¦

.' ¦ I: give iht/t;06oks:
j for. the founding t)f,a. ColUgt-ai-tk^,Colo>iyr'

*n*ar^

Y^ILE«¥MII¥EI&SinrY«

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

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

ffiambtiigr :
PRINTED BT C. J. CLAY, Sl.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS,

ST PAUL'S
EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS
AND TO
PHILEMON.

A REVISED TEXT

INTRODUCTIONS, NOTES, AND DISSERTATIONS.

BT
J. B. LIGHTFOOT, D.D.
canon op st Paul's;
htilsean professor of divinity,
AND
HONORARY FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.

Hon&on :
MACMILLAN AND CO.
i875.
[All Bights reserved.]

mimht&i moy riNecOe KA9COC KAfCO xpicToy.

ITaCXof yevopevos piyioros vTroypap.ii.6s. Clement.

OvX lis HavXos 8iaTa.o-o-op.ai vptv ckcivos aVocn-oAor,
iya> KaraKpiros' e<elvos i\ev6epos, iya> Se p*XPl v^v SovXos.
Ignatius.

OiVe cya> oiVe aXXoy opoios epol bvvarai KaraKoXovdfjo-ai
rfj o-o(pla tov paKaplov /cat ivho^ov Tlavkov. Polycarp.

PREFACE.

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
dention, of appending, to my commentary on the Colossian
-Epistle an essay on ' Christianity and Gnosis.' This- intention
jhas not been fulfilled in the letter; but the subject enters-
jlargely into the investigation of the Colossian heresy, where-
3 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

vi Preface.
could not be discussed with any advantage apart from the
Epistle to the Ephesians, for the three letters are inseparably
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 tlie Lyeus  i — 72
II. The Colossian Heresy  73 — 113
On some points connected with the Essenes.
1. The name Essene  114— 119
2. Origin and Affinities of the Essenes  11 9 — 1 57
3. Essenism and Christianity  158 — 179
III. Character and Contents of the Epistle  180 — 194
TEXT AND NOTES  197—3"
On some Various Readings in the Epistle  312 — 322
On the meaning of Trkq papa  323 — 339
The Epistle from Laodicea  340 — 366
EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
INTRODUCTION  369— 39S
TEXT AND NOTES  399—412
INDEX  415— 424

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

LYING in, or overhanging, the valley of the Lycus, a situation
tributary of the Maeander, were three neighbouring ^^
towns, Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Colossse1. The river flows, cities.

1 The following are among the most
important books of travel relating to
this district ; Pococke Description of
the East and Sonne Other Countries, Vol.
n, Part n, London 1745; Chandler
Travels in Asia Minor etc., Oxford
1775; Leake Tour in Asia Minor,
London 1824; Arundell Discoveries in
Asia Minor, London 1834 ; Hamilton
Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and
Armenia, London 184-2 ; Fellows Asia
Minor, London 1839, Discoveries in
Lycia, London 1840; de Tcbihatcheff
Asie Mineure, Description Physique,
Statistique et ArcMologique, Paris
1 853 etc., with the accompanying Atlas
(i860); de 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
ArcMologique en Grece et en Asie
Mineure, continued by Waddington
and not yet completed ; Texier De
scription de VAsie Mineure, Vol. 1
{1839). -*-' *s ^ar^y necessary to add
the smaller works of Texier and Le Bas
on Asie Mineure (Paris 1862, 1863)
COL.

in Didot's series L'Univers, as these
have only a seoondary value. Of the
books enumerated, Hamilton's work
is the most important for the topo
graphy, etc.; Tchinatcheff's for the
physical features ; and Le Bas and
Waddington' s for the inscriptions,
etc. The best maps are those of
Hamilton and Tchihatcheff ; to which
should be added the Karte von Klein-
Asien by v. Vincke and others, pub
lished 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 of the 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
(1828) is a well-known book. Allomand
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 I

THE CHURCHES OP THE LTCUS.

Their
neighbourhood and inter
course.

Physicalforces at
work.

roughly speaking, from east to west ; but at this point, which
is some few miles above its junction with the Ma?ander, its
direction is more nearly from south-east to north-west .
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 Colossse 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, Colossse 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.
Thus situated, they would necessarily hold constant in
tercourse with each other. We are not surprised therefore
to find them so closely connected in the earliest ages of
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.
The physical features of the neighbourhood are very strik
ing. Two potent forces of nature are actively at work to
change the face of the country, the one destroying old land
marks, the other creating fresh ground.

and an introduction by the Rev. H. B.
Tristram. This -is a selection from
a larger series of Svoboda's photo
graphs, published separately.
1 The maps differ very considerably
in this respect, nor do the statements
of travellers always agree. The di
rection of the river, as given in the
text, accords with the maps of Hamil
ton and Tohihatcheff, and with the
accounts of the most accurate writers.

8 Anton. Itin. p. 337 (Wesseling)
gives the distance as 6 miles. See also
Fellows Asia Minor p. 283, Hamilton
1. p. £14. The relative position of the
two cities appears in Laborde's view,
pi. xxxix.
3 I do not find any distinct notice
of the distance ; but, to judge from the
maps and itineraries of modern tra
vellers, this estimate will probably be
found not very far wrong.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 3
On the one hand, the valley of the Lycus was and is Frequent
, , earth-
especially liable to violent earthquakes. The same danger quakes.
indeed extends over large portions of Asia Minor, but this
district is singled out by ancient writers1 (and the testimony
of modem 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 neighbourhood3.
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-tme>
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 Clermont4. Ancient monuments are
buried, fertile lands overlaid, river-beds choked up and streams
diverted, fantastic grottos 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 See especially Strabo xii. 8. 16 ' The old town was destroyed about 25
(p. 578) rb iroXirpTiTov rijs x&Pas Kai years past by an earthquake, in which
rb eiaeiarov el yap Tts SXKtj, ko! r\ 12,000 people perished.'
AaoSiiceia eUtraaros, nal rrp irK-qaiox&poo 3 See below p. 38.
St Kdpovpa. i Tchihatcheff P. 1. Geogr. Phys.
2 ThusPococke (p. 71) in 1745 writes Comp. p. 344 sq., esp. p. 353. See the
of Denizli, which is close to Laodicea, 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,
andmanu- . . T
factures of the fertility of the district was and is unusually great. Its
trict 1S" ricn pastures fed large flocks of sheep, whose fleeces were of
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 esteemed6. Here also we read of a guild
•of dyers6. And lastly, Colossse gave its name to a peculiar
1 Fellows Asia Minor p. 283. vvpov xp^paros, irXrialov oIkovptcs. For
2 See note 4. this strange adjective Kopafos (which
s Boeckh Corp. Inscr. no. 3924 (at seems to be derived from n6pa£ and to
Hierapolis) toSto rb fyipov are<pavdi -^ mean 'raven-black') see the passages
tpyaalar&v [Sacpiiav. See Laborde's in Hase and Dindorf's Steph. Thes.
view, 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, iropQvpafiaipeh. context. Vitruvius represents this as
« Strabo xiii. 4. 14 (p. 630) tan b~k the natural colour of the fleeces, and
¦Kal irpos- pa<j>T]v epluv OavpaarQs dp.- attributes it to the water drunk by the
perpov rb Kara rty 'lepav lroXw ildwp, sheep. See also Plin. N. H. viii. 48
Sa-re ra iK r&v Wwi) fiairropem hApCKka § 73. So too Hieron. adv. Jovin. ii.
etvai rots ix r9\% k&kkov Kal rots aXovp- 2 1 (11. p. 358) ' Laodicese indumentis
ytaai. ornatus incedis.' The ancient accounts
6 Strabo xii. 8. 16 (p. 578) <ptpu b" b of the natural colour of the fleeces in
wepl tV AaoSiKeiav twos Trpofiarav this neighbourhood are partially con-
Aperas oOk eh paKaKorrrra povav twv firmed by modern travellers ; e.g. Po-
iploiv, J KO' r&v MtXtiriaiK iiaipipu, cocke p. 74, Chandler p. 228.
&\\a koI els rty nopaftv xpoav, ware 6 Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3938 [^ <?p-
xal vpoaodevovrtu \apirpws Air' airav, yaala\ rSv yva<pi\uv Kal fiaipiuv ruv\
Ciairep xal ol KoKoaayvol djrd rod bpu- a\ovpy[w]i'.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. g
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, t. Laodi-
deserves to be considered first. Laodice was a common name jts name
among the ladies of the royal house of the Seleucidse, as*°dhis"
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 Lycus9,
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 situated5 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 Lycus6. 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 vepribus nascitur cyclaminum...
flos ejus colossinus in coronas admit-
titur,' a passage which assists in de
termining the colour.
2 iirl Avk<p, Boeckh Corp. Inscr. no.
3938, PtoL Geogr. v. 2, Tab. Peut.
* laudicium pilycum ' ; irpos [rip] Avxtp,
Eckhel Num. Vet. in. p. 166, Strabo
1. c, Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 5881, 5893;
vpbs Avkov, Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 6478.
A citizen was styled AaoSiKeis dirb
Avkov, Diog. Laert. ix. 12 § 116.
3 Plin. N. H. v. 29.
4 Steph. Byz. s.v., who quotes the
oracle in obedienoe to which (us {k4\cv-
ae Zeiis vfi§pep£n)s) it was founded.
5 For descriptions of Laodicea see
Smith p. 250 sq., Pococke p. 71 sq.,
Chandler p. 224 sq., Arundell Seven
Churches^. 84 sq., Asia Minor 11. v. 180

sq. , Fellows AsiaMinor 280 sq., Hamil
ton 1. p. 514 sq., Tohihatcheff P. 1. p.
252 sq., 258 sq. -See also the views in
Laborde, pi. xxxix, Allom and Walsh
11. p. 86, and Svoboda phot.- 36 — 38.
The modern Turkish name is Eski-
hissar, 'the Old Castle,' corresponding
to the modern Greek, Pale6kastro,
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 affluentibus Asopo et Capro'; see
Tohihatcheff P. 1. p. 258. Strabo
xii. (1. c.) is more careless in his de
scription (for it can hardly be, as
Tohihatcheff assumes, that he has
mistaken one of these two tributaries
for the Lycus itself), ivravda 8£ Kal
b Kdirpos Kal 0 Avkos avpfidWe t$

6 THE CHURCHES OF 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
polity.0 " 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 now3. 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.
MaidvSpip irorapQ irorapos eipeyiBiis, The modern name of the Lycus is
where ivravda refers to b irepl rty Tchoruk Sti.
AaoSiKuav to'ttos, and where by the 1 The modern name of Cadmus is
junction of the stream with the Mae- Baba-Dagh, 'The father of mountains.'
ander must be intended the junction a Strabo xii. 1. c. ^ Si AaodUeta
of the combined stream of the Lycus piKpk irporepov otaa atifyaiv IXaflev i<p'
and Caprus. On the coins of Lao- iipwv Kal tuiv r^pertpwv iraripoiv, Katroi
dicea (Eckhel in. p. 166, Mionnet rv. KaKuffeiaa ix iroXtopHas M MiSpiSdrov
p. 330, ib. Suppl. vii. p. 587, 589) rov 'Evirdropos. Strabo flourished in
the Lycus and Caprus appear to- the time of Augustus and the earlier
gether, being sometimes represented years of Tiberius. The growing im-
as a wolf and a wild-boar. The Asopus portance of Laodicea dates from before
is omitted, either as being a less im- the age of Cicero : see p. 7.
portant stream or as being less capa- 3 Strabo I.e.; Diog. Laert. ix. 11
ble of symbohcal representation. Of § 106, 12 § 116; Philostr. Vit. Soph.
modern travellers, Smith (p. 250), and i. 25; Eckhel Doctr. Num. Vet. m.
after him Pococke (p. 72), have cor- p. 162, 163 sq.
rectly described the position of the 4 Bev. iii. 17; see below p. 43.
streams. Chandler (p. 227), misled by 5 Strabo I.e.
Strabo, mistakes the Caprus for the 6 The ruins of Laodicea have form-
Lycus and the Lycus for the Maaander. ed the quarry out of which the modern

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 7
Not less important, as throwing light on the Apostolic Its polit;.
history, is the political status of Laodicea. Asia Minor aB the
under the Romans was divided into districts, each compris- '^J,^,*
ing several towns and haying 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 Siot/cr/cns — ¦
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 court3; hither at stated seasons flocked suitors, advo-

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 Corp. Inscr. no.
3935. See especially Hamilton 1. p.
515 sq., who describes these ruins as
' bearing the stamp of Roman extrava
gance and luxury, rather than of the
stern and massive solidity of the
Greeks.' 1 See Becker and Marquardt RSm.
Alterth. in. 1. p. 136 sq.
2 See Cic. ad Att. v. 21, 'Idibus
Februariis... forum institueram agere
Laodicea? 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), h rats peflaran i^erd fe
ral dioiKriaeat rrjs 'Aalas TJ KLfivpaTiKTJ.
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 Earn. ii. 17, iii. 5, 7, 8,
ix. 25, xiii. 54, 67, xv. 4 ; ad Att. v. 16,
17, 20, 21, vi. 1, 2, 3, 7. He visited
Laodicea on several occasions, some
times making a long stay there, and
not a few of his letters are written
thence. See especially his account of
his work there, ad Att. vi. 2, ' Hoc foro
quod egi ex Idibus Februariis Laodicea?
ad Kalendas Maias omnium dioece-
sium, pra?ter Cilicia?, mirabilia qua?-
dam emcimus ; ita multa? eivitates,

8 THE CHURCHES OF 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 address themselves in succession, the one writing
from his captivity in Rome3, the other from his exile at
Patmos4.
Its religi- On the religious worship of Laodicea very little special in-
ship. " 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
Laodicenus5. 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 quardt I.e. p. 138 sq. It had lost its
have been second in importance to original sense, as the mother city of a
none of the cities in his province, ex- colony. Laodicea is styled 'metropolis'
cept perhaps Tarsus. See also the on 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 Cehenaa to the Epistle to the Ephesians.
(Apamea Cibotus), the metropolis of 4 Bev. 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 : Orat. p. 578 sq. (passim). In the coins com-
xxxv (n. p. 69) %vvdyerai irXijBos dvSpa- memorating an alliance with some other
7iw oiKaiopiviav, SiKafbvTav, ijyepbvuv, city Laodicea is represented by Zeus ;
iirriperiov, ofoerfie, k.t.X. e.g. Mionnet IV. pp. 320, 324, 331 sq.,
2 On this word see Becker and Mar- Suppl. vn. pp. 586, 589.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

9

refoiinded by a Syrian king and is not unlikely to have
adopted some features of Syrian worship1.
a. On the north of the valley, opposite to the sloping 2. Hieiia-
hills which mark the site of Laodicea, is a broad level terrace it/Stua-
jutting out from the mountain side and overhanging the plain tion-
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 Mseander
and the Lycus ; but, as the Maeander above its junction
with the Lycus passes through a narrow ravine, they blend,

1 aceic or &ceic AAoAwecoN. See
Waddington Voyage en Asie Mineure
au point de vue Numismatique (Paris
J8S3) pp. 25, 26 sq. Mr Waddington
adopts a suggestion communicated to
him by M. de Longperier that this
word represents the Aramaic SftSJ ' the
strong, mighty,' which appears also in
the Arabic 'Aziz.' This view gains
some confirmation from the fact, not
mentioned by Mr Waddington, that
"Aftfos was an epithet of the Ares of
Edessa : Julian Orat. iv; comp. Cure-
ton Spic. Syr. p. 80, and see de Lagarde
Gesamm. Abhandl. p. 16. On the other
hand this Shemitic word elsewhere,
when adopted into Greek or Latin, is
written'Af if os or Azizus : see Garrucci in
the ArchcBologia xliii. p. 45 'Tyrio Sep-
timio Azizo,' and Boeckh Corp. Inscr.
gSgs'Afr.gos'Ayplira'Ev'po!. M.deLong-
perier offers the alternative that AceiC,
i.e. 'Atrfs, is equivalent to 'Agmtikos.
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 AC6IC is represented with his
hand on the horns of a goat, and on
the strength of this coincidence would
identify him with ' the Azazel of the
Semites ' [Saint Paul, p. 359), though
tradition and orthography alike point to
some other derivation of Azazel (7TKW) .

3 For descriptions of Hierapolis,
see Smith p. 245 sq., Pococke 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. 'lepairoXts, Leake
Num. Hell. p. 67), appears not to occur
as a designation of the Phrygian city,
which seems always to be written Hie
rapolis. The citizens however are
sometimeB called 'lepoiroXirai on the
coins. The modern name is given different
ly by travellers. It is generally called
Pambouk-Ealessi, 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, Pococke, Chand
ler, Arundell, Tchihatcheff, 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 says
'Hierapolis, now called Tabuk-Kale
or Pambuk-Kale' (p. 252).

IO

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Remark able
physical
features.

Their
relation to
the Apos
tolic his
tory.

when seen from a distance, with the loftier range of the
Mesogis which overhangs the right bank of the Mseander
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
striking beauty of the scenery has no value. It is not
probable that he had visited this district when the letters
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-

1 Strabo xiii. 4. 14 (p. 629) says
vireppaXovai de ri]V MeffwyfSa . . . TroXets
elal wpbs piv rfj Mefl-wyfSt KaravTiKpit
AaoSiKetas 'lepd iroXts, k.t.X. He can
not mean that Hierapolis was situated
immediately in or by the Mesogis (for
the name does not seeni ever to be ap
plied to the mountains between the
Lycus and Ma?ander), 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 Me
ander) is the Laodicean Hierapolis'
(to distinguish it from others of the
name); but KaravnKpi cannot be sepa
rated from AaoSuceias 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 Plaoe-
shared in common with the neighbouring towns, it had another
source of wealth and prosperity peculiar to itself. The streams
to which the seenery 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 baths2. 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-
bear ample testimony. More favoured than Laodicea, it has 0f jts
not in its immediate neighbourhood any modern town or ruiM'
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- eipelijs irpotpeplaraTov ovSas airdvruv,
tropolis, see below, p. 70, note 1. %ctfy)ois, xpvaoiroXi. 'lepdiroXi, irorvia Nu/t-
2 Strabo 1. 0. ovra S' iarlv dipOovov <j>u>v, vdpaav, dyXatyai., Kexaapivr).
to TrXijSos tov vdaros ware tj toXis pearij 4 Mionnet iv. p. 297, 306, 307,
tuv airopdnov [SaXavelwv iarl. ib. Suppl. vn. p. 567 ; Waddington
3 Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3909, 'A<rt5os 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 thermse, as
might be expected, are among the more prominent.
Its religi- A city, which combined the pursuit of health and of
ship. " gaiety> na(i fitly chosen as its patron deity Apollo, the god
alike of medicine and of festivity, here worshipped especially
as ' Archegetes,' the Founder1. 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
tonium. . . ...
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 ; adds ov prjv Kal ttjv alrlav avrov avvvoy-
Mionnet iv. pp.297, 301,307,1b. Suppl. oat. txu, Xiyu Si a re erSov lis eTSov xal
vn. p. 568, 569, 570. In coins struck a iJKovaa as iJKovaa. Ammian. Maro.
to commemorate alliances with other xxiii. 6. 18 also mentions this mar-
cities, Hierapolis is represented by vel, but speaks cautiously, 'ut asse-
Apollo Archegetes: Mionnet iv. p. 303, runt quidam,' and adds 'quod qua
ib. Suppl. vn. 572, 573,574; Waddington causa eveniat, rationibus physiois per-
Voyage etc. p. 25 ; and see Eckhel mittatur.' Comp. Anthol. vn. p. 190
111. p. 156. On the meaning of Ar- EH ns dirdy^aadai piv bwct davdrov S'
chegetes, under which name Apollo was imOvpa, e% 'IepSs jrdXeus \pvxpbv vSap
worshipped by other cities also, who ttUtu ; Stobasus Eel. i. 34, p. 680. La-
regarded him as their founder, see borde states (p. 83) that he discovered
Spanhehn on Callim. Hymn. Apoll. 57. by experiment that the waterB 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 wpovola...ehc dimSo- tion of the marvel. Other modern
Tots rial Svvdpeai tovtov avpfiaivovros. travellers, who have visited the Pluto-
See also Plin. N. H. ii. 93 § 95 'lo- nium, are Cockerell (Leake p. 342),
cum... matris tantum magna? sacerdoti and Svoboda. In Svoboda's work a
jnnoxium.' Dion Cass. (Xiphil.) lxviii. chemical analysis of the waters is
2 7, who also witnesseclthe phenomenon, given.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 1 3
of the 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- Epktetus.
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
Epietetus, 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 1 Did he ever meet the great Apostle himself, while Epietetus
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 Epietetus certainly was not ;
his Stoic doctrine and his Stoic morality are alike apparent:
but nevertheless his language presents some strange coin
cidences 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
history 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 Colossi. Only within the of.d?ter\,
J _ mining 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 Chona? (Colossa?) 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 inscr. 1693 b.
See also Mionnet rv. pp. 296, 305 ; 2 Steph. Byz. s.v. diro rov lepa toX-
Leake Num. Hell. p. 66. Xa txav.
The worship of Serapis appears else- 3 See Philippians, pp. 312, 313,

14

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

inscription found in situ and 'giving the name1. Herodotus
Subterra- states that in Colossas the river Lycus disappears in a sub
net of° the" terranean cave, emerging again at a distance of about five
Lycus. stades'"; 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 Colossa?,
no such subterranean channel has been discovered. But on
the other hand the appearance of the river at this point sug
gests 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 (Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3956) with
the letters ...HNOON, found nearChona?.
2 Herod, vii. 30 airiKero is KoXoaads,
nrbXiv peydXijv ^pvyiTjS, iv T-rj AOkos iro-
rapbs is xaapa yrjs iafidXXwv dtpavlfe-
rai, eVetrct Sid araSidov ws irivre pd-
Xiara kij dvacpaivopevos eVStSot Kal ovros
is rbv M.alav5pov.
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 Colossa?. It stands on the
Tchoruk Sd (Lycus) at the point where
it is joined by two other streams, 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;

Spos KdSpos t£ ov Kal b AiJ/cos /Set Kal
dXXos bpojvvpos T(p 6pei' rb irXiov 5'
ovros orb yijs pvels elr' dvaKvipas avvi-
ireaev els ravrd tois &X\ois Trorapois, kp-
tpalvav dpa Kal r6 iroXvTprjrov rijs x&Spas
Kal to etiaeiarov. If the Lycus is meant,
may not avviireaev imply that this re
markable feature had changed before
Strabo wrote ?
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
Colossa?, but thinks that he has dis
covered the subterranean course of the
Lycus, to which Herodotus refers, much
higher up a stream, close to its source
(' a dix pas de cette source'), which he
describes as ' a deux lieues au nord de
Colossa?.' Yet in the same paragraph
he says ' Or il [Herodote, exact cice
rone] savait que le Lycus disparait
pres de Colossce, ville considerable de
la Phrygie' (the italics are his own).
He apparently does not see the
vast difference between his pres de
Colossce thus widely interpreted and

THE CHURCHES OP 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
Colossse. 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 Colossse 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 greatness
Eastern and Western Asia, Colossse 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 great3.' But after
this time its glory seems to wane. The political supremacy
the precise h rf 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 Colossa? ; 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 x Plin. N.H. xxxi. * § 20. This is
if so, Herodotus has expressed himself the Ak-Su, which has strongly petrify-
very carelessly. On the whole Ha- ing qualities.
milton's solution seems much more 2 Herod, vii. 30. See p. 14, note 2.
probable. 3 Xen. Anab. i. 2. 6 i^eXavvei Sia $pu-
Arundell's account (Seven Churches ylas...els KoXoaads, ttoXiv ohovpiv-qv,
p, 98 sq., Asia Minor p. 160 sq.) is eiSalpova Kal peydXrjv.

16 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
and later of Laodicea and the growing popularity of Hierapolis gradu
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,
Colossa? 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 places3. Without doubt Co
lossa? was the least important Church, to which any epistle of
St Paul was 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
Colossce or Colassce? So far as the evidence goes, the con
clusion would seem to be that, while Colossse alone occurs
during the classical period and in St Paul's time, it was after
wards supplanted by Colassse, when the town itself had either
disappeared altogether or was already passing out of notice4.
i ir&Xiapa, 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 praster jam Ancyra here mentioned is not the
dicta, Ancyra, Andria, Cehenas, Colos- capital of Galatia, but a much smaller
ea?,' etc. The commentators, referring Phrygian town.
to this passage, overlook the words » Laborde p. 102 «De cette grande
,'pra?ter jam dicta,' and represent Pliny celebrite de Colossa? il ne reste presque
as calling Colossa? '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 resteB d'un theatre de meoiocre
with Strabo's statement. But in fact dimension, une acropole sans hardi-
Pliny has already exhausted all the esse,' etc.
considerable towns, Hierapolis, Lao- 3 Geogr. v. -z.
dicea, Apamea, etc., and even much 4 All Greek writers till some cen-
less important places than these (see turies after the Christian era write it

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

17

Considered ethnologically, these three cities are generally Ethnologi-
regarded as belonging to Phrygia.

But as they are situated tionToT

on the western border of Phrygia, and as the frontier line tte. three
separating Phrygia from Lydia and Caria was not distinctly

KoXoff<ro£ : so Herod, vii. 30, Xen.
Anab. i. 2. 6, Strabo xii. 8. 13, Diod.
xiv. 80, Poly«n. Strat. vii. 16. 1 ;
though in one or more mss of some
of these authors it is written KoXaaaal,
showing the tendency of later scribes.
Colossa is also the universal form in
Latin writers. The coins moreover, even
as late as the reign of Gordian (a.d. 238
— 244) when they ceased to be struck,
universally have KOA0CCHN0I (or KO-
AOCHNOl); Mionnet iv. p. 267 sq.:
see Babington Numismatic Chronicle
New series in. p. 1 sq., 6. In Hie-
rooles (Synecd. p. 666, Wessel.) and
in the Apostolic Constitutions (vii. 46)
KoXaaaal 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
„ KoXoaaos, the question of the correct
spelling might be regarded as settled ;
but in a Phrygian city over which so
many Eastern nations swept in suc
cession, who shall say to what lan
guage the name belonged, or what are
its affinities ?
Thus, judging from classical usage,
we should say that KoXoaaal was the
old form and that KoXaaaal 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 KoXoaaais are
overwhelming. It is read by NBDFGL
(A is obliterated here and C is want
ing) ; and in the Old Latin, Vulgate,
and Armenian Versions. On the other

hand iv KoXaaaais is read by EP. 17.37.
47, and among the versions by the Mem-
phitic and the Philoxenian Syriac
(jsdASot^X&B, though the marg.
gives KOACCAIC). In the Peshito also
the present reading represents KoXcttr-
trots, 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* EP . 37 (EoXa-
rroets) .47. C is wanting here, but has
EoXoffcraets in the subscription. On
the other hand KoXoaaaeis (or KoXoa-
aais) appears in KB1 (according to
Tregelles, but B3 Tisch.; see his introd.
p. xxxxviii) DFG (but G has left Eo-
Xaaaaeis in the heading of one page,
and KoXooa-oets in another) L. 17 (Ko-
Xotraets), in the Latin Version, and in
the margin of the Philoxenian Syriac.
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 irpos KoXatr-
aaets or vpos KoXaaaaeis conform to
the opening iv KoXoaaais or iv KoXaa
aais, as shown in G, we seem to
arrive at the conclusion that, while iv
KoXoaaais was indisputably the original
reading in the opening, irpos KoXaa
aaeis was probably the earlier reading
in the title. If so, the title must

COL.

i8

Theirpolitical
relations.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
traced, this designation is not persistent1. Thus Laodicea is
sometimes assigned to Caria, more rarely to Lydia2 ; and again,
Hierapolis is described as half Lydian, half Phrygian8. On
the other hand I have not observed that Colossa? 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

have been added at a somewhat later
date ; which is not improbable.
Connected with this question is the
variation in the adjectival form, -rpios
or -aais. Parallels to this double ter
mination occur in other words ; e.g.
AoKiprjvos, AoKipevs ; AaoSiKijvos, Aao-
StKevs; Nikotjcos, Ntraeu's; 'SayaXaaaij-
vis, "ZayaXaaaeis, etc. The coins,' while
they universally exhibit the form in o,
are equally persistent in the termina
tion -ipos, KOAOCCHNOiN ; and it is
curious that to the form KoXoaarjuot
in Strabo xii. 8 § 16 (p. 578) there is
a various reading KoXcto-o-aets. Thus,
though there is no necessary con
nexion between the two, the termina
tion -r;v6s seems to go with the 0 form,
and the termination -aevs with the u.
form. For the above reasons I have written
confidently iv KoXoaaais in the text,
and with more hesitation wpbs KoXaa
aaeis in the superscription.
1 Strabo, xiii. 4. 12 (p. 628) rd 5'
il-TJs iwl rd vona pipy tois totois Tovrots
ipirXoKds txei ptypi vpos tov lavpov,
ware koI to $pvyia Kal rd KapiKd Kal
rd AiSia Kal fri rb. rwv Mvawv SvaSta-
Kpira etvai irapaTlirrovTa els aXXi/Xci"

els Si ri)V avy%vaiv ravripi ov pixpa
ovXXapfidvei to tovs 'Tupalovs /mj Kara
(pv\a SieXelv avrovs k.t.X.
2 To Phrygia, Strabo xii. 8. 13 (p.
576), Polyb. v. 57, and so generally;
to Caria, Orac. Sibyll. iii. 472 KapiSv
dyXaov diarv, Ptol. v. 2, Philostr. Vit.
Soph. i. 25 (though in the context
Philostratus adds that at one time tj
$pvyla ZvveraTTeTo); to lydia, Steph.
Byz. s.v. On the coins the city is
sometimes represented as seated be
tween two female figures (bpf fiA and
KApiA; Eckhel hi. p. 160, comp.
Mionnet iv. 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, p. 65, note 5,
and comp. Wesseling, Itin. p. 665.
3 Steph. Byz. s.v. says /teraft) $pv-
ylas Kal AvSlas irbXis. But generally
Hierapolis is assigned to Phrygia ; e.g.
Ptol. v. 2, Vitruv. viii. 3 § 10.
4 Colossa? 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, Polya?n. Sft-a*. vii.
16. 1.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. ig
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 re-
transferred from the one to the other ; till finally, before the
Christian era, they became a permanent part of Asia, their
original province. Here they remained, until the close of the
fourth century, when a new distribution of the Roman empire
was made, and the province of Phrygia Pacatiana created with
Laodicea as its capital*.
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 ™ j!5j[jotu,_
fact is established by ample independent testimony. When, h°od.
with the insolent licence characteristic of Oriental kings, An
tiochus the Great transplanted two thousand Jewish families
from Babylonia and Mesopotamia into Lydia and Phrygia4, 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 b.o. 49 they seem sense, as applying to the Roman pro-
to have been permanently attached to vince.
'Asia': before that time they are 2 Cio. ad Earn. xiii. 67 'ex pro-
bandied about between Asia and Ci- vincia mea Ciliciensi, cui scis rpels
licia. These alternations are traced by Sioix^aeis 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. 641 sq. See Becker and Marquardt Asia? nostrarum dicecesium' and ' in
Rom. Alterth. in. 1. p. 130 sq< Lao- hac mea Asia.' See also above p. 7,
dioea is assigned to 'Asia' in Boeckh notes 2, 3.
Corp. Inscr. 6512, 6541, 6626. 3 Hierocles Synecd. p. 664 sq. (Wes-
The name ' Asia ' will be used seL) : see below p. 6g.
throughout this chapter in its political * Joseph. Ant iq. 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 proprsetor 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 capital3.
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) etra
'Airdpeia ij Kifiwrbs Xeyopivi) Kal Aao-
SlKeia atirep elal piyiarai tuv Kara rip)
Qpvylav woXeav. Below § 15 (p. 577)
he says 'Airdpeia 8' iarlv ipiropiov piya
ttjs ISlas Xeyopivrjs 'Aalas Sevrepevov
perd tt]v "Eipeaov. The relative im
portance of Apamea and Laodicea two
or three generations earlier 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.
2 In Josephus l.e, the words are ret
Kord rijv $pvylav Kal AvSlav, the two
names being under the vinculum of
the one article: while immediately
afterwards Lydia is dropped and Phry
gia alone named, trip\pai nvds...els
typvylav, 3 Cic. pro Place. 28 ' Sequitur auri
ilia invidia Judaici...Quum aurum Ju-
da?orum nomine quotannis ex Italia et
ex omnibus provinciis Hierosolyma

exportari soleret, Flaccus sanxit edieto
ne ex Asia exportari liceret...multitu-
dinem Judasorum, flagrantem non-
numquam in concionibus, pro repub-
lica contemnere gravitatis summa?
fuit... Apamea? manifesto comprehen-
sum ante pedes pra?toris in foro ex-
pensum est auri pondo centum paullo
minus... Laodicea? viginti pondo paullo
amplius.' Josephus (Antiq. xiv. 7. 2), quoting
the words of Strabo, iripjpas Se Mt0/>t-
Sdr-ns els Ka f\a/3e...Td tov lovSalav
OKTaKoaia raXavra, 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 of
Mithridates. 4 This calculation supposes (1) That
the half -shekel 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 OF 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
they thank the Roman Consul for a measure granting to
Jews the liberty of observing their sabbaths and practising '
other rites of their religion2; 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 Csesarea
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 insurgents3. 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 reigns of Severus, from its physical features, or from its
Macrinus, and thf 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
proaches 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 N0O6- 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 Bq., 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- 3 Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10. 21.
tain overhanging Apamea is identified 3 Talm. Babl. MoedKaton 26a, quot-
with Ararat, and the ark (ki/3wto's) is ed by Neubauer, La Geographic dii

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
Lycus3. It may be inferred from other notices that this branch
of trade had a peculiar attraction for the Jews4. 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
polis." 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 Israel5.'
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 tirees.' 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 Talmudieal to the Church ,of Laodicea, Rev. hi. 1 7
passage, Talm. Babl. Baba Metziah ovk oWos 6V1 av el b...yvpvos- avpfiov-
84a (also quoted by Neubauer, p. 311), \eiia aoi dyopdaai . . .' Ipdria Xevxd ha
in which Elijah appearing to R. Ish- irepipdXji, 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 Laodicea,' 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 fidppa SapSiavimv (Arist. Pax 11 74,
the Jewish cemetery at the Porta Por- Acharn. 112) and the QoiviKlSes XapSia-
tuensis (Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 9916) pucai (piat0 Com. in Athen. 11. p. 48 e)
runs thus; 6N9<\ . KITe . AMMIA . of the comic poets.
[e]lOYAe<\ . ATIO . AAXIKIAC. k.t.X., « Talm. Babl. Sabbath 147b, quoted
i.e. hSa Kelrai 'Appla 'lovSata diro byNeubauer La Giographie du Talmud
AaoSiKelas. 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-
which mentions one Trypho from Lao- port's Ereck Millin p. 113, col. 1.

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 y^ted the
in which he evinces so deep an interest. Whether we ex- distou>ts
r when he
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
i • o-r.ii • i meant by
as lying on St Pauls route or as witnessing his labours, phrygiain
But Phrygia was a vague and comprehensive term; nor can l e'
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. stPaul's
and confirmed the churches of Pisidia and Lycaonia founded phrygia on
on his first visit, he passes through 'the Phryarian and Galatian *"? second
' r ° . mission-
country1.' T have pointed out elsewhere that this expression ary jour-
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 Colossse 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 tt)v Qpvyiav Kal YaXa- iii. 1 rfjs 'Irovpalas Kal TpaxuvlnSos
tiki)v x"Pav> *^e correct reading. For xw/>as, Acts xiii. 14 ' Avrioxeiav tt)v Iliai-
this use of Qpvylav as an adjective Slav (the correct reading).
comp. Mark i. 5 iraaa r\ 'lovSata x&Pai s See Galatians, p. 18 sq., 22.
Joh. iii. 22 els rrjv 'lovSaiav yrpi, Luke

24 THE CHURCHES OF 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 conspire 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- of Colossse on his second missionary journey, it is equally
journey, 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,'1 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 —
it
would be northward for the first part of the way, and thus
would lie on the border land of Phrygia and Galatia; where
as on this second occasion, when he was travelling from An
tioch 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 Mseander
and Lycus by the high mountain ranges which bound these
latter to the north2.
1 Acts xviii. 23. St Paul and St Luke is not the country
2 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
the Apostle to the Churches
Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe,
which lay within the Roman province of
Galatia. This interpretation of Gala
tia necessaiily affects his view of St
Paul's routes (pp. 126 sq., 331 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 preach the
Gospel there (pp. 331 sq., 356 sq., 362).
As Antioch in Pisidia would on this
hypothesis be the farthest church in
1 Galatia and Phrygia' which St Paul
visited, his direct route from that city
to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 23, xix. 1)
would naturally He by this valley. I
have already (Galatians pp. iS 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

seems to exclude any visit of The infer-
of the Lycus before his first

ence from

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 provinces 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 which this
view of Galatia creates. The part of
Asia Minor, with which 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?
1 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

St Luke's Roman captivity
narra lve owq language to the Colossians

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
And this inference is confirmed by St Paul's

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. iii. 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, rrjv Qpvylav Kal TaXariKijv x^pav
(see Galatians p. 22), though it has an
important bearing on St Paul's proba
ble route. (6) He states that Troas
was St Paul's aim ('l'objeetif 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 se
cond. 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 oomes 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 him 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 ? 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. Moreover the 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 (Acts xx.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

27

He represents his knowledge of their continued progress, borne out
and even of their first initiation, in the truths of the Gospel, P^*s 0TO
as derived from the report of others. He describes himself language.

13) while his companions sailed, would
not be deterred by any rough or un
frequented paths. But the facts ad
duced by Perrot do not lend them
selves to any such inference, nor does
he himself draw it. He cites an in
scription of the year a.d. 82 which
speaks of A. Ca?sennius 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 confirming 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.
(hi) The notices in the Galatian
Epistle, 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
which 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 ocoupies 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. 9 sq.) ; 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 CHURCHES OP 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-
Sjlence of fessj[on 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 other3. Moreover, if he had
actually visited Colossse, 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 Colos
sians 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 flesh' 4.
and therefore points to Lycaonia and this time, and who on this showing was
Pisidia. But are we to infer on the himself a Galatian? Some mention
same grounds that he was personally would seem to be especially suggested
known to the Corinthians (i Cor. ix. 6), where St Paul is justifying his conduct
and to the Colossians (Col. iv. 10) ? In respecting the attempt to compel Titus
fact the name of Barnabas, as a fa- to be circumcised.
mous Apostle and an older disciple even 1 Col. i. 4.
than St Paul himself, would not fail to * i. 9 Sib. tovto Kal i)pe1s, dtp' t)s r)pi-
be well known in all the churches. pas r)Koiaapev, 06 iravipeBa, k.t.X. This
On the other hand one or two notices corresponds to ver. 6 Kadiis Kal iv bpiv,
in the Galatian Epistle present serious &(/>' ijs rjpipas r)Koiaare Kal iiriyvure
obstacles to M. Renan's view. What tt)v xdpiv tov GeoO iv a'Xi/Sela. The
are we to say for instance to St Paul's day when they first heard the preach-
statement, that he preached the Gos- ing of the Gospel, and the day when
pel in Galatia 5t' dadiveiav ttjs aapKos he first heard the tidings of this fact,
(iv. 13)) i-e- because he was detained by are set against each other.
sickness (see tfaZatJares pp. 23 sq., 172), 3 e.g. i. 5—8, 21—23, 25, 28, 29.
whereas his journey to Lycaonia and ii. 5, 6.
Pisidia is distinctly planned with a 4 ii. 1 0i\w ydp ipas elSivai i)XIkov
view to missionary work ? Why again dyuva fy") twip vp&v Kal tGv iv AaoSt-
is there no mention of Timothy, who Kela Kal Saoi oix etipaKav to irpoaairov
was much in St Paul's company about pov iv rapid, tm irapaKXrjOuaiv oi Kap-

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

29

But, if he was not directly their evangelist, yet to him Epaphras
they were indirectly indebted for their knowledge of the truth. ^gdist
Epaphras had been his delegate to them, his representative °* *his
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 adultera
tions by these false teachers, but in its genuine simplicity by
Epaphras 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 Spirit'1.

Slai avrtSv, avpfiifiaoBivres k.t.X. The
question of interpretation is whether
the people of Colossa? and Laodicea
belong to the same category with the
fi<rot, 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 inrip 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
side the Colossians and Laodiceans.
If 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 corporalem. 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 Kal Saoi, see
the note on the passage.
1 i. 6 iv iravrl tQ Koapip tariv Kap-
irotpopovpevov Kal ai%avopevov, KaOus Kal
iv iplv, dip' i)s i)pipas i)Kovaare koI
iiriyvorre ti)v x&P"1 T°v Oeo" & dXi)6ela,
Ka$ds ipdBere diro 'Biratppa tov ayairrj-
tov avvSovXov i)p<3v, os. ianv jriaros

30 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
St Paul's How or when the conversion of the Colossians took place,
YP ^J 1 (I PT1 0 P
at Ephesus we have no direct information. Yet it can hardly be wrong to
mental in connect the event with St Paul's long sojourn at Ephesus.
their con- Jjere he remained preaching for three whole years. It is
version. _ ...
possible indeed that during this period he paid short visits to
54—57. 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
people'2. 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 Greeks'8. 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
iirip ypiSv SiaKovos tov Xpiarov, b Kal xaBAs [/ml] ipdSere diro 'TbiraQpa, trans-
iijXwaas i)p1v ti)v vptSv dyairijv iv irvei- lated in our English Version by the
pan. ambiguous expression, ' as ye also
The various readings which 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 KaStis ipddere has Ka$ws taught by Epaphras,' being an ex-
Kal ipdSere. With this reading the planation of iv dX-nBela. See the notes
passage suggests that the instructions on the 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 Colossa?; whereas the correct Asia, how I was with you all the time',
text identifies them, (ii) For iirip i)pwv and ver. 31 'For three years night and
the received reading is virip vpuv. day I ceased not warning every one
Thus the fact that St Paul did not with tears.' As it seems necessary to
preach at Colossa? in person, but allow for a brief visit to Corinth (2 Cor.
through his representative, is obhterat- xii. 14, xiu. 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. s Acts xix. 10.
The obscurity of rendering is in

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 3 1
'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- Close alii-
polls would doubtless be the cities lying in the valley of the these cities
Lycus. The bonds of amity between these places and Ephesus gUtj|llEplie"
appear to have been unusually strong. 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 m0n and
Laodicean Nymphas5, would fall in with the Apostle of the NymPlias>
Gentiles and hear from his lips the first tidings of a heavenly
life. But, whatever service may have been rendered by Philemon but especi-
at Colossse, or by Nymphas at Laodicea, it was to Epaphras phrag.pa~
especially that all the three 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 are 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 1 Cor. xvi. 19 dairdtovrai vpas al p. 324, 325, 331, 332, Suppl. vn. p.
iKKXijalai rijs 'Aalas. In accordance 583,586, 589; iep<\TTOAeiTCON . 6(J>e-
withthesefactsitshouldbenoticedthat CIOON . OMONOIA, Eckhel in. p. 155,
St Paul himself alluding to this period 15^ Mionnet rv. p. 299, 300, 307,
speaks of 'Asia', as the scene of his Suppl. vn. 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 Erause Civitat. Neocor. § 20.
in the School of Tyrannus; and this * Philem. 1, 1, 19.
continued for two years, so that all 5 Col. iv. 15. On the question
they which dwelt in Asia, etc' whether the name is Nymphas or
a AAOAlKCCON . etbeciOoN . OMO- Nympha, see the notes there.
NOIA, Eckhel m. p. 165, Mionnet rv. « iv. 12, 13.

3 2 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
St Paul We pass over a period of five or six years. St Paul s
stranger to fi^t captivity in Rome is now drawing to a close. During
this dis- -this interval he 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 Mseander ; 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
men"atn" during his residence in Rome, so far as they are known to
Rome. us2_ jt. ;s 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.
Colossa? "We have seen that Colossse was an unimportant place, and
before his that it had no direct personal claims on the Apostle. We
twoinc? 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 Colossse 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- l6' ll> 3 Col. iv. io, n. See Philippians
8 See Philippians p. 6 sq. p. 17 sq. * i 4 8

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 33
wrestling in his prayers on their behalf,' that they might
stand fast and not abandon the simplicity of their earlier faith1.
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 «• Onesi-
t . . . . _ mds a fu-
was also in communication with another Colossian, who had gitive in
visited Rome under very different circumstances. Onesimus, ome"
the runaway slave, had sought the metropolis, the common
sink of all nations3, 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 slave3 into a 'faithful and beloved brother4.'
This combination of circumstances called the Apostle's at- The Apos-
tention to the Churches of the Lycus, and more especially to Bpat0hes
Colossse. His letters, which had been found ' weighty and {j^ j^^Y.
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.
1. He addresses a special letter to the Colossians, written i. The
Epistt T"
in the joint names of himself and Timothy, warning them T0 the
against the errors of the false teachers. He gratefully ac- £™s"
knowledges the report which he has received of their love
and zeal5. 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 philosophy7. The purity of their Christianity The theo-
is endangered by two errors, recommended to them by their the practi-
heretical leaders — the one theological, the other practical — th^Colos- sians.
1 iv. 12, 13. 4 Col. iv. 9; comp. Philem. 16.
s Tac. An. xv. 44. ° i. 3 — 9, 2 1 sq.
3 Philem. II tov irori aot dxpi\orov " ii. 1 sq.
k.t.X. 7 «• 4. 8> 18.
COL.

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 to
The pro- touch the springs of action. As both errors flowed from the
tive'to1 ' same source, they must be corrected by the application of the
I'n'thf68 same remedy, the Christ of the Gospel. In the Person of Christ,
Christ of the one mediator between heaven and earth, is the true solution
pel. of the theological 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-
Eeferences logical creed and their moral principles ; while at the same
phras. *ime ne 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 Colossse3. He did
not return to Colossse as the bearer of the letter, but remained
1 i. 1—20, ii. 9, hi. 4. The two note 4. The later tradition, which
threads are closely interwoven in St makes him bishop of Colossse, 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 chapter. for his flock, can hardly be held to
1. 7, iv. 12. deserve any higher credit. His day is
3 For the reasons why Epaphras the 19th of July in the Western
cannot be identified with Epaphrodi- Calendar. His body is said to he in
tus, who is mentioned in the Phi- the Church of S. Maria Maggiore at
lippian letter, see Philippians p. 60, Rome.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 3£
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 Ephesus3, Tychicus
i . , . . ... . . and Onesi-
who was entrusted with a wider mission at this time, and in its mus ac-
discharge would be obliged to visit the valley of the Lycus4. ^fetter.
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 Colossians6. But he sends The salu-
one or two salutations which 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 Ephesus8
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 consequence7, may have been widely known), and for whom
therefore he asks a favourable reception at his approaching
visit to Colossse, according to instructions which they had already
received ; and Jesus the Just, of whose relations with the

1 Col. iv. 12. prisoner at this time, and have been
a Philem. 23 b avvaixpaXuros pov. removed with his parents to Colossa?.
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 3 Acts xx. 4, 2 Tim. iv. 12.
parents were natives of Giscala and, 4 See below, p. 37,
when the Romans invaded and wasted 6 Col. iv. 7 — 9.
Juda?a, were banished thence with their ° Acts xix. 29.
son to Tarsus. He adds that Epaphras 7 Acts xiii. 13, xv. 37 — 39.
may have been St Paul's fellaw-
3—2

36 THE CHURCHES OP 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 appearing1.
Charge re- Lastly, the Laodiceans were closely connected with the
Laodkel 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 Arcbippus, a resident
either at Colossse 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 misgiving2.
2. The 2* -But, while providing for the spiritual welfare of the
Lettee to wh0ie Colossian Church, he did not forget the temporal inter-
Philemon. _ ° x
ests of its humblest member. Having attended to the solici
tations of the evangelist Epaphras, he addressed himself to
the troubles of the runaway slave Onesimus. The mission of
Tychicus to Colossse 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 man3, and claiming for
giveness for him as a return due from Philemon to himself
as to his spiritual father4.
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. 3 Philem. 11, 16.
2 iv. 15—17. 4 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 Colossse,
and asks Philemon to ' prepare a lodging' for him".
3. But at the same time with the two letters destined espe- 3- Tlie
• n j> n 1* 1 Circular
cialiy tor bolossse, the Apostle despatched a third, which had Lettee, of
a wider scope. It has been already mentioned that Tychicus ^yfc*
was charged with a mission to the Asiatic Churches. It has *e nt to
. Laodicea.
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 Ephesians3.
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 Colossse. Bub he
was not charged to deliver another copy of the circular letter
at Colossa? 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 ancLread at Colossse.
Thus the three letters are closely related. Tychicus is the Personal
^ _ * links con-
personal link of connexion between the Epistles to the Ephe- necting
sians and to the Colossians ; Onesimus between those to the letters.
Colossians and to Philemon.
For reasons given elsewhere5, it would appear that these
three letters were written and despatched towards the close of
1 yy_ j^, 24. 5 See Philippians p. 29 sq. ; where
2 ver. 22. reasons are given for placing the
3 See the introduction to the epis- Philippian Epistle at an earher, and
tle_ the others at a later stage in the
« Ephes. vi. 21, 22. Apostle's .captivity.

38

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

Earthquake in
the Lycus
Valley.

the Apostle's captivity, about the year 63. At some time not-
very distant from this date, a great catastrophe overtook the
cities of the Lycus valley. An earthquake was no uncommon
occurrence in this region1. 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-

11 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 hi. 34,7 Hierapohs 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. i2iStraboxh.8,p.579,
Dion Cass. liv. 30. Strabo names only
Laodicea and Tralles, but Dion Cas-
sius says ij 'Aala rb 'iBvos iiriKovplas
nvbs Sia aeiapovs pdXiara iSelro.
(3) a.d. 60- according to Tacitus
(Ann. xiv. 27); a.d. 64: or 65 according
to Eusebius (Chron. s.a.), who includes
also Hierapolis and Colossa?. To this
earthquake allusion is made in a Sibyh
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 Hierapohs
also suffered.
This hst 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 : the date uncertain, Carura
(Strabo xii. 8, p. 578); A.D. 17 the
twelve cities, Sardis being the worst
suffei-er (Tac. Ann. ii. 7, Plin. N. H.
ii. 86, Dion Cass. lvii. 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. 155, under Anto
ninus Pius, 'Rhodiorum et Asia op-
pida' (Capitol. Anton. Pius 9); a.d.
178, under M. Aurelius, Smyrna and
other cities (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,
4,10); a.d. 262, under Gallienus 11
(Trebell.. Gallien. 5 'Malum tristius in
A sice urbibus fuit... hiatus terra? pluri-
mis in locis fuerunt, cum aqua salsa
in fossis appareret,' ib. 6 'vastatam
Asiam. . .elementorum concussionibus '),
Strabo says (p. 579) that Philadelphia
is more or less shaken daily (KaB'
¦npipav) , and that Apamea has suffered
from numerous earthquakes.
2 Tac. Ann. xiv. 27 ' Eodem anno
ex inlustribus Asia? urbibus Laodicea,
tremore terra? prolapsa, nullo a nobis
remedio propriis opibus revaluit. ' The
year is given ' Nerone iv, Corn. Cosso
consulibus' (xiv. 20). Two different
writers, in Smith's Dictionary of Geo
graphy and Smith's Dictionary of the
Bible, s.v. Laodicea, place the destruc
tion of Laodicea in the reign of Tibe
rius,, confusing this earthquake with
an earlier one (Ann. ii. 47). By this

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

39

quent to the burning of Rome (A.D. 64), and mentions Hiera- Its proba-
polis and Colossse also as involved in the disaster1; while later
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 fire2. 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 earthquakes3, it is far from improbable that he

earlier earthquake 'duodecim celebres
Asia? urbes conlapsa?,' but their names
are given, and not one is situated in
the valley of the Lycus.
1 Euseb. Chron. 01. 210 (11. p. 154
sq., ed. Schone) 'In Asia tres ur
bes terra? motu conciderunt Laodicea
Hierapoli3 Colossa?.' The Armenian
version and Jerome agree in placing
it the next event in order after the fire
at Rome (a.d. 64), though there is 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
Hierapohs was involved in the cata
strophe; comp. ib. v. 289.
2 This is evidently the idea of
Orosius, vii. 7.
3 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.

Grcec. 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 (Pragrn. 42, Mailer's
Pragm. Hist. Grac. in. p. 621) as
erected to commemorate the liberality
of Tiberius in contributing to the re
storation of the ruined cities (seeEckhel
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 which 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
the monument. It should be added
that Nipperdey (on Tac. Ann. ii. 47)
supposes the earthquake at Ephesus

40 THE CHURCHES OP 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
ters36 let" *^e year named by 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 Colossse 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 Rome2, is valuable as illustrating a later notice
in the Apostolic writings3.
St Mark's It has been seen that, when these letters were written,
visit 6 S* Mark was intending shortly to visit Colossse, 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,
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-
whieh comprised the years a.d. 29 — 3 1 ; 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.
»ius- 3 See below, p. 43.
1 Hertzberg (Geschichte Griechen- 4 Two notices however imply that
lands unter der Herrschaft der Romer, St Mark had some personal connexion
n.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: (i) St Peter, writing to the
quakes twice within a few years, a.d. Churches of Asia Minor, sends a salu-
6oandA.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
SibyUines, iv. 107 TXrjpov AaoSUua, ai him to Rome (2 Tim. iv. n Mdpicov
Si rptiaei irori aeiapos irprivlfas, ari)aei dvaXafidv dye perd aeavrov). Thus it
82 lrdXiv t6Xiv eipvdyviav, where arijaei seems fairly probable that St Mark's
must be the 2nd person, ' Thou wilt re- projected visit to Colossa? was paid.
build thy city with its broad streets.'

THE CHURCHES OP 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. ^°ita y
At all events we find him at Miletus, near to the mouth of ColoBSK-
the Mseander1; 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
in A '"'in
his death they pass into the hands of St John2, who takes up Minor.
his abode in Asia Minor. Of Colossse 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 Laodicea3 ; 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- Oorres-
T)011cl.PHCGS
longs the note which was struck by St Paul in the letter to between
Colossse. An interval of a very few years has not materially we1^"
altered the character of these Churches. Obviously the same st Paul's
... . 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 x- T.he
doctrine of
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 '
things, that through Him all things were created and in Him
all things are sustained, that He is the primary source (dpxv)
1 2 Tim. iv. 20. By a strange error evangelized directly or indirectly by
Lequien (Oriens Christ. 1. p. 833) St Paul, we have no means of deciding.
substitutes Hierapolis for Nicopohs in Such a visit is far from unlikely, but
Tit. hi. 12, and argues from the pas- it can hardly have been of long dura-
sage that the Church of Hierapohs tion. A copy of his letters would pro-
was founded by St Paul. bably be sent to Laodicea, as a prin-
2 It was apparently during the in- cipal centre of Christianity in Pro-
terval between St Paul's first captivity consular Asia, which is among the
at Rome and his death, that St Peter provinces mentioned in the address of
wrote to the Churches of Asia Minor the First Epistle.
(1 Pet. i. 1). Whether in this interval s Rev. hi. 14 — 21.
he also visited personally the districts

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 (ap^ij) of the creation of Goda. 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 media
tors, 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-
whichUfoh nition of the theological truth, is enforced by both Apostles
low upon m Very similar 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 throne5'.
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 ministry6. Some

1 Col. i. 15 — 18. per' ipov, k.t.X. Here again it must
2 Rev. hi. 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 (r) dpxl) ttjs KTlaeas tov Oeov), promises to the faithful in the other
which so closely resembles the Ian- six Churches. This double coinci-
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
tix Churches, nor do we there find in the Epistle to the Colossians, can
anything resembling it. hardly, I think, be fortuitous, and
3 Col. iii. 1. suggests an acquaintance with and
4 Ephes. ii. 6 ovv/ryetpev Kal awe- recognition of the earlier Apostle's
KdBiaev k.t.X. teaching on the part of St John.
6 Rev. iii. 21 Swau avrtp KaBlaai 6 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 is it 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 ^"aith de-
sayest I am rich and have gotten me riches and have need110"110611,
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, cea>
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. 1 9. 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. hi. 17, 18, where the correct
if Archippus (as is very probable) had reading with the repetition of the
beenhvingwhenStJohnwrote,thecoin- definite articles, 6 TaXalirtapos Kal b
dence would be still more striking ; see eXeivos, signifies the type, the em-
Trench's Epistles to the Seven Churches bodiment of wretchedness, etc.
in Asia, p. 180. But for reasons given B Tac. Ann. xiv. 27.
elsewhere (Philippians p. 197 sq.), this

44 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
cial neighbours, Apamea and Cibyra, could lay claim \ No one
would dispute her boast that she 'had gotten riches and had
need of nothing.'
Pride of But is there not a second and subsidiary idea underlying
al'wealth." tne Apocalyptic rebuke 1 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 ex-
clusiveness2 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 mind3.
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 knowledge5. 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 Churche8 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- 2 See the next chapter of this 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- 4 i. 27.
byra), xii. 58 (Apamea), he mentions s ii. 2, 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 Laodicea herself had that ye may know what is the hope
not disdained under similar circum- of his cahing, what the riches of tlie
stances to receive assistance from Au- glory of his inheritance in the saints..'
gustus: Strabo, xii. p. 579.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

45

fixed his abode at Ephesus, it would appear that not a few of The early
* ' . . disciples
the oldest surviving members of the Palestinian Church ac- settle in
companied him into ' Asia,' which henceforward became the far Agia
head-quarters of Apostolic authority. In this body of emi
grants Andrew1 and Philip among the Twelve, Aristion and
John the presbyter3 among other personal disciples of the
Lord, are especially mentioned.
Among the chief settlements of this Christian dispersion was andespeci-
Hierapolis. This fact explains how these Phrygian Churches Hierapo-
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 Bethsaida3, the

1 Canon Murator. fol. i, 1. 14 (p. 17,
ed. Tregelles), Cureton's Ancient Sy
riac Documents pp. 32, 34. Comp.
Papias in Euseb. H.E. hi. 39.
2 Papias in Euseb. H. E. hi. 39.
3 Polycrates in Euseb. H.E. iii. 31,
V. 24 QlXiirirov [tov] t&v SwSeKa airo-
arbXbJv, os KeKolpiyrai iv 'lepairbXet,
Kal Sio Bvyaripes avrov yeyijpaKvlai
irapBivoi, Kal i) iripa avrov Bvydr-qp iv
ayltp irveipan iroXtrevaapivrj, rj iv
'JZipiatp avairaterai. 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.
hi. 30), i) Kal roiis diroarbXovs diroSo-
Kipdaovai' Hirpos piv yap Kal QIXititos
iiraiSoiroii)aavTO, QlXiiriros Si Kal rds
Bvyaripas dvSpdaiv ifciSoiKe. On the
other hand in the Dialogue between
Caius 'and Proclus, Philip the Evan
gelist was represented as residing at
Hierapohs (Euseb. H.E. ih. 31) perd
tovtov Si Tapo<pi)TiSes riaaapes al 3?l-
Xiirirov yeyivqvrai ev 'lepairbXei t$ Kara
ri)v 'Aalav 6 rdtpos avrtSv iarlv iKel, Kal
6 tov irarpos avrwv, where the mention
of thefour 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 reheve the Twelve of some
onerous duties (Acts vi. 2—5). (2) Af
ter Philip the Evangehst has preached
in Samaria, two of the Twelve are sent
thitherto 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 Cassarea, 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 Caius and
Proclus as being 'in harmony with
(avvcj. Sav) ' the language of Polycrates.
And accordingly in another passage
(H.E. iii. 39), when he has occasion

46

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Phihp the early friend and fellow-townsman of St John, and the first
with Ms Apostle who is recorded to have held communication with
daughters. fae Gentiles1. Here he died and was buried ; and here after

to mention the conversations of Papias
with Philip's daughters at Hierapohs,
he again supposes them to be the same
who are mentioned in the Acts.
My reasons for believing that the
Phihp who hved at Hierapohs was not
the Evangelist, but the Apostle, are as
follows, (i) This is distinctly stated
by the earhest 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 Caius and
Proclus. I have given reasons else
where for questioning the separate ex
istence of the Roman presbyter Caius,
and for supposing that this dialogue
was written by HippolytuB 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 ah respects therefore
his authority is inferior. Moreover
it is suspicious in form. It mentions
four daughters instead of three, makes
them ah 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 Phihp
the 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 Phihp
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 Phihp 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...elirev 1} rl QiXiiriros,
but there is no reference to Philip the
Evangehst. When therefore we read
later that he conversed with the
daughters of Phihp, it seems natural
to infer that the Phihp 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 Phihp place the
Apostle at Hierapohs; Tischendorf,
Act. Apost. Apocr. p. 75 sq.
On the other hand, those who sup
pose that the Evangehst, 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
quahty. There is no improbability
in supposing that both the Philips
were married and had daughters.
1 John xii. 20.

THE CHURCHES OF 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 00iiected
preachers of the Gospel, which he transmitted to posterity in by 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 the Oracles of the Lord, using the
information thus collected to illustrate the discourses, and
perhaps the doings, of Christ as recorded in the Gospels3.
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 mira
culously escaped from any evil effects4.
1 See above p. 45, note 3. * Euseb. i.e. cis Si Kara robs avrois
2 Euseb. H. E. hi. 39. This is the b Hairlas yevbpevos Sdrynaiv vapeiXn-
general reference for ah those particu- <phai Bavpaalav iirb [dirb ?] TtSv tow
lars respecting Papias which are de- $iXtirirov Bvyaripwv pvqpoveiei, rd vvv
rived from Eusebius. oijpeiariov vexpov ydp avdaraaiv Kar
3 See Westcott, Canon p. 63. On airrbv yeyovviav laropei, Kal aD irdXiv
the opinions of Papias and on the irepov irapdSogov irepl 'lovarov rbv iiri-
nature of his work, I may perhaps be KXnBivra Jiapoafiav 7e-yoy6s k.t.X. The
allowed to refer to an article in the information respecting the raising of
Contemporary Review Aug. 1867, where the dead man might have come from
I have collected and investigated all the daughters of Philip, as the context
the notices of this father. The object seems certainly to imply, while yet the
of Papias' work was not to construct event happened in Papias' own time
a Gospel narrative, but to interpret (icar* avrov). It will be remembered
and illustrate those already existing, that even Iremeus mentions similar
I ought to add that on two minor miracles as occurring in his own age
points, the martyrdom of Papias and (Hcer. ii. 32. 4). Eusebius does not
the identity of Philip with the Evan- say that the miraculous preservation
gelist, I have been led to modify my of Justus Barsabas also occurred in
views since the article was written. the time of Papias.

48 Life and
teaching of Papias.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
If we may judge by his name, Papias was a native of
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. Oth er-

1 Papias, or (as it is very frequently
written in inscriptions) Pappias, is a
common Phrygian name. It is found
several times at Hierapohs, not only
in inscriptions (Boeckh Corp. Inscr.
no. 3930, 3912 a add.) but even on
coins (Mionnet iv. p. 301). This is
explained by the fact that it was
an epithet of the Hierapolitan Zeus
(Boeckh 3817 TJairla Ait aurijpi), just as
in Bithynia this same god was called
Tidiras (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., Ilairlas tov
'S.Tpdrttivos 6 KaXotipevos Aioyivrjs. In
an inscription at Trajanopolis we meet
with it in a curious conjunction with
other familiar names (Boeckh no. 3865 i
add.) Ilairirlas Tpoqttpov Kal T«x«??s
k.t.X. (see Waddington on Le Bas, In
scr. no. 718). This last belongs to the
year a.d. 199. Other analogous Phry
gian names are Ammias, Tatias (with
the corresponding feminines), which
with Latin terminations become Ammi.
anus, Tatianus.
Thus at Hierapolis the name Papias
is derived from heathen mythology,
and accordingly the persons bearing it
on the inscriptions and coins are all
heathens. It may therefore be pre
sumed that our Papias was of Gentile
origin. The inference however is not
absolutely certain, since elsewhere it is
found borne by Jews ; see the Tal-
mudical references in Zunz Namen der
Juden p. 16.

2 Chron. Pasch. sub ann. 163 aim
t$ dyltg Si ILoXvKdpirtp Kal dXXoi 6' dirb
$iXaSeX<peias paprvpovaiv iv "ZpvpvQ' koX
iv Hepydptp Si 'iTepoi, iv ots r\v Kal Ua-
irlas Kal dXXoi iroXXol, tZv Kal 'iyypao^a
qbipovrai rd paprvpia. 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
(scripta) 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 rrj avT-fi Si irepl auTou
ypatjyq Kal dXXa paprvpia avvijirro
...piB' &v Kal M.riTp65ojpos...avr)pr]Tai'
tCiv ye pijv Tore irepifSoT)ruiv paprvpav els
tis iyvwptfero Iii6vios...i^TJs Si xal
dXXoiv iv Hepydptjj iroXei ttjs ' Aalas inro-
pvqpara pepaprvpriKOTUv (fiiperai, Kdp-
irov Kal HairvXov Kal yvvaiKos 'A7a-
BovIktjs k.t.X. He here falls into the
serious error of imagining that Metro-
dorus, Pionius, Carpus, Papylus, and
the others were martyred under M.
Aurehus, whereas we know from their
extant Acts that they suffered in the
Decian persecution. Eor the martyr
doms 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,
which are included in Ruinart (Act.
Sine. Mart. p. 120 sq., 1689) are appa
rently the same which were seen by
Eusebius. Those of the latter are a

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 49
wise he must. have lived to a very advanced age. Eusebius, to Acoountof
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 discrimination. But the adverse verdict of Eusebius
must be corrected by the more sympathetic language of Ire-
nseus2, 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
writer to the Canonical Gospels, but the discussion has no very
direct bearing on our special subject, and may be dismissed
here8. One question however, which has a real importance
as affecting the progress of the Gospel in these parts, has been
late compilation of the Metaphrast, date ; so that the not very serious diffi-
but were probably founded on the culty of his longevity will disappear.
earlier document. At all events the The time of Polycarp's martyrdom
tradition of the persecution in which is fixed by various data as Easter
they suffered could hardly have been a. d. 166 (see Clinton's Fast. Rom. 1.
perverted or lost. Eusebius seems to p. 157).
have found their Acts bound up in the L H. E. hi. 39 acpoSpa apiKcbs rbv
same volume with those of Polycarp, vovv. In another passage (iii. 36), as
and without reading them through, to commonly read, Eusebius makes par-
have drawn the hasty inference that tial amends to Papias by cahing him
they suffered at the same time. But iviip to irdvra Sri pdXtara Xoyitiraros
notwithstanding the error, or perhaps Kal ttjs ypaiprjs clSr/puv, but this pas-
owing to it, this passage in the Eccle- sage is found to be a spurious inter-
siastical History, by a confusion of the polation (see Contemporary Review 1. c.
names Papias and Papylus, seems to p. 12), and was probably added by
have given rise to the statement re- some one who was acquainted with the
specting Papias in the Chronicon Pas- work of Papias and desired to do him
chale and in the Syrian epitome, as it justice.
obviously has misled Jerome respect- 2 Iren. v. 33. 3, 4.
ing Pionius. If so, the martyrdom 3 See on this subject Westcott
of Papias is a fiction, and he may have Canon p. 64 sq. j Contemporary Review
died a natural death at an earlier I.e. p. 12 sq.
COL. 4

50 THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
raised by modem criticism and must not be passed over in
silence.
A modern It has been supposed that there was an entire dislocation
respecting an(l discontinuity in the history of Christianity in Asia Minor
Chnsti- a^ a cert,am epoch ; that the Apostle of the Gentiles was
amty in r ' r
Asia Minor ignored and his teaching repudiated, if not anathematized;
stated and
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 representative1.
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
strong-hold, a repulse at this point must involve its ultimate
defeat along the whole line.
The posi- Of St John himself I have already spoken2. 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
trustworthy sources the sayings of certain Apostles and early
disciples ; but St Paul is not named among tbem. He also
gives short extracts from Papias referring to the Gospels of
St Matthew and St Mark, and mentions that this writer made

1 The theory of the Tubingen duced (at least as far as regards the
school may be studied in Baur'B Christ- Asiatic Churches) by Renan Saint Paul
liche Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhun- p. 366 sq.
derte or in Schwegler's Nachapostoli- 5 See above p. 41 sq.
sches Zeitalter. It has been repro-

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. S1
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.
(i) The range of personal testimony which Papias would be i. The
able to collect depended on his opportunities. Before he had collected
grown up to manhood, the personal reminiscences of St Paul y aPias"
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, Irenseus,
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 the 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
disciples of Christ, of whom alone he is speaking in this preface
to his work, which Eusebius quotes.
(2) But, though we have no right to expect any mention 2. His re-
• f GTGUCGS to
of St Paul where the appeal is to personal testimony, yet with
4—2

5 2 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
theCa- quotations from or references to the Canonical writings^
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
rf^use-06 no reason to 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 Peter2.1
Exactly similar is his language respecting Irenseus also. Ire-
nseus, 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
of Peter3.' There is every reason therefore to suppose that
Eusebius would deal with Papias as he has dealt with Polycarp
and Irenseus, and that, unless Papias had introduced some
1 § 3- Polycarp, in which St Paul's name
2 H. E. iv. 14 b yi toi IloXii/capiros is mentioned ; but the quotation is
iv rjj SijXuBelar) irpos QiXiirTijalovs avroS brought to illustrate the life of Igna-
ypaip-fi ipepopivrj els Sevpo Kixpyral riai tius, and the mention of the Apostle
paprvplais into ttjs Jlirpov irporipas iiri- there is purely accidental.
ctoXijs. This is all that Eusebius s E. E. v. 8 pipvip-ai Si koI ttjs'
says with reference to Polycarp's know- 'ludwav irpiisTt\s iviaroXys, paprvpia c£
ledge of .the Canonical writings. It avrys irXeiara eiatpipuv, opoiut Si Kal
bo happens that in an earlier passage ttjs Hirpov irporipas.
(iii. 36) he has given an extract from

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 53
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
eilence in the case of Papias1.
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 "
Here it seems fair to argue from the well-known to the un- from M8
known. Of the opinions of Papias respecting St Paul we know
absolutely nothing; of the opinions of Polycarp and Irenssus
ample evidence lies before us. 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 Irenseus2. Is it
probable that his opinions should be diametrically opposed to
those of his friend and contemporary on a cardinal point affect
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
1 It is necessary to press this argu- is even more remarkable in other cases.
ment, because though it has never been Thus, when speaking of the epistle of
answered and (so far as I can see) is the Roman Clement (H. E. hi. 38), he
quite unanswerable, yet thoughtful alludes to the coincidences with the
men, who have no sympathy with the Epistle to the Hebrews, but omits to
Tubingen views of early Christian his- mention the direct references to St
tory, still continue to argue from the Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians
silence of Eusebius, as though it had which is referred to by name, and is
some real significance. To illustrate the even silent about the numerous and
omissions of Eusebius I have given patent quotations from the Epistle of
only the instances of Polycarp and St James.
Irenaras, because they are historically 2 Iren. Hear. v. 33. 4.
•connected with Papias ; but his silence

54

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

with the
recogni tion of
St Paul.

