YALE
DIVINITY SCHOOL
LIBRARY

Gift of
JOHN R. MOTT

WORKS BY J. B. LIGHTFOOT, D.D.,
Late Bishop of Durham.
NOTES ON EPISTLES OF ST PAUL FROM UN-
published COMMENTARIES. 8vo. im.
ST PAUL'S EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS AND
TO PHILEMON. A Revised Text, with Introductions, Notes, and Disserta
tions. Third Edition. Svo. us.
ST PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. A
Revised Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. Tenth Edition.
8vo. us.
ST PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. A
Revised Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. Fourth Edition.
8vo. us.
DISSERTATIONS ON THE APOSTOLIC AGE. Re-
/W«ta/from editions of St Paul's Epistles. Second Edition. 8vo. Cloth. 14J.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part I. ST CLEMENT
OF ROME. A Revised Text, with Introductions, Notes, Dissertations, and
Translations. New Edition. 1 vols. 8vo. 32J.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part II. ST IGNATIUS.
ST POLYCARP. Revised Texts, with Introductions, Notes, Dissertations,
and Translations. Second Edition. 1 vols, in 3. 8vo. 48.5.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Revised Texts, with short
Introductions and English Translations. Edited and completed by J. R.
Harmer, M.A., Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, sometime
Chaplain to the Bishop. 8vo. i6j.
ON A FRESH REVISION OF THE ENGLISH NEW
TESTAMENT. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. p. 6d.
ORDINATION ADDRESSES AND COUNSELS TO
CLERGY. Third Thousand. Crown 8vo. 6s.
LEADERS IN THE NORTHERN CHURCH. Sermons
preached in the Diocese of Durham. Second Edition, with an additional
Sermon on St Columba by the present Bishop of Durham. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CAMBRIDGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SERMONS PREACHED IN ST PAUL'S CATHEDRAL.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
SERMONS PREACHED ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
ESSAYS ON THE WORK ENTITLED "SUPER
NATURAL RELIGION." Reprinted from The Contemporary Review.
Second Edition. 8vo. 10s. 6d.
BIBLICAL ESSAYS. 8vo. 12s.
INDEX OF NOTEWORTHY WORDS AND PHRASES
FOUND IN THE CLEMENTINE WRITINGS, commonly called the
Homilies of Clement. 8vo. 5$.
HISTORICAL ESSAYS. Globe 8vo. 5-r.
BISHOP LIGHTFOOT. Reprinted from The Quarterly
Review. With a prefatory note by the Bishop of Durham. With Portrait.
Crown 8vo. y. 6d.
MACMILLAN AND CO. Ltd., LONDON.

THE EPISTLES OF ST PAUL.
in.
THE FIRST ROMAN CAPTIVITY.
2.
EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
3-
EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

SAINT PAUL'S
EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS

AND TO

PHILEMON.

A REVISED TEXT
WITH
INTRODUCTIONS, NOTES, AND DISSERTATIONS.

BY
J. B. LIGHTFOOT, D.D., d.o.l, ll.d.,
LATE BISHOP 03 DUBHAM,
HONOBABY FELLOW 03 TEINITX COLLEGE, OAMBKIDSS.

MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited
NEW YOKE: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1900
All rights reserved.

First Edition May 1875.
New Editions Dec. 1875, March 1879.
Jieprinted May 1879, 1880, 1883, 1884, 1886,
1890, 189a, 1897, 1900

TO THE
RIGHT REV. EDWARD HAROLD BROWNE, D.D.
LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER,
m SINCERE ADMIRATION
OP
HIS PERSONAL CHARACTER AND EPISCOPAL WORK
AND IN
GRATEFUL RECOGNITION OF
THE PRIVILEGES OF A PRIVATE FRIENDSHIP.

MIMHTAI MOY riN6C9e KAGCllC KATCO XP'CTO'?

LTavXof yevo/itvos peyurros viroypappos. Clement.

Ovx <"s Kiii^-os hiaraiyiTOiiai vpiv' eKeivos airoorokos,
iym KaraiepiTos' eieeivos iXevdepos, cya 8e V-*XPL """ SoCXoy-
Ignatius.

Ojre iya ovn aXKos opoios epoi bvvarai KaratcoXovBrjo-ai
tjj uoipiq. rov nanapiov mu cv8o£ov IlavXou. PoLYCABP.

PKEFACE TO THE FIKST EDITION.

On the completion of another volume of my commentary, I
wish again to renew my thanks for the assistance received
from previous labourers in the same field. Such obligations
must always be great; but it is not easy in a few words to
apportion them fairly, and I shall not make the attempt. I
have not consciously neglected any aid which might render
this volume more complete; but at the same time I venture
to hope that my previous commentaries have established my
claim to be regarded as an independent worker, and in the
present instance more especially I have found myself obliged
to diverge widely from the treatment of my predecessors, and
to draw largely from other materials than those which they
have collected.
In the preface to a previous volume I expressed an in
tention of appending to my commentary on the Colossian
Epistle an essay on ' Christianity and Gnosis.' This intention
has not been fulfilled in the letter; but the subject enters
largely into the investigation of the Colossian heresy, where
it receives as much attention as, at all events for the pre
sent, it seems to require. It will necessarily come under dis
cussion again, when the Pastoral Epistles are taken in hand.
The question of the genuineness of the two epistles con
tained in this volume has been deliberately deferred. It
could not be discussed with any advantage apart from the
Epistle to the Ephesians, for the three letters are inseparably

viii Preface.
bound together. Meanwhile however the doctrinal and his
torical discussions will, if I mistake not, have furnished answers
to the main objections which have been urged ; while the
commentary will have shown how thoroughly natural the
language and thoughts are, if conceived as arising out of an
immediate emergency. More especially it will have been made
apparent that the Epistle to the Colossians hangs together
as a whole, and that the phenomena are altogether adverse
to any theory of interpolation such as that recently put forward
by Professor Holtzmann.
In the commentary, as well as in the introduction, it has
been a chief aim to illustrate and develope the theological
conception of the Person of Christ, which underlies the Epistle
to the Colossians. The Colossian heresy for instance owes
its importance mainly to the fact that it throws out this
conception into bolder relief. To this portion of the subject
therefore I venture to direct special attention.
I cannot conclude without offering my thanks to Mr A. A
VanSittart, who, as on former occasions, has given his aid
in correcting the proof sheets of this volume ; and to the
Rev. J. J. Scott, of Trinity College, who has prepared the
index. I wish also to express my obligations to Dr Schiller-
Szinessy, of whose talmudical learning I have freely availed
myself in verifying Frankel's quotations and in other ways.
I should add however that he is not in any degree responsible
for my conclusions, and has not even seen what I have written.
Trinity College,
April 30, 1875.

CONTENTS.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
INTRODUCTION. PAGE
I. The Churches of the Lycus  i — 70
II. The Colossian Heresy  71 — in
III. Character and Contents of the Epistle  112 — 126
TEXT AND NOTES  129—243
On some Various Readings in the Epistle  244 — 254
On the Meaning of irK-qpaipa  255 — 271
The Epistle from Laodicea  272 — 298
EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
INTRODUCTION  301—327
TEXT AND NOTES  331—344
DISSERTA TIONS.
1. The Name Essene  347 — 332
2. Origin and Affinities oj the Essenes  353 — 394
3. Essenism and Christianity  395 — 417
INDEX  419—428

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

I' YING in, or overhanging, the valley of the Lycus, a Situation
J-^ tributary of the Maeander, were three neighbouring three6
towns, Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Colossae1. The river flows, oities-

1 The following are among the most
important books of travel relating to
this district; Pococke Description of
the East and Some Other Countries, Vol.
n, Part n, London 1 745 ; Chandler
Travels in Asia Minor etc., Oxford
'775 5 Leake Tour in Asia Minor,
London 1824; Arundell Discoveries in
Asia Minor, London 1834 ; Hamilton
Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and
Armenia, London 1842 ; Fellows Asia
Minor, London 1839, Discoveries in
Lycia, London 1840 ; Davis Anatolica,
London 1874 ; Tohihatcheff Asie Mi-
neure, Description Physique, Statis-
tique et Archeologique, Paris 1853 etc.,
with the accompanying Atlas (i860) ;
Laborde Voyage de VAsie Mineure
(the expedition itself took place in
1826, but the date on the title-page
is 1838, and the introduction was
written in 1861) ; Le Bas Voyage
Archeologique en Greece et en Asie
Mineure, continued by Waddington
and not yet completed ; Texier De
scription de VAsie Mineure, Vol. 1
(1839). It is hardly necessary to add
the smaller works of Texier and Le
Bas on Asie Mineure (Paris 1862, 1863)
in Didot's Beries L'Univers, as these
have only a secondary value. Of the

books enumerated, Hamilton's work
is the most important for the topo
graphy, etc. ; Tchihatcheff's for the
physical features; and Le Bas and
Waddington's for the inscriptions, etc.
The best maps are those of Hamilton
and Tohihatcheff : to which should be
added the Karte von Klein-Asien by
v. Vincke and others, published by
Schropp, Berlin 1844.
Besides books on Asia Minor gene
rally, some works relating especially to
the Seven Churches may be mentioned.
Smith's Survey ofthe Seven Churches of
Asia (1678) is a work of great merit for
the time, and contains the earliest de
scription of the sites of these Phrygian
cities. It was published in Latin first,
and translated by its author after
wards. Arundell's Seven Churches
( 1 82 8) is a well-known book. Allom and
Walsh's Constantinople and the Scenery
of the Seven Churches of Asia Minor
illustrated (1850) gives some views of
this district. Svoboda's Seven Churches
of Asia (1869) contains 20 photographs
and an introduction by the Rev. H. B.
Tristram. This is a selection from
a larger series of Svoboda's photo
graphs, published separately.

COL.

2 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
roughly speaking, from east to west ; but at this point, which
is some few miles above its junction with the Maeander, its
direction is more nearly from south-east to north-west1.
Laodicea and Hierapolis stand face to face, being situated
respectively on the southern and northern sides of the valley,
at a distance of six miles2, and within sight of each other,
the river lying in the open plain between the two. The
site of Colossae is somewhat higher up the stream, at a distance
of perhaps ten or twelve miles3 from the point where the
road between Laodicea and Hierapolis crosses the Lycus.
Unlike Laodicea and Hierapolis, which overhang the valley on
opposite sides, Colossae stands immediately on the river-bank,
the two parts of the town being divided by the stream. The
three cities lie so near to each other, that it would be quite
possible to visit them all in the course of a single day.
Their Thus situated, they would necessarily hold constant in-
bourhcod tercourse with each other. We are not surprised therefore
and inter- t0 nnd them so closely connected in the earliest aares of
course. ...
Christianity. It was the consequence of their position that
they owed their knowledge of the Gospel to the same evan
gelist, that the same phases of thought prevailed in them,
and that they were exposed to the same temptations, moral
as well as intellectual.
Physical The physical features of the neighbourhood are very striking.
forces at rri^ potent forces 0f nature are actively at work to change the
face of the country, the one destroying old landmarks, the other
creating fresh ground.
On the one hand, the valley of the Lycus was and is

1 The maps differ very considerably Fellows Asia Minor p. 283, Hamilton
in this respect, nor do the statements i. p. 514. The relative position of the
of travellers always agree. The direo- two cities appears in Laborde's view,
tion of the river, as given in the text, pi. xxxix.
accords with the maps of Hamilton and 3 I do not find any distinct notice
Tchihatcheff, and with the accounts of the distance ; but, to judge from the
of the most accurate writers. maps and itineraries of modern tra-
s Anton. Itin. p. 337 (Wesseling) vellers, this estimate will probably be
gives the distance as 6 miles. See also found not very far wrong.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 3
especially liable to violent earthquakes. The same danger Frequent
indeed extends over large portions of Asia Minor, but this quakes.
district is singled out by ancient writers1 (and the testimony
of modern travellers confirms the statement2), as the chief
theatre of these catastrophes. Not once or twice only in the
history of Laodicea do we read of such visitations laying waste
the city itself or some flourishing town in the neighbourhood8.
Though the exterior surface of the earth shows no traces of
recent volcanoes, still the cavernous nature of the soil and
the hot springs and mephitic vapours abounding here indicate
the presence of those subterranean fires which from time to
time have manifested themselves in this work of destruction.
But, while the crust of the earth is constantly broken up Deposits
by these forces from beneath, another agency is actively em- tine_
ployed above ground in laying a new surface. If fire has
its fitful outbursts of devastation, water is only less powerful in
its gradual work of reconstruction. The lateral streams which
swell the waters of the Lycus are thickly impregnated with
calcareous matter, which they deposit in their course. The
travertine formations of this valley are among the most re
markable in the world, surpassing even the striking pheno
mena of Tivoli and Clermont*. Ancient monuments are
buried, fertile lands overlaid, river-beds choked up and streams
diverted, fantastic grottoes and cascades and archways of stone
formed, by this strange capricious power, at once destructive
and creative, working silently and relentlessly through long
ages. Fatal to vegetation, these incrustations spread like a
stony shroud over the ground. Gleaming like glaciers on the
hill-side they attract the eye of the traveller at a distance
1 Strabo xii. 8 (p. 578) to iroKirprrrov of Denizli, which is close to Laodicea,
rrjs x®Pas Ka' T° eiaeicrrov el yap ' The old town was destroyed about 25
ris dXKij, xal 1} AaoSlneia etfowros, koI years past by an earthquake, in which
tijs irKrjo-iexiipov Si Kdpovpa, Ioann. 12,000 people perished.'
Lyd. p. 349 (ed. Bonn.) tcvsvorepov 3 See below, p. 38.
treUrai, ota rd irepl rijv ipvylas AaoSi- * Tohihatcheff P. 1. Geogr. Phys.
veiar xal rrjv Trap airrg 'lepdir iro'Xo'. Comp. p. 344 sq., esp. p. 353. See the
2 Thus Pococke (p. 71) in 1745 writes references below, pp. 9 sq., 15.
I — 2

4 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
of twenty miles1, and form a singularly striking feature in
scenery of more than common beauty and impressiveness.
Produce At the same time, along with these destructive agencies,
tortured of the fertility of the district was and is unusually great. Its
the dis- ricn pastures fed large flocks of sheep, whose fleeces were of
trict. r ° ,
a superior quality ; and the trade in dyed woollen goods was
the chief source of prosperity to these towns. For the bounty
of nature was not confined to the production of the material,
but extended also to the preparation of the fabric. The
mineral streams had chemical qualities, which were highly
valued by the dyer2. Hence we find that all the three towns,
with which we are concerned, were famous in this branch of
trade. At Hierapolis, as at Thyatira, the guild of the dyers
appears in the inscriptions as an important and influential
body3. Their colours vied in brilliancy with the richest
scarlets and purples of the farther East4. Laodicea again was
famous for the colour of its fleeces, probably a glossy black,
which was much esteemed5. Here also we read of a guild
of dyers'. And lastly, Colossae gave its name to a peculiar
1 Fellows Asia Minor p. 283. vipov xpuparos, irXijirlov oUovvres. For
2 See note 4. this strange adjective Kopai-6s (which
3 Boeokh no. 3924 (comp. Anatolica seems to be derived from nopal- and to
p. 104) tovto to rjpuov "Zreipavw 1) ipy a- mean ' raven- black ') see the passages
a I a. rwv fiaipiuv, at Hierapolis. See in Hase and Dindorf's Steph. Thes.
Laborde, pi. xxxv. In another inscrip- In Latin we find the form coracinus,
tion too (Le Bas and Waddington, no. Vitruv. viii. 3 § 14 'Aliis coracino co-
1687) there is mention of the purple- lore,' Laodicea being mentioned in the
dyers, iroptpvpafiatpeis. context. Vitruvius represents this as
1 Strabo xiii. 4. 14 (p. 630) (an Si the natural colour of the fleeces, and
Kal rirpbs {Scupijv ipliriv davjiaarus ovp- attributes it to the water drunk by the
perpov to Kara, rrjv 'lepdv iro'Xw vowp, sheep. See also Plin. N. H. viii. 48
ware to. Ik rwv fn^Ov fSairrbpeva iva- § 73- So too Hieron. adv. Jovin. il
piXka elvai tois iK rrjs kokkov Kal tois 21 (11. p. 358) 'LaodicesB indumentis
aKovpyiaiv. ornatus incedis. ' The ancient accounts
5 Strabo xii. 8. 16 (p. 578) cpipei S 6 of the natural colour of the fleeces in
irepl tijv AaoSlKtuav roiros irpo^druv this neighbourhood are partially con-
dperas ovk els paKaKorijra p&vov tuv firmed by modern travellers ; e. g. Po-
ipluv, % Kal tuv MiXijatuv Siatpipei, eocke p. 74, Chandler p. 228.
dWd xal ets tt)v Kopa^rjv "Xfioav, ware 6 Boeokh Corp. Inscr. 3938 [7} ip-
(col TpoaoSelovrai \apirpus dir avrwv, yaala\ tuv yvatpi[uv leal flaipiwv tuv]
wairep koX ol Ko\o<r<rrjvol dico tov bpw- akovpy[w]v.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 5
dye, which seems to have been some shade of purple, and
from which it derived a considerable revenue1.
i. Of these three towns Laodicea, as the most important, r. laodi-
deserves to be considered first. Laodice was a common name Ti CEA'
its name
among the ladies of the royal house of the Seleucidae, as and ms-
Antiochus was among the princes. Hence Antiochia and Lao
dicea occur frequently as the designations of cities within
the dominions of the Syrian kings. Laodicea on the Lycus2,
as it was surnamed to distinguish it from other towns so
called, and more especially perhaps from its near neighbour
Laodicea Catacecaumene, had borne in succession the names
of Diospolis and Rhoas3; but when refounded by Antiochus
Theos (b.c. 261 — 246), it was newly designated after his wife
Laodice4. It is situated6 on an undulating hill, or group
of hills, which overhangs the valley on the south, being washed
on either side by the streams of the Asopus and the Caprus,
tributaries of the Lycus8. Behind it rise the snow-capped

1 See the passage of Strabo quoted
p. 4, note 5. The place gives its name
to the colour, and not conversely,
as stated in Blakesley's Herod, vii.
113. See also Plin. N. H. xxi. 9 § 27,
'In vepribns nascitur cyclaminum ...
flos ejus colossinus in coronas admit-
titur,' a passage which assists in de
termining the colour.
2 iirl Avku, Boeckh Corp. Inscr. no.
3938, Ptol. Geogr. v. 2, Tab. Pent.
'laudicium pilycum'; irpbs [ry] Avku,
Eckhel Num. Vet. in. p. 166, Strabo
I.e., Boeckh C.I. 5881,5893; irpbsAvKov,
Boeckh 6478. A citizen was styled
AaoSixeis dirb Avkov, Diog. Laert. ix.
12 § 1 16 ; C.I. L. vi. 374 ; comp. irepl
rbv Avkov Appian. Mithr. 20.
3 Plin. N. H. v. 29.
* Steph. Byz. s. v., who quotes the
oracle in obedience to which (is iKi\ev-
ae Zeis vsjiifipepiTiis) it was founded.
5 For descriptions of Laodicea see
Smith p. 250 sq., Pococke p. 71 sq.,
Chandler p. 224 sq., Arundell Seven

Churches p. 84 sq., Asia Minor 11. p. 1 80
sq., Fellows Asia Minor 280 sq., Hamil
ton 1. p. 514 sq., Davis Anatelica p.
92 sq., Tohihatcheff P. 1. p. 252 sq.,
258 sq. See also the views in Laborde,
pi. xxxix, Allom and Walsh n. p. 86,
and Svoboda phot. 36 — 38.
The modern Turkish name is Eski-
hissar, 'the Old Castle,' corresponding
to the modern Greek, Paledkastro,
a common name for the sites of an
cient cities ; Leake p. 251. On the
ancient site itself there is no town or
village; the modern city Denizli is a
few miles off.
6 The position of Laodicea with
respect to the neighbouring streams is
accurately described by Pliny N. H.
v. 29 ' Imposita est Lyco flumini, la-
tera afnuentibus Asopo et Capro ' ; see
Tchihatcheff P. 1. p. 258. Strabo
xii (1. 0.) is more careless in his de
scription (for it can hardly be, as
Tohihatcheff assumes, that he has
mistaken one of these two tributaries

6 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
heights of Cadmus, the lofty mountain barrier which shuts in
Its grow- the south side of the main valley1. A place of no great
perity, importance at first, it made rapid strides in the last days
of the republic and under the earliest Caesars, and had be
come, two or three generations before St Paul wrote, a po
pulous and thriving city2. Among its famous inhabitants
are mentioned the names of some philosophers, sophists, and
rhetoricians, men renowned in their day but forgotten or
almost forgotten now8. More to our purpose, as illustrating
the boasted wealth and prosperity of the city, which appeared
as a reproach and a stumblingblock in an Apostle's eyes4, are
the facts, that one of its citizens, Polemo, became a king and a
father of kings, and that another, Hiero, having accumulated
enormous wealth, bequeathed all his property to the people
and adorned the city with costly gifts5. To the good fortune
of her principal sons, as well as to the fertility of the country
around, the geographer Strabo ascribes the increase and pros
perity of Laodicea. The ruins of public buildings still bear
testimony by their number and magnificence to the past great
ness of the city6.
for the Lycus itself), ivravda Si Kal Lycus and the Lycus for the Mffiander.
o KoVpos Kal 6 Aims avppdWei rip The modern name of the Lycus is
M.aiivSpu irorapij) irorapbs evperyioijs, Tchoruk Su.
where ivravda refers to 6 irepl rijv 1 The modern name of Cadmus is
AaoSkeiav tottos, and where by the Baba-Dagh, ' The father of mountains.'
junction of the stream with the Mae- 2 Strabo xii. 1. c. ij oi AaoSlxua
ander must be intended the junction piKpd irporepov ovaa ai^ijaiv (\afjev i<p'
of the combined stream of the Lycus ijpuv Kal tuv ijperipuv iraripuv, Katroi
and Caprus. On the coins of Lao- KaKuBetaa ix iroXioprtas iiri MiBpiSdrov
dicea (Eckhel in. p. 166, Mionnet iv. tou 'Evirdropos. Strabo flourished in
p. 330, ib. Suppl. vn. p. 587, 589) the time of Augustus and the earlier
the Lycus and Caprus appear to- years of Tiberius. The growing im-
gether, being sometimes represented portance of Laodicea dates from before
as a wolf and a wild boar. The Asopus the age of Cicero : see p. 7.
is omitted, either aB being a less im- 3 Strabo 1. c. ; Diog. Laert. ix. 1 1
portant stream or as being less capa- § 106, 12 § 116; Philostr. Vit. Soph.
ble of symbolical representation. Of i. 25 ; Eckhel Doctr. Num. Vet. in.
modern travellers, Smith (p. 250), and p. 162, 163 sq.
after him Pococke (p. 72), have cor- * Rev. iii. 17 ; see below p. 43.
reotly described the position of the 6 Strabo 1. c. On this family see
streams. Chandler (p. 227), misled by Ephemeris Epigraphica 1. p. 270 sq.
Strabo, mistakes the Caprus for the 6 The ruins of Laodicea have formed

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 7
Not less important, as throwing light on the Apostolic Its politi-
history, is the political status of Laodicea. Asia Minor £* the '
under the Romans was divided into districts, each compris-eapitalofa r conventus.
ing several towns and having its chief city, in which the
courts were held from time to time by the proconsul or
legate of the province, and where the taxes from the sub
ordinate towns were collected1. Each of these political ag
gregates was styled in Latin conventus, in Greek Swt'/cr/o-t? —
a term afterwards borrowed by the Christian Church, being
applied to a similar ecclesiastical aggregate, and thus natu
ralised in the languages of Christendom as diocese. At the
head of the most important of these political dioceses, the
' Cibyratic convention' or 'jurisdiction,' as it was called, com
prising not less than twenty-five towns, stood Laodicea2.
Here in times past Cicero, as proconsul of Cilicia, had held
his court8 ; hither at stated seasons flocked suitors, advo-

the quarry out of which the modern
town of Denizli is built. Yet notwith
standing these depredations they are
still very extensive, comprising an
amphitheatre, two or three theatres,
an aqueduct, etc. The amphitheatre
was built by the munificence of a
citizen of Laodicea only a few years
after St Paul wrote, as the inscription
testifies ; Boeckh C. I. no. 3935. See
especially Hamilton 1. p. 515 sq., who
describes these ruins as 'hearing the
stamp of Roman extravagance and
luxury, rather than of the stern and
massive solidity of the Greeks.'
1 See Marquardt RSmische Stoats-
verwaltung 1. p. 365 sq.
2 See Cic. ad AU. v. 21, 'Idibus
Februariis... forum institueram agere
LaodicesB Cibyraticum,' with the re
ferences in the next note : comp. also
Plin. N. H. v. 29 'Una (jurisdictio)
appellatur Cibyratica. Ipsum (i. e.
Cibyra) oppidum Phrygiae est. Con-
veniunt eo xxv civitates, celeberrima
urbe Laodicea.'

Besides these passages, testimony is
borne to the importance of the Ciby
ratic ' conventus ' by Strabo, xiii. 4
§ 17 (p. 631), iv tois peylarais i^era^e-
rai SioiKijaeai tijs 'Aaias ij Ki^vpariKij.
It will be remembered also that Ho
race singles out the Cibyratica negotia
(Epist. i. 6. 33) to represent Oriental
trade generally. The importance of
Laodicea may be inferred from the fact
that, though the union was named after
Cibyra, its head-quarters were from the
first fixed at or soon afterwards trans
ferred to Laodicea.
3 See ad Fam. ii. 17, iii. 5, 7, 8,
ix. 25, xiii. 54, 67, xv. 4 ; ad Att. v. 16,
17, 20, si, vi. 1, 2, 3, 7. He visited
Laodicea on several occasions, some
times making a long stay there, and
not a few of hiB letters are written
thence. See especially his account of
his work there, ad Att. vi. 1, ' Hocforo
quod egi ex Idibus Februariis LaodicesB
ad Kalendas Maias omnium dioece-
sium, praster Ciliciae, mirabilia quaa-
dam efficimus ; ita multse civitates.

8 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
cates, clerks, sheriffs'-officers, tax-collectors, pleasure-seekers,
courtiers — all those crowds whom business or leisure or policy
or curiosity would draw together from a wealthy and populous
district, when the representative of the laws and the majesty
of Rome appeared to receive homage and to hold his assize1.
To this position as the chief city of the Cibyratic union the
inscriptions probably refer, when they style Laodicea the
'metropolis2.' And in its metropolitan rank we see an
explanation of the fact, that to Laodicea, as to the centre
of a Christian diocese also, whence their letters would rea
dily be circulated among the neighbouring brotherhoods, two
Apostles addressed themselves in succession, the one writing
from his captivity in Rome', the other from his exile at
Patmos4.
Its religi- On the religious worship of Laodicea very little special in-
shipW°r" formation exists. Its tutelary deity was Zeus, whose guardian
ship had been recognised in Diospolis, the older name of the
city, and who, having (according to the legend) commanded its
rebuilding, was commemorated on its coins with the surname
Laodicenus*. Occasionally he is also called Aseis, a title which
perhaps reproduces a Syrian epithet of this deity, ' the mighty.'
If this interpretation be correct, we have a link of connexion
between Laodicea and the religions of the farther East — a con
nexion far from improbable, considering that Laodicea was
etc' Altogether Laodicea seems to p. 184. It had lost its original sense,
have been second in importance to as the mother city of a colony. Lao-
none of the cities in his province, ex- dicea is styled ' metropolis ' on the
cept perhaps Tarsus. See also the coins, Mionnet rv. p. 321.
notice, in Verr. Act. ii. 1. c. 30. 3 Col. iv. 16 with the notes. See
1 The description which Dion Chry- also below p. 37, and the introduction
sostom gives in his eulogy of Cehense to the Epistle to the Ephesians.
(Apamea Cibotus), the metropolis of 4 Rev. iii. 14.
a neighbouring ' dioecesis,' enables us 6 See Eckhel in. p. 159 sq. (passim),
to realise the concourse which gather- Mionnet rv. p. 315 sq., ib. Suppl. vn.
ed together on these occasions : Oral. p. 578 sq. (passim). In the coins com-
xxxv (11. p. 69) £vvdyerai irXrjBos ivBpii- memorating an alliance with some
tuv SiKafopivuv, SiKafbvruv, ijyepbvuv, other city Laodicea is represented by
imijper&v, oIkctuv, k.t.X. Zeus; e. g. Mionnet rv. pp. 320, 324,
2 On this word see Marquardt 1. c. 331 sq., Suppl. vu. pp. 586, 589.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

refounded by a Syrian king and is not unlikely to have
adopted some features of Syrian worship1.
2. On the north of the valley, opposite to the sloping 2. Hibra
hills which mark the site of Laodicea, is a broad level terrace its situa-
jutting out from the mountain side and overhanging the plain tlon-
with almost precipitous sides. On this plateau are scattered
the vast ruins of Hierapolis2. The mountains upon which
it abuts occupy the wedge of ground between the Maeander
and the Lycus ; but, as the Maeander above its junction
with the Lycus passes through a narrow ravine, they blend,

1 <\C€IC or AC6IC AAOAlKECON. See
Waddington Voyage en Asie Mineure
au point de vue Numismatique (Paris
'853) pp. 25, 26 sq. Mr Waddington
adopts a suggestion commiinicated to
him by M. de Longperier that this
word represents the Aramaic St'tl? 'the
strong, mighty,' which appears also in
the Arabic 'Aziz.' This view gains
some confirmation from the fact, not
mentioned by Mr Waddington, that
"A^fos was an epithet of the Ares of
Edessa: Julian Orat. iv; comp. Cure-
ton Spic. Syr. p. 80, and see Lagarde
Gesamm. Abhandl. p. 16. On the other
hand this Shemitic word elsewhere,
when adopted into Greek or Latin, is
written "AfifosorAzizus: seeGarrucciin
the Archaologia xi.ni. p. 45 ' Tyrio Sep-
timio Azizo,' and Boeckh Corp. Inscr.
9893 "A fifos 'Ayplira Zii/jos. M. de Long
perier offers the alternative that AC6IC,
i. e. 'Aals, is equivalent to 'AaiariKbs.
An objection to this view, stronger
than those urged by Mr Waddington,
is the fact that 'Aals seems only to be
used as a feminine adjective. M.
Renan points to the fact that this
zeyc ACEIC is represented with his
hand on the horns of a goat, and on
the strength of this coincidence would
identify hi™ with 'the Azazel of the
Semites' (Saint Paul, p. 359), though
tradition and orthography alike point to
some other derivation of Azazel (7 fKtl?).

2 For descriptions of Hierapolis,
see Smith p. 245 sq., Pocooke p. 75
sq., Chandler 229 sq., Arundell Seven
Churches p. 79 sq., Hamilton p. 517
sq., Fellows Asia Minor p. 283 sq.
For the travertine deposits see espe
cially the description and plates in
Tohihatcheff P. 1. p. 345, together with
the views in Laborde (pi. xxxii —
xxxviii), and Svoboda (photogr. 41
— 47). Tohihatcheff repeatedly calls
the place Hieropolis ; but this form,
though commonly used of other towns
(see Steph. Byz. s. v. 'lepawoXis, Leake
Num. Hell. p. 67), appears not to occur
as a designation of the city on the
Lycus, which seems always to be writ
ten Hierapolis. The citizens however
are sometimes called 'lepoiroXIrai on
the coins.
The modern name is given different
ly by travellers. It is generally called
Pambouk-Kalessi, i. e. ' cotton-castle, '
supposed to allude to the appearance
of the petrifactions, though cotton is
grown in the neighbourhood (Hamilton
*¦ P- 5 ' 7)- So Smith, Pocooke, Chand
ler, Arundell, Tohihatcheff, Wadding
ton, and others. M. Renan says
' Tambouk, et non Pambouk, Kalessi '
(S. Paul p. 357). Laborde gives the
word Tambouk in some places and
Pambouk in others; and Leake Bays
' Hierapolis, now called Tabuk-Kale
or Pambuk-Kale' (p. 252).

10

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Remarkablephysicalfeatures.

when seen from a distance, with the loftier range of the
Mesogis which overhangs the right bank of the Maeander
almost from its source to its embouchure, and form with it
the northern barrier to the view, as the Cadmus range does
the southern, the broad valley stretching between. Thus
Hierapolis may be said to lie over against Mesogis, as Laodicea
lies over against Cadmus1.
It is at Hierapolis that the remarkable physical features
which distinguish the valley of the Lycus display themselves
in the fullest perfection. Over the steep cliffs which support
the plateau of the city, tumble cascades of pure white stone,
the deposit of calcareous matter from the streams which, after
traversing this upper level, are precipitated over the ledge
into the plain beneath and assume the most fantastic shapes
in their descent. At one time overhanging in cornices fringed
with stalactites, at another hollowed out into basins or broken
up with ridges, they mark the site of the city at a distance,
glistening on the mountain-side like foaming cataracts frozen
in the fall.
But for the immediate history of St Paul's Epistles the
th^Apos-0 strikmg beauty of the scenery has no value. It is not
tolichis- probable that he had visited this district when the letters
tory. to the Colossians and Laodiceans were written. Were it
otherwise, we can hardly suppose that, educated under widely
different influences and occupied with deeper and more absorb-

Their
relation to

1 Strabo xiii. 4. 14 (p. 629} says
iirepfiaXovai Si ttjv Meauyl5a...irbXei.s
elal irpbs piv Tr) MeauylSi KaravriKpi)
AaoStKelas 'lepa iroXis, k.t.X. He can
not mean that Hierapolis was situated
immediately in or by the Mesogis (for
the name does not seem ever to be ap
plied to the mountains between the
Lycus and Maeander), but that with
respect to Laodicea it stood over a-
gainst the Mesogis, as I have explain
ed it in the text. The view in Laborde
(pi. xxxix) shows the appearance of
Hierapolis from Laodicea. Strabo

had himself visited the place and
must have known how it was situated.
Some modern travellers however (e.g.
Chandler and Arundell) speak of the
plateau of Hierapolis as part of the
Mesogis. Steiger (Kolosser p. 33)
gets over the difficulty by translating
Strabo's words, ' near the Mesogis but
on the opposite side (i.e. of the Mae
ander) is the Laodicean Hierapolis'
(to distinguish it from others of the
name) ; but KaravriKpi cannot be
separated from AaoSixelas without
violence.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. II
ing thoughts, he would have shared the enthusiasm which this
scenery inspires in the modern traveller. Still it will give
a reality to our conceptions, if we try to picture to ourselves
the external features of that city, which was destined before
long to become the adopted home of Apostles and other
personal disciples of the Lord, and to play a conspicuous part —
second perhaps only to Ephesus — in the history of the Church
during the ages immediately succeeding the Apostles.
Like Laodicea, Hierapolis was at this time an important Hierapolis
and a growing city, though not like Laodicea holding metro- watering-
politan rank1. Besides the trade in dyed wools, which it l°laae-
shared in common with the neighbouring towns, it had another
source of wealth and prosperity peculiar to itself. The streams,
to wliich the scenery owes the remarkable features already
described, are endowed with valuable medicinal qualities,
while at the same time they are so copious that the ancient
city is described as full of self-made baths". An inscription,
still legible among the ruins, celebrates their virtues in heroic
verse, thus apostrophizing the city :
Hail, fairest soil in all broad Asia's realm;
Hail, golden city, nymph divine, bedeck'd
With flowing rills, thy jewels3.
Coins of Hierapolis too are extant of various types, on which
iEsculapius and Hygeia appear either singly or together4.
To this fashionable watering-place, thus favoured by nature,
seekers of pleasure and seekers of health alike were drawn.
To the ancient magnificence of Hierapolis its extant ruins The mag-
nificGiics
bear ample testimony. More favoured than Laodicea, it has 0f its
not in its immediate neighbourhood any modern town or™1113,
village of importance, whose inhabitants have been tempted
to quarry materials for their houses out of the memorials of
1 On its ecclesiastical title of me- eipetijs irpoipepioTaTov odSas airdvruv,
tropolis, see below, p. 69. xalP°"< XPWoiroXi 'lepdiroXi, irorvia TSvp-
2 Strabo 1. c. oilru 5' iariv itpBovov ipuv, vdpaaiv, dyXat-rjai, KeKaapivrj.
rb irXfjBos tov vSaros uare 1) iroXis pearij 'Mionnet iv. p. 297, 306, 307,
ruv avropdruv jSaXaveluv iarl. ib. Suppl. vii. p. 567 ; Waddington
3 Boeckh Corp. Inscr, 3909, 'A<ri3os Voyage etc. p. 24.

12 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
its former greatness. Hence the whole plateau is covered with
ruins, of which the extent and the good taste are equally re
markable; and of these the palaestra and the thermae, as
might be expected, are among the more prominent.
Itsreligi- A city, which combined the pursuit of health and of
ship7°r" £aietyi ha<i fitly chosen as its patron deity Apollo, the god
alike of medicine and of festivity, here worshipped especially
as ' Archegetes,' the Founder \ But more important, as illus
trating the religious temper of this Phrygian city, is another
fact connected with it. In Hierapolis was a spot called the
The Plu- Plutonium, a hot well or spring, from whose narrow mouth
issued a mephitic vapour immediately fatal to those who
stood over the opening and inhaled its fumes. To the muti
lated priests of Cybele alone (so it was believed) an immunity
was given from heaven, which freed them from its deadly
effects2. Indeed this city appears to have been a chief centre
of the passionate mystical devotion of ancient Phrygia. But
indications are not wanting, that in addition to this older
worship religious rites were borrowed also from other parts
1 Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3905, 3906; 27, who also witnessed thephenomenon,
Mionnet rv.pp. 297, 301, 307, ib. Suppl. adds ov pijv xal rijv ah-lav airov avvvorj-
vn. p. 568, 569, 570. In coins struck aai (xu, Xiyu Si & re t-XSov us eTSov xal
to commemorate alliances with other <J ¦/jxovaa us ijxovaa. Ammian. Marc.
cities, Hierapolis is represented by xxiii. 6. 18 also mentions this mar-
Apollo Archegetes : Mionnet iv. p. 303, vel, but speaks cautiously, 'ut asse-
ib. Suppl. vn. 572, 573, 574; Wad- runt quidam,' and adds 'quod qua
dington Voyage etc. p. 25; and see causa eveniat, rationibus physicis per-
Eckhel in. p. 156. On the meaning mittatur.' Comp. Anthol. vn. p. 190
of Archegetes, under which name B? tu dirdyl-aaBai piv SxveT Bavarov 5'
Apollo was worshipped by other cities iwiBvpet, i£ 'Upas irbXeus sjivxpbv SSup
also, whioh regarded him as their tUtu; Stobsaus Eel. i. 34, p. 680. La-
founder, see Spanheim on Callim. borde states (p. 83) that he discovered
Hymn. Apoll. 57. by experiment that the waters are
2 Strabo 1. c. He himself had seen sometimes fatal to animal life and
the phenomenon and was doubtful how sometimes perfectly harmless ; and if
to account for the immunity of these this be substantiated, we have a solu-
priests, etre Beta irpovolg,...dTe avriSb- tion of the marvel. Other modern
tois rial Svvdpeai roirov ovppatvovros. travellers, who have visited the Pluto-
See also Plin. N. H. ii. 93 § 95 'lo- nium, are Cockerell (Leake p. 342),
oum... matris tantum magnaa sacerdoti and Svoboda. In Svoboda's work a
innoxium. ' Dion Cass. (Xiphil. ) lxviii. chemical analysis of the waters is given.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 13
ofthe East, more especially from Egypt1. By the multitude
of her temples Hierapolis established her right to the title of
the 'sacred city,' which she bore2.
Though at this time we have no record of famous citizens The birth-
at Hierapolis, such as graced the annals of Laodicea, yet a gene- EpiSetus.
ration or two later she numbered among her sons one nobler
far than the rhetoricians and sophists, the millionaires and
princes, of whom her neighbour could boast. The lame slave
Epictetus, the loftiest of heathen moralists, must have been
growing up to manhood when the first rumours of the Gospel
reached his native city. Did any chance throw him across
the path of Epaphras, who first announced the glad-tidings
there ? Did he ever meet the great Apostle himself, while Epictetus
dragging out his long captivity at Rome, or when after his tianity.
release he paid his long-promised visit to the valley of the
Lycus ? We should be glad to think that these two men met
together face to face — the greatest of Christian, and the great
est of heathen preachers. Such a meeting would solve more
than one riddle. A Christian Epictetus certainly was not:
his Stoic doctrine and his Stoic morality are alike apparent ;
but nevertheless his language presents some strange coinci
dences with the Apostolic writings, which would thus receive
an explanation8. It must be confessed however, that of any
outward intercourse between the Apostle and the philosopher
histoiy furnishes no hint.
3. While the sites of Laodicea and Hierapolis are con- 3. Colos-
spicuous, so that they were early identified by their ruins, Difficulty
the same is not the case with Colossae. Only within the of.deter-
J • minmg its
present generation has the position of this once famous city site.
been ascertained, and even now it lacks the confirmation of any
1 On a coin of Hierapolis, Pluto- where in this neighbourhood. At
Serapis appears seated, while before Chonas (Colosss) is an inscription
him stands Isis with a sistrum in her recording a vow to this deity; Le Bas
hand ; Waddington Voyage etc. p. 24. Asie Mineure insor. 1693 b.
See also Mionnet iv. pp. 296, 305 ; s Steph. Byz. s. v. dirb rov lepb, iroX-
Leake Num. Hell. p. 66. X& (xei"-
The worship of Serapis appears else- » See Philippians, p. 313 sq.

14

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

inscription found in situ and giving the name1. Herodotus
Subterra- states that in Colossae the river Lycus disappears in a sub-
ueanohan- . . .. . „ , , n
nel of the terranean cave, emerging again at a distance of about rive
Lycus. stades2; and this very singular landmark — the underground
passage of a stream for half a mile — might be thought to have
placed the site of the city beyond the reach of controversy.
But this is not the case. In the immediate neighbourhood of
the only ruins which can possibly be identified with Colossae,
no such subterranean channel has been discovered. But on the
other hand the appearance of the river at this point suggests
that at one time the narrow gorge through which it runs, as
it traverses the ruins, was overarched for some distance with in
crustations of travertine, and that this natural bridge was broken
up afterwards by an earthquake, so as to expose the channel
of the stream3. This explanation seems satisfactory. If it be

1 See however a mutilated inscrip
tion (Boeokh Corp. Inscr. 3956) with
the letters.. .HNOON, found near Chonas.
2 Herod, vii. 30 dirlxero is KoXoaads,
ttoXiv peydXijv Qpvylrjs, iv ttj AiKos iro
rapbs is x&vpa yys iafidXXuv dipavlfe-
rai, (ireira Sid araSluv us irivre pd-
Xiard kij dvatpaivopevos ixSiSoi xal ovtos
is rbv MalavSpov.
3 This is the explanation of Hamil
ton (1. p. 509 sq.), who (with the doubt
ful exception of Laborde) has the merit
of having first identified and described
the site of Colossse. It stands on the
Tchoruk Su (Lycus) at the point where
it is joined by two other Btreams, the
Bounar Bashi Su and the Ak-Su. In
confirmation of his opinion, Hamilton
found a tradition in the neighbourhood
that the river had once been covered
over at this spot (p. 522). He followed
the course of the Lycus for some dis
tance without finding any subterrane
an channel (p. 521 sq.).
It is difficult to say whether the fol
lowing account in Strabo xii. 8 § 16
(p. 578) refers to the Lycus or not;

6pos KdSpos ei; ov xal b Aixos pel xai
dXXos opuvvpos rip Spef to irXiov 5'
ovtos iirb yrjs pvels etr' dvaxisj/as avvi-
ireaev els rairb tois dXXois irorapdis, ip-
tpaivuv dpa xal to iroXvrpijrov rijs x&P0-*
xal to eiaeiarov. If the Lyous is meant,
may not avviireaev imply that this re
markable feature had changed before
Strabo wrote 1
Laborde (p. 103), who visited the
place before Hamilton, though his ac
count was apparently not published
till later, fixes on the same site for
Colossae, but thinks that he has dis
covered the subterranean course of the
Lycus, to whichHerodotus refers, much
higher up a stream, close to its source
('a dix pas de cette source'), whioh he
describes as ' a deux lieues au nord de
CoIossbb.' Yet in the same paragraph
he says 'Or il [Herodote, exact cice
rone] savait que le Lycus disparait
pres de Colossa, ville considerable de
la Phrygie' (the italics are his own).
He apparently does not see the
vast difference between his pres de
Golossce thus widely interpreted and

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. IS
rejected, we must look for the underground channel, not within
the city itself, as the words of Herodotus strictly interpreted
require, but at some point higher up the stream. In either
case there can be little doubt that these are the ruins of
Colossae. The fact mentioned by Pliny1, that there is in this Petrifying
city a river which turns brick into stone, is satisfied by a side
stream flowing into the Lycus from the north, and laying
large deposits of calcareous matter ; though in this region, as
we have seen, such a phenomenon is very far from rare. The
site of Colossae then, as determined by these considerations, lies
two or three miles north of the present town of Chonos, the
mediaeval Chonae, and some twelve miles east of Laodicea.
The Lycus traverses the site of the ruins, dividing the city
into two parts, the necropolis standing on the right or northern
bank, and the town itself on the left.
Commanding the approaches to a pass in the Cadmus range, Its ancient
and standing on a great high-way communicating between '
Eastern and Western Asia, Colossae at an early date appears
as a very important place. Here the mighty host of Xerxes
halted on its march against Greece ; it is mentioned on this
occasion as 'a great city of Phrygia2.' Here too Cyrus remained
seven days on his daring enterprise which terminated so
fatally ; the Greek captain, who records the expedition, speaks
of it as 'a populous city, prosperous and great8.' But after
this time its glory seems to wane. The political supremacy
the precise iv tj of Herodotus himself. very confused and it is not clear
Obviously no great reliance can be whether he has fixed on the right site
placed on the accuracy of a writer, for Colossss ; but it bears testimony to
who treats his authorities thus. The the existence of two subterranean
subterranean stream which Laborde courses of rivers, though neither of
saw, and of which he gives a view them is close enough to the city to
(pi. xl), may possibly be the pheno- satisfy Herodotus' description.
menon to which Herodotus alludes; but * Plin. N. H. xxxi. i § 20. This is
if so, Herodotus has expressed himself the Ak-Su, which has strongly petrify-
very carelessly. On the whole Hamil- ing qualities.
ton's solution seems much more proba- a Herod, vii. 30. See p. 14, note 2.
ble. See however Anatolica p. 1 1 7 sq. 3 Xen. Anab.i.1.6 ifrXavvet Sid */>u-
Arundell's account (Seven Churches ytas...els KoXoaads, irbXiv olxovpivijv,
p. 98 sq., Asia Minor p. 160 sq.) is eiSalpova Kal peydXijv.

1 6 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
and later of Laodicea and the growing popularity of Hierapolis gradu-
dfi elm 6 «
ally drain its strength ; and Strabo, writing about two genera
tions before St Paul, describes it as a 'small town1' in the
district of which Laodicea was the capital. We shall there
fore be prepared to find that, while Laodicea and Hierapolis
both hold important places in the early records of the Church,
Colossae disappears wholly from the pages of history. Its com
parative insignificance is still attested by its ruins, which are
few and meagre2, while the vast remains of temples, baths,
theatres, aqueducts, gymnasia, and sepulchres, strewing the
extensive sites of its more fortunate neighbours, still bear wit
ness to their ancient prosperity and magnificence. It is not
even mentioned by Ptolemy, though his enumeration of towns
includes several inconsiderable places8. Without doubt Colossae
was the least important church to which any epistle of St Paul
is addressed.
Uncertain And perhaps also we may regard the variation in the
graphyof orthography of the name as another indication of its com-
thename. parative obscurity and its early extinction. Are we to write
Golossce or Colassce? So far as the evidence goes, the con
clusion would seem to be that, while Colossas alone occurs
during the classical period and in St Paul's time, it was after
wards supplanted by Colassae, when the town itself had either
disappeared altogether or was already passing out of notice*.
1 irbXiapa, Strabo xii. 8. 13 (p. 576). v. 28, 29 § 29), so that only decayed
Plin. N.H. v. 32. §41 writes 'Phrygia and third-rate towns remain. The
...oppida ibi celeberrima prater jam Ancyra here mentioned is not the
dicta, Ancyra, Andria, Celamae, Colos- capital of Galatia, but a much smaller
S83,' etc. The commentators, referring Phrygian town.
to this passage, overlook the words ' Laborde p. 102 'De cette grande
' prater jam dicta, ' and represent Pliny ce'le'brite' de Colossas il ne reste presque
as calling Colossae ' oppidum celeberri- rien : ce sont des substructions sans
mum.' Not unnaturally they find it suite, des fragments sans grandeur;
difficult to reconcile this expression les restes d'un theatre de mediocre
with Strabo's statement. But in fact dimension, une acropole sans hardi-
Pliny has already exhausted all the esse,' etc. ; comp. Anatolica p. 115.
considerable towns, Hierapolis, Lao- 3 Geogr. v. 2.
dicea, Apamea, etc., and even much * All Greek writers till some cen-
less important places than these (see turies after the Christian era write it

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

17

Considered ethnologically, these three cities are generally Ethnologi-
regarded as belonging to Phrygia. But as they are situated tions of
on the western border of Phrygia, and as the frontier line J^lf186
separating Phrygia from Lydia and Caria was not distinctly

KoXoo-o-af: so Herod, vii. 30, Xen.
Anab. i. ¦*. 6, Strabo xii. 8. 1 3, Diod.
xiv. 80, Polysen. Strat. vii. 16. 1 ;
though in one or more mss of some
of these authors it is written KoXaaaai,
showing the tendency of later scribes.
Colossce is also the universal form in
Latin writers. The corns moreover, even
as late as the reign of Gordian (a.d. 238
— 244) when they ceased to be struck,
universally have koAocchnoi (or ko-
AoCHNOl); Mionnet rv. p. 267 sq.:
see Babington Numismatic Chronicle
New series ni. p. 1 sq., 6. In Hie-
rocles (Synecd. p. 666, Wessel.) and
in the Apostolic Constitutions (vii. 46)
KoXaaaai seems to be the original read
ing of the text, and in later Byzan
tine writers this form is common. If
Prof. Babington (p. 3) were right in
supposing that it is connected with
xbXoaaos, the question of the correct
spelling might be regarded as settled ;
but in a Phrygian city over which bo
many Eastern nations swept in suc
cession, who shall say to what lan
guage the name belonged, or what are
its affinities ?
ThuB, judging from classical usage,
we should say that KoXoaaai was the
old form and that KoXaaaai did not
supplant it till some time after St
Paul's age. This view is confirmed
by a review of the authorities for the
different readings in the New Testa
ment. In the opening of the epistle (i. 1)
the authorities for iv KoXoaadis are
overwhelming. It is read by SBDFGL
(A is obliterated here and C is want
ing) ; and in the Old Latin, Vulgate,
and Armenian Versions. On the other

hand iv KoXaaaats is read by KP. 17.
37. 47, and among the versions by the
Memphitic and the Philoxenian Syriac
(-floCUtondACXn, though the marg.
gives koAccaic). In the Peshito also
the present reading represents KoXoo--
o-ofs, but as the vowel was not express
ed originally and depends on the later
pointing, its authority can hardly be
quoted. The Thebaic is wanting here.
In the heading of the epistle how
ever there is considerably more au
thority for the form in a. KoXaaaaeis
is the reading of AB* KP . 37 (KoXa-
aaeis) . 47. C is wanting here, but has
KoXaaaaeis in the subscription. On
the other hand KoXoaaaeis (or K0X00--
aais) appears in KB1 (according to
Tregelles, but Bs Tisch.; see his introd.
p. xxxxviii) DFG (but G has left Ko-
Xaaaaets in the heading of one page,
and KoXooffaeis in another) L. 17 (Ko-
Xoo-a«s), in the Latin Version, and in
the margin of the Philoxenian Syriao.
The readings of both Peshito and
Philoxenian (text) here depend on the
vocalisation; and those of other ver
sions are not recorded. In the sub
scription the preponderance of au
thority is even more favourable to
KoXaaaaeis. Taking into account the obvious
tendency which there would be in
scribes to make the title irpbs KoXoa
aaeis or irpbs KoXaaaaeis conform to
the opening iv KoXoaadis or iv KoXaa-
aais, as shown in G, we seem to
arrive at the conclusion that, while iv
KoXoaadis was indisputably the original
reading in the opening, irpbs KoXoir-
aaeis was probably the earlier reading
in the title. If so, the title must have

COL.

i8

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Their
pohticalrelations.

traced, this designation is not persistent1. Thus Laodicea is
sometimes assigned to Caria, more rarely to Lydia 2; and again,
Hierapolis is described as half Lydian, half Phrygian8. On
the other hand I have not observed that Colossae is ever re
garded as other than Phrygian4, partly perhaps because the
notices relating to it belong to an earlier date when these
several names denoted political as well as ethnological divi
sions, and their limits were definitely marked in consequence,
but chiefly because it lies some miles to the east of the other
cities, and therefore farther from the doubtful border land.
Phrygia however ceased to have any political significance,
when this country came under the dominion of the Romans.
Politically speaking, the three cities with the rest of the

been added at a somewhat later date ;
which is not improbable.
Connected with this question is the
variation in the adjectival form, -ijvbs
or -aeis. Parallels to this double ter
mination occur in other words ; e. g.
AoKipijvbs, AoKipeis; AaoSixijvbs, Acto-
Stxeis ; ^ixaijvbs, 'Sixaeis ; EayaXaaorj-
vbs, 'ZayaXaaaeis, etc. The coins, while
they universally exhibit the form in u,
are equally persistent in the termina
tion -ijvbs, KOAOCCHNGON ; and it is
curious that to the form KoXoaaijvol
in Strabo xii. 8 § 16 (p. 578) there is
a various reading KoXa<r<raers. Thus,
though there is no necessary con
nexion between the two, the termina
tion -ijvbs seems to go with the o form,
and the termination -aeis with the a
form. For the above reasons I have written
confidently iv KoXoaadis in the text,
and with more hesitation irpbs KoXaa
aaeis in the superscription.
1 Strabo, xiii 4. 12 (p. 628) t4 8'
iffis iirl rd vbria piprq rots tottois roirois
ipirXoxds e%ei M^X/" *Vo» rov TaOpox,
uare Kal rd $pvyia xal rd Kapixd xal
t4 AvSia xal (ti rd tuv Mvauv SvaSid-
xptra etvai irapairiirTovTa els SKXijXa'

els Si T-tjv avyxvaiv ravrrpi oi pixpa
avXXapfidvei rb rois 'Pupalovs pi) xard
ipvXa SieXeiv airovs x.t.X.
2 To Phrygia, Strabo xii. 8. 13 (p.
576), Polyb. v. 57, and so generally;
to Caria, Orac. Sibyll. iii. 472 KapCov
dyXabv &arv, Ptol. v. 2, Philostr. Vit.
Soph. i. 25 (though in the context
Philostratus adds that at one time tj
$pvyl<} (werdTTtiTa) ; to Lydia, Steph.
Byz. s. v. On the coins the city is
sometimes represented as seated be
tween two female figures (bpYPA and
KApiA; Eckhel m. p. 160, comp.
Mionnet rv. p. 329. From its situation
on the confines of the three countries
Laodicea seems to have obtained the
surname Trimitaria or Trimetaria, by
which it is sometimes designated in
later times : see below, and comp.
Wesseling, Itin. p. 665.
3 Steph. Byz. s. v. says perat)b $pv
ylas xai AvSlas iroXis. But generally
Hierapolis is assigned to Phrygia : e. g.
Ptol. v. 2, Vitruv. viii. 3 § 10.
4 ColossaB is assigned to Phrygia in
Herod, vii. 30, Xen. Anab. i. 2. 6,
Strabo xii. 8. 13, Diod. xiv. 80, Plin.
N. H. v. 32 § 41, Polyaen. Strat. vii,
16. 1.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 19
Cibyratic union belonged at this time to Asia, the procon
sular province1. As an Asiatic Church accordingly Laodicea
is addressed in the Apocalyptic letter. To this province they
had been assigned in the first instance ; then they were handed
over to Cilicia2; afterwards they were transferred and retrans-
ferred from the one to the other ; till finally, before the Chris
tian era, they became a permanent part of Asia, their original
province. Here they remained, until the close of the third
century, when a new distribution of the Roman empire was
made, and the province of Phrygia Prima, afterwards called
Pacatiana, was created with Laodicea as its capital8.
The Epistle to the Colossians supposes a powerful Jewish important
colony in Laodicea and the neighbourhood. We are not how- settlement
ever left to draw this inference from the epistle alone, but the ^^
fact is established by ample independent testimony. When, hood.
with the insolent licence characteristic of Oriental kings, An
tiochus the Great transplanted two thousand Jewish families
from Babylonia and Mesopotamia into Lydia and Phrygia 4, Colony of
we can hardly doubt that among the principal stations of these the Great.
new colonists would be the two most thriving cities of Phrygia,
which were also the two most important settlements of the
Syrian kings, Apamea and Laodicea, the one founded by
his grandfather Antiochus the First, the other by his father
Antiochus the Second. If the commercial importance of Apa
mea at this time was greater (for somewhat later it was reck
oned second only to Ephesus among the cities of Asia Minor
1 After the year e. 0. 49 they seem sense, as applying to the Roman pro-
to have been permanently attached to vince.
'Asia': before that time they are 2 Cic. ad Fam. xiii. 67 'ex pro-
bandied about between Asia and Ci- vincia mea Ciliciensi, cui scis rpeis
licia. These alternations are traced by Siotxrjaeis Asiaticas [i. e. Cibyraticam,
Bergmann de Asia provincia (Berlin, Apamensem, Synnadensem] attributas
1846) and in Philologus 11. 4 (1847) fuisse'; ad Att. v. 21 'mea expectatio
p. 64isq. See Marquardt Rom. Staats- Asia? nostrarum dioecesium' and 'in
verivalt. 1. p. 176 sq. Laodicea is hac mea Asia.' See also above, p. 7,
assigned to ' Asia ' in Boeckh Corp. notes 2, 3.
Inscr. 6512, 6541, 6626. 3 Hierocles Synecd. p. 664 sq. (Wes.
Trie name 'Asia' will be used sei.): see Marquardt l.c. p. 190.
throughout this chapter in its political 4 Joseph. Antiq. xii. 3, 4.
2 — 2

20

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

as a centre of trade), the political rank of Laodicea stood
higher1. When mention is made of Lydia and Phrygia2,
this latter city especially is pointed out by its position, for it
stood near the frontier of the two countries. A Jewish settle
ment once established, the influx of their fellow-countrymen
¦ would be rapid and continuous. Accordingly under the Roman
domination we find them gathered here in very large numbers.
Confisca- When Flaccus the propraetor of Asia (B.C. 62.), who was afterwards
Flaccus. accused of maladministration in his province and defended by
Cicero, forbade the contributions of the Jews to the temple-
worship and the consequent exportation of money to Palestine,
he seized as contraband not less than twenty pounds weight in
gold in the single district of which Laodicea was the capital 8.
Calculated at the rate of a half-shekel for each man, this sum
represents a population of more than eleven thousand adult
freemen4: for women, children, and slaves were exempted. It
must be remembered however, that this is only the sum which

1 Strabo xii. 8. 13 (p. 576) elra
'Airdpeia ^ Kifiurbs Xeyopivij xal Aao-
Sixeia atirep elal piyiarai tuv xard Tr)i<
Qpvylav irbXeuv. Below § 15 (p. 577)
he says 'Airdpeia 6" iariv ipirbpiov piya
ttjs ISlus Xeyopivijs 'Aolas Sevrepevov
perd rijv "Eipeoov. The relative im
portance of Apamea and Laodicea two
or three generations earher than St
Paul may be inferred from the notices
in Cicero; but there is reason for
thinking that Laodicea afterwards grew
more rapidly than Apamea.
5 In Josephus 1. c. the words are rd
xard rrjv ipvylav xal AvSiav, the two
names being under the vinculum of
the one article : while immediately
afterwards Lydia is dropped and Phry
gia alone named, iripij/ai rivds ... els
ipvylav. " Cio. pro Flacc. 28 ' Sequitur auri
ilia invidia Judaici...Quum aurum Ju
daeorum nomine quotannis ex Italia et
ex omnibus provinciis Hierosolyma

exportari soleret, Flaccus sanxit edicto
ne ex Asia exportari liceret.. .multitu-
dinem Judaeorum, flagrantem non-
numquam in concionibus, pro repub-
lica coutemnere gravitatis summae
fuit.. .Apamea manifesto comprehen
sion ante pedes praetoris in foro ex-
pensum est auri pondo centum paullo
minus... Laodiceaeviginti pondo paullo
amplius.' Josephus (Antiq. xiv. 7. 2), quoting
the words of Strabo, iripijras Si MiBpi-
Sdrijs els Eu IXajSe...Td, tuv 'lovSaluv
bxraxbaia rdXavra, explains this enor
mous sum as composed of the temple-
offerings of the Jews which they sent
to Cos for safety out of the way oi
Mithridates. 4 This calculation supposes (1) That
the half-skekel weighs nogr.; (2) That
the Roman pound is 5050 gr.: (3)
That the relation of gold to silver was
at this time as 12 : 1. This last esti
mate is possibly somewhat too high.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 21
the Roman officers succeeded in detecting and confiscating ;
and that therefore the whole Jewish population would pro
bably be much larger than this partial estimate implies. The
amount seized at Apamea, the other great Phrygian centre,
was five times as large as this1. Somewhat later we have a Other
document purporting to be a decree of the Laodiceans, in which evi mc6'
they thank the Roman Consul for a measure granting to
Jews the liberty of observing their sabbaths and practising
other rites of their religion1; and though this decree is pro
bably spurious, yet it serves equally well to show that at this
time Laodicea was regarded as an important centre of the
dispersion in Asia Minor. To the same effect may be quoted
the extravagant hyperbole in the Talmud, that when on a cer
tain occasion an insurrection of the Jews broke out in Caesarea
the metropolis of Cappadocia, which brought down upon their
heads the cruel vengeance of king Sapor and led to a mas
sacre of 12,000, 'the wall of Laodicea was cloven with the
sound of the harpstrings' in the fatal and premature mer
riment of the insurgents'. This place was doubtless singled
1 The coinage of Apamea affords a stated to have rested there. Whether
striking example of Judaic influence this Apamea obtained its distinctive
at a later date. On coins struck at surname of Cibotus, the Ark or Chest,
this place in the reignB of Severus, from its physical features or from its
Macrinus, and the elder Philip, an position as the centre of taxation and
ark is represented floating on the finance for the district, or from some
waters. Within are a man and a wo- other cause, it is difficult to say. In
man : on the roof a bird is perched ; any case this surname might naturally
while in the air another bird ap- suggest to those acquainted with the
proaohes bearing an olive-branch in Old Testament a connexion with the
its claws. The ark bears the inscrip- deluge of Noah ; but the idea would
tion NOie. Outside are two standing not have been adopted in the coinage
figures, a man and a woman (ap- of the place without the pressure of
parently the same two who have been strong Jewish influences. On these
represented within the ark), with their coins see Eckhel Doctr. Num. Vet. in.
hands raised as in the attitude of p. 132 «!-, and the paper of Sir F.
prayer. The connexion of the, ark Madden in the Numismatic Chronicle
of Noah with Apamea is explained by N. S. vi. p. 173 sq. (1866), where they
a passage in one of the Sibylline are figured.
Oracles (i. 261 sq.), where the moun- 2 Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10. 21.
tain overhanging Apamea is identified s Talm. Babl. Moid Katon 26 a, quot-
with Ararat, and the ark (xifiurbs) is ed by Neubauer, La Geographic du

22 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
out, because it had a peculiar interest for the Jews, as one
of their chief settlements1. It will be remembered also, that
Phrygia is especially mentioned among those countries which
furnished their quota of worshippers at Jerusalem, and were
thus represented at the baptism of the Christian Church on
the great day of Pentecost2.
Mention has already been made of the traffic in dyed wools,
which formed the staple of commerce in the valley of the
Lycus 8. It may be inferred from other notices that this branch
of trade had a peculiar attraction for the Jews 4. If so, their
commercial instincts would constantly bring fresh recruits to a
Special colony which was already very considerable. But the neighbour-
tions°of hood held out other inducements besides this. Hierapolis, the
Hiera- gav watering place, the pleasant resort of idlers, had charms
for them, as well as Laodicea the busy commercial city. At
least such was the complaint of stricter patriots at home.
' The wines and the baths of Phrygia,' writes a Talmudist bit
terly, ' have separated the ten tribes from Israel V
Talmud p. 319, though he seems to dicea on the Lycus, to a Jewish
have misunderstood the expression source.
quoted in the text, of which he gives 2 Acts ii. 10.
the sense, ' Cette ville tremblait au 3 See p. 4.
bruit des fleches qu'on avait threes.' 4 Acts xvi. 14. Is there an allusion
It is probably this same Laodicea to this branch of trade in the message
which is meant in another Talmudical to the Church of Laodicea, Rev. iii. 17
passage, Talm. Babl. Baba Metziah oix oTSas 6Vi ai el b...yvpvbs- avpfiov-
84 a (also quoted by Neubauer, p. 311), Xeiu aoi dyopdaai ... Ipdna Xevxd tva
in which Elijah appearing to R. Ish- irepifidXij, k.t.X. ? The only other of the
mael ben R. Jose, says ' Thy father seven messages, which contains an
fled to Asia ; flee thou to iiaodicea,' allusion to the white garments, is ad-
where Asia is supposed to mean dressed to the Church of Sardis, where
Sardis. again there might be a reference to the
1 An inscription found at Rome in pdupa ZapSiavixov (Arist. Pax 11 74.
the Jewish cemetery at the Porta Por- Acharn. 112) and the (poivixlbes 7.apSia-
tuensis (Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 9916) vixal (Plato Com. in Athen. 11. p. 48 e)
runs thus; 6N0A . KITE . AMMIA . of the comic poets.
[e]lOYA6A . ATTO . AAAlKIAC. k.t.X., « Talm. Babl. Sabbath 147 b, quoted
i.e. ivBa xeirai 'Appla 'lovSala Airb by Neubauer La GSographiedu Talmud
AaoSixeias. Probably Laodicea on the p. 317: see Wiesner Schol. zum Babyl.
Lycus is meant. Perhaps also we Talm. p. 259 sq., and p. 207 sq. On
may refer another inscription (6478), the word translated 'baths,' see Rapo-
whioh mentions one Trypho from Lao- port's Erech Millin p. 113, col. i.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 23
There is no ground for supposing that, when St Paul wrote St Paul
his Epistle to the Colossians, he had ever visited the church visited the
in which he evinces so deep an interest. Whether we ex- ^tnct
amine the narrative in the Acts, or whether we gather up wrote.
the notices in the epistle itself, we find no hint that he had
ever been in this neighbourhood; but on the contrary some
expressions indirectly exclude the supposition of a visit to the
district. It is true that St Luke more than once mentions Phrygia What is
as lying on St Paul's route or as witnessing his labours. m^?Piahi
But Phrygia was a vague and comprehensive term ; nor can st Luke ?
we assume that the valley of the Lycus was intended, unless
the direction of his route or the context of the narrative dis
tinctly points to this south-western corner of Phrygia. In
neither of the two passages, where St Paul is stated to have
travelled through Phrygia, is this the case.
1. On his second missionary journey, after he has revisited 1. St Paul's
and confirmed the churches of Pisidia and Lycaonia founded phrygiaon
on his first visit, he passes through ' the Phrygian and Gaiatian *"? s.econii
country1.' I have pointed out elsewhere that this expression ary i°ur-
must be used to denote the region which might be called in
differently Phrygia or Galatia — the land which had originally
belonged to the Phrygians and had afterwards been colonised
by the Gauls ; or the parts of either country which lay in the
immediate neighbourhood of this debatable ground2. This
region lies considerably north and east of the valley of the
Lycus. Assuming that the last of the Lycaonian and Pisidian
towns at which St Paul halted was Antioch, he would not
on any probable supposition approach nearer to Colossae than
Apamea Cibotus on his way to 'the Phrygian and Galatian
country,' nor indeed need he have gone nearly so far west-

1 Acts xvi. 6 rty $pvylav xal TdXa- iii. 1 rijs Irovpalas xal TpaxuvtriSos
rixijv x&fWs *^e correct reading. For X<&Pass Acts ™i- n'Avnbxeiav rrjv Hiai-
this use of Qpvylav as an adjective Slav (the correct reading).
comp. Marki. 5 iraaa r\ lovSala x&Pas ' See Galatians, p. 18 sq., 22.
Joh. iii. 22 ets ri)v 'lovSalav yrjv, Luke

24 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
ward as this. And again on his departure from this region
he journeys by Mysia to Troas, leaving ' Asia ' on his left hand
and Bithynia on his right. Thus the notices of his route con
spire to show that his path on this occasion lay far away from
the valley of the Lycus.
2. Hisvisit 2. But if he was not brought into the neighbourhood
third mis- °f ColossaB on his second missionary journey, it is equally
sionary improbable that he visited it on his third. So far as regards
Asia Minor, he seems to have confined himself to revisiting
the churches already founded ; the new ground which he broke
was in Macedonia and Greece. Thus when we are told that
during this third journey St Paul after leaving Antioch ' passed
in order through the Galatian country and Phrygia, confirm
ing all the disciples V we can hardly doubt that ' the Galatian
country and Phrygia ' in this latter passage denotes essentially
the same region as 'the Phrygian and Galatian country' in
the former. The slight change of expression is explained by
the altered direction of his route. In the first instance his
course, as determined by its extreme limits — Antioch in Pisidia
its starting-point, and Alexandria Troas its termination —
would be northward for the first part of the way, and thus
would lie on the border land of Phrygia and Galatia ; whereas
on this second occasion, when he was travelling from Antioch
in Syria to Ephesus, its direction would be generally from
east to west, and the more strictly Galatian district would
be traversed before the Phrygian. If we suppose him to leave
Galatia at Pessinus on its western border, he would pass
along the great highway — formerly a Persian and at this
time a Roman road — by Synnada and Sardis to Ephesus,
traversing the heart of Phrygia, but following the valleys of
the Hermus and Cayster, and separated from the Maeander
and Lycus by the high mountain ranges which bound these
latter to the north 2.
1 Acts xviii. 23. St Paul and St Luke is not the country
3 M. Renan (Saint Paul pp. 51 sq., properly so called, but that they, are
126, 313) maintains that the Galatia of speaking of the Churches of Pisidian

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

25

Thus St Luke's narrative seems to exclude any visit of Tlie infer-
6iicd from
the Apostle to the Churches of the Lycus before his first

Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe,
whioh lay within the Roman province of
Galatia. This interpretation of Gala
tia necessarily affects his view of St
Paul's routes (pp. 1 26 sq., 33 1 sq. ) ; and
he supposes the Apostle on his third
missionary journey to have passed
through the valley of the Lyons, with
out however remaining to preaoh the
Gospel there (pp. 331 sq., 356 sq., 362).
As Antioch in Pisidia would on this
hypothesis be the farthest church in
' Galatia and Phrygia ' whioh St Paul
visited, his direct route from that city
to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 23, xix. 1)
would naturally lie by this valley. I
have already (Galatians pp. 18 sq., 22)
stated the serious objections to which
this interpretation of ' Galatia ' is open,
and (if I mistake not) have answered
most of M. Renan's arguments by an
ticipation. But, as this interpretation
nearly affects an important point in
the history of St Paul's dealings with
the Colossians, it is necessary to sub
ject it to a closer examination.
Without stopping to enquire whe
ther this view is reconcilable with St
Paul's assertion (Col. ii. 1) that these
churches in the Lycus valley ' had not
seen his face in the flesh,' it will ap
pear (I think) that M. Renan's argu
ments are in some cases untenable and
in others may be turned against him
self. The three heads under which
they may be conveniently considered
are: (i) The use of the name 'Galatia';
(ii) The itinerary of St Paul's travels ;
(iii) The historical notices in the Epis
tle to the Galatians.
(i) On the first point, M. Renan
states that St Paul was in the habit of
using the official name for each dis
trict, and therefore called the country
which extends from Antioch in Pisidia

to Derbe 'Galatia,' supporting this
view by the Apostle's use of Asia,
Macedonia, and Achaia (p. 51). The
answer is that the names of these
elder provinoes had very generally su
perseded the local names, but this was
not the case with the other districts of
Asia Minor where the provinces had
been formed at a comparatively late
date. The usage of St Luke is a
good criterion. He also speaks of
Asia, Macedonia, and Achaia; but at
the same time his narrative abounds
in historical or ethnographical names
which have no official import ; e. g.
Lycaonia, Mysia, Pamphylia, Pisidia,
Phrygia. Where we have no evidence,
it is reasonable to assume that St
Paul's usage was conformable to St
Luke's. And again, if we consider
St Luke's account alone, how insu
perable are the difficulties wliich this
view of Galatia creates. The part of
Asia Minor, with whioh we are imme
diately concerned, was comprised offi
cially in the provinces of Asia and
Galatia. On M. Renan's showing, St
Luke, after calling Antioch a city of
Pisidia (xiii. 14) and Lystra and Derbe
cities of Lycaonia (xiv. 6), treats all
the three, together with the interme
diate Iconium, as belonging to Galatia
(xvi. 6, xviii. 23). He explains the in
consistency by saying that in the former
case the narrative proceeds in detail,
in the latter in masses. But if so,
why should he combine a historical
and ethnological name Phrygia with
an official name Galatia in the same
breath, when the two are different in
kind and cannot be mutually exclusive ?
' Galatia and Asia,' would be intelligi
ble on this supposition, but not 'Ga
latia and Phrygia.' Moreover the very
form of the expression in xvi. 6, ' the

26

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

St Luke's Roman captivity. And this inference is confirmed by St Paul's
nnrrra.t.Tsjn x d

narrative

own language to the Colossians.

Phrygian and Galatian country' (ac
cording to the correct reading which
M. Renan neglects), appears in its stu
died vagueness to exclude the idea that
St Luke means the province of Gala
tia, whose boundaries were precisely
marked. And even granting that the
Christian communities of Lycaonia
and Pisidia could by a straining of
language be called Churches of Gala
tia, is it possible that St Paul would
address them personally as ' ye fool
ish Galatians' (Gal. hi. i)? Such lan
guage would be no more appropriate
than if a modern preacher in a fami
liar address were to appeal to the
Poles of Warsaw as 'ye Russians,' or
the Hungarians of Pesth as 'ye Aus-
trians,' or the Irish of Cork as 'ye
Englishmen.' (ii) In the itinerary of St Paul
several points require consideration.
(a) M. Renan lays stress on the fact
that in Acts xvi. 6, xviii. 23, the order
in which the names of Phrygia and
Galatia occur is inverted. I seem to
myself to have explained this satisfac
torily in the text. He appears to be
unaware of the correct reading in xvi.
6, T7JP &pvylay Kal TaXariKi)v x&Pav
(see Galatians p. 22), though it has an
important bearing on St Paul's proba
ble route. (5) He states that Troas
was St Paul's aim (Tobjectif de Saint
Paul') in the one case (xvi. 6), and
Ephesus in the other (xviii. 23): con
sequently he argues that Galatia, pro
perly so called, is inconceivable, as
there was no reason why he should
have made 'this strange detour to
wards the north.' The answer is that
Troas was not his 'objectif ' in the
first instance, nor Ephesus in the
second. On the first occasion St Luke
states that the Apostle set out on his

journey with quite different intentions,
but that after he had got well to the
north of Asia Minor he was driven by a
series of divine intimations to proceed
first to Troas and thence to cross over
into Europe (see Philippians p. 48).
This narrative seems to me to imply
that he starts for his further travels
from some point in the western part
of Galatia proper. When he comes to
the borders of Mysia, he designs bear
ing to the left and preaching in Asia ;
but a divine voice forbids him. He
then purposes diverging to the right
and delivering his message in Bithynia ;
but the same unseen power checks him
again. Thus he is driven forward, and
passes by Mysia to the coast at Troas
(Acts xvi. 6—8). Here all is plain.
But if we suppose bim to start, not from
some town in Galatia proper such as
Pessinus, but from Antioch in Pisidia,
why should Bithynia, which would be
far out of the way, be mentioned at
all 1 On the second occasion, St Paul's
primary object is to revisit the Gala
tian Churches which he had planted
on the former journey (xviii. 23), and
it is not till after he has fulfilled this
intention that he goes to Ephesus.
(c) M. Renan also calls attention to
the difficulty of traversing 'the central
steppe ' of Asia Minor. ' There was
probably,' he says, 'at this epoch no
route from Iconium to Ancyra,' and in
justification of this statement he re
fers to Perrot, de Gal. Rom. prov. p.
102, 103. Even so, there were regular
roads from either Iconium or Antioch
to Pessinus ; and this route would serve
equally well. Moreoverthe Apostle, who
was accustomed to 'perils of rivers,
perils of robbers, perils in the wilder
ness ' (2 Cor. xi. 26), and who preferred
walking from Troas to Assos (Aots xx.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

27

He represents his knowledge of their continued progress, borne om
and even of their first initiation, in the truths of the Gospel, Paul's own
as derived from the report of others. He describes himself anguage

13) while his companions sailed, would
not be deterred by any rough or un
frequented paths. But the faots ad
duced by Perrot do not lend them
selves to any such inference, nor does
he himself draw it. He oites an in
scription of the year A.D. 82 whioh
speaks of A. Caesennius Gallus, the
legate of Domitian, as a great road-
maker throughout the Eastern pro
vinces of Asia Minor, and he suggests
that the existing remains of a road be
tween Ancyra and Iconium may be
part of this governor's work. Even if
the suggestion be adopted, it is highly
improbable that no road should have
existed previously, when we consider
the comparative facility of construct
ing a way along this line of country
(Perrot p. 103) and the importance of
such a direct route, (d) ' In the con
ception of the author of the Acts,'
writes M. Renan, 'the two journeys
across Asia Minor are journeys of con
firmation and not of conversion (Acts
xv. 36, 41, xvi. 5, 6, xviii. 23).' This
statement seems to me to be only
partially true. In both cases St Paul
begins his tour by confbming churches
already established, but in both he
advances beyond this and breaks new
ground. In the former he starts with
the existing churches of Lycaonia and
Pisidia and extends his labours to
Galatia: in the latter he starts with
the then existing churches of Galatia,
and carries the Gospel into Macedonia
and Achaia. This, so far as I can dis
cover, was his general rule.
(iii) The notices in the Galatian
Epistles, which appear to M. Renan to
favour his view, are these: (a) St Paul
appears to have 'had intimate rela
tions with the Galatian Church, at

least as intimate as with the Corinth
ians and Thessalonians,' whereas St
Luke disposes of the Apostle's preaching
in Galatia very summarily, unless the
communities of Lycaonia and Pisidia
be included. But the Galatian Epis
tle by no means evinces the same
close and varied personal relations
whioh we find in the letters to these
other churches, more especially to the
Corinthians. And again ; St Luke's
history is more or less fragmentary.
Whole years are sometimes dismissed
in a few verses. The stay in Arabia
which made so deep an impression on
St Paul himself is not even mention
ed : the three months' sojourn in
Greece, though doubtless full of stir
ring events, only occupies a single
verse in the narrative (Acts xx. 3).
St Luke appears to have joined St
Paul after his visit to Galatia (xvi. 10);
and there is no reason why he should
have dwelt on incidents with which he
had no direct acquaintance, (b) M.
Renan sees in the presence of emis
saries from Jerusalem in the Galatian
Churches an indication that Galatia
proper is not meant. ' It is improba
ble that they would have made such a
journey.' But why so? There were
important Jewish settlements in Gala
tia proper (Galatians p. 9sq.); there
was a good road through Syria and
Cilicia to Ancyra (Itin.Anton. p. 205 sq.,
Itin. Hierosol. p. 575 sq. ed. Wessel.) ;
and if we find such emissaries as far
away from Jerusalem as Corinth (2 Cor.
xi. 13, etc.), there is at least no impro
bability that they should have reached
Galatia. (c) Lastly; M. Renan thinks
that the mention of Barnabas (Gal. ii.
1, 9, 13) implies that he was person
ally known to the churches addressed,

28

THE OHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

as hearing of their faith in Christ and their love to the saints1.
He recals the day when he first heard of their Christian pro-
Silence of fession and zeal2. Though opportunities occur again and again
where he would naturally have referred to his direct personal
relations with them, if he had been their evangelist, he abstains
from any such reference. He speaks of their being instructed
in the Gospel, of his own preaching the Gospel, several times
in the course of the letter, but he never places the two in
any direct connexion, though the one reference stands in the
immediate neighbourhood of the other8. Moreover, if he had
actually visited Colossae, it must appear strange that he should
not once allude to any incident occurring during his sojourn
there, for this epistle would then be the single exception to
his ordinary practice. And lastly ; in one passage at least, if
interpreted in its natural sense, he declares that the Colossians
were personally unknown to him : ' I would have you know,'
he writes, ' how great a conflict I have for you and them that
are in Laodicea and as many as have not seen my face in the
flesh4.'

and therefore points to Lycaonia and
Pisidia. But are we to infer on the
same grounds that he was personally
known to the Corinthians (i Cor. ix. 6),
and to the Colossians (Col. iv. io)? In
fact the name of Barnabas, as a fa
mous Apostle and an older disciple even
than St Paul himself, would not fail to
be well known in all the churches.
On the other hand one or two notices
in the Galatian Epistle present serious
obstacles to M. Renan's view. What
are we to say for instance to St Paul's
statement, that he preached the Gos
pel in Galatia Si' daBiveiav rijs aapxds
(iv. 1 3), i. e. because he was detained by
sickness (see Galatians pp. 23 sq., 172),
whereas his journey to Lycaonia and
Pisidia is distinctly planned with a
view to missionary work ? Why again
is there no mention of Timothy, who
was much in St Paul's company about

this time, and who on this showing was
himself a Galatian? Some mention
would seem to be especially suggested
where St Paul is justifying his conduct
respecting the attempt to compel Titus
to be circumcised.
1 Col. i. 4.
s i. 9 Sid tovto xal ijpeis, dip' ijs ypi
pas tjxoiaapev, ov irav6pe8a k.t.X. This
corresponds to ver. 6 xaBiis xal iv ipuv,
dip' ?Js ijpipas fixovaare xal iiriyvure
rijv x&Plv T°i ^eov iv dXijdela. The
day when they first heard the preach
ing of the Gospel, and the day when
he first heard the tidings of this fact,
are set against each other.
3 e.g. i. s— 8, 21—23, 25, 28, 29.
ii. 5, 6.
4 ii. 1 BiXu ydp ipas elSivai IjXIkov
dyuva (xu iirip ipuv xal ruv iv AaoSi-
xelq. xal Saoi ovx tupaxav to irpbauirov
pov iv aapKi, tva irapaxXrjBuaiv al /cap-

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

29

But, if he was not directly their evangelist, yet to him Epaphraswfljfl thtri
they were indirectly indebted for their knowledge of the truth, evangelist
Epaphras had been his delegate to them, his representative ^trick
in Christ. By Epaphras they had been converted to the Gos
pel. This is the evident meaning of a passage in the open
ing of the epistle, which has been much obscured by misreading
and mistranslation, and which may be paraphrased thus : ' The
Gospel, which has spread and borne fruit throughout the rest
of the world, has been equally successful among yourselves.
This fertile growth has been manifested in you from the first
day when the message of God's grace was preached to you,
and accepted by you — preached not as now with adulterations
by these false teachers, but in its genuine simplicity by Epa
phras our beloved fellowservant ; he has been a faithful minister
of Christ and a faithful representative of us, and from him we
have received tidings of your love in the Spirit1.'

Slai avruv, ovpfiifiaaBevTes x.t.X. The
question of interpretation is whether
the people of Colossae and Laodicea
belong to the same category with the
iaoi, or not. The latter view is taken
by one or two ancient interpreters
(e.g. Theodoret in his introduction to
the epistle), and has been adopted by
several modern critics. Yet it is op
posed alike to grammatical and logical
considerations. (1) The grammatical
form is unfavourable; for the preposi
tion virip is not repeated, so that all
the persons mentioned are included
under a vinculum. (2) No adequate
sense can be extracted from the pas
sage, so interpreted. For in this case
what is the drift of the enumeration?
If intended to be exhaustive, it does
not fulfil the purpose ; for nothing is
said of others whom he had seen be
sides the Colossians and Laodiceans.
It not intended to be exhaustive, it is
meaningless; for there is no reason
why the Colossians and Laodiceans

especially should be set off against
those whom he had not seen, or in
deed why in this connexion those whom
he had not seen should be mentioned
at all. The whole context shows that
the Apostle is dwelling on his spiritual
communion with and interest in those
with whom he has had no personal com
munications. St Jerome (Ep. cxxx. ad
Demetr. § 2) has rightly caught the
spirit of the passage; 'Ignoti ad ig-
notam scribimus, dumtaxat juxta fa-
ciem oorporalem. Alioquin interior
homo pulcre sibi cognitus est ilia
notitia qua et Paulus apostolus Co-
lossenses multosque credentium no
verat quos ante non viderat.' For
parallels to this use of xal Saoi, see
the note on the passage.
1 i. 6 iv iravrl tQ Koapu iariv Kap-
irotpopovpevov xal avi-avbpevov, xaBus xal
iv vpiv, dip' ijs ijpipas t)xovaare xal
iiriyvure ri)v x&piv r°v &eov iv dXrjBelq.,
xaBiis ipdBere dirb ''Eiraippd rov dyairrj-
rov avvSovXov ijpuv, bs iariv iriarbs

54-57

30 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
St Paul's How or when the conversion of the Colossians took place,
r 6 sid. c ti c 6
atEphesus we have no direct information. Yet it can hardly be wrong
mental in *° connect the event with St Paul's long sojourn at Ephesus.
their con- Here he remained preaching for three whole years. It is
version. . . . . .
possible indeed that during this period he paid short visits to
^ D- other neighbouring cities of Asia : but if so, the notices in the
Acts oblige us to suppose these interruptions to his residence
in Ephesus to have been slight and infrequent1. Yet, though
the Apostle himself was stationary in the capital, the Apostle's
influence and teaching spread far beyond the limits of the city
and its immediate neighbourhood. It was hardly an exag
geration when Demetrius declared that 'almost throughout
all Asia this Paul had persuaded and turned away much
people2.' The sacred historian himself uses equally strong
language in describing the effects of the Apostle's preaching;
'All they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord,
both Jews and Greeks8.' In accordance with these notices
the Apostle himself in an epistle written during this sojourn
sends salutations to Corinth, not from the Church of Ephesus
specially, as might have been anticipated, but from the
virip ijpuv Sidxovos tov Xpiarov, b xal ko.Ows [xal] ipdBere dirb 'l&iratppa, trans-
SrjXuaas rjpiv rrjv ipuv dydirijv iv irvev- lated in our English Version by the
pan. ambiguous expression, ' as ye also
The various readings whioh obscure learned of Epaphras.' The true force
the meaning are these, (i) The re- of the words is, ' according as ye were
ceived text for KaSus ipdBere has Ka$us taught by Epaphras,' being an ex-
xal ipdBere. With this reading the planation of iv dXijBela. See the notes
passage suggests that the instructions on trie passage.
of Epaphras were superadded to, and 1 See especially xx. 18 ' Ye know,
so distinct from, the original evangeli- from the first day when I set foot on
zation of Colossas ; whereas the correct Asia, how I was with you all the time,'
text identifies them, (ii) Eor vvip ijpuv and ver. 31 'For tliree years night and
the received reading is iirip ipuv. day I ceased not warning every one
Thus the fact that St Paul did not with tears.' As it seems necessary to
preach at Colossae in person, but allow for a brief visit to Corinth (2 Cor.
through his representative, is obliterat- xii- i4> ^iii- 1) during this period, other
ed. In both cases the authority for interruptions of long duration should
the readings which I have adopted not be postulated.
against the received text is over- 2 Acts xix. 26.
whelming. 3 Aots xix- io-
The obscurity of rendering is in

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 31
'Churches of Asia' generally1. St Luke, it should be ob
served, ascribes this dissemination of the Gospel, not to jour
neys undertaken by the Apostle, but to his preaching at Ephe
sus itself2. Thither, as to the metropolis of Western Asia,
would flock crowds from all the towns and villages far and near.
Thence they would carry away, each to his own neighbour
hood, the spiritual treasure which they had so unexpectedly
found. Among the places thus represented at the Asiatic metro- Relations
polis would doubtless be the cities lying in the valley of the cities'with
Lycus. The relations between these places and Ephesus ap- Ephesus.
pear to have been unusually intimate. The Concord of the
Laodiceans and Ephesians, the Concord of the Hierapolitans
and Ephesians, are repeatedly commemorated on medals struck
for the purpose3. Thus the Colossians, Epaphras and Phile- The work
mon, the latter with his household4, and perhaps also the mon and
Laodicean Nymphas6, would fall in with the Apostle of the ymp as'
Gentiles and hear from his lips the first tidings of a heavenly
life. But, whatever service may have been rendered by Philemon but espeoi-
at Colossae, or by Nymphas at Laodicea, it was to Epaphras phras.
especially that all the tliree cities were indebted for their
knowledge of the GospeL Though he was a Colossian by birth,
the fervency of his prayers and the energy of his love ane re
presented as extending equally to Laodicea and Hierapolis6.
It is obvious that he looked upon himself as responsible for
the spiritual well-being of all alike.
1 i Cor. xvi. 19 daird£ovrai vpds al p. 324, 325, 331, 332, Suppl. vn. p.
ixxXijalai tijs 'Aalas. In accordance 583, 586, 589; lepATTOAeiTOON . 6(be-
withthesefactsitshouldbenoticedthat CICON . OMONOI&, Eckhel in. p. 155,
St Paul himself alluding to this period 157, Mionnet iv. p. 299, 300, 307,
speaks of 'Asia,' as the scene of his Suppl. vu. p. 569, 571, 572, 574, 575.
ministry (2 Cor. i. 8, Rom. xvi. 5). See Steiger Kolosser p. 50, and comp.
2 Acts xix. 10 ' disputing daily in Krause Givitat. Neocor. § 20.
the School of Tyrannus ; and this con- • Philem. 1, 2, 19.
tinued for two years, so that all they 6 Col. iv. 15. On the question
which dwelt in Asia, etc' whether the name is Nymphas or
8 AAOAIKECON . 6(}>eciOON . OMO- Nympha, see the notes there.
nolo., Eckhel in. p. 165, Mionnet iv. 6 iv. 12, 13.

32 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
St Paul We pass over a period of five or six years. St Paul's
strangerto nrst captivity in Rome is now drawing to a close. During
triot^8* tnis interval ne has not once visited the valley of the Lycus.
He has, it is true, skirted the coast and called at Miletus,
which lies near the mouth of the Maeander ; but, though the
elders of Ephesus were summoned to meet him there1, no
mention is made of any representatives from these more dis
tant towns.
His I have elsewhere described the Apostle's circumstances
ment aT" ^hiring ms residence in Rome, so far as they are known to
Rome. us2_ it is sufficient to say here, that though he is still a
prisoner, friends new and old minister freely to his wants.
Meanwhile the alienation of the Judaic Christians is complete.
Three only, remaining faithful to him, are commemorated as
honourable exceptions in the general desertion8.
Colossae We have seen that Colossae was an unimportant place, and
before his *na* ^ ^a0- no direct personal claims on the Apostle. We
notice by might therefore feel surprise that, thus doubly disqualified,
dents. it should nevertheless attract his special attention at a critical
moment, when severe personal trials were superadded to ' the
care of all the churches.' But two circumstances, the one
affecting his public duties, the other private and personal,
happening at this time, conspired to bring Colossae prominently
before his notice.
i. The i. He had received a visit from Epaphras. The dangerous
Epaphbas. condition of the Colossian and neighbouring churches had
filled the mind of their evangelist with alarm. A strange
form of heresy had broken out in these brotherhoods — a com
bination of Judaic formalism with Oriental mystic specula
tion — and was already spreading rapidly. His distress was
extreme. He gratefully acknowledged and reported their faith
in Christ and their works of love4. But this only quickened
his anxiety. He had ' much toil for them ' ; he was ' ever

1 Acts xx. 16, 17. 8 Col. iv. 10, 11. See Philippiam
a See Philippians p. 6 sq. p. 17 sq. * i. 4l 8.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 33
wrestling in his prayers on their behalf,' that they might
stand fast and not abandon the simplicity of their earlier faith '.
He came to Rome, we may suppose, for the express purpose
of laying this state of things before the Apostle and seeking his
counsel and assistance.
2. But at the time when Epaphras paid this visit, St Paul a> onesi-
was also in communication with another Colossian, who had M.Y.sa.fu"gitive va
visited Rome under very different circumstances. Onesimus, Rome.
the runaway slave, had sought the metropolis, the common
sink of all nations9, probably as a convenient hiding place,
where he might escape detection among its crowds and make
a livelihood as best he could. Here, perhaps accidentally,
perhaps through the intervention of Epaphras, he fell in with
his master's old friend. The Apostle interested himself in his
case, instructed him in the Gospel, and transformed him from a
good-for-nothing slave 8 into a ' faithful and beloved brother V
This combination of circumstances called the Apostle's at- Tt[e ._
tention to the Churches of the Lycus, and more especially to stle d<>-
i • i i sp™«cjiss
Colossae. His letters, which had been found ' weighty and three let-
powerful ' in other cases, might not be unavailing now ; and taneously."
in this hope he took up his pen. Three epistles were written
and despatched at the same time to this district.
i. He addresses a special letter to the Colossians, written i. The
in the joint names of himself and Timothy, warning them 10 IHE
against the errors of the false teachers. He gratefully ac- c°t°as'
knowledges the report which he has received of their love
and zeal8. He assures them of the conflict which agitates
him on their behalf6. He warns them to be on their guard
against the delusive logic of enticing words, against the vain
deceit of a false philosophy 7. The purity of their Christianity The theo-
ii i i_j.t.- logioal and
is endangered by two errors, recommended to them by their the practi-
heretical leaders — the one theological, the other practical — £hVcolos°- sians.
1 iv. 12, 13. 4 Col. iv. 9; comp. Philem. 16.
2 Tac. Ann. xv. 44. 6 i. 3— 9« 2I B9-
3 Philem. 11 rbv Trort aoi axprjarov 6 ii. 1 sq.
x.t.X. 7 "¦ 4. 8. 18.
COL. 3

34 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
but both alike springing from the same source, the conception
of matter as the origin and abode of evil. Thus, regarding
God and matter as directly antagonistic and therefore apart
from and having no communication with each other, they sought
to explain the creation and government of the world by inter
posing a series of intermediate beings, emanations or angels,
to whom accordingly they offered worship. At the same time,
since they held that evil resided, not in the rebellious spirit of
man, but in the innate properties of matter, they sought to
overcome it by a rigid ascetic discipline, which failed after all
The pro- to touch the springs of action. As both errors flowed from the
per correc- same source, they must be corrected by the application of the
both lies same remedy, the Christ of the Gospel. In the Person of Christ,
in the , , . .
Christ of the one mediator between heaven and earth, is the true solution
the Gos- of the theoiogicai difficulty. Through the Life in Christ, the
purification of the heart through faith and love, is the effectual
triumph over moral evil1. St Paul therefore prescribes to
the Colossians the true teaching of the Gospel, as the best anti
dote to the twofold danger which threatens at once their theo-
References logical creed and their moral principles ; while at the same
phras? time he enforces his lesson by the claims of personal affection,
appealing to the devotion of their evangelist Epaphras on
their behalf2.
Of Epaphras himself we know nothing beyond the few but
significant notices which connect him with Colossae 8. He did
not return to Colossae as the bearer of the letter, but remained
1 i. i — 20, ii. 9, iii. 4. The two note 4. The later tradition, which
threads are closely interwoven in St makes him bishop of Colossaa, is doubt-
Paul's refutation, as these references less an inference from St Paul's lan-
will show. The connexion of the two guage and has no independent value.
errors, as arising from the same false The further statement of the martyr-
principle, will be considered more in ologies, that he suffered martyrdom
detail in the next ohapter. for his flock, can hardly be held to
8 i. 7, iv. 12. deserve any higher credit. His day is
8 For the reasons why Epaphras the 19th of July in the Western
cannot be identified with Epaphrodi- Calendar. His body is said to lie in
tus, who is mentioned in the Phi- the Church of S. Maria Maggiore at
lippian letter, see Philippians p. 61, Rome.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 35
behind with St Paul1. As St Paul in a contemporary epistle
designates him his fellow-prisoner*, it may be inferred that
his zeal and affection had involved him in the Apostle's cap
tivity, and that his continuance in Rome was enforced. But
however this may be, the letter was placed in the hands of
Tychicus, a native of proconsular Asia, probably of Ephesus ", Tychicus
, i>i ¦ i •¦ i • !¦¦ and Onesi-
who was entrusted with a wider mission at this time, and in its mus ao-
discharge would be obliged to visit the valley of the Lycus 4. ^m^™Jr
At the same time he was accompanied by Onesimus, whom the
Colossians had only known hitherto as a worthless slave, but
who now returns to them with the stamp of the Apostle's warm
approval. St Paul says very little about himself, because
Tychicus and Onesimus would be able by word of mouth to
communicate all information to the Colossians 6. But he sends The salu-
one or two salutations wliich deserve a few words of explana
tion. Epaphras of course greets his fellow-townsmen and
children in the faith. Other names are those of Aristarchus
the Thessalonian, who had been with the Apostle at Ephesus a
and may possibly have formed some personal connexion with
the Colossians at that time : Mark, against whom apparently
the Apostle fears that a prejudice may be entertained (perhaps
the fact of his earlier desertion, and of St Paul's dissatisfaction
in consequence r, may have been widely known), and for whom
therefore he asks a favourable reception at his approaching
visit to Colossae, according to instructions which they had already
received; and Jesus the Just, of whose relations with the
i Col. iv. 12. prisoner at this time, and have been
2 Philem. 23 6 avvcuxpdXurbs pov. removed with his parents to Colosssa.
The word may possibly have a meta- It is not quite clear whether this
phorical sense (see Philippians p. 11); statement respecting Epaphras is part
but the literal meaning is more proba- of the tradition, or Jerome's own con-
ble. St Jerome on Philem. 23 (vn. p. jecture appended to it.
762) gives the story that St Paul's ! Aots xx. 4, 2 Tim. iv. 12.
parents were natives of Giscala and, * See below, p. 37.
when the Romans invaded and wasted 6 Col. iv. 7—9.
Judaaa, were banished thenoe with their « Acts xix. 29.
son to Tarsus. He adds that Epaphras 7 Aots xiii. 13, xv. 37— 39.
may have been St Paul's fellow-
3—2

36 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
Colossians we know nothing, and whose only claim to a men
tion may have been his singular fidelity to the Apostle at a
critical juncture. Salutations moreover are added from Luke
and from Demas; and here again their close companionship
with the Apostle is, so far as we know, the sole cause of their
names appearing \
Charge re- Lastly, the Laodiceans were closely connected with the
Laodicea Colossians by local and spiritual ties. To the Church of Lao
dicea therefore, and to the household of one Nymphas who
was a prominent member of it, he sends greeting. At the
same time he directs them to interchange letters with the
Laodiceans; for to Laodicea also he had written. And he
closes his salutations with a message to Archippus, a resident
either at Colossae or at Laodicea (for on this point we are left
to conjecture), who held some important office in the Church,
and respecting whose zeal he seems to have entertained a
misgiving 2.
2 The 2> -^u*> wm^e providing for the spiritual welfare of the
Letter to whole Colossian Church, he did not forget the temporal inter-
Philemon. ests of its humblest member. Having attended to the soli
citations of the evangelist Epaphras, he now addressed himself to
the troubles of the runaway slave Onesimus. The mission of
Tychicus to Colossae was a favourable opportunity of restoring
him to Philemon ; for Tychicus, well known as the Apostle's
friend and fellow-labourer, might throw the shield of his pro
tection over him and avert the worst consequences of Phile
mon's anger. But, not content with this measure of precaution,
the Apostle himself writes to Philemon on the offender's be
half, recommending him as a changed man s, and claiming for
giveness for him as a return due from Philemon to himself as to
his spiritual father 4.
The salutations in this letter are the same as those in
the Epistle to the Colossians with the exception of Jesus
1 Col. iv. io — 14. " Philem. 11, 16.
s iv. 15—17. * ver. 19.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 37
Justus, whose name is omitted1. Towards the close St Paul
declares his hope of release and intention of visiting Colossae,
and asks Philemon to ' prepare a lodging ' for him s.
3. But at the same time with the two letters destined espe- 3. The
cially for Colossae, the Apostle despatched a third, which had j^^ot
a wider scope. It has been already mentioned that Tychicus wbi<* a
was charged with a mission to the Asiatic Churches. It has sent to
been noticed also that the Colossians were directed to procure
and read a letter in the possession of the Laodiceans. These
two facts are closely connected. The Apostle wrote at this
time a circular letter to the Asiatic Churches, which got
its ultimate designation from the metropolitan city and is
consequently known to us as the Epistle to the Ephesians".
It was the immediate object of Tychicus' journey to deliver
copies of this letter at all the principal centres of Christi
anity in the district, and at the same time to communicate
by word of mouth the Apostle's special messages to each4.
Among these centres was Laodicea. Thus his mission brought
him into the immediate neighbourhood of Colossae. But he
was not charged to deliver another copy of the circular letter
at Colossae itself, for this Church would be regarded only as
a dependency of Laodicea; and besides he was the bearer of
a special letter from the Apostle to them. It was sufficient
therefore to provide that the Laodicean copy should be circu
lated and read at Colossae.
Thus the three letters are closely related. Tychicus is the Personal
personal link of connexion between the Epistles to the Ephe- necting
sians and to the Colossians ; Onesimus between those to the f*Z ihiee
Colossians and to Philemon.
For reasons given elsewhere', it would appear that these
three letters were written and despatched towards the close of
the Apostle's captivity, about the year 63. At some time not
1 w. 23, 24. B See Philippians p. 30 sq. j where
* ver. 22. reasons are given for placing the
8 See the introduction to the epis- Philippian Epistle at an earlier, and
tie. the others at a later stage in the
* Ephes. vi. 21, 22. Apostle's captivity.

38

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Earth- very distant from this date, a great catastrophe overtook the
the Lycus cities of the Lycus valley. An earthquake was no uncommon
ey' occurrence in this region \ But on this occasion the shock had
been unusually violent, and Laodicea, the flourishing and popu
lous, was laid in ruins. Tacitus, who is our earliest authority
for this fact, places it in the year 60 and is silent about the
neighbouring towns2. Eusebius however makes it subse-
1 See above, p. 3. Laodicea was
visited by the following earthquakes

in the ages preceding and subsequent
to the Christian era.
(1) Before about B.C. 125, Orac.
Sibyll. iii. 471, if the date now com
monly assigned to this Sibylline Oracle
be correct, and if the passage is to be
regarded as a prophecy after the event.
In iii. 347 Hierapolis is also mentioned
as suffering in the same way; but it
may be questioned whether the Phry
gian city is meant.
(2) About B.C. 12, Strabo xii. 8, p. 579,
Dion Cass. liv. 30. Strabo names only
Laodicea and Tralles, but Dion Cas-
sius says ij 'Aala rb (Bvos iirixovplas
nvbs Std aeiapois pdXiara iSeiro.
(3) a.d. 60 acoording to Tacitus
(Ann. xiv. 27); a.d. 64 or 65 according
to Eusebius (Chron. s.a.), who includes
also Hierapolis and Colosss. To this
earthquake allusion is made in a Sibyl
line Oracle written not many years
after the event; Orac. Sibyll. iv. 107
(see also v. 289, vii. 23).
(4) Between a.d. 222 and a.d. 235,
in the reign of Alexander Severus, as
we learn from another Sibylline Oracle
(xii. 280). On this occasion Hierapolis
also suffered.
This list will probably be found not
to have exhausted all these catastro
phes on record.
The following earthquakes also are
mentioned as happening in the neigh
bouring towns or in the district gene
rally: at an uncertain date, Carura
(Strabo xii. 8, p. 578) ; a.d. 17 the

twelve cities, Sardis being the worst
sufferer (Tac. Ann. ii. 7, Plin. N. H.
ii. 86, Dion Cass. Ivii. 17, Strabo xii.
8> P- 579); a.d. 23 Cibyra (Tac. Ann.
iv. 13); a.d. 53 Apamea (Tac. Ann.
xii. 58): about a.d. 138 — 142, under
Antoninus Pius, 'Rhodiorum et Asice
oppida' (Capitol. Anton. Pius 9, Aristid.
Or. xliv); a.d. 151 or 152, under the
same emperor, Mitylene and other
places (Aristid. Or. xxv); a.d. 180,
under M. Aurelius, Smyrna (Chron.
Pasch. 1. p. 489, ed. Dind., Aristid. Or.
xx, xxi, xii ; see Clinton Fast. Rom. 1.
p. 176 sq., Hertzberg Griechenland etc.
n. pp. 371, 410, and esp. Waddington
Mimoire sur la Chronologie du Rheteur
JElius AriMide pp. 242 sq., 267, in
MiSm. de TAcad. des Inscr. xxvi, 1867,
who has corrected the dates); a.d. 262,
under Gallienus 11 (Trebell. Gallien. 5
'Malum tristius in Asice urbibus fuit
...hiatus terraB plurimis in locis fue
runt, cum aqua salsa in fossis appa-
reret,' ib. 6 'vastatam .4siam.. .elemen-
torum concussionibus'). Strabo says
(p. 579) that Philadelphia is more or
less shaken daily (xaB' ijpipav), and
that Apamea has suffered from nu
merous earthquakes.
2 Tac. Ann. xiv. 27 'Eodem anno
ex inlustribus Asia? urbibus Laodicea,
tremore terraB prolapsa, nullo a nobis
remedio propriis opibus revaluit.' The
year is given 'Nerone iv, Corn. Cobso
consulibus' (xiv. 20). Two different
writers, in Smith's Dictionary of Geo
graphy and Smith's Dictionary of tlie
Bible, s.v. Laodicea, place the destruc-

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

39

quent to the burning of Rome (a.d. 64), and mentions Hiera- its proba-
polis and Colossae also as involved in the disaster s ; while later ° a e"
writers, adopting the date of Eusebius and including the three
cities with him, represent it as one of a series of divine judg
ments on the heathen world for the persecution of the Chris
tians which followed on the fire a. Having no direct knowledge
of the source from which Eusebius derived his information, we
should naturally be disposed to accept the authority of Tacitus
for the date, as more trustworthy. But, as indications occur
elsewhere that Eusebius followed unusually good authorities in
recording these earthquakes 8, it is far from improbable that he

tion of Laodicea in the reign of Tibe
rius, confusing this earthquake with
an earlier one (Ann. ii. 47). By this
earlier earthquake 'duodeoim celebres
Asia? tubes conlapsse,' but their names
are given, and not one is situated in
the valley of the Lyons.
1 Euseb. Chron. 01. 210 (n. p. 154
sq., ed. Schone) 'In Asia tres urbes
terra? motu conciderunt Laodicea Hie-
rapoliB Colossal.' The Armenian ver
sion and Jerome agree in placing it
the next event in order after the fire
at Rome (a.d. 64), though there iB a
difference of a year in the two texts.
If the Sibylline Oracle, v. 317, refers to
this earthquake, as seems probable,
we have independent testimony that
Hierapolis was involved in the cata
strophe; comp. ib. v. 289.
2 This is evidently the idea of Oro-
sius, vii. 7.
a I draw this inference from his
account of the earthquake in the reign
of Tiberius. Tacitus (Ann. ii. 47) states
that twelve cities were ruined in one
night, and records their names. Pliny
also, who mentions this earthquake as
' the greatest within the memory of
man ' (N. H. ii. 86), gives the same
number. Eusebius however, Chron.
01. 198 (11. p. 146 sq., ed. Schone),
names thirteen cities, coinciding with

Tacitus as far as he goes, but including
Ephesus also. Now a monument was
found at Puteoli (see Gronov. Thes.
Grac. Ant. vn. p. 433 sq.), and is now
in the Museum at Naples (Museo
Borbonico xv, Tav. iv, v), dedicated
to Tiberius and representing fourteen
female figures with the names of four
teen Asiatic cities underneath ; these
names being the same as those men
tioned by Tacitus with the addition of
Ephesus and Cibyra. There can be
no doubt that this was one of those
monuments mentioned by Apollonius
quoted in Phlegon (Fragm. 42, MiiUer's
Fragm. Hist. Grcec. in. p. 621) as
erected to commemorate the liberality
of Tiberius in contributing to the re
storation of the ruined cities (see Eckhel
Doct. Num. Vet. vi. 192 sq.). But no
earthquake at Ephesus is mentioned
by Tacitus. He does indeed speak of
such a catastrophe as happening at
Cibyra (Ann. iv. 13) six years later
than the one whioh ruined the twelve
cities, and of the relief which Tiberius
afforded on this latter occasion as on
the former. But we owe to Eusebius
alone the fact that Ephesus also was
seriously injured by an earthquake in
the same year — perhaps not on the
same night — with the twelve cities:
and this fact is necessary to explain

40 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Bearing on gives the correct date1. In this case the catastrophe was sub-
ology of sequent to the writing of these letters. If on the other hand
tersS6let *^e year name(i D7 Tacitus be adopted, we gain a subsidiary
confirmation of the comparatively late date which I have ven
tured to assign to these epistles on independent grounds ; for,
if they had been written two years earlier, when the blow was
recent, we might reasonably have expected to find some refer
ence to a disaster which had devastated Laodicea and from
which Colossae cannot have escaped altogether without injury.
The additional fact mentioned by the Roman historian, that
Laodicea was rebuilt from her own resources without the usual
assistance from Rome *, is valuable as illustrating a later notice
in the Apostolic writings s.
St Mark's It has been seen that, when these letters were written,
vjsit_ St Mark was intending shortly to visit Colossae, and that the
Apostle himself, looking forward to his release, hoped at length
to make a personal acquaintance with these churches, which
hitherto he knew only through the report of others. Whether
St Mark's visit was ever paid or not, we have no means of
determining4. Of St Paul himself it is reasonable to assume,
the monument. It should be added Si irdXiv irbXiv eipvdyviav, where arrjaei
that Nipperdey (on Tac. Ann. ii. 47) must be the 2nd person, ' Thou wilt re-
supposes the earthquake at Ephesus build thy city with its broad streets.'
to have been recorded in the lost por- This Sibylline poem was written about
tion of the fifth book of the Annals the year 80. The building of theamphi-
which comprised the years A.D. 29 — 31; theatre, mentioned above (p. 6, note 6),
but this bare hypothesis cannot out- would form part of this work of recon-
weigh the direct testimony of Euse- struction.
bius. 3 See below, p. 43.
1 Hertzberg (Geschichte Qriechen- l Two notices however imply that
lands unter der Herrschaft der Rimer St Mark had some personal connexion
11. p. 96) supposes that Tacitus and Eu- with Asia Minor in the years imme-
sebius refer to two different events, diately succeeding the date of this re-
and that Laodicea was visited by earth- ference : (1) St Peter, writing to the
quakes twice within a few years, a.d. Churches of Asia Minor, sends a salu-
60 and a.d. 65. tation from St Mark (1 Pet. v. 13);
2 Tac. Ann. xiv. 27, quoted above, (2) St Paul gives charge to Timothy,
p. 38, note 2. To this fact allusion is who appears to be still residing at
made in the feigned prediction of the Ephesus, to take up Mark and bring
Sibyllines, iv. 107 TXijpov AaoSlxeia, ai him to Rome (2 Tim. iv. 1 1 HdpKov
Si rpuati irori aeiapbs irprjvl£as, arrjaei dvdXafiuv dye perd aeavroi). Thus it

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 41
that in the interval between his first and second Roman cap- St Paul
tivity he found some opportunity of carrying out his design. ^°ng y
At all events we find him at Miletus, near to the mouth of 0oloBSB'
the Maeander1 : and the journey between this place and Lao
dicea is neither long nor difficult.
At the time of this visit — the first and last, we may
suppose, which he paid to the valley of the Lycus — St Paul's
direction of the Asiatic Churches is drawing to a close. With St John
his death they pass into the hands of St John2, who takes up Minor.
his abode in Asia Minor. Of Colossae and Hierapolis we hear
nothing more in the New Testament: but from his exile in
Patmos the beloved disciple delivers his Lord's message to the The mes-
Church of Laodicea 8 ; a message doubtless intended to be Laodicea.
communicated also to the two subordinate Churches, to which
it would apply almost equally well.
The message communicated by St John to Laodicea pro- Corres-T)OHd.611C60
longs the note which was struck by St Paul in the letter to between
Colossae. An interval of a very few years has not materially x^se and"
altered the character of these churches. Obviously the same st Paul's
J Epistles.
temper prevails, the same errors are rife, the same correction
must be applied.
1. Thus, while St Paul finds it necessary to enforce the 1. The
truth that Christ is the image of the invisible God, that in the Person
Him all the divine fulness dwells, that He existed before all o£ CiaiBi'
things, that through Him all things were created and in Him
all things are sustained, that He is the primary source (dpxv)
seems fairly probable that St Mark's he also visited personally the districts
projected visit to Colossa? was paid. evangelized direotly or indirectly by
1 2 Tim. iv. 20. By a strange error St Paul, we have no means of deciding.
Lequien (Ori&m Christ. 1. p. 833) Such a visit is far from unlikely, but
substitutes Hierapolis for Nicopolis in it can hardly have been of long dura-
Tit, iii. 12, and argues from the pas- tion. A copy of his letters would pro-
sage that the Church of Hierapolis bably be sent to Laodicea, as a prin-
was founded by St Paul. cipal centre of Christianity in Pro-
" It was apparently during the in- consular Asia, which is among the
terval between St Paul's first captivity provinces mentioned in the address of
at Rome and his death, that St Peter the Eirst Epistle.
wrote to the Churches of Asia Minor ' Rev. iii. 14 — 21.
(1 Pet. i. 1). Whether in this interval

42 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
and has the pre-eminence in all things1; so in almost identical
language St John, speaking in the person of our Lord, declares
that He is the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the primary
source (apxn) of the creation of God2. Some lingering shreds
of the old heresy, we may suppose, still hung about these
Churches, and instead of 'holding fast the Head' they were
even yet prone to substitute intermediate agencies, angelic
mediators, as links in the chain which should bind man to
God. They still failed to realise the majesty and significance,
the completeness, of the Person of Christ.
and prac- And the practical duty also, which follows from the recog-
wMch^ol68 ration of the theological truth, is enforced by both Apostles
low upon m verv simiiar language. If St Paul entreats the Colossians
to seek those things which are above, where Christ is seated on
the right hand of God3, and in the companion epistle, which
also he directs them to read, reminds the Churches that
God raised them with Christ and seated them with him in
heavenly places in Christ Jesus4; in like manner St John
gives this promise to the Laodiceans in the name of his Lord :
' He that overcometh, I will grant to him to sit with me in my
throne, even as I also overcame and did sit with my Father in
His throne6.'
2. Warn- 2. But again ; after a parting salutation to the Church of
lukewarm- Laodicea St Paul closes with a warning to Archippus, ap-
ness. parently its chief pastor, to take heed to his ministry8. Some
1 Col. i. 15 — 18. per ipov, x.r.X. Here again it must
s Rev. iii. 14. It should be ob- be noticed that there is no such re
served that this designation of our semblance in the language of the
Lord (ij dpxh rijs xrlaeus tou Oeofi), promises to the faithful in the other
which so closely resembles the Ian- six Churches. This double coinoi-
guage of the Colossian Epistle, does dence, affecting the two ideas which
not occur in the messages to the other may be said to cover the whole ground
six Churches, nor do we there find in the Epistle to the Colossians, can
anything resembling it. hardly, I think, be fortuitous, and
s Col. iii. 1. suggests an acquaintance with and
4 Ephes. ii. 6 awijyeipev xal awe- recognition of the earlier Apostle's
xdBiaev x.t.X. teaching on the part of St John.
8 Rev. iii. 21 Stbau ainp xaBlaai ° Col. iv. 17.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 43
signs of slackened zeal seem to have called forth this rebuke.
It may be an accidental coincidence, but it is at least worthy
of notice, that lukewarmness is the special sin denounced in
the angel of the Laodiceans, and that the necessity of greater
earnestness is the burden of the message to that Church1. As
with the people, so it is with the priest. The community takes
its colour from and communicates its colour to its spiritual
rulers. The ' be zealous' of St John is the counterpart to the
' take heed' of St Paul.
3. Lastly ; in the Apocalyptic message the pride of wealth 3. The
is sternly condemned in the Laodicean Church : ' For that thou ^aithde-
sayest I am rich and have gotten me riches and have need nounced.
of nothing, and knowest not that thou art utterly wretched
and miserable and beggarly and blind and naked, I counsel
thee to buy gold of me refined with fire, that thou mayest
have riches2.' This proud vaunt receives its best illustration
from a recent occurrence at Laodicea, to which allusion has
already been made. Only a very few years before this date an
earthquake had laid the city in ruins. Yet from this catastrophe
she rose again with more than her former splendour. This The vaunt
however was not her chief title to respect. While other cities, oea_
prostrated by a like visitation, had sought relief from the con
cessions of the Roman senate or the liberality of the emperor's
purse, it was the glory of Laodicea that she alone neither
courted nor obtained assistance, but recovered by her own
resources. 'Nullo a nobis remedio/ says the Roman his
torian, 'propriis opibus revaluit3.' Thus she had asserted a
proud independence, to which neither far-famed metropolitan
Ephesus, nor old imperial Sardis, nor her prosperous commer-
1 Rev. iii. 19. If the common view, interpretation of the angels seems to
that by the angel of the Church its me incorrect.
chief pastor is meant, were correct, and 2 Rev. iii. 17, 18, where the correct
if Arehippus (as is very probable) had reading with the repetition of the
beenlivingwhenStJohnwrote.thecoin- definite articles, 0 rdXaiirupos xal 6
cidence would be still more striking; see iXeivbs, signifies the type, the em-
Trench's Epistles to the Seven Churches bodiment of wretchedness, etc.
in Asia p. 180. But for reasons given 3 Tac. Ann. xiv. 27.
elsewhere (Philippians p. 199 sq.), this

44 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
cial neighbours, Apamea and Cibyra, could lay claim1. No
one would dispute her boast that she 'had gotten riches and
had need of nothing.'
Pride of ^u* ^s *nere n°t a second and subsidiary idea underlying
intellects- the Apocalyptic rebuke ? The pride of intellectual wealth,
we may well suspect, was a temptation at Laodicea hardly less
strong than the pride of material resources. When St Paul
wrote, the theology of the Gospel and the comprehension of
the Church were alike endangered by a spirit of intellectual
exolusiveness2 in these cities. He warned them against a vain
philosophy, against a show of wisdom, against an intrusive
mystic speculation, which vainly puffed up the fleshly mind8.
He tacitly contrasted with this false intellectual wealth ' the
riches of the glory of God's mystery revealed in Christ4,' the
riches of the full assurance of understanding, the genuine trea
sures of wisdom and knowledge6. May not the same contrast
be discerned in the language of St John ? The Laodiceans
boast of their enlightenment, but they are blind, and to cure
their blindness they must seek eye-salve from the hands of the
great Physician. They vaunt their wealth of knowledge, but
they are wretched paupers, and must beg the refined gold of
the Gospel to relieve their wants6.
This is the last notice in the Apostolic records relating to
the Churches in the valley of the Lycus ; but during the suc
ceeding ages the Christian communities of this district play
a conspicuous part in the struggles and the development of the
Church. When after the destruction of Jerusalem St John
1 In all the other cases of earth- a See the next chapter of thiB intro-
quake which Tacitus records as hap- duction.
pening in these Asiatic cities, Ann. 3 Col. ii. 8, 18, 23.
ii. 47 (the twelve cities), iv. 13 (Ci- * i. 27.
byra), xii. 58 (Apamea), he mentions ' ii. 1, 3.
the fact of their obtaining relief from 6 Comp. Eph. i. 18 ' The eyes of
the Senate or the Emperor. On an your understanding being enlightened,
earlier occasion Laodioea herself had that ye may know what is the hope
not diBdained under similar circum- of his oalling, what the riches of the
stances to receive assistance from Au- glory of his inheritance in the saints.'
gust us : Strabo, xii. p. 579.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

45

fixed his abode at Ephesus, it would appear that not a few of The early
the oldest surviving members of the Palestinian Church ac- settle in
companied him into 'Asia,' which henceforward became the far°AsiaU"
head-quarters of Apostolic authority. In this body of emi
grants Andrew1 and Philip among the twelve, Aristion and
John the presbyter2 among other personal disciples of the
Lord, are especially mentioned.
Among the chief settlements of this Christian dispersion was and espe-
Hierapolis. This fact explains how these Phrygian Churches Hierap0.
assumed a prominence in the ecclesiastical history of the second ^s-
century, for which we are hardly prepared by their antecedents
as they appear in connexion with St Paul, and which they
failed to maintain in the history of the later Church.
Here at all events was settled Philip of Bethsaida8, the

1 Canon Murator. foi. i, 1. 14 (p. 17,
ed. Tregelles), Cureton's Ancient Sy
riac Documents pp. 32, 34. Comp.
Papias in Euseb. H. E. iii. 39.
8 Papias in Euseb. H. E. iii. 39.
" Polycrates in Euseb. H. E. iii. 31,
V. 24 QlXiirirov [rbv] tuv SuSexa diro-
arbXuv, os Kexolpifrai iv 'lepairbXel,
xal Sio Bvyaripes airov yeyrjpaxviai
vapSivoi, xal 1) iripa airov Bvydrrjp iv
dylip irveipMTi iroXiTevaapivij, rj iv
'Titpiau dvairaierai. To this third
daughter the statement of Clement of
Alexandria must refer, though by a
common looseness of expression he
uses the plural number (Euseb. H. E.
iii. 30) rj xal rois diroariXovs diroSo-
xipdaovai- Hirpos piv ydp xal HXiiriros
inaiSorroiijaavTO, $[Xiiriros Si xal rds
Bvyaripas dvSpdaiv i^iSuxe. On the
other hand in the Dialogue between
Gaius and Proclus, Philip the Evan
gelist was represented as residing at
Hierapolis (Euseb. H. E. iii. 31) perd
tovtov Si irpoipirriSes riaaapes al <£/-
Xiirirov yeyivijvrcu iv 'lepairbXei tj) Kara
rrjv 'Aalav 6 rdcpos airuv iariv iKei, xal
6 rov irarpbs airuv, where the mention
of the four daughters prophesying iden

tifies the person meant (see Acts xxi.
8). Nothing can be clearer than that
St Luke distinguishes Philip the Evan
gelist from Philip the Apostle ; for
(1) When the Seven are appointed, he
distinctly states that this new office
is created to relieve the Twelve of some
onerous duties (Acts vi. 2 — 5). (2) Af
ter Philip the Evangelist has preached
in Samaria, two of the Twelve are sent
thither to convey the gifts of the Spirit,
which required the presence of an
Apostle (viii. 14 — 17). (3) When St
Paul and his companions visit Philip
at CaBsarea, he is carefully described
as 'the Evangelist, being one of the
Seven' (xxi. 8). As St Luke was a
member of the Apostle's company
when this visit was paid, and stayed
'many days' in Philip's house, the
accuracy of his information cannot be
questioned. Yet Eusebius (H. E. iii.
31) assumes the identity of the Apostle
with the Evangelist, and describes the
notice in the Dialogue of Gaius and
Proclus as being 'in harmony with
(awo.Suv)' the language of Polycrates.
And accordingly in another passage
(JET. E. iii 39), when he has occasion

46

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Philip the early friend and fellow-townsman of St John, and the first
wFthhis Apostle who is recorded to have held communication with
daughters. tne Qgntiles1. Here he died and was buried ; and here after

to mention the conversations of Papias
with Philip's daughters at Hierapolis,
he again supposes them to be the same
who are mentioned in the Acts.
My reasons for believing that the
Philip who lived at Hierapolis was not
the Evangelist, but the Apostle, are as
follows, (i) This is distinctly stated
by the earliest witness, Polycrates,
who was bishop of Ephesus at the
close of the second century, and who
besides claimed to have and probably
had special opportunities of knowing
early traditions. It is confirmed more
over by the notice in Clement of
Alexandria, who is the next in order
of time, and whose means of infor
mation also were good, for one of
his earliest teachers was an Ionian
Greek (Strom, i. i, p. 322). (2) The
other view depends solely on the au
thority of the Dialogue of Gaius and
Proclus. I have given reasons else
where for questioning the separate ex
istence of the Roman presbyter Gaius,
and for supposing that this dialogue
was written by Hippolytus bishop of
Portus (Journal of Philology 1. p. 98
sq., Cambridge, 1868). But however
this may be, its author was a Roman
ecclesiastic, and probably wrote some
quarter of a century at least after
Polycrates. In all respects therefore
his authority is inferior. Moreover
it is suspicious in form. It mentions
four daughters instead of three, makes
them all virgins, and represents them
as prophetesses, thus showing a dis
tinct aim of reproducing the particu
lars as given in Acts xxi. 9 ; whereas
the account of Polycrates is divergent
in all three respects. (3) A life-long
friendship would naturally draw Philip
tho Apostle of Bethsaida after John,

as it also drew Andrew. And, when
we turn to St John's Gospel, we can
hardly resist the impression that inci
dents relating to Andrew and Philip
had a special interest, not only for
the writer of the Gospel, but also for
his hearers (John i. 40, 43 — -46, vi.
5 — 8, xii. 20 — 22, xiv. 8, 9). Moreover
the Apostles Andrew and Philip appear
in this Gospel as inseparable com
panions. (4) Lastly ; when Papias men
tions collecting the sayings of the
Twelve and of other early disciples
from those who heard them, he gives
a prominent place to these two Apos
tles rl 'AvSpias ... etirev rj tI ^IXiinros,
but there is no reference to Philip the
Evangelist. When therefore we read
later that he conversed with the
daughters of Philip, it seems natural
to infer that the Philip intended is
the same person whom he has men
tioned previously. It should be added,
though no great value can be assign
ed to such channels of information,
that the Acts of Philip place the
Apostle at Hierapolis ; Tischendorf,
Act. Apost. Apocr. p. 75 sq.
On the other hand, those who sup
pose that the Evangelist, and not
the Apostle, resided at Hierapolis, ac
count for the other form of the tra
dition by the natural desire of the
Asiatic Churches to trace their spiritual
descent directly from the Twelve. This
solution of the phenomenon might have
been accepted, if the authorities in
favour of Philip the Evangelist had
been prior in time and superior in
quality. There is no improbability
in supposing that both the Philips
were married and had daughters.
1 John xii. 20.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 47
his decease lived his two virgin daughters, who survived to a
very advanced age and thus handed down to the second century
the traditions of the earliest days of the Church. A third
daughter, who was married, had settled in Ephesus, where
her body rested1. It was from the two daughters who resided Their tra
at Hierapolis, that Papias heard several stories of the first collected
preachers of the Gospel, which he transmitted to posterity in b? Papias.
his work2.
This Papias had conversed not only with the daughters
of Philip, but also with at least two personal disciples of the
Lord, Aristion and John the presbyter. He made it his busi
ness to gather .traditions respecting the sayings of the Saviour
and His Apostles; and he published a work in five books,
entitled An Exposition of Oracles of the Lord, using the
information thus collected to illustrate the discourses, and
perhaps the doings, of Christ as recorded in the Gospels8.
Among other stories he related, apparently on the authority
of these daughters of Philip, how a certain dead man had
been restored to life in his own day, and how Justus Barsabas,
who is mentioned in the Acts, had drunk a deadly poison and
miraculously escaped from any evil effects4.
1 See above p. 45, note 3. * Euseb. 1. c. us Si xard rois airois
5 Euseb. H. E. iii. 39. This is the 0 Hairlas yevbpevos Siijyrjaiv irapeiXrj-
general reference for all those particu- tpivai Bavpaalav iirb [dirb ?] r&v tov
lars respecting Papias which are de- iiXlirirov Bvyaripuv pvrjpoveiei, rd vvv
rived from Eusebius. arjpeiurtov vexpov ydp dvdaraaiv Kar
3 See Westcott, Canon p. 63. On airbv yeyovviav laropei, Kal av irdXiv
the opinions of Papias and on the (repov irapdSogov irepl 'lovarov rbv iiri-
nature of his work, I may perhaps be xXrjBivTa Bapaafidv yeyovbs k.t.X. The
allowed to refer to articles in the information respecting the raising of
Contemporary Review Aug. 1867, Aug. the dead man might have come from
and Sept. 1875, where I have investi- the daughters of Philip, as the context
gated the notices of this father. The seems certainly to imply, while yet the
object of Papias' work was not to con- event happened in Papias' own time
struct a Gospel narrative, but to in- (xar airbv). It will be remembered
terpret and illustrate those already that even IrenaBus mentions similar
existing. I ought to add that on two miracles as occurring in his own age
minor points, the martyrdom of Papias (Har. ii. 32. 4). Eusebius does not
and the identity of Philip with theEvan- say that the miraculous preservation
gelist, I have been led to modify my of Justus Barsabas also occurred in
views since the first article was written, the time of Papias.

48

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Life and If we may judge by his name, Papias was a native of
oTpSifs. Phrygia. probably of Hierapolis1, of which he afterwards be
came bishop, and must have grown up to youth or early man
hood before the close of the first century. He is said to have
suffered martyrdom at Pergamum about the year 165 ; but
there is good reason for distrusting this statement, independ
ently of any chronological difficulty which it involves2. Other-

1 Papias, or (as it is very frequently
written in inscriptions) Pappias, is a
common Phrygian name. It is found
several times at Hierapolis, not only
in inscriptions (Boeokh Corp. Inscr.
no. 3930, 3912 a add.) but even on
coins (Mionnet rv. p. 301). This is
explained by the fact that it was
an epithet of the Hierapolitan Zeus
(Boeckh 3817 Uairla Ait aurrjpi), just as
in Bithynia this same god was called
ndiras (Lobeck Aglaoph. p. 1048 ; see
Boeckh Corp. Inscr. in. p. 1051).
Hence as the name of a mortal it is
equivalent to the Greek Diogenes ; e.g.
Boeckh no. 3912 a add., Hairias tov
'Zrpdruvos 0 xaXoipevos Aioyivijs. Galen
also mentions a physician of Laodicea,
bearing this name (Op. xn. p. 799, ed.
Kiihu). In an inscription at Tra-
janopolis we meet with it in a curious
conjunction with other familiar names
(Boeckh no. 3865 i add.) rfair7rias T/>o-
tplpov xal Ivxixijs k.t.X. (see Wad
dington on Le Bas, Inscr. no. 718).
This last belongs to the year a.d. 199.
On other analogous Phrygian names
see the introduction to the Epistle to
Philemon. Thus at Hierapolis the name Papias
is derived from heathen mythology,
and accordingly the persons bearing it
on the inscriptions and ooins are all
heathens. It may therefore be pre
sumed that our Papias was of Gentile
origin. The inference however is not
absolutely certain. A rabbi of this
name is mentioned in the Mishna
Shekalim iv. 7, Edaioth vii. 6. These

two references are given by Zunz Namen
der Juden p. 16.
s Chron. Pasch. sub. ann. 163 aiv
to) dylu 5i HoXvxdptru xal dXXoi 6' dirb
QiXaSeXtpelas paprvpovaiv iv lipipvn' xal
iv Hepydpu Si (repot, iv ols ijv xal TLa-
irlas xal dXXoi iroXXol, uv Kal (yypaipa
tpipovrai rd papripia. See also the
Syrian epitome of Euseb. Chron. (n.
p. 216 ed. Schone) 'Cum persecutio in
Asia esset, Polycarpos martyrium subiit
et Papias, quorum martyria in libro
(soripta) extant,' but the Armenian
version of the Chronicon mentions only
Polycarp, while Jerome says ' Poly-
carpus et Pionius fecere martyrium.'
In his history (iv. 15) Eusebius, after
quoting the Martyrdom of Polycarp at
length, adds iv r% airy Si irepl airov
ypatpij xal dXXa papripia avvijirTO
... preB' uv xal HijrpbSupos ... dvtjjynrai-
tuv ye pty Tore irepifioJrTUV papripuv els
ns iyvupl^ero Hibvios ... il-ijs Si Kal
dXXuv iv HepydfUfi irbXei rijs 'Aalas iiro-
pvfjpara pepapTVjyijxbTuv tpiperai, Kap
irov Kal IIa7rijXou Kai yvvaiKos 'Aya-
Bovlxvs x.t.X. He here apparently falls
into the error of imagining that Metro-
dorus, Pionius, and all the others, were
martyred under M. Aurelius, whereas
we know from their extant Acts that
some at least suffered in the Decian
persecution. For the martyrdoms
of Pionius and Metrodorus see Act.
SS. Bolland. Feb. 1 ; for those of
Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonica, ib.
April 13. The Acts of the former,
whioh are included in Ruinart (Act.
Sine. Mart. p. 120 sq., 1689) are appa-

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

49

wise he must have lived to a very advanced age. Eusebius, to Acoount of
whom chiefly we owe our information respecting him, was
repelled by his millennarian views, and describes him as a man
of mean intelligence1, accusing him of misunderstanding the
Apostolic sayings respecting the kingdom of Christ and thus
interpreting in a material sense expressions which were intended
to be mystical and symbolical. This disparaging account,
though one-sided, was indeed not altogether undeserved, for
his love of the marvellous seems to have overpowered his
faculty of ^crimination. But the adverse verdict of Eusebius
must be corrected by the more sympathetic language of Ire
naeus2, who possibly may have known him personally, and who
certainly must have been well acquainted with his reputation
and character.
Much has been written respecting the relation of this

rently the same which were seen by
Eusebius. The only Aots of the latter
known until lately were a late com
pilation of the Metaphrast, but the
original document has been recently
discovered and published by Aube
(1881). See on the whole subject
of these martyrdoms, Ignatius and
Polycarp 1 pp. 622 sq., 695 sq. Eu
sebius, finding the Acts of all these
persons bound up together with those
of Polycarp drew the hasty inference
that they were martyred at the same
time. With regard to Pionius and his
companions, as we have seen, he was
very wide of the mark; but Carpus,
Papylus, and Agathonice, may have
suffered within a few years of Poly
carp, though probably not during the
same reign (l.c. p. 625 sq.). At all
events this passage in the Ecclesiastical
History, by a confusion of the names
Papias and Papylus, must have given
rise to the statement respecting Papias
in the Chronicon Paschale and in the
Syriao epitome, as it obviously has
misled Jerome respecting Pionius.
COL.

This part of the Chronicon Paschale
is plainly taken from Eusebius, as the
coincidences of expression and the
sequence of events alike show. The
martyrdom of Papias therefore ap
pears to be a fiction, and he may have
died a natural death at an earlier date.
Polycarp's martyrdom is now shown
by M. Waddington's investigations to
have taken place a.d. 155 (MSmoire
sur la ChronoUigie du Rheteur Mlius
Aristide p. 232 sq., in the Mem. de
I'Acad. des Inscr. xxvi, 1867) ; see Ig
natius and Polycarp 1 p. 629 sq.
1 H. E. iii. 39 aipoSpa apixpos tov
vovv. In another passage (iii. 36), as
commonly read, Eusebius makes par
tial amends to Papias by calling him
avrjp rd irdvra on pdXiara Xoyiuraros
xal tijs ypaiprjs elSrjpuv, but this passage
is found to be a spurious interpola
tion (see Contemporary Review, August,
1867, p. 12), and was probably added
by some one who was acquainted with
the work of Papias and desired to do
him justice.
3 Len. v. 33. 3, 4.

SO THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
writer to the Canonical Gospels, but the discussion has no very
direct bearing on our special subject, and may be dismissed
here1. One question however, which has a real importance
as affecting the progress of the Gospel in these parts, has been
raised by modern criticism and must not be passed over in
silence.
A modern It has been supposed that there was an entire dislocation
respecting and discontinuity in the history of Christianity in Asia Minor
anttyhi at a certain epoch; that the Apostle of the Gentiles was
Asia Minor ignored and his teaching repudiated, if not anathematized;
discussed, and that on its ruins was erected the standard of Judaism,
around which with a marvellous unanimity deserters from the
Pauline Gospel rallied. Of this retrograde faith St John is
supposed to have been the great champion, and Papias a
typical and important representative2.
The subject, as a whole, is too wide for a full investigation
here. I must content myself with occupying a limited area,
showing not only the historical baselessness, but the strong
inherent improbability of the theory, as applied to Hierapolis
and the neighbouring churches. As this district is its chief
stronghold, a repulse at this point must involve its ultimate
defeat along the whole line.
Theposi- Of St John himself I have already spoken8. It has been
John shown that his language addressed to these churches is not
only not opposed to St Paul's teaching, but presents remark
able coincidences with it. So far at least the theory finds no
support; and, when from St John we turn to Papias, the case
is not different. The advocates of the hypothesis in question
and of lay the chief stress of their argument on the silence of Papias,
or rather of Eusebius. Eusebius quotes a passage from Papias,
in which the bishop of Hierapolis mentions collecting from
1 See on this subject Westcott Canon or in Schwegler's Nachapostolisches
p. 64 sq. ; Contemporary Review, Au- Zeitalter. It has been reproduced (at
gust and September, 1875. least as far as regards the Asiatic
8 The theory of the Tubingen school Churches) by Renan S. Paul p. 366 sq.
may be studied in Baur's Christliche 3 See above p. 41 sq.
Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhunderte

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 5 1
trustworthy sources the sayings of certain Apostles and early
disciples; but St Paul is not named among them. He also
gives short extracts from Papias referring to the Gospels of
St Matthew and St Mark, and mentions that this writer made
use of the first Epistle of St John and the first Epistle of St
Peter; but here again there is no allusion to St Paul's writings.
Whether referring to the personal testimony or to the Canon
ical writings of the Apostles, Papias, we are reminded, is
equally silent about St PauL
On both these points a satisfactory answer can be given;
but the two cases are essentially different, and must be con
sidered apart.
(1) The range of personal testimony which Papias would be 1. The
able to collect depended on his opportunities. Before he had collected
grown up to manhood, the personal reminiscences of St Paul by PaPias-
would have almost died out. The Apostle of the Gentiles had
not resided more than three years even at Ephesus, and seems
to have paid only one brief visit to the valley of the Lycus, even
if he visited it at all. Such recollections of St Paul as might
once have lingered here would certainly be overshadowed by
and forgotten in the later sojourn of St John, which, beginning
where they ceased, extended over more than a quarter of a cen
tury. To St John, and to those personal disciples of Christ who
surrounded him, Papias and his contemporaries would naturally
and almost inevitably look for the traditions which they so
eagerly collected. This is the case with the leading representa
tive of the Asiatic school in the next generation, Irenaeus,
whose traditions are almost wholly derived from St John and
his companions, while at the same time he evinces an entire
sympathy with the work and teaching of St PauL But indeed,
even if it had been otherwise, the object which Papias had
directly in view did not suggest any appeal to St Paul's
authority. He was writing an 'Exposition of Oracles of the
Lord,' and he sought to supplement and interpret these by
traditions of our Lord's life, such as eyewitnesses only could
give. St Paul could have no place among those personal
4—2

52 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
disciples of Christ, of whom alone he is speaking in this preface
to his work, which Eusebius quotes.
2. His re- (2) But, though we have no right to expect any mention
the Ca- of St Paul where the appeal is to personal testimony, yet with
writings, quotations from or references to the Canonical writings
the case, it may be argued, is different. Here at all events we
might look for some recognition of St Paul. To this argument
it would perhaps be a sufficient reply, that St Paul's Epistles
do not furnish any matter which must necessarily have been
introduced into a work such as Papias composed. But the
complete and decisive answer is this; that the silence of Euse
bius, so far from carrying with it the silence of Papias, does not
No weight even afford a presumption in this direction. Papias may have
tachedto quoted St Paul again and again, and yet Eusebius would see
ofEuse^°e no reason *° chronicle the fact. His usage in other cases is
bius. decisive on this point. The Epistle of Polycarp which was
read by Eusebius is the same which we still possess. Not
only does it teem with the most obvious quotations from St
Paul, but in one passage it directly mentions his writing to the
Philippians1. Yet the historian, describing its relation to the
Canonical Scriptures, contents himself with saying that it 'em
ploys some testimonies from the former Epistle of Peter2.'
Exactly similar is his language respecting Irenaeus also. Ire
naeus, as is well known, cites by name almost every one of St
Paul's Epistles; yet the description which Eusebius gives under
this same head, after quoting this writer's notices respecting
the history of the Gospels and the Apocalypse, is that 'he
mentions also the first Epistle of John, alleging very many
testimonies from it, and in like manner also the former Epistle
1 § 3- bo happens that in an earlier passage
2 H. E. iv. 14 b yi toi IloXixapiros (iii. 36) he has given an extract from
iv tJ SijXuBelai] irpbs QiXiiririjalovs airov Polycarp, in which St Paul's name
ypa<p7J cpepopAvn els Sevpo xixfnjral nai is mentioned ; but the quotation is
paprvpiais dirb rrjs Hirpov irporipas iiri- brought to illustrate the life of Igna-
aroXijs. This is all that Eusebius tins, and the mention of the Apostle
says with reference to Polycarp's know- there is purely accidental.
ledge of the Canonical writings. It

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 53
of Peter1.' There is every reason therefore to suppose that
Eusebius would deal with Papias as he has dealt with Polycarp
and Irenaeus, and that, unless Papias had introduced some
curious fact relating to St Paul, it would not have occurred
to him to record mere quotations from or references to this
Apostle's letters. It may be supposed that Eusebius records
with a fair amount of attention references to the Catholic
Epistles in early writers, because the limits of the Canon in
this part were not accurately fixed. On the other hand the
Epistles of St Paul were universally received and therefore
did not need to be accredited by any such testimony. But
whatever may be the explanation, the fact is patent, and it
furnishes a complete answer to the argument drawn from his
silence in the case of Papias2.
But, if the assumption has been proved to be baseless, have The views
we any grounds for saying that it is also highly improbable ? inferred*8
Here it seems fair to argue from the well-known to the un- from ?",s
known. Of the opinions of Papias respecting St Paul we know
absolutely nothing; of the opinions of Polycarp and Irenaeus
ample evidence lies before ue. Noscitur a sociis is a sound
maxim to apply in such a case. Papias was a companion of
Polycarp, and he is quoted with deference by Irenaeus8. Is it
probable that his opinions should be diametrically opposed to
those of his friend and contemporary on a cardinal point affect-
1 H. E. v. 8 pipvrjrai Si xal rijs Irenasus, because they are historically
'ludvvov irpurijs iiriaroXrjs, papripia il- connected with Papias ; but his silence
avTijs irXeiara elatpipuv, opolus Si xal is even more remarkable in other cases.
¦njs Hirpov irporipas. Thus, when speaking of the epistle of
8 It is necessary to press this argu- the Roman Clement (H. E. iii. 38), he
ment, because though it has never been alludes to the coincidences with the
answered and (so far as I can see) is Epistle to the Hebrews, but omits to
quite unanswerable, yet thoughtful mention the direct references to St
men, who have no sympathy with the Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians
Tubingen views of early Christian his- which is referred to by name. I have
tory, still continue to argue from the discussed the whole subject in the
silence of Eusebius, as though it had Contemporary Review, January, 1875,
some real significance. To illustrate p. 169 sq.
the omissions of Eusebius I have given s Iren. Hcer. v. 33. 4.
only the instances of Polycarp and

54

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Millenna-rian views
consistent
with the
recognition of
St Paul.

Claudius
Apolli-naris bi-

ing the very conception of Christianity (for the rejection of
St Paul must be considered in this light) ? or that this vital
heterodoxy, if it existed, should have escaped an intelligent
critic of the next generation who had the five books of his
work before him, who himself had passed his early life in Asia
Minor, and who yet appeals to Papias as preserving the doc
trinal tradition which had been handed down from the Apostles
themselves to his own time? I say nothing of Eusebius himself,
who, with a distinct prejudice against Papias, accuses him of
no worse heresy in his writings than entertaining millennarian
views. It may indeed be confessed that a man like Papias, whose
natural bent, assisted by his Phrygian education, was towards
sensuous views of religion, would not be likely to appreciate the
essentially spiritual teaching of St Paul ; but this proves nothing.
The difference between unconscious want of sympathy and con
scious rejection is all-important for the matter in hand. The
same charge might be brought against numberless theologians,
whether in the middle ages or in more modern times, into whose
minds it never entered to question the authority of the Apostle
and who quote his writings with the utmost reverence. Nei
ther in the primitive days of Christianity nor in its later
stages has the profession of Chiliastic views been found in
consistent with the fullest recognition of St Paul's Apostolic
claims. In the early Church Irenaeus and Tertullian are
notable instances of this combination ; and in our own age and
country a tendency to millennarian speculations has been com
monly associated with the staunchest adherence to the funda
mental doctrines of St Paul1.
The literary character of the see of Hierapolis, which had
been inaugurated by Papias, was ably sustained by Claudius
1 In the earlier editions I had given a that his see was not Hierapolis on the
place to Abercius, as Bishop of Hiera- Meander, butHierapolisnearSynnada.
polis, between Papias and Claudius The question is discussed at greater
ApoUinaris following the extant Acts length in my Ignatius and Polycarp
of Abercius. But the recent researches i. p. 477 sq.
of Prof. W. M. Ramsay have shown

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 55
Apollinaris. His surname, which seems to have been com- shop of
mon in these parts1, may have been derived from the patron iisieraP°
deity of Hierapolis2 and suggests a Gentile origin. His inti
mate acquaintance with heathen literature, which is mentioned
by more than one ancient writer, points in the same direction.
During the reign of M. Aurelius he had already made himself
a name by his writings, and seems to have been promoted to
the see of Hierapolis before the death of that emperor8.
Of his works, which were very numerous, only a few scanty His liter-
fragments have survived4. The imperfect lists however, which ary w r
have reached us, bear ample testimony both io the literary

1 Some of the family, as we may
infer from the monuments, held a
high position in another Phrygian
town. On a tablet at iEzani, on which
is inscribed a letter from the emperor
Septimius Severus in reply to the con
gratulations of the people at the ele
vation of Caracalla to the rank of Au
gustus (a.d. 198), we find the name of
KA&Y^ioc.&TroAAiNApioc . &YPHA1&-
noc, Boeckh 3837 (see in. p. 1066
add.). In another inscription at the
same place, the same or another mem
ber of the family is commemorated as
holding the office of praator for the
second time, CTp&THroyNTOC . to . B .
kA . attoAAinapioy; Boeckh 3840,
ib. p. 1067. See also the inscriptions
3842 c, 3846 z (ib. pp. 1069, 1078) at
the same place, where again the name
Apollinarius occurs. It is found also
at Appia no. 3857 b (ib. p. 1086). In
more distant regions we meet with at
least two contemporaries of this Chris
tian father, bearing the same combi
nation of names, the one in Upper
Egypt (Boeckh 483 r b), and the other
at Athens (Inscr. Att. m. 1 140). At an
earlier date, under Trajan, we are
confronted with a Ti. Claudius Apol
linaris likewise in Upper Egypt
(Boeckh 4714). At an earlier date
one Claudius Apollinaris is found in

command of the Roman fleet at Mi-
senum (Tac Hist. iii. 57, 76, 77), and
a person of the name appears in a
Neapolitan inscription (C. I. L. x.
3564). The name Apollinaris occurs
also at Hierapolis itself, but combined
with another nomen, Boeckh no. 3915,
n.AiAioc.n.&iAiOY.&rroAAiNApioY. ioyAiano[y] .Yioc.ce[...] . attoAAi-
N&pic . makgAcon . x.r.X., which shows
that both the forms, Apollinaris and
Apollinarius, by which the bishop of
Hierapolis is designated, are legitimate.
The former however is the oorreot
Latin form, the latter being the Greek
adaptation. More than a generation later than
our Apollinaris, Origen in his letter to
Africanus (Op. 1. 30, Delarue) sends
greeting to a bishop bearing this name
(rbv xaXbv i)p.uv irdirav ' AiroXivdpiov), of
whom nothing more is known.
2 Apollo Archegetes; see above p.
12, note 1.
3 Euseb. H. E. iv. 26, Chron. s. a.
171, 172, ' Apollinaris Asianus, Hiera-
politanus episcopus, insignis habetur.'
* Collected in Routh's Reliquiae Sa
cra 1. p. 159 sq., and more recently in
Otto's Corp. Apol. Christ, ix. p. 479 sq.
For more respecting the writings of
Claudius Apollinaris see Contemporary
Review, February 1876, p. 486 sq.

56 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
activity of the man, and to the prominence of the Church over
which he presided, in the great theological and ecclesiastical
controversies of the age.
He takes The two questions, which especially agitated the Churches
two chief6 of Asia Minor during the last thirty years of the first century,
siesof^ were tne celebration of the Easter festival and the pretensions
day- of the Montanist prophets. In both disputes Claudius Apolli
naris took an active and conspicuous part.
i. The i. The Paschal controversy, after smouldering long both
question, here and elsewhere, first burst into flames in the neighbouring
Church of Laodicea1. An able bishop of Hierapolis therefore
must necessarily have been involved in the dispute, even if he
had been desirous of avoiding it. What side Apollinaris took
in the controversy the extant fragments of his work do not
by themselves enable us to decide ; for they deal merely with
a subsidiary question which does not seriously affect the main
issue2. But we can hardly doubt that with Polycarp of
Smyrna and Melito of Sardis and Polycrates of Ephesus he
defended the practice which was universal in Asia8, observing
the Paschal anniversary on the 14th Nisan whether it fell on
a Friday or not, and invoking the authority of St John at
Ephesus, and of St Philip at his own Hierapolis4, against
the divergent usage of Alexandria and Palestine and the
West.
2.Montan- 2. His writings on the Montanist controversy were still
1Bm> more famous, and are recommended as an authority on the
subject by Serapion of Antioch a few years after the author's
1 See below, p. 61. 3 Eusebius represents the dioceses
2 The main point at issue was of 'Asia' and the neighbourhood, as
whether the exact day of the month absolutely unanimous ; H. E. v. 23 rrjs
should be observed, as the Quarto- 'Aalas dirdaijs al irapoixlai, v. 24 rrjs
decimans maintained, irrespective of 'Aalas rrdarjs dpa rais opbpois ixKXijalais
the day of the week. The fragments of Tas irapoidas. ' Asia ' includes all this
Apollinaris (preserved in the Chron. district, as appears from Polycrates,
Pasch. p. 13) relate to a discrepancy ib.
which some had found in the accounts 4 See Polycrates of Ephesus in
of St Matthew and St John ; see Con- Euseb. H. E. v. 24.
temporary Review I. c. p. 487 sq.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

57

death1. Though later than many of his works2, they were
written soon after Montanus had divulged the extravagance of
his pretensions and before Montanism had attained its complete
development. If a later notice may be trusted, Apollinaris was
not satisfied with attacking Montanism in writing, but sum
moned at Hierapolis a council of twenty-six bishops besides
himself, where this heresy was condemned and sentence of
excommunication pronounced against Montanus together with
his adherent the pretended prophetess Maximilla8.

1 In Euseb. H. E. v. 19.
¦ Eusebius (H. E. iv. 27) at the
close of his list of the works of Apol
linaris gives xal d perd ravra avv-
iypasjie Kard Tijs [tuv] $pvyuv alpi-
crews per ov iroXiv KOivoropijBeiaijs
Xpbvov, rbre ye pty uairep ixtpieiv dp-
Xopivijs, (ti tov Movravov dpa Tats ai
rov spevSoirpotpifriaiv dpxds Tijs irapex-
rpoirrjs iroiovpivov, i.e. the vagaries of
Montanus and his followers had al
ready begun when Apollinaris wrote,
but Montanism assumed a new phase
shortly after.
3 Included in the Libellus Synodi-
cus published by Pappus; see Labb.
Cone. 1. 615, ed. Coleti. Though this
council is not mentioned elBewhere,
there is no sufficient ground for ques
tioning its authenticity. The import
ant part taken by Apollinaris against
the Montanists is recognised by Eu
sebius H. E. v. 16, irpbs ttjc XeyopAvrjv
xard $piyas atpeaiv SirXov laxvpbv xal
dKarayuviarov iirl rijs 'XeparrbXeus rbv
'AiroXivdpiov. After mentioning the council the
compiler of this Synodicon speaks thus
of the false prophets; ot xal jSXaatpij-
pus, rrroi iaipovuvres, xaBus cpijaiv 6
ottos irarrjp [i.e. 'AiroXivdpios], rbv jSiov
xariarpesj/av, oiv airois Si xarixpive
xal BebBorav rbv axvria. He evidently
has before him the fragments of the
anonymous treatises quoted by Euse

bius (H. E. v. 16), as the following
parallels taken from these fragments
show: ws iirl ivepyovpivu xal Saipo-
vuvTi...f}Xao<pijpeiv SiSdaxovros toB
dirijvBaSiapivov irveipaTos...rbv [3ibv
xaraarpixpai 'loiSa irpoSbrov Slxijv
...olov iirirpoirov riva QeoSorov iroXis
alpei A670S... TeTeXevriJKaai Movravos re
xal BeoSoros xal 1) irpoeipijpivij yvvrj.
Thus he must have had before him a
text of Eusebius (H. E. v. 16) which
omitted the words Srj tis at the com
mencement, as they are omitted in
some existing mss; and accordingly
he ascribed all the treatises to Apol
linaris. The parallels are taken from
the first and second treatises ; the
first might have been written by
ApoUinaris, but the second was cer
tainly not by his hand, as it refers to
much later events.
Hefele (Gonciliengeschichte 1. p. 71)
places the date of this council be
fore a.d. 150. But if the testimony
of Eusebius is worth anything, this is
impossible; for he states that the
writings of Claudius Apollinaris a-
gainst the Montanists were later than
his Apology to M. Aurelius (see the
last note), and this Apology was not
written till after a.d. 174. The chro
nology of Montanism is very perplex
ing, but Hefele's dates appear to be
much too early. The Chronicon of
Eusebius gives the rise of Montanism

58

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

His other
haeresiolo-gical writ
ings.

His apolo
getic

Nor were his controversial writings confined to these two
topics. In one place he refuted the Encratites1 ; in another he
upheld the orthodox teaching respecting the true humanity
of Christ2. It is plain that he did not confine himself to
questions especially affecting Asia Minor; but that the doc
trine and the practice of the Church generally found in him
a vigorous advocate, who was equally opposed to the novelties
of heretical teaching and to the rigours of overstrained asceti
cism. Nor again did Apollinaris restrict himself to controversies
carried on between Christian and Christian. He appears alike
as the champion of the Gospel against attacks from without,
and as the promoter of Christian life and devotion within the
pale of the Church. On the one hand he was the author of an
apology addressed to M. Aurelius8, of a controversial treatise in
five books against the Greeks, and of a second in two books

under a.d. 172 or 173, and this state
ment is consistent with the notices in
his History. But if this date be cor
rect, it most probably refers to Mon
tanism as a distinct system; and the
fires had probably been smouldering
within the Church for some time be
fore they broke out.
It will be observed that the writer
of the Synodicon identifies Theodotus
the Montanist (see Euseb. H. E. v. 3)
with Theodotus the leather-seller who
was a Monarohian. There is no au
thority for this identification in Euse
bius. 1 Theodoret. H. F. i. 21.
2 Socr. H. E. iii. 7.
3 Euseb. H. E. iv. 26, 27. He re
ferred in this Apology to the incident
of the so-called Thundering Legion
which happened a.d. 174; and as re
ported by Eusebius (ff. E. v. 5), he
stated that the legion was thus named
by the emperor in commemoration of
this miraculous thunderstorm. As a
contemporary however, he must pro

bably have known that the title Legio
Fulminata existed long before; and
we may conjecture that he used some
ambiguous expression implying that
it was fitly so named (e.g. iiruvvpov
rijs avvrvxlas), which Eusebius and
later writers misunderstood ; just as
Eusebius himself (v. 24) speaks of
Irenseus as tpepuvvpJis tis wV t-jj irpoarj-
yopia air£ re rip Tpbiru elprjvoiroios. Of
the words used by Eusebius, olxetav t<J>
7670TOT1 irpos tov j3aaiXius elXijtpivai
irpoarjyopiav, we may suspect that ol-
xelav Tip yeyovbn irpoarjyopiav is an ex
pression borrowed from Apollinaris
himself, while irpbs tov fiaaiXius elXij
tpivai gives Eusebius' own erroneous
interpretation of his author's meaning.
The name of this legion was Fulmi
nata not Fulminatrix, as it is often
carelessly written out, where the in
scriptions have merely b-vlm or some
other abbreviation. I have discussed
this story of the Thundering Legion
more fully in Ignatius and Polycarp, 1.
p. 472 sq.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 59
against the Jews 1 ; on the other we find mentioned among his
writings a work in two books On Truth, and a second On Piety, and di'
. . . dactic
besides several of which the titles have not come down to us2, works.
He seems indeed to have written on almost every subject which
interested the Church of his age. He was not only well versed
in the Scriptures, but showed a wide acquaintance with secular
literature also. His style is praised by a competent judge4,
and his orthodoxy was such as to satisfy the dogmatic precision
of the post-Nicene age6.
These facts are not unimportant in their bearing on the
question which has already been discussed in relation to Papias.
If there had been such a discontinuity of doctrine and practice Important
bearing of
in the Church of Hierapolis as the theory in question assumes, these facts
if the Pauline Gospel was repudiated in the later years of the history of
first century and rank Judaism adopted in its stead, how can Christi-
we explain the position of Apollinaris ? Obviously a counter
revolution must have taken place, which undid the effects of
the former. One dislocation must have been compensated by
another. And yet Irenaeus knows nothing of these religious con
vulsions which must have shaken the doctrine of the Church to
its foundations, but represents the tradition as one, continuous,
unbroken, reaching back through the elders of the Asiatic
Churches, through Papias and Polycarp, to St John himself —

1 The words xal irpbs 'JovSalovs irpu- Piety, of which we know from Photius
tok xal Seirepov are omitted in some Bibl. 14; see Contemporary Review,
mss and by Rufinus. They are found 1. c. p. 487.
however in the very ancient Syriac 3 Theodoret. Har. Fab. iii. 2 dvijp
version, and are doubtless genuine, dS-iirraaios xal irpbs t$ yvuaei tuv Beluv
Their omission is due to the homoeote- xal ttjv (!-u8ev iraiSetav irpoaeiXijtpus.
leuton, as they are immediately pre- So too Jerome, Ep. 70 (1. p. 428, ed.
ceded by xal irepl dXrjBelas irpurov xal Vallarsi), names him among those who
Seirepov. were equally versed in sacred and pro-
2 A list of his works is given by fane literature.
Eusebius (H. E. iv. 27), who explains * Photius 1. c, d£t6Xoyos Si b dvijp
that there were many others which xal tppdaei d%ioX6yu Kexpnpivos.
he had not seen. This Ust omits the B Euseb. H. E. iv. 21, Jerome
work on the Paschal Feast, whioh is 1. c, Theodoret. 1. c, Socr. H. E.
quoted in the Chronicon Paschale iii. 7.
p. 13 (ed. Dind.), and the treatise On

60 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
Irenaeus who received his Christian education in Asia Minor,
who throughout life was in communication with the churches
there, and who had already reached middle age when this second
revolution is supposed to have occurred. The demands on
our credulity, which this theory makes, are enormous. And
its improbability becomes only the more glaring, as we extend
Solidarity our view. For the solidarity of the Church is the one striking
Church in fact unmistakably revealed to us, as here and there the veil
the second wnich shrouds the history of the second century is lifted.
century. J . _,
Anicetus and Soter and Eleutherus and victor at Kome,
Pantaenus and Clement at Alexandria, Polycrates at Ephesus,
Papias and Apollinaris at Hierapolis, Polycarp at Smyrna,
Melito at Sardis, Ignatius and Serapion at Antioch, Primus
and Dionysius at Corinth, Pothinus and Irenaeus in Gaul,
Philippus and Pinytus in Crete, Hegesippus and Narcissus
in Palestine, all are bound together by the ties of a common
organization and the sympathy of a common creed. The
Paschal controversy is especially valuable, as showing the
limits of divergence consistent with the unity of the Church.
The study of this controversy teaches us to appreciate with
ever-increasing force the pregnant saying of Irenseus that
the difference of the usage establishes the harmony of the
faith1.
Activity of Though Laodicea cannot show the same intellectual ac
tivity as Hierapolis, yet in practical energy she is not want
ing.
Martyr- One of those fitful persecutions, which sullied the rule of
the imperial Stoic, deprived Laodicea of her bishop Sagaris2.
The exact date of his martyrdom is not known ; but we cannot
be far wrong in assigning it to an early year in the reign of

1 Iren. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24 1) Sia- 'Aatas, 0) Scryctpis xaipqj ipaprvprjaev,
ipwvla rrjs vijarelas (the fast which pre- iyivero tfrijais iroXXi) iv AaoSixela
ceded the Paschal festival) tijv bpbvoiav vepl tov iraaxa ipireaivros xard Kaipbv
rijs iriareus avvlarijai. iv ixeivais rals rjpipais, xal iypdtpij ravra
8 Melito in Euseb. H. E. iv. 26 iirl (i. e. Melito's own treatise on the
'ZepoviXXlov HaiXov dvBvirdrov rijs Paschal festival).

Laodicea.

dom of

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 6l
M. Aurelius, if not before1. His name appears to have been
held in great honour2.
But while the Church of Laodicea was thus contending Outbreak
against foes without, she was also torn asunder by feuds within. 0hai oon- *
Coincident with the martyrdom of Sagaris was the outburst of tr0Yersv-
the Paschal controversy, of which mention has been already
made, and which for more than a century and a half disturbed
the peace of the Church, until it was finally laid at rest by the
Council of Nicaea. The Laodiceans would naturally regulate
their festival by the Asiatic or Quartodeciman usage, strictly
observing the day of the month and disregarding the day of
the week. But a great commercial centre like Laodicea must
have attracted large crowds of foreign Christians from Palestine
or Egypt or Rome or Gaul, who were accustomed to commemo
rate the Passion always on a Friday and the Resurrection on
a Sunday accordmg to the western practice; and in this way
probably the dispute arose. The treatise On the Paschal
Festival by Melito of Sardis was written on this occasion to
defend the Asiatic practice. The fact that Laodicea became
the head-quarters of the controversy is a speaking testimony
to the prominence of this Church in the latter half of the
second century.
At a later date the influence of Laodicea has sensibly de- Laodicea
clined. In the great controversies of the fourth and fifth history.
1 The proconsulate of Paullus, under founded with Servius (Servillius) (see
whom tbia martyrdom took place is Borghesi rv. p. 493, vni. p. 504,
dated by Borghesi (QSuvres viii. p. 507) Mommsen Rom. Forsch. 1. p. 8, Ephem.
somewhere between a.d. 163 — 168 ; by Epigr. n. p. 338). The mistake must
Waddington (Fostes des Provinces Asia- have been introduced very early into
tiques p. 228) probably a.d. 164 — 166. the text of Eusebius. All the Greek mss
Some reasons are given in Ignatius have Servillius (Servilius), and so it is
and Polycarp 1. p. 494, whioh seem given in the Syriao Version. Rufinus
to point to a.d. 159 or 163; but the however writes it correctly Sergius.
exact year must remain uncertain. a Besides Melito (I. c), Polycrates of
All these solutions rest on the as- Ephesus refers to him with respect;
sumption that the Servillius Paullus Euseb. H. E. v. 24 rl Si Sei Xiyeiv
here named must be identified with L. "Zdyapiv iiriaKoirov xal pdprvpa, Ss iv
Sergius Paullus of the inscriptions. AaoSixela xeKoipijrai.
The name Sergius is elsewhere con-

62 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
centuries she takes no very conspicuous part. Among her
bishops there is not one who has left his mark on history. And
yet their names appear at most of the great Councils, in which
The Arian they bear a silent part. At Nicaea she was represented by
NiSI' Nunechius1. He acquiesced in the decrees of the Council, and
A-D- 325- as metropolitan published them throughout the Churches of his
Philippo- province2. A little later this see lapsed into Arianism. At the
a.d. 347. synod of Philippopolis, composed of bishops who had seceded
from the Council of Sardica, the representative of Laodicea was
present and joined in the condemnation of the Athanasians.
But the see had changed hands twice meanwhile. Cecropius
had won the imperial favour by his abuse of the orthodox
party, and was first promoted to Laodicea, whence he was
translated to Nicomedia8. He was succeeded by Nonnius, who
signed the Arian decree at Philippopolis4. When Laodicea
[Constan- recovered her orthodoxy we do not know ; but it is perhaps
a.d. 381!] a significant fact, that she does not appear at the second
The Nes- general Council, held at Constantinople (a.d. 38 1)5. At the
EuTcftiam ^T& general Council, which met at Ephesus, she is represented
heresies, by Aristonicus, who signs the decrees condemning Nestorius.
Ephesus. . . . ^ , .
a.d. 431. Again in the next Christological controversy which agitated the
Latrocin- Church she bears her part. At the notorious Robbers' Synod,
a.d. 449. held also at Ephesus, she was represented by another Nune
chius, who committed himself to the policy of Dioscorus and
the opinions of the heretic Eutyches6. Yet with the fickleness
which characterized this see at an earlier date during the Arian
Chalce- controversy, we find this same Nunechius two years later at
the Council of Chalcedon siding with the orthodox party and

DON.
A.D. 451

1 Labb. Cone. n. 57, 62 ; Cowper's * Labb. Cone. n. 744.
Syriac Miscellanies pp. n, 28, 34. He 6 Cowper's Syriac Miscell. p. 39.
had also been present at the Synod e Labb. Cone. rv. 892, 925, 928,
of Ancyra held about a.d. 314 (see 1107, 1170, 1171, 1185. In the Acts
Galatians p. 34); ib. p. 41. of this, heretical council, as occasion
2 Labb. Gone. 11. 236. ally in those of the Council of Chal-
3 Athanas. ad Episc. JEgypt. 8 (Op. cedon, Laodicea is surnamed Trimi-
1. p. 219), Hist. Arian. ad Mon. 74 taria (see above, p. 18, note 2).
(ib. p. 307).

