to God, and the other 
 to Christ. "The kingdom of His Son " is plainly that kingdom 
 which has Christ for its Head and Founder — which is partially 
 developed on earth, and shall be finally perfected in heaven. 
 [Eph. V. 5.] The word "kingdom" is used in harmony 
 with the action indicated by the verb. As a church, men 
 meet together in its sacred assemblies ; as a kingdom, they 
 
 ^ V&ssow, sub voce ; Buttmann, Lcxilogu.i,Y). 305, ed. Fislilake, London, 1840. 
 * Josephus, A?itiq. ix. 2, 1. ^ Kapliel. Annot. ii. p. 527. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 13. 37 
 
 :ire located as citizens in it. It belon(:;s of ri^ht to " His 
 Son." He founded it, organized it, and rules over it — pre- 
 scribes its laws, regulates its usages, protects its subjects, and 
 crowns them with blessings. It is therefore a kingdom of 
 light, whose prismatic rays are truth, purity, and happiness. 
 We cannot say, with Olshausen, that the kingdom is regarded 
 in its subjective aspect, for the language is that of objective 
 transference — change of condition, implying, however, change 
 of character. This kingdom is one in which the Colossians 
 Avere, at the period of Paul's writing to them. It is not the 
 future heaven, ideally, as Meyer takes it, and in which they 
 were placed only spe d jure, as Gesner, Keil, Koppe, and others 
 have it. It is a present state — but one which is intimately con- 
 nected with futurity. The one kingdom of God has an earthly 
 and a celestial phasis. It resembles a city divided by a river, 
 but still under the same municipal administration, and having 
 one common franchise. The head of this kingdom is named— 
 Tov vlov Trj<i aya.Tnj'; avrov — " The Son of His love." This 
 is a solitary appellation. The apostle is about to descant 
 upon tlie glory of the Saviour, and therefore he here intro- 
 duces Him as the Son. [Eph. i, 3.] The phrase itself 
 does not really differ from vto? ayaTrrjTo^;, Matt. iii. 17, 
 xii. 18, xvii. 5 ; or from the similar idiom in Eph, i. 6, 
 vl6<; ?77a7r7//zeVo9. It signifies the Son who possesses His love 
 — or who excites it in the Divine heart. The meaning is the 
 same in either case, for He who possesses the love is the cause 
 of it towards Himself. Sustaining such a relation to the 
 Father, He is the object of boundless and unchanging affection. 
 This love corresponds to the nature at once of Him who 
 manifests it and Him who enjoys it. The love of God to one 
 who is His own Image will be in harmony with the Divine 
 nature of both — infinite as its object, and eternal and majestic 
 as the bosom in which it dwells. This love of the Father 
 to the Son prompted Him to give that Son as Saviour, and 
 then to exalt Him to Universal Empire. John iii. 35. Two 
 metaphysical and antagonistic deductions from this clause 
 may be noted. The first extreme is that of Theodore of 
 Mopsuestia,^ who affirm^ that we are here taught that Christ 
 
 ^ "0^£v xai " viov ayirrns ' avToy IxdXiriv' ug oh Ifvrii <tiv Tlarps; avra viov aXX 
 aya.'Kn Tns viofftviai a^iu^ivTa tovtuv, — Catena, ed. Cramer, p. 302. 
 
38 COLOSSI ANS I. 14. 
 
 is Son, not by nature, but by adoption. But the apostle is 
 not speaking of the essential relation of the Son to the Father, 
 but of the emotion which such a relationship has created. He 
 does not say how He became the Son ; he only says, that as 
 the Son, He is the object of intense affection on the part of 
 the Father. The other extreme is that of Augustine,^ who 
 argues that love indicates the essence or substance of Deity, 
 out of which the Son sprang. But Love is an attribute, and 
 not an essence ; it belongs to character, and not to substance ; 
 it prompts, and does not produce. It is the radiance of the 
 sun, but not the orb itself — the current of the stream, but not 
 the water which forms it. Olshausen's modification of the 
 same hypothesis is liable to similar objections. Nor do we 
 tind sufficient ground for the inference deduced by Huther 
 and De Wette, that the phrase " kingdom of His Son " 
 implies that the blessing of sonship, or adoption, is conferred 
 on all its members, or that they become sons ; for believers 
 are, in the context, and in harmony with its imagery, regarded 
 as subjects, and not as children. Nor is God named our 
 Father in verse 12. Lastly, our rescue and subsequent 
 settlement are ascribed to God the Father, for His sovereign 
 grace and power alone are equal to the enterprise — and thanks 
 again are due to Him. 
 
 (Ver. 14.) 'Ev m €')(ofji,ev rrjv airokvjpwaLV, ttjv a(f)e(Tiv rcov 
 afiapTLwu — " In whom we have redemption — the forgiveness 
 of sins." The words Bta tov aLfjbaTo<i avrov of the Received 
 Text rest on no good authority, for the entire preponderance 
 of authorities, manuscripts, versions, and quotations, is against 
 them. The phrase is an imitation of Eph. i. 7. Lachmann 
 reads ea^o/jiev in the aorist, without sufficient grounds. The 
 apostle could not speak of the Son without a reference to His 
 redeeming work. The work of the Father has its own aspect, 
 and so has the work of the Son. Our direct change of condi- 
 tion is ascribed to the Father, as the almighty and powerful 
 dispenser of blessing ; but we are said to be united to the 
 
 ^ Quod autem dictum est filii caritatis suae, nihil aliud intelligatur, quam filii 
 sui dilecti quam filii postremo substantise suae. Caritas quippe patris, quae in 
 iiatura ejus est ineffabiliter simplici, nihil aliud est, quam ejus ipsa natura, atque 
 substantia. Ac per hoc filius caritatis ejus nuUus alius est, quam qui de 
 substantia est genitus. — Opera, ed. Beued. vol. viii. p. 1501, Paris, 1836. 
 
COLOSSIAXS I. 14. 30 
 
 Son, and so to be iu Him as to obtain redemption in the union 
 — for by the price He paid forgiveness of sins is secured and 
 conferred. This verse, then, does not merely describe a 
 blessing — the enjoyment of which is indispensable to our 
 preparation for heaven, and our removal from the realm of 
 darkness, but it also and especially characterizes a continuous 
 gift enjoyed by those who are settled in the kingdom of the 
 Son. The subjects of His kingdom are in vital union with 
 Him — in Him they are having redemption. Their translation 
 out of the tyranny of darkness — their place in the new king- 
 dom, and their growing maturity for heavenly bliss, are im- 
 plied in this redemption, though its special element is the 
 forgiveness of sins. Their first condition was one of guilt as 
 well as gloom, and forgiveness was enjoyed in their emigra- 
 tion from it. Nor are they perfect under the benign reign of 
 the Son, and as a state of imperfection is so far one of sin, it 
 is in daily need of repeated pardon. The results of Christ's 
 work are fully enjoyed only in heaven — the process of re- 
 demption is there completed, and thus we are said still to be 
 having it as long as we are on earth. The entire verse has 
 been fully illustrated under Eph. i. 7. The difference of 
 diction is unessential, d/jiapriwv being employed in Colossians, 
 and irapaTTTw/jidToov in the Epistle to the Ephesians. One 
 question not alluded to there may be here noticed, and that 
 is, why forgiveness occupies in both places so prominent a 
 place ? It stands as an explanation of redemption, not as if it 
 included the whole of it, but because — 
 
 1. It is a first and prominent blessing. So soon as faith 
 springs up in the heart the pardon of sin is enjoyed — the 
 results of expiation are conferred. This doctrine was placed 
 in the front of apostolic preaching: Acts v. 31, xiii. 38, 
 xxvi. 1 8 ; and among the Divine declarations and promises 
 of the Old Testament, it occurs with cheering emphasis and 
 repetition : Ex. xxxiv. 7 ; Isa. xl. 2, Iv. 7 ; Jer. xxxiii. 8 ; 
 Mic. vii. 18; Ps. Ixxxv. 2, ciii. 3; and again and again 
 it is announced as the result of accepted sacrifice in tlie 
 Levitical law. And no wonder. So deep is man's guilt, and 
 so tremendous is the penalty ; so agonized is his conscience, 
 and so terrible are his forebodings ; so utterly helpless and 
 hopeless is his awful state without Divine interposition, that 
 
40 COLOSSIANS I. 14. 
 
 a free and perfect absolution from the sentence stands out 
 ]iot only as a blessing of indescribable grandeur and necessity, 
 but as the first and welcome offer and characteristic of the 
 gospel of Christ. And it is no sectional or partial blessing. 
 It makes no distinction among sins, no discrimination among 
 transgressors. Its circuit is complete, for every sin is included, 
 and it is offered with unbounded freedom and invitation. No 
 previous qualification is requisite, and no subsequent merit is 
 anticipated. And as it is the act of the sovereign judge, who 
 shall arraign its equity, or by what other authority can it be 
 revoked or cancelled? Eom. viii. 33, 34. 
 
 2. Forgiveness is more closely connected with redemption 
 than any other blessing, as it is the only blessing enjoyed 
 immediately from Christ, and as the direct result of His expia- 
 tion. It springs at once from the \vrpov which forms the 
 centre and basis of the diroXvTpaxji'i. Other blessings 
 obtained for Christ's sake are given through some appointed 
 and dependent medium. Thus, peace is the effect of pardon ; 
 and holiness is the product of the Spirit and the word, as 
 agent and instrument. But forgiveness passes through no inter- 
 vention — it comes at once from the cross to the believing soul. 
 
 3. It is essentially bound up with subsequent gifts. For- 
 giveness precedes purity — there is change of state before there 
 is change of heart. The Holy Ghost did not come down till 
 Christ was glorified — till His expiatory oblation had been 
 accepted. Being justified, believers are sanctified. The 
 imputation of righteousness is a necessary pre-requisite to the 
 infusion of holiness. The Spirit will not take up His abode 
 in an unpardoned soul, and the sinner's relation to the law 
 must be changed ere his nature be renovated. At the same 
 time, pardon and holiness are inseparably associated, and the 
 remission of trespasses is the precursor of peace and joy, hope 
 and life. So that, such being its nature, origin, and results, 
 the apostle naturally places " forgiveness of sins " in apposition 
 with redemption in Christ Jesus. 
 
 Having now spoken of Christ and the blessings secured by 
 union to Him, the apostle, for obvious reasons, lingers on that 
 Name round which crystallized all the doctrines he taught 
 — all the truths of that theology which it was the one business 
 of his life to proclaim. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 14. 41 
 
 The next verse begins a lofty and comprehensive paragraph, 
 in which the dignity and rank of Christ are described in 
 linked clauses of marvellous terseness and harmony. The 
 apostle introduces the name of the Son on purpose, and then 
 details in sweeping completeness the glory of His person and 
 work. There is no doubt that the verses were composed in 
 reference to modes of error prevalent at Colosse, and the 
 forms of expression have their special origin, shape, and edge 
 in this polemical reference. While the writer states absolute 
 truth in rich and glowing accumulation of sentences, still, the 
 thought and diction are so moulded as to bear against false 
 dogmas wliich were in circulation. It is strange that in any 
 system of theology the person of Christ should be depreciated, 
 and His mediatorial work vailed and slighted. The spectacle, 
 however, is not an uncommon one. Yet the apostles can 
 scarcely find language of sufficient energy and lustre to tell in 
 it the honour and majesty of the Hedeemer. The sentences 
 in which Paul describes the rank and prerogative of 
 Christ are like a bursting torrent, dashing away every 
 barrier in its impetuous race. How he exults in the 
 precious theme, and how his soul swells into impassioned 
 panegyric ! 
 
 We do not know in what precise way the dignity of Jesus 
 was vilified by the Colossian errorists. It would seem, indeed, 
 that the germs of Gnosticism and Ebionitism were to be found 
 in Colosse — denial of Christ's actual humanity, and of His 
 supreme divinity. The apostle, therefore, holds Him out as the 
 one Supreme Creator, not only of the world, but of the uni- 
 verse, and declares that reconciliation is secured in the body 
 of His flesh through death. Confused notions of the spirit- 
 world appear also to have prevailed. Jesus was discrowned. 
 The Lord of the angels was placed among the angels, as if 
 he had been a selected delegate out of many illustrious com- 
 peers. That He was superhuman may not have been denied — 
 but that He was truly human was more than questioned. 
 That there had been a being of superior order upon earth was 
 allowed, but whether as a veritable man he had blood to shed, 
 and a soul and body to be severed in death and re-united in 
 resurrection, appears to have been doubted or denied. Ascetic 
 austerities, and mystical speculations, took the place of 
 
42 COLOSSIANS I. 15. 
 
 reliance on an objective atonement.^ The gospel was sliorn 
 of its simplicity, and mutilated in its adaptations, in order to 
 be fitted in to the dogmas and announced in the specious 
 nomenclature of a vain theosophy. That Jesus, as a celestial 
 being, stood in a certain relation to God, and bore some 
 similitude to Him, might be granted — but the likeness was 
 thought to be faint and distant. The apostle affirms of Him 
 in choice and expressive terms, on the other hand, " Who is 
 the image of the invisible God" — 
 
 (Ver. 15.) "0<i iarcv eiKcbv rov &gov tov dopdrov. 2 Cor. 
 iv. 4. The clause dazzles by its brightness, and awes by its 
 mystery. We feel the warning — " Draw not nigh hither, for 
 the place is holy ground." One trembles to subject such a 
 declaration to the scrutiny of human reason, and feels as if he 
 were rudely profaning it by the appliances of earthly erudition. 
 The invisible God — how dark and dreadful the impenetrable 
 vail ! Christ His image — how perfect in its resemblance, 
 and overpowering in its brilliance ! We must worship whilst 
 we construe ; and our exegesis must be penetrated by a pro- 
 found devotion. 
 
 The relative o? carries us back at once to vi6<t, in verse 13, 
 and in its connection with the intermediate verse it may bear 
 a causal signification, " inasmuch as He is," etc. Bernhardy, p. 
 292. The noun eoKcov does not require the article, being 
 clearly defined by the following genitive. Winer, ^ 19, 2, (b)} 
 That this term was a current one in the Jewish theosophy, is 
 plain from many citations.^ Hesychius defines elKcov by 
 XapaKT^p and tvtto^. Chrysostom speaks of it as to Kara 
 Trdv taov kol ofjuoiov, " a faithful likeness in every thing ; " and 
 Theophylact describes it as dirapaXkaKTO'i, " without change." 
 
 The epithet dopaTo<i, as applied to God, refers not, perhaps, 
 to the fact that He is and has been unseen, but to His invisi- 
 bility, or to the fact that He cannot and will not be seen. 
 John i. 18 ; Eom. i. 20; 1 Tim. i. 17. Perhaps the Great 
 
 1 See Introduction. * Moulton, p. 155, note 6. 
 
 ^ Philo, De Opificio, xiyov tUova had, p. 12, Opera i. ed. Pfeifl'er, Xoyos St Iffnv 
 uKUDi haZ, De, Monarch. Similar expressions are found among the Kabbalists, 
 and among oriental theosophists, and seem to embody in various forms of disguise 
 and error a truth which appears to have descended with other fragments of an 
 early patriarchal time. Kleuker, Zendavesta, i. p. 4. Usteri, Paulin. Lehrb- 
 p. 308. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 15. 43 
 
 God remains concealed for ever in the unfathomable depths of 
 His own essence which, to every created vision, is so dazzling 
 as to be " dark with excess of light." There needs, therefore, 
 a medium of representation, which must be His exact similitude. 
 But where shall this be found ? Can any creature bear upon 
 him the full impress of Divinity, and shine out in God's stead 
 to the universe without contraction of person or diminution of 
 splendour ? Could the Infinite dwarf itself into the finite, or 
 the Eternal shrink into a limited cycle ? May we not, there- 
 fore, anticipate a medium in harmony with the original ? The 
 lunar reflection is but a feeble resemblance of the solar glory. 
 So that the image of God must be Divine as well as visible — 
 must be ofioova-io^ — of the same essence with the original. A 
 visible God can alone be the image of God, possessing all the 
 elements and attributes of His nature. The Divine can be 
 fully pictured only in the Divine. The universe mirrors the 
 glory of God, but does not circumscribe it. His " invisible 
 things " assume a palpable form and aspect in the objects and 
 laws of creation. Man is made in the image of God — in his 
 headship over the earth around him, he is " the image and 
 glory of God " — but he was only a faint and fractional minia- 
 ture, even in his first and best estate, and now it is sadly 
 dimmed and effaced. But Christ is the image of God — not 
 (TKia — a shadowy or evanescent sketch which cannot be 
 caught or copied, but clkcov, a real and perfect likeness — no 
 feature absent, none misplaced, and none impaired in fulness 
 or dimmed in lustre. The very counterpart of God He is. 
 
 Now, this Image of God is not Christ in His Divine nature, 
 or as the eternal Logos, as Olshausen, Huther, Biihr, Usteri, 
 and Adam Clarke, and many of the Fathers, suppose, for the 
 apostle is speaking of the Son, and of that Son as the author 
 of redemption and forgiveness of sin. It is therefore Jesus 
 in His mediatorial person that the apostle characterizes as 
 being the image of God. For it is a strange notion of Chry- 
 sostom, and some of his followers, such as Clarius, that as 
 invisibility is a property of God, it must also be a property of 
 His image, if that image be an undeviating similitude.^ Our 
 Lord Himself said, even when He dwelt upon earth robed in 
 
 ^ Bengel says — Invisbilis imago secundum naturam divtnavi ; visibilis secun- 
 dum humanam. 
 
44 COLOSSIANS I. 15. 
 
 no mantle of light, and with no nimbus surrounding His 
 brow, " He who hath seen me hath seen the Father." Visibility 
 is implied in the very notion of an image. The spirit of the 
 statement is, that our only vision or knowledge of the Father 
 is in His Son. " No man knoweth the Father but the Son, 
 and he to whom the Son shall reveal Him." The Socinian 
 hypothesis, advocated even by Grotius and Heinrichs, that 
 only because He revealed so fully the will of God is He 
 called the image of God, is far short of the full meaning,^ 
 though as the " image " shines upon us we look and learn. To 
 Him, as " Angel of the Presence," we are indebted for those 
 glimpses of the " eternal power and Godhead " which creation 
 discloses — those glimpses of sovereignty throned upon bound- 
 less power, fathomless wisdom, and unwearying goodness, 
 which are presented by the universe above us and around us. 
 The elements of the Divine nature and character which are 
 mirrored out to us in providence are derived from the same 
 source. Christ, as Creator and Preserver, is the palpable 
 image of God. In this aspect, it is not visibility of person 
 that can be maintained, but the embodiment of attribute in 
 visible result, as in Eom. i. 20, where it is said, " the invisible 
 things " of the Creator are " clearly seen." 
 
 But especially in Himself and as Eedeemer is He the 
 representative of God. His prophetic epithet was "Immanuel, 
 God with us." In His incarnate state He brought God so 
 near us as to place Him under the cognizance of our very 
 senses — men saw, and heard, and handled Him — a speaking, 
 acting, weeping, and suffering God ; He was, as Basil terms 
 it, elK(t}v ^waa'^ a living image. He held out an image of 
 God in the love He displayed, which was too tender and 
 fervent, too noble and self-denying, to have had its home in 
 any created bosom — in the power He put forth, which was 
 too vast to be lodged in other than a Divine arm, and also in 
 His wisdom and holiness, and in those blessed results which 
 sprang from His presence. When he moved on the surface 
 of the billows, did not the disciples see a realization of the 
 unapproachable prerogative of Him " who treadeth upon the 
 
 1 Dr. Owen says — -"Were He not the essential image of the Father in His own 
 Divine person, He could not be the representative image of God unto us as He is 
 incarnate." — Christologia, p. 78, IVorks, vol. i. Edin. 1850. 
 
 ^ Contra Eunom. p. 28. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 15. 45 
 
 waves of tlie sea"? When the crested waves were hushed 
 into quiet, as He looked out upon the storm and spoke to it, 
 His fellow-voyagers felt that they had heard the voice of 
 Divinity. When the dead were evoked by His touch and 
 word from their slumbers, the spectators beheld the energy 
 and prerogative of Him who says of Himself, " 1 kill, and I 
 make alive ; I wound, and I heal." When the hungry were 
 satisfied with an immediate banquet in the desert, the abun- 
 dance proved the presence of the Lord of the Seasons, who, 
 in the process of vegetation, multiplies the seed cast into the 
 furrow " in some thirty, in some sixty, and in some an 
 hundred fold." In those daily miracles of healing was there 
 not manifest the soft and effective hand of Him who is 
 "abundant in goodness"? and in those words of wondrous 
 penetration which touched the heart of the auditor was there 
 not an irresistible demonstration of the Divine omniscience ? 
 Still, too, at the right hand of the Majesty on high, is He the 
 visible administrator and object of worship. Thus, " the Son 
 of His love " is a visible image of the invisible Father, not 
 the "copy of an image"' — distinct from Him, and yet so 
 like Him, making God in all His glorious fulness apparent to 
 us — showing us in Himself and His works the bright contour 
 and likeness of the invisible Jehovah. This glory is not 
 merely official, but it is also essential, not won, but possessed 
 from eternity. the grandeur of that redemption of which 
 He is the author, and the magnificence of that kingdom of 
 which He is head ! Not only is He the image of God — but 
 the apostle adds — 
 
 J7pft)TOTo/co? TTctcTT;? «Ttcretu<f — " The first-born of every 
 creature." [irdarj'i, Eph. ii. 21.] The meaning of this 
 remarkable phrase is not easily discovered to our entire 
 -satisfaction. Only, it is clear, from the previous clause, and 
 from the succeeding verse, that the apostle cannot mean to 
 class Jesus Himself among created thino;s. It is an awkward 
 expedient on the part of Isidore,^ Erasmus, Fleming,^ and 
 Michaelis, to propose to change the accentuation tt/jwto- 
 
 ' Uapdhiy/xit uxivoi, Epiphanius, Haeres., Ixv. See also Dorner, Lehre von 
 der Person Christi, etc., Berlin, 1852. 
 
 ^ Ep. iii. 31 OU TfUITOV TJjj KTlViUi . . . OlWo. ffUTOt TiTOICSVXl . , . <V« » 
 
 "* Christology, i. p. 216. 
 
46 COLOSSIANS I. 15. 
 
 t6ko<;, and by making it a paroxyton, to give it the sense of 
 first-producer. But the term, with such a meaning, has only 
 a feminine application/ and it cannot bear such a sense in 
 the eighteenth verse. 
 
 1. Many of the Fathers, and not a few of the moderns, 
 understand the epithet as denotive of the generation of the 
 Logos, or Divine Son. Thus, in QEcumenius occurs the 
 phrase lyevvrjOeU crvvaiZio'^, " begotten co - eternally," and 
 Chrysostom says of Him — ^eo9 ^ap koX Oeov uio?. Athanasius 
 describes Him — aTpeTrro? e^ arpeTTTov, " the unchangeable 
 from the unchangeable," a statement preceded by another to 
 this effect — 6 Se vl6<i vo/xo'i e/c tov irarpo'i dtBto<; t'yevqOrj.z 
 Theophylact puts the question — " first-born of every creature, 
 how ? " and Bca >yevv^aeco<i is his reply. Tertullian, too, uses 
 similar phraseology — primogenitus ut ante omnia genitus ; and 
 again, primogenitus conditionis, i.e. conditorum a Deo? Ambrose 
 writes — primogenitus, quia nemo ante ipsum, unigenitus quia 
 nemo post ipsum.'^ We cannot readily accept the interpreta- 
 tion, though defended by Calovius, Aretius, Bahr, Bohmer, 
 von Gerlach, and Bloomfield, etc. As Bengel admits, it 
 makes the genitive Tracr?;? Krlaeca depend on Trpwro'i in 
 composition. The syntax is not impossible, as with the 
 simple adjective, John i. 15, 30, but the following similar 
 phrase — Trpwroro/fo? e/c tcop veKpwv, shows that such an 
 exegesis cannot here be adopted, for it is plain that it cannot 
 mean " begotten before all the dead." The comparison there 
 is not one of time even, as Meyer erroneously takes it — 
 but one of rank. The sense assigned by this class of critics is, 
 that Christ was the begotten of the Father, and became His 
 Son prior to the work of creation. But we doubt if this be 
 the form of truth intended by the apostle, for we should have 
 expected the noun vl6<i, or some other term denoting rela- 
 tionship, to have occurred in the clause. Christ is called 
 TrpoiTOTOKO'i in reference to His mother, but never in connec- 
 tion with His Divine Father, in any place where any semblance 
 
 ' Homer, Iliad, xvii. 5. So Thomas Magister — UpuroroKo; o TrpuTu; nx^'-U, 
 TptuToroxcs Ti lartrnp, h ^fetiTus ri^aira. 
 
 '^ Expositi ) fidei, i. p. 242. Vide Suicer's Thesaurus, sub voce TpuTOTOKas, 
 
 ^ AdversuH Prax. c. 7 ; Adversus Marc. v. 19, pp. 660, 330, vol. ii. Opera, 
 cil. Oehler, Lipsiae, 1854. 
 
 * De Fide, xiv. 89, Opera, vol. ii. p. 550, eJ. Migue, Paris, 1845. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 15. 47 
 
 of the doctrine of eternal filiation is referred to, and in such a 
 word derived from tlktw, the reference is to maternal, not to 
 paternal origin. 
 
 2. The antagonist exegesis is that of the Arians and So- 
 cinians, which presumes that Christ is, in this phrase, classed 
 as a portion of creation. Even Athanasius, in his second 
 discourse against the Arians, admits that Christ has got the 
 name Zia rrjv ttoWwv ahek^^oirolrjaiv. A common argument 
 in favour of this exegesis is, that where this epithet is used, 
 it is implied that he who bears it is not only compared with 
 others, but is one of them. Thus, in the phrase " first-born 
 among many brethren," the inference is, that the first-born 
 is one of the family, though his rank be pre-eminent ; and 
 in the phrase "first-born from the dead," Jesus is plainly 
 regarded as having been one of the dead Himself, though He 
 now be exalted above them. So that the deduction is, if He 
 is called the " first-born of every creature," then He is, in the 
 comparison, and from a necessary oixoiyiveta, regarded as one 
 of the creatures. Why then, it is confidently asked, shrink 
 from such a conclusion ? 
 
 We might give the reply of Basil to Eunomius,^ who had 
 adopted such an exegesis — " if He be called the first-born of 
 the dead, because He is the cause of their resurrection, then, 
 by parity of argument, he is the First-born of the whole 
 creation, because He is the cause of its existence." Theodoret 
 puts the question — if He is only-begotten, how can He be 
 first-begotten : and if first-begotten, how can He be only- 
 begotten ? And he guards against the Arian inference by 
 adding — irpcoTOTOKo^ ov'^ co? aSeX^^v ^X'wt' ttjv Krlcnv, that is. 
 He cannot have a brotherly relation to the creation, and be at 
 the same time its maker. The ancient critics also observe 
 that the epithet employed by the apostle is not TrpwroKTia-ro'i, 
 first-created. Besides, in the cases in which the term irpcoro- 
 T0/C09 marks him who bears it, as one of a class referred to, 
 such a class is usually expressed in the plural number, as in 
 the 10th verse, and Eom, viii. 29, Eev. i. 5, but the apostle 
 does not here say rwv KTicrfiaTOiv. 
 
 ^ Ei OS irpeoTOToxos vixpcuv i'/pfirai, dia to alrioi iivai rn; ix, vixpav onctffTciffius, 
 o'liro) »a) TpuTOTOKos XTiffiuii, oia to kItios iivxi tou tj oi/K otTuv I'li TO tivxi -rapayayuv 
 
 Thi xTtffn, — Lib. iv. Opera ii. p. 204. 
 
48 COLOSSIANS I. 15, 
 
 Yet, even assuming for a moment the Socinian hypothesis, 
 we would not be nonplussed. We reckon it very wrong on 
 the part of Usteri^ to translate the Pauline term by Erst- 
 geschaffene, " first-created," and it is easy to see what must 
 be the theological conclusions drawn from such a rendering. 
 Anselm explains that the words apply to Jesus only as man, 
 for as God He is unige7hitus non primogenitits. N(5W, we have 
 shown that the preceding clause, " image of the invisible 
 God," implies Christ's divinity, and we might say with Anselm 
 that this refers to His humanity. That body was created by 
 the Holy Ghost — it was a creature, and still is so, as we 
 believe. Though on the throne, it is not deified — is not so 
 covered nor interpenetrated with divinity as to cease to be a 
 humanity. Nay, the last and loftiest prerogative is to be exer- 
 cised by the " man whom He hath ordained," so that even with 
 this construction we are under no necessity to adopt the Arian or 
 Socinian hypothesis. If in the former clause there is express 
 proof of Christ's divinity, in the latter there is no less assertion of 
 His real humanity, a humanity which stands out in special pre- 
 eminence over the entire creation, as its Lord and proprietor. 
 
 3. Our own view is a modified form of that which takes 
 TrptoToroKO'i in its figurative meaning of chief or Lord — 
 " begotten before all creation." This view is held by 
 Melancthon, Cameron, Piscator, Hammond, Eoell, Suicer, 
 Cocceius, Storr, Flatt, De Wette, Pye Smith, Piobinson, and 
 Whitby. Theodore of Mopsuestia'^ held the same opinion — 
 ovK. eVt '^povov Xeyerai fiovov' aWa yap Kal eVt irpoTL^'qcrew^ 
 — but he understood by KTiaL<i the new creation. The famous 
 Photius, of the ninth century, in the 192nd question of his 
 Amphilochia, has given a similar view, referring, however, the 
 phrase to His human nature, and His resurrection from the 
 dead.^ Some critics conjoin both the first and second views. 
 We apprehend that the apostle selects the unusual word for a 
 special reason. It seems to have been a prime term in the 
 nomenclature of the Colossian errorists, and the apostle takes 
 the epithet and gives it to Him to whom alone it rightfully 
 belongs. Traces of the same idiom are found in the Jewish 
 
 ' Lehrb. p. 315, Holzhausen, in his reply to Sclileiermacher in the Tubing. 
 Zp'tts^rhrlft, 1833, uses similar unguarded language 
 
 * Catena, ed, Cramer, p. 306. - AVolf, Curae, vol. v. 800. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 15. 49 
 
 Kabbala — in which Jehovah Himself is called the " first-born 
 of the world," that is, in all probability, the Divine represen- 
 tative of essential and immanent perfection to the world.^ 
 Thus the first heavenly man was called Adam Kadmon — the 
 first-begotten of God — He who is Messiah and the Metatron 
 of the burning bush. Not that Paul merely borrowed his 
 language, but the terms which the errorists were perverting 
 he refers to Jesus in their full truth and legitimate application. 
 In a similar theological dialect, Philo names the X070? by the 
 epithet irpwToyovo'i.^ The diction of the Old Testament in 
 reference to the Hebrew "ii33 is in harmony, and is based upon 
 the familiar rights and prerogatives of human primogeniture. 
 The Hebrew adjective is applied to what is primary, prominent, 
 and the most illustrious of its classis, Job xviii. 13; "first- 
 born of death" — alarming and fatal malady, Isa. xiv. 30; 
 " first-born of the poor " — a pauper of paupers. Still more, 
 we find the term in the Messianic oracle of the 89th Psalm — 
 " I will make him my first-born " — will invest him with royal 
 dignity, and clothe him M-ith pre-eminent splendour, so as 
 that he shall tower in majesty above all his kingly compeers. 
 Israel elevated above the other nations, brought into a 
 covenant relation, and reflecting so much of the Divine glory, is 
 Jehovah's first-born, Ex. iv. 22, Jer. xxxi. 9. The church of 
 Christ, blessed and beloved, and placed nearer the throne than 
 angels, is the "church of the first-born," Heb. xii. 23. And 
 when believers are regarded as sons — as a vast and happy 
 brotherhood — He who loved them, and died for them, who has 
 won for Himself special renown in their adoption, and has 
 imprinted His image on all the children, stands out as chief in 
 the family, and is " the first-born among many brethren," 
 Eom. viii. 29. Again, in Heb i. 6, Jesus receives the same 
 appellation, inasmuch as the spirits of the heavenly world are 
 solemnly summoned to do Him homage as His Father's repre- 
 sentative.^ Moreover, when He is styled, as in the 18th verse, 
 
 1 Schoettgen, Horae Htb. i. 922. 
 
 " De Confusione Ling. p. 381, vol. ii. Opera, ed. Pfeiffer. 
 
 ^ Bleek, in loc. Der Brief an die Ilebrder erldutert, Berlin, 1836. It inity 
 be added that under the Roman law, haeres and dominus were interchangeable 
 terms, and to compare great things with small, in one of the Hebrides it was the 
 rnstom for the head of the clan to abdicate when his son came of age. — Boswell's 
 Tour, p. 261. 
 
50 COLOSSIANS I. 15. 
 
 and in Kev. i. 5, " the first-born of the dead," the reference is 
 not to mere time or priority, but to prerogative, for He is not 
 simply the first who rose, " no more to return to corruption," 
 but His immortal primogeniture secures -the resurrection of His 
 people, and is at once the pledge and the pattern of it. The 
 genitive then may be taken as that of reference. Bernhardy, 
 p. 139. The meaning therefore is, "first-born in reference to 
 the whole creation." The phrase so understood is only another 
 aspect of the former clause. The first-born was his father's 
 representative, and acted in his father's name. Christ stands 
 out as the First-born, all transactions are with Him, and they 
 are equivalent to transactions with the Sovereign Father. 
 The Father is invisible, but the universe is not left without 
 a palpable God. Its existence and arrangements are His, 
 and the supervision of it belongs to Him. He is the God who 
 busies Himself in its affairs, and with whom it has to do. He 
 is its First-born, its chief and governor. As the first-born of 
 the house is he to whom its management is entrusted, so the 
 First-born of the whole creation is He who is its governor and 
 Lord, and whose prerogative it is to exhibit to the universe 
 the image and attributes of the unseen Jehovah. He is 
 manifested Deity, appearing, speaking, working, ruling, as in 
 patriarchal times when He descended in a temporary humanity, 
 and held familiar discourse with the world's " grey fathers," 
 and as under the Mosaic economy, of whose theocracy He was 
 the head, of whose temple He was the God, and of whose 
 oracles He was the inspirer. ISTow He is exalted to unbounded 
 sovereignty, as " Lord of all," rolling onwards the mighty and 
 mysterious wheels of a universal providence, without halting 
 or confusion ; seated as His Father's deputy on a throne of 
 unbounded dominion, which to this world is its tribunal of 
 judgment — wearing the name at which every knee bows, " of 
 tilings in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the 
 earth" — the acting President of the universe, and therefore 
 " the First-born of every creature." His Father's love to Him 
 has given Him this pre-eminence, this "double portion,"^ "Thou 
 art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee." It is plainly 
 implied at the same time that He existed before all creatures, 
 for He has never stood in any other or secondary relation 
 1 Deut. xxi. 17. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 16. 51 
 
 to the universe — to the many mansions of His Father's 
 liouse. 
 
 (Ver. 16.) "On ev avro) eKriaOr] ra iravra, to, ev rots" 
 ovpavoU Koi ra iirl T779 7?}9. The conjunction on assigns the 
 reason of the preceding statement. He is first-born of the whole 
 creation, for by Him "all things" were created — and He is the 
 image of God, for as Creator He shines out in the " brightness 
 of His Father's glory," so that we apprehend it to be a narrow 
 and confined view to restrict the reference of on to the last 
 clause of the previous verse. The phrase ra trdvra means 
 " the all " — the universe, the whole that exists. Winer, ^ 
 18, 8. The aorist characterizes creation as a past and perfect 
 work. Creation is here in the fullest and most unqualified 
 sense ascribed to Christ, and the doctrine is in perfect harmony 
 with the theology of the beloved disciple, John i. 3. The 
 work of the six days displayed vast creative energy, but it was 
 to a great extent the inbringing of furniture and population 
 to a planet already made and in diurnal revolution, for it 
 comprehended the formation of a balanced atmosphere, the 
 enclosure of the ocean within proper limits, the clothing of 
 the soil with verdure, shrubs, trees, and cereal grasses — the 
 exhibition of sun, moon, and stars, as lights in the firmament 
 — the introduction of bird, beast, reptile, and fish, into their 
 appropriate haunts and elements — and the organization and 
 endowment of man, with Eden for his heritage, and the 
 world for his home. But this demiurgical process implied 
 the previous exercise of Divine omnipotence, for " in the 
 beginning God created the heaven and the earth." It is 
 not, therefore, the wise and tasteful arrangement of pre- 
 existent materials or the reduction of chaos to order, beauty, 
 and life, which is here ascribed to Jesus, but the summoning 
 of universal nature into original existence. What had no 
 being before was brought into being by Him. The universe 
 was not till He commanded it to be. " He spake and it was 
 done." Every form of matter and life owes its origin to the 
 Son of God, no matter in what sphere it may be found, or 
 with what qualities it may be invested. " In heaven or on 
 earth." Christ's creative work was no local or limited operation ; 
 it was not bounded by this little orb ; its sweep surrounds 
 the universe which is named in Jewish diction and according 
 
 G 
 
52 COLOSSIANS I. 16. 
 
 to a natural division — " heaven and earth." Every form and 
 kind of matter, simple or complex — the atom and the star, the 
 sun and the clod — every grade of life from the worm to the 
 angel — every order of intellect and being around and above 
 us, the splendours of heaven and the nearer phenomena of 
 earth, are the product of the First-born.-^ 
 
 Ta opara koI ra aopara — " The visible and the invisible." 
 This distinction seems to have been common in the Eastern 
 philosophy : ^ the latter epithet being referred to the abode of 
 angels and blessed spirits. The meaning is greatly lowered 
 by some of the Greek Fathers, who thought the term was 
 applicable to the souls of men, and by not a few of the 
 moderns, who include under it the souls of the dead. The 
 meaning is, what exists within the reach of vision, and what 
 exists beyond it. The object of which the eye can take 
 cognizance, and the glory which " eye hath not seen," are 
 equally the " handiwork " of Jesus. The assertion is true, not 
 only in reference to the limited conceptions of the universe 
 current in the apostle's days, but true in the widest sense. 
 The visible portion of the creation consisting of some myriads 
 of stars, is but a mere section or stratum of the great fabric. 
 In proportion as power is given to the telescopic glass, are 
 new bodies brought into view. Nothing like a limit to crea- 
 tion can be descried. The farther we penetrate into space, 
 the luminaries are neither dimmer nor scarcer, but worlds of 
 singular beauty and variety burst upon us, and the distant 
 star-dust is found to consist of orbs so dense and crowded as 
 to appear one blended mass of sparkling radiance. Eays of 
 light from the remotest nebulfe must have been two millions 
 of years on their inconceivably swift journey to our world. 
 The nearest fixed star is twenty-one billions of miles from us, 
 so that between it and us there is room in one straight line 
 for 12,000 solar systems, each as large as our own. From the 
 seraph that burns nearest the throne, through the innumerable 
 suns and planets which are so thickly strewn in the firmament, 
 and outwards to the unseen orbs which sentinel the verge of 
 space — all is the result of Christ's omnipotence and love. 
 
 It is probable, however, that the apostle thought of heaven 
 proper when he spoke of things invisible, for he adds, as if in 
 
 * See also on p. 54. ^ Gesenius, de Theolog. Samaritana, p. 20. 
 
COLOSSI AN S I. 16. 53 
 
 special reference to its population — " whether they be thrones, 
 or dominions, or principalities, or powers " — 
 
 EtT€ dpovoi eire KvpiorrjTef; etVe dp'^m et're e^ovaiai. Tliese 
 epithets refer to celestial dignities. In Eph. i. 21, he says 
 — V7repdv(0 irdaij^i dp')(rj<; koI i^ovaia<i koL Bvvdfjb€a)<; Kai Kvpto- 
 T7JT09. The arrangement is different — the two last terms of 
 the one are the two first in the other, and Kvpi,6Trj<i, wliich 
 is second here, is last in Ephesians. Qpovot occurs here, but 
 hwdfiew^ is excluded. The "thrones" appear to be the highest, 
 — chairs of state in humble and distant imitation of the Divine 
 imperial throne. We need not repeat our remarks made on 
 this subject under Eph. i. 21. If we may credit Ireneeus,^ 
 the Gnostics held that another power than Divine created 
 the celestial hierarchy. Simon Magus said — Ennoian generarc 
 angelos et potestates, a quibus et mundum hunc factum. The 
 object of the apostle is to show that Jesus is the creator, not 
 simply of lower modes of being, but of the higher Essences 
 of the Universe. Yes, those Beings, so illustrious as to be 
 seated on " thrones ; " so noble as to be styled " dominions ; " 
 so elevated as to be greeted with the title of " principalities ; " 
 and so mighty as to merit the appellation of " powers : " these, 
 so like God as to be called " gods " themselves,^ bow to the 
 Son of God as the one author of their existence, position, and 
 prerogative. As no atom is too minute, so no creature is too 
 gigantic for His plastic hand. What a reproof to that 
 " worshipping of angels " afterwards reprobated by the apostle 
 — beings who are only creatures, and who themselves are 
 summoned to do suit and service to the First-born. The sen- 
 tence is at this point concluded, but the apostle reiterates — 
 
 Td Trdvra Si avrov Kol el<i avrov cKTicrrat — " All things by 
 Him and for Him were created." Already the apostle had 
 said — iv avro) iKTia-drj rd irdvTa. The change of preposition 
 and tense can scarcely be regarded as accidental, or as intro- 
 duced for the mere sake of varied diction. Chrysostom, 
 indeed, and many after him, regard iv and Sid as synonymous. 
 Indeed, this Father says, to iv avrm, Si avrov eVrt ; and 
 Usteri repeats the blunder; while De Wette finds compacted into 
 iv the double sense of Bt avrov and etV avrov. The old school 
 
 1 Cont. Haer. i. 23, § 2 ; vol. i. 238, ed. Stieren. 
 ^ Ps. xcvii. 7. 
 
64 COLOSSIANS I. 16. 
 
 of Jewish interpretation, represented by Philo and some of the 
 Kabbalists, held a theory which was adopted by several of the 
 Fathers, as Origen, Athanasius, and Hilary ; by the mediaeval 
 divines ; and virtually by Neander, Bahr, Bohmer, Kleuker, 
 Olshausen, and Kahler. Their notion is, that in the Logos, 
 and by Him, was the world created — the idea was in Him, 
 and its working out was by Him. He is both causa exem- 
 plaris and coMsa cffectiva. " In Him," says Olshausen, " are 
 all things created, i.e. the Son of God is the intelligible 
 world, the Koa-fio^ z/ot^to?, i.e. things themselves according to 
 the idea of them. He carries their essentiality in Himself; 
 in the creation they come forth from Him to an indepen- 
 dent existence, in the completion of all things they return to 
 Him." We cannot, with Cocceius and others, take ev as 
 bringing out the idea that the universe was created by the 
 Father, in the Son. No mention is made of the Father in 
 the context. We rather hold, with Meyer, "that the act 
 of creation rests in Christ originally, and its completion is 
 grounded in Him." He is not simply instrumental cause, but 
 He is also primary cause. The impulse to create came upon 
 Him from no co-ordinate power of which He was either the 
 conscious or the passive organ. All things were created in 
 Him — the source of motive, desire, and energy was in Him. 
 He was not, as a builder, working out the plans of an architect 
 — but the design is His own conception, and the execution is 
 His own unaided enterprise. He did not need to go beyond 
 Himself, either to find space on which to lay the foundation 
 of the fabric, or to receive assistance in its erection. On 
 the other hand, the extrinsic aspect is represented by Bid 
 — the universe is the result of the exercise of His omnipo- 
 tence, or as the Syriac renders, " by His hand." It still stands 
 out as having been brought into existence by Him. The 
 aorist carries us back to the act of creation, which had all its 
 elements in Him, and the perfect tense exhibits the universe 
 as still remaining the monument and proof of His creative 
 might. The first clause depicts creation in its origin, and 
 the second refers to it as an existing effect. In the former, it 
 is an act embodying plan and power, which are alike "in 
 Him " — in the latter, it is a phenomenon caused and still 
 continued " by Him." Winer, § 50, 6. 
 
COLOSSIAXS I. IG. 5o 
 
 Kal etf avrop. Not in ipso, as the Vulgate renders, but 
 " and for Him." This clause marks out His final purpose in 
 creation. It means not " for Him " as the middle point of 
 creation, as Biihr and Huther imagine ; nor simply " for His 
 plan," as Baumgarten-Crusius holds ; nor merely " for His 
 glory," as Bohmer explains it ; nor with a main view to His 
 Incarnation, as Melancthon regards it ; nor yet with an 
 express reference to His Universal Headship, as Grotius and 
 Storr have maintained. The phrase " for Him " seems to 
 mean for Him in every aspect of His Being, and every pur- 
 pose of His Heart. He is, as Clement of Alexandria says, 
 TeXo'i as well as dp)(i]. Not only is the universe His sole and 
 unhelped work, but it is a work done by Himself, and especially 
 for Himself, — for every end contemplated in His infinite 
 wisdom and love. A man of taste and skill may construct 
 a magnificent palace, but it is for His sovereign as a royal 
 habitation. On the contrary, Christ is uncontrolled, meeting 
 with no interference, for His is no subordinate agency defined 
 and guided by a superior power for which it labours and to 
 which it is responsible. No licence of this nature could be 
 permitted to any creature, for it would be ruinous to the 
 universe and fatal to himself. Such a path of uncurbed 
 operation would astonish all heaven, and soon surprise all hell. 
 He only " of whom, to whom, and for whom are all things," 
 can have this freedom of action in Himself and for Himself. 
 
 Had the Divine Being remained alone. His glory would have 
 been unseen and His praises unsung. But He longed to 
 impart of His own happiness to creatures fitted to possess it — 
 to fill so many vessels out of that " fountain of life " which 
 wells out from His bosom. Therefore Christ fitted up these 
 " all things " " for Himself," in order that He might exhibit 
 His glory while He diffused happiness through creatures of 
 innumerable worlds, and enabled them to behold His mirrored 
 brightness and reflect it ; that He might occupy a throne of 
 supreme and unapproachable sovereignty ; and show to the 
 universe His indescribable grace, which, in stooping to save 
 one of its worlds, has thrown a new lustre over the Divine 
 holiness, and proved the unshaken harmony and stability of 
 the Divine administration. For this Creator is He "in whom 
 we have redemption," and this noblest of His works was in 
 
5G COLOSSI ANS I. 17. 
 
 certain prospect when for Himself all things were created — a 
 platform of no stinted proportions prepared for Him and by 
 Him. Creation in itself presents an imperfect aspect of God, 
 opens up a glimpse of only one side of His nature — His 
 brightest and holiest phase lying under an eclipse ; but 
 redemption exhibits Him in His fulness of essence and 
 symmetry of character. And did not Christ contemplate such 
 a manifestation when He brought into existence so vast an 
 empire to enjoy and adore the august and ennobling spectacle ? 
 Thus His all-sided relation to the universe is depicted — it is "in 
 Him," " by Him," and " for Him." Let no one say. He is an 
 inferior agent — the universe was created " in Him ; " let no 
 one surmise, He is but a latent source — it is " by Him ; " let 
 no one look on Him as another's deputy — it is " for Him," 
 In every sense He is the sovereign creator — His is the con- 
 ception, and Himself the agent and end. 
 
 (Ver. 17.) Kal avT6<i eariv irpo irdvTwv — "And He is 
 before all." The pronoun in the nominative has an emphatic 
 sense — " and this one " — the creator of all, is before all. Two 
 meanings have been assigned to the preposition irpo. 
 
 1. Many take it in the sense of order, or eminence — such 
 as Noesselt, Heinrichs, Baumgarten-Crusius, Schleiermacher, 
 and, of necessity, the Socinian expositors. There is no need 
 of this secondary meaning, and the phrase as it occurs in 
 Jas. v. 12, 1 Pet. iv. 8, does not warrant such an exegesis, 
 for it occurs in those places as a kind of adverbial emphasis. 
 
 2. It naturally means " before all " in point of time — as 
 Bohmer, Meyer, De Wette, and Huther take it. John i. 30. 
 When connected with persons, tt/jo bears such a primary 
 meaning always in the New Testament, John v. 7 ; Eom. xvi. 
 7; Gal. i. 17. Priority of existence belongs to the great 
 First Cause. He who made all necessarily existed before all. 
 Prior to His creative work. He had filled the unmeasured 
 periods of an unbeginning eternity. Matter is not eternal — 
 is not the dark and necessary circumference of His bright 
 Essence. He pre-existed it, and called it into being. Every- 
 thing is posterior to Him, and nothing coeval with Him. And 
 the present tense is employed — " He is," not " He was." 
 John viii. 58, His is unchanging being. At every point of 
 His existence it may be said of Him, He is. He is all that 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 17. 57 
 
 He was, and all that He will be — and comprises iu Him the 
 birth and end of time. Were His existence measured by 
 human epochs, you might say of Him at some bygone period, 
 " He was " — but the apostle, glancing at His immutability of 
 nature, simply says, " He is." OEcumenius rightly remarks, 
 that the apostle writes not iyevero irpb iravrcov, aX.V eaTi irpo 
 irdvTOiv. 
 
 Kal ra irdvra ev avTu> avvearrjKe — " And all things in 
 Him are upheld." Not only is He the creator, but He is 
 also preserver. Heb. i. 3. The verb sometimes signifies to 
 arrange, to constitute, to create, but it also denotes to main- 
 tain in existence what has been created. 2 Pet. iii, 5.^ Such 
 is the view of the Fathers ; as CEcumenius paraphrases — St' 
 avTou TYjv yeveatv Kal rrjv Siufiovrjv e^et. UpofirjdelTai ayu 
 iTTolrjae, The perfect tense seems to point us to this signifi- 
 cation. What has been created has still been preserved. The 
 two meanings of the verb meet and merge in its perfect tense. 
 The rd iravra, in this verse, are those of the preceding clauses, 
 and not simply the church, as some in timidity and error 
 restrict it. All things were brought together, and are still 
 held together in Him. The energy which created is alone 
 competent to sustain, every successive moment of providence 
 being, as it were, a successive act of creation. In Him this 
 sustentation of all things reposes. He is the condition of their 
 primary and prolonged being. Wliat a vast view of Christ's 
 dignity ! His arm upholds the universe, and if it were with- 
 drawn, all things would fade into their original non-existence. 
 His great empire depends upon Him in all its provinces — 
 life, mind, sensation and matter ; atoms beneath us to which 
 geology has not descended, and stars beyond us to which 
 astronomy has never penetrated. He feeds the sun with fuel, 
 and vails the moon in beauty. He guides the planets on their 
 journey, and keeps them from collision and disorder. Those 
 secret forms of existence which the unaided eye cannot detect 
 are receiving from Him " their meat in due season." The rain 
 
 ' Thus we find — Herodotus, vii. 225, aT^anvfio, ffuvurrnxis, a standing army ; rat 
 (runffTr,Kora, things as at present. Again, Aristotle, de Mund. 6, Ix tou hau ra. 
 vaira »ai lia hou iif/.7v (Tvviirrtix'.. So Plato, Pol. 7, etc. ; Timaeus, p. 29. In 
 Philo, too, the same meaning is often found, as may be seen in the collected 
 examples of Eisner, Krebs, Loesner, and Kypke. 
 
58 COLOSSIANS I. 17. 
 
 out of His reservoirs nourishes " grass for the cattle, and herl) 
 for the service of man." The vitiated atmosphere discharged 
 from animal lungs becomes in His laboratory the source of 
 special nutrition to vegetable life, and the foul breathings of 
 forges and manufactories supply with strength and colour the 
 tall and gorgeous plants of the torrid zone. Thus that universal 
 balance is preserved, the derangement of which would throw 
 around the globe the pall of death. Order is never violated, 
 the tree yields fruit " after his kind," and according to the 
 original edict. Evening and morning alternate in sure and 
 swift succession. The mighty and minute are alike to Him 
 whose supervision embraces the extinction of a world and the 
 fall of a sparrow. The " creeping things innumerable in the 
 great and wide sea " look up to Him, and He opens His hand 
 and " they are filled with good ; " as well the leviathan who is 
 " made to play therein," as the insect that builds its coral cell — 
 first its dwelling and then its tomb. Every pulsation of our 
 heart depends on His sovereign beneficence who feeds us 
 and clothes us. The intellect of the cherub reflects His light, 
 and the fire of the seraph is but the glow of His love. All 
 things which He has evoked into being have their continued 
 subsistence in Him. 
 
 Are we not entranced with the dignity of our Eedeemer, and 
 are we not amazed at His condescension and love ? That the 
 creator and upholder of the universe should come down to 
 such a world as this, and clothe Himself in the inferior nature 
 of its race, and in that nature die to forgive and save it, is the 
 most amazing of revelations. Dare we lift our hearts to con- 
 template and credit it ? And yet it is truth, most glorious 
 truth ; truth sealed with the blood of Calvary. What sublimity 
 is shed around the gospel ! The God of the first chapter of 
 Genesis is the babe of the first chapter of Matthew. He whom 
 Isaiah depicts as " the Lord God, the creator of the ends of the 
 earth," " who hath measured the waters in the hollow of His 
 liand, and meted out heaven with the span," is the Christ 
 crucified of evangelical story and apostolic preaching. He who, 
 in the pages of Jeremiah, is " the true God, the living God, 
 and an everlasting King," is in the pages of John the Word 
 made flesh — the weeping Jesus — the master girded with a 
 towel and washing His disciples' feet — the sufferer crowned 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 17. 59 
 
 with thorns and nailed in nakedness to the cross. He who is 
 depicted in Ezekiel as seated on the sapphire throne, with the 
 rainbow for its canopy, and the cherubim for its bearers and 
 i^uardians, is none other than He whose garments were 
 divided by His executioners, yea, whose corpse was pierced by 
 the barbarous arm of a Eoman soldier, and probed to the very 
 lieart to prove the reality of His death. He who warned the 
 ancient people that they " saw no manner of similitude in the 
 day when He spake to them in Horeb," says at length to a 
 group standing around Him, " Behold my hands and my feet, 
 that it is I myself, handle me and see." He by whom all 
 things were made had not " where to lay His head." What 
 faith in power and extent should not be reposed in such a 
 Saviour-God ! Surely He who made and who sustains the 
 universe is able to keep that we " have committed to Him," 
 and will not, from inability or oversight, suffer a confiding 
 spirit to sink into perdition. 
 
 We have not chosen to interrupt the course of exegesis by 
 taking notice of the non-natural interpretation which has been 
 sometimes put upon these verses. The deniers of theEedeemer's 
 deity, and of necessity such as Crellius, Slichting, and the 
 editors of the " Improved Version," ^ hold that the creation re- 
 ferred to is not the physical, but a moral creation, — an exegesis 
 acquiesced in, in some of its parts, by Grotius, Wetstein, 
 Ernesti, Noesselt, Heinrichs, Schrader, Baumgarten-Crusius, 
 and Schleiermacher. But, as Whitby remarks, it is a " flat 
 and mean " exposition ; or, as Daille calls it, " cMcancuse glosse." 
 For — 
 
 1. It is contradicted by the paragraph which afterwards, 
 and that formally, introduces the new or spiritual creation, and 
 connects it as a sequel with that other creation which in these 
 verses the apostle ascribes to Christ. This mode of connection 
 is a plain proof that two distinct acts, or provinces of operation 
 and government, are referred to Christ. 
 
 2. The obvious meaning of the terms employed is against 
 the Socinian hypothesis. Had the words occurred in any 
 
 ^ The views of Photiiius, a disciple of Marcellus, in the fourth century, were 
 .similar, and were condemned even by an Arian Council at Sirmiiim, in 351. It 
 is strange to find Lampe adopting the Socinian exegesis, as in his Commentary 
 bn the 45th Psalm, p. 573. 
 
60 COLOSSI AXS I. 17. 
 
 common paragraph, their meaning would never have been 
 doubted. Had the Father been spoken of, the reference to 
 creation, in its proper sense, would never have been impugned. 
 Why then, when the reference is to the Son, should not the 
 first and most natural interpretation be put upon the lan- 
 guage ? Pierce remarks, that the exegesis which adopts the 
 notion of a spiritual creation would never have been espoused 
 " but for the sake of an hypothesis." The language in its 
 words and spirit — its minuteness and universality — leads us to 
 the first or physical creation. It is a miserable shift of the 
 editors of the Improved Version to argue " the apostle does 
 not say by Him were created heaven and earth, but things in 
 heaven and things on earth." The inspired language is, the 
 universe — " the all " was created by Him without exception ; 
 " things in heaven," comprising heaven and its population ; and 
 " things on earth," meaning earth and all that it contains. One 
 is apt to wonder at the hardihood of such an exegesis, and to 
 pause and ask with Whitby, " Do the angels need this moral 
 creation, or are they a part of this spiritual creation ? " And 
 how jejune to say, that by " things in heaven " are meant the 
 Jews, and by " things on earth," the Gentiles ! Besides, if we 
 adopt the hypothesis, that a moral renovation is described by 
 these words, the paragraph would lead us to suppose that it 
 had been already effected, and that it still subsisted, whereas 
 in reality it had only commenced. 
 / 3. Such phraseology cannot signify a moral creation. The 
 ' verb KTL^co has sometimes a secondary sense, and refers to 
 the new creation. In such cases not only is the meaning 
 obvious from the context, as in Eph. ii. 10, 2 Cor. v. 17, 
 Eph. iv. 24, Col. iii. 10, but also the subjects of the renova- 
 tion are living men already in physical existence ; and there 
 can be therefore no mistake in calling the mighty moral change 
 that passes over them a creation. In the paragraph before us, 
 on the other hand, no such previous condition exists ; all things 
 are said to be created, that is, brought into existence, by 
 Christ Jesus. The passages of similar meaning in the Old 
 Testament, as Ps. li. 10, Isa. xlv. 8, Jer. xxxi. 22, etc., 
 present no difficulty, for they carry with them the prin- 
 ciple of their own solution. Such phraseology as that before 
 us occurs not in any of these places ; and in one of them 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 17. 61 
 
 where there is simihir diction, ambiguity is guarded against by 
 the addition of the epithet " new," — " I create new heavens 
 and a new earth." 
 
 Lastly, as Whitby,^ Dr. Pye Smith," and Burton ^ have shown, 
 the early Greek Fathers unanimously understood the passage 
 of a " proper and physical creation." The Sociuian interpreta- 
 tion, in short, is as repugnant to sound exegesis as the trans- 
 parent trick of Marcion was to ordinary honesty, when, according 
 to Tertullian, he omitted in his edition the verses altogether. 
 The perversion of them is not better than the exclusion of 
 them ; nay, the latter has the merit of a direct avowal of 
 inability or reluctance to explain them. They, however, 
 survive as a bright and glorious testimony to Him who is the 
 " true God and eternal life." 
 
 A similar assault upon the natural meaning of the paragraph, 
 and which created no small stir, was made by Schleiermacher * 
 in the third number of the Studien unci Kritiken, 1832. His 
 exegesis in its general principles and minute details is opposed 
 alike to sound philology and to the context. His affirmation 
 that ktI^glv is never used in Hellenistic Greek of creation 
 proper, is contradicted by Wisd. i. 14, etc.; Eev. iv. 11, 
 x. 6. His attempt to connect irpcoTO'foKO'i as an adjective with 
 the preceding ecKcov is another failure clearly proved by the 
 verbal arrangement. How frigid to confine the phrase, " visible 
 and invisible," to the last half of the previous clause — " things 
 on earth " ! Somewhat more spiritual and ingenious than the 
 Socinian hypothesis, this exegesis of Schleiermacher leads to 
 the same unsatisfactory result. It was answered by Osiander 
 in the same journal, 1833 ; and by Holzhausen in the 
 Tubing. Zeitschrift, 1833; by Bahr in an appendix to his 
 Commentary ; and by Bleek in his Exposition of Hebreius, 
 i. 3. 
 
 ^ See alao Pearson on the Creed, p. 156, vol. i. ed. Oxford, 1847. 
 
 2 Script/ure Testimony, iii. 273. 
 
 ^ Testimony of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Divinity of Christ (passim), 
 Oxford, 1837. 
 
 * Thus lie says, " Christus ist in dem gesammten Umfang der geistigen Men- 
 schenwelt das erstgeborne Bild Gottes, das ursprungliche Abbild Gottes ; alia 
 Gliiubigea soUten in das Bild Christi gestaltet werden, woraus ebenfalls das Bild 
 Gottes in ihnen entstehen miisse, ein Bild zweiter Ordaung." — Stud. u. Krit. 
 1832, 3, S. 521 tf. 
 
02 COLOSSIANS I. 18. 
 
 (Ver. 18.) Kal avro^ iartv rj K6(f)d\r] tov aa}fji,aro<; t?}? 
 iKK\7)(rLa<;. — " And He is the head of the body — the Church.' 
 The latter genitive is in apposition. The apostle now com- 
 mences the second portion of the paragraph, and portrays 
 Christ's relation to the Church. As Theodoret says, He passes 
 diro rrji; d6o\ojla<; el<; rrjv oltcovofiiav. Still He stands out 
 supreme — the one guardian and benefactor — the one Saviour 
 and president — koL avT6<; — He and none other. The meaning 
 of the phrase, " head of the body — the church," has been given 
 under Eph. i. 22, 23, and iv. 15, 16. The probability 
 is that Christ's headship was impugned by the false teachers, 
 in consequence of their theory of emanations and other 
 fantastic reveries about the spirit-world. The church is not, 
 as Noesselt ^ says, the whole family in heaven and in earth, 
 — nor yet the human race, one of whom Christ became ; — 
 but the company of the redeemed, the body of the faithful 
 in Christ Jesus. The previous verses show His qualification 
 for such a headship, — His possession of a Divine nature — His 
 supremacy over the universe, and His creation and support of 
 all things. Any creature would be deified were he so highly 
 exalted ; for he would, from his position, become the god of 
 the Christian people, as their blesser, protector, and object 
 of worship. But the church and the universe are under one 
 administration, that of Him who is " King of kings and Lord 
 of lords." The king of the universe is able to be Head of the 
 church, and He has won the Headship in His blood. It is 
 no eminence to which he is not entitled, no function which 
 he cannot worthily discharge. For the apostle subjoins the 
 following statement as proof — 
 
 "O9 ia-Tcv dp')(rj — " Who is the beginning." This term has 
 been variously understood. Storr and Flatt reduce its signifi- 
 cance by making it mean governor of the world ; Calvin comes 
 near the true view in his paraphrase — initium sccundac et novae, 
 creationis ; Baumgarten, nearer still, when he defines it by 
 Urhebcr, originator. Meyer, De Wette, Huther, Biihr, Steiger, 
 and others, join it to the following words, as if the full clause 
 were — a/3%^; . • . tcov veKpwv. Meyer and De Wette take it 
 simply in a temporal sense {irpo iravTcov dvaard^, as Theophylact 
 has it), and as if it were equivalent to dirap-)(r], which some 
 ■^ Opxiscula, vol. ii. \}. 231. 
 
COLOSSI ANS I. 18. Go 
 
 Mss, even have/ while the other expositors give the sense of 
 lyrincipium. Such a construction is certainly very strange, 
 especially when we consider that Ik precedes roiv veKpwv. We 
 incline to keep the word by itself, and to regard it as being 
 much the same as in the phrase, Eev. iii. 14 — rj ap'xrj t^<? 
 KTLaewi Tov ©eou — the cause or source of the creation of God. 
 Wisdom of Solomon, xii. 16, xiv. 27. The noun, standing by 
 itself, would seem to point out Christ in His solitary grandeur 
 as the prime source of all the blessings and honours detailed in 
 the subsequent verses. The relative has plainly a causal sense, 
 so that the connection is " He is Head of the body, — the 
 church, — inasmuch as He is the one source of its existence 
 and blessings ;" and He is so, as being " the first-begotten from 
 the dead," and, as verse 20 shows, the Eeconciler of men to 
 God by the blood of His cross. This exegesis gives a special 
 dignity to the epithet — Christ, the first source of existence 
 and blessing. But for His gracious intervention, no church 
 had ever existed, and no salvation been ever enjoyed. Having 
 ransomed the church by His blood, may He not rule it by His 
 power, and be " the Head " ? 
 
 And no matter what blessing is enjoyed, what its kind or 
 amount. He is its author. There may be subordinate supplies 
 — wells of water ; but His rain from heaven fills them. Con- 
 viction of sin and repentance unto life are produced by a 
 glimpse of Christ. " They shall look on me whom they have 
 pierced, and mourn." The pardon of guilt comes directly from 
 Him ; and His death provides for the sanctification of the heart ; 
 His Spirit the agent, and His word the instrument. Every 
 grace may be traced to Him, and it bears the heart away to 
 Him as the source of saving influence. He has originated 
 salvation, and He gives it. He is in the most unlimited sense 
 — "'PXV — " t^6 beginning." And we are the more confirmed in 
 this view of keeping a/3%?; separated from the following clause 
 and giving it an absolute meaning, from the fact that, in the 
 Philonic vocabulary,^ it is the name of Logos, and was pro- 
 
 ^ Such as 17, 46, 63 ; Chrysostom's text, and that of (Ecumenius. 
 
 2 Kai yag ".^x^ • • • **' >-oyo;. De Confus. Lijig. p. 380, vol. iii. ed. Pfeiifer. 
 The first source of all was named by Cerinthus, as in the Latin of Irenaeus, 
 principalitas. Adver. Haeres. p. 253, Opera, vol. i. ed. Stieren, 1853. As to 
 the question whether the Logos of Philo be a person, or only the personification 
 of an attribute, a question both sides of which are discussed by Gfrorer, Liicke, 
 
64 COLOSSIANS I. 18. 
 
 bably introduced by the apostle with a special reference to 
 current and insidious errors. The description proceeds — 
 
 JT/owTOTo/co? 6/c ra)v veKpcov — " First-begotten from the dead." 
 In Kev. i. 5 we find but the simple genitive. It is 
 out of the question, on the part of Bullinger, Keuchenius, 
 Aretius, Erasmus, and Schleiermacher, to connect dpxv with j 
 TrpcoTOTo/co? — an abstract with a concrete. We must take this ' 
 word as in the former clause — " first - begotten of every 
 creature," and regard it as referring, not to the priority of time, 
 but to dignity and station. He was not the first that rose in 
 absolute priority, nor simply the first who rose, no more to die. 
 But He was among the dead ; and as He rose from the midst 
 of them, He became their chief, or Lord — " the first-fruits 
 of them that sleep." From Him the dead will get deliverance, 
 for He rose in their name, and came — eV — out from among 
 them as their representative. In this character He destroyed 
 " him that had the power of death." Not only when He was 
 " cut off, but not for Himself," did He "finish transgression and 
 make an end of sin," but He " abolished death." Nay, He 
 has the keys of death and Hades. His people rise in virtue 
 of His power. The instances of resurrection prior to His own 
 were only proofs that the dead might be raised, but His 
 Tesurrection was a pledge that they should be raised. The 
 Lord Himself shall descend ; the trump shall sound, and 
 myriads of sleepers shall start into life ; no soul shall lose, and 
 none mistake its partner ; neither earth nor sea shall retain one 
 occupant. But He is not only the pledge. He is also the 
 pattern. His people shall be raised in immortal youth and 
 beauty ; their vile bodies fashioned like unto His glorious 
 body, and therefore no longer animal frames, but so ethe- 
 realized and attempered as to be able to dwell in a world which 
 
 Dorner, Dahne, Pye Smith, and other distinguished scholars, we quite agree with 
 the view of Scha.ff {Church History, i. p. 213), that Philo himself vibrated 
 between the two opinions, and took each as it served his turn. There is no 
 doubt, that when he calls his Logos, archangel, interpreter, High Priest, the 
 first-born Son of God, he seems to give Him a personal existence ; and there is 
 little doubt that he appears to regard Him only as a species of personification, 
 when he names Him the reflection of God, the ideal world, the medium of the 
 sensible world, the summation of those ideas which are the archetypes of all 
 being. — Dorner, JUntwickelungeschichte der Lehre von der Person Christi, 2nd ed. 
 vol. i. pp. 24, 25, Also, Liicke, Commtntar ilber das Evang. Joluinnis, i. 249 
 e< seq., Bonn, 1840. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 18. 65 
 
 " flesh and blood cannot inherit " — to see God and yet live, 
 to bear upon them without exhaustion the exceeding weight 
 of glory, and to serve, love, and enjoy the unvailed Divinity 
 without end. 
 
 "Iva, jevrjTac iv iraa-Lv avTO<i Trpoarevonv — " In order that in 
 all things He should have the pre-eminence." The conjunc- 
 tion appears to be telic, and not merely ecbatic, as Biihr 
 supposes. It indicates, not the result, but the final purpose 
 of the entire economy. And we cannot, with Meyer and 
 others, connect this clause solely with the one that goes before 
 it, as if His pre-eminence rested merely upon the fact that He 
 was the first-born from the dead. The clause has its root in the 
 entire paragraph, as we shall immediately endeavour to show. 
 The emphatic verb irpwrevoi does not occur anywhere else in 
 the New Testament, but we find it in the Septuagint, 2 Mace, 
 vi. 18 ; Esth. v. 11 ; Xenophon, Cyrop. 8, 2, 28 ; Joseph, Antiq. 
 9, 8, 3 ; Plutarch, De Educat. lib. c, 13, where this very phrase 
 occurs ; ^ Plato, Leges, 692, p. 54, vol, vii. Opera, ed, Bekker, 
 1826, Two distinct meanings have been assigned to iv iraaiv. 
 1. It maybe taken as mascuKne, "among all persons," as is 
 the opinion of Anselm, Beza, Cocceius, Heinrichs, Piscator, 
 and Usteri. If the clause referred simply to the veKpoi, of 
 which Jesus is the first-born, then we should have expected 
 the article — iv toU irdaiv. That iv following irpoarevai may 
 refer to persons, Kypke has shown in his note on this verse, 
 though 'H-apd is the preposition as frequently employed, and more 
 usually the simple genitive. 2. The phrase iv iraatv is more 
 naturally taken by the majority in a neuter sense, " in every 
 thing," or " in all respects." This is the ordinary meaning of 
 the phrase in the New Testament. 2 Cor. xi. 6 ; Eph. i, 
 23 ; 1 Tim. iii. 11 ; 2 Tim. ii. 7 ; Tit, ii. 9 ; 1 Pet. iv. 11. 
 The usus loquendi is therefore in favour of this interpretation, 
 "first in all points ; " or as Theophylact says, in all things — toU 
 irepl avTov 6eo)povfi6voL<; — " in all things which have refer- 
 ence to Himself; " as Chrysostom has it, 'Travra-^ov tt/jwto?. 
 The verb yivTjrac is not to be confounded with the verb of 
 simple existence. The meaning is not that He might be, but 
 that "He might become," Acts x, 4; Eom. iii. 19 ; Heb. 
 V. 12. The verb in such cases denotes the manifestation 
 
 1 See Wetstein, in loc. 
 
66 COLOSSI ANS I. 18. 
 
 of result — that He may show Himself to be in all things First. 
 "We do not say, with Meyer and Huther, that this pre-eminence 
 is looked upon as wholly future, and as only to be realized 
 at the resurrection. If we held the close and sole connection 
 of 7rp(OTevQ)v with TrpwroTOKO'i, we should be obliged to keep 
 this view partially, but not to its full extent ; for, in respect 
 to the dead, as now dead, Jesus stands out as the First who 
 has so risen from a similar state. The meaning, then, 
 is, that in consequence of His being what the apostle has just 
 described Him to be. He has in all things the primacy ; that 
 He stands out as First to the universe, for He is its visible 
 God, its Creator and Preserver ; and He is the Head of the 
 Church, the fount of spiritual blessing, the " Resurrection and 
 the Life." 
 
 As the image — elKonv — of the invisible God He has the 
 pre-eminence. For He is without date of origin or epoch of 
 conclusion. No eclipse shall sully the splendours of His 
 nature. What He has been. He is, and He shall be. JSTor is 
 His essence bounded by any circumference, but it is every- 
 where, undiluted by boundless extension. His mind com- 
 prises all probabilities, and has decided all certainties. His 
 power knows no limit of operation, and is unexhausted by 
 effort. His truth is pure as the solar beam, and the fulness of 
 infinite love dwells in His heart. But such Divine glory is 
 common to the Godhead, and He shares it equally with Father 
 and Spirit. Even here, however. He is First ; for He has 
 visibility, which the Father and Spirit have not ; and He is 
 the God of the universe whom it sees, recognizes, and adores. 
 Nay, more. He has cast a new lustre over His original glory 
 by His incarnation and death. He has won for Himself an 
 imperishable renown. This dignity so earned by Him is 
 specially called His own, in contradistinction from His prior 
 and essential glory, and it is His peculiar and valued posses- 
 sion. Eobed in His native majesty, which has been aug- 
 mented by the mediatorial crown, is He not the most glorious 
 being in the universe ? Matt. xxv. 31 ; John xvii. 24. 
 
 And He has pre-eminence as Creator, for creation is His 
 special work. It existed in idea in the mind of God, but it 
 was brought into existence by the power of Christ. These 
 worlds on worlds, which in their number and vastness con- 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 18. 67 
 
 found US, have Him as artificer, for He " telleth the number of 
 the stars, and calleth them by their names." Creation owns 
 Him as Lord. The natural impulse is to reason from effect 
 upwards to cause — " from nature up to nature's God : " but the 
 God whom such instinctive logic discovers, and whose might 
 and wisdom, science and philosophy illustrate with rich, varied, 
 profound, and increasing, nay, interminable examples, is none 
 other than this "First-born of every creature." On His arm 
 hangs the universe, and He receives its homage. Above all, 
 there is matchless grandeur in the constitution of His person 
 as the Head of the Church. The Father is pure Divinity, and 
 so is the Spirit : the wisest, greatest, and best ; infinite, 
 eternal, and unchangeable in essence, attributes, and character. 
 But the Son has another nature, one in person with His 
 Deity. The divine is not dwarfed into the human, nor has 
 the human been absorbed into the divine, but both co-exist 
 without mixture or confusion. The incarnation of Jesus 
 illuminates the Old Testament as a promise, and fills the New 
 Testament as a fact. Possessed of this composite nature, 
 Christ is distinguished from every being : none like Him in 
 unapproachable mystery — as the God-man who has gained 
 His capital supremacy by His agony and cross. Was ever 
 suffering like His in origin, intensity, nature, or design ? 
 
 Again, as the source of blessing, has He not primal rank ? 
 These spiritual gifts possess a special value, as springing from 
 His blood, and as being applied by His Spirit. He is seated 
 in eminence as the dispenser of common gifts to His universe, 
 but He is throned in pre-eminence as the provider and 
 bestower of spiritual blessings to His Church, Are not His 
 instructions without a rival in adaptation, amount, and power ? 
 What parallel can be found to His example, so perfect and so 
 fascinating, that of a man that men may see, and admire, and 
 imitate ; while it contains in itself, at the same time, the 
 secret might of Divinity to mould into its blessed resemblance 
 the heart of all His followers who are " changed into the same 
 image from glory to glory " ? In short, there is such wondrous 
 singularity in the glory of Christ's person and work, so much 
 that gives Him a radiance all His own, and an elevation high 
 and apart, that it may be truly said, that in all things He has 
 the pre-eminence. None like Christ is the decision of faith : 
 
 H 
 
68 COLOSSIANS I. 19. 
 
 none but Christ is the motto of love. The apostle assigns 
 another or additional reason — 
 
 (Ver. 19.)'''0Tt ev avroj evSoKtjcrev. A different spelling of 
 the word is exhibited in some of the MSS. such as A, D, E, 
 — yvSoKTiaev, but without authority. Schniid supposes that 
 TrXrjpwixa is the nominative; and he understands it thus — the 
 entire Godhead was pleased to dwell in Christ. We believe, 
 with the majority of expositors, that 6 ^eo9 is to be supplied as 
 the nominative, and not tw Oeo), in the dative. Matt. iii. 17; 
 Luke iii. 22. The full syntax is found in 1 Cor. i. 21 ; Gal. 
 i. 15. But we cannot hold, with some, that the pronoun avrw 
 refers to God, for we take it as still pointing to Him who has 
 been the prime subject of discourse. To make o Xptaro^ the 
 nominative, as Conybeare does, implies the sense that Christ is 
 not only the means, but the end in this reconciliation, for the 
 reading would plainly be in the next verse — " and by Himself 
 to reconcile all things unto Himself," a mode of speech not 
 in accordance with Pauline usage. Christ reconciles, not to 
 Himself, but to God. We incline also to connect the clause 
 immediately with the preceding one, and not generally with the 
 previous paragraph. "That in all things He might have the 
 pre-eminence ; " for, in order to this, " it pleased God — it was 
 His good purpose — that in Him should all fulness dwell." The 
 pre-eminence, therefore, could not but be His. The verb does 
 not mean that it was God's desire that all fulness should dwell 
 in Christ, but that it was His resolve, as being His pleasure.-^ 
 
 Udv TO ifXrjpwpLa KaroiKrj(Tai. On the meaning of TrXrjpcofia 
 we have spoken at length under Eph. i. 23. In the verb 
 the idea of past and continued residence is presented. We 
 see no reason to deviate here from the meaning assigned to 
 the noun in the place referred to, so that we must hold, against 
 Biihr and Steiger, that the word has a passive, and not an 
 active signification, denoting, not that which fills up, but the 
 state of fulness, or the contents of it. But to what does this 
 fulness refer ? 
 
 1. It is a most extraordinary exegesis of Theodoret and 
 Severianus,^ followed by Baumgarten-Crusius, Heinrichs, Wahl, 
 
 ' In reference to the meaning and derivation of the verb, there is an elaborate 
 note of Fritzsche, Comment, in Ep. ad Roman, ii. 369. See also Sturz, p. 168 ; 
 Lobexk ad Phryn. p. 456. ^ Catena, p. 310. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 19. 69 
 
 and Schleiermacher, that TrXi^pwfia signifies the multitude 
 which compose the church. This view has been exposed by 
 us under Eph. i. 23. Here it would yield no tolerable 
 meaning, and would not be in harmony at all with the context. 
 Pierce follows the rendering of Castalio — " it seemed good to 
 God the Father to inhabit all fulness by Christ." 
 
 2. Some limit the meaning of the clause by basing their 
 interpretation of it on a following verse in ii. 9, " all the 
 fulness of the Godhead." But there is no reason to subjoin 
 the genitive Tr)^ OeoT'qTO'i in this place, the meaning here 
 being more general and sweeping in its nature. 
 
 3. This fulness is referred by Q^^cumenius, Huther, and 
 others, to the Divine essence. Servetus based, according to 
 Beza, a species of Pantheism on this declaration. But such 
 an idea cannot be entertained, because the Divine essence 
 dwelt in Christ unchangeably, and not by the Father's con- 
 sent or purpose. It is His in His own right, and not by 
 paternal pleasure. Whatever dwells in Christ by the Father's 
 pleasure is official, and not essential ; relational, and not 
 absolute in its nature. 
 