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 millen-
narian views.
Millenna- It may indeed be confessed that a man like Papias, whose
consistent8 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 brdught 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 Irenseus 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 Paul.
As the successor of Papias and the predecessor of Clau
dius Apollinaris in the see of Hierapolis, we may perhaps name
probably Abercius or AviRClus1. His legendary Acts assign his epi-

1 The hfe of this Abercius is print
ed in the Bohandist Acta Sanctorum
Oct. 22. -It may safely be pronounced
spurious. Among other incidents, the
saint goes to Rome and casts out a
demon from Lucilla, the daughter of
M. Aurehus and Faustina, at the same
time compelling the demon to take up
an altar from Rome and transport it
through the air to Hierapohs. But
these Acts, though legendary them

selves, contain an epitaph which has
the ring of genuineness and which
seems to have suggested the story to
the pious forger who invented the
Acts. This very interesting memorial
is given and discussed at length by
Pitra, Spicil. Solesm. in. p. 532 sq. It is
inscribed by one Abercius of Hierapohs
on his tomb, which he erected during
his life-time. He declares himself a
disciple of the good shepherd, who

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

55

scopate to the reign of Marcus Aurelius; and, though they Ms succes-
are disfigured by extravagant fictions, yet the date may perhaps S°r'
be accepted, as it seems to be confirmed by other evidence.
An inscription on his tombstone recorded how he had paid one

taught him trustworthy writings (ypdp-
para irtard) and sent him to visit
queenly Rome, where he saw a people
sealed with the bright seal [of bap
tism]. He recounts also a journey to
Syria and the East, when he crossed
the Euphrates. He says that faith
served up to him as a banquet the
i^Gyc from the fountain, giving him
bread and wine. He states that he
has reached his 72 nd year. And he
closes by threatening with severe pe
nalties those who disturb his tomb.
The resemblance of this inscription to
others found in situ in the cemetery at
Hierapohs, after allowance made for
the Christian element, is very striking.
The commencement 'EkXckttjs iroXeuis
closely resembles the form of another
Hierapohtan inscription, Boeckh Corp.
Inscr. 3906; the enumeration of fo
reign tours has a counterpart in the
monument of one Flavius Zeuxis which
states that the deceased had made 72
voyages round the promontory of Ma-
lea to Italy (ib. 3920) ; and lastly, the
prohibition against putting another
grave upon his, and the imposition of
fines to be paid to the treasury and
the city if this injunction is violated,
are echos of language which occurs
again and again on tombstones in this
city (ib. 3915, 3916, 3922, 3923, etc.).
Out of this epitaph, which he found
probablyat Hierapohs, and whieh,as he
himself tells us (§41), was in a much
muthated condition, the legend-writer
apparently created his story, interpret
ing the queen, by which Aberoius himself
probably meant the city of Rome, to
be the empress Faustina, with whom
the saint is represented as having an
interview, M. Aurelius himself being

absent at the time on his German cam
paign. This view, that the epitaph is
genuine and gave rise to the Acts, is
also maintained by Garrucci (Civilta
Cattolica 1856, 1. p. 683, 11. p.84,quoted
in the Acta Sanct. I.e.), whose criti
cisms however are not always sound;
and indeed as a whole it bears every
mark of authenticity, though possibly
it may contain some interpolations,
which its mutilated condition would
encourage. The inscription itself however does
not tell us what office Abercius held or
when he hved. There was a person of
this name bishop of Hierapolis present
at the Council of Chalcedon a. d. 451
(Labb. Cone. iv. 862, 1204, 1341, 1392,
1496, 1 744, ed. Coleti). But a chief pastor
of the Church at this late date would
have declared his office plainly; and the
inscription points to a more primitive
age, for the expressions are archaic and
the writer seems to veil his profession of
Christianity under language studiously
obscure. The open profession of Chris
tianity on inscriptions occurs at an
earlier date in these parts than else
where. Already the word XpiCTIANOC
or XpHCTIANOC is found on tomb
stones of the third century; Boeckh
Corp. Inscr. 3857 g, 3857 p, 3865 1; see
Renan Saint Paul p. 363. Thus we
are entirely at fault unless we accept
the statement in the Acts.
And it is not unreasonable to sup
pose that, so far as regards the date
and office of Abercius, the writer of
these Acts followed some adequate his
torical tradition. Nor indeed is his
statement altogether without confirm
ation. We have evidence that a per.
son bearing this name lived in these

56

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

His jour, visit to the city of Rome, and another to the banks of the
neys' Euphrates. These long journeys are not without parallels in
the lives of contemporary bishops. Polycarp of Smyrna visited
Rome, hoping to adjust the Paschal controversy; Melito of

parts of Asia Minor, somewhere about
this time. An unknown writer of a
polemical tract against Montanism de
dicates his work to one Avircius Mar-
cellus, at whose instigation it was
written. Eusebius (H. E. v. 16), who
is our authority for this fact, relates
that Montanism found a determined
and formidable opponent in Apollina
ris at Hierapolis and ' several other
learned men of that day with him,'
who left large materials for a his
tory of the movement. He then goes
on to say ; dpxopevos yovv rijs Kar1
avrwv ypatpijs t&v elprjpivoiv Si} ris
.. .vpooipid^eTai. ..rovrov tov rpoirov 'B/c
irXelarov Saov Kal iKavtardrov XP°V0V>
Ayamyri 'AovtpKie MdpKeXXe, eiriTaxBels
viro aov avyypdtpai rivd Xoyov k.t.X.,
i. e. ' One of the aforesaid writers at
the commencement of his treatise
against them (the Montanists) etc'
May not the person here addressed be
the Abercius of the epitaph ?
But if so, who is the writer that
addresses him, and when did he hve ?
Some mss omit 5iJ tis, and others
substitute tJ'Si), thus making Apollinaris
himself the writer. But the words
seem certainly to have been part of
the original text, as the sense requires
them ; for if they are omitted, tQv el-
pi/pivtav must be connected with kot'
avT&v, where it is not wanted. Thus
Eusebius quotes the writer anony
mously ; and those who assign the trea
tise to Apolhnaris cannot plead the
authority Qf the original text of the
historian himself.
But after all may it not have been
written by Apolhnaris, though Euse
bius was uncertain about the author

ship? He quotes in succession three
avyypdppara or treatises, speaking of
them as though they emanated from
the same author. The first of these,
from which the address to Avircius
Marcehus is quoted, might very well
have been composed soon after the
Montanist controversy broke out (as
Eusebius himself elsewhere states was
the case with the work of Apollinaris,
iv. 27 Kara ttjs ti2v Qpvywi alpiaeas
...Ciairep eKipveiv dpxopivijs); but the
second and third distinctly state that
they were written some time after the
death of Montanus. May not Euse
bius have had before him a volume
containing a cohection of tracts against
Montanism 'by Claudius Apollinaris
and others,' in which the authorship
of the several tracts was not distinctly
marked? This hypothesis would ex
plain the words with which he pre
faces his extracts, and would also ac
count for his vague manner of quota
tion. It would also explain the omis
sion of Si) ns in some texts (the
ancient Syriao version boldly sub
stitutes the name of Apolhnaris), and
would explain how Rufinus, Nicepho-
rus, and others, who might have had
independent information, ascribed the
treatise to this father. I have al
ready pointed out how Eusebius was
led into a similar error of connecting
together several martyrologies and
treating them as contemporaneous, be
cause they were collected in the same
volume (p. 48, note 2). Elsewhere
too I have endeavoured to show that
he mistook the authorship of a tract
which was bound up with others,
owing to the absence of a title (Caius

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS. 57
Sardis went as far as Palestine, desiring to ascertain on the spot
the facts relating to the Canon of the Old Testament Scriptures.
These or similar motives may have influenced Abercius to
undertake his distant journeys. If we may assume the identi
fication of this bishop with one Avircius Marcellus who is men
tioned in a contemporary document, he took an active interest
in the Montanist controversy, as from his position he was
hkely to do.
The Iiteraiy character of the see of Hierapolis, which had Claudius
Apolli-
been inaugurated by Papias, was ably sustained by Claudius naris bi-
Apollinaris. His surname, which seems to have been com- Hierapo.
mon in these parts1, may have been derived from the patron ll3-

Or Hippolytus ? in the Journal of Phi
lology i. p. 98 sq.).
On this hypothesis, Claudius Apol
linaris would very probably be the
author of the first of these treatises.
If so, it would appear to have been
written while he was still a presbyter,
at the instigation of his bishop Avir
cius Marcellus whom he succeeded not
long after in the see of Hierapohs.
If on the other hand Eusebius has
correctly assigned the first treatise to
the same writer as the second and
third, who must have written after the
beginning of the third century, Avir
cius Marcellus to whom it is addressed
cannot have held the see of Hierapohs
during the reign of M. Aurelius (a. d.
161 — 180) ; and, if he was ever bishop
of this city, must have been a successor,
not a predecessor, of Claudius Apolli
naris. In this case we have the al
ternative of abandoning the identifica
tion of this Avircius with the Hiera-
politan bishop of the same name, or of
rejecting the statement of the Acts
which places his episcopate in this
reign. The occurrence of the name Aber
cius in the later history of the see, of
Hierapohs (see p. 55) is no argument

against the existence of this earher
bishop. It was no uncommon practice,
for the later occupants of sees to assume
the name of some famous predecessor
who hved in primitive or early times.
The case of Ignatius at Antioch is only
one of several examples which might
be produced.
There is some ground for supposing
that, like Papias and Apollinaris,
Abercius earned » place in literary
history. Baronio had in his hands an
epistle to M. Aurelius, purporting to
have been written by this Abercius,
which he obviously considered genuine
and which he describes as ' apostoh-
cum redolens spiritum,' promising to
pubhsh it in his Annals (Martyr. Rom.
Oct. 22). To his great grief however
he afterwards lost it ('doluimus vehe-
menter e manibus nostris elapsam
nescio quomodo'), and was therefore
unable to fulfil his promise (Annal. s. a.
163, n. 15). A pijilXos SiSaaKaXlas by
Abercius is mentioned in the Acts
(§39); but this, if it ever existed, was
doubtless spurious.
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

5,8 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
deity of Hierapohs1 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 emperor2.
His hter- Of his works, which were very numerous, only a few scanty
fragments have survived3. The imperfect lists however, which
have reached us, bear ample testimony both to the literary
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 chief of Asia Minor during the last thirty years of the first century,
srestofVthe*were *^e 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 Paschal controversy, after smouldering long both
is inscribed a letter from the emperor A,A|0C . n . AlAl0Y . ArmAAlNApiOY •
Septimius Severus in reply to the con- r i r i
x , ,- ... , , ,, , loyAiANO y . yioc. ce ... .attoAAi-
gratulations of the people at the ele- L J L J
vation of Caracaha to the rank of Au- NApic.MAKeAcON . k.t.X., which shows
gnstus (A. d. 198), we find the name of that both the forms, Apollinaris and
KA«\YAl0C . ATTOAAINAIHOC . AYPHAIA- A190lHnarim, by which the bishop of
NOC, Boeckh 3837 (see in. p. 1066 Hierapohs is designated, are legitimate.

add.). In another inscription at the
same place, the same or another mem
ber of the family is commemorated as
holding the office of praitor for the

The former however is the correct
Latin form, the latter being the Greek
adaptation. More than a generation later than
our Apollinaris, Origen in his letter to
second time, CTpATHrOYNTOC TO. B. am^us (Op. 1. 30, Delarue) sends
KA . ATTOAAlNApioy ; Boeckh 3840, greeting to a bishop bearing this name
ib. p. 1067. See also the inscriptions (rbv KaXov ijpiov irdirav 'AiroXivdpiov), of
3842 c, 3846 z (ib. pp. 1069, 1078) at ¦ whom nothing more is known.
the same place, where again the name ' Apollo Archegetes ; see above p.
Apohinarius occurs. It is found also 12, note 1.
at Appiano. 3857 b (ib. p. 1086). At an 3 Euseb. H. E. iv. 26, Chron. s. a.
earlier date one Claudius Apollinaris 171, 172, ' Apollinaris Asianus, Hiera-
appears in command of the Roman pohtanus episcopus, insignis habetur.'
fleet at Misenum (Tac. Hist. hi. 57, 76, 3 Collected in Routh's Reliquia Sa-
77). The name occurs also at Hiera- crm 1. p. 159 sq., and quite recently in
pohs itself, Boeckh. no. 3915, TT . Otto's Corp. Apol. Christ, ix. p. 47gsq.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 59
here and elsewhere, first burst into flames in the neighbouring «• The
Church of Laodicea1. An able bishop of Hierapolis therefore question.
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 Asia3, observing
the Paschal anniversary on the 14th Nisan whether it fell on a
Friday or not, and invoking the authority of St John at Ephe
sus, and of St Philip at his own Hierapolis4, against the diver
gent usage of Alexandria and Palestine and the West.
2. His writings on the Montanist controversy were still 2. Montan-
more famous, and are recommended as an authority on the
subject by Serapion of Antioch a few years after the author's
death6. Though later than many of his works6, 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
1 See below, p. 63. district, as appears from Polycrates, ib.
2 The main point at issue was 4 See Polycrates of Ephesus in
whether the exact day of the month Euseb. H. E. v. 24.
should be observed, as the Quarto- 5 In Euseb. H. E. v. 19.
decimans maintained, irrespective of 6 Eusebius (H. E. iv. 27) at the
the day of the week. The fragment close of his hst of the works of Apol-
of Apollinaris (preserved in the linarius gives Kal a p. era ravra avv-
Chron. Pasch. p. 13) relates to a dis- iypaipe Kara tt)s [rap] $pvy3v alpi-
crepancy which some had found in aetas per' 06 iroXbv KaivoTopi/Betaris
the accounts of St Matthew and St xpbvov, rare ye p'hv wairep iKtpieiv dp-
John. X°/i^"'?s> ^Tl T<>0 Movravov dpa rals ai-
3 Eusebius represents the dioceses tov \pev8oirpotpyTioiv dpxds ttjs irapeK-
of 'Asia' and the neighbourhood, as rpoirijs iroiovpivov, i.e. the vagaries of
absolutely unanimous ; H.E.y. 23 rrjs Montanus and his followers had al-
Aalas dirdaris al irapoiKlai, v. 24 ttjs ready begun when Apolhnaris wrote,
'Aalas irdai\s apa rals opopois iKKXijalais but Montanism assumed a new phase
ros irapoiKtas. ' Asia' includes all this shortly after.

6o

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

himself, where this heresy was condemned and sentence of
excommunication pronounced against Montanus together with
his adherent the pretended prophetess Maximilla1.
His other Nor were his controversial writings confined to these two
gteal writ- topics. In one place he refuted the Encratites2 ; in another he
ings. upheld the orthodox teaching respectirig the true humanity of
Christ3. It is plain that he did not confine himself to questions
especially affecting Asia Minor ; but that the doctrine and the

1 Included in the Libellus Synodi-
cus published by Pappus; see Labb.
Cone. i. 615, ed. Coleti. Though this
council is not mentioned elsewhere,
there is no sufficient ground for ques
tioning its authenticity. The import
ant part taken by Apolhnaris against
the Montanists is recognised by Eu
sebius IT. E. v. 16, irpbs ttjv Xeyopivijv
Kara ^pvyas alpeaiv SirXov laxvpbv Kal
dKaraytbviarov iirl rijs 'lepairbXews rbv
'AiroXivdpiov. After mentioning the council the
compiler of this Synodicon speaks thus
of the false prophets ; ol koX /SXa<r0ij-
ptas, 'qroi Saipov&vres, KaBtbs <pt\aiv b
abrbs irar^p [i.e. 'AtroXivdpios'], rbv fliov
Kariarpttpav, abv avrols Si KariKpive
./rai QebSorov rbv oKvria. He evidently
has before him the fragments of the
anonymous treatises quoted by Euse
bius (H. E. v. 16), as the following
parahels taken from these fragments
shew: ws iirl ivepyovpivtp Kal Saipo-
vCjvri...§Xaa tprjpelv SiSdffKovros tov
airijvBuSiapivou irvetiparos ... rbv ft ibv
xaTaarpiipai 'loOSa irpoSbrov SIktjv
...olov iirlrpoTrbv Tiva QebSorov to\vs
alpet Xbyos . . .TereXeuTTiKaai ~M.ovravbs re
Kal BeoSoros Kal i) irpoeipripivij yvvij.
Thus he must have had before him a
text of Eusebius which omitted the
words 817 ns at the commencement, as
they are omitted in some existing
mss (see above, p. 56, note); and ac
cordingly he ascribed all the treatises
to Apollinaris. The parallels are

taken from the first and second trea
tises ; the first might have been written
by Apolhnaris, but the second was
certainly not by his hand, as it re
fers to much later events (see above,
P- 56)- Hefele (Conciliengeschichte 1. p..
71) places the date of this council
before a. d. i 50. 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 p. 59,
note 6), and this Apology was not
written till after a.d. 174 (see p. 61,
note 1). The chronology of Montanism
is very perplexing, but Hefele's dates
appear to be much too early. The
Chronicon of Eusebius gives the rise
of Montanism under a.d. 172 or 173,
and this statement is consistent with
the notices in his History. But if
this date be correct, it most probably
refers to Montanism as a distinct
system; and the fires had probably
been smouldering within the Church
for some time before 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 Monarchian. There is no au
thority for this identification in Euse.
bius. 2 Theodoret. H. P. i. 21.
3 Socr. H..E. iii. 7.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

61

practice of the Church generally found in him a vigorous advo
cate, who was equally opposed to the novelties of heretical
teaching and the rigours of overstrained asceticism.
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 His apolo-
apology addressed to M. Aurelius1, of a controversial treatise ingetic
five books against the Greeks, and of a second in two books
against the Jews2 ; on the other we find mentioned among his
writings a work in two books on Truth, and a second on Piety, and di-
besides several of which the titles have not come down to us3. ^£ks.
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

1 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 (H.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. iirtivvpov
ri?s avvryxlas), which Eusebius and
later writers misunderstood; just as
Eusebius himself (v. 24) speaks of
Irenseus as ipep&vvpos tis imv rrj irpoaij-
yopla avrtp re Tip rpoirip elprpioiroios. Of
the words used by Eusebius, oUelav rip
yeyovbn irpbs tov fiaaiXius eVkippivai
irpoariyopiav, we may suspect that ol-
Keiav rip yeyovori irpoaijyoplav is an ex
pression borrowed from Apolhnaris
himself, while irpbs tou fiaaiXiws elXrj-
ipivat gives Eusebius' own erroneous

interpretation of his author's mean
ing. The name of this legion was Ful
minata, not Fulminatrix, as it is often
carelessly written out, where the in
scriptions have merely fvlm. ; see
Becker and Marquardt Rom. Alterth.
™- 2, p. 353-
2 The words Kal irpbs 'lovSalovs irpQ-
tov Kal SevTepov are omitted in some
mss and by Rufinus. They are found
however in the very ancient Syriac
version, and are doubtless genuine.
Their omission is due to the homceote-
leuton, as they are immediately pre
ceded by Kal irepl aXijBelas irparov Kal
Seorepov. 3 A hst of his works is given by
Eusebius (H. E. iv. 27), who explains
that there were many others which
he had not seen. This hst omits the
work on the Paschal Feast, which is
quoted in the Chronicon Pasehale
p. 13 (ed. Dind.), and the treatise on
Piety, of which we know from Photius
Bibl. 14.

62 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
literature also1. His style is praised by a competent judge2,
and his orthodoxy was such as to satisfy the dogmatic precision
of the post-Nicene age3.
These facts are not unimportant in their bearing on the
question which has been already discussed in relation to Papias:
Important If there had been such a discontinuity of doctrine and practice
thesTfacts m the Church of Hierapolis as the theory in question assumes,
on the if the Pauline Gospel was repudiated in the later years of the
Christi- first century and rank Judaism adopted in its stead, how can we
explain the position of Apollinaris? Obviously a counter-revo
lution must have taken place, which undid the effects of the
former. One dislocation must have been compensated by ano
ther. And yet Irenseus knows nothing of these religious convul
sions 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 —
Irenseus 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 fa°t unmistakably revealed to us, as here and there the veil
theseoond which shrouds the history of the second century is lifted.
Anicetus and Soter and Eleutherus and Victor at Rome, Pantse-
nus 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 Irenseus in Gaul, Philippus and Piny-
1 Theodoret. Ho?r. Fab. iii. 2 dvijp profane literature.
'd^iiiraivos Kal irpbs rjj yviiaeiruv Beluv a Photius I.e., AfroXoyos Si 6 avrtp
Kal ttjv i^aBev iraiSeiav irpoaetXijoidis. Kal ifipdaei d^ioXoytp Kexpitf^ios.
So too Jerome, Ep. 70 (1. p. 428, ed. 3 Euseb. H.E. iv. 21, Jerome I.e.,
Vaharsi), names him among those who Theodoret. I.e., Socr. H.E. iii. 7.
were equally versed in sacred and

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 63
tus 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 con
sistent with the unity of the Church. The study of this con
troversy 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.
Though Laodicea cannot show the same intellectual activ- Activity of
ity as Hierapolis during the second century, yet in practical
energy she is not wanting.
The same persecution, which, permitted if not encouraged Martyr-
by the imperial Stoic, was fatal to Polycarp at Smyrna, deprived Sagaris.
Laodicea also of her bishop Sagaris2. The exact year in which c- A-D- l6i'
he fell a martyr is not known ; but we can hardly be wrong in
assuming that his" death was nearly coincident with those of
Polycarp and his companions. His name appears to have been
held in great honour3.
But while the Church of Laodicea was thus contending Outbreak
against foes without, she was also torn asunder by feuds within. °hal eao^ '
Coincident with the martyrdom of Sagaris was the outburst of troversy.
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 Nicsea. 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

1 Iren. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24 17 Sia- iv iKelvais rats ifpipais, Kal iypdcpi) ravra
ipoyvla ttjs vriarelas (the fast which pre- (i. e. Mehto's own treatise on the
ceded the Paschal festival) T-tjv bpovoiav Paschal festival). .
tijs irlareus ovvlarnai. ".Besides Mehto (I.e.), Polycrates of
2 Mehto in Euseb. H. E. iv. 26 iirl Ephesus refers to him with respect;
XepoviXXlov HavXov dvBvirdrov Tijs Euseb. H. E. v. 24, t! Si Sel Xiyeiv
'Aalas, (J Xdyapis Kaipu: ipapriptiaev, Xdyapiv iirlaKoirov Kal pdprvpa, Ss iv
iyivero ^rijais iroXXii iv AaoSiKela Aao5tKeZ? KeKolpip-ai.
repl rov irdaxa ipireadvros Kara Katpov

64 THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.
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 according to the western practice ; and in this way pro
bably 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.
Hierapohs At a la-ter date the influence of both Hierapolis and Laodicea
and Lao- has sensibly declined. In the great controversies of the fourth
dicea in J °
later and fifth centuries they take no conspicuous part. Among
their bishops there is not one who has left his mark on history.
And yet their names appear at most of the great Councils,
The Arian in which they bear a silent part. At Nicsea Hierapolis was
NicIea represented by Flaccus1, Laodicea by Nunechius3. They both
a-1*- 325- acquiesced in its decrees, and the latter as metropolitan published
them throughout the Phrygian Churches3. Soon after, both
PhHppo- sees lapsed into Arianism. At the synod of Philippopohs,
Pa";dS 347. composed of bishops who had seceded from the Council of Sar-
dica, the representatives of these two sees were present and
joined in the condemnation of the Athanasians. On this occa
sion Hierapolis was still represented by Flaccus, who had thus
turned traitor to his former faith4. On the other hand Laodicea
had changed its bishop 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 Nicomedia6.

1 Labb. Cone. 11. 57, 62, ed. Coleti; Syriac Miscellanies pp. 11, 28, 34.
Cowper's Syriac Miscellanies p. n, He had also been present at the Synod
28. It is remarkable that after Papias of Ancyra held about a.d. 314 (see
all the early bishops of Hierapolis Galatians -p. 34); ib. p. 41.
of whom any notice is preserved, have 3 Labb. Cone. 11. 2 36.
Roman names ; Avircius Marcellus (?), 4 ib. 744.
Claudius Apollinaris, Flaccus, Lucius, 5 Athanas. ad Episc. JSgypt. 8 (Op.
Venantius. 1. p. 219), Hist. Arian. ad Mon. 74
2 Labb. Cone. n. 57, 62; Cowper's (ib. p. 307).

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

65

He was succeeded by Nonnius, who signed the Arian decree at
Philippopohs1. When these sees recovered their orthodoxy we
do not know ; but it is perhaps a significant fact, that neither
is represented at the second general Council, held at Constan
tinople (a.d. 38 1)2. At the third general Council, which met at
Ephesus, Laodicea is represented by Aristonicus, Hierapolis
by Venantius3. Both bishops sign the decrees condemning
Nestorius. Again in the next Christological controversy which
agitated the Church the two sees bear their part. At the no
torious Robbers' Synod, held also at Ephesus, Laodicea was
represented by another Nunechius, Hierapolis by Stephanus.
Both bishops committed themselves to the policy of Dioscorus
and the opinions of the heretic Eutyches*. Yet with the fickle
ness which characterized these sees at an earlier date during
the Arian controversy, we find their representatives two years
later at the Council of Chalcedon siding with the orthodox
party and condemning the Eutychian heresy which they had
so lately supported5. Nunechius is still bishop of Laodicea,
and reverses his former vote. Stephanus has been succeeded

[Constan
tinople.A.D. 381.]
The Nes-
torian and
Eutychianheresies. Ephesus. A.D. 431.

Latrocin-ium.a. d. 449.

1 Labb. Cone. n. 744.
2 Cowper's Syriac Miscell. p. 39.
3 Labb. Cone. in. 1085, 1222, Mans.
Cone. iv. 1367. The name of this
bishop of Hierapohs is variously writ
ten, but Venantius seems to be the
true orthography. For some unex
plained reason, though present in
person he signs by deputy. He had
before subscribed the protest to Cyril
against commencing the proceedings
before the arrival of John of Antioch
(Mans. Cone. v. 767), and perhaps his
acquiescence in the decisions of the
Council was not very hearty.
1 Labb. Cone. rv. 892, 925, 928,
1 107, 1 170, 1 1 7.1, 1185, In the Acts
of this heretical council, as occasion
ally in those of the* Council of Chal
cedon, Laodicea is surnamed Trimi-
taria (see above, p. 18, note 2). Fol
lowing Le Quien (Or. Christ. 1. p. 835),
COL.

Chalce don.
A.D. 451.

I have assumed the Stephanus who
was present at the Latrocinium to
have been bishop of the Phrygian
Hierapohs, though I have not found
any decisive indication which Hie
rapohs is meant. On the other hand
the bishop of the Syrian Hierapohs
at this time certainly bore the name
Stephanus (Labb. Cone. rv. 727, 1506,
[i55°]> i644> 1836, v. 46); and the
synod held under Stephanus a.d. 445,
which Wiltsch (Geography and Statis
tics of the Church 1. p. 170, Eng.
Trans.) assigns to our Hierapohs,
belongs to the Syrian city of the same
name, as the connexion with Perrha
shews : Labb. Conc.tiv. 727, 1644.
6 Labb. Cone. iv. 853, 862, 1195,
1204, 1241, 1312, 1337, 1383, 1392,
1444, 1445, 1463, 1480, 1481,

1501, 1505,
1746, 1751.

1496,
1716, 1732, 1736, 1744,

66

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

Later
vacillation
of these

Their com
parative
unimpor tance.

Council
op Laodi
cea an ex
ception.

at Hierapolis by Abercius, whose orthodoxy, so far as we know,
had not been compromised by any previous expression of
opinion \
The history of these churches at a later date is such as
might have been anticipated from their attitude during the
period of the first Four General Councils. The sees of Laodicea
and Hierapolis, one or both, are represented at all the more
important assemblies of the Church ; and the same vacillation
and infirmity of purpose, which had characterized their holders
in the earlier councils, marks the proceedings of their later suc
cessors2. But, though the two sees thus continue to bear witness to
their existence by the repeated presence of their occupants at
councils and synods, yet the real influence of Laodicea and
Hierapolis on the Church at large has terminated with the
close of the second century. On one occasion only did either
community assume a position of prominence. About the middle
of the fourth century a council was held at Laodicea3. It
1 The bishops of both sees are
addressed by the Emperor Leo in
his letter respecting the Counch of
Chalcedon: but their rephes are not
preserved. Nunechius is still bishop
of Laodicea ; but Hierapohs has again
changed hands, and Phihppus has
succeeded Abercius (Labb. Cone. iv.
1836 sq.). Nunechius of Laodicea was
one of those who signed the decree
against simony at the Counch of Con
stantinople (a.d. 4J9): Cone. v. 50.
2 See for instance the tergiversa
tion of Theodorus of Laodicea and Ig
natius of Hierapohs hi the matter of
Photius and the 8th General Counch.
3 This counch 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 Syriac ms Brit. Mus.
Add. 14, 528, are lists- of the bishops
present at the earher councils, includ
ing Laodicea (see Wright's Catalogue of
the Syriac MSS in the British Museum,
dcocvi, p. 1030 sq.). These lists have
been published by Cowper (Syriac
Miscell. p. 42 sq., Analecta Niccena
P- 3^), who however has transposed
the hsts of Antioch and Laodicea, so
that he ascribes to the Antiochian
Synod the names which reahy belong
to the Laodicean. This is determined'
(as I am informed by Prof. Wright)
by the position of the hsts.
The Laodicean hst then, which seem3
to be imperfect, contains twenty names ;"

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

67

was convened more especially to settle some points of ecclesi- its decree
astical discipline ; but incidentally the assembled bishops were canon.
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

and, when examined, it yields these re
sults. (1) At least three-fourths of the
names can be identified with bishops
who sat at Nicsea, and probably the
exceptions would be fewer, if in some
cases they had not been obscured by
transcription into Syriac and by the
errors of copyists. (2) When identi
fied, they are found to belong in almost
every instance to Coelesyria, Phoenicia,
Palestine, Cilicia, and Isauria, whereas
apparently not one comes from Phrygia,
Lydia, or the other western districts
-of Asia Minor.
Supposing that this is a genuine
Laodicean hst, we are led by the first
result to place it as near in time as
possible to the Council of Nicsa ;
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 MS the heading of the canons
begins ' Of the Synod of Laodicea of
Phrygia.' On the whole it appears
probable that this snpposed hst of
bishops who met at Laodicea belongs
to some other Council. The Laodicean
Synod seems to have been, as Dr
Westcott describes it (I.e.), 'A small
gathering- of clergy from parts of
Lydia and Phrygia.'
In a large mosaic in the Church
at Bethlehem, in which ah the more
important Councils are represented,
we find the following inscription ; ['Hj
£710 dvoSos r\ iv AaoSiKela rrjs Qpvylas

twv Ki hriaKoiroiv ydyonei' Sid Movravov
Ki [r]d[s] Xoiirds ipiaeis' toi5[tous] lis
alperiKobs xal ixBpobs t^s dXeBelas r)
dyla avvoSos dveBepdrtaev (Ciampini de
Sacr. Mdif. a Constant, eonstr. p. 1 56 ;
comp. Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 8953). From
its position we might infer that the
synod to which this inscription refers
was supposed to have taken place be
fore the Council of Nicsea; and if so,
it may have been one of those Asiatic
synods held against Montanism at
the end of the second or beginning of
the third century. But, inasmuch as
no record of any such synod is pre
served elsewhere, we must probably
refer it to the well-known Counch of
Laodicea in the fourth century. In
this case however the description is
not very correct, for though Montanism
is incidentally 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. 1 169: 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 hst 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.). S— 2

68

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

otherwise have obtained, and to which it was hardly entitled
by its constitution or its proceedings. Its decrees were con
firmed and adopted by later councils both in the East and in
the West1.
Its decrees More important however for my special purpose, than the
the Epis- influence of this synod on the Church at large, is the light
tie to the which its canons throw on the heretical tendencies of this
sians. district, and on the warnings of St Paul in the Colossian
Epistle. To illustrate this fact it will only be necessary to
write out some of these canons at length:
Col. ii. 14, 29. 'It is not right for Christians to Judaize and abstain
' '' 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, abstain from labour on it as Christians. But if they
should be found Judaizers, let them be anathema in the sight
of Christ.'
Col. h. 18. 35. 'It is not right for Christians to abandon the Church
of God and go away and invoke angels (a<yye\oi/? ovofia^eivY
and hold conventicles (o-wa£et? Troielv) ; for these things are
forbidden. If therefore any one is found devoting himself
different planetary symbol, and a dif
ferent permutation of the vowels with
the same invocation ARE ' (byAATON .
THN . TTOAlN . MlAHCICON . KAI .

1 By the Quinisextine Counch (a.d.
692) in the East (Labb. Cone. vn.
1345), and by the Synod of Aix-la-
Chapehe (a.d. 789) in the West (Cone.
ix. 10 sq.).
8 Theodoret about a century after
the Laodicean Counch, commenting on
Col. ii. 18, states that this disease
(to irdBos) which St Paul denounces
' long remained in Phrygia and Pi
sidia.' ' For this reason also, ' he
adds, ' a synod convened in Lao
dicea of Phrygia forbad by a decree
the offering prayer to angels; and
even to the present time oratories of
the holy Michael may be seen among
them and their neighbours.' See
also below' p. 71, note 1. A curi
ous inscription, found in the theatre
at Miletus (Boeckh C. I. 2895), illus
trates this tendency. It is an inscrip
tion in seven columns, each having a

TTANTAC . TOYC . KATOIKOYNTAC,
while at the common base is written
*PX*rreAOI . <t>YAACC6T(M . H . TTO-
AlC . MlAHCICON . KAI . TTANT€C . 01 .
KAT . . . Boeckh writes, ' Etsi hie
titulus Gnosticorum et Baeihdianorum
commentis prorsus congruus est, ta-
men potuit ab ethnicis Mileshs scrip-
tus esse; quare nolui eum inter Chris.
tianos rejicere, quum prsesertim pub
lics Milesiorum superstitionis docu
menting insigne sit.' The idea of
the seven cfyioi, combined in the one
dpxdyyeXos, seems certainly to point
to Jewish, if not Christian, influences :
Rev. i. 4, iii. 1, iv. 5, v. 6.

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS. 69
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 astrologers1, or to make
safe-guards (<f>v\aicTripia) as they are called, for such things are
prisons (&<r/tw»T»?pta) of their souls2: 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 volun
tary humility and worshipping of angels,' which three centuries
before had called forth the Apostle's rebuke and warning in the
Epistle to the Colossians.
During the flourishing period of the Eastern Church, Lao- Ecclesias*
dicea appears as the metropolis of the province of Phrygia of Laodi-
Pacatiana, counting among its suffragan bishoprics the see of Hierapo-
Colossse3. On the other hand Hierapolis, though only six1"'
miles distant, belonged to the neighbouring province of Phrygia
Salutaris4, whose metropolis was Synnada, and of which it was
one of the most important sees. The stream of the Lycu3
seems to have formed the boundary line between the two
ecclesiastical provinces. At a later date Hierapolis itself was
raised to metropolitan rank5.
1 Though there is no direct men- \aKrrfpioP (1) a safeguard or amulet,
tion of ' magic ' in the letter to the (1) a guard-house.
Colossians, yet it was a characteristic » A list of the bishoprics belonging
tendency of this part of Asia: Acts to this province at the time of the
xix. 19, 1 Tim. hi. 8, 13. See the note Counch of Chalcedon is given, Labb.
on Gal. v. 20. The term paBijpanKol Cone. iv. 1501, 1716.
is used in this decree in its ordinary 4 Cone. iv. 17 16, 1744.
sense of astrologers, soothsayers. B At the 5th and 6th General Coun--
3 A play on the double sense of 0u- cils (a.d. 553 and a.d. 680) Hierapohs

7o Obscurityof Colossa?,

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.
But while Laodicea and Hierapolis held the foremost place
in the records of the early Church, and continued to bear an
active, though inconspicuous part, in later Christian history,
Colossse 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 Colossse at
taches his signature to the decree of an ecclesiastical synod.
The city ceased to strike coins in the reign of Gordian (a.d.
238 — 244) \ It fell graduaUy into decay, being supplanted by
Chonse ^e neighbouring town Chon&e, 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

It is sup-

is styled a metropolis (Labb. Cone. vi.
220, vn. 1068, 1097, 1117) ; and in the
latter case it is designated metropohs
of Phrygia Pacatiana, though this
same designation is stih given to Lao
dicea. Synnada retains its position
as metropohs of Phrygia Salutaris.
From this time forward Hierapohs
seems always to hold metropolitan
rank. But no notice is preserved of
the circumstances under which the
change was made. In the Notitioe it
generally occurs twice — first as a suf
fragan see of Phrygia Salutaris, and
secondly as metropohs of another
Phrygia Pacatiana (distinct from that
which has Laodicea for its metropolis) ;
Hieroclis Syneedemus et Notitice (ed.
Parthey) Not. 1, pp. 56, 57, 69, 73 ;
Not. 3, pp. 114, 124; Not. 7, pp. 152,
161; Not. 8, pp. 164, 176, 180; Not.
9, pp. 193, 197 ; Not. 10, pp. 212, 220.
In this latter position it is placed
quite out of the proper geographical
order, thus showing that its metro
politan jurisdiction was created com--

paratively late. The number of dioceses
in the province is generally given as
9 ; Nhus ib. p. 301. The name of the
province is variously corrupted from
HaKanavijs, e.g. KaTTariavijs, Kairira-
Sodas. Unless the ecclesiastical posi
tion of Hierapohs was altogether ano
malous, as a province within a pro
vince, its double mention in the No-
titios must be explained by a confusion
of its earlier and later status.
1 See Mionnet iv. p. 269, Leake
Numism. Hellen. p. 45.
2 Joannes Curopalata p. 686 (ed.
Bonn.) <pijpi]...Tovs TotipKovs dirayyiX-
Xovaa ri)v iv Xilivats iroXireiav xal airrdv
rbv irepipbijTov iv Baipaat xal dvaB-q-
paai tov dpxiarpaTrjyov vabv KaraXa^eiv
iv paxalpa...Kal to Si] axerXidrepov,
pi/Si rds tov xaaparos aypayyas iv ipirep
ol irapappiovres irorapol ixelae x&vev6-
pevoi Sid rijs tou dpxiar pariyy ov ira-
Xaias iiriSi)plas Kal Beoaijplas iis Sid
irpavovs dararovv rd jtevpa Kal Xidv
evSpopovv (xovo'ii ro^s KaTaireipevyoras.
Siarrjpijaai, k.t.X.

THE CHURCHES OP THE LYCUS.

71

a renewed assault of its ancient enemy, the earthquake1* It is
commonly said that Chonas is built on the site of the ancient
Colossse ; 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 Chonas
by way of explanation, till at length the name of this primitive
Apostolic Church passes wholly out of sight2.
The Turkish conquest pressed with more than common Turkish
severity on these- districts. When the day of visitation came, otm<luest•

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 which the
waters flowed away harmlessly : Hart
ley's Researches in Greece p. 53. See
another legend, or another version of
the legend, in which the archangel
interposes, in Laborde p. 103.
It was the birth-place of Nicetas
Choniates, one of the most important
of the Byzantine historians, who thus
speaks of it (de Manuel vi. -z, p. 230,
ed. Bonn.) ; Qpvyiav re Kal AaoSlKeiav
SieXB&v dtpiKveirai is Xdivas, irbXiv eb-
Satpova Kal peydXipi, irdXai rds KoXaa-
ads, tt\v ipov tov avyypatpiws irarplSa,
Kal rbv dpxayyeXiKov vabv eiai&v peyiBei
piyiaTov Kal KaXXei KaXXiarov 6vra Kal
Bavpaalas x£LP°* dwavra tpyov k.t.X.,
where a corrupt reading IlaXaoods for
KoXaaads has misled some. It will be
remembered that the words irbXiv
evSaipova xal peydXipi are borrowed from
Xenophon's description of Colossa?
(Anab. i. 2. 6): see above, p. 15, note 3.
He again alludes to his native place,
de Isaac, h. 2, pp. 52, 3 toi>s AaoSiKels
Si $piyas pvpiax<2s iKaKaaev, diairep koI

robs tuv Xavuv tuv ipiSv olKyropas, and
Urbs Capta 16, p. 842, rb Si ijv ipov
tov avyypatpiojs NtKTJra irarpls al X&vat
koI 17 dyxiripptav ravr'Q $pvyiK$j AaoSl-
Keia. 1 Thus 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 locahty, where
they have remained ever since. Earth
quakes have been largely instrumen
tal in changing the sites of cities
situated within the range of their
influence. 2 At the Counch of Chalcedon (a.d.
451) Nunechius of Laodicea subscribes
'for the absent bishops under him,'
among whom is mentioned 'Eirupavlov
iroXews KoXaaadv (Labb. Cone. iv. 1501,
ed. Coleti; comp. ib. 1745). At the
Quinisextine Counch (a.d. 692) occurs
the signature of Koapas iirloKoiros irb-
Xeus KoXaaaarjs (sic) TLaKaTiavfjs (Cone.
vn. 1408). At the 2nd Counch of
Nicsea (a. d. 787) the name of the see
is in a transition state ; the bishop
Theodosius (or Dositheus) signs him
self sometimes HwvGv tJtoi KoXaaaiSv,
sometimes Xoivuv simply (Cone. viii.
689,796,988, 1200, 1222, 1357, 1378,
I432> 1523, 1533. in maD-y of 'which
passages the word Xavuv is grossly

72

THE CHURCHES OF THE LYCUS.

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
the knock unheeded. The long-impending doom overtook
her, and the golden candlestick was removed for ever from the
Eternal Presence1.

corrupted). At later Councils the see
is cahed XiSvai ; and this is the name
which it bears in the Notifies (pp. 97,
127, 199, 222, 303, ed. Parthey).
1 For the remains of Christian
churches at Laodicea see Fellows Asia

Minor p. 282, Pococke p. 74. A de
scription of the three fine churches at
Hierapohs is given in Fergusson's Il
lustrated Handbook of Architecture n.
p. 967 sq.; comp. Texier Asie Mineure
1. p. 143-

II.
THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

FROM the language of St Paul, addressed to the Church Two ele-
of Colossse, we may infer the presence of two disturbing ™^|
elements which threatened the purity of Christian faith and Colossian
mi -i heresy.
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 x. 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 circumcision2.
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 worship8. Anticipating the result which
will appear more clearly hereafter, we may say that along
1 Col. ii. 16, 17, 21 sq. a ii. 11. 3 ii. 4, 8, 18, 23.

74

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

Are these
combinedor sepa
rate?

General
reasons for
supposing
one heresy
only, in .
whichtheyare fused.

with its Judaism there was a Gnostic element in the false
teaching which prevailed at Colossse.
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 Judaso-
Gnostic heresy which combined the two z ?
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 real

1 The Colossian heresy has been
made the subject of special disserta
tions by SoHNECKBNBUEaBK Beitrdge
zur Einleitung ins N. T. (Stuttgart
1832), and Ueber das Alter derjudischen
Proselyten-Taufe, nebst einer. Beilage
iiber die Irrlehrer zu Colossa (Berlin
1828) ; by Osiandek Ueber die Colos-
sischen Irrlehrer (Tiibinger Zeitschrift
for 1834, in. p. 96 sq.); and by Bhein-
WALD.De Pseudodoctoribus Colossensibus
(Bonn 1834). But more valuable con
tributions to the subject will often be
found in introductions to the com
mentaries on the epistle. Those of
Bleek, Davies, Meyer, Olshausen,
Steigeb, and De Wette may be
mentioned. Among other works which
may be consulted are Baue Der Apos-
tel Paulus p. 417 sq. ; Boehmeb
Isagoge in Epistolam ad Colossenses,
Berlin 1829, p. 56 sq., p. 277 sq.;
Bueton Inquiry into the Heresies of
the Apostolic Age, Lectures iv, v;
Ewald Die Sendschreiben des Apostels
Paulus p. 462 sq. ; Hilgeneeld
Der Gnosticismus u. das Neue Testa
ment in the Zeitschr. f. Wissensch.

Theol. xiii. p. 233 sq.; E. A. Lip-
sius in Schenkels Bibel-Lexikon, s. v.
Gnosis; Mayekhoff Der Brief an
die Colosser p. 107 sq.; Neandeb
Planting of the Christian Church 1.
p. 319 sq. (Eng. Trans.) ; De Pkes-
sensIs Trois Premiers Siecles 11. p.
194 sq. ; Stoee Opuscula n. 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
critics, 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. 12 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 75
difficulty. If the two elements seem irreconcileable, or at least
incongruous, at first sight, the incongruity disappears on further
examination. It will be shown in the course of this investi
gation, that some special tendencies of religious thought among
the Jews themselves before and about this time prepared the
way for such a combination in a Christian community like
the Church of Colossse \ Moreover we shall find that the Chris
tian heresies of the next succeeding ages exhibit in a more
developed form the same complex type, which, here appears in
its nascent state*; 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 Colossse.
But in fact the Apostle's language hardly leaves the ques- s. Paul's
tion open. The two elements are so closely interwoven in isfocisive
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-im
posed 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
2 See below, p. 107 sq. tendencies are related to one another
3 Col. ii. 8 — 23. Hilgenf eld (Der Gnos- as -fire and water, and nothing stands
ticismus etc. p. 250 sq.) contends stre- in the way of allowing the author after
nuonsly for the separation of the two the first side-glance at the Gnostics to

76 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 intertwined in
their growth. And the more carefully we examine the sequence
of the Apostle's thoughts, the more intimate will the connex
ion appear.
Gnostic- Having described the speculative element in this complex
bTdefined heresy provisionally as Gnostic, I purpose enquiring in the first
and.d*" place, how far Judaism prior to and independently of Chris
tianity 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 Gnostic
ism. But, as a preliminary to these enquiries, some definition of
the word, or at least Some conception of the leading ideas
which it involves, will be necessary. With its complex varie
ties and elaborate developments we have no concern here :
for, if Gnosticism can be found at all in the records of the
pass over with ver. 1 1 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.
thath. 8 — io refers to 'pure Gnostics,' 9 Sn, 10 Ss, 11 iv if, 12 iv $, 13 Kal,
and ii. 16 — 23 to 'pure Judaizers.' 16 oSv). I hope to make this point clear
To this 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
tagonistic, they managed nevertheless heresy is maintained also by Hein-
to reconche their differences; for we richs(Koppe N. T. vn.Part 2, 1803). At
find them united in several Judaso- 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, Iw&poaav yap, his language is not very exphcit. And
Svres txBiaroi rb irplv, irvp Kal BdXaaaa, earher sthl Calvin in his argument to
koI to, irlor" iSei^aTijv; (2) That the the epistle writes, 'Putant aliqui duo
two passages are directly connected fuisse hominum genera, qui abducere
together by to\ aroixeia tov xbapov, tentarent Colossenses ab evangelh pu-
which occurs in both w. 8, 20 ; (3) ritate,' but rejects this view as uncalled
That it is not a simple transition once for.
for ah from the Gnostic to the Judaic The same question is raised with
element, but the epistle passes to and regard to the heretical teachers of the
fro several times from the one to the Pastoral Epistles, and should pro-
other; while no hint is given that two bably be answered in the same way.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 77
Apostolic age, it will obviously appear in a simple and ele
mentary form. Divested of its accessories and presented in its
barest outline, it is not difficult of delineation1.
1. As the name attests2, Gnosticism implies the possession 1. Intel-
of a superior wisdom, which is hidden from others. It makes a dusive-
distinction between the select few who have this higher gift, !?,esa °.f
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 spirit3, 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. Specn-
which its energies were concentrated and to which it professed n^tJ0f 6
to hold the key, were mainly twofold. How can the work of f*n0Btic-
creation be explained ? and, How are we to account for the ex
istence of evil 4 ? ' To reconcile the creation of the world and Creation
the existence of evil with the conception of God as the abso- world, anc?
lute Being, was the problem which all the Gnostic systems set efte*®"*
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- higher gnosis, see the notes on Col. i.
tory of Gnosticism are Neandeb 28, and Phil. hi. 15.
Church History 11. p. 1 sq. ; Bauk Die 3 See Neander 1. c. p. 1 sq., from
Christliche Gnosis (Tubingen, 1835) ; whom the epithet is borrowed.
Mattee Histoire Critique du Gnos- 4 The fathers speak of this as the
ticisme (2nd ed., Strasbourg and Paris, main question about which the Gno-
1843); B. A. Lipsius Gnosticismus in sties busy themselves; Unde malum?
Erseh u. Gruber s. v. (Leipzig, i860); ir68ev 1} Karta; Tertull. de Prcescr. 7,
and for Gnostic art, King Gnostics adv. Marc. 1. 2, Eus. H. E. v. 27;
and their Remains (London 1864). passages quoted by Baur Christliche
2 See esp. Iren. i. 6. 1 sq., Clem. Gnosis p.,19. On the leading concep-
Alex. Strom, ii. p. 433 sq. (Potter). On tions of Gnosticism see especially Ne-
the words riXeioi, irvevpariKol, by which ander, 1. c. p. 9 sq.
they designated the possessors of this

78 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
Existence The Gnostic argument ran as follows : Did God create the
howto'be worl<i out 0I" nothing, evolve it from Himself? Then, God
explained? keijjg 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.
the abode ^n*s s°luti°n 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. " 1* 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, seons, spirits, or
angels, of Gnosticism, conceived as more or less concrete and

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 79
-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-
n • t . ... „ ~ . oal errors
tor my immediate purpose) of the speculative views of Gnostic- of Gnostic
ism. But it is obvious that these views must have exerted lsm'
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-
1 site ethi-
were given1: cal rules_
(i) On the one hand, it was contended that the desired (i) Eigid
end might best be attained by a rigorous abstinence. Thus
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 i^ense?6
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 hves. 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, hi. poavvits KarayylKXovai, with the whole
5 (P- 529) e*s ^0 SieXbvres irpdypara &- passage which fohows. As examples
vdaas rds alpiaeis airoxpivibpeBa av- of the one extreme may be instanced
toIs' i) yap toi dSiaipapus jrfv SiSda- the Carpocratians and Cainites : of the
Kovaiv, rj to inriprovov dyovaai iyKpd- other the Encratites,
Teiav Sib. Svaa'e^elo.s Kal (pikairexBr)-

80 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.
Original Gnosticism, as defined by these characteristic features, has
enc^of1 " obviously no necessary connexion with Christianity2. Christi-
Gnostic- anity would naturally arouse it to unwonted activity, by lead-
its subse- ing men to dwell more earnestly on the nature and power of
nexion00n" evil, and thus stimulating more systematic thought on the
withChns- 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 find a place for the latter, henceforth
oftheCarpocratiansinlren. i. 25. 3 sq., become prominent questions which
ii. 32. 1 sq., Hippol. Har. vii. 32, Epi- press for solution ; and Gnosticism in
phan. Harr. xxvii. 2 sq. ; from which its several developments undergoes
passages it appears that they justified various modifications in the endeavour
their moral profligacy on the principle to solve them. Bedemption must be
that the highest perfection consists in set in some relation to the fundamen-
• the most complete contempt of mun- tal Gnostic conception of the antagon-
dane things. ism between God and matter ; and
! It will be seen from the descrip- Christ must have some place found
tion in the text, that Gnosticism (as for Him in the fundamental Gnostic
I have defined it) presupposes only a doctrine of emanations.
behef in one God, the absolute Being, If it be urged that there is no autho-
as against the vulgar polytheism. All rity for the name ' Gnostic' as apphed
its essential features, as a speculative to these pre-Christian theosophists, I
system, may be explained from this am not concerned to prove the con-
simple element of behef, without any trary, as my main position is not
intervention of specially Christian or affected thereby. The term ' Gnostic '
even Jewish doctrine. Christianity is here used, only because no other is so
added two new elements to it; (1) the convenient, or so appropriate. See
idea of Redemption, (2) the person of note 2, p. 81.
Christ. To explain the former, and to

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

81

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?£o.r®.
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 (Die drei ersten
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.
8 We may perhaps gather from the
noticeswhioh are preserved that, though
the substantive yvaais was used with
more or less precision even before con
tact with Christianity to designate. the
superior ihumiriation of these opinions,
COL.

the adjective yvuariKol 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 per a Si ravra
iireKaXeaav iavrobs yvioariKobs, ipdanov-
tm pbvoi ra fldBi) yiviiaKeiv; 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 earhest
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 then
development they adopted the name
yvtoariKol does not appear. Irenceus
(Hcer. i. 25. 6) speaks of the name as
affected especially by the Carpocra-
tians. Eor 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.
Bev. h. 24 oifrices ovk tyvuaav rd paBia
tou Xarava, lis Xiyovatv (as explained
by the passage already quoted from
Hippol. Hatr. v. 6; see Galatians,
p. 298, note 3). 6

82 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
sects of . .
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.
Sadducee- With the Sadducees we have no concern here. Whatever
lyn'ega-16" respect may be due to their attitude in the earlier stages of
tlve- 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 of the
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 Berth alike were strict observers of the ritual law, but, while
compared, the Pharisee 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
EssenTsm! easily recognised, this is not the case with the Essene. The
Essene is the great enigma of Hebrew history. Admired alike
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 2 For the Pharisees see Vit. i irapa-
be apphed to them even in the Talmud; irX^aiis ian tjj irap' "EXXijai Ztwiktj
see Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Juden- Xeyopivn: for the Essenes, Ant. xv. 10.
thum I. pp. 95, 694 sq. ; comp. Keim 4 SioIt-q xp&pevov rfj irap' "EXXijatv vto
Geschichte Jesu von Nazara 1. p. 281. HvBaybpov KaraSeSeiypiivi).

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. g3
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 theAsuffioi-
portrait of this sect may be so far restored, as to establish with tinct por-
a reasonable amount of probability the point with which alone {j^*,,"*
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 anticipated the results in this statement, I shall Main 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- hi3 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. 3. i, .int. xiii. 11. 1, 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. (n. p. 457 sq.), Apol. pro Jud. tion of the Essenes is found also
(n. p. 632 sq., a fragment quoted by in the Christian Hegesippus (Euseb.
Eusebius Prop. Evang. viii. 11). H.E. iv. 22) and in the heathen Dion
The account of the Therapeutes by the Cheysostom (Synesius Dion 3, p. 39).
latter writer, de Vita Contemplativa Epiphanius (Hair. pp. 28 sq., 40 sq.)
(n. p. 471 sq.), must also be consulted, discusses two separate sects, which he
as describing a closely alhed sect. To calls Essenes and Ossaians respectively.
these should be added the short notice These are doubtless different names of
of Pliny,. #. if. v. 15. 17, as expressing the same persons. His account is, as
the views of a Eoman writer. His ac- usual, confused and inaccurate, but
6—2

84

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

Observ- from work on the sabbath he far surpassed all the other Jews.
Mosaic He would not light a fire, would not move a vessel, would not
law- perform even the most ordinary functions of life1. The whole
day was given up to religious exercises and to exposition of the

has a certain value. Ah other autho
rities are secondary. HiFPOLYTUs,if<E?\
ix. 18 — 28, follows Josephus (Bell. Jud.
ii. 8. 2 sq.) almost exclusively. Poe-
phyey also (de Abstinentia, iv. 11 sq.)
copies this same passage of Josephus,
with a few unimportant exceptions
probably taken from a lost work by
the same author, irpos robs "EXXi;vas,
which he mentions by name. Euse
bius (Prcep. Evang. viii. 1 1 sq., ix. 3)
contents himself with quoting Philo
and Porphyry. Solinus (Polyh. xxxv.
9 sq.) merely abstracts Phny. Tal-
mudical and rabbinical passages, sup
posed to contain references to the Es
senes, are collected by Frankel in the
articles mentioned in a later para
graph ; but the allusions are most un
certain (see the appendix to this
chapter) . The authorities for the his
tory of the Essenes are the subject of
an article by W. Clemens in the
Zeitschr.f. Wiss. Theol. 1869, p. 328 sq.
The attack on the genuineness of
Philo's treatise De Vita Contemplativa
mada by Gratz (in. p. 463 sq.) has
been met by Zeller (Philosophic, in. ii.
p. 255 sq.), whose refutation is com
plete. The attack of the same writer
(in. p. 464) on the genuineness of the
treatise Quod omnis probus liber Zeller
considers too frivolous to need refuting
(ib. p. 235). A refutation will be found
in the above-mentioned article of W.
Clemens (p. 340 sq.).
Of modern writings relating to the
Essenes the following may be espe
cially mentioned ; Belleemann Ueber
Essaer u. Therapeuten, Berhn 1821;
Gfeorek Philo n. p. 299 sq. ; Dahne
Ersch u. Gruber's Encylclopadie s. v. ;
Feankel Zeitschrift fiir die religi'dsen

Interessen des Judenthums 1846 p. 441
sq., Monatschrift fiir Geschichte u.
Wissenschaft des Judenthums 1853
p. 30 sq., 61 sq, ; Bottger Ueber den
Orden der Essde.r, Dresden 1849 ;
Ewald Geschichte des Volkes Israel iv.
p. 420 sq., vn. p. 153 sq. ; Eitschl
Entstehung der Altkatholischen Kirche
p. 179 sq. (ed. -i, 1857), and Theolo-
gische Jahrbiicher 1855, p. 315 sq.;
Jost Geschichte des Judenthums 1. p.
207 sq. ; Geaetz Geschichte der Juden
in. p. 79 sq., 463 sq. (ed. ¦*, 1863);
Hilgenfeld Judisclie Apocalyptik p.
245 sq., and Zeitschr. f. Wiss. Theol.
x. p. 97 sq., xi. p. 343 sq., xiv. p.
30 sqt; Westcott Smith's Dictionary
of the Bible s.v.; GiNSBur.G' The
Essenes, London 1864, and in Kitto's
Cyclopedia s. v. ; Deeenboueg L'His-
toire et la Giographie de la Palestine
p. 166 sq., 460 sq.; Ketm Geschichte
Jesu von Nazara 1. p. 282 sq. ; Haus-
eath Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte
1. p. 133 sq.; Lipsius Schenkel's Bibel
Lexikon s. v. ; Heezpeld Geschichte
des Volkes Israel n. 368 sq., 388 sq.,
509 sq. (ed. 2, 1863) ; Zeller Philo
sophic der Griechen in. 2. p. 234 sq.
(ed. 2, 1868); Langen Judenthum in
PaldstinaTp.igo sq.; Lowy Kritisch-tal-
mudisches Lexicon s.v. (Wien 1863);
Weiss Zur Geschichte der jiidischen
Tradition p. 120 sq. (Wien).
1 B. J. h. 8. 9 cpvXdaaovrai . . . rats
ipSbpaaiv tpyav iipdirreaBai Siatpopiirara
'lovSaluiv dirdvriav ' ob pbvov yap rpoipas
iavrots irpb ypipas pids irapaaKevd^ovaiv,
(is pijSi irvp ivaioiev iKetvij rij ripipa, oXV
ovSi OKevbs n peraKivijaai Bappovaiv k.t.X.
Hippolytus (Haw. ix. 25) adds that some
of them do not so much as leave their
beds on this dav.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 85
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
death2. 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 External
normal Judaism ; but here the divergence begins. In three super-
main points we trace the working of influences, which must8,
have been derived from external sources.
1. To the legalism of the Pharisee, the Essene added an 1. Bigid
... i-i i-ii- -ii-i- asceticism,
asceticism, which was peculiarly his own, and which in many jn reBpect
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 evennvith 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. iyKpdreiav 'Eaaatiav ydp ovSels Hyerai
Of the Therapeutes see Philo Vit. Cont. ywaiKa, Slon tpiXavrov ¦q yvvq xal f>;\d-
§ 3> 4- tvitov ov perplus Kal Seivov dvSpos ijBii
a B. J. l.v. § 9 aipas Si piyiarov irapaaaXevaai, with more to the same
irap auTOis perd tov Qebv to ovopa tov purpose. This peculiarity astonished
vopoBirov, Kav pXaaipitpijari ns els tovtov the heathen Pliny, N. H. v. 15, 'gens
(i. e. rbv vopoBirijv), KoXa$eaBai Bavdrip : sola et in toto orbe proeter ceteros mira,
comp. § 10. sine ulla femina, venere abdicata . . .
s B. J. 1. c. § 2 ydpov piv virepoij/ia In diem ex asquo convenarum turba
irap avrols . .- . rds twv yvvaUiav daeX- renascitur large frequentantibus . . .
yetas ipvXaaaopevoi Kal pr/Septav r-npelv Ita per saeculorum millia (incredibile
ireireiapivoi tt)v irpbs 'iva irlariv, Ant. dictu) gens ffiterna est, in qua nemo
xviii. 1.5; Philo Fragm. p. 633 ydpov naseitur. Tarn fcecunda ihjs aliornm
irapxtrriaavTo perd tov Siaipepovrus daKeiv vitas pcenitentia est.'

86 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
m s' 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 oh for Again, in hot climates oil for anointing the body is almost
anoin ing. a necessarv 0f l£fe, "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. c. § 13. Josephus speaks evreXij- Kal Sif/ov &Xes, ous ol dfipobiairb-
of these as irepov 'Eaaijv&v rdypa, o SI- Taroi irapaprvovaiv vaa&irip" irorbv vSiop
anav piv Kal tB-n Kal vbpipa toIs fiXXois vaparialov aiirols ianv; and again more
bpo<ppovovv, Siearbs Si tj) Kara ydpov Sb^Tj. 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. if. E. h. 23) olvov Kal
or Franciscan brotherhood; so that, aUepa ovk (iriev, oibi tpipvxov tipaye.
living 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 cehbacy so prominent a place in his treatise :
or subject to the more rigorous dis- see Zeher, p. 243.
ciphne of the sect. 3 B. J. 1. c. § 8.
2 B. J. 1. u. § 5; see Philo's account * B. J. 1. c. § 3 KijXiSa Si vvoXappd-
of the Therapeutes, Vit. Cont. § 4 ai- vovai rb tXaiov k. t. X. ; Hegesippus 1. c.
rovvroi Si iroXvTtXis oiiSev, dXXd &prov tXaiov ovk ijXel'paTo.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 87
From these facts it seems clear that Essene abstinence was TJnderly-
tyi in8 princi-
somethmg more than the mere exaggeration ot Pharisaic prin- pie 0f this
ciples. The rigour of the Pharisee was based on his obligation of asceticism.
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 3. Specu-
of the sect, we shall find that the Essenes have diverged ^J6
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 BUn-wor-
the Pharisee. But there was another side to their theological Bhip-
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. c. § 5 wpbs ye prjv rb Beiov Josephus states to be offered to the sun
ISlas ebaeflels- irplv yap dvaaxeiv rbv ijXiov (els abrbv), into the ordinary prayers of
obSiv tpBiyyovrai t&v fleflqXbiv, irarpiovs the Pharisaic Jew at day-break, see the
Si nvas els airbv evxds, Hairep iKereiovres appendix to this chapter.
dvareiXai. Compare what Philo says 2 B. J. 1. c. § 9 ois prj rds avyds iflpl-
of the Therapeutes, Vit. Gont. § 3 foi«> tov Beov. There can be no doubt,
ijXlov piv dvlaxovros dijpeplav alroipevoi I think, that by tov Beov is meant the
rijv Svtws ebqpeplav, tpwrbs ovpavlov ttjx ' sun-god ' ; comp. Eur. Heracl. 749
Sidvoiav avrCiv avairXyaBijvai, and. ib.%11. Beov tpaeatppporoi abyal, Ale. 722 rb
On the attempt of Frankel (Zeitschr. ipiyyos tovto tov Beov, Appian Prcef. 9
p. 458) to resolve this worship, which Zvopivov tov Beov, Lib. 113 tov Beov

88 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) Eesur- (ii) Nor again is it an insignificant fact that, while the
the body 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
frepl SelXijv iairipav Svtos, Civ. iv. 79 other were. See the appendix.
Svvovtos dpri tov Beov : comp. Herod, h. " B.J. I.e. % 11 Kal yap Ippurat irap'
24. Dr Ginsburg has obliterated this airrdis ijbe r) 86£a, (pBapra piv elvai t&
very important touch by translating Tas adipara Kal ttjv vXijv ob pAvipav abrois,
avyisTou Beov 'theDiYiner&ys' (Essenes ras Si \pvxas dBavdrovs del Siapiveiv . . .
p. 47). It is a significant fact that iireiSdv Si aveBwai rdv Kara. adpKa Sea-
Hippol-ytus {Hair. ix. 25) omits the pdv, ola 5ij paxpas SovXelas &Tij\Xay-
words Toudeov, evidently regarding them pivas, Tore xalpeiv Kal pereiipovs <j>ipeo-
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 dhect
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. Hcer. xix. 2, xx. 3 'Oa- hand Hippolytus (Hcer. ix. 27) says of
ar\vol Si periarijaav dirb 'louSaXapov els them opoXoyovat ydp Kal riiv adpKa
rr\v ruv2iap\patuv a'ipeaiv, liii, 1, 2 2a/x- dvaffTi)aeo8ai Kal faeoBai dBdvarov ov
tfalci ydp ipprjveiovTai 'HXiaKol, from rpbirov Hdy dBdvaros iariv ij ipvxil k.t.X.;
the Hebrew J£>£0 'the sun.' The but his authority is worthless on this
historical connexion of the Sampsseans point, as he can have had no personal
with the Essenes is evident from these knowledge of the facts : see Zeher 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. 4,9.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 89
resurrection of the body would be repulsive, as involving a
perpetuation of evil.
(iii) But they also separated themselves from the religious (hi) Pro-
belief of the orthodox Jew in another respect, which would sacrifices.
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 creed 2. 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 priests3.
(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 ange s'
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. 1. 5 els Si rb lepbv ava- from the temple-sacrifices cannot be
B-fipard re ariXXovres Bvaias oik iirne - considered apart from the fact that they
Xovai SiaipopbTnn ayveidv, as vopl^oiev, ate no animal food : see above p. 86,
/cal Si' airrb elpybpevoi tov koivov repevla- note 2. (3) The Christianized Es-
paros i<p' avruv rat Bvaias iirireXovai. senes, or Ebionites, though strong
So Philo Quod omn, prob. lib. § 12 de- Judaizers in many respects, yet dis-
scribes them as 06 f#a KaraBbovres d\X' tinctly protested against the sacrifice
^epoirpeireis -ras iavruv Siavolas Kara- of animals ; see Clem. Horn, iii. 45, 52,
o-At ¦dgeiv d£iovvres. and comp. Eitschl p. 224. On this sub-
2 Th/i following considerations show ject see also Zeller p. 242 sq,, and the
that thiir abstention should probably appendix to this chapter.
be explained in this way-; (1) Though 3 Ant. xviii 1. 5 lepels re [x«/>°-
the language of Josephus may be am- Tovovai\ Sid irolinaiv airov re Kal @pupd-
biguous, that of Philo is unequivocal tuv, B. J. ii. 8. 5 irpoKarevxtTai Si 6 le-
on this- point; (2) Their abstention pevs r^srpoipTJs k.t.X.; seeBitschlp. 181.

9o

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

of their sect, and the names of the angels1.' 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 Colossse : and we may well suspect that we have
here a germ which was developed into the Gnostic doctrine of
seons or emanations.
(v) Specu- (v) If so, it is not unconnected with another notice relating
God and to Essene peculiarities. The Gnostic doctrine of intermediate
reaion. kemgg between God an(i 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 (pereeopo-
Xeo-^ai?), 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
universe3.
(vi) Magic- (vi) Mention has been made incidentally of certain secret
books peculiar to the sect. The existence of such an apocryphal
literature was a sure token of some abnormal development in
doctrine4. In the passage quoted it is mentioned in relation to
1 B. J. 1. c. § 7 Spxovs abrois Bpvvai 2 See below, in the appendix.
(ppiK&Seis . . . piire Kpbij/eiv n robs alpe- 3 Philo Omn. prob. lib. § 12 (p. 458)
Tiaras pfyre iripois abrav ri pijvboeiv, Kal rb Si (pvaiKOv lis pelfov i) Kara dvBpuirl-
av pixpi Bavdrov rls (Sidjffrai. irpbs vnv cpbaiv perempoXiaxais airoXnrbvres,
tovtois bpvbovai pifievl piv peraSovvai irXrjV oaov auroi; irepl virdp^eas Geou Kal
tiSv Soypdruv iripias 7) lis avrbs peri- rrjs tov iravrbs yeviaews chiXoaotpeiTai.
Xapev' dipi^eaBai Si Xr/arelas Kal avvri\- 4 The word Apocrypha was used
pi/aeiv bpotus rd re ttjs alpiaeas abnSv originally to designate the secret books
pipXla Kal rd ruv dyyiXav 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, which were
Homilies, which shows how closely heretical, generally Gnostic, forgeries.
the Christian Essenes followed the See Prof. Plumptre's article Apocry-
practice of their Jewish predecessors pha in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible,
in this respect. See Zeller p. 254. and the note on drbKpvtpoi below,- ii. 3.

al charms.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

91

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
described1. 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 stones2. This expres-

1 B. J. h. 8. 12 elal Si iv aiirois ot
Kal rd piiXXovra irpoyivdiaKeiv inriaxvovv-
rat, plpXois lepals Kal SiaQbpois dyvelais
Kal Trpoxprp-iSv dwocpdeypaaiv ipiraiSorpi-
Pobpevoi' airdviov Si, etirore, iv rals irpo-
ayopevaeaiv aaroxyaovaiv. Dr Ginsburg
(p. 49) translates fiifiXois lepals 'the
sacred Scripture,' and irpo$r)Ti2v diro-
tpBiypaaiv ' the sayings of the prophets';
but as the definite articles are wanting,
the expressions cannot be so rendered,
nor does there seem to be any reference
to the Canonical writings.
We learn from an anecdote in Ant.
xiii. 11. i, that the teachers of this
sect communicated the art of predic
tion to their disciples by instruction.
We may therefore conjecture that with
the Essenes this acquisition was con
nected with magic or astrology. At ah
events it is not treated as a dhect
inspiration. 2 B. J. ii. 8. 6 airovddfovai Si cktS-
irus irepl rd T&v iraXaiav avyypdppara,
pdXiara .rb. irpbs wtpeXeiav tyvxijs Kal aia-
paros- iKXiybvres' iv&ev avrots irpbs Bepa-
irelav iraBCiv pi$ai re dXef irl)pioi Kal XlBav
ISibrijres dvepewiavrat. This passage
might seem at first sight to refer simply
to the medicinal quahties of vegetable
and mineral substances ; but a compari
son with another notice in Josephus in
vests it with a different meaning. In Ant.
viii. 2. 5 he states that Solomon, having
received by divine inspiration the art
of defeating demons for the advantage
and healing of man (els tlxpiXuav Kal

Bepairelav rols avBpthirois), composed and
left behind him charms (iiripSds) by
which diseases were allayed, and diverse
kinds of exorcisms (rpbirovs i£opKthaewv)
by which demons were cast out. ' This
mode of healing,' he adds, 'is very
powerful even to the present day'; and
he then relates how, as he was credibly
informed (laTopijaa), 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, which had concealed in it one
of the roots which Solomon had direct
ed 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
demon was exorcized ; and thus, adds
Josephus, oatprjs i] SoXopiivos KaBlaraTo
abveais koI aoipla. On these books re
lating to the occult arts and ascribed to
Solomon see Fabrioius Cod. Pseud.
Vet. Test. 1. p. 1036 sq., where many
curious notices are gathered together.
Comp. especially Origen. In Matth.
Comm. xxxv. § 110 (in. p. 910), Pseudo-
Just. Quest. 55.
This interpretation explains all the
expressions in the passage, The XlBav

92 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. Exclu- 3- But the notice to which I have just alluded suggests
o^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 orders1 in the community, the solemn
oaths by which they bound their members, were so many
safeguards against a betrayal of this precious deposit, which

ISiorifres naturally points to the use of referring to magical arts, illustrates
charms or amulets, as maybe seen e.g. its use here.
from the treatise, Damigeron deLapi- Thus these Essenes were dealers in
dibus, printed in the Spieil. Solemn, in. charms, rather than physicians. And
p. 324 sq. : comp. Eing 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
cients' thus finds an adequate expla- forms. The works of Alexander of
nation. On the other hand the pnly Tralles, an eminent ancient physician,
expression which seemed to militate constantly recommend the use of such
against this view, iXefir^pioi plfat, is charms, of which some obviously come
justified by the story in the Antiqui- from a Jewish source and not impro
ves. It should be added also that bably may have been taken from these
Hippolytus (Hcer. ix. 22) paraphrases Solomonian books to which Josephus
the language of Josephus so as to give refers. A number of passages from
it this sense; irdvv Si irepiipyas this and other writers, specifying
txovai irepl pordvas Kal XlBovs, irepiep- charms of various kinds, are given in
yorepoi Svres irpbs Tas Tobruiv ivepyclas, Becker and Marquardt Rom. Alterth.
(pdaKovres prj pdripi ravra yevovivai. IV. p. 116 sq. See also Spencer's note
The sense which ireplepyos ('curiosus') on Orig. c. Gels. p. 17 sq.
- bears in Acts xix. 19 and elsewhere, ] See especially B. J, ii. 8. 7, 10.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 93
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 TJie t-
that the three characteristics, which were singled out above as notes of
, Gnostic-
distinctive of Gnosticism, reappear in the Essenes ; though it ism found
has been convenient to consider them in the reversed order. Essenes.
This Jewish sect exhibits the same exclusiveness 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 Judseo-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 Judaism1.
But the Essenes of whom historical notices are preserved How
were inhabitants of the Holy Land. Their monasteries were Were the
situated on the shores of the Dead Sea. We are told indeed, ^f^sed?
that the sect was not confined to any one place, and that
1 I have said nothing of the Cab- 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 Cabbalistic doctrine
resy: because the books containing however will serve to show to what
the Cabbalistic speculations are com- extent Judaism may be developed in
paratively recent, and if they contain the direction of speculative mysticism.
ancient elements, it seems impossible

94

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

members of the order were found in great numbers in divers
cities and villages1. But Judaea in one notice, Palestine and Syria
in another, are especially named as the localities of the Essene
settlements2. 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 practice3. Bat 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.
Do they What ground have we for assuming the existence of this type in
Aaia ' Asia Minor? Do we meet with any traces of it in the cities
Minor? 0f foe 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.
How the But indeed throughout this investigation, when I speak of
sene is to the Judaism in the Colossian Church as Essene, I do not
stood assume a precise identity of origin, but only an essential
1 Philo Fragm. p. 632 olKovai Si 'Essene gate' at Jerusalem (B.J.y.
iroMas piv irbXeis rijs 'lovSalas, iroXXas 4. 2) seems to point to some estabhsh-
Si Kwpas, Kal peydiXovs Kal iroXvavBpiii- ment of the order close to the walls of
irovs oplXovs; Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 4 pla that city.
Si o6k tanv abrdv vbXis, dXX iv &aWj;- 3' They are only known to us from
KaroiKovai iroXXol. On the notices of Philo's treatise de Vita Contemplativa.
the settlements and dispersion of the Their settlements were on the shores
Essenes see Zeller p. 239. of the Mareotic lake near Alexandria.
2 Philo names Judcea in Fragm. p. Unlike the Essenes, they were not
632 ; Palestine and Syria in Quod omn. gathered together in convents as mem-
prob. lib. 12 p. 457. Their chief bers of a fraternity, but hved apart as
settlements were in the neighbourhood anchorites, though in the same neigh-
of the Dead Sea. This fact is men- bourhood. In other respects their
tioned by the heathen writers Pliny tenets and practices are very similar.
(N. H. v. 15) and Dion Chrysostom to those of the Essenes.
(Synesius Dio 3). The name of the 4 See above, p. 19 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 95
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 Probabih-
T16S 01 til. (3
enamoured of and was wedded to Oriental mysticism, the case.
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
. ... . mdica-
and as clear as with our defective information on the whole tions.
subject we have any right to expect in this particular instance.
When St Paul visits Ephesus, he comes in contact with St Paul at
• -i •-, Ephesus
certain strolling Jews, exorcists, who attempt to cast out evil a.d.
spirits1. Connecting this fact with the notices of Josephus, from S4— 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 r&v irepiepxopivuv in this passage : see Wetstein ad loc,
lovSatuv i^opKiarav. and the references in Becker and Mar-
2 See above p. 91, note 2. quardt Rom. Alterth. iv. p. 123 sq.
3 On the later contact of Essenism But this supposition does not exclude
with Christianity, see the appendix, the Jews from a share in these magical
and Galatians p. 310 sq. arts, while the context points to some
* There is doubtless a reference to such participation.
the charms cahed !~&<piaia ypdppara

96

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.