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

63

condemning the Eutychian heresy which he had so lately sup
ported1. The history of this church at a later date is such as might
have been anticipated from her attitude during the period of
the first Four General Councils. The same vacillation and
infirmity of purpose, which had characterized her bishops in the
earlier councils, marks the proceedings of their later successors2.
But, though this see thus continues to bear witness to its
existence by the repeated presence of its occupants at councils
and synods, yet its real influence on the Church at large has
terminated with the close of the second century. On one
occasion only did this Church assume a position of prominence.
About the middle of the fourth century a council was held at
Laodicea3. It was convened more especially to settle some

Latervacillation of Lao
dicea.

Its com
parativeunimportance. Council or Laodi
cea an ex
ception.

1 Labb. Cone. rv. 853, 1195, 1241,
1312, 1384, 1392, 1445, 1463, 1481,
1501, 1732, 1736, 1745, 1752. Nune
chius was addressed by the Emperor
Leo in his letter respecting the Counoil
ofChalcedon. He was also one of those
who signed the decree against simony
at the Council of Constantinople (a.d.
459): Cone. v. 50.
2 See for instance the tergiversa
tion of Theodorus of Laodicea in the
matter of Photius and the 8th General
Council. 3 This council cannot have been
held earlier than the year 344, as the
7th canon makes mention of the Pho-
tinians, and Photinus did not attract
notice before that year: see Hefele,
Conciliengesch. 1. p. 722 sq. In the
ancient lists of Councils it stands after
that of Antioch (a.d. 341), and before
that of Constantinople (a.d. 381).
Dr Westcott (History of the Canon
p. 400) is inclined to place it about
a.d. 363, and this is the time very
generally adopted.
Here however a difficulty presents
itself, which has not been noticed

hitherto. In the Syriao ms Brit. Mus.
Add. 14,528, are lists of the bishops
present at the earlier councils, includ
ing Laodicea (see Wright's Catalogue of
the Syriac MSS in the British Museum,
dcccvi, p. 1030 sq.). These lists have
been published by Cowper (Syriac
MisceU. p. 42 sq., Analecta Niccena
p. 36), who however has transposed
the lists of Antioch and Laodicea, so
that he ascribes to the Antiochian
Synod the names which really belong
to the Laodicean. This is determined
(as I am informed by Prof. Wright)
by the position of the lists.
The Laodicean list then, which seems
to be imperfect, contains twenty names ;
and, when examined, it yields these re
sults. (1) At least three-fourths of the
names can be identified with bishops
who sat at Nicaaa, and probably the
exceptions would be fewer, if in some
cases they had not been obscured by
transcription into Syriao and by the
errors of copyists. (2) When identi
fied, they are found to belong in almost
every instance to Ccelesyria, Phoanicia,
Palestine, Cilicia, and Isauria, whereas

64

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Its decree points of ecclesiastical discipline ; but incidentally the assembled
Canon. bishops were led to make an order respecting the Canon of
Scripture1. As this was the first occasion in which the subject
had been brought formally before the notice of an ecclesiastical
assembly, this Council of Laodicea secured a notoriety which
it would not otherwise have obtained, and to which it was
hardly entitled by its constitution or its proceedings. Its
decrees were confirmed and adopted by later councils both in
the East and in the West2.

apparentlynot one comes fromPhrygia,
Lydia, or the other western districts
of Asia Minor.
Supposing that this is a genuine
Laodicean list, we are led by the first
result to place it as near in time as
possible to the Council of Nicaea;
and by the second to question whether
after all the Syrian Laodicea may not
have been meant instead of the Phry
gian. On the other hand tradition is
unanimous in placing this synod in
the Phrygian town, and in this very
Syriac its the heading of the canons
begins 'Of the Synod of Laodicea of
Phrygia.' On the whole it appears
probable that this supposed list of
bishops who met at Laodicea belongs
to some other Council. The Laodicean
Synod seems to have been, as Dr
Westcott describes it (1. c), 'A small
gathering of clergy from parts of
Lydia and Phrygia.'
In a large mosaic work in the Church
at Bethlehem, in which all the more
important councils are represented,
we find the following inscription ; [*H]
dyia avvoSos i) iv AaoSixeia rrjs $pvyias
tuv xe iTiaxbiTuv yiyovev Sid "M.ovravbv
xi [t]ci[s] Xoiirds ipiaeis' toi/[tous] ws
alpenxois xal exBpois rrjs dXeBetas t)
dyia avvoSos dveBepdnaev (Ciampinide
Sacr. Mdif. a Constant, constr. p. 156;
comp. Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 8953).
The mention of Montanus might sug

gest that this was one of those Asiatio
synods held against Montanism at
the end of the second or beginning of
the third century. But no record of
any such synod is preserved elsewhere,
and, as all the other Councils com
memorated in these mosaics are found
in the list sanctioned by the Quini-
sextine Counoil, this can hardly have
been an exception. The inscription
must therefore refer to the well-known
Counoil of Laodicea in the fourth cen
tury, which received this sanction.
The description however is not very
correct, for though Montanism is inci
dentally condemned in the eighth
canon, yet this condemnation was not
the main object of the council and oc
cupies a very subordinate place. The
Bethlehem Mosaics were completed
a.d. 1169: see Boeckh C. I. 8736.
1 The canons of this Council,
59 in number, will be found in Labb.
Cone. 1. 1530 sq. ed. Coleti. The last
of these forbids the reading of any
but ' the Canonical books of the New
and Old Testament.' To this is often
appended (sometimes as a 60th canon)
a list of the Canonical books; but
Dr Westcott has shown that this list
is a later addition and does not
belong to the original decrees of the
council (Canon p. 400 sq.).
2 By the Quinisextine Counoil (a. d.
692) in the East (Labb. Cone. vn.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 65
More important however for my special purpose, than the Its deorees
influence of this synod on the Church at large, is the light the Epi-
which its canons throw on the heretical tendencies of this o^ic*
district, and on the warnings of St Paul in the Colossian sians-
Epistle. To illustrate this fact it will only be necessary to
write out some of these canons at length :
29. 'It is not right for Christians to Judaize and abstain Col. ii. i4,
from labour on the sabbath, but to work on this same day. They '
should pay respect rather to the Lord's day, and, if possible, ab
stain from labour on it as Christians. But if they should be
found Judaizers, let them be anathema in the sight of Christ.'
35. ' It is not right for Christians to abandon the Church Col. ii. 18.
of God and go away and invoke angels (0776X01/9 ovofid^eiv)1
and hold conventicles (awd%ei<s iroieiv); for these things are
forbidden. If therefore any one is found devoting himself
to this secret idolatry, let him be anathema, because he aban
doned our Lord Jesus Christ and went after idolatry.'
36. 'It is not right for priests or clergy to be magicians
or enchanters or mathematicians or astrologers2, or to make
1345), and by the Synod of Aix-la- the same invocation, ape • <pyAaton .
Chapelle (a.d. 789) in the West (Cone. THN # tjo^in . miAhciwn . km .
IX. IO Sq.). TTANT&C . TOYC . K&TOIKOYNT&C,
1 Theodoret about a century after whUe at the common Daae is written
theLaodicean Council, commenting on Ao| . 4,^^™ . H . no-
Col. ii. 18, states that this disease
(rb irdBos) which St Paul denounces *IC • miAhc.wn . KM . nANTec . 01 .
'long remained in Phrygia and Pi- KAT... Boeckh wntes, 'Etsi hie
sidia.' 'For this reason also,' he titulus Gnosticorum et Basilidianorum
adds, 'a synod convened in Lao- commentis prorsus congruus est, ta-
dicea of Phrygia forbad by a decree men potuit ab ethnicis Milesiis scrip.
the offering prayer to angels; and tus esse ; quare nolui eum inter Chris-
even to tho present time oratoriea of tianos rejicere, quum priesertim pub-
the holy Michael may be seen among lies Milesiorum superstitionis docu-
them and their neighbours.' See mentum insigne sit.' The idea of
also below p. 68, note 1. A curi- the seven ayioi, combined in the one
ous inscription, found in the theatre dpxdyyeXos, seems certainly to point
at Miletus (Boeckh C. I. 2895), illus- to Jewish, if not Christian, influences:
trates this tendency. It is written Rev. i. 4, iii. 1, iv. 5, v. 6.
in seven columns, each having a dif- a Though there is no direct men-
ferent planetary symbol, and a dif- tion of 'magio' in the letter to the
ferent permutation of the vowels with Colossians, yet it was a characteristio
COL. S

66 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
safeguards (cf)Vr\aicrrjpt,a) as they are called, for such things are
prisons (Seo-fMOTr/pia) of their souls1: and we have enjoined
that they which wear them be cast out of the Church.'
37. ' It is not right to receive from Jews or heretics the
festive offerings which they send about, nor to join in their
festivals.' 38. ' It is not right to receive unleavened bread from the
Jews or to participate in their impieties.'
It is strange, at this late date, to find still lingering in
these churches the same readiness to be 'judged in respect
of an holiday or a new moon or a sabbath,' with the same
tendency to relinquish the hold of the Head and to substitute
' a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels,' which three
centuries before had called forth the Apostle's rebuke and
warning in the Epistle to the Colossians.
Career of The career of Hierapolis is not so easily followed during these
p0lis'' centuries. So far as we can trace the facts, its history appears
not to have differed materially from that of its neighbour
Laodicea, though even less conspicuous than this latter. But
there has been much confusion with another less considerable
Phrygian city of the same name, Hieropolis or Hierapolis, near
Synnada2; and notices have hitherto been appropriated to it,
tendency of this part of Asia : Acts in the same Journal 1883, p. 424 sq.
xix. 19, 2 Tim. iii. 8, 13. See the The most important result is the
note on Gal. v. 20. The term paBrj- rescue from oblivion of the city of
panxol is used in this decree in its Hieropolis near Synnada, wliich had
ordinary sense of astrologers, sooth- a considerable Christian population as
sayers. early as the second century. This
1 A play on the double sense of <pv- place, which belonged to Phrygia Salu-
XaKTijpiov (1) a safeguard or amulet, taris and therefore was a suffragan see
(2) a guard-house. of Synnada, is commonly written
2 A flood of light has been thrown Hierapolis in the records of the Coun-
upon the ecclesiastical arrangements oils and in the Notitiaa, and is even
of Phrygia by the recent researches of declined 'lepds iroXews. Inconsequence
Prof.W. M. Ramsay ; seehispapers Trois of Ramsay's discoveries I have con-
Villes Phrygiennes in the Bulletin de siderably modified what I wrote in the
CorrespondanceHell4nique,3niiletiS8i, earlier editions of this work, as it is
The Tale of Abercius in the Journal of now clear that many bishops, who
Hellenic Studies 1882, p. 339 sq., and have hitherto been assigned to the
The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia city near the Lycus, belong to this

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 67
which are now shown to belong to its less famous namesake.
This latter place appears from the monumental inscriptions, as
well as from other indications, to have occupied a position in
the early history of Christianity quite out of proportion to its
size or its political importance.
During the flourishing period of the Eastern Church, Lao- Ecclesias-
dicea appears as the metropolis of the province of Phrygia ofLaodi"8
Pacatiana counting among its suffragan bishoprics the see of Hferapo-
Colossae1. Hierapolis would seem to have been one of the li3-
more important sees in this same province. At a later date
Hierapolis itself was raised to metropolitan rank2.
But while Laodicea and Hierapolis held the foremost place Obscurity
in the records of the early Church, and continued to bear an

namesake. This is the case not only
with the early Abercius, who has
been already mentioned (p. 54), but
also with a later bishop of the same
name, who was present at the Council
of Chalcedon (Labb. Cone. rv. 862,
1204, 1496, 1716, 1744). This con
fusion may suggest a suspicion, that
even Papias and Claudius Apollinaris —
one or both — may belong to this other
Hierapolis; but the consideration that
the city near the Lycus had a Chris
tian community as early as the Apo
stolic times and that it was the larger
place of the two will reassure us.
1 A list of the bishoprics belonging
to this province at the time of the
Council of Chalcedon, on whose behalf
their metropolitan signs the decrees,
is given, Labb. Gone. rv. 1501, 1716.
Colossae is one of these, but Hierapolis
is not.
2 At the 5th and 6th General Coun
cils (a.d. 553 and a.d. 680) Hierapolis
is styled a metropolis (Labb. Cone. vi.
220, vn. 1068, 1097, 1117); and in the
latter case it is designated metropolis
of Phrygia Pacatiana, though this
same designation is still given to Lao

dicea. Synnada retains its position
as metropolis of Phrygia Salutaris.
From this time forward Hierapolis
seems always to hold metropolitan
rank. But no notice is preserved of
the circumstances under which the
change was made. It took place how
ever after Hierocles, and not impro
bably in a.d. 535 under Justinian : see
Ramsay Cities and Bishoprics of Phry
gia p. 374. Accordingly in the No-
titice, which are later, it is entered
as metropolis of another Phrygia Pa
catiana (distinct from that which has
Laodicea for its metropolis) : Hieroclis
Synecdemus et Notitice (ed. Parthey)
Not. 1, pp. 56, 57, 73 ; Not. 3, p. 124;
Not. 6, p. 147; Not. 7, pp. 152, 161;
Not. 8, pp. 164, 180; Not. 9, p. 197;
Not. 10, p. 220. In this position it is
placed out of the proper geographical
order and near the close of the list, thus
showing that its metropolitan jurisdic
tion was created at a comparatively late
date. The number of dioceses in the
province is generally given as 9 ; Nilus
ib. p. 301. The name of the province
is variously, corrupted from Haxanavrjs
e.g. Kairiranavyjs, KairiraboKias.
5—2

68

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

active, though inconspicuous part, in later Christian history,
Colossae was from the very first a cipher. The town itself, as
we have seen, was already waning in importance, when the
Apostle wrote ; and its subsequent decline seems to have been
rapid. Not a single event in Christian history is connected
with its name; and its very existence is only rescued from
oblivion, when at long intervals some bishop of Colossae at
taches his signature to the decree of an ecclesiastical synod.
The city ceased to strike coins in the reign of Gordian (a.d.
It is sup- 238 — 244)1. It fell gradually into decay, being supplanted by
Chona>. ythe neighbouring town Chonae, the modern Chonos, so called
from the natural funnels by which the streams here disappear
in underground channels formed by the incrustations of traver
tine2. We may conjecture also that its ruin was hastened by
a renewed assault of its ancient enemy, the earthquake8. It is

1 See Mionnet rv. p. 269, Leake
Numism. Hellen. p. 45.
2 Joannes Curopalata p. 686 (ed.
Bonn.) <pijpij...Tois Toipxovs dirayyiX-
Xovaa rty iv Xc&pcus iroXireiav xaX airbv
rbv irepifSbrjrov iv Bavpaai xal dvaBrj-
paai toO dpxiarparrjyov vabv KaraXafHeiv
iv paxatpq.... Kal rb S^ axerXiiirepov,
pijSi rds tov xdaparos arjpayyas iv tpwep
ol irapappiovres irorapol ixeiae x°>vevb-
pevoi did ttjs rov dpxiarpaTijyov ira-
Xaids iiriSrjpias xal Beoaijpias us Sid
irpavovs dararovv to pevpa xai Xidv
evSpopovv (xovai, rois KaTaTCetpevybras
Siarijpijaai, k.t.X.
The ' worship of angels' is curiously
connected with the physical features
of the country in the legend to which
Curopalata refers. The people were in
imminent danger from a sudden inun
dation of the Lycus, when the arch
angel Michael appeared and opened a
chasm in the earth through whioh the
waters flowed away harmlessly : Hart
ley's Researches in Greece p. 53. See
another legend, or another version of
ihe legend, in which the archangel
interposes, in Laborde p. 103.

It was the birthplace of Nicetas
Choniates, one of the most important
of the Byzantine historians, who thus
speaks of it (de Manuel, vi. 2, p. 230,
ed. Bonn.); $pvylav re xal AaoSlxeiav
SieXBuv dtpixveirai is XuWs, irbXiv eu-
Salpova xal peydXijv, 7rtiAat Tas KoXao--
o-as, Tr)i> ipov tou avyypaipius irarpiSa,
xal rbv dpxayyeXixbv vabv elaiuv peyiBei
piyiarov Kal KaXXei KaXXiarov Svra Kal
Bavpaalas xeLpbs diravra ipyov k.t.X.,
where a corrupt reading ITaXao-o-ds for
KoXaaads had misled some. It will be
remembered that the words irbXiv
eiSatpova xal peydXijv are borrowed from
Xenophon's description of Colossaa
(Anab. i. 2. 6) : see above, p. 15, note 3.
He again alludes to his native place,
de Isaac, ii. 1, pp. 52, 3 rois AooSocefs
Si Qpbyas pvpiaxus ixdxuaev, uairep xal
rois tuv TLuvwv tuv ipuv olxijropas, and
Urbs Capta 16, p. 842, rb Si rjv epov
tou avyypaipius THixrjra irarpis al Xwvai
Kal 17 dyxirippuv rairn ipvyiKij AaoSl-
xeia. " We may conjecture that it was the
disastrous earthquake under Gallienus
(a.d. 262) which proved fatal to Colos-

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 69
commonly said that Chonae is built on the site of the ancient
Colossae ; but the later town stands at some distance from the
earlier, as Salisbury does from Old Sarum. The episcopal
see necessarily followed the population ; though for some time
after its removal to the new town the bishop still continued
to use the older title, with or without the addition of Chonae
by way of explanation, till at length the name of this primitive
Apostolic Church passes wholly out of sight1.
The Turkish conquest pressed with more than common Turkish
i t _ _ «... conquest.
severity on these districts. When the day of visitation came,
the Church was taken by surprise. Occupied with ignoble
quarrels and selfish interests, she had no ear for the voice of
Him who demanded admission. The door was barred and

saB (see above p. 38, note 1). This is
consistent with the fact above men
tioned that no Colossian coins later
than Gordian are extant. We read
indeed of an earthquake in the reign
of Gordian himself ' eo usque gravis nt
civitates etiam terras liiatu deperirent'
(Capitol. Vit. Gord. 26), but we are not
informed of the localities affected by
it. When St Chrysostom wrote, the
city existed no longer, as may be in
ferred from his comment (si. p. 323)
'H irbXis tijs $pvylas tjv xai SijXov ix
tov ttjv Aaoblxeiav irXrjaiov elvai.
On the other hand M. Renan
(L'Antechrist p. 99) says of the earth
quake under Nero, 'Colosses ne sut
se relever; elle disparut presque du
nombre des eglises'; and he adds in a
note 'Colosses n'a pas de monnaies
imperiales [Waddington].' For this
statement there is, I believe, no au
thority; and as regards the coins it is
certainly wrong.
Earthquakes have been largely in
strumental in changing the sites of
cities situated within the range of
their influence. Of this we have an
instance in the neighbourhood of

ColossaB. Hamilton (1. p. 514) reports
that an earthquake which occurred at
Denizli about a hundred years ago
caused the inhabitants to remove their
residences to a different locality, where
they have remained ever since.
1 At the Council of Chalcedon (a.d.
451) Nunechius of Laodicea subscribes
'for the absent bishops under him,'
among whom is mentioned 'T&iritpavtov
wbXeas KoXaaauv (Labb. Cone. rv. 1501,
ed. Coleti; comp. ib. 1745). At the
Quinisextine Council (a.d. 692) occurs
the signature of Koapos iiriaxoTos irb-
Xeus KoXaaaarjs (sic) TLaxanavrjs (Cone.
vn. 1408). At the 2nd Council of
Nicsaa (a.d. 787) the name of the see
is in a transition state; the bishop
Theodosius (or Dositheus) signs him
self sometimes Xuvuv ijtoi KoXaaauv,
sometimes Xuvuv simply (Cone. vni.
689, 796, 988, 1200, 1222, 1357, 1378,
1432. iS23. IS33. in many of which
passages the word Xuvuv is grossly
corrupted). At later Councils the see
is called Xwvar, and this is the name
which it bears in the Notitia (pp. 97,
127, 199, 222, 303, ed. Parthey).

7° THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
the knock unheeded. The long-impending doom overtook
her, and the golden candlestick was removed for ever from
the Eternal Presence1.
1 For the remains of Christian Hierapolis is given in Fergusson's II-
Churches at Laodicea see Fellows Asia lustrated Handbook of Architecture n.
Minor p. 282, Pocooke p. 74. A de- p. 967 sq. ; comp. Texier Asie Mineure
scription of three fine churches at 1. p. 143.

II.
THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

FROM the language of St Paul, addressed to the Church Two ele-
of Colossae, we may infer the presence of two disturbing m the
elements which threatened the purity of Christian faith and jj[^yian
practice in this community. These elements are distinguish
able in themselves, though it does not follow that they present
the teaching of two distinct parties.
I. A mere glance at the epistle suffices to detect the i. Judaic
presence of Judaism in the teaching which the Apostle com
bats. The observance of sabbaths and new moons is decisive
in this respect. The distinction of meats and drinks points in
the same direction1. Even the enforcement of the initiatory
rite of Judaism may be inferred from the contrast implied in
St Paul's recommendation of the spiritual circumcision 2.
2. On the other hand a closer examination of its language 2. Gnos-
shows that these Judaic features do not exhaust the portrai
ture of the heresy or heresies against which the epistle is
directed. We discern an element of theosophic speculation,
which is alien to the spirit of Judaism proper. We are con
fronted with a shadowy mysticism, which loses itself in the
contemplation of the unseen world. We discover a tendency
to interpose certain spiritual agencies, intermediate beings,
between God and man, as the instruments of communication
and the objects of worship*. Anticipating the result which
will appear more clearly hereafter, we may say that along
1 Col. ii. 16, 17, 21 sq. a ii- n. ' "• 4> 8, 18, 23.

72

Are these
combined
or sepa
rate?

Generalreasons for
supposingone heresy
only, in
which they
are fused.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
with its Judaism there was a Gnostic element in the false
teaching which prevailed at Colossae.
Have we then two heresies here, or one only? Were
these elements distinct, or were they fused into the same
system? In other words, Is St Paul controverting a phase
of Judaism on the one hand, and a phase of Gnosticism on
the other; or did he find himself in conflict with a Judaeo-
Gnostic heresy which combined the two J ?
On closer examination we find ourselves compelled to
adopt the latter alternative. The epistle itself contains no
hint that the Apostle has more than, one set of antagonists
in view; and the needless multiplication of persons or events
is always to be deprecated in historical criticism. Nor indeed
does the hypothesis of a single complex heresy present any

1 The Colossian heresy has been
made the subject of special disserta
tions by Schneckenburoer Beitrage
zur Einleitung ins N. T. (Stuttgart
1832), and Ueber das Alter derjiidischen
Proselyten-Taufe, nebst einer Beilage
fiber die Irrlehrer zu Colossa (Berlin
1828) ; by Osiander Ueber die Colos-
sischen Irrlehrer (Tubinger Zeitschrift
for 1834, 111. p. 96 sq.) ; and by Rhein-
wALDDe Pseudodoctoribus Colossensibus
(1834). But more valuable contribu
tions to the subject will often be found
in introductions to commentaries on
the epistle. Those of Bleek, Davies,
Meyeb, Olshausen, Steioer, De
Wette, and Klopper may be men
tioned. Among other works which
may be consulted are Baur Der Apos-
tel Paulus p. 417 sq. ; Bobhmer
Isagoge in Epistolam ad Colossenses,
Berlin 1829, p. 56 sq., p. 277 sq.;
Burton Inquiry into the Heresies of
the Apostolic Age, Lectures iv, v;
Ewald Die Sendschreiben des Apostels
Paulus p. 462 sq. ; Hilgenfeld
Der Gnosticismus u. das Neue Testa
ment in the Zeitschr. f. Wissensch.

Theol. xiii. p. 233 sq. ; R. A. Lip
sius in Schenkels Bibel-Lexicon, a. v.
Gnosis; Mayerhoff Der Brief an
die Colosser p. 107 sq. ; Neander
Planting of the Christian Church 1.
p. 319 sq. (Eng. Trans.) ; Pres-
sense Trois Premiers Siecles 11. p.
194 sq. ; Storr Opuscula 11. p. 149
sq. ; Thiersch Die Kirche im Apos-
tolischen Zeitalter p. 146 sq. Of all
the accounts of these Colossian false
teachers, I have found none more
satisfactory than that of Neander,
whose opinions are followed in the
main by the most sober of later
writers. In the investigation which follows I
have assumed that the Colossian false
teachers were Christians in some sense.
The views maintained by some earlier
oritics, who regarded them as (1) Jews,
or (2) Greek philosophers, or (3) Chal
dean magi, have found no favour and
do not need serious consideration. See
Meyer's introduction for an enumera
tion of such views. A refutation of
them will be found in Bleek's Vor-
lesungen p. 1 2 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 73
real difficulty. If the two elements seem irreconcilable, or at
least incongruous, at first sight, the incongruity disappears on
further examination. It will be shown in the course of this
investigation, that some special tendencies of religious thought
among the Jews themselves before and about this time pre
pared the way for such a combination in a Christian community
like the Church of Colossae \ Moreover we shall find that the
Christian heresies of the next succeeding ages exhibit in a more
developed form the same complex type, which here appears in
its nascent state2; this later development not only showing
that the combination was historically possible in itself, but
likewise presupposing some earlier stage of its existence such
as confronts us at Colossae.
But in fact the Apostle's language hardly leaves the ques- S. Paul's
tion open. The two elements are so closely interwoven in ia^ctslve
his refutation, that it is impossible to separate them. He on.thls
passes backwards and forwards from the one to the other
in such a way as to show that they are only parts of one
complex whole. On this point the logical connexion of the
sentences is decisive : ' Beware lest any man make spoil of
you through philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of
men, after the rudiments of the world... Ye were circumcised
with a circumcision not made with hands... And you... did He
quicken,... blotting out the handwriting of ordinances which
was against you... Let no man therefore judge you in meat
or drink, or in respect of a holy day or a new moon or a
sabbath... Let no man beguile you of your prize in a self-
imposed humility and service of angels... If ye died with Christ
from the rudiments of the world, why... are ye subject to
ordinances... which things have a show of wisdom in self-
imposed service and humility and hard treatment of the body,
but are of no value against indulgence of the flesh3.' Here
1 See below, p. 83 sq. elements. He argues that ' these two
! See below, p. 107 sq. tendencies are related to one another
3 Col. ii. S  23. Hilgenfeld (Der Gnos- as fire and water, and nothing stands
ticismus etc. p. 250 sq.) contends stre- in the way of allowing the author after
nuously for the separation of the two the first side-glance at the Gnostics to

74 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
the superior wisdom, the speculative element which is charac
teristic of Gnosticism, and the ritual observance, the practical
element which was supplied by Judaism, are regarded not
only as springing from the same stem, but also as inter
twined in their growth. And the more carefully we examine
the sequence of the Apostle's thoughts, the more intimate will
the connexion appear.

Gnostic- Having described the speculative element in this complex
bTdefined heresy provisionally as Gnostic, I purpose enquiring in the
an\dd ^rs* P^ace> h°w ^ar Judaism prior to and independently of
Christianity had allied itself with Gnostic modes of thought;
and afterwards, whether the description of the Colossian heresy
is such as to justify us in thus classing it as a species of
Gnosticism. But, as a preliminary to these enquiries, some de
finition of the word, or at least some conception of the leading
ideas which it involves, will be necessary. With its complex
varieties and elaborate developments we have no concern here :
for, if Gnosticism can be found at all in the records of the
paBs over with ver. n to the Judaizers, separate heresies are attacked, but on
with whom Col. ii. 1 6 sq. is exclusively the contrary the sentences are con-
concerned.' He supposes therefore nected in a logical sequence (e.g. ver.
that ii. 8 — io refers to 'pure Gnostics,' 9 bri, io os, n iv o5, 12 iv $, 13 xal,
and ii. 16 — 23 to 'pure Judaizers.' 16 oiv). I hope to make this point clear
To tbis it is sufficient to answer (1) in my notes on the passage.
That, if the two elements be so an- The hypothesis of more than one
tagonistio, they managed nevertheless heresy is maintained also by Hein-
to reconoile their differences; for we richs (KoppeW.T.vn.Part 2, 1803). At
find them united in several Judaeo- an earher date it seems to be favoured
Gnostic heresies in the first half of by Grotius (notes on ii. 16, 21); but
the second century, £vvtipoaav ydp, his language is not very explicit. And
bvres (xBiaroi rb irpiv, irvp xal BdXaaaa, earher still Calvin in his argument to
xal rd iriar' (Sei^drijv ; (2) That the the epistle writes, ' Putant aliqui duo
two passages are directly connected fuisse hominum genera, qui abducere
together by to aroixeia tov xoapov, tentarent Colossenses ab evangelii pu-
which occurs in both w. 8, 20 ; (3) ritate,' but rejects this view. The same
That it is not a simple transition once question is raised with regard to the
for all from the Gnostio to the Judaic heretical teachers in the Pastoral Epig.
element, but the epistle passes to and ties and in Ignatius, and should be
fro several times from the one to the answered in the same way ; see Igna-
other ; while no hint if* given that two tius and Polycarp 1. p. 364.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 75
Apostolic age, it will obviously appeal- in a simple and ele
mentary form. Divested of its accessories and presented in its
barest outline, it is not difficult of delineation \
1. As the name attests2, Gnosticism implies the possession 1. Intel-
of a superior wisdom, which is hidden from others. It makes a elusive-
distinction between the select few who have this higher gift, ^aB °?
and the vulgar many who are without it. Faith, blind faith, ism-
suffices the latter, while knowledge is the exclusive possession
of the former. Thus it recognises a separation of intellectual
caste in religion, introducing the distinction of an esoteric
and an exoteric doctrine, and interposing an initiation of some
kind or other between the two classes. In short it is animated
by the exclusive aristocratic spirit8, which distinguishes the
ancient religions, and from which it was a main function of
Christianity to deliver mankind.
2. This was its spirit ; and the intellectual questions, on 2. Speou-
which its energies were concentrated and to which it professed nets oi '
to hold the key, were mainly twofold. How can the work of Gn°s*i«-
creation be explained ? and, How are we to account for the ex
istence of evil4? To reconcile the creation of the world and Creation
the existence of evil with the conception of God as the abso- ° orl£ and
lute Being, was the problem which all the Gnostic systems set existence
themselves to solve. It will be seen that the two questions
cannot be treated independently but have a very close and
intimate connexion with each other.
1 The chief authorities for the his- they designated the possessors of this
tory of Gnosticism are Neander higher gnosis, see the notes on Col. i.
Church History 11. p. 1 sq. ; Baor Die 28, and Phil. iii. 15.
Christliche Gnosis (Tubingen, 1835); 3 See Neander l.c. p. 1 sq., from
Matter Histoire Critique du Gnos- whom the epithet is borrowed.
ticisme (2nd ed., Strasbourg and Paris, 4 The fathers speak of this as the
1843); R. A. Lipsios Gnosticismus in main question about which the Gno-
Ersch u. Gruber s. v. (Leipzig, i860) ; sties busy themselves ; Unde malum?
Mansel Gnostic Heresies of the First irb&ev -r) Kada ; Tertull. de Prascr. 7,
and Second Centuries (London, 1875) ; adv. Marc. 1. 2, Eus. H. E. v. 27 ;
and for Gnostic art, Kino Gnostics passages quoted by Baur Christliche
and tlieir Remains (London 1864). Gnosis p. 19. On the leading ooncep-
2 See esp. Iren. i. 6. 1 sq., Clem. tions of Gnosticism see especially Ne-
Alex. Strom, ii. p. 433 sq. (Potter). On ander, 1. 0. p. 9 sq.
the words riXeioi, irvevpariKol, by which

76 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
Existence The Gnostic argument ran as follows : Did God create the
¦f "1
how to' be world out of nothing, evolve it from Himself? Then, God
explamed? kemg perfectly good and creation having resulted from His
sole act without any opposing or modifying influence, evil
would have been impossible ; for otherwise we are driven to
the conclusion that God created evil.
Matter This solution being rejected as impossible, the Gnostic was
of evil. obliged to postulate some antagonistic principle independent
of God, by which His creative energy was thwarted and limited.
This opposing principle, the kingdom of evil, he conceived to
be the world of matter. The precise idea of its mode of
operation varies in different Gnostic systems. It is sometimes
regarded as a dead passive resistance, sometimes as a turbulent
active power. But, though the exact point of view may shift,
the object contemplated is always the same. In some way or
other evil is regarded as residing in the material, sensible
world. Thus Gnostic speculation on the existence of evil ends
in a dualism.
Creation, This point being conceded, the ulterior question arises :
explained? How then is creation possible ? How can the Infinite com
municate with the Finite, the Good with the Evil ? How can
God act upon matter? God is perfect, absolute, incompre
hensible. This, the Gnostic went on to argue, could only have been
possible by some self-limitation on the part of God. God must
express Himself in some way. There must be some evolution,
Doctrine some effluence, of Deity. Thus the Divine Being germinates, as
tions. i* were ; and the first germination again evolves a second from
itself in like manner. In this way we obtain a series of succes
sive emanations, which may be more or fewer, as the requirements
of any particular system demand. In each successive evolution
the Divine element is feebler. They sink gradually lower and
lower in the scale, as they are farther removed from their
source ; until at length contact with matter is possible, and
creation ensues. These are the emanations, aeons, spirits, or
angels, of Gnosticism, conceived as more or less concrete and

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 77
personal according to the different aspects in which they are
regarded in different systems.
3. Such is the bare outline (and nothing more is needed 3. Practi-
for my immediate purpose) of the speculative views of Gnostic- ofGnostic-
ism. But it is obvious that these views must have exerted ism-
a powerful influence on the ethical systems of their advocates,
and thus they would involve important practical consequences.
If matter is the principle of evil, it is of infinite moment for a
man to know how he can avoid its baneful influence and thus
keep his higher nature unclogged and unsullied.
To this practical question two directly opposite answers two oppo.
were given 1 : si*6 etni-
° _ cal rules.
(1) On the one hand, it was contended that the desired (j) Bigid
end might best be attained by a rigorous abstinence. Thus asoetioism-
communication with matter, if it could not be entirely avoided,
might be reduced to a minimum. Its grosser defilements
at all events would be escaped. The material part of man
would be subdued and mortified, if it could not be annihilated ;
and the spirit, thus set free, would be sublimated, and rise to
its proper level. Thus the ethics of Gnosticism pointed in the
first instance to a strict asceticism.
(ii) But obviously the results thus attained are very slight (ii) Un-
and inadequate. Matter is about us everywhere. We do but Scenaened
touch the skirts of the evil, when we endeavour to fence our
selves about by prohibitive ordinances, as, for instance, when we
enjoin a spare diet or forbid marriage. Some more compre
hensive rule is wanted, which shall apply to every contingency
and every moment of our lives. Arguing in this way, other
Gnostic teachers arrived at an ethical rule directly opposed to
the former. 'Cultivate an entire indifference,' they said,
' to the world of sense. Do not give it a thought one way or
1 On this point see Clem. Strom, iii. poavvijs xarayyiXXovai, with the whole
5 (p. 529) els Svo SieXbvres irpdypara d- passage which follows. As examples
irdaas rds alpiaeis diroxpivupeBa av- of the one extreme may be instanced
tois- ij ydp rot dSiaipopus t;fjv SiSda- the Carpocratians and Cainites : of the
xovaiv, rl rb iiriprovov dyovaai iyxpd- other the Encratites.
reiav Sid Svaaefielas xal tpiXairexdiJ-

78

Original
independence of
Gnostic
ism and
its subse
quent con
nexionwithChris-tianity.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
the other, but follow your own impulses. The ascetic prin
ciple assigns a certain importance to matter. The ascetic fails
in consequence to assert his own independence. The true rule
of life is to treat matter as something alien to you, towards
which you have no duties or obligations and which you can
use or leave unused as you like1.' In this way the reaction from
rigid asceticism led to the opposite extreme of unrestrained
licentiousness, both alike springing from the same false concep
tion of matter as the principle of evil.
Gnosticism, as defined by these characteristic features, has
obviously no necessary connexion with Christianity 2. Christi
anity would naturally arouse it to unwonted activity, by lead
ing men to dwell more earnestly on the nature and power of
evil, and thus stimulating more systematic thought on the
theological questions which had already arrested attention.
After no long time Gnosticism would absorb into its system
more or fewer Christian elements, or Christianity in some of
its forms would receive a tinge from Gnosticism. But the
thing itself had an independent root, and seems to have been

1 See for instance the description
of the Carpocratians in Iren. i. 25. 3 sq.,
ii. 32. 1 sq., HippoL Har. vii. 32, Epi-
phan. Har. xxvii. 1 Bq.; from which
passages it appears that they justified
their moral profligacy on the principle
that the highest perfection consists in
the most complete contempt of mun
dane things.
2 It will be seen from the descrip
tion in the text, that Gnosticism (as
I have defined it) presupposes only a
belief in one God, the absolute Being,
as against the vulgar polytheism. All
its essential features, as a speculative
system, may be explained from this
simple element of behef, without any
intervention of specially Christian or
even Jewish doctrine. Christianity
added two new elements to it ; (1) the
idea of Redemption, (2) the person of
Christ. To explain the former, and to

find a place for the latter, henceforth
become prominent questions wliich
press for solution ; and Gnosticism in
its several developments undergoes
various modifications in the endeavour
to solve them. Redemption must be
set in some relation to the fundamen
tal Gnostic conception of the antagon
ism between God and matter ; and
Christ must have some place found
for Him in the fundamental Gnostic
doctrine of emanations.
If it be urged that there is no autho
rity for the name ' Gnostic ' as apphed
to these pre-Christian- theosophists, I
am not concerned to prove the con
trary, as my main position is not
affected thereby. The term ' Gnostic '
is here used, only because no other is
so convenient or so appropriate. See
note 2, p. 81.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 79
prior in time. The probabilities of the case, and the scanty
traditions of history, alike point to this independence of the
two1. If so, it is a matter of little moment at what precise
time the name 'Gnostic' was adopted, whether before or after
contact with Christianity ; for we are concerned only with the
growth and direction of thought which the name represents2.
If then Gnosticism was not an offspring of Christianity, Its alli-
but a direction of religious speculation which existed indepen- Judaism
dently, we are at liberty to entertain the question whether it p?f°-re..
did not form an alliance with Judaism, contemporaneously anity.
with or prior to its alliance with Christianity. There is at
least no obstacle which bars such an investigation at the out-

1 This question will require closer
investigation when I come to discuss
the genuineness of the Epistle to the
Colossians. Meanwhile I content my
self with referring to Baur Christliche
Gnosis p. 29 sq. and Lipsius Gnosti-
cismus p. 230 sq. Both these writers
concede, and indeed insist upon, the
non-Christian basis of Gnosticism, at
least so far as I have maintained it in
the text. Thus for instance Baur
says (p. 52), 'Though Christian gnosis
is the completion of gnosis, yet the
Christian element in gnosis is not so
essential as that gnosis cannot still be
gnosis even without this element. But
just as we can abstract it from the
Christian element, so can we also go still
further and regard even the Jewish as
not strictly an essential element of
gnosis.' In another work (Diedreiersten
Jahrhunderte p. 167, 1st ed.) he ex
presses himself still more strongly to
the same effect, but the expressions
are modified in the second edition.
* We may perhaps gather from the
notices which are preserved that, though
the substantive yvuais was used with
more or less precision even before con
tact with Christianity to designate the
superior illumination of these opinions,

the adjective yvuanKol was not distinct
ly applied to those who maintained
them till somewhat later. Still it is
possible that pre-Christian Gnostics
already so designated themselves.
Hippolytus speaks of the Naassenes
or Ophites as giving themselves this
name; Har. v. 6 perd Si raira iire-
xdXeaav iavrois yvwarixois, ipdaxovres
jibvoi rd fidBij yivuaxeiv; comp. §§ 8,
11. His language seems to imply
(though it is not explicit) that they
were the first to adopt the name. The
Ophites were plainly among the earliest
Gnostic sects, as the heathen element
is still predominant in their teaching,
and their Christianity seems to have
been a later graft on their pagan theo-
sophy ; but at what stage in their
development they adopted the name
yvaanxol does not appear. Irenasus
(Har. i. 25. 6) speaks of the name as
affected especially by the Carpocra-
tians. For the use of the substantive
yvuais see 1 Cor. viii. 1, xiii. 2, 8, 1 Tim.
vi. 20, and the note on Col. ii. 3 : comp.
Rev. ii. 24 oinves ovk (yvuaav t4 jSaBia
tov "Zaravd, us Xiyovaiv (as explained
by the passage already quoted from
Hippol. Hot. v. 6; see Galatians,
p. 309, note 3).

80 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
set. If this should prove to be the case, then we have a
combination which prepares the way for the otherwise strange
phenomena presented in the Epistle to the Colossians.
The three Those, who have sought analogies to the three Jewish sects
the Jews, among the philosophical schools of Greece and Rome, have com
pared the Sadducees to the Epicureans, the Pharisees to the
Stoics, and the Essenes to the Pythagoreans. Like all historical
parallels, this comparison is open to misapprehension : but,
carefully guarded, the illustration is pertinent and instructive.
Sadduoee- With the Sadducees we have no concern here. Whatever
lyn'ega- " respect may be due to their attitude in the earlier stages of
tlTe- their history, at the Christian era at least they have ceased to
deserve our sympathy; for their position has become mainly
negative. They take their stand on denials — the denial of the
existence of angels, the denial of the resurrection of the dead,
the denial of a progressive development in the Jewish Church.
In these negative tendencies, in the materialistic teaching ofthe
sect, and in the moral consequences to which it led, a very
rough resemblance to the Epicureans will appear1.
Pharisee- The two positive sects were the Pharisees and the Essenes.
Essenism Both alike were strict observers of the ritual law; but, while
compared. ^g pnarisee was essentially practical, the tendency of the
Essene was to mysticism; while the Pharisee was a man of
the world, the Essene was a member of a brotherhood. In this
respect the Stoic and the Pythagorean were the nearest counter
parts which the history of Greek philosophy and social life could
offer. These analogies indeed are suggested by Josephus himself2.
Elusive While the portrait of the Pharisee is distinctly traced and
features of ....... ,, . . , _,
Essenism. easily recognised, this is not the case with the Essene. The
Essene is the great enigma of Hebrew history. Admired ahke
by Jew, by Heathen, and by Christian, he yet remains a dim
vague outline, on which the highest subtlety of successive
1 The name Epicureans seems to * For the Pharisees see Vit. 2 irapa-
be apphed to them even in the Talmud; irXrjaibs ian t% irap' "WXXijai 'Ztu'Ckti
see Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Juden- Xeyopiv-g: for the Essenes, Ant. xv. 10.
thum 1. pp. 95, 694 sq. ; comp. Keim 4 Sialr\j xptbpevov ry Tap "'EXXijaiv virb
Geschichte Jesu von Nazara 1. p. 281. UvBaybpov xaTaSeSeiypivn.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 8 1
critics has been employed to supply a substantial form and an
adequate colouring. An ascetic mystical dreamy recluse, he
seems too far removed from the hard experience of life to be
capable of realisation.
And yet by careful use of the existing materials the A suffioi-
portrait of this sect may be so far restored, as to establish with tinof por-
a reasonable amount of probability the point with which alone j^seot
we are here concerned. It will appear from the delineations attainable.
of ancient writers, more especially of Philo and Josephus, that
the characteristic feature of Essenism was a particular direction
of mystic speculation, involving a rigid asceticism as its prac
tical consequence. Following the definition of Gnosticism
which has been already given, we may not unfitly call this
tendency Gnostic.
Having in this statement anticipated the results, I shall Mam fea-
now endeavour to develope the main features of Essenism ; Essenism.
and, while doing so, I will ask my readers to bear in mind
the portrait of the Colossian heresy in St Paul, and to mark
the resemblances, as the enquiry proceeds1.
The Judaic element is especially prominent in the life and
teaching of the sect. The Essene was exceptionally rigorous
in his observance of the Mosaic ritual. In his strict abstinence
1 The really important contempo- count, we may conjecture, was taken
rary sources of information respecting from Alexander Polyhistor, a contem-
the Essenes are Josephus, Bell. Jud. porary of Sulla, whom he mentions
ii. 8. 2 — 13, Ant. xiii. 5. 9, xviii. 1. 5, in his prefatory elenchus as one of
Vit. 2 (with notices of individual Es- hiB authorities for this 5th book, and
senes Bell. Jud. i. 3. 5, ii 7. 3, ii. 20. 4, who wrote a work On the Jews (Clem.
iii. 2. 1, Ant. xiii. 11. 2, xv. 10.4,5); Alex. Strom, i- 21, p. 396, Euseb.
and Philo, Quod omnis probus liber Prcep. Ev. ix. 17). Significant men-
§ 12 sq. (11. p. 457 sq.), Apol. pro Jud. tion of the Essenes is found also
(11. p. 632 sq., a fragment quoted by in the Christian Hegesippus (Euseb.
Eusebius Prcep. Evang. viii. 11). The H. E. iv. 22) and in the heathen Dion
account of the Therapeutes by the Chrysostom (Synesius Dion 3, p. 39).
latter writer, de Vita Contemplativa Epiphanius (Har. pp. 28 sq., 40 sq.)
(11. p. 471 sq.), must also be consulted, discusses two separate sects, which he
as describing a closely allied sect. To calls Essenes and Ossaans respectively.
these should be added the short notice These are doubtless different names of
of Pliny, N. H. v. 15. 17, as expressing the same persons. His account is, as
the views of a Roman writer. His ac- usual, confused and inaccurate, but
COL. 6

82

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

Observ- from work on the sabbath he far surpassed all the other Jews.
Mosaic 6 -^e would n°t light a fire, would not move a vessel, would not
law. perform even the most ordinary functions of Hfe1. The whole
day was given up to religious exercises and to exposition of the

has a certain value. All other autho
rities are secondary. Hippolytus, Har.
ix. 18 — 28, follows Josephus (Bell. Jud.
ii. 8. 2 sq.) almost exclusively. Por
phyry also (de Abstinentia, iv. n sq.)
copies this same passage of Josephus,
with a few unimportant exceptions
probably taken from a lost work by
the same author, 7rpos toi5s "\^iXXijvas,
whioh he mentions by name. Euse
bius (Prap. Evang. viii. 1 1 sq. , ix. 3)
contents himself with quoting Philo
and Porphyry. Solinus (Polyh. xxxv.
9 sq.) merely abstracts Pliny. Tal-
mudical and rabbinical passages, sup
posed to refer to the Essenes, are col
lected by Frankel (see below) ; but the
allusions are most uncertain (see
below, p. 362 sq.). On the authorities
for the history of the Essenes see W.
Clemens in Zeitschr. f. Wiss. Theol.
1869, p. 328 sq.
The attack on the genuineness of
the De Vit. Gont. by Gratz (in. p.
463 sq.) has been met by Zeller (Philos.
ni. ii. p. 255 sq.), whose refutation is
complete. Yet Lucius, Hilgenfeld, and
Schurer reject it as spurious. The at
tack of Gratz (in. p. 464) on the Quod
omnis probus liber Zeller considers too
frivolous to need refuting (ib. p. 235).
A refutation will be found in Clemens
(I.e. p. 340 sq.).
Of modern writings relating to the
Essenes the following may be espe
cially mentioned; Bellermann Ueber
Essder u. Therapeuten, Berlin 1821;
Gfborer Philo 11. p. 299 sq. ; Dahne
Ersch u. Gruber's Eneyklopadie s.v. ;
Frankel Zeitschrift fiir die religiosen
Inter essen des Judenthums 1846 p. 441
sq., Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte u.
Wissenschaft des Judenthums 1853,

p. 30 Bq., 61 sq. ; Bottgeb Ueber den
Orden der Essder, Dresden 1849 >
Ewald Geschichte des Volhes Israel rv.
p. 420 sq., vn. p. 153 sq.; Ritschl
Entstehung der Altkatholischen Eirche
p. 179 sq. (ed. 2, 1857), and Theolo-
gische Jahrbiicher 1855, p. 315 sq. ;
Jost Geschichte des Judenthums i. p.
207 sq. ; Grabtz Geschichte der Juden
m. p. 79 sq., 463 sq. (ed. 2, 1863);
Hilgenfeld Judische Apocalyptik p.
245 sq., and Zeitschr. f. Wiss. Theol.
x. p. 97 sq., xi. p. 343 sq., xiv. p.
30 sq. ; Westcott Smith's Dictionary
of the Bible o. v.; Ginsburg The
Essenes, London 1864, and in Kitto's
Cyclopadia s. v. ; Derenbourg L'His-
toire et la Giographie de la Palestine
p. 166 sq., 460 sq. ; Keim Geschichte
Jesu von Nazara 1. p. 282 sq. ; Haus
rath Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte
'• P- 133 sq.; Lipsius Schenkel's Bibel
Lexihm s. v. ; Herzeeld Geschichte
des Volhes Israel n. 368 sq., 388 sq.,
509 sq. (ed. 2, 1863); Zeller Philo-
sophie der Griechen m. ii. p. 234 sq.
(ed. i, 1868) ; Langen Judenthum in
Palastina p. 190 sq. ; Lowy Kritisch-
talmudisches Lexicon s.v. ; Weiss Zur
Geschichte der jiidischen Tradition p.
120 sq.; Lucius Essenismus etc. (1881);
Hilgenfeld Ketzergeschichte p. 87 sq.
(1884) ; Sohurer Gesch. d. Jiid. Volkes
11. p. 467 sq. (ed. 1, 1886).
1 15. J. ii. 8. 9 tpvXdaaovrai . . . Tats
iBSbpaaiv (pyuv itpdirreaBai Siatpoparara
'lovSaluv dirdvruv' oi pjovov ydp Tpoipds
iavrois irpb rjpipas pids irapaaxevd^ovaiv ,
us pijSi irvp ivaioiev hxelvo rjj rjpipq., dXX'
oiSi aKevos n peraKivfjaai Bappovaiv k.t.X.
Hippolytus (Har. ix. 25) adds that some
of them do not so much as leave their
beds on this day.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 83
Scriptures1. His respect for the law extended also to the law
giver. After God, the name of Moses was held in the highest
reverence. He who blasphemed his name was punished with
death". In all these points the Essene was an exaggeration,
almost a caricature, of the Pharisee.
So far the Essene has not departed from the principles of Externalpi ('"I "|"1 p.llTfl
normal Judaism ; but here the divergence begins. In three super-
main points we trace the working of influences which must added-
have been derived from external sources.
1. To the legalism of the Pharisee, the Essene added an 1. Rigid
... , . , tii- 1 i • i ¦ asceticism
asceticism, which was peculiarly his own, and which in many m respect
respects contradicted the tenets of the other sect. The honour- to
able, and even exaggerated, estimate of marriage, which was
characteristic of the Jew, and of the Pharisee as the typical Jew,
found no favour with the Essene3. Marriage was to him an marriage,
abomination. Those Essenes who lived together as members of
an order, and in whom the principles of the sect were carried to
their logical consequences, eschewed it altogether. To secure
the continuance of their brotherhood they adopted children,
whom they brought up in the doctrines and practices of the
community. There were others however who took a different
view. They accepted marriage, as necessary for the preservation
of the race. Yet even with them it seems to have been regard
ed only as an inevitable evil. They fenced it off by stringent
rules, demanding a three years' probation and enjoining various
1 Philo Quod omn. prob. lib. § 12. iyxpdretav ''Eaaaluv ydp oiSels d/yerai
Of the Therapentes see Philo Vit. Cont. yvvaXxa, Sion tplXavrov ij yvvij xal £17X6-
g i>, 4. rvirov oi per plus KaX Seivbv dvSpbs rjBij
2 B. J. 1. 0. § 9 aifias Si piyiarav irapaaaXevaai, with more to the same
irap airois perd rbv Bebv rb ovopa too purpose. This peculiarity astonished
vopoBirov, xdv pXaatprjpTjan ns els tovtov the heathen Pliny, N. H. v. 15, 'gens
(i.e. rbv vopoBirijv), KoXdfeadai Bavdru : sola et in toto orbe praeter ceteros mira,
comp. § 10. sine ulla femina, venere abdicata . . .
3 B. J. 1. c. § 2 ydpov piv vireposj/la In diem ex asquo oonvenarum turba
wap' airois . . . Tas ruv yvvaiKuv daeX- renascitur large frequentantibus . . .
yelas cpvXaaabpevoi xal pr/Septav rijpeiv Ita per saaculorum millia (incredibile
ireireiapivot ttjv irpbs tva irianv, Ant. dictu) gens aeterna est, in qua nemo
xviii. 1. 5; Philo Fragm. p. 633 70^01' nasoitur. Tam fcecunda illis aliorum
vaprjri)aavTo nerd tov Siaipepbvrus daxeiv vit83 poenitentia est.'
6—2

84 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
purificatory rites1. The conception of marriage, as quickening
and educating the affections and thus exalting and refining
human life, was wholly foreign to their minds. Woman was
a mere instrument of temptation in their eyes, deceitful,
faithless, selfish, jealous, misled and misleading by her passions.
meats and But their ascetic tendencies did not stop here. The
drinks Pharisee was very careful to observe the distinction of meats
lawful and unlawful, as laid down by the Mosaic code, and even
rendered these ordinances vexatious by minute definitions of
his own. But the Essene went far beyond him. He drank
no wine, he did not touch animal food. His meal consisted of
a piece of bread and a single mess of vegetables. Even this
simple fare was prepared for him by special officers consecrated
for the purpose, that it might be free from all contamination2.
Nay, so stringent were the rules of the order on this point,
that when an Essene was excommunicated, he often died of
starvation, being bound by his oath not to take food prepared
by defiled hands, and thus being reduced to eat the very grass
of the field3.
and oil for Again, in hot climates oil for anointing the body is almost
anoin mg. a necessary of life. From this too the Essenes strictly ab
stained. Even if they were accidentally smeared, they were
careful at once to wash themselves, holding the mere touch to
be a contamination4.
1 B. J. 1. a. § 13. Josephus speaks eirreXrj- xal o\jiov oXes, ous 0! afipodiano-
of these as trepov 'Ysaarjvuv rdypa, 0 SI- raroi irapapriovaiv iaatbiru' trorbv vbup
airav piv xal (Brj xal vbpipa tois dXXois vapandiov airois ianv ; and again more
bpoippovovv, Siearbs SiryKard ydpovSo^n. to the same effect in § 9 : and compare
We may suppose that they correspond- the Essene story of St James in Hege-
ed to the third order of a Benedictine sippus (Euseb. H. E. ii 23) oT^oi* xai
or Franciscan brotherhood; so that, aUepa ovk (iriev, oiSi (pxpvxov (ipaye.
Uving in the world, they would observe Their abstention from animal food
the rule up to a certain point, but accounts for Porphyry's giving them
would not be bound by vows of celibacy so prominent a place in his treatise :
or subject to the more rigorous dis- see Zeller, p. 243.
cipline of the sect. 3 B. J. 1. c. § 8.
8 B. J. 1. c. § 5; see Philo's account * B. J. 1. c. § 3 KijXiSa Si viroXapfid-
of the Therapeutes, Vit. Cont. § 4 ai- vovai rb (Xaiov k.t.X. ; Hegesippus 1. c.
rovvrai Si ToXvreXis oibiv, dXXd dprov (Xaiov oix ijXel\j/aro.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 85
From these facts it seems clear that Essene abstinence was TJnderly-
something more than the mere exaggeration of Pharisaic prin- p^e onhis"
ciples. The rigour of the Pharisee was based on his obligation of asoeticism-
obedience to an absolute external law. The Essene introduced
a new principle. He condemned in any form the gratification
of the natural cravings, nor would he consent to regard it as
moral or immoral only according to the motive which suggested
it or the consequences which flowed from it. It was in
itself an absolute evil. He sought to disengage himself, as far
as possible, from the conditions of physical life. In short, in
the asceticism of the Essene we seem to see the germ of that
Gnostic dualism which regards matter as the principle, or at
least the abode, of evil.
2. And, when we come to investigate the speculative tenets 2. Specn-
of the sect, we shall find that the Essenes have diverged nets.
appreciably from the common type of Jewish orthodoxy.
(i) Attention was directed above to their respect for (i) Tend-
Moses and the Mosaic law, which they shared in common with Sun-wor-
the Pharisee. But there was another side to their theological p'
teaching. Though our information is somewhat defective, still
in the scanty notices which are preserved we find sufficient
indications that they had absorbed some foreign elements of
religious thought into their system. Thus at day-break they
addressed certain prayers, which had been handed down from
their forefathers, to the Sun, 'as if entreating him to rise1.'
They were careful also to conceal and bury all polluting sub
stances, so as not ' to insult the rays of the god2.' We can-
1 B. J. 1. u. § 5 irpbs ye pijv to Beiov Josephus states to be offered to the sun
ISlus evaeBeis' irpiv ydp dvaaxeiv Toy ijXiov (els avrov), into the ordinary prayers of
oiSiv tpBiyyovrai tuv BeBrjXuv, irarplovs the Pharisaic Jew at day-break, see the
Sinvas els avrbv evxds,uairepUeTeiovres second dissertation on the Essenes.
dvareiXai. Compare what Philo says " B. J. 1. 0. § 9 is M Tas au-yas iBpl-
of the Therapeutes, Vit. Cont. % 3 friev tov Beov. There can be no doubt,
ijXiov piv dvlaxavros evrjpeptav ahoipevoi I think, that by tov Beov is meant the
rijv Svrus eiijpepiav, tpurbs ovpavlov rijv 'sun-god'; comp. Eur. Heracl. 749
Sidvoiav airuv dvairXijaBrjvai, andi&.§ 11. Beov ipaealpBporoi aiyal, Ale. Ill rb
On the attempt of Frankel (Zeitschr. ipiyyos tovto tov Beov, Appian Prof. 9
p. 458) to resolve this worship, whioh SvopJvov tou Beov, Lib. 113 tou Beov

86 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
not indeed suppose that they regarded the sun as more than a
symbol of the unseen power who gives light and life ; but their
outward demonstrations of reverence were sufficiently promi
nent to attach to them, or to a sect derived from them, the
epithet of 'Sun-worshippers1,' and some connexion with the
characteristic feature of Parsee devotion at once suggests itself.
The practice at all events stands in strong contrast to the
denunciations of worship paid to the ' hosts of heaven' in the
Hebrew prophets.
(ii) Resur- (ii) Nor again is it an insignificant fact that, while the
aebody* Pharisee maintained the resurrection of the body as a cardinal
denied. article of his faith, the Essene restricted himself to a belief in
the immortality of the soul. The soul, he maintained, was con
fined in the flesh, as in a prison-house. Only when disengaged
from these fetters would it be truly free. Then it would
soar aloft, rejoicing in its newly attained liberty2. This
doctrine accords with the fundamental conception of the
malignity of matter. To those who held this conception a
irepl SeCXijv iairipav ovros, Civ. iv. 79 other were. See below, p. 372.
Svvovtos dpri rov Beov: comp. Herod, ii. 2 B. J. 1. 0. § 11 xal ydp (ppurai irap'
24. Dr Ginsburg has obliterated this avrois ijSe ij Sb%a, tpBaprd piv elvai to
very important touch by translating rds adpara xal rty vXijv oi pbvipov avrois,
at^as rov deov1 the Divine rays '(Essenes rds Si spvxds dBavdrovs del Siapiveiv . . .
p. 47). It is a significant fact that iireiSbv Si dveBwai ™ xard adpKa Sea-
Hippolytus (Har. ix. 25) omits the puv, ola S^ paKpds SovXeias drijXXay-
wordsTou6'eoi),evidentryregardingthem pivas, rbre xalpeiv xal pereupovs tpipea-
as a stumbling-block. How Josephus Bai k.t.X. To this doctrine the teach-
expressed himself in the original He- ing of the Pharisees stands in direct
brew of the Bellum Judaicum, it is contrast ; ib. § 13 : comp. also Ant.
vain to speculate : but the Greek trans- xviii. 1. 3, 5.
lation was authorised, if not made, by Nothing can be more explicit than
him. the language of Josephus. On the other
1 Epiphan. Har. xix. 2, xx. 3 'Off- hand Hippolytus (Har. ix. 27) says of
arjvdl Si periaTijaav dirb 'lovSai'apov els them bpoXoyovai ydp xal rijv adpxa
rrjv tuv 2apspaiuv atpeaiv, liii. 1 , 2 1,ap- dvaar-rjaeaSai xal (aeaBai dBdvarov ov
sfidioi ydp ippijveiovrai 'WXiaxol, from rpbirov rjSij dBdvarbs ianv ij faxi) x.t.X.;
the Hebrew CDC 'the sun.' The but his authority is worthless on this
historical connexion of the Sampsaeans point, as he can have had no personal
with the Essenes is evident from these knowledge of the facts : see Zeller p.
passages: though it is difficult to say 251, note 2. Hilgenfeld takes a dif-
what their precise relations to each ferent view; Zeitschr. xiv. p. 49.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 8;
resurrection of the body would be repulsive, as involving a
perpetuation of evil.
(iii) But they also separated themselves from the religious (iii) Pro-
belief of the orthodox Jew in another respect, which would aaciifices.
provoke more notice. While they sent gifts to the temple
at Jerusalem, they refused to offer sacrifices there \ It would
appear that the slaughter of animals was altogether forbidden
by their creed2. It is certain that they were afraid of con
tracting some ceremonial impurity by offering victims in the
temple. Meanwhile they had sacrifices, bloodless sacrifices, of
their own. They regarded their simple meals with their
accompanying prayers and thanksgiving, not only as devotional
but even as sacrificial rites. Those who prepared and presided
over these meals were their consecrated priests 8.
(iv) In what other respects they may have departed from, (iv) Eso-
or added to, the normal creed of Judaism, we do not know, trine of
But it is expressly stated that, when a novice after passing "^is-
through the probationary stages was admitted to the full privi
leges of the order, the oath of admission bound him ' to conceal
nothing from the members of the sect, and to report nothing
concerning them to others, even though threatened with death ;
not to communicate any of their doctrines to anyone otherwise
than as he himself had received them ; but to abstain from
robbery, and in like manner to guard carefully the books
1 Ant. xviii. I. 5 els Si rb lepbv dva- from the temple-sacrifices cannot be
Brjpard re ariXXovres Bvatas oix iirire- considered apart from the fact that they
Xovai Siatpopbrijri ayveiuv, as vopi^oiev, ate no animal food: see above p. 86,
xal Si airb elpybpevoi too koivov repevla- note 2. (3) The Christianised Es-
Pmtos icp' avrwv Tas Bvalas iirireXovai. senes, or Ebionites, though strong
So Philo Quod omn. prob. lib. § 12 de- Judaizers in many respects, yet dis-
scribes them as oi fpa KaraBiovres dXX' tinctly protested against the sacrifice
Upoirpeireis- rds iavrwv Siavoias Kara- of animals; see Clem. Hom. iii. 45, 52,
axevdteiv d£iovvres. and comp. Ritschl p. 224. On this sub-
2 The following considerations show ject see also Zeller p. 242 sq., and my
that their abstention should probably second dissertation.
be explained in this way: (1) Though s Ant. xviii. 1. 5 lepeis re [xeipo-
the language of Josephus may be am- rovovai"\ Sid irolijaiv airov re xal Bpupd-
biguous, that of Philo is unequivocal tuv, B. J. ii 8. 5 irpoxareixerai Si b le-
on this point; (2) Their abstention pebs ttjs Tporprjs x.t.X. ; see Ritschl p. 181.

88 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
of their sect, and the names of the angels V It may be reason
ably supposed that more lurks under this last expression than
meets the ear. This esoteric doctrine, relating to angelic beings,
may have been another link which attached Essenism to the
religion of Zoroaster2. At all events we seem to be justified
in connecting it with the self-imposed service and worshipping
of angels at Colossae : and we may well suspect that we have
here a germ which was developed into the Gnostic doctrine of
aeons or emanations.
(v) Specu- (v) If so, it is not unconnected with another notice relating
God and1 *° Essene peculiarities. The Gnostic doctrine of intermediate
Creation, beings between God and the world, as we have seen, was
intimately connected with speculations respecting creation.
Now we are specially informed that the Essenes, while leaving
physical studies in general to speculative idlers (/j.eTecopo-
\eo-^w?), as being beyond the reach of human nature, yet
excepted from their general condemnation that philosophy
which treats of the existence of God and the generation of the
universe s.
(vi) Magic- (vi) Mention has been made incidentally of certain secret
al charms, j^^g peculiar to the sect. The existence of such an apocryphal
literature was a sure token of some abnormal development in
doctrine 4. In the passage quoted it is mentioned in relation to
1 B. J. 1. c. § 7 bpxovs airois Spvvai ' See the second dissertation.
tppixwSeis...pijre xpispeiv ti rois alpe- s Philo Omn. prob. lib. § 12 (p. 458)
TiffTds prjre iripois airwv n pijviaeiv, xal rb Si ipvaixbv ti)s peifov rj xard dvdpuirl-
dv pixpi Bavarov tis Bidfrijrai. irpbs vijv tpiaiv pereupoXiaxais diroXiirbvTes,
rovrois bpviovai prjSevl priv peraSovvai irX'tjv Saov airov irepl iwdp^eus Beov xal
ruv Soypdruv iripws ij us airbs peri- rijs tov iravrbs yeviaeus rpiXoaotpetrai.
XaBev d<pi£eaBai Si Xrjarelas xal avvrrj- * The word Apocrypha was used
prjaeiv bpoius rd re rijs aipiaeus airuv originally to designate the secret books
BiBXla xal id rwv dyyiXuv bvbpara. which contained the esoteric doctrine
With this notice should be compared of a sect. The secondary sense ' spu-
the Ebionite Siapaprvpla, or protest of rious' was derived from the general
initiation, prefixed to the Clementine character of these writings, whioh were
Homilies, whioh shows how closely heretical, mostly Gnostic, forgeries.
the Christian Essenes followed the See the note on dirbxpvtpoi below, ii. 3,
practice of their Jewish predecessors and the discussion in Ignatius and
in this respect. See Zeller p. 254. Polycarp 1. p. 337 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
some form of angelology. Elsewhere their skill in prediction,
for which they were especially famous, is connected with the
perusal of certain 'sacred books,' which however are not
described \ But more especially, we are told that the Essenes
studied with extraordinary diligence the writings of the
ancients, selecting those especially which could be turned to
profit for soul and body, and that from these they learnt the
qualities of roots and the properties of stones 2. This expres-

89

1 B. J. ii. 8. 12 riri Si iv airois ot
xal rd piXXovra irpoyivuaKeiv iiriaxvovv-
rai, BIBXois lepdis Kal Siatpbpois d7Pefais
Kal irpotpijrwv diroipBiypaaiv (piraiSorpi-
fBovpevof awdviov Si, etir ore, iv rais trpo-
ayopeiaeaiv daroxrjaovaiv. Dr Ginsburg
(p. 49) translates ptBXois lepats ' the
sacred Scripture,' and irpotprrruv diro-
•pBiypaaiv ' the sayings of the prophets ' ;
but as the definite articles are wanting,
the expressions oannot be so rendered,
nor does there seem to be any refer
ence to the Canonical writings.
We learn from an anecdote in Ant.
xiii. 11. 2, that the teachers of this
sect communicated the art of predic
tion to their disciples by instruction.
We may therefore conjecture that with
the Essenes this acquisition was con
nected with magic or astrology. At all
events it is not treated as a direct
inspiration. s B. J. ii. 8. 6 oirovSdgovai Si iKrb-
irus irepl rd ruv iraXatuv avyypdppara,
pdXiara rd irpbs wtpiXeiav ipvxijs xal ati-
paros ixXiyovres' (vBev airois irpbs Bepa-
irelav iraBuv pi'Cai re d\e£irijpioi xal XlBuv
ISibrirres dvepevvuvrai. This passage
might seem at first sight to refer simply
to the medicinal qualities of vegetable
and mineral substances ; but a compari
son with another notice in Josephus in
vests it with a different meaning. InAnt.
viii. 2, 5 he states that Solomon, having
received by divine inspiration the art
of defeating demons for the advantage
and healing of man (eis ucpiXeiav xal

Bepairelav rois dvBpiiirois), composed and
left behind him charms (iiruSds) by
which diseases were allayed, and diverse
kinds of exorcisms (Tpoxous ifrpxaaeuv)
by which demons were cast out. ' This
mode of heaUng,' he adds, 'is very
powerful even to the present day'; and
he then relates how, as he was credibly
informed (larbprjaa), one of his coun
trymen, Eleazar by name, had healed
several persons possessed by demons
in the presence of Vespasian and his
sons and a number of officers and com
mon soldiers. This he did by applying
to the nose of the possessed his ring,
whioh had concealed in it one of the
roots whioh Solomon had directed to
be used, and thus drawing out the
demon through the nostrils of the
person smelling it. At the same time
he adjured the evil spirit not to re
turn, ' making mention of Solomon
and repeating the charms composed
by him.' On one occasion this E-
leazar gave ocular proof that the de
mon was exorcized; and thus, adds
Josephus, aatpijs ij "ZoXopuvos Kadiararo
aiveais Kal aorpla. On these books re
lating to the occult arts and ascribed
to Solomon see Fabricius Cod. Pseud.
Vet. Test. 1. p. 1036 sq., where many
curious notices are gathered together.
See especially Origen In Matth. Comm.
xxxv. § no (in. p. 910), Pseudo- Just.
Quast. 55.
This interpretation explains all the
expressions in the passage. The XlBuv

9° THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
sion, as illustrated by other notices, points clearly to the study
of occult sciences, and recalls the alliance with the practice
of magical arts, which was a distinguishing feature of Gnos
ticism, and is condemned by Christian teachers even in the
heresies of the Apostolic age.
3. Exolu- 3. But the notice to which I have just alluded suggests
of Essen- a broader affinity with Gnosticism. Not only did the theo-
ism" logical speculations of the Essenes take a Gnostic turn, but
they guarded their peculiar tenets with Gnostic reserve. They
too had their esoteric doctrine which they looked upon as the
exclusive possession of the privileged few ; their ' mysteries '
which it was a grievous offence to communicate to the un
initiated. This doctrine was contained, as we have seen, in an
apocryphal literature. Their whole organisation was arranged
so as to prevent the divulgence of its secrets to those without.
The long period of noviciate, the careful rites of initiation, the
distinction of the several orders 1 in the community, the solemn
oaths by which they bound their members, were so many
safeguards against a betrayal of this precious deposit, which

ISibrirres naturally points to the use of 19 and elsewhere, referring to magical
charms or amulets, as may be seen e.g. arts, illustrates its use here.
from the treatise, Damigeron de Lapi- Thus these Essenes were dealers in
dibus, printed in the Spicil. Solemn, in. charms, rather than physicians. And
p. 324 sq. : comp. King Antique Gems yet it is quite possible that along with
Sect, iv, Gnostics and their Remains. this practice of the occult sciences they
The reference to 'the books of the an- studied the healing art in its nobler
ci&uts' thus finds an adequate expla- forms. The works of Alexander of
nation. On the other hand the only Tralles, an eminent ancient physician,
expression which seemed to militate constantly recommend the use of such
against this view, dXe£irrjpioi plj;ai, is charms, of which some obviously come
justified by the story in the Antiqui- from a Jewish source and not impro
ves; comp. also Clem. Hom. viii. 14. bably may have been taken from these
It should be added also that Hippolytus Solomonian books to which Josephus
(Har. ix. 22) paraphrases the language refers. A number of passages from
of Josephus so as to give it this sense ; this and other writers, specifying
iravv Si irepiipyus (xpvai irepl Bordvas charms of various kinds, are given in
Kal Xlffovs, vepiepybrepoi 6vres rpbs Becker and Marquardt Rom. Alterth.
rds Toiruv ivepyeias, tpdaxovres p-i) pdrrjv iv. p. 116 sq. See also Spencer's note
ravra yevovivai. The sense which ire- on Orig. c. Cels. p. 17 sq,
plepyos ('curiosus') bears in Aots xix. * See especially £. J. ii. 8. 7, 10.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 91
they held to be restricted to the inmost circle of the brother
hood. In selecting these details I have not attempted to give a
finished portrait of Essenism. From this point of view the de
lineation would be imperfect and misleading: for I have left out
of sight the nobler features of the sect, their courageous en
durance, their simple piety, their brotherly love. My object was
solely to call attention to those features which distinguish
it from the normal type of Judaism, and seem to justify the
attribution of Gnostic influences. And here it has been seen The three
that the three characteristics, which were singled out above as o^ltic-
distinctive of Gnosticism, reappear in the Essenes ; though it iBm found
has been convenient to consider them in the reversed order. Essenes.
This Jewish sect exhibits the same exolusiveness in the com
munication of its doctrines. Its theological speculations take
the same direction, dwelling on the mysteries of creation,
regarding matter as the abode of evil, and postulating certain
intermediate spiritual agencies as necessary links of communi
cation between heaven and earth. And lastly, its speculative
opinions involve the same ethical conclusions, and lead in
like manner to a rigid asceticism. If the notices relating to
these points do not always explain themselves, yet read in
the light of the heresies of the Apostolic age and in that of
subsequent Judaeo-Gnostic Christianity, their bearing seems to
be distinct enough ; so that we should not be far wrong, if we
were to designate Essenism as Gnostic Judaism 1.
But the Essenes of whom historical notices are preserved How
were inhabitants of the Holy Land. Their monasteries were ^ere the
situated on the shores of the Dead Sea. We are told indeed, Essenes
' dispersed?
that tbe sect was not confined to any one place, and that
1 I have said nothing of the Kab- to separate these from later additions
bala, as a development of Jewish or to assign to them even an approxi-
thought illustrating the Colossian he- mate date. The Kabbalistic doctrine
resy : because the books containing however will serve to show to what
the Kabbalistic speculations are com- extent Judaism may be developed in
paratively recent, and if they contain the direction of speculative mystic-
ancient elements, it seems impossible ism.

92

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

Do they
appear in
Asia Minor?

How the
term Es
sene is to
be under
stood.

members of the order were found in great numbers in divers
cities and villages'. But Judaea in one notice, Palestine and Syria
in another, are especially named as the localities of the Essene
settlements 2. Have we any reason to suppose that they were
represented among the Jews of the Dispersion ? In Egypt
indeed we find ourselves confronted with a similar ascetic
sect, the Therapeutes, who may perhaps have had an inde
pendent origin, but who nevertheless exhibit substantially the
same type of Jewish thought and practice 8. But the Disper
sion of Egypt, it may be argued, was exceptional ; and we might
expect to find here organisations and developments of Judaism
hardly less marked and various than in the mother country.
What ground have we for assuming the existence of this type
in Asia Minor ? Do we meet with any traces of it in the cities
of the Lycus, or in proconsular Asia generally, which would
justify the opinion that it might make its influence felt in the
Christian communities of that district ?
Now it has been shown that the colonies of the Jews in
this neighbourhood were populous and influential4; and it
might be argued with great probability that among these
large numbers Essene Judaism could not be unrepresented.
But indeed throughout this investigation, when I speak of
the Judaism in the Colossian Church as Essene, I do not
assume a precise identity of origin, but only an essential
'Essene gate' at Jerusalem (B. J. v.
4. 2) seems to point to some establish
ment of the order close to the walls of
that city.
3 They are only known to us from
Philo's treatise de Vita Gontcmplativa.
Their settlements were on the shores
of the Mareotio lake near Alexandria.
Unhke the Essenes, they were not
gathered together in convents as mem
bers of a fraternity, but lived apart as
anchorites, though in the same neigh
bourhood. In other respects their
tenets and practices were very similar
to those of the Essenes.
* See above p. 19 sq.

1 Philo Fragm. p. 632 oUovai Si
iroXXds fiiv irbXeis rijs 'lovSaias, iroXXds
Si xupas, xal peydXovs xal iroXvavBpw-
irovs bpiXovs, Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 4 pia
Si oix (anv airuv iroXis, dXX iv iKaarrj
KaroiKovai iroXXol. On the notices of
the settlements and dispersion of the
Essenes see Zeller p. 239.
2 Pnilo names Judaa in Fragm. p.
632 ; Palestine and Syria in Quod omn.
prob. lib. 11, p. 457. Their chief set
tlements were in the neighbourhood
of the Dead Sea. This fact is men
tioned by the heathen writers Pliny
(N. H. v. 15) and Dion Chrysostom
(Synesius Dio 3). The name of the

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 93
affinity of type, with the Essenes of the mother country. As
a matter of history, it may or may not have sprung from the
colonies on the shores of the Dead Sea ; but as this can neither
be proved nor disproved, so also it is immaterial to my main
purpose. All along its frontier, wherever Judaism became Probabili-
enamoured of and was wedded to Oriental mysticism, the ewe0* *he
same union would produce substantially the same results.
In a country where Phrygia, Persia, Syria, all in turn had
moulded religious thought, it would be strange indeed if
Judaism entirely escaped these influences. Nor, as a matter of
fact, are indications wanting to show that it was not unaffected
by them. If the traces are few, they are at least as numerous Direct
and as clear as with our defective information on the whole tions1"
subject we have any right to expect in this particular instance.
When St Paul visits Ephesus, he comes in contact with St Paul at
certain strolling Jews, exorcists, who attempt to cast out evil f S^4™
spirits1. Connecting this fact with the notices of Josephus, from 57-
which we infer that exorcisms of this kind were especially Exorcisms
practised by the Essenes2, we seem to have an indication of
their presence in the capital of proconsular Asia. If so, it is
a significant fact that in their exorcisms they employed the
name of our Lord : for then we must regard this as the earliest
notice of those overtures of alliance on the part of Essenism,
which involved such important consequences in the subse
quent history of the Church3. It is also worth observing,
that the next incident in St Luke's narrative is the burn
ing of their magical books by those whom St Paul converted magical
. . . books.
on this occasion . As Jews are especially mentioned among
these converts, and as books of charms are ascribed to the
Essenes by Josephus, the two incidents, standing in this close
1 Acts xix. 13 ruv irepiepxopivuv in this passage : see Wetstein ad loc,
'lovSatuv Qopxiaruv. and the references in Becker and Mar-
2 See above, p. 89, note 2. quardt Rom. Alterth. rv. p. 123 sq.
3 On the latter contact of Essenism But this supposition does not exclude
with Christianity, see the third disser- the Jews from a share in these magical
tation, and Galatians p. 322 sq. arts, while the context points to some
1 There is doubtless a reference to such participation.
the charms called 'T&ipiaia ypdppara

94

Sibylline
Oracle a.d. 80.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
connexion, throw great light on the type of Judaism which
thus appears at Ephesus1.
Somewhat later we have another notice which bears iD
the same direction. The Sibylline Oracle, which forms the
fourth book in the existing collection, is discovered by internal
evidence to have been written about a.d. 80 z. It is plainly
a product of Judaism, but its Judaism does not belong to
the normal Pharisaic type. With Essenism it rejects sacri
fices, even regarding the shedding of blood as a pollution 8,
and with Essenism also it inculcates the duty of frequent
washings 4. Yet from other indications we are led to the con
clusion, that this poem was not written in the interests of
Essenism properly so called, but represents some allied though

1 I can only regard it as an accidental
coincidence that the epulones of the
Ephesian Artemis were called Essenes,
Pausan. viii. 13. 1 toi>s t% 'Apripili
landropas tij 'Eipeala yivopivoVs, xaXov-
pivovs Si iirb ruv iroXiruv '~&aarjvas : see
Guhl Ephesiaca 106 sq. The Etymol.
Magn. has 'Eaaijv b BaatXeis xard 'E0e-
alovs, and adds several absurd deriva
tions of the word. In the sense of ' a
king' it is used by Callimachus Hymn.
Jov. 66 oi ae Beuv iaarjva irdXiv diaav. It
is probably not a Greek word, as other
terms connected with the worship of
the Ephesian Artemis (e.g. peydBvfos,
a Persian word) point to an oriental
or at least a non-Greek origin; and
some have derived it rrom the Ara
maic J^Dn chasin ' strong ' or ' power
ful.' But there is no sufficient ground
for connecting it directly with the
name of the sect 'Eaaijvol or 'Eaaaioi,
as some writers are disposed to do
(e. g. Spanheim on Callim. 1. c, Creuzer
Symbolik iv. pp. 347, 349) ; though
this view is favoured by the fact that
certain ascetic practices were enjoined
on these pagan 'Essenes.'
2 Its date is fixed by the following
allusions. The temple at Jerusalem

has been destroyed by Titus (vv. 122
sq.), and the cities of Campania have
been overwhelmed in fire and ashes
(w. 127 sq.). Nero has disappeared
and his disappearance has been fol
lowed by bloody contests in Rome (w.
116 sq.); but his return is still ex
pected (vv. 134 sq.).
3 See w. 27 — 30 ot vijois piv dir avras
diroarpitpovaiv ISbvres, xal Bupois, elxaia
Xl&uv ISpipara xutpuv a'tpaaiv ipipixuv
pepiaapiva xal Bval\jairerpairbSuv k.t.X.
In an earlier passage w. 8 sq. it is
said of God, othe ydp olxov (xei va$
XiBov ISpvBivra KUtpbrarov vuSbv re,
Bporuv iroXvdkyia XuBrjv.
4 ver. 160 iv irorapocs Xoiaaa&e SXov
Sipas devdoiai. Another point of con
tact with the Essenes is the great
stress on prayers before meals, ver. 26
eiXoyiovres irpiv iriieiv ipayieiv re. Ewald
(Sibyll. Biicher p. 46) points also to
the prominence of the words eiaeBeiv,
eiaeBrjs, eiaeBla (w. 26, 35, 42, 45,
133. 148, I5L 162, 165, i8r, 183) to
designate the elect of God, as tending
in the same direction. The force of
this latter argument will depend mainly
on the derivation which is given to the
name Essene. See below, p. 347 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

95

independent development of Judaism. In some respects at
all events its language seems quite inconsistent with the purer
type of Essenism1. But its general tendency is clear : and
of its locality there can hardly be a doubt. The affairs of
Asia Minor occupy a disproportionate space in the poet's de
scription of the past and vision of the future. The cities of
the Maeander and its neighbourhood, among these Laodicea,
are mentioned with emphasis2.
And certainly the moral and intellectual atmosphere would Phrygia
not be unfavourable to the growth of such a plant. The same J^ngeS
district, which in speculative philosophy had produced a Thales *° this
and a Heraclitus8, had developed in popular religion the wor- religion.
ship of the Phrygian Cybele and Sabazius and of the Ephe
sian Artemis4. Cosmological speculation, mystic theosophy,
religious fanaticism, all had their home here. Associated with
Judaism or with Christianity the natural temperament and the
intellectual bias of the people would take a new direction;

1 Thus for instance, Ewaid (1. c, p.
47) points to the tacit approval of mar
riage in ver. 33. I hardly think however
that this passage, which merely con
demns adultery, can be taken to imply
so much. More irreconcilable with pure
Essenism is the belief in the resur
rection of the body and the future life
on earth, which is maintained in w.
176 sq. ; though Hilgenfeld (Zeitschr.
xiv. p. 49) does not recognise the diffi
culty. See above p. 88. This Sibyl
line writer was perhaps rather a He-
merobaptist than an Essene. On the
relation of the Hemerobaptists and
Essenes see the third dissertation.
Alexandre, Orac. Sibyll. (n. p. 323),
says of this Sibylline Oracle, 'Ipse
liber haud dubie Christianus est,' but
there is nothing distinctly Christian
in its teaching.
2 w. 106 sq., 145 sq. ; see above p. 40,
note 2. It begins xXvBi Xeis 'Aatijs pe-
yaXavxios Eipwirijs re.
8 The exceptional activity of the

forces of nature in these districts of
Asia Minor may have directed the
speculations of the Ionio school towards
physics, and more especially towards
cosmogony. In Heraclitus there is
also a strong mystical element. But
besides such broader affinities, I ven
ture to call attention to special dicta of
the two philosophers mentioned in the
text, which curiously recall the tenets
of the Judaso-Gnostio teachers. Thales
declared (Diog. Laert. i. 27) rbv xbapov
(pxjrvxov xal Saipbvuv irXrjpij, or, as re
ported by Aristotle (de An. i. 5, p. 411),
irdvra irXrjpij Beuv elvai. In a recorded
saying of Heraclitus we have the very
language of a Gnostic teacher ; Clem.
Alex. Strom, v. 13, p. 699, Td piv rrjs
yvuaios Bddij Kpiirreiv diriarlv
dyaBrj, KaB' 'EpdKXeirov diriaritj ydp
Siatpvyydvei rb pij yivoiaKeaBai. See
above pp. 75, 90.
*¦ For the characteristic features of
Phrygian religious worship see Steiger
Kolosser p. 70 sq.

96 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
but the old type would not be altogether obliterated. Phrygia
reared the hybrid monstrosities of Ophitism1. She was the
mother of Montanist enthusiasm2, and the foster-mother of
Novatian rigorism8. The syncretist, the mystic, the devotee,
the puritan, would find a congenial climate in these regions
of Asia Minor.

Previousresultssummed up.

Is the
Colossianheresy Gnostic ?

Three
notes of
Gnosti
cism.

i. Intel
lectualexolusive
ness.

It has thus been shown first, that Essene Judaism was
Gnostic in its character ; and secondly, that this type of Jewish
thought and practice had established itself in the Apostolic age
in those parts of Asia Minor with which we are more directly
concerned. It now remains to examine the heresy of the
Colossian Church more nearly, and to see whether it deserves
the name, which provisionally was given to it, of Gnostic
Judaism. Its Judaism all will allow. Its claim to be regarded
as Gnostic will require a closer scrutiny. And in conducting
this examination, it will be convenient to take the three notes
of Gnosticism which have been already laid down, and to enquire
how far it satisfies these tests.
I. It has been pointed out that Gnosticism strove to esta
blish, or rather to preserve, an intellectual oligarchy in religion.
It had its hidden wisdom, its exclusive mysteries, its privileged
class. Now I think it will be evident, that St Paul in this epistle

1 The prominence, whioh the Phry
gian mysteries and Phrygian rites held
in the syncretism of the Ophites, is
clear from the account of Hippolytus
Har. v. 7 sq. Indeed Phrygia appears
to have been the proper home of Ophi
tism. Yet the admixture of Judaic
elements is not less obvious, as the
name Naassene, derived from the He
brew word for a serpent, shows.
8 The name, by which the Mon
tanists were commonly known in the
early ages, was the sect of the ' Phry
gians ' ; Clem. Strom, vii. 17, p. 900 ai
Si [ruv alpiaeuv] dirb (Bvovs [irpoaayo-
peiovrai], us rj tuv Qpvyuv (comp. Eus.

H. E. iv. 27, v. 16, Hipp. Har. viii
19, x. 25). From oi (or ij) Kard Qpvyds
(Eus. H. E. ii. 25, v. 16, 18, vi. 20)
comes the soloeoistic Latin name Cata-
phryges. 3 Socrates (iv. 28) accounts for the
spread of Novatianism in Phrygia by
the auttpoaivrj of the Phrygian temper.
If so, it is a striking testimony to the
power of Christianity, that under its
influence the religious enthusiasm of
the Phrygians should have taken this
direction, and that they should have
exchanged the fanatical orgiasm of
their heathen worship for the rigid
Puritanism of the Novatianist.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

97

feels himself challenged to contend for the universality of the st Paul
Gospel. This indeed is a characteristic feature of the Apostle's i°r^s
teachmg at all times, and holds an equally prominent place in yraversal-
the epistles of an earlier date. But the point to be observed is, Gospel,
that the Apostle, in maintaining this doctrine, has changed the
mode of his defence ; and this fact suggests that there has been
a change in the direction of the attack. It is no longer against
national exclusiveness, but against intellectual exolusiveness,
that he contends. His adversaries do not now plead ceremonial
restrictions, or at least do not plead these alone : but they erect
an artificial barrier of spiritual privilege, even more fatal to
the universal claims of the Gospel, because more specious and
more insidious. It is not now against the Jew as such, but
against the Jew become Gnostic, that he fights the battle of
liberty. In other words ; it is not against Christian Pharisaism
but against Christian Essenism that he defends his position.
Only in the hght of such an antagonism can we understand the
emphatic iteration with which he claims to 'warn every man
and teach every man in every wisdom, that he may present
every man perfect in Christ Jesus1.' It will be remembered against
that ' wisdom' in Gnostic teaching was the exclusive possession of tentFons of
the few; it will not be forgotten that 'perfection' was the term an arist°-
. ... . . oraoy of
especially applied in their language to this privileged minority, intellect.
as contradistinguished from the common herd of believers;
and thus it will be readily understood why St Paul should go
on to say that this universality of the Gospel is the one object
of his contention, to which all the energies of his hfe are
directed, and having done so, should express his intense anxiety
for the Churches of Colossae and the neighbourhood, lest they
should be led astray by a spurious wisdom to desert the true
knowledge2. This danger also will enable us to appreciate a
1 i. 28 vovBerovvres irdvra dvBpuirov in some copies, the second in others.
xal SiSdaxovres irdvra dvBpuirov iv For riXeiov see the note on the passage.
irdan aotplq. tva irapaarijaupev irdvra a The connexion of the sentences
dvBpuirov riXeiov iv Xpiarip x.t.X. The should be carefully observed. After
reiteration has offended the scribes; the passage quoted in the last note
and the first irdvra dvBpuirov is omitted comes the asseveration that this is

COL.

7

gS THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
novel feature in another passage of the epistle. While dwelling
on the obliteration of all distinctions in Christ, he repeats his
earlier contrasts, ' Greek and Jew,' ' circumcision and uncircum
cision,' 'bondslave and free'; but to these he adds new words
which at once give a wider scope and a more immediate appli
cation to the lesson. In Christ the existence of 'barbarian' and
even ' Scythian,' the lowest type of barbarian, is extinguished1.
As culture, civilisation, philosophy, knowledge, are no conditions
of acceptance, so neither is their absence any disqualification in
the believer. The aristocracy of intellectual discernment, which
Gnosticism upheld in religion, is abhorrent to the first principles
of the Gospel.
He con- Hence also must be explained the frequent occurrence of
touf wis1-8 the words ' wisdom' (aocpia), 'intelligence' (<7iWt<?), 'knowledge'
dom with (-y^eScrts), 'perfect knowledge' (eVifyz/wo-is), in this epistle2. St
Paul takes up the language of his opponents,, and translates it
into a higher sphere. The false teachers put forward a 'philo
sophy,' but it was only an empty deceit, only a plausible display
of false reasoning8. They pretended 'wisdom,' but it was
merely the profession, not the reality4. Against these pretentions
the Apostle sets the true wisdom of the Gospel. On its wealth,
its fulness, its perfection, he is never tired of dwelling6. The
true wisdom, he would argue, is essentially spiritual and yet
essentially definite ; while the false is argumentative, is specu-
the one object of the Apostle's preach- 'SxiBijs. There is nothing correspond
ing (i. 29) els 0 xal kowiu k.i .X.; then ing to this in the parallel passage,
the expression of concern on behalf Gal. iii. 28.
of the Colossians (ii. 1) BiXu ydp ipas 2 For aotpla see i. 9, 28, ii. 3, iii. 16,
elSivai i)XIkov dyuva (xu iirip ipuv iv. 5 s for aiveais i. 9, ii. 2 ; for yvuais
k.t.X.; then the desire that they may ii. 3; for iirlyvuais i. 9, 10, ii. 2,
be brought (ii. 1) els irdv irXovros rrjs iii. i°-
irXrjpoipoplas rrjs avveaeus, els iirl- s ii. 4 7ri6,aj'oXo7£a, ii. 8 xev}j dirdrrj.
yvuaiv tov pvarijplov tov Beov; then 4 ii. 23 Xbyov piv (xovra aotplast
the definition of this mystery (ii. 2, 3), where the piv suggests the contrast
Xpiarov iv $ elalv irdvres ol Bijaavpol ofthe suppressed clause.
x.t.X.; then the warning against the 6 e.g. i. 9, 28, iii. 16 iv irdarj
false teachers (ii 4) touto Xiyu tva aoiplq. ; ii. 2 T7;s irXijpoipoplas. For the
pijBels ipds irapaXoylgijrai x.r.X. 'wealth' of this knowledge compare
1 Col. iii. 11 after irepirop^ xal i. 27, ii. 2, iii. 16; and see above
dxpoBvaria the Apostle adds BdpBapos, p. 44.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 99
lative, is vague and dreamy1. Again they had their rites of
initiation. St Paul contrasts with these the one universal, com- and dwells
t • 9ii ii p /-m i • .-Mi • rm ¦ ontheveri-
prehensive mystery , the knowledge ot God in Christ. This table mys-
mystery is complete in itself: it contains 'all the treasures of ery'
wisdom and of knowledge hidden' in it8. Moreover it is offered
to all without distinction : though once hidden, its revelation is
unrestricted, except by the waywardness and disobedience of
men. The esoteric spirit of Gnosticism finds no countenance in
the Apostle's teaching.
2. From the informing spirit of Gnosticism we turn to the 2. Specu-
speculative tenets — the cosmogony and the theology of the tenets.
Gnostic. °~,
And here too the affinities to Gnosticism reveal themselves theology.
in the Colossian heresy. We cannot fail to observe that the
Apostle has in view the doctrine of intermediate agencies, re- st Paul
garded as instruments in the creation and government of the Ja0<?brine of
world. Though this tenet is not distinctly mentioned, it is ^e^e
0 •> • mediators,
tacitly assumed in the teaching which St Paul opposes to it.
Against the philosophy of successive evolutions from the Divine
nature, angelic mediators forming the successive links in the
chain which binds the finite to the Infinite, he sets the doctrine
of the one Eternal Son, the Word of God' begotten before the setting
worlds4. The angelology of the heretics had a twofold bearing ; thTdoc-1
it was intimately connected at once with cosmogony and with ^ie ' of the
religion. Correspondingly St Paul represents the mediatorial oarnate,
function of Christ as twofold : it is exercised in the natural
creation, and it is exercised in the spiritual creation. In both
these spheres His initiative is absolute, His control is universal,
His action is complete. By His agency the world of matter was
created and is sustained. He is at once the beginning and the
1 ii. 4, 18. sages are i. 15 — 20, ii. 9 — 15. They
2 i. 26, 27, ii. -i, iv. 3. will be found to justify the statements
3 ii. 2 iv $ elalv iravres ol Brjaavpol in this and the following paragraphs
rijs aoiptas xal ttjs yvuaeus dirbxpvipot. of the text. For the meaning of in-
For the meaning of dirbxpvtpoi see above dividual expressions see the notes on
p. 88, and the note on the passage. the passages.
4 The two great Christological pas-
7—2

ICO THE COLOSSIAN HERESY .
end of the material universe; 'All things have been created
through Him and unto Him.' Nor is His office in the spiritual
as the re- world less complete. In the Church, as in the Universe, He is
heaven s°le, absolute, supreme ; the primary source from which all life
and earth. procee(js am} tne ultimate arbiter in whom all feuds are reconciled.
His rela- On the one hand, in relation to Deity, He is the visible
(i) Deity ; image of the invisible God. He is not only the chief manifes-
as God tation of the Divine nature : He exhausts the Godhead mani-
rnam-fested. fested. In Him resides the totality of the Divine powers and
attributes. For this totality Gnostic teachers had a technical
The piero- term, the pleroma or plenitude1. From the pleroma they sup-
'III (I TPSKlfifl
in Him. posed that all those agencies issued, through which God has at
any time exerted His power in creation, or manifested His will
through revelation. These mediatorial beings would retain more
or less of its influence, according as they claimed direct parentage
from it or traced their descent through successive evolutions.
But in all cases this pleroma was distributed, diluted, transformed
and darkened by foreign admixture. They were only partial and
blurred images, often deceptive caricatures, of their original,
broken lights of the great central Light. It is not improbable
that, like later speculators of the same school, they found a place
somewhere or other in their genealogy of spiritual beings for
the Christ. If so, St Paul's language becomes doubly signifi
cant. But this hypothesis is not needed to explain its reference.
In contrast to their doctrine, he asserts and repeats the asser
tion, that the pleroma abides absolutely and wholly in Christ
as the Word of God2. The entire light is concentrated in
Him.
(2) Created Hence it follows that, as regards created things, His supre-
absolute &S macy must ^e aDS°lute- IQ heaven as in earth, over things
Lord. immaterial as over things material, He is king. Speculations on
the nature of intermediate spiritual agencies — their names, their
ranks, their offices — were rife in the schools of Judaeo-Gnostic
1 See the detached note on irXrj- irXrjpupa xaroixrjaai, ii. 9 iv atrip xa-
pupa. roixet irdv rb irXrjpupia rrjs Bebrijros au-
2 i. 19 iv aitrif eiSbxrjaev irdv rb panxus.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 101
thought. ' Thrones, dominations, princedoms, virtues, powers' —
these formed part of the spiritual nomenclature which they had
invented to describe different grades of angelic mediators.
Without entering into these speculations, the Apostle asserts
that Christ is Lord of all, the highest and the lowest, what
ever rank they may hold and by whatever name they are
called1, for they axe parts of creation and He is the source of
creation. Through Him they became, and unto Him they
tend. Hence the worship of angels, which the false teachers incul- Angelola-
cated, was utterly wrong in principle. The motive of this therefore
angelolatry it is not difficult to imagine. There was a show of °°ndem11-
humihty2, for there was a confession of weakness, in this sub
servience to inferior mediatorial agencies. It was held feasible
to grasp at the lower links of the chain which bound earth
to heaven, when heaven itself seemed far beyond the reach
of man. The successive grades of intermediate beings were
as successive steps, by which man might mount the ladder
leading up to the throne of God. This carefully woven web
of sophistry the Apostle tears to shreds. The doctrine of the
false teachers was based on confident assumptions respecting
angelic beings of whom they could know nothing. It was
moreover a denial of Christ's twofold personality and His
mediatorial office. It follows from the true conception of as a denial
Christ's Person, that He and He alone can bridge over the lect media-
chasm between earth and heaven ; for He is at once the lowest tlon'
and the highest. He raises up man to God, for He brings down
God to man. Thus the chain is reduced to a single link,
this link being the Word made flesh. As the pleroma resides
in Him, so is it communicated to us through Him8. To sub
stitute allegiance to any other spiritual mediator is to sever
1 See especially i. 16 etre Bpbvot Compare also ii. io rj xetpdXrj irdaijs
etre Kvpibrijres etre dpxal etre il-ovatai dpxrjs xal i£ovatas, and ii. 15 drrexSvad-
k.t.X., compared with the parallel pas- pevos rds dpxds Kal Tas il-ovalas k.t.X.
sage in Eph. i. 21 virepdvu irdaijs dpxrjs 2 ii. 18 BiXuv iv rarceivoippoaivi] xal
xdX iipvalas xal Svvdpeus xaX Kvpibrrjros Bprjaxelf tuv dyyiXuv k.t.X.
xal rcavrbs dvbparos ivopatouivov x.t.X. a ii. 10; comp. i. 9.

102 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
the connexion of the limbs with the Head, which is the centre
of life and the mainspring of all energy throughout the body1.
The Apo- Hence follows the practical conclusion, that, whatever is
ticalS infer- done> must be done in ttie name of tlie Lord2- Wives must
ence. submit to their husbands ' in the Lord ' : children must obey
their parents 'in the Lord' : servants must work for their mas
ters as working ' unto the Lord3.' This iteration, ' in the Lord,'
' unto the Lord,' is not an irrelevant form of words ; but arises
as an immediate inference from the main idea which under
lies the doctrinal portion of the epistle.
3. Moral 3. It has been shown that the speculative tenets of Gnos-
Gnostic° ticism might lead (and els a matter of fact we know that
doctrme. tnev did lead) to either of two practical extremes, to rigid
asceticism or to unbridled license. The latter alternative ap
pears to some extent in the heresy of the Pastoral Epistles4
and still more plainly in those of the Catholic Epistles5 and
the Apocalypse6. It is constantly urged by Catholic writers as
a reproach against later Gnostic sects'.
Asceticism But the former and nobler extreme was the first impulse
?ossianCO °^ tne Gnostic. To escape from the infection of evil by escap-
heresy ing from the domination of matter was his chief anxiety. This
appears very plainly in the Colossian heresy. Though the pro
hibitions to which the Apostle alludes might be explained in
part by the ordinances of the Mosaic ritual, this explanation
will not cover all the facts. Thus for instance drinks are
mentioned as well as meats8, though on the former the law
of Moses is silent. Thus again the rigorous denunciation, ' Touch
not, taste not, handle not9,' seems to go very far beyond the
Levitical enactments. And moreover the motive of these pro-
1 ii. 18. iv. 2 the ascetic tendency still pre-
2 iii. 17. dominates.
3 iii. 18, 20, 23. 6 2 Pet. ii. 10 sq., Jude 8.
4 At least in 2 Tim. iii. 1 — 7, where, 6 Apoc. ii. 14, 20 — 22.
though the most monstrous develop- T See the notes on Clem. Bom. Ep.
ments of the evil were still future, ii. § 9.
the Apostle's language implies that it 8 ii. 16.
had already begun. On the other hand » ii. 21.
in the picture of the heresy in 1 Tim.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 103
hibitions is Essene rather than Pharisaic, Gnostic rather than not ex-
Jewish. These severities of discipHne were intended ' to check fts^juda by
indulgence of the flesh1.' They professed to treat the bodyism-
with entire disregard, to ignore its cravings and to deny its
wants. In short they betray a strong ascetic tendency2, of
which normal Judaism, as represented by the Pharisee, offers
no explanation. And St Paul's answer points to the same inference. The St Paul's
difference will appear more plainly, if we compare it with his shows its
treatment of Pharisaic Judaism in the Galatian Church. This p"110?'10bearing.
epistle offers nothing at all corresponding to his language on
that occasion; 'If righteousness be by law, then Christ died
in vain' ; ' If ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you no
thing' ; ' Christ is nullified for you, whosoever are justified by
law ; ye are fallen from grace3.' The point of view in fact is
wholly changed. With these Essene or Gnostic Judaizers the
Mosaic law was neither the motive nor the standard, it was only
the starting point, of their austerities. Hence in replying the
Apostle no longer deals with law, as law ; he no longer points It is no
the contrast of grace and works ; but he enters upon the moral contrast of
aspects of these ascetic practices. He denounces them, as con- law and
r x grace.
centrating the thoughts on earthly and perishable things4.
He points out that they fail in their purpose, and are found
valueless against carnal indulgences5. In their place he offers
the true and only remedy against sin — the elevation of the
inner life in Christ, the transference of the affections into a
higher sphere8, where the temptations of the flesh are powerless.
Thus dying with Christ, they will kill all their earthly mem
bers7. Thus rising with Christ, they will be renewed in the
image of God their Creator".
1 ii. 23. remarks in the text apply only to the
2 Asceticism is of two kinds. There former.
is the asceticism of dualism (whether 3 Gal. ii. 21, v. 2, 4.
consciousorunconscious),whichsprings 4 ii. 8, 20 — 22.
from a false principle; and there is the 6 ii. 23 oiK iv nprj nvl irpos irXijapo-
asceticism of self-discipline, which is vijv rijs aapubs: see the note on these
the training of the Christian athlete words. » iii. 1, 2.
(1 Cor. ix. 27). I need not say that the 7 iii. 3, 5. 8 iii. 10.

104 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
The truth ^n attempting to draw a complete portrait of the Colossian
of the heresy from a few features accidentally exhibited in St Paul's
above re- J •>
suit tested epistle, it has been necessary to supply certain links ; and
some assurance may not unreasonably be required that this
has not been done arbitrarily. Nor is this security wanting.
In all such cases the test will be twofold. The result must
be consistent with itself: and it must do no violence to the
historical conditions under which the phenomena arose.
(i) Its in- i. In the present instance the former of these tests is fully
herent satisfied. The consistency and the symmetry of the result is
consisten- _ J .
cy and its great recommendation. The postulate of a Gnostic type
' brings the separate parts of the representation into direct con
nexion. The speculative opinions and the practical tenden
cies of the heresy thus explain, and are explained by, each
other. It is analogous to the hypothesis of the comparative
anatomist, who by referring the fossil remains to their proper
type restores the whole skeleton of some unknown animal from
a few bones belonging to different extremities of the body, and
without the intermediate and connecting parts. In the one case,
as in the other, the result is the justification ofthe postulate.
(2) its 2. And again; the historical conditions of the problem
historical1 are carefully observed. It has been shown already, that Ju-
sequence. daism in the preceding age had in one of its developments
assumed a form which was the natural precursor of the Colos
sian heresy. In order to complete the argument it will be
necessary to show that Christianity in the generation next suc
ceeding exhibited a perverted type, which was its natural out
growth. If this can be done, the Colossian heresy will take
its proper place in a regular historical sequence.
Continu- I have already pointed out that the language of St John
thiTtype m tne Apocalypse, which was probably written within a few
of Judaso- years of this epistle, seems to imply the continuance in this
cisminthe district of the same type of heresy which is here denounced
by St Paul1. But the notices in this book are not more de-
1 See above p. 41 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 105
finite than those of the Epistle to the Colossians itself; and
we are led to look outside the Canonical writings for some
more explicit evidence. Has early Christian history then pre
served any record of a distinctly Gnostic school existing on the
confines of the Apostolic age, which may be considered a legiti
mate development of the phase of religious speculation that
confronts us here ?
We find exactly the phenomenon which we are seeking in Heresy of
the heresy of Cerinthus1. The time, the place, the circum
stances, all agree. This heresiarch is said to have been origin
ally a native of Alexandria2 ; but proconsular Asia is allowed His date
on all hands to have been the scene of his activity as a
teacher8. He hved and taught at the close of the Apostolic
age, that is, in the latest decade of the first century. Some
writers indeed make him an antagonist of St Peter and St
Paul4, but their authority is not trustworthy, nor is this very
early date at all probable. But there can be no reasonable
doubt that he was a contemporary of St John, who was related
by Polycarp to have denounced him face to face on one me
morable occasion5, and is moreover said by Irenaeus to have
written his Gospel with the direct object of confuting his errors6.
1 The relation of Cerinthus to the with St John in the bath is placed at
Colossian heresy is briefly indicated Ephesus : see below, note 5.
by Neander Planting of Christianity 4 Epiphanius (xxviii. 2 sq.) repre-
1. p- 325 sq. (Eng. Trans.). It has sents him as the ringleader of the
been remarked by other writers also, Judaizing opponents of the Apostles
both earher and later. The subject in the Acts and Epistles to the Co-
appears to me to deserve a fuller rinthians and Galatians. Philastrius
investigation than it has yet re- (Har. 36) takes the same line.
ceived. 5 The well-known story of the en-
3 Hippol. Har. vii. 33 Alyvirrtuv counter between St John and Cerinthus
raiSela dttKijBeis, X. 21 6 h AlyinrTip in the bath is related by Irensus
daxTjaels, Theodoret. Har. Fab. ii. 3 iv (iii. 3. 4) on the authority of Polycarp,
Alyxhrru irXeiarov Siarplx/ras xpbvov. who appears from the sequence of
3 Iren. i. 26. 1 'et Cerinthus autem Ireofflus' narrative to have told it at
quidam...in Asia docuit,' Epiphan. Home, when he paid hisvisit to Ani-
Har. xxviii. 1 iyivero Si owtos d Kij- cetus ; 6s xal M 'Avixijrov iiriSijpijaas
pivBos iv ry 'Aala SiarplBwv, xdxeiae r% 'Piipv iroXXois dirb ruv irpoeipijpivuv
toO KijpiypaTOS tijv dpxrjv rrerroirjptvos, alpenxuv iiriarpespev...xdl elalv ol dxij-
Theodoret. 1. c. varepov els tijv 'Aalav xobres airov Sn 'ludvvrjs k.t.X.
aiplxero. The scene of his encounter 6 Iren. iii. n. 1.

106 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

Cerinthus ' Cerinthus,' writes Neander, ' is best entitled to be con-
tween Ju- sidered as the intermediate link between the Judaizing and
daism and +jie Gnostic sects.' ' Even among the ancients,' he adds, ' opposite
cism. reports respecting his doctrines have been given from opposite
points of view, according as the Gnostic or the Judaizing element
was exclusively insisted upon : and the dispute on this point
has been kept up even to modern times. In point of chro
nology too Cerinthus may be regarded as representing the prin-
¦' ciple in its transition from Judaism to Gnosticism1.'
Judaism Of his Judaism no doubt has been or can be entertained.
minenthi ^ne gross Chiliastic doctrine ascribed to him2, even though
his system ft may have been exaggerated in the representations of ad
verse writers, can only be explained by a Jewish origin. His
conception of the Person of Christ was Ebionite, that is Judaic,
in its main features8. He is said moreover to have enforced
the rite of circumcision and to have inculcated the observance
of sabbaths4. It is related also that the Cerinthians, like the
Ebionites, accepted the Gospel of St Matthew alone5.
though At the same time, it is said by an ancient writer that his
cism is adherence to Judaism was only partial6. This limitation is
already doubtless correct. As Gnostic principles asserted themselves
aggressive. r r
more distinctly, pure Judaism necessarily suffered. All or nearly
all the early Gnostic heresies were Judaic; and for a time a
compromise was effected which involved more or less concession
on either side. But the ultimate incompatibility of the two
at length became evident, and a precarious alliance was ex
changed for an open antagonism. This final result however
was not reached till the middle of the second century: and
meanwhile it was a question to what extent Judaism was pre-
1 Church History ii. p. 42 (Bonn's statements of these writers would not
Trans.). carry much weight in'themselves ; but
2 See the Dialogue of Gaius and in this instance they are rendered
Proclus in Euseb. H. E. iii. 28, Dio- highly probable by the known Judaism
nysius of Alexandria, ib. vii. 25, Theo- of Cerinthus.
doret. 1. c, Augustin. Har. 8. 5 Epiphan. Har. xxviii. 5, xxx. 14,
3 See below p. 111. Philastr. Har. 36.
* Epiphan. Har. xxviii. 4, 5, Phi- « Epiphan. Har. xxviii. 1 irpoaixeiv
lastr. Har. 36, Augustin. 1. c. The rip'IovSaiaptp drb pipovs.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 107
pared to make concessions for the sake of this new ally. Even
the Jewish Essenes, as we have seen, departed from the ortho
dox position in the matter of sacrifices; and if we possessed
fuller information, we should probably find that they made
still larger concessions than this. Of the Colossian heretics
we can only form a conjecture, but the angelology and an-
gelolatry attributed to them point to a further step in the
same direction. As we pass from them to Cerinthus we are
no longer left in doubt; for the Gnostic element has clearly Gnostic
gained the ascendant, though it has not yet driven its rival ^eTch"
out of the field. Two characteristic features in his teaching ms-
especially deserve consideration, both as evincing the tendency
of his speculations and as throwing back light on the notices
in the Colossian Epistle.
1. His cosmogony is essentially Gnostic. The great pro- 1. His
blem of creation presented itself to him in the same aspect; Cosmo"
and the solution which he offered was generically the same. gony
The world, he asserted, was not made by the highest God,
but by an angel or power far removed from, and ignorant of,
this Supreme Being1. Other authorities describing his sys
tem speak not of a single power, but of powers, as creating
the universe2 : but all alike represent this demiurge, or these
1 Iren. i. 26. 1 'Non a primo Deo atque virtutes, quos distantes longe a
factum esse mundum docuifc, sed a superioribus virtutibus mundum istum
virtute quadam valde separata et dis- in inferioribus partibus condidisse...
tante ab ea prinoipalitate qu» est su- Post hunc Cerinthus haireticus erupit,
per universa, et ignorante eum qui est similia docens. Nam et ipse mundum
super omnia Deum'; Hippol. Har. vii. institutum esse ab illis dicit'; Epi-
33 (Xeyev oix Vlrb tov irpurov GeoB ye- phan. Har. xxviii. 1 (va elvai tuv dyyi-
yovivai tov xbapov, dXX' iirb Swdpews Xuv tuv tox xbapov ireiroirjxbruv ; Theo-
twos xe%upiapivns Tijs birip rd SXa i£ov- doret. H. F. ii. 3 (va piv elvai rbv ruv
alas xal dyvooians rov birip irdvra Bebv, SXwv Bebv, oix airbv Si elpat tov xbapov
X. 21 virb Svvdpeiis tivos dyyeXixijs, Sijpiovpyov, dXXd Svvdpeis nvbs xexu-
iroXi Kexupiapivijs xal Sieariiaijs ttjs piapivas xal iravreXus airbv dyvooiaas ;
virip rd SXa aiBevrlas xal dyvooians rbv Augustin. Har. 8. The one statement
irrip iravra Bebv. is quite reconcilable with the other.
2 Pseudo-Tertull. Har. 3 ' Carpocra- Among those angels by whose instru-
tes preeterea hanc tulit seotam : Unam mentality the world was created, Ce-
esse dicit virtutem in superioribus rinthus appears to have assigned a
principalem, ex hac prolatos angelos position of preeminence to one, whom

108 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
demiurges, as ignorant of the absolute God. It is moreover
stated that he held the Mosaic law to have been given not
by the supreme God Himself, but by this angel, or one of
these angels, who created the world1.
and conse- From these notices it is plain that angelology had an im-
gelologv?* portant place in his speculations; and that he employed it
to explain the existence of evil supposed to be inherent in
the physical world, as well as to account for the imperfections
of the old dispensation. The 'remote distance' of his angelic
demiurge from the supreme God can hardly be explained ex
cept on the hypothesis of successive generations of these inter
mediate agencies. Thus his solution is thoroughly Gnostic.
At the same time, as contrasted with later and more sharply
defined Gnostic systems, the Judaic origin and complexion of
his cosmogony is obvious. His intermediate agencies still re
tain the name and the personality of angels, and have not
yet given way to those vague idealities which, as emanations
Angels of or aeons, took their place in later speculations. Thus his theory
sons of is linked on to the angelology of later Judaism founded on
tics16"08' ^e an&elic appearances recorded in the Old Testament nar
rative. And again : while later Gnostics represent the demi
urge and giver of the law as antagonistic to the supreme and
good God, Cerinthus does not go beyond postulating his igno
rance. He went as far as he could without breaking entirely
with the Old Testament and abandoning his Judaic standing-
ground.
Cerinthus In these respects Cerinthus is the proper link between the
tween the incipient gnosis of the Colossian heretics and the mature
heresyMid gnosis 0I* tae second century. In the Colossian epistle we
later Gnos- stiH breathe the atmosphere of Jewish angelology, nor is there
any trace of the won of later Gnosticism2 ; while yet speculation
is so far advanced that the angels have an important function
he regarded as the demiurge in a Har. xxviii. 4 tov Sebuxbra vbpov (va
special sense and under whom the itvai ruv dyyiXuv tuv tov xbapov ire-
others worked; see Neander Church rroirjxbruv.
History n. p. 43. 2 I am quite unable to see any
1 Pseudo-Tertull. 1. c. ; Epiphan. reference to the Gnostic conception of

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
in explaining the mysteries of the creation and government
of the world. On the other hand it has not reached the
point at which we find it in Cerinthus. Gnostic conceptions
respecting the relation of the demiurgic agency to the supreme
God would appear to have passed through three stages. This
relation was represented first, as imperfect appreciation ; next,
as entire ignorance; lastly, as direct antagonism. The second
and third are the standing points of Cerinthus and of the later
Gnostic teachers respectively. The first was probably the
position of the Colossian false teachers. The imperfections
of the natural world, they would urge, were due to the limited
capacities of these angels to whom the demiurgic work was
committed, and to their imperfect sympathy with the Supreme
God; but at the same time they might fitly receive worship
as mediators between God and man ; and indeed humanity
seemed in its weakness to need the intervention of some such
beings less remote from itself than the highest heaven.
2. Again the Christology of Cerinthus deserves attention 2. His
from this point of view. Here all our authorities are agreed. iogy.
As a Judaizer Cerinthus held with the Ebionites that Jesus
was only the son of Joseph and Mary, born in the natural way.
As a Gnostic he maintained that the Christ first descended in
the form of a dove on the carpenter's son at his baptism ; that
He revealed to him the unknown Father, and worked miracles
through him : and that at length He took His flight and left
him, so that Jesus alone suffered and rose, while the Christ
remained impassible1. It would appear also, though this is
an aon in the passages of the New sq.) attempts to show that Cerinthus
Testament, which are sometimes quoted did not separate the Christ from
in support of this view, e.g., by Baur Jesus, and that Irenseus (and subse-
Paulus p. 428, Burton Lectures p. in quent authors copying him) have
gq. wrongly attributed to this heretic the
1 Iren. i. 26. 1, Hippol. Har. vii. theories of later Gnostics, seem insuf-
33, x. 21, Epiphan. Har. xxviii. 1, fioient to outweigh these direct state-
Theodoret. H. F. ii. 3. The argu- ments. It is more probable that the
ments by which Lipsius (Gnosticismus system of Cerinthus should have ad-
pp. 245, 258, in Ersoh u. Gruber; mitted some foreign elements not very
Quellenkritik des Epiphanios p. 118 consistent with his Judaic standing

109

HO THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
not certain, that he described this re-ascension of the Christ as
a return ' to His own pleroma1.'
Approach Now it is not clear from St Paul's language what opinions
Crainttuan tne Colossian heretics held respecting the person of our Lord ;
f hri^t°th kut we may safely assume that he regarded them as inadequate
Colossian and derogatory. The emphasis, with which he asserts the
eternal being and absolute sovereignty of Christ, can hardly be
explained in any other way. But individual expressions tempt
us to conjecture that the same ideas were already floating in
the air, which ultimately took form and consistency in the
tenets of Cerinthus. Thus, when he reiterates the statement
that the whole pleroma abides permanently in Christ2, he
would appear to be tacitly refuting some opinion which main
tained only mutable and imperfect relations between the two.
When again he speaks of the true gospel first taught to the
Colossians as the doctrine of ' the Christ, even Jesus the Lord3,'
his language might seem to be directed against the tendency
to separate the heavenly Christ from the earthly Jesus, as
though the connexion were only transient. When lastly he
dwells on the work of reconciliation, as wrought ' through the
blood of Christ's cross,' 'in the body of His flesh through
death4,' we may perhaps infer that he already discerned a
disposition to put aside Christ's passion as a stumbling-block
in the way of philosophical religion. Thus regarded, the
point, than that these writers should in suum pleroma.' The doctrine is pre-
have been misinformed. Inconsistency cisely that whioh he has before as-
was a necessary condition of Judaic cribed to Cerinthus (i. 26. 1), but the
Gnosticism. The point however is mode of statement may have been
comparatively unimportant as affect- borrowed from the Nioolaitans or the
ing my main purpose. Valentinians or some other later Gnos-
1 Irenasus (iii 11. 1), after speaking tics. There is however no improbabi-
of Cerinthus, the Nicolaitans, and lity in the supposition that Cerinthus
others, proceeds ' non, quemadmodum used the vrovd pleroma in this way. See
illi dicunt, alteram quidem fabricatorem the detached note on rrXtjpupa below.
(i.e. demiurgum), ahum autem Patrem 2 i. 19, ii. 9. See above p. 100, note 2.
Domini : et alium quidem f abrioatoris On the force of xaroixeiv see the note
filium, alteram vero de superioribus on the earher of the two passages.
Christum, quem et impassibilem per- a ii. 6 irapeXdBere rbv Xpiarov, 'Jij-
severasse, descendentem in Jesum aovv rbv Kipiov.
filium fabrioatoris, et iterum revolasse ¦* i. 20, 22.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. Ill
Apostle's language gains force and point ; though no stress can
be laid on explanations which are so largely conjectural.
But if so, the very generahty of his language shows that The Gnos-
these speculations were still vague and fluctuating. The dif- thTcokL
ference which separates these heretics from Cerinthus may be Biansl)emg
... vague and
measured by the greater precision and directness m the Apo- undeve-
stolic counter-statement, as we turn from the Epistle to the °pe
Colossians to the Gospel of St John. In this interval, extend
ing over nearly a quarter of a century, speculation has taken
a definite shape. The elements of Gnostic theory, which
were before held in solution, had meanwhile crystallized around
the facts of the Gospel. Yet still we seem justified, even at
the earher date, in speaking of these general ideas as Gnostic,
guarding ourselves at the same time against misunderstanding
with the twofold caution, that we here employ the term to
express the simplest and most elementary conceptions of this
tendency of thought, and that we do not postulate its use as a
distinct designation of any sect or sects at this early date.
Thus limited, the view that the writer of this epistle is com
bating a Gnostic heresy seems free from all objections, while it
appears necessary to explain his language ; and certainly it
does not, as is sometimes imagined, place any weapon in the
hands of those who would assail the early date and Apostolic
authorship- of the epistle.

III.
CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE.

Theunder- TT7ITH0UT the preceding investigation the teaching of this
thTheresy * ' epistle would be very imperfectly understood; for its
necessary, direction was necessarily determined by the occasion which gave
rise to it. Only when we have once grasped the nature of
the doctrine which St Paul is combating, do we perceive that
every sentence is instinct with life and meaning.
The errors We have seen that the error of the heretical teachers was
twofold twofold. They had a false conception in theology, and they had
sprang a false basis of morals. It has been pointed out also, that these
from one .
root. two were closely connected together, and had their root in the
same fundamental error, the idea of matter as the abode of evil
and thus antagonistic to God.
So the As the two elements of the heretical doctrine were derived
answer to from ^ae same source, so the reply to both was sought by the
the same Apostle in the same idea, the conception of the Person of Christ
as the one absolute mediator between God and man, the true
and only reconciler of heaven and earth.
But though they are thus ultimately connected, yet it will
be necessary for the fuller understanding of St Paul's position
to take them apart, and to consider first the theological and
then the ethical teaching of the epistle.
i. The I. This Colossian heresy was no coarse and vulgar develop-
teachmg" ment or" falsehood. It soared far above the Pharisaic Judaism
ofthe which St Paul refutes in the Epistle to the Galatians. The
heretics. questions in which it was interested lie at the very root of our

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 113
religious consciousness. The impulse was given to its specu- its lofty
lations by an overwhelming sense of the unapproachable1"
majesty of God, by an instinctive recognition of the chasm
which separates God from man, from the world, from matter.
Its energy was sustained by the intense yearning after some
mediation which might bridge over this chasm, might establish
inter-communion between the finite and the Infinite. Up to
this point it was deeply religious in the best sense of the term.
The answer which it gave to these questions we have but com-
already seen. In two respects this answer failed signally. On Failure.
the one hand it was drawn from the atmosphere of mystical
speculation. It had no foundation in history, and made no
appeal to experience. On the other hand, notwithstanding
its complexity, it was unsatisfactory in its results ; for in this
plurality of mediators none was competent to meet the require
ments of the case. God here and man there — no angel or
spirit, whether one or more, being neither God nor man, could
truly reconcile the two. Thus as regards credentials it was
without a guarantee ; while as regards efficiency it was wholly
inadequate. The Apostle pointed out to the Colossians a more excellent The
way. It was the one purpose of Christianity to satisfy those answer6 S
very yearnings which were working in their hearts, to solve ~ ln tlle
that very problem which had exercised their minds. In Christ of Christ.
they would find the answer which they sought. His life — His
cross and resurrection — was the guarantee ; His Person — the The me-
Word Incarnate — was the solution. He alone filled up, He the world
alone could fill up, the void which lay between God and man, church* 8
could span the gulf which separated the Creator and creation.
This solution offered by the Gospel is as simple as it is ade
quate. To their cosmical speculations, and to their religious
yearnings alike, Jesus Christ is the true answer. In the
World, as in the Church, He is the one only mediator, the one
only reconciler. This twofold idea runs like a double thread
through the fabric of the Apostle's teaching in those passages
of the epistle where he is describing the Person of Christ.
col. 8

114 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
It will be convenient for the better understanding of St
Paul's teaching to consider these two aspects of Christ's me
diation apart — its function in the natural and in the spiritual
order respectively.
(i) In the (i) The heresy of the Colossian teachers took its rise, as
' we saw, in their cosmical speculations. It was therefore natural
that the Apostle in replying should lay stress on the function
of the Word in the creation and government of the world.
This is the aspect of His work most prominent in the first
of the two distinctly Christological passages. The Apostle
there predicates of the Word, not only prior, but absolute
existence. All things were created through Him, are sustained
in Him, are tending towards Him. Thus He is the begin
ning, middle, and end, of creation. This He is, because He
is the very image of the Invisible God, because in Him dwells
the plenitude of Deity.
Impor- This creative and administrative work of Christ the Word
this aspect ln the natural order of things is always emphasized in the
of the writings of the Apostles, when they touch upon the doctrine
Christ, 0f His Person. It stands in the forefront of the prologue to
St John's Gospel : it is hardly less prominent in the opening
of the Epistle to the Hebrews. His mediatorial function in the
Church is represented as flowing from His mediatorial func
tion in the world. With ourselves this idea has retired very
much into the background. Though in the creed common
to all the Churches we profess our belief in Him, as the
Being ' through whom all things were created,' yet in reahty
this confession seems to exercise very little influence on our
thoughts. And the loss is serious. How much our theological
conceptions suffer in breadth and fulness by the neglect, a
moment's reflexion will show. How much more hearty would be
the sympathy of theologians with the revelations of science and
the developments of history, if they habitually connected them
with the operation of the same Divine Word who is the centre
of all their religious aspirations, it- is needless to say. Through
the recognition of this idea with all the consequences which

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 115
flow from it, as a Uving influence, more than in any other way,
may we hope to strike the chords of that ' vaster music,' which
results only from the harmony of knowledge and faith, of rever
ence and research.
It will be said indeed, that this conception leaves un- notwith-
touched the philosophical difficulties which beset the subject ; difficulties
that creation still remains as much a mystery as before. ^ un"
This may be allowed. But is there any reason to think that
with our present limited capacities the veil which shrouds it
ever will be or can be removed? The metaphysical specula
tions of twenty-five centuries have done nothing to raise it.
The physical investigations of our own age from their very
nature can do nothing ; for, busied with the evolution of phe
nomena, they lie wholly outside this question, and do not even
touch the fringe of the difficulty. But meanwhile revelation
has interposed and thrown out the idea, which, if it leaves
many questions unsolved, gives a breadth and unity to our
conceptions, at once satisfying our religious needs and linking
our scientific instincts with our theological beliefs.
(ii) But, if Christ's mediatorial office in the physical crea- (ii) In the
• i • tt- Church.
tion was the starting pomt ol the Apostles teaching, His
mediatorial office in the spiritual creation is its principal theme.
The cosmogonies of the false teachers were framed not so
much in the interests of philosophy as in the interests of re
ligion; and the Apostle replies to them in the same spirit
and with the same motive. If the function of Christ is unique
in the Universe, so is it also in the Church. He is the sole Its abso-
and absolute link between God and humanity. Nothing short raoter.
of His personality would suffice as a medium of reconcilia
tion between the two. Nothing short of His life and work
in the flesh, as consummated in His passion, would serve as
an assurance of God's love and pardon. His cross is the atone
ment of mankind with God. He is the Head with whom
all the living members of the body are in direct and imme
diate communication, who suggests their manifold activities
to each, who directs their several functions in subordination
8—2

Ii6 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
to the healthy working of the whole, from whom they indi
vidually receive their inspiration and their strength.
Hence And being all this He cannot consent to share His prero-
megdfa° gative with others. He absorbs in Himself the whole function
tions are 0f mediation. Through Him alone, without any interposing
mentally link of communication, the human soul has access to the
Father. Here was the true answer to those deep yearnings after
spiritual communion with God, which sought, and could not
find, satisfaction in the manifold and fantastic creations of a
dreamy mysticism. The worship of angels might have the
semblance of humihty; but it was in fact a contemptuous
defiance of the fundamental idea of the Gospel, a flat denial
of the absolute character of Christ's Person and office. It
was a severance of the proper connexion with the Head, an
amputation of the disordered limb, which was thus disjoined
from the source of life and left to perish for want of spiritual
nourishment.
Christ's The language of the New Testament writers is beset with
mediation s-rv. ,,• i r t j i
in the difficulties, so long as we conceive oi our Lord only in con-
pk^i11, nexion with the Gospel revelation : but, when with the Apo-
byHis sties we realise in Him the same Divine Word who is and
in the ever has been the light of the whole world, who before Chris-
or ' tianity wrought first in mankind at large through the avenues
of the conscience, and afterwards more particularly in the Jews
through a special though still imperfect revelation, then all
these difficulties fall away. Then we understand the signifi
cance, and we recognise the truth, of such passages as these :
' No man cometh unto the Father, but by me' : ' There is no
salvation in any other'; 'He that disbelieveth the Son shall
not see life, but the wrath of God abideth upon him1.' The
exclusive claims advanced in Christ's name have their full and
perfect justification in the doctrine of the Eternal Word.
Relation The old dispensation is primarily the revelation of the abso-
doctrine of ^u*e sovereignty of God. It vindicates this truth against two
the Word opposing forms of error, which in their extreme types are repre-
1 Joh. xiv. 6, Aots iv. 12, Joh. iii. 36.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. "7
sented by Pantheism and Manicheism respectively. The Pan- to the mo-
theist identifies God with the world : the Manichee attributes oHhe Old
to the world an absolute existence, independent of God. With Testa-
t. ment.
the Pantheist sm ceases to have any existence : for it is only
one form of God's working. With the Manichee sin is in
herent in matter, which is antagonistic to God. The teaching
of the Old Testament, of which the key-note is struck in the
opening chapters of Genesis, is a refutation of both these errors.
God is distinct from the world, and He is the Creator of
the world. Evil is not inherent in God, but neither is it in
herent in the material world. Sin is the disobedience of in
telligent beings whom He has created, and whom He has
endowed with a free-will, which they can use or misuse.
The revelation of the New Testament is the proper com- The New
plement to the revelation of the Old. It holds this position in ^^p^.
two main respects. If the Old Testament sets forth the abso- men*ary
r . „ ,. . to the Old.
lute unity of God — His distinctness from and sovereignty over
His creatures — the New Testament points out how He holds
communion with the world and with humanity, how man
becomes one with Him. And again, if the Old Testament
shows the true character of sin, the New Testament teaches
the appointed means of redemption. On the one hand the
monotheism of the Old Testament is supplemented by the
theanthropism1 of the New. Thus the theology of revelation is
completed. On the other hand, the hamartiology of the Old
Testament has its counterpart in the soteriology of the New.
Thus the economy of revelation is perfected.
1 I am indebted for the term thean- In applying the terms theanthro-
thropism, as describing the substance pism and soteriology to the New Testa-
of the new dispensation, to an article ment, as distinguished from the Old,
by Prof. Westcott in the Contemporary it is not meant to suggest that the
Review rv. p. 417 (December, 1867); ideas involved in them were wholly
but it has been used independently, wanting in the Old, but only to indi-
though in very rare instances, by other cate that the conceptions, which were
writers. The value of terms such as I inchoate and tentative and subsidiary
have employed here in fixing ideas is in the one, attain the most prominent
enhanced by their strangeness, and will position and are distinctly realised in
excuse any appearance of affectation. the other.

118 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
2- The 2. When we turn from the theology of these Colossian
ethical heretics to their ethical teaching, we find it characterised by
error of ....
the here- the same earnestness. Of them it might indeed be said that
they did 'hunger and thirst after righteousness.' Escape from
Their impurity, immunity from evil, was a passion with them. But
earnest* i* was n0 less true that notwithstanding all their sincerity they
ness, . went astray in the wilderness' ; ' hungry and thirsty, their soul
fainted within them.' By their fatal transference of the abode of
sin from the human heart within to the material world without,
they had incapacitated themselves from finding the true anti-
but funda- dote. Where they placed the evil, there they necessarily sought
miscon- the remedy. Hence they attempted" to fence themselves about,
andam- an<^ *° Purify tfleir lives by a code of rigorous prohibitions.
sequent Their energy was expended on battling with the physical con
ditions of human life. Their whole mind was absorbed in
the struggle with imaginary forms of evil. Necessarily their
character was moulded by the thoughts which habitually en
gaged them. Where the * elements of the world,' the ' things
which perish in the using1,' engrossed all their attention, it
could not fail but that they should be dragged down from the
serene heights of the spiritual life into the cloudy atmosphere
which shrouds this lower earth.
St Paul St Paul sets himself to combat this false tendency. For
tuteVa negative prohibitions he substitutes a positive principle; for
principle special enactments, a comprehensive motive. He tells them
nances. that all their scrupulous restrictions are vain, because they fail
to touch the springs of action. If they would overcome the
evil, they must strike at the root of the evil. Their point of
view must be entirely changed. They must transfer them
selves into a wholly new sphere of energy. This transference
is nothing less than a migration from earth to heaven — from
the region of the external and transitory to the region of
the spiritual and eternal2. For a code of rules they must
substitute a principle of life, which is one in its essence but

n. 20, 22. ¦" 111. 1 sq.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 1 19
infinite in its application, which will meet every emergency,
will control every action, will resist every form of evil.
This principle they have in Christ. With Him they have This prin.
died to the world ; with Him they have risen to God. Christ, the hea-
the revelation of God's holiness, of God's righteousness, of^c^te
God's love, is light, is life, is heaven. With Him they have been
translated into a higher sphere, have been brought face to face
with the Eternal Presence. Let them only realise this trans
lation. It involves new insight, new motives, new energies.
They will no more waste themselves upon vexatious special
restrictions : for they will be furnished with a higher inspiration
which will cover all the minute details of action. They will
not exhaust their energies in crushing this or that rising desire,
but they will kill the whole body1 of their earthly passions
through the strong arm of this personal communion with God
in Christ. When we once grasp this idea, which lies at the root of St Paul's
St Paul's ethical teaching, the moral difficulty which is sup- o^faiftf
posed to attach to his doctrine of faith and works has vanished. aai ^orl"l
It is simply an impossibility that faith should exist without in tlie
works. Though in form he states his doctrine as a relation of this prin -
contrast between the two, in substance it resolves itself into cip e'
a question of precedence. Faith and works are related as
principle and practice. Faith — the repose in the unseen, the
recognition of eternal principles of truth and right, the sense
of personal obligations to an Eternal Being who vindicates
these principles — must come first. Faith is not an intellectual
assent, nor a sympathetic sentiment merely. It is the absolute
surrender of self to the will of a Being who has a right to"'
command this surrender. It is this which places men in
personal relation to God, which (in St Paul's language) justifies
them before God. For it touches the springs of their actions ;
it fastens not on this or that detail of conduct, but extends
1 ii. 11 iv ttj direKSiaei rod aupa- vpeis rd iravra, and ver. 9 direxSvad-
tos rrjs aapKos, iii. 5 vexpuaare ovv rd pe"oi rbv iraXaibv dvBpuirov. See the
p4Xrj with ver. 8 vvvl Si dirbBeaBe xal notes on the several passages.

120 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
throughout the whole sphere of moral activity; and thus it
determines their character as responsible beings in the sight
of God.
The From the above account it will have appeared that the dis-
oloeyof tinctive feature of this epistle is its Christology. The doctrine
this epistle 0f the Person of Christ is here stated with greater precision
and fulness than in any other of St Paul's epistles. It is
therefore pertinent to ask (even though the answer must neces
sarily be brief) what relation this statement bears to certain
other enunciations of the same doctrine ; to those for instance
considered which occur elsewhere in St Paul's own letters, to those which
to are found in other Apostolic writings, and to those which
appear in the fathers of the succeeding generations.
i. The i. The Christology of the Colossian Epistle is in no way
logy of st different from that of the Apostle's earlier letters. It may
Paul's indeed be called a development of his former teaching, but only
epistles as exhibiting the doctrine in fresh relations, as drawing new
deductions from it, as defining what had hitherto been left un
defined, not as superadding any foreign element to it. The
doctrine is practically involved in the opening and closing words
of his earliest extant epistle: 'The Church which is in God
the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ ' ; ' The grace of our Lord
Jesus Christ be with you V The main conception of the Person
of Christ, as enforced in the Colossian Epistle, alone justifies and
explains this language, which otherwise would be emptied of all
significance. And again: it had been enunciated by the Apostle
explicitly, though briefly, in the earliest directly doctrinal passage
which bears on the subject ; ' One Lord Jesus Christ, through
whom are all things and we through Him2.' The absolute
the same universal mediation of the Son is declared as unreservedly in
stance" but tnis passage from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, as in any
1 i Thess. i. i, v. 28. even where the term itself is not
2 1 Cor. viii. 6 Si' ov tA irdvra xal used. See the dissertation on the doc
kets Si' airoi. The expression 6V ov trine of the Logos in the Apostolic
impUes the conception of the Logos, writers.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 121
later statement of the Apostle : and, if all the doctrinal and less fully
practical inferences which it implicitly involves were not
directly emphasized at this early date, it was because the cir
cumstances did not yet require explicitness on these points.
New forms of error bring into prominence new aspects of the
truth. The heresies of Laodicea and Colossae have been inva
luable to the later Church in this respect. The Apostle himself,
it is not too much to say, realised with ever-increasing force the
manifoldness, the adaptability, the completeness of the Christian
idea, notwithstanding its simplicity, as he opposed it to each
successive development of error. The Person of Christ proved
the complete answer to false speculations at Colossae, as it had
been found the sovereign antidote to false practices at Corinth.
All these unforeseen harmonies must have appeared to him, as
they will appear to us, fresh evidences of its truth.
2. And when we turn from St Paul to the other Apostolic 2. The
writings which dwell on the Person of Christ from a doctrinal 0iogy of
point of view, we find them enunciating it in language which Apostolic
implies the same fundamental conception, though they may not writings.
always present it in exactly the same aspect. More especially
in the Epistle to the Hebrews first, and in the Gospel of St Their
John afterwards, the form of expression is identical with the mentai
statement of St Paul. In both these writings the universe is ldentlty*
said to have been created or to exist by or through Him.
This is the crucial expression, which involves in itself all
the higher conceptions of the Person of Christ \ The Epistle
to the Hebrews seems to have been written by a disciple of
St Paul immediately after the Apostle's death, and therefore
within some five or six years from the date which has been
assigned to the Colossian letter. The Gospel of St John, if the
traditional report may be accepted, dates about a quarter of a
century later ; but it is linked with our epistle by the fact that
the readers for whom it was primarily intended belonged to the
neighbouring districts of proconsular Asia. Thus it illustrates,
1 Joh. i. 3 irdvra Si' avrov iyivero k.t.X., Heb. i. 2 Si' oJ Kal iiroiijaev rois
aluvas.

[22

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.

Firmness
of the
apostolicidea.

3. The
Christ
ology of
the suc
ceeding
ages.

Its loose
ness of
concep
tion.

and is illustrated by, the teaching of St Paul in this letter.
More especially by the emphatic use of the term Logos, which
St Paul for some reason has suppressed, it supplies the centre
round which the ideas gather, and thus gives unity and direct
ness to the conception.
In the Christology of these Apostolic writings there is a firm
ness and precision which leaves no doubt about the main con
ception present to the mind of the writers. The idea of Christ
as an intermediate being, neither God nor man, is absolutely and
expressly excluded. On the one hand His humanity is distinctly
emphasized. On the other He is represented as existing from
eternity, as the perfect manifestation of the Father, as the abso
lute mediator in the creation and government of the world.
3. But, when we turn from these Apostolic statements to
the writings of succeeding generations, we are struck with the
contrast 1. A vagueness, a flaccidity, of conception betrays itself
in their language.
In the Apostolic Fathers and in the earlier Apologists we
find indeed for the most part a practical appreciation of the
Person of Christ, which leaves nothing to be desired; but as
soon as they venture upon any directly dogmatic statement, we
miss at once the firmness of grasp and clearness of conception
which mark the writings of the Apostles. If they desire to
emphasize the majesty of His Person, they not unfrequently fall
into language which savours of patripassianism2. If on the other
hand they wish to present Him in His mediatorial capacity,
they use words which seem to imply some divine being, who
is God and yet not quite God, neither Creator nor creature8.

1 The remarks on the theology of
the Apostolic Fathers, as compared
with the Apostles, in Dorner's Lehre
von der Person Christi 1. p. 130 sq.
seem to me perfectly just and highly
significant. See also Pressense' Trois
Premiers Siecles 11. p. 406 sq. on the
unsystematic spirit of the Apostolic
Fathers. 2 See for instance the passages

quoted in the note on Clem. Bom. 2
ra iraBrjpara avrov.
3 The unguarded language of Justin
for instance illustrates the statement
in the text. On the one hand Peta-
vius, Theol. Dogm. de Trin. ii 3. 2, dis
tinctly accuses him of Arianism: on
the other Bull, Def. Fid. Nic. ii. 4. 1 sq.,
indignantly repudiates the charge and
claims him as strictly orthodox. Peta-

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 1 23
The Church needed a long education, before she was fitted
to be the expositor of the true Apostolic doctrine. A conflict
of more than two centuries with Gnostics, Ebionites, Sabellians,
Arians, supplied the necessary discipline. The true successors The Apo-
of the Apostles in this respect are not the fathers of the second apphed in
century, but the fathers of the third and fourth centuries. In the later age8,
expositors of the Nicene age we find indeed technical terms
and systematic definitions, which we do not find in the Apostles
themselves ; but, unless I have wholly misconceived the nature
of the heretical teaching at Colossae and the purport of St Paul's
reply, the main idea of Christ's Person, with which he here
confronts this Gnostic Judaism, is essentially the same as that
which the fathers of these later centuries opposed to the Sabel-
lianism and the Arianism of their own age. If I mistake not,
the more distinctly we realise the nature of the heresy, the
more evident will it become that any conception short of the
perfect deity and perfect humanity of Christ would not have
furnished a satisfactory answer; and this is the reason why
I have dwelt at such length on the character of the Colossian
false teaching, and why I venture to call especial attention to
this part of my subject.
Of the style of the letter to the Colossians I shall have occa- Style of
sion to speak hereafter, when I come to discuss its genuine- epistle.
ness. It is sufficient to say here, that while the hand of St Paul
is unmistakeable throughout this epistle, we miss the flow and
the versatility of the Apostle's earlier letters.
A comparison with the Epistles to the Corinthians and to the
Philippians will show the difference. It is distinguished from Its rug-
them by a certain ruggedness of expression, a ' want of finish ' and com-
often bordering on obscurity. What account should be given of PresB10n>
this characteristic, it is impossible to say. The divergence of
vius indeed approaches the subject nevertheless Justin's language is occa-
from the point of view of later Western sionally such as no Athanasian could
theology and, unable to appreciate have used. The treatment of this
Justin's doctrine of the Logos, does father by Dorner (Lehre 1. p. 414 sq.)
less than justice to this father ; but is just and avoids both extremes.

124 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
style is not greater than will appear in the letters of any active-
minded man, written at different times and under different
circumstances. The epistles which I have selected for contrast
suggest that the absence of all personal connexion with the
Colossian Church will partially, if not wholly, explain the dimi
nished fluency of this letter. At the same time no epistle of
but essen- St Paul is more vigorous in conception or more instinct with
' meaning. It is the very compression of the thoughts which
creates the difficulty. If there is a want of fluency, there is no
want of force. Feebleness is the last charge which can be
brought against this epistle.
Analysis. The following is an analysis of the epistle :
I. Introductory (i. i — 13).
(1) i. 1, 2. Opening salutation.
(2) i. 3 — 8. Thanksgiving for the progress of the Colossians
hitherto.
(3) i. 9 — 13. Prayer for their future advance in knowledge and
well-doing through Christ.
[This leads the Apostle to speak of Christ as the
only path of progress.]
II. Doctrinal (i. 13 — ii. 3).
The Person and Office of Christ.
(1) i. 13, 14. Through the Son we have our deliverance, our
redemption.
(2) i. 15 — 19. The Preeminence of the Son ;
(i) As the Head of the natural Creation, the Universe
(i. 15—17) ;
(ii) As the Head of the new moral Creation, the
Church (i. 18).
Thus He is first in all things ; and this, because the pleroma
has its abode in Him (i. 19).
(3) L 20— ii. 3. The Work of the Son— a work of recon
ciliation ;
(i) Described generally (i. 20).
(ii) Applied specially to the Colossians (L 21 — 23).

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 1 25
(iii) St Paul's own part in carrying out this work. His Analysis.
sufferings and preaching. The ' mystery' with which
he is charged (i. 24 — 27).
His anxiety on behalf of all (i. 28, 29) : and more
especially of the Colossian and neighbouring Churches
("• i—3)-
[This expression of anxiety leads him by a direct path
to the next division of the epistle.]
III. Polemical (ii. 4 — iii. 4).
Warning against errors.
(1) ii 4 — 8. The Colossians charged to abide in the truth
of the Gospel as they received it at first, and not to be
led astray by a strange philosophy which the new teachers
offer.
(2) ii. 9 — 15. The truth stated first positively and then
negatively. [In the passage which follows (ii. 9 — 23) it will be ob
served how St Paul vibrates between the theological
and practical bearings of the truth, marked a, /2, re
spectively.]
(i) Positively.
(a) The pleroma dwells wholly in Christ and is com
municated through TTim (ii. 9, 10).
(/J) The true circumcision is a spiritual circumcision
(ii. 11, 12).
(ii) Negatively. Christ has
(/?) annulled the law of ordinances (ii 14) ;
(a) triumphed over all spiritual agencies, however power
ful (ii. 15).
(3) ii. 16 — iii. 4. Obligations following thereupon.
(i) Consequently the Colossians must not
(J3) either submit to ritual prohibitions (ii. 16, 17),
(a) or substitute the worship of inferior beings for
allegiance to the Head (ii. 18, 19).
(ii) On the contrary this must henceforth be their
rule •

126 CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
Analysis. i. They have died with Christ; and with Him they
have died to their old life, to earthly ordinances (ii.
20—23).
2. They have risen with Christ ; and with Him they
have risen to a new life, to heavenly principles (iii.
1-4).
IV. Hortatory (iii. 5 — iv. 6).
Practical application of this death and this resurrection.
(1) iii. 5 — 17. Comprehensive rules.
(i) What vices are to be put off, being mortified in this
death (iii. 5 — 11).
(ii) What graces are to be put on, being quickened
through this resurrection (iii. 12 — 17).
(2,) iii. 18 — iv. 6. Special precepts.
(a) The obligations
Of wives and husbands (iii. 18, 19) ;
Of children and parents (iii 20, 21) ;
Of slaves and masters (iii. 22 — iv. 1).
(&) The duty of prayer and thanksgiving ; with special
intercession on the Apostle's behalf (iv. 2 — 4).
(c) The duty of propriety in behaviour towards the
unconverted (iv. 5, 6).
V. Personal (iv. 7 — 18).
(1) iv. 7 — 9. Explanations relating to the letter itself.
(2) iv. 10 — 14. Salutations from divers persons.
(3) iv. 15 — 17. Salutations to divers persons. A message
relating to Laodicea.
(4) iv. 18. Farewell.

nPOS KOAASSAEIS.

WE SPEAK WISDOM AMONG THEM THAT ARE PERFECT.
YET NOT THE WISDOM OP THIS WORLD.
BUT WE SPEAK THE WISDOM OP GOD IN A MYSTERY.

Jste vas electionis
Fires omnes rationis
Humance transgreditur :
Super choros angelorum
Raptus, coeli secretorum
Doctrinis imbuitur.
De hoc vase tam fecundo,
Tam electo et tam mundo,
Tu nos, Christe, complue;
Nos de luto, nos de fcece,
Tua sancta purga prece.
Regno tuo statue.

1IPOS KOAASSAEIS.