 4. The proper exegesis, then, is, that all fulness of grace, or 
 saving blessings, dwells in Christ — a species of fulness, the 
 contents of which are described in the following verse. John 
 i. 14-16. We do not exclude the work of creation as a 
 result of this fulness laid up in the Image and First-born, but 
 the apostle seems to connect it more with the process and 
 results of redemption. Whatever is needed to save a fallen 
 world, and restore harmony to the universe, is treasured 
 up in Him — is in Him. It was indispensable that the 
 law should be magnified while its violators were forgiven, 
 lest the circuit of the Divine jurisdiction should be narrowed, 
 or its influence counteracted ; and there is a fulness of 
 merit in the sufferings of Jesus which has shed an imperish- 
 able lustre on the nature and government of God. That 
 copious variety of gifts connected with the Christian economy 
 has its source in Jesus. Knowledge and faith, pardon and 
 life, purity and hope, comfort and strength, impulse and 
 check, all that quickens and all that sustains, each in 
 its place and connection, is but an emanation of this unex- 
 hausted plenty. And there is " all " fulness ; abundance of 
 
70 COLOSSIANS I. 19. 
 
 blessing, and of every species of blessing, in proper time and 
 order. As the bounties of providence are scattered around us 
 with rich niuniiicence, and consist not of one kind of gift 
 which might become fatal in its monotony, but of an immense 
 variety, which is essential, singly and in combination, to the 
 sustenance of life ; so the blessings which spring out of this 
 fulness are not only vast in number and special in adaptation, 
 by themselves, but in their mutual relations and dependence 
 they supply every necessity, and fill the entire nature with 
 increasing satisfaction and delight. The impartation of know- 
 ledge, though it grew to the " riches of the full assurance of 
 ■understanding," could not of itself minister to every want ; 
 nor yet could the pardon of sin severed from the benefits 
 which flow from it. Therefore there is secured for us peace 
 as well as enlightenment ; renovation along with forgiveness : 
 condition and character are equally changed ; the tear of 
 penitence glistens in the radiance of spiritual joy, and the 
 germs of perfection ingrafted now are destined for ever to 
 mature and expand. Provision, moreover, would be inade- 
 quate without application. Man is not merely informed that 
 God is merciful, and that he may come to Him and live ; or 
 that Christ has died, and that he may believe and be saved ; 
 or that heaven is open, and that he may enter and be happy. 
 Not only is provision ample, but in this fulness appliance is 
 ,'secured. Not only has salvation been purchased, but it is 
 placed within an available reach, for while the cross is 
 erected, the eye is opened, and the vision carried towards 
 its bleeding victim ; not only has atoning blood been shed, 
 but it is sprinkled upon the heart ; not only is there the 
 promise of a heavenly inheritance, but the soul is purified, 
 yea, and " kept by the power of God through faith." In short, 
 every grace, as it is needed, and when it is needed, in every 
 variety of phasis and operation ; every grace, either to nurse 
 the babe or sustain the perfect man, to excite the new life or 
 to foster it, to give pardon and the sense of it, faith and the 
 full assurance of it, purity and the felt possession of it ; every 
 blessing, in short, for health or sickness, for duty or trial, for 
 life or death, for body or soul, for earth or heaven, for time or 
 eternity, is wrapt up in that fulness which dwells in Christ. 
 It may be that TfKrjpw^a was a term employed by the heretics 
 
COLOSSI AN S I. 20. 71 
 
 who disturbed the Colossian church, but we cannot lay sucli 
 stress upon this circumstance as is done by Biihr and Steiger, 
 nor safely deduce from it an inevitable exegesis. There is no 
 doubt that irXripwixa was a distinctive epithet in the vocabu- 
 lary of the heretics of a later age, such as Valentinus, and in 
 the teaching ascribed to Cerinthus. It is found also among 
 the peculiar terms of the Kabbalists. But it would be rash to 
 affirm that the apostle used the word because these heretics 
 abused it, for in his days the germ of that theosophy and 
 mysticism had only found existence, and neither the system 
 nor the nomenclature was fully developed. 
 
 (Ver. 20.) Kat hi avrov aTTOKaraWd^at ra Trdvra et? 
 avTov — " And by Him to reconcile all things to Himself." 
 This sentence still hangs upon the verb euSoKrjae. Elprjvo- 
 7roL7]aa<i agrees with 6e6<;, the understood nominative to 
 evhoKTjae. God having made peace by the blood of His cross 
 (Christ's), was pleased to reconcile by Him (Christ) all 
 things to Himself. If the participle elprjvo. referred to Jesus, 
 we should have expected it to be in the accusative before the 
 infinitive. The instances adduced by Steiger, who holds this 
 view, to prove the occurrence here of a species of anacoluthon, 
 are not in point. On the meaning of diroKaraX. we have 
 spoken under Eph. ii. 16, and need not repeat our remarks. 
 The phrase to, irdvTa, in this verse, must be identical in 
 meaning with ra irdvTa in the 16th verse — created by Jesus 
 and for Him ; and ra Trdvra in the 1 7th verse — preserved 
 by Him. The meaning is further developed and specified in 
 the last clause — elVe ra eVl t?}? 7779, etVe ra ev rol<; oupavol<i — 
 all things, " whether they be things on earth, or things in 
 heaven." The apostle seems thus to refer to the universe — 
 specially the intelligent universe. The reconciliation is 
 eff'ected through Christ, an idea repeated by the apostle in 
 the 22nd and 23rd verses. 
 
 1. It is surely a low and pointless interpretation of the 
 words to refer them, with Junker, Heinrichs, Schleusner, and 
 others, to Jew and Gentile, for the passage is widely different 
 from the paragraph in the 2nd chapter of Ephesians ; or with 
 Beza, Crocius, and Wolf, to understand " things in heaven " 
 of the happy souls of the departed ; or with Schleiermacher, 
 to suppose the apostle to refer to earthlj^ and ecclesiastical 
 
72 COLOSSIANS I. 20. 
 
 relationships. The previous context plainly condemns such a 
 narrow and groundless interpretation. 
 
 2. On the ether hand, it is going beyond the record to base 
 upon the words the dogma of universal restoration. Evil 
 spirits, and finally impenitent men, are left in unrelieved 
 gloom. Those who reject this reconciliation, and depart from 
 the world in unbelief, fall into the hands of a God " who is 
 clear when He judges." 
 
 On this passage, Davenant says truly — torquct i7iterpretcs et 
 vicissim ah illis torquetur. De Wette, indeed, referring to Job 
 iv, 18 and xv. 15, imagines that angels need some process of 
 peacemaking, or rather of perfecting — a notion akin to 
 Calvin's,^ that they were in want of confirmation. 
 
 But supposing that by " things in heaven " we understand 
 angels and all other holy intelligences, in what sense can it be 
 said that they need or receive reconciliation ? Some elude 
 the diflQculty, and argue that the reconciliation is not between 
 God and perfect spirits, but between them and redeemed 
 humanity. Thus Theodoret — cvvrj-^e Tol<i iiri'yelot.'i ra iirov- 
 pdvta : and such is the view of Chrysostom, Augustine, and 
 Pelagius, of Cameron, Dickson, and perhaps the majority. 
 This is a truth, but perhaps not the whole truth intended. 
 The language implies more than this exegesis contains, for all 
 things in heaven are not merely reconciled to all things on 
 earth, but both are at the same time reconciled to God. And 
 we cannot espouse the opinion of Huther, Biihr, and 
 Olshausen, who make the reference in et? avrov to Christ, 
 refrardincj Him as both means and end. The idea is not in 
 
 1 Inter Deum et Angelos longe diversa ratio, illic enim nulla defectio, nullum 
 peccatum, ideoque nullum divortium. Sed tamen duabus de causis Angelos 
 quoque oportuit cum Deo pacificari : nam quum creaturae sint, extra lapsus 
 periculum uon erant, nisi Cliristi gratia fuissent confirmati. Hoc autem non 
 parvum est momentum ad pacis cum Deo perpetuitatem, fixum habere statum 
 in iustitia, ne casum aut defectionem amplius timeat. Deinde in hac ipsa 
 obedientia, quam praestant Deo, non est tam exquisita perfectio, ut Deo omni 
 ex parte et citra veniam satisfaciat. Atque hue procul dubio spectat sententia 
 ista ex libro lob (4, IS.), In Angelis suis reperiet iniquitatem : nam si de 
 diabolo exponitur, quid magnum ? pronuntiat autem illic Spiritus summam 
 puritatem sordere, si ad Dei iustitiam exigatur. Constituendum igitur, non 
 esse tantum in Angelis iustitiae, quod ad plenam cum Deo coniunctionem 
 sufficiat, itaijue pacificatore opus habent, per cuius gratiam penitus Deo 
 adhaereant. In loo. 
 
COLOSSIANS I, 20. 73 
 
 unison with Pauline phraseology, for God is usually regarded 
 as the ultimate end. But the idea in this case would be, that 
 all beings are brought by the death of Christ to obey Him, 
 and to find in Him their common centre. The dative, indeed, 
 is commonly employed, as in Eph. ii. 16, Eom. v. 10; but 
 the employment here of the accusative with eh may indicate 
 something unusual in the verb — may denote to reconcile for, 
 or in reference to Himself, that is, God, He being regarded 
 generally as the end of this reconciliation. Eeconcihation to 
 God is thus predicated of the " things in heaven," though they 
 had never revolted. Nor can w^e simply declare, with 
 Melancthon, Cameron, and Bahr, that the sentiment of this 
 verse is identical with that found in Eph. i. 10, and that 
 aTTOKaraXKa^ai, is of the same meaning as avaKecpaXaico- 
 aaadai. Indeed, as Meyer well suggests, the bringing 
 together under one head is the result of the reconciliation 
 which is here described. The verb diroKar. is defined by 
 Suidas as meaning (^CkoTroiria-aL — to make friends ; and 
 Fritzsche renders it prorsus reconciliare.^ The cltto, in com- 
 position, does not signify " again," as Passow erroneously 
 gives it. [Eph. ii. 16.] This reconciliation we understand 
 in its result — et? — and as denoting unalterable union, — that 
 lie mis^lit reconcile all things and unite them so reconciled to 
 Himself. Such a pregnant meaning of verbs is no uncommon 
 occurrence. 2 Tim. iv. 18 — a-waet eh ttjv ^aacXeiav, will 
 save and translate us to His kingdom. Mark viii. 19 — ore 
 Tov<i irevre aprovi eKkaaa eh tov<; TreyTa/ctcr^iXiou?, when I 
 broke and distributed the five loaves to the five thousand. 
 Acts xxiii. 24, etc.; Winer, ^ 66, 2, d; Xenophon, Anah. 11, 
 3, 11; Polyh. 8, 11; Odyss. ii. 14. There needed no 
 atonement for innocent creatures, but they must have felt the 
 disruption of sin, and seen the terrible anger of God against 
 it. May they not have trembled at the bare idea of apostasy, 
 and may not the very suspicion of it have made them stand 
 before God with more of awe than love ? When the angels 
 beheld their fellows sin so grievously, when they mourned 
 over the tarnished brightness of their lost and exiled natures, 
 might not the memory of the melancholy spectacle fill them 
 with terror, and as they felt themselves placed in a jeopardous 
 
 ' Comment, in Ep. ad Rom. i. 278. 
 
74 COLOSSIANS I. 20. 
 
 crisis, might they not shrink as they gazed upon the imsullied 
 justice and inexorable vengeance of Jehovah-king ? Might 
 not holiness unrelieved by an act of grace, be ever impressing 
 the conviction that " it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands 
 of the living God " ? For sin was possible to them, and what 
 had happened might again take place, while the penalty of 
 sin was as swift in its descent as it was unspeakable in its 
 burden, and irremediable in its effects. The flashing majesty 
 of the throne might still the pulse of the universe, or cause it 
 to throb in subdued and solemn alarm. The radiance of 
 grace had not been seen to play upon the sceptre of righteous- 
 ness. Acquiescence in the Divine rectitude might not 
 conquer trepidation, and the love which encircled them might 
 not cast out all fear of lapse and punishment. Bat when 
 they found out the ineffable stores of the Divine benignity 
 towards man — in the mission and death of Jesus, in the 
 untold abundance and fulness of blessings conferred upon him, 
 in a vast salvation secured at a vast expense, and in a happy 
 alliance concluded between them and the ransomed church — 
 did they not share in the same reconciliation and feel them- 
 selves drawn nearer a God of grace, whom they can now love 
 with a higher thrill and praise with a more rapturous halle- 
 lujah ? In being re-united with man they feel themselves 
 brought closer to God, and though they sing of a salvation 
 which they did not require, still they experience the Saviour's 
 tenderness, and are charmed with the reign of His crowned 
 humanity. The gloom that sin had thrown over them is 
 dispelled; and creation as one united whole rejoices in the 
 presence of God. The one Eeconciler is the head of these 
 vast dominions, and in Him meet and merge the discordant 
 elements which sin had introduced. The breach is healed. 
 Gabriel embraces Adam, and both enjoy a vicinity to God, 
 which but for the reconciliation of the cross would never have 
 been vouchsafed to either. The humanity of Jesus bringing 
 all creatures around it, unites them to God in a bond which 
 never before existed — a bond which has its origin in the 
 mystery of redemption. Thus all things in heaven and earth 
 feel the effect of man's renovation ; unnumbered worlds, so 
 thickly strewn as to appear but dim and nebulous masses, are 
 pervaded by its harmonizing influence ; a new attraction binds 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 20. 75 
 
 them to the throne. Blessings which naked Deity might not 
 be able to bestow are poured out upon them by the incarnate 
 Lord " who filleth all in all ; " and the exhibition of love in 
 the agonies of Christ may have secured what unalloyed equity 
 could not, may have placed the universe for ever beyond the 
 reach of apostasy and revolt. Then at length starts into view 
 the blessed kingdom — "the new heavens and new earth, 
 wherein dwelleth righteousness." 
 
 Nor need we wonder at the infinite results of the death of 
 Christ, when we reflect that, as the apostle has described Him, 
 He is Creator, Preserver, and End of all things. Creation, to 
 its farthest verge, could not but be affected by the grace and 
 the death of Him who gave to it its original being and still 
 supplies the means of its continued existence. When He laid 
 aside the splendours of the Godhead, and walked a man upon 
 the footstool, and died on a world and for a world which He 
 had made, to satisfy Divine justice, and glorify the principles 
 of the Divine administration, it might be anticipated that the 
 effect of that stupendous enterprise should be felt everywhere, 
 diffusing the attractive power of a new spiritual gravitation 
 among all things, " whether they be things on earth or things 
 in heaven." 
 
 Elpi]vo7roi,7](ra<i Bia tov aifjuaro^ rov crravpov avrov — " Hav- 
 ing made peace by the blood of His cross." We understand 
 the participle to be in agreement with ^eo<?, as the nominative 
 to evSoKTjae, and not with Xpcaro'i, as the Greek Fathers, and 
 even Storr and Steiger, construe the clause. The aorist par- 
 ticiple here is of the same tense with the aorist infinitive in 
 the preceding clause, and it points out the method by which 
 reconciliation has been secured. The blood of His, that is, 
 Christ's cross, was the source of peace — the reference being 
 to the atoning sacrifice presented on Calvary. Blood shed on 
 earth creates feuds to be extinguished only by other blood ; 
 it calls up the avenging kinsman to wait, watch, pursue, and 
 retaliate ; but the blood of Christ's violent and vicarious death 
 brings peace, restores alliance between heaven and earth. 
 While we look on the paternal aspect of God's character, we 
 must not overlook His position as moral governor — bound to 
 inflict the penalty annexed to the violation of His statutes. 
 [Eph. ii. 16.] He must visit the sinner with His judicial 
 
76 COLOSSIANS I. 20. 
 
 displeasure ; or as the scholastic theology of Bede phrased it, 
 " in every one of us He hated what we had done, He loved 
 what He Himself had done." The justice of God, as Mtzsch ^ 
 says, is a necessary and inseparable idea of His love. The 
 antithesis of mercy and justice is no longer unresolved, nor do 
 they neutralize one another. Sin at the same time creates 
 enmity in the human heart towards God, an enmity removed 
 also by faith in the great propitiation. Thus the cross is the 
 symbol of peace. He who died on it possessed God's nature, 
 the offended party, and man's nature, the offending party ; and 
 thus being qualified to mediate between them. His blood was 
 poured out as a peace-offering. The law is satisfied, and 
 guilty sinners are freed from the curse : an amnesty is pro- 
 claimed ; God reconciles the world unto Himself, and justified 
 man has peace with God. 
 
 The apostle repeats St' avrou to give prominence to the 
 efficacious agency of His Son. " By Him," that is, by His 
 blood, and by all the work which His mediatorial person is so 
 well fitted to carry on and consummate. The last clause 
 explains the preceding irdvra. As if there might be doubt in 
 some minds ; or as if some ascribed a limited influence to a 
 Jewish death upon Jewish soil, the apostle exclaims " all " — 
 " whether they be things in earth," which is first and specially 
 interested ; or whether they be " things in heaven." Chrysos- 
 tom, to support his view, erroneously and ungrammatically 
 connects this clause with the one immediately before it, as if 
 the peace made by the blood of the cross was simply and 
 solely peace between things in heaven and things on earth. 
 In fine, the entire process, as the connection of this verse with 
 the preceding one shows, springs from the Divine pleasure — 
 it so " pleased " Him. 
 
 Now, if there was a tendency among the false teachers in 
 Colosse to depreciate Jesus, lower the value and restrict the 
 extent of His saving work ; if they derogated either from His 
 personal dignity or official prerogative, the apostle applies a 
 mighty and sufficient counteractive. That Saviour whom the 
 apostles preached was no creature, but Himself the Creator ; 
 was invested with no provincial government, but ruled and 
 preserved the wide realms of space ; was no subordinate spirit 
 
 ^ System der Christlichen Lehre, § 80, 5th Auflage, Bonn, 1844. 
 
COLOSSI ANS I. 21. 77 
 
 in the celestial crowd, but one who is the end as well as author 
 of all things ; is supreme Lord of His Church, as is most due ; 
 and as He possesses all fulness within Himself, and has by the 
 shedding of His blood restored harmony to the universe, there- 
 fore, now, in every point He has an unchallenged pre-eminence. 
 On the dark background of an old theosophic heresy there 
 shines out this starry halo of mediatorial merit and renown. 
 
 (Ver. 21.) Kal vfids, irore 6vTa<i dTrrjWorpicofxevovi} koi 
 i-^dpov^; rr) Siavoia ev Tol<; ep'yoi'i roc<i Trovrjpocf;, vvvl Be 
 uTTOKaTriXka^ev — " And yet now He has reconciled you who 
 were once alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked 
 works." The apostle turns directly to the Colossians, and 
 applies to their experience the results of these more general 
 statements. And he does not disguise the truth when he 
 describes their past condition — •wore. Kal vixa<i, " you even." 
 Hartung, p. 125. The participle 6vTa<i occurs before airrjXX. 
 Jelf, § 375, 4. l^AiTTfsXoT. Eph. ii. 12, iv. 18.] It 
 here denotes that spiritual alienation from God which cha- 
 racterized the heathen world. Though the term God is not 
 expressed, the idea is plainly implied. They had strayed so 
 far from God, that they had lost all view of His unity and 
 spirituality. His holiness and His love, and felt no longer the 
 hallowing influence of His existence, majesty, and government. 
 This severance from God was the early fruit of sin, for when 
 the Divine Being descended to paradise, as was His wont, the 
 guilty Adam acknowledged the impulse of this alienation 
 when he attempted to " hide himself from the presence of the 
 Lord God among the trees of the garden." So severed, they 
 needed re-union. Nay, not only were they aliens, but enemies 
 — i^OpoiK;. We see no reason to adopt Meyer's view, and take 
 the adjective in a passive sense — objects of the Divine enmity, 
 a meaning which it does not bear in Eom. v. 10. We prefer 
 the usual and active sense, as seen in the common phrase 
 6 e'xPpo'i ; and it is superfluous on the part of Calovius to unite 
 both acceptations. That enmity had its seat ry BiavoLa, which 
 Meyer is obliged to render, with Luther, " on account of your 
 mind " — hated on account of your corrupt mind. This enmity 
 toward God was in the mind. [Sidvoia, Eph. ii. 3.] The 
 noun represents the seat of thought, or rather of disposition. 
 Luke i. 51 ; 1 Chron. xxix. 18. 
 
78 COLOSSIANS I. 21. 
 
 The connection of this with the next clause has been 
 variously understood. Michaelis gratuitously renders " en- 
 mity in consequence of pre-eminence in evil works." Eras- 
 mus is as wide of the mark in his explanation — inimici, cui ? 
 menti, etenim qui carni scrvit, repugned rationi. Bahr, relying 
 on the usage of Siavoelv being followed by iv, connects the 
 two clauses very closely — operibus malis intenta, peccatorum 
 studiosa. We incline to take the clauses as separate statements 
 in order, the first as describing the seat of enmity, and the 
 second as marking the sphere of its development. It is lodged 
 in the mind, but it embodies itself in deeds ; and those deeds 
 are " wicked," are in harmony with the source of activity. The 
 apostle charges them not merely with spiritual and latent 
 hostility to God, but with the manifestation of that hostility 
 in open acts of unnatural rebellion. It is not a neutral 
 alienation, but one characterized by positive enmity. The 
 charge may be easily substantiated. No thoughts are more 
 unwelcome to men, none less frequently in their mind, than 
 God. Men may like an ideal God of their own creation, such 
 an one as themselves have invested with a fictitious divinity, 
 but the God of the gospel stirs up opposition ; His holiness 
 alarms them ; and their heart is filled with prejudice against 
 His scheme of salvation, because it so humbles the creature 
 by pressing on him as a ruined and helpless sinner a gratuitous 
 pardon which he could never win ; and because, in urging him 
 to the possession of holiness, it necessitates a total revolution 
 in all his habits and desires. It is a melancholy indictment : 
 antagonism to infinite purity and love: sins committed in 
 violation of a law " holy, and just, and good." It was true of 
 the heathen world, and it is true generally of fallen humanity, 
 that there is alienation, that such alienation creates enmity, 
 and that this enmity proves its virulence and disloyalty in 
 repeated transgressions.^ Some of the Fathers, such as 
 TertuUian, Ambrose, and Jerome, following an unwarranted 
 reading found in D\ E\ tj}? 8iavoLa<i avrov, render — enemies 
 to His, that is, God's mind. 
 
 ISvvi Se aTTOKaTrjWa^ev. This reading of the verb has the 
 high authority of A, C, D^^\ E, J, K, almost all the Versions, 
 
 ' As Photius says, they were enemies, for they were seen — ra Ix^f"^ ■/rpa.TTovTts 
 Apud Qicumen. in he. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 22. 79 
 
 and many of the Fathers, Codex B has airoKaTrfkXd^T^re, 
 a form which Lachmann follows ; while D\ F, G, and some of 
 the Latin Fathers, have the participle d7roKaTaXX.ayevT€<i. The 
 peculiarity of construction has apparently given rise to these 
 various lections, but the Textus Pieceptus is best supported. 
 The order adopted by Lachmann gives us this connection 
 — " It pleased God that in Him should all fulness dwell, and 
 that He should reconcile all things to Himself ; and even you, 
 once aliens and enemies (but ye are now reconciled), even you 
 it pleased Him to present, holy and perfect, before Him." The 
 same parenthetical connection might be maintained by keep- 
 ing the verb in the active. Or the first clause may form a 
 pendant to the preceding verse — " It pleased Him to reconcile 
 all things to Himself, and you too, though ye were enemies in 
 your mind by wicked works." But these forms of construc- 
 tion are intricate and needless. We prefer beginning a new 
 sentence with kuI vixd^ irore, and then Trapaarr^aai, in the 
 following verse, becomes the infinitive of design. ISTor do 
 we perceive any grounds for changing the nominative, God 
 being still the subject, as is the view of Zanchius, Bengel, 
 Bahr, Boehmer, Huther, Meyer, against that of the Greek 
 Fathers, with Beza, Calvin, Crocius, Estius, Heinrichs, and 
 De Wette, which refers the nominative to Christ. The 
 work of reconciliation is God's. Man does not win his 
 way back to the Divine favour by either costly offering or 
 profound penitence. God reunites him to Himself ; has 
 not only provided for such an alliance, but actually forms 
 and cements it. 
 
 The apostle has dwelt at length on the dignity and majesty 
 of Jesus, but without hesitation he speaks here of His incar- 
 nate state, for in Him there was a union of extremes, of God 
 and man — of earth and heaven. Indeed, the incarnation, 
 rightly understood, enhances the Eedeemer's greatness. The 
 spiritually sublime is truly seen in His condescension and 
 death. So, he adds — 
 
 (Ver. 22.) 'Ev ra> (jcofxaTC T779 aapKo<; avrov Bid rov Oavdrov 
 — "In the body of His (Christ's) flesh through death." 
 Sirach xxiii. 16. The clause has a remarkable distinctness. 
 Eeconciliation is effected in His body ; that body is a genuine 
 physical frame, for it is the body of His flesh ; and there was 
 
80 COLOSSIANS I. 22. 
 
 an actual decease, as by His death peace was secured. They 
 were reconciled in His body and by His death, a difference of 
 relation being indicated by the prepositions iv and hid ; the 
 latter pointing out the instrumental cause, and the former 
 describing the inner sphere of uniting operation which pre- 
 ceded that death. Without that fleshly body there could have 
 been no death, and the assumption of humanity brought Jesus 
 into a fraternal relationship with all His people. The apostle 
 thus cautions against a spurious spiritualism, which seems to 
 have endangered the Colossian church — as if without an 
 atonement man could be redeemed. Marcion, in his quotation 
 of the verse, omitted the words t?)? crap/co?. 
 
 We need not say, with Bengel, Schrader, and Olshausen, that 
 the apostle writes " the body of His flesh," lest any one should 
 imagine that He might mean His body, the church ;^ nor need 
 we suppose, with Beza, Huther, Bohmer, and Steiger, that 
 there is an express polemical reference to Doketism, or the 
 denial of a real humanity to our Lord, though the germs of such 
 a heresy might be in existence. Jerome, in one of his letters 
 to Pammachius, says of the apostle and the language of this 
 verse — apostolus volcns corpus Christi carncum et non 
 spirituale, a'ereum, tenue, demonstrare. There is no such 
 emphasis in the phrase as Estius and Grotius find when 
 they speak of such vast results flowing from so feeble an 
 instrument, nor is there that contrast between the earthly 
 and glorified body of Christ as is suggested by Flatt, Eoell, 
 and von Gerlach. The purpose of reconciliation is next 
 described. 
 
 JJapacTTriaai, vfia<; dyiov<i Kal dfjbcofjbov^ koX dve'yKXr]rov<i Kare- 
 vdoTTiov avTov. — " To prcscut you holy and blameless, and unre- 
 proveable before Him." This is the infinitive of design. Winer, 
 § 44, 1 ; Matthiae, ii. p. 1 2 34. [Eph. i. 3.] The three adjectives 
 express generally the same idea, but in different and consecu- 
 tive aspects. ['Aylovi; koI dfj,(Ofji,ov<; KaTevccTriov avrov, Eph. 
 i. 4.] There is no ground for the hypothesis of Biihr and 
 Bengel, that the three epithets may be thus characterized — 
 the first as having reference to God, the second to ourselves, and 
 the third to our fellow-men. The first term refers to inner 
 
 ' Yet Pierce inclines to such a notion, though he says, "I am not positive in 
 this interpretation. " 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 23. 81 
 
 consecration, and the purity which it creates and fosters ; the 
 second shows the development of tliis purity in the life ; and 
 the third expresses the result, that heart and life are therefore 
 alike unchallengeable, and that neither against the one nor the 
 other can any charge be preferred. It cannot be alleged against 
 the life that its holiness is but hypocrisy, since that has its 
 root in the sanctified spirit ; neither can the sanctity of the 
 heart be arraigned as inoperative and dead, for it exhibits 
 itself in actions of heavenly worth and resemblance. God 
 presents them before Himself, not before Christ, as Meyer 
 supposes, eavTov not being required. This we take to be 
 the connection, though some connect the words Karevwinov 
 avTov with the three epithets, as if it described their genuine- 
 ness or reality. Such is the connection in Eph. i. 4, but 
 here the phrase seems most naturally connected with the verb 
 — to present before Him. The allusion is to the ultimate 
 consummation : to no period on earth, but to final acceptance 
 before the throne — when the saint shall have come to maturity, 
 and his spiritual development shall have been crowned and 
 perfected. [Eph. v, 27.] The question has been raised, 
 whether the apostle refers, in this last clause, to the righteous- 
 ness of justification, or the holiness of sanctification ; to jus- 
 titia im'putata, as Huther supposes ; or to justitia inhaerens, as 
 Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Calvin maintain ; or to both, 
 as is held by Theodoret, Zanchius, Crocius, Calovius, De 
 Wette, and Meyer. [Eph. i. 4.] Besides that the terms 
 employed by the apostle are inapplicable to justifying right- 
 eousness, it may be remarked that the reconciliation which 
 the apostle represents as having already taken place is but 
 another form of expressing the blessing of justification — 
 pardon, and acceptance with God. This privilege was past, but 
 the ultimate result which flows from it was still to come. 
 Therefore, as this change of state is only a prelude to a change 
 of character — as this justification is a step towards such an 
 end, it follows that the holiness realized in that end is that of 
 sanctification, the maturity of which is acknowledged in the 
 presentation of the saint to God. 1 Cor. i. 8 ; 1 Thess. iii. 
 13, V. 23. 
 
 (Ver. 23.) EX <ye i'jnfievere rfj nrLcneL reOefieXicofjievot Kal 
 eSpaooi, fcal fMr] fxeraKivovfievoL diro t?}? e/\,7r/So9 rov svaj^/eXiov 
 
82 COLOSSIANS I. 23. 
 
 ov r)Kovaare^ — " If ye continue in the faith, grounded and fast, 
 and not moved away from the hope of the gospel which ye 
 have heard." The clause depends, not, as Bengel intimates, 
 on aTroKarrjXKa^ev, but on the nearer verb Trapao-rrjaai. The 
 attainment of spiritual perfection, and the honour of presenta- 
 tion to God, are dependent on the fact specified in this 
 verse. Eoye does not imply doubt [Eph. iii. 2], and so far 
 differs from elVep, but there is no reason to render it, with 
 Pierce, " because." " If, as is the case, ye continue in the faith;" 
 for T7} TTia-Tet is connected with eTrifieveTe, as in Eom. vi. 1, xi. 
 23, 1 Tim. iv. 16 ;^ whereas reOefieX would require iirl, as 
 in Matt vii. 25, or iv, as in Eph. iii. 18. Continuance in 
 the faith is essential to salvation : loss of faith would be for- 
 feiture of life. The blessings of Christianity are given without 
 interruption only to continuous belief. And that perpetuity of 
 faith was not to be a vibratory and superficial state. They 
 were to remain in the faith, or saving belief of the truth, 
 ehpaloi Kol TeOefieXtoy/xevoi — " grounded and settled." [Eph. 
 iii. 18.] 1 Pet. v. 10; 1 Cor. vii. 37, xv. 58. The first 
 epithet alludes to the cause, and the second to its effect, for 
 what is founded becomes fixed : while the third clause depicts a 
 general result — koX fir) fiejaKLvovfievoL, "and therefore not shaken 
 away," as the use of jxr] seems to indicate. The adverb firj 
 has such a connection of dependence, Klihner, § 708 ; Hartung, 
 ii. pp. 113, 114; Winer, § 55, 1, a. If they were founded, 
 they were fixed, and if both they could not be moved — airo 
 Trj<; eXTTtSo? tov evayyeXiou ov r)KovaaTe. [Eph. i. 18.] 
 See also verse fifth of this chapter. The hope is that blessed 
 life revealed by the gospel as its distinctive prospect. That 
 gospel is further characterized as " having been preached to 
 every creature which is under heaven " — 
 
 Toil KTjpv'^OevTO'i iv irdar] KTiaet rfj viro tov ovpavov. The 
 article rfi before irda-r] is probably to be expunged, on the 
 authority of A, B, C, D\ F, G. The general meaning of this 
 hyperbole will be found under verse 6. Thomas Aquinas was 
 so hard pressed^ as to propose a future rendering — praedica- 
 
 1 'YlKovffaTi is spelt, by an oversight, with a spiritus asper in Tischendorf's 
 second edition. 
 '^ Aelian, Hist. var. x. 15. Joseph. Antiq. viii. 7, 5. 
 ^ De Praescrip. Haer. iii. vol. ii. p. 5, Opera, ed. Oehler, 1754. 
 
COLOSSIAKS I. 23. 83 
 
 litur. Perhaps, as Meyer proposes, these words arc a species 
 of confirmation. Apostasy was all the more Llameable, for 
 they had heard the gospel — a gospel of no narroiv diffusion 
 and value — a gospel, also, which numbered among its ad- 
 herents and preachers, the great name of Paul. There is thus 
 a warning in these words of coming danger and seductive 
 influence. It is an extraordinary reason which Anselm, after 
 Gregory, proposes — that every creature must mean man, 
 because man has something in common with every creature ; 
 existence with stones, living growth with trees, sense and 
 motion with the lower animals, and reason and intellect with 
 the angels. 
 
 Thus a life of faith is one of hope, and leads to glory. 
 This belief has a conservative power ; for it keeps in a jus- 
 tified state, and it secures augmenting holiness. While, 
 therefore, the perseverance of the saints is a prominent doc- 
 trine of Scripture, and a perennial source of consolation, it is 
 inconsistent with exhortations to permanence of faith, and not 
 warnings of the sad results of deviation and apostasy. He 
 who stops short in the race, and does not reach the goal, cannot 
 obtain the prize. He who abandons the refuge into which 
 he fled for a season, is swept away when the hurricane breaks 
 upon him. The loss of faith is the knell of hope. " There is 
 a way to hell even from the gate of heaven." As Tertullian 
 says : " While the straws of light faith fly away, the mass of 
 corn is laid up the purer in the garden of God." For man is 
 not acted on mechanically by the grace of God, but his whole 
 spiritual nature is excited to earnest prayer and anxious 
 effort. Its continuance in the faith is not the unconscious 
 impress of an irresistible law, but the result of a diligent use 
 of every means by which belief may be fostered and deepened. 
 The fact that God keeps believers makes them, therefore, 
 distrustful of themselves and dependent upon Him. And the 
 confidence of success inspirits them. " Many a man, from 
 having been persuaded that he is destined to attain some great 
 object, instead of being lulled into carelessness by this belief, 
 has been excited to the most laborious and unwearied efforts, 
 such as perhaps, otherwise, he would not have thought of 
 making for the attainment of his object."^ Thus, as rational 
 
 ^ Whately, quoted in Wood's Theology, iii. 238. 
 I 
 
84 COLOSSIANS I. 24. 
 
 "beings are wrought upon by motives, so warnings and 
 appeals are addressed to them, and these appliances form 
 a special feature of God's plan of preserving them. The 
 apostle thus shows them how much is suspended on their 
 perseverance. 
 
 Ov eyevofiTjv ijoD UavXa 8idKovo<; — " Of which I Paul was 
 constituted a minister." [Eph. iii. 7.] The apostle reverts 
 to his solemn inauguration, his past course of active service, 
 and the authority under which he had acted. This brief and 
 distinct intimation forms a special introduction to the second 
 section of the epistle, and the warning against seduction by 
 false teachers. 
 
 (Ver. 24.) Nvv X^^P^ ^^ '''°*^ TraOtJixaatv virep v/hmv — " Now 
 I rejoice in my sufferings for you." The MSS. D^, E\ F, G, 
 with the Vulgate, and many of the Latin Fathers, prefix 6'?. 
 The reading probably arose from a homoioteleuton or repe- 
 tition of the last syllable of the previous word — oiaKov 09 09. 
 Nvv is not a particle of transition, as Bahr and Liicke^ make 
 it, but means "at the present time;" with the chain upon my 
 wrist, I rejoice ; not, however, as if he had been sorrowful at 
 a previous period. The apostle felt that his sufferings had 
 their source in his diaconate, and therefore he gloried in them. 
 The simple dative, or a participial nominative, is more fre- 
 quently used to express the cause of joy ; the preposition eVt 
 sometimes employed, and occasionally iv, as in Phil i. 18, 
 Luke X. 20, and in the clause before us. To rejoice in them 
 is not very dififerent from to rejoice over, or upon, or for them, 
 only, that in the latter case, the afflictions are regarded as 
 external causes of joy, whereas, in the former case, the writer 
 represents himself as immersed in them, and rejoicing in 
 them. The Stephanie Text adds fiov after iraOrjixaaLv, but on 
 no great authority. The words virep v/jlwv, which we connect 
 with iv iraO. and not with %aip(a, have been variously inter- 
 preted. They cannot mean " in your stead," though Steiger 
 adopts such a view ; and yet in some sense Paul might be 
 regarded as the representative of the churches in heathendom. 
 Nor can the words mean, on the other hand, merely "for 
 your good," as Meyer, De Wette, and Huther suppose ; or as 
 fficumenius gives it, Xva vfia'^ oi^eXrjcraL SvvrjOco, for this was 
 ^ Programm, 1833. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 24. 85 
 
 an ultimate effect, and not the immediate cause of the apostle's 
 sufferings. We prefer, with Heinrichs and Stolz, the ordinary- 
 sense of " on your account," as we may suppose the apostle 
 to refer especially to the Gentile portion of the church. His 
 preaching to the Gentiles was the real and proximate cause of 
 his incarceration. He had, in Jerusalem, declared his mission 
 to the Gentiles, but the mob broke upon him in fury. He 
 was confined for safety, and having on his trial appealed to 
 Cffisar, he was carried to Eome, and pending the investigation 
 kept a prisoner there. Paul does sometimes refer to the good 
 results of his sufferings, as in Phil. i. 12, but he here alludes 
 to the cause of them. 
 
 Kal dvravaifkripS) ra varep'^/xaTa rcbv OXl-^ecov rov Xpiarov 
 — " And fill up what is wanting of the afflictions of Christ." 
 Kat is simply connective, not aWd, as Bengel imagines ; nor 
 Kal yap, as Bahr explains it. It does not render a reason, as 
 Calvin supposes, but simply begins an explanatory statement. 
 This is peculiar language, and its peculiarity has given rise 
 to many forms of exegesis. Chrysostom says : — " It appears 
 a great thing which he utters, but not one of arrogance " 
 — aXk' ovK dirovoia'i. The noun va-reprj/xa denotes what is 
 yet lacking, 1 Cor. xvi. 17, 1 Thess. iii. 10, Phil. ii. 30; 
 and is rendered by Theodoret Xetirofievov ; and ^Xt-i/rt? is 
 pressure from evil, violent suffering. The general sense of 
 the verb is to fill up ; and the question is, in what sense 
 did the apostle fill up what was wanting of the sufferings of 
 Christ ? 
 
 1. Many of the mediaeval Catholic interpreters understood 
 the clause as referring to the atonement, and that its defects 
 may be supplied by the sufferings of the saints. This was a 
 proof-text for the doctrine of indulgences which Bellarmine, 
 Cajetan, Salmeron, Suarez, the Ehemish annotators, and others, 
 laid hold of, as if the merits of Paul's sufferings supplemented 
 those of Christ, and were to be dispensed so as to procure the 
 remission of penalty. This inference, which a-Lapide charac- 
 terizes as no7i male, is in direct antagonism to the whole tenor 
 of Scripture, which represents the sacrifice of Jesus as perfect 
 in obedience and suffering, so perfect as to need neither 
 supplement nor repetition. 
 
 2. Not a few get rid of the difficulty by giving the genitive 
 
86 COLOSSIANS I. 24. 
 
 Xpicnov an unwonted and unwarrantable meaning, and 
 rendering the phrase — " sufferings on account of Christ." The 
 idea may be in itself a correct one, but it is not the shade of 
 idea which the genitive expresses. This exegesis is supported 
 by Tertullian, Schoettgen, Eisner, Storr, Pierce, Eosenmliller, 
 riatt, Bohmer, Burton, and Trollope, but it cannot be 
 grammatically defended. 
 
 3. Calovius, Carpzovius, and Seb. Schmid, understand the 
 phrase as signifying " sufferings meted out to His people by 
 Christ ; " a meaning not very different from that adopted by 
 Liicke — aflictiones, quae Paulo apostolo, Christo auctore et 
 auspice Christo, perferendae erant This mode of explanation 
 does not fix upon the pointed meaning of the genitive, which, 
 when following ^Xt-^/rt?, denotes the suffering person; Eph. 
 iii. 13; 2 Cor. i. 4; Jas. i. 27. 
 
 4. Yet more remote is the view of Photius, adopted by 
 Junker and Heinrichs, that the clause denotes such sufferings 
 as Christ would have endured, had He remained longer on 
 the earth. The words of Photius are — dW oaa . . . eiraOev 
 &v Kol vTrecnri, Ka6' ov Tpbirov Kol irplv Krjpvaacov Kol evajyeXt- 
 ^6fievo<i TTjv ^acnXelav tmv ovpavSiv} 
 
 5. Some able and accomplished scholars take this view — 
 that the sufferings of Paul are styled by him the afflictions of 
 Christ, because they were similar in nature. Such is the 
 view of Theodoret, Meyer, Schleiermacher, Huther, and Winer. 
 Fergusson says — " the great wave of affliction did first beat on 
 Him, and being thereby broken, some small sparks of it only 
 do light upon us." The idea is a striking one, yet it is not 
 universally true. The distinctive element in Christ's suffer- 
 ings had and could have no parallel in those of the apostle 
 — to wit, vicarious agony : Divine infliction and desertion — 
 endurance of penalty to free others from bearing it. There 
 were general points of similarity, indeed, between the suffer- 
 ings of Christ and those of the apostle, so that he might, 
 though at an awful distance, compare his afflictions to those 
 of his Divine Master. Both suffered at the hand of man, 
 and both suffered in innocence. Eom. viii. 17; 1 Pet. 
 iv. 13. But though such a thought may occur in other 
 parts of Scripture, it does not occur in connection with such 
 
 ' Amphiiockia, 143. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 24. 87 
 
 phraseology as is found in the clause before us. An apostle 
 may say that he endures afflictions like those of Christ ; but 
 here Paul says that he supplements the afflictions of Christ. 
 There is an idea in the phrase above and beyond that of mere 
 similarity. Similarity is not of itself supplement, nor does it 
 of necessity imply it. 
 
 And thus, in the last place, we are brought to the common 
 interpretation — that these sufferings are named the afflictions 
 of Christ because He really endured them ; they were His, for 
 He really felt them. The genitive is naturally that of posses- 
 sion. Such is the view of Chrysostom and Theophylact, 
 Augustine and Auselm, of Calvin and Beza, Luther and 
 Melancthon, Zanchius and Grotius, Vitringa ^ and Michaelis, 
 of Biihr and Steiger, of the Catholics Estius and a-Lapide, 
 Davenant, Whitby, Conybeare, Doddridge, De Wette and 
 Olshausen. Thus, Augustine on Ps. Ixi. exclaims of Christ — 
 qui 2y(issits est in capite nostra et patititr in memh'is suis, id est 
 nobis ipsis. And Leo, quoted by Bohmer, says — passio 
 Christi perducitur ad finetn mundi, in omnibus qui pro justitia 
 adversa tolerant, ipse covipatitur. Christ's personal sufferings, 
 which are past, and his sympathetic sufferings, which are still 
 endured, have been distinguished thus in the old Lutheran 
 theology of Gerhard ; that the former are suffered vTroo-raTt/cco?, 
 the latter a-'^eriKm. The Rabbins, in their special dialect, 
 attached a similar meaning to the phrase n^B'D ''i'nn ^ — sufferings 
 of Messiah — distributing them through various generations. 
 The church is in the next clause called the body of Christ : 
 and the Head suffers in all His members. The apostle's 
 suffering's were those of Christ, for Christ is identified with all 
 His people. The scene of the apostle's conversion impressed 
 this truth upon his mind too deeply ever to be forgotten by 
 him : the startling challenge yet rang in his ear — " Saul, Saul, 
 why persecutest thou me ? " The Eedeemer was one with the 
 poor flock at Damascus, so soon, in Saul's imagination, to be 
 " scattered and peeled ; " for the errand of blood was directed 
 against Him as really as against them. On the other hand, 
 but in accordance with this truth, apostates who resile from 
 their profession, and virtually proclaim that they have dis- 
 covered faith in Christ to be a dream and a delusion, are said 
 * Ohservat. Sacrae, p. 144. " Bu.xtorf, Lex. Tal. p. 700. 
 
88 COLOSSI ANS I. 24. 
 
 to " crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him 
 to an open shame." Again, in 2 Cor. i. 5, the apostle says 
 — " The sufferings of Christ abound in us," that is, sufferings 
 endured by Christ in us ; and therefore, such being the 
 sympathetic affinity between us, our consolation also aboundeth 
 by Christ.-^ Again, in Heb. xiii. 13, Christians are exhorted 
 to " go forth unto Him without the camp, bearing His 
 reproach;" not reproach on His account, but the reproach 
 which is His, and which He still bears in us, through our 
 living connection with Him. 2 Cor. ii. 10. Nay, more, we 
 are informed in Heb. xi. 26, that Moses esteemed "the 
 reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt." 
 Now, according to the Old Testament, the God of the theocracy, 
 the Jehovah of the burning bush, the Angel of the covenant, 
 is none other than He who became incarnate ; so that, while 
 Moses, as His representative, incurred special and ungrateful 
 obloquy, that obloquy is termed the reproach of Christ, of 
 Him who sent him, and who was personated by him. And 
 there is ample foundation laid for the language before us in 
 our Lord's pathetic and solemn discourse, recorded in Mathew, 
 in which He declares His oneness with His people, that He lives 
 in them, endures in them the pangs of hunger and thirst, and 
 in them is fed and refreshed, is shut up when they are im- 
 prisoned, and welcomes the step of benevolence — is conscious, 
 with them, when they are in a foreign land, of the desolation 
 and solitude of a stranger, and is thankful for the shelter and 
 fellowship of hospitality — feels the shame of their nakedness 
 when they are bereft of clothing, and accepts with joy the 
 proffered gift of a compassionate friend — suffers in them in 
 their sickness, and enjoys a kind look and deed. 
 
 The personal sufferings of Jesus are over, but His sufferings 
 in His people still continue. They are still defective ; for much 
 remains to be endured in this world. The apostle, in sufi'ering 
 for the sake of the church, felt that he was filling up the 
 measure of those afflictions. 
 
 The double compound verb avravaifk'qpSi denotes "to fill 
 up in relation to." Some, like Olshausen^ and Eisner, lay 
 no peculiar stress on the preposition ; but we cannot suppose 
 
 ^ Alford, in loc. 
 
 ' Fisclier, Animadver. ad Welleri Gram. p. 369. 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 24. 89 
 
 it to be used without some special purpose. The verb ava-nXripo) 
 has a simple sense, but avTavairXrjpo) has a relative one. 
 What the relation is, has been disputed. Winer explains the 
 first compound — qui vaTeprjfia a se relidum, ipse explet ; and 
 the second — qui alterius varepn^fjui de suo explet. E-obinson 
 and Schrader give avrt a reference to the Colossians — who 
 " in your room fill up ; " while Fritzsche, in a note under 
 Eom. XV. 19, suggests the notion of accumulation — m incdis 
 joerferendis aemidans. Some give the first preposition the 
 sense of vicissim — " in turn," as is done by E. Schmid, Beza, 
 Macknight, and Le Clerc,^ who render — ille ego qui olviio 
 ccclesiam Christi vexaveram, nunc vicissim in ejus utilitateni 
 pergo multa mcda perpeti. Others, as CEcumenius, give it the 
 sense of equivalent repayment for the sufferings which Jesus 
 endured for us ; or, as Gerhard has it, quoted in Bahr — " as 
 Christ suffered for my redemption, it is but fitting that I 
 should, in my turn, vicissim, suffer for the advancement of His 
 glory." This view is also held by Bahr, Bohmer, and Titt- 
 mann.^ We cannot adopt this view, for we do not see it fully 
 sustained by the passages adduced in support of it. The 
 passages from Dio Cassius, Apollonius Alexandrinus, and 
 Demosthenes, do not bear it out ; for in them the dvrC of 
 the verb may bear an objective sense — may denote the corre- 
 spondence between the supplement and the defect. So Cony- 
 beare, in the passage before us — " the avTi is introduced into 
 uvravaTrXrjpco, by the antithesis between the notions of 
 7r\7)pova6ac and varepela-Oai,." Meyer's view is similar, and it 
 is, we believe, the correct one. The verb denotes to fill up with 
 something which meets the exigence, or is equivalent to the 
 want. The apostle filled up the sufferings of Christ not with 
 some foreign agony that had no reloMon to the defect ; but the 
 process of supplement consisted of sufferings which met the 
 deficiency, in quality and amount. It was not a piece of new 
 cloth on an old garment, or new wine in old bottles — an 
 antagonism which would have happened had Paul suffered " as 
 a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evil-doer, or as a busybody 
 in other men's matters ; " but the apostle filled up what was 
 yet wanting in the Saviour's sympathetic sorrows, for he adds, 
 they were endured — 
 
 1 Ars. Crit. p. 134, London, 1698. * De Synon. p. 230. 
 
90 COLOSSIANS I. 25. 
 
 ^Ev rfi aapKL /xov inrep rod crajyu.aT09 avrov — " In my flesh 
 for his body's sake." Storr, Bahr, Bohmer, Steiger, and 
 Huther, connect the first clause with rwf OXl-ylrecov tov X. — 
 sufferings which are in my flesh. But more naturally, with 
 Meyer and De Wette, we join the words to the verb, and 
 believe them to represent the mode or circumstances in which 
 the apostle filled up what was left of the aftlictions of Christ. 
 It was in his present fleshly state, and as a suffering man. 
 2 Cor. iv. 11; Gal. iv. 1 4. The next clause points out the 
 cause of suffering — " for his body's sake ; " and this fact gave 
 his sufferings their mysterious and supplemental value. Suffer- 
 ing for His body, implies the fellow-suffering of the Head. 
 Steiger and Liicke's cofniection — " sufferings of Christ for His 
 body's sake" — is whoUy^^ainst the spirit of the inter- 
 pretation. [Tov aco/MaTO^; avrov 6 icniv rj eKK\.7]<jia. Eph. 
 i. 23.] 
 
 (Ver. 25.) '"H? ijevo/xrjv iyco 8{aKovo<; — "Of which church 
 I was made a minister." [Aiukovo^, Eph. iii. 7.] In the 
 passage in the Epistle to the Ephesians, the apostle speaks of 
 his diaconate in reference to the gospel ; but here in connec- 
 tion with the church. And truly the church never had such 
 a servant as Paul — of such industry and heroism — such 
 enthusiasm and perseverance — such sufferings and travels — 
 such opposition and success. He had no leisure even when 
 in chains. The artistic beauties of Athens served but to give 
 point to his orations ; and the Prastorium at Eome furnished 
 hira with occasion to describe the armour and weapons of the 
 sacramental host of God's elect. His service stands out in 
 superlative eminence, whether you measure it by the miles 
 he journeyed, by the sermons he preached, by the stripes 
 and stonings he endured, by the privations he encountered, 
 — "in hunger and thirst, in cold and nakedness," and by 
 the shipwrecks he suffered, or by the souls he converted, 
 the churches he planted or watered, the epistles he wrote, 
 and the death which crowned a life of such earnestness and 
 triumph. 
 
 Kara ttjv olKOVOfiiav rov Seov, rrjv hoOdcrdv /juoc et? vfia<i — 
 " According to the dispensation of God committed to me for 
 you." [OiKovo/jLia, etc., Eph. i. 10, iii. 2.] In the Divine 
 arrangement of the spiritual house, the apostle held a function 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 25. 91 
 
 which had special reference to the members of the Gentile 
 churches. Paul regarded this as his distinctive office, 
 and how he gloried in it ! It had a breadth which suited 
 his mighty mind, and it necessitated the preaching of an 
 unconditioned gospel, which specially delighted his ample 
 heart. He would not be confined within the narrow circuit 
 of Judaism ; the field on which his soul set itself was the 
 world. 
 
 UXrjpcbaat rov \6yov rov Oeov — " To fulfil the word of 
 God." Eom. XV. 19. The meaning is not altered, whether 
 you connect these words with the first or second clause of the 
 verse, either — " of which I was made a servant, to fulfil the 
 word of God," or — " according to the dispensation given in 
 charge to me, to fulfil the word of God." The last is the 
 more natural, and is in accordance with the usual style of the 
 apostle. In either case TrXrjpoxTai is the infinitive of design. 
 The verb has various meanings in the New Testament, and has 
 therefore been variously understood here. 
 
 Vitringa,^ as was natural to such a Hebraist, seeks the 
 meaning of the term from Jewish usage, and compares ifKrjpow 
 to "IJ??, which signified to teach. Flatt and Bahr follow him 
 in their exegesis ; but such a method has no warrant, and 
 we are not forced to it by the impossibility of discovering 
 another. Cornelius a-Lapide ekes out a meaning in this 
 way — to fulfil what Christ began ; Steiger, following Tholuck,^ 
 adopts the subjective idea — to realize and experience its 
 fulness. One class of interpreters, represented by Calixtus 
 and Heinrichs, apply it to the fulfilment of the Divine promises 
 and prophecies of the admission of Gentiles into the church ; 
 and another class, headed by Theodoret, regard the clause 
 as pointing out the diffusion of the gospel — the filling of all 
 places with its preaching. Calvin takes the special idea of 
 fulfilling or giving effect to the gospel — ut efficax sit Dei 
 sermo, virtually the interpretation of some of the Greek 
 Fathers ; while Luther renders reichlich predigen, to preach 
 fully — a notion adopted by Olshausen, that is, to declare the 
 gospel in all its fulness and extent. Fritzsche has a con- 
 jecture of his own — that the apostle uses this term as if his 
 instructions were a supplementary continuation of those of 
 1 Obaervni. i. p. 207. ^ Berg-pred. p. 135. 
 
92 COLOSSIANS I. 26. 
 
 their teacher Epaphras ; -^ and De Wette, by a metonj'my, 
 regards the gospel as a service or decree which Paul wrought 
 out, a notion also held by some of the Lexicographers. In 
 assigning a meaning to the verb, much depends on the signifi- 
 cation given to the noun. Now, we regard the following verse 
 as explanatory — the X070? being the mystery hid from ages 
 and generations — not the gospel in itself, but that gospel in 
 its adaptation to the Gentiles, and its reception by them. The 
 apostle says of himself that he did not preach, but that he 
 fulfilled the gospel. He carried out its design — held it up as 
 the balm of the world — proclaimed it without distinction of 
 blood or race. He did not narrow its purpose, or confine it 
 to a limited sphere of influence ; but, as the apostle of the 
 Gentiles, he opened for it a sweep and circuit adapted to its 
 magnificence of aim, and its universality of fitness and suffi- 
 ciency. He carried it beyond the frontiers of Jud^a, lifted 
 it above the walls of the synagogue, and held it up to the 
 nations. The gospel, since the apostle's time, has received 
 no fuller expansion, nor have any wider susceptibilities been 
 detected or developed in it. As an instrument of human 
 regeneration, he brought it to perfection. Whether you 
 regard the purpose of its author, its own genius or adequacy, 
 its unlimited offers, indiscriminate invitations, and tested 
 efficacy ; the apostle, in preaching it everywhere, and to all 
 classes without reserve, laboured " to fulfil the word of God," 
 Luke vii. 1, ix. 31 ; Acts xiii, 25, xiv. 26, 
 
 (Ver. 26.) To fivcrr^piov to airoKeKpv^fxevov airo rwv 
 av(t)V03v Koi airo rail' yevecop, vvvl Se icf)av€pQ)6r] roc<i dyiot,^ 
 avTov. This verse, as we have said, defines what is meant by 
 the "word" which Paul fulfilled. The meaning of "the mystery 
 hid from ages and from generations," has been explained under 
 Eph. iii, 3, 6. [fjuva-T-^piov, Eph, i, 9, alcov, yeved, Eph. iii, 9, 
 21,] Alcov is age or lifetime, and yeved is the space of one 
 generation. In all past time, this mystery was concealed. 
 The apostle does not say, as has been remarked — Trpb rcov 
 aloovojv, as if the mystery had been hidden from eternity ; 
 but only that it was wrapt in obscurity during the entire past 
 historical epoch. It is a strange conceit of Bengel — Aeones 
 referuntur ad angclos, generationes ad homines. The mystery 
 ^ Comment, in Ep. ad Rom. vol. iii, 257, 
 
COLOSSI AN S I. 27. 93 
 
 is not the gospel generally, as Calvin and Davenant errone- 
 ously suppose ; but the preaching of it to the Gentiles, and 
 their incorporation into the church, or, as the apostle here 
 describes it — " Christ in you, the hope of glory." Nay, so little 
 was it understood, that it required a special revelation to make 
 it known to the reluctant mind of the Apostle Peter, 
 
 In the next clause the syntax is changed, and therefore, as 
 might naturally be expected, we find various readings devised 
 to amend the grammar, such as (pavepcoOev in D and E, and 
 vuu e(^avepdodr} in other Codices. The participial construc- 
 tion is suddenly departed from, and the verb is employed. 
 The anacoluthon gives a sharpness to the contrast. Winer, 
 § 64; Bernhardy, p. 473. [Eph. i. 20.] The adverb vvvi, 
 supported by A, D, E, J, K, is the strengthened form of vvv, 
 Buttmann, § 80; and he points out the contrast. The verb 
 employed to denote the disclosure of a mystery is aTroKoXviTTco 
 in Eph. iii. 5 ; but this verb occurs in a similar connection, 
 Eom. xvi. 26; Tit. i. 3; Mark iv. 22. The word denotes 
 manifestation by Divine power, as the inspired history so 
 plainly relates. But what is meant by roi? djloL'i ? Because 
 the apostle, in the parallel passage in the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, adds airoaTokoL'i koI irpo^rjTac^, many think that 
 the same addition is to be understood here. Such is the view 
 of Theodoret, Estius, Bjihr, Bohmer, Steiger, Olshausen, and 
 others. F, G, add, without warrant, airocrroXofi to the text. 
 There is no reason to depart from the meaning which the 
 epithet bears in the first verse of the epistle ; and so Chrysos- 
 tom, Calvin, Meyer, and De Wette rightly take it. 
 
 (Ver. 27.) or? rjdeXrjaev o 0eo9 'yvcoplaai, T19 irXovro'i 
 Trj<i B6^r)<; rov fivarrjpiov rovrov iv Tot9 edvecnv — " To whom," 
 or, as beiug persons, " to whom God wished to make known 
 what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the 
 Gentiles." Some suppose that ^^voipiaai has a broader and 
 more definite meaning than e^avepwdr], though without good 
 foundation, [ryveoplaai, Eph. i. 9.] It is wrong on the part of 
 many expositors to press a theological meaning upon the verb 
 rjde\r)o-€v, as if it contained a special reference to free grace. 
 It merely intimates that the Divine intention was not neces- 
 sitated, and that it was God's pleasure to instruct His people 
 in the full bearings and adaptation of the gospel. The saints 
 
94 COLOSSIANS I. 27. 
 
 did not discover the mystery : the development of Christianity 
 sprang neither from their philanthropy nor their ingenuity, 
 but it was God who unfolded the mystery in all wisdom and 
 prudence. The apostle now illustrates the character of the 
 disclosure — rt ro TrX-oyro? t?}? 80^779 (for such seems to be 
 the preferable reading) — " what is the wealth of the glory " 
 of this mystery. There is no ground for resolving the phrase 
 into a Hebraism, and rendering it with Chrysostom, iroWr] 
 So^a ; nor with Erasmus, gloriosa opulentia ; or with Beza 
 and Davenant, gloriosae divitiae. [Eph. i. 6.] Both terms, 
 ifKovTO'i and ho^a, are favourites of the apostle, and are 
 employed to represent what is bright, substantial, and per- 
 manent. That mystery is enveloped in glory, and that glory 
 has at once a solid basis and an unfading lustre. It is no halo 
 which glimmers and disappears — no gilding which is easily 
 effaced ; but it is rich, having the weight, value, and brilliancy of 
 gold. There is no authority for rendering, with Vatablus and 
 Heinrichs, the interrogative by quantus. And that such wealth 
 of glory may be appreciated, the apostle adds, in explanation — 
 "0<i ecmv X.pL(n6<i iv vfuv, r] iX7rl<i rrj^ Bo^r]^ — "Which is 
 Christ in you, the hope of glory." There are various readings 
 — the neuter o being found in A, B, F, G, the Vulgate, 
 and Latin Fathers — a reading suggested by the gender of 
 the preceding noun. The masculine is preferable — the 
 gender being caused by that of the following substantive 
 Xpiaro^. Winer, § 24; Kiihner, § 786, 3 ; Mark xv. 16 ; 
 Gal. iii. 16. The meaning depends very much on precision 
 of view as to the antecedent. It is not /xvarrjpiov, as Chry- 
 sostom, a-Lapide, Kistmacher, Junker, and others suppose — 
 a supposition which yields but a bald interpretation ; for it 
 is not the mystery in itself, but the wealth of the glory of 
 the mystery which God had disclosed to the saints. It is not 
 the fact that Christ was among the Gentiles, but the character 
 and relations of that fact that the apostle dwells on. Kor is 
 the antecedent merely 7r\ovTo<;, as many maintain, among 
 whom are Theodoret and (Ecumenius, Meyer and Bohmer ; 
 nor simply Bo^a, as Schmid holds ; for the reference is 
 not to the riches of the glory by themselves, but to those 
 riches possessed and enjoyed by the Gentile converts. The 
 one idea is at the same time involved in the other ; the glory 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 27. 95 
 
 is not an abstraction, for it resides in the mystery, and the 
 mystery cannot appear in nakedness, for it always exhibits 
 this pure and imperishable lustre. The antecedent is rather 
 the complex idea of the entire clause — not Christ in Himself, 
 but in His novel and gracious relation to the Gentile world, 
 as a developed and illustrious mystery. The term Christ is 
 not to be explained away, as if it merely meant the doctrine 
 of Christ, as is proved by the subsequent clause — " whom we 
 preach." The words ev vfilv are rendered by many " amon'T 
 you," that is, in the midst of you, as in the preceding clause 
 and in the margin of our English Bibles. But the meaning 
 " in you " is virtually implied ; for Christ, as the hope of 
 glory, was not contemplated merely, but possessed. He was 
 not merely before them to be beheld, but in them to be felt. 
 Pierce and Macknight render, loosely and incorrectly — Christ 
 to you the hope of glory. This frequent allusion to the 
 Redeemer by name — to His power and work, as the Divine 
 source of blessing, seems to have had a reference to the views 
 of some among the Colossians, who would have had a church 
 without a Christ and salvation without a Saviour. 
 
 The clause r] iXTrU Tr]<; B6^r]<; is in apposition with XptaT6<;. 
 It is out of all rule, on the part of Erasmus, Menochius, and 
 others, apparently following Theophylact, to render t% B6^7]<; 
 by the adjective €vSo^o<;. Nor is this glory simply that of 
 God, nor is it the moral worth and dignity of Christians, nor 
 yet the glory obtained in disclosing the mystery. The 
 " glory " is the future blessedness of believers, as in Eom. ii. 7, 
 10, viii. 18; 1 Cor. ii. 7; 2 Cor. iv. 17; 1 Thess. ii. 12; 
 Heb. ii. 10; Eom. v. 2. The noun eXTrtV is not hope as 
 an emotion, but the foundation of it, as in 1 Tim. i. 1, and it is 
 followed by the genitive of the thing hoped for, or the object 
 of hope. The clause is well explained by Theophylact — Store 
 Si avTov iX7ri^o/M€v t^9 80^779 rv^^etv alwvLov. The life of 
 glory rests on Christ as its author and basis — such is the 
 blessed statement of the apostle. Let us pause for a moment 
 over this glory, and its connection with Christ, and then we 
 shall be able to know with the saints — " what are the riches 
 of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles." 
 
 The glory of Christians is yet to come, but it is certain. 
 "What they so earnestly pray for, and so heartily long and 
 
96 COLOSSIANS I. 27. 
 
 labour for, shall be revealed over and beyond their anticipa- 
 tions. Deliverance from all evil is followed by introduction 
 into all good. What is partially and progressively enjoyed 
 in time, is fully and for ever possessed in heaven. The spirit 
 in its present feebleness would bow and faint beneath the 
 pressure of it, nay, it might die in delirious agony ; but then 
 it shall have power and stateliness not only to bear, but to 
 enjoy the " far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." 
 Now, no man can see Him and live — our frail humanity 
 would be consumed by the terrible vision ; but the saint is 
 prepared to gaze with unmingled rapture on His majesty, and 
 to live, walk, and be happy in its lustre. The mind shall be 
 filled with light from the face of God, and the heart shall 
 pulsate with love in eternal and undivided empire. The 
 ima^e of God, in all its loveliness and brilliance, shall be 
 restored to every heart, and that heart shall enjoy uninter- 
 rupted fellowship with Him who sits upon the throne. 
 Nothing can happen to mar or modify this communion ; for 
 though an angel were to pass between him and the throne, 
 he could cast no shadow upon the rapt and adoring saint. 
 Every man shall be as perfect as Christ — in soul, body, and 
 spirit, and beyond the possibility of forfeit or relapse. The 
 burden of sin is removed, and to the sense of oppression there 
 shall succeed the consciousness of spiritual buoyancy and eleva- 
 tion; the taint of depravity is wiped away, and the joy of salva- 
 tion shall mingle its aromatic fragrance with the " new wine " 
 in the kingdom of our Father. The body, too, shall be raised 
 an ethereal vehicle, no longer the prey of disease, languor, 
 and death, but clothed in immortal youth and vigour, and so 
 assimilated to the blessed spirit within it, as neither to cramp 
 its movements nor confine its energies. No pain there — no 
 throbbing brow there — no tear on the cheek there — no 
 sepulchre there — no symbol of mourning there — no spectacle 
 like the apparition of Eachel weeping for her children — or 
 like the widow of Nain following the bier of a lost and loved 
 one. " Death is swallowed up of life" — the graves have been 
 opened — they that dwell in the dust have awakened to endless 
 minstrelsy. Nor do they dwell in a paradise restored 
 amidst the lovely bowers, shady groves, and exuberant fruits 
 of a second Eden. Such glory is too bright for earth, and is 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 27. 97 
 
 therefore to be enjoyed in a scene which shall be in harmony 
 with it. See under verse 12. 
 
 Now, Christ is the hope of this glory. Glory had been 
 forfeited, but Jesus interposed for its restoration. When the 
 Saviour is received by faith, the hope of glory springs up in 
 the bosom — a hope as strange aforetime to it as the pine and 
 the box-tree in the desert. Christians are by nature sinners 
 doomed to die, yet, tlirough Christ, they exult in the promise 
 of life. Though, in their physical frame, they are of the earth 
 earthy, their treasure is in heaven. They can look on the 
 Divine Judge, who must, but for Christ, have condemned 
 them, and call him, in Jesus, their Father-God ; and they can 
 gaze on the home of angels, so far above them, and say of it, 
 in confidence — that, too, is our home. The basis of this life 
 is Jesus. If it be asked, why have his sins not borne down 
 the evil-doer, and crushed him beneath the intolerable load ? 
 why has the lightning slumbered beneath the throne, and not 
 swiftly descended on his head ? why are the angry passions 
 within him hushed, and his gloomy thoughts dissipated ? 
 whence such a change in relation and character ? — the pro- 
 blem is solved by the statement — " Christ within you," This 
 hope rests on His objective work — for " it was Christ that 
 died." Who shall reverse the sentence of our justification, 
 or pronounce it inconsistent with sovereign equity ? And 
 who shall condemn us ? Shall sin raise its head ? — He has 
 made an end of it. Shall Satan accuse ? — he has been cast 
 out. Shall conscience alarm ? — it has been purged from dead 
 works. Or shall death frown horribly on us ? — even it has 
 been abolished. The basis of this hope of glory is also the 
 subjective work of Christ — by His Spirit within the saint. Not 
 only has he the title to heaven, but he gets maturity for it. 
 The process of sanctification begets at once the idea and the 
 hope of perfection. If one sees the block of marble assuming 
 gradually, under the chisel, the semblance of humanity, he 
 infers at once what form of sculpture the artist intends. So, 
 if there be felt within us the transforming influence of the 
 Holy Ghost, bringing out the Divine image with more and 
 more fulness and distinctness, can we doubt the ultimate 
 result? Eom. xv. 13. Such consciousness inspires vivid 
 expectation. In short, in whatever aspect the saints view their 
 
98 COLOSSIANS I. 28. 
 
 hope, they see it in connection with Christ. If they look 
 behind them, the earliest dawning of it sprang from faith in 
 His cross ; if they look around them, it is sustained by the 
 promises of Him who sealed these pledges in His blood ; if 
 they look forward and upward, it is strengthened by the 
 nearing proximity of realization in Him who is " in the midst 
 of the throne." What a blessed change to the Gentile world ! 
 They had been described as once " without Christ," but now 
 Christ was in them ; once they had no hope, but now, they 
 had in them Him who was the hope of glory. No wonder 
 that the apostle rejoiced in suffering for the Gentile churches, 
 and thanked God for that arrangement which enabled him to 
 carry out the gospel to its widest susceptibility of application, 
 and thus develop a doctrine which had been concealed for 
 ages. Is his language too gorgeous, when, surveying the 
 wondrous process and the stupendous results, he speaks of 
 the " riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles 
 — Christ in you, the hope of glory " ? And that glory is not 
 to be under eclipse — that Saviour is not to be selfishly con- 
 cealed. No; the apostle adds, as characteristic of his grand 
 commission and daily labour — 
 
 (Ver. 28.) ^Ov rjfxel'; KarayyeWofiev — "Whom we preach." 
 Acts xvii. 3 ; PhiL i. 1 7. Chrysostom and Theophylact lay 
 undue stress on the kuto., as if the idea of down — deorsum, were 
 implied in the verb, and the inference were, that they delivered 
 a message which had descended from heaven. This Christ, so 
 glorious in person and perfect in work — the incarnate God — 
 the bleeding peacemaker — the imperial governor of the uni- 
 verse — it is He, none else, and none besides Him, whom we 
 preach. Not simply His doctrine, but Himself; and He was 
 preached, not by Paul alone, but by all his colleagues. This 
 Christ is the one and undivided object of proclamation ; and 
 if He be the hope of glory, no wonder that they rejoice to pro- 
 claim Him wide and far, and on every possible occasion. The 
 apostolic preaching was precise and definite. It contained no 
 reveries about the heavenly hierarchy. It was overlaid by no 
 tasteless and tawdry declamation about invisible and worthless 
 mysteries. It dealt not in ascetic distinctions of meats and 
 drinks. There was about it none of those abstruse transcen- 
 dentalisms in which the Colossian heresiarchs seem to have 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 28. 99 
 
 indulged. It did not gratify the morbid and curious, by 
 prying into celestial arcana. It did not nourish a carnal pride 
 under the delusion of a " voluntary humility." Nor did it de- 
 throne a Saviour-God, and substitute the worshipping of angels 
 for the faith, love, and homage due to Him. The one theme 
 was Christ — " Him first. Him last. Him midst." Christ, as the 
 one deliverer, conferring pardon by His blood, purity by His 
 Spirit, and perfection by His pledge and presence, securing 
 defence by His power, comfort by His sympathy, and the 
 hope of glory by His residence in the believing heart ; 
 this Christ, as the only source of such multifarious and 
 connected gifts, we preach, and we preach with special tender- 
 ness and anxiety. For he characterizes his preaching thus — 
 IS ovd6Tovvre<f iravja avOpwiTOV, Koi 8i8do-KOVT6<i irdvra 
 avOpcoTTov iv irda-r) aro(f>ia — " Reminding every man, and 
 teaching every man in all wisdom." iii. 16, The two parti- 
 ciples, as might be expected, have been variously distinguished. 
 [NouOeaia, Eph. vi. 4.] There is no warrant in the context 
 for translating this first term by the Latin corripientcs — as in 
 the Vulgate ; as if the apostle meant to say, either that men 
 in sin needed to be rebuked, or that false teachers were 
 subjected by himself to severe and merited castigation. 
 Theophylact, followed by De Wette and Olshausen, refers the 
 first term to practice — hrX t?}9 irpd^eo)^, and the second to 
 doctrine — eirl SoyfidTcov. According to Steiger, the one marks 
 tlie early communication of Christian truth, and the latter 
 chai'acterizes fuller instruction. By Huther the heart is 
 supposed to be concerned in vovOeTovvre'i, and the intellect in 
 hchdcncovre^. Meyer affirms that the two words correspond to 
 the cardinal injunction of the gospel — /xeravoelre and TnareveTe 
 — repent and believe. We are inclined to be somewhat 
 eclectic among these opinions, and to regard the first term 
 as the more general, and the second as the more special — the 
 one as describing the means employed to arouse the soul and 
 stimulate it to reflection, and the other as the definite form of 
 instruction which was communicated to the anxious and 
 inquiring spirit.^ The apostle warned every man — any one, 
 
 ^ Thus Clement says, — n voufirtun; oZv ohvu Vmctra IffTi vairouffti; ^u^n;, etc. — 
 "Counsel is the prescribed diet of a diseased soul, advising it to take what is 
 salutary, and warning it against what is pernicious." 
 
 K 
 
100 COLOSSIANS I. 28. 
 
 every one, — urged him as a sinner to bethink himself, to 
 consider his danger, as the victim of a broken law — and 
 apprehending the certainty of safety alone in Christ, to look 
 at the adaptation of the gospel and the glory of its evidence, 
 and to submit to its paramount claims. And he taught 
 " every man " — gave him full instruction — left him in no 
 dubiety, but presented him with a correct and glowing sketch 
 of redemption by the cross. And this was done — 
 
 ^Ev irda-rj (TO(f)La — " In all wisdom." Estius and Eosen- 
 miiller. Pierce and A. Clarke, following the Latin Fathers, 
 blunder when they take these words to denote the object of 
 the teaching ; for in the New Testament that object is 
 governed in the accusative. Mark vi. 30, xii. 14; Luke xx. 
 21 ; John xiv. 26 ; 1 Tim. iv. 11 ; Tit. i. 11. Eoell com- 
 bines both this view and the following one. Chrysostom 
 rightly renders eV by /xeTa. See the phrase explained under 
 Eph. i. 8. It is probably to be joined to the latter or 
 principal participle, and points out the mode or spirit of the 
 apostle's teaching. ICor. iii. 10. The apostle rejects, indeed, 
 one species of wisdom — that which so often assumed the self- 
 satisfied name of philosophy ; but still he felt the necessity of 
 employing the highest skill and prudence in discharging the 
 duties of his office. 1 Cor. ii. 4. To preach the gospel so as 
 to guide the wandering sinner to Christ — to drive him from 
 all refuges of lies, and urge him to embrace a free and full 
 salvation — to enlighten, comfort, strengthen, and refresh the 
 children of God, is seen to be a task demanding consummate 
 wisdom, when we consider the endless varieties of character 
 and temperament, the innumerable sophistries of the human 
 heart, and the ever-changing condition and events of our brief 
 existence. Yet, while Christ crucified is the theme of every 
 address, such uniformity of doctrine does not imply sameness 
 of argument or tedious monotony of imagery and illustration. 
 There may be, and there will be, in this wisdom, circumstantial 
 variety in the midst of essential oneness — for the truth, though 
 old, is ever new. 
 
 And the apostle dwells on the individualizing character of 
 the gospel, and repeats the words " every man." There is in 
 this probably a special reference to the partial views of those 
 who were disturbing the Colossian church. The apostle 
 
COLOSSIANS I. 29. lOt 
 
 felt an undying interest in every man, whatever his character 
 or creed — every man, whatever his race or lineage — every 
 man, whatever his colour or language — every man, whatever 
 his class or station ; every living man on earth shared in his 
 sympathies, had a place in his prayers, and, so far as the 
 sphere of his personal teaching extended, might receive the 
 impress of his counsels, and the benefit of his instructions. 
 The motive of his effort is then described — 
 
 "Iva Trapaar^acofxev iravTa avOpwTTOv reXetov iv Xpia-Tco — 
 " In order that we may present every man perfect in Christ." 
 A glorious aim — tva — the noblest that can stimulate enthu- 
 siasm, or sustain perseverance in suffering or toil. The 'Irjaov 
 of the Textus Eeceptus is not supported by full authority. 
 The phrase " perfect in Christ " does not simply mean perfect 
 in knowledge, because of this previous teaching, as Chrysostom 
 and Calvin supposed ; for the effect of such knowledge is 
 moral in its nature, and sanctifying in its effect. John xvii. 3. 
 Such perfection is " in Christ," in fellowship with Him, is 
 derived from Him, and consists in likeness to Him. The 
 verb occurs in verse 22, and in a clause of similar import. 
 The time of presentation is described under Eph. v. 27. 
 The object of his preaching was to save every man. He was 
 contented with nothing less than this, and nothing else than 
 this was his absorbing motive. Not that every man was 
 perfected whom he had endeavoured to instruct, but such was 
 his avowed object. Theophylact thus writes — ri \eyei<; ; irdvTa 
 avOpoiTTov ; val, <f>7}(Ti, rouro (nrovSd^ofjbev el Be firj yivrjTai, 
 ouSev 7r/309 rjfjid<i. Clement of Alexandria takes Trdvra in the 
 sense of 6\ov — the man entire — soul, body, and spirit. And 
 the gaining of that object cost the apostle no small pains and 
 labour, for he adds — 
 
 (Ver. 29.) EU o koX kottiw — "For which I also labour." 
 To attain this blessed end, I also toil — dycovi^op^evo^ — 
 " intensely struggling," or as Wycliffe renders — / traueile 
 in stri/uynge. It was no light work, no pastime ; it made a 
 demand upon every faculty and every moment. 1 Tim. iv. 10. 
 Since the apostle had many adversaries to contend with, as is 
 evident from numerous allusions in his epistles, Phil. i. 29, 
 30, 1 Tim. vi. 5, 2 Thess. iii. 2, many suppose that such 
 struggles are either prominently alluded to here, or at least 
 
102 COLOSSI ANS I. 29. 
 
 are distinctly implied in the use of the participle. But the 
 context does not favour such a hypothesis. It would seem 
 from the following yerses, that it is to an agony of spiritual 
 earnestness that the apostle refers — to that profound yearning 
 which occasioned so many wrestlings in prayer, and drew 
 from him so many tears ; fiera 7roXkr]<i Trj<; (tttovS)]^, as Chry- 
 sostom paraphrases it. When we reliect upon the motive — 
 the presentation of perfect men to God, and upon the 
 instrument — the preaching of the cross, we cease to wonder 
 at the apostle's zeal and toils. For there is no function so 
 momentous, — not that wliich studies the constitution of man, 
 in order to ascertain his diseases and remove them ; nor that 
 which labours for social improvement, and the promotion of 
 science and civilization ; nor that which unfolds the resources 
 of a nation, and secures it a free and patriotic government — 
 far more important than all, is the function of the Christian 
 ministry. What in other spheres is enthusiasm, is in it but 
 sobriety. Barnes well says — " In such a work it is a privilege 
 to exhaust our strength ; in the performance of the duties of 
 such an office, it is an honour to be permitted to wear out life 
 itself." 
 
 It was, indeed, no sluggish heart that beat in the apostle's 
 bosom. His was no torpid temperament. There was such a 
 keenness in all its emotions and anxieties, that its resolve and 
 action were simultaneous movements. But though he laboured 
 so industriously, and suffered so bravely in the aim of winning 
 souls to Christ and glory, still he owned that all was owing 
 to Divine power lodged within him — 
 
 The work to be perform'd is ours, 
 The strength is all His own ; 
 
 'Tis He that works to will, 
 'Tis He that works to do ; 
 His is the power by which we act, 
 His be the glory too. 
 