SibyllineOracle
a.d. 80.

connexion, throw great light on the type of Judaism which
thus appears at Ephesus1.
Somewhat later we have another notice which bears in
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. 8o2. 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 pollution8,
and with Essenism also it inculcates the duty of frequent
washings4. 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. I roils rfj 'ApripiSi
landropas rij 'Eipeala yivopivovs, KaXov-
pivovs Si biro tQv iroXiridv 'Eoaijvas : see
Guhl Ephesiaca 106 sq. The Etymol.
Magn. has 'Eaarjv b paaiXebs Kara 'E0e-
atovs, and adds several absurd deriva
tions of the word. In the sense of 'a
king' it is used by Calhmachus Hymn.
Jov. 66 of ae BeCov iaarjva. irdXiv Biaav. It
is probably not a Greek word, as other
terms connected with the worship of
the Ephesian Artemis (e.g. peydpv-
fos, a Persian word) point to" an orien
tal or at least a non-Greek origin ; and
some have derived it from the Ara
maic ]'Dn chasin 'strong' or 'power
ful.' But there is no sufficient ground
for connecting it directly with the
name of the sect '"Eaaiivol or 'Eaaaloi,
as some writers are disposed to do
(e. g. Spanheim on Callim. 1. 0., Creuzer
Symbolik iv. pp. 347, 349) ;. though
this view is favoured by the fact that
certain ascetic practices were enjoined
on these pagan ' Essenes.'
" Its date is fixed by the following
allusions. The temple at Jerusalem

has been destroyed by Titus (w. 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 Borne (w.
116 sq.); but his return is still ex
pected (w. 134 sq.).
3 See w. 27 — 30 oE vijobs piv diravras
airoarptyovaiv ISbvres, Kal papobs, elxdia
Xl&uv ISpbpara Kiaip(3v a'lpaaiv ip^/b-^ojv
pepiaapiva Kal Bvalyoi rerpairbSutV K.T.X.
In an earher passage w. 8 sq. it is
said of God, oGre ydp oTkov §x€t- vaip
XlBqv ISpvBivra KtacpbraTOV vtaSbv re, ppo-
t2v iroXvaXyia Xiipm:
4 ver. 160 iv irorapois Xobaa&Be SXoif
Sepas devdciai. Another point of con
tact with the Essenes is the great
stress on prayers before meals, ver. 26 .
ebXoyeovres irplv irieeiv ipayeetv re. Ewald
(Sibyll. Biicher p. 46) points also to
the prominence of the words evaepelv,
evaep^s, evaepia (w. 26, 35, 42, 45,
'33. HS, 15'. 162, 165, 181, 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 the appendix.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY,
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 Mseander and its neighbourhood, among these Laodicea,
are mentioned with emphasis2.
And certainly the moral and intellectual atmosphere would
not be unfavourable to the growth of such a plant. The same
district, which in speculative philosophy had produced a Thales
and a Herachtus8, had developed in popular religion the wor
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;

97

Phrygiaand Asia
congenial
to this
type of
religion.

1 Thus for instance, Ewald (L 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 behef in the resur
rection of the body and the future life
on earth, which is maintained in vv.
176 sq.; though Hilgenfeld (Zeitschr.
xrv. p. 49) does not leeognise 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 appendix. Alexandre,
Orac. Sibyll. (11. 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 kXOBi Xeus 'Aal-ns pte-
yaXavxios IZvpiiiriis re.
3 The exceptional activity of the
COL.

forces of nature in these districts of
Asia Minor may have directed the
speculations of the Ionic school towards
physics, and more especially towards
cosmogony. In Herachtus there is
also a strong mystical element. But
besides such broader affinities, I ven
ture to cah attention to special diota of
the two philosophers mentioned in the
text, which Curiously recall the tenetB
of the Judaso-Gnostic teachers. Thales
declared (Diog. Laert. i. 27) rbv xoapov
tfhijivxov Kal Saipbvuv irX^plj, or, as re
ported by Aristotle (de An. i. 5, p. 41 1),
jrriVra irXijpit BeiSv elvai. In a recorded
saying of Herachtus we have the very
language of a Gnostic teacher ; Clem.
, Alex. Strom, v. 13, p. 699, to' piv rrjs
yvibaios pdBij KpCirreiv airiarlrj
ayaBi), KaB' "BpaKXeiroV airiartii yap
Siatpvyydvei to pir\ yuiiiaKeaBai. See
above pp. 77, 92.
4 For the characteristic features of
Phrygian religious worship see Steiger
Kolosser p. 70 sq. 7

98 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.

Previous
results summed
up.

Is the
Colossian
heresy Gnostic 1

Three
notes of
Gnosti
cism.

i. Intel
lectual exclusive-
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, which the Phry
gian mysteries and Phrygian rites held
in the syncretism of the Ophites, is
clear from the account of Hippolytus
Hcer. 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 their
name Naassene, derived from the He
brew word for a serpent, shows.
2 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 [tiSv alpeaiuv] dirb HBvovs [irpoaayo-
peiovrai], lis 1) ruv ipvyav (comp. Eus.

H. E. iv. 27, v. 16, Hipp. Hcer. viii.
19, X. 25). From ol (or rj) Kara ipvyds
(Eus. H. E. ii. 25, v. 16, 18, vi. 20)
comes the solcecistic Latin name Cata-
phryges. 3 Socrates (iv. 28) accounts for the
spread of Novatianism in Phrygia by
the aucppoabvri 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 puritan-
ism of the Novatianist.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 99
feels himself challenged to contend for the universality of the St Paul
Gospel. This indeed is a characteristic feature of the Apostle's for\ne
teaching at all times, and holds an equally prominent place in "?iveJ's ?"
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 exclusiveness,
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 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 light 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 ter^tf^g 0f
the few ; it will not be forgotten that ' perfection' was the term an aristo-
...... . . . . . cracy of
especiaUy applied m 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 life are
directed, and having done so, should express his intense anxiety
for the Churches of Colossse 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 fa/Bpwirov in some copies, the second in others.
/cal SiSdaKovres irdvra HvBpwirov iv For riXeiov see the note on the passage.
irdan aoipla tva irapaar^aapev irdvra * The connexion of the sentences
dvSpairov TiXeiovivXpioTtp k.t.X. The should be carefully observed. After
reiteration has offended the scribes ; the passage quoted in the last note
and the first trdvra dvBpairov is omitted comes the asseveration that this is
7—2

IO0 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
trasts the . .
true wis- the words 'wisdom' (ao^>iet), 'intelligence' (otmots), 'knowledge'
the^Mse, (y«5<"?)> 'perfect knowledge' (eirlyvcoo-i<>),, 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-reasoning3. They pretended 'wisdom,' but it was
merely the profession, not the reality 4. Against these pretentions
the Apostle sets the true wisdom of the Gospel. On its wealth,
its fulness, its perfection, he is never tired of dwelling5. 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- SkijBiis. There is nothing correspond
ing (i. 29) els 6 Kal kottiu k.t.X.; then ing to this in the parallel passage,
the expression of concern on behalf Gal. hi, 28.
of the Colossians (ii. 1) BiXui yap bpds 2 For aotpla see i. 9, 28, ii. 3, hi. 16,
elSivai ijXIkov Ay&va ?x<"> vvip ipuv iv. 5 ; for abveais i. 9, ii. 2 ; for yvwais
k.t.X. ; then the desire that they may ii. 3 ; for iirlyvaais i. 9, io, ii. 2,
be brought (ii. 2) els irdv irXovros rijs hi. 10.
irX-npoipoplas ttjs avviaeas, els iirl- 8 ii. 4 iriBavoXoyla, ii. 8 Kevi) Avary.
yvwaiv too pvariiplov tov Beov; then 4 h. 23 Xbyov piv txovra aoqbtas,
the definition of this mystery (ii. 2,3), where the piv suggests the contrast
Xpiarov iv # elalv icdvres 0! 8-naavpol of the suppressed clause.
k.t.X. ; then the warning against the ° e. g. i. 9, 28, hi. 16 iv irdan
false teachers (ii. 4) tovto Xiya tva aoaSla ; ii. 2 rijs irXripocioptas. For the
pnSels vpas irapaXoyltrrrai k.t.X. 'wealth' of this knowledge compare
1 Col. hi. 11 after irepiropi) Kal i. -27, ii. 2, iii. 16; and see above
&KpoPvarla the Apostle adds pdpPapos, p. 44.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 1 01
lative, is vague and dreamy1. Again they had their rites of
initiation. St Paul contrasts with these the one universal, com- and dwells
ontheven-
prehensive mystery2, the knowledge of God in Christ. This table mys.
mystery is complete in itself: it contains 'all the treasures of ery"
wisdom and of knowledge hidden' in it3. 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. J5^
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 doctrine of
world. Though this tenet is not distinctly mentioned, it is an^li?
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 ; thrdoc-1
it was intimately connected at once with cosmogony and with *™ieo* tlia
religion. Correspondmgly St Paul represents the mediatorial carnate, \
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. 13 — 20, ii. 9—15. They
2 i. 26, 27, ii. 2, iv. 3. will be found to justify the statements
3 ii. 2 iv $ elalv irdvres ol Bijaavpol in this and the following paragraphs
rijs aocplas Kal rijs yviiaeas AiroKpvipoi. of the text. For the meaning of in-
For the meaning of Airbxpoipoi see above dividual expressions see the notes on
p. 90, and the note on the passage. the passages.
4 The two great Christological pas-

102 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 thet Church, as in the Universe, He is
heaven sole, absolute, supreme ; the primary source from which all life
and earth. proceeds and the ultimate arbiter in whom all feuds are reconciled.
Hisrela- On the one hand, in relation to Deity, He is the visible
(i)IDeity ¦ image of the invisible God. He is not only the chief manifes-
as G.od tation of the Divine nature : He exhausts the Godhead mani-
mam-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-
^Hhn 6S Pose,i 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) i Created Hence it follows that, as regards created things, His supre-
absXt;eaSmacy must be absolute. In heaven as in earth, over things
t 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 Judaso-Gnostic
1 See the detached note on irXi)- irX-hpapa KaroiKijaai, ii. 9 iv airy ko-
PaP-a- ¦ roiKei irav to irX-qpupa ttjs 6ebTi)Tos aa-
2 i. 19 iv avrip evSbKijaev irdv rb .pariKUS.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 103
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 are 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 incur- Angelol^
cated, was utterly wrong in principle. The motive of- this therefore
angelolatry it is not difficult to imagine. There was a show of ed
humility2, 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
angehc 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 ofa?adenial
x of His per-
Christ's Person, that He and He alone can bridge over the feet media-
chasm between earth and heaven ; for He is at once the lowest
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 hnk 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 especiaUy i. 16 etre Bpivoi Compare also ii. 10 n KecpaXii irda-ns
etre Kvptbri]Tes elre dpxal etre i£ovaiai dpxvs Kal igovalas, and ii. 1 5 direKSvad-
K.T.X., compared with the parallel pas- pevos tos dpxds Kal tAs i&valas k.t.X.
sage in Eph. i. 21 birepdva irdar/s dpxvs '' h. 18 BiXuv iv TaireivoippoavvQ Kal
Kal i&valas koI Svvdpeas Kal Kvpibrifros BpvaKela riSv dyyiXuv k.t.X.
Kal icavrbs bvbparos Svopagopivov k.t.X. ' H. 10; comp. i. 9.

104 TiIE 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.
Hence follows the practical conclusion, that, whatever is
stie's prac- done, must be done in the name of the Lord2. Wives must
ence mf6r" §UDnut to their husbands ' in the Lord ': children must obey
their parents 'in the Lord': servants must work for the mas
ters as working ' unto the Lord8.' 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 as a matter of fact we know that
doctrine, they 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 Put the former and nobler extreme was the first impulse
lossf6 G°" ^ ^e 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 enaotments. And moreover the motive of these pro-
1 ii- J8. iv. 2 the ascetic tendency still pre-
2 hi. 17. dominates.
3 hi. 18, 20, 23. 6 2 Pet u I0 sq ; Jude g_
4 At least in 2 Tim. hi. 1—7, where, « Apoc. ii. 14, 20—22.
though the most monstrous develop, ? See the notes on Clem. Eom. Ep,
ments of the evil were still future, ii. § 9.
the Apostle's language implies that it s ii. 16.
had already begun. On the other hand. 9 ii. 21.
in the picture of the heresy in 1 Tim,

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 105
hibitions is Essene rather than Pharisaic, Gnostic rather than not ex-
Jewish. These severities of discipline were intended ' to check its juda-
indulgence of the flesh1.' They professed to' treat the bodylsm>
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 aearini?
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 ^
centrating the thoughts on earthly and perishable things4
He points out that they fail in their purpose, and are found
valueless against carnal indulgences8. 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 Creator8.
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.
conscious orraconscious) .which springs 4 ii. 8, 20 — 22.
from a false principle; and there is the 5 ii. 2:3 ovk iv Tipij rtvi irpbs irXvapo-
asceticism of self-discipline, which is vr)v ttjs aapxos : see the note on these:
the training of the Christian athlete words. 6 iii. 1, 2.
(1 Cor. ix. 27). I need not say that the 7 iii. 3, 5. 8 iii. 10.

106 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
The truth In attempting to draw a complete portrait of the Colossian
above re- heresy from a few features accidentally exhibited in St Paul's
suit tested epjstiej ft j^s 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
consisten- satisfied. The consistency and the symmetry of the result is
symmetry i*s grea,t 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 of the postulate.
(2) Its 2. And again ; - the historical conditions of the problem1
historical 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- * nave already pointed out, that the language of St John
thutype in the APocaJyPse> whicQ was probably written within a few
of Judffio- years of this epistle, seems to imply the continuance in this
cism in the district of the same type of heresy which is here denounced
district. by gt paup_ But the notices in ttia book are not more de_
1 See above p, 41 sq.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 107
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- erm us'
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 au p aoe*
teacher8. He lived 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 Irenseus to have
written his Gospel with the direct object of confuting his errors'.
1 The relation of Cerinthus to the Ephesus : Bee below, note 5.
Colossian heresy is briefly indicated by 4 Epiphanius (xxviii. 2 sq.) repre-
Neander Planting of Christianity 1. sents him as the ringleader of the
p. 325 sq. (Eng. Trans.). It has been Judaizing opponents of the Apostles
remarked by other writers also, both in the Acts and Epistles to the Co-
earlier and later. The subject ap- rinthians and Galatians. Philastrius
peared to me to deserve a fuller in- (Hmr. 36) takes the same line.
vestigation than it has yet received. 5 The well-known story of the en-
2 Hippol. Hmr. vii. 33 Alyvirrluv counter between St John and Cerinthus
iraiSela daKvBels, x. 21 b iv Alybrrrip in the bath is related by Irenaeus
dowels, Theodoret. Hcer. Fab. ii. 3 iv (iii. 3. 4) on the authority of Polycarp,-
AlybirTip irXelorov Siarplif/as xpdvov. who appears . from the sequence of
* Den. i. 26. 1 ' et Cerinthus autem Irensus' narrative to have told it at
quidam ... in Asia docuit,' Epiphan. Rome, when he paid his visit to Ani-
Harr. xxviii. 1 iyivero Si ovros b K17- cetus ; 6s Kal iirl 'Aviktjtov iiriSvpvaas
pivBos iv T-fj'Aaia Siarpipuv, KaKeiae tov T%'Mtip-n iroXXobs dirb riiv irpoeipvpivav
KVpvypaTosTi)vdpxwireiroivpivos,Theo- alperiKWv. iirioTpe\f'ev...Kal elalv ol aKi)-
doret. I.e. varepov els tvv 'Aalav dipl- Kobres avrov on 'loidwvs k.t.X.
kcto. The scene of his encounter with 6 Iren. hi. 11. 1.
St John in the bath is placed at

108 THE COLOSSIAN HERESY.
Cerinthus 'Cerinthus,' writes Neander, 'is best entitled to be con-
tween Ju- sidered as the intermediate link between the Judaizing and
Gnosti-and ^e 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.
minent in The gross Chiliastic doctrine ascribed to him2, even though
his system ^ mav 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.'
At the same time, it is said by an ancient writer that his
Gnosti- adherence to Judaism was only partial6. This limitation is
already doubtless correct. As Gnostic principles asserted themselves
aggressive. m0re 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 n. p. 42 (Bonn's statements of these writers would not
Trans.). carry much weight in themselves ; but
2 See the Dialogue of Caius and in this instance they are rendered
Proclus in Euseb. H. E. hi. 28, Dio- highly probable by the known Judaism
nysius of Alexandria, ib. vii. 25, Theo- of Cerinthus.
doret. 1. c, Augustin. Hmr. 8. 5 Epiphan. Hcer. xxviii. 5, xxx. 14,
3 See below p. in. Philastr. Hmr. 36.
* Epiphan. Hair, xxviii. 4, 5, Phi- 6 Epiphan. Hmr. xxviii. 1 irpoaixeiv
lastr. Hmr. 36, Augustin. 1. c. The np 'IovSaeap.ip dro pipovs.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 109
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 his teach-
out of the field. Two characteristic features in his teaching mg-
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- i- 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 ahke represent this demiurge, or these
1 Iren. i. 26. 1 ' Non a primo Deo atque virtutes, quos distantes longe a
factum esse mundum docuit, sed a superioribus virtutibus mundum istuni
virtute quadam valde separata et dis- in inferioribus partibus condidisse...
tante ab ea principahtate quae est su- Post hunc Cerinthus hasreticus erupit,
per universa, et ignorante eum qui est similia docens. Nam et ipse mundum
'super omnia Deum ' ; Hippol. Hmr. vii. institutum esse ab illis dicit ' ; Epi-
33 (Xeyev obx inrb toC irpiirov Beov ye- phan. Hcer. xxviii. 1 tva etvat tov dyyi-
ywbnu tov xdapov, dXX' inrb Svvdpeilis \av t&v rbv Koapov ireiroiVKoroiv ; Theo-
nvos Kexwpiapivvs tijs vrrip rd SXa efov- doret. H. F. ii. 3 Iva piv elvai rbv t&v
alas Kal dyvoovavs rbv birip irdvra Beov, SXoiv Oeov, o6k avrov Si elvai tou Koapov
X. 21 birb Swdpeiis twos dyyeXiKijs, Svpiovpybv, dXXd Svvdpeis nvas Kexu-
iroXb Kexvpiopivvs Kal Sieariiavs ttjs piapevas Kal iravreXws avrov dyvoovaas;
birip rd 6Xa abBevrlas Kal dyvoovavs rbv Augustin. Hmr. 8. The one statement
inrip irdvra Beov. is quite reconcilable with the other.
2 Pseudo-Tertull. Hmr. 3 ' Carpocra- Among those angels by whose instru-
tes prseterea hanc tulit sectam : TJnam 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 bne, whom

HO 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-
gelology. 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 seons, took their place in later speculations. Thus his theory
fi q 7*] i py* ATI n.
sons of is linked on to the angelology of later Judaism founded on
ticsrGn°S" tne an§e^c 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
tweenthe incipient gnosis of the Colossian heretics and the mature.
heresyand §nosis of the seccmd centui7' In the Colossian epistle we
later Gnos- still breathe the atmosphere of Jewish angelology, nor is there
any trace of the ason of later Gnosticism2; while yet speculation
is so far advanced that the angels have an important function
he regarded as the demiurge in a Hmr. xxviii. 4 ToV SeSoiK6ra vbpov iva
special sense and under whom the elvai twv d7Y<?W tuv tov Koapov To
others worked ; see Neander Church ttoivkotuv.
History n. p. 43. * I am quite unable to see any
1 Pseudo-Tertull. 1. c. ; Epiphan. reference to the Gnostic conception of

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. Ill
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 mon in the passages of the New Tes- sq.) attempts to show that Cerinthus
tament, which are sometimes quoted did not separate the Christ from
in support of this view, e.g., by Baur Jesus, and that Irenasus (and subse-
Paulus p. 428, Burton Lectures p. 1 1 1 quent authors copying him) have
sq. . wrongly attributed to this heretic the
1 Iren. i. 26. 1, Hippol. Hmr. vii. theories of later Gnostics, seem insuf-
33, x. 31, Epiphan. Hmr. xxviii. 1, ficient 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 Ersch u. Gruber ; mitted some foreign elements not very
Quellenkritik des Epiphanios p. 118 consistent with his Judaic standing

112 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
CeTinthian *^e Colossian heretics held respecting the person of our Lord ;
Christo- but -we may safely assume that he regarded them as inadequate
logy m the J J 6 i
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 which 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 Nicolaitans or from
ing my main purpose. some later Gnostics. There is how-
1 Irenasus (iii. 11. 1), after speaking ever no improbability in the suppo-
of Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans, pro- sition that Cerinthus used the word
ceeds ' non, quemadmodum ilh dieunt, pleroma in this way ; see the detached
alterum quidem fabricatorem (i. e. de- note on rX^piapa below.
miurgum), alium autem Patrem Do- 2 i. io,ii.o. See above p. 102, note 2.
mini: et ahum quidem fabricatoris On the force of KaroiKeiv see the note
filium, alterum vero de superioribus on the earher of the two passages,
Christum, quern et impassibilem per- 3 ii. 6 TrapeXApere toV Xpurrav, 'Iv
severasse, descendentem in Jesum aauv rbv Kvpiov.
filium fabricatoris, et iterum revolasse * i. 2», 22.

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY. 113
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 generality of his language shows that The Gnos-
these speculations were still vague and fluctuating. The dif- thTcolos-
ference which separates these heretics from Cerinthus may be siansbeing
, . . •' • vague and
measured by the greater precision and directness in the Apo- undeve-
stolic counter-statement, as we turn from the Epistle to the
Colossians to the Gospel of St John. In this interval, extend
ing over nearly a quarter of a century, speculation had 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.

COL.

On some points connected with the Essenes.

I.

THE NAME ESSENE.

Various
forms of
the name
in Greek.

The name is variously written in Greek ¦

xiii. 5. 9, xiii. 10. 6, xv. 10. 5, xviii.
2, 13, Vit. 2 ; Plin. N. H. v. 15. 17
in Synes. Dion 3 ; Hippol. Hmr.
Epiphan. Hmr. p. 28 sq, 127 (ed.

1. 'Eo-o-nvos : Joseph. Ant,
1. 2, 5, B. J. ii. 8,
(Essenus) ; Dion Chrys.
ix. 18, 28 (ms iorqvos) ;
Pet.).
2. 'Eo-o-aios: Philo 11. pp. 457, 471, 632 (ed. Mang.); Hegesip-.
pus in Euseb. H.E. iv. 22 ; Porphyr. de Abstin. iv, 11. 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-o-iji'os, if the common texts may be trusted.
3. 'Oo-o-aios: Epiphan. Hcer. pp. 40 sq., 125, 462. The common
texts very frequently make him write 'Oo-otjvos, 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-cratos, Epiphan. Hcer. p. 117. Erom the connexion the
same sect again seems to be meant : but owing to the form
Epiphanius conjectures (oiuai) that the name is derived from
Jesse, the father of David.
AH etymo- If any certain example could be produced where the name occurs
logies to jn any earjy Hebrew or Aramaic writing, the question of its. deriva-
which de- tion would probably be settled; but in the absence of a single decisive

THE ESSENES. 1 15
instance a wide field is opened for conjecture, and critics have not rive the
been backward in availing themselves of the license. In discussing name
the claims of the different etymologies proposed we may reject :
First : derivations from the Greek. Thus Philo connects the word (i) From
with oo-tos. 'holy': Quod omn. prob. 12, p. 457 'Eo-o-atoi...8ia\eKTou e ree '
IAX1JVUC7S Trapiow/Jioi. o'crtonyTos, § 13, p. 459 t<3v 'Ecnrauov *J ocrtiov,
Fragm. p. 632 koXovvtcu [Lev *Ecro-atoi, irapa. Trjv oVto'rgra, piol 8oku>
[Sokei?], t^s irpooTryopias afiwoVv-res. 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 iropuw/ioi octiot^toi be ren
dered ' from an incorrect derivation from the Greek homonym hosiotes'
(ib. p. 32), since the word Trapoivvu.os never involves the notion of false
etymology. The amount of truth which probably underlies Philo's
statement will be considered hereafter. Another Greek derivation
i« 10-os, 'companion, associate,' suggested by Rapoport, Freeh Millvn
p. 41. Several others again are suggested by Lowy, s. v. Essaer, e. g.
eo-w from their esoteric doctrine, or aT<ra from their fatalism. All
such may be rejected as instances of ingenious trifling, if indeed
they deserve to be, called ingenious.
Secondly : derivations from proper names whether of persons or (ii) Prom
of places. Thus the word has been derived from Jesse the father of names of
r , . . persons or
David (Epiphan. L a), or from one ,SP'1 Isai, the disciple of E. places ;
Joshua ben Perachia who migrated to Egypt in the time of Alexander
Jannaeus (Low in Ben C&ananja 1. p. 352)- Again it has been
referred to the town Fssa (a doubtful reading in Joseph. Ant. xiii.
15. 3) beyond the Jordan. And other similar derivations have been
suggested. Thirdly : etymologies from the Hebrew or Aramaic, which do (hi) From
not supply the right consonants, or do not supply them in the right j.^*6™ t
order. Under this head several must be rejected ; supplying
^lDtf asar ' to bind,' Adler Volhslehrer vi. p. 50, referred to by J^1^*
Ginsburg Essenes p. 29. nants,
"POPl chdsid 'pious,' which is represented by 'Ao-tSaTos (1 Mace.
ii. 42 (v. 1.), vii. 13, 2 Mace, xiv, 6), and could not possibly assume
the form 'Eero-aTos or 'Eo-ctji-o'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
8—2

u6

THE ESSENES.

such as
those which
make n
part of
the root.

Other de
rivations consider
ed:

(i)WDK'a
physician';

original of Josephus ; and it has been adopted by many more recent
writers. S^HD s'chS, 'to bathe,' from which with an Aleph prefixed we
might get 'KnDN as'chai ' bathers' (a word however which does not
occur) : Gratz Gesch. der Juden in. pp. 82, 468.
yUX tsanuat. ' retired, modest,' adopted by Erankel (ZeUschrift
1846, p. 449, Monatschrift n. p. 32) after a suggestion by Low.
To this category must be assigned those etymologies which con
tain a | as the third consonant, of the root ; since the comparison of
the parallel forms 'Eo-othos and 'Ectotjvo's shows that in tlie latter
word the v is only formative. On this ground we must reject:
TDFl chasin; see below under t*Ety-
JXn chotsen 'a fold' of a garment, and so supposed to signify the
Trcpi.tfDp.0. 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.
PfcJ^ tasban ' strong' : see Cohn in Erankel's Monatschrift vn.
p. 271. This etymology is suggested to explain Epiphanius Hmr.
p. 40 tovto Si to yevos raw 'OcrcrrjviSv kpuvrp/zverai 8id t^s e/cSoVecos
tov oVo'/xaros orij3apdv -ycVos ('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 Ain, it is plain
that he got this interpretation from some one else, probably from
Epiphanius. The correct reading however in Epiphanius is 'Oo-o-aiW,
not 'Ocro-rjvtov ; and it would therefore appear that this father or hia
informant derived the word from the Hebrew root TTJ? rather than
from the Aramaic |B>J?. The 'Oo-craioi would then be the D'TJJ, 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
Aramaic fDn chasin 'powerful, strong' (from |Dn) ; but this is open
to the same objections as \^V.
When all such derivations are eliminated as untenable or impro
bable, considerable uncertainty still remains. The 1st and 3rd radi
cals might be any of the gutturals X, n, n, V ; and the Greek cr, as the,
2nd radical, might represent any one of several Shemitic sibilants,
Thus we have the choice of the following etymologies, which have
found more or less favour.
(1) NDX asa 'to heal,' whence WDK asya, 'a 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 (rrpo% OepatrtCav,

THE ESSENES. 1 17
¦n-afloiy). This etymology is supported likewise by an appeal to the
name depairevral, which Philo gives to an allied sect in Egypt (de Vit.
Cont. § 1, 11. 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. c), bent upon extracting from it as much
moral significance as possible, says, 6epa.Tre.VTal koI OepcnrevrpiSe; ko.-
Xovvrai, tjtoi Trap' ocrov laTpiKrjv iirayyeWovTCU Kpelcrcrova r^s Kara.
7roA.eis (to p.ev ydp o-co/i.a-ra Oepairevet. p.6vov, tKelvt] 8e Kal i^v^as k. t. A.)
rj trap ocrov Ik ^>uo-«ds ko1 t<ov Upcov vop-utv iiraiSevOrjcrav Oepanrevetv
to ov k.t.X. : but the latter meaning alone accords with the usage of
the word; for Bepcnrtvrqs, used absolutely, signifies 'a worshipper,
devotee,' not 'a physician, healer.' This etymology of 'Eo-o-aios is
ascribed, though wrongly, to Philo by Asaria di .Rossi (Meor Fnayim
3, fol. 33 a) and has been very widely received. Among more recent
writers, who have adopted or favoured it, are Bellermann (Ueber Essaer
u.Therapeutenj). 7), Gfrorer (Philo n. p. 341), Dahne (Ersch u. Gruber,
s. v.), Baur (Christi. Kirche der drei erst. Jahrh. p. 20), Herzfeld
(Gesch. des Judenthums n. p. 371, 395, 397 sq.), Geiger (Urschrift
p. 126), Derenbourg (L'Histoire et la Geographie de la Palestine
pp. 170, 175, notes), Keim (Jesus von Naza/ra I. p. 284 sq.), and
Hamburger (Real-Encyclopadie fiir Bibel u. Talmud, s.v.). Several
of these writers identify the Essenes with the Baithusians (|»D1JV3)
of the Talmud, though in the Talmud the Baithusians are connected
with the Sadducees. This identification was suggested by di Bossi
(1. c. fol. 33 5), who interprets 'Baithusians' as ' the school of the
Essenes' (X'D'S TV3) : while subsequent writers, going a step further,
have explained it ' the school of the physicians' (fr^DS TV3).
(2) XTM chaza 'to' see', whence N*tn chazya 'a seer', in re- (2) X»fn
ference to the prophetic powers which the Essenes claimed, as the ' a Beer 5
result of ascetic contemplation : Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 12 eiVi Se «v aurois
o" Kal rd p.£XXovTa irpoywutcrKUV vmo-xyovvTai k. t. X. For instances of
such Essene prophets see Ant. xiii. 11. 2, xv. 10. 5, B. J. 1. 3. 5, ii. 7.
3. Suidas, s. v. 'Eo-craiot, says : Geiopia. rd iroXXd irapap.evovo-iv, evOev
Kal 'Eo-omoi KaAowrai, touto StjXovvtos toS ovop-arog, rovrtcTTi, Oeioprj-
tikoL 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 Ntn is rather opav than
¦Oeapeiv ; 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

118 THE ESSENES.
(Zeitsehr. 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 £, and the X by o\ 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) ntiflf (3) PlfcJ'y zasah 'to do,' so that 'Eo-o-aloi would signify 'the
•to do '; doer3j the observers of the law,' thus referring to the strictness of
Essene practices : see Oppenheim in Frankel's Monatschrift vii.
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 Annalen 1839, p. 145.
Thus the talmudic phrase ne>JJD »SMK> interpreted 'men of prac
tice, of good deeds,' is supposed to refer to the Essenes (see Frankel's
Zeitschrift in. p. 458, Monatschrift 11. p. 70). In some passages indeed
(see Surenhuis Mishna 111. p. 313) it may possibly mean 'workers of
miracles' (as- tpyov 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. 126.) 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) chasyo (4) .iflr>»» chasi (r^Sou ctise) or p^_U2Qii chasyo, ' pious,' in
pious ; gyriac. This derivation, which is also given by de Sacy (Ghrestom.
Arab. 1. p. 347), is adopted by Ewald (Gesch. des V. Isr. iv. p. 484,
ed. 3, 1864, vn. pp. 154, 477, ed. 2, 1859), who abandons in its fa
vour another etymology (\tn chazzan ' watcher, worshipper' = Oepa-
7revnj'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 oo-ios, 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. 115),
and it also accounts for the tendency to write 'Oo-o-aios for 'Eo-cratos
in Greek. Ewald moreover points out how an Essenizing Sibylline
poem (Orac. Sib. iv ; see above, p. 96) dwells on the Greek equiva
lents, eio-e/fy's, evo-€f3iy, etc. (vv. 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. vn. p. 154, Sibyll. BUcher p. 46. Lipsius (Schen-

THE ESSENES. 119
kel's Bibel-Lexikm, s.v.) also considers thi3 the most probable ety
mology. (5) NET! chashot (also ne>n) Heb., 'to be silent' ; whence DWn (5) DWn
chashshavm ' the silent ones,' who meditate on mysteries. Jost (Gesch. Qnes ,
d. Judentk. 1. p. 207) believes that this was the derivation accepted
by Josephus, since he elsewhere (Ant. iii. 7. 5, iii. 8. 9) writes out JBTI,
choshen, 'the high-priest's breast-plate' (Exod. xxviii. 15 sq), eo-orfv or
£o-ot;i/i/s in Greek, and explains it 0-qp.aivei rovro Kara rijv 'EAAt/vow
yXwnav Xoyeiov (i. e. the 'pi ace* of oracles' or 'of reason': comp. Philo
de Mon. ii. § 5, II. p. 226 KaAcirat A.oy«7ov irvp.m<s, «rei8»/ rd Iv ovpavia
iravra, XoyoK koI avaXoyiais BeSrjp.iovpyrjTai «. t. X.), as it is translated
in the lxx. Even though modern critics should be right in connect
ing |B>n with the Arab. ,«u»-». 'pulcher fuit, ornavit' (see Gesen. Tkes,
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 efm^cv sSs p.vo~rqpi6v ti cppiKrdv rj twv
IvSov cruairr) Ka.Ta.cpa.lvtTa.1, ; and perhaps this will also explain the Greek
equivalent Oeiapip-iKoi, which Suidas gives for 'Eoro-atoi. The use of
the Hebrew word D'NETl in Mishna ShehaUm 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
Chaldaisches 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.

ORIGIN AND AFFINITIES OF THE ESSENES.
HpHE ruling principle of the Restoration under Ezra was the isola- The prin-
-*- tion of the Jewish people from all influences of the surrounding ^ re'sto-
nations. Only by the rigorous application of this principle was it ration.
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

120

THE ESSENES.

Rise of
the Asi-
damns.

Phari-saism and
Essenismtraced to
the same
principle.

Foreignelementsin Esse
nism.

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 Maccabsean wars we read of a party or sect
called the Chasidim or Asidceans ('Ao-tStuoi), the 'pious' or 'devout/
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 struggle 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 exclusiveness and
isolation is wrapt in the same obscurity. At a somewhat later date
it is exhibited in the Pharisees and the Essenes; but whether these
were historically connected with the Chasidim as divergent offshoots
of the original sect, or whether they represent independent develop
ments of the same principle, we are without the proper data for
deciding. The principle itself appears in the name of the Pharisees,
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 Grsecia 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 contamin
ation with the outer world.
Thus the sect may have arisen in the heart of Judaism. The
idea of ceremonial purity was essentially Judaic. But still, when we
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 allowed.

THE ESSENES. 121
The investigations of Frankel, published first in 1846 in his Frankel's
Zeitschrift, and continued in 1853 in his Monatschrift, have given a ^J^"^.
different direction to current opinion. Frankel maintains that oeived,
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. 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*ss an^
that, whatever value Frankel's investigations may have as contribu- mislead-
tions to our knowledge of Jewish religious thought and practice, they s'
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 sect. 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 'Eo-o-alos, 'Eo-otjvos, represent two different Hebrew words, the | ^7* 10n
former Ten chasid, the latter yov 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-cuos, 'E0-0-17- *[^
yds, are plainly duplicate forms of the same Hebrew or Aramaic
original, like 2a/xi/raios and ^apuj/rjvos (Epiphan. Hcer. pp. 40, 47,
127; and even Sa/Ai^mjs p. 46), Na£a>patos and Na^apijvo's, TtTTaios
and rmrjvds (Steph. Byz. s. v., Hippol. Hmr. vi. 7), with which we

1 Zeitscrift^. 449 'Fiir Essaer liegt, nach einer Bemerkung des Herrn L.
wie schon von anderen Seiten bemerkt Low im Orient, das Hebr. yiJX nahe';
wurde, das Hebr. TDn, fur Essener, see also pp. 454, 455; Monatschrift ¦$ -it.

122 THE ESSENES.
may compare Boorpaios and Bocrrp^vos, MeAmuos and MeXtrrjvos, 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
tsanuag_ should have taken such an incongruous form as 'Eo-o-ijvo's.
(3) And lastly; the more important of the two words, chasid, had
already a recognised Greek equivalent in 'Ao-iScuos ; and it seems
highly improbable that a form so divergent as 'Eo-o-aios should have
taken its place.
Depend- Indeed Frankel's derivations are generally, if not universally,
ence of abandoned by later writers ; and yet these same writers repeat his
on the quotations and accept his results, as if the references were equally valid,
deriva- 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, consistently logical (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' (111. p. 463), but even boldly translates chasiduth '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. 116). 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 of the Essenes, while
distinctly repudiating the etymology1.
The term But, although 'Eo-o-atos or 'Ectotjvos is not a Greek form of cliasid,
noTap- ** mign* s*iH happen that this word was applied to them as an
plied epithet, though not as a proper name. Only in this case the refer-
to the ence 0USnt *° be unmistakeable, before any conclusions are based
Essenes. 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 Maccabsean war,
is called a chasid2. At all events this R. Jose is known to have
1e.g. Keim(p.-286) and Derenbonrg p. 454, Monatschr. pp. 33, 62. See
(p. 166, 461 sq.), who both derive Frankel's own aocount of this E. Jose
Essene from WDK ' a physician.' in an earlier volume, Monatschr. 1.
2 Mishna Chagigah ii. 7 ; Zeitschr. p. 405 sq.

THE ESSENES. 123
been a married man, for he is stated to have disinherited his children
(Baba Bathra 133 6); 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 ceased1. In this latter sense the expression D'OltJ'SOn D^TOn,
' the ancient or primitive Chasidim' (Monatschr. pp. 31, 62), is perhaps
used; for these primitive Chasidim again are mentioned as having
wives and children2, and it appears also that they were scrupulously
exact in bringing their sacrificial offerings8. 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 (D11J? V&"f\ HEW T>Dn), etc., are the ruin of the 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
illustrations given. Again ; the saying in Mishna Pirke Aboth v.
10, 'He who says Mine is thine and thine is thine is [a] chasid
(Ton ~{pw "(?&) ~(?& "h®),' is quoted by several writers as though it
referred to the Essene community of goods4. 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
1 Zeitschr. p. 457, Monatschr. p. 69 sage of Pirke Aboth. Later in the vo-
sq.; see below, p. 126. lume (p. 467) Gratz tacitly alters the
2 Niddah 38 a ; see Lbwy s. v. Es- words to make them express recipro-
saer. cation or community of goods, sub-
3 Mishna Kerithuth vi. 3, Nedarim stituting 'Thine is mine' for 'Thine
10 a; see Monatschr. p. 65. is thine' in the second clause; ' The
4 Thus Gratz (in. p. 81) speaking of Chassid must have no property of his
the community of goods among the own, but must treat it as belonging to
Esseneswrites, 'From this view springs tne g00jety (TDH hv> ~{?W "|^B> ^>B>).'
the proverb; Every Chassid says; Mine At least; ag he gives no reference, I
and thine belong to thee (not me)' thus gUppoBe that he refers to the same
giving a turn to the expression which pag8age. in this loose way he treats
in its original connexion it does not the whole BUBject. Keim (p. 294)
at all justify. Of the existence of such quotes the passage correctly, but refers
a proverb I have found no traces. It it nevertheless to Essene communism.
certainly is not suggested in the pas-

124

THE ESSENES.

especially the clause which immediately follows (and which these
writers do not give), 'He who says Thine is mine and mine 400
mine is wicked (jJtJ'l),' show plainly that "pon must be taken in its
general sense ' pious,' and the whole expression implies not recipro
cal interchange but individual self-denial.
Possible It might indeed be urged, though this is not Frankel's plea, that
connexion supposing the true etymology of the word 'Eo-o-aios, 'Eo-o-qvos, to be
and chasyo the Syriac f^jjaM, r<L&flSM, ch'se, chasyo (a possible derivation),
chasid might have been its Hebrew equivalent as being similar
in sound and meaning, and perhaps ultimately connected in deriva
tion, the exactly corresponding triliteral root NDn (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-tSaioi, which is still used
later than the Maccabsean era, would also have gone with it ; rather
than that a new Greek word 'Eo-o-aTos (or 'Eo-cnjj/o's) should have been
invented to take its place. But indeed the Syriac Version of the
Old Testament furnishes an argument against this convertibility fit
the Hebrew chasid and the Syriac chasyo, which must be regarded as
Usage is almost decisive. The numerous passages in the Psalms, where the
able toUr" -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 Asidssans. But in such
passages *VDn is commonly, if not universally, rendered in the
Peshito not by rdfflu, r&sata, but by a wholly different word jl»:u
zadik. And again, in the Books of Maccabees the Syriac rendering
for the name 'Ao-i&uoi, 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-t8aios and 'Eo-o-aios is removed.
Frankel's other derivation 5>m, tsaniiat, suggested as an equi-
second1'8 valent to 'Eo"<"?>'°s> has found no favour with later writers, and
derivation indeed is too far removed from the Greek form to be tenable.
1 This is Hitzig's view (Geschichte by the later Jews because the Syrian
des Volkes Israel p. 427). He main- Essenes means exactly the same as
tains that " they were caUed 'Hasidim 'Hasidim.'

1 ,?

THE ESSENES. 125
JJor do the passages quoted by him1 require or suggest any allusion tsanua^
to this sect. Thus in Mishna Bemai, vi. 6, we are told that the consider-
sohool of Hillel permits a certain license in a particular matter, but
it is added, 'The ij?m of the school of Hillel followed the pre
cept of the school of Shammai.' Here, as Frankel himself confesses,
the Jerusalem Talmud knows nothing about Essenes, but explains
the word by **1E>3, i.e. 'upright, worthy2'; while elsewhere, as he
allows3, 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, Eiddushm 7 1 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 DtyU¥, 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* *vrO 1DW1 V3JJ1 VUSB',
' 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 j^oiogieJ"
the Talmud, SODN, asya, ' a physician,' is the one which has found in the
most favour. For the reasons given above (p. 117) this derivation ,? m"/'
seems highly improbable, and the passages quoted are quite insuffi- ' a physi-
cient to overcome the objections. Of these the strongest is in the oian'
Talm. Jerus. Yoma iii. 7, where we are told that a certain physician
(*DS) 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 j^y f as.
the tithes — this being regarded as a disqualification, apparently sages
because it was inconsistent with the highest degree of ceremonial ^.^h ^
purity4. The same story is told with some modifications in Midrash
Qoheleth iii. 1 1 5- 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. Lbwy (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
for Frankel's conclusion that this particular physician was an Essene,
or for the derivation of the word Essene which others maintain . Again,
1 Zeitschr. pp. 455, 457 ; Monatschr. " Frankel Monatschr. p. 71 : comp.
p. 32. Derenbourg p. 170 sq.
2 Monatschr. p. 32. 6 See Lowy Krit.-Ialm. Lex. s. v.
* Zeitschr. p. 455. Essaer.

126 THE ESSENES,
in the statement of Talm. Jerus. Kethuboth H. 3, that correct manu
scripts were called books of »DN 1, 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.
(2) £asah Hitherto our search for the name in the Talmud has been unsuc-
cessful. One possibility however still remains. The talmudical
writers speak of certain ntJ'yD Witt 'men of deeds'; and if (as some
suppose) the name Essene is derived from nK>J), have we not here the
mention which we are seeking ? Frankel rejects the etymology,
but presses the identification4. 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 Essenes5. 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 'KOK
ncyo. Thus, Frankel concludes, 'the identity of these with D^TDn
becomes still more plain.' Now it seems clear that this expression
TWO *1MK in some places cannot refer to miraculous powers, but
must mean 'men of practical goodness,' as for instance in Succah
51a, 53 a; and being a general term expressive of moral excellence,
it is naturally connected with chasidim, which is likewise a general
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 him6, and hence there is a temptation to translate it 'won
der-worker,' as applied to him. But the reason is quite insufficient.
1 Urged in favour of this derivation pip/ dXXd avvervpei trap iavrrj), is also
by Herzfeld 11. p. 398. the meaning suggested here by the
2 The oath taken by the Essenes context.
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 8- 7) avvrvpvaeiv... s Tce pasgag6 js adduced in support
rd tijs alpiaews avruv fiiflXla can have of this derivation by Derenbourg p.
nothing to do with accuracy in tran- 175.
scribing copies, as Herzfeld (n.pp. 398, 4 See Zeitschr. p 438, Monatschr.
407) seems to think. The natural mean- pp.68 — 70.
ing of avvrvpeiv, 'to keep safe or close' 6 gee above, p. 118.
and so 'not to divulge' (e.g. Polyb. « Taanith 246, Yoma 53S; see Su-
xxxi. 6. 5 ovk i£i$aive t^v iavrijs yvii- renhuis Mishna in. p. 313.

THE ESSENES. 1 27
Moreover it must be observed that R. Chaninah's wife is a promi
nent person in the legends of his miracles reported in Taanith 246 ;
and thus we need hardly stop to discuss the possible meanings of
ntS^D 'EOS, since his claims to being considered an Essene are barred
at the outset by this fact1.
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 Pharisees3. 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 The au-
the Aboth of Rabbi Nathan, c. 37, which, as he gives it, appears f0° thfs
conclusive; 'There are eight kinds of Pharisees... and those Phari- derivation
sees who live in celibacy are Essenes.' But what are the facts an error-
of the case 1 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 agreed3. Secondly; Dr Ginsburg has taken
the reading i}XW]) inainD, 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,
Babl. Sotah fol. 22 b, Jerus. Sotah v. 5, Jerus. Berakhoth ix. 5,
(quoted by Buxtorf and Levy, s.v. £>nD), distinctly prove. In
Babl. Sotah 1. c, the corresponding expression is HJB'ysi »min HD
'What is my duty, and I will do it,' and the passage in Jerus.
Berakhoth 1. c. is to the same effect. These parallels show that
the reading JWyNT Tain HD 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-
1 In this and similar cases it is un- s. v. , 1. p. 829 : comp. Essenes pp. 22,
necessary to consider whether the 28.
persons mentionedmighthavebelonged 3 e.g. Geiger Zeitschrift f. Jiidische
to those looser diBciples of Essenism, Theologie vi. p. 20 sq. ; Zunz Gottes-
who married (see above, p. 85) : be- dienstliche Vortrage p. 108 sq. : comp.
cause the identification is meaningless Steinschneider Catal. Heb. Bibl. Bodl.
unless they belonged to the strict order col. 2032 sq. These two last references
itself. are given by Dr Ginsburg himself.
2 Ginsburg in Eitto's Cyclopaedia

128 THE ESSENES.
appear together. Lastly; Inasmuch as Dr Ginsburg himself takes a
wholly different view of the name Essene, connecting it either with
)Vn 'an apron,' or with K»Dn 'pious1,' it is difficult to see how he could
translate >3XW 'Essene' (from KB>U '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 would 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
Tj?s!jn|st of this sect by name in the Talmud, and all the identifications,
though not of the word Essene with diverse expressions occurring there
the^Tai-111 -aave faded us on examination, it might still happen that allusions
mud? 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.
(i) The (i) He sees a reference to the Essenes in the XTOn chabura or
chaber i Society,' which is mentioned several times in talmudical writers'.
or Asso-
ciate. The chaber ("an) 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
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.
A passage But in the first place there is no reference direct or indirect
tfgUhcon- to tte cnal:,er> or ^deed to any organisation of any kind, in the
sidered. 1 Essenes p. 30; comp. Kitto's Cy- 1862.no. 33, p. 459, areference pointed
clopcedia, s. v. Essenes. out to me by a friend.
2 It is given by Landsberg in the s Zeitschr. p. 450 sq., Monatschr.
Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums pp. 3^ 70.

THE ESSENES. 1 29
passage of C/tagigah. It simply contemplates different degrees of
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,
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 five2, 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. As this artificial combination has failed, we are compelled to Difference
fall back on the notices relating to the chaber, and to ask whether between
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 his mean- spent in the 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
(Sijjpvvrai Kard xpovov tijs daKvaeus p. 12 sq., comp. Kitto's Cyclopmdia
els polpas rkaaapas), adding that the s.v. p. 828) that the Essenes passed
older members are considered to be through eight stages 'from the be-
defiled by contact with the younger, ginning of the noviciate to the 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 § 8 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 the Essenes ;
ing outside.' Then, ' after he has given and, as I shall have occasion to point
evidence of his perseverance (perd ttjv out afterwards, there is no ground for
¦rijs Kapreplas iirlSei£iv), his character ascribing to this sect any Messianic
is tested for two years more ; and, if expectations whatever.
found worthy, he is accordingly ad- ' Zeitschr. p. 452, note.
COL. * 9

r30 THE ESSENES.
the chaber these suggest any connexion with the account of the Essenes in
and the 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 difficulties1, 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 gam Juxarets
or common people'; but he was under no external surveillance and
decided for himself as to his own purity. Moreover he 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 associates3. In one passage, Sanhedrin 41 a, it is even
assumed, as a matter of course, that a woman may be an associate
(mm). 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.
(?) The (2) Having discussed Frankel's hypothesis respecting the chaber,
keneseth. I need hardly follow his speculations on the Bene-hakkeneseth,
HD33n ^a, 'sons of the congregation' (Zabim iii. 2), in which ex-
1 The entrance into lower grade was rbpov iirdparol elaiv. Again in Acts
describedas 'taking Q*BJ3' or 'wings.' iv. 13, where the Apostles are described
The meaning of this expression has as ISiwrai, the expression is equivalent
been the subject of much discussion; to tarn haarets. See the passages
see e.g. Herzfeld 11. p. 3gosq., Frankel quoted in Buxtorf, Lex. p. 1626.
Monatschr, p. 33 sq. 3 jyi these particulars and others
2 The contempt with which a chaber may be gathered from Bekhoroth 30 6,
would look down upon the vulgar herd, Mishna Demai ii. 2, 3, Jerus. Demai
the tam haarets, finds expression in ii. 3, v. i, Tosifta Demai 2, Aboth R.
the language of the Pharisees, Joh. vii. Nathan c. 41.
49 4 ixXos oiros 6 prj ywiiaKuv tov * See Herzfeld 11. p. 386.

THE ESSENES. • 13I
pression probably few would discover the reference, which he finds,
to the lowest of the Essene orders l.
(3) But mention is also made of a ' holy congregation ' or ' as- (3) The
sembly' (KCHp t6np, nE>np mj?) 'in Jerusalem'; and, following gr^on"
Rapoport, Frankel sees in this expression also an allusion to the at Jerusa-
Essenes ". The grounds for this identification are, that in one pas- em
sage (Beraklioth 9 b) they are mentioned in connexion with prayer at
day break, 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, another
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 3. But
in fact the identification is beset with other and more serious diffi
culties. For this ' holy congregation ' at Jerusalem is mentioned long
after the second destruction of the city under Hadrian4, when on not an
Frankel's own showing5 the Essene society had in all probability Essen9
0 J r j commu-
ceased to exist. And again certain members of it, e.g. Jose ben nity.
Meshullam (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 Jews *.
(4) Neither can we with Frankel7 discern any reference to the (4) The
Essenes in those pp»ro Vethikin, ' pious ' or ' learned ' men (whatever e " lv"
may be the exact sense of the word), who are mentioned in Beraklwth
9 b 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
1 Monatschr. p. 35. whole of the winter to studying the
3 Zeitschr. pp. 458, 461, Monatschr. Scriptures and the summer to work.'
pp. 32, 36. * Monatschr. p. 32.
3 It is added however in Midrash s Ib. p. 70.
Qoheleth ix. 9 'Some say that they 6 See Derenbourg p.175.
(the holy congregation) devoted the 1 Monatschr. p. 32.
9-2

132 • THE ESSENES.
these Jipini w-ere not Essenes, we have no sufficient grounds for
maintaining that they were.
(5) The (5) Nor again can we find any such reference in the Qijpf
elders1' 1V6 O'WKin or ' primitive elders1.' It may readily be granted that this
term is used synonymously, or nearly so, with D'JlE'Xin 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 b) simply refer to the stricter observances
of early times, and do not indicate any reference to a particular
society or body of men.
(6) The (6) Again Frankel finds another reference to this sect in the
bathers^ TPTW ^>30 Toble-shacharith, or ' morning-bathers,' mentioned in
Tosifta Yadayim c. 2". The identity of these with the -qpiepofia-
¦n-Tio-Tal of Greek writers seems highly probable. The latter how
ever, though they may have had some affinities with Essene practices
and tenets, are nevertheless distinguished from this sect wherever
they are mentioned3. But the point to be observed is that, even
though we should identify these Toble-shacharith with the Essenes,
the passage in Tosifta Yadayim, so far from favouring, runs directly
counter 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) The (7) In connexion with the Toble-shacharith we may consider
Banaim. another name, Banaim (0*1533), in which also Frankel discovers
an allusion to the Essenes4. In Mishna Mikvaoth ix. 6 the word
is opposed to 113 bor, '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 (Jit. 2) mentions
having spent some time with one Banus a dweller in the wilderness,
who lived on vegetables and fruits and bathed often day and night
1 Monatschr. pp. 32, 68. 3 See below, p. 166.
3 Ib. p, 67. *. Zeitschr. p. 455.

THE ESSENES. 1 33
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 d£ivdpiov), Josephus
which he afterwards" defines more accurately as a spade (§ 9 t$ ™eajSi
o~KaXi8i, tolovtov ydp eori to BiSopievov vtt aiiriav d^ivlSiov Tots veoavcr-
TaTots) 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
exclude it, as I shall have occasion to show hereafter1. I shoidd add Another
that Sachs interprets Banaim 'the bathers,' regarding the explanation 0f Bana-
in Shabbath 1. c. as a 'later accommodation2.' This seems to me very im'
improbable; but, if it were conceded, the Banaim would then ap
parently be connected not with the Essenes, but with the Hemero-
baptists. From the preceding investigation it will have appeared how Eesults of
little Frankel has succeeded in establishing his thesis that 'the tiaatiort63"
talmudical sources are acquainted with the Essenes and make
mention of them constantly 3.' 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
obliged to fall back upon the representations of Philo and Josephus.
Their accounts are penned by eye-witnesses. They are direct and Philo and
explicit, if not so precise or so full as we could have wished. The Joseph"8
r ' r ^ our mam
writers obviously consider that they are describing a distinct and authori,
exceptional phenomenon. And it would be a reversal of all esta-
Wished rules of historical criticism to desert the solid standing-

1 See below, p. 161. senes in our patristic (i. e. rabbinical)
3 Beitrdge 11. p. 199. In this de- literature/ says Herzfeld truly (11.
rivation he is followed by Graetz (in. p. 397), 'has led to a splendid hypo-i
p. 82, 468) and Derenbourg (p. 166). thesis-hunt (einer stattlichen Hypo-
3 Monatschr. p. 31. thesenjagd).'
* ' The attempt to point out the Eg.

.134 THE ESSENES.
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
tion of " ancient writers, which has been echoed by several later critics. They
them is were interested, it is argued, in making their accounts attractive
able^and" *° their heathen contemporaries, and they coloured them highly
explains for this purpose1. We may readily allow that they would not be
no ing. 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
tinge to the Essene doctrine of the future state of the blessed (B. J.
ii. 8. 1 1). 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) The (i) How, for instance, could this principle of accommodation have
avoidance je(j k0th Philo and Josephus to lay so much stress on their divergence
rices is not from Judaic orthodoxy in the matter of sacrifices 1 Yet this is
accounted p^aps the most crucial note of heresy which is recorded of the
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-heifer2, which are so obviously inadequate that they have not
been repeated by later writers and may safely be passed over in
The no- silence here. On this point indeed the language of Josephus is not
Josephus quite explicit. He says (Ant. xviii. i. 5) that, though they send
and Philo offerings (dva8ijp.a.Ta) to the temple, they perform no sacrifices, and
sidered. he assigns as the reason their greater strictness as regards ceremonial
purity (8ia<£opoTijTi dyveiwv as vo/xi£otev), adding that ' for this
reason being excluded from the common sanctuary (re[j.€vio-p.aTOi)
they perform their sacrifices by themselves (icp' ovjw ras 6vcrlas
iiriTeXova-i).' Frankel therefore supposes that their only reason for
abstaining from the temple sacrifices was that according to their
1 Monatschr. p. 31. » Monatschr. 64.

THE ESSENES. 135
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 uidawful 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-ra. Oepa-iraiTol 6eov) do not sacrifice ani
mals (ov £(3a KaraOvovTc;), but hold it right to dedicate their own hearts
as a worthy offering (dXX' lepoirpeireis ras iavrwv Stavotas KaTao-/ceva£eM>
d(jiovvre<;). 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)
Ms 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. n. 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 Their
temple which polluted the sacrifices. And this view is further re- ment"scon.
commended by the fact that it alone will explain the position of firmed by
their descendants, the Christianized Essenes, who condemned the trine of
slaughter of victims on grounds very different from those alleged Christian
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 vithout 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 nost arbitrary excision. This violent process however,
uncritical as it is, was very likely to have been adopted by the
Essenes3. 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
1 B. J. ii. 8. 5 KaBdirep els &yibv n 8. 9, 10). The Christian Essenes how-
ripevos iripaylvovrai rb Semviyriipiov ; ever did combine both these incongru-
see also tie passages quoted above p. ous tenets by the expedient which is
89, note 3. explained in the text. Herzfeld him-
2 See belcw, p. 142. self suggests that allegorical interpre-
3 Herzfelo (11. p. 403) is unable to tation may have been employed to
reconcile an j rejection of the Old Tes- justify this abstention from the temple
tament Scrijtures with the reverence sacrifices.
paid to Moses by the Essenes (B. J. ii.

136 THE ESSENES.
The Cle- descendants of this Judaic sect1. Thus in the Clementine. Homilies,
mentme Ebionite work which exhibits many Essene features, the chief
Homilies . J
justify spokesman St Peter is represented as laying great stress on the duty
this doc- 0£ distinguishing the true and the false elements in the current
arbitrary Scriptures (ii. 38, 51, iii. 4, 5, 10, 42, 47, 49, 50, comp. xviii. 19). The
6f ?b10n sa7mS traditionally ascribed to our Lord, ' Show yourselves approved
Scriptures, money-changers ' (ylvecrde TpcwrefiTai SoKipioi), is more than once quoted
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)?
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 'haies
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 aiiong
the highest achievements of man ' to know the names of ctngels, to
drive away demons, to endeavour to heal diseases by charms \<j>ap-
paKiais), and to find incantations (en-aotSas) against venomous ser->
Essene pents (iii. 36)'; when again St Peter is made to condemn as false
features in those scriptures which speak of God swearing, and to set against them
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 ideas2.
1 See Galatians, p. 310 sq. toiJs. ZqiaoKov ydp ireirXdafai ravra
3 Epiphanius (Hmr. xviii. 1, p. 38) tA fiipxia Kal pi)Siv toMuv birb tuv
again describes, as the account was iraripav yeyevijaBai. Here we have in
handed down to him (us b els vpds iXBiiv combination all the features which we
irepiixu X070?), the tenets of a Jewish are seeking. The cradle of this sect
sect which he calls the Nasareans, avrijv is placed by him in Gilead an! Bashan
Si oi irapeSixero tvv irevrdrevxav, AXXA and 'the regions beyond the Jordan.'
iipoXbyei piv rbv Mavaia, Kal on eSi- He uses similar language als» (xxx. 18,
%aro vopoBealav iirlarevev, ov rairvv Si p. 142) in describing the Ebionites,
cpvaiv, AXX' iripav. SBev rk piv irdvra whom he places hi much the same
</>vXdTTOvat tuv 'lovSalav 'lovSaloi Svres, localities (naming Moab also), and
Bvalav Si ovk iBvov oSre ipftxuv whose Essene features are/unmistake-
perelxov, dXXA ABipirov ijv irap' avrals able: ovre yap Sixovrai TvvirevTarevxov
rb Kpeuv peraXappdveiv 7 Bvoid&y av- Jiaiiaius SXip> AXXd riv.a Mpara diro-

THE ESSENES. 137
(ii) Nor again is Frankel successful in explaining the Essene (ii) The
prayers to the sun by rabbinical practices \ Following Rapoport, .^shio
be supposes that Josephus and Philo refer to the beautiful hymn of the
of praise for the creation of light and the return of day, which ^tY^ex-
forms part of the morning-prayer of the Jews to the present plained
time3, and which seems to be enjoined in the Mishna itself8; and awa^'
this view has been adopted by many subsequent writers. But the
language of Josephus is not satisfied by this explanation. For
he says plainly (B. J. ii. 8. 5) that they addressed prayers to the
sun*, 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. 11, 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 (evrjpiepiav) and for truth and for keen vision of reason
(ofu<D7riav Aoyio-joiot!).' 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 (Hmr. xix. 2, xx. 3, pp. 40 sq., 47) speaks of a sect TheSamp-
called the Sampsa?ans or ' Sun- worshippers5,' as existing in his S8eaJJs are
own time in Persea on the borders of Moab and on the shores of sect,
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
Trajan6. Elsewhere (xxx. 3, p. 127) he seems to use the terms
Sampssean, Ossene, and Elchasaite as synonymous (irapd tois %afuj/rj-
vots Kal 'Oo-a-^vots Kal 'EAjceo-amois KaXovp.£vois). 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 (Hmr. ix. 13 sq.) who describes it at considerable length. From as appears
these accounts it appears that the principal feature in the book sacred
was the injunction of frequent bathings for the remission of sius k°oli °*.
(Hipp. Hmr. ix. 13, 15 sq.). We are likewise told that it 'anathema
tizes immolations and sacrifices (dvo-iaq koI Upovpyias) as being alien
pdXXovaiv. Srav Si avrois e&rjs irepl p. 169 sq.
ip\j/bxav Ppiiaeas k.t.X. These parallels * See above, p. 87, note 1,
will speak for themselves. 5 See above, p. 83.
1 Zeitschr. p. 458. 6 Galatians p. 311 sq. See also be*
•* See Ginsburg Essenes p. 69 sq. low, p. 167.
* Berakhoth i. 4 ; see Dsrenbourg,

138 THE ESSENES.
to God and certainly not offered to God by tradition from (e<c) 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' (Epiphan. xix. 3, p. 42). Notwithstanding,
Its Essene we are informed that the sect retained the rite of circumcision, the
pecuhan- 0t,servance 0f tae sabbath, and other practices of the Mosaic law
(Hipp. Hmr. ix. 14; Epiph. Hmr. 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 Nasareeans ' ; 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. xix. 1). It
should be added that the word Elchasai probably signifies the ' hidden
power'2; 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. ix. 15, 17). It is
hardly necessary to call attention to the number of Essene features
which are here combined3. 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.
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
Doubtful to be called Sampsseans 1 What was the original meaning of this
tMsTsun" out'w'ar(i reverence which they paid to the sun ? Did they regard it
worship, merely as the symbol of Divine illumination, just as Philo frequently
1 See p. 136, note 2. In this respect they departed from the
2 Galatians p. 312, note 1. For original principles of Essenism, alleg-
another derivation see below, p. 167. ing, as it would appear, a special reve-
3 Celibacy however is not one of lation (is SijBev AiroKaXfyeais) in justifi-
these: comp. Epiphan. Hasr. xix. 1 (p. cation. In hke manner marriage is
40) AirexBdverai Si t% irapBevla, piaei commended in the Clementine Ho-
Si ttjx iyKpdreiav, dcaY/rafet Si ydpov. milies.

THE ESSENES. 1 39
treats it as a type of God, the centre of all light (e. g. de Sonm.
i. 13 sq., 1. p. 631 sq.), and even calls the heavenly bodies 'visible
and sensible gods ' (de Mund. Op. 7, 1. p. 6)"i Or did they honour
the light, as the pure ethereal element in contrast to gross terrestrial
matter, according to a suggestion of a recent writer "I Whatever may The
have been the motive of this reverence, it is strangely repugnant to ja™on!Lt
the spirit of orthodox Judaism. In Ezek. viii. 16 it is denounced as to Jewish
an abomination, that men shall turn towards the east and worship ortuodoxy.
the sun ; and accordingly in Berakhoth 7 a, a saying of R. 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 (hi) The
notices contribute nothing towards elucidating the practices of this tio^uof1**
sect. Least of all do they point to any affinity between the Essenes marriage
and the Pharisees. The nearest resemblance, which Frankel can cotmte^
produce, to any approximation in this respect is an injunction in for.
Mishna Kethvhoth 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
writings teem with passages implying not only the superior sanctity,
but even the imperative duty, of marriage. The words 'Be fruitful
and multiply' (Gen. L 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 1VN),
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 113 a, b, as fairly illustrating the doctrine
of orthodox Judaism on this point5. As this question affects the
«
1 The important place which the J Keim 1. p. 289.
heavenly bodies held in the system • See Wiesner Schol. zum Bdbyl.
of Philo, who regarded them as ani- Talm. 1. pp. 18, 20.
mated beings, may be seen from * Monatschr. p. 37.
Gfrb'rer's Philo 1. p. 349 sq. » Justin Martyr mor« than once

140

(iv) The
Essene
practiceof magic
still a
difficulty.

General
result.

THE ESSENES.
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
tations which are so prominent in the practice of the Essenes would,
as a rule, have been received with any favour by the Pharisaic Jew.
In Mishna Pesachim iv. 9 (comp. Berakhoth 10 b) it is mentioned
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 Essenes1. In the same spirit in Mishna
Sanhedrin xi. 1 B. 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
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 enumerated"; 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

taunts the Jewish rabbis with their
reckless encouragement of polygamy.
See Dial. 134, p. 363 r>, toIs Aavvirois
Kal rvipXdis SiSaoKdXois bp&v, olrives Kal
ptXP1 "V" Ka' riaaapas Kal irivre (xtlv
vpds yvvaiKas e'Kaarov ovyxwpovai' Kal
eav eilpopcpbv tis ISwv iiriBvp^ay avrijs
K.t.X., ib. 141, p. 371 A, E, birolov
irpdrrovaiv ol dirb tov yivovs bp&v av-
Bpairoi, Kara -wdaav yrjv ivda Av iriSy-

pvaaaiv rj irpoairepipBZaiv Aybpevoi Svb-
pan ydpov yvvaiKas k.t.X., with Otto's
note on the first passage.
1 See above, p. 91, note 2.
' Dial- 85, p. 311 0, ijSv pAvtouoI i%
iip&v iiropKiaral ry TiXvn, Ciairep Kal tA
(Bvq, xp&pevoi e£opKi{ovai Kal Bvpidpaai.
Kal KaraSiapois xp&vrai.
3 Herzfeld, u. p. 392 sq.

THE ESSENES. 141
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.
It was shown above that the investigations of Frankel and others Frankel
failed to discover in the talmudical writings a single reference to the . al
Essenes, which is at once direct and indisputable. It has now Wishing
appeared that they have also failed (and this is the really important bls Polnt'
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 bv Frankel and by Affinities
those who have anticipated or followed him. But' these are exactly jfssTnes
such as we might have expected. Two distinct features combine to and Phari-
make up the portrait of the Essene. The Judaic element is quite ff ^.j0??"
as prominent in this sect as the non-Judaic. It could not be more the Judaic
strongly emphasized than in the description given by Josephus him- B
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
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 0f the
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, gradual.
it 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
1 See above, p. 120.

142

THE ESSENES.