I TAYAOS aVoo-ToAos XpicrTOV 'Iricrou Sid BeXrifiaro^
-*—*- Qeov, Kat Tipiodeos 6 d$e\(p6s, %toI$ iv KoAoo-cats

i, 2. 'Paul, an apostle of Christ
Jesus by no personal merit but by
God's gracious will alone, and Timothy,
our brother in the faith, to the conse
crated people of God in Colossi, the
brethren who are stedfast in their
allegiance and faithful in Christ May
grace the well-spring of all mercies, and
peace the crown of all blessings, be
bestowed upon you from God our
Father.' i. diroo-roXos] On the exceptional
omission of this title in some of St
Paul's epistles see PhiL i. I. Though
there is no reason for supposing that
his authority was directly impugned
in the Colossian Church, yet he inter
poses by virtue of his Apostolic com
mission and therefore uses his autho
ritative title.
8ia BeXriparos Qeov] As in I Cor. i. I,
2 Cor. i. I, Ephes. i. I, 2 Tim. i. i.
These passages show that the words
cannot have a polemical bearing. If
they had been directed against those
who questioned his Apostleship, they
would probably have taken a stronger
form. The expression must therefore
be regarded as a renunciation of all
personal worth, and a declaration of
God's unmerited grace; comp. Rom.
ix. 1 6 apa ovv ov tov BeXovrot ov8i
tov TpexoVTOS aXXh tov iXeuvros Qeov.
The same words Sid deXtjpuiTos Gfou are
used in other connexions in Rom. xv.
32, 2 Cor. viii 5, where no polemical
reference is possible.
Tipodeos] The name of this disciple
is attached to the Apostle's own in
COL.

the heading of the Philippian letter,
which was probably written at an
earlier stage in his Roman captivity.
It appears also in the same connexion
in the Epistle to Philemon, but not in
the Epistle to the Ephesians, though
these two letters were contempora
neous with one another and with the
Colossian letter. Por an explanation
of the omission, see the introduction
to that epistle.
In the Epistles to the Philippians
and to Philemon the presence of Ti
mothy is forgotten at once (see Phil.
i. 1). In this epistle the plural is
maintained throughout the thanks
giving (w. 3, 4, 7, 8, 9), but after
wards dropped, when the Apostle be
gins to speak in his own person (i. 23,
24), and so he continues to the end.
The exceptions _(i. 28, iv. 3) are rather
apparent than real.
o aSeXcpos] Timothy is again desig
nated simply 'the brother' in 2 Cor.
i. 1, Philem. 1, but not in Heb. xiii. 23,
where the right reading is rbv aSeXipov
rjpwv. The same designation is used
of Quartus (Rom. xvi. 23^ of Sosthenes
(1 Cor. i. 1), of Apollos (1 Cor. xvi. 12) ;
comp. 2 Cor. viii. 18, ix. 3, 5, xii. 18.
As some designation seemed to be
required, and as Timothy could not
be called an Apostle (see Galatians,
p. 96, note 2), this, as the simplest
title, would naturally suggest itself.
2. KoXo<ro-<us] Por the reasons
why this form is preferred here, while
KoXao-o-aeis is adopted in the heading
of the epistle, see above, p. 16 sq.
9

130

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1-3
^a'jOis vpuv

dy'tots Kal 7ri(rTo7<z dSeXcpoTs ev XpujTw
Kal eiptjvr) diro Qeov iraTpos tj/jiojv.
3 Ey^;aj0to-Tov/Ji6i' tw Qew ^KaiJ ira-rpl tov Kvpiov

dylois] ' saints, ,'i.e. the people con
secrated to God, the Israel of the new
covenant; see the note on Phil. i. i.
This mode of address marks the later
epistles of St Paul. In his earlier
letters (i, 2 Thess., I, 2 Cor., Gal.) he
writes rfj ixx\i)0-ia, rais ixxXrjcriais. The
change begins with the Epistle to the
Romans, and from that time forward
the Apostle always uses dylois in
various combinations in addressing
churches (Rom., Phil., CoL, Ephes.).
Por a similar phenomenon, serving as
a chronological mark, see the note on
ij xap'f, iv. 1 8. The word dylois must
here be treated as a substantive in
accordance with its usage in parallel
passages, and not as an adjective con
nected with abeXcpots. See the next
note. xal mo-ro'is dSeXobols] This unusual
addition is full of meaning. Some
members ofthe Colossian Church were
shaken in their allegiance, even if they
had not fallen from it. The Apostle
therefore wishes it to be understood
that, when he speaks of the saints, he
means the true and stedfast members
of the brotherhood. In this way he
obliquely hints at the defection. Thus
tho words xal iriorois d8eX<£>oZs are a
supplementary explanation of tois d-
¦yiW. He does not directly exclude
any, but he indirectly warns all. The
epithet mo-rbs cannot mean simply
'believing'; for then it would add no
thing which is not already contained
in dylois and d8eX<pois. Its passive
sense, 'trustworthy, stedfast, unswerv
ing,' must be prominent here, as in
Acts xvi. 15 ei xexpixare pe Trio-rrjv Ta
Kvpicp elvai. See Galatians p. 155.
iv Xpiora] Most naturally connected
with both words mo-Tois dSfXcpoir,
though referring chiefly to trio-rois ;
COmp. Ephes. vi. 21 irio-rbs bidxovos ev

Kvpicp, I Tim. i. 2 yvrjo-'icp reKva iv irl-
o-rei. Por the expression mo-rbs iv
Xpio-Ta, iv Kvplm, see also 1 Cor.iv. 17,
Ephes. i 1. The Apostle assumes
that the Colossian brethren are 'sted
fast in Christ.' Their state thus con
trasts with the description of the he
retical teacher, who (ii. 19) ov xparel
rrjv xecpdXrjv.
xdpis k.t.\.] On this form of saluta
tion see the note to 1 Thess. i. 1.
irarpbs ijpuv] The only instance in
St Paul's epistles, where the name of
the Father stands alone in the open
ing benediction without the addition
of Jesus Christ. The omission was
noticed by Origen (Rom. 1. § 8, rv. p.
467), and by Chrysostom (ad loc. xi. p.
324, Horn, in 2 Cor. xxx, x. p. 65 1 ). But
transcribers naturally aimed at uni
formity, and so in many copies we find
the addition xdi Kvpiov 'Irjo-ov Xpiarov.
The only other exception to the Apo
stle's usual form is in I Thessalonians,
where the benediction is shorter still,
X^pis vpiv xal elptjvi), and where like
wise the copyists have supplied words
to lengthen it out in accordance with
St Paul's common practice.
3 — 8. 'We never cease to pour
forth our thanksgiving to God the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ on
your account, whensoever we pray to
Him. "We are full of thankfulness
for the tidings of the faith which ye
have in Christ Jesus, and the love which
ye show towards all the people of God,
while ye look forward to the hope
which is stored up for you in heaven
as a treasure for the life to come.
This hope was communicated to you
in those earlier lessons, when the Gos
pel was preached to you in its purity
and integrity — the one universal un
changeable Gospel, which was made
known to you, even as it was carried

I- 4, 5]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

131

r)nu>v '\t]frov XjOiO"ToD iravTore Trepl v/nwv irpocrev^ofxevoi'
4dKOv(ravTes ttjv tticttiv vpuSv ev XpuxTtS '\t](rov, Kat ty\v
d<yd'7Tr]v [i)v e^exe] eis TravTas toi/s dyiovs, s$td tjjv

throughout the world, approving itself
by its fruits wheresoever it is plant
ed. For, as elsewhere, so also in you,
these fruits were manifested from the
first day when ye received your lessons
in, and apprehended the power of, the
genuine Gospel, which is not a law of
ordinances but a dispensation of grace,
not a device of men but a truth of
God. Such was the word preached to
you by Epaphras, our beloved fellow-
servant in our Master's household,
who in our absence and on our behalf
has ministered to you the Gospel of
Christ, and who now brings back to us
the welcome tidings of the love which
ye show in the Spirit.'
3. HvxaptoTovpev] See the notes on
1 Thess. i. 2.
irarpi] If the xal be omitted, as the
balance of authorities appears to sug
gest, the form of words here is quite
exceptional. Elsewhere it runs 6 Qebs
koi irarrip tov Kvpiov, Rom. XV. 6, 2 Cor.
i. 3, xL 31, Ephes. i. 3 (v. 1.), 1 Pet. i.
3; comp. Rev. i. 6 : and in analogous
cases, such as o Oeos xal irarrjp ijpmv,
the rule is the same. See the note on
Clem. Rom. § 7. In iii. 17 however
we have to Qem irarpi, where the evi
dence is more decisive and the ex
pression quite as unusual On the
authorities for the various readings
here see the detached note.
rrdvrore k.t.X.] We here meet the
same difficulty about the connexion of
the clauses, which confronts us in
several of St Paul's opening thanks
givings. The words irdvTore and rrepl
vpuv must clearly be taken together,
because the emphasis of irepi vpSv
would be inexplicable, if it stood at
the beginning of a clause. But are
they to be attached to the preceding or
to the following sentence? The con
nexion with the previous words is fa

voured by St Paul's usual conjunction
of evxapioreiv ndvrore (see the note on
Phil. i. 3), and by the parallel passage
ou iravopai ev)(apioTav virep vptiv in
Ephes. i. 16. Thus the words will
mean ' We give thanks for you always
in our prayers' Por this absolute
use of irpoaevxbpe voi see Matt. vi. 7,
Acts xvi. 25.
4. dxovo-avres] 'having heard' from
Epaphras (ver. 8); for the Apostle had
no direct personal knowledge of the
Colossian Church: see the introduc
tion, p. 27 sq.
iv Xpiarm 'I170-0G] To be connected
with njv iriorai vpuv. The strict clas
sical language would require rrjv iv
X. 'I., but the omission of the article is
common in the New Testament (e. g.
ver. 8); see the note on 1 Thess. i 1,
and Winer § xx. p. 169 (ed. Moulton).
The preposition iv here and in the pa
rallel passage, Ephes. i. 15, denotes the
sphere in which their faith moves,
rather than the object to which it is
directed (comp. 1 Cor. iii. 5); for, if
the object had been meant, the na
tural preposition would have been im
or els (e.g. ii. 5). This is probably the
case also in the passages where at
first sight it might seem otherwise,
e.g. 1 Tim. iii. 13, 2 Tim. iii. 15; for
compare 2 Tim. i. 13 iv iriarei xal
dyairn ttj iv Xpiarm 'Irjaov, where the
meaning is unambiguous. There is
however authority in the lxx for the
use of iv with mans, iriareveiv, to de
note the object, in Jer. xii. 6, Ps.
Ixxviii. 22, and perhaps in Mark i. 15,
Rom. iii. 25, and (more doubtfully still)
in Joh. iii. 15.
rjv exere] See the detached note on
the various readings.
5. Sta ttjv eX7n'8a] 'for the hope,' i.e.
looking to the hope. The following
reasons seem decisive in favour of con-
9—2

132

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1.6

er\7ri$a Tr]v aTTOKeifxevrtv vfxiv ev rots ovpavols, i)v 7rpot]-
KOvaraTe ev tw Xoyw ty\<s dXt]6eia<s tov evayyeXiov, 6tov
irapovTos ets vp.5.^, /ca&iis Kal ev iravTi ™ Kocrfict) itTTiv

necting 8id -rijv iXirita, not with eu^a-
piarovpev, but with rrjv irianv x.t.X.,
whether rjv exere be retained or not.
(i) The great distance of evxapiarov-
pev is against the former connexion;
(2) The foUowing clause, rjv irporjxov-
aart x.t.X., suggests that the words
dia ttjv eXiriSa describe the motives of
the Colossians for well-doing, rather
than the reasons of the Apostle for
thanksgiving: (3) The triad of Chris
tian graces, which St Paul delights to
associate together, would otherwise be
broken up. This last argument seems
conclusive; see especially the corre
sponding thanksgiving in 1 Thess. i. 3,
pvrjpovevovres vpuv tou epyov rrjs iri
arems xa\ tov koitov ttjs dydirrjs xal
ttjs viropovrjs rrjs iXiribos k.t.\., with
the note there. The order is the same
here, as there; and it is the natural
sequence. Faith rests on the past;
love works in the present; hope looks
to the future. They may be regard
ed as the efficient, material, and
final causes respectively of the spiri
tual life. Compare Polycarp Phil. 3
irianv rjns iarl prjrrjp irdvruv rjpmv,
iiraxdXovSovoijs ttjs iXiridos, irpoayovarjs
rrjs dydirrjs.
The hope here is identified with the
object of the hope : see the passages
quoted on Gal. v. 5. The sense of
iXiris, as of the corresponding words
in any language, oscillates between the
subjective feeling and the objective
realisation ; comp. Rom. viii. 24 t%
yap iXiri8i iamOrjpev iXiris tie ftXeiro-
pevrj ovx eanv iXiris' o yap j3Xeirei ns
k.t.X., where it passes abruptly from
the one to the other.
tt)v diroxeipevrjv] 'which is stored
up.' It is the drjaavpbs iv ovpavm of
the Gospels (Matt. vi. 20, 21, Luke xii.
34, xviii. 22).
Trpoij/couo-aTf] ' of which ye were

told in time past' The preposition
seems intended to contrast their
earlier with their later lessons — the
true Gospel of Epaphras with the false
gospel of their recent teachers (see
the next note). The expression would
gain force, if we might suppose that
the heretical teachers obscured or
perverted the doctrine of the resur
rection (comp. 2 Tim. ii. 18) ; and their
speculative tenets were not unlikely
to lead to such a result. But this is
not necessary; for under any circum
stances the false doctrine, as leading
them astray, tended to cheat them of
their hope; see ver. 23. The common
interpretations, which explain irpo- as
meaning either 'before its fulfilment'
or 'before my writing to you,' seem
neither so natural in themselves nor
so appropriate to the context.
rijs dX-qBelas tov evayyeXiov] ' the
truth ofthe Gospel,' i.e. the true and
genuine Gospel as taught by Epaphras,
and not the spurious substitute of
these later pretenders : comp. ver. 6
iv dXrjdeia. See also Gal. ii. 5, 14,
where a similar contrast is implied in
the use of 17 aXrjtieta tov evayyeXiov.
6. tou irapovTos els vpds] 'which
reached you.' The expression irapei
vai els is not uncommon in classical
writers ; comp. irapeivai irpos in Acts
xii. 20, Gal. iv. 18, 20. So also evpe-
Ofjvai els (Acts viii. 40), yevesrdai els
(e.g. Acts xxv. 15), and even elvai
els (Luke xi. 7). See Winer § 1. p.
5i6sq. iv iravrl r& xbapm] For a similar
hyperbole see Rom. i. 8 iv SXa t<»
xbapm ; comp. 1 Thess. i. 8, 2 Cor. ii. 14,
iv iravrl rorrco. More lurks under these
words than appears on the surface. The
true Gospel, the Apostle seems to say,
proclaims its truth by its universality.
Tbe false gospels are the outgrowths

1.6]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

133

Kapiro<popovjj.evov Kal av^avoptevov, Kadws Kal iv v/uuv,
d<p' f)<s ripiepas tJKOvrraTe Kat iireyvtuTe ttjv x^Piv T°u

of local circumstances, of special idio
syncrasies; the true Gospel is the
same everywhere. The false gospels
address themselves to limited circles ;
the true Gospel proclaims itself boldly
throughout the world. Heresies are
at best ethnic : truth is essentially
catholic. See ver. 23 pi) peraxivovpevoi
dirb rifs i\iri8os tou euayyeXiou oJ
ijKoua-are, tou xrjpvxdevros iv irdajj
xriae t Trj vrro tov ovpavov.
iariv xapirocpopovpevov] 'is constantly
bearing fruit.' The fruit, which the
Gospel bears without fail in all soils
and under every climate, is ita cre
dential, its verification, as against the
pretensions of spurious counterfeits.
The substantive verb should here be
taken with the participle, so as to
express continuity of present action ;
as in 2 Cor. ix. 12 ou povov iariv irpoaa-
vairKrjpovaa x.t.X., Phil. ii. 26 irriirodmv
rjv. It is less common in St Paul
than in some of the Canonical writers,
e.g. St Mark and St Luke; but pro
bably only because he deals less in
narrative. Of the middle xapnocpopeiadai no
other instance has been found. The
voice is partially illustrated by xaSu-
vocpopeladai, aibrjpocpopeladai, rvpira-
voipope'iadai, though, as involving a
different sense of -cpopeladai 'to wear,'
these words are not exact parallels.
Here the use of the middle is the
more marked, inasmuch as the active
occurs just below (ver. 10) in the
same connexion, Kapirocpopovvres xal
av£av6pevoi. This fact however points
to the force of the word here. The
middle is intensive, the active exten
sive. The middle denotes the inherent
energy, the active the external diffu
sion. The Gospel is essentially a re
productive organism, a plant whose
'seed is in itself.' For this 'dynamic '
middle see Moulton's note on Winer
§ xxxviii. p. 319.

xal av£av6p.evov] The Gospel is not
like those plants which exhaust them
selves in bearing fruit and wither
away. The external growth keeps
pace with the reproductive energy.
While xapirocpopovpevov describes the
inner working, av^avbpevov gives the
outward extension of the Gospel. The
words xal av^avopevov are not found
in the received text, but the autho
rity in their favour is overwhelming.
xadms xa\ iv vpiv] The comparison
is thus doubled back, as it were, on
itself. This irregularity disappears in
the received text, xa\ iariv xapirocjio-
povpevov xadms xai iv vpiv, where the
insertion of xal before xapirocpopovpe-
vov straightens the construction. For
a similar irregularity see 1 Thess. iv.
I irapaxdXovpev iv Kvplu 'Irjaov iva,
xadms irapeXdfieTe irap' rjpmv to iras bei
vpds irepiirareiv xal dpiaxeiv Qem, xadms
xai irepiirareiTe, iva irepiaaevrjre paXXov,
where again the received text simpli
fies the construction, though in a dif
ferent way, by omitting the first iva
and the words xadms xai ireptirarelre.
In both cases the explanation of the
irregularity is much the same; the
clause reciprocating the comparison
(here xadms xal iv vpiv, there xadms
xal irepiiraTclre) is an afterthought
springing out of the Apostle's anxiety
not to withhold praise where praise
can be given.
For the appearance of «al in both
members of the comparison, xal iv
iravrl t^> xoapa... xadms xal, comp.
Rom. i. 13 xal iv vpiv xadms xai iv toIs
\011rols edveaiv ; and in the reversed
order below, iii. 13 xadms xal 6 Kvpios
ixapiaaro vpiv, ovrms xal vpeis (with
the note): see also Winer liii. p. 549
(ed. Moulton). The correlation of the
clauses is thus rendered closer, and
the comparison emphasized.
tjxovaare xal iiriyvmre] The accusa
tive is governed by both verbs equally,

134

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 7, 8

Qeov iv dXrjdeia, 7/ca0a5s ipiddeTe airo 'EiraCppd tov
dyairrjTOv (rvvSovXov r]p.wv, os icrTtv 7rto-Tos virep tjfxwv
Sta/coi/os tov XpuTTOv, 86 Kal SriXwo-a? ri/uuv ttjv vfxcov
dyairrjv ev irvev/uaTt. ever was very natural, inasmuch as
xadms xal is an ordinary collocation
of particles and has occurred twice in
the preceding verse.
'Eiracppd] On thenoticesof Epaphras,
and on his work as the evangelist
of the Colossians see above, p. 29 sq.,
p. 34 sq., and the note on iv. 12.
o-uvfiouXou] See iv. 7. The word does
not occur elsewhere in St Paul.
virep rjpmv] As the evangelist of
Colossae, Epaphras had represented
St Paul there and preached in his
stead ; see above, p. 30. The other
reading virep vpmv might be interpret
ed in two ways : either (1) It might
describe the personal ministrations of
Epaphras to St Paul as the represen
tative of the Colossians (see a similar
case in Phil. ii. 25, iv. 18), and so it
might be compared with Philem. 13
tva virep aov poi Siaxovfj ; but this in
terpretation is hardly consistent with
roil Xpiarov. Or (2) It might refer to
the preaching of Epaphras for the
good of the Colossians ; but the na
tural construction in this case would
hardly be mep vpmv (of which there is
no direct example), but either vpmv
(Rom. xv. 8) or vpiv (1 Pet. i. 12).
The balance of external authority
however is against it. Partly by
the accidental interchange of similar
sounds, partly by the recurrence of
virep ufKav in the context (vv. 3, 9), and
partly also from ignorance of the his
torical circumstances, u,u<ui/ would read
ily be substituted for rjpmv. See the
detached note on various readings.
8. d xal dTjXcoo-as] ' As he preached
to you from us, so also he brought
back to us from you the tidings, etc.'
iv irvevpan] To be connected with
ttjv vpmv dyairrjv. 'The fruit of the
Spirit is love,' Gal. v. 22. Por the

'Ye were instructed in and fully ap
prehended the grace of God.' For
this sense of axoieiv see below, ver.
23. For iiriyivmaxeiv as denoting 'ad
vanced knowledge, thorough apprecia
tion,' see^the note on iiriyvmais, ver. 9.
tt)v x°-Plv T0" &*<">] St Paul's syno-
nyme for the Gospel. In Acts xx. 24
he describes it as his mission to preach
to evayyeXiov rijs xapiros rov Qeov.
The true Gospel as taught by Epa
phras was an offer of free grace, a
message from God ; the false gospel,
as superposed by the heretical teach
ers, was a code of rigorous prohibitions,
a system of human devising. It was
not x°P's hut Soypara (ii. 14),; not tou
Qeov but tou Koapov, rmv dvdpairav (ii.
8, 20, 22). For God's power and good
ness it substituted self-mortification
and self-exaltation. The Gospel is
called fj x&pis roii OeoS again in 2 Cor.
vi. 1, viii. 9, with reference to the same
leading characteristic which the Apo
stle delights to dwell upon (e.g. Rom.
iii. 24, v. 15, Eph. ii. 5, 8), and which
he here tacitly contrasts with the doc-
trineof -the later intruders. The false
teachers of Colossse, like those of Ga
latia, would lead their hearers aderelv
ttjv x&piv tov 6eou (Gal. ii. 21) ; to ac
cept their doctrine was ixiriirreiv ttjs
Xapiros (Gal. v. 4).
iv dXrjdeia] i.e. 'in its genuine sim
plicity, without adulteration' : see the
note on rijs dXridelas tov evayyeXiov,
ver. 5.
7. xadms ipddere] 'even as ye were
instructed in it,' the clause being an
explanation of the preceding iv dXrj-
Gelq,} COmp. ii. 7 xadas iSiSaxdrjre.
On the insertion of xal before ipd
dere in the received text, and the con
sequent obscuration of the sense, see
above, p. 29 sq. The insertion how-

1-9]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

135

9 Ala tovto Kal ffyxets, d(j)' r)s rjfxepas tJKOvo~a[xev, ov
Travopieda virep vpidSv irpoarevj/opievoi Kal aiTov/Jievoi 'tva
7rXtipa)6fJT€ Tt]v iiriyvwiTtv tov 6eXrj/J.aTos avTov iv

omission of the article, ttjv iv irvevpan,
see the note on ver. 4.
9 — 14. ' Hearing then that ye thus
abound in works of faith and love,
we on our part have not ceased, from
the day when we received the happy
tidings, to pray on your behalf. And
this is the purport of our petitions ;
that ye may grow more and more in
knowledge, till ye attain to the perfect
understanding of God's will, being en
dowed with all wisdom to apprehend
His verities and all intelligence to
follow His processes, living in the
mind of the Spirit — to the end that
knowledge may manifest itself in
practice, that your conduct in life may
be worthy of your profession in the
Lord, so as in all ways to win for you
the gracious favour of God your King.
Thus, while ye bear fruit in every
good work, ye will also grow as the
tree grows, being watered and re
freshed by this knowledge, as by the
dew of heaven : thus ye will be
strengthened in all strength, according
to that power which centres in and
spreads from His glorious manifesta
tion of Himself, and nerved to all
endurance under affliction and all
long-suffering under provocation, not
only without complaining, but even
with joy : thus finally (for this is the
crown of all), so rejoicing ye will pour
forth your thanksgiving to the Uni
versal Father, who prepared and fitted
us all — you and us alike — to take pos
session of the portion which His good
ness has allotted to us among the
saints in the kingdom of light. Yea,
by a strong arm He rescued us from
the lawless tyranny of Darkness, re
moved us from the land of our bond
age, and settled us as free citizens in
our new and glorious home, where His
Son, the offspring and the representa

tive of His love, is King; even the
same, who paid our ransom and thus
procured our redemption from cap
tivity — our redemption, which (be
assured) is nothing else than the re
mission of our sins.'
9. Aid toBto] 'for this cause,' i. e.
'by reason of your progressive faith
and love,' referring not solely to d xal
SrjXmaas x.t.X. but to the whole of
the preceding description. For 81b
tovto xal rjpels in an exactly similar
connexion, see 1 Thess. ii. 13; comp.
Ephes. i. 15 8id tovto xdym x.t.X. In
all these cases the xal denotes the
response of the Apostle's personal
feeling to the favourable character
of the news ; ' we on our part.' This
idea of correspondence is still further
emphasized by the repetition of the
same words : xal iv vpiv dcp' fjs -qpipas
rjxovaare (ver. 6), xai rjpels dcp' fjs Tjpe
pas rjxovaapev (ver. 9).
xai airou/iei/oi] The words have an
exact parallel in Mark xi. 24 (as cor
rectly read) irdvra oaa irpoaevxeade
xal avrelade.
Xva] With words like irpoaeixeaBai,
alreladai, etc., the earher and stronger
force of tva, implying design, glides
imperceptibly into its later and weaker
use, signifying merely purport or re
sult, so that the two are hardly sepa
rable, unless one or other is directly
indicated by something in the con
text. See the notes on Phil. i. 9, and
comp. Winer § xliv. p. 420 sq.
ttjv iir'iyvaaiv] Afavourite wordin the
later epistles of St Paul ; see the note
on Phil i. 9. In all the four epistles
of the first Roman captivity it is an
elementin the Apostle's openingprayer
forhis correspondents' well-being(Phil.
i 9, Ephes. i. 17, Philem. 6, and here).
The greater stress whichis thus laid on
the contemplative aspects of the Gospel

136

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 10

irdo-ti a'ofpia Kal crvvecrei irvev/maTtKrj, I0 'ireptirxxTrjcjai
a^ttas tov Kvpiov ets iraa'av dpecrKeiav iv iravTi 'epyta

may be explained partly by St Paul's
personal circumstances, partly by the
requirements of the Church. His en
forced retirement and comparative
leisure would lead his own thoughts
in this direction, while at the same
time the fresh dangers threatening the
truth from the side of mystic specu
lation required to be confronted by
an exposition of the Gospel from a
corresponding point of view.
The compound iiriyvmais is an ad
vance upon yvmais, denoting a larger
and more thorough knowledge. So
Chrysostom here, eyvwre, dXXd Set n
xal imyvmvai. Comp. Justin Mart.
Dial. 3, p. 221 A, rj irapexovaa avr&v
t»v dvdpmirivav xal rmv Beiav yvmaiv,
eireira ttjs tovtov deiorrjros xal Sixaio-
o-vvtjs iiriyvoaiv. So too St Paul
himself contrastsyiycoo-KEU'j'yi'mo-is, with
imyivmaxeiv, iiriyvmais, as the par
tial with the complete, in two pas
sages, Rom. i. 21, 28, 1 Cor. xiii. 12.
With this last passage (apn yivoiaxm
ix pepovs, rore Se iiriyvmaopai) com
pare Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 17, p. 369,
irapd rmv 'Ej3pa'ixmv irpocpTjrmv peprj
rfjs aXrjdeias ov xar iiriyvmaiv Xa-
fibvres, where xar iiriyvmaiv is com
monly but wrongly translated 'without
proper recognition' (comp. Tatian ad
Grcec. 40). Hence also iiriyvmais is
used especially of the knowledge of
God and of Christ, as being the per
fection of knowledge : e. g. Prov. ii. 5,
Hos. iv. 1, vi. 6, Ephes. i. 17, iv. 13,
2 Pet. i. 2, 8, ii. 20, Clem. Alex. Peed.
ii. 1, p. 173.
aocpia xal avveaei] ' wisdom and in
telligence.' The two words are fre
quently found together: e.g. Exod.
xxxi. 3, Deut. iv. 6, 1 Chron. xxii. 12,
2 Chron. i. 10 sq., Is. xi. 2, xxix. 14,
Dan. ii. 20, Baruch iii. 23, 1 Cor. i. 19,
Clem. Rom. 32. So too aocpol xal
avveroi, Prov. xvi. 21, Matt. xi. 25,
and elsewhere. In the paraUel pas

sage, Eph. i. 8, the words are iv irdon
aocpia. xal cppovrjaei, and the substitu
tion of cppovrjais for avveais there is
instructive. The three words are
mentioned together, Arist. Eth. Nic.
i 13, as constituting the inteUectual
(8iaw))jTixai) virtues. 2ocpia is mental
exceUence in its highest and fuUest
sense; Arist. Eth. Nic. vi. 7 17 dxpi-
j3eo-TaTrj r&v imaTrjpmv... mairep xecpa-
Xrjv exovaa iiriarrj.pr] rmv npimrdrmv
(see Waitz on Arist. Organ. 11. p. 295
sq.), Cicero de Off. i. 43 ' princeps om
nium virtutum,' Clem. Alex. Peed. ii. 2,
p. 181, TeXeia...ipirepiXa^ovaa Ta oXa.
The Stoic definition of aocpia, as iiri-
arrjfLij deimv xal dvdpmirlvmv xal rmv
rovrmv alnav, is repeated by various
writers : e.g. Cic. de Off. ii. 5, Philo
Congr. erud.grat. 14, p. 530, [Joseph.]
Mace. 2, Clem. Alex. Peed. ii. 2, p. 181,
Strom, i. 5, p. 333, Orig. c. Cels. iii. 72,
Aristob. in Eus. Prcep. Ev. xiii. 12,
p. 667. And the glorification of aocpia
by heathen writers was even sur
passed by its apotheosis in the Pro
verbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon.
WhUe aocpia 'wisdom' is thus primary
and absolute (Eth. Nic. vi. 7 pi) povov
rd ix rmv dpxmv elSevai dXXd xai 7rcpi
Tas dpxas dXTjdeveiv), both avveais ' m-
teUigence' and cppovrjais 'prudence'
are derivative and special (Eth. Nic
vi. 12 rmv iaxdrmv xal tibv xad' exaorov).
They are both applications of o-ooiia
to details, but they work on different
Unes; for, while avveais is critical,
cppovrjais is practical; while avveais
apprehends the bearings of things,
cppovrjais suggests lines of action : see
Arist. Eth. Nic. vi. Ill) pev yap eppb-
vrjais iiriraxriKT] ianv... rj Se avve
ais xptnxrj. Por avveais see 2 Tim.
11. 7 voei o Xeym, Smaei ydji aoi 6 Kv
pios avv e a iv iv irdaiv. This relation
of aocpia to o-uWo-is explains why in
almost every case aocpia (aocjibs) pre
cedes avveais (avveros), where they

I. II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

137

dyadw Kapiro(f)opovvTes Kal avgavopievoi Tt) imyvcoo'ei
- ¦¦ Qeov' "iv iraarrj bvvdfiei hwapiovpievoi KaTa to

TOV

are found together, and also why in
Baruch ui. 23 oi ixtjjTTjTal ttjs avvi-
aeus, 6Sbv Si aocpias ovx eyvmaav, we
find avveais implying a tentative, par
tial, approach to aocpia. The relation
of aocjiia to tppovijais will be considered
more at length in the note on the
parallel passage, Ephes. i. 8.
irvevpanxfi] The word is emphatic
from its position. The false teachers
also offered a aocpia, but it had only
a show of wisdom (ii 23) ; it was an
empty counterfeit calling .itself philo
sophy (ii 8); it was the offspring of
vanity nurtured bythemindofthe flesh
(ii 18). See 2 Cor. i. 12 oux iv aocpia
aapKiKjj, where a simUar contrast is
impUed, and 1 Cor. i 20, ii. 5, 6, 13,
iu. 19, where it is directly expressed
by aocpia tov xoapov, aocpia dvdpmirmv,
aocpia tov aimvos tovtov, dvdpaicivT] ao
cpia, etc.
IO. ircpiiraTTJaai dtjius X.T.X.] So I
Thess. ii. 12, Ephes. iv. 1 ; comp. PhU.
i 27. The infinitive here denotes the
consequence (not necessarily the pur
pose) of the spiritual enlightenment
described in tva irXrjpmOfJTe x.t.X. ; see
Winer § xhv. p. 399 sq. With the
received text irepiiraTrjaai vpds dtjims
k.tX. the connexion might be doubtful ;
but this reading is condemned by ex
ternal evidence. The emphasis of the
sentence would be marred by the inser
tion of vpas. The end of aU knowledge,
the Apostle would say, is conduct.
rou Kupi'ou] i. e. 'of Christ.' In 1
Thess. ii. 12 indeed we have irepiira-
relv dijlms tov Qeov ; but St Paul's com
mon, aud apparently universal, usage
requires us to understand d Ku'p*os of
Christ. dpeaxeiav] ie. 'to please God in all
ways'; comp. 1 Thess. iv. 1 mas Set
vpds irepiiraTelv xal apiaxeiv Qea. As
this word was commonly used to de
scribe the proper attitude of men to
wards God, the addition of rou Qeov

would not be necessary: Philo Quis
rer. div. her. 24 (1. p. 490) ds drroSe-
Xopevov (tov Qeov) rdr i/fiix*?1 ixovalov
ipeaxeias, de Ahrah. 25 (11. p. 20)
rds irpbs dpeaxeiav oppas, de Viet. Off.
8 (II. p. 257) fiid iraaav ievai rmv els
dpeaxeiav dSiSi/, with other passages
quoted by Loesner. Otherwise it is
used especially of ingratiating oneself
with a sovereign or potentate, e.g.
Polyb. vi. 2. 12; and perhaps in the
higher connexion, in which it occurs
in the text, the idea of a king is stUl
prominent, as e.g. PhUo de Mund.
Op. 50 (i. p. 34) 7rdn-a xai Xiyetv xal
irparreiv iairovbafcev els dpeaxeiav tou
JraTpos xai fiaaCXems. Towards men
this complaisance is always dangerous
and most commonly vicious; hence
dpiaxeia is a bad quality in Aristotle
[?] (Eth. End. ii. 3 to Xlav irpos tJSovtjv)
as also in Theophrastus (Char. 5 ou'x
ejri Ta fieXriara ijSovqs irapaaxevaan-
xrj), but towards the King of kings no
obsequiousness can be excessive. The
dpiaxeia of Aristotle and Theophrastus
presents the same moral contrast to
the dpiaxeia here, as dvdpdirois api
axeiv to Oem apiaxeiv in such passages
as 1 Thess. ii. 4, Gal. i 10. Opposed
to the dpiaxeia commended here is dv-
dpmirapeaxeia condemned below, Ui. 22.
ev iravrl x.tA.] i. e. 'not only showing
the fruits of your faith before men
(Matt. vii. 16), but yourselves growing
meanwhile in moral stature (Eph.iv. 13).'
ttj imyvdaei] 'by the knowledge.'
The other readings, iv rjj imyvdaei,
els rrjv iiriyvmaiv, are unsuccessful
attempts to define the construction.
The simple instrumental dative re
presents the knowledge of God as the
dew or the rain which nurtures the
growth of the plant; Deut. xxxii. 2,
Hos. xiv. 5.
11. Swapovpevot] A word found
more than once in the Greek versions
of the Old Testament, Ps. lxvii (lxviii).

138

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 12

KpaTOS Trj<5 hoprjs avTov ets iraTav viropiovriv Kat piuKpo-
Qvp.tav juera ^ajoas* Izev%aptcrTovvTes tcS iraTpt tw tKa-
12. t<$ Ixavuaavn vpas.

29 (lxx), Eccles. x. 10 (lxx), Dan. ix.
27 (Theod.), Ps. lxiv (Ixv). 4 ( Aq.), Job
xxxvi. 9 (Aq.), but not occurring else
where in the New Testament, except
in Heb. xi. 34 and as a various read
ing in Ephes. vi. 10. The compound
ivSwapovv however appears several
times in St Paul and elsewhere.
xard rb xpdros] The power commu
nicated to the faithful corresponds to,
and is a function of, the Divine might
whence it comes. Unlike Svvapis or
laxvs, the word xpdros in the New
Testament is applied solely to God.
ttjs 86§rjs au'rou] The 'glory' here,
as frequently, stands for the majesty
or the power or the goodness of God,
as manifested to men; e.g. Eph. i. 6,
12, 17, iii. 16; comp. ver. 27, below.
The 86ga, the bright light over the
mercy-seat (Rom. ix. 4), was a symbol
of such manifestations. God's revela
tion of Himself to us, however this
revelation may be made, is the one
source of all our highest strength
(xard rd xpdros x.r.X.).
viropovfjv xdipaxpodvpiav] 'endurance
and long-suffering.' The two words
occur in the same context in 2 Cor. vi.
4, 6, 2 Tim. iii. 1 o, James v. 1 o, 1 1 , Clem.
Rom. 58 (64), Ign. Ephes. 3. They
are distinguished in Trench Synon.
§ liii. p. 184 sq. The difference of
meaning is best seen in their opposites.
While viropovr) is the temper which
does not easily succumb under suffer
ing, paxpodvpla is the self-restraint
which does not hastily retafiate a
wrong. The one is opposed to cow
ardice or despondency, the other to
wrath or revenge (Prov. xv. 1 8, xvi. 32 ;
see also the note on iii. 12). While
vrropovr) is closely aUied to hope (1
Thess. i. 3), paxpodvpia is commonly
connected with merc^(e.g.Exod. xxxiv.
6). This distinction however, though
it applies generally, is not true with

out exception. Thus in Is. Ivii. 15
paxpodvpia is opposed to dXiyosjmxia,
where we should rather have expected
viropovrj ; and paxpodvpelv is used simi
larly in James v. 7.
perd xapSs] So James i. 2, 3, iraaav
Xapdv rjyijaaade.. .orav ireipaapols ire-
piiriaTjTe iroixiXois, yivmaxovres on rb
Soxipiov Vfimv ttjs iriarems xarepyd^erai
viropovrjv x.r.X. : comp. 1 Pet. iv. 13,
and see below i. 24. This parallel
points to the proper connexion of
perd xapas, which should be attached
to the preceding words. On the other
hand some would connect it with ei-
xapiorovvTes for the sake of preserving
the balance of the three clauses, iv
iravrl epya dyadm xapirocpopovvres, iv
iraarj Svvapei Svvapovpevoi, perd xapds
evxapiarovvres ; and this seems to be
favoured by PhU. i. 4 perd xapas n)»
Serjaiv iroiovpevos : but when it is so
connected, the emphatic position of
perd xapas cannot be explained; nor
indeed would these words be needed
at aU, for evxapiana is in itself an act
of rejoicing.
12. euj;apio-roSi/rcs] Most naturaUy
coordinated with the preceding parti
ciples and referred to the Colossians.
The duty of thanksgiving is more than
once enforced upon them below, ii. 7,
in. 17, iv. 2 ; comp. 1 Thess. v. 18. On
the other hand the first person rjpas,
which follows, has led others to con
nect eu'^apioToui/rfs with the primary
verb of the sentence, ov wavopeda ver.
9. But, even if the reading rjpas be
preferred to u/iSs (which is perhaps
doubtful), the sudden transition from
the second to the first person is quite
after St Paul's manner (see the note
on ii. 13, 14, avve£moiroirjaev vpas...
Xapiadpevos rjpiv), and cannot create
any difficulty.
r£ Ixavmaavn] 'who made us com
petent'; comp. 2 Cor. iii. 6. On the

1. 13]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

139

vataravTi lipids ets tvjv p.epiha tov KXt'ipov tcov dyltov ev
tw (pWTr I36s ipvaraTO ti/Jids ck tj?s i^ovarlas tov

various readings see the detached
note. ttjv pepiSa tov xXiJpou] 'the parcel
ofthe lot,' 'the portion which consists
in the lot,' rou xXiJpou being the
genitive of apposition : see Winer § lix.
p. 666 sq., and comp. Ps. xv (xvi). 5
Kupios pepls ttjs xXrjpovopias pov. In
Acts viii. 21 juepis an(l xXijpos are co
ordinated'; in Gen. xxxi. 14, Num.
xvui. 20, Is. lvu. 6, /iepis and xXrjpo-
vopia. The inheritance of Canaan, the
allotment of the promised land, here
presents an analogy to, and supplies
a metaphor for, the higher hopes of
the new dispensation, as in Heb. iii
7 — iv. 11. See also below, iii 247^0
dvTa7rd8oo-i!' rrjs xXrjpovoplas, and Ephes.
i 18. St Chrysostom writes, 8id ri
xXijpov xaXft; 8eixvus ori ou'8eis ajro
Karopdrnparmv dixeimv fiaaiXeias Tuy^a-
vei, referring to Luke xvii. 10. It is
not won by us, but allotted to us.
iv ra cpari] Best taken with the
expression tt)v pepiSa x.r.X. For the
omission of the definite article, [rrjv]
iv rd> <pi»Ti, see above, w. 2, 4, 8. The
portion of the saints is situated in the
kingdom of light For the whole con
text compare St Paul's narrative in
Acts xxvi. 18 rou imaTpisjr-at dirb
axorovs els cpms xal tijs i£ovalas
tov Sarava ejri tov Qeov, tov Xaj3elv
aurous aipeaiv dpLaprimv xal xXijpov
iv rois rjyiaapivois, where aU the
ideas and many of the expressions
recur. See also Acts xx. 32, in another
of St Paul's later speeches. As a clas
sical paraUel, Plato Besp. vn. p. 518 a,
ex re cparbs els axoros pediarapivmv
xal ix axorovs els cpms, is quoted.
13. 'We were slaves in the land of
darkness. God rescued us from this
thraldom. He transplanted us thence,
and settled us as free colonists and
citizens in the kingdom of His Son, in
the realms of light.'

e'puo-aro] 'rescued, delivered us' by
His strong arm, as a mighty conquer
or: comp. ii. 15 dpiapjSeiaas. On the
form ipvaaro see A. Buttmann, p. 29:
comp. Clem. Rom. 55, and see the
note on igepifaaev, ib. 6.
i£ovaias] Here 'arbitrary power, ty
ranny.' The word igovaia properly sig
nifies 'liberty of action' (egean), and
thence, like the corresponding Eng
lish word ' license,' involves two second
ary ideas, of which either may be so
prominent as to eclipse the other ;
(1) 'authority,' 'delegated power' (e.g.
Luke xx. 2); or (2) 'tyranny,' 'law
lessness,' 'unrestrained or arbitrary
power.' For this second sense comp.
e. g. Demosth. F. L. p. 428 ttjv dyav
Tavnjv i^ovaiav, Xenoph. Hiero 5
rrjs els to irapbv il-ovalas evexa (speak
ing of tyrants), Plut. Vit. Eum. 13 dvd-
yo>yoi rais i£ovalais xai juaXaxot rais
Stairais, Vit. Alex. 33 ttjv i£ovaiav
xal tov oyxoj/ rijs 'AXe£dv8pov Svvdpems,
Herodian ii. 4 xadaipeaiv ttjs dverov
i£ovaias. This latter idea of a capri
cious unruly rule is prominent here.
The expression 17 i£ovala rou o-xdrous
occurs also in Luke xxii. 53, where
again the idea of disorder is involved.
The transference from darkness to
Ught is here represented as a trans
ference from an arbitrary tyranny, an
it-ovaia, to a well-ordered sovereignty,
a fiaaiXeia. This seems also to be
St Chrysostom's idea ; for he explains
ttjs i^ovaias by ttjs rvpavviSos, adding
XaXeirbv Kal to dirXms elvai virb r<a Sia-
jSoXm' to Se xal per i£ovatas, rouro
XciXeirmrepov. peTearrjaev] 'removed,' when they
were baptized, when they accepted
Christ. The image of peTearrjaev is
supplied by the wholesale transporta
tion of peoples (dj/aordrous or dva-
airdarovs iroieiv), of which the history
of oriental monarchies supplied so

140 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I. 13
o-kotovs, Kat p.eTeo-Tno'ev ets Tt)v tSacrtXeiav tov viov Ttjs

many examples. See Joseph. Ant. ix.
II. I tous dixTjTopas alxpaXmriaas
perearrjaev els rrjv airov jSaaiXeiav,
speaking of Tiglath-Pileser and the
Transjordanic tribes.
rou uioO] Not of inferior angels, as
the false teachers would have it (ii. 18),
but of His own Son. The same con
trast between a dispensation of angels
and a dispensation of the Son un
derlies the words here, which is ex
plicitly brought out in Heb. i. 1 — ii. 8 ;
see especiaUy i. 2 iXdXrjaev rjpiv iv vim,
compared with ii. s °^ 7°p dyycXois
vireragev rrjv olxovpivrjv ttjv peXXovaav.
Severianus has rightly caught the idea
underlying tou uiuu here ; virb tov
xXrjpovbpov iapev, ovx ^7T0 t°vs olxiras.
rrjs dydirrjs aurou] 'of His love' As
love is the essence ofthe Pather(i Joh.
iv. 8, 16), so is it also of the Son. The
mission of the Son is the revelation of
the Father's love ; for as He is the
povoyevrjs, the Father's love is per
fectly represented in Him (see 1 Joh.
iv. 9). St Augustine has rightly in
terpreted St Paul's words here, de
Trin. xv. 19 (vni, p. 993) 'Caritas
quippe Patris. ..nihil est quam ejus
ipsa natura atque substantia. . .ac per
hoc filius caritatis ejus nullus est alius
quam qui de ejus substantia est geni-
tus.' See also Orig. c. Cels. v. 1 1. Thus
these words are intimately connected
with the expressions which follow,
eixuv rou QeoO rou dopdrov (ver. 15),
and iv avrm evSbxrjaev irav to irXij-
papa xaroixrjaai (ver. 19). The loose
interpretation, which makes rou uiou
ttjs dydirrjs equivalent to rou uiou rou
rjyairn pivov, destroys the whole force
of the expression.
In the preceding verses we have a
striking illustration of St Paul's teach
ing in two important respects. First.
The reign of Christ has already begun.
His kingdom is a present kingdom.
Whatever therefore is essential in the
kingdom of Christ must be capable of

realisation now. There may be some
exceptional manifestation in the world
to come, but this cannot alter its in
herent character. In other words the
sovereignty of Christ is essentially a
moral and spiritual sovereignty, which
has begun now and will only be per
fected hereafter. Secondly. Corre
sponding to this, and equally signi
ficant, is his language in speaking of
individual Christians. He regards
them as alreadyrescued from the
power of darkness, as already put in
possession of their inheritance as
saints. They are potentially saved,
because the knowledge of God is itself
salvation, and this knowledge is within
their reach. Such is St Paul's con- 1
stant mode of speaking. He uses the
language not of exclusion, but of com
prehension. He prefers to dwell on
their potential advantages, rather than
on their actual attainments. He hopes
to make them saints by dwelling on
their calling as saints. See especially
Ephes. ii. 6 avvrjyeipev xal avvexddiaev
ivrols iirovpavlois iv Xpiarm'lrjaov x.r.X.
14. exopev] For the reading ea-
xopev, which is possibly correct here,
and which carries out the idea en
forced in the last note, see the de
tached note on the various readings.
In the parallel passage, Ephes. i. 7,
there is the same variation of reading.
ti7j» d7roXurpo>o-«'] 'ransom, redemp
tion.' The image of a captive and en
slaved people is still continued : Philo
Omn. prob. lib. 17 (11. p. 463) alxpd-
Xmros dirrjxdrj . . .diroyvovs diroXvrpmaiv,
Plut. Vit. Pomp. 24 iroXemv alxpa-
Xmrmv diroXvTpmaeis. The metaphor
however has changed from the victor
who rescues the captive by force of arms
(ver. 13 ipvaaro) to the philanthropist
who releases him by the payment of a
ransom. The clause which foUows in
the received text, Sid ro£i atparos av
rov, is interpolated from the paraUel
passage, Ephes. i. 7.

I. H]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

141

dydirt]<s avTov, I4eV do e^Ojuei/ Tt)v dwoXvTpbdO'iv, Ttjv
dfpecriv tcov dptapTiwv

14. h <J laxopev.

ttjv acpeaiv rmv apapnmv] So in the
parallel passage Ephes. i. 7 the Apo
stle defines rrjv diroXvrpmaiv as ttjv
acpeaiv rmv rrapairrmpdrmv. May not
this studied precision point to some
false conception of dVoXurgmiris put
forward by the heretical teachers'?
Later Gnostics certainly perverted the
meaning of the term, applying it to
their own formularies of initiation.
This is related of the Marcosians by
Irenaeus i 13. 6 8id tt)v diroXvrpaaiv
dxparrfrovs xal dopdrovs yiveadai to
xpiTj x.r.X., i 21. I 00-01 ydp eio-i
Taurus Tijs yvaprjs fiuorayiByoi, roaav-
rai xal diroXvrpmaeis, ib. § 4 eivai 8e
TeXeiav diroXvTpmatv avrrjv ttjv iiriyvm
aiv tov dpprjTov peyedovs (with the
whole context), and Hippolytus Hcer.
vi. 41 rKiyoval n cpmvfj dpprjTm, imn-
divres X"Pa r<i> TVV diroXvTpmatv Xa-
jSobti x.r.X. (comp. ix. 13). In sup
port of their nomenclature they per
verted such passages as the text, Iren.
i. 21. 2 rov IlauXoi/ prjrds cpdaxovai
rrjv iv Xpianp'lTjaov diroXvTpmatv iroX-
Xdxis peprjwxevai. It seems not im
probable that the communication of
similar mystical secrets, perhaps con
nected with their angelology (ii. 18),
was put forward by these Colossian
false teachers as an d7roXurp<oo-is. Com
pare the words in the baptismal for
mula of the Marcosians as given in
Iren. i. 21. 3 (comp. Theodt. Hcer.
Fab. i 9) cis&o>0'ii'xaid7roXi/rpa)o-ii'xai
xoivmviav rmv Svvdpeav, where the last
words (which have been differently
interpreted) must surely mean ' com
munion with the (spiritual) powers.'
Thus it is a parallel to eis XuTpwo-ii'
dyyeXixjji', which appears in an alter
native formula of these heretics given
likewise by Irenaeus in the context ;
for this latter is explained in Clem.
Alex. Exc. Theod. p. 974, eis Xvrpaaiv

ayyeXixijv, Tovrianv, rjv xal ayyeXoi
exovaiv. Any direct historical con
nexion between the Colossian heretics
and these later Gnostics of the Valen-
tinian school is very improbable ; but
the passages quoted wih serve to show
how a false idea of dn-oXurpiuo-is would
naturally be associated with an eso
teric doctrine of angeUc powers. See
the note on i 28 Iva rcapaarrjaapev
irdvra avdpmirov reXetov.
15 sq. In the passage which fol
lows St Paul defines the Person of
Christ, claiming for Him the absolute
supremacy, (1) In relation to the Universe, the
Natural Creation (w. 15 — 17);
(2) In relation to the Church, the
new Moral Creation (ver. 18);
and he then combines the two, tva
yevrjrai iv irdaiv avrbs irpmrevmv, ex
plaining this twofold sovereignty by the
absolute indweUing of the pleroma in
Christ, and showing how, as a conse
quence, the reconciliation and har
mony of all things must be effected
in Him (vv. 19, 20).
As the idea of the Logos underlies "
the whole of this passage, though the
term itself does not appear, a few
words explanatory of this term will be
necessary by way of preface. The
word Xdyos then, denoting both ' rea
son ' and ' speech,' was a philosophical
term adopted by Alexandrian Juda
ism before St Paul wrote, to express
the manifestation of the Unseen God,
the Absolute Being, in the creation
and government of the World. It
included all modes by which God
makes Himself known to man. As
His reason, it denoted His purpose
or design ; as His speech, it implied
His revelation. Whether this Xdyos
was conceived merely as the divine
energy personified, or whether the

I43 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I- 15
«OS 6<TTII/ etKW!/ TOV QeOV TOV dopUTOV, irpWTOTOKOS
conception took a more concrete form,
I need not stop now to enquire ; but
I hope to give a fuUer account of the
matter in a later volume. It is suf
ficient for the understanding of what
foUows to say that Christian teachers,
when they adopted this term, exalted
and fixed its meaning by attaching
[to it two precise and definite ideas :
(i) 'The Word is a Divine Person,'
d Xdyos rjv irpbs tov 6ew xal Qebs rjv
b Xdyos ; and (2) ' The Word became
incarnate in Jesus Christ,' 6 Xoyos
aapl- iyivero. It is obvious that these
two propositions must have altered
materially the significance of aU the
subordinate terms connected with the
idea of the Xdyos ; and that therefore
their use in Alexandrian writers, such
as Philo, cannot be taken to define,
though it may be brought to illus
trate, their meaning in St Paul and
St John. With these cautions the
Alexandrian phraseology, as a pro
vidential preparation for the teaching
of the Gospel, will afford important
aid in the understanding of the Apo-
stoUc writings.
15—17. ' He is the perfect image,
the visible representation, of the un
seen God. He is the Firstborn, the
absolute Heir of the Father, begotten
before the ages ; the Lord of the
Universe by virtue of primogeniture,
and by virtue also of creative agency.
For in and through Him the whole
world was created, things in heaven
and things on earth, things visible
to the outward eye and things cog
nisable by the inward perception. His
supremacy is absolute and universal.
All powers in heaven and earth are
subject to Him. This subjection ex
tends even to the most exalted and
most potent of angelic beings, whether
they be caUed Thrones or Domina
tions or Princedoms or Powers, or
whatever title of dignity men may
confer upon them. Yes : He is first
and He is last. Through Him, as the

mediatorial Word, the universe has
been created ; and unto Him, as the
final goal, it is tending. In Him is
no before or after. He is pre-existent
and self-existent before aU the worlds.
And in Him, as the binding and sus
taining power, universal nature co
heres and. consists.'
15. os ianv x.r.X.] The Person of
Christ is described first in relation
more especiaUy to Deity, »s eix<Bv rou
©eou tou dopdrou, and secondly in
relation more especiaUy to created
things, as irpmroroxos irdarjs xriaems.
The fundamental conception of the .
Logos involves the idea of mediation
between God and creation. A per
verted view respecting the nature of |
the mediation between the two lay, i
as we have seen, at the root of the
heretical teaching at Colossae (p. 34, I
p. 101 sq., p. 115 s1-)> an<I required to
be met by the true doctrine of Christ
as the Eternal Logos.
elxmv] ' the image.' This expres
sion is used repeatedly by PhUo, as a
description of the Logos ; de Mund.
Op. 8 (i. p. 6) tov doparov xal vorjrbv
delov Xbyov eixbva Xeyei ©eou, de
Confus. ling. 20 (1. p. 419) rrjv eixbva
avrov, rbv lepmrarov Xoyov, ib. § 28
(l. p. 427) rrjs di'Siou eixdvos aurou Xo
yov tov lepcurdrou x.r.X., de Profug.
19 (l. p. 561) d virepdvm rovrmv Xdyos
#eios...aurds elxmv virdpxmv ©eou, de
Monarch, ii. 5 (II. p. 225) Xdyos 8e
ianv elxmv Qeov Si ov avpiras 6 xo
apos iSrjpiovpyelro, de Somn. i. 41
(1. p. 656), etc. For the use which
Philo made of the text Gen. i. 26, 27,
xar' eixdva rjperepav, xar' eixbva ©eou,
see the note on iii 10. StiU earUer
than Philo, before the idea of the Xd
yos had assumed such a definite form,
the term was used of the Divine o-oaSia
personified in Wisd. vii. 26 dirauyao-p,a
ydp eVri <f»a)rds di'8iou...xai elxdv irjs
dyadbrrjros avrov. St Paul himself
applies the term to our Lord in an
earlier epistle. 2 Cor. iv. 4 Tijs 86£rjs

I.iS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

143

rou Xpiorou os ianv eixdv tov ©eou
(comp. Ui. 18 rrjv avrr/v eixbva p.era-
popcpovpedd). Closely allied to elxmv
also is xaPdxrrjp, which appears in the
same connexion in Heb. i 3 mv dirav-
yaapa rrjs S6£tjs xal xapaxTrjp Ttjs uWo-
ordo-ecos aurou, a passage illustrated
by Philo de Plant. 5 (l p. 332) o-oipa-
yi8i Qeov 17s d xaPaKTVP icrnv didios
Xdyos. See also Phil. ii. 6 iv popcpfj
Qeov virdpxmv.
Beyond the very obvious notion of
likeness, the word elxmv involves two
other ideas ;
(1) Representation. In this re
spect it is allied to xctpaxnjp, and dif
fers from opoimpa. In opoimpa the
resemblance may be accidental, as
one egg is Uke another; but elxmv
implies an archetype of which it is a
copy, as Greg. Naz. Or at. 30 (1. p. 554)
says aun; ydp elxbvos cpvais pi prj pa
eivai tov apxervirov. So too Io. Da-
masc. de Imag. i. 9 (1. p. 311) elxmv
eanv opoimpa xaPaxTijpl£ov rd
7rpa>Tdru7roi'; comp. Philo de Mund.
Op. 23 (1. p. 16). On this difference
see Trench N. T. Synon. § xv. p. 47.
The elxmv might be the result of direct
imitation (piprjTixrj) like the Head of
a sovereign on a coin, or it might be
due to natural causes (cpvaixrj) like
the parental features in the child,
but in any case it was derived from
its prototype : see BasU. de Spir.
Sand. 18 § 45 (m. p. 38). The word
itself however does not necessarily
imply perfect representation. Thus
man is said to be the image of God ;
I Cor. xi. 7 elxmv xai 8bl-a ©eou U7rdp-
Xmv, Clem. Rom. 33 avdpmirov... rrjs
eavrov elxovos xdpaxrrjpa. Thus again
an early Judaeo-Christian writer so
designates the duly appointed bishop,
as the representative of the Divine au
thority ; Clem. Hom. iii 62 <bs eixbva
©eou irporiprnvras. The idea of per
fection does not lie in the word itself,
but must be sought from the context
(e.g. irdv to irXrjpmpa ver. 19). The
use which was made of this expression,
and especiaUy of this passage, in the

Christological controversies of tho
fourth and fifth centuries may be seen
from tho patristic quotations in Petav.
Theol. Dogm. de Trin. ii. 11. 9 sq.j
vi. 5. 6.
(2) Manifestation. This idea comes
from the implied contrast to rou do-
pdrou ©eou. St Chrysostom indeed
maintains the direct opposite, arguing
that, as the archetype is invisible, so
the image must be invisible also, d
rou aoparov elxav xai airrj dbparos xal
bpolms dbparos. So too Hilary c.
Const. Imp. 21 (n. p. 378) 'ut imago
invisibilis Dei, etiam per id quod ipse
invisibUis est, invisibilis Dei imago
esset.' And this was the view of the
Nicene and post-Nicene fathers gene
raUy. But the underlying idea of the
elxmv, and indeed of the Xdyos gene
rally, is the manifestation of the hid
den : comp. Philo de Vit. Moys. ii. 12
(il. p. 144) eixmi' ttjs dopdrov cjxvaems
ipqbavrjs. And adopted into Christian
theology, the doctrine of the Xdyos
expresses this conception still more
prominently by reason of the Incarna
tion; comp. Tertull. adv. Marc. v. 19
' Scientes fiUum semper retro visum,- si
quibus visus est in Dei nomine, ut
imaginem ipsius,' Hippol. c. Noet. 7
Sia ydp ttjs elxbvos opoias Tvyxavovarjs
evyvmaros o irarrjp yiverai, ib.
§ 12, 13, Orig. in loann. vi. § 2 (rv.
p. 104). Among the post-Nicene fa
thers too St Basil has caught the right
idea, Epist. xxxviii. 8 (111. p. 121) d
rijs elxovos xaravorjaas xdXXos iv irepi-
voia rov apxervirov yiverai. ..fiXeireiv 8td
rovrov ixeivov... to dyevvrjTov xdXXos iv
to yewrjra Karoirrevaas. The Word, ,
whether pre-incarnate or incarnate, j
is the revelation of the unseen Father : \
comp. John i 18 ©edw ouSeis eaipa-
xev irdmore' /xovoyevns ©eds, d mv els
tov koXitov rov irarpos, ixeivos i^rjyrj-
aaro, XIV. 9, I0 d empaxms ipe em-
paxev rbv irarepa' irms av Xeyeis,
Ael£ov rjpiv rbv irarepa; (compared
with vi. 46 ou^ on rdf irarepa empaxev
ns k.t.X.). The epithet dopdrov how
ever must not be confined to tho ap-

144

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1-15

prehension of the bodily senses, but
will include the cognisance of the in
ward eye also.
TrptoToroxos rrdarjs xriVeas] 'the
First-born of all creation.' The word
irpmroToxos has a twofold parentage :
(i) Like elxmv it is closely con
nected with and taken from the Alex
andrian vocabulary of the Logos. The
word however which Philo appUes to
the Xdyos is not 7rp<Brdroxos but rrpm-
rbyovos : de Agric. 12 (i. p. 308) 7rpo-
arrjadpevos tov dpdbv aurou Xoyov irpm-
Tbyovov vlbv, de Somn. i. 37 (1. p. 653)
6 irpmroyovos aurou delos Xdyos, de
Confus. ling. i. 28 (1. p. 427) o-7rou8a-
fe'rifl xoapeladai xard rov Trpoordyovoi'
aurou Xdyov : comp. ib. i 14 (1. p. 414)
- a 1 t\ ' - 1
tovtov irpeapvTarov viov o rmv ovrmv
dvereiXe irarrjp, ov erepmdi irpmroyovov
mvbpaae : and this designation 7rpeo--
0uraros uids is several times apphed
to the Xdyos. Again in Quis rer. div.
her. § 24 (1. p. 489) the language of
Exod. xiii. 2 dyiaabv poi irav irpmTOTO-
kov irpmroyeves x.r.X. is so interpreted
as to apply to the Divine Word. These
appellations, 'the first-begotten, the
eldest son,' are given to the Logos by
Philo, because in his philosophy it
includes the original conception, the
archetypal idea, of creation, which
was afterwards realised in the mate
rial world. Among the early Chris
tian fathers Justin Martyr again and
again recognises the application of the
term irpmrbroxos to the Word ; Apol.
i 23 (p. 68) Xdyos aurou virdpxmv xal
irpmrbroxos xal Svvapis, ib. § 46 (p. 83)
tov Xpiarov irpmrbroxov rov Qeov elvai
.. Xbyov ovra ov irdv yevos dvdpmirmv
periaxe, ib. § 33 (p. 75 0) t6v Xoyov bs
xai irpmrbroxos rm Qem ian. So too
Theophilus ad Autol. ii. 22 rourov rbv
Xbyov eyevvrjaev irpocpooixbv, irpmrbro
xov irdarjs xriaeas.
(2) The word irpmrdroxos had also
another not less important hnk of
connexion with the past. The Mes
sianic reference of Ps. lxxxix. 28, iym
Trpmrbroxov drjaopai avrov X.T.X., seems
to have beon generally aUowed. So

at least it is interpreted by R. Nathan
in Shemoth Rabba 19, foi. 118. 4, 'God
said, As I made Jacob a first-born
(Exod. iv. 22), so also will I make
king Messiah a first-born (Ps. lxxxix.
28).' Hence 'the first-born' 6 irporb-
roxos (1133) used absolutely, became
a recognised title of Messiah. The
way had been paved for this Messianic
reference of Trpoordroxos by its prior
appUcation to the Israelites, as the
prerogative race, Exod. iv. 22 ' Israel
is my son, my first-born ' : comp. Psalm.
Salom. xvui. 4 rj irai8eia aov icp' rjpas
ms vlbv irpmrbroxov povoyevij, 4 Esdr. vi.
58 'nos populus tuus, quem vocasti
primogenitum, unigenitum,' where the
combination of the two titles appUed
in the New Testament to the Son is
striking. Here, as elsewhere (see the
note on Gal. iii. 16 xal rois arreppaaiv .
x.r.X.), the terms are transferred from
the race to the Messiah, as the repre
sentative, the embodiment, of the race.
As the Person of Christ was the
Divine response aUke to the philoso
phical questionings of the Alexan
drian Jew and to the patriotic hopes
of the Palestinian, these two currents
of thought meet in the term Trpard-
roxos as applied to our Lord, who is
both the true Logos and the true
Messiah. For this reason, we may
suppose, as well as for others, the
Christian Apostles preferred wp<ord-
roxos to irpmroyovos, which (as we may
infer from Philo) was the favourite
term with the Alexandrians, because
the former alone would include the
Messianic reference as well
The main ideas then which the word
involves are twofold; the one more
directly connected with the Alexan
drian conception of the Logos, the
other more nearly aUied to the Pales
tinian conception of the Messiah.
(1) Priority to aU creation. In
other words it declares the absolute
pre-existence of the Son. At first
sight it might seem that Christ is
here regarded as one, though the
earUest, of created beings. This in-

I. 15]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

145

terpretation however is not required
by the expression itself. The fathers
of the fourth century rightly called
attention to the fact that the Apostle
writes not 7rp<BrdxrioTos, but 7rpo>TO-
toxos; e.g. Basil, c. Eunom. iv (1.
p. 292). Much earlier, in Clem. Alex.
Exc. Theod. 10 (p. 970), though with
out any direct reference to this pas
sage, the povoyevfjs xal irpmrbroxos is
contrasted with the TrpmrdxTioToi, the
highest order of angelic beings ; and
the word irprnToxnaros occurs more
than once elsewhere in his writings (e.g.
Strom, v. 14, p. 699). Nor again does
the genitive case necessarily imply that
the jrpordroxos Himself belonged to
the KTio-is, as wUl be shown presently.
And if this sense is not required by the
words themselves, it is directly exclud
ed by the context. It is inconsistent
alike with the universal agency in
creation which is ascribed to Him in
the words following, iv avra ixrladij
ra irdvra, and with the absolute pre-
existence and self-existence which is
claimed for Him just below, aurds
eanv Trpd iravrmv. We may add also
that it is irreconcilable with other
passages in the ApostoUc writings,
while it contradicts the fundamental
idea of the Christian consciousness.
More especially the description Trpcord-
toxos redans xriaems must be interpret
ed in such a way that it is not incon
sistent with His other title of povoye-
vrjs, unions, alone of His kind and
therefore distinct from created things.
The two words express the same
eternal fact; but while povoyevrjs
states it in itself, irpmrbroxos places it
in relation to the Universe. The
correct interpretation is suppUed by
Justin Martyr, Dial. § 100 (p. 326
D) irpmrbroxov tov Qeov xai 7rpd irav
rmv rmv xnapdrav. He does not
indeed mention this passage, but it
was doubtless in his mind, for he else
where uses the very expression irpm
rbroxos ir&arjs xrlaeas, Dial. § 85
(p. 311 u), § 138 (p. 367 b); comp. also
§ 84 (p. 310 b), where the words rrom-
COL.

totoxos rmv iravrmv irotijpaTav occur.
(2) Sovereignty over all creation.
God's 'first-born' is the natural ruler,
the acknowledged head, of God's
household. The right of primogeni
ture appertains to Messiah over all
created things. Thus in Ps. lxxxix.
28 after Trpoordroxoi/ drjaopai airbv
the explanation is added, u^ijXdv
Trapa rois /3ao-iXeuo-iv rijs y^s, i.6. (as
the original implies) 'above all the
kings of the earth.' In its Messianic
reference this secondary idea of
sovereignty predominated in the word
wpatTtWoxos, so that from this point of
View 7roa>rdroxos irdaijs xriaems would
mean 'Sovereign Lord over all crea
tion by virtue of primogeniture.' The
edrjxev xXrjpbvopov iravrmv of the Apo-
stolic writer (Heb. i 2) exactly cor
responds to the drjaopai irpmroToxov
of the Psalmist (lxxxix. 28), and
doubtless was tacitly intended as a
paraphrase and appUcation of this
Messianic passage. So again in Heb.
XU. 23, ixxXrjaia irpmrorbxav, the most
probable explanation of the word is
that which makes it equivalent to
'heirs of the kingdom,' all faithful
Christians being ipso facto irpmrbroxoi,
because all are kings. Nay, so com
pletely might this idea of dominion by
virtue of priority eclipse the primary
sense ofthe term 'first-born' in some
of its uses, that it is given as a title to
God Himself by R. Bechai on the Pen
tateuch, foL 124, 4, 'Who is primo-
genitus mundi,' tb\V h\V 11133 KWB>,
i.e os eanv irpmrbroxos tov xbapov, as
it would be rendered in Greek. In this
same work again, foi 74. 4, Exod. xui.
2 is falsely interpreted so that God is
represented as calUng Himself 'pri-
mogenitus': see Schottgen p. 922.
For other instances of secondary uses
of 1133 in the Old Testament, where
the idea of 'priority of birth' is over
shadowed by and lost in the idea of
'pre-eminence,' see Job xviii. 13 'the
first-born of death,' Is. xiv. 30 'the
first-born of the poor.'
Troops xtio-cibs] 'of all creation,'
IO

146

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[LIS

rather than • of every created thing!
The three senses of xrio-is in the New
Testament are : (1) creation, as the
act of creating, e.g. Rom. i. 20 dirb
xriaems xbapov : (2) creation, as the
aggregate of created, things, Mark xiii.
19 dir dpxrjs xriaems rjv exnaev 0 Qeds
(where the paraUel passage, Matt.
xxiv. 21, has dir dpxrjs xbapov), Rom.
viii. 22 jrao-a 7 xri'o-is avarevdi^ei : (3)
a creation, a single created thing, a
creature, e.g. Rom. vui 39 oure ns
xrldis erepa, Heb. iv. 13 oux 'iariv
xnais acpavrjs. As Kriais without the
definite article is sometimes used of
the created world generaUy (e. g. Mark
xiii. 19), and indeed belongs to the
category of anarthrous nouns Uke
xbapos, yrj, ovpavbs, etc. (see Winer
§ xix p. 149 sq.), it is best taken so
here. Indeed irdo-ns xriaems, in the
sense of Trdvros xriaparos, would be
awkward in this connexion; for 7rp<i>-
totoxos seems to require either a col
lective noun, or a plural iraamv t&v
xriaemv. In ver. 23 the case is differ
ent (see the note there). The anar
throus 7rSo-a xrio-is is found in Judith
ix. 12 fHaatXev irdarjs xriaems aov,
whUe iraaa rj xriats occurs in Judith
xvi. 14, Mark xvi. 15, Rom. vui 22,
Clem. Rom. 19, Mart. Polyc. 14. For
irds, signifying 'all' and not 'every,'
when attached to this class of nouns,
see Winer § xviii. p. 137.
The genitive case must be inter
preted so as to include the full mean
ing of irpmroToxos, as already ex
plained. It wUl therefore signify :
' He stands in the relation of irpard-
roxos to aU creation,' i.e. 'He is the
Firstborn, and, as the Firstborn, the
absolute Heir and sovereign Lord, of
all creation.' The connexion is the
same as in the passage of R. Bechai
already quoted, where God is caUed
primogenitus mundi. Another ex
planation which would connect the
genitive with the first part of the com
pound alone (irpmrb-), comparing Joh.
i. 15, 30, irpmros pov rjv, unduly strains
the grammar, while it excludes the

idea of 'heirship, sovereignty.'
The history of the patristic exegesis
of this expression is not without a pain
ful interest. All the fathers of the
second and third centuries without
exception, so far as I have noticed,
correctly refer it to the Eternal
Word and not to the Incarnate Christ,
to the Deity and not to the hu
manity of our Lord. So Justin I. c,
Theophilus I. c, Clement of Alexan
dria Exc. Theod. 7, 8, 19 (pp. 967,
973), TertuUian adv. Prax. 7, adv.
Marc. v. 19, Hippolytus Hcer. x. 33,
Origen c. Cels. vi. 47, 63, 64, etc., in
Ioann. i § 22 (iv. p. 21), xix. § 5 (p.
305), xxviii. § 14 (p. 392), Cyprian
Test. ii. 1, Novatian de Trin. 16, and
the Synod of Antioch (Routh's Rel.
Sacr. m. pp. 290, 293). The Arian
controversy however gave a dif
ferent turn to the exegesis of the
passage. The Arians fastened upon
the expression irpmroroxos irdaijs xri
aems, and drew from it the inference
that the Son was a created being.
The great use which they made of
the text appears from the document
in Hilary, Fragm. Hist. Op. n. p.
644. The right answer to this false
interpretation we have already seen.
Many orthodox fathers however, not
satisfied with this, transferred the
expression into a new sphere, and
maintained that irparbroxos irdaijs
xriaems describes the Incarnate Christ.
By so doing they thought to cut up
the Arian argument by the roots. As
a consequence of this interpretation,
they were obliged to understand the
xriais and the xrl^eadat in the context
of the new spiritual creation, the
xaix^ xri'ors of 2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15.
Thus interpreted, irpisrdroxos 7^0175
xn'o-ews here becomes nearly equiva
lent to irp<ardroxos eV jtoXXois dSeXcpols
in Rom. viii. 29. The arguments al
leged in favour of this interpretation
are mainly twofold: (1) That, if ap
plied to the Divine nature, n-pardroxos
would contradict povoyevtjs which else
where describes the nature of the

I.iS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

147

Eternal Son. But those who main
tained, and rightly maintained, that
jrpo>rdroxos (Luke ii. 7) did not neces
sarily imply that the Lord's mother
had other sons, ought not to have
been led away by this fallacy. (2) That
jrpardroxos in other passages (e. g.
Rom. vui. 29, Rev. i 5, and just be
low, ver. 18) is appUed to the hu
manity of Christ. But elsewhere, in
Heb. i 6 orav Se irdXiv elaaydyg rov
TtpmToroxov x.t.X., the term must al
most necessarily refer to the pre-
existence of the Son ; and moreover
the very point of the Apostle's lan
guage in the text (as wUl be seen pre
sently) is the paralleUsm in the two
relations of our Lord — His relation to
the natural creation, as the Eternal
Word, and His relation to the spiritual
creation, as the Head ofthe Church —
so that the same word (irprnToroxos
iraarjs xria'ems ver. 15, 7rpi»Tdroxos ex
t&v vexp&v ver. 18) is studiously used of
both. A false exegesis is sure to bring a
nemesis on itself. Logical consistency
required that this interpretation should
be carried farther ; and MarceUus, who
was never deterred by any considera
tions of prudence, took this bold step.
He extended the principle to the
whole context, including even elxmv
tov dopdrov Qeov, which likewise he
interpreted of our Lord's humanity.
In this way a most important Christo
logical passage was transferred into
an alien sphere; and the strongest
argument against Arianism melted
away in the attempt to combat Arian
ism on false grounds. The criticisms
of Eusebius on MarceUus are perfectly
just: Eccl. Theol. i. 20 (p. 96) raura
jrepi rrjs debrrjTos rou uiou rou Qeov,
xav pr) i/IapxeXXm Soxfj, eipijrai' ov yap
irepl rijs aapxbs elirev dv roaavra 6
dews diroardkos x.r.X.; Comp. ib. ii 9
(p. 67), ni 6 sq. (p. 175), c. Marcell. i
1 (p. 6), i. 2 (p. 12), ii. 3 (pp. 43,
46 sq., 48). The objections to this
interpretation are threefold : (1) It
disregards the history of the terms
in their connexion with the pre-

Christian speculations of Alexandrian
Judaism. These however, though di
rectly or indirectly they were present
to the minds of the earlier fathers
and kept them in the right exegetical
path, might very easily have escaped
a writer in the fourth century. (2) It
shatters the context. To suppose
that such expressions as iv avra i-
xriadrj rd irdvra [rd] iv rots ovpavois xal
[to] eVi rrjs yijs, or rd irdvra Si' aurou
...exriarai, or ra irdvra iv avr& avve-
arnxev, refer to the work of the Incar
nation, is to strain language in a way
which would reduce all theological
exegesis to chaos; and yet this, as
MarceUus truly saw, is a strictly logi
cal consequence of the interpretation
which refers Trpmrbroxas irdaijs xriaems
to Christ's humanity. (3) It takes no
account of the cosmogony and angel
ology of the false teachers against
which the Apostle's exposition here
is directed (see above, pp. 101 sq.,
nosq., 115 sq.). This interpretation
is given by St Athanasius c. Arian.
ii. 62 sq. (1. p. 419 sq.) and appears
again in Greg. Nyss. c. Eunom. ii.
(11. pp. 451— 453> 492), ib. Ui (n. p.
540—545)) de Perf. (in. p. 290 sq.),
Cyril Alex. Thes. 25, p. 236 sq., de
Trin. Dial. iv. p. 517 sq., vi. p. 625 sq.,
Anon. Chrysost. Op. viii. p. 223, appx.
(quoted as Chrysostom by Photius
Bibl. 277). So too Cyril expresses
himself at the Council of Ephesus,
Labb. Cone. in. p. 652 (ed. Colet).
St Athanasius indeed does not confine
the expression to the condescension
(o-uyxard/3ao-is) of the Word in the In
carnation, but includes also a prior
condescension in the Creation of the
world (see Bull Def. Fid. Nic. iii 9 §
1, with the remarks of Newman Select
Treatises of S. Athanasius 1. pp. 278,
368 sq.). This double reference how
ever only confuses the exegesis of
the passage still further, while theo-
logicaUy it might lead to very serious
difficulties. In another work, Expos.
Fid. 3 (1. p. 80), he seems to take a
truer view of its meaning. St Basil,
IO — 2

148

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

iraartj's KTicecos'

i6«' OTt

ev avTco e/crtcrc

Ta iravT

who to an equally clear appreciation
of doctrine generally unites a sounder
exegesis'than St Athanasius, whUe men
tioning the interpretation which refers
the expression to Christ's human na
ture, himself prefers explaining it
ofthe Eternal Word; c. Eunom. iv. (i.
p. 292). Of the Greek commentators
on this passage, Chrysostom's view is
not clear; Severianus (Cram. Cat. p.
303) and Theodoret understand it
rightly of the Eternal Word ; while
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Cram. Cat.
pp. 306, 308, 309, Rab. Maur. Op. vi.
p. 511 sq. ed. Migne) expresses him
self very strongly on the opposite
side. Like MarceUus, he carries the
interpretation consistently into the
whole context, explaining iv a-irq to
refer not to the original creation (xri-
o-is) but to the moral re-creation
(dvdxriais), and referring elxdv to the
Incarnation in the same way. At a
later date, when the pressure of an
immediate controversy has passed
away, the Greek writers generaUy
concur in the earUer and truer inter
pretation of the expression. Thus
John Damascene (de Orthod. Fid. iv.
8, 1. p. 258 sq.), Theophylact (ad loc),
and (Ecumenius (ad loc), all explain
it of Christ's Divine Nature. Among
Latin writers there is more diver
sity of interpretation. While Ma-
rius Victorinus (adv. Arium i 24, p.
1058, ed. Migne), Hilary of Poictiers
(Tract, in ii Ps. § 28 sq., l p. 47 sq.; de
Trin. viu. 50, n. p. 248 sq.),and HUary
the commentator (ad loc.), take it of
the Divine Nature, Augustine (Expos.
ad Rom. 56, in. p. 914) and Pelagius
(ad loc.) understand it ofthe Incarnate
Christ. This sketch of the history of
the interpretation of the expression
would not be complete without a re
ference to another very different ex
planation. Isidore of Pelusium, Epist.
iii. 31 (p. 268), would strike out a new
path of interpretation altogether (ei
xal 86£aipi nat xaivoTepav epprjveias

[I. 16
a, [t«]
dvarepveiv 6Sdv), and for the passive
rrpmroroxos suggests reading the active
irpmroroxos, alluding to the use of this
latter word in Homer (H. xvii 5 prJTijp
irpmroroxos... ov irpiv elSvla toxoio:
comp. Plat. Thecet. 151 0 &airep ai
irpmTorbxoi). Thus St Paul is made
to say that Christ 7rpd>roi' reroxeVai,
Tovrean, ireiroiijxivai rrjv xriatv.
16. dVi x.r.X.] We have in this sen
tence the justification of the title
given to the Son in the preceding
clause, irprnToroxos irdaijs xriaems. It
must therefore be taken to explain
the sense in which this title is used.
Thus connected, it shows that the
irprnToroxos Himself is not included
in iraaa xn'o-is ; for the expression
used is not rd aXXa or rd Xowrd, but
rd irdvra ixriadr) — words which are
absolute and comprehensive, and wUl
admit no exception.
iv avrcji] 'in Him,' as below ver.
17 iv avrm avveaTrjxev. For the pre
position comp. Acts xvii. 28 iv avra
yap £mpev xai xivovpeda xai etrpev.
All the laws and purposes which
guide the creation and government
of the Universe reside in Him, the
Eternal Word, as their meeting-point.
The Apostolic doctrine of the Logos
teaches us to regard the Eternal
Word as holding the same relation to
the Universe which the Incarnate
Christ holds to the Church. He is
the source of its Ufe, the centre of all
its developments, the mainspring of
aU its motions. The use of iv to
describe His relations to the Church
abounds in St Paul (e.g. Rom. vui. 1,
2, xu. 5, xvi. 3, 7, 9, etc., 1 Cor. i 30,
iv. 15, 17, vii 39, xv. 18, 22, etc.), and
more especiaUy in the Epistles to the
Colossians and Ephesians (e.g. below
ii 7, 10). In the present passage, as
in ver. 17, the same preposition is
appUed-also to His relations to the
Universe ; comp. Joh. i 4 eV ai!r<5
far) rjv (more especiaUy if we connect
the preceding o yiyovev with it)

1. 16]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

149

iv rots ovpavols Kat [Va] eVt Ttjs yfjs, Ta opaTa Kal Ta

Thus it is part of the paraUelism
which runs through the whole pas
sage, and to which the occurrence of
irpurdroxos in both relations gives the
key. The Judseo- Alexandrian teachers
represented the Logos, which in their
view was nothing more than the
Divine mind energizing, as the rdiros
where the eternal ideas, the voryrbs
xbapos, had their abode ; PhUo de
Mund. Op. 4 (I. p. 4) Saairep iv ixeiva
voijTot, ib. § S (p. 4) ou8e d ex t&v ISemv
xoapos aXXov av ex01 to irov rj rbv
delov Xoyov rbv ravra Siaxoo-pajaavra,
ib. § 10 (p. 8) d daaparos xoapos...
I8pv6els iv to de'uo Xiya ; and see
especially de Migr. Abr. 1 (1. p. 437)
oixos iv a Siairdrai...do~a av ivdvprj-
para tcktj, mairep iv oixm to Xdym Sta-
6eis. The ApostoUc teaching is an
enlargement of this conception, inas
much as the Logos is no longer a
philosophical abstraction but a Di
vine Person: see Hippol. Hcer. x.
33 alnov rois yivopevots Adyos Jjv, iv
eavrm cpepav to deXetv tov yeyewij-
xotos. • .exet iv eavrm rds iv r& irarpi
wpoewoTjdelaas I8ias odev xeXeiiovros
irarpos yiveadai xbapov rd xard ev Ad
yos aTrrreXeiro apeaxav Qe& : comp.
Orig. in loann. i. § 22, iv. p. 21.
iKrladrj] The aorist is used here;
the perfect below. 'Exrladr) describes
the definite historical act of creation ;
exTtarai the continuous and present
relations of creation to the Creator :
COrap. Joh. i 3 xaPiS avTov iyevero
ov8eevmth.ib. o yeyovev, I Cor. ix. 22
iyevopijv rois dadeveaiv aadevrjs with
ib. rois irdaiv yeyova irdvra, 2 Cor. xu.
17 p.17 riva mv dir i araXx a with ver. 18
xai avvaireare iXa rov dSeXcpbv, I Joh.
iv. 9 rov povoyevrj direaraXxev 6
©eos eis rbv xoapov tva £rjaapcv St* au
rou with ver. IO on avrbs rjyairrjaev
rjpas xal direareiXev rbv vlbv avrov.
rd iravra] 'the universe of things,'
not 7rdvra 'all things severally,' but
to irdvra 'all things collectively.' With
very few exceptions, wherever this

phrase occurs elsewhere, it stands in a
similar connexion; see below, vv. 17,
20, iii. 11, Rom. xi 36, 1 Cor. viu. 6,
xi. 12, xU. 6, xv. 27, 28, 2 Cor. v. 18,
Eph. i. 10, n, 23, iv. 10, Heb. i. 3,
U. 8, Rev. iv. 1 1. Compare Rom. viii.
32 to 7rdvra rjpiv ^apio-erai, 2 Cor. iv.
IS rd irdvra 8t' iipas, with I Cor. iii.
22 eire xbapos. ..vpmv ; and PhU. iii 8
rd irdvra itjjpimdrjv with Matt. xvi.
26 idv rbv xoapov oXov xepSrjaij. Thus
it wiU appear that rd irdvra is nearly
equivalent to 'the universe.' It
stands midway between irdvra and rd
jrav. The last however is not a scrip
tural phrase; for, whUe with rd irdvra
it involves the idea of connexion, it
suggests also the unscriptural idea of
self-contained unity, the great world-
soul of the Stoic pantheist.
iv rois ovpavots x.r.X.] This division
of the universe is not the same with
the following, as if [rd] iv rois ovpavols
were equivalent to rd ddpara and [rd]
eVi rijs yijs to rd opard. It should
rather be compared with Gen. i. 1
iiroiijaev 6 Qebs tov ovpavov xal ttjv
yrjv, ii. I o-uvereXeV61>)o-ai' d ovpavbs xal
ij yr) xal jras d xbapos avrmv, xiv. 1 9
os exTiaev rbv ovpavov xai ttjv yijv,
Rev. X. 6 8s exnaev rbv ovpavov xal
to iv avrm xal rrjv yrjv xai rd iv aurij.
It is a classification by locality, as the
other is a classification by essences.
Heaven and earth together com
prehend all space; and all things
whether material or immaterial are
conceived for the purposes of the
classification as having their abode in
space. Thus the sun and the moon
would belong to bpard, but they would
be iv rois ovpavots ', while the human
soul would be classed among ddpara
but would be regarded as iiri ttjs yrjs ;
see below ver. 20.
It is difficult to say whether rd...rd
should be expunged or retained. The
elements in the decision are; (1) The
facUity either of omission or of ad
dition in the first clause, owing to the

ISO

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 16

dopaTa, etre dpovot e'tTe KvptoTtjTes, etre dp%al

,i
etTe

termination of 7rdvra : (2) The much
greater authority for the omission in
the first clause than in the second.
These two combined suggest that rd
was omitted accidentally in the first
clause, and then expunged purposely
in the second for the sake of uni
formity. On the other hand there is
(3) The possibihty of insertion in both
cases either for the sake of gram
matical completeness or owing to the
paraUel passages, ver. 20, Ephes. i. 10.
On the whole the reasons for their
omission preponderate. At all events
we can hardly retain the one without
the other.
rd dpard x.rX] 'Things material
and immaterial,' or, according to the
language of philosophy, cpawbpeva and
voipeva : comp. Plato Phced. 79 a
d&pev oiv, el jSouXet, eci?7, 8uo el'817 rmv
ovrmv, rb pev bparov, to Se dei8es, X.T.X.
e'lre x.r.X.] ' whether they be thrones
or lordships, etc' The subdivision is
no longer exhaustive. The Apostle
singles out those created beings that
from their superior rank had been or
might be set in rivalry with the Son.
A comparison with the parallel
passage Ephes. i. 21, virepdva irdarjs
dpxrjs xai i£ovaias xal 8vvdpems xal
xvpidrrjTos xai iravrbs x.r.X., brings out
the following points :
(1) No stress can be laid on the
sequence of the names, as though St
Paul were enunciating with authority
some precise doctrine respecting the
grades of the celestial hierarchy. The
names themselves are not the same
in the two passages. WhUe dpxrj, i£-
ovaia, xvpibrns, are common to both,
dpovos is pecuUar to the one and
Sivapis to the other. Nor again is
there any correspondence in the se
quence. Neither does Sivapis take
the place of dpovos, nor do the three
words common to both appear in the
same order, the sequence being dpx-
e'|. [Svv.] xvp. in Eph. i 21, and [dpbv.]
xvp. dpx. i£. here.

(2) An expression in Eph. i 21
shows the Apostle's motive in intro
ducing these lists of names : for he
there adds xai iravrbs ovdparos dvo-
pa{\opevav ov povov iv ra almvi rovrm
dXXd xai iv ra peXXovn, i.e. 'of every
dignity or title (whether real or imagi
nary) which is reverenced,' etc.; for
this is the force of 7ravrds dvoparos
ovopa£opivov (see the. notes on Phil.
ii. 9, and Eph. I. c). Hence it appears
that in this catalogue St Paul does
not profess to describe objective
reaUties, but contents himself with
repeating subjective opinions. He
brushes away all these speculations
without enquiring how much or how
Uttle truth there may be in them,
because they are altogether beside
the question. His language here
shows the same spirit of impatience
with this elaborate angelology, as in
u. 18.
(3) Some commentators have re
ferred the terms used here solely
to earthly potentates and dignities.
There can be Uttle doubt however
that their chief and primary reference
is to the orders of the celestial hier
archy, as conceived by these Gnostic
Judaizers. This appears from the con
text ; for the words rd a'dpara imme
diately precede this Ust of terms, while
in the mention of irdv rd rrXTJpmpa
and in other expressions the Apostle
clearly contemplates the rivalry of
spiritual powers with Christ. It is
also demanded by the whole design
and purport of the letter, which is
written to combat the worship paid to
angels. The names too, more especially
dpbvot, are especially connected with
the speculations of Jewish angelology.
But when this is granted, two questions
stiU remain. First; are evil as weU as
good spirits included, demons as weU
as angels? And next; though the
primary reference is to spiritual
powers, is it not possible that the
expression was intended to be compre-

1. 16]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

151

hensive and to include earthly dignities
as well} The clause added in the
paraUel passage, ou povov iv ™ al&vi
touto x.t.X., encourages us thus to
extend the Apostle's meaning ; and we
are led in the same direction by the
comprehensive words which have pre
ceded here, [rd] ev rois ovpavots
x.t.X. Nor is there anything in the
terms themselves which bars such an
extension; for, as wiU be seen, the
combination dpxal xai i£ovaiat is
applied not only to good angels but
to bad, not only to spiritual powers
but to earthly. Compare Ignat.
Smyrn. 6 rd iirovpdvia xal ij 86£a t&v
dyyeXmv xal ol apxovres dparot re xal
doparoi. Thus guided, we may paraphrase
the Apostle's meaning as follows :
' You dispute much about the succes
sive grades of angels; you distinguish
each grade by its special title; you
can teU how each order was generated
from the preceding; you assign to
each its proper degree of worship.
Meanwhile you have ignored or you
have degraded Christ. I tell you, it
is not so. He is first and foremost,
Lord of heaven and earth, far above
aU thrones or dominations, all prince
doms or powers, far above every
dignity and every potentate — whether
earthly or heavenly — whether angel
or demon or man — that evokes your
reverence or excites your fear.' See
above, pp. 101 sq.
Jewish and Judaeo-Christian specu
lations respecting the grades of the
celestial hierarchy took various forms.
In the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs (Levi 3), which as coming
near to the Apostolic age supplies a
valuable Ulustration (see Galatians
p. 307 sq.), these orders are arranged
as follows : (1) dpbvot, igovalai, these
two in the highest or seventh heaven;
(2) ol dyyeXoi 01 cpipovres rds airo-
xptaeis rois dyyeXois tov irpoamirov in
the sixth heaven; (3) 01 dyyeXoi roii
irpoamirov in the fifth heaven ; (4) 0!
ayioi in the fourth heaven; (5) ai Swd-

(ihs t&v irapepfidX&v in the third
heaven ; (6) rd rrvevsiara r&v iirayay&v
(i.e. of visitations, retributions) in the
second heaven : or perhaps the denizens
of the sixth and fifth heavens, (2) and
(3), should be transposed. The lowest
heaven is not peopled by any spirits.
In Origen de Princ. i. 5. 3, ib. i. 6.
2, 1. pp. 66, 70 (comp. i. 8. 1, ib. p. 74),
we have five classes, which are given
in an ascending scale in this order;
(1) angels (sancti angeli, rd£is dyye-
Xtxrj) ; (2) princedoms (principatus,
Sivapis dpxixij, dpxai) ; (3) powers (po-
testates, igovalai); (4) thrones (throni
vel sedes, dpovot); (5) dominations
(dominationes, xupidnjres); though
elsewhere, in loann. i. § 34, iv. p. 34,
he seems to have a somewhat differ
ent classification in view. In Ephrem
Syrus Op. Syr. 1. p. 270 (where the
translation of Benedetti is altogether
faulty and misleading) the ranks are
these : (i) deal, Bpbvoi, xupidnjres ; (2)
dpxdyycXoi,dpxal,i£ovalat; (3) dyyeXoi,
Swdpei s , xepovjSip, aepacpip ; these three
great divisions being represented by
the xiMapxoi, the exarovrap^oi, and the
irevnjxbvTapxoi respectively in Deut. i.
15, on which passage he is comment
ing. The general agreement between
these wUl be seen at once. This
grouping also seems to underlie the
conception of BasU of Seleucia Orat.
39 (p. 207), who mentions them in this
order; dpbvot, xupidnjres, dpxal, e'£-
ovcrUii, Svvdpets, xepou/Si/4, aepacpip.
On the other hand the arrangement of
the pseudo-Dionysius, who so largely
influenced subsequent speculations,
is quite different and probably later
(Dion. Areop. Op. 1. p. 75, ed. Cord.);
(i) dpbvot, xepovflip, irepacpip; (2) e'|ou-
0-1'ai, xupidnjres, Suvdu.eis; (3) dyyeXoi,
dpxdyyeXoi, dpxal. But the earlier
Usts for the most part seem to
suggest as their common foundation a
classification in which Bpbvoi, xupidnj
res, belonged to the highest order, and
dpxal, ii-ovalat to the next below.
Thus it would appear that the Apo
stle takes as an illustration the titles

152

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1. 16

ij^ovcriar Ta irdvTa $i avTov Kal ets ovtov eKTicrTar

assigned to the two highest grades in
a system of the celestial hierarchy
which he found current, and which
probably was adopted by these Gnos
tic Judaizers. See also the note on
ii: 18.
dpbvot] In all systems alike these
'thrones' belong to the highest grade
of angeUc beings, whose place is in
the immediate presence of God. The
meaning of the name however is
doubtful : (i) It may signify the occu
pants of thrones which surround the
throne of God; as in the imagery of
Rev. iv. 4 xvxXodev rou dpbvov dpbvoi
e'lxoat reaaapes (comp. xi. 16, XX. 4).
The imagery is there taken from the
court of an earthly king : see Jer. Ui
32. This is the interpretation given
by Origen de Princ. i 5. 3 (p. 66), i
6. 2 (p. 70) 'judicandi vel regendi...
habentes officium.' Or (2) They were
so caUed, as supporting or forming
the throne of God; just as the chariot-
seat of the Almighty is represented
as resting on the cherubim in Ezek.
i 26, ix. 3, x. 1 sq., xi. 22, Ps. xviii. 10,
1 Chron. xxvui. 18. So apparently
Clem. Alex. Proph. Eel. 57 (p. 1003)
dpbvot av etev...8td rd dvairaveadat iv
avrois tov Qebv. From this same
imagery of the prophet the later mys
ticism of the Kabbala derived its
name 'wheels,' which it gave to one
of its ten orders of Sephiroth. Adopt
ing this interpretation, several fathers
identify the 'thrones' with the che
rubim : e.g. Greg. Nyss. c Eunom.
i (11. p. 349 sq.), Chrysost. de Incompr.
Nat. in. 5 (1. p. 467), Theodoret (ad
loc), August, in Psalm, xcviii. § 3
(iv p. 1061). This explanation was
adopted also by the pseudo-Dionysius
de Ccel. Hier. 7 (1. p. 80), without how
ever identifying them with the cheru
bim ; and through his writings it came
to bo generaUy adopted. The former
interpretation however is more pro
bable; for (1) The highly symbolical
character of the latter accords better

with a later stage of mystic speculation,
like the Kabbala; and (2) It seems
best to treat dpbvot as belonging to the
same category with xupidnjres, dpxal,
i^ovalai, which are concrete words
borrowed from different grades of
human rank and power. As implying
regal dignity, dpbvot naturaUy stands
at the head of the Ust.
xupidnjres] 'dominations,' %& Ephes.
i 21. These appear to have been re
garded as belonging to the first grade,
and standing next in dignity to the
dpbvot. This indeed would be sug
gested by their name.
dpxai, i£ovaiat] as Ephes. i. 21.
These two words occur very frequently
together. In some places they refer
to human dignities, as Luke xii. 11,
Tit. iii. 1 (comp. Luke xx. 20); in
others to a spiritual hierarchy. And
here again there are two different
uses : sometimes they designate good
angels, e.g. below u. 10, Ephes. iu. 10;
sometimes evil spirits, e.g. ii 15,
Ephes. vi. 12 : while in one passage at
least (1 Cor. xv. 24) both may be in
cluded. In Rom. vni. 38 we have dp-
Xal without ii-ovalai (except as a v. 1.),
and in 1 Pet. iu. 22 igovalai without
dpxai, in connexion with the angeUc
orders. 81' aurou x.t.X.] 'As all creation
passed out from Him, so does it all con
verge again towards Him.' For the
combination of prepositions see Rom.
xi. 36 i£ avrov xal 81 aurou xai eis av
rbv rd iravra. He is not only the a but
also the co, not only the dpxrj but also
the reXos of creation, not only the first
but also the last in the history of
the Universe : Rev. xxii. 1 3. For
this double relation of Christ to the
Universe, as both the initial and the
final cause, see Heb. u. ,10 Si' bv rd
irdvra xai 81' ou rd irdvra, where 81' bv
is nearly equivalent to eis aurdv of the
text. In the Judaic philosophy of Alex
andria the preposition 8id with the

I. i7]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

153

17 /cat ovtos etTTtv irpd irdvTtov, Kal Ta iravTa iv avTta

genitive was commonly used to de
scribe the function of the Logos in
the creation and government of the
world; e.g. de Cherub. 35 (1. p. 162)
where Philo, enumerating the causes
which combine in the work of Crea
tion, describes God as vcp' ov, matter
as e'| o5, and the Word, as 6V ov ;
comp. de Mon. U. 5 (n. p. 225) Xdyos...
81' ou avpiras 0 xoapos eSiju-ioupyeiro.
The Christian Apostles accepted this
use of did to describe the mediatorial
function of the Word in creation ; e.g.
John i 3 irdvra Si' outou iyivero x.rA.,
ib. ver. IO 6 Koapos Si' auVou iyevero,
Heb. i 2 ii ov xai iiroiijaev rovs
aimvas. This mediatorial function
however has entirely changed its
character. To the Alexandrian Jew it
was the work of a passive tool or instru
ment (de Cherub. l.c. 8i' ov, to ipya-
Xeiov, opyavov...8i ov); but to the
Christian Apostle it represented a
cooperating agent. Hence the Alex
andrian Jew frequently and consist
ently used the simple instrumental
dative ^ to describe the relation of
the Word to the Creator, e.g. Quod
Deus immut. 12 (ip. 281) a xal tov
xoapov eipydfero, Leg. All. i 9 (i
P- 47) r¥ irepiKpaveardTm xai rqXauye-
ffTar^> eavrov Xdya> prjpan 6 Qebs dp-
cpbrepa iroiei, comp. ib. ni. 31 (l p. 106)
d Xdyos... <h xaddirep opydvm irpoaxprj-
adpevos. This mode of speaking is not
found in the New Testament.
eis aurdv] 'unto Him.' As of the
Father it is said elsewhere, 1 Cor. viu.
6 e'£ ou rd irdvra xal rjpels els avrov,
so here of the Son we read to 7rdvra
St' aurou xai els avrov. AU things
must find their meeting-point, their re-
conciUation, at length in Him from
whom they took their rise — in the
Word as the mediatorial agent, and
through the Word in the Father as
the primary source. The Word is
the final cause as well as the creative
agent of the Universe. This ultimate
goal of the present dispensation in

time is similarly stated in several pas
sages. Sometimes it is represented
as the birth-throe and deliverance of
all creation through Christ ; as Rom.
viii. 19 sq. avrrj ij xriats iXevdepmdrj-
aerat, irdaarj xriats... avvaSivei. Some-"
times it is the absolute and final sub
jection of universal nature to Him;
as I Cor. XV. 28 orav uirorayjj avra
ra irdvra. Sometimes it is the recon-
cfiiation of all things through Him ; as
below, ver. 20 Si* auVou diroxaraXXagai
rd n-dvra. Sometimes it is the reca
pitulation, the gathering up in one
head, of the Universe in Him; as
Ephes. i. IO dvaxetpaXaimaaadat rd
7rdvra eV to Xpiarm. The image in
volved in this last passage best illus
trates the particular expression in the
text els avrbv exriarat; but all alike
enunciate the same truth in different
terms. The Eternal Word is the goal
ofthe Universe, as He was the starting-
point. It must end in unity, as it
proceeded from unity: and the centre
of this unity is Christ. This expres
sion has no parallel, and could have
none, in the Alexandrian phraseology
and doctrine.
17. xal avrbs x.r.X.] 'and HE IS
before alt things' : comp. Joh. viii. 58
jrpiv 'Afipaap yeviadat, iym elpl (and
perhaps also viii. 24, 28, xiu. 19). The
imperfect rjv might have sufficed
(comp. Joh. i 1), but the present eanv
declares that this pre-existence is
absolute existence. The <\yroc 6ctin
here corresponds exactly to the erm
eiwii in St John, and this again is Ulus
trated by Exod. Ui. 14. The verb there
fore is not an enclitic, but should be ac
centuated eo-nv. See Basil adv. Eunom.
iv (i. p. 294) d dVooroXos elirav, llavra
81 avrov xal eis aurdv exriarat, mcpeiXev
eiireiv, Kai aurds iyevero irpb iravrmv,
elirmv Si, Kal avrbs eari irpb iravrmv,
e8ei£e rbv pev del Svra rrjv Se xrlaiv
yevopAvrjv. The avrbs is as necessary
for the completeness of the meaning,

154

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 18

orvvea'TtjKev . l8Kal avTos icTtv t) KetpaXt] tov arw-

as the eo-nv. The one emphasizes the
personality, as the other declares the
pre-existence. For this emphatic ai
res see again ver. 18; comp. Ephes.
ii. 14, iv. 10, 11, 1 Joh. ii 2, and esp.
Rev. xix. IS xal avrbs iroipavel. . -xal
avrbs irarel. The other interpretation
which explains irpb iravrmv of superi
ority in rank, and not of priority in
time, is untenable for several reasons.
(1) This would most naturaUy be ex
pressed otherwise in Biblical language,
as iirl iravrmv (e.g. Rom. ix. 5, Eph. iv.
6), or un-ep jrdvra (Eph. i. 22), or ujrep-
dvm iravrmv (Eph. i. 21, iv. 10). (2)
The key to the interpretation is given
by the analogous words in the con
text, esp. irpmrbroxos, VV. 15, 18. (3)
Nothing short of this declaration of
absolute pre-existence would be ade
quate to introduce the statement
which follows, xai to irdvra iv avrm
o-uveor>7Xev. irpb iravrmv] 'before all things' In
the Latin it was translated ' ante
omnes,' i.e. thronos, dominationes, etc. ;
and so TertuUian adv. Marc v. 19
'Quomodo enim ante omnes, si non
ante omnia? Quomodo ante omnia,
si non primogenitus conditionis V But
the neuter rd jrdvra, standing in the
context before and after, requires the
neuter here also.
o-uve'o-njxev] ' hold together, cohere.'
He is the principle of cohesion in the
universe. He impresses upon creation
that unity and solidarity which makes
it a cosmos instead of a chaos. Thus
(to take one instance) the action of
gravitation, which keeps in their places
things fixed and regulates the mo
tions of things moving, is an expres
sion of His mind. Similarly in Heb.
i. 3 Christ the Logos is described as
cbioav rd irdvra (sustaining the Uni
verse) T& prjpan rijs 8vvdpems avrov.
Here again the Christian Apostles
accept the language of Alexandrian
Judaism, which describes the Logos
as the Seapbs of the Universe ; e.g.

Philo de Profug. 20 (1. p. 562) S re
ydp rou ovros Xdyos Seapbs mv t&v
dirdvTmv...xal avvexei rd peprj iravra
xal acptyyet xal xo>Xuei avra SiaXveadat
xal 8iaprda6at, de Plant. 2 (I. p. 33 1)
avvdyav rd peprj irdvra xal acptyymv'
Seapbv ydp avrbv apprjxTOV rov iravrbs
6 yevvrjaas iirolei iraTijp, Quis rer. div.
her. 38 (i. p. 507) i\dya acpiyyerai deia'
xdXXa ydp ian xai Seapbs ovros to
jrdvra rijs ovaias ixireirXrjpmxms : and
for the word itself see Quis rer. div.
her. 12 (i. p. 481) avvearrjxe xal {\m-
irvpelrat irpovoia Qeov, Clem. Rom. 27
ev Xoym rrjs peydXaavvrjs ourou avve-
anjaaTo rd Trdvra. In the same con
nexion o-uyxeirai is used, Ecclus. xliii.
26. The indices to Plato and Aristotle
amply Ulustrate this use of avvea-rrjxev.
This mode of expression was common
with the Stoics also.
18. 'And not only does He hold
this position of absolute priority and
sovereignty over the Universe — the
natural creation. He stands also in
the same relation to the Church —
the new spiritual creation. He is its
head, and it is His body. This is His
prerogative, because He is the source
and the beginning of its life, being
the First-born from the dead. Thus
in all things — in the spiritual order as
in the natural — in the Church as in
the World — He is found to have the
pre-eminence.' The elevating influence of this
teaching on the choicest spirits of the
subapostolic age wUl be seen from
a noble passage in the noblest of
early Christian writings, Epist. ad
Diogn. § 7 T0V Xdyov rov ayiov... dv-
dpmirois ivlSpvoe...ov, xaddirep dv ns
elxdaetev, dvdpmirois virrjperrjv riva irip-
i/'as 17 dyyeXov r) apxovra r) riva r&v
Steirovrmv rh iiriyeia fj riva t&v irema-
revpevmv rds e'v ovpavots SiotxTjaeis, aXX'
avrbv tov rexvinjv xai Sr/ptovpybv tov
dXaiv...© 7rdvra Siareraxrai xai Simpta-
rai xal uiroreraxrai, ovpavoi xal rd iv

I. 18]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

155

/xcctos, Ttjs iKKXt]0~tas' bs eo'Tiv dp%tj, irpwTOTOKOS

tois ovpavots, yrj xai rd e'v -rjj yrj x.r.X.
See the whole context.
xal au'rds] 'and He,' repeated from
the preceding verse, to emphasize the
identity of the Person who unites in
Himself these prerogatives : see on
ver. 17, and comp. ver. 18 aurds, ver.
19 8t* aurou. The Creator of the
World is also the Head ofthe Church.
There is no bUnd ignorance, no im
perfect sympathy, no latent conflict, in
the relation of the demiurgic power
to the Gospel dispensation, as the
heretical teachers were disposed con
sciously or unconsciously to assume
(see above, p. 99 sq., p. 108 sq.), but
an absolute unity of origin.
17" xeipaXij] 'the head,' the inspiring,
ruling, guiding, combining, sustaining
power, the mainspring of its activity,
the centre of its unity, and the seat
of its Ufe. In his earUer epistles the
relations of the Church to Christ are
described under the same image (1
Cor. xn. 12 — 27; comp. vi 15, x. 17,
Rom. xii 4 sq.) ; but the Apostle
there takes as his starting-point the
various functions of the members, and
not, as in these later epistles, the
originating and controUng power of
the Head. Comp. i. 24, ii. 19, Eph.
i 22 sq., ii 16, iv. 4, 12, 1 5 sq., v. 23, 30.
ttjs e'xxXijo-ias] in apposition with
rou aaparos : comp. i 24 rou o-touaros
auVou, o eoTiv 17 ixxXjjaia, Eph. I. 23.
dpxv] 'the origin, the beginning.'
The term is here applied to the In
carnate Christ in relation to the
Church, because it is applicable to
the Eternal Word in relation to the
Universe, Rev. ui 14 rj dpxv Tijs xri
aems tov Qeov. The paraUelism ofthe
two relations is kept in view through
out. The word dpxij here involves
two ideas : ( 1) Priority in time ; Christ
was the first-fruits of the dead, djrapxrj
(1 Cor. xv. 20, 23): (2) Originating
power; Christ was also the source of
Ufe, Acts iu. 14 6 dpxqybs ttjs £mrjs;
comp. Acts v. 31, Heb. ii 10. He is

not merely the principium princi-
piatum but the principium princi-
pians (see Trench Epistles to the
Seven Churches p. 183 sq.). He rose
first from the dead, that others might
rise through Him.
The word dpxi7, like irpmros (see
the note on PhU. i. 5), being absolute
in itself, does not require the definite
article. Indeed the article is most
commonly omitted where dpxv occurs
as a predicate, as will appear from
several examplos to be gathered from
the extracts in Plut. Mor. p. 875 sq.,
Stob. Eel. Phys. i. 10. i2sq. Comp. also
Aristot. Met. x. 7, p. 1064, rd delov...
av 6117 irpmTTj xal xupKardnj dpxrj, OnataB
in Stob. Eel. Phys. i. 2. 39 puVds ydp
[©eds] dp^d xal irpdrov, Tatian. ad
GrCBC. 4 Geds...p,dvos avapxos mv xal
aurds virdpxmv t&v oXav dpxrj, Clem.
Alex. Strom, iv. 25, p. 638, d ©eds 8e
avapxos, dpxi) r&v SXmv iravTeXrjs, dpxrjs
iroujTixbs, Method, de Great. 3 (p. 100,
ed. Jahn) irdarjs dperrjs dpx1)" Kc" T
yr)v. ..rjyfj tov ©edv, pseudo-Dionys.
de Div. Nom. v. § 6 ,dpxr) ydp ian t&v
ovrmv, § 10 jrdvrav ouv dpxr) xal reXev-
rt) r&v ovrmv 6 irpomv.
The text is read with the definite
article, n dpxrj, in one or two excel
lent authorities at least; but the ob
vious motive which would lead a
scribe to aim at greater distinctness
renders the reading suspicious.
jrpfflToYoxos] Comp. Rev. i 5 d jrpa>-
rdroxos rcSv vexp&v xal 6 apxmv t&v
fiaatXemv rrjs yrjs. His resurrection
from the dead is His title to the
headship of the Church; for 'the
power of His resurrection ' (Phil. iii.
10) is the Ufe of the Church. Such
passages as Gen. xlix. 3, Deut. xxi. 17,
where the irpmroToxos is called dpxr)
rixvmv and superior privUeges are
claimed for him as such, must neces
sarily be only very faint and partial
illustrations of the connexion between
dpxrj and irpmroroxos here, where the
subject-matter and the whole context

i56

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 19

eK twv veKpwv, tva yevtiTat ev iraa-tv ovtos irpwTevwv
X9oti iv avTto evSoKt]o~ev irav to irXtjptofia KaTotKtj-

point to a fuller meaning of the words.
The words irpmroroxos ix r&v vexp&v
here correspond to irpmroroxos irdaijs
xriaems ver. 15, so that the paralleUsm
between Christ's relations to the Uni
verse and to the Church is thus em-

iva yevrjTai x.r.X.] As He is first
with respect to the Universe, so it
was ordained that He should become
first with respect to the Church as
weU. The yevyrai here answers in a
manner to the eo-nv of ver. 17. Thus
eo-riv and yivryrat are contrasted as
the absolute being and the histo
rical manifestation. The relation be
tween Christ's headship of the Uni
verse by virtue of His Eternal God
head and His headship of the Church
by virtue of His Incarnation and
Passion and Resurrection is some
what similarly represented in PhU. u.
6 sq. e'v popcpfi Qeov virdpxmv. . .pap<prjv
SovXov Xaf$mv...yevbp,evos virrjxoos pixpi
davarov. ..81b xai d ©eds aurdv virepv-
TJr-aaev x.r.X.
e'v irdaiv] 'in all things,' not in the
Universe only but in the Church
also. Kai ydp, writes Theodoret, as
Qebs, irpb iravrmv iarl xai avv to irarpi
ian, xal as dvdpmiros, irpmroroxos ix
t&v vexpmv xal tov amparos xecpaXrj.
Thus e'v n-ao-iv is neuter and not mas
culine, as it is sometimes taken. Ei
ther construction is grammatically
correct, but the context points to the
former interpretation here; and this
is the common use of ev irdaiv, e. g.
iu. 11, Eph. i. 23, PhU. iv. 12. For
the neuter compare Plut. Mor. p. 9
airevSovres tovs iral8as iv irdot rd^iov
7rpG>reuo-ai. On the other hand in
[Demosth.] Amat. p. 1416 xpdnorov
eivai rd irpareietv iv atraat the context
shows that airaat is masculine.
aurds] 'He Himserf'; see the note
on xai aurds above.
19, 20. 'And this absolute supre

macy is His, because it was the
Father's good pleasure that in Him
aU the plenitude of Deity should have
its home; because He wiUed through
Him to reconcUe the Universe once
more to Himself. It was God's pur
pose to effect peace and harmony
through the blood of Christ's cross,
and so to restore all things, whatso
ever and wheresoever they be, whe
ther on the earth or in the heavens.'
19. on iv avra x.r.X.1 The eternal
indwelling of the Godhead explains
the headship of the Church, not less
than the headship of the Universe.
The resurrection of Christ, whereby
He became the dpxr) of the Church,
was the result of and the testimony to
His deity; Rom. i 4 rou dptadevros
viov Qeov...i£ dvaardaeas vexp&v.
ev8bxTjaev] sc. 6 Qebs, the nomina
tive being understood; see Winer
§ Mii p. 655 sq., § lxiv. p. 735 sq.;
comp. James i 12 (the right reading),
iv. 6. Here the omission is the more
easy, because ev8oxia, evSoxelv etc. (like
deXrjpa), are used absolutely of God's
good purpose, e.g. Luke ii 14 e'v dv-
dpmirots euSoxias (or euSoxia), PhU. ii.
13 usrep rijs evSoxias, Clem. Rom. § 40
jravra rd ytvbpeva iv ev8oxsjaei; see the
note on Clem. Rom. § 2. For the ex
pression generally comp. 2 Mace. xiv.
35 ov, Kvpte, evSoxijaas vabv rijs arjs
xaraaxTjvaaems iv rjpiv yeveadai. The
alternative is to consider n-av to jtXij-
pmpa personified as the nominative ;
but it is difficult to conceive St Paul
so speaking, more especiaUy as with
evSbxrjaev personification would sug
gest personality. The irXrjpmpa in
deed is personified in Clem. Alex.
Exc. Theod. 43 (p. 979) avvaiveaavros
xal tov icXTjpapaTos, and in Iren. i 2.
6 £ouXj pia xal yvmprj to irdv irXijpmpa
T&v almvmv x.r.X., i. 12. 4 jrav rd 77X77-
pmpa ijvSbxTjaev [Si' aurou 8o£daat rbv
irarepa]; but the phraseology of the

1. 20]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

15;

cat, so/cat St' avTov diroKaTaXXa^at Ta irdvTa ets

Valentinians, to which these passages
refer, cannot be taken as an indica
tion of St Paul's usage, since their view
of the irXrjpmpa was wholly different.
A third interpretation is found in
TertuUian adv. Marc. v. 19, who trans
lates e'v avrm in semetipso, taking 6
Xpiarbs as the nominative to eu'8dx?j-
o-ev : and this construction is followed
by some modern critics. But, though
grammatically possible, it confuses
the theology of the passage hope
lessly. rd irXrjpmpa] 'the plenitude,' a re
cognised technical term in theology,
denoting the totaUty of the Divine
powers and attributes ; comp. U. 9.
See the detached note on irXrjpmpa.
On the relation of this statement to
the speculations of the false teach
ers at Colossae see the introduction,
pp. 100, no. Another interpretation,
which explains rd irXrjpmpa as refer
ring to the Church (comp. Ephes. i
22), though adopted by several fathers,
is unsuited to the context and has
nothing to recommend it.
xaroix/jo-ai] 'should have its per
manent abode.' The word occurs again
in the same connexion, ii. 9. The
false teachers probably, like their
later counterparts, maintained only a
partial and transient connexion of the
irXrjpmpa with the Lord. Hence St
Paul declares in these two passages
that it is not a irapoixla but a xotoi-
xia. The two words xaroixeiv, irapot-
xeiv, occur in the lxx as the common
renderings of 3B" and "\.i respect
ively, and are distinguished as the
permanent and the transitory; e.g.
Gen. xxxvi. 44 (xxxvu. i) xaraxei Se
'Iaxaj3 iv TJj yn ov irapaxrjaev 6 jranjp
aurou e'v yjj Xavadv (comp. Hos. X. 5),
Philo Sacr. Ab. et Ca. 10 (1. p. 170 m) 6
rois e'yxuxXiois pavots iiravexmv irapotxel
aocpia, ov xaroixei, Greg. Naz. Orat.
xiv (l p. 271 ed. CaUlau) ris ttjv xara
aKTjvr)v xat n)v avm irbXiv; ris irapot-
xiav xal xaTotxiav ; comp. Orat. vii

(1. p. 200). See also the notes on
Ephes. ii. 19, and on Clem. Rom. 1.
20. The false teachers aimed at
effecting a partial reconciUation be
tween God and man through the in
terposition of angelic mediators. The
Apostle speaks of an absolute and
complete reconciUation of universal
nature to God, effected through the
mediation of the Incarnate Word.
Their mediators were ineffective, be
cause they were neither human nor
divine. The true mediator must be
both human and divine. It was
necessary that in Him aU the pleni
tude of the Godhead should dweU.
It was necessary also that He should
be born into the world and should
suffer as a man.
81' aurou] i.e. rou Xpiorou, as ap
pears from the preceding e'v avrm,
and the following 8td rou atparos
tov aravpov aurou, 81' aurou. This
expression 81' aurou has been already
applied to the Preincarnate Word in
relation to the Universe (ver. 16) ; it
is now used of the Incarnate Word in
relation to the Church.
a7roxaTaXXd£ai] SC. eu8dx7jo"ev d ©eds.
The personal pronoun aurdv, instead
of the reflexive eaurdv, is no real ob
stacle to this way of connecting the
words (see the next note). The al
ternative would be to take rd irXij-
pmpa as governing dWoxaraXXd^ai, but
this mode of expression is harsh and
improbable. The same double compound dVoxar-
aXXdaaeiv is used below, ver. 21 and
Ephes. ii. 16, in place of the usual xar-
aXXdo-o-eiv. It may be compared
with djroxardo-rao-is, Acts iii 21. Ter
tuUian, arguing against the dualism
of Marcion who maintained an anta
gonism between the demiurge and the
Christ, lays stress on the compound,
adv. Marc. v. 19 'conciliari extraneo
possent, reconciliari vero non aUi
quam suo.' The word diroxaraXXda-
aetv corresponds to d-mjXXorpimu.evovs

158

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[L21

ovtov, eiprjvoiroitio-as cia tov atpiaTOs tov CTavpov
avTov, St' avTov e'tTe Ta iirl Ttjs yijs e'tTe to iv tois
ovpavols, 3lKal vpids iroTe ovTas dirtiXXoTptco/Jievovs Kai

here and in Ephes. ii 16, implying a
restitution to a state from which they
had faUen, or which was potentially
theirs, or for which they were destined.
SimUarly St Augustine on Gai iv. 5
remarks that the word used of the
vlodeaia is not accipere (Xapfidvetv)
but recipere (diroXapjidveiv). See the
note there.
rd Trdvra] The whole universe of
things, material as well as spiritual,
shaU be restored to harmony with
God. How far this restoration of
universal nature may be subjective, as
involved in the changed perceptions
of man thus brought into harmony
with God, and how far it may have an
objective and independent existence,
it were vain to speculate.
eis uurdv] 'to Him,' i.e. 'to Him
self.' The reconcUiation is always
represented as made to the Father.
The reconcUer is sometimes the Fa
ther HimseU7 (2 Cor. v. 18, 19 e'x tou
©eou rou xaraXXd£avros Jjuas eaurai
Sid Xp«rrou...©eds yv iv Xpiarm xbapov
xaraXXdoamv eavrq), sometimes the
Son (Ephes. ii. 16: comp. Rom. v.
10, n). Excellent reasons are given
(Bleek Hebr. 11. p. 69, A. Buttmann
Gramm. p. 97) for supposing that the
reflexive pronoun eaurou etc. is never
contracted into outou etc. in the
Greek Testament. But at the same
time it is quite clear that the oblique
cases of the personal pronoun aurds are
there used very widely, and in cases
where we should commonly find the
reflexive pronoun in classical authors :
e.g. Ephes. i. 4, 5 e'£eXe'£oro ijjuas...
eivai rjpas dyiovs xal dpapovs xarevdirtov
avrov. ..irpoopiaas rjpas eis viodeaiav
Sid 'I770-OU Xpiorou eis aurdv. See
also the instances given in A. Butt
mann p. 98. It would seem indeed
that avrov etc. may be used for e'au-

tou etc. in almost every connexion,
except where it is the direct object
of the verb.
elpTjvmroirjaas] The word occurs in
the lxx, Prov. x. 10, and in Hermes
in Stob. Eel. Phys. xU. 45. The sub
stantive elprjvoiroibs (see Matt. v. 9)
is found several times in classical
writers. Si' aurou] The external authority
for and against these words is nearly
evenly balanced : but there would
obviously be a tendency to reject
them as superfluous. They are a re
sumption of the previous 81' aurou.
For other examples see ii 13 u/ias,
Rom. vni. 23 xai auroi, Gai u. 15, 16
Tjpels, Ephes. i. 13 e'v a xai, iii. I, 14
rourou x°-Pw> where words are simi
larly repeated for the sake of emphasis
or distinctness. In 2 Cor. xu. 7 there
is a repetition Of tva pr) virepaipmpat,
where again it is omitted in several
excellent authorities.
21 — 23. 'And ye too — ye GentUes —
are included in the terms of this
peace. In times past ye had estranged
yourselves from God. Your hearts
were hostile to Him, while ye Uved on
in your evil deeds. But now, in
Christ's body, in Christ's flesh which
died on the Cross for your atonement,
ye are reconciled to Him again. He
wUl present you a living sacrifice, an
acceptable offering unto Himself, free
from blemish and free even from
censure, that ye may stand the pierc
ing glance of Him whose scrutiny
no defect can escape. But this
can only be, if ye remain true to
your old allegiance, if ye hold fast
(as I trust ye are' holding fast) by the
teachmg of Epaphras, if the edifice of
your faith is built on solid foundations
and not reared carelessly on the sands,
if ye suffer not yourselves to be

1.22]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

159

ix^povs Ttj Biavota. iv tois epyois Tots irovtipots, vvvl Be
diroKaTtirWaytjTe a3iv ™ a-topiaTi Ttjs o~apKos avTov Bid

21. vvvl Si diroxarijXXaiev.

shifted or shaken but rest firmly on
the hope which ye have found in the
Gospel — the one universal unchange
able Gospel, which was proclaimed to
every creature under heaven, of which
I Paul, unworthy as I am, was called
to be a minister.'
21. dmjXXorpiai/xevous] 'estranged,'
not dXXorpious, 'strangers' ; comp.
Ephes. ii. 12, iv. 18. See the note on
diroxaTaXXa^ai, ver. 20.
ex^pous] 'hostile to God,' as the
consequence of dirrfXXoTpiapivovs, not
'hateful to God,' as it is taken by
some. The active rather than the
passive sense of ixdpovs is required
by the context, which (as commonly in
the New Testament) speaks of the
sinner as reconciled to God, not of
God as reconcUed to the sinner : comp.
Rom. v. IO ei ydp exdpol ovres xanjX-
Xayqpev t& ©era x.r.X. It is the mind
of man, not the mind of God, which
must undergo a change, that a re
union may be effected.
Tjj Siavola] 'in your mind, intent.'
For the dative of the part affected
compare Ephes. iv. 18 iaxormpevot tjj
Siavola, Luke i- S I vireprjCpdvovs Siavola
xapSlas avrmv. So xapSiq, KapSiats,
Matt. v. 8, xi. 29, Acts vii. 5 1, 2 Cor.
ix. 7, 1 Thess. U. 17; cppeaiv, 1 Cor.
xiv. 20.
e'v rois epyois x.r.X.] 'in the midst
of, in the performance of your wicked
works' ; the same use of the preposi
tion as e.g. ii 23, iv. 2.
vvvi] Here, as frequently, vvv
(vvvl) admits an aorist, because it de
notes not 'at the present moment,'
but 'in the present dispensation, the
present order of things': comp. e.g.
ver. 26, Rom. v. n, vii. 6, xi. 30, 31,
xvi. 26, Ephes. ii 13, iii 5, 2 Tim. i.
10, 1 Pet. i. 10, u. 10, 25. In aU
these passages there is a direct con
trast between the old dispensation

and the new, more especially as af
fecting the relation of the Gentiles to
God. The aorist is found also in
Classical writers, where a similar con
trast is involved; e.g. Plato Symp.
193 A jrpd rou, mairep Xeym, ev rjpev'
vuvi Se 8id tijv dSixiav Siaxiadrjpev virb
rov deov, Isseus de Cleon. her. 20 rore
pev... vvvl Se...e/3ouXrj61i7.
arroxanjXXdyijre] The reasons for
preferring this reading, though the
direct authority for it is so slight, are
given in the detached note on the
various readings. But, whether diro-
xar^XXdy^Te or dWoxarnXXa^ ev be pre
ferred, the construction requires ex
planation. If djroxan;XXa|ev be a-
dopted, it is perhaps best to treat
Se as introducing the apodosis, the
foregoing participial clause serving as
the protasis: ' Andyou,thoughyewere
once estranged... yet now hath he
reconciled] in which case the first
vpas wiU be governed directly by diro-
xan;XXa£ev; see Winer Gramm. § liii.
p. 553. If this construction be adopted,
irapaarrjaai vpds wUl describe the re
sult of dVoxarvXXalev, 'so as to pre
sent you' ; but 6 Qebs will still be the
nominative to diroxanjXXa^ev as in
2 Cor. v. 19. If on the other hand
djroxanjXXdyijre be taken, it is best to
regard vuvi Se djroxanjXXdyijre as a
direct indicative clause substituted
for the more regular participial form
vuvi 8e d7roxaraXXayevras for the sake
of greater emphasis : see the note on
ver. 26 to diroxexpvppivov...vvv Se icjia-
vepddij. In this Case irapaarrjaai will
be governed directly by euSdxrjo-ev,
and will itself govern upas irore <Was
x.r.X., the second vpds being a repe
tition of the first; 'And you who
once were estranged. ..but now ye have
been reconciled... to present you, I
say, holy and without blemish.' For
the repetition of upas, which was

i6o

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1-23

tov davaTOV [avTOv~], irapaa'Ttja'ai vp.ds dytovs Kai dfita-
fxovs Kal dveyK.Xt]Tovs KaTevwirtov avTov, a3ei ye eirtfxe-
veTe tv\ irto-Tet Tede/ueXtwiuevoi Kal eBpaloi Kai fxr\ fj.eTa-

needed to disentangle the construc
tion, see the note on Si' aurou ver.
20. 22. r^so-apxdsaurou] It has been sup
posed that St Paul added these words,
which are evidently emphatic, with a
polemical aim either; (1) To combat
docetism. Of this form of error how
ever there is no direct evidence till a
somewhat later date : or (2) To com
bat a false spiritualism which took
offence at the doctrine of an atoning
sacrifice. But for this purpose they
would not have been adequate, because
not explicit enough. It seems simpler
therefore to suppose that they were
added for the sake of greater clear
ness, to distinguish the natural body
of Christ intended here from the
mystical body mentioned just above,
ver. 18. Similarly in Ephes. ii 14
e'v rjj aapxl avrov is used rather than
ev to adpari avrov, because ampa
occurs in the context (ver. 16) of
Christ's mystical body. The same
expression, rd ampa rrjs aapxbs, which
we have here, occurs also below, ii.
11, but with a different emphasis and
meaning. There the emphasis is on
to a&pa, the contrast lying between
the whole body and a single member
(see the note) ; whereas here rijs aap
xbs is the emphatic part of the ex
pression, the antithesis being between
the material and the spiritual. Com
pare also Ecclus. xxui 16 Svdpmiros
rrbpvos iv ampart aapxbs avrov.
Marcion omitted Tijs aapxbs as in
consistent with his views, and ex
plained ev r<3 ampart to mean the
Church. Hence the comment of
TertuUian adv. Marc. v. 19, 'utique
in eo corpore, in quo mori potuit per
carnem, mortuus est, non per eccle-
siam sed propter ecclesiam, corpus
commutando pro corpore, carnale pro
spiri tali.'

irapaarrjaai] If the construction
which I have adopted be correct, this
is said of God Himself, as in 2 Cor.
iv. 14 d e'yeipas rov Kvpiov 'irjaovv xai
rjpas avv 'Irjaov iyepel xai irapaarij-
a e 1 aiiv vplv. This construction seems
in all respects preferable to connect
ing irapaarrjaai directly with diroxa-
njXXdyijre and interpreting the words,
' Ye have been reconciled so that ye
should present yourselves (ypas). ..be
fore Him.' This latter interpretation
leaves the xal upas 7rore ovras x.r.X.
without a government, and it gives to
the second upas a reflexive sense (as
if i5pas aurous or eavrovs), which is at
least harsh.
dpoipous] 'without blemish] rather
than 'without blame,' in the language
ofthe New Testament; see the note
on Ephes. i. 4. It is a sacrificial word,
like riXeios, SXbxXrjpos, etc. The verb
n-apio-rdvai also is used of presenting
a sacrifice in Rom. xii. 1 irapaarfjaat
ra ampara vp&v dvaiav £&aav dyiav
x.tX, Lev. xvi. 7 (v. I): comp. Luke
ii. 2.
dveyxXTj'rous] An advance upon dpm-
povs, 'in whom not only no blemish
is found, but against whom no charge
is brought' : comp. 1 Tim. vi. 14 5Wi-
Xov, dverriXijpirrov. The word dvey-
xXtjtos occurs again in 1 Cor. i. 8,
1 Tim. iii 10, Tit. i 6, 7.
xaTevmmov aurou] 'before Him] i e.
'Himself,' as in the paraUel passage,
Ephes. i 4; if the construction here
adopted be correct. For this use of
the personal pronoun instead of the
reflexive see the note on eis aurdv,
ver. 20. But does xarevdmov avrov
refer to God's future judgment or
His present approbation? The latter
seems more probable, both because
the expression certainly has this
meaning in the parallel passage, Ephes.
i. 4, and because xarevonriov, ivdmov,

1-33]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

l6l

Kivovtuevoi diro Ttjs iXirlBos tov evayyeXiov ov tJKOva'aTt,
tov Ktipv%6evT0S iv irdcrr\ KTiaei Ttj viro tov ovpavov, ov
iyevofxtjv eyco TLavXos SiaKovos.

Karevavn, etc., are commonly so used ;
e.g. Rom. xiv. 22, 1 Cor. i. 29, 2
Cor. ii. 17, iv. 2, vii. 12, xu. 19,
etc On the other hand, where the
future judgment is intended, a dif
ferent expression is found, 2 Cor. v.
IO epirpoadev rov jSijpaTos rou Xpiorou.
Thus God is here regarded, not as
the judge who tries the accused, but
as the pmpoaxbiros who examines the
victims (Polyc. Phil. 4, see the note
on Ephes. i 4). Compare Heb. iv. 12,
13, for a closely allied metaphor. The
passage in Jude 24, o-njo-ai xaTevtMriov
rijs 8o£tjs aurou dpdpovs ev dyaXXidaet,
though perhaps referring to final ap
proval, is too different in expression
to influence the interpretation of St
Paul's language here.
23. eiye] On the force of these par
ticles see Gai iii 4. They express a
pure hypothesis in themselves, but
the indicative mood foUowingconverts
the hypothesis into a hope.
impivere] 'ye abide by, ye adhere
to,' with a dative; the common con
struction of iirtpivetv in St Paul : see
the note on PhU. i. 24, In this con
nexion rj 7riorei is perhaps 'your
faith,' rather than 'the faith.'
redepeXimpevoi x.t.X.] 'built on a
foundation and so firm' ; not like
the house of the fooUsh man in the
parable who buUt x">pls depeXlov, Luke
vi. 49. For redepeXimpevoi comp.
Ephes. ui 17. The consequence of re-
BepeXtapevoi is eSpalot : Clem. Rom. 33
rjSpaaev iirl tov dacpaXrj rov ISiov
/3ouXijparos depeXlov. The words
eSpaios, eSpdfai, etc., are not uncom
monly applied to buildings, e.g. e'Spai-
wpa 1 Tim. iii. 1 5. Comp. Ign. Ephes.
IO vpeis i8paloi rij iriarei.
pr) peraxivoupevoi] 'not constantly
shifting,' a present tense; the same
idea as iSpaloi expressed from the ne
gative side, as in 1 Cor. xv. 58 e'Spaioi
COL.

yiveade, dperaxivrjToi, Polyc. Phil. IO
'firmi in fide et immutabiles.'
rijs e'XiriSos x.r.X.] 'the hope held
out by the Gospel,' tov evayyeXiov be
ing a subjective genitive, as in Ephes.
i. 18 rj iXiris ttjs xXijo-ecDs (COmp.
iv. 4). ^
e'v 7700-17 xrio-ei] ' among every crea
ture,' in fulfilment of the Lord's last
command, Mark xvi. 15 xijpu|are to
euayye'Xtov irdarj T77 xriaei. Here how
ever the definitive article, though
found in the received text, ev Trdo-jj n}
xriaei, must be omitted in accordance
with the best authorities. For the
meanings of 7racra xrio-is, 7rao-a ij xri-
o-is, see the note on ver. 15. The ex
pression 7rao-a xnVis must not be limit
ed to man. The statement is given in
the broadest form, all creation animate
and inanimate being included, as in
Rev. V. 13 irav xrio"pa...xai rd e'v au-
rois Trdvra Tjxouo"a Xeyovra x.r.X. For
the hyperbole e'v jrdo-J7 xrio-ei compare
1 Thess. i 8 eWavrl rbira. To demand
statistical exactness in such a context
would be to require what is never re
quired in similar cases. The motive
of the Apostle here is at once to em
phasize the universality of the genuine
Gospel, which has been offered with
out reserve to all aUke, and to appeal
to its pubUcity, as the credential and
guarantee of its truth : see the notes
on ver. 6 e'v 7ravri to xbapa and on
ver. 28 irdvra avdpmirov.
ov iyevbprjv x.r.X.] Why does St
Paul introduce this mention of him
self so abruptly ? His motive can
hardly be the assertion of his Aposto
lic authority, for it does not appear
that this was questioned; otherwise
he would have declared his commis
sion in stronger terms. We can only
answer that impressed with the dig
nity of his office, as involving the offer
of grace to the Gentiles, he cannot
II

162

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I.24

*4Nui/ %atjOft) iv rots iradtj/mao'iv virep VjUtov, Kai

refrain from magnifying it. At the
same time this mention enables him
to Unk himself in bonds of closer sym
pathy with the Colossians, and he
passes on at once to his relations with
them: comp. Ephes. iu. 2 — 9, 1 Tim.
i. 11 sq., in which latter passage the
introduction of his own name is
equally abrupt.
iym nauXos] i.e. 'weak and unwor
thy as I am' : comp. Ephes. iii. 8 epoi
to eXaxiaTorepa iravrav ayiav.
24 — 27. 'Now when I see the fuU
extent of God's mercy, now when I
ponder over His mighty work of re
conciliation, I cannot choose but re
joice in my sufferings. Yes, I Paul
the persecutor, I Paul the feeble and
sinful, am permitted to supplement—
I do not shrink from the word — to
supplement the afflictions of Christ.
Despite all that He underwent, He the
Master has left something still for me
the servant to undergo. And so my
flesh is privileged to suffer for His
body — His spiritual body, the Church.
I was appointed a minister of the
Church, a steward in God's household,
for this very purpose, that I might
administer my office on your behalf,
might dispense to you Gentiles the
stores which His bountiful grace has
provided. Thus I was charged to
preach without reserve the whole
Gospel of God, to proclaim the great
mystery which had remained a secret
through aU the ages and aU the gene
rations from the beginning, but which
now in these last times was revealed
to His holy people. For such was His
good pleasure. God wiUed to make
known to them, in all its inexhaustible
wealth thus displayed through the
call of the GentUes, the glorious reve
lation of this mystery — Christ not the
Saviour of the Jews only, but Christ
dwelling in you, Christ become to you
the hope of glory.'
24. Nuv xai'po>] A sudden outburst
of thanksgiving, that he, who was less

than the least, who was not worthy to
be called an Apostle, should be allowed
to share and even to supplement the
sufferings of Christ. The relative os,
which is found in some authorities, is
doubtless the repetition of the final
syllable of Sidxovos ; but its insertion
would be assisted by the anxiety of
scribes to supply a connecting link
between the sentences. The genuine
reading is more characteristic of St
Paul. The abruptness, which dis
penses with a connecting particle, has
a paraUel in 1 Tim. i 12 xdpiv e^io t&
ivSvvapdaavri pe Xpiarm x.r.X., where
also the common text inserts a Unk of
connexion, xai xapw *Xa x.r.X. Com
pare also 2 Cor. vu. 9 vvv xa^Pa> °"X
Sri x.r.X., where again there is no con
necting particle.
The thought underlying vuv seems to
be this : 'If ever I have been disposed
to repine at my lot, if ever I have felt
my cross almost too heavy to bear,
yet now — now, when I contemplate
the lavish wealth of God's mercy —
now when I see all the glory of bear
ing a part in this magnificent work —
my sorrow is turned to joy.'
dvrava7rX7jp<3] 'I fill up on my part,'
'I supplement.' The single compound
dvairXijpovv occurs several times (e.g.
1 Cor. xiv. 16, xvi. 17, Gal. vi 2) ; an
other double compound irpoaavairXTj-
pouv twice (2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9; comp.
Wisd. xix. 4, V. I); but avravan-X^pouv
only here in the lxx or New Testa
ment. For this verb compare De-
mosth. de Symm. p. 182 rovrmv t&v
avppopi&v exdarrjv SteXelv xeXevm irevre
pepij xard SmSexa dvSpas, dvravan-Xij-
povvras irpbs rbv eviropmrarov del
rous dn-optordrous (where rois diropm-
rdrous should be taken as the subj ect tc
dvravan-Xijpouvras), Dion Cass. xliv. 48
iv oaov.-.eveoei, tovto ex ttjs irapa rmv
aXXmv avvreXeias dvTavairXripmdfj,
Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 12 p. 878 ou-
ros. ..tijv diroo-roXixi^v dirovaiav
dvravairXijpol, ApoUon. Constr. Or. i 3

1.24]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

103

dvTavairXtjpw Ta vo-Teptj/uiaTa tcov dXi\[secov tov Xpi-

(p. 13 sq.) ij dvrmvvpia dvravairXij-
pouo-a xal njv deatv tov ovbparos xal
T17V rd^iv tou prjparos, Ptol. Math.
Comp. vi 9 (1. p. 435 ed. Halma) eWi
8' 17 pev iXXeiiretv iiroiei ttjv diro-
xaTdaraaiv rj 8e rrXeovd£etv xard
riva o"uvru^iav 17V terms xal d *Lr-
irapxos avravajrXijpoupevijv iras xara-
vevoTjxet x.r.X. The substantive dvra-
va7rXnp(oo-is occurs in Diog. Laert. x.
48. So too dvravairXijdetv Xen. Hell.
ii. 4- II, 12 £uverdfavTo cUcrre ipirXfj-
aat Tnv 080 v... 01 8e aWd ttjs <puXijs
dvravim\rjaav. . .rrjv 686v. Compare also
dvravio-ouv Themist. Paraphr. Arist.
43 B ouSev xmXvei xard raurdv aXXodi
irov peraj3dXXeiv depa eis v8mp Kal
dvraviaovadat rbv avprravra oyxov, and
dvTovlaapa Joseph. Ant. xviu. 9. 7.
The meaning of dvri in this compound
wUl be plain from the passages quoted.
It signifies that the supply comes from,
an opposite quarter to the deficiency.
This idea is more or less definitely ex
pressed in the context of all the pas
sages, in the words which are spaced.
The force of avrava7rXijpoiiv in St Paul
is often explained as denoting simply
that the supply corresponds in ex
tent to the deficiency. This inter
pretation practically deprives dvri of
any meaning, for dva7rXijpouv alone
would denote as much. If indeed the
supply had been the subject of the
verb, and the sentence had run to
iradijpaTd pov avTavairXijpoi rd UOT17-
prjpara x.r.X., this idea might perhaps
be reached without sacrificing the
sense of dvri ; but in such a passage
as this, where one personal agent is
mentioned in connexion with the sup
ply and another in connexion with
the deficiency, the one forming the
subject and the other being involved
in the object of the verb, the dvrl can
only describe the antithesis of these
personal agents. So interpreted, it
is eminently expressive here. The
point of the Apostle's boast is that
Christ the sinless Master should have
left something for Paul the unworthy

servant to suffer. The right idea has
been seized and is well expressed by
Photius Amphil. 121 (1. p. 709 Migne)
ou ydp drrX&s cpijaiv 'A.vairXrjp&, dXX'
AvTavairXrjpm; Tovreanv, 'Avri 8eoTrd-
rov xai StSao-xdXou d SovXos iym xal
padrjTrjs x.t.X. Similar in meaning,
though not identical, is the expres
sion in 2 Cor. i 5, where the suffer
ings of Christ are said to 'overflow'
(irepiaaeveiv) upon the Apostle. The
theological difficulty which this plain
and natural interpretation of dvrava-
¦n-Xrjpovv is supposed to involve will
be considered in the note on tov
dXiyjreav. rd uarepnpara] ' the things lack
ing.' This same word varepTjpa 'de
ficiency' occurs with dvan-Xijpouv I Cor.
xvi. 17, PhU. ii. 30, and with irpoaava-
irXrjpovv 2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9. Its direct
opposite is irepiaaevpa 'abundance,
superfluity,' 2 Cor. vin. 13, 14 ; comp.
Luke xxi. 4. Another interpretation,
which makes vareprjpa an antithesis
to irporiprjpa, explaining it 'the later'
as opposed to the earlier 'sufferings
of Christ,' is neither supported by the
usage of the word nor consistent with
dvravawXijpa. tov dXi-ijrcmv rod Xpiorou] 'of the
afflictions of Christ,' ie. which Christ
endured. This seems to be the only
natural interpretation of the words.
Others have explained them as mean
ing 'the afflictions imposed by Christ,'
or 'the afflictions endured for Christ's
sake,' or 'the afflictions which re
semble those of Christ.' All such
interpretations put a more or less
forced meaning on the genitive. All
alike ignore the meaning of dvri in
dvravaTrXqpoi which points to a dis
tinction of persons suffering. Others
again suppose the words to describe
St Paul's own afflictions regarded as
Christ's, because Christ suffers in His
suffering Church ; e.g. Augustine in
Psalm, cxlu. § 3 (rv. p. 1590) 'Patitur,
inquit, adhuc Christus pressuram, non
in carne sua in qua ascendit in caelum.
II — 2

164

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[L2S

ctov ev Ttj rrapKi p.ov virep tov <rco/uiaTOS avTov, b
io~Tiv t] eKKXtjcria- *si)s iyevofxtjv iyco SiaKovos KaTa ty\v

sed in carne mea quae adhuc laborat
in terra,' quoting Gal. ii. 20. This
last is a very favourite explanation,
and has much to recommend it. It
cannot be charged with wresting the
meaning of ai dXiijceis tov Xpiarov.
Moreover it harmonizes with St Paul's
mode of speaking elsewhere. But, like
the others, it is open to the fatal ob
jection that it empties the first pre
position in dvrava7rXt7p<5 of any force.
The central idea in this interpretation
is the identification of the suffering
Apostle with the suffering Christ,
whereas dvrava7rXijp<S emphasizes the
distinction between the two. It is
therefore inconsistent with this con
text, however important may be the
truth which it expresses.
The theological difficulty, which
these and similar explanations are in
tended to remove, is imaginary and
not real. There is a sense in which
it is quite legitimate to speak of
Christ's afflictions as incomplete, a
sense in which they may be, and in
deed must be, supplemented. For
the sufferings of Christ may be con
sidered from two different points of
view. They are either satisfactorice
or cedificatorice. They have their
sacrificial efficacy, and they have their
ministerial utility. (1) From the
former point of view the Passion of
Christ was the one fuU perfect and
sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satis
faction for the sins of the whole
world. In this sense there could
be no varep-npa of Christ's sufferings;
for, Christ's sufferings being different
in kind from those of His servants,
the two are incommensurable. But
in this sense the Apostle would surely
have used some other expression
such as rov aravpov (i. 20, Eph. ii.
16 etc.), or tov davdrov (i. 22, Rom.
v. 10, Heb. ii. 14, etc.), but hardly
r&v dXfyeav. Indeed dXisjr-is, 'afflic

tion,' is not elsewhere applied in
the New Testament in any sense
to Christ's sufferings, and certainly
would not suggest a sacrificial act.
(2) From the latter point of view
it is a simple matter of fact that the
afflictions of every saint and mar
tyr do supplement tbe afflictions of
Christ. The Church is built up by
repeated acts of self-denial in succes
sive individuals and successive gene
rations. They continue the work which
Christ began. They bear their part
in the sufferings of Christ (2 Cor. i 7
xoivuvoi tov iradrjparmv, Phil. hi. 10
xoivmviav T&v iradrjpdrmv) ; but St Paul
would have been the last to say that
they bear their part in the atoning
sacrifice of Christ. This being so, St
Paul does not mean to say that his
own sufferings filled up aU the va-
TepTJpara, but only that they went to
wards fining them up. The present
tense dvrava7rXijpm denotes an incho
ate, and not a complete act. These
varepijpaTa wiU never be fully supple
mented, until the struggle of the
Church with sin and unbeUef is
brought to a close.
Thus the idea of expiation or sa
tisfaction is wholly absent from this
passage; and with it is removed the
twofold temptation which has beset
theologians of opposite schools. (1)
On the one hand Protestant commen
tators, rightly feeling that any inter
pretation which infringed the com
pleteness of the work wrought by
Christ's death must be wrong, be
cause it would make St Paul contra
dict himself on a cardinal point of his
teachmg, have been tempted to wrest
the sense of the words. They have
emptied dvrava7rXijp(3 of its proper
force ; or they have assigned a false
meaning to uorepnpara ; or they have
attached a non-natural sense to tbe
genitive rou Xpio-rou. (2) On the

1.26]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

I6S

OLKOvopiiav tov Qeov Tt)v Bodei&av /not ets v/uids, irXtjpcoa'ai
tov Xoyov tov Qeov, %6to juiva-Ttjpiov to diroKeKpvpLjxevov

other hand Romanist commentators,
while protesting (as they had a right
to do) against these methods of inter
pretation, have fallen into the opposite
error. They have found in this pas
sage an assertion of the merits of the
saints, and (as a necessary conse
quence) of the doctrine of indul
gences. They have not observed that,
if the idea of vicarious satisfaction
comes into the passage at all, the satis
faction of St Paul is represented here
as the same in kind with the satisfac
tion of Christ, however different it may
be in degree ; and thus they have truly
exposed themselves to the reproach
which Estius indignantly repudiates
on their behalf, 'quasi Christus non
satis passus sit ad redemptionem nos-
tram, ideoque supplemento martyrum
opus habeat; quod inipiuni est sen-
tire, quodque CathoUcos dicere non
minus impie calumniantur haeretici'
It is no part of a commentator here
to enquire generaUy whether the Ro
man doctrine of the satisfaction of the
saints can in any way be reconciled
with St Paul's doctrine of the satis
faction of Christ. It is sufficient to
say that, so far as regards this par
ticular passage, the Roman doctrine
can only be imported into it at the
cost of a contradiction to the PauUne
doctrine. It is only fair to add how
ever that Estius himself says, ' quse
quidem doctrina, etsi CathoUca et
ApostoUca sit, atque aliunde satis
probetur, ex hoc tamen ApostoU loco
nobis non videtur admodum soUde
statui posse.' But Roman CathoUc
commentators generaUy find this
meaning in the text, as may be seen
from the notes of h, Lapide.
rou amparos aurou] An antithesis
of the Apostle's own flesh and Christ's
body. This antithetical form of ex
pression obUges St Paul to explain
what he means by the body of Christ,

o e'oriv 17 ixxXijaia ; comp. ver. 1 8.
Contrast the explanation in ver. 22 e'v
ru ampart ttjs aapxbs avrov, and see
the note there.
25. rnv olxovopiav x.r.X.] 'steward
ship in the house of God.' The word
olxovopla seems to have two senses :
(1) 'The actual administration of a
household'; (2) 'The office of the ad
ministrator.' For the former mean
ing see the note on Ephes. i 10 ; for
the latter sense, which it has here,
compare I Cor. ix. 17 olxovopiav ireiri-
arevpat, Luke xvi. 2 — 4, Isaiah xxii.
19, 21. So the Apostles and minis
ters ofthe Church are called olxovbpot,
1 Cor. iv. 1, 2, Tit. i. 7 : comp. 1 Pet.
iv. 10.
els vpds] 'to youward,' ie. 'for
the benefit of you, the GentUes'; eis
upds being connected with rfjv Sodel-
adv pat, as in Ephes. iii. 2 n)v olxovo
piav rijs xctpcros rou ©eou ttjs Sodeiarjs
poi els iipas; comp. Rom. xv. 16 81a
ttjv xaPlv TVV Sodeladv poi dWd rou
©eou els to elvai pe Xeirovpybv Xpiarov
'Iijcrou els rd edvrj.
irXrjp&aat] 'to fulfil,' ie. 'to preach
fully,' 'to give its complete develop
ment to'; as Rom. xv. 19 <oo-re pe
djrd 'lepovaaXrjp xai xvxXm pexpi rou
'IXXvpiKov ireirXrjpmxevai rd evayyeXiov
tov Xpiarov. Thus ' the word of
God' here is 'the Gospel,' as in most
places (1 Cor. xiv. 36, 2 Cor. ii. 17, iv.
2, etc.), though not always (e. g. Rom.
ix. 6), in St Paul, as also in the Acts.
The other interpretation, 'to accom-
pUsh the promise of God,' though
suggested by such passages as 1 Kings
ii. 27 irXrjpmdrjvai to prjpa Kvpiov,
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21 wXijpio&^vai Xdyov
Kvpiov, etc., is alien to the context
here. 26. rb puo-njpiov] This is not the
only term borrowed from the ancient
mysteries, which St Paul employs to
describe the teaching of the Gospel

1 66

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I.27

diro tcov aicovcov Kal diro tcov yevecov, vvv oe e<pavepco6t]
toTs dy iois ovtov, a7ots tj6eXt]o-ev 6 Qeos yvcopto~ai ti
to ttXovtos Ttjs Boptjs tov pivcrTtipiov tovtov iv tois

The word reXeiov just below, ver. 28,
seems to be an extension of the same
metaphor. In Phil. iv. 12 again we
have the verb pepvtjpai: and in Ephes.
i. 14 acj>payl£eodat is perhaps an image
derived from the same source. So
too the Ephesians are addressed as
LTauXou avppvarai in Ign. Ephes. 12.
The Christian teacher is thus regarded
as a tepocpdvTTjs (see Epict. iii. 21.
13 sq.) who initiates his disciples into
the rites. There is this difference
however ; that, whereas the heathen
mysteries were strictly confined to a
narrow circle, the Christian mysteries
are freely communicated to all There
is therefore an intentional paradox in
the employment of the image by St
Paul. See the notes on 7rdWa avdpa-
irov reXeiov below.
Thus the idea of secresy or reserve
disappears when pvarrjptov is adopted
into the Christian vocabulary by St
Paul: and the word signifies simply
'a truth which was once hidden but
now is revealed,' 'a truth which with
out special revelation would have been
unknown.' Of the nature of the truth
itself the- word says nothing. It may
be transcendental, incomprehensible,
mystical, mysterious, in the modern
sense ofthe term (1 Cor. xv. 51, Eph.
v. 32) : but this idea is quite acciden
tal, and must be gathered from the
special circumstances of the case, for
it cannot be inferred from the word
itself. Hence pvanjpiov is almost
universaUy found in connexion with
words denoting revelation or pubUca-
tion ; e. g. ajroxaXunretv, diroxdXvsjfis,
Rom. xvi. 25, Ephes. iii. 3, 5, 2 Thess.
ii. 7 ; yvmpiCetv Rom. xvi. 26, Ephes. i
9, iii. 3, 10, vi. 19; cpavepovv Col. iv. 3,
Rom. xvi. 26, 1 Tim. iii. 16; XaXeiv iv.
3, 1 Cor. ii. 7, xiv. 2; Xeyeiv, 1 Cor.
xv. 51.
But the one special 'mystery' which

absorbs St Paul's thoughts in the
Epistles to the Colossians and Ephe
sians is the free admission of the
Gentiles on equal terms to the pri
vUeges of the covenant. Por this he
is a prisoner ; this he is bound to
proclaim fearlessly (iv. 3, Ephes. vi.
19); this, though hidden from all time,
was communicated to him by a special
revelation (Ephes. iii. 3 sq.); in this had
God most signally displayed the lavish
wealth of His goodness (ver. 27, U.
2 sq., Ephes. i. 6 sq., Ui. 8 sq.). In one
passage only throughout these two
epistles is pvarrjptov appUed to any
thing else, Ephes. v. 32. The same
idea of the pvarijptov appears very
prominently also in the thanksgiving
(added apparently later than the rest
of the letter) at the end of the Epistle
to the Romans, xvi 25 sq. puo-njpiou...
els viraxorjv iriarems els irdvra rd eoVij
yvmptadivros. dirb t&v almvmv x.r.X.] The pre
position is doubtless temporal here,
being' opposed to vuv, as in the pa
rallel passage, Ephes. ni 9: comp.
Rom. xvi. 25 xard a7roxdXuT^iv pvarrj-
piov xpovots almviois aeatyrjpevov,
I Cor. ii 7 Qeov aocpiav iv pvai-qplm
ttjv atjroxexpvppevrjv rjv irpompiaev 6
Qebs irpb t&v almvmv. So too dV
al&vos, Acts iii. 21, xv. 18, Ps. xcii.
3, etc.; dird xara|3oXijs xbapov, Matt.
xui. 35, xxv. 34, etc.
rav yeveiSv] An aiiov is made up of
many yeveai; comp. Ephes. iii. 21 els
rraaas rds yeveds rou al&vos r&v alm
vmv, Is. U. 9 ds yeved al&vos (where
the Hebrew has the plural 'gene
rations'). Hence the order here.
Not only was this mystery unknown
in remote periods of antiquity, but
even in recent generations. It came
upon the world as a sudden surprise.
The moment of its revelation was the
moment of its fulfilment.

1.28]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

167

edveciv, 0 eo'Tiv XjOtcTTOs iv v/uiiv, rj iXiris Ttjs Bo^tjs'
*sbv f)/ue?s KaTayyeXXo/mev vovdeTOvvTes irdvTa avdpco-
ds eVriv.
irXeov e'v rourois ij iroXX^ roti pvarrjplov
8b£a. Here too was its wealth; for
it overflowed all barriers of caste or
Judaism was 'beggarly' (Gal.

*7-
vuv Se x.r.X.] An indicative clause
is substituted for a participial, which
would otherwise have been more na
tural, for the sake of emphasizing the
statement; comp. ver. 22 vuvi Se diro-
KaTiiXXdyijTe, and see Winer § lxiii. p.7 1 7.
27. rjdeXrjaev] ' willed,' ' was phased,.'
It was God's grace: it was no merit
of their own. See the note on i. 1
8id deXijpaTOS ©eou.
to jrXouros] The 'wealth of God,'
as manifested in His dispensation of
grace, is a prominent idea in these
epistles: comp. ii 2, Ephes. i 7, 18,
ni 8, 16; comp. Rom. xi 33. See
above, p. 43 sq. St Paul ases the
neuter and the masculine forms in
differently in these epistles (e.g. rd
irXovros Ephes. i 7, o tXoutos Ephes.
i, 18), as in his other letters (e.g. rd
irXovros 2 Cor. vui. 2, 6 irXovros Rom.
ix. 23). In most passages however
there are various readings. On the
neuter forms rd itXovtos, rd (fjXos, etc.,
see Winer § ix. p. 76.
Tijs 86£tjs] i e. ' of the glorious
manifestation.' This word in Hel
lenistic Greek is frequently used of a
bright Ught; e.g. Luke ii 9 irepieXap-
yjrev, Acts xxU. II rou cparbs, I Cor.
xv. 41 nXiou, o-eXnvijs, etc., 2 Cor. iii. 7
Toil irpoamirov [Mmvaims]. Hence it
is applied generaUy to a divine mani
festation, even where there is no phy
sical accompaniment of light ; and
more especially to the revelation of
God in Christ (e. g. Joh. i. 14, 2 Cor.
iv. 4, etc.). The expression jrXouros
ttjs 8d|ijs occurs again, Rom. ix. 23,
Ephes. i 18, ui. 16. See above, ver.
1 1 with the note.
ev rois eoVeo-iv] ie. 'as exhibited
among the Gentiles.' It was just
here that this 'mystery,' this dispen
sation of grace, achieved its greatest
triumphs and displayed its transcend-
ant glory; cpaiverai pev yap xal e'v e're'-
pois, writes Chrysostom, jroXXcji 8e

iv. 9) in comparison, since its treasures
sufficed only for a few.
0 e'oriv] The antecedent is pro
bably tou pnfaTTjpiov ; comp. U. 2 rou
puonjpiou rou ©eou, Xpio~rou e'v a eiaiv
jrdvres x.r.X.
Xpiards e'v upiv] 'Christ in you,'
ie. 'you Gentiles.' Not Christ, but
Christ given freely to the GentUes,
is the 'mystery' of which St Paul
speaks; see the note on pvarrjptov
above. Thus the various reading, os
for d, though highly supported, inter
feres with the sense. With Xpio-rds
ev upiv compare peff ijp&v Qebs Matt.
i. 23. It may be a question however,
whether e'v upiv means 'within you'
or 'among you.' The former is per
haps tbe more probable interpreta
tion, as suggested by Rom. viu. 10,
2 Cor. xui 5, Gai iv. 19 ; comp.
Ephes. iii. 17 xaroix^aai rov Xpiarov
Sid rijs iriarems iv rals xap8iau vp&v.
ij iXiris] Comp. 1 Tim. i. 2 ; so <j
[xoivij] iXiris rjpmv Ign. Eph. 21, Magn.
1 1, Philad. 5, etc., applied to our Lord.
28, 29. 'This Christ we, the Apo
stles and EvangeUsts, proclaim with
out distinction and without reserve.
We know no restriction either of
persons or of topics. We admonish
every man and instruct every man.
We initiate every man in all the mys
teries of wisdom. It is our single
aim to present every man fully and
perfectly taught in Christ. For this
end I train myself in the discipline of
self-denial; for this end I commit my
self to the arena of suffering and toil,
putting forth in the conflict all that
energy which He inspires, and which
works in me so powerfully.'
28. npeis] 'we,' the preachers; the
same opposition as in 1 Cor. iv. 8, 10,

168

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 28

irov Kai BihdcKOVTes irdvTa dvBpcoirov iv irao-t] cro<pia,
'iva irapacrTtjo-cofxev irdvTa avdpcoirov TeXetov iv Xpio-Tcp'

ix. 1 1, 2 Cor. xiu. 5 sq., 1 Thess. ii.
13 sq., etc. The Apostle hastens, as
usual, to speak of the part which he
was privileged to bear in this glorious
dispensation. He is constrained to
magnify his office. See the next note,
and comp. ver. 23.
ov 17'peis x.r.X.] As in St Paul's own
language at Thessalonica, Acts xvii. 3
ov iym xarayyeXXm vpiv, and at
Athens, Acts xvii 23 rouro e'y<» xa
rayyeXXm ipiv, in both which pas
sages, as here, emphasis is laid on the
person of the preacher.
vou#erouvres] 'admonishing.' The
two words vovderelv and Si8do-xeiv pre
sent complementary aspects of the
preacher's duty, and are related the
one to the other, as perdvota to irians,
'warning to repent, instructing in
the faith.' For the relation of vovderelv
to perdvota see Plut. Mor. p. 68 i'vean
to vovderovv xai perdvotav ipiroiovv,
p. 452 17 vovdeaia xai d i/rdyos epiroiel
perdvotav xal alaxvvrjv. The two verbs
vouoVreiv and StSdo-xetv are connected
in Plato Protag. 323 d, Legg. 845 b,
Plut. Mor. p. 46 (comp. p. 39), Dion
Chrys. Or. xxxiii p. 369; the sub
stantives 8i8axn and vovderijais in
Plato Resp. 399 b. Similarly vou6V-
reiv and ireideiv occur together in
Arist. Rhet. ii. 18. For the two func
tions of the preacher's office, cor
responding respectively to the two
words, see St Paul's own language in
Acts XX. 21 8iapapTvpbpevos..rrjv els
Qeov perdvotav xal irianv els rbv
Kvpiov ijpmv 'irjaovv.
irdvra avdpmirov] Three times re
peated for the sake of emphasizing
the universality of the Gospel. This
great truth, for which St Paul gave
his Ufe, was now again endangered
by the doctrine of an intellectual ex
olusiveness taught by the Gnosticizers
at Colossae, as before it had been
ondangered by the doctrine of a

ceremonial exolusiveness taught by
the Judaizers in Galatia. See above,
pp. 75, 90, 96 sq. For the repetition
of jrdvra compare especially 1 Cor. x.
1 sq., where jrdvres is five times, and
ib. xii. 29, 30, where it is seven times
repeated; see also Rom. ix. 6, 7, xi
32, 1 Cor. xii 13, xiii. 7, xiv. 31, etc
Transcribers have been offended at
this characteristic repetition here, and
consequently have omitted irdvra av
dpmirov in one place or other.
e'v jrdo-j7 aocpia] The Gnostic spoke
of a blind faith for the manv, of a
higher yv&ats for the few. St Paul
declares that the fullest wisdom is
offered to aU aUke. The character of
the teaching is as free from restriction,
as are the qualifications of the recipi
ents. Comp. ii. 2, 3 jrav 7rXouros rijs
irXrjpocpoplas rrjs avveaems... irdvres oi
drjaavpol rijs aocpias xal yvmaems.
irapaarrjampev] See the note On
irapaarrjaai, ver. 22.
reXeiov] So I Cor. ii. 6, 7 aocpiav 8e
XaXovpev iv rois reXeiois...©eou o-o-
<piav e'v pvaTTjpim n)v djroxexpuppevtjv.
In both these passages the epithet
reXeios is probably a metaphor bor
rowed from the ancient mysteries,
where it seems to have been applied
to the fully instructed, as opposed to
the novices: comp. Plato Phcedr.
249 C reXeous del reXerds reXoiipevos
reXeos ovrias pbvos yiyverai. ..2^0 B, 0
elSov re xai e'reXouvro reXenSv rjv depis
Xeyeiv paxapi<urdnjv...puoupevoi re xal
e'jrojrreuovres iv avyfi xadapa, Symp.
209 B raura...xav av pvrjdeirjs' rd Se
riXea xal e'jroirrixd. ..ou'x 018' ei dibs t
hi eiijs, Plut. Fragm. de An vi. 2
(V. p. 726 Wyttenb.) d iravreXrjs 1781;
xal pepvrjpivos (with the context),
Dion Chrys. Or. xii. p. 203 rfjv 6X0-
xXijpov xai to ovn reXeiav reXernv
puoupevov; see Valcknaer on Eurip.
Hippol. 25, and Lobeck Aglaoph. p. 33
sq., p. 126 sq. Somewhat similarly in

1.29]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

169

yets o Kat kottiw aycovtQpfxevos Kara Tt]v evepyeiav av-
tov Ttjv ivepyov/j.evt]v iv ifiol iv Bvvdfxei.

the LXX, I Chron. XXV. 8 TeXeimv xal
pavdavovrmv stands for 'the teachers
(or the wise) and the scholars.' So
also in 2 Peti. 16 ejrdjTTai yevrjdevres
ttjs ixeivov peyaXeidnjros we seem to
have the same metaphor. As an illus
tration it may be mentioned that
Plato and Aristotle called the higher
philosophy eVojrnxdv, because those
who have transcended the bounds
of the material, oiov e'vreXij [1. e'v re-
Xerjj] reXos exetv cpiXoaocpiav [cpiXoao-
cpias] vopifouo-i, Plut. Mor. 382 D, B.
For other metaphorical expressions
in St Paul, derived from the myste
ries, see above on puonjpiov ver. 26.
Influenced probably by this heathen
use of reXeios, the early Christians
applied it to the baptized, as opposed
to the catechumens : e.g. Justin Dial.
8 (p. 225 0) irdpeanv iiriyvbvn aoi rov
Xpiarov tov Qeov xal reXeio yevopeva
evSaipovelv, Clem. Horn, iii 29 viroxa-
oelv pot xeXevaas, ds pijirm elXsjcpon ro
irpbs aanjpiav ^dirnapa, rois tjStj re-
Xeiois ecprj X.T.X., xi. 36 j3airTiaas...rj8Tj
Xonrbv riXeiov ovra X.T.X. ; and for
later writers see Suicer Thes. s. vv. re-
Xewoi, reXelmats. At all events we
may ascribe to its connexion with the
mysteries the fact that it was adopted
by Gnostics at a later date, and most
probably by the Gnosticizers at this
time, to distinguish the possessors of
the higher yv&ats from the vulgar
herd of believers: see the passages
quoted in the note on PhU. iii 15.
While employing the favourite Gnostic
term, the Apostle strikes at the root
of the Gnostic doctrine. The lan
guage descriptive of the heathen mys
teries is transferred by him to the
Christian dispensation, that he may
thus more effectively contrast the
things signified. The true Gospel also
has its mysteries, its hierophants, its
initiation: but these are open to all
alike. In Christ every beUever is re

Xeios, for he has been admitted as
iirbirrrjs of its most profound, most
awful, secrets. See again the note
on djrdxpuoioi, ii. 3.
29. els b] i. 6. els to irapaarrjaai irdvra
avdpairov riXeiov, 'that I may initiate
all mankind in the fulness of this mys
tery,' 'that I may preach the Gospel
to all without reserve.' If St Paul
had been content to preach an exclu
sive Gospel, he might have saved him
self from more than half the troubles
of his life.
xojridi] This word is used especi
aUy of the labour undergone by the
athlete in his training, and therefore
fitly introduces the metaphor of dya>-
vijjdpevos : comp. I Tim. iv. IO els tov
to ydp xom&pev xal dymvi£6peda (the
correct reading), and see the passages
quoted on PhU. ii. 16.
dymvifdpevos] 'contending in the
lists,' the metaphor being continued
in the next verse (ii. 1), rjXixov dy&va;
comp. iv. 12. These words dy<»v, dy<o-
vla, dymvlCeadai, are only found in St
Paul and the Pauline writings (Luke,
Hebrews) in the New Testament.
They occur in every group of St Paul's
Epistles. The use here most resembles
I Thess. ii. 2 XaXrjaai irpbs vpas rd
evayyeXiov rou ©eou e'v jroXX<5 dytovi.
ivepyovpivrjv] Comp. Eph. ui 20. For
the difference between ivepyeiv and
ivepyeladai see the note on Gal. v. 6.
II. 1 — 3. 'I spoke of an arena and
a conflict in describing my apostolic
labours. The image was not lightly
chosen. I would have youknowthatmy
care is not confined to my own direct
and personal disciples. I wish you to
understand the magnitude of the
struggle, which my anxiety for you
costs me — for you and for your neigh
bours of Laodicea, and for all who,
Uke yourselves, have never met me
face to face in the flesh. I am con
stantly wrestling in spirit, that the

i?o

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. i, 2

II. * QeXco ydp v/uds etBevai, iJXikov dycova 'e^co virep
vpcov Kal tcov iv AaoBtKia Kal oaroi ov% ecopaKav to
irpocrcoirov pov iv arapKt, %'iva irapaKXtidcocriv al Kapoiat

hearts of all such may be confirmed
and strengthened in the faith; that
they may be united in love ; that they
may attain to all the unspeakable
wealth which comes from the firm
conviction of an understanding mind,
may be brought to the perfect know
ledge of God's mystery, which is no
thing else than Christ — Christ con
taining in Himself aU the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge hidden away.'
i. ©eXo> x.t.X.] As in i Cor. xi 3.
The corresponding negative form, ov
deXm [6VXopev] upas dyvoeiv, is the more
common expression in St Paul; Rom.
i. 13, xi. 25, 1 Cor. x. 1, xii 1, 2 Cor.
i. 8, 1 Thess. iv. 13.
dyoiva] The arena of the contest to
which dyuvifdpevos in the preceding
verse refers may be either outward or
inward. It wiU include the 'fightings
without,' as weU as the 'fears within.'
Here however the inward struggle,
the wrestUng in prayer, is the predo
minant idea, as in iv. 12 ardvrore dyiovi-
£bpcvos virep vpmv iv rals irpoaevxals
tva aradrjre xt.X.
t&v iv AaoSixia] The Laodiceans
were exposed to the same doctrinal
perils as the Colossians: see above,
pp. 2, 41 sq. The HierapoUtans are
doubtless included in xal 6V01 x.t.X.
(comp. iv. 13), but are not mentioned
here by name, probably because they
were less closely connected with Co
lossae (see iv. 15 sq.), and perhaps also
because the danger was less threaten
ing there.
xal diroi x.t.X.] 'and all who, like
yourselves, have not seen, etc' ; where
the xai ocoi introduces the whole class
to which the persons previously enu
merated belong; so Acts iv. 6'Awas
d dpxtepevs xal Kdidcpas xal 'imdvvrjs xal
AXe'£av8pos xal oaoi ijaav e'x ye'vous
dpxteparixov, Rev. xviii. 17 xal jras xu-
BepvrjTTjs xal 7ras d e'irl roirov irXemv xal

vaurat xal ocoi njv fldXao-o-av e'pydfov-
rai. Even a simple xal wiU sometimes
introduce the general after the parti
cular, e.g. Acts v. 29 6 Herpos xal oi
diroaroXoi, Ar. Nub. 413 ev 'A.dsjvaiois
xal rots "EXXijat, etc.; see Kiihner
Gramm. § 521, n. p. 791. On the other
hand xal oaoi, occurring in an enume
ration, sometimes introduces a d ifie r en t
class from those previously mentioned,
as e.g. in Herod, vii 185. As a pure
grammatical question therefore it is
uncertain whether St Paul's language
here impUes his personal acquaintance
with his correspondents or the con
trary. But in all such cases the sense
of the context must be our guide.
In the present instance xai do~oi is
quite out of place, unless the Colos
sians and Laodiceans also were per
sonaUy unknown to the Apostle. There
would be no meaning in singUng
out individuals who were known to
him, and then mentioning compre
hensively all who were unknown to
him : see above, p. 28, note 4. Hence
we may infer from the expression
here, that St Paul had never visited
Colossae — an inference which has been
already shown (p. 23 sq.) to accord
both with the incidental language of
this epistle elsewhere and with the
direct historical narrative of the Acts.
eoopaxav] For this ending of the 3rd
pers. plur. perfect in -av see Winer
§ xui. p. 90. The received text reads
empdxaat. In this passage the m form
has the higher support; but below
in ver. 18 the preponderance of au
thority favours edpaxev rather than
edpaxev. On the use of the form in o
see Buttmann Ausf. Griech. Sprachl.
§ 84, 1. p. 325.
2. irapaxXTjoWiv] ' encouraged,
confirmed] i. e. 'comforted' in the
older and wider meaning of the word
('confortati'), but not with its mo-

II. 3]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

171

avTcov, arvjifiiiQao'devTes iv dydirt] Kai els irav ttXovto<;
Ttjs irXtipo(f>optas Ttjs crvvececos, ets iiriyvcociv tov p:v-
o~Ttiptov tov Qeov, XpirrTOv 3iv cp eio'iv irdvTes oi Qt\-

dern and restricted sense : see irapd-
xXi7ons Phil. ii. I. For jrapaxaXeiv rds
xapSias comp. iv. 8, Ephes. vi. 22, 2
Thess. u. 17.
a! xapSiai] They met the Apostle
heart to heart, though not face to
face. We have here the same oppo
sition of xapSla and irpoamirov as in
1 Thess. U. 17, though less directly
expressed ; see ver. 5.
aunSv] Where we should expect
uptav, but the substitution of the third
person for the second is suggested by
the immediately preceding xal 00-01.
This substitution confirms the inter
pretation of xal do-01 already given.
Unless the Colossians are included in
do-01, they must be excluded by au'rav.
Yet this exclusion is hardly conceiva
ble in such a context.
o-up)3i/3ao-5evres] 'they being united,
compacted] for o-up£i;8d£eiv must here
have its common meaning, as it has
elsewhere in this and the companion
epistle : ver. 19 Sid tov dcpmv xal
o-uvdeap<i)v...o-upj3tj3a£dpevov, Ephes. iv.
16 jrdv rd a&pa o-vvappaXoyovpevov xal
o-upj3ij3afdpevov. Otherwise we might
be disposed to assign to this verb here
the sense which it always bears in the
lxx (e.g. in Is. xi 13, 14, quoted
in 1 Cor. u. 16), 'instructed, taught,'
as it is rendered in the Vulgate. Its
usage in the Acts is connected with
this latter sense; e.g. ix. 22 avpfiifidgmv
'proving,' xvi. 10 o-up/3i|3df ovres 'con
cluding'; and so in xix. 33 awepipa-
aav 'AXe'^avSpov (the best supported
reading) can only mean 'instructed
Alexander.' Por the different sense
of the nominative absolute see the
note on iu. 16. The received text
substitutes avpfiifHaadivrmv here.
iv dydjrjj] For love is the avvSeapos
(ui 14) of perfection.
xal els] ' and brought unto] the
thought being supplied from the pre

ceding avpjStfiaadivTes, which involves
an idea of motion, comp. Joh. xx. 7
e'vreruXiype'vov eis eva rdrrov.
jrdv jrXouros] This reading is better
supported than either irav rd jrXouros
or jrdvra irXourov, while, as the inter
mediate reading, it also explains the
other two.
Tijs irXr/pocpopias] 'the full assu
rance] for such seems to be the
meaning of the substantive wherever
it occurs in the New Testament ; 1
Thess. i. 5 e'v irXijpocpopia jroXXjj, Heb.
vi 1 1 jrpds rijv irXrjpocpopiav Tijs eXiriSos,
X. 22 e'v irXijpocpopia iriarems, comp.
Clem. Rom. 42 perd irXrjpocpopias irvev
paros ayiov. With the exception of
1 Thess. i 5 however, all the Biblical
passages might bear the other sense
'fulness': see Bleek on Heb. vi 11.
For the verb see the note on jtcttXij-
pocpoprjpivoi below, iv. 12.
eViyj/<oo-iv] See the note on i 9.
rou pvarrjpiov x.r.X.] 'the mystery
of God, even Christ in whom, etc.,'
Xpto-rou being in apposition with rou
pvarrjpiov; COmp. i. 27 rou pvarrjpiov
rovrov. ..o eanv Xpiarbs iv vpiv, I Tim.
Ui 16 rb rijs evaefieias pvarrjpiov, "Os
icpavepddrj x.r.X. The reasonsfor adopt
ing the reading rou ©eou Xpio-roi are
given in the detached note on various
readings. Other interpretations of this
reading are; (1) 'the God Christ,'
taking Xpio-rou in apposition with
©eou ; or (2; ' the God of Christ,'
making it the genitive after ©eou :
but both expressions are without a
paraUel in St Paul. The mystery
here is not 'Christ,' but 'Christ as
containing in Himself all the treasures
of wisdom' ; see the note on i. 27
Xpio-rds e'v vpiv. For the form of the
sentence comp. Ephes. iv. 15, i6ijxeep-
aXrj, Xpiords e'£ ou jrdv rd ampa x.r.X.
3. jrdvres] So irav jrXouros ver. 2,
irdo-j aocjiia U. 28. These repetitions

172

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 4

a-avpol Ttjs o~o(pias Kal yvcocecos diroKpvcpoi. 4 tovto

serve to emphasize the character of
the Gospel, which is as complete in
itself, as it is universal in its appU
cation. aocpias xal yvao-eias] The two words
occur together again Rom. xi. 33 <»
fSddos irXourou xal aocpias xal yvmaems
©eou, 1 Cor. xii 8. They are found
in conjunction also several times
in the lxx of Eccles. i. 7, 16, 18, ii.
21, 26, ix. 10, where HD3n is repre
sented by aocpia and njn by yvwo-is.
While yvi3o-is is simply intuitive,
aocpia is ratiocinative also. WhUe
yv&ats appUes chiefly to the appre
hension of truths, o-ocpia superadds the
power of reasoning about them and
tracing their relations. When Bengel
on 1 Cor. xii. 8 sq. says, ' Cognitio
[yv<»o-is] est quasi visus ; sapientia
[o-ooiia] visus cum sapore,' he is so
far right ; but when he adds, ' cogni
tio, rerum agendarum; sapientia, re
rum aeternarum,' he is quite wide of
the mark. Substantially the same,
and equally wrong, is St Augustine's
distinction de Trin. xii. 20, 25 (viii.
PP. 923> 926) 'intelligendum est ad
contemplationem sapientiam [o-otpiav],
ad actionem scientiam [yv<So-iv] perti-
nere...quod alia [o-otpia] sit inteUec-
tualis cognitio aeternarum rerum, alia
[y vc3 o-ts] rationalis temporal ium '(comp.
xiv. 3, p. 948), and again de Div.
Quosst. ad Simpl. ii. 2 § 3 (vi. p. 1 14)
'ita discerni probabiUter solent, ut
sapientia pertineat ad intellectum
seternorum, scientia vero ad ea quas
sensibus corporis experimur.' This is
directly opposed to usage. In Aris
totle Eth. Nic. i. 1 yvfflo-is is opposed
to irpdi-ts. In St Paul it is connected
with the apprehension of eternal mys
teries, I Cor. xiii. 2 eiSm rd puo-nj-
pia jrdvra xal jrdo-av tijv yv<5o"iv. On
the relation of aocjiia to o-uveo-is see
above, i 9.
djrdxpucpoi] So I Cor. i. 7 XaXovpev
Qeov aocpiav iv pvarrjpim, ttjv diro-
xexpvppivrjv. As before in TeXeios

(i 28), so here again in djrdxpucpoi the
Apostle adopts a favourite term of
the Gnostic teachers, only that he may
refute a favourite doctrine. The word
apocrypha was especiaUy applied to
those esoteric writings, for which
such sectarians claimed an auctoritak
secreta (Aug. c Faust, xi. 2, vni. p3
219) and which they carefully guarded
from publication after the manner of
their Jewish prototypes the Essenes
(see above, p. 89 sq.) : comp. Iren. i
20. I dpvdrjTov irXrjdos diroxpvcpmv xal
vbdmv ypacfi&v, Clem. Alex. Strom, i.
15 (p. 357) /3i/3Xous diroxpvcpovs rdv-
8pbs rouSe oi rrjv UpoSixov periovres
atpeatv avxovat Kexrrjadat, lb. IU. 4
(p. 524) ippi") Se avrois to Soy pa ex
nvos diroKpbcpov. See also the appli
cation of the text Prov. ix. 17 dprmv
xpvcpimv rjSems dsjraade to these heretics
mStrom.i. 19 (p. 375). Thus the word
apocrypha in the first instance was
an honourable appellation appUed by
the heretics themselves to their eso
teric doctrine and their secret books;
but owing to the general character
of these works the term, as adopted
by orthodox writers, got to signify
'false,' 'spurious.' The early fathers
never apply it, as it is now applied,
to deutero-canonical writings, but
confine it to supposititious and he
retical works : see Smith's Dictionary
of the Bible s. v. In the text St
Paul uses it xaTaxpijanx&s, as he uses
pvarripiov. ' All the richest treasures
of that secret wisdom,' he would say,
'on which you lay so much stress,
are buried in Christ, and being buried
there are accessible to all alike who
seek Him.' But, while the term a7rd-
xpucpos is adopted because it was
used to designate the secret doctrine
and writings of the heretics, it is also
entirely in keeping with the metaphor
ofthe 'treasure'; e.g. Is. xiv. 3 Sdam
aoi drjaavpovs axoreivovs diroxpvcpovs,
I Mace. i. 23 eXa3e roiis drjaavpovs
rods djroxpvcpous, Dan. xi. 43 e'v rois

II. 5]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

173

Xeyco, 'iva utiBels v/mas irapaXoyi^tjTai iv iridavoXoyia'
sei yap Kal Ttj o~apKi direipii, dXXd tco irvev/uLaTi crvv

djroxpucpots rou xpucrou Kai T0U dpyupou :
comp. Matt. xiii. 44.
The stress thus laid on djrdxpucpoi
will explain its position. It is not
connected with elalv, but must be
taken apart as a secondary predicate :
comp. ver. IO eore e'v auVcu jre7rXijpa>-
pevoi, Ui. I ou d Xpiaros ianv iv 8e£iij
tov ©eou xadrjpevos, James i. 17 Jrdv
Sdprjpa riXeiov avmdev ianv, xara/3ai-
vov x. t. X.
4 — 7. 'I do not say this without a
purpose. I wish to warn you against
any one who would lead you astray
by specious argument and persuasive
rhetoric. For I am not an indifferent
spectator of your doings. Although
I am absent from you in my flesh, yet
I am present with you in my spirit.
I rejoice to behold the orderly array
and the soUd phalanx which your faith
towards Christ presents against the
assaults of the foe. I entreat you
therefore not to abandon the Christ,
as you learnt from Epaphras to know
Him, even Jesus the Lord, but to walk
stUl in Him as heretofore. 1 would
have you firmly rooted once for all in
Him. I desire to see you built up
higher in Him day by day, to see you
growing ever stronger and stronger
through your faith, whUe you remain
true to the lessons taught you of old,
so that you may abound in it, and thus
abounding may pour forth your hearts
in gratitude to God the giver of all.'
4. tovto Xeym x.r.X.] ' I say aU
this to you, lest you should be led
astray by those false teachers who
speak of another knowledge, of other
mysteries.' In other connexions rou
ro Xeyu wiU frequently refer to the
words foUowing (e.g. Gal. iii. 17, 1 Cor.
i 12); but with iva it points to what
has gone before, as in Joh. v. 34 raura
Xeyco tva vpeis amdrjre.
The reference in rouro Xeyu extends
over vv. 1 — 3, and involves two state

ments; (1) The declaration that all
knowledge is comprehended in Christ,
vv. 2, 3; (2) The expression of his own
personal anxiety that they should re
main stedfast in this conviction, vv.
1, 2. This last point explains the lan
guage which follows, ei ydp xal r%
aapxi K.T.X.
jrapaXoyifijrai] 'lead you astray by
false reasoning] as in Daniel xiv. 7
pijSeis ae irapdXoyi£iadm (lxx): comp.
James i 22, Ign. Magn. 3. It is not
an uncommon word either in the lxx
or in classical writers. The system
against which St Paul here contends
professed to be a cpCXoaocpia (ver. 8)
and had a Xdyov aocpias (ver. 23).
e'v jricavoXoyia] The words mdavo-
Xoyeiv (Arist. Eth. Nic. i. l), iridavoXo
yia (Plat. Thecet. 162 e), jri6,avoXoyi-
xbs (Epictet. i. 8. 7), occur occasion
ally in classical writers, but do not
bear a bad sense, being most fre
quently opposed to dir68ei£is, as pro
bable argument to strict mathemati
cal demonstration. This contrast pro
bably suggested St Paul's language in
I Cor. ii 4 oux e'v ireidols orocpias Xd-
yois dXX' e'v djroSei^ei irvevparos
x.r.X., and may possibly have been
present to his mind here.
5. dXXa] Frequently introduces the
apodosis after ei or ei xal in St Paul ;
e.g. Rom. vi. 5, 1 Cor. ix. 2, 2 Cor. iv.
16, v. 16, xi. 6, xiu. 4 (v. I).
to irvevpan] 'in my spirit] not
'by the Spirit' We have here the
common antithesis of flesh and spirit,
or body and spirit : comp. 1 Cor. v. 3
dirav r<3 adpari, irapmv Se rep irvevpan.
St Paul elsewhere uses another anti
thesis, irpoamira and xap8ia, to express
this same thing; 1 Thess. ii. 17.
Xaipav xal flXeirmv] ' rejoicing and
beholding.' This must not be regarded
as a logical inversion. The contem
plation of their orderly array, though
it might have been first the cause.