 Therefore the apostle thus concludes — 
 
 Kara rrjv evepyeiav avrov Tr]v evep'yovfiivrjv iu e/xol ev 
 BwdfieL — " According to His working, that worketh in me 
 with might." The preposition Kara expresses the measure of 
 Paul's apostolical labour. He laboured not only under the 
 
COLOSSI ANS I. 29. 103 
 
 prompting of the Divine energy, but he laboured just so far as 
 that imparted energy enabled him, 1 Cor. xv. 1 0. " By 
 the grace of God I am what I am : and His grace which was 
 bestowed upon me was not in vain ; but I laboured more 
 abundantly than they all : yet not I, but the grace of God 
 which was with me." Tlie pronoun avTov refers not to God, 
 as many imagine, but to Christ. The participle is not in the 
 passive, but the middle voice, as in Gal. v. 6. [Eph. iii. 20.] 
 Winer, § 38, 6. The phrase eV hvvd^eo does not, as Vatablus 
 and Michaelis suggest, refer to miracles, but has an adverbial 
 sense, specifying the mode of operation. Eom. i. 4 ; 2 Thess. 
 i. 11. The occurrence of the noun and a correlate verb inten- 
 sifies the meaning. Winer, § 32, 2. [Eph. i. 5, 6.] It 
 was no feeble manifestation of Divine power that showed 
 itself in the great apostle of the Gentiles. Its ample energies 
 clothed him with a species of moral omnipotence. Phil, 
 iv. 13. The sublime motive to present every man perfect in 
 Christ, through the preaching of Christ, could only be realized 
 by the conferment of Divine qualification and assistance. 
 Mere human influence cannot reach it, though the faculties 
 be kept in full tension, and the mind be disciplined into 
 symmetrical operation. Learning, industry, and genius, are of 
 little avail, without piety and spiritual support. " Our suffi- 
 ciency is of God." 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 The apostle had just spoken of his sufferings for the church, 
 and his conflicts for the realization of the one grand aim of 
 the Christian ministry. That aim filled his spirit and nerved 
 his energies. It made him what he was — a preacher, and at 
 length a martyr. The value of souls and the glory of Christ 
 wrapt tliemselves up in one burning thought, and created and 
 sustained one dominant and living impulse within him. It 
 was his heart's desire that the gospel should be preserved in 
 its purity and simplicity, Iree from all admixtures of Judaism 
 and false philosoply. He knew that the introduction of error 
 imperilled the salvation of sinners, hindered the diffusion of 
 the word, and robbed the cross of its special adaptations to a 
 lost world. And his affection was not wholly set upon 
 churches where he had preached in person. He had no little 
 jealousies and no favouritism, but all the believing communi- 
 ties, whatever their age, place, or origin, found in him imme- 
 diate sympathy and co-operation. The churches which he had 
 not visited in person might scarcely be inclined to believe this 
 fully, and might naturally imagine that their neighbours which 
 had been honoured by his presence had a deeper hold on his 
 affection. But the apostle seeks to dispel this illusion, and 
 says in earnest exhortitude ^ — 
 
 (Ver. 1.) ©eXo) yap v/xd^ elBevat, rfkUov aywva e^a> irepi 
 vfiatv Kai roiv iv AaohiKeia, Kal ocrot, oy^ ecopaKaat to irpoawirov 
 fiov iv aapKL — " For I wish that you knew what a great con- 
 flict I have about you and them in Laodicea, and as many as 
 have not seen my face in the flesh." It is disputed whether 
 TrepL or virip be the better reading — A, B, C, D^^^ declare for 
 
 1 " From the construction of this Exordium, I venture to assert, that there is 
 no rule laid down by Aristotle, Cicero, and other masters of eloquence, concern- 
 ing the framing of introductions, which is not adhered to in this brief opening. 
 For three things are required by them in a legitimate Exordium : That it be 
 adapted to render the hearer attentive, and docile, and to conciliate hia affection." 
 — Davenant, in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 1. 105 
 
 tlie latter ; while the former is supported by D\ E, F, G, J, K, 
 and the Greek Fathers ; Lachmann and Tischendorf are 
 divided. Perhaps irepi. is the right reading, and virep was 
 suggested from iv. 12 and i. 24. The reading kwpaKav — the 
 Alexandrian form — is also preferable to that of the Textus 
 Receptus — kwpaKacn. "Winer, § 13, 2 c. 
 
 The division of chapters is here unhappy, for this verse is 
 but a supplementary explanation of the preceding one. " I 
 am in an agony," he had said, and now he adds, " I would ye 
 knew what an agony I am in about you." The noun a'^tav 
 means deep and earnest solicitude,^ accompanied with toil and 
 peril Phil. i. 30 ; 1 Thess. ii. 2 ; 1 Tim. vi. 12. It points 
 out that intense and painful anxiety which preyed upon him, 
 now in occasional terror, and now in reviving hopes — that 
 ceaseless conflict which filled his waking hours with effort, and 
 relieved with prayer the watches of the night. His soul was 
 in a perpetual distress for them : every suspicion about them 
 left a pang behind it — the bare possibility of their relapse or 
 apostasy brought with it unutterable dismay and sorrow. 
 Therefore he says, rj\,iKov a^wva — " How great a struggle." 
 Hesychius gives, as synonyms for the adjective, oirolov, 
 TTOTairov. Jas. iii. 5. It was no easy or supine struggle. 
 He knew what was at stake. They were in danger, and he 
 could not be in the midst of them. The seducer might have 
 been pictured out to him, but he was not privileged to con- 
 front him. How the Colossians stood he knew not. He was 
 aware of the hazard they were in generally — but the shiftings 
 of the crisis and its individual results could only be faintly 
 apprehended. Like the caged bird beating its bared and 
 bleeding breast against the wires of its prison, as it hears the 
 repeated cry of its unseen young ones, the apostle turned ever 
 and anon toward those churches, painted to himself their 
 danger and their need of help, and strained his eager spirit to 
 the utmost as he sighed over the possible desolation which might 
 come upon them. Nor did he idly chafe in his confinement, 
 — but he wrote this letter, and he wished them to know the 
 depth of the love which he cherished toward them. " I would 
 that ye knew." Similar construction is found in 1 Cor. xi. 3 ; 
 Phil. 112; Rom. xi. 25. If they knew it, they would listen 
 
 ' Uoxxh (pfo'vT/f— as Theodoret explains it. 
 
106 COLOSSIANS II. 2. 
 
 all the more readily to his suggestions and counsels. Laodicea 
 is also mentioned, from its proximity to Colosse, and perhaps 
 because it was exposed to similar seductions. A few Codices, 
 with the Philoxenian Syriac, add kuI tcov iv 'lepairoXei, a gloss 
 evidently taken from iv. 13. The apostle says, besides, "and 
 as many as have not seen my face in the flesh." This mode of 
 expression is a popular one, and is not therefore to be pressed 
 as if " in the flesh " was opposed to " in the Spirit," or as if, 
 as Olshausen suggests, it put " the bodily countenance in con- 
 trast to the spiritual physiognomy." The reference in oaoL 
 has been keenly disputed — whether it alludes to a class dif- 
 ferent from the Christians in Colosse and Laodicea ; or whether 
 it characterizes them also as persons unknown to the apostle 
 and unvisited by him. This question has been fully treated 
 in the Introduction, to which the reader is referred. The 
 point of the apostle's agony is thus described — 
 
 (Ver. 2.) ' Iva 7rapaK\r]6ooaiv al Kaphiat uvtSv — " That their 
 hearts miglit be comforted." In the violent effort described 
 in aycov, there is implied a definite design expressed by iW. 
 The pronoun avrutv, in the third person, comprehends all the 
 classes of persons mentioned in the preceding verse. We 
 agree with Meyer that there is no reason to depart from the 
 ordinary sense of the verb, which plainly means to comfort, in 
 1 Thess. iii. 2; 2 Thess. ii. 17; Eph. vi. 22; Matt. ii. 18, 
 V, 4 ; 2 Cor. i. 4. The addition of KupSla renders such a 
 meaning more certain. It appears to us that there is in this 
 earnest wish an allusion to that discomfort which the intro- 
 duction of error creates, as indeed is more plainly shown by 
 the concluding phraseology of the verse. The conflict of error 
 with truth could not but lead to distraction and mental tur- 
 moil ; and in proportion to their misconception of the gospel, 
 or their confusion of idea with regard to its spirit, contents, 
 and aim, would be their loss of that peace and solace which 
 the new religion had imparted to them. 
 
 ^v^^i^aaOevre^ iv djaTrr) — " United together in love." 
 [Eph. iv. 16.] The Elzevir Text reads avfi^i^aaOevTcov on 
 very sliglit authority. The reading is an evident emendation 
 with reference to the preceding avrojv. The masculine form 
 and nominative case of the participle presents no real difficulty. 
 [Eph. iv. 2.J The Vulgate translation — instructi — is based 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 2. 107 
 
 upon the usage of the Septuagint, in which this verb represents 
 several Hebrew verbs, the principal of which are portions of 
 either Vl) or ^11, and signifying to instruct.^ Isa. xl. 13 ; 
 Ex. xviii. 16; Lev. x. 11, etc. It is used with a similar 
 secondary sense in Acts xvi. 10, ix. 22, where it means to 
 gather up the lessons presented, and knit them together in 
 the form of inference or demonstration. Hesychius defines 
 (Tv/x^cfid^6C by et? ^iXiav a^ei ; and the Scholiast, quoted by 
 Wetstein, has it, (rv/jbj3i/3acr0evTe'i, olov ev(o9evr€<i ; this last 
 term being that also employed in explanation by Theophylact.^ 
 But the natural sense here is, " being compacted together," 
 love being the element of union ; iv pointing not simply to 
 its bond, as if it were hta. In the peculiar condition of the 
 Colossian church, this virtual prayer was very necessary. The 
 entrance of error naturally begets suspicion and alienation. 
 One wonders if his neighbour be infected, and how far ; and 
 that neighbour reciprocates similar curiosity and doubts. 
 Expressions are too carefully weighed, and a man is made 
 " an offender for a word." A sinister construction is apt to 
 be put upon the slightest actions; nay, caution defeats its 
 very purpose, and fails to secure good understanding. But 
 the apostle was anxious that these churches should feel no 
 such disaster, should be shivered into repellent fragments by 
 none of those evil influences, but that they should remain in 
 inutual and affectionate oneness — bound together in love — 
 proof alike against the invasion of heresy, and the secret 
 upspringing of internal mistrusts and dislikes. 
 
 Kai et? Trdvra ttKovtov tt}? 'TrXr}po(f)opLa<; ri]^ avveaeco^ — 
 " And unto the whole wealth of the full assurance of under- 
 standing." But with which of the preceding clauses is this 
 one to be joined ? It seems preferable to connect it with the 
 last — " knit together " — iv . . . koX el<i — " in love and in 
 order to the wealth." The two prepositions are closely united 
 by Kai — iv pointing out the element of union, and et? denoting 
 its purpose. This syntax seems preferable to connecting the 
 phrase with the rjXiKov dywva of the first verse, as is done by 
 
 ' So also Ambrosiaster and Hilary, as well as Bretschneider, who, in liis 
 Lexicon, suh voce, renders this clause hene edocti ad amorem tmituum. 
 
 ^ Herodotus, i. 74, and Thucydides, ii. 29, where it is said of Nymphodorus, 
 that he reconciled Perdiccas to the Athenians — |£/vs/3//3a«. 
 
108 COLOSSIANS II. 2. 
 
 Calovius, or even with 7rapaK\r)9toatv of the first clause of 
 this verse, as is proposed by Storr and Flatt ; for in this last 
 connection Kai would seem to be superfluous, or it must begin 
 a new clause and receive another than its merely copulative 
 signification. Luther, in his version, wrongly omits /cat, and 
 renders — in der Liehe zu allem Reichthum ; and this is also 
 
 the rendering of the Peschito "JjZcll mV'-^V l^o.KK.ii. 
 
 The two things have, indeed, a close connection. Pascal remarks, 
 " In order to love human things, it is necessary to know them ; 
 in order to know those that are divine, it is necessary to love 
 them." The conjunction KaC is simply copulative, and eh 
 points out the purpose or design, which might have been 
 expressed by Xva, with a verb. The noun 'irXrjpocpopia is full 
 certainty or assurance. 1 Thess. i. 5; Heb. vi. 11, x. 22. 
 " The full assurance of understanding " is the fixed persuasion 
 that you comprehend the truth, and that it is the truth which 
 you comprehend. It is not merely the vivid belief, that what 
 occupies the mind is the Divine verity, but that this verity is 
 fully understood. The mind which has reached this elevation, 
 is confident that it does not misconceive the statements of the 
 gospel, or attach to them a meaning which they do not bear. 
 Believing them to be of God, it is certain that it apprehends 
 the mind of God in His message. If a man possesses not 
 this certainty — if the view he now cherishes differ from that 
 adopted by him again — if what he holds to-day be modified 
 or explained away to-morrow — if new impressions chase away 
 other convictions, and are themselves as rapidly exiled in turn 
 — if, in short, he is " ever learning and never able to come to 
 the knowledge of the truth," then such dubiety and fluctuation 
 present a soil most propitious to the growth and progress of 
 error. And as the mental energy is frittered away by such 
 indecision, the mind becomes specially susceptible of foreign 
 influence and impression. It was the apostle's earnest desire 
 that the Colossian church, and the members of the other 
 churches referred to, should assuredly understand the new 
 religion — its facts and their evidence — its doctrines and their 
 connections — its promises and their basis — its precepts and 
 their adaptation — its ordinances and their simplicity and 
 power. The fixed knowledge of those things would fortify 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 2. 109 
 
 their minds against the seductive insinuations of false teachers, 
 who mix just so much truth with their fallacies as often to 
 give them the fascinations of honesty and candour, and who 
 impose them as the result of superior enlightenment, and of 
 an extended and advantageous research. The mind most 
 liable to be seduced is that which, having reached only an 
 imperfect and onesided view, is continually disturbed and 
 perplexed by opposite and conflicting ideas which from its 
 position it is unable to reconcile, but is forced to wonder 
 whether really it has attained to just conceptions of the truth. 
 The traveller who has already made some progress, but who 
 begins gradually to doubt and debate, to lose faith in himself, 
 and wonder whether he be in the right way after all, is pre- 
 pared to listen to the suggestions of any one who, under 
 semblance of disinterested friendship, may advise to a path of 
 danger and ruin. No wonder that the apostle describes the 
 value of the full assurance of understanding by his favourite 
 term — " riches " — for it is a precious form of intellectual 
 wealth, and no wonder that he yearns for the Colossian 
 Christians to possess it in no scanty measure, but in all its 
 opulence, ^vveo-f; has been explained under i. 9. 
 
 JEt? iTTLyvcoaiv tov fivaTTjpiov tov &€ov koX IIaTpo<s Koi rov 
 Xpia-Tov — " To the full knowledge of the mystery of God, and 
 of the Father, and of Christ." So reads the Received Text. 
 The connection of this clause has been variously understood. 
 It is needless to make the preceding clause a parenthesis, and 
 join this one to irapaKk'qdaxnv. Bahr takes it as denoting the 
 end, while the clause before it specifies the means — " unto all 
 riches of the full assurance of understanding, so that ye 
 may know the mystery." But perhaps the clause is merely 
 parallel with the preceding one, or rather, is a farther develop- 
 ment of it. The noun iTriyvaai^ is plainly shown here to mean 
 " full knowledge," as, indeed, we have argued under Eph. 
 i. 18, and in this epistle, i. 9. The idea of a mystery is taken 
 from verses 26 and 27 of the former chapter. The mystery, 
 he says, had been long hid ; but God had chosen to reveal 
 the riches of its glory, and therefore he desires that his 
 readers should not only distinctly recognize it, and highly 
 value it, but specially, that they should fully comprehend its 
 contents and lessons. The reading of the concluding portion 
 
110 COLOSSI ANS II. 3. 
 
 of the clause is sadly perplexed and uncertain. The difficulty 
 relates to the words of the Eeceived Text — koX Trarpo? Kal rod 
 XpLCTTov. These have on their side D^^^ E, J, K, and several 
 of the Fathers; Codices 47, 73, with Chrysostom and Pela- 
 gius, who have — Trarpo? koX rod Xpiarov, followed by the 
 Syriac, Vulgate, and Coptic Versions. Codices A, C, 4, read 
 — rou Oeov irarpo-i rov Xpiarov, while Codices 41 and 61 
 have — rov Geov Kal 7rarp6<; rov Xpiarov. The word rrarpo^; 
 is omitted by some MSS., while Codex 17 reads — rov Geov 
 rod ev Xpiarm. D^ presents the clause thus — rov &€ov 6 iari 
 Xpiarov, but B has — rov ©eov Xpiarov. Hilary follows the 
 last reading, but Clement and Ambrosiaster quote — rov ©eov 
 iv Xpiaro). The shorter reading, ending with Qeov, is found 
 in 37, 67^ 71, 80\ and 116. For the short reading without 
 the clause, Tischendorf, in his second edition, Griesbach, Scholz, 
 Heinrichs, Bahr, Olshausen, De Wette, and Einck, have de- 
 clared themselves. The reading — rov ©eov Xpiarov has 
 advocates in Lachmann, Meyer, and Steiger. It is plain, on 
 the one hand, that many of these readings are nothing but 
 glosses to escape or solve a difficulty ; and it is as clear, on 
 the other, that none of them possesses preponderating authority. 
 For A, B, and D read differently, and the older Fathers and 
 Versions agree with none of them, since Cyril has, for example 
 — rov ©eov Kal Xpiarov, and Theophylact cites — rov ©eov 
 'Trarpo<i ev Xpiaru), while Hilary explains, by adding, Devs 
 Christus sacrament lun est. 
 
 (Ver. 3.) Ev a> elai rrdvre^ ol Orjaavpol rrj<; ao(f)ia<; Kal t^9 
 <yva)aeci)<i airoKpv^oi — " In which are hidden all the treasures 
 of wisdom and knowledge." The reference in the relative is 
 supposed, by the great majority of interpreters, from Chry- 
 sostom down to Baumgarten-Crusius, to be to Christ. The 
 margin of our English version gives " wherein," that is, in 
 which mystery ; and this, we apprehend, is the right construc- 
 tion. Such is the view of Suicer, Cocceius, Eoel, Lange, 
 Grotius, Bengel, Huther, Bahr, Bohmer, De Wette, etc. If the 
 short reading of the previous clause be adopted, then there is 
 no mention of Christ in the last verse at all. But especially 
 the apostle is speaking of the mystery, and he here eulogizes 
 it as worthy of fuller and farther insight. Nay, he places it 
 in sharp contrast with the false and hollow error which was 
 
COLOSSIANS 11. 3. Ill 
 
 insinuating itself among them. That system which was 
 " not after Christ," might boast of its stores of philosophy, but 
 they were not to be captivated by its pretences. They needed 
 not to go in quest of higher truth and loftier science ; for in^ 
 that mystery proclaimed among them were deposited all the 
 treasures of wisdom and knowledge. The nouns aoc^ia and 
 ryvMaa are, perhaps, not to be carefully distinguished, as the 
 words seem, to be used in reference to the terminology of the 
 false teachers. The words appear to have been favourite 
 epithets with them — were, in fact, a sample of the enticing 
 words referred to in the next verse, for they imagined them- 
 selves in possession of the only genuine wisdom and knowledge. 
 ]iut the apostle affirms, in opposition, that only in this 
 mystery are they to be discovered in reality, and that all else 
 bearing the name is but hollow semblance and counterfeit. 
 Whatever distinction may be made, as in Rom, xi. 33, 1 Cor. 
 xii. 8, such seems to us the preferable exegesis in the verse 
 before us. Augustine makes a distinction, by referring to the 
 Vulgate translation of Job xxviii. 28 — "Behold, piety is 
 wisdom — sapientia, and to abstain from evil is knowledge — 
 scientia." ^ Calvin says — inter sapientiam et intelligentiam non 
 porro magnum discrimen, quia duplicatio ad augendum valet ; 
 but this statement is scarcely correct. The two substantives 
 may refer to the same thing, but under different aspects. Not 
 that the first comprehends res humanae, and the other res 
 divinae ; or, that the one is practical sagacity, and the other 
 theoretic knowledge of God. This latter distinction, though it 
 be commonly held, and may be true of the English terms 
 wisdom and knowledge, is not warranted by Scripture usage. 
 Col. i. 9 ; 1 Cor. i. 17, 21, ii. 6, viii. 1. Meyer says ao^ia 
 is the more general, and 'yvwai'^ the more special. The latter 
 term is divine science, and the first is that enlightenment which 
 springs from it. So that the first noun is subjective, and 
 the second objective. The study of the ^v6}ai<{ brings the 
 a-o(f)ta. Wisdom results from penetration into this knowledge. 
 Knowledge is the study, and wisdom its fruit. 
 
 The verse before us is thus a high encomium on the mystery, 
 and an inducement to the apostle's readers to value it, to cling- 
 to it, to study it, and to enthrone it in a niche so lofty and 
 ' Enarratio in Psal. cxxxv. Op. vol. 4, eJ. Paris, 1835. 
 
112 COLOSSIANS II. 3. 
 
 inaccessible, that it could neither be rivalled nor dethroned. 
 We quite agree, with Eobinson, that airoKpy^oi does not 
 denote " hid " in its literal sense, for the apostle says that God 
 had made known the mystery ; but " hid " in the secondary 
 sense of being laid or treasured up, as in Septuagint, Isa. xlv. 3 ; 
 1 Mace. i. 23. So that there is no need to adopt the sug- 
 gestion of Bengel and Meyer, which denies that a7r6Kpv(f>oi 
 is the predicate, and would render — " in whom all the hidden 
 treasures are laid up." Bahr objects to the same mode of 
 construction, that the article should precede airoKpv^oL ; but 
 the objection is not based upon an invariable rule or practice. 
 And we are also, by the exegesis which we propose, saved all 
 the perplexity which the idea of concealment originates. Eor 
 those treasures are hidden, according to Bohmer and Dave- 
 nant, from the unbelieving world ; according to Olshausen, 
 from the unassisted intellect ; and, according to Calvin, they 
 are said to be hidden because the preaching of the cross is 
 always foolishness to the world. Ahditam sapientiam, says 
 Melancthon, quia mundus non earn intelligit, as is said in 1 Cor. 
 ii. 7, 8 ; Matt. xi. 25 ; 2 Cor. iv. 3, 4. ©rjaavpo^ has a 
 similar tropical meaning, as well in the classics as in the New 
 Testament. Xenophon, Memor. i. 6, 14; Hesiod, Op. 715; 
 Eurip. Io7i, 923; Plato, Phil. 15, e; Matt. vi. 20; Mark x. 
 2 1 ; 2 Cor. iv. 7. The meaning of the apostle then is, that 
 in this mystery are stored up all the treasures of wisdom and 
 knowledge ; not a few scanty fragments of faded wealth, but 
 the entire amount without alloy or defalcation. Here, and not 
 in the vaunted theosophy of the false teachers, might a man 
 become wise, by being initiated into the true knowledge. Let 
 it be the knowledge of God which he yearns after — the com- 
 prehension of the essence, character, attributes, and works of 
 the invisible Majesty — then he will obtain full satisfaction 
 neither from the palpable limnings of nature — for they present 
 but a shaded profile, nor yet from the subtleties of a spiritual- 
 istic philosophy — for it can only bring out a dim and imper- 
 sonal abstraction. But God as He is — in every element and 
 relation — in the fulness of His being and glory — is revealed 
 in the gospel, and there may we find Him out, not by search- 
 ing, but by looking on Him as portrayed not only in His 
 power and wisdom, His eternity and infinitude, but also in 
 
COLOSSIANS 11. 3. 113 
 
 His grace and love, His condescension and mercy — those pro- 
 perties of His nature which creation could not have disclosed, 
 nor human ingenuity have either imagined or anticipated. 
 
 The highest conceptions of the Divine polity are to be 
 learned, also, from this mystery. By means of the atonement, 
 it achieves what to human administration is utter impos- 
 sibility. It pardons without weakening the authority of law, 
 or bringing prerogative in conflict with enactment. Earthly 
 governments proclaim the ordinance, and then apprehend, 
 convict, and punish offenders ; and when they do commute 
 a sentence or grant a respite, they are usually prompted to 
 such clemency because the penalty is felt to be too severe in 
 the circumstances, and then so-called mercy is only equity 
 correcting inequalities of law. Were they not to punish, 
 they would dissolve the bonds of society and speed their own 
 extinction. The sphere of the tribunal is that of indictment 
 and proof, and according to the evidence so are the verdict 
 and sentence. But God, the Legislator, is not under such 
 restraint, for while He proclaims a universal amnesty to all who 
 will avail themselves of it, He neither by this anomaly repeals 
 the code, nor declares it superseded for the crisis, nor suffers 
 it to fall into contempt ; but, charging sinners with their 
 atrocious guilt, and convincing them that they are most justly 
 liable to the menaced punishment. He at once absolves them, 
 without encouraging them to sin with hope of impimity, or 
 weakening the allegiance of the universe by the apparent 
 reversal of those righteous principles which are the habitation 
 of His throne, and which have guided and glorified His past 
 procedure. By the dignity of His nature and the extent of 
 His humiliation, the perfection of His obedience and the sub- 
 stitutionary efficacy of His death, that Christ whom the false 
 teachers depreciated had glorified the law more than if man 
 had never sinned, or having fallen, had himself suffered the 
 unmitigated penalty. No philosophy ever dreamed of such 
 an awful expedient as God robed in humanity, and in that 
 nature dying to redeem His guilty creatures — whose name, 
 nature, and legal liabilities He had assumed ; and such a 
 scheme never found a place in any system of jurisprudence. 
 Such knowledge was too wonderful for them, it was high, they 
 could not attain unto it. 
 
114 COLOSSIANS II. 3. 
 
 On the other hand, the false preachers laboured in incul- 
 cating asceticism, penance, and neglect of the body, as a 
 means of weaning the spirit from earth, and bringing it into 
 fellowship with God. They also gave unwarranted functions 
 to angels and higher spirits, as if they could shield the soul 
 from guilt, and as if contact with them spiritualized it, and 
 helped to raise it to blessedness. They put mysticism in 
 room of the atonement, and ascribed to the hosts of God that 
 guardian power which belongs to faith and the Divine Spirit. 
 Theirs was a temple without an altar or a propitiation, though 
 it was crowded with genii and tutelar subordinates. It was 
 vain philosophy and out of place ; for it fell short of heaven, 
 and could secure no benefit upon earth. It was wrong about 
 God, and erring about man — it gave him a stone for bread. 
 
 But " wisdom and knowledge " were in the evangelical 
 mystery — the veritable and coveted yvMaa was there. There 
 might be discovered the truest theosophy — no gaudy vision, 
 but blessed fact — God in Christ, and our God ; there would 
 also be found the richest philosophy, in which antagonisms 
 were reconciled, and all the relations of the universe were 
 harmonized by the cross, the mystery of man's origin, 
 nature, and destiny, cleared up ; while the noblest ethics were 
 propounded, in unison with all our aspirations and spiritual 
 instincts — plainly showing what man may be, ought to be, 
 and will be, through the influence and operations of the Holy 
 Ghost — the crowning and permanent gift of the Christian 
 dispensation. What men have sought in deep and perplexing 
 speculations on the order and origin of all things, they will 
 find in this mystery. What they have striven in daring 
 adventure to reach about the existence and issue of evil, they 
 will get here laid to their hand. The intricacies and anomalies 
 of their own mental and moral nature, on which they have 
 constructed so many conflicting and self-destructive theories — 
 which still have repeated themselves in successive generations, 
 are here solved by Him who knows our frame. The inter- 
 minable discussions on man's chief end, which ended only in 
 fatigue and disappointment, are silenced here by the " still 
 small voice." " Where is the wise ? where is the scribe ? 
 where is the disputer of this world ?" Let them come and 
 see, and learn, and they will find that, in the Divine plan of 
 
COLOSSIAXS II. 4. 115 
 
 redemption are manifested the noblest elements of reflection, 
 and the purest objects of spiritual faith and attachment. For 
 theology transcends all the sciences in circuit and splendour. 
 It brings us into immediate communion with Infinitude and 
 Eternity. Its theme is the Essence and Attributes of Jehovah, 
 with the truth He has published, and the works He has 
 wrought. It tells us of the unity and spirituality of His 
 nature, the majesty of His law, the infinitude of His love, and 
 the might and triumph of His Son, as the conqueror of sin 
 and death. The intellect is unable to comprehend all its 
 mysteries by superior subtlety and penetration, and the 
 imagination only fatigues itself in the attempt to grasp and 
 realize its destiny. Its fields of thought can never be 
 exhausted, even though the slower processes of understanding 
 were superseded by the eager and rapid discoveries of 
 unwearied intuition. " Who can, by searching, find out 
 God ; who can find out the Almighty unto perfection ?" 
 And after those combinations of wisdom, power, and love, 
 which characterize the counsels and government of God, have 
 attracted and engaged the inquiring soul through innumerable 
 ages, there will still remain heights to be scanned, and depths 
 to be explored, facts to be weighed, and wonders to be 
 admired. [Eph. iii. 10.] 
 
 The apostle approaches nearer and nearer his subject — the 
 seductions of a false and pretentious philosophy. 
 
 (Ver. 4.) TovTo Be Xeyw — " Now, this I say." This present 
 tense some regard as future in its look, as if the apostle meant 
 — " what I am about to utter is intended to prevent your being 
 led astray." But the clause has evidently a retrospective 
 reference to the preceding statement, and not exclusively 
 either to the first or third verse. " What I am saying, or 
 have just said, as to my anxiety for you, and as to the treasury 
 of genuine science in the gospel, has this purpose — to put you 
 on your guard. Do not listen to those specious harangues 
 about their boasted possession of the only or the inner ao(J3ia 
 and ryvSxn^. It is all a delusion intended to impose upon you 
 Purest wisdom and loftiest knowledge are not in their keeping 
 but in yours ; for in that mystery into wnich you have been 
 now so fully initiated, are hidden all the treasures of wisdom 
 and of knowledge." Quaercndum est, says TertuUian, donee 
 
 L 
 
116 COLOSSIANS II. 4. 
 
 invenias, et credenduon uhi inveneris, et nihil amplius, nisi ats- 
 todiendum quod credidisti} 
 
 "Iva ixrj Tfc? u/ia? TrapaXoyi^rjTaL iv TridavoXoyia — " Lest any 
 man should beguile you with enticing words." The reading 
 fjbr)B€L<;, though unusual, is supported by A, B, C, D, E, while 
 the reading /i?; rt? of the Stephanie Text rests on inferior 
 authorities. The deponent verb used by the apostle occurs 
 only again in Jas. i. 22 ; but is found in the Seventy, 
 1 Sam. xix. 17. It is found also in Demosthenes,^ where 
 it signifies to miscount. Here it denotes to delude by false 
 reasoning, as in ^Eschines, p. 53 (ed. Dobson, vol. xii.) ; 
 Polyb. 16, 10, 3; Gen. xxix. 25; Josh. ix. 22 (28). The 
 means of deception are characterized by one pithy and 
 expressive compound — inOavoXo^ia. The word occurs only 
 in this place. The cognate verb which is found in the classical 
 writers,^ is defined by Passow to mean — to bring forward 
 reasons in order to prove anything likely or probable ; or, as 
 we might say in English — "to talk so as to talk one over." 
 The substantive occurs in Plato ;^ and the word, in its separate 
 parts, TTidavol Xoyot, is found in Josephus and Philo.^ The 
 term is here employed in a bad sense, — to characterize that 
 teaching which aimed to fascinate their mind and debauch 
 their conscience, by its specious sophistry. This is a com- 
 mon accompaniment of heretical novelty. It professes, by a 
 process of dilution or elimination, to simplify what is obscure, 
 unravel what is intricate, reconcile what is involved in dis- 
 crepancy, or adapt to reason what seems to be above it. Or it 
 deals in mystery, and seeks to charm by a pretence of occult 
 wisdom, and the discovery of recondite senses and harmonies. 
 It was a form of similar mysticism, priding itself in intimate 
 communion with the invisible and the spiritual, that seems to 
 
 ' De Praescrip. Haeret. cap. ix. Oppra, vol. ii. p. 12, ed. Oehler. 
 
 2 822, 25 ; 1037, 15, ed. Reisk ; or vol. vii. p. 413 ; vol. viii. p. 43, of Oratores 
 Attici, ed. Dobson. 
 
 3 Arist. Eth. i. 1. Diodorus Sic. i. 39, xiii. 95. Diogenes L. 10, 87, ed. 
 Hiibner. 
 
 * Theaet. § 52, vol. iii. p. 440, ed. Bekker, London. In this place it is 
 joined with ukos, and denotes deception ; probability being opposed to avihi^iv 
 Koci ocvayxYiv — conclusive demonstration. Fabric. Cod. Apoc. iii. 694. 
 
 * Joseph. Antiq. viii. 9. Philo, de Migratione Ah. vol. iii. p. 490, ed. 
 Pfeiffer. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 5. " 117 
 
 have been introduced at Colosse. How much need, therefore, 
 they had of that " full assurance of understanding " which the 
 apostle so earnestly wished them to possess. Such illumina- 
 tion was a perfect shield against this delusive rhetoric, with 
 which they might be so artfully and vigorously plied, 
 
 (Ver. 5.) El yap koX ttj crapKl aTreLfii, dWa rep irvevfiari <tvv 
 vfitv elfit — " Tor though indeed in the flesh I be absent, yet in 
 the spirit with you am I." Tap gives the reason why the 
 writer so warns them. It is refinement on the part of 
 Theophylact to make the sense — " I see in spirit the false 
 teachers, and therefore bid you be on your guard." The 
 meaning is very plain. Personally the apostle was not, and 
 could not be, at Colosse ; but mentally he was there. In 
 1 Cor. v. 3, 4, the apostle employs rw a-cofiaTi — a more Hel- 
 lenic phrase. It is in opposition to the plain sense to refer 
 TTvevfxa, with Ambrosiaster, Grotius, and Lord Barrington, 
 to the Holy Spirit ; as if a special inspiration had kept the 
 apostle cognizant of what was transacting at Colosse. When 
 one takes a very deep and continuous interest in a distant 
 community, he is not only ever picturing them to his imagina- 
 tion, but he so transports himself, in idea, to their locality, 
 that he walks and speaks with them, is an inmate of their 
 dwellings and a guest at their table, is engaged in all their 
 occupations, and feels himself for the moment to be one of 
 themselves. So it was with the apostle and the absent church 
 in Asia Minor. Xvv is similarly employed in Phil. i. 23 ; 
 1 Thess. iv. 17. That this language does not by any means 
 imply a previous residence in Colosse, as Wiggers supposes, 
 has been shown in the Introduction to this volume. The 
 particle aXkd is rendered " yet " — doch, by Huther ; attamen, 
 by Bahr — a translation which it may often bear after el or 
 idv} There is no need at all for supposing such an e lipsis 
 as the following, — I am absent, still not wholly ignorant of 
 you, or uninterested in you, dXkd, but I am with you in 
 spirit. Hartung, ii. p. 40 ; Kiihner, § 741, 1, 3 ; Klotz, 
 Devarius, vol. ii. 18 ; and Devarius, vol. i. 7. 
 
 Xalpayv koI ^Xeirwv vficov rrjv rd^cv — " Joying and behold- 
 ing your order." One would naturally expect the apostle to 
 say — seeing and rejoicing ; that is, rejoicing because he saw. 
 ^ See Bahr, in loc. Kypke, aioud 1 Cor. iv. 15. 
 
118 COLOSSIANS II. 5. 
 
 Bahr adduces Josephus as expressing himself similarly — u/^a? 
 ev 'i'^ovra'i %(xtpa) koI /SXeVa). But the German commentator 
 misquotes the Jewish historian, or rather the best MSS. show 
 that he uses the participle ^Xe-rroiv, as does the apostle, and 
 not the verb. De Wette adopts this form — "with joy seeing 
 your order." Calvin and Estius have it — " rejoicing because 
 I see your order," and others — " gaudeo videns." Winer, 
 followed by Olshausen, takes Kat in the sense of scilicet — 
 " I am with you rejoicing, inasmuch as I see your order." ^ 
 Fritzsche is nearer our view when he solves the difficulty 
 thus — rejoicing over you, i<j> vfiiv — laetans de vobis — and seeing 
 your array .^ Dismissing the idea of a hendiadys and a zeugma 
 — taking kul in its ordinary sense, and neither as causal nor 
 explicative ; and seeing rd^tv can belong only to one of the 
 verbs ^Xeiro), we come to the conclusion of Meyer, that the 
 first participle qualifies the clause — " present with you." The 
 meaning is — I am present with you in spirit, rejoicing in this 
 ideal fellowship, and viewing your order. His spiritual pre- 
 sence with them was a source of joy, and it enabled him to 
 see their orderly array and consistency. The sentiment is 
 somewhat similar to that contained in i. 3, 4. There he says, 
 that the accounts which he had received about them prompted 
 him, as often as he prayed, to thank God for them ; here he 
 tells them that his being with them in spirit was a source of 
 joy, and neither of doubt, disquietude, nor sorrow. And the 
 verb ^XeTTcov is used with special appropriateness, as the apostle 
 supposes himself to be among them, looking around him and 
 taking a survey of their condition. 2 Cor. vii. 8 ; Eom. vii. 
 23. Schleusner, referring to a common trope, indeed says 
 quaintly, of the verb — de omnibus reliquis sensibus corporis 
 usurpatur, ut adeo ^Xeireiv saepe sit audire, as in Matt. xv. 31, 
 where it is said that the people saw the dumb speak. But 
 the meaning there is not, that they heard them speak, but that 
 they saw the whole phenomenon of the restoration of hearing. 
 The Lexicographer instances also the verse before us, as if the 
 apostle meant to say, that he knew of their order from hearing 
 the reports of others. But such an exegesis is truly bathos, 
 and robs the sentiment of its spirit and beauty. 
 
 While the noun rd^c^, among its other uses, is often found 
 ^ § 54, 5. * Comm. in Ep. ad Bom. ii. p. 425. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 5. 119" 
 
 as a military term,-^ denoting the result of that discipline to 
 which an army is subjected, and also sometimes describing tlie 
 symmetry and arrangement of society ; ^ it has besides the 
 emphatic signification of good order.^ Thus Chrysostom uses, 
 in explanation, evra^la. In the latter significant sense, the 
 apostle here employs the term — " seeing your good order." 
 What the writer refers to, we may learn from his own usage. 
 And first, the apostle accuses certain members of the church of 
 Thessalonica of a breach of order — that they walked aTa/cT&)9 — 
 " disorderly ; " whereas of himself and coadjutors he says — ort 
 ovK. r)TaKTr]craiJiev iv vfilv — " for we were not disorderly among 
 you," and again, he adds — aKouofiev jdp Ti,va<i TrepLTrarovvra<i 
 iv viuv araKTO)'!; — " for we hear that some among you walk 
 disorderly." 2 Thess. iii. 6, 7, 11. The disorder referred to 
 in this passage, was the strong and vicious tendency to idle- 
 ness which had been manifested in Thessalonica — some refusing 
 to work and earn a subsistence, and aimingj to throw them- 
 selves on the liberality of the richer brethren in the church. 
 This breach of order was private and personal. 1 Thess. v. 14. 
 And secondly, after rebuking the church in Corinth, for the 
 turbulence and confusion caused by the display of spiritual 
 gifts, he sums up by saying — " let all things be done decently 
 and in order, — koI Kara ra^iv." There had been a social or 
 ecclesiastical breach of order. Perhaps to both kinds of order 
 does the apostle here refer. In their individual consistency 
 and purity of character, in their unshaken attachment to the 
 truth in the midst of seduction, and in all the arrangements 
 and forms of their worship and discipline, such good order was 
 observed, as that error was excluded, unity preserved, and 
 edification promoted. It is a meagre explanation of Michaelis 
 and Heinrichs, to represent this order in the vulgar sense of 
 subjection to the ofiice-bearers, and as opposed to insubordina- 
 tion. Theophylact and Huther are more correct in referring it 
 to love, which at least was the bond of union, and one principal 
 support of order. 
 
 Ka\ TO a-repem/Ma t?}? 6t<? XpicrTov Trto-Tew? vfiwv — " And the 
 solidity of your faith in Christ." The noun o-Tepeiofia is not 
 
 ^ Suidas, sm6 voce. Josephus, B. Jud. iii. 9, 2. Xen. Cyrop. viii. 3, 6. 
 
 2 Dem. 200, Orat. At. vol. v. p. 308, ed. Dobson. Plato, Crit. 109. 
 
 3 Plato, Gorg. 504, Leg. 875. Polybius, i. 4. 
 
120 COLOSSIANS II. 5. 
 
 found elsewhere in the New Testament. Eepresentmg, in the 
 first chapter of Genesis, the Hebrew y"*!?"], and rendered in the 
 Vulgate firmamentum, it signifies something solid or compact, 
 such as the foundation of a building. It naturally came to 
 signify not the object, but the quality which characterizes it — 
 firmness or hardness. Ps. Ixxiii. 4. So that it here points 
 out that feature in the faith of the Colossians which specially 
 commended it to the notice and eulogy of the apostle, to wit, 
 its unyielding nature, or the stiffness of its adherence to its 
 one object — Christ. In such a crisis as that, when fluctuation 
 would have been incipient ruin, it was not the elevation of 
 their faith, nor its growth, nor any of its fruits, but this one 
 feature of it — its unshaken constancy — which the watchful eye 
 of the apostle so carefully noted, and so joyously recorded. 
 Acts xvi. 5 ; 1 Pet. v. 9. The very position of the words is 
 emphatic — t?)? eU Xpiarov Tr/o-reo)?, as if et? X. distinguished 
 and glorified the faith. [Eph. i. 1.] It reposed on Christ 
 — as unshaken as its object. His love never wavers. His 
 power never fails. His fidelity never resiles from its pledge. 
 And those unseen blessings which faith surveys are unchang- 
 ing in their certainty and glory. The portals of heaven are 
 never barred — its living stream is never dried up ; the pearls 
 of its gates are unsoiled, nor is the gold of its pavement ever 
 •worn through. Surely, then, faith ought to be as stedfast as 
 the foundation on which it rests, and the object which it 
 contemplates and secures. It is out of place, with Bengel and 
 others, to make this noun a species of adjective to TTLcrrew^i, as 
 if the meaning were jirma fides non patitur quicquam ex ordine 
 suo moveri. Nor is it warrantable on the part of Olshausen 
 and Meyer, to take raft? in its military sense, and to make 
 crrepecofjia the power which strengthens for the fight, or a spe- 
 cies of fortification by which they were defended. ^Tepecofia 
 is, indeed, employed to represent the Hebrew V?o in Ps. xviii. 2, 
 but the Greek translation is according to the general sense 
 of the Hebrew term, — the proverbial firmness of a rock. In 
 1 Mace. ix. 14, quoted by Meyer, a-Tepiwfia t^9 Trapefifiokrj'^ 
 is not the fortification of the camp, but the strength of the 
 army, that portion which could be relied upon for its prowess. 
 In the Version of Symmachus, Isa. xxvi. 1, it represents the 
 Hebrew ?n, which the Seventy render irepirei'^o^ ; the prin- 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 6. 121 
 
 cipal idea of the original term being strength, while bulwark, 
 antemurale, is only a secondary and technical application. It is 
 a curious reading of the clause which occurs in Augustine and 
 Ambrosiaster — the former having id quod deest fidei vestrae 
 in CliristOy and the latter, supplens id quod deest utilitati fidei 
 vestrae in Christum — implying that they both read va-reprj/xa 
 for (TTepicofia. 
 
 (Ver. 6.) '/2? ovv irapekd^ere tov Xpicrov 'Irjcrovv rov 
 Kvpiov, iv avTM irepnraTeiTe — " As then ye have received 
 Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in Him." The particle ovv turns4- 
 us to the preceding verse, and to the fact of their order and 
 stedfast faith. Calvin rightly says — laudi attexit exhorta- 
 tionem. He has commended them for their order and sted- 
 fast faith, and he now adds a word of warning and counsel. 
 Gradually does he approach the main end of his writing. 
 Ever as he comes near it does he utter some sentiment which 
 delays his full admonition. He wishes by his previous allu- 
 sions and warnings to prepare their minds for the final and 
 thorough exposure and condemnation. And thus he has 
 intimated — what thanks he offers for them, what prayers he 
 presents for their deeper illumination and persistency in the 
 truth — what sufferings he has endured for them, and what sym- 
 pathies he has with them — what joy he felt in being mentally 
 present with them, and surveying their good order and un- 
 swerving faith. And he has eulogized that gospel which they 
 had received — as the truth — as a fruit-bearing principle — as 
 a disclosure of the Divine person, exalted dignity, and saving 
 work of the Son of God ; and as a mystery long hidden, but 
 at length revealed, and comprising in it the deep and inex- 
 haustible treasures of all spiritual science. Since, therefore, 
 they had received Christ Jesus, the Lord, the giver and subject 
 of that gospel, it surely became them to walk in Him. 
 
 The verb trapaXapb^dvw, signifying to take to oneself, is 
 used emphatically to appropriate wisdom or instruction — ' 
 much as in Scotland the faculty of acquiring knowledge is 
 termed uptake. 1 Cor. xi. 23, xv. 1, 3 ; Gal. i. 9, 12 ; 
 Phil. iv. 9 ; 1 Thess. ii. 13. They had received him, in the 
 way of being taught about Him — verse 7. They had been 
 instructed, and they had apprehended the lesson. It is a 
 superficial exegesis on the part of Theophylact, Grotius, and 
 
122 COLOSSIANS II. 6. 
 
 others, to make the proper name X. 'I. mean merely the doctrine 
 of Christ. For it was Christ Himself whom they had received 
 — the sum and life of all evangelical instruction. Nay, more, 
 the repetition and structure of the sentence show that the full 
 meaning is — ye have received Christ Jesus as the Lord. In 
 the character of Lord they had accepted Him. This was the 
 testing element of their reception. The Anointed Jesus is 
 now " Lord of all," and to acknowledge His Lordship is to 
 own the success of His atoning work as well as to bow to His 
 sovereign authority. Thus we understand the apostle when 
 he says, 1 Cor. xii. 3, " Wherefore I give you to understand, 
 that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus 
 accursed ; and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, 
 but by the Holy Ghost." On the special meaning and use of 
 the terms see Eph. i. 2. The form of error introduced 
 among them, which would rob the Saviour of His dignity, led 
 to the denial of the Messiahship in its true sense ; and in its 
 spiritualism, it would, at the same time, explain away His 
 humanity. 
 
 These expressive terms are thus the symbols of a vast 
 amount of instruction. Whatever men receive in the gospel, 
 it is Christ. He is the soul of doctrine — for prophets foretold 
 Him, and apostles preached Him ; and the oracles of the one 
 and the sermons of the other had no splendour but from Him, 
 and no vitality but in Him. Ethical teaching has as close a 
 connection with Him, for it expounds His law, defers to 
 His authority, and exhibits the means of obedience and fer- 
 tility in His imparted Spirit and strength. Promise is based upon 
 His veracity, and sealed in His blood, and suffering looks for 
 sympathy to Him who bled and wept. The great mystery of the 
 Divine government is solved in Him, and in Him alone is the 
 enigma of man's history and destiny comprehended. Spiritual 
 life has its root in Him — the growth of the Divine image, and 
 the repose of the soul in the bosom of Him who made it. In 
 believing the gospel, men receive no impersonal abstraction, 
 but Christ Himself — light, safety, love, pattern, power, and 
 life. And they receive Him as " the Lord." He won the Lord- 
 ship by His death. He rose from the sepulchre to the throne. 
 To Him the universe bends in awful homage, and the church 
 worships Him in grateful allegiance. The Colossians had 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 6. 123 
 
 received Him as the Lord, and surely no seduction would ever 
 lead them to discrown Him, and transfer their fealty to one of 
 the crowded and spectral myriads which composed the celestial 
 hierarchy — one of a dim and cloudy mass which was indistinct 
 from its very number, surrounding the throne, but never daring 
 to depute any of its members to ascend it. 
 
 " As ye have received Him, walk in Him." The particle co? 
 denotes something more than a reason, for it indicates manner 
 — " according as." Matt. viii. 1 3 ; Luke xiv. 2 2 ; 1 Cor. iii. 5 ; 
 Tit. i. 5. The demonstrative adverb which follows 0)9, in sense, 
 is here as often omitted. ^Ev avrm TrepLTrarelre — " Walk in 
 Him." The verb is often used to describe manner of life, or 
 visible conduct; and that life is to be enjoyed in union with 
 Christ. If reception of Christ the Lord refer to inner life, 
 then this walk refers to its outer manifestation. It was to be 
 no inert or latent principle. Christ was not merely a theme 
 to be idly contemplated or admired in a supine and listless 
 reverie ; nor a. creed to be carelessly laid up as in a distant 
 and inaccessible deposit ; nor an impulse which might produce 
 a passing and periodical vibration, and then sink into abeyance 
 and exhaustion; but a power, which, in diffusing itself over 
 mind and heart, provided for its own palpable manifestation 
 and recognition in the daily life. For there could be no 
 walking in Him, without the previous reception of Him. The 
 outer life is but the expression of the inner. Ability to walk 
 is the result of communicated animation. Nay, more, if they 
 received Him, they could not but walk in Him. The recep- 
 tion of such truth necessitates a change of heart. It is a 
 belief which, from its very nature, produces immediate results. 
 In Him, and in Him according to the character in which they 
 had received Him, were they to walk. And they would not 
 walk in Him as they received Him, if they were tempted to 
 reject His functions and qualifications as the Christ, or in any 
 form, or on any pretext, to modify, depreciate, or set aside 
 His claims ; or if they were prompted to deny or explain 
 away His true humanity as Jesus — taking from His life its 
 reality, and from His death its atoning value ; or if they were 
 induced to withhold their allegiance from Him as Lord, the 
 one rightful governor, proprietor, and judge. There must 
 therefore be faith in Him as the Christ, the consciousness of 
 
124 COLOSSIANS II. 7. 
 
 a near and living relation to Him as Jesus, the kinsman, the 
 brother-man ; and deep and loyal obedience to Him as Lord. 
 " He is thy Lord, worship thou Him." " In Him " pre- 
 supposes the reception of Him ; and to " walk in Him," is to 
 have life in Him and from Him, with thought and emotion 
 shaped and inspired by His presence. The hallowed sphere 
 of walk is in Him, but beyond this barrier are sin and danger, 
 false philosophies, and mazy entanglements. If they walked 
 in Christ, they would be fortified against those doubts which 
 the pernicious teachings of error, with their show of wisdom, 
 were so apt to superinduce. 
 
 (Ver. 7.) ^Eppi^cofievoc kol iiroiKoSo/Moufxevoc iv av7u> — 
 " Having been rooted, and being built up in Him," ['Eppi- 
 ^(ofiivoc, Eph. iii, 17. 'EttolkoB. Eph. ii. 20,] The par- 
 ticiples are used in a tropical sense, and are connected with 
 the preceding clause — " walk in Him." The figures, as Meyer 
 'T\ remarks, neither agree with the preceding verb, nor with one 
 another. But the main ideas are stability and growth — the 
 root, " in Him," beyond the possibility of eradication ; and 
 the growth that of a symmetrical structure, which, " in Him," 
 has its unshaken foundation. The first participle, by its tense, 
 indicates a previous state, and the second a present condition. 
 They had already been rooted, but they were still to be 
 making progress. Were such their character, were they 
 rooted in Christ, and not simply adhering to Him by some 
 superficial tie, and were they being built up, or growing in 
 gracious attainment, then might they defy all the efforts of the 
 false teachers to detach them from the truth, 
 
 Kal ^€/3aiovjjb€voi iv rrj iriaTet Kadoi<i iSiSd'x^OrjTe — " And 
 stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught." The pre- 
 ' position is omitted in some Codices, and by Lachmann and 
 Tischendorf. If this reading be adopted, we should be 
 inclined, with Meyer, to take the dative in an instrumental 
 sense — " stablished by means of the faith ;" but if iv be 
 retained, perhaps the common rendering is preferable. See 
 under i. 7. They were to be confirmed in the faith which had 
 been taught them — that system of belief which Epaphras had 
 preached to them. We should agree with Olshausen, against 
 Meyer, that 7r/crTt<? is faith in the objective sense, were it not 
 for iv avrfi in the following clause, which we believe to be 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 7. 125 
 
 genuine, thougli it is wanting in A and C. Tor the apostle 
 says — Trepiao-evovre^i iv avrr}. This abounding bids us take 
 faith in a subjective sense — the conscious belief of the truth 
 — and in that belief they were not to be stinted, cautious, or 
 timid, but they were to abound. Their faith was not to be 
 scanty as a rivulet in summer, but like the Jordan in harvest, 
 overflowing its banks. And they were to abound in it — 
 
 'Ev €v^apiaTLa — " With thanksgiving." A similar con- 
 struction is found in Eom. xv. 13 ; 2 Cor. iii, 9, viii. 7. They 
 could not but be thankful that the truth had been brought to 
 them, and that by the Divine grace they had been induced 
 fully and unreservedly to believe it. Two other and opposing 
 forms of construction have been proposed. Grotius renders 
 per gratiarum actionem crescentes in fide, as if the thanks were 
 the means of abounding in faith ; while Storr, Flatt, Bohmer, 
 and Huther take it thus — abounding by means of the same in 
 thanksgiving, as if faith were the means of thanksgiving. But 
 the connection, as we have first given it, is more in harmony 
 with the sequence and position of the words. The entire 
 verse is at once a precept and a warning, and were the pre- 
 cept obeyed and the warning listened to, then " philosophy 
 and vain deceit " would ply their machinations in vain. 
 
 Having again and again approached his subject by indirect 
 allusions, the apostle now boldly and fully brings it out. 
 " Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain 
 deceit." And we may remark in introduction, that the senti- 
 ment of the verse has been sometimes greatly abused. The 
 apostle has been quoted in condemnation of philosophy in 
 general, though he expressly identifies the philosophy which 
 he reprobates with " vain deceit." Philosophy, science, or 
 the pursuit and love of wisdom, cannot be stigmatized, as in 
 itself hostile to faith. The apostle himself has employed 
 philosophy to prove the existence of the Creator, and show 
 the sin and folly of polytheism and idolatry. Eom. i. 19-23. 
 The attributes of the Divine nature — not in themselves cogniz- 
 able by the senses — have assumed a visible embodiment in 
 the works of creation, and he who fails to discover the one 
 God in His productions is " without excuse." ^ So that the 
 
 ^ "God, whom the wisest men acknowledgfi to bee a Power uneffaWe, and 
 Vertue infinite, a Light by abundant claritie invisible ; and Understanding which 
 
126 COLOSSIANS 11. 7. 
 
 teaching of Natural Theology is not erroneous, but defective 
 — it needs not to be corrected, but only to be supplemented. 
 Why should the love of wisdom be reckoned vanity, when the 
 page on which man is invited to study is wide as the universe, 
 and rolls back to creation ? Wherever he turns his eye, on 
 himself or beyond himself — above, around, or beneath him, 
 ten thousand things invite his examination. Earth and heaven, 
 mind and matter, past and present, summon him to wake up 
 his faculties, and scrutinize and reflect on the universe around 
 him. Let him look down on the sands and rocks of his home, 
 and he enters into Geology. Let him know this ball to be 
 one of many similar orbs in the sky, and Astronomy entrances 
 him. Let him gaze at the munificent plenty around him, 
 spread over zone and continent in the shape of trees, flowers, 
 and animals, and he is introduced into Geography, Botany, 
 and Zoology. Let him survey the relations of matter — its 
 forms, quantities, and laws of mixture and motion, and at once 
 he finds himself among Mathematics, Optics, Mechanics, and 
 Chemistry. Let him turn his vision upon himself, and observe 
 the attributes and functions of his physical life, and he dips 
 into the mysteries of Anatomy and Physiology. Let him 
 strive to learn what has happened before him, and in what 
 connection he stands to brethren of other tongues and countries, 
 and he is brought into acquaintanceship with History, 
 Philology, and Political Economy. And, in fine, let his own 
 conscious mind make itself the theme of reflection — in its 
 
 it selfe can onely comprehend, an Essence eternall and spirituall, of absolute 
 purenesse and simplicity : was, and is pleased to make himselfe knowne by the 
 worke of the World : in the wonderfuU magnitude whereof, (all which He im- 
 braceth, iilleth and sustaineth) we behold the Image of that glory, which cannot 
 be measured, and withall that one, and yet universall Nature, which cannot be 
 defined. In the glorious Lights of Heaven, we perceive a shadow of his divine 
 Countenance ; in his merciful! provision for all that live, his manifold goodnesse : 
 and lastly, in creating and making existent the World universall, by the absolute 
 Art of his owne Word, his Power and Almightinesse ; which Power, Light, 
 Vertue, Wisdome, and Goodnesse, being all but attributes of one simple Essence, 
 and one God, we in all admire, and in part discerne 'per speculum creaturarum, 
 that is, in the disposition, order, and variety of Celestiall and Terrestriall bodies : 
 Terrestriall, in their strange and manifold diversities ; Celestiall, in their beauty 
 and magnitude ; which in their continual! and contrary motions, are neither 
 repugnant, intermixt, nor confounded. By these potent effects, we approach to 
 the knowledge of the Omnipotent cause, and by these motions, their Almighty 
 Mover." — Sir Walter Raleigh, p. 1, History of the World, London, 1614. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 7. 127 
 
 powers and aspirations, its faculties and emotions, its obligations 
 and destiny, and he is initiated into the subtleties and wonders 
 of Metaphysics and Morals, Legislation and Theology. Thus, 
 Strabo, in the first chapter of his Geography} says — " That 
 acquaintance with Divine and human things constitutes what 
 is called philosophy." 
 
 Again, not only is philosophy a necessary result of our 
 being and condition, but it is full of benefit, for the more a 
 man knows his own nature, the more will he feel the adapta- 
 tion of Christianity to it, and be persuaded of its Divine 
 origin. The inner nature has its religious instincts and 
 susceptibilities, which are not grafted upon it, but are of its 
 very essence. As the eye is fitted for the reception of light, 
 and light alone can enable it to fulfil its functions — as it is 
 made for the light and the light for it — so religious truth 
 alone is fitted to satisfy those yearnings and aspirations. 
 There is a perfect harmony between God's inner revelation of 
 Himself in man, and His external revelation of Himself in 
 Scripture. Wrong belief may be against reason, but unbelief 
 is against nature. A sound philosophy comes to this con- 
 clusion — that Christianity fulfils every condition — that in its 
 God and its incarnate Jesus — its revelation and its atonement 
 — its sanctifying agency and its future heaven — it responds 
 to every want and hope of humanity. Man must have some 
 God — it gives him the true one. He seeks to some revelation, 
 and it sends him the genuine oracle. He relies on some 
 sacrifice, and it shows the perfect atonement. He anticipates 
 a heaven, and it provides him with such a home, and enables 
 him to reach it. This philosophy develops what Tertullian 
 has happily called testwionium animae naturaliter Christianae. 
 
 But it is not such philosophy, or such use of philosophy, 
 that the apostle condemns — " Philosophy was, in its first 
 descent, a generous, noble thing ; a virgin beauty, a pure light, 
 born of the Father of lights." ^ At the same time, it is not 
 to be denied that the greater portion of heresies have been 
 
 ^ "H too Ta h7a xoci roc avSpcd-jriia i'TnfiXii'ovTos dvTrip t»)v (pi^o^ixpiav iTicrTrif/,n)i 
 (paaiv. Vol. i. p. 4, ed. Cramer, Berlin, 1844. Justin also characterizes philoso- 
 phers thus — KaJ o't (ptX'o<ro(poi ol rnv aXnin xa.) hiav tl^ivai iTayyiXXofinioi yvuirit. 
 
 Cohort, ad Graecos, p. 14, vol. i. Opera, ed. Otto, 1842. 
 
 ^ Gale, Court of the Gentiles, Part ii. Preface. Clement, Strom, i. p. 282. 
 
128 COLOSSIANS II. 7. 
 
 allied to a false philosophy. Tertullian, in the seventh chapter 
 of his De Praescriptione Haereticorum, says — ipsae denique 
 haereses a pldlosopliia suhornantur} Platonism and Aristo- 
 telianism had each in turn the ascendency, and Christianity 
 has suffered from the four great forms of philosophy — Sen- 
 sationalism, Idealism, Scepticism, and Mysticism, the error of 
 each of which lies in pushing to extravagance some important 
 truth. And in modern times, has not Hegelian Pantheism 
 clothed itself in biblical phraseology ? Its doctrine, that " the 
 consciousness which man has of himself is the consciousness 
 which God has of Himself," finds its appropriate mythical 
 representation in the mediatorial person of the God-man ; 
 while " eternal life " is but the symbol of an immortality 
 without individual existence. Have not men in their wildness 
 invoked " the stars in their courses " to light against Him who, 
 enthroned above them, has not forgotten that distant and 
 insignificant planet on which sin and misery dwell ? Have 
 they not called to them the rocks and fossils of the early 
 
 ^ The Father justifies his accusation in the following strains : — Inde aeones, 
 et formae nescio quae infinitae, et trinitas hominis apud Valentinuna ; Platonicus 
 fuerat : inde Marcionis deus melior de tranquillitate ; a Stoicis venerat : et ut 
 anima interire dicatur, ab Epicureis observatur : et ut carnis restitutio negetur, 
 de una omnium philosophorum schola sumitur : et ubi materia cum deo aequatur, 
 Zenonis disciplina est : et ubi aliquid de igneo deo allegatur, Heracletus inter- 
 venit. Eadem materia apud haereticos et philosophos volutatur, idem retracta- 
 tiis implicantur : unde malum, et quare ? et unde homo, et quomodo ? et, quod 
 proxime Valentinus proposuit, unde deus ? scilicet de enthymesi et ectromate. 
 Miserum Aristotelem ! qui illis dialecticam instituit, artificem struendi et 
 destruendi, versipellem in sententiis, coactam in coniecturis, duram in argumentis, 
 operariam contentionum, molestam etiam sibi ipsi, omnia retractantem, ne quid 
 omnino tractaverit. Hinc illae fabulae et genealogiae intei-minabiles, et 
 quaestiones infructuosae, et sermones serpentes velut cancer, a quibus nos 
 apostolus refrenans nominatim philosophiam contestatur caveri oportere, scribens 
 ad Colossenses, Videte, ne qui sit circumveniens vos per philosophiam et inanem 
 seductionem, secundum traditionem hominum, praeter providentiam spiritus 
 sancti. Fuerat Athenis, et istam sapientiam humanam, affectatricem et 
 interpolatricem veritatis, de congressibus noverat, ipsam quoque in suas 
 haereses multipartitam varietate sectarum invicem repugnantium. Quid ergo 
 Athenis et Hierosolymis ? quid academiae et ecclesiae ? quid haereticis et 
 Christianis ? Nostra institutio de porticu Solomonis est, qui et ipse tradlderat 
 dominum in simplicitate cordis esse quaerendum. Viderint qui Stoicum et 
 Platonicum et dialecticum Christianismum protulerunt. Nobis curiositate opus 
 uon est post Christum lesum, nee inquisitione post evangelium. Cum credimus, 
 nihil desideramus ultra credere. Hoc enim prius credimus, non esse quod ultra 
 credere debeamus. — De Praescr. Hacret. p. 8, Opera, vol. ii., Lipsiae, 1854. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 7. 129 
 
 infancy of the globe to prove that the record of creation M-as 
 not furnished by the Creator ? Are there not those at the 
 present time who regard inspiration as but the " fine frenzy " 
 of an Oriental temperament, or look upon it as being " as 
 wide as the world, as common as God," and who, therefore, 
 take from the biblical records their sole, infallible, and supreme 
 authority, leaving us an Old Testament without prophecies, 
 and a New Testament without miracles and redemption ? 
 These are, verily, abuses of philosophy — " oppositions of 
 science, falsely so called." "VVe do not, therefore, object to 
 philosophy, or to the philosophical treatment of Christianity. 
 We can have no horror at free thoughts and bold inquiry, so 
 long as men indicate their desire to submit to the decisions of 
 Evidence. There is a legitimate province for philosophy to 
 work in, and "faith is the synthesis of reason and the 
 individual will." ^ 
 
 But tlie system condemned by the apostle was something 
 which assumed the name of philosophy, yet had nothing of 
 its spirit. It sprang from a wrong motive. So far from 
 being the love of wisdom, it was the fondness of folly. It 
 was nursed in a fantastic imagination, and intruded into a 
 supersensuous sphere. It did not deal with nature around it, 
 but with the supernatural beyond it. It did not investigate 
 its own constitution, but it pryed into the arcana of the spirit- 
 world. It was wholly spectral and baseless. It developed 
 superstition and crossed the path of the gospel. It lived in 
 a cloud-land which it had created, and withdrew itself from 
 the influence and faith of apostolical Christianity. The 
 plain truths of redemption did not satisfy its prurient appetite, 
 nor could it content itself with the " manifold wisdom " of the 
 cross. It longed for something more ethereal than historical 
 facts, something more recondite than the mystery of godliness. 
 It forestalled the Eosicrucian vanities. It peopled the 
 spheres with imaginary Essences, to which it assigned both 
 names and functions. It laboured to purge itself from the 
 vulgarities of physical life, in order to enter this spiritual 
 circle. It battled with the flesh, till the crazy nerves gave 
 it such sights and sounds as it longed to enjoy. The 
 ordinances of the New Testament were too tame for it, and it 
 ^ "Essay on Faith," in Coleridge's Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit, p, 120. 
 
130 COLOSSIANS II. 8, 
 
 created a new and emaciating ritual for itself. It was, in 
 short, an eccentric union of Judaism with the Gnostic 
 Theosophy — a mixture of Jewish ritualism with Oriental 
 mysticism. It took from Moses those special parts of his 
 economy, which " sanctified to the purifying of the flesh," and 
 it seems to have deepened and exaggerated them. It selected 
 from the Eastern Theosophy its armies of vEons, its array of 
 principalities and powers, whom it marshalled as its mediators, 
 and to whom it inculcated homage. It was smitten with the 
 disease of him who will look into the sun, and who soon 
 mistakes for realities the gaudy images that float before him. 
 Such was the visionary science which had special charms for 
 the inhabitants of Phrygia, and which in after years produced 
 unmistakeable results. That the apostle means such 
 philosophy is evident, for in no other way could his warning 
 be appropriate. It was of a present, and not a future 
 danger — a real, and not an imaginary jeopardy that he so 
 earnestly cautioned them. It was not, as TertulKan imagines, 
 the whole Greek philosophy, for that lay not in his way ; nor 
 yet any special form of it, as Grotius and others have held, 
 for the philosophy of the Academy and the Porch, of Epicurus 
 and Pythagoras, was not the source of immediate danger to 
 the Colossian church. 
 
 (Ver. 8.) BXeirere, fi^ Tt9 t'/ia? earat 6 avkaycoyayv Slu t^? 
 <j)iXoao^La<; koX Kevri<i airaTTj'i — " Be on your guard lest any 
 one make a spoil of you through philosophy and vain deceit." 
 The verb /SXeTrw, in this sense, is sometimes followed by the 
 accusative of the persons to be guarded against, occasionally 
 by the genitive preceded by am-o, sometimes also by 'iva ; but 
 most usually by ^rj, and its compounds with the aorist 
 subjunctive. Here, however, we have the future indicative, 
 earai, as in Heb. iii. 12. The apostle therefore does not say 
 that the evil had happened, but he expresses his fear that it 
 would happen — his misgiving, that what he apprehended 
 would take place. Winer, § 56, 2 (b), a; Bernhardy, p. 
 402 ; Hartung, vol. ii. 139. He saw the attractive subtlety, 
 and he could not withhold the warning and pre-intimation. 
 The expression, too, is pointed and emphatic — rt? o avXaycoycjv 
 — more so than if he had employed the subjunctive, avXaycoyfj. 
 It individualizes the spoiler — represents him as at his work 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 8. 131 
 
 — associates vividly the actor with the action. Gal. i. 7. 
 When some infer from the language that the apostle had only 
 one person specially in his eye — one restless and attractive 
 heresiarch, we would not contradict, though we are not 
 prepared to come- decidedly to the same conclusion. The 
 participle, which occurs only here, belongs to the later Greek,^ 
 and denotes — making a prey of — driving off as booty, though 
 it is finical on the part of Meyer to base the latter significa- 
 tion upon the expression of the 6th verse, walk in Him, as 
 if they might be caught when not in that walk, and forced 
 away as a spoil. The expression shows the strong feeling 
 of the apostle, and how he regarded their capture by that 
 philosophy as fatal, almost beyond recovery, to their faith and 
 peace. It is not in accordance with the language to think 
 of the false teacher or teachers taking faith, mind, or purity, 
 or anything else as a prey from the Colossians, for the 
 Colossians themselves are the booty. The means employed 
 were — 
 
 ^La tt}? ^i\,oao(j>ia<i Kot K6vrj<i airdrr]'; — " By philosophy and 
 empty delusion." This philosophy is none other than the 
 theme of the TriOavoXoyia of verse 4, and is nothing else' in 
 essence than "vain deceit." For the second clause, where 
 neither preposition nor article is repeated, explains the first 
 — philosophy which was expressed in " vain words," is 
 identical with "vain deceit." There is no reality about it. 
 It is out and out a delusion, a tissue of airy figments. The 
 term philosophy was a favourite one in the Greek world, but 
 it was extended in course of time to portions and objects of 
 Jewish study by the affectation of Philo^ and Josephus.^ 
 Tittmann, in his very one-sided essay ,^ restricts the term 
 solely to Jewish doctrine, and Heinrichs no less narrowly to 
 Jewish worship. Perhaps the apostle would not have given 
 any mere Jewish system such an appellation, but he uses the 
 term because there might be in it some mixture of Gentile 
 
 1 Heliodorus, 10, p. 512. Aristaenet. ii. ep. 22. 
 
 2 De Somniis, Opera, vol. v. p. 160, ed. Pfeitfer. ^ Cont. Ap. ii. 4. 
 
 * De Vestigiis Gnost. inN. T. frustra quaesitis, etc., Lipsiae, 1773. Compare, 
 on the other hand, Neander, Geschichte der Pjlanzung, etc., vol. i. p. 512. 
 Vaughan's Causes of the Corruption of Christianity, p. 167, etc. Brucker, 
 Histor. Crit. Phil. ii. p. 40, etc, 
 
 M 
 
132 COLOSSIANS II. 8. 
 
 lore, and especially because the false teachers dignified their 
 views by such a title. 
 
 Kara rrjv TrapdSoatv tmv av9pco7r(ov — " After the tradition 
 of men." The preposition does not connect this with the 
 first clause of the verse, as Meyer construes, and as if it 
 showed the direction in which they were seduced, but it is to 
 be joined with the immediately preceding words. It points 
 out, not so much, as Storr supposes, the authority of that 
 philosophy, as its general source and character. It is 
 according to the tradition of men, and not according to Divine 
 revelation. In 2 Thess. iii. 6, the construction is fully 
 expressed. Elements of the tradition here referred to are 
 found in Matt. xv. 2 ; Mark vii. 3, 5, 8, 9, 13 ; Gal. i. 14. 
 It is not simply doctrine, as Olshausen and Huther take it; 
 nor perhaps Gr?eco- Jewish doctrine, as others supposed. It 
 was, to a great extent, that tangled mass of oral teaching, 
 which, age after age, the Jews had unwarrantably engrafted on 
 the written law. That farrago of unwritten statute and ritual 
 is contrasted by Jesus with the " commands of God." It was 
 solely of man, and partook largely of his vanity and weakness. 
 As in the instance adduced by Christ, it explained away the 
 obligation of tlie fifth commandment by a mean quibble, which 
 added impiety to filial neglect, and permitted a son to starve his 
 parent under a pretence of superior liberality to God. It taught 
 the payment " of mint, anise, and cumin," but forgot " the 
 weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith." It 
 scrupled to eat with unwashed hands, but was forward to 
 worship with an unregenerate heart. It was eloquent and 
 precise about cleaning of cups, but vague and dumb about 
 the purifying of conscience. It converted religion into a 
 complicated routine, with a superstitious and perplexing ritual, 
 as if man were to be saved by the observance of ceremonies 
 as puerile as they were cumbrous — a series of postures, 
 ablutions, amulets, and vain repetitions. It lost sight of the 
 spirituality of worship, but enjoined a careful genuflexion. It 
 buried ethics under a system of miserable and tedious casuistry. 
 It attempted to place everything under formal regulation, and 
 was now busied in solemn trifling, and now lost in utter 
 indecency. It was mighty about the letter, and oblivious of 
 the spirit. It rejoiced in the oblation of a ram, but had no 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 8. 133 
 
 sympathy with the " sacrifice of a broken and contrite heart." 
 It drew water every year from the well at Siloam with a 
 pompous procession, but had no thirst for the living stream 
 which its prophets had predicted and described. It would 
 drill man into a fatiguing devotion. It trained to the mere 
 mummery of worship when it prescribed the movement of eye 
 and foot, of head and arm. It intruded its precepts into 
 every relation, and attempted to fill out the Divine law by 
 laying down directions for every supposable case. It was not 
 content with leading principles, but added innumerable supple- 
 ments. It surrounded the rite of circumcision with many 
 ridiculous minutiae. It professed to guard the sanctity of the 
 Sabbath by a host of trifling injunctions, descending to the 
 needle of the tailor, the pen of the scribe, and the wallet of 
 the beggar. The craftsman was told that he was guilty if he 
 tied a camel-driver's knot, or a sailor's knot, on that day, but 
 not guilty if he merely tied a knot which he could loose with 
 one of his hands ; and that he might leap over a ditch, but 
 not wade through the water that lay in it. It declared by 
 what instrument the paschal lamb should be roasted, and how 
 a jar of wine must be carried during a festival ; with what 
 gestures a phylactery was to be put on, and with what 
 scrupulous order it was to be laid aside. It left nothing to 
 the impulse of a living piety. It was ignorant that a sanctified 
 spirit needed no such prescriptions ; that the " due order " 
 could only be learned from the inner oracle ; and that 
 obedience to all its ramified code, apart from the spirit of 
 genuine faith and devotion, was only acting a part in a heart- 
 less pantomime. 
 
 And these traditions proved that they were from man, not 
 only from their character, but from their verbiage and ap- 
 pended sanctions. If the Mishna be, as we believe it to be, 
 on the whole, a faithful record of many such traditions, then, 
 that they were of men is a fact inscribed on their very front. 
 The recurring formula is — Eabbi Eleazar said this, but Eabbi 
 Gamaliel said that ; this was the opinion of Eabbi Meir, but 
 that of Eabbi Jehudah ; Hillel was of this mind, but Beth 
 Shammai of that; Eabbi Tarphon pronounced in this way, 
 but Eabbi Akivah in that ; thus thought Ben Azai on the 
 one hand, but thus thought Eabbi Nathan on the other ; 
 
134 COLOSSIANS II. 8. 
 
 such was the decision of Jochanan Ben Saacchai, bat such was 
 the opposite conclusion of Matthias Ben Harash. It never 
 rose above a mere human dictum, and it armed its jurists with 
 supreme authority. It never shook the mire off its wings, or 
 soared into that pure and lofty empyrean which envelopes the 
 Divine tribunal, so that in His light it might see light. What 
 had been thus conceived in the dry frivolity of one age, was 
 handed down to another, and the mass was swiftly multiplied 
 in its long descent. The Pharisee selected one portion and 
 practised it, and the Essene chose another and made it his 
 rule of life. It was carried in one or other of these shapes 
 to other lands, and though it commingled with other opinions 
 of similar source and tendency, it never belied its parentage 
 
 as the TRADITIONS OF MEN. 
 
 Kara ra aroi'^ela tov Koa/Mov — " After the rudiments of the 
 world." The reference is somewhat obscure. The noun 
 (Troi)(elov is employed in 2 Pet. iii. 10, 12,^ to denote the 
 elements of physical nature, while in Heb. v. 12 it signifies 
 the simple lessons and truths of Christianity, and is opposed 
 to TeXeLOTT]^. In the former sense it frequently occurs in the 
 ancient philosophy, as comprising fire, air, earth, and water. 
 It is amusing to observe with what ingenuity some of the 
 Greek Fathers 2 give it such a sense in the passage before us, 
 because, forsooth, all the elements are employed in the 
 Jewish service — water for purification and fire for sacrifice, 
 earth for the erection of altars, and the revolution of the 
 aerial bodies for the determination of the sacred festivals. 
 The noun sometimes signifies an elementary sound, or a letter, 
 and so came to denote what is rudimentary — what is suited to 
 the tuition of infancy. In this sense we understand the 
 apostle to use it in Gal. iv. 3, 9, and with special reference to 
 the Jewish ritual and worship. The churches in Galatia had 
 a strong and wayward tendency to revert to Judaism, or at 
 least to incorporate it, or a portion of it, into the new religion. 
 And as they had embraced a system which was spiritual and 
 mature — which was not embodied in types and ceremonies, 
 but in pure, simple, universal truths — the apostle wonders 
 why, with their higher and manly privilege, they should go 
 
 1 Wisdom vii. 17, xix. 17. Plato, Timaeus, 48. Yitruvius, 1, 4. 
 
 2 Especially Genadius, quoted by CEcumenius, in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 8. 135 
 
 back to " the weak and beggarly elements ; " why, when they 
 had been reading the book of Divine instruction with its com- 
 plete and lasting lessons, they should revert and descend again 
 to the mere alphabet. It was as if one who was able to sweep 
 the heavens, and tell the sizes, distances, and revolutions of 
 its luminaries, should forswear this noble exercise, and seat 
 himself in an infant school, and find the highest pleasure 
 among the first and trite axioms and diagrams of geometry. 
 
 The term /cocr/xo9 marks the nature of these elements. It is 
 said that the Jewish economy had a^^iov Koa-fitKov — " a worldly 
 sanctuary," an epithet placed in contrast with ra iirovpavLa, 
 and with o-ktjvt) ov 'yetpoTrolrjTo^;. Our opinion is, that in the 
 clause under discussion, the apostle refers to the Jewish wor- 
 ship. Some interpreters, such as Meyer and Bohmer, think 
 this exposition too restricted, and give the meaning as refer- 
 ring both to the ritual of the Jewish and the heathen world, 
 supposing the " world " to signify, as it often does, the non- 
 Christian portion of its population. Huther also gives it a 
 similar extension of meaning — Elemenie des ethischen Lebens 
 in cler Welt. His objections to the common interpretation 
 are fully set aside by De Wette, and are not in themselves of 
 any weight. But the phrase before us has a definite meaning 
 affixed to it in the Epistle to the Galatians, and there it 
 denotes simply the Jewish system. There was in the Galatian 
 churches no attempt to heathenize, but only to Judaize ; no 
 endeavour to engraft heathenism, but only Judaism on the 
 new dispensation. 
 
 That the Mosaic economy should receive the name of ele- 
 ments is easily understood, but why should such a genitive 
 as Koa/jbov be added ? It belonged to the world in a special 
 sense, not to the world or age in the Jewish sense of the term, 
 as if, as Wahl supposes, the meaning were — adapted to the 
 men of this age. It was of the world, as being like it, evident 
 to the senses, visible, and material, in contrast with what is 
 spiritual and invisible. In this sense, the whole economy was 
 mundane, for it was sensuous ; it pictured itself to the eye in 
 the stones of its edifice, the robes of its priests, the victims of 
 its altars, its restrictions on diet, its frequent washings, the 
 blood of its initiatory rite, and the periods of its sacred festi- 
 vals. It was a worldly panorama, and it portrayed but the 
 
136 COLOSSIANS 11. 8. 
 
 elements of spiritual truth. It set before its votaries the 
 merest first principles, which were indeed often expounded 
 and developed by its prophets. It was " a shadow of things 
 to come," not even a full and vivid picture. Under the l7th 
 verse the exposition will be more fully given. The party at 
 Colosse, who attempted to seduce, presented some elements of 
 the Mosaic ritual and worship as a special instrument of 
 spiritual elevation and ascetic discipline. They inculcated a 
 philosophy which, whatever might be its mysticism or its 
 metaphysical or heathen features, was in essence an adaptation 
 of Judaism, not as found in the Mosaic writings, but as over- 
 laid and disfigured by a mass of accumulated traditions. 
 