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 sharp antagonism between the two sects, which
the principles of the Essenes when fully matured would involve.
Hence the If therefore it should be shown that the talmudical and rabbinical
of their1 ? writings here and there preserve with approval the sayings of certain
appearing Essenes, this fact would present no difficulty. At present however no
corded" decisive example has been produced; and the discoveries of Jellinek
orthodox for instance1, who traces the influence of this sect in almost every
' 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 temple2,' when his prophecy was on the point of fulfilment
(about B.C. no). At this moment Judas is represented as sitting
in the midst of his 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 locality3. 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,
bation of tna.fc the Essenes are regarded with so much sympathy by Philo and
Josephus Josephus themselves. Even though the purity of Judaism might
deneeof" kave be6n somewnat suUied in this sect by the admixture of foreign
•orthodoxy, elements, this fact would attract rather than repel an eclectic like
Philo, and a latitudinarian like Josephus. The former, as an Alexan-
1 Orient 1849, pp. 489, 537, 553- interpreted by the more precise. Even
s B. J. i. 3. 5 irapibvra 8t4 tov lepov. then however it is not directly stated
In the parallel narrative, Ant. xiii. that Judas himself was within the
n. 2, the expression is irapibvra tA temple area.
Upbv, which does not imply so much; a See above, pp. 89, 134 sq.
but the less precise notice must be

THE ESSENES. 1 43
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.
But if Essenism owed the features which distinguished it from What was
Pharisaic Judaism to an alien admixture, whence were these foreign element m
influences derived ] From the philosophers of Greece or from the Essenism?
religious mystics of the East? On this point recent writers are
divided, Those who trace the distinctive characteristics of the sect to Theory of
Greece, regard it as an offshoot of the Neopythagorean School grafted g0je^hi^
on the stem of Judaism. This solution is suggested by the state- fluence.
ment of Josephus, that ' they practise the mode of life which among
the Greeks was introduced (KaTaBeSei.yp.evy) by Pythagoras1.' 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- ?neorv bv
sistent advocate in Zeller, who draws out the parallels with great Zeller.
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 life 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
1 Ant. xv. to. 4.

144 THE ESSENES.
Zeller's *° maintain a traditional doctrine inviolable; both pay the highest
theory. 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 fathered 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
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...'
This array of coincidences is formidable, and thus skilfully
Absence of marshalled might appear at first sight invincible. But a closer
Pythago™ examination detracts from its value. In the first place the two
rean fea- distinctive characteristics of the Pythagorean philosophy are wanting
Essenes!16 to tlie 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
The coin- for instance the demons who in the Pythagorean system held an in
cidences termediate place between the Supreme God and man, and were the
are in
some cases result of a compromise between polytheism and philosophy, have no
only ap- 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
Pythagoreans". When these imperfect and (for the purpose) value-
1 Zeller Philosophic der Griechen, * Diog. Laert. viii. 17 ; see Zeller
Th. in. Abth. 2, p. 281. 1. c. p. 282, note 5. The precept

THE ESSENES. 145
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
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 unlike 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 g^eeest
secure it independently in a similar way, by a recognised process of any his-
initiation, by a solemn form of oath, by a rigid distinction of orders. comiexiou
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 ? tej?*Ion
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- facts are
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
in question occurs among a number of representing Pythagorean doctrine.
insignificant details, and has no spe- l Zeller 1. c. p. 68 (comp. 1. p. 242).
cial prominence given to it. In the While disputing Zeller's position, I
Life ofApollonius by Philostratus (e.g. have freely made use of his references.
vi. 10) considerable stress is laid on It is impossible not to admire the
the worship of the sun (Zeller 1. c. p. mastery of detail and clearness of ex-
137, note 6); but the • syncretism of position in this work, even when the
this late work detracts from its value as conclusions seem questionable.
COL. 10

146 THE ESSENES.
Disappear- nothing of them. Here and there persons like Diodorus of Aspendus
the Pytha- are satu*ised by the Attic poets of the middle comedy as ' Pytha
goreans, gorizers,' in other words, as total abstainers and vegetarians ' ; but
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 Polyhistor", a younger contemporary of Sulla, for fthe
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 philosophy3 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 defunct4. Yet long before this the Essenes
t^Neoov1 f°rmed a compact, well-organized, numerous society with a peculiar
thagorean- system of doctrine and a definite rule of life. We have seen that
Pliny the elder speaks of this celibate society as having existed
' through thousands of ages5.' 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, the fact becomes still more significant. But on
any showing the priority in time is distinctly in favour of the
Essenes as against the Neopythagoreans.
And accordingly we find that what is only a tendency in the
The Es- Neopythagoreans is with the Essenes an avowed principle and a .
eenetenets definite rule of life. Such for instance is the case with celibacy, of
1 Athen. iv. p. i6r, Diog. Laert. guisset, hunc exstitisse qui illam reno-
viii. 37. See the index to Meineke varct.'
Fragm. Com. s. w. irvdayopiKos, etc. * Sen. N. Q. vii. 32 ' Pythagorica
The words commonly used by these ilia invidiosa turbse schola prascep-
satirists are irvBayoplfeiv, irvBayopiar^s, torem non invenit.'
irvBayopiapbs. The persons so satirized 5 N.H.v. 15. The passage is quoted
were probably in many cases not more above p. 85, note 3. The point of time,
Pythagoreans than modern teetotallers at which Josephus thinks it necessary
are Eechabites. to insert an account of the Essenes as
- Diog. Laert. viii. 24 sq.; see Zeller already flourishing (Ant. xiii. 5. 9), is
1. c. p. 74—78. prior to the revival of the Neopytha-
3 Cic. Tim. r 'sic judieo, post fflos gorean school. How much earlier the
nobiles Pythagoreos quorum disci- Jewish sect arose, we are without data
plina extincta est quodammodo, cum for determining.
aliquot saccula in Italia Siciliaque vi- « Ses p. 83, note 1.

THE ESSENES. 1 47
which Pliny says that it has existed as an institution among the more deve-
Essenes per smculorum miUia, and which is a chief corner-stone of thoNeopy-
their practical system. The Pythagorean notices (whether truly or not, thagorean.
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 light ; and if virginity is
ascribed to Apollonius of Tyana, the great Pythagorean of the first
Christian century, in the fictitious biography of Philostratus2, this re
presentation is plainly due to the general plan of the novelist, whose
hero is 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 conception and the
definiteness of practice are in almost every instance on the side of
the Essenes ; so that, looking to 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) Ge°-
affdiation involves, must be added to the chronological. The home difficulties
of the Essene sect is allowed on all hands to have been on the iu the
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 follows4. 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
Syrian Greeks. We know that at this time Hellenizing influences
did infuse themselves largely into Judaism : and what more natural
1 Diog. Laert. viii. 42. had been differently represented by
3 Vit. Apoll. i. 1 5 sq. At the same others.
time Philostratus informs us that the 3 1. c. p. 288 sq.
conduct of his hero in this respect i 1. c. p. 290 sq.
10 — 2

148

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

to which
also Py
thago reanismmay have
been in
debted.

THE ESSENES.
than that among these the Pythagorean philosophy and discipline
should have recommended itself to a section of the Jewish people 1
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 exclusiveness 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 sources1.

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

1 See the references in Zeller i. p. 218 sq. ; comp. in. 2, p. 67.

THE ESSENES. 149
Christian era, to reply with any confidence. Yet there is one system Eesem-
to which we naturally, look, as furnishing the most probable answer. paarg-Bem'°
The Medo-Persian religion supplies just those elements which dis
tinguish the tenets and practices of the Essenes from the normal
type of Judaism, (i) First; we have here a very definite form of (i) Dual-
dualism, which exercised the greatest influence on subsequent Gnostic 1Sm*
sects, and of which Manicheism, the most mature 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 light, and consequent worship of the sun as the fountain of light, wors lp'
will explain those anomalous notices of the Essenes in which they are
represented as paying reverence to this luminary l. (3) Moreover ; (iii) Angel-
the ' worship of angels ' in the Essene system has a striking parallel a T^"
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)Striving
also to add the intense striving after purity, which is the noblest rityr pu"
feature in the Persian religion, I do so, not because the Essenes
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, Other
1 Keim (Geschichte J 'esu von Nazara peylanp irXv'det arparov- Aairaadpevoi
x- P- ,303) refers to Tac. Hist. iii. 24 Si rbv ijXiov, dis £0os abro1s,oipdpflapoi
' Undique clamor; et orientem solem k.t.X.
(ita in Syria. mos est) tertiani salu- 2 See e.g. Vendidad Farg. xix; and
tavere,' as illustrating this Essene the liturgical portions of the book are
practice. The commentators on Ta- largely taken up with invocations of
citus quote a similar notice of the these intermediate beings. Some ex-
Parthians in Herodian iv. 15 dpa Si tracts are given in Davies' Colossians
vXla dvlaxovrt icpdvv ' Aprdfiavos abv p. 146 sq.

ISO
coinci
dences ac
cidental.

The de
struction
of the
Persian empire
not ad-

but favour
able to the
spread of
Parsism.

THE ESSENES.
which may or may not have been accidental. Thus for instance the
magi, Hke 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 established2.
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,
when the Persian monarchy and religion were once more restored4,
its influence must have been reduced within the narrowest limits.
But does analogy really suggest such an inference ? Does not the
history of the Jews themselves show that the religious influence of
a people on the world at large may begin just where its national
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

1 Hilgenfekl (ZeitschriffK.Tp. 99 sq.)
finds coincidences even more special
than these. He is answered by Zeller
(in. 1. 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 A^ivopavreta (Plin. N. II.
xxxvi. 19) of the magi. Zeller con
tents himself with replying that the
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 thes9

accidental resemblances. So far as
regards minor coincidences, Zellpr
makes out as good a case for his
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.
3 1- 0. p. *75.
4 See Gibbon Decline and Fall
c. viii, Milman History of Christianity
11. p. 247 sq. The latter speaks of
this restoration of Zoroastrianism, as
' perhaps the only instance of the
vigorous revival of a Pagan religion.'
It was far purer and less Pagan than
the system which it superseded; and
this may account for its renewed life.

THE ESSENES. 151
in alien soils. For in tracing Essenism to Persian influences I have 1
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
nationabty was eclipsed. It was then that Hermippus gave to the Lidica-
Greeks the most detailed account of this religion which had ever been influence
laid before them1. It was then that its tenets suggested or moulded during this
the 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
Cappadocia2. 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 spirits3
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
alien features in Essene Judaism were derived from the Zoroastrian
religion. But are we justified in going a step further, and attribut- Are Bud-
ing other elements in this eclectic system to the more distant East ? nuenoea
The monasticism of the Buddhist will naturally occur to our also Per-
rninds, 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 influences4. 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. Supposed
Hilgenfeld answers this question in the affirmative. He points establish-
triumphantly to the fact that as early as the middle of the second ment at
century before Christ the Buddhist records speak of their faith as ,jrja
flourishing in Alasanda the chief city of the land of Yavana. The
1 See Miiller Fragm. Hist. Grmc. deus (Tob. hi. 17); see M. Miiller
in. p. 53 sq. for this work of Hermig-. Chips from a German Workshop 1.
pus irepl Mdyav. He flourished about p. 148 sq. For the different dates as-
e.c. 200. See Max Midler Lectures on signed to the book of Tobit see Dr
the Science of Language 1st ser. p. 86. Westcott's article Tobit in Smith's
5 Strabo xv. 3. 15 (p. 733) 'Ev Si -n? Dictionary of the Bible p. 1525.
KainraSoKla (iroXb yap iKei rb tSiv Ma- 4 Zeitschrift X. p. 103 sq.; comp.
7ui- tpvXov, ot Kal iripaiBoi KaXovvrai- xi. p. 351. M. Eenan also (Langues
jroXXa Si Kal tiSv JlepaiKav BeSv lepd) Semitiques in. iv. 1, Vie de Jesus
K.T4\. p. 98) suggests thatBuddhist influences
3 At least in one instance, Asmo- operated in Palestine.

152 THE ESSENES.
place intended, he conceives, can be none other than the great
Alexandria, the most famous of the many places bearing the name \
The au- In *his opinion however he stands quite alone. Neither KSppen",
thority wno js his authority for this statement, nor any- other Indian
preted " scholar3, so far as I am aware, for a moment contemplates this identi
fication. Yavana, or Yona, was the common Indian name for the
Grseco-Bactrian kingdom and its dependencies4; 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.
But indeed I hardly think that, if Hilgenfeld had referred to the
original authority for the statement, the great Buddhist history
Mahawanso, he would have ventured to lay any stress at all on
andwholly this notice, as supporting his theory. The historian, or rather
untrust- fabulist (for such he is in this earlier part of his chronicle), is re-
itself. lating the foundation of the Maha thupo, or great tope, at Buanwelli
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 then- aid in the erection.
In fact the fabric huge
Bose 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 Yona, accom-
1 x. p. 105 'was schon an sich, thumskunde 11. p. 236; Hardy Manual
zumal in dieser Zeit, schwerlich Alex- of Budhism p. 516.
andria ad Caucasum, sondern nur * For its geographical meaning in
Alexandrien in Aegypten bedeuten older Indian writers see Koppen I. c.
kann.' Comp, xi. p. 351, where he Since then it has entirely departed
repeats the same argument in reply to from its original signification, and
Zeller. This is a very natural in- Yavana is now a common term used
ference from a western point of view; by the Hindoos to designate the Mo-
but, when we place ourselves in the hammedans. Thus the Greek name
position of a Buddhist writer to whom has come to be applied to a people
Bactria was Greece, the relative pro- which of all others is most unlike the
portions of things are wholly changed. Greeks. This change of meaning ad-
2 Die Religion des Buddha 1. p. 193. mirably illustrates the use of "EXXvv
3 Comp. e. g. Weber Die Verbin- among the Jews, which in like man-
dungen Indiens mit den Landern im ner, from being the name of an alien
Westenv-dismt'heAUgem.Monatschr. nation, became the name of an alien
/. Wissensch. u. Literatur, Braun- religion, irrespective of nationality:
schweig 1853; Lassen Indisehe Alter- see the note on Gal. ii. 3.

THE ESSENES.

153

panied by 30,000 priests from the vicinity of AlasaddS, 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 phenomenon
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 civilization ignorance
at all reconcilable with the ignorance of this religion, which the dhism in
Greeks and Bomans betray at a much later date2. For some centu- ttie West.
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 Boman Empire s. Thus Strabo, Strabo.
who wrote under Augustus and Tiberius, apparently mentions the
Buddhist priests, the sramanas, under the designation sarmanm, (%ap-
//.dVas)4; but he avowedly obtains his information from Megasthenes,

1 Mahawanso p. 171, Tumour's
translation. 2 How for instance, if any such
establishment had ever existed at
Alexandria, could Strabo have used
the language which is quoted in the
next note ?
3 Consistently with this view, we
may allow that single Indians would
visit Alexandria from time to time for
purposes of trade or for other reasons,
and not more than this is required by
the rhetorical passage in Dion Chry-
sost. Or. xxxii (p. 373) bpw yap iyuye
06 pbvov "BXXijras irap' vpiv  AXXa
Kal BaKTplovs Kal XKbBas Kal Hipaas Kal
'IvSuv nvds. The qualifying fivas
tehows how very slight was the com
munication between India and Alex
andria. The mission of Pantamus
may have been suggested by the pre
sence of such stray visitors. Jerome
(Vir. III. 36) says that he went ' roga-
tus ab ilhus gentis legatis.' It must
remain doubtful however* whether
some other region than Hindostan,
such as Ethiopia for instance, is not
meant, when Pantasnus is said to have
gone to India : see Cave's Lives of the
Primitive Fathers p. 188 sq.
How very slight the communication
was between India and the West in
the early years of the Christian era,

appears from this passage of Strabo
xv. 1 . 4 (p. 686) ; Kal oi vvv Si i f Alybir-
tov irXiovres ipiroptKol np "NelXip Kal Tip
'Apapiip KbXTip pixpi rijs 'IvSiktjs aird-
vioi piv Kal ireptTeirXeOKaai pixP1- T°G
Ydyyov, Kal ovroi S' ISiwrai Kal obSiv
irpbs laroplav ridv tottojv XPV&IP-01, after
which he goes on to say that the only
instance of Indian travellers in the
West was the embassy sent to Augus
tus (see below p. 155), which came A(j>'
ivbs rbirov Kal irap' ivbs fSaatXiws.
The communications between India
and the West are investigated by two
recent writers, Beinaud Relations Poli-
tiques et Commerciales de V Empire
Romain avec VAsie Gentrale, 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.
4 Strabo xv. 1. 59, p. 712. In the
mss it is written Yappdvas, but this
must be an error either introduced by
Strabo's transcribers or found in the
copy of Megasthenes 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-

154

Barde- sascs.

THE ESSENES.
who travelled in India somewhere about the year 300 B.C. and wrote
a book on Indian affairs. Thus too Bardesanes at a much later date
gives an account of these Buddhist ascetics, without however naming
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 Antonines1.

cidences of language it is clear that
Clement also derived his information
from Megasthenes, whose name he
mentions just below. The fragments
of Megasthenes relating to the Indian
philosophers will be found in Miiller
Fragm. Hist. Grmc. 11. p. 437. They
were previously edited by Schwanbeck,
Megasthenis Indica (Bonnse 1S46).
For Xappdvai we also find the form
Xapavaloi 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 the fact that the Pali word sammana
corresponds to the Sanskrit sramana.
See Schwanbeck, 1. u. p. 17, quoted by
Miiller p. 43 7.
It should be borne in mind however,
that several eminent Indian scholars
believe Megasthenes to have "meant
not Buddhists but Brahmins by hrs
Xappdvas. 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. hi) says; 'That Lassen is
right in taking the 'Zappdvai, men
tioned by Megasthenes, forBrahmanic,
not for Buddhist ascetics, might be
proved also by their dress. Dresses
made of the 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
the following reasons the other view
appears to me more probable : (1) The
term sramana is the common term
for the Buddhist ascetic, whereas it
is very seldom used of the Brahmin.
(2.) The Tidppavos (another form of
sramana), mentioned below p. 156,
note 1, appears to have been a
Buddhist. This view is taken even
by Lassen, Ind. Alterth. in. p. 60.
(3) The distinction of Bpaxpaves and

Lappavm in Megasthenes or-the writers
following him corresponds to the dis
tinction of Bpaxpdves and 2apava1oi
in Bardesanes, Origen, and others;
and, as Schwanbeck has shown (1. c),
the account of the Sappdyai. in Mega
sthenes for the most part is a close
parallel to the account of the Sapavaioi
in Bardesanes (or ai 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 the
'Zappavai, than that Brahmins are in
tended by the term.
The Pali form, 'Zapavaioi, as a de
signation of the Buddhists, first occurs
in Clement of Alexandria or Barde-
Banes, whichever may be the earher
writer. It is generally ascribed' to
Alexander Polyhistor, who flourished
e.o. 80 — 60, because his authority is
quoted by CyrU of Alexandria (c.
Julian, iv. p. 133) in the same context
in which the 2apavawi 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
thewnention of the Samanasi. Indeed
all the facts given in this passage of
Cyril (including the reference to Poly
histor). are taken from Clement of
Alexandria (Strom, i. 15; see the next
note), whose account Cyrilhasabridged.
It is possible indeed that Clement
himself derived the 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
"Zapavaloi (see the last note). The
work of Bardesanes, recounting his
conversations with these Indian am
bassadors, is quoted again byPorphyry

THE ESSENES.
Clement of Alexandria, writing in the latest years of the second
century or the earliest of the third, for the first time1 mentions
Buddha by name; and even he betrays a strange ignorance of this
Eastern religion2.
Still later than this, Hippolytus, while he gives a fairly intelligent,
though brief, account of the Brahmins3, 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

155
Clement of Alexan
dria.

Hippoly
tus.

A Bud
dhist at
Athens.

in a fragment preserved by Stobams
Eel. iii. 56 (p. 141). In this last pas
sage the embassy is said to have arrived
iirl Tijs fiaaiXeias rijs ' Avruvlvov tov i£
'Epiaav, by which, if the words be
correct, must be meant Elagabalus
(a.d. 218 — 222), the spurious Antonine
(see Hilgenfeld Bardesanes p. 12 sq.).
Other ancient authoritieshoweverplace
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 the most accurate
account of the Buddhists to be found
in any ancient Greek writer ; but even
here the monstrous stories, which the
Indian ambassadors related to him,
show how little trustworthy such
sources of information were.
1 Except possibly Arrian, Ind. viii.
1, who mentions an ancient Indian
king, Budyas (BovSbas) byname; but
what he relates of him is quite incon
sistent with the history of Buddha,
and probably some one else is intended.
2 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 "Sapavaloi Bdicrpav
(comp. Cyrill. Alex. 1. c); (2) He dis
tinguishes two classes of Indian gymno-
sophists, whom he calls Zappdvai and
Bpaxpavai. These are Buddhists and
Brahmins respectively (see p. 153, note
4) ; (3) He says afterwards elal Si
tiSv 'IvSwv ol rols Boi/TTa ireiBbpevoi
irapayyiXpaaiv, Sv Si1 bjrep^oXijv aep-
vbrvros els [us?] Bebv renp^Kaai.

Schwanbeck indeed maintains that Cle
ment here intends to describe the same
persons whom he has just mentioned
as Zappdvai ; but this is not the natural
interpretation of his language, which
must mean ' There are also among
the 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 have known
this. In fact he has 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. The second, as we
saw, was derived from Megasthenes-.
The third, relating to Buddha., same-,
as we may conjecture, either from
Pantamus (if indeed Hindostan is
really meant by the 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 Zepvol. As he distinguishes
them from the gymnosophists, and
mentions the pyramid as a sacred
building with them, the identification
with the Buddhists can hardly be
doubted. Here- therefore 2e/W is a
Grecized form of Zapavaloi,; and this
modification of the word would occur
naturally to Clement, because, aepvol,
aepve1ov,-were already used-of the ascetic
life: e.g. Philo de Vit. Cont: 3 (p.
475 m) lepbv S KaXelrai aepuelov, k al
povaar-qpiov iv $ povoipevoi tA tov
aepvov fiiov pvaT-fjpia reXoOvrai.
3 Hcer. i. 24.

156

THE ESSENES.

Greeks and Bomans by burning himself alive at Athens1 — there
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 exist2.
And, if so, the coincidences must be very precise, before we are
The al- justified in attributing any peculiarities of Essenism to Buddhist
cidences 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

prove
nothing.

1 The chief authority is Nicolaus of
Damascus in Strabo xv. i. 73 (p. 270).
The incident is mentioned also in Dion
Cass. hv. 9. Nicolaus had 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 the presence of
an astonished crowd, and perhaps of
the emperor himself, at Athens. He
anointed himself and then leapt smil
ing on the pyre. The inscription on
his tomb was Zappavoxvyas 'IvSbs dirb
Bapybaijs KarA ra irdrpia 'Iv5c3v ^&tj
iavrbv airadavarlaas Keirai. The tomb
was visible at least as late as the age
of Plutarch, who recording the self-
immolation of Calanus before Alexan
der (Vit. Alex. 69) says, tovto iroXXols
%reaiv varepav dXXos 'IvSbs iv 'ABijvais
Kalaapi avvihf iirolrjae, Kal Se'iKwrai pixpi
vvv rd pvijpelov 'lvSov irpoaayopevbpevov.
Strabo also places the two incidents in
conjunction in another passage in
which he refers to this person, xv. 1. 4
(p. 686) 6 KaraKatjaas iavrbv 'Adijvrjai
aaipiaTip 'Ivdos, KaBdirep Kal b KdXavos
K. T. X.
The reasons for supposing this per
son to have been a Buddhist, rather
than a Brahmin, are: (1) The name
ZappavoxvyAs (which appears with
some variations in the mss of Strabo) ,
being apparently the Indian sramana-
karja, i. e. ' teacher of the ascetics,'
in other words, a Buddhist priest ; (2)
The place Bargosa, i. e. Barygaza,
where Buddhism flourished in that
age. See Priaulx p. 78 sq. In Dion
Cassius it is written Zdppapos.
And have we not here an explana
tion of 1 Cor. xiii. 3, if tva KavBrjaoi-
pai 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 the Apostle, who
observed the altar ArNCOCTOOl GecOl,
was not likely to overlook the sepul
chre with the strange inscription
EAYTON AlTAeANATICAC K6ITAI. 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-sacrifice. We may well
imagine therefore that the fate of this
poor Buddhist fanatic was present to
his mind when he penned the words
Kal iAv irapaSQ to croyxa pov...Aydiri]v Si
pr) ?Xw, ovSiv ihcpeXovpai. Indeed it would
furnish an almost equally good illus
tration of the text, whether we read tva
KavB-qaupai or ha Kavxvaoipai. Dion
Cassius (1. c.) suggests that the deed
was done bird cpikoriplas or eis iirlbei^iv.
How much attention these religious
suicides of the Indians attracted in the
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 the
speech which Josephus puts in the
mouth of Eleazar (B. J. vii. 8. 7), pxi-
fapev els 'IvSobs Tobs aoiplav AaKe'iv bir-
laxvovpivovs ... ol Si ... irvpl to aiSpa
irapaSbvres, Situs Si) Kal KaBapurdrvv
AiroKpivwai tov a&paTos tt}v tyvxvv, vp-
vovpevoi TeXevr&ai ... dp' ofiv o6k alSob-
pe&a xelpov 'IvSiov cppovovvTes ;
2 In the reign of Claudius an em
bassy arrived from Taprobane (Ceylon);

THE ESSENES. 1 57
in common with the monasticism of the Essene recluse, whose life Monasti-
ii • cisni
was largely spent in manual labour. They both enjoin celibacy, '
both prohibit the use of flesh and of wine, both abstain from the 0ism.
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 Four or-
that the four orders of the Essene community are derived from the * ^ BteT)S
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 Buddhist
suggest any historical connexion between Essenism and Buddhism. seeu firgt
Indeed it is not till some centuries later, when Manicheism starts in Mani-
into being, that we find for the first time any traces of the influence
of Buddhism on the religions of the West \
and from these ambassadors Pliny de- not Singalese, and thus belonged to
rived his information regarding the the non-Buddhist part of the island;
island, N. H. vi. 24. Bespecting their see Priaulx p. 91 sq.
religion however he says only two 1 Even its influence on Manicheism
words ' coli Herculem,' by whom pro- however is disputed in a learned article
bably Rama is meant (Priaulx p. 116). in the Home and Foreign Review in.
From this and other statements it p. 143 sq. (1863), by Mr P. Le Page
appears that they were Tamils and Benouf (see Academy 1873, p. 399).

ESSENISM AND CHRISTIANITY.
The theory "l"T has become a common practice with a certain class of writers to
plains " caH Essenism to their aid in accounting for any distinctive features
Christi- 0f Christianity, which they are unable to explain in any other
outgrowth way. Wherever some external power is needed to solve a perplexity,
of Essen- nere is the deus ex machina whose aid they most readily invoke.
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'3 : 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 tlie 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, un defiled, and separate from
sinners, would therefore naturally associate Himself with that order
tested by of Judaism which was most congenial to his nature'.3 I purpose
testing these strong assertions by an appeal to facts.
1 De Quincey's attempt to prove the theories of the writers mentioned
that the Essenes were actually Chris- in the text; but it is even more un-
tians (Works vi p. 270 sq., ix p. 253 tenable and does not deserve serious
sq.), who used the machinery of an refutation.
esoteric society to inculcate their doc- 2 Griitz in p. 217.
trines ' for fear of the Jews,' is con- a Ginsburg Essenes p. 24.
ceived in a wholly different spirit from

THE ESSENES. 159
For the statements involved in those words of the last extract Our Lord
which I have underlined, no authority is given by the writer him- bave be.
self; nor have I been able to find confirmation of them in any longed to
quarter. On the contrary the frequent allusions which we find to
the vulgar herd, the iSuorat, the fjxm haarets, who are distinguished
from the disciples of the schools1, 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 obey2, 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.
This preliminary barrier being removed, we are free to investi- The argu-
gate the evidence for their presumed connexion. And here we are tjje ajience
met first with a negative argument, which obviously has great of the New
weight with many persons. Why, it is asked, does Jesus, who so mentan-
unsparingly denounces the vices and the falsehoods of Pharisees and swered.
Sadducees, never once mention the Essenes by way of condemnation,
or indeed mention them by name at all 1 Why, except that He
himself belonged to this sect and looked favourably on their
teaching? This question is best answered by another. How can
we explain the fact, that throughout the enormous mass of tal
mudical aud 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 political
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
practices invested them with the character of philosophers and
interested the Greeks and Bomans in their history ; but in the
national life of the Jews they bore a very insignificant part3- If the
1 See above, p. 130. Thus Lipsius writes (p. 190), 'In the
2 Matt, xxiii. 2, 3. general development of Jewish life
3 This fact is fully recognised by Essenism occupies a far more sub-
several recent writers, who will not be ordinate place than is commonly
suspected of any undue bias towards ascribed to it.' And Keim expresses
traditional views of Christian history. himself to the same effect (1. p. 305).

i6o

THE ESSENES.

The posi
tive argu
ments for
a connex-

Sadducees, who held the highest offices in the hierarchy, are only
mentioned directly on three occasions in the Gospels', it can be no
surprise that the Essenes are not named at all.
As no stress therefore can be laid on the argument for silence,
any hypothesis of connexion between Essenism and Christianity
must make good its claims by establishing one or both of these two
twofohf points ; first, that there is direct historical evidence of close inter
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. Absence i. On the former point it must be premised that the Gospel
historical narrative does not suggest any hint of a connexion. Indeed its general
evidence tenor is directly adverse to such a supposition. From first to last
Jesus and his disciples move about freely, taking part in the
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
place either in the Evangelical narrative or in the Apostolic Church,
who, it is contended, form direct and personal links of communi
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
herald of the Kingdom ; the other is the most prominent figure in the
early Church of Jerusalem.
(i) John the Baptist was an ascetic. His abode was the desert ;
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
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

of a con
nexion.

Two indi
vidual cases al-

(i) John
the Bap
tist

not an Es
sene.

Derenbourg also, after using similar
language, adds this wise caution, ' In
any case, in the present state of our
acquaintance with the Essenes, which
is so imperfect and has no chance of
being extended, the greatest prudence
is required of science, if she prefers to
be true rather than adventurous, if she
has at heart rather to enlighten than to

surprise ' (p. 461). Even Gratz in one
passage can write soberly on this sub
ject : ' The Essenes had throughout
no influence on political movements,
from which they held aloof as far as
possible ' (in. p. 86).
1 These are (1) Ma.tt. hi. 7 ; (2)
Matt. xvi. 1 sq.; (3) Matt. xxii. 23 sq.,
Mark xii. 18, Luke xx, 27.

THE ESSENES. 161
questioned whether his food of locusts would have bee'n permitted
by the Essenes, if they really ate nothing which had life (tp.\jn>xovl).
And again ; his baptism as narrated by the Evangelists, and their
lustrations as described in 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.
In this mode of Hfe John was not singular. It would appear External
that not a few devout Jews at this time retired from the world and fiances to
buried themselves in the wilderness, that they might devote them- John in
selves unmolested to ascetic discipline and religious meditation. auus'
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 difference4. The conscious
ness of a divine mission, the gift of a prophetic insight, in John was
the real and ail-important distinction between the two. But here who was
also the same mistake is made ; and we not uncommonly find Banus jj,° ^
described as an Essene. It is not too much to say however, that the
whole tenor of Josephus' narrative is opposed to this supposition5.
1 See above p. 86. Si v 'Eaaip/uv, KaBCis iroXXdKis etirapev.
3 Gratz m. p. 220. ovras yAp ipbpvv alpijaeaBai tt\v Aplarvv,
3 rb koivwvvtikov, Joseph. B. J. ii. el irdaas KarapdBoipi. aKXvpaywyiaas
8. 3. See also Philo Fragm. 632 birip yovv ipavrbvKal iroXXAiravvBels ras rpeis
tov KoivuipeXovs, and the context. SiijXBov. Kal pvSi tt\v ivrev&ev ipirei-
4 Ewald (vi. p. 649) regards this plav Ikuvvv ipavnp voplaas elvai, irvBb-
Banus as representing an extravagant pevbs too Bavovv Svopa KarA tvv ipvplav
development of the school of John, Siarplfietv, ioBiJTi piv Airb SivSpav xP^m
and thus supplying a link between the pevov, rpoipvv Si rijv abropdnos ipvopivvv
real teaching of the Baptist and the irpooebepbpevov, tyvxpip Si vSan tvv Vl*t-
doctrine of the Hemerobaptists pro- pav Kal tvv vbKra iroXXdms Xovbpevov
fessing to be derived from him. irpbs Ayvelav, frXuriis iyevbpvv abrov.
6 The passage is so important that koI Siarpl^as irap' avnp iviavrobs rpeis
I give it in full ; Joseph. Vit. 2 irepl koI tvv iiriBvpiav reXeiiiaas els ttjv toXiv
SKKalSexa Si ft-17 yevbpcvos iflovXiBvv tuiv inriarpeipov. ivveaKalSeKa S' Irq ?XW"
Tap' ijpXv alpiaetav ipireiplav Xafieiv. rip^dpvv re iroXirebeoBai T§ $apiaaluv
rpeis 8' elalv atrai' Qapiaabav piv v alpiaei KaraKoXovB&v k.t.X.
irpdiTV, Kal ZaSSovKaiav v Sevripa, rptrv

COL.

II

162 THE ESSENES.
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 (Siijkdov) 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 him as his zealous disciple (£17X0)1-175 iyevop-r/v 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.
General Of John himself therefore no traits are handed down which
suggest that he was a member of the Essene community. He was an
ascetic, and the Essenes were asceties ; 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 contrast1. But the later history of his real or sup
posed disciples has, or may seem to have, some bearing on this
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 Hemerohaptists2, in Hebrew Toble-shacharith3, 'day' or
' '-morning 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
1 Matt. ix. 14 sq., xi. 1.7 sq., Mark and this is more in accordance with
ii. 18 sq., Luke v. 33, vii. 31 sq. the analogy of other compounds from
2 The word T]pepo§airriaral is gene- VP-tpa, as r/pepbpios, vpepoSpbpos, vpepo-
rally taken to mean ' daily-bathers,' aKbiros, etc.
and this meaning is suggested by Apost. Josephus (B. J. ii. 8. 5) represents
Const, vi. 6 drives, KaB' iKaoryv vpipav the Essenes as bathing, not at dawn,
iAv pv paTTtawvTai, ovk iaBlouaiv, ib. 23 but at the fifth hour, juet before their
avrl KaBvpepivov iv pbvov Sobs fidirriapa, meal. This is hardl/ consistent either
Epiphan. Hmr. xvii. 1 (p. 37) el p-q n with the name of the Toble-shacharith,
Apa KaB' imorvv vpipav pairrifoiTb tis orwith the Talmudical anecdote of them
iv vSan. But, if the word is intended quoted above p. 132. Of Banus he re-
as a translation of TobU-shacharith ports (Vit. 2) thathe 'bathed often day
'morning bathers,' as it seems to be, and night in cold water.'
it must signify rather ' day -bathers '; s See above p. 132.

THE ESSENES. 1 63
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) We must not hastily conclude, when we meet with certain (a) Their
persons at Ephesus about the years a.d. 53, 54, who are described rf^n10^°
as ' knowing only the baptism of John,' or as having been 'baptized Baptist.
unto John's baptism 1,' that we have here some early representatives
of the Hemerobaptist sect. These were Christians, though imperfectly John's dis-
informed Christians. Of Apollos, who was more fully instructed by ephesus
Aquila and Priscilla, this is stated in the most explicit terms2 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
ambiguity3- 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
impulse towards Christianity; but to others it represented a widely
different form of belief and practice. The Gospel of St John was Professed
written, according to all tradition, at Ephesus in the later years of t later
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 light4. 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 season5,'
1 The former expression is used of unfrequently also ' to kindle, to set on
Apollos, Acts xviii. 24; the latter of fire,' .as e.g. Xen. Anab. iv. 4. 12 ol
' certain disciples, ' Acts xix. 1. dXXoi Avaardvres irvp l/coioc; so that d
2 This appears from the whole nar- Kaiopevos may mean either ' which
rative, but is distinctly stated in ver. burns away' or 'which is lighted.'
25, as correctly read, iSiSaoKev AKpifiws With the former meaning it would de-
t4 irepl tov 'Iijo-oS, not tou Kvplov as in note the transitoriness, with the latter
the received text. the derivative character, of John's
3 The iriarebaavTes in xix. 1 is slightly ministry. There seems no reason for
ambiguous, and some expressions in excluding either idea here. Thus the
the passage might suggest the oppo- whole expression would mean 'the
site : but paBirrAs seems decisive, for lamp which is kindled and burns away,
the word would not be used absolutely and (only so) gives light.' For an ex-
except of Christian disciples.; comp. ample of two verbs or participles joined
vi. 1, 2, 7, ix. 10, 19, 26, 38, and fre- together, where the second describes a
quently. ' result conditional upon the first, see
i jonn j g. I Pet. ii. 20 el Apaprdvovres Kal KoXa-
5 John v. '35 ixeivos vv b Xv\vos o qbifrpevoi biropeveire...el dyaBoiroiovvres
Kaibpevos Kal ipalvw k.t.X. The word Kal irdaXovres brropevelre, i Thess^ iv. 1
Kaleiv is not only ' to bum,' but not irus Sti vepnrarelv Kal apiaKeiv Seip.
II — 2

1 64 THE ESSENES.
John himself lost no opportunity of bearing his testimony to the
loftier claims of Jesus1. 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
The facts distorted the facts of history. They perverted John's teaching, and
distorted7 *^ey misrepresented his office. His baptism was no more a single
by them, rite, once performed and initiating an amendment of life ; it was a
daily recurrence atoning for sin and sanctifying the person2. He
himself was no longer the forerunner of the Messiah ; he was the
very Messiah3. In the latter half of the first century, it would
Spread of seem, there was a great movement among large numbers of the
Hemero- jews jn fav0Ur of frequent baptism, as the one purificatory rite
principles, 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 quote 4. Some years earlier these sectarians
are mentioned by name as opposing James the Lord's brother and
the Twelve at Jerusalem 5. 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
1 See John i. 15 — 34, hi. 23 — 30, sum; in tantum, inquit, ut et ipse
V. 33 sq. : comp. x. 41, 42. This Jesus omnibus hominibus et prophetis
aspect of St John's Gospel has been majorem esse pronuntiaverit Johan-
brought out by Ewald Jahrb. der Bibl. nem etc.'; see also § 63.
Wissensch. in. p. 1 56 sq. ; see also 4 See above p. 96.
Geschichte vn. p. 152 sq., die Johan- 6 Clem. Recogn. 1. c. This portion
neischen Schriften p. 13. There is of the Clementine Becognitions is ap-
perhaps an allusion to these ' disciples parently taken from an older Judaizing
of John' in 1 Joh. v. 6 oik iv rip vSari romance, the Ascents of James (see
povov, AXX' iv rip vSan Kal iv rip a'lpan- Galatians pp. 316, 349). Hegesippus
koI rb irvevpa k.t.X. ; comp. Acts i. 5, also (in Euseb. H. E. iv. 22) mentions
xi. 16, xix. 4. the Hemerobaptists in his list of Jewish
2 Apost. Const, vi. 6; comp. § 23. sects; and it is not improbable that
See p.162, note 2. this hst was given as an introduction
3 Clem. Recogn. i. 54 ' ex discipulis to his account of the labours and mar-
Johannis, qui...magistrumsuumveluti tyrdom of St James (see Euseb. H. E.
Christum praedicarunt,' ib. § 60 'Ecce ii. 23). If so, it was probably derived
unus ex discipulis Johannis adfirmabat from the same source as the notice in
Christum Johannem fuisse, et non Je- the Recognitions.

THE ESSENES.

r65

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 A wrong
the Baptist of world-wide fame. Nothing more than this was u® j™^
needed for the choice of an eponym. From St John's Gospel name.
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 called1, alike by those who allow and those who deny its
justice2. 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'*.

1 They are cahed Baptists by Justin
Mart. Dial. 10, p. 307 a. He mentions
them among other Jewish sects, with
out however alluding to John.
2 By the author of the Recognitions
(1. c.) who denies the claim; and by
the author of the Homilies (see below
p. 166, note 2), who allows it.
3 These Mandeans are a rapidly di
minishing sect living in the region
about the Tigris and the Euphrates,
south of Bagdad. Our most exact
knowledge of them is derived from
Petermann (Herzog's Real-Encyklo-
pddie s. w. Mendaer, Zabier, and
Deutsche Zeitschrift 1854 p. 181 sq.
1S56 p. 331 sq., 342 sq., 363sq., 386 sq.)
who has had personal intercourse
with them; and from Chwolson (die
Ssabier u. der Ssabismus 1. p. 100 sq.)
who has investigated the Arabic autho
rities for their earher history. The
names by which they are known are
(1) Mendeans, or more properly Man-
deans, N'HJO Mandaye, contracted
from Si»m K130 Manda dechaye 'the
word of life.' This is their own name
among themselves, and points to their
Gnostic pretentions. (2) Sabeans, Tsa-
hiyun, possibly from the root IDS 'to

dip ' on account of their frequent lus
trations (Chwolson 1. p. no; but see
Galatians p. 312), though this is
not the derivation of the word which
they 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 the name by which
they are known in the Koran and in
Arabic writers, and by which they call
themselves when speaking to others.
(3) Nasoreans, K'HIVJ 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. the 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 the
Baptist has a very prominent place in
their theological system, as the one
true prophet. On the other hand
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

1 66

THE ESSENES.

(6) Their
relation to the
Essenes.

They were
at first
distinct,if not anta
gonistic.

(6) Of the connexion between this sect and John the Baptist
we have been able to give a probable, though necessarily hypothe
tical account. But when we attempt to determine its relation to
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
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 Essenism1. 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
Vith the Scribes and Pharisees*- His authority on such a point
may be worth very little ; but connected with other notices, it should

Mesopotamia. Chwolson- (i.p. 139 sq.)
has shown that these last adopted the
name in the 9th century to escape
persecution from the Mohammedans,
because in the Koran the Sabeans, as
monotheists, are ranged with the Jews
and Christians, and viewed in a more
favourable light than polytheists. The
name however has generally been ap
plied in modern times to the false
rather than to the true Sabeans.
1 See p. 96 sq.
2 Hegesipp. in Euseb, H.E. iv. 22,
Apost. Const, vi. 6. So also the
Pseudo-Hieronymus in the Indiculus
de Hmresibus (Corp. Hmres. 1. p. 283,
ed. Oehler).
3 Clem. Horn. ii. 23 'Iadvvijs res
iyivero vpepo(3airnaTvs, Ss Kal rou kv-
plov vp&v 'XvaoO KarA tov tijs avgvytas

X670K iyivero irpboSos. It is then
stated that, as Christ had twelve lead
ing disciples, so John had thirty.
This, it is argued, was a providential
dispensation — the one number repre
sents the solar, the other the lunar
period ; and so they illustrate another
point in this writer's theory, that in
the syzygies the true and the false are
the 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 Hmr. xvii. 1 (p. 37) fo-a ti2v ypap-
parioiv Kal Qapioaluv (ppovovaa. But
he adds that they resemble the Sad
ducees 'not only in the matter of the

THE ESSENES. 167

•

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 But after
the temple and polity were destroyed, the shock vibrated through g^Bu^"on
the whole fabric of Judaism, loosening and breaking up existing of the
societies, and preparing the way for new combinations. More es- TemPl9
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
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 aafUgi0^ea
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 Elchesai, which came from
the farther East1. Henceforth Elchesai is the prominent name in
the history of those Jewish and Judaizing sects whose proper home
is east of the Jordan2, 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 Esspne
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. Elchesai is. regarded as the founder of the sect of
Mandeans*. (ii) But, if great weight has been attached to the supposed (ii) James
V ' > 8 o the Lord's
connexion of John the Baptist with the Essenes, the case of James the Brother
Lord's brother has been alleged with still more confidence. Here,
it is said, we have an indisputable Essene connected by the closest
familv ties with the Founder of Christianity. James is reported to invested
J , , ¦ , with JiS-
have been holy from his birth ; to have drunk no wme nor strong gfme oha.
resurrection of the dead, but also in the doctrine of two coordinate princi-
their unbelief and in the other points.' pies, the male and female. This no-
1 See Galatians p. 311 sq. on this tice, as far as it goes, agrees with the
Book of Elchesai. ' account of Elchesai or Elxai m Hip-
2 See above p. 137. Polytus (H<er- ix" ^ e^ an,d Epipna-
3 See Chwolson 1. p. 112 sq., 11. vine (Hcer. xix. 1 sq.). But_the deri-
p C43 sq TheArabic writerEn-Nedim, vation of the name Elchesai given by
who hved towards the close of the Epiphanius (Hcer. xix. 2) Sbvapts «*«-•
tenth century, says that the founder Xvppivv (»D3 ?Tl) is different' and pro
of the Sabeans (i.e. Mandeans) was bably correct (see Galatians p. 312).
El-chasaich (-sws'l ) wbo taught

168

THE ESSENES.

racteris-
tics.

But the
account comes
fromuntrust worthy
sources.

No Essene
features in
the true
portraitsof James
or of the
earliestdisciples.

drink ; to have eaten no flesh ; to have allowed no razor to touch his'
head, no oil to anoint his body ; to have abstained from using the
bath ; and lastly to have worn no wool, but only fine linen1. 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 J ewish-Christian his
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 facts2.
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 3. In like
manner Essene portraits are elsewhere preserved of the Apostles Peter4
and Matthew5, 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 James s,' a Judseo-Christian work stamped,
as we happen to know, with the most distinctive Essene features7.
But if we turn from these religious novels of Judaic Christianity
to earlier and more trustworthy sources, of information — to the
Gospels or the Acts or the Epistles of St Paul — we fail to discover
the faintest traces of Essenism in James. 'The historical James,'
says a recent writer, 'shows Pharisaic but not Essene sympathies8.' -
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

' Hegesippus in Euseb. H. E. ii. 23.
2 See Galatians p. 348 sq.
3 See Galatians p. 311.
4 Clem.'Hom. xii. 6, where St Peter
is made to say dprip povip Kal iXalacs
XpiSpai, Kal aravl'us Xaxdvois; comp,
xv. 7 vSaTos povov koI dprov.
5 Clem. Alex. Pmdag. ii. 1 (p. 174)
aireppdrwv Kal dKpodpbiav Kal Xaxacwj'
dvev Kpetov pereXdppavev.
' See Galatians p. 349, note,

7 Epiphanius (Hcer. 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 the fire on the
altar (see above pp. 134 — 136): (2) It
published the most unfounded calum
nies against St Paul.
8 Lipsius, Schenkel's Bibel-Lexicon,
p. 191.

THE ESSENES. 169
laid down by the Mosaic law. The only sacrificial victims, which
they abhorred, were victims offered to idols. They took their part in
the religious 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
and the joy of a better hope. It was altogether within the sphere
of orthodox Judaism that the Jewish element in the Christian
brotherhood 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 visibie oe.
Christian community of the metropolis, which may possibly have been fare the
due to Essene influences1. Five or six years later, the heretical t^e ^po_
teaching which threatened the integrity of the Gospel at Colossae stolic age.
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 ^e jewisn
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 Pereea 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 Dlanees
that Essene influences contributed largely to the characteristic features favour the
of the Gospel, such a view, if tenable at all, must find its support in a ^ °
some striking coincidence between the doctrines and practices of the nexion?
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
1 Bom. xiv. », 21. * See Galatians p. 310 sq.

170

THE ESSENES.

not whether Christianity arose amid such and such circumstances,
but how far it was created and moulded by those circumstances.
(i) Observ- (i) Now one point which especially strikes us in the Jewish
sabbath 6 historian's account of the Essenes, is their strict observance of
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 the 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 the 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. 1 — 12; Mark ii.
23 — iii. 6; Luke vi. 1— 11, xiv. 1 — 6.

1 Gratz (in. p. 233) considers this
narrative an interpolation made from
a Pauline point of view (' eine pau-
linistische Tendenz - interpolation ') .
This theory of interpolation, inter
posing wherever the 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 his school, that
they explained the origin of the G os-
pels by the conflict of two opposing
camps, the Ebionite and the Pauline.
'By this master-key,' he adds, ' criti
cism was first put in a position to test
what is historical in the Gospels, and
what bears the stamp of a polemical
tendency (was einen tendentiosen po-
lemisehen Charakter hat). Indeed
by this means the element of trust
worthy history in the Gospels melts
down to a minimum' (in. p. 224). In
other words the judgment is not to be
pronounced upon the evidence, but

'And they avoid... touching any work
(iipdirreaOai Zpywv) on the sabbath-day
more scrupulously than any of the Jews
(Siaipopurara 'lovSaluv AirdvTwv) ; for
the evidence must be mutilated to suit
the judgment. The method is not new.
The sectarians of the 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 his 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 — the conflict of fire and water, of
the sacrificial and the baptismal sys
tems. Wherever sacrifice was men
tioned with approval, there was a
'Tendenz-interpolation' (see above
p. 136). In this manner again the ge
nuine 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. •

171

they do not venture so much as to move
a vessel2, nor to perform the most ne-
oessary offices 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 cured; It is the sabbath-day;
it is not lawful for thee to carry thy
bed. But he answered them, He that
made me whole, the same said unto
me, Take up thy bed and walk....
Therefore the Jews did persecute Jesus
and sought to slay him, because he
did these things on the sabbath-day.
But Jesus answered them, My Father
worketh hitherto, and I work, etc.
(John v. 10 — iS; 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 the sabbath-day
(John ix. 14, 16).'
(ii) But there were other points of ceremonial observance, in (ii) Lus-
which the Essenes superadded to the law. Of these the most re- j^'o^j
markable was their practice of constant lustrations. In this respect ceremo-
the Pharisee was sufficiently minute and scrupulous in his abser- servano"ea.
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.

'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
they wash their hands oft (irvyprj), eat
not. ..The Pharisees and scribes asked
him, Why walk not thy disciples ac
cording to the tradition of the elders
 But he answered... Ye hypocrites,

'So they wash their whole body
(AiroXo-uovrai rb aiSpa) in cold water;
and after this purification (Ayvetav)...
being clean (KaBapoi) 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)-''

misprints in the Greek) : ' For the con
nexion of Jesus with the Essenes com
pare moreover Markxi. 16 Kal obK ijipiev
b 'IijitoOs tva tis SuviyK-y aKevos. SiA tou
lepov with Josephus B. J. ii. 8. 9 AXX'
obSi aKeObs ri peraKivrjaai Bappovaiv (ol
'Eaaaioi).' He does not explain what
this notice, which refers solely to the
scrupulous observance of the sabbath,
has to do with the profanation of the
temple, with which the passage in the

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 have to
this honourable epithet : and in those
portions of his work, which I have
consulted, I have not found either.

\yz

•THE ESSENES.

Avoidance of

laying aside the 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 the man  Let them alone,
they be blind leaders of the blind...'
' To eat with unwashen hands de
fileth not the man (Matt. xv. i — 20,
Mark vii. 1—23).'

' And when the Pharisee saw it, he
marvelled that he had not first washed
before dinner (tov Aplarov). And the
Lord said unto him : Now do ye Pha
risees make clean the outside of the
cup and the platter. ..Ye fools... behold
all things are clean unto you (Luke
xi. 38—41).'

' After a year's probation (the novice)
is admitted to closer intercourse (irpba?
eiaiv iyyiov t-§ Sialrv), and the lustral
waters in which he participates have a
higher degree of purity (koI KaBapuri-
piov rdv irpbs Ayvelav vbdruv peraXap-
pdvei, § 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 them
eat strange food (n twv Aavvi/Boiv)...
they were not induced to submit (§10).'
'Exercising themselves in. ..divers
lustrations (Siatpbpois ayvelais . . .ipirai-
Sorpifiobpevoi, § 12).'

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 him eat with the publicans
and sinners they said unto the disci
ples, Why eateth your Master with the
publicans and the sinners...' (Mark
ii. 15 sq. ; Matth. ix. 10 sq., Luke v.
30 sq.)
'They say... a friend of publicans
and sinners (Matth. xi. 19).'
' The Pharisees and the scribes mur
mured, saying, This man receiveth
sinners and eateth with them (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).'
' Behold, a woman in the city that ' And they are divided into four
was a sinner... began to wash his feet grades according to the time passed

'And after this purification they
assemble in a private room, where no
person of a different belief (nSv irepo-
5b£uv, i.e. not an Essene) is permitted
to enter; and (so) being by themselves
and clean (abrol KaBapol) they present
themselves at the refectory (Senrvrp-v-
piov), as if it were a sacred precinct
(§ 5)-'

THE ESSENES. 1 73
with her tears, and did wipe them under the discipline : and the juniors
with the hairs of her head and kissed are regarded as so far inferior to the
W3 feet  Now when the Pharisee seniors, that, if they touch them, the
which had bidden him saw it, he spake latter wash their bodies clean (Airo-
within himself saying, This man, if XobeoBai), as if they had come in con-
he had been a prophet, would have tact with a foreigner (KaBArep AXXo^
known who and what manner of wo- tpvXip avpipvpivras, § 10).'
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 force to the Essenes.
(iii) If the lustrations of the Essenes far outstripped the en- (iii) As-
actments of the Mosaic law, so also did their asceticism. I have cetiolsm-
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 Gospel1. 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-bibber ' 2, He whose first exercise of power ?nd c>rlnk-
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 head with oil thou didst not ' And they consider oil a pollution
anoint (Luke vii. 46).' (KvXISa), and though one is smeared
'Thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy involuntarily, he rubs his body clean
head (Matt. vi. 17).' (apvxerai t6 aiipa, § 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 celibacy of the Essenes ; Cehbacy.
aind 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
1 See above p. 87. 5 Matt. xi. 19, Luke vii. 34.
3 Ginsburg Essenes p. 14.

174

THE ESSENES.

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 spying 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- (iv) But not only where the Essenes superadded to the cere-
ance of the rnonial law, does their teaching present a direct contrast to the pheno-
sacrifices. 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 teaching3- 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 gifts5; He charges
the cleansed lepers to go and fulfil the Mosaic ordinance and offer
Practice the sacrificial offerings to the priests6- And His practice also is
of Christ conformable to His .teaching. He comes to Jerusalem regularly to
disciples, attend the great festivals, where sacrifices formed the most striking
part of the ceremonial, and He himself enjoins preparation to be
made for the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb. If He repeats the
inspired warning of the older prophets, that mercy is better than
sacrificer, this very qualification shows approval of the practice in
1 i Cor. vii. 26—31. * Luke xxiv. 53, Acts ii. 46, iii. 1
s See p. 134 sq. sq., v. 20 sq., 42.
a Matt. xxi. 12 sq., 23 sq., xxiv. 1 sq., » Matt, xxiii. 18 sq.: comp. v. 23,
xxvi. 55, Mark xi. 11, 15 sq., 27, xii. 24.
35, xiii. r sq., xiv. 49, Luke ii. 46, xix. « Matt. viii. 4, Mark i. 44, Luke v.
45, xx. 1 sq., xxi. 37 sq., xxii. 53, 14.
John ii. 14 sq., v. 14, vii. 14, viii. 2, r Matt. ix. 13, xii, 7.
20, 59, x. 23, xi. 56, xviii. 20.

THE ESSENES. 175
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 suction.
resurrection of the body is a fundamental article in the belief of the of the
early disciples. This was distinctly denied by the Essenes1. How- b° y"
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 out
Lord by the characteristic tenets of Essenism, the theory of affinity
fails. There are indeed several coincidences on which much stress Some sup-
has been laid, but they cannot be placed in the category of distinct- fnoidences
ive features. They are either exemplifications of a higher morality, considered.
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 f?~ . 10~
feeling of brotherhood which distinguished Christians and Essenes love.
alike. But what is gained by all this 1 It is quite plain that
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- Prohi-
nication be Yea, yea, Nay, nay.' Have we not here, it is urged, ^££ ot
the very counterpart to the Essene prohibition of oaths2 1 Yet it
1 See above p. 88. abruv laxvpbrepov SpKov rd Si bpvbeiv
3 Jos. B. J. ii. 8. 6 irdv to pvBiv bir abrols irepCtaTarai, xelpbv n tijs imopdas

176 THE ESSENES.
would surely be quite as reasonable to say that both alike 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 public and
private honesty1. 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 schools2.
When Josephus and Philo called the attention of Greeks and Bomans
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-way3.
Commu- And again ; attention has been called to the community of goods
coods *n *^e infant Church of Christ, as though this were a legacy of Es
senism. But here too the reasonable explanation is, that we have
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 brotherhood4. 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-
biroXapfidvovTes' ijSij ydp KareyvaaBal toiovtois SpKois) in this connexion.
ipaai tox AiriaTobpevov Stxa Beov, Philo 1 On the distinctions which the
Omn. prob. lib. 12 (11. p. 458) tov cbi- Jewish doctors made between the va-
XoBiov Seiypara irapixovrai pvpla...T& lidity of different kinds of oaths, see
Aviiporov k.t.X. Accordingly Josephus the passages quoted in Lightfoot and
1 relates (Ant. xv. 10. 4) that Herod the Schottgen on Matt. v. 33 sq. The Tal-
Great excused the Essenes from taking mudical tract Shebhuoth tells its own
the oath of allegiance to him. Yet tale, and is the best comment on the
they were not altogether true to their precepts in the Sermon on the Mount.
principles; for Josephus says (B. J. ii. 2 See e.g. the passages in Wetstein
8. 7), that on initiation into the sect on Matt. v. 37.
the members were bound by fearful 3 BabaMetsia 49 a. See also Light-
oaths (Spmvs ippiKwSeis) to fulfil certain foot on Matt. v. 34.
conditions ; and he twice again in the * Acts v. 4.
same passage mentions oaths (bpvbovai.

THE ESSENES. 177
' other point of supposed coincidence in the social doctrines of the two Prohi-
communities. The prohibition of slavery was indeed a highly honour- JjJ^ of ,
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, like 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 Essene3.
The StoiG 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 Pal<1 *°
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
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-
-1 Philo Omn. prob. lib. § 12 (11. p. 1. 5 otfre SovXav iiriTi)5e6'ivai r.rijaiv.
458) SovXbs re rap' abrois oiSi els iartv ! See for instance the passages from
dXV iXeiBtpoi irdvres k.t.X., Fragm. 11. Seneca quoted in Philippians p. 305.
p. 632 ovk AvSoAtoSov; Jos. Ant. xviii.

COL.

12

178

Thepreaching of the
Kingdomwrongly ascribedto the
Essenes.

The Es
senes not
prophets, but for-
tune-tell-

They had
no vivid
Messianic expecta
tions.

THE ESSENES.
tidings should be preached to the poor1. 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 bden 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'2- 'The announcement of
the kingdom of heaven unquestionably went forth from the Essenes .
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 hopes4. The Messianic idea was built on a belief in the resur
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 polity; they separated themselves almost
entirely from public affairs. The deliverance of the individual is the
shipwreck of the whole, it has been well said, was the plain watch
word of Essenism6. 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 found8. The philosophical tenets

1 Is. lxi. i ebayyeXlaaaBai irraxoh,
quoted in Luke iv. 18. There are
references to this particular part of the
prophecy again in Matt. xi. 5, Luke
vii. 22 , and probably also in the beati
tude paKapiot 0! irraxol K.T.X., Matt. V.
3, Luke vi. 20.
2 Gratz Gesch. in. p. 219.
8 ib. p. 470.
4 Lipsius Schenkel's Bibel-Lexikon
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
with the Messianic prophecy.' ' Of all
this,' says Keim, ' there is no trace.'
s Keim I. c.
6 How little can be made out of
Philo's Messianic utterances by one
who is anxious to make the most pos
sible out of them, may be seen from
Gfrorer's treatment of the subject,
Philo 1. p. 486 sq. The treatises which
bear on this topic are the de Prmmiis
et Pctnis (1. p. 408, ed. Mangey) and
the de Execrationibus (1. p. 429). They
deserve to be read, if only for the nega
tive results which they yield.

THE ESSENES. 179
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.

12 — 3

III.
CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE.

The un- TT7TTHOUT the preceding investigation the teaching of this
derstand- V* • -i i -i -, ¦ n i -, i r
ing of the ' * 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
fronTone a *"a'se Dasis °f morals. It has been pointed out also, that these
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
both is in from the same source, so the reply to both was sought by the
truth""6 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-
teaching'1 ment of falsehood. It soared far above the Pharisaic Judaism
heretics whicn $t Paul refutes in the Epistle to the Galatians. The
questions in which it was interested lie at the very root of our

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. l8i
religious consciousness. The impulse was given to its specu- Its lofty "N
lations by an overwhelming sense of the unapproachable motlTe'
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 3^,^. \
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 answer
very yearnings which were working in their hearts, to solve " in the
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, Q^^f18
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 two-fold 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.

!82 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
Universe. ^& ga^ .q tkeir cosmicai 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.
Lmpor- This creative and administrative work of Christ the Word
this aspect i>n t"6 natural order of things is always emphasized in the
of the writings of the Apostles, when they touch upon the doctrine
Christ, of 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-
vtion 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 Be
ing 'through whom all things were created,' yet in reality
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. 1 83
flow from it, as a living 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. y8{g^'
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 tha
tion was the starting point of the Apostle's 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 racter-. J
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 l'ove 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:

1 84; CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF 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-
me'dia- gative with others. He absorbs in Himself the whole function
funda^6 °f mediation. Through Him alone, without any interposing
mentally j}^ 0f communication, the human soul has access to the
wrong. 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 humility; 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
in the difficulties, so long as we conceive of our Lord only in con-
justified nexi°n 'with the Gospel revelation : but, when with the Apo-
byHis syes We realise in Him the same Divine Lord who- is and
mediation _
in the ever has been the light of the whole world, who before Chris-
World. . .
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.
„ , ,. The old dispensation is primarily the revelation of the abso-
Eelatiou r » . .
of the lute 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, Acts iv. 12, Joh. iii. 36.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 185
sented by Pantheism and Manicheism respectively. The Pan- to the mo-
theist identifies God with the world : the Manichee attributes of the'oid
to the world an absolute existence, independent of God. With ^^'
the Pantheist sin 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 is comple-
two main respects. If the Old Testament sets forth the abso- to^he^md
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 iv. 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 aro distinctly realised in
excuse any appearance of affectation. the other.

1 86

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.

2. The
ethical
error of
the here
tics.

Theirpracticalearnest
ness.

but funda
mental
miscon ceptionand con
sequent
failure.

St Paul
substi
tutes a
principle
for ordi-

2. When we turn from the theology of these Colossian
heretics to their ethical teaching, we find it characterised by
the same earnestness. Of them it might indeed be said that
they did ' hunger and thirst after righteousness.' Escape from
impurity, immunity from evil, was a passion with them. But
it was no less true that notwithstanding all their sincerity they
'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
dote. Where they placed the evil, there th.ey necessarily sought
the remedy. Hence they attempted to fence themselves about,
and to purify their lives by a code of rigorous prohibitions.
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 sets himself to combat this, false tendency. For
negative prohibitions he substitutes, a positive principle ; for
special enactments, a comprehensive motive. He tells them
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

11. 20, %t.

n:. i sq.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 1 87
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 Thiaprin-
died to the world; with Him they have risen to God. Christ, thehea-
the revelation of God's holiness, of God's righteousness, °f ^j^8
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- 0I faith
posed to attach to his doctrine of faith and works has vanished. ^^J^l
It is simply an impossibility that faith should exist without in the
works. Though in form he states his doctrine as a relation of thisprin-
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. n iv rv AveKSvaei toO aiipa- bpels tA irdvra, and ver. 9 AveKSvad-
tos rijs aapKbs, hi. 5 veKpiiaare obv T& pevoi tov iraXaibv dvBpairov. See the
piXv with ver. S vvvl Si AirbBeaBe Kal notes on the several passages.

i88. CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OF 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-
ologyof 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 t. The Christology of the Colossian Epistle is in no way
logy of St different from that of the Apostle's earlier letters. It may
earlier 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 you1.' 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
*t BUb"but *^8 PassaSe from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, as in any
1 i Thess. i. i, v. 18. even where the term itself is not used.
3 1 Cor. viii. 6 Si' off rd irdvra koI See the dissertation on the doc
kets Si avrov. The expression 81 ov trine of the Logos in the Apostolic
implies the conception of the Logos, writers.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. .. 1S9
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 Colossi 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 be opposed it to each
successive development of error. The Person of Christ proved
the complete answer to false speculations at Colossse, 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 0f
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 mental
statement of St Paul. In both these writings the universe is ldentltv-
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 Christ1. 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 rravra Si avrov iyivero k.t.X., Heb. i. 2 Si' ov Kal ewolijaev tovt
alwvas.

193

Firmness of the
apostolic
idea.

3. The
Christology of
the suc
ceedingages.

Its loose
ness of
conception.

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE.
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
contrast1. 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 creature3.

1 The remarks on the theology of
the Apostolic Fathers, as compared
with the Apostles, in Dorner's Lelire
von der Person Christi 1. p. 130 sq.
seem to me perfectly just and highly
significant. See also de Pressense"
Trois Premiers Slides 11. p. 406 sq.
on the unsystematic spirit of the Apo-
Btolic Fathers.
a See for instance the

'quoted in the note on Clem. Horn. 2
td ira&vpara 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. 191
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 a.re not the fathers of the second applied in
century, but the fathers of the third and fourth centuries. In the later a^es-
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 Colossse 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 unmistakable 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-
. -, f • n c ¦ i r gedness
them by a certain ruggedness of expression, a want of finish and com-
often bordering on obscurity. What account should be given of Presslon'
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 (Lelire 1. p. 414 sq.)
less than justice to this father ; but is just and avoids both extremes.

I92 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
tialvigour. . x . , , n , ...
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) i. 20 — ii. 3. The Work of the Son — a work of recon
ciliation ;
(i) Described generally (i. 20).
(ii) Applied specially to the Colossians (i. 2 1 — 23).

CHARACTER AND CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. 193
(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
(ii- 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 u, /J, re
spectively.]
(i) Positively.
(o) The pleroma dwells wholly in Christ and is com
municated through Him (ii. 9, 10).
(/3) 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
(/3) either submit to ritual prohibitions (ii. 16, 17),
(a) or substitute the worship of inferior beings for
allegiance to the Head (ii. iS, 19).
(ii) On the contrary this must henceforth be their
rule:
COL. x3

194 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.
i-4).
IV. Hoetatort (iii. 5 — iv. 6).
Practical application of this death and this resurrection.
(1) iii. 5 — 12. Comprehensive rules.
(i) What vices are to be put off, being mortified in this
death (iii. 5 — n).
(ii) What graces are to be put on, being quickened
through this resurrection (iii. 12 — 17).
(2) iii. 13 — 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).
(b) 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.

IIPOS KOAASSAEIS.

13—2

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

Iste vas electionis
Vires omnes ration is
Humance transgreditur ¦
Super choros angelorum
Baptus, cadi secretorum
Doctrinis imbuitur.
De hoc vase tarn fecundo,
Tarn electo et tarn, mundo,
Tu nos, Christe, complue ;
Nos de luto, nos de fence,
Tua sancta purga prece,
Regno tuo statue.

nPOS KOAASSAEIS.

1 T ^YAOS d.7r6<rTo\os XpicrTov 'lticrov Bid 6e\ti/J.aTos
Qeov, Kai Ti/nodeos 6 dBe\<j)6s, * rots iv KoXocro-ais

i, 2. 'Paul, an apostle of Christ
Jesus by no personal merit but by
God'sgracious will alone, and Timothy,
our brother in the faith, to the conse
crated people of God in Colossse, 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. drroo-ToXos] 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.
&ia deXvpMTOS Beoi] As in i Cor. i. I,
2 Cor. i. i, Ephes. i i, 2 Tim. i. 1.
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. 16 a pa ovv ov tov BeXovros ovSe
tov Tpexovros dXXa. tov eXeavros Beov.
The same words 8ta BeXvparos Beov are
used in other connexions in Rom. xv.
32, 2 Cor. viii. 5, where no polemical
reference is possible.
TtpoBeos] The name of this disciple
is attached to the Apostle's own in

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 (vv. 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 aSeX0os] 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 dSeX<j)bv
vpav. 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. KoXoo-o-ais:] For the reasons
why this form is preferred here, while
KoXao-o-ae'is is adopted in the heading
of the epistle, see above, p. 16 sq.

198

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1-3

dy'iois Kal 7na"roFs d$e\<poTs iv Xpitrrai' x&P19 ^A""
icai eiptivri diro Qeov 7rctTpd<s rjfxwv^,
3F.vXapio"rQuiueu to Qew \kcli\ iraTpl tov Kvplov

aylois'] 'saints,' i.e. the people con
secrated to God, the Israel of the new
covenant; see the note on Phil. i. 1.
This mode of address marks the later
epistles of St PauL In his earlier
letters (1, 2 Thess., 1, 2 Cor., Gal.) he
writes tj7 eKKXijcria, rais eKKXrjcriais. The
change begins with the Epistle to the
Romans, and from that time forward
the Apostle always uses Aylois in
various combinations in addressing
Churches (Rom., Phil., Col., Ephes.).
For a similar phenonemon, serving as
a chronological mark, see the note on
1} x°-PKt iv- r8. The word aylois must
here be treated as a substantive in
accordance with its usage in parallel
passages, and not as an adjective con
nected with dSeXcpois. See the next
note. kui itio-to'is dSeXcpols] This unusual
addition is full of meaning. Some
members of the Colossian Church were
shaken in theiv 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 brotheriwod. In this way he
obliquely hints at the defection. Thus
the words koI ma-Tols dSeXcpols are a
supplementary explanation of tqIs a-
yiois. 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 aylois and ddeXcpols. Its passive
sense, 'trustworthy, stedfast, unswerv- •
ing,' must be prominent here, as in
Acts xvi. 15 el Ker.piKari pe moryv rm
Kvpla elvai. See Galatians p. 155.
ev Xpio-Ta] most naturally connected
with both words irtcrrois dSeXqbois,
though referring chiefly to mo-rois;
comp. Ephes. vi. 21 irio-rbs iiaKovos ev

Kvpia, I Tim. i. 2 yvTjcrla) reKva ev irl-
o~rei. For the expression mo-rbs ev
Xpio-ra, iv Kvpltp, see also 1 Cor. iv. 1 7,
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 Kparet
rfjv KecpaXijv.
xdpis k.t.X.] On this form of saluta
tion see the note to 1 Thess. i. 1.
irarpos jpav] The only instance in
St Paul's epistles, where the name of
the Father stands alone in the open
ing benediction without tbe addition
of Jesus Christ. The omission was
noticed by Origen (Bom. 1. § 8, iv. p.
467), and by Chrysostom (ad loc. xi. p.
324,110m. in 2 Ccw.xxx, x.p. 651). But
transcribers naturally aimed at uni
formity, and so in many copies we find
the addition kcli Kvplov 'lvcrov XpioTov.
The only other exception to the Apo
stle's usual form is in 1 Thessalonians,
where the benediction is shorter still,
X^pis vp.lv Ka\ elpyvrj, 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, andthefow 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.