174

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 6

vfuv eipii, %aipcov Kal fiXeirtov vfxwv Ttjv Ta^iv Kat to
(TTepecop.a Ttjs els XpiCTOV irio~Tecos vpicov. 6cos ovv irap-
eXafieTe tov XjOI<ttoV, 'Itjo-ovv tov Kvpiov, iv ovtco irept-

was afterwards the consequence, of
the Apostle's rejoicing. He looked,
because it gave him satisfaction to
look. rrjv rd£iv] 'your orderly array] a
mUitary metaphor: comp. e.g. Xen.
Anab. i. 2. 18 iSouera rijv Xapjrpdnjra
xai ttjv rd£iv rou crrpareuparos idav-
paae, Plut. Vit. Pyrrh. 16 xanSmv
rd£iv re xal cpuXaxds xal xbapav avr&v
xal rd axrjpa rrjs arpaTOireSeias edav-
paae. The enforced companionship
of St Paul with the soldiers of the
praetorian guard at this time (Phil. i.
13) might have suggested this image.
At all events in the contemporary
epistle (Ephes. vi. 14 sq.) we have an
elaborate metaphor from the armour
of a soldier.
rd o-repei»pa] ' solid front, close
phalanx] a continuation of the me
taphor: comp. 1 Mace. ix. 14 eiSev
'iouSas on BaxxlSrjS xal rd arepimpa
rijs irapepfioXrjs iv rots 8e£to~ts. Some
what similar are the expressions o-re-
peovv tov irbXepov I Mace. X. 50, xard
r^v arepematv ttjs pd;(ijs Ecclus. xxviii.
10. For the connexion here compare
I Pet. V. 9 dvriaTTjre arepeol rrj iriarei,
Acts xvi. 5 iarepeovvro Tjj iriarei.
6. as ovv jrapeXdj3ere x.r.X.] ie.
' Let your conviction and conduct be
in perfect accordance with the doc
trines and precepts of the Gospel as
it was taught to you.' For this use
of irapeXdfieTe 'ye received from your
teachers, were instructed in,' comp.
1 Cor. xv. 1, 3, Gal. i 9, Phil. iv. 9,
1 Thess. ii. 13, iv. 1, 2 Thess. in. 6.
The word rrapaXapfidveiv implies either
'to receive as transmitted,' or ' to re
ceive for transmission': see the note
on Gal. i 12. The cos of the protasis
suggests a outos in the apodosis, which
in this case is unexpressed but must
be understood. The meaning of ds

irapeXdfSere here is explained by the
xa6V»s ipddere dirb 'Efracppd in i. 7; see
the note there, and comp. below, ver. 7
xadms i8i8dxdT]Te.
rbv Xpiarov] 'the Christ] rather
than 'the Gospel,' because the central
point in the Colossian heresy was the
subversion of the true idea of the
Christ. 'Iijaouv rbv Kupiov] 'even Jesus the
Lord] in whom the true conception
of the Christ is realised : comp. Ephes.
iv. 20, 21, vpeis Se ovx •"'ras ipddere
tov Xpiarov, etye avrbv rjxovaare xal
e'v avrm iSiSdxdrjTe, xadms iariv 0X17-
deia iv t& 'irjaov, where the same
idea is more directly expressed. The
genuine doctrine of the Christ con
sists in (1) the recognition of the his
torical person Jesus, and (2) the ac
ceptance of Him as the Lord. This
doctrine was seriously endangered by
the mystic theosophy of the false
teachers. The same order which we
have here occurs also in Ephes. iii. 1 1
ev to Xpiarm 'Irjaov to Kvplm rjp&v
(the correct reading).
7. eppifcapevoi] Two points may
be noticed here; (1) The expressive
change of tenses; ippi£mpevoi 'firmly
rooted' once for all, eVoixoSopodpevoi,
fte/Satovpevoi, 'built up and strength
ened' from hour to hour. (2) The
rapid transition of metaphor, jrepi-
jrareire, ippi£mpevoi, itroixoSopoipevoi,
the path, the tree, the buUding : comp.
Ephes. iii. 17 e'ppifcope'voi xal redepe
Ximpevoi. The metaphors of the plant
and the building occur together in
I Cor. iii. 9 ©eou yedpytov, Qeov oixo-x
Sopd. The transition in this passage
is made easier by the fact that pifouv
(Plut. Mor. 321 d), ixpt(ovv (Jer.i. 10,
1 Mace. v. 51), irpoppifrs (Jos. B. J.
vii. 8. 7), etc., are not uncommonly
used of cities and buildings.

II- 7] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 175
iraTeiTe, ' ippi^copievoi Kat iiroiKoBoptovfxevoi iv avTco Kai
,3ef3aioi/pievoi Ttj irio-Tet, Kadcos iBiBd^dtiTe, irepicro-ev-
ovTes iv avTtj ev ev^apio-Tia..

iirotxoSopovpevot] 'being built up]
as in 1 Cor. iii. 10 — 14. After this
verb we might have expected eV
avrm Or eV aurdv (i Cor. iii. 12)
rather than e'v aura} ; but in this
and the companion epistle Christ is
represented rather as the binding
element than as the foundation of the
buUding: e.g. Ephes. ii. 20 eVoixoSo-
prjdevres iirl r<p depeXim t&v diroardXmv
xal jrpocpijTOV, ovros dxpoymvialov
aurou Xpiorow 'lijo-ou, e'v a iraaa [17]
oixoSopn au£et eis vadv ayiov ev Kvplm,
iva xal upeis <ruvoixo8opeto-c9e. The
eVi in e'jroixoSopeiv does not neces
sarily refer to the original foundation,
but may point to the continued pro
gress of the building by successive
layers, as e.g. [Aristot] Rhet. ad Alex.
4 (p. 1426) ejroixoSopouvra rd erepov ms
iirl rb erepov avl-etv. Hence e'jroixo
Sopeiv is frequently used absolutely,
'to build up' (e.g. Jude 20, Polyb.
Ui. 27. 4), as here. The repetition of
e'v avrm emphasizes the main idea of
the passage, and indeed of the whole
epistle. rj} jrio-rei] 'by your faith] the
dative ofthe instrument; comp. Heb.
xiii. 9 KaXbv yap x°piTl /3ej3aioucr#ai
rijv xapSiav. Faith is, as it were, the
cement of the building : comp. Clem.
Rom. 22 raura jrdvra |3e/3aioi 1} e'v
Xpia-TO irians.
xadms iSiSdxdrjre] i e. ' remaining
true to the lessons which you re
ceived from Epaphras, and not led
astray by any later pretenders'; comp.
i. 6, 7 ev dXrjdeia, xadms ipddere dirb
'Eiracppa. iv avry x.r.X.] The same ending
occurs in iv. 2. Thanksgiving is the
end of all human conduct, whether
exhibited in words or in works. For
the stress laid on thanksgiving in St
Paul's epistles generaUy, see the note

on Phil. iv. 6. The words euxdpioros,
evxaptarelv, evxaptaria, occur in St
Paul's writings alone of the Apostolic
epistles. In this epistle especially
the duty of thanksgiving assumes a
peculiar prominence by being made
a refrain, as here and in iii. 15, 17,
iv. 2: see also i 12.
8 — 15. ' Be on your guard; do not
suffer yourselves to faU a prey to
certain persons who would lead you
oaptive by a hoUow and deceitful
system, which they call philosophy.
They substitute the traditions of men
for the truth of God. They enforce
an elementary discipUne of mundane
ordinances fit only for children. Theirs
is not the Gospel of Christ. In Christ
the entire fulness of the Godhead
abides for ever, having united itself
with man by taking a human body.
And so in Him — not in any inferior
mediators — ye have your life, your
being, for ye are filled from His
fulness. He, I say, is the Head over
all spiritual beings — call them prin
cipalities or powers or what you wiU.
In Him too ye have the true circum
cision — the circumcision which is not
made with hands but wrought by
the Spirit — the circumcision which
divests not of a part only but of the
whole carnal body — the circumcision
which is not of Moses but of Christ.
This circumcision ye have, because ye
were buried with Christ to your old
selves beneath the baptismal waters,
and were raised with Him from those
same waters to a new and regenerate
life, through your faith in the power
ful working of God who raised Him
from the dead. Yes, you — you Gen
tiles who before were dead, when ye
walked in your transgressions and in
the uncircumcision of your unchastened
carnal heathen heart — even you did

176

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 8

8BXeireTe /utj tis vfxds ecTai 6 o~vXaywyo3v Bid

8. pij TIS I
God quicken into life together with
Christ; then and there freely for
giving all of us — Jews and GentUes
aUke — all our transgressions ; then and
there canceUing the bond which stood
vaUd against us (for it bore our own
signature), the bond which engaged us
to fulfil all the law of ordinances, which
was our stern pitiless tyrant. Aye,
this very bond hath Christ put out
of sight for ever, nailing it to His
cross and rending it with His body
and killing it in His death. Taking
upon Him our human nature, He
stripped off and cast aside all the
powers of evU which clung to it like a
poisonous garment. As a mighty con
queror He displayed these His fallen
enemies to an astonished world, lead
ing them in triumph on His cross.'
8. BXejrere x.r.X.] The form of the
sentence is a measure ofthe imminence
of the peril. The usual construction
with j3Xe'jreiv p^ is a conjunctive ; e.g.
in Luke xxi. 8 /3Xe'jrere prj irXavrjdrjre.
Here the substitution of an indicative
shows that the danger is real ; comp.
Heb. iU. 12 /3Xejrere pijjrore ecrrai ev
rivi upaSv xapSla irovrjpd diriarias. For
an example of pr) with a future indi
cative see Mark xiv. 2 pnjrore ecrrai
dopvftos; and comp. Winer § lvi. p.
631 sq.
ns] This indefinite ns is frequently
used by St Paul, when speaking of
opponents whom he knows weU
enough but does not care to name :
see the note on Gal. i. 7. Comp. Ign.
Smyrn. S ov rives dyvoovvres dpvovv-
rai...rd Se ovbpara avrmv, ovra airiara,
ovk e8o£e pot iyypdyyai.
avXaymymv] ' makes you his prey,
carries you off body and soul' The
word appears not to occur before St
Paul, nor after him, independently of
this passage, tiU a late date : e. g. Heliod.
Aeth. X. 35 °*itos eanv b rrjv iprjv dv-
yarepa avXaymyrjaas. In Tatian ad
Graec. 22 upeis 8e uWd rounov oruXayco-

crrai upas.
yeio-tre it seems to be a reminiscence
of St Paul Its full and proper mean
ing, as appears from the passages
quoted, is not 'to despoiy but 'to
carry off as spoil,' in accordance with
the analogous compounds, 8ouXay<a-
yeiv, aKevaymyelv. So too the closely
allied word Xacpvpayayelv in Plut.
Mor. p. 5 iraXepos yap ov Xacpvpaymyel
dpenjv, Vit. Galb. 5 rd pev raXarcSv,
orav vwoxeiptoi yevmvrat, Xacpvpayayrj-
aeadai. Tne Colossians had been res
cued from the bondage of darkness ;
they had been transferred to the
kingdom of light; they had been
settled there as free citizens (i. 12,
13); and now there was danger that
they should faU into a state worse
than their former slavery, that they
should be carried off as so much
booty. Comp. 2 Tim. iii 6 aixpaXco-
rifovres yvvatxdpia.
For the construction earai 6 avXa-
ycoycSv see the notes on Gal. i. 7, iii. 21.
The former passage is a close paraUel
to the words here, ei prj rives elatv oi
rapdaaovres vpds x.t.X. The expres
sion 6 avXaymymv gives a directness
and individuality to the reference,
which would have been wanting to the
more natural construction os avXaym-
yrjaei. Sid rrjs cptXoaoCpias x.r.X.] ' through
his philosophy which is an empty de
ceit.' The absence of both preposition
and article in the second clause shows
that xevijs djrdnjs describes and quali
fies cpiXoaocpias. Clement therefore
(Strom, vi. 8, p. 771) had a right to
contend that St Paul does not here
condemn ' phUosophy' absolutely. The
cpiXoaocpia xal xevrj dirdrij of this pas
sage corresponds to the \jVeu8aivupos
yv&ats of I Tim. vi. 20.
But though 'philosophy' is not
condemned, it is disparaged by the
connexion in which it is placed. St
Chrysostom's comment is not altoge
ther wrong, iireiSrj Soxel aepvbv elvai rb

II. 8]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

177

Trjs qtuXoo'O'pias Kal Kevfjs dirdTtjs, KaTa Ttjv irapd-

rrjs cpiXoaocpias, irpoaedrjKe xal xevf/s
djrdnjs. The term was doubtless used by
the false teachers themselves to de
scribe their system. Though essentially
Greek as a name and as an idea, it
had found its way into Jewish circles.
Philo speaks of the Hebrew religion
and Mosaic law as rj jrdrptos cpiXoo-o-
tpia (Leg. ad Gai. 23, n. p. 568, de
Somn. u. 18, i.p, 675) or n 'lovSdixfj
cpiXoo-ocpla (Leg. ad Gai. 33, 11. p. 582)
or 17' xard McBuafjv cpiXoaocpla (de Mut.
Nom. 39, 1. p. 612). The system of
the Essenes, the probable progenitors
of the false teachers at Colossae, he
describes as 17 8i^a jrepiepyeias 'EXXij-
vixmv bvoparav cpiXoaocpla (0 mil. prob.
lib. 13, n. p. 459). So too Josephus
speaks of the three Jewish sects as
rpeis epiXoaocpiai(Ant. xviii. I. 2, comp.
B. J. ii. 8. 2). It should be remem
bered also, that in this later age,
owing to Roman influence, the term
was used to describe practical not less
than speculative systems, so that it
would cover the ascetic Ufe as well as
the mystic theosophy of these Colos
sian heretics. Hence the Apostle is
here flinging back at these false teach
ers a favourite term of their own, 'their
vaunted philosophy, which is hollow
and misleading.'
The word indeed could claim a truly
noble origin; for it is said to have
arisen out of the humHity of Py
thagoras, who called himself ' a lover
of wisdom,' prjSeva ydp eivai aocpbv
Svdpmirov dXX' fj ©edv (Diog. Laert.
Proosm. § 12; comp. Cic. Tusc. v. 3).
In such a sense the term would en
tirely accord with the spirit and teach
ing of St Paul; for it bore testimony
to the insufficiency of the human in-
teUect and the need of a revelation.
But in his age it had come to be asso
ciated generaUy with the idea of subtle
dialectics and profitless speculation ;
while in this particular instance it was
combined with a mystic cosmogony
and angelology which contributed a
COL.

fresh element of danger. As con
trasted with the power and fulness
and certainty of revelation, all such
philosophy was 'foolishness' (1 Cor.
i 20). It is worth observing that this
word, which to the Greeks denoted
the highest effort of the intellect, oc
curs here alone in St Paul, just as he
uses a'penj, which was their term to
express the highest moral excellence,
in a single passage only (Phil. iv. 8 ;
see the note there). The reason is
much the same in both cases. The
Gospel had deposed the terms as
inadequate to the higher standard,
whether of knowledge or of practice,
which it had introduced.
On the attitude of the fathers to
wards phUosophy, while philosophy
was a living thing, see Smith's Dic
tionary of the Bible s.v. Clement,
who was followed in the main by the
earUer Alexandrine fathers, regards
Greek philosophy not only as a pre
liminary training (irpoiratSeia) for the
Gospel, but even as in some sense a
covenant (Siadrjxrj) given by God to the
Greeks (Strom, i 5, p. 33 1, vi. 5, p. 761,
ib. § 8, p. 771 sq.). Others, who were
the great majority and of whom Ter
tullian may be taken as an extreme
type, set their faces directly against
it, seeing in it only the parent of aU
heretical teaching : e. g. de Anim. 2, 3,
Apol. 46, 47. In the first passage,
referring to this text, he says, ' Ab
apostolo jam tunc philosophia con-
cussio veritatis providebatur'; in the
second he asks, 'Quid simUe phUo-
sophus et Christianus?' St Paul's
speech at Athens, on the only oc
casion when he is known to have
been brought into direct personal
contact with Greek philosophers (Acts
xvii. 18), shows that his sympathies
would have been at least as much
with Clement's representations as with
TertuUian's. xard x.r.X.] The false teaching is
described (1) As regards its source—
12

1 78

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 8

doo~iv tcov dvdptoircov, KaTa Ta crTOix^ia t°v koo;uov,

'the tradition of men'; (2) As regards
its subject matter — ' the rudiments of
the world!
rrjv irapdSoatv x.tX] Other systems,
as for instance the ceremonial mishna
of the Pharisees, might fitly be de
scribed in this way (Matt. xv. 2 sq.,
Mark vii 3 sq.) : but such a descrip
tion was pecuUarly appropriate to a
mystic theosophy like this of the Co
lossian false teachers. The teaching
might be oral or written, but it was
essentially esoteric, essentially tradi
tional It could not appeal to sacred
books which had been before all the
world for centuries. The Essenes,
the immediate spiritual progenitors
of these Colossian heretics, distinct
ly claimed to possess such a source
of knowledge, which they carefuUy
guarded from divulgence ; B. J. U. 8. 7
avvTTjprjaetv bpolas rd re ttjs aipeaeas
avr&v /3i/3Xia xal rd rav dyyeXmv ovb-
para (see above pp. 87, 88 sq., 93).
The various Gnostic sects, their direct
or coUateral spiritual descendants,
almost without exception traced their
doctrines to a simUar source : o. g.
Hippol. Haer.v. 7 d cpijo-1 jrapaSeSw-
xevai Maptdpvfl rbv 'idxmfiov rou Ku-
piou rdv dSeXcpdv, vii. 20 cpacrlv eipijxevai
Mardiav avrois Xdyous diroxpvcpovs ovs
ijxovae irapd tov aa-rijpos, Clem. Alex.
Strom, vii. 17 (p. 898) xaddirep 6 Baai-
XeiSrjS, xdv TXauxiav e'jriypdcpijrai SiSd-
axaXov, ds avxovaiv avroi, rdv Herpov
eppijvea' daavrms Se xai OuaXevrivov
©eoSd SiaxTjxoevat cpipovaiv, yvdptpos
Se ovros iyeybvet IlauXou. So too a
later mystic theology of the Jews,
which had many affinities with the
teaching of the Christianized Essenes
at Colossae, was self-designated Kab
bala or ' tradition,' professing to have
been handed down oraUy from the
patriarchs. See the note on dirbxpvcpoi,
ii- 3-
rd aroixeia] 'the rudiments, the
elementary teaching'; comp. ver. 20.
The same phrase occurs again Gal. iv.

3 (comp. ver. 9). As aroixeia signifies
primarily 'the letters of the alphabet,'
so as a secondary meaning it denotes
'rudimentary instruction.' Accord
ingly it is correctly interpreted by
Clement Strom, vi. 8 (p.77i)nauXos ...
ovx en iraXtvbpopelv d£ioi iirl ttjv 'EX-
Xrjvixrjv cpiXoaoCplav, aroixeia tov xo
apov ravrrjv dXXrjyop&v, crroi^eiairixr/v
nva ouo-av (i.e. elementary) xal jrpo-
iraiSeiav ttjs dXrjdeias (comp. ib. vi. IS,
p. 799), and by Tertullian adv. Marc.
v. 19 'secundum elementa mundi, non
secundum caelum et terram dicens,
sed secundum litteras seculares.' A
large number of the fathers however
explained the expression to refer to
the heavenly bodies (called o-roixela),
as marking the seasons, so that the
observance of 'festivals and new-
moons and sabbaths' was a sort of
bondage to them. It would appear
from Tertullian's language that Mar
cion also had so interpreted the
words. On this false interpretation
see the note on Gal. iv. 3. It is quite
out of place here: for (1) The context
suggests some mode of instruction,
e. g. ttjv irapdSoatv t&v dvdpmirmv here,
and 8oypari£eade in ver. 20 ; (2) The
keeping of days and seasons is quite
subordinate to other external ob
servances. The rite of circumcision
(ver. 11), and the distinction of meats
(ver. 21), respectively, are placed in
close and immediate connexion with
rd aroixeia rou xbapov in the two
places where it occurs, whereas the
observance of days and seasons (ver. 16)
stands apart from either.
rou xdo-pou] ' of the world] that is,
' belonging to the sphere of material
and external things.' See the notes
on Gal. iv. 3, vi. 14.
' In Christ,' so the Apostle seems
to say, ' you have attained the Uberty
and the inteUigence of manhood ; do
not submit yourselves again to a rudi
mentary discipline fit only for chil
dren (rd aroixeia). In Christ you

II. 9, io]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

179

Kat ov /caret XjOttXTOV 9'oti ev avTw KaToiKet irdv to
irXtjpcopia Ttjs 6eoTt]TOs crcofxaTiKcos, I0Kal iaTe iv avTco

have been exalted into the sphere of
the Spirit: do not plunge yourselves
again into the atmosphere of material
and sensuous things (rou xdo-pou).'
ou xaTd.Xpicrrdv] ' not after Christ.'
This expression is wide in itself, and
should be interpreted so as to supply
the negative to both the preceding
clauses ; ' Christ is neither the author
nor the substance of their teaching:
not the author, for they Usten to hu
man traditions (xard rnv jrapdSocriv
tov dvdpmirmv) ; not the substance, for
they replace Him by formal ordinances
(xard rd aroixeia roil xdo-pou) and by
angeUc mediators.'
9 sq. In explaining the true doc
trine which is 'after Christ,' St Paul
condemns the two false principles,
which lay at the root of this heretical
teaching; (i) The theological error of
substituting inferior and created be
ings, angeUc mediators, for the divine
Head Himself (w. 9, 10) ; and (2) The
practical error of insisting upon ritual
and ascetic observances as the foun
dation of their moral teaching (vv. 1 1
— 14). Their theological speculations
and their ethical code alike were at
fault On the intimate connexion be
tween these two errors, as springing
out of a common root, the Gnostic
dualism of these false teachers, see
the introduction, pp. 33 sq., 77, 85,
112 sq.
on x.r.X.] The Apostle justifies the
foregoing charge that this doctrine
was not xard Xpiarov; 'In Christ
dweUs the whole pleroma, the entire
fulness of the Godhead, whereas they
represent it to you as dispersed among
several spiritual agencies. Christ is
the one fountain-head of all spiritual
Ufe, whereas they teach you to seek it
in communion with inferior creatures.'
The same truths have been stated be
fore (i 14 sq.) more generally, and they
are now restated, with direct and im

mediate reference to the heretical
teaching. xaToixei] 'has its fixed abode.' On
the force of this compound in relation
to the false teaching, see the note on
i.19. jrdv rd irXrjpmpa] 'all the plenitude]
' the totality of the divine powers and
attributes.' On this theological term
see i 19, and the detached note at the
end of the epistle.
¦rijs debnjTos] 'of the Godhead.'
' Non modo divinae virtutes, sed ipsa
divina natura,' writes Bengel. For
the difference between debrns ' deltas]
the essence, and tfeidrrjs 'divinitas]
the quaUty, see Trench N. T. Syn.
§ ii. p. 6. The different force of
the two words may be seen by a
comparison of two passages in Plu
tarch, Mor. p. 857 A jrao-iv Aiyujrriois
deibrijTa jroXXnv xal Sixatoavvrjv pap-
rvprjaas (where it means a divine
inspiration or faculty, and where no
one would have used debrnra), and
Mor. 415 O ex Se rjpmmv els Saipovas ai
/3eXrioves i^u^al njv pera/3oXnv Xapj3d-
vovaiv, e'x 8e Satpovmv dXiyai pev en
Xpbva jroXXcp 81' dperfjs xadapdetaai
iravrdirasri debrnjTos pereV^ov (where
deibrrjTos would be quite out of place,
because all Saipoves without exception
were delot, though they only became
deal in rare instances and after long
probation and discipUne). In the
New Testament the one word occurs
here alone, the other in Rom. i. 20
alone. So also rd 6Viov, a very favour
ite expression in Greek philosophy, is
found once only, in Acts xvii. 29, where
it is used with singular propriety ; for
the Apostle is there meeting the hea
then phUosophers on their own ground
and arguing with them in their own
language. Elsewhere he instinctively
avoids a term which tends to obscure
the idea of a personal God. In the
Latin versions, owing to the poverty of
12 — 2

i8o

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. io

ireirXtjpwpievoi, os eo'Tiv t\ KecpaXt) irao-tjs dpyijs Kai

the language, both debrrjs and deibrns
are translated by the same term divi-
nitas; but this was felt to be inade
quate, and the word deitas was coined
at a later date to represent debris :
August, de Civ. Dei vii § i, vn. p. 162
(quoted in Trench) 'Hanc divinitatem
vel, ut sic dixerim, deitatem : nam et
hoc verbo uti jam nostros non piget,
utde Graeco expressius transferant id
quod UU debrrjra appeUant etc'
aapanx&s] ' bodily-wise] ' corpo
really] ie. ' assuming a bodily form,
becoming incarnate.' This is an ad
dition to the previous statement in
i. 19 e'v aura euSdxijaev jrdv rd irXrjpmpa
xaTotxijaai. The indweUing of the ple
roma refers to the Eternal Word, and
not to the Incarnate Christ: but am-
partK&s is added to show that the
Word, in whom the pleroma thus had
its abode from aU eternity, crowned
His work by the Incarnation. Thus
whUe the main statement xarotxel irdv
rb irXrjpmpa ttjs debrrjros of St Paul
corresponds to the opening sentence
6 Xbyos rjv irpbs rbv Qeov xal ©eds tjv 6
Xbyos of St John, the subsidiary ad
verb o-opanxtos of St Paul has its
counterpart in the additional state
ment xal d Xdyos crdp£ iyivero of St
John. AU other meanings which have
been assigned to o-o>parixd>s here, as
' wholly ' (Hieron. in Is. xi. 1 sq., iv.
p. 156, 'nequaquam per partes, ut in
ceteris Sanctis'), or 'really' (Aug. Epist.
cxlix, 11. p. 5 13 ' Ideo corporaliter dixit,
quia ilU umbratiUter seducebant'), or
' essentially ' (HUar. de Trin. viii. 54,
n. p. 252 ' Dei ex Deo signiflcat veri
tatem etc.,' Cyril. Alex, in Theodoret.
Op. V. p. 34 Tovreanv, ov axenxms,
Isid. Pelus. Ep. iv. 166 dvrl tou ouo-i-
eoScos), are unsupported by usage. Nor
again can the body be understood of
anything else but Christ's human body;
as for instance of the created World
(Theod. Mops, in Rab. Op. vi. p. 522)
or of the Church (Anon, in Chrysost. ad
loc). According to these two last inter

pretations rd irXrjpmpa rrjs debmjTos is
taken to mean the Universe (' univer-
sam naturam repletam ab eo') and the
Church (rrjv ixxXrjalav rreirXrjpmpevrjv
virb rijs deornros avrov, see Ephes. i. 23)
respectively, because either of these
may be said to reside in Him, as the
source of its life, and to stand to Him
in the relation of the body to the
head (ampanxms). But these forced
interpretations have nothing to re
commend them.
St Paul's language is carefully
guarded. He does not say e'v ampan,
for the Godhead cannot be confined
to any limits of space; nor amparoet-
8&s, for this might suggest the un
reality of Christ's human body; but
aapanx&s, 'in bodily wise,' 'with a
bodily manifestation.' The relation of
aapartK&s to the clause which it quaU-
fies wUl vary with the circumstances,
e.g. Plut. Mor. p. 424 E rd piaov
ov TOirtx&s aXXa ampanxms Xiyeadai,
i.e. 'ratione corporis habita,' A than.
Exp. Fid. 4 (l. p. 8l) ampanxms eis
rdv 'I170-0UV yeypairrai, i. e. ' secundum
corpus,' Ptolem. in Epiphan. Haer.
XXXUL 5 xard pev rb cpaivbp^vov xal
ampariK&s eKreXeladat dvrjpidrj, Orig. c.
Cels. U. 69 dcpavTJ yeveadai ampanxms,
ib. vi. 68 xal ampanxms ye XaXoipevos,
Macar. Magn. in. 14 aopartxas xap'l~
feiv rav padrjrmv.
IO. xal e'crre e'v aur<3] ' and ye are
in Him] where e'crre should be sepa
rated from the foUowing ireirXrjpmpe-
voi ; comp. John xvii. 21, Acts xvii. 28.
True Ufe consists in union with Him,
and not in dependence on any inferior
being; comp. ver. 19 01! xparmv rrjv
xecpaXrjv, i£ ov X.T.X.
jrejrXijpcapeVoi] ' being fulfilled] with
a direct reference to the preceding
jrXnpcupa; ' Your fulness comes from
His fulness ; His jrXnpcopa is trans
fused into you by virtue of your in
corporation in Him.' So too John
i 16 e'x rou irXrjpdparos aurou rjpels
irdvres eXdfiopev, Ephes. iii. 19 iva irXij-

II. II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

I8l

i^ovcias' "iv d> Kal irepieT/mtidriTe irepiTO/mtj d^etpo-

pmdrJTe eis jrdv rd jrXrjpocpa rou ©eou,
iv. 13 els pirpov rjXixias rov jrXrjpaipa-
tos tov Xpiarov, comp. Ign. Ephes.
init. tjj euXoyrjpevry e'v peyedet ©eou
jrarpds irXrjpmpari. Hence also the
Church, as ideally regarded, is called
the irXrjpmpa of Christ, because all His
graces and energies are communicated
to her ; Ephes. i. 23 rjns eorlv rd ampa
aurou, to jrXnpwjza rou rd jrdvra e'v ira-
criv jrXijpoupevou.
os] For the various reading o see
the detached note. It was perhaps a
correction made on the false suppo
sition that e'v aur£ referred to the
irXrjpmpa. At all events it must be re
garded as an impossible reading; for
the image would be altogether con
fused and lost, if the irXsjpapa were
represented as the head. And again
17' xecpaXr) is persistently said elsewhere
of Christ; i 18, u. 19, Ephes. i 22,
iv. 15, v. 23. HUary de Trin. ix. 8
(11. p. 264) explains the 0 as referring
to the whole sentence to eivai iv avrm
ireirXrjpmpevovs, but this also is an in
conceivable sense. Again it has been
suggested that d ianv (like ToureVriv)
may be taken as equivalent to scilicet
(comp. Clem. Hom. viu. 22); but this
would require rg xecpdXjj, even if it
were otherwise admissible here.
r) xecpaXij'] The image expresses much
more than the idea of sovereignty : the
head is also the centre of vital force,
the source of all energy and life; see
the note on ver. 19.
irdaijs dpxrjs x.r.X.] * of every prin
cipality and power] and therefore
of those angeUc beings whom the
false teachers adopted as mediators,
thus transferring to the inferior mem
bers the allegiance due to the Head:
comp. ver. 18 sq. For dpxrjs xal i£ov-
alas, see the note on i. 16.
11. The previous verses have dealt
with the theological tenets of the false
teachers. The Apostle now turns to
their practical errors; 'You do not
need the circumcision of the flesh;

for you have received the circumcision
of the heart. The distinguishing fea
tures of this higher circumcision are
threefold. (1) It is not external but
inward, not made with hands but
wrought by the Spirit. (2) It divests
not of a part only of the flesh, but of
the whole body of carnal affections.
(3) It is the circumcision not of
Moses or of the patriarchs, but of
Christ.' Thus it is distinguished, as
regards first its character, secondly
its extent, and thirdly its author.
jrepierpij'^r/re] The moment at which
this is conceived as taking place is
defined by the other aorists, o-uvra-
cpivres, ovvrjyepdrjTe, etc., as the time
of their baptism, when they 'put on
Christ.' dxeiporroir)™] ie. 'immaterial,' 'spi
ritual,' as Mark xiv. 58, 2 Cor. v. 1.
So x«pojroiijros, which is used in the
N. T. of material temples and their
furniture (Acts vii. 48, xvU. 24, Heb.
ix. 1 1, 24, comp. Mark I. c), and of the
material circumcision (Ephes. ii. 11
rijs Xeyopevijs Trepiropfjs ev crapxl ^ei-
poiroinrou). In tbe lxx ^etpojroiijra
occurs exclusively as a rendering of
idols (D,?'?N, e.g. Lev. xxvi 1, Is. ii.
18, etc.), false gods (DWN Is. xxi. 9,
where perhaps they read DWK), or
images (D^Dn Lev. xxvi. 30), except in
one passage, Is. xvi. 12, where it is
appUed to an idol's sanctuary. Owing
to this association of the word the
application which we find in the New
Testament would sound much more
depreciatory to Jewish ears than it
does to our own ; e. g. e'v xeipojroiijrois
xaroixei in St Stephen's speech, where
the force is broken in the received
text by the interpolation of vaois.
For illustrations of the typical sig
nificance of circumcision, as a symbol
of purity, see the note on Phil. Ui. 3.
e'v rjj x.r.X.] The words are chosen to
express the completeness of the spiri
tual change. (1) It is not an exSuo-is
nor an djrdSucris, but an direxSvats.

1 82

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 12

woitjTcp, iv Ttj direK.Bvo'ei tov crcopiaTos Ttjs o~apKos,
iv rfj ireptTopiiji tov Xpio~Tov, " cvvTacpevTes ovtco iv

The word djre'xSvcris is extremely rare,
and no earUer instances of it are pro
duced; see the note on ver. 15 djrexSu-
o-dpevos. (2) It is not a single mem
ber but the whole body, which is thus
cast aside ; see the next note. Thus
the idea of completeness is brought
out both in the energy of the action
and in the extent of its operation, as
in iii 9 djrexSuo-dpevoi rdv jraXaidv
avdpmirov. tov a&paros x.r.X.] ' the whole body
which consists of the fiesh] i. e. ' the
body with all its corrupt and carnal
affections'; as iii. 5 vexpdaare ovv
Ta peXrj. For iUustrations of the
expression see Rom. vi 6 iva xarap-
yrjdr) rb ampa rrjs dpaprlas, vii. 24 rov
amparos tov davarov rovrov, PhU. Ui
21 rd a&pa rijs rairetvmaems rjpcov.
Thus rd o-ajpa rijs aapxbs here means
' the fleshly body' and not ' the entire
mass of the flesh'; but the contrast
between the whole and the part still
remains. In i 22 the same expression
rd crcSpa rijs aapxbs occurs, but with a
different emphasis and meaning : see
the note there.
The words t<Sv dpapn&v, inserted be
tween rou amparos and rijs aapxbs in
the received text, are clearly a gloss,
and must be omitted with the vast
majority of ancient authorities.
12. Baptism is the grave of the
old man, and the birth of the new.
As he sinks beneath the baptismal
waters, the beUever buries there all
his corrupt affections and past sins;
as he emerges thence, he rises re
generate, quickened to new hopes
and a new life. This it is, because
it is not only the crowning act of his
own faith but also the seal of God's
adoption and the earnest of God's
Spirit. Thus baptism is an image of
his participation both in the death and
in the resurrection of Christ. See
Apost. Const, ui. 17 17 xardSucris rd

avvairodavelv, rj dvaSvats to avvavaarrj.
vat. For this twofold image, as it
presents itself to St Paul, see es
peciaUy Rom. vi. 3 sq.
e'v rep /3ajrnap<S] 'in the act of
baptism.' A distinction seems to be
observed elsewhere in the New Tes
tament between pdimapa 'baptism'
properly so caUed, and jSajrnapds
'lustration' or 'washing' of divers
kinds, e.g. of vessels (Mark vii 4, [8,]
Heb. ix. 10). Even Heb. vi. 2 /3ajr-
Ttap&v SiSaxrjs, which at first sight
might seem to be an exception to this
rule, is perhaps not reaUy so (Bleek
ad loc). Here however, where the
various readings f}airnap& and /Sajr-
riapart appear in competition, the
preference ought probably to be
given to (iaimapip as being highly
supported in itself and as the less
usual word in this sense. There is
no a priori reason why St Paul
should not have used /Sajrno-pds with
this meaning, for it is so found in Jo
sephus Ant. xviii 5. 2 Pairnapm avv-
livat (of John the Baptist). Doubtless
the form fUdirnapa was more appro
priate to describe the one final and
complete act of Christian baptism,
and it very soon obtained exclusive
possession of the ground in Greek ;
but in St Paul's age the other form
fiairnapbs may not yet have been
banished. In the Latin Version bap-
tisma and baptismus are used indis
criminately : and this is the case also
with the Latin fathers. The substan
tive 'baptism' occurs so rarely in any
sense in St Paul (only Rom. vi. 4, Eph.
iv. 5, besides this passage), or indeed
elsewhere in the N. T. of Christian
baptism (only in 1 Pet. iu. 21), that
we have not sufficient data for a
sound induction. So far as the two
words have any inherent difference of
meaning, fiaimapos denotes rather the
act in process and frdirnapa the result.

II. 12]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

183

tw jSairT laptop, iv do Kai a~vvt]yep6t]Te Bia Ttjs irloTecos
Ttjs ivepyelas tov Qeov tov iyeipavTOs avTov eK \roov\

12. rif fSaTTlapari.

iv a] ie. l3airrio-pa. Others would
understand XpicrnS for the sake of
the paralleUsm with ver. 11 e'v m
xal... e'v ejj xal. But this parallelism is
not suggested by the sense : while on
the other hand there is obviously a
very close connexion between avvra-
cpevres and avvtjyepdrjTe as the two
complementary aspects of baptism;
comp. Rom. vi. 4 sq. o-uverdcpijpev
aurai Sid rov /SajrnVparos iva mairep
rjyepdrj Xpiarbs •¦ -ovrms xal rjpels.. .el
yap avpcpvroi yeybvapev to5 dpotdpan
rov davarov avrov, dXXa xal ttjs
dvaardaems iaopeda, 2 Tim. ii. II
ei ydp auvajreo'dvopev, xai o-uvfij-
aopev. In fact the idea of Xpiaru
must be reserved for avvTjyepdrjre
where it is wanted, 'ye were raised
together with Him'
Sid rrjs iriarems x.r.X.] 'through
your faith in the operation] ivepyelas
being the objective genitive. So St
Chrysostom, iriarems oXov iariv' e'jri-
areucrare on Svvarai b Qebs e'yeipai,
xal ovrms rjyepdrjTe. Only by a belief
in the resurrection are the benefits of
the resurrection obtained, because
only so are its moral effects produced.
Hence St Paul prays that he may
' know the power of Christ's resurrec
tion' (Phil iii 10). Hence too he
makes this the cardinal article in the
Christian's creed, ' If thou... believest
in thy heart that God raised Him
from the dead, thou shalt be saved'
(Rom. x. 9). For the influence of
Christ's resurrection on the moral and
spiritual being, see the note on Phil
1. c Others take rijs ivepyelas as the
subjective genitive, 'faith which comes
from the operation etc.,' arguing from
a mistaken interpretation of the par
aUel passage Ephes. i 19 (where xard
rrjv ivipyeiav should be connected, not
with rois jricrreuovras, but with ri to

Vjrepj3dXXov peyedos x.r.X.). The former
explanation however yields a better
sense, and the genitive after jrio-ns
far more commonly describes the ob
ject than the source of the faith, e.g.
Rom. iii. 22, 26, Gal. iii. 22, Ephes. iii.
12, PhU. i. 27, iii. 9, 2 Thess. ii. 13.
13. In the sentence which foUows
it seems necessary to assume a change
of subject. There can be little doubt
that d ©eds is the nominative to <ruv-
efo)07roii7o-ev : for (1) The parallel pas
sage Ephes. ii. 4, 5 directly suggests
this. (2) This is uniformly St Paul's
mode of speaking elsewhere. It is
always God who e'yeipei, avveyeipet,
(aonoiel, avv£aoiroicl, etc., with or in
or through Christ. (3) Though it might
be possible to assign o-uv au'r<5 to the
subject of avve^moiroirjaev (see the note
on i 20), yet a reference to some other
person is more natural. These reasons
seem to decide the subject of o-uve£a>-
oiroirjaev. But at the same time it
appears quite impossible to continue
the same subject, d Qebs, to the end of
the sentence. No grammatical mean
ing can be assigned to djrexSvo-dpevos,
by which it could be understood of
God the Father. We must suppose
therefore that a new subject, d Xpio--
rds, is introduced meanwhile, either
with rjpxev or with djrexSuo-dpevos it
self ; and of the two the former seems
the easier point of transition. For a
simUar instance of abrupt transition,
which is the more natural owing to the
intimate connexion of the work of the
Son with the work of the Father, see
e.g. i 17 sq.
xal upas] i.e. 'you Gentiles.' This
will appear from a study of the
parallel passages iii. 7, 8, Ephes. i 13,
ii. 1 sq., 11, 13, 17, 22, iii. 2, iv. 17;
see the notes on Ephes. i 13, and on
rrj dxpoj3varia just below.

1 84

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II- i3

'3,

veKpwv aKat vpias veKpovs ovTas tois irapairTco/nacriv
Kai Ttj dKpo(3v<TTia Ttjs o~apKOs v/uuSv, ovve<^coo7rotrio~ev

rois irapairrdpaaiv x.r.X.] ' by reason
of your transgressions etc' The ira-
pajrrapara are the actual definite trans
gressions, while the dxpofivaria rrjs
aapxbs is the impure carnal disposition
which prompts to them. Por the da
tive comp. Ephes. ii. 1, 5, where the
same expression occurs ; see Winer
Gramm. § xxxi. p. 270. On the other
hand in Rom. vi 11 vexpovs pev rfj
dpapria, (mvras Se t& ©e<5, the dative
has a whoUy different meaning, as the
context shows. The e'v of the received
text, though highly supported, is doubt
less an interpolation for the sake of
grammatical clearness.
rj dxpo/3uoria x.r.X.] The external
fact is here mentioned, not for its own
sake but for its symbolical meaning.
The outward uncircumcision of the
Gentiles is a type of their unchastened
carnal mind. In other words, though
the literal meaning is not excluded,
the spiritual reference is most promi
nent, as appears from ver. 11 e'v rij
djrexSucrei rou amparos. Hence Theo
dore's comment, dxpofivarlav (ixdXe-
aev) to irepixeladat en rrjv dvrjrbrrjTa.
At the same time the choice of the
expression shows that the Colossian
converts addressed by St Paul were
mainly GentUes.
o-uvefojojroiijo-ev] It has been ques
tioned whether the Ufe here spoken of
should be understood in a spiritual
sense of the regeneration of the moral
being, or in a literal sense of the fu
ture life of immortaUty regarded as
conferred on the Christian potentially
now, though only to be realised here
after. But is not such an issue alto
gether superfluous ? Is there any rea
son to think that St Paul would have
separated these two ideas of Ufe ? To
him the future glorified life is only
the continuation of the present moral
and spiritual Ufe. The two are the
same in essence, however the accidents

may differ. Moral and spiritual rege
neration is salvation, is hfe.
upas] The pronoun is repeated for
the sake of emphasis. The omission
in some good copies is doubly ex
plained ; (1) By the desire to simplify
the grammar ; (2) By the wish to re
lieve the awkwardness of the close
proximity between upas and rjpiv. This
latter consideration has led a few
good authorities to substitute rjpas for
ipas, and others to substitute upiv for
rjpiv. Por mstances of these emphatic
repetitions in St Paul see the note on
L 20 SC avrov.
avv avrm] ' with Christ,' as in Ephes.
ii 5 avvefaoirolrjaev to Xpiarm. On
the inadmissibility of the reading aunj)
see the note on els avrbv i 20.
Xapio-dpevos] ' having forgiven] as
in Luke vii. 42 sq., 2 Cor. U. 7, 10,
xii. 13, Ephes. iv. 32; see also the note
on ui. 13 below. The idea of sin as a
debt incurred to God (Matt. vi. 12 rd
dcpeiXrjpara r/pcSv, comp. Luke xi. 4)
underlies this expression, as it does
also the commoner term for pardon,
dcpeais 'remission.' The image is
carried out in the cancelled bond,
ver. 14.
rjpiv] The person is changed ; ' not
to you Gentiles only, but to us all
alike.' St Paid is eager to claim his
share in the transgression, that he
may claim it also in the forgiveness.
Por other examples of the change
from the second to the first person,
see i. 10—13, iii. 3, 4, Ephes. ii. 2, 3,
13, 14, iv. 31, 32, v. 2 (the correct
reading), 1 Thess. v. 5, where the mo
tive of the change is similar. See also
Gal. iii. 25, 26, iv. 5, 6, where there is
the converse transition.
14. e|aXei\Jras] ' having cancelled.'
The word e'£aXeicpetv, like Siaypdcpetv,
signifying 'to blot out, to erase,' is
commonly opposed to eyypdcpeiv 'to
enter a name, etc' ; e.g. Arist. Pax

II. 14]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

I85

vpias avv avTco, ^apiarafievos tj/uuv iravTa Ta irapairToo-
piaTa, I4 i^aXeiylr-as to Kad' tjpicov xeipoypa<pov toIs

1 181, Lysias c. Nicom. p. 183, Plato
Resp. vi. p. 501 b. More especially is
it so used in reference to an item in
an account, e.g. Demosth. c Aristog.
i- P- 791 iyypdtpovrat irdvres 01 icpXi-
axdvovres. . .i^dXifXiirrai to ScjjXrjpa.
rb xaff rj'pcSv x.r.X.] ' the bond stand
ing against us.' The word x«pdypa-
cpov, which means properly an auto
graph of any kind, is used almost ex
clusively for a note of hand, a bond or
obligation, as having the ' sign-manual '
of the debtor or contractor : e.g. Tobit
V. 3 (comp. ix. 5) eScoxev avrm to XelP°~
ypacpov, Plut. Mor. p. 829 A tov X"P°~
ypdcpmv xal avpfioXaimv. It is more
common in Latin than in Greek, e.g.
Cic Fam. vii 18 ' Misi cautionem chi-
rographi mei,' Juv. Sat. xvi. 41 ' De
bitor aut sumptos pergit non reddere
nummos, Vana supervacui dicens
chirographa ligni' (comp. xiu. 137).
Hence chirographum,chirographarius,
are frequent terms in the Roman law
books; see Heumann-Hesse Hand-
lexicon zu den Quellen des romischen
Rechts s.v. p. 74.
In the case before us the Jewish
people might be said to have signed
the contract when they bound them
selves by a curse to observe all the
enactments of the law (Deut. xxvu.
14 — 26 ; comp. Exod. xxiv. 3) ; and
the primary reference would be to
them. But rjpiv, fjp&v, seem to in
clude GentUes as weUas Jews, so that
a wider reference must be given to
the expression. The Soypara there
fore, though referring primarily to the
Mosaic ordinances, wUl include aU
forms of positive decrees in which
moral or social principles are embo
died or reUgious duties defined ; and
the 'bond' is the moral assent of the
conscience, which (as it were) signs
and seals the obligation. The Gen
tiles, though ' not having a law, are a
law to themselves/ oinves ivSeixvvvrai

to epyov tov vopov y pair rov ev rats
xap8iais avrmv, avppaprvpovarjs
avr&v rfjs cruvei8ijerecos, Rom. ii. 14, 15.
Soe the notes on Gal. ii. 19, iv. 11.
Comp. Orig. Hom. in Gen. xiii 4 (11.
p. 96).
rois 8dypao-iv] ' consisting in ordi
nances': comp. Ephes. ii. 15 rdv vdpov
tov ivroX&v iv Soypaatv. The word
Sdypa is here used in its proper sense
of a ' decree,' ' ordinance,' correspond
ing to 8oypaTi£eade below, ver. 20.
This is its only sense in the N. T. ;
e.g. Luke ii. 1, Acts xvii 7, of the
emperor's decrees ; Acts xvi. 4 of the
Apostolic ordinances. Here it refers
especially to the Mosaic law, as in
Joseph. Ant. XV. 5. 3 rd xdXXicrra tov
Soypdrcov xal rd daicoYara rcSv ev Tois
vbpots, Philo Leg. All. i. 16 (1. p. 54)
StarTJpTjais rmv dyimv Soypdrcov, 3 Mace.
i. 3 raw irarplav Soypdrcov. Comp.
Iren. Fragm. 38 (p. 855 Stieren) where,
immediately after a reference to our
text, rois rcov 'IouSaicov Sbypaat irpoa-
epxeadat is opposed to irvevpanx&s
Xeiroupyeiv. In the parallel passage,
Ephes. U. 15, this is the exclusive
reference; but here (for reasons ex
plained in the last note) it seems best
to give the term a secondary and
more extensive appUcation.
The dative is perhaps best explained
as governed by the idea of yeypap
pevov involved in xeipoypacpov (comp.
Plat. Ep. vU. p. 243 A rd yeypappiva
rvirois) ; as in 1 Tim. ii. 6 rd paprvpiov
xatpots iSiois, where xaipols depends
on an implied pepaprupijpevov. Other
wise it is taken as closely connected
with xaff fjp&v, ' the bond which was
in force against us by reason of the
ordinances': see Winer § xxxi. p. 273,
A. Buttmann p. 80. Possibly an e'v
has dropped out of the text before
rois Soypaatv, owing to the simUar
ending veiporpA<J>ON6N (comp. Ephes.
ii. 1 5) ; but, if so, the omission must

i86

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 14

Boyp.ao'iv, o tjv virevavTiov tjplv Kal ovto tjpKev iK

date from the earUest age, since no
existing authorities exhibit any traces
of such a reading; see the note on
ver. 18 4 ibpaxev, and comp. PhiL ii
I ei ns airXdyxya.
A wholly different interpretation
however prevails universaUy among
Greek commentators both here and
in Ephes. ii. 15. They take tois 8dy-
paaiv, iv 8bypaaiv, to mean the ' doc
trines or precepts of the Gospel,' and
so to describe the instrument by
which the abrogation of the law was
effected. So Chrysostom, Severianus,
Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theo
doret, followed by the later commen
tators CEcumenius and Theophylact.
Strangely enough they do not allude
to the correct interpretation; nor (with
the exception of the passage ascribed
to Irenaeus which is quoted above)
have I found any distinct traces of it
in any Greek father. The grammati
cal difficulty would be taken to favour
this interpretation, which moreover
was characteristic of the age when
the battle of creeds was fought. But
it has been universally abandoned by
modern interpreters, as plainly inap
propriate to the context and also as
severing the substantive Sdypa here
from the verb Soyparifeiv in ver.20. The
Latin fathers, who had either decretis
or sententiis in their version, were
saved from this false interpretation ;
e.g. Hilar, de Trin. i. 12 (11. p. 10),
ix. 10 (11. p. 265 sq.), Ambros. Apol.
Dae. 13 (1. p. 698), de Fid. iii. 2 (11.
p. 499), August, de Pecc. Mer. i 47
(x. p. 26) : though they very commonly
took toIs Sbypaaiv, iv Soypaatv, to
refer to the decree of condemnation.
Jerome however on Ephes. ii. 15
(vii. p. 581) foUows the Greeks. The
later Christian sense of Sdypa, mean
ing ' doctrine,' camefrom its secondary
classical use, where it was applied to
the authoritative and categorical 'sen
tences' of the phUosophers : comp.
Just. Mart. Apol. i. 7 (p. 56 d) 01 e'v

"EXXijo-i rd aurols dpecrrd Soypariaavres
ix iravrbs t& evi ovopari cpiXoaocptas
irpoaayopevovrat, xatirep rmv Soyparmv
ivavrlav ovtov, Cic. Acad. U. 9 'de
suis decretis quae philosophi vocant
ioypara] Senec. Epist. xcv. 10 ' Nulla
ars contemplativa sine decretis suis
est, quae Graeci vocant dogmata, nobis
vel decreta Ucet adpellare vel scita
vel placita.' See the indices to Plu
tarch, Epictetus, etc, for iUustrations
of the use of the term. There is an
approach towards the ecclesiastical
meaning in Ignat. Magn. 13 |Se0aico-
drjvai iv rois Sbypaaiv rou Kupiou xal
nSi' ajrocrrdXcov, Barnab. § I rpia ouv
Soypara e'oriv Kvpiov (comp. § 9, 10).
0 rjv x.r.X.] ' which was directly op
posed to us.' The former expression,
rd xa6" ijp&v, referred to the validity
of the bond; the present, o rjv ujrevav-
riov 17'piv, describes its active hostility.
It is quite a mistake to suppose that
the first preposition in virevavrios
mitigates its force, as in uVoSijXcoais,
ujrdXeuxos, viropaivopai, -viroarjpaiveiv,
etc. Neither in classical writers nor
in the lxx has the word any shade of
this meaning. It is very commonly
used, for instance, of things which are
directly antagonistic and mutually
exclusive: e.g. Aristot. de Gen.
et Corr. i. 7 (p. 323) Arjpdxpiros...
cpijcrl...Td aurd xai dpoiov elvai to re
iroiovv xal rb irdaxov...ioixaat Se oi
tovtov tov Tpbirov Xeyovres virevavria
(ie. self- contradictory) cpalveadat Xi-
yeiv" atnov Se rrjs ivavnoXoyias X.T.X.,
[Plato] Alcib. Sec 138 c 2Q. Td pai-
veadai apa virevavriov aoi Soxet no
cppoveiv; AA. LTdvu pev ouv... 1 39 B 2Q.
Kal prjv 8uo ye ujrevavria e'v! irpdypart
ir&s av eir/ ; (i e. how can one thing
have two direct opposites?), where
the whole argument depends on this
sense of virevavrios. In compounds
with urrd the force of the preposition
will generaUy be determined by the
meaning of the other element in the
compound; and, as ivavrios (evavri)

ii. is]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

187

tov juecrov, irpoa~t]Xob'o~as avTO tw o~Tavpop' 1S direKBv-

impUes locality, a local sense is commu
nicated to ujrd. Thus uirevavrios may
be compared with uWaXXdo-o-eiv, u-
rravrav, uiravnafeiv, uirorpe'^etv (Xen.
Cyrop. i. 2. 12 Xjjards ujroSpapeiv ' to
hunt down '), uWeXauveiv (Xen. Andb.
i 8. 15 ujreXdo-as cos cruvavrfjo-ai, 'riding
up'), vcpiardvat (Polyb. i. 5° 6u'jrecrn7-
ae ttjv eavrov vavv dvriirpapov rots
jroXepiois,'hebroughtup'hisown8hip). With this meaning, 'over against,'
' close in upon,' the preposition does
not weaken but enhance the force of
ivavrios, so that the compound will
denote ' direct,' ' close,' or ' persistent
opposition.' xal aurd rjpxev x.r.X.] ' and He, i. e.
Christ, hath taken it away.' There
is a double change in this clause : (1)
The participles {jfapiadpevos, i£aXet-
ijfas) are replaced by a finite verb.
(2) The aorists (awe£moiroiijaev, xa~
ptadpevos, i^dXelijr-as) are replaced by
a perfect. The substitution of rjpev
for rjpxev in some copies betrays a
consciousness on the part ofthe scribes
of the dislocation produced by the
new tense. As a new subject, 6
Xpiaros, must be introduced some
where (see the note on ver. 13), the
severance thus created suggests this
as the best point of transition. The
perfect rjpxev, ' He hath removed it,'
is suggested by the feeling of reUef
and thanksgiving, which rises up in
the Apostle's mind at this point. Por
the strong expression atpeiv e'x [rou]
piaov, 'to remove and put out of
sight,' comp. lxx Is. Ivii. 2, Epictet.
in. 3. 15, Plut. Mor. p. 519 d; so 2
Thess. U. 7 e'x piaov yevrjrai.
irpoarjXdaas k.t.X.] ' The abrogation
was even more emphatic. Not only
was the writing erased, but the do
cument itself was torn up and cast
aside.' By irpoarjXmaas is meant that
the law of ordinances was nailed to
the cross, rent with Christ's body,
and destroyed with His death : see
tho notes on Gal. vi. 14 81 oZ [rov

crraupou] epoi xbapos (the world, the
sphere of material ordinances) eVrau-
pcorat xdym xbapa, where the idea is
the same. It has been supposed that
in some cities the abrogation of a
decree was signified by running a
nail through it and hanging it up in
public. The image would thus gain
force, but there is no distinct evi
dence of such a custom.
15. direxSucrdpevos x.r.X.] This
word appears not to occur at all be
fore St Paul, and rarely if ever after
his time, except in writers who may
be supposed to have his language be
fore them; e.g. Hippol. Haer. i 24
airexSvadpevov to a&pa o jrepixeirai.
In Joseph. Ant. vi. 14. 2 djrexSus is
only a variation for perexSus which
seems to be the correot reading. The
word also appears in some texts of
Babrius Fab. xvUi 3, but it is merely
a conjectural emendation. Thus the
occurrence of dn-exSuecr&H here and in
iii. 9, and of dn-exSuo-is above in ver. 1 1,
is remarkable ; and the choice of an
unusual, if not a wholly new, word
must have been prompted by the de
sire to emphasize the completeness of
the action. The force of the double
compound may be inferred from a pas
sage of Lysias, where the two words
diroSveadai and exSveadai occur toge
ther; c. Theomn. i 10 (p. 117) rpd-
axmv doipdnov diroSeSvadat fj rbv xtra-
viaxov ixSeSvadai. Here however the
sense of djrexSuo-dpevos is difficult.
The meaning generaUy assigned to it,
'having spoiled, stripped of their
arms,' disregards the middle voice.
St Jerome is chiefly responsible for
this common error of interpretation :
for in place of the Old Latin ' exuens
se,' which was grammatically correct,
he substituted ' exspohans ' in his re
vised version. In his interpretation
however he was anticipated by the
commentator HUary, who read ' exu
ens ' for ' exuens se ' in his text. Dis
carding this sense, as inconsistent with

i88

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. is

o-dfxevos rets dp%ds Kal Tas egovcrias iBeiypaTi-

the voice, we have the choice of two
interpretations. (i) The common interpretation of
the Latin fathers, 'putting off the
body,' thus separating direxSvadpevos
from ras dpxas x.r.X. and understand
ing rnv aapxa or rd creopa with it; comp.
2 Cor. v. 3 e'vSuo-dpevoi. So Novat. cii?
Trin. 16 'exutus carnem'; Ambros.
Expos. Luc. v. § 107 (1. p. 1381) 'ex
uens se carnem,' comp. de Fid. iu.
2 (11. p. 499); Hilar, de Trin. i. 13
(n. p. 10) ' exutus carnem ' (comp. ix.
10, p. 265), x. 48 (p. 355) 'spohans
se carne' (comp. ix. 11, p. 266); Au
gustin. Epist. 149 (11. p. 513) ' exuens
se carne,' etc This appears to have
been the sense adopted much earlier
in a Docetic work quoted by Hippol.
Haer. viu. IOt/fu^r) iKeivrj iv r& ampart
Tpacpelaa, direxSvaapivrj to a&pa xal
irpoarjXdaaaa irpbs to £vXov xal dptap-
/3euo-acra x.r.X. It is so paraphrased
likewise in the Peshito Syriac and the
Gothic. The reading dn-exSuo-dpevos
rrjv aapxa xal rds i^ovaias (omitting
rds dp^ds xal), found in some an
cient authorities, must be a corrup
tion from an earUer text, which had
inserted the gloss ttjv adpxa after
djrexSucrdpevos, while retaining rds
ctpxas xai, and which seems to have
been in the hands of some of the La
tin fathers already quoted. This in
terpretation has been connected with
a common metaphorical use of diro
Sveadai, signifying 'to strip' and so
' to prepare for a contest'; e. g. Plut.
Mor. 8ll B jrpds 7rdcrav djroSudpevoi
ttjv iroXinxrjv irpa£tv, Diod. Sic. ii. 29
e'jrl cpiXoaocpiav diroSiivres. The seri
ous objection to this rendering is, that
it introduces an isolated metaphor
which is not explained or suggested
by anything in the context.
(2) The common interpretation of
the Greek fathers ; ' having stripped
off and put away the powers of evil,'
making djrexSucrdpevos govern rds dp-
X«s x.r.X. So Chrysostom, Severianus,

Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodo
ret. This also appears to have been
the interpretation of Origen, in Matt.
xu. § 25 (iii. p. S44), *• § 40 (P- 56o),
in Ioann. vi. § 37 (iv. p. 155), ib. xx
§ 29 (p. 356), though his language is
not explicit, and though his transla
tors, e. g. in Libr. les. Hom. vii § 3
(n. p. 413), make him say otherwise.
The meaning then wUl be as follows.
Christ took upon Himself our human
nature with aU its temptations (Heb. iv.
15). The powers of evil gathered about
Him. Again and again they assailed
Him; but each fresh assault ended
in a new defeat. In the wilderness
He was tempted by Satan ; but Satan
retired for the time baffled and
defeated (Luke iv. 13 drreo-nj djr'
avrov &XP1 xaipov). Through the
voice of His chief disciple the temp
tation was renewed, and He was
entreated to decline His appointed
sufferings and death. Satan was
again driven off (Matt, xvi 23 urraye
oiriam pov, Sarava, axdvSaXov ei ipov :
comp. Matt. viii. 31). Then the last
hour came. This was the great crisis
of aU, when ' the power of darkness'
made itself felt (Luke xxii. S3 rj e'£o u-
o-ia toC axdrous; see above i 13), when
the prince of the world asserted his
tyranny (Joh. xii. 31 6 dpxmv rov
xbapov). The final act in the conflict
began with the agony of Gethsemane;
it ended with the cross of Calvary.
The victory was complete. The enemy
of man was defeated. The powers of
evil, which had clung Uke a Nessus
robe about His humanity, were torn
off and cast aside for ever. And the
victory of mankind is involved in the
victory of Christ. In His cross we
too are divested of the poisonous
clinging garments of temptation and
sin and death ; to dirodeadat rnv
oVijTonjTa, says Theodore, rjv uirep rijs
xoivijs dcpeiXev evepyeaias, aireSvaaro
xdxeivcov (i. e. rmv dvriKeipivmv 8vvd-
pemv) ttjv avdevreiav fiirep e'xej^prjvro

II. iS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

189

o~ev iv irapptjcria, 6piapifievo-as avTOvs iv avTco.

xaff rj'pcSv. . For the image of the gar
ments comp. Is. lxiv. 6, but especiaUy
Zech. iii 1 sq., ' And he showed me
Joshua the high-priest standing be
fore the angel of the Lord and Satan
standing at his right hand to resist
him. And the Lord said unto Satan,
The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan...
Now Joshua was clothed with filthy
garments... And He answered and
spake unto those that stood before
Him, saying, Take away the filthy gar
ments from him. And unto him He
said, Behold, i" have caused thine ini
quity to pass from thee' In this
prophetic passage the image is used
of His type and namesake, the Jesus
of the Restoration, not in his own
person, but as the high-priest and re
presentative of a guilty but cleansed
and forgiven people, with whom he is
identified. For the metaphor of drrex-
Svaduevos more especiaUy, see Philo
Quod det. pot. ins. 13 (1. p. 199) i£ava-
trrdvres Se xal Siepetadpevoi rds eWe^-
vous aurcov jrepnrXoxds evpap&s e'xSu-
a bpe da, where the image in the con
text is that of a wrestUng bout.
This interpretation is grammatical;
it accords with St Paul's teaching; and
itis commended by the paraUel uses of
the substantive in ver. 1 1 e'v rfj djrex-
8uo-eirou o-coparosrijs crapxds,and ofthe
verb in ui 9 direxSvadpevoi rbv iraXaibv
avdpmirov x.t.X. The dirixSvais accom
plished in us when we are baptized into
His death is a counterpart to the dWx-
Suo-is which He accompUshed by His
death. With Him indeed it was only
the temptation, with us it is the sin
as weU as temptation; but otherwise
the parallel is complete. In both
cases it is a divestiture of the powers
of evil, a liberation from the dominion
of the flesh. On the other hand the
common explanation ' spoiUng ' is not
less a violation of St Paul's usage
(iii. 9) than of grammatical rule.
rds dpxds x.r.X.] What powers are
especially meant here wUl appear from

Ephes. vi. 12 jrpds rds dp^ds, jrpds rds
egoucrias, 7rpds rous xoapoxpdropas tov
axoTovs tovtov, irpbs ra irvevparixd rijs
irovTjpias x.r.X. See the note on i. 16.
e'8eiypdno-ev] ' displayed] as a vic
tor displays his captives or trophies in
a triumphal procession: Hor. Epist.
i 17. 33 ' captos ostendere civibus hos-
tes.' The word is extremely rare;
Matt. i. 19 prj diXtov avrrjv Setypariaat
(where it ought probably to be read
for the more common word rrapaSeiy-
pariaai), Act. Paul, et Petr. 33 eXeye
7rpos rdv Xabv tva pf) povov dirb rijs tov
Sipcovos djrdnjs cpvyaatv dXXd xal Seiy-
paTtaovaiv avrbv. Nowhere does the
word convey the idea of ' making an
example ' (irapa8etypariaai) but signi
fies simply ' to display, publish, pro
claim.' In the context of the last
passage we have as the consequence,
coo-re 7rdvras rods eu\aj3eis avSpas /38e-
XvrreaBai 2lpava rbv pdyov xal dvoaiov
aurdv xarayyeXX eiv, ie. to proclaim
his impieties. The substantive occurs
on the Rosetta stone I 30 (Boeckh
C. I. 4^97) raw avvrereXeapivrnv rd
Jrpos rdv Seiyjianapov Stdcpopa.
iv irapprjaig] ' boldly] not 'publicly.'
As jrappijo-iais 'unreservedness, plain
ness of speech ' (irav-prjaia, its opposite
being dpprjaia 'silence'), so whUe
applied still to language, it may be
opposed either (1) to 'fear,' as John
vii. 13, Acts iv. 29, or (2) to 'am
biguity, reserve,' Joh. xi. 14, xvi.
25,29; but ' misgiving, apprehension '
in some form or other seems to be
always the correlative idea. Hence,
when it is transferred from words to
actions, it appears always to retain
the idea of ' confidence, boldness'; e.g.
I Mace iv. 18 Xiji/fere rd axuXa perd
isappijaias, Test, xii Patr. Rub. 4 oux
eixov irapprjaiav dreviaat els irpbamirov
'Iaxco/3, Jos. Ant. ix. 10. 4 ujr' aiaxvvijs
re tov crupj3e/3rjxdros Seivou xal rou prj-
xer aura? irapprjaiav etvat. The idea of
pubUcity may sometimes be connected
with the word as a secondary notion,

190

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 16

l6Mt) ovv tis v/Jids KpiveToo iv fipcoa-ei Kal iv irocei tj

1 6. rj c?v irbaei.

e. g. in Joh. vii. 4, where e'v irapprjaia
elvai ' to assume a bold attitude' is
opposed to e'v xpujrra iroieiv (comp.
xviii. 20); but it does not displace the
primary sense.
6piap|3euo-as] ' leading them in tri
umph] the same metaphor as in 2 Cor.
ii. 14 rco iravrore dpiapfievovn ij pas iv
rm Xpiarm x.r.X., where it is wrongly
translated in the A.V. ' causeth us to
triumph.' Here however it is the de
feated powers of evil, there the sub
jugated persons of men, who are led
in pubhc, chained to the triumphal
car of Christ. This is the proper
meaning and construction of dpiap-
fievetv, as found elsewhere. This verb
takes an accusative (1) of the person
over whom the triumph is celebrated,
e.g. Plut. Vit.Arat. 54 tovtov AlpiXtos
idptdpjSevae, Thes. et Rom. Comp. 4
(Sao-iXeis idpidp^evae : (2) of the spoUs
exhibited in the triumph, e.g. Tatian
C Grace 26 iravaaade Xdyous dXXorpi-
ous dpiapfievovres xai, mairep b xoXoios,
ovx t8iois imxoapovpevoi irrepols: (3)
more rarely of the substance of the
triumph, e.g. Vit. Camill. 30 d Se
KdpiXXos idptdpfievae. . tov dwoXmXvias
amrrjpa irarpiSos yevbpevov, i. e. ' in the
character of his country's saviour.'
The passive dpiapj3eveadat is ' to be led
in triumph,' ' to be triumphed over,'
e.g. Vit. C. Marc. 35. So the Latins
say 'triumphare aliquem' and 'trium-
phari.' ev aurco] i. e. to aravpa '. COmp.
Ephes. U. 16 djroxaraXXd^ij rois dpepo-
repous...8id rou aravpov. The violence
of the metaphor is its justification.
The paradox of the crucifixion is thus
placed in the strongest Ught — triumph
in helplessness and glory in shame.
The convict's gibbet is the victor's
car. 16 — 19. 'Seeing then that the bond
is cancelled, that the law of ordinances
is repealed, beware of subjecting your
selves to its tyranny again. Suffer no

man to call you to account in the
matter of eating or drinking, or again
of the observance of a festival or a
new moon or a sabbath. These are
only shadows thrown in advance, only
types of things to come. The sub
stance, the reaUty, in every case be
longs to the Gospel of Christ. The
prize is now fairly within your reach.
Do not suffer yourselves to be robbed
of it by any stratagem of the false
teachers. Their reUgion is an offi
cious humihty which displays itself in
the worship of angels. They make a
parade of their visions, but they are
foUowing an empty phantom. They
profess humiUty, but they are puffed
up with their vaunted wisdom, which
is after all only the mind of the flesh.
MeanwhUe they have substituted in
ferior spiritual agencies for the One
true Mediator, the Eternal Word.
Clinging to these lower inteUigences,
they have lost their hold of the Head;
they have severed their connexion
with Him, on whom the whole body
depends; from whom it derives its
vitality, and to whom it owes its unity,
being supplied with nourishment and
knit together in one by means of the
several joints and attachments, so that
it grows with a growth which comes
from God HimseK.'
16 sq. The two main tendencies of
the Colossian heresy are discernible
in this warning (w. 16 — 19), as they
were in the previous statement (vv. 9
— 15). Here however the order is
reversed. The practical error, an ex
cessive ritualism and ascetic rigour,
is first dealt with (w. 16, 17); the
theological error, the interposition of
angeUc mediators, foUows after (w.
18, 19). The first is the substitution
of a shadow for the substance; the
second is the preference of an inferior
member to the head. The reversal of
order is owing to the connexion of the
paragraphs; the opening subject in

II. 17]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[91

ev /uepei eopTtjs t\ veofitivtas

17-
the second paragraph being a conti
nuation of the concluding subject in
the first, by the figure called chiasm :
comp. Gal. iv. 5.
xpiverco] not 'condemn you] but
'take you to task'; as e.g. Rom. xiv.
3 sq. The judgment may or may not
end in an acquittal ; but in any case
it is wrong, since these matters ought
not to be taken as the basis of a judg
ment. e'v IBpdcrei x.r.X.] 'in eating and
in drinking'; Rom. xiv. 17 ou ydp
ianv 17 jiaaiXeia rou ©eou /3pcocris xal
irdo-is, dXXd SiKaioavvr) x.r.X., Heb. ix.
IO e'jrt fip&paaiv Kal iropaatv xal 81a-
cpbpois fiaimapols, Sixatcdpara aapxbs,
comp. 1 Cor. vni 8 /Spcopa Se ij'pas ov
irapaamjaei to Qe& X.T.X. The first
indication that the Mosaic distinctions
of things clean and unclean should be
abolished is given by our Lord Him
self: Mark vii 14 sq. (the correct read
ing in ver. 19 being xadapi^mv irdvra rd
Bpdpara). They were afterwards form
ally annulled by the vision which ap
peared to St Peter: Acts x. 11 sq.
The ordinances of the Mosaic law
applied almost exclusively to meats.
It contained no prohibitions respect
ing drinks except in a very few cases;
e.g. of the priests ministering in the
tabernacle (Lev. x. 9), of liquids con
tained in unclean vessels etc. (Lev.
xi. 34, 36), and of Nazarite vows
(Num. vi 3). These directions, taken
in connexion with the rigid obser
vances which the later Jews had
grafted on them (Matt, xxiii 24),
would be sufficient to explain the ex
pression, when apphed to the Mosaic
law by itself, as in Heb. 1. c. The rigour
of the Colossian false teachers how
ever, like that of their Jewish proto
types the Essenes, doubtless went far
beyond the mjunctions of the law. It
is probable that they forbad wine and
animal food altogether: see the intro
duction pp. 86, 104 sq. For allusions

r\ aafifSaTcov, I?a icrTiv (tkioL
ianv irxicV.
in St Paul to similar observances not
required by the law, see Rom. xiv. 2
d Se aadev&v Xd^ava iadiet, ver. 2 1 xa
Xbv to prj cpayelv xpea prjSe jrieiv oivov
x.r.X., I Tim. iv. 2, 3 xaXv6vrav...dire-
Xeadat (ipaparmv a d ©eds exnaev x.r.X.,
Tit. i. 14 pr) irpoaexovTes...ivToXals
dvdpmirmv. . .irdvra xadapd rois xadapois.
The correct reading seems to be xal
e'v nbaet, thus connecting together the
words between which there is a natu
ral affinity. Comp. Philo Vit. Moys.
i. § 33 (n. p. 1 10) Seairoivats xaXejrais
avve£evypevov fip&act xal irbaet, Ign.
Trail. 2 ot! ydp fiprnparmv xal jrorcov
eio-lv Stdxovoi.
e'v pepei] 'in the matter of] etc.;
comp. 2 Cor. ui 10, ix. 3 e'v to pipei
rovrm. The expression seems origi
nally to mean ' in the division or cate
gory,' and in classical writers most
commonly occurs in connexion with
such words as ridivai, iroietadat, dpid-
petv, etc.: comp. Demosth. c Aristocr.
§ 148 dcra-.-o-rparicorns cov ev acpevSo-
vtjtov xal -sjr-iXov pepei... eoTpdreurai, i.e.
'in the capacity of.' Hence it gets
to signify more widely, as here, 'with
respect to,' 'by reason of: comp.
PhUo Quod det. pot. ins. § 2 (1. p. 192)
ev pepei Xdyou rou jrpoxdjrrovros xard
rdv irarepa xoapovvrai, in Flacc. 20
(n. p. 542) oaa iv pepei xapiros xal 8m-
peds eXafiov. But JEHan V. H. viii 3
xpivovres exaarov iv ra pepei rpdvou,
quoted by the commentators, is a false
paraUel : for cpdvou is there governed
by xpivovres and e'v ra pepei means ' in
his turn.'
eoprijs k.t.X.] The same three words
occur together, as an exhaustive enu
meration of the sacred times among
the Jews, in 1 Chron. xxui. 31,2 Chron.
u. 4, xxxi. 3, Ezek. xiv. 17, Hos. ii. 11,
Justin Dial. 8, p. 226; comp. Is. i 13,
14. See also Gal. iv. IO rjpepas irapa-
¦rrjpelade xal pfjvas xah xaipovs xal e'vi-
aurous, where the first three words
correspond to the three words used

192

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 18

tcov /neXXovTcov, to Be crco/nia tov XpaTTOV. * p.t]Beis

here, though the order is reversed.
The e'oprrj here, Uke the xaipoi there,
refers chiefly to the annual festivals,
the passover, pentecost, etc. The veo-
prjvia here describes more precisely
the monthly festival, which is there
designated more vaguely as pfjves.
The odppara here gives by name the
weekly holy-day, which is there indi
cated more generally by ijpipai.
veopnvias] See Num. xxvui 11 sq.
The forms veopijvia and vovprjvia seem
to be used indifferently in the common
dialect, though the latter is more
common. In the Attic vovprjvia alone
was held to be correct; see Lobeck
Phryn. p. 148. On the whole the
preference should perhaps be given
to veopijvias here, as supported by
some authorities which are generaUy
trustworthy in matters of orthography,
and as being the less usual form in
itself. cra/3/3drcov] ' a sabbath-day] not, as
the A. V., 'sabbath days'; for the co
ordinated words eoprijs, veopijvias, are
in the singular. The word crn/30ara
is derived from the Aramaic (as dis
tinguished from the Hebrew) form
KrUB>, and accordingly preserves the
Aramaic termination in u. Hence it
was naturaUy declined as a plural
noun, o-dj3/3ara, craj3/3drcov. The gene
ral use of adpjlaTa, when a single sab
bath-day was meant, wiU appear from
such passages as Jos. Ant. i 1. 1 dyo-
pev rijv rjpe'pav, irpoaayopevovres avrrjv
ad/3j3ara, ib. Ui. IO. I e/3Sdpijv 17'pepav
fjris ad$$ara xaXelrai, Plut. Mor.
169 0 'louSaioi aafifSdrmv ovrmv iv
dyvdpirrois xa6e£bpevoi, ib. 67 1 E oipat Se
xal tijv tov cra/3/3drcov eoprrjv prj iravra-
iraatv drrpoaStovvaov eivai, Hor. Sat.
i. 9. 69 ' hodie tricesima sabbata.' In
the New Testament ad/3/3ara is only
once used distinctly of more than a
single day, and there the plurality of
meaning is brought out by the at
tached numeral; Acts xvii. 2 iirl adfi-
Hara rpla.

On the observance of days and sea
sons see again Gal. iv. 10, Rom. xiv.
5, 6. A strong anti- Judaic view on the
subject is expressed in the Epist. ad
Diogn. § 4. Origen c. Cels. vUi. 21, 22,
after referring to Thucyd. i 70 prjre
eoprrjv dXXo Tl rjyeladat rj to rd 8iovra
irpd£at, says d re'Xeios, del e'v rots Xb-
yois cov xal rois epyois xal rois Siavorj-
paat tov rfj cpvaet xvpiov Xbyov Qeov,
del iariv avrov iv rals ijpepais xal ael
dyei xvptaxds npe'pas, and he then goes
on to explain what is the irapaaxevr),
the iraaxa, the irevrijxoaTrj, of such a
man. The observance of sacred times
was an integral part of the old dispen
sation. Under the new they have
ceased to have any value, except as a
means to an end. The great principle
that ' the sabbath was made for man
and not man for the sabbath,' though
underlying the Mosaic ordinances,
was first distinctly pronounced by our
Lord. The setting apart of special
days for the service of God is a con
fession of our imperfect state, an
avowal that we cannot or do not de
vote our whole time to Him. Sab
baths will then ultimately be super
seded, when our life becomes one
eternal sabbath. Meanwhile the Apo
stle's rebuke warns us against attri
buting to any holy days whatever a
meaning and an importance which is
aUen to the spirit of the New Covenant.
Bengel on the text writes, ' Sabba
tum non laudatur, non imperatur;
dominica memoratur, non praecipitur.
Qui profundius in mundi negotiis hae-
rent, his utilis et necessarius est dies
definitus : qui semper sabbatizant,
majori libertate gaudent.' Yes: but
these last are just they who will most
scrupulously restrict their liberty, so
as dirpbaxoiroi yiveadai.
17. Two ideas are prominent in
this image. (1) The contrast between
the ordinances of the Law and the
teaching of the Gospel, as the shadow
and the substance respectively ; Philo

II. i8]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

193

vpids KaTajipaiQeveTco QeXcov iv Taireivofppoo'vvtj Kal

de Conf.ling. 37 (1. p. 434) vopiaavras
Ta pev prjrd tov xpijcrpcov crxids nvas
cocravel crcopdrcov elvai, Joseph. B. J.
ii. 2. 5 ax idv ainjabpevos flaaiXeias
tjs rjpiraaev eavrm rd a&pa; comp.
Philo in Place 19 (11. p. 541) o-xid jrpay-
pdrcov dp' ijaav, ov jrpdypara. (2) The
conception of the shadow as thrown
before the substance (rj Se o-xid jrporpe-
Xei rou adparos, says a Greek commen
tator), so that the Law was a type and
presage of the Gospel; Heb. x. 1 o-xidv
e\mv 6 vbpos T&v peXXdvrcov dyad&v
(comp. viii 5)- Thus it impUes both
the unsubstantiality and the super
session of the Mosaic ritual
d] 'which things] whether dis
tinctions of meats or observances of
times. If the other reading d be ta
ken, it wiU refer to the preceding
sentence generaUy, as if the antece
dent were ' the whole system of ordi
nances.' rd Se a&pa x.r.X.] As the shadow
belonged to Moses, so ' the substance
belongs to Christ'; i.e. the reaUty,
the antitype, in each case is found in
the Christian dispensation. Thus the
passover typifies the atoning sacrifice;
the unleavened bread, the purity and
sincerity of the true beUever; the
pentecostal feast, the ingathering of
the first fruits; the sabbath, the rest
of God's people ; etc.
18. The Christian's career is the
contest of the stadium (Spbpos, Acts
xx. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 7); Christ is the
umpire, the dispenser of the rewards
(2 Tim. iv. 8); life eternal is the bay
wreath, the victor's prize (j3pa/3eiov,
1 Cor. ix. 24, PhU. iii 14). The Co
lossians were in a fair way to win this
prize; they had entered the lists duly ;
they were running bravely : but the
false teachers, thrusting themselves in
the way, attempted to trip them up
or otherwise impede them in the race,
and thus to rob them of their just
reward. For the idea of xara/3pa-
/3eue'rco compare especiaUy Gal. v. 7
COL.

irpexere KaXms' ris vpas ivixo\j/ev
x.r.X. xara|3pa|8euerco] ' rob of the prize,
the j3paj3eiov'; comp. Demosth. Mid.
p. 544 (one of the documents) eVio-rd-
pet9a Srpdrcova ujto MeiSiou xarajSpa-
ftevdevra xal jrapd irdvra rd Sixaia
dnpmdivra, which presents a close
paraUel to the use of xarappaj3eveiv
here. See also Eustath. on II. i. 403 sq.
(p. 43) xarafipafievei airbv, as cpaatv
oi iraXatoi, ib. Opusc 277, etc. The
false teachers at Colossse are not re
garded as umpires nor as successful
rivals, but simply as persons frustrat
ing those who otherwise would have
won the prize. The word xara/3pa/3eueiv
is wide enough to include such. The
two compounds xara/3pa/3eueiv and ira-
pa/3pa/3eueiv (Plut. Mor. p. 535 0 oi
irapappafievovres iv rots dy&at) Only
differ in this respect, that deprivation is
the prominent idea in the former word
and trickery in the latter. Jerome,
Epist. exxi ad Algas. (1. p. 879), sets
down this word, which he wrongly
interprets 'bravium accipiat adversum
vos,' as one of St Paul's Cilicisms.
The passages quoted (whether the
document in the Midias be authentic
or not) are sufficient to show that
this statement is groundless.
deXmv iv] ' taking delight in] ' de
voting himself to.' The expression
is common in the lxx, most frequently
as a translation of "3 pan, 1 Sam.
xviii. 22,v 2 Sam. xv. 26, 1 Kings x. 9,
2 Chron. ix. 8, Ps. cxi. 1, cxlvi. 10,
but in one passage of "3 fiXI,
1 Chron. xxviii 4. So too Test, xii
Pair. Asher I e'dv ouv rj i/w^r) deXtj
e'v xaXcS. Comp. also 1 Mace. iv. 42
deXijras vdpov, and see ideXodprjaxeia
below. Against this construction no
valid objection has been urged. Other
wise deXcov is taken absolutely, and
various senses have been assigned to
it, such as 'imperiously' or 'design
edly' or 'wilfully' or 'gladly, readily';
but these are either unsupported by
13

194

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 18

6pt]CTKeia tcov dyyeXwv, d eopaKev ipi/3aTevcov, e'iKtf <pv-

usage or inappropriate to the context
Leclerc (ad loc.) and Bentley (Crit.
Sacr. p. 59) conjectured deXymv; Toup
(Emend, in Suid. n. p. 63) more plau
sibly e'Xd'iov ; but the passages quoted
show that no correction is needed.
rairetvoCppoavvT]] Humility is a vice
with heathen moraUsts, but a virtue
with Christian Apostles; see the note
on Phil. u. 3. In this passage, which
(with ver. 23) forms the sole exception
to the general language of the Apo
stles, the divergence is rather appa
rent than real The disparagement is
in the accompaniments and not in the
word itself. HumiUty, when it be
comes self-conscious, ceases to have
any value; and self-consciousness at
least, if not affectation, is impUed by
deXmv iv. Moreover the character of
the raireivocppoavvTi in this case is fur
ther denned as dprjaxeia t&v dyyeXmv,
which was altogether a perversion of
the truth.
dpTjaxeia] This word is closely con
nected with the preceding by the vin
culum of the same preposition. There
was an officious parade of humility in
selecting these lower beings as inter
cessors, rather than appealing di
rectly to the throne of grace. The
word refers properly to the external
rites of reUgion, and so gets to sig
nify an over-scrupulous devotion to
external forms; as in Philo Quod det.
pot. ins. 7 (l. p. 195) dprjaxeiav dvri
baiOTTjTos rjyovpevos, Plut. Vit. Alex.
2 Soxei xal to dprjaxeveiv ovopa rats
xaraxbpois yeviadat xal ireptepyois
iepoupyiais: comp. Acts xxvi. 5, and
see the well-known remarks of Cole
ridge on James i. 26, 27, in Aids to
Reflection p. 14. In the lxx dprj
axeveiv, dprjaxeia, together occur four
times (Wisd. xi. 16, xiv. 16, 18, 27),
and in all these examples the refer
ence is to idolatrous or false worship.
Indeed generally the usage of the
word exhibits a tendency to a bad
sense.

tov dyyeXcov] For the angelology
and the angelolatry of these Colossian
false teachers, more especiaUy in its
connexion with Essene teaching, see
the introduction, pp. 89 sq., 101 sq.,
1 10, 1 15 sq. For the prominence which
was given to angelology in the specu
lations of the Jews generally, see the
Preaching of Peter quoted in Clem.
Alex. Strom, vi. 5 (p. 760) prj8e xard
IouSaious aefieade, xal yap ixelvoi...
ovx iiriaravTat Xarpeuovres dyyeXois
xal dp^ayyeXois, Celsus in Orig. c. Cels.
v. 6 (i. p. 580) irpmrov ovv rmv 'lovSaimv
davpa£eiv a£tov, el rbv pev ovpavov xal
rous e'v ra8e dyyeXous aefiovai X.T.X.,
comp. ib. }. 26 (p. 344). Prom Jews
it naturaUy spread to Judaizing
Christians; e.g. Clem. Hom. Ui. 36
dyyeXcov dvbpara yvapl£eiv, viii. 12 sq.,
Test, xii Patr. Levi 3 (quoted above
on i 16). The interest however ex
tended to more orthodox circles, as
appears from the passage in Ignat.
Trail. 5 prj ov Svvapai rd iirovpdvia
ypayjr-at ;... Svvapai voetv Ta iirovpdvia
xal Tas Torrodeaias ras dyyeXixds xal
rds o-uordcreis rds dpxovnxds x.r.X. (see
the note there). Of angelology among
Gnostic sects see Iren. ii. 30. 6, ii. 32.
5, Orig. c Cels. vi. 30 sq. (1. p. 653),
Clem. Alex. Exc. Theod. p. 970 sq.,
Pistis Sophia pp. 2, 19, 23, etc.
d ibpaxev k.t.X.] UteraUy ' invading
what he has seen] which is generaUy
explained to mean 'parading' or 'por
ing over his visions.' For this sense of
ep/Sareueiv, which takes either a geni
tive or a dative or an accusative, comp.
Philo de Plant. Noe U. 19 (1. p. 341)
01 irpoamrepm xcopouvres tov imorrj-
pcov xal e'jrl jrXeov e'pjSareuovres aurais,
2 Mace U. 30 rd pev e'p/3areuovres xai
jrepi jravrcov jroieicr&ii Xdyov xal jroXu-
jrpaypoveiv e'v rois xard pepos. At a
later date this sense becomes com
mon, e.g. Nemesius de Nat. Hom.
p. 64 (ed. Matthaei) oilpavbv ipfiarevei
rfj dempia. In Xen. Symp. iv. 27 e'v
t& avrm /3i/3Xia> dpepbrepot e'p/3areuere

II i9]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

195

aiov/uievos viro tov voos
n, the reading may be doubtful.
though d edpaxev singly might mean
' his visions,' and ep/Saretiow ' busying
himself with,' the combination ' inva
ding what he has seen,' thus inter
preted, is so harsh and incongruous
as to be hardly possible; and there
was perhaps some corruption in the
text prior to aU existing authorities
(see the note on Phil. U. 1 for a par
allel case). Did the Apostle write
e'copa (or aldpa) xevep/3areucov ? In this
case the existing text c\60opAKeN6M
Bateycon might be explained partly
by an attempt to correct the form
e'copa into aldpa or conversely, and
partly by the perplexity of transcribers
when confronted with such unusual
words. This reading had suggested
itself to me independently without
the knowledge that, so far as regards
the latter word, it had been antici
pated by others in the conjecture a
idpa (or a edpaxev) xevepj3areucov. The
word xevepj3arelv 'to walk on empti
ness,' ' to tread the air ' and so meta
phoricaUy (Uke aepofiarelv, aidepofia-
relv, aldepepfiarelv, etc.) ' to indulge in
vain speculations,' is not an uncommon
word. For its metaphorical sense espe
ciaUy see Plut. M- or. p. 336 f outos epep-
0ero xevepj3arouv xal o-cpaXXdpevov ujr
dvapxias to piyedos avrrjs, Basil. Op.
L p. 135 rdv vovv...pvpla irXavrjdivra
xal 7roXXd xevep^arrjaavra X.T.X., ib. I.
p. 596 o-ov Se pij xevep/3areirco d vous,
Synes. de Insomn. p. 156 oure ydp xe-
vep/3arouvras rods Xbyovs if-rjveyxav.
Though the precise form xevepjSareveiv
does not occur, yet it is unobjection
able in itself. For the other word
which I have ventured to suggest,
idpa or aldpa, see Philo de Somn. ii. 6
(i. p. 665) virorvcpov pevos vir al-
mpas cbpev&v xal xevov cpvarjparos, ib.
§ 9 (p. 667) rrjv iir aim pas cpopoupe-
vryv xevrfv Sd|av, Quod Deus immut.
§ 36 (I. p. 298) mairep iir' aldpas ti
vos iffevSovs xai dfiefiaiov 8b£rjs Cpopel-
adat Kara xevov 0aivovra. The

19

Kai ou

Tt]S arapKos avTOv,
But first and last passages more especiaUy

present striking parallels, and show
how germane to St Paul's subject
these ideas of 'suspension or ba
lancing in the air' (e'copa or aldpa)
and 'treading the void' (xevep/3areue«v)
would be, as expressing at once the
spiritual pride and the emptiness of
these speculative mystics ; see also de
Somn. ii. 2 (p. 661) ipcpaiverai xal to
rijs xevfjs 8d£ijs, e'cp* ijv, cos icp' dppa,
Sid rb xovCpov dvajiaivet, cpvam-
pevos xal perecopov rjm prj xms eavrbv.
The substantive, e'copa or ai'copa, is used
sometimes of the instrument for sus
pending, sometimes of the position of
suspension. In this last sense it de
scribes the poising of a bird, the float
ing of a boat on the waters, the ba-
lan cing on a rope, and the Uke. Hence
its expressiveness when used as a me
taphor. In the received text a negative is
inserted, d pr) empaxev ipj3arevav.
This gives a very adequate sense ' in
truding into those things which he
has not seen'; ov ydp eiSev dyyeXous,
says Chrysostom, xal ourco 8idxeirai cos
iScdv: comp. Ezek. xiii. 3 ou'al rois irpo-
tpTjrevovaiv dirb xapSias auVcov xal rd
xacrdXou pn /3Xe'jrouo-iv. But, though
the difficulty is thus overcome, this
cannot be regarded as the original
reading of the text, the authorities
showing that the negative was an after
insertion. See the detached note on
various readings.
For the form ebpaxev, which is bet
ter supported here than edpaxev, see
the note on ii 1.
eixjj cpuo-iou'pevos] ' vainly puff edup]
Their profession of humility was a
cloke for excessive pride : for, as
St Paul says elsewhere (1 Cor. viii
1), ij yv&ats cpvatol. It may be ques
tioned whether eixjj should be con
nected with the preceding or the fol
lowing words. Its usual position in
St Paul, before the words which it
qualifies (Rom. xiii. 4, 1 Cor. xv. 2,
13—2

196

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

PL 19

KpaTcov Ttjv KecpaXtjv, i£ ov irdv to o-cop-a Bid tcov dcpcov

Gal. iv. 11; there is an exceptional
reason for the exceptional position in
Gal. iii. 4), points to the latter con
struction. rou vods x.r.X.] 'the mind of his
fiesh] i.e. unenlightened by the Spirit;
comp. Rom. viii. 7 rd cppdvijpa rrjs
aapxbs. It would seem that the
Apostle is here taking up some watch
word of the false teachers. They
doubtless boasted that they were di
rected ujto tov vobs. Yes, he answers,
but it is d vovs rrjs aapxbs vpmv. Com
pare Rev. U. 24, where the favourite
Gnostic boast ytvdaxeiv rd fiadea is
characterized by the addition of rou
SaravS (see Galatians p. 298, note 3).
Comp. August. Gonf. x. 67 'Quem
invenirem qui me reconciliaret tibi?
Ambiendum mihi fuit ad angelos?
Qua prece? quibus sacramentis?
Multi conantes ad te redire, neque
per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, ten-
taverunt haec et inciderunt in deside-
rium curiosarum visionum et digni
habiti sunt illusionibus. Elati enim
te quaerebant doctrinae fastu, etc'
19. ou xparcov] ' not holding fast.'
This is the most common construction
and meaning of xparelv in the New
Testament; e.g. Mark vii. 8dcpevres
ttjv ivToXr)v rov ©eou xpareire rrjv
irapdSoatv t&v dvdpmirmv ; comp. Cant.
Ui. 4 eupov ov Tjydirrjaev 7j ¦sjr-vxrj pov,
exparrjaa avrbv xai oux dcprjxa avrbv.
rrjv xecpaXrjv] ' the Head' regarded
as a title, so that a person is at once
suggested, and the relative which
follows is masculine, e'£ ou; comp. the
paraUel passage, Ephes. iv. 16 ds e'o-nv
17 xecpaXn, Xpiarbs e£ ov irdv rb a&pa
x.r.X. The supplication and worship
of angels is a substitution of inferior
members for the Head, which is the
only source of spiritual life and energy.
See the introduction pp. 34, 76, 99
sq, ii3sq.(
8id t&v dcp&v x.t.X.] 'through the
junctures and ligaments' Galen, when
describing the structure of the human

frame, more than once specifies the
elements of union as twofold : the
body owes its compactness partly to
the articulation, partly to the attach
ment; e.g. Op. 11. p. 734 (ed. Kiihn)
ecrri Se d rpdjros rfjs avvdiaems avr&v
Strros xard yevos, o pev erepos xard
apdpov, 6 Se erepos xara avpcpvatv.
Similarly, though with a more general
reference, Aristotle speaks of two
kinds of union, which he describes
as dcpij 'contact' and avpcpvats
' cohesion' respectively ; Metaph. iv. 4
(p. 1014) Stacpipet Si avpcpvats dcprjs'
evda pev yap ovdev irapd rrjv dcprjv erepov
avayxrj elvai, iv Se rots avpirecpvxbaiv
eari n ev to ovto iv dpcpolv a iroiei
avrl rov dirreadai ovpirecpvxivai xal
elvai ev x.r.X., Phys. Ausc. iv. 6 (p.
213) rourois dcprj iariv" avpcpvats Si,
orav apcpa ivcpyela ev yevcovrai (comp.
ib. v. 3, p. 227), Metaph. x. 3 (p. 1071)
ocra eanv dcpfl xal prj avpcpvaei. The
relation of contiguous surfaces and
the connexion of different parts to
gether effect structural unity. This
same distinction appears in the A-
postle's language here. Contact and
attachment are the primary ideas in
dcpai and avvSeapoi respectively.
Of the function of dcprj, 'contact,' in
physiology (jrepl dcpfjs rijs iv rots cpvo-i-
xois) Aristotle speaks at some length
in one passage, de Gen. et Corr. i. 6
(p. 322 sq.). It may be mentioned,
as Ulustrating St Paul's image, that
Aristotle in this passage lays great
stress on the mutual sympathy and
influence of the parts in contact, de
scribing them as iradr/Tixa xal iroajrixd
and as xtvr/rtxd xal xivnrd uV dXXr/Xcov.
Elsewhere, Uke St Paul here, he uses
the plural ai dcpai ; de Caelo i 11 (p.
280) rd aveu Cpdopas ore pev ov ore Se
prj ov, olov ras dcpds, on dvev rov cpdei-
peadat irporepov ovaai iarepov ovx eiaiv,
de Gen. et Corr. i. 8 (p. 326) oure ydp
xard rds dcpds e'vSe^erai Suevai Sid
tov Siacpavcov oure Sid tcov irbpmv,ib.
§ 9 (P- 327) « ycip Staxpiveadai Suvarai

II. i9]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

197

Kal o-vvBeo-picov iirixopriyov/uievov Kal o-vvrStfia^o/uievov

xard ras dcpds, moire p cpaai rives, xav
pr/jro) 77 SiTjpsjpevov, earai Strjprjpevov'
Svvarov ydp 8iaipedrjvai : COmp. [Plat.]
Axioch. p. 365 A avveiXeypivov rds
dcpds xal to adpan pmpdXeov. It is
quite clear from these passages of
Aristotle, more especially from the
distinction of dcpai and jrdpoi, that ai
dcpai are the joinings, the junctures.
When appUed to the human body
they would be 'joints,' provided that
we use the word accurately of the re
lations between contiguous limbs, and
not loosely (as it is often used) of the
parts of the Umbs themselves in the
neighbourhood of the contact. Hip
pocrates indeed used dtpai as a physio
logical term in a different sense, em
ploying it as a synonyme for dppara
i e. the fasciculi of muscles (see Galen
Op. xix. p. 87), but this use was quite
exceptional and can have no place
here. Thus ai dcpai will be almost a
synonyme for rd Spdpa, differing how
ever (1) as being more wide and com
prehensive, and (2) as not emphasizing
so strongly the adaptation of the
contiguous parts.
The considerations just urged seem
decisive as to the meaning of the
word. Some eminent modern critics
however explain ai dcpai to be 'the
senses,' foUowing Theodoret on Ephes.
iv. 16 dcpfjv Se ttjv diadrjaiv irpoarjyb-
pevaev, e'jreiSn xal aurrj pia T&v irivre
aiadrjaeav, xal djrd tov pepovs to irdv
mvbpaae. St Chrysostom had led the
way to this interpretation, though his
language is less expficit than Theo-
doret's. To such a meaning how
ever there are fatal objections. (1)
This sense of dcprj is whoUy. unsup
ported. It is true that touch lies at
the root of all sensations, and that
this fact was recognised by ancient
physiologists: e.g. Aristot. de A nim.
i. 13 (p. 435) dvev pev ydp dcpfjs ovSe
plav ivSexerat aXXijV atadrjatv e^eiv. But
here the connexion ends ; and unless
more cogent examples not hitherto ad-

ducedare forthcoming, we are justified
in saying that al dcpai could no more
be used for ai aladrjaeis, than in
EngUsh ' the touches ' could be taken
as a synonyme for 'the senses.' (2) The
image would be seriously marred by
such a meaning. The dcpai and o-uv-
Seapoi would no longer be an ex
haustive description of the elements
of union in the anatomical structure ;
the conjunction of things so incon
gruous under the vinculum of the
same article and preposition, Sid rcov
dcpcov xal avvSeapmv, would be un
natural ; and the intrusion of the
' senses ' would be out of place, where
the result specified is the supply of
nourishment (iirtxoprjyovpevov) and the
compacting of the parts (o-uv£i/3afd-
pevov). (3) All the oldest versions, the
Latin, the Syriac, and the Memphitic,
explain it otherwise, so as to refer in
some way to the connexion of the
parts of the body; e.g. in the Old
Latin it is rendered nexus here and
junctura in Ephes. iv. 16.
o-uvSeo-pcov] 'bands," ligaments.' The
Greeko-uv8eo-pos,likethe English ' liga
ment,' hasageneral andaspecial sense.
In its general and comprehensive mean
ing it denotes any of the connecting
bands which strap the body together,
such as muscles or tendons or liga
ments properly so called; in its special
and restricted use it is a ' ligament '
in the technical sense; comp. Galen
Op. IV. p. 369 avv8eapos ydp ianv, b
yovv ISias, ov xoiv&s dvopa£bp,evos, a&-
pa vevp&Ses if; dcrrou, pev oppdpevov
iravrms Siairecpvxbs 8e rj els barovv ij els
puv. Of the avvSeapoi or Ugaments
properly so called Galen describes at
length the several functions and uses,
more especially as binding and holding
together the Stapdp&aets; Op. I. 236,
11. 268, 739, in. 149, iv. 2, etc., comp.
Tim. Locr. de An. Mund. p. 557 o-uv-
Seapois jrorrdv xivaaiv rois vevpou
avvdsjr-e rd dpdpa (Opusc. Mythol. etc
ed. Gale). In our text indeed o-uv-

198

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 20

av^ei Ttjv av^tjo'iv tov Qeov. aoet diredaveTe avv XpiCTcp

Seapot must be taken in its compre
hensive sense; but the relation ofthe
dcpai to the avv8eapoi in St Paul stUl
remains the same as that of the 8iap-
dpmaeis to the avvSeapoi in Galen.
iirixoprjyovpevov x.r.X.] The two func
tions performed by the dcpai and o-uv-
Seo-poi a,re first the supply of nutri
ment etc. (iirixopr/yovpevov), and se
condly the compacting of the frame
(o-uv/3ij3afdpevov). In other words
they are the communication of Ufe
and energy, and the preservation of
unity and order. The source of all (e'£
ov) is Christ Himself the Head ; but
the channels of communication (Sid
rcov x.r.X.) are the different members
of His body, m their relation one to
another. For imxoprjyovpevov 'bounti
fully furnished' see the note on Gal.
Ui. 5. Somewhat similarly Aristotle
speaks of a&pa xdXXicrra irecpvKos xal
xexopTjyrjpevov, Pol. iv. I (p. 1288).
For examples of xopnyia appUed to
functions of the bodily organs, see
Galen. Op. ni. p. 617 e'v rais elairvoals
Xoprjyia ¦s\rvxpds jroidrr/ros, Alex. Probl.
i. 8l to irXelarov rrjs Tpocprjs i£v8apov-
pevov xopciytirat irpbs yeveaiv rou jrd-
dovs. For cruvj3i/3afdpevav, 'joined to
gether, compacted,' see the note on
ii. 2. In the paraUel passage, Ephes.
iv. 16, this part of the image is more
distinctly emphasized, awappoXayovpe-
vov xal o-uv/3i/3afdpevov. The difference
corresponds to the different aims of
the two epistles. In the Colossian
letter the vital connexion with the
Head is the main theme; in the
Ephesian, the unity in diversity among
the members.
au£ei Tr)vau£ijo-iv x.r.X.] By the two
fold means of contact and attach
ment nutriment has been diffused and
structural unity has been attained,
but these are not the ultimate result ;
they are only intermediate processes ;
the end is growth. Comp. Arist.
Metaph. iv.4(p.ioi4)au£ijo-iv exei8'
erepov r& ctnreadai xal avpirecpvxe-

vai...8iacpepei Se avpcpvats dcpfjs, where
growth is attributed to the same two
physiological conditions as here.
rou ©eou] i.e. 'which partakes of
God, which belongs to God, which
has its abode in God.' Thus the finite
is truly united with the Infinite ; the
end which the false teachers strove
in vain to compass is attained; the
Gospel vindicates itself as the true
theanthropism, after which the human
heart is yearning and the human in
tellect is feeling. See above, p. 115
sq. With this conclusion of the sen
tence contrast the paraUel passage
Ephes. iv. 16 rrjv av^rjaiv tov amparos
iroietrai els olxo8opi)v eavrov iv
dydirrj, where again the different
endings are determined by the dif
ferent motives of the two epistles.
The discoveries of modern physi
ology have invested the Apostle's
language with far greater distinctness
and force than it can have worn to
his own contemporaries. Any expo
sition of the nervous system more
especially reads Uke a commentary on
his image ofthe relations between the
body and the head. At every turn
we meet with some fresh illustration
which kindles it with a flood of Ught.
The voUtion communicated from the
brain to the limbs, the sensations of
the extremities telegraphed back to
the brain, the absolute mutual sym
pathy between the head and the
members, the instantaneous paralysis
ensuing on the interruption of con
tinuity, all these add to the com
pleteness and life of the image. But
the foUowing passages wiU show how
even ancient scientific speculation was
feehng after those physiological truths
which the image involves; Hippocr.
de Morb. Sacr. p. 309 (ed. Foese) xard
raura vopi£m rbv eyxecpaXov Suvapiv
irXeianjv e^eiw e'v rep dvdpdirm...ol Se
ocpdaXpol xal rd ovara xal rj yXmaaa
xal ai xftpes Kai °' JrdSes, 01a dv d e'yxe-
cpaXos ytvdaxTj, roiavra vrvnoerovcri...

IL20]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

199

diro tcov o-Tot^etW tov Koa-fxov, ti cos ^covTes iv koo-juico

es Se rrjv cruvecriv d e'yxecpaXos e'crrlv d
8iayyeXXcov...8idn cprjpl rdv iyxicpaXov
eivai tov epprjveuovra rnv cruvecriv, al Se
cppe'ves aXXas ovopa exovat rfj TVXV
xexnjpt vov. . .Xeyouo-i Se rives ds cppove-
opev rij xap St 17 xal rd dviaipevov rouro
e'ori xal rd cppovrifov" rd Se ovx ovrms
e^ei...rfjs...cppovijo-ios ovSerepa perecr-
nv dXXti jrdvrcov roure'cov d eyxccpaXos
airids iartv...irp&T0s ataddverai 6 e'y-
xe'cpaXos rcov e'v to criopari e'vedvrcov
(where the theory is mixed up with
some curious physiological specula
tions), Galen. Op. I. 235 aurds Se 6
iyxecpdXos on pev dpxr) Tots vevpois
airaai ttjs Svvdpeds ianv, evapy&s
e'pdaopev. . .jrdrepov Se as aurds rois
vevpois, ourco ixeivm jrdXiv erepov rt
pbptov iiriiripiret, rj irrjyrj ns aurciv
iariv, er aSrjXov, i&. rv. p. II dpxrj pev
yap avr&v (i.e. rciov vevpmv) b iyxicpaXbs
ion, xal rd irddrj els avrbv cpepei, otov
els apovpdv riva rijs Xoytortxrjs if'uxfjs'
excpvais 8" ivrevdev, otov irpipvov nvbs
els 8ev8pov dvrjxovros peya, 6 vmnalos
eari pveXbs...avpirav 8' ourco ro a&pa
perdXapfidvei 81 avr&v rrpdrijs pev xal
pdXiara xivrjaeas, iirl raurjj 8' aladrj-
aems, XIV. p. 313 aurrj ydp (ie. 17
xecpaXrj) xaddirep tis dxpbiroXis ian rou
amparos xal tov ripicordrcov xal dvay-
xaiorarcov avdpamois aladrjaemv o'ixtjttj-
piov. Plato had made the head the
central organ of the reason (Tim. 69
sq.: see Grote's Plato m. pp. 272,
287, Aristotle n. p. 179 sq.), if in
deed the speculations of the Timaeus
may be regarded as giving his serious
physiological views ; but he had postu
lated other centres of the emotions
and the appetites, the heart and the
abdomen. Aristotle, while rightly re
fusing to localise the mind as mind,
had taken a retrograde step physio
logically, when he transferred the
centre of sensation from the brain to
the heart; e.g. de Part. Anim. ii 10
(p. 656). Galen, criticizing his pre
decessors, says of Aristotle 877X0S e'o-ri
xareyvaxms pev avrov (i. e. rou e'yxerpd-

Xov) reXiav dxprjariav, cpavep&s 8' dpo-
Xoyeiv ai8oupevos (Op. in. p. 625). The
Stoics however (Zrjvcov xal Xpucrijr7ros
dpa r& acperipm x°PV iravrl) were even
worse offenders ; and in reply to them
more especially Galen elsewhere dis
cusses the question irbrepov iyxecpdXos
r) xapSia njv dpxrjv er^ei, Op. V. p. 213
sq. Bearing in mind all this diversity
of opinion amongancient physiologists,
we cannot fail to be struck in the
text not only with the correctness of
the image but also with the propriety
of the terms ; and we are forcibly
reminded that among the Apostle's
most intimate companions at this time
was one whom he calls ' the beloved
physician' (iv. 14).
20 — 23. 'You died with Christ to
your old life. All mundane relations
have ceased for you. Why then do
you — you who have attained your
spiritual manhood — submit stiU to
the rudimentary discipline of chUdren?
Why do you — you who are citizens of
heaven — bow your necks afresh to
the tyranny of material ordinances, as
though you were stiU Uving in the
world ? It is the same old story again ;
the same round of hard, meaningless,
vexatious prohibitions, 'Handle not,'
' Taste not,' ' Touch not.' What foUy 1
When ail these things — these meats
and drinks and the like — are earthly,
perishable, wholly trivial and unim
portant! They are used, and there
is an end of them. What is this, but
to draw down upon yourselves the
denunciations uttered by the prophet
of old 1 What is this but to abandon
God's word for precepts which are
issued by human authority and incul
cated by human teachers ? All such
things have a show of wisdom, I grant.
There is an officious parade of re
Ugious devotion, an eager affectation
of humihty ; there is a stern ascetic
rigour, which iU-treats the body : but
there is nothing of any real value
to check indulgence of the flesh.'

200

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 21, 22

BoyfiaTt^eo-de', "Mr) dyjst] p.t]Be yevcti p.t]Be 6'tyns ss(a

20. From the theological tenets of
the false teachers the Apostle turns
to the ethical — from the objects of
their worship to the principles of
their conduct. The baptism into
Christ, he argues, is death to the
world. The Christian has passed
away to another sphere of existence.
Mundane ordinances have ceased to
have any value for him, because his
mundane Ufe has ended. They be
long to the category of the perishable;
he has been translated to the region
of the eternal. It is therefore a denial
of his Christianity to subject himself
again to their tyranny, to return once
more to the dominion of the world.
See again the note on iii 1.
et direfldvere] 'if ye died, when ye
were baptized into Christ.' Por this
connexion between baptism and death
see the notes on ii. 11, ui 3. This
death has many aspects in St Paul's
teaching. It is not only a dying with
Christ, 2 Tim. ii. II ei ydp avvairedd-
vopev ; but it is also a dying to or from
something. This is sometimes repre
sented as sin, Rom. vi. 2 oinves djreo'd-
vopev Tjj dpapria (cotap. VV. 7, 8);
sometimes as self, 2 Cor. v. 14, 15 apa ol
irdvres diridavov... iva oi £&vTes prjxiTi
eavrols fcocnv; sometimes as the law,
Rom. vU. 6 xaTTjpyrjdrjpev dirb tov vb
pov dirodavbvres, Gal. ii 19 Sid vbpov
vbpa diridavov ; sometimes stiU more
widely as the world, regarded as the
sphere of all material rules and all
mundane interests, so here and iii. 3
direddvere ydp. In all cases St Paul
uses the aorist diridavov, never the
perfect ridvrjxa ; for he wishes to em
phasize' the one absolute crisis, which
was marked by the change of changes.
When the aorist is wanted, the com
pound verb djroo'vrjo-xeiv is used ; when
the perfect, the simple verb dvrjaxeiv ;
see Buttmann Ausf. Gramm. § 1 14.
This rule holds universally in the
Greek Testament.
djrd rcov aroixeimv x.r.X.J ie. 'from

the rudimentary, disciplinary, ordi
nances, whose sphere is the mundane
and sensuous': see the note on ver.
8. For the pregnant expression diro-
davelv dirb comp. Gal. V. 4 xaTijpyrjdrjTe
airb Xpiarov (SO too Rom. vii 2, 6),
2 Cor. xi 3 cpdapfj...dirb rijs djrXdrnros,
and see A. Buttmann p. 277 note.
8oyparifeo-5e] 'are ye overridden
with precepts, ordinances' In the
lxx the verb Soyparifeiv is used seve
ral times, meaning 'to issue a decree,'
Esth. Ui. 9, 1 Esdr. vi. 33, 2 Mace x.
8, xv. 36, 3 Mace. iv. 11. Elsewhere
it is appUed most commonly to the
precepts of phUosophers ; e.g. Justin
Apol. i. 7 °i i" "sZXXrjai Ta airois
dpeo-ra Soypariaavres ix iravrbs to
evi ovopari cpiXoaocpias irpoaayopev-
ovrai (comp. § 4), Epict. iii. 7. 17 sq.
ei deXeis eivai cpiXbaocpos...8oypaTl£mv
rd dlaxpd. Here it would include
aUke the 8bypara of the Mosaic law
(ver. 14) and the 86ypara of the ' phi
losophy' denounced above (ver. 8).
Both are condemned ; the one as super
seded though once authoritative, the
other as whoUy vexatious and un
warrantable. Examples are given in
the foUowing verse, pi) d-^rg x.r.X.
For the construction here, where
the more remote object, which would
stand in the dative with the active
voice (2 Mace x. 8 e8oypdrio-av...r<3
reov 'iouSaicov edvei), becomes the
nominative of the passive, compare
Xprjpari^eadai Matt. U. 12, 22, Siaxo-
veiadai Mark x. 45, and see Winer
§ xxxix. p. 326, A. Buttmann p. 163,
Kiihner § 378, n. p. 109.
21. Mn dijnj x.r.X.] The Apostle dis
paragingly repeats the prohibitions of
the false teachers in their own words,
' Handle not, neither taste, neither
touch.' The rabbinical passages quoted
in Schottgen show how exactly St
Paul's language reproduces, not only
the spirit, but even the form, of these
injunctions. The Latin commenta
tors, Hilary and Pelagius, suppose

II. 22]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

201

ia-Ttv iravTa ets (pdopdv Ttj diro^ptjareij, KUTa Ta

these prohibitions to be the Apostle's
own, thus making a complete shipwreck
of the sense. So too St Ambrose de
Noe et Area 25 (1. p. 267), de Abr. i
6 (1. p. 300). We may infer from the
language of St Augustine who argues
against it, that this was the popular
interpretation in his day : Epist. cxix
(11. p. 512) 'tanquam praeceptum pu-
tatur apostoU, nescio quid tangere,
gustare, attaminare, prohibentis.' The
ascetic tendency of the age thus
fastened upon a sUght obscurity in
the Greek and made the Apostle
recommend the very practices which
he disparaged. For a somewhat simi
lar instance of a misinterpretation
commonly received see the note on
rois Sbypaaiv ver. 14. Jerome how
ever (1. p. 878) had rightly interpreted
the passage, illustrating it by the pre
cepts of the Talmud. At a stiU earUer
date TertuUian, Adv. Marc. v. 19,
gives the correct interpretation.
These prohibitions relate to defile
ment contracted in divers ways by
contact with impure objects. Some
were doubtless reenactments of the
Mosaic law ; while others would be
exaggerations or additions of a rigor
ous asceticism, such as we find among
the Essene prototypes of these Colos
sian heretics, e.g. the avoidance of oil,
of wine, or of flesh-meat, the shunning
of contact with a stranger or a re
Ugious inferior, and the Uke; see pp.
83 sq. For the reUgious bearing of
this asceticism, as springing from the
dualism of these heretical teachers,
see above, pp. 77, 102 sq.
di/rTj] The difference between ajrreer-
dai and dtyydveiv is not great, and in
some passages where they occur toge
ther, it is hard to distinguish them :
e.g. Exod. xix. 12 irpoaexere eavrols rou
dvafirjvai eis rd opos xal diyelvn av
rov' irds 6 ds\fdpevos rov opovs davdrm
TeXevrrjaei, Eur. Bacch. Sljovr ediyev
oSff^sp-ad' rjp&v, Arist. de Gen. et Corr.
i 8 (p. 326) Sid ri ou yiyverai aijrdpeva

ev, mairep uScop v8aros dVav diyjj ;
Dion Chrys. Or. xxxiv (n. p. 50) oi
8* e'x irapipyov irpoaiaatv dirrbpevoi
pMiav rov irpdyparos, mairep ol airov8rjs
diyydvovTes, Themist. Paraphr.
Arist. 95 rnv Se depnv aurdiv airreadai
t&v aladrjT&v dvayxalov' xal ydp rou-
vopa aurijs e'x rou airreadai xal dty
ydveiv. But ajrreo-0ai is the stronger
word of the two. This arises from
the fact that it frequently suggests,
though it does not necessarily involve,
the idea of a voluntary or conscious
effort, 'to take hold of — a suggestion
which is entirely wanting to the co
lourless word diyydvetv; comp. The
mist. Paraphr. Arist. 94 rj tov foW
drpn xplais iarl xal dvriXrji/ris rou diy-
ydvovros. Hence in Xen. Cyrop. 1.3.
5 on ae, cpavai, bp&, orav pev tov aprov
dyjfTj, els ouSe'v rijv xf'P°- dirosjrdpevov,
orcoi Se rovrmv nvbs dtyrjs, evdvs diroxa-
daipet ttjv x*iPa "'* ™ xeipbpaxrpa x.r.X.
Thus the words chosen in the Latin Ver
sions, tangere for Smreadat and attami
nare or contrectare for diyelv, are un
fortunate, and ought to be transposed.
Our EngUsh Version, probably influ
enced by the Latin, has erred in the
same direction, translating airreadai
by 'touch' and diyelv by 'handle.'
Here again they must be transposed.
' Handle ' is too strong a word for ei
ther ; though in default of a better it
may stand for airreadai, which it more
nearly represents. Thus the two words
dsfri] and diyijs being separate in mean
ing, yeuarj may well interpose ; and the
three together will form a descending
series, so that, as Beza (quoted in
Trench N. T. Syn. § xvii. p. 57) weU
expresses it, ' decrescente semper
oratione, intelligatur crescere super-
stitio.' On the other hand ai/rr; has been
interpreted here as referring to the
relation of husband and wife, as e.g.
in I Cor. vii. I yvvatxbs prj airreadai ;
and the prohibition would then be
illustrated by the teaching of the he-

202

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 22

ENTciAlMATA KAI AlA&CKt\Al'<\C TOON ei N 6 p W n ft) N '

retics in I Tim. iv. 3 xcoXudvrcov yapelv.
But, whatever Ukelihood there may be
that the Colossian false teachers also
held this doctrine (see above, p. 83 sq.),
it nowhere appears in the context,
and we should not expect so import
ant a topic to be dismissed thus cur
sorily. Moreover dtyydveiv is used as
commonly in this meaning as airreadai
(see Gataker Op. Grit. p. 79, and ex
amples might be multiplied) ; so that
all ground for assigning it to airrea
dai especially is removed. Both djr-
readat and dtyydveiv refer to defile
ment incurred through the sense of
touch, though in different degrees;
' Handle not, nor yet taste, nor even
touch.' 22. ' Only consider what is the real
import of this scrupulous avoidance.
Why, you are attributing an inherent
value to things which are fleeting;
you yourselves are citizens of eternity,
and yet your thoughts are absorbed
in the perishable.'
d] 'which things] ie. the meats
and drinks and other material objects,
regarded as impure to the touch. The
antecedent to a is implicitly involved
in the prohibitions pi) dS/fij x.t.X.
ianv els cpdopdv] ' are destined for
corruption.' For similar expressions
see Acts viii 20 ein eis djrcoXeiav
(comp. ver. 23 eis x0^1)" mxpias xal
avvSeapov dStxias. . .ovra), 2 Pet. ii. 12
yeyevvrjpiva  els SXaatv xal cpdopdv.
For the word cpdopd, involving the idea
of ' decomposition,' see the note on Gal.
vi. 8. The expression here corresponds
to els dcpe8pmva e'x/3dXXerai (ixiropeve-
rai), Matt. xv. 17, Mark vii. 19.
rfj diroxprjaei] 'in the consuming]
Comp. Senec. de Vit. beat. 7 ' in ipso
usu sui periturum.' WhUe the verb
diroxp&pai is common, the substantive
dirbxprjais is extremely rare : Plut.
Mor. p. 267 P ^aipeiv rais roiaurais
diroxprjaeai xal avaroXals r&v ireptrrmv
(i.e. ' by such modes of consuming end
abridging superfluities'), Dion. Hal.

A. R. I. 58 e'v diroxprjaei yrjs poipas.
The unusual word was chosen for its
expressiveness: the xP7°"ty nere waa
an dirbxprjais ; the things could not
be used without rendering them unfit
for further use. The subtlety of the
expression in the original cannot be
reproduced in any translation.
On the other hand the clause is
sometimes interpreted as a continua
tion of the language of the ascetic
teachers ; ' Touch not things which aU
lead to ruin by their abuse.' This in
terpretation however has nothing to
recommend it. It loses the point of
the Apostle's argument ; while it puts
upon eivai els cpdopdv a meaning which
is at least not natural.
xard x.t.X.] connected directly with
vv. 20, 21, so that the words d ianv...
rij djroxprjo-ei are a parenthetical com
ment. rd ivrdXpara x.r.X.] The absence of
both preposition and article before 81-
SaaxaXlas shows that the two words
are closely connected. They are placed
here in their proper order ; for ivrdX-
para describes the source of authority
and 8i8aaxaXias the medium of com
munication. The expression is taken
ultimately from Isaiah xxix. 13, where
the words run in the lxx, pdnjv Se
aefiovrai pe, Si8do"xovres ivrdXpara dv
dpmirmv xal 8iSaaxdXias. The Evan
gelists (Matt. xv. 9, Mark vii. 7), quot-
ing-the passage, substitute in the latter
clause SiSdcrxovres SiSacrxaXias ivrdX
para dvdpmirmv.
The coincidences in St Paul's lan
guage here with our Lord's words as
related in the Gospels (Matt. xv.
1 — 20, Mark vii. 1 — 23) are striking,
and suggest that the Apostle had this
discourse in his mind. (1) Both alike
argue against these vexatious ordi
nances from the perishableness of
meats. (2) Both insist upon the indif
ference of such things in themselves.
In Mark vii. 19 the Evangelist em
phasizes the importance of our Lord's

II. 23]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

203

33

amva io~Tiv Xoyov pev e^ovTa o-ocpias iv ideXodpn-

words on this occasion, as practically
aboUshing the Mosaic distinction of
meats by declaring all alike to be
clean (xadapifav ; see the note on ver.
16). (3) Both alike connect such or
dinances with the practices condemn
ed in the prophetic denunciation of
Isaiah. 23. ' All such teaching is worthless.
It may bear the semblance of wisdom ;
but it wants the reality. It may make
an officious parade of reUgious service ;
it may vaunt its humiUty; it may
treat the body with merciless rigour ;
but it entirely fails in its chief aim.
It is powerless to check indulgence of
the flesh.'
aTiva] ' which sort of things.' Not
only these particular precepts, pi) asfo
x.t.X., but all precepts falling under
the same category are condemned.
For this force of dr iva as distinguished
from 5, see the notes on Gal. iv. 24,
v. 19, PhU. iv. 3. The antecedent
here is not ivrdXpara xal StSacrxa-
Xias x.t.X., but the prohibitions given
in ver. 21.
Xdyov pev x.r.X.] ' having a reputa
tion for wisdom] but not the reality.
The corresponding member, which
should be introduced by 8i, is sup
pressed; the oppositive clause being
postponed and appearing later in a
new form, odx e'v npij tivi x.r.X. Such
suppressions are common in classical
writers, more especiaUy in Plato ; see
Kiihner § 531, 11. p. 813 sq., Jelf § 766,
and comp. Winer § bini p. 719 sq.
Jerome therefore is not warranted in
attributing St Paul's language here to
'imperitia artis grammaticae' (Epist.
cxxi, Op. 11. p. 884). On the contrary
it is just the license which an adept
in a language would be more likely
to take than a novice.
In this sentence Xdyov exovra ao
cpias is best taken as a single predicate,
so that e'o-nv is disconnected from
exovra. Otherwise the construction
e'erriv exovra (for e\ei) would be

supported by many parallels in the
Greek Testament ; see Winer § xiv.
P- 437-
The phrase Xdyov e^eiv nvds, so far
as I have observed, has four meanings.
(&.) Two as applied to the thinking
subject, (i) ' To take account of, to hold
in account, to pay respect to': e.g.
jEsch. Prom. 231 {ipor&v Se rav ra-
Xatirdpmv Xdyov oux eaxev ovSeva, De-
mosth. de Coron. § 199 eijrep fj 8o£tjs
17 irpoyovmv rj rou peXXovros al&vos
etxe Xoyov, Plut. Vit. Philop. 18 jtcos
a£iov ixeivov Xbyov ej^eiv rou dvSpds
x.r.X. (ii) ' To possess the reason or
account or definition of,' 'to have a
scientific knowledge of; Plato Gorg.
p. 465 A rexvrjv Se avrrjv ov cprjpi eivai
dXX' ipireiplav, on ovx e^ei Xdyov ou-
Siva mv irpoacpipei, djroia drra rnv cpv
aiv iariv, and so frequently. These
two senses are recognised by Aristotle,
Eth. Nic. i. 13 (p. 1 102), where he
distinguishes the meaning of the ex
pressions exetv Xdyov rou irarpbs fj r&v
CpiXmv and exetv Xbyov t&v padrjnx&v.
(b) Two as appUed to the object of
thought. (Ui) ' To have the credit or
reputation of,' as here. This sense of
exetv Xbyov, ' to be reputed,' is more
commonly found with an infinitive:
e.g. Plato Epin. 987 B aurds 'AcppoSi-
tijs eivai cr^eSov e^ei Xdyov. (iv) ' To
fulfil the definition of, to possess the
characteristics, to have the nature of ;
e.g. PhUo Vit. Cont. 4 (11. p. 477) e'xd-
repov 8c irrjyrjs Xdyov exov, Plut. Mor.
p. 637 D T0 Se mbv oure dpxrjs e^ei Xd
yov, ou ydp vcpiararai irpmrov, ovre
oXov cpvaiv, dreXes ydp ianv, ib. 640 F
Sei jrpds ro e'pcpureudpevov xaPas Xdyov
exetv to Set-bpevov. The senses of Xd
yov exetv with other constructions, or
as used absolutely, are very various,
e.g. ' to be reasonable,' ' to hold dis
course,' ' to bear a ratio,' etc, but do
not come under consideration here.
Nor again does such an expression as
Plut. Mor. p. 550 0 prj're tov Xdyov
e'xtov tov vopoderov, ' not being in pos-

204

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

LIL 23

CKeia Kal Taireivofppoo-vvtj ^/cat] drpeiBeia coopiaTOs, ovk

session of, not knowing, the intention
of the legislator'; for the definite ar
ticle removes it from the category of
the cases considered.
e'v e'5eXot7pijo-xeia] 'in volunteered,
self-imposed, officious, supererogatory
service] One or both of these two
ideas, (i) ' excessive readiness, officious
zeal,' (ii) 'affectation, unreality,' are in
volved in this and similar compounds;
e.g. ideXo8ovXeia, ideXoxdxrjais, ideXo-
xiv8vvos, ideXoxmCpelv, edeXoprjrmp, ide-
Xorrpd|evos : these compounds being
used most frequently, though not al
ways (as this last word shows), in a
bad sense. This mode of expression
was naturaUsed in Latin, as appears
from Augustine Epist cxlix. 27 (n.
p. 5 14) ' Sic enim et vulgo dicitur qui
divitem affectat thelodives, et qui sa-
pientem thelosapiens, et cetera hujus-
modi' Epiphanius, when writing of
the Pharisees, not content with the
word here supphed by St Paul, coins
a double compound ideXoirepiaaodpTj-
axeia, Haer. i. 16 (p. 34).
Taireivocppoavvrj] The word is here
disparaged by its connexion, as in ver.
18 (see the note there). The force of
ideXo- may be regarded as carried on
to it. Real genuine Taireivocppoavvrj
is commended below; iU. 12.
dcpetSeia acoparos] ' hard treatment
of the body.' The expression dcpeiSelv
rou amparos is not uncommon, being
used most frequently, not as here of
ascetic discipfine, but rather of cou
rageous exposure to hardship and
danger in war, e.g. Lysias Or. Fun.
25, Joseph. B. J. iii. 7. 18, Lucian
Anach. 24, Plut. Vit. Pericl. 10 ; in
Plut. Mor. p. 137 0 however, of a stu
dent's toil, and ib. p. 135 b, more gene
rally of the rigorous demands made
by the soul on the body. The substan
tive dcpeiSeia or dcpeiSia does not often
occur. On the forms in -eta and -la
derived from adjectives in -17s see
Buttmann Ausf. Gramm. § 119, 11.
p. 416 sq. The great preponderance

of manuscript authority favours the
form dcpeiSeia here : but in such ques
tions of orthography the fact car
ries less weight than in other matters.
The xal before dcpeiSeia should proba
bly be omitted; in which case dcpeiSeia
becomes an instrumental dative, ex
plaining Xdyov exovra aocpias. While
the insertion would naturaUy occur to
scribes, the omission gives more point
to the sentence. The ideXodprjaxela
xal raireivocPpoo-vvTj as the reUgious
elements are thus separated from the
dcpeiSeia amparos as the practical rule.
oux e'v ripg x.t.X.] 'yet not reaUy of
any value to remedy indulgence of
the flesh] So interpreted the words
supply the oppositive clause to Xdyov
pev exovra aocpias, as the presence of
the negative oux naturaUy suggests.
If the sentence had been undisturbed,
this oppositive clause would naturally
have been introduced by Se', but the
interposition of e'v ideXodprjaKeia x.r.X.
has changed its form by a sort of at
traction. For this sense of e'v npij
comp. Lucian Merc. cond. 17 rd xaivd
rcov viroSrjparmv iv ripf] nvl xal ejripe-
Xela iariv: similarly Horn. H. ix. 319
e'v Se iij npij x.t.X. The preposition
jrpds, Uke our Enghsh 'for] when used
after words denoting utUity, value,
sufficiency, etc, not uncommonly in
troduces the object to check or prevent
or cure which the thing is to be em
ployed. And even though utility may
not be directly expressed in words,
yet if the idea of a something to be
remedied is present, this preposition
is freely used notwithstanding. See
Isocr. Phil. 16 (p. 85)jrpds roiis /3ap£d-
pous xPr}°~iP0V3 Arist. H.A. iii. 21 (p.
522) avpcpipet irpbs rds Siappoias rj roi-
aunj pdXicrra, de Respir. 8 (p. 474)
dvdyxrj yiveadai xardsj/v£iv, el piXXei
rev^eadat amrrjpias' touto ydp fiorjdel
jrpds raurrjv rnv cpdopdv, Lucian Pise.
27 xprjcnpov yovv xal jrpds e'xeivous rd
toiovtov, Galen Op. xn. p. 399 xpmpi-
vm ye rivi irpos to irddos apxreim ore-

II. 23]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

205

iv Tip.fi tivi irpos irXtjo-fxovrjv Ttjs arapKos.

art, p. 420 rou Sovros aurd jrpds dXo>-
jrexias cpdXaxpmaeis x.r.X., p. 430 avvi-
drjxav...cpdppaxa irpbs peovaas Tpixas,
p. 476 |3pa^urdnjv eyovri Suvapiv cos
irpbs rd jrpoxeipevov avpirrapa, p. 482
tovto Se xal jrpds rd ev 0X03 t& adpan
iijavdrjpaTa acpoSpaxprjaipov e'oTiv,p.5 1 4
Xprjariov 8e jrderi rois avayeypappivots
/Soijdrjpacri jrpds rds yivopevas 81' eyxau-
aiv xecpaXdXyias, p. 60 1 xdXXicrrov jrpds
avrrjv cpdppaxov ey^edpevov vdpSivov
pupov. These examples from Galen
areonlyafewoutofprobablysomehun-dreds, which might be collected from
the treatise in which they occur, the
de Compositione Medicamentorum.
The language, which the Colossian
false teachers would use, may be in
ferred from the account given by Philo
of a Judaic sect of mystic ascetics,
who may be regarded, not indeed as
their direct, but as their collateral
ancestors (see p. 84) note 2, p. 92), the
Therapeutes of Egypt; de Vit. Cont.
§ 4 (11. p. 476 sq.) rpvcp&aiv virb ao-
iplas eandpevoi irXovaims xal dcpdbvms
ra Soypara ^oprjyoucrrjs, cos xai...pd-
Xis 81' If ijfiep&v diroyeveadai rpo-
cpfjs dvayxaias. . atTovvrai Se. . .Sprov ev-
reXrj, xal os\r-ov aXes...iroTOv uScop vapa-
nalov avrois iariv. ..rrXrjapovjjv ds
ixdpiv re xal ejri/3ouXov e'xrpejrdpevoi
\jrvxvs xal adparos. St Paul appa
rently has before him some similar
exposition of the views of the Colos
sian heretics, either in writing or
(more probably) by report from Epa
phras. In reply he altogether denies
the claims of this system to the title
of aocpia; he disputes the value of
these Soypara; he allows that this
n-Xno-povrj is the great evU to be check
ed, the fatal disease to be cured; but
he wUl not admit that the remedies
prescribed have any substantial and
lasting efficacy.
The interpretation here offered is
not new, but it has been strangely
overlooked or despised. The pas
sages adduced wUl I trust show the

groundlessness of objections which
have been brought against it owing to
the use of the preposition ; and in all
other respects it seems to be far pre
ferable to any rival explanation which
has been suggested. The favourite
interpretations in ancient or modern
times divide themselves into two
classes, according to the meaning as
signed to jrpds irXrjapavTJv rijs aapxbs.
(1) It is explained in a good sense :
' to satisfy the reasonable wants ofthe
body.' In this case oux e'v Tipjj nvi is
generaUy interpreted, ' not holding it
(the body) in any honour.' So the
majority of the fathers, Greek and
Latin. This has the advantage of
preserving the continuity of the words
oux ev Tipfj rivl jrpds jrXrjo-povfp/ x.r.X. :
but it assigns an impossible sense to
jrXno-povr) rrjs aapxbs. For jrXnapovrj
always denotes 'repletion,' 'surfeit
ing,' ' excessive indulgence,' and can
not be used of a reasonable attention
to the physical cravings of nature; as
Galen says, Op. xv. p. 113 jrdvnov eico-
dbrav ov povov larp&v dXXd xal rcov aX-
Xcov EXXrjvcov to rrjs irXrjapovrjs ovopa
pdXXdv jrcos imcpipeiv rats ujrep/3o-
Xais Trjs crupper pou jroo-drrjros :
and certainly neither the Apostle nor
the Colossian ascetics were likely to
depart from this universal rule. To
the long Ust of passages quoted in
Wetstein may be added such refer
ences as Philo Leg. ad Gai. § 1 (11.
p. 546), Clem. Horn. viii. 15, Justin
Dial. 126, Dion. Alex, in Euseb. HE.
vU. 25; but they might be increased
to any extent. (2) A bad sense is
attached to jrXrjo-povrj, as usage de
mands. And here two divergent in
terpretations have been put forward.
(i) The proper continuity of the sen
tence is preserved, and the words oux
ev npij rivl jrpds irXrjapovrjv ttjs aapxbs
are regarded as an exposition of the
doctrine of the false teachers from
their own point of view. So Theo
dore of Mopsuestia, ou riptov vopi£ov

206

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[ILL i

III. * Et ovv crvvtiyepdtjTe tco XpicrTw, Ta avco ty-
TetTe, ov 6 Xpio-Tos io~Ttv iv Be^td tov Qeov Ka8t]fj.evos'

ras to 8id jrdvrcov jrXijpouV rrjv aapxa,
dXXdydp pdXXov aipovpivovs dirixeadat
t&v jroXXcov Sid rnv rou vdpou jrapdSo-
atv. This able expositor however is
evidently dissatisfied, for he intro
duces his explanation with the words
daacpes piv ian, jSouAerai Se eijreiv
x.r.X.; and his explanation has not
been adopted by others. Either the
sentence, so interpreted, becomes flat
and unmeaning, though it is obviously
intended to clinch the whole matter ;
or the Apostle is made to confirm the
value of the very doctrines which he
is combating. (U) The sentence is
regarded as discontinuous; and it is
interpreted, 'not of any real value'
(or ' not consisting in anything com
mendable] or ' not holding the body
in any honour ') but ' tending to gra
tify the carnal desires ' or ' mind. '
This in some form or other is almost
universally adopted by modern inter
preters, and among the ancients is
found in the commentator Hilary.
The objections to it are serious, (a)
The dislocation of the sentence is in-
expUcable. There is no indication
cither in the grammar or in the voca
bulary that a separate and oppositive
clause begins with jrpds jrXijo-povnv
x.r.X., but on the contrary everything
points to an unbroken continuity. (/3)
The sense which it attaches to ttXijo--
povrj rijs aapxbs is either forced and
unnatural, or it makes the Apostle
say what he could not have said. If
rrXijo-povr) rfjs aapxbs could have the
sense which Hilary assigns to it, ' sa-
gina carnalis sensus traditio humana
est,' or indeed if it could mean ' the
mind of the flesh ' in any sense (as it
is generally taken by modern com
mentators), this is what St Paul might
well have said. But obviously jrXno--
povn rfjs aapxbs conveys a very differ
ent idea from such expressions as rd
cpvoiovadai virb rou voos rfjs aapxbs

(ver. 1 8) or rd cppbvrjpa rijs aapxbs
(Rom. viU. 6, 7), which include pride,
self-sufficiency, strife, hatred, bigotry,
and generaUy everything that is earth-
bound and selfish. On the other hand,
if irXijapovrj rrjs aapxbs be taken in its
natural meaning, as applying to coarse
sensual indulgences, then St Paul
could not have said without qualifi
cation, that this rigorous asceticism
conduced jrpds irXrjapovrjv rijs aapxbs.
Such language would defeat its own
object by its extravagance.
III. 1 — 4. 'Ifthisbeso; if ye were
raised with Christ, if ye were trans
lated into heaven, what foUows ? Why
you must reaUse the change. AU your
aims must centre in heaven, where
reigns the Christ who has thus ex
alted you, enthroned on God's right
hand. All your thoughts must abide
in heaven, not on the earth. For, I
say it once again, you have nothing to
do with mundane things: you died,
died once for aU to the world : you
are Uving another life. This life in
deed is hidden now: it has no out
ward splendour as men count splen
dour; for it is a life with Christ, a hfe
in God. But the veil wiU not always
shroud it. Christ, our life, shall be
manifested hereafter; then ye also
shall be manifested with Him and the
world shall see your glory.'
I. Ei ouv avvTjyipdrjTe x.r.X.] 'If
then ye were raised] not ' have been
raised! The aorist avvrjyipdrjTe, like
djrefldvere (ii 20), refers to their bap
tism ; and the ei ouv here is a resump
tion of the ei in ii 20. The sacra
ment of baptism, as administered in
the Apostolic age, involved a twofold
symbolism, a death or burial and
a resurrection : see the note on u.
12. In the rite itself these were re
presented by two distinct acts, the
disappearance beneath the water and
the emergence from the water: but

III. 2, 3]
3

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

207

Ta dvco <ppoveiT€, pit) Ta iirl Ttjs yt)s. sdire6dveTe ydp,
Kai »J ^COtj VfXWV KeKpVTTTOl O-VV TOO XjOttTTW iv tco Qecd'

in the change typified by the rite they
are two aspects of the same thing,
'Uke the concave and convex in a
circle,' to use an old simile. The ne
gative side — the death and burial —
implies the positive side— the resur
rection. Hence the form of the Apo
stle's resumption, ei ajrefldvere, ei ouV
cruvrjyept^rjre. The change involved in baptism, if
truly realised, must pervade a man's
whole nature. It affects not only his
practical conduct, but his intellectual
conceptions also. It is nothing less
than a removal into a new sphere of
being. He is translated from earth
to heaven ; and with this translation
his point of view is altered, his stan
dard of judgment is whoUy changed.
Matter is to him no longer the great
enemy ; his position towards it is one
of absolute neutrality. Ascetic rules,
ritual ordinances, have ceased to have
any absolute value, irrespective of
their effects. All these things are of
the earth, earthy. The material, the
transitory, the mundane, has given
place to the moral, the eternal; the
heavenly. rd avco frjreire x.t.X.] 'Cease to
concentrate your energies, your
thoughts on mundane ordinances, and
realise your new and heavenly Ufe, of
which Christ is the pole-star.'
e'v 8e|iS x.r.X.] 'being seated on the
right hand of God] where xadrjpevos
must not be connected with ianv;
see the note on djrdxpucpoi, u. 3. This
participial clause is pertinent and
emphatic, for the session of Christ
impUes the session of the beUever
also ; Ephes. ii. 4 — 6 d 8e Qebs... rjpas...
o-we£aoirolijaev  xal avvrjyeipev xal
o-uvexdt7io"ev ev rois iirovpaviois iv
Xpurra 'Irjaov x.r.X. ; comp. Rev. Ui. 21
d vix&v, 8dam avra xadiaai per iuov
iv r& dpbvca pov, ds Kaym ivixrjaa xal
ixddiaa pera rou irarpos pov iv t&

dpbva aurou, in the message addressed
to the principal church of this dis
trict: see above, p. 42. Baj3ai, says
Chrysostom, jrou rdv vouv dirrjyaye rbv
rjpirepov ; ir&s cppovrjparos aurous e'jrXrJ-
paae peydXov ; ovx fjpxei Td avco ei
ireiv, oiiSe, Ou d Xpiards ianv, dXXd
ri ; 'Ev 8e|iej rou ©eou xadrjpevos' e'xei-
dev Xoiirov ttjv yfjv dpdv jrapecxeuafe.
2. rd avco] The same expression
repeated for emphasis; 'You must
not only seek heaven ; you must also
think heaven.' For the opposition of
rd avm and rd ejri rfjs yfjs in connexion
with ippoveiv, comp. Phil. Ui. 19, 20
ol rd ejriyeia cppovovvres, rjpcov ydp
to jroXireupa iv ovpavots virdpxet;
see also Theoph. ad Autol. u. 17.
Extremes meet. Here the Apostle
points the antithesis to controvert a
Gnostic asceticism : in the Philippian
letter he uses the same contrast to
denounce an Epicurean sensualism.
Both alike are guilty of the same fun
damental error ; both alike concen
trate their thoughts on material, mun
dane things.
3. djret7dvere] ' ye died ' in baptism.
The aorist djreddvere denotes the past
act ; the perfect xixpwrrai the perma
nent effects. Por direddvere see the
notes on U. 12, 20.
Kexpurrnu] 'is hidden, is buried
out of sight, to the world.' The Apo
stle's argument is this: 'When you
sank under the baptismal water, you
disappeared for ever to the world.
You rose again, it is true, but you
rose only to God. The world hence
forth knows nothing of your new life,
and (as a consequence) your new life
must know nothing of the world.'
'Neque Christum,' says Bengel, 'ne
que Christianos novit mundus ; ac ne
Christiani quidem plane seipsos' ; comp.
Joh. xiv. 17 — 19 T0 irvevpa rrjs dXij-
delas o 6 xbapos ov 8vvarai Xa/ielv, on
ov dempel avrb ov8e yivcoorxei

208

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 4

*'bTav 6 XjOtiTTOs spavepcodtj, t] •X>cor\ tj/ucov, totc Kai
i/juets avv ovtco (pavepcodticrecrde iv Bo^tj.

avrb, vpeis [Se] ytvdaxere avrb...b xb
apos pe ovx en deapel, vpeis Se dem-
pelri pe' on eym £d>, xal vpeis
fno-ere. 4. d Xpiords] A fourth occur
rence of the name of Christ in this
context; comp. ver. 2 rei Xpio-ra, d
Xpiaros, ver. 3 ouv to Xpiarm. A
pronoun would have been more natu
ral, but less emphatic.
rj fcor) rjpcov] This is an advance on
the previous statement, >j £iof) upcov
xixpvirrai avv rm Xpiarm, in two re
spects : (1) It is not enough to have
said that the Ufe is shared with Christ.
The Apostle declares that the life is
Christ. Comp. 1 Joh. v. 12 6 exmv rdv
viov exei rr)v fcorjv, Ign. Ephes. 7 e'v da-
vdra fcof) dXijoVvij (of Christ), Smyrn.
4 'iryo-ous Xpiarbs to aXrjdivbv rjp&v ff/v,
Ephes. 3 'Irjaovs Xpiarbs to d8idxpirov
rjpcov ffjv, Magn. I '1170-00 XpicrroS tou
Siajravrds rjpcov ffjv. (2) For upcov IS
substituted rjpcov. The Apostle hastens
to include himself among the reci
pients of the bounty. For this cha
racteristic transition from the second
person to the first see the note on U.
13. The reading upcov here has very
high support, and on this account I
have given it as an alternative ; but
it is most probably a transcriber's cor
rection, for the sake of uniformity
with the preceding.
rore xal upeis x.r.X.] ' The veil which
now shrouds your higher life from
others, and even partly from your
selves, will then be withdrawn. The
world which persecutes, despises, ig
nores now, will then be bUnded with
the dazzling glory of the revelation.'
Comp. 1 Joh. Ui 1, 2 d xbapos ov
yivdaxet rjpas, on ovx eyvm avrbv.
dyairrjTot, vvv rexva Qeov iapev, xal
oiirm icpavepddrj ri iaopeda' otSapev
oti idv cpavepmdjj, opoioi avra iao
peda x.r.X., Clem. Rom. 50 oi cpavepm-

ij fwrj vpmv.
drjaovrai iv rfj eiriaKOirrj rrjs ftaaiXelas
rov Xpiarov.
iv 8d£n] Joh. xvii. 22 rrjv 8b§av rjv
Sedcoxds poi, 8e8mxa avrois, Rom. vui. 17
tva xal avvSo^aad&pev.
S — 11. ' So then realise this death
to the world; kill aU your earthly
members. Is it fornication, impurity
of whatever kind, passion, evil desire ?
Or again, is it that covetousness which
makes a religion, an idolatry, of greed ?
Do not deceive yourselves. For all
these things God's wrath wUl surely
come. In these sins ye, like other
Gentiles, indulged in times past, when
your Ufe was spent amidst them. But
now everything is changed. Now you
also must put away not this or that
desire, but all sins whatsoever. An
ger, wrath, maUce, slander, filthy
abuse ; banish it from your Ups. Be
not false one to another in word or
deed ; but cast off for ever the old
man with his actions, and put on the
new, who is renewed from day to day,
growing unto perfect knowledge and
refashioned after the image of his
Creator. In this new life, in this
regenerate man, there is not, there
cannot be, any distinction of Greek or
Jew, of circumcision or uncircumci
sion ; there is no room for barbarian,
for Scythian, for bond or free. Christ
has displaced, has annihUated, all
these; Christ is Himself aU things
and in all things.'
5. The false doctrine of the Gnos
tics had failed to check sensual indul
gence (u. 23). The true doctrine of
the Apostle has power to kiU the
whole carnal man. The substitution
of a comprehensive principle for
special precepts — of the heavenly life
in Christ for a code of minute ordi
nances — at length attains the end
after which the Gnostic teachers have
striven, and striven in vain.

III. 5] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 209
5 NeKjOaxrare ovv Ta pieXt] Ta iirl Ttjs yijsm iropveiav,
aKadapo'iav, iraQos, iiridvpiiav KaKtjv, Kal Tt\v irXeov-

Nexpcocrare ouv] i.e. ' Carry out this
principle of death to the world (ii. 20
djreddvere, Ui. 3 djreddvere), and kiU
everything that is mundane and car
nal in your being.'
rd piXr) x.r.X.] Each person has a
twofold moral personality. There is
in him the ' old man,' and there is in
him also 'the new' (w. 9, 10). The
old man with all his members must
be pitUessly slain. It is plain that rd
peXrj here is used, Uke avdpmiros in
ver. 9, not physically, but moraUy.
Our actual limbs may be either rd eVi
rfjs yfjs or rd e'v rois ovpavots, accord
ing as they are made instruments for
the world or for Christ: just as we —
our whole being — may identify our
selves with the jraXaids avdpmiros Or
with the veos avdpmiros of our twofold
potentiality. For this use of the phy
sical, as a symbol of the moral of
which it is the potential instrument,
compare Matt. v. 29 sq. ei Se 6 ScpdaX-
pbs aov o Sextos axav8aXi£ei ae, e£eXe
avrbv x.r.X.
I have ventured to punctuate
after rd eVi rfjs yfjs. Thus iropveiav
x.t.X. are prospective accusatives,
which should be governed directly by
some such word as dirbdeade. But
several dependent clauses interpose ;
the last of these incidentaUy suggests
a contrast between the past and the
present ; and this contrast, predomi
nating in the Apostle's mind, leads to
an abrupt recasting of the sentence,
vuvi Se dirbdeade xal vpeis rd jrdvra,
in disregard of the original construc
tion. . This opposition of jrore and vvv
has a tendency to dislocate the con
struction in St Paul, as in i 22 vuvi 8«
d7roxarnXXdyijre(ordrroKaT7jXXa£ev),i.26vvv Se icpavepddrj : see the note on this
latter passage. For the whole run of
the sentence (the parenthetic relative
clauses, the contrast of past and pre
sent, and the broken construction)
COL.

compare Ephes. ii. 1 — 5 xai upas... e'v
ais jrore...e'v oiy xal...jrore...d8e ©eds...
xal ovras rjpas avve^moiroirjaev.
With the common punctuation the
interpretation is equally awkward,
whether we treat rd peXrj and jrop-
veiav x.r.X. as in direct apposition, or
as double accusatives, or in any other
way. The case is best put by Seve-
rianus, adpxa xaXei ttjv dpaprlav, rjs xal
ra pJXrj xarapidpel...b irdXatbs dvdpm
iros ianv ro cppovrjpa to ttjs dpaprlas,
peXn Se aurou at irpdl-eis rmv dpaprrj-
pdrcov; but this is an evasion of the
difficulty, which consists in the direct
apposition of the instruments and the
activities, from whatever point they
are viewed.
iropveiav x.r.X.] The general order
is from the less comprehensive to the
more comprehensive. Thus iropveia is
a special kind of uncleanness, while
dxadapaia is uncleanness in any form,
Ephes. v. 3 iropveia Se xal dxadapaia
iraaa ; comp. Gal. v. 19 iropveia, dxa
dapaia, aaeXyeia, with the note there.
Thus again irddos, though frequently
referring to this class of sins (Rom. i.
26, 1 Thess. iv. 5), would include other
base passions which do not fall under
the category of dxadapaia, as for in
stance gluttony and intemperance.
irddos, iwidvpiav] The two words
occur together in 1 Thess. iv. 5 pfj e'v
jrdc'ei iirtdvpias. So in a passage closely
resembling the text, Gai v. 24 oi Se
rou Xpiorou 'Irjcrou njv adpxa iaravpm
aav avv rois iradrjpaaiv xal rals iirtdv-
piats. The same vice may be viewed
as a jrdd'os from its passive and an im
dvpia from its active side. The word
imdvpia is not used here in the re
stricted sense which it has e.g. in
Arist. Eth. Nic. ii. 4, where it ranges
with anger, fear, etc., being related
to irddos as the species to the genus
(see Gal. 1. c. note). In the Greek
Testament imdvpia has a much more

2IO

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 6

e^'iav, tjTis io~Tiv eiBcoXoXaTpeia, 6Bt a epyeTat r\ opyti

comprehensive sense ; e.g. Joh. viii. 44
rds imdvpias tov irarpos vp&v diXere
iroieiv. Here, if anything, imdvpia
is wider than jrados. While irddos in
cludes ,all ungovernable affections, e'jn-
dvpia xaxrj reaches to all evil longings.
'iSou, says Chrysostom, yevix&s to irdv
etire' irdvra yap imdvpia xaxrj, fiaaxa-
via, dpyrj, Xujrrj. The epithet is added
because imdvpia is capable of a good
sense : comp. 1 Cor. x. 6 imdvprjrds
xax&v. xal tt)v jrXeove£iav] 'and especially
covetousness? Impurity and covet
ousness may be said to divide between
them nearly the whole domain of hu
man selfishness and vice; ' Si avaritia
prostrata est, exsurgit libido' (Cypr.
de Mort. 3). The one has been already
dealt with ; the other needs now to be
specially denounced; comp. Ephes.
V. 3 iropveia Se xal dxadapaia iraaa rj
jrXeove|ia. ' Homo extra Deum,' says
Bengel (on Rom. i. 29), 'quaerit pabu
lum in creatura materiali vel per vo-
luptatem vel per avaritiam.' Comp.
Test, xii Patr. Jud. 18 cpvXd^aade
ovv, rixva pov, dirb rrjs iropveias xal rrjs
cptXapyvpias . . .on raura dcptara vbpov
©eou. Similarly Lysis Pythag. 4 (Epi-
stol. Graec. p. 602, ed. Hercher) dvo-
pdtjaipi 8' av avr&v [ie. the vices]
jrpdrov iireXdav ras par ipas dxpaalav
re xal irXeove£lav' dpcpm Se iroXvyovoi
irecpvxavTi. It must be remembered
that jrXeove£ia is much wider than
cpiXapyvpia (see Trench N. T. Syn.
§ xxiv. p. 77 sq.), which itself is called
pl£a jrdvrcov tcov xaxcov (i Tim. vi io).
The attempt to give jrXeove|ia here
and in other passages the sense of 'im
purity' (see e.g. Hammond on Rom.
i 29) is founded on a misconception.
The words jrXeovexreiv, irXeove|ia, wiU
sometimes be used in relation to sins
of uncleanness, because such may be
acts of injustice also. Thus adultery
is not only impurity, but it is robbery
also : hence 1 Thess. iv. 6 to pfj ujrep-
ftaivetv xal irXeovexrelv iv rep irpdypan

rbv dSeXcpbv avrov (see the note
there). In other passages again there
wiU be an accidental connexion; e.g.
Ephes. iv. 19 els ipyaaiav dxadapaias
irdarjs iv jrXeove|ia, i. e. ' with greedi
ness,' 'with entire disregard for the
rights of others.' But nowhere do
the words in themselves suggest this
meaning. Here the particles xal tijv
show that a new type of sin is intro
duced with jrXeovef iav : and in the
parallel passage Ephes. v. 3 (quoted
above) the same distinction is indi
cated by the change from the con
junctive particle xal to the disjunctive
rj. It is an error to suppose that this
sense of rrXeove£ia is supported by
Clem. Alex. Strom, iii. 12 (p. 551 sq.)
cos yap rj jrXeove^ia iropveia Xeyerai, rrj
aurapxeia ivavriov pevrj. On the con
verse error of explaining dxadapaia to
mean 'greediness,' 'covetousness,' see
the note on 1 Thess. ii. 3.
rjns x.t.X.] 'for it is idolatry' :
comp. Ephes. v. 5 jrXeove'xnjs, S (or ds)
ianv eiScoXoXdrprjs, Polyc. Phil. 11
' Si quis non abstinuerit se ab avari
tia, ab idololatria coinquinabitur' (see
Philippians p. 63 on the misunder
standing of this passage). The covet
ous man sets up another object of
worship besides God. There is a sort
of reUgious purpose, a devotion of the
soul, to greed, which makes the sin
of the miser so hateful The idea of
avarice as a religion may have been
suggested to St Paul by our Lord's
words, Matt. vi. 24 ou Svvaade ©ecp
SouXeueiv xal papmva, though it is a
mistake to suppose that Mammon was
the name of a Syrian deity. It ap
pears however elsewhere in Jewish
writers of this and later ages: e.g.
Philo de Mon. i. 2 (n. p. 214 sq.) jrav-
raxbdev pev dpyvpiov xal xpvalov exiro-
pifoucri, to Se iropiadev ds dyaXpa delov
iv dSiiTots drjaavpocpvXaxovaiv (with the
whole context), and Shemoth Rabba
foi. 121. 3 'Qui opes suas multiplicat
per foenus, ille est idololatra' (with

III. 7, 8]
tov Qeov'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

2ir

' iv ois Kal vpiels irepieiraTtjcraTe iroTe, otc

i^tJTe iv tovtois' 8 vvvl Be dirodecrde Kal vpieTs Ta irdvTa,

other passages quoted by Wetstein
and Schottgen on Ephes. v. 5). St
Chrysostom, Horn, in Joann. Ixv
(vin. p. 392 sq.), enlarges on the cult
of wealth — the consecration of it, the
worship paid to it, the sacrifices de
manded by it : rj Se cpiXapyvpia Xeyei,
©ucro'v pot rnv o-aurou "fyvxrjv, xal ireidet'
vpas otovs exet jimpovs, oia Several dv-
para (p. 393). The passage in Test.
xii Patr. Jud. 18 rj cpiXapyvpia irpbs
etSmXa dSrjyei is no real parallel to St
Paul's language, though at first sight
it seems to resemble it. For fjns,
' seeing that it,' see the note on Phil
iv. 3.
6, 7. Si' d x.r.X.] The received
text requires correction in two points.
(1) It inserts the words eVi tous uious
rfjs direidelas after rou ©eou. Though
this insertion has preponderating sup
port, yet the words are evidently in
terpolated from the parallel passage,
Ephes. v. 6 Sid raura ydp epxerai rj
dpyf) rou Qeov iirl rods uious rfjs djrei-
delas. We are therefore justified in
rejecting them with other authorities,
few in number but excellent in cha
racter. See the detached note on va
rious readings. When the sentence is
thus corrected, the paraUeUsm of 81'
d...iv ols xai... may be compared with
Ephes. i II e'v cp xal ixXrjpddTjpev...iv a
xal vpeis. ..iv ^ xaliriarevaavres iacppa-
yladrjTe, and U. 21, 22 ev d> jrdo-a [ij]
oiKo8opf)...eV co xal upeis avvoixoSo-
pelade. (2) The vast preponder
ance of authority obliges us to substi
tute tovtois for avrots.
6. epxerai] This may refer either
to the present and continuous dispen
sation, or to the future and final judg
ment The present epxeadat is fre
quently used to denote the certainty
of a future event, e.g. Matt. xvii. 11,
Joh. iv. 21, xiv. 3, whence 6 ipxbpevos
ig a designation of the Messiah : see
Winer § xl. p. 332.