 Kal ov Kara Xpiarov — "And not after Christ." That 
 philosophy was not according to Christ. It is a needless 
 dilution of the sense, on the part of Erasmus and Eoell, etc., 
 to render — " not according to the doctrine of Christ." It was 
 not based upon Christ, but was in contrariety to His person 
 and work. It depreciated Him, and undervalued His media- 
 tion. But true Christian science has Him for its centre, and 
 Him for its object. It bows to His authority, and ever seeks 
 to exalt Him. Any new doctrine may be safely tested by the 
 estimation in which it holds Christ ; for all that is false and 
 dangerous in speculation, invariably strives to lower His rank 
 and official dignity, and therefore is neither in source, spirit, 
 substance, nor tendency, according to Him.^ And they were 
 to be on their guard against such dangerous deceptions, which 
 were not according to Christ. Though the apostle says — 
 " not after Christ " — it must not be inferred that the errorist 
 or errorists made no profession of Christianity, or were openly 
 hostile to it. Had this been the case, their non-Christian 
 character would have been boldly and distinctly pointed out 
 by the apostle. They seem to have been disciples in name. 
 Nor did they come like mere Judaizers and make an open 
 assault, or insist in plain terms that Christian Gentiles should 
 be circumcised and keep the law. Then they would have 
 been confronted like the Judaizers in Galatia. But they were 
 
 ^ "My design all alongst this discourse, butts at this one principle, that 
 speculations in religion are not so necessarj', and are more dangerous tlian 
 sincere practice. It is in religion as in heraldry, the simpler the bearing be, 
 it is so much the purer and ancienter." — Six George Mackenzie's Beligio Stoici, 
 p. 141, Edinburgh, 1605. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 9. 137 
 
 more insidious in their attack — boasted the possession of an 
 inner and a higher knowledge, and preached an ideal system 
 of specious pretensions, and made up apparently of Judaism 
 and Gnosticism, ^ — or Judaism deeply imbued with that 
 mysticism which distinguished the Essenes, and that kind 
 of theosophy which is found in Philo.^ 
 
 (Ver. 9.) "On ev avru) KaroiKei irav to irXrjpcofia Tr}<j OeoTrj- 
 T09 (TwiJbartKoi<i. This is an irresistible argument. Any 
 system not after Christ must be human and wrong — " for in 
 Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." The 
 noun irX-^pcofia has been fully explained under Eph. i. 23. 
 The substantive 6e6Tr)<i is an abstract term, like Deity, in which 
 God is viewed in essence rather than personality. The word 
 is quite different in meaning from detorr]^, Eom. i. 2 — a term 
 which describes quality rather than being. The words differ 
 as divinitas and deltas — divineness and Deity ; or, as the 
 Germans express it — Gottlichkeit and Gottheit. The Syriac 
 
 uses the expressive term IZooililj. The fulness of the 
 
 Godhead is a fulness filled up by it — is that Godhead in all 
 its native attributes and prerogatives. And it is the whole 
 fulness — not one cycle of Divine perfections — a single cluster 
 of Divine properties — not a partial possession of isolated 
 glories — nor a handful of meted and fractional resources, but 
 the entire assemblage of all in existence and character that 
 constitutes the Divinity. What He is, and as He is, in being, 
 mode, and manifestation, dwells in Christ. See under i. 15. 
 One blushes to mention the Socinian misinterpretation, which 
 so reduces this sublime statement as to make it signify merely, 
 that the whole will of God was manifested by Him — an 
 attempt which Calovius well names detorsio mera. Nor are 
 we less confounded with the capricious and baseless exposition 
 of Heinrichs, Baumgarten-Crusius, Schleusner, Gerhard, and 
 Junker, that ifKrjpwixa can mean the church gathered without 
 distinction from all nations, and that the apostle intends to 
 say — that the whole church has its existence, wellbeing, or 
 
 ' See also Matter, Histoire Critique du Gnosticisme, etc., Paris, 1828 ; Burton, 
 An Inquirij into the Heresies of the Apostolic Age,'W orks, vol. iii. ; the Bampton 
 Lecture for 1829. 
 
 - Davidson, Introduction, vol. ii. p. 411. 
 
 L 
 
138 COLOSSIANS 11. 9. 
 
 instruction in Christ. Nor is the singularly ungrammatical 
 exegesis of some early expositors less wonderful — that " in 
 Him " means in the church, and that in this church dwells the 
 fulness of the Godhead. Bahr ably refutes the view of 
 Noesselt, which, though a little more ingenious than the 
 Socinian hypothesis, does not essentially differ from it in 
 result. The sense naturally suggested by the terms is the 
 correct one. Nor are we to search for any recondite meaning, 
 as if irXtjpcofia must be taken in a Gnostic sense ; or as if in the 
 verb KaroLKcl there were a necessary allusion to the so-named 
 Shechinah — in which dwelt the Divinity. Whatever be the 
 polemical reference, the ordinary meaning of the verb cannot 
 be set aside, as denoting actual and prolonged habitation. 
 
 The mode of this mysterious inhabitation is declared to be 
 a-Q}fjLaTLKa)<; — " in a bodily form," for such is the first and plain 
 meaning of the adverb. Other and vaguer ideas have been 
 attached to it. It is a necessary result of the interpretation 
 which takes 'rfkrjpwixa to signify the church, that it must 
 regard aeofiaTiKco'i as intense and hyperbolical, and therefore 
 we have the dilution of a quasi. The church dwells in Christ, 
 as if in a bodily form — as if it formed His body. But — 
 
 1. The least plausible hypothesis is that of Capellus and 
 Heumann, who look upon the term as equivalent to oXct)?, and 
 as signifying "altogether." Such a translation makes the 
 clause tautological, for Trdv is already employed, and besides 
 it cannot be borne out by any legitimate examples. Why 
 resort to a rare and technical use of the word, as peculiar as 
 in our familiar phrase, a tody of divinity, meaning a full course 
 of theological instruction ? 
 
 2. Others, again, under the influence of the previous con- 
 trast between the law and the gospel, imagine an antithesis in 
 the word, as if it stood in antagonism to rfTrt/cw?. There was 
 a symbolical residence in the temple, but an actual one in 
 Christ Jesus. The polemical Augustine first broached the 
 idea. Non ideo corporalitcr quia corporcus est Deus, sed aut 
 verbo translato usus est., tanquam in tcmplo manufacto non 
 corjooraliter scd timhratiliter hahitavcrit, id est, praefigurantihus 
 signis, nam illas omnes olservationcs umhras fiduromm vocat, 
 etiam ipso translato vocahulo, .... aut certe corporaliter 
 dictum est, quia et in Christi corpore, quod assumpsit ex virgine, 
 
' COLOSSIANS II. 9. 139 
 
 tanquam in tcmplo liabitat Dens} Augustine has been 
 followed by Vatablus, a-Lapide, Grotius, Glassius, Hackspann, 
 Vitringa, Eoell, Crellius, Schoettgen, Noesselt, Michaelis, 
 Bengel, and Bretschneider. But there is no such implied 
 contrast in this verse as between cra5//.a and aKid in verse 17, 
 and there is therefore no just ground of departure from the 
 common and absolute signification. Christ is held up as the 
 grand centre and source of true philosophy, and the reason is 
 that Godhead was incarnate in Him, and that therefore His 
 claims are paramount, both in person and function. He is 
 not only the Wonder of wonders in Himself, but creation and 
 redemption — the two prime books of study — trace themselves 
 to Him as their one author. 
 
 3. A large number of critics give to croo/xaTiKm the meaning 
 of essentialitcr, that is, the Godhead dwells in Christ really, 
 or in substance — ouo-itySw?. Names of high authority are 
 leagued in favour of this interpretation. Theophylact and 
 Q^cumenius, and Isidore the Pelusiot, among the "Fathers ; 
 Calvin, Beza, and Melancthon, among the reformers ; with 
 Steiger, Huther, Olshausen, and Usteri,^ among the more 
 recent expositors. The ground of this interpretation lies 
 again in a supposed polemical contrast, which certainly does 
 not appear in the context. Melancthon says — est oppositum 
 inJiabitationi separahili lit habitat Deus in Sanctis, that is, the 
 union of Divinity with Christ is a personal union — not like 
 the influential indwelling of God in a believing heart. 
 Huther supposes such a contrast as this, that the Deity did 
 not dwell in Christ as it dwelt in the old prophets who 
 preceded Him. Olshausen again gives prominence to a 
 Gnostic antagonism, as if the apostle meant to distinguish 
 between a merely temporary influence of a higher spirit, and 
 a permanent union of the Godhead — an idea as naturally 
 brought out by giving to the adverb its usual signification. 
 To fall back for defence upon any uses of the Hebrew word 
 QVJ?, is all but to surrender the cause. The Hebrew noun 
 does signify ipjse, but never in connection with persons — de 
 rebus tantummodo, as Gesenius, sub voce, remarks. The noun 
 o-ftj/ia does signify person in the New Testament, though Biihr 
 
 1 Ep. 187, vol. ii. r- 1036, ed. Ben., Paris, 1836. 
 ^ Lehrb. p. 234. See also Hammond, in loc. 
 
1-10 COLOSSIANS II. 9. 
 
 denies it. Daveuant says — " the Hebrew put souls for 
 persons, and the Greek put bodies ; " but the instances of the 
 latter usage adduced by him M'ill not bear him out ; for in 
 them tliere is usually distinct reference to the corporeal part 
 of the person. In those instances in the New Testament in 
 which awfjua appears to signify person, it is not only followed 
 with a genitive of person, but there is always some special 
 reason why the term should be so employed — some implied 
 contrast, some contextual point, or some tacit reference to the 
 body or external person. Thus, among the classics, it is 
 appropriately used of soldiers and slaves, whose bodies are in 
 special request. As in the New Testament it is used in 
 connection with the eye. Matt, vi, 22; with marriage — a 
 union characterized as "one flesh," Eph. v. 28; with the 
 idea of death, Phil. i. 20; and the notion of a living 
 sacrifice, in which the dead bodies of victims were offered, 
 Eom. xii. 1. Indeed, in Homeric usage crco/za always denotes 
 a corpse. So that, absolutely, the noun does not signify 
 person ; and such a sense is never given to the cognate 
 adjective or adverb. This exegesis seems to have arisen from 
 an attempt to define by it the nature of that union which 
 subsisted between Divinity and humanity in the person of 
 Christ. 
 
 4. The last and best interpretation is that which takes 
 ao)/MaTLKo)'i in its literal and only meaning — in a bodily shape, 
 and not as Theodoret paraphrases — to? iv aoofiart,. Such is 
 also the view of Calovius, Estius, Storr, De Wette, Bahr, 
 Bohmer, and Meyer. Yet Steiger calls it — abgeschmacht — 
 insipid, and Olshausen regards it as tautological, because the 
 words " in Him " occur in the same clause. But the words 
 " in Him " are the general reference, and the adverb specifies 
 the mode in which He possessed the Divine fulness. The 
 fulness of the Godhead was embodied in Him, or dwelt in 
 Him — in no invisible shape, and by no unappreciable contact. 
 It assumed a bodily form. It abode in Him as a man. It 
 made its residence the humanity of Jesus. Divinity was 
 incarnated in Christ. It shrank not from taking upon it our 
 nature, and realizing the prophetic title — " Immanuel, God 
 with us." The same idea is contained in John i. 14 — "the 
 Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." The Logos, yet 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 9. 141 
 
 unfleshed, was God, and was with God, Divine and yet distinct 
 from the Fatlier; but the fulness of Godhead was only spiritually 
 within Him, Now, it has made its abode in his humanity 
 without consuming it or deifying it, or changing any of its 
 essential properties. It hungered and it ate, it thirsted and 
 it drank, it grieved and it wept, it watched and prayed, it 
 wearied itself and it lay down, it was exhausted and it slept, 
 it bled and it died. That body so filled and honoured was no 
 phantom, as many even in the apostolic age imagined, for it 
 had " flesh and bones," and, after its resurrection, it bore the 
 scar of its recent wounds. It was therefore no vehicle which 
 Divinity assumed by any singular process, but in the same 
 way as the children become " partakers of flesh and blood," so 
 did Christ partake of them. He was born as children are 
 born, and the infant was wrapt " in swaddling bands." He 
 was nursed as children are nursed, for " butter and honey 
 should he eat." His young soul grew in wisdom as His 
 physical frame grew in stature. It was easily seen that 
 Godhead dwelt in that humanity, for glimpses of its glory 
 flashed again and again through its earthly covering. The 
 radiance was vailed, but never entirely eclipsed. His disciples 
 " beheld His glory, the glory indeed of the only begotten of 
 the Father." Peter felt impressed by it, and urged his own 
 sinfulness as the reason why intercourse should be suspended ; 
 while Thomas, under the impulse of wonder and faith, cried 
 out — " My Lord, and my God." Jesus prayed for others, 
 and bade others pray on their own behalf; but He never 
 solicited their prayers for Himself. When suppliants bowed 
 the knee to Him, He never said — " See thou do it not ; " 
 never thought it to be idolatry on their part to offer Him 
 homage, or felt it to be " robbery " on His part to accept it. 
 His second coming is " the glorious appearing of the great 
 God." At His baptism and transfiguration, the voice from the 
 excellent glory hailed Him as God's beloved Son. He detected 
 the inmost thoughts and enmities of the multitude, for he 
 possessed a species of intuition which lies far above humanity. 
 " He knew what was in man." " The wind blovveth where it 
 listeth," but it listened to Him ; and He who trod upon the 
 waves of the Sea of Galilee, made them a 23ath which God 
 marks as His own. He wrought miracles at discretion, and 
 
142 COLOSSIANS II. 9. 
 
 wielded at pleasure the prerogative of forgiving sins. He 
 assumed a co-ordinate power with the Father, and claimed 
 with Him an equal right of dispensing with those obligations 
 of the sabbatic law, which had been enacted for men by 
 Divine authority. The most ordinary eye discovered something 
 extraordinary about Him. The crowd that heard Him said — 
 " He speaketh as one having authority ; " for He spoke in the 
 tones of conscious Divinity. " We have seen strange things 
 to-day," shouted the spectators ; and no wonder, those strange 
 things were the characteristic acts of the strangest of Beings 
 — the only Being who is God-man. A perfection not of earth 
 belonged to His nature ; for " the prince of this world," who 
 finds so much to work upon in common humanity, could find 
 nothing in Him ; and the demons, whose appetite for evil leads 
 them ever to detect it and vaunt over it, acknowledged Him 
 to be " the Holy One of God." Eeferring to His death as the 
 destruction of a temple, He asserted Himself able in three 
 days to raise it again — a task that could be achieved only by 
 the Divine Creator and Life-giver. While He walked on 
 earth. He spoke of Himself as one " who is in heaven." Born 
 centuries after Abraham, He yet pre-existed the great father 
 of His nation. Lowly and humble — the son of Mary, He 
 was the Image of the invisible God ; and so close was His 
 likeness to Him who sent Him, that He said — " He who hath 
 seen me, hath seen ■ the Father." And the apostle uses the 
 present tense — the Divine fulness still " dwells " in Him. It 
 was no temporary union, but an abiding possession. His 
 glorious body has in it the same fulness of the Godhead, as 
 had the body of His humiliation. The mode of inhabitation 
 the apostle does not specify. What may be inferred is, that 
 the union is a personal union of His natures — not a simjDle 
 concord of will, so that there are two persons ; nor such an 
 absorption of the one element into the other, that there is only 
 one nature. We know not whether Docetic views prevailed 
 at that early period in the Colossian church, but it is certain 
 that Christ was undervalued and His person misunderstood, 
 in the false philosophy. Therefore the apostle affirms, in this 
 brief but weighty clause, the great mystery of His mediatorial 
 nature — the personal union in Him of Divinity and manhood. 
 Any philosophy not " after Christ," must be earthly and 
 
COLOSSIA^S II. 10. 143 
 
 delusive. It has missed the central truth — is amused with 
 the stars, but forgetful of the sun. " For in Him dwells all 
 the fulness of the Godhead bodily ; " and, with singular 
 congruity, the apostle adds — 
 
 (Ver. 10.) K.ai irrre iv avTw TreTrXrjpcofMevoc — "And ye are 
 made full in Him." The clause is still in continuation of the 
 warning, and crowns the argument. It is in entire opposition 
 to the tcsus loquencU of the New Testament, on the part of 
 Grotius, Bos, and Heumann, to make eVre an imperative, for 
 it emphasizes their present state. The phrase iv avTu> has 
 a meaning found with peculiar frequency — in Him — in union 
 with Him ; and it is wrong in Erasmus to render it — " by, or 
 by means of Him." The participle TreirXrjpco/xevoi is evidently 
 used with a reference to the irXr^pcofia of the preceding verse 
 — ^ye are filled out of Christ's fulness, or are full in His fulness. 
 
 Opinions on the sense or reference of the participle are 
 modified by the view entertained of the meaning of the pre- 
 ceding verse. Schoettgen narrows the meaning by far too 
 much, and gives but one aspect of the sense, which he renders 
 — per istum estis perfecte cclocti ; for though the apostle has 
 been referring to instruction, yet far more is here implied. 
 The exegesis of Grotius is rather an inference — illo contenti 
 estate ; for if they were complete in Jesus, it followed that 
 they needed no supplemental endowments from any other 
 quarter. The meaning of the clause is much the same as that 
 found in Eph. iii. 19, to the exposition of which the reader 
 may turn. Meyer says that nothing is to be supplied after 
 •jreirXrjp., neither tt}? 6e6Tr]To<i with Theophylact, nor rov 
 '7r\r]p(o/xaro<; rfji; Oeortjro'i with De Wette. But the question 
 recurs, of what elements is this fulness composed ? or, if the 
 participle be rendered " perfect " — " ye are perfect in Him," 
 of what elements is this perfection made up ? The clause 
 has a very close connection with the foregoing verse, and with 
 the phrase — " all the fulness of the Godhead," It is because 
 that fulness dwells in Christ that they are filled up in Him. 
 Being in Him, they are brought into contact with what is in 
 Him ; and that fulness of God contains a life whose pulsations 
 create a responsive throbbing within them. There is in Christ 
 complete provision, and what is so furnished is pledged to be 
 conferred. There needs, therefore, be no want, and no casting 
 
144 COLOSSIANS II. 10. 
 
 about for any other source of supply. Believers have actual 
 and present completeness of provided blessing, and there is 
 the guaranteed completeness of prospective gifts. "Ye are 
 complete in Him," for the scriptural view of Christ's person 
 meets the deepest necessities of our spiritual nature. " What 
 does it mean ? " asks Chrysostom, " that you have nothing 
 less than Him " — tI ovv iartv ; otl ovSh eXarrou e^ere avrov. 
 The apostle adds another and striking clause — 
 
 "O9 ianv rj Kecf^aXr/ Tracr^? '^PX'}? '^'^^ e^ovcria<i — " Who is 
 the head of all principality and power." On the authority of 
 B, D, E, F, G, Lachmann reads 0, but 09 is retained on the 
 authority of A, C, J, K, and that of the Greek Fathers. Lach- 
 mann's choice is vindicated by Steiger and Bohmer, though it 
 appears to have sprung from a grammatical fondness for 
 7r\T]pco/j,a as the principal preceding noun. If this reading be 
 adopted, the foregoing clause must be placed in a parenthesis. 
 " In Him, and that bodily, dwells all tlie Godhead's fulness 
 . . . which is the Head of all principalities and powers." 
 The authorities are nearly balanced, but the reading 09 is most 
 in analogy with the apostle's style of thought and expression. 
 Besides, with the reading o, the words eV o5 in verse 11 must 
 refer also to irX-^pcofjia, and no tolerable sense could be extracted 
 from such a connection. The terms apxv and i^ovcria are 
 abstract ones, having reference to celestial dignities, and to 
 such as were unfallen. The relative, as in i. 18, may be 
 rendered — " as being He who is ; " or, perhaps, " inasmuch as 
 He is." Jelf, § 836, 3. The Head of principalities and 
 powers. Eph. i. 21. There is no exception; the entire 
 hierarchy, even its mightiest and noblest chieftains and 
 dignities, own submission to Christ, and form a portion of His 
 spiritual dominions, i. 16. There was some special reason 
 why he intimates Christ's headship not generally over the 
 church or the universe, but specially over the angelic hosts. 
 If we can rely on accounts of the teaching ascribed to Simon 
 Magus, we might find in them an illustration of the apostle's 
 statement. Epiphanius relates, that Simon Magus invented 
 names of principalities and powers, and insisted that the 
 learning of such names was essential to salvation. Similar 
 bizarrerie is ascribed to Cerinthus. See Whitby, in loc. 
 Whatever be its source, there is no doubt that the apostle 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 11. 145 
 
 alludes to some prevalent error — which interposed angels, in 
 some sense, as mediators — and so far derogated from the 
 personal glory and saving merit of Christ. That theosophy 
 which was invading them seems to have dealt largely 
 in idle and delusive speculation on the rank and office of 
 angels — assigning to them provinces of operation which belong 
 to the Son of God — looking to them as guardians or saviours, 
 and forgetting that they are but His servants, executing His 
 commission and doing Him homage. Why rely upon the 
 courtiers, when access may be had at once to the King ? 
 why be taken up with our fellow-servants, who are only 
 stewards of limited resources, when the Master has not only 
 the fulness of Divinity, but has it in a human shape — has tlie 
 heart of a brother to love you, and the arm of a God to 
 protect and bless you ? Alas ! that saints so called have 
 the usurped place of principalities and powers in the Cliurch 
 of Eome. 
 
 If they were complete in Christ, they had no need to go 
 beyond Christ, and to resort to any ceremonies imposed upon 
 them by the Judaizers. They had everything which it was 
 alleged they wanted, and everything already in Christ. The 
 heretical preceptors had enjoined upon them the rite of cir- 
 cumcision, but the apostle shows that it would be really a 
 superfluous ceremony, since they had already experienced a 
 nobler circumcision than that of the knife — for it was executed 
 by no material hand. They were, in short, the " true circum- 
 cision " — for the apostle proceeds — 
 
 (Ver. 11.) ''Ev cS Kal ire pier /jbrjdrjre Treptrofxfj a^etpo7rot»7Tft> 
 — " In whom, too, ye were circumcised with a circumcision 
 not made with hands." There is no need to suppose, with 
 Olshausen, that in these words there is expressed an ideal 
 unity of all His people in Christ in His death and resurrec- 
 tion. Though such an idea may be found in other parts of 
 Scripture, it cannot be found here — save in the exercise of a 
 refined ingenuity, For, first, the formula ev tp has its usual 
 significance — union with Him — union created by the Spirit, 
 and effected by faith ; and, secondly, the blessing described 
 in the verse had been already enjoyed, for they were and had 
 been believers in Him in whom they are complete. Through 
 their living union with Christ, they had enjoyed the privilege. 
 
146 COLOSSIANS IL 11. 
 
 and were enjoying the results of a spiritual circumcision. 
 Why then should they suffer the incision of a sharp flint or 
 a glittering knife — in itself, at best, but a sign — when they 
 had already experienced the blessing of a circumcision that 
 drew no blood, and gave no pain — a circumcision " not made 
 with hands " ? The meaning of the adjective d'^eipo7roL7]TO'i 
 is very apparent. Mark xiv, 58, and 2 Cor. v. 1. The cir- 
 cumcision made without hands is plainly opposed to that 
 which is made with hands — ^€cpo7roLr]To<i. [Eph. il 11.] 
 ) This idea of a spiritual circumcision was no novel one, for it 
 occurs in the Old Testament in different forms.'^ When 
 Israel was yet in the wilderness, the Divine command was 
 given — " Circumcise the foreskin of your heart," and at the 
 same period the Divine promise was made — " And the Lord 
 thy God will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy 
 seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with 
 all thy soul, that thou mayest live." The prophet Jeremiah 
 repeats the injunction — " Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, 
 and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah 
 and inhabitants of Jerusalem." He also describes a part of 
 the population thus — " Behold, their ear is uncircumcised ; " 
 nay, he declares that the whole house of Israel are " uncir- 
 cumcised in the heart." Ezekiel speaks of men " uncircumcised 
 in heart and uncircumcised in flesh." Stephen, in his address, 
 used this ancient phraseology, and calls his audience " uncir- 
 cumcised in hearts and ears." ^ The Apostle Paul in other 
 places has similar ideas and language.^ Schoettgen lias 
 adduced like quotations from the Eabbis, and Philo, as is his 
 wont, spiritualizes the ordinance * — as rjBovcov eKTO/xijv ; iraOaiv 
 iravToav ^KTOfirjv. So that the kind of circumcision referred 
 to was easily understood, and could not be misinterpreted. 
 It was besides an invaluable blessing, for it lay — 
 
 'Ey rfi aiTCKhvaeL ^ rov cr(o/xaTo<i t^? (xapKO'i — " In the 
 putting off of the body of the flesh." The noun aireKhva-fi 
 occurs only here — the verb is found in the 15th verse. The 
 MSS., A, B, C, D^, E\ F, G, etc., omit the words Ta>v d/jLapricov, 
 found in the Eeceived Text. Elesh is corrupted humanity, 
 
 1 Deut. X. 16, XXX. 6 ; Jer. iv. 4, vi. 10, ix. 26 ; Ezek. xliv. 7. 
 
 « Acts vii. 51. * Rom. ii. 29. 
 
 * De Migrat, Abr. Oper. vol. iii. p. 454. '' WiK'iCirti erroueously in Tischendorf. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 11. 147 
 
 Eom. vii. 23; Gal. v. 16. [Eph. ii. 3.] We cannot take 
 (Twfia in any other than its usual signification, though Calvin, 
 Grotius, Zanchius, Crocius, Bahr, and Steiger, take it in the 
 sense of totality or mass. See under verse 9. But the 
 spirit of this exegesis is plainly implied. It is in harmony 
 with the idea of circumcision, that the peculiar phrase — " body 
 of the flesh," is used ; and the contrast seems to be this, that 
 in the manual circumcision only a portion of one member of 
 the material body was cut off, but in the spiritual circumcision, 
 the whole flesh which is the seat and habitation of sin is cast 
 away and laid aside. The entire slough which encircles the 
 spirit and enslaves it is rolled off, newness of life is felt, and 
 the believer walks no longer after the flesh, is no longer 
 carnal, or does its deeds. As Meyer well says, " He who is so 
 circumcised is no more eV Ty capKi, as heretofore, when 
 concupiscence ivrjpyecTO iv toU fieXeaiv ; he is no longer 
 adpKLvo<i, ire'jrpafiei/o'i vtto rrjv d/juapriav, and walks no longer 
 Kara adpica, but in newness of spirit." It is plain that the 
 spiritual circumcision is not different from regeneration, or the 
 putting off the old man and putting on the new man. The 
 apostle adds a further explanation of this marvellous change, 
 when he says — 
 
 ^Ev rfj TrepiTo/xfj tov Xptcrrov — " In the circumcision of 
 Christ." Some have regarded the genitive as that of agent, 
 as if the apostle meant — the circumcision which Christ 
 performs. Such is the virtual view of Theophylact, when 
 he says of Christ — o\ov dvdpwirov TrepLTe/jLveL. Schoettgen, 
 again, regards the phrase as an allusion to the personal 
 circumcision of Jesus, as if that sufficed for all His people. 
 Neither view is in harmony with the language and context. 
 The circumcision of Christ is that circumcision which belongs 
 to Him, in contradistinction to that which belonged to Moses 
 or to the law. The spiritual circumcision is a blessing which 
 specially belongs to Christ — is of His providing, and is to be 
 enjoyed only in fellowship with Him. That of Moses was 
 made with hands, and was a seal of the Abrahamic or 
 national covenant — that of Christ is no chirurgical process, 
 but is spiritual and effectual in its nature. The mark in the 
 foreskin was the token of being a Jew, but the off-thrown 
 body of the flesh was the index of one's being a Christian. 
 
 N 
 
148 COLOSSIANS II. 12. 
 
 Though the scar of circumcision might attest a nationality, it 
 was no certificate of personal character — " all are not Israel 
 who are of Israel ;" but, wherever " the flesh " was parted 
 with, there was the guarantee of individual purity and 
 progress. The charter of Canaan was limited to the manual 
 circumcision, but the " true circumcision " are thereby infefted 
 in a heavenly inheritance. The Hebrew statute was for the 
 man-child eight days old, but the Christian privilege has no 
 distinction of age, or sex, or nation ; for it belongs to every 
 one in Christ. And it was, and is, a chief blessing — the 
 death of sinful principle and the infusion of a higher life — the 
 possession of a new nature, which has Christ for its source, 
 ay, and Christ for its pattern. Thus the flesh is thrown off, 
 and the spirit assumes the predominance, with its quickened 
 susceptibilities, its healthful activities, and its intense aspira- 
 tions — thinking, feeling, and acting, in harmony with its sphere 
 and destiny. And if such a collection of spiritual blessings 
 has been received, why be subjected to a legal ceremony 
 which could be at best but a faint type of them ? Surely if 
 they had received the thing signified, they need not now 
 degrade themselves by submitting to a sign, which was in 
 itself only a painful and bloody symbol of the Hebrew nation- 
 ality and covenant. For a new sign has been appointed — 
 
 (Ver. 12.) ^vvTa(f)6VTe<i avTO) iv rat iSairTia/jbarL — "Having 
 been buried with Him in baptism." The state described in 
 this past participle precedes or is coincident with the action 
 of the verb TrepieTfi-qdijre. " Having been buried, they were 
 circumcised." The burial and the circumcision only differ in 
 form and circumstance. The circumcision was seen to be 
 effected when the burial was completed. Burial implies a 
 previous death ; and what is that death, but the off- casting of 
 the body of the flesh ? The reality of death is evinced by 
 burial, for this body of sin which once lived with us is slain 
 and sepulchred. This point of burial they had reached — when 
 they were baptized — for then they personally professed a faith 
 which implied the death of sin within them. Why then does 
 the apostle use the figure of a burial ? for the burial is as 
 really without hands as is the circumcision — since no knife 
 was employed at the one, and no bier or shroud was deposited 
 in the other. The apostle employs the figure, first, to show 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 12. 149 
 
 the reality of the death which the old man had undergone ; 
 and, secondly, to connect the process by harmony of symbol 
 or parallel with the resurrection of Christ, which was at once 
 a sign and pledge of the resuscitation. Those two ideas, the 
 excision of the body of the flesh, which is equivalent to its 
 death, and the raising of Christ as the typal life and the Life- 
 giver, seem to have suggested to the apostle the notion of an 
 intervening process — a burial with Christ. AVhen you were 
 baptized, you were so placed as if you had been laid with 
 Christ in His tomb — " all old things passed away ;" you were 
 in respect to the old man what the dead Clirist was in respect 
 to His first physical life — dead to it and done with it. Only, 
 He died for sin, and you die to it ; He died for it in His body, 
 while you die to it in your souls. But this burial is not a final 
 state, it is simply one of transition — " In whom also ye are 
 raised by faith." 
 
 The reference is plainly to the ordinance of baptism, and 
 to its spiritual meaning. We scarcely suppose that there is 
 any reference to the mode of it ; for whatever may be other- 
 wise said in favour of immersion, it is plain that here the 
 burial is wholly ideal — not a scenic and visible descent into 
 an earthy or a watery tomb, but of such a nature entirely as 
 the circumcision with which it is identified, and the resurrec- 
 tion which invariably succeeds it. Thus, in the apostolic 
 conception, men may be buried in baptism without being 
 suhmerged in water, in the same way as they may be circum- 
 cised without the spilling of blood. The entire statement is 
 spiritual in its nature — the death, the burial, and the resurrec- 
 tion ; the circumcision, and the off-putting of the body of the 
 flesh. The apostle looks on circumcision and baptism as being 
 closely connected — the spiritual blessing symbolized by both 
 ])eing of a similar nature ; though, probably, it would be 
 straining this connection to allege it as a proof that baptisjn 
 has been in all points ordained for the church in room of 
 circumcision. 
 
 It is not within our province to enter on the question 
 whether apostolical baptism was by immersion, sprinkling, or 
 affusion. What we say is, — granting that immersion had been 
 the early and authorized form of baptism, we are not prepared 
 to admit any allusion to that form in the clause before us. 
 
150 COLOSSIANS II. 12. 
 
 It does not advance the opposite argument to say, that the 
 immersion of a believer resembles a burial. This has been a 
 favourite idea from very early times. And not only so, but 
 trine immersion was often practised — one reason assigned 
 being a reference to the Trinity, but another argument being 
 that it was a symbolic allusion to the three days — rrjv 
 rpLrjjjiepov — of Christ's abode in the tomb.^ Still, to many 
 minds there is manifest incongruity in the symbol. Where, 
 in Scripture, is water the symbol of the world of death, or 
 of the grave? It is always the means of washing — the 
 instrument of purification. At what point of baptism is death 
 symbolized — for it precedes burial ? Means of imitating the 
 death and resurrection of Jesus could be easily devised — for 
 they were physical facts that could with no difficulty be 
 pictured out. But a believer's death and resurrection with 
 Christ are spiritual events ; and the same process cannot 
 surely be the emblem of both classes of truths — cannot be at 
 the same time the figure of a fact, and the figure of a figure. 
 Death, burial, and resurrection, are truths not portrayed by 
 gesture and position in baptism, but only recognized in it — 
 not acted out, or represented in visible form, but only 
 experienced and professed. Believers are buried in baptism, 
 but even in immersion they do not go through a process 
 having any resemblance to the burial and resurrection of 
 Christ. The Colossians did not personate death and burial in 
 baptism any more than they imitated the circumcision of 
 Moses. In a similar sense, though without reference to any 
 sacramental institute, believers are crucified with Christ, 
 though no nail pierce their hands ; they are enthroned with 
 Him, while they wear no symbol of royalty ; and they have 
 an unction from the Holy One, but no material oil is poured 
 upon their heads. 
 
 'JEy c5 Ka\ auvT]yepdi]T€ — " In whom too ye were raised 
 together." Beza, and after him Calixtus, Suicer, Steiger, 
 Bohmer, De Wette, and Baumgarten-Crusius, refer the relative 
 to ^airria-fiart,. But the language would, in such a case, be 
 inapt, as " out of baptism " would appear to be the natural 
 
 ^ Gregor. Nyss. Opera, vol. iii. p. 372. Cyril. Hieros. Catech. ii. 4. Joannes 
 Damas. Expositio fidei Ortho. 10. The works of Vossius, Gale, Wall, Carson, 
 Wilson, Beecher, and Halley, may also be referred to. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 12. 151 
 
 expression. There appears to be no formal resemblance 
 between baptism and burial in the apostle's mind, and so he 
 says not i^ ov, but simply iv u> — " in whom," that is, in Christ. 
 Justinian and Davenant, Meyer and Huther, thus refer the 
 pronoun — " With Him " they are buried — " in Him " they rise 
 again ; for union with Him is the one efficacious principle. 
 The verb is explained and its meaning defended under Eph. 
 ii. 6. It is not an ideal or potential spiritual resurrection 
 secured for them, but one now and actually enjoyed by 
 believers. The vivification of the soul involves in it, as a 
 necessary result, the resurrection of the body — a result essential 
 to the development of the new life in its highest sphere ; but 
 it is wrong in Theophylact to give this aorist verb a future 
 meaning, or rather to mix up the two significations. While 
 union with Christ is the bond of security, the instrumental 
 cause is next described — 
 
 Aia Trj<i iri<new<i — " By the faith." A similar use of iv and 
 hid is found in Eph. i. 7, each preposition retaining its dis- 
 tinctive signification. It is faith which achieves this spiritual 
 resurrection — belief in the Divine testimony is the vehicle 
 which the Divine resurrectionary power employs. The apostle, 
 Eph. i. 19, 20, prays that the Ephesians might know "what 
 is the exceeding greatness of God's power to us-ward v^ko 
 helieve" and the kind of power referred to is, as here, tliat 
 which raised Christ from the dead, and which also quickens 
 and raises up believers who had been "dead in trespasses 
 and sins." Thus it is faith — 
 
 Tr]<i ip€pjeLa<; tov &eov rod i'yelpavTo<; avrov e/c veKpwv 
 — " Of the operation of God who raised Him from the dead." 
 Many interpreters take the genitive as that of agency — " faith 
 inwrought by God." Such is the view of Flacius, Calixtus, the 
 older interpreters, Luther, Melancthon, as also of Storr, Flatt, 
 Bengel, Bahr, Bohmer, De Wette, Huther, Olshausen, and 
 Conybeare. Luther renders — den Gott loirket; and Melancthon 
 draws the lesson — non igitur potest suis virihus ratio fidem in 
 nobis efficere. Whatever truth may be in this doctrine, and 
 whatever may be the proof of it in other parts of Scripture, 
 it is not the doctrine which the apostle here delivers. For 
 according to usage in such a case, the genitive is that of object. 
 So with regard to ©eoO, Mark xi. 22 : 'OvofxaTo^, Acts lii. 16 ; 
 
152 COLOSSIANS II. 12. 
 
 'Irjaov X., etc., Eom. iii. 22 ; Gal. ii. 16, 20, iii. 22 ; Eph. iii. 
 12 ; Phil. iii. 9 ; Jas. ii. 1 ; Eev. ii. 13 : EvayjeXiov, Pliil. i. 
 27 : 'AXrjdela'i, 2 Thess. ii. 13. The genitive thus denotes 
 the object of faith, or the thing believed. Such is the view 
 of the mass of interpreters, of the Greek Fathers, of Calvin 
 and Beza, of Grotius and Erasmus, of Meyer, Bloomfield, etc. 
 The object of this vivifying faith is the Divine power which 
 raised up Christ from the dead. The construction which the 
 apostle employs in Eph. i. 19 — et? ri/xa.<; tou? 'TriarevovTWi 
 Kara rr)v ivipyetav K-r-a, is no argument against this view, 
 for, as we have there said, Kara does not point out the source 
 of faith, but turns attention to the model after which the 
 Divine power operates in quickening the spiritually dead. A 
 description of the Divine power, as showing itself in the 
 resurrection of Christ, more naturally allies itself with the 
 idea of spiritual resuscitation, which it resembles, than with 
 that of the production of faith. 
 
 The sinner is raised out of death. United to Christ by the 
 Spirit, and exercising a belief in God, he is justified and 
 obtains legal life — exemption from the penalty of law ; and he 
 is also sanctified, or is endowed with spiritual life — comes to 
 the conscious enjoyment of God's favour, and the possession 
 of His image. This faith has special reference to the Divine 
 power in one of its manifestations, the raising of Jesus Christ 
 from the dead. Power is evinced most strikingly in a resur- 
 rection — the restoration of a dead body to life is the work of 
 Omnipotence. Love may pity, but power restores — a power 
 which the apostle calls exceeding great and mighty. Eph. i. 
 19. Faith lays hold on this phasis of omnipotence, and on 
 this act of its achievement, because it feels that spiritual 
 quickening is at once the result which springs from the one 
 and is pledged by the other. The nature of this power and 
 its relation to believers have been fully explained under a 
 similar passage — Eph. i. 20. The resurrection of Christ 
 proves the acceptance of his atonement on the part of the 
 Father, " who raised His Son from the dead, and gave Him 
 glory that our faith and hope might be in God." It therefore 
 showed that the way of salvation was open, that the majesty 
 of the law had been vindicated, and that the blessings of 
 redemption might therefore be conferred in all their fulness 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 13. 153 
 
 and without restraint. Blood had been shed, and might now 
 be sprinkled ; and the Saviour being glorified, the Spirit 
 might now descend. If I believe in that power which raised 
 Jesus Christ from the dead, I believe in a power which might 
 righteously have crushed me, but is now mercifully wielded 
 to save me ; which has set its seal on the work of Christ, 
 and will now distribute and apply its rich results ; and which, 
 having exalted the Redeemer, has placed itself under a solemn 
 stipulation to reward Him with a numerous seed, so that He 
 shall " see of the travail of His soul and shall be satisfied." 
 Thus, this power working out the purposes of Divine Love 
 and the devices of Infinite Wisdom, stands out so employed as 
 the object of saving faith. 
 
 But the apostle now appeals to the Colossian believers. 
 
 (Ver. 13.) Kal vfj,d<i v€Kpov<i ovTa<i iv rot? irapaTrrcofiaaLV 
 KoX T7} aKpo^vcnla ri]<i aapKO'? vjxoiv, (rvve^cooTTOtrjaev vfid<i 
 (Tvv avTcp — " And you, being dead in trespasses and the uncir- 
 cumcision of your flesh, you He quickened with Him." Any 
 differences of reading are too trivial to be noted save that 
 which repeats vp,d<i on the authority of A, C, J, K. The 
 apostle still continues the general thought without any formal 
 and specific connection. The connection proposed by Steiger, 
 namely, to join the first clause to the participle iy€ipavTo<i, is 
 utterly untenable. It would create tautology, and the repeti- 
 tion of vfid^ does not render it necessary. Bernhardy, p. 275. 
 We far prefer connecting veKpov<i with the verb avvei^wo- 
 iroiTjcrev. Though we admire the acuteness and general 
 soundness of Meyer, yet we wonder how here, and in Eph. 
 ii. 1, he comes to the conclusion that v€Kp6<i refers to physical 
 death. For the dead condition was one of reality, though it 
 be past. It was not a liability to death ; they were not, as 
 he phrases it — so gut ivie todt — certo morituri, they were mortui. 
 Besides, the liability to physical death is not removed by faith 
 in Christ. And the quickening and upraising are already 
 experienced, they are not blessings to be enjoyed uncounted 
 years afterwards. The apostle does not surely say — that 
 believers were soon and certainly to die, and that when the 
 Saviour came again, they should all be summoned out of their 
 graves to the possession of eternal life. But he appeals to 
 present enjoyments already conferred — to a death which had 
 
154 C0L03SIANS II. 13 
 
 bound them, and a life which the Divine energy had infused 
 into them. Meyer argues for the ideal possession of life now, 
 and its full realization at the second coming. But if such 
 ideal possession leave the dreadful reality untouched, it brings 
 with it no good. If, instead of ideal possession, he had said 
 partial possession, he would have come nearer the truth. For 
 the life now enjoyed is, alas, too often faint and languid in its 
 pulsations, and the fulness of its strength is a future bestow- 
 ment. We therefore take the tenses in their simple signifi- 
 cance, and not in any proleptic sense, as even Chrysostom 
 takes them, and we regard the preposition ev before irapair- 
 Tcofiaa-iv, as denoting that condition in which spiritual death 
 exists. When Meyer insists that the life to which believers 
 are raised is eternal life, and that nothing less can be meant 
 by the apostle, he forgets that present spiritual life precedes 
 — that glory is only the consummation of grace, and that 
 eternal life is but the crown and perfect development of emo- 
 tions already felt, occupations already begun, and pleasures 
 already experienced. The life implanted now is brought to 
 maturity in a sphere where all is congenial to its tastes and 
 instincts, its susceptibilities and powers. The Colossians had 
 been really and spiritually dead, they were now as really and 
 spiritually alive. They had been not only exposed to death on 
 account of sin, but had been dead in sin. Now they are not 
 simply gifted with the charter of a life yet to be reached, but 
 they are actually living in faith and holiness. The nature of 
 this death, and its connection with sin, along with the mean- 
 ing of 7rapa7rT(o/ia<Tt,v, will be found explained in the parallel 
 place, Eph. ii. 1, etc. There is no ground for Olshausen's 
 notion, that the prior clause has a general meaning, and that 
 this verse begins a practical application ; for the same appeal 
 runs throughout, only it may be more pointed and intense in 
 the verse before us. 
 
 Kal TTj aKpo^varia t?)9 aapKo<i vfiwv — " And in the uncir- 
 cumcision of your flesh." The apostle here alludes to their 
 Gentile extraction. They wanted in their flesh the seal of the 
 Abrahamic covenant. We incline to take the words in their 
 literal sense. Uncircumcision had, indeed, sometimes a spiritual 
 meaning. Deut. x. 1 6 ; Jer. iv. 4. Theodoret adopts such a 
 sense here — a/c/joyS. r. aapKo<i rrjv nrovrjpiav iKoXeaev ; so also 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 13. 155 
 
 Beza, Grotiiis, Biihr, Steiger. But such an interpretation 
 ratlier takes np the result than gives the meaning. Thus, 
 the Gentiles were uncircumcised, and in consequence "vvere 
 " aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from 
 the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God." 
 Their degraded, miserable, idolatrous, and dead state was the 
 effect of their uncircumcision. Calvin says — scd tamen Paulus 
 hie loqueretur de contumacia cordis humani adversus Beum, et 
 natura pravis affedionihus inqiiinata. But there is no 
 occasion to take o-dp^ in other than its physical meaning. 
 Beza takes the genitive as one of apposition — flesh, which is 
 uncircumcision, a thing abominable to God ; while others 
 render it — praeputiiim nempe vitiositas. That " uncircum- 
 cision " and " flesh " are to be taken in their ordinary physical 
 sense, is also apparent from the change of person in the last 
 clause. Did the term simply signify natural corruption, then 
 the apostle himself was once in such a state. But he does 
 not feel or say so. On the contrary, he makes the distinction 
 you Gentiles were dead in the uncircumcision of your flesh — 
 but ive, Jew and Gentile alike, are forgiven our tre^asses. 
 See under next clause. Uncircumcision of the flesh was the 
 physical mark of a heathen state, and that heathen state was 
 in consequence of this want, and in itself, one of degradation, 
 impurity and death. The flesh which had not the seal was 
 truly corrupted and sinful. It is pressing the clause too 
 much to bring out of it a proof of original sin, as is done by 
 Zanchius and Bengel ; the latter calls it — exquisita appellatio 
 peecati originalis. The false teachers insisted strenuously on 
 the necessity of circumcision — a theory very common in those 
 times, for believing Jews were zealous of the law.^ But the 
 apostle naturally says — True, ye were uncircumcised ; your 
 flesh had not been wounded so as to bear the sign of the 
 Divine covenant, but ye have been circumcised, not with a 
 manual operation, but with the circumcision of Christ. The 
 apostle admits that they were uncircumcised, for they did not 
 belong to Israel, but he has already contended that such a 
 
 ■^ In a pamphlet named IsraeVs Ordinances, the late Charlotte Elizabeth, 
 addressing a Jewish convert, Bishop Alexander of Jerusalem, rebukes him for 
 not circumcising his sons — "Call you what we will, my Lord, you are a Jew — 
 a circumcised Jew. My dear Lord, bear with me, while I respectfully and 
 affectionately put once more the (^uery — why are not your sons also Jews ? " 
 
156 COLOSSIANS II. 13. 
 
 circumcision as that which of old disabled the Shechemites 
 from self-defence, and kept the Israelites after they crossed 
 the Jordan from commencing the conquest, did not become 
 them, and was in their case wholly superfluous, for they had 
 been spiritually initiated, and had put off the body of flesh. 
 They had been dead in sins — this was their real moral state ; 
 dead too in the uncircumcision of their flesh, and this was 
 their external and heathen condition. Looking at them as 
 men, they were dead in sins — looking at them as heathen 
 men, they were dead also in the uncircumcision of their flesh. 
 Xvue^oooTrolrjaev v/jlo.'; avv avrat — " You He brought to life 
 together with Him." The nominative is still God — not 
 Christ, as Heinrichs would have it. The work of quickening 
 is God's prerogative. This process of life-giving is not simply 
 redemption, as De Wette gives it, but rather one special aspect 
 or blessing of it. It is used with perfect propriety, for life 
 is the blessing appropriate to the dead. Some wonder why 
 (7vvr)yep6r]Te should have occurred before it, since the idea of 
 resurrection so naturally follows that of life-giving. But in 
 both places the verbs are in harmony with the flgure ; the 
 apostle, in verse 1 2, speaks of burial, and therefore he employs 
 the term resurrection, while here he speaks simply of death, 
 and so he places life in correspondence and contrast with it. 
 But not only so, there is also a difference of allusion and 
 meaning. The burial there is a voluntary renunciation of sin, 
 and off-casting of its body — the completing point of the 
 process of death to sin ; but here it is a death in sin which 
 the apostle describes, and out of which the Colossians had 
 been raised by the power of God, and through their union 
 with Christ. The former is a series of acts in which the 
 believer in the enjoyment of vivifying energy dies unto sin — 
 and puts off the flesh. Nay, the more he lives, the more he 
 dies ; and in proportion to the growth and development of life 
 are the extent and progress of death. It is a special view of 
 the work of sanctification, in which, according to the measure 
 of life to God, there is death to sin. But the death described 
 in this verse is very different. It is a death which pre-exists 
 life, and does not co-exist with it — death in sin — in conse- 
 quence of its fatal reign and power. The one is dying — a 
 conscious state ; the other is death — a condition of insensi- 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 13. 157 
 
 bility and danger. In the one, the decay of love to sin may 
 be registered ; in the other, the mastery of sin is spiritual 
 paralysis and death. The nature of this life, and its con- 
 nection with Christ, are illustrated under Eph. ii. 5. 
 
 Xapca-dfievo'i r]p,lv iravra ra irapairrdo^aTa — " Having 
 forgiven us all our trespasses." The reading rjpA,v is on largely 
 preponderant authority preferred to the vfiiv of the Keceived 
 Text. It is easy to see how viitv should have been inserted, 
 as u/ia? precedes. Nor is it difficult to apprehend why the 
 apostle should say " us " instead of " you." He speaks in one 
 clause of a distinctive feature of their past spiritual state — 
 " dead in the uncircumcision of your flesh." That was 
 peculiar to them, but death in sin was common both to him 
 and to them, and they were now both partakers of the " common 
 salvation." They both had enjoyed forgiveness, and so he 
 says — " having forgiven us our trespasses." The aorist par- 
 ticiple points to forgiveness as something past, and yet preceding 
 the act of life-giving. Having forgiven your trespasses. He 
 has quickened you. The pardoning and life-giving are scarcely 
 synonymous, as some would argue. But this dead state is 
 a guilty state, for it is a sinful state, and all sin brings down 
 upon ItseK the Divine displeasure and penalty. Having 
 forgiven them these trepasses, which were the source and 
 means of death, He brings them out of it. To have given 
 them spiritual life, and yet kept them under the penalty of 
 sin, which is legal death, would have been a process in which 
 one gift neutralized its fellow. The restoration to life is thus 
 the token and result of a prior forgiveness. The welcome to 
 the prodigal son was a proof that he had been pardoned. 
 The death was one in trespasses ; and those very trepasses, 
 yea " all " of them, are blotted out. The reader is requested 
 to turn to what is said under chap. i. 14, and under Eph. 
 i. 7. The life is not, as Bohmer imagines, subsequent to this 
 forgiveness, because the pardon is God's special act, whereas 
 the life originates in man's co-operation and response. This 
 doctrine is neither stated nor implied. Nor is it true. For 
 all life is God's immediate gift, from its lowest to its highest 
 forms. No human chemistry can produce it beneath us — no 
 suasion nor art can create it within us. It is a drop out of 
 the Fountain of Life. [Eph. i. 20.] The apostle proceeds to 
 
158 COLOSSIANS II. 14. 
 
 describe the process through which sin was forgiven — or that 
 work which God had done, the result of which had been to 
 them life and forgiveness. 
 
 ( Ver. 1 4.) 'E^aXei^^a^ to Kad' rj/xwv '^eipoypa^ov — " Having 
 blotted out the handwriting against us." This verse is so curt 
 and compact, that its analysis is not without difficulty. It is 
 to be borne in mind that " God " is still the subject, and the 
 alteration for which Heinrichs contends cannot for a moment 
 be admitted. It will not do to say, with Trollope, that " the 
 apostle, in the ardour of his mind, has not attended to the 
 syntax." What in other places is ascribed to Christ, may be 
 here without any impropriety ascribed to God ; for Christ's 
 suffering and death were of His sanction, and with His co- 
 operation. What Christ did, God did by Him. Nor is there 
 any argument here, as Bahr insirmates, against the satisfactio 
 vicaria. For the satisfaction was offered by Christ, and God, 
 having accepted it, did the act described in the participle 
 ef aXei-^/ra?. This verb ^ signifies to smear, or plaster over, and 
 then it is used to denote the act by which a law or deed of 
 obligation is cancelled. It is found with another signification, 
 Eev. vii. 17, xxi. 4. It occurs also in Eev. iii. 5 ; but it is 
 used in a sense not very different from what it bears in this 
 verse in Acts iii. 19; and in Sept. Ps. 1. 1, 9, cviii. 13; 
 Isa. xliii. 25. In these places it describes the forgiveness 
 of sin, where sin as a debt is supposed to be wiped out. The 
 word occurs in Demosthenes ^ — a-KoireiaOe el 'xpr) tovtov 
 [yoiJLov] e^aXely^ai. Its technical signification may be gathered 
 from the fact that it stands opposed to avaypdifxo, and some- 
 times to iyypdcjja. Liddell and Scott, sub voce. The word, 
 then, means here, to expunge. That to which the process of 
 obliteration is applied is appropriately termed a handwriting 
 — X^tpoypacpov, a note of hand, a written bond. The term 
 occurs only here in the New Testament, but is found in Tobit 
 V. 3, ix. 5 ; Josephus xvii. 14, 2 ; Polybius, Exccrpta Legal. 
 98. Schoettgen and Vitringa take it as corresponding to the 
 Hebrew nin "iDtr, and as denoting tabula' debiti. But as it 
 
 ^ From the root Xiv that ruus through so many of the Indo-Germanic tongues. 
 — Benfey, Wurzel-Lex. ii. 122. 
 
 * Oratores Altici, vol. vi. p. 429, ed. Dobson ; also vol. vii. p. 378, viii. p. 
 15, etc. Also Lysias, do. vol. ii. p. 182, and p. 588. ^Atttifui is more frequently 
 used with x^'P'y- or auyypa^ri. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 14. 159 
 
 signifies a claim of unpaid debt, it is therefore also one of 
 punishment, for it was Ka& rj^Siv — " against us." 
 
 Both the connection and meaning of roh SojfiaaLv have 
 been variously taken. That it is to be joined with '^eipo'ypa^ov 
 we have no manner of doubt. 
 
 1. Some, such as Erasmus, Storr, Flatt, Conybeare, and 
 Olshausen, divide the verse thus — to KaB* rjfjbwv %eipo7. toU 
 Boyfiaacv, o rjv virevavTiov rj/juv — " The handwriting, which, 
 by its ordinances, was against us." Olshausen admits that, 
 with such a construction, the position of the dative is not 
 quite natural, and he quotes, along with Winer, Acts i. 3, 
 with which this verse has little analogy. The admittedly 
 natural reference of the dative is to ')(eip6<ypa<l>ov. 
 
 2. Others attach SojfjLacrtv to the participle e^a\ei^a<i, and 
 understand it as describing the means by which the blotting 
 has been effected. This is the view of the Greek expositors, 
 of Grotius, Estius, Bengel, Fritzsche,^ and Bohmer. The 
 explanation of Soy/xaaiv, by Theodoret, is 77 evajy€XiKr} 
 BtSaaKoXia ; and by Theophylact — rovriart jy irlareL. To 
 this we answer as we have done to the similar exegesis of 
 Eph. ii. 15, that such a sense given to Bojfia is wholly unbiblical 
 — that the declaration of Scripture is, that the handwriting 
 against man, which we here understand to be the Mosaic law, 
 is abrogated, not by any opposing or modifying enactments, 
 but by the death of Christ. Besides, and more convincingly 
 still, we learn from verse 2 that these Boy/xara are no longer 
 law, for the apostle says — rt 8o<y/jLaTi^ea6e ; why do ye suffer 
 such Soyfiara to be published or imposed ? That is — these 
 ordinances are abolished, and it is now the height of folly for 
 others to re-enact them, or for you to observe them. The 
 cognate verb of the 20th verse is used with special reference 
 to the noun of this verse. Whatever these ordinances are, 
 they belong to an obsolete economy, and are no longer of any 
 obligation, for they were on the handwriting which has been 
 wiped out. 
 
 3. Steiger joins Bojfiaaiv with the participle in this verse. 
 He understands the phrase as defining one special phase of 
 the handwriting — " the handwriting in respect of its ordi- 
 nances." Having blotted out the handwriting in this aspect 
 ' Dissert, ii. p. 1()8. 
 
IGO COLOSSI ANS II. 14. 
 
 of it, viz. its enactments — plainly implying that in some other 
 aspect of it it still stands unrepealed. See on this view, also, 
 our comment on Eph. ii. 15. 
 
 4. Bahr, Huther, and De Wette understand Soy/xaaiv as 
 belonging to the whole clause, or rather as explaining how it 
 came that the handwriting was against us. It is because of 
 its ho^fiara that it is against us ; De Wette renders — durcli 
 die Satzungen. Calovius and Gieseler supply the participle 
 6v — the handwriting which is, or being in its ordinances 
 against us. 
 
 5. But keeping the words in their natural position and 
 connection with '^eipoypa^ov, there is variety of view. Calvin, 
 Beza, Vitringa, Wolf, Camerarius, Heinsius, and others, eke 
 out the construction from the parallel passage of the Epistle 
 to the Ephesians, and would supply at discretion either iv 
 or o-vp ^ — the handwriting consisting in ordinances, or the 
 handwriting along with its ordinances ; or taking the dative 
 for the genitive, the handwriting of ordinances. 
 
 6. Meyer takes the dative as that of instrument. The 
 Boyfiara, in his view, as a constituent portion of the law, are 
 that with which the handwriting is made out. We prefer 
 calling the simple dative that of form, that distinctive and 
 well-known form which the handwriting assumed. In this 
 way, the dative is governed by the verbal portion of the noun, 
 lypacfiov — that is 'yeypa/jL/xevov. The apostle thus describes 
 the handwriting as of a special shape, it assumed the form of 
 ordinances. Had the apostle said iv Boyfiaaiv, the meaning 
 would have been — which consisted of ordinances; a meaning 
 which, however, is not materially different from that to which 
 we incline, as the form is but the index to the substance. 
 Our view also embraces inferentially that given under No. 4. 
 We do not say that the handwriting is against us because of 
 its Boy/jLara, but we say more largely, that the handwriting 
 whose form of structure was that of Boy/xaTa, is against us. 
 For the meaning of Boy/xara, see under Eph. ii. 15. This 
 handwriting was kuO' rj/mwv — " directed against us." After 
 verbs, and in phrases implying hostility in word or action, kuto, 
 denotes against, and points out the direction of the hostility. 
 And to explain more fully his meaning, the apostle adds — 
 
 ^ Bishop Middleton on Greek article, in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS II, 14. IGl 
 
 '^O rjv virevavTiov rjfuv — " Which was inimical to lis." It 
 is a needless refinement on the part of Beza, Bohmer, and 
 Eobinson, to lay stress upon the viro, as if a covert or imder- 
 hand hostility were implied, or as if it had been unnoticed, or 
 as if, as Suicer and Witsius think, it is only in some sense 
 contrary to us, because in another sense it was a symbol of 
 coming grace. None of these meanings are sustained by 
 biblical usage. Sept. Gen. xxii. 17; Lev. xxvi. 17; Ex, 
 xxiii, 27 ; Num. x, 9 ; Deut. xxxii, 27 ; Josh. v. 13 ; in which 
 places it represents one or other of the two Hebrew terms — 
 Tis, or "!>*. The word is one of those frequent compounds 
 which characterize the later Greek, and mark it as a period 
 of decay. Thus we do not, like many expositors, take KaB"" 
 rjiJLwv and virevavrlov rjixlv as synonyms, or the latter as 
 explanatory of the former, but we regard the two statements 
 as giving two distinct ideas. Bengel compares the first to a 
 status belli, and the second to ipsa pugna. It has a hostile 
 attitude — it has also in it a deep and active antagonism. 
 The question then recurs, what is the hostile handwriting ? 
 
 1, A strange exposition is found in ancient times — that 
 the handwriting is man's corporeal frame, Theodoret expressly 
 says — ruovfiat tolvvv kuI to cruifxa ■^/xcov KokeiaOai '^eip6'ypa(f)ov. 
 That is, probably, our body, as represented by Christ's 
 humanity, which was nailed to the cross. This is, to some 
 extent, the view of Steiger, given both in his Commentary on 
 1 Pet. ii. 24, and in this place. In the first comment referred 
 to, he says — " Our sin adhered to Him until it was legally 
 destroyed in His body, and His body was in this respect like 
 a handwriting over our guilt." Again, he adds, " That by the 
 appointment of His Son to be our sacrifice, God set out a 
 corporeal document of our guilt," On the verse before us he 
 writes : — " The body of Christ, as a body, is no handwriting ; 
 but it is that body, destined to be a sin-offering, which is at 
 once a document exhibiting our guilt, and representing the 
 law, in so far as the latter serves the purpose of an indictment." 
 The image, however, is not very distinct, and the sacrificial 
 body of the Lord was rather a witness of our sin, than a 
 handwriting against us. But the idea is, that something 
 different from Christ, and yet closely associated with Him, 
 was obliterated in His death. Steiger's notion is evidently 
 
162 COLOSSIANS II. 14. 
 
 based upon a literal interpretation of the last clause of the 
 verse, yet it is wholly out of harmony Ivith the entire 
 phraseology. And in what sense does a body resemble a 
 handwriting ? or how could it be hostile to us ? or how has it 
 been taken out of the way ? 
 
 2. An opinion as ancient as the preceding supposes the 
 handwriting to be the broken covenant which God originally 
 made with Adam. This opinion is found in Chrysostom, 
 Theophylact and QEcumenius, Ambrose and Anselm. Bahr, 
 and others, trace this opinion to Irenaius. Speaking of the 
 handwriting of our debt as affixed to the cross, he says — 
 quemadmodum per lignum fadi sumus dehitores Deo, per lignum 
 accipiamus nostri debiti remissionem} The use of this fanciful 
 analogy can scarce, perhaps, be taken as a formal exegesis, 
 though he regards the handwriting generally as sin. TertuUian 
 is said to hold a similar notion, but his opinion will be 
 seen to be more in unison with our own. Bahr well objects 
 to this view, that errors on this subject are not among those 
 alleged to be held by the false teachers, and that this Adaraic 
 covenant, containing principally one prohibition, could in no 
 appropriate sense have such a descriptive plural noun as 
 Sojixara attached to it. The whole paragraph refers to a 
 later transaction altogether than the covenant of Eden. 
 
 3. The reformers Melancthon, Luther, and Zuingli thought 
 the reference to be to the accusations of conscience. The 
 guilty conscience resembles a guilt-book, or an indictment.^ 
 Besides replying, with Bahr, that this exegesis does not tally 
 with the purpose of the paragraph, nor with the idea implied 
 in Soyfjiara, we may add, that the notion of the Eeformers is 
 wholly of a subjective nature, whereas the verse presents an 
 objective view of the work of God in Christ. It tells us what 
 God has done as the means of enabling Him to forgive sins, 
 but their interpretation points to a blessing which follows only 
 from the forgiveness of sin. The act of God is prior to for- 
 giveness — is external in its nature ; while pardon, with a quieted 
 conscience, is one of the results of the believing reception of 
 it. An inner conviction, also, cannot be well figured as an 
 outer and written record of many heads against us. These 
 
 ' Adversus Haeres. v. 17, 3. 
 
 ^ Unser Gewissen gleich als ein Schuldbuch ist. — Luther. 
 
COLOSSI ANS II. 14. 163 
 
 critics confound what follows from faith in the cross, with what 
 was done upon the cross that faith might secure such a result. 
 It is one thing to expunge an indictment, and quite another 
 thing to have the blessed consciousness that we actually share 
 in the indemnity. 
 
 4. Not a few understand the apostle to refer to the cere- 
 monial law, or the Mosaic law in its ritual part or aspect. 
 Such is the view of Calvin, Beza, Crocius, van Till, Gomar, 
 Vorstius, Grotius, Deyling, Schoettgen, Wolf, Biihr, and 
 others. This is, no doubt, the common view, and it is true so 
 far as it goes. The entire ritual, with its lustrations and sacri- 
 fices, had a close and constant connection with sin — " in them 
 was a remembrance of sin every year." It is true that it was 
 abrogated by the death of Christ on the cross, and it is also 
 true that one special error of the false teachers was the incul- 
 cation of ceremonial distinctions and observances, and that the 
 apostle has such mischievous teaching specially in view. But 
 it is not the less true that the apostle makes no such distinc- 
 tion between one part of the Mosaic law and another. In the 
 parallel passage in the twin epistle the apostle speaks of the 
 " enmity " produced by the ceremonial law, but that was an 
 enmity of races — between Israel who possessed it, and Non- 
 Israel which wanted it. So that, in order to their union, the 
 cause of separation and mutual dislike must be taken out of 
 the way. But here the apostle speaks not of race and race — 
 nor of Jew and Gentile as separated in blood and creed, but 
 of both as being in the same condition — having a handwriting 
 against them. He does not specify separate parties, he says 
 " us," whether Jew or Gentile. Nay, more, it is to Gentiles, 
 distinguished by the uncircumcision of their flesh, and never 
 placed under the ceremonial law, that the apostle is speaking. 
 That law spoke, indeed, of sin, but it spoke intelligibly only 
 to those who understood its symbols, and obeyed its pre- 
 scriptions. Still the ceremonial law was against the Gentiles, 
 as it kept them out of the Divine covenant. Moreover, 
 the apostle is writing of a blessing not determined in its 
 distribution by race or blood, but enjoyed by all the 
 members of the church — the forgiveness of sin. But the 
 forgiveness of sin was not secured by the simple abrogation 
 of the Levitical law, for its abrogation is only one, though 
 
 
 
164 COLOSSIANS II. 14. 
 
 an important one, of the many results of the death on 
 Calvary. 
 
 5. Therefore we are inclined, with Meyer, De Wette, Dave- 
 nant, Neander, Bohmer, Huther, and others, to understand the 
 reference of the apostle to the entire Mosaic law. That law 
 presents a condemnation of the whole human race — " that all 
 the world may become guilty before God." Davenant says — 
 " I accordingly explain the handwriting in ordinances to mean 
 the force of the moral law binding to perfect obedience, and 
 condemning for any defect in it, laden with the ceremonial 
 rites as skirts and appendages." But lest this opinion should 
 imply that the moral law was abolished, he adds — "the law as 
 to the power of binding and condemning is abrogated, and 
 its rites and ceremonies are at the same time abolished." 
 But whatever the handwriting, with its ordinances, is, it 
 undergoes only one process — it is blotted out. The distinc- 
 tion referred to, however true in result, cannot therefore be 
 sustained as an interpretation. So that we talvC ^x^eipojpacfiov, 
 not as denoting the Mosaic law absolutely and in itself, but 
 rather in its indictment. It is against us, at once in direction 
 and operation. It is the Jinding of the law which is against 
 us, as well as its dogmatic form. And this, especially, is a 
 bond, a writing which pronounces our sentence of death. This 
 is Chrysostom's view in its result, and also that of TertuUian, 
 who writes — chirographuni mortis,^ syinholuni mortis? Schoett- 
 gen, in loc, adduces a similar rabbinical expression ; when one 
 sins, God dooms him to die, but when he repents, the hand- 
 writing is abolished — i?t:3nD ansn.^ It is not, therefore, so much 
 the law with the authority of legislation, as the law with its 
 power of punishment. It is not the code prescribing duty, but 
 rather as at the same time authorizing the infliction of merited 
 penalty, which becomes the 'x^eipoypacpov. In this view, the 
 SojfjLaTa are a handwriting, or a bond which exhibits and 
 warrants our liability to punishment. But the liability to 
 penalty is expunged, the handwriting is wiped out. The law 
 in itself is not, and cannot be contrary to men, but it has 
 become so because they have failed to obey it. Its precepts 
 are not hostile to them, for obedience to them would secure 
 our welfare. The law has been given, both moral and cere- 
 
 ^ De jnuUcitia, xix. ^ De poenitentia, vi. ^ Tanchuma, fol, 44, 2. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 14, 165 
 
 monial ; the first has been universally brokeu, and therefore 
 every man is exposed to its curse; the second presents this 
 melancholy truth in its ritual bloodshedding and expiation ; 
 but what the one charged, and the other confessed,^ has been 
 obliterated. The claim of condemnation exhibited by the 
 moral law, and traced in the blood and read by the fires of 
 the Levitical law has now been blotted out ; not the moral 
 law itself, as it must be eternal and immutable — having its 
 origin in the Divine nature, and forming an obligation under 
 which every creature is placed by the fact of his existence. 
 " Do we make void the law through faith ? " asks the apostle, 
 and his reply is, "Nay, God forbid, we establish the law." 
 If the death of Christ was necessary to cancel the indictment 
 which the law presented, it only strengthens and ratifies its 
 preceptive authority. It follows, however, that if the sj^ecial 
 purpose of the ceremonial law was to confess the fact of man's 
 exposure to the curse, and portrays the mode of his deliver- 
 ance from it, then, surely, the curse being borne, and the 
 condemning sentence expunged, the Levitical code has served 
 its purpose, and ceases to exist. What it taught in symbol, 
 is now enforced in reality ; what it foreshadowed in type, has 
 now become matter of history. And this it is the special 
 object of the apostle to show as a lesson and caution to the 
 Colossians.^ 
 
 This handwriting had assumed the form of " ordinances." 
 In Eph. ii. 14, the apostle uses the term expressly of the 
 ceremonial law and its positive institutions. But the two 
 places are not entirely analogous. There the apostle describes 
 the ceremonial code as a hedge between Jew and Gentile, and 
 shows how, through its abolition by Christ in His death, the 
 union of the two races was secured, both being, at the same 
 time, and by the same event, reconciled to God. Here, how- 
 ever, as the apostle speaks specially of the spiritual results of 
 Christ's death, and of these as effected by God the Father, he 
 seems, as we have said, to refer to the entire Mosaic Institute, 
 but especially to the ceremonial law, as it was so palpable and 
 
 ^ The xt'poy. bore upon it the signature or acknowledgment of the debtor, 
 and so differed from avyypcKfn, which contained the signatures of both contract- 
 ing parties. 
 
 ^ Also Lucian, Prometh., Opera, vol. ii. p. 2, ed. Bipont. — Toirourov xp'*"* ''V 
 
 Kavzairi^ wpo(rtiXcii/it>icf, 
 
166 COLOSSIANS II. 14. 
 
 prominent a portion of the system, and contained sucli a 
 number of minute and peremptory enactments. 
 
 Kai avro rjpKev e/c rov fxeaov — " And He has taken it out 
 of the way." The use of the perfect tense adds emphasis to 
 the verb — he took it out of the way, and still it remains out 
 of the way. The apostle says, Kal avro — this very document, 
 terrible as it is ; that is to say. He not only blotted out the 
 writing upon it, but He has taken out of the way the parch- 
 ment itself ; or, as Theophylact says — eirolif^ae /xTjBe (paiveadat. 
 The idiom e« rov fieaov (the contrast being iv tw fieat^ is no 
 uncommon one. On the change of construction from participle 
 to verb marking emphasis, see under i. 6. Winer, § 63, I. 2, b. 
 How God has taken it so effectually out of the way is next 
 told us — 
 
 n poa7]\(oaa^ avro tu) aravpui — " Having nailed it to the 
 cross." The participle occurs only here in the New Testament, 
 but is similarly found in 3 Mace. iv. 9. The allusion is not 
 to the tablet nailed to the cross above the sufferer, as Gieseler 
 assumes, but to the crucifixion of the Eedeemer Himself. 
 There seems to be no historical ground for the illustration of 
 Grotius, that it was customary to thrust a nail through papers 
 — declaring them old and obsolete, much in the same way as 
 a Bank of England note is punched through the centre when 
 declared to be no longer of value, and no longer to be put into 
 circulation. The idea of the apostle is, that when Christ was 
 nailed to the cross, the condemning power of the law was 
 nailed along with Him, and died with Him — " Now we are 
 delivered from the law, that being dead in which we were 
 held." Eom. vii. 6. In other words, God exempts sinners 
 from the sentence which they merit, through the sufferings 
 and death of Jesus. The implied doctrine is, that the guilt 
 of men was borne by Christ when he died — -was laid on Him 
 by that God who by this method took the handwriting out of 
 the way. Jesus bore the sentence of the handwriting in 
 Himself, and God now remits its penalty ; having forgiven 
 you all your trespasses, inasmuch as He has blotted out the 
 hostile handwriting and taken it out of the way, for He nailed 
 it to the cross of His Son. Meyer remarks, that i^a\eL(p6iv 
 and atpeiv e/c rov fieaov are not two really distinct acts, but 
 represent the same thing. We would rather say, that the 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 15. 167 
 
 first term characterizes the act, and the second refers to the 
 completed result ; while the third participle — irpoa-rjXdacra'i — 
 defines the external mode of accomplishment. 
 
 (Ver. 15.) ' A7reK8v<Tdfi€vo<; ra? o,p'^a<i koX Ta<; e'^oucr/a? — 
 " Having spoiled the principalities and powers." We should 
 have expected «at to be placed between the two clauses ; but 
 its absence indicates the close connection, nay, the identity of 
 the two acts ; or, perhaps, of the process in which the two 
 acts were completed. In blotting out the handwriting, God 
 at the same time vanquished Satan. If ever there was bathos 
 in exegesis, it is in that of Kosenmiiller — that when Jesus 
 rose again from the dead, it was seen how vain were the 
 efforts of the Jewish magistrates against Him. Suicer, Junker, 
 and others, take a similar view. The terms have been explained 
 under i. 16, and under Eph. i. 21, vi. 12. We cannot agree 
 with Pierce that good angels are meant ; they needed not to 
 be spoiled or triumphed over openly. Hostile spiritual 
 powers are plainly designated. Their reign over man had its 
 origin in his sin ; and their usurpation lasted till sin was 
 atoned for, and its power destroyed. Hence Satan is called 
 the " god " and " prince of this world." [Eph. ii. 2 ;] Luke 
 xi. 22. 
 
 The verb aTreKSvo/aat, which means literally to cast off any- 
 thing, such as clothing, has been taken by many as referring 
 to Christ's own death, as if he had cast off the flesh in dying 
 — an idea which seems to have originated the reading rrjv 
 adpKa, in F, G, seen too in the Syriac, and followed by some 
 of the Latin Fathers. Augustine has — spolians se came. So 
 that the figure has been supposed to be that of a naked wrestler. 
 But the diction of the verse is that of avowed and open war- 
 fare, and the participle direKS. must have the sense of spoiling ; 
 conquering, and then making the vanquished a spoil, as is 
 done when a fallen foe is stript of his armour. This last is 
 the idea and image of Meyer, which perhaps is too minute, 
 for the general figure is, that He stript them of all power and 
 authority. The compound form of the verb indicates how 
 completely this was done ; e/cSueti/ ^ is used in the sense of 
 sjpoliare, and the Vulgate here renders exspolians. 
 
 'EBeiyfidriaev iv irapprjaLa — " He made a show of them 
 1 Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 24. 
 
168 COLOSSIANS II. 15. 
 
 openly." The allusion is plainly to the triumph which is 
 celebrated after a battle. His spiritual foes, on being van- 
 quished, were exhibited as a public spectacle. The meaning 
 is not that He exposed their weakness — ttjv aaOevetav eSei^e, 
 as Theodoret understands it. That is certainly implied, but 
 the idea is. He has shown the fact of their complete subjuga- 
 tion in His triumph over them. There is no ground to give 
 the simple verb the sense of the compound — irapaSeLyfiari^eLv, 
 and add the idea of shame, as is done by Theophylact, Beza, 
 Eoell, Storr, and Conybeare. Such an idea, as well as that 
 of weakness, may be indeed inferred from the humiliating 
 exposure. And it was no private parade, it was done iv 
 irapprjo-ia — " openly." John vii. 4. Theophylact gives it 
 rightly — Brj/jLoaia, iravTcov opoiVTwv — " openly, in the eyes of 
 all ;" — Ixulmlich, frei und frank, as Meyer paraphrases it. 
 
 ©piap/3ev(xa<; iv avrai — " Having triumphed over them in 
 it." The participle is used in 2 Cor. ii. 14, with a hiphil 
 sense, and it here occurs with the accusative, like the Latin — 
 triuonphare aliqucm. Adhering to the hiphil sense — " maketh 
 or causeth to triumph," some would supply i^/ia? — maketh us 
 to triumph over them. Such an idea only encumbers the 
 sense. The three verbs in the verse do not form a climax. But 
 the spiritual foes are spoiled, and then they are exposed ; while 
 the last participle defines the manner and purpose of the 
 exposure — it formed a public triumph. The truth expressed 
 is, that there has been complete and irretrievable subjugation. 
 But the meaning and reference of the last words iv avrS are 
 doubtful. The Syriac and Vulgate, with Theodoret, and the 
 editors Griesbach and Scholz, read iv avrS — " in Himself." 
 If the reference be made to Christ, then it is wrong, for God 
 is the nominative ; and if to God, then the phrase is not very 
 intelligible. Meyer takes the reference to be to the principal 
 noun of the preceding verse — x^cpojpacfiov. His meaning is, 
 that the expunged and perforated handwriting was a proof of 
 Satan's overthrow. This exegesis, however, gives a fulness of 
 meaning to iv avTw, which the words will not bear. They 
 simply mean " in it," that is, in the handwriting. Now it was 
 not in the handwriting simply that God obtained His victory, 
 but in obliterating it, and nailing it to the cross — an idea that 
 could not be expressed by the bare iv avrw. " In the cheiro- 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 15. 169 
 
 graph," and in what he did with the cheirograph, are very 
 different ideas, requiring very different forms of diction. 
 
 Opinions are nearly divided as to whether ev avTM refers 
 to Christ or to the cross. Wolf, Musculus, Bengel, Storr, 
 Flatt, Roseurniiller, Biihr, Huther, and De Wette, hold the 
 first view. Our objection to this view is, that in the two 
 verses no mention is made of Christ. The work is wholly 
 ascribed to God — not formally to God in Christ. 
 
 And therefore we incline to the other opinion, that iv avrw 
 carries us back to aravpS. Such is the opinion of the Greek 
 Fathers, Theophylact and CEcumenius, of Calvin, Beza, Gro- 
 tius, Crocius, Steiger, Bohmer, and Olshausen. Origen has no 
 less than eight times for iv avrai the phrase iv rat ^vKm. 
 Epij)hanius, Macarius, and Athanasius, read either so, or iv 
 aTuvpo). The reading is a gloss, but it shows the general 
 opinion. In the cross God achieved His victory over the 
 infernal powers — " through death," he " that had the power 
 of death " was destroyed. Through the agency of fallen 
 spirits sin was introduced, and it was the sphere of their 
 dominion ; they could rule in a condemned world, but not in 
 a redeemed one ; and when that world was released from death 
 by the death of Christ, the instrument of His death was 
 the weapon of conquest and symbol of victory over them. 
 Most strong is the prevailing opinion of the mediseval Latin 
 church, as seen in Aquinas, Anselm, and others, that this 
 spoiling was in the nether world, and over the daemons who 
 held the souls of the patriarchs in captivity, and that the 
 triumphal procession was the march of the imprisoned spirits 
 out of the limhus patrum. [Eph. iv. 8, 9.] The subject 
 throughout the previous context is God, not Christ ; and the 
 whole notion is an idle chimera. 
 
 Most glorious is the thought that the church is released 
 from the bond that held it, and delivered from the hellish 
 powers that tyrannized over humanity — a deliverance achieved 
 for it by Him alone " whose right hand and holy arm " could 
 get Him the victory. Eedemption is a work at once of price 
 and power, of expiation and conquest. On the cross was the 
 purchase made; on the cross was the victory gained. The 
 blood that wipes out the sentence was there shed, and the 
 death which was the death-blow of Satan's kingdom was there 
 
170 COLOSSIANS II. IG. 
 
 endured. Those nails which killed Christ pierced the sentence 
 of doom — gave egress to the blood which cancelled it, and 
 inflicted at the same time a mortal wound on the hosts of 
 darkness. That power which Satan had exercised was so 
 prostrated, that every one believing on Christ is freed from 
 his vassalage. Christ's death was a battle, and in it God 
 achieved an immortal victory. The conflict was a furious 
 one, mighty and mysterious in its struggle. The combatant 
 died ; but in dying He conquered. Hell might be congratu- 
 lating itself that it had gained the mastery, and might be 
 wondering what should be the most fitting commemoration 
 and trophy, when He who died arose the victor — no enemy 
 again daring to dispute His power or challenge His right, and 
 then God exhibited His foes in open triumph. " The prince 
 of this world is cast out." 
 