199

rjntav Iriarov Xpia-rov irdvTOTe irepl v/uuSv Trpoaevxpfxevoi'
4aKovcravT6s Tt]v tt'io-tiv vfiwv iv Xpia-Tty 'lti(rov, Kal rrjv
dyawriv \i]v 6%€Te] eh 7rdvTas tovs d-yiovs, 5Sid Ttjv

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. evxapio-Tovpev] See the notes on
1 Thess. i. 2.
jrarpl] If the K.al be omitted, as the
balance of authorities appears to sug
gest, the form of words here is quite
exceptional. Elsewhere it runs 6 Beds
Kal irarrjp tov Kvplov, Rom. xv. 6, 2 Cor.
i. 3, xi. 31, Ephes. i. 3 (v. 1.), 1 Pet. i.
3 ; comp. Rev. i. 6 : and in analogous
cases, such as 6 Bebs Kal irarrjp qpav,.
the rule is the same. See the note on
Clem. Rom. § 7. In iii. 17 however
we have ™ Bea irarpl, 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.
iram-ore 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 iravrore and irepl
ip.av must clearly be taken together,
because the emphasis of irepl vpav
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 evxapiarelv iravrore (see the note on
Phil. i. 3). and by the parallel passage
ov iravopai evxapicrrav virep vpa>v in
Ephes. i. 16. Thus the words will
mean ' We give thanks for you always
in our prayers.' For this absolute
use of irpoo-evxopevoi see Matt. vi. 7,
Acts xvi. 25.
4. aKovo-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.
ev Xpio-ra 'irjcrov] to be connected
with ttjv irio-Tiv vp&v. The strict clas
sical language would require ryv iv
X.'I., but the omission of the article is
common to the New Testament (e. g.
ver. 8) ; see the note on 1 Thess. i. 1,
and Winer § xx. p. 169 (ed. Moulfon).
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 iirl
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 irio-rei Kal
dydirrj ry iv Xpto-na 'Ijjo-ou, where the
meaning is unambiguous. There is
however authority in the lxx for the
use of ev with iricris, irio-reveiv, 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. 1 5.
fy i'xere] See the detached note on
the various readings.
5. &ia 7-171/ iXmSa] 'for the hope,' i.e.
looking to the hope. The following
reasons seem decisive in favour of con-

200 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I. 6
i\7rt^a tvjv diroKei}xevr}v v/uuv iv to?s ovpavoTs, r\v Trporj-
Kovarare iv ™ Xoyco Trjs d\rj6elas tov evayyeXiov, 6tov
7rapcvTOs ets i/'/xas, Kadais Kal iv iravTl tw koc/ulw io~Tlv

necting bid rfjv iXiriba, not with evxa~
pio-rovpev, but with rfjv iricrnv k.t.X.,
whether fjv 'ixere be retained or not.
(i) The great distance of evxapio-rov-
pev is against the former connexion ;
(2) The following clause, fjv irporjKov-
o-are k.t.X., suggests that the words
Sid tijv iXmSa 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,
pvvpovevovres vpwv tov epyov rijs iri-
o-recos Ka\ tov Kcnrov rijs dyairrjs Kai
rrjs viropovrjs rijs eXirlbos k.t.X., 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
mcTiv fjTis ion pryrr\p irdvrcov vpa>v,
iiraKoXovBovo-ns rr/s eXwibos, irpoayoiicrns
•rrjs dydirrjs.
The hope here is identified with the
object, of the hope : see the passages
quoted on Gal. v. 5. The sense of
eXms, as of the corresponding words
in any language, oscillates between the
subjective feeling and the objective
realisation; comp. Rom. viii. 24 777
yap iXirlbi icrdBvpev' iXirls be ftXeiro-
pevn ovk ecrriv eXuls' o yap (SXeirei ris
k.t.X., where it passes abruptly from
the one to the other.
Trjv drroKeipevrjv] ' which is stored
up.' It is the Brjo-avpos ev ovpavai of
the Gospels (Matt. vi. 20, 21, Luke xii.
34, xviii. 22).
Trpor/Kovo-are] ' nf 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 ?rpo- as
meaning either 'before its fulfilment'
or 'before my writing to you,' seem
neither so natural in themselves nor
so appropriate to the context.
rrjs dXrj&eias tov evayyeXiov] ' the
truth of the 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 dXrjBela. See also Gal. ii. 5, 14,
where a similar contrast is implied in
the use of 7; dXrjBeia tov evayyeXiov.
6. tov rrapovros els v/xas] 'which,
reached you.' The expression irapel-
vai els is not uncommon in classical
writers ; comp. irapeivai irpbs in Acts
xii. 20, Gal. iv. 18, 20. So also evpe-
Bijvai els (Acts viii. 40), yevecrBai els
(e.g. Acts xxv. 15), and even elvai
els (Luke xi. 7). See Winer § 1. p.
5i6sq. iv iravr'i toi Koo-pco] For a similar
hyperbole see Rom. i. 8 iv oXcp ra
Koapa ; comp. 1 Thess. i. 8, 2 Cor. ii. 14,
eV iravri rona. More lurks under these
words than appears on the surface. The
true Gospel, the Apostle seems to say,
proclaims its truth by its universality.
The false gospels are the outgrowths

1.6]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

201

Kap7ro(popovfxevov Kal av^avo/mevov, Kadi^s Kal iv v/juv,
d<f> fe rifUepas rjKova-aTe t<al iTreyvwTe Trjv %^9LV ToS

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 prj peraKivovpevoi
airo rrjs iXirlbos tov evayyeXiov ov
VKOvcrare, tov KrjpvxBevros iv irdcrrj
Kricrei rfi vrrb rbv ovpavov.
io-riv Kapirotpopoiipevov] ' is constantly
bearing fruit.' The fruit, which the
Gospel bears without fail in all soils
and under every climate, is its 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. 1 2 ov povov io-riv irpocra-
vairXrjpovcra k.t.X., Phil. ii. 26 eiriiroBav
i/V. 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 Kapiroef>opeio-Bai no
other instance has been found. The
voice is partially illustrated by ko>8<o-
vo(popeio-8ai, cribvpoifropeicrBai, rvpira-
votpopeio-Bai, though, as involving a
different sense of -<popeio-8ai ' 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, Kapirotpopovvres koa
av^avopevoi. 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
§ xxx viii. p. 3T9-

Kal av£avopevov] 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 Kapirocpopovpevov describes the
inner working, avt-avopevov gives the
outward extension of the Gospel. The
words Kal avi-avopevov are not found
in the received text, but the autho
rity in their favour is overwhelming.
KaBas Kal iv vpiv] The comparison
is thus doubled back, as it were, on
itself. This irregularity disappears in
the received text, koi io-riv Kapirotpo-
povpevov KaBdis Kal ev vpiv, where the
insertion of Ka\ before Kapirotpopoiipe
vov straightens the construction. For
a similar irregularity see 1 Thess. iv.
I irapaKaXovpev iv Kvplm 'lncov tva,
KaBds irapeXd^ere irap' jJ/iook to iras bet
iipds Trepnrareiv Kal dpecrKeiv Bea, KaBas
Kal irepiirareXre, tva. ire pio-o-evrjre ftSXXoi',
where again the received text simpli
fies the construction, though in a dif
ferent way, by omitting the first tva
and the words KaBds ko.1 rrepiirareire.
In both cases the explanation of the
irregularity is much the same; the
clause reciprocating the comparison
(here KaBws Kal iv vp.iv, there Ka8<os
Kal irepiirareire) is an afterthought
springing out of the Apostle's anxiety
not to withhold praise where praise
can be given.
For the appearance of ko.1 in both
members of the comparison, kuI ev
iravri reo Koopat-.-KaBms Kal, comp.
Rom. i. 13 Kal ev vpiv KaBas Kal iv rois
Xoiirois eBveo-iv; and in the reversed
order below, iii. 13 Ka8a>s Kal 6 Kipws
ixaplo-aro vpiv, ovtcos Kai vpels (with
the note) : see also Winer liii. p. 549
(ed. Moulton). The correlation of the
clauses is thus rendered closer, and
the comparison emphasized.
VKOvo-are Kal iireyvcore] The accusa
tive is governed by both verbs equally,

202

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 7, 8

Qeov iv dXtjdela, ' Kadcos ifxadeTe diro 'Enra(ppd tov
dya7rt]T0v o-vvdovXov tj/ncov, 6s io~Ttv 7Tio~tos virep r\ixu>v
BiaKOVos tov XpiaTOV, s6 Kal ($7jAwcras rjfxiv ty\v vjuoov
dycnrrjv iv irvevfxaTi.

' Ye were instructed in and fully ap
prehended the grace of God.' Por
this sense of aKoveiv see below, ver.
23. For imyivdo-Keiv as denoting ' ad
vanced knowledge, thorough apprecia
tion,' see the note on iirlyvaois, ver. 9.
rrjv x^PLV T0V &eov] St Paul's syno-
nyme for the Gospel. In Acts xx. 24
he describes it as his mission to preach
to evayyeXiov r rj s xd p it o s roil Beoii.The
true Gospel as taught by Epaphras was
an offer of free grace, a message from
God ; the false gospel, as superposed
by the heretical teachers, was a code
of rigorous prohibitions, a system of
human devising. It was not x°Pls hut
boy para (ii. 14) ; not tov Beov but tov
Koo-pov, t&v dvBpairav (ii. 8, 20, 22).
For God's power and goodness it sub
stituted self-mortification and self-
exaltation. The Gospel is called v' x<*pir
-rod Beov again in 2 Cor. vi. 1, viii. 9,
with reference to the same leading
characteristic which the Apostle de
lights to dwell upon (e.g. Rom. iii. 24,
v. 1 5, Eph. ii. 5, 8), and which he here
tacitly contrasts with the doctrine of the
later- intruders. The false teachers of
Colossse, like those of Galatia, would
lead their hearers dBereiv 1-171/ x"Piv
tov &eov (Gal. ii. 21) ; to accept their
doctrine was iKirlirreiv rijs \dpiTos
(Gal. v.4).
ivdXrjBe'ia] i.e. 'in its genuine sim
plicity, without adulteration' : see the
note on rrjs dXrjBelas roO evayyeXiov,
ver. 5.
7. KaBas ipdBere] ' even as ye were
instructed in it,' the clause being an
explanation of the preceding iv dXv-
Bela; comp. ii. 7 KaBas ibiba^Bijrf.
On the insertion of ko.1 before ipd-
Bere in the received text, and the con
sequent obscuration of the sense, see
above, p. 29 sq. The insertion how

ever was very natural, inasmuch as
KaBas Kal is an ordinary collocation
of particles- and has occurred twice in
the preceding verse.
'Enaippa] On thenotices of 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-wboiiXov] See iv. 7. The word ,
does not occur elsewhere in St Paul.
virep r'ipmv] As the evangelist of
Colossse, Epaphras had represented
St Paul there and preached in his
stead; see above, p. 30. The other
reading virep i!p<3j/ 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 crov poi- btaKovfj ; but this in
terpretation is hardly consistent with
roil Xpio-rov. 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 virep vpav (06 which there is
no direct example), but either vpav
(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 iipav in the context (vv. 3, 9), and
partly also from ignorance of the his
torical circumstances, vpav would read
ily be substituted for vp&v. See the
detached note on various readings.
8. o ko\ br/Xdo-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
ri]v vpav dydirnv. ' The fruit of the
Spirit is love,' Gal. v. 22. For the

J-9] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 203
9 Aid tovto ical rifieh, d(p> fa ^fxepa-i rjKOvtjafxev, ov
iravoneda virep vjxwv irpoarevxoiJievoi Kal aiTOv/aevoi 'iva
ir\r]pw6f]Te ti)v iiriyvworiv tov 6e\ii/naTos avTOv iv

omission of the article, 1-171/ ivirvevpan,
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 tlie 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 will yc 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 bondage,
and settled us as free citizens in our
new and glorious home, where His Son,
the offspring and the representative

of His love, is King ; even the same,
who paid our ransom and thus pro
cured our redemption from captivity —
our redemption, which (be assured)
is nothing else than the remission of
our sins.'
9. Aia toCt-o] 'for this cause,' i.e.
' by reason of your progressive faith
and love,' referring not solely to 6 Kal
brpXdoas k.t.X. but to the whole of
the preceding description. For 81a
tovto ko.1 vpets in an exactly similar
connexion, see 1 Thess. ii. 13; comp.
Ephes. i. 15 bid tovto Kayd K.T.X. In
all these cases the ko.1 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 word& : Kal ev vpiv a<p,' vs v^Pas
VKOVcrare (ver. 6), Kal qpels off? 77? ripe-
pas iJKovcrapev (ver. 9).
ko.1 alrovpevoi] The words have an
exact parallel in Mark xi. 24 (as cor
rectly read) irdvra ocra iipocrevxeo-8t
Kal alreicrBe.
tva] With words like irpocrevxecBai,
alrelo-Bai, etc., the earlier 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.
rfv imyvao-iv] A favourite word in 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 opening prayer
for his correspondents' well-being(PhiI.
i. 9, Ephes. i. 17, Philem. 6, and here).
The greater stress which is thus laid on
the contemplative aspects of the Gos-

204

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS,

[I. 10

7rdo~t] o~o<pia ical crvvecrei irvev/uiaTiK^, I0 irepiiraTtjcrai
dfclais tov Kvpiov eh iraaav dpeo~Keiav iv iravTi kpyw

pel maybe 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 iiriyvacris is an ad
vance upon yvao-is, denoting a larger
and more thorough knowledge. So
Chrysostom here, eyvare, dXXd bet ti
ko.1 imyvdvai. Comp. Justin Mart.
Dial. 3, p. 221 A, 77 irapexovo-a avrdv
rdv dvBpairlvav Kal rdv Belav yvdo-iv,
eireira Tijs roiirav Beibrrjros Kal biKaio-
o-vvqs iirlyvacriv. So too St Paul
himself contrasts yivdo-Kew, yj/mo-is-,with
imyivdo-Keiv, iirlyvao-is, as the par
tial with the complete, in two pas
sages, Rom. i. 21, 28, 1 Cor. xiii. 12.
With this last passage (apn yivdo-Ka
e'k pepovs, Tore be iwiyvdcropai) com
pare Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 17, p. 369,
7rapa rav 'E/3pai'K<»i/ irpo(pvrdv peprj
rrjs dXrjBeias ov Kar iiriyvao~iv Xa-
fibvres, where kot iiriyvaciv is com
monly but wrongly translated 'without
proper recognition ' (comp. Tatian ad
Grwc. 40). Hence also iirlyvao-is 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-
o-oipia Kal crvveo-ei] '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 awpol ko.1
o-vverol, Prov. xvi. 21, Matt. xi. 25,
and elsewhere. In the parallel pas

sage, Eph. i. 8, the words are iv irdo-rj
crocpig. ko.1 abpovijcrei, and the substitu
tion of (ppovrjcris for crvvecris there is
instructive. The three words are
mentioned together, Arist. Eth. Nic.
i. 13, as constituting the intellectual
(biavorjTiKal) virtues. Socpla is mental
excellence in its highest and fullest
sense ; Arist. Eth. Nic. vi. 7 17 &Kpi-
fieo-Tarr) rdv iiricrn]pdv...do-irep Kecpa-
Xrjv exovo-a imo-rrjprj rav Tipiararav
(see Waitz on Arist. Organ. 11. p.
295 sq), Cicero de Off. i. 43 'prin-
ceps omnium virtutum,' Clem. Alex.
Peed. ii. 2, p. 181, TeXeta...ipirepiXa-
/3oTJcra ra oXa. The Stoic definition of
o~o(pla, as iirio-TTjprj Beiav Kal dvBpairlvav
Kai rav rovrav alridv, 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,
Aristob. in Eus. Prwp. Ev. xiii. 12
p. 667). And the glorification of croepia
by heathen writers was even sur
passed by its apotheosis in the Pro
verbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon.
While o-a(j>la 'wisdom' is thus primary
and absolute (Eth. Nic. vi. 7 prj pbvov
rd sk Tav dpxav elbeval dXXd Kal irepl
raj dpxds dXrjBeveiv), both crvvecris ' in
telligence' and (ppovrjcris 'prudence'
are derivative and special (Eth. Nic.
vi. 12 rdv ioxdrav Kal rav KaB' eKacTov).
They are both applications of o-ocpia
to details, but they work on different
lines ; for, while o-ivecris is critical,
(ppovrjcris is practical ; while cvveo-is
apprehends the bearings of things,
abpcvrjcris suggests lines of action : see
Arist. Eth. Nic. Vi. II n pev ydp (ppo
vrjcris iiriraKTiKrj -io-riv ...rj be crvve
cris KpiriKrj. For crvvecris see 2 Tim.
ii. 7 vbei b Xeya, bdcrei ydp croi 6
Kvpios crvveo-iv iv iracriv. This relation
of o-o(j>ia to o-iveo-is explains why in
almost every case o-o<jSi'a (o-o(p6s) pre
cedes a-vveo-is (o-vverbs), where they

I. II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

dyavw Kapiro<popovvTes Kal dv^avofxevoi tyj iiriyvcoo-ei
tov Qeov' "iv irdo-r^ Bwd/uei Bwa/jLOv/utevoi KaTa to

are found together, and also why in
Baruch iii. 23 01 eKfrjnrrai rrjs crvve-
creas, obbv be cro(pias ovk eyvao-av, we
find o-vveo-ts implying a tentative, par
tial, approach to o-o<pi'a. The relation
of o-o(pia to (jipbvrjo-is will be considered
more at length in the note on the
parallel passage, Ephes. i. 8.
irvevpMTiKfj] The word is emphatic
from its position. The false teachers
also offered a o-ocftla, 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 by the mind of the flesh
(ii. 18). See 2 Cor. i. 12 ovk iv o-orpla
o-apKiKjj, where a similar contrast is
implied, and 1 Cor. i. 20, ii. 5, 6, 13,
iii. 19, where it is directly expressed
by croepia tov Kocrpov, cro(pia dvBpdirav,
cro<pia tov aldvos tovtov, dvBpamvrj cro-
(pla, etc.
IO. ireptiraTrjo-ai d£tas K.T.X.] So I
Thess. ii. 1% Ephes. iv. i ; comp. Phil.
i. 27. The infinitive here denotes the
consequence (not necessarily the pur
pose) of the spiritual enlightenment
described in tva TrXrjpaBfjTe k.t.X. ; see
Winer § xliv. p. 399 sq. With the re
ceived text rou irepiiraTrjcrai vpas d^Uos
k.t.X. 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 vpiis. The end of all knowledge,
the Apostle would say, is conduct.
tov Kvplov] i.e. 'of Christ.' In 1
Thess. ii. 12 indeed we have rrepnra-
reiv d^las rov Beov ; but St Paul's com
mon, and apparently universal, usage
requires us to understand 6 Kvpms of
Christ. dpeo-Keiav] i.e. ' to please God in all
ways'; comp. 1 Thess. iv. 1 irds bet
vpMS irepiiraretv Kai dpecrKeiv Qed. As
this word was commonly used to de
scribe the proper attitude of men to

wards God, the addition of toG eeov
would not be necessary : Philo- Quis
rer. div. her. 24 (1. p. 490) ds dirobe-
Xopevov (tov Qeov) Tas ¦vsvxrjs ckovo-Iov
dpea-Keias, de Abrah. 2 J (II. p. 20)
rds irpbs dpecrKeiav bppds, de Vict. Off,
8 (11. p. 257) bid iracrdv levai rdv els
dpeo-Keiav bbdv, 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 still
prominent, as e.g. Philo de Mund.
Op. 50 (i. p. 34) irdvra Kai Xeyeiv Kai
irpdrreiv itnrovbat^ev els dpecrKeiav tov
irarpbs Kal fSacnXeas. Towards men
this complaisance is always dangerous
and most commonly vicious; hence
dpeo-Keia is a bad quality in Aristotle
[?] (Eth. Eud. ii. 3 to Xiav irpbs -nbovrjv)
as also in Theophrastus (Char. 5 ovk
eiri rd j3eXTio-ra rjbovrjs irapao-Kevao-ri-
ktj), but towards the King of kings no
obsequiousness can be excessive. The
dpeo-Keia of Aristotle and Theophrastus
presents the same moral contrast to
the dpeo-Keia here, as dvBpdirois dpe
crKeiv to Bed dpeo-Kuv in such passages
as 1 Thess. ii. 4, Gal. i. 10. Opposed
to the dpeo-Keia commended here is dv-
Bpairapeo-Keia condemned below, iii. 22.
iv iravrl k.t.X.] i.e. 'not only showing
the fruits of your faith before men
(Matt. vii. 16), but yourselves growing
meanwhilein moral stature (Eph.iv. 13).'
ttj imyvdo-ei] 'by the knowledge.'
The other readings, iv rfj imyvdo-ei,
els tt)i/ eirlyvao-iv, 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.
II. bwapovpevoi] A word found

2o6

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

LI-

KpaTOs Trjs Bofctjs avTOv eh irdcav v7ro/j.ovr)v Kai fxaKpo-
dvfxlav fjteTa %apds- ' Vi ev%api(TTOvvTes ra iraTpt tw iKa-

12. Tip iKavuaavri vpas.

more than once in the Greek versions
of the Old Testament, Ps. lxvii (lxviii).
29 (lxx), Eccles. x. 10 (lxx), Dan. ix.
27 (Theod.), Ps. lxiv (lxv). 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
fvbvvapovv however appears several
times in St Paul and elsewhere.
Kara to Kparos] The power commu
nicated to the faithful corresponds to,
and is a function of, the Divine might
whence it comes. Unlike bvvapis or
Icrxis, the word Kpdros in the New
Testament is applied solely to God.
tt}s bbi-ijs ovtov] 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 bb£a, 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
(Kara to Kparos k.t.X.).
viropovrjv Kai paKpoBvpiav] 'endurance
and long-suffering.' The two words
occur in the same context in 2 Cor. vi.
4, 6, 2 Tim. iii. 10, James v. 10, 11,
Clem. Rom. 58, Ign. Ephes. 3. They
are distinguished in Trench Synon.
§ liii. p. 184 sq. The difference of
meaning is best seen in their opposites.
While viropovrj is the temper which
does not easily succumb under suffer
ing, paKpaBvpia is the self-restraint
which does not hastily retaliate a
wrong. The one is opposed to cow
ardice or despondency, the- other to
wrath or revenge (Prov. xv. 1 8, xvi. 3 2 ;
see also the note on iii. 12). While
viropovri is closely allied to hope (1
Thess. i. 3), paKpoBvpla is commonly
connected with mercy (e.g. Exod. xxxiv.

6). This distinction however, though
it applies generally, is not true with
out exception. Thus in Is. Ivii. 15
paicpoBvpia is opposed to dXiyotyvxia,
where we should rather have expected
viropovrj ; and paxpoBvpeiv is used simi
larly in James v. 7.
juera ^apas] So James i. 2, 3, irdcrav
Xapdv vyijcracr8e...oTav ireipacrpMis ire-
piirecrrjTe noiKiXois, yivdcrKOvres ort to
boKipiov vjtdv ttjs mo-Teas Karepydfcerat
viropovrjv k.t.X. : comp. 1 Pet. iv. 13,
and see below i. 24. This parallel
points to the proper cennexion of
perd xapds, which should be attached
to the preceding words. On the other
hand some would connect -it with ev-
xapio-Tovvres,ior the sake of preserving
the balance of the three clauses, iv
iravrl epya dyaBd Kapiro(popovvres,, iv
irdcrrj bvvdpei bvvapovpevoi, perd xapas
evxapurrovvres ; and this seems to be
favoured by Phil. i. 4 jiera xapds ttjV
oerjcriy iroiovpevos : but when it is so
connected, the emphatic position of
perd xapas cannot be explained ; nor
indeed would these words be needed
at all, for eixapio-ria is in itself an act
of rejoicing.
12. evxapio-rovvres] most naturally
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,
iii. 17, iV. 2 ; comp. 1 Thess. v. 18. On
the other hand the first person 77/10?,
which follows, has led others to con
nect evxapio-rovvres with the primary
verb of the sentence, 01/ iravbpejBa ver.
9. But the sudden transition from
the second to the first person is quite
after St Paul's manner (see the note
on ii. 13, .14, ovve^aoiroirjo-ev vpas...
xapurdpevos 17p.iT/), and cannot create
any difficulty.
rep iKavdaavri] ' who made us com
petent'; comp. 2 Cor. iii. 6. On the

I- 13]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

207

vwcravTi rjfxds eh ti)v fxepida tov KXr/pov tcov dyicov ev
Tip (ptoTr I36s epvo-aTO rjjj.d's eK Ttjs ipdvarias tov

various readings see the detached
note. rrjv pepiba rov KXiJpou] 'the parcel
of the lot,' ' the portion which consists
in the lot,' roG kXtjpou being the
genitive of apposition : see Winer § lix.
p. 666 sq., and comp. Ps. xv (xvi). 5
Kvpios pepls rrjs KXrjpovoplas pov. In
Acts viii. 21 pepls and xXr^pos are co
ordinated ; in Gen. xxxi. 14, Num.
xviii. 20, Is. lvii. 6, pepls and kXijpo-
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. 24 t»)i»
di/rajToSoo-ii/ rfj j KXrjpovoplas, and Ephes.
i. 18. St Chrysostom writes, bid ti
K.\rjpov KaXeT; beiKvis on ovbels dirb
KaropBapdrav olxelav flacriXeias rvyxa-
vei, referring to Luke xvii. 10. It is
not won by us, but allotted to us.
iv ra (pari] best taken with the ex
pression ttjv pepiba k.t.X. For the
omission of the definite article, [rr)i/]
iv r<3 (pari, 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 imorperjrai dirb
o-kotovs els (pas Kal rrjs i£ovcrlas
tov 'Saravd ori rbv Qeov, tov Xa^eiv
avrovs a(peo-iv dpapTidv Kal K.Xrjpov
• iv rois vyiao-jxevois, where all 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 parallel, Plato Besp. vii. p. 518 M,
etc re (barbs els o-kotos peBiarapevav
Kal eK o-Korous els (pas, is quoted.
1 3. ' 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.'

ipvo-aro] 'rescued, delivered us' by
His strong arm, as a mighty conquer
or: comp. ii. 15 Bpiapfievo-as. On the
form ipvo-aro see A. Buttmann, p. 29:
comp. Clem. Rom. 55, and see the
note on i£epl£ao-ev, ib. 6.
e'f ovo-i'as] here ' arbitrary power, ty
ranny.' The word igovo-la properly sig
nifies 'liberty of action' (egecm), 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 rrjv ayav
ravrrjv ef-ovcriav, Xenoph. Hiero 5
rfj j els to wapbv i^ovcrias eveKa (speak
ing of tyrants), Plut. Vit.Eum. 13 dvd-
ymyoi rats i£ovcriais Kal paXaxol rats
bialrats, Vit. Alex. 33 rrjv i£ovcrLav
Kal tov oyKov rrjs 'AXe^dvbpov bvvdpeas,
Herodian ii. 4 Kadaipeo-tv rijs dverov
i^ovo-ias. This latter idea of a Capri
cious unruly rule is prominent here.
The. expression 77 i£ovo-la tov -o-kotovs
occurs also in Luke xxii. 53, where
again the idea of disorder is involved.
The transference from darkness to
light is here represented as a trans
ference from an arbitrary tyranny, an
i£ovo-ia, to a well-ordered sovereignty,
a Pao-iXeia. This seems also to be
St Chrysostom's idea; for he explains
rrjs i^ovcrlas by rrjs rvpawibos, adding
XaXeirbv Kal to dwXds elvai'Virb to bia-
/3oX<»' to be Kai per i£ovcrias, tovto
XaXeirdrepov. pereo-rno-ev] 'removed? when they
were baptized, when they accepted
Christ. The image of peTeo-njerev is
supplied by the wholesale transporta
tion of peoples (dvao-raTOvs or dva-
orrdo-TOVS iroielv), of which the history
of oriental monarchies supplied so

2oS EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I. 13
o~kotovs, Kal jueTecrTrjo'ev eh Tt\v fiao~i\eiav tov vlov tj/s

many examples. See Joseph. Ant. ix.
II. I totjs oiKrjropas aixpaXaricras
pereo-Trjcrev els rrjv avrov (3ao-iXeiav,
speaking of Tiglath-Pileser and the
Transjordanic tribes.
roG vlov] 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 especially i. 2 iXdXrjo-ev rjpiv iv via,
compared with ii. 5 ov yap dyyeXots
virera^ev rrjv olKOvpevijv rrjv peXXovo-av.
Severianus has rightly caught the idea
underlying toG vlov here; virb rbv
KXrjpovbpov io-pev, ovx vivo tovs oiKeras.
rrjs dydirrjs aGYoG] ' of His love' As
love is the essence of the Father (1 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 (viii. 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.' Thus these words are intimately
connected with the expressions which
follow, eiKav Toil Qeoii roil dopdrov (ver.
15), and iv avrm evboKrjcrev irav to irXij-
papa KaroiKrjo-ai (ver. 19). The loose
interpretation, which makes roG vlov
tvs dydirvs equivalent to roG vlov tov
rjyairrjpevov, 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 already rescued 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
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 crvvrjyeipev Kal crvveKaBicrev
iv rols iirovpavlois iv Xpicrrd 'Irjaov
K.T.X: 14. i'xopev] For the reading «r-
X<>pev, which is possibly correct
here, and which carries out the idea
enforced 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.
rrjv diroXvTpao-iv] 'ransom, redemp
tion.' The image of a captive and en
slaved people is still continued : Philo
Omn. prob. lib. 17 (11. p. 463) alxpd-
X<btos dirrjx^V ¦ • -diroyvovs diroXiirpacriv,
Plut. Vit. Pomp. 24 irbXeav di^pa-
ikdrav diroXvrpdo-eis. The metaphor
however has changed from the victor
who rescues the captive byforceof arms
(ver. 13 epvo-aro) to the philanthropist
who releases him by the payment of a
ransom. The clause which follows in
the received text, bid tov atparos av
rov, is interpolated from the parallel
passage, Ephes. i. 7.

!¦ »4] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 209
ayairrjs avTov, I4eV a> exoptev ' ty\v diroXvTptoariv, ti)v
d<peo-iv twv d/napTicav

14. ev $ toxopev.

rrjv a(j>eo-iv rcoi/ dpapndv] So in the
parallel passage Ephes. i. 7 the Apo
stle defines nji/ d7roXurp<»o-ii/ as 1-171/
afecriv rcoi/ irapairrapdrcov. May not
this studied precision point to some
false conception of d7roXi/rpo>o-w 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
Irenseus i. 13. 6 bid rfjv diroXirpacriv
aKparrjTovs Kal dopdrovs yivecrBai r<5
Kptrij k.t.X., i. 21. I 00-01 ydp elcri
ravrns rrjs yvdpv* pivaTayayoi, Tocrav-
rat Kal diroXiiTpoio-eir, ib. § 4 elvai be
reXeiav airoXiiTpacriv airrjv rrjv eiriyva-
o-iv roG dpprjrov peyeBovs (with the
whole context), and Hippolytus Hcer.
VI. 41 Xeyovcrl Ti q^avij dppijra, emri-
Bevres Xe'Pa rd rrjv diroXvTpaciv Xa-
j36vri k.t.X. (comp. ix. 13). In sup
port of their nomenclature they per
verted such passages as the text, Iren.
1. 21. 2 rov IlavXov prjias (pdaKovo-i
t^v ev Xpiord '\rjo-ov diroXvrpao-iv iroX-
Xokis peprjwKevai. 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 diroXirpao-is. Com
pare the words in the baptismal for
mula of the Marcosians as given in
Iren. i. 21. 3 (comp. Theodt. Hwr.
Fab. i. 9) •*'! evacriv Kal diroXvTpacriv
Kal Koivavlav rdv bvvdpeav, where the
last words (which have been differ
ently interpreted) must surely mean
'communion with the (spiritual)powers.'
Thus it is a parallel to els Xvrpao-tv
dyyeXiKnv, which appears in an alter
native formula of these heretics given
likewise by Irenseus in the context;
for this latter is explained in Clem.
Alex. Exc. Theod. p. 974, els Xvrpao-iv
COL.

dyyeXiKrjv, rovreo-Tiv, 771/ Kai ayyeXoi
exovo-iv. 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 will serve to show
how a false idea of diroXvrpao-is would
naturally be associated with an eso
teric doctrine of angelic powers. See
the note on i. 28 tva 710.pacrTvo-ajj.ev
irdvra dvBpairov reXeiov.
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 (vv. 15 — 17);
(2) In relation to the Church, the
new Moral Creation (ver. 18);
and he then combines the two, tva
yevrjrai iv irdcriv avrbs irpareiav, ex
plaining this twofold sovereignty by the
absolute indwelling 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 Xoyos
was conceived merely as the divine
energy personified, or whether the
14

210

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[Lis

iJos eo~Tiv eiKwv tov Qeov tov dopaTov, 7rpwTOTOKO<;

conception took a more concrete form,
I need not stop now to enquire. A
fuller account of the matter will be
found in the dissertation at the end
of this volume. It is sufficient for the
understanding of what follows 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,' o Xoyos rjv
irpos rbv Qeov Kai Qebs vv ® Xoyos',
and (2) ' The Word became incarnate
in Jesus Christ,' o Xoyos crapi- iyevero. It
is obvious that these two propositions
must have altered materially the sig
nificance of all the subordinate terms
connected with the idea of the Xdyos ;
and that therefore their use in Alex
andrian writers, such as Philo, cannot
be taken to define, though it may be
brought to illustrate, their meaning
in St Paul and St John. With these
cautions the Alexandrian phraseology,
as a providential preparation for the
teaching of the Gospel, will afford im
portant aid in the understanding of
the Apostolic 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 called Thrones or Domina
tions or Princedoms or Powers, or
whatever title of dignity men may
confer upon them.XYes : 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 all the worlds.
And in Him, as the binding and sus
taining power, universal nature co
heres and consists.'
15. os io-Tiv k.t.X.] The Person of
Christ is described first in relation
more especially to Deity, as eiK&v tov
Qeov roG dopdrou, and secondly in re
lation more especially to created
things, as irpaTOTOKOS irdcrrjs Krlcreas.
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,
as we have seen, at the root of the
heretical teaching at Colossae (p. 34;
p. 101 sq., p. 181 sq.), and required to
be met by the true doctrine of Christ
as the Eternal Logos.
eiKav] 'the image.' This expres
sion is used repeatedly by Philo, as a
description of the Logos ; de Mund.
Op. 8 (l. p. 6) rbv dbparov Kai vorjrbv
Beiov Xoyoy e'lKOva Xeyet OeoG, de
Confus. ling. 20 (1. p. 419) 1-7)1/ e'lKava
auroO, tov lepdrarov Xbyov, ib. § 28
(i. p. 427) ttjs d'iblov elKovos avrov Xb
yov toG tep<ardrou k.t.X., de Profiug.
19 (i- p. 5^ * ) b virepdva rovrav Xoyos
Belos ¦ ¦ ovtos e'lKav virdpxav Qeov, de
Monarch: ii. 5 (11. p. 225) Xoyos be
icrnv e'lKav Qeov bi ov crvpiras b ko-
crpos ibvpiovpyeiro, de Somn. i. 41
(1. p. 656), etc. For the use which
Philo made of the text Gen. i. 26, 27,
Kar' eiKova rjperepav, Kar e'lKOva Qeov,
see the note on iii. 10. Still earlier
than Philo, before the idea of the Xo
yos had assumed such a definite form,
the term was used of the Divine o-onji'u
personified in Wisd. vii. 26 diraiyao-pa
yap eo-Ti (paTos diblov...Kal cIkwv rrjs
dyaBbnjTos avrov. St Paul himself
applies the term to our Lord in an
earlier epistle, 2 Cor. iv. 4 rijs bbfys

I. i5]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

211

Tov XpioroO 5s io-Tiv el<dv tov Qeov
(comp. iii. 18 rr)i/ avrrjv eiKova pera-
piopqbovpeBa). Closely allied to elxdv
also is xapaKriJp, which appears in the
same connexion in Heb. i. 3 &v dirav-
yao-pa ttjs bb£rjs Kal xaPaKTVP r*is uto-
oTao-eois avrou, a passage illustrated
by Philo de Plant. 5 (l p. 332) o-(f>pa-
yibi Qeov 77s 6 xaPaiiTVP *<mv dtbios
Xoyos. See also Phil. ii. 6 iv pop(pjj
Qeov virdpxav.
Beyond the very obvious notion of
likeness,,the word eUav involves two
other ideas ;
(1) Representation. In this re
spect it is allied to xaPaKTVP> and dif-
, fers from bpoiapa. In bpoiapa the
resemblance may be accidental, as
one egg is like another; but ehdv
implies an archetype of which it is a
copy, as Greg. Naz. Oral. 30 (i.p. 554)
says at/1-77 yap elKovos (pio-is piprjpa
tivat tov dpxervirov. So too Io. Da-
masc. de Imag. L 9 (1. p. 311) elxdv
icmv bpoiapa xaPaKTVPl£ov T0
irparoTvirov; comp. Philo deMund.
Op. 23 (1. p. 16). On this difference
see Trench N. T. Synon. § xv. p. 47.
The elKdv might be the result of direct
imitation (pipajriKv) like the head of
a sovereign on a coin, or it might be
due to natural causes ((pvo-tia,) like
the parental features in the child,
but in any case it was derived from
its prototype : see Basil, de Spir.
Sanct. 18 § 45 (in. p. 38). The word
itself however does riot necessarily
imply perfect representation. Thus
man is said to be the image of God ;
I Cor. xi. 7 eiKav Kal bb£a Qeov virdp-
Xa>", Clem. Rom. 33 av6pairov...Trjs
iavrov elxdvos xaPaKTvpa- Thus again
an early Judaeo-Christian writer so
designates the duly appointed bishop,
as the representative of the divine au
thority ; Clem. Horn. iii. 62 »s eUbva
Qeov irpoTtpdvras. The idea of per
fection does not lie in the word itself,
but must be sought from the context
(e. g. irai> rb irXrjpapa ver. 19). The
use which was made of this expression,
and especially of this passage, in the

Christological controversies of the
fourth and fifth centuries may be seen
from the patristic quotations in Petav.
Theol. Dogm. de Trin. ii. 11. 9 sq.,
vi. 5. 6.
(2) Manifestation. This idea comes
from the implied contrast to roG do-
pdrou Qeov. St Chrysostom indeed
maintains the direct opposite, arguing
that, as the archetype is invisible, so
the image must be invisible also, 77'
roG dopdrov e'iK&v Kal avrr) dbparos Kal
bpoias dbparos. So too Hilary c.
Const. Imp. 21 (n. p. 378) 'ut imago
invisibilis Dei, etiam per id quod ipse
invisibilis est, invisibilis Dei imago
esset.' And this was the view of the
Nicene and post-Nicene fathers gene
rally. But the underlying idea of the
eiKav, and indeed of the Xoyos gene
rally, is the manifestation of the hid
den : comp. Philo de Fit. Moys. ii. 12
(n. p. 144) eiKav rrjs dopdrov (pvo-eas
ipKpavrjs. And adopted into Christian
theology, the doctrine of the Xoyos
expresses this conception still more
prominently by reason of the Incarna
tion; comp. TertulL adv. Marc. v. 19
'Scientes filium semper retro visum, si
quibus visus est in Dei nomine, ut
imaginem ipsius,' Hippol. c. Noet. 7
bid yap tvs elxovos bpoias rvyxavovcnjs
evyvao-ros 6 irarrjp yiverat, 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 (m. p. 121) 6
rrjs elxbvos Karavoijo-as KaXXos iv rrepi-
voiq roG dpxervirov yiveTai...jiXeirfiv bid
tovtov iKeivov...rb dyevvvrov KaXXos iv
Toi yewrjrii KaToirrevcras. The Word,
whether pre-incarnate or incarnate,
is the revelation of the unseen Father : .
comp. John i. 18 Qeov ovbels edpa-
Kev rrdirore' povoyevrjs Oeos, d &v els
rbv koXttov tov irarpos, ixeivos i^V"IV~
(raTO, xiv. 9, IO d eapdxas ipe id-
paKev rbv irarepa' irds crii Xeyeis,
Lei^ov fjpiv rbv irarepa; (compared
with vi. 46 ovx on rbv irarepa idpaKev
tis k.t.X.). The epithet dopdrov how
ever must not be confined to the ap-
14—2

212

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I.15

prehension of the bodily senses, but
will include the cognisance of the in-
• ward eye also.
irparbroKos irdo-Tjs KTioeas] ' the
First-born of all creation.' The word
irparbroKos has a twofold parentage :
(i) Like elxdv it is closely con
nected with and taken from the Alex
andrian vocabulary of the Logos. The
word however which Philo applies to
the Xoyos is not irparbroKos but irpa-
rbyovos: de Agric. 12 (1. p. 308) 7rpo-
crrrjadpevos rbv bpBbv avrov Xbyov irpa
rbyovov vlov, de Somn. i. 37 (1. p. 653)
o irparoyovos avrov Beios Xoyos, de
Confus. ling. i. 28 (1. p. 427) o-irovba-
£era> KOo-pelo-Bai Kara rbv irparbyovov
avroii Xbyov : comp. ib. i. 14 (l. p. 414)
tovtov irpeo-fivrarov vlov b Tav ovrav
'avereiXe iraTrjp, ov erepaBi irparbyovov
dvbpaore : and this designation irpecr-
§vraros vlbs is several times applied
to the Xoyos. Again in Quis rer. div.
her. § 24 (1. p. 489) the language of
Exod. xiii. 2 dylao-bv poi irdv irparbro-
ko» irparoyeves k.tX. 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 irpiBToTOKos to the Word; Apol.
i. 23 (p. 68) Xoyos avrov virdpxav Kai
npaTOTOKOs Kal bvvapis, ib. § 46 (p. 83)
rbv Xpicrrbv irparbroKov roil Qeov elvai
...Xbyov ovra ov irdv yevos dv&pdirav
pereo-xe, ib. § 33 (p. 75 c) tov Xbyov bs
Kal irparbroKos rd Qed icrn. So too
Theophilus ad Antol. ii. 22 tovtov tov
Xbyov iyevrnjo-ev irporpopiKov, irparbro
Kov ircurvs Krlo-eas.
(2) The word irparoroKos had also
another not less important link of
connexion with the past. The Mes
sianic reference of Ps. Ixxxix. 28, iyd
irparoTOKov Brjaopai avrov k.t.X., seems
to have been generally allowed. So

at least it is interpreted by R. Nathan-
in Shemoth Rahba 19, fol. 1 18. 4, ' God
said, As I made Jacob a first-born
(Exod. iv. 22), so also will I make
king Messiah a first-born (Ps. Ixxxix.
28).' Hence 'the first-born' d irpcard-
tokos (1133), used absolutely, became
a recognised title of Messiah. The
way had been paved for this Messianic
reference of irparbroKos by its prior
application to the Israelites, as the
prerogative race, Exod. iv. 22 ' Israel
is my son, my first-born': comp. Psalm.
Salom. xviii. 4 77 iraibela o-ov i(p' vpas
ds vlov irparoTOKov povoyevrj, 4 Esdr. vi.
58 'nos populus tuus, quern vocasti
primogenitum, unigenitum,' where the,
combination of the two titles applied
in the New Testament to the Son is
striking. Here, as elsewhere (see the
note on Gal. iii. 16 ko\ toIs aireppao-iv
k.t.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 alike 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 irpard-
tokos 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 irparb-
tokos to irparoyovos, 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
iuvolves are twofold ; the one more
directly connected with the Alexan
drian conception of the Logos, the
other more nearly allied to the Pales
tinian conception of the Messiah.
(1) Priority to all 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
earliest, of created things. This in-

I.iS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

213

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 irparbKnoTos, but 7rp<ard-
tokos; e.g. Basil, c. Eunom. iv (p. 1.
p. 292). Much earlier, in Clem. Alex.
Ejcc. Theod. 10 (p. 970), though with
out any direct reference to this pas
sage, the povoyevns Kal irpcordroKos is
contrasted with the irparoKricnoi, the
highest order of angelic beings ; and
the word irparoKnoros 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 irparbroKos Himself belonged to
the Krio-ts, as will 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 avrm iKricrBv
rd irdvra, and with the absolute pre-
existence and self-existence which is
claimed for Him just below, adros
ecrnv irpb irdvrav. We may add also
that it is irreconcileable with other
passages in the Apostolic writings,
while it contradicts the fundamental
idea of the Christian consciousness.
More especially the description irparo-
tokos irdcnjs Kncreas must be interpret
ed in such a way that it is not incon
sistent with His other title of povoye-
vns, unicus, alone of His kind and
therefore distinct from created things.
The two words express the same
eternal fact ; but while povoyevvs
states it in itself, irparbroKos places it
in relation to the Universe. The
correct interpretation is supplied by
Justin Martyr, Dial. § 100 (p. 326
n) irparbroKov tov OeoG Kal irpb irdv
rav rdv KTurpdrav. He does not
indeed mention this passage, but it
was doubtless in his mind, for he else
where uses the very expression jrpo>-
totokos irdo-Tjs kti'o-€<os, Dial. § 85
(p. 31 1 b), § 138 (p. 367 d) ; comp. also
§ 84 (p. 310 b), where the words irpa-

roroKos rdv irdvrav Troujparav 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. Ixxxix.
28 after TrpwrdroKoi/ Bncropai avrov
the explanation is added, vyjnjXbv
irapa rofs j3ao-iXevcriv ttjs yTjs, i.e. (as
the original implies) 'above all the
kings of the earth.' In its Messianic
reference this secondary idea of
sovereignty predominated in the word
7rp<BrdroKos, so that from this point of
view TrpcardroKos irdcnjs Krlo-eas would
mean ' Sovereign Lord over all crea
tion by virtue of primogeniture.' The
cBvkcv KXvpbvopov irdvrav of the Apo
stolic writer (Heb. i. 2) exactly cor
responds to the Bncropai irpardrqKov
of the Psalmist (Ixxxix. 28), and
doubtless was tacitly intended as a
paraphrase and application of this
Messianic passage. So again in Heb.
xii. 23, iKKXvcria irparaTonav, the most
probable explanation of the word is
that which makes it equivalent to
'heirs of the kingdom,' all faithful
Christians being ipso facto irpwrbroKoi,
because all are kings. Nay, so com
pletely might this idea of dominion by
virtue of priority eclipse the primary
sense of the 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,' D?'IJ?.!?K' 11133 Kin&5>,
i. e. os icrnv irparbroKos tov Koo-pov, as
it would be rendered in Greek. In this
same work again, fol. 74. 4, Exod. xiii.
2 is falsely interpreted so that God is
represented as calling Himself 'pri-
mogenitus': see Schottgen p. 922.
For other instances of secondary uses
of "VD3 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'.
irdo-rjs KTiWctis] lof all creation,'

214

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[1. 15

rather than 'of every created thing.'
The three senses of ktIo-is in the New
Testament; are (1) creation, as the
act of creating, e.g. Rom. i. 20 dirb
Kricreas Koapov : (2) creation, as the
aggregate of created things, Mark xiii.
19 dir' dpxijs Kricreas 771/ eKTiaev b Qebs
(where the parallel passage, Matt.
xxiv. 21, has dir' dpxv* Kocrpov), Rom.
viii. 22 7rao-a 17 ktIctis rrvo-revd£ei : (3)
a creation, a single created thing, a
creature, e.g. Rom. viii. 39 ovre ns
ktictis krepa, Heb. iv. 13 ovk ecrnv
ktio-is dojai/ns. As ktIo-is without the
definite article is sometimes used of
the created world generally (e.g. Mark
xiii. 19), and indeed belongs to the
category of anarthrous nouns like
Koo-pos, yfj, ovpavbs, etc. (see Winer
§ xix. p. 149 sq.), it is best taken so
here. Indeed ndo-qs Krlo-eas, in the
sense of irdvros KTio-paros, would be
awkward in this connexion ; for irpio-
totokos seems to require either a col
lective noun, or a plural irao-dv -rdv
KTto-eav. In ver. 23 the case is differ
ent (see the note there). The anar
throus n-So-a ktio-is is found in Judith
IX. 12 (3ao-iXev 7rao"fjs Kricreas crov,
while n-ao-a 7/ ktio-is occurs in Judith
xvi. 14, Mark xvi. 15, Rom. viii. 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 irparbroKos, as already ex
plained. It will therefore signify:
' He stands in the relation of irpard-
tokos to all 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 called
primogenitus mundi. Another ex
planation which would connect the
genitive with the first part of the com
pound alone (irparb-), comparing Joh.
i. 15, 30, irpdrbs fiou tjv, 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.e.,
Theophilus I.e., Clement of Alexan
dria Exc. Theod. 7, 8, 19 (pp. 967,
973), Tertullian adv. Prax. 7, adv.
Marc. v. 19, Hippolytus Hcer. x. 33,
Origen c. Cels. vi. 47, 63, 64, in loann.
i. § 22 (rv. p. 21), xix. § 5 (p. 305),
xxviii. § 14 (p. 392), Cyprian Test.
ii. 1, Novatian de Trim. 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 irpcordroKos irdcnjs kt'i-
aeas, 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. 11. 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 7rp<ordroKos irdo-rjs
KTio-eas 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
ktiVis and the Krl^eo-Bai in the context
of the new spiritual creation, the
Kaii/77 ktio-is of 2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15.
Thus interpreted, 7rpcordroKos ndo-ns
Krlo-eas here becomes nearly equiva
lent to irparbroKos iv iroXXo'is dbeXepols
in Rom. viii. 29. The arguments al
leged in favour of this interpretation
are mainly twofold: (1) That, if ap
plied to the Diviue nature, irparbroKos
would contradict povoyevfjs which else
where describes the nature of the

LiS]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

215

Eternal Son. But those who main
tained, and rightly maintained, that
n-pairdroKos (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
7rp<ordroKos in other passages (ag.
Rom. viii. 29, Rev. i. 5, and just be-
Jbw, ver. 18) Is applied to the hu
manity of Christ. But elsewhere, in
Heb. i. 6 orav.be irdXiv elcraydyy rbv
irparoTOKov k.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 will be seen pre
sently) is the parallelism 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 of the Church —
so that the same word (n-pcororoKos
irdorjs Kricreas ver. 15, irpairdroKos ix
rdv vexpdv ver. 1 8) 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 Marcellus, who
was never deterred by any considera
tions of prudence, took this bold step.
He extended the principle to the
whole context, including even eUdv
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 Marcellus are perfectly
just : Eccl. Theol- i. 20 (p. 96) raGra
irepl rrjs Bebrvros roG vioG roG SeoG,
kov prj MapKeXXco boKrj, etpvrai' ov ydp
dv irepl tvs crapKos av elirev Tocravra b
Beios dirbo-roXos k.t.X.; comp. ib. ii. 9
(p. 67), iii. 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 avrd i-
Kxiaurj rd irdvra [rd] iv rots ovpavois Kal
[rd] ori ttjs yfjs, or rd irdvra 5V adroG
• •¦eKTicrTai, or rd irdira iv avrd crvve-
cmjKev, 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
Marcellus truly saw, is a strictly logi
cal consequence of the interpretation
which refers irparbroKos irdcrrjs Kricreas
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., 181 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. 45 1— 453, 492), ib. iii (n. p.
540—545), de Perf (in. p. 290 sq.),
Cyril Alex. Thes. 25, p. 236 sq., de
Trin. Dial. iv. p. 5 17 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. m. p. 652 (ed. Colet.).
St Athanasius indeed does not confine
the expression to the condescension
(crvyKaTdPacrts) of the Word in the In
carnation, but includes also a prior
condescension in the Creation of the
world (see Bull Def.Fid.Nie. iii. 9. §
1, with the remarks of Newman Select
Treatises ofS. Athanasius 1. pp. 278,
368 sq.). This double reference how
ever only confuses the exegesis of
the passage still further, while theo
logically it might lead to very serious
difficulties. In another work, Expos.
Fid. 3 (l p. 80), he seems to take a
truer view of its meaning. St Basil,

2l6

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

II. 16

7ra'o"»js KTitrews* l6ort ev avTw iKTiadn Ta irdvTa, [to]

who to an equally clear appreciation
of doctrine generally unites a sounder
exegesis than St Athanasius, whilemen-
tioning the interpretation which refers
the expression to Christ's human na
ture, himself prefers explaining it
of the 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 Marcellus, he carries the
interpretation consistently into the
whole context, explaining iv avrd to
refer not to the original creation (kt'i-
ms) but to the moral re-creation
(dvaKTio-is), and referring eiKav to the
Incarnation in the same way. At a
later date, when the pressure of an
immediate controversy has passed
away, the Greek writers generally
concur in the earlier and truer inter
pretation of the expression. Thus
John Damascene (de Orthod. Fid. iv.
8, 1. p. 258 sq.), Theophylact (ad foe),
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. 1. p. 47 sq. de
Trin. viii. 50, n. p. 248 sq.), and Hilary
the commentator (ad loc), take it of
tlie Divine Nature, Augustine (Expos.
ad Rom. 56, 111. p. 914) and Pelagius
(ad loc.) understand it of the 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 (el
Kal bb£aipl ricri Kaivoripav epjxvveias

dvarepveiv 6Sbv), and for the passive
irpwrdroKos suggests reading the active
irparoroKos, alluding to the use of this
latter word in Homer (II. xvii. 5 pvrvp
irparoroKos ... ov irplv elbvia tokoio:
comp. Plat. Thewt. 151 c do-irep al
irparoToKoi). Thus St Paul is made
to say that Christ irparov reroKevai,
rovreo-Ti, ireiroivKevai tvv kt'ictiv.
16. Sri k.t.X.] We have in this sen
tence the justification of the title
given to the Son in the preceding
clause, irparbroKos irdorjs kricreas. It
must therefore be taken to explain
the sense in which this title is used.
Thus connected, it shows that the
7rp<ordroKos Himself is not included
in n-So-a ktio-is; for the expression
used is not rd aXXa or rd Xoiird, but
rd irdvra iKTio-Bv — words which are
absolute and comprehensive, and will
admit no exception.
iv avrar] 'in Him,' as below ver.
1 7 iv avrd crvv.ecrrvKev. For the pre
position comp. Acts xvii, 28 iv avrd
j ydp £dpev Kal KivovpeBa Kal 9 icrpev.
; All the laws and purposes which
I guide the creation and government
j 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
AVord as holding the same relation to
! the Universe which the Incarnate
; Christ holds to the Church. He is
the source of its life, the centre of all
i its developments, the mainspring of
all its motions. The use of iv to
describe His relations to the Church
abounds in St Paul (e.g. Rom. viii. 1,
! 2, xii. 5, xvi. 3, 7, 9, etc., 1, Cor. i. 30,
'¦ iv. 15, 17, vii. 39, xv. 18, 22, etc.), and
more especially 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
applied also to His relations to the
Universe; comp. Joh. i. 4 iv avrd
Car/ 771/ (more especially if we connect
the preceding b yeyovev with it).

I. 16]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

217

iv Toh ovpavoh Kal \ra\ iirl ttjs yfjsy to opaTa Kal tgc

Thus it is part of the parallelism
which runs through the whole pas
sage, and to which the occurrence of
irpcardroKos in both relations gives the
key. The Judaao-Alexandrian teachers
represented the Logos, which in then-
view was nothing more than the
Divine mind energizing, as the rdiros
where the eternal ideas, the vovrbs
xbo-pos, had their abode; Philo de
Mund. Op. 4 (i. p. 4) bcrairep iv iKeiva
vbrjTa, ib. § 5 (p. 4) ovbe b eK T<5i/ Ibedv
Kocrpos aXXov av e^oi rbirov 77 row
Beiov Xbyov rbv raCra o"taKoo-p.7;o"ai/Ta,
ib. § IO (p. 8) d do-dparos Kocrpos...
IbpvBels iv to Bt'ua Xdy<B ; and see
especially de Migr. Abr. 1 (I. p. 437)
oikos iv a biaiTaTai...ocra av ivBvpv
pMra reKrj, darrep iv oik<o-t&> Xbya bia-
Bels. The Apostolic 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 atnov rots yivopevois Abyos 771/, iv
iavrd (pepav rb BeXeiv tov yeyewrj-
KOTos.-.exei iv eavrd rds iv rd irarpl
irpoeworjBeio-as Ibeas SBev KeXevovnos
irarpbs ylvecrBai Koo-pov rb Kara ev Ab
yos direTeXeiro dpecrKav Qed: comp.
Orig. in Ioann. i § 22, iv. p. 21.
iKTio-Bv] The aorist is used here;
the perfect below. 'EktIo-Bv describes
the definite historical act of creation;
cKno-rai the continuous and present
relations of creation to the Creator :
comp. Joh. i. 3 xaPls avrov iyivero
ovbe ev with ib. b yeyovev, I Cor.ix. 22
iyevbpv" T°ts dcrBevecriv do-Bevrjs with
ib.rois irdcriv yeyoi/a irdvra, 2 Cor. xii.
17 prjriva av direcrraXK a with ver. 18
Kal o"vi/a7reo"r€ tXa tov dbeX(j)bv, I Joh.
iv. 9 tov povoyevrj direcrraXKev o
Qebs els rbv Kocrpov tva (jjcrapcv bi' av
rov with ver. 10 dri adrds vycmw*"
v'pds Kai direcrreiXev rbv vibv avrov.
rd irdvra] 'the universe of things}
not irdvra *all things severally,' but
rd irdvra' a\\ things collectively.' With
very few exceptions, wherever this

phrase occurs elsewhere, it stands in a
similar connexion ; see below, vv. 1 7,
20, iii. 1 1, Rom. xi. 36, 1 Cor. viii. 6,
xi. 12, xii. 6, xv. 27, 28, 2 Cor. v. 18,
Eph. i. 10, 11, 23, iv. 10, Heb. i. 3,
ii. 8, Rev. iv. 1 1. Compare Rom. viii.
32 rd irdvra vpiv xapl&erai, 2 Cor. iv.
15 to irdvra bi vpas, with I Cor. iii.
22 etre Kocrpos. ..vpav; and Phil. iii. 8
rd irdvra ifapiddvv with Matt. xvi.
26 idv rbv Koo-pov oXov Kepbycry. Thus
it will appear that rd irdvra is nearly
equivalent to 'the universe.' It
stands midway between irdvra and to
irdv. The last however is not a scrip
tural phrase ; for, while 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 tois ovpavois, k.t.X^] This division
of the universe is not the same with
the following, as if [rd] iv rots ovpavois
were equivalent to rd dbpara and [Yd]
iirl rrjs yrjs to rd dpard. It should
rather be compared with Gen. i. 1
iirolvo-ev b Qebs tov ovpavbv Kal rrjv
yrjv, ii. I crvvereXecrBva-av o ovpavbs Kal
77 yrj Kal irds b Koo-pos avrdv, xiv. 19
bs eKTicrev rbv ovpavbv Kal rrjv yrjv,
Rev. X. 6 bs eKTicrev rbv ovpavbv koI
rd iv avrd Kal rrjv yrjv Kal rd iv avrrj.
It is a classification by locality, as the
other is a classification by essences.
Heaven and earth together com
prehend all space; andt 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 rols ovpavois ; while the human
soul would be classed among ddpara
but would be regarded as iirl tijs yrjs;
see below ver. 20.
It is difficult to say whether rd...ra
should be expunged or retained. The
elements in the decision are; (1) The
facility either of omission or of ad
dition in the first clause, owing to the

'2l8

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 16

dopaTa, eire dpovoi e'tTe KvpioTr/Tes, eiTe dp%al eire

termination of irdi/ra : (2) The 'touch
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 possibility of insertion in both
cases either for the sake of gram
matical completeness or owing to the
parallel 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 bpard k.t.X.] 'Things material
and immaterial,' or, according to the
language of philosophy, (paivbpeva and
vovpeva: comp. Plato Phced. 79 a
Bdpev ovv, el (3ovXei, e(pv, biio e'lbv rdv
ovrav, to pev bparbv, to be deibes, K.T.X.
eire k.t.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 irdo-vs
dp\rjs Kal it-ovalas Kai bvvdpeas Kal
KvpibnjTos Kal iravros k.t.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. While dpxv, i£-
ovcrla, Kvpibrrjs, are common to both,
Bpbvos is peculiar to the one and
bvvapis to the other. Nor again is
. there any correspondence in the se
quence. Neither does bvvapis take
the place of Bpbvos, nor do the three
words common to both appear in the
same order, the sequence being dpx-
«?£. [bvv.]Kvp. in Eph. i. 21, and [Bpbv.]
Kvp. dpx- e|. here.

(2) An expression in Eph. i. 21
shows the Apostle's motive in intro
ducing these lists of names: for he
there adds Kal iravros dvbparos ovo-
jia£opivov ov pbvov iv ra a'tdvi rovra>
dXXd koI iv t& pieXXovn, i. e. ' of every
dignity or title (whether real .or imagi
nary) "which is reverenced,' et-e.^ for
this is the force of iravros ovbparos
6vopa£opevov (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
realities, but contents himself with
repeating subjective opinions. He
brushes away all these specula
tions without enquiring how much
or how little truth there may be in
them, because they are altogether
beside the question. His language
here shows the same spirit of im
patience with this elaborate angelo
logy, as inii. 18.
(3) Some commentators have re
ferred the terms used here solely to
earthly potentates and dignities.
There can be little 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 ddpara imme
diately precede this list of terms, while
in the mention of irdv rd irXrjpapa
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
Bpbvoi, are especially connected with
the speculations of Jewish angelology.
But when thisis granted, two questions
still remain. First ; are evil as well as
good spirits included, demons as well
as angels? And next; though the
primary reference is to spiritual
powers, is it not possible that the
expression was intended to be compre-

I. 16]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

219

hensi ve and to include earthly dignities
as well? The clause added in the
parallel passage, ov pbvov iv rd aldvi
rovra K.r.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] iv tois ovpavois
k.t.\. Nor is there anything in the
terms themselves which bars such an
extension; for, as will be seen, the
combination dp^ai Kal i£ovo-tat is
applied not only to good angels but
to bad, not only to spiritual powers
but to earthly. Compare Iguat
Smyrn. 6 rd iirovpdvia Kal ij bb£a rdv
ayyeXav Kal ol apxovres bparoi re Kal
ddparot. 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 tell 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
all 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. 103 sq.
Jewish and Judseo-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 illustration (see Galatians
p. 307 sq.), these orders are arranged
as follows: (1) Bpbvoi, igovaiai, these
two in the highest or seventh heaven;
(2) 01 dyyeXoi ol (pepovres rds djro-
Kpicreis rols dyyeXots rod irpoo-airov in
the sixth heaven ; (3) 01 ayyeXoi tov
irpoo-dmov in the fifth heaven; (4) ol
dywi in the fourth heaven ; (5) al bvvd-

fitts rdv napepfioXav in the third
heaven ; (6) rd irvevpara rdv inayaydv
(i.e.ofvisitations,retributions)inthese-
cond 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£»s dyye-
Xikv); (2) princedoms (principatus,
biivapis dpxi<V, bpxat) ', (3) powers (po-
testates, i^ovcriai) ; (4) thrones (throni
vel sedes, Bpbvoi); (5) dominations
(dominationes, Kvpibrvres) ; though
elsewhere, in Ioann. i. § 34, rv. 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) Beoi, Bpbvoi, Kvpibrvres; (2)
dpxdyyeXoi,dpxal, i£ovcriai; (3) dyyeXoi,
Svi>bpeis,x<povftip, acpacpip ; these three
great divisions being represented by
the xlXiapxoi, the eKaTovrapxoi, and the
irevrrjKovrapxoi. respectively in Deut.
i. 15, on which passage he is comment
ing. The general agreement between
these will be seen at once. This
grouping also seems to underlie the
conception of Basil of Seleucia Orat.
39 (p. 207), who mentions them in this
order; Bpbvoi, Kvpibrvres, dpxal, i£-
ovcriai, Svvdpeis, xepovfiip,, oepacpip.
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.);
(l) Bpbvoi, xepovfttp, crepatplp.; (2) i£ov-
crlat, KvpibrrjTes, bvvdpeis; (3) dyyeXoi,
dpxdyyeXot, dpxal. But the earlier
lists for the most part seem to
suggest as their common foundation a
classification in which Bpbvoi, Kvpibrv
res, belonged to the highest order, and
apxal, i£ovo-lai to the next below.
Thus it would appear that the Apo
stle takes as an illustration the titles

220

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 1 6

*

efovo'iai' to iravTa

Si

avTOv Kai ets avTOV eKTio~Tai'

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. 1 8.
Bpbvoi] In all systems alike these
'thrones' belong to the highest grade
of angelic 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 kvkXoBcv Toil Bpbvov Bpbvoi
etKoo-i recrcrapes (comp. xi. 1 6, XX. 4).
The imagery is there taken from the
court of an earthly king : see Jer. Iii.
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 called, 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. xxviii. 18. So apparently
Clem. Alex. Proph. Eel. 57 (p. 1003)
Bpbvoi av eiev...bia rb dvairaveoBai iv
avro'is rbv Qeov. 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. A dopt-
ing this interpretation, several fathers
identify the 'thrones' with the che
rubim: e.g. Greg. Nyss. ad Eunom.
i (11. p. 349 sq), Chrysost. delncompr.
Nat. iii. 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 Cosl. Hier. 7 (1. p. 80), without how
ever identifying them with the cheru
bim ; and throughjiis writings it came
to be generally adopted. The former
interpretation however is more pro
bable; for (1) This highly symbolical
nomenclature accords better with a

later stage of mystic speculation, like
the Kabbala; and (2) It seems natural
to treat Bpbvoi as belonging to the
same category with Kvpibrvres, dpxal,
i£ovo-lai, which are concrete words
borrowed from different grades of
human rank and power. As implying
regal dignity, Bpbvoi naturally stands
at the head of the list.
KvpibrijTes] 'dominations' as Ephes.
i. 21. These appear to have been re
garded as belonging to the first grade,
and standing next in dignity to 'the
Bpbvoi. This indeed would be sug
gested by their name.
dpxal, igovcriai) as FpheS. 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 ii. 10, Ephes. iii. 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-'
eluded. In Rom. viii. 38 we have dp-
Xal without ii-ovoiai (except as a v. 1.),
and in 1 Pet. iii. 22 i£ovo-iai without
dp^ai, in connexion with the angelic
orders. 84' adrou k.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 e £ adroG Kal Si' avrov Kal els av
rov rd irdvra. He is not only the Abut
also the Oi, not only the dpxv but also
the reXos of creation, not only the first
but also the last in the history of
the Universe: Rev. xxii. 13. For
this double relation of Christ to the
Universe, as both the initial and the
final cause, see Heb. ii. 10 Si' bv rd
irdvra Kal oV ov rd irdyra, where Si' bv
is nearly equivalent to els avrov of the
text. In the Judaic philosophy of Alex
andria the preposition Sid with the

I. i7]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

221

17

Kai avTos eo~Tiv irpo iravTuiv, icai Ta iravTa ev avTio

genitive was commonly used to de
scribe the function of tlie 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 dob' ov, matter
as e'£ ou, and the Word as Si' ov ;
comp. de Mon. ii. 5 (11. p. 225)Xdyos...
Si' ou crvpiras b Kocrpos ibrjpiovpyeiro.
The Christian Apostles accepted this
use of Sid to describe the mediatorial
function of the Word in creation; e.g.
John i 3 irdvra bi avrov iyivero K.r.X.,
ib. ver. 10 d Ktapos 6V adroG iyivero,
Heb. i. 2 81' on Kai iiroirjaev Toils
aldvas. 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. 1. c. 81' ov, to ipya-
Xelov, bpyavov...bi 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 a to describe the relation of
the Word to the Creator, e. g. Quod
Deus immut. 12 (1. p. 281) a Kal rbv
Koapov elpyd£ero, Leg. All. 1 9 (l
p. 47) rio irepKbaveardra Kal rvXavye-
ardra iavrov Xoya prjpan o Qebs ap.-
(pbrepa iroici, comp. ib. hi. 3 1 (i. p. 106)
d Xoyos... d KaOdirep bpydvm irpoaxpv-
adpevos. This mode of speaking is not
found in the New Testament.
els avrov] ' unto Him.' As of the
Father it is said elsewhere, I Cor. viii.
6 c| ov rd irdvra koi 77p.eTs fis avrov,
so here of the Son we read to irdvra
bi avrov Kai els avrov. All things
mustfind their meeting-point, their re
conciliation, 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 birfch-throe and dtliverance of
all creation through Christ ; as Rom.
viii. 19 sq. avrrj 77 kt'iois eXev8epa8rj-
aerai,irdaarj Krlais...avvabivei. Some
times it is the absolute and final sub
jection of universal nature to Him;
as I Cor. XV. 28 drai/ virorayrj adr<3
to irdvra. Sometimes it is the recon
ciliation of all things,through Him ; as
below, ver. 20 81' adroG diroKaraXXa£ai
rd irdvra. Sometimes it is the reca
pitulation, the gathering up in one
head, of the Universe in Him; as
Ephes. i. 10 dvaKeipaXaidaaadai rd
irdvra iv r<» XpioriS. The image in
volved in this last passage best illus
trates the particular expression in the
text eis adTdv...«Krio-rai ; but all alike
enunciate the same truth in different
terms. The Eternal Word is the goal
of the 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. Kal adros k.t.X.] 'and HE IS
before all things': comp. Joh. viii. 58
irpiw 'Afipaap yevioBai, iyd el pi (and
perhaps also viii. 24, 28, xiii. 19). The
imperfect vv might have sufficed
(comp. Joh. i. 1), but the present eanv
declares that this pre-existence is
absolute existence. The aytoc ecnN
here corresponds exactly to the efoi
eiiwi in St John, and this again is illus
trated by Exod. iii. 14. The verb there
fore is not an enclitic, but should be ac
centuated eanv. See Basil adv. Eunom.
iv (l. p. 294) d dirdo-roXos elirdv, Tidvra
bi avrov koi els avrov eKTiarai, a(peiXev
elirelv, Kal avrbs iyivero irpb irdvrav,
elirdv be, Kal avrbs can irpb iravrav,
ebeil-e tov pev del bvra rrjv be Krlcfiv
yevopivrjv. The avrbs is as necessary
for the completeness of the meaning,

222

o~vveo~Tr\Kev .

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I. 18
18 Kal avTos icrTiv r\ Ke<pa\rj tov o~w-

as the eanv. The one emphasizes the
personality, as the other declares the
pre-existence. For this emphatic av
rbs see again ver. 18; comp. Ephes.
ii. 14, iv. 10, 11, 1 Joh. ii. 2, and esp.
Rev. xix. 15 Kai adrds iroipavei. . .Kal
avrbs irarel. The other interpretation
which explains jrpd irdvrav of superi
ority in rank, and not of priority in
time, is untenable for several reasons.
(1) This would most naturally be ex
pressed otherwise in Biblical language,
as eVl irdvrav (e.g. Rom. ix. 5, Eph. iv.
6), or virep irdvra (Eph. i. 22), or virep-
dva irdvrav (Eph. i. 21, iv. io). (2)
The key to the interpretation is given
by the analogous words in the con
text, esp. irparbroKos, VV. 15, 18. (3)
Nothing short of this declaration of
absolute pre-existence would be ade
quate to introduce the statement
which follows, Kal rd irdvra iv avrd
avviarvKev. irpb irdvrav] ' before all things.' In
the Latin it was translated 'ante
omnes,' i.e. thronos, dominationes, etc. ;
and so Tertullian adv. Marc. v. 19
'Quomodo enim ante omnes, si non
ante omnia? Quomodo ante omnia,
si non primogenitus conditionis?' But
the neuter rd irdvra, standing in the
context before and after, requires the
neuter here also.
avviarrjKev] ' 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
(pipav to irdvra (sustaining the uni
verse) r<3 p-npan rrjs bvvdpeas adroG.
Here again the Christian Apostles
accept the language of Alexandrian
Judaism, which describes the Logos
as the beapbs of the Universe ; e.g.