7. e'v ofs x.r.X.] The clause eVi rous "
uious rfjs direidelas having been struck
out, e'v ofs must necessarily be neuter
and refer to the same as 81' 3. Inde
pendently of the rejection of the
clause, this neuter seems more proba
ble in itself than the masculine : for
(i) The expression irepiirareiv iv is
most commonly used of things, not of
persons, especiaUy in this and the
companion epistle : iv. 5, Ephes. ii. 2,
10, iv. 17, v. 2 ; (2) The Apostle would
hardly denounce it as a sin in his Co
lossian converts that they ' walked
among the sons of disobedience' ; for
the Christian, though not of the world,
is necessarily in the world : comp. 1
Cor. v. 10. The apparent parallel,
Ephes. ii. 3 ev ois xal rjpels irdvres dve-
arpacprjpev irore iv rats iiridvptais rijs
aapxbs rjp&v (where ofs seems to be
masculine), does not hold, because the
addition e'v rais imdvpiais x.t.X. makes
all the difference. Thus the rejection
of the clause, which was decided by
textual considerations, is confirmed by
exegetical reasons.
xal upeis] ' j/«, Uke the other heathen'
(i. 6 xal e'v upiv), but in the next
verse xal upeis is rather 'ye your
selves,' ' ye notwithstanding your for
mer Uves.'
ore e'ffjre x.r.X.] ' When ye lived in
this atmosphere of sin, when ye had
not yet died to the world.'
ev rourois] 'in these things' We
should have expected aurois, but
tovtois is substituted as more empha
tic and condemnatory : comp. Ephes.
V. 6 Sid raura ydp epxerai x.r.X. The
two expressions ffjv e'v and irepiirareiv
iv involve two distinct ideas, denoting
the condition of their Ufe and the cha
racter of their practice respectively.
Their conduct was conformable to
their circumstances. Comp. Gal. v. 25
ei fcopev irvevpan, irvevpan xal arot-
X&pev. 14 — 2

212

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 9

opytjv, dvpov, KaKiav, i3Xa(r(ptipiav, ala^poXoytav e'/c
tov o~t6uotos vpicov 9 jurj -^evBearQe els dXXtjXovs' direK-

8. The errors of the past suggest
the obUgations of the present. Thus
the Apostle returns to the topic with
which the sentence commenced. But
the violence of the contrast has broken
up the grammar of the sentence; see
the note on ver. 5.
rd irdvra] 'not only those vices which
have been specially named before
(ver. 5), but all of whatever kind.' The
Apostle accordingly goes on to spe
cify sins of a whoUy different type
from those already mentioned, sins
of uncharitableness, such as anger,
detraction, maUce, and the Uke.
dpyrj'v, dvpov] ' anger, wrath] The
one denotes a more or less settled
feeling of hatred, the other a tumul
tuous outburst of passion. This dis
tinction of the two words was fixed
chiefly by the definitions of the Stoics :
Diog. Laert. vU. 1 14 6 Se dvpos ianv
dpyr) dpxopivrj. So Ammonius dvpbs
pev e'o-n irpbaxaipos, bpyr): Se iroXuvjad-
vios pvrjatxaxia, Greg. Naz. Carm. 34
(il. p. 612) dvpbs piv iariv ddpbos fecris
cppevds, dpyr) 8e dvpbs ippevmv. They
may be represented in Latin by ira
and furor ; Senec. de Ira ii 36 ' Aja-
cem in mortem egit furor, in furorem
ira,' and Jerome in Ephes. iv. 31 'Fu
ror incipiens ira est' : see Trench
N. T. Syn. § xxxvii, p. 123 sq. On
other synonymes connected with dv
pbs and dpyrj see the note on Ephes.
iv. 31.
xaxiav] ' malice] or ' malignity] as
it may be translated in default of a
better word. It is not (at least in the
New Testament) vice generally, but
the vicious nature which is bent on
doing harm to others, and is weU de
fined by Calvin (on Ephes. iv. 31) ' ani-
mi pravitas, quae humanitati et aequi-
tati est opposita.' This will be evi
dent from the connexion in which it
appears, e.g. Rom. i 29, Eph. iv. 31,
Tit. Ui 3. Thus xaxia and jrovr/pia

(which frequently occur together, e.g.
1 Cor. v. 8) only differ in so far as the
one denotes rather the vicious dispo
sition, the other the active exercise of
it. The word is carefuUy investigated
in Trench N. T. Syn. § xi. p. 35 sq.
fiXaacpTjplav] 'evil speaking, rail
ing, slandering] as frequently, e.g.
Rom. iii. 8, xiv. 16, 1 Cor. iv. 13 (v.l),
x. 30, Ephes. iv. 31, Tit. Ui. 2. The
word has the same twofold sense, ' evil
speaking ' and ' blasphemy,' in classi
cal writers, which it has in the New
Testament. aio-xpoXoyiav] 'foul-mouthed abuse.'
Tbe word, as used elsewhere, has two
meanings: (1) ' Filthy 4alking] as de
fined in Clem. Alex. Paed. u. 6 (p.
189 sq.), where it is denounced at
length: comp. Arist. Pol. vii. 17, Epict.
Man. 33, Plut. Mor. 9, and so com
monly; (2) 'Abusive language] as
e.g. Polyb. viii 13. 8, xu. 13. 3, xxxi.
10. 4. If the two senses of the word
had been quite distinct, we might have
had some difficulty in choosing be
tween them here. The former sense
is suggested by the parallel passage
Ephes. V. 4 alaxpoTTjs xai papoXoyia fj
eirpaireXla; the second by the con
nexion with jSXaacprjpla here. But
the second sense is derived from the
first. The word can only mean ' abuse,'
when the abuse is 'foul-mouthed.'
And thus we may suppose that both
ideas, ' filthiness ' and ' evil-speaking,'
are included here.
9. djrexSucrdpevoi X.T.X.] 'putting
off.' Do these aorist participles de
scribe an action coincident with or
prior to the TJrevSeade ? In other
words are they part of the command,
or do they assign the reason for the
command? Must they be rendered
' putting off,' or ' seeing that ye did (at
your baptism) put off' ? The former
seems the more probable interpreta
tion; for (1) Though both ideas are

III. TO, II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

213

Bva-dpievoi tov iraXatov dvdpcoirov avv rats irpd^ecriv
*Kal iyBvcrapxevoi tov veov, tov dvaKaivovpievov

avTov,

ets eiriyvcoo'LV kot eiKOva tov KTicavTOs ovtov oirov

found in St Paul, the imperative is the
more usual; e.g. Rom. xiii. 12 sq. dirodd-
peda ovv rd epya tou crxdrous, ivSvam-
peda Se rd djrXarou records. ••evSucrao-o'e
Jrdv Kupiov'Irjo-ouv Xpiarov, Ephes. vi. 1 1 ,
ivSvaaade rijv iravoirXiav with ver. 14
o-rfjre ovv... ivSvadpevoi K.T.X., I Thess.
V. 8 vrjcpapev ivSvadpevoi k.t.X. The
one exception is Gal. Hi. 27 00-01 ydp
eis Xpiarov i^airriadrjTe, Xptcrrbv ive-
Svaaade. (2) The 'putting on' in
the parallel passage, Ephes. iv. 24, is
imperative, not affirmative, whether
we read ivSvaaadai Or ivSvaaade.
(3) The participles here are foUowed
immediately by an imperative in the
context, ver. 12 ivSvaaade ovv, where
the idea seems to be the same. For
the synchronous aorist participle see
Winer § xiv. p. 430. St Paul uses
djrex8ucrdpevoi, ivSvadpevoi (not djrex-
8udpevoi, e'vSudpevoi), for the same
reason for which he uses ivSvaaade
(not ivSveade), because it is a thing to
be done once for all. For the double
compound direxSveadai see the notes
onu. 11, 15.
iraXaibv avdpmirov] as Rom. vi. 6,
Ephes. iv. 22. With this expression
compare d e£co, d eo-eo avdpmiros, Rom.
vU. 22, 2 Cor. iv. 16, Ephes. Ui. 16 ; 6
xpvirrbs rijs xapSias dvBpairos, I Pet.
iii. 4 ; d ptxpds pou avdpmiros, ' my in
significance,' Polycr. in Euseb. H. E.
v. 24.10. rdv viov x.r.X.] In Ephes. iv.
24 it is ivSvaaadai tov Kaivov avdpm
irov. Of the two words vios and xat-
vbs, the former refers solely to time,
the other denotes quaUty also ; the
one is new as being young, the other
new as being fresh : the one is op
posed to long duration, the other to
effeteness ; see Trench N. T. Syn.
§ lx. p. 206. Here the idea which is
wanting to vios, and which xaivds gives

in the paraUel passage, is more than
supplied by the addition rdv dvaxai-
voipevov x.r.X.
The vios or xaivds avdpairos in these
passages is not Christ Himself, as the
parallel expression Xpio-rdv ivSvaa
adai might suggest, and as it is actu
aUy used in Ign. Ephes. 20 els rbv xat-
vbv avdpmirov 'Irjaovv Xpiarov, but the
regenerate man formed after Christ.
The idea here is the same as in xaivfj -
Kriais, 2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15: comp.
Rom. vi. 4 Kaivorrjs fcofjs, Barnab. 16
iyevbpeda xatvol, irdXiv i£ dp^fjs xrifd-
pevot. tov dvaxaivovpevov] 'which is ever
being renewed] The force of the pre
sent tense is explained by 2 Cor. iv.
16 6 earn rjpcov [avt7pcojros] dvaxaivourai
rjpepa xal ijpepa. Compare also the
use of the tenses in the paraUel pas
sage, Ephes. iv. 22 sq. dirodiadai, dva-
veovadai, ivSvaaadai. For the Op
posite see Ephes. iv. 22 rbv iraXaibv
avdpmirov tov cpdetpopevov x.r.X.
els iiriyvmaiv] ' unto perfect know
ledge] the true knowledge in Christ,
as opposed to the false knowledge of
the heretical teachers. For the im
pUed contrast see above, pp. 44, 97 sq.
(comp. the notes on i. 9, ii. 3), and for
the word iiriyvmais the note on i 9.
The words here are to be connected
closely with dvaxaivovpevov. comp.
Heb. vi. 6 jrdXiv dvaxaivl£eiv eis pe
rdvotav. xar eixo'va x.r.X.] The reference is
to Gen. i 26 xal eirrev d ©eds, IIoiij-
ampev avdpmirov xar eixbva rjperipav
x.r.X. ; comp. ver. 28 xar* eixdva ©eou
iiroiijaev airov. See also Ephes. iv. 24
tov xaivbv avdpmirov rbv xara Qeov xn-
adevra. This reference however does
not imply an identity of the creation
here mentioned with the creation of
Genesis, but only an analogy between

214

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. n

ovk evi ''EXXtjV Kat 'lovBalos, irepiTopLtj Kal aKpofiva'Tia,

the two. The spiritual man in each
believer's heart, like the primal man
in the beginning of the world, was
created after God's image. The xaivrj
' xrio-is in this respect resembles the
dpxaia xriats. The pronoun aurdv
cannot be referred to anything else
but the vios dvdpmiros, the regene
rate man; and the aorist xrlaavros
(compare xnadivra in the parallel
passage Ephes. iv. 24) refers to the
time of this dvayewrjais in Christ.
See Barnab. 6 dvaxaiviaas rjpas iv
rfj dcpiaei r&v dpapnmv iiroiijaev rjpas
SXXov -rvirov. ..dadv Srj dvairXdaaov-
ros aurou rjpas, after which Gen. i. 26
is quoted. The new birth was a re
creation in God's image; the subse
quent life must be a deepening of this
image thus stamped upon the man.
The aUusion to Genesis therefore
requires us to understand rou xrlaav
ros of God, and not of Christ, as it is
taken by St Chrysostom and others ;
and this seems to be demanded also
by the common use of d xriaas. But
fif Christ is not d xriaas, may He not be
| intended by the eixcov rou xrio-avros?
In favour of this interpretation it may
be urged (1) That Christ elsewhere is
called the eixcov of God, i. 1 5, 2 Cor.
iv. 4; (2) That the Alexandrian school
interpreted the term in Gen. i. 26 as
denoting the Logos; thus Philo de
Mund. Op. 6 (i. p. 5 M) rd apxirvirov
irapd8eiypa, ISia r&v ISe&v b Qeov Xb
yos (comp. ib. §§7, 23, 24, 48), Fragm.
II. p. 625 M dvrjrbv yap ouSev direixovia-
dfjvai irpbs rbv dvardrm xal irarepa
r&v bXmv iSvvaro, dXXa irpbs tov Seitre-
pov Qeov os ianv ixeivov Xdyos x.r.X.
Leg. Alleg. i 31, 32 (1. p. 106 sq.).
Hence Philo speaks of the first man
as eixcov eixdvos (de Mund. Op. 6), and
as jrayxdXou irapaSeiyparos jrdyxaXov
pipnpa (ib. § 48). A pregnant mean
ing is thus given to xard, and xar" ei-
xbva is rendered ' after the fashion (or
pattern) of the Image.' But this in
terpretation seems very improbable in

St Paul ; for (1) In the parallel pas
sage Ephes. iv. 24 the expression is
simply xard ©edv, which may be re
garded as equivalent to xar eixbva rov
xrlaavros here ; (2) The Alexandrian
explanation of Gen. i 26 just quoted
is very closely alUed to the Platonic
doctrine of ideas (for the eixcov, so in
terpreted, is the archetype or ideal
pattern of the sensible world), and
thus it lies outside the range of those
conceptions which specially recom
mended the Alexandrian terminology
of the Logos to the Apostles, as a fit
vehicle for communicating the truths
of Christianity.
11. djrou] ie. 'in this regenerate
life, in this spiritual region into which
the beUever is transferred in Christ.'
oux evi] 'Not only does the dis
tinction not exist, but it cannot exist.'
It is a mundane distinction, and there
fore it has disappeared. For the
sense of evi, negativing not merely the
fact, but the possibility, see the note
on Gal. iii. 28.
"EXXijv x.r.X.] Comparing the enume
ration here with the paraUel passage
Gal. Ui 28, we mark this difference.
In Galatians the aboUtion of aU dis
tinctions is stated in the broadest
way by the selection of three typical
instances; religious prerogative ('Iou-
Saios/EXXijv), social caste(8ouXos, eXeu-
t9epos), natural sex (dpaev, drjXv). Here
on the other hand the examples are
chosen with special reference to the
immediate circumstances of the Co
lossian Church. (1) The Judaism of
the Colossian heretics is met by'EXXijv
xal 'louSaios, and as it manifested it
self especially in enforcing circumci
sion, this is further emphasized by
jrepiropr) xal dxpoj3uo-ria (see above,
p. 71). (2) Their Gnosticism again is
met by /3dp/3apos, Sxuflrjs. They laid
special stress on intelligence, penetra
tion, gnosis. The Apostle offers the
full privUeges of the Gospel to barba
rians and even barbarians of the low-

III. II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

215

/SdpfSapos, 1.Kvdt]s, BovXos, iXevdepos, dXXa Ta irdvTa

est type (see p. 97 sq.). In Rom. i 14
the division "EXXijo-ii' Te xal j3ap/3dpois
is almost synonymous with aocpols
re xal dvorjrois. (3) Special cir
cumstances, connected with an emi
nent member of the Church of Colos
sae, had directed his attention at this
moment to the relation of masters and
slaves. Hence he cannot leave the
subject without adding SoSXos, eAeu-
depos, though this has no special bear
ing on the Colossian heresy. See
above, p. 33, and the note on Ui. 22,
together with the mtroduction to the
Epistle to PhUemon.
irepiropr) x.r.X.] Enforcing and ex
tending the lesson of the previous
clause. This abolition of distinctions
appUes to religious privilege, not only
as inherited by birth ("EXXrjv xal 'Iou-
Saios), but also as assumed by adop
tion (jrepiTopf) xal dxpoftvoria). If it is
no advantage to be born a Jew, it is
none to become as a Jew; comp. 1 Cor.
tu. 19, Gal. v. 6, vi. 15.
/3dpj3apos] To the Jew the whole
world was divided into 'IouSaioi and
"EXXijves, the privileged and unprivi
leged portions of mankind, reUgious
prerogative being taken as the line of
demarcation (see notes Gal. ii. 3).
To the Greek and Roman it was
similarly divided into "EXXrjves and
|3dp/3apoi, again the privileged and
unprivileged portion of the human
race, civihsation and culture being
now the criterion of distinction.
Thus from the one point of view the
'EXXrjv is contrasted disadvantage
ous^ with the 'IouSaios, whUe from
the other he is contrasted, advantage
ously with the fiapfiapos. Both dis
tinctions are equally antagonistic to
the Spirit of the Gospel. The Apostle
declares both alike nuU and void in
Christ. The twofold character of the
Colossian heresy enables him to strike
at these two opposite forms of error
with one blow.
The word j3dpj3apos properly deno

ted one who spoke an inarticulate,
stammering, unintelligible language;
see Max Muller Lectures on the Sci
ence of Language 1st ser. p. 81 sq.,
114 sq., Farrar Families of Speech
p. 21 : comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 11. Hence
it was adopted by Greek exolusiveness
and pride to stigmatize the rest of
mankind, a feehng embodied in the
proverb jrds pr) "EXXrjv j3dp/3apos (Ser-
vius on Verg. Aen. ii 504) ; comp.
Plato Polit. 262 B to pev 'EXXrjvixdv
cos ev djrd iravrmv dcpaipovvres xopis,
avpiraai Se rois d\Xois yevecnv...j3dp-
fiapov pia xkrjaet irpoaetirovres avrb
x.t.X., Dionys. Hal. Rhet. xi. 5 SurXouv
Se to edvos, "EXXrjv fj fiapfiapos x.r.X.
So PhUo Vit. Moys. ii 5 (11. p. 138)
speaks of rd rjptav rpfjpa tou dvdpd-
jrcov yivovs, rd /3ap/3aptxdv, as opposed
to rb 'EXXrjvixdv. It is not necessary
to suppose that they adopted it from
the Egyptians, who seem to have caU
ed non-Egyptian peoples berber (see
Sir G. Wilkinson in Rawlinson's He
rod, u. 158); for the onomatopoeia wiU
explain its origin independently, Stra
bo xivj 2. 28 (p. 662) otpai Se to |3dp-
fiapov xar' dp^ds ixirecpavrjadai ovrms
xar ovoparoirotiav iirl t&v Svaexcpbpms
xal axXrjp&s xal rpa^ecos XaXouvnov, cos
rd |3arrapifeiv x.r.X. The Latins,
adopting the Greek culture, adopted
the Greek distinction also, e.g. Cic. de
Fin. ii. 15 'Non solum Graecia et Ita
lia, sed etiam omnis barbaria': and
accordingly Dionysius, Ant. Rom. i.69,
classes the Romans with the Greeks
as distinguished from the ' barbarians '
— this twofold division of the human
race being taken for granted as abso
lute and final. So too in v. 8, having
mentioned the Romans, he goes on to
speak of oi dXXoi "EXXrjves. The older
Roman poets however, writing from a
Greek point of view, (more than half
in irony) speak of themselves as bar-
bari and of their country as barbaria;
e.g. Plant. Mil. Glor. ii. 2. 58 'poetae
barbaro' (of Naevius), Asin. Pro! 11.

2l6

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 12

Kai iv irdtriv XjOttrro's. 1%ivBvo-ao'de ovv, cos iKXeKTol

'Maccus vortit barbare,' Poen. iii. 2.
21 'in barbaria boves.'
In this classification the Jews ne
cessarily ranked as 'barbarians'; Orig.
c. Cels. i. 2. At times PhUo seems
tacitly to accept this designation (Vit.
Moys. 1. c); but elsewhere he resents
it, Leg. ad Gai. 31 (11. p. 578) uVd cppo-
vrjparos, ds pev evtoi t&v 8iaj3aXXdvnov
eijroiev av, fiapfiapixov, ds 8' exet rb
dXrjdis, iXevdeplov xal evyevovs. On
the other hand, the Christian Apolo
gists with a true instinct glory in the
'barbarous'' origin of their religion:
Justin Apol. i. 5 (p. 56 a) dXXd xal e'v
|3ap/3dpoisujr' aurou tov Abyov popcpmdev-
tos xal avdpmirov yevopevov, ib. § 46 (p.
83 r) e'v ftapjidpois Se 'A/3padp x.r.X.,
Tatian. ad Graec. 29 ypacpals no-lv
ivrvxelv J3apj3aptxals, ib. 3 1 rdv Se
(Mcouerfjv) irdarjs jiapfidpov aocpias dp-
Xyyov, ib. 35 TVS Ka@' vpas /3ap/3dpou
cptXoaocplas. By glorying in the name
they gave a practical comment on the
Apostle's declaration that the distinc
tion of Greek and barbarian was
abolished in Christ. In a similar spirit
Clem. Alex. Strom, i 16 (p. 361) en
deavours to prove that ov povov cpiXo-
aocpias dXXa xal irdarjs axeSbv re^vijs
euperal fiapfiapoi.
'Not till that word barbarian]
writes Prof. Max MiiUer (1. c. p. 118),
'was struck out of the dictionary of
mankind and replaced by brother, not
tUl the right of aU nations of the world
to be classed as members of one genus
or kind was recognised, can we look
even for the first beginnings of our
science. This change was effected by
Christianity... Humanity is a word.
which you look for in vain in Plato or
Aristotle; the idea of mankind as one
family, as the children of one God, is
an idea of Christian growth : and the
science of mankind, and of the lan
guages of mankind, is a science which,
without Christianity, would never have
sprung into life. When people had
been taught to look upon all men as

brethren, then and then only, did the
variety of human speech present itself
as a problem that called for a solution
in the eyes of thoughtful observers :
and I therefore date the real begin
ning of the science of language from
the first day of Pentecost... The com
mon origin of mankind, the differences
of race and language, the susceptibi
lity of all nations of the highest men
tal culture, these become, in the new
world in which we live, problems of
scientific, because of more than scien
tific interest.' St Paul was the great
exponent of the fundamental principle
in the Christian Church which was
symbolized on the day of Pentecost,
when he declared, as here, that in
Christ there is neither "EXXrjv nor
j3dp/3apos, or as in Rom. i 14 that he
himself was a debtor equaUy'EXXrjo-iv
re xal /3ap/3dpois.
The only other passage in the New
Testament (besides those quoted) in
which fidpfiapos occurs is Acts xxvUi.
2, 4, where it is used of the people of
Melita. If this Melita be Malta, they
would be of Phoenician descent.
Sxvdrjs] The lowest type of barba
rian. There is the same collocation
of words in Dionys. Halic. Rhet. xi.
S, 6 irarrjp, fidpfiapos, 'S.Kvdrjs, vios,
Aesch. c. Ctes. 172 SxudSjs, j3dp/3apos,
eXXrjvifcov tjj cpeovjj (of Demosthenes).
The savageness of the Scythians was
proverbial The earlier Greek writers
indeed, to whom omne ignotum was
pro magnifico, had frequently spoken
of them otherwise (see Strabo vii. 3.
7 sq.,p. 300 sq.). Aeschylus for instance
called them euvopoi SxudW, Fragm.
189 (comp. Eum. 703). Like the
other Hyperboreans, they were a
simple, righteous people, living be
yond the vices and the miseries
of civilisation. But the common
estimate was far different, and pro
bably far more true: e.g. 3 Mace.
vU. 5 vbpov Sxvd&v dypiarepav . . .ulpb-
njra (comp. 2 Mace iv. 47), Joseph.

III. 12]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

217

tov Qeov, dyiot [koI~\ nyairtjpievoi, crirXdy^ya oiKTippiov,

C. Ap. ii. 37 2xu<9ai.../3paxu tcov Orjplav
Siaepepovres, PhUo Leg. ad Gai. 2
(n. p. 547) Sapparav ye'vrj xal Sxudcov,
ajrep ovx fjrrov e'f rjypimrai r&v Teppavt-
k&v, Tertull. adv. Marc. i. 1 ' Scytha
tetrior,' Orig. c Cels. i. 1 Sxut/eov, xal
ei n 2xu61c3v aaefiiaTepov. In Vit. Moys.
u. 4 (1. p. 137) Philo seems to place
the Egyptians and the Scythians at the
two extremes in the scale of barbarian
nations. The passages given in Wet
stein from classical writers are hardly
less strong in the same direction.
Anacharsis the Scythian is said to have
retorted e'pol Se jrdvres "EXXryves axvdi-
£evaiv, Clem. Strom, i 16 (p. 364).
The Jews had a special reason for
their unfavourable estimate of the
Scythians. In the reign of Josiah
hordes of these northern barbarians
had deluged Palestme and a great
part of Western Asia (Herod, i 103
— 106). The incident indeed is passed
over in silence in the historical books;
but the terror inspired by these in
vaders has found expression in the
prophets (Ezek. xxvui, xxxix, Jer. i
13 sq., vi. 1 sq.), and they left behind
them a memorial in the Greek name
of Beth-shean, SxuoW jrdXis( Judith iii.
10, 2 Mace, xii 29 : comp. Judges i.
27 lxx) or 2xut7ojroXis, which seems to
have been derived from a settlement
on this occasion (Plin. N. H. v. 16;
see Ewald Gesch. m. p. 689 sq., Grove
s. v. Scythopolis in Smith's Bibl. Did.).
Hence Justin, Dial. § 28 (p. 246 a),
describing the largeness of the new
dispensation, says xdv Sxvdr/s 77 ns fj
Hiparjs, exet Se ttjv tov Qeov yv&atv
xal tov Xpiarov avrov xal cpvXdaaet
rd aldvta 8ixaia. . .cpiXos earl rm Qem,
where he singles out two different but
equally low types of barbarians, the
Scythians being notorious for their
ferocity, the Persians for their licen
tiousness (Clem. Alex. Paed. i. 7,
p. 131, Strom, iii. 2, p. 515, and the
Apologists generally). So too the
Pseudo-Lucian, Philopatris 17, sati

rising Christianity, KP. rdSe efjre, el xal
ra T&v "SiXvd&v iv t& ovpavm eyYapdr-
roucri. TP. jrdvra, el tvxoi ye xprjarbs
xal e'v edveai. From a misconception
of this passage in the Colossians,
heresiologers distinguished four main
forms of heresy in the pre-Christian
world, |3apj3apio-pds, axvdiapbs, eXXrj-
viapbs, iouSai'o-pds ; so Epiphan. Epist.
ad Acac. 2 aacp&s yap irepl rovrmv t&v
reaadpav aipiaemv 6 djrderroXos e'jrire-
pcov ecprj, 'Ev ydp Xpicrrco 'irjo-ou ou |3dp-
jiapos, ov Sxiidr/s, ovx "EXXrjv, oux 'Iou-
8alos, dXXd xaivf) xnVis : comp. Haer.
i. 4, 7 sq., 1. pp. 5, 8 sq., Anaceph. 11.
pp. 127, 129 sq.
rd jrdvra x.r.X.] ' Christ is all
things and in all things.' Christ
has dispossessed and obliterated aU
distinctions of religious prerogative
and inteUectual preeminence and so
cial caste; Christ has substituted
Himself for aU these ; Christ occupies
the whole sphere of human Ufe and
permeates all its developments : comp.
Ephes. i 23 tov rd jrdvra e'v irdaiv irXrj-
poupevou. For rd jrdvra, which is
stronger than oi jrdvres, see Gal. iii
22 o-uvexXeicrev rj ypacprj rd irdvra virb
dpaprlav with the note. In this pas
sage e'v jrdorv is probably neuter, as
in 2 Cor. xi. 6, Phil. iv. 12, 1 Tim. iii
11, 2 Tim. ii. 7, iv. 5, Ephes. iv. 6, vi
16. In the parallel passage Gal. iii. 28
the corresponding clause is irdvres
vpeis els iare iv Xpiarm 'irjaov. The
inversion here accords with a chief
motive of the epistle, which is to as
sert the absolute and universal supre
macy of Christ ; comp. i. 17 sq., U.
10 sq., 19. The two parts of the anti
thesis are combined in our Lord's
saying, Joh. xiv. 20 upeis e'v ipoi, xdym
iv vpiv.
12 — 15. ' Therefore, as the elect of
God, as a people consecrated to His
service and specially endowed with
His love, array yourselves in hearts of
compassion, in kindliness and humi-

2l8

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 12

Xptio~TOTt]Ta, Taireivotppdirvvtiv , irpavTtjTa, piaKpodv-

lity, in a gentle and yielding spirit.
Bear with one another, forgive freely
among yourselves. As your Master
forgave you His servants, so ought ye
to forgive your fellow-servants. And
over all these robe yourselves in love;
for this is the garment which binds
together all the graces of perfection.
And let the one supreme umpire in
your hearts, the one referee amidst
all your difficulties, be the peace of
Christ, which is the destined goal of
your Christian calling, in which is
realised the unity belonging to mem
bers of one body. Lastly of all ; show
your gratitude by your thanksgiving.'
12. ivSvaaade ovv] ' Put on there
fore] as men to whom Christ has be
come all in all. The incidental men
tion of Christ as superseding aU other
relations gives occasion to this argu
mentative ouv : comp. iii I, 5.
cos exXexrol tov Qeov] ' as elect ones
of God.' Comp. Rom. viii. 3, Tit. i. 1 .
In the Gospels xXrjroi and ixXexrol are
distinguished as an outer and an in-
Der circle (Matt, xxii 14 jroXXol ydp
eio-iv xXtjtoi, oXiyoi Se e'xXexroi), xXnroi
being those summoned to the privi
leges of the Gospel and e'xXexroi those
appointed to final salvation (Matt.
xxiv. 22, 24, 31, Mark xiii. 20, 22, 27,
Luke xviii 7). But in St Paul no
such distinction can be traced. With
him the two terms seem to be coex
tensive, as two aspects ofthe same pro
cess, xXrjroi having special reference to
the goal and e'xXexroi to the starting-
point. The same persons are ' called '
to Christ, and 'chosen out' from the
world. Thus in 1 Thess. i. 4 eiSdres
tt)v e'xXoynv upcov x.r.X. the word clearly
denotes election to Church-member
ship. Thus also in 2 Tim. ii. 10, where
St Paul says that he endures all things
Sid rovs ixXexrovs, adding tva xal aurol
ami-npias rvxmaiv x.r.X., the uncertainty
implied in these last words clearly
shows that election to final salvation
is not meant. In the same sense he

speaks of an individual Christian as
'elect,' Rom. xvi. 13. And again in
I Cor. i. 26, 27 fSXiirere rijv xXijaiv
upcov... rd p&pa rov xoapov i£eXi£aro,
the words appear as synonymes. The
same is also the usage of St Peter.
Thus in an opening salutation he ad
dresses whole Christian communities
as e'xXexroi (1 Pet. i. 1 ; comp. v. 13 ij
eruvexXexrr) e'v BafivX&vi, i.e. probably
ixxXrjala), as St Paul under similar
circumstances (Rom. i 6, 7, 1 Cor.
i. 2) designates them xXnroi; and in
another passage (2 Pet. i. 10) he ap
peals to his readers to make their
xXfjcris and ixXoyrj sure. The use of
exXexrds in 2 Joh. 1, 13, is apparently
the same; and in Apoc xvU. 14 oi
per' aurou xXnroi xal e'xXexroi xal jri-
o-roi this is also the case, as we may
infer from the addition of irtaroi, which
points to those who have been true to
their ' calling and election.' Thus the
Gospels stand alone in this respect.
In fact e'xXoyn denotes election by
God not only to final salvation, but to
any special privilege or work, whe
ther it be (1) Church-membership, as
in the passages cited from the epistles ;
or (2) The work of preaching, as when
St Paul (Acts ix. 15) is called o-xeuos
e'xXoyfjs, the object of the 'election'
being defined in the words foUowing,
tov paaraaat to ovopd pov ivdmov
[tcov] idv&v re xal fiaaiXemv x.r.X. ; or
(3) The Messiahship, 1 Pet. ii 4, 6; or
(4) The fatherhood of the chosen
people, as in the case of Isaac and Ja
cob, Rom. ix. 11; or (5) The faithful
remnant under the theocracy, Rom.
xi. 5, 7, 28. This last appUcation pre
sents the closest analogy to the idea
of final salvation : but even here St
Paul treats xXrjats and e'xXoyrj as co
extensive, Rom. xi. 28, 29 xard Se rf)v
e'xXoynv dyajrrjrol Sid tous irarepas'
aperapiXrjra yap Ta xapi°~P-ci'<'a xal rj
xXfjcris rov Qeov.
dytot x.r.X.] These are not to be
taken as vocatives, but as predicates

III. 13]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

219

(Uiav 13 dve-^opevoi dXXtjXwv, Kal ¦^api^op.evoi eavTols,

further defining the meaning of e'xXex
roi. AU the three terms e'xXexroi,
dyioi, rjyairTjpevot, are transferred
from the Old Covenant to the New,
from the Israel after the flesh to the
Israel after the Spirit. For the two
former comp. 1 Pet. U. 9 ye'vos e'xXexrdv
...edvos ayiov; and for the sense of
dyioi, ' the consecrated people of God,'
see the note on Phil. i. 1. For the
third word, rjyairrjpevoi, see Is. v. 1
"Acrco Sr) to ijyairrjpiva x.r.X., Hos.
U. 25 rrjv oux rJyaTPjpevrjv rjyajnjpevijv
(as quoted in Rom. ix. 25). In the
New Testament it seems to be used
always of the objects of God's love ;
e.g. I Thess. i 4 eiSdres, dSeXcpol rjya-
irrjpevol uird ©eou, rnv e'xXoynv vp&v,
2 Thess. U. 13 dSeXcpol rjyajrnpe'voi ujrd
Kvpiov (comp. Jude 1); and so proba
bly Rev. XX. 9 rijv iroXiv tt)v rjyaiTTjpe-
vr/v. For the connexion of God's elec
tion and God's love see Rom. xi. 28
(quoted above), 1 Thess. 1. c. The xal
is omitted in one or two excellent
copies (though it has the great pre
ponderance of authorities in its fa
vour), and it is impossible not to feel
how much the sentence gains in force
by the omission, e'xXexroi ©eou, dyioi,
Tjyairnpivoi ; comp. I Pet. ii 6.
orrXdyxva oixnppou] ' a heart of
pity.' For the meaning of crjrXdyxva
see the note on Phil, i 8, and for the
whole expression comp. airXdyxva iXi-
ousLukei 78, Test. xiiPatr. Zab. 7, 8.
Xprjo-rdVrjra x.r.X.] The two words
yprjordrrys and Taireivocppoavvrj, ' kind
liness ' and 'humUity,' describe the
Christian temper of mind generally,
and this in two aspects, as it affects
either (1) our relation to others (xprja-
rdVrjs), or (2) our estimate of self (ra-
iretvocppoavvTj). For xP'/O-rdrrjs see the
note on Gal. V. 22 : for raireivocppoavvij,
the note on Phil. ii. 3.
irpavrrjra K.T.X.] These next two
words, irpavrns and paxpodvpia, de
note the exercise of the Christian
temper in its outward bearing to

wards others. They are best distin
guished by their opposites. jrpaunjs
is opposed to 'rudeness, harshness,'
dypidnjs (Plato Symp. 197 d), xaXejrd-
rrjs (Arist. H.A. ix. 1); paxpodvpia to
'resentment, revenge, wrath,' dpyrj
(Prov.xvi. 32), d£uxoXia (Herm. Mand,
v. 1, 2). For the meaning of paxpo
dvpia see above, on i 1 1 ; for the form
of irpavTrjs (jrpadnjs), on Gal. v. 23.
The words are discussed in Trench
N. T. Syn. § xiii. p. 140 sq., § xliii.
p. 145 sq., § liii p. 184 sq. They ap
pear in connexion Ephes. iv. 2, Ign.
Polyc. 6 paxpodvprjaare ovv per dXXrj-
Xmv iv irpavTrjTi.
13. dXXrjXtov, eaurois] The pro
noun is varied, as in Ephes. iv. 32
yiveade els dXXrjXovs xPVaT0'"--XaPl-
fdpevoi eaurois x.r.X., I Pet. iv. 8 — IO
rrjv els e avroiis dyairrjv ixTevr) e^ovres
. . .cpiXdif evoi eis a'XXijXous...eis Eav
rovs aurd [to xaPt0"Pa] 8iaxovouvres.
The reciprocal eavrmv differs from the
reciprocal dXXijXcov in emphasizing the
idea of corporate unity : hence it is
more appropriate here (comp. Ephes.
iv. 2, 32) with xaptCopevot than with
dvexbpevot : comp. Xen. Mem. iu. 5. 16
dvri pev tov avvcpyelv eavrols rd o-up-
cpipovra, iirrjped£ovatv dXXijXois, xal
cpdovovatv eavrols paXXov rj rois dX-
Xots dvdpmirois...xai irpoaipovvrat pdX
Xov ovra xepSaiveiv djr' dXXijXcovr)
avvmcpeXovvres aurous, where the pro
priety of the two words in their re
spective places wUl be evident : and
ib. u. 7. I2 dvrl vcpopapevmv eaurds
rjSecos dXXrjAas edpmv, where the vari
ation is more subtle but not less ap
propriate. For instances of this use of
eavrmv see Bleek Hebraerbrief iii. 13
(p. 4S3 s1-)> Kiihner Griech. Gramm.
§ 45 S (ii- P- 497 sq.).
xapi£bpevoi] ie. ' forgiving'; see the
note on U. 13. An a fortiori argu
ment lurks under the use of eaurois
(rather than dXXijXois) : if Christ for
gave them, much more should they
forgive themselves.

220

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 14

idv tis irpos Tiva ^tl pioiuKptjv Kadcos Kal 6 Kvpios
i^ap'io-aTO vpiiv, ovtcos Kal vpteis' I4eVt irdaiv Be tovtois

popcprjv] 'a complaint] As pip-
cpeadat is ' to find fault with,' referring
most commonly to errors of omission,
so popcprj here is regarded as a debt,
which needs to be remitted. The
rendering of the A. V. 'a quarrel '
(= querela) is only wrong as being an
archaism. The phrase popcprjv exetv
occurs several times in classical Greek,
but generaUy in poetry: e.g. Eur.
Or est. 1069, Arist. Pax 664.
xat7cos xal x.r.X.] This must not be
connected with the preceding words,
but treated as an independent sen
tence, the xac'cos xai being answered
by the ouras xai. For the presence of
Kai in both clauses of the comparison
see the note on i 6. The phenomenon
is common in the best classical writers,
e.g. Xen. Mem. i. 6. 3 mairep xal tcov
aXXcov epymv oi SiSdaxdXoi. . . ourco xal
av x.t.X. ; see the references in Hein-
dorf on Plato Phaedo 64 c, Sophist.
217 b, and Kiihner Griech. Gramm.
§ 524 (ii- P- 799)-
d Kupios] This reading, which is
better supported than 6 Xpiarbs, is
also more expressive. It recalls more
directly the lesson of the parable
which enforces the duty of fellow-
servant to fellow-servant ; Matt, xviii.
27 o-jrXayxvio-5eis Se d xvpios tov
SouXou ixeivov diriXvaev avrbv xal rd
Sdveiov dcpfjxev aura x.r.X.: comp. below
iv. I eiSdres on xal upeis exere xvpiov
ivovpavm. The readingXpierrds perhaps
comes from theparallel passage Ephes.
iv. 32 xaPiCopevot eavrols, xadms xal b
Qebs iv Xpiarm ixapiaaro rjpiv (or vpiv).
ovrms xal upeis] SC. xapi£eade eav
rols. 14. ejrl irdaiv] ' over and above all
these] comp. Luke iii. 20 irpoaidrjxev
xal rouro e'jrl irdaiv. In Luke xvi. 26,
Ephes. vi. 16, the correct reading is
probably e'v rrao-iv. Love is the outer
garment which holds the others in
their places.

rnv dyarrnv] SC ivSvaaade, from ver.
12. a]' which thing] i.e. 'love'; comp.
Ephes. v. 5 irXeovixTrjs, o ianv eiScoXo-
Xdrprjs, Ign. Rom. 7 dprov ©eou o'e'Xco,
o e'trriv o-dpf Xpicrrou, Magn. IO pera-
fidXeade els veav fuprjv d ianv 'irjaovs
Xpiarbs, Trail. 8 dvaxrrjaaade eavrovs
iv iriarei o ianv oap£ tov Kvpiov.
Though there are various readings in
the passages of the Ignatian Epistles,
the o seems to be generaUy right.
These instances wUl show that 0 may
be referred to rfj-v dyairrjv alone. 0-
therwise we migfit suppose the ante
cedent to be rd ivSvaaadai ttjv dyairrjv,
but this hardly suits the sense. The
common reading fjns is obviously a
scribe's correction.
or5v8eo-pos x.r.X.] ' the bond of per
fection] i. e. the power, which unites
and holds together aU those graces
and virtues, which together make up ;
perfection, ndvra ixelva, says Chry
sostom, avrrj avacpiyyei' oirep av eitrrjs
dyaddv, ravrrjs dirovarjs ovSev ianv
dXXd Stappel : comp. Clem. Rom. 49
rdv Seapbv rfjs dydirrjs rov Qeov ris
Svvarai i^ijyrjaaadat ; Thus the Pytha
goreans (Simplic inEpictet p. 208 a)
ireptaa&s rmv dXXcov dper&v rijv cptXiav
iripmv xal avvSeapov avrrjv iraamv r&v
dper&v eXeyov. So too Themist. Orat.
i. (p. 5 0) j3aaiXiKrj (dpern) 7rapd rds
dXXas eis rjv |uv8ouvrai xal ai Xoiirai,
mairep eis piav xopvcprjv dvrjppevai.
The word wiU take a genitive either
of the object bound or of the binding
force: e.g. Plato Polit. 310 a rourov
deibrepov eivai rbv t-iivSeapov dperijs
pep&v cpvaems dvopoimv xal iiri rdvavria
cpepopevmv, where the dperfj £uv8ei and
the peprj cpvaems |uv8eirai. We have
an instance of the one genitive (the
objective) here, of the other (the sub
jective) in Ephes. iv. 3 e'v ra awSiapco
rijs eiprjvrjs (see the note there).
Another explanation makes o-uv8eo--

III. iS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

221

Ttjv dydirtyv, 6 icrTiv o-vvBeo;uos Ttjs TeXetoTtjTOs. lsKal
t] eiprjvt] tov Xpio-Tov fipafieveTco ev Tats KapBiats vpicov,
eis ijv Kal eKXtjdtiTe iv evi cwpiaTi. Kal evydptarToi

pos = avvdeais here, 'the bundle, the
totaUty,' as e.g. Herodian. iv. 12 jrdv
ra tov avvSeapov t&v emaroX&v (comp.
Ign. Trail. 3 avvSeapov diroarbXav) ;
but this unusual metaphor is highly
improbable and inappropriate here,
not to mention that we should expect
the definite article 6 avvSeapos in this
case. With either interpretation,
the function assigned to a'ydrrn, here
is the same as when it is declared to
be jrXrjpcopa vbpov, Rom. xiii. 10 (comp.
Gal. v. 14). See also the aU-embracing
office which is assigned to it in 1 Cor.
xiu. 15- rj elprjvrj tov Xpio-rou] ' Christ S
peace] which He left as a legacy to His
disciples: Joh. xiv. 27 elpijvrjv dcpirjpi
upiv, elprjvrjv rrjv iprjv SiSmpi vpiv;
comp. Ephes. U. 14 aurds ydp eariv rj
elprjvij rjpcov with the context. The
common reading rj elprjvrj rov Qeov has
a paraUel in PhU. iv. 7.
/8paj3euerco] 'be umpire] for the
idea of a contest is only less promi
nent here, than in /3pa/3eiov 1 Cor. ix.
24, PhU. Ui. 14 (see the note there).
SrdSiov evSov iiroiijaev e'v rois Xoyio-pois,
writes Chrysostom, xal dycova xal ddXrj-
o-iv xal 0paj3eunjv. Wherever there
is a conflict of motives or impulses or
reasons, the peace of Christ must step
in and decide which is to prevail : Mr)
dvpbs /3pa/3euera, says Chrysostom
again, pr) cpiXoveixia, pr) avdpairivrj
elprjvrj- 17 ydp avdpairivrj elprjirrj ix rou
dpiiveadai yiverai, ix tov prjSev irdaxetv
8eivov. For this metaphor of some one
paramount consideration acting as
umpire, where there is a conflict of
internal motives, see Polyb. ii. 35. 3
djrav rd yiyvbpevov viro r&v TaXdnov
dvpm paXXov fj Xoyiapa /3pa/3euV
adat, Philo de Migr. Abr. 12 (l p.
446) rropeiierai d acppmv 81' dpxporipmv
fivpov re xal imdvpias del... tov tjvioxov

xal j3pai3eurfjv Xdyov djro^aXcdv
(comp. de Ebriet. 19, 1. p. 368), Jos.
B. J. vi. 2. 6 e'/3pd$eue Tas rbXpas b...
cpofios. Somewhat similarly ruxrj
(Polyb. xxvii. 14. 4) or cpiats (Athen.
xv. p. 670 a) are made /3pa/3eueiv. In
other passages, where 6 Qebs or rd
oeiov is said j3pa(3eueiv, this implies
that, whUe man proposes, God dis
poses. In Philo dXrjdeia fipafievovaa
(Qui rer. div. her. 19, 1. p. 486) is a
rough synonyme for dXrjdeia Sixdfouo-a
(de Abr ah. 14, 11. p. 10, etc.): and
in Josephus (Ant. vi. 3. 1) Sixdc^eiv and
j3pa^eueiv are used together of the
same action. In aU such cases it ap
pears that the idea of a decision and
an award is prominent in the word,
and that it must not be taken to de
note simply rule or power.
els fjv x.r.X.] Comp. 1 Cor. vii. 15
e'v Se elprjvrj xe'xXijxev ijpds d Qebs.
iv evi o-copan] ' As ye were called as
members of one body, so let there
be one spirit animating that body':
Ephes. iv. 4 ev ampa xal ev irvevpa.
This passage strikes the keynote of
the companion Epistle to the Ephe
sians (see esp. ii. 16 sq., iv. 3 sq.).
euxdpioroi] ' And to crown all for
get yourselves in thanksgiving towards
God': see the notes on i 12, U. 7. The
adjective evxdpiaros, though not oc
curring elsewhere in the Greek Bible,
is not uncommon in classical writers,
and like the English 'grateful,' has
two meanings; either (1) 'pleasurable'
(e.g. Xen. Cyr. U. 2. 1) ; or (2) ' thank
ful' (e. g. Boeckh C. I. no. 1625), as
here. 16, 17. ' Let the inspiring word of
Christ dweU in your hearts, enriching
you with its boundless wealth and en
dowing you with all wisdom. Teach
and admonish one another with psalms,
with hymns of praise, with spiritual
songs of aU kinds. Only let them be

222

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 16

yivetrde. l6'0 Xoyos tov XpiaTOv ivotKeiTco iv vpiiv irXov-
crioos ev irda"r\ o-o(pla' BtBdo-KOVTes Kal vovdeTOvvTes
pervaded with grace from heaven.
Sing to God in your hearts and not
with your Ups only. And generally ;
whatever ye do, whether in word or
in deed, let everything be done in the
name of Jesus Christ. And (again I
repeat it) pour out your thanksgiving
to God the Father through Him.'
1 6. 'O Xdyos rou Xpio-rou] ' the word
of Christ] tov Xpiarov being the sub
jective genitive, so that Christ is the
speaker. Though d Xdyos rou ©eoS
and d Xdyos rou Xvpiov occur fre
quently, d Xdyos rou Xpicrroii is found
here only. There seems to be no di
rect reference in this expression to
any definite body of truths either
written or oral, but d Xdyos rou Xpia
rov denotes the presence of Christ in
the heart, as an inward monitor :
comp. I Joh. ii. 14 6 Xbyos rou Qeov
iv vpiv pevei, with ib. i. IO d Xdyos au
rou ovx eanv iv rjpiv, and so perhaps
Acts xviii. 5 avveixero rea Xbym (the
correct reading).
e'v upiv] ' in your hearts] not' among
you' ; comp. Rom. viii 9, 1 1 rd ivoixovv
aurou irvevpa iv vpiv, 2 Tim. i. S, 14,
and Lev. xxvi. 12, as quoted in 2 Cor.
vi. 16, ivotxrjam iv avrois.
irXovaims] See above, p. 43 sq., and
the note on i 27.
e'v jrdcrij croepia] 'in every kind of
wisdom.' It seems best to take these
words with the preceding clause,
though Clem. Alex. Paed. ii. 4 (p. 194)
attaches them to what foUows. For
this position of e'v jrdaij aocpia, at the
end of the sentence to which it refers,
comp. i. 9, Ephes. i 8. The connexion
here adopted is also favoured by the
parallel passage Ephes. v. 18, 19 (see
the note below). Another passage i

28 vouoVrouvres jrdvra avdpmirov xal
SiSdcrxovres jrdvra dvdpairov iv irdarj
aocpia has a double bearing : while the
connexion favours our taking e'v irdo-j]
aocpia hero with the following words,

Kai
the order suggests their being at
tached to the preceding clause.
SiSdo-xovres x.r.X.] The participles
are here used for imperatives, as fre
quently in hortatory passages, e.g.
Rom. xii. 9 sq., 16 sq., Ephes. iv. 2, 3,
Hebr. xui. 5, 1 Pet. ii. 12 [?], iii. 1, 7, 9,
15, 16. It is not, as some insist, that
the participle itself has any imperati
val force; nor, as maintained by others,
that the construction should be ex
plained by the hypothesis of a prece
ding parenthesis or of a verb sub
stantive understood or by any other
expedient to obtain a regular gram
matical structure (see Winer, § xiv.
p. 441 sq., § lxii. p. 707, § lxiii p. 716,
§ lxiv. p. 732). But the absolute par
ticiple, being (so far as regards mood)
neutral in itself, takes its colour from
the general complexion of the sen
tence. Thus it is sometimes indica
tive (e.g. 2 Cor. vii. 5, and frequently),
sometimes imperative (as in the pas
sages quoted), sometimes optative (as
above, ii. 2, 2 Cor. ix. 11, comp. Ephes.
iii. 17). On the distinction of 8i8d-
o-xeiv and vovderelv see the note on i.
28 ; they describe respectively the posi
tive and. the negative side of instruc
tion. On the reciprocal e'aurous see
the note on Ui. 13.
¦sp-aXpols x.r.X.] To be connected with
the preceding sentence, as suggested
by Ephes. v. 18 sq. dXXd jrXijpouo-6'e e'v
irvevpan, XaXouvres eaurois [e'v] ijr-aX-
pois xal vpvots xal aiSais [jrveupanxais],
ezSovres xal i/raXXovres rfj xapSla upcov
tco Kvpia. The datives describe the
instruments of the SiSaxrj and vou-
deaia. The three words i^aXpds, upvos, cfSrj,
are distinguished, so far as they are
distinguishable, in Trench N.T. Syn.
§ lxxviii. p. 279 sq. They are cor
rectly defined by Gregory Nyssen in
Psalm, c. iii (1. p. 295) i/>aXpds piv
ianv rj Sid rou dpydvou rou povaixov

III. 16]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

223

eavTOvs yfsaXpiols vptvois coBais irvevpiaTLKaTs iv Ttj

peXaSia, cpSn Se rj Sid arbparos yevo-
pevrj rou peXous perd prjpdrmv iirtcpm-
vrjais... vpvos Se rj eVi rois ujrdpxoucriv
rjpiv ayadols dvandepevrj rep ©e<p evcprj-
pia ; see also Hippol. p. 191 sq. (ed.
de Lagarde). In other words, while
the leading idea of ijraXpds is a musi
cal accompaniment and that of vpvos
praise to God, coSrj is the general word
for a song, whether accompanied or
unaccompanied, whether of praise or
on any other subject. Thus it was
quite possible for the same song to
be at once -v/zaXpos, upvos, and cpSij.
In the text the reference in ijraXpois,
we may suppose, is specially, though
not exclusively (1 Cor. xiv. 26), to
the Psalms of David, which would
early form part of the religious wor
ship of the Christian brotherhood.
On the other hand vpvois would more
appropriately designate those hymns
of praise which were composed by the
Christians themselves on distinctly
Christian themes, being either set
forms of words or spontaneous effu
sions of the moment. The third word
tp8ais gathers up the other two, and
extends the precept to aU forms of
song, with the Umitation however that
they must be irvevparixai. St Chry
sostom treats upvoi here as an advance
upon ¦sjr-dXpoi, which in one aspect they
are ; oi 1/raXpoi, he says, jrdvra exovaiv,
oi 8e vpvoi irdXiv ov8ev dvdpdirtvov'
orav iv rois ¦sfraXpols padij, Tore xal up-
vous eio-erai, are detbrepov jrpaypa.
Psalmody and hymnody were highly j
developed in the reUgious services of j
the Jews at this time : see Philo in '¦
Flacc. 14 (il. p. 535) jrdvvuxoi Se 81a-
reXecravres e'v vpvois xal tubals, de Vit.
Cont. § 3 (n. p. 476) jroioucriv t}apara
xal vpvovs els ©edv Sid iravrolav pirpov
xal peXcov, a pvdpols aepvoripots dvay-
xaims xapdrrouo-i, § 10 (p. 484) d dva
crrds upvov aSei rreirotrj pivov ets rov
©edv, fj xaivbv avrbs ireirotrjKms f) dp-
Xaibv Tiva t&v jrdXai iroirjrav' perpa
ydp xal peXrj xardXeXoiiraai jroXXa ejrcov

rpiperpcov, jrpocroSicov, upvcov, irapa-
oirovSeicov, jrapa/3copt'cov, araaipmv, xo-
ptx&v, arpocpais iroXvarpbcpots ev Siape-
perpnpe'vcov x.r.X., § 1 1 (p. 485) aSovai
ireiroiTjpivovs els rbv ©edv vpvovs jtoX-
Xois perpois xal peXeo-i x.r.X., with
the whole context. They would thus
find their way into the Christian
Church from the very beginning.
For instances of singing hymns or
psalms in the Apostolic age see Acts
iv. 24, xvi. 25, 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 26.
Hence even in St Paul's epistles, more
especially his later epistles, fragments
of such hymns appear to be quoted; e.g.
Ephes. v. 14 (see the note there). For
the use of hymnody in the early Church
of the succeeding generations see Plin.
Epist. x. 97 'Ante lucem convenire,
carmenque Christo quasi Deo dicere
secum invicem,' Anon. [Hippolytus] in
Euseb. H. E. V. 28 i/raXpol Se' oaoi xal
mSal dSeXcp&v dir dpxvs virb m-
ar&v ypacpelaai rbv Adyov tou Qeov tov
Xpiarov vpvovat deoXoyovvres. The
reference in the text is not solely or
chiefly to pubUc worship as such.
Clem. Alex. Paed. ii 4 (p. 194) treats
it as applying to social gatherings;
and again Tertullian says of the agape,
Apol. 39 'Ut quisque de scripturis
Sanctis vel de proprio ingenio potest,
provocatur in medium Deo canere,'
and of the society of husband and
wife, Ad Uxor. u. 8 'Sonant inter
duos psahni et hymni, et mutuo pro-
vocant quis melius Domino suo cantet.'
On the psalmody etc. of the early
Christians see Bingham Antiq. xiv.
c. 1, and especially Probst Lehre und
Gebet p. 256 sq.
e'v rfj x°P'™] '*M God's grace';
comp. 2 Cor. i 12 oux e'v aocpia aap-
xixj dXX' e'v x"Pm ©cov. These
words are perhaps best connected with
the preceding clause, as by Chryso
stom. Thus the paralleUsm with e'v
jrdo-17 aocpia is preserved. The cor
rect reading is iv rfj x<"P'"j n0'; *'"
xdpm. For 17 \dpis, 'Divine grace'

224

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 17, 18

j(dpiTt, dBovTes iv Tats KapBlats vpuiov tco Qecp' %1 Kai
irdv b ti iav iroitJTe iv Xoyco ij iv 'epycp, iravTa ev
6v6p.ori Kvpiov 'Itjo-ov, ev^apio-TOVVTes too 0ea> iraTpi
Bl OVTOV. 18 At yvvaiKes, viroTaa'ceo'de rots avBpdcriv, cos dvtj-

see PhU. i. 7 avvxoivavovs pov ttjs
xapiros with the note. The definite
article seems to exclude aU lower
senses of x"Pls bere, such as 'accept-
ableness,' 'sweetness' (see iv. 6). The
interpretation 'with gratitude,' if
otherwise tenable (comp. 1 Cor. x. 30),
seems inappropriate here, because the
idea of thanksgiving is introduced in
the following verse.
iSovres x.r.X.] This external mani
festation must be accompanied by the
inward emotion. There must be the
thanksgiving of the heart, as well as
of the lips ; comp. Ephes. v. 19 aSovres
xal ij/dXXovres rjj xapSig. (probably the
correct reading), where tjj xapSla
' with the heart ' brings out the sense
more distinctly.
17. jrdv o n x.r.X.] This is proba
bly a nominative absolute, as Matt. x.
32 jrds ovv oans bpoXoyrjaet... bpo-
Xoyrjo-co xdyco e'v avrm (comp. Luke
xii. 8), Luke xii. 10 jrds os ipel Xbyov
...dcpedrjaerai avra, John xvii. 2 jrd v
o SeSmxas avra, Smarj aurols X.T.X.;
comp. Matt, vii 24 (v. I).
irdvra] sc. iroieire, as the following
euxapio-rouvres suggests; comp. ver.
23-
e'v ovbpan x.r.X.] This is the great
practical lesson which flows from the
theological teaching of the epistle.
Hence the reiteration of Kvpim, iv
Kvpim, etc., vv. 18, 20, 22, 23, 24. See
above, p. 102.
eu'xapio-rouvres] On this refrain see
the notes on i. 12, ii. 7.
to ©eco irarpi] This, which is quite
the best authenticated reading, gives
a very unusual, if not unique, colloca
tion of words, the usual form being
either d ©eds xal irarrjp or ©eds jrarrjp.
The xal before jrarpi in the received

text is an obvious emendation. See
the note on i 3, and the appendix on
various readings.
18 — 21. 'Ye wives, be subject to
your husbands, for so it becomes you
in Christ. Te husbands, love and
cherish your wives, and use no harsh
ness towards them. Ye chUdren, be
obedient to your parents in all things ;
for this is commendable and lovely in
Christ. Ye parents, vex not your
children, lest they lose heart and grow
sullen.' 18 sq. These precepts, providing
for the conduct of Christians in private
households, should be compared with
Ephes. v. 22 — vi. 9, 1 Pet. ii 18— iii. 7,
Tit. ii. 1 sq.; see also Clem. Rom. 1,
Polyc. Phil. 4 sq.
Ai yuvaixes] ' Ye wives] the nomina
tive with the definite article being
used for a vocative, as frequently in
the New Testament, e.g. Matt. xi. 26,
Mark v. 41, Luke vui. 54; see Winer
§ xxix. p. 227 sq. The frequency of
this use is doubtless due to the fact
that it is a reproduction of the He
brew idiom. In the instances quoted
from classical writers (see Bernhardy
Syntax p. 67) the address is not
so directly vocative, the nominative
being used rather to define or select
than to summon the person in ques
tion. rois dv8pdcriv] The iSiois of the
received text may have been inserted
(as it is inserted also in Ephes. v. 24)
from Ephes. v. 22, Tit. U. 5, 1 Pet. iU.
1, 5, in all which passages this same
injunction occurs. The scribes how
ever show a general fondness for this
adjective ; e.g. Mark xv. 20, Luke ii. 3,
Acts i. 19, Ephes. iv. 28, 1 Thess. ii
15, iv. 11.

III. 19 — 22]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

225

Kev iv Kvpicp. *9Ot dvBpes, dyairaTe Tas yvva'iKas Kal
\ I D ^ ' ' 3QT" ^ ' « '
[xt] iriKpaivecrue irpos avTas. la TeKva, viraKoveTe
tois yovevcriv KaTa iravTW tovto ydp evdpecTov eo'Tiv
iv Kvpicp. "Ol iraTepes, fit] ipedi^ETe Ta TeKva vpcov,
'iva pit] ddvpcoo'iv. 29Ot BovXoi, viraKoveTe KaTa irdvTa

dvfjxev] The imperfect, as Ephes. v.
4 a ovx dvfjxev (the correct reading) ;
comp. Clem. Hom. Contest. 3 rou8e
pf) peraSouvai X^?"*, <*s <"' rrpoarjxev,
Xen. de Re Equestr. xii. 14 d tWapxco
jrpoo-fjxev eiSe'vat re xal nparreiv ; and
see D'OrviUe on Charito vui. 2 (p. 699
sq.). The common uses of the imper
fect ISei, ejrpeirev, etc, in classical wri
ters do not present a very exact
paraUel; for they imply that the thing
which ought to have been done has
been left undone. And so we might
interpret Acts xxu. 22 ou ydp xaflfj-
xev aurdv ffjv (the correct reading).
Here however there can hardly be
any such reference; and the best
Ulustration is the English past tense
'ought' (='owed'), which is used in
the same way. The past tense per
haps implies an essential a priori
obUgation. The use of xP*iv> *XPVi
occasionally approximates to this; e.g.
Eur. Andr. 423.
The idea of ' propriety' is the link
which connects the primary meaning
of such words as dvijxeiv, irpoafjxeiv,
xadrjxeiv, 'aiming at or pertaining to,'
with their ultimate meaning of moral
obUgation. The word dvnxetv occurs
in the New Testament only here and
in the contemporary epistles, Ephes.
v. 4, Philem. 8.
e'v Kupicp] Probably to be connected
with eds dvfjxev, rather than with ujto-
rdcrcrecrfJe ; comp. ver. 20 eu'dpecrrdv
ianv iv Kvpicp.
19. pr) irtxpaiveade X.T.X.] 'show no
bitterness, behave not harshly'; comp.
Lynceus in Athen. vi. p. 242 0 mxpav-
deiij irpbs riva t&v av£dvrmv, Joseph.
Ant. V. 7. I Seivcos jrpds tous tou 81-
xat'ou irpdlarapivovs ixirixpaivbpevos,
Plut. Mor. p. 457 A jrpds yuvaia Sia-
COL.

irtxpaivovrat. So also mxpaiveadat iiri
nva in the lxx, Jerem. xhv (xxxvii).
15, 3 Esdr. iv. 31. This verb mxpai
veadat and its compounds occur fre
quently in classical writers.
20. xard irdvra] As in ver. 22. The
rule is stated absolutely, because the
exceptions are so few that they may
be disregarded.
eudpecrrdv e'oriv] ' is well pleasing,
commendable.' The received text
suppUes this adjective with a dative
of reference to Kupicp (from Ephes.
v. 10), but e'v Kvpim is unquestionably
the right reading. With the reading
thus corrected eiapearov, like dvfjxtv
ver. 18, must be taken absolutely,
as perhaps in Rom. xii. 2 rd deknpa
tov ©eou rd dyadbv xal evdpearov xai
reXeiov: comp. Phil. iv. 8 oaa aepvd
...baa irpoacpiXfj. The qualification
ev Kupicp implies 'as judged by a
Christian standard,' 'as judged by
those who are members of Christ's
body.' 21. ipedi^ere] 'provoke, irritate!
The other reading jrapopyifere has
higher support, but is doubtless taken
from the paraUel passage, Ephes. vi. 4.
'Irritation' is the first consequence of
being too exacting with children, and
irritation leads to moroseness (ddv-
pia). In 2 Cor. ix. 2 ipedi£eiv is used
in a good sense and produces the
opposite result, not despondency but
energy. dflupcoeriv] 'lose heart, become spi
ritless] i. e. ' go about their task
in a Ustless, moody, sullen frame of
mind.' 'Fractus animus] says Ben
gel, ' pestis juventutis.' In Xen. Cyr.
i. 6. 13 ddvpia is opposed to rrpodvpia,
and in Thuc ii. 88 and elsewhere
ddvpelv is opposed to dapaelv. is

226

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 23

-rots KaTa o-dpKa Kvpiois, p.t\ iv 6(p6aXp.oBovXeia cos
dvdpcoirdpeo-KOi, dXX' iv dirXoTtjTi KapBias, <pofiovp.evoi
tov Kvpiov. a3o idv iroifJTe, iK -^v^ns ipyd^earde 00s

12. iv oipBa
22 — iv. 1. ' Ye slaves, be obedient
in all things to the masters set over
you in the flesh, not rendering them
service only when their eyes are upon
you, as aiming merely to please men,
but serving in all sincerity of heart, as
living in the sight of your Heavenly
Master and standing in awe of Him.
And in everything that ye do, work
faithfully and with all your soul, as
labouring not for men, but for the
great Lord and Master Himself ; know
ing that ye have a Master, from whom
ye will receive the glorious inheritance
as your recompense, whether or not
ye may be defrauded of your due by
men. Yes, Christ is your Master and
ye are his slaves. He that does a
wrong shaU be requited for his wrong
doing. I say not this of slaves only,
but of masters also. There is no par-
tiaUty, no respect of persons, in God's
distribution of rewards and punish
ments. Therefore, ye masters, do ye
also on your part deal justly and equi
tably by your slaves, knowing that ye
too have a Master in heaven.'
22. Oi 80SX01] The relations of
masters and slaves, both here and in
the companion epistle (Ephes. vi.
5 — 9), are treated at greater length
than is usual with St Paul. Here
especially the expansion of this topic,
compared with the brief space assign
ed to the duties of wives and husbands
(vv. 18, 19), or of children and parents
(vv. 20, 21), deserves to be noticed.
The fact is explamed by a contempo
rary incident in the Apostle's private
life. His intercourse with Onesimus
had turned his thoughts in this di
rection. See above, p.33, and the in
troduction to the Epistle to Philemon:
comp. also the note on ver. 11.
dcpflaXpoSouXeia] ' eye-service] as
Ephes. vi. 6 : comp. Apost. Const, iv.

XpobovXelais. 12 prj ds 6cpddXp68ovXos dXX' ms cpi-
XoSeWoros. This happy expression
would seem to be the Apostle's own
coinage. At least there are no traces
of it earliei. Compare ideXodp-qaxeia
ii. 23. The reading dipdaXpoSovXeig.
is better supported than dcpdaXpoSov-
Xeiais, though the plural is rendered
shghtly more probable in itself by its
greater difficulty.
dvt7pcojrdpeo-xoi] Again in Ephes. vi.
6. It is a lxx word, Ps. Iii. 6, where
the Greek entirely departs from the
Hebrew : comp. also dvdpmirapeaxelv
Ign. Rom. 2, dvdpmirapiaxeta Justin
Apol. i. 2 (p. 53 e). So dxXoapeo-xrjs
or dxXodpeo-xos, Timo Pblias. in Diog.
Laert iv. 42 (vv. 11.).
djrXdnjri xapSias] As in Ephes. vi. 5,
i.e. 'with undivided service'; a lxx
expression, 1 Chron. xxix. 1 7, Wisd. i 1 .
rdv Kupiov] 'the one Lord and
Master,' as contrasted with rois xard
adpxa xvpiots: the idea being carried
out in the following verses. The re
ceived text, by substituting rdv ©edv,
blunts the edge of the contrast.
23. ipyd(eade] i. e. ' do it dUi-
gently,' an advance upon jroifJTe.
oux dvo'pcojrois] For the use of oj
rather than pf) in antitheses, see Wi
ner § lv. p. 601 sq. The negative
here is wholly unconnected with the
imperative, and refers solely to to
Kvpim. 24. djro Kupiou] ' However you may
be treated by your earthly masters,
you have still a Master who wUl re
compense you.' The absence of the
definite article here (comp. iv. 1) is
the more remarkable, because it is
studiously inserted in the context, w.
22 — 24, rdv Kupiov, ra Kvplm, np Ku
picp. In the parallel passage Ephes.
vi. 8 it is jrapd Kvpiov : for the differ
ence between the two see Gal. i 12.

III. 24, 25]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

227

tw Kvpicp, Kal ovk dvdpcoirois, a4etSoTes 6ti diro Kvpiov
diroXtjpi^seo'de Ttjv avTairoBoctv Ttjs KXr\povop.ias' tw
Kvpicp \pi(TTcp BovXeveTe' as6 yap dBiKoov /co/xtereTat 6

rijv dvrajrd8oo-iv] 'the just recom
pense,' a common word both in the
lxx and in classical writers, though
not occurring elsewhere in the New
Testament ; comp. dvrairoSopa Luke
xiv. 12, Rom. xi. 9. The double com
pound involves the idea of ' exact re
quital.' rfjs xXrypovopias] ' which consists in
the inheritance] the genitive of appo
sition: see the note on rfj v pepiSa tov
xXr/pou, i 12. There is a paradox in
volved in this word : elsewhere the
doCXos and the xXrjpovdpos are con
trasted (Matt, xxi 35 — 38, etc., Rom.
viii 15 — 17, Gal. iv. 1, 7), but here
the SoCXos is the xXypovopos. This he
is because, though SoOXos dvdpcdjrcov,he
is djreXeudepos Kupiou (i Cor. VU. 22)
and thus xXnpovdpos Sid ©eou (Gal. iv.
7); comp. Hermas Sim. v. 2 tva avy-
xXijpovbpos yevrjrai d SovXos rm vim
(with the context).
t& Kvpim x.t.X.] i e. ' you serve as
your master the great Master Christ]
This clause is added to explain how
is meant by the preceding dirb Kvpiov.
For this appUcation of Kupios com
pare (besides the paraUel passage,
Ephes. vi. 6 — 9) 1 Cor. vii 22 d ydp
e'v Kupicp xXijdels SouXos djreXeuoepos
Kupiou e'oriv x.r.X. It seems best to
take 8ouXeuere here as an indicative,
rather than as an imperative ; for (1)
The indicative is wanted to explain
tbe previous djrd Kupiou ; (2) The im
perative would seem to require cos rip
Kupicp, as in Ephes. vi. 7 (the correct
text). On the other hand see Rom.
xU. 11.
25. d ydp dStx&v x.r.X.] Who is
this unrighteous person ? The slave
who defrauds his master of his ser
vice, or the master who defrauds his
slave of his reward? Some interpret
ers confine it exclusively to the for
mer ; others to the latter. It seems

best to suppose that both are included.
The connexion of the sentence dydp
dSixcov (where ydp, not Se, is certainly
the right reading) points to the slave.
On the other hand the expression
which follows, rd Sixatov xal ttjv lab-
rrjra x.r.X., suggests the master. Thus
there seems to be a twofold reference ;
the warning is suggested by the case
of the slave, but it is extended to the
case of the master ; and this accords
with the parallel passage, Ephes. vi. 8
exaaros b dv ironjajj dyadbv tovto xopi-
aerat irapd Kvpiov, eire SouXos eire
iXeiidepos. The recent fault of Onesimus would
make the Apostle doubly anxious to
emphasize the duties of the slave to
wards the master, lest in his love for
the offender he should seem to con
done the offence. This same word
rjSixrjo-ev is used by St Paul to describe
the crime of Onesimus in Philem. 18.
But on the other band it is the Apo
stle's business to show that justice
has a double edge. There must be a
reciprocity between the master and
the slave. The philosophers of Greece
taught, and the laws of Rome assumed,
that the slave was a chattel. But a
chattel could have no rights. It would
be absurd to talk of treating a chattel
with justice. St Paul places the rela
tions of the master and the slave in a
wholly different light. Justice and
equity are the expression of the Di
vine mind: and with God there is no
irpoaairoXrjpi\fia. With Him the claims
of the slave are as real as the claims
of the master.
xopio-erai] For this sense of the
middle, 'to recover,' 'to get back,'
and so (with an accusative of the thing
to be recompensed), ' to be requited
for', see e.g. Lev. xx. 17 dpaprlav xopi-
ovvrai, 2 Cor. v. IO xopiarjrat exaaros
rd Sid rou amparos ; comp. Barnab.
IS— 2

228

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. i

tjB'iKtjo-ev, Kal ovk eo'Tiv irpoo'coiroXtipiy^ia. Iv. *Ot
KVpiot, to B'tKaiov Kal Ttjv io-OTtjTa toIs BovXots irape-
XeorBe, e'iBoTes oti Kal vpeis e^eTe Kvpiov iv ovpavw.

§40 Kupios dirpoamirdXrjpirTms xpivei
rbv xbapov' exaaros, xadms iiroirjaev,
xopietrat. In the paraUel passage
Ephes. vi. 8, the form is certainly xo-
uio-erai : here it is more doubtful, the
authorities being more equally divided
between xoptelrat and xopiaerai. See
however the note on yvmpiaovatv iv. 9.
jrpoo-cojroXrjp^ia] On this word see
the note Gai ii. 6. This jrpoenojroXnji-
ijria, though generally found on the
side of rank and power, may also be
exercised in favour of the opposite ;
Lev. xix. 15 ov Xrji/fij irpbamirov rrrm-
Xov ovSe prj davpaajjs irpbamirov 8vva-
arov. There would be a tendency in
the mind of the slave to assume that,
because the irpoaairoXrjpsjrla of man
was on the side of the master, there
must be a corresponding irpoaairo-
Xrjpi/fia of God on the side of the
slave. This assumption is corrected
by St Paul.
IV. 1. rnv io-dnjra] ' equity] 'fair
ness1; comp. Plut. Sol. et Popl. Comp. 3
vbpmv iabrrjra irapexbvrmv. Somewhat
similarly Lysias Or. Fun. 77 (speak
ing of death) oure ydp tous irovrjpovs
virepopq oure tous dyadovs davpdfet,
dXX' icrov eaurdv irapexet irdaiv.
It seems a mistake to suppose that
taoTTjs here has anything to do with
the treatment of slaves as equals
(comp. PhUem. 16). When connected
with rd Sixaiov, the word naturaUy sug
gests an even-handed, impartial treat
ment, and is equivalent to the Latin
aequitas : comp. Arist. Top. vi. 5 (p.
143) d rnv Sixaiocruvrjv (Xeycov) ef iv iab-
rrjros iroirjTixrjv 17 Siaveprjrixrjv roil taov,
Philo de Great. Princ. 14 (11. p. 373)
eari ydp io-dnjs. . .pijrrjp Sixaioauvrjs,
Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 6 (p. 764) perd
Stxaiocruvrjr xai icrdrnros j-fjs irpds tous
iirioTpecpovTas. Thus in Arist. Eth.
Nic v. I rd 8ixaiov and to 'icrov are
regarded as synonymes, and in Plut.

Mor. p. 719 the relation of io-drrjs to
Sixaidrns is discussed. The word here
is used in the same sense in which the
adjective occurs in the common ex
pressions io-os Sixaarrjs, iaos dxpoarrjs,
etc. Philo, describing the Essene
condemnation of slavery, says, Omn.
prob. lib. 12 (n. p. 457) xaraytvdaxovai
re rmv Seairor&v, ov povov ds aSixmv.
labrTjra Xupaivopevcov, dXXd xal cos acre-
/3<Sv x.r.X., but he possibly does mean
' equality' rather than * equity.'
jrapexeaae] ' exhibit on your part.'
The middle irapixeadai, 'to afford from
oneself,' will take different shades of
meaning according to the context, as
' to furnish one's quota ' (e.g. Herod.
viii. 1, 2) or ' to put forward one's re
presentative ' (esp. of witnesses, e.g.
Plato Apol. 19 d). Here the idea is
' reciprocation,' the master's duty as
corresponding to the slave's.
exere Kvpiov] As Ephes. vi. 9; comp.
I Cor. VU. 22 d eXevdepos xXijdels Sou-
X6s ianv Xpiarov.
2 — 6. ' Be earnest and unceasing
in prayer; keep your hearts and minds
awake while praying : remember also
(as I have so often told you) that
thanksgiving is the goal and crown of
prayer. Meanwhile in your petitions
forget notus — myself Paul — my fellow
labourer Timothy — your evangeUst
Epaphras — all the teachers of the
Gospel ; but pray that God may open
a door for the preaching of the word,
to the end that we may proclaim the
free offer of grace to the GentUes —
that great mystery of Christ for which
I am now a prisoner in bonds. So
shall I declare it fearlessly, as I am
bound to proclaim it. Walk wisely
and discreetly in all your deaUngs with
unbelievers; aUow no opportunity to
slip through your hands, but buy up
every passing moment. Let your lan
guage be always pervaded with grace

IV. 2-4]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

229

' Tjj irpoarevxtj irpoo-KapTepelTe, yptjyopovvTes iv
avTtj iv ev^apio-Ticf 3 irpoo'ev^opievoi dpa Kal irepl tjpicov,
'iva 6 Qeos dvoi^tj tjpXv dvpav tov Xoyov, XaXijo-ai to
/nvo'Ttjpiov tov XjOtfTTOv, Bi 6 Kal BeBepai' 4'iva tpave-

and seasoned with salt. So will you
know how to give a fit answer to each
man, as the occasion demands.'
2. jrpoo-xaprepeire] 'cling closely
to', 'remain constant to' (comp. Mark
iii. 9, Acts vui. 13, x. 7), and so ' con
tinue stedfast in.' This word occurs
again with 777 irpoaevxjj, rats irpoaev-
xdls, Acts i 14, U. 42, vi. 4, Rom. xii.
12. The construction is with a simple
dative both in the New Testament
(li cc) and in classical writers, except
where it stands absolutely (Acts ii. 46,
Rom. xui. 6). The injunction here
corresponds to the d8iaXeijrrios jrpoo--
evxeade of I Thess. V. 17.
yprjyopouvres] Long continuance in
prayer is apt to produce listlessness.
Hence the additional charge that the
heart must be awake, if the prayer
is to have any value. The word is not
to be taken UteraUy here, but meta
phorically. In Matt. xxvi. 41 etc., yprj-
yopelre xal irpoaeiixeade, the idea is not
quite the same.
e'v ei5x«pioTiaj As the crown of aU
prayer; see the notes on i 12, U. 7.
3. rjpcov] 'us] 'the Apostles and
preachers of the Gospel,' with refer
ence more especiaUy to Timothy (i 1)
and Epaphras (iv. 12, 13). Where
the Apostle speaks of himself alone,
he uses the singular (ver. 3, 4 Se'Sepai,
epavepdam). Indeed there is no rea
son to think that St Paul ever uses an
' epistolary' plural, referring to himself
solely: see on 1 Thess. Hi. 1.
ha x.t.X.] On the sense of tva after
irpoaevxeadai etc., see the note on i 9.
dvpav tov Xdyou] ' a door of admis
sion for the word] i e. ' an oppor
tunity of preaching the Gospel,' as
£ Cor. xvi. 9 dvpa ydp jioi dvemyev
peydXrj xal e'vepyrjs, 2 Cor. ii. 12
dvpas pot dvemypevrjs iv Kvpia : COmp.

Plut. Mor. p. 674 D coo-rrep jtuXijs dv-
otxdelaijs, ovk dvriaxov...avvetaiovat
iravTo8airols dxpodpaaiv. Similarly e'io-o-
80s is used in 1 Thess. i 9, ii. 1. The
converse application of the metaphor
appears in Acts xiv. 27 fjvoi£ev rois
edveaiv dvpav iriarems, where the door
is opened not to the teachers, but to
the recipients of the Gospel. Accord
ing to another interpretation (suggest
ed by Ephes. vi. 19 tva poi Sotfrj Xdyos
ev avoi£et tov arbparos pov) it is ex
plained ' the door of our speech,' i. e.
'our mouth': comp. Ps. cxli (cxi). 3,
Mic. vii. 5, Ecclus. xxviU. 25. But the
parallel passages do not favour this
sense, nor wiU the words themselves
admit it. In that case for rjpiv 6upav
rou Xdyou we should require rnv dupav
rcov Xdycov [rjpcov]. 'The word' here is
' the Gospel,' as frequently.
XaXfjo-ai] 'so as to speak] the in
finitive of the consequence, like eiSe'vai
ver. 6; see Winer § xliv. p. 400.
rb uvaTijpiov x.t.X.] i e. the doctrine
of the free admission of the Gentiles.
For the leading idea wliich St Paul
in these epistles attaches to 'the mys
tery' of the Gospel, see the note on
i 26. 81' o] St Paul might have been still
at large, if he had been content to
preach a Judaic Gospel. It was be
cause he contended for Gentile Uberty,
and thus offended Jewish prejudices,
that he found himself a prisoner. See
Acts xxi. 28, xxii. 21, 22, xxiv. 5, 6,
xxv. 6, 8. The other reading, Si' ov,
destroys the point of the sentence.
xal SfSepai] 2 Tim. ii. 9 p e'x pi Seo--
pcov, PhUem. 9 vuvi Se xal Seo-pios.
4. tva epavepdam x.r.X.] This is
best taken as dependent on the pre
vious clause tva 6 Qebs— tov Xpiarov.
For instances of a double tva, where

230

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. s, 6

pcocrco ovto, cos Bei pe XaXijo-ai. siv arotpia irepiiraTeiTe
irpos tovs epco, tov Kaipov i^ayopat^opievoi' 66 Xoyos

the second is not coordinated with,
but subordinated to, the first, see the
note on Gal. Ui 14. The immediate
purport of the Colossians' prayers
must be that the Apostle should have
all opportunities of preaching the
Gospel: the ulterior object, that he
should use these opportunities boldly.
5. e'v aocpia] Matt. X. 16 yiveade
ovv cppbvipoi cos ol ocpeis.
tovs e£co] ' those without the pale '
of the Church, the unbelievers; as in
1 Cor. v. 12, 13, 1 Thess. iv. 12. So 01
e£m6ev, i Tim. Ui 7. The beUevers on
the other hand are oi earn, 1 Cor. v. 12.
This mode of speaking was derived
from the Jews, who caUed the heathen
MWnn (Schottgen on 1 Cor. I. c),
translated oi e'xrds Ecclus. Prol. and
ol e£mdev Joseph. Ant. xv. 9. 2.
e'£ayopa£dpevoi x.r.X.] ' buying up
the opportunity for yourselves, let
ting no opportunity slip you, of saying
and doing what may further the cause
of God': comp. Ephes. v. 16. The ex
pression occurs also in Dan. ii. 8 oiSa
on xaipbv vpeis e'£ayopd£ere, i e. ' are
eager to gain time.' Somewhat simi
lar are the phrases rdv xpdvov xepSai-
vetv, rb irapbv xepSaivetv. So too Seneca
Ep. i. 1 ' Tempus... coUige et serva.'
In much the same sense Ignatius says,
Polyc. 3 rous xaipous xarapdvdave. For
this sense of e'|ayopdfco ' coemo' (closely
allied in meaning to cruvayopdfco), see
Polyb. iii. 42. 2 i^ijybpaae jrap' avr&v
rd re povb£vXa jrXoia irdvra x.r.X.,
Plut. Vit. Crass. 2. More commonly
the word signifies 'to redeem' (see the
note on Gai Ui. 13), and some would
assign this sense to it here; but no ap
propriate meaning is thus obtained. In
Mart. Polyc. 2 Sid pias copas rfjv aico-
viov xbXaatv e|ayopafdpevoi it means
' buying off,' a sense in which i^mvel-
adai occurs several times. The reason
for the. injunction is added in Ephes.
V. 16, on ai rjpepat irovrjpai eiaiv: the

prevaUing evil of the times makes the
opportunities for good more precious.
6. iv xo-pti-t] 'with grace, favour]
ie. ' acceptableness,' 'pleasingness';
comp. Eccles. x. 12 Xdyot arbparos
aocpov X"Pls> I"8- xhv C^lv)- 3 i£exvdn
Xapis iv xeiXeal aov, Ecclus. xxi. 1 6 iirl
XeiXovs avverov evpedrjaerat x°Pls- In
classical writers x°Pis Xdycov is a stUl
more common connexion; e.g.Demosth.
c. Phil. i. 38, Dionys. Hal. de Lys.
§§ 10, 11, Plut. Vit. Mar. 44.
aXan] Comp. Mark ix. 50 e'dv Se rd
aXas avaXov yevrjrai, e'v rivi aurd
apruo-ere; exere e'v eavrols SXa. The
salt has a twofold purpose. (1) It
gives a flavour to the discourse and
recommends it to the palate: comp.
Job vi. 6 ei jiprndijaerai dpros avev
dXds; el 8e xal eon yeupa e'v prjpaai
xevols; in which passage the first
clause was rendered by Symmachus
prjn fipadijaciai dvdprvrov to pr)
exetv dXa; This is the primary idea
of the metaphor here, as the word rjp-
rvpivos seems to show. (2) It preserves
from corruption and renders whole
some; Ign. Magn. 10 dXiadrjTe iv
aura tva pr) 8tacpdapjj ns iv vpiv,
e'jrel djrd rfjs do-pfjs iXeyxdrjaeade.
Hence the Pythagorean saying, Diog.
Laert. ViU. I. 35 oi dXes irav ad£ovatv
S n xal irapaXdj3aai. It may he in
ferred that this secondary applica
tion of the metaphor was present to
the Apostle's mind here, because in
the parallel epistle, Ephes. iv. 29, he
says jrds Xdyos aairpbs ix rou arb
paros upcov pi) ixiropeviada x.r.X. In
the first application the opposite to
dXan rjprupevos would be papbs 'in
sipid ' (Luke xiv. 34); in the second,
aairpbs ' corrupt.'
Heathen writers also insisted that
discourse should be 'seasoned with
salt'; e.g. Cic de Orat. i. 34 'facetia-
rum quidam lepos quo, tanquam sale,
perspergatur omnis oratio.' They

IV. 7]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

231

vp.wv iravTOTe iv %dpiTi, dXaTi tjpTvpievos, eiBevai vpids
ircos Bel evi eKaa'Tcp diroKpiveadai.
7Ta KaT ipte irdvTa yvwpia'ei vpiv Tv%ikos 6 dya-

likewise dwelt on the connexion be
tween x«P« and SXes; e. g. Plut. Mor.
p. 514 P \bpiv nvd irapacrxeudfovTes
dXXnXois, mairep dXal rois Xdyois e'cpij-
Suvovcn rrjv 8taTpif3rjv, p. 697 D (comp. p.
685 A) oi jroXXol xdpiras xaXouo-iv [rdv
aXa], on e'jrl rd jrXeicrra piyvupevos
evappoara rij yevaei xal irpoacpiXrj jroiei
xal xexapiapiva, p. 669 A rj Se tov dXcov
8vvapts...xdpiv aunp xal rJSovfjv jrpocr-
ridnat, Dion Chrys. Or. xvui § 13.
Their notion of 'salt' however was
wit, and generaUy the kind of wit
which degenerated into the eurpaire-
Xia denounced by St Paul in Ephes.
v. 4 (see the note there).
The form aXas is common in the
lxx and Greek Testament. Other
wise it is rare : see Buttmann Gramm.
1. p. 220, and comp. Plut. Mor. 668 f.
eiSevai] 'so as to know'; see the note
on XaXfjcrai ver. 3.
e'vi exdo-ra] 'Not only must your
conversation be opportune as regards
the time; it must also be appropriate
as regards the person.' The Apostle's
precept was enforced by his own ex
ample, for he made it a rule to be
come rois irdaiv irdvra, tva irdvrms n-
vds 0-cootj (I Cor. ix. 22).
7 — 9. 'You wiU learn everything
about me from Tychicus, the beloved
brother who has ministered to me
and served with me faithfully in the
Lord. This indeed was my purpose
in sending him to you : that you might
be informed how matters stand with
me, and that he might cheer your
hearts and strengthen your resolves
by the tidings. Onesimus wiU accom
pany him — a faithful and beloved bro
ther, who is one of yourselves, a Co
lossian. These two will inform you of
aU that is going on here.'
7. Td xar' ipe irdvra] 'all that
relates to me'; see the note on
Phil. i. 12, and comp. Bion in Diog.

Laert. iv. 47. So Acts xxv. 14 rd xard
rdv IlauXov.
yvcopio-ei] On this word see the
note PhU. i 22.
Tuxixos] Tychicus was charged by
St Paul at this same time with a more
extended mission. He was entrusted
with copies of the circular letter,
which he was enjoined to deUver in
the principal churches of proconsular
Asia (see above, p. 37, and the intro
duction to the Epistle to the Ephe
sians). This mission would bring him
to Laodicea, which was one of these
great centres of Christianity (see p. 8);
and, as Colossae was only a few miles
distant, the Apostle would naturally
engage him to pay a visit to the Co
lossians. At the same time the pre
sence of an authorised delegate of St
Paul, as Tychicus was known to be,
would serve to recommend Onesimus,
who owing to his former conduct
stood in every need of such a recom
mendation. The two names Tuxixos
and 'Ovrjo-ipos occur in proximity in
Phrygian inscriptions found at Alten-
tash (Bennisoa?) Boeckh 3857 r sq.
appx. Tychicus was a native of proconsu
lar Asia (Acts xx. 4) and perhaps of
Ephesus (2 Tim. iv. 12: see Philippi
ans p. 1 1). He is found with St Paul
at three different epochs in his life.
(1) He accompanied him when on
his way eastward at the close of the
third missionary journey a.d. 58 (Acts
xx. 4), and probably like Trophimus
(Acts xxi. 29) went with him to Jeru
salem (for the words dxpi rfjs 'Aaias
must be struck out in Acts xx. 4). It
is probable indeed that Tychicus, to
gether with others mentioned among
St Paul's numerous retinue on this
occasion, was a delegate appointed by
his own church according to the Apo
stle's injunctions (1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4) to

532

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 8

7TJJTOS dBeX<pos Kal iricrTOS BiaKOVOS Kal crvvBovXos iv
Kvpicp' 86v eirepi^ra irpos vpas els avTo tovto, 'iva

bear the contributions of his brethren
to the poor Christians of Judaea; and
if so, he may possibly be the person
commended as the brother ou d orai-
vos iv np euayyeXicp Sia iraa&v t&v ix-
xXrjcricov (2 Cor. viii. 18): but this wiU
depend on the interpretation of the
best supported reading in Acts xx. 5
ouroi Se irpoaeXdbvrcs epevov rjpds e'v
TpcodSi. (2) We find Tychicus again
in St Paul's company at the time with
which we are immediately concerned,
when this epistle was written, proba
bly towards the end of tho first Ro
man captivity, a.d. 62, 63 (see Philip
pians p. 31 sq.). (3) Cnce more, at the
close of St Paul's Ufe (about a.d. 67),
he appears again to have associated
himself with the Apostle, when his
name is mentioned in connexion with
a mission to Crete (Tit. iii. 12) and
another to Ephesus (2 Tim. iv. 12).
For the legends respecting him, which
are sUght and insignificant, see Act.
Sand. Boll. April 29 (m. p. 619).
Tychicus is not so common a name
as some others which occur in the
New Testament, e. g. Onesimus, Tro
phimus; but it is found occasionally
in inscriptions belonging to Asia Mi
nor, e.g. Boeckh C. I. 2918, 3665,
[38S7 c], 3^57 r, (comp. 3865 i, etc.);
and persons bearing it are commemo
rated on the coins of both Magnesia
ad Maeandrum (Mionnet in. p. 153 sq.,
Suppl. vi. p. 236) and Magnesia ad
Sipylum (ib. iv. p. 70). The name
occurs also in Roman inscriptions; e.g.
Muratori, pp. docooxvii, mccoxciv,
mmlv. Along with several other
proper names similarly formed, this
word is commonly accentuated Tuxixos
(Chandler Greek Accentuation § 255),
and so it stands in all the critical
editions, though according to rulo
(Winer § vi. p. 58) it should bo Tuxixos.
xal jrio-rds x.r.X.] The connexion of
the words is not quite obvious. It
seems best however to take e'v Kvpim

as referring to the whole clause iriarbs
Sidxovos xal aiiv8ov\os rather than to
o-uv8ouXos alone : for (1) The two sub
stantives are thus bound together by
the preceding jrio-rds and the foUowing
e'v Kupicp in a natural way: (2) The at
tachment of e'v Kupicp to jricrrds Sidxo
vos is suggested by the parallel pas
sage Ephes. vi. 21 Tuxixos d dyannrds
aSeXcpos xal marbs Sidxovos ev Kupicp.
The question of connecting e'v Kupicp
with aSeXcpos as well need not be en
tertained, since the idea of dSeXrpds,
'a Christian brother,' is complete in
itself : see the note on Phil, i 14. The
adjective mo-rds will here have its
passive sense, ' trustworthy, stedfast,'
as also in ver. 9: see Galatians p.
154 sq.
8idxovos] * minister] but to whom ?
To the churches, or to St Paid him
self? The foUowing o-uvSouXos sug
gests the latter as the prominent idea
here. So in Acts xix. 22 Timothy and
Erastus are described as Suo rav Sia-
xovouvrcov aunp. Tychicus himself also
was one of several who ministered to
St Paul about that same time (Acts
xx. 4). It is not probable however,
that Sidxovos has here its strict official
sense, 'a deacon,' as in Rom. xvi. 1,
Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iU. 8, 12.
o-uvSouXos] The word does not oc
cur elsewhere in St Paul, except in
i. 7, where it is said of Epaphras. It is
probably owing to the fact of St Paul's
applying the term in both these pas
sages to persons whom he calls Sidxo-
voi, that o-uvSouXos seems to have been
adopted as a customary form of ad
dress in the early Church on the part
of a bishop, when speaking of a deacon.
In the Ignatian letters for instance,
the term is never used except of dea
cons; Ephes. 2, Magn. 2, Philad. 4,
Smyrn. 12. Where the martyr has
occasion to speak of a bishop or a
presbyter some other designation is
used instead.

IV. 9]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

233

yvwTe t« irepl tjpcov Kal irapaKaXecrti Tas KapBias vpwv,
9crvv 'Ovtjo-'ipiw tco irio-Tw Kal dyairtjTcp dBeX<pw, os
iarTiv e'£ vpwv. irdvTa vpiv yvwpio-ovo~iv Ta wBe.

8. ejrep^a] ' / send] or ' I have
sent] eirepyjra being the epistolary
aorist; see the note on eypai/ra, Gal.
vi. 11. Tychicus appears to have ac
companied the letter itself. For simi
lar instances of the epistolary ejrep^a,
iiriareiXa, eta, see 2 Cor. viii. 18, 22,
ix. 3, Ephes. vi. 22, PhU. U. 25, 28,
PhUem. 11, Hebr. xiu. 22, Polyc.
Phil. 13.
yvcore rd irepl ijp&v] This must be
preferred to the received reading, yvcp
rd jrepl vp&v, for two independent
reasons. (1) The preponderance of
ancient authority is decidedly in its
favour. (2) The emphatic eis au'rd
tovto tva seems imperatively to de
mand it. St Paul in the context
twice states the object of Tychicus'
visit to be that the Colossians might
be informed about the Apostle's own
doings, rd xar' ipe irdvra yvmplaet vpiv
(ver. 7), and jrdvra upiv yvmpiaovaiv rd
coSe. He could hardly therefore have
described 'the very purpose' of his
mission in the same breath as some
thing quite different.
It is urged indeed, that this is a
scribe's alteration to bring the passage
into accordance with Ephes. vi. 21.
But against this it may fairly be ar
gued that, on any hypothesis as re
gards the authorship and relation of
the two letters, this strange varia
tion from yvcore rd jrepl rjpcov to yvcp
rd 7repl upcov in the author himself is
improbable. On the other hand a
transcriber was under a great temp
tation to substitute yvcp for yvcore ow
ing to the following irapaxaXiarj, and
this temptation would become almost
irresistible, if by any chance jrepl vpmv
had been written for rrepl ijpcov in the
copy before him, as we find to be the
case in some mss. See the detached
note on various readings.
irapaxaXiajj x.t.X.] i.e. 'encourage

you to persevere by his tidings and ex
hortations.' The phrase occurs again,
Ephes. vi. 22, 2 Thess. ii. 17 : see above
ii. 2. The prominent idea in all these
passages is not comfort or consolation
but perseverance in the right way.
9. o-uv 'Ovijo-ipcp] See above, p. 33,
and the introduction to the Epistle to
PhUemon. T*f jrio-rcp x.r.X.] The man whom the
Colossians had only known hitherto,
if they knew him at aU, as a worthless
runaway slave, is thus commended to
them as no more a slave but a brother,
no more dishonest and faithless but
trustworthy, no more an object of con
tempt but of love; comp. Philem. 11,
16. yvcopio-ouo-iv] This form has rather
better support from the mss than
yvwptovatv : see also above iii. 25. On
the Attic future from verbs in -ifco in
the Greek Testament generally see
Winer § xiii p. 88, A. Buttmann p. 32
sq. Is there any decisive instance of
these Attic forms in St Paul, except in
quotations from the lxx (e.g. Rom. x.
19, xv. 12) '(
10—14. ' I send you greeting from
Aristarchus who is a fellow-prisoner
with me ; from Marcus, Barnabas'
cousin, concerning whom I have al
ready sent you directions, that you
welcome him heartily, if he pays you
a visit; and from Jesus, surnamed
Justus; aU three Hebrew converts.
They alone of their fellow-countrymen
have worked loyally with me in spread
ing the kingdom of God; and their
stedfastness has indeed been a com
fort to me in the hour of trial. Greet
ing also from Epaphras, your feUow-
townsman, a true servant of Christ,
who is ever wrestling in his prayers on
your behalf, that ye may stand firm
in the faith, perfectly instructed and
fully convinced in every will and pur-

234

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. io

10 ' Acrira^eTai vpds 'Apio-Tap^os 6 trvvai^paXwTOS

pose of God. I bear testimony to the
earnestness with which he labours for
you and the brethren of Laodicea and
those of Hierapolis. Greeting also
from Luke the physician, my very
dear friend, and from Demas.'
io. The salutations to PhUemon
are sent from the same persons as to
the Colossians, except that in the
former case the name of Jesus Justus
is omitted.
'Apio-rapxos] the Thessalonian. He
had started with St Paul on his voy
age from Jerusalem to Rome, but
probably had parted from the Apostle
at Myra (see Philippians p. 33 sq.).
If so, he must have rejoined him
at Rome at a later date. On this
Aristarchus see Philippians p. 10,
and the introduction to the Epistles
to the Thessalonians. He would be
well known in proconsular Asia, which
he had visited from time to time ;
Acts xix. 29, xx. 4, xxvii 2.
o-uvaixpdXcords pou] In PhUem. 23
this honourable title is withheld from
Aristarchus and given to Epaphras.
In Rom. xvi. 7 St Paul's kinsmen,
Andronicus and Junias, are so called.
On the possibility of its referring to a
spiritual captivity or subjection see
Philippians p. 1 1. In favour of this
meaning it may be urged, that, though
St Paul as a prisoner was truly a Seo—
pios, he was not strictly an aixpdXcoros
'a prisoner of war'; nor could he have
called himseU' so, except by a confu
sion of the actual and metaphorical.
If on the other hand cruvaixpdXcoros
refers to a physical captivity, it cannot
easily be explained by any known fact.
The incident in Acts xix. 29 is hardly
adequate. The most probable solu
tion would be, that his relations with
St Paul in Rome excited suspicion
and led to a temporary confinement.
Another possible hypothesis is that
he voluntarUy shared the Apostle's
captivity by living with him.
Mdpxos] doubtless John Mark, who

had been associated with St Paul in
his earUer missionary work; Acts xii.
25, xv. 37 sq. This commendatory
notice is especially interesting as be
ing the first mention of him since the
separation some twelve years before,
Acts xv. 39. In the later years of the
Apostle's life he entirely effaced the
unfavourable impression left by his
earUer desertion; 2 Tim.iv. 1 1 'ianv ydp
poi evxprjaros els Siaxoviav.
This notice is Ukewise important in
two other respects. (1) Mark appears
here as commended to a church of
proconsular Asia, and intending to
visit those parts. To the churches of
this same region he sends a salutation
in 1 Pet. v. 13 ; and in this district
apparently also he is found some few
years later than the present time,
2 Tim. iv. 11. (2) Mark is now resid
ing at Rome. His connexion with the
metropolis appears also from 1 Pet. v.
13, if Ba/3uXcov there (as seems most
probable) be rightly interpreted of
Rome; and early tradition speaks of
his Gospel as having been written for
the Romans (Iren. iii. l i ; comp.
Papias in Euseb. H. E. in. 39).
6 dvei/nds] ' the cousin.' The term
dvesjnoi is applied to cousins gernian,
the children whether of two brothers
or of two sisters or of a brother and
sister, as it is carefully defined in
PoUux iU. 28. This writer adds that
avravi-\jr-ioi means neither more nor
less than dveyp-ioi. As a synonyme
we find i£d8eXcpos, which however is
condemned as a vulgarism; Phryn.
p. 306 (ed. Lobeck). Many instances of
dveyjriol are found in different authors
of various ages (e.g. Herod, vii. 5, 82,
ix. 10, Thucyd. i 132, Plato Charm.
154 B, Gorg. 471 b, Andoc. de Myst.
§ 47, Isaeus Hagn. Her. § 8 sq.,
Demosth. c. Macart § 24, 27, etc.,
Dion. Hal. A.R. i. 79, Plut. Vit. Thes.
7, Vit. Caes. 1, Vit. Brut. 13, Lucian
Dial. Mort. xxix. 1, Hegesipp. in
Euseb. H. E. iv. 22), where the rela-

IV. io]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

235

pov, Kal MapKOs 6 dve^sios Bapvdfia, irepl ov iXafieTC

tionship is directly defined or already
known, and there is no wavering as to
the meaning. This sense also it bas in'
the lxx, Num. xxxvi. 1 1. In very late
writers however (e.g. Io. Malalas
Chron. xvii p. 424, Io. Damasc. adv.
Const. Cab. 1 2, 11. p. 62 1 ; but in Theodt.
H. E. v. 39, which is also quoted by
E. A. Sophocles Gr. Lex. s. v. for
this meaning, the text is doubtful)
the word comes to be used for a
nephew, properly dSeXrpiSous; and
to this later use the rendering of
our English versions must be traced.
The German translations also (Luther
and the Zurich) have 'Neffe.' The
earliest of the ancient versions (Latin,
Syriac, Egyptian) seem aU to translate
it correctly ; not so in every case ap
parently the later. There is no reason
to suppose that St Paul would or
could have used it in any other than
its proper sense. St Mark's relation
ship with Barnabas may have been
through his mother Mary, who is men
tioned Acts xU. 12. The incidental
notice here explains why Barnabas
should have taken a more favourable
view of Mark's defection than St
Paul, Acts xv. 37 — 39. The notices in
this passage and in 2 Tim. iv. 1 1 show
that Mark had recovered the Apo
stle's good opinion. The studious re
commendation of St Mark in both
passages indicates a desire to efface
the unfavourable impression of the
past. The name of Mark occurs in five
different relations, as (1) The early
disciple, John Mark, Acts xii. 12, 25,
xv. 39 ; (2) The later companion of St
Paul, here and Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv.
11; (3) The companion and ' son ' of
St Peter, 1 Pet. v. 13 ; (4) The evan
gelist ; (5) The bishop of Alexandria.
Out of these notices some writers get
three or even four distinct persons
(see the note of CoteUer on Apost.
Const, ii 57). Even Tillemont (Mem.
Eccl. n. p. 89 sq., 503 sq.) assumes two

Marks, supposing (1) (2) to refer to
one person, and (3) (4) (5) to another.
His main reason is that he cannot
reconcile the notices of the first with
the tradition (Euseb. H. E. ii. 15, 16)
that St Mark the evangelist accom
panied St Peter to Rome in a.d. 43,
having first preached the Gospel in
Alexandria (p. 515). To most persons
however this early date of St Peter's
visit to Rome wiU appear quite ir
reconcilable with the notices in the
ApostoUc writings, and therefore
with them TUlemont's argument will
carry no weight. But in fact Euse
bius does not say, either that St Mark
went with St Peter to Rome, or that
he had preached in Alexandria before
this. The Scriptural notices suggest
that the same Mark is intended in all
the occurrences of the name, for they
are connected together by personal
links (Peter, Paul, Barnabas); and the
earliest forms of tradition Ukewise
identify them.
Bapvd/3a] On the affectionate tone
of St Paul's language, whenever he
mentions Barnabas after the colli
sion at Antioch (Gal. ii. 11 sq.) and
the separation of missionary spheres
(Acts xv. 39), see the note on Gal. ii.
13. It has been inferred from the
reference here, that inasmuch as Mark
has rejoined St Paul, Barnabas must
have died before this epistle was
written (about a.d. 63); and this has
been used as an argument against
the genuineness of the letter bear
ing his name (Hefele Sendschr. d.
Apost. Barnab. p. 29 sq.); but this
argument is somewhat precarious.
From 1 Cor. ix. 6 we may infer that
he was still Uving, A.D. 57. The
notices bearing on the biography of
Barnabas are collected and discussed
by Hefele, p. 1 sq.
e'Xd/3ere e'vroXds] These injunctions
must have been communicated pre
viously either by letter or by word of
mouth : for it cannot be a question

236

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 11

Kai

evToXas, 'Edv eXdt] irpbs vpds, Be^acrde ovtov,
'Iticrovs 6 Xeyopevos 'Iovcttos, ol SvTes iK irepiToptjs'
ovtoi povoi avvepyol els Ttiv fiao-iXelav tov Qeov, oiTives
(Joseph. Vit. §§ 9, 65), and by a son
of the historian Josephus himself (ib.
§1). It occurs in the rabbinical writ

here of an epistolary aorist. The
natural inference is, that they were
sent by St Paul himself, and not by
any one else, e.g. by St Peter or St
Barnabas, as some have suggested.
Thus the notice points to earlier com
munications between the Apostle and
Colossae. But what was their tenour? It
seems best to suppose that this is
given in the next clause e'dv eXdrj
x.r.X. By an abrupt change to the
oratio recta the injunction is repeat
ed as it was delivered; comp. Ps.
CV (civ). IS fjXey£ev ujrep aurcSv /3a-
o-iXeis' Mf) aijfTjade x.r.X. After verbs
signifying ' to command, charge, etc.,'
there is a tendency to pass from the
oblique to the direct; e.g. Luke v. 14,
Acts i 4, xxiii 22. The reading Se-
t-aadai gives the right sense, but can
hardly be correct. If this construc
tion be not accepted, it is vain to
speculate what may have been the
tenour of the injunction.
11. xal 'Irjo-ous] He is not men
tioned elsewhere. Even in the Epi
stle to PhUemon his name is omitted.
Probably he was not a man of any
prominence in the Church, but his
personal devotion to the Apostle
prompted this honourable mention.
For the story which makes him bishop
of Eleutheropolis in Palestine, see Le
Quien Oriens Christ, m. p. 633.
'IoSo-ros] A common name or sur
name of Jews and proselytes, denot
ing obedience and devotion to the
law. It is applied to two persons in
the New Testament, besides this Je
sus; (1) Joseph Barsabbas, Acts i 23;
(2) A proselyte at Corinth, Acts xviu.
7. It occurs twice in the list of early
Jewish Christian bishops of Jerusa
lem, in Euseb. H. E. iii. 35, iv. 5. It
was borne by a Jew of Tiberias who
wrote the history of the Jewish war

ings (Kt3Dl» or »t3DV, Schottgen on
Acts i 23, Zunz Judennamen p. 20),
and in monumental inscriptions from
Jewish cemeteries in various places
(Boeckh C. I. no. 9922, 9925 ; Revue
Archeologique i860, n. p. 348 ; Gar-
rucci Dissertazioni Archeologiche n.
p. 182). So also the corresponding
female name Justa (Garrucci I. c. p.
180). In Clem. Hom. ii. 19, Ui 73, iv.
1, xiu. 7, the Syrophoenician woman
of the Gospels is named 'louo-ra,
doubtless because she is represented
in this Judaizing romance as a prose-
lytess (jrpoo-rjXuros xiU. 7) who strictly
observes the Mosaic ordinances (rfjv
voptpov dvaSe^apivTj iroXirelav ii. 20),
and is contrasted with the heathen
'dogs' (rd et9vrj e'oixdra xucriv ii. 19)
who disregard them. In some cases
Justus might be the only name of the
person, as a Latin rendering of the
Hebrew Zadok; whUe in others, as
here and in Acts i 23, it is a surname.
Its Greek equivalent, 6 Sixatos, is the
recognised epithet of James the Lord's
brother : see Galatians, p. 348.
0! ovres x.t.X.] i.e. 'converts from
Judaism' (see the note Gal. ii. 12),
or perhaps 'belonging to the Cir
cumcision'; but in this latter case
irepiropfjs, though without the article,
must be used in a concrete sense,
like rfjs irepiroprjs, for 'the Jews.'
Of Mark and of Jesus the fact is
plain from their name or their con
nexions. Of Aristarchus we could not
have inferred a Jewish origin, inde
pendently of this direct statement.
pbvot] ie. of the Jewish Christians
in Rome. On this antagonism of the
converts from the Circumcision in the
metropolis, see Philippians p. 16 sq.
The words however must not be closely

IV. 12]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

23;

iyevtjQrio-dv poi iraptiyopia. " dtrira^eTai vpds 'Eirarppa?
6 e'£ vpwv, BovXos Xpio~TOv '\t\crov, iravTOTe dyvoviVp-
pevos virep vpwv iv Tais irpoo-evxais, 'iva TTadtJTe tc-

pressed, as ff absolutely no Jewish
Christian besides had remained friend
ly; they wUl only imply that among
the more prominent members of
the body the Apostle can only name
these three as stedfast in their alle
giance: comp. Phil. ii. 20 ouSe'va e^m
laos\rvxov ... irdvres yap x.r.X. (with
the note).
rnv fiaaCXelav x.r.X.] See the note on
ii3- oinves x.r.X.] 'men whom I found
etc.'; comp. Acts xxvUi. 15 ous ISmv
d LTauXos euxapicrrrjcras ra ©e<p eXa/3ev
ddpaos, and see Philippians p. 17.
For otnves, not specifying the indi
viduals, but referring them to their
class characteristics, see the notes on
Gal. iv. 24, v. 19, Phil. Ui. 7, iv. 3.
iraprsyopia] ' encouragement] ' com
fort.' The range of meaning in this
word is even wider than in irapapv-
dla or irapdxXrjais (see the note Phil.
ii. 1). The verb jraprjyopeiv denotes
either (1) ' to exhort, encourage' (He
rod, v. 104, ApoU. Rhod. ii 64) ;
(2) 'to dissuade' (Herod, ix. 54, 55);
(3) ' to appease,' * quiet ' (Plut. Vii.
Pomp. 13, Mor. p. 737 0); or (4) 'to
console, comfort ' (Aesch. Eum. 507).
The word however, and its derivates
jrapijyopia, jraprjydpnpa, jrapijyopixds,
jrapijyoprjnxds, were used especially as
medical terms, in the sense of 'as
suaging,' 'alleviating'; e.g. Hippocr.
PP- 392, 393, 394, Galen xiv. p. 335,
446, Plut. Mor. pp. 43 D, 142 D ; and
perhaps owing to this usage, the idea
of consolation, comfort, is on the whole
predominant in. the word; e.g. Plut.
Mor. p. 56 A rds e'jrl rois drvxrj petal
jraprjyopias, p. 1 1 8 A rois dcpaipovpivois
rds Xujras Sid rfjs yevvaias xai aepvfjs
jraprjyopias, Vit. Cim. 4 ejrl iraprjyopla
rov irivdovs. In Plut Mor. p. 599 b
Tcaprjyopia and avvrjyopia are contrast

ed, as the right and wrong me
thod of dealing with the sorrows of
the exile ; and the former is said to
be the part of men irappijo-iafope'vcov
xal SiSaaxbvrmv on rd Xujreio-dai xal
rarreivouv eavrbv iirl iravrl pev axprj-
ordv eVri x.r.X.
12. 'Ejracppds] His full name would
be Epaphroditus, but he is always
called by the shortened form Epa
phras, and must not be confused with
the Philippian Epaphroditus (see Phi
lippians p. 60), who also was with St
Paul at one period of his Roman
captivity. Of Epaphras, as the Evan
geUst of Colossae, and perhaps of the
neighbouring towns, see above, pp. 29
sq.;34sq._ d e'£ upcov] ' who belongs to you]
' who is one of you] i. e. a native, or
at least an inhabitant, of Colossae, as
in the case of Onesimus ver. 9 ; comp.
Acts iv. 6, xxi. 8, Rom. xvi. 10, 11,
1 Cor. xii. 16, Phil. iv. 22, etc.
SoiXos X. 'I.] This title, which the
Apostle uses several times of himself,
is not elsewhere conferred on any
other individual, except once on
Timothy (Phil. i. 1), and probably
points to exceptional services in the
cause of the Gospel on the part of
Epaphras. dycovifdpevos] ' wrestling ' ; comp.
Rom. XV. 30 avvaymviaaadai poi iv
rals irpoaevxals. See also the great
dyuvia of prayer in Luke xxU. 44.
Comp. Justin Apol. ii. 13 (p. 51 b)
xal euxdpevos xal irappd^ms dycovifd-
pevos. See also i 29, ii. 1, with the
notes. oraa'fJTe] ' standfast] doubtless the
correct reading rather than o-rfjre
which the received text has; comp.
Matt. U. 9, xxvii. 11, where also the
received text substitutes the weaker
word.

238

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 13

Xeiot Kal ireirXtjPodyoptipevoi iv iravTl OeXtjpaTi tov
Geou. 13papTvpw yap avTw oti e%et iroXvv irovov virep

ireirXrjpocpopTjpevoi] 'fully persuad
ed.' The verb irXrjpocpopeiv has several
senses, (i) ' To fulfil, accompUsh'; 2
Tim. iv. 5 rrjv Siaxoviav aov jrXrjpo-
cpbprjaov, ib. ver. 17 to xrjpvypa irXrj-
pocpopTjdrj, Clem. Hom. xix. 24 jren-Xrj-
pocpoprjpivmv vvv tj8t] rptmv rjpep&v.
So perhaps Hermas Sim. 2 irXrjporpo-
povai rbv jrXourov avrmv ...irXrjpocpo-
povai ras i/ruxds aurcov, though it is a
little diflicult to carry the same sense
into the latter clause, where the word
seems to signify rather 'to satisfy.'
(2) 'To persuade fully, to convince';
Bom. iv. 21 irXrjpocpoptjdels on 0 eVijy-
yeXrai Suvards eVnv xal iroiijaai, xiv.
5 e'v to iSico vol irXrjpocpopelada, Clem.
Rom. 42 JrXijporpoprjfle'vres Sid rijs dva-
ardaems x.t.X., Ign. Magn. 8 els to
rrXnpocpoprja'fjvai rods ajreiaouvras, ib. 1 1
ireirXrjpocpoprjadai iv rfj yevvrjaet X.T.X.,
Philad. inscr. ev rjj dvacrrdo-ei aurou
jrejrXrjpocpoprjpevrj e'v jravri iXiet, Smyrn.
I ireirXrjpocpoprjpivovs els rbv Kvpiov
rjpmv, Mart Ign. 7 jrXrjpocpopfjo-ai tous
dcrd'eveis rjpas eVi rois irpoyeyovbatv,
Clem. Hom. Ep. ad lac. 10 ireirXrjpocpo-
prjpevos on e'x ©eou Stxaiov, ib. xvii
13, 14, xix. 24 avvendiprjv cos jrXrjpo-
cpopovpevos. So too lxx Eccles. viii. 1 1
iirXrjpoCpopTjdTj xapSia rov iroirjaat rd
jrovrjpdv. (3) 'To fill'; Rom. xv. 13 jtXij-
poipoprjaat vpds irdarjs xapas(a doubtful
V. i), Clem. Rom. 54 ris jrejrXijpocpoprjpe-
vos dydnrjs ; Test, xii Patr. Dan 2 777
irXeove£lqiirXrjpoepopTJdTjvTT]sdvaipiaemsaurou, where it means ' I was fiUed
with,' i. e. 'I was fully bent on,' a
sense closely allied to the last. From
this account it wUl be seen that there
is in the usage of the word no
justification for translating it 'most
surely believed' in Luke i. 1 tcov
jrejrXrjpocpopr/pevcov ev rjpiv jrpaypdrcov,
and it should therefore be rendered
' fulfilled, accomplished.' The word
is almost exclusively biblical and ec
clesiastical ; and it seems clear that
the passage from Ctesias in Photius

(Bibl. 72) jroXXols Xdyois xal opxois
jrXnpocpopijo-avres Meyd/3u£ov is not
quoted with verbal exactness. In
Isocr. Trapez. § 8 the word is now
expunged from the text on the autho
rity of the mss. For the substantive
irXijpocpopia see the note on ii. 2 above.
The reading of the received text here,
ireirXrjpmuivoi, must be rejected as of
inferior authority.
e'v iravrl x.r.X.] 'in every thing

willed by God' ; comp. 1 Kings ix. 11.
So the plural rd deXrjpara in Acts
xiii. 22, Ephes. ii. 3, and several times
in the lxx. The words are best con
nected directly with jrejrXrjpocpopnp.e'voi.
The passages quoted in the last note
amply illustrate this construction. The
preposition may denote (1) The abode
of the conviction, as Rom. xiv. 5 e'v rep
I8iep vol; or (2) The object of the
conviction, as Ign. Magn. 11 e'v rrj
yevvrjcrei, Philad. inscr. e'v rfj dvaard-
aei; or (3) The atmosphere, the
surroundings, of the conviction, as
Philad. inscr. iv iravrl iXiei. This
last seems to be its sense here. The
connexion o-raflfjre...e'v, though legiti
mate in itself (Rom. v. 2, 1 Cor. xv.
1), is not favoured by the order of
the words here.
13. jtoXuv jrdvov] ' much toil] both
inward and outward, though from the
connexion the former notion seems to
predominate, as in dycova u. 1 ; comp.
Plat. Phaedr. p. 247 b jtovos re xal
dycov eaxaros tyvxfl irpbxeirat. Of the
two variations which transcribers
have substituted for the correct read
ing ffjXov emphasizes the former idea
and xdirov the latter. The true read
ing is more expressive than either.
The word jrdvos however is very
rare in the New Testament (occur
ring only Rev. xvi. 10, 11, xxi. 4,
besides this passage), and was there
fore Uable to he changed.
xal reov x.r.X.] The neighbouring
cities are taken in their geographical

IV. i4]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

239

vpwv Kal tcov iv AaoBiKia Kai T&5V ev 'lepairoXei.
14 dcrira^eTai vpds AovKas d laxpos 6 dyairtjTOS, Kal
Atjpas.
order, commencing from Colossae; see
above, p. 2. Epaphras, though a Co
lossian, may have been the evangeUst
of the two larger cities also.
AaoSixia] This form has not the same
overwhelming preponderance of au
thority in its favour here and in w.
15, 16, as in U. 1, but is probably cor
rect in all these places. It is quite
possible however, that the same per
son would write Aao8ixia and Aao8ixeia
indifferently. Even the form Aao-
81x170 is found in Mionnet, Suppl. vn.
p. 581. Another variation is the con
traction of Aao8- into AaS-; e.g. Aa-
Sixrjvds, which occurs frequently in the
edict of Diocletian.
14. Aouxds] St Luke had traveUed
with St Paul on his last journey to
Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 1 sq.). He
had also accompanied him two
years later from Jerusalem to Rome
(Acts xxvii. 2 sq.). And now again,
probably after another interval of two
years (see Philippians p. 31 sq.), we
find him in the Apostle's company.
It is not probable that he remained
with St Paul in the meanwhile (Phil
ippians, p. 35), and this wiU account
for his name not occurring in the
Epistle to the PhiUppians. He was
at the Apostle's side again in his
second captivity (2 Tim. iv. 11).
Lucas is doubtless a contraction
of Lucanus. Several Old Latin mss
write out the name Lucanus in the
superscription and subscription to the
Gospel, just as elsewhere Apollos is
written in fuU Apollonius. On the
frequent occurrence of this name Lu
canus in inscriptions see Ephem.
Epigr. 11. p. 28 (1874). The shortened
form Lucas however seems to be
rare. He is here distinguished from
oi ovres ix jrepiropfjs (ver. II). This
alone is fatal to his identification
(mentioned as a tradition by Origen

ad loc.) with the Lucius, St Paul's
' kinsman ' (i. e. a Jew ; see Philip
pians pp. 17, 171, 173), who sends
a salutation from Corinth to Rome
(Rom. xvi. 21). It is equally fatal to
the somewhat later tradition that he
was one of tho seventy (Dial, c Marc.
§ 1 in Orig. Op. 1. p. 806, ed. De la
Rue ; Epiphan. Haer. U. 1 1). The iden
tification with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts
xiU. 13) is possible but not probable.
Though the example of Patrobius for
Patrobas (Rom. xvi. 14) shows thatsuch
a contraction is not out of the ques
tion, yet probability and testimony
alike point to Lucanus, as the longer
form of the Evangelist's name.
d larpbs] Indications of medical
knowledge have been traced both in
the third Gospel and in the Acts ; see
on this point Smith's Voyage and
Shipwreck of St Paul p. 6 sq. (ed. 2).
It has been observed also, that St
Luke's first appearance in company
with St Paul (Acts xvi. 10) nearly syn
chronizes with an attack of the Apo
stle's constitutional malady (Gal. iv.
13, 14); so that he may have joined
him partly in a professional capacity.
This conjecture is perhaps borne out
by the personal feeling which breathes
in the following 6 dyairrjrbs. But
whatever may be thought of these
points,- there is no ground for ques
tioning the ancient belief (Ireu. iU. 14.
1 sq.) that the physician is also the
Evangelist. St Paul's motive in spe
cifying him as the Physician may not
have been to distinguish him from any
other bearing the same name, but to
emphasize his own obligations to his
medical knowledge. The name in this
form does not appear to have been
common. The tradition that St Luke
was a painter is quite late (Niceph.
CaU. ii. 43). It is worthy of notice
that the two Evangelists are men-

240

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. is, 16

li'Acrirao'aa'8e tovs iv AaoBiKia. dBeX<povs Kal N«v/u-
(pav Kal Ttjv KaT oikov avTwv iKK.Xtj(riav. l6Kat

OTav

tioned together in this context, as also
in Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 1 1.
d dyajrrjrds] ' tlie beloved one] not to
be closely connected with d larpbs, for
d dyajrrjrds is complete in itself ; comp.
Philem. 1, Rom. xvi. 12 (comp. vv. 5,
8, 9), 3 Joh. 1. For the form compare
the expression in the Gospels, Matt.
iii. 17, etc. 6 vibs pov, 6 dyajrrjrds x.r.X. ;
where a comparison of Is. xUi 1, as
quoted in Matt. xii. 18, seems to show
that d dyajnjrds x.t.X. forms a distinct
clause from d uids pou.
Arjpas] On the probability that this
person was a Thessalonian (2 Tim. iv.
10) and that his name was Demetrius,
see the introduction to the Epistles to
the Thessalonians. He appears in
close connexion with St L uke in Philem.
24, as here. In 2 Tim. iv. 10 their
conduct is placed in direct contrast,
Arjpdspe iyxariXiirev. ..Aouxas eVriv pb-
vos per' e'pou. There is perhaps a fore
shadowing of this contrast in the lan
guage here. While Luke is described
with special tenderness as 6 larpbs, 6
dyajrrjrds, Demas alone is dismissed
with a bare mention and without any
epithet of commendation.
15 — 17. ' Greet from me the bre
thren who are in Laodicea, especially
Nymphas, and the church which as
sembles in their house. And when
this letter has been read among you,
take care that it is read also in the
Church of the Laodiceans, and be sure
that ye also read the letter which I
have sent to Laodicea, and which ye
wiU get from them. Moreover give
this message from me to Archippus ;
Take heed to the ministry which thou
hast received from me in Christ, and
discharge it fully and faithfully.'
15. NupcpSv] As the context shows,
an inhabitant of Laodicea. The name
in full would probably be Nymphodo-
rus, as Artemas (Tit. iii. 12) for Arte
midorus, Zenas (Tit. iU. 13) for Zeno-

dorus, Theudas (Acts v. 16) for The
odorus, Olympas (Rom. xvi. 15) for
Olympiodorus, and probably Hermas
(Rom. xvi. 14) for Hermodorus (see
Philippians, p. 174). Other names in
as occurring in the New Testament
and representing different termina
tions are AmpUas (Ampliatus, a v. I.),
Antipas (Antipater), Demas (Deme
trius?), Epaphras (Epaphroditus), Lu
cas (Lucanus), Parmenas (Parme
nides), Patrobas (Patrobius), Silas
(Sylvanus), Stephanas (Stephanepho-
rus), and perhaps Junias (Junianus,
Rom. xvi. 7). For a collection of
names with this contraction, found in
different places, see Chandler Greek
Accentuation § 34 ; comp. Lobeck Pa
thol, p. 505 sq. Some remarkable
instances are found in the inscrip
tions; e.g. 'Ao-xXas, Arjpoadds, Aiopds,
'Eppoyds, Nixopds, 'Ovrjaas, Tpocpds,
etc; see esp. Boeckh C. I. in. pp. 1072,
1097. The name Nymphodorus is
found not unfrequently ; e. g. Herod.
vii. 137, Thuc. ii. 29, Athen. i p. 19 f,
vi. p. 265 c, Mionnet Suppl. vi. p. 88,
Boeckh C.I. no. 158, etc. The con
tracted form Nupcpds however is very
rare, though it occurs in an Athenian
inscription, Boeckh ft /. 269 Nuvcpds,
and apparently also in a Spartan,
ib. 1240 Euruxos Nuvcpd. In Murat.
mdxxxv. 6, is an inscription to one Nu.
Aquilius Nymphas, a freedman, where
the dative is Nymphadi. Other
names from which Nymphas might
be contracted are Nymphius, Nyinphi-
cus, Nymphidius, Nymphodotus, the
first and last being the most common.
Those, who read aurfjs in the fol
lowing clause, take it as a woman's
name (Nuprpav, not Nupcpdv) ; and the
name Nymphe, Nympha, Nympa, etc.,
occurs from time to time in Latin
inscriptions; e.g. C. I. L. n. 1099,
1783, 3763, ni. 525, v. 607, etc. Mura-
tor. cmxxiv. 1, molix. 8, mccxov. 9,

IV. i6]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

241

dvayvwardfj irap' vpiv tj iirio~ToXtj, iroitjo'aTe 'iva Kal

mdxci. 3. But a Doric form of the
Greek name here seems in the highest
degree improbable.
rrjv xar' oixov x.r.X.] The same ex
pression is used of Prisca and Aquila
both at Rome (Rom. xvi. 5) and at
Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 19), and also of
PhUemon, whether at Colossae or at
Laodicea is somewhat uncertain (Phi
lem. 2) ; comp. Acts xii. 1 2 rfjv oixiav rfjs
Mapias- -ou ijo-av ixavoi avvrjdpoiapivoi
xal rrpoaevxbpevoi, and see Philippi
ans p. 56. Perhaps similar gather
ings may be implied by the expres
sions in Rom. xvi. 14, 15 tous avv av
rois aSeXcpovs, tovs aiiv avrois jrdvras
dyious (Probst Kirchliche Disciplln
p. 182, 1873). See also Act Mart.
Justin. § 3 (11. p. 262 ed. Otto), Clem.
Recogn. x. 71 ' Theophilus .. domus
suae ingentem basilicam ecclesiae no
mine consecraret' (where the word
'basilica' was probably introduced
by the translator Ruffinus). Of the
same kind must have been the ' coUe-
gium quod est in domo Sergiae Pau-
linae ' (de Rossi Roma Sotterranea 1.
p. 209); for the Christians were first
recognised by the Roman Government
as ' coUegia ' or burial clubs, and pro
tected by this recognition doubtless
held their meetings for religious wor
ship. There is no clear example of a
separate building set apart for Chris
tian worship within the limits of the
Roman empire before the third cen
tury, though apartments in private
houses might be specially devoted to
this purpose. This, I think, appears
as a negative result from the passages
collected in Bingham viii 1. 13 and
Probst p. 181 sq. with a different view.
Hence the places of Christian assem
bly were not commonly called vaoi til]
quite late (Ignat. Magn. 7 is not
really an exception), but 01x01 ©eou,
oixoi ixxXijai&v, oixoi euxrnpioi, and the
like (Euseb. H. E. vii. 30, viii. 13,
ix. 9, etc).
aurav] The difficulty of this read-
COL.

ing has led to the two corrections, ai
rov and aurijs, of which the former
appears in the received text, and the
latter is supported by one or two very
ancient authorities. Of these alter
native readings however, aurou is con
demned by its simplicity, and avrfjs
has arisen from the form Nuprpav,
which prima facie would look like a
woman's name, and yet hardly can be
so. We should require to know more
of the circumstances to feel any con
fidence in explaining aurcov. A sim
ple explanation is that aurcov denotes
' Nymphas and his friends,' by a trans
ition which is common in classical
writers; e.g. Xen. Anab. iii. 3. 7 jrpoo--
r/ei pev (MidpiSdrrjs)... irpbs rous'EXXij-
vas" e'jrel 8' e'yyus e'yevocro x.t.X., iv.
5. 33 '"¦*' °" rjXdov irpbs Xeipiaocpov,
xareXdp/3avov xal ixeivovs axrjvovv-
ras: see also Kiihner Gramm. § 371
(11. p. 77), Bernhardy Syntax p. 288.
Or perhaps rovs iv AaoSixia dSeXcpous
may refer not to the whole body of the
Laodicean Church, but to a family of
Colossian Christians established in
Laodicea. Under any circumstances
this exxXijo-ia is only a section of rj
AaoSixecov ixxXrjaia mentioned in ver.
16. On the authorities for the vari
ous readings see the detached note.
16. rj iiriaroXif] ' the letter] which
has just been concluded, for these
salutations have the character of a
postscript; comp. Rom. xvi. 22 Tep-
nos 0 ypdi/ras rfjv imaroXijv, 2 Thess.
Ui. 14 8id Tfjs imaroXrjs, Mart. Polyc.
20 rfjv eVioroXfjv SiairepsJAaade. Such
examples however do not countenance
the explanation which refers eypai/ra
upiv e'v rrj imaToXjj in I Cor. v. 9 to
the First Epistle itself, occurring (as
it does) in the middle of the letter
(comp. 2 Cor. vii. 8).
jroirjo-are tva] ' cause that '; so John
xi. 37, Apoc. xiii. 15. In such cases
the tva is passing away from its earUer
sense of design to its later sense
of result. A corresponding classical
16

242

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 17

iv Ttj AaoBiKewv iKKXtjo-ia. dvayvwaQt}, Kai Ttjv eK
AaoBtKias 'iva Kal vpeis dvayvwTe. I7Kat et7raTe ' Ap-
¦Xiirirw, BXeire Ttjv BiaKOviav tjv irapeXafies iv Kvptw,
'iva ai/Ttjv irXtjpois.

expression is iroieiv cos or djrcos, e. g.
Zen. Cyr. vi. 3. 18.
A similar charge is given in 1 Thess.
v. 27. The precaution here is proba
bly suggested by the distastefulness
of the Apostle's warnings, which might
lead to the suppression of the letter.
rnv e'x AaoSixias] i. e. ' the letter left
at Laodicea, which you wiU procure
thence.' For this abridged expres
sion compare Luke xi. 13 d jrarfjp 6
e'£ ovpavov Scdcrei irvevpa ayiov, xvi 26
(V. 1.) prjSe oi ixeldev irpbs rjpas
Siairepmaiv, Susann. 26 cos Se fjxovaav
rijv xpavyrjv iv to trapaSeiam oi ix rrjs
oixias, elaeirrj8rjaav x.t.X. For instances
of this proleptic use of the preposi
tion in classical writers, where it is ex
tremely common, see Kuhner Gr. §448
(11. p. 474), Jelf Gr. § 647, Matthias
Gr. § 596 : e. g. Plat. Apol. 32 b tous
ovx dveXope'vous rods e'x rfjs vavpaxias,
Xen. Cyr. vU. 2. S dpiraabpevot to e'x
t&v oixicov, Isocr. Paneg. § 187 rfjv
euSaipoviav rrjv e'x rfjs 'Aalas eis ttjv
Evpdirrjv Siaxopiaaipev. There are
good reasons for the belief that St
Paul here alludes to the so-called
Epistle to the Ephesians, which was
in fact a circular letter addressed to
the principal churches of proconsular
Asia (see above, p. 37, and the intro
duction to the Epistle to the Ephe
sians). Tychicus was obliged to pass
through Laodicea on his way to Co
lossae, and would leave a copy there,
before the Colossian letter was deli
vered. For other opinions respecting
this 'letter from Laodicea' see the
detached note.
tva xai upeis x.r.X.] ' see that ye also
read] At first sight it might seem as
though this iva also were governed by
rroincrare, like the former; but, inas
much as iroiTJaare would be somewhat

awkward in this connexion, it is perhaps
better to treat the second clause as
independent and elliptical, (/3Xe'jrere)
tva x.t.X. This is suggested also by
the position of rfjv e'x AaoSixias be
fore tva; comp. Gal. ii. IO povov rcov
jrrcoxcov tva pvrjpoveucopev (with the
note). Ellipses before tva are fre
quent; e.g. John ix. 3, 2 Cor. viii. 13,
2 Thess. iii. 9, 1 Joh. ii. 19.
17. Kal e'irrare] Why does not the
Apostle address himself directly to
Archippus? It might be answered that
he probably thought the warning
would come with greater emphasis,
when deUvered by the voice of the
Church. Or the simpler explanation
perhaps is, that Archippus was not
resident at Colossae but at Laodicea :
see the introduction to the Epistle
to Philemon. On this warning itself
see above, p. 42.
BXeVe] 'Look to] as 2 Joh. 8 /3XeVere
e'auroiis tva pr) x.r.X. More commonly
it has the accusative of the thing to
be avoided; see PhU. iii. 2 (with the
note). ttjv Siaxoviav] From the stress which
is laid upon it, the Siaxovia here would
seem to refer, as in the case of Timo
thy cited below, to some higher func
tion than the diaconate properly so
called. In Acts xu. 25 the same
phrase, jrXrjpoGv rfjv Siaxoviav, is used
of a temporary ministration, the col
lection and conveyance of the alms for
the poor of Jerusalem (Acts xi. 29);
but the solemnity of the warning here
points to a continuous office, rather
than an immediate service.
jrape'XajSes] i. 6. probably jrap' epov.
The word suggests, though it does not
necessarily imply, a mediate rather
than a direct reception : see the note
Gal. i 12. Archippus received the

IV. 18] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 243
18 'O do~iracrpds Ttj iprj XeLPl nauAou. Mi/jj/uoi/eJeTe
pov tcov Betrpcov. 'H ^apts r16^' vpwv.

charge immediately from St Paul,
though ultimately from Christ ' Non
enim sequitur,' writes Bengel, 'a
Domino (1 Cor. xi. 23), sed in Domi
no.' irXrjpois] 'fulfil] i. e. ' discharge
fully' ; comp. 2 Tim. iv. 5 rnv Siaxo
viav o-ou jrXrjpocpdpr/o-ov.
18. 'I add this salutation with my
own hand, signing it with my name
Paul. Be mindful of my bonds.
God's grace be with you."
'O doTrao-pds x.r.X.] The letter was
evidently written by an amanuensis
(comp. Rom. xvi. 22). The final salu
tation alone, with the accompanying
sentence pvrjpoveuere x.r.X., was in the
Apostle's own handwriting. This
seems to have been the Apostle's
general practice, even where he does
not call attention to his own signature.
In 2 Thess. iii. 17 sq., 1 Cor. xvi. 21,
as here, he directs his readers' notice
to the fact, but in other epistles he
is silent. In some cases however he
writes much more than the final sen
tence. Thus the whole letter to
Philemon is apparently in his own
handwriting (see ver. 19), and in the
Epistle to the Galatians he writes a
long paragraph at the close (see the
note on vi. 11).
rj iprj x€'PL llauXou] The same
phrase occurs in 2 Thess. Ui. 17, 1 Cor.
xvi 21. For the construction comp.
e. g. Philo Leg. ad Gai. 8 (n. p. 554)
ipov ian tov Mdxpcovos epyov Tdios,
and see Kiihner § 406 (n. p. 242), Jelf
§ 467. tov Seap&v] His bonds establish
an additional claim to hearing. He
who is suffering for Christ has a right
to speak on behalf of Christ. The

appeal is similar in Ephes. iii. 1 rou'rou
Xdpiv eyco IlaOXos d 8eo-pios rou X. 'I.,
which is resumed again (after a long
digression) in iv. I jrapaxaXco ouv upas
eyco o Seaptas iv Kvplm d£lms irepi-
irarijaai x.r.X. (comp. vi. 30 ujrep ou
irpeofieila e'v dXuo-ei). So too Philem.
9 roiouros cov cos IlauXos ... Se'crpios
Xpiarov 'irjo-ou. These passages seem
to show that the appeal here is not for
himself, but for his teaching— not for
sympathy with his sufferings but for
obedience to the Gospel. His bonds
were not his own; they were rd 8eo-pd
tou euayyeXiou (PhUem. 13). In Heb.
x. 34 the right reading is not rois Seo--
pois pov, but rois Seaplots avveira-
drjaare (comp. xiii 3). Somewhat simi
lar is the appeal to his ariypara in
Gal. vi. 17, 'Henceforth let no man
trouble me.' See the notes on PhUem.
10, 13-
'H x"P" x.r.X.] This very short form
of the final benediction appears only
here andin 1 Tim. vi. 21, 2 Tim. iv. 22.
In Tit. Hi. 15 jrdvrav is inserted, and
so in Heb. xiU. 25. In Ephes. vi. 24
the form so far agrees with the ex
amples quoted, that rj x°-pts is used
absolutely, though the end is length
ened out. In all the earUer epistles rj
xdpis is defined by the addition of ro«
Kupiou [rjpcov] 'Irjcrou [XpicrroC] ; I Thess.
v. 28, 2 Thess. iii. 18, 1 Cor. xvi. 23,
2 Cor. xiii. 13, Gal. vi 18, Rom. xvi.
20, [24], Phil iv. 23. Thus the abso
lute 17 x°V"s m *ne fina' benediction
may he taken as a chronological note.
A similar phenomenon has been al
ready Observed (tjj e'xxXrjcria., rais e'x-
xXrjaiais) in the opening addresses:
see the note on i. 2.

16 — 2

244

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

On some Various Readings in the Epistle1.

Harmon- istic read
ings.

Prepon
derantevidence(i) for the
correctreading;

(2) against
the correct
reading.Examples.iii. 6,
words in
serted.

In one respect the letters to the Ephesians and Colossians hold a unique
position among the Epistles of St Paul, as regards textual criticism. They
alone have been exposed, or exposed in any considerable degree, to those
harmonizing tendencies in transcribers, which have had so great an influence
on the text of the Synoptic Gospels.
In such cases there is sometimes no difficulty in ascertaining the correct
reading. The harmonistic change is condemned by the majority of the
oldest and best authorities ; or there is at least a nearly even balance of
external testimony, and the suspicious character of the reading is quite
sufficient to turn the scale. Thus we cannot hesitate for a moment about
such readings as i. 14 Sid tou atparos airov (from Ephes. i. 7), or Ui. 16 ^aX-
pois xai vpvois xal mSals irvevpanxals, and ra» Kupicp (for rco ©eco) in the
same verse (both from Ephes. v. 19).
In other instances again there can hardly be any doubt about the text,
even though the vast preponderance of authority is in favour of the harmo
nistic reading ; and these are especially valuable because they enable us
to test the worth of our authorities. Such examples are :
iii. 6. The omission of the words eVi rovs viobs rfjs drreio'eias (taken
from Ephes. v. 6). Apparently the only extant MS in favour of the omission
is B. In D however they are written (though by the first hand) in smaller
letters and extend beyond the Une (in both Greek and Latin), whence
we may infer that they were not found in a copy which was before the tran
scriber. They are wanting also in the Thebaic Version and in one form of the
Ethiopic (Polyglott). They were also absent from copies used by Cle
ment of Alexandria (Paed. iii, 11, p. 295, where however they are inserted
in the printed texts ; Strom, iii. 5, p. 531), by Cyprian (Epist. Iv. 27, p. 645
Wiltms being commonly adopted,
though full of errors, and no attention
being paid to the various readings of
Boetticher's text. Besides the errors
corrected in the foUowing pages, I
have also observed these places where
the text of this version is incor
rectly reported ; ii. 7 ev avTJj not
omitted; ii. 13 the second i)p$s not
omitted ; ii. 17 the singular (8), not the
plural (a) ; iii. 4 upcov, not ijpuv ; iii
16 rcji 9ecp, not rcji Kvplm; iii. ii rbv
Kipiov, not rbv 9eov ; iv. 3 doubtful
whether 81' 8 or di Sv ; and probably
there are others.

1 The references to the patristic quo
tations in the following pages have all
been verified. I have also consulted
the Egyptian and Syriac Versions in
every case, and the Armenian and
Latin in some instances, before giving
the readings. As regards the mss, I
have contented myself with the colla
tions as given in Tregelles and Tisch
endorf, not verifying them unless I
had reason to suspect an error.
The readings of tbe Memphitio Ver
sion are very incorrectly given even by
the principal editors, such as Tregelles
and Tischendorf; the translation of

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 245
ed. Hartel), by an unknown writer (de Sing. Cler. 39, in Cypr. Op. in. p. 2 1 5),
by the Ambrosian Hilary (ad loc), and by Jerome (Epist. xiv. 5, 1. p. 32)
though now found apparently in all the Latin mss.
iii. 21. ipediCere is only found in B K and in later hands of D (with its iii. 21
transcript E) among tho uncial mss. All the other uncials read jrapopyifere, <?p«Mjw«.
which is taken from Ephes. vi. 4. In this case however the reading of B is
supported by the greater number of cursives, and it accordingly has a place
in the received text. The versions (so far as we can safely infer their read
ings) go almost entirely with the majority of uncials. The true readings of Syriac
the Syriac versions are just the reverse of those assigned to them even by version
the chief critical editors, Tregelles and Tischendorf. Thus in the Peshito, ^te^6"
the word used is the Aphel of 1^1 > the same mood of the same verb being
«mployed to translate jrapopyifeiv, not only in Rom. x. 19, but even in
the parallel passage Ephes. vi. 4. The word in the text of the Harclean
is the same »__0\^i«, but in the margin the alternative ^^^tt^^^l^^A^
is given. White interprets this as saying that the text is ipediCere and the
margin irapopyi^ere, and he is foUowed by TregeUes and Tischendorf. But
in this version, as in the Peshito, the former word translates jrapopyifeiv in
Rom. x. 19, Ephes. vi. 4; whUe in the Peshito the latter word is adopted
to render ipedi£etv in 2 Cor. ix. 2 (the only other passage in the N. T.
where ipedl£etv occurs). In the Harclean of 2 Cor. ix 2 a different word
from either, ckutku, is used. It seems tolerably clear therefore that
irapopyl£ere was read in the text of both Peshito and Harclean here, whUe
ipedi^ere was given in the margin of the latter. The Latin versions seem Latin
also to have read irapopyl£ere ; for the Old Latin has ad iram (or in iram versions.
or ad iracundiam) provocare, and the Vulgate ad indignationem provo-
care here, whUe both have ad iracundiam provocare in Ephes. vi. 4.
The Memphitic too has the same rendering 'fcs.iorrr in both passages. Of
the earUer Greek fathers Clement, Strom, iv. 8 (p. 593), reads ipedi£ere :
and it is found in Chrysostom and some later writers.
These examples show how singularly free B is from this passion for Great
harmonizing, and may even embolden us to place reliance on its authority value of B.
in extreme cases.
For instance, the paraUel passages Ephes. v. 19 and Col. iu. 16 stand Parallel
thus in the received text : passages.

Ephesians.
XaXouvres eaurois i/^aXpois xal vp
vois xal dSdis irvevpanxals ci8ovres
xal i/rdXXovres e'v rj xap8ia vpmv
to Kupicp.

Colossians. Col. iii. 16,
SiSdcrxovres xal vovdeTovvres eav- Epn. v. 19.
rods ¦\\rdXpols xal vpvois xal co8ai?
irvevpanxals iv x^PlTl aSovres ev rrj
xapSla vp&v ra Kvpim.

And A carries the harmonizing tendency still further by inserting e'v
xdpin before q.8ovres in Ephes. from the parallel passage.
In B they are read as foUows :

XaXouvres eaurois e'v y/aXpois xal
vpvois xai cslSals aSovres xal yjrdX-
Xovres rjj xapSla vp&v r& Kupicp.

SiSdcrxovres xal voutferouvres eau-
rous 1/raXpois vpvois cpSais irvevpa
nxals iv rfj x°P'T' aSovres iv rals
xapSiats vp&v rm Oem.

246 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Altera- Here are seven divergences from the received text. (1) The insertion of iv
f°m f°r before sfraXpols in Ephes. ; (2) The omission of xai, xal, attaching i/raXpois,
harmon- u'pvois, coSais in Col. ; (3) The omission of jrveupanxais in Ephes. ; (4) The
izing. insertion of rfj before xdpm in Col. ; (5) The omission of e'v before rij Kap
Sia in Ephes.; (6) The substitution of rais xapSiats for rfj xapSia in Col. :
(7) The substitution of ™ ©ecp for to Kvpim in Col.
Of these seven divergences the fourth alone does not affect the question :
ofthe remaining six, the readings of B in (2), (6), (7) are supported by the
great preponderance of the best authorities, and are unquestionably right.
In (1), (3), (5) however the case stands thus :
ev r-aXpois. (T) <?„ ^aXuols B, P, with the cursives 17, 67**, 73, 116, 118, and the
Latin, d, e, vulg., with the Latin commentators Victorinus, Hilary,
and Jerome. Of these however it is clear that the Latin autho
rities can have little weight in such a case, as the preposition
might have been introduced by the translator. All the other
Greek mss with several Greek fathers omit e'v.
irvevpan- (3) jrveupanxais omitted in B, d, e. Of the Ambrosian Hilary Tischen-
xdls. dorf say8 ' flUct lectio ' ; but his comment ' In quo enim est
spiritus, semper spiritualia meditatur' seems certainly to recog
nise the word. It appears to be found in every other authority.
tjj xapStg.. (5) Trj KapSia N* B with < )rigen in Cramer's Catena, p. 201.
ev ttj xapSia K L, and the vast majority of later mss, the Armenian
and Ethiopic Versions, Euthalius (Tischendorf's ms), Theodoret,
and others. The Harclean Syriac (text) is quoted by Tischen
dorf and Tregelles in favour of e'v rij xapSia, but it is im
possible to say whether the translator had or had not the pre
position.
e'v rais xapSiais K°A D F G P, 47, 8pc ;the Old Latin, Vulgate, Mem-
phitic, Peshito Syriac, and Gothic Versions, together with the
margin of the Harclean Syriac ; the fathers Basil (n. p. 464),
Victorinus (probably), Theodore of Mopsuestia, the Ambrosian
Hilary, Jerome, and others. Chrysostom (as read in the existing
texts) wavers between e'v rij xapSia and e'v rais xapSiais. This
form of the reading is an attempt to bring Ephes. into harmony
with Col., just as (6) is an attempt to bring Col. into harmony
with Ephes.
It will be seen how slenderly B is supported; and yet we can hardly
resist the impression that it has the right reading in all three cases. In the
omission of irvevpanxals more especially, where the support is weakest, this
impression must, I think, be very strong.
ExceUence This highly favourable estimate of B is our starting-point ; and on the
of B else- whole it will be enhanced as we proceed. Thus for instance in i 22 and ii. 2
where. we gnaji fjnci this ms alone (with one important Latin father) retaining the
correct text ; in the latter case amidst a great complication of various read
ings. And when again, as in iv. 8, we find B for once on the side of a reading
which might otherwise be suspected as a harmonistic change, this support
alone will weigh heavily in its favour. Other cases in which B (with more
or less support) preserves the correct reading against the mass of authorities
are U. 2 jrdv jrXouros, U. 7 rrj jricrrei, ii. 13 rois irapairrmpaatv (omitting e'v,

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 247
v. 12 araflfJTe, together with several instances which will appear in the
course of the following investigation. On the other hand its value must
not be overestimated. Thus in iv. 3 rd pucmjpiov rou Xpio-rou 81 b xal
SeSepat1 there can be Uttle doubt that the great majority of ancient autho- False
rities correctly read 81' d, though B F G have 81' ov : but the variation is readings
easily explained. A single stroke, whether accidental or deUberate, alone
would be necessary to turn the neuter into a masculine and make the
relative agree with the substantive nearest to it in position. Again in
U. 10 ds e'o-nv n xecpaXrj, the reading of B which substitutes d for Zs is
plainly wrong, though supported in this instance by D F G 47*, by the Latin
text d, and by HUary in one passage (de Trin. ix. 8, n. p. 263), though else
where (ib. i. 13, 1. p. 10) he reads 5. But here again we have only an in
stance of a very common interchange. Whether for grammatical reasons or
from diplomatic confusion or from some other cause, five other instances of
this interchange occur in this short epistle alone; i. 15 o for os F G; i 18 o
for Ss F G; i 24 os for 5 C D* etc.; i 27 os for o 8 C D K L etc.; Ui. 14 os
for o N* D. Such readings again as the omission of xal airoupevoi i. 9 by
B K, or of 81 aurou in i. 20 by B D* F G etc., or of rj imaroXij in iv. 16 by
B alone, need not be considered, since the motive for the omission is
obvious, and the authority of B wiU not carry as great weight as it would
in other cases. SimUarly the insertion of rj in i 18, rj dpxrj, by B, 47, 67**,
bscr, and of xal in ii 15, xal iSeiypdnaev, by B alone, do not appear to deserve
consideration, because in both instances these readings would suggest
themselves as obvious improvements. In other cases, as in the omission of
Tfjs before yfjs (i 20), and of evi in ev evi adpan (iii. 15), the scribe of B has
erred as any scribe might err.
The various readings in this epistle are more perplexing than perhaps
in any portion of St Paul's Epistles of the same length. The foUowing de
serve special consideration. i. 3 TO) 9eop TTATpi'.
On this very unusual collocation I have already remarked in the notes i. 3 T§
(p. 133). The authorities stand as follows : f)e& irarpi,
(i) rd) dea irarpi B C*.
(2) rep dea to jrarpi D* F G Chrysostom.
One or other is also the reading of the Old Latin (d, e, g, harl.**), of the
Memphitic, the two Syriac (Peshito and Harclean), the Ethiopic, and the
Arabic (Erpenius, Bedwell, Leipzig) Versions; and of Augustine (de Unit.
Eccl. 45, ix. p. 368) and Cassiodorus (n. p. 1351, Migne).
(3) r<3 deep xal jrarpi k A C2 D° K L P and apparently all the other
mss; the Vulgate and Armenian Versions; Euthalius (Tischendorf s ms),
Theodore of Mopsuestia (transl), Theodoret, the Ambrosian HUary, and
others. A comparison of these authorities seems to show pretty clearly that
r<3 de& jrarpi was the original reading. The other two were expedients
1 In this passage B (with some few expression (u. 2, 1 Cor. iv. 1, Eev. x.
other authorities) has tou ©eou for tou 7 ; comp. 1 Cor. ii. 1, v. 1.) for a less
Xpio-ToS, thus substituting a commoner common (Ephes. iii. 4).

248 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
for getting rid of a very unusual collocation of words. The scribes have
compared felt the same difficulty again in iii. 17 euxapiaroCvres t& dem irarpi 81
withiii.17, aurou, and there again we find xai inserted before jrarpi. In this latter
instance however the great preponderance of ancient authority is in
favour of the unusual form rep dem irarpi.
and i. 12. It is worth observing also that in i. 12, where rep irarpi has the highest
support, there is sufficient authority for r& dea irarpi to create a suspicion
that there too it may be possibly the correct reading. Thus no dem irarpi
is read in N 37, while 6ecp rep narpi stands in F G. One or other must have
been the reading of some Old Latin and Vulgate texts (f, g, ta, fuld.), of the
Peshito Syriac, of the Memphitic (in some texts, for others read r& irarpi
simply), of the Arabic (Bedwell), of the Armenian (Uscan), and of Origen
(11. p. 451, the Latin translator); while several other authorities, Greek
and Latin, read rep dea xal irarpi.
Unique There is no other instance of this collocation of words, d ©eds irarrjp,
oolloca- in the Greek Testament, so far as I remember; and it must be regarded
n' as peculiar to this epistle. i 4 thn Ar<\nHN [hn e'xerej.
i + Here the various readings are ;
rrjv dydinpr (I) „>„ iyim}v B
Ljjv exere], ,^ ^ iya7rrjv %v ^xeTe A N C D* F G P 17, 37, 47; the Old
Latin and Vulgate, Memphitic (apparently), and Harclean
Syriac Versions; the Ambrosian Hilary, Theodore of
Mopsuestia (transl.), and others.
(3) rnv dydjrrjv rnv. D* KL; the Peshito Syriac (apparently)
and Armenian (apparently) Versions; Chrysostom, Theo
doret and others.
If the question were to be decided by external authority alone, we
could not hesitate. It is important however to observe that (2) conforms
to the paraUel passage Philem. 5 dxoucov aov ttjv dydjrrjv xal rfjv irianv i)v
exeis, while (3) conforms to the other parallel passage Ephes. i 15 xal [tijv
dydjrrjv] rrjv els irdvras tovs dyiovs. Thus, though rjv exere is SO highly sup
ported and though it helps out the sense, it is open to suspicion. StiU the
omission in B may be an instance of that impatience of apparently super
fluous words, which sometimes appears in this Ms.
i 7 YTT6p HMOON AIAKON0C.
i. 7 Here there is a conflict between mss and Versions.
virep i)pS,v. (1) rj^av A B X* D* F G, 3, 13, 33, 43, 52, 80, 91, 109. This must
also have been the reading of the Ambrosian Hilary
though the editors make him write 'pro vobis'), for he ex
plains it 'qui eis ministravit gratiam Christi vice apostoli.'
(2) vp&v N° C D" K L P, 17, 37, 47, and many others ; the Vul
gate, the Peshito and Harclean Syriac, the Memphitic,
Gothic, and Armenian Versions; Chrysostom, Theodore
of Mopsuestia (.transl.), and Theodoret (in their respec
tive texts, for with the exception of Chrysostom there
is nothing decisive in their comments), with others.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 249
The Old Latin is doubtful ; d, e having vobis and g nobis.
Though the common confusion between these two words even in the
best mss is a caution against speaking with absolute certainty, yet such
a combination of the highest authorities as we have here for rjpcov does
not leave much room for doubt: and considerations of internal criticism
point in the same direction. See the note on the passage.
i. 12 TO) 1KANCOCANTI.
Against this, which is the reading of all the other ancient authorities, i. I2
we have Uavdoavn.
(2) no xaXeo-avn D* F G, 17, 80, with the Latin authorities d, e,
f, g, m, and the Gothic, Armenian, and Ethiopic Ver
sions. It is so read also by the Ambrosian Hilary, by
Didymus de Trin. Ui. 4 (p. 346), and by Vigilius Thap-
sensis c. Varim. i 50 (p. 409).
(3) to xaXe'cravn xal ixavcoo-avri, found in B alone.
Here the confusion between tooiikanoocanti and tcoikaA6canti would
be easy, more especiaUy at a period prior to the earliest existing mss,
when the iota adscript was still written ; while at the same time KaXiaavn
would suggest itself to scribes as the obvious word in such a connexion. It
is a Western reading.
The text of B obviously presents a combination of both readings.
i 14 In q*> Ixomsn.
For exopev B, the Memphitic Version, and the Arabic (BedweU, Leipzig), ;, I4
read eaxopev. This is possibly the correct reading. In the paraUel pas- exopev or
sage, Ephes. i. 7, several authorities (N* D*, the Memphitic and Ethiopic Exopev?
Versions, and the translator of Irenseus v. 14. 3) similarly read eaxopev for
(xopev. It may be conjectured that eaxopev in these authorities was a
harmonistic change in Ephes. i. 7, to conform to the text which they or
their predecessors had in Col. i. 14. Tischendorf on Ephes. I c. says 'aut
utroque loco exopev aut eaxopev Paulum scripsisse puto'; but if any infer
ence can be drawn from the phenomena of the mss, they point rather to a
different tense in the two passages.
i 22 ATTOKATHXAArHTe.
This reading is perhaps the highest testimony of all to the great value i. 22
of B. ft7roxarijX-
The variations are; Xdyrjre.
(1) diroxanjXXdyrjre B. This also seems to be the reading of
HUary of Poitiers In xci Psalm. 9 (1. p. 270), who trans
fers the Apostle's language into the first person, 'cum
aliquando essemus alienati et inimici sensus ejus in factis
malis, nunc autem reconciliati sumus corpore carnis ejus.'
(2) djroxarnXXdxrjrai 17.
(3) djroxaraXXayeVres D* F G, and the Latin authorities d, e, g,

2SO

U. 2
rov ©e«
X-pio-roQ.

ou

Original
reading.

Varia tions ;

(a) by in
terpreta
tion,

(*)by
omission,

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
m, the Gothic Version, the translator of Irenseus (v. 14. 3),
and others.
(4) diroxanjXXa^ev, all the other authorities.
Of these (2) is obviously a corruption of (1) from similarity of sound;
and (3) is an emendation, though a careless emendation, of (1) for the sake
of the grammar. It should have been diroxaraXXayevTas. The reading
therefore must lie between diroxarnXXdynre and diroxarnXXa£ev. This latter
however is probably a grammatical correction to straighten the syntax.
In the Memphitic a single letter &.T for a.q would make the difference
between djroxarrjXXdyrjre and diroxaTrjXXa£ev; but no variation from the
latter is recorded. ii. 2 toy 8eof, xP'CTof.
The various readings here are very numerous and at first sight per
plexing ; but the result of an investigation into their several claims is far
from unsatisfactory. The reading which explains aU the rest may safely
be adopted as the original.
(1) Toy 9eoY XPICT°Y-
This is the reading of B and of Hilary of Poitiers, de Trin. ix. 62
(1. p. 306), who quotes the passage sacramenti Dei Christi in quo etc., and
wrongly explains it ' Deus Christus sacramentum est.'
AU the other variations are derived from this, either by explanation or
by omission or by amplification.
By explanation we get ;
(2) toy 9eoY 0 ecTiN xpiCTOc,
the reading of D, with the Latin authorities d, e, which have Dei quod
est Christus. So it is quoted by VigUius Thapsensis c. Varim. i 20
(p. 380), and in a slightly longer form by Augustine de Trin. xiii 24 (vni.
p. 944) mysterium Dei quod est Christus Jesus.
(3) toy 6eoY en xpiCTCo.
So it is twice quoted by Clement of Alexandria Strom, v. 10 (p. 683), ib.
12 (p. 694); or
toy 9eoY toy 6N XP'CTOO,
the reading of 17.
So the Ambrosian Hilary (both text and commentary) has Dei in
Christo. And the Armenian has the same lengthened out, Dei in Christo
Jesu (Zohrab) or Dei patris in Christo Jesu (Uscan).
(4) Domini quod de Christo
is the Ethiopic rendering. Whether this represents another various read
ing in the Greek or whether the paraphrase is the translator's own, it is
impossible to say.
The two foUowing variations strive to overcome the difficulty by
omission ;
(S) toy eeoY,
the reading of D by a second hand, of P, 37, 67**, 71, 80 116.
(6) toy XPICT°T'
the reading of Euthalius in Tischendorf's ms; but Tischendorf adds
the caution ' sed non satis apparet.'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 25 I
All the remaining readings are attempts to remedy the text by ampli- (c) by
fication. They fall into two classes ; those which insert irarpds so as to a,mPhnoft-
make Xpiarov dependent on it, (7), (8), and those which separate ©eou from
Xpio-rou by the interposition of a xai, (9), (10), (11).
(7) TOY 660Y TTATpOC XPICT0Yi M b7 in"
the reading of N (by the first hand). Tischendorf also adds b""" and ^LJJjf t0
o'™ ; but I read Scrivener's coUations differently (Cod. Aug. p. 506) : or govern
TOY 8eOY TTATpOC TOY XPICT°T' XpicrroO :
the reading of A C, 4.
One or other is the reading of the Thebaic Version (given by Gries
bach) and of the Arabic (Leipz.).
A lengthened form of the same, Dei patris Christi Jesu, appears in the
oldest mss of the Vulgate, am. fuld. f : and the same is also the reading
of the Memphitic (Boetticher).
(8) TOY 960Y KAI TTATpOC TOY XPICT0I-
So X (the third hand) b"™", o'", and a corrector in the Harclean
Syriac. (9) TOY QeOY KAI XPICT0Y» (ii) by
the simplest form of the other class of emendations by amplification, separating
It is found in Cvrii Thes. p. 287. %">° fr?m
* XpiaTOV
(io) TOY 960Y TTATpOC KAI TOY XPICT0T- by a con-
So 47, 73, the Peshito Syriac (ed. princeps and Schaaf). And so it junction.
stands in the commentators Chrysostom (but with various readings) and
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spicil. Solesm. I. p. 131 Dei patris et Christi,
but in Rab. Maur. Op. vi. p. 521 Dei patris Christi Jesu).
Pelagius has Dei patris et Christi Jesu, and so the Memphitic ( Wilkins).
(I i) TOY 9eOY KAI TTATpOC KAI TOY XPICT0Y- The 00m-
This, which may be regarded as the latest development, is the reading ™on 'ex*
of the received text. It is found in D (third hand) KL, and in the great develop-
majority of cursives ; in the text of the Harclean Syriac, and in Theodoret ment.
and others.
Besides these readings some copies of the Vulgate exhibit other varia
tions; e. g. demid. Dei patris et domini nostri Christi Jesu, tolet. Dei
Christi Jesu patris et Domini.
It is not necessary to add any remarks. The justification of rou ©eou
Xpiarov as the original reading will have appeared in the variations to
which it has given rise. The passage is altogether an instructive lesson in
textual criticism.

U. 16 eN Bpcocei kai eN ndcei.
In this reading B stands alone among the mss; but it is supported by ii. ,6
the Peshito Syriac and Memphitic Versions, by Tertullian (adv. Marc. v. xa( or r) t
19), and by Origen (in loann. x. § 11, iv. p. 174). The testimony of Ter
tullian however is invalidated by the fact that he uses et as the connecting
particle throughout the passage ; and the Peshito Syriac also has ' and ' for
rj in the two last clauses, though not in the second

252

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

ii. 1 8, the
omissionof the
negative.

The form
edpaxev.

ii. 23. Is
xal to be
omitted ?

The rest have iv fipdaei f) e'v irdo-ei. This may be explained as a very
obvious, though not very intelligent, alteration of scribes to conform to the
disjunctive particles in the context, fj e'v pepei eoprijs fj veoprjvias rj aa$$armv.
In this same context it is probable that B retains the right form veo
prjvias (supported here by F G and others) as against the Attic vouprjvias.
In the same way in iii. 25 xopiaerat and iv. 9 yvmpiaovatv B (with some
others) has resisted the tendency to Attic forms.
ii 18 a edpAKeN.
That this is the oldest reading which the existing texts exhibit, wiU
appear from the following comparison of authorities.
(1) a idpaxev (ibpaxev) A B K* D* 17*, 28, 67** ; the Old Latin au
thorities d, e, m ; the Memphitic, Ethiopic, and Arabic (Leipz.)
Versions; Tertull. c. Marc. v. 19 ('ex visionibus angelicis';
and apparently Marcion himself also) ; Origen (c. Cels. v. 8,
1. p. 583, though the negative is here inserted by De la Rue,
and in Cant, ii, in. p. 63, in his quae videt) ; Lucifer (De non
conv. c. haer. p. 782 Migne) ; the Ambrosian Hilary (ad he.
explaining it ' Inflantur motum pervidentes stellarum, quas
angelos vocaf). So too the unknown author of Quaest. ex
N. T. ii. 62 in August Op. in. Appx. p. 156. Jerome (Epist.
exxiad Alg. § 10, 1. p. 880) mentions both readings (with and
without the negative) as found in the Greek text : and Augus
tine (Epist. 149, n. p. 514), while giving the preference to quae
non vidit, says that some mss have quae vidit.
(2) d pfj edpaxev (ibpaxev) Nc C D1' K L P, and the great majority of
cursives ;
(3) d oux edpaxev F G.
The negative is also read in g ; in the Vulgate, the Gothic, both the
Syriac and the Armenian Versions ; in the translator of Origen In Rom. ix.
§ 42 (iv. p. 665), in Ambrose in Psalm, cxviii Exp. xx. (1. p. 1222), and in
the commentators Pelagius, Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spic.
Solesm. 1. p. 132 ' quae nee sciunt'), Theodoret, and others.
From a review of these authorities we infer that the insertion of the
negative was a later correction, and that d edpaxev (or edpaxev) represents
the prior reading. In my note I have expressed my suspicion that d ecopa-
kcv (or ibpaxev) is itself corrupt, and that the original reading is lost.
The unusual form ibpaxev is found in X B* C D P, and is therefore to be
preferred to edpaxev. ii. 23 [kai] AtpeiAiA COOMATOC.
Here xai is found in aU the Greek copies except B, but is omitted in
these Latin authorities, m, the translator of Origen (In Rom. ix. § 42, iv.
p. 665), HUary of Poitiers (Tract, in xiv Ps. § 7, p. 73), the Ambrosian
Hilary, Ambrose (de Noe 25, p. 267), and Paulinus (Epist. 50, p. 292 sq.). We
have more than once found B and Hilary alone in supporting the correct
reading (i 22, ii 2) ; and this fact gives weight to their joint authority here.
The omission also seems to explain the impossible reading of d, e, which

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 253
have in religione et humilitate sensus et vexationem corporis, where for
et vexationem we should perhaps read ad vexationem,, as in the Ambrosian
HUary. There was every temptation for a scribe to insert the xai so as to
make dcpeiSia range with the other datives : while on the other hand a finer
appreciation of the bearing of the passage suggests that St Paul would have
dissociated it, so as to give it a special prominence.
A similar instance occurs in iii. 12 cos e'xXexroi tou ©eou, dyioi xal rjya-
mjpevoi, where B omits the xal with 17 and the Thebaic Version. In 219
xal dyioi is read for dyiot xai. The great gain in force leads to the suspicion
that this omission may be correct, notwithstanding the enormous prepon
derance of authority on the other side.

iv. 8. TNooTe ta nepi hmcon.
Of the various readings of this passage I have already spoken (p. 29 sq., iv. 8
note I, p. 233). yvcore rd
The authorities are as foUows : ™Pl *i£"-
(I) yvcSre rd jrepl rjpcSv A B D*F G P, IO, 17, 33, 35, 37, 44, 47, 71,
111, 116, 137 ; d, e, g; the Armenian and Ethiopic Versions;
Theodore of Mopsuestia1, Theodoret3, Jerome (on Ephes. vi
21 sq., vn p. 682), and Euthalius (Tischendorf's ms). This
is also the reading of X*, except that it has upcov for rjpcov.
(2) yvcp rd jrepl upcov K° CDb°K L and the majority of cursives;
the Memphitic, Gothic, Vulgate, and both Syriac Versions;
the Ambrosian Hilary, Jerome (on Philem. 1, vn. p. 748),
Chrysostom (expressly), and others.
The internal evidence is considered in the note on the passage, and
found to accord with the vast preponderance of external authority in favour
of yvcore rd jrepl npcov. The reading of K by the first hand exhibits a
transitional stage. It would appear as though the transcriber intended it
to be read yvcp re rd irepl upeSv. At all events this is the reading of 1 1 1 The vari-
and of Io. Damasc. Op. n. p. 214. The variation yva rd irepl upcov is thus ous read-
easUy explained. (1) ijpcov would be accidentally substituted for upcov; (2) yvcore mgs I16;
would then be read yv<3 re ; (3) the awkward and superfluous re would be for-
omitted. In Ulustration of the tendency to conform the persons of the
two verbs yvcp, irapaxdXiar] (see p. 233), it may be mentioned that 17 reads
yvcore, jrapaxaXeVrjre, both here and in Ephes. vi. 22.
1 It is true that in the text (Spicil. et oblectent vos per suum adventum
Solesm. 1. p. 123, Bab. Maur. Op. vn. [=xai wapaKaXio-rj rds xapdtas upcov],
p. 539, Migne) he is credited with the omnia quae hio aguntur manifesta
later Latin reading ut cognoscat quae facientes vobis.' See Spicil. Solesm.
circa vos sunt, but his comment im- 1. c. ; the comment is mutilated in
plies the other ; ' Quoniam omnia Eab. Maur. Op. 1. 0.
vobis nota faciet Tychicus Ola quae 2 In the text; but in the commen-
erga me sunt, propterea a me directus tary he is made to write tva yva ydp,
est cum Onesimo fratre qui a vobis ^ijcri, rd irepl ijp&v, an impossible
venerat, ut nota vobis faciant quae reading.
erga nos sunt [= yvcore rd irepl ijpuv]

254

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

IV. 15
aurcov.

Nymphas
or Nym
pha?