 All this teaching bore upon the Colossian church and its 
 crisis. Let not the ritual law — which exhibits the condemn- 
 ing power of the whole law — be enacted among you, for it 
 has been fully and formally abrogated. Let not your minds 
 be dazzled or overawed by esoteric teaching about the spirit- 
 world. All those spirits are beneath the Divine Master; if 
 good, they are His servants ; if evil, they are conquered 
 vassals. 
 
 Now follows the pointed and practical lesson. Already 
 had they been warned against one phasis of error — " philosophy 
 and vain deceit," and a sufficient reason is given. Next is 
 rehearsed their privilege of circumcision and baptism, their 
 death to sin and their life to God. Here their forgiveness is 
 stated along with the means which had been taken to secure 
 it; and this process, so decided and characteristic, lays the 
 foundation for the warning in the verse which we are novi' to 
 consider. 
 
 (Ver. 16.) Mr} ovv Tt9 v^a'^ KpiveTO) ev /3pu>a6L tj iv iroaet, 
 — " Let no one, therefore, judge you in eating or in drinking," 
 — test your piety by such a criterion. The participle ovv 
 refers back to the preceding statement, especially to the 
 first clause of the 14th verse. The verb may be followed by 
 the accusative, intimating who are the objects of judgment, 
 while ev accompanying it sometimes specifies its period, as in 
 John xii. 48, and sometimes its quality, as in Acts xvii. 31, 
 
C0L0S3IAN3 II. 16. 171 
 
 but here it denotes the basis on which judgment is passed, or 
 rather, the sphere in which it is exercised. According to 
 Meyer, ^pa)<7i<;, in the writings of the Apostle Paul, is uni- 
 formly actio edendi, and so distinct from /Bpcbfxa — cihis, though 
 in other portions of the New Testament, and among the 
 classics, that distinction is not observed. Some of the lexico- 
 graphers do not admit the statement, as is manifest by their 
 citations, neither does Fritzsche — but we believe Meyer to be 
 correct. ITocrt? is also the act of drinking, in contrast with 
 TTo/ia, the draught. Though the Mosaic law did not dwell so 
 much on drinks as meats, yet, as we shall see, it included some 
 statutes about drinks and drinking vessels, and therefore we 
 cannot agree with De Wette tliat Troo-t? was inserted " for 
 the sake of the alliteration " — dcs GleichUangcs wcgcn. The 
 eating and drinking are, therefore, a reference to the dietetic 
 injunctions of the Mosaic law. Lev. vii. 20-27, xi. Certain 
 kinds of animal food were prohibited. The Jews were 
 allowed the flesh of ruminant quadrupeds with a cloven hoof, 
 of fishes with scales and fins, and of such insects as the locust, 
 while unclean birds were specified in a separate catalogue. 
 The priests on the eve of ministration were solemnly for- 
 bidden the use of wine. Certain kinds of vessels that had 
 contained water, and been defiled, were to be broken, but others 
 were only to be rinsed. The Nazarites did not taste any 
 product of the vine. No doubt the pride of sanctity was 
 strong in the Jewish mind, and the tendency was, both in 
 Essenes and Pharisees, to multiply such prohibitions, and to 
 place around meats and drinks a finical array of minute and 
 complex regulations. The party at Colosse had strong ascetic 
 tendencies, and were apt to sit in judgment upon those who 
 felt that " every creature of God is good, and nothing to be 
 refused." The errorists forgot that the spirituality of Chris- 
 tianity rose far above such physical restraints and distinctions, 
 and that the new kingdom was " not meat and drink, but 
 righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." 
 
 ''JI iv fjbepei koprrj'i rj vovfirivla<i rj aa^fidruiv — " Either in the 
 particular of a festival, or of a new moon, or of Sabbath-days." 
 The phrase iv pLepei, as in classic use,^ signifies not simply in 
 
 ^ See "Wetstein, in loc; Aelian, v. 8, 3. Krebs regards h /u-ipu as an elegant 
 redundancy, but his examples do not sustain his opinion. 
 
172 COLOSSIANS II. 16. 
 
 respect of, as Beza, Flatt, Biilir, and Hutlier give it. It 
 gives a specialty to the theme or sphere of judgment, 
 by individualizing the topic or occasion. Melancthon and 
 Zanchius render — vicibus festorum. The Greek Fathers 
 Chrysostom and Theophylact take it as denoting a partial 
 observance, as if the heretics did not retain the whole of the 
 original rule ; and Calvin supposes iv fjiipec to intimate that 
 they made unwarranted distinctions between one day and 
 another. "Feast," or Festival, refers, as is plain from the 
 contrast, to the three great annual feasts of the Passover, 
 Pentecost, and Tabernacles. The " new moon " ushered in 
 certain monthly celebrations, while the sabbaths were weekly 
 in their periods. Some, indeed, such as Neumann, suppose 
 the allusion to be to the grand sabbatic periods of the seventh 
 day, the seventh year, and the fiftieth year. But there is no 
 warrant or necessity for such a reference here, though the 
 apostle says to the Galatians, " ye observe days and months, 
 and times and years." Eom, xiv. 5, 6. The term a-d^^arov 
 often occurs in a plural form in the New Testament, as if, 
 as Winer supposes, the Syro-Chaldaic form — ^n^t:' — had been 
 transferred into the Greek tongue. Matt. xii. 1 ; Luke iv. 16; 
 Acts xiii. 14, xvi. 13, Allusions to these feasts, collectively, 
 will be found in 1 Chron. xxiii. 31 ; 2 Chron. ii. 4, xxxi. 3. 
 The observances of the Jewish rubric, whether in its original 
 form, or with the multiplied and ascetic additions which it 
 presented in those days, laid believers no longer under obliga- 
 tion. They belonged to an obsolete system, which had 
 " decayed and waxed old." Christianity inculcated no such 
 periodical holidays. For it did not bid men meet thrice 
 a year to feast themselves, but each day to " eat their bread 
 with gladness and singleness of heart." It did not summon 
 them to any tumultuous demonstration with "trumpets at 
 new moon," since every division of the month was a testimony 
 of Divine goodness, and the whole kalendar was marked by 
 Divine benefactions — every day alike a season of prayer and 
 joy. Nor were they to hallow the " sabbaths," for these had 
 served their purpose, and the Lord's day was now to be a 
 season of loftier joy, as it commemorates a more august event 
 than either the creation of the universe or the exodus from 
 Egypt. Every period is sanctified — " day unto day uttereth 
 
COLOSSI ANS II. 17. 173 
 
 speech, and night unto night tcacheth knowledge." Sensations 
 of spiritual joy are not to be restricted to holy days, for they 
 thrill the spirit every moment, and need not wait for expression 
 till there be a solemn gathering, for every instant awakes to 
 the claims and the raptures of religion. The new religion is 
 too free and exuberant to be trained down to " times and 
 seasons " like its tame and rudimental predecessor. Its feast 
 is daily, for every day is holy ; its moon never wanes, and its 
 serene tranquillity is an unbroken Sabbath. The Jewish 
 Sabbath was kept, however, by the early Christians along 
 with their own Lord's day for a considerable period ; till at 
 length, in 3G4 a.d., the Council of Laodicea condemned the 
 practice as Judaizing. 
 
 (Ver, 17.) "A iariv cklcl jwv /xeWovrcov — "Which are a 
 shadow of things to come." The plural form of the relative 
 has higher authority than the singular, which is adopted by 
 Lachmann, and is found in B, F, G, and in several of the Latin 
 Fathers. The relative is not to be restricted to aa^^droiv, 
 as Eichter argues ; nor does it simply connect itself with 
 those festive days, as Flatt takes it. The entire ritual is 
 alluded to — the ritual as God appointed it, and not as over- 
 loaded by its self-willed votaries. 
 
 The noun a Kid may bear two different meanings. It may 
 either signify a shadow projected from a body by its intercep- 
 tion of the light ; or it may signify, as here, a 6.\m and shadowy 
 sketch of an object, in contrast not only with a full and 
 coloured likeness, but with the object itself. Meyer contends 
 strenuously for the former, viz. that aKid is not <xKia<ypa^[a, 
 but simply " shadow," as if the Christian economy threw its 
 shadow back, and this shadow was ritual Mosaism. This 
 idea brings out, indeed, the typical relation which Judaism 
 bore to Christianity. But perhaps the apostle had the figure 
 before his mind which he has elsewhere employed ; " the law," 
 he says, " had a shadow of good things to come," and not the 
 "very image of the things." In this expression he distin- 
 guishes a Kid and eUcov, as being both likenesses, though of a 
 different kind ; and in the passage before us, he distinguishes 
 o-Kid from the reality or substance — aco/xa — which it repre- 
 sents. The nouns a-Kid and acofia are thus also contrasted by 
 Josephus, when he makes Antipater say of Archelaus — aKiav 
 
174 COLOSSIANS II. 17. 
 
 avTr]aofi€vo<; (3acn\e[a^, rj<i rjp-jTadev eavTw to acofxa} Pliotius 
 vaguely renders crcofia by dXijdeia. The " things to come " 
 are the spiritual blessings of the Christian dispensation, not as 
 Meyer, in accordance with his favourite theory, supposes, 
 blessings to be enjoyed at the Parousia, or second coming. 
 Heb, X. 1. The apostle employs ecrrt in the present, not 
 because, as Meyer argues, the blessings are yet future to the 
 present point of time ; but either because, as Davenant sup- 
 poses, he gives a definition, or because the apostle transports 
 himself ideally to a period when ritual Judaism was of 
 Divine obligation, and when it was really the shadow of 
 things yet to come. The connection of a-Kid with the genitive 
 Tcov fieX. forbids the notion of Zanchius and Suicer, that the 
 reference may be to the comparative darkness of the former 
 economy. 
 
 To 8e cTMfxa XpicTTov — " But the body is Christ's." A few 
 Codices change the passage by a glaring amendment, and 
 read o Xptaro'i, while A, B, C prefix the article toO, a read- 
 ing which Lachmann prefers. " But the body is Christ's," 
 that is, of Christ's provision and possession. Meyer, taking 
 acofjLa in the sense of body, that is, the concrete reality of those 
 things to come, supposes that Christ is here supposed to be 
 its head. But the term body, with its correlative organ — 
 head, invariably refers in Paul's writings to the church — a 
 meaning which cannot in this place be admitted. Chrysostom 
 adopted this sense, and to support it, altered the connection, 
 and clumsily joined this clause to the following verse — " You 
 who are the body of Christ, let no man deceive you of your 
 reward." The same construction is approved by Photius, and 
 also by Augustine, who has corpus atitem Christi, nemo vos 
 convincat. The meaning is not that Christ is the body, but 
 that He possesses it. The realities so long shadowed out arc 
 His — all that composes them belongs to Him. 
 
 The clause then contains the great truth that the Mosaic 
 economy was no empty congeries of useless and meaningless 
 observances — infantine in character and design; but an 
 organism at once Divine in its origin, and fraught with 
 lessons of striking form. It was a dim outline — a-Kcd — of 
 those substantial blessings which are of Christ, and it served 
 ^ De Bell. Jml. ii. 2, 5. Also Cicero, de Officih, 3, 17. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 17. 175 
 
 a gracious purpose during its existence. It was a rudimentary 
 sketch. Its temple with its apartments, vessels, and furniture ; 
 its priesthood, in their imposing robes and duties ; its altar, 
 with the fire on its hearth, and the cloud of smoke resting 
 over it ; its victims, in their age, kind, and qualifications ; its 
 rubric, with its holidays, and their special observances ; its 
 minute ritual in reference to diet, dress, and disease — all were 
 the faint lines of a sketch which was limned by the Divine 
 pencil for the guidance and government of Hebrew faith and 
 worship. The eye of faith might, as it gazed, be able to fill 
 in the picture, and see in distant perspective the sublime 
 group of a tabernacle filled and inhabited by the Great Spirit ; 
 a Priest offering the most costly of victims — the God-man 
 presenting Himself; an altar consecrated by blood precious 
 beyond all parallel ; and a sabbatism not only serene and 
 joyous on earth, but stretching away into eternity as a "rest 
 remaining to the people of God." Thus the hieroglyph and 
 substance exactly correspond, though the former be only an 
 adumbration and a miniature. 
 
 But not only was there this close and preordained relation 
 between the shadow and the substance, there was also a 
 predictive correspondence. The sketch is taken from the 
 reality, and implies the existence of it. The shadow is the 
 intended likeness of the substance. In other words, Chris- 
 tianity was not fashioned to resemble Judaism, but Judaism 
 was fashioned to resemble Christianity. The antitype is 
 not constructed to bear a likeness to the type, but the 
 type is constructed to bear a likeness to the antitype. It 
 is, in short, because of the antitype that the type exists. 
 The Mosaic economy being a rude draught of Christianity, 
 presupposed its future existence. If it had been an institute 
 without ulterior object, if its rites had contained no prospec- 
 tive delineations, or if its whole design had terminated in 
 present observance, then it could not have received the 
 apostolic designation. But it was a typical system. Now, a 
 type not only pictured out the nature of a future reality, but 
 it foretold its certainty. It showed, and it foreshowed. The 
 sacrifice not only showed that the offerer was under sentence 
 of death, and that only by the substitutionary shedding of 
 blood the awful sentence could be repealed ; but it also fore- 
 
176 COLOSSIANS II. 17. 
 
 showed that the great and final oblation of infinite efficacy 
 would assuredly be presented in " the fulness of the time." It 
 not only portrayed the mode, but it gave assurance of the 
 fact — it was at once a symbol and a prophecy. The entire 
 Jewish ritual was so organized, as not only to exhibit a faint 
 and distant likeness to Christianity, but it estabhshed the 
 certainty that the new dispensation of which it was an early 
 and elementary copy should be at length organized in perfec- 
 tion and symmetry. The " figure for the time then present " 
 guaranteed the introduction of the figured reality in the time 
 to come. The sign not only preceded, but certified the 
 advent of the thing signified. 
 
 Still, the shadow is in itself nothing — it is empty, baseless, 
 and indistinct. The Hebrew ceremonial could not give full 
 instruction by its symbols, and it could only purge " as per- 
 taining to the flesh." It had no power to enter into the con- 
 science, and impart peace and the sense of forgiveness. The 
 blood of an animal could not secure Divine favour. The thief, 
 after restoring fourfold to the man whom he had wronged, and 
 so satisfying him, must also offer a victim on the altar to God, 
 in order that the penalty incurred from Him might be remitted. 
 The man who had been contaminated by any ceremonial impurity, 
 who had touched a corpse, or come into accidental contact with 
 a leper, was by means of an appointed ordeal of ablution and 
 sacrifice restored to his previous status. But the whole appa- 
 ratus was wanting in spiritual power, and its only virtue was 
 in its connection with the substance to come. That it was a 
 shadow so designed, and not a fortuitous and unmeaning 
 system, is plain from its correspondence with the body which 
 is Christ's, and its consequent fulfilment in Him. The harmony 
 is universal and complete. The great High Priest has come 
 and clothed Himself in humanity — a living vestment far more 
 costly than the robes of Aaron, "made for glory and for 
 beauty ; " and all other victims have been superseded by His 
 oblation of Himself. Omniscience is His, and therefore no 
 formal Urim and Thummim glitters on His breast. The Self- 
 sacrifice He presented was pure as the fire from God by which 
 it was consumed, and it has been visibly accepted. He has 
 gone through the starry vail, and into heaven itself, with the 
 names of all His clients inscribed upon His heart ; and He 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 18. 177 
 
 pleads the merit of His blood before a mercy-seat not cano- 
 pied by a cloud, but enveloped in the Majesty of Him who sits 
 upon it. The woven and metallic cherubim disappear in the 
 reality, for the angels having performed their allotted parts 
 in the mystery of redemption, are " ministering spirits to 
 them who shall be heirs of salvation." There is no need, 
 now that the law be engraved on stone, for it is written in- 
 delibly on " the fleshy tables of the heart." It is no longer 
 required that there be a bath, or a " sea of brass," for believers 
 are washed in the laver of regeneration. The golden lamp- 
 stand has been extinguished, for the lustre of the Enlightening 
 Spirit fills the House of God. Nay, the entire church on 
 earth is a spiritual priesthood, engaged in appropriate minis- 
 trations, serving now, indeed, in the outer court, but soon to 
 be called up into the inner sanctuary. 
 
 The argument of the apostle, then, is — why go down to 
 " the weak and beggarly elements " ? Who would listen to any 
 sophistry urging him to prefer the shadow to the substance ? 
 Such a relapse would be an attempt to roll back the Divine 
 purpose, and impede that religious progress which Chris- 
 tianity had introduced ; an effort to restore an intolerable 
 yoke, and rob the new religion of its spirituality and vigour. 
 The result would be to stifle devotion by a periodical mechan- 
 ism, and degrade obedience into a service of trifles. And 
 therefore the apostle solemnly warns the Colossians not to be 
 imposed upon by such pretences, and not for a moment to sub- 
 mit to teaching which would supplant the real by the ritual, 
 and give them a religion of obsolete externalities for one of 
 vital freedom and spiritual jurisdiction. 
 
 (Ver. 18.) MrjSeU vfxd<i Kara^pa^eveTO) — "Let no man rob 
 you of your reward." Theodoret explains the peculiar verb 
 as meaning to aZlK(o<i jBpa^eveiv — to confer a reward unjustly. 
 Zonaras, on the 35th canon of the Laodicean Council, has 
 usually been adduced, and he says that the action of the verb is 
 done when this takes place — to fir) tov viKijaavTa a^covv tov 
 /SpafSeiov, aXX erepw StSovat avTO, " not to reckon one who has 
 conquered worthy of the prize, but to give it to another." 
 Suidas says more distinctly — to aXXov drycovi^ofxevov dXXov 
 (TTe(f}avova6aL \ejei 6 airoaToXo'; KaTa^ pa/Seveadai. The other 
 figure, adopted by Beza, from one of the exceptional meanings 
 
178 COLOSSIANS II. 18. 
 
 of ^pa/Sevoi, is not sustained by any certain examples. His 
 idea is, let no one usurp the office of a ^pa^evrt]-? against 
 you ; while in a similar way a-Lapide, Crocius, and Bengel, 
 generally adopt this meaning — let no one assuming such an 
 office domineer over you, and so prescribe to you how you are 
 to act in order to obtain the prize. Such an interpretation 
 has more in derivation to recommend it than the notion of 
 Luther, Castalio, and Calvin — let no one intercept the prize, 
 or get it before you. The apostle warns them to listen to 
 none of these instructors, for their design was to rob them of 
 that prize, which, as the result of their spiritual victory, Chris- 
 tianity set before them. If they yielded to any of the practices 
 referred to in this verse, then they followed the solicitation of one 
 who would rob them of that " prize of their high calling " for 
 which they had been pressing forward. It is thus a term of 
 far deeper import than the preceding Kpivero), though Photius, 
 Hesychius, Eisner, Storr, Huther, Biihr, and Olshausen vir- 
 tually identify them. For there is in it not merely the giving 
 of a wrong judgment, but a judgment which involves in it the 
 loss of all that the gospel promises to the winner, a life of 
 glory on higli. It is a tame idea of De Wette, to suppose that 
 the prize is the true worship of God, for it is here looked upon 
 not as a prize, but as the means of obtaining the prize. It 
 may be remarked in passing, that Jerome regards the verb 
 as a Cilicism, or a provincialism of the apostle, but others 
 have shown that the word occurs among the classics, as in 
 Demosthenes and Polybius. 
 
 The true connection and meaning of the following word, 
 6e\(ov, are not easily ascertained. The agitated question is, 
 whether it should be joined to Kara^pa/SeveTO), or to the follow- 
 ing words, iv Ta7reivo(ppoavi>r). If it be joined to the former, 
 the meaning will be " willingly " — let no one willingly seduce 
 you ; but this would be a counsel to the false teachers as well 
 as to the Colossians. Or it may be, as Grotius gives it — etiamsi 
 id maxime velit, " let no one, although he should set his heart 
 iipon it, rob you of your reward." Beza finds in the term a 
 support to the sense which he attached to the verb — let no one 
 assume voluntarily the office of a prize-distributor over you, 
 and thus wrong you. Erasmus gives the term an adverbial 
 sense of ciqndc, studiose ; and others render it ultro. Steiger 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 18. 179 
 
 inclines to a similar opinion, and Tittmann translates — consulto 
 vel ultro} But the usage is not well sustained in the Ncav 
 Testament, and the participle is, as Bengel remarks, the first 
 of a series, OeKwv, i/x^arevcov, (f)vatov/j.evo<i, Kparoiv, and each 
 of the participles has its independent construction. It must 
 therefore be joined to iv TaTrecvocpp. — but how ? Olshausen, 
 Wahl, Bahr, Bohmer, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Bretschneider, 
 preceded by Hesychius, Phavorinus, Augustine, Estius, Eisner, 
 Storr, and Flatt, take 6e\(ov in the sense of evSoKwv, " delight- 
 ing in " — affectans humilitatem. Thus they regard it as a 
 Hebraism formed upon the usage 3 |*Dn — 1 Sam. xviii. 22 ; 
 2 Sam. XV. 26; 2 Chron. ix. 8;" Ps! cxi. 2, cxlvii. 10. 
 Though this usage may be regarded as established in the 
 Septuagint, yet it is not found in the New Testament, nor 
 does it suit here. For the apostle is not wishing to paint the 
 character of the false teacher, but to warn against his wiles. 
 He does not mean to say that the false teacher has a special 
 pride in his own humility, but he means to say, that the 
 Colossians must be on their guard against him, for he will 
 seek to entrap them by means of that humility. 
 
 We give dekwv its common meaning. Let no man beguile 
 you — wishing to do it by his humility. This is the natural 
 view of the Greek Fathers, of Theodoret, and of Theophylact 
 who says — on OeKovaiv vfj,d<; Kara/Spa^ evetv Bia Ta7r€cvo(f)p. 
 BoKovat]^. So Photius, Calvin, Huther, Meyer, and De 
 Wette. The preposition iv denotes the means of deception, or 
 the sphere in which the deceiver moves. The humility referred 
 to, as may be seen from the last verse of the chapter, is a 
 spurious humility. Fanatical pride is often associated with 
 this humility, as when, for show, the beggar's feet are washed ; 
 and the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs. 
 And men become proud of their humility — glory in the feel- 
 ing of self-annihilation. The spirit of the false teacher, with 
 all its professed lowliness, would not bend to the Divine reve- 
 lation, but nursed its fallacies with a haughty tenacity, and 
 preached them with an impious daring, for he was "vainly 
 puffed up by his fleshly mind." 
 
 Kal 6pr}(Ticeiq twv ajjeXcov — " And adoration of angels." 
 This is another of the instruments of seduction. The genitive 
 1 De Synon. p. 130. 
 P 
 
180 COLOSSIANS II. 18. 
 
 T(Jov ayyekcov cannot be that of subject, as if the meaning 
 were, a worship like that which angels present, or such as man 
 may learn from them — OprjaKeia ayjeXiKT]. Such a view is held 
 by Schoettgen and Wolf, and in its spirit by Noesselt, Eosen- 
 mliller, Luther, and Schrader. TertuUian says — aliqiws taxat, 
 qui ex visionihus angelicis dicebant, cihis cibstinendum, etc. 
 Adver. Mar don, v. 19. 
 
 The genitive is that of object. The attempt of the false 
 teacher was not to get them into an ecstasy such as that felt 
 by the "rapt seraph, who adores and burns," but it was a 
 positive inculcation of angel-worship. OprjaKela is often 
 followed by the genitive of object.^ Winer, § 30, 1. The 
 term, whatever its derivation, denotes devotional service. 
 How angels came to be worshipped we may not precisely 
 know, though, certainly, it might not be difficult to account 
 for it, when one sees how saint- worship has spread itself so 
 extensively in one section of Christendom. The angels 
 occupied the highest place which creatures could occupy 
 under the Theocracy. They held lofty station and dis- 
 charged important functions. The law was " ordained by 
 angels, in the hands of a mediator," nay, the apostle calls 
 it " the word spoken by angels." Jehovah descended 
 with ten thousand of His holy ones, when " from His right 
 hand went a fiery law." The Jews, said Stephen, in his 
 address, " received the law by the disposition of angels." 
 Whatever be the meaning of these declarations, there is 
 no doubt that they indicate some special and important 
 province of angelic operation. Josephus expresses the 
 same opinion — the current one of his nation.^ No wonder 
 that those beings, so sublimely commissioned by God, and 
 burning in the reflection of His majesty, command human 
 reverence, and are therefore themselves called "gods." Ps. 
 xcvii. 7, compared with Heb. i. 6. 
 
 Now, the step from respect to worship is at once short and 
 easy, for it is but an exaggeration. The heart, not content 
 with feeling that a being so near God and so like Him 
 should be held in esteem and admiration, passes into excess, 
 
 ^ Herodian, v. 7, 3. Joseph. Ant'iq. iv. 4, 1 ; iv. 8, 44, etc. etc. Wisdom 
 xiv. 27 ; Clement, Strom, vi. 566. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. vi. 4. 
 " Antiq. xv. 5. Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Jud. vol. i. p. 808. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 18. ISl 
 
 and worships where it had honoured. And to fortify itself 
 in the practice, it perverted the angelic office. It raised 
 those creatures from attendants to mediators — from mes- 
 sengers to interested protectors. It would seem that in 
 the days of the patriarch Job ^ such a feeling existed in the 
 early world. " Call now," is the challenge of Eliphaz, " if 
 there be any that will answer thee ; and to which of the saints 
 wilt thou turn ? " and in another chapter mention is made of 
 an angel interpreter. In the book of Tobit,"^ the Jewish 
 belief is incidentally brought out — that angels formally pre- 
 sent prayers to God. In the imagery of the Apocalypse, we 
 find an angel at the altar, having in his hand a golden censer 
 and much incense, that he should offer it with "the prayers of 
 all saints." In the Testimony of the Twelve Patriarchs, and in 
 the book of Enoch, the same notion is prominently exhibited. 
 And thus the prayer offered through the angel, was by and by 
 presented to him. It was first offered to him that he might 
 carry it to God, and then it was offered to him without such 
 ulterior reference or prospect. Again, that angels were en- 
 trusted with the presidency of various countries and nations, 
 was another Jewish opinion ; and it was with a superstitious 
 people a matter of extreme facility to pass from that obeisance, 
 which might be yielded to a representative of Divinity, to that 
 veneration which is due to Jehovah alone. If a man bent 
 one knee in loyalty, he soon bent both knees in worship ; 
 and asked from the substitute what should be solicited from 
 the principal. 
 
 That the worship of created spirits was widespread, thus 
 admits of no doubt. The Fathers abundantly testify to it. 
 Origen affirms it of the Jews, and Clement makes the same 
 assertion ; both of them, as well as the treatise called the 
 " Preaching of Peter," describing the Jews as XarpevovTa 
 a<y>y6\oL<i. An old Jewish liturgy distinctly contains angel- 
 worship, and exhibits one form of it. Celsus also avers it. 
 The Platonic idea of demons — itself, in all probability, a relic 
 of Eastern Theosophy — spread itself, in Asia Minor, and com- 
 bined with the Jewish superstition. That such practices should 
 
 1 V. 1 ; xxxiii. 23. Hirzel and Prof. Lee on Job, in Joe. 
 
 ^ xii. 12. Bcihmer, Isagoge in Epist. ad Coloss. p. 281. Neander, Geschichte 
 der PJlanzung, etc., p. 508. Suicer, suh voce ILyytXo;. 
 
182 coLossiANS ir. is. 
 
 take root in Plirygia is no marvel, for there they found a 
 congenial soil. Theodoret testifies to their existence, and that 
 they remained in Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time. The 
 thirty-fifth canon of the Council of Laodicea, a city in the 
 vicinity, solemnly interdicted the practice, but did not wholly 
 eradicate it. In the days of Theodoret, the archangel Michael 
 was worshipped at Colosse ; and a vab<; dp'^^ayyeXiKo^ was built 
 in his honour, and for a miracle alleged to be wrought by him. 
 Though those historical quotations refer to post- apostolic periods, 
 still they appear to describe the remnants of earlier practices, 
 and they afford at least some analogies that help us to judge 
 of the superstitions which the apostle mentions and reprobates. 
 The Catholic interpreters, Estius and a-Lapide, make a strong 
 effort to exclude this passage, from such as might be brought 
 against the worship of saints. 
 
 The two nouns, "humility and worship of angels," are closely 
 connected, and mean a species of humility connected with 
 angel-worship. It was out of a fanatical humility that service 
 was offered to angels. It was thought that the great God was 
 too majestic and distant to be addressed, and they therefore 
 invented these internuncii. That the heretical party thought 
 the glory of the Only-Begotten too dazzling for approach, and 
 therefore took refuge in angel-worship, is an opinion of Chry- 
 sostom and Theophylact, but in opposition to the whole tenor 
 of the rebuke generally, and of the following clause particu- 
 larly, for it contains the accusation of " not holding the Head." 
 The true reason and connection are given, as we have given 
 them, by Theodoret. 
 
 '^A fir] kdopaKev i/jL^aTevcov. This clause presents a very 
 strange difference of reading, for the negative is omitted in 
 some MSS. of high authority, such as A, B, D\ and by several 
 of the Latin Fathers. It is therefore rejected by Lachmann, 
 and his reading is approved of by Olshausen, Steiger, Huther, 
 and Meyer. Olshausen says that fx')] was added because 
 critics thought that they were obliged to insert a negative. 
 His assertion may be turned against himself; for we might 
 reply that the copyists could not discover the propriety of /jli] 
 according to their finical notions of grammar ; since some, as 
 in P, G, changed it into ovk, and others omitted it altogether. 
 The meaning of the clause is not materially different which- 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 18. 183 
 
 ever reading be adopted. If the negative be omitted, the 
 clause must be an ironical description. The words " which 
 he has seen " will mean, visions which he professes or imagines 
 to have seen — visions which are the result of a morbid ima- 
 gination or a distempered brain. We prefer the common 
 reading found in C, D^^^, E, J, K, in the A^ulgate, Gothic, and 
 Syriac Versions, and in so many of the Greek Fathers. The 
 negative firj, and not ovk, is rightly employed. "Winer, § 55, 3.^ 
 The participle efi^arevcov, found only here in the New Testa- 
 ment, but occurring several times in the Apocrypha, and allied 
 in origin to the similar term ifx^aivco, is wrongly supposed 
 by some, such as Erasmus, to signify, to walk in state — as if 
 the expression were taken a tragicis cothurnis. It sometimes 
 denotes, to go into the possession of, as in Josh. xix. 49. And 
 then it is usually followed by etV Buddaeus, Zanchius, and 
 Huther assign it such a meanincf here. It also has the sense 
 of — to go into, to penetrate into, or to intrude. It is so used 
 of God,^ and often of man, both in a literal and tropical 
 sense, and is followed sometimes by the dative and sometimes, 
 as here, by the accusative.^ Phavorinus defines it — to evSov 
 €^€pevvr]<Tac rj crKoirria-ai, and Hesychius explains it by the 
 less intense term ^T/TT^o-a?. The compound Keve/x^arevetv is 
 employed, in Plato, to denote senseless speculation. From the 
 verb ecopuKev, there is no need to deduce the idea of mental 
 perception or knowledge, as Heinrichs and Flatt incline to do 
 — quae intelhdu percipere nemo potest. The word is often 
 used of visions and visionary representations — Acts xi. 17, 
 ix. 10-12, x. 3; Piev. ix. 17; and of a supersensuous view 
 of God— John i. 18, vi. 46, xiv. 7 ; 1 John iv. 12. 
 
 The reference in the clause — " intruding into what he has 
 not seen " — appears to be the worship of angels. The current 
 theosophy spent no little of its ingenuity upon the spirit-world. 
 It wandered not only beyond the regions of sense, but even that 
 of Scripture. It mustered into troops the heavenly orders. 
 [Eph. i. 21.] This oriental propensity was a prevalent one. 
 The inquisitive spirit pryed into the invisible world around it 
 and above it. It loved such phantasms, and lost itself in 
 
 ' Moulton, p. 603, note 4. - Chrysos. 2 Horn, in Philip. 
 
 ^ Philo, de Plant. Noe, vol. iii. p. 120, ed Pfeiffer. ^schylus, Persae, 419. 
 Eurip. Electra, 595. Josephus, Antiq. xii. 1. 
 
184 COLOSSIANS II. 18. 
 
 transcendental reveries. The creed of tlie Zendavesta had its 
 Ornmzd, its six Amshaspands, its eight-and-twenty Izeds, and 
 hosts of Teruers — all of them objects of worship and prayer. 
 Augustine says, with justice, that many had tried the interces- 
 sion of angels, but had failed ; and not only so, but — inciderunt 
 in dcsidcriwm curiosarum visionum} How the Jewish fancy 
 strove to penetrate the curtain that conceals the unseen, may 
 be learned from the following quotation from a rabbinical 
 treatise.^ " As there are ten Sephiroth, so there are ten troops 
 of angels, as follows : — the Erellim, Ishim, Benei-haelohim, 
 Malachim, Hashmalim, Tarshishim, Shinanim, Cherubim, 
 Ophanim, and the Seraphim. Captains are set over each of 
 them — Michael over the Erellim, Zephaniah over the Ishim, 
 Hophniel over the Benei-haelohim, Uzziel over the Malachim, 
 Hashmal over the Hashmalim, Tarshish over the Tarshishim, 
 Zadkiel over the Shinanim, Cherub over the Cherubim, 
 Eaphael over the Ophanim, and Jehuel over the Seraphim." 
 Tertullian mentions some who professed to divine their asceti- 
 cism from angelic revelation,^ a remark which serves at least 
 for illustration. 
 
 Some, such as Steiger, have proposed to join the following 
 adverb elKi) to ifM^arevcov, and give it the sense of " rashly " 
 or " uselessly." This notion, however, is already contained in 
 the reproof. But the idea with our exegesis is, that the 
 mental inflation of the errorists, which co-exists with his 
 humility and his angel-worship, and prompts him to pry into 
 what is concealed from him, is ei«>} — it is without ground. 
 It has no warrant. Matt. v. 2 2 ; Eom. xiii. 4. 
 
 The following clause discovers one prime ground of the 
 heresy, and shows the principal reason why the gospel 
 was not cordially received. It was not intricate enough, 
 it did not deal in any vain speculations, but it claimed 
 and commanded attention to the real and practical, and it 
 showed not the way into the abstruse and recondite. It 
 did not harmonize with current notions of angelology and 
 asceticism, and it was outdone in those respects by Essene 
 Gnosticism. It did not forbid the humble spirit to raise 
 
 ^ Confess, x. 42. 
 
 2 Berith -Dienucha in Eisenmenger, Entd. Jud. vii. p. 374. 
 
 ^ Adverstis Marc. v. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 18. 185 
 
 itself to the Diviue throne ; for it taught that the inter- 
 vening distance was spanned by the mediatorial nature of 
 Christ. It exhibited the angels as " ministering spirits," or 
 fellow-servants ; but it held up no eccentric array of visions 
 and phantasms, which might beguile men into fanatical wor- 
 ship and conceited contrition. In the fulness of its revelation 
 it left to no man the claim of discovery, or the merit of inven- 
 tion. He, then, who did not receive it as presented to him, 
 but wished to change its nature and supplement its oracles, 
 so that it might have the air and the aspect of a transcendental 
 theosophy, was "puffed up by his fleshly mind," — thought 
 himself possessed of a higher knowledge, and favoured with 
 profounder instruction than our Lord and His apostles. 
 
 The participle (pvaiovfjuevo^;, — not from ^vaa, which, in the 
 classical writers, makes (f>uai,d(o, but from cpvoy, — signifies 
 inflated. 1 Cor. iv. 6, 18, 19, v. 2, viii. 1. The heretic 
 was blown up with his delusion, verifying the remark — 
 -)) yvcbaa cf)vaLot — " knowledge puffeth up." He was too 
 proud to learn — too wise to acknowledge any instruction 
 beyond himself. The source of inflation was a "fleshly 
 mind," "he was puffed up." 
 
 'Ttto rov vo6<i tt}? aapKo^i avrov — "By the mind of his 
 flesh." The expression is peculiar, but darkly emphatic. 
 Nou<i is mind — not simply intellect, but mind as the region 
 of thought and susceptibility ; while crdp^ is, as in so many 
 other places, the name of unregenerate humanity. The ex- 
 pression denotes something more than 7nens imhecilla. Nor 
 is it enough to resolve the two genitives into the phrase — 
 aapKiKrj<i Stavola'i, or with Usteri, into vo^fxara aap/ctKa. The 
 genitive is not a mere predicate, but is the genitive of pos- 
 session. The "flesh" possesses and governs the "mind." The 
 mind did not struggle with the carnal principle, but succumbed 
 to it. It was wholly under the sway of a nature unchanged 
 by the grace of God, and which therefore exercised its pre- 
 dominance to serve and please itself. In all these mental 
 efforts and sentiments concerning Christianity, the false 
 teacher was guided not by any pure regard to the Divine 
 revelation, or by a simple desire to bow to the Divine will ; 
 but his " mind " was influenced by motives, and determined 
 by reasonings, which sprung from a nature wholly under the 
 
186 COLOSSIANS II. 19. 
 
 empire of sense and fancy ; a nature which was satisfied with 
 an array of external puerilities — which preferred ascetic dis- 
 tinctions to spiritual self-denial — revelled in imaginations 
 that at once sprung from it and lorded over it — and, in 
 short, acting like itself and for itself, coveted and set up a 
 religion of man, but spurned and thrust away that religion 
 which is of God. And thus, in a later century, and in the 
 same country, it was believed that the Holy Spirit communi- 
 cated to Montanus more and nobler revelations than Christ 
 had delivered in the gospel. The "flesh" could not but have a 
 sensuous system — one resembling itself; and the "mind," acting 
 under its sway, could not but devise a scheme in keeping 
 with such governing and prompting influence. 1 Cor. ii. 14. 
 And, by this means, the abettor of error was " vainly puffed 
 up"^ that he possessed a deeper enlightenment than the apostles, 
 and a purer sanctity than the churches ; and, in his vanity, he 
 dreamed of being able, by his unhallowed reveries, to supply 
 the defects and multiply the attractions of the gospel. The 
 three participles of this verse, and that of the first clause of 
 the following verse, have a close connection — OeKoav express- 
 ing the desire of the heresiarch to make converts by a specious 
 snare — i/x^arevcov portraying one special source and feature 
 of his system — (f)vaiovijL€vo<i indicating his moral temperament 
 — and, lastly, Kparwv pointing to the lamentable accompani- 
 ment and necessary result — " not holding the Head " — 
 
 (Ver. 19.) Kal ou Kparcov ttjv Ke^akrjv. The participle 
 describes a firm grasp — a tenacious hold. Song of Sol. iii. 4 ; 
 Acts iii. 1 1 ; Matt. xiv. 3 ; Mark ix. 2 7. The term Ke<^aXrj, 
 applied to Christ as Head of His church, has been explained 
 under Eph. i, 22, and alluded to Col. i. 18. Those errorists 
 did not hold the Head, and, indeed, the greater portion of 
 their errors tended to this result. If they worshipped angels, 
 they could not adore His person. If they insisted on circum- 
 cision and ascetic penances, they depreciated the merit of His 
 work. If they preached the permanence of Mosaic ceremonies, 
 they mistook the spirit and lost the benefit of the system 
 which He had founded. They did not hold the truth as to 
 His person or His work, His government or His dispensation. 
 
 ^ Miiller renders — der vonseinem uiujottUchen Wellsinne avfgeblasene. — Lehre 
 von der Sunde, p. 452. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 19. 187 
 
 Those errors on vital points were fatal. So long as cardinal 
 truths are held, many minor misconceptions may be tolerated ; 
 but when the former are lost, Christianity becomes a worth- 
 less and nominal profession. Bengel says truly, qui own itnice 
 Christum tenet, plane non tenet. 
 
 ^E^ ov nrav to acofxa, Sta tmv a(f)cov Kal crvvSea/xcov, eTri'^opT]- 
 >yovfMevov koX av[xj3i,^a^o[JbiVOV, av^ei ttjv av^rjaiv tou Oeov — 
 " From whom the whole body, through joints and bands, 
 supplied and compacted, groweth the growth of God." The 
 similar passage is Eph. iv. 16. The first words — t^ ov, mean, 
 from which Head as the source of life and growth. We 
 should expect the relative in such a case to agree in gender 
 with its antecedent — e'^ ^9, and for this reason some copies 
 add Xpiarov. The words are taken by some as masculine, 
 the pronoun being supposed to refer to Him who is the Head 
 — Christ. But though this be the common interpretation, as 
 of Bahr, Huther, and De Wette, we cannot agree with it. It 
 would destroy the harmony of the figure, which has its basis 
 not in Christ as person, but in Christ as Head. Some take 
 the relative as neuter, and in a special sense. Thus Bengel 
 — ex quo, ex tenendo caput. We agree, however, with Meyer, 
 that the neuter form refers to the Head — not personally as 
 Jesus, but really or objectively — niclit 2)C'i'sdnlich sondern 
 sdcJdich. Kiihner, ii. § 785 ; Jelf, ^820. 
 
 Ildv TO acj/Mi . . . av^et Tr]v av^rjaiv tov Qeov. Such is 
 the construction and ending of the sentence — "groweth the 
 growth of God." The form av^eu occurs only elsewhere in 
 Eph. ii. 21. There is no ellipse here needing the supply of 
 KaTci, as Piscator and others suppose ; but the verb governs its 
 correlate noun — no uncommon form of syntax. Eph. i. 3, 
 20, ii. 4, iv. 1; John xvii. 26; Jelf, § 552; Buttmann, 
 § 131, 4, 5 ; Kiihner, § 547, a. There is in such an idiom an 
 extension of the meaning of the verb. Often, in such a case, 
 when a relative does not intervene, the accusative has a dis- 
 tinctive or intensive epithet connected with it. John vii. 24 ; 
 1 Tim. i. 18 ; Bernhardy, p. 106 ; Winer, § 32, 2. Here we 
 have a genitive for a similar purpose. Luke ii. 8. Now 
 this genitive is not to be explained away as a mere Hebrew 
 superlative, as in Storr's paraphrase — mirifice crcscit. Nor is 
 the exegesis of Calvin, Biihr, and Winer in the third edition 
 
188 COLOSSIANS II. 19. ' 
 
 ot Lis grammar, up to the full sense — mcremenhcm quod Deus ' 
 vult d probed ; nor yet is Kara deov correct, as Chrysostom 
 renders it. It means, as Winer gives it, in his fifth edition 
 — "an increase wrought by God." Winer, § 36, 3 (h). The 
 growth of that spiritual body corresponds with its nature — is 
 the result of Divine influence and power. And the means of 
 growth are stated in the intermediate clause. For the body 
 is not only connected with the head, but is also — 
 
 Aicb Tcov dcf^cov Kol avvSeaficou eTn'^opTjyov/xevoi' kol cru/iySt- 
 ^a^ojMevov. The first participle iTn-yopr)'^. is in the middle 
 voice, and, in an absolute sense, means, " furnished with re- 
 ciprocal aid." 2 Cor. ix. 10; Gal. iii. 5. Xvvap^ioko^ovjxevov 
 is the word used in the parallel verse of the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, but the substantive iTnyopr^^ia occurs in the same 
 verse. The next participle avfx^L^. signifies " brought 
 and held together in mutual adaptation." (See under the 
 second verse.) And this is done Sta Twy a<^o)v koI crvvBea- 
 fiwv — " by joints and ligatures." The noun aj)r) signifies a 
 joint, and so it is generally understood. Meyer supposes 
 it to mean nervous energy or sensibility — Lebensthatigheit 
 — what the Greek Fathers understand by ataOrja-L^;. We 
 may, perhaps, understand it not merely of joints in the strict 
 anatomical sense, but generally of all these means, by which 
 none of the parts or organs of the body are found in isola- 
 tion. The other anarthrous noun, crvvhea^o<;, has a mean- 
 ing not dissimilar, and perhaps refers to those visible and 
 palpable ligatures of flesh and sinew which give to the body 
 unity of organization.^ Dan. v. 6. Some would assign a 
 noun to each participle — " furnished by the joints and com- 
 pacted by the ligatures." There appears, however, to be no 
 necessity for this refinement. The apostle describes that 
 unity of the body which is dependent upon its head, and is 
 essential to its growth. The expression e| ov is neither to 
 be confined to the participles nor restricted to the verb ; for 
 the apostle has said, emphatically, " the whole body." It is 
 not this or that organ that grows from its vital connection with 
 the head, while others unconnected perish and die ; but the 
 living energy of the head pervades the entire body — pervades 
 
 E5 IffTou lis IfTTovv \fi,ipuof/,iva am1%irf/.o; a.(i.ipo7)i yiyvirai xoivo;. Galen, quoted 
 by Balir, in loc. Theodoret says — lia ruv viu^av 'ixu 'ra.; a]ff/}r,ini; TO (TUfia. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 19. 189 
 
 it because it is an organic unity, supplied with conductors, 
 and bound together by joints. Means are provided for dis- 
 tributing through it this vitality ; there is no barrier to impede 
 it — no point at which it stops. The body, so connected with 
 the head, and so supplied and knit by internal structure and 
 external bands, grows, and all grows, by Divine influence 
 and blessing. The whole church of Christ depends on Him 
 as its head — " out of Him " are derived organization, life, and 
 growth. The idea is well expanded by Theophylact. 
 
 The "joints and bands" have been differently understood, and 
 so have the supply and the symmetry. Bengel understands 
 the first noun and participle of faith, and the second noun and 
 participle of love and peace ; this last view being held also 
 by Zanchius, who gives it as — charitas inter membra. This is 
 also Davenant's notion — " the first substantive represents what 
 unites us to Christ, and the second what binds ns to one 
 another." It is a strange idea of Theodoret, that the "joints 
 and bands " are prophets, apostles, and teachers. Bohmer 
 adds, in modification, " but yet as little do we exclude the 
 laity " — " ahcr eben so wenig excliidiren wir die Laicn!' Such 
 an idea destroys the harmony of the figure. For teachers and 
 taught compose the church, or the body and its organs, and 
 they are held together by what the apostle calls joints and 
 bands. To characterize minutely the spiritual elements of 
 unity represented by these terms, would be pressing too 
 much on the figure. The question is, what power gives 
 vitality and union to the mystical body of Christ ? The reply 
 must be, Divine influence communicated by the Spirit, and 
 using as its instruments faith and love. The last grace is 
 specially mentioned in the correspondent passage of the twin 
 epistle. The whole body, so pervaded and united, grows — 
 all grows in perfect synmietry, and in connection with its 
 Head. Without the head it dies— without "joints and bands " 
 it falls into pieces, and each dissevered organ wastes away. 
 The application is obvious. The church can enjoy neither 
 life nor growth, if, misunderstanding Christ's person or under- 
 valuing His work, it have no vital union with Him. If the 
 creed of any community supplant His mediatorship, and find 
 no atoning merit in His blood; if its worship look up to 
 angels, and not to Him to whom " all power is given in heaven 
 
190 COLO SSI ANS II. 20. 
 
 and in earth ;" if it place its trust in ritual observances and 
 bodily service, it cannot be one either with Him or with other 
 portions of His church. Severed alike from head and trunk — 
 from the vitality of the one and the support and sympathies 
 of the other — it dies in isolation. So it was or would be 
 with him or with them who threatened to disturb the Colossian 
 Church. The entire figure and description are more fully pre- 
 sented in Eph. iv. 15, 16, where we have given a lengthened 
 exegesis. 
 
 The apostle still presses home his doctrine. It was no 
 abstract truth which he had enunciated, and he winds up the 
 paragraph by a reference to its pervading lesson — exhibiting 
 the care and caution which should prevent any ordinances of 
 an ascetic nature — such as those which belonged to the 
 Jewish ritual — from being superinduced on Christianity. 
 
 (Ver. 20.) El aireOdveTe avv XpiaTw airo twv crrot^e/coy tov 
 Koa-fiov. The ovv of the Eeceived Text has no authority, 
 neither has the article r&J before the proper name. " Since ye 
 died off with Christ from the rudiments of the world," or, 
 have been separated by such a death from the rudiments of 
 the world. The phrase " rudiments of the world " has been 
 already explained under the eighth verse. To be dead to 
 them is to be done with them, or, to be in such a state that 
 they have no longer any authority over us. Thus in Eom. vii. 
 3, 4, the wife by the death of her husband is said to be so 
 free from conjugal law, that she may marry another man. In 
 Gal. ii. 19, the apostle speaks of being " dead to the law." 
 The dative is used in those two cases, as if there was a 
 consciousness of complete deliverance. The preposition airo is 
 here employed to intensify the idea, as if death were followed 
 by distance or removal. Winer, § 47, b. They had nothing 
 more to do with the rudiments of the world — and the rudi- 
 ments of the world had nothing more to do with them. The 
 apostle again introduces his favourite idea of union with Christ. 
 The death of Christ abrogated the ritual law ; and being one 
 with Him in that death, they had died to that law — the airo 
 denoting consequent separation. We cannot agree with 
 Huther, in inferring from this passage, that the phrase " rudi- 
 ments of the world" expresses something more than the 
 Mosaic law, and denotes the ethical life of the heathen world. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 20. 191 
 
 He says — " the language implies that the Colossians had 
 served the elements of the world ; and if so, then, if you 
 mean the ritual institute by these elements, you must hold 
 what you can never prove, that the majority in this church 
 were of Jewish extraction." ^ But the argument is not con- 
 clusive. In Gal. iv. 9, the apostle may refer to heathen 
 elements, so far as they had a ceremonial and sensuous aspect ; 
 but the rites of the heathen world — its a-roc^eia, never had 
 any Divine claim or obligation, so that the death of Christ 
 did not formally annul them ; whereas the Mosaic law was 
 an ordinance of God's appointment, and only by yielding to it 
 could religious privilege and blessing be enjoyed prior to the 
 death on Calvary. It was by initiation into this rudimentary 
 and worldly system, that the worship of the one God could be 
 engaged in. Heathenism never had any authority over them, 
 whatever might be its actual power. If its ordinances be meant, 
 then the apostle warns against a return to them. This is not 
 the case, for the ordinances against which he cautions were 
 remnants of a system not wholly unlawful like Gentilism, but 
 of one which had enjoyed Divine sanction. In short, the whole 
 paragraph has special reference to Jewish customs. After 
 speaking, in the eighth verse, of the rudiments of the world, he 
 describes the glory of Christ, and affirms that the Colossian 
 believers are circumcised in Him — a reference to the Jewish 
 ritual. Then, having said that the handwriting of ordinances 
 had been blotted out, he adds, as a warranted inference from, 
 and application of the doctrine — let no man judge you in 
 eating and drinking, or in respect of new moons and Sabbath 
 days — another direct allusion to Mosaic institutions. And in 
 fine, as a sample of those rudiments of the world, he quotes — 
 " touch not, taste not, handle not." There were among them, it 
 is true, other practices than such as had been originally Jewish ; 
 — an asceticism which was foreign to the Mosaic system, and an 
 angel- worship which was, perhaps, based upon a misrepresenta- 
 tion of traditions connected with it ; but still the central 
 error of the false teachers was an attempt to impose the 
 ceremonial yoke, in some of its aspects, on the members of the 
 Christian church, as something which would ensure them a 
 transcendental purity, and bring them into a magical connec- 
 ^ On the other band, see Baur, Paulus, p. 594. 
 
192 COLOSSIANS 11. 20. 
 
 tion with the powers of the spirit-world. The apostle then 
 asks — 
 
 Tl ft)? i^(M)vre<i ev KoafjiW BoyfiaTi^eaOe, /xr] ayp-rj, fXTjSe jevcrr], 
 firjBe 6l<yr)<i : — " Why, as living in the world, do ye suffer such 
 ordinances to be published among you as ' touch not, taste not, 
 handle not ' V " Bahr is wrong in saying that rt stands for 
 Sia Tt, though the one phrase may explain the other. The word 
 K6afio<; cannot here mean the physical world, as Schnecken- 
 burger maintains,^ for it must have the ethical meaning which 
 it bears in the previous clause and in verse eighth. It is the 
 sphere of the " weak and beggarly elements." But the Colos- 
 sians had been translated into the kingdom of God's dear 
 Son, therefore the code of the realm which they had left 
 had. no more force upon them. A Eussian naturalized in 
 Britain need not trouble himself about any imperial ukase, as 
 if he yet lived under the Autocrat. 
 
 The verb Soy/jbari^etv, which occurs only here in the New 
 Testament, but sometimes in the Septuagint and Apocrypha, 
 signifies in the classics to pronounce an opinion, as well as 
 to enforce or publish a decree. The latter meaning prevails 
 in the Septuagint, Esth. iii. 9, etc.; 2 Mace. x. 8, xv. o6. 
 Some look on the verb as active. Thus Melancthon has de- 
 crcta facitis ; Ambrosiaster, decernitis ; and Olshausen, " why 
 do ye again set up worldly ordinances ? " The majority of 
 commentators take the word in a middle sense, though Beza, 
 Wolf, and Meyer give it a passive significance. Buttmann, 
 § 135, 8. But we cannot see how the use of the middle 
 would imply a censure, any more than the employment of the 
 passive. The middle brings out rather a pointed caution — 
 " why should ye permit the preaching of dogmas ? or why 
 should ye allow such dogmas to be imposed on you ? " They 
 could not suppress the teaching of the errorists, but they 
 needed not to listen to it, and far less to yield to it. The 
 strong form of the verb almost says, that the apostle suspected 
 a latent tendency in their temperament to listen and be 
 charmed. The apostle, in Eph. ii. 15, calls the Mosaic law, 
 in one aspect of it, by the name Soy/xara, and he here uses 
 the cognate verb referring to the same institute. The argu- 
 ment is a cogent one. They were dead to such ordinances — 
 
 1 Theolog. Jahrb. 1848. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 20. 193 
 
 why then should they act cas if they lived under them ? They 
 did not belong to that /coc/io?, of the character of which such 
 ordinances partook. They belied their entire position, and 
 reversed all their relations, if, after being freed by Christ, they 
 again sunk themselves into bondage — if they allowed the 
 handwriting to be reinscribed, and taking the nail out of it, 
 laid it up among their solemn archives as an instrument of 
 revived and extended authority. To submit to the ritual 
 which they had believed to be obsolete, was in direct 
 antagonism to all that Jesus had done for them, and to all 
 which they had willingly acknowledged as His achievement 
 on their behalf. Some of the S6<y/u,aTa to which the apostle 
 alludes are now given, and they are ascetic in nature. But 
 ere we advance to them, we shall take up the clause which we 
 believe to be joined closely with Soyfiari^ecrde, viz., the last 
 clause of verse 22. 
 
 Kara ra ivraX/xaTa koI SiSaa-KaXlwi rdov avOpcoTroiv. Matt. 
 XV. 9 ; Mark vii. 7 ; Isa. xxix. 13. Our reasons for adopting 
 this view will be afterwards stated. This clause describes the 
 source of such Boy/xaTa, and virtually contains another reason 
 why they should not be submitted to. The prime reason is, 
 that believers are dead with Christ to them ; but the sub- 
 ordinate reason is, that the edicts are wholly human in their 
 origin. "Why should ye for a moment suffer them to be 
 imposed upon you according to — kutu — or having no higher 
 authority than, the commandments and doctrines of men ? " 
 The two nouns differ not, as Grotius supposes, that the 
 former is enacted by law, and the latter enjoined by 
 philosophers ; but rather, as Olshausen says, the first is enact- 
 ment — the second, the principles on which it is based. The 
 first — evraX., is the dogma in its preceptive and practical form, 
 of which there is a specimen in the preceding part of the 
 verse — " touch not, taste not, handle not ; " and the second 
 — SiBaa-KoXLa, is the doctrine out of which it arises — the 
 convictions and theories by which it is illustrated and 
 defended. The same general idea has been stated under the 
 eighth verse, Christ is Head, and to Him alone do we owe 
 subjection. Whatever authority ordinances had when the 
 Mosaic economy stood, they have none now — the institute 
 being abolished in the death of Him who is the one Legislator. 
 
194 COLOSSIANS II. 21. 
 
 And all extra-biblical additions to it were human in their 
 very origin. 
 
 (Ver. 21.) Mr] ayfrrj firjBe <yevcrr] firjhe Oi'yr)'; — "Touch not, 
 taste not, handle not." These curt dogmas are not the 
 apostle's own teaching, but the mottoes, or prominent lessons, 
 or watchwords of the false teachers.^ In all probability, the 
 three terms refer to the same general object — abstinence from 
 certain meats and drinks. It is therefore excessive refinement 
 to distribute them according to certain distinctions, either 
 with Flatt, Bohmer, Hammond, and Homberg, referring the 
 first verb — or, with Grotius, the last verb — to marriage ; or, 
 with Estius, Zanchius, and Erasmus, giving the first verb an 
 allusion to Levitical uncleanness, special or general. The two 
 critics last named refer the last term to Levitical sacred things, 
 but Michaelis and Storr refer it to impurities. Bohmer, with 
 a strange caprice, finds a reference in ^^777? to the holy oil 
 which the Essenes specially regarded as lobes. But though 
 the words refer generally to diet, and are so used by the 
 classics,^ there may be a distinction among them, as they 
 seem to be repeated, along with the negative, for the sake of 
 emphasis. The first and last verbs are somewhat similar, and 
 both represent in the Septuagint the Hebrew — VJJ. But the 
 first term may here denote that handling which is necessary 
 to eating — the touch which precedes taste ; while the last, a 
 sister-term, with tango and touchy may signify the slightest 
 contact. In Heb. xii. 20, the contrast seems to be this — a 
 beast was not only not to graze on Sinai, but not even for 
 a moment to set a hoof upon it. Thus in Eurip. Bacchae, 617, 
 where a similar contrast obtains — " he did not come in contact, 
 far less handle me^ — there was neither touch nor grasp." The 
 last verb is the most dogmatic — you are not to take certain 
 meats into your hand, nor are you to taste them ; nay, you 
 are not even to touch them, though in the slightest 
 degree — you are to keep from them hand, tongue, and 
 even finger-tip. The apostle does not specify the objects 
 to be abstained from, for they were so well known to his 
 readers. 
 
 ^ The words would, in modern usage, have the marks of quotation assigned to 
 them. 
 
 ^ Xenophon, Cyrop. i. 3, 5 ; i. 11. ^ 0^7-' 'i^iyi^ 0I6'' H'^a.f ri/iuv. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 22. 195 
 
 The connection and meaning of the next clause are matter 
 of various opinion. 
 
 (Ver. 22.) "A ea-Tiv Trdvra et? (f)6opav rfj aTro-^pi'iaei. The 
 idea of Macknight is altogether unsupported. He supposes 
 the reference of the apostle to be to Pythagorean abstinence 
 from animal food, and he connects this and the previous verse 
 in the following way. Touch not, taste not, handle not what- 
 ever things tend to the destruction of life in the using. He 
 takes the maxim of the false teachers condemned by the 
 apostle to be this — abstain from everything the eating of 
 •vvhich involves the taking away of life. The idea itself is 
 foreign to the argument, nor can it be supported by the 
 apostle's diction. 
 
 The question turns upon the meaning assigned to (pOopd, 
 and the supposed antecedent to the relative. 
 
 I, A large party take (f)6opd in a spiritual sense, and 
 suppose the relative to refer to the precepts contained in the 
 preceding verse, as if the warning were — all which maxims 
 tend by their observance to spiritual ruin — lead to the eternal 
 destruction of such as are influenced by them. Some of those 
 who hold this view, give d7r6xpT]<n<; the sense of abuse, as 
 if the apostle wished to say — the law did make distinctions 
 of meats and drinks, but the unwarranted abuse of such a 
 distinction is a fatal course. Others, again, connect the last 
 clause of the verse with the first — all which precepts tend to 
 your own ruin, by your observance of them, for they are an 
 observance based upon the doctrines and commandments of 
 men. Such, generally, are the views of Ambrosiaster and 
 Augustine, a-Lapide, Heumann, Suicer, and Junker. 
 
 II. Others suppose the antecedent to be not the maxims, 
 but the things forbidden in them, and amonfr such critics 
 there are two classes. 
 
 1. Some suppose the apostle to be still further showing the 
 opinion of the false teachers. According to them, the mean- 
 ing is, either, all which meats and drinks lead to ruin in the 
 use of them, according to the commandments and teachings 
 of those men ; or, all these meats and drinks to be abstained 
 from, tend to destruction by the use of them, if you are to be 
 judged by their opinions and doctrines. The verse, then, 
 would contain this idea — the false teachers forbade the touch- 
 
 Q 
 
196 COLOSSIANS II. 22, 
 
 ing and tasting of certain things, because, in their opinion, 
 the use of them brought certain pernicious results. Tliis 
 opinion is concurred in by Kypke, Storr, De Wette, Bohmer, 
 and Baumgarten-Crusius. There is nothing in the words 
 themselves to contradict it ; it may be grammatically defended, 
 and the noun (f)dopd may bear the meaning of spiritual 
 hurt, as in GaL vi. 8. But it does not appear to us to be in 
 so complete harmony with the context as is the following 
 exegesis. 
 
 2. The opinion which we prefer is that which gives the 
 same antecedent to the relative, but understands the clause 
 to be an exposure of the absurdity of such asceticism — " all 
 which things are meant for destruction through the use of 
 them." The meats and drinks about which the errorist ex- 
 claimed — " touch not, taste not, handle not," are meant to be 
 consumed by use. They perish or cease to exist, because 
 they are eaten and drunk for the support of life. They are 
 intended for this destiny — eVrtV et? — exist for it ; God created 
 them to be consumed, and they meet this destiny by being 
 used to the full — utto — used to the complete satisfaction of 
 appetite. The verb iariv is more than a copula. It means — 
 exists — which things exist. The noun (f)dopd is often used in 
 a physical sense — in the Seventy, Ex. xviii. 18 ; Isa. xxiv. 
 3 ; Jonah ii. 7 ; and in the New Testament, 1 Cor. xv. 42, 
 50 ; 2 Pet. ii. 12; Josephus, Antiq. \ii. 13, 3. The term 
 a7ro;^p77o-t? is not abuse in the English sense of the word — but, 
 " full use." The Latin ahutor has this meaning also — to use 
 up ; as often in Cicero, and also in Terence and Suetonius. 
 It is this using up or consuming of a thing by use contained 
 in the dnro and cib, that gave the term in Latin, Greek, and 
 English, the secondary signification of misuse. 
 
 The apostle thus states two objections to the Colossian 
 asceticism. First. It contradicts the design of Providence, 
 which created such meats and drinks for man's use and satis- 
 faction. The apostle, as we have said, uses dTro-^prja-i^i, which 
 does not signify abuse, but full use. The maxims of the 
 false teachers are — " touch not, taste not, handle not ; " but the 
 things from which he sternly enjoins this abstinence are, in 
 their own nature, utterly harmless, and not only is the use of 
 them unaccompanied with spiritual damage, but that use is 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 22. 197 
 
 enjoined by Him whose providence has so liberally furnished 
 them for the stay and support of life. The meats and drinks 
 so frowned upon have been created for the very purpose of 
 being consumed, and having served their purpose in this con- 
 sumption they perish. A religion of asceticism is therefore a 
 libel upon Providence — a surly and superstitious refusal of the 
 Divine benignity. It believes that the eating and drinking 
 of some gifts of Divine goodness is fraught with unspeakable 
 danger, and therefore it makes its selections among them in its 
 " show of wisdom." Strange conviction, that what is physically 
 nutritious may be spiritually poisonous ; and that what gives 
 strength to the body may send " leanness to the soul " I No 
 wonder that such a self-righteous and ungrateful practice led 
 by a swift path to a dark and Manicha^an theology. 
 
 And, secondly, things which are meant to perish in being 
 used up, can have little connection with genuine piety ; it does 
 not, and cannot depend on abstinence from them. Our Lord 
 Himself said — " not that which goeth into the mouth defileth 
 a man ; " and the apostle declares — " every creature of God is 
 good, and nothing to be refused ; " and he speaks of meats 
 " which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving." 
 1 Cor. vi. 13. It degrades Christianity to make it a system 
 of physical or ascetic distinctions. Spirituality is not based 
 on such external and ceremonial forms. The error, as 01s- 
 hausen says, " was in looking for holiness in the outward 
 rather than the inward." Such an error has been, alas ! too 
 common in the church, and is the result of superstitious 
 indolence and vanity. Men seek to be acted on from with- 
 out, and to be sanctified as if by the secret and unconscious 
 charm of an amulet ; misunderstanding, forgetting, or shun- 
 ning the mighty work or change which should be going on 
 within. That change is from the centre to the outer life, not 
 from the outer life to the seat of motive and thought. What 
 the lips receive or refuse from " cup and platter," has neither 
 propitiatory merit nor demerit, nor can it exercise a hidden 
 power over heart and mind. The palate may be ungratified 
 and yet the conscience be defiled ; the anchorite, while he 
 starves himself, may roll many a vice, as a sweet morsel, under 
 his tongue ; for self-denial in corporeal appetite usually takes 
 ample revenge or compensation in spiritual indulgence and 
 
198 COLOSSIANS II. 23. 
 
 pride. And thus it has been often found, that men attach a 
 
 higher sanctity to abstinence from certain kinds of food and 
 
 physical refreshment, than to abstinence from sin ; and would 
 
 rather violate a Divine statute, than break a self-inflicted 
 
 fast. 
 
 What mean they ? Canst thou dream there is a power 
 In lighter diet at a later hour 
 To charm to sleep the threatenings of the skies, 
 And hide past folly from all-seeing eyes ? ^ 
 
 Several things concur in justifying the view we have taken, 
 which is that of the Greek Fathers, of Luther, Calvin, and Beza, 
 of Grotius, Meyer, Steiger, and Bahr. The apostle is speaking 
 of physical things, as eating and drinking, and it is natural to 
 understand <p6opd and airoxpvf^''^ ^^ their physical sense, and 
 in connection with those elements of forbidden sustenance. 
 Again, the writer places no substantive after the three verbs, 
 and the ellipse imparts a certain emphasis. The objects to be 
 abstained from were yet present to his mind, and it was 
 natural for him to allude to them, and to show that they were 
 designed for use, nay, were of so little permanence and value 
 that they perished in this use. The mimetic clause — " touch 
 not," etc., is inserted, or rather rapidly interjected, as the 
 apostle passes on. It will therefore be best read in a paren- 
 thesis. The swiftness of the apostle's thoughts interferes so far 
 with the order of them. He first shows the inconsistency of 
 yielding to ordinances after they had become dead to them ; 
 and he meant to point out the source of such ordinances, but 
 the mention of them suggests the pointed quotation of some 
 of them, and then he cannot refrain, in a brief underthought, 
 from exposing their absurdity, ere he formally carries out his 
 purpose of showing their origin and inutility. Lastly, the 
 Greek Fathers understand the phrase in this way. They do 
 not mince the matter, but give cfiOopd its coarsest meaning. 
 Chrysostom, followed by Theodoret, says — et? Koirpov yap 
 diravra fjueTajBaXKerai. (Ecumenius uses this language — 
 viroKeiraL iv tm dcfieSpMvt ; while Theophylact is yet more 
 explicit — (ji9eip6fX€va <yap iv rfj yaa-rpl Blo, tov d(f)€Bpcovo<i 
 vTToppei. 
 
 (Ver. 23.) "Atlvci iarcv \6yov /juev e^ovra <TO(f)ia<i — " Which 
 ^ Cowper. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 23. 199 
 
 things indeed having a show of wisdom." The antecedent to 
 anva is the preceding clause — " doctrines and commandments 
 of men." Kiihner, § 431, 2. The peculiar form anva repre- 
 sents this idea — all which things, that is, the entire class of 
 them. Kiihner, § 781, 4, 5. We do not connect eariv with 
 the participle exovra, as some do ; but specially with the 
 concluding clause of the verse. ,40709 signifies sometimes 
 report or rumour — then mere rumour — then mere talk or 
 pretext — words and only words — \6yov ov irpdyfjbara. It is 
 thus opposed to akrjdeia. Diodorus Siculus, 13, 4; Polybius, 
 17 (18), 14, 5. The word thus means a certain kind of 
 semblance, which in Scotch is called a so^igh — sound without 
 reality. These precepts and commandments had the air, aspect, 
 nomenclature, and pretensions of wisdom. The particle fiev 
 might imply the contrast, the apodosis not being formally 
 expressed. Kiihner, § 734, 2 ; Winer, § 63, 1. 2, e. This last 
 critic says — the parallel member of the sentence is included 
 in the one with fiiv. Thus, Heb. vi. 16, — men, indeed — ^lev 
 — swear by the greater, and the implied contrast is, but God 
 can only swear by Himself. These teachings have a show of 
 wisdom, ixev — but none in reality. Or, Eom. iii. 2, " What 
 advantage, then, hath the Jew ? — much every way " — irpcoTov 
 fiiv — " chiefly indeed," but not wholly, " because that unto 
 them were committed the oracles of God." Thus Acts xix. 4, 
 *I(odvvT]<i fiev i^aTTTiaev — " John indeed baptized " the baptism 
 of repentance ; the implied contrast being — but not so Jesus. 
 So, in the clause before us, the same construction has been 
 found by some, — there is the semblance, indeed, of wisdom, 
 but not the reality. We are inclined, however, to regard the 
 apodosis as existing in ovk iv Tififj rivi ; but Se is not expressed, 
 because the construction is changed into the dative, following 
 up the case of the preceding nouns, and because the word ovk, 
 to which Bi would be attached, has in it a palpable adversative 
 power. It was worse than hypercriticism on the part of 
 Jerome to say, that the particle was omitted — propter' 
 imperitiani artis grammaticae. The apostle particularizes and 
 adds, this verbiage of wisdom consists " in will-worship " — 
 
 'Ev iOekoOprjcTKeia. This is worship not enjoyed by God, 
 but springing out of man's own ingenuity — unauthorized 
 devotion, OprjcrKeia being religious service — the outer mani- 
 
200 COLOSSIANS II. 23. 
 
 festation of inner feeling. Thus, tOekoBovKo^; is one who is 
 wilfully a slave ; idekoKtvBvvo'i is one who is wilfully in 
 danger. The worship referred to is unsolicited and unaccepted. 
 It is superstition, and probably is the homage paid to angels. 
 Such worship had the feint of wisdom, as it professed to base 
 itself on invisible arcana ; and to ask and receive blessings 
 and protection from creatures, whose agency comes not within 
 the range of observation, but who were supposed to be the 
 patrons and defenders of those who could name them in 
 erring and extravagant devotion. 
 
 Kal raireivo^pocrvvri — "And humility." This has been 
 already explained under the 18 th verse. The humility re- 
 ferred to is plainly of that spurious kind, that, in its excess 
 and affectation, could not look up to God, but deemed it 
 wondrous wisdom to invoke angels on its behalf. 
 
 KaX d<j)€LSLa a(t)fiaTo<;. The term a(})€tSla is unsparingness, 
 and here unsparingness in the form of severity, or that austere 
 asceticism which the apostle has already reprimanded. In 
 this sense it often occurs among the classical writers.^ The 
 body is not only kept under, that is, kept in its proper and 
 subordinate position, but it is hated, lacerated, and tormented 
 into debility. The appetites are looked upon as sinful, and 
 are checked — not supplied in healthful moderation. Every 
 species of support is grudged — " to back and belly too." The 
 physical constitution is thus enervated and sickened. Yet its 
 sinful tendencies are only beaten down, not eradicated. Job 
 made a covenant with his eyes, but those fanatics would dim 
 theirs by fasting. The whole process was a cardinal mistake, 
 for it was a system of externals, both in ceremonial and ethics. 
 The body might be reduced, but the evil bias might remain 
 unchecked. A man might whip and fast himself into a 
 walking skeleton, and yet the spirit within him might have 
 all its lusts unconquered, for all it had lost was only the 
 ability to gratify them. To place a fetter on a robber's hand 
 will not cure him of covetousness, though it may disqualify 
 him from actual theft. To seal up a swearer's mouth will not 
 pluck profanity out of his heart, though it may for the time 
 prevent him from taking God's name in vain. To lacerate 
 the flesh almost to suicide, merely incapacitates it for indul- 
 1 Diodorus Sic. 13, 60. Thucyd. ii. 51. 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 23. 201 
 
 gence, but does not extirpate sinful desire. Its air of superior 
 sanctity ^ is only pride in disguise — it has but " a show of 
 wisdom," and is not — 
 
 OvK, iv TLjjifi Tivl, Trpo? 7r\r]a/jLovr)v rrj<; crapKo^. There is 
 difficulty in arriving at a correct interpretation of these clauses, 
 and one reason is, that we have first to solve whether they 
 should be joined or disconnected. It is quite plain that the 
 apostle intends a contrast, and the preposition iv is repeated. 
 
 1. Very many interpreters supply a-(io/jLaro<i to Ti/xfj. The 
 Greek interpreters held this view, followed by Pelagius, Calvin, 
 Luther, and other reformers ; by Estius, and a-Lapide in the 
 Popish Church ; by Daille, Davenant, and Macknight ; and in 
 later times by the lately deceased critics, De Wette and 
 Baumgarten-Crusius. The meaning, then, is — " which things 
 have a show of wisdom in will- worship, humility, and neglect- 
 ing of the body, not in any honour shown to the body in 
 reference to such things as satisfy corporeal appetite." This 
 is a favourite interpretation, but we cannot receive it. For, 
 as Meyer remarks, it gives adp^ the meaning of o-cofia, which 
 had just been previously used — a meaning which it cannot 
 bear. Then, too, this exegesis supplies <7(t)/jiaro<; without any 
 reason, and it restricts the contrast introduced by ovk to only 
 one member of the sentence. That contrast seems to refer to 
 all the manifestations of this specious wisdom, and not simply 
 to one of them. Besides, this interpretation gives a very 
 feeble ending to the verse ; austerity towards the body, is 
 M'eakly characterized as not giving honour to the body in 
 
 ^ Car je vous prie quelle ombre de sagesse y a-t-il en ee caresme par exemple, 
 qu'ils commencerent I'autre jour, apres la preface ordinaire de leur carneval ? 
 Ou est la raison ? ou le sens commun, qui puisse avoiier, s'il est litre, que ce soit 
 sagesse, apres s'estre licentie a toute sorte de debauches, et de folies, de penser 
 effacer tout cela avec une poign^e de ceudres ? Que ce soit sagesse de croire, 
 que c'est jeusner, de manger du poisson ? Que ce soit sagesse d'estimer, que 
 c'est se sanctifier, de manger des lierbes, ou du saumon, ou de la moulue ? 
 ct que c'est soiiiller son ^me d'un pech^ mortel, et digne du feu eternel, de 
 gouter d'un morceau de beuf, ou de niouton, ces quarante jours durant? comme 
 si toute la nature des choses s'^toit chang^e en un moment, et que les 
 animaux de la terre fussent tons devenus contagieux, et mortel s, de bons et 
 salutaires, qu'ils ^to3'ent, il n'y a que quatre jours ? Est-ce sagesse d'attacher 
 le Christianisme k une observation si peu raisonnable, et de dire, comme ils 
 font, que ceux, qui mangent de la chair en ce temps, ne sont pas Chretiens ? II 
 n'y a point d'esprit si mediocre, qui ne juge aistiment, qu'il n'y a nuUe apparence 
 de sagesse en tout cela ; pour ne rien dire de pis. — Daill6, pp. 548-550. 
 
202 COLOSSIANS II. 23. 
 
 things which satisfy its physical appetites, as if the Colossians 
 needed such a definition. And lastly, this irXija-fiom] is 
 something more than the gratification of corporeal desire, for 
 in the Pauline vocabulary, acofia is only a portion of adp^. 
 
 2. Another view, which holds the same connection, is that 
 which gives rifjn] the sense of value, and brings out this 
 exegesis — which are not of any value, inasmuch as they are 
 concerned with things which serve only to the gratification of 
 the flesh. These are useless prohibitions, and have but a 
 show of wisdom, for they are concerned with matters which 
 minister only to appetite — quum ad ca spectent quibus farciUir 
 caro. The participle ovra is thus supposed to stand before 
 7rpo9. This is the idea of Beza and Crocius, and that of 
 Heinrichs is only a worse modification of it. It restricts the 
 meaning of a-dp^, and needs considerable eking out in its 
 construction. 
 
 3. Others take the word a-dp^ in its full sense, and suppose 
 the apostle to mean that all prohibitions which bear especially 
 against the body are of little worth, for they minister all the 
 while to the pride of corrupted humanity. The last clause is 
 thus nearly equivalent to an earlier one — " vainly puffed up 
 by his fleshly mind." With some varieties, this is the 
 exegesis of Hilary, Bengel, Storr, Flatt, Bohmer, Steiger, 
 Biihr, and Huther. Meyer, in taking the same view, places 
 aapKo^i in contrast with aoiixaro<i, and ifK'qa^iovr] with d^eihla. 
 He also lays the principal stress of the contrast on the words 
 ovK ii> rtfif] TLvl, as if they stood in antagonism to the \6yov 
 ao(J3la<;. That wisdom is all a pretence — it has no honour in 
 reality or basis. Still, with this otherwise good interpretation, 
 the connection of the last clause appears to be hard, for Trpo? 
 must signify um dadurcJi, or " all of them tend to." A modi- 
 fication of this view is adopted by Conybeare, who gives the 
 clause a pregnant sense — " not of any value to check the 
 indulgence of the flesh." His reviewer in the North British 
 Rcvieiv applauds the exegesis.^ We do not accept the sense 
 of fleshly passion for adp^, and we cannot believe 7r/3o<? to 
 be so utterly indifferent in its meaning. In the proposed 
 
 ' Vol. XX. p. 336. " There is really no difSeulty in the vp'o;. As a jocose 
 philologer of cm- acquaintance observed — ' Poor ■rp'o; is morally indifferent, and 
 flexible either to checking or promoting. ' " 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 23. 203 
 
 exegesis, tt/oo? must signify "against." It sometimes is so 
 translated, still the idea of hostility is found, not in the 
 particle, but in its adjuncts, as fid^eardai, ^dWeiv, or as in 
 the New Testament, Acts vi. 1, where the idea of antagonism 
 is found in yoyyva-fioii, Acts xxiv. 19, where the clause is 
 preceded by KaTTjyopeiv, and in Eph. vi. 11, where there is 
 the idea of combat. In all such cases the idea of hostility is 
 implied in the clause, and the preposition only expresses the 
 reference — but there is no such idea implied in the verse 
 before us. The same principle explains the anay of classical 
 instances adduced by Peile 
 
 4. While we take this general view, we are inclined to 
 regard the verse, from \6yov to tivi, as participial ; and with 
 Bahr, closely to connect icniv with tt/jo?. " Which things 
 having, indeed, a show of wisdom in superstition, humility, 
 and corporeal austerity, not in any thing of value, are for, or 
 minister to the gratification of the flesh." H/do? after et/*/ 
 denotes result. John xi. 4. There needs, with this view, 
 the insertion of no explanatory terms, or connecting ideas 
 taken for granted. The verb stands at a distance from the 
 preposition, but is not on that account the less emphatic. 
 The apostle means to condemn those precepts and teachings, 
 and he is about to pronounce the sentence ; but to make it 
 the more emphatic he briefly enumerates what they chiefly 
 consist of, and then his censure is, that they produce an effect 
 directly the opposite to their professed design. Their avowed 
 purpose is to loM'er and abase humanity, and he gives them 
 epithets all showing this object ; while he adds with sternness 
 and force, that their only result is to rouse up and inflate 
 imregenerate humanity. That Tr'Kijajj.ov^ can bear this 
 tropical meaning there is no doubt, as in Hab, ii. 16, where 
 the word occurs with art/im?; Sirach i. 16, where it is used 
 with o-o0ta9; and Isa. Ixv. 15, where it stands absolutely, 
 but with a spiritual sense. The phrase ovk iv rifijj tlvI, then 
 brings out this contrast — those doctrines have in sooth a 
 show of wisdom, in their will- worship, humility, and corporeal 
 austerity, but they have really nothing of value . 
 