Philo de Profug. 20 (1. p. 562) o re
ydp tov ovros Xoyos beapbs av rdv
air dvr av . . .Kal awixei rd pepv iravra
Kal acplyyei Kal KaXvei avrd btaXiieaBai
Kal biapraaOai, de Plant. 2 (i. p. 33 1 )
avvdyav rd pipv irdvra Kal a(piyyav'
beapbv yap avrbv dppvKrov tov iravros
b yevvrjaas iirolei irarrjp, Quis rer. div.
her. 38 (l p. 507) Xoya adiiyyerai Beta'
xdXXa ydp ion Kal beapbs ovros rd
irdvra rrjs ovalas iKireirXvpaKas : and
for the word itself see Quis rer. div.
her. 12 (L p. 481) avvearvKe ko.1 £is>-
irvpeirai irpovoia 6eoG, Clem. Rom. 27
iv Xdyo> T7Js jieyaXaavvvs avrov avve-
arfjaaTo rd iravra. In the same con
nexion o-dyKeirai is used, Ecclus. xliii.
26. The indices to Plato and Aristotle
amply illustrate this use of avvecmjKev.
This mode of expression was common
also with the Stoics.
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 will be seen from
a noble passage in the noblest of
early Christian writings, Epist. ad
Diogn. § 7 rbv Xbyov rdv dyiov...dv-
Bpdirois ivlbpvae...ov, KaBdirep dv ns
elKaaeiev, dvBpdirots virrjpervv nva irip.-
i}ras v ayyeXov fj apxovra ij nva rdv
bieirbvrav rd iirlyeia 17 nva tibi/ ireiria-
revpivav ras iv ovpavois bioiKijaeis, dXX'
avrbv rbv tcxvitvv Kal bvpiovpybv rdv
oXav...a irdvra biaTeroKrai Kal bidpia-
rat xal diroreraKrai, ovpavol koi rd iv

I. 18] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 223
//ottos, tijs eKKAjjcrias* os io~Tiv dp^rj, irpaTOTOKOs

tois ovpavois, yij Kal rd ev rfj yjj K.r.X.
See the whole context.
Kal adrds] ' 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 avrbs, ver.
19 bi' avrov. The Creator of the
World is also the Head of the Church.
There is no blind 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. 101 sq., p. nosq.), but
an absolute unity of origin.
») KecpaXr)] ' the head,' the inspiring,
ruling, guiding, combining, sustaining
power, the mainspring of its activity,
the centre of its unity, and the seat
of its life. In his earlier epistles the
relations of the Church to Christ are
described under the same image (1
Cor. xii. 12 — 27; comp. vi. 15, x. 17,
Rom. xii. 4sq); 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 controlling 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 iKieXvaias] in apposition with
tov adparos : comp. i. 24 roG adparos
avrov, o ianv 77 iKKXvaia, Eph. i. 23.
dpxv] i^le 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. iii. 14 77 dpxv rrjs kt'i-
aeas tov OeoG. The parallelism of the
two relations is«kept in view through
out. The word dpxv here involves
two ideas: (1) Priority in time; Christ
was the first-fruits of the dead, dirapxv
(1 Cor. xv. 20, 23): (2) Originating
power; Christ was also the source of
life, Acts iii. 14 d dpxvybs rrjs Carjs;
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 dpxv, like irpdros (see
the note on Phil. 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 examples 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 Beiov...
av e"v irpdrv Kai KvpiaTan) dpxVi Onatas
in Stob. Eel. Phys. i. 2. 39 adrds ydp
[deds] dp^d Kal irpdrov, Tatian. ad
Grcec. 4 Qebs...p.bvos avapxos av Kal
avrbs virdpxav rdv bXav dpxv, Clem.
Alex. Strom, iv. 25, p. 638, d Qebs be
avapxos, dpxv rdv bXav iravreXijs, dpxvs
TroivriKos, Method, de Great. 3 (p. 100,
ed. Jahn) irdavs dperrjs dpxv" Kal irv
yvv . . . vyfj rbv 6edv, pseudo-Dionys.
de Div. Norn. v. § 6 dpxv ydp ion rdv
ovrav, § IO irdvrav ovv dpxv Ka' reXev-
rrj rdv ovrav b irpoav.
The text is read with the definite
article, 17 dpxv, 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.
irparbroKos] Comp. Rev. i. 5 b irpa
rbroKos rdv veKpav Kal 6 apxav rdv
jiaaiXeav rrjs yfjs. 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 life of the Church. Such
passages as Gen. xlix. 3, Deut. xxi. 17,
where the irparbroKos is called dpxv
rcKvav and superior privileges are
claimed for him as such, must neces
sarily be only very faint and partial
illustrations of the connexion between
dpxv and 7rpa>rdroKos here, where the
subject-matter and the whole context

224

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 19

6K toj/v veKpwv, iva yevr\Tai ev iracriv afros irpwTevwv
19 oti iv avTw evdoKticrev irdv to irX^pw/jta KaTOtKrj-

point to a fuller meaning of the words.
The words irparbroKos eV tibv veKpdv
here correspond to irparbroKos irdorjs
Kriaeas ver. 15, so that the parallelism
between Christ's relations to the Uni
verse and to the Church is thus em
phasized. tva yemjrai k.t.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
well. The yivvrai here answers in a
manner to the eo-nv of ver. 17. Thus
eanv and yivvrai 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 Phil. ii.
6 sq. iv popcpij GeoG virdpxav...pop(prjv
bovXov Xafiav. . .yevbpevos virrjKOOS pexpi
8avdrov...bib Kal d Oeds adrdv iiirepv-
y[raaev k.t.X.
iv irdaiv] ' in all things,' not in the
Universe only but in the Church
also. Kal ydp, writes Theodoret, «
Qebs, irpb irdvrav e'ori Kal avv rd rrarpi
iari, Kai ds dvBpairos, irparoTOKos eV
rdv veKpdv Kal tov adparos KecpaXrj.
Thus iv irdaiv 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 iv irdaiv, e.g.
iii. 11, Eph. i. 23, Phil. iv. 12. For
the neuter compare Plut. Mor. p. 9
o-7red8oi/7-es rods iraiSas ev 7rao-i rd^iov
nparevaai. On the other hand in
[Demosth.] Amat. p. 1416 Kpdnarov
elvai rb irpareveiv iv airaai the context
shows that diraat is masculine.
adrds] 'He Himself'; see the note
on Kal adrds above.
19, 20. 'And this absolute supre

macy is His, because it was the
Father's good pleasure that in Him
all the plenitude of Deity should have
its home; because He willed through
Him to reconcile the Universe once
more to Himself. *tf t 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 avrd k.t.X.] 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 dpxv of the Church,
was the result of and the testimony to
His deity; Rom. i. 4 rod bpiaBevros
vlov Qeov...i£ dvaardaeas veKpdv.
evboKvaev] sc. d Qebs, the nomina
tive being understood; see Winer
§ lviii. p. 655 sq., § Ixiv. p. 735 sq.;
comp. James i. 12 (the right reading),
iv. 6. Here the omission is the more
easy, because evboKla, evboKeiv etc. (like
BiXvpd) are used absolutely of God's
good purpose, e.g. Luke ii. 14 e'v dv-
Bpairois evboKlas (or evboKla), Phil. ii.
13 virep rijs edSoKi'as, Clem. Rom. § 40
7rdvra rd yivbpeva iv evboKrjaei ; see the
note in Clem. Rom. § 2. For the ex
pression generally comp. 2 Mace. xiv.
35 av, Kvpie, evboKvaas vabv rrjs arjs
KaraaKvvdaeas iv 77p.1v yeveaBai. The
alternative is to consider irdv rd ttXtJ-
papa personified as the nominative ;
but it is difficult to conceive, St Paul
so speaking, more especially as with
ed8dK7jo-ev personification would sug
gest personality. The ifXvpau.a in
deed is personified in Clem. Alex.
Exc. Theod. 43 (p. 979) avvaiviaavros
Kal tov irXvpdparos, aud in Iren. i. 2.
6 fiovXjj pia Kal yvdprj to irdv irXjvpapa
rdv aldvav k.t.X., i. 12. 4 irdv to ttXv-
papa vvboKvaev [81' adroG So^do-ai rdv
jTarepa] ; but the phraseology of the

I. 20] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 225
a-ai, *°Kal oV avTov diroKaTaWa^ai to. iravra eh

"Valentinians, to which these passages
refer, cannot be taken as an indica
tion of St Paul's usage, since their view
of the irXijpapa was wholly different.
A third interpretation is found in
TertulUan adv. Marc. v. 19, who trans
lates iv avrd in semetipso, taking d
Xpiarbs as the nominative to evbbiaj-
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 irXjpapa] 'the plenitude,' a re
cognised technical term in theology,
denoting the totality of the Divine
powers and attributes ; comp. ii. 9.
See the detached note on irXvpapa.
On the relation of this statement to
the speculations of the false teach
ers at Colossa? see the introduction,
pp. 102, 112. Another interpretation,
which explains rd irXrjpapa 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.
KaroiKfjo-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
irX-npapa with the Lord. Hence St
Paul declares in these two passages
that it is not a irapoixla but a Karoi-
Ki'a. The two words KaroiKeiv, irapoi-
Kelv, occur in the lxx as the common
renderings of 3tJ>i and "VlJ respect
ively, and are distinguished as the
permanent and the transitory ; e.g.
Gen. xxxvi. 44 (xxxvii. 1) KarmKei be
'laKto(3 ev rfj yfj ov irapaKJjaev b irarijp
avrov iv yfj Xavadv (comp. Hos. X. 5),
Philo Sacr. Ab. et Ca. 10 (1. p. 170 m) d
rois iyKVKXiois pbvois iiravexav irapoiKei
ao(pla, ov KaToiKei, Greg. Naz. Orat.
xiv (i. p. 271 ed. Caillau) ris rrjv Kara
aKvvrjv Kal rrjv dva irbXiv; ris irapoi-
Kiav Kal KaroiKiav; comp. Orat. vii
COL.

(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 reconciliation be
tween God and man through the in
terposition of angelic mediators. The
Apostle speaks of an absolute and
complete reconciliation 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 all the pleni
tude of the Godhead should dwell.
It was necessary also that He should
be born into the world and should
suffer as a man.
81 adroG] i. e. tov XpioroG, as ap
pears from the preceding iv avrd},
and the following Sid roG atparos
tov aravpov avrov, [bi avroG]. This
expression 81' adroG 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.
diroKaraXXd^ai] SC. evboKvaev b Qebs.
The personal pronoun avrbv, 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 77X77-
papa as governing a7roKaraXXd£ai, but
this mode of expression is harsh and
improbable. The same double compound diroKa-
raXXdaaeiv is used below, ver. 2 1 and
Ephes. ii. 16, in place of the usual Ka-
TaXXdaaeiv. It may be compared
with diroKardo-raais, Acts iii. 21. Ter-
tullian, 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 alii
quam sue' The word diroKaTciXXda-
ceiv corresponds to d7r7jXXoTpi<»p.eVovS IS

226

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 21

avTov, eiprivoirotvo-as Bia tov a't/xaTOs tov (TTavpov
avrov, oY avTov eiVe Ta iirl tjjs yfjs e'lTe Ta ev tor
ovpavoh, aiKal iz/ias 7TOTe oVtos dirtiWoTpicofAevovs Kai

here and in Ephes. ii. 16, implying a
restitution to a state from which they
had fallen, or which was potentially
theirs, or for which they were destined.
Similarly St Augustine on Gal. iv. 5
remarks that the word used of the
vloBeaia is not accipere (Xapfidveiv)
but recipere (dirbXapfldveiv). See the
note there.
rd irdvra] The whole universe of
things, material as well as spiritual,
shall 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.
els avrbv] 'to Him,' i.e. 'to Him
self.' The reconciliation is always
represented as made to the Father.
The reconciler is sometimes the Fa
ther Himself (2 Cor. v. 18, 19 e'K rod
6eoG roG KsraXXdfavros 7)pas eaurco
Sid XpioroG...6eds 77V e'v Xpiard Koapov
KardXXdaaav eavrd), sometimes the
Son (Ephes. ii. 16: comp. Rom. v.
10, 1 1). Excellent reasons are given
(Bleek Hebr. 11. p. 69, A. Buttmann
Gramm. p. 97) for supposing that the
reflexive pronoun eauroG etc. is never
contracted into avrov etc. in the
Greek Testament. But at the same
time it is quite clear that the oblique
cases of the personal pronoun adrds 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'£aro rjpas—
elvai ijpas dyiovs Kal dpdfiovs Karevairtov
avrov ...irpooplaas vpas els vloBealav
bid 'l7)o-oG XpioroG els avrbv. See
also the instances given in A. Butt
mann p. 98. It would seem indeed
that avrov etc. may be used for iav-

rov etc. in almost every connexion,
except where it is the direct object
of the verb.
eip7;vo7roi7)o-as] The word occurs in
the lxx, Prov. x. 10, and in Hermes
in Stob. Eel. Phys. xii. 45. The sub
stantive elpvvoiroibs (see Matt. v. 9)
is found several times in classical
writers. 81' adroG] 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 Si' adroG.
For other examples see ii. 13 vpas,
Rom. viii. 23 Kal avrol, Gal. ii. 15, 16
Tjp-eis, Ephes. i. 13 e'v a Kai, iii. 1, 14
rodrov x°-Plv> where words are simi
larly repeated for the sake of emphasis
or distinctness. In 2 Cor. xii. 7 there
is a repetition of tva pv virepalpapai,
where again it is omitted in several
excellent authorities.
2 1 — 23. ' And ye too— ye Gentiles —
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 lived 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
will 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
teaching 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

I. 22]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

227

i%dpovs Ttj Biavoia iv Toh 'epyoi<s Toh irovtjpoh, vvvl Be
diroKaTrjWayriTe ™iv t«j o'wfxari Ttjs crapKOS avTov Bid
21. vvvl Se d7roKaTri\Xof ev.

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. din)XXorpi(op,e'voi/s] 'estranged'
not dXXorpiows, 'strangers'; comp.
Ephes. ii. 12, iv. 18. See the note on
a7roKaraXXd|ai ver. 20.
ixBpovs] 'hostile to God,' as the
consequence of dmjXXoTpi<»p,e'voj/s, 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 reconciled to the sinner : comp.
Rom. V. 10 ei ydp ixBpol ovres Kar^X-
Xdyvpev rd 6e<5 K.rJi.. It is the mind
of man, not the mind of God, which
must undergo a change, that a re
union may be effected.
ttj Siavoia] 'in your mind, intent.'
For the dative of the part affected
compare Ephes. iv. 18 iaKorapivoi rfj
biavola, Luke L 5 1 virepv<pdvovs biavola
Kapbias avrdv. So Kapbia, Kapbiais,
Matt. v. 8, xi. 29, Acts vii. 5 1, 2 Cor.
ix. 7, 1 Thess. ii. 17; 4>peaiv, 1 Cor.
xiv. 20.
e'v rois epyois k.t.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.
vvvl] Here, as frequently, vGv
(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. 11, vii. 6, xi. 30, 31,
xvi. 26, Ephes. ii. 13, iii. 5, 2 Tim. i.
10, 1 Pet. i. 12, ii. 10, 25. In all
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 wpd roG, dairep Xeycu, ev VP*V'
vvvl be bid rrjv dbiKiav biaKioBvpev virb
tov Beov, Isseus de Cleon. her. 20 rdre
pev. . .vvvl be. . .i^ovXrjBv-
diroKarnXXbyvre] 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 dVo-
Kai-7)XXdy77Te or diroKar7jXXa|ev be pre
ferred, the construction requires ex
planation. If diroKar7JXXa£ev be a-
dopted, it is perhaps best to treat
Se as introducing the apodosis, the
foregoing participial clause serving as
the protasis: 'And you, thoughye were
once estranged... yet now hath he
reconciled,' in which case the first
vpus will be governed directly by diro-
KanjXXa^ev; see Winer Gramm. § liii.
p. 553. If this construction be adopted,
irapaarrjaai vpds will describe the re
sult of diroKariJXXalev, 'so as to pre
sent you' ; but d Oeds will still be the
nominative to dn-oKanjXXa^ev as in
2 Cor. v. 19. If on the other hand
dn-oKanjXXdyTjre be taken, it is best to
regard vwl be diroKaTvXXdyvre as a
direct indicative clause substituted
for the more regular participial form
vuvi be diroKaraXXayivras for the sake
of greater emphasis : see the note on
ver. 26 rd diroKeKpvppevov . . .vvv be icpa-
vepdBv- In this case irapaarrjaai will
be governed directly by ed8oK77o-ev,
and will itself govern vpas irbre dvras
k.t.X., the second vpJds 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 vpds, which was
15—2

228

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[L23

tov QavaTOV [cci/'toi/], irapaa,Tr\a,ai vfxas dyiovs Kai d/juo-
juous Kal dveykXtiToi/s KaTevwiriov avTOv, a3ei ye iirijj.e-
i/ere ttj irio~Tei TedefxeXiwfxevoi Kal iBpaloi Kal fxrj jj.eTa-

needed to disentangle the construc
tion, see the note on bi avrov ver.
20. 2 2. rfj s aapKos adroG] 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 nothave 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 rfj aapxl adroG is used rather than
iv r<3 adpan adroG, because adpa
occurs in the context (ver. 16) of
Christ's mystical body. The same
expression, rd adpa rrjs aapKos, which
we have here, occurs also below, ii.
1 1, but with a different emphasis and
meaning. There the emphasis is on
rd adpa, the contrast lying between
the whole body and a single member
(see the note); whereas here 1-77S aap
Kos is the emphatic part of the ex
pression, the antithesis being between
the material and the spiritual. Com
pare also Ecclus. xxiii. 16 dvBpairos
irbpvos e'v adpan aapKos avrov.
Marcion omitted rrjs aapKos as in
consistent with his views, and ex
plained iv ra adpan to mean the
Church. Hence the comment of
Tertullian adv. Marc. v. 19, 'utique
in eo corpore, in quo mori potuit per
carnem, mortuus est, non per eccie-
siam sed propter ecclesiam, corpus
commutando pro corpore, carnale pro
spiritali.'

Trapao-TT/o-ai] If the construction
which I have adopted be correct, this
is said of God Himself, as in 2 Cor.
iv. 14 d iyelpas tov Kvpiov 'I770-0GV Kal
ijpas aiiv 'I770-0G iyepel Kal irapaarrf
aei aiiv vpiv. This construction seems
in all respects preferable to connect
ing Trapaarfjaai directly with djroKa-
rvXXdyvre and interpreting the words,
' Ye have been reconciled. so that ye
should present yourselves (vpds).. -be
fore Him.' This latter interpretation
leaves the Kal vpas irore bvras K.r.X.
without a government, and it gives to
the second vpas a reflexive sense (as
if vpds avrovs Or eavrovs), which is at
least harsh.
dpdpovs] 'without blemish' rather
than ' without blame,' in the language
of the New Testament; see the note
on Ephes. i. 4. It is a sacrificial word,
like re'Xeios, oXokXtjpos, etc. The verb
irapiardvai also is used of presenting
a sacrifice in Rom. xii. 1 trapaaTrjaai
Ta aapara vpav Bvaiav £daav dylav
k.t.X., Lev. xvi. 7 (v. 1.) : comp. Luke
ii. 2.
aveyKX^rous] an advance upon dpd
povs, 'in whom not only no blemish
is found, but against whom no charge
is brought': comp. 1 Tim. vi 14 aon-i-
Xov, dveiriXvpirrov. The word dve'y-
Kkqros occurs again in 1 Cor. i. 8,
1 Tim. iii. 10, Tit. i. 6, 7.
Karevmjriov adroG] ' before Him' i.e.
' Himself,' as in the parallel 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 els avrbv,
ver. 20. But does Karevdmov airov
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 paraUel passage, Ephes.
i. 4, and because Karevdmov, ivdmov,

1.23] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 229
Kivovpievoi diro tjjs iXirtBos tov evayyeXiov ov ^KOvaraTe,
tov Ktipv^devTos iv 7ra<r>j KTio~et Ttj viro tov ovpavov, ov
iyev6jur]v iyoo TlavXos BiaKOvos.

Kare'vavri, etc., are commonly so used ;
e.g. Rom. xiv. 22, 1 Cor. i. 29, 2
Cor. ii. 17, iv. 2, vii. 12, xii. 19,
etc. On the other hand, where the
future judgment is intended, a dif
ferent expression is found, 2 Cor. v.
IO epirpoaBev tov (ivparos tov Xpiarov.
Thus God is here regarded, not as the
judge who tries the accused, but as
the papoaKonos 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, arrjaai Kare-
vairiov tvs Sd^s adroG djidpovs iv
dyaXXidaei, though perhaps referring
to final approval, is too different in
expression to influence the interpre
tation of Paul's language here.
23. et ye] On the force of these par
ticles see Gal. iii. 4. They express a
pure hypothesis in themselves, but
the indicative mood following converts
the hypothesis into a hope.
implvere] 'ye abide by, ye adhere
to,' with a dative; the common con
struction of impiveiv in St Paul : see
the note on Phil. i. 24. In this con
nexion 7-77 iriaret is perhaps 'your
faith,' rather than ' the faith.'
redepeXiapivoi K.r.X.] ' built on a
foundation and so firm' ; not like
the house of the foolish man in the
parable who built x<opls BepeXiov, Luke
vi. 49. For reBepeXiapevot comp.
Ephes. hi 1 7. The consequence of re-
BepeXiapJvoi is eSpaioi : Clem. Rom. 33
77 bpaaev iirl tov da(paXrj tov Ibiov
jSovXriparos BepiXiov. The words
eSpaios, eSpdfco, etc., are not uncom
monly applied to buildings, e.g. ibpai-
apa 1 Tim. iii. 15. Comp. Ign. Ephes.
IO vpeis eSpaioi rfj irlarei.
prj peraKivovpevoi] 'not constantly
shifting,' a present tense; the same
idea as ibpaioi expressed from the ne
gative side, as in 1 Cor. xv. 58 ibpaioi

yiveaBe, dperaKivvroi, Polyc. Phil. IO
' firmi in fide et immutabiles.'
ttjs eXiribos K.r.X.] 'the hope held
out by the Gospel,' roG edayyeXi'ou be-
• ing a subjective genitive, as in Ephes.
i. 18 77 e'Xn-ls rrjs icXijaeas (comp.
iv. 4).
iv irdarj KriVei] ' among every crea
ture,' in fulfilment of the Lord's last
command, Mark xvi. 15 Kvpvgare to
evayyeXiov irdarj rfj KTiaei. Here how
ever the definitive article, though
found in the received text, e'v irday rfj
Krlaei, must be omitted in accordance
with the best authorities. For the
meanings of n-ao-a ktio-is, irdaa v" kti-
ais, see the note on ver. 15. The ex
pression 7rdo-a ktio-is must not be limit
ed to mm The statement is given in
the broadest form, all creation animate
and inanimate being included, as in
Rev. V. 13 irdv KTiapa...Kal rd e'v av-
rois irdvra fjKovaa Xiyovra k.t.X. For
the hyperbole e'v 7rdoT7 Kn'o-ee compare
1 Thess. i. 8 e'v jravrl romp. 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 alike, and to appeal
to its publicity, as the credential and
guarantee of its truth : see the notes
on ver. 6 ev 7ravrl t<3 Koapa and on
Ver. 28 irdvra avBpairov.
ov iyevbpvv K.T.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

230 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [I. 24
a4Niw ya'ipia iv Toh iradnpiacriv virep vfiwv, Kai

- refrain from magnifying it. At the
same time this mention enables him
to link himself in bonds of closer sym
pathy with the Colossians, and he
passes on at once to his relations with
them: comp. Ephes. iii. 2 — 9, 1 Tim.
i. 11 sq, in which latter passage the
introduction of his own name is
equally abrupt.
e'y<o naGXos] i. e. ' weak and unwor
thy as I am': comp. Ephes. iii. 8 e'p.o!
Ta iXaxiarorepa irdvrav dylav.
24 — 27. ' Now when I see the full
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 all the ages and all 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 willed to make
known to them, in all its inexhaustible
wealth thus displayed through the
call of the Gentiles, 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. NOv xalV<°] 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 5s,
which is found in some authorities, is
doubtless the repetition of the final
syllable of Siokovos; 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 parallel in Tim. i. 12 x"P'v 'X"" r<P
ivbvvapdaavrl pe Xpiard k.t.X., where
also the common text inserts a link of
connexion, ko.1 xaPlv *xm K-T-^- Com
pare also 2 Cor. vii. 9 vGv xa'-Pa>i °^X
on k.t.X., where again there is no con
necting particle.
The thought underlying vGv seems
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.'
dvravan-X77p<5] ' I fill up on my part,'
' I supplement.' The single compound
dvairXi7poGv occurs several times (e.g.
1 Cor. xiv. 16, xvi. 17, Gal. vi. 2); an
other double compound irpoo-ava?^-
poGv twice (2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9; comp.
Wisd. xix. 4, v.l.) ; but dvravairX^poGv
- only here in the lxx or New Testa
ment. For this verb compare De-
mosth. de Symm. p. 182 rovrav rdv
avppopidv eKaarvv bieXeiv KeXeiia irevre
pepv Kara bdbeKa avbpas, dvravairXv-
povvras irpbs rbv evrropdrarov del
rovs diropaTarovs (where rods dsropeu-
rdrous should betaken as the subject to
dvrava7rX7)poGvTas), Dion Cass. xliv. 48
iv oaov. ..ivebei, roGro eKrfjs irapd rdv
a X X a v avvreXelas dvravairXvpaBfj,
Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 12 p. 878 od-
tos...ti]V diroaroXiKrjv dirovalav
dvravairXvpoi, Apollon. Constr. Or. i. 3

1.24] dvTavairXriptv Ta vo~Tept]fxa
(p. 13 sq.) 77 dvrovup-ia dvrava7rX7)-
pouo-a Kal rfjv Biaiv toC bvbpjiTos ko.1
rrjv rd|iv roG pvparos, Ptol. Math.
Comp. vi. 9 (1. p. 435 ed. Halma) eVel
S . 77 u-ev iXXelireiv iirolei rrjv diro-
Kardaraaiv v' be irXeovd£eiv Kara
nva avvrvxiav fjv Xaas Kal b "l?T-
7rapxos dvravairXvpovpivvv iras Kara-
vevoTjKei K.r.X. The substantive dvra-
i/airX77po)o-ts occurs in Diog. Laert. x.
48. So too di/Tava7rX7J6'eiv Xen. Hell.
ii. 4. II, 12 £vverd£avTO, dare ipirXrj-
aai tvv 0S0V...01 be dirb rrjs CpvXrjs
dvraveirXvaav -. . .Trjv bbbv. Compare also
dwravio-oGv Themist. Paraphr. Arist.
43 B odSev KoiXdei Kara radrdv aXXotfi
irov p.erafldXXeiv depa els vbap Kal
dvraviaovaBai rbv avpiravra SyKov, and
dvravlaapa Joseph. Ant. xviii. 9. 7.
The meaning of dvrl in this compound
will 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 dvravairXvpovv in St Paul
is often explained as denoting simply
that the supply corresponds in ex
tent to the deficiency. This inter
pretation practically deprives dvrl of
any meaning, for dvairXTjpoCv alone
would denote as much , If indeed the
supply had been the subject of the
verb, and the sentence had run rd
iraBrjpard pou avravaTrXTjpoT ra varrj-
prjpara k.t.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 correspondence 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

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

231

Ta twv dXiyjseouV tov Xpi-
servant to suffer. The right idea has
been seized and is well expressed by
Photius Amphil. 121 (1. p. 709 Migne)
od ydp dirXds (pvaiv ' AvairXvpd, dXX
' AvravairXvpd, rovrianv, 'Avrl SeoTrd-
rov Kal SiSao-KaXou d 80GX0S iyd Kal
padvrrjs k.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 '
(n-epio-o-edeiv) upon the Apostle. The
theological difficulty which this plain
and natural interpretation of dvrava-
irXvpovv is supposed to involve will
be considered in the note on r<Sv
BXlyjreav. rd darep^para] ' the things lack
ing.' This same word varipvpa 'de-
ficiency' occurs with dva7rX77pouv 1 Cor.
xvi. 17, Phil. ii. 30, and with irpoaava-
irXvpovv 2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9. Its direct
opposite is ireplaaevpa 'abundance,
superfluity,' 2 Cor. viii. 13, 14; comp.
Luke xxi. 4. Another interpretation,
which makes varipvpa an antithesis
to irporeprjpa, explaining it ' the later '
as opposed to the earlier 'sufferings of
Christ,' is neither supported by the
usage of the word nor consistent with
avrava7rX77p(5. raiv BXtyeav tov XpioroG] ' of the
afflictions of Christ' i. e. 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 dvrl in
dvravairXvpd 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. cxliL § 3 (iv.p. 1590) 'Patitur,
inquit, adhuc Christus pressuram, non
in came sua in qua ascendit in caelum,

232

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 25

gttov ev Ttj capKi fiov virep tov <rw'u«Tos avTov, 6
eo-nv r\ eKKXtjcria- aJ>Js iyevop.t]v iyw BiaKOVos Kara Ttjv

sed in carne mea qua? 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 al BXtyeis roG Xpio-roG.
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 prepo
sition in dvTavairXrjpd of any force.
The central idea in this interpretation
is the identification of the suffering
Apostle with the suffering Christ,
whereas dvravairXrjpd 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 full perfect and
sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satis
faction for the sins of the whole
world. In this sense there could
be no varipvpa 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 rod aravpov (i. 20, Eph. ii.
1 6 etc.), or rod Bavdrov (i. 22, Rom.
v. 10, Heb. ii. 14, etc.), but hardly
r<ov BXtyeav. Indeed BXtyis, '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.
X2) From the latter point of view
it is a simple matter of fact that the
afflictions of every saint and mar
tyr do supplement the 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. Tbey bear their part
in the sufferings of Christ (2 Cor. i. 7
Koivavol rdv iraBvpdrav, Phil. iii. IO
Koiyavlav rdv iraBvpdrav) ; but St Paid
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 all- the va
repvpara, but only that they went to
wards filling them up. The present
tense dvravairXvpd denotes an incho
ate, and not a complete act. These
varepvpara will never be fully supple
mented, until the struggle of the
Church with sin and unbelief 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 comment
ators, 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
teaching, have been tempted to wrest
the sense of the words. They have
emptied dvravan-XrjptS of its proper
force ; or they have assigned a false
meaning to varepvpara ; or they have
attached a non-natural sense to the
genitive rod XpioroG. (2) On the

1.26]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

233

oiKOvo/uLiav tov Qeov Ttjv BodeHa-dv fioi eh vfj.ds, irXripwo-ai
tov Xoyov tov Qeov, s6to jUvaTtipiov to diroKeKpvfXfxtvov

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 impium est sen-
tire, quodque Catholicos dicere non
minus impie calumniantur hseretici.'
It is no part of a commentator here
to enquire generally 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 Pauline
doctrine. It is only fair to add how
ever that Estius himself says, 'quse
quidem doctrina, etsi Catholica et
Apostolica sit, atque aliunde satis
probetur, ex hoc tamen Apostoli loco
nobis non videtur admodum solide
statui posse.' But Roman Catholic
commentators generaUy find this
meaning in the text, as may be seen
from the notes of k Lapide.
rod adpaTos adroG] An antithesis
of the Apostle's own flesh and Christ's
body. This antithetical form of ex
pression obliges St Paul to explain
what he means by the body of Christ,

o e'o-Tiv 77 iKKXvala ; comp. ver. 18.
Contrast the explanation in ver.-22 e'v
rd adpan rrjs aapKos avrov, and see
the note there.
25. tvv olKovoplav K.r.X.] ' steward
ship in the house of God.' The word
olKovopla 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 1 Cor. ix. 17 olKovoplav ireirl-
arevpai, Luke xvi. 2 — 4, Isaiah xxii.
19, 21. So the Apostles and minis
ters of the Church are called ohovbpoi,
1 Cor. iv. 1, 2, Tit. i. 7 : comp. 1 Pet.
iv. 10.
eis dpas] ' to youward,' i. e. ' for
the benefit of you, the Gentiles '; eis
vpHs being connected with rfjv Soo'ei-
adv /iot, as in Ephes. iii. 2 r^v oikovo-
plav Trjs xdpiros roG OeoG ttjs boBeiavs
poi eis vpas; comp. Rom. xv. 16 Sid
rrjv xdplv TVV boBeladv poi virb rov
OeoG eis to elvai pe Xenovpybv Xpia-
tov 'It)o-oG eis rd edvv-
irXvpdaai] ' to fulfil,' i.e. ' to preach
fully,' 'to give its complete develop
ment to'; as Rom. XV. 19 (acre pe
a7rd 'lepovaaXfjp Kal kvkXco pixP1 T°d
'iXXupiKoC ireirXvpaKivat rb evayyeXiov
rov Xpio-roG. 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
plish the promise of God,' though
suggested by such passages as 1 Kings
ii. 27 irXvpaBrjvai to pijpa Kvplov,
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21 irXvpaBrjvai Xbyov
Kvplov, etc., is alien to the context
here. 26. rd pvo-TTJpiov] This is not the
only term borrowed from the ancient
mysteries, which St Paid employs to
describe the teaching of the Gospel.

234

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[I. 27.

diro twv aicovcov Kal diro twv yeve^v, vvv Be itpavepwdt]
Toh dyiois avTov, a? ois tj6eXtjo~ev 6 Geos yvwpio'di ti
TO irX0VT0S TJJS Bo^tjS TOV /JLVO-Trjp'lOV TOVTOV iv TOiS

The word riXeiov just below, ver. 28,
seems to be an extension of the same
metaphor. In Phil. iv. 12 again we
have the verb pepivpai : and in Ephes.
i. 14 o(ppayl£ea8ai is perhaps an image
derived from the same source. So
too the Ephesians are addressed as
IEadXou avppvarai in Ign. Ephes. 12.
The Christian teacher is thus regarded
as a lepocpdvnjs (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
harrow 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 n-dvra &v8pa-
7rov riXeiov below.
Thus the idea of secresy or reserve
disappears when pvarrjpwv 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 of the 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 pvarvpiov is almost
universally found in connexion with
words denoting revelation or publica
tion ; e. g. diroKaXvirteiv, diroKaXv^ns,
Rom. xvi. 25, Ephes. iii. 3, 5, 2 Thess.
ii. 7 ; yvapi^eiv Rom. xvi. 26, Ephes. i.
9, iii. 3, 10, vi. 19 ; (pavepovv Col. iv. 3,
Rom. xvi. 26, 1 Tim. iii. 16; XaXeiv iv.
3, 1 Cor. ii. 7, xiv, 2 ; Xiyeiv, 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 privi
leges of the covenant. For 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, ii.
2 sq., Ephes. i. 6 sq., iii. 8 sq.). In one
passage only throughout these two
epistles is pvar-npiov applied to any
thing else, Ephes. v. 32. The same
idea of the pvarvpiov 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. pvarvpiov....
els viraKofjv iriareas els irdvra rd 'iBirrj
yvapiaBevros. dirb rdv aldvav k.t.X.] The pre
position is doubtless temporal here,
being opposed to vGv, as in the pa
rallel passage, Ephes. iii. 9 : comp.
Rom. xvi. 25 Kara diroKaXvyjriv pvarv
piov xpovois alavlois aeaiyvpevov,
I Cor. ii. 7 OeoG aocpiav iv pvarvpia
rrjv airOKCKpvppevrjv 77V irpodptaev b
Qebs irpb rdv aldvav. So too a7r'
aioivos, Acts iii. 21, xv. 18, Ps. xcii.
3, etc.; dird KarafioXfjs Koapov, Matt.
xiii. 35, xxv. 34, etc.
rwv yevetov] An aldv is made up of
manyyeveai; comp. Ephes. iii. 21 els
iraaas ras yeveds roG ai<Svos rdv ald
vav, Is. Ii. 9 as yeved aldvos (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.

I. 28]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

235

'euveo'iv, 6 io~Tiv Xpi&Tos iv vjmv, t] iXirh tjjs 5J£»j8'
' bv rjjueh KaTayyeXXo/Jtev vovde-rovvTes irdvTa dvdpto-
27. 6's itmv.
viiv Se k.tA.] 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 vuvl Se diro-
KaTTjXXdyr/re, and see Winer § lxiii. p. 7 1 7 .
27. ?7'/3e'X77o-ev] 'willed," was pleased.'
It was God's grace : it was no merit
of their own. See the note on i. 1
81a BeXvparos OeoG.
rd 7rXoGros] 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,
iii. 8, 16 j comp. Rom. xi. 33. See
above p. 43 sq. St Paul uses the
neuter and the masculine forms in
differently in these epistles (e.g. rd
irXoGros Ephes. i 7, d itXoGtos Ephes.
i. 18), as in his other letters (e.g. to
itXovtos 2 Cor. viii. 2, d wXoGros Rom.

irXeov e'v rodrois 77 7roXX^ toC pvarvpiov
bb£a. Here too was its wealth; for
it overflowed all barriers of caste or
race. Judaism was 'beggarly' (Gal.
iv. 9) in comparison, since its treasures
sufficed only for a few.
o eo-Tiv] The antecedent is pro
bably roG pvarvpiov; comp. ii. 2 rod
pvarvpiov rov OeoG, XpioroG ev a elaiv
irdvres k.t.X.
Xpiarbs iv vpiv] ' Christ in you,'
i.e. 'you Gentiles.' Not Christ, but
Christ given freely to the Gentiles,
is the ' mystery ' of which St Paul
speaks; see the note on pvarvpiov
above. Thus the various reading, os
for o, though highly supported, inter
feres with the sense. With Xpiarbs
iv vpiv compare peB' vpdv Qebs Matt.
i. 23. It may be a question however,
whether iv vpiv means ' within you '

ix. 23). In most passages however ,;; -or 'among you.' The former is per-

there are various readings. On the
neuter forms rd irXoGros, to £rjXos, etc.,
see Winer § ix. p. 76.
ttjs Sd^s] i.e. 'of the glorious
manifestation.' This word in Hel
lenistic Greek is frequently used of a
bright fight; e.g. Luke ii. 9 irepiiXap-
TJrev, Acts xxii II toG (parbs, 1 Cor.
xv. 41 tJXi'ou, aeXvvrjs, etc. 2 Cor. iii. 7
roG irpoaairov \M.avaeas]. Hence it
is applied generally 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 u-XoGtos
rfjs So^tjs occurs again, Rom. ix. 23,
Ephes. i 18, iii 16. See above ver.
1 1 with the note.
iv rois eBveaiv] i.e. '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; (palverai piv ydp Kal iv ere-
pois, writes Chrysostom, jroXXdi be

haps the more probable interpreta
tion, as suggested by Rom. viii. 10,
2 Cor. xiii. 5, Gal. iv. 19; comp.
Ephes. iii. 17 KaroiKijaai rbv Xpiarbv
bid tvs m' areas iv rais Kapbiais vpdv.
n iXiris] comp. 1 Tim. i. 2; so 77
[koivt)] eXirls rjpdv Ign. Eph. 21, Magn.
Philad. 5, etc., applied to our Lord.
28, 29. ' This Christ we, the Apo
stles and Evangelists, 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. vpels] ' we,' the preachers ; the
same opposition as in 1 Cor. iv. 8, 10,

236

A'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

¦\ [I. 28

irov Kal BiBao~KOVTe$ irdvTa dvQptairov iv iraart] o~o(pia,
iva irapaomTt]crwiJLev iravTa dvQpwirov TeXeiov iv XpiCTio'

ix. 11, 2 Cor. xiii. 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.
dv impels k.t.X.] as in St Paul's own
language at Thessalonica, Acts xvii. 3
ov iyd KarayyeXXa vpiv, and at
Athens, Acts xvii. 23 tovto iyd Ka
rayyeXXa vpiv, in both which pas
sages, as here, emphasis is laid on the
person of the preacher.
vou#eToGvres] 'admonishing.' The
two words vovBerelv and bibaaKeiv pre
sent complementary aspects of the
preacher's duty, and are related the
one to the other, as perdvoia to irlans,
>' warning to repent, instructing in
the faith.' For the relation of vovBerelv
to perdvoia see Plut. Mor. p. 68 evean
rb vovBerovv Kai perdvoiav ipiroiovv,
p. 452 V vovdeala Kal b -v/zdyos ipiroiei
perdvoiav Kal alaxvmjv. The two verbs
vovBerelv and 8i8do-Keiv are connected
in Plato Prolog. 323 d, Legg. 845 b,
Plut. Mor. p. 46 (comp. p. 39), Dion
Chrys. Or. xxxiii. p. 369; the sub
stantives bibaxv and vovBenjais in
Plato Resp. 399 b. Similarly vovBe
relv and irelBeiv 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 biapapTvpbpevos...rrjv els
Qeov perdvoiav Kai irlariv els rbv
Kdpiov vpdv 'ivaovv.
irdvra dvBpairov] three times re-
/¦ peated for the sake of emphasizing
the universality of the Gospel. This
great truth, for which St Paul gave
his life, was now again endangered
by the doctrine of an intellectual ex
clusiveness taught by the Gnosticizers
at Colossse, as before it had been
endangered by the doctrine of a

ceremonial exclusiveness taught by
the Judaizers in Galatia. See above'
pp. tj, 92, 98 sq. For the repetition
of 7rdvra compare especially 1 Cor. x.
1 sq, where 7rdvres 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 iravra dv
Bpairov in one place or other.
e'v 77-00-77 o-oqSi'a] The Gnostic spoke
of a blind faith for the many, of a
higher yv<So-is for the few. St Paul
declares that the fullest wisdom is
offered to all alike. The character of
the teaching is as free from restriction,
as are the qualifications of the recipi
ents. Comp. ii. 2, 3 ttov irXovros rijs
irXvpocpopias rfjs avveaeas-.irdvres ol
Bvaavpol rrjs ao(pias Kai yvdaeas.
Ttapaarrjaapev] See the note on
irapaarrjaai, ver. 22.
re'Xeiov] So I Cor. ii. 6, 7 aocplav be
XaXovpev iv rois reXeiois.-.O'eoG ao
cplav iv pvarrjpla rrjv diroKeKpvppivvv.
In both these passages the epithet
re'Xeios 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 Phmdr.
249 C reXeous del reXerds reXovpevos
reXeos ovtois /idvos yiyverai. ..250 B, C
eiSdv re Kal eVeXoGvro reXeraJv t^v Bipis
Xeyeiv paKapiardrvv. . .pvovpevol re Kai
e7T07rret;ovres e'v avyfj KaBapq, Symp.
209 B TaGra...Kav ail pvvdeirjs' rd be
reXea Kal iiroirriKa. . .ovk 018' el olbs r
av e'trjs, Plut. Fragm. de An. vi. 2
(v. p. 726 Wyttenb.) d iravreXrjs 77877
koi pepvvpivos (with^ the context),
Dion Chrys. Or. xii. p. 203 rr;v 0X0-
KXvpov Kai rdi dvrl reXeiav TeXerr/v
pvovpevov; see Valcknaer on Eurip.
Hippol.2 5, and. LobeckAglaoph.p.33
sq., p. 1 26 sq. Somewhat similarly in

1.29]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

237

a9ets 6 Kai KOiriw dyiovi^o/uevo? KaTa Ttjv ivepyeiav av-
tov Ttjv ivepyov[xevr\v iv ifxol iv Bwd/nei.

the lxx 1 Chron. xxv. 8 TeXeiW koi
pavBavbvrav stands for ' the teachers
(or the wise) and the scholars.' So
also in 2 Pet. i. 16 «' iron-rat yevrjdivres
•njs iKeivov peyaXeidrTjros we seem to
have the same metaphor. As an illus
tration it may be mentioned that
Plato and Aristotle called the higher
philosophy iiroirriKov, because those
who have transcended the bounds
of the material, oidv e'vreXfj [L e'v re-
Xerfj] re'Xos e^eiv oiiXocroobiav [qbiXoo-o-
oSias] 1/op.i'fovo-i, Plut. Mor. 382 D, E.
For other metaphorical expressions
in St Paul, derived from the myste
ries, see above on pvo-njpiov ver. 26.
,. Influenced probably by this heathen
use of re'Xeios, the early Christians
applied it to the baptized, as opposed
to the catechumens: e.g. Justin Dial.
8 (p. 225 c) rrdpeanv imyvbvn aoi rbv
Xpiarbv tov Qeov Kal reXelco yevopiva
evbaipoveiv, Clem. Horn. iii. 29 viroxa-
peiv pot KeXedoxts, as p.rjira> eiXv<pbn rd
7rpds aarvpiav fiairrtapa, rots 17877 re-
Xeiois e(pv K.rA., xi 36 fiairriaas. . .7S77
Xotirdv re'Xeiov ovra K.r.X.; and for
later writers see Suicer Thes. s. w. re-
Xeiba, reXeiaais. 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<3o-is from the vulgar
herd of believers : see the passages
quoted in the note on Phil. 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 believer is re-

Xetos, for he has been admitted as
iirbirrvs of its most profound, most
awful, secrets. See again the note
on diroKpvtpoi, ii. 3.
29. els b] i.e. els rd 7rapao-T7}o"ai irdvra
avBpairov re'Xeiov, ' 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.
kotticS] This word is used especi
ally of the labour undergone by«*the
athlete in his training, and therefore
fitly introduces the metaphor of dyi»-
vifdpevos : comp. 1 Tim. iv. 10 els tov
to yap Komdpev Kal dyavi£bpe8a (the
correct reading), and see the passages
quoted on Phil. ii. 16.
dycavifdpevos] 'contending in the
lists,' the metaphor being continued
in the next verse (ii. 1), tJXikov dy<3va;
comp. iv. 12. These words aytov, dyo>-
vla, dyavi(ea8cu, 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 vpds to
evayyiXiov rov OeoG ev iroXXiS aydvi.
ivepyovpimjv] Comp. Eph. iii. 20. For
the difference between ivepyeiv and
ivepyeiaBai 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 you know that my
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,
like yourselves, have never met me
face to face in the flesh. I am con
stantly wrestling in spirit, that the

238

EPISTLE TO THE CQLOSSIANS.

[IL i, 2

II. IQeXw ydp u/uas elBevai, tjX'iKOV dywva e%fc) virep

vfxtov Kai twv ev

AaoB,

ikiol Kai 00-01 ov% ewpaKav to

7rpocrcoirov /mov iv crapKi, "'iva irapaKXtjdwo'iv al KapBiai

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 all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge hidden away.'
i. Oe'Xib K.r.X.] as in i Cor. xi. 3.
The corresponding negative form, ov
6e%a [BeXopev] vpas 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.
dywva] The arena of the contest to
which dyavi(bpevos in the preceding
verse refers may be either outward or
inward. It will include the 'fightings
without,' as well as the ' fears within.'
Here however the inward struggle,
the wrestling in prayer, is the predo
minant idea, as in iv. 12 irdvrore dycavi-
fdpevos virep dprav e'v rats irpoaevxais
tva OTaBijre k.t.X.
rdv iv AaoSiKi'a] The Laodiceans
were exposed to the same doctrinal
perils as the Colossians: see above
j>p. 2, 41 sq. The Hierapohtans are
doubtless included in Kal do-01 K.r.X.
(comp. iv. 13), but are not mentioned
here by name, probably because they
were less closely connected with Co
lossse (see iv. 15 sq.), and perhaps also
because the danger was less threaten
ing there.
Kal 6V01 K.r.X.] 'and all who, like
yourselves, have not seen, etc.'; where
the ko.1 00-01 introduces the whole class
to which the persons previously enu
merated belong; so Acts iv. 6 "Awas
d dpxiepeiis Kal Kaiafl^as Kai laavvvs Kal
'AXe£avbpos Kal baoi 770-av eV yevovs
dpx'epariKoG, Rev. xviii. 17 Kal jrds ku-
/3epv7)T77s Kal irds b iirl rbirov irXiav Kal

vaGrai Kal oaoi rrjv BaXaaaav epya£ov-
rai. Even a simple Kal will sometimes
introduce the general after the parti
cular, e.g. Acts V. 29 d Uerpos Kal ol
dirboroXoi, Ar. Nub. 413 e'v 'Advvaiois
ko.1 rois "EXX770-1, etc. ; see Kiihner
Gramm. §521,11. p. 791. On the other
hand koi oaoi, occurring in an enume-
ration,sometimes introduces a different
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 implies 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 koi 00-01 is
quite out of place, unless the Colos
sians and Laodiceans also were per
sonally unknown to the Apostle. There
would be no meaning in singling
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
Colossse — 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.
e'mpaKav] For this ending of the 3rd
pers. plur. perfect in -av see Winer
§ xiii. p. 90. The received text reads
iapaKaai. In this passage the a form
has the higher support; but below
in ver. 18 the preponderance of au
thority favours ibpaKev rather than
e'aipaKev. On the use of the form in o
see Buttmann Ausf. Griech. Sprachl.
§ 84, 1. p. 325.
2. ira.paKX77&3o-iv] ' 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.

239

avTwv, <rvpipir3aar6evTe<i iv dydirtj Kal eh irdv ttXovtos
tjjs irXripotpopias Ttjs cvveaeios, eh iiriyv(oo~iv tov fxv-
a-Ttjpiov tov Qeov, Xpio-Tov 3 iv 10 elclv irdvTes 01 Qv\-

dern and restricted sense : see irapd-
kXt/o-is Phil. ii. I. For 7rapaKaXeiv rds
Kapbias comp. iv. 8, Ephes. vi. 22, 2
Thess. ii. 17.
al Kapblai] They met the Apostle
heart to heart, though not face to
face. We have here the same oppo
sition of Kapbia and irpbaairov as in
1 Thess. ii. 17, though less directly
expressed ; see ver. 5.
avrav] where we should expect
dptav, but the substitution of the third
person for the second is suggested by
the immediately preceding koI 00-01.
This substitution confirms the inter
pretation of koI 00-01 already given.
Unless the Colossians are included in
00-01, they must be excluded by avrdv.
Yet this exclusion is hardly conceiva
ble in such a context.
o-v/ij3i/3ao-6,e'vTes] ' they being'united,
compacted] for o-up|3i/3dfeiv must here
have its common meaning, as it has
elsewhere in this and the companion
epistle: ver. 19 Sid r<Sv dcpdv Kal
avvbiapav. . .avp/3ijSa£bpevov, Ephes. iv.
16 irdv rd adpa avvappoXoyovpevov Kal
avpfiifia^bpevov. Otherwise we might
be disposed to assign to this verb here
the sense which it always bears in the
lxx (e.g. in Is. xl. 13, 14, quoted
in 1 Cor. ii. 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 avpfiifidfav
' proving,' xvi. 10 ovpfiifid£avTes ' con
cluding'; and so in xix. 33 o-uve/3i/3a-
aav 'AXi^avbpov (the best supported
reading) can only mean 'instructed
Alexander.' For the different sense
of the nominative absolute see the
note on iii. 16. The received text
substitutes avpfiifiaaBevTav here.
e'v dydirrj] for love is the avvbeapos
(iii. 14) of perfection.
Kal eis] 'and brought unto,' the
thought being supplied from the pre

ceding avpfiifiaaBevTes, which involves
an idea of motion, comp. Joh xx. 7
evrervXiypevov els eva rbirov.
irdv irXoGros] This reading is better t
supported than either irdv rd n-XoGros
or irdvra irXoGrov, while, as the inter
mediate reading, it also explains the
other two.
rrjs irXvpocpopias] ' 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 irXvpocpoplq. iroXXfj, Heb.
vi. 1 1 7rpds T77V irXvpocpopiav rrjs iXiribos,
X. 22 e'v irXvpocpoplq. iriareas, comp.
Clem. Rom. 42 perd irXvpotpoplas irvev-
paros dyiov. 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 ireirXv
pocaopvpevoi below, iv. 12.
eVi'yvoicriv] See the note on i. 9.
roG pvarvpiov K.r.X.] ' the mystery
of God, even Christ in whom, etc.,'
Xpio-roG being in apposition with roG !
pvarvpiov ; comp. i. 27 roG pvarvpiov
tovtov... o ianv Xpiarbs iv vpiv, I Tim.
hi. 16 rd rfjs evaefieias pvarvpiov, "Os
i(pavepaBrj k.t.X. The reason? for adopt
ing the reading roG OeoG XpioroG are
gi^en in the detached note on various
readings. Other interpretations of this
reading are; (1) 'the God Christ,'
taking Xpio-roG in apposition with
OeoG; or (2) 'the God of Christ,'
making it the genitive after OeoG :
but both expressions are without a
parallel 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
Xpiarbs iv vpiv. For the form of the
sentence comp. Ephes. iv. 15, 16 7) Ke<£>-
0X77, Xpiarbs e'£ oi irdv to adpa K.r.X.
3. irdvres] So irdv irXoiiTos ver. 2,
170077 aocjiia ii. 28. These repetitions

240

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 4

aavpol Ttjs o~o(j)tas Kal yvwarews diroKpvcpoi. 4 tovto

serve to emphasize the character of
the Gospel, which is as complete in
itself, as it is universal in its ap
plication. aocplas Kal yvdaeas] The two words
occur together again Rom. xi. 33 a
(3d8os irXovrov Kal aocpias Kal yvdaeas
Qeov, 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 nD3n is repre
sented by o-ooii'a and njn by yvc5o-is.
'While yv<5o-is is simply intuitive,
aorpia is ratiocinative also. While
yvi£o-is applies chiefly to the appre
hension of truths, ao(pia superadds the
power of reasoning about them and
tracing their relations. When Bengel
on 1 Cor. xii. 8 sq. says, 'Cognitio
[yv<So-is] est quasi visus ; sapientia
[o-oqSi'a] 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-ooSi'av],
ad actionem scientiam [yv<So-iv] perti-
nere...quod alia [aorpia] sit intellec-
tualis cognitio aeternarum rerum, alia
[yv<3o-ts]rationalistemporalium'(comp. xiv.- 3, p. 948), and again de Div.
Qucest. ad Simpl. ii. 2 § 3 (vi. p. 114)
' ita discerni probabiliter solent, ut
sapientia pertineat ad intellectum
seternorum, scientia vero ad ea quse
sensibus corporis experimur.' This is
directly opposed to usage. In Aris
totle Eth. Nic. i. 1 yvoio-is is opposed
to irpd^is. In St Paul it is connected
with the apprehension of eternal mys
teries, I Cor. xiii. 2 eiSco rd pvarrj-
pia irdvra Kal irdaav rrjv yvdaiv. On
the relation of aoqjia to avveais see
above, i. 9.
dn-OKpuoioi] So I Cor. i. 7 XaXoGpev
OeoG aocplav iv ¦ pvarvpia, rrjv diro-
KeKpvppevvv. As before in re'Xeios

(i. 28), so here again in diroKpvrpoi the
Apostle adopts a favourite term of
the Gnostic teachers, only that he may
refute a favourite doctrine. The word
apocrypha was especially applied to
those esoteric writings, for which
such sectarians claimed an auctoritas
secreta (Aug. c. Faust, xi. 2, viii. p.
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 dpvBvrov TrXfj8os diroKpvcpav Kai
vbBav ypaq^dv, Clem. Alex. Strom, i.
15 (p. 357) /3i'/3Xovs diroKpvcpovs rdv-
bpbs rovbe ol rrjv UpoblKOv penbvres
aipeaiv aiixovai KeKTtjaBai, ib. iii. 4
(p. 524) ippvv Se adrois rd 8dypa ck
nvos diroKpvcpov. See also the appli
cation of the text Prov. ix. 17 dprav
Kpvdyiav rjbeas d^raaBe to these heretics
in Strom.i. 19 (p. 375). Thus the word
apocrypha in the first instance was
an honourable appellation applied 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 Karaxpv<rriKas, as he uses
pvarvpiov. ' 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 dirb-
Kpvcbos 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
of the 'treasure'; e.g. Is. xiv. 3 bdaa
aot Bvaavpovs aKoreivovs diroKpv(povs,
I Mace. i. 23 eXa(3e rods Bvaavpoiis
roiis drroKpv(povs, Dan xi. 43 '" T0'f

II. 5]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

241

Xeyw, tva fitjBeh v/nds irapaXoyityjTai iv iriBavoXoyia'
5 el yap Kai Ttj capKl direi/mi, dXXd too irvevpiaTi crvv

airoKpvrpois tov xpvo-oG Kal roG dpyvpov :
comp. Matt. xiii. 44.
The stress thus laid on diroKpvqSoi
will explain its -position. It is not
connected with eio-iv, but must be
taken apart as a secondary predicate :
COmp. ver. IO e'o-re e'v avrat ,ir*7rX77pav-
pivoi, iii. I oij d Xpiarbs e'oriv e'v bet-ia
tov OeoG Kadnpevos, James i. 17 irdv
bapvpa re'Xeiov dvaB.ev ianv, Karaj3ai-
vov K.r.X.
4-^-7. ' I do not say this without a
purpose. I wish to warn you against
any 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 solid 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
still in Him as heretofore. I 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, while 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. roGro Xeyia K.rA.] ' I Say all
this to you, lest you should be led
astray by those false teachers who
speak of another knowledge, of other
mysteries.' In other connexions roG-
ro Xeya will frequently refer to the
words following (e.g. Gal. iii. 17, 1 Cor.
i. 12); but with tva it points to what
has gone before, as in Joh. v. 34 raGra
Xe'yai tva vpeis aaBfjre.
The reference in roGro Xe'ya extends
over vv. 1 — 3, and involves two state-
COL.

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 Kal ttj
aapKi K.r.X.
irapaXoyi'fTjrai] ' lead .you astray by
false reasoning', as in Daniel xiv. 7
pvbels ae jrapaXoyi^iaBa (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 d>tXoao(pla (ver. 8)
and had a Xdyov ao(plas (ver. 23).
e'v mBavoXoyla] The words jriBavo-
Xoyeiv (Arist. Eth. Nic. i. 1), mdavoXo-
yia (Plat. Thecet. 162 e), irio'avoXoyi-
kos (Epictet. i. 8. 7), occur occasion
ally in classical writers, but do not
bear a bad sense, being most fre
quently opposed to dirbbei^is, as pro
bable argument to strict mathemati
cal demonstration. ' This contrast pro
bably suggested St Paul's language in
I Cor. ii. 4 ovk iv ire idols aocpias Xb-
yois aXX iv airobel£ei irvevparos
k.t.X., and may possibly have been
present to his mind here.
5. dXXd] frequently introduces the
apodosis after el or ei koi in St Paul ;
e.g. Rom. vi. 5, 1 Cor. ix. 2, 2 Cor. iv.
16, v. 16, xi. 6, xiii. 4 (v. 1.).
ra) irvedpan] '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
djrtov rd adpan, irapdv be rip irvevpan.
St Paul elsewhere uses another anti
thesis, irpoadira and Kapbla, to express
this same thing; i Thess. ii. 17.
Xalpav Kal jSXeirav] '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,
16

242

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 6

v/uuv elfx'i, xaipwv Kai tSXeirwv v/uodv Tt\v Ta^iv Kal to
o-Tepewfxa Ttjs eh Xpierrov Trio-Tews v/utcov. 6tos ovv irapr-
eXa/3eTe tov Xpio-Tov, 'Ititrovv tov Kvpiov, iv avTw irepi-

was afterwards the consequence, of
the Apostle's rejoicing. He looked,
because it gave him satisfaction to
look. T77V rd£iv] ' your orderly array ', a
military metaphor : comp. e.g. Xen.
Anab. i. 2. 18 Ibovaa rfjv Xapirpbrvra
Kal rvv rd£iv roG arparevparos iBav-
paae, Plut. Vit. Pyrrh. 16 Kanbdv
ra£iv re Kal (pvXaKas Kal Koapov avrav
Kal to axvpa rrjs arparoirebelas idav-
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 arepeapa] 'solid front, close
phalanx', a continuation of the me
taphor : comp. 1 Mace. ix. 14 e'Sev
'lod8as on BaKxibvs Kal to arepeapa
rijs irapepftoXrjs iv rots be^iols. Some
what similar are the expressions ore-
peovv rbv irbXepov I Mace. X. 50, Kara
rrjv arepeaatv ttjs pdxv? Ecclus. xxviii.
10. For the connexion here compare
I Pet. V. 9 avrlarvre orepeol rfj iriarei,
Acts xvi. 5 iarepeovvro rfj iriarei.
6. as ow irapeXd/3ere K.r.X.] i. e.
' 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 itapeXdfiere ' ye received from your
teachers, tgere instructed in', comp.
I Cor. xv. I, 3, Gal. i. 9, Phil. iv. 9,
I Thess. ii. 13, iv. I, 2 Thess. iii. 6.
The word irapaXapfidveiv implies either
'to receive as transmitted', or 'to re
ceive for transmission' : see the note
on Gal. i. 12. The as of the protasis
suggests a oijrag in the apodosis, which
in this case is unexpressed but must
be understood. The meaning of ds

irapeXdfiere hero is explained by the
KaBds ipddere dirb 'Eiracppd in i. 7 ; see
the note there, and convp. below ver. 7
KaBas ibibdxBrjre.
rbv Xpiorbv] 'the Christ', rather
than 'the Gospel', because the central
point in the Colossian heresy was the
subversion of the true idea of the
Christ. 'hjaoiiv rbv Kvpiov] ' even JeSUS the
Lord', in whom the true conception
of the Christ is realised : comp. Ephes.
iv. 20, 21, dpeis 8e' odx odrias ipABere
rbv Xpiarbv, e'iye avrbv TjKovaare Kal
e'v avrd ibibdxBvre, KaBas ianv dXij-
Beia iv rd 'I770-0G, 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
e'v ™ Xpiard 'Ivaov ri5 Kvpia v'pdv
(the correct reading).
7. e'ppifcope'vot] Two points may
be noticed here; (1) The expressive
change of tenses ; ippifapivoi ' firmly
rooted' once for all, iirotKobopovpevoi,
fiefiaiobpevot, ' built up and strength
ened' from hour to hour. (2) The
rapid transition of metaphor, irept-
rt-aretre, ippifapivoi, iiroiKobopovpevoi,
the path, the tree, the building: comp.
Ephes. iii. 17 ippigapevoi Kal reBepe-
Xiapevoi. The metaphors of the plant
and the building occur together in
I Cor. iii. 9 OeoG yedpyiov, OeoG oiko-
SopTJ. The transition in this passage
is made easier by the fact that pifoGv
(Plut. Mor. 321 d), eVpifoGv (Jer. i. 10,
1 Mace. v. 51), irpdppifos (Jos. B. J.
vii. 8. 7), etc., are not uncommonly
used of cities and buildings.

II. 7] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 243-
iraTelTe, ^ippi^wfievoi Kal iirotKoBo/jioviuievot iv avTw Kal
ftej3aiovfj.evoi Ttj ir'io~Tei, Kadws iStBdxdtiTe, irepicro~ev-
ovres ev avTtj iv evxapto-Tia.

iirotKobopovpevot] ' being built up,'
as in 1 Cor. iii. 10 — 14. After this
verb we might have expected eV
avrd or iir adrdv (1 Cor. iii. 12)
rather than e'v avrd; but in this
and the companion epistle Christ is
represented rather as the binding
element than as the foundation of the
building : e. g. Ephes. ii. 20 iiroiKobo-
PVoevres iirl rd BepeXla rdv diroarbXav
Kal irpocpvrav, Svros aKpoyavialnv
avTov Xpiarov 'bjaov, iv a irdaa [77]
o'lKoboprj Qd£ei eis vadv dyiov e'v Kvpia,
iv a Kal vpeis avvoiKobopeloBe. The
e'irl in iiroiKobopeiv 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.]i?/W. ad Alex.
4 (p- 1426) iiroiKobopovvra rb erepov ds
iirl rb erepov av^eiv. Hence eVoiKo-
SopeTv is frequently used absolutely,
'to build up' (e.g. Jude 20, Polyb.
iii. 27, 4), as here. The repetition of
e'v avrd emphasizes the main idea of
the passage, and indeed of the whole
epistle. ttj 7riVret] 'by your faith', the
dative of the instrument ; comp. Heb.
xiii. 9 KaXov yap xdpm (SefiaiovoBai
tt)v Kapbiav. Faith is, as it were, the
cement of the building : comp. Clem.
Rom. 22 raGra irdvra /3e/3aio7 77' e'v
Xpiard iriaris.
KaBds ibibdxBvre] 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 *'" dXvBeiq, KaBds ipaBere dirb
'Eiraqipa. iv avrjj k.t.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 generally, see the note

on Phil. iv. 6. The words edxdpio-ros,
edxapitrreiv, evxapiaria, occur in St
Paul's writings alone of the Apostolic
epistles. In this epistle especially the '
duty of thanksgiving assumes a pe
culiar 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 fall a prey to
certain persons who would lead you
captive by a hollow and deceitful
system, which they call philosophy.
They substitute the traditions of men
for the truth of God. They enforce
an elementary discipline 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 will.
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
theuncircumcisionofyourunchastened
carnal heathen heart — even you did
16— 2

244 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [II. 8
8B\e7reTe fitj tis v/uds ecrTai 6 avXayboywv Bid
8. prj ris ijrai vpas.