The Syriac
versions.

The Latin
author ities.

iv. 15. KAT OIKON AYTCON.
The readings here are :
(1) avr&v K A C P, 5, 9, 17, 23, 34, 39, 47, 73 ; together with the
Memphitic Version, the Arabic (Leipz.), and Euthalius (Tisch
endorf 's ms). The Memphitic Version is commonly but
wrongly quoted in favour of aurou, owing to a mistranslation
of Wilkins. But both Wilkins and Boetticher give without
any various reading hou-hi, ie. ofxov aurcov. This seems also
to be the reading of Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spic. Solesm.
i p. 133) quae in domo eorum est ecclesia ; though in Rab.
Maur. Op. vi. p. 540 his text runs quae in domo ejus est eccle-
siam, and he is made to say Nympham cum omnibus suis
qui in domo ejus sunt.
(2) au'rfjs B 67**.
(3) avrov llPGKL and the great majority of cursives ; and so
the Gothic Version, Chrysostom, and Theodoret (the latter
distinctly).
The singular, whether aurou or au'rfjs, is the reading of the old Latin
and Vulgate, which have ejus, and ofthe Armenian. The pronoun is also sin
gular in the Peshito and Harclean Syriac. In this language the same con
sonants express masculine and feminine alike, the difference lying in the
pointing and vocaUsation. And here the copies are inconsistent with them
selves. In the Peshito (both the editio princeps and Schaaf) the proper
name is vocahsed as a feminine Numphe ( = Nupcpij), and yet ok>&ua=>
is treated as having a masculine affix, kot oikov aurou. In the text of the
Harclean coJu.l is pointed thus, as a feminine aurfjs; while the margin
gives the alternative reading crJu.i (without the point) = au'rou. The name
itself is written Nympha, which according to the transhteration of this version
might stand either for a masculine (as Barnaba, Luka, in the context, for
BapvdlSas, Aouxds) or for a feminine (since Demas, Epaphras, are written with
an s)1. The Latin ejus leaving the gender undetermined, the Latin commen
tators were free to take either Nymphas or Nympha ; and, as Nympha was a
common Latin form of Nupcpij, they would naturally adopt the female name.
So the commentator Hilary distinctly.
It should be added that the word is accentuated as a masculine vvpcpdv
in D° L P, and as a feminine vvpcpav in B° and Euthalius (Tischendorf's ms).

1 More probably the latter. In
Eom. xvi the terminations -a and as
for the feminine and masculine names
respectively are carefully reproduced
in the Harclean Version. In ver. 15
indeed we have Julias, but the trans

lator doubtless considered the name
to be a contraction for Julianas. The
proper Syriac termination -a seems
only to be employed for the Greek -as
in very familiar names such as Bar-
naba, Luka.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 255
On ihe meaning of irXrjpcofia.
The verb irXrjpouv has two senses. It signifies either (1) 'To fill', e. g. The mean-
Acts ii. 2 iwXrjpaaev oXov rbv o'xov ; or (2) ' To fulfil, complete, perfect, inS 0I the
accomplish', e.g. Matt. xxvi. 56 tva irXrjpmd&aiv ai ypacpal, Rom. xiii. 8 v!lb „
vbpov ireirXrjpmxev, Acts xii. 25 jrXnpcoo-avres Tijv Siaxoviav. The latter sense
indeed is derived from the former, but practically it has become separate
from it. The word occurs altogether about a hundred times in the New
Testament, and for every one instance of the former sense there are at
least four of the latter.
In the investigations which have hitherto been made into the significa- False issue
tion of the derived substantive irXrjpmpa, as it occurs in the New Testa- raised
ment, an almost exclusive prominence has been given to the former mean- ^xju™™8
ing of the verb ; and much confusion has arisen in consequence. The
question has been discussed whether irXrjpmpa has an active or a passive
sense, whether it describes the filling substance or the filled receptacle :
and not unfrequently critics have arrived at the result that different
grammatical senses must be attached to it in different passages, even resulting
within the limits of the same epistle. Thus it has been maintained that "} tlieolo-
the word has a passive sense ' id quod impletur' in Ephes. i 23 tjj ixxXijaia f01^ con'
rjns eartv to a&pa avrov, to irXrjpmpa rou rd irdvra iv irdaiv irXrjpovpivov, ^
and an active sense 'id quod implet' in Ephes. iii. 19 tva irXrjpmdrjre els irdv
rb irXrjpmpa tov ©eou. Indeed so long as we see in irXrjpouv only the sense
'to fiU', and refuse to contemplate the sense 'to complete', it seems im
possible to escape from the difficulties which meet us at every turn, other
wise than by assigning to its derivative jrXnpcopa both an active and a
passive sense; but the greatest violence is thus done to the connexion of
theological ideas.
Moreover the disregard of lexical rules is not less violent1. Substan- and disre-
tives in -pa, formed from the perfect passive, appear always to have a 8ar(* of
passive sense. They may denote an abstract notion or a concrete thing ; Srammal".
they may signify the action itself regarded as complete, or the product of
the action ; but in any case they give the result of the agency involved in Meaning
the corresponding verb. Such for example are dyyeXpa 'a message', appa ofsubstan-
'a knot', dpybpapa 'a silver-made vessel', /3ouXeupa 'a plan', Sixalapa 'a"Tesm
righteous deed' or 'an ordinance', fijnjpa 'an investigation', xijpuypa 'a
proclamation', xdXvpa 'a hindrance', opoimpa 'a likeness', Spapa 'a vision',
1 The meaning of this word irXrjpmu.a it two main senses, ' id quod imple-
is the subject of a paper De vocis irX-tj- tur ' and ' id quo res impletur ', the
papa vario sensu in N. T. in Storr's latter being the more common. He
Opusc. Acad. 1. p. 144 sq., and of an ela- apparently considers that he has sur-
borate note in Fritzsehe's Bom. 11. p. mounted the difficulties involved in
469 sq. Storr attempts to show that Storr's view, for he speaks of this last
it always has an active sense 'id quod as a passive sense, though in fact it is
implet ' in the New Testament. Fritz- nothing more than ' id quod implet '
sche rightly objects to assigning a expressed in other words. In Eom.
persistently active sense to a word xiii. 10 irX-tjpmpa vbpov he concedes an
which has a directly passive termi- active sense ' legis completio ', h. e.
nation: and he himself attributes to ' observatio '.

256

Apparent exceptions.

irXijpmpaconnected with the
secondsense of
irXijpovv. Its uses in
classicalwriters. (1) 'A
ship's
orew.'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
arp&pa 'a carpet', acpaipmpa 'a round thing', etc. In many cases the
same word will have two meanings, both however passive; it wiU denote
both the completed action and the result or object of the action : e.g.
Spiraypa the 'robbery' or the 'booty', dvrdXXaypa the 'exchange' or the
'thing given or taken in exchange', drjpevpa the 'hunt' or the 'prey',
irdrrjpa the 'tread' or the 'carpet', and the like. But in aU cases the word
is strictly passive; it describes that which might have stood after the
active verb, either as the direct object or as the cognate notion. The
apparent exceptions are only apparent. Sometimes this deceptive appear
ance is in the word itself. Thus xdXvppa 'a veil' seems to denote 'that
which covers', but it is really derived from another sense and construction
of xaXvirretv, not ' to hide', but ' to wrap round' (e.g. Hom. II. v. 315 irpbade
Si oi iriirXoto cpaetvov irrvyp e'xdXui/rev, xxi 32 1 Toaarjv oi daiv xadvirepde
xaXu\jVco), and therefore is strictly passive. Sometimes again we may be led
astray by the apparent connexion with the following genitive. Thus in
Plut. Mor. 78 b 8rjXcopa rou jrpoxdrrreiv the word does not mean, as might
appear at first sight, 'a thing showing' but 'a thing shown', 'a demon
stration given'; nor in 2 Thess. i 5 evSety pa rfjs Sixaias xplaems must we
explain 'ivSeiypa 'a thing proving', but 'a thing proved', 'a proof. And
the same is probably the case also with such expressions as avpiroaimv
ipidtapa (Critias in Athen. xiii. p. 600 d), rd|ou pupa (iEsch. Pers. 147),
and the Uke ; where the substantives in -pa are no more deprived of their
passive sense by the connexion, than they are in urrdSrjjia jroScov or arp&pa
xXivrjs; though in such instances the Ucense of poetical construction may
often lead to a false inference. Analogous to this last class of cases is Eur.
Troad. 824 Zijvds e^eis xuXixcov irXrjpmpa, xaXXiarav Xarpeiav, not ' the fiUing',
but ' the fulness of the cups, the brimming cups, of Zeus.'
Now if we confine ourselves to the second of the two senses above
ascribed to irXnpouv, it seems possible to explain irXrjpmpa in the same way,
at all events in aU the theological passages of St Paul and St John, without
doing any violence to the grammatical form. As irXrjpouv is ' to complete',
so irXrjpmpa is 'that which is completed', ie. the complement1, the full
tale, the entire number or quantity, the plenitude, the perfection.
This indeed is the primary sense to which its commonest usages in
classical Greek can be most conveniently referred. Thus it signifies (1)
'A ship's crew': e.g. Xen. Hell. i. 6. 16 Sid ro e'x iroXXcov jrXnpcopdrcov e's
o'Xiyas (vaus) ixXeXixdat rolls dpiarovs eperas. In this sense, which is very
frequent, it is generaUy explained as having an active force, ' that which
fills the ships'; and this very obvious explanation is recommended by the
fact that jrXnpouv vavv is a recognised expression for 'manning a ship', e.g.
1 The English word complement has
two distinct senses. It is either (i)
the complete set, the entire quantity
or number, which satisfies a given
standard or cadre, as e. g. the com
plement of a regiment; or (ii) the
number or quantity which, when added
to a preexisting number or quantity,
produces completeness ; as e. g. the

complement of an angle, i. e. the angle
by which it falls short of being a
complete right angle. In other words,
it is either the whole or the part. As
a theological term, trXipmpa corre
sponds to the first of these two senses ;
and with this meaning alone the word
' complement ' will be used in the fol
lowing dissertation.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 25;
Xen. Hell. i. 6. 24. But n-Xrjpcopa is used not only of the crew which mans
a ship, but also of the ship which is manned with a crew ; e.g. Polyb. i. 49.
4, 5s Trlv irapovaiav t&v irXrjpaparmv...rd irpoacpdrms irapayeyovbra jrXrjpco-
para, Lucian Ver. Hist. ii. 37, 381 ^Vo &v° JrXrjpcopdTcov ipdxovro...irivre ydp
ei^ov irXrjpaSpara ; and it is difficult to see how the word could be trans
ferred from the crew to the ship as a whole, if the common explanation
were correct. Fritzsche (Rom. 11. p. 469 sq.), to whom I am chiefly indebted
for the passages quoted in this paragraph, has boldly given the word two
directly opposite senses in the two cases, explaining it in the one ' ea quibus
naves complentur, h.e. vel socii navales vel milites classiarii vel utrique',
and in the other 'id quod completur, v.c. navigium'; but this severance of
meaning can hardly be maintained. On the other hand, if we suppose that
the crew is so caUed as 'the complement', (ie. 'not that which fills the
ship', but 'that which is itself full or complete in respect of the ship'),
we preserve the passive sense of the word, while at the same time the
transference to the fuUy equipped and manned vessel itself becomes natural.
In this sense 'a complement' we have the word used again of an army,
Aristid. Or. I. p. 381 prjre aurdpxeis eaeadai irXrjpmpa evbs oixeiov arparevparos (2) 'Popu-
napaaxiadai. (2) It sometimes signifies 'the population of a city', Arist. lation.'
Pol. ui. 1 3 (p. 1 284) prj pivroi Svvarol irXrjpmpa irapaaxicrdai irbXems (comp.
iv. 4, p. 1 291). Clearly the same idea of completeness underUes this
meaning of the word, so that here again it signifies 'the complement':
comp. Dion. Hal. A. R. vi. 51 rou 8' dXiyou xal oux dliopd^ou irXijpcoparos
to irXeidv ian Srjponxdv x.r.X., Eur. Ion 663 rcov epiXmv irXrjpmp' ddpoiaas (3) 'Total
'the whole body of bis friends'. (3) 'The entire sum', Arist. Vesp. 660 amount.'
rourcov 7rXrjpcopa rdXavr' iyyiis Sicr^iXia yiyverai rjplv, ' From these sources a (^) ' Entire
total of nearly two thousand talents accrues to us'. (4) 'The full term', term.'
Herod. iU. 22 dyScoxovra 8' erea fdrjs irXrjpapa dvSpl paxporarov irpoxeeadat. (5) 'Fulfil-
(5) ' The perfect attainment', ' the full accomplishment', e.g. Philo de Abr. ment.'
46 (n. p. 39) irXijpcopa xprjcrrcov iXiriSmv. In short the fundamental mean
ing of the word generally, though perhaps not universally, is neither 'the
fining material', nor 'the vessel filled'; but 'that which is complete in
itself', or in other words ' plenitude, fulness, totahty, abundance'.
In the Gospels the uses of the word present some difficulty. (1) In Use of
Matt. ix. 16 aipei ydp rd irXrjpmpa avrov dirb rov ipariov xal xelpov axiapa rrXrjpwpa
yiverai, it refers to the imfiXrjpa pdxovs dyvdepov which has gone before ; but ™ls e
irXrjpmpa need not therefore be equivalent to eVi/3Xijpa so as to mean the jfatt. ix.
patch itself, as is often assumed. The following pronoun aurou is most 16.
naturally referred to eiri/3Xrjpa ; and ff so jrXrjpcopa describes. ' the com
pleteness', which results from the patch. The statement is thus thrown
into the form of a direct paradox, the very completeness making the
garment more imperfect than before. In the parallel passage Mark Mark ii
ii. 21 the variations are numerous, but the right reading seems certainly 21.
to be atpet to irXrjpapa air aurou, rd Kaivov tov iraXaiov x.r.X. The received
text omits the preposition before aurou, but a glance at the authorities is
convincing in favour of its insertion. In this case the construction wiU be
aipei to jrXrjpcopa (nom.) dir* aurou (i.e. rofl ipariov, which has been men
tioned immediately before), rd xaivbv (irXrjpmpa) tou iraXatou (ipariou);
'The completeness takes away from the garment, the new completeness
COL. I7

258 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
of the old garment', where the paradox is put still more emphaticaUy.
Mark vi. (2) In Mark vi. 43 the right reading is xal rjpav xXacrpdrov ScoSexa xocpi-
?3- „ous irXrjpmpara, i.e. 'full' or 'complete measures', where the apposition to
xocplvovs obviates the temptation to explain irXrjpdpaTa as 'ea quae im-
Mark viii. plent'. On the other hand in Mark vUi 20 irbamv airvpiSmv irXrjpcopara
20- xXao-pdrcov rjpare; this would be the prima facie explanation; comp.
Eccles. iv. 6 dyacrdv e'crn jrXrjpcopa Spaxds dvajraucrecos uirep irXrjpdpaTa Suo
Spax&v pbxdov. But it is objectionable to give an active sense to irXrjpapa
under any circumstances ; and if in such passages the patch itself is meant,
it must still be so called, not because it fills the hole, but because it is
itself fulness or full measure as regards the defect which needs sup
plying.
Usage in From the Gospels we pass to the Epistles of St Paul, whose usage
St Paul's bears more directly on our subject. And here the evidence seems all to
Epistles ^en(j jn £ne game direction. (1) In 1 Cor. x. 26 roti Kvpiov ydp ij yrj xal to
jg_ ' ' irXrjpmpa au'rfjs it occurs in a quotation from Ps. xxiv (xxiii). 1. The ex
pressions rd irXrjpmpa rijs yijs, rd jrXrjpcopa rrjs daXdaarjs, occur several times
in the lxx (e.g. Ps. xcvi (xcv). 11, Jer. viii. 16), where rd irXrjpapa is a
translation of &OD, a word denoting primarily 'fulness', but having in its
secondary uses a considerable latitude of meaning ranging between ' con
tents' and ' abundance '. This last sense seems to predominate in its
Greek rendering irXrjpapa, and indeed the other is excluded altogether in
Eom. xiii. some passages, e.g. Cant. v. 13 e'irl irXrjpmpara vSdrmv. (2) In Rom. xiii. 10
10. irXijpcopa vdpou rj dydirrj, the best comment on the meaning of the word is
the context, ver. 8 d dyair&v rbv erepov vbpov rrerrXrjpmxev, SO that jrXrjpcopa
here means the 'completeness' and so 'fulfilment, accompUshment': see
Eom. xv. the note on Gal. v. 14. (3) In Rom. XV. 29 e'v irXrjpcopan euXoyias Xpiarou
29. eXevaopai, it plainly has the sense of 'fulness, abundance'. (4) In Gal.
Gal. iv. 4. IV. 4 ore Se rjXdev rb irXrjpmpa roil XPovov an(l Ephes. i. IO eis olxovopiav rov
Eph. i. to. irXrjpcoparos rav xaip&v, its force is illustrated by such passages as Mark
i. 15 jreirXrjpcorai d xaipbs xal rjyyixev rj fiaaiXeia x.r.X., Luke xxi 24 a^pi
ou irXrjpmdmatv xatpol idv&v (comp. Acts ii. I, vii. 23, 30, ix. 23, xxiv. 27), SO
that the expressions will mean 'the fuU measure of the time, the full tale
Rom. xi. ofthe seasons'. (5) In Rom. xi. 25 rrmpmais dirb pepovs to 'ierparjX ye'yo-
25. vev d^pis ou rd jrXrjpcopa tcov e'dViov elaiXdrj, it seems to mean ' the full num
ber', 'the whole body', (whether the whole absolutely, or the whole rela
tively to God's purpose), of whom only a part had hitherto been gathered
Eom. xi. into the Church. (6) In an earUer passage in this chapter the same
12. expression occurs of the Jews, xi. 12 ei Se rd irapdirrmpa avr&v jtXoutos
xbapov xal rd ijrnjpa aurcov jrXouros idv&v, iroam pdXXov rd jrXrjpcopa aurcov.
Here the antithesis between rjrnjpa and jrXrjpcopa, ' failure' and 'fulness', is
not sufficiently direct to fix the sense of irXrjpmpa ; and (in the absence of
anything to guide us in the context) we may fairly assume that it is used
in the same sense of the Jews here, as of the Gentiles in ver. 25.
General Thus, whatever hesitation may be felt about the exact force of the
result. word as it occurs in the Gospels, yet substantially one meaning runs
through all the passages hitherto quoted from St Paul. In these jrXrjpcopa
has its proper passive force, as a derivative from jrXrjpouv ' to make com
plete'. It is 'the fuU complement, the entire measure, the plenitude, the

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 259
fulness'. There is therefore a presumption in favour of this meaning in
other passages where it occurs in this Apostle's writings.
We now come to those theological passages in the Epistles to the Theologi-
Colossians and Ephesians and in the Gospel of St John, for the sake of oal Pa?-
which this investigation has been undertaken. They are as follows ; sages in
Col. i. 19 e'v avrm evSbxrjaev irav to irXrjpapa xaroixfjaat. Colossians
Col. ii. 9 e'v aurcp xaroixei irav rd jrXrjpcopa rfjs t7edrijros aapanx&s, xal and Ephe-
e'oTe e'v avrm irejrXrjpcopevoi. SianS.
Ephes. i 23 aurdv eScoxev xecpaXnv uirep jrdvra rfj iKKXr/aiq, rjns iariv rd
ampa aurou, rd irXrjpcop.a rou rd irdvra iv irdaiv jrXrjpoupevou.
Ephes. Ui. 19 iva irXrjpa>c9ijrc els irav to irXrjpmpa rov &eov.
Ephes. iv. 13 ets dvSpa Te'Xeiov, eis pirpov ijXixias rou jrXrjpcoparos tov
Xpiarov. John i. 14, 16, xal d Xdyos o-dp£ iyivero xal iaxrjvmaev iv rjplv (xai idea- St John.
aapeda rnv 8b£av aurou, 86§av cos povoyevovs irapa irarpbs) irXijpijs j^dpiros
xai aXrjpeias...e'x tov jrXnpcoparos aurou rjpeis irdvres iXd(3opev xal x^Ptv civrl
Xapiros. To these should be added two passages from the Ignatian Epistles1, Ignatius.
which as belonging to the confines of the Apostolic age afford valuable
illustration of the Apostolic language.
Ephes. inscr. 'Iyvdnos, d xal ©eocpdpos, rij euXoyrjpe'vrj e'v peyidet ©eou
irarpbs irXi]pmpan'i...rij ixxXrjaia rrj dgtopaxapiarm rrj alajj iv 'Ecpeaa x.r.X.
Trail, inscr. 'Iyvdnos, d xal 6eorpdpos...e'xxXijo"ta dyia r% ovajj iv TpdXXe-
aiv...rjv xal dcrirdfopal e'v no irXrjpcopari, e'v ajrotrroXixcp xdpaxrfjpi.
It wiU be evident, I think, from the passages in St Paul, that the word The term
jrXrjpcopa 'fulness, plenitude', must have had a more or less definite theo- nas a re_
logical value when he wrote. This inference, which is suggested by the 5
frequency of the word, seems almost inevitable when we consider the form
of the expression in the first passage quoted, Col. i. 19. The absolute use
of the word, irdv rd irXrjpmpa ' all the fulness', would otherwise be uninteUi-
gible, for it does not explain itself. In my notes I have taken 6 Oebs to be
the nominative to euSdxijo-ev, but if the subject of the verb were jrdv rd
irXnpcojia, as some suppose, the inference would be still more necessary. The
word however, regarded as a theological term, does not appear to have been
' The first of the two passages is present Syriac text has et perfectae for
containedin the short Syriac. recension, irXijpapan; but there is no reason
though loosely translated; the other is for supposing that the Syriac trans-
wanting there. I need not stop to en- lator had another reading before
quire whether the second was written him. A snght change in the Syriac,
by Ignatius himself or not. The seven . 1 . »
epistles, even if not genuine (as I now r"^ ~p "" r"^ ~G,
believe them to be), can hardly date would bring this version into entire
later than the middle of the second accordance with the Greek; and the
century and are therefore early enough confusion was the more easy, because
to afford valuable illustrations of the the latter word occurs in the imme-
Apostles' language. diate context. Or the translator may
a The common texts read xal irXrjpa- have indulged in a paraphrase ac-
ytian, but there can be little doubt cording to his wont; just as in the
(from a comparison of the authorities) longer Latin version TXijpdpart here
that xai should be struck out. The is translated repletae.
17 — 2

26o

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

derived from Pa
lestine and
not Alex
andria.

It denotes
thetotalityof the Di
vine pow
ers, etc.
in the
Colossian letter.

Analogy to
its usage
elsewhere :
e.g.in Philo,
of the
family,

and in
Aristotle,
of the
state.

adopted, like so many other expressions in the ApostoUc writers1, from the
nomenclature of Alexandrian Judaism. At least no instance of its occur
rence in this sense is produced from Philo. We may therefore conjecture
that it had a Palestinian origin, and that the Essene Judaizers of Colossae,
whom St Paul is confronting, derived it from this source. In this case it
would represent the Hebrew s<6d, of which it is a translation in the lxx,
and the Aramaic rc£-Acsrj or some other derivative of the same root,
such being its common rendering in the Peshito.
The sense in which St Paul employs this term was doubtless the sense
which he found already attached to it. He means, as he explicitly states in
the second Christological passage of the Colossian Epistle (ii. 9), the ple
roma, the plenitude of 'the Godhead' or 'of Deity'. In the first passage
(i 19), though the word stands without the addition rfjs d'edrrjros, the signi
fication required by the context is the same. The true doctrine of the one
Christ, who is the absolute mediator in the creation and government of the
world, is opposed to the false doctrine of a plurality of mediators, ' thrones,
dominions, principaUties, powers '. An absolute and unique position is
claimed for Him, because in Him resides 'all the pleroma', i.e. the full
complement, the aggregate of the Divine attributes, virtues, energies. This
is another way of expressing the fact that He is the Logos, for the Logos is
the synthesis of all the various Suvdpeis, in and by which God manifests
Himself whether in the kingdom of nature or in the kingdom of grace.
This application is in entire harmony with the fundamental meaning of
the word. The term has been transferred to the region of theology, but in
itself it conveys exactly the same idea as before. It implies that all the
several elements which are required to realise the conception specified are
present, and that each appears in its fuU proportions. Thus PhUo, describing
the ideal state of prosperity which will result from absolute obedience
to God's law, mentions among other blessings the perfect development of
the family : ' Men shall be fathers and fathers too of goodly sons, and women
shall be mothers of goodly children, so that each household shall be the
pleroma of a numerous kindred, where no part or name is wanting of aU
those which are used to designate relations, whether in the ascending line,
as parents, uncles, grandfathers, or again in the descending Une in like
manner, as brothers, nephews, sons' sons, daughters' sons, cousins, cousins'
sons, kinsmen of all degrees2.' So again Aristotle, criticizing the Re
public of Plato, writes; ' Socrates says that a city (or state) is composed of
four classes, as its indispensable elements (rmv dvayxaiordrmv) : by these he
means the weaver, the husbandman, the shoemaker, and the builder ; and
again, because these are not sufficient by themselves, he adds the smith
and persons to look after the necessary cattle, and besides them the mer
chant and the retail dealer : these together make up the pleroma of a
city in its simplest form (raura irdvra yiverai irXrjpapa rfjs jrpcdrrjs jrdXecos) ;

1 See the notes on Col. i. 15 sq.
2 de Praem. et Poen. 18 (11. p. 425).
The important words are ds exacrrov
oIkov irXijpmpa elvai iroXvavBpdirov avy
yeveias, pijbevbs iXXettpSivros fj pipovs

rj bvbparos tuv dsa iirnprjpi^erai k.t.X.
The construction of the subsequent
part of the sentence is obsoure ; and
for bpolovs we should probably read
bpolus.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 261
thus he assumes that a city is formed to supply the bare necessities of Ufe
(rav dvayxaicov x"Plv) B^c' *• I'rom these passages it will be seen that the
adequacy impUed by the word, as so used, consists not less in the variety
of the elements than in the fulness of the entire quantity or number.
So far the explanation seems clear. But when we turn from the Colos- Transition
sian letter to the Ephesian, it is necessary to bear in mind the different fr°m Co-
aims of the two epistles. While in the former the Apostle's main object ^fians to
is to assert the supremacy of the Person of Christ, in the latter his prin- Bfans~
cipal theme is the Ufe and energy of the Church, as dependent on Christ2.
So the pleroma residing in Christ is viewed from a different aspect, no
longer in relation to God, so much as in relation to the Church. It is that Cone-
plenitude of Divine graces and virtues which is communicated through sponding
Christ to the Church as His body. The Church, as ideally regarded, the aPPlloft-
bride 'without spot or wrinkle or any such thing', becomes in a manner T^pU„a
identified with Him3. AU the Divine graces which reside in Him are to the
imparted to her; His 'fulness' is communicated to her : and thus she may Church.
be said to be His pleroma (i. 23). This is the ideal Church. The actual
mUitant Church must be ever advancing, ever struggling towards the
attainment of this ideal. Hence the Apostle describes the end of all
offices and administrations in the Church to be that the coUective body
may attain its full and mature growth, or (in other words) may grow up
to the complete stature of Christ's fulness4. But Christ's fulness is God's
fulness. Hence in another passage he prays that the brethren may by
the indweUing of Christ be fulfilled till they attain to the pleroma of God
(Ui. 19). It is another way of expressing the continuous aspiration and
effort after hoUness which is enjoined in our Lord's precept, 'Ye shall
be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect'5.
The Gospel of St John, written in the first instance for the same Gospel of
churches to which the Epistle to the Ephesians was sent, has numerous and St John.
striking points of resemblance with St Paul's letter. This is the case here.
As St Paul tells the Ephesians that the ideal Church is the pleroma of
Christ and that the miUtant Church must strive to become the pleroma
of Christ, so St John (i 14 sq.) after describing our Lord as povoyevrjs,
i.e. the unique and absolute representative of the Father, and as such
'full (irXrJprjs) of grace and of truth', says that they, the disciples, had
' received out of His pleroma' ever fresh accessions of grace. Each indi-
1 Arist. Pol. iv. 4 (p. 1291). these various partial graces bestowed
2 See the notes on Col. ii. 19 (p. on individuals to be the unity and
198). mature growth of the whole, 'the
3 Ephes. v. 27 sq. building up of the body ', pexpl xarav-
4 The Apostle in this passage Tijo-oipev oi jrdvres els rijv ivbrrjTa...
(Ephes. iv. 13) is evidently oontem- eh dv Spa riXeiov, els pirpov tjXiKlas rov
plating the coUective body, and not irXrjpdpaTos tov Xpierov. This cor-
the individual believers. He writes ol porate being must grow up into the
irdvres, not irdvres, and dvSpa riXeiov, one colossal Man, the standard of
not dvSpas reXelovs. As he has said whose spiritual and moral stature is
before ivl ixdara ijp&v ebbBij [rj] xdpis nothing less than the pleroma of
xard tA pirpov rfjs Swpeas rou Xpt- Christ Himself.
crroO, so now he describes the result of 6 Matt. v. 48.

262

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

Ignatian
letters.

Gnosticsects.

The Co
rinthians.

vidual believer in his degree receives a fraction of that pleroma which is
communicated whole to the ideal Church.
The use of the word is not very different in the Ignatian letters. St
Ignatius greets this same Ephesian Church, to which St Paul and St John
successively here addressed the language already quoted, as 'blessed in
greatness by the pleroma of God the Father', ie. by graces imparted
from the pleroma. To the TralUans again he sends a greeting ' in the ple
roma', where the word denotes the sphere of Divine gifts and operations, so
that e'v no irXrjpmpari is almost equivalent to e'v ra Kupicp or e'v ra irvevpan.
When we turn from CathoUc Christianity to the Gnostic sects we find
this term used, though (with one important exception) not in great fre
quency. Probably however, if the writings of the earlier Gnostics had
been preserved, we should have found that it occupied a more important
place than at present appears. One class of early Gnostics separated the
spiritual being Christ from the man Jesus ; they supposed that the Christ
entered Jesus at the time of His baptism and left him at the moment of
His crucifixion. Thus the Christ was neither born as a man nor suffered
as a man. In this way they obviated the difficulty, insuperable to the
Gnostic mind, of conceiving the connexion between the highest spi
ritual agency and gross corporeal matter, which was involved in the
Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation and Passion, and which Gnostics of
another type more effectually set aside by the theory of docetism, i.e. by
assuming that the human body of our Lord was only a phantom body and
not real flesh and blood. Irenseus represents the former class as teaching
that 'Jesus was the receptacle of the Christ', and that the Christ 'de
scended upon him from heaven in the form of a dove and after He had
declared (to mankind) the nameless Father, entered (again) into the ple
roma imperceptibly and invisibly'1. Here no names are given. But in
another passage he ascribes precisely the same doctrine, without however
naming the pleroma, to Cerinthus3. And in a third passage, which links
together the other two, this same father, after mentioning this heresiarch,
again aUudes to the doctrine which maintained that the Christ, having
descended on Jesus at his baptism, 'flew back again into His own ple
roma'3. In this last passage indeed the opinions of Cerinthus are men-

1 iii. 1 6. i 'Quoniam autem sunt
qui dicunt Iesum quidem receptaculum
Christi fuisse, in quem desuper quasi
columbam descendisse, et quum indi-
casset innominabilem Patrem, incom-
prehensibiliter et invisibiliter intrasse
in pleroma '.
2 i. 26. 1 'post baptismum descen
disse in eum ab ea principalitate, quae
est super omnia, Christum figura eo-
lumbae; et tunc annuntiasse incog-
nitum Patrem et virtutes perfecisse :
in fine autem revolasse iterum Christum
de Iesu et Iesum passum esse et
resurrexisse, etc'
3 iii. 11. 1 'iterum revolasse in suum

pleroma '. ThiB expression is the con
necting lin> between the other two
passages. This third passage is quoted
more at length above, p. no. In this
passage however the reference of illi
in ' quemadmodum illi dicunt ' is
doubtful. Several critics refer it to
the Valentinians, and certainly some
characteristic errors of the Valentinian
teaching are specified immediately
after. The probable explanation seems
to be that it is intended to include
the Gnostics generally, and that Ire
nasus mentions in illustration the
principal errors of Gnostic teaching,
irrespective of the schools to which

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 263
tioned in connexion with those of other Gnostics, more especially the
Valentinians, so that we cannot with any certainty attribute this expression
to Cerinthus himself. But in the first passage the unnamed heretics who
maintained this return of the Christ 'into the pleroma' are expressly dis
tinguished from the Valentinians ; and presumably therefore the allusion
is to the Cerinthians, to whom the doctrine, though not the expression, is
ascribed in the second passage. Thus there seems to be sufficient reason Connexion
for attributing the use of the term to Cerinthus1. This indeed is probable of this use
on other grounds. The term pleroma, we may presume, was common to p . ,
St Paul and the Colossian heretics whom he controverts. To both alike it ^^ fae
conveyed the same idea, the totaUty of the divine powers or attributes or Colossian
agencies or manifestations. But after this the divergence begins. They heretics.
maintained that a single divine power, a fraction of the pleroma, resided in
our Lord : the Apostle urges on the contrary, that the whole pleroma has
its abode in Him2. The doctrine of Cerinthus was a development of the
Colossian heresy, as I have endeavoured to show above3. He would
therefore inherit the term pleroma from it. At the same time he The pie-
seems to have given a poetical colouring to his doctrine, and so doing roma
to have treated the pleroma as a locality, a higher spiritual region, l°oallBeo-.
from which this divine power, typified by the dove-like form, issued
forth as on wings, and to which, taking flight again, it reascended
before the Passion. If so, his language would prepare the way for the still
more elaborate poetic imagery of the Valentinians, in which the pleroma,
conceived as a locaUty, a region, an abode of the divine powers, is con
spicuous. The attitude of later Gnostics towards this term is widely divergent. The term
The word is not, so far as I am aware, once mentioned in connexion with avoided by
the system of BasiUdes. Indeed the nomenclature of this heresiarch be- Ba3maes,
longs to a whoUy different type ; and, as he altogether repudiated the
doctrine of emanations4, it is not probable that he would have any fondness
for a term which was almost inextricably entangled with this doctrine.
On the other hand with Valentinus and the Valentinians the doctrine but promi-
of the pleroma was the very key-stone of their system ; and, since at first nent in
sight it is somewhat difficult to connect their use of the term with St Paul's, Valentl"
a few words on this subject may not be out of place.
Valentinus then dressed his system in a poetic imagery not unlike the Poetic teachmg
they belong. He goes on to say that 4 Hippol. E. H. vn. 22 epeiyei ydp
St John in his Gospel desired to ex- 7rdvv xal SiSoixe rds Kard irpofioXijv rwv
elude ' omnia talia '. yeyovbrmv ovaias b SaaiXeldijs. Basi-
1 I have not been able however to lides asked why the absolute First
verify the statement in Harvey's Ire- Cause should be likened to » spider
ikbus 1. p. Irani that ' The Valentinian spinning threads from itself, or a smith
notion of a spiritual marriage between or carpenter working up his materials.
the souls of the elect and the angels The later BasiUdeanB, apparently in-
of the Pleroma originated with Ce- fluenced by Valentinianism, super-
rinthus '. added to the teaching of their founder
2 See p. 99 sq., and the notes on in this respect; but the strong language
i. 19. quoted by Hippolytus leaves no doubt
3 p. 105 sq. about the mind of Basilides himself.

264

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

of Valen
tinus.

Topogra
phical conceptionof the ple
roma.
Antithesis of pleroma
and keno-

Pleroma the abode
of the
.ffions.

Differentforms of
Valenti-
nlanism.

myths of his master Plato. But a myth or story involves action, and action
requires a scene of action. Hence the mysteries of theology and cosmogony
and redemption call for a topographical representation, and the pleroma
appears not as an abstract idea, but as a locality.
The Valentinian system accordingly maps out the universe of things
into two great regions, called respectively the pleroma and the kenoma,
the 'fulness' and the 'void'. From a Christian point of view these may be
described as the kingdoms of Ught and of darkness respectively. From
the side of Platonism, they are the regions of real and of phenomenal
existences — the world of eternal archetypes or ideas, and the world of
material and sensible things. The identification of these two antitheses
was rendered easy for the Gnostic ; because with him knowledge was one
with morality and with salvation, and because also matter was absolutely
bound up with evil. It is difficult to say whether the Platonism or the
Christianity predominates in the Valentinian theology ; but the former at
all events is especially prominent in their conception of the relations
between the pleroma and the kenoma.
The pleroma is the abode of the JEons, who are thirty in number.
These iEons are successive emanations, of which the first pair sprang im
mediately from the preexistent Bythus or Depth. This Bythus is deity in
itself, the absolute first principle, as the name suggests ; the profound,
unfathomable, limitless, of whom or of which nothing can be predicated
and nothing known. Here again we have something Uke a local repre
sentation. The jEons or emanations are plainly the attributes and energies
of deity ; they are, or they comprise, the eternal ideas or archetypes of the
Platonic phUosophy. In short they are deity relative, deity under self-
imposed limitations, deity derived and divided up, as it were, so as at
length to be conceivable.
The topographical relation of Bythus to the derived iEons was dif
ferently given in different developments of the Valentinian teaching.
According to one representation he was outside the pleroma; others
placed his abode within it, but even in this case he was separated from the
rest by Horus ("Opos), a personified Boundary or Fence, whom none, not
even the iEons themselves, could pass1. The former mode of representa-

1 Por the various modes in which
tha relation of the absolute first prin
ciple to the pleroma was represented
in different Valentinian schools, see
Iren. i 1. 1, i. a. 4, i. n. 1, 3, 5, i. 12.
1, etc. The main distinction is that
stated in the text; the first principle
was represented in two ways; either
(i) as a monad, outside the pleroma ;
or (ii) as a dyad, a syzygy, most com
monly under the designation of But?6s
and Siyrj, included within the pleroma
but fenced off from the other seons.
The Valentinian doctrine as given by
Hippolytus (vi. 29 sq.) represents the

former type. There are good, though
perhaps not absolutely decisive, rea
sons for supposing that this father gives
the original teachmg of Valentinus
himself. For (1) this very doctrine of
the monad seems to point to an earlier
date. It is the lin> which connects
the system of Valentinus not only
with Pythagoreanism to which (as
Hippolytus points out) he was so
largely indebted, but also with the
teaching of the earlier heresiarch Ba
siUdes, whose first principle likewise
was a monad, the absolute nothing,
the non-existent God. The conception

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 265
tion might be thought to accord better with the imagery, at the same time
that it is more accurate if regarded as the embodiment of a phUosophical
conception. Nevertheless the latter was the favourite mode of delinea
tion; and it had at least this recommendation, that it combined in one all
that is real, as opposed to all that is phenomenal. In this pleroma every
existence which is suprasensual and therefore true has its abode.
Separated from this celestial region by Horus, another Horus or Kenoma,
Boundary, which, or who, like the former is impassable, lies the ' kenoma ' the region
or ' void ' — the kingdom of this world, the region of matter and material _ Pneno"
0 mena.
things, the land of shadow and darkness1. Here is the empire of the
Demiurge or Creator, who is not a celestial Mon at all, but was born in this
very void over which he reigns. Here reside all those phenomenal, decep
tive, transitory tilings, of which the eternal counterparts are found only in
the pleroma.
It is in this antithesis that the Platonism of the Valentinian theory Platonism
reaches its climax. AU things are set off one against another in these two of this an-
regions": just as tithesis-
The swan on stiU St Mary's lake
Floats double, swan and shadow.
Not only have the thirty iEons their terrestrial counterparts; but their
subdivisions also are represented in this lower region. The kenoma too
has its ogdoad, its decad, its dodecad, Uke the pleroma3. There is one
Sophia in the supramundane region, and another in the mundane; there
is one Christ who redeems the iEons in the spiritual world, and a second
Christ who redeems mankind, or rather a portion of mankind, in the
sensible world. There is an iEon Man and another iEon Ecclesia in the
celestial kingdom, the ideal counterparts of the Human Race and the
Christian Church in the terrestrial. Even individual men and women, as
we shaU see presently, have their archetypes in this higher sphere of
intelUgible being.
of the first principle as a dyad seems of his exposition. It seems most na-
to have been a later, and not very tural therefore that he should have
happy, modification of the doctrine of taken the system of the founder as his
the founder, being in fact an extension basis. On the other hand Irenseus
of the principle of syzygies which Va- (i. n. 1) states that Valentinus re-
lentinus with a truer philosophical con- presented the first principle as a dyad
ception had restricted to the derived ("Appjjros or Buffos, and Siyrj) : but
essences. (2) The exposition of Hip- there is no evidence that he had any
polytus throughout exhibits a system direct or indirect knowledge of the
at once more consistent and more writings of Valentinus himself, and
simple, than the luxuriant develop- his information was derived from the
ments of the later Valentinians, such later disciples of the school, more
as Ptolemseus and Marcus. (3) The especially from the Ptolemsans.
sequence of his statement points to 1 Iren. i. 4. 1, ¦*, ii. 3. 1, ii. 4. 1, 3,
the same conclusion. He giveB a con- ii. 5. 1, u. 8. 1 — 3, ii. 14. 3, iii. 25. 6,
secutive account of some one system, 7, etc.
turning aside from time to time to 2 Iren. i. 6. 3, i. 7. 1 sq., ii. 14. 3,
notice the variations of different Va- ii. 15. 3 sq., u. 20. 5, ii. 30. 3, etc
lentinian schools from this standard 3 Iren. i. 5. a, ii. 14. 3 ; comp.
and again resuming the main thread Hippol. vi. 34.

266

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The locali
sation of
the plero
ma carried
out in de
taU.

The con
nexionwith St
Paul's use
of the term
obscured,

owing
partly to
the false
antithesisxivapa

The topographical conception of the pleroma moreover is carried out
in the detaUs of the imagery. The second Sophia, called also Achamoth, is
the desire, the offspring, of her elder namesake, separated from her
mother, cast out of the pleroma, and left 'stranded' in the void beyond1,
being prevented from returning by the inexorable Horus who guards the
frontier of the supramundane kingdom. The second Christ — a being com
pounded of elements contributed by all the iEons2 — was sent down from the
pleroma, first of all at the eve of creation to infuse something like order
and to provide for a spiritual element in this lower world; and secondly,
when He united Himself with the man Jesus for the sake of redeeming
those who were capable of redemption3. At the end of all things Sophia
Achamoth, and with her the spiritual portion of mankind, shaU be redeemed
and received up into the pleroma, while the psychical portion wiU be left
outside to form another kingdom under the dominion of their father the
Demiurge. This redemption and ascension of Achamoth (by a perversion of
a scriptural image) was represented as her espousals with the Saviour, the
second Christ; and the pleroma, the scene of this happy union, was called
the bridal-chamber4. Indeed the localisation of the pleroma is as complete
as language can make it. The constant repetition of the words ' within '
and 'without', 'above' and 'beneath', in the development of this philoso
phical and religious myth stUl further impresses this local sense on the term5.
In this topographical representation the connexion of meaning in the
word pleroma as employed by St Paul and by Valentinus respectively
seems at first sight to be entirely lost. When we read of the contrast be
tween the pleroma and the kenoma, the fulness and the void, we are
naturaUy reminded of the plenum and the vacuum of physical specula
tions. The sense of pleroma, as expressing completeness and so denoting
the aggregate or totaUty of the Divine powers, seems altogether to have
disappeared. But in fact this antithesis of xivmpa was, so far as we can
make out, a mere afterthought, and appears to have been borrowed, as
Irenaeus states, from the physical theories of Democritus and Epicurus8.
It would naturally suggest itself both because the opposition of jrXrjprjs and
xevds was obvious, and because the word xivmpa materially assisted the
imagery as a description of the kingdom of waste and shadow. But in

1 Iren. i. 4. 1 Xeyovo-iv ev crxiais
[o-xids] xal Kevdparos rbirois kxfieppd-
o-6 at x.t.X. The Greek ms reads xal
o-KijviipaTos, but the rendering of the
early Latin translation ' in umbrae
[et?] vacuitatis locis' leaves no doubt
about the word in the original text.
Tertullian says of this Achamoth (adv.
Valent. 14) 'explosa est in loca lu-
minis aliena ... in vacuum atque inane
illud Epicuri '. See note 6.
2 Iren. i. -i. 6, Hippol. vi. 31.
" They quoted, as referring to this
descent of the second Christ into the
kenoma, the words of St Paul, PhU.

u. 7 eauT6v exevcocrev ; Clem. Alex. Exc.
Theod. 35 (p. 978).
4 Iren. i. 7. 1 xal rovro etvai vvp-
tplov Kal vbpnpijv, vvpipmva Si rb irav
irXrjpmpa: comp. Hippol. vi. 34 6 vvp-
iplos avrijs.
B This language is so frequent that
special references are needless. In
Iren. n. 5. 3 we have a still stronger
expression, 'in ventre pleromatis '.
6 Iren. u. 14. 3 ' TJmbram autem et
vacuum ipsorum a Democrito et Epi-
curo sumentes sibimetipsis aptaverunt,
quum illi primum multum sermonem
fecerint de vacuo et de atomis '.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 267
itself it is a false antithesis. The true antithesis appears in another, and borrowed
probably an earUer, term used to describe the mundane kingdom. In this from phy-
earUer representation, which there is good reason for ascribing to Valen- f1 ir1'
tinus himself, it is called not xivmpa ' the void', but variprjpa ' the defi- hut re-
ciency, incompleteness'1. Moreover the common phraseology of the appears in
Valentinian schools shows that the idea suggested by this opposition to their com-
xivmpa was not the original idea of the term. They speak of to irXrjpmpa mon Pnra"
tov almvmv, rd rrdv jrXtjpcopa rcov almvmv, ' the whole aggregate of the
.cEons'3. And this (making aUowance for the personification of the iEons)
corresponds exactly to its use in St Paul.
Again the teaching of the Valentinian schools supplies other uses The origi-
which serve to Ulustrate its meaning. Not only does the supramundane nal mean-
kingdom as a whole bear this name, but each separate iEon, of which that mg *ilown
kingdom is the aggregation, is Ukewise caUed a pleroma3. This designa- useBi
tion is given to an .cEon, because it is the fulness, the perfection, of which
its mundane counterpart is only a shadowy and defective copy. Nor does
the narrowing of the term stop here. There likewise dweUs in this higher
region a pleroma, or eternal archetype, not only of every comprehensive
mundane power, but of each individual man; and to wed himself with this
heavenly partner, this Divine ideal of himself, must be the study of his Ufe. interpre-
The profound moral significance which underUes the exaggerated Plato- tation of
nism and perverse exegesis of this conception will be at once apparent. J°nn lv-
But the manner in which the theory was carried out is curiously Ulus- ''
trated by the commentary of the Valentinian Heracleon on our Lord's
discourse with the Samaritan woman4. This woman, such is his explana-
1 Hippol. vi. 31 xaXelrat Se Spos piv ment used by Hippolytus, plainly de-
ouros 6'ri <btpopl$ei a7rd rou irXijpcoparos notes the whole mundane region.
c?£co rb baripijpa- pendens Se on peri- Hippolytus does not use the word
Xei xal tov vtrrepijpaTos (i. e. as standing xivmpa, though so common in Irenseus.
between the irXrjpmpa and vo-ripijpa)- This fact seems to point to the earlier
crraupdsSd.orijrifjnjyevclxXivcosxaldperci- date of the Valentinian document
vojjtcos, cos pij Sbvarrbai pijSiv tov vcrrepij- which he uses, and so to bear out the
pans xarayevio-eai eyyus rmv ivrbs irXrj- result arrived at in a previous note
pciparos almvmv. Irenasus represents the (p. 264) that we have here a work of
Marcosians as designating the Demi- Valentinus himself. The word ucrrc?-
urge xapirds vo-repijpaTos i. 17. 2, i. 19. prjpa appears also in Exc. Theod. 22
1, ii. praef. 1, ii. 1. 1 (comp. i. 14. 1). (p. 974)-
This was perhaps intended originally 2 e.g. Hippol. vi. 34, Iren. i. 2. 6.
as an antithesis to the name of the See especiaUy Iren. u. 7. 3 ' Quoniam
Christ, who was xapirbs irXrjpdparos. enim pleroma ipsorum triginta Aeones
The Marcosians however apparently sunt, ipsi testantur '.
meant Sophia Achamoth by this iVre- 3 See the passages from Irenseus
p77pa. This transference from the quoted above, note 1; comp. Exc.
whole to the part would be in strict Theod. 32, 33 (p. 977). SimUarly
accordance with their terminology: for Xdyoi is a synonym for the iEons,
as they called the supramundane seons bprnvipms tQ Abym, Exc. Theod. 25 (p.
irXrjpdpaTa (Iren. i. 14. 2, 5 ; quoted in 975).
Hippoi vi. 43, 46), so also by analogy 4 Heracleon in Orig. in loann. xiii,
they might designate the mundane iv. p. 205 sq. The passages are coUect-
powers baTepTJpara (comp. Iren. i. 16. ed in Stieren's Irenasus p. 947 sq. See
3). The term, as it occurs in the docu- especiaUy p. 950 ofa-ai [b 'HpaxXewv] rijs

268 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
tion, belongs to the spiritual portion of mankind. But she had had six1
husbands, or in other words she had entangled herself with the material
world, had defiled herself with sensuous things. The husband however,
whom she now has, is not her husband ; herein she has spoken rightly : the
Saviour in fact means 'her partner from the pleroma'. Hence she is
bidden to go and call him ; that is, she must find ' her pleroma, that
coming to the Saviour with him (or it), she may be able to obtain from
Him the power and the union and the combination with her pleroma' (rijv
Svvapiv xal rrjv evmaiv xal rrjv dvdxpaaiv ttjv irpbs to irXrjpmpa aurfjs). ' For',
adds Heracleon, ' He did not speak of a mundane (xoapixov) husband when
He told her to call him, since He was not ignorant that she had no lawful
husband'.
Valenti- Impossible as it seems to us to reconcile the Valentinian system with
nians ac- the teaching of the Apostles, the Valentinians themselves felt no such
cept St difficulty. They intended their philosophy not to supersede or contradict
St John *ue Apostolic doctrine, but to supplement it and to explain it on philo
sophical principles. Hence the Canon of the Valentinians comprehended
the Canon of Catholic Christianity in all its essential parts, though some
Valentinian schools at all events supplemented it with Apocryphal wri
tings. More particularly the Gospel of St John and the Epistles to the
Colossians and Ephesians were regarded with especial favour; and those
passages which speak of the pleroma are quoted more than once in their
writings to illustrate their teaching. By isolating a few words from the
context and interpreting them wholly without reference to their setting,
and quote they had no difficulty in finding a confirmation of their views, where we see
them in on]y an incongruity or even a contradiction. For instance, their second
therr°r ° Christ — the redeemer of the spiritual element in the mundane world — was,
views. as we saw, compacted of gifts contributed by all the iEons of the pleroma.
Hence he was caUed ' the common fruit of the pleroma', ' the fruit of all the
pleroma'2, 'the most perfect beauty and constellation of the pleroma'3; hence
2apapelri5os rbv Xeybpevov biro rov am- participation in this higher region)
rijpos dvSpa. rb irXijpmpa elvai avrrjs, but of the spiritual portion thereof.
tva avv exelvm yevopivrj irpbs rbv aarrjpa 1 Origen expressly states that Hera-
Koplaeadai irap avrov rijv Sbvaptv xai cleon read ££ for irevre. The number
rijv ivmaiv xal tijv dvdxpaaiv ttjv irpbs six was supposed to symbohze the
rb irXnpmpa ai/rijs dwrjO-jj' ob ydp material creature; see Heracleon on
irepl dvSpbs, (pijal, Koapixov i-Xeyev  'the forty and six years' of John ii.
Xeycov airrj rbv amrrjpa eiprjxevai, *c6- 20 (Stieren p. 947). There is no reason
vrjabv aov rbv dvSpa xal e\0e iv&dSe' Stj- to think that Heraoleon falsified the
Xovvra rbv dirb rov irXijpdparos ab- text here; he appears to have found
tvyov. Lower down Heracleon says this various reading already in his
tjv abrrjs b dvijp ev rm Almvi. By this copy.
last expression I suppose he means 2 The expression is 6 xoivds rou ir\rj-
that the great aaon Man of the Ogdoad, pdparos xapiros in Hippolytus vi. 32,
the eternal archetype of mankind, com- 34, 36 (pp. 190, 191, 192, 193, 196). In
prises in itself archetypes correspond- IrenaBUB i. 8. 5 it is xapirds iraprds rou
ing to each individual man and woman, irXijpdparos.
not indeed of the whole human race 8 Iren. i. 2. 6 reXeiirarov xdXXos re
(for the Valentinian would exclude the xal darpov rov irXijpdpaTos.
psychical and carnal portion from any

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 269
also he was designated ' All' (irdv) and 'AU things' (irdvra)1. Accordingly,
to this second Christ, not to the first, they applied these texts; Col. iii. 11
' And He is aU things', Rom. xi. 36 'All things are unto Him and from Him
are all things', Col. ii. 9 ' In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead',
Ephes. i 10 ' To gather together in one aU things in Christ through God'2.
So too they styled him EuSdxrjros, with a reference to Col. i. 19, because
'all the pleroma was pleased through Him to glorify the Father'3. And
inasmuch as this second Christ was according to the Valentinian theory
instrumental in the creation of the mundane powers, they quoted, or rather
misquoted, as referring to this participation in the work of the Demiurge,
the passage Col. i 16 ' In Him were created all things, visible and invisible,
thrones, deities, dominions'4. Indeed it seems clear that these adaptations
were not always afterthoughts, but that in several instances at least their
nomenclature was originally chosen for the sake of fitting the theory to
isolated phrases and expressions in the ApostoUc writings, however much
it might conflict with the ApostoUc doctrine in its main lines5.
The heretics caUed Docetae by Hippolytus have no connexion with Use of the
docetism, as it is generaUy understood, i.e. the tenet that Christ's body t®rm^by
was not real flesh and blood, but merely a phantom body. Their views on ® ooe'
this point, as represented by this father, are wholly different6. Of their
system generaUy nothing need be said here, except that it is largely satu
rated with Valentinian ideas and phrases. From the Valentinians they
evidently borrowed their conception of the pleroma, by which they under
stood the aggregate, or (as locaUsed) the abode, of the jEons. With them,
as with the Valentinians, the Saviour is the common product of all the
.<Eons7; and in speaking of him they echo a common Valentinian phrase
'the pleroma ofthe entire iEons'8.
The Ophite heresy, Proteus-like, assumes so many various forms, that and by
the skill of critics has been taxed to the utmost to bind it with cords two Ophite
and extract its story from it. It appears however from the notices of sects-
Hippolytus, that the term pleroma was used in a definite theological sense
by at least two branches of the sect, whom he calls Naassenes and Peratae.
Of the Naassenes Hippolytus tells us that among other images bor- (i) Naas-
rowed from the Christian and Jewish Scriptures, as well as from heathen senes.
poetry, they described the region of true knowledge — their kingdom of
1 Iren. i. 2. 6, i. 3. 4. dopara, Bpbvoi, xupidnjres, ^aaiXetat, Beb-
2 Iren. i. 3. 4. The passages are rijres, XeiTovpylai' Sib xal 6 Oebs airov
given in the text as they are quoted by virepisjimaev x. r. X. (the last words being
Irenseus from the Valentinians. Three taken from Phil. ii. 9 sq.).
out of the four are incorrect. 5 Thus they interpreted Ephes. iii.
3 Iren. i. 12. 4; comp. Exc. Theod. 21 els irdaas ras yeveds tou aimvos t&v
31 (P- 977) e^ 0 xareXB&v eiSoxla rod aldvmv as referring to their generated
oXou jjv iv airm ydp irav to irXrjpmpa rjv aeons: Iren. i. 3. 1. Similar is the
ampanxms. use which they made of expressions in
4 Iren. i. 4. 5 birms ev avra rd irdvra the opening chapter of St John, where
xnaBy, rd bpard xal rd abpara, Bpbvoi, they found their first Ogdoad described:
BebTirres, xvpibrijres, where the mis- ib. i. 8. 5.
quotation is remarkable. In Exc. 6 B. H. viii. 10 (p. 267).
Theod. 43 (p. 979) the words run irdvra 7' ib. viii 9.
ydp e'v aurcji ixriaBrj rd dpard xal rd 8 ib. viii. io (p. 266).

270

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

(ii)Peratae.Their
theology

and corre
sponding
applica tion of
irXijpmpa.

Pistis Sophia.

Frequentuse of tbe
term.

heaven, which was entered by initiation into their mysteries — as the land
flowing with milk and honey, ' which when the perfect (the true Gnostics,
the fuUy initiated) have tasted, they are freed from subjection to kings (d/3a-
o-iXeurous) and partake of the pleroma.' Here is a plain allusion to Joh.
i 1 6. 'This', the anonymous Naassene writer goes on to say, 'is the ple
roma, through which all created things coming into being are produced
and fulfilled (jrejrXnpioTai) from the Uncreated'1. Here again, as in the
Valentinian system, the conception of the pleroma is strongly tinged with
Platonism. The pleroma is the region of ideas, of archetypes, which
intervenes between the author of creation and the material world, and
communicates their specific forms to the phenomenal existences of the
latter. The theology of the second Ophite sect, the Peratae, as described by
Hippolytus, is a strange phenomenon. They divided the universe into
three regions, the uncreate, the self-create, and the created. Again the
middle region may be said to correspond roughly to the Platonic kingdom
of ideas. But their conception of deity is entirely their own. They
postulate three of every being; three Gods, three Words, three Minds
(i. e. as we may suppose, three Spirits), three Men. Thus there is a God
for each region, just as there is a Man. In fuU accordance with this per
verse and abnormal theology is their application of St Paul's language.
Their Christ has three natures, belonging to these three kingdoms respec
tively ; and this completeness of His being is impUed by St Paul in Col.
i. 19, ii. 9, which passages are combined in then- loose quotation or para
phrase, ' All the pleroma was pleased to dwell in him bodily, and there is
in him all the godhead', i.e. (as Hippolytus adds in explanation) 'of this
their triple division (rrjs ourco Sijjprjpevijs rpidSos)'2. This appUcation is
altogether arbitrary, having no relation whatever to the theological mean
ing of the term in St Paui It is also an entire departure from the
conception of the Cerinthians, Valentinians, and Naassenes, in which this
meaning, however obscured, was not altogether lost. These three heresies
took a horizontal section of the universe, so to speak, and applied the
term as coextensive with the supramundane stratum. The Peratae on the
other hand divided it vertically, and the pleroma, in their interpretation of
the text, denoted the whole extent of this vertical section. There is
nothing in common between the two applications beyond the fundamental
meaning of the word, 'completeness, totaUty'.
The extant Gnostic work, called Pistis Sophia, was attributed at one
time on insufficient grounds to Valentinus. It appears however to
exhibit a late development of Ophitism3, far more Christian and less
heathen'in its character than those already considered. In this work the
word pleroma occurs with tolerable frequency; but its meaning is not
easily fixed. Early in the treatise it is said that the disciples supposed a
certain 'mystery', of which Jesus spoke, to be 'the end of all the ends'
and 'the head (xecpaXnv) of the Universe' and 'the whole pleroma'4.
Here we seem to have an allusion to the Platonic kingdom of ideas,

1 R. H. v. 8. " R. H. v. 12.
3 See Kostlin in Theolog. Jahrb.

Tiibingen 1854, p. 185.
4 Pistis Sophia p. 3 sq.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 27 1
i.e. of intelUgible being, of absolute truth, as reproduced in the Valenti
nian pleroma. And the word is used sometimes in connexion with the
completeness of revelation or the perfection of knowledge. Thus our
Lord is represented as saying to His disciples, ' I wiU teU you the whole
mystery and the whole pleroma, and I wiU conceal nothing from you
from this hour; and in perfection will I perfect you in every pleroma and
in every perfection and in every mystery, which tilings are the perfection of
all the perfections and the pleroma of all the pleromas'1 Elsewhere
however Mary, to whom Jesus is represented as making some of His
chief revelations, is thus addressed by Him ; ' Blessed art thou above
(irapd) all women that are on the earth, for thou shalt be pleroma of all
the pleromas and perfection of aU the perfections'2, where the word must
be used in a more general sense.
One heresy stiU remains to be noticed in connexion with this word. Monoimus
Hippolytus has preserved an account of the teaching of Monoimus the the Ara-
Arabian, of whom previously to the discovery of this father's treatise we n-
knew Uttle more than the name. In this strange form of heresy the
absolute first principle is the uncreate, imperishable, eternal Man. I need
not stop to enquire what this statement means. It is sufficient for the
present purpose to add that this eternal Man is symbolized by the letter I,
the 'one iota', the 'one tittle' of the Gospel3; and this i, as representing
the number ten, includes in itself all the units from one to nine. 'This',
added Monoimus, 'is (meant by) the saying (of scripture) All the ple
roma was pleased to dwell upon the Son of Man bodily'*. Here the
original idea of the word as denoting completeness, totality, is still
preserved. 1 ib. p. 15 sq.: comp. pp. 4, 60, 75, parently in tbe sense of ' comple-
187, 275. tion'.
2 ib. p. 28 sq.: comp. p. 56. On p. 7 ' Matt. v. 18,
rrXtjpmpa is opposed to dpxrj, ap- 4 JJ. H. viii. 13.

272 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The Epistle from Laodicea1.
Different The different opinions respecting the epistle thus designated by
theories St Paul, which have been held in ancient or modern times, will be seen
classified. from tae following table;
i. An Epistle written by the Laodiceans; to
(a) St Paul ;
(JS) Epaphras ;
(y) Colossse.
2. An Epistle written by St Paul from Laodicea.
(a) i Timothy;
(f$) i Thessalonians;
(y) 2 Thessalonians;
(8) Galatians.
3. An Epistle addressed to the Laodiceans by
(a) St John (the First Epistle) ;
(6) Some companion of St Paul (Epaphras or Luke) ;
(c) St Paul himself;
(i) A lost Epistle.
(ii) One of the Canonical Epistles.
(a) Hebrews ;
(j3) Philemon;
(y) Ephesians.
(iii) The Apocryphal Epistle.
In this maze of conflicting hypotheses we might perhaps be tempted to
despair of finding our way and give up the search as hopeless. Yet I ven
ture to think that the true identification of the epistle in question is not,
or at least ought not to be, doubtful.
An 1. The opinion that the epistle was addressed by the Laodiceans to
epistle St Paul, and not conversely, found much support in the age of the Greek
written by commentators. It is mentioned by St Chrysostom as held by ' some per-
the Laodi- aons>t though he himself does not pronounce a definite opinion on the sub
ject- It is eagerly advocated by Theodore of Mopsuestia. He supposes
of this ^aa^ *ne letter of the Laodiceans contained some reflexions on the Colos-
theory. sian Church, and that St Paul thought it good for the Colossians to hear

1 The work of Anger, Ueber den elaborate, is less satisfactory. A later
Laodicenerbrief (Leipzig 1 843), is very monograph by A. Sartori, Ueber den
complete. He enumerates and dis- Laodicenserbrieffhubeck 1853), is much
cusses very thoroughly the opinions slighter and contributes nothing new.
of his predecessors, omitting hardly 2 ad loc. rives Xeyoucriv brt oixl rijv
anything relating to the Uterature of IlauXou jrpds aurous direaraXpivriv, dXXd
the subject which was accessible at rijv irap' aurcov IlauXco- oil ydp eiVe rijv
the time when he wrote. His expo- Tpbs AaoSixias dXXd rijv c!x AaoSt-
sition of his own view, though not less xeias.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

273

what their neighbours said of them1. Theodoret, though not mentioning
Theodore by name, foUows in his footsteps*. The same opinion is also
expressed in a note ascribed to Photius in the CEcumenian Catena.
This view seems to have been very widely entertained in ancient
times. It possibly underlies the Latin Version 'ea quae Laodicensium
est'3: it is distinctly expressed in the rendering of the Peshito, 'that
which was written by the Laodiceans'4. At a more recent date too it
found great favour. It was adopted on the one hand by Calvin5 and
Beza6 and Davenant and Lightfoot7, on the other by Baronius8 and
a Lapide and Estius, besides other very considerable names8. Latterly
its popularity has declined, but it has secured the support of one or two
commentators even in the present century.
The underlying motive of this interpretation was to withdraw the sup- Beasons
port which the apocryphal epistle seemed to derive from this reference, *or **¦
without being obUged at the same time to postulate a lost epistle of St
Paul. The critical argument adduced in its support was the form of ex
pression, rrjv e'x AaoSixeias. The whole context however points to a "different Objections
explanation. The Colossian and Laodicean Epistles are obviously regarded to it.
as in some sense companion epistles, of which the Apostle directs an inter
change between the two churches. And again, if the letter in question had

1 Bab. Maur. Op. vi. p. 540 (Migne)
'Non quia ad Laodicenses scribit.
Unde quidam falsam epistolam ad
Laodicenses ex nomine beati Pauli
confingendam esse existimaverunt ;
nee enim erat vera epistola. iEstima-
verunt autem quidam illam esse, quae
in hoc loco est significata. Apostolus
vero non [ad] Laodicenses dicit sed
ex Laodicea; quam iUi scripserunt
ad apostolum, in quam aliqua repre-
hensionis digna inferebantur, quam
etiam hac de causa jussit apud eos
legi, ut ipsi reprehendant seipsos
discentes quse de ipsis erant dicta
etc' (see Spic. Solesm. 1. p. 133).
3 After repeating the argument
based on the expression ri)v ex AaoSi
xeias, Theodoret says elxbs Si avrois rj
rd iv KoXaaaais yevbpeva alndaaaBat
•ij rd avrd robrots vevoaijKivai.
3 This however may be questioned.
On the other hand Beza (ad loc),
Whitaker (Disputation on Scripture pp.
108, 303, 468 sq., 526, 531, Parker
Society's ed.), and others, who explain
the passage in this way, urge that it is
required by the Greek ex AaoSixeias,
and complain that the other interpre
tation depends on the erroneous Latin
rendering. 4 Or, ' that which was written from
COL.

Laodicea.' The difference depends on
the vocalisation of r^ *"-V which
may be either (1) 'Laodicea,' as in w.
I3s i5> or (2) 'the Laodiceans,' as in
the previous clause in this same ver.
16. 6 Calvin is very positive ; ' Bis
hallucinati sunt qui Paulum arbi
trate sunt ad Laodicenses scripsisse.
Non dubito quin epistola fuerit ad
Paulum missa ... Impostura autem
nimis crassa fuit, quod nebulo nescio
quis hoc prffitextu epistolam supponere
ausus est adeo insuisam, ut nihil
a PauU spiritu magis alienum fingi
queat. ' The last sentence reveals the
motive which unconsciously led so
many to adopt this unnatural inter
pretation of St Paul's language.
6 ad loc. 'Multo foedius errarunt
qui ex hoc loco suspicati sunt quan-
dam fuisse epistolam Pauli ad Lao
dicenses  quum potius significet
Paulus epistolam aUquam ad se
missam Laodicea, aut potius qua re-
sponsuri essent Laodicenses Colos-
sensibua.' 7 Works 11. p. 326.
8 Ann. Eccl. s. a. 60, § xiu.
9 e.g. Tillemont Mem. Eccl. 1. p.
576- 18

274 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
been written by the Laodiceans to St Paul, why should he enjoin the Colos
sians to get it from Laodicea ? How could he assume that a copy had been
kept by the Laodiceans ; or, if kept, would be given up when required 1 In
deed the difficulties in this hypothesis are so great, that nothing but the
most imperious requirements of the Greek language would justify its
acceptance. But the expression in the original makes no such demand.
It is equally competent for us to explain rnv e'x AaoSixeias either 'the
letter written from Laodicea', or ' the letter to be procured from Laodi
cea', as the context may suggest. The latter accords at least as well with
Greek usage as the former1.
Views ^he vast majority of those who interpret the expression in this way
respecting assume that the letter was written to (a) St Paul. The modifications of
the person this view, which suppose it addressed to some one else, need hardly be
addressed, consicdered- The theory for instance, which addresses it to (/3) Epaphras2,
removes none of the objections brought against the simpler hypothesis.
Another opinion, which takes (y) the Colossians themselves to have been
the recipients3, does indeed dispose of one difficulty, the necessity of
assuming a copy kept by the Laodiceans, but it is even more irreconcile-
able with the language of the context. Why then should St Paul so stu
diously charge them to see that they read it 1 Why above all should he
say xal upeis, 'ye also', when they were the only persons who would read it
as a matter of course 1
2. A letter 2- ^ secon(l °lass °f identifications rests on the supposition that it
written was a letter written from Laodicea, though not by the Laodiceans thein-
from Lao- selves. The considerations which recommend this hypothesis for accept-
St°pa 1 ance are tne same as 'n *he I*9* case- 1' withdraws aU support from the
apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans, and it refrains from postulating a
lost Apostolic epistle. It is not exposed to aU the objections of the other
theory, but it introduces new difficulties still more serious. Here a choice
r Timothy. °^ 8everal epistles is offered to us. (a) The First Epistle to Timothy.
This view is distinctly maintained by John Damascene4 and by Theophy
lact6; but it took its rise much earlier. It appears in the margin of the
Philoxenian Syriac6, and it seems to have suggested the subscriptions
found in many authorities at the close of that epistle. The words e'ypdcprj
dird AaoSixeias are found in AKL 47 etc., and many of these define the
place meant by the addition rjns eVri prjrpdiroXis *puyias rfjs naxanavfjs.
A similar note is found in some Latin mss. It is quite possible that this
subscription was prior to the theory respecting the interpretation of Coi
iv. 1 6, and gave rise to it; but the converse is more probable, and in some
1 See the note on iv. 16. irpds aurous c?irecrraXpc:vrjv...dX\d rijv
2 e.g. Storr Opusc. n. p. 124 sq. irap' avrmv IlaiiXco ex AaoSixeias ypa-
3 So for instance Corn, a Lapide, as rpeiaav.
an alternative, 'vel certe ad ipsos 5 ad loc. rls Si rjv ij ex AaoSixeias;
Colossenses, ut vult Theodor.'; but I 1) Tp0s TipbBeov irpiirrj- au'rrj ydp ex
do not find anything of the kind in AaoSixeias eypdcpij. rives Sc? qSaaiv Sri
Theodoret. This view also commends rjv ol AaoSixets HoiiXco iiriareiXav, dXX'
itself to Beza. oux olSa rl dv ixeivijs iSei avrois irpos
4 Op. n. p. 214 (ed. Lequien) rrjv peXrlmaiv.
irpbs TipbBeov irpdrrjv Xiyei. But he 6 ad loc. ' Propter earn quas est ad
adds rives cpairlv Sri oirxl ttjv HaiXov Timotheum dixit.'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 275
mss (a1™ 74) the bearing of this subscription on Col. iv. 16 is emphasized,
iSou Sr) xal rj ix AaoSixeias. This identification has not been altogether
without support in later times1. (/3) The First Epistle to tlie Thessaio- 1 Thessa-
nians. A final colophon in the Philoxenian Syriac asserts that it was lonians.
'written from Laodicea': and the same is stated in a later hand of d,
'scribens a Laodicea.' Again an Ethiopic ms, though giving Athens as
the place of writing, adds that it was ' sent with Timotheus, Tychicus, and
Onesimus2.' This identification was perhaps suggested by the fact that
1 Thessalonians foUows next after Colossians in the common order of St
Paul's Epistles, (y) The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. In the 2 Thessa-
Peshito (as given by Schaaf 3) there is a final colophon stating that this lonians.
epistle ' was written from Laodicea of Pisidia and was sent by the hand of
Tychicus3.' Though the addition of Pisidia wrongly defines the place as
Laodicea Combusta, instead of Laodicea ad Lycum, yet the mention of
the messenger's name shows plainly that the identification with the missing
epistle of Col. iv. 16 was contemplated. So too the Memphitic ' per Silva-
num et Tychicum', and a Latin prologue 'per Titum et Onesimum.'
Again, an Ethiopic MS points to the same identification, though strangely
confused in its statements. In the superscription we are told that this
epistle was written when the Apostle was at Laodicea, but in the sub
scription that it 'was written at Athens to Laodicea and sent by Tychicus';
whUe the prolegomena state that it was written and left at Laodicea, and
that afterwards, when St Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians from
Bome, he gave directions that it should be transmitted to the Thessalonians
by the Colossians4. (8) The Epistle to the Galatians^. This might have Galatians.
been chosen, partly because it affords no internal data for deciding where
it was written, partly because like the Colossian Epistle it is directed
against a form of Judaism, and the advocates of this hypothesis might not
be careful to distinguish the two types, though very distinct in themselves.
I find no support for it in the subscriptions, except the notice ' per Tychi
cum ' in some Slavonic mss.
The special difficulties attending this class of solutions are manifold. Objections
(1) It does not appear that St Paul had ever been at Laodicea when he to these
wrote the letter to the Colossians. (2) All the epistles thus singled out somtloris.
are separated from the Colossian letter by an interval of some years at
least. (3) In every case they can with a high degree of probabUity be
shown to have been written elsewhere than at Laodicea. Indeed, as
St Paul had been long a prisoner either at Csesarea or at Rome, when
he wrote to Colossae, he could not have despatched a letter recently from
Laodicea. 1 It is adopted by Erasmus in his 8 In the editio princeps (Vienna
paraphrase ; ' vicissim vos legatis e- 1 555) the latter part of this colophon,
pistolam qu® Timotheo scripta fuit ' and was sent by the hand of Tychi-
ex LaodicenBium urbe': but in his eus,' is wanting.
commentary he does not commit him- * Catal. Bibl. Bodl. Cod. ASthiop.
self to it. Por other names see Anger p. 23.
p. 17, notek. " Bloch, quoted in Anger p. 17,
2 Catal. Bibl. Bodl. Cod. AZthiop. note i
p. 23.
18—2

276

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

(i) A lost
letter.

3. A letter 3- Thus we are thrown back on some form of the solution which
to the Lao- makes it a letter written to the Laodiceans. And here we may at once
written b reJect the hypothesis that the writer was (a) St John1. The First Epistle
(a) St °f St John, which has been selected, was written (as is allowed on all hands)
John. much later than this date. Nor again does St Paul's language favour
(0) A com- the alternative, which others have maintained, that the letter in question
St'paul0 was wrltten Dv (P) one °f St Paul's companions, e.g. Epaphras or Luke'.
(c) StPa'ul. The writer must therefore have been (c) St Paul himself.
On this assumption three alternatives offer themselves.
(i) We may suppose that the epistle in question has been lost. It has
been pointed out elsewhere that the Apostle must have written many letters
which are not preserved in our Canon3. Thus there is no a priori ob
jection to this solution ; and, being easy and obvious in itself, it has found
oonimon support in recent times. If therefore we had no positive reasons
for identifying the Laodicean letter with one of the extant epistles of our
Canon, we might at once close with this account of the matter. But
such reasons do exist. And moreover, as we are obliged to suppose that
at least three letters! — the Epistles to the Colossians, to the Ephesians,
and to Philemon — were despatched by St Paul to Asia Minor at the
same time, it is best not to postulate a fourth, unless we are obliged to
do so.(ii) But, if it was not a lost letter, with which of the Canonical
Epistles of St Paul can we identify it with most probabiUty 1 Was it
(a) The Epistle to the Hebrews ? The supporters of this hypothesis are
able to produce ancient evidence of a certain kind, though not such as
carries any real weight. Philastrius, writing about the close of the fourth
century, says that some persons ascribed the authorship of the Epistle to
the Hebrews to Luke the Evangelist, and adds that it was asserted (appa
rently by these same persons, though this is not quite clear) to have been
written to the Laodiceans4. Again in the Graeco-Latin MS G of St Paul's
1 A conjecture of Lightfoot (Works Hebrasos interdum. Et

(ii) A Ca
nonicalepistle. (a) He
brews.Philastrius.

h. pp. 326, 339, London 1684), but he
does not lay much stress on it. He
offers it ' rather then conceive that any
epistle of Paul is lost.' See also
Anger p. 17, note m.
2 Baumgarten Comm. ad loc, quoted
by Anger p. 25, note g.
3 Philippians p. 136 sq.
4 Hcer. lxxxix ' Sunt alii quoque
qui epistolam PauU ad Hebrseos non
adserunt esse ipsius, sed dicunt aut
Barnabas esse apostoli aut Clementis
de urbe Soma episcopi ; alii autem
Lucie evangelists aiunt epistolam
etiam ad Laodicenses scriptam. Et
quia addiderunt in ea qusedam non
bene 6entientes, inde non legitur in
ecclesia; et si legitur a quibusdam,
non tamen in ecclesia legitur populo,
nisi tredecim epistolaa ipsius, et ad

in ea quia
rhetorice scripsit, sermone plausibUi,
inde non putant esse ejusdem apostoli;
et quia factum Christum dicit in ea
[Heb. iii. 2], inde non legitur.; de
poenitentia autem [Heb. vi 4, x. 26}
propter Novatianos seque. Cum ergo
factum dicit Christum, corpore, non
divinitate, dicit factum, cum doceat
ibidem quod divinse sit et paternal
substantisB fiUus, Qui est splendor
gloria, inquit, et imago substantia
ejus [Heb. i. 3] ' etc. Oehler punc
tuates the sentence with wliich we
are concerned thus : * alii autem Lucsb
evangeUstse. Aiunt epistolam etiam
ad Laodicenses scriptam,' and in his
note he adds 'videlicet Pauli esse
apostoli.' Thus he supposes the
clause to refer to the apocryphal
Epistle to the Laodiceans: and Fa-

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 277
Epistles, the Codex Boernerianus, probably written in the ninth century, Supposed
after the Epistle to PhUemon, which breaks off abruptly at ver. 20, a testimony
vacant space is left, as if for the conclusion of this epistle : and then follows of MS G*
a fresh title ad laudicenses incipit epistola
npoc A&OYoAKHCAC Ap^eTAI eTTICTOAH
This is evidently intended as the heading to another epistle. No other
epistle however succeeds, but the leaf containing this title is foUowed by
several leaves, which were originaUy left blank, but were filled at a later
date with extraneous matter. What then was this Epistle to the Laodi
ceans, which was intended to foUow, but which the scribe was prevented
from transcribing? As the Epistle to the Hebrews is not found in this
MS, and as in the common order of the Pauline Epistles it would follow
the Epistle to Philemon, the title has frequently been supposed to refer to
it. This opinion however does not appear at all probable. Anger1 in
deed argues in its favour on the ground that in the companion ms F, the
Codex Augiensis, which (so far as regards the Greek text) must have been
derived immediately from the same archetype2, the Epistle to the Hebrews
does really foUow. But what are the facts 1 It is plain that the Greek Eelatiou
texts of G and F came from the same original: but it is equally plain that oi G- to F-
the two scribes had different Latin texts before them — that of G being the
Old Latin, and that of F Jerome's revised Vulgate. No argument there
fore derived from the Latin text holds good for the Greek. But the
phenomena of both mss alike3 show that the Greek text of their common
archetype ended abruptly at Philem. 20 (probably owing to the loss of the
final leaves of the volume). The two scribes therefore were left severaUy
to the resources of their respective Latin mss. The scribe of F, whose
Greek and Latin texts are in paraUel columns, concluded the Epistle to
Philemon in Latin, though he could not match it with its proper Greek ;
and after this he added the Epistle to the Hebrews in Latin, no longer
however leaving a blank column, as he had done for the last few verses of
PhUemon. On the other hand the Latin text in G is interlinear, the Latin
bricius explains the notice similarly. 1 Laodicenerbrief p. 29 sq.
Such a reference however would be a If indeed the Greek text of P was
quite out of place here. The whole not copied immediately from G, as
paragraph before and after is taken maintained by Lr Hort in the Journal
up with discussing the Epistle to of Philology m. p. 67. The divergent
the Hebrews; and the interposition phenomena of the two Latin texts
of just six words, referring to a seem to me unfavourable to this hypo-
whoUy different matter, is inconceiv- thesis ; but it ought not to be hastily
able. We must therefore punctuate rejected.
either 'aui autem Lucae evangeUstSB 3 Volkmar, the editor of Credner's
aiunt epistolam, etiam ad Laodi- Geschichte des Neutestamentlichen Ka-
censes scriptam', or 'alii autem Luck non p. 299, with strange carelessness
evangeUstae aiunt ; epistolam etiam speaks of ' the appearance (das Vor-
ad Laodicenses scriptam.' In either kommen) of the Laodicean Epistle in
case it will mean that some persons both the Codices Augiensis and Boer-
supposed the Epistle to the Hebrews nerianus which in other respects are
to have been written to the Laodi- closely allied.' There is no mention
ceans. of it in the Codex Augiensis.

278

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The spu
rious Lao-
diceanEpistleintended.

This iden
tification
unsatis factory.

(/3) Phile
mon.

words being written above the Greek to interpret them. When therefore
the Greek text came to an end, the scribe's work was done, for he could no
longer interlineate. But he left a blank space for the remainder of Phile
mon, hoping doubtless hereafter to find a Greek ms from which he could
fill it in; and he Ukewisegave the title ofthe epistle which he found next
in his Latin copy, in Greet as weU as in Latin. The Greek title however
he had to supply for himself. This is clear from the form, which shows it
to have been translated from the Latin by a person who had the very
smaUest knowledge of Greek. No Greek in the most barbarous age would
have written A&oyA&khcac for AaoAik6AC or AaoAikhnoyc. The <\oy is
a Latin corruption au for ao, and the termination ac is a Latin's notion of
the Greek accusative. Thus the whole word is a reproduction of the Latin
' Laudicenses,' the en being represented as usual by the Greek rj \ If so,
we have only to ask what writing would probably appear as Epistola ad
Laudicenses in a Latin copy ; and to this question there can be only one
answer. The apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans occurs frequently in
the Latin Bibles, being found at least two or three centuries before the
ms G was written. Though it does not usually follow the Epistle to
Philemon, yet its place varies very considerably in different Latin copies,
and an instance will be given below2 where it actually occurs in this
position. Thus beyond the notice in Philastrius there is no ancient support for
the identification of the missing letter of Col. iv. 16 with the Epistle
to the Hebrews ; and doubtless the persons to whom Philastrius alludes
had no more authority for their opinion than their modern successors.
Critical conjecture, not historical tradition, led them to this result.
The theory therefore must stand or fall by its own merits. It has
been maintained by one or two modern writers3, chiefly on the ground of
some partial coincidences between the Epistles to the Hebrews and the
Colossians; but the general character and purport of the two is wholly
dissimUar, and they obviously deal with antagonists of a very different
type. The insuperable difficulty of supposing that two epistles so unlike
in style were written by the same person to the same neighbourhood at
or about the same time would still remain, even though the Pauline
authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews should be for a moment granted.
(/3) The Epistle to Philemon has been strongly advocated by Wieseler4,

1 It is curious that this ms, which
was written by an Irish scribe, should
give the same corrupt form, Laudac-
for Laodac-, which we find in the
Book of Armagh ; see below, p. 282.
a See p. 286. It occurs also in this
position in the list of Aelfric (see below
p. 362), where the order of the Pauline
Epistles is ... Col., Hebr., 1, 2 Tim.,
Tit., Philem., Laod.
3 See especiaUy Schneokenburger
Beitr'dge p. 153 sq.
1 Some earUer writers who main

tained this view are mentioned by
Anger, p. 25, note f. It has since been
more fully developed and more vigor
ously urged by Wieseler, first in a
programme Commentat. de Epist. Lao-
dicena quam vulgo perditam putant
1844, and afterwards in his weU-known
work Chronol. des Apostol. Zeit. p.
405 sq. It may therefore be iden-'
titled with his name. He speaks of it
with much confidence as ' scarcely
open to a doubt,' but he has not
succeeded in convincing others.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 279
as the letter to which St Paul refers in this passage. For this identification
it is necessary to establish two points ; (1) that Philemon lived not at
Colossae, but at Laodicea; and (2) that the letter is addressed not to a
private individual, but to a whole church. For the first point there is
something to be said. Though for reasons explained elsewhere the abode
of Philemon himself appears to have been at Colosses, wherever Archippus
may have resided1, still two opinions may very fairly be held on this point.
But WieseWs arguments entirely fail to estahlish his other position. The This epis-
theme, the treatment, the whole tenour of the letter, mark it as private : and tie does
the mere fact that the Apostle's courtesy leads him to include in the open- ^g^.jf1
ing salutation the Christians who met at Philemon's house is powerless to tjons.
change its character. Why should a letter, containing such intimate
confidences, be read pubUcly in the Church, not only at Laodicea but at
Colossae, by the express order of the Apostle ? The tact and delicacy
of the Apostle's pleading for Onesimus would be nullified at one stroke
by the demand for publication.
(y) But may we not identify the letter in question with the Epistle to the (y) Ephe-
Ephesians, which also is known to have been despatched at the same time slaas-
with the Epistle to the Colossians ? UnUke the Epistle to Philemon, it
was addressed not to a private person but to a church or churches. If
therefore it can be shown that the Laodiceans were the recipients, either
alone or with others, we have found the object of our search. The argu- This is the
ments in favour of this solution are reserved for the introduction to that true solu-
epistle. MeanwhUe it is sufficient to say that educated opinion is tending,
though slowly, in this direction, and to express the belief that ulti
mately this view wUl be generaUy received2.
(iii) Another whoUy different identification remains to be mentioned, (iu) The
It was neither a lost epistle nor a Canonical epistle, thought some, but e^ant un-
the writing which is extant under the title of the ' Epistie to the Laodi- jjpjatie t0
ceans,' though not generaUy received by the Church. Of the various the Laodi-
opinions held respecting this apocryphal letter I shall have to speak ceans.
presently. It is sufficient here to say that the advocates of its genuineness
faU into two classss. Either they assign to it a place in the Canon with
the other Epistles of St Paul, or they acquiesce in its exclusion, holding
that the Church has authority to pronounce for or against the canonicity
even of Apostolic writings.
The apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans is a cento of PauUne General
phrases strung together without any definite connexion or any clear object, character
They are taken chiefly from the Epistle to the Philippians, but here and gpnricnia
there one is borrowed elsewhere, e.g. from the Epistle to the Galatians. epistle.
Of course it closes with an injunction to the Laodiceans to exchange
epistles with the Colossians. The Apostle's injunction in Col. iv. 16
suggested the forgery, and such currency as it ever attained was due to
the support which that passage was supposed to give to it. Unlike most
forgeries, it had no ulterior aim. It was not framed to~ advance any
1 See the introduction to the Epistle to PhUemon.
2 See above p. 37.

280 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
particular opinions, whether heterodox or orthodox. It has no doctrinal
peculiarities. Thus it is quite harmless, so far as falsity and stupidity
combined can ever be regarded as harmless.
Among the more important mss which contain this epistle are the
following. The letters in brackets [ ] give the designations adopted in the
apparatus of various readings which follows.
i. Fuldensis [Fj. The famous ms of the Vulgate N. T. written for
Victor Bishop of Capua, by whom it was read and corrected in the years
546, 547 ; edited by Ern. Kanke, Marburgi et Lipsiae 1868. The Laodicean
Epistle occurs between Col. and 1 Tim. without any indication of doubtful
authenticity, except that it has no argument or table of contents, like the
other epistles. The scribe however has erroneously interpolated part of
the argument belonging to 1 Tim. between the title and the epistle ; see
p. 291 sq. of Ranke's edition.
2. Cavensis [K]. A MS of the whole Latin Bible, at the Monastery
of La Cava near Salerno, ascribed to the 6th or 7th or 8th century. See
Vercellone Var. Lect. Vulg. Lat. Bibl. 1. p. lxxxviii, and also Mai Nov.
Patr. Biblioth. 1. 2, p. 62. The readings in the Laodicean Epistle are
here given from a collation which the Bev. J. Wordsworth, now Bishop
of Salisbury, kindly made for me. They are not suppUed by Vercel
lone. Laod. occurs in this ms between Col. and 1 Thess. (Mai p. 62).
Dr Westcott (Smith's Diet, ofthe Bible s. v. Vulgate, p. 17 13) has remarked
that the two oldest authorities for the interpolation of the three heavenly
witnesses in 1 Joh. v. 7, this La Cava MS and the Speculum pubUshed by
Mai, also support the Laodicean Epistle (see Mai 1. c. pp. 7, 62 sq.). The
two phenomena are combined in another very ancient ms, Brit. Mus. Add.
11,852, described below.
3. Armachanus [A], A MS of the N. T., now belonging to Trinity
College, Dublin, and known as the * Book of Armagh.' It was written in the
year 807, as ascertained by Bp. Graves; see the Proceedings of the Royal
Irish Academy in. pp. 316, 356. The Laodicean Epistle follows Colossians
on foi. 138, but with the warning that Jerome denies its genuineness. The
text of the Laodicean Epistle in this ms is not so pure as might have been
anticipated from its antiquity. I owe the collation of readings which is
given below to the kindness of Dr Reeves, who is engaged in editing the ms.
4. Darmstadiensis [D]. A foi. ms of the whole Bible, defective from
Apoc. xxii. 12 to the end, now in the Grand-ducal Ubrary at Darmstadt,
but formerly belonging to the Cathedral Library at Cologne ; presented
by Hermann Pius, Archbishop of Cologne from a.d. 890 — 925. Laod. fol
lows Col. A collation was made for Anger, from whom (p. 144) this account
is taken. 5. Bernensis no. 334 [B]. A 4to MS of miscellaneous contents, end
ing with the PauUne Epistles, the last being the Epistle to the Laodiceans;
written in the 9th cent. The Laodicean Epistle is a fragment, ending with
' Gaudete in Christo et praecavete sordibus in lucro' (ver. 13). This account
is taken by Anger from Sinner Catal. Cod. MSS. Bibl. Bern. t. p. 28. In
his Addenda (p. 179) Anger gives a collation of this ms.
6. Toletanus [T]. A ms of the Latin Bible belonging to the Cathedral
Library at Toledo, and written about the 8th century : see Westcott in Smith's

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 28 1
Diet, ofthe Bible, s. v. Vulgate p. 1710, Vercellone Var. Lect. 1. p. Ixxxiv.
sq. The readings in the Laodicean Epistle are taken from the copy of
Palomares given in Bianchini Vind. Canon. Script. Vulg. Lat. Edit. p.
cxcv (Romae, 1740). In my first edition I had followed Joh. Mariana
Schol. in Vet. et Nov. Test. p. 831 (Paris, 1620), where also this epistle is
printed in fuU from the Toledo ms. The two differ widely, and the copy
of Mariana is obviously very inaccurate. Anger (see p. 144) does not
mention Bianchini's copy. In this ms Laod. follows Col.
7. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 3 (formerly 3562)1 [PJ. A Latin Bible, in
one volume foi, called after Anowaretha by whom it was given to the
monastery of Glanfeuille (St Maur), and ascribed in the printed Catalogue
to the 9th cent. Laod. follows Col. on foi 379.
8. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 6 [P2]. A ms of the Latin Bible in 4 vols.
foi, according to the Catalogue probably written in the 10th cent. [?]. It
belonged formerly to the Due de NoaiUes. Laod. follows Col. It contains
numerous corrections in a later hand either between the Unes or in the
margin. The two hands are distinguished as P2*, P2**.
9. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 250 (formerly 3572) [P3]. A foi. ms of the
N. T., described in the Catalogue as probably belonging to the end of the 9th
cent. Laod. foUows Col. It has a few corrections in a later hand. The
two hands are distinguished as Ps*, P3**.
These three Parisian mss I coUated myself, but I had not time to ex
amine them as carefully as I could have wished.
10. Brit. Mus. Add. 11,852 [G]. An important MS of St Paul's
Epistles written in the 9th cent. It formerly belonged to the monastery of
St Gall, being one of the books with which the Ubrary there was enriched by
Hartmot who was Abbot from a.d. 872 to 884 or 885. Laod. follows Heb.
and has no capitula Uke the other epistles.
1 1. Brit. Mus. Add. 10,546 [C]. A foi MS of the Vulgate, commonly
known as 'Charlemagne's Bible,' but probably belonging to the age of
Charles the Bald (f 877). Laod. stands between Heb. and Apoc. It has
no argument or capitula.
12. Brit. Mus. Reg. 1. E. vii, vni [RJ. An English ms of the Latin
Bible from Christ Church, Canterbury, written about the middle of the
10th cent. Laod. foUows Heb. This is the most ancient ms, so far as I am
aware, in which the epistle has capitulations. It is here given in its fullest
form, and thus presents the earliest example of what may be called the
modern recension.
13. Brit. Mus. Harl. 2833, 2834 [HJ. A MS of the 13th cent, written
for the Cathedral of Angers. Laod. follows Apoc.
The readings of the four preceding mss are taken from the collations
in Westcott Canon Appx. E p. 572 sq. (ed. 4).
14. Brit. Mus. Harl. 31 31 [HJ. A smallish 4to of the 12th cent.,
said to be of German origin, with marginal and interlinear glosses in some
parts. Laod. stands between Philem. and Heb. It has no heading but
only a red initial letter P. At the end is 'Expl. Epla ad Laodicenses.
Prologus ad Ebreos.'
1 So at least I find the number given in my notes. But in Bentl. Grit. Sacr.
p. xxxvii it is 3561.

282 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
15. Brit. Mus. Sloane 539 [S]. A small fol. of the 12th cent., said to be
German. It contains St Paul's Epistles with glosses. The gloss on
Col. iv. 16 ' et ea quae est Laodicensium etc' runs ' quam ego eis misi ut ipsi
michi ut videatis hie esse responsum.' Laod. follows Heb., and has no
glosses. The two last mss I collated myself.
16. Bodl. Laud. Lat. 13 (formerly 810) [LJ. A 4to ms in double
columns of the 13th cent, containing the Latin Bible. See Catal. Bibl. Laud.
Cod. Lat. p. 10. Laod. follows Col. Notwithstanding the date of the ms,
it gives a very ancient text of this epistle.
17. Bodl. Laud. Lat. 8 (formerly 757) [LJ. A fol. ms of the Latin
Bible, belonging to the end of the 12th cent. See Catal. Bibl. Laud. Cod.
Lat. p. 9. This is the same MS, which Anger describes (p. 145) as 115 C
(its original mark), and of which he gives a coUation. Laod. stands between
2 Thess. and 1 Tim.
I am indebted for collations of these two Laudian mss to the kindness
of the Rev. J. Wordsworth, Fellow of Brasenose College.
18. Vindob. 287 [V]. The Pauline Epp., written by Marianus Scotus
(i e. the Irishman), a.d. 1079. See Alter Nov. Test, ad God. Vindob. Graece
Expressum 11. p. 1040 sq., Denis Cod. MSS Lat. Bibl. Vindob. 1. no. lvui,
Zeuss Grammatica Celtica p. xviii (ed. 2). The Epistle to the Laodiceans
is transcribed from this MS by Alter 1. c. p. 1067 sq. It follows Col.
19. Trin. Coll. Cantabr. B. 5. 1 [X]. A fol. ms of the Latin Bible,
written probably in the 12th century. Laod. follows Col. I have given a
collation of this ms, because (like Brit. Mus. Reg. 1. E. viii) it is an early
example of the completed form. The epistle is preceded by capitula, as
foUows. Incipiunt Capitula Epistole ad Laodicenses.
1. Paulus apostolus pro Laodicensibus domino gratias refert et horta-
tur eos ne a seductoribus decipiantur.
2. De manifestis vinculis apostoli in quibus letatur et gaudet.
3. Monet Laodicenses apostolus ut sicut sui audierunt praesentia ita
retineant et sine retractu faciant.
4. Hortatur apostolus Laodicenses ut fide sint firmi et quae integra et
vera et deo placita sunt faciant. et salutatio fratrum. Explioitjnt Capitu
la. Incipit Epistola beati Pauli Apostoli ad Laodicenses.
These capitulations may be compared with those given by Dr Westcott
from Reg. 1. E. viU, with which they are nearly identical.
Besides these nineteen mss, of which (with the exception of Cavensis)
collations are given below, it may be worth whUe recording the following,
as containing this epistle.
Among the Lambeth mss are (i) no. 4, large fblio, 12th or 13th cent.
Laod. stands between Col. and 1 Thess. (ii) no. 90, smaU folio, 13th or
14th cent. Laod. stands between Col. and 1 Thess. without title or heading
of any kind. Apparently a good text, (iii) no. 348, 4to, 15th cent. Laod.
stands between Col. and 1 Thess., without heading etc. (iv) no. 544, 8vo,
1 5th cent. Laod. stands between Col. and 1 Thess., without heading etc.
(v) no. 1 152, 4to, 13th or 14th cent Laod. occupies the same position as
in the four preceding mss and has no heading or title. The first and last

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 283
of these five mss are collated by Dr Westcott (Canon p. 572 sq.). I in
spected them aii
In the Bodleian Library at Oxford, belonging to the Canonici collection,
are (i) Canon. Bibl. 82 (see Catal. p. 277), very smaU 4to, 13th cent., con
taining parts of the N. T. St Paul's Epp. are at the end of the volume,
following Apoc. Laod. intervenes between Tit. and Philem., beginning
' Explicit epistola ad titum. Incipit ad laud.', and ending ' Explicit epistola
ad laudicenses. Incipit ad phylemonem '. (ii) Canon. Bibl. 7 (see Catal.
p. 251), small 4to, beginning of 14th cent, containing Evv., Acts, Cath.
Epp., Apoc, Paul. Epp. Laod. is at the end. (iii) Canon. Bibl. 16 (Catal.
p. 256), small 4to, containing the N. T., 15th cent, written by the hand
• Stephani de Tautaldis'. Laod. follows Col. (iv) Canon. Bibl. 25 (Catal.
p. 258), very smaU 4to, mutilated, early part of the 15th cent. It contains
a part of St Paul's Epp. (beginning in the middle of Gal.) and the Apoca
lypse. Laod. foUows Col. For information respecting these mss I am
indebted to the Rev. J. Wordsworth.
In the University Library, Cambridge, I have observed the Epistle to the
Laodiceans in the following mss. (i) Dd. 5. 52 (see Catal. 1. p. 273), 4to,
double columns, 14th cent. Laod. is between Col. and 1 Thess. (ii) Ee.
1. 9 (see Catal. n. p. 10), 4to, double columns, very smaU neat hand, 15th
cent. It belonged to St Alban's. Laod. is between Col. and 1 Thess.
(iii) Mm. 3. 2 (see Catal. iv. p. 174), foi, Latin Bible, double columns, 13th
cent. Laod. is between Col. and 1 Thess., but the heading is ' Explicit
epistola ad Colocenses, et hie incipit ad Thesalocenses', after which Laod.
foUows immediately. At the top of the page is 'Ad Laudonenses '.
(iv) Ee. 1. 16 (see Catal. 11. p. 16), 4to, double columns, Latin Bible, 13th
or 14th cent. The order of the N. T. is Evv., Acts, Cath. Epp., Paul. Epp.,
Apoc Here Laod. is between Heb. and Rev. ; it is treated Uke the other
books, except that it has no prologue.
In the CoUege Libraries at Cambridge I have accidentally noticed the
foUowing mss as containing the epistle; for I have not undertaken any
systematic search, (i) St Peter's, O. 4. 6, foi, 2 columns, 13th cent, Latin
Bible. The order of the N. T. is Ew., Acts, Cath. Epp., Paul Epp., Apoc.
The Epistle to the Laodiceans is between Heb. and Apoc. (ii) Sidney A.
5. 11, foi, 2 columns, Latin Bible, 13th cent. The order of the N.T. is
Ew., Paui Epp., Acts, Cath. Epp., Apoc. ; and Laod. is between 2 Thess.
and 1 Tim. (iii) Emman. 2. 1. 6, large foi, Latin Bible, early 14th cent. The
order of the N. T. is different from the last, being Evv., Acts, Cath. Epp.,
Paul. Epp., Apoc. ; but Laod. is in the same position, between 2 Thess. and
1 Tim. Notice of a few other mss, in which this epistle occurs, will be found
in Hody de Bibl. Text. Orig. p. 664, and in Anger p. 145 sq.
This list, sUght and partial as it is, will serve to show the wide circula
tion of the Laodicean Epistle. At the same time it wiU have been ob
served that its position varies very considerably in different copies.
(i) The most common position is immediately after Colossians, as the
notice in Col. iv. 16 would suggest. This is its place in the most ancient
authorities, e. g. the Fulda, La Cava, and Toledo mss, and the Book of
Armagh.

284 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
(ii) Another position is after 2 Thess. So Laud. Lat. 8, Sidn. A. 5. 1 1,
Emman. 2. 1. 6 : see also mss in Hody Bibl. Text. Orig. p. 664. It must
be remembered that in the Latin Bibles the Epistles to the Thessalonians
sometimes precede and sometimes follow the Epistle to the Colossians.
Hence we get three arrangements in different mss; (1)1, 2 Thess., Col.
Laod.; (2) Col, Laod., 1, 2 Thess.; (3) Col, 1, 2 Thess., Laod.
(iii) It occurs at least in one instance between Titus and Philemon ;
Oxon. Bodl. Canon. 82. Mai also (Nov. Pair. Bibl. 1. 2. p. 63) men
tions a ' very ancient MS ', in which it stands between Titus and 1 John ;
but he does not say how Titus and 1 John appear in such close neighbour
hood. (iv) Again it follows Philemon in Brit. Mus. Harl. 313 1. This also
must have been its position in the Latin ms which the scribe of the Codex
Boernerianus had before him : see above p. 280.
(v) Another and somewhat common position is after Hebrews; e.g.
Brit. Mus. Add. 11,852, Add. 10,546, Reg. 1. E. viii, Sloane 539, Camb.
Univ. Ee. 1. 16, Pet. 0. 4. 6. See also Hody 1. c
(vi) It is frequently placed at the end of the New Testament, and so
after the Apocalypse when the Apocalypse comes last, e. g. HarL 2833.
Sometimes the Pauline Epistles follow the Apocalypse, so that Laod. occurs
at the end at once of the PauUne Epistles and of the N. T. ; e. g. Bodl.
Canon. Lat. 7.
Other exceptional positions, e. g. after Galatians or after 3 John, are
found in versions and printed texts (see Anger p. 143) ; but no authority
of Latin mss is quoted for them.
The Codex Fuldensis, besides being the oldest ms, is also by far the
most trustworthy. Iu some instances indeed a true reading may be pre
served in later mss, where it has a false one; but such cases are rare.
The text however was already corrupt in several places at this time;
and the variations in the later mss are most frequently attempts of the
scribes to render it intelligible by alteration or amplification. Such
for instance is the case with the mutilated reading 'quod est' (ver. 13),
which is ampUfied, even as early as the Book of Armagh, into 'quod-
cunque optimum est ', though there can be Uttle doubt that the expression
represents ro Xourov of Phil. iii. 2, and the missing word therefore is ' reli-
quum'. The greatest contrast to F is presented by such mss as RX, where
the epistle has not only been filled out to the amplest proportions, but also
supplied with a complete set of capitulations Uke the Canonical books.
Though for this reason these two mss have no great value, yet they are
interesting as being among the oldest which give the ampUfied text, and I
have therefore added a collation of them. On the other hand some much
later mss, especiaUy L1( preserve a very ancient text, which closely resem
bles that of F.1
1 The epistle bas been critically In the apparatus of various readings,
edited by Anger Laodicenerbrief p. 155 which is subjoined to the epistle, I
sq. and Westcott Canon App. E. p. 572. have not attempted to give such mi-
I have already expressed my obligations nute differences of spelling as e and ae
to both these writers for their colla- or c and t (Laodicia, Laoditia), nor is
tions of mss. the punctuation of the mss noted.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 285
AD LAODICENSES.
Paulus Apostolus non ab hominibus neque per hominem sed per Textofthe
Ihesum Christum, fratribus qui sunt Laodiciae. ' Gratia vobis et pax ePlstle.
a Deo patre et Domino Ihesu Christo.
"Gratias ago Christo per omnem orationem meam, quod perma-
nentes estis in eo et perseverantes in operibus eius, promissum ex-
pectantes in diem iudicii. * Neque destituant vos quorundam vanilo-
quia insinuantium, ut vos avertant a veritate evangelii quod a me
praedicatur. 5 Et nunc faciet Deus ut qui sunt ex me ad profectum
veritatis evangelii deservientes et facientes benignitatem operum quae
salutis vitae aeternae.
6 Et nunc palarn sunt vincula mea quae patior in Christo ; quibus
Inc. ad laodicenses F ; Incipit epistola (aepistola K) ad laodicenses (laudicen
ses KPjB) KBDTPjP^CEHjSV; Epistola ad laodicenses M (if this heading be
not due to the editor) ; Inoipit epistola pauU ad laodicenses GIIj ; Inoipit epistola
beati pauli ad laodicenses X; Incipit aepistola ad laudicenses sed hirunimus
earn negat esse pauli A : no heading in LjLotlj.
apostolus] om. KTM. hominibus] homine G. ihesum christum] christum
ihesum T. christum] add. ' et deum patrem omnipotentem qui suscitavit eum
a mortuis' BX. fratribus qui sunt] his qui sunt fratribus A. For fratribus
B has fratres, laodiciae] laudociae T; ladoicie L; laudaciae A; laudiciae KB;
laodicea e B.
a. patre] et patre nostro Ljj patre nostro HjHjSM; nostro A. domino]
add. nostro PgPjBGLj.
3. christo] deo meo DP^jPjCIi!; deo meo et christo ihesu EX. oratio
nem omnem] homnem horationem K. meam] memoriam M. permanentes
estis] estis permanentea AGB. in operibus eius] in operibus bonis HjHaS ;
om. KBDTPjPjPgCM. promissum expectantes] promissum spectantes T ; et
promissum expectantes M; promissionem expectantes V; sperantes promissio-
nem AG; sperantes promissum EX. diem] die BTDPjPgGCEH^SL^MX;
diae K. iudicu] iudicationis GBX.
4. neque] add. enim B. destituant] distituant A ; destituunt Hj ;
destituatM, Spec; destituit KDTP^jCM ; distituitB; destituiP2. vanilo-
quia] vamloquentia KBDTPjPjPjGOVM ; vaneloquentia. Spec. insinuantium]
insinuantium se GM; insanientium H^. ut] hut K; sed ut BAT; sed peto
ne B; seductorem ne X. avertant] Spec; evertant FKTML2; evertent B.
evangelii] aevanguelii A (and so below). a] ha K.
5. et nunc... veritatis evangelii] om. L. faciet deus] deus faciet AG.
nt] hut K; add. sint G. qui] que (altered from qui) P„* (or P3**). me]
add. perveniant KTM; add. proficiant V. ad profectum] imperfeotum A; ad
perfectum B ; in profectum G. veritatis evangelu] evangelu veritatis V. de
servientes] add. sint P2**P3**H1H2S. For deservientes BX have dei servientes.
et facientes] repeated in Lx. operum] hoperum K; eorum BX; operam T;
opera L2. quae] om. M; add. sunt AP2**GCEH1H2SVX. It is impossible to
say in many cases whether a scribe intended operum quae or operumque, Ranke
prints operumque in F. salutis] add. Lx. vitae] om. K.
6. nunc] no = nonLa. palam sunt] sunt palam G; sunt (om. palam) A.

286 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Textofthe laetor et gaudeo. 'Et hoc mihi est ad salutem perpetuam; quod
epistle. ipSum factum orationibus vestris et administrante Spiritu sancto,
sive per vitam sive per mortem. " Est enim mihi vivere in Christo
et mori gaudium. ' Et id ipsum in vobis faciet misericordia sua, ut
eandem dilectionem habeatis et sitis unianimes.
10 Ergo, dilectissimi, ut audistis praesentia mei, ita retinete et facite
in timore Dei, et erit vobis vita in aeternum : " Est enim Deus qui
operatur in vos. " Et facite sine retractu quaecumque facitis.
18 Et quod est [reliquum], dilectissimi, gaudete in Christo ; et prae-
cavete sordidos in lucro. " Omnes sint petitiones vestrae palam apud
Deum ; et estote firmi in sensu Christi " Et quae integra et vera et
Christo] add. Ihesu (iesu) DPjPjPjCVX. quibus] in quibus KTBMPS.
et] ut C.
7. mihi] michi H^S (and so below); enim (for mihi) M. factum] fletum
KTL2M; factum est P8**H1S. orationibus] operationibus B. vestris] meis
DPX. et] est KTM : om. GiSXi^X. administrante spiritu sancto] adminis-
trantem (or ad minis trantem) spiritum sanctum FBTL2; amministrante
epiritum sanctum DCPjPj* (but there is an erasure in Pj). For administrante
LjX have amministrante ; and for spiritu sancto G transposes and reads sancto
spiritu. per mortem] mortem (om. per) Hj .
8. mihi] om. M. vivere] vivere vita DTLypgPgC VHaH2S ; vere vita
FKLjBMX ; vera vita B ; vere (altered into vivere prima majrai) vita L2 . gaudium]
lucrum et gaudium A ; gaudium ut lucrum HjP2** ; gaudium vel lucrum HjS.
9. et] qui V. id ipsum] in ipsum FBL2; in idipsum LjV; ipsum TP2GM;
ipse AHjH2SBX. in vobis] vobis P2; in nobis H2. misericordia sua]
misericordiam suam FBDAP1P2P3CHIHi!BS'v'L1L2X (but written misericordia
sua iji several cases). ut] hut K. et] om. Ljj ut V. unianimes] unaai-
mes BDTP1P.,P3GCH1BL1L2VMSX; hunanimes K.
10. ergo] egoH2. ut] hutK; et L2. praesentia mei] praesentiam ei
DP ; praesentiam mei KT ; praesentiam G** ; in praesentia mei Pa** ; praesen
tiam mihi M; presenciam eius L2; praesentiam dei A; prassentiam domini (dni)
P^'HjHjS. ita] om. KDP1P2**Pa0X. retinete] retinere A. in] cum
TM ; om. B. timore] timorem AB. dei] domini HXS. vita] pax et vita
BX. in aeternum] in aeterno A; in aeterna G*; aeterna (eterna) G**PLj.
11. enim] om. B. operatur] hoperatur K. vos] vobis KGATH^ELjSB
VP2** (or P2*) P„**MX
12. retractu] retractatu BPjjBL2; retractatione AGV ; tractuT; reatu HXS.
Iji P2** ut peccato is added; in H2 t peccato. quaecumque] quodcumque TM.
13. quod est reliquum] quod est FKBTDP1P2*PS*BCL1L2MX; quod est
optimum GH1H2Sv'; quodounque optimum est A; quodcunque est obtimum
P2**; quod bonum eBt Ps**: see p. 290. dUectissimi] duectissime B. christo]
domino DPjP2P3CX. sordidos] add. omnes P2**H1H2S; add. homines A.
in] ut Llt lucro] lucrum BX.
14. omnes] in omnibus G; homines (attached to the preceding sentence)
KTM. petitiones] petiones T. sint] omitted here and placed after palam
HjS. apud] aput F; ante AG. deum] dominum A. estote] stote T.
firmi in sensu christi] sensu firmi in christo ihesu B.
15. quae] add. sunt E. integra] intigra A. vera] add. sunt DPjPjPj

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 287
pudica et iusta et amabilia, facite. '* Et quae audistis et accepistis in Text of the
corde retinete ; et erit vobis pax. epistle.
18 Salutant vos sancti.
19 Gratia Domini Lhesu cum spiritu vestro.
J0 Et facite legi Colosensibus et Colosensium vobis.
OVX. pudica et iusta] iusta et pudica B. iusta] iusta et casta AGV;
casta et iusta P.,**H1H2S. amabilia] add. sunt KTHjHjSM; add. et sancta
EX.
16. et] om. K. audistis] add. et vidistis L2. accepistis] accipistis A.
pax] add. ver. 17, salutate omnes fratres (sanctos for fratres GV) in osoulo
sancto AGP2**H1H2SEVX.
18. sancti] omnes sancti AGBHjSVX; sancti omnes H2; add. in christo
ihesu BX
19. domini ihesu] domini nostri ihesu (iesu) christi KDTAPjPjPjGCH^HjS
VMBX. 20. et] add. hanc H^SP/*. legi] add. epistolam LjPs**. colosen-
eibus et] om. FKTDPiP/PjCVLjLj. colosensium] add. epistolam L2. The
words colosensibus, colosensium, are commonly written with a single s, more
especially in the oldest MSS. In Lx the form is oholosensium, in K colosseusium.
The last sentence et facite etc is entirely omitted in M. In BX it is ex
panded into et facite legi colosensibus hanc epistolam et colosensium (colosen
sibus B) vos legite. deus autem et pater domini nostri ihesu christi custodiat
vos immaculatos in christo ihesu cui est honor et gloria in secula seculorum.
amen. Subscriptions. Explicit PjPjHj; Exp. ad laodicenses F; Explicit epistola
ad laodicenses (laudicenses B) DPjGCHzSEVX ; Finis T. There is no subscrip
tion in ALjLj, and none is given for M.
The foUowing notes are added for the sake of elucidating one or two Notes on
points of difficulty in the text or interpretation of the epistle. the epis-
4 Neque] This is the passage quoted in the Speculum § 50 pubUshed by
Mai Nov. Patr. Bibl. 1. 2. p. 62 sq., ' Item ad Laodicenses : Neque destituat
vos quorundam vaneloquentia (sic) insinuantium, ut vos avertant a veritate
evangelU quod a me praedicatur'. We ought possibly to adopt the reading
' destituat... vanUoquentia ' of this and other old mss in preference to the
' destituant. . . vanUoquia ' of F. ' Vaniloquium ' however is the rendering of
paraidXoyia I Tim. i 6, and is supported by such analogies as inaniloquium,
malUoq uium, multiloquium, stultiloquium, etc. ; see Hagen Sprachl. Erorter.
zur Vulgata p. 74, Roensch Das Neue Testament TertuUians p. 710.
destituant] Properly 'leave in the lurch' and so 'cheat', 'beguile', e.g.
Cic pro Rose. Am. 40 ' induxit, decepit, destituit, adversariis tradidit, omni
fraude et perfidia fefeUit' In Heb. ix. 26 els ddirrjaiv ttjs dpaprlas is trans
lated 'ad destitutionem peccati'. The original here may have been igava-
¦njamaiv or ac7crr|irci>crii'. insinuantium] In late Latin this word means
little more than 'to communicate', 'to inculcate', 'to teach': see the refer
ences in Roensch Itala u. Vulgata p. 387, Heumann-Hesse Handlexicon
des romischen Rechts s. v., Ducange Glossarium s. v. So too 'insinuator'
Tertull. ad Nat. ii. 1, 'insinuatrix ' August Ep. no (il p. 317). In Acts
xvu. 3 it is the rendering of irapandipevos.

288 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Notes on 5 ut qui sunt etc.] The passage, as it stands, is obviously corrupt ; and
the epis- a comparison with Phil. i. 12 rd xar ipe pdXXov els irpoxoirrjv tov evay
yeXiov iXrjXvoev seems to reveal the nature of the corruption. (1) For
'qui' we should probably read 'quae', which indeed is found in some
late mss of no authority. (2) There is a lacuna somewhere in the sen
tence, probably after ' evangelii'. The original therefore would run in this
form 'ut quae sunt ex me ad profectum veritatis [eveniant]... deservientes
etc.', the participles belonging to a separate sentence of which the beginning
is lost. The supplements 'perveniant', 'proficiant', found in some mss give
the right sense, though perhaps they are conjectural. The Vulgate of Phil.
i 12 is 'quae circa me sunt magis ad profectum venerunt evangelii'. In the
latter part of the verse it is impossible in many cases to say whether a
ms intends 'operum quae' or 'operumque'; but the former is probably
correct, as representing epymv rmv ttjs amnjpias: unless indeed this sen
tence also is corrupt or mutilated.
7 administrante etc.] Considering the diversity of readings here, we
may perhaps venture on the emendation ' administratione spiritus sancti ',
as this more closely resembles the passage on which our text is founded,
Phil. i. 19 Sid -rrjs vpmv Serjaems xal iirixoprjyias tov irvevparos X.T.X.
12 retractu] 'wavering', 'hesitation'. For this sense of 'retractare',
'to rehandle, discuss', and so 'to question, hesitate', and even 'to shirk',
' decUne', see Oehler Tertullian, index p. cxciii, Roensch N T. Tertullians
p. 669, Ducange Glossarium s. v.: comp. e.g. Iren. v. n. 1 'ne relinqueretur
quaestio his qui infideliter retractant de eo '. So ' retractator' is equivalent
to ' detractator ' in Tert de Jejun. 15 ' retractatores hujus officii' (see
Oehler's note) ; and in 1 Sam. xiv. 39 ' absque retractatione morietur ' is the
rendering of ' dying he shall die', Bavdrm dirodaveirat. Here the expression
probably represents xopls.-.SiaXoyiapmv of Phil. ii. 14, which in the Old Latin
is ' sine. . .detractionibus'. All three forms occur, retractus (Tert. Scorp. i),
retractatus (Tert. Apol. 4, adv. Marc, i 1, v. 3, adv. Prax. 2, and frequently),
retractatio (Cic. Tusc. v. 29, 'sine retractatione' and so frequently; 1 Sam.
1. c). Here ' retractus' must be preferred, both as being the least common
form and as having the highest Ms authority. In Tert. Scorp. 1 however
it is not used in this same sense.
13 quod est reliquum] I have already spoken of this passage, p. 286, and
shall have to speak of it again, p. 291. The oldest and most trustworthy
mss have simply ' quod est'. The word ' reliquum ' must be supplied, as
Anger truly discerned (p. 163) ; for the passage is taken from Phil. iii. 1 ro
Xoiirov, dSeXcpol pov, xaipere iv Kvpim. See the Vulgate translation of ro
XourdV in 1 Cor. vii. 29. Later and less trustworthy authorities supply
'optimum' or 'bomim'.
14 in sensu Christi] 'in the mind of Christ' : for in 1 Cor. ii 16 voiv
Xpiarov is rendered ' sensum Christi'.
20 facite legi etc.] Though the words 'Colosensibus et' are wanting in
very many of the authorities which are elsewhere most trustworthy, yet 1
have felt justified in retaining them with other respectable copies, because
(1) The homoeoteleuton would account for their omission even in very an
cient mss; (2) The parallelism with Col. iv. 16 requires their insertion;
(3) The insertion is not Uke the device of a Latin scribe, who would hardly

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 289
have manipulated the sentence into a form which savours so strongly of a
Greek original.
It is the general, though not universal, opinion that this epistle was Theory of
altogether a forgery of the Western Church1; and consequently that the a Greek
Latin is not a translation from a lost Greek original, but preserves the °?1Slnal
earUest form of the epistle. Though the forgery doubtless attained its sousse
widest circulation in the West, there are, I venture to think, strong reasons
for dissenting from this opinion.
If we read the epistle in its most authentic form, divested of the addi- Frequent
tions contributed by the later mss, we are struck with its cramped style. Grecisms
Altogether it has not the run of a Latin original. And, when we come to ln.tb,e
examine it in detail, we find that this constraint is due very largely to the
fetters imposed by close adherence to Greek idiom. Thus for instance we
have ver. 5 'qui [or quae] sunt ex me', ol [or rd] «'<f ipov; operum quae
salutis, epymv tcoi» ttjs amrrjpias ; ver. 6 palam vincula mea quae potior,
cpavepol 01 Seapoi pov ovs viropivm ; ver. 13 sordidos in lucro, alaxpoxepSets ;
ver. 20 et facite legi Colosensibus et Colosensium vobis, xal iroujaare iva tois
KoXacraaevaiv avayvmcrBrj xal r) KoXaaaaimv iva [xal] vpiv. It is quite
possible indeed that parallels for some of these anomalies may be found in
Latin writers. Thus Tert. c. Marc, i 23 ' redundantia justitiae super scri-
barum et Pharisaeorum' is quoted to illustrate the genitive 'Colosensium'
ver. 202. The Greek cast however is not confined to one or two expressions
but extends to the whole letter.
But a yet stronger argument in favour of a Greek original remains. It differs
This epistle, as we saw, is a cento of passages from St PauL If it had been widely
written originaUy in Latin, we should expect to find that the passages were ?!".,?
taken directly from the Latin versions. This however is not the case. Thus an^ YvI-
compare ver. 6 'palam sunt vincula mea' with Phil, i 13 'ut vincula mea gate Ver-
manifesta fierent': ver. 7 'orationibus vestris et administrante spiritu sions.
sancto' [administrations spiritus sancti'?] with PhU. i 19 'per vestram
obsecrationem (V. orationem) et subministrationem spiritus sancti'; ver. 9
' ut eandem dilectionem habeatis et sitis unianimes ' with PhU. ii. 2 ' eau-
dem caritatem habentes, unanimes'; ver. 10 'ergo, dilectissimi, ut audistis
praesentia mei. . facite in timore ' with Phii ii 1 2 'Propter quod (V. Itaque)
dilectissimi mihi (V. charissimi mei) sicut semper dbaudistis (V. obedis-
tis)... praesentia (V. in praesentia) mei... cum timore (V. metu)...operamini';
ver. n, 12 'Est enim Deus qui operatur in vos (v. 1. vobis). Et facite sine
retractu quaecumque facitis' with Phil. U. 13, 14 Deus enim est qui operatur
in vobis.. .Omnia autem facite sine... detractionibus (V. haesitationibus)' ;
ver. 13 'quod est [reliquum}, dilectissimi, gaudete in Christo et praecavete'
with PhU. iU. 1, 2 'de caetero, fratres mei, gaudete in Domino... Videte'; ib.
'sordidos in lucro' with the Latin renderings of alaxpoxepSeis 1 Tim. iii. 8
' turpiiucros' (V. 'turpe lucrum sectantes'), alaxpoxepSrj Tit. i. 7 turpi-
1 e.g. Anger Laodicenerbrief p. 142 rum quidem, qui testetur earn a se
sq., Westcott Canon p. 454 sq. (ed. 4). lectam?' The accuracy of this state-
Erasmus asks boldly, ' Qui factum est ment wiU be tested presently.
ut haec epistola apud Latinos extet, a Anger p. 165.
cum nrdlus sit apud Graecos, ne vete-
COL. l9

290

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

Thus in
ternal
evidence favours
a Greek
original.Externaltestimony to the
same ef
fect.[Muratorian Frag
ment.]

lucrum (V. 'turpis lucri cupidum'); ver. 14 'sint petitiones vestrae
palam apud Deum ' with Phil. iv. 6 ' postulationes (V. petitiones) vestrae
innotescant apud Deum ' ; ver. 20 ' facite legi Colosensibus et Colosensium
vobis' with Col. iv. 16 'facite ut et in Laodicensium ecclesia legatur et earn
quae Laodicensium (mss Laodiciam) est ut (om. V.) vos legatis'. These
examples tell their own tale. The occasional resemblances to the Latin
Version are easily explained on the ground that reminiscences of this
version would naturally occur to the translator of the epistle. The
habitual divergences from it are only accounted for on the hypothesis that
the original compiler was better acquainted with the New Testament in
Greek than in Latin, and therefore presumably that he wrote in Greek.
And, if we are led to this conclusion by an examination of the epistle
itself, we shall find it confirmed by an appeal to external testimony.
There is ample evidence that a spurious Epistle to the Laodiceans was
known to Greek writers, as well as Latin, at a sufficiently early date. A
mention of such an epistle occurs as early as the Muratorian Fragment on
the Canon (about a.d. 170), where the writer speaks of two letters, one to
the Laodiceans and another to the Alexandrians, as circulated under the
name of Paul1. The bearing of the words however is uncertain. He may
be referring to the Marcionite recension of the canonical Epistle to the
Ephesians, which was entitled by that heretic an epistle to the Laodiceans2.
Or, if this explanation of his words be not correct (as perhaps it is not),
still we should not feel justified in assuming that he is referring to the ex
tant apocryphal epistle. Indeed we should hardly expect that an epistle
of this character would be written and circulated at so early a date. The
reference in Col. iv. 16 offered a strong temptation to the forger, and proba-

1 Canon Murat. p. 47 (ed. Tregelles).
The passage stands in the ms, ' Fertur
etiam ad Laudecenses alia ad Alexan
drines Pauli nomine fincte ad heresem
Marcionis et alia plura quae in catho-
licam eclesiam recepi non potest.'
There is obviously some corruption in
the text. One very simple emenda
tion is the repetition of 'alia', so that
the words would run ' ad Laudicenses
alia, alia ad Alexandrinos '. In this
case fincte ( = finctae) might refer to
the two epistles first mentioned, and
the Latin would construe intelligibly.
The writing described as 'ad Laodi
censes alia' might then be the Epistle
to the Ephesians under its Marcionite
title, tbe writer probably not having
any personal knowledge of it, but sup
posing from its name that it was a dif
ferent and a forged writing. But what
can then be the meaning of 'alia ad
Alexandrinos'? Is it, as some have
thought, the Epistle to the Hebrews?
But this could not under any circum

stances be described as 'fin eta ad hae-
resem Marcionis ', even though we
should strain the meaning of the
preposition and interpret the words
' against the heresy of Marcion'. And
again our knowledge of Marcion's Ca
non is far too full to admit the hypo
thesis that it included a spurious Epi
stle to the Alexandrians, of which no
notice is elsewhere preserved. We are
therefore driven to the conclusion that
there is a hiatus here, as in other
places of this fragment, probably after
' Pauli nom in e ' ; and ' finctae ' will then
refer not to the two epistles named
before, but to the mutilated epistles
of Marcion's Canon which he had
' tampered with to adapt them to his
heresy'. In this case the letter 'ad
Laudicenses ' may refer to our apocry
phal epistle or to some earUer for
gery. * See the Introduction to the Epi
stle to the Ephesians.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

291

bly more than one unscrupulous person was induced by it to try his hand at
falsification1. But, however this may be, it seems clear that before the close
of the fourth century our epistle was largely circulated in the East and West
alike. ' Certain persons ', writes Jerome in his account of St Paul, ' read Jerome.
also an Epistle to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by aU2'. No doubt is
entertained that this father refers to our epistle. If then we find that Theodore.
about the same time Theodore of Mopsuestia also mentions an Epistle to
the Laodiceans, which he condemns as spurious8, it is a reasonable inference
that the same writing is meant. In this he is followed by Theodoret4; and Theodoret.
indeed the interpretations of Col. iv. 16 given by the Greek Fathers of this
age were largely influenced, as we have seen, by the presence of the spurious
epistle which they were anxious to discredit6. Even two or three centuries
later the epistle seems to have been read in the East At the Second 2nd Coun-
Council of Nicaea (a. d. 787) it was found necessary to warn people against ^ °'
' a forged Epistle to the Laodiceans ' which was ' circulated, having a place
in some copies of the Apostle6.'

Nicaea.

The Epistle to the Laodiceans then in the original Greek would run The Greek
somewhat as follows7 : restored.

nPOZ AAOAIKEAZ.
TTAYAOZ attoctoAoc oyk ait' an6pcottcon o-fAe Ai' ANepoonoy "Gal. i. 1.
aAAa Aia" Mhcoy XpicToy, to?c AAeA<po?c to?c o?cin £n AaoAik6i'a.
2bX<\pic ymTn kai eipHNH And Geoy nATpdc kai Kypioy 'lncoy bGal.i. 3;
w r\ rflUi j "1 ¦
XpicToy.

1 Timotheus, who became Patriarch
of Constantinople in 511, while still a
presbyter includes in a list of apocry
phal works forged by the Manicheans i)
TrevTeKaidexdrij [i.e. rov HaiXov'] irpbs
AaoSixeisiiriaroXrj, Meursep.n7(quoted
by Fabricins, Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1.
p. 139). Anger (p. 27) suggests that
there is a confusion of the Marcionites
and Manicheans here. I am disposed
to think that Timotheus recklessly
credits the Manicheans with several
forgeries of which they were innocent,
among others with our apocryphal
Epistle to the Laodiceans. StiU it is
possible that there was another Lao
dicean Epistle forged by these heretics
to support their peculiar tenets.
2 Vir. III. 5 (11. p. 840) 'Legunt qui
dam et ad Laodicenses, sed ab omni
bus exploditur'.
3 The passage is quoted above, p.
273, note 1.
1 rives iiriXafiov xal irpbs AaoStKias
avrbv yeypacpivac airlKa rolvvv Kai

irpoatpipovai irerrXaapivijv eiriaroXijv.
6 Anger (p. 143) argues agamst a
Greek original on the ground that the
Eastern Church, unlike the Latin, did
not generally interpret Col. iv. 16 as
meaning an epistle written to the Lao
diceans. The fact is true, but the in
ference is wrong, as the language of
the Greek commentators themselves
shows. 6 Act. vi. Tom. v (Labbe vin. p.
1 125 ed. Colet.) xal yap rov Belov diro-
arbXov irpbs AaoStxeis ipiperai irXaarii
iiriaroXij Iv nai filfSXots rod iiroirrbXov
iyKeipivij, rjv ol iraripes ijpdv direSoKl-
ixaaav ds airov aXXorplav.
7 A Greek version is given in Elias
Hutter's Polyglott New Testament
(Noreb. 1599): see Anger p. 147, note g.
But I have retranslated the epistle
anew, introducing the Pauline passages,
of which it is almost entirely made up,
as they stand in the Greek Testament.
The references are given in the mar
gin.
19 — 2

292 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
•Phil. i. 3. 8cEYXAplCTCO TO) XpiCTd) €N TTAOH ACrlcel MOY, OTI GCT6 6N AYT<£
•aPetTm'o; MIN0NT6C KAI npOCKApTepOYNTCC ToTc eprOIC AYTOY, dAnGKA6)(dMeN0l
™\7;..cf", thn enArre^'AN "eic hmIpan kpicccoc.
PhU. n. 16. i»»'.„, , r , . -
fiTim. i. 6. A/\HAe YMAC ClATTATHCCOCIN "mataioAopai tingon AiAackontcon
'ool'T'^' 4' !'NA B<iTTOi::TpeT"ciN ymac And hTfic aAh66i'ac 'toy eyArreAi'oy toy
Gal. u. 5, 14. eyArreAic96NTOC fn' cmoy- "ka! nyn noieicei d Oedc Fna kTA el
(cf. i 8)" ^M0* e'c nP0K0TT"N THC aAhOgiac toy efArreAiOY * * • AATpey'oNTec
kPhil. 1. 12. KAI TTOIOYNT6C ^pHCTOTHTA epr<J0N TOON THC CCOTHpiAC [ka'|] THC
'PhU. i. 13. aiconi'oy ZGOHC. 8KAI nyn 'rpANepoi oi ACCMOl' moy, oyc YnOMeNCO C5N
m Matt. v. 12 : */ «» r m 1 » » . . ~ 7 *..«»> ' s
cf PhU. i. 18! XpiCTCp, €N OIC mX^ipW KAI ArAAAlCOMAI. KAI "TOYTO 6CTIN MOI 6IC
"Phil. i. 19. cCOTHpiAN aTaion, d ka'i ATTfcBH AlA THC ymoon AeHceooc ka'i <5nl)(OpH-
°PhU. i. 20. hac nNeyMATOC ahoy, "erre Aia zcofic erre Aia Banatoy. 8p6MOi rap
p PhU. i. 21. ,«sw « >,,„ « , a s \ s , t rn
TO ZHN 6N XplCTCp KAI TO ATT06ANeiN XAP*» KAI T0 *TTO TT0IHC6I [KAlJ
dPhil. U. -a. 6N YM?N Alii TOY eAdoyC AYTOY, INA qTHN AYTHN ArATTHN 6XHT6, CYM-
'Phil. U. 12. cpYXOI 0NT6C. "'COCTG, ArAnHTOl', KAGdiC YTTHKO^CATe 6N TH nApOYCIA
< 2 Thesa. n. 5 moy, oy'tooc BMNHM0Ney0NT6C mgta rpdBoy Kypioy eprAZecGe, KAI
(see vulg.). „ , - , , , ,. nt/-i k , s „ . 1
¦Phil. ii. 13. ecTAI YMIN ZCOH 6IC TON AICONA" lt)eOC fd.p 6CTIN O GNeprmN 6N
"J11,11:..11- '+¦ ymTn. "kai unoie?Te voopic AiaAopcmcon *o n Ian noifiTe.
sCoLui.17,23. ,.,.,, , , . . ^
'PhU. iii. 1. Kai yT0 AomoN, ArATTHTOi, xA|PeTe 6N XpicTop. BAeneTe Ae
¦ I Tim. iii. 8; T()yc »AjCj/p0KepAeTc. "alTANTA TA AITHMATA YMCON rNCOpiZ€C9a) npOC
"Phil. iv. 6. ton QedN. kaI beApAToi riNecSe cn uto> noT toy XpicToy. 15ddcA re
0 1 Cor. iT. 16! 1 OAOKAHpA KAI AAHefi KAI C6MNA KAI AlKAIA KAI TTpOCfplAH, TAyTA
dPhU. iv. 8,9. npACC6T6. 16A KAI HKOYCAT6 KAI nApeA<iBeT€, 6N TH KApAiA KpAT6?Te,
KAI H eipHNH ICTAI M68' YMCON.
"PHI. iv. 22. 18e'ACTTAZ0NTAI YMAC ol AHO!.
fPhU. iv. 23. Uf,H X*PIC T°Y Kyp/oy 'Ihcoy XpicToy mgta toy nNeyMAToc
YMOON.
* CoL iv. [6. MgKAI noiHCATe Fna toTc K0AACCA6YCIN ANArNCOCGH, ka'i H TOiN
KoAacca60>n Fna ka'i ymTn.
Scanty cir- But, though written originally in Greek, it was not among Greek Christ-
oulationin jang ^^ j.ajs epjstle attamed its widest circulation. In the latter part of
' the 8th century indeed, when the Second Council of Nicaea met, it had found
its way into some copies of St Paul's Epistles1. But the denunciation of
this Council seems to have been effective in securing its ultimate exclusion.
We discover no traces of it in any extant Greek ms, with the very doubtful
but wide exception which has already been considered2. But in the Latin Church
diffusion tae caSe was different. St Jerome, as we saw, had pronounced very de-
in the cidedlv against it. Yet even his authority was not sufficient to stamp it
West. J 1 Quoted above, p. 291, note 6. 2 See above, p. 277 sq.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 293
out. At least as early as the sixth century it found a place in some copies
of the Latin Bibles : and before the close of that century its genuineness was
affirmed by perhaps the most influential theologian whom the Latin Church
produced during the eleven centuries which elapsed between the age of
Jerome and Augustine and the era of the Reformation. Gregory the Great Gregory
did not indeed affirm its canonicity. He pronounced that the Church had tlie Great.
restricted the canonical Epistles of St Paul to fourteen, and he found a
mystical explanation of this limitation in the number itself, which was at
tained by adding the number of the Commandments to the number of the
Gospels and thus fitly represented the teaching of the Apostle which com
bines the two1. But at the same time he states that the Apostle wrote
fifteen ; and, though he does not mention the Epistle to the Laodiceans by
name, there can be little doubt that he intended to include this as his
fifteenth epistle, and that his words were rightly understood by subsequent
writers as affirming its Pauline authorship. The influence of this great
name is perceptible in the statements of later writers. Haymo of Halber- Haymo of
stadt, who died a.d. 853, commenting on CoL iv. 16, says, The Apostle 'en- Halber-
joins the Laodicean Epistle to be read to the Colossians, because though it stailt-
is very short and is not reckoned in the Canon, yet still it has some use"-
And between two or three centuries later Hervey of Dole (c. A. d. i i 30), if it Hervey of
be not Anselm of Laon3, commenting on this same passage, says: 'Although Dole.
the Apostle wrote this epistle also as his fifteenth or sixteenth4, and it is
estabUshed by Apostolic authority like the rest, yet holy Church does not
reckon more than fourteen', and he proceeds to justify this limitation of
the Canon with the arguments and in the language of Gregory6. Others
1 Greg. Magn. Mor. in lob. xxxv. 4 A third Epistle to the Corinthians
§ 25 (m. p. 433, ed. Gallico.) 'Eecte being perhaps reckoned as the 15th;
vita ecclesiae multipUcata per decern see Fabric. Cod. Apocr. Nov. Test. n.
et quattuor computatur; quia utrum- p. 866.
que testamentum custodiens, et tam 5 Patrol. Lat. clxxxi. p. 1355 sq.
secundum Legis decalogum quam se- (ed. Migne) 'et ea similiter epistola,
cundum quattuor Evangelii hbros vi- quae Laodicensium est, i.e. quam ego
vens, usque ad perfectionis culmen Laodicensibus misi, legatur vobis.
extenditur. Unde et Paulus aposto- Quamvis et hanc epistolam quintam-
lus quamvis epistolas quindecim scrip- decimam vel sextamdecimam aposto-
serit, sancta tamen ecclesia non am- lus scripserit, et auctoritaa earn apo-
pUus quam quatuordeeim tenet, ut ex stolica sicut caetera firmavit, sancta
ipso epistolarum numero ostenderet tamen ecclesia non amplius quam qua-
quod doctor egregius Legis et Evange- tuordecim tenet, ut ex ipso epistola-
Ui secreta rimasset'. rum numero ostenderet etc' At the
3 Patrol. Lat. cxvii. p. 765 (ed. end of the notes to the Colossians he
Migne) 'Et earn quae erat Laodicen- adds, 'Hucusque proteuditur epistola
sium ideo praecipit Colossensibus legi, quae missa est ad Colossenses. Con-
quia, licet perparva sit et in Canone gruum autem videtur ut propter noti-
non habeatur, aliquid tamen utilitatis tiam legentium subjiciamus earn quae
habet '. He uses the expression ' earn est ad Laodicenses directa ; quam, ut
quae erat Laodicensium', because rijvix diximus, in usu non habet ecclesia.
AaoSixeias was translated in the Latin Est ergo talis.' Then foUows the text
Bible 'earn quae Laodicensium est'. of the Laodicean Epistle, but it is not
3 See Galatians p. 232 on the au- annotated.
thorship of this commentary.

294

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

English Church.Aelfric.

John of
Salisbury.

The epis
tle repu
diated by
Lanfranc.

however did not confine themselves to the qualified recognition given to the
epistle by the great Bishop of Rome. Gregory had carefully distinguished
between genuineness and canonicity; but this important distinction was not
seldom disregarded by later writers. In the English Church more especi
aUy it was forgotten. Thus Aelfric abbot of Cerne, who wrote during the
closing years of the tenth century, speaks as foUows of St Paul : ' Fifteen
epistles wrote this one Apostle to the nations by him converted unto the
faith : which are large books in the Bible and make much for our amend
ment, if we foUow his doctrine that was teacher of the GentUes'. He then
gives a Ust of the Apostle's writings, which closes with ' one to PhUemon
and one to the Laodiceans; fifteen in aU as loud as thunder to faithful
people1'. Again, nearly two centuries later John of Salisbury, Uke wise
writing on the Canon, reckons ' Fifteen epistles of Paul included in one
volume, though it be the wide-spread and common opinion of nearly aU that
there are only fourteen ; ten to churches and four to individuals : supposing
that the one addressed to the Hebrews is to be reckoned among the Epistles
of Paul, as Jerome the doctor of doctors seems to lay down in his preface,
where he refuteth the cavils of those who contended that it was not Paul's.
But the fifteenth is that which is addressed to the Church of the Laodi
ceans ; and though, as Jerome saith, it be rejected by aU, nevertheless was
it written by the Apostle. Nor is this opinion assumed on the conjecture
of others, but it is confirmed by the testimony of the Apostle himself : for
he maketh mention of it in the Epistle to the Colossians in these words,
When this epistle shall have been read among you, etc. (Col. iv. 16)2'.
Aelfric and John are the typical theologians of the Church in this country
in their respective ages. The Conquest effected a revolution in ecclesiasti
cal and theological matters. The Old English Church was separated from
the Anglo-Norman Church in not a few points both of doctrine and of disci-
pUne. Yet here we find the representative men of learning in both agreed
on this one point — the authorship and canonicity of the Epistle to the
Laodiceans. Prom the language of John of Salisbury however it appears
that such was not the common verdict at least in his age, and that on this
point the instinct of the many was more sound than the learning of the few.
Nor indeed was it the undisputed opinion even of the learned in this coun
try during this interval. The first Norman Archbishop, Lanfranc, an ItaUan
by birth and education, explains the passage in the Colossian Epistle as
referring to a letter written by the Laodiceans to the Apostle, and adds that
1 A Saxon Treatise concerning the Old
and New Testament by 2Elfricus Abbas,
p. 28 (ed. W. L'Isle, London 1623).
2 Ioann. Sarisb. Epist. 143 (i.p. 210
ed. Giles) 'Epistolae Pauli quindecim
uno volurnine comprehensae, Uoet sit
vulgata et fere omnium communis
opinio non esse nisi quatuordecim,
decern ad ecclesiaa, quatuor ad perso-
nas ; si tamen ilia quae ad Hebraeos
est connumeranda est epistolis Pauli,
quod in praefatione ejus astruere vide-
tur doctorum doctor Hieronymus, Ulo-

rum dissolvens argutias qui earn Pardi
non esse contendebant. Caeterum
quintadecima est ilia quae ecclesiae
Laodicensium scribitur ; et Ucet, ut ait
Hieronymus, ab omnibus explodatur,
tamen ab apostolo scripta est: neque
sententia haec de aliorum praesumitur
opinione sed ipsius apostoli testimonio
roboratur. Meminit enim ipsius in
epistola ad Colossenses his verbis,
Quum lecta fuerit apud vos haec epi
stola, etc'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 295
otherwise 'there would be more than thirteen Epistles of Paul1'. Thus
he tacitly ignores the Epistle to the Laodiceans, with which he can hardly
have been unacquainted.
Indeed the safest criterion of the extent to which this opinion prevailed, Occur-
is to be found in the manuscripts. At all ages from the sixth to the rence in
fifteenth century we have examples of its occurrence among the Pauline MSg. *f
Epistles and most frequently without any marks which imply doubt respect- countries.
ing its canonicity. These instances are more common in proportion to
the number of extant mss in the earlier epoch than in the later2. In one
of the three or four extant authorities for the Old Latin Version of the
Pauline Epistles it has a place". In one of the two most ancient copies of
Jerome's revised Vulgate it is found4. Among the first class mss of
this latter version its insertion is almost as common as its omission. This
phenomenon moreover is not confined to any one country. Italy, Spain,
Prance, Ireland, England, Germany, Switzerland — all the great nations of
Latin Christendom— contribute examples of early manuscripts in which
this epistle has a place5.
And, when the Scriptures came to be translated into the vernacular Versions.
languages of modern Europe, this epistle was not uncommonly included. Albigen-
Thus we meet with an Albigensian version, which is said to belong to the slan-
thirteenth century8. Thus too it is found in the Bohemian language, both Bohemian.
in manuscript and in the early printed Bibles, in various recensions7.
And again an old German translation is extant, which, judging from Un- German.
guistic pecuUarities, cannot be assigned to a later date than about the
fourteenth century, and was printed in not less than fourteen editions of
the German Bible at the close of the fifteenth and the beginning of the
sixteenth centuries, before Luther's version appeared8. In the early Eng- EngUsh.
lish Bibles too it has a place. Though it was excluded by both Wycliffe and
Purvey, yet it did not long remain untranslated and appears in two
different and quite independent versions, in mss written before the middle
of the fifteenth century8. The prologue prefixed to the commoner of the
two forms runs as foUows :
1 Patrol. Lat. cl. p. 331 (ed. Migne) written within a few years of the Co
on Col. iv. 16 'Haec si esset apostoli, dex Amiatinus.
ad Laodicenses diceret, non Laodicen- « The list of mss given above, p. 280
sium; et plusquam tredecim essent sq., wUl substantiate this statement.
epistolae Pauli'. We should perhaps 6 An account of this ms, wliich is at
read •*""' for xiii, 'quatuordecim' for Lyons, is given by Reuss in the Revue
'tredecim', as Lanfranc is not likely de Th&ologie v. p. 334 (Strassb. 1852).
to have questioned the Pauline author- He ascribes the translation of the New
ship of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Testament to the 13th century, and
2 The proportion however is very dates the ms a Uttle later.
different in different coUections. In the 7 This version is printed by Anger,
Cambridge University Library I found p. 170 sq.
the epistle in four only out of some 8 See Anger, p. 149 sq., p. 166 sq.
thirty mss which I inspected; whereas 9 These two versions are printed in
in the Lambeth Library the proportion Lewis's New Testament translated by
was far greater. J.FicZi/(i73i)p.99Sq.,andinForshaU
3 The Speculum of Mai, see above, and Madden's Wycliffite Versions of
p_ 28o. the H°iy Bible (1850) iv. p. 438 sq.
* The Codex Fuldensis, which was They are also given by Anger p. 168 sq.

296

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

EngUsh
prologue.

Two Ver
sions of
the epis
tle.

' Laodicensis ben also Colocenses, as tweye townes and 00 peple in
manors. These ben of Asie, and among hem hadden be false apostlis,
and disceyuede manye. Therfore the postle bringith hem to mynde of
his conuersacion and trewe preching of the gospel, and excitith hem to be
stidfast in the trewe witt and loue of Crist, and to be of 00 wil. But this
pistU is not in comyn Latyn bookis, and therfor it was but late translatid
into Englisch tunge1.'
The two forms of the epistle in its EngUsh dress are as follows2. The
version on the left hand is extant only in a single ms ; the other, which oc
cupies the right column, is comparatively common.

' Poul, apostle, not of men, ne
bi man, but bi Jhesu Crist, to
the britheren that ben of Lao
dice, grace to 30U, and pees of
God the fadir, and of the Lord
Jhesu Crist. Gracis I do to Crist
bi al myn orisoun, that 30 be
dweUinge in him and lastinge, bi
the biheest abidinge in the dai
of doom. Ne he vnordeynede vs
of sum veyn speche feynynge,
that vs ouerturne fro the sothfast-
nesse of the gospel that of me
is prechid. Also now schal God
do hem leuynge, and doynge of
blessdnesse of werkis, which heelthe
of lyf is. And now openh ben
my boondis, whiche I suffre in
Crist Jhesu, in whiche I glad
and ioie. And that is to me
heelthe euerlastynge, that that I
dide with oure preieris, and my-
nystringe the Holy Spirit, bi lijf
(1843), who takes the rarer form from
Lewis and the other from a Dresden
ms. Dr Westcott also has printed the
commoner version in bis Canon, p. 457
(ed. 4), from Forshall and Madden.
Of one of these two versions For
shall and Madden give a coUation
of several mss ; the other is taken from
a single MB (1. p. xxxn). Lewis does
not state whence he derived the rarer
of these two versions, but there can be
little doubt that it came from the same
visPepys. 2073 (belonging to Magd.CoU.
Cambridge) from which it was taken by
Forshall and Madden (1. p. lvu); since
he elsewhere mentions using this MS
(p. 104). The version is not known to

' Poul,apostle,not of men,ne by man,
but bi Jhesu Crist, to the britheren
that ben at Laodice, grace to 30U, and
pees of God the fadir, and of the
Lord Jhesu Crist. I do thankyngis
to my God bi al my preier, that 30 be
dwelling and lastyng in him, abiding
the biheest in the day of doom. For
neithir the veyn spekyng of summe
vnwise men hath lettide 30U, the
whiche wolden turne 30U fro the
treuthe of the gospel, that is prechid
of me. And now hem that ben of
me, to the profi3t of truthe ofthe
gospel, God schal make disseruyng,
and doyng benygnyte of werkis, and
helthe of eueriasting Ujf. And now
my boondis ben open, which Y suffre
in Crist Jhesu, in whiche Y glade and
ioie. And that is to me to euerlast-
yng helthe, that this same thing be
doon by 30ure preiers, and mynys-
tryng of the HoU Goost, either bi
exist in any other. Forshall and Mad
den given the date of the ms as about
1440. 1 From ForshaU and Madden, rv. p.
438. The earUest mss which contain
the common version of the Laodicean
Epistle (to which this prologue is pre
fixed) date about a.d. 1430.
2 Printed from Forshall and Madden
l.c. I am assured by those who are
thoroughly conversant with old Eng
Ush, that they can discern no differ
ence of date in these two versions,
and that they both belong probably to
the early years of the 15th century.
The rarer version is taken from a bet
ter Latin text than the other.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

297

or bi deoth. It is forsothe to me
Ujf into Crist, and to die ioie
withouten eende. In vs he schal
do his merci, that 30 haue the
same louynge, and that 36 be of
o wil. Therfore, derlyngis, as 30
han herd in presence of me,
hold 36, and do 30 in drede of
God; and it schal be to 30U lijf
withouten eend. It is forsothe
God that worchith in vs. And do
30 withouten ony withdrawinge,
what soeuere 30 doon. And that
it is, derlyngis, ioie 30 in Crist,
and flee 3e maad foul in clay.
AUe 30ure axingis ben open anentis
God, and be 3e fastned in the
witt of Crist. And whiche been
hool, and sooth, and chast, and
rightwijs, and louable, do 3e; and
whiche herden and take in herte,
hold je; and it schal be to 30U
pees. Holi men greeten 30U weel,
in the grace of oure Lord Jhesu
Crist, with the HoU Goost. And
do 36 that pistil of Colosensis to
be red to 30U. Amen.

lijf, either bi deeth. Forsothe to me
it is lijf to lyue in Crist, and to die
ioie. And his mercy schal do in 30U
the same thing, that 30 moun haue
the same loue, and that 30 be of 00
will. Therfore, 30 weel biloued
britheren, holde 30, and do 30 in the
dreede of God, as 30 han herde
the presence of me ; and lijf schal
be to 30U withouten eende. Sotheli
it is God that worchith in 30U. And,
my weel biloued britheren, do 30
without eny withdrawyng what euer
thingis 30 don. Joie 30 in Crist, and
eschewe 3e men defoulid in lucre,
either foul wynnyng. Be alle 30ure
askyngis open anentis God, and be
30 stidefast in the witt of Crist. And
do 30 tho thingis that ben hool, and
trewe, and chaast, and iust, and able
to be loued; and kepe 36 in herte
tho thingis that 30 haue herd and
take ; and pees schal be to 30U. Alle
holi men greten 30U weel The grace
of oure Lord Jhesu Crist be with
30ure spirit. And do 30 that pistil
of Colocensis to be red to 30U.

Thus for more than nine centuries this forged epistle hovered about Revival of
the doors of the sacred Canon, without either finding admission or being learning
peremptorily excluded. At length the revival of learning dealt its death- ji °0?."
blow to this as to so many other spurious pretensions. As a rule, Roman 0f j^e
CathoUcs and Reformers were equally strong in their condemnation of its epistle.
worthlessness. The language of Erasmus more especially is worth quoting
for its own sake, and must not be diluted by translation :
'NihU habet Pauli praeter voculas aUquot ex caeteris ejus epistolis Strictures
mendicatas  Non est cujusvis hominis Paulinum pectus effingere. Tonat, of Eras-
fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus. At haec, praeterquam quod brevis- mus*
sima est, quam friget, quam jacet !...Quanquam quid attinet argumentari ?
Legat, qui volet, epistolam  Nullum argumentum efficacius persuaserit
earn non esse Pauli quam ipsa epistola. Et si quid mihi naris est, ejus
dem est opificis qui naeniis suis omnium veterum theologorum omnia
scripta contaminavit, conspurcavit, perdidit, ac praecipue ejus qui prae
caeteris indignus erat ea contumeUa, nempe D. Hieronymi1.'

1 On Col. iv. 16. Erasmus is too
hard upon the writer of this letter,
when he charges him with such a mass
of forgeries. He does not explain how

this hypothesis is consistent with the
condemnation of the Epistle to the La
odiceans in Hieron. Vir. HI. 5 (quoted
above p. 291).

298

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

Exceptions.

But some eccentric spirits on both sides were still found to maintain its
genuineness. Thus on the one hand the Lutheran Steph. Prsetorius prefaces
his edition of this epistle (a.d. 1595) with the statement that he 'restores
Prstorius. it to the Christian Church'; he gives his opinion that it was written ' either
by the Apostle himself or by some other ApostoUc man': he declares
that to himself it is ' redolent of the spirit and grace of the most divine
Paul'; and he recommends younger teachers of the Gospel to 'try their
strength in explaining it', that thus 'accustoming themselves graduaUy
to the Apostolic doctrine they may extract thence a flavour sweeter than
ambrosia and nectar1.' On the other hand the Jesuit Stapleton was
not less eager in his advocacy of this miserable cento. To him its genuine
ness had a controversial value. Along with several other apocryphal
writings which he accepted in like manner, it was important in his eyes
as showing that the Church had authority to exclude even Apostolic
writings from the Canon, if she judged fit2. But such phenomena were
quite abnormal. The dawn of the Reformation epoch had effectually
scared away this ghost of a Pauline epistle, which (we may confidently
hope) has been laid for ever and will not again be suffered to haunt the
mind of the Church.

Stapleton.

1 Pauli Apostoli ad Laodicenses
Epistola, Latine et Germanice, Ham
burg. 1595, of which the preface is
given in Fabricius Cod. Apocr. Nov.
Test. 11. p. 867. It is curious that
the only two arguments against its
genuineness which he thinks worthy
of notice are (1) Its brevity; which he
answers by appealing to the Epistle to
PhUemon; and (2) Its recommenda
tion of works ('quod scripsit opera
esse facienda quae sunt salutis aeter-
nae'); which he explains to refer to

works that proceed of faith.
2 See Bp. Davenant on Col. iv. 16:
'Detestanda Stapletonis opinio, qui
ipsius Paufi epistolam esse statuit,
quam omnes patres ut adulterinam et
insulsam repudiarunt ; nee sanior con-
clusio, quam inde deducere voluit,
poase nimirum ecclesiam germanam
et veram apostoU Pauli epistolam
pro sua authoritate e Canone exclu-
dere'. So also Whitaker Disputation
on Scripture passim (see the references
given above, p. 273, note 3).

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

INTKODTJCTION TO THE EPISTLE.
'T'HE Epistle to Philemon holds a unique place among the Unique
-*- Apostle's writings. It is the only strictly private letter ofthe "
which has been preserved. The Pastoral Epistles indeed are ePlstle-
addressed to individuals, but they discuss important matters
of Church discipline and government. Evidently they were
intended to be read by others besides those to whom they
are immediately addressed. On the other hand the letter
before us does not once touch upon any question of public
interest. It is addressed apparently to a layman. It is wholly
occupied with an incident of domestic life. The occasion
which called it forth was altogether common-place. It is
only one sample of numberless letters which must have been
written to his many friends and disciples by one of St Paul's
eager temperament and warm affections, in the course of a
long and chequered life. Yet to ourselves this fragment, which
has been rescued, we know not how, from the wreck of a large Its value.
and varied correspondence, is infinitely precious. Nowhere is
the social influence of the Gospel more strikingly exerted ;
nowhere does the nobility of the Apostle's character receive
a more vivid illustration than in this accidental pleading on
behalf of a runaway slave.
The letter introduces us to an ordinary household in a The
small town in Phrygia. Four members of it are mentioned addressed.
by name, the father, the mother, the son, and the slave,
i. The head of the family bears a name which, for good or i. Phile-
for evil, was not unknown in connexion with Phrygian story.

302

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

Occur- The legend of Philemon and Baucis, the aged peasants who
the name entertained not angels but gods unawares, and were rewarded
SaPhry" ky their divine guests for their homely hospitality and their
conjugal love ', is one of the most attractive in Greek mytho
logy, and contrasts favourably with many a revolting tale in
which the powers of Olympus are represented as visiting this
lower earth. It has a special interest too for the Apostolic
history, because it suggests an explanation of the scene at
Lystra, when the barbarians would have sacrificed to the
Apostles, imagining that the same two gods, Zeus and Hermes,
had once again deigned to visit, in the likeness of men, those
regions which they had graced of old by their presence2. Again,
in historical times we read of one Philemon who obtained an
unenviable notoriety at Athens by assuming the rights of
Athenian citizenship, though a Phrygian and apparently a
slave 3. Otherwise the name is not distinctively Phrygian. It
does not occur with any special frequency in the inscriptions
belonging to this country ; and though several persons bearing
this name rose to eminence in literary history, not one, so far
as we know, was a Phrygian.
This Phi- The Philemon with whom we are concerned was a native,
Colossian or a^ least an inhabitant, of Colossae. This appears from the
fact that his slave is mentioned as belonging to that place. It
may be added also, in confirmation of this view, that in one of
two epistles written and despatched at the same time St Paul

1 Ovid. Met. vu. 626 sq. 'Jupiter
hue, specie mortali, cumque parente
Venit Atlantiades positis caducifer alis'
etc. 2 Acts xiv. 11 ol Beol bpoiwBivres
dvBpmirois xari^ijaav irpbs rjpas x.r.X.
There are two points worth observing
in the Phrygian legend, as illustrating
the ApostoUc history. (1) It is a
miracle, which opens the eyes of the
peasant couple to the divinity of their
guests thus disguised; (2) The im
mediate effect of this miracle is their
attempt to sacrifice to their divine
visitors, ' dia hospitibus mactare para-

bant'. The famUiarity with this
beautiful story may have suggested to
the barbarians of Lystra, whose ' Ly-
caonian speech' was not improbably
a dialect of Phrygian, that the same
two gods, Zeus and Hermes, had again
visited this region on an errand at
once of beneficence and of vengeance,
whUe at the same time it would prompt
them to conciUate the deities by a
similar mode of propitiation, ijBeXov
Bveiv. 3 Aristoph. Av. 762 el Si rvyxdvei
tis cSk <$pblj...tppsiylXos Spvis ivBdb' tarai,
roO QiXypovos yivovs.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 303
announces the restoration of Onesimus to his master, while in
the other he speaks of this same person as revisiting Colossae \
On the other hand it would not be safe to lay any stress on
the statement of Theodoret that Philemon's house was still
standing at Colossae when he wrote 2, for traditions of this kind
have seldom any historical worth.
Philemon had been converted by St Paul himself8. At converted
what time or under what circumstances he received his first Paul.
lessons in the Gospel, we do not know : but the Apostle's long
residence at Ephesus naturally suggests itself as the period
when he was most likely to have become acquainted with a
citizen of Colossae4.
Philemon proved not unworthy of his spiritual parentage. His evan-
— P"f 1 7 Cfl.l
Though to Epaphras belongs the chief glory of preaching the zeal,
Gospel at Colossae6, his labours were well seconded by Phi
lemon. The title of ' fellow-labourer,' conferred upon him by
the Apostle 6, is a noble testimony to his evangelical zeal. Like
Nymphas in the neighbouring Church of Laodicea 7, Philemon
had placed his house at the disposal of the Christians at Colossae
for their religious and social gatherings8. Like Gaius9, to
whom the only other private letter in the Apostolic Canon is
addressed I0, he was generous in his hospitalities. All those aQd wide
hospita-
with whom he came in contact spoke with gratitude of his lity.
1 Compare Col. iv. 9 with Philem. designates PhUemon's own family (in-
1 1 sq. eluding his slaves) by this honourable
2 Theodoret in his preface to the title of ixxXijala, in order to interest
epistle says irbXiv Si elxe [6 $iXijpmv] them in his petition. This is plainly
Tis KoXdaaar xal ij olda Si airov wrong. See the note on Col. iv. 15.
pixpi tov irapbvros pjephrrjxe. This is 9 3 Joh. 5 sq.
generally taken to mean that PhUe- 10 I take the view that the xvpla
mon's house was stiU standing, when addressed in the Second Epistle of St
Theodoret wrote. This may be the John is some church personified, as
correct interpretation, but the language indeed the whole tenour of the epistle
is not quite explicit. seems to imply : see esp. w. 4, 7 sq.
3 ver. 19. The salutation to the ' elect lady '
* See above, p. 30 sq. (ver. 1) from her 'elect sister' (ver.
5 See above, p. 31 sq. 15) will then be a greeting sent to
6 ver. 1 avvepyif rjpuv. one church from another ; just as in
1 Col. iv. 13. 1 Peter the letter is addressed at the
8 ver. 2 rj} xar' dlxbv aov ixxXijala. outset ixXexrots Ubvrov k.t.X. (i. 1) and
The Greek commentators, Chrysostom contains at the close a salutation from
and Theodoret, suppose that St Paul rj iv BafHuXdvi avvexXexrfj (v. 13).