 The paragraph therefore reprobates superstitious asceticism. 
 The religious history of the world shows what fascination there 
 is to many minds in voluntary suffering. Such asceticism 
 
204 COLOSSIANS II. 23. 
 
 threw its eclipse over the bright and lovely spirit of Pascal. 
 The oriental temperament feels powerfully the fatal charm. As 
 if the Divine Being might fail to subject them to a sufficient 
 amount of discipline, men assume the labour of disciplining 
 themselves, but choose a mode very unlike that which God 
 usually employs. 
 
 The Brahmin kindles on his own bare head 
 
 The sacred fires, self-torturing his trade. 
 
 Which is the saintlier worthy of the two ? 
 
 Past all dispute yon anchorite, say you. 
 
 Your sentence and mine differ. What's a name ? 
 
 I say the Brahmin has the fairer claim, 
 
 If sufferings Scripture nowhere recommends, 
 
 Devised by self to answer selfish ends. 
 
 Give saintship, then, all Europe must agree 
 
 Ten starveling hermits suffer less than he. 
 
 Such delusions are not confined to religious follies, for their 
 origin lies deep in human nature. Men glory in being what 
 their fellows dare not aspire to, and there is no little self- 
 aggrandizement in this self-annihilation. When Diogenes 
 lifted his foot on Plato's velvet cushion and shouted, " Thus I 
 trample on Plato's pride," the Athenian sage justly replied, 
 " But with still greater pride." The apostle utters a similar 
 sentiment ; the carnal nature is all the while gratified, even 
 though the body, wan and wasted, is reduced to the point of 
 bare existence. There is more pride in cells and cloisters 
 than in courts and palaces, and oftentimes as gross sensuality. 
 The devotee deifies himself, is more to himself than the object 
 of his homage. The whole of these fanatical processes, so far 
 from accomplishing their ostensible object, really produce the 
 reverse ; such will- worship is an impious invention ; such 
 humility is pride in its most sullen and offensive form ; and 
 these corporeal macerations, so far from subduing and 
 sanctifying, only gratify to satiety the coarse and selfish 
 passions ; nay, as history has shown, tend to nurse licentious- 
 ness in one age, and a ferocious fanaticism in another. The 
 entire phenomenon, whatever its special aspect, is a huge self- 
 deception, and a reversal of that moral order which God has 
 established. 
 
 In the course of expounding this chapter, we have found 
 several illustrations in post- apostolic times. We now present 
 
COLOSSIANS II. 23. 205 
 
 another, which shows how the practices described in this sec- 
 tion were viewed in themselves, and condemned at a very 
 early period. The unknown author of that very precious 
 document, the letter to Diognetus, and now rightly included 
 by Hefele among the remains of the apostolical Fathers, 
 speaks in a style worthy of an apostle. He says of the Jews, 
 " But indeed I think that you have no need to learn from me 
 their ridiculous and senseless alarms about their food, their 
 superstition about the Sabbath, their boasting of circumcision, 
 and their pretexts of fasting, and the observance of new 
 moons. How is it right to receive some of the things which 
 God has created for the use of man as fitly ^ created, and to 
 reject others of them as useless and superfluous ? How can it 
 be else than impious to libel God, as if He had forbidden any 
 good action to be done on the Sabbath day ? How worthy of 
 ridicule their exultation about the curtailment of the flesh 
 as a witness of their election, as though on this account they 
 were the peculiar objects of God's complacency ! Who will 
 regard as a sign of piety, and will not much more regard as a 
 mark of folly, their scrupulous study of the ^ stars, and their 
 watching of the moon, in order to procure the observance of 
 months and days, and to arrange the Divine dispensations and 
 changes of the seasons — some into feasts and others into fasts, 
 according to their inclination ? I imagine that you are suf- 
 ficiently informed, that the Christians rightly abstain from 
 the prevailing emptiness of worship and delusion, and from 
 the fussiness^ and vainglory of the Jews." 
 
 Our readers will pardon us for inserting in a note a modern instance of this 
 pride of sanctity covered with a robe of revolting humility. Last year (1854), a 
 new saint was added to the Popish calendar, by name Benedetto Giuseppe Labre, 
 who had made his residence in the Coliseo for many years, and was noted by 
 travellers for his craziness and filth. At the usual mock trial which takes place 
 at a canonization, the pleading of the so-called Devil's advocate against him 
 was rebutted by the so-called God's advocate in the following terms, literally 
 translated from the paper : — "He was a model of humility, abstinence, and 
 mortification, taking only for food remains of cabbage, lemon peel, or lettuce 
 leaves, which he picked up in the streets. He even ate, once, some spoiled 
 
 •• KaXus. * HapiSpiiovTtic;. 
 
 2 ni>>.vri>ayfiiiffijyr.s. Opera, Justini Mart. vol. ii. pp. 474-476, ed. Otto. 
 
206 COLOSSI ANS II. 23. 
 
 soup which he found on a dunghill, where it had been thrown. All these facts 
 are fully proved by the juridical documents laid before the tribunah" . . . . 
 Having spoken at length of the wooden cup, all broken and rotten, in which he 
 received his soup at the door of the houses, " eternal monument of his volun- 
 tary privations," the advocate proceeds : "What more shall I say? A glance 
 cast upon him was sufficient to discover in him a perfect model of poverty. His 
 hair and beard were neglected, his face pale, his garments ragged, his body 
 livid ; a rosary hung from his neck ; he wore no stockings ; his shirt was dirty 
 and disgusting ; and to give of him a full idea, let us add, that he was so com- 
 pletely covered with vermin (pidocchi), that in the churches many persons kept 
 away from him for fear of catching them ! " 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 The apostle leaves his scornful flagellation of the false 
 teachers, and comes to a more congenial occupation. For 
 though it is needful to refute error, it is more pleasant to 
 inculcate truth. If the Colossian believers should act iu 
 accordance with their privileges — if they understood how the 
 charge preferred against them by the law had been met with 
 a discharge on the cross of Calvary — if the process of sanc- 
 tification beginning in their hearts should work outward, and 
 hallow and adorn their lives — if they felt that whatever bless- 
 ings they enjoyed in part, or anticipated in fulness, sprang 
 from union with Christ, then should they be fortified against 
 every effort to induce them to sever themselves from the 
 Head, and against every attempt to substitute reveries for 
 truth, or human inventions for Divine enactments. Then, 
 too, should they learn that worship does not consist of 
 superstitious invocations, and that sanctification is not identi- 
 cal with fanatical austerities. Let them move in a spiritual 
 region lifted far above those earthly vanities, and let them 
 look down on them as the offspring of a morbid and self- 
 deceived imagination, or the craving and the nutriment of a 
 self-satisfied pride. 
 
 (Ver. 1.) El ovv avvrj^epOrjTe r<p Xpicnm — "If, then, ye 
 have been raised together with Christ," or are in a risen state. 
 The particle ovv is illative, and el does not mean "if," as if it 
 betokened uncertainty, but it introduces a premiss on which a 
 conclusion is to be based. It is somewhat of a syllogistic 
 form, as Fritzsche, Klihner, and Meyer suppose, but the notion 
 appears to be a needless refinement. There are few forms of 
 reasoning or inference based upon fact or hypothesis, which 
 cannot be moulded into a syllogism. There is no doubtful- 
 ness in the statement, it asserts an actual condition, as in 
 many parts of the New Testament too numerous to quote. 
 Hartung, ii. p. 202. The same meaning must be given to 
 
208 COLOSSIANS III. 1. 
 
 it as in ii. 20. They had been dead in sins, but they had 
 been quickened together with Christ, There may be a refer- 
 ence, as many suppose, to the phrase, "buried in baptism," 
 though there the allusion is to death to sin, not death in it. 
 Now, the restoration of life implies resurrection, for the dead 
 on being quickened do not lie in their sepulchres. The power 
 that reanimated Lazarus immediately cried to him, " Come 
 forth." The nature and results of this spiritual resurrection 
 are detailed under Eph. ii. 6. Union with Christ enjoys a 
 peculiar and merited prominence — " risen with Christ." Their 
 new position laid them under a special obligation, and they 
 are thus enjoined — " seek those things which are above " — 
 
 Ta avco ^7]Telre. The reference in avco is here, as is proved 
 by the concluding clause, to heaven — " seek things in heaven." 
 There is no occasion to supply dyaOd, for it is implied. The 
 expression is used in contrast with Karco, and with rd iirl t?}? 
 yfj^ in the following verse. The same idea is often expressed, as 
 in Phil. iii. 14, 20 ; Matt. vi. 20, 33 ; Gal. iv. 26. The region 
 of spiritual death is a nether-world, that of life is an elevated 
 realm — the living not only rise, but they sit with Christ " in 
 the heavenly places." The precise locality is now indicated — 
 
 Ov 6 Xpi(TT6<i icrrtv iv Se^ca rov ©eov KaOij/xevo'; — " Where 
 Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God." The ideas of 
 honour, power, and felicity, implied in the declaration will be 
 found under Eph. i. 20. Illustrations or allusions occur in 
 1 Kings ii. 19; 1 Sam. xx. 2 5 ; Ps. ex. 1 ; Eev. iii. 2 1 ; 
 Ptom. viii. 34 ; Heb. vii. 25 ; Phil. ii. 9. 
 
 The clause presents inducements to obey the injunction, 
 " Seek those things which are above." And these inducements 
 lie in the statement of two facts. Fii^st, they have been raised 
 up with Christ, and therefore they ought to seek things above. 
 Any other search or desire would be very inconsistent. The 
 image seems to be — the region of the dead is beneath ; they 
 are let down to their final resting-place. Should, then, a man 
 rise from this dark and deep receptacle, and ascend to the 
 living world, would he set his desires on the gloom, and chill, 
 and rottenness, he had left behind him ? Would he place the 
 objects of his search among the coffins, and the mean and 
 creeping things that live on putrefaction ? Would he still 
 seek for things below ? At the very idea and memory of that 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 2. 209 
 
 locality would not his spirit shudder ? And if the Christians 
 at Colosse had been raised from a yet lower condition, and by 
 a still nobler resurrection, should not similar feelings and 
 associations rule their minds ? Why should they be gazing 
 downwards from their position, and groping amidst things so 
 far beneath them ? Their past state, with its sin and guilt, its 
 degradation and misery, could surely have no attractions for 
 them. Having been brought up, they must still look up ; and 
 what they seek must be in harmony with their own pure and 
 elevated position — Su7'stnn corda. And, secondly, Christ is 
 above in a station of glory. Their union with Him will lead 
 their thoughts to Him. Whatever the character of the things 
 to be sought may be, they are to be found with Christ. Truth 
 and blessing are from Him — promise and hope centre in Him. 
 Whether the " things above " be a fuller glimpse of heaven, a 
 higher preparation for it, or a sweeter foretaste of it ; whether 
 it be to learn its songs, reach a deeper sympathy with its 
 enjoyments, or realize a living unity with its population ; still, 
 Christ at God's right hand enjoys a special pre-eminence, as 
 those attainments are from Him, and the song, the service, 
 and the inhabitants of heaven have Him as object, or as Lord. 
 As the salvation which they experience comes from that 
 blood by the shedding of which He rose to His glorious 
 position — as there He intercedes so effectually, and governs so 
 graciously, by word, providence, and Spirit — as there He 
 holds heaven in their name, and prepares them for it — as their 
 present life and peace originate in union with Him — a union 
 to be realized yet more vividly when He shall bid them 
 " come up hither ; " therefore should their desire stretch away 
 upward and onward towards Him and the scene he occupies 
 " on the right hand of the glorious majesty." " An high look," 
 though it be sin in ordinary things, and be the index of a 
 proud heart, is yet the true aspect of a humble believer. 
 
 The form of expression, " things above," while it has a 
 distinctive meaning in Christianity, and is not a mere image, 
 is one that is also based on our moral nature. Local elevation 
 is the instinctive symbol of spiritual aspiration and refine- 
 ment. Hence the origin of the phrases collected by some 
 commentators from the classics. 
 
 (Ver. 2.) Ta avco (ppoveire, fj,r] to, eVt t?}? 7^9 — " Set your 
 
210 COLOSSIANS III. 2. 
 
 mind on things above, not on things on the earth." The 
 verb in this verse differs so far from that employed in the 
 preceding, that it refers more to inner disposition, while the 
 former is rather practical pursuit. The sure safeguard 
 against seeking things below, is not to set the mind upon 
 them. The " things above " have been already glanced at. 
 The things " on the earth " are not, as Huther and Schrader 
 suppose, the meat and drinks and other elements of the 
 ascetic system which the apostle condemns, but such things 
 as are the objects of usual and intense search among men. 
 Phil. iii. 19. The apostle does not urge any transcendental 
 contempt of things below, but simply asks that the heart be 
 not set upon them in the same way, and to the same extent, 
 in which it is set upon things above. The pilgrim is not to 
 despise the comforts which he may meet with by the way, 
 but he is not to tarry among them, or leave them with regret. 
 " Things on earth " are only subordinate and instrumental — 
 " things above " are supreme and final. Attachment to things 
 on the earth is unworthy of one who has risen with Christ, 
 for they are beneath him, and the love of them is not at all 
 in harmony with his position and prospects. What can wealth 
 achieve for him who has treasure laid up in heaven ? Or 
 honour for him who is already enthroned in the heavenly 
 places ? Or pleasure for him who revels in " newness of 
 life " ? Or power for him who is endowed with a moral 
 omnipotence ? Or fame for him who enjoys the approval of 
 God ? Nay, too often, when the " things on earth " are 
 possessed, they concentrate the heart upon them, and the 
 "look and thoughts are downward bent." Bishop Wilson on 
 this place observes — " for things on earth too naturally draw 
 us down, attract us, fix us. Esau's red pottage prevails over 
 the birthright. The guests in the parable turn away to their 
 land, or oxen, or families. The Gadarene mind wishes Christ 
 to depart from its coasts." ^ The things on earth are seen, 
 therefore they are temporal ; the things in heaven are unseen, 
 and therefore they are eternal. If the mind be fully occupied 
 with things above, things on earth will be barred out. The 
 apostle adduces another reason, not indeed essentially different, 
 but exhibiting another phasis of the argument — 
 
 ' Lectures on Colossians, p. 282, 3rd ed. 
 
COLOSSIANS . III. 3. 211 
 
 (Ver. 3.) 'AireOdveTe yap — " For ye died." The expression 
 is general, and the apostle does not simply say, ye died to the 
 world — TOi? KUTco,^ or mundo ^ — and should have no more 
 concern with it, but he says, ye died, that is, with Christ, and 
 all that is out of Christ, or hostile to Him, should cease to 
 excite your attention or engross your industry. The apostle 
 had said in the first verse that they had risen with Christ, here 
 he resorts to a previous point in their spiritual career, and says 
 they had already died. ii. 20. Neither " seek nor savour " the 
 things of earth ; for having died, and having been even buried 
 with Christ, your sphere of being, action, and enjoyment, is 
 totally different from your former state. As Luther says — 
 Wir leben nicht im Fleisch, sondern luir loohncn im Fleisch — 
 " we live not in the flesh, but we dwell in the flesh." When 
 they did die, their death was but a birth into a new life, for 
 he adds — 
 
 Kal 7] ^wrj vficov KeKpvmaL avv tu> XpccrrS iv tm 0eo3 — " And 
 your life has been hidden with Christ in God." The death is 
 past and over, but the life has been hid, and still is in that 
 hidden state — KeKpvirrat. The peculiar phraseology of the 
 clause has suggested a variety of interpretations. There are 
 many who regard this life as future or eternal life, laid up for 
 Christians with Christ in God. So the Greek Fathers, and 
 many who partly follow them, such as Erasmus, Eosenmiiller, 
 Barnes, and Meyer. We apprehend that the apostle speaks 
 not of the resurrection, as Theodoret supposes, but of a spiritual 
 life enjoyed now, though not in the meantime fully developed. 
 That life which we now live in the flesh has a hidden source 
 with Christ in God — its infinite fountain. The idea of 
 Olshausen is somewhat different, for he places the notion of 
 concealment in the nature of the life more than in its source. 
 He says — " the life of believers is called hidden, inasmuch 
 as it is inward, and the outward does not correspond 
 with it." Von Gerlach says — "his life is not in him, but 
 it is in Christ." The exegesis of De Wette is similar. This 
 life, he says, is hidden, being inner as opposed to being 
 visible — inncrliclmicht avf das siclitbarc gcrichtd ist — and as 
 being ideal, not — real oder offenhar. Barnes, again, lays 
 too much stress on the idea of security : eternal life is " safely 
 
 ' Theopliylact. " Bengel. 
 
 R 
 
212 COLOSSIANS III, 3. 
 
 deposited " ^ with Christ in God. a-Lapide finds his choicest 
 illustration of the phrase in the seclusion of monastic life. 
 We cannot agree witli such as hold that the apostle calls this 
 a hidden life, as being concealed from the world, inasmuch 
 as he counsels them to make the results of it more apparent, 
 and to show their vitality in their modes of action. The 
 mortification of the members which is enjoined in the following 
 verse, is but the fruit and expansion of this life. As it diffuses 
 itself, it carries death with it to all sinful propensities. ISTow, 
 of this life God is the source, and Christ the channel ; and 
 when it is said to be hid " with Christ in God," the mean- 
 ing is not only that channel and fountain are both super- 
 sensuous and invisible, but that our connection with them is 
 also a matter of inner experience — not as yet of full and 
 open manifestation. 
 
 This life is hidden avv tco Xpicrrw — " with Christ," for He 
 is its medium, and our union with Him gives us life ; and it 
 is hidden with Him iv t&I ©ew — " in God," not merely as 
 He is now removed from view and exalted to God's right 
 hand, but as He enjoys supreme repose and fellowship in the 
 bosom of His Father. Bohmer's connection of ^co?; at once 
 with avv T&) XpLaro) is forbidden by the position of the words; 
 and the eccentric and baseless interpretation of Calixtus and 
 Heinrichs needs not be mentioned. The idea of concealment, 
 and not that of security, seems to be principally contained in 
 the verb, for it is placed in contrast with open manifestation 
 at Christ's appearance. If the apostle had meant our future 
 life, then the idea of security might naturally be found in this 
 concealment. But he speaks of present life — life really, 
 though partially enjoyed, life giving a palpable, though feeble, 
 demonstration of its health and vigour. The prepositions avi^ 
 
 ' "Ac ne molesta sit exspectatio, notemus istas particulas, in Deo, et cum 
 Chrisio: quae significant, extra periculumessevitamnostram, tametsinon apparent. 
 Nam et Deus fidelis est, ideoque uon abnegabit depositum, nee fallct in suscepta 
 custodia : et Christi societas maiorem etiamnum securitatem affert. Quid enim 
 magis expetendum, quam vitam nostram manere cum ipso vitae fonte ? Quare 
 non est, quod terreamur, si undique circumspicientes vitam uusquam cernamus. 
 Spe enim salvi sumus. Ea vero, quae iam patent oculis, non sperantur. Neque 
 vero tantum mundi opinione vitam absconditam esse docet, sed etiam quoad 
 sensum nostrum : quia hoc verum et necessarium est spei nostrae experimentum, 
 ut tanquam morte circumdati vitam alibi quaeramus quam in mundo. " — Calvin 
 in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 4. 213 
 
 and €v express, as Meyer remarks, the first coherence, and 
 the second inherence. 
 
 This life is at once divine and mediatorial — God's gift to 
 believers through Christ ; and the gift, along with its medium 
 and its destiny, are hidden in the Giver, as the infinite source. 
 But this concealment is no argument against present and 
 partial enjoyment ; for one may drink of the stream and be 
 unable either to detect its source, which hides itself far away 
 and high among the mountains, or conjecture at what distant 
 point its deepening current pours itself into the ocean. The 
 life is not said, by the apostle, to be hidden in itself, either 
 from the world or from believers themselves, as so many com- 
 mentators suppose. True, indeed, it is mysterious. It is not 
 among things of vulgar gaze. It is a strange experience ; 
 none can know it save he who has it. For Christians die 
 and yet live ; nay, the moment of death is that of life — the 
 instant of expiry is that of birth. Yet this life is now 
 enjoyed — is therefore now a matter of secret consciousness, 
 though much about it is beyond inquiry and analysis. No 
 one can lay bare the principle of physical life ; the knife of 
 the anatomist cannot uncover the cord which binds the 
 conscious thinking essence to its material organ and habita- 
 tion. But the special thought of the apostle is, that the 
 ethereal nature of spiritual life eludes research, alike in its 
 origin and destiny. Its source is too high for us to climb to 
 it, and its destiny is too noble to be written in human 
 language. As to the former, it is hidden with Christ in God; 
 and as to the latter, it shall not be fully revealed till Christ 
 come the second time in glory. But it shall be ultimately 
 disclosed. For Christ, with whom our life is hidden, shall 
 reveal Himself, and we whose life is so hidden with Him 
 shall also appear with Him in glory. When its medium is 
 revealed, its character and destiny shall also be laid bare. 
 
 (Ver. 4.) "Orav 6 Xpi(TTO<; (jjavepcodj] r) Kwrj i^fjuoiv, rore koI 
 vfjbel<i crvv avrw (fjavepoid/jaeade iv 86^r) — " When Christ, who 
 is our life, shall appear, then, too, shall ye with Him be 
 revealed in glory." The form v/j^mv appears, on good 
 authority, to be preferable to the -tj/j^mv of the Eeceived Text. 
 The verb (pavepcoOfj is opposed to the KeKpvTrrai of the 
 previous verse. There is concealment now, but there shall be 
 
214 COLOSSIANS III. 4. 
 
 ultimate and glorious disclosure. 1 John i. 2, iii. 2, 5 ; 
 Eom. viii. 18; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 Pet. v. 4. Christ is 
 termed " our life ; " and in the former verse our life is said 
 to be hid with Him. He is our life, not simply because he 
 reveals it, and He alone has " the words of eternal life ; " nor 
 yet because coming that we " might have life, and that we 
 might have it more abundantly," He " died that we might 
 live," and has given us this blessed pledge — " as I live, ye 
 shall live also ; " but specially, because by His Spirit, as His 
 representative. He enters into the heart and gives it life — fans 
 and fosters it by his continuous abode — gratifies all its 
 instincts, and evokes all its susceptibilities by His word and 
 His presence. " If Christ be in you, the body is dead 
 because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness." 
 When it is said — " Christ our life shall appear," the mean- 
 ing is, that He shall appear in the character of our life. In 
 this peculiar aspect of His operation shall He make Himself 
 manifest. To appear as our life, implies our relation to Him 
 as His living ones ; and the unveiling of the Fountain shall 
 allow the eye to discover the myriads of rivulets which issue 
 out of it ; or, as our life is hid with Christ, so, when Christ 
 comes out of His hiding-place, our life shall accompany Him 
 into openness and light. ISTay more, as our life, He appears 
 to perfect it, and to give it fulness and finality of develop- 
 ment. At present it is checked by a variety of causes. It 
 exists in a body " dead because of sin," and it feels the chill 
 of a mortality that so closely envelops it. The distance, too, 
 implied in the fact — that it is hidden with Christ in God — 
 keeps it from its perfect strength, and induces occasional 
 debility and lassitude ; but the revelation of Christ brings it 
 into nearness and vigour. Nay more, at that period, the 
 body is to be brought into harmony with it, and " mortality 
 shall be swallowed up of life." For He who is our life shall 
 diffuse life through us — " change our vile body, and fashion it 
 like unto His own glorious body." The physical frame then 
 to be raised, spiritualized, and imbued vt'ith life, shall be a fit 
 receptacle for the living soul within it, which shall then 
 indulge its tastes without hindrance, feeling no barrier to 
 activity in any of its occupations — no stint to capacity in 
 any of its enjoyments. Hiems nostra, says Augustine, Christi 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 4. 215 
 
 occidtatio, aestas nostra, Christi rcvelatio. Siiicer remarks — 
 gloria cajjitis est gloria coriooris et memhrorum. For the 
 apostle describes, as the consequence of the appearance of 
 Christ our life, that "we, too, shall appear with Him in glory." 
 Eom. viii. 1 7 ; 1 John iii. 2. Since He appears as our life, 
 so to appear with Him is, on our part, to appear as partakers 
 of His life. The source, progress, and maturity of our life 
 shall then be fully apparent — how it originated, and how it 
 was sustained — what course it took, and what obstacles it 
 encountered — how it was still supported, and still maintained 
 its hold — how it was felt in our own consciousness, and yet 
 had its hidden spring " with Christ in God " — and what shall 
 be now its high crown and its magnificent destiny — all shall 
 be seen in the living and life-filling brightness of " Christ our 
 life." The followers of Christ shall surround Him in triumpli, 
 a dense and glorious retinue — " ye, too, shall appear with 
 Him," and that — ev So^rj, 
 
 It would be wrong to restrict this " glory " to any special 
 aspect of final perfection. It consists, as Davenant, after the 
 schoolmen, says, of the " robe of the soul and the robe of the 
 body." It is here the result of life — vita gloriosa} of life in 
 its highest form and fullest manifestation — life diffused 
 through " spirit, soul, and body." Nor is our appearance in 
 glory with Christ a momentary gleam ; it is rather the first 
 burst of unending splendour. And it has, or shall have, for 
 its elements — final freedom from the sins and sorrows of 
 earth ; perfect holiness beyond the possibility of loss, with 
 unmingled felicity beyond the reach of forfeit ; an endless 
 abode in heaven, and in the brightest province of it ; the 
 rapturous adoration of God, and unbroken fellowship with 
 Christ; the exalted companionship of angels and genial spirits 
 of human kindred ; and the successful pursuit of Divine 
 knowledge in a realm where no shadow ever falls, but where 
 is chanted the high halleluiah, welling out of the conscious- 
 ness that all this ecstasy is of sovereign grace, ay, all of it 
 sealed to us for eternity, in connection with " Christ our life." 
 
 The apostle now descends to particularize certain forms of 
 sins which were very prevalent in heathendom — in which 
 they themselves had revelled during their prior state of 
 
 1 Beza. 
 
216 COLOSSIANS III. 5. 
 
 gloom and degradation, but which they must now and for 
 ever abandon. 
 
 (Ver. 5.) NeKpcoaaTe ovv ra fieki] vjxwv ra iirl r?}? jrj<i — 
 " Mortify, therefore, your members which are upon the earth," 
 " Therefore," since such are the peculiarities and prospects of 
 your spiritual state, act in harmony with them ; and since 
 you have died, diffuse the process of death through all your 
 members. If the heart is dead, let all the organs which it 
 once vivified and moved die too — nay, put them to death. 
 Let them be killed from want of nutriment and exercise. 
 Similar language is found in Eom. viii. 13, where Oavarovre 
 is employed; and in Gal. v. 24, where occurs the modal verb 
 (TTavprna-are. In ra fiekr], the allusion is to members of the 
 body, taken not in a physical, but in a spiritual sense. Hilary, 
 Grotius, Bengel, and others, destroy the point of the allusion 
 in regarding sin itself as a body, and its special parts as 
 members. The apostle had strongly condemned asceticism, 
 and declared it in the conclusion of the preceding chapter 
 to be an absolute failure, and he now shows how the end it 
 contemplated is to be secured. There is no reason for Meyer 
 to deny that the apostle regards " the old man " as the body 
 to which such members belong. It is not, indeed, the eye, 
 foot, and hand, as these are in themselves, or as they belong 
 to the physical frame, but as they belong to, and are in 
 subjection to the " old man." The phrase is to be understood 
 in the same spirit as our Lord's emphatic declaration about 
 the plucking out of the right eye, and the cutting off of the 
 right arm. Matt. v. 29. The lust that uses and debases 
 these organs or members as its instruments, is to be ex- 
 tirpated. 
 
 And the " members " are characterized as being ra eVt r?}? 
 yt]<; — " upon the earth." The allusion is to the previous 
 phraseology — " set your affections not on things on the earth." 
 That is to say, earth is the sphere of their existence and 
 operation ; and as they belong to it, they are to be killed, for 
 they are in utter antagonism with that higher life which is 
 hid with Christ in God. They are " of the earth, earthy " — 
 their essence is earthy, and so are their temptations, sources, 
 and forms of enjoyment. The man who possesses a life that 
 has its spring in heaven, and seeks and relishes things above, 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 5. 217 
 
 will not stoop to gratifications which are so far beneath him 
 in nature, so utterly opposed to that new and spiritual exist- 
 ence which he cherishes within him, and which grows in power 
 and health in proportion to the thoroughness and universality 
 of the death wdiicli is executed on the " members which are 
 on the earth." The apostle then enumerates some of these 
 forms of sensuality. 
 
 Uopveiav, aKaOapcriav, 7rddo<i, i7n6vfxiav KaKTqv — " Fornica- 
 tion, impurity, lust, and evil concupiscence." These accusatives 
 are in apposition to to, /xeXr]. The first two terms are found 
 in Eph. V. 3, and denote fornication and lewdness. 2 Cor. 
 xii. 21 ; Gal. v. 19. See especially under Eph. iv. 19, 
 where the second occurs, and is described. But, in fact, the 
 shapes and kinds of lewdness, to be found not only in the 
 pagan worship, and in the symbols carried in religious pro- 
 cessions, but also in common life, as depicted on tables and 
 furniture, are beyond description.^ The term Tra^o? is too 
 lightly understood by Grotius and Chrysostom, as signifying 
 — motus vitiosi, such as anger and hatred ; and perhaps too 
 darkly by such as refer it wholly to unnatural lust. The 
 noun does not seem of itself to have this last sense, but it 
 occurs with a special adjunct in Eom. i. 26 ; and the 
 adjective, Tra^t/co?, has an indescribable baseness. It seems 
 here to denote the state of mind that urges and excites to 
 impurity — to ipcoriKov rrdOo^;,^ that condition in which man 
 is mastered by unchastity, and the imagination being defiled, 
 is wholly at the mercy of obscene associations. It is morlus 
 libidinis, as Bengel says. The next terra, eiriOvixla kukt], refers 
 to the same circle of vices, and is more general in its nature. 
 The four words may be regarded as in two pairs. The prior 
 pair refers to act, the first term more particular, and the 
 second more comprehensive ; the second pair to impulse, the 
 first again more special, and the second more sweeping in its 
 nature. They were no longer to be guilty of fornication, or 
 any similar deed of lewdness ; they were no longer to be 
 filled with libidinous thoughts, or any other prurient feelings, 
 having their issue in lecherous indulgences. 
 
 Kal rrjv ifKeove^lav riTi<i iarlv elBcoXoXarpeCa — " And that 
 covetousness which is idolatry." The form T^rt? may cor- 
 » Juvenal, Sat. ii. « Plato, Phaedrus, vol. i. p. 153, Op. ed. Bekker. 
 
218 COLOSSIANS III. 6. 
 
 respond to the Latin quippe quae — since indeed. The reader 
 may turn for the meaning of ifKeove^ta, and its occurrence in 
 this connection, to our comment on Eph. iv. 19, v. 3-5. The 
 noun irXeov. has the article, which none of the preceding sub- 
 stantives have, and it alone is the antecedent to 77x69. Winer, 
 § 24, 3. We believe that it does not characterize any form 
 of sensuality, or quaestum niereiricium, as the Greek expositors, 
 and others after them, suppose, though it denotes a vice that 
 has its origin in the same selfish or self-seeking depravity. 
 Trench, in his New Testament Synonyms, § 24, has some 
 excellent observations on this word, remarking that the 
 'K\eoveKT7)<i is as free in scattering and squandering as he was 
 eager and unscrupulous in getting ; that monsters of covet- 
 ousness have been also monsters of lust; and that irXeove^ld 
 is a far deeper passion than mere miserliness or avarice, as 
 being " the fierce and ever fiercer longing of the creature 
 which has turned from God to fill itself with the inferior 
 objects of sense." This desire of having more, and yet more, 
 is idolatry. What it craves it worships, what it worships it 
 makes its portion. To su(;li a god there is given the first 
 thought of the morning, the last wish of the evening, and the 
 action of every waking hour. 
 
 (Ver. 6.) At a ep'^erat -q 6p<yr) tov Oeov — "On account of 
 which sins cometh the wrath of God." The reading Zl 6 has 
 also several authorities in its favour. On the meaning of the 
 clause see our exposition of Eph. v. 5. This special wrath 
 is often suffered on earth, and it is not wholly reserved for the 
 other world. Meyer, as in the correspondent place in the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians, denies that the op'yrj is manifested 
 here, and justifies his opinion by pointing to Paul's certain 
 conviction of the near approach of the day of judgment. The 
 sins mentioned in the previous verse are, as we have shown 
 on Eph. V. 6, often visited by penalty on earth. The next 
 clause of the Textus Eeceptus — eirl tov^ vlov<i tj}? aTreiOeiaf 
 — is excluded by Tischendorf, but without sufficient authority. 
 It is wanting in B, certainly, but this is a solitary MS. witness. 
 The clause occurs in Eph. v. 6, and is there explained, as 
 also under Eph. ii. 2, 3. They who indulge in such vices, 
 not only disobey the Divine statute, but also violate the laws 
 of their own constitution. This opyrj is more than chastise- 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 7. 219 
 
 ment, or KoXaai^i, it is direct and punitive indignation fre- 
 quently inflicted here in the form of physical debility and 
 disease, remorse and stupefaction. 
 
 (Ver. 7.) ^Ep oh kuI vfieL<; irepieTraWjcrari irore ore i^-rjre ev 
 rovTOL<i. The relative oh may be either masculine or neuter, 
 as it is referred to vLov<i, or to the a of the previous verse. 
 Each construction has been vindicated. With Olshausen and 
 Bahr, we prefer the neuter, not only because irepLTrarelv is 
 usually employed in connection with things, and not persons, 
 but because the believers in Colosse are said, in the next 
 clause, to have lived in them, and in the 8th verse, to have 
 thrown them all off. Calvin says — male Erasmus vcrtit, inter 
 quos. Meyer prefers the masculine in this first clause, but is 
 obliged to change the gender in reference to royrof? in the 
 second clause. "In which lusts ye too once walked;" 
 " walked " having, of course, its common tropical meaning. 
 But that period was now over — a new era had dawned ; 
 and their walk was in a widely different sphere, one in 
 which, by the assistance of the Spirit, they copied the example 
 of Jesus, and sought, and were acquiring a growing preparation 
 for the purity and bliss of heaven. 
 
 "Ore i^7]T€ iv TovToi<i. TovTOL<i, and not avmh, on the 
 evidence of A, B, C, D^, E\ though avroh has in its favour 
 D, E^, F, G, J, K. Elatt, Bohmer, Huther, and others, take 
 TovToi<i to be masculine ; an exegesis which does not give 
 any tolerable meaning. In e'^T^re there is an allusion by 
 contrast to the aTreddveTe. They once lived in such sins. 
 Life is here used in a spiritual, and not in its physical sense, 
 as in 1 Thess. iii. 8. Other instances may be found in the 
 classics — posscmne vivcre, says Cicero, nisi in litteris viverem ? ^ 
 Libanius describes Alexander as iv ^Ohvaaua ^cov ; Aelian 
 (Hist. Var. iii. 13) speaks of a people so fond of wine— wo-re 
 i^rfv avTov'i iv oXvw ; and we have the phrase ol ^coyre? — they 
 who enjoy life. They had felt supreme enjoyment in such 
 indulgences. So much had they been engrossed with them, 
 and such fancied gratification did they find in them, that they 
 might be said to " live in them." The difference of meaning 
 between the two verbs has been variously understood, but 
 there needs no special definition. They once walked in such 
 
 * Ep. 9, 26. 
 
220 COLOSSIANS III. 8. 
 
 lusts, when they lived in them ; that is, they were utterly 
 addicted to them, for they believed tliat life or happiness was 
 to be found in them. Calvin says the verbs differ, as do 
 2wtentia ct actus. 
 
 (Ver. 8.) Nvvl he a-Trodeade koL vfi£c<i ra irdvTa — " But 
 now do ye also put off the whole." The words kuc viiei^ here 
 correspond to koL vjjbeh in the preceding verse, and vvvi stands 
 out in contrast with Trore. The verb is found in Eph. iv. 25. 
 Wolf is wrong in referring Travra to /ieX?/, which is so far 
 distant from it. The phrase ra Travra is the entire circle 
 of vices ; not, as Winer says, this or that all (intensive), but 
 "the all which is immediately adduced," § 18, 1. A radical 
 and extensive change had taken place ; but (^e adversative) 
 they were to " cast off " that slough in which were lodged all 
 degrading sins. The catalogue or class of sins is subjoined. 
 
 'Opjrjv, Ovfjbov, KUKiav, ^Xacrcfjij/xlav, ala^poXoyiav e'/c tov 
 cTTo/LtaTo? vfiojv — " Augcr, indignation, malice, calumny, 
 abusive discourse out of your mouth," The apostle observes 
 a different order, and uses some other terms in Eph. iv. 31. 
 Under that place the first four terms repeated here have been 
 explained. Bahr and Trench take 0^7?; in distinction from 
 6vfi6<;, as denoting settled indignation bordering on revenge. 
 This is the Stoical definition — €7ridv/jiia rt/utup/a? ; and it is 
 also the opinion of Origen, as brought out in his exposition of 
 the second Psalm. Still, we think that though opyj] charac- 
 terizes a habit or state, the idea of visible display is usually 
 associated with it, as indeed the phrase opyrj 6vp,ov often 
 found in the Septuagint plainly implies ; and, as is manifest 
 from the diction of the previous verse, " the wrath of God 
 Cometh." 'Opyrj is the outburst, or the vice in a palpable 
 form ; Bvfio^ is the violent emotion that boils within ; while 
 KaKia points to the state of heart in which malice originates, 
 and /SXaacprjfiia is that calumnious denunciation to which 
 anger so often prompts. As regards ala'^poXoyla, which 
 occurs only here, we agree with De Wette and Trench, that 
 its meaning is not to be confined to obscene speech. That it 
 has this express meaning is beyond any doubt, but it also 
 often denotes generally foul or abusive language,^ and as it 
 is so closely connected with the passion of anger, such may 
 • Polybius, viii. 13, 8 ; Plut. de lib. Ethu:. 14. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 9. 221 
 
 be its meaning here. It is therefore a more comprehensive 
 term than ^XaacprjfjLia, as the first refers to what especially 
 injures character, and the second to what offends in any 
 sense, not only to what hurts the ear of modesty, but to 
 whatever in any form is scurrilous and indecent — that mix- 
 ture of ribaldry and profanity which too often escapes from 
 the burning lips of passion. The addition, e'/c rov aroixaro^ 
 vfioov, may belong to both ^Xaacf). and alcr^p. with the verb 
 airoOeade mentally repeated. Nor can we give the words the 
 emphasis which Theophylact attaches to them. " See," says 
 he, " how he recounts the members of the old man," that is, 
 shows how each sins, as " the mind by falsehood, the heart 
 by anger, the mouth by blasphemy, eyes and hidden members 
 by fornication, the liver by evil concupiscence, the hands by 
 covetousness." 
 
 From sins of malignity, the apostle passes to sins of 
 falsehood. 
 
 (Ver. 9.) Mr] -v/reu8ecr^e et? dXX,i]\ov<; — " Do not lie to one 
 another." As one of the Greek Fathers says, falsehood ill 
 became them who avowed themselves disciples of Him who 
 said, " I am the truth." The apostle, in writing to the Ephe- 
 sians, adds as a reason why they should adhere to the truth 
 — "we are members one of another." He does not here say, 
 as some suppose, lie not against or about one another, that is, 
 to the damage of one another ; but his meaning is, in all your 
 communications among yourselves, never depart from the 
 truth. 
 
 The connection of the following clause is best ascertained 
 by adherence to the literal meaning of the participle, d-jreK- 
 Bvadfievoi, — "having put off the old man with his deeds." 
 The Vulgate gives cxucntes in the present time, and is followed 
 by Luther, Bengel, Storr, De Wette, and Huther.^ Tlie 
 
 ' We had forgotten to mention an extraordinary interpretation of this verb, 
 aviKhvof^ai, as it occurs in ii. 15. Dr. Donaklson, in his book of capricious and 
 destructive criticism, called "Jashar " (London, 1855), in vindication of certain 
 views which he entertains of the character of humanity in general, and of Christ 
 in particular, to wit, His liability to temptation, justifies his theology by quot- 
 ing the verse referred to, pp. 70, 71. After affirming, with no little vaunt, that 
 all interpreters up to himself have misunderstood it, he says that it must have 
 the same meaning as in iii. 9. He gives the following exegesis — "the princi- 
 palities and powers " are the potent lords of lust — duces libidinum — which rule 
 in our members, and stuck to Christ like the poisoned shirt of Nessus, and these 
 
222 COLOSSIANS III. 10. 
 
 putting off of tlie old man, as described by the aorist, cannot 
 be contemporary with the foregoing imperatives, but it pre- 
 cedes them. It is a process consummated, and so Calvin, 
 Bahr, Bohmer, and Meyer rightly understand it. Beza says 
 correct!}^, that the participles are used alnoXoyLKco^. These 
 participles are not to be taken in the sense of imperatives, as 
 the first class of expositors virtually regards them, but they 
 unfold a reason why the sins condemned should be uniformly 
 abstained from. Lie not one to another, as being persons 
 who have put off the old man ; or, as the participle has often 
 a causal sense — since ye have put off the old man with his 
 deeds. De Wette says that such an argument is superfluous, 
 but surely the paragraph may conclude as it began, with an 
 argument. The first argument is, ye are dead ; and the 
 second contains one of the results of that spiritual death wdth 
 Christ. 
 
 'ATreKSvadfievot rov iraXaiov dvOpcoirov avv tol^ irpd^eatv 
 avrov — " Since ye have put off the old man with his deeds." 
 The expressive personality — " old man " — has been explained 
 under Eph. iv. 22. It is a bold personification of our first 
 nature as derived from Adam, the source and seat of original 
 and actual transgression, and called " old," as existing prior 
 to our converted state. This ethical person is to be put off 
 from us as one puts off clothes, and with all his deeds — all 
 the practices which characterized him, and the sins to which 
 he excited. This was a change deeper by far than asceticism 
 could ever reach. For it was a total revolution. Self-denial 
 in meats and drinks, while it prunes the excrescence, really 
 helps the growth of the plant, but this uproots it. 
 
 (Ver. 10.) Kal ivSuadfievoc rbv veov, top dvuKaivovfievov. 
 
 He conquered and led in triumph. Not to say, with Mr. Perowne, that the 
 exegesis is "sheer nonsense," and contrary to the entire meaning of the terms, 
 the strain and spirit of the context, and to Paul's theology, we simply reply, 
 that the acute and learned autlior of the New Cratylus may see that God, and 
 not Christ, is the subject, and that if a'nx.'Svo/u.ai must there denote " the putting 
 oft' from himself " something which clings to the agent, the affirmation of the 
 verse is at utter variance with the purity and spirituality of the Divine Being. 
 Nay, more, Dr. Donaldson sa3-s, that "the principalities and powers, " those 
 lords of lust which so clung to Christ that they were only flung oft' by Him 
 wlien He died, were and must have been in Christ, for they were " created in 
 Him," according to Col. i. 16. Is there any wonder that previous commentators 
 never came to such conclusion ? 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 10. 223 
 
 As the old man is thrown off the new man is assumed. In 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians, the apostle inserts between the 
 off-putting and the on-putting a clause in reference to re- 
 newal " in the spirit of the mind," and there using a different 
 adjective he calls the new man rov Katvov avOpodirov, but he 
 Iiad previously used the verb avaveovadai. Here, he says 
 Tov veov \avdpai'irov\, but he adds tov uva/caivov/jievov. So 
 that though it be in different forms, both terms are employed 
 in both places. If the verbal term from veo'i be followed by 
 the epithet Kaiv6<; in Ephesians, and if in Colossians the 
 epithet veo<i be followed by the verbal term from Kaiv6<i, it is 
 plain that the same general meaning is intended by the 
 apostle. Though yeo9 and /catz/09 may be distingu shed, their 
 meaning is thus blended. If V60<; be " recent," and in this 
 sense be opposed to iTakai6<;, then this recency springs from 
 renewal. The one man is old, for he belonged to a past and 
 former state ; and the other is new, for his assumption was 
 to them but a novelty, a matter of yesterday in their spiritual 
 experience. 
 
 This man is new not only in point of time, but of quality 
 or character, for he is renewed — et? eTrlyvcoacu. It is not 
 the idea of Paul in this expression, that the new man, still 
 renewing, never grows old, iJTa ov iraXaiovTaL — as the Greek 
 expositors imagine. Eather would we say, with Calovius, 
 that he is called " re-novatus, because he was once novus at 
 his first creation," and as the preposition ava would fairly 
 seem to imply. Man must be brought back to his original 
 purity, but the process of renovation is continuous, as the use 
 of the present participle indicates. Bahr quotes Augustine 
 as saying — in ipso animo renati non est perfcda novitas. We 
 cannot take the participle to be simply a predicate of avOpoiTrov, 
 for the construction points out its connection with veov. The 
 new man (the present participle being used) is renewing, as 
 the apostle affirms — '7/iepa kol rj/xepa — in 2 Cor. iv. 6 ; or, 
 as Theophylact says, del ical del. 
 
 In the phrase et? enruyvwaiv, the preposition cannot signify 
 the instrumental cause of the renewal, but it denotes the final 
 purpose. The new man is renewed " unto knowledge." The 
 meaning of eTTLyv(0(n<; may be seen under Eph. i. 17; and 
 in this epistle, i. 9 ; ii. 2. And that perfect knowledge has 
 
224 COLOSSIANS III. 10. 
 
 a close connection with God, for it is characterized as 
 being — 
 
 Kar eiKova tov KTiaavro<; avrov — " After the image of Him 
 who created him." A large nnmber of expositors connect the 
 clause directly with the participle avanaivovixevov, the image 
 of God being the pattern after which the believer is renewed. 
 Meyer joins it more closely to et9 eirl'yvwaiv, but the meaning 
 is not materially different. The likeness is renewed after the 
 image of God, and the special feature of that image selected 
 by the apostle is knowledge. The knowledge of the renewed 
 man corresponds in certain elements to that of God. Other 
 features of resemblance of a moral nature are referred to in 
 the parallel passage, Eph. iv. 24. That image is said to 
 belong to God the creator, not Christ, as was supposed in the 
 early church, and as is understood by Miiller. A peculiar 
 exegesis is adopted by a-Lapide and Schleiermacher, the 
 former making tov Kria-avTo<i the object of the knowledge ; 
 and the latter thus explaining the image — so erneuct, class man 
 an iJim das Uhcnhild Gottes erkennen hann. 
 
 But what creation is referred to ? Is it the first or the 
 second creation ? Many incline to the first view, as if the 
 apostle meant that man is brought back to that likeness which 
 God gave him on the day of creation. So Calovius, Heinsius, 
 Estius, Schoettgen, and De Wette. But though this be a 
 truth, it is not that precise form of truth conveyed by the 
 apostle's language. It is not of man generally, but of the 
 new man that he speaks — the new man renewed unto know- 
 ledge after the image of Him who created him, to wit, the 
 new man. The apostle does not say — who created you. The 
 new man is the converted spiritual nature, not the man himself 
 in proper person. It is this creation of the new man, not that 
 of the man himself, which is ascribed to God. Thus, the 
 parallel passage in Eph. iv. 24 says expressly — " the new man 
 which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." 
 This new nature is of God, and not of self-development. All 
 creation is indeed from God, and this new creation is no 
 exception. The new man is not the ethical symbol of a mere 
 reformation which a strong will may achieve ; nor is it any 
 change of creed, party, or opinions, which is the result of 
 personal examination and conviction. These are but as 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 10. 225 
 
 statuary, compared with living humanity ; for however close 
 the resemblance, there is always, in spite of highest art, the 
 still eye and the motionless lip. Yes, God's work is a living 
 power, something so compact and richly endowed, so fitted 
 to our nature, and so much a part of us as to be called a man, 
 but at the same time so foreign to all previous powers and 
 enjoyments as to be called the ncio man. 
 
 As the first man was made by God, and in His image, so is 
 this new man. The special point of resemblance stated is 
 knowledge. This may have been selected, as an allusion to 
 the boasted knowledge and proud philosophy of the false 
 teachers in Colosse. ii. 2. There are, it is true, many points 
 in which our relative knowledge shall never, and can never, 
 resemble the absolute Divine omniscience. But as the Spirit 
 is the source of our knowledge, no one can predict what 
 amount of it, or what forms of it. He may communicate 
 when the mind is freed from every shadow and bias, and is 
 surrounded with an atmosphere of universal truth. Human 
 language is necessarily an imperfect vehicle of thought, and it 
 may then be dispensed with. "Now we see through a glass 
 darkly, but then face to face," — our conceptions shall resemble 
 God's in fulness and truth ; for no dim medium of intellectual 
 vision shall shade or disturb our views. Immediate cognition 
 shall also be our privilege — " now we know in part, but then 
 shall we know, even as we are known." 
 
 In accordance wdth that strange theory by which Miiller 
 would account for the origin of sin — a theory at once above 
 the domain of consciousness and beyond the limits of Scrip- 
 ture, he denies that there is any biblical warrant for the idea 
 that man, having lost the image of God by the fall, has it 
 restored to him under the gospel by the renovating influence 
 of the Spirit of God. His notion of a pre-temporal state, in 
 which man fell, when, how, or where, he does not say, neces- 
 sitates him to the conclusion, that when Adam fell, man lost 
 nothing, but that there was only awakened in him the 
 consciousness of a previous want and deficiency, so that sinful 
 principles already within him acquired universal dominion 
 over the human race. A transition, on the part of Adam, 
 from an absolutely pure state into one of sin, is not, he holds, 
 necessarily contained in the inspired record. " The narrative 
 
22G COLOSSIANS III. 10. 
 
 of the first sin, as well as the description of that condition 
 which preceded it, does not of necessity lead us to any further 
 idea than that of an initial state in which sin has not yet made 
 its appearance," and does not imply, " that Adam through his 
 fall implanted in human nature a principle previously foreign 
 to it." ^ Miiller's inference, of course, is, that it cannot he 
 properly said that the Divine image is restored to man, seeing 
 that on earth, at least, he never possessed it. The passage 
 before us, and the parallel passage in Eph. iv. 24, certainly 
 affirm that the new man is the reflection of the Divine image 
 in some of its features. They do not indeed affirm, in as 
 many words, that he becomes possessed of the same Divine 
 image which he once enjoyed. But the statement is virtually 
 implied. Had man never this Divine image, and does he 
 enjoy it for the first time through faith in Christ ? " The new 
 man," Miiller says, " is the holy form of human life which 
 results from redemption." Now, not to say that the very idea 
 of redemption, reconciliation, or renewal, implies a restoration 
 to some previous state in which none of them was needed, 
 there being in that state no penalty to be ransomed from, no 
 enmity to be subdued, and no impurity to be cleansed away 
 — let us see what revelation teaches as to man's primeval 
 condition and his possession of the Divine image. 
 
 The idea of " non-temporal sinfulness " we must discard as 
 a speculation about which Scripture is completely silent, and 
 which, putting the lapse of ideal humanity beyond the period 
 of paradise, only shifts back the difficulty in proportion, but 
 does not explain it. In Gen. i. 26, 27, and v. 1, we are 
 told that man was created in the image and likeness of God, 
 but no formal explanation of the phraseology is attached. 
 Opinions have varied as to the meaning of the peculiar 
 phrase ; some, like Pott, Eosenmiiller, and von Bohlen, placing 
 it almost in physical form, rising scarcely as high as the 
 heathen Ovid ; ^ some regarding it as a general expression of 
 
 1 Lehre von der S'unde, vol. ii. p. 483, etc., 3rd ed., Breslau, 1849. 
 
 ^ Animal mentisque capacius altae, et quod dom'mari in caetera posset. Also 
 Cicero, De natura Beorum, i. 32. Pythagoras could say, as reported by 
 Diogenes Laertius, that there is a relationship between men and the gods, 
 because men are partakers of the Divine principle. Dio. L. p. 584, ed. Is. 
 Casaubon. Xenophon, Mem. i. 4, 14. 
 
C0L0SSIA2;S IIL 10. 227 
 
 the dignity of the race, like Herder, Schumann, Delitzsch, 
 and Knobel;^ others finding in it the idea of dominion over 
 the lower creatures — like Ephrem, Grotius, and Tuch ; and 
 others, as Calvin, and the majority of the Eeformers and 
 Theologians, regarding it too exclusively as the symbol of 
 spiritual capacities and powers. 
 
 But what do we gather from Scripture ? In the edict 
 against murder. Gen. ix. 6, the atrocity of the crime is taught 
 by the doctrine, that " in the image of God made He man." 
 On this express account the life of animals formally delivered 
 into man's hand for meat, has not the sacredness of human 
 life. Further, the Apostle James (iii. 9) exposes the rashness 
 and inconsistency of sins of the tongue, blessing God in one 
 breath, and in another cursing man " made after the simili- 
 tude of God." If man did not still retain this image of God, 
 there would be no sin either in killing or cursing him. 
 Therefore this image referred to is something altogether 
 independent of the fact or development of sin in man's 
 nature, for it is still possessed, and ought to shield him from 
 violence and anathema. 
 
 This image, so unaffected by the fall, plainly results from 
 man's position as a creature. His physical formation is not 
 only noble and supreme, but as a rational and immortal 
 creature, and as God's representative to the lower creation, he 
 bears the image of God. These endowments yet remain to 
 him. He has not been degraded from the erectness of his 
 mien, nor have reason and immortality been penally wrested 
 from him. And thus through himself he still learns what 
 God is, or rather, is enabled to comprehend lessons on the 
 nature and attributes of God by the analogies of his own 
 mental and spiritual constitution. For, when he is told that 
 God knows or loves, he naturally and necessarily forms his 
 ideas of the Divine knowledge or affection, by feeling what 
 these properties are within himself, and by inferring what 
 they must be when resident in an infinite and unchanging 
 essence. Or if he be informed that God is a person, his own 
 conscious and unmerging individuality leads him at once to 
 attach a correct and definite meaning to the term, and he is in 
 himself a living witness against Pantheistic folly and delusion. 
 ^ Als beseelle Elnheit. Knobel, die Genesis erkldrt, p. 18. 
 
228 COLOSSIANS III. 10. 
 
 But is tins all that is meant by the Divine image ? 
 Miiller says, that it simply consists in " personal essence," ^ 
 and that man is thereby distinguished from other classes of 
 existences. But we apprehend that the expression reaches 
 deeper than this. There are certain properties or privileges 
 which man has forfeited by the fall, and which are affh^med 
 to have been originally possessed or enjoyed by him. Ignor- 
 ance and spiritual death now characterize him. But is not 
 spiritual intelligence a portion of the Divine image — the 
 reflection of God's own light ? There is also what the apostle, 
 Eph. iv. 18, calls "the life of God," and from that we are 
 now alienated ; but would that mere personal essence on 
 which Miiller insists, bear any resemblance to God at all, if 
 such vitality did not fill it ? A personal essence with the 
 gloom of ignorance within it, and the eclipse of death upon it, 
 could not be recognized as bearing the Divine image. There- 
 fore a mere personality devoid of such intelligence and life, 
 could scarcely be called the image of God, or regarded as 
 constituting the whole of it. And yet, though they formed a 
 portion of that image, they have been lost by the fall, and 
 are reconferred only in Christ. Besides, can any one bear 
 the moral image of God and not be happy — not be a partaker 
 of His immortal blessedness ? But dissatisfaction and misery 
 are the doom of fallen humanity, everywhere, and at all 
 times. 
 
 That man was once filled with wisdom, purity, life, and 
 happiness, appears to be the repeated statement of Scripture. 
 The theory of Miiller consistently says, man never had these 
 on earth, and therefore could not lose them. But the narra- 
 tive of Genesis, though it do not treat the subject dogmatic- 
 ally, presents the picture of an innocent creature, tempted by 
 the serpent, and doomed for his apostasy to toil and death. 
 Does Prof. Miiller believe that the sin of man in an ideal 
 ante-creational state was followed by no penalty ? Or was 
 the penalty of this kind, that the sinner was only subjected 
 to another trial in another sphere, with the sad certainty 
 that the germs of evil would ripen into fatal action ? The 
 narrative in Genesis must be interpreted in the light of the 
 other and subsequent Scriptures, and they plainly teach that 
 
 ^ Personliches Wesen. 
 
COLOSSIANS IIL 10. 229 
 
 Adam's transgression is the primary source of prodigious 
 spiritual loss. 
 
 Our belief therefore is, that the Divine image, in which 
 man was made, consists of more than personal essence, or 
 dominion over the inferior creatures. These, indeed, belong 
 to it, and are still retained by man. The gospel, therefore, 
 has no effect upon them save to hallow them. Man did not 
 forfeit manhood by his fall, and of necessity, what is essential 
 to his manhood and his position still belongs to him. For 
 his creational relationship to the God above him and the 
 existences beneath him, could not be impaired, or his anni- 
 hilation or metamorphosis would have been the result. But 
 wliile manhood has not been lost, its nobler characteristics, 
 without which the original image would have been imperfect, 
 have been obliterated. What belongs to constitution, fallen 
 man has retained ; what belongs to quality and character has 
 gone from him. The latter is a portion of the image as 
 much as the former ; the image, not of a Divine essence, but 
 of an intelligent, holy, and blessed Divine person. And those 
 features of the image which have been lost through the fall, 
 are given back to the disciples of Christ. 
 
 We do not base any argument on the statement that the 
 fallen Adam begat a son in his own image, whereas the 
 Creator made man in His image. Nor do we imagine that 
 any such notion of a double image of God, one essential 
 and incapable of loss, and another moral and liable to be 
 erased, can be found at all in the use of the two terms ^2): 
 and ri^^l, as they are both separated and interchanged in the 
 sacred record. Nor have we begged the question by arguing 
 back from the verse before us, and assuming from the image 
 of the new man created by God, what the image of the first 
 man created by Him must have been. For the apostle does 
 not say that the new man is renewed in knowledge after Him 
 who originally created humanity, but after the image of Him 
 who creates himself — the new man. Indeed, the image con- 
 ferred in renovation, though generically the same, cannot be 
 in all points identical with that given in creation. It is 
 fuller and lovelier, a richer intelligence with nobler objects of 
 cognition ; a higher form of life, having its type in the 
 normal man — the second Adam ; both reaching forward to a 
 
230 COLOSSIANS III. 11. 
 
 development to which neither means nor scope could have 
 been found in Eden, or in simple connection with the first 
 man, who is " of the earth, earthy." In fine, we are not sure 
 if Miiller's theory does not contain, by implication, what we 
 have advanced. In illustrating the declaration of Paul, that 
 ' in God we live, move, and have our being," he says — " God 
 has willed man to be like Himself, in order that there might 
 be a being which should be capable of fellowship with Him." 
 But surely mere personality could not of itself constitute such 
 a likeness, or lead inherently to such a communion. It must 
 possess other qualities than simple consciousness to give it 
 this resemblance, and fit it for this enjoyment of Him. 
 Therefore these qualities, as we have contended, did and must 
 belong to this first image, and being lost in the fall, are and 
 must be restored to the second image, which characterizes and 
 beautifies the " new man." 
 
 (Ver. 11.) "Ottov ouK evi "EX\r]v koI 'IovSalo<i — "Where 
 there is neither Greek nor Jew." The first adverb refers to 
 the preceding clause, " in which sphere of renewal," or simply, 
 the idea of locality being so far sunk, " in which thing ; " as 
 in 2 Pet. ii. 11 ; Prov. xxvi. 20. The peculiar term eve is 
 supposed by many to be the contracted form of evea-ri. 
 Phavorinus defines it by Icriv, vTrdp-^ec. Others regard it as 
 the simple preposition in the Ionic form ; " the notion of the 
 verb," as Kiihner says, " being so subordinate that it is dropt." 
 Such is the view of Eobinson, Buttmann, and Winer, etc. 
 But in this place the idea of the preposition is already 
 expressed by ottov. There is also the analogy of other 
 prepositions similarly used, such as eVt and irdpa. Perhaps 
 the supposition of the Etymologicum Magnum is correct, that 
 evt is elliptical, leaving the reader to supply wliat part of 
 the verb the syntax requires. In all the places of the New 
 Testament where it is used it is preceded by ovk, and 
 expresses a strong negation. Gal. iii. 28; Jas. i. 1 7. There 
 is probably in the phrase the idea also of inner existence — 
 where there does exist any inner distinction of Greek or 
 Jew. 
 
 The apostle now specifies various mundane distinctions. 
 
 "EWrjv Koi ^lovBaiO'i, irepiTOfir] Koi aKpo^vcTTia, j3dp^apo<;, 
 X'cu6r)<;, Bov\o<;, iXevOepo^;. The first pair is the natural 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 11. 231 
 
 distinction of " Greek and Jew." Tiie noun eWrjv, as 
 opposed to ^dpl3apo<;, means a Greek proper, and as opposed 
 to 'IovSaio<i, signifies one belonging to the Greek world, and 
 perhaps viewing that world as the representative of that 
 civilized heathenism which was brought into close and ex- 
 tensive correspondence with Palestine. Eom. i. 14, 16, ii. 9 ; 
 Gal. iii, 28. The noun 'lovSaio^; means a Jew, originally 
 and merely one of the tribe of Judah ; but latterly, as that 
 tribe on its return from Babylon was so ascendant, it came to 
 denote any one of the Hebrew race. There is no ground for 
 the idea of the Greek expositors that eWrjp means a prose- 
 lyte, and 'IovSaLo<i a native Jew — e/c irpoyovtov, as Chrysostom 
 has it. The second couple of epithets points out a religious 
 distinction — irepcTOfMr] koI aKpo^vaTia, " circumcision and 
 uncircumcision." The " circumcision " is the Jewish world, as 
 Abraham's progeny, with the seal of the covenant in its flesh, 
 and distinguished by its theocratic privileges, while the 
 " uncircumcision " is non-Israel, or all the world beyond the 
 chosen seed, and destitute of religious blessing. It has been 
 said that the apostle uses four pairs of terms, but he drops 
 the use of the /cat, and there is no contrast between ^dp^apo<i 
 — XicvOrj^ — " barbarian — Scythian." While the epithet aKpo- 
 /Bvaria applied to the whole world beyond Israel, there 
 were various distinctions in that world itself. The Hellenic 
 section was elevated by refinement and culture, but other 
 portions were debased and wretched. The two terms now 
 under review appear to differ only in intensity. The Scythian 
 is one at the lowest point of barbarism, as we might say 
 — a negro, or even a Hottentot — a savage, or even a Bushman. 
 The Scythian races, represented by the modern Tartar or 
 Cossack races of Asia and Eastern Europe, were regarded as 
 at the bottom of the scale. Scythians, according to Josephus, 
 were ^pax^ '^^^ drjplwv Sia(})€povre<;^ — while Herodotus calls 
 them cannibals — dv6pco7ro(f>dyoL. Cicero against Piso uses a 
 similar climax — quod nullus in Barbaria. Quis hoc facit ulla 
 in Scytliia tyrannus ? The next two terms represent a social 
 distinction, S0OX09, eKev6epo<i — " bond, free," a distinction 
 very common in those countries and times. Some manu- 
 scripts, and those of high authority, insert a Kai before ekev- 
 1 Contra Ap. 2, 37. 
 
232 coLossiANs ni. n. 
 
 6epo<;, such as A, D\ E, F, G. It might be used as in the 
 two first couples, for there is a contrast. There are thus 
 three forms of distinction expressed, and one implied — 
 national distinction, religious distinction, and social distinction ; 
 and there is also implied the secular distinction between 
 civilization and savagism. The apostle completes his thoughts 
 by adding — 
 
 'AWa TCL TTCLvra koI iu iraaiv XpLcrro'; — " But Christ is all 
 and in all." The phrase is idiomatic. Christ is everything 
 to all of them having the new man. To one and all of them 
 He is everything, so far as the sufficiency, offer, and enjoy- 
 ment of salvation are concerned, or as the apostle says in the 
 similar passage in Galatians, " ye are all one in Christ Jesus." 
 
 Now, the meaning of the apostle is not that a man loses 
 nationality on becoming a Christian ; or that social rank is 
 obliterated by admission into the church. The blood of 
 Javan was not changed in a Greek, nor the blood of Abraham 
 in a Jew, when both met in a spiritual kingdom. The rude 
 manners of the Scythian might be refined by his faitli, but he 
 did not lose his peculiarity of colour or configuration. The 
 chain of the slave was not broken by his religion, any more 
 than the circumcision of the Jew was erased. But the 
 meaning of the apostle is — 
 
 First, That such distinctions do not prevent the on-putting 
 of the new man. In other words, such differences of nation, 
 religion, culture, and social position, do not interfere with the 
 adaptation, the offer, or the reception and the results of the 
 gospel. It is fettered by no geographical limits, by no local 
 or lineal peculiarities. The Greek is not nearer Christ for 
 his philosophy, nor the Scythian more distant for his want of 
 it. The incision of the ceremonial knife gave no preference 
 to the Jew, nor was the absence of it any drawback to the 
 Gentile. The slave was as welcome as the freeman — the 
 wandering nomade as the polished citizen. Whatever a 
 man's descent or race, his creed or rites ; whatever his 
 language or pursuits, his colour or climate, his dwelling or 
 usages, his position or character — the gospel comes to him 
 with special offer, and adaptation, and completeness, and 
 having embraced it he will feel its renewing power. It does 
 not insist on the Gentile submitting to the Abrahamic rite. 
 
C0L0S8IANS III. 11. 233 
 
 nor require the Jew to be initiated into the wisdom of the 
 Greek ; it does not stand aloof from the slave till he burst Ids 
 chain, nor does it command the barbarian to master an 
 alphabet or win the civic franchise ere it can save and change 
 him. No ; it comes alike to the synagogue and to the 
 temple, with equal fitness to freedom and to servitude ; with 
 equal fulness, freeness, and tenderness to the citizen in the 
 forum and to the wanderer on the wide and solitary steppe. 
 All adventitious distinctions are levelled at its just and 
 loving glance. 
 
 Secondly, It is taught by the apostle, tliat in the church, 
 the sphere of the new man's activity and enjoyments, prior 
 and external distinctions, do not modify the possession of 
 spiritual privilege and blessing. In the spiritual common- 
 wealth, no partition is erected between Jew and Greek ; the 
 barbarian is not degraded to a lower seat, nor is any outer 
 court appropriated for the Scythian. The slave does not 
 obtrude though he mingle his voice in the same song of 
 spiritual freedom with his master, and drink out of the same 
 sacramental cup. The Tartar in his sheepskin may kneel 
 with the citizen in his mantle, and each break with the other 
 that bread which is " the communion of the body of Christ." 
 Nay, the faith of the untutored savage may be more earnest, 
 childlike, and fearless in its reliance ; may be a fuller source 
 of gladness and triumph than the faith of him whose 
 philosophy may have prompted him to ask other reasons than 
 Scripture may have given, and to fortify his belief with 
 arguments which the simple disciple did not want, and could 
 not understand. 
 
 Oh, it needs not that one enjoy the erudition of the schools 
 in order to be taught of God ! The graces of civilization are 
 not the necessary soil for the graces of the Spirit. Secular 
 enfranchisement is not indispensable to fellow-citizenship with 
 the saints. In the sphere of the new man, those distinctions 
 which obtain in the world exercise no disturbing or preventive 
 influence. That new man has broken all the ties of the old 
 man, and is not more akin to one race than to another, has 
 no affinities of blood, is not circumscribed by national bound- 
 aries, or forbidden by the inequalities of social rank, and by 
 whomsoever assumed, he may be fully possessed. This is the 
 
234 COLOSSIANS III. 12. 
 
 glory of Christianity, that as it is developed in the church, it 
 has none of the barriers or predilections which the epithets of 
 this verse indicate as obtaining in the world, and dividing it 
 into jealous and exclusive ranks and castes, but is at once and 
 fully enjoyed by all the believing possessors of our common 
 humanity. The idea of Theophylact, that the verse refers to 
 the absence of distinctions in the other world, is wholly opposed 
 to the scope and context. 
 
 The apostle now particularizes certain graces which they 
 were to assume. He had specified the sins which marked 
 the old man, and now he signalizes those virtues which are 
 connected with the new man. Ye have put on the new man, 
 and ye enjoy the all-sufficiency of Christ — therefore, ovv, ye 
 must manifest your possession of the following elements of 
 Christian character — 
 
 (Ver. 12.) ^EvBvaaade ovv, w? iKXeKTol tov 0€ov, a<yioi /cal 
 rj'yaTrr^fievQL — " Put on, therefore, as the chosen of God, holy 
 and beloved." While ovv refers back to one argument, tw? 
 carries the mind forward to another. In the epithet cKkeKToi 
 we recognize the fact of their separation from the world, or 
 the realization in their present state of God's eternal and 
 gracious choice. We incline, with Meyer and Lachmann, to 
 regard e/cXe/cTot as the substantive, and the other two epithets 
 as its predicates. Others, as Luther, Calvin, Bahr, Huther, 
 and De Wette, reverse this exegesis, and take the two follow- 
 ing words as co-ordinate substantives. But it is better to 
 take eKkeKTOL as describing their present position, and ar^iot 
 and T)<yaT7r]fxevoi as specifying its character, for election is not 
 determined by character, but determines it. [Eph. i. 4, 5.] 
 The meaning of a'ytoL is consecrated, set apart to God, this 
 consecration necessarily producing holiness of life. This is 
 an appeal to their character, and not simply to their position 
 in the visible church. [Eph. i. 1,] They were also the 
 objects of God's special complacency — " beloved." His eternal 
 and sovereign love did elect them, and now, that election 
 having taken effect. He has special complacency in them. 
 Their assumption of these graces would certify to themselves 
 their election, would be a happy develojDment of their conse- 
 cration, as well as a proof of its genuineness, and would also 
 endear them yet more to Him, who in love had predestinated 
 
COLOSSI ANS III. 12. 235 
 
 them to the adoption of children. These thoughts formed a 
 convincing appeal to them, and could not but induce them to 
 feel and act as the apostle recommends. And so they are 
 enjoined to put on — 
 
 ^7r\dy^va OLKTcpfMov. The singular of the last word is 
 preferred to the plural on the authority of A, C, D^, E, F, G. 
 The singular is also found in several places of the Septuagint. 
 Dan. ix. 18 ; Zech. i. 16. The phrase is a Hebraism, cor- 
 responding to the Hebrew — ^V^?.. Gcsen. Lehrg. p. 671. 
 The following genitive, oltcripixov, gives a specific intensity to 
 the clause ; it makes it ificparcKOTepov, as Chrysostom says ; 
 since the first word of itself might denote kind or merciful 
 emotion. Luke i. 78. The Colossians were not to cherish 
 a hard and unrelenting disposition, that was slow to remit 
 punishment, but forward ever to inflict it. 
 
 OlKTt,pfi6<;, from o'i — oIkto<; has more reference to feeling, 
 or commiseration ; while the second term, ■^(^prjaTorrjra, kind- 
 ness, is, as the word really implies, that form of kindness 
 which is serviceable to others. Jerome describes it as — 
 invitans ad familiaritatem sui, dulcis alloquio, moribus tem- 
 perata} " To do good " is the injunction, and disciples are 
 to cherish the habit, and to create opportunities for it. 
 Christians are to be obliging in their general demeanour. 
 The last three terms are found in the same order in Eph. iv. 2. 
 Taireivo^poavvTj is lowliness of mind, opposed to haughtiness 
 and conceit. The adjective, raTreii/o?, is used often in the 
 classics to denote " mean-spirited." Trench has the excellent 
 remark, that " Chrysostom is bringing in pride under the dis- 
 guise of humility, when he characterizes humility as the 
 making of ourselves small when we are great, for it is the 
 esteeming of ourselves small because we are so." ^ As the 
 same writer well remarks, " the idea of such a grace is 
 wholly Christian,^ for the gospel leads man to a feeling of 
 
 1 Com. in Ep. ad Gal. v. 22. ' New Testament Syjioiipns, § 42. 
 
 ^ The statement may not at first sight appear to be correct to its full extent. 
 iEschylus, Prometh. Vinct., makes Oceanus bring the following charge against 
 Prometheus — <ru S' oul'fru TCfruvos — not even yet are you humble ; that is, thou 
 hast not learned submission by thy punishment. A similar result, viz. that of 
 submissiveuess, is said by Plutarch to be, in fact, the end of Divine chastise- 
 ment — TXTuvis Kcci xa,ra.(p<ilii)s ■z-^o; tov Siit — De sera numinis vindicatioTie, cap. iii. 
 Instances also may be found in Plato — ^vvi-rirai Tctfum ku'i KiKitrfivf^iyo; — Leges, 
 
236 COLOSSIANS III. 12. 
 
 entire and unalterable dependence upon God." Augustine 
 eulogizes this grace by saying, that if asked quae via sit ad 
 obtinendam vcritatem .? he will reply, primum est humilitas, 
 quid secundum, humilitas, quid tertium, humilitas, etc. Calvin 
 remarks on the connection, that the graces previously mentioned 
 cannot be cherished without it. 
 
 The next term is irpaonr^, meekness. We cannot fully 
 acquiesce in Mr. Trench's idea, that this word describes 
 "exercises of mind which are first and chiefly toward God, 
 or is that temper of spirit in which we accept His dealings 
 with us without disputing or resisting." Neither he, nor 
 Ellicott,-^ who follows him, has produced any direct scriptural 
 instance of such a sense, though certainly he who is truly 
 meek will always bow to God in serene resignation. He 
 who, under the influence of Divine grace, does not resent a 
 human injury, will not quarrel with any Divine allotment. 
 But irpaoTT]'; is here ranked among graces which have specially 
 human relations, such as mercy and long-suffering. Even in 
 raireivoc^poavvr], the idea is man-w^ard fully as much as God- 
 ward. In the place it here occupies in the range of virtues, 
 it denotes that want of arrogance or insolence in reference to 
 our fellow-men, which lowliness before God ever tends to 
 produce and increase. MaKpoOufila is literally " long-minded- 
 ness," and is opposed to what we often call shortness of 
 temper. All the terms of the text receive further illustration 
 in the subsequent clauses. 
 
 Now, these virtues certainly suit — &>? — " the elect of God, 
 holy and beloved." They are in source and essence an 
 imitation on the part of the saint of what God has felt 
 towards him, and they indicate a consciousness of the relation 
 which he sustains to the Divine benefactor. For he has 
 experienced the Divine mercy in its sweep and fulness — 
 there was no frown on the Divine countenance, when he so 
 
 iv. p. 113, vol. viii. ed. Bekker, and in other places ; Ast, Lex. Platon. sub voce. 
 Still, the idea in these places seems to be that of a sense of lowliness inwrought 
 by some depressing event, and forced upon the mind by some painful contrast. 
 This is not the habitual grace of Christian humility, for a man who may feel 
 himself to be deeply humiliated, will yet only recoil into a fiercer pride, and be 
 far, far indeed, from being humble. 
 
 ^ Grammatical Commentary on Ephesians, iv. 2. London, 1855. [See Ellicott 
 on the present passage.] 
 
COLOSSIANS m. 13. 237 
 
 abject, insignificant, and withal so provoking and guilty, drew 
 near. God has crowned him " with loving-kindness and tender 
 mercy ; " and though he be daily sinning, daily coming short 
 of duty, nay, ever committing positive faults, he is borne 
 with, and he has been long borne with, as " sentence against 
 an evil work has not been speedily executed." Must he not 
 therefore act toward his fellows on the same level with him- 
 self, as God from the heights of His glory has acted towards 
 him ? And there is need for the exercise of such virtues, for 
 " offences must come ; " or, as the apostle intimates in the 
 next clause — 
 
 (Ver. 13.) ^Ave')(oiJievot dWrjXcov, koI -^api^o/jievoc eavrot'?, 
 edv Ti<i Trpof nva exj] fiofj,cf)7]v — " Forbearing one another, and 
 forgiving one another, if any one have a complaint against 
 any other." The meaning of the first participle has been 
 illustrated under Eph. iv. 2, and we need not in this place 
 repeat the illustration. The sense is, having patience with 
 one another — waiting with composure under injury or provo- 
 cation, till those who so offend may come to a better mind. 
 The other participle, 'x^api^o/xevoc, carries forward the sense — 
 not only are we to forbear, but we are also to forgive. Not 
 only are we to show humility, meekness, and long-suffering as 
 we forbear, but we are also to manifest bowels of mercy and 
 goodness in forgiving. The second participle, '^api^oixevoL, is 
 found in a passage almost parallel, in Eph. iv. 32, and it also 
 occurs in the same sense in ii. 13 of this epistle. The pro- 
 noun €avTol<; is simply for a\Xi]\oi<; ; and the noun fMOficpr) 
 denotes " ground of offence or complaint," explained in some 
 of the Codices by the substitution of 0/3777. There may be 
 just ground of offence, but it is not to excite to resentment or 
 retaliation. And the apostle proposes for imitation the highest 
 of examples. 
 
 Ka6(o<i Koi 6 Xpi,(TTo<; i'^apiaaTo vfilv, ovTa><i kul vfiefi. 
 Xapt^ofievoi is to be supplied, and not the imperative, 
 'XjcLpil^eaOe, with some, nor yet irotdre, as is found in some 
 MSS., such as D\ E^ F, G. The conjunction occurs twice, 
 for the sake of intensity (Klotz, ad Devar. 635), and Ka6w<i 
 Kai introduces an argumentative illustration. In a corre- 
 sponding passage in the Epistle to the Ephesians, the apostle 
 makes reference to God — " forgiving one another, even as 
 
238 COLOSSIANS III. 13. 
 
 God for Christ's sake has forgiven you." iv. 32. This differ- 
 ence of person in the two places seems to have suggested the 
 various readings which occur in the old copies. Not a few 
 of them have Kvpio<;, such as A, B, D^, F, G, and those appear 
 to be almost equal in authority to C, D^, E, J, K, which 
 have Xptcrro?, a reading supported, however, by many of the 
 Versions and Fathers. But here forgiveness is specially 
 ascribed to Christ. If Christ forgive sin, the inference is, 
 that He is Divine. Pardon is a Divine prerogative, yet 
 Christ exercises it. And it is not on His part a venturesome 
 act, nor one which is provisional, and cannot take effect till 
 it receive the sanction of the Father, but it is at once full, 
 decided, and final. The Saviour gave the paralytic patient a 
 complex benefit in a single act, when He said to him as he 
 lay helpless on a couch at His feet, " Thy sins be forgiven 
 thee." And if Christ forgive sin. He is entitled to do so, for 
 He has made provision for it in His sufferings and death. 
 May He not Himself dispense the fruits of His atonement, 
 and pardon those for whom He died ? The general idea is 
 the same as that of Eph. iv. 32. Christians are to forgive 
 one another because Christ has forgiven them, for His 
 example has all the force of a formal command. They are 
 also to forgive one another as He has forgiven them — fully 
 and freely, at once and for ever ; not pardoning seven times, 
 but demurring to the seventy times seven ; not insulting him 
 who has injured them by the rigid exaction of a humiliating 
 apology, or stinging him by a sharp and unexpected allusion 
 to his fault ; not harbouring antipathy, but forgetting as well 
 as forgiving; not indulging a secret feeling of offence, and 
 waiting for a moment of quiet retaliation; but expelling 
 every grudge from their hearts by an honest and thorough 
 reconciliation. Meyer expressly condemns the reference, 
 found by Chrysostom and Theophylact, to the medium by 
 which Christ forgives, to wit. His own death, their inference 
 being, that we ought to lay down our lives for others. "We 
 should also demur to this full form of expression on the part 
 of these Fathers as being a necessary deduction here. The 
 doctrine is found, however, in other parts of Scripture, as in 
 1 John iii. 16. But perhaps we may be warranted to say, 
 that as in tlie case of Christ's pardoning us, there was a self- 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 1^- 239 
 
 denial even unto death — so with us, there should be self-denial 
 too. There may be a painful effort, but it should be made — 
 the forgiveness may cost us no little sacrifice, but we must 
 not shrink from it. Such a doctrine seems to be implied, 
 though we cannot say as firmly as Chrysostom, that the 
 proper interpretation of Ka6(o<i demands it — to yap, Ka6(o<;, 
 ravTa airairel. 
 