God quicken into life together with
Christ; then and there freely for
giving all of us — Jews and Gentiles
alike — all our transgressions ; then and
there cancelling the bond « hich stood
valid 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. Ay,
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 evil 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. BXeWe k.t.X.] The form of the
sentence is a measure of the imminence
of the peril. The usual construction
with fiXeireiv prj is a conjunctive; e.g.
in Luke xxi. 8 fiXiirere prj irXavvBfJTe.
Here the substitution of an indicative
shows that the danger is real ; comp.
Heb. iii. 12 /3Xeirere prJjTOTe carat ev
tivi vpdv Kapbia irovrjpd dirtarias. For
other instances of prj with a future
indicative comp. Mark xiv. 2 prjirore
earai Bbpvfios, Rom. xi. 21 prjiras ovbe
aov (pelaerai ; and see Winer § lvi. p.
631 sq.
tie] This indefinite tis is frequently
used by St Paul, when speaking of
opponents whom he knows well
enough but does not care to name :
see the note on Gal. i. 7. Comp. Ign.
Smyrn. 5 ov rives dyvoovvres dpvovv-
rai...Ta be bvbpara avrdv, ovra dmara,
ovk e'8o£e pot iyypaty-ai.
avXayaydv] ' 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, till a late date : e.g. Heliod.
Aeth. X. 35 ovros ianv b rrjv iprjv 8v-
ydrepa avXayayrjaas. In Tatian ad

Grxc. 22 dpeis be vrrb roiirav avXaya-
yeiaBe it seems to be a reminiscence
of St Paul. Its full and proper mean
ing, as appears from the passages
quoted, is not 'to despoil,' but 'to
carry off as spoil', in accordance with
the analogous compounds, SouXayto-
yeiv, o-Keuaycoyeiv. So too the closely
allied word Xacpvpayayelv in Plut.
Mor. p. 5 7rdXepos ydp ov Xad>vpayaye1
dperrjv, Vit. Galb. $ Td pev TaXardv,
brav viroxexpioi yevavrai, Xa<pvpayayv~
aeaBai. The 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,
1 3) ; and now there was danger that
they should fall into a state worse
than their former slavery, that they
should be carried off as so much
booty. Comp. 2 Tim. iii. 6 alxpaXa-
ri£ovres yvvaiKapia.
For the construction earai d avXa
yaydv see the notes on Gal. i. 7, iii. 21.
The former passage is a close parallel
to the words here, ei prj rives elaiv ol
rapdaaovres dpas k.t.X. The expres
sion d o-uXayaiyaSv gives a directness
and individuality to the reference,
which would have been wanting to the
more natural construction 6s o-uXay<»-
yijcrei. 8id rrjs cpiXooocplas k.t.X.] ' through
his philosophy which is an empty de
ceit '. The absence of both preposition
and article in the second clause shows
that xevfjj d7rdr77s describes and quali
fies (piXoaocplas. Clement therefore
(Strom, vi. 8, p. 771) had a right to
contend that St Paul does not here
condemn 'philosophy' absolutely. The
(piXoaocpta Kal Kevrj dirdrv of this pas
sage corresponds to the yjrevbavvpos
yvdais 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-

II. 8] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 245
Ttjs (piXotfocpias Kal Kevfjs diraTtis, KaTa ty\v irapa-

ther wrong, iireibrj Sokci aepvbv elvai rb
rrjs (piXoao<f>las, irpoaiBvKe Kal Kevfjs
dirdrvs. 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 w.iy into Jewish circles.
Philo speaks of the Hebrew religion
and Mosaic law as 77' irdrpios (piXoao-
(pia (Leg. ad Cai. 23, 11. p. 568, de
iSomn. ii. 18, 1. p. 675) or 77 'lovbdUrj
(piXooocbla (Leg. ad Cai. 33, n. p. 582)
or 77 Kara McoGo-fjv qbiXooocpta (de Milt.
Nom. 39, 1. p. 612). The system of
the Essenes, the probable progenitors
of the false teachers at Colossse, he
describes as tj 81'xa irepiepyeias 'EXXtj-
viKav bvopdrav (piXoaocpia (Oriin. prob.
lib. 13, 11. p. 459). So too Josephus
speaks of the three Jewish sects as
rpeis (piXoao(piai (Ant. xviii. 1. 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 life 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 humility of Py
thagoras, who called himself ' a lover
of wisdom', pv&*va ydp elvai aocbbv
dvBpairov dXX' 77 Oedv (Diog. Laert.
Prooem. § 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
tellect and the need of a revelation.
But in his age it had come to be asso
ciated generally 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
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 dperrj, 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 philosophj', 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
earlier Alexandrian fathers, regards
Greek philosophy not only as a pre
liminary training (irpoiraibela) for the
Gospel, but even as in some sense a
covenant (biaBrjKv) given by God to the
Greeks (Strom, i. 5, p. 331, vi. 5, p. 761,
£&.'§ 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 all
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 simile philo-
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 strong
with Clement's representations as with
Tertullian's. Kara k.t.X.] The false teaching is

?46

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 8

Bocriv twv dvOpcoirwv, Kara rd a-TOi^eia tov Koar/j.ov,

^described (1) As regards its source—
'the traditions of men'; (2) As regards
,-its subject matter — 'the rudiments of
the world'.
tt)v irapdboaiv k.t.X.] 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 peculiarly 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, distinctly
claimed to possess such a source of
knowledge, which they carefully
guarded from divulgence ; B. J. ii. 8 7
avvTVprjaeiv bpoias Ta re rrjs alpiaeas
avrdv (3i{3Xia Kal rd rav dyyiXav bvb-
para (see above pp. 89, 90 sq, 95).
The various Gnostic sects, their direct
or collateral spiritual descendants,
almost without exception traced their
doctrines to a similar source : e. g.
llippol. Hcer. V. 7 d 05770-1 irapabeba-
Kevai Mapidpvrj rbv 'laKaftov rov Kv
piov rbv dbeX(f)bv, vii. 20 (paalv elprjKevat
Mardlav avrols Xbyovs diroKpvrpovs 011 s
rjKovae irapa. tov aarrjpos, Clem. Alex.
Strom. A ii. 17 (p. 898) Kaddirep b Bao"i-
XeiSifs, Kav TXavKiav iiriypdcpvrai bibd-
aKaXov, as av'xovaiv avroi, rbv Uirpov
ippvvia- daavras be Kal OdaXevrivov
OeoSa biaKijKoevai (pepovaiv, yvdpipos
be ovros iyeybvei HaitXov. So too a
later mystic theology of the Jews,
which had many affinities with the
teaching of the Christianized Essenes
at Colossse, was self-designated Kab
bala or 'tradition', professing to have
been handed down orally from the
patriarchs. See the note on diroKpvcpoi,
ii. 3-
rd o-roixeiu] ' 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)IIaCXos...
oi!k en iraXivbpopeiv djioi iirl rrjv EX-
XvviKrjv (piXoaocpiav, aroixeia rov Ko
apov ravrvv dXXvyopdv, oTOixeiartiir/v
nva ovaav (i. e. elementary) ko.1 irpo-
iraibeiav rrjs dXvBeias (comp. ib. vi. 1 5,
p. 799), and by Tertullian adv. Marc.
v. 19 ' secundum elementa mundi, non
secundum coelum et terrain dicens,
sed secundum literas seculares'. A
large number of the fathers however
explained the expression to refer to
the heavenly bodies (called aroixeia),
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. rrjv irapdboaiv rdv dvBpdirav here,
and boypari£ea8e 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 o-Toixeia rod Koapov in the two
places where it occurs, whereas the
observance of days and seasons(ver. 16)
stands apart from either.
roG Koo-pov] ' 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 liberty
and the intelligence of manhood ; do
not submit yourselves again to a rudi
mentary discipline fit only for chil-

II. 9, io]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

347

Kal ov KaTa XpiffTov 9oti iv avTw KaTOiKei irdv tI
irXtjpuijUa Ttjs 6eoTt]Tos crwfxaTiKws, I0Kal e'cre ev avTU

dren (rd o-roixeia). In Christ you
have been exalted into the sphere of
the Spirit : do not plunge yourselves
again into the atmosphere of material
and sensuous things (rod Koapov).'
ov Kara Xpiarbv] '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 listen to hu
man traditions (koto rrjv irapdboaiv
t£v dvBpdirav) ; not the substance, for
they replace.Him by formal ordinances
(Kara rd aroixeia tov Koapov) and by
angelic 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; (1) The t/teological error of
substituting inferior and created be
ings angelic mediators for the divine
Head Himself (vv. 9, 10) ; and (2) The
- practical error of insisting upon ritual
and ascetic observances, as the foun
dation of their moral teaching (vv. 11
— 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, 79, 87,
180 sq.
on K.r.X.] The Apostle justifies the
foregoing charge that this doctrine
was not Kara Xpiarbv ; ' In Christ
dwells 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
life, 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. KaroiKeX] ' has its fixed abode' , On
the force of this compound in relation
to the false teaching, see the note on
i. 19. irdv rd irXrjpapa] '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 fledrrfTos] ' of the Godhead'.
' Non modo divinse virtutes, sed ipsa
divina natura', writes Bengel. For
the difference between debrvs 'deitas',
the essence, and Beibrvs 'divinitas',
the quality, 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 irdaiv Aiyuirri'ois
Beibrvra iroXXf)v Kal biKaioavvvv pap-
rvpvaas (where it means a divine
inspiration or faculty, and where no
one would have used Bebrvra), and
Mor. 415 0 e'" 8e vpdav els baipovas al
fieXrloves yjrvxal rrjv peralSoXrjv Xap/3a-
vovaiv, c'k be batpbvav dXi'yai piv en
Xpbva iroXXd bi' dperrjs KaBapBeiaai
iravrdiraai Beorvros periaxov (where
Beibrvros would be quite out of place,
because all baipoves without exception
were Beioi, though they only became
Beoi in rare instances and after long
probation and discipline). In the
-New Testament the one word occurs
here alone, the other in Rom. i. 20
alone. So also to Belov, 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 philosophers 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

248 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [II. 10
ireirXtipwixevoi, os icrTiv t] Ke(j)aXtj irdo-tis dp%tjs Kai
loc). According to these two last inter
pretations rb irXrjpapa rrjs Beorvros IS
taken to mean the Universe ('univer-
sam naturam repletam ab eo') and the
ChurCh (rrjv iKKXvaiav ireirXrjpapevvv
inrb rrjs d'edrTjros adroG, 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 (aapariKds). But these forced
interpretations have nothing to re
commend them.
St Paul's language is carefully
guarded. He does not say e'v adpan, •
for the Godhead cannot be confined
to any limits of space ; nor o-wpaToei-
8*5s, for this might suggest the un
reality of Christ's human body ; but
o-iBpariK<5s, 'in bodily wise', 'with a
bodily manifestation'. The relation
of aapariKds to the clause which it
qualifies will depend on the circum
stances of the case : comp. e.g. Plut.
Mor. p. 424 B Xeiirerai roiwv rb jieaov
ov roiriKds dXXd o-oipariKoJs Xe'yeo"^ai,
i.e. 'ratione corporis habita', Athan.
Exp. Fid. 4 (1. p. 81) eKarepa roiwv
rd irepl rb Kriapa prjrd aapariKds els
Tov 'hjaovv yeypairrai, i.e. 'secundum
corpus', Ptolem. in Epiphan. Hair.
xxxiii. 5 Kara pev rb (paivbpevov Kal
aapariKds iKreXeiaBav dvrjpiBv.
IO. Kal eVre iv avrd] ' and ye are
in Him', where eVre should be sepa
rated from the following ireirXvpapi-
voi; comp. John xvii. 21, Acts xvii. 28.
True life consists in union with Him,
and not in dependence on any inferior
being; comp. ver. 19' od Kparcav rrjv
KecpaXrjv, e'£ od k.t.X.
^ ireirXvpapivoi] 'being fulfilled' ,with
' a direct reference to the preceding
irXrjpapa ; ' Your fulness comes from
His fulness-; His irXrjpapa is trans
fused into you by virtue of your in
corporation in Him'. So too John
1. ID eK rov irXvpapiaros avrov vpeis
trdvres iXdfiopev, Ephes. iii. 19 tva irXij-
padqre els irdv rb irXvpapa rov OeoG,

Latin versions, owing to the poverty of
the language, both Bebrqs and Beibrvs
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 Bebrrjs:
August, de Civ. Dei vii. § 1, vn. p. 162
(quoted in Trench) ' Hanc divinitatem
vel, ut sic dixerim, deitatem : nam et
hoc verbo uti jam nostros non piget,
ut de Grseco expressius transferant id
quod ill! Bebrvra appellant etc'
aapariKds] 'bodily-wise', ' corpo
really ', i.e. 'assuming a bodily form,
becoming incarnate'. This is an ad
dition to the previous statement in
1. 19 e'v avrd evboKqae'v irdv to irXrjpapa
KaroiKrjaai. The indwelling of the ple
roma refers to the Eternal Word, and
not to the Incarnate Christ ; but o-<a-
pariKas is added to show that the
Word, in whom the pleroma thus had
its abode from all eternity, crowned
His work by the Incarnation. Thus
while the main statement KaroiKei irdv
rb irXrjpapa rijs Beorvros of St Paul
corresponds to the opening sentence
d Xoyos 77V 7rpos rbv Oedv Kal ©cos rjv °
Xoyos of St John, the subsidiary ad
verb aapariKds of St Paul has its-
counterpart in the additional state
ment Kal d Xoyos aap£ iyivero of St
John. All other meanings which have
been assigned to aapariKds 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. 513 ' Ideo corporaliter dixit,
quia illi umbratiliter seducebant'), or
'essentially' (Hilar, de Trin. viii. 54,
11. p. 252 ' Dei ex Deo- significat veri-
tatem etc.', Cyril. Alex.- in Theodoret.
Op. V. p. 34 roureVrtv, od axeriKas,
Isid. Pelus. Ep. iv. 166 dvrl rov ovai-
abds), are unsupported by usage. Nor
again can the body be understood of
anything else butChrist'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

II. II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

249

e^ovo-'ias' "iv tp Kal TrepieT\xr\Qr\Te irepiTOfitj d%€ipo-

iv. 13 eis perpov 7)XtKias rov irXvpdpa-
tos rov Xpiarov, comp. Ign. Ephes.
init. rfj evXoyvpevrj iv peyeBei OeoG
irarpbs irXvpdpan. Hence also the
Church, as ideally regarded, is called
the irXrjpapa of Christ, because all His
graces and energies are communicated
to her ; Ephes. i. 23 ^fns eWlv rd adpa
avrov, rd irXvpapa roG rd irdvra ev ird-
aiv irXvpovpivov.
os] For the various reading d see
the detached note. It was perhaps a
correction made on the false suppo
sition that e'v adr<3 referred to the
irXvpapa. At all events it must be re
garded as an impossible reading; for
the image would be altogether con
fused and lost, if the irXrjpapa were
represented as the head. And again
77 KefpaXrj is persistently said elsewhere
of Christ; i. 18, ii. 19, Ephes. i. 22,
iv. 15, v. 23. Hilary de Trin. ix. 8
(11. p. 264) explains the S as referring
to the whole sentence rd eivai e'v adr<5
ireirXvpapivovs, but this also is an in
conceivable sense. Again it has been
suggested that 0 ianv (like roureo-riv)
may be taken as equivalent to scilicet
(comp. Clem. Horn. viii. 22); but this
would require rfj KenSaXfj, even if it
were otherwise admissible here.
77 KeoSaXTJ] 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.
irdavs dpxvs K.r.X.] ' of every prin
cipality and power', and therefore
of those angelic 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 dpxjjs koI e'gou-
0-1'as, see the note on i. 16.
1 1. 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.
ircpierpTj^Tjre] The moment at which
this is cenceived as taking place is
defined by the other aorists, awra-
(pevres, avvvyepBvre, etc., as the time
of their baptism, when they 'put on
Christ'.' dxeipoiroir;'™] i.e. 'immaterial', 'spi
ritual', as Mark xiv. 58, 2 Cor. v. 1.
So xeip°?roi77Tos, which is used in the
N. T. of material temples and their
furniture (Acts vii. 48, xvii. 24, Heb.
ix. 11, 24, com p. Mark I. c), and of the
material circumcision (Ephes. ii. 11
rfjs Xeyopiwjs irepiroprjs iv aapKi x«-
poiroivrov). In the LXX xetP0?rot'7?ra
occurs exclusively as a rendering of
idols (D^K, a g. Lev. xxvi. 1, Is. ii.
18, etc.), false gods (DTli?K Is. xxi. 9,
where perhaps they read D^K), or
images (d^DPI Lev. xxvi. 30), except in
one passage, Is. xvi. 12, where it is
applied 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 x*1P°k'01Vtois
KaroiKei in St Stephen's speech, where
the force of the passage is broken in
the received text by the interpolation
of vaots.
For illustrations of the typical sig
nificance of circumcision, as a symbol
of purity, see the note on Phil. iii. 3.
e'v rfj K.r.X.] The words are chosen to
express the completeness of the spiri
tual change. (1) It is not an eKbvais
nor an dirbbvais, but an dn-eKSiio-is.

250

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 12

iroirjTU), iv Ttj direKBvcrei tov cwpiaTOS Ttjs o~apKOS,
iv Tt\ irepiTO/ntj tov XpicrTov, " o-WTacbevTes avTw iv

The word direKSiio-is is extremely rare,
and no earlier instances of it are pro
duced; see the note on ver. 15 direKbo-
adpevos. (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
ill ill. 9 direKbvadpevoi rbv iraXaiov
dvBpairov. toG adparos K.r.X.] ' the whole body
which consists of the flesh', i.e. 'the
body with all its corrupt and carnal
affections'; as iii. 5 veKpwo-are oiTv
rd piXv- For illustrations' of the
expression see Rom. vi. 6 tva Karap-
yrjBrj to adpa ttjs dpaprias, vii. 24 rod
adparos tov Bavdrov tovtov, Phil. iii.
21 rd adpa rijs raireivdaeas vpdv.
Thus rd adpa rrjs aapKos 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 o-capa rrjs aapKos occurs, but with a
different emphasis and meaning : see
the note there.
The words rdv dpapndv, inserted be
tween rov adparos and rrjs aapKos 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 believer 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
Avost. Const, iii. 17 77 KaTaSutris rd

avvarroBaveiv, rj dvdbvais rb avvavaarrj-
vai. For this twofold image, as it
presents itself to St Paul, see es
pecially Rom. vi. 3 sq.
e'v r<5 fiairriapa] 'in the act of
baptism'. A distinction seems to be
observed elsewhere in the New Tes
tament between |3dirno-pa ' baptism ' ^
properly so called, and fiarrriapbs
'lustration' or 'washing' of divers
kinds, e. g. of vessels (Mark vii. 4, [8,]
Heb. ix. 10). Even Heb. vi. 2 /3air-
napdv bibaxvs, which at first sight
might seem to be an exception to this
rule, is perhaps not really so (Bleek
ad loc.). Here however, where the
various readings fiairnapd and /3air-
riapan appear in competition, the
preference ought probably to be
given to Paimapy as being highly
supported in itself (see the detached
note on various readings) and as the
less usual word in this sense. There
is no a priori reason why St Paul
should not have used plairnapos with
this meaning, for it is so found in Jo
sephus Ant. xviii. 5. 2 Pairnapij} avv-
livai (of John the Baptist). Doubtless
the form fidimapa 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
Pairnapbs 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. iii. 21), that
we have not sufficient data for a
sound induction. So far as the two
words have any inherent difference of v
meaning, fiairriapos denotes rather the

II. 12]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

25.I

™ fiaiTTiarfJiu), iv <w Kai crvvriyep6t]Te Bia Ttjs itiffTews
Ttjs ivepy^etds tov Qeov tov iyetpavTos avTov etc \rcov\

12. TCfi fiairrlopari.

act in process and pdirnapa the re
sult. . iv a] i.e. fiaimapd. Others would
understand Xpionji for the sake of
tlie parallelism with ver. 11 e'v a
koi.. -e'v a Kai. But this parallelism is
not suggested by the sense : while on
the other hand there is obviously a
very close connexion between o-wra-
(pivTes and avvvyepBvre as the two
- complementary aspects of baptism ;
comp. Rom. vi. 4 sq. ovverdcpvpev
avrd bid roG fiairriaparos tva dairep
Vyip&V Xpiarbs. ..ovras Kal vpets...el
yap avpcpvroi yeybvapev r<3 dpoicopart
roG a'avarou adroG, dXXd Kal rfjs
dvaardaeas iabpeBa, 2 Tim. il. II
el yap avvaireOd vopev, Kal avv£rj~
aopev. In fact the idea of Xpio-nji
must be reserved for avvrjyepBvre
where it is wanted, 'ye were raised
togetlwr with Him'.
bid rrjs irlareas K.r.X.] 'through
your faith in the operation] ivepyelas
being the objective genitive. So St
Chrysostom, irlareas oXov iariv' ima-
revaare on bvvarai b Qebs iyelpai,
Kal odVms rjyip&vre. 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, then shalt be saved'
(Rom. x. 9). For the influence of
Christ's resurrection on the moral and
spiritual being, see the note on Phil.
I.e. Others take ttJs ivepyelas as the
subjective genitive, 'faith which comes
from the operation etc.', arguing from
a mistaken interpretation of the par
allel passage Ephes. i 19 (where Kara
rrjv ivipyeiav should be connected, not

with rods jrio-redovrar, but with ri rd
vrrepfidXXov piyeBos k.t.X.). The former
explanation however yields a better
sense, and the genitive after irians
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, Phil. i. 27, iii. 9, 2 Thess. ii. 13.
13. In the sentence which follows
it seems necessary to assume a change
of subject. There can be little doubt
that d Oeds is the nominative to aw- ^
e^aoiroajaev: 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, avveyelpei,
£aoiroiei, avv£aoiroiei, etc., with or in
or through Christ. (3) Though it might
be possible to assign avv avrd to the
subject of avvefaoiroivaev (see the note
on i. 20), yet a reference to some other
person is more natural. These reasons
seem to decide the subject of awefa-
orroivaev. But at the same time it
appears quite impossible to continue
the same subject, d Oeds, to the end of
the sentence. No grammatical mean
ing can be assigned to direKSuo-dpevos,
by which it could be understood of
God the Father. We must suppose
therefore that a new subject, d Xpio--
rbs, is introduced meanwhile, either
with vpKev or with dweKSua-dpevos it
self; and of the two the former seems
the easier point of transition. For a
similar 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.
koI vpds] 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
rfj aKpofivaTia just below.

252

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. i3

veKpwv 3 Kai vptas veKpovs ovTas toTs irapairTWjxaariv
Kai Ttj aKpoiSvcTict Ttjs aapKos vfjtwv, cvveVcooiroitjO'ev

roTs irapairrapaaiv K.r.X.] ' by reason
of your transgressions etc' The ira-
pairrdpara are the actual definite trans
gressions, while the aKpofivaria rrjs
aapKos is the impure carnal disposition
which prompts to them. For 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 veKpois pev rfj
dpaprla, £dvras be ra OeiS, the dative
has a wholly 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.
Ttj aKpo(3uo-ria K.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 rfj
direKbvaei rod adparos. Hence Theo
dore's comment, aKpofivartav (eKaXe-
aev) to irepiKelaBai en rrjv Sv7jrori7ra.
At the same time the choice of the
expression shows that the Colossian
converts addressed by St Paul were
mainly Gentiles.
awefaoiroivoev] It has been ques
tioned whether the life 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 immortality 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 life 1 To
him the future glorified life is only
the continuation of the present moral
and spiritual life. The two are the
same in essence, however the accidents

may differ. Moral and spiritual rege-'
neration is salvation, is life.
dpas] The pronoun is repeated for
the sake of emphasis. The omission
in some good copies is doubly ex
plained; (r) By the desire to simplify
the grammar; (2) By the wish to re
lieve the awkwardness of the close
proximity between vpds and 77'piv. This
latter consideration has led a few
good authorities to substitute 77'pSs for
dpas, and others to substitute vpiv for
77'piv. For instances of these emphatic
repetitions in St Paul see the note on
i. 20 bi avrov.
aiiv aura] 'with Christ', as in Ephes.
ii. 5 avve£aotrolvaev ra Xpio-T<5; On
the inadmissibility of the reading aura
see the note on eis adrov i. 20.
Xapiadpevos] ' having forgiven', as
in Luke vii. 42 sq., 2 Cor. ii. 7, 10,
xii. 13, Ephes. iv. 32 ; see also the note
on iii. 13 below. The idea of sin as a
debt incurred to God (Matt. vi. 12 rd
bcpeiXvpara rjpdv, 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 Paul is eager to claim his
share in the transgression, that he
may claim it also in the forgiveness.
For other examples of the change
from the second to the first person,
see i. 10—13, '«• 3, 4> Ephes. ii. 2, 3,
13, H. iv. 3i) 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\|/as] ' having cancelled' '.
The word e£aXeiqieiv, like biaypdcpeiv,
signifying 'to blot out, to erase', is
commonly opposed to iyypdcpeiv 'to
enter a name, etc.'; e.g. Arist. Pax

II. i4]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

253

Vfias o~vv avTia, xaPl<ralJ-evo's yfuv iravTa Ta irapairTW-
fxaTa, I*i£aXel\}sas to Kad' t]piwv x€lP°VPa(P0V T0's

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 e'yypdqiovrai irdvres 01 brpXi-
aKavovres. . .i^dXrjXiirTai to b<j>Xvpa.
rd KafJ' rjpdv K.r.X.] 'the bond stand
ing against us'. The word x«pdypa-
(bov, 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) eSfflKev aura rd xelP°~
ypadyov, Plut. Mor. p. 829 A rav xelP°-
ypdqbmv Kal avpj36Xaiav. 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 supervaeui dicens
chirographa ligni' (comp. xiii. 137).
Hence chirographum, chirographarius,
are frequent terms in the Roman law
books; see Hesse Handlexicon zu
den Quellen des romischen Reehts
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. xxviii
14 — 26; comp. Exod xxiv. 3); and
the primary reference would be to
them. But 7jpiv, jjpaiv, seem to in
clude Gentiles as well as Jews, so that
a wider reference must be given to
the expression. The 8dypara there
fore, though referring primarily to the
Mosaic ordinances, will include all
forms of positive decrees in which
moral or social principles are embo
died or religious 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 ivbeUvvvrai-

to epyov tov vopou ypairrov ev rais
Kapbiais avrdv, avppaprvpovavs
avrdv rfjs OT/veiSTJo-ems, Rom. ii. 14, 15-
See the notes on Gal. ii. 19, iv. 11.
Comp. Orig. Horn, in Gen. xiii. 4 (11.
p. 96).
rois bbypaaiv] 'consisting in ordi
nances': comp. Ephes. ii. 15 rbwbpov
rdv ivroXdv iv bbypaaiv. The word
Sdypa is here used in its proper sense
of a ' decree', ' ordinance', correspond
ing to boypari£eatle 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 KaXXiora rav
boypdrav Kal rd do-ioirara rav e'v rois
vbpois, Philo Leg. All. i. 16 (1. p. 54)
biarrjfnjais rdv dylav boypdrav, 3 Mace.
i. 3 rdv irarplav boypdrav. Comp.
Iren. Fragm. 38 (p. 855 Stieren) where,
immediately after a reference to our
text, rois rav lovbalav bbypaat irpoa-
ipXeaBai is opposed to irvevpariKas
Xeirovpyeiv. In the parallel passage,
Ephes. ii. 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 application.
The dative is perhaps best explained
as governed by the idea of yeypap-
pevov involved in xe'poypa0o" (comp.
Plat. Ep, vii. p. 243 A rd yeypappiva
rvirois) ; as in 1 Tim. ii. 6 rd paprvpiov
Kaipals Ibiois, where Kaipois depends
on an implied pepaprupr/pevov. Other
wise it is taken as closely connected
with KaB' rjpdv, 'the bond which was
in force against us by reason of the
ordinances ' : see Winer § xxxi. p.
273, A. Buttmann p. 80. Possibly an
ev has dropped out of the text before
rois bbypaaiv, owing to the similar
ending xeiporp*4>ONeN (comp. Ephes.
ii. 1 5) ; but, if so, the omission must

254

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 14

B6yfiao~iv, 6 rjv virevavTiov fjfxiv Kal avTO tjpKev ck

date from the earliest age, since no
existing authorities exhibit any traces
of such a reading; see the note on
ver. 1 8 a ibpaKev, and comp. Phil. ii.
I ei ris oTrXdyxva.
A wholly different interpretation
however prevails universally among
Greek commentators both here and
in Ephes. ii. 15. They take rois 8oy-
paaiv, iv bbypaaiv, 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 (Ecumenius and Tlieophylaet.
Strangely enough they do not allude
to the correct interpretation ; nor (with
the exception of the passage ascribed
to Irenseus 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. 26; sq.), Ambros. Apol.
Dav. 13 (I. p. 698),. & Fid. iii. 2 (11.
p. 499), August, de Pecc. Mer. i. 47
(x. p. 26) : though they very commonly
took rois Sdypao-iv, iv bbypaaiv, to
refer to the decree of condemnation.
Jerome however on Ephes. ii. 15
(vn. p. 581) follows the Greeks. The
later Christian sense of Sdypa, mean
ing 'doctrine', came from its secondary
classical use, where it was applied to
the authoritative and categorical ' sen
tences ' of the philosophers: comp.
Just. Mart. Apol. i. 7 (p. 56 d) ol iv

"EXX770-1 rd avrols dpeara boypartaavres
iK iravros ra evl ovbpan (f)iXoao(pias
rrpoaayopevovrai, Kaiirep rdv boyparav
ivavriav ovrav, Cic. Acad. ii. 9 ' de
suis decretis quse philosophi vocant
bbypara', Senec. Epist. xcv. 10 ' Nulla
ars contemplativa sine decretis suis
est, quse Grseci vocant dogmata, nobis
vel decreta licet adpellare vel scita
vel placita'. See the indices to Plu
tarch, Epietetus, etc., for illustrations
of the use of the term." There is an
approach towards the ecclesiastical
meaning in Ignat. Magn. 13 /3e/3aia-
Brjvai iv rois 8dyuao"iv rou Kvpiov Kal
rdv diroarbXav, Barnab. § I rpia ovv
bbypara ianv Kvplov (comp. § 9, 10).
o rjv k.t.X.] ' which was directly op
posed to us '. The former expression,
rd KaB' vpdv, referred to the validity
of the bond ; the present, 0 ijv virevav
Tiov rjpiv, describes its active hostility.
It is quite a mistake to suppose that
tlie first preposition in virevavrlos
mitigates its force, as in d7roSrjXrj)o-is,
virbXevKos, viropaivopai, viroavpalveiv,
etc. Neither in classical writers nor
in the lxx lias 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) ArjpiKpiros...
(pVal ...to avro Kal bpoiov elvai rb re
iroiovv Kal to irdaxov . . -iolKaai be 01
tovtov rbv rpoirov Xiyovres virevavria
(i.e. self-contradictory) (palvea&ai Xi-
yeiv' alriov be rrjs ivavrioXoyias k.t.X.,
[Plato] Alcib. Sec. 138c 2Q. To pai-
veaBai dpa vrrevavrlov aoi boKel rd
(ppoveiv ; A A. ndvu pev ouv... 1 39 n 2Q.
Kal pr)v biio ye virevavria evl irpdypan
irds dv e"v ; (i- e. how can one thing
have two direct opposites?), where
the whole argument depends on this
sense of virevavrios. In compounds
with virb the force of the preposition
will generally be determined by the
meaning of the Other element in the
compound; and, as ivavrios (evavn)

II. 15] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 255
tov fieaov, irpoff'tjXwo'as avTo tw o~Tavpw' Isdir€KBv->

implies locality ,,a local sense is commu
nicated to diro. Thus uirevavrios may'
be compared with djraXXdo-o-eiv, d-
iravrdv, ujravndfeiv, uirorpe'xetv (Xen.
Cyrop. i. 2. 12 Xrjords dWoSpapeiv, ' to
hunt down'), dVeXadveiv (Xen. Anab.
i. 8. 15 vireXdaas as ovvavrfjoai, ' riding
up'), doSio-rdvat (Polyb. i. 50. 6 virearv-
ae rrjv eavrov vaiiv dvriirpapov rois
iroXepiois/hebroughtup'hisownship). 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.' Kal adrd ijpKev k.t.X.] " and He, i. e.
Christ, hath taken it aulay'. There
is a double change in this clause : (1)
The participles (xapiadpevos, i£aXel-
yjras) are replaced by a finite verb.
(2) The aorists (o-uvefmoiroir/o-ev, x°>
piadpevos, igakefyas) are replaced by
a perfect. The substitution of rjpev
for tjpKev in some copies betrays a
consciousness on the part of the scribes
of the dislocation produced by the
new tense. As a new subject, 6
Xpiarbs, must be introduced some
where (see the note 011 ver. 13), the
Severance thus created suggests this
as the best point of transition. The
perfect tfpKev, ' He hath removed it',
is suggested by the feeling of relief
and thanksgiving, which ' rises up in
the Apostle's mind at this point. For
the strong expression a'lpeiv ck [tov]
piaov, 'to remove and put out of
sight', comp. lxx Is. lvii. 2, Epictet.
iii. 3. 15, Plut, Mor. p. 519 t>; so 2
Thess. ii. 7 eK peaov yivrytai.
¦trpoarjXdaas 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 irpoavXdaas is meant that
the law of ordinances was nailed to
the cross, rent with Christ's body,
and destroyed with His death : see
the notes on Gal. vi. 14 &' ov [roG

craupoG] e'poi Koapos (the world, the
sphere of material ordinances) iarav-
parai Kayd Koapm, 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. direKbvadpevos k.t.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. Hcer. i. 24
direKSuo-dpevov rd adpa b irepiKeirai,
In Joseph. Ant. vi. 14. 2 direKSGs is
only a variation for pereKbvs which
seems to be the correct reading. The
word also appears in some texts of
Babrius Fab. xviii. 3, but it is merely
a conjectural emendation. Thus the
occurrence of direKbveaBai here and in
iii. 9, and of dn-e'KSuo-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
diroSueo-d'ai and iKbveaBat occur toge
ther ; c Theomn. i. 10 (p. 117) <£d-
o-Ktav Botpdnov dirobebvaBai i) rbv xtra-
vIokov iKbebvaBai. Here however the
sense of direKbvadpevos is difficult.
The meaning generally 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
sc', which was grammatically correct,
he substituted ' exspolians' in his re
vised version. In his interpretation
however he was anticipated by the
commentator Hilary, who read ' exu
ens' for ' exuens se' in his text. Dis
carding this sense, as inconsistent with

256

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. iS

crdnevos ras dpxds Kal Tas epowias iBeiyfxaTt-

the voice, we have the choice of two
interpretations. (1) The common interpretation of
the Latin fathers, 'putting off the
body', thus separating dVeKSuo-dpevos
from rds dpxds k.t.X. and understand
ing tt)v adpKa or rd o-i»pa with it ; comp.
2 Cor. v. 3 ivbvadpevoi. So Novat. de
Trin. 16 'exutus carnem'; Ambros.
Expos. Luc. v. § 107 (1. p. 1 381) 'ex-
uens se carnem', comp. de Fid. iii.
2 (11. p. 499); Hilar, .de Trin. i. 13
(11. p. 10) 'exutus carnem' (comp. ix.
10, p. 265), x. 48 (p. 355) 'spolians
se came' (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.
Hwr. viii. IO ijnixV eKeivv iv ra adpan
rpa(pe1aa, direKbvaapevv rb adpa Kal
irpoarjXdaaaa irpbs rb £vXov Kal Bpiap-
(Sevaaaa k.t.X. It is so paraphrased
likewise in the Peshito Syriac and the
Gothic. The reading d?reKSuo-dpcvos
rrjv adpKa Kal rds i^ovalas (omitting
rds dpxds koI), found in some an
cient authorities, must be a corrup
tion from an earlier text, which had
inserted the gloss ttjv adpKa after
direKbvadpevos, while retaining rds
dpxds Kal, 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 dn-oSd-
eaBai, signifying 'to strip' and so
'to prepare for a contest'; e.g. Plut.
Mor. 811 E irpos irdaav dirobvbpevoi
rrjv iroXinKrjv irpd^iv, Diod. Sic. ii. 29
e'irl (biXoaocplav dirobvvres. 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 direKbvadpevos govern rds dp-
xbs k.t.X. So Chrysostom, Severianus,

Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodo
ret. This also appears to have been
the interpretation of Origen, in Matt.
xii. § 25 (in. p. 544), ib. § 40 (p- 56o)>
in loann. vi. § 37 (iv. p. 155), ib. xx.
§ 29 (P- 3S&), though his language is
not explicit, and though his transla
tors, e. g. in Libr. les. Horn. vii. § 3
(11. p. 413), make him say otherwise.
The meaning then will be as follows.
Christ took upon Himself our human
nature with all its temptations (Heb.iv.
1 5). 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 direarv dir'
avrov dxpi Kaipov). 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 viraye
birlera pov, Saraud, aKavbaXov el epov :
comp. Matt. viii. 31). Then the last
hour came. This was the great crisis
of all, when 'the power of darkness'
made itself felt (Luke xxii. 53 77' e'|ou-
o-iarcfJo-Kdrous; see above i. 13), when
the prince of the world asserted his
tyranny (Joh. xii. 30 d .dpxav tov
Koapov). 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 like 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; ra diroBiaBai rrjv
BvvTQTvra, says Theodore, 77V U7rep rfjs
koivtjs ddtelXev evepyealas, direbvaaro
KaKeivav (i.e. rdv dvriKeipivav bvvd-
peav) rrjv avdevreiav tjirep eKexpTivro

II. is] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. , 257
o~ev iv irapptja-'ia, dpia/mfSevaas avTOVs iv avTw.

KaB' vp-dv. For the image of the gar
ments comp. Is. lxiv. 6, but especially
Zech. iii. i 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, / 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 dire«-
Suo-dpevos more especially, see Philo
Quod det. pot. ins. 13 (1. p. 199) i£ava-
ardvres be Kal biepeiadpevoi rds ivrex-
vovs avrdv irepiirXoKas evpiapds i Kbv-
abp.eBa, where the image in the con
text is that of a wrestling bout.
This interpretation is grammatical ;
it accords with St Paul's teaching ; and
it is commended by the parallel uses of
the substantive in ver. 1 1 e'v rfj direK-
bvaei roG adparos rrjs aapKos, and of the
verb in iii. 9 direKbvadpevoi rbv irdXaiov
avBpairov k.t.X. The direKbvais accom
plished in us when we are baptized into
His death is a counterpart to the dirac-
Suo-is which He accomplished by His
death. With Him indeed it was only
the temptation, with us it is the sin
as well 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 'spoiling' is not
less a violation of St Paul's usage
(iii. 9) than of grammatical rule.
rds dpxds k.t.X.] What powers are
especially meant here will appear from
COL.

Ephes. vi. 12 irpds rds dpxds, irpbs rds
i^ovalas, irpbs rods KoapoKpdropas tov
aKorovs tovtov, irpbs rd 7rveupariKa rrjs
irovrjpias k.t.X. See the note on i. 16.
e'Setypdrto-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 BeXav avrrjv beiypariaai
(where it ought probably to be read
for the more common word irapabeiy-
pariaai), Act. Paul, et Petr. 33 eXeye
irpds rdv Xadv tva prj pbvov dirb ttjs tov
2ip<ovos dirdrvs (bvyaaiv dXXd Kal Seiy-
pariaovaiv avrbv. Nowhere does the
word convey the idea of ' making an
example' (irapabeiypariaai) but signi
fies simply 'to display, publish, pro
claim' In the context of the last
passage we have as the consequence,
a>o-re irdvras rods euXa/3eis avbpas j3Se-
Xurreo-^ai 2ipa>va rdv pdyov Kal dvbaiov
avrbv Karayy e'XXeiv, i.e. to proclaim
his impieties. The substantive occurs
on the Rosetta stone 1. 30 (Boeckh,
G I. 4697) rav avvrereXeapivav rd
irpds rdv beiypanapbv bidepopa.
iv irappvala] ' boldly', not 'publicly'.
As irappvala is ' unreservedness, plain
ness of speech' (irav-pvaia, its opposite
being dppvala ' silence'), so while
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 Xtj^rere rd o-kGXo perd
irappvaias, Test. xii. Patr. Rub. 4 ovk
e'xov irappvoiav drevioai els irpbaairov
'laKaf3, Jos. Ant. ix. IO. 4 dir' alaxvvvs
re roG o-upj3e/3r7Koros SeivoG Kal roG ^77-
Ke'r aura irapprjcriav eivai. The idea of
publicity may sometimes be connected
with the word as a secondary notion,
17

258

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 16

1 Mt) ovv tis v/uds KpiveTto iv /3j0a>Vet Kal iv ir6o~ei h

16. 17 ev ircaei.

e.g. in Joh. vii. 4, where e'v irappvala
elvai 'to assume a bold attitude' is
opposed to e'v Kpvirrd iroieiv (comp.
xviii. 20) ; but it does not displace the
primary sense.
c5piap/3euo-as] ' leading them in tri
umph', the same metaphor as in 2 Cor.
U. 14 rd irdvrore Bpiapfievovn rjjids iv
rd Xpiard k.t.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 public, chained to the triumphal
car of Christ. This is the proper
meaning and construction of Bpiap-
jSedeiv, 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 AlpiXios
iBpiapjievcre, Thes. et Rom. Comp. 4
PaaiXels iBpidpftevae : (2) of the spoils
exhibited in the triumph, e.g. Tatian
C. Grwc 26 iravaaaBe Xdyous dXXorpi-
ovs Bpiapfievovres Kal, dairep b KoXoibs,
ovk Ibiois iiriKoapovpevoi irrepols : (3)
more rarely of the substance of the
triumph, e.g. Vit. Camill. 30 6 be
KapiXXos iBpidpfievae ...rbv diroXaXvias
aarrjpa irarpibos yevbpevov, i.e. ' in the
character of his country's saviour'.
The passive BpiapfieveaBai 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 avrd] i. e. ra aravpd : comp.
Ephes. ii. 16 diroKaraXXd^r; rods dpnSo-
ripovs...bid rov aravpov. The violence
of the metaphor is its justification.
The paradox of the crucifixion is thus
placed in the strongest light — 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 reality, 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 religion is an offi
cious humility which displays itself in
the worship of angels. They make a
parade of their visions, but they are
following an empty phantom. They
profess humility, but they are puffed
up with their vaunted wisdom, which
is after all only the mind of the flesh.
Meanwhile they have substituted in
ferior spiritual agencies for the One
true Mediator, the Eternal Word.
Clinging to these lower intelligences,
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 Himself.'
16 sq. The two main tendencies of
the Colossian heresy are discernible
in this warning (vv. 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 (vv. 16, 17) ; the
theological error, the interposition of
angelic mediators, follows after (vv.
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.

259

iv jnepei eopTtjs rj veofxtjvias ij 0~aj3f3aTwv, I7a io~Tiv o~Kid

'7-

o eanv cKia.

the second paragraph being a conti
nuation of the concluding subject in
the first, by the figure called chiasm :
comp. Gal. iv. 5.
Kpive'ra] 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 ppdaei k.t.X.] 'in eating and
in drinking'; Rom. xiv. 17 ou ydp
e'oriv 7; fiaaiXela tov OeoG flpdais Kal
irbais, dXXd biKaioavvn k.t.X., Heb. ix.
IO e'iri fipdpaoiv Kal irbpaaiv ko.1 bta-
(pbpois fiairTiopois, btKaiapara aapKos,
comp. 1 Cor. viii. 8 Ppdpa be 77'pas/od
7rapaoT7Jo-ei to ©e<5 K.r.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 Ka8apl£av irdvra rd
j3pdpara). 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 applied to the Mosaic
law by itself, as in Heb. I.e. The rigour
of the Colossian false teachers how
ever, like that of their Jewish proto
types the Essenes, doubtless went far
beyond the injunctions of the law. It
is probable that they forbad wine and
animal food altogether : see the intro
duction pp. 86, 104 sq. For allusions

in St Paul to similar observances not
required by the law, see Rom. xiv. 2
6 be doBevdv Xdxava iaBlei, ver. 21 Ka
Xov rd prj (payeiv Kpia p,7)8e irieiv oivov
K.r.X., I Tim. iv. 2, 3 Ka)Xudvrav...d7re'-
Xeo&ai ppajidrav d b Qebs eKTiaev K.T.X.,
Tit. i. 14 pr) 7rpoo"e'xovres...e'vroXais
dvBpdirav. . -iravra KaBapa rois Kadapols.
The correct reading seems to be koI
e'v irbaei, thus connecting together the
words between which there is a natu
ral affinity. Comp. Philo Vit. Moys.
i- § 33 (IL P- 1 1 °) Seo-jroivais x°Aei"a's
avve£evypevov fipdaei Kal irbaei, Ign.
Trail. 2 ov ydp ftpapdrav Kal irordv
elalv biaKovoi.
iv pipei] 'in the matter of etc. ;
comp. 2 Cor. iii. 10, ix. 3 e'v nS pepei
rod™. 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 nBivai, iroielaBai, dpiB-
pelv, etc. : comp. Demosth. c. Aristocr.
§ 148 baa,...oTpariaTvs dv iv a(bevbo-
vrjrov Kal^iXoG pipei...iarpdrevrai, i.e.
'in the capacity of. Hence it gets
to signify more widely, as here, ' with
respect to ', ' by reason of : comp.
Philo Quod det. pot. ins. § 2 (1. p. 192)
e'v pepei Xoyov rov irpoKoirrovros Kara
rbv irdrepa Koapovvrai, in Flacc. 20
(ii. p. 542) oaa iv pipei xdpiros Kal ba-
peds eXa/3ov. But iElian V. H. viii. 3
Kpivovres eKaarov iv ra pepei (pbvov,
quoted by the commentators, is a false
parallel : for (pbvov is there governed
by Kpivovres and e'v rr5 pe'pet 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. xxiii. 31,2 Chron.
ii. 4, xxxi. 3, Ezek. xiv. 17, Hos. ii. 11,
Justin Dial. 8, p. 226; comp. Is. i. 13,
14. See also Gal. iv. 10 rjpipas irapa-
rvpeioBe Kal prjvas Kal Kaipovs Kal ivi-
avrovs, where the first three words
correspond to the three words used
17 — 2

26o EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. LIL l8
Toav jueXXovTWv, to Be arcona tov XpiGTOV. * /Jfoets
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. viii. 21, 22,
after referring to Thucyd. i. 70 prjre
eoprrjv d'XXo ri rjyelaBai fj to ra beovra
irpdfjai, says 6 rc'Xetos, del iv rois Xb-
yois av Kal rois epyois Kal rois biavorj-
paai rov rfj (piiaei Kvpiov Xdyou OeoG,
del ianv avroii iv rals vpcpais Kal del
dyet KvpiaKas vpipas, and he then goes
on to explain what is the irapaaKevrj,
the irdaxa, the irevTeKoarrj, 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
alien to the spirit of the New Covenant.
Bengel on the text writes, ' Sabba-
tum non laudatur, non imperatur ;
dominica memoratur, non prsecipitur.
Qui profundius in mundi negotiis hsa-
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 dirpdo-KO!TOi yive-aBai.
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

here, though the order is reversed.
The e'opnj here, like the Kaipoi there,
refers chiefly to the annual festivals,
the passover, pentecost, etc. The veo-
pvvia here describes more precisely
the monthly festival, which is there
designated more vaguely as pfjves.
The o-d(3/3ara here gives by name the
weekly holy-day, which is there indi
cated more generally by vpipai.
veopvvias] See Num. xxviii. 11 sq.
The forms veopvvla and vovpvvia seem
to be used indifferently in the common
dialect, though the latter is more
common. In the Attic vovpvvia alone
was held to be correct; see Lobeck
Phryn. p. 148. On the whole the
preference should perhaps be given
to veopvvias here, as supported by
some authorities which are generally
trustworthy in matters of orthography,
and as being the less usual form in
itself. o-a/3/3drav] ' a sabbath-day', not, as
the A. V., 'sabbath days'; for the co
ordinated words iopTijs, veopvvias, are
in the singular. The word adfifiara
is derived from the Aramaic (as dis
tinguished from the Hebrew) form
Kri3E', and accordingly preserves the '
Aramaic termination in a. Hence it
was naturally declined as a plural
noun, adpfiara, aaftfidrav. The gene
ral use of adfifiaTa, when a single sab
bath-day was meant, will appear from
such passages as Jos. Ant. i. 1. 1 dyo-
. pev rrjv vpipav, irpoaayopeiiovres avrrjv
adftpara, ib. iii. IO. I e/38dpriv 7/pepav
77ns o-d/3(3ara KaXelrai, Plut. Mor.
169 C 'Iou8atot aaftfidrav ovrav iv
dyvdpirrois KaBe£bpevoi, ib. 67 1 F olpai be
Kal rrjv rdv oafiftdrav eoprrjv prj iravrd-
iraaiv dirpoabibvvaov eivai, Hor. Sat.
i. 9. 69 ' hodie tricesima sabbata'. In
the New Testament o-dj3/3ara 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 em o-dj3-
/3ara rpia.

II. ,8] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 26l
v/uds KaTafipa(5eveTGo~ 6eXwv iv Taireivo<ppoo~vvy Kai
e'rpexere KaXds' ris vpds iveKotyev
K.T.X. Karaj3pa/3euero)] ' rob of the prize,
tlie fipafteiov'; comp. Demosth. Mid.
p. 544 (one of the documents) imard-
peBa Srpdriava diro Mei8iou Karafipa-
ftevBivra Kal irapd rravra rd b'maia
dnpaBivra, which presents a close
parallel to the use of Kara/3pa/3eueiv
here. See also Eustath. in II. i. 403 sq.
(p. 43) Kara/3paj3euet avrbv, as (baaiv
ol n-dXaioi, 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 Kara/3pa/3eueiv
is wide enough to include such. The
two compounds Kara/3pa/3euetv and ira-
paPpafieveiv (Plut. Mor. p. 535 0 01
irapa|3pa/3euovres e'v rois dy<acri) only
differ in this respect, that deprivation is
the prominent idea in the former word
and trickery in the latter. Jerome,
Epist. cxxi. 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.
BeXav iv] 'taking delight in', 'de
voting himself to'. The expression
is common in the lxx, most frequently
as a translation of '"2 pan, 1 Sam.
xviii. 22, 2 Sam. xv. 26, 1 Kings x. 9,
2 Chron. ix. 8, Ps. cxi. 1, cxlvi. 10,
but in one passage of "3 nxi,
1 Chron. xxviii. 4. So too Test. xii.
Pair. Ashef I e'dv ouv 77 \jrvxv SiXrj
iv KaXd. Comp. also 1 Mace. iv. 42
BeXvrds vbpov, and see iBeXoBpvaKeia
below. Against this construction no
valid objection has been urged. Other
wise BeXav 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

de Conf. ling. 37 (1. p. 434) vopiaavras
rd pev pr/rd rav XPV°~11®V aKias nvas
daavel aapdrav elvai, Joseph. B. J.
ii. 2. 5 aKidv alrvabpevos fiaoiXelas
77s vpiraaev eaura rd adpa ; comp.
Philo in Flacc. 1 9 (11. p. 541 ) o-Kid irpay-
pdrav dp' tjaav, ov irpdypara. (2) The
conception of the shadow as thrown
before the substance (rj 8e o-Kid irporpi-
X« rod adparos, says a Greek commen
tator), so that the Law was a type and ,
presage of the Gospel; Heb. x. 1 o-Kidv
exav 0 vbpos rdv peXXbvrav dyaBdv
(comp. viii. 5). Thus it implies 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 o be ta
ken, it will refer to the preceding
sentence generally, as if the antece
dent were ' the whole system of ordi
nances '-
rd 8e adpa k.t.X.] As the shadow
belonged to Moses, so ' the substance
belongs to Christ'; i.e. the reality,
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 believer; 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 (Spdpos, 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 (fipafielov,
1 Cor. ix. 24, Phil. 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 Kara^pa-
/3eueVto compare especially GaL v. 7

262

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 1 8

dptjcTKela twv dyyeXcov, d eopaKev ifxfiaTevwv, eiKtj <pv-

usage or inappropriate to the context.
Leclerc (ad loc.) and Bentley (Crit.
Sacr. p. 59) conjectured BiXycov; Toup
(Emend, in Suid. 11. p. 63) more plau
sibly iXBdv ; but the passages quoted
show that no correction is needed.
raireivooSpoo-uvfl] Humility is a vice
with heathen moralists, but a virtue
with Christian Apostles; see the note
on Phil. ii. 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. Humility, when it be
comes self-conscious, ceases to have
any value ; and self-consciousness at
least, if not affectation, is implied by
BiXav iv. Moreover the character of
the raireivocppoavvv in this case is fur
ther defined as BpvaKeia rav dyye'Xi»v,
which was altogether a perversion of
the truth.
BpvaKeia] 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 religion, and so gets to sig
nify an over-scrupulous devotion to
external forms ; as in Philo Quod det.
pot. ins. 7 (I. p. 195) BpvaKeiav dvrl
do-idrr/ros rjyoiipevos, Plut. Vit. Alex.
2 boKei koi rb BpnaKeveiv bvopa rais
KaraKopois yeviaBai Kal irepiepyois
lepovpyiais: comp. Acts xxvi. 5, and
seethe well-known remarks of Cole
ridge on James i. 26, 27, in Aids to
Reflection p. 14. In the lxx Bpv-
aKeveiv, BpvaKeia, 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.

rav ayyeXav] For the angelology
and angelolatry of these Colossian
false teachers, more especially in its
connexion with Essene teaching, see
the introduction, pp. 89 sq., 101 sq.,
iio, i8isq. 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) 01786 Kara
'lou8aious aefieaBe, Kal yap e'xeivoi...
ouk eVioravrai Xarpeuovrcs dyyeXois
ko.1 dpxayyeXois, Celsus in Orig. c. Cels.
v. 6 (i. p. 580) irpdrov ovv rdv 'lovbaiav
Bavpb£eiv at;iov, el rbv pev ovpavbv Kai
rods ev raSe dyye'Xous aifiovoi K.r.X.,
comp. ib. i. 26 (p. 344). From Jews
it naturally spread to Judaizing
Christians; e.g. Clem. Horn. iii. 36
dyy eXeov bvbpara yvaplfciv, 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 strange passage in
Ignat. Trail. 5 pv ov bvvapai rd iirov-
pdvia ypd"\[rai;...bvvapai voelv ra iirov-
pdvia Kal rds roiroBeaias rds dyyeXtKas
Kal rds o-uo-rdo-eis rds dpxovriKas K.r.X.
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 ibpaKev K.r.X.] literally ' invading
what he has seen,' which is generally
explained to mean ' parading' or ' por
ing over his visions'. For this sense of
e'p/3aredciv, which takes either a geni
tive or a dative or an accusative, comp.
Philo de Plant. Noe ii. 19 (1. p. 341)
ol irpoaarepa xa}P°vVTes rdv eirio-rr/-
pdv Kal iirl irXiov ep/3areuovres adrais,
2 Mace. ii. 30 rd pev ipPareveiv Kal
irepl iravrav iroielaBai Xbyov Kal iroXv-
irpaypovelv iv rois Kara pepos. At a
later date this sense becomes com
mon, e. g. Nemesius de Nat. Horn.
p. 64 (ed. Matthsei) ovpavbv ep/3aredei
rfj Beapia. In Xen. Symp. iv. 27 e'v
ra aura /3i/3Xia> dpcpbrepoi ipftareveri

II. 19] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 263
o~iovfievos vird tov voos Ttjs aapKds ovtov, 19Kai ov

n, the reading may be doubtful. But
though d ebpaKev singly might mean
'his visions', and ip^arevav '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 all existing authorities
(see the note on Phil. ii. 1 for a par
allel case). Did the Apostle write
e'topa (or aldpa) Kevepjiarevav 1 In this
case the existing text AeojpaKSNeiw
BoreycoN might be explained partly
by an attempt to correct the form
idpa into aioipg or conversely, and
partly by the perplexity of transcri
bers when confronted with such un
usual words. This reading had suggest
ed 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 d
idpa (or d idpaKev) Kevepfiareiiav. The
word Kevcp/3arciv 'to walk on empti
ness', 'to tread the air', and so meta
phorically (like depojSareiv, alBepojSa-
reiv, alBepep^areiv, etc.) ' to indulge in
vain speculations', is not an uncommon
word. For its metaphorical sense espe
cially see Plut. Mor. p. 336 F ovras ipip.-
/3ero Kevepfiarovv Kai acpaXXbpevov vir'
dvapxias to peyeBos avTrjs, Basil. Op.
I. p. 135 rdv vovv...pvpla irXavv Bevra
Kal iroXXd KevepfiarrjaavTa K.r.X., ib. I.
p. 596 0-0G be prj Kevep|3areiro) d voGs,
Synes. de Insomn. p. 156 ou're ydp ke-
vepftarovvras rovs Xdyous ifyjveyKav.
Though the precise form KevepPareveiv
does not occur, yet it is unobjection
able in itself. For the other word
which I have ventured to suggest,
idpa or aioipg, see Philo de Somn. ii. 6
(i. p. 665) virorv(povpevos vir al
apas (bpevdv Kal Kevov (pvcrqparos, ib.
§ 9 (P- 667) rrjv eV alapas (bopovpi-
vvv Kevrjv bb^av, Quod Deus immut,
§ 36 (i. p. 298) dairep iir alapas n-
vbs ifrevbovs ko.1 d/3e/3aiou Sd^ijs (popei-
aBai Kara Kevov |3aivovra. The

first and last passages more especially
present striking parallels, and show
how germane to St Paul's subject
these ideas of 'suspension or balan
cing in the air' (e'oSpa or aioSpa) and
'treading the void' (KevepjiaTeveiv)
would be, as expressing at once the
spiritual pride and the emptiness of
these speculative mystics ; see also de
Somn. ii. 2 (p. 661) e'poWverai Kal to
rfjs Kevfjs 8d£rjs, id) ijv, ds id)' appa,
bid rb Kovrpov dvaftalvei, (pvad-
pevos Kal periapov 77 <o p 77 K cos eavrov.
The substantive, idpa or aimpa, 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
lancing on a rope, and the like. Hence
its expressiveness when used as a me
taphor. In the received text a negative is
inserted, d pr) idpaKev ipfiarevav.
This gives a very adequate sense ' in
truding into those things which he
has not seen'; ov yap elbev dyyiXovs,
says Chrysostom, Kal outo SiaKetrai g>s
Ibdv : comp. Ezek. xiii. 3 oual rois irpo-
(pVrevovatv dirb Kapbias avrdv Kai to
KaBbXov prj j3Xeirouo-tv. 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 ebpaKev, which is bet
ter supported here than idpaKev, see
the note on ii. 1.
eiKtj cpvaioiipevos] ' vainly puff ed up.'
Their profession of humihty was a
cloke for excessive pride: for, as
St Paul says elsewhere (1 Cor. viii.
1), 77 yvdais (pvaioi. It may be ques
tioned whether eixfj 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,

264 FPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [H- !9
KpaTwv Tt]v KerpaXqv, e£ ov irdv to aw/ia Bid twv a(pwv

Gal. iv. 11; there is an exceptional
reason for the exceptional position in
Gal. iii. 4), points to the latter con
struction. roG vods k.t.X.] 'the mind of his
flesh', i.e. unenlightened by the Spirit;
comp. Rom. viii. 7 rd oipdvTjpa rijs
aapKos. 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 un-d rou vods. Yes, he answers,
but it is d voGs rijs aapKos vpdv. Com
pare Rev. ii. 24, where the favourite
Gnostic boast yivooo-Keiv rd fiadea is
characterized by the addition of rod
2arav5 (see Galatians p. 298 note 3).
Comp. August. Conf. x. 67 'Quem
invenirem qui me reconciliaret tibi?
Ambiendum mihi fuit ad angelos?
Qua prece 1 quibus sacramentis 1
Multi conantes ad te redire, neque
per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, tent-
averunt hsec et inciderunt in deside-
rium curiosarum visionum et digni
habiti sunt illusionibus. Elati enim
te quserebant doctrinse fastu, etc'
19. ou Kpardv] 'not holding fast.'
This is the most common construction
and meaning of Kparelv in the New
Testament; e.g. Mark vii. 8doie'vrcs
rrjv ivroXrjv rov Qeov Kpareire rrjv
irapdboaiv rav dvdpdirav ; COmp. Cant.
iii. 4 eupov ov vydirvaev v' ^vxv pov,
iKpdrnoa avrbv Kal ovk dcpiJKa avrbv.
rr)v KeqbaXrjv] '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
parallel passage, Ephes. iv. 16 ds eVnv
77 KecpaXrj, Xpiarbs e'£ ou irdv rd o-iSpa
K.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, 78, 101
sq., 181 sq.
Sid rav dcpdv K.r.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)
can be b rpbiros -ttjs avvBiaeas avrdv
birrbs Kara yevos, b pev erepos Kara
apBpov, b be erepos Kara avpcpvaiv.
Similarly, though with a more general
reference, Aristotle speaks of two
kinds of union, which he describes
as dcprj 'contact' and avpd>yais
' cohesion' respectively ; Metaph. iv. 4
(p. 1014) biacpipei be avpd>vaisd(pijs'
evBa pev yap ov&ev irapd rrjv d(pr)v erepov
dvdyKv elvai, iv be rois avpireqbvKoaiv
iarl n ev rd aurd e'v dpcoolv o iroiei
dvrl rov dirreaBai avpirecpVKevai Kai
elvai ev k.t.X., Phys. Ausc. iv. 6 (p.,
213) rourois dcprj ianv" avpcj)vais be,
d'rav aptpa ivepyeia ev yevavrai (comp.
ib. v. 3, p. 227), Metaph. x. 3 (p. 107 1)
baa ianv dcprj Kal 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
dcW and o-uv8eo-pot respectively.
Of the function of dj>rj, ' contact', in
physiology (irepl doifjs Ttjs iv rois (pvai-
ko'is) Aristotle speaks at some length
in one passage, de Gen. et Corr. i. 6
(p. 322 sq.). It may be mentioned,
as illustrating 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 iraBvriKa Kal 7roi77riKa
and as Kivvrmd Kal KivTjrd dir' dXXriXtSv.
Elsewhere, like St Paul here, he uses
the plural ai dcpai ; de Ccelo i. 1 1 (p.
280) rd dvev (pBopds ore pev ov ore Se
p7/ dv, oiovrds dcpds, on avev rov d)6el-
peaBai irpbrepov ovaai varepov ovk elalv,
de Gen. et Corr. i. 8 (p. 326) oure ydp
Kara ras dqSds e'vScxerai buevai bid
rdv biad)avdv oure Sid rav irbpav, ib.
§ 9 (P- 327) " yaP biaKplveaBai biivarai

II. 19] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 265
Kal o~vvBeamfJ.o)v iirixoptiyov/mevov Kal o-vvr3ir3afyiJ.evov

Kara rds d (pas, dairep (paal rtves, Kav
p.rjirco 77 bivpvpevov, earai bivpvpevov'
bvvarbv yap biaipeBrjvai: COmp. [Plat.]
Axioch. p. 3^5 A avveiXeypevov rds
dtpds Kal to adjian papaXiov*, It is
quite clear from these passages of
Aristotle, more especially from the
distinction of dqbal and irdpoi, that al
drpal are the joinings, the junctures.
When applied 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 limbs themselves in the
neighbourhood of the contact. Hip
pocrates indeed used d(f>ai 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 andean have no place here.
Thus al dcpal will be almost a synonyme
for rd apBpa, differing however (1) as
being more wide and comprehensive,
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 al dqbal to be 'the
senses', following Theodoret on Ephes.
iv. 16 d(prjv be Ttjv ataBvaiv irpooijyb-
pevaev, iireibrj Kal avrv pia rav ire'vre
alaBrjaeav, Kal dirb rov pepous rd irdv
dvbpaae. St Chrysostom had led the
way to this interpretation, though his
language is less explicit than Theo-
doret's. To such a meaning how
ever there are fatal objections. (1)
This sense of doSrj is wholly 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 Anirn.
i. 13 (p. 435) <*vev /**" yop dd>Tjs ovbe-
piav ivbixeraiaXXvva'iaBvaivexeiv. But
here the connexion ends ; and unless
more cogent examples not hitherto ad

duced are forthcoming, we are justified
in saying that al dipai could no more
be used for al aladtjaeis, than in
English 'the touches' could be taken
as a synonyme for 'the senses.' (2) The-
image would be seriously marred by
such a meaning. The doiai and avv-
beapoi 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 rcSv
depdv koi avvbiapav, would be un
natural; and the intrusion of the
'senses' would be out of place, where
the result specified is the supply of
nourishment (imxopvyovpevov) and the
compacting of the parts (o-upj3i/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-uvSe'o-pcov] ' bands,' 'ligaments' The
Greek o-dvSeo-posjlike the English 'liga
ment/has a general and a special sense.
Initsgerieralandcomprehensivemean-
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 avvbeapos ydp ianv, b
yovv Iblas, ov Kotvds bvopa£bpevos, ad
pa vevpdbes i£ borov pev bppdpevov
irdvras biairecbvKos be fj eis doroGv rj els
piiv. Of the o-uv8eo-pot or ligaments
properly so called Galen describes at
length the several functions and uses,
more especially as binding and holding
together the biapBpdaeis ; Op. 1. 236,
11. 268, 739, 111. 149, iv. 2, etc., comp.
Tim. Locr. de An. Mund. p. 557 avv-
biapois irorrdv Kivaoiv rois vevpois
avvaTJre rd apBpa (Opusc. Mythol. etc.
ed Gale). In our text indeed o-uv-

266

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 20

av^ei Ttjv av^t]o-iv tov Qeov. *°ei direddveTe (Tvv Xpio-TcS

beapoi must be taken in its compre
hensive sense ; but the relation of the
doiai to the o-uvSeo-poi in St Paul still
remains the same as that of the Siap-
Bpdaeis to the o-uv8eo-poi in Galen.
iirixopvyovpevov K.r.X.] The two func
tions performed by the dd>ai and o-uv-
beapoi sire first the supply of nutri
ment etc. (iirixopvyovpevov), and se
condly the compacting of the frame
(o-uv/3i/3afdpevov). In other words
they are the communication of life
and energy, and the preservation of
unity and order. The source of all (c£
ou) is Christ Himself the Head ; but
the channels of communication (8id
rav K.r.X.) are the different members
of His body, in their relation one to
another. For iirixopvyovpevov 'bounti
fully furnished' see the note on Gal.
iii. 5. Somewhat similarly Aristotle
speaks of adpa KaXXiara irecpvKos Kal
Kexopvytjpevov, Pol. iv. I (p. 1 288).
For examples of x°Pvy^a applied to
functions of the bodily organs, see
Galen Op. III. p. 617 iv rals elairvoais
Xopvyia -\//uxpds iroiorvros, Alex. Probl.
i. 81 rd irXeio-rov rrjs rporpijs i£vbapov-
pevov xopvyelrai irpbs yiveaiv rov ird-
Bovs. For o-uv/3i/3afdpevov, 'joined to
gether, compacted', see the note on
ii. 2. In the parallel passage, Ephes.
iv. 16, this part of the image is more
distinctly emphasized, awappoXovpe-
vov koi avvfiifiai^bpevov. 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.
auf ei rrjv av^naiv K.T.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.xv.4 (p. 1014) av£va'iv ^XeL °"
ereppu r<3 airreoBai Kal avpire(pVKe-

vai...biad>ipet be avp(f>vais dcpijs, where
growth is attributed to the same two
physiological conditions as here.
rou OeoG] 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 Go
spel vindicates itself as the true the-
anthropism, after which the human
heart is yearning and the human in
tellect is feeling. See above p. 183
sq. With this conclusion of the sen
tence contrast the parallel passage
Ephes. iv. 16 ttjv au|r;aiv r0" adparos
iroieirai els olKoboprjv eavrov ev
dya7T77, 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 like a commentary on
his image of the relations between the
body and the head. At every turn we
meet with some fresh illustration
which kindles it with a flood of light.
The volition 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 following passages will show how
even ancient scientific speculation was
feeling after those physiological truths
which the image involves ; Hippocr.
de Morb. Sacr. p. 309 (ed Foese) Kara
rauTa vopl£a rbv iyKecpaXov bvvapiv
irXeioTTjv exeiv e'v ra dv6,pcoirco...oi Se
ocp&dXpol Kal rd ouara Kal 77 yXc5o-o-a
Kal al xe'per Kal 01 irdSes, 01a dv d e'yKe-
(paXos yivaaKtj, rotaGra virvperovai...

II. 2D]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

267

diro twv o-TOixeiwv tov koo-juiov, t'i cos ^wvtcs iv koo-jUw

is be rrjv avveaiv b e'yKeqiaXos e'orlv d
8iayye'XXcov...Sidn ^pl r6v iyKecpaXov
eivai rbv eppvvevovra rrjv avveaiv, al be
(ppives dXXas bvopa exovai rfj tvxV
KeKrrjpivov . . .Xeyoval be rives cos (j)povi-
opev rrj Kapbltj Kal rb aviapevov tovto
ion Kal rb d>povrl£ov' rd Se oux ouras
exei...rijs...d)povrjaios ovberepa pirea-
nv dXXd irdvrav rovreav b iyKe(paXos
airibs ioTiv...irpdros alaBdverai b iy-
KecpaXos rcov ev no adpan ivebvr.av
(where the theory is mixed up with
some curious physiological specula
tions), Galen Op. I. 235 adrds Se d
e'yKe'nSaXos on pev dpxv rois vevpois
airaai rrjs bvvdjieas ianv, ivapyds
ejiaBopev . . .irdrcpov be ds avrbs rois
vevpois, ovra eVeii/co irdXiv erepov rt
pbpiov iimripirei, fj irvyv ris avrdv
iarlv, er dbrjXov, ib. IV. p. 1 1 dpxv pev
ydp avrdv (ie. rav vevpav) b iyKecbaXbs
can, Kal rd irdBv els avrbv (pipei, olov
els apovpdv nva rrjs XoyiariKrjs i//uxrjs'
eK(pvais & ivrevBev, olov irpepvov nvbs
eis bivbpov dvrjKovros peya, b vanalbs
ian pueXds. ..avpirav 8' oun» rb adpa
peraXapftavei Si' aurtov irpdrns pev Kal
pdXiara Kivrjaeas, iirl ravrrj 8' alaBrj-
aeas, XIV. p. 31 3 aurr; ydp (i.e. 77
KetfiaXrj) KaBdirep ris aKpbwoXis ian rov
aaparos Kal tov npiardrav Kal dvay-
Kaiordrav dvBpairois alaBrjaeav 01K77T7J-
pwv. Plato had made the head the
central organ of the reason (Tim. 69
sq. : see Grote's Plato iil pp. 272,
287, Aristotle 11. p. 179 sq.), if in
deed the speculations of the Timseus
may be regarded as giving his serious
physiological views; but he had postu
lated other centres of the emotions
and appetites, the heart and the
abdomen. Aristotle, while rightly re
fusing to localize 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 8ijXds ian
KareyvaKas piv avrov (i.e. rou iyKeipd-

Xov) reXe'av dxpvrriav, (pavepas 8 opo-
Xoyeiv albovpevos (Op. III. p. 625). ' The
Stoics however (Zrjvav Kal Xpuo-tiriros
dpa r<5 arperipa x°PV 7ra"1"') were even
worse offenders ; and in reply to them
more especially Galen elsewhere dis
cusses the question irdrepov iyKeCpaXos
7) Kapbla rrjv dpxvv exei, Op. V. p. 213
sq. Bearing in mind all this diversity
of opinion among ancient 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 still to
the rudimentary discipline of children?
Why do you — you who are citizens of
heaven — bow your necks afresh to
the tyranny of material ordinances, as
though you were still living 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 folly !
When all 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 ? 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
ligious devotion, an eager affectation
of humility ; there is a stern ascetic
rigour, which ill-treats the body ; but
there is nothing of any real value
to check indulgence of the flesh.'

268

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 21, 22

BoyixaTitearde ; siMj) aty wBe yevcrtj {Xt]Be 6'iytjs M(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 life 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. I.
ei d7Te(3dvere] ' if ye died, when ye
were baptized into Christ.' For this
connexion between baptism and death-
see the notes on ii. n, iii. 3. This
death has many aspects in St Paul's
teaching. It is not only a dying with
Christ, 2 Tim. ii. 1 1 el ydp avvairedd-
vopev ; but it is also a dying to or from
something. This is sometimes repre
sented as sin, Rom. vi 2 oinves diredd-
vopev rrj dpapriq (comp. VV. 7, 8);
sometimes as self, 2 Cor. v. 14,15 dpa of
irdvres diriBavov. ..tva ol £dvres prjKert
eaurois fcoo-iv; sometimes as the law,
Rom. vii. 6 Karrjpyrjdvpev dirb tov vb-
pov diroBavbvres, Gal. ii. 19 Sid vdpou
vbpa diriBavov ; sometimes still more
widely as the world, regarded as the
sphere of all material rules and all
mundane interests, so here and iii. 3
aVeo'dvere ydp. In all cases St Paul
uses the aorist diriBavov, never the
perfect riBvvKa; 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 dn-odVrjo-Keiv is used; when
the perfect, the simple verb oVrjo-Keiv;
see Buttmann Ausf. Gramm. § 114.
This rule holds universally in the
Greek Testament.
dirb rdv aroixeiav K.r.X.] i.e. 'from

the rudimentary, disciplinary, ordi
nances, whose sphere is the mundane
and sensuous' : see the note on yer.
8. For the pregnant expression diro-
Baveiv dird comp. Gal. V. 4 KarvpyvBvre
dirb Xpio-roG (so too Rom. vii. 2, 6),
2 Cor. xi. 3 (pBaprj-.-dirb rijs dirXor7;ros,
and see A. Buttmann p. 277 note.
boyparl£eo8e] 'are ye overridden
with precepts, ordinances.' In the
lxx the verb 8oyparifeiv is used seve
ral times, meaning ' to issue a decree,'
Esth. iii. 9, 1 Esdr. vi. 33, 2 Mace. x.
8, xv. 36, 3 Mace. iv. 11. Elsewhere
it is applied most commonly to the
precepts of philosophers ; e.g. Justin
Apol. i. 7 01 e'v "EXXt;o-i rd aurois
dpeo-rd boyparlaavres eV iravros ra
evl dvbpan (piXooocplas irpoaayopev-
ovrai (comp. § 4), Epict. iii. 7. 17 sq.
ei BeXeis elvai CpiXbao(pos...boypaTl£av
rd alaxpd. Here it would include
alike the bbypara of the Mosaic law
(ver. 14) and the bbypara of the 'phi
losophy' denounced above (ver. 8).
Both are condemned ; the one as super
seded though once authoritative, the
other as wholly vexatious and un
warrantable. Examples are given in
the following verse, p.r) d\jrrj k.t.X.
For the construction here, where
the more remote object, which would
stand in the dative with the active
voice (2 Mace. x. 8 c'8oypdricrav...ra
rav 'lovbaiav edvei), becomes the
nominative of the passive, compare
Xpvparl£ea8ai Matt. ii. 12, 22, biaKo-
veiadai Mark x. 45, and see Winer
§ xxxix. p. 326, A. Buttmann p. 163,
Kuhner §378, 11. p. 109.
21. M17 d\jrtj k.t.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.

269

io~Tiv irdvTa eh (pdopdv Ttj diroxptiarei), KaTa Ta

these prohibitions to be the Apostle's
own,thus making a complete shipwreck
of the sense. So too St Ambrose de
Noe etArca 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.
(n. p. 512) 'tanquam prseceptum pu-
tatur apostoli, nescio quid tangere,
gustare,attaminare,prohibentis.' The
ascetic tendency of the age thus
fastened upon a slight 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 bbypaaiv ver. 14. Jerome how
ever (1. p. 878) had rightly interpreted
the passage, illustrating it by the pre
cepts of the Talmud. At a still earlier
date Tertullian, Adv. Mare. 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
ligious inferior, and the like; see pp.
85 sq. For the religious bearing of
this asceticism, as springing from the
dualism of these heretical teachers,
see above pp. 79, 104 sq.
cnl/77] The difference between airrea
Bai and Biyydveiv is not great, and in
some passages where they occur toge
ther, it is hard to distinguish them :
e.g. Exod. xix. 12 irpoo-c'xere eaurois roG
dvafUjvai els rb opos Kal Biyeiv n av
rov' irds o a-^rapevos rov bpovs Bavdra
TeXevrrjaei, Jbwr. Bacch.617 o£r eBiyev
ovff rj^raB' vpdv, Axist.deGen.etCorr.
i. 8 (p. 326)810 ri ov yiyverai dtydpeva

ev, dairep vbap vbaros brav Blyjj;
Dion Chrys. Or. xxxiv. (11. p. 50) ol
8' c'k irapipyov irpoalaaiv dirrbpevoi
pdvov roG irpdyparos, dairep ol oirovbrjs
Biyydvovres, Themist. Paraphr.
Arist. 95 rrjv be d(pr)v avrdv airreaBai
rdv alaBvrdv dvayKalov' Kal ydp rou-
vopa avrijs c'k roG airreaBai Kal Biy
ydveiv. But airreaBai 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 fcVyydvetv; comp. The
mist. Paraphr. Arist. 94 rj rav gdav
a(pv Kplais ian Kal dvTiXvyr'cs T°d Biy-
ydvovros. Hence in Xen. Cyrop. i. 3.
5 on ae, (paval, opd, orav pev tov dprov
01/7-77, els ovbev Ttjv xe'Pa diroyfrdpevov,
orav be rovrav nvds Biytjs, evBiis diroKa-
Balpei rrjv Xf 'Pa f is I'd xeipbpaKTpa K.r.X.
Thus the words chosen in the Latin Ver
sions, tangere for airreaBai and attami-
nare or contrectare for Biyeiv, are un
fortunate, and ought to be transposed.
Our English "Version, probably influ
enced by the Latin, has erred in the
same direction, translating airreaBai
by 'touch' and Biyelv 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 airreaBai, which it more
nearly represents. Thus the two words
d\jrtj and Biytjs being separate in mean
ing, yeuo-77 may well interpose; and the
three together will form a descending
series, so that, as Beza (quoted in
Trench N. T. Syn. § xvii. p. ^7) well
expresses it, 'decrescente semper
oratione, intelligatur crescere super-
stitio'. On the other hand a^rg has been
interpreted here as referring to the
relation of husband and wife, as e.g.
in I Cor. vii. I yuvaiKos pi) airreaBai;
and the prohibition would then be
illustrated by the teaching of the he-

270 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. tIL 22
evTaXfxaTa Kal BiBao~KaXias toov dv6pwn'(av'

retics in i Tim. iv. 3 KmXudvrav yapelv.
But, whatever likelihood there may be
that the Colossian false teachers also
held this doctrine (see above p. 85 sq.),
it nowhere appears in the context,
and we should not expect so import
ant a topic to be dismissed thus cur
sorily. Moreover Biyydveiv is used as
commonly in this meaning as airreaBai
(see Gataker Op. Crit. p. 79, and ex
amples might be multiplied) ; so, that
all ground for assigning it to airrea
Bai especially is removed. Both dir-
reaBai and Biyydveiv 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', i.e. the meats
and drinks and other material objects,
regarded as impure to the touch.
The antecedent to d is implicitly
involved in the prohibitions prj d-usy
K.T.X. ianv els (bdopdv] ' are destined for
corruption'. For similar expressions
see Acts viii. 20 e"aj eis diraXeiav
(comp. ver. 23 els x°^Vv iriKpias Kal
aiivbeapov dbiKlas  ovra), 2 Pet. ii. 12
yeyewvpeva  eis dXaaiv Kal (pBopdv.
For the word (pBopd, involving the idea
of ' decomposition', see the note on Gal.
vi. 8. The expression here corresponds
to eis adrebpdva eK/3dXXerai (eWopeuerai),
Matt. xv. 17, Mark vii. 19.
rfj a7roxpi70-ei] 'in the consuming'.
While the verb diroxpdpai is common,
the substantive dirbxpv<ns is extremely
rare : Plut. Mor. p. 267 ¥ xa'LPeiv Tals
roiavrais diroxptjaeai Kal avaroXals rdv
irepirrav (i.e. 'by such modes of con
suming and abridging superfluities'),
Dion. Hal. A. R. i 58 iv diroxpijo-ei

yrjs poipas. The unusual word was
chosen for its expressiveness : the xpfj-
o-is here was an dirbxpvais > ^e things
could not be used without rendering
them unfit for further use. The sub
tlety of the expression in the original
cannot be reproduced in any transla
tion. On the other hand the clause is
sometimes interpreted as a continua
tion of the language of the ascetic
teachers ; ' Touch not things which all
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 elvai els (pBopdv a meaning which
is at least not natural.
Kara k.t.X.] connected directly with
vv. 20, 21, so that the words d ianv...
rfj diroxprjaei are a parenthetical com
ment. rd ivrdXpara K.r.X.] The absence of
both preposition and article before bi-
baaKaXias 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 SiSao-KaXias the medium of com
munication. The expression is taken
ultimately from Isaiah xxix. 1 3, where
the words run in the lxx, pdrrjv be
aifiovral pe, bibaaKOvres ivraXpara dv-
Bpdirav Kal bibaaKaXias. The Evan
gelists (Matt. xv. 9, Mark vii. 7), quot
ing the passage, substitute in the latter
clause 8i8do-Kovres bibaaKaXias ivrdX
para dvBpairav.
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 perishdbleness 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.