304 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Legendary kindly attentions '. Of his subsequent career we have no cer-
dom. tain knowledge. Legendary story indeed promotes him to the
bishopric of Colossae *, and records how he was martyred in his
native city under Nero 8. But this tradition or fiction is not
entitled to any credit. All that we really know of Philemon is
contained within this epistle itself.
2. Apphia 2. It is a safe inference from the connexion of the names
that Apphia was the wife of Philemon*. The commentators
assume without misgiving that we have here the familiar
Roman name Appia, though they do not explain the intrusion
A strictly of the aspirate5. This seems to be a mistake. The word occurs
name. very frequently on Phrygian inscriptions as a proper name, and
is doubtless of native origin. At Aphrodisias and Philadelphia,
at Eumenia and Apamea Cibotus, at Stratonicea, at Philo-
melium, at iEzani and Cotiaeum and Dorylaeum, at almost all
the towns far and near, which were either Phrygian or subject
to Phrygian influences, and in which any fair number of inscrip
tions has been preserved, the name is found. If no example
has been discovered at Colossae itself, we must remember that
not a single proper name has been preserved on any monu
mental inscription at this place. It is generally written either
Apphia or Aphphia6; more rarely Aphia, which is perhaps
1 vv. 5, 7. Like other direct statements of this
2 Apost. Const, vu. 46 rijs Si iv same writer, as for instance that the
s^pvyta AaoSixeias [<;7r!ffK07ros] "Apxiiriros, Colossians sent a deputation to St
Ko\acrcrac?cij» Si <$tXijpmv, Bepolas Si rijs Paul (L'Antechrist p. 90), this asser-
icaTcV t&axeSovlav 'Ovijaipos b ^tXijpovos. tion rests on no authority.
The Greek Menaea however make Phi- 6 They speak of 'Atrtpla as a softened
lemon bishop of Gaza; see TiUemont form of the Latin Appia, and quote
'• P- 574, note l*vi- Acts xxviii. 15, where however the form
8 See TUlemont 1. pp. 290, 574, for is 'Airrlov. Even Ewald writes the
the references. word Appia.
* Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3814 TSelx- 6 'Airc^ia, no. 2782, 2835, 2950,
avSpos xal 'Atpipla ywi) airov. In the 3432, 3446, 2775 b, 0, d, 2837 b, 3902
foUowing inscriptions also a wife bear- m, 3962, 4124, 4145 : 'Atpipla, no. 3814,
ing the name Apphia (Aphphia, Aphia) 4141, 4277, 4321 f, 3827 1, 38462,
or Apphion (Apbphion, Aphion) is 3846 z17. So far as I could trace any
mentioned in connexion with her hus- law, the form 'Atpipla is preferred in
band; 2720, 2782, 2836, 3446, 2775 the northern and more distant towns
b, 0, d, 2837 b, 3849, 3902 m, 3962, like iEzani and Cotiasum, whUe 'Airipla
4141, 4277, 4321 f, 3846 z17, etc. prevaUs in the southern towns in the
M. Eenan (Saint Paul p. 360) says more immediate neighbourhood of
'Appia, diaconesse de cette viUe.' Colosss, such as Aphrodisias. This

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

305

due merely to the carelessness of the stonecutters \ But, so far its affini-
as I have observed, it always preserves the aspirate. Its dimi- ies
nutive is Apphion or Aphphion or Aphion '. The allied form
Aphphias or Aphias, also a woman's name, is found, though
less commonly*; and we likewise frequently meet with the
shorter form Apphe or Aphphe \ The man's name correspond
ing to Apphia is Apphianos, but this is rare 4. The root would
appear to be some Phrygian term of endearment or relation
ship 6. It occurs commonly in connexion with other Phrygian and ana-
names of a like stamp, more especially Ammia, which under- ogies
goes the same modifications of form, Amia, Ammias, Ammion
or Amion, Ammiane or Ammiana, with the corresponding
masculine Ammianos'. With these we may also compare

accords with the evidence of our mss,
in which 'Airtpla is the best supported
form, though 'Atpipla is found in some.
In Theod. Mops. (Cramer's Cat. p. 105)
it becomes 'Aptpla by a common cor
ruption ; and Old Latin copies write
the dative Apphiadi from the allied
form Apphias.
The most interesting of these in
scriptions mentioning the name is no.
2782 at Aphrodisias, where there is a
notice of *X. 'Airtplas dpxiepelas 'Aalas,
pijrpbs xal dSeXtpfjs xai pdppijs avvxXij-
rtxmv, tpiXowdrpiSos x.t.X.
1 no. 2720, 3827.
2 'Airipiov or "Atptptov 2733, 2836,
3295, 3849- 3902 m> 4207; "A0iok,
3846 z3i ana'Aipeiov 3846 z31; and even
"Airtpeiv and "Atptpeiv, 3167, 3278. In
3902 m the mother's name is 'Airtpla
and the daughter's "Aircpiov.
3 'Atpiplas 3697, 3983 ; 'Atplas 3879.
4 "Acprpij 3816, 3390, 4143 ; "Att^
3796, 4122.
6 It is met with at the neighbouring
town of HierapoUs, in the form 'Air-
tplavos no. 391 1. It also occurs on
coins of not very distant parts of Asia
Minor, being written either 'Airtplavos
or ' Atpiplavos ; Monnet 111. p. 179, 184,
iv. p. 65, 67, Suppl. vi. p. 293, vn.
P- 365-
6 Suidaa "Airrpa- aSeXtpijs xal dSeX-
tpov viroxbpiapa, and so Bekk. Anecd.
p. 441. Eustath. II. p. 565 says dirtpav
COL.

ttjv dSeXtpijv 'Attik&s pbvij ij dSeXiprj
etTot dv, xal irdirirav rbv iraripa pbvos
0 irais k.t.X., and he adds lariov Si Sri
ix tov ms ippi&ij dirtpa yiverai xal rb
airipiov, inroKbpiapa ov ipmpivijs' nvis
Si xal rb dirtpa iiroxopiapA rpaatv 'Am-
xbv. These words were found in writers
of Attic comedy (PoUux iu. 74 ij irapa.
rois viots KiapmSois airtpla xal dirtplov
xal dirtpdpiov; comp. Xenarchus rods
piv yipovras Svras iirixaXoipevat rrarpl-
Sia, rois S' dirtpdpia, rois vemripovs,
Meineke Fragm. Com. in. p. 617) :
and doubtless they were heard com
monly in Attic homes. But were they
not learnt in the nursery from Phry
gian slaves ? 'Airtpdptov appears in two
inscriptions almost as a proper name,
2637 KXouSla dirtpdpiov, 3277 dirtpdpiov
AoXXtavrj. In no. 4207 (at Telmissus)
we have ''EXivij 1) xal "Atpipiov, so that
it seems sometimes to have been em
ployed side by side with a Greek name ;
comp. no. 3912a IIairlas...b xaXoipevos
Aioyivijs, quoted above, p. 48. This
wiU account for the frequency of the
names, Apphia, Apphion, etc. In
Theocr. xv. 13 we have airepvs, and in
Callim. Hym. Dian. 6 airira, as a term
of endearment applied to a father.
7 This appears from the fact that
Ammias and Ammianos appear some
times as the names of mother and son
respectively in the same inscriptions;
e.g. 3846 Z*2, 3847 k, 3882 i. 20

306 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Tatia, Tatias, Tation, Tatiane or Tatiana, Tatianos. Similar
too is the name Papias or Pappias, with the lengthened form
Papianos, to which corresponds the feminine Papiane1. So
again we have Nannas or Nanas, Nanna or Nana, with their
Not to be derivatives, in these Phrygian inscriptions 2. There is a tend-
with the ency m some of the allied forms of Apphia or Aphphia to drop
Appia *^e aspirate so tnat tney are "written with a pp, more especially
in Appe8, but not in the word itself; nor have I observed con
versely any disposition to write the Roman name Appia with an
aspirate, Apphia or Aphphia *. Even if such a disposition could
be proved, the main point for which I am contending can
hardly be questioned. With the overwhelming evidence of the
inscriptions before us, it is impossible to doubt that Apphia is
a native Phrygian name B.
Her share Of this Phrygian matron we know nothing more than can
in the . . . .
letter. be learnt from this epistle. The tradition or fiction which
represents her as martyred together with her husband may be
safely disregarded. St Paul addresses her as a Christian6.
Equally with her husband she had been aggrieved by the mis
conduct of their slave Onesimus, and equally with him she
might interest herself in the penitent's future well-being.
3. Arehip- 3. With less confidence, but still with a reasonable degree
pus, the
son. of probability, we may infer that Archippus, who is likewise
mentioned in the opening salutation, was a son7 of Philemon
1 On the name Papias or Pappias 4 In the Greek historians of Bome
see above, p. 48. for instance the personal name is al-
2 See Boeckh Corp. Inscr. m. p. ways "Airirios and the road 'Airirla ; so
1085 for the names TS&vas, etc. too in Acts xxviii. 15 it is 'Airirlov
3 We have not only the form 'Airirij $6pov.
several times (e.g. 3827 x, 3846 p, 6 The point to be observed is that
3846 x, 3846 z48, etc.); but also "Airirijs examples of these names are thickest
3827 g, 3846 n, 3846 z77, still as a in the heart of Phrygia, that they di-
woman's name. These aU occur in minish in frequency as Phrygian in-
the same neighbourhood, at Cotiasum fluence becomes weaker, and that they
and iEzani. I have not noticed any >almost, though not entirely, disappear
instance of this phenomenon in the in other parts of the Greek and Eoman
names Apphia, Apphion; though pro- world
bably, where Eoman influences were 6 ver. 2 Tg dSeXtpij. See the note.
especially strong, there would be a 'So Theodore of Mopsuestia. But
tendency to transform a Phrygian name Chrysostom erepov riva tarns iplXov, and
into a Eoman, e. g. Apphia into Appia, Theodoret b Si "Apxfmros tt)v SiSaaxa-
and Apphianus into Appianus. Xlav airmv iireirlo-Tevro.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 307
and Apphia. The inscriptions do not exhibit the name in
any such frequency, either in Phrygia or in the surrounding dis
tricts, as to suggest that it was characteristic of these parts1.
Our Archippus held some important office in the Church 2 ; His office
but what this was, we are not told. St Paul speaks of it as
a ' ministry ' (SuiKovia). Some have interpreted the term tech
nically as signifying the diaconate; but St Paul's emphatic
message seems to imply a more important position than this.
Others again suppose that he succeeded Epaphras as bishop of
Colossae, when Epaphras left his native city to join the Apostle
at Rome3; but the assumption of a regular and continuous
episcopate in such a place as Colossae at this date seems to
involve an anachronism. More probable than either is the
hypothesis which makes him a presbyter. Or perhaps he held
a missionary charge, and belonged to the order of ' evangelists V
Another question too arises respecting Archippus. Where
was he exercising this ministry, whatever it may have been \
At Colossae, or at Laodicea ? His connexion with Philemon and abode,
would suggest the former place. But in the Epistle to the
Colossians his name is mentioned immediately after the salu
tation to the Laodiceans and the directions affecting that
Church ; and this fact seems to connect him with Laodicea. Laodicea,
On the whole this appears to be the more probable solution 6. ]£an r
Laodicea was within walking distance of Colossae 6. Archippus ColosS8B-
must have been in constant communication with his parents,
who lived there; and it was therefore quite natural that,
writing to the father and mother, St Paul should mention the
son's name also in the opening address, though he was not on
the spot. An early tradition, if it be not a critical inference
1 It occurs in two Smyrncean in- Mopsuestia. On the other hand Theo-
scriptions, no. 3143, 3224. doret argues against this view on
2 CoL iv. 27 fiXiire ttjv Siaxoviav ijv critical grounds ; nvis itpaaav tovtov
irapiXafies iv Kvplm, tva airrjv irXijpdis. AaoSixeias yeyevijaBai SiSdaxaXov, dX\'
8 So the Ambrosian Hilary on Col. ij Tpbs $i\i)pova iiriaToXi) SiSdaxei eis
jv_ i» iv KoXaaaais ovros $Kec rep ydp $i-
4 Ephes. iv. 1 1 hears testimony to Xtjpovi Kal tovtov avvrdrrei : but he
the existence of the office of evangeUst does not aUege any traditional support
at this date. for his own opinion.
s It is adopted by Theodore of B See above, pp. *, 15. 20 — 2

3o8

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

4. Onesi
mus.

from the allusion in the Colossian letter, makes him bishop not
of Colossae, but of Laodicea 1.
His career. Of the apprehensions which the Apostle seems to have
entertained respecting Archippus, I have already spoken 2. It
is not improbable that they were suggested by his youth and
inexperience. St Paul here addresses him as his 'fellow-
soldier V but we are not informed on what spiritual campaigns
they had served in company. Of his subsequent career we
have no trustworthy evidence. Tradition represents him as
having suffered martyrdom at Colossae with his father and
mother. 4. But far more important to the history of Christianity
than the parents or the son of the family, is the servant. The
name Onesimus was very commonly borne by slaves. Like
other words signifying utility, worth, and so forth, it naturally
lent itself to this purpose i. Accordingly the inscriptions offer
a very large number of examples in which it appears as the
name of some slave or freedman5; and even where this is
A servile not the case, the accompaniments frequently show that the
person was of servile descent, though he might never himself
have been a slave8. Indeed it occurs more than once as a
fictitious name for a slave 7, a fact which points significantly to
sponding female name Onesime in
MCCXXXIX. 12, MDXLVI. 6, MDCXII. 9.
A more diligent search than I have
made would probably increase the
number of examples very largely.
s e.g. Corp. Inscr. Lat. in. p. 238,
no. I467, D. M. M. AVB . ONESIMO . CAB-
PION . AVG . LIB . TABVL . FILIO. In
the next generation any direct notice
of servUe origin would disappear; but
the names very often indicate it. It
need not however necessarily denote
low extraction : see e.g. Liv. xliv. 16.
7 Menander Inc. 312 (Meiaeke Fragm.
Com. iv. p. 300), where the 'Ovijatpos
addressed is a slave, as appears from
the mention of his rpbtptpos, i. e. mas
ter; Galen de Opt. Doctr. 1 (1. p. 41)
ed. Kiihn), where there is a, reference
to a work of Phavorinus in which was
introduced one Onesimus b HXourapxou

1 Apost. Const, vn. 46 quoted above,
p. 306, note 1.
2 See p. 42.
3 ver. 2 rip avvarparimTy rjpmv. See
the note.
4 e. g. Chresimus, Chrestus, One
siphorus, Symphorus, Carpus, etc. So
too the corresponding female names
Onesime,Chreste, Sympherusa,eto. : but
more commonly the women's names
are of a different cast of meaning,
Arescusa, Prepusa, Terpusa, ThaUusa,
Tryphosa, etc.
6 e.g. in the Corp. Inscr. Lat. m.
p. 223, no. 2146, p. 359, no. 2723, p.
986, no. 6107 (where it is speUed Ho-
nesimus) ; and in Muratori, co. 6,
DXXIX. 5, OMLXVIII. 4, Mill. 2, MDXVIII. 2,
MDXXIII. 4, MDLI. 9, MDLXXI. 5, MDLXXV.
1, MDxon. 8, mdxovi. 7, mhovi. 2, mdcx.
19, mdcxiv. 17, 39 ; and the corre-

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 309
the social condition naturally suggested by it. In the inscrip
tions of proconsular Asia it is found1; but no stress can be laid
on this coincidence, for its occurrence as a proper name was
doubtless coextensive with the use of the Greek language.
More important is the fact that in the early history of Christi
anity it attains some eminence in this region. One Onesimus its pro-
is bishop of Ephesus in the first years of the second century, a^ngCthe
when Ignatius passes through Asia Minor on his way to Christians
martyrdom, and is mentioned by the saint in terms of warm sularAsia.
affection and respect2. Another, apparently an influential
layman, about half a century later urges Melito bishop of
Sardis to compile a volume of extracts from the Scriptures;
and to him this father dedicates the work when completed8.
Thus it would appear that the memory of the Colossian
slave had invested the name with a special popularity among
Christians in this district.
Onesimus represented the least respectable type of the Position
least respectable class in the social scale. He was regarded by duct "of1*
philosophers as a 'live chattel,' a 'live implement4'; and he had Onesimus.
taken philosophy at her word. He had done what a chattel or
an implement might be expected to do, if endued with life and
intelligence. He was treated by the law as having no rights 6 ;
and he had carried the principles of the law to their logical
consequences. He had declined to entertain any responsibilities.
SouXos 'WrciKrirrm SiaXeybpevos ; Anthol. oBai; see also §§ 2, 5, 6.
Graec. 11. p. i6i,wherethecontext shows 3 Melito in Euseb. B. E. iv. 26
that the person addressed as Onesimus HeXlrmv 'Ovijalpa r$ dSeXtptp xaf/>«c.
is a slave ; ib. 11. p. 482, where the ''EnreiSrj iroXXdKts ij^laaas x.r.X.
master, leaving legacies to his servants, 4 Aristot. Pol. i. 4 (p. 1253) d SovXos
Bays 'Ovijaipos etxoat irivre \ puds exirm xrfjpi rt ipspvxov, Eth. Nic. vui. 13 (p.
Ados S' elxoai pvds ixirm- \ irevrrjKOVra 1161) 6 ydp SovXos tpspvxov Spyavov, rb
2vposm ZiWnj Sixa, x.r.X. See also 5" Spyavov d\j/vxos SovXos. See also the
the use of the name in the Latin play classification of 'implements' inVarro,
quoted Suet. Galb. 13 (according to one de Be rust. 1. 17. 1 ' Instrument! genus
reading). vocale et semivocale et mutum : vocale,
1 It occurs as near to CoIosssb as in quo sunt servi; semivocale, in quo
Aphrodisias; Boeckh C. I. no. 2743. boves; mutum, in quo plaustra.'
2 Ign. Ephes. 1 iv 'Ovrjalpm rif iv 6 Dig. iv. s 'ServUe caput nuUum
dydiru dSirjyrjrm ipHv Si iv aapxl iiri- jus habet' (Paulus); ib. 1. 17 'In per-
aKbirm...eiXbyijros b xW&V-**0* "/"" sonam servilem nulla cadit obUgatio '
allocs ovaiv toiovtov iirlaxoirov xexrij- (TJlpianus).

3IO EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
There was absolutely nothing to recommend him. He was
a slave, and what was worse, a Phrygian slave ; and he had
confirmed the popular estimate of his class1 and nation2 by
his own conduct. He was a. thief and a runaway. His offence
did not differ in any way, so far as we know, from the vulgar
type of slavish offences. He seems to have done just what
the representative slave in the Roman comedy threatens to do,
when he gets into trouble. He had 'packed up some goods
and taken to his heels8.' Rome was the natural cesspool for
these offscourings of humanity4. In the thronging crowds of
the metropolis was his best hope of secresy. In the dregs of
the city rabble he would find the society of congenial spirits.
His en- But at Rome the Apostle spread his net for him, and he
with St was caught in its meshes. How he first came in contact with
Paul in t^g imprisoned missionary we can only conjecture. Was it an
accidental encounter with his fellow-townsman Epaphras in the
streets of Rome which led to the interview? Was it the
pressure of want which induced him to seek alms from one
whose large-hearted charity must have been a household word
in his master's family ? Or did the memory of solemn words,
which he had chanced to overhear at those weekly gather
ings in the upper chamber at Colossae, haunt him in his
loneliness, till, yielding to the fascination, he was constrained
to unburden himself to the one man who could soothe his
1 Plaut. Pseud, i. 2, 6 'Ubi data non Lydus esset': comp. Alciphr.
occasiost, rape, clepe, tene, harpaga, Epist. in. 38 $pbya olxirijv ?%w irovrj-
bibe, es, fuge; hoc eorum opust'; Ovid pbv x.r.X.: Apollod. Com. (Meineke,
Amor. i. 15. 17 'Dum faUax servus.' iv. p. 451) 06 iravraxov <$pb£ elpj.
2 Cicero speaks thus of Phrygia and k.t.X. This last passage refers to the
the neighbouring districts ;proFlacc. 27 cowardice with which, besides all their
' Utrum igitur nostrum est an vestrum other bad qualities, the Phrygians were
hoc proverbium Phrygem plagis fieri credited : comp. Anon. Com. (ib. rv.
solere melioremi Quid de tota Caria? p. 652) SeiXbrepov Xa7<£ $pvybs, TertuU.
Nonne hoc vestra voce vulgatum est ; de Anim. 20 ' Comici Phirygas timidos
si quid cum periculo experiri veUs, in Uludunt': see Eibbeck Com. Lat. p.
Care id potissimurn esse faciendum? 106.
Quid porro in Graeeo sermone tam 3 Ter. Phorm. i. 4. 13 ' aUquid con-
tritum est, quam si quis despicatui vasassem, atque hinc me protinam
ducitur, ut Mysorum ultimas esse di- conjioerem in pedes.'
catur ? Nam quid ego dioam de Lydia? 4 SaU. Cat. xxxvn. 5 ' Eomam sicuti
Quis unquamGraeous comoediam scrip- in sentinam confluxerant' : oomp. Tac.
sit in qua servus primarum partium Ann. xv. 44.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 311
terrors and satisfy his yearnings? Whatever motive may
have drawn him to the Apostle's side — whether the pangs
of hunger or the gnawings of conscience — when he was once
within the range of attraction, he could not escape. He and con-
listened, was impressed, was convinced, was baptized. The ver810n¦
slave of Philemon became the freedman of Christ1. St Paul
found not only a sincere convert, but a devoted friend, in his
latest son in the faith. Aristotle had said that there ought
not to be, and could not be, any friendship with a slave qua
slave, though there might be qua man 2 ; and others had held
still stronger language to the same effect. The Apostle did
not recognise the philosopher's subtle distinction. For him
the conventional barrier between slave and free had altogether
vanished before the dissolving presence of an eternal verity8.
He found in Onesimus something more than a slave, a beloved st Paul's
brother, both as a slave and as a man, 'both in the flesh and in for \,-m
the Lord V The great capacity for good which appears in the
typical slave of Greek and Roman fiction, notwithstanding all
the fraud and profligacy overlying it, was evoked and developed
here by the inspiration of a new faith and the incentive of a
new hope. The genial, affectionate, winning disposition, puri
fied and elevated by a higher knowledge, had found its proper
scope. Altogether this new friendship was a solace and a
strength to the Apostle in his weary captivity, which he could
ill afford to forego. To take away Onesimus was to tear out
Paul's heart6.
But there was an imperious demand for the sacrifice. One- Necessity
simus had repented, but he had not made restitution. He ^^
could only do this by submitting again to the servitude from
1 1 Cor. vii. 22. ni. p. 2 sq. (ed. 2, 1854) with the
2 Eth. Nic. viu. 13 (p. 1161) ipiXla editor K. E. Hermann's references to
8' oix Ian irpbs rd dt/rvxa oiSi Slxatov the Uterature of the subject, p. 5.
dXX' oiSi irpbs tirirov ij povv, oiSi irpbs 8 1 Cor. vii. 21 sq., Gal. Ui. 28, Col.
SovXov J SovXos- oiSiv ydp xoivbv ianv Ui. 11. With this contrast the ex-
6 ydp SovXos ipijivxov Spyavov, rb b" pression attributed to a speaker in
Spyavov di/iirxos SouXos" rj pev ovv SovXos, Macrob. Sat. i. 11 ' quasi vero curent
oix ian tpiXla irpbs airbv, J S' avBpioiros divina de servis.'
jc.t.X. On the views of Aristotle re- 4 Philem. 16.
specting slavery see Becker's Charikles " ver. 12.

312 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
which he had escaped. Philemon must be made to feel that
when Onesimus was gained for Christ, he was regained for his
old master also. But if the claim of duty demanded a great
sacrifice from Paul, it demanded a greater still from Onesimus.
notwith- By returning he would place himself entirely at the mercy of the
therislf master whom he had wronged. Roman law, more cruel than
Athenian, practically imposed no limits to the power of the
master over his slave \ The alternative of life or death rested
solely with Philemon, and slaves were constantly crucified for
far lighter offences than his2. A thief and a runaway, he had
no claim to forgiveness.
Mediation A favourable opportunity occurred for restoring Onesimus
eus y° 1_ *0 h^15 master. Tychicus, as the bearer of letters from the
Apostle to Laodicea and Colossae, had occasion to visit those
parts. He might undertake the office of mediator, and plead
the cause of the penitent slave with the offended master.
Under his shelter Onesimus would be safer than if he en-
supple- countered Philemon alone. But St Paul is not satisfied with
j^jjkg this precaution. He will with his own hand write a few words
Apostle's 0f eager affectionate entreaty, identifying himself with the
cause of Onesimus. So he takes up his pen.
Analysis After the opening salutation to Philemon and the members
letter6 °^ ^ family, ne expresses his thankfulness for the report which
has reached his ears of his friend's charitable deeds. It is a
great joy and encouragement to the Apostle that so many
brethren have had cause to bless his name. This wide-spread
reputation for kindliness emboldens him to reveal his object in
writing. Though he has a right to command, he prefers rather
to entreat. He has a petition to prefer on behalf of a child of
1 Dig. i. 6 'In potestate sunt servi quo crimine servus suppUcium? quis
dominorum; quae quidem potestas testis adest? quis detulit?... 0 demons
juris gentium est : nam apud omnes ita servus homo est ? ml fecerit, esto.
peraeque gentes animadvertere possu- Hoc volo, sic jubeo, etc.' Compare
mus dominis in servos vitae necisque the words of the slave in Plautus Mil.
potestatem fuisse.' Comp. Senec. de Glor. ii. 4. 19 ' NoU minitari : scio
Clem. i. 18 'Cum in servum omnia crucem futuram rnilii sepulcrum : Ibi
Uceant.' mei sunt majores siti, pater, avos,
2 So the mistress in Juv. Sat. vi. proavos, abavos.'
219 sq. 'Pone crucem servo. Meruit

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 313
his own. This is none other than Onesimus, whom Philemon Analysis
will remember only as a worthless creature, altogether untrue letter.
to his name, but who now is a reformed man. He would have
wished to detain Onesimus, for he can ill afford to dispense
with his loving services. Indeed Philemon would doubtless have
been glad thus to minister vicariously to the Apostle's wants.
But a benefit which wears the appearance of being forced,
whether truly so or not, loses all its value, and therefore he
sends him back. Nay, there may have been in this desertion a
Divine providence which it would ill become him Paul to thwart,
Onesimus may have been withheld from Philemon for a time,
that he might be restored to him for ever. He may have left as
a slave, that he might return more than a slave. To others —
to the Apostle himself especially — he is now a dearly beloved
brother. Must he not be this and more than this to Philemon,
whether in earthly things or in heavenly things ? He therefore
begs Philemon to receive Onesimus as he would receive himself.
As for any injury that he may have done, as for any money that
he may owe, the Apostle makes himself responsible for this.
The present letter may be accepted as a bond, a security for
repayment. Yet at the same time he cannot refrain from
reminding Philemon that he might fairly claim the remission of
so small an amount. Does not his friend owe to him his own
soul besides ? Yes, he has a right to look for some filial grati
tude and duty from one to whom he stands in the relation of a
spiritual father. Philemon will surely not refuse him this com
fort in his many trials. He writes in the full confidence that
he will be obeyed ; he is quite sure that his friend will do more
than is asked of him. At the same time he trusts to see him
before very long, and to talk over this and other matters.
Philemon may provide him a lodging: for he hopes through
their prayers that he may be liberated, and given back to them.
Then follow the salutations, and the letter ends with the
Apostle's benediction.
Of the result of this appeal we have no certain knowledge. Eesrdt
It is reasonable to suppose however that Philemon would not appeal.

314 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
belie the Apostle's hopes ; that he would receive the slave as a
brother ; that he would even go beyond the express terms of
the Apostle's petition, and emancipate the penitent. But all
this is a mere conjecture. One tradition makes Onesimus bishop
of Ephesus \ But this obviously arises from a confusion with
Legendary his namesake, who lived about half a century later 2. Another
18 oiy' story points to Bercea in Macedonia as his see s. This is at least
free from the suspicion of having been suggested by any notice
in the Apostolic writings : but the authority on which it rests
does not entitle it to much credit. The legend of his missionary
labours in Spain and of his martyrdom at Rome may have been
built on the hypothesis of his continuing in the Apostle's
company, following in the Apostle's footsteps, and sharing the
Apostle's fate. Another story, which gives a circumstantial
account of his martyrdom at Puteoli, seems to confuse him with
a namesake who suffered, or was related to have suffered, in the
Decian persecution4.
Deprecia- The estimate formed of this epistle at various epochs has
epistle differed widely. In the fourth century there was a strong bias
time?ly agamst ^ The 'spirit of the age' had no sympathy with either
the subject or the handling. Like the spirit of more than one
later age, it was enamoured of its own narrowness, which it
mistook for largeness of view, and it could not condescend to
such trivialities as were here offered to it. Its maxim seemed
to be De minimis non curat evangelium. Of what account was
the fate of a single insignificant slave, long since dead and gone,
to those before whose eyes the battle of the creeds was still
raging? This letter taught them nothing about questions of
theological interest, nothing about matters of ecclesiastical disci-
1 See Acta Sanct. Boll, xvi Eebr. may be intended. But on the other
(n. p. 857 sq. ed. nov.) for the autho- hand the language of Ignatius (Ephes.
rities, if they deserve the name. i sq.) leaves the impression that he is
a If we take the earlier date of the speaking of a person comparatively
Epistles of St Ignatius, a.d. 107, we young and untried in office.
get an interval of 44 years between the 3 Apost. Const, vu. 46, quoted above,
Onesimus of St Paul and the Onesimus p. 304, note 2.
of Ignatius. It is not altogether impos- 4 Eor the legend compare Act.
sible therefore that the same person Sanct. 1. c. p. 858 sq. See also the

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 315
pline ; and therefore they would have none of it. They denied
that it had been written by St Paul. It mattered nothing to
them that the Church from the earliest ages had accepted it as
genuine, that even the remorseless 'higher criticism' of a
Marcion had not ventured to lay hands on it \ It was wholly
unworthy of the Apostle. If written by him, they contended,
it must have been written when he was not under the influence
of the Spirit : its contents were altogether so unedifying. We Eeply
may infer from the replies of Jerome 2, of Chrysostom 8, and of fathers.
Theodore of Mopsuestia4, that they felt themselves to be
stemming a fierce current of prejudice which had set in this
direction. But they were strong in the excellence of their
cause, and they nobly vindicated this epistle against its
assailants. In modern times there has been no disposition to under-rate High es-
its value. Even Luther and Calvin, whose bias tended to the modern0
depreciation of the ethical as compared with the doctrinal wnters-
portions of the scriptures, show a true appreciation of its beauty
and significance. ' This epistle ', writes Luther, ' showeth a Luther.
right noble lovely example of Christian love. Here we see how
note on the Ignatian Mart. Mom. 10. bere quod aedificare nos possit etc....
1 Hieron. Comm. in Philem. praef. sed mihi videntur, dum epistolam sim-
YTI- P- 743 ' Pauli esse epistolam ad pUcitatis arguunt, suam imperitiam
Philemonem saltern Marcione auctore prodere, non inteUigentes quid in sin-
do cean tux: qui, quum caet eras epis tolas gulis sermonibus virtutis et sapientiae
ejusdem vel non susceperit vel quaedam lateat.'
in hia mutaverit atque corroserit, in 3 Argum. in Philem. dXX' iiretSi) nvis
hanc solam manus non est ausus mit- tpaai irepirrbv elvai rb xal rairiyv irpoa-
tere, quia sua Ulam brevitas defende- xeXaBat rty iiriaroXijv, etye birip irpdypa-
bat.' St Jerome has in his mind tos pixpov ijl-lmaev, birip evbs dvSpbs, pa-
TertuUian adv. Marc. v. 21 'SoUhuic Birmaav oaoi ravra iyxaXoxiaiv Sri pvplmv
epistolae brevitas sua profuit, ut fal- elalv iyxXijparmv al-ioi x.r.X., and he
sarias manus Marcionis evaderet.' goes on to discuss the value of the
2 ib. p. 742 sq. ' Qui nolunt inter epistle at some length.
epistolas Pauli earn recipere quae ad 4 Spicil. Solesm. l p. 149 ' Quid
PhUemonem scribitur, aiunt non sem- vero ex ea lucri possit acquiri, convenit
per apostolnm nee omnia Christo in se manif estius expUcare, quia nee omni-
loquente dixisse, quia neo humana bus id existimo posse esse cognitum;
imbecilUtas unum tenorem Sancti Spi- quod maxime heri jam ipse a nobis
ritusferrepotuissetetc...Hisetcaeteris disseri postulasti'; ib. p. 152 'De hiB
istius modi volunt aut epistolam non et nunc superius dixi, quod non omnes
esse Pauli quae ad Philemonem scri- similiter arbitror potius se (potuisse?)
bitur aut, etiamsi PauU sit, nihil ha- prospicere.'

316 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
St Paul layeth himself out for poor Onesimus, and with all his
means pleadeth his cause with his master: and so setteth
himself as if he were Onesimus, and had himself done wrong
to Philemon. Even as Christ did for us with God the Father,
thus also doth St Paul for Onesimus with Philemon... We are all
his Onesimi, to my thinking.' 'Though he handleth a subject,'
Calvin. says Calvin, ' which otherwise were low and mean, yet after his
manner he is borne up aloft unto God. With such modest
entreaty doth he humble himself on behalf of the lowest of men,
that scarce anywhere else is the gentleness of his spirit por
trayed more truly to the life.' And the chorus of admiration
has been swelled by later voices from the most opposite quarters.
Later 'The single Epistle to Philemon,' says one quoted by Bengel,
'very far surpasses all the wisdom of the world1.' 'Nowhere,'
writes Ewald, 'can the sensibility and warmth of a tender friend
ship blend more beautifully with the loftier feeling of a
commanding spirit, a teacher and an Apostle, than in this
letter, at once so brief, and yet so surpassingly full and signifi
cant V ' A true little chef d'oeuvre of the art of letter-writing,'
exclaims M. Renan characteristically8. 'We have here,' writes
Sabatier, 'only a few familiar lines, but so full of grace, of
salt, of serious and trustful affection, that this short epistle
gleams like a pearl of the most exquisite purity in the rich
treasure of the New Testament4.' Even Baur, while laying
violent hands upon it, is constrained to speak of this 'little letter'
as ' making such an agreeable impression by its attractive form '
and as penetrated 'with the noblest Christian spirit8.'
The epi- The Epistle to Philemon has more than once been com-
pared°with pared with the following letter addressed to a friend by the
o/pnn younger Pliny on a somewhat similar occasion8 :
Your freedman, with whom you had told me you were vexed
came to me, and throwing himself down before me clung to my feet,
i FrankePrae/..iV.T.<3raec.p.26,27, Paul himself gave at the end of his
quoted by Bengel on PhUem. i. letter to the Colossians been better
2 Die Sendschreiben etc. p. 458. reaUsed, 6 Xbyos vp&v irdvrore iv xdptn,
3 L' Antichrist p. 96. £\aTl -/jprvpAvos x.r.X. (Col. iv. 6).'
4 L'ApStre Paul p. 194. He goes on 6 Paulus p. 476.
to say; ' Never has the precept which 6 Plin. Ep. ix. 21.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 317
as if they had been yours. He was profuse in his tears and his
entreaties; he was profuse also in his silence. In short, he con
vinced me of his penitence. I believe that he is indeed a reformed
character, because he feels that he has done wrong. You are angry,
I know ; and you have reason to be angry, this also I know : but
mercy wins the highest praise just when there is the most righteous
cause for anger. You loved the man, and, I hope, will continue to
love him : meanwhile it is enough, that you should allow yourself
to yield to his prayers. You may be angry again, if he deserves it ;
and in this you will be the more readily pardoned if you yield now.
Concede something to his youth, something to his tears, something
to your own indulgent disposition. Do not torture him, lest you
torture yourself at the same time. For it is torture to you, when one
of your gentle temper is angry. I am afraid lest I should appear not
to ask but to compel, if I should add my prayers to his. Yet I will
add them the more fully and unreservedly, because I scolded the man
himself with sharpness and severity ; for I threatened him straitly
that I would never ask you again. This I said to him, for it was
necessary to alarm him ; but I do not use the same language to you.
For perchance I shall ask again, and shall be successful again ; only
let my request be such, as it becomes me to prefer and you to grant.
Farewell. The younger Pliny is the noblest type of a true Roman as an ex-
gentleman, and this touching letter needs no words of praise. Jji ec^aon
Yet, if purity of diction be excepted, there will hardly be any racter.
difference of opinion in awarding the palm to the Christian
Apostle. As an expression of simple dignity, of refined courtesy,
of large sympathy, and of warm personal affection, the Epistle
to Philemon stands unrivalled. And its pre-eminence is the
more remarkable because in style it is exceptionally loose. It
owes nothing to the graces of rhetoric ; its effect is due solely
to the spirit of the writer.
But the interest which attaches to this short epistle as its higher
an expression of individual character is far less important than ln eres "
its significance as exhibiting the attitude of Christianity to a
widely spread and characteristic social institution of the ancient
world. Slavery was practised by the Hebrews under the sanction
of the Mosaic law, not less than by the Greeks and Romans.

318 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Slavery But though the same in name, it was in its actual working
Hebrews.6 something wholly different. The Hebrew was not suffered either
by law-giver or by prophet to forget that he himself had been
a bondman in the land of Egypt ; and all his relations to his
dependents were moulded by the sympathy of this recollection.
His slaves were members of his family; they were members
also of the Holy Congregation. They had their religious, as
well as their social, rights. If Hebrews, their liberty was
secured to them after six years' service at the outside. If
foreigners, they were protected by the laws from the tyranny
and violence of their masters. Considering the conditions of
ancient society, and more especially of ancient warfare, slavery
as practised among the Hebrews was probably an escape from
alternatives which would have involved a far greater amount of
human misery. Still even in this form it was only a temporary
concession, till the fulness of time came, and the world was
taught that ' in Christ is neither bond nor free V
Among the Jews the slaves formed only a small fraction of
the whole population 2. They occupy a very insignificant place
in the pictures of Hebrew life and history which have been
Large handed down to us. But in Greece and Rome the case was far
slaves in different. In our enthusiastic eulogies of free, enlightened,
Grfe"e democratic Athens, we are apt to forget that the interests
of the many were ruthlessly sacrificed to the selfishness of the
few. The slaves of Attica on the most probable computation
were about four times as numerous as the citizens, and about
three times as numerous as the whole free population of the
state, including the resident aliens 8. They were consigned for
the most part to labour in gangs in the fields or the mines
1 On slavery among the Hebrews the year 309 B. 0. 21,000 citizens,
see the admirable work of Prof. Gold- 10,000 residents, and 400,000 slaves
win Smith Does the Bible sanction (Ctesicles in Athen. vi. p. 272 b).
American slavery f p. 1 sq. This would make the proportion of
2 In Ezra n. 65 the number of slaves slaves to citizens nearly twenty to one.
compared with the number of free is It ia supposed however that the num-
a little more than one to six. ber of citizens here includes only
3 Boeckh Public Economy of Athens adult males, whereas the number of
p. 35 sq. According to a census taken slaves may comprise both sexes and
by Demetrius Phalereus there were in aU ages. Hence Boeckh's estimate

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 319
or the factories, without any hope of bettering their condition.
In the light of these facts we see what was really meant by
popular government and equal rights at Athens. The propor
tions of the slave population elsewhere were even greater. In
the small island of .cEgina, scarcely exceeding forty English
square miles in extent, there were 470,000 slaves ; in the con
tracted territory of Corinth there were not less than 460,000 \
The statistics of slave-holding in Italy are quite as startling. We
are told that wealthy Roman landowners sometimes possessed as
many as ten or twenty thousand slaves, or even more2. We may
indeed not unreasonably view these vague and general statements
with suspicion : but it is a fact that, a few years before the Chris
tian era, one Claudius Isidorus left by will more than four thou
sand slaves, though he had incurred serious losses by the civil war8.
And these vast masses of human beings had no protection Cruelty of
from Roman law *. The slave had no relationships, no con- jaw to.
iugal rights. Cohabitation was allowed to him at his owner's wards
J ° ° _ _ slaves.
pleasure, but not marriage. His companion was sometimes
assigned to him by lot 6. The slave was absolutely at his
master's disposal; for the smallest offence he might be scourged,
mutilated, crucified, thrown to the wild beasts 6. Only two or
which is adoptedin the text. Por other working of slavery among tbe Eomans
calculations see Wallon Histoire de is placed in its most favourable light in
I'Esclavage i.p. 221 sq. Gaston Bossier La Religion Romaine
1 Athen. I. c. p. 272 b, d. The state- 11. p. 343 sq. (Paris 1874), and in Over-
ment respecting .aSgina is given on beck Studien zur Gesch. d. Alten Eir-
the authority of Aristotle; that re- c he 1. p. 1 58 sq.
specting Corinth on the authority of B Mom. Alterth.l.a. p. i84sq.; Gallus
Epitimseus. 11. p. 144 sq. In this, as in other
3 Athen. I. c. 'Papalmv ixaaros ... respects, the cruelty of the legislature
7rXeicrrous Saovs xexrijpivos olxiras' xal was mitigated by the humanity of in-
ydp pvplovs xal Siapvplovs xal in irXelovs dividual masters ; and the inscriptions
Sc- irdpiroXXot xixTTjvrai. See Becker show that male and female slaves in
Gallus n. p. 113 (ed. 3). many cases were aUowed to live to-
3 Plin. N. H. xxxiu. 47. gether through life as man and wife,
4 On the condition of Greek and though tbe law did not recognise or
Eoman slaves the able and exhaust- secure their union. It was reserved
ive work of Wallon Histoire de VEs- for Constantine to take the initiative
clavage dans VAntiquiU (Paris 1847) in protecting the conjugal and famUy
is the chief authority. See also Becker rights of slaves by legislature ; God.
and Marquardt R'am. Alterth. v. 1. p. Theod. U. 25. 1.
139 sq. ; Becker Charikles n. p. 1 sq., 8 Wallon 11. p. 177 sq.; Rom. Alterth.
Gallus 11. p. 99 sq. The practical 1. c; Gallus n. p. 145 sq. ; Bein Privat-

320 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
three years before the letter to Philemon was written, and
probably during St Paul's residence in Rome, a terrible tragedy
had been enacted under the sanction of the law1. Pedanius
Murder of Secundus, a senator, had been slain by one of his slaves in
Secundus. a fit of anger or jealousy. The law demanded that in such
cases all the slaves under the same roof at the time should be
put to death. On the present occasion four hundred persons
were condemned to suffer by this inhuman enactment. The
populace however interposed to rescue them, and a tumult
ensued. The Senate accordingly took the matter into delibera
tion. Among the speakers C. Cassius strongly advocated the
enforcement of the law. ' The dispositions of slaves,' he argued,
'were regarded with suspicion by our ancestors, even when
they were born on the same estates or in the same houses and
learnt to feel an affection for their masters from the first. Now
however, when we have several nations among our slaves, with
various rites, with foreign religions or none at all, it is not
possible to keep down such a rabble except by fear.' These
sentiments prevailed, and the law was put in force. But the
roads were lined by a military guard, as the prisoners were
led to execution, to prevent a popular outbreak. This incident
illustrates not only the heartless cruelty of the law, but also
the social dangers arising out of slavery. Indeed the universal
distrust had already found expression in a common proverb,
' As many enemies as slaves V But this was not the only way
in which slavery avenged itself on the Romans. The spread
of luxury and idleness was a direct consequence of this state
of things. Work came to be regarded as a low and degrading,
because a servile occupation. Meanwhile sensuality in its vilest
recht der Romer p. 552 sq. Hadrian took place a.d. 61. The law in ques-
first took away from masters the tion was the Senatusconsultum Silo-
power of life and death over their nianum, passed under Augustus a. d.
slaves; Spart. Vit. Hadr. 18 ' Servos 10.
a dominis occidi vetuit eosque jussit 2 Senec. Ep. Mor. 47 ' Deinde ejus-
damnari per judices, si digni essent'. dem arrogantiae proverbiurn jactatur
For earUer legislative enactments which totidem hostes esse quot servos' ; comp.
had afforded a very feeble protection Macrob. i. 11. 13. See also Eestus
to slaves, see below p. 327. p. 261 (Ed. MueUer) 'Quot servi tot
1 Tac. Ann. xiv. 42. This incident hostes in proverbio est '.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 321
forms was fostered by the tremendous power which placed the
slave at the mercy of the master's worst passions \
With this wide-spread institution Christianity found itself Christian-
in conflict. How was the evil to be met ? Slavery was in- revX-
woven into the texture of society ; and to prohibit slavery was tl0Iiary.
to tear society into shreds. Nothing less than a servile war
with its certain horrors and its doubtful issues must have been
the consequence. Such a mode of operation was altogether
alien to the spirit of the Gospel. 'The New Testament', it
has been truly said, 'is not concerned with any political or
social institutions; for political and social institutions belong to
particular nations and particular phases of society.' ' Nothing
marks the divine character of the Gospel more than its per
fect freedom from any appeal to the spirit of political revo
lution2.' It belongs to all time: and therefore, instead of
attacking special abuses, it lays down universal principles
which shall undermine the evil.
Hence the Gospel never directly attacks slavery as an in- st Paul's
r J / treatment
stitution : the Apostles never command the liberation of slaves of the
as an absolute duty. It is a remarkable fact that St Paul in onesimus.
this epistle stops short of any positive injunction. The word
' emancipation ' seems to be trembling on his lips, and yet he
does not once utter it. He charges Philemon to take the run
away slave Onesimus into his confidence again ; to receive him
1 See the saying of Haterius in the f erence. Dans l'age de la force et dans
elder Seneca Controv. iv. Praef., 'Im- la plenitude de leurs faeultes, eUe les
pudicitia in ingenuo crimen est, in vouait, a son choix, soit au travail,
servo necessitas, in liberto officium', soit au vice; au travail les natures
with its context. Wallon (1. p. 332) grossieres; au vice, les natures plus
sums up the condition of the slave delicates, nourries pour le plaisir du
thus: 'L'esclave appartenait au mai- maitre, et qui lorsqu'U en etait las,
tre : par lui meme, Q n'etait rien, U etaient rele'gue'es dans la prostitution
n'avait rien. Voila le principe ; et a son profit. Avant et aprfis l'age du
tout ce qu'on en pent tirer par voie travail, abandonnes a leur faiblesse ou
de consequence formait aussi, en fait, a leurs infirmite's ; eniants, Us grand -
l'etat common des esclaves dans la issaient dans le de'sordre ; vieUards, Us
plupart des pays. A toutes les epo- mouraient souvent dans la misere;
ques, dans toutes les situations de la morts, Us etaient quelquefois deiaisse's
vie, cette autorite' souveraine plane sur la voie pubUque... '
sur eux et modifie leur destinee par 2 G. Smith Does the Bible etc. ? pp.
ses rigueurs comme par son indif- 95, g6.
COL. 21

322

His lan
guage re
specting slavery
elsewhere.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
with all affection; to regard him no more as a slave but as
a brother ; to treat him with the same consideration, the same
love, which he entertains for the Apostle himself to whom he
owes everything. In fact he tells him to do very much more
than emancipate his slave, but this one thing he does not
directly enjoin. St Paul's treatment of this individual case
is an apt illustration of the attitude of Christianity towards
slavery in general.
Similar also is his language elsewhere. Writing to the
Corinthians, he declares the absolute equality of the freeman
and the slave in the sight of God 1. It follows therefore that
the slave may cheerfully acquiesce in his lot, knowing that all
earthly distinctions vanish in the light of this eternal truth.
If his freedom should be offered to him, he will do well to
accept it, for it puts him in a more advantageous position2:
but meanwhile he need not give himself any concern about
his lot in life. So again, when he addresses the Ephesians and
Colossians on the mutual obligations of masters and slaves,
he is content to insist on the broad fact that both alike are
slaves of a heavenly Master, and to enforce the duties which

1 i Cor. vU. 21 sq.
2 The clause, dXX' et xal Sivaaai
iXev&epos yeviadai, pdXXov xP^crcu, bas
been differently interpreted from early
times, either as recommending the
slave to avaU himself of any oppor
tunity of emancipation, or as advising
him to refuse tbe offer of freedom and
to remain in servitude. The earUest
commentator whose opinion I have
observed, Origen (in Cram. Cat. p.
140), interprets it as favourable to
Uberty, but he confuses the mean
ing by giving » metaphorical sense to
slavery, SovXov mvbpaaev dvayKalms rbv
yeyapijKbra. Again, Severianus (ib. p.
141) distinctly explains it as recom
mending a state of Uberty. On the
other hand Chrysostom, while men
tioning that ' certain persons ' interpret
it ei Sivaaai iXevBepmBijvai, iXevBepiiBijri,
himself supposes St Paul to advise the
slave's remaining in slavery. And so
Theodoret and others. The balance

of argument seems to be decidedly in
favour of the former view.
(1) Tbe actual language must be
considered first. And here (i) the
particles el xal wUl suit either inter
pretation. If they are translated ' even
though', tbe clause recommends the
continuance in slavery. But xal may
be equaUy weU taken with Svvaaai, and
the words wiU then mean ' if it should
be in your power to obtain your free
dom'. So above ver. 11 idv Si xal
XmpiaBy : comp. Luke xi. 18 ei" Si Kal
6 Zarapas itp' iavrbv SiepeplaBrj, 1 Pet.
Ui. 14 dXX' el xal irdaxoire Sid Stxatoai-
vijv. (U) The expression paXXov xpV^ai
seems to direct the slave to avail him
self of some new opportunity offered,
and therefore to recommend liberty;
comp. ix. 12, 15.
(2) The immediate context will
admit either interpretation. If slavery
be preferred, the Bentence is con
tinuous. If Uberty, the clause dXX' el

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 323
flow from its recognition1. He has no word of reproach for
the masters on the injustice of their position ; he breathes no
hint to the slaves of a social grievance needing redress.
But meanwhile a principle is boldly enunciated, which must The
in the end prove fatal to slavery. When the Gospel taught idea fatal
that God had made all men and women upon earth of one to 8lavei7-
family ; that all alike were His sons and His daughters ; that,
whatever conventional distinctions human society might set up,
the supreme King of Heaven refused to acknowledge any;
that the slave notwithstanding his slavery was Christ's freed
man, and the free notwithstanding his liberty was Christ's
slave ; when the Church carried out this principle by admitting
the slave to her highest privileges, inviting him to kneel side
by side with his master at the same holy table ; when in short
the Apostolic precept that ' in Christ Jesus is neither bond nor
free' was not only recognised but acted upon, then slavery was
doomed. Henceforward it was only a question of time. Here
was the idea which must act as a solvent, must disintegrate
this venerable institution, however deeply rooted and however
widely spread. ' The brotherhood of man, in short, is the idea
xal. ..pdXXov xp^crcu ls parenthetical. (i) Such a recommendation would be
In this latter case its motive is to alien to the spirit of a man whose
correct misapprehension, as if the sense of political right was so strong,
Apostle would say, ' When I declare and who asserted his citizenship so
the absolute indifference of the two stanchly on more than one occasion
states in the sight of God, I do not (Acts xvi. 37, xxu. 28). (u) The in-
mean to say that you should not avail dependent position of the freeman
yourselves of freedom, if it comes in would give him an obvious advantage
your way ; it puts you in a more ad- in doing the work of Christ, which
vantageous position, and you will do it iB difficult to imagine St Paul en-
weU to prefer it '. Such a corrective joining bim deUberately to forego.
parenthesis is altogether after St (iii) Throughout the passage the Apo-
Paul's manner, and indeed instances stle, while maintaining the indifference
occur in this very context: e.g. ver. of these earthly relations in the sight
ii idv Si Kal xapia^V x.t.X., ver. 15 of God, yet always gives the prefer-
el Si b airiaros xaPl&TaL x.t.X. This ence to a position of independence,
last passage is an exact paraUel, for whenever it comes to a Christian na-
the ydp of ver. 16 is connected imme- turaUy and without any undue im-
diately with ver. 14, the parenthesis patience on his part. The spirit
being disregarded as here. which animates St Paul's injunctions
(3) The argument which seems de- here may be seen from w. 8, 11, 15,
cisive is the extreme improbabUity 26, 27 etc.
that St Paul should have recommended 1 Ephes. vi. 5 — 9, Col. iii. 22 — iv. 1.
slavery in preference to freedom. For
21 — 2

324 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Its general which Christianity in its social phase has been always striving
to realise, and the progress of which constitutes the social
history of Christendom. With what difficulties this idea has
struggled; how it has been marred by revolutionary violence, as
well as impeded by reactionary selfishness ; to what chimerical
hopes, to what wild schemes, to what calamitous disappoint
ments, to what desperate conflicts, it has given birth; how
often being misunderstood and misapplied, it has brought not
peace on earth but a sword — it is needless here to rehearse.
Still, as we look back over the range of past history, we can
see beyond doubt that it is towards this goal that Christianity
as a social principle has been always tending and still tends1.'
its effects And this beneficent tendency of the Gospel was felt at
on s avery. once .^ ^g eg-ec^s on siaverv. The Church indeed, even in
the ardour of her earliest love, did not prohibit her sons from
retaining slaves in their households. It is quite plain from
extant notices, that in the earlier centuries, as in the later,
Christians owned slaves2 like their heathen neighbours, with
out forfeiting consideration among their fellow-believers. But
nevertheless the Christian idea was not a dead-letter. The
Protection chivalry of the Gospel which regarded the weak and helpless
and manu- . . .
mission of from whatever cause, as its special charge, which extended its
s aves. protection to the widow, the orphan, the sick, the aged, and the
prisoner, was not likely to neglect the slave. Accordingly we
find that one of the earliest forms which Christian benevolence
took was the contribution of funds for the liberation of slaves8.
Honours But even more important than overt acts like these was the
slave mar- moral and social importance with which the slave was now
tyrs- invested. Among the heroes and heroines of the Church were
found not a few members of this class. When slave girls like
1 G. Smith Does the Bible etc. 1 p. Christian writers coUected in Ba-
121. bington Abolition of Slavery p. 20 sq.
2 Athenag. Suppl. 35 SovXoi eiaiv 3 Ignat. Polyc. 4 pi) ipdrmaav iirb
¦r)pTv, tois piv xal irXelovs rois 8' iXdrrovs. tov koivov iXevBepovaBat, Apost. Const.
It would even appear that the domes- iv. 9 rd. <?{ avrmv, ms irpoeiptJKapev,
tic servant who betrayed Polycarp dBpoifbpeva xP^IMTa Stardaaere Staxo-
(Mart. Polyc. 6) was a slave, for he vovvres els dyopaapois tuv dylinv, pvb-
was put to the torture. Comp. Justin. pevoi SoiXovs xal alxpaXmrovs, 8e-
Apol. ii. 12. See also passages from aplovs, x.t.X.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 325
Blandina in Gaul or Felicitas in Africa, having won for them
selves the crown of martyrdom, were celebrated in the festivals
of the Church with honours denied to the most powerful and
noblest born of mankind, social prejudice had received a wound
which could never be healed.
While the Church was still kept in subjection, moral in- Christ-
fluence and private enterprise were her only weapons. But dominant
Christianity was no sooner seated on the throne of the Caesars
than its influence began to be felt in the imperial policy1. The
legislation of Constantine, despite its startling inequalities, Legisla-
forms a unique chapter in the statute-book of Rome. In its constan-
mixed character indeed it reflects the transitional position of tme'
its author. But after all allowance made for its very patent
defects, its general advance in the direction of humanity and
purity is far greater than can be traced in the legislation even
of the most humane and virtuous of his heathen predecessors.
More especially in the extension of legal protection to slaves,
and in the encouragement given to emancipation, we have an
earnest of the future work which Christianity was destined to
do for this oppressed class of mankind, though the relief which
it gave was after all very partial and tentative2.
1 It must not however be forgotten p. 560 sq. The character of this excep-
that, even before Christianity became tional legislation is the strongest im-
the predominant reUgion, a more hu- peachment of the general cruelty of the
mane spirit had entered into Boman law; while at the same time subse-
legislation. The important enact- quent notices show how very far from
ment of Hadrian has been already effective it was even within its own
mentioned, p. 319, note 6. Even ear- narrow limits. See for instance the
lier the lex Petronia (of which the date passage in Galen, v. p. 17 (ed. Kiirin)
is uncertain) had prohibited masters Xaxrl^ovai xal robs SipBaXpois i^opir-
from making their slaves fight with rovai xal ypatpelm Kevrovaiv k.t.X. (comp.
wfld beasts in mere caprice and with- ib. p. 584), or Seneca de Ira Ui. 3. 6
out an order from a judge (Dig. xlviti. ' eculei et fidiculae et ergastula et cru-
8. 11); and Claudius (a.d. 47), finding ces et circumdati defossis corporibus
that the practice of turning out sick ignes et eadavera quoque trahens un-
slaves into tbe streets to die was on eus, varia vinculorum genera, varia
tbe increase, ordered that those who poenarum, lacerationes membrorum,
survived this treatment should have inscriptiones frontis et bestiarum im-
tbeir freedom (Dion Cass. lx. 29, Suet. manium caveae.'
Claud. 25). For these and simUar On the causes of these ameUorations
enactments of the heathen emperors in the law see RSm. Alterth. v. 1. p. 199.
Bee WaUon in. p. 60 sq., Rom. Alterth. 2 On the legislation of Constan-
v. 1. 197, Eein Privatrecht d. R'dmer tine affecting slavery see De BrogUe

326

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

Subse
quent activity
ofthe Church.

And on the whole this part has been faithfully and courage
ously performed by the Church. There have been shameful
exceptions now and then : there has been occasional timidity
and excess of caution. The commentaries of the fathers on
this epistle are an illustration of this latter fault1. Much may
be pardoned to men who shrink from seeming to countenance
a violent social revolution. But notwithstanding, it is a broad
and patent fact that throughout the early and middle ages the
influence of the Church was exerted strongly on the side of
humanity in this matter8. The emancipation of slaves was
regarded as the principal aim of the higher Christian life8 ; the
amelioration of serfdom was a matter of constant solicitude
with the rulers of the Church.
And at length we seem to see the beginning of the end.
The rapid strides towards emancipation during the present
s^ff' generation are without a parallel in the history of the world.
The abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire at
an enormous material sacrifice is one of the greatest moral

The con
quests and
hopes of

L'Eglise et L'Empire Romain i. p. 304
sq. (ed. 5), Chawner Influence of Chris
tianity upon the Legislation of Con
stantine the Great p. 73 sq., Wallon in.
p. 414 sq. The legislation of Justinian
is still more honourably distinguished
for its aUeviation of the evUs of slavery.
1 E.g. Chrysostom and Theodore of
Mopsuestia (Spic. Solesm. 1. p. 152).
Yet St Chrysostom himself pleads the
cause of slaves earnestly elsewhere.
In Hom. xl ad 1 Cor., a. p. 385 he says
of slavery, ' It is tbe penalty of sin and
the punishment of disobedience. But
when Christ came, he annvdled even
this, For in Christ Jesus there is no
slave nor free. Therefore it is not ne
cessary to have a slave; but, if it
should be necessary, then one only or
at most a second '. And be then teUs
his audience that if they reaUy care for
the welfare of slaves, tbey must ' buy
them, and having taught them some
art that they may maintain themselves,
set them free.' 'I know,' he adds,
' that I am annoying my hearers ; but

what can I do? For this purpose I am
appointed, and I will not cease speak
ing so.' On the attitude of this father
towards slavery see Mohler p. 89 sq.
2 On the influence of Christianity in
this respect see WaUon in. p. 314 sq.,
Biot De I'Abolition de VEsclavage
Ancien en Occident (1840), Ch. Ba
bington Influence of Christianity in
promoting the Abolition of Slavery etc
(1846), Schmidt Essai historique sur
la Societe Civile dans le Monde Romain
etc. p. 228 sq. (1853), Mohler Gesam-
melte Schriften 11. p. 54 sq., G. Smith
Does theBible etc.? p. 95 sq., E. S. Talbot
Slavery as affected by Christianity
(1869), Lecky Rationalism in Europe 11.
p. 255 sq., European Morals n. p. 65
sq., Overbeck Studien etc. 1. p. 172 sq.,
AUard Les Esclaves Chretiens (1876).
The last-mentioned work, which ap
peared after this introduction was first
published (1875), treats the question
very fiuly.
8 Mohler p. 99 sq., Schmidt p.
246 sq., Lecky E. M. n. p. 73 sq.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 327
conquests which England has ever achieved. The liberation of
twenty millions of serfs throughout the Russian dominions has
thrown a halo of glory round the name of Alexander IL, which
no time can dim. The emancipation of the negro in the vast
republic of the New World was a victory not less important
than either to the well-being of the human race. Thus within
the short period of little more than a quarter of a century this
reproach of civilisation and humanity has been wiped out in
the three greatest empires of the world. It is a fit sequel
to these achievements, that at length a well-directed attack
should have been made on the central fortress of slavery and
the slave-trade, the interior of Africa. May we not venture
to predict that in future ages, when distance of view shall
have adjusted the true relations of events, when the brilliancy
of empires and the fame of wars shall have sunk to their
proper level of significance, this epoch will stand out in the
history of mankind as the era of liberation ? If so, the Epistle
to Philemon, as the earliest prelude to these magnificent social
victories, must be invested with more than common interest
for our generation.

VNOWHVI* KO&1I

WHERE THE SPIRIT OP THE LORD IS, THERE
IS LIBERTY.
WHO IS WEAK, AND I AM NOT WEAK?
WHO IS OFFENDED, AND I BURN NOT?

Such ever was love's way : to rise, it stoops.

IIPOS <MAHMONA.

nAYAOS, Seo-fiios XpttTToO 'Itjtrou Kat Ti/u66eos 6
doe\(pos, 4>tAr;|Uow ™ dcyairnToj Kai (rvvepyw tj/utop
~Kai 'A-Trtyia ttj d%e\<pij Kal 'Kp^nnrai tw avva"TpaTtuiTY\
r]fxwv Kat Trj KaT oikov <rov eKKXtjiria' 3^dpt? vfiiv

i — 3. ' Paul, now a prisoner of
Christ Jesus, and Timothy a brother
in the faith, unto Philemon our
dearly-beloved and feUow-labourer in
the Gospel, and unto Apphia our sis
ter, and unto Archippus our feUow-
soldier in Christ, and to the Church
which assembles in thy house. Grace
and peace to you aU from God our
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.'
1. 8iapios] The authoritative title
of 'Apostle' is dropped, because
throughout this letter St Paul desires
to entreat rather than to command
(ver. 8, 9); see the note on Phil. i. 1.
In its place is substituted a designa
tion which would touch his friend's
heart. How could PhUemon resist
an appeal which was penned within
prison walls and by a manacled hand?
For this characteristic reference to
his ' bonds ' see the note on ver. 13.
Tipbdeos] Timothy seems to have
been with St Paul during a great part
of his three years' sojourn in Ephesus
(Acts xix. 22), and could hardly have
failed fro make the acquaintance of
Philemon. For the designation 6
aSeXcpos applied to Timothy see the
note on Col. i. 1.
<&iXijpovi x.t.X.] On the persons
here addressed, and the language in
which they are described, see the in
troduction p. 301 sq.
avvepym] It would probably be
during St Paul's long sojourn at Ephe

sus that PhUemon had laboured with
him : see above p. 3 1 sq.
rjpmv] should probably be attached
to dyamjrcp as well as to avvepym ;
oomp. Rom. xvi. 5, 8, 9, 1 Cor. x. 14,
Phil. ii. 12.
2. rij dSeXcpTj] For this the re
ceived text has rfj dyairTjrjj. Internal
probabiUties can be urged in favour
of both readings. On the one hand
dyairijrfi might have been introduced
for the sake of conformity to the pre
ceding dyaiTTjTm; on the other dSeXcpfj
might have been substituted for aya-
irrjrrj on grounds of false delicacy.
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spicil. So
lesm. 1. p. 154), who had the reading
dyairrjTji, feels an apology necessary :
' Istius temporis (i. e. of the present
time) homines propemodum omnes in
crimine vocandos esse existimant, mo
do si audierint nomen charitatis. A-
postolus vero non sic sentiebat; sed
contrario etc' I have preferred rrj
dSeXcpfj, because the preponderance of
ancient authority is very decidedly in
its favour.
avvaTpaTimTjj] These spiritual cam
paigns, in which Archippus was his
comrade, probably took place while
St Paul was at Ephesus (a.d. 24 — 57).
For the word crtixo-rpancori/s see Phil.
ii. 25. The metaphor of arparela,
arpareveaoat, is common in St Paul.
rij xar olxov k.t.X.] probably at Co
lossae ; see above p. 302 sq. For the

332

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[4,5

Kai elptjvr] diro Qeov 7raTpos tj/uwv Kat Kvptov lrjcov
XpiCTOV. 4 Ev%apio-Tu) to Qew fiov iravTOTe, fxveiav cov ttoiov-
Hevos eirl twv 7rpoa-evxcov fxov, 5dKOVwv crov ttjv d<ya7rr]v

meaning of the expression see the
note on Col. iv. 15.
4 — 7. ' I never cease to give thanks
to my God for thy weU-doing, and thou
art ever mentioned in my prayers.
For they teU me of thy love and faith
— thy faith which thou hast in the
Lord Jesus, and thy love which thou
showest towards aU the saints ; and it
is my prayer that this active sympathy
and charity, thus springing from thy
faith, may abound more and more, as
thou attainest to the perfect know
ledge of every good thing bestowed
upon us by God, looking unto and
striving after Christ. For indeed it
gave me great joy and comfort to hear
of thy loving-kindness, and to learn
how the hearts of God's people had
been cheered and refreshed by thy
help, my dear brother'.
The Apostle's thanksgiving and in
tercessory prayer (ver. 4) — the cause
of his thanksgiving (ver. 5) — the pur
port of his prayer (ver. 6) — the joy
and comfort which he has in Phile
mon's good deeds (ver. 7) — this is the
very simple order of topics in these
verses. But meanwhile aU established
principles of arrangement are defied
in the anxiety to give expression to
the thought which is uppermost for
the moment. The clause dxovmv x.t.X.
is separated from evxaptarm x.t.X., on
which it depends, by the intervening
clause pveiav aov x.t.X. which intro
duces another thought. It itself in
terposes between two clauses, pveiav
aov x.t.X. and oirms rj xoivmv'ta k.t.X.,
which stand in the closest logical and
grammatical connexion with each
other. Its own component elements
are dislocated and inverted in the
struggle of the several ideas for im
mediate utterance. And lastly, in ^a-

pav ydp k.t.X. there is again a recur
rence to a topic which has occurred
in an earUer part of the sentence (ttjv
dydirrjv...els iravras tovs dylovs) but
which has been dropped, before it was
exhausted, owing to the pressure of
another more importunate thought.
4. Eilxapio-rca] See the note on
1 Thess. i. 2.
iravrore] should probably be taken
with ei/'xapjcrrcS (rather than with
pveiav x.t.X.), according to St Paul's
usual collocation in these opening
thanksgivings: see the notes on Col.
i. 3, Phil. i. 3.
pveiav aov x.t.X.] ' making mention
of thee.' For pveiav iroieiaoai see the
note on 1 Thess. i. 2. Here the ' men
tion' involves the idea of intercession
on behalf of Philemon, and so intro
duces the oirms x.r.X. of ver. 6. See
the note there.
5. dxovmv] This information would
probably come from Epaphras (Col. i.
7, 8, iv. 12) rather than from Onesi
mus. The participle is connected
more directly with evxaptarm than
with the intervening words, and ex
plains the grounds of the Apostle's
thanksgiving. ttjv dydmjv x.t.X.] i. e. ' the faith
which thou hast towards the Lord Je
sus Christ and the love which thou
showest to aU the saints. The logical
order is violated, and the clauses are
inverted in the second part ofthe sen
tence, thus producing an example of
the figure called chiasm; see Gal. iv.
4, 5. This results here from the Apo
stle's setting down the thoughts in
the sequence in which they occur to
him, without paying regard to sym
metrical arrangement. The first and
prominent thought is PhUemon's love.
This suggests the mention of his faith,

61

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

333

Kai tt]v irttTTiv rjv e^eis wpos tov Kvpiov 'Irjo~ovv Kal ek
7ravTas tous dyiovs, 607rws t] Kotvoovia Trjs ir'nrTeta^ o~ov
evepyrjs yevtjTai ev eiriyvwcrei TravTos dyadov tov ev

as the source from which it springs.
This again requires a reference to the
object of faith. And then at length
comes the deferred sequel to the first
thought — the range and comprehen
siveness of his love. The transition
from the object of faith to the object
of love is more easy, because the love
is represented as springing from the
faith. Some copies transpose the
order, reading -rrjv irianv xal -rfjv dya
irrjv — an obvious emendation. Others
would obviate the difficulty by giving
to irianv the meaning ' fidelity, sted-
fastness'; Winer § 1. p. 511 sq. Thus
they are enabled to refer both words,
irianv xai dydirijv, equally to both
the clauses which foUow. But though
this is a legitimate sense of iriaris
in St Paul (see Galatians p. 155),
yet in immediate connexion with rjv
eXfts irpbs rbv Kvpiov 'Irjaovv, it is
hardly possible that the word can
have any other than its proper theo
logical meaning. See the opening of
the contemporary epistle, Col. i. 4.
irpbs x.t.X.] The change of prepo
sitions, irpbs tov Kvpiov ' towards the
Lord ' and els tovs dyiovs ' unto the
saints', deserves attention. It seems
to arise from the instinctive desire to
separate the two clauses, as they refer
to different words in the preceding
part ofthe sentence. Of the two pre
positions the former (7rpo-s) signifies
direction ' forward to ', ' towards '; the
latter (iv-s) arrival and so contact,
' in-to ', ' unto.' Consequently either
might be used in either connexion;
and as a matter of fact els is much
more common mthirlarts (iriareveiv), as
it is also with dydirrj, irpbs being quite
exceptional (1 Thess. i. 8 ij wians vpmv
rj irpbs rbv Oeov; comp. 2 Cor. Ui. 4).
But where a distinction is necessary,
there is a propriety in using irpbs of
the faith which aspires towards Christ,

and els of the love which is exerted
upon men. Some good copies read
els here in both clauses.
6. oirms x.r.X.] to be taken with
pveiav aov iroiovpevos K.r.X., as giving
the aim and purport of St Paul's
prayer. Others connect it with rjv
ex*is, as if it described the tendency
of Philemon's faith, ' ita ut'; but, even
if oirms could bear this meaning, such
a connexion is altogether harsh and
improbable. 17 xoivmvia x.t.X.] Of many interpre
tations which have been, or might be,
given of these words, two seem to de
serve consideration. ( 1 ) ' Your friendly
offices and sympathies, your kindly
deeds of charity, which spring from
your faith': comp. Phil. i. 5 im. rfj
xoivmvia vpmv els to evayyiXiov, Heb.
xiu. 16 rijs eviroitas xat xotvmvias,
whence xoivmvia is used especially
of 'contributions, almsgiving', Rom.
xv. 26, 2 Cor. viii. 4, ix. 13. (2)
' Tour communion with God through
faith' : comp. 1 Cor. i. 9, and see also
2 Cor. xiii. 13, 1 Joh. i. 3, 6, 7. The
paraUel passages strongly support
the former sense. Other interpreta
tions proposed are, 'The participa
tion of others in your faith, through
your example ', or ' your communion
with me, springing out of your faith'.
This last, which is widely received, is
suggested by ver. 17; el xoivmvbs el,
cprjai, xard rijv irianv, writes Chrysos
tom, Kal xard ra dXXa btpeiXets xoivm-
ve'tv (comp. Tit. i. 3 xard xoivrjv irianv):
but it is out of place in this context.
ivepyrjs] 'effective'. The Latin
translators must have read ivapyrjs,
for they render the word evidens or
manifesta. Jerome (ad. loc.) speaks
of evidens a& the reading of the Latin,
and effieax of the Greek text. The
converse error appears in the MSS of
Clem. Hom. xvii. 5, ivipyeia for ivdp-

334

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[7

rJlXiv ets XpicrTOV. ' xapdv ydp 7ro\\riv 'ea"xpv Kal irapa-
k\y]<tiv eirl Ttj dyairt] o~ov, oti Ta cnrXay^va Ttav dytwv
dvairetravTai Zid o~ov, dde\(pe.
6. ev ipiv els Xptarbv.
mss are of no great authority; and in
the present instance scribes would be

yeia. See also similar vv. 11. in Orig.
c. Cels. i.25,n. 52, iv. 89.
iv iirtyvmaet x.t.X.] ' in the perfect
knowledge of every good thing'. This
iiriyvmais, involving as it does the
complete appropriation of all truth
and the unreserved identification with
God's wiU, is the goal and crown of
the beUever's course. The Apostle
does not say ' in the possession ' or ' in
the performance ' but ' in the know
ledge of every good thing'; for, in this
higher sense of knowledge, to know is
both to possess and to perform. In
aU the epistles of the Roman capti
vity St Paul's prayer for his corre
spondents culminates in this word
iiriyvmais: see the note on Col. i. 9.
This iiriyvmais is the result and the
reward of faith manifesting itself in
deeds of love, oirms rj xoivmvia rijs iri
arems x.t.X. For the sequence comp.
Ephes. iv. 13 els rrjv ivbrrjra ttjs iri
arems xcii rrjs iirtyvoaems k.t.X., Tit.
i. I Kara irianv ixXexrmv Oeov Kal iiri
yvmaiv dXrjOeias ttjs xar' evaiftetav.
The iiriyvmais therefore which the
Apostle contemplates is Philemon's
own. There is no reference to the
force of his example on others, as it
is sometimes interpreted, 'in their re
cognition of every good thing which
is wrought in you '.
roS iv ijp'iv] ' which is in us Chris
tians ', ' which is placed within our
reach by the Gospel'; i.e. the whole
range of spiritual blessings, the com
plete cycle of Christian truth. If the
reading rou iv vpiv be adopted, the
reference will be restricted to the
brotherhood at Colossae, but the
meaning must be substantially the
same. Though vpiv has somewhat
better support, we seem to be justi
fied in preferring rjpiv as being much
more expressive. In such cases the

strongly tempted to alter rjpiv into
vpiv from a misapprehension of the
sense, and a wish to apply the words
to Philemon and his household. A
simUar misapprehension doubtless led
in some copies to the omission of row,
which seemed to be superfluous but
is really required for the sense.
eis Xpiarov] ' unto Christ', i.e. lead
ing to Him as the goal. The words
should be connected not with roO iv
rjpiv, but with the main statement of
the sentence ivepyrjsyivrjTai x.r.X.
7. xaPav yup] This sentence again
must not be connected with the words
immediately preceding. It gives the
motive of the Apostle's thanksgiving
mentioned in ver. 4. This thanks
giving was the outpouring of gratitude
for the joy and comfort that he had
received in his bonds from the report
of Philemon's generous charity. The
connexion therefore is evxapiarm rc»
Oem pov  dxovmv aov ttjv dydirrjv
¦ ¦¦Xapdv yap iroXXrjv 'iaxov K.r.X. For
Xapdv the received text (Steph. but not
Elz.) reads x°-Plv> which is taken to
mean 'thankfulness' (1 Tim. i. 12,
2 Tim. i. 3) ; but this reading is abso
lutely condemned by the paucity of
ancient authority.
ra airXdyxva] 'the heart, the spi
rits '. On rd cr7rXdyx"ci, the nobler vis
cera, regarded as the seat of the emo
tions, see the note on PhU. i. 8. Here
the prominent idea is that of terror,
grief, despondency, etc.
dvairiiravrai] 'have been relieved,
refreshed', comp. ver. 20. The com
pound dvairaveadat expresses a tem
porary relief, as the simple iraieaBai
expresses a final cessation : Plut. Vit.
Lucull. 5 iroXXmv aSdts dvaxtvoiivrmv
rbv MtBptSanxbv irbXepov etprj Mdpxos

8,9]

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

335

Ato woWr/v ev XpifTTw Trapprjtriav e^wi/ eTriTao-o-etv
crot to dvfJKOV, 9$id Tt)v dydirrjv pidKKov irapaKaXvo ,
toiovtos wv cos Ilai/Aos TrpetrfivTrvi vvvl Se Kal SeV/utos

g. vvv Si xal Siapios.

avrov ov ireiravaOai dXX' dvarre-
iravaaai. Thus it impUes 'relaxation,
retreshmeiit', as a preparation for the
renewal of labour or suffering. It is
an Ignatian as weU as a Pauline word ;
Ephes. 2, Smyrn. 9, 10, 12, Trail. 12,
Magn. 15, Horn. 10.
dSeXcpi] For the appeal suggested
by the emphatic position of the word,
comp. GaL vi. 18. See also the note
on ver. 20 below.
8 — 17. 'Encouraged by these tid
ings of thy loving spirit, I prefer to
entreat, where I might command. My
office gives me authority to dictate
thy duty in plain language, but love
bids me plead as a suitor. Have I not
indeed a right to command — I Paul
whom Christ Jesus long ago commis
sioned as His ambassador, and whom
now He has exalted to the rank of His
prisoner? But I entreat thee. I have
a favour to ask for a son of my own —
one doubly dear to me, because I be
came his father amidst the sorrows of
my bonds. I speak of Onesimus, who
in times past was found whoUy untrue
to his name, who was then far from
useful to thee, but now is useful to
thee — yea, and to myself also. Him I
send back to thee, and I entreat thee
to take him into thy favour, for in
giving him I am giving my own heart.
Indeed I would gladly have detained
him with me, that he might minister
to me on thy behalf, in these bonds
with which the Gospel has invested
me. But I had scruples. I did not
wish to do anything without thy direct
consent; for then it might have seem
ed (though it were only seeming) as if
thy kindly offices had been rendered
by compulsion and not of free will.
So I have sent him back Indeed it
may have been God's providential de
sign, that he was parted from thee for

a season, only that thou mightest re
gain him for ever; that he left thee as
a slave, only that he might return to
thee a beloved brother. This indeed
he is to me most of all ; and, if to me,
must he not be so much more to thee,
both in worldly things and in spiritual ?
If therefore thou regardest me as a
friend and companion, take him to
thee, as if he were myself.'
8. Aid] i.e. 'Seeing that I have
these proofs of thy love, I prefer to
entreat, where I might command'.
irapprjaiav] ' confidence ', literally
'freedom' or 'privilege of speech';
see the notes on CoL ii. 15, Ephes. iii.
12. It was his Apostolic authority
Which gave him this right to command
in plain language. Hence the addi
tion iv XpiaTtS.
to dvfjxov] ' what is fitting ' : see
the note on Col. iii. 18.
9. dea tt)v dyairrjv] 'for lovds sake',
i. e. ' having respect to the claims of
love '. It is not Philemon's love (vv.
5, 7), nor St Paul's own love, but love
absolutely, love regarded as a principle
which demands a deferential respect.
roioOror mv x.t.X.] 'being such an
one as Paul an ambassador, and now
also a prisoner, of Christ Jesus'
Several questions of more or less diffi
culty arise on these words. (1) Is
roioCros Sv to be connected with or
separated from ms IlaCXos x.r.X. 1 If se
parated, rotoflror &v wiU mean 'though
as an Apostle I am armed with such
authority', and cos IlavXos k.t.X. wiU
describe his condescension to entreaty,
'yet as simply Paul, etc' But the
other construction is much more pro
bable for the following reasons, (a)
roiovros mv so used, implying, as it
would, something of a personal boast,
seems unUke St Paul's usual mode
of speaking. Several interpreters in-

336

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[io

XpiCTOv 'ln<rov. IO irapaKaXw ere Trept tov e/ixov tckvov,
deed, taking rotovros mv separately,
refer it to ver. 8, ' seeing that this is

my disposition', i.e. 'seeing that I
desire to entreat'; but toiovtos sug
gests more than an accidental impulse.
(b) As rotouro? and ms are correlative
words, it is morenatural to connect them
together; comp. Plato Symp. 181 e
irpoaavayxd£eiv to tolovtov mairep xdl
x.t.X., Alexis (Meineke Fragm. Com.
III. p. 399) rotoiro to £fjv ianv mairep
01 xvftoi. Such passages are an answer
to the objection that roioCros would
require some stronger word than cor,
such as olos, Ss, or coo-re. Even after
such expressions as 6 auros, ro avrb,
instances occur of cos (mairep): see
Lobeck Phryn. p. 427, StaUbaum on
Plat. Phosd. 86 a. Indeed it may be
questioned whether any word but cos
would give exactly St Paul's meaning
here, (c) All the Greek commentators
without a single exception connect
the words TotoCros mv ds HauXos to
gether. (2) Assuming that the words
rocouros mv ms x.t.X. are taken toge
ther, should they be connected with
the preceding or the foUowing sen
tence ? On the whole the passage is
more forcible, if they are Unked to the
preceding words. In this case the re
sumptive irapaxaXm (ver. 10) begins a
new sentence, which introduces a fresh
subject. The Apostle has before de
scribed the character of his appeal;
he now speaks of its object. (3) In
either connexion, what is the point of
the words toiovtos mv ms IlauXos
x.t.X. ? Do they lay down the grounds
of his entreaty, or do they enforce his
right to command? If the view of
irpeafivrrjs adopted below be correct,
the latter must be the true interpre
tation; but even though irpea^vTrjs
be taken in its ordinary sense, this
will still remain the more probable
alternative; for, while irpea^vTrjs and
Siapios would suit either entreaty or
command, the addition Xpio-roS 'I^o-oC
suggests an appeal to authority.
cos IlaGXos] The mention of his per
sonal name involves an assertion of

authority, as in Ephes. iii. 1 ; comp.
Gal. v. 2, with the note there. Theo
doret writes, o nauXov axovaas rrjs
olxovpivrjs dxovei rbv xrjpvxa, yrjs xai
OaXdrrrjs rbv yempybv, rrjs ixXoyfjs to
axevos, K.r.X.
irpeafHrrjs] Comparing a passage in
the contemporary epistle, Ephes. vi.
20 virep uv irpea/levm iv aXvaet, it
had occurred to me that we should
read irpeaf3evrijs here, before I was
aware that this conjecture had been
anticipated by others, e.g. by Bentley
(Crit. Sacr. p. 93) and by Benson
(Paraphrase etc. on Six EpisUes of
St Paul, p. 357). It has since been
suggested independently in Linwood's
Observ. quced. in nonnulla N. T. loca
1865, and probably others have enter
tained thesame thought. Still believ
ing that St Paul here speaks of him
self as an 'ambassador', I now ques
tion whether any change is necessary.
There is reason for thinking that in
the common dialect irpea^vrrjs may
have been written indifferently for
irpeafievTTJs in St Paul's time; and if
so, the form here may be due, not to
some comparatively late scribe, but
to the original autograph itself or to
an immediate transcript. In 1 Mace.
xiv. 21 the Sinaitic ms has oi irpeafiv-
repot (a corruption of 01 irpeafivTai
01, for the common reading is ol irpea-
fievrat ol); in xiv. 22 it reads irpea^v-
rat Iov8aimv; but in xiii. 21 irpeaftev-
ras : though in all passages alike the
meanmg is ' ambassadors'. Again the
Alexandrian ms has irpeafivras in xiiL
21, but irpeajievTai in xiv. 22, and 01
irpeafievTe 01 (i.e. ol irpeaftevrdi 01) in
xiv. 21. In 2 Mace. xi. 34 this same
ms has irpeafivre, and the reading of
the common texts of the lxx (even
Tischendorf and Fritzsche) here is
irpeaftvrai. Grimm treats it as mean
ing ' ambassadors ', without even no
ticing tbe form. Other mss are also
mentioned in Holmes and Parsons
which have the form irpeaftvTrjs in
1 Mace. xiii. 21. In 2 Chron. xxxn.
31 again the word for 'ambassador'

"1

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

337

ov [eyw] eyevvtitra iv tois Beo-/jioh,'Ovtio-iiuiov, " tov TroTe

is written thus in the Vatican ms,
though the e is added above the line;
and here too several mss iu Holmes
and Parsons agree in reading irpea-
Pvrais. Thus in the age of our
earliest extant mss at aU events, the
scribes used both forms indifferently
in this sense. So also Eusebius on
Isaiah xvui. 2 writes o Se 'AxiiXas
irpeafivTas i£i8mxev elirmv, 'O otto-
crre'XXcai' iv SaXdaai) irpeafivras. Again
in Ignat. Smyrn. 11 QeoirpeafSvrijs
is the form in all the mss, though
the meaning is 'an ambassador of
God.' So too in Clem. Hom. Ep.
Clem. 6 the mss read o rijs dXij6Vi'as
irpeafiimis, which even Schwegler
and Dressel tacitly retain. See also
Appian Samn. 7, where irpeafievTov
is due to the later editors, and Acta
Thomae § 10, where there is a v. 1.
irpeaPvrijs in at least one ms. In
Wood's Ephesus Inscr. vi. 1, p. 24
(belonging to the age of Trajan) srpeo--
fBevripois stands for irpea^vripois.
The main reason for adopting this
rendering is the parallel passage, which
suggests it very strongly. The diffi
culty which many find in St Paul's
describing himself as an old man is
not serious. On any showing he must
have been verging on sixty at this
time and may have been some years
older. A Ufe of unintermittent toil
and suffering, such as he had lived,
would bring a premature decay; and
looking back on a long eventful Ufe,
he would naturaUy so think and speak
of himself. Thus Roger Bacon (Opus
Majus 1. 10, p. 15, ed. Jebb; Opus Ter
tium p. 63, ed. Brewer) writes 'me
senem', 'nos senes', in 1267, though
he appears to have been not more
than fifty-two or fifty-three at the
time and lived at least a quarter of a
century after (see E. Charles Roger
Bacon, Sa Vie etc. pp. 4 sq., 40). So
too Scott in his fifty-fifth year speaks
of himself as 'an old grey man '
and ' aged' (Lockhart's Life vni. pp.
327, 357). It is more difficult to
COL.

understand how St Paul should make
his age a ground of appeal to Phi
lemon who, if Archippus was his
son, cannot have been much younger
than himself. The commentator Hi
lary says that the Apostle appeals
to his friend 'quasi coaevum aeta-
tis', but this idea is foreign to the
context. The comment of Theophy
lact is, roioCros mv, cpijai, ir peajiev-
ttj s, xai ovrms a£ios dxoveadai, ms
elxbs HavXov irpeaftvTrjv, rovrian xa\
dirb rov SiSaaxaXtxov a^imparos xai
rov xpovov rb alSiaipov exovra K.r.X.
Does he mean to include both mean
ings in ir pea j3vtijs1 Or is he accident
ally borrowing the term ' ambassador '
from some earlier commentator with
out seeing its bearing ?
xal Siapws] Another title to respect.
The mention of his bonds might sug
gest either an appeal for commisera
tion or a claim of authority : see the
note on ver. 13. Hero the addition of
XpioTov 'IijcroS invests it with the cha
racter of an official title, and so gives
prominence to the latter idea. To his
old office of ' ambassador ' Christ has
added the new title of ' prisoner.' The
genitive Xpiarov Irjaov belongs to
irpeafivTrjs as well as to Siaptos, and
in both cases describes the person who
confers the office or rank.
IO. irapaxaXm ae K.r.X.] St Chryso
stom remarks on the Apostle's with
holding the name, until he has favour
ably disposed Philemon both to the
request and to the object of it ; roo-oii-
tois Se irpoXedvas aurou rfjv i/fu^iji/,
ovSe evBims iviftaXe to ovopa, dXXa
Toaavrrjv irotrjadpevos airrjaiv dvafidX-
Xerat x.r.X. The whole passage de
serves to be read.
ov iyevvrjaa K.r.X.] So too I Cor. iv.
15. In Gal. iv. 19 he speaks of him
self as suffering a mother's pangs for
his chUdren in the faith. Comp. Phil.
Leg. ad Cai. 8 (n. p. 554) ipov ian
tov Mdxpmvos epyov rd'ios" pdXXov avrbv
tj ovx tjttov rmv yovimv yeyevvtjxa.
iv rots Seapois] He was doubly
22

338

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[12

aoi d^rprjiTTOV, wvi oe [feat] aoi Kal e/nol ev^/pr]<rTOV bv
dve7re/Jiy{^d croi. "avTov, TOVTeaTiv Ta e\xa airXayxya,

dear to the Apostle, as being the child
of his sorrows.
'Ovijcrt/ioi'] for 'Ovrjaipov by attrac
tion, as e.g. Mark vi. 1 6 bv iym direxe-
cpdXiaa 'ImdvvTjv, ouros ianv. Hence
forward he will be true to his name,
no longer dvdir/Tos, but bvtjatpos: comp.
Ruth i. 20 ' CaU me not Naomi (plea
sant) but call me Mara (bitter) etc'
The word axprjaros is a synonyme for
dvbvrjTos, Demosth. Phil. iii. § 40 (p.
I2l) airavra ravra axprjara dirpaxra
dvovrjra x.t.X.: comp. Pseudophocyl.
37 (34) XPl^s-o' dvrjaipbs ian, cpiXos
8' d8txmv dvbvrjTos. The significance
of names was a matter of special im
portance among the ancients. Hence
they were careful in the inauguration
of any great work that only those who
had bona nomina, prospera nomina,
fausta nomina, should take part: Cic
de Div. i. 45, PUn. N. H xxviii. 2. 5,
Tac. Hist. iv. 53. On the value at
tached to names by the ancients, and
more especiaUy by the Hebrews, see
Farrar Chapters on Language p. 267
sq., where a large number of instances
are coUected. Here however there is
nothing more than an affectionate
play on a name, such as might occur
to any one at any time : comp. Euseb.
H. E. V. 24 6 Hlprjvaios cpepmvvpbs ns
mv rfj irpoarjyopia, avrm re rco rpd-
irm elprjvoirotbs.
1 1. axp'?crro!',<r{!xp'joTOi/] Comp. Plat.
Resp. iii. p. 41 1 a xpyo-ipov i£ dxprj-
arov... iiroiijaev. Of these words, dxprj-
aros is found only here, evxprjaros
occurs also 2 Tim. ii. 21, iv. 11, in the
New Testament. Both appear in the
lxx. In Matt. xxv. 30 a slave is de
scribed as dxpetos. For the mode of
expression comp. Ephes. v. 15 prj ms
aaocpot dXX' cos aocpot. Some have dis
covered in these words a reference to
Xpiarbs, as commonly pronounced xpij-
crrds; comp. Theoph. ad Autol. i. 12
ro XPl0~rbv rjSxi xai evxprjarov K.r.X.
and see Philippians p. 16 note. Any

such allusion however, even if it should
not involve an anachronism, is far too
recondite to be probable here. The
play on words is exhausted in the
reference to 'Oitj'cuuos.
xal ipoi] An after-thought ; comp.
Phil. ii. 27 rfXirjaev avrov, ovx avrbv
Se povov dXXd Kal ipe. This accounts
for the exceptional order, where ac
cording to common Greek usage the
first person would naturaUy precede
the second.
dveirepijra] ' I send back', the epis
tolary aorist used for the present : see
the notes on PhU. ii. 25, 28. So too ?ypa-
yjr-a, ver. 19, 21 (see the note). It is
clear both from the context here, and
from Col. iv. 7 — 9, that Onesimus ac
companied the letter.
12. aurov K.r.X.] The reading of
the received text is av 8e avrbv, tovt-
ean ra ipd airXdyxva, irpoaXafiov.
The words thus suppUed doubtless
give the right construction, but must
be rejected as deficient in authority.
The accusative is suspended ; the sen
tence changes its form and loses itself
in a number of dependent clauses;
and the main point is not resumed tUi
ver. 17 TrpocrXajSou aurov cos ipi, the
grammar having been meanwhile dis
located. For the emphatic position
of avrov comp. John ix. 21, 23, Ephes.
i. 22. rd ipd airXdyxva] ' my very heari,
a mode of speech common in all lan
guages. For the meaning of o-TrXdyx""
see the note on Phil. i. 8. Comp.
Test. Patr. Zab. 8, Neph. 4, in both
which passages Christ is called r6
arrXdyxvov of God, and in the first it
is Said exere evairXayxviav...tva xai 6
Kvpios eis vpds airXayxviaoeis iXerjaij
vpds' on xaiye iir iaxdrmv rjpepmv
o Oeos diroareXXet rb airXdyxvov av-
roii iiri rrjs yrjs K.r.X. Otherwise
rd £p,d airXdyxva has been interpreted
'my son' (comp. ver. io ov iyevvrjaa
x.r.X.), and it is so rendered here in

13, H]

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

339

13 ov eyia efiovXo/uitiv 7roos ifxavTov KaTe^iv,
aov fxoi ZiaKOvi] ev toI<s Sea/Jiols tov evayyeXiov

iva
. 14.

the Peshito. For this sense of o-7rXdy-
xva comp. Artemid. Oneir. i. 44 01
irdiSes ariXdyxvo. Xeyovrai, ib. V. 57
rd Se areXayxva [iarjpatve] rbv iraiSa,
ourco ydp Kal rdv ira18a KaXeiv eBos iari.
With this meaning it is used not less
of the father than of the mother;
e.g. Philo de Joseph. 5 (11. p. 45) Brjp-
crlv evmxia xdi Ooivrj yiyovas yevaapi-
vots—rmv ip&v airXdyxvmv, Basil. Op.
III. p. 501 d piv irpoTeiverai rd oTrXdy-
xva nprjv rcSv rpocpmv. The Latin vis
cera occurs still more frequently in
this sense, as the passages quoted in
Wetstein and Suicer show. For this
latter interpretation there is much to
be said. But it adds nothing to the
previous ov iyivvrjaa x.t.X., and (what
is a more serious objection) it is
whoUy unsupported by St Paul's
usage elsewhere, which connects
airXdyxva with a different class of
ideas: see e.g. vv. 7, 20.
13. i/3ovX6pTjv] ' I was of a mind',
distinguished from ijBiXrjaa, which
follows, in two respects ; (1) WhUe
PovXeaBat involves the idea of 'pur
pose, deliberation, desire, mind', 6i-
Xeiv denotes simply 'will'; Epictet. i.
12. 13 fiovXbpai ypdcpeiv, cos BiXm, rd
Aimvos ovopa; ov' aXXa 8i8aaxopat Be-
Xeiv tos Set ypdcpeaBai, Ui. 24. 54 tov
tov BiXe bpdv, xal ov 0ovXei oifrei. (2)
The change of tenses is significant.
The imperfect implies a tentative, in
choate process; while the aorist de
scribes a definite and complete act.
The will stepped in and put an end
to the incUnations of the mind. In
deed the imperfect of this and similar
verbs are not infrequently used where
the wish is stopped at the outset by
some antecedent consideration which
renders it impossible, and thus prac
tically it is not entertained at all : e.g.
Arist. Ran. 866 ifiovXbprjv pev ovx
ipi&iv iv6d8e, Antiph. de Herod, coed.
I (p. 129) ifiovXbprjv pev. ..vvv Se x.t.X. ;
Isaeus de Arist. haer. 1. (p. 79) iftovXb-

prjv pev,.
jEsch. c.

virep
Xwpts
vvv Se ovx e'£ taov K.r.X.,
Ctes. 2 (p. S3) ifSovXbprjv
pev ovv, c5 'A.Brjvdioi...iirei8r) Se irdvra
x.t.X., Lucian Abd. 1 ifiovXbprjv pev
ovv rfjv larptxrjv K.r.X. ...vuvi Se K.r.X.;
see Kiihner § 392 6 (11. p. 177). So
Acts xxv. 22 ij3ovXbprjv xdi avrbs
rov avBpmirov dxoiiaat, not ' I should
wish' (as Winer § xii. p. 353) but ' I
could have wished', i.e. 'if it had not
been too much to ask'. Similarly
TJOeXov Gal. iv. 20, rjvxbprjv Rom. ix. 3.
See Revision of the English New
Testament p. 96. So here a not im
probable meaning would be not ' I
was desirous', but 'I could have de
sired'. xarixetv] 'to detain' or 'retain',
opposed to the foUowing direxijs, ver.
IS- virep aov x.t.X.] Comp. Phil. ii. 30
iva dvairXrjpmaTj to vpmv vareprjpa rijs
irpbs pe XeiTovpylas, I Cor. Xvi. 1 7 rd
vpirepov variprjpa avrol aveirXijpmaav.
See the note on Col. i. 7. With a de
licate tact the Apostle assumes that
Philemon would have wished to per
form these friendly offices in person,
if it had been possible.
ev rois Seapols] An indirect appeal
to his compassion: see vv. 1, 9, 10.
In this instance however (as in ver. 9)
the appeal assumes a tone of author
ity, by reference to the occasion of his
bonds. For the genitive rou evayye
Xiov, describing the origin, comp. Col.
i. 23 rijs eXiriSos tov evayyeXiov. They
were not shackles which self had
riveted, but a chain with which
Christ had invested him. Thus they
were as a badge of office or a decora
tion of honour. In this respect, as in
others, the language of St Paul is
echoed in the epistles of St Ignatius.
Here too entreaty and triumph alter
nate ; the saint's bonds are at once
a ground for appeal and a theme of
thanksgiving: Trail. 12 7rapaKaXel
vpas ra Seapd pov, Philad. 7 pdprvs
22 — 2

340

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

(15, 16

«5e t»js afjs yvcufxris ovSev tjdeXriaa 7roifjaai, 'iva ixrj eus
KaTa dvayKr\v to dyadov aov r\, dXXa KaTa eKOvaiov
lsTa%a yap Bia tovto e^topiadt] irpos iopav, 'iva aiwviov
avTov aVe^s, l6ovKeTi oJs SovXov, dXXa virep SovXov,

fie poi e'v cp fie'Sepat, Ephes. II iv § (i.e.
Xpiarm 'l?;crou) rd 8eapd irepitpepm,
rovs irvevpanxovs papyapiras, Smyrn.
10 dvrisjr-vxov vpmv rd irvevpa pov xai
rd Seapd pov, Magn. I e'v ois irepicpipm
Seapdis adeo rds ixxXrjaias ; see also
Ephes. 1, 3, 21, Magn. 12, Troll. 1,5,
10, Smyrn. 4, 11, Polyc. 2, Rom. 1, 4,
J, Philad. 5.
14. x^P's K.r.X.] ' without thy ap
proval, consent'; Polyb. ii. 21. 1, 3,
Xcopls rijs acperipas yvmprjs, ^copls rijs
avrov yvmprjs: similarly avev [ttjs]
yvmprjs, e.g. Polyb. xxi. 8. 7, Ign.
Polyc. 4.
cos Kara dvdyKijv] St Paul does not
say Kard dvdyxrjv but cos xara dvdyxrjv.
He wiU not suppose that it would
really be by constraint; but it must
not even wear the appearance (eis) of
being so; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 17 cos ev
dtppoavvrj. See Plin. Ep.ix. 21 ' Vereor
ne videar non rogare sed cogere';
where, as here, the writer is asking
his correspondent to forgive a domes
tic who has offended.
rd dyaBov aov] ' the benefit arising
from thee ', i. e. ' the good which I
should get from the continued pre
sence of Onesimus, and which would
be owing to thee '.
Kard exovatov] as in Num. xv. 3. The
form xaff exovaiav is perhaps more
classical: Thuc. viii. 27 xaff exovaiav
ij irdvv ye dvdyxv. The word under
stood in the one case appears to be
rpbirov (Porphyr. de Abst. i. 9 xaff
exovaiav rpbirov, comp. Eur. Med. 75 1
exovaim rpbirm) ; in the Other, yvmprjv
(so exovaia, e'£ exovaias, etc.) : comp.
Lobeck Phryn. p. 4.
15. rd^a ydp K.r.X.] The ydp ex
plains an additional motive which
guided the Apostle's decision : ' I did
not dare to detain him, however

much I desired it. I might have de
feated the purpose for which God in
His good providence allowed him to
leave thee'.
ixmpioBrj] ' He doeB not say', writes
Chrysostom, ' For this cause he fled,
but For this cause he was parted:
for he would appease Philemon by a
more euphemistic phrase. And again
he does not say he parted himself,
but he was parted: since the design
was not Onesimus' own to depart for
this or that reason: just as Joseph
also, when excusing his brethren,
says (Gen. xiv. 5) God did send me
hither.' irpbs mpav] 'for an hour,' 'for a
short season' : 2 Cor. vii. 8, GaL ii. 5.
' It was only a brief moment after all',
the Apostle would say, 'compared
with the magnitude of the work
wrought in it. He departed a repro
bate; he returns a saved man. He
departed for a few months ; he returns
to be with you for aU time and for
eternity'- This sense of almviov must
not be arbitrarily limited. Since he
left, Onesimus had obtained eternal
Ufe, and eternal life involves eternal
interchange of friendship. His ser
vices to his old master were no longer
barred by the gates of death.
dirixTjs] In this connexion airixeiv
may bear either of two senses : (1) ' to
have back, to have in return' : or (2)
' to have to the full, to have wholly ',
as in PhU. iv. 18 dirixm irdvra (see the
note). In other words the prominent
idea in the word may be either resti
tution, or completeness. The former
is the more probable sense here, as
suggested by xarixetv in verse 13 and
by ixmpiaBrj in this verse.
16. ms SovXov] St Paul does not
say SovXov but cos SovXov. It was a

17—ig]

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

341

doeXtpov dyairrjTOV, fxaXiaTa ejxo'i, iroaw «5e /mdXXov
aoi Kai ev trap/ct Kal ev Kvpitp. I7et ovv fxe exeis koi-
vwvov, irpoaXa,Qov avTov a5s ifie' lSei oe ti rjSiKrjaev ae
h ocpeiXet, tovto e'^uot eXXoya. 19e'<y« TIavXos eypa\[sa

matter of indifference whether he
were outwardly fiovXos or outwardly
iXevBepos, since both are one in Christ
(Col. iii. 11). But though he might
stUl remain a slave, he could no longer
be as a slave. A change had been
wrought in him, independently of his
possible manumission : in Christ he
had become a brother. It should be
noticed also that the negative is not
prjxirt, but ovxin. The negation is
thus whoUy independent of ha... diri-
xvs- It describes not the possible
view of Philemon, but the actual state
of Onesimus. The ' no more as a slave '
is an absolute fact, whether PhUemon
chooses to recognise it or not.
d8eXcpbv ayairTjrbv] xai tco xfiovm xe-
xep8axas xal rjj iroidrrjTi, writes Chry-
sostom, apostrophizing Philemon.
iroam Se paXXov k.t.X.] Having first
said 'most of aU to me', he goes a
step further, ' more than most of all
to thee'.
koI e'v o-apKl k.t.XJ ' In both spheres
alike, in the affairs of this world and
in the affairs of the higher Ufe.' In
the former, as Meyer pointedly says,
PhUemon had the brother for a slave;
in the latter he had the slave for a
brother: comp. Ign. Troll. 12 Kard
7rdvra pe dvejravcrav aapxi re xdi irvev-
uart. 17. e^eis xotvmvbv] ' thou holdest
me to be a comrade, an intimate
friend' For this use of exetv comp.
Luke xiv. l8?^e pe irap^rrjpivov, PhU.
ii. 29 tovs toiovtovs ivripovs e^ere.
Those are xotvmvai, who have common
interests, common feeUngs, common
work. 18 — 22. 'But if he has done thee
any injury, or if he stands in thy debt,
set it down to my account. Here is my
signature — Paul — in my own hand

writing. Accept this as my bond. I
will repay thee. For I will not in
sist, as I might, that thou art indebted
to me for much more than this ; that
thou owest to me thine own self. Yes,
dear brother, let me receive from my
son in the faith such a return as a
father has a right to expect. Cheer
and refresh my spirits in Christ. I
have full confidence in thy compU-
ance, as I write this ; for I know that
thou wilt do even more than I ask.
At the same time also prepare to
receive me on a visit ; for I hope that
through your prayers I shall be set
free and given to you once more.'
18. ei fie n] The case is stated
hypotheticaUy but the words doubt
less describe the actual offence of
Onesimus. He had done his master
some injury, probably had robbed
him ; and he had fled to escape pun
ishment. See the introduction.
rj ScpeiXei] defining the offence which
has been indicated in TJSixTjaev. But
stiU the Apostle refrains from using
the plain word exXesp-ev. He would
spare the penitent slave, and avoid
irritating the injured master.
e"XXdya] ' reckon it in', ' set it down'.
This form must be adopted instead of
e'XXdyei which stands in the received
text, as the great preponderance of
authority shows. On the other hand
we have e'XXoyeirai Rom. v. 13 (though
with a V. L e'XXoyarai), iXXoyovpevmv
Boeckh C. I. no. 1732 a, and ivXoyei-
adat Edict. Diocl. in Corp. Inscr. Lat.
in. p. 836. But the word is so rare
in any form, that these occurrences of
eTiXoyeiv afford no ground for exclud
ing e'XXoyav as impossible. The two
forms might be employed side by side,
just as we find eXedv and ekeetv, £vpav
and cjvpeiv, e'pcorav and ipmrelv (Matt

342

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[20

Trj ifj.fi X«0t, iyw diroTtaw 'iva fxtj Xeyco aoi, oti Kai
aeavTov fxoi irpoaotpeiXei's. %°vai, dZeX<pe, iyw aov oval-
firjv iv Kvp'iw' dvdiravaov /uov Ta airXay%va iv XpiaTw.

xv. 23), and the like; see Buttmann
Ausf. Gramm.% 112 (11. p. 53). The
word Xoyav, as used by Lucian Lexiph.
15 (where it is a desiderative 'to be
eager to speak', Uke cpovdv, Bavardv,
cpappaxdv, etc.), has nothing to do with
the use of eXXoySv here.
19. eyco IlavXos] The introduc
tion of his own name gives it the cha
racter of a formal and binding signa
ture: comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 21, Col. iv. 18,
2 Thess. iii. 17. A signature to a
deed in ancient or mediaeval times
would commonly take this form, iym 6
Selva, — ' I so and so' ; where we should
omit the marks of the first person.
eypai\ra] An epistolary or docu
mentary aorist, as in ver. 21 ; so too
dviirep\jra ver. ii. See the note on
eypaijfa Gal. vi. 1 1. The aorist is the
tense commonly used in signatures;
e.g. viriypa-ijr-a to the conciliar de
crees. This incidental mention of his auto
graph, occurring where it does,
shows that he wrote the whole letter
with his own hand. This procedure
is quite exceptional, just as the pur
port of the letter is exceptional. In
all other cases he appears to have
employed an amanuensis, only adding
a few words in his own handwriting
at the close : see the note on Gal. I. c.
tva pi) Xeym] 'not to say', as 2 Cor.
ix. 4. There is a suppressed thought,
' though indeed you cannot fairly claim
repayment', 'though indeed you owe
me (dcpeiXeis)asmuchasthis',on which
the ha pi) x.r.X. is dependent. Hence
irpoaocpeiXeis ' owest besides'; for this
is the common meaning of the word.
o-eavrdv] St Paul was his spiritu
al father, who had begotten him in
the faith, and to whom therefore he
owed his being; comp. Plato Legg. iv.
p. 717 B cos Bipis bcpeiXovra dirorivetv

rd irpmrd re xai peyiara ocpeiXrjpaTa...
vopi£eiv Se, a xixrrjTai xai e^ei, jrdvra
eivai rmv yevvrjodvTmv...dpxbpevov
dirb rrjs ovaias, Seu'repa rd rov amparos,
rpi'ra rd rrjs i/'v^^s, dirorivovra 5a-
velapara x.t.X.
20. vai] introducing an affectionate
appeal as in Phil. iv. 3 vol ipmrm xal
ai. d8eXcpe] It is the entreaty of a bro
ther to a brother on behalf of a bro
ther (ver. 16). For the pathetic ap
peal involved in the word see the
notes on GaL Ui. 15, vi. 1, 18; and
comp. ver. 7.
eyco] ' I seem to be entreating for
Onesimus ; but I am pleading for my
self: the favour will be done to me';
comp. ver. 17 7rpocrXa/3ov avrbv ms ipe.
The emphatic iym identifies the cause
of Onesimus with his own.
o-ov dvaiprjv] 'may J have satis
faction, find comfort in thee', i. e. 'may
I receive such a return from thee, as
a father has a right to expect from
his child.' The common use of the
word ovalpijv would suggest the
thought of filial offices; e.g. Arist.
Thesm. 469 ovrcos dvaiprjv rmv rex-
vmv, Lucian Philops. 27 irpbs rnv
oyjrtv rmv vlimv, ovrms bvaiprjv, ecprj,
rourcov, Ps-Ignat. Hero 6 ovaiprjv aov,
iraiSlov iroBetvbv, Synes. Ep. 44 ovrco
rijs fepds cpiXoaocpias dvaiprjv xdi irpaa-
en rmv iraiSimv rmv ipavrov, with
other passages quoted in Wetstein.
So too for ovaaBai, ovrjats, compare
Eur. Med. 1025 sq. jrpiv acpcpv ova-
adai... aXXcos dp' vpds, c3 rexv, e'£e-
Bpesjrdprjv, Ale. 333 aXts Se iraiSmv'
rmvS' ovrjaiv ev^opai Beois yeveaBai,
PhUem. Inc. 64 (rv. p. 55 Meineke)
eTeKes pe, prjrep, xdi yevoiro aoi rix-
vmv ovi/eris, mairep xai Sixatbv iari
aoi, Ecclus. XXX. 2 6 iraiSevmv rbv
viov avrov dvno-erai eV aurco (the

21, 22]

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

343

MIle7rot0a)s Trj viraKOrj aov eypa^rd aoi, etSws OTt Kai
direp a Ae'cyw 7rotfj'o"ets. ^dfxa oe Kal eToifxate fxoi
^eviav iXiri^w ydp oti Bid twv irpoaev^wv vfxwv va-
piadriaofxai vfiiv.

only passage in the lxx where the
word occurs). The prayer ovaiprjv aov,
dvaiprjv vpmv, etc., occurs several times
in Ignatius; Polyc. I, 6, Magn. 2, 12,
Ephes. 2. It is not unlikely that bval-
P-tjv here involves a reference to the
name Onesimus; see the note on ver.
1 1. The Hebrew fondness for playing
on names makes such an aUusion at
least possible.
e'v Kvpim ) As he had begotten Phi
lemon e'v Kvpim (comp. 1 Cor.iv. 15, 17),
so it was iv Kvpim that he looked for
the recompense of filial offices.
dvd;ravo-ov K.r.X.] See the note ver. 7.
21. eypa^a] 'I write': see the note
on ver. 19.
«7rep a Xeyco k.t.X.] What was the
thought upmost in the Apostle's mind
when he penned these words? Did
he contemplate the manumission of
Onesimus 1 If so, the restraint which
he imposes upon himself is signifi
cant. Indeed throughout this epistle
the idea would seem to be present to
his thoughts, though the word never
passes his lips. This reserve is emi
nently characteristic of the Gospel.
Slavery is never directly attacked as
such, but principles are inculcated
which must prove fatal to it.
22. dpa 8i x.t.X.] When St Paul
first contemplated visiting Rome, he
had intended, after leaving the me
tropolis, to pass westward into Spain;
Rom. xv. 24, 28. But by this time he
appears to have altered his plans, pur
posing first to revisit Greece and Asia
Minor. Thus in PhiL ii. 24 he looks
forward to seeing the PhiUppians
shortly; while here he contemplates a
risit to the Churches of the Lycus
vaUey. There is a gentle compulsion in this
mention of a personal visit to Colossae.
The Apostle would thus be able to

see for himself that Philemon had not
disappointed his expectations. Simi
larly Serapion in Eus. HE. vi. 12
jrpocrSoKare pe e'v rd^ei.
£eviav] ' a lodging ' ; comp. Clem.
Hom. xii. 2 irpoaiaatv rds ijevlas eroi-
pdfovrer. So the Latin parare hospi-
tium Cic. ad Att. xiv. 2, Mart. Ep.
ix. 1. This latter passage, 'Vale et
para hospitium', closely resembles St
Paul's language here. In the expres
sion before us £evia is probably the
place of entertainment : but in such
phrases as xaXeiv eVi £cvlq, irapaxaXeh
iiri £eviav, tppovri'feiv £evias, and the
like, it denotes the offices of hospital
ity. The Latin hospitium also in
cludes both senses. The £evm, as a
lodging, may denote either quarters
in an inn or a room in a private house :
see Philippians p. 9. For the latter
comp. Plato Tim. 20 0 irapd Kptriav
irpbs rbv £evmva, ov xai xaraXvopev,
dcpixbpcBa. In this case the response
would doubtless be a hospitable recep
tion in Philemon's home; but the
request does not assume so much as
this. XapiaBrjaopai] ' I shall be granted
to you'. The grant (xapl£eaBai) of
one person to another, may be for
purposes either (1) of destruction, as
Acts XXV. II ovSels pe Svvarai avrois
xapiaaaBai (comp. ver. 16), or (2) of
preservation, as Acts iii. 14 jjrrjaaaBe
avSpa cpovia xapicr6V/vai vpiv, and
here. 23 — 25. ' Epaphras my feUow-cap-
tive in Christ Jesus salutes you. As
do also Mark, Aristarchus, Demas,
and Luke, my fellow-labourers. The
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with
thee and thy household, and sanctify
the spirit of you all.'
23 sq. For these salutations see
the notes on CoL iv. 10 sq. Epaphras

344

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[23—25

a3'Aaira^eTai ae 'E7rad)oas 6 avvai%fidXwTOS fiov iv
A.piaTw 'Irjaov, a4MaoKos, 'AplaTap^os, At] /mas, Aou/cas,
01 avvepyo'i fiov.
35 'H %aots tov Kvpiov [qfiujv] 'Irjaov XpiaTov fieTa
tov irvevfiaTos vfitSv.

is mentioned first because he was a
Colossian (CoLiv. 12) and, as the evan
gelist of Colossae (see p. 29 sq.), doubt
less weU known to Philemon. Of the
four others Aristarchus and Mark be
longed to the Circumcision (Col. iv. 11)
while Demas and Luke were Gentile
Christians. All these were of Greek
or Asiatic origin and would probably
be weU known to Philemon, at least
by name. On the other hand Jesus
Justus, who is honourably mentioned
in the Colossian letter (iv. 11), but

passed over here, may have been a
Roman Christian.
6 avvaixpdXmros] On the possible
meanings of this title see Col. iv. 10,
where it is given not to Epaphras but
to Aristarchus.
25. 'H x«p« K.r.X.] The same form
of farewell as in Gal. vi. 18; comp.
2 Tim. iv. 22.
upcov] The persons whose names
are mentioned in the opening saluta
tion, r

DISSERTATIONS.

On some points connected with the Essenes.
I.
THE NAME ESSENE.
II.
OEIGIN AND AFFINITIES OP THE ESSENES.
III.
ESSENISM AND CHRISTIANITY.

THE NAME ESSENE.
The name is variously written in Greek : Various
, , t , . ... .. forms of
i. E0-0-17VOS : Joseph. Ant. xiu. 5. 9, xui. 10. 6, xv. 10. 5, xviii. the name
1. 2, 5, B. J. ii. 8. 2, 13, Vit. 2; Plin. If. H. v. 15. 17 m Greek-
(Essenus) ; Dion Chrys. in Synes. Dion 3 ; Hippol. Haer.
ix. 18, 28 (ms eoTivo's) ; Epiphan. Haer. p. 28 sq., 127 (ed.
Pet.).
2. 'Eo-amos : Philo 11. pp. 457, 471, 632 (ed. Mang.); Hegesip
pus in Euseb. H. E. iv. 22; Porphyr. de Abstin. iv. n. So
too Joseph. B. J. ii. 7. 3, ii. 20. 4, iii. 2. 1 ; Ant. xv. 10. 4 ;
though in the immediate context of this last passage he
writes 'Eo-otivos, if the common texts may be trusted.
3. 'Ocro-alos: Epiphan. Haer. pp. 40 sq., 125, 462. The common
texts very frequently make him write 'Oo-crnvos, but see
Dindorf's notes, Epiphan. Op. 1. pp. 380, 425. "With Epi
phanius the Essenes are a Samaritan, the Ossseans a Judaic
sect. He has evidently got his information from two distinct
sources, and does not see that the same persons are intended.
4. 'Ieo-o-cuos, Epiphan. Haer. p. 117. From the connexion the
same sect again seems to be meant : but owing to the form
Epiphanius conjectures (o!p.ai) that the name is derived from
Jesse, the father of David.
If any certain example could be produced where the name occurs All etymo-
in any early Hebrew or Aramaic writing, the question of its deriva- be rejected
tion would probably be settled : but in the absence of a single decisive which de-
. . . . . rive tbe
instance a wide field is opened for conjecture, and critics have not name

348 THE ESSENES.
been backward in availing themselves of the license. In discussing
the claims of the different etymologies proposed we may reject :
(i) From First : derivations from the Greek. Thus Philo connects the word
tlaeGreek; with oo-ios 'holy': Quod omn. prob. 12, p. 457 "Ecrcroj:oi...8iaXiKTOv
iWrjvucrji; irapciw/xoi dcridnrros, § 13, p. 459 tcov Eercroicuv v ocriiov,
Fragm. p. 632 xaXovvrai jj,ev 'Ecro-aioi, 7rapd tijv oo-iotijto., fioi ookco
[Sokei?], tt)<s jrpooTryoptds dgimOevTes. It is not quite clear whether
Philo is here playing with words after the manner of his master
Plato, or whether he holds a pre-established harmony to exist among
different languages by which similar sounds represent similar things,
or whether lastly he seriously means that the name was directly
derived from the Greek word oo-ios. The last supposition is the least
probable ; but he certainly does not reject this derivation ' as incor
rect' (Ginsburg Essenes p. 27), nor can irapuiwinoi ocricrnyro% be ren
dered ' from an incorrect derivation from the Greek homonym hosiotes1
(ib. p. 32), since the word irapoiwpo's never involves the notion of false
etymology. The amount of truth which probably underlies Philo's
statement will be considered hereafter. Another Greek derivation
is lao<;, ' companion, associate,' suggested by Eapoport, Erech MilUn
p. 41. Several others again are suggested by Lowy, s. v. Essaer, e.g.
ecrco from their esoteric doctrine, or aTcra from their fatalism. All
such may be rejected as instances of ingenious trifling, if indeed
they deserve to be called ingenious.
(ii) From Secondly: derivations from proper names whether of persons or
names of 0f piaceS- Thus the word has been derived from Jesse the father
persons or r
places ; of David (Epiphan. 1. c), or from one »{}>' Isai, the disciple of R.
Joshua ben Perachia who migrated to Egypt in the time of Alexander
Jannaeus (Low in Ben Ghananja 1. p. 352). Again it has been
referred to the town Essa (a doubtful reading in Joseph. Ant. xiii
15. 3) beyond the Jordan. And other similar derivations have been
suggested.
(iii) From Thirdly: etymologies from the Hebrew or Aramaic, which do
roots not no* suPply the right consonants, or do not supply them in the right
supplying order. Under this head several must be reiected ;
tbe right J '
conso- 1DX ^sar 'to bind,' Adler Volkslehrer vi. p. 50, referred to by
nan s, Ginsburg Essenes p. 29.
TDM chasid 'pious,' which is represented by 'AuiSatos (1 Maca
ii. 42 (v. 1.), vii. 13, 2 Mace. xiv. 6), and could not possibly assume

THE ESSENES. 349
the form "Eo-o-aTos or 'Eo-cnyvo's. Yet this derivation appears in Josip-
pon ben Gorion (iv. 6, 7, v. 24, pp. 274, 278, 451), who substitutes
Chasidim in narratives where the Essenes are mentioned in the
original of Josephus ; and it has been adopted by many more recent
writers. NHD s'chd 'to bathe,' from which with an Aleph prefixed we
might get 'KnDX as'chai 'bathers' (a word however which does not
occur): Gratz Gesch. der Juden ill. pp. 82, 468.
JflJV tsanuat 'retired, modest,' adopted by Frankel (Zeitschrift
1846, p. 449, Monatsschrift 11. p. 32) after a suggestion by Low.
To this category must be assigned those etymologies which con- such as
tain a } as the third consonant of the root ; since the comparison t\°-Bl
of the parallel forms "Eo-craios and 'Ecro-iyvos shows that in the latter make n
word the v is only formative. On this ground we must reject : the root,
j'DPl chasm; see below under |'U>JJ.
jXfl chotsen 'a fold' of a garment, and so supposed to signify the
jrepifcup.a or 'apron', which was given to every neophyte among the
Essenes (Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 5, 7): suggested by Jellinek Ben Cha-
nanja iv. p. 374.
Vt^]} tP^hvn, * strong' : see Cohn in Frankel's Monatssclwift vii.
p. 271. This etymology is suggested to explain Epiphanius Haer.
p. 40 tovto 8e to yevo<s tcov 'Octctj/vcui' kpjx/qveveTai Sid tjjs e-KSdo-ecos
toB ovdp:aTos crri/Sapdv yeVos ('a sturdy race'). The name 'Essene'
is so interpreted also in Makrisi (de Sacy, Chrestom. Arab. 1. p. 114,
306) ; but, as he himself writes it with Elif and not Aim, it is plain
that he got this interpretation from some one else, probably from
Epiphanius. The correct reading however in Epiphanius is 'Ocrcraitov,
not 'Oo-oinviav ; and it would therefore appear that this father or his
informant derived the word from the Hebrew root Tt57 rather than
from the Aramaic |e»jC The 'Oo-omoi would then be the D'tjl, and this
is so far a possible derivation, that the n does not enter into the root.
Another word suggested to explain the etymology of Epiphanius is the
Hebrew and Aramaic |»Dn chasm 'powerful, strong' (from }Dfl); but
this is open to the same objections as J'B'JI.
When all such derivations are eliminated as untenable or impro- Other de-
bable, considerable uncertainty still remains. The 1st and 3rd radi- Jo^!?^
cals might be any of the gutturals N, n, n, 1? ; and the Greek cr, as the ed :
2nd radical, might represent any one of several Shemitic sibilants.

35° THE ESSENES.
Thus we have the choice of the following etymologies, which have
found more or less favour.
(i)NiDN'a i1) XDN Asa 'to heal,' whence s^DS asya, 'a physician.'
physician'; The Essenes are supposed to be so called because Josephus states
(B. J. ii. 8. 6) that they paid great attention to the qualities of herbs
and minerals with a view to the healing of diseases (7rpds Oeparreiav
iradmv). This etymology is supported likewise by an appeal to the
name Oepairevrai, which Philo gives to an allied sect in Egypt (de Vit.
Cont. § i, n. p. 471). It seems highly improbable however, that the
ordinary name of the Essenes should have been derived from a
pursuit which was merely secondary and incidental ; while the sup
posed analogy of the Therapeutse rests on a wrong interpretation of
the word. Philo indeed (1. a), bent upon extracting from it as much
moral significance as possible, says, Bepairevral Kal OepairevrpiSes xa-
XovvTai, tjtoi wap oaov iarptx-qv iirayyeXXovTai Kpeicrcrova t^s Kara
7rdXets (17 ji-ev ydp crmpma Oeparrevei p.6vov, ixeivrj 8c Kai i/a^as K.T.X.)
ij irap oaov ex cpvcrecos Kai rc3v lepeoV vofiiav iiraiSevdrjo-av Bepaireveiv
to ov x.r.X. : but the latter meaning alone accords with the usage of
the word ; for fiepairevrrjs, used absolutely, signifies ' a worshipper,
devotee,' not 'a physician, healer.' This etymology of 'Ecrcraios is
asoribed, though wrongly, to Philo by Asaria de' Rossi (Meor Enayim
3, fol. 33 a) and has been very widely received. Among more recent
writers, who have adopted or favoured it, are Bellermann (Ueber Essder
u. Therapeuten p. 7), Gfrorer [PhUo 11. p. 341), Dahne (Ersch u. Gruber,
s. v.), Baur (Christi. Kirche der drei erst. Jahrh. p. 20), Herzfeld
(Gesch. des Judenthums 11. p. 371, 395, 397 sq.), Geiger (JJrschrift
p. 126), Derenbourg (L' Histoire et la Geographie de la Palestine
pp. 170, 175, notes), Keim (Jesus von Nazara I. p. 284 sq.), and
Hamburger (Real-Encyclopddie fur Bibel u. Talmud, s. v.). Several
of these writers identify the Essenes with the Baithusians (pDUTQ)
of the Talmud, though in the Talmud the Baithusians are connected
with the Sadducees. This identification was suggested by Asaria de'
Rossi (1. c. fol. 33 6), who interprets ' Baithusians' as ' the school of the
Essenes' (sTD'N JTO) : while subsequent writers, going a step further,
have explained it 'the school ofthe physicians' (WDK rpa).
(2) K'tn (2) NTH chaza, 'to see', whence torn chazyd 'a seer', in re-
a seer ; fererice to the prophetic powers which the Essenes claimed as the
result of ascetic contemplation : Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 12 eicti Se ev avrois

THE ESSENES. 35 1
oi koi Ta /xeXXovra irpoyivcucjKc-iv vmo-xvowTai k. t. A. For instances of
such Essene prophets see Ant. xiii. n. 2, xv. 10. 5, B. J. i. 3. 5, ii. 7.
3. Suidas, s. v. 'Ecrcraioi, says : Oempia to. 7roAAa rrapaji.ivovo-iv, ev$ev
xal 'Ecrcraioi KaAovvrai, touto SrjXovvrog tov ovop.aTos, tovtcoti, Oemprj-
tikoi. For this derivation, which was suggested by Baumgarten
(see Bellermann p. 10) and is adopted by Hilgenfeld (Jud. Apocal.
p. 278), there is something to be said : but Ktn is rather opav than
vewpeiv ; and thus it must denote the result rather than the process,
the vision which was the privilege of the few rather than the con
templation which was the duty of all. Indeed in a later paper
(Zeitschr. xi. p. 346, 1868) Hilgenfeld expresses himself doubtfully
about this derivation, feeling the difficulty of explaining the 0-0-
from the T. This is a real objection. In the transliteration of the
lxx the t is persistently represented by f, and the X by tr. The
exceptions to this rule, where the manuscript authority is beyond
question, are very few, and in every case they seem capable of ex
planation by peculiar circumstances.
(3) i"l£W zasah ' to do,' so that 'Eo-craiot would signify ' the (3) ilW
doers, the observers of the law,' thus referring to the strictness of '
Essene practices : see Oppenheim in Frankel's Monatsschrift vn.
p. 272 sq. It has been suggested also that, as the Pharisees were
especially designated the teachers, the Essenes were called the 'doers
by a sort of antithesis : see an article in Jost's Anmalen 1839, P- x45.
Thus the Talmudic phrase nB>5?D 'SWK, interpreted 'men of prac
tice, of good deeds,' is supposed to refer to the Essenes (see Frankel's
Zeitschrift in. p. 458, Monatsschrift n. p. 70). In some passages indeed
(see Surenhuis Mishna in. p. 313) it may possibly mean ' workers of
miracles' (as epyov Joh. v. 20, vii. 21, x. 25, etc.); but in this sense
also it might be explained of the thaumaturgic powers claimed by the
Essenes. (See below, p. 362.) On the use which has been made of a
passage in the Aboth of R. Nathan c. 37, as supporting this deriva
tion, I shall have to speak hereafter. Altogether this etymology has
little or nothing to recommend it.
I have reserved to the last the two derivations which seem to
deserve most consideration.
(4) •<*»!« ohasi (rCsxu* ch'se) or nc^jjjaM chasyo, ' pious,' in (4) chasyo
Syriac. This derivation, wliich is also given by de Sacy (Ghrestom. plous '
Arab. 1. p. 347), is adopted by Ewald (Gesch. des V. Isr. iv. p. 484,

35 2 THE ESSENES.
ed. 3, 1864, vn. pp. 154, 477, ed. 2, 1859), who abandons in its fa
vour another etymology (Jjn chazzan ' watcher, worshipper' = 0epa-
7revTi;s) which he had suggested in an earlier edition of his fourth
volume (p. 420). It is recommended by the fact that it resembles
not only in sound, but in meaning, the Greek ocrios, of which it is a
common rendering in the Peshito (Acts ii. 27, xiii. 35, Tit. i. 8).
Thus it explains the derivation given by Philo (see above, p. 350),
and it also accounts for the tendency to write "Oo-traios for "Eero-alos
in Greek. Ewald moreover points out how an Essenizing Sibylline
poem (Orac. Sib. iv ; see above, p. 96) dwells on the Greek equiva
lents, evo-e/3ris, evcreBirj, etc. (w. 26, 35, 42 sq., 148 sq., 162, 165 sq.,
178 sq., ed. Alexandre), as if they had a special value for the
writer : see Gesch. vu. p. 154, Sibyli. Biicher p. 46. Lipsius (Schenkel's
Bibel-Leancon, s. v.) also considers this the most probable etymology.
(5) DWKTI (5) X£JTl chdsha (also ntSTl) Heb. ' to be silent' ; whence D'KSJTI
ones'" chashshdim ' the silent ones,' who meditate on mysteries. Jost (Gesch.
d. Judenth. 1. p. 207) believes that this was the derivation accepted
by Josephus, since he elsewhere (Ant. iii. 7. 5, iii. 8. 9) writes out |E>n,
choshen ' the high-priest's breast-plate' (Exod. xxviii. 15 sq.), eacrrjv or
ecrcnjvTn'i in Greek, and explains it o-rj/jiaivei. tovto xard tijv 'EXXijvmv
yAcorrav Aoyeiov (i.e. the 'place of oracles' or 'of reason' : comp. Philo
de Mon. ii. § 5, II. p. 226, xaXeiTai Xoyetov tru/wos, iireiSi) Ta iv ovpavoi
irdvra Aoyots «al avaAoyiais 8e8?/p.iovpyijTai k.t.A.), as it is translated
in the lxx. Even though modern critics should be right in connect
ing »{j»n with the Arab. l^f>*s- ' pulcher fuit, ornavit* (see Gesen. Thes.
p. 535, s. v.), the other derivation may have prevailed in Josephus'
time. We may illustrate this derivation by Josephus' description of
the Essenes, B. J. ii. 8. 5 tois eijmuev cos p.vo-rrjpidv n cppixrdv ij tcov
efi/Sov o-mimtj; xaTacpaiverai ; and perhaps this will also explain the Greek
equivalent OemprjTixoi, which Suidas gives for 'Ecrcraioi. The use of
the Hebrew word DiNSJTI in Mishna Shekalim v. 6, though we need
not suppose that the Essenes are there meant, will serve to show how
it might be adopted as the name of the sect. On this word see Levy
Ghalddisches Worterbuch p. 287. On the whole this seems the most
probable etymology of any, though it has not found so much favour
as the last. At all events the rules of transliteration are entirely
satisfied, and this can hardly be said of the other derivations which
come into competition with it.

II.
ORIGIN AND AFFINITIES OF THE ESSENES.

THE ruling principle of the Restoration under Ezra was the isola- Tbe prin-
tion of the Jewish people from all influences of the surrounding tj^ resto-
nations. Only by the rigorous application of this principle was it ratlon-
possible to guard the nationality of the Hebrews, and thus to preserve
the sacred deposit of religious truth of which this nationality was the
husk. Hence the strictest attention was paid to the Levitical ordi
nances, and more especially to those which aimed at ceremonial
purity. The principle, which was thus distinctly asserted at the
period of the national revival, gained force and concentration at a
later date from the active antagonism to which the patriotic Jews
were driven by the religious and political aggressions of the Syrian
kings. During the Maccabasan wars we read of a party or sect Eise of
called the Gluxsidim or Asidasans (kcriSaioi), the 'pious' or 'devout,' djeans.
who zealous in their observance of the ceremonial law stoutly re
sisted any concession to the practices of Hellenism, and took their
place in the van of the straggle with their national enemies, the
Antiochene monarchs (i Mace. ii. 42, vii. 13, 2 Mace. xiv. 6). But,
though their names appear now for the first time, they are not men
tioned as a newly formed party; and it is probable that they had their
origin at a much earlier date.
The subsequent history of this tendency to exolusiveness and
isolation is wrapt in the same obscurity. At a somewhat later date Pbari-
it is exhibited in the Pharisees and the Essenes/ but whether these Essenism
were historically connected with the Chasidim as divergent offshoots traced to
of the original sect, or whether they represent independent develop- prmcipie.
ments of the same principle, we are without the proper data for
deciding. The principle itself appears in the name of the Pharisees,
col. 23

354 THE ESSENES.
which, as denoting 'separation,' points to the avoidance of all foreign
and contaminating influences. On the other hand the meaning of
the name Essene is uncertain, for the attempt to derive it directly
from Chasidim must be abandoned ; but the tendency of the sect is
unmistakeable. If with the Pharisees ceremonial purity was a
principal aim, with the Essenes it was an absorbing passion. It was
enforced and guarded moreover by a special organization. While the
Pharisees were a sect, the Essenes were an order. Like the Pytha
goreans in Magna Graecia and the Buddhists in India before them,
like the Christian monks of the Egyptian and Syrian deserts after
them, they were formed into a religious brotherhood, fenced about by
minute and rigid rules, and carefully guarded from any contamination
with the outer world.
Foreign Thus the sect may have arisen in the heart of Judaism. The
elements £<jea 0f ceremonial purity was essentially Judaic. But still, when we
in Esse- r ^ J
nism. turn to the representations of Philo and Josephus, it is impossible to
overlook other traits which betoken foreign affinities. Whatever the
Essenes may have been in their origin, at the Christian era at least
and in the Apostolic age they no longer represented the current type
of religious thought and practice among the Jews. This foreign
element has been derived by some from the Pythagoreans, by others
from the Syrians or Persians or even from the farther East; but,
whether Greek or Oriental, its existence has until lately been almost
universally aUowed.
Frankel's The investigations of Frankel, published first in 1846 in his
weU re- Zeitschrift, and continued in 1853 in his Monatsschrift, have given
oeived, a different direction to current opinion. Frankel maintains that
Essenism was a purely indigenous growth, that it is only Pharisaism
in an exaggerated form, and that it has nothing distinctive and owes
nothing, or next to nothing, to foreign influences. To establish this
point, he disparages the representations of Philo and Josephus as
coloured to suit the tastes of their heathen readers, while in their
place he brings forward as authorities a number of passages from tal-
mudical and rabbinical writings, in which he discovers references to
this sect. In this view he is followed implicitly by some later
writers, and has largely influenced the opinions of others; while
nearly all speak of his investigations as throwing great light on
the subject.

THE ESSENES. 355
It is perhaps dangerous to dissent from a view which has found but
so much favour ; but nevertheless I am obliged to confess my belief f^"^,!
that, whatever value Frankel's investigations may have as contribu- mialead-
. ing.
tions to our knowledge of Jewish religious thought and practice, they
throw little or no light on the Essenes specially ; and that the blind
acceptance of his results by later writers has greatly obscured the
distinctive features of this seot. I cannot but think that any one,
who will investigate Frankel's references and test his results step by
step, will arrive at the conclusion to which I myself have been led,
that his talmudical researches have left our knowledge of this sect
where it was before, and that we must still refer to Josephus and
Philo for any precise information respecting them.
Frankel starts from the etymology of the name. He supposes His double
that "Ecro-aios, 'Eo-o-ijvos, represent two different Hebrew words, the Jf"^ lon
former TDn chasid, the latter imjx tsanua^, both clothed in suit- name.
able Greek dresses1. Wherever therefore either of these words
occurs, there is, or there may be, a direct reference to the

It is not too much to say that these etymologies are impossible ; Fatal ob-
and this for several reasons. (1) The two words 'Eo-o-aios, 'Ecro-77- ^° lons °
vo's, are plainly duplicate forms of the same Hebrew or Aramaic
original, like 2a/xy/aios and ^a/it/rip/ds (Epiphan. Haer. pp. 40, 47,
127, and even ^ap-ipiTrj^ p. 46), Nafcopaios and Nac^ap^vo's, TiTTaios
and rirnjvos (Steph Byz. s. v., Hippol. Hcer. vi. 7), with which we
may compare Boorpaios and Boorpijvos, MeAiTaios and MeXiTjfvos, and
numberless other examples. (2) Again ; when we consider either
word singly, the derivation offered is attended with the most serious
difficulties. There is no reason why in "Ecro-aTos the d should have
disappeared from chasid, while it is hardly possible to conceive that
tsanua^ should have taken such an incongruous form as 'Ecrcnjvds.
(3) And lastly ; the more important of the two words, chasid, had
already a recognised Greek equivalent in 'Ao-i8aios ; and it seems
highly improbable that a form so divergent as 'Eo-craTos should have
taken its place.
Indeed Frankel's derivations are generally, if not universally, Depend- 611CB tyf
abandoned by later writers ; and yet these same writers repeat his the theory
1 Zeitschrift p. 449' Fiir Essoer Uegt, nach einer Bemerkung des Herrn L.
wie schon von anderen Seiten bemerkt Low im Orient, das Hebr. D13X nahe' ;
wurde, das Hebr. TDn, itix Essener, seealsopp.454,455; Monatsschriftji.$2.
23—2

356on the
derivation.

The term
chasidnot ap
phed speciaUy
to tbe

THE ESSENES.
quotations and accept his results, as if the references were equally valid,
though the name of the sect has disappeared. They seem to be
satisfied with the stability of the edifice, even when the foundation
is undermined. Thus for instance Gratz not only maintains after
Frankel that the Essenes ' were properly nothing more than station
ary or, more strictly speaking, logically consistent (consequente)
Chasidim,' and 'that therefore they were not so far removed from the
Pharisees that they can be regarded as a separate sect,' and 'accepts
entirely these results' which, as he says, 'rest on critical inves
tigation ' (in. p. 463), but even boldly translates chasid/uth ' the
Essene mode of life' (ib. 84), though he himself gives a -wholly
different derivation of the word ' Essene,' making it signify ' washers'
or 'baptists' (see above, p. 349). And even those who do not go to
this length of inconsistency, yet avail themselves freely of the
passages where chasid occurs, and interpret it ot the Essenes, while
distinctly repudiating the etymology '.
But, although 'EcrcraTos or 'Eo-cnyvds is not a Greek form of chasid,
it might still happen that this word was applied to them as an
epithet, though not as a proper name. Only in this case the refer
ence ought to be unmistakeable, before any conclusions are based
upon it. But in fact, after going through all the passages, which
Frankel gives, it is impossible to feel satisfied that in a single in
stance there is a direct allusion to the Essenes. Sometimes the word
seems to refer to the old sect of the Chasidim or Asidceans, as for
instance when Jose ben Joezer, who lived during the Maccabaean war,
is called a chasid2. At all events this R. Jose is known to have
been a married man, for he is stated to have disinherited his children
(Baba Baihra 133 b) ; and therefore he cannot have belonged to the
stricter order of Essenes. Sometimes it is employed quite generally
to denote pious observers of the ceremonial law, as for instance
when it is said that with the death of certain famous teachers the
Chasidim ceased8. In this latter sense the expression D'JItJWin D'TDn,
'the ancient or primitive Chasidim' (Monatsschr. pp. 31, 62), is perhaps
used ; for these primitive Chasidim again are mentioned as haviDg

1 e. g. Keim (p. 286) and Derenbourg
(p. 166, 461 sq.), who both derive
Essene from N'DN ' a physician.'
2 Mishna Chagigah U. 7; Zeitschr.
p. 454, Monatsschr. pp. 33, 62. See

Frankel's own account of this E. Jose
iu an earUer volume, Monatsschr. 1.
p. 405 so..
8 Zeitschr. p. 457, Monatsschr. p 69
sq. ; see below, p. 360.

THE ESSENES. 357
wives and children1, and it appears also that they were scrupulously
exact in bringing their sacrificial offerings2. Thus it is impossible to
identify them with the Essenes, as described by Josephus and Philo.
Even in those passages of which most has been made, the reference
is more than doubtful. Thus great stress is laid on the saying of R.
Joshua ben Chananiah in Mishna Sotah iii. 4, ' The foolish chasid and
the clever villain (DnyjltJH! nDltPTDn), etc., are the ruin ofthe world.'
But the connexion points to a much more general meaning of chasid,
and the rendering in Surenhuis, ' Homo pius qui insipiens, improbus
qui astutus,' gives the correct antithesis. So we might say that
there is no one more mischievous than the wrong-headed conscientious
man. It is true that the Gemaras illustrate the expression by ex
amples of those who allow an over-punctilious regard for external
forms to stand in the way of deeds of mercy. And perhaps rightly.
But there is no reference to any distinctive Essene practices in the
illustrat;->ns given. Again; the saying in Mishna Pirke Aboth v.
10, 'He who says Mine is thine and thine is thine is [a] chasid
(TDn ~fa\V ~frw\ ~\b& "hw)t is quoted by several writers as though it
referred to the Essene community of goods3. But in the first place
the idea of community of goods would require, ' Mine is thine and
thine is mine' : and in the second place, the whole context, and
especially the clause which immediately follows (and which these
writers do not give), ' He who says Thine is mine and mine is
mine is wicked (jlBH),' show plainly that TDn must be taken in its
general sense 'pious,' and the whole expression implies not recipro
cal interchange but individual self-denial.
1 Niddah 38 a ; see Lowy s. v. Es- supposes, reciprocation or community
saer. of goods, substituting 'Thine is mine '
2 Mishna Kerithuth vi. 3, Nedarim for 'Thine is thine' in tbe second
ro a ; see Monatsschr. p. 65. clause ; ' The Chassid must bave no
3 Thus Gratz (in p. 81) speaking of property of his own, but must treat
the community of goods among tbe it as belonging to tbe Society (*^{{>
Essenes writes, 'From thisview springs TDn W "fa® ~(?W).' At least, as be
the proverb ; Every Ohassid says ; Mine gives no reference, I suppose that he
and thine belong to thee (not me)' thus refers to the same passage. This very
giving a turn to the expression which expression ' mine is thine and tbine is
in its original connexion it does not mine ' does indeed occur previously
at aU justify. Of the existence of such in the same section, but it is applied
a proverb I have found no traces. It as a formula of disparagement to tbe
certamly is not suggested in the pas- £am haarets (see below p. 364), who
sage of Pirke Aboth. Later in the vo- expect to receive again as much as they
lume (p. 467) Gratz tacitly alters the give. In this loose way Gratz treats
words to make them express, as he the whole subject. Keim (p. 294)

358 THE ESSENES.
Possible It might indeed be urged, though this is not Frankel's plea, that
conn^°n supposing the true etymology of the word °Ecrcraros, 'Eo-otjvo's, to be
im&chasyo the Syriac rOteu, p^-««n. ch'se, chasyo (a possible derivation),
discussed. '
chasid might have been its Hebrew equivalent as being similar
in sound and meaning, and perhaps ultimately connected in derrva-
tion, the exactly corresponding triliteral root mon (comp. Din) not
being in use in Hebrew1. But before we accept this explanation
we have a right to demand some evidence which, if not demonstra
tive, is at least circumstantial, that chasid is used of the Essenes :
and this we have seen is not forthcoming. Moreover, if the Essenes
had thus inherited the name of the Chasidim, we should have ex
pected that its old Greek equivalent 'Ao-iSaioi, which is still used
later than the Maccabsean era, would also have gone with it ; rather
than that a new Greek word 'Eo-o-aios (or 'Eo-cnjvos) should have been
invented to take its place. But indeed the Syriac Version of the
Old Testament furnishes an argument against this convertibility of
the Hebrew chasid and the Syriac chasyo, which must be regarded as
Usage is almost decisive. The numerous passages in the Psalms, where the
abl^to"** expressions ' My chasidim,' ' His chasidim' occur (xxx. 5, xxxi. 24,
this view, xxxvii. 28, Iii. 11, lxxix. 2, lxxxv. 9, xcvii. 10, cxvi. 15, cxxxii. 9,
cxlix. 9 : comp. xxxii. 6, cxlix. 1, 5), seem to have suggested the
assumption of the name to the original Asidaeans. But in such
passages TDn is commonly, if not universally, rendered in the
Peshito not by riflou , kIaOOas , but by a wholly different word ." - ,i\
zadik. And again, in the Books of Maccabees the Syriac rendering
for the name 'AorSaioi, Chasidim, is a word derived from another
quite distinct root. These facts show that the Hebrew chasid and
the Syriac chasyo were not practically equivalents, so that the one
would suggest the other ; and thus all presumption in favour of a
connexion between 'Ao-iSaios and 'Eo-o-aios is removed.
Frankel's Frankel's other derivation yuv, tsanuat, suggested as an equi-
derivation valen* to 'Eo-o->jvos, has found no favour with later writers, and
tsanua^ indeed is too far removed from the Greek form to be tenable.
consi er- ^or (jQ ^ passages quoted by him2 require or suggest any allusion
quotes tbe passage correctly, but refers by the later Jews because tbe Syrian
it nevertheless to Essene communism. Essenes means exactly tbe same as
1 This is Hitzig's view (Geschichte 'Hasidim.'"
des Volkes Israel p. 427). He main- 2 Zeitschr. pp. 455, 457; Monatsschr.
tains that ' ' tbey were caUed ' Hasidim ' p. 32.

THE ESSENES. 359
to this sect. Thus in Mishna Demai, vi. 6, we are told that the
school of Hillel permits a certain license in a particular matter, but
it is added, 'The <bu¥ of the school of Hillel followed the pre
cept ofthe school of Shammai.' Here, as Frankel himself confesses,
the Jerusalem Talmud knows nothing about Essenes, but explains
the word by VUJO, ie. 'upright, worthy"; while elsewhere, as he
allows", it must have this general sense. Indeed the mention of the
' school of Hillel ' here seems to exclude the Essenes. In its com
prehensive meaning it will most naturally be taken also in the other
passage quoted by Frankel, Kiddushin 71 a, where it is stated that
the pronunciation of the sacred name, which formerly was known to
all, is now only to be divulged to the D'JIUV, i.e. the discreet, among
the priests ; and in fact it occurs in reference to the communication
of the same mystery in the immediate context also, where it could
not possibly be treated as a proper name ; VD' 'Xna "ID1511 1*JM yiJVB>,
' who is discreet and meek and has reached middle age,' etc.
Of other etymologies, which have been suggested, and through other sup-
which it might be supposed the Essenes are mentioned by name in ^^zJ^I'
the Talmud, N>DN, asya, ' a physician,' is the one which has found in the
most favour. For the reasons given above (p. 350) this derivation (,\ Agy^
seems highly improbable, and the passages quoted are quite insufii- ' a Physi~
cient to overcome the objections. Of these the strongest is in the
Talm. Jerus. Yoma iii. 7, where we are told that a certain physician
boa) offered to communicate the sacred name to R. Pinchas the not sup-
son of Chama, and the latter refused on the ground that he ate of ^ pa3.
the tithes — this being regarded as a disqualification, apparently sages
. „ quoted in
because it was inconsistent with the highest degree of ceremonial its behalf.
purity 8. The same story is told with some modifications in Midrash
Qoheleth iii. 11*. Here Frankel, though himself (as we have seen)
adopting a different derivation of the word ' Essene,' yet supposes
that this particular physician belonged to the sect, on the sole ground
that ceremonial purity is represented as a qualification for the
initiation into the mystery of the Sacred Name. Lowy (1. c.) denies
that the allusion to the tithes is rightly interpreted: but even sup
posing it to be correct, the passage is quite an inadequate basis either
1 Monatsschr. p. 32. Derenbourg p. 170 sq.
» Zeitschr. p. 455.- 4 See L8w7 Xrit.-Talm. Lex. s. 7.
u Frankel Monatsschr. p. 71: comp. Essaer.

360 THE ESSENES.
for Frankel's conclusion that this particular physician was an Essene,
or for the derivation of the word Essene which others maintain. Again,
in tho statement of Talm. Jerus. Kethuboth ii. 3, that correct manu
scripts were called books of »DN ', the word Asi is generally taken as
a proper name. But even if this interpretation be false, there is abso
lutely nothing in the context which suggests any allusion to the
Essenes". In like manner the passage from Sanhedrin 99 b, where
a physician is mentioned3, supports no such inference. Indeed, as
this last passage relates to the family of the Asi, he obviously can
have had no connexion with the celibate Essenes.
(1) gasah Hitherto our search for the name in the Talmud has been unsuc-
'todo.' ceggful. One possibility however still remains. The talmudical
writers speak of certain nB>J)0 'SWN 'men of deeds' ; and if (as some
suppore) the name Essene is derived from ntW have we not here the
mention which we are seeking ? Frankel rejects the etymology,
but presses the identification*. The expression, he urges, is often
used in connexion with chasidim. It signifies ' miracle workers,'
and therefore aptly describes the supernatural powers supposed to be
exercised by the Essenes*. Thus we are informed in Mishna Sotah ix.
15, that ' When R. Chaninah ben Dosa died, the men of deeds ceased;
when R. Jose Ketinta died, the chasidim ceased.' In the Jerusalem
Talmud however this mishna is read, ' With the death of R. Cha
ninah ben Dosa and R. Jose Ketinta the chasidim ceased'; while the
Gemara there explains R. Chaninah to have been one of the *ej»3S
nE>J!D- Thus, Frankel concludes, ' the identity of these with D^TDn
becomes still more plain.' Now it seems clear that this expression
ne>J)D ^CWK in some places cannot refer to miraculous powers, but
must mean 'men of practical goodness,' as for instance in Succah
51 at 53 a > and being a general term expressive of moral excellence,
it is naturally connected with chasidim, which is likewise a general
1 Urged in favour of this derivation xxxi. 6. 5 ovx ei-tipaive ttjv tavrrji- yvii-
by Herzfeld II. p. 398. prjv d\\a ervverrjpei trap' iavrrj), is also
2 Tbe oath taken by tbe Essenes tbe meaning suggested here by the
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 7) avvTijpijo-eiv... context.
rd ttjs alpitreut avruv p\j3Xia can have 3 Tbe passage is adduced in support
nothing to do with accuracy in tran- of this derivation by Derenbourg p.
scribing copies, as Herzfeld (11. pp. 398, 1 75.
407)seemstotbink. Tbe natural mean- * See Zeitschr. p. 438, Monatsschr.
ing of avvTijpe'iv, ' to keep safe or close ' pp. 68 — 70.
and so 'not to divulge' (e.g. Polyb. 6 See above, p. 351.

THE ESSENES. 361
term expressive of piety and goodness. Nor is there any reason why
it should not always be taken in this sense. It is true that stories
are told elsewhere of this R. Chaninah, which ascribe miraculous
powers to him1, and hence there is a temptation to translate it ' won
der-worker,' as applied to him. But the reason is quite insufficient.
Moreover it must be observed that R. Chaninah's wife is a promi
nent person in the legends of his miracles reported in Taaniih 24 b ;
and thus we need hardly stop to discuss the possible meanings of
ntyyo iWia, since his claims to being considered an Essene are barred
at the outset by this fact2.
It has been asserted indeed by a recent author, that one very
ancient Jewish writer distinctly adopts this derivation, and as dis
tinctly states that the Essenes were a class of Pharisees8. If this
were the case, Frankel's theory, though not his etymology, would
receive a striking confirmation : and it is therefore important to
enquire on what foundation the assertion rests.
Dr Ginsburg's authority for this statement is a passage from Tbe au-
the Aboth of Rabbi Nathan, c. 37, which, as he gives it, appears for tnjs
conclusive; 'There are eight kinds of Pharisees... and those Phari- derivationtraced to
sees who live in celibacy are Essenes.' But what are the facts an error.
of the case? First/ This book was certainly not written by its
reputed author, the R. Nathan who was vice-president under the
younger Gamaliel about a.d. 140. It may possibly have been
founded on an earlier treatise by that famous teacher, though even
this is very doubtful : but in its present form it is a comparatively
modern work. On this point all or almost all recent writers
on Hebrew literature are agreed4- Secondly ; Dr Ginsburg has taken
the reading »3KK>u insinD, without even mentioning any alternative.
Whether the words so read are capable of the meaning which he
has assigned to them, may be highly questionable ; but at all events
this cannot have been the original reading, as the parallel passages,
1 Taaniih 24 6, Yoma 53 6; see Su- » Ginsburg in Kitto's Cyclopaedia
renhuis Mishna in. p. 313. s. v., 1. p. 829: comp. Essenes pp. 22,
2 In this and similar cases it is un- 28.
necessary to consider whether the per- 4 e.g. Geiger Zeitschrift f. Jiidische
sons mentioned might have belonged Theologie vi. p. 20 sq. ; Zunz Gottes-
to those looser disciples of Essenism, dienstliche Vortrage p. 108 sq. : comp.
who married (see above, p. 83): be- Steinschneider Catal. Heb. Bibl. Bodl.
cause the identification is meaningless col. 2032 sq. These two last references
unless tbe strict order were intended. are given by Dr Ginsburg himself.

362 THE ESSENES.
Babl. Sotah fol. 22 b, Jerus. Sotah v. 5, Jerus. Berakhoth ix. 5,
(quoted by Buxtorf and Levy, s.v. B>ns), distinctly prove. In
Babl. Sotah I.e., the corresponding expression is nJOTNl 'fDin HD
'What is my duty, and I will do it,' and the passage in Jerus.
Berakhoth l.c. is to the same effect. These parallels show that
the reading riiBWI TDin TVO must be taken also in Aboth c. 37,
so that the passage will be rendered, ' The Pharisee who says, What
is my duty, and I will do it.' Thus the Essenes and celibacy dis
appear together. Lastly / Inasmuch as Dr Ginsburg himself takes a
wholly different view of the name Essene, connecting it either with
jsn ' an apron,' or with tfiDn ' pious ',' it is difficult to see how he could
translate «3Kt?V 'Essene' (from two 'to do') in this passage, except
on the supposition that R. Nathan was entirely ignorant of the
orthography and derivation of the word Essene. Yet, if such igno
rance were conceivable in so ancient a writer, his authority on this
question woidd be absolutely worthless. But indeed Dr Ginsburg
would appear to have adopted this reference to R. Nathan, with the
reading of the passage and the interpretation of the name, from .
some other writer2. At all events it is quite inconsistent with
his own opinion as expressed previously.
Are the But, though we have not succeeded in finding any direct mention
Essenes j ^ secj. ^_ name ^ the Talmud, and all the identifications
alluded to, J '
though not of the word Essene with diverse expressions occurring there
the Tai- have failed us on examination, it might still happen that allusions
mu<*? to them were so frequent as to leave no doubt about the persons
meant. Their organisation or their practices or their tenets might
be precisely described, though their name was suppressed. Such
allusions Frankel finds scattered up and down the Talmud in great
profusion.
,,, jjje (1) He sees a reference to the Essenes in the SOian chdbiira or
chaber < Society,' which is mentioned several times in talmudical writers 3.
or Asso- .
ciate. The chaber pan) or 'Associate is, he supposes, a member of this
brotherhood. He is obliged to confess that the word cannot always
have this sense, but still he considers this to be a common desig-
1 Essenes p. 30; comp. Kitto's Cy- 1862, no. 33, p. 459, a reference pointed
clopaedia, s. v. Essenes. out to me by a friend.
2 It is given by Landsberg in the s Zeitschr. p. 450 sq., Monatsschr.
Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums pp. 31, 70.

THE ESSENES. . 35,
nation of the Essenes. The chaber was bound to observe certain
rules of ceremonial purity, and a period of probation was imposed
upon him before he was admitted. With this fact Frankel connects
the passage in Mishna Chagigah ii. 5, 6, where several degrees of cere
monial purity are specified. Having done this, he considers that he
has the explanation of the statement in Josephus (B. J. ii. 8. 7, 10),
that the Essenes were divided into four different grades or orders
according to the time of their continuance in the ascetic practices
demanded by the sect.
But in the first place there is no reference direct or indirect A passage
to the chaber, or indeed to any organisation of any kind, in the JLaj^on.
passage of Chagigah. It simply contemplates different degrees of sidered.
purification as qualifying for the performance of certain Levitical
rites in an ascending scale. There is no indication that these
lustrations are more than temporary and immediate in their applica
tion; and not the faintest hint is given of distinct orders of men,
each separated from the other by formal barriers and each demand
ing a period of probation before admission from the order below,
as was the case with the grades of the Essene brotherhood described
by Josephus. Moreover the orders in Josephus are four in number1,
1 As the notices in Josephus (B. J. mitted into the society. A comparison
ii. 8) relating to this point have been with the other passage shows that
frequently misunderstood, it may be these two years comprise the period
well once for all to explain bis mean- spent in tbe second and third grades,
ing. The grades of the Essene order each extending over a year. After
are mentioned in two separate notices, passing through these three stages in
apparently, though not really, discord- three successive years, he enters upon
ant. (1) In § 10 he says that they are the fourth and highest grade, thus
'divided into four sections according becoming a perfect member.
to the duration of their discipline ' It is stated by Dr Ginsburg (Essenes
(Scrj/nivrai xard XP°V0V T'?! daxrjaeas p. 12 sq., comp. Kitto's Cyclopaedia
els polpas reo-csapai), adding that the s.v. p. 828) that tbe Essenes passed
older members are considered to be through eight stages ' from tbe be-
deflled by contact with the younger, ginning of tbe noviciate to tbe achieve-
i. e. each superior grade by contact ment of the highest spiritual state,'
with the inferior. So far his meaning this last stage qualifying them, like
is clear. (2) In § 7 he states that one Elias, to be forerunners of the Mes-
who is anxious to become a member of siah. But it is a pure hypothesis that
the sect undergoes a year's probation, the Talmudical notices thus combined
submitting to discipline but 'remain- have anything to do with tbe Essenes ;
ing outside.' Then, 'after he has given and, as I shall have occasion to point
evidence of his perseverance (perd tt)v out afterwards, there is no ground for
rijs xapreplas M8eiiiv), his character ascribing to this, sect any Messianio
is tested for two years more ; and, if expectations whatever.
found worthy, he is accordingly ad-

364 THE ESSENES.
while the degrees of ceremonial purity in Chagigah are five. Frankel
indeed is inclined to maintain that only four degrees are intended
in Chagigah, though this interpretation is opposed to the plain sense
of the passage. But, even if he should be obliged to grant that the
number of degrees is five1, he will not surrender the allusion to the
Essenes, but meets the difficulty by supposing (it is a pure hypothesis)
that there was a fifth and highest degree of purity among the Essenes,
to which very few attained, and which, as I understand him, is not
mentioned by Josephus on this account. But enough has already
been said to show, that this passage in Chagigah can have no con
nexion with the Essenes and gives no countenance to Frankel's
views.
Diflerence As this artificial combination has failed, we are compelled to
ll AT TVP fill
the chaber ^au h*0^ 0TL *^e n°ti°es relating to the chaber, and to ask whether
and tbe these suggest any connexion with the account of the Essenes in
Essene. 6& J
Josephus. And the facts oblige us to answer this question in the
negative. Not only do they not suggest such a connexion, but they
are wholly irreconcilable with the account in the Jewish historian.
This association or confraternity (if indeed the term is applicable
to an organisation so loose and so comprehensive) was maintained
for the sake of securing a more accurate study and a better ob
servance of the ceremonial law. Two grades of purity are men
tioned in connexion with it, designated by different names and pre
senting some difficulties3, into which it is not necessary to enter here.
A chaber, it would appear, was one who had entered upon the
second or higher stage. For this a period of a year's probation was
necessary. The chaber enrolled himself in the presence of three
others who were already members of the association. This ap
parently was all the formality necessary : and in the case of a teacher
even this was dispensed with, for being presumably acquainted with
the law of things clean and unclean he was regarded as ex officio
a chaber. The chaber was bound to keep himself from ceremonial
defilements, and was thus distinguished from the {.am haarets
or common people8 ; but he was under no external surveillance and
1 Zeitschr. p. 452, note. sion; see e.g. Herzfeld n. p. 390 sq.,
2 The entrance into tbe lower grade Frankel Monatsschr. p. 33 sq.
was described as 'taking D»S33' or 3 Tbe contempt with which a chaber
'wings.' The meaning of this expression would look down upon the vulgar herd,
has been tbe subject of much discus- the £am haarets, finds expression in

THE ESSENES. 365
decided for himself as to his own purity. Moreover ho was, or
might be a married man : for the doctors disputed whether the
wives and children of an associate were not themselves to be
regarded as associates'. In one passage, Sanhedrin 41 a, it is even
assumed, as a matter of course, that a woman may be an associate
(man). In another (Niddah 33 6)' there is mention of a Sadducee
and even of a Samaritan as a chaber. An organisation so flexible as
this has obviously only the most superficial resemblances with the
rigid rules of the Essene order; and in many points it presents a
direct contrast to the characteristic tenets of that sect.
(2) Having discussed Frankel's hypothesis respecting the chaber, (2) The
I need hardly follow his speculations on the Bene-hakkeneseth, jj^gg^ '
JlDJDn '33, ' sons of the congregation' (Zabim iii. 2), in which ex
pression probably few would discover the reference, which he finds,
to the lowest of the Essene orders*.
(3) But mention is also made of a ' holy congregation' or ' as- (3) The
sembly' (wip t6np, ne^lp m«) ' in Jerusalem ' ; and, following gregation1'
Rapoport, Frankel sees in this expression also an allusion to the ** Jsrusa-
Essenes *. The grounds for this identification are, that in one pas
sage (Berakhoth 9 6) they are mentioned in connexion with prayer at
daybreak, and in another (Midrash Qoheleth ix. 9) two persons are
stated to belong to this 'holy congregation,' because they divided
their day into three parts, devoting one-third to learning, anothei
to prayer, and another to work. The first notice would suit the
Essenes very well, though the practice mentioned was not so distinc
tively Essene as to afford any safe ground for this hypothesis. Of
the second it should be observed, that no such division of the day is
recorded of the Essenes, and indeed both Josephus (B. J. ii. 8. 5)
and Philo (Fragm. p. 633) describe them as working from morning
till night with the single interruption of their mid-day meal s- But
the language of tbe Pharisees, Joh. vii. ii. 3, v. 1, Tosifta Demai *, Aboth R.
49 d Sx^os ovtos 6 pij ycviiffxoiv rov Nathan a. 41.
vipov errdparol eliriv. Again in Acts 2 See Herzfeld 11. p. 386.
iv. 13, where tbe Apostles are de- s Monatsschr. p. 35.
scribed as ISiQrat, the expression is * Zeitschr. pp. 458, 461, Monatsschr.
equivalent to tam naarets. See the pp. 32, 34.
passages quoted in Buxtorf, Lex. p. B It is added however in Midrash
,g2g_ Qoheleth ix. 9 'Some say that they
1 All these particulars and others (tbe holy congregation) devoted the
may be gathered from Bekhoroth 30 6, whole of the winter to studying the
Mishna Demai ii. 2. 3, Jerus. Demai Scriptures and tbe summer to work.'

366 THE ESSENES.
in fact the identification is beset with other and more serious diffi
culties. For this ' holy congregation ' at Jerusalem is mentioned long
not an after the second destruction of the city under Hadrian1, when on
J^iSSPTlficommu- Frankel's own showing* the Essene society had in all probability
mty. ceased to exist. And again certain members of it, e. g. Jose ben
Meshuilam (Mishna Bekhoroth iii 3, vi. 1), are represented as uttering
precepts respecting animals fit for sacrifice, though we have it on
the authority of Josephus and Philo that the Essenes avoided the
temple sacrifices altogether. The probability therefore seems to be
that this 'holy congregation' was an assemblage of devout Jews
who were drawn to the neighbourhood of the sanctuary after the
destruction of the nation, and whose practices were regarded with
peculiar reverence by the later Jews3.
(4) The (4) Neither can we with Frankel* discern any reference to the
athiitin. ;g;sgenes jjj those ppW Vathikin, ' pious ' or ' learned ' men (whatever
may be the exact sense of the word), who are mentioned in Berakhoth
9 6 as praying before sunrise ; because the word itself seems quite
general, and the practice, though enforced among the Essenes, as
we know from Josephus (B. J. ii. 8. 5), would be common to all
devout and earnest Jews. If we are not justified in saying that
these )'p<m were not Essenes, we have no sufficient grounds for
maintaining that they were.
(5) Tbe (5) Nor again can we find any such reference in the D'Opt
eiders1' '^ E^I^Kin or ' primitive elders V It may readily be granted that this
term is used synonymously, or nearly so, with D^ISWin D*TDn
'the primitive chasidim' ; but, as we failed to see anything more
than a general expression in the one, so we are naturally led to
take the other in the same sense. The passages where the expression
occurs (e.g. Shabbath 64 6) simply refer to the stricter observances
of early times, and do not indicate any reference to a particular
society or body of men.
(6) Tbe (6) Again Frankel finds another reference to this sect in the
bathers11'8 n,"int;' ^3ts TdbU-shachdrith, or 'morning-bathers,' mentioned iu
Tosifta Yadayim c. 2 s. The identity of these with the ijaepoj3a-
iTTio-Tal of Greek writers seems highly probable. The latter how
ever, though they may have had some affinities with Essene practices
1 Monatsschr. p. 32. * Monatsschr. p. 32.
2 Ib. p. 70. 6 Monatsschr. pp. 32, 68.
s See Derenbourg p. 175. « 76. p. 67.

THE ESSENES. 367
and tenets, are nevertheless distinguished from this sect wherever
they are mentioned1. But the point to be observed is that, oven
though we should identify these Toble-shacharith with the Essenes,
the passage in Tosifta Yadayim, so far from favouring, is distinctly
adverse to Frankel's view which regards the Essenes as only a branch
of Pharisees : for the two are here represented as in direct an
tagonism. The Toble-shacharith say, ' We grieve over you, Pharisees,
because you pronounce the (sacred) Name in the morning without
having bathed.' The Pharisees retort, 'We grieve over you, Toble-
shacharith, because you pronounce the Name from this body in which
is impurity.' (7) In connexion with the Toble-shacharith we may consider (7) The
another name, Banaim (D'&Oa), in which also Frankel discovers
an allusion to the Essenes3. In Mishna Mikvaoth ix. 6 the word
is opposed to 112 hor, ' an ignorant or stupid person ' ; and this
points to its proper meaning 'the builders,' i. e. the edifiers or
teachers, according to the common metaphor in Biblical language.
The word is discussed in Shabbath 114 and explained to mean
' learned.' But, because in Mikvaoth it is mentioned in connexion
with ceremonial purity, and because in Josephus the Essenes are
stated to have carried an ' axe and shovel ' (B. J. ii. 8. 7, 9), and be
cause moreover the Jewish historian in another place (VU. 2) mentions
having spent some time with one Ban us a dweller in the wilderness,
who lived on vegetables and fruits and bathed often day and night
for the sake of purity, and who is generally considered to have been
an Essene ; therefore Frankel holds these Banaim to have been Es
senes. This is a specimen of the misplaced ingenuity which distin
guishes Frankel's learned speculations on the Essenes. Josephus does
not mention an ' axe and shovel,' but an axe only (§ 7 a£ivdpiov), Josephus
which he afterwards defines more accurately as a spade (§ 9 ttj prete(j.
o-koAmSi, toioutov yap «rri to SiSojuevov vir ovtoiv afivi'Siov tois veocrv-
o-totois) and which, as he distinctly states, was given them for the
purpose of burying impurities out of sight (comp. Deut. xxiii 12 — 14).
Thus it has no connexion whatever with any ' building ' implement.
And again, it is true that Banus has frequently been regarded as
an Essene, but there is absolutely no ground for this supposition.
On the contrary the narrative of Josephus in his Life seems to
1 See below, p. 404. " Zeitschr. p. 455.

368 THE ESSENES.
Another exclude it, as I shall have occasion to show hereafter1. I should add
of Bana- ^hat Sachs interprets Banaim ' the bathers,' regarding the explanation
lm- in Shabbath 1. c. as a ' later accommodation2.' This seems to me very
improbable ; but, if it were conceded, the Banaim would then ap
parently be connected not with the Essenes, but with the Hemero-
baptists.
Results of From the preceding investigation it will have appeared how
t atio V6B" ¦'i^6 Frankel has succeeded in establishing his thesis that ' the
'talmudical sources are acquainted with the Essenes and make
mention of them constantly8.' We have seen not only that no
instance of the name Essene has been produced, but that all those
passages which are supposed to refer to them under other designa
tions, or to describe their practices or tenets, fail us on closer exa
mination. In no case can we feel sure that there is any direct
reference to this sect, while in most cases such reference seems to be
excluded by the language or the attendant circumstances4. Thus we are
Pbilo and obliged to fall back upon the representations of Philo and Josephus.
curtain Their accounts are penned by eye-witnesses. They are direct and
authori- explicit, if not so precise or so full as we could have wished. The
ties. writers obviously consider that they are describing a distinct and
exceptional phenomenon. And it would be a reversal of all esta
blished rules of historical criticism to desert the solid standing-
ground of contemporary history for the artificial combinations and
shadowy hypotheses which Frankel would substitute in its place.
Frankel's But here we are confronted with Frankel's depreciation of these
deprecia- ancient writers, which has been echoed by several later critics. They
tbem is were interested, it is argued, in making their accounts attractive
able and *° their heathen contemporaries, and they coloured them highly
explains for this purpose5. We may readily allow that they would not be
uninfluenced by such a motive, but the concession does not touch the
main points at issue. This aim might have led Josephus, for example,
to throw into bold relief the coincidences between the Essenes and
Pythagoreans ; it might even have induced him to give a semi-pagan
1 See below, p. 399. senes in our patristic (i.e. rabbinical)
2 Beitrdge 11. p. 199. In this deri- literature,' says Herzfeld truly (11.
vation he is followed by Graetz (in. p. 397), 'has led to a splendid hypo-
p. 82, 468) and Derenbourg (p. 166). thesis-hunt (einer stattlichen Hypo-
3 Monatsschr. p. 31. thesenjagd).'
4 ' The attempt to point out tbe Es- 6 Monatsschr. p. 31.