 (Ver. 14.) ^EttI iraai Be TovTOi<i ttjv ayaTrijv. The con- 
 struction still depends on ivBvcraa-de of the 12tli verse. 
 Looking at the figure implied in the verb, some, such as 
 Gataker and Meyer, give to eVi the sense of " over," as if the 
 meaning were — on those other parts of spiritual raiment 
 throw this, as an over-dress. But such an exegesis appears 
 to press the figure. Nor can the preposition bear the sense 
 which Calvin puts upon it of propter, that is, ye cannot 
 exhibit these graces unless ye have love. ^Eiri means " in 
 addition to," with the idea implied, that what follows is chief 
 or best. Luke xvi. 26. In addition to all these, as last and 
 best, " put on love." 'Aydirrj is the grace of love, on the 
 beauty, propriety, and excellence of which the apostle so often 
 insists. [Eph. i. 1, 4.] We take the next clause in its 
 plain sense — 
 
 "O ian crvvBea ixo<i t?}? TeXetoT7;T09 — " Which is the bond 
 of perfectness," that bond which unites all the graces into 
 completeness and symmetry. "Htl<; is the reading of the 
 Received Text, but o is found in such high authorities as A, 
 B, C, F, G. It weakens the sense to regard the claiise as a 
 species of Hebraism, as if it meant " a perfect bond ; " or as 
 Erasmus renders it in his paraphrase — perfedum et indissoluhile 
 vinculum. Such is the view of Melancthon, Vatablus, Balduin, 
 Michaelis, Calovius, Estiiis, Grotius, Wolf, Eosenmiiller, and 
 Flatt. The apostle here calls love, not perfection, but its 
 bond, or that which holds together all the graces which 
 constitute it. Some, indeed, as Bretschneider, Bengel, Usteri, 
 Bohmer, De Wette, and Olshausen, take the term in the sense 
 oi fasciculus, Inhcgriff — not that which binds, but that which 
 is bound up. In a similar sense, Calvin and Bohmer take it 
 for suinma. The two interpretations differ, as do the German 
 words Band and Btcnd (Biindel), or the English bond and 
 bundle. There is one passage of Herodian appealed to, where 
 
240 COLOSSIAITS III. 14. 
 
 the word has such a meaning — iravra rov avvSea/iov rwv 
 eiTLaTokoiv, the whole package or bundle of letters. But that 
 is not the common meaning of the term, either in the classics 
 or the New Testament. The noun reXetoxT;?, as an abstract 
 term with the article, describes moral perfection as a whole. 
 Perfection consists of many graces, each in its own place and 
 relations, each in its own circle and sphere — but they are 
 held together by love. Did they exist singly, or in separate 
 clusters, perfection would not be enjoyed ; were they fragmen- 
 tary, and not coalescent, symmetry of character would be lost. 
 
 For love is the product of the other graces, the fruit of their 
 ripe development, so that in their perfect state they should 
 throw around them this preserving cincture. Love itself is, 
 at the same time, the highest element of this perfection, and 
 forms the nearest resemblance to Him of whom it is said — 
 " God is love." It creates perfection, but here it is specially 
 represented as a bond which sustains it. No grace is com- 
 plete without it. Without it, knowledge is but a selfish 
 acquisition, purity an attempted personal gain, and zeal a 
 defective struggle ; uninspired by it, faith is but an abortive 
 and monopolizing grasp, and hope an exclusive anticipation. 
 Sin is essentially selfishness in a variety of forms, and not till 
 such selfishness be fully put down, can the semblance of per- 
 fection be enjoyed. Love to God and to every one that bears 
 His image, as the fulfilment of the law, imparting fervour and 
 breadth to every grace, giving odour to the blossom, and being 
 itself the fruit, is the bond of perfectness. A heart replete 
 M'ith this love maintains all its spiritual acquirements in 
 health and vigour. Bound up in this zone, every Christian 
 excellence fills its own place, and keeps it, and the whole 
 character is sound, does not distort itself by excess, nor 
 enfeeble itself by defect. [Eph. iv. 15, v. 2.] 
 
 Love is thus regarded here, not as a congeries of graces, 
 which make up perfection — as Bengel says — amor complectihcr 
 virtutum U7iiversitatem. It is more its oflEice than itself which 
 the apostle regards. It is not looked upon here as containing 
 perfection within itself, but as so uniting the other graces 
 that it gives them perfection and keeps them in it. Meyer 
 shrewdly says, that if love, as a bundle, contained all the 
 other graces in it already, how could the apostle bid them 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 14. 241 
 
 assume love in addition to them ?— cttI iraa-i, tovtol'^. If 
 they were to put on all its parts, how could they assume it 
 as something still distinct ? Huther takes the neuter 6 as 
 referring to the preceding clause, — love, the putting on of 
 which is the bond of perfection. But the apostle's idea is, 
 not that the putting on of the love, but that the love, when 
 put on, is the bond of perfectness. Our view is not unlike 
 that of Chrysostom and Theodoret. Some of the older in- 
 terpreters labour to reconcile the statement of the apostle 
 with his doctrine of justification by faith, and Eomish writers 
 pressed them hard on the subject. Crocius and Schmid 
 refer this perfection simply to the unity or integrity of the 
 church, which love creates and preserves. But though this 
 be not the precise meaning of the apostle, it is certainly 
 included under his statement, and this idea, coupled with the 
 phraseology of Eph. iv. 3, may have led one of the copyists 
 to insert ivoTijro';. What is the bond of perfectness to an 
 individual is also the bond of perfectness to a church.^ [Eph. 
 iv. 3,U4, 15, V. 2]; 1 Pet. iii. 8. 
 
 ^ " Let us consider that charity is a right noble and worthy thing ; greatly per- 
 fective of our nature ; much dignifying and beautifying our soul. It rendereth 
 a man truly great, enlarging his mind unto a vast circumference, and to a 
 capacity near infinite ; so that it by a general care doth reach all things, by an 
 universal affection doth embrace and grasp the world. By it our reason ob- 
 taineth a field or scope of employment worthy of it, not confined to the slender 
 interests of one person or one place, but extending to the concerns of all men. 
 Charity is the imitation and copy of that immense love, which is the fountain 
 of all being and all good ; which made all things, which preserveth the world, 
 which sustaineth every creature ; nothing advanceth us go near to a resemblance 
 of Him, who is essential love and goodness ; who freely and purely, without any 
 regard to his own advantage or capacity of finding any beneficial return, doth 
 bear and express the highest good-will, with a liberal hand pouring down 
 showers of bounty and mercy on all His creatures ; who daily putteth up num- 
 berless indignities and injuries, upholding and maintaining those who offend 
 and provoke Him. Charity rendereth us as angels, or peers to those glorious 
 and blessed creatures, who, without receiving or expecting any requital from us, 
 do heartily desire and delight in our good, are ready to promote it, do willingly 
 serve and labour for it. Nothing is more amiable, more admirable, more vener- 
 able, even in the common 63^6 and opinion of men ; it hath in it a beauty and a 
 majesty apt to ravish every heart ; even a spark of it in generosity of dealing 
 breedeth admiration, a glimpse of it in formal courtesy of behaviour procureth 
 much esteem, being deemed to accomplish and adorn a man : how lovely, there- 
 fore, and truly gallant, is an entire, sincere, constant, and uniform practice 
 thereof, issuing from pure good-will and affection ! " — Barrow's Works, vol. i. 
 pp, 250, 251, Edinburgh, 1841. 
 
242 COLOSSIANS III. 15. 
 
 The apostle still continues his exhortation — 
 (Ver. 15.) Kal r] elprjvq tov Xpiarov ^pa^everw iv ral<; 
 KaphiaL<i vfi(ov — " And let the peace of Christ rule in your 
 hearts." The reading Xpucnov is preferred to the common 
 one of ©€ov, on good authority, such as A, B, C\ D\ F, G, 
 and various Versions and Fathers. Some regard this peace as 
 the result of the preceding admonitions — the peace of mutual 
 concord. Such is the view of no less distinguished critics 
 than the Greek expositors, and of Calvin, Grotius, Vatablus, 
 Calovius, and Meyer. Chrysostom's illustration is as follows: 
 — " Suppose a man to have been unjustly insulted, two 
 thoughts are born of the insult, the one nrging him to 
 vengeance, and the other to patience, and these wrestle with 
 one another. If the peace of God stand as umpire, it bestows 
 the prize on that which calls to endurance, and puts the other 
 to shame." We cannot embrace this exegesis, for we regard 
 it as narrow and unusual. " Peace " is commonly with the 
 apostle a far higher blessing than mere harmony with others, 
 or the study of Christian union. It is with him synonymous 
 with happiness, that calm of mind which is not ruffled by 
 adversity, overclouded by sin or a remorseful conscience, or 
 disturbed by the fear and the approach of death. Isa. 
 xxvi. 3. This view is, generally, that of Luther, Bengel, De 
 Wette, Biihr, Olshausen, and Huther. Nor is it out of 
 harmony with the context. For nothing is more fatal to such 
 " peace " than the indulgence of those foul and angry passions 
 wliich the apostle warns them to abandon in the preceding 
 verses (5 to 9), and there is nothing so conducive to its 
 purity and permanence as the cultivation of those serene and 
 genial graces which are enjoined in verses 12, 13, and 14. 
 It is almost as if he had said — those vices being dropt, and 
 those virtues being assumed, the peace of Christ shall there- 
 fore reign within you, and its happy sensations you will be 
 led naturally to express " in psalms, hymns, and spiritual 
 songs." 
 
 It is called " the peace of Christ," a phrase not essentially 
 different in meaning from the common one, " peace of God." 
 It is given by Christ, or produced and perpetuated by His 
 Spirit. It is the Eedeemer's own legacy — John xiv. 27, 
 " My peace I give unto you ; let not your hearts be troubled. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 15. 243 
 
 neither let them be dismayed." Christ has secured this 
 peace in His blood as Mediator, and He has the right to 
 dispense it as the result of the reconciliation or atonement. 
 
 And such tranquillity, which in its highest aspect is 
 Christian felicity, was not simply to be in their hearts, but it 
 was to " rule " in them ; it was not merely to have existence, 
 but it was to exercise supreme command. For such is the 
 meaning of ^pa^everw, as it naturally comes from its original 
 and literal signification of presiding at the games, and then 
 of distributing the rewards of victory. Both senses have, 
 however, been separately maintained by critics ; Chrysostom 
 adhering to the idea of adjudication — Kpirr}<i koX d<yo)vodeTr](; ; 
 and (Ecumenius employing in explanation the verb ^leaneveiv. 
 Calvin, Erasmus, and Vatablus look upon it as the figure of a 
 wrestler who himself wins the prize — let this peace obtain 
 the prize and keep it ; but the view is against sound philo- 
 logy, for the word is never used of the combatant, but only of 
 the umpire. Nor can we accept the view of Huther, Wahl, 
 and Bretschneider, who refer generally to the idea of IBpa^elov 
 implied in ii. 18, and understand the apostle to say, " let the 
 peace of God confer its rewards upon you." Nor is there 
 more foundation for the opposite idea of Kypke, who supposes 
 it to mean specially, "let the peace of God distribute the 
 prize of love in your hearts." The general and very frequent 
 sense we have already assigned to the verb is preferable, and 
 such is the opinion of many commentators, supported by 
 numerous examples. Diodorus Sic. 13, 53, etc.; Wisdom x. 
 12. Loesner has collected many examples from Philo. This 
 peace was to possess undisputed supremacy — was to be uncon- 
 trolled president in their hearts. 
 
 'Ev raU KapSlai^ vfiMv. Let it not be a state of mind 
 admired or envied, but one actually possessed ; let it not be 
 hovering as a hoped-for blessing on the outskirts of your 
 spirits, but let it be within you ; let it not be an occasional 
 visitant, often scared away by dominant and usurping passion, 
 but a central power, exercising a full and unlimited adminis- 
 tration. Let it so govern, and happiness will be the result, 
 every source of disquietude and element of turbulence being 
 destroyed. The apostle thus wished the Colossians highest 
 spiritual welfare, that their souls might enjoy unbroken quiet. 
 
244 COLOSSIANS III. 15. 
 
 A peace, which is not the peace of Christ, is often rudely dis- 
 turbed, for it is but a dream and a slumber in the midst of 
 volcanic powers, which are employing the time in gathering 
 up their energies for a more awful conflict. There is no 
 question, if a man possessed and cherished the ripe conscious- 
 ness of his interest in Christ, if he had full assurance, and 
 felt that God was for him — if the elements of sinful passion, 
 either in its fouler forms of sensuality, or its darker aspects of 
 malignity, were subdued; and if "the gentleness of Christ" 
 were at home within him, and all the graces which possess a 
 kindred character were aroimd him, bound and held together 
 by that " love which is the bond of perfectness," that then 
 he would enjoy a peace or a bliss second only to the eleva- 
 tion and felicity of heaven. Phil. iv. 7. And it was no 
 audacity in them to seek or cultivate that peace^ for to it they 
 had been called. 
 
 El<i fjv Kul eKKrj6r}Te — " To which ye were also, or indeed 
 were, called." This verb is often used by the apostle. 
 Eph. iv. 1. The possession of this peace was a prime end 
 of their Christianity. The gospel summons a man, not to 
 misery, but to happiness — not to internal discord, but to 
 ultimate peace. And they were called to the possession of 
 it — 
 
 'Ev evl awfiari — " In one body ; " not et? ev awjia — " into 
 one body," that is, so as to form one body. But the meaning 
 is, that they already formed one body, or that unitedly they 
 had been called to the possession of peace. And the apostle 
 adds — 
 
 Kal ev')(api(TTOL <yive(T6e — " And be ye thankful." [Eph. 
 V. 4, 20.] Not a few take the adjective in the sense of 
 friendly, as if the apostle bade them cherish amicable feelings 
 to one another. This is the view of Jerome, of Calvin, 
 Suicer, a-Lapide, Biihr, Steiger, and Olshausen, who give ev'^d- 
 ptaroi the sense of 'x^prjarol in Eph. iv. 32. Calvin renders 
 amahihs sitis ; and Conybeare " be thankful one to another." 
 With Huther, Olshausen, De Wette, and Meyer, we prefer 
 the meaning " thankful "- — that is, towards God. The former 
 sense abounds in the classics, and though the latter is found 
 there too, yet it seems to be wholly contrary to the usage of 
 the kindred terms in the New Testament. For there is every 
 
COLOSSIANS III. IG. 245 
 
 cause of thankfulness to Him who had called them to the 
 possession of such peace. If that peace dwelt within them, 
 and reigned within them — if Christ had at once provided it 
 for them, and summoned them unitedly to its enjoyment, 
 surely profound gratitude was due to such a benefactor. 
 
 (Ver. 16.) 'O A0709 rov XpiaTov ivoiKetTO) iv vfuv ifkov- 
 (Tico<i — " Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly." Lach- 
 mann and Steiger propose to read this clause parenthetically, 
 and to join the previous yivea-de to the following participles — 
 Bi8daKovr€<;, etc. But nothing is gained by such a distribu- 
 tion. For Xpcarov, a few authorities and Fathers read 
 Oeov ; and the Coptic and Clement read Kvpiov. " The word 
 of Christ" is the gospel, the doctrine of Christ, or the truth 
 which has Christ for its subject. In fact, Christ is both the 
 giver of the oracle and its theme. By ev vfuv is meant, not 
 simply among you — unter euch, as Luther translates, or as De 
 Wette contends. Let the Christian truth have its enduring 
 abode " within you " — let it be no stranger or occasional 
 guest in your hearts. Let it not be without you, as a lesson 
 to be learned, but within you, as the source of cherished and 
 permanent illumination. Let it stay within you — irXovo-ico'i, 
 abundantly. That is, let it be completely understood, or let 
 the soul be fully under its influence. Let it dwell not with a 
 scanty foothold, but with a large and liberal occupancy. 
 
 Different ideas have been formed of the best mode of 
 dividing the following clauses of the verse. Our translators, 
 following the Peschito, Chrysostom, and Luther, Calvin, and 
 Beza, add the words " in all wisdom " to the clause which we 
 have already considered. But the idea of wisdom is better 
 joined to the following clause, which refers to mutual teach- 
 ing — "in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another." 
 Our translators, too, so point the verse as to make psalms and 
 hymns the material of instruction, whereas it seems better, 
 and more appropriate, to keep the clause distinct, thus — " Let 
 the word of Christ dwell in you richly ; in all wisdom teach- 
 ing and admonishing one another: in psalms, hymns, and 
 spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts unto the 
 Lord." ^ 
 
 ^ T('j ifTi* Xo'yt; rav X^imu ; ra Xiyia t'lfi rev ay'tau iua.yyiX.iau xa) rut fit- 
 Ifo^/uti QfTorriXw xxi Tut hiut r^oiftiTtit' Vlas "i'i itcimT tt fifi.7t i Xiyoi rev ticu %t 
 
246 COLOSSIANS III. 16. 
 
 The words ev Trday ao^ta are thus connected as they are in 
 i. 28, and such is the view, among others, of Bengel, Storr, 
 Bahr, Steiger, Olshausen, and Baumgarten-Crusius. See under 
 i, 28, where the participles — SiSacr/coi^re?, koI vov66TovvTe<; — 
 occur, though in reverse order, and where they are also ex- 
 plained. The anakoluthon which occurs in the construction 
 is almost necessary, and gives special prominence to the ideas 
 expressed by the participles. The duty enjoined in this clause 
 has a very close connection with that enjoined in the preceding 
 one. Unless the word of Christ dwelt richly within them, 
 they could not fulfil this duty ; for they could not teach and 
 admonish unless they knew what lessons to impart, and in 
 what spirit to communicate them ; but the lessons and the 
 spirit alike were to be found in the gospel. Mutual exhorta- 
 tion must depend for its fitness and utility on mutual 
 knowledge of the Christian doctrine. Sj^aring acquaintance 
 with Divine revelation would lead to scanty counsel and 
 ineffective tuition. 
 
 Wa\fiol<;, vfMvoi<;, a)Bai<; TTvevixaTiKai'^, ev rrj ■^dpirt aSovre^: ev 
 rai? KaphlaL<i vfiwv tq) Qea>. Both the conjunctions ^Kal) 
 which appear in the Eeceived Text seem, on good authority, 
 to be mere euphonistic insertions. Some take the words 
 down to ')(apiTi, as connected with the preceding participles — 
 " admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual 
 songs." Our objection is, that while metrical or musical 
 compositions are not the common vehicle of instruction or 
 admonition, they are specially connected with sacred song. 
 The datives, without the preposition, denote the materials of 
 song. The phrase ev ry ^dpiri, according to Huther and De 
 
 *««■>) ffo^'iX \ "ilk Ttjs ocx^eaffius xai avayvanrius xai fiiXir))! t*» itieav 'y^a(pu)i' "Orav 
 Tttvra, (Tu^vu; ti x,tt,i l-Tnf/.iXcas fitXiru/itv, Ton xai n iiiiyifj,n ^Xn^eivTai, xcci o vous 
 vrXouriX,iTai, xai ii xa^oia i^i^ivyirai, xai to ar'of/.a Ix^iti vXoviria rris h'lat ^iiar- 
 xaXias 7a vafiara' 'E^e/S/i li tivis fjcira i/Ti^yilpavi'ias xai i^ioyvai/u.ixnjvris fiiXiTuvTi; 
 ra; hias y^a^a; •ri'TrouiTiv li; reuv ai^'iffiiuv toj (id^a^^a, aXXei Ss af/,a6ais xa\ 
 a'jripiax'i.'TrTwi abra; ava.yi\ia'(rxov7is, xa) //.yi diax^ivovns rriv iyroXhv aTo rij; irvf^^ovXyis, 
 yivovTai "iiiffi^aii^ovii xai xixatiTn^ia(rf/,'ivoi " T«v lo'iav <runi^ticriv'" S/a roZre uvi ro, 
 "'E» '^affn ffoipia" fiyouv, "va fiira Vuvroi I'l^ous ffoplag, xai rrj; Tytvf^arixr,! S»- 
 Xov'.ri xai tTi; r^oXarnxv!;, xa) r»s luXafitiTix^s "iiaS'iffius xai Tits o^6ris ^lax^lfftu; 
 xai avayivuffxufitv, xai faXlTeHf^iv Ta; hiag y^alpas, xai ^i^affxufMv J/' auTuy xai 
 tavTdvs xai Tovi aXXovi' NIKH^OPOT OEOTOKOT TOT A2TPAXANIOT KAI 
 2TATPOTnOAEn2 APXlEni2KOnOr KrPIAKOAPOMION, T0M02 npnTos, 
 p. 155, EN AeHNAI2, 1840. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 16. 247 
 
 Wette, means " with a grateful spirit." 1 Cor. x. 30. It appears 
 to us wholly out of the question on the part of Calvin, Beza, 
 a-Lapide, Biihr, and many others, to take the words as denoting 
 eua-')(7)fx6vco'i, " gracefully " — sine confusione. We prefer, with 
 Estius, Steiger, and Meyer, to regard the phrase as meaning 
 by the influence of grace, given, as Chrysostom remarks, by 
 the Spirit. Luther joins the phrase erroneously to the 
 preceding term. The following dative, tm ©eo), indicates Him 
 in honour of whom this sacred minstrelsy is raised, and the 
 formula iv rat? KapSiaa describes the sincerity of the service, 
 — the silent symphony of the heart. Tischendorf appears to 
 us to have forsaken his own critical principles in retaining the 
 singular form rfj KapBia, for he has confessedly against him 
 
 A, B, C \ D \ F, G, the Syriac which reads ^ZonNn, and 
 
 the Vulgate, which has — in cordihus vestris. For remarks on 
 the different terms, and their distinction, the reader is referred 
 to what has been said by us under Eph. v. 19. We have 
 there said that probably by Psalms may be understood the 
 Hebrew book of that name, so commonly used in the syna- 
 gogues ; that the hymns might be other compositions divested 
 of Jewish imagery and theocratic allusions, and more adapted 
 to the heathen mind ; while the spiritual odes were freer forms 
 of song, the effusion of personal experience and piety, and do 
 not simply point out the genus to which the entire class of 
 such compositions belonged. 
 
 Still the sentiment hangs on the first clause — " let the 
 word of Christ dwell within you nobly." These sacred songs, 
 whether in the language of Scripture, or based upon it, could 
 be sung in the right spirit only when the indwelling " word " 
 pressed for grateful utterance. When the gospel so possessed 
 the heart as to fill it with a sense of blessing, then the lips 
 might be tuned to song. Experimental acquaintance with 
 Christianity could only warrant the chanting of the sacred 
 ode.^ 
 
 ^ The following is a portion of Basil's encomium on the Psalms, referred to 
 by us in Ephesians : — "Psalmody is the calm of the soul, the repose of the 
 spirit, the arbiter of peace : it silences the wave, and conciliates the whirlwind 
 of our passions, soothing that which is impetuous, and tempering that which is 
 unchaste. Psalmody is an engenderer of friendship, a healer of dissension, a 
 reconciler of those who were inimical ; for who can longer account that man his 
 
248 COLOSSIANS III. 17. 
 
 (Ver. l7.) Kal Trap o rt, av iroitjre, iv Xoyo) rj iv epyw, 
 iravra iv ovofiart Kvpiov 'Iijaov — " And whatever ye do in 
 word or in deed, do all of it in the name of the Lord Jesus," 
 or " Whatever ye are in the custom of doing," etc. On the 
 use of dv with the present, see Winer, § 42, 3, h, {/S). This 
 concluding precept is general in its nature. Some take ttuv, 
 with riatt and Biihr, in an absolute case, others think it 
 better to regard it as repeated in the plural form iravra. 
 Meyer takes the whole clause, as far as ep^yw, as an absolute 
 nominative. There is an earnest rapidity in the composition 
 which may easily excuse any rhetorical anomaly. The rule 
 laid down by Kiihner is, that a word of special importance is 
 placed at the beginning of a sentence in the nominative, to 
 represent it emphatically as the fundamental subject of the 
 whole sentence, § 508. ISTo doubt, special emphasis is laid 
 on irav, for the apostle's idea is, that while some things are 
 done formally in the name of the Lord Jesus, everything 
 should be done really in it. The imperative irocetTe is to be 
 
 enemy, with whom to the throne of God he hath raised the strain ? Wherefore 
 that first of blessings. Christian love, is diffused by psalmody, which devises tlie 
 harmonious concert as a bond of union, and connects the people in choral 
 symphonies. Psalmody repels the demons ; it lures the ministry of angels ; a 
 weapon of defence in nightlj' terrors, a respite from daily toil ; to the infant a 
 presiding genius, to manhood a resplendent crown, a balm of comfort to the 
 aged, a congenial ornament to women. It renders the desert populous, and 
 appeases the forum's tumult ; to the initiated an elementary instruction, to 
 proficients a mighty increase, a bulwark unto those who are perfected in know- 
 ledge. It is the church's voice. This exhilarates the banquet ; this awakens 
 that pious sorrow which has reference to God. Psalmody, from a heart of 
 adamant can excite the tear : psalmody is the employment of angels, the delight 
 of Heaven, and spiritual frankincense. Oh ! the sapient design of our 
 Instructor, appointing that at once we should be recreated by song, and 
 informed by wisdom. Thus, the precepts of instruction are more deeply 
 engraven on our hearts : for the lessons which we receive unwillingly have a 
 transient continuance ; but those which charm and captivate in the hearing, 
 are permanently impressed upon our souls. — From hence may not everything be 
 acquired ? Hence mayest thou not be taught whatever is dignified in fortitude, 
 whatever is consujnmate in justice, whatever is venerable in temperance, what- 
 ever is sublime in wisdom ? Here the nature of penitence is unfolded ; patience 
 is here exemplified. Is there a blessing to be named, which here resides not ? 
 The splendours of theology beam eflTulgent ; Jesus is predicted ; the resurrection 
 is announced ; judgment is proclaimed ; the sword of vengeance is unsheathed ; 
 crowns of glory glitter ; speechless mysteries astonish. All these are treasured 
 up in the book of Psalms, as in a common treasury of the soul." — Boyd's 
 translation, London, 1834. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 17. 249 
 
 supplied. The plural irdvTa individualizes what has been put 
 collectively under the singular irav. As for the whole of 
 what you do in word or in act, let every part or separate 
 element of it be done in the name of the Lord Jesus. The 
 apostle has just spoken of formal religious service, and surely 
 it is to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus. But not it alone 
 — all speech and action must be imbued with the same spirit. 
 But what is meant by the phrase — " in the name of " ? 
 [Eph. V. 20.] The Greek Fathers explain it widely — avrov 
 KaXelv j3or]d6v. Jerome is farther in error when he renders 
 it — ad honorem, for that would represent eh with the accusa- 
 tive. Vitringa, Observat. Sac. p. 327, says that the phrase 
 corresponds to d'it?. It rather corresponds to D??'3, and strictly 
 means — by his authority, or generally, in recognition of it. 
 To speak in His name, or to act in His name, is to speak and 
 act not to His honour, but under His sanction and with the 
 conviction of His approval. This is the highest Christian 
 morality, a vivid and practical recognition of Christ in every- 
 thing said or done. Not simply in religious service, but in 
 the business of daily life ; not merely in psalms, hymns, and 
 spiritual songs, but in the language of friendship and of 
 bargain, of the forum and the fireside ; not simply in deeds 
 which, in their very aspect, are a Christian compliance, such 
 as almsgiving, or sacramental communion, but in every act, in 
 solitude and in society, in daily toil, in the occupations of 
 trade, or negotiations of commerce. This is a high test. It 
 is comparatively easy to engage in religious discourse, but far 
 more difficult to discourse on everything in a religious spirit ; 
 comparatively easy to do a professedly Christian act, but far 
 more difficult to do every act in a Christian spirit. In the 
 one case the mind sets a watch upon itself, and speaks and 
 acts under the immediate consciousness of its theme and 
 purpose, but in the other, the heart is so influenced by 
 religious feeling, that without an effort it acknowledges the 
 name of Christ. Men may for the occasion solemnize them- 
 selves, and word and act may be in direct homage to Christ, 
 but the season of such necessity passes away, and the sensa- 
 tions it had created lose their hold. Thus the associations of 
 the Sabbath fade during the week, and the emotions of the 
 sanctuary lose themselves in the market-place. 
 
250 COLOSSIANS III. 17. 
 
 Still, tlie apostle does not inculcate any familiar or fanatical 
 use of Christ's name, it is not to be mixed up with the 
 phrases of colloquial life. A man is not to say, in Christ's 
 name I salute thee, or in Christ's name I buy this article or 
 sell that one, charter this vessel, or engage in that speculation. 
 But the apostle means, that such ought to be the habitual 
 respect to Christ's authority, such the constant and practical 
 influence of His word within us, that even without reference 
 to Him, or express consultation of Him, all we say and do 
 should be said and done in His spirit, and with the persuasion 
 that He approves. Christianity should ever guard and regulate 
 amidst all secular engagements, and its influence should hallow 
 all the relations and engagements of life. This is the grand 
 desideratum, the universal reign of the Christian spirit. The 
 senator may not discuss Christian dogmas in the midst of 
 national interests, but his whole procedure must be regulated, 
 not by faction or ambition, but by that enlightened patriotism, 
 which, based on justice, is wise enough to know that true 
 policy can never contravene morality, and is benignant enough 
 to admit that other states are interlinked with out progress, 
 and that the world is one vast brotherhood. The merchant 
 is not to digress into a polemical dispute while he is conclud- 
 ing a sale, but love of profit is not to supersede rectitude, nor 
 is the maxim, that there is no friendship in trade, ever to lead 
 him to take undue advantage, or accomplish by dexterity what 
 equity would scarcely permit. The tradesman, as he lifts his 
 tool, is not to say, in Christ's name I strike ; but in the spirit 
 of Him who was among His disciples, " as one that serveth " 
 is he faithfully to finish the labour assigned him, ever feeling 
 himself to be under the "great taskmaster's eye." Art, 
 science, literature, politics and business, should be all baptized 
 into the spirit of Christ. 
 
 Ev'^aptarovvTe<i ra> 0ec3 Kal JJarpl St avrov — " Giving 
 thanks to God even the Father by Him." The sentiment is 
 found in Eph. v. 20, more pointedly and fully expressed, and 
 in almost the same connection. As ye give thanks to God 
 by Christ, so think all and speak all in Christ's name, who is 
 the medium of thanksgiving. Blessings come through Him, 
 and through Him thanks are to be rendered. With this 
 clause, Kypke wrongly connects the previous one, thus — 
 
COLOSSUNS III. 17. 251 
 
 " always in the name of the Lord Jesus giving thanks to 
 God." 
 
 The apostle now comes to the inculcation of some special 
 duties belonging to social and domestic life. Steiger, after 
 Chrysostom and Theophylact, has remarked, that only in 
 Epistles addressed to Asiatic churches do such formal exhorta- 
 tions occur, and he endeavours to account for it by the sup- 
 position that the liberty proclaimed by the false teachers had 
 developed a dangerous licentiousness and taught a kind of 
 Antinomian exemption from the rules and obligations of mo- 
 rality. It is true, as Meyer replies, that no direct polemical 
 tendency is discernible in this section : still there must have 
 been some reason why, in his letters to Asiatic communities, 
 Paul dwells so strongly on this important branch of ethics. 
 We may have little more than conjecture, yet we know that 
 the apostle penned no paragraph in vain, and that there must 
 have been more than accident in the fact that conjugal duty is 
 not mentioned in the Epistles to Home, Philippi, and Thes- 
 salonica, but is specially dwelt upon in those to Ephesus and 
 Colosse, as also in the Apostle Peter's epistles to churches in 
 the same region. The exhortations tendered by Paul to Titus 
 as a Cretan pastor, when he touches on the same subject, have 
 more of a general character, and those found in the epistle to 
 the church in Corinth were called forth by peculiar queries. 
 But here, and in the twin epistle, the apostle places special 
 stress on the conjugal relationship, and its reciprocal obliga- 
 tions ; as also on the relative duties of parents and children, 
 of masters and slaves. Chrysostom gives, as the reason, that 
 in such respects these churches were deficient, though he does 
 not specify the source of such deficiency. His own homilies 
 supply one form of illustration, for they abound in severest 
 reproofs against the indecencies, luxuries, and immoralities of 
 wedded life, and the picture is evidently taken from the state 
 of manners that prevailed in the Byzantine capital, in which 
 the discourses seem to have been delivered. It would thus 
 appear that in the Asiatic cities there was great need to enforce 
 the duties originated by the marriage tie^ and it may be, that 
 forms of false doctrine had a tendency to excite spurious 
 notions of so-called Christian liberty. It is easy to conceive 
 how a creed of boastful freedom would speedily work its way 
 
252 COLOSSIANS III. 18. 
 
 among slaves. The reader will not forget how, at the period 
 of the Eeformation, the principles of a licentious liberty were 
 not only received, but to a great extent acted out by the 
 Anabaptists of Munster. 
 
 (Ver. 18.) At <yvvaiK€S, vTrordcraecrOe Tot9 avSpdaiv — 
 " Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands." The tS/ot9 of 
 the Keceived Text has no good authority, and some manu- 
 scripts, such as D^, E^, F, G, add vficov, an evident gloss. 
 The injunction has been fully considered under Eph. v. 
 25-33, where it is enforced by a special argument, and a 
 tender analogy derived from the conjugal relation of Christ 
 and His church. The submission which is inculcated on the 
 part of the wife is wholly different in source and form from 
 that slavery which is found in heathen lands, for it is the 
 willing acquiescence which springs out of social position and 
 wedded love, and is dictated at once by a wife's affection, 
 and by her instinctive tendency to lean on her husband for 
 support. The very satire which is heaped upon a wife who 
 governs, or who attempts it, is a proof that society expects 
 that fitting harmony of the hearth which the gospel recom- 
 mends. The early and biblical idea of a wife as that of a 
 " help meet," implies that she was to be auxiliary — second, 
 and not principal in the household. Thus unity of domestic 
 administration was to be secured by oneness of headship. 
 
 The apostle subjoins as a reason — co? dvrjKev iv Kvplcp. 
 Adopting a different punctuation, many, from Chrysostom to 
 Winer and Schrader, join ev Kvpicp to the verb vTroTuaa-eaOe, 
 as if the meaning were — " be submissive in the Lord." The 
 order of the words seems to forbid such an exegesis, and 
 €v Kvpicp is united by its position to dvfJKev — " as is fitting 
 in the Lord." In the imperfect form or time of the verb is 
 implied, according to Winer, an appropriate hint that it had 
 not been so with them at all times. § 40, 3 ; Bernhardy, 
 373. The translation then is — -"as it should be in the 
 Lord." This obligation of submission commenced with their 
 union to the Lord, sprang out of it, and had not yet been 
 fully discharged. It is therefore not a duty which had only 
 newly devolved upon them, but its propriety reached back 
 to the point of their conversion. Their union with the Lord 
 not only expounded the obligation, but also enforced it. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 19. 2o3 
 
 Though the general strain of these exhortations be the same 
 as in the Epistle to the Ephesians, there is usually some 
 specific difference. In the other epistle he says, " wives, be 
 obedient to your own husbands as to the Lord," where co? points 
 out the nature, and not simply, as Ellicott thinks, the aspect of 
 the obedience enjoined. Tlie spirit of the obedience is referred 
 to in Ephesians, and the becoraingness of that spirit in the 
 clause before us. How different from heathen principles, either 
 that of Aristotle — mores viri lex vitae ; or that of Cato, as 
 repeated by Livy, that wives are simply in tnanu viroricm. 
 
 (Ver. 19.) Oi dvSpe<;,a<yaTrdTe Ta<i yvvalKa^,Kal jx-q TTLKpalveade 
 TTjoo? avTd<; — " Ye husbands, love your wives." The duty is 
 touchingly illustrated in Eph. v. 25, 26. The implication 
 is, that the submission of the wife is gained by the love of 
 the husband. Though the husband is to govern, he must 
 govern in kindness. This duty is so plain that it needs no 
 enforcement. The apostle then specifies one form in which 
 the want of this love must have often shown itself — " and be 
 not bitter against them." The tropical use of the verb is as 
 obvious as is that of the noun in Eph. iv. 3 1. The verb, which is 
 sometimes followed by eVt in the Septuagint, is here followed 
 by 'irp6<i} There is no doubt that the inconsistency here 
 condemned was a common occurrence in heathen life, where 
 a wife was but a legal concubine, and matrimony was not 
 hallowed and ennobled by the Spirit of Him who wrought 
 His first miracle to supply the means of enjoyment at a 
 marriage feast. The apostle forbids that sour and surly 
 objurgation which want of love will necessarily create ; all 
 that hard treatment in look and word, that unkind and 
 churlish temper which defective attachment so often leads to. 
 Wives are to submit, not indeed to guard against a frown or 
 a chiding, but to ensure a deeper love. So that if this love 
 is absent, such obedience will not be secured by perpetual 
 irritation and fault-finding, followed by the free use of op- 
 probrious and degrading epithets. 
 
 In Ephesians, the apostle proposes as the example Christ's 
 love to the church in its fervour, self-sacrifice, and holy pur- 
 pose, and also enjoins the husband to love his wife as himself, 
 
 1 The verb occurs in the same sense in Philo, and is to some extent explained 
 by Plutarch. See Kypke, in loc. 
 
254 COLOSSIANS III. 19. 
 
 as being in truth a portion of himself (&)? containing in it a 
 species of argumentative comparison), but here the injunction 
 is curt and uniUustrated, followed only by the prohibition of 
 a sin which a husband's indifference will most certainly induce. 
 It would almost seem, however, as if the phrase, " as is fitting 
 in the Lord," enforced both the duty recorded before it, and 
 that which stands after it. Tertullian, in his address to his 
 wife, w^ritten before he became a Montanist, describes the 
 happiness of a marriage in the Lord in the following glowing 
 terms : — " How can we find words to express the happiness 
 of that marriage which the church effects, and the oblation 
 confirms, and the blessing seals, and angels report, and the 
 Father ratifies ? What a union of two believers, with one 
 hope, one discipline, one service, one spirit, and one flesh ! 
 Together they pray, together they prostrate themselves, and 
 together keep their fasts, teaching and exhorting one another, 
 and sustaining one another. They are together at the church 
 and at the Lord's supper ; they are together in straits, in 
 persecutions, and refreshments. Neither conceals anything 
 from the other ; neither avoids the other ; neither is a burden 
 to the other ; freely the sick are visited, and the needy re- 
 lieved ; alms without torture ; sacrifices without scruple ; 
 daily diligence without hindrance ; no using of the sign by 
 stealth ; no hurried salutation ; no silent benediction ; psalms 
 and hymns resound between the two, and they vie with each 
 other which shall sing best to their God. Christ rejoices on 
 hearing and beholding such things ; to such persons He sends 
 His peace. Where the two are. He is Himself; and where 
 He is, there the Evil One is not." ^ 
 
 ^ " Quale jugum fidelium duonim unins spei, unius disciplinpe, ejusdem 
 servitutis ! Ambo fratres, ambo conservi, nulla spiritus carnisve discretio. 
 Atrjuin vere duo in came una ; ubi caro una, unus et spiritus. Simul orant, 
 simul Tolutantur, et simul jejunia transigunt, alterutro docentes, alterutro 
 hortantes, alterutro sustinentes. In ecclesia Dei pariter utrique, pariter in con- 
 vivio Dei, pariter in augustiis, in persecutionibus, in refrigeiiis ; neuter alteruni 
 celat, neuter alteruni vitat, neuter alteri gravis est ; libere seger visitatur, 
 indigens sustentatur ; eleemosynfe sine torniento, sacrificia sine scrupulo, quoti- 
 diana diligentia sine impediniento ; non furtiva signatio, non trepida gratulatio, 
 non muta bcnedictio ; sonant inter duos psalmi et hymni, et mutuo provocant, 
 quis melius Deo suo cantet. Talia Christus videns et audiens gaudet, his pacem 
 suam mittit ; ubi duo, ibi et ipse ; ubi et ipse, ibi et malus non est." — TertuU. 
 ad Uxorem, ii. 9. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 20,21. 255 
 
 From conjugal the apostle naturally passes to parental 
 duty. 
 
 (Ver. 20.) Ta reKva, v7ra/cov€Te rot? yovevat Kara iravTU — 
 " Children, obey your parents in all things." The wife is 
 generally to be submissive, but children are to be obedient, 
 to listen and execute parental commands, and to exemplify a 
 special form of submission for which the filial relation affords 
 so many opportunities. [Eph. vi. 1-3.] The love of the 
 child's heart naturally leads it to obedience. Only an un- 
 natural child can be a domestic rebel. Where the parents 
 are Christians, and govern their children in a Christian spirit, 
 obedience should be without exception, or — Kara irdvra. 
 The apostle, speaking in reference to Christian parents, for 
 his epistle could reach none but children of that class, takes 
 no heed of any exception. The principle involved in his 
 admonition is, tliat children are not the judges of what they 
 should or should not obey in parental precepts. 
 
 The best reading of the following clause is rovro jap evdpearov 
 icrrtv iv Kvplw — "For this is well-pleasing in the Lord," 
 not as the older form had it, " well-pleasing to the Lord." 
 The construction is similar to that of the 19 th verse, the 
 specific difference of thought being, that in the former case 
 submission is an appropriate thing in the Lord ; while in this 
 case filial obedience is marked with special approbation, as 
 being well-pleasing in the Lord. Eesting on Christian prin- 
 ciple and motive, it meets Divine approbation. In Eph. vi. 1, 
 the apostle calls it — SUacov, a thing right in itself, and then 
 he quotes the fifth commandment to show that such a duty is 
 also inculcated in Scripture, but here he regards it simply in 
 a religious aspect, and awards to it Christ's approval. 
 
 (Ver. 21.) 01 7raTepe<i firj ipedl^ere ra reKva vjJbSiv — "Ye 
 fathers, do not provoke your children." [Eph. vi. 4.] 
 Authorities of no mean note give us irapopjl^ere, a reading 
 adopted by Griesbach, Scholz, and Lachmann, but which 
 might slip into the text from Eph. vi. 4, though, certainly, 
 it is found in A, C, D\ E\ F, G. The verb, as in 1 Mace. xv. 
 40, Deut. xxi. 20, is to irritate, to fret, to rouse to anger, and 
 not, as in 2 Cor. ix. 2, to stir up to emulation. Fathers are 
 spoken to since training is their duty, and because this 
 peculiar sin which the apostle condemns is one to which they. 
 
256 COLOSSI ANS III. 21. 
 
 and not mothers, are peculiarly liable. The paternal govern- 
 ment must be one of kindness, without caprice ; and of equity, 
 without favouritism. The term includes greatly more than 
 what Burton understands by it — " do not carry their punish- 
 ment too far." The child, when chastised, should feel that 
 the punishment is not the result of fretful anger ; and when it 
 obeys, its obedience should not be prompted, or rather forced, 
 by menaced infliction. If children, let them do what they 
 can, never please their father, if they are teazed and irritated 
 by perpetual censure, if they are kept apart by uniform stern- 
 ness, if other children around them are continually held up as 
 immeasurably their superiors, if their best efforts can only 
 moderate the parental frown, but never are greeted with the 
 parental smile, then their spirit is broken, and they are 
 discouraged. 
 
 Against this sad result the apostle warns — 
 "Iva fi7] advjxoiaiv — " Lest they be disheartened." The com- 
 position of the verb shows its strong signification. Children 
 teazed and irritated lose heart, renounce every endeavour to 
 please, or render at best but a soulless obedience. The verb 
 occurs only here in the New Testament, but is found in the 
 Septuagint, 1 Kings i. 16, etc., and in several of the classical 
 authors. What the apostle guards against has been often 
 witnessed, with its deplorable consequences. In the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, he speaks more fully, and enjoins the positive 
 mode of tuition — "but bring them up in the nurture and 
 admonition of the Lord," The young spirit is to be carefully 
 and tenderly developed, and not crushed by harsh and un- 
 generous treatment. Too much is neither to be demanded nor 
 expected. The twig is to be bent with caution, not broken in 
 the efforts of a rude and hasty zeal. Approbation is as necessary 
 to the child as counsel, and promise as indispensable as warning 
 and reproof. Gisborne on this place well says — " To train up 
 children as servants of God, as soldiers of Jesus Christ, for a 
 future existence in preference to the present life ; to instruct 
 and habituate them, in conformity with their baptismal vow, to 
 renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil, and to live not 
 unto themselves but to that Eedeemer who died for them ; this 
 is universally the grand duty of a parent. This well-known 
 duty the apostle, though he does not name it, presupposes as 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 21. 257 
 
 acknowledged and felt by the Colossians. lu the discharge of 
 this duty, and in every step of their proceedings, he directs 
 them to beware, as parents, of provoking their children to anger ; 
 that is to say, as the original term evidently implies, of exer- 
 cising their own authority with irritating unkindness, with 
 needless and vexatious severity ; of harassing their children 
 by capricious commands and restrictions ; of showing ground- 
 less dissatisfaction, and scattering unmerited reproof. To act 
 thus, the apostle declares, would be so far from advancing the 
 religious improvement of children, that it would discourage 
 them. It would not only deaden their affections towards their 
 parents, but would dispirit their exertions, and check their 
 desires after holiness." ^ 
 
 Following the same order of thought as in the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, the apostle next turns him to the other members of 
 the household, the slaves. It is probable that the false philo- 
 sophy inculcated, with regard to them, certain notions of 
 freedom which were not merely unattainable, but the belief of 
 which might only aggravate the essential hardness of their lot. 
 Steiger has referred to the fact that the Pharisees gave a 
 special prominence to political freedom (John viii. 33), and 
 he says, drawing his authority from Philo, that the Essenes 
 held a doctrine which would, if carried out to practice, lead 
 to a philanthropic revolution. At all events, they condemned 
 slave-masters as not only unjust, but impious, and destroyers 
 of a law of nature — Oeafiov (^vaew<; avaipovvTcov. The false 
 teachers, if they held similar views, might inculcate this 
 abstract doctrine, which, whatever its inherent truth, could 
 not in those days lead to anything but discord and blood- 
 shed. The apostle, on the other hand, applied himself to 
 things as they were, and while he attempted to moderate an 
 evil which he could not subvert, he laid down those principles, 
 by the spread of which social bondage first was shorn of its 
 grievances, and then lost its very existence. We have already 
 stated, under Eph. vi. 5-8, the relation in which the gospel 
 stood to the slaves, how it raised them to spiritual brother- 
 hood, and gave them a conscious freedom which chains and 
 oppression could not subvert. It so trained them, and so 
 tutored their Christian masters, that slavery in a Christian 
 1 Familiar Exposition of the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians, London, 1816. 
 
258 COLOSSIANS III, 22. 
 
 household must have existed only in name, and the name 
 itself was ready to disappear as soon as society was leavened 
 with the spirit of Christianity. 
 
 The injunctions here delivered are much the same as those 
 in the Epistle to the Ephesians. The reader is invited to 
 turn to the prefatory remarks to our comment on Eph. vi. 5. 
 The apostle does not speak vaguely, but hits upon those vices 
 which slavery is so apt to engender — indolence, eye-service, 
 and reluctance in labour. 
 
 (Ver. 22.) 01 BovXot vTraKovere Kara irdvra rot? Kara 
 aapica Kvploiq. [Eph. vi. 5.] The master of the slave is 
 only so — Kara aapKa, the relationship is but corporeal and 
 external, the contrast being — the real master is the Lord 
 Christ. No distinction can be established between Kvpio<; 
 and Secr7roT779 in the New Testament, either in their Divine or 
 human application. The principle of the obedience is Kara 
 irdvTa, as in verse 20. Refractoriness on the part of the 
 slave would at once have embittered his life, and brought 
 discredit on the new religion which he professed, but active 
 and cheerful discharge of all duty would both benefit himself, 
 promote his comfort, and recommend Christianity. 
 
 M.r) iv ocjiOaXfioBovXeta cb? dvOpwirdpecTKOL — " Not with 
 eye-service, as men-pleasers." [Eph. vi. 6.] The plural form 
 of the first noun is preferred by some, as being the more 
 difficult reading, but the singular has A, B, D, E, F, Gr, in its 
 favour. Yet Tischendorf has rejected it in spite of all this 
 testimony. The Codices D, E, F, G, have another, and per- 
 haps more correct spelling — 6<^9a\pLohov\ia. In Eph. vi. 6, the 
 apostle uses Kara, but here iv. In the former place they are 
 enjoined to obey in singleness of heart, as unto Christ — " not 
 according to eye-service " — that is, not in the style of eye- 
 service ; here they are asked not to serve in eye-service, 
 that is, in the spirit of it. Slaves have usually but the one 
 motive, and that is, to avoid punishment, and therefore they 
 only labour to please the master when his eye is on them. 
 They are disposed to trifle when he is absent, in the hope 
 that their indolence may not be detected. But Christian 
 slaves were to work on principle, were to do their duty at all 
 times, and from a higher motive, conscious that another eye 
 was upon them, and that their service was really rendered to 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 23. 259 
 
 another master. Such a conviction would prevent them 
 being avOpcoTrdpeaKot. See under Eph. vi. 6, where we 
 have noticed the necessary connection of this vice with 
 slavery. 
 
 'AW iv aTrXoTrjTL KapSia<; <f)OJ3ovfMevot rov Kvpcov — " But 
 in singleness of heart fearing the Lord " (Christ). Kvpcov 
 is preferred to @eov on undoubted authority. [Eph. vi. 5.] 
 Singleness of heart (1 Chron. xxix. 17) is that sincerity 
 which the heathen slave could scarcely possess, for he would 
 often seem to work, and yet contrive to enjoy his ease under 
 the semblance of activity. Duplicity is the vice which the 
 slave uses as his shield. He professes anxiety when he feels 
 none, and he exhibits a show of industry without the reality. 
 For this singleness of heart could only be secured by such a 
 motive as the gospel presents — " fearing the Lord " — standing 
 in awe of His authority over them. They would not be 
 men-pleasers if they bowed to Christ's authority, for then 
 their aim would be to please Him; nor would there be 
 eye-service, if they wrought in singleness of heart, for 
 such a feeling would lead them to conclude the task 
 in hand, irrespectively of every minor and personal con- 
 sideration. 
 
 (Ver. 23.) In this verse the common reading is /cat irav o, 
 ri iav iroirjTe, but the better reading is o eav irotTJre, ck '^v^T]<i 
 ipyd^eade, ct)9 t&> Kvpla> Koi ovk dvdpcoiroi'; — " Whatever ye 
 are in the way of doing, work it heartily as to the Lord, and 
 not to men." They were, in any task that might be assigned 
 them, to labour at it, to work it out, and that without 
 grumbling or reluctance, not only doing it honestly but 
 cheerfully, as Chrysostom says — firj fxerd 8ov\i.Krj<; dvdjKT]';. 
 [Eph. vi. 6.] The heathen slave might do everything with a 
 grudge, for he had no interest in his labour, but the believing 
 slave was to act with cordiality, plying his toil with alacrity, 
 for he was serving in all this industry no human master, but 
 the Lord, who had bought him with His precious blood. Let 
 this be the feeling, and there would be no temptation to fall 
 into eye-service, men-pleasing, and duplicity of heart or 
 conduct. The apostle says without reservation — " as to the 
 Lord, and not to men." There is no necessity to take ovk as 
 meaning ov fiovop. The immediate object of the service 
 
 u 
 
2C0 COLOSSIAXS III. 24. 
 
 must be man, but the ultimate object is the Lord ; the 
 negative, though absolute in form, being relative in sense. 
 Winer, S 55, I.-' The service, whatever its nature, or its 
 relation to man, was ever to be felt and viewed as an act of 
 obedience done to Christ. See under verse 1 7. In doing it 
 to others, they did it to Him ; and to Him, with such claims 
 upon their love and fealty, they could not but give suit and 
 service heartily. As usual, in the parallel place in Ephesians, 
 the thought is given more fully, and the relationship of the 
 slave's labour to Christ is twice noted. Besides, not only was 
 the servant to work as here — e/c ■^vj(rj<; — " from the heart," 
 pointing out his relation to his work, but he is enjoined also 
 to labour — /act' evvoia^ — that is, " with good will " to his 
 master. The apostle adds yet further — 
 
 (Ver. 24.) ElSoTef on airo Kvpiov airdXri-y^ea-Qe rrjv 
 avTairohocTiv Tr)<i KXrjpovofiia^ — " Knowing that from the Lord 
 ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance." "With this 
 persuasion within them, they should be able to follow out the 
 inspired admonition, and such knowledge w^ould form a 
 motive of sufficient energy and life. Serving the Lord in 
 serving man, they would receive their reward from Him. 
 Winer, § 47,^ represents utto as denoting that the recompense 
 comes immediately from Christ, its possessor. Their masters 
 are in no sense to be the dispensers of that reward. Christ 
 Himself shall bestow it. The compound noun, avTa7r68oai<;, 
 is found only here in tlie New Testament.^ That remunera- 
 tion is the "inheritance." [Eph. i. 11-14.] Also Col. 
 i. 12. The genitive is that of apposition, such as is found in 
 Eph. iv. 9 ; 2 Cor. v. 25. See our Commentary on 
 Ephesians, iv. 9. The inheritance is heavenly glory, 1 Pet. 
 i. 4, and that is their prospective blessing. They had no 
 inheritance on earth, nothing which they could call their 
 own ; they could not even realize property in themselves — 
 but an inheritance rich and glorious awaited them. In the 
 hope of it — and the enjoyment of it could not be very 
 distant — they were to work, and suffer and wait, and in the 
 possession of it they would find immediate and ample 
 compensation. [Eph. vi. 8.] There is no room here for 
 
 1 Moulton, p. 594. ^ jn^^ p^ 4^3^ note. 
 
 ^ But sometimes in the classics, Eisner, in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS III. 25. 2G1 
 
 the Popish doctrine of merit. Nota lioc, says a-Lapide, 'pro 
 meritis honorum operum, cotitra Novantes ; but Bahr adduces 
 the terse reply of Calovius — filiis haereditas non confcrtur 
 ex obedientiae merito, sed jure filiationis. 
 
 The ^dp of the next clause, as found in the Textus Eecep- 
 tus, cannot be received, as it is only an interpolated gloss — 
 Tft> Kvptw Xpia-Tw Bov\eveT€ — which the Vulgate renders, 
 Domino Christo servite, " serve ye the Lord Christ." Perhaps, 
 as Meyer says, the imperative is preferable, 'yap being spurious. 
 It is thus a summation of the whole — " the master, Christ, 
 serve ye." The use of the indicative is foreign to the 
 passage, which is injunctive. Since the Lord gives such a 
 reward so rich and blessed, serve ye Him. Look above and 
 beyond human service, and with such a bright prospect in 
 view, serve the Lord Christ. Your masters on earth have no 
 absolute right over you : the shekels they may have paid for 
 you can only give them power over your bodies, your time 
 and your labour ; but the Lord has bought you with His blood, 
 and has therefore an indefeasible claim to your homage and 
 service. 
 
 (Ver. 25.) 'O fyap ahcKwv Kopbiaerat o rjBiKrja-ev. The Se 
 of the Stephanie is rightly replaced by yap, on the evidence 
 of A, B, C, D\ F, G, and many of the Versions. The con- 
 struction of the clause is idiomatic — " the wrong-doer shall 
 receive what he has wronged." Winer, § 66, b, says it can 
 scarcely be called a brachylogy, for it is somewhat, as is said 
 in German, — er wird das Unrecht erndten — that is, he does 
 not receive the wrong itself, but the fruit of it, or the wrong, 
 in the form of punishment. He shall be paid, as we say, in 
 his own coin. The wrong-doer shall bear the penalty of the 
 wrong. 
 
 The question is, to whom does the apostle refer ? 1. Some 
 suppose him to mean the slave, as if to warn him, that if he 
 failed in his duty he must expect to be punished. This is the 
 notion of Theophylact, Bengel, Storr, Flatt, Heinrichs, and De 
 Wette. This exegesis may have the support of the mere 
 words, but it does not tally with the concluding clause — 
 " there is no respect of persons with Him." Is the fact that 
 the Judge has no respect of persons an argument that an un- 
 just slave shall not escape punishment ? The phrase, " respect 
 
2C2 COLOSSIANS III. 25. 
 
 of persons," usually implies that an offender, simply for his 
 rank and station, escapes the penalty — a mode of partiality 
 not at all applicable to slaves. The argument of Bengel is 
 only ingenious — tenues saepe putant, sihi propter tenuitatem 
 ipsoriim esse parcendum. 
 
 2. Others regard the verse as indicating a great general 
 principle, applicable alike to the master and his slave. Such 
 is the view of Jerome and Pelagius, Bahr, Huther, Baumgarten- 
 Crusius, and Trollope. Jerome says, quicumque injuriam 
 inhderit, sive do7iiinus sive servus, uterque. . . . But the same 
 objection applies to this view as to the former. So that we 
 incline to the third opinion, which is, that the words refer to 
 the master, the view of Theodoret, Ansel m, Aquinas, Erasmus, 
 Beza, Calvin, Estius, and Meyer, while De Wette allows its 
 possibility. The connection of the thought seems to be — 
 "you are Christ's servants, and you shall receive the reward 
 from Him. Injustice you may in the meantime receive from 
 your earthly masters, but they shall be judged for it, not at a 
 human tribunal, where their rank may protect them, but 
 before Him who in His decisions has no respect of persons. 
 Therefore, ye masters, give your slaves what is just and equal." 
 There is, besides, a strong tendency in any one who owns 
 slaves, and exercises irresponsible power over them, to treat 
 them with capricious and heedless tyranny. The statement 
 of the apostle, then, contains a general truth, with a special 
 application to the proprietors of slaves, and is therefore the 
 basis of the following admonition. Meyer rests another 
 argument on the current meaning of the participle aSiKcov in 
 the New Testament, which, he says, with the exception of 
 E,ev. xxii. 11, denotes Unrecht zufilgen, not Unrecht thun. 
 In fact, our translators have given the word at least 
 eight different renderings. Ten times have they rendered 
 it " hurt," eight times have they rendered by " do wrong," 
 as in the case before us, twice simply by " wrong," twice by 
 " suffer wrong," once by " injure," once by " take wrong," once 
 by " offender," and once by " unjust." The predominant idea is 
 not, to act unjustly, but to injure, and refers therefore more 
 probably not to the slave forgetting his duty, but to his 
 master, tempted by his station and power to do an act of 
 injury towards his servile and helpless dependants. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 1. 263 
 
 Kal ovK can TTpoa-ooTroXrf^ia — " And there is no respect of 
 persons." [Eph. vi. 9.] Eom. ii. 11; Acts x, 34; Jas. ii. 
 1, 9. 
 
 (Chap. IV. Ver. 1.) The division of chapters is here very- 
 unfortunate. The apostle, while he stooped to counsel tlie 
 slave, was not afraid to speak to his master. 
 
 01 KVfiLOL, TO hUaiov Kal rrjv laorrjTa rol'^ Sov\ot<i 
 nrapi'^ea-de — "Ye masters, afford for your part to your 
 servants what is just and equal," or rather " reciprocal." 
 [Eph. vi. 9.] The verb in the middle voice, has in it the 
 idea, "as far as yovi are concerned." Acts xix. 24. The 
 principal term, and the one about which there is any dispute, 
 is la-oTTjTa. What does the apostle mean precisely by it ? 
 Not a few understand by it equity in general. Such is the 
 view of Robinson, Wahl, Bretschneider, and Wilke, in their 
 respective lexicons, and also of Steiger, Huther, and De Wette, 
 in their respective commentaries. Others, again, like 
 Erasmus, a-Lapide, and Bohmer, look on the words as denot- 
 ing impartiality — do not in your treatment of your slaves 
 prefer one to another, give them the like usage. In the only 
 other passage of the New Testament where the word occurs, 
 it denotes not equity, but equality. 2 Cor. viii. 14: "But 
 by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be 
 a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a 
 supply for your want ; that there may be equality." In this 
 verse equality is the idea — your abundance and their want, 
 their abundance and your want, being in reciprocal adjustment. 
 In the passage before us, we incline to foUow the older 
 expositors, Calvin, Zanchius, Crocius, as also Meyer, who give 
 it such a sense. 
 
 The meaning is not very different from that of the cor- 
 responding passage in Eph. vi. 9 — " ye masters, do the same 
 things unto them," which we have explained as meaning what 
 Calvin has called the jus analogu7ii. While we agree with 
 the general view of Meyer, we think him wrong in his special 
 application of it. He regards the laorijra as involving that 
 spiritual parity which Christian brotherhood creates. Slaves 
 are your equals, and they should be treated with such equality. 
 This exegesis is based on the supposition that Christian slaves 
 only are meant, a supposition which, we think, cannot be 
 
264 COLOSSIANS IV. 1. 
 
 admitted. The slaves are told how to behave toward their 
 masters, whether these masters are Christians or not; and 
 the master is admonished how to conduct himself toward his 
 slaves, whether these slaves be Christians or not. The apostle 
 speaks to Christian slaves and Christian masters; but such 
 slaves might have heathen masters, and such masters might 
 have unconverted slaves. There is no warrant, then, for 
 saying, that the apostle only teaches the duty of masters 
 towards Christian servants. Whatever the religious creeds 
 of their serfs, they were to give them what is just and equal. 
 The equality lay in reciprocal duty ; if the slave is bound to 
 serve the master, the master is bound equally to certain duties 
 to the slave. The elements of service have a claim on equal 
 elements of mastership. Equality demands this, that he shall 
 give the slave all to which he is entitled, not with a view to 
 please men, but to please God — " doing it heartily as unto 
 the Lord." Such property had its duties as well as its rights, 
 and the equality lay between the exercise of such duties and 
 the enforcement of such rights. The phrase to BcKaLov means 
 what is right, irrespective of all considerations, that is, what 
 the position of the slave as a man and a servant plainly 
 involves. Eight and duty should be of equal measurement. 
 The apostle did not bid the masters demit their mastership, 
 for he does not mean by laorrjii, equality of rank with them- 
 selves, for such an elevation would imply greatly more than 
 the bestowal of personal freedom. Masters are still called so, 
 as they still stood in that relationship, but Christianity was 
 to regulate all their transactions with those placed under 
 them and owned by them. And with regard to their Christian 
 slaves — the equality wliich Meyer contends for was certainly 
 to guide them — the equality so well explained in the Epistle 
 to Philemon. 
 
 One powerful reason the apostle adds — 
 
 ElSore^;, on kuI uytiet? e'^exe Kvpiov iv ovpavoi<i — " Knowing 
 that ye too have a master in heaven." The participle has its 
 common causal sense. It is not material to our purpose 
 whether the reading be ovpava> or ovpavol<i. The sense is — 
 ye are under law yourselves to the highest of masters — you 
 are in the position of servants to the heavenly Lord. As ye 
 would that your ]\Iaster should treat you, so do you as masters 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 1. 265 
 
 treat theiu. Let the great Master's treatment of yoa be the 
 model of your treatment of them. If the masters realized 
 this fact, that in this higher service their slaves, if Christians, 
 and themselves were colleagues, ransomed by the same price, 
 the same service appointed to them, and the same prospect 
 set before them, a tribunal before which they should stand on 
 the same level, and an inheritance in which they should equally 
 share, irrespective of difference in social rank upon earth, then 
 would they be kept from all temptations to harshness and 
 injury towards their dependants. Who does not recollect the 
 touching language of Job ? " If I did despise the cause of 
 my man-servant, or of my maid-servant, when they contended 
 with me ; what then shall I do when God riseth up ? and 
 when He visiteth, what shall I answer Him ? Did not He 
 that made me in the womb make him ? and did not one 
 fashion us in the womb?" xxxi. 13-15. 
 
 That the apostle in such admonitions pursued the wisest 
 course, the Servile wars of Eome are abundant evidence. The 
 principles inculcated by him lightened the burden, and their 
 practical development in course of time removed it. So 
 numerous were the slaves, that in very many cases they far 
 outnumbered the freemen — as in Attica, where the proportion 
 was at least four to one. Probably very many of them were 
 to l)e found in all the early churches. 
 
 Tlie apostle lays down three positions fatal to slavery. 
 First, he denies a common theory of the times, which seems 
 to have regarded slaves as an inferior caste, either born so, as 
 Aristotle atfirms, or brought into servitude, as Homer sings, 
 from mental imbecility.^ For he pleads for reciprocity, and 
 thereby admits no distinction but the one of accidental rank. 
 And, secondly, he declares that certain duties to slaves spring 
 from natural right, an idea the admission of which would not 
 only at once have put an end to the incredible cruelties of 
 Spartan and Eoman slave-owners, but which did also, by and 
 by, as it leavened society, prompt Christian men to give liberty 
 to their servants, made like themselves in God's image, and as 
 entitled as themselves to a free personality. Thirdly, he avows 
 that in the Cliristian church there is neither " bond nor free," 
 and thus provides and opens a spiritual asylum, within which 
 ^ Euripides, too, says of the slave race — ol^ o'/if ; JVov xa»o'». 
 
266 COLOSSIANS IV. 1. 
 
 equality of the highest kind was enjoyed, and master and 
 slave were not in such a relationship recognized. For master 
 and slave were alike the free servants of a common Lord in 
 heaven. In the meantime, as Chrysostom says, Christianity 
 gave freedom in slavery, and this was its special distinction.^ 
 The same Father tells what spiritual benefit Christian servants 
 had often imparted to their masters' households, and Neander 
 states that a Christian female slave was the means of bringing 
 the province of ancient Georgia to the knowledge of Christ.'^ 
 
 ■* Toiourov ^piffTiavKrfios, In loc. 1 CoF. xix. 
 
 ' Memorials, p. 306. Bohn, London. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The apostle now passes to more general admonitions. But 
 he places prayer in front, and he delights to contemplate it as 
 the " ladder " which connects earth with heaven, by which the 
 soul rises to highest communion, and spiritual blessings, like 
 descending angels, come down to our world. 
 
 (Ver. 2.) Tfj Trpoaev^fj Trpoa-KaprepelTe — "Continue in 
 prayer." The apostle knew the benefit of prayer from his 
 own experience, and he is therefore anxious that they should 
 pray with persevering energy, and give himself a prominent 
 place in their intercessions. [Eph. vi. 18.] Eom. xiii. 12 ; 
 1 Thess. V. 17. They prayed, and the apostle was well aware 
 of it, but he exhorts them to " continue in prayer." They 
 were never to suppose that prayer was needless, either because 
 their desires had been gratified, or God had bestowed upon 
 them all His gifts. But as they were still needing, and God 
 was still promising, they were still to persist in asking. This 
 perseverance was a prime element of successful prayer, as it 
 proved their sincerity, and evinced the power of their faith. 
 They were to pray and wait, not to be discouraged, but still 
 to hold on — wrestling in the spirit of him who said, " I will 
 not let thee go except thou bless me." 
 
 rp7]yopovvr€<i ev avrfj ev ev-^apiaTLa. The phrase iv eu^a- 
 pLaTia is not connected with the preceding ttj Trpoaev^r} 
 Trpoa-KaprepecTe, but with the words last quoted — " watching in 
 it with thanksgiving." The present form belongs only to the 
 later Greek. Phryniclius, ed. Lobeck, pp. 118, 119 — iypi]yopa 
 perfect of iyeipo) being employed. Eustathius, ad Odyss. 1880; 
 Sturz, p. 157 ; Buttmann, § .343. It would be an unworthy 
 view to refer this language to the practice of ancient Chris- 
 tianity, which was compelled by persecution to spend so many 
 hours of the night in devotional exercises. Such tame for- 
 mality is not involved, but it still clings to humanity, and is 
 found not only " in the confusion of Paternoster and Ave 
 
268 COLOSSIANS IV. 3. 
 
 Marias among the Catholics," but also "in the no less pious 
 babbling of many a pietist keeper of the hours." ^ The apostle 
 enjoins, not physical, but spiritual wakefulness, as in Eph. vi. 
 18, where he employs aypvjrvovvTe';. They were to be ever 
 on their guard against remissness. If a man refuses to sleep 
 that his attention may not be interrupted, his watching argues 
 the value he places on the end desired. To prayer, Christians 
 are to give themselves with sleepless anxiety, and are ever to 
 watch against all slackness or supineness in it, and against all 
 formality and unbelief. 1 Thess. v. 6 ; 1 Pet. v. 8. They 
 were not to become torpid or careless, but were to beware of 
 spiritual sleepiness in their devotions. And along with prayer, 
 they were to be wakeful " in thanksgiving." Olshausen lays 
 too great stress upon the phrase when he says that by ev 
 ev^apiarca the more general irpoa-ev^rj is more accurately 
 defined. He adds, " that the prayer of a Christian, in the 
 consciousness of his experienced grace, can never be anything 
 else than a thanksgiving." But the apostle in no sense nor 
 form identifies prayer with thanksgiving, he only classes 
 thanksgiving along with prayer. See under ii. 7. Still there 
 are so many grounds for thanksgiving that it cannot be 
 omitted in any approach to the throne of grace. While we 
 ask for so much, there is also much for which we ought to 
 give thanks. We must give Him credit for what He has 
 done already, while we ask Him to do more. There are many 
 reasons of thanksgiving, and not the least of them is the 
 privilege of prayer itself. Prayer and thanksgiving co-exist 
 only on earth. They shall be separated in the other world, 
 for in the region of woe there is only wailing, and in that of 
 glory there is only melody. 
 
 (Ver. 3.) The apostle wished himself to be specially in- 
 cluded in their suppHcations. 
 
 Ilpocrev^o/jbevoc afia koi 'rrepl r,pL(vv — "Praying at the same 
 time also for us." We cannot suppose, Mdth some critics, that 
 Paul means only himself when he uses ?7/i<wz/. True, indeed, 
 he immediately uses the singular, still he seems first to include 
 others with himself. But we cannot say that Timothy is the 
 only person meant besides himself. These others may have 
 been persons circumstanced like the apostle, and probably 
 ' Stier, Reden Jesu, Matt. vi. 7. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 3. 2G9 
 
 comprised at least those whose names are mentioned in the 
 concluding salutations. The Greek expositors dwell on the 
 apostle's humility in asking the prayers of the Colossian 
 church, Theophylact adding that the circumstance also shows 
 — TTjv hvvafiLv TTj'i (f)i,\aBeX(f)ov eL'^%. Yes, and it also shows 
 that the apostle was no Stoic, that he felt the need of those 
 prayers, and set a high value on them. For the circumstances 
 in which he was placed had a depressing tendency, and he 
 seems, not indeed to have lost confidence in himself, but to 
 have had some apprehension that from age and infirmity he 
 might yield, or appear to yield before them. But he knew 
 the power of prayer. " Human entreaty has shut up heaven, 
 and has again opened it. At the voice of a man the sun 
 stood still. Prayer has sweetened the bitter fountain, divided 
 the sea, and stilled its waves. It has disbanded armies, and 
 prevented conflict ; it has shortened battle, and given victory 
 to right. It has conferred temporal abundance, as in the case 
 of Jabez ; and given effect to medical appliances, as in the 
 case of Hezekiah. It has quenched the mouths of lions, and 
 opened the gates of the prison-house. As Jesus prayed by 
 the river, the dove alighted on Him ; and as He prayed on 
 the hill. He was transfigured. The glory of God was mani- 
 fested to Moses when he asked it, and the grace of Christ to 
 Paul when he besought it. Not a moment elapsed between 
 the petition of the crucified thief and its glorious answer. 
 Ere Daniel concluded his devotion, the celestial messenger 
 stood at his side. The praying church brought down upon 
 itself the Pentecostal effusion." ^ The prayer which he wished 
 to be offered for them was this — 
 
 "Iva 6 0609 avoL^rj r)iuv dvpav rod Xoyov — " That God would 
 open to us a door of discourse " — that is, an opportunity of 
 preaching. Mr. Ellicott, on Eph. i. 17, assigns to lua three 
 meanings in the Xew Testament — a telic, hypotelic, and 
 ecbatic meaning, and he adds, that " our criticism, admitting 
 the third and denying the second after verbs of entreaty, is 
 somewhat illogical." He prefers the second, or covert telic 
 sense. But surely our admission of an ecbatic sense of ipa 
 in the New Testament, does not compel us to admit in such a 
 construction as the one before us, a hypotelic sense. Nor do 
 ' Eadie, The Divine Love, etc., p. 184, 1855. 
 
270 COLOSSIANS IV. 3. 
 
 we feel the harshness which Winer alleges to be in the telic 
 sense of Xva after verbs of entreating. In short, the hypotelic 
 sense is more ingenious than sound. The result, as future, 
 and as the effect of conscious instrumentality, is subjectively 
 regarded under the aspect of design. The subject of a prayer 
 is rarely so blended with its design as to obscure it when it 
 is prefaced by Xva, for that subject still assumes to the writer's 
 mind the idea of purpose, and therefore there is no need to 
 drop or modify the proper telic sense of the conjunction. 
 Here the opening of the door of utterance was to be the 
 subject of prayer, and they were to pray in order that it might 
 be granted. While the theme was on their tongue, the 
 j)rompting of a final purpose was felt in their hearts. The 
 suppliants naturally looked at the end, while they repeated 
 the theme, and thus the apostle proposes this theme to them 
 under the aspect of an end which they were to keep steadily 
 before them at a throne of grace. 
 
 We cannot agree with those who think that by Ovpav rov 
 Xoyov is meant simply " the mouth," as the medium of speech. 
 Yet a great number hold this view, such as Thomas Aquinas 
 and Anselm, Calvin and Beza, Cajetan and Estius, a-Lapide, 
 Zanchius, and Bengel. In the New Testament we find dvpa 
 used in the secondary sense of occasion, or opportunity. Acts 
 xiv. 27; 1 Cor. xvi. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 12; Eev. iii. 8. The 
 figure is so natural and apparent, that it occurs frequently 
 among classical writers, both Greek and Latin. While the 
 exegesis referred to does not come up to the meaning of the 
 words, that of Chrysostom and his followers goes beyond it, 
 when they thus explain Ovpav as — eccroSov Kal Trapprjaiav, an 
 idea borrowed from Eph. vi. 19. The apostle longed for 
 liberty, not for itself, but for the opportunity which it gave 
 him of preaching the gospel. He might, indeed, in his cap- 
 tivity, find some opportunity of preaching, but he longed for 
 uninterrupted licence. Nay, his own personal liberty was 
 nothing to him but in so far as it gave him an unhampered 
 sphere of evangelical labour. The opening of the door of his 
 prison would be the opening of a door of discourse to them, 
 and specially to him, for his design was — 
 
 AaXrjcraL to fivarijpiov rod Xpiarov — " To speak the 
 mystery of Christ." The infinitive is that of result. Winer, 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 3. 271 
 
 § 44. On the meaning of fivaTijptov, see under Eph. i. 9, 
 iii. 4, and especially vi. 19. Christ is the subject of that 
 mystery, it has Him for its theme. See also under i. 2G. 
 It was the apostle's special function to act as a hierophant, or 
 to make it known. It was by the proclamation of it that its 
 blessings were to be enjoyed, and the apostle longed to speak 
 it. His attachment to the mystery was in no way weakened 
 by the persecution which for his disclosure of it had come 
 upon him. 
 
 At' o Koi SeSe/xai — " For which yea I am bound." Winer, 
 § 58, 4, 2. The form 6 is preferred to 6v, as being the read- 
 ing of A, C, D, E, J, K, etc. See under i. 24. These chains 
 lay upon him because he unveiled the mystery in its full 
 extent. He had been imprisoned for preaching it, but still, if 
 liberated, would he preach it again. Thus, at length, the 
 apostle converges those prayers upon himself. In praying 
 for the others, as he requested them, particular reference was 
 to be made to himself, and his inability, through his bonds, 
 to proclaim the mystery of Christ. These bonds had not 
 deadened his love to it, and he longed to proclaim it in this 
 aspect of it as a mystery, viz. its adaptation to the Gentile 
 races. Eph. iii. 8, The special cause of his imprisonment 
 was his proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles, and his 
 admission of converted heathens into the church without 
 respect to the Mosaic law. They had, therefore, special reason 
 to remember him in their prayers. Hallet ^ says well, " that 
 we Gentiles are indebted inconceivably more to the Apostle 
 Paul than we are to any man that ever lived in the world. 
 He was the apostle of the Gentiles, and gloried in that cha- 
 racter. While Peter went too far toward betraying our 
 privileges, our Apostle Paul stood up with a courage and zeal 
 becoming himself. Eor us in particular, as for the Gentiles 
 in general, our invaluable friend laboured more abundantly 
 than all the apostles. For us he suffered. He was persecuted 
 for this very reason, because he laboured to turn us from 
 darkness to light, and to give to us the knowledge of salva- 
 tion upon our repentance towards God, and faith in our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. How dear, then, should his memory ever be to 
 us ! " 
 
 1 Notes, etc., vol. i, p. 382. 
 
272 COLOSSIAXS IV. 4. 
 
 (Ver. 4.) "Iva (pavepcoaco avro, oo? hel fie XaXrjarat — " That 
 I may make it manifest as I ought to speak." Quite peculiar 
 is the connection invented by Bengel — " SiSefiai, iva (pavepwaco, 
 vindus sum ut patcfaciam. Farad oxon." We do not agree 
 with Beza, Bahr, and De Wette, that the two conjunctions 
 (tm) are parallel, and both depending on irpoo-ev^ofievot, for 
 the last one appears simply to develop the order of thought. 
 They were to pray in order that God would open a door of 
 utterance for him, and this in order that he might preach the 
 gospel with all his original boldness and freedom. The one 
 'iva, therefore, depends upon the otlier — " praying in order 
 that God would open a door of utterance for me to speak the 
 mystery of Christ, in order that this being granted I may 
 make it manifest as I ought to speak." Some understand by 
 the phrase, " as I ought to speak," the moral qualities of 
 preaching — but Meyer thinks that the apostle refers simply 
 to freedom of speech, to absence of physical restraint, or to 
 unlimited power of travel from land to land. But the com- 
 prehensive phrase, " as I ought to speak," may comprehend 
 both sets of ideas, and certainly the context does not limit it 
 to the latter. It is true that imprisonment deprived the 
 apostle of the power of preaching at all, but when he says, 
 " as I ought," the pregnant phrase refers not simply to his 
 commission, as the world's apostle, and to the licence of travel 
 which it involved, but also to the spirit in which such duty 
 should be discharged. For it might be surmised that what 
 Paul had suffered for the gospel had lessened his love for it, 
 or modified his views of the office which he held. And may 
 we not suppose that the apostle wished the world to under- 
 stand, that if he were liberated, there would be no abatement 
 of his zeal, no subduedness of tone in his speech, no mutila- 
 tion of his message, and no accommodation of it so as to 
 avoid a recurrence of the penalty, but all his old fervour and 
 power, all his former breadth of view, and all his uncompro- 
 mising hostility to Jewish narrowness and bigotry — " that I 
 may make it manifest as I ought to speak." The form of 
 request presented to the Ephesians is more pointed. He 
 twice asks them to pray for him, that he may speak with 
 boldness, and he graphically depicts himself as an ambassador 
 in chains. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 5. 273 
 
 The exhortations of the two following verses refer to the 
 outer aspects of Christian conduct, or such aspects of it as 
 present themselves to the world. While they were to set 
 their affections on things above, and mortify their " members 
 which are upon the earth ; " while they were to put off cer- 
 tain vices, and assume certain virtues, culminating in love ; 
 while they were to be exemplary in every social relation — as 
 husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and ser- 
 vants ; and while they were to be instant in prayer for them- 
 selves and for the apostle, all this ethical code referred to 
 personal and mutual spiritual duties within the church. 
 They must, however, in ordinary circumstances, come in con- 
 tact with unbelieving heathenism around them. If they 
 shrank entirely from such company, the inference of the 
 apostle would be realized — " for then must ye needs go out 
 of the world." But they were not to go out of the world 
 because it was bad, they were to remain in it for the purpose 
 of making it better. And that their conduct might exercise 
 such a beneficial influence they were thus enjoined — 
 
 (Ver. 5.) ^Ev aocjjla irepiirarelTe irpo^ Tov<i e'^to — "Walk 
 in wisdom towards them which are without." The verb 
 TrepnraTelv, when, as here, it has an ethical sense, is some- 
 times followed by Kara, as in Eom. viii. 4, xiv. 15, 1 Cor. 
 iii. 3, but more usually by eV; the shade of difference being, 
 that in the former case, the ideas of source and similarity 
 are implied, and in the latter the character or sphere of walk 
 is principally indicated. The phrase ol e^co — " those who 
 are without," is found in 1 Cor. v, 12, and in 1 Thess. iv. 12, 
 and points to persons beyond the pale of the church, and not 
 simply or prominently the false teachers, as Junker supposes. 
 Those without should be surrounded with every inducement 
 to come in. No barrier should be thrown in their way, but 
 the attractive nature of Christianity should be wisely ex- 
 hibited to them. And as the life and practice of those within 
 the church is what they especially look at and learn from, so 
 the apostle says, " walk in wisdom — tt/jo?," in reference to 
 them. The admonition, as contained in Eph. v. 15, is more 
 general, and wants the pointed application which it bears 
 here. 
 
 The " wisdom " here enforced is more than mere prudence. 
 
274 COLOSSIANS IV. 5. 
 
 [Eph. V. 15.] It means that while Christians are to abstain 
 from such sins as disgrace their profession, and are to preserve 
 a holy consistency, adorning the doctrine of God their 
 Saviour ; they are also to exhibit, at the same time, not only 
 the purity of the gospel, but its amiability, its strictness of 
 principle in union with its loveliness of temper, its generosity 
 as well as its rectitude, and its charity no less than its 
 devoutness and zeal. Let " those without " not be told of 
 Christian self-possession in a tone of irritation, or of Christian 
 happiness w^hile uneasiness sits on the brow of the speaker. 
 Let no one wrangle about the duty of peacemaking, or bow 
 his face to the earth as he tries to expatiate on the hope of 
 the gospel. The world's Bible is the daily life of the church, 
 every page of which its quick eye minutely scans, and every 
 blot on wliich it detects with gleeful and malicious exactness. 
 The same wisdom will assume the form of discretion in refer- 
 ence to time and place. Unwise efforts at proselytism defeat 
 their own purpose ; zeal without knowledge is as the thunder 
 shower that drenches and injures, not the rain that with 
 noiseless and gentle descent softens and fertilizes. The great 
 Teacher Himself has said, " Give not that which is holy unto 
 the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they 
 trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." 
 Matt. vii. 6. 
 
 Tbv Kaipov i^ayopa^ofievot — " Eedeeming the time." Cony- 
 beare renders — " and forestall opportunity." The clause has 
 been explained under Eph. v. 16. The general meaning is 
 " purchasing, or seizing on the opportunity." The preposition 
 e/c, in composition, according to EUicott, directs the thought 
 to the undefined times or circumstances out of w^hich, in each 
 particular case, the Katpo^ was to be bought ; a notion different 
 only in aspect from our view given under Eph. v. 16, which 
 takes e'/c to represent " out of another's possession," a view 
 which appears to us to be more in harmony with the spirit of 
 the figure. The immediate reference is to the injunction of 
 the preceding clause. Every season for exercising such 
 wisdom is to be eagerly improved, or no opportunity for its 
 display is to be trifled with or lost. The idea of the Greek 
 expositors is foreign to the purpose — " the time is not yours, 
 but belongs to those who are without, for whose good you 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 6. 275 
 
 must employ it." So Theodoret — ovic earcv vfi6T£po<i 6 irapiav 
 al(ov, '^prjcraade avrtp eh to Biov. Not less away from the 
 point is the definition of Aiigustine — Q^iid estredimere tempiis, 
 nisi cum opus est, etiam detrimento temporalium commodorum, 
 ad aeterna qiiaerenda et capessenda spatia temporis comparare. 
 The reason annexed in the Epistle to the Ephesians, " because 
 the days are evil," is not found in the passage before us. 
 
 The next verse, though it contains a sentiment which is of 
 great moment by itself, is yet closely connected with this 
 which goes before it. 
 
 (Ver. 6.) 'O \o<yo<i vficov iravroTe iv '^dptTC, aXart rjprv- 
 fievo<i — " Let your conversation be always with grace, seasoned 
 with salt." The phrase X070? iv %aptTt is, according to 
 Eobinson, equivalent to X0709 '^aplei'i. But the noun %a/3t9 
 signifies, perhaps, that gracious spirit which rules the tongue, 
 and prompts it both to select the fittest themes, and to clothe 
 them in the most agreeable and impressive form. Sirach xxi. 
 16 ; Luke iv. 22 ; Sept. Ps. xlv. 3. It is not that %a/3i9 tov 
 \6jov which Plutarch ascribes to the courtly Alcibiades, or 
 that graciousness or blandness of tongue which is but mere 
 politeness. It is vastly higher than what Bloomfield under- 
 stands by it — " terseness of thought and smartness of expres- 
 sion." Chrysostom says well, " it is possible to be simply 
 agreeable — ■xapievTil^eaOaL — but we are to beware that this 
 agreeableness fall not into indifference." In Eph. iv. 29, the 
 apostle gives a different and negative form of advice, but adds 
 as the needed characteristic of Christian conversation — " that 
 which is good to the use of edifying." 
 
 To show his meaning yet more fully, the apostle employs a 
 strong metaphor — " seasoned with salt." The participle em- 
 ployed is the ordinary culinary term. The figure represents 
 speech as liable to become insipid, or to lose spiritual piquancy 
 unless it be seasoned with salt. The form aXari, from aka<i, 
 seems to have belonged to the popular speech.^ Salt has 
 various applications in Scripture, such as the salt of the cove- 
 nant and the salt of the sacrifice, and appears to be the 
 symbol of what is quickening and conservative in its nature. 
 
 1 Suidas affirms that it is used only in the phrase uXaffiy vu. Buttmann, 
 however, says that the word is only a euphonious form for aXan, § 58. See also 
 Suicer, sub voce, where there is much curious information. . 
 
 Z 
 
276 COLOSSIANS IV. 6. 
 
 We therefore demur to the notion of many commentators, 
 that the term here refers principally, if not wholly, to 
 wisdom. The Attic salt, indeed, was that wit which gave 
 zest and sparkle to Athenian conversation. But it was not 
 wisdom in any special sense. Nor can we agree with Meyer 
 and Bohmer, that salt is, in Matt. v. 13, Mark ix. 49, 50, 
 or Luke xiv. 34, the symbol of wisdom. It is rather the 
 symbol of that spiritual conservative power which Christianity 
 exerts on society and the world. Here it stands in explana- 
 tion of %a/3i9, not specifically of ao(jiLa. True, indeed, %api9 
 involves aocpla, gracious words must be always wise words, 
 but wisdom is here employed to characterize the walk, and 
 grace to describe the " fruit of the lips." The conversation 
 which X0709 denotes is to be seasoned with this condiment, 
 that it may be in itself free from every pernicious taint and 
 quality, that it may be relished by those who hear it, and 
 that on them it may exercise a beneficial influence.^ In Eph. 
 iv. 2 9 the apostle says, " let no corrupt speech proceed out of 
 your mouth." Christian speech is not to be insipid, far less 
 to be corrupt, but it is to possess that hallowed pungency 
 which shall excite interest in the inquirer, and that preser- 
 vative flavour which may influence for good the mind and 
 heart of those who, being without, are disposed to put 
 questions to the members of the church. For the apostle 
 subjoins as a reason — 
 
 Elhevat 7r&J9 Set i'/xa9 evl eKaaro) aTroKplvecrdai, — " That ye 
 may know how it becomes you to answer each one." Though 
 in certain cases the infinitive may stand for the imperative 
 among the classical writers, there is no reason to adopt such 
 a supposition here. Winer, § 43, 5, f?. Tremellius and Storr, 
 
 1 Baldwin (Professor Witebergensis, 1624) has a most extraordinary comment 
 on this place. He understands the apostle to refer to wit — " De salibus, et 
 jocis in sermone hie est quaestio. " And he subjoins the following permissions 
 and regulations: — "Modus tamen in jocis homine gravi ac prudenti, multo 
 magis Christiano dignus est, qui et si praecise et secundum ornnes circumstantias 
 praescribi non potest, ex his tamen regulis dignosci potest. 1. Joci sint docti 
 qui moralia qusedam sua urbanitate tacite iustillant. 2. Ad jocandum non 
 abutaraur sacris scripturis. 3. Jocantes omnes non seipsos tantum sed et aliorum 
 sales libenter audiant. 4. Obscura si qua forte excidunt, ambitu verborum 
 tegenda sunt. 5. Non jocemur semper in aliorum gratiam, ne nos ipsos pro- 
 stituamus. 6. Jocemur in tempore : nam apud tristes jocari intempestivum 
 est, ut et in re seria. 7. Joci non sint affectati." — P. 240. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 6. 277 
 
 however, translate by scitote, while Grotius, Bengel, and 
 Huther regard the verb as a kind of ablative gerund, sciendo. 
 But the infinitive, as in other places, denotes the object, 
 Matthiae, § 532. The Greek expositors commit a blunder, 
 we think, in giving the phrase " every one " too extensive a 
 meaninjT, and including in it the members of the church. 
 Thus Theodoret, aWco? ^yap tm aTriarw koX aXX&)? tw irtaTw, 
 etc. Chrysostom lays too much stress on external condition, 
 for he says " a prince must be answered in one way, and a 
 subject in another, a rich man in one way, and a poor man in 
 another," and he adds a sarcastic reason, that the minds of 
 rich and powerful men are feebler, more inflammable, and 
 undecided — acrdevecyrepat, fxaXKov <^\e<yiMaLvovaaL, fiaWov 
 hiappeova-ai. Ambrosiaster has a similar train of illustration. 
 That of Primasius is better — aliter paganis, aliter Judaeis, aliter 
 haereticis, aliter astrologis, d caeferis est respondendum. 
 
 For it is of those without that the apostle speaks, and each, 
 as he puts his question, is to have a gracious and effective 
 answer. " Death and life are in the power of the tongue." ^ 
 Prov. xviii. 21, One kind of answer will not suffice for all, 
 but each one is to be answered as he should be. Therefore 
 the necessity of the " grace " and of the " salt." The question 
 might refer to various things. It might refer to evidence or 
 to doctrine, to ritual or to ethics. It might embody an objec- 
 tion, suggest a difficulty, or contain a peculiar solution. It 
 might be a query, in which lurked a satire, or one that argued 
 a humble and inquiring mind. It might be as aimless as 
 Pilate's interrogation, " what is truth ? " or it might be the 
 
 ^ "And we may generally observe, that men of the weakest minds are often- 
 times the most garrulous ; they unconsciously try to make up in number of 
 Words what is obviously wanting in weight and wisdom : whereas men of much 
 grace and sound intellect try to say much in few words : they bring massive 
 thoughts within small compass : there is hardly anything they dread more than 
 to seem to be talking much, and yet to be really saying nothing. And it is well 
 worthy of remark also, that he never speaks much to edification who knows not 
 when to cease to speak. It is one thing to speak much, and another to speak 
 with effect. Much talkativeness and much grace seldom go together. Speak- 
 ing and thinking aright are widely different operations of the mind ; and the one 
 is often possessed in an eminent degree, while the other is almost entirely want- 
 ing. We may generally lay it down as a rule, that there is far the most depth 
 ivhere there is the least noise." — Watson's Discourses on the Colossians, pp. 370, 
 371. 
 
278 COLOSSIANS IV. 6 
 
 result of such an idle curiosity as that which moved the 
 Athenian gossips on Mars' hill to say, " we would know there- 
 fore what those things mean." Or it might indicate a state 
 of mind in which mingled feelings were in operation, as when 
 the Jews at Rome came to the apostle's lodging to hear of 
 him what he thought. The tone of one querist might be that 
 of scorn, of another that of earnest inquiry. One, as he asked 
 information, might show that conviction had made some pro- 
 gress ; another, that his previous thoughts had been gross 
 misconceptions. But each was to be answered as was becom- 
 ing — according to the contents, the spirit, and the object of 
 his question — answered so that he might at once receive 
 enlightenment and impression, be charmed out of his hostility, 
 reasoned out of his misunderstanding, guided out of his diffi- 
 culty, awakened out of his indifference, and won over to the 
 new religion under the solemn persuasicit that it was foolish 
 to triile any longer with Christianity, and dangerous any more 
 to oppose the claims of a Divine revelation, enriched with 
 such materials, fortified with such proofs, and commended by 
 such results to universal reason and reception. 1 Pet. iii. 1, 15; 
 2 Tim. ii. 25, 26. According to those passages, meekness is 
 one special element of the Christian answer. 
 
 In fine, wholly out of place is the notion of Pierce, that 
 the answer here referred to is that which Christians were 
 often obliged to make to heathen rulers when summoned to 
 appear before them. Elton, in his exposition of this epistle 
 (1620, London), makes the following pithy application: — 
 " Wouldest thou then be able to speak fitly, and to good 
 purpose on euery occasion, as in one particular case, in time 
 of distresse, in time of trouble, and vexation of body or 
 minde, wouldest thou be able to speake a word of comfort, 
 and as the Prophet saith, Isa. i. 4, know to minister a word 
 in time to him that is weary ? Oh then let thy tong be euer 
 poudred with the salt of grace, haue in thy mouth at all other 
 times gracious speeches, and certainly then thou shalt not be 
 to seeke of sweete and comfortable words in time of neede. 
 Many come to their friends whom they loue well, and wish 
 well vnto, in time of their trouble, haply lying on their sicke 
 beds, and are not able to affoord them one word of spirituall 
 comfort, onely they can vse a common forme of speech, aske 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 7. 279 
 
 them how they doe, and say, they are sorry to see them so, 
 and then they haue done : here is one speciall cause of it, 
 their mouthes are not seasoned with gracious speaches at 
 other times; they vse not to season their speech with grace 
 at other times, and so it comes to passe that when they 
 should, and (it may hee) would vse gracious and comfortable 
 words, they cannot frame themselues to them, but euen then 
 also, they are out of season with them ; learne thou therefore 
 to acquaint thy selfe with holy and religious speeches, let tliy 
 mouth at other times be exercised in speaking graciously, and 
 then (doubtlesse) though thou canst not speake so eloquently, 
 as some that foame out nothing but goodly speaches, yet thou 
 shalt be able to speake to better purpose, because (indeede) it 
 is not mans wit, but Gods grace, that seasons speach, and 
 makes it profitable and comfortable." 
 
 The apostle did not wish to burden the epistle with any 
 lengthened or minute account of his private affairs. There 
 was much which all interested in him would naturally wish 
 to know — his health, his means, his prospects and plans. 
 But the bearer of the epistle would make all necessary com- 
 munications, and one so recommended as Tychicus was, would 
 be eagerly listened to as he spoke to them of the aged prisoner 
 at Eome. 
 
 (Ver. 7.) Ta Kar i/jue iravra <yvwpLcret, v/jlcv Tv^iko^ 6 aya- 
 7r7/To<? aSeXc^o?, Kol 7ncrT0<; BcaKovo^, ical avu8ovXo<i iv Kvpiat 
 — " Of all that concerns me Tychicus shall inform you — the 
 beloved brother and faithful minister and fellow-servant in 
 the Lord." The phrase ra kut ifie is a common one in 
 Greek, as Eisner and Wetstein have abundantly shown. 
 Tychicus is honoured with three appellations. Firsi, he is 
 called " the beloved brother," one of the sacred brotherhood, 
 bound together by the tie of a common fatherhood in God. 
 His apostolic dignity did not fill Paul with reserve toward any 
 fellow-believer, but he owned and loved as a brother every 
 one who was with himself in Christ. Besides this common 
 spiritual relationship, Tychicus must have endeared himself 
 to the apostle, and therefore possessed his entire confidence. 
 See under Eph. vi. 21. He was, secondly," & trusty servant," 
 and as such carried this epistle, and was charged with these 
 oral messages to Colosse and to Ephesus. The term ZidKovot 
 
280 COLOSSIANS IV. 8. 
 
 may mean, generally, one who has spent his thue and energies 
 in connection with the church and that apostle who was one 
 of its ornaments and bulwarks. In Eph. vi. 2 1 he is called, 
 as here, " the beloved brother and trusty servant," but the 
 apostle adds in this place a third epithet — koI (tvvBov\o<; — 
 " and fellow-servant." Official service of a general nature is 
 implied in BtaKovo^, but under this term the apostle speaks of 
 him as a colleague. See under i. 7. The words iv Kvpia are 
 referred by De Wette to all the three epithets, and by Meyer 
 to the last two of them. The meaning is not different which- 
 ever view be adopted. But as the first two names have 
 distinct and characteristic epithets attached to them, and the 
 last has none, perhaps iv Kvplw is to be specially joined to it, 
 for the fellowship in service is marked by the common object 
 and sphere of it — "the Lord." 
 
 (Yev. 8.) There are in this verse two marked differences of 
 reading. The Textus Eeceptus, followed by Tischendorf, reads 
 %va yvoi ra irepl vficov — "That he might know your affairs;" 
 but the other reading is Iva yvwre ra irepl 'q/juwv — " That ye 
 might know our affairs." The last appears to be the most 
 natural. The apostle had just said, "All about me shall 
 Tychicus tell you, whom I have sent for this purpose, that ye 
 might know how it fares with us," and then he adds of him 
 and Onesimus, " they will inform you of all things here." 
 Whereas, if the reading of the Eeceived Text be adopted, a 
 new idea is introduced — " that he might know your affairs " — 
 and one out of harmony with the twice expressed design of 
 the mission. The common reading has the support of C, D'% 
 E, J, K, the Syriac and Vulgate Versions, and many of the 
 Fathers. The other reading has, however. A, B, D\ F, G, 
 the text of Theodoret and Jerome. The phrase, et? avTo 
 rovTo, refers to what has been said, viz. " all my state shall 
 Tychicus declare unto you ; " and he adds, " I have sent him 
 for this very purijose." Is it conceivable that now the apostle 
 should introduce another and very different purpose after this 
 strong assertion ? It is objected to this reading that it is 
 copied from Eph. vi. 22. But surely, in two epistles written 
 at the same time, and carried by the same bearer, might not 
 the same commission be given to him for both churches, and 
 in the same words ? If the other clauses of the commission 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 9. 281 
 
 are the same, why should this clause vary t The declared 
 result is the same in both places, and for both churches — 
 " that he might comfort your hearts " — and there is no reason 
 to suppose any difference in the process, for their hearts were 
 to be comforted by a direct and full knowledge of the apostle's 
 condition. The various lections may have arisen from omit- 
 ting the syllable re before rd, from their resemblance. One 
 ancient Father has 7^03 re rd. Bengel takes yvo) for the first 
 person. The new reading is adopted by Scholz and Lachmann 
 as editors, recommended by Griesbach, vindicated by Einck, 
 and followed by Meyer, Baumgarten-Crusius, Olshausen, and 
 Huther. The reading then is — 
 
 ' Ov eirefiylra 7rpo<? vfid<; eh avrb rovro iva yvwre ra irept 
 rj/jLMv — " Whom I have sent unto you for this very purpose, 
 that ye might know our affairs." In the verb eTrefiyfra is a 
 common idiom. Tychicus could not be sent off till the letter 
 was finished, and yet he says, forestalling the act, " I have 
 sent him." The Colossians were in distress at the apostle's 
 condition, and in sorrow for his imprisonment; but when 
 Tychicus should tell them how he was circumstanced, and 
 what his views and feelings were, how his mind was unruffled 
 and his courage unsubdued, he would comfort their hearts — 
 Kal TrapaKoXearj Ta? KapSia^ vficov. 
 
 Tychicus was not to be despatched on this errand by him- 
 self. He had a companion whose history and change had 
 been striking and peculiar in their nature. 
 
 (Ver. 9.) ^vv ^Ovrjcrifia) rw iriCTU) Kal dyaTnjroi d.SeX(})a> — 
 " Along with Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother." 
 Onesimus carried with him another and more special testi- 
 monial and introduction to his master, Philemon. Onesimus 
 had been a slave — had fled from his owner, and had, during 
 his exile, been converted by the apostle. He was sent back 
 in his new character, "not now as a servant, but above a 
 servant — a brother beloved, especially to me, but how much 
 more to thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord." On being 
 converted he had become, and is now eiilogized as, "a brother;" 
 and whatever may have been his delinquencies as a slave 
 of Philemon, he is now commended as a faithful brother — 
 one the genuineness of whose Christianity might be safely 
 trusted. He was also " one of themselves " — 'E| vfxcoi^, 
 
282 COLOSSIANS IV. 19. 
 
 Colosse being either the place of his birth or his ordinary 
 abode. 
 
 JJavra v/xlv yvtoptovac ra a)Se — " They shall inform you of 
 all matters here." The phrase is of much the same meaning 
 as ra kut i/xe irdvra in verse 7, only the last is more per- 
 sonal, and the one before us more general in its nature. The 
 apostle knew well the anxiety of the Colossians about him, 
 and he wished them to be amply gratified. 
 
 The epistle is now brought to a conclusion by the introduc- 
 tion of a few salutations. Those who send their greetings to 
 Colosse, were either personally, or at least by name, known 
 to the church. The Syriac translator, in rendering the Greek 
 term " salute," reverts to the old Hebrew form, and makes it 
 — " ask for the peace of." 
 
 (Ver, 10.) Aaird^eTaL vfia^; Apiarap'yo'i o avvai'^aXoyro'; 
 fiov — " Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner saluteth you." Aris- 
 tarchus was a Macedonian, and a native of Thessalonica. 
 Acts xix. 29, XX. 4, xxvii. 2 ; Philem. 24. He had been 
 much in Paul's society — was with him during the riot at 
 Ephesus, and several of his journeys in Syria and Greece — 
 was with him too when he sailed for Italy, in order to follow 
 out his appeal to Cajsar, and seems to have remained with 
 him in Rome. He is here termed a " fellow-prisoner," but in 
 Philemon only a fellow-labourer ; whereas in this epistle 
 Epaphras is named a fellow-servant, but in Philemon a fellow- 
 prisoner. From such an exchange of those epithets, it has 
 been inferred that the imprisonment of Aristarchus was not 
 compelled but voluntary. There was no charge against him, 
 and no prosecution. He seems to have attached himself to 
 Paul, and he willingly shared his imprisonment, that the 
 apostle might enjoy his service and sympathy. Probably, as 
 Meyer suggests, his friends shared in his confinement by 
 turns. It was Aristarchus who was with him when 
 he wrote to the Colossians; but Epaphras had taken 
 his place when, about the same period, he wrote to 
 Philemon. 
 
 Kal MdpKQ<i dveyjrio'i Bapvd^a. By dve^jno'?, allied to 
 nepos — nephew — is to be understood not nephew but cousin 
 — geschwisterkind — " sister's son," by which term our trans- 
 lators themselves probably meant cousin. Num. xxxvi. 11. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 10. 283 
 
 HesycLius defines it thus — avey^toi, aBeXcfycov vloC} There 
 seems no good reason to doubt that Mark is the John Mark 
 referred to in Acts xii. 12, 25, xiii. 5, 13, xv. 37-39. He 
 was the occasion of the well-known dispute and separation 
 between Paul and Barnabas. On a former missionary tour, 
 he had left them, and " went not with them to the work." 
 Paul, therefore, thought it not good to take him, — " and the 
 contention was so sharp between them, that they parted 
 asunder the one from the other." Whether Paul or Barnabas 
 was right in his opinion about Mark we know not. His de- 
 sertion of a former enterprise seemed to justify Paul's opinion, 
 and perhaps Barnabas thought too kindly of a near relation. 
 Yet his subsequent conduct seems to warrant the substantial 
 soundness of the judgment of Barnabas. Mark was apparently 
 reconciled to Paul afterwards, and may have given the apostle 
 ample reason to retract his censure. It may be, too, that the 
 very dispute about him awakened within him renewed energy 
 and perseverance. Again does Paul mention him with high 
 commendation, 2 Tim. iv. 11, — "Only Luke is with me. 
 Take Mark, and bring him with thee : for he is profitable to 
 me for the ministry." 
 
 The name of Barnabas seems to be presented by Paul as a 
 kind of passport to Mark. Barnabas must have been a name 
 familiar to the Colossian church. His character must have 
 endeared him to all who knew him, or had heard of his hearty 
 evangelical labours. By birth a Levite, of the island of 
 Cyprus, he was at a very early stage of its history converted 
 to Christianity. At once he disencumbered himself of his 
 worldly possessions, and devoted himself to the spread of the 
 gospel. It was he who introduced Paul to the church in 
 Jerusalem, and such was the confidence reposed in him, that 
 he was sent as the deputy of the mother-church to Antioch, 
 to bring back a faithful report of the progress of the gospel 
 in that city. On his visit to the Syrian capital, the sacred 
 historian says of him, Acts xi. 23, 24, "Who, when he came, 
 and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them 
 
 ^ Lobeck, ad Phrynich. , says — "Pollux dicit filiosfiliasquefratrum etsororum 
 did ivt^pious, ex his prognatos uvf^^ialou;, avi^^ia.'ia.s." It is thus the same with 
 i|aStX(p<)'s — "first-cousin." The word rendered " nephews," 1 Tim. v. 4, as the 
 translation of 'ixytva, signifies, as it often does in Old English, not brothers' and 
 sisters' cliildren, but nepotes — descendants generally, and especially TiKva r't»>at. 
 
284 COLOSSI ANS IV. 10. 
 
 all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the 
 Lord. For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost 
 and of faith : and much people was added unto the Lord." 
 Barnabas, finding the field so ample and so inviting, went at 
 once to Tarsus, and brought Saul with him to Antioch, and 
 such was the great success of their joint labours in preaching 
 Christ, that " the disciples were called Christians first in 
 Antioch." Barnabas next went up to Jerusalem with funds 
 to relieve the poor saints, and then Paul and he visited many 
 places in company. He is found soon again at Antioch, and 
 he was delegated to go up to Jerusalem to secure a settlement 
 of the angry controversy as to the observance by Christians 
 of the Mosaic law. Eeturning to Antioch with the apostolic 
 finding, he continued some time there " teaching and preach- 
 ing the word of the Lord." It was after this period that 
 Paul and he had the sharp contention about the fitness of 
 Mark for the missionary tour which they had sketched for 
 themselves. The last account of him is in these words — 
 " and so Barnabas took Mark and sailed unto Cyprus." There 
 seems every reason to believe that the society of Barnabas 
 had a salutary effect on the mind of Paul, and at a period, 
 too, when he might not be fully conscious of his powers and 
 r[ualifications, nor be able to realize the high destiny which 
 lay before him. Barnabas thus stood on the confines of the 
 apostolic college, though he was not within it, and next to its 
 members, he occupies a distinguished place in the early 
 church. Such, in fine, was the zeal and success of this " Son 
 of Consolation," such his prominence among the brethren, 
 and so identified was he with the apostles, that he seems to 
 be classed among them. Acts xiv. 4. So that we are dis- 
 posed to infer that the mention of him here was not simply 
 to point out Mark from others bearing the same name, but 
 also to secure for him,, through his relationship to Barnabas, 
 a cordial welcome and reception at Colosse. 
 
 Ilepl ov iXdlSere ivroXd^ — " Concerning whom ye received 
 instructions." The antecedent is not Barnabas, as Theophy- 
 lact supposes, but Mark. What these commands were, or by 
 whom enjoined, what they contained, or when they were 
 delivered, we know not. Some suppose that they were sent 
 at this period by Tychicus — a supposition which the tense of 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 11. 285 
 
 the verb will not warrant. Vain is all conjecture, such as 
 that of Anselm and Schrader, who think that the apostle 
 alludes to previous advices of an opposite nature, which are 
 here recalled ; or that of Grotius, who refers the missive to 
 Barnabas ; or Huther, who ascribes it to some Christian com- 
 munity — von irgend einer Gevicinde ; or Estius, who so natu- 
 rally assigns its origin to the Church of Eome.^ Not a few 
 imagine that the following clause contains the instructions — 
 
 'Kav eXOy tt/oo? vfid'i, Be^aaOe avTov — " If he come to you, 
 receive him." But against this view is to be noticed the 
 plural form €VTo\d<;, implying that there was a variety of 
 commands ; and the omission of the article shows that it has 
 no reference to what follows. This view, adopted by Calvin 
 and Baumgarten-Crusius, seems, however, to have originated 
 a various reading — he^aaOat, found in D\ F, G, and in the 
 Syriac Version and Ambrosiaster — " concerning whom ye 
 have received commandment to receive Jiim, should he come 
 to you." Such a reading at once betrays its exegetical origin. 
 The present reading cannot be disturbed. We are therefore 
 ignorant of these evroXal, in their origin and purpose. But 
 the apostle adds, parenthetically, for himself, concerning 
 Mark, "if he come to you, receive him." Mark evidently 
 purposed a journey which might lead him to Colosse, and the 
 Colossians were to give him, should he come among them, a 
 kind reception. The verb Be^ofiat is used, both in the classics 
 and New Testament, to denote the welcome which one gives 
 to an honoured guest — a guest-friend, as the Germans translate 
 the Greek feVo?. Matt. x. 14, 40, 41 ; Luke ix. 5, 48. The 
 apostle continues the list of salutations — 
 
 (Ver. 11.) KaVl7)(Tov'i 6 Xejofievo'i^Iovcrro'i — "And Jesus, 
 wdio is named Justus." Of this Jesus Justus we know nothing. 
 Chrysostom and others would identify him with the Justus 
 mentioned in Acts xviii. 7. That appears to have been a 
 proselyte — this was a born Jew. 
 
 The proper punctuation of the remaining clause is matter 
 of doubt. It has been commonly read — ol ovre'i eK irepu- 
 Tofir]<i, with a stop, " who were of the circumcision," namely, 
 
 ' The view of Reuss, in his GescJuchte der Neutest. Schri/ten, is both unneces- 
 sary and extreme, for he supposes by this language that there had been sent a 
 previous epistle to the Colossians, which has been lost. 
 
286 COLOSSIANS IV. 11. 
 
 Aristarclius, Mark, and Jesus Justus. And then the apostle 
 adds — " these only are my fellow-workers to the kingdom of 
 God." But it is plain that the apostle had many other fellow- 
 workers, and that he means, that among the believing Jews 
 these only had co-operated with him. Such a necessary 
 limitation of meaning has suggested another form of punctua- 
 tion, which puts a stop after 'IoOo-to?, and commences with 
 01 6vT€<; e/c irepiTofi^<; a new sentence — " these being of the 
 circumcision, they alone were my fellow- workers ; " or, " of them 
 of the circumcision, these alone were my fellow- workers." This 
 construction is adopted by Lachmann, Steiger, Huther, and 
 Meyer. In such a case the phrase ol oVre? e'/c Tre/jiTo/i?}?, is 
 a species of anacoluthon. Such a construction, however, seems 
 awkward. Indeed, by the first form of construction, the same 
 result is obtained ; for it is plain that in ovtoi fiovoi, the 
 writer limits himself to the circumcision. By " the kingdom 
 of God," the apostle means the church — as a divine institute ; 
 and they were his colleagues not in the kingdom, but " unto 
 the kingdom," that is, unto its furtherance and consolidation. 
 The preposition et? has often such a signification. To con- 
 solidate and extend this kingdom was the end of his apostolical 
 mission. These three Jews were the only parties of their 
 race who lent him any assistance for this purpose at Eome, 
 and of whom therefore he adds — 
 
 OiTivef iyev^Orjaav jjloi 7rap7)<yopca — " Who indeed have 
 been an encouragement to me." The Syriac renders — " and 
 
 these only," ^ n .■-\«-^ ^qjcjio. The noun occurs only here. 
 It signifies originally an address or exhortation, then it came 
 to denote the result of such exhortation — comfort.^ Still we 
 apprehend it is comfort in the form of encouragement. The 
 other believing Jews plagued the apostle, and he complains 
 of them in the epistle to the Philippians, that they preached 
 Christ " even of envy and strife — of contention, not sincerely, 
 supposing to add affliction to my bonds." Phil. i. 15, 16. As 
 the apostle of the Gentiles, and the zealous maintainor of the 
 free and unconditioned admission of men to the church, without 
 any reference to the law, Paul was an object of bitter prejudice 
 to many Christian Hebrews. The names which follow are, 
 therefore, those of persons of heathen birth. 
 ^ Kypke, in loc. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 12. 287 
 
 (Ver. 12.) ^Aa-7rd^6Tai v/j,a<i 'JETra^pa? o e^ vficov — "There 
 salutes you Epaphras, one of you." i. 7. As a Colossian 
 himself, Epaphras had a deep interest in them, and sends 
 them his affectionate greeting. The apostle further characterizes 
 Epaphras as a servant of Christ — BovXo'i Xpia-rov. Some 
 insist on putting no comma between vixoiv and S0OX09. The 
 reading of highest authority seems to be XpccrTou 'Irja-ov — 
 " a servant of Christ Jesus." This good man, probably the 
 founder of the Colossian church, could not forget them — for 
 he was one of them by birth ; and, as a servant of Christ 
 Jesus, and one of their pastors, he had also a deep spiritual 
 affinity with them. And not only so, but the apostle describes 
 him further — as 
 
 TIdvroTe dy(ovi,^ofievo<i virep vficov iv Tai<i 7rpocr€V'xa,i<; — 
 " Always striving for you in his prayers." Though he was 
 absent, he did not forget them. The best scene of memory 
 is at the throne of grace. In proportion to the fervour of 
 one's affection will be the importunity of his petition. Love 
 so pure and spiritual as that of Epaphras will produce an 
 agony of earnestness. There will be no listless or fitful asking 
 — but a mighty and continual wrestling of heart. And the 
 apostle witnesses that for this end Epaphras supplicated — 
 
 "Iva aTTjTe TekeioL koI ireirXrjpocfiopTjfievot iv iravrl deXijfjLarL 
 rov ©eov — " That ye may stand perfect and full-assured in all 
 the will of God." ^ The Stephanie reading ireirXrjpcofiivoi is 
 not based on sufficient authority. The language of the clause 
 is very expressive. Epaphras prayed that they might stand, 
 and neither wander nor fall — stand perfect and full assured — 
 every grace of the Spirit within them, and their minds pos- 
 sessing an undoubting and imperturbable persuasion on every 
 point of Divine instruction, or of " the whole will of God." It 
 is a needless refinement on the part of Meyer to connect iv 
 iravrl deXtjfiaTt so closely with o-t^t6, as the Local-hestimmung ; 
 and to take rek. koX ireirX. as the Modal-hestimmung. For the 
 words iv OeXrjp^ari are, in our view, closely allied to reXetoc 
 Kol TreirXr). — that they might be perfect and fully assured in 
 the whole will of God. And we are the more confirmed in 
 our view when we turn to ii. 2, where the noun 'irXr}po(popLa 
 
 ^ Ulphilas lias here the expressive term allavauratvana — all-doing— orono- 
 perantes. 
 
288 COLOSSIANS IV. 13. 
 
 occurs in the phrase — "full assurance of understanding." 
 And the allusion is plainly to the dangers which beset the 
 Colossian church, and against which they are warned in the 
 second chapter, — dangers in the form of seductive spiritualism 
 and false philosophy, and against which the grand preservative 
 was a perfect and full assured knowledge of the whole will of 
 God. An imperfect or dubious acquaintanceship with that 
 will would at once lay them open to the stratagems of the 
 false teachers, ' who headed their errors with the title and 
 varnished them with the semblance, of the " Divine will," and 
 claimed for their theosophic dreams and ascetic statutes Divine 
 authority. See under ii. 2. The preposition iv is not to be 
 taken as eh, with Grotius ; nor secunditni, with Storr ; nor yet 
 durch — through, with Bahr. The apostle subjoins a further 
 testimony to Epaphras in the following verse. But there is 
 no little variety of reading as to the quality or virtue ascribed 
 to him. The Eeceived Text reads — 
 
 (Ver. 13.) MapTvpo) yap avrm on e^ei ^y]\ov nroXvv virep 
 vjjbwv — " For I certify, in his favour, that he has great zeal for 
 you." This verse is confirmatory {'yap) of the preceding. 
 Instead of t^rfKov ttoXvv, A, B, C, etc., have ttoXvv itovov ; 
 while D\ F, G have iroXvv kottov. Some, again, read iroOov, 
 and some wywva. The best reading appears to be irovov — 
 the Vulgate rendering it multum laborew,. The other readings 
 — ^rjXov, irodov, and wyoiva — may have been so many glosses 
 on the more difficult term irovov, which occurs only else- 
 where in the Apocalypse. IIovo<i is toil or travail — such as 
 that which attends a combat.^ Hesychius defines it by ctttouSt;, 
 eircraai'i. It occurs several times in the Septuagint. This 
 7roi>o9 led to the previous prayerful aycov. This stress of 
 spirit begat the anxious solicitude in prayer which the apostle 
 has described in the former verse. But the pains and prayers 
 of Epaphras were not confined to Colosse, for the apostle adds — 
 
 ^ An old commentator on Colossians thus defines righit zeal : — " 1. Let it not 
 be a pretended zeale as in loash. 2. Nor a superstitious zeale as in Paule. 
 3. Nor a passionate zeale, only for a fit, as in lohn at his first entrance. 4. Nor 
 a malitious zeale as in persecutors, that thinke they doe God good seruice in 
 vexing men wrongfully. 5. Nor a wrong intended zeale, such as is the zeale of 
 merit-mongers. 6. Nor a contentious zeale, such as theirs that make needlesse 
 rents in the church. 7. Nor a secure zeale that is a zeale not raised by godly 
 sorrow, or that is carried without care or feare of falling away. 8. Nor an idle 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 14. 289 
 
 Kal ruiv iv AaohtKeia Kal toov iv 'lepairoXei — " And for 
 them in Laodicea, and for them in Hierapolis." Laodicea and 
 Hierapolis were cities of the same region as Colosse. See 
 Introduction, chap. i. All the three towns were in Phrygia, 
 and Epaphras was well known to the churches in them. He 
 bore their names on his heart before the Lord in fervent and 
 uninterrupted intercession. 
 
 (Ver. 1-4.) ^A<T7rd^€Tat vfia^ AovKd<; 6 larpo^ 6 arya7n]T6<i, 
 Ka\ Arj^a^i — " There salutes you Luke, the beloved physician, 
 and Demas." That this Luke was Paul's companion does not 
 appear to admit of any doubt; nor is there any reason for 
 denying the old opinion, that he was the author of the third 
 Gospel. He is styled " the beloved physician," either to dis- 
 tinguish him from others of the same name, or to specify 
 the peculiar office in which he had endeared himself to the 
 apostle. The health of the apostle, as they might know, had 
 been signally benefited by his medical skill, and that this 
 might be at all times available to his patient, Luke attached 
 himself to his person, accompanied him in several of his 
 missionary tours, was with him in his voyage to Pome, and 
 remained with him in the Italian metropolis. Luke is 
 mentioned in Philem. 24 ; 2 Tim. iv. 11. It is said 
 in Ecclus. xxxviii. 1, 2, " Honour a physician with the 
 honour due unto him for the uses which ye may have of 
 him, for the Lord hath created him, for of the Most High 
 cometh healing." Sir Thomas Browne, however, in the first 
 chapter of his Religio Medici, says, that " several circumstances 
 might persuade the world he had no religion," and among them 
 he mentions — " the general scandal of my profession." It was, 
 indeed, a common saying, — uhi ires fnedici, duo aihei. Luke 
 might have been an example to the profession. His physico- 
 spiritual character is happily delineated in the following 
 epigram : 
 
 zeale that is all words without workes : the word is reiidred labour sometimes, 
 and it is certaine true zeale is spent about good workes. 9. Nor an ouercurious 
 zeale, shewed either by sticking too much to the letter of scripture, or by prying 
 into or harsh censureing of the lesser faults of others. 10. Or a bitter zeale, 
 that spends it selfe in rayling and fiery reproches, railers seldome stand long. ' 
 11. Or an ignorant bold zeale such as was in the lewes. Or lastly a selfe con- 
 ceited zeale, when men trust too much to themselues, and their owne iudgi-ments. " 
 —By field. London, 1615. 
 
290 COLOSSIANS IV. 15,16. 
 
 " Pandit evangelii et medicinae munera Lucas 
 
 Artibus hinc, illinc religione valens. 
 
 Utilis ille labor, per quern vixere tot aegri 
 
 Utilior per quem tot didicere mori." ^ 
 
 Who Demas was, we know not. He seems to have been 
 the person who afterwards left the apostle on account of his 
 love of the world ; and the name has no distinctive or 
 eulogistic epithet added to it, as if the apostle had suspected 
 this future estrangement — an estrangement which we are 
 perhaps not warranted to identify with absolute apostasy. 
 2 Tim. iv. 10. The word itself, as has been remarked, is 
 Greek, and not Hebrew, as Schoettgen thought; for he 
 supposes it to be a Greek form of idh, ending in a?, and 
 not to9 — as BqfiLO'i would mean carnifex. It is probably a 
 contraction of Arj/M^rpiof;. 
 
 (Ver. 15.) ^ AcTTrdaaaOe rov<i iv AaoBiKeia aSeX</)ov?, Kal 
 NvfKpdv, Kol rrjv kut oIkov avrov eKKXijaiav. The various 
 readings in the verse are not very important. Some read 
 Nvjju(f)av as a female name, and write avrrji;, like B, in agree- 
 ment of gender. Others, for the opposite reason, support the 
 form avrov; while A, C, and others, read avrwv, but avrov 
 seems to have highest authority. " Salute the brethren in 
 Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church in his house." The 
 Colossian church was, in the apostle's name, to salute the 
 sister church in Laodicea, especially not forgetting in such a 
 greeting Nymphas, and the church in his house. The first 
 Kal points out Nymphas as worthy of distinction, and probably 
 the last Kal introduces the explanation. The church in his 
 house could not, as Bahr supposes, be the whole Laodicean 
 church; nor can the words, as some of the Greek Fathers 
 opine, mean simply the family of Nymphas, all of whom were 
 Christians. Some portion of the Laodicean believers, for what 
 reason we know not, statedly met for worship in the house of 
 Nymphas ; and Meyer has shown that if avrwv were the right 
 reading, as he thinks it is, such a use of the plural is not against 
 Greek usage. 
 
 (Ver. 16.) K.aX orav avayvcoadfj Trap' vfiiv 17 eincnoXri, 
 iroiT^a-are Xva Kal iv rfj AaoSiKecov iKKXrjcria avayvcoadfj, Kal 
 rrjv eK AaoBtKeiaf; 'iva Kal vfi€l<; dvayvSre — " And when this 
 ^ "Webster and "Wilkinson's New Testament, p. 206. 
 
COLOSSI AN S IV. 16. 291 
 
 epistle has been read among you, cause that it be read also in 
 the church of the Laodiceans ; and that ye too read that from 
 Laodicea." The construction iroirja-are 'iva belongs to the 
 later Greek. Matthiae, § 531, 1. Nor should we say that 
 in such a case tW is ecbatic, for though result be described 
 in the clause which follows it, design is clearly expressed by 
 the verb which precedes it. The apostle alludes to the public 
 reading of his letter in the churches, and recommends an 
 exchange of epistles. The epistle sent to Colosse and read 
 there was to be sent to Laodicea, and read there too. The 
 words Trap vfuv signify " among you," not by you ; and 
 17 iina-roKri is the one which the apostle was at that moment 
 writing. But the difficulty lies in determining what the 
 Colossians were to read in turn, or what document is meant 
 by the phrase rr]v e'/c AaohiKelaii — " that from Laodicea." The 
 apostle's language is not explicit, inasmuch as the Colossians 
 would understand at once the reference made by him. But 
 the question is, does e/c point to the origin or authorship of 
 the epistle, or only to its present localit}^ ? Was it an epistle 
 which had come to Paul from Laodicea, or would it need only 
 to be brought out of Laodicea in order to be read at Colosse ? 
 
 The expression is pregnant and idiomatic. 
 
 1. Many have taken it to mean a letter which Paul 
 himself had received from the church in Laodicea. Theodoret, 
 Photius, Calvin, Estius, Erasmus, Beza, van Til, Baumgarten- 
 Crusius, and others, hold this view, though they can only 
 conjecture as to the nature and contents of such a document. 
 But the principal support of such a view is the assumed 
 meaning of e/c, in the phrase e/c .^aoSt/ce/a?. It is argued 
 that e'/c denotes origin. True, but the texture of the verse 
 shows that the epistle is supposed to be in Laodicea, when 
 they were to try and get it oiit of that city. It was to be 
 brought from Laodicea to them, and by their own endeavour. 
 Besides, as Dr. Davidson remarks, " It is difficult to conceive 
 of the mode in which the apostle's injunction could have been 
 carried into effect. It is very unlikely that the Laodiceans 
 kept a copy, or that Paul knew of it. Or if it be conjectured 
 that Tychicus and Onesimus, the bearers of the Colossian 
 letter, carried that which the apostle had received from tlie 
 Laodiceans, the idea is inconsistent with iroi^aare Xva kqI 
 
 z 
 
292 COLOSSI ANS IV. 16. 
 
 u/iet? avayvwre rrjv ix AaoBiKeLa<; ; implying endeavour to get 
 the Laodicean epistle." ^ Nor is there any hint in the epistle 
 to the Colossians, that it is a reply to any queries or com- 
 munications, the reading of which might cast light on those 
 of its statements which served the purpose of an answer. 
 
 2, Others take it for some epistle written at Laodicea, 
 either supposing it, like Theophylact, to be the First Epistle 
 to Timothy, according to the common subscription ; or like 
 Lightfoot, the First Epistle of John ; or as Jablonsky opined, 
 an epistle written to the Colossian pastors generally ; or as 
 Storr and Flatt would think, one specially addressed to 
 Epaphras. Such suppositions are as easily refuted as they 
 are made. Philastrius of Brescia, Schultess, Stein, in his 
 appendix to his commentary on Luke, and Schneckenburger, 
 suppose the Epistle to the Hebrews to be intended. It cannot 
 be the early uncanonical production now known by the title 
 of the Epistle of Laodicea, a document which Hutter translated 
 out of Latin into Greek, and of which Jerome said — ah 
 omnibus exploditur. Marcion, in his canon, according to Ter- 
 tullian, gave the Epistle to the Ephesians the title of the 
 Epistle to the Laodiceans. [Commentary on Ephesians, 
 Introduction, p. xxv.] 
 
 3. The more probable opinion is, that it is an epistle sent 
 by Paul to Laodicea at this very period. The epistles were 
 to be interchanged. And the interchange is naturally this — 
 that the Laodiceans read the epistle which had been sent to 
 Colosse, and the Colossians the epistle which had been sent 
 to Laodicea.^ Wieseler argues that the epistle meant is that 
 to Philemon. But it is hard to prove that either Archippus 
 or Philemon was a Laodicean. It would certainly be strange 
 for the Colossian church to send Paul's charge to the minister 
 of another church, when, according to Wieseler, there was an 
 epistle destined for individuals in the same community. Then, 
 again, as has been observed, what is there in the private letter 
 to Philemon to make it of general use at Colosse ? Again, 
 many, as Biihr, Steiger, Bohmer, and Anger, who hold that 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians is a circular letter, believe it to 
 be here meant, while some maintain that its original destina- 
 
 ' Introduction, vol. ii. p. 134. 
 
 ^ Chronologie des Jpost. Zeitalters, p. 
 
 452. 
 
COLOSSI ANS IV. 16. 293 
 
 tion was Laodicea. But how, it might be asked, how did the 
 apostle know that the encyclical epistle should have reached 
 Laodicea just at the time when his letter should arrive at 
 Colosse ? The spirit of the injunction in verse 16, seems 
 plainly to imply that both letters were despatched at once, 
 and the same might be inferred from the apostle's desire 
 expressed in ii. 1, that the Laodiceans as well as the Colos- 
 sians should be aware of his intense solicitude for them. 
 Tychicus, as Meyer suggests, would travel through Laodicea 
 to Colosse, and he would there impart the oral confirmation 
 that the letter referred to by the apostle was lying at Lao- 
 dicea. This arrangement being known to the apostle gave 
 precision to his language. One difficulty in our way is the 
 fact that Paul bids the Colossian church salute the brethren 
 in Laodicea. Why do so, it is asked, if he himself despatched 
 a letter at the same time to Laodicea ? But the salutation 
 sent through the Colossians would manifest the apostle's 
 desire that both churches should cherish a sisterly attachment, 
 and the transmission of the apostle's salutation to Laodicea 
 would be a fitting occasion for the interchange of epistles. 
 
 But will the phrase rrjv ck AaoSiKcla^ bear such a meaning? 
 There is no doubt that it may, the preposition showing that 
 the letter was there, and to be brought out of that city. The 
 idiom means that the letter was there, or would be found 
 there, and was to be carried thence. Thus, Bahr refers to 
 Luke xi. 13 — 6 irarrjp 6 i^ ovpavov Baxret irvevfia aytov — 
 where the particle i^ characterizes the descent of a gift out of 
 heaven, and from One who is in heaven. Matt. xxiv. 17 has 
 also been referred to — apat, ra eK t?}9 olKiat avTov — but the 
 similarity of construction is not so close. The case of airo, 
 in Heb. xiii. 24, and the reverse one of et9 in Luke ix. 61, 
 come under a similar law. Compare 2 Cor. ix. 2 ; Phil. iv. 
 22. The law is based on what is called the attraction of 
 prepositions, when, for example, instead of a preposition denot- 
 ing rest being used, the idea of motion is attracted from the 
 verb, which either expresses it or implies it, and a preposition 
 signifying such motion is employed. Kiihner, §623; Winer, 
 § 66, 6. The idea of fetching the epistle out of the city of 
 Colosse was present to the writer's mind, and so he says e/c — 
 the epistle to be gotten out, and not iv — the epistle now lying 
 
294 
 
 COLOSSIANS IV. 16. 
 
 in Laodicea. This ascertained usage puts an end to the 
 objections of the Greek expositors, who aflfirm that this view 
 would necessitate such a phrase as ttjv •rrpo'i AaoBLK€a<;. 
 
 The inference, of course, is that this epistle is lost, like 
 many others of the apostle's writings. Probably it was wholly 
 of a temporary and local nature, and therefore has not been pre- 
 served.^ An inspired writing is not necessarily a canonical one. 
 
 We subjoin a copy of the spurious epistle referred to on p. 292 : — 
 
 1. Paulus apostolus, non ab homini- 
 bus, neque per hominem, sed per Jesum 
 Christum, fratribus qui estis Laodicese. 
 
 2. Gratia vobis, et pax a Deo Patre 
 et Domino nostro Jesu Christo. 
 
 3. Gratias ago Christo per omnem 
 orationem meam, quod permanentes 
 estis et perseverantes in operibus bonis, 
 promissionem expectantes in die 
 judiciL 
 
 4. Neque disturbent vos quorundam 
 vaniloquia insimulantium veritatem, ut 
 vos avertant a veritate Evangelii, quod 
 a me prsedicatur. 
 
 5 Et nunc faciet Deus, ut qui sunt 
 ex me, perveniant ad perfectum veri- 
 tatis Evangelii, sint deservientes, et 
 beuignitatem operum facientes, quae 
 sunt salutis vitse seternse. 
 
 6. Et nunc palam sunt vincula mea, 
 quae patior in Christo, in quibus laetor 
 et gaudeo. 
 
 7. Scio enim quod hoc mihi est ad 
 salutem perpetuam, quod factum est 
 orationibus vestris, administrante 
 Spiritu Sancto. 
 
 8. Sive per vitam, sive per mortem, 
 est mihi vivere vita in Christo, et mori 
 gaudium. 
 
 9. Et ipse Dominus noster in nobis 
 faciet misericordiam suam, ut eandem 
 dilectionem habeatis et sitis unanimes. 
 
 10. Ergo, dilectissimi, ut audistis 
 praesentiam Domini, ita sentite, et 
 faeite in timore ; et erit vobis vita in 
 seternum. 
 
 11. Est enim Deus, qui operatur in 
 vobis ; 
 
 1. Paul an apostle, not of men, neither 
 by man, but by Jesus Christ, to the 
 brethren which are at Laodicea. 
 
 2. Grace be to you, and peace from 
 God the Father, and our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 3. I thank Christ in every prayer of 
 mine, because ye continue and per- 
 severe in good works, looking for that 
 which is promised in the day of judg- 
 ment. 
 
 4. Let not the vain speeches of any 
 trouble you, who pervert the truth, 
 that they seduce you from the truth of 
 the gospel which is preached by me. 
 
 5. And now may God effect it, that 
 my converts may attain to a perfect 
 knowledge of the truth of the gospel, 
 be beneficent, and doing good works 
 which are connected with the salvation 
 of eternal life. 
 
 6. And now my bonds which I suffer 
 in Christ, are manifest, in which I 
 rejoice and am glad. 
 
 7. For I know that this shall turn 
 to my salvation for ever, which is 
 secured through your prayer, and the 
 supply of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 8. Whether by life or by death; [for] 
 to me shall be a life in Christ, to die 
 will be joy. 
 
 9. And our Lord Himself will grant 
 us His mercy, that ye may have the 
 same love and be like-minded. 
 
 10. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye 
 have heard of the coming of the Lord, 
 so tlunk and act in fear, and it shall 
 be to you life eternal ; 
 
 11. For it is God, who worketh in 
 you; 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 17. 295 
 
 This interchange of epistles was a salutary custom ; it 
 made an epistle sent to one church to become, in reality, the 
 common property of all the churches, and it led in no very 
 long period to the formation of the canon of the New 
 Testament. 
 
 (Ver. 1 7.) Kal elTrare 'Ap'^LTnroi. BXeTre rrjv ZiaKoviav fjv 
 irapeka^e'i iv Kvplo), Xva avrrjv 7rX.7)poU — " And say to Arch- 
 ippus. Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in 
 the Lord, that thou fulfil it." Archippus is mentioned also 
 in Philemon. There is no ground for the opinion of Michaelis, 
 Storr, Wieseler, and Theodoret, based on the Apostolic Con- 
 stitutions, vii. 46,^ that Archippus was a Laodicean. Philem. 2. 
 What the motive of the apostle in sending him this exhorta- 
 tion was, we do not know. It would be an unwarranted 
 suspicion, on the one hand, to suppose that Archippus was in 
 danger of proving unfaithful ; and it is no less a baseless 
 notion of Bengel, on the other hand, that he was either in 
 sickness or old age, and not far from the end of his career. 
 The form elirare. is peculiar. Winer,, §15- ^^ construing 
 the exhortation, it serves no purpose to take back 'iva 
 from its place, and read ^SXeVe Xva, for what then should 
 come of avrr]v ? 2 John 8. The phrase " in the Lord " has 
 not the same meaning as " from the Lord," with which some 
 
 12. Et facite sine peccato qusecunque 12. And do without sin whatever 
 facitis. things ye do. 
 
 13. Et quod optimum est, dilectis- 13. And what is best, my beloved, 
 simi, gaudete in Domino Jesu Christo, rejoice in the Lord Jesus Christ, and 
 et cavete omnes sordes in omni lucro. avoid all filthy lucre. 
 
 14. Omnes petitiones vestrae sint 14. Let all your requests be made 
 palam apud Deum ; estote firmi in known before God, and be firm in the 
 sensu Christi. doctrine of Christ. 
 
 15. Et quse integra, et vera, et 15. Andwhatsoever things are sound, 
 pudica, et casta, et justa, et amabilia and true, and of good report, and chaste, 
 sunt, facite. and just, and lovely, these things do. . 
 
 16. Et quoe audiistis et accepistis, in 16. And those things which ye have 
 corde retinete, et erit vobis pax. heard, and received, keep in your 
 
 hearts, and peace shall be with you. 
 
 17. Salutant vos omnes sancti. 17. All the saints salute you. 
 
 18. Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi 18. The grace of our Lord Jesus 
 cum spiritu vestro. Amen. Christ be with your spirit. Amen. 
 
 19. Hanc facite legi Colossensibus, 19. Cause that this Epistle be read 
 et earn, quae est Colossensium, vobis. among the Colossians, and the Epistle 
 
 of the Colossians to be read among you. 
 
 1 Tra Ss sv ifvy'io. KaaliKuoa " Apx''^'^"i, P- IST', ed. Ueltzeu, 1852. 
 
296 COLOSSIANS IV. 18. 
 
 would identify it. It points out the source of the ministry, 
 not simply, but by describing the sphere in which it was 
 given and received. It was "in the Lord" — the recipient 
 was in union with the Lord himself, and the ministerial 
 function was conferred upon him, and accepted by him under 
 no foreign influence, obligation, or motive. Whatever this 
 ministry was, and we cannot determine its nature, whether it 
 be the diaconate specially or the pastorate generally, it was 
 therefore a divine office which Archippus held. He had 
 " received it in the Lord," and the charge was, that he was 
 to see to it " that he fulfilled it." Acts xii. 25. This was 
 to be his solicitude, to discharge all the duties which such an 
 office laid upon him, and to fill up with holy activity that 
 sphere which the Lord had marked out for him. There is 
 no occasion to adopt the idea of Grotius, that the verb '7r\r}pol<i 
 is any imitation of the Hebrew xbo, as applied to the conse- 
 cration of a priest, for the word is found with a similar sense 
 in the classics and in Philo. Some suppose that Archippus 
 was holding office in the absence of Epaphras, others that he 
 was a son of Philemon, and deacon under his father as pastor. 
 It has been said, that it marks the free intercourse of the 
 early churches, when such an address should be made by 
 a church to one of its ministers. Only it should be borne in 
 mind, that the church was simply the vehicle of communica- 
 tion. It was an admonition of Paul to Archippus through 
 the church. The idea of Theophylact is, that Paul sends him 
 the admonition so openly, for this purpose, that when he had 
 occasion to rebuke any members of the church, they might 
 not deem him bitter or censorious, for they would recall the 
 apostle's charge to him, and esteem him for so faithfully 
 obeying it. 
 
 (Ver. 18.) 'O ao-7rao-/xo9 rrj e/xfj ■xetpl HavXov — " ^TfjC 
 
 salutation of ^aul Initij mine oton ijanti." Having em- 
 ployed an amanuensis in writing the previous portion of the 
 epistle, the apostle authenticates it by adding his salutation 
 in his own hand. 1 Cor. xvi. 21; 2 Thess. iii. 17. What 
 associations and feelings that handwriting would excite ! 
 Many an eye would be moistened as it gazed upon it. Not 
 only does he write the salutation himself, but he adds, with 
 his own hand too, the remaining clauses. 
 
COLOSSIANS IV. 18. 297 
 
 Mvr)fiov€veTe fiov to>v Seafiwv — " iElenieittftCr Ttig IJOlttlS," a 
 brief but pathetic request. The alternative view of Heinrichs 
 is a very miserable one — stipendio mihi mitfendo. Nor can 
 we, with Olshausen and others, confine the mode of remem- 
 brance craved by the apostle simply to supplication for him. 
 As Meyer says — -Jede Beschrdnkung ist unlefugt — " every 
 limitation is unwarranted." Every possible form of remem- 
 brance they were besought to cherish. With every mention 
 of his name, or allusion to his work, his chain was to be 
 associated. Every picture which their mind's eye formed of 
 him was to be that of a prisoner. When they felt their 
 obligations to him as an apostle, they were to think of his 
 captivity. Their freedom of religious observance was to 
 suggest to them, by the contrast, his incarceration. When 
 they asked a blessing on their spiritual benefactors, they were 
 not to forget the fetters of him — the apostle of the Gentiles. 
 " Remember my bonds." When his right hand penned the 
 salutation of the previous clause, no wonder he felt his bonds 
 so keenly, and spoke of them, for at the same moment his left 
 hand was chained to the right arm of the Roman soldier who 
 kept him.^ And now he bids them farewell — 
 
 'H %a/3t9 ixed' vjxoiv — " (&XU.it ie tOltfj ^Q\X." The adieu 
 is brief, but expressive. The apostle concludes as he began, 
 with an earnest benediction, a prayer for fulness of blessing, 
 alike for their present and eternal welfare. The 'Afi'^v of 
 the Received Text is not well authenticated, and the sub- 
 scription, though correct, is necessarily spurious. 
 
 ' [ " The remark of Eadie is just, that as the apostle used his hand to write, 
 he felt his bonds yet more keenly ; but, in all probability, it was not the k/t, 
 but the right hand that was bound to the soldier that guarded him. Smith, 
 Diet. Antiq., s.v. 'Catena,' p. 207."— Ellicott.] 
 
INDEX. 
 
 "Absent in the flesh, but present in 
 
 the Spirit," meaning of, 117 
 Abstinence from meats and drinks, no 
 
 test of genuine piety, 197 
 Acting "in the name of Christ" the 
 
 highest morality, 248 
 Aim of the preacher should be to reach 
 
 every individual, 99 
 Alienation from God characteristic of 
 
 mankind, 77 
 Angels drawn nearer to God and man 
 
 by the work of redemption, 74 
 "Answering every one," illustrated, 
 
 277 _ 
 Asceticism, a libel on Providence, 197 
 Assurance, the blessedness of, 243 
 Atoning sacrifice of Christ, the source 
 
 of peace, 75 
 
 Barnabas, notices of his history, 283 
 
 Basil's encomium on the Psalms, 247 
 
 "Beholding your order," explained, 
 117-119 
 
 Believers " complete in Christ," 143 
 
 Benefits of "full assurance of under- 
 standing," 109, 287 
 
 Blessedness of heaven, 96 
 
 Blessing, Divine forgiveness a first 
 and prominent, 39 
 
 " Blotting out the handwriting against 
 us," meaning of the phrase, 158 
 
 Bonds of Paul suffered for the sake of 
 the Gentiles, 271, 297 
 
 "Buried in baptism," no allusion to 
 the mode of that ordinance, 148 
 
 Children, duties of, to their parents, 
 255 
 
 Christ the Creator of "thrones, and 
 dominions, and principalities, and 
 powers," 54; pre-eminent as Creator, 
 66 ; pre-eminent as the fountain of 
 blessing, 67 ; pre-eminent in the 
 constitution of His person, 67; "the 
 image of God " in His Divine works, 
 44 ; " the image of God " in His 
 Mediatorial person, 43; "the image 
 of God " in perfection, 43 ; the 
 essence of the gospel, 122 ; the hope 
 
 of glory subjectively and objectively, 
 97 ; the pattern after which His 
 followers are to forgive one another, 
 238 
 
 " Christ our life " explained, 214 ; not 
 simply the instrumental, but prim- 
 ary cause, of creation, 54 
 
 Christ's body, though on the throne, 
 not deified, 48 ; qualifications for 
 being Head of the church, 62 
 
 Christian truth in the heart, the source 
 of comfort and guidance, 245 ; union, 
 love the prime element of, 107 
 
 Christian's life " hidden, " the, because 
 on earth not openly manifested, 211 
 
 Church defined, 62 ; Christ the source 
 of its existence and blessing, 62 
 
 "Circumcision of Christ," spiritual, 
 147 ; the, "not made with hands," 
 146 
 
 Colosse, city of, ix ; church of, xiv ; 
 epistle to, its genuineness, xxii ; 
 contents of, xxxix ; time and place, 
 xliv ; works on, xlv ; errorists in, 
 
 XXX 
 
 "Commandments and doctrines of 
 men" of no authority in religion, 
 193 
 
 "Conversation seasoned with salt," 
 explained, 275 
 
 Covetousness, how styled idolatry, 217 
 
 Creation, work of, ascribed in its full- 
 est sense to Christ, 51, 60 ; univer- 
 sally affected by the death of Christ, 
 75 
 
 Cross, the symbol of peace, 76 
 
 "Dead in trespasses," death spiritual, 
 153 ; "dead with Christ" infers 
 mortification of the sensuous mem- 
 bers, 216 
 
 Death to sin, and death in sin, dis- 
 tinguished, 156 ; to the world, 
 separation from the elements of the 
 world, 192 
 
 Dietetic regulations of the Law laid 
 aside under the Gospels, 171 
 
 Disunity and rank of Christ described, 
 41 
 
INDEX. 
 
 299 
 
 Divine forgiveness daily needed, 39 
 
 Divine polity, highest conceptions of, 
 in the gospel, 113 
 
 Divinity and humanity personally 
 united in Christ, 140 
 
 Divinity of Christ proved by His for- 
 giving sin, 238 
 
 Doctrine, to be tested by the estima- 
 tion in which it holds Christ, 136 
 
 Dogmas of the false teachers of Colosse, 
 41, 114 
 
 "Door of utterance," meaning of the 
 phrase, 270 
 
 Efficacy of prayer, 269 
 
 Election not determined by character, 
 
 but determines it, 234 
 Epaphras, earnest prayers of, for the 
 
 Colossians, 287 
 Epaphras, teaching of, sanctioned by 
 
 apostolic authority, 17, 287 
 " E]>istle from Laodicea," what it was, 
 
 291 
 Epistles, interchange of, among the 
 
 early Christians useful, 295 
 Errorists of Colosse did not "hold the 
 
 head," 186 
 Errors existing in Colosse, 41 
 Eternity of Christ, 66 
 
 Faith established and abounding, 125 
 
 Faith, the instrumental means in the 
 spiritual resurrection, 151 
 
 Falsehood unworthy of men spiritually 
 renewed, 222 
 
 Fellow-labourers, Jewish, present with 
 Paul, 286 
 
 "Filling up what is wanting of the 
 afflictions of Christ, " meaning of the 
 phrase, 85 
 
 Final glory illustrated, 33, 95, 214 
 
 Final purpose contemplated by Christ in 
 creation, 55 
 
 "First-born of every creature," 
 meaning of the phrase, 46 ; probably 
 a fundamental term with the Colos- 
 sian errorists, 48 
 
 Forgiveness bound up with subsequent 
 Divine gifts, 40 ; more closely con- 
 nected with redemption than any 
 other blessing, 40 ; of sin a necessary 
 accompaniment of spiritual life, 157 
 
 Formal allusions to religion in daily 
 business, abuse of piety, 250 
 
 Fountain of every blessing is in Christ, 
 64 
 
 Fruit-bearing in the believer, illus- 
 trated, 25 
 
 "Fulfilling the word of God," mean- 
 ing of the phrase, 92 
 
 "Full assurance of understanding," 
 meaning of the expression, 109 
 
 "Fulness of the Godhead dwelling 
 bodily " in Christ, 137 ; of saving 
 blessing in Christ, 69 
 
 Gentiles especially indebted to Paul, 
 
 271 ; Paul especially a minister of 
 
 them, 90 
 God, the source of meetness for the 
 
 inheritance of the saints, 34 
 "God's glory," the phrase explained, 
 
 28 
 God's love to the Son, 37 ; pleasure 
 
 that "all fulness should dwell in 
 
 Christ," 69 
 Gospel, the, fruit-bearing and diffusive, 
 
 13 
 " Grace in truth," grace in its genuine 
 
 form, 15 
 Grace the grand characteristic of the 
 
 gospel, 14 
 Graces becoming the "elect of God, "235. 
 Gratitude, profound, due to Christ, 
 
 244 ; why a duty of believers, 31 
 Grounds of thanksgiving on behalf of 
 
 the Colossians, 9 
 
 "Head of principality and power," 
 Christ the, 144 
 
 Heavenly glory, why an object of 
 hope, 10 
 
 Hebrew ceremonial wanting in spiritual 
 power, 176 
 
 Heresies, allied to false philosophy, 126 
 
 "Hope of glory," the future blessed- 
 ness of believers, 96 
 
 Hierapolis, xi. 
 
 Humility, necessary in considering the 
 relations of the Divine nature, 42 ; 
 spurious, 179 
 
 Husbands, duties of, to their wives, 253 
 
 "Image of God" marks Christ's pre- 
 eminence, 66 
 
 " Image of God " the model of man 
 spiritually renewed, 224 
 
 Inducements to seek ' ' the things which 
 are above," 208 
 
 "Inheritance of the saints," allusion 
 to the allotment of Canaan, 31 
 
 Intense earnestness of Paul, 101 
 
 Joy, accompanying patience and long- 
 suffering, 30 ; of the apostle from 
 being present with the Colossians in 
 spirit, 118 
 
 Judaism fashioned to resemble Chris- 
 tianity, 176 
 
 Kalendar, Jewish, abrogated under 
 
 Christianity, 172 
 "Kingdom of Christ" is present as 
 
 well as future, 37 
 
300 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 " Kingdom of darkness," why so 
 designated, 35 
 
 Knowledge of God, aliment of spiritual 
 growth, 26 ; possessed by man, may 
 be indeiinitely enlarged, 225 
 
 Labours of Paul on behalf of the 
 
 church unceasing, 91 
 Laodicea, city of, x 
 Law, the moral, in its condemnation, 
 
 and the ceremonial in its rites, 
 
 expunged by Christ's death, 164 
 Life, God's immediate gift, 157 ; "of 
 
 faith," the, a life of hope, 83 ; 
 
 spiritual, as it shall be developed at 
 
 Christ's second coming, 214 
 Light characteristic of the heavenly 
 
 glory, 32 
 " Likeness to God " in regeneration, 
 
 higher than that in creation, 229 
 Love, exhibited by the Colossians, 18 ; 
 
 " in the Spirit " is love in the Holy 
 
 Spirit, 19 
 Love, of the Father towards the Son, 
 
 37 ; the perfection of the Christian 
 • character, 240 ; the crown and result 
 
 of the other graces, 1 9 ; to the saints, 
 
 love to Christ, 7 
 Luke, a companion of the apostle, 289 
 
 Mark, from whom Paul separated, re- 
 conciled to him, 283 
 
 Masters and servants are alike under 
 Christ, 265 
 
 Masters, duties of, to their servants, 
 263 
 
 Medium of spiritual life, union with 
 Christ, 212 
 
 "Meetness for the inheritance of the 
 saints," why necessary, 34 
 
 "Mind, the fleshly," capacitated only 
 for sensuous objects, 1 86 
 
 Mosaic economy, the, only rudimental, 
 135 ; observances, full of meaning, 
 175 
 
 "Mystery hid from ages and genera- 
 tions, " meaning of, 92 
 
 "Name of the Lord Jesus," everything 
 
 to be done in the, 248 
 National distinctions immaterial in 
 
 regeneration, 230 
 "New man," descriptive of humanity 
 
 renewed, 223 
 Nouns with correlative verbs intensify 
 
 the meaning, 27, 103 
 
 "Old man," personification of de- 
 praved humanity, 222 
 
 Onesimus, a converted slave sent back 
 to Colosse, 281 
 
 Origin of sin, Miiller's theory, 225 
 
 Parental training, quotation from Gis- 
 borne, 256 
 
 Paternal kindness enjoined, 255 
 
 "Patience and long-suffering," ad- 
 juncts of faith, 28 
 
 Paul, why named an apostle of Jesus 
 Christ, 1 
 
 " Peace of Christ," what it is, 242 
 
 Peace resulting from Christ's sacrifice, 
 75 
 
 "Perfect in Christ," meaning of the 
 phrase, 101 
 
 Perseverance in faith, essential to sal- 
 vation, 83 ; of the saints a distinct 
 doctrine of Scripture, 83 
 
 Personal essence, not the image of God 
 in man, 228 
 
 Philosophy, advantages of true, in 
 studying religion, 127 
 
 Prayer, false, prevalent among the 
 Colossians, 130 ; efficacy of, 269 ; 
 on behalf of himself, besought by 
 Paul, 268 ; of the apostle on behalf 
 of the Colossians, 7 ; and thanksgiv- 
 ing not to be confounded, 268 
 
 Preaching, subject of, Christ, 98 ; wis- 
 dom needed in, 99 
 
 Pre-eminence in all things belongs to 
 Christ, 65 
 
 Pride in disguise, the natural result of 
 asceticism, 200, 204 
 
 " Principalities and powers " spoiled in 
 Christ's death, 167 
 
 "Putting off" the body of the flesh," 
 regeneration, 147 
 
 " Quickened with Christ," a blessing 
 enjoyed even on earth, 156 
 
 Race and social rank not lost on pro- 
 fessing Christianity, 232 
 
 Reality and fulness of the gospel, the 
 cause why it is often rejected, 184 
 
 " Receiving Christ Jesus the Lord," is 
 to receive Christ as Lord, 121 
 
 Reconciliation, final design of, 81 ; 
 work of God, 79 
 
 "Reconciling all things," meaning and 
 reference of the expression, 72 
 
 Redemption exhibits Christ in the ful- 
 ness of His essence, 56 ; obtained by 
 virtue of union with Christ, 39 
 
 Regeneration not restricted to class, 
 rank, or nation, 232 
 
 Resurrection of Christ, results of the, 64 
 
 Reward of faithful service, 259 
 
 Ritual of Moses, a shadow of future 
 blessings, 175 
 
 "Rudiments of the world," meaning 
 of the expression, 135, 190 
 
INDEX. 
 
 301 
 
 Salutation of Paul peculiarly affect- 
 ing, 296 
 
 Satan vanquished by the death of 
 Christ, 169 
 
 Science and philosopliy not hostile to 
 faith, 125 
 
 Science, the highest, found in the 
 gospel, 114 
 
 Sensuality often visited with its appro- 
 priate penalty on earth, 218 
 
 Servants, duties of, to their masters, 258 
 
 Sinners exempted from condemnation 
 through the Cross, 166 
 
 Sins of malignity defined, 220 
 
 Social duties, specially urged on the 
 Asiatic churches, 251 
 
 Socinian hypothesis of Christ as Creator 
 unnatural and contradictory, 60 
 
 Spiritual characteristics of the heathen 
 world, 78; "spiritual knowledge" 
 conferred by the Holy Ghost, 23 
 
 Steadfast faith, its advantages and 
 reasonableness, 120 
 
 Success in winning souls to be traced 
 to Divine power, 103 
 
 Thanksgivixg on behalf of the Colos- 
 
 sians, 4 ; rendered to God as the 
 
 Father of Christ, 5 
 "Things above" supreme, "things 
 
 below" subordinate, 210 
 Timothy, how associated with Paul 
 
 in writing the Epistle, 2; joined with 
 
 Paul in expressing the sentiments of 
 
 the Epistle, 5 
 Traditions of men, 132, 193 
 Translation into the kingdom of Christ 
 
 described, 36 
 Tychicus, the bearer of the Epistle to 
 
 the Colossians, 279 
 
 Union to Christ, the efficacious prin- 
 ciple in the spiritual resurrection, 
 151 
 
 Unity and nourishment of the Church, 
 Christ the source of, 188 
 
 Universal being, Christ the preserver 
 of, 57 
 
 Visible and invisible, a common ex- 
 pression in Eastern philosophy, 52 
 
 Voluntary suffering intensely fascinat- 
 ing to many minds, 204 
 
 Walking, figuratively descriptive of a 
 person's tenor of life, 24, 219 ; in 
 Christ, the result of receiving Him, 
 123 ; worthy of the Lord, explained, 
 24 ; "in wisdom toward them that 
 are without," meaning of, 273 
 
 Warnings against being misled by false 
 teachers, 116 
 
 Watchwords of the errorists of Colosse, 
 194 
 
 "Will of God," often too much re- 
 stricted, 21 
 
 " Wisdom and knowledge," genuine, 
 revealed in the gospel. 111 ; needed 
 in preaching, 100 
 
 Wives, duties of, to their husbands, 252 
 
 " Word of the gospel," the oral com- 
 munications of the first Christian 
 teachers, 11 
 
 "World, all the," meaning of the 
 phrase, 12 
 
 "Worshipping of angels," origin of 
 the, 180 
 
 Wrong-doing will be requited at the 
 final judgment, 261 
 
INDEX OF GREEK TERMS MORE PARTICULARLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 "Ayie;, ..... 3 
 
 'Sauhrav, Ai^airxuv, ... 99 
 
 'AXfihia liayyiXlov, 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 Ua^nfiara ii'^ip vfiui/, . 
 
 
 . 84 
 
 Avrava-TXt^^u, 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 napaXafifidya, 
 
 
 . 121 
 
 ' A-rixpupo;, 
 
 
 
 112 
 
 Xlapdiy lis, Uapav 
 
 ", 
 
 
 . 12 
 
 AvroXXeTpioiti, 
 
 
 
 77 
 
 YlXvpou, 
 
 
 
 . 91 
 
 '^PX'l, 
 
 
 
 63 
 
 UXripufia, . . 
 
 
 
 68, 137 
 
 VvofffiSj i'TT'iyvojfftyy 
 
 ;i, 10 
 
 9, 11 
 
 ], 223 
 
 Tlpaaicauio, . 
 
 
 
 . 11 
 
 Aoyfiara,, , 
 
 
 
 159 
 
 TlpUTOTOKOS, 
 
 
 
 . 46 
 
 Aoyfx.ariZ,u, 
 
 
 
 192 
 
 'S,o(p'ta, fwiai;, 
 
 
 
 22, 111 
 
 ElKUV, 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 'SiT-piufia, . 
 
 
 
 . 120 
 
 'E*. . 
 
 
 
 293 
 
 ^TOI^ilOy, 
 
 
 
 . 134 
 
 'EX-rls, 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 'SvXecyayait, 
 
 
 
 . 130 
 
 "Evi, . 
 
 
 
 230 
 
 'Sufi^ifia^o), 
 
 
 
 . 106 
 
 Ey avTU, A/ auTHUj 
 
 
 
 53, 55 
 
 2uvoavXou;, , 
 
 
 
 . 16 
 
 E'3'tyvutrx-My 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 lufLO., iri.p'i,. 
 
 
 
 . 80 
 
 e'sku, 
 
 
 
 93 
 
 Itofta.nx.oii, 
 
 
 
 , 138 
 
 "Iv«, , 
 
 
 
 269 
 
 T«|;j, 
 
 
 
 . 119 
 
 \\.aTa^faJ3iuu, 
 
 
 
 177 
 
 't'Ttip Ifiut iiaxovo;, 
 
 
 . 17 
 
 Kr'tX,a, 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 T?ro/*ov>) Ka) fi,ax,po6viJ.i 
 
 X, 
 
 . 28 
 
 Aoyes, 
 
 
 
 . 199 
 
 ^avipoco, 
 
 
 . 93 
 
 Aiyo; aXrJiia;, , 
 
 
 
 . 11 
 
 Xtipoypaifiv, 
 
 
 . 158 
 
 Mi,, . 
 
 
 
 . 199 
 
 
 
 
 
 MORRISON AND OIBB, EDINBURGH, 
 
 PRINTEIW TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICB. 
 
 f 
 
Date Due i 
 
 
 ''•*"." . ■ ' - 
 
 
 ^^^^^ttm 
 
 -N.— ^ 
 
 
 
 1* 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^>m»mmmi^ 
 
 
 
 
 ^pitl00'm 
 
 
 Ifc 
 
 
 p A riLU^^s^ 
 
 
 
 
 t^^iraii^-r-w 
 
 
 h^ 
 
 
 ^^^^^^k 
 
 '"•'^^-SfiSSlI 
 
 '$7B 
 
 
 jWrHT-m 
 
 
 
 
 ^ttSSSiSSSSSu 
 
 ir 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -.-■-■^ 
 
 
 
 
 iT'i -iii-»iu^iiffr 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 iiw^ 
 
 .smmmm 
 
 IJPPMWMmMI 
 
 M«r.' 
 
 
 jintrm^'^ 
 
 »,■ 
 
 
 
 ^ 'T^'ift* 
 
 m^ 
 
 
 
 j^in-' -.' ^ 
 
 
 
 
 f) 
 
 PRINTED 
 
 IN U. S. A. 
 
 
BS2715 .Ell 1884 
 
 A commentary on the Greek text of the 
 
 Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00066 1142