THE ESSENES. 369
tinge to the Essene doctrine of the future state of the blessed (B. J.
ii. 8. n). But it entirely fails to explain those peculiarities of the
sect which marked them off by a sharp line from orthodox Judaism,
and which fully justify the term 'separatists' as applied to them
by a recent writer. In three main features especially the portrait of
the Essenes retains its distinctive character unaffected by this con
sideration. (i) How, for instance, could this principle of accommodation have (i) The
led both Philo and Josephus to lay so much stress on their divergence 0f saorj_
from Judaic orthodoxy in the matter of sacrifices 1 Yet this is fioes is not
. accounted
perhaps the most crucial note of heresy which is recorded of the for.
Essenes. What was the law to the orthodox Pharisee without the
sacrifices, the temple-worship, the hierarchy? Yet the Essene
declined to take any part in the sacrifices; he had priests of his own
independently of the Levitical priesthood. On Frankel's hypothesis
that Essenism is merely an exaggeration of pure Pharisaism, no ex
planation of this abnormal phenomenon can be given. Frankel does
indeed attempt to meet the case by some speculations respecting the
red heifer1, which are so obviously inadequate that they have not
been repeated by later writers and may safely be passed over in
silence here. On this point indeed the language of Josephus is not The no-
quite explicit. He says (Ant. xviii. 1. 5) that, though they send tI0es ?
offerings (avaJBijuaTa) to the temple, they perform no sacrifices, and and Philo
he assigns as the reason their greater strictness as regards ceremonial gidered.
purity (StacpopoTrjTi. dyveiuiv as vofi,i£oiev), adding that ' for this
reason being excluded from the common sanctuary (Te/tcvioyiaTos)
they perform their sacrifices by themselves (icp' avTiov rds Gvcrias
imreXovcri).' Frankel therefore supposes that their only reason for
abstaining from the temple sacrifices was that according to their
severe notions the temple itself was profaned and therefore unfit for
sacrificial worship. But if so, why should it not vitiate the offerings,
as well as the sacrifices, and make them also unlawful 1 And indeed,
where Josephus is vague, Philo is explicit Philo (11. p. 457) dis
tinctly states that the Essenes being more scrupulous than any in the
worship of God (iv tois pidXio-Ta OepairevroX ®eov) do not sacrifice ani
mals (ou fcua KaTa&vovTes), but hold it right to dedicate their own hearts
as a worthy offering (dAA' lepoirperceis Tas laurcuv Siavoias Karao-Kevd^eiv
1 Monatsschr. 64.
COL. 24

37°

Theirstate
ments con
firmed by
the doc
trine of
Christian
Essenes.

Tbe Cle
mentineHomiliesjustify this doc
trine by

THE ESSENES.
dfioiWes). Thus the greater strictness, which Josephus ascribes to them,
consists in the abstention from shedding blood, as a pollution in
itself. And, when he speaks of their substituting private sacrifices,
his own qualifications show that he does not mean the word to be
taken literally. Their simple meals are their sacrifices ; their refec
tory is their sanctuary; their president is their priest1. It should be
added also that, though we once hear of an Essene apparently within
the temple precincts (B. J. i. 3. 5, Ant. xiii. 11. 2)', no mention is
ever made of one offering sacrifices. Thus it is clear that with the
Essene it was the sacrifices which polluted the temple, and not the
temple which polluted the sacrifices. And this view is further re
commended by the fact that it alone will explain the position of
their descendants, the Christianized Essenes, who condemned the
slaughter of victims on grounds very different from those alleged
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, not because they have been super
seded by the Atonement, but because they are in their very nature
repulsive to God ; not because they have ceased to be right, but
because they never were right from the beginning.
It may be said indeed, that such a view could not be main
tained without impugning the authority, or at least disputing the
integrity, of the Old Testament writings. The sacrificial system is
so bound up with the Mosaic law, that it can only be rejected
by the most arbitrary excision. This violent process however,
uncritical as it is, was very likely to have been adopted by the
Essenes". As a matter of fact, it did recommend itself to those
Judaizing Christians who reproduced many of the Essene tenets, and
who both theologically and historically may be regarded as the lineal
descendants of this Judaic sect4. Thus in the Clementine Homilies,
an Ebionite work which exhibits many Essene features, the chief
spokesman St Peter is represented as laying great stress on the duty
of distinguishing the true and the false elements in the current

1 B. J. ii. 8. 5 xaddirep els dyibv n
rdpevos irapaylvovrai rb denrvijTijpiov :
see also the passages quoted above p.
89, note 3.
1 See below, p. 377.
8 Herzfeld (11. p. 403) is unable to
reconcile any rejection of tbe Old Tes
tament Scriptures with tbe reverence
paid to Moses by the Essenes (B. J. ii.

8.9,10). Tbe Christian Essenes how
ever did combine both these incongru
ous tenets by the expedient which is
explained in the text. Herzfeld him
self suggests that allegorical interpre
tation may have been employed to
justify this abstention from tbe temple
sacrifices. 4 See Galatians, p. 322 sq.

THE ESSENES.

371

Scriptures (ii. 38, 51, iii. 4, 5, 10, 42, 47, 49, 50, comp. xviii. 19). The arbitrary
saying traditionally ascribed to our Lord, 'Show yourselves approved of The0"
money-changers' (yivecrOe rpaireilXTai Soxifiot), is more than once quoted Scriptures.
by the Apostle as enforcing this duty (ii. 51, iii 50, xviii. 20).
Among these false elements he places all those passages which repre
sent God as enjoining sacrifices (iii. 45, xviii. 19). It is plain, so he
argues, that God did not desire sacrifices, for did He not kill those
who lusted after the taste of flesh in the wilderness? and, if the
slaughter of animals was thus displeasing to Him, how could He
possibly have commanded victims to be offered to Himself (iii. 45) 1
It is equally clear from other considerations that this was no part
of God's genuine law. For instance, Christ declared that He came
to fulfil every tittle of the Law ; yet Christ abolished sacrifices (iii.
51). And again, the saying ' I will have mercy and not sacrifice' is
a condemnation of this practice (iii. 56). The true prophet 'hates
sacrifices, bloodshed, libations' ; he ' extinguishes the fire of altars'
(iii. 26). The frenzy of the lying soothsayer is a mere intoxication
produced by the reeking fumes of sacrifice (iii. 13). When in the
immediate context of these denunciations we find it reckoned among
the highest achievements of man ' to know the names of angels, to
drive away demons, to endeavour to heal diseases by charms (cpap-
fiaKiais), and to find incantations («raoiSds) against venomous ser
pents (iii. 36)' ; when again St Peter is made to condemn as false Essene
those scriptures which speak of God swearing, and to set against them tnig wort.
Christ's command 'Let your yea be yea' (iii. 55); we feel how
thoroughly this strange production of Ebionite Christianity is satu
rated with Essene ideas1.
1 Epiphanius (Har. xviii. 1, p. 38) iraripinv yeyevrjallai. Here we bave in
again describes, as the account was combination all the features which we
handed down to him (lis b els ijpas i/\66iv are seeking. The cradle of this seot
irepiexet \byos), tbe tenets of a Jewish is placed by bim in Gilead and Bashan
sectwhicb he calls the Nasareans, aiJrriv and 'the regions beyond the Jordan.'
Se 06 irapeSexero tV irevrdrevxov, ctXXcl He uses similar language also (xxx. 18,
wjw\6yet piv tov Mwiiaia, xal Sn ite- p. 142) in describing tbe Ebionites,
faro vopoSecrlav eirlarevev, ob rabrijv St whom be places in much tbe same
tpijo-iv, dXX' eripav. bdev rd pev irdvTa localities (naming Moab also), and
tpuKdrrovm tuv 'lovSaluv 'lovdatoi 6vres, whose Essene features are unmistake-
Qvalav Si) ovx tBvov oCt e epifivxwv able: ovre yap Sexovrai rty irevrdrevxov
pereixo", dXXA dBfpirov rjv irap aiirdis Muvaiws SKijv aXXd Tiva ptjpaTa diro-
rb xpeQv peraXapfiavetv ij 8vtria£eiv ai- pdWovaiv. orav be airois etir-ns irepl
rois. Ztpaoxov ydp ireirXdaBai ravra eaipvxuv ppdiirews x.r.}\. These parallels
TdpifiXla xal pijSev rovrwv virb tuv will speak for themselves.
24 — 2

372

THE ESSENES.

(ii) The
Esseneworshipof the
Sun can
not be ex
plained
away.

The Samp-
sivans are
an Essene
sect,

as appears
from their
sacredbook of
Elchasai.

(ii) Nor again is Frankel successful in explaining the Essene
prayers to the sun by rabbinical practices1. Following Rapoport,
he supposes that Josephus and Philo refer to the beautiful hymn
of praise for the creation of light and the return of day, which
forms part of the morning-prayer of the Jews to the present
time2, and which seems to be enjoined in the Mishna itself3; and
this view has been adopted by many subsequent writers. But tho
language of Josephus is not satisfied by this explanation. For
he says plainly (B. J. ii. 8. 5) that they addressed prayers to the
sun4, and it is difficult to suppose that he has wantonly intro
duced a dash of paganism into his picture ; nor indeed was there
any adequate motive for his doing so. Similarly Philo relates of the
Therapeutes (Vit. Cont. n, 11. p. 485), that they 'stand with their
faces and their whole body towards the East, and when they see that
the sun is risen, holding out their hands to heaven they pray for
a happy day (evijp.epiav) and for truth and for keen vision of reason
(6£vioiriav Xoyio-p.ov).' And here again it is impossible to overlook
the confirmation which these accounts receive from the history of
certain Christian heretics deriving their descent from this Judaic sect.
Epiphanius (Hcer. xix. 2, xx. 3, pp. 40 sq., 47) speaks of a sect
called the Sampsaaans or ' Sun- worshippers6,' as existing in his
own time in Peraea on the borders of Moab and on the shores of
the Dead Sea. He describes them as a remnant of the Ossenes
(i.e. Essenes), who have accepted a spurious form of Christianity
and are neither Jews nor Christians. This debased Christianity
which they adopted is embodied, he tells us, in the pretended
revelation of the Book of Elchasai, and dates from the time of
Trajan8. Elsewhere (xxx. 3, p. 127) he seems to use the terms
Sampssean, Ossene, and Elchasaite as synonymous (n-apd tois 2ap.i/nj-
vois Kai 'Oo-criji/ois Kai 'EXKecrcraiois xaXovp,evois). Now we happen to
know something of this book of Elchasai, not only from Epiphanius
himself (xix. 1 sq., p. 40 sq., xxx. 17, p. 141), but also from Hippo
lytus (Hcer. ix. 13 sq.) who describes it at considerable length. From
these accounts it appears that the principal feature in the book
was the injunction of frequent bathings for the remission of sins

1 Zeitschr. p. 458.
2 See Ginsburg Essenes p. 69 sq.
3 Berakhoth i. 4; see Derenbourg,
p. 169 sq.

4 See above, p. 85, note 1.
6 See above, p. 81.
6 Galatians p. 324 sq. See also be
low, p. 405.

THE ESSENES. 373
(Hipp. Har. ix. 13, 15 sq.). We are likewise told that it 'anathema
tizes immolations and sacrifices (6Wias koi lepo-upyias) as being alien
to God and certainly not offered to God by tradition from (ix) the
fathers and the law,' while at the same time it ' says that men ought
to pray there at Jerusalem, where the altar was and the sacrifices
(were offered), prohibiting the eating of flesh which exists among
the Jews, and the rest (of their customs), and the altar and the fire,
as being alien to God ' (Epiph. Hcer. xix. 3, p. 42). Notwithstanding,
we are informed that the sect retained the rite of circumcision, the Its Essene
observance of the sabbath, and other practices of the Mosaic law f^g n'
(Hipp. Hcsr. ix. 14; Epiph. Hcer. xix. 5, p. 43, comp. xxx. 17,
p. 141). This inconsistency is explained by a further notice in
Epiphanius (1. c.) that they treated the Scriptures in the same
way as the Nasarseans1 ; that is, they submitted them to a process of
arbitrary excision, as recommended in the Clementine Homilies,
and thus rejected as falsifications all statements which did not square
with their own theory. Hippolytus also speaks of the Elchasaites
as studying astrology and magic, and as practising charms and
incantations on the sick and the demoniacs (§ 14). Moreover in two
formularies, one of expiation, another of purification, which this
father has extracted from the book, invocation is made to ' the holy
spirits and the angels of prayer' (§15, comp. Epiph. Hcer. xix. 1). It
should be added that the word Elchasai probably signifies the ' hidden
power'8; while the book itself directed that its mysteries should be
guarded as precious pearls, and should not be communicated to the
world at large, but only to the faithful few (Hipp. Hcer. ix. 15, 17). It
is hardly necessary to call attention to the number of Essene features
which are here combined8. I would only remark that the value of
the notice is not at all diminished, but rather enhanced, by the uncri
tical character of Epiphanius' work ; for this very fact prevents us
from ascribing the coincidences, which here reveal themselves, to this
father's own invention
1 See p. 370, note 3. In this respect they departed from the
3 Galatians p. 325, note 1. Por original principles of Essenism, alleg-
another derivation see below, p. 405. ing, as it would appear, a special reve-
3 Celibacy however is not one of lation (eis SijBev aToxaXvsfieois) injustifi-
these : comp. Epiphan. Hmr. xix. 1 (p. cation. In like manner marriage is
40) direxBdverai Se TJ irapBevltf, pmet commended in tbe Clementine Ho-
c5<! tvv iyxpdreiav, dmyxd£et Se ydpov. milies.

374

THE ESSENES.

The
practice

In this heresy we have plainly the dregs of Essenism, which
has only been corrupted from its earlier and nobler type by the
admixture of a spurious Christianity. But how came the Essenes
to be called Sampsseans 1 What was the original meaning of this
outward reverence which they paid to the sun? Did they regard it
merely as the symbol of Divine illumination, just as Philo frequently
treats it as a type of God, the centre of all Hght (e. g. de Somn.
i 13 sq., i. p. 631 sq.), and even calls the heavenly bodies ' visible
and sensible gods' (de Mund. Op. 7, I. p. 6)1? Or did they honour
the light, as the pure ethereal element in contrast to gross terrestrial
matter, according to a suggestion of a recent writer2? Whatever may
repugnant have been the motive of this reverence, it is strangely repugnant to
to Jewish the spirit of orthodox Judaism. In Ezek. viii. 16 it is denounced as
orthodoxy. r
an abomination, that men shall turn towards the east and worship
the sun ; and accordingly in Berakhoth 7 a a saying of B,. Meir is
reported to the effect that God is angry when the sun appears and the
kings of the East and the West prostrate themselves before this
luminary8. We cannot fail therefore to recognise the action of some
foreign influence in this Essene practice — whether Greek or Syrian or
Persian, it will be time to consider hereafter.
(iii) On the subject of marriage again, talmudical and rabbinical
notices contribute nothing towards elucidating the practices of this
sect. Least of all do they point to any affinity between the Essenes
and the Pharisees. The nearest resemblance, which Frankel can
produce, to any approximation in this respect is an injunction in
Mishna Kethuboth v. 8 respecting the duties of the husband in pro
viding for the wife in case of his separating from her, and this he
ascribes to Essene influences4; but this mishna does not express any
approval of such a separation. The direction seems to be framed
entirely in the interests of the wife : nor can I see that it is at all
inconsistent, as Frankel urges, with Mishna Kethuboth vii. 1 which
allows her to claim a divorce under such circumstances. But how
ever this may be, Essene and Pharisaic opinion stand generally in the
sharpest contrast to each other with respect to marriage. The talmudic

(iii) The
depreciation of
marriage
not ac
counted
for.

1 Tbe important place which the
heavenly bodies held in the system
of Pbilo, who regarded tbem as ani
mated beings, may be seen from
GfrSrer's Philo 1. p. 349 sq.

s Keim 1. p. 289.
3 See Wiesner Schol.
Talm. 1. pp. 18, 20.
1 Monatsschr. p. 37.

zum Babyl.

THE ESSENES. 375
writings teem with passages implying not only the superior sanctity,
but even the imperative duty, of marriage. The words ' Be fruitful
and multiply' (Gen. i. 28) were regarded not merely as a promise,
but as a command which was binding on all. It is a maxim of the
Talmud that 'Any Jew who has not a wife is no man' (D1K W*x),
Yebamoth 63 a. The fact indeed is so patent, that any accumula
tion of examples would be superfluous, and I shall content myself
with referring to Pesachim 1 1 3 a, 6, as fairly illustrating the doctrine
of orthodox Judaism on this point1. As this question affects the
whole framework not only of religious, but also of social life, the
antagonism between the Essene and the Pharisee in a matter so
vital could not be overlooked.
(iv) Nor again is it probable that the magical rites and incan- (iv) The
tations which are so prominent ih the practice of the Essenes would, practice
as a rule, have been received with any favour bv the Pharisaic Jew. oi magi°
„ . stiU a
In Mishna Pesachim iv. 9 (comp. Berakhoth 10 6) it is mentioned difficulty.
with approval that Hezekiah put away a 'book of healings' ; where
doubtless the author of the tradition had in view some volume of
charms ascribed to Solomon, like those which apparently formed part
of the esoteric literature of the Essenes" In the same spirit in Mishna
Sanhedrin xi 1 R. Akiba shuts out from the hope of eternal life
any ' who read profane or foreign (i. e. perhaps, apocryphal) books,
and who mutter over a wound' the words of Exod. xv. 26. On
this point of difference however no great stress can be laid. Though
the nobler teachers among the orthodox Jews set themselves stead
fastly against the introduction of magic, they were unable to resist
the inpouring tide of superstition. In the middle of the second
century Justin Martyr alludes to exorcists and magicians among
the Jews, as though they were neither few nor obscure8. Whether
these were a remnant of Essene Judaism, or whether such practices
1 Justin Martyr more than once Bpwirot, xard iraaav yrjv IvBa dv iiriSij-
taunts the Jewish rabbis with their pijaiaaiv rj irpoo-reutpButrtv dyopevoi bvb-
reckless encouragement of polygamy. pari ydpov yvvdtxas x.t.\., with Otto's
See Dial. 134, p. 363 d, rocs davvirots note on tbe first passage.
xal rvcpXois SiSaaxdXois bpdv, oinves xal a See above, p. 89, note 1.
pe\pt vvv xal riairapas xal irtvre Ijceiv 8 Dial. 85, p. 311 0, ijSij pAvroi ol <?£
ipas ywaixas txaarov ovyxwpovm- xal vpwv iiropxurral ttj TixyTii tSinrep xal rd
idv eSpopipbv ris ISiov irriBvpijirri airrjs iBvrj, xpt&pevoi i%opxl$ovai xal Bvpidpaai
K.r.X. ib. 141, P- 371 A> E> birdiov xal xaraSiapois xpwvrai.
rrpdrToviTiv ol dirb tov ytvovs vpwv dv-

376

Generalresult.

THE ESSENES.
had by this time spread throughout the whole body, it is impossible
to say; but the fact of their existence prevents us from founding
an argument on the use of magic, as an absolutely distinctive feature
of Essenism. Other divergences also have been enumerated1; but, as these do
not for the most part involve any great principles, and refer only to
practical details in which much fluctuation was possible, they cannot
under any circumstances be taken as crucial tests, and I have not
thought it worth while to discuss them. But the antagonisms on
which I have dwelt will tell their own tale. In three respects more
especially, in the avoidance of marriage, in the abstention from the
temple sacrifices, and (if the view which I have adopted be correct) in
the outward reverence paid to the sun, we have seen that there is
an impassable gulf between the Essenes and the Pharisees. No
known influences within the sphere of Judaism proper will serve
to account for the position of the Essenes in these respects ; and
we are obliged to look elsewhere for an explanation.

Frankelhas failed
in esta
blishing his point.

AffinitiesbetweenEssenes
and Phari
sees con
fined to
the Judaic
side.

It was shown above that the investigations of Frankel and others
failed to discover in the talmudical writings a single reference to the
Essenes, which is at once direct and indisputable. It has now
appeared that they have also failed (and this is the really important
point) in showing that the ideas and practices generally considered
characteristic of the Essenes are recognised and incorporated in these
representative books of Jewish orthodoxy ; and thus the hypothesis
that Essenism was merely a type, though an exaggerated type, of
pure Judaism falls to the ground.
Some affinities indeed have been made out by Frankel and by
those who have anticipated or followed him. But these are exactly
such as we might have expected. Two distinct features combine to
make up the portrait of the Essene. The Judaic element is quite
as prominent in this sect as the non-Judaic It could not be more
strongly emphasized than in the description given by Josephus him
self. In everything therefore which relates to the strictly Judaic
side of their tenets and practices, we should expect to discover not
only affinities, but even close affinities, in talmudic and rabbinic
authorities. And this is exactly what, as a matter of fact, we do
1 Herzfeld, u. p. 392 sq.

THE ESSENES. 377
find. The Essene rules respecting the observance of the sabbath,
the rites of lustration, and the like, have often very exact parallels
in the writings of more orthodox Judaism. But I have not thought
it necessary to dwell on these coincidences, because they may well
be taken for granted, and my immediate purpose did not require me
to emphasize them.
And again ; it must be remembered that the separation between The di-
Pharisee and Essene cannot always have been so great as it appears ver861108
in the Apostolic age. Both sects apparently arose out of one great Essenes
movement, of which the motive was the avoidance of pollution1. The Pharisees
divergence therefore must have been gradual. At the same time, it gradual.
does not seem a very profitable task to write a hypothetical history
of the growth of Essenism, where the data are wanting ; and I shall
therefore abstain from the attempt. Frankel indeed has not been
deterred by this difficulty ; but he has been obliged to assume his
data by postulating that such and such a person, of whom notices
are preserved, was an Essene, and thence inferring the character
of Essenism at the period in question from his recorded sayings or
doings. But without attempting any such reconstruction of history,
we may fairly allow that there must have been a gradual develop
ment ; and consequently in the earlier stages of its growth we should
not expect to find that shaip antagonism between the two sects, which
the principles of the Essenes when fully matured would involve.
If therefore it should be shown that the talmudical and rabbinical Hence the
writings here and there preserve with approval the sayings of certain of tteir
Essenes, this fact would present no difficulty. At present however no appearing1.11 tllU Io"
decisive example has been produced ; and the discoveries of Jellinek cords of
for instance2, who traces the influence of this sect in almost every Judaism.
page of Pirke Aboth, can only be regarded as another illustration of
the extravagance with which the whole subject has been treated by
a large section of modern Jewish writers. More to the point is a
notice of an earlier Essene preserved in Josephus himself. We learn
from this historian that one Judas, a member of the sect, who had
prophesied the death of Antigonus, saw this prince ' passing by through
the temple8,' when his prophecy was on the point of fulfilment
1 See above p. 353 sq. In the parallel narrative, Ant. xii.
» Orient 1849, PP- +8o> 537. 553- «• '¦«> the expression is irapiovra rb
8 B. J. i. 3. 5 irapiovra Sid rov lepov. lepbv, which does not imply so much;

378 THE ESSENES.
(about B.C. no). At this moment Judas is represented as sitting
in the midst of bis disciples, instructing them in the science of pre
diction. The expression quoted would seem to imply that he was
actually teaching within the temple area. Thus he would appear
not only as mixing in the ordinary life of the Jews, but also as
frequenting the national sanctuary. But even supposing this to be
the right explanation of the passage, it will not present any serious
difficulty. Even at a later date, when (as we may suppose) the
principles of the sect had stiffened, the scruples of the Essene were
directed, if I have rightly interpreted the account of Josephus, rather
against the sacrifices than against the locality1. The temple itself,
independently of its accompaniments, would not suggest any offence
to his conscience.
The appro- Nor again, is it any obstacle to the view which is here maintained,
Philo and *ua* ^e Essenes are regarded with so much sympathy by Philo and
Josephus Josephus themselves. Even though the purity of Judaism might
dence of have been somewhat sullied in this sect by the admixture of foreign
or o oxy. eiernentSj this fact would attract rather than repel an eclectic like
Philo, and a latitudinarian like Josephus. The former, as an Alexan
drian, absorbed into his system many and diverse elements of heathen
philosophy, Platonic, Stoic, and Pythagorean. The latter, though
professedly a Pharisee, lost no opportunity of ingratiating himself
with his heathen conquerors, and would not be unwilling to gratify
their curiosity respecting a society with whose fame, as we infer from
the notice of Pliny, they were already acquainted.
What was But if Essenism owed the features which distinguished it from
element in Pharisaic Judaism to an alien admixture, whence were these foreign
Essenism? influences derived? From the philosophers of Greece or from the
religious mystics of the East ? On this point recent writers are
divided.
Theory of Those who trace the distinctive characteristics of the sect to
goreanin- Greece> regard it is an offshoot ofthe Neopythagorean School grafted
fluence. on the stem of Judaism. This solution is suggested by the state
ment of Josephus, that ' they practise the mode of life which among
but tbe less precise notice must be that Judas himself was within the
interpreted by tbe more precise. Even temple area.
then however it is not directly stated 1 See above, pp. 87, 369 sq.

THE ESSENES. 379
the Greeks was introduced (KaTa8e8eiyp.ivrj) by Pythagoras V It is
thought to be confirmed by the strong resemblances which as a
matter of fact are found to exist between the institutions and prac
tices of the two.
This theory, which is maintained also by other writers, as for Statement
instance by Baur and Herzfeld, has found its ablest and most per- theory by
sistent advocate in Zeller, who draws out the parallels with great ZeUer-
force and precision. ' The Essenes,' he writes, ' like the Pythagoreans,
desire to attain a higher sanctity by an ascetic life ; and the absten
tions, which they impose on themselves for this end, are the same
with both. They reject animal food and bloody sacrifices ; they
avoid wine, warm baths, and oil for anointing ; they set a high value
on celibate life : or, so far as they allow marriage, they require that
it be restricted to the one object of procreating children. Both wear
only white garments and consider linen purer than wool. Washings
and purifications are prescribed by both, though for the Essenes they
have a yet higher significance as religious acts. Both prohibit oaths
and (what is more) on the same grounds. Both find their social
ideal in those institutions, which indeed the Essenes alone set them
selves to realise — in a corporate hfe with entire community of goods,
in sharply defined orders of rank, in the unconditional submission
of all the members to their superiors, in a society carefully barred
from without, into which new members are received only after a
severe probation of several years, and from which the unworthy are
inexorably excluded. Both require a strict initiation, both desire
to maintain a traditional doctrine inviolable ; both pay the highest
respect to the men from whom it was derived, as instruments of
the deity : yet both also love figurative clothing for their doctrines,
and treat the old traditions as symbols of deeper truths, which they
must extract from them by means of allegorical explanation. In
order to prove the later form of teaching original, newly-composed
writings were unhesitatingly forged by the one as by the other,
and lathered upon illustrious names of the past. Both parties pay
honour to divine powers in the elements, both invoke the rising
sun both seek to withdraw everything unclean from his sight, and
with this view give special directions, in which they agree as well
with each other as with older Greek superstition, in a remarkable
1 Ant. xv. 10. 4.

380 THE ESSENES.
way. For both the belief in intermediate beings between God and
the world has an importance which is higher in proportion as their
own conception of God is purer ; both appear not to have disdained
magic ; yet both regard the gift of prophecy as the highest fruit of
wisdom and piety, which they pique themselves on possessing in
their most distinguished members. Finally, both agree (along with
the dualistic character of their whole conception of the world...) in
their tenets respecting the origin of the soul, its relation to the body,
and the life after death1 ...'
Absence of This array of coincidences is formidable, and thus skilfully
Pvthaso- marshalled might appear at first sight invincible. But a closer
rean fea- examination detracts from its value. In the first place the two
turesintbe . . .
Essenes. distinctive characteristics of the Pythagorean philosophy are wanting
to the Essenes. The Jewish sect did not believe in the trans
migration of souls ; and the doctrine of numbers, at least so far as
our information goes, had no place in their system. Yet these con
stitute the very essence of the Pythagorean teaching. In the next
place several of the coincidences are more apparent than real. Thus
Tbe coin- for instance the demons who in the Pythagorean system held an
are in intermediate place between the Supreme God and man, and were the
some cases result of a compromise between polytheism and philosophy, have no
parent, near relation to the angelology of the Essenes, which arose out of a
wholly different motive. Nor again can we find distinct traces among
the Pythagoreans of any such reverence for the sun as is ascribed to
the Essenes, the only notice which is adduced having no prominence
whatever in its own context, and referring to a rule which would
be dictated by natural decency and certainly was not peculiar to the
Pythagoreans2. When these imperfect and (for the purpose) value
less resemblances have been subtracted, the only basis on which the
theory of a direct affiliation can rest is withdrawn. All the re
maining coincidences are unimportant. Thus the respect paid to
founders is not confined to any one sect or any one age. The
reverence of the Essenes for Moses, and the reverence of the
1 Zeller Philosophic der Griechen Life of Apollonius by Philostratus (e.g.
Th. in. Abth. -t, p. 281. vi. 10) considerable stress is laid on
3 Diog. Laert. viii. 17; see Zeller tbe worship of the sun (Zeller 1. 0. p.
1. c. p. 282, note 5. The precept in 137, note 6) ; but the syncretism of
question occurs among a number of this late work detracts from its value as
insignificant details, and has no spe- representing Pythagorean doctrine.
cial prominence given to it. In tbe

THE ESSENES. 381
Pythagoreans for Pythagoras, are indications of a common humanity,
but not of a common philosophy. And again the forgery of suppo
sititious documents is unhappily not the badge of any one school.
The Solomonian books of the Essenes, so far as we can judge from
the extant notices, were about as unhke the tracts ascribed to
Pythagoras and his disciples by the Neopythagoreans as two such
forgeries could well be. All or nearly all that remains in common
to the Greek school and the Jewish sect after these deductions is
a certain similarity in the type of life. But granted that two bodies and in
of men each held an esoteric teaching of their own, they would not suggest
secure it independently in a similar way, by a recognised process of ?n? , '
initiation, by a solemn form of oath, by a rigid distinction of orders, connexion.
Granted also, that they both maintained the excellence of an ascetic
life, their asceticism would naturally take the same form ; they would
avoid wine and flesh ; they would abstain from anointing themselves
with oil; they would depreciate, and perhaps altogether prohibit,
marriage. "Unless therefore the historical conditions are themselves
favourable to a direct and immediate connexion between the Pytha
goreans and the Essenes, this theory of affiliation has little to
recommend it.
And a closer examination must pronounce them to be most Twofold
unfavourable. Chronology and geography alike present serious t0 ^g
obstacles to any solution which derives the peculiarities of the theory.
Essenes from the Pythagoreans.
(i) The priority of time, if it can be pleaded on either side, must (i) Chro-
be urged in favour of the Essenes. The Pythagoreans as a philo- faa°f™e
sophical school entirely disappear from history before the middle of adverse.
the fourth century before Christ. The last Pythagoreans were
scholars of Philolaus and Eurytus, the contemporaries of Socrates and
Plato1. For nearly two centuries after their extinction we hear
nothing of them. Here and there persons like Diodorus of Aspendus Disappear-
are satirised by the Attic poets of the middle comedy as ' pytha- the p^a.
gorizers,' in other words, as total abstainers and vegetarians2; but goreans.
1 Zeller 1. c. p. 68 (comp. 1. p. 242). 2 Athen. iv. p. 161, Diog. Laert.
While disputing Zeller's position, I viii. 37. See tbe index to Meineke
have freely made use of his references. Fragm. Com. s. vv. irvBayopixos, etc.
It is impossible not to admire tbe The words commonly used by these
mastery of detail and clearness of ex- satirists are irvBayoplfetv, irvBayopuTTijs,
position in this work, even when the irvoayopiapbs. Tbe persons so satirised
conclusions seem questionable. were probably in many cases not more

382 THE ESSENES.
the philosophy had wholly died or was fast dying out. This is the
universal testimony of ancient writers. It is not till the first century
before Christ, that we meet with any distinct traces of a revival.
In Alexander Polyhistor1, a younger contemporary of Sulla, for the
first time we find references to certain writings, which would seem
to have emanated from this incipient Neopythagoreanism, rather than
from the elder school of Pythagoreans. And a little later Cicero
commends his friend Nigidius Figulus as one specially raised up to
revive the extinct philosophy2. But so slow or so chequered was
its progress, that a whole century after Seneca can still speak of the
Priority of school as practically defunct3. Yet long before this the Essenes
to^eonv-^ formed a compact, well-organized, numerous society with a peculiar
tbagorean- system of doctrine and a definite rule of life. We have seen that
ism. Pliny the elder speaks of this celibate society as having existed
' through thousands of ages4.' This is a gross exaggeration, but it
must at least be taken to imply that in Pliny's time the origin of the
Essenes was lost in the obscurity of the past, or at least seemed so to
those who had not access to special sources of information. If, as
I have given reasons for supposing6, Pliny's authority in this passage
is the same Alexander Polyhistor to whom I have just referred,
and if this particular statement, however exaggerated in expression,
is derived from him, tbe fact becomes still more significant. But
on any showing the priority in time is distinctly in favour of the
Essenes as against the Neopythagoreans.
The Bs- And accordingly we find that what is only a tendency in the
sene tenets Ne0pythagoreans is with the Essenes an avowed principle and a
more than definite rule of life. Such for instance is the case with cehbacy, of
tbagorean." which Pliny says that it has existed as an institution among the
Essenes per scBculorum millia, and which is a chief corner-stone of
Pythagoreans than modern teetotallers torem non invenit.'
are Eechabites. 4 N. H. v. 15. Tbe passage is quoted
1 Diog. Laert. viii. 24 sq. ; see Zeller above p. 83, note 3. The point of time,
1. c. p. 74 — 78. at which Josephus thinks it necessary
2 Cic. Tim. 1 ' sic judico, post illos to insert an account of the Essenes as
nobiles Pytbagoreop quorum disci- already flourishing (Ant. xiii. 5. 9), is
plina extincta est quodammodo, cum prior to tbe revival of the Neopytha-
aliquot seecula in Italia Siciliaque vi- gorean school. How much earlier the
guisset, nunc exstitisse qui illam reno- Jewish sect arose, we are without data
varet.' for determining.
3 Sen. N. Q. vii. 32 'Pythagorica 6 Seep. 81, note 1.
ilia invidiosa turbse schola prsocep-

THE ESSENES. 383
their practical system. The Pythagorean notices (whether truly or not,
it is unimportant for my purpose to enquire) speak of Pythagoras as
having a wife and a daughter1. Only at a late date do we find the
attempt to represent their founder in another Hght ; and if virginity
is ascribed to Apollonius of Tyana, the great Pythagorean of the first
Christian century, in the fictitious biography of Philostratus ', this
representation is plainly due to the general plan of the novelist, whose
hero is perhaps intended to rival the Founder of Christianity, and
whose work is saturated with Christian ideas. In fact virginity can
never be said to have been a Pythagorean principle, though it may
have been an exalted ideal of some not very early adherents of the
school. And the same remark applies to other resemblances between
the Essene and Neopythagorean teaching. The clearness of con
ception and the definiteness of practice are in almost every instance
on the side of the Essenes; so that, looking at the comparative
chronology of the two, it will appear almost inconceivable that they
can have derived their principles from the Neopythagoreans.
(ii) But the geographical difficulty also, which this theory of (ii) Geo-
affiliation involves, must be added to the chronological. The home difficulties
of the Essene sect is allowed on all hands to have been on the j° the
theory.
eastern borders of Palestine, the shores of the Dead Sea, a region
least of all exposed to the influences of Greek philosophy. It is
true that we find near Alexandria a closely allied school of Jewish
recluses, the Therapeutes ; and, as Alexandria may have been the
home of Neopythagoreanism, a possible link of connexion is here
disclosed. But, as Zeller himself has pointed out, it is not among
the Therapeutes, but among the Essenes, that the principles in
question appear fully developed and consistently carried out3; and
therefore, if there be a relation of paternity between Essene and
Therapeute, the latter must be derived from the former and not
conversely. How then can we suppose this influence of Neopytha
goreanism brought to bear on a Jewish community in the south
eastern border of Palestine ? Zeller's answer is as follows *. Judaea
was for more than a hundred and fifty years before the Maccabean
period under the sovereignty first of the Egyptian and then of the
1 Diog. Laert. viii. 42. bad been differently represented by
2 Vit. Apol. i. 15 sq. At tbe same others.
time Philostratus informs us that the 8 1. c. p. 288 sq.
conduct of bis hero in this respect i 1. c. p. 290 sq.

384

The fo
reign ele
ment of
Essenism
to be
sought in
the East,

to which
also Py
thago
reanism may have
been in
debted.

THE ESSENES.
Syrian Greeks'. We know that at this time Hellenizing influences
did infuse themselves largely into Judaism : and what more natural
than that among these the Pythagorean philosophy and discipline
should have recommended itself to a section of the Jewish people?
It may be said in reply, that at all events the special locality of the
Essenes is the least favourable to such a solution : but, without
pressing this fact, Zeller's hypothesis is open to two serious objections
which combined seem fatal to it, unsupported as it is by any
historical notice. First, this influence of Pythagoreanism is assumed
to have taken place at the very time when the Pythagorean school
was practically extinct : and secondly, it is supposed to have acted
upon that very section of the Jewish community, which was the
most vigorous advocate of national exolusiveness and the most averse
to Hellenizing influences.
It is not therefore to Greek but to Oriental influences that con
siderations of time and place, as well as of internal character, lead
us to look for an explanation of the alien elements in Essene Judaism.
And have we not here also the account of any real coincidences which
may exist between Essenism and Neopythagoreanism ? We should
perhaps be hardly more justified in tracing Neopythagoreanism
directly to Essenism than conversely (though, if we had no other
alternative, this would appear to be the more probable solution
of the two) : but were not both alike due to substantially the same
influences acting in different degrees? I think it will hardly be denied
that the characteristic features of Pythagoreanism, and especially of
Neopythagoreanism, which distinguish it from other schools of Greek
philosophy, are much more Oriental in type, than Hellenic. The
asceticism, the magic, the mysticism, of the sect all point in the
same direction. And history moreover contains indications that
such was the case. There seems to be sufficient ground for the
statement that Pythagoras himself was indebted to intercourse with
the Egyptians, if not with more strictly Oriental nations, for some
leading ideas of his system. But, however this may be, the fact
that in the legendary accounts, which the Neopythagoreans invented
to do honour to the founder of the school, he is represented as taking
lessons from the Chaldeans, Persians, Brahmins, and others, may be
taken as an evidence that their own philosophy at all events was
partially derived from eastern sources '.
1 See the references in Zeller i. p. 218 sq.; comp. m. 2, p. 67.

THE ESSENES. 385
But, if the alien elements of Essenism were borrowed not so
much from Greek philosophy as from Oriental mysticism, to what
nation or what religion was it chiefly indebted ? To this question it
is difficult, with our very imperfect knowledge of the East at the
Christian era, to reply with any confidence. Yet there is one system Eesem-
to which we naturally look, as furnishing the most probable answer. parsjsm
The Medo-Persian religion supplies just those elements which dis
tinguish the tenets and practices of the Essenes from the normal
type of Judaism. (1) First ; we have here a very definite form of (i) Dual-
dualism, which exercised the greatest influence on subsequent Gnostic
sects, and of which Manicheism, the most matured development of
dualistic doctrine in connexion with Christianity, was the ultimate
fruit. For though dualism may not represent the oldest theology
of the Zend-Avesta in its unadulterated form, yet long before the
era of which we are speaking it had become the fundamental prin
ciple of the Persian religion. (2) Again ; the Zoroastrian symbolism (ii) Sun-
of hght, and consequent worship of the sun as the fountain of light, p'
will explain those anomalous notices of the Essenes in which they are
represented as paying reverence to this luminary '. (3) Moreover ; (iii) Angel-
the ' worship of angels' in the Essene system has a striking parallel ° ry*
in the invocations of spirits, which form a very prominent feature
in the ritual of the Zend-Avesta. And altogether their angelology
is illustrated, and not improbably was suggested, by the doctrine of
intermediate beings concerned in the government of nature and of
man, such as the Amshaspands, which is an integral part of the
Zoroastrian system2. (4) And once more; the magic, which was so (iv) Magic.
attractive to the Essene, may have received its impulse from the
priestly caste of Persia, to whose world-wide fame this form of super
stition is indebted for its name. (5) If to these parallels I venture (v) Striv-
also to add the intense striving after purity, which is the noblest ™grityier
feature in the Persian religion, I do so, not because the Essenes
1 Keim (Geschichte Jesu von Nazara pey'mTw irXrjBei erparov- dairaadpevoi
: p. 303) refers to Tac. Hist. iii. 24 SirbvijXtov, eis Bos airois, ol fidpfiapoi
'TJndique clamor; et orientem solem x.tX
(ita in Syria mos est) tertiani salu- 2 See e.g. Vendidad Parg. xix; and
tavere ' as illustrating this Essene the liturgical portions of the book are
practice Tbe commentators on Ta- largely taken up with invocations of
citus quote a similar notice of tbe these intermediate beings. Some ex-
Parthians in Herodian iv. 15 apa Si tracts are given in Davies' Colossians
TjXicj) dvluxovri iipdvrj 'AprdjSavos abv p. 146 sq.
COL. 25

386

THE ESSENES.

Other
coinci dences ac
cidental.

Tbe de
struction
of tbe
Persianempire not ad
verse

might not have derived this impulse from a higher source, but
because this feature was very likely to recommend the Zoroastrian
system to their favourable notice, and because also the particular
form which the zeal for purity took among them was at all events
congenial to the teaching of the Zend-Avesta, and may not have
been altogether free from its influences.
I have preferred dwelling on these broader resemblances, because
they are much more significant than any mere coincidence of details,
which may or may not have been accidental. Thus for instance the
magi, like the Essenes, wore white garments, and eschewed gold
and ornaments ; they practised frequent lustrations ; they avoided
flesh, living on bread and cheese or on herbs and fruits; they
had different orders in their society; and the like1. All these, as I
have already remarked, may be the independent out-growth of the
same temper and direction of conduct, and need not imply any direct
historical connexion. Nor is there any temptation to press such
resemblances; for even without their aid the general connexion seems
to be sufficiently established 2.
But it is said, that the history of Persia does not favour the
hypothesis of such an influence as is here assumed. The destruction
of the Persian empire by Alexander, argues Zeller3, and the subse
quent erection of the Parthian domination on its ruins, must have
been fatal to the spread of Zoroastrianism. From the middle of the
third century before Christ, when the Parthian empire was esta
blished, till towards the middle of the third century of our era,

1 Hilgenfeld (Zeitschrift x. p. 99 sq.)
finds coincidences even more special
than these. He is answered by Zeller
(in. 2, p. 276), but defends his posi
tion again (Zeitschrift xi. p. 347 sq.),
though with no great success. Among
other points of coincidence Hilgenfeld
remarks on the axe (Jos. B. J. ii. 8.
7) which was given to the novices
among the Essenes, and connects it
with the dgivopavrela (Plin. N. H.
xxxvi 19) of tbe magi. Zeller con
tents himself with replying that tbe
use of the axe among the Essenes for
purposes of divination is a pure con
jecture, not resting on any known
fact. He might have answered with

much more effect that Josephus else
where (§ 9) defines it as a spade or
shovel, and assigns to it a very dif
ferent use. Hilgenfeld has damaged
his cause by laying stress on these
accidental resemblances. So far as
regards minor coincidences, Zeller
makes out as good a case for bis
Pythagoreans, as Hilgenfeld for his
magians. 2 Those who allow any foreign
Oriental element in Essenism most
commonly ascribe it to Persia : e. g.
among the more recent writers, Hil
genfeld (1. c), and Lipsius Schenkel's
Bibel-Lexikon s. v. Essaer p. 189.
8 1. c. p. 275.

THE ESSENES. 387
when the Persian monarchy and religion were once more restored \
its influence must have been reduced within the narrowest limits.
But does analogy really suggest such an inference ? Does not the butfavour-
history of the Jews themselves show that the religious influence of 6pread 0f
a people on the world at large may begin just where its national Parsism.
life ends ? The very dispersion of Zoroastrianism, consequent on the
fall of the empire, would impregnate the atmosphere far and wide ;
and the germs of new religious developments would thus be implanted
in alien soils. For in tracing Essenism to Persian influences I have
not wished to imply that this Jewish sect consciously incorporated
the Zoroastrian philosophy and religion as such, but only that
Zoroastrian ideas were infused into its system by more or less direct
contact. And, as a matter of fact, it seems quite certain that Persian
ideas were widely spread during this very interval, when the Persian
nationality was eclipsed. It was then that Hermippus gave to the Indica-
Greeks the most detailed account of this religion which had ever been innuonoe
laid before them1. It was then that its tenets suggested or moulded durmgthis
Da period.
tbe speculations of the various Gnostic sects. It was then that
the worship of the Persian Mithras spread throughout the Roman
Empire. It was then, if not earlier, that the magian system took
root in Asia Minor, making for itself (as it were) a second home in
Cappadocia3. It was then, if not earlier, that the Zoroastrian demon-
ology stamped itself so deeply on the apocryphal literature of the
Jews themselves, which borrowed even the names of evil spirits4
from the Persians. There are indeed abundant indications that
Palestine was surrounded by Persian influences during this period,
when the Persian empire was in abeyance.
Thus we seem to have ample ground for the view that certain
1 See Gibbon Decline and Fall the Science of Language 1st ser. p. 86.
C. viii, Milman History of Christianity 3 Strabo xv. 3. 15 (p. 733) 'Ev Si ry
11. p. 247 sq. Tbe latter speaks of Ka7r7ra5oriej( (iro\b ydp ixei rb rwv Md-
this restoration of Zoroastrianism, as -yew cpvXov, ot xal iripaiBot xaXovvraf
' perhaps the only instance of tbe iroXXa Si xal twv Ileptrixwv Beov lepd)
vigorous revival of a Pagan religion.' x.r.X.
It was far purer and less Pagan than 4 At least in one instance, Asmo-
the system which it superseded; and deus (Tob. iii. 17); see M. Miiller
this may account for its renewed life. Chips from a German Workshop 1.
2 See Miiller Fragm. Hist. Grace. p. 148 sq. For the different dates as-
m. p. 53 sq. for this work of Herrnip- signed to the book of Tobit see Dr
pus irepl 'HLdywv. He flourished about Westcott's article Tobit in Smith's
B.C. 200. See Max Miiller Lectures on Dictionary of the Bible p. 1525.
25 — 2

388

THE ESSENES.

Are Bud
dhist in
fluences
also per
ceptible?

SupposedBuddhist
establishment at
Alexan
dria.

The au
thoritymisinterpreted

alien features in Essene Judaism were derived from the Zoroastrian
religion. But are we justified in going a step further, and attribut
ing other elements in this eclectic system to the more distant East ?
The monasticism of the Buddhist will naturally occur to our
minds, as a precursor of the cenobitic life among the Essenes ; and
Hilgenfeld accordingly has not hesitated to ascribe this characteristic
of Essenism directly to Buddhist influences '. But at the outset
we are obliged to ask whether history gives any such indication
of the presence of Buddhism in the West as this hypothesis requires.
Hilgenfeld answers this question in the affirmative. He points
confidently to the fact that as early as the middle of the second
century before Christ the Buddhist records speak of their faith as
flourishing in Alasanda the chief city of the land of Yavana. The
place intended, he conceives, can be none other than the great
Alexandria, the most famous of the many places bearing the name2.
In this opinion however he stands quite alone. Neither Koppen 3,
who is his authority for this statement, nor any other Indian
scholar 4, so far as I am aware, for a moment contemplates this identi
fication. Yavana, or Yona, was the common Indian name for the
Graeco-Bactrian kingdom and its dependencies3 ; and to this region
we naturally turn. The Alasanda or Alasadda therefore, which is
here mentioned, will be one of several Eastern cities bearing the name
of the great conqueror, most probably Alexandria ad Caucasum.

1 Zeitschrift x. p. 103 sq. ; comp.
xi. p. 351. M. Benan also (Langues
S6mitiqv.es 111. iv. 1, Vie de Jesus
p. 98) suggests that Buddhist influences
operated in Palestine.
a x. p. 105 'was schon an sich,
zumal in dieser Zeit, schwerlich Alex
andria ad Caucasum, sondern nur
Alexandrien in Aegypten bedeuten
kann.' Comp. xi. p. 351, where he
repeats tbe same argument in reply to
Zeller. This is a very natural in
ference from a western point of view ;
but, when we place ourselves in tbe
position of a Buddhist writer to whom
Bactria was Greece, the relative pro
portions of things are wholly changed.
3 Die Religion des Buddha 1. p. 193.
4 Comp. e. g. Weber Die Verbin-
dungen Indiens mit den Landern im
Westen-p.67Z,m the Allgem. Monatsschr.

f. Wissensch. u. Literatur, Braun
schweig 1853 ; Lassen Indische Alter-
thumskunde 11. p. 236 ; Hardy Manual
of Budhism p. 516.
6 For its geographical meaning in
older Indian writers see Koppen 1. e.
Since then it has entirely departed
from its original signification, and
Yavana is now a common term used
by the Hindoos to designate the Mo
hammedans. Thus tbe Greek name
has come to be applied to a people
which of all others is most unlike the
Greeks. This change of meaning ad
mirably illustrates the use of "EXXrjv
among tbe Jews, which in like man
ner, from being tbe name of an alien
nation, became the name of an alien
religion, irrespective of nationality;
see tbe note on Gal. ii. 3.

THE ESSENES. 389
But indeed I hardly think that, if Hilgenfeld had referred to the
original authority for the statement, the great Buddhist history
MaJiawanso, he would have ventured to lay any stress at all on
this notice, as supporting his theory. The historian, or rather and wholly
fabulist (for such he is in this earlier part of his chronicle), is re- WorthSt"in
lating the foundation of the Maha thfipo, or great tope, at Ruanwelli ltsel1-
by the king Dutthagamini in the year b.c. 157. Beyond the fact
that this tope was erected by this king the rest is plainly legendary.
All the materials for the construction of the building, we are told,
appeared spontaneously as by miracle — the bricks, the metals, the
precious stones. The dewos, or demons, lent their aid in the erection.
In fact the fabric huge
Rose like an exhalation.
Priests gathered in enormous numbers from all the great Buddhist
monasteries to do honour to the festival of the foundation. One
place alone sent not less than 96,000. Among the rest it is mentioned
that ' Maha Dhammarakkito, thero (i.e. senior priest) of Y6na, accom
panied by 30,000 priests from the vicinity of Alasadda, the capital
of the Y6na country, attended1.' It is obvious that no weight can
be attached to a statement occurring as part of a story of which
the other details are so manifestly false. An establishment of
30,000 Buddhist priests at Alexandria would indeed be a pheno
menon of which historians have shown a strange neglect.
Nor is the presence of any Buddhist establishment even on a General
much smaller scale in this important centre of western civilisation 0f]3u(£
at all reconcilable with the ignorance of this religion, which the dbism in
the West.
Greeks and Bomans betray at a much later date . For some centu
ries after the Christian era we find that the information possessed by
western writers was most shadowy and confused; and in almost
every instance we are able to trace it to some other cause than the
actual presence of Buddhists in the Eoman Empire3. Thus Strabo, Strabo.
1 Mahawanso p. 171, Tumour's may allow that single Indians would
translation. visit Alexandria from time to time for
2 How for instance, if any such purposes of trade or for other reasons,
establishment had ever existed at and not more than this is required by
Alexandria, could Strabo have used the rhetorical passage in Dion Chry-
the language wliich is quoted in the eost. Or. xxxii (p. 373) bp& ydp iyoiye^
next note? °6 pbvov "EXXijcas irap' bpiv  AXXa
3 Consistently with this view, we xal Haxrplovs xal "ZxiBas xal Uipaas xal

390

THE ESSENES.

who wrote under Augustus and Tiberius, apparently mentions the
Buddhist priests, the sramanas, under the designation sarmance (Sap-
juavas) • ; but he avowedly obtains his information from Megastbenes,

'IvSwv nvds. Tbe qualifying rcpas
shows how very slight was the com
munication between India and Alex
andria. Tbe mission of Pantamus
may have been suggested by tbe pre
sence of such stray visitors. Jerome
(Vir. III. 36) says that he went 'roga-
tus ab illius gentis legatis.' It must
remain doubtful however, whether
some other region than Hindostan,
such as JEthiopia for instance, is not
meant, when Pantsnus is said to have
gone to India : see Cave's Lives of the
Primitive Fathers p. 188 sq.
How very slight tbe communication
was between Lidia and the West in
tbe early years of tbe Christian era,
appears from this passage of Strabo
xv. 1. 4 (p. 686) ; xal ol vvv Si i£ Alyvir-
tov irXiovres ipiropixol t$ NelXy xal Tip
'Apa(3lw xbXirw pixpi ttjs 'IhSixtjs aird-
vioi piv xal irepiireTXexixam pixpi rov
Tiyyov, xal ovroi S' ISiiSrai xai oiSiv
irpbs laroplav rwv rbirtav Xfrfvipois after
which he goes on to say that tbe only
instance of Indian travellers in the
West was the embassy sent to Augus
tus (see below p. 392), which came dtp'
evbs rbirov xal irap' ivbs (laiTtXiws.
Tbe communications between India
and the West are investigated by two
recent writers, Beinaud Relations Poli-
tiques et Commerciales de I'Empire
Romain avec VAsie Centrale, Paris
1863, and Priaulx The Indian Travels
of Apollonius of Tyana and the Indian
Embassies to Rome, 1873. The latter
work, which is very thorough and
satisfactory, would have saved me
much labour of independent investiga
tion, if I had seen it in time.
1 Strabo xv. 1. 59, p. 712. In the
mss it is written Tappdvas, but this
must be an error either introduced by
Strabo's transcribers or found in the
copy of Megastbenes which this author
used. This is plain not only from the
Indian word itself, but also from the
parallel passage in Clement of Alexan
dria (Strom, i. 15). From the coin

cidences of language it is clear that.
Clement also derived bis information
from Megasthenes, whose name be
mentions just below. The fragments
of Megastbenes relating to the Indian
philosophers will be found in Miiller
Fragm. Hist. Grace. 11. p. 437. They
were previously edited by Scbwanbeck,
Megasthenis Indica (Bonnse 1846).
For 2appdvai we also find the form
liapavaioi in other writers ; e.g. Clem.
Alex. 1. c, Bardesanes in Porphyr. de
Abstin. iv. 17, Orig. c. Cels. i. 19 (1.
p. 342). This divergence is explained
by tbe fact that tbe Pali word sammana
corresponds to tbe Sanskrit sramana.
See Schwanbeck, 1. c. p. 17, quoted by
Miiller, p. 437.
It should be borne in mind however,
that several eminent Indian scholars
believe Megastbenes to bave meant
not Buddhists but Brahmins by his
tappdvas. So for instance Lassen
Rhein. Mus. 1833, p. 180 sq., Ind.
Alterth. 11. p. 700: and Prof. Max.
Miiller (Pref. to Bogers's Translation
of Buddhaghosha's Parables, London
1870, p. Iii) says; 'That Lassen is
right in taking the Zappdvai, men
tioned by Megastbenes, for Brahmanic,
not for Buddhist ascetics, might be
proved also by their dress. Dresses
made of tbe bark of trees are not
Buddhistic' If this opinion be correct,
the earlier notices of Buddhism in
Greek writers entirely disappear, and
my position is strengthened. But for
tbe following reasons tbe other view
appears to me more probable: (i) The
term sramana is tbe common term
for tbe Buddhist ascetic, whereas it
is very seldom used of tbe Brahmin.
(2) The Zdppavos (another form of
sramana), mentioned below p. 392,
note 2, appears to have been a
Buddhist. This view is taken even
by Lassen, Ind. Alterth. in. p. 60.
(3) Tbe distinction of "Bpaxpdves and
Sappavat in Megastbenes or the writers
following bim corresponds to the dis-

THE ESSENES.

391

who travelled in India somewhere about the year 300 b.o. and wrote
a book on Indian affairs. Thus too Bardesanes at a much later date Barde-
gives an account of these Buddhist ascetics, without however naming sanes'
the founder of the religion ; but he was indebted for his knowledge
of them to conversations with certain Indian ambassadors who visited
Syria on their way westward in the reign of one of the Antonines '.
Clement of Alexandria, writing in the latest years of the second Clement
century or the earliest of the third, for the first2 time mentions dria"6™11"
Buddha by name; and even he betrays a strange ignorance of this
Eastern religion 3.

tinction of Bpax/idves and Sapavaiot
in Bardesanes, Origen, and others ;
and, as Schwanbeck has shown (1. c),
the account of tbe Xappdvat in Mega
stbenes for the most part is a close
parallel to the account of tbe Zapavaioi
in Bardesanes (or at least in Por
phyry's report of Bardesanes). It
seems more probable therefore that
Megasthenes has been guilty of con
fusion in describing the dress of tbe
Xap/idvai, than that Brahmins are in
tended by the term.
The Pali form, Sapavatoi, as a de
signation of the Buddhists, first occurs
in Clement of Alexandria or Barde
sanes, whichever may be the earlier
writer. It is generally ascribed to
Alexander Polyhistor, who flourished
b.c. 80 — 60, because his authority is
quoted by Cyril of Alexandria (c.
Julian, iv. p. 133) in the same context
in which the Zapavaiot are mentioned.
This inference is drawn by Schwan
beck, Max Miiller, Lassen, and others.
An examination of Cyril's language
however shows that the statement for
which he quotes the authority of Alex
ander Polyhistor does not extend to
the mention of the Samanaei. Indeed
all the facts given in this passage of
Cyril (including tbe reference to Poly
histor) are taken from Clement of
Alexandria (Strom, i. 15; see below n.
3), whose account Cyril has abridged.
It is possible indeed that Clement
himself derived tbe statement from
Polyhistor, but nothing in Clement's
own language points to this.
1 The narrative of Bardesanes is

given by Porphyry de Abst. iv. 17.
The Buddhist ascetics are there called
Sapavatoi (see tbe last note). Tbe
work of Bardesanes, recounting his
conversations with these Indian am
bassadors, is quoted again by Porphyry
in a fragment preserved by Stobffius
Eel. iii. 56 (p. 141). In this last pas
sage the embassy is said to bave arrived
iirl rrjs fiaaiXeias rijs 'Avrwvlvov tov il-
'Epiawv, by which, if tbe words be
correct, must be meant Elagabalus
(a.d. 218 — 222), tbe spurious Antonine
(see Hilgenfeld Bardesanes p. 12 sq.).
Other ancient authorities however place
Bardesanes in the reign of one of the
older Antonines ; and, as the context
is somewhat corrupt, we cannot feel
quite certain about the date. Barde
sanes gives by far tbe most accurate
account of the Buddhists to be found
in any ancient Greek writer ; but even
here the monstrous stories, which tbe
Indian ambassadors related to him,
show how little trustworthy such
sources of information were.
2 Except possibly Axrian, Ind. viii.
1, who mentions an ancient Indian
king, Budyas (BovSias) by name ; but
what he relates of bim is quite incon
sistent with tbe history of Buddha,
and probably some one else is intended.
3 In this passage (Strom, i. 15, p.
359) Clement apparently mentions
these same persons three times, sup
posing that he is describing three dif
ferent schools of Oriental philosophers.
(1) He speaks of 'Zapa.vaioi Bdxrpwv
(comp. Cyrill. Alex. 1. c); (2) He dis
tinguishes two classes of Indian gymno-

392

THE ESSENES.

Hippoly tus.

A Bud
dhist at
Athens.

Still later than this, Hippolytus, while he gives a fairly intelligent,
though brief, account of the Brahmins ', says not a word about the
Buddhists, though, if he had been acquainted with their teaching,
he would assuredly have seen in them a fresh support to his theory
of the affinity between Christian heresies and pre-existing heathen phi
losophies. With one doubtful exception — an Indian fanatic attached
to an embassy sent by king Porus to Augustus, who astonished the
Greeks and Bomans by burning himself alive at Athens2 — there

sophists, whom be calls ~2,appdvai and
Bpa%pavai. These are Buddhists and
Brahmins respectively (see p. 390, note
1) ; (3) He says afterwards eM Si
twv 'IvSwv ol rocs BoOrrtt ireidopevoi
irapayyiXpaaiv, Sv Si' iTepj36Xijv aep-
vbrrjTos els [dis?] Bebv reripijxacri.
Schwanbeck indeed maintains that Cle
ment here intends to describe the same
persons whom be bas just mentioned
as Sappdvat ; but this is not the natural
interpretation of his language, which
must mean ' There are also among
tbe Indians those who obey the pre
cepts of Buddha.' Probably Schwan
beck is right in identifying the Zappa-
vat with the Buddhist ascetics, but
Clement appears not to bave known
this. In fact be bas obtained his in
formation from different sources, and
so repeated himself without being aware
of it. Where he got the first fact it is
impossible to say. Tbe second, as we
saw, was derived from Megasthenes.
The third, relating to Buddha, came,
as we may conjecture, either from
Pantasnus (if indeed Hindostan is
really meant by tbe India of his mis
sionary labours) or from some chance
Indian visitor at Alexandria.
In another passage (Strom, iii. 7,
p. 539) Clement speaks of certain In
dian celibates and ascetics, who are
called Sepvol. As be distinguishes
them from the gymnosophists, and
mentions tbe pyramid as a sacred
building with tbem, tbe identification
with tbe Buddhists can hardly be
doubted. Here therefore 2epvol is a
Grecized form of Sapavatoi ; and this
modification of tbe word would occur
naturally to Clement, because aepvol,
crepvetov, were already used of the ascetic

life: e.g. Philo de Vit. Cont. 3 (p.
473 m) lepbv 6 xaXeirai aepvetov xal
povaffTijptov iv $ povoipevoi rd tov
trepvoG (3lov pvimjpia reXovvrai.
1 Haer. i. 24.
2 Tbe chief authority is Nicolaus of
Damascus in Strabo xv. 1. 73 (p. 270).
The incident is mentioned also in Dion
Cass. liv. 9. Nicolaus bad met these
ambassadors at Antioch, and gives an
interesting account of the motley com
pany and their strange presents. This
fanatic, who was one of the number,
immolated himself in tbe presence of
an astonished crowd, and perhaps of
the emperor himself, at Athens. He
anointed himself and then leapt smil
ing on the pyre. Tbe inscription on
bis tomb was Zappavoxvyds 'IvSbs dirb
Bapyotrijs xard rd irdrpia 'IvSwv iBij
iavrov diraBavarliras xelrai. Tbe tomb
was visible at least as late as tbe age
of Plutarch, who recording the self-
immolation of Calanus before Alexan
der (Vit. Alex. 69) says, touto iroXXois
iretjiv varepov &XXos 'IvSbs iv 'ABijvats
'Kaiaapi trvvwv iirolrjtre, xal Seixvvrai
pixpi vvv to pvrjpeiov 'IvSov irpoo-ayo-
pevipevov. Strabo also places the two
incidents in conjunction in another
passage in which he refers to this
person, xv. ,1. 4 (p. 686) d xaraxaio-as
iavrov 'ABijvrjtn aotpurr'ijs 'IvSbs, xaBdirep
xal b KdXa;-os x.r.X.
The reasons for supposing this per
son to bave been a Buddhist, rather
than a Brahmin, are: (1) The name
ilappavoxnyds (which appears with
some variations in tbe mss of Strabo)
being apparently the Lidian sramana-
karja, i.e. 'teacher of the ascetics,'
in other words, a Buddhist priest;
(2) The place Bargosa, i.e. Barygaza,

THE ESSENES.
is apparently no notice in either heathen or Christian writers, which
points to the presence of a Buddhist within the limits of the Boman
Empire, till long after the Essenes had ceased to exist1.
And if so, the coincidences must be very precise, before we are
justified in attributing any peculiarities of Essenism to Buddhist
influences. This however is far from being the case. They both
exhibit a well-organized monastic society : but the monasticism
of the Buddhist priests, with its systematized mendicancy, has little
in common with the monasticism of the Essene recluse, whose life
was largely spent in manual labour. They both enjoin cehbacy,
both prohibit the use of flesh and of wine, both abstain from the
slaughter of animals. But, as we have already seen, such resem
blances prove nothing, for they may be explained by the inde
pendent development of the same religious principles. One coincidence,
and one only, is noticed by Hilgenfeld, which at first sight seems
more striking and might suggest a historical connexion. He observes
that the four orders of the Essene community are derived from the

393

The al
leged coin
cidences
provenothing. Monasti cism.
Asceti cism.

where Buddhism flourished in that
age. See Priaulx p. 78 sq. la Dion
Cassius it is written Zdppapos.
And have we not here an explana
tion of 1 Cor. xiii. 3, if Xva xavBtjao-
pat be the right reading? The pas
sage, being written before the fires of
the Neronian persecution, requires ex
planation. Now it is clear from Plu
tarch that the 'Tomb of the Indian'
was one of the sights shown to stran
gers at Athens : and tbe Apostle, who
observed the altar A["N0OCTOOI 6eooi,
was not likely to overlook the sepul
chre with the strange inscription
e&YTON atta9anaticac KeiTAi. In
deed the incident would probably be
pressed on his notice in his discussions
with Stoics and Epicureans, and he
would be forced to declare himself as
to the value of these Indian self-im
molations, when he preached the doc
trine of self-sacrifioe. We may well
imagine therefore that the fate of this
poor Buddhist fanatic was present to
his mind when he penned tbe words
xal idv irapaSiS rb awpd pov...dydirijv Si
pTjex.w,ob5evwtpeXovpai. Lideed it would
furnish an almost equally good illus
tration of the text, whether we read tva

Four or
ders and
four steps.

xavBijuopai or Xva xavxijcrapai. Dion
Cassius (1. c.) suggests that the deed
was done iirb ipiXonpIas or els iirlSetgiv.
How much attention these religious
suicides of the Lidians attracted in tbe
Apostolic age (doubtless because the
act of this Buddhist priest had brought
the subject vividly before men's minds
in the West), we may infer from tbe
speech which Josephus puts in the
mouth of Eleazar (B. J. vii. 8. 7), fiXi-
spwpev els 'IvSobs rois o-oiplav daxetv iir-
io~xvovpevovs ... ol Si ... irvpl to ffwpa
irapaSbvres, tiirtiis Si) xal xaBapwrdrijv
diroxplvwtji tov uwparos rijv spvxrjv, ip-
vovpevoi reXeiiTWo-i...dp' ovv ovx alSov-
peBa xeipov 'IvSwv tppovovvres ;
1 In the reign of Claudius an em-
bassyarrived from Taprobane (Ceylon) ;
and from these ambassadors Pliny de
rived his information regarding the
island, N. H. vi. 24. Bespecting their
religion however he says only two
words 'coli Herculem,' by whom pro
bably Bama is meant (Priaulx p. 116).
From this and other statements it
appears that tbey were Tamils and
not Singalese, and thus belonged to
tbe non-Buddhist part of the island;
see Priaulx p. 91 sq.

394 THE ESSENES.
four steps of Buddhism. Against this it might fairly be argued
that such coincidences of numbers are often purely accidental,
and that in the present instance there is no more reason for con
necting the four steps of Buddhism with the four orders of Essenism
than there would be for connecting the ten precepts of Buddha
with the Ten Commandments of Moses. But indeed a nearer
examination will show that the two have nothing whatever in
common except the number. The four steps or paths of Buddhism
are not four grades of an external order, but four degrees of spiritual
progress on the way to nirvana or annihilation, the ultimate goal
of the Buddhist's religious aspirations. They are wholly uncon
nected with the Buddhist monastic system, as an organization.
A reference to the Buddhist notices collected in Hardy's Eastern
Monachism (p. 280 sq.) will at once dispel any suspicion of a
resemblance. A man may attain to the highest of these four stages
of Buddhist illumination instantaneously. He does not need to
have passed through the lower grades, but may even be a layman
at the time. Some merit obtained in a previous state of existence
may raise him per saltum to the elevation of a rahat, when all
earthly desires are crushed and no future birth stands between him
and nirvana. There remains therefore no coincidence which would
suggest any historical connexion between Essenism and Buddhism.
Buddhist Indeed it is not till some centuries later, when Manicheism1 starts
seen firsf8 'n*° being, that we find for the first time any traces of the influence
in Mani- 0f Buddhism on the religions of the West2.
cheism. 1 Even its influence on Manicheism cessorsof Alexander, bywhichreligious
however is disputed in a learned article freedom was secured for the Buddhists
in the Home and Foreign Review in. throughout their dominions. If this
p. 143 sq. (1863), by Mr P. Le Page interpretation had been correct, we
Benouf (see Academy 1873, p. 399). must bave supposed that, so far as
2 An extant inscription, containing regards Egypt and Western Asia, tbe
an edict of tbe great Buddhist king treaty remained a dead letter. But
Asoka and dating about the middle of later critics bave rejected this interpre-
the 3rd century b.c, was explained by tation of its purport : see Thomas's
Prinsep as recording a treaty of this edition of Prinsep's Essays on Indian
monarch with Ptolemy and other sue- Antiquities 11. p. 18 sq.

III.
ESSENISM AND CHRISTIANITY.
TT has become a common practice with a certain class of writers to Tbe theory
-¦-call Essenism to their aid in accounting for any distinctive features Z^ ex"
of Christianity, which they are unable to explain in any other Christi-
,___ tttt. -, anity as an
way. Wherever some external power is needed to solve a perplexity, outgrowth
here is the deus ex machina whose aid they most readily invoke. ?f Bssen-
Constant repetition is sure to produce its effect, and probably not a
few persons, who want either the leisure or the opportunity to
investigate the subject for themselves, have a lurking suspicion
that the Founder of Christianity may have been an Essene, or at
all events that Christianity was largely indebted to Essenism for its
doctrinal and ethical teaching1. Indeed, when very confident and
sweeping assertions are made, it is natural to presume that they
rest on a substantial basis of fact. Thus for instance we are told by
one writer that Christianity is ' Essenism alloyed with foreign ele-
ments'2: while another, who however approaches the subject in a
different spirit, says ; ' It will hardly be doubted that our Saviour
himself belonged to this holy brotherhood. This will especially be
apparent, when we remember that the whole Jewish community at
the advent of Christ was divided into three parties, the Pharisees,
the Sadducees, and the Essenes, and that every Jew had to belong to
one of these sects. Jesus who in all things conformed to the Jewish
law, and who was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from
sinners, would therefore naturally associate Himself with that order
1 De Quincey's attempt to prove ceived in a wholly different spirit from
that tbe Essenes were actually Chris- tbe theories of the writers mentioned
tians (Works vi. p. 270 sq., ix. p. 253 in the text; but it is even more un-
sq.), who used tbe machinery of an tenable and does not deserve serious
esoteric society to inculcate their doc- refutation.
trines ' for fear of the Jews,' is con- 2 Gratz in. p. 217.

396 THE ESSENES.
tested by of Judaism which was most congenial to His nature '.' I purpose
testing these strong assertions by an appeal to facts.
Our Lord For the statements involved in those words of the last extract
bave be- which I have underlined, no authority is given by the writer him-
longed to self • n0T have I been able to find confirmation of them in any
any sect. quarter. On the contrary the frequent allusions which we find to
the vulgar herd, the ISibrrai, the £om haarets, who are distinguished
from the disciples of the schools2, suggest that a large proportion of
the people was unattached to any sect. If it had been otherwise, we
might reasonably presume that our Lord, as one who ' in all things
conformed to the Jewish law,' would have preferred attaching Him
self to the Pharisees who ' sat in Moses' seat' and whose precepts
He recommended His disciples to obey d, rather than to the Essenes
who in one important respect at least — the repudiation of the temple
sacrifices — acted in flagrant violation of the Mosaic ordinances.
Tbe argu- This preliminary barrier being removed, we are free to investi-
thTsuence Sa*e *'ne eyidence for their presumed connexion. And here we are
of tbe New met first with a negative argument, which obviously has great
ment an- weight with many persons. Why, it is asked, does Jesus, who so
unsparingly denounces the vices and the falsehoods of Pharisees and
Sadducees, never once mention the Essenes by way of condemnation,
or indeed mention them by name at all? Why, except that He
Himself belonged to this sect and looked favourably on their
teaching 1 This question is best answered by another. How can
we explain the fact, that throughout the enormous mass of tal
mudical and early rabbinical literature this sect is not once men
tioned by name, and that even the supposed allusions to them, which
have been discovered for the first time in the present century, turn
out on investigation to be hypothetical and illusory 1 The difficulty
is much greater in this latter instance ; but the answer is the same
in both cases. The silence is explained by the comparative insig
nificance of the sect, their small numbers and their retired habits.
Their settlements were far removed from the great centres of pohtical
and religious life. Their recluse habits, as a rule, prevented them
from interfering in the common business of the world. Philo and
Josephus have given prominence to them, because their ascetic
1 Ginsburg Essenes p. 24. > Matt, xxiii. 2, 3.
! See above, p. 364.

swered.

THE ESSENES. 397
practices invested them with the character of philosophers and
interested the Greeks and Romans in their history; but in the
national hfe of the Jews they bore a very insignificant part1. If the
Sadducees, who held the highest offices in the hierarchy, are only
mentioned directly on three occasions in the Gospels 2, it can be no
surprise that the Essenes are not named at all.
As no stress therefore can be laid on the argument from silence, Tbe posi-
any hypothesis of connexion between Essenism and Christianity mentefor
must make good its claims by establishing one or both of these two a oonnex-
. , j. ,, , ... , . . , ion may be
points : Jirst, that there is direct historical evidence of close inter- twofold.
course between the two; and secondly, that the resemblances of
doctrine and practice are so striking as to oblige, or at least to
warrant, the belief in such a connexion. If both these lines of
argument fail, the case must be considered to have broken down
i. On the former point it must be premised that the Gospel i. Absence
narrative does not suggest any hint of a connexion. Indeed its general historical
tenor is directly adverse to such a supposition. From first to last evidenceof a con-
Jesus and His disciples move about freely, taking part in the nexion.
common business, even in the common recreations, of Jewish life.
The recluse ascetic brotherhood, which was gathered about the shores
of the Dead Sea, does not once appear above the Evangelists' horizon.
Of this close society, as such, there is not the faintest indication.
But two individuals have been singled out, as holding an important Two indi-
place either in the Evangelical narrative or in the Apostolic Church, oases ai_
who, it is contended, form direct and personal links of communi- lesed.
cation with this sect. These are John the Baptist and James the
Lord's brother. The one is the forerunner of the Gospel, the first

1 This fact is fully recognised by is so imperfect and has no chance of
several recent writers, who will not be being extended, the greatest prudence
suspected of any undue bias towards is required of science, if she prefers to
traditional views of Christian history. be true rather than adventurous, if she
Thus Lipsius writes (p. 190), 'In the has at heart rather to enlighten than to
general development of Jewish life surprise ' (p. 461). Even Gratz in one
Essenism occupies a far more sub- passage can write soberly on this sub
ordinate place than is commonly ject : ' The Essenes had throughout
ascribed to it.' And Keim expresses no influence on political movements,
himself to the same effect (1. p. 305). from which they held aloof as far as
Derenbourg also, after using similar possible ' (m. p. 86).
language, adds this wise caution, ' In 2 These are (1) Matt. iii. 7 ; (2)
any case, in the present state of our Matt. xvi. 1 sq. ; (3) Matt. xxii. 23 sq.,
acquaintance with the Essenes, which Mark xii. 18, Luke xx. 27.

398 THE ESSENES.
herald of the Kingdom; the other is the most prominent figure in the
early Church of Jerusalem.
(i) John (i) John the Baptist was an ascetic. His abode was the desert ;
tis^ ap~ his clothing was rough; his food was spare; he baptized his
penitents. Therefore, it is argued, he was an Essene. Between the
premisses and the conclusion however there is a broad gulf, which can
not very easily be bridged over. The solitary independent life, which
not an Es- John led, presents a type wholly different from the cenobitic esta
blishments of the Essenes, who had common property, common
meals, common hours of labour and of prayer. It may even be
questioned whether his food of locusts would have been permitted
by the Essenes, if they really ate nothing which had life (efiipvxov '),
And again; his baptism as narrated by the Evangehsts, and their
lustrations as described by Josephus, have nothing in common except
the use of water for a religious purpose. When therefore we are
told confidently that ' his manner of life was altogether after the
Essene pattern2,' and that 'he without doubt baptized his converts
into the Essene order,' we know what value to attach to this bold
assertion. If positive statements are allowable, it would be more
true to fact to say that he could not possibly have been an Essene.
The rule of his life was isolation; the principle of theirs, community3.
External In this mode of life John was not singular. It would appear
blances to *^at not a few devout Jews at this time retired from the world and
John in buried themselves in the wilderness, that they might devote them
selves unmolested to ascetic discipline and religious meditation.
One such instance at all events we have in Banus the master of
Josephus, with whom the Jewish historian, when a youth, spent
three years in the desert. This anchorite was clothed in garments
made of bark or of leaves ; his food was the natural produce of the
earth ; he bathed day and night in cold water for purposes of
purification. To the careless observer doubtless John and Banus
would appear to be men of the same stamp. In their outward mode
of life there was perhaps not very much difference 4. The conscious-
1 See above p. 84. Banus as representing an extravagant
2 Gratz in. p. 100. development of the school of John,
3 rd xotvavijrixbv, Joseph. B. J. ii. and thus supplying a Unk between the
8. 3. See also Philo Fragm. 632 brrip real teaching of tbe Baptist and tbe
rod xoivwipeXovs, and tbe context. doctrine of the Hemerobaptists pro-
4 Ewald (vi. p. 649) regards this fessing to be derived from bim.

Banus,

THE ESSENES. 399
ness of a divino mission, the gift of a prophetic insight, in John was
the real and all-important distinction between the two. But here who wah
also the same mistake is made ; and we not uncommonly find Banus 5j aD
described as an Essene. It is not too much to say however, that the
whole tenor of Josephus' narrative is opposed to this supposition1.
He says that when sixteen years old he desired to acquire a know
ledge of the three sects of the Jews before making his choice of one ;
that accordingly he went through (SiiJAeW) all the three at the cost
of much rough discipline and toil ; that he was not satisfied with the
experience thus gained, and hearing of this Banus he attached
himself to bim as his zealous disciple (^ijXcddJ? eyevdaijv avrov) ; that
having remained three years with him he returned to Jerusalem ;
and that then, being nineteen years old, he gave in his adhesion to
the sect of the Pharisees. Thus there is no more reason for con
necting this Banus with the Essenes than with the Pharisees. The
only natural interpretation of the narrative is that he did not belong
to any of the three sects, but represented a distinct type of religious
life, of which Josephus was anxious to gain experience. And his
hermit life seems to demand this solution, which the sequence of the
narrative suggests.
Of John himself therefore no traits are handed down which General
suggest that he was a member of the Essene community. He was an
ascetic, and the Essenes were ascetics ; but this is plainly an inade
quate basis for any such inference. Nor indeed is the relation of his
asceticism to theirs a question of much moment for the matter in
hand ; since this was the very point in which Christ's mode of life
was so essentially different from John's as to provoke criticism
and to point a contrast 2. But the later history of his real or sup
posed disciples has, or may seem to have, some bearing on this
1 Tbe passage is so important that Siarpifleiv, io-Brj-ri piv dirb SivSpav xpu-
I give it in full; Joseph. Vit. i irepl pevov, rpotpijv Si rijv airopdrws tpvopevrjv
ixxalSexa Si errj yevbpevos ipovXTJ8ijv twv irpotrtpepbpevov, spvxpv bi vSan rijv rjpi-
irap' rjpiv alpiaewv ipireiplav Xafielv. pav xal Tijv vixra iroXXdxis Xovbpevov
rpeis 6" elalv avrai- ^apmalwv piv ij irpbs dyvelav, ftjXarijs iyevbprjv airov.
irpwrv, xal XaSSovxalwv r, Sevripa, rplrv xal Siarplsfias irap' abr$ iviavrobs rpeis
Si ij "Etstjijvwv, xaBws iroXXdxis elirapev. xal tijv iiriBvplav reXeubaas els rijv irbXiv
ovrws yap ipbpijv alpijaeaBai r*<v dplarrjv, viriffrpecpov. ivveaxalSexa S' trrj fya?
el irdaas xarapABoipi. o-xXijpaywyijiras rjpidpijv re rcoXneieaBai rij iapiaalwv
vofix ipavrbv xal iroXXd irovrjBels rds rpeis alpiaei xaraxoXovBwv x.t.X.
SirjXBov. xal pijSi tijv ivreOBev ipiret- 2 Matt. ix. 14 sq., xi. 17 sq., Mark
piav Ixavtjv ipavrip vopXaas elvai, irvBb- ii. 18 sq., Luke v. 33, vii. 31 sq.
uevbs riva BavoSv 6vopa (card, rijv ipijplav

400 THE ESSENES.
investigation. Towards the close of the first and the beginning
of the second century we meet with a body of sectarians called
TheHeme- in Greek Hemerobaptists 1, in Hebrew Toble-shacharith 2, ' day ' or
ro ap is s. , mornmg bathers.' What were their relations to John the Baptist
on the one hand, and to the Essenes on the other? Owing to
the scantiness of our information the whole subject is wrapped in
obscurity, and any restoration of their history must be more or
less hypothetical ; but it will be possible at all events to suggest
an account which is not improbable in itself, and which does no
violence to the extant notices of the sect.
(a) Their (a) We must not hastily conclude, when we meet with certain
John the ° Persons a* Ephesus about the years a.d. 53, 54, who are described
Baptist, as ' knowing only the baptism of John,' or as having been ' baptized
unto John's baptism8,' that we have here some early representatives
John's dis- of the Hemerobaptist sect. These were Christians, though imperfectly
ciples at inforlned Christians. Of Apollos, who was more fully instructed by
Aquila and Priscilla, this is stated in the most explicit terms 4. Of
the rest, who owed their fuller knowledge of the Gospel to St Paul,
the same appears to be implied, though the language is not free from
ambiguity6. But these notices have an important bearing on our
subject ; for they show how profoundly the effect of John's preaching
was felt in districts as remote as proconsular Asia, even after a lapse
of a quarter of a century. With these disciples it was the initial
1 The word ijpejiopatrrnsral is gene- or with the Talmudical anecdote of
rally taken to mean ' daily-bathers,' them quoted above, p. 367. Of Banus
and this meaning is suggested by Apost. he reports (Vit. 2) that he 'bathed
Const, vi. 6 o'lrives, xaB' ixdo-rrjv rjpipav often day and night in cold water.'
idv pi) i3airrlawvrai, oix iaBlovutv, ib. 23 2 See above, p. 366 sq.
dvrl xaBijpepivov iv pivov Sobs pdimo-pa, 3 The former expression is used of
Epiphan. Haer. xvii. 1 (p. 37) el prj ti Apollos, Acts xviii. 24; tbe latter of
dpa xa.8' ixdo-Tijv i)pipav paTTlfotrb tis ' certain disciples,' Aots xix. 1.
iv vSan. But, if the word is intended 4 This appears from the whole nar-
as a translation of Toble-shacharith rative, but is distinctly stated in ver.
'morning bathers,' as it seems to be, 25, as correctly read, iSloaaxev d/cpi/ScSj
it must signify rather ' day-bathers ' ; rd irepl tov 'Iijaov, not rov xvpiov as in
and this is more in accordance with the received text.
the analogy of other compounds from 6 The irio-reio-avres in xix. 1 is slightly
rjpipa, as i)pepbpios, ijuepoSpbpos, ijpepo- ambiguous, and some expressions in
axbiros, etc. the passage might suggest tbe oppo-
Josephus (JS. J. ii. 8. 5) represents site : but pjaBiyrds seems decisive, for
the Essenes as bathing, not at dawn, tbe word would not be used absolutely
but at tbe fifth hour, just before their except of Christian disciples ; comp.
meal. This is hardly consistent either vi. 1, 2, 7, ix. 10, 19, 26, 38, and fre-
with tbe name of the Toble-shacharith, quently.

THE ESSENES. 401
impulse towards Christianity ; but to others it represented a widely
different form of belief and practice. The Gospel of St John was Professed
• • f 0II0W6FS
written, according to all tradition, at Ephesus in the later years of at a jater
the first century. Again and again the Evangelist impresses on his date.
readers, either directly by his own comments or indirectly by the
course of the narrative, the transient and subordinate character of
John's ministry. He was not the light, says the Evangelist, but
came to bear witness of the hght1. He was not the sun in the
heavens : he was only the waning lamp, which shines when kindled
from without and burns itself away in shining. His light might well
gladden the Jews while it lasted, but this was only ' for a season '.'
John himself lost no opportunity of bearing his testimony to the
loftier claims of Jesus s. From such notices it is plain that in the
interval between the preaching of St Paul and the Gospel of St
John the memory of the Baptist at Ephesus had assumed a new
attitude towards Christianity. His name is no longer the sign of
imperfect appreciation, but the watchword of direct antagonism.
John had been set up as a rival Messiah to Jesus. In other
words, this Gospel indicates the spread of Hemerobaptist principles,
if not the presence of a Hemerobaptist community, in proconsular
Asia, when it was written. In two respects these Hemerobaptists
distorted the facts of history. They perverted John's teaching, and The facts
of history
they misrepresented his office. His baptism was no more a single distorted
rite, once performed and initiating an amendment of life ; it was a ^ them'
daily recurrence atoning for sin and sanctifying the person4. He
1 Tonri j_ g, result conditional upon the first, see
a John v. 35 ixeivos rjv 6 Xbxyos b 1 Pet. ii. 20 el dpaprdvovres xal /coXa-
xaibpevos xal tpalvwv x.t.X. Tbe word tpqbpevot biropeveire...el ayaBoirotoSvres
xaleiv is not only 'to burn', but not xal irdaxovres inropeveiTe, 1 Thess. iv. 1
unfrequently also 'to kindle, to set on iras Set irepiirareiv xal dpicrxeiv GecJ.
fire', as e.g. Xen. Anab. iv. 4. 12 ol 3 See John i. 15—34, m- 23—30,
cSXXoc dvacrrdvres irvp ixaiov; so that 6 v. 33 sq.: comp. x. 41, 42. This
xaibpevos may mean either 'which aspect of St John's Gospel bas been
burns away ' or ' which is lighted '- brought out by Ewald Jahrb. der Bibl.
With the former meaning it would de- Wissensch. in. p. 156 sq. ; see also
note tbe transitoriness, with the latter Geschichte vn. p. 152 sq., die Johan-
the derivative character, of John's neischen Schriften p. 13. There is
ministry. There seems no reason for perhaps an allusion to these ' disciples
excluding either idea here. Thus the of John ' in 1 Job. v. 6 oix iv rip iiSart
whole expression would mean 'the pbvov, dXX' iv ry vSan xal iv rip a'lpari-
lamp which is kindled and burns away, xal rb irvevpa x.t.X.; comp. Acts 1. 5,
and (only so) gives light '. For an ex- xi. 16, xix. 4.
ample of two verbs or participles joined * Apost. Const, vi. 6; comp. § 23.
together, where the second describes a See p. 400, note 1.
COL. 26

402

Spread of
Hemerobaptist principles,

A wrong
use made
of John's
name.

THE ESSENES.
himself was no longer the forerunner of the Messiah ; he was the
very Messiah1. In the latter half of the first century, it would
seem, there was a great movement among large numbers of the
Jews in favour of frequent baptism, as the one purificatory rite
essential to salvation. Of this superstition we have had an instance
already in the anchorite Banus to whom Josephus attached himself
as a disciple. Its presence in the western districts of Asia Minor
is shown by a Sibylline poem, dating about a. d. 80, which I have
already had occasion to quote2. Some years earlier these sectarians
are mentioned by name as opposing James the Lord's brother and
the Twelve at Jerusalem s. Nor is there any reason for questioning
their existence as a sect in Palestine during the later years of the
Apostolic age, though the source from which our information comes
is legendary, and the story itself a fabrication. But when or how
they first connected themselves with the name of John the Baptist,
and whether this assumption was made by all alike or only by one
section of them, we do not know. Such a connexion, however false
to history, was obvious and natural ; nor would it be difficult to
accumulate parallels to this false appropriation of an honoured name.
Baptism was the fundamental article of their creed ; and John was
the Baptist of world-wide fame. Nothing more than this was
needed for the choice of an eponym. From St John's Gospel
it seems clear that this appropriation was already contemplated,
if not completed, at Ephesus before the first century had drawn
to a close. In the second century the assumption is recognised
as a characteristic of these Hemerobaptists, or Baptists, as they are
once called4, alike by those who allow and those who deny its

1 Clem. Recogn. i. 54 ' ex discipulis
Johannis, qui... magistrum suum veluti
Christum praedicarunt,' ib. § 60 'Ecce
unus ex discipulis Johannis adfirmabat
Christum Johannem fuisse, et non Je
sum; in tantum, inquit, ut et ipse
Jesus omnibus hominibus et propbetis
majorem esse pronuntiaverit Johan
nem etc. ' ; see also § 63.
2 See above, p. 94.
8 Clem. Recogn. 1. t. This portion
of the Clementine Recognitions is ap
parently taken from an older Judaizing
romance, the Ascents of James (see

Galatians pp. 330, 367). Hegesippus
also (in Euseb. H. E. iv. 22) mentions
the Hemerobaptists in his list of Jewish
sects; and it is not improbable that
this list was given as an introduction
to bis account of tbe labours and mar
tyrdom of St James (see Euseb. H. E.
ii. 23). If so, it was probably derived
from the same source as tbe notice in
the Recognitions
4 They are called Baptists by Justin
Mart. Dial. 10, p. 307 a. He mentions
them among other Jewish sects, with
out however alluding to John.

THE ESSENES.

403

justice1. Even in our age the name of 'John's disciples' has been
given, though wrongly given, to an obscure sect in Babylonia, the
Mandeans, whose doctrine and practice have some affinities to the
older sect, and of whom perhaps they are the collateral, if not the
direct, descendants".
(6) Of the connexion between this sect and John the Baptist (&) Their
we have been able to give a probable, though necessarily hypothe- to the01"
tical account But when we attempt to determine its relation to Esseues-
the Essenes, we find ourselves entangled in a hopeless mesh of
perplexities. The notices are so confused, the affinities so subtle,
the ramifications so numerous, that it becomes a desperate task to
distinguish and classify these abnormal Jewish and Judaizing heresies.
One fact however seems clear that, whatever affinities they may have
had originally, and whatever relations they may have contracted They were
at first

1 By tbe author of the Recognitions
(1. c.) who denies the claim; and by
the author of the Homilies (see below,
p. 404, note 3), who allows it.
a These Mandeans are a rapidly di
minishing sect living in tbe region
about the Tigris and the Euphrates,
south of Bagdad. Our most exact
knowledge of tbem is derived from
Petermann (Herzog's ReaUEncyklo-
piidie s. w. Mendaer, Zabier, and
Deutsche Zeitschrift 1854 p. 181 sq.,
1856 P- 33' s1-> 34^ sq., 363 sq., 386 sq.)
who bas had personal intercourse
with them; and from Chwolson (die
Ssabier u. der Ssabismus 1. p. 100 sq.)
who bas investigated the Arabic autho
rities for their earlier history. The
names by which they are known a»e
(1) Mendeans, or more properly Man
deans, RW"UD Mondays, contracted
from WIT! KTJD Manda dechaye 'tbe
word of life.' This is their own name
among themselves, and points to their
Gnostic pretentions. (2) Sabeans, Tsa-
biyun, possibly from tbe root JDV ' to
dip' on account of their frequent lus
trations (Chwolson 1. p. no; but see
Galatians p. 325), though this is
not tbe derivation of the word which
tbey themselves adopt, and other ety
mologies have found favour with some
recent writers (see Petermann Herzog's
Real-Encykl. Suppl. xviii. p. 342 s. v.

Zabier). This is tbe name by which
tbey are known in the Koran and in
Arabic writers, and by which they call
themselves when speaking to others.
(3) Nasoreans, K'HIVi Natsoraye.
This term is at present confined to
those among them who are dis
tinguished in knowledge or in business.
(4) 'Christians of St John, or Disci
ples of St John' (i.e. tbe Baptist;.
This name is not known among them
selves, and was incorrectly given to
them by European travellers and mis
sionaries. At the same time John tbe
Baptist has a very prominent place in
their theological system, as the one
true prophet. On the other band
they are not Christians in any sense.
These Mandeans, the true Sabeans,
must not be confused with the false
Sabeans, polytheists and star-wor
shippers, whose locality is Northern
Mesopotamia. Chwolson (1. p. 139 sq.)
has shown that these last adopted tbe
name in tbe 9th century to escape
persecution from tbe Mohammedans,
because in the Koran the Sabeans, as
monotheists, are ranged with tbe Jews
and Christians, and viewed in a more
favourable light than polytheists. The
name however bas generally been ap
plied in modern times to the false
rather than to the true Sabeans.

26-

404 distinct, if not anta
gonistic.

But after
tbe de
structionof the
Temple

THE ESSENES.
afterwards with one another, the Hemerobaptists, properly speaking,
were not Essenes. The Sibylline poem which may be regarded as
in some respects a Hemerobaptist manifesto contains, as we saw,
many traits inconsistent with pure Essenism '. In two several accounts,
the memoirs of Hegesippus and the Apostolic Constitutions, the
Hemerobaptists are expressly distinguished from the Essenes2. In an
early production of Judaic Christianity, whose Judaism has a strong
Essene tinge, the Clementine Homilies, they and their eponym are
condemned in the strongest language. The system of syzygies, or
pairs of opposites, is a favourite doctrine of this work, and in these
John stands contrasted to Jesus, as Simon Magus to Simon Peter, as
the false to the true; for according to this author's philosophy
of history the manifestation of the false always precedes the mani
festation of the true3. And again, Epiphanius speaks of them as
agreeing substantially in their doctrines, not with the Essenes, but
with the Scribes and Pharisees4. His authority on such a point
may be worth very little ; but connected with other notices, it should
not be passed over in silence. Yet, whatever may have been their
differences, the Hemerobaptists and the Essenes had one point of
direct contact, their belief in the moral efficacy of lustrations. When
the temple and polity were destroyed, the shock vibrated through
the whole fabric of Judaism, loosening and breaking up existing
societies, and preparing the way for new combinations. More es
pecially the cessation of the sacrificial rites must have produced
a profound effect equally on those who, like the Essenes, had con
demned them already, and on those who, as possibly was the case

1 See p. 94 sq.
2 Hegesipp. in Euseb. H. E. iv. 22,
Apost. Const, vi. 6. So also tbe
Pseudo-Hieronymus in the Indiculus
de Haeresibue (Corp. Haeres. 1. p. 283,
ed. Oehler).
3 Clem. Hom. ii. 23 'ludvvrjs tis
iyivero ^jpepofiairriGTijs, 6s xal tov xv
piov ijpwv 'Iijirov xard rbv rijs trvfvylas
Xbyov iyivero irpboSos. It is then
stated that, as Christ had twelve lead
ing disciples, so John bad thirty.
This, it is argued, was a providential
dispensation — the one number repre
sents the solar, the other tbe lunar
period ; and so tbey illustrate another

point in this writer's theory, that in
tbe syzygies the true and tbe false are
tbe male, and female principle respect
ively. Among these 30 disciples he
places Simon Magus. With this the
doctrine of the Mandeans stands in
direct opposition. They too have their
syzygies, but John with them repre
sents the true principle.
4 Haer. xvii. 1 (p. 37) fcra tc3v ypap-
pariwv xal $apiffalwv tppovovira. But
be adds that tbey resemble tbe Sad
ducees ' not only in tbe matter of tbe
resurrection of the dead, but also
in tbeir unbelief and in the other
points.'

THE ESSENES.

405

with the Hemerobaptists, had hitherto remained true to the orthodox
ritual. One grave obstacle to friendly overtures was thus removed ;
and a fusion, more or less complete, may have been the consequence.
At all events the relations of the Jewish sects must have been there may
materially affected by this great national crisis, as indeed we know to 7*? e been
have been the case. In the confusion which follows, it is impossible
to attain any clear view of their history. At the beginning of the
second century however this pseudo-baptist movement received a fresh
impulse from the pretended revelation of Elchasai, which came from
the farther East1. Henceforth Elchasai is the prominent name in
the history of those Jewish and Judaizing sects whose proper home
is east of the Jordan5, and who appear to have reproduced, with
various modifications derived from Christian and Heathen sources,
the Gnostic theology and the pseudo-baptist ritual of their Essene
predecessors. It is still preserved in the records of the only extant
people who have any claim to be regarded as the religious heirs of the
Essenes. Elchasai is regarded as the founder ofthe sect of Mandeans8.
(ii) But, if great weight has been attached to the supposed (ii) James
connexion of John tbe Baptist with the Essenes, the case of James the 3^^^
Lord's brother has been alleged with still more confidence. Here,
it is said, we have an indisputable Essene connected by the closest
family ties with the Founder of Christianity. James is reported to invested
have been holy from his birth; to have drunk no wine nor strong ^ne ch^_
drink : to have eaten no flesh ; to have allowed no razor to touch his racteris- tics.
head, no oil to anoint his body; to have abstained from using the
bath; and lastly to have worn no wool, but only fine linen4. Here
we have a description of Nazarite practices at least and (must it not
be granted) of Essene tendencies also.
But what is our authority for this description ? The writer, from
whom the account is immediately taken, is the Jewish-Christian his-
1 See Galatians p. 324 sq. on this pies, the male and female. This no-
Book of Elchasai. tice, as far as it goes, agrees with the
s See above, p. 372. account of Elchasai or Elxai in Hip-
s See Chwolson 1. p. 112 sq., 11. polytus (Haer. ix. 13 sq.) and Epipba-
P-543s1- TheArabiewriterEn-Nedim, nius (Haer. xix. 1 sq.). But tbe deri-
who lived towards tbe close of tbe vation of tbe name Elchasai given by
tenth century, says that tbe founder Epiphanius (Haer. xix. 2) Sivapis xexa-
of the Sabeans (i.e. Mandeans) was Xiw&)j ('D3 S'll) is different and pro-
EUhasaich ( -w^l) who taught bably correct (see Galatians p. 325).
V^- ' * Hegesippus in Euseb. H.E. ii. 23.
the doctrine of two coordinate princi-

406

THE ESSENES.

But the
account
comes from
untrust worthysources.

torian Hegesippus, who flourished about a.d. 170. He cannot there
fore have been an eye-witness of the facts which he relates. And
his whole narrative betrays its legendary character. Thus his account
of James's death, which follows immediately on this description, is
highly improbable and melodramatic in itself, and directly con
tradicts the contemporary notice of Josephus in its main facts1.
From whatever source therefore Hegesippus may have derived his
information, it is wholly untrustworthy. Nor can we doubt that he
was indebted to one of those romances with which the Judaizing
Christians of Essene tendencies loved to gratify the natural curiosity of
their disciples respecting the first founders of the Church*. In hke
manner Essene portraits are elsewhere preserved ofthe Apostles Peter3
and Matthew4 which represent them as living on a spare diet of
herbs and berries. I believe also that I have elsewhere pointed out
the true source of this description in Hegesippus, and that it is taken
from the 'Ascents of James6,' a Judaeo-Christian work stamped,
as we happen to know, with the most distinctive Essene features"
But if we turn from these religious novels of Judaic Christianity
to earlier and more trustworthy sources of information — to the
No Essene Gospels or the Acts or the Epistles of St Paul — we fail to discover
features in ^e faintest traces of Essenism in James. ' The historical James.'
the true '
says a recent writer, ' shows Pharisaic but not Essene sympathies V
This is true of James, as it is true of the early disciples in the mother
Church of Jerusalem generally. The temple-ritual, the daily sacrifices,
suggested no scruples to them. The only distinction of meats, which
they recognised, was the distinction of animals clean and unclean as
laid down by the Mosaic law. The only sacrificial victims, which
they abhorred, were victims offered to idols. They took their part in
the rehgious offices, and mixed freely in the common life, of their
fellow-Israelites, distinguished from them only in this, that to their
Hebrew inheritance they superadded the knowledge of a higher truth
1 See Galatians p. 366 sq.
2 See Galatians p. 324.
3 Clem. Hom. xii. 6, where St Peter
is made to say tLprw pbvw xal iXalais
Xfiwpai, xal airavlws Xaxdvois ; comp.
XV. 7 vSaros pbvov xal dprov.
1 Clem. Alex. Paedag. ii. 1 (p. 174)
ffireppdrwv xal dxpoSpiwv xal Xax^wi*
&vev xpewv pereXdpfiavev.
5 See Galatians p. 367, note.

portraitsof James
or of tbe
earliestdisciples.

6 Epiphanius (Haer. xxx. 16) men
tions two points especially, in which
the character of this work is shown :
(1) It represented James as condemn
ing the sacrifices and tbe fire on the
altar (see above, pp. 371 — 373): (2) It
published the most unfounded calum
nies against St Paul.
7 Lipsius, Schenkel's Bibel-Lexicon,
p. 191.

THE ESSENES. 407
and the joy of a better hope. It was altogether within the sphere of
orthodox Judaism that the Jewish element in the Christian brother
hood found its scope. Essene peculiarities are the objects neither
of sympathy nor of antipathy. In the history of the infant Church
for the first quarter of a century Essenism is as though it were not.
But a time came, when all this was changed. Even as early as the Essene
year 58, when St Paul wrote to the Romans, we detect practices in the u?fluen°ea
Christian community ofthe metropolis, which may possibly have been fore tbe
due to Essene influences1. Five or six years later, the heretical the Apo-
teaching which threatened the integrity of the Gospel at Colossae stoll° a8e-
shows that this type of Judaism was already strong enough within
the Church to exert a dangerous influence on its doctrinal purity.
Then came the great convulsion — the overthrow of the Jewish polity
and nation. This was the turning-point in the relations between
Essenism and Christianity, at least in Palestine. The Essenes were Conse-
extreme sufferers in the Roman war of extermination. It seems juences^ °*
the Jewish
probable that their organization was entirely broken up. Thus cast war.
adrift, they were free to enter into other combinations, while the
shock of the recent catastrophe would naturally turn their thoughts
into new channels. At the same time the nearer proximity of the
Christians, who had migrated to Peraea during the war, would bring
them into close contact with the new faith and subject them to its
influences, as they had never been subjected before2. But, whatever
may be the explanation, the fact seems certain, that after the destruc
tion of Jerusalem the Christian body was largely reinforced from their
ranks. The Judaizing tendencies among the Hebrew Christians, which
hitherto had been wholly Pharisaic, are henceforth largely Essene.
2. If then history fails to reveal any such external connexion 2. Do the
with Essenism in Christ and His Apostles as to justify the opinion jj^j,
that Essene influences contributed largely to the characteristic features favour the
theory of
of the Gospel, such a view, if tenable at all, must find its support in a con-
some striking coincidence between the doctrines and practices of the nexl0n*
Essenes and those which its Founder stamped upon Christianity.
This indeed is the really important point ; for without it the external
connexion, even if proved, would be valueless. The question is
not whether Christianity arose amid such and such circumstances,
but how far it was created and moulded by those circumstances.
1 Rom. xiv. 2, 21. a See Galatians p. 322 sq.

408 THE ESSENES.
(i) Observ- (i) Now one point which especially strikes us in the Jewish
aDP? of tne historian's account of the Essenes, is their strict observance of
sabbath. '
certain points in the Mosaic ceremonial law, more especially the
ultra-Pharisaic rigour with which they kept the sabbath. How far
their conduct in this respect was consistent with the teaching and
practice of Christ may be seen from the passages quoted in the
parallel columns which follow :

'Jesus went on the sabbath-day
through the corn fields ; and his disci
ples began to pluck tbe ears of corn and
to eat1  But when the Pharisees saw
it, they said unto him, 'Behold, thy
disciples do that which it is not lawful
to do upon tbe sabbath-day. But he
said unto them, Have ye not read what
David did... The sabbath was made
for man, and not man for the sabbath.
Therefore the Son of Man is Lord even
of the sabbath-day...'
' It is lawful to do well on the sab
bath-days ' (Matt. xii. i — 12; Mark ii.
23 — iii. 6; Luke vi. 1 — ii, xiv. 1 — 6.

'And they avoid... touching any work
(itpdirreo-Bai ipywv) on the sabbatb-day
more scrupulously than any of the Jews
(Siatpopwrara 'lovSalwv dirdvrwv)', for

1 Gratz (m. p. 233) considers this
narrative an interpolation made from
a Pauline point of view ('eine pau-
linistiscbe Tendenz -interpolation ').
This theory of interpolation, inter
posing wherever tbe evidence is unfa
vourable, cuts up all argument by the
roots. In this instance however Gratz
is consistently carrying out a princi
ple which he broadly lays down else
where. He regards it as the great
merit of Baur and bis school, that
tbey explained the origin of tbe Gos
pels by the conflict of two opposing
camps, tbe Ebionite and the Pauline.
' By this master-key,' be adds, ' criti
cism was first put in a position to test
what is historical in the Gospels, and
what bears tbe stamp of a polemical
tendency (was einen tendentiosen po-
lemischen Cbarakter bat). Indeed
by this means the element of trust
worthy history in the Gospels melts
down to a minimum ' (m. p. 224). In
other words the judgment is not to be
pronounced upon tbe evidence, but

tbe evidence must be mutilated to suit
tbe judgment. Tbe method is not new.
Tbe sectarians of tbe second century,
whether Judaic or anti-Judaic, had
severally their 'master-key.' The
master-key of Marcion was a conflict
also — the antagonism of the Old and
New Testaments. Under bis hands
the historical element in the New Tes
tament dissolved rapidly. The mas
ter-key of the anti-Marcionite writer
of the Clementine Homilies was like
wise a conflict, though of another
kind — tbe conflict of fire and water, of
the sacrificial and tbe baptismal sys
tems. Wherever sacrifice was men
tioned with approval, there was a
' Tendenz-interpolation ' (see above,
p. 370 sq.). In this manner again the
genuine element in the Old Testament
melted down to a minimum.
2 Gratz however (in. p. 228) sees a
coincidence between Christ's teaching
and Essenism in this notice. Not to
do him injustice, I will translate his
own words (correcting however several

THE ESSENES.

409

tbey do not venture so much as to move
a vessel", nor to perform the most ne
cessary offioes of life (B. J. ii. 8. 9).'

See also a similar incident in Luke
xiii. 10 — 17).
' The Jews therefore said unto him
that was oured ; It is tbe sabbath-day;
it is not lawful for thee to carry thy
bed. But he answered tbem, He that
made me whole, the same said unto
me, Take up thy bed and walk....
Therefore the Jews did perseoute Jesus
and sought to slay him, beoause he
did these things on the sabbath-day.
But Jesus answered them, My Father
worketh hitherto, and I work, etc.
(John v. 10 — 18 ; comp. vii 22, 23).'
'And it was the sabbath-day when
Jesus made the clay, and opened his
eyes  Therefore said some of the
Pharisees, This man is not of God, be
cause he keepeth not tbe sabbath-day
(Jobnix. 14, 16).'
(ii) But there were other points of ceremonial observance, in
which the Essenes superadded to the law. Of these the most re
markable was their practice of constant lustrations. In this respect
the Pharisee was sufficiently minute and scrupulous in his obser
vances ; but with the Essene these ablutions were the predominant
feature of his religious ritual Here again it will be instructive
to compare the practice of Christ and His disciples with the practice
of the Essenes.

(ii) Lus
trations and other
ceremo
nial ob
servances.

'And when they saw some of his
disciples eat bread with defiled (that
is to say, unwashen) hands; for the
Pharisees and all the Jews, except
tbey wash their bands oft (irvypij), eat
not... The Pharisees and scribes asked
him, Why walk not thy disciples ac
cording to the tradition of the elders
misprints in the Greek) : 'For the con
nexion of Jesus with tbe Essenes com
pare moreover Mark xi. 16 xal oix rjcpiev
6 'Iijo-ovs Xva ris Sieviyxij axevos Sid roC
lepov with Josephus B. J. ii. 8. 9 dXX
ovSi axevbs ti peraxairjaai Bappovaiv (ol
'Ecnrcuoc).' He does not explain what
this notice, which refers solely to the
scrupulous observance of the sabbath,
has to do with tbe profanation of the
temple, with which tbe passage in tbe

' So they wash their whole body
(diroXoiovrai rb trwpa) in cold water ;
and after this purification (dyvelav)...
being clean (xaBapol) they come to the
refectory (to dine)  And when they
have returned (from their day's work)
they sup in like manner (B. J. ii
8- 5)-'
Gospel is alone concerned. I have
seen Gratz's history described as a
' masterly ' work. The first requisites
in a historian are accuracy in stating
facts and sobriety in drawing infer
ences. Without these, it is difficult to
see what claims a history can bave to
this honourable epithet : and in those
portions of his work, which I have
consulted, I have not found either.

4io

THE ESSENES.

 But he answered. ..Te hypocrites,
laying aside tbe commandment of God,
ye hold the tradition of men....'
' Not that which goeth into the
mouth defileth the man ; but that
which cometh out of the mouth, this
defileth tbe man  Let them alone,
they be blind leaders of tbe blind...'
' To eat with unwashen hands de
fileth not the man (Matt. xv. i — 20,
Mark vii. 1 — 23).'

Avoidance of
strangers.

¦ 'After a year's probation (the novice)
is admitted to closer intercourse (717360--
etaiv ^yytov ry Sialr-rj), and tbe lustra!
waters in which he participates bave a
higher degree of purity (xal xaBapwri-
pwv twv irpbs dyvelav iSdrwv peraXapr
pdvet, § 7).'
' It is a custom to wash after it, as
if polluted by it (§9).'
'Backed and dislocated, burnt and
crushed, and subjected to every in
strument of torture ... to make tbem
eat strange food (re tc5k dcrwtjBwv)..
tbey were not induced to submit (§ 10);'
'Exercising themselves in. ..divers
lustrations (Siatpopois dyvetais...ipirai-
Sorpij3oipevot, § 12).'

' And when tbe Pharisee saw it, he
marvelled that he had not first washed
before dinner (tov dpltrrov). And the
Lord said unto him : Now do ye Pha
risees make clean the outside of tbe
cup and the platter. ..Ye fools... behold
all things are clean unto you (Luke
xi. 38—41).' Connected with this idea of external purity is the avoidance of
contact with strangers, as persons who would communicate cere
monial defilement. And here too the Essene went much beyond
the Pharisee. The Pharisee avoided Gentiles or aliens, or those
whose profession or character placed them in the category of
' sinners ' ; but the Essene shrunk even from the probationers and
inferior grades of his own exclusive community. Here again we
may profitably compare the sayings and doings of Christ with the
principles of this sect.
¦ And when the scribes and Phari
sees saw bim eat with the publicans
and sinners tbey said unto the disci
ples, Why eateth your Master with tbe
publicans and the sinners...' (Mark
ii. 13 sq., Mattb. ix. 10 sq., Luke v.
30 sq.).
'They say... a friend of publicans
and sinners (Mattb. xi. 19).'
' Tbe Pharisees and the scribes mur
mured, saying, This man receiveth
sinners and eateth with tbem (Luke
xv. 2).'
' They all murmured saying that he
was gone to be a guest with a man
that is a sinner (Luke xix. 7).'

'And after this purification they
assemble in a private room, where no
person of a different belief (rc3» irepo-
S6i)wv, i. e. not an Essene) is permitted
to enter ; and (so) being by themselves
and clean (airot xaBapol) they present
themselves at the refectory (Seiirviyrij-
piov), as if it were a sacred precinct
(§ 5)-'

THE ESSENES. 4H
'Behold, a woman in tbe city that 'And they are divided into four
was a sinner... began to wash bis feet grades according to the time passed
with ber tears, and did wipe them under tbe discipline: and tbe juniors
with the hairs of her head and kissed are regarded as so far inferior to tbe
his feet  Now when the Pharisee seniors, that, if they touch them, the
which bad bidden him saw it, he spake latter wash their bodies clean (diro-
witbin himself, saying, This man, if Xoieo-Bat), as if tbey bad oome in con-
he bad been a prophet, would bave tact with a foreigner (xaBdirep dXXo-
known who and what manner of wo- tpbXw avptpvpivras, § io).'
man this is that toucheth him ; for
she is a sinner (Luke vii. 37 sq.).'
In all these minute scruples relating to ceremonial observances,
the denunciations which are hurled against the Pharisees in the
Gospels would apply with tenfold foroe to the Essenes.
(iii) If the lustrations of the Essenes far outstripped the en- k^ Ae.
actments of the Mosaic law, so also did their asceticism. I have oetloism.
given reasons above for believing that this asceticism was founded on
a false principle, which postulates the malignity of matter and is
wholly inconsistent with the teaching of the Gospel \ But without
pressing this point, of which no absolutely demonstrative proof can be
given, it will be sufficient to call attention to the trenchant contrast
in practice which Essene habits present to the life of Christ. He
who ' came eating and drinking ' and was denounced in consequence Eating
as 'a glutton and a wine-bibber2,' He whose first exercise of power ?nd drink-
is recorded to have been the multiplication of wine at a festive enter
tainment, and whose last meal was attended with the drinking of
wine and the eating of flesh, could only have excited the pity, if not
the indignation, of these rigid abstainers. And again, attention
should be directed to another kind of abstinence, where the contrast
is all the more speaking, because the matter is so trivial and the
scruple so minute.
'My bead with oil thou didst not 'And tbey consider oil a pollution
anoint (Luke vii. 46).' (xVXiSa), and though one is smeared
'Thou, when tbou fastest, anoint thy involuntarily, be rubs his body clean
head (Matt. vi. 1 7).' (cr^ercu rb adpa, § 3).'
And yet it has been stated that 'the Saviour of the world 
showed what is required for a holy life in the Sermon on the Mount
by a description of the Essenes3.'
But much stress has been laid on the cehbacy of the Essenes;
1 See above, p. 85- 8 Matt. xi. 19, Luke vii. 34.
3 Ginsburg Essenes p. 14.

412 THE ESSENES.
Celibacy, and our Lord's saying in Matt. xix. 12 is quoted to establish an
identity of doctrine. Yet there is nothing special in the language
there used. Nor is there any close affinity between the stern
invectives against marriage which Josephus and Philo attribute to
the Essene, and the gentle concession ' He that is able to receive it,
let him receive it.' The best comment on our Lord's meaning here
is the advice of St Paul1, who was educated not in the Essene, but
in the Pharisaic school. Moreover this saying must be balanced by
the general tenour of the Gospel narrative. When we find Christ
discussing the relations of man and wife, gracing the marriage
festival by His presence, again and again employing wedding ban
quets and wedded life as apt symbols of the highest theological
truths, without a word of disparagement or rebuke, we see plainly
that we are confronted with a spirit very different from the narrow
rigour of the Essenes.
(iv) Avoid- (iy) But not only where the Essenes superadded to the cere-
ance of the moniai iaW) <joes their teaching present a direct contrast to the pheno-
sacrinces. mena of the Gospel narrative. The same is true also of those points
in which they fell short of the Mosaic enactments. I have already
discussed at some length the Essene abstention from the temple
sacrifices2. There can, I think, be little doubt that they objected to
the slaughter of sacrificial victims altogether. But for my present
purpose it matters nothing whether they avoided the temple on
account of the sacrifices, or the sacrifices on account of the temple.
Christ did neither. Certainly He could not have regarded the
temple as unholy; for His whole time during His sojourns at Jeru
salem was spent within its precincts. It was the scene of His
miracles, of His ministrations, of His daily teaching *. And in like
manner it is the common rendezvous of His disciples after Him4.
Nor again does He evince any abhorrence of the sacrifices. On the
contrary He says that the altar consecrates the gifts6; He charges
the cleansed lepers to go and fulfil the Mosaic ordinance and offer
the sacrificial offerings to the priests". And His practice also is
1 1 Cor. vii. 26 — 31. John ii. 14 sq., v. 14, vii. 14, viii. 1,
2 See p. 369 sq. 20, 59, x. 23, xi. 56, xviii. 20.
3 Matt. xxi. 12 sq., 23 sq., xxiv. 1 sq., 4 Luke xxiv. 53, Acts ii. 46, iii. 1
xxvi. 55, Mark xi. 11, 15 sq., 27, xii. sq., v. 20 sq., 42.
35, xiii. 1 sq., xiv. 49, Luke ii. 46, xix. 6 Matt, xxiii. 18 sq. : comp. v. 23, 24.
45, xx. 1 sq., xxi. 37 sq., xxii. 53, 6 Matt. viii. 4, Marki. 44, Luke v. 14.

THE ESSENES. 413
conformable to His teaching. He comes to Jerusalem regularly to Practice
attend the great festivals, where sacrifices formed the most striking anil j^3
part of the ceremonial, and He himself enjoins preparation to be disciples.
made for the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb. If He repeats the
inspired warning of the older prophets, that mercy is better than
sacrifice', this very qualification shows approval of the practice in
itself. Nor is His silence less eloquent than His utterances or His
actions. Throughout the Gospels there is not one word which can
be construed as condemning the sacrificial system or as implying a
desire for its cessation until everything is fulfilled.
(v) This last contrast refers to the ceremonial law. But not (v) Denial
less wide is the divergence on an important point of doctrine. The eurreoti0n
resurrection of the body is a fundamental article in the belief of the of tne
J body.
early disciples. This was distinctly denied by the Essenes2. How
ever gross and sensuous may have been the conceptions of the
Pharisees on this point, still they so far agreed with the teaching of
Christianity, as against the Essenes, in that the risen man could not,
as they held, be pure soul or spirit, but must necessarily be body
and soul conjoint.
Thus at whatever point we test the teaching and practice of our Some sup-
Lord by the characteristic tenets of Essenism, the theory of affinity incidences
fails. There are indeed several coincidences on which much stress °?n- ,
. sidered.
has been laid, but they cannot be placed in the category of distinct
ive features. They are either exemplifications of a higher morality,
which may indeed have been honourably illustrated in the Essenes,
but is in no sense confined to them, being the natural outgrowth of
the moral sense of mankind whenever circumstances are favourable.
Or they are more special, but still independent developments, which
owe their similarity to the same influences of climate and soil,
though they do not spring from the same root. To this latter class
belong such manifestations as are due to the social conditions of the
age or nation, whether they result from sympathy with, or from
repulsion to, those conditions.
Thus for instance, much stress has been laid on the aversion to Simplicity
war and warlike pursuits, on the simplicity of living, and on the J^10"
feeling of brotherhood which distinguished Christians and Essenes love.
alike. But what is gained by all this? It is quite plain that
1 Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7. s See above, p. 86.

414

THE ESSENES.

Prohi
bition of
oaths.

Community of
goods.

Christ would have approved whatever was pure and lovely in the
morality of the Essenes, just as He approved whatever was true in
the doctrine of the Pharisees, if any occasion had presented itself
when His approval was called for. But it is the merest assumption
to postulate direct obligation on such grounds. It is said however,
that the moral resemblances are more particular than this. There is
for instance Christ's precept 'Swear not at all... but let your commu
nication be Yea, yea, Nay, nay.' Have we not here, it is urged,
the very counterpart to the Essene prohibition of oaths ! 1 Yet it
would surely be quite as reasonable to say that both ahke enforce that
simplicity and truthfulness in conversation which is its own credential
and does not require the support of adjuration, both having the same
reason for laying stress on this duty, because the leaders of religious
opinion made artificial distinctions between oath and oath, as regards
their binding force, and thus sapped the foundations of pubhc and
private honesty *. And indeed this avoidance of oaths is anything
but a special badge of the Essenes. It was inculcated by Pytha
goreans, by Stoics, by philosophers and moralists of all schools8.
When Josephus and Philo called the attention of Greeks and Romans
to this feature in the Essenes, they were simply asking them to
admire in these practical philosophers among the 'barbarians' the
realisation of an ideal which their own great men had laid down.
Even within the circles of Pharisaism language is occasionally heard,
which meets the Essene principle half-way 4
And again ; attention has been called to the community of goods
in the infant Church of Christ, as though this were a legacy of Es
senism. But here too the reasonable explanation is, that we have
1 Jos. B. J. ii. 8. 6 irav rb pijBiv iir conditions ; and be twice again in tbe

airwv laxvpbrepov SpxoV rb Si bpvietv
avrois irepiiararai, xeipbv ri rijs iiriopxlas
viroXapPdvovres' i)8rj ydp xareyvwaBal
tpaai rbv awiffTobpevov Slxa Qeov, Pbilo
Omn. prob. lib. 12 (11. p. 458) roO <pi-
XoBiov Selyjjtara irapixovrai pvpla...rb
dvwporov x.r.X. Accordingly Josephus
relates (Ant. xv. 10. 4) that Herod tbe
Great excused the Essenes from taking
the oath of allegiance to Mm. Yet
they were not altogether true to their
principles ; f Dr Josephus says (B. J. ii.
8. 7), that on initiation into the sect
the members were bound by fearful
oaths (SpKom ppixtiSeis) to fulfil certain

same passage mentions oatbs (Spviovat,
rotovrois Spxois) in this connexion.
2 On the distinctions which the
Jewish doctors made between the va
lidity of different kinds of oatbs, see
tbe passages quoted in Lightfoot and
Schottgen on Matt. v. 33 sq. The Tal
mudical tract Shebhuoth tells its own
tale, and is tbe best comment on the
precepts in tbe Sermon on the Mount.
8 See e.g. the passages in Wetstein
on Matt. v. 37.
4 Baba Metsia 49 a. See also Light
foot on Matt. v. 34.

THE ESSENES. 4JS
an independent attempt to realise the idea of brotherhood — an
attempt which naturally suggested itself without any direct imitation,
but which was soon abandoned under the pressure of circumstances.
Indeed the communism of the Christians was from the first wholly
unlike the communism of the Essenes. The surrender of property
with the Christians was not a necessary condition of entrance into
an order ; it was a purely voluntary act, which might be withheld
without foregoing the privileges of the brotherhood1. And the com
mon life too was obviously different in kind, at once more free and
more sociable, unfettered by rigid ordinances, respecting individual
liberty, and altogether unlike a monastic rule.
Not less irrelevant is the stress, which has been laid on an- Prohi-
other point of supposed coincidence in the social doctrines of the two Biavery.
communities. The prohibition of slavery was indeed a highly honour
able feature in the Essene order ', but it affords no indication of a
direct connexion with Christianity. It is true that this social insti
tution of antiquity was not less antagonistic to the spirit of the
Gospel, than it was abhorrent to the feelings of the Essene ; and ulti
mately the influence of Christianity has triumphed over it. But the
immediate treatment of the question was altogether different in the
two cases. The Essene brothers proscribed slavery wholly ; they
produced no appreciable results by the proscription. The Christian
Apostles, without attempting an immediate and violent revolution
in society, proclaimed the great principle that all men are equal in
Christ, and left it to work. It did work, Hke leaven, silently but
surely, till the whole lump was leavened. In the matter of slavery
the resemblance to the Stoic is much closer than to the Essene8.
The Stoic however began and ended in barren declamation, and no
practical fruits were reaped from his doctrine.
Moreover prominence has been given to the fact that riches are Bespect
decried, and a preference is given to the poor, in the teaching of our poverty.
Lord and His Apostles. Here again, it is urged, we have a dis
tinctly Essene feature. We need not stop to enquire with what
limitations this prerogative of poverty, which appears in the Gospels,
must be interpreted; but, quite independently of this question, we may
1 j^cts v. 4. P. 632 "'* dvSpdiroSov, Jos. Ant. xviii.
a Philo Omn. prob. lib. § 12 (11. p. 1. 5 aire SobXwv iiririjSevovai xrrjaiv.
4.-8) SovXbs tc trap' airois oiSi ets iariv 3 See for instance the passages from
dXX' iXtvBepot iravres x.t.X., Fragm. 11. Seneca quoted in Philippians p. 307.

4i6

THE ESSENES.

Thepreaching of the
Kingdomwrongly ascribed
to tbe
Essenes.

Tbe Es
senes not
prophets,
but for
tune-tell-

fairly decline to lay any stress on such a coincidence, where all other-
indications of a direct connexion have failed. The Essenes, pursuing a
simple and ascetic life, made it their chief aim to reduce their material
wants as far as possible, and in doing so they necessarily exalted
poverty. Ascetic philosophers in Greece and Rome had done the
same. Christianity was entrusted with the mission of proclaiming
the equal rights of all men before God, of setting a truer standard of
human worth than the outward conventions of the world, of protest
ing against the tyranny of the strong and the luxury of the rich,
of redressing social inequalities, if not always by a present compen
sation, at least by a future hope. The needy and oppressed were the
special charge of its preachers. It was the characteristic feature of
the ' Kingdom of Heaven,' as described by the prophet whose words
gave the keynote to the Messianic hopes of the nation, that the glad
tidings should be preached to the poor '. The exaltation of poverty
therefore was an absolute condition of the Gospel.
The mention of the kingdom of heaven leads to the last point
on which it will be necessary to touch before leaving this subject.
' The whole ascetic life of the Essenes,' it has been said, ' aimed only
at furthering the Kingdom of Heaven and the Coming Age.' Thus
John the Baptist was the proper representative of this sect. ' From
the Essenes went forth the first call that the Messiah must shortly
appear, The kingdom of heaven is at hand". ' The announcement of
the kingdom of heaven unquestionably went forth from the Essenes '8.
For this confident assertion there is absolutely no foundation in fact ;
and, as a conjectural hypothesis, the assumption is highly improbable.
As fortune-tellers or soothsayers, the Essenes might be called
prophets ; but as preachers of righteousness, as heralds of the king
dom, they had no claim to the title. Throughout the notices in
Josephus and Philo we cannot trace the faintest indication of Mes
sianic hopes. Nor indeed was their position at all likely to foster
such hopes 4. The Messianic idea was built on a belief in the resur-

1 Is. lxi. i evayyeXiaaaBai irrwxois,
quoted in Luke iv. 18. There are
references to this particular part of the
propheoy again in Matt. xi. 5, Luke
vii. 22, and probably also in tbe beati
tude uaxdpioi ol irrwxol x.r.X., Matt. V.
3, Luke vi. 20.
4 Gratz Gesch. in. p. 219.

3 ib. p. 470.
4 Lipsius Schenkel's Bibel-Lemkon
s. v. Essaer p. 190, Keim Jesus von
Nazara 1. p. 305. Both these writers ex
press themselves very decidedly against
the view maintained by Gratz. ' The
Essene art of soothsaying,' writes
Lipsius, ' has absolutely nothing to do

THE ESSENES.

417

rection of the body. The Essenes entirely denied this doctrine.
The Messianic idea was intimately bound up with the national hopes
and sufferings, with the national life, of the Jews. The Essenes had
no interest in the Jewish pohty ; they separated themselves almost Tbey bad
entirely from public affairs. The deliverance of the individual in the MeJs'ianio
shipwreck of the whole, it has been well said, was the plain watch- expecta
tions.
word of Essenism1. How entirely the conception of a Messiah might
be obliterated, where Judaism was regarded only from the side of a
mystic philosophy, we see from the case of Philo. Throughout the
works of this voluminous writer only one or two faint and doubtful
allusions to a personal Messiah are found *. The philosophical tenets
of the Essenes no doubt differed widely from those of Philo ; but in
the substitution of the individual and contemplative aspect of reli
gion for the national and practical they were united ; and the effect
in obscuring the Messianic idea would be the same. When there
fore it is said that the prominence given to the proclamation of the
Messiah's kingdom is a main link which connects Essenism and
Christianity, we may dismiss the statement as a mere hypothesis,
unsupported by evidence and improbable in itself.

with the Messianic prophecy.' ' Of all
this,' says Keim,' * there is no trace.'
1 Keim I. c.
8 How little can be made out of
Pbilo's Messianic utterances by one
who is anxious to make tbe most pos
sible out of tbem, may be seen from

Gfrorer's treatment of the subject,
Philo i.p. 486 sq. Tbe treatises wbicb
bear on this topic are the de Praemiis
et Poenis (1. p. 408, ed. Mangey) and
the de Execrationibus (1. p. 429). They
deserve to be read, if only for the nega
tive results whioh they yield.

COL.

27

INDEX.

Abercius (Aviroius), Bp. of Hierapolis,
P- 54. 66
Acts of tbe Apostles ; passages ex
plained, p. 23 (xiii. 4, xvi. 6); p. 93
(xix. 13, 19); p. 302 (xiv. 11)
sdificatoris, the sufferings of Christ
as, i. 24
.Elfrio on the Epistle to Laodiceans,
p. 294
Alasanda or Alasadda, p. 388 sq.
Alexander of Tralles on charms, p. 90
Alexander Polyhistor, p. 81, 391
Alexandria, a supposed Buddhist es
tablishment at, p. 388 sq.
Andrew, St, in Asia, p. 45
angelolatry condemned, p. 99, 101,
116, i. 16, ii. 10, 15, 18; forbidden
by the Council of Laodicea, p. 65 sq.
angelology of Cerinthus, p. 108; of
Essenism, p. 94; of the Jews, ii. 18
angels, orders of, i. 16
Anselm of Laon, p. 293
Antiochus tbe Great, colony of, in Asia
Minor, p. 19
Antiochus Theos refounds Laodicea,
P- 5
aorist, epistolary, iv. 8, Ph. 11, 19, 21 ;
contrasted with perfect, i. 16
Apamea, p. 19, 20; Jews at, p. 21
Apocalypse, correspondences with St
Paul's Epistles to Asia, 41 sq.
apocrypha, use of word, p. 90, ii. 3
Apollinaris, see Claudius ApoUinaris
Apollo Archegetes worshipped at Hie
rapolis, p. 12
Apostolic Fathers, Christology of, p.

Apostolic Writings, Christology of, p.
121
Apphia, wife of Philemon, p. 304 ; the
name Phrygian, 304 sq.
Archippus, iv. 17; son of Philemon,
306 ; bis office and abode, 307 ; re
buke to, 43
Arian heresy in Hierapolis and Lao
dicea, p. 62
Arian use of the expression 'Firstborn
of all creation,' i. 15
Aristarchus, iv. 10
Aristion, p. 45
Aristotle, on slavery, p. 311 ; definition
of 'knowledge,' ii. 3; of 'wisdom,'
i. 9
Armagh, Book of, p. 278, 280, 284
article, omission of the definite, i. 4
asah, a supposed derivation of Essenes,
P- 35i. 36°
Ascents of James, p. 406
Asceticism among tbe Jewish sects, p.
85 ; among Colossian beretios, p. 102 ;
Essenes, p. 406; a result of Gnostic
ism, p. 77
Aseis, a, Laodicean title of Zeus, p. 8
Asia, meaning of, p. 19
Asia Minor, geography of, p. 1 sq.;
list of writers on, p. 1 ; bow divided
under the Bomans, p. 7 ; a modern
hypothesis about Christianity in, p.
s°sq-
Asidseans, p. 353
asya, a supposed derivation of Essene,
P- 35°
Athanasius, on 'Firstborn of all Crea
tion,' i. 15
27—2

420

INDEX.

Athens, slavery at, p. 318; a Buddhist
burnt alive at, p. 392
Augustine, on 'Firstborn of all Crea
tion,' i. 15; on 'wisdom and know
ledge,' ii. 3
dydirrj, b vibs rijs aydirijs airov, i. 13
dytos, i. 2
dywv, dywvla, dywvlfreaBai, i. 29, ii. i,
iv. 12
dSeXtpos (b), i. 1
dBupetv, iii. 21
acVx/>oXo7la, iii. 8
dxaBapala, iii. 5
SXas, iv. 5
dXrjBeia, 1) dXrjBeia rov eiayyeXiov, i. 5 ;
iv dXijBela, i. 6
dXXd, in apodosis after ei, ii. 5
&pwpos, i. 22
dvairaveaBat, Ph. 7
dvairXijpovv, i. 24
dviyxXijros, i. 22
dvesjribs, iv. 10
dvrjxeiv, iii. 18; to dc?JKoc, Ph. 8
dvBpairdpeaxoi, iii. 22
dvravaTXijpovv, i. 24
dvrairbSoais, iii. 24
ddparos, i. 1 6
direxSbeaBai, ii. 15
dirixSvais, ii. 11
dirixetv, Ph. 15
cwnjXXorpicUjUCTi'oc, i. 21
diroBvijaxeiv, ii. 20
cwroKciraXXdcrcreH', i. 20, 21
dirbxpvtpos, ii. 3
diroXirpwais, i. 14
diroxpijais, ii. 22
dirreaBai, ii. 21
dpiaxeia, i. 10
dpx1}, applied to Christ, p. 41 ; i. 16, 18
au£dWcz', i. 6
aurds cTcrTtK, i. 17
dtpeiSeia, ii. 23
depi}, ii. 19
dxetpoirolrjTOS, ii. 11
dxpijaros, Ph. 1 1
B (Cod. Vaticanus), excellence of, p.
H5
Banaim, p. 367 sq.

Banus, p. 367, 398 sq.
Bardesanes, on Buddhists, p. 391; his
date, ib.
Barnabas, life of, iv. 10; epistle ascribed
to, ib.
basilica, iv. 15
Basilides, p. 263
Baur, p. 75, 79, 316
Bene-hakkenesetb, p. 365
Brahminism, p. 391, 392
Buddhism, assumed influence on Es
senism, p. 388 sq. ; supposed esta
blishment of, in Alexandria, p. 388 ,
unknown in tbe West, p. 389 sq.,
four steps of, p. 393 sq.
Buddhist at Athens, p. 392
pirrrtapa, fiairriapbs, ii. 12
pdpfiapos, iii. 11
(iKafftp-rjula, iii. 8
(3oiXeaBai, Pb. 13
Ppafiebeiv, iii. 15
Cabbala, see Kabbala
Cainites, p. 77
Calvin, iii. 8, p. 273, 316
Canonical writings and Papias, p. 50
Carpocratians, p. 77, 78
Catapbryges, p. g6
Cavensis, codex, p. 280
celibacy, p. 373, 374, 411 sq.
Cerinthus, p. 105 sq.; Judaism of, p.
106; Gnosticism of, ib. ; cosmogony
of, p. 107 ; Christology of, p. 109
sq. ; pleroma of, p. 262
chaber, p. 362
Chagigah, on ceremonial purity, p.
363 sq.
Chalcedon, council of, p. 62
ebasha, chasbaim, a derivation of Es
sene, p. 352
cbesi, chasyo, a derivation of Essene,
P- 35i sq-; connexion with chasid, p.
358
chasid, a false derivation of Essene, p.
34» sq.
Chasidim, p. 353, 355 sq. ; not a proper
name for the Essenes, p. 356
cbasin, cbosin, a false derivation for
Essene, p. 349

INDEX.

421

ohaza, ohazya, a derivation of Essene,
p. 350 sq.
Chonos or ChonaB, p. 15, 69
Christ, the Person of, p. 34 ; St Paul's
doctrine about, p. 41, 113 sq., i. 15 —
20, ii. 9 — 15 ; the Word Incarnate,
p. 99, 100 ; tbe pleroma in Him,
p. 100, i. 19, ii. 9, 10 ; life in Him,
the remedy against sin, p. 34, 118
sq.; His teaching and practice not
Essene, p. 407 sq.
Christianity, not an outgrowth of Es
senism, p. 395 sq. ; in relation to
Epictetus, p. 13 ; to Gnosticism, p.
78 ; to slavery, p. 321 sq.
Christianity in Asia Minor, p. 50
Christianized Essenes, p. 87, 88,370 sq.
Christians of St John, p. 403
ChriBtology of Ep. to Col. p. 99, 120 ;
of other Apostolic writings, p. 121 ;
of succeeding ages, p. 122
Chronicon Paschale, p. 48, 59
Chrysostom, i. 13, 15, iii. 16, p. 272,
Ph. 15, p. 315
Cibotus, p. 21
Cibyratic convention, p. 7
circular letter — tbe Ep. to the Ephe
sians — p. 37
Claudius, embassy from Ceylon in the
reign of, p.. 393
Claudius Apollinaris, the name, p. 54
sq. ; his works, p. 55 sq.
Clement of Alexandria, p. 77, 96, i. 9,
15, ii. 8, iii. 5, 16, p. 391 sq.
Clement of Bome (§ 7) i. 3 ; (§ 58) i. 11 ;
(§33)i.iS; (Ep. ii. § 9), p. 102
Clementine Homilies, p. 370 sq., 373,
404
Clementine Becognitions, p. 402
Clermont, p. 3
collegia, iv. 15
Colossse, orthography of, p. 16, i. 2;
situation, etc., p. 1 sq.; site, p. 13;
ancient greatness and decline, p. 15;
a Phrygian city, p. 18 sq.; Jewish
colony at, p. 19 ; not visited by St
Paul when tbe epistle was written,
p. 33; Epaphras the evangelist of,
p. 29 ; intended visit of Mark to, p.

40; visit of St Paul to, p. 41 ; ob
scurity of, p. 67 ; a suffragan see of
Laodicea, p. 67 ; Turkish conquest
of, p. 69
Colossian heresy, nature of, p. 71 sq.,
87, ii. 8 ; writers upon, p. 72 ; bad
regard to the Person of Christ, p.
1 10 ; relation to Gnosticism, p. 96 ;
St Paul's answer to, p. 113 sq.
Colossians, Epistle to, p. 33 ; bearers
°f| P- 35 J salutations in, ib. ; charge
respecting Laodicea, p. 36 ; written
by an amanuensis, iv. 18; Christo
logy of, p- 120; style of, p. 123;
analysis of, p. 124; various read
ings, see readings
colossinus, p. 4
community of goods, p. 414
Concord of tbe Laodiceans and Ephe
sians, etc., p. 31
congregation, tbe holy, at Jerusalem,
P- 365
Constantine, legislation of, p. 325
Constantinople, Council of, p. 62
conventus, p. 7
Corinth, visit of St Paul to, during bis
residence at Ephesus, p. 30
Corinthians, First Epistle to ; passages
explained : (i. 19) i. 9 ; (ii. 6, 7) i.
28 ; (v. 9) iv. 16 ; (vii. 21) p. 322 sq. ;
(viii. 6) p. 120 ; (ix. 24) ii. 18 ; (xi. 7)
i. 15 ; (xiii. 3) p. 392 ; (xiii. 12) i. 9 ;
(xv. 24) i. 16
Corinthians, Second Epistle to ; pas
sages explained : (i. 7) i. 24 ; (iii. 6)
i. 12 ; (iv. 4) i. 15 ; (v. 14, 15) ii. 20;
(vi. 1) i. 6 ; (vi. 4, 6) i. 11 ; (viii. 9)
i. 6 ; (ix. 12) ib. ; (xiii. 5) i. 27
Cornelius a Lapide, p. 231, 274
Creation, Gnostic speculations about,
p. 76 sq.; Essene do., p. 88
Cyril of Alexandria, p. 391
KaBws xat, i. 6, iii. 1
xal in both members of a comparison,
i. 6
xal oaoi, ii. 1
xatvbs and vios, ii. 10
xaxla, iii. 8
xaptrotpopeiaBai, i. 6

422

INDEX.

xarappafSeieiv, ii. 18
xaTevdnriov airov, i. 22
xaroixeiv, i. 19
xevepfiareieiv, ii. 18
xetpaXi), i. 18
xXijpovopla, iii. 24
xXijpos, i. 12
xXrjrbs, iii. 12
xoivwvla, Pb. 6
xopl^eiv, iii. 25
/ccwridV, i. 29
xopa^bs, p. 4
xbapos, ii. 8
xpareiv, ii. 19
xpdros, i. 11
xplveiv, ii. 16
xrlais, i. 15
/ctfoios, d, (Christ) i. 10; (master), iii. 24
xvpibrijs, i. 16
Xapaxrijp, i. 15
Xapl&aBai, ii. 13, iii. 13, Ph. 22
Xdpis, i. 2, (ij) iii. 16; 17 xcipis toB GeoB,
i. 6
Xeipbypatpov, ii. 14
XpijarbTijs, iii. 12
Damascene : see Jbta Damascene
Darmstadiensis Codex, p. 280
dative (of instrument), ii. 7, iii. 16;
(of part affected), i. 4
Demas, p. 36, iv. 14, Ph. 24
Denizli, p. 7 ; earthquake at, p. 3
diocese, p. 7
Diognetus, Epistle to, i. 18
Dion Chrysostom, p. 79, 389
Diospolis, an old name of Laodicea,
P- 5
Divinity of Christ, p. 99 sq., 114 sq.,
i- '5
Docetse, use of pleroma by, p. 269
dualism, p. 76, 85, 385
dyes of Colossee and the neighbour
hood, p. 4
Setyparl^eiv, ii. 15
Siapios, Ph. 1, 10
Seapbs, Ph. 13
Sid with gen., used of tbe Logos, p.
120, i. 16, 20
Siaxovta, Sidxovos, iv. 7, 17

SiSaaxeiv, i. 28
Siolxijais, p. 7
Soy pa, ii. 14
Soyparl^eiv, ii. 20
8d|a, i. 11, 27
SoOXos, Ph. 16 ; cToCXos 'Iijcrou Xpiarov,
iv. 12
Sivapis, i. 16
Svvapovv, i. 1 1
Earthquakes in the valley of tbe Ly
cus, p. 38
Ebionite Christology of Cerintbus,p. 108
Elchasai, founder of the Mandeans, p.
4°5
Elchasai, Book of, p. 373
elders, primitive, p. 366
Eleazar expels evil spirits, p. 89
English Church on tbe Epistle to Lao
dicea, p. 294
English versions of the Epistle to Lao
dicea, p. 295 sq.
Epaphras, p. 34; evangelist of Co-
lossffi, p. 29, 31 ; mission to St Paul,
p. 32, iv. 12, Pb. 23
Epaphroditus, p. 34
Ephesians, Epistle to ; a circular letter,
p. 37 ; readings in, harmonistic with
Epist. to Col. p. 244 sq. ; passages
explained, i. 18 (i. 23) ; i. 21 (i. 16);
i. 23 (i. 18); ii. 3 (iii. 6); ii. 4 (iii.
1); "• 4> 5 ("• 13); ii- " (i- 21);
ii. 14 (i. 17); ii. 15 (ii. 14); ii. 16
(i. 20) ; ii. 20 (ii. 7); iii. 17 (ii. 17);
iii. 21 (i. 26); iv. 10, 11 (i. 17); iv.
18 (i. 21) ; iv. 19, v. 3 (iii. 5) ; v. 32
(i. 26)
Ephesus, Council of, p. 62
Ephesus, St Paul at, p. 30, 93 ; exor
cists at, p. 93
Epictetus, p. 13
Epiphanius, account of Cerinthus, p.
105; on the Nasareans, p. 371
epistolary aorist, Ph. 11, 19, 21
epulones of Ephesian Artemis called
Essenes, p. 94
Erasmus on tbe Epistle to Laodicea,
p. 297
Essene, meaning of term, p. 92 ; the

INDEX.

423

name, p. 347 sq. ; Frankel's theory,
P- 354 S<1.
Essenes, p. 80, ii. 8; list of writers
upon, p. 81; localities of, p. 91;
asoetioism of, p. 83 ; speculations of,
p. 85; exolusiveness of, p. 90; Jo
sephus and Pbilo chief authorities
upon, p. 368; oath taken by, p. 360;
their grades, p. 363 ; origin and af
finities, p. 353 sq.; relation to Chris
tianity, p. 395 sq. ; to Pharisaism, p.
99s 354! to Neopythagoreanism, p.
378 sq.; to Hemerobaptists, p. 400 sq.;
to Gnosticism, p. 90 sq.; to Parsism,
P* 385 sq.; to Buddhism, p. 388 sq.;
avoidance of oaths, p. 413 sq.; for
tune-tellers, p. 41 6 ; silence of New
Test, about, p. 396; relation to John
the Baptist, p. 398 sq. ; to James the
Lord's brother, p. 405 sq.; Chris
tianized Essenes, p. 87, 88, 370 sq.
Essenism, p. 80; main features of, p.
81 sq.; compared with Christianity,
p. 407 sq. ; the sabbath, p. 408 ;
lustrations, p. 409 ; avoidance of
strangers, p. 410 ; asceticism, celi
bacy, p. 41 1 ; avoidance of the Tem
ple, p. 412; denial of the resurrec
tion of the body, p. 413 ; certain
supposed coincidences with Christ
ianity, p. 413 sq.
Eusebius, on the earthquakes in tbe
valley of the Lycus, p. 39 ; his mis
take respecting some martyrdoms,
p. 48 ; silence about quotations from
Canonical writings, p. 52 sq.; on
Papias, p. 49; on the Thundering
Legion, p. 58; on MarceUus, i. 15
evil, Gnostic theories about, p. 76
exorcists at Ephesus, p. 93
Ezra, restoration under, p. 353
iavrov and airov, i. 20 ; and dXX^Xwv,
iii. 13
iryii, Ph. 19
iBeXoBpijaxela, ii. 23
cf ye, i. 23
elxiiv, i. 15, iii. 11
elvai xapirotpopoipevov, i. 6
els, i. 6, ii. 22, Pb. 6

ix AaoStxlas (rfy/), iv. 16
ixxXijala, iv. 15
ixXexrbs, iii. 12
iXXoyav, Ph. 18
c!X7r£s, i. 5
iv, iv. 12; denoting the sphere, i. 4;
iv airip, i. 16; ir pipet, ii. 16; ev
Tavrl BeXijpart, iv. 12 ; ev T&aiv, i. 18 ;
iv rois c?p7ois, i. 21; ev ipiv, i. 27,
iii. 16; ivXpiarip, i. 1
ivepyeiv, evepyetaBat, i. 29
in, iii. 1 1
i!-ayopd£ea6ai, iv. 5
i^aXeltpeiv, ii. 14
igovala, i. 13, 16
go (ol), iv. 5
ioprr), ii. 16
iiriyivwaxetv, iirlyvwais, p. 98, i. 6, 9,
Ph. 6
imBvpla, iii. 5
iwipiveiv, i. 23
eVicrroXij (fj), iv. 16
iirtxopijyeiv, ii. 19
iirotxoSopeiv, ii. 7
ipydfeaBat, iii. 23
ipeBlfetv, iii. 21
ipptfrwpivot, ii. 7
IpXeaBat, iii. 6
ebapearos, iii. 20
eiSoxla, eiSoxeiv, i. 19
evxaptarelv, evxapiaria, ii. 7, i. 3 ; e»xd-
picrros, iii. 15
'Etpiata ypdppara, p. 93
exeiv, Ph. 17
exfipol, 21
F (Codex Augiensis) relation to G, p.
277
Firstborn of all Creation, i. 15
Flaccus, p. 20
Frankel on the Essenes, p. 354 sq.
G (Codex Boernerianus) relation to F,
p. 277
Galatia, meaning of, in St Paul and St
Luke, p. 24
Galatian and Colossian Judaism com
pared, p. 103, i. 28

424

INDEX.

Galatians, Epistle to ; passages ex
plained, i. 24 (Gal. ii. 20), i. 28 (iv.
19), ii. 8 (iv. 3)
Galen, ii. 19, 20
Ginsburg (Dr), p. 88, 361 sq., 363, 395
sq., 411
Gnostic, p. 78 sq.
Gnostic element in Colossian heresy,
p. 71 sq.
Gnostic sects, use of pleroma by, p.
262 sq.
Gnosticism, list of writers on, p. 75;
definition of, p. 74 sq. ; intellectual
exolusiveness of, p. 75 ; speculations
of, p. 75 sq.; practical errors of, 77
sq. ; independent of Christianity, p.
78; relation to Judaism, p. 79; to
Essenism, p. 91 ; to Colossian heresy,
p. 96
Gratz, p. 349, 357, 395, 397, 408, 409
Greece, slavery in, p. 318
Gregory the Great on the Epistle to
the Laodiceans, p. 293
guild of dyers, p. 4
Vappdvas, p. 390
yvuais, i. 9, ii. 3
yvwanxbs, p. 79
Haymo of Halberstadt, on the Epistle
to tbe Laodiceans, p. 293
Hebrew slavery, p. 317 sq.
Hebrews, Epistle to tbe ; passages ex
plained, i. 11 (Heb. xi. 34); i. 15 (i.
% 3. 6)
Hefele on the date of Claudius Apolli
naris, p. 57
Hemerobaptists, p. 400 sq.
Hervey of Dole, on the Epistle to the
Laodiceans, p. 293
Hierapolis, p. 2, 9; modern name, p. 9;
physical features of, p. 10; a fa
mous watering place, p. n; the
Plutonium at, p. 12; dyes of, p. 4;
birthplace of Epictetus, p. 13; po
litical relations of, p. 18; attrac
tions for Jews, p. 22; a Christian
settlement, p. 45 ; Philip of Bethsaida
at, p. 45 sq.; Council at, p. 57;
Papias, Bishop of, p. 48 sq.; Claudius

Apollinaris, bishop of, p. 55'Sq.; con
fused with Hieropolis, p. 54, 66
Hilgenfeld, p. 73 ; on tbe Essenes, p.
388 sq.
James the Lord's brother, p. 405 sq.
Jerome, p; 29; on St Paul's parents,
p. 35; on tbe Epistle to tbe Laodi
ceans, p. 291 sq.
Jesus Justus, iv. 1 1
Jews, sects of the, p. 80
imperfect, iii. 18
indicative after pXiireiv pr), ii. 8
infinitive of consequence, i. 10, iv. 3, 6
John (St) in Asia Minor, p. 41; Apoca
lypse, passages explained, p. 41 (iii.
14—21)
John (St), Gospel, p. 401 (i. 8, v. 35); Se-
condEpistle, p. 303 ; Third Epistle, ib.
John tbe Baptist, not an Essene, p.
398 sq.; disciples of, at Ephesus, p.
400; claimed by Hemerobaptists, p.
401 sq.
John (St), Christians of, p. 403
John Damascene, p. 15
John of Salisbury on tbe Epistle to tbe
Laodiceans, p. 294
Josephus on Essenism, p. 367 sq.
Judaism and Gnosticism, p. 79
Xva, iv. 16
'Iouo-ros, iv. 11
iabrijs, iv. 1
Kabbala, p. 91, i. 16, ii. 8
Lanfranc on tbe Epistle to tbe Laodi
ceans, p. 295
Laodicea, situation, p. 2; name and
history, p. s; condition, p. 6; politi
cal rank and relations, p. 7, 18; reli
gious worship at, p. 8; Council of, p.
63 ; ecclesiastical status, p. 67 ; dyes
of, p. 4; surnamed Trimetaria, p. 18;
the vaunt of, p. 44
Laodicea, the letter from, iv. 16, p.
272 sq.
Laodiceans, apocryphal Epistle to the,
p. 279 sq.; list of mss of, p. 281
sq.; Latin text of, p. 285 ; notes on,
p. 287 sq. ; theory of a Greek ori-

INDEX.

425

ginal, p. 289 ; restoration of the
Greek, p. 291; circulation of, p. 292
sq.; English prologue and versions
of, p. 296 ; strictures of Erasmus on,
p. 297; opinions on the genuineness
of, p. 298
Latrooinium, see Robbers' Synod
Legio Fulminata, p. 58
legislation of Constantine on slavery,
P- 325
Logos, the, i. is
Luke, St, iv. 14; his narrative of St
Paul's third missionary journey, p.
24 sq. ; makes a distinction between
Philip the Apostle and Philip the
Evangelist, p. 45
lukewarmness at Laodicea, p. 42
lustrations of the Essenes, p. 411
Luther's estimate of tbe Epistle to
Philemon, p. 315
Lycus, district of tbe ; list of writers on,
p. 1 sq.; physical features of, p. 2
sq.; produce of, p. 4; subterranean
channel of the, p. 14; earthquakes
in the valley of the, p. 38 sq.
Lycus, churches of tbe, p. 1 sq. ; evan
gelised by Epaphras, p. 29 sq.;
ecclesiastical status of, p. 67
AaoStxla, iv. 13
Xd70j< ixetv rivbs, ii. 23
Magic, forbidden by Council of Laodi
cea, p. 65; among the Essenes, p.
88 sq., 37s sq.
magical books at Ephesus, p. 93
Mandeans, p. 403
Marcosians, p. 267
Mark (St), iv. 10; visits Colossae, p. 40
Matthew (St), Gospel of, accepted by
Cerinthus and the Ebionites, p. 106
Megasthenes, p. 390 sq.
monasticism of tbe Essenes and Bud
dhists, p. 393
Monoimus, tbe Arabian, p. 271
Montanism, Claudius Apollinaris on,
p. 57 ; Phrygian origin of, p. cfi
morning bathers, p. 366 sq., 400 sq.
Muratorian Fragment on the Epistle
to tbe Laodiceans, p. 290

paxpoBvpla, i. 11, iii. 12
pepls, i. 12
pveiav iroietaBai, Ph. 4
popcpi), iii. 13
povoyevijs, i. 15
pvarijpiov, i. 26
Naassenes, p. 269
Nasareans, Nasoreans, p. 370, 373, 403
Neander on Cerinthus, p. 106
Neopythagoreanism and Essenism, p.
378 sq.
New Testament, relation of, to the Old
Testament, p. 116
Nicffla, Bishops of Hierapolis and Lao
dicea at tbe Council of, p. 62
Nicetas Choniates, p. 68
Nicolaus of Damascus, p. 392
nominative with definite article for
vocative, iii. 18
Novatianism in Phrygia, p. g6
Nymphas, iv. 15, p. 31
veopijvla, ii. 16
vios, iii. 10
vovBereiv, i. 28
vvv with aorist, i. 21
Onesimus, p. 309, Ph. 10; at Bome,
p. 33; encounters St Paul, p. 310;
returns to Philemon, p. 35, 311 sq. ;
legendary history of, p. 314
Ophites, p. 79, 96, 269
otxovopla, i. 25
oIkos, rrjv xar olxov, iv. 15
bpolwpa, i. 25
SvaaBat, bvalprjv, Pb. 20
bpyi), iii. 8
cVris, iii. 5, iv. 11
btpBaXpoSovXela, iii. 23
o)Stj, iii. 16
lis, Ph. 14, 16
Pantaanus in India, p. 390
Papias, p. 47 ; writings of, ib. ; life and
teaching of, p. 48 ; account of, given
by Eusebius, p. 49; traditions col
lected by, p. 51 sq. ; references to
the Canonical writings, p. 51 sq. ;

426

INDEX.

silence of Eusebius, p. 52; views in
ferred from his associates, p. 53
Parsism, resemblances to, in Essen
ism, p. 86, 385 sq. ; spread by the de
struction of the Persian empire, p.
386 ; influence of, p. 387
participle used for imperative, iii. 16
Paschal controversy, p. 56, 61
Paul (St) visits Phrygia on his second
missionary journey, p. 23 ; had not
visited CoIosssb when he wrote, p.
23 sq. ; visits Phrygia on bis third
journey, p. 24; silence about per
sonal relations with Colossas, p. 28 ;
at Ephesus, p. 30, 93 sq. ; at Bome,
p. 32; mission of Epaphras to, ib.;
meets with Onesimus, p. 33, 310;
despatches threeletters, p. 33; visits
Colossffl, p. 41; his plans after bis
release, Pb. 22 ; uses an amanuensis,
iv. 18; bis signature, iv. 18, Ph. 19 ;
coincidences with words of our Lord,
ii. 22; bis teaching on the univer
sality of the Gospel, p. 97 ; on the
kingdom of Christ, i. 13 sq. ; on tbe
orders of angels, i. 16 sq.; on phi
losophy, ii. 8; on tbe Incarnation,
ii. 9; on the abolition of distinc
tions, iii. n ; on slavery, iii. 22 sq.,
p. 321 sq.; his cosmogony and the
ology, p. 99 sq. ; bis answer to the
Colossian heresy, p. 113 sq.; bis
Christology, p. 120, i. 15 sq.; his
relations with Philemon, p. 302 sq. ;
connects baptism and death, ii. n,
20, iii. 3; makes use of metaphors
from the mysteries, i. 26, 28; from
tbe stadium, ii. 18, in. 14; his rapid
change of metaphor, ii. 7
Paul (St) Epistles of, correspondences
with the Apocalypse — on the Person
of Christ, p. 41; warning against
lukewarmness, p. 42 ; against pride
of wealth, p. 43
Paul (St) apocryphal Epistle of, to
the Laodiceans, p. 279 sq.
Pedanius Secundus, execution of bis
slaves, p. 320
Person of Christ, St Paul and St John

on, p. 41 sq.; St Paul's answer to
tbe Colossian heresy, p. 113 sq.; i.
15 sq.
personal pronoun used for reflexive,
i. 20, 22
Peter (St) and the Church in Asia
Minor, p. 41
petrifying stream at Colossse, p. 15
Pharisees, p. 80; relation to Essenes,
p. 80, 354 sq., 374, 376
Philemon, p. 31, 368 sq. ; legendary
history of, p. 303 ; his wife, p. 304 ;
his son, p. 306
Philemon, Epistle to ; introduction to,
p. 301 ; character of, p. 302 ; analy
sis of, p. 312 Bq.; different estimates
of, p. 314 sq. ; compared with a letter
of Pliny, p. 316
Philip the Apostle, in Asia, p. 45 sq. ;
confused with Philip the Evangelist,
P-45
Philippopolis, synod of, p. 62
Pbilo, on the Essenes, p. 348, 378; his
use of Logos, i. 15
Phrygia, p. 17 sq. ; meaning of the
phrase in St Luke, p. 23 ; religious
tendencies of, p. 95 ; see Paul (St)
Pistis Sophia, p. 271
Pliny the elder, his account of the
Essenes, p. 81
Pliny the younger, a letter of, p. 316
sq.
pleroma, p. 25s sq.
Plutonium, at Hierapolis, p. 12
Polycarp, martyrdom of, p. 49
poverty, respect paid to, by Essenes
and by Christ, p. 415 sq.
Praetorius on the Epistle to tbe Lao
diceans, p. 298
Pythagoreanism and Essenism, p. 378
sq. ; disappearance of, p. 381
irdBos, iii. 5
irapaxdXetv, ii. 1
irapaXapfldveiv, ii. 6
irapdirTwpa, ii. 13
irapeivai els, i. 6
irapixeaBat, iv. 1
irapijyopla, iv. 1 r
irapprjala, iv irapprjalg:, ii. 15, Ph. 8

INDEX.

427

7ras, iras d xoapos, i. 16; iracra icrlcris,
i. 15; rd irdvra, i. 16
irarijp, b Qebs waTijp, i. 3 ; jrar?}p rjpwv,
i. 2.
irai/ecr0ai, Ph. 7.
7r«3o»oXo7(a, ii. 4
irixpatveoBai, iii. 19
Tricrrds, iricrrol aSeXcpof, i. 2
rrXeove^la, iii. 5
irXijpotpope'iv, iv. 12.
irXijpotpopla, ii. 2
jrXijpoCx, i. 25, iv. 17
irXijpapa, i. 19, ii. 9, p. 255 sq.
TrX^cTjUoi^J, ii. 23
TrXoOros, i. 27
iropveia, iii. 5
irpavrrjs, iii. 12
irpeapevrrjs, irpeaBvrijs, Ph. 8
7rpd 7rdcrwi', i. 17
irpoaxobeiv, i. 5
irpds, ii. 23, Ph. 5
irpoaxaprepeiaOai, iv. ¦&
irpoawiroXijpsj/la, iii. 25
vpuroroxos, i. 15, 18
<piXofl-o0ia, ii. 8
tpBopd, ii. 22
cppdvijais, i. 9
tpvXaxrijpiov, p. 66
spdXpbs, iii. 16
Quartodeciman controversy, p. 56, 61
Quinisextine Council, p. 64
Beadings, harmonized with corre
sponding passages in the Epistle to
tbe Ephesians, p. 244 (iii. 6) ; p. 245
(ii. 21, v. 19)
readings, various, p. 247 (i. 3) ; p. 248
(i. 4, i- 7); P- 249 (*- I2> *• J4> i- 22);
p. 250 (ii. 2); p. 251 (ii. 16) ; p. 252
(ii. 18, ii. 23) ; p. 253 (iv. 8) ; p. 254
(iv. 15)
Benan, on the meaning of Galatia in
St Paul and St Luke, p. 25; on the
Epistle of Philemon, p. 316
resurrection of the body, p. 86, 413
Eevelation; see Apocalypse
Bobbers' Synod, p. 62
Boman slavery, p. 319

Eome, Onesimus at, p. 310 ; St Paul
at, p. 32
pifrvv, ii. 7
Sabbath, observance of, by Essenes, p.
82, 408
Sabmaus, p. 403
sacrifices prohibited by Essenes, p. 87,
369
Sadduceeism, p. 80
Sagaris, bishop of Laodicea, p. 61
Samaneei, p. 390 sq.
Sampsseans, p. 372
Sarmanae, p. 390 sq.
satisfactoriffl, sufferings of Christ re
garded as, i. 25
Secundus, see Pedanius Secundus
Seven churches, literature relating to,
p. 1
Sibylline Oracle, p. 94
silence of Eusebius on canonical books,
p. 52 sq. ; of the New Testament
about tbe Essenes, p. 396
slave martyrs, p. 324
slavery, Hebrew, p. 317; Greek, p. 318;
Eoman, p. 319; St Paul's treatment
of, p. 321 sq. ; attitude of Christian
ity towards, p. 323 sq. ; prohibited
by Essenes, p. 415 ; legislation of
Constantine, p. 325 ; of Justinian,
p. 326 ; abolition of, ib.
Socrates on Novatianism in Phrygia,
p. 96
Sophia of Valentinus, p. 265 ; Sophia
Achamoth, p. 266
stadium, metaphor from the, ii. 18
Stapleton on the Epistle to tbe Laodi
ceans, p. 298
Strabo on Buddhism, p. 389 sq.
sunworsbip, p. 85, 372 sq., 380, 385
crd/3/3aro, ii. 16
crdp£, rb awpa rrjs aapxbs, i. 22
TixiBijs, iii. 11
aotpla, i. 9, 28, ii. 3, iii. 16
cr7rXd7X>'a (rd); iii. 12, Ph. 7, 12
arepiupa, ii. 5
aroixeia (rd), ii. 8
cruXcryGrYeiV, ii. 8
avpfiijS&Setv, ii. 2, 19

428

INDEX.

crwoiXjcdXciiros, iv. io
aivSeapos, ii. 19, iii. 14
abvSovXos, i. 7, iv. 7
aiveais, i. 9, ii. 2
avarpaTiwnjs, Ph. l
awpa, rb awpa rijs aapxbs, ii. 1 1
awparixws, ii. 9
Tacitus on the earthquake of Laodicea,
P- 39
Talmud, supposed etymologies of Es
sene in, p. 350 sq., 355 sq.; supposed
allusions to the Essenes, p. 362 sq.
Testaments, Old and New, p. 117
Testaments of tbe Twelve Patriarchs,
on the orders of angels, i. 16
theantbropism of the New Testament,
p. 117
thundering legion, p. 58
Thyatira, dyes of, p. 4
Timotheus, his position in these epi
stles, i. 1, Ph. 1 ; 'the brother,' i. 1
Tivoli compared with the valley of tbe
Lycus, p. 3
travertine deposits in the valley of the
Lycus, p. 3
Trimetaria, a surname of Laodicea, p.18
Tychicus, iv. 7, p. 35, 312
Taireivotppoabvij, iii. 1 2
rd£is, ii. 5
rc?Xeios, i. 28
ris (indef.), St Paul's use of, ii. 8
roioCros iiv, Ph. 9, 12
BiXeiv, Ph. 13; BiXeiv iv, ii. 18

BiXijpa Qeov, i. 1
BepeXiovv, i. 23
Bebrijs, rb Beiov, ii. 9
Biyydvetv, ii. 21
Bvrjaxeiv, diroBvrjaxetv, ii. 20
Bpiappeietv, ii. 15
Bvpbs, iii. 8
Bipa tov X0701), iv. 3
iip;cos, iii. 16
virevavrios, ii. 14
biropovrj, i. 11
variprjpa, i. 24, p. 267 sq.
Valentinianism, different forms of, p.
264 sq.
Valentinians accept St Paul and St
John, p. 268
Valentinus, use of pleroma by, p. 263
vathikin, p. 366
versions of tbe Epistle to the Lao
diceans, Latin, p. 289 ; Bohemian,
German, and English, p. 295 sq.
Word, the, p. 99 ; see Logos, Christ
Wycliffe, on the apocryphal Epistle to
the Laodiceans, p. 295
Yavana or Tona, p. 388
Zeller on Essenism, p. 378 sq.
Mend Avesta, p. 385
Zoroastrianism and Essenism, p. 385
sq.

CAMBRIDGE I , PRINTED BY J. & C. K. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.