271

»3

aTivd io~Tiv Xoyov fiev ex0VTa <ro(pias iv ideXodptj-

words on this occasion, as practically
abolishing the Mosaic distinction of
meats by declaring all alike to be
clean (KaBaplfav ; 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 religious service;
it may vaunt its humility ; 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.'
dnva] ' which sort of things'. Not
only these particular precepts, pi) d^rn
k.t.X., but all precepts falling under
the same category are condemned.
For this force of dnva as distinguished
from d, see the notes on Gal. iv. 24,
v. 19, Phil. iv. 3. The antecedent
here is not ivrdXpara Kal bibaaKa
Xias K.r.X., but the prohibitions given
in ver. 21.
Xdyov pev k.t.X.] ' having a reputa
tion for wisdom', but not the reality.
The corresponding member, which
should be introduced by bi, is sup
pressed; the oppositive clause being
postponed and appearing later in a
new form, ouk e'v npfj nvi K.r.X. Such
suppressions are common in classical
writers, more especially in Plato ; see
Kiihner § 531, 11. p. 813 sq, Jelf § 766,
and comp. Winer § lxiii. p. 719 sq.
St Jerome therefore is not warranted
in attributing St Paul's language here
to ' imperitia artis grammaticse' (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 e'xovra 0-0-
(pias is best taken as a single predicate,
so that e'o-nv is disconnected from
e'xovTa. Otherwise the construction
e'o-rtv .e'xovra (for exei) would be

supported by many parallels in the
Greek Testament; see Winer § xiv.
P- 437-
The phrase Xdyov e'xeiv nvos, so far
as I have observed, has four meanings.
(a) Two as applied to the thinking
sutject. (i) 'To take account of, to hold
in account, to pay respect to': e.g.
iEsch. Prom. 231 /3porav be rav ra-
Xaiirapav Xbyov ovk eo"xev ovbiva, De-
mosth. de Coron. § 199 e'iirep f) Sd^s
i) irpoybvav tj tov pe'XXovros alavos
elxe Xbyov, Plut. Vit. Philop. 18 iras
d£iov eVeivou Xdyov e\eiv rod dvbpbs
K.r.X. (ii) ' To possess the reason or
account or definition of, 'to have a
scientific knowledge of; Plato Gorg.
p. 465 A rexvr)V Se avrrjv ov (pvpi elvai
dXX' ipireiplav, on ovk exei Xdyov ou-
Seva av irpoa(j)epei, brrola arra ttjv (pv-
aiv iarlv, 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 e'xeiv Xoyov rou irarpbs fj rdv
(plXav and e'xeiv Xdyov rav paBvnKav.
(b) Two as applied to the object of
thought, (iii) ' To have the credit or
reputation of, as here. This sense of
e'xeiv Xdyov, ' to be reputed', is more
commonly found with an infinitive :
e. g. Plato Epin. 987 B adrds 'AaipoSi-
T77S elvai axibov e'xei Xdyov. (iv) 'To
fulfil the definition of, to possess the
characteristics, to have the nature of;
e.g. Philo Vit. Cont. 4 (11. p. 477) cko-
repov be irrjyfjs Xdyov e'xov, Plut. Mor.
p. 637 D rd be dbv oure dpxvs exei Xd
yov, ov yap v(piaTarai irpdrov, oure
dXou (pvaiv, areXes ydp ianv, ib. 640 F
8ci irpds rd ipqbvrevbpevov xdpas Xbyov
e'xeiv to 8e£dpevov. The senses of Xd
yov e'xeiv 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 C prjre rdv Xdyov
exoiiv rod vopoBerov, ' not being in pos-

272

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[II. 23

ence/a Kal Ta7reivo(ppoo~vvtj [Kal] d<peiBeta aroofxaTOS, ovk

session of, not knowing, the intention
of the legislator'; for the definite ar
ticle removes it from tlie category of
the cases considered.
e'v iBeXoBpvaKeia] '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. iBeXobovXeia, iBeXoKaKvais, iBeXo-
Kivbvvos, iBeXoKaqbeiv, iBeXoptjrap, iBe-
Xoirpbl-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 naturalised in Latin, as appears
from Augustine Epist. cxlix. 27 (11.
p. 514) ' 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 supplied by St Paul, coins
a double compound iBeXoirepiaaoBpv
aKeia, Hair. i. 16 (p. 34).
raireivodppoavvTj] The word is here
disparaged by its connexion, as in ver.
1 8 (see the note there). The force of
e'BeXo- may be regarded as carried on
to it. Real genuine raireivorppoavvv
is commended below ; iii. 1 2.
drpeibeia adparos] ' hard treatment
of the body'. The expression dcpeibeiv
rov adparos is not uncommon, being
used most frequently, not as here of
ascetic discipline, 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. 1370 however of a stu
dent's toil, and ib. p. 1 35 e, more gene
rally of the rigorous demands made
by the soul on the body. The substan
tive b(beibeia or dd)eibia does not often
occur. On the forms in -eia and -ia
derived from adjectives in -77s see
Buttmann Ausf. Gramm. § 119, 11.
p. 416 sq. The great preponderance

of manuscript authority favours the
form dajeibela here : but in such ques
tions of orthography the fact car
ries less weight than in other matters.
The koI before dcpeibela should, proba
bly be omitted ; in which case dcpeibela
becomes an instrumental dative, ex
plaining Xdyov exovra aocpias. While
the insertion would naturally occur to
scribes, the omission gives more point
to the sentence. The iBeXoBpvaKeia
Kal raireivodrpoavvv as the religious
elements are thus separated from the
d(pelbeia adparos as the practical rule.
ou'k e'v npfi k.t.X-] 'yet not really of
any value to remedy indulgence of
tlie flesh' So interpreted the words
supply the oppositive clause to Xdyov
pev exovra aocpias, as the presence of
the negative ovk naturally suggests.
If the sentence had been undisturbed,
this oppositive clause would naturally
have been introduced by Se', but the
interposition of e'v iBeXoBpvaKeia k.t.X.
has changed its form by a sort of at
traction. For this sense of e'v npfj
comp. Lucian Merc. cond. 17 rd Kaivd
rdv virobvpdrav iv rijirj nvt Kal e'lripe-
Xeia iarlv : similarly Horn. II. ix. 319
e'v be Irj npfj k.t.X. The preposition
irpbs, like our English 'for', when used
after words denoting utility, 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) irpos robs /3ap0d-
pous xPV°~lP-0V> Arist. H. A. iii. 21 (p.
522) avprpepei irpbs rds biappoias rj roi-
aiirv pdXiara, de Respir. 8 (p. 474)
dvdyKT; ylveaBai Kardi//-u£iv, ei piXXei
rev£ea8ai aarvpias' tovto yap j3otj8ei
irpos ravrvv rrjv (pBopdv, Lucian Pise.
27 XPWlPov VoC" Kal irpbs c'kcivous to
toiovtov, Galen Op. xii. p. 399 xp<op-i-
va> ye rivi 7rpds rd irdd'os dpKreia are-

II. 23]

EPISTLE TO THE COhOSSIANS.

2/3

iv Tipitj tivi irpos irX}]0"fj.ovtjV Ttjs aapKos.

an, p. 420 roG bbvros avrd irpbs dXo>-
ireKlas (paXaKpdaeis k.t.X, p. 430 avvi-
BrjKav . . .(pdppaKa irpbs peovaas rpixas,
p. 476 ^paxvrdrvv exovn bvvapiv ds
irpbs to irpoKelpevov avpirrapa, p. 482
ToGro Se Kal irpds rd e'v oXa> ra adpan
i^avBrjpara odtbbpa xptjaipbv ianv, p.5 1 4
XPVoriov be irdai rois dvayeypappivois
(iovBrjpaai irpos rds yivopivas bi eyKav-
aiv Ke(j)aXaXyias, p. 601 koXXiotov irpos
aurdv (pdppaKOV iyxebpevov vdpbivov
pvpov. These examples from Galen
are only a fe w out of probably som e hun
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. 86, note 2, p. 94), the
Therapeutes of Egypt ; de Vit. Cont.
§ 4 (n. P- 47^ sq.) rpvd)daiv virb ao-
(plas iandpevoi irXovalas Kal dcpBbvas
to 8dypara xoptjyovavs, ds Kal...pb-
Xis bi e£ rjpepdv diroyeveaBai rpo-
(prjs dvayKalas...aiTOvvrai be...uprov eu-
reXrJ, Kal o^rov d~Xes...irbrov vbap vapa-
naiov avrois iariv...irXvapovrjv ds
ixBpbv Te Kal imfiovXov iKrpeirbpevoi
yjnixvs Kal 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 aocpla; he disputes the value of
these Sdypara; he allows that this
irXvapovv is the great evil to be check
ed, the fatal disease to be cured ; but
he will 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 will I trust show the
COL.

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 moderil
times divide themselves into two
classes, according to the meaning as
signed to irpds irXrio-povrjv rfjs aapKos.
(1) It is explained in a good sense:
' to satisfy the reasonable wants of the
body'. In this case ouk e'v npjj nvi is
generally 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
ouk e'v npfj nvt irpos irXr;o-povr)v k.t.X. :
but it assigns an impossible sense to
irXrjo-povr) rfjs aapKos. For trXrjopovrj
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. 1 13 7rdvrav eiw-
Bbrav ov pbvov larpdv dXXd Kal rdv dX-
Xav 'EXXtJvojv to ttjs TrXvapovrjs bvopa
pdXXdv iras iiri(bipeiv rals virepjio-
Xais rrjs avpperpov iroo-drTjros:
and certainly neither the Apostle nor
the Colossian ascetics were likely to
depart from this universal rule. To
the long list of passages quoted in
Wetstein may be added such refer
ences as Philo Leg. ad. Cai. § 1 (11.
p. 546), Clem. Horn. viii. 15, Justin
Dial. 126, Dion. Alex, in Euseb. H.E.
vii. 25 ; but they might be increased
to any extent. (2) A bad sense is
attached to irXjfo-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 ouk
e'v np^ rtvl irpds irXvcrpovr)v rijs aapKos
are regarded as an exposition of the
doctrine of the false teachers from
their own point of view. So Theo
dore of Mopsuestia, ou ripiov voplfyv-
iS

274

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. i

III. 'Et ovv o-vvt]yepdt]Te tw XpiCTM, Ta dvco ty-
TelTe, ov 6 Xpio-Tos icrTiv iv Be^id tov Qeov Kadnptevos'

ras rb bid irdvrav irXvpovv rrjv adpKa,
aXXd ydp pdXXov alpovpivovs dirixeadai
rdv iroXXdv bid rijv rov vbjiov irapdbo
aiv. This able expositor however is
evidently dissatisfied, for he intro
duces his explanation with the words
aaacpes piv ian, fiovXerai be elireiv
k.t.X.; and his explanation has not
been adopted by others. Either the
sentence, so interpreted, becomes fiat
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 lie
is combating, (ii) 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
explicable. There is no indication
either in the grammar or in the voca
bulary that a separate and oppositive
clause begins with irpds irXvapovrjv
k.t.X., but on the contrary everything
points to an unbroken continuity. (/3)
The sense which it attaches to irX?7o--
povrj rrjs aapKos is either forced and
unnatural, or it makes the Apostle
say what he could not have said. If
irXvapovt) rfjs aapKos 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 itXtjo--
povrj rijs aapKos conveys a very differ
ent idea from such expressions as rd
(jniaiovaBai virb tov vobs ttJs aapKos

(ver. 1 8) or rd (ppbvvpa rfjs aapKos
(Rom. viii. 6, 7), which include pride,
self-sufficiency, strife, hatred, bigotry,
and generally everything that is earth-
bound and selfish. On the other hand,
if irXvapovr) rijs aapKos 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 irpbs irXvapovrjv Trjs aapKos.
Such language would defeat its own
object by its extravagance.
Ill- 1 — 4. ' If this be so; if ye were
raised with Christ, if ye were trans
lated into heaven, what follows? Why
you must realise the change. All 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 all to the world: you
are living 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 life
in God. But the veil will 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. el ovv avvtjyipBvre K.T.X.] 'If
then ye were raised', not 'have been
raised'. The aorist avvvyipBvre, like
direBdvere (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 ii.
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

in. 2, 3]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

275

*Ta dvw (ppoveiTe, firj Ta iirl Ttjs yijs. 3 direddveTe yap,
Kal tj fat] v/ulwv KeKpviTTai arvv to Xpio~Tu> iv tw Gear

in the change typified by the rite they
are two aspects of the same thing,
' like the concave and convex in a cir
cle', to use an old simile. The nega
tive side — the death and burial — im
plies the positive side — the resurrec
tion. Hence the form of the Apo
stle's resumption, el direBdvere, el ovv
avvvyipBvre. The change mvolved 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 wholly 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 Svio ^reire k.t.X.] ' Cease to
concentrate your energies, your
thoughts, on mundane ordinances, and
realise your new and heavenly life, of
which Christ is the pole-star'.
e'v 8e|iS k.t.X.] ' being seated on the
right hand of God', where KaBrjpevos
must not be connected with e'o-riv ;
see the note on diroKputfiot, ii 3. This
participial clause is pertinent and
emphatic, for the session of Christ
implies the session of the believer
also; Ephes. ii. 4 — 6 d Se Qcbs—vpds...
avve£aoiroivaev  Kal avvrjyeipev Kal
avveKaBiaev iv rois iirovpavlois iv
Xpiard 'I770-0G k.t.X.; comp. Rev. iii. 21
d vtKtov, bdaa avrd KaBlaai per' ipov
iv r<5 Bpbva pov, ds Kayd ivUvaa Kal
imBiaa perd roG irarpos pov iv ra

Bpbva avrov, in the message addressed
to the principal church of this dis
trict: see above p. 42. Ba/3ai, says
Chrysostom, iroC rdv vovv dirtjyaye rbv
rjpirepov; irds (ppovrjparos avrobs iirXv-
paae peydXou; ouk ^fpKei Td dvo> ei-
ireiv, ou'Se, Ou" d Xpiarbs ianv, dXXd
ri; 'Ev be£ia tov Qeov KaBrjpevos. e Ket-
8ev Xotirdv rrjv yfjv opav irapeaKeiia£e.
2. rd avis] The same expression
repeated for emphasis ; ' You must
not only seek heaven ; you must also
think heaven.' For the opposition of
rd dva and rd iirl rfjs yijs in connexion
with qbpoveiv, comp. Phil. iii. 19, 20
ot rd iirlyeia (ppovovvres, rjpdv ydp
to iroXireupa e'v ovpavois uVapxei;
see also Theoph. ad Autol. ii 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. direcMvere] ' ye died' in baptism.
The aorist direcJdverc denotes the past
act ; the perfect KiKpvrrrai the perma
nent effects. For d7re6,dvere see the
notes on ii. 12, 20.
KcKpuTrrai] '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 rd irvevpa Ttjs oXtj-
cJeias o 6 Kaapos ov bvvarai Xaj3eiv, on
ou Beapel outo ou'Se yivdaiiei
l8—2

276 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [HI- 4
AOTav 6 Xpia-Tos (pavepooBt), r\ '(wr\ t]p.wv, totc Kal
vjueTs aw avTw rpavepwdrjcrecrde iv Bopt}.
4. v £arj vpdv.

ovto, vpeis [be] yivdaKere avrb...b ko-
apos pe ouk en Beapei vpeis Se Bea-
pelri pe' on iyd £d, Kal vpeis
irjaere. 4. d Xpio-rds] A fourth occur
rence of the name of Christ in this
context; comp. ver. 2 ra Xpiard, b
Xpiarbs, ver. 3 o-uv to Xpiard. A
pronoun would have been more natu
ral, but less emphatic.
tj (at) ijpav] This is an advance on
the previous statement, rj (at) vpdv
KeKpvirrai aiiv rd Xpiard, in two re
spects : (1) It is not enough to have
said that the^ife is shared with Christ.
The Apostle declares that the life is
Christ. Comp. 1 Joh. v. 12 d e'x&>v rbv
vlov exei rrjv £aijv, Ign. Ephes. 7 e'v 6a-
vdra £at) dXvBivrj (of Christ), Smyrn.
4 It/0"oGs Xpiarbs rb dXvBivbv ijpav tjjv,
Ephes. 3 'Iria-ous Xpiarbs rb dbiaKpirov
rjpdv ffjv, Magn. I 'I170-0G Xpiaroii tov
biairavrbs vpdv £fjv. (2) For vpdv is
substituted rjpcSv. 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 ii.
13. The reading dp<Sv 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.
rdre Kal upeis k.t.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 blinded, with
the dazzling glory of the revelation'.
Comp. 1 Joh. iii. 1, 2 d Koapos ov
ytvaaKei rjpds, on ouk eyvo) aurdv.
dyairTjroi, vGv tc'kvo 0eoG iapiv, Kal
nvira iqbavepdBv rl iaopeBa' oiSapev
on e'dv (pavepaBfj, opoioi avrd iao
peBa k.t.X., Clem. Rom. 50 "i (pavepa-

8rjaovrai (or (bavepol eaovrai) iv rfj iirt-
aKoirfj rfjs fiaaiXeias tov Xpiarov.
iv bb^tj] Joh. xvii. 22 ttjv bbgav rjv
bebaKas poi, bibaKa avrols, Rom. viii. 1 7
iva Kal avvbo^aadapev.
5 — 11. ' So then realise this death
to the world; kill all 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 will surely
come. In these sins ye, like other
Gentiles, indulged in times past, when
your life 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, malice, slander, filthy
abuse; banish it from your lips. 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 annihilated, all
these; Christ is Himself all things
and in all things'.
5. The false doctrine of the Gnos
tics had failed to check sensual indul
gence (ii. 23). The true doctrine of
the Apostle has power to kill 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.

277

s Ne/C|OW(raTe ovv Ta /ueXri Ta iirl Ttjs ytjs' iropveiav,
aKadapo-'tav, irados, iiridvpiiav KaKt]v, Kal Tt\v irXeov-

veKpfflo-are ouv] i. e. ' Cairy out this
principle of death to the world (ii. 20
diredavere, iii. 3 a7refldvere), and kill
everything that is mundane and car
nal in your being'.
rd pe'XT) k.t.X.] Each person has a
twofold moral personality. There is
in him the 'old man', and there is in
him also 'the new' (vv. 9, 10). The
old man with all his members must
be pitilessly slain. It is plain that ra
piXv here is used, like dvBpairos in
ver. 9, not physically, but morally.
Our actual limbs may be either rd eVl
rfjs yfjs or rd e'v tois oupdvois, 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 iraXaios dvBpairos or
with the ve'os dvBpairos 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. el be b 6(p8aX-
pbs aov d be£ibs aKavbaXl£ei ae, c£eXe
aurdv kt.X.
I have ventured to punctuate
after rd iirl rijs yijs. Thus iropveiav
k.t.X. are prospective accusatives,
which should be governed directly by
some such word as dwbdeoBe. But
several dependent clauses interpose;
the last of these incidentally 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,
vuvl be diroBeaBe Kal vpeis Ta irdvra
in disregard of the original construc
tion. This opposition of irori and vuv
has a tendency to dislocate the con
struction in St Paul, as in i. 22 vuvl bi
diroKarijXXdyvTe (or diroKarvXXa^ev),i.26
vvv be icpavipadv : 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)

compare Ephes.-ii. 1 — 5 Kal upas. ..e'v
ais irore. ..ivols Kal . irore...d be Qebs. ¦¦
Kai ovras vpas avve^aoiroivaev.
With the common punctuation the
interpretation is equally awkward,
whether we treat rd piXv and irop
veiav k.tX. as in direct apposition, or
as double accusatives, or in any other
way. The case is best put by Seve-
rianus, adpKa KaXei rrjv dpnpriav, rjs Kal
rd pe'X77 KaTapi8pei...b iraXaios dvBpa
iros ianv rb (ppbvvpa rb rrjs dpaprlas,
piiXv be avrov al irpd£eis rdv dpaprv-
pdrav; 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 k.t.X.] The general order
is from the less comprehensive to the
more comprehensive. Thus iropvela is
a special kind of uncleanness, while
aKaBapala is uncleanness in any form,
Ephes. V. 3 iropvela bi Kal aKaBapala
irdaa; comp. Gal. v. 19 iropvela, aKa
Bapala, daiXyeia, with the note there.
Thus again irdBos, 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 aKaBapala, as for in
stance gluttony and intemperance.
¦irdBos, iiriBvpiav] The two words
occur together in 1 Thess. iv. 5 prj « "
irddei imBvplas. So in a passage closely
resembling the text, Gal. v. 24 ol be
roil Xpiarov 'Ivaov rrjv adpKa iaravpa-
aav ovv rois iraBvpaaiv Kal rals im8v-
plais. The same vice may be viewed
as a irdBos from its passive and an eVi-
Bvpla from its active side. The word
imBvpia 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 irdBos as the species to the genus
(see Gal. 1. c. note). In the Greek
Testament inidvpia has a much more'

2/S EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. CIIL 6
e^'tav, tjTis io-Tlv elBwXoXaTpela, 6Bi d epxeral n °P^n

comprehensive sense; e.g. Joh. viii. 44
rds imBvpias rov irarpbs vpdv BiXere
iroielv. Here, if anything, imBvpla
is wider than irdBos. While irdBos in
cludes all ungovernable affections, im-
Bvpla kokij reaches to all evil longings.
'l8ou, says Chrysostom, yeviKds rb irdv
elire' irdvra yap imBvpla koktJ, fiaaKa-
via, dpyrj, Xvirv- The epithet is added
because imBvpla is capable of a good
sense: comp. 1 Cor. x. 6 imBvpvrds
KaKav. Kal rijv irXeove|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 iropvela be Kal aKaBapala irdaa 77
irXeovegla. ' Homo extra Deum', says
Bengel (on Rom. i. 29), ' quserit pabu
lum in creatura materiali vel per vo-
luptatem vel per avaritiam.' Comp.
Test, xii Patr. Jud. 18 (bvXdgaoBe
ovv, reKva pou, dird .rfjs tropvelas Kal rrjs
d)iXapyvpias...bn raiira ddtiara vopov
Qeov. Similarly Lysis Pythag. 4 (Epi-
stol. Grose, p. 602, ed. Hercher) dvo-
p.d£aipi 8' dv aunSv [i.e. the vices]
irpdrov iireXBdv rds paripas, aKpaaiav
re Kal irXeove|iav" dp(pa be iroXvyovoi
irerpvKavri. It must be remembered
that irXeove£la is much wider than
(ptXapyvpla (see Trench N. T. Syn.
§ xxiv, p. 77 sq), which itself is called
pi(a irdvrav rdv KaKav (i Tim. VI. 10).
The attempt to give irXeove|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 irXeoveKreiv, irXeovegia, will
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 rd prj direp-
ffalveiv Kal irXeoveKreiv iv ra irpaypan

rbv dbeXcpbv avrov (see the note
there). In other passages again thero
will be an accidental connexion; e.g.
Ephes. iv. 19 els ipyaalav dKaBapaias
irdavs iv irXeove£ia, i.e. 'with greedi
ness', 'with entire disregard for the
rights of others'. But no where do
the words in themselves suggest this
meaning. Here the particles koI njv
show that a new type of sin is intro
duced with irXeove|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 koi to the disjunctive
77. It is an error to suppose that this
sense of irXeove^la is supported by
Clem. Alex. Strom, iii. 12 (p. 551 sq.)
ois ydp 77 irXeovef-ia iropvela Xiyerai, rfj
avrapKeia ivavnovpivq. On the con-
Verse error of explaining aKaBapala to
mean ' greediness', ' covetousness ', see
the note on 1 Thess. ii. 3.
fjns k.t.X.] 'for it is idolatry':
comp. Ephes. v. 5 irXeovinrvs, o (or ds)
e'o-Ttv elbaXoXdrpvs, Polyc. Phil. II
' Si quis non abstinuerit se ab avaritia,
ab idololatria coinquinabitur' (see
Philippians p. 63 on the misunder
standing of this passage). The cove
tous man sets up another object of
worship besides God. There is a sort
of religious 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 od bvvaaBe ©e<5
SouXeueiv Kal papava, 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 (11. p. 214 sq.) irav-
TaxbBev pev dpyvpiov Kcii xpvalov eWo-
pifouo-i, rd 8e iroptaBev ds dyaXpa Beiov
iv dSdrots BvaavporpvXaKovaiv (with the
whole context), and Shemoth Rabba
fol. 121. 3 'Qui opes suas multiplicat
per frenus, ille est idololatra' (with

HI- 7, 3]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

279

tov Qeov' ' ev ois Kai vfxels irepieiraTtjcraTe itotc, OTe
itjJTe ev tovtois' 8vvvl Be dirodea'de Kal vpieh Ta irdvTa,

other passages quoted by Wetstein and
Schottgen on Ephes. v. 5). St Chry-
sostom, Horn, in Johann. Ixv (viii.
p. 392 sq.), enlarges on the cult of
wealth — the consecration of it, the
worship paid to it, the sacrifices de
manded by it : 77 Se (piXapyvpia Xiyei,
6Go*ov poi ttjv aauroG ^vxvv, Kal irel&ei'
bpas otovs exei j3a>pous, ola Several 8v-
p.ara (p. 393). The passage in Test.
xii Pair. Jud. 18 fj (piXapyvpia irpbs
eiS&>Xa dSr/yet is no real parallel to St
Paul's language, though at first sight
it seems to resemble it. For f-fns,
' seeing that it', see the note on Phil.
iv. 3.
6, 7. bi d k.t.X.] The received
text requires correction in two points.
(1) It inserts the words eVi rods ulous
rfjs direidelas after roG ©eoD. Though
this insertion has preponderating sup
port, yet the words are evidently in
terpolated from the parallel passage,
Ephes. v. 6 Sid raura ydp epxerat 77
opyi7 tov Qeov em rovs vlovs rrjs direi-
Beias. 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 parallelism of 8t'
a...iv ois koi\. .may be compared with
Ephes. i. 1 1 e'v a Kal ixXvpadvpev-.-iv a
Kal vpeis. ..iv d Kalmarevaavres iacppa-
yiaBvre, and ii. 21, 22 e'v a irdaa [ij]
otKobopt) . . .iv <a Kal vpeis avvoiKobo-
pelo-cJe. (2) The vast preponder
ance of authority obliges us to substi
tute rourots for adrois.
6. epxerat] This may refer either
to the present and continuous dispen
sation, or to the future and final judg
ment. The present epxeaBai is fre
quently used to denote the certainty
of a future event, e.g. Matt. xvii. 11,
Joh. iv. 21, xiv. 3, whence d ipxbpevos
is a designation of the Messiah : see
Winer § xl. p. 332.

e'v o*s K.r.X.] The clause e'irl rods
uioGs rfjs direiBeias having been struck
out, e'v ois must necessarily bo neuter
and refer to the same as 81' d. Inde
pendently of the rejection of the
clause, this neuter seems more proba
ble in itself than the masculine : for
(1) The expression irepiirareiv e'v is
most commonly used of things, not of
persons, especially 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 e'v otc Kal 7Jpeis irdvTes dve-
arpdipvpev irore iv rals imBvplais rijs
aapKos vpdv (where ois seems to be
masculine), does not hold, because the
addition e'v rais imdvpiais K.r.X. makes
all the difference. Thus the rejection
of the clause, which was decided by
textual considerations, is confirmed by *
exegetical reasons.
7, Kai upets] 'ye, like the other
heathen' (i. 6 koI iv vpiv), but in the
next verse koI upeis is rather ' ye your
selves', 'ye notwithstanding your for
mer lives'.
ore effjre k.t.X.] ' When ye lived in
this atmosphere of sin, when ye had
not yet died to the world'.
e'v rourots] 'in these things' We
should have expected aurois, but
tovtois is substituted as more empha
tic and condemnatory : comp. Ephes.
V. 6 Sid raGra ydp epxerat k.t.X. The
two expressions ffjv e'v and irepiirareiv
ev involve two distinct ideas, denoting
the condition of their life and the cha
racter of their practice respectively.
Their conduct was conformable to
their circumstances. Comp. Gal. v. 25
ei £dpev trvevpari, irvevpan Kal aroi-
Xdpev.

280

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 9

opytjv, 6vp.6v, KaKiav, tSXao-Cprnuiiav, aio-XP°^07Lau e,c
tov o-TO/maTOs v/jlcov 9 pit] yjsevBeo-de eh dXXt]Xovs' aireic-

8. The errors of the past suggest
the obligations 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 wholly different type
from those already mentioned, sins
of uncharitableness, such as .anger,
detraction, malice, and the like.
dpyTJv, clupdv] ' 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. vii. 114 d Sc Bvpbs ianv
bpyr) dpxope'vTj. So Ammianus Bvpbs
piv ian irpboKaipos, opyr) be iroXvxpb-
vtos pvvaiKaKia, Greg. Naz. Carm. 34
(II. p. 612) Bvpbs piv ianv ddpbos £iais
(ppevbs, bpyr) be Bvpbs ippivav. 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 Bv
pbs and dpyrj see the note on Ephes.
iv. 31.
KaKiav] ' 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 well de
fined by Calvin (on Ephes. iv. 31) ' ani-
mi pravitas, quae humanitati et asqui-
tati est opposita'. This will be evi
dent from the connexion in which it
appears, e.g. Rom. i. 29, Eph. iv. 31,
Tit. iii. 3. Thus kokIo and irovvpla

(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 carefully investigated
in Trench N. T. Syn. § xi. p. 35 sq.
pXaacbtjplav] ' evil speaking, rail
ing, slandering', as frequently, e.g,
Rom. iii. 8, xiv. 16, 1 Cor. iv. 13 (v. 1.),
x. 30, Ephes. iv. 31, Tit. iii. 2. The
word has the same twofold sense, 'evil
speaking' and ' blasphemy', in classi
cal writers, which it has in the New
Testament. alaxpoXoyiav] 'foul-mouthed abuse'.
The word, as used elsewhere, has two
meanings: (1) 'Filthy-talking', as de
fined in Clem. Alex. Peed. ii. 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, xii. 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 alaxpbrvs Kal papoXoyia ij
eurpaireXia ; the second by the con
nexion with f3Xao(f>vpla 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. direKbvadpevoi K.r.X.] 'putting
off'. Do these aorist participles de
scribe an action coincident with or
prior to the ^euSeo-cle? 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. 10, II]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

28l

Bvo~dp.evoi tov iraXaiov dvdpioirov crvv Tah irpa^ecriv
> - 10 \ > 5- ' < ' ^» '
avTov, Kai evovaapevoi tov veov, tov avaKaivovfievov

"j,'.

eis eiriyvcocriv KaT eiKova tov KTicravTOs ovtov oirov

found in St Paul, the imperative is the
more usual ; e.g. Rom. xiii. 1 2 sq. diroBd-
pe&a ovv rd epya roil okotovs, ivbvad-
pedabe rd orrXaroC (barbs.. -ivbvaaaBe
rbv Kvpiov 'Ivaovv Xpiarbv, Ephes.vi. 1 1
ivbvaaaBe rijv iravoirXlav with ver. 14
a-rfjre ovv...ivbvadpevoi K.r.X., I Thess.
v. 8 vrjcpapev ivbvadpevoi K.r.X. The
one exception is Gal. iii. 27 do-01 ydp
els Xpiarbv ifiairrlaBvre, Xpiarbv ive-
bvaaoBe. (2) The 'putting on' in
the parallel passage, Ephes. iv. 24, is
imperative, not affirmative, whether
we read ivbvaaaBai or ivbvaaaBe.
(3) The participles here are followed
immediately by an imperative in the
context, ver. 12 eVSuo-ao-o'e ouv, where
the idea seems to be the same. For
the synchronous aorist participle see
Winer § xiv. p. 430. St Paul uses
direKbvadpevoi, ivbvadpevoi (not aireK-
Sudpevot, e'vSudpevoi), for the same
reason for which he uses ivbvaaaBe
(not ivbveaBe), because it is a thing to
be done once for all. For the double
compound dVeK8ueo-6,ai see the notes
on ii 11, 15.
irdXaiov avBpairov] as Rom. vi. 6,
Ephes. iv. 22. With this expression
compare d e£a, b eaa dvBpairos, Rom.
vii. 22, 2 Cor. iv. 16, Ephes. iii. 16; b
Kpvirrbs rijs Kapblas 'dvBpairos, I Pet.
iii. 4 ; d piKpbs pov dvBpairos, ' my in
significance', Polycr. in Euseb. H. E.
v. 24. 10. rdv ve'ov K.r.X.] In Ephes. iv.
24 it is ivbvaaaBai rbv Kaivbv avBpa
irov. Of the two words ve'os and koi-
vbs, the former refers solely to time,
the other denotes quality 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 ve'os, and which koivos gives

in the parallel passage, is more than
supplied by the addition tov dvaKai-
voupevov K.T.X.
The ve'os or Kaivbs dvBpairos in these
passages is not Christ Himself, as the
parallel expression Xpiarbv ivbvaa
aBai might suggest, and as it is actu
ally used in Ign. Ephes. 20 eis rdv koi-
vbv avBpairov 'ivaovv Xpiarbv, but the
regenerate man formed after Christ.
The idea here is the same as in koivt)
Krio-»s, 2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15 : comp.
Rom. vi. 4 Kaivbrvs £<<>fjs, Barnab. 16
iyevbpeBa Kaivol, irdXiv e'| apxvs Krifo-
pevoi. rbv dvaKaivovpevov] 'which is ever
being renewed'. The force of the pre
sent tense is explained by 2 Cor. iv.
160 eaa rjpdv [avBpairos] dvaKaivovrai
77 p ip a k a 1 rj p e'p a. Compare also the
use of the tenses in the parallel pas
sage, Ephes. iv. 22 sq. airoBiaBai, dva-
veovaBai, ivbvaaaBai. For the op
posite see Ephes. iv. 22 rdv iraXaiov
avBpairov tov (pBeipbpevov k.t.X.
eis eViyv<Bo-iv] ' unto perfect know
ledge', the true knowledge in Christ,
as opposed to the false knowledge of
the heretical teachers. For the im
plied contrast see above pp. 44, 99 sq.
(see the notes on i. 9, ii. 3), and for
the word iirlyvaais the note on i. 9.
The words here are to be connected ;
closely with dvaKaivovpevov : comp.
Heb. vi. 6 irdXiv dvaKaivi£ eiv els pe
rdvoiav. kot eiKova k.t.X.] The reference is
to Gen. i. 26 Kal elirev b Qebs II017;-
aapev avBpairov kot e'lKova rjperipav
K.r.X.; comp. ver. 28 Kar e'lKova Qeov
eirdajaev avrbv. See also Ephes. iv. 24
tov Kaivbv avBpairov rbv Kara ©eov kti-
aBivra. This reference however does
not imply an identity of the creation
here mentioned with the creation of
Genesis, but only an analogy between

282

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. u

ovk evi ''EXXt]V Kal 'lovBaTos, irepiTOfxtj Kal aKpo/Svo-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 koivt)
Kriais in this respect resembles the
dpxaia Kriais. The pronoun aurdv
cannot be referred to anything else
but the vios dvBpairos, the regene
rate man; and the aorist Krlaavros
(compare KnaBivra in the parallel
passage Ephes. iv. 24) refers to the
time of this dvayevmjais in Christ.
See Barnab. 6 dvaKaivlaas ijpds iv
rfj dcpeaei rdv apapndv iito'vijaev vpas
aXXov rvrrov...dadv bi) avairXaaaov-
tos avrov vpds, 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 allusion to Genesis therefore
requires us to understand roG Krlaav
ros of God, and not of Christ, as it is
taken by St Chrysostora and others ;
and this seems to be demanded also
by the common use of d Krlaas. But
if Christ is not d Krlaas, may He not be
intended by the eiKrav rod Krlaavros ?
In favour of this interpretation it may
be urged (1) That Christ elsewhere is
called the cIk<ov of God, i. 15, 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 dpxirvirov
irapdbeiypa, Ibia rav i8ec3v d ©eoG Xo
yos (comp. ib. §§ 7, 23, 24, 48), Fragm.
II. p. 625 M BvrjTov yap ovbev drreiKovia-
Brjvai irpbs rbv dvardra Kal iraripa
rdv bXav ibvvaro, dXXd irpos rbv Seure-
pov Qeov bs ianv ckcivou Xoyos K.r.X.
Leg. Alleg. i. 31, 32 (1. p. 106 sq.).
Hence Philo speaks of the first man
as eiKav eUbvos (de Mund. Op. 6), and
as irayKaXou irapabeiyparos irdyKaXov
pipTjpa (ib. § 48). A pregnant mean
ing is thus given to Kurd, and Kar ei
Kova 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 Kara Qeov, which may be re
garded as equivalent to kot e'lKova rov
Krlaavros here; (2) The Alexandrian
explanation of Gen. i. 26 just quoted
is very closely allied to the Platonic
doetrine of ideas (for the e'iKdv, 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 tit
vehicle for communicating the truths
of Christianity.
11. oirou] i.e. 'in this regenerate
life, in this spiritual region into which
the believer is transferred in Christ.'
ouk 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.
"EXX77V k.t.X.] Comparing the enume
ration here with the parallel passage
Gal. iii. 28, we mark this difference.
In Galatians the abolition of all dis
tinctions is stated in the broadest
way by the selection of three typical
instances; religious prerogative ('Iou-
balos, "eXXt;v), social caste (SoGXos, e"Xeu-
Bepos), natural sex (dpaev, BijXv). 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 "EXX77V
Kal 'lou&aios, and as it manifested it
self especially in enforcing circumci
sion, this is further emphasized by
irepiTopr) Kal aKpofivaria (see above,
P- 73)- (2) Their Gnosticism again is
met by j3dp/3apos, 2ku6V. They laid
special stress on intelligence, penetra
tion, gnosis. The Apostle offers the
full privileges of the Gospel to barba
rians and even barbarians of the low-

III. ii] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 283
fidpfiapos, 1,Kv6tis, BovXos, iXevdepos, dXXd Ta iravTa

est type (see p. 99 sq). In Rom. i. 14,
the division °EXX?)o-tv re Kal /9ap/3apois
is almost synonymous with o-oqbois
re Kal dvoTJrots. (3) Special cir
cumstances, connected with an emi
nent member of the Church of Colos
sse, had directed his attention at this
moment to the relation of masters and
slaves. Hence he cannot leave the
subject without adding 8oGXos, e'Xeu-
cJepos, though this has no special bear
ing on the Colossian heresy. See above
p. 33, and the note on iii. 22, together
with the introduction to the Epistle
to Philemon.
irepiropr) k.t.X.] Enforcing and ex
tending the lesson of the previous
clause. This abolition of distinctions
applies to religious privilege, not only
as inherited by birth ("eXXtjv koI 'iou-
Saios), but also as assumed by adop
tion (irepiropr) Kal aKpo/Suoria). If it is
no advantage to be born a Jew, it is
none to become as a Jew ; comp. 1 Cor.
vii. 19, Gal. v. 6, vi. 15.
^dp/3apos] To the Jew the whole
world was divided into 'IowSaToi and
"EXXr/ves, the privileged and unprivi
leged portions of mankind, religious
prerogative being taken as the line of
demarcation (see notes Gal. ii. 3).
To the Greek and Roman it was
similarly divided into "EXX77VCS and
/3dp/3apot, again the privileged and
unprivileged portion of the human
race, civilization and culture being
now the criterion of distinction.
Thus from the one point of view the
"EXX77V is contrasted disadvantage-
ously with the 'IouSaios, while from
the other he is contrasted advanta
geously with the fidpfiapos. Both dis
tinctions are equally antagonistic to
the Spirit of the Gospel. The Apostle
declares both alike null 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 fidpfiapos properly deno

ted one who spoke an inarticulate,
stammering, unintelligible language;
see Max Miiller 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 exclusiveness
and pride to stigmatize the rest of
mankind, a feeling embodied in the
proverb irds pij "EXX77V j3dp/3apos (Ser-
vius on Verg. uEn. ii. 504) ; comp.
Plato Polit. 262 B rd pev 'EXXtjvikov
ds ev dirb irdvrav dtbaipovvrcs xo,P's>
avpiraai be rots dXXots ye'veo-tv. . ./3ap-
j3apov piq kXtJo-ci irpoaelirovres aurd
k.t.X., Dionys. Hal. Rhet. xi. 5 SurXoGv
8e to eBvos, "EXX77V f) (3dpj3apos K.r.X.
So Philo Vit. Moys. ii. 5 (11. p. 138)
speaks of rd rjpiav rprjpa rov dvBpd-
irav yivovs, to fiapfiapiKov, as opposed
to to 'EXXtjvikov. It is not necessary
to suppose that they adopted it from
the Egyptians, who seem to have call
ed non-Egyptian peoples berber (see
Sir G. Wilkinson in Rawlinson's He-
rod.'ii. 158); for the onomatopoeia will
explain its origin independently, Stra
bo xiv. 2. 28 (p. 662) olpai be rb jidp-
j3apov Kar dpxds iKire(bavtjaBai ovras
Kar bvoparoiroiiav iirl rdv bvaeKipbpas
Kal aKXvpds Kal rpaxias XaXouvreov, ds
rb j3arrapi£eiv K.r.X. The Latins,
adopting the Greek culture, adopted
the Greek distinction also, e.g. Cic. de
Fin. ii. 1 5 ' 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 01 dXXoi "EXXvves. 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. Plaut. Mil. Glor. ii. 2. 58 'poeta
barbaro' (of Neevius), Asin. Prol. 11.

284 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [III. 12
Kal iv irdo-iv XpicrTos. 12ivBvo-ao-6e ovv, ws eKXeKTOi
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 "EXXtjv nor
fidppapos, or as in Rom. i. 14 that he
himself was a debtor equally "EXX770-1V
re Kal /3ap/3dpois.
The only other passage in the New
Testament (besides those quoted) in
which /3dpj3apos occurs is Acts xxviii.
2, 4, where it is used of the people of
Melita. If this Melita be Malta, they
would be of Phoenician descent.
SkudV] the lowest type of barba
rian. There is the same collocation
of words in Dionys. Halic Rhet. xi.
5, 6 irarrjp, fidpfiapos, Skv&tjs, vios,
Much. c. Ctes. 172 2ku6V, fidppapos,
eXXvvl£av Ttj (pavfj (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.). jEschylus for instance
called them evvopoi SkucJoi, 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 'S.KvBdv dypiaripav...dpb-
rijra (comp. 2 Mace. iv. 47), Joseph.

'Maccus vortit barbare', Pcen. iii, 2.
21 'in barbaria boves'.
In this classification the Jews ne
cessarily ranked as ' barbarians'. At
times Philo seems tacitly to accept
this designation ( Vit. Moys. 1. c) ; but
elsewhere he resents it, Leg. ad Cai.
31 (II. p. 578) uird (ppovrjparos, as pev
evioi rav biafiaXXbvrav e'irroiev av, fiap-
(3apiKoG, ds b' e'xei to dXvBes, iXevBe-
piov ko.1 evyevois. On the other hand
the Christian Apologists with a true
instinct glory in the ' barbarous' ori
gin of their religion: Justin Apol. i.
5 (p. 56 a) dXXd Kal ev /3ap/3dpois vir
avrov tov Abyov pop<ba6evros Kal av
Bpairov yevopivov, ib. § 46 (p. 83 D) e'v
fSapfiapois be 'A/3padp k.t.X., Tatian.
ad Grcec. 29 ypa<pais nalv ivrvxeiv
j3ap/3apiKais, ib. 31 r6v Se (Ma>uo-fjv)
irdavs /3apj3dpou aocplas dpxvybv, ib. 35
ttjs KaB' tjpds /3ap/3dpou (piXoaocplas.
By glorying in the name they gave a
practical comment on the Apostle's
declaration, that the distinction of
Greek and barbarian was abolished in
Christ. In a similar spirit Clem. Alex.
Strom, i. 16 (p. 361) endeavours to
prove that ou pbvov (piXoaocplas dXXd
Kal irdavs axebbv rixvijs evperal /3dp-
jiapoi. 'Not till that word barbarian',
writes Prof. Max Miiller (1. c. p. 118),
' was struck out of the dictionary of
mankind and replaced by brother, not
till the right of all 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

III. 12] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 285
tov Qeov, dyioi [Kal] tjyairrifjievoi, cirXayxva oiKTipptov,

C. Ap. ii. 37 SKutJai. . .fipaxv rdv Bvplav
biacpipovres, Philo Leg. ad Cai. 2
(II p. 547) Sapparav yc'v77 Kal %Kv8dv,
airep oux rjrrov e'^ypiorat tov Teppavi-
k<5v, Tertull. ode. Marc. i. 1 ' Scytha
tetrior'. In Vit. 3ioys. ii. 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 Wetstein from clas
sical writers are hardly less strong in
the same direction. Anacharsis the
Scythian is said to have retorted e'pol
Se 7rdvres ^EXXrjves aKv8l£ovaiv, 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 Palestine and a great
part of Western Asia (Herod, i. 103
— 1 06). The incident indeed is passed
over in silence hi the historical books ;
but the terror inspired by these in
vaders has found expression in the
prophets (Ezek. xxxviii, xxxix, Jer. i.
13 sq., vi. 1 sq), and they left behind
them a memorial in the Greek name
of Beth-shean,2Ku6W irbXis (Judith iii.
10, 2 Mace. xii. 29: comp. Judges i.
27 lxx) or SkupoitoXis, which seems to
have been derived from a settlement
on this occasion (Plin. N. H. v. 16;
see Ewald. Gesch. ut p. 689 sq, Grove
s. v. Scythopolis in Smith's Bibl.
Diet). Hence Justin, Dial. § 28 (p. 246 a),
describing the largeness of the new
dispensation, says kov Skuc/^s ?j ns fj
Uepavs, exei be ttjv roil Qeov yvdaiv
Kal rov Xpiarov avrov Kal (pvXdaaei
rd alavia biKaia...(piXos iari rd Qed,
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. Pasd. i. 7,
p. 131, Strom, iii. 2, p. 515, and the
Apologists generally). So too the
Pseudo-Lucian, Philnpatris 17, sati

rising Christianity, KP. rdSe eiire, ei Kal
rd rav SKvBdv iv rd ovpavd e'yxapdr-
roum. TP. 7ravra, ei ruxot ye xPV°~TUS
Kal iv e'Bveai. From a misconception
of this passage in the Colossians,
heresiologers distinguished four main
forms of heresy in the pre-Christian
world, /3ap/3apio-pds, aKvBiapbs, eXXv~
viapbs, lovbdiapbs; so Epiphan. Epist.
ad. Acac. 2 aacpas yap irepl rovrav rdv
reaaapav aipeaeav b dirbaroXos imre-
pdv i'cpv, 'Ev ydp Xpiard 'hjaov ov /3dp-
/3apos, ov Skuo^s, ou'x "EXX77V, ouk 'Iou-
SaTos, dXXd Kaivij Kriais : comp. Hair.
i. 4, 7 sq., 1. p. 5, 8 sq, Anaceph. 11.
pp. 127, 129 sq.
rd iravra k.t-X.] ' Christ is all
tilings and in all things' Christ
has dispossessed and obliterated all
distinctions of religious prerogative
and intellectual preeminence and so
cial caste ; Christ has substituted
Himself for all these ; Christ occupies
the whole sphere of human life and
permeates all its developments ; comp.
Ephes. i 23 roG rd irdvra e'v irdaiv 77X77-
povpevov. For rd irdvra, which is
stronger than 01 7rdvrcs, see Gal. iii.
22 avviKXeiaev ij ypacptj rd iravra virb
dpaprlav with the note. In this pas
sage e'v irao-iv 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
upeis efs eVre e'v Xpiard '\vaov. 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., ii.
10 sq, 19. The two parts of the anti
thesis are combined in our Lord's
saying, Joh. xiv. 20 upeis e'v e'poi, Kayd
ev vpiv.
1 2 — 1 5. ' Therefore, as the elect of
God, as a people consecrated to His
service and specially endowed with
Plis love, array yourselves in hearts of
compassion, in kindliness and humi-

286

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. n

Xpt,o~TOTt]Ta, Taireivocppoa-vvriv, irpavTtjTa, fxaKpoov-

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. ivbvaaaBe ovv] 'Put on there
fore', as men to whom Christ has be
come all in all. The incidental men
tion of Christ as superseding all other
relations gives occasion to this argu-
vmentative ouv: comp. iii. I, 5.
ds eVXeKrol toG ©eoG] ' as elect ones
of God.' Comp. Rom. viii. 3, Tit. i. 1.
In the Gospels kXvto'i and iKXeKrol are
distinguished as an outer and an in
ner circle (Matt. xxii. 14 7roXXol yip
elaiv kXtitoi, bXlyoi be iKXeKrol), kXtjtoI
being those summoned to the privi
leges of the Gospel and iKXeKrol 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 of the same pro
cess, kXtjtoi having special reference to
the goal and iKXeKrol to the starting-
^joint. The same persons are ' called'
to Christ, and ' chosen out' from the
Nworld. Thus in 1 Thess. i 4 elbbres
rtjv iKXoyr)v upoiv k.t.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 tovs cVXcktous, adding tva Kal au'rol
aarvplas nixaaiv k.t.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 pXiirere rrjv KXrjaiv
vpdv...rd papa rou Koau-ov it-eXegaro,
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 iKXeKrol (1 Pet. i. 1 ; comp. v. 13 77'
avveKXeKTrj iv BaftvXdvi, i. e. probably
iKKXvaia), as St Paul under similar
circumstances (Rom. i. 6, 7, 1 Cor.
i. 2) designates them kXtjtoI; and in
another passage (2 Pet. i. 10) he ap
peals to his readers to make their
kXtJo-is and cKXoyrj sure. The use of
eKXeKTos in 2 Joh. 1, 13 is apparently
the same; and in Apoc. xvii. 14 01
per aurou KX77T01 Kal iKXeKrol Kal iri-
o-roi this is also the case, as we may
infer from the addition of marol, which
points to those who have been true to
their 'calling and election'. Thus the
Gospels stand alone in this respect.
In fact eKXoyTJ 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 aKevos
eKXoyfJs, the object of the 'election'
being defined in the words following,
rou fiaardaai to ovopd pov ivdmov
[rav] edvdv tc Kal ftaaiXiav k.t.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 j or (5) The faithful
remnant under the theocracy, Rom.
xi. 5, 7, 28. This last application pre
sents the closest analogy to the idea
of final salyation: but even here St
Paul treats kXtjo-is and cKXoyrj as co
extensive, Rom. xi. 28, 29 koto Se rr)v
eKXoyijv dyairTjrot Sid rois iraripas'
aperapiXvra yap rd xaP'-a'PaTa Kai V
KXtjais tov Qeov,
dyioi k.t.X.] These are not to be
taken as vocatives, but as predicates

III. 13] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. '287
Hiav 13dvexofxevoi dXXtiXiav, Kal xaPl$[JLev01 eavTots,

further defining the meaning of iKXeK
rol. All the three terms ckXcktoi,
ayiot, ?)ya7r7ipe'voi, 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. ii. 9 ye'vos cVXcktov
...eBvos dyiov; and for the sense of
dyioi, 'the consecrated people of God',
see the note on Phil. i. 1. For the
third word, 7Jyairrjpt'vot, see Is. v. 1
"Aaa St) to vyairnpivo) k.t.X., HoS.
ii. 25 rfjv ouk rjyairvpivvv rjyarrvpevvv
(as quoted in Rom. ix. 25). In the^-
New Testament it seems to be used
always of the objects of Gods love:
e.g. I Thess. i. 4 eiSores. dSeXqioi rjya-^.
¦jrrjpevot ujrd ©eoG, rfjv eKXoyrjv vpdv,
2 Thess. ii. 13 dbeX(bol vyairvpevoi virb
Kvplov (comp. Jude 1); and so proba
bly Rev. XX. 9 rijv irdXtv rrjv rjyairvpi
vvv. For the connexion of God's elec
tion and God's love see Rom. xi. 28
(quoted above), 1 Thess. 1. c. The Kal
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, iicXeKTol ©eoG, dyioi,
rjyairvpevoi ; comp. I Pet. ii. 6.
orrXdyxva otKnppov] ' a heart of
pity'. For the meaning of airXdyxva
see the note on Phil. i. 8, and for the
whole expression comp. orrXdyxva eXe'-
ovs Luke i. 78, Test, xii Pair. Zab. 7, 8.
XPVo-rbrvTa k.t.X.] The two words'*
XPVarbrvs and raireivocppoovvv, ' kind
liness' and 'humihty', describe the
Christian temper of mind generally,
and this in two aspects, as it affects
either (1) our relation to others (xpvc-
rbrvs), or (2) our estimate of self (ra-
ireivoibpoavvv). For xpvarbrvs see the
note on Gal. v. 22 ; for raireivod)pocrvvv,
tile-note on Phil. ii. 3.
irpai-rvra k.t.X.] These next two
words, rrpavrrjs and paKpoBvpia, de
note the exercise of the Christian
temper in its outward bearing to

wards others. They are best distin
guished by their opposites. irpavrTjs
is opposed to ' rudeness, harshness ',
dypidrTjs (Plato Symp. 197 D), xaXe7rd-
tt;s (Arist. H. A. ix. 1); paKpoBvpia to
' resentment, revenge, wrath,' dpyrj
(Prov. xvi. 32), b&xoXia (Herm. Mand.
v. 1, 2). For the meaning of paKpo
Bvpia see above, on i. 1 1 ; for the form
of irpavrns (irpabrvs), 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 paKpodvprjaare ovv per' dXXrj-
Xav iv irpaurrjn.
13. alCXrjXav, eaurois] The pro
noun is varied, as in Ephes. iv. 32
yiveade els dXXrjXous xPVTT0'l--XaPl"
fdpevoi eaurois ktX., I Pet. iv. 8 — IO
ttJv els iavrovs dydirvv eKrevf} exovres
...<fiiXd£evoi eis dXX7JXous...eis eau-
tous aurd [rd x°pto"pa] StaKovouvTes.
The reciprocal e'aurav differs from the*"
reciprocal dXXTJXmv in emphasizing the
idea of corporate unity: hence it is
more appropriate here (comp. Ephes.
iv. 2, 32) with xaptfdpevoi than with
dvexdpevoi; comp. Xen. Mem. iii. 5. 16^
dvrl pev roG avvepyeiv eaurois rd avp-
(pipovra, iirvped^ovaiv oXXtJXois, Kal
(pdovovaiv eaurois pdXXov 77 rois dX-
Xois dv61pa>irois...Kal irpoaipovvrai paX-
Xov oura) Kepbaiveiv dir' dXXTJXiuv 77
o-uva>0eXoGvres aureus, where the pro
priety of the two words in their re
spective places will be evident; and
ib. ii. 7- 12 dvrl v(popapivav eavras
vbeas ctXXtj Xasedpav, where the vari
ation is more subtle but not less ap
propriate. For instances of this use of
e'aorav see Bleek Hebraerbrief iii. 13
(p. 453 sq), Kiihner Griech. Gramm.
§ 4SS (ii- P- 497 sq-)-
xapiibpevoi] i.e. 'forgiving'; see the
note on ii. 13. An a fortiori argu^
ment lurks under the use of e'aurots
(rather than oXXtjXois) : if Christ for
gave them, much more should they,
forgive themselves.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 14

idv tis irpos Tiva ext} fxoix.<pt\v KadiCs Kal 6 Kvpios
ixapicaTO v/uuv, ovtojs Kal v/mels' 14eirl irdcriv Be tovtois

popcptjv] 'a complaint'. As pe'p-
rpeadai is ' to find fault with ', referring
most commonly to errors of omission,
so popqbij 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 e'xeiv
occurs several times in classical Greek,
but generally in poetry: e.g. Eur.
Or est. 1069, Arist. Pax 664.
KaBds ko.1 k.t.X.] This must not be
connected with the preceding words,
but treated as an independent sen
tence, the KaBds Kai being answered
by the outos Kai. For the presence of
Kai in both clauses of the comparison
see the note oni. 6. The phenomenon
is common in the best classical writers,
e.g. Xen. Mem. i. 6. 3 dairep Kal rdv
dXXav epyav ol bibdaKaXoi...ovra Kal
av k.t.X.; see the references in Hein-
dorf on Plato Phcvdo 64 c, Sophist.
217 b, and Kiihner Griech. Gramm.
§ 524 (11. p. 799).
y b Kupior] This reading, which is
better supported than d Xpio-rds, 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-7rXayxvio-f9eis be o Kvpios rod
SouXou eKeivou direXuo-ev aurdv Kal rb
bdveiov dcpiJKev auno K.r.X.: COmp. below
iv. I el8dres on Kal upeis exere Kvpiov
iv ov'pavd. The reading Xpiarbs perhaps
comes from the parallel passage Ephes.
iv. 32 xaPl£opevoi eaurois, KaBds Kal b
Qebs iv Xpiard ixapiaaro rjplv (or upiv).
outos Kal upeis] SC. xaPl&a'8e eau
rois. 14. iirl irdaiv] ' over and above all
these', comp. Luke iii. 20 irpoaiBvKev
Kal roGro e'irl irdaiv. In Luke xvi. 26,
Ephes. vi. 16, the correct reading is
probably e'v irdo-iv. Love is the outer
garment which holds the others in
.their places.

rrjv dydirvv] SC ivbvaaaBe, from ver.
12. b] 'which thing', i.e;']ove'; comp.
Ephes. V. 5 irXeoveKrvs, o ianv elbaXo-
Xdrprjs, Ign. Rom. 7 dprov ©eoG BeXa,
b ianv adp% Xpiarov, Magn. IO pera-
ftdXeaBe els veav £upr)v o e'oriv 'IT70-0GS
Xpiarbs, Trail. 7 dvaKTtjaaaBe iavroiis
iv iriarei o ianv odpf; tov Kvpiov.
Though there are various readings in
the passages of the Ignatian Epistles,
the d seems to be right in every case.
These instances will show that d may
be referred to rrjv dydirvv alone. 0-
therwise we might suppose the ante
cedent to be to ivbvaaaBai rrjv dydirvv,
but this hardly suits the sense. The
common reading 77ns is obviously a
scribe's correction.
aiivbeapos k.t.X.] 'the bond of per?
flection', i. e. the power, which unites
and holds together all those graces
and virtues, which together make up
perfection. Ildvra iKeiva, says Chry>-
sostom, auT77 avacbiyyei' oirep av e'tirijs
dyaBbv, raiirvs dirovavs ovbiv ianv
dXXd biappel : comp. Clem. Rom. 49
rbv beapbv rrjs dyairrjs rov Qeov ris
bvvarai igrjytjaaadai ; Thus the Pytha
goreans (Simplic. in Epictet. p. 208 a)
irepiaads rav dXXav dperdv Ttjv (piXlav
irlpav Kal avvbeappv aurrjv iraadv rdv
dperdv eXeyov. So too Themist. Orat.
i. (p. 5 c) fiaaiXiKi) (dperij) irapa rds
dXXas els 77V ^uvSoGvrai Kal at Xoiirai,
dairep els piav Kopv(j)ijv dvvppivai.
The word will take a genitive either
of the object bound or of the binding
force: e.g. Plato Polit. 310 a toutov
Beibrepov eivai rbv Qvvbeapov dperfjs
pepdv (pvaeas dvbpoiav Kal iirl rdvavria
(pepopevav, where the aperi) £vvbei and
the pepv c/Suo-eois £uv8eirai. We have
an instance of the one genitive (the
objective) here, of the other (the sub-
jectivej in Ephes. iv. 3 iv to awbiapa
rrjs elpijvvs (see the note there). '
Another explanation makes o-uvSeo:-

III. 15] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 289
Ttjv dyairtjv, b io~Ttv avvBeo-fxos Ttjs TeXeioTtjTOS. lsKat
t] eiptjvti tov XpiarTOv flpafieveTW e'v Tals KapBlais vjxwv,
eh r\v Kal iKXrj6t]Te iv evi acopiaTi. Kal eir^a/Ota-rot

pos = avv8eais here, 'the bundle, the
totality', as e.g. Herodian. iv. 12 irdv
ra rdv avvbeapov rav eirioroXiSv (comp.
lgn. Trail. 3 avvbeapov diroarbXav);
but this unusual metaphor is highly
improbable and inappropriate here,
not to mention that we should expect
the definite article d o-dv8eo-pos in this
case. With either interpretation,
the function assigned to dydirv here
is the same as when it is declared to
be irX7jp<»pa vbpov, Rom. xiii. 10 (comp.
GaL v. 14). See also the all-embracing
office which is assigned to it in 1 Cor.
xiii. 15. v eipvvv rov XptoToG] ' Christ's
peace', which He left as a legacy to His
disciples : Joh. xiv. 27 elprjvvv dcplvpi
vpiv, elprjvvv ttjv iprjv bibapi vpiv;
comp. Ephes. ii 14 aurds ydp ianv 771
elprjvrj rjpdv with the context. The
common reading 77 eiprjvi; roG Qeov has
a parallel in Phil. iv. 7.
ftpaPevira] 'be umpire', for the\
idea of a contest is only less promi
nent here, than in /3paj3eiov 1 Cor. ix^
24, Phil. iii. 14 (see the note there).
SraSiov evSov eiroii)o-ev iv rois Xoyiajwls,
writes Chrysostom, Kal dyiSva Kal dBXv
aiv Kal 0pa/3euT77'v. 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),.
Bvpbs /3pa|8euc'riB, says Chrysostom
again, pr) cbiXoveiKia, prj dvBpairlvrj
eiprjvv' rj yap dvBpairivv elprjvv eK tov
dpvveaBai yiverai, eK roG pvbev irdaxeiv
beivbv. For this metaphor of some one
paramount consideration acting as
umpire, where there is a conflict of
internal motives, see Polyb. ii. 35. 3
dirav rb yiyvbpevov virb rdv VaXdrav
Bvpd paXXov ij Xoyiapd /3pa/3eue-
0-6'ai, Philo de Migr. Abr. 12 (1. p.
446) iropeuerat d dcppav bi dpcborepav
Bvpov re Kal emdvplas del... rbv tjvloxov
COL.

Kal ftpafievrfjv Xd-yov diro/3aXaiv
(comp. de Ebriet. 19, 1. p. 368), Jos.
B. J. vi. 2. 6 e/3pd/3eue rds rbXpas b...
</>d/3os. Somewhat similarly rvxv
(Polyb. xxvii. 14. 4) or oiuo-is (Athen.
xv. p. 670 a) are made /3pa/3euetv. In
other passages, where d ©eds or rd
cleiov is said /3pa/3eueiv, this implies
that, while man proposes, God dis
poses. In Philo 0X176*610 fipafievovaa
(Qui rer. div. her. 19, 1. p. 486) is a
rough synonyme for dXrjcleio SiKofouo-a
(de Abrah. 14, 11. p. 10, etc.): and
in Josephus (Ant. vi. 3. 1) biKa£eiv and
fipafieveiv are used together of the
same action. In all 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 vv k.t.X.] Comp. 1 Cor. vii. 15
e'v Se elprjvrj KiKXvKev rjpds b Qebs.
iv ivl o-aipan] 'As ye were called as^
members of one body, so let there
be one spirit animating that body':
Ephes. iv. 4 ev o-c5pa Kal ev irvevpa.
This passage strikes the keynote of
the companion Epistle to the Ephe-
sians (see esp. ii. 16 sq, iv. 3 sq). ^
eu'xdpio-roi] ' And to crown all for
get yourselves in thanksgiving towards
God': see the notes on i. 12, ii. 7. The
adjective eu'xdpio-ros, 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. ii. 2. 1); or (2) 'thank
ful' (e.g. Boeckh C. I. no. 1625), as
here. 16, 17. 'Let the inspiring word of
Christ dwell 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 all kinds. Only let them be
19

290yiveo~6e, o-'iws iv

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [IIL l6
O Xoyos tov Xpio-Tov ivoiKeiTW iv vjmv irXov-
irdo~ri o-o(pia.' BiBdcrKOVTes Kal vovdeTOVVTes

l6<

pervaded with grace from heaven.
Sing to God in your hearts and not
with your lips 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'.
i6. 'O Xdyos roG Xpio-roG] ' the word
of Christ', rov Xpiarov being the sub
jective genitive, so that Christ is the
speaker. Though d Xdyos tov ©eou
and d Xdyos roC Kvpiov occur fre
quently, d Xdyos toG Xpio-roG 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 roG Xpto--
toG denotes the presence of Christ in
the heart, as an inward monitor :
comp. I Joh. ii. 14 d Xdyos toG ©eou
iv vpiv p-ivei, with ib. i. IO d Xdyos ad
roG ovk eo-riv e'v ijpiv, and so perhaps
Acts Xviii. 5 avveixero rd Xdyto (the
•correct reading).
e'v vpiv] 'in your hearts', not'among
you'; comp. Rom. viii. 9, 1 1 to c'voikoGv
auroG irvevpa iv vpiv, 2 Tim. i. 5, 14,
and Lev, xxvi. 12, as quoted in 2 Cor.
VI. 16, ivoiKrjaa iv avrols.
irXavalas] See above p. 43 sq., and
the note on i. 27.
e'v irdo-77 erooiia] 'in every kind of
wisdom'. It seems best to take these
words with the preceding clause,
though Clem. Alex. Pmd. ii. 4 (p. 194)
attaches them to what follows. For
this position of e'v irdo-77 o-onSia, 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 voufleroCvres irdvra avBpairov Kal
bibdaKovres irdvra avBpairov iv irdo-77
o-ooiia has a double bearing : while the
connexion, favours our taking e'v irdoT7
aocpia here with the following words,

the order suggests their being at
tached to the preceding clause.
SiSdo-Kovres k.t.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. xiii. 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, § Ixii 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. 1 1, comp. Ephes.
hi. 17). On the distinction of SiSd-
aKeiv and voud'eTelv see the note on i.
28 ; they describe respectively the posi
tive and the negative side of instruc
tion. On the reciprocal eaurous see
the note on iii. 13.
TJraXpais k.t.X] to be connected with
the preceding sentence, as suggested
by Ephes. v. 18 sq. dXXd irXvpovaBe iv
irvevpan, XaXouvres eaurois [e'v] i|/-aX-
pois Kal upvois Kal abais [jrveupanKais],
aSovres Kal -usdXXovres rfj Kapbia vpdv
rd Kvpia. The datives describe the
instruments of the 8i8axrj and vou-
6Wia. The three words tyaXpbs, upvos, dbv,
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) tyaXpbs piv
eanv tj bid rou dpydvou rou pouo-iKOu

III. 16] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 291
eavTOVs yjsaXpiois v/jlvois wBah irvev piaTiKah iv ttj

peXabia, cpbfj be 77 8id ordparos yevo-
pe'vr; roG jieXovs p*rd pvpdrav iiri(pd-
vvais... vpvos be 77 eVl toi-s virapxovaiv
tjplv dyaBols dvanBejiivv rd Qed evd)rj-
pla; see also Hippol. p. 191 sq. (ed.
de Lagarde). In other words, while
the leading idea of ¦jrdXpbs is a musi
cal accompaniment and that of upvos
praise to God, dbrj 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 -^aXpds, vpvos, and 0)877'.
In the text the reference in i/>aXpois,
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 upvois 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
mSais gathers up the other two, and
extends the precept to all forms of
song, with the limitation however that
they must be irvevpariKai. St Chry
sostom treats upvoi here as an advance
upon TJraXpoi, which in one aspect they
are ; 01 ilraXpol, he says, 7rdvra i'xovaiv,
ol be upvot irdXtv ouSev avBpairivov'
orav iv rois ^aXpois pdBrj, rare Kal vp,-
vovs e'laerai, are Beibrepov irpdypa.
Psalmody and hymnody were highly
developed in the religious services of
the Jews at this time : see Philo in
FlaCC 14 (II. p. 535) irdvvuxot be bia-
TeXiaavTes iv upvois Kal abals, de Vit.
Cont. § 3 (ii. p. 47^) iroiovaiv aapara
Kal vpvovs els Qeov bid iravroiav peVpaiv
koi peXdv, a pvBpois aepvoripois dvay-
Kalas xaporrovai, § IO (p. 484) d dva-
ards vpvov dSet rreiroivpevov els rbv
Qeov, rj Kaivbv avrbs ireiroiTjKiBs 77 dp-
Xalbv nva tov irdXai iroivrdv' pirpa
ydp Kal peXv KaraXeXoiiraai 7roXXa iirdv

rpiperpo>v, rrpoaobiav, vpvav, irapa-
airovbelav, irapafSaplav, araatpav, x°-
piKwv, arpocpais iroXvarpbcpois ev biape-
perpvpevav k.t.X., § 1 1 (p. 485) aSouo-i
ireiroivpevovs els tov Qeov upvous iroX-
Xois pirpois Kal piXeal k.t.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//aXpol Se 00-01 koI
abcu. dbeXcpdv dir dpxvs viro iri-
ardv ypa(peiaai rbv Abyov rov ©eou rov
Xpiarbv vpvovai BeoXoyovvres. The
reference in the text is not solely or
chiefly to public worship as such.
Clem. Alex. Peed. 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. ii. 8 ' Sonant inter
duos psalmi 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"PtT'] (*'w God's grace';
comp. 2 Cor. i. 12 ouk e'v ood)ia aap-
kiktj dXX' e'v x°-PlTl Qeov. These
words are perhaps best connected with
the preceding clause, as by Chryso
stom. Thus the parallelism with e'v
irdo-77 o-ooiia is preserved. The cor
rect reading is e'v rfj x^P'1"') n°t iv
xdptTt. For 77 x"Plr> 'divine grace',
19 — 2

292 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [HI. 17, l8
XapiTi, aBovTes ev Tais KapBiais v/xwv tw ©e«' ' Ka'
7raiv o ti idv iroitJTe iv Xoyco ij iv epyui, iravTa ev
SvopaTi Kvpiov 'Itjo-ov, evxapio-TovvTes tw ©e<» iraTpi
Bi avTov. 18 Al yvvawes, viroTaco-eo'de toTs dvBpdariv, cos avtj-

see Phil. i. 7 avvKoivavois pov rrjs
xdpiros with the note. The definite
article seems to exclude all lower
senses of x«P" nere> 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.
abovres k.t.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. i9a8ovres
Kal i/raXXovres rfj Kapbia (probably the
correct reading), where tjJ Kapbia
' with the heart ' brings out the sense
more distinctly.
17. irdv d rt k.t.X.] This is proba
bly a nominative absolute, as Matt. x.
32 irds ouv bans opoXoyijoei... opo-
Xoyrjaa Kayd iv avrd (comp. Luke
xii. 8), Luke xii. IO irds bs ipei Xbyov
...drpeBrjaerai avrd, John xvii. 2 irdv
d bibaKas avrd, bdatj avrols k.t.X.;
comp. Matt. vii. 24 (v. 1.).
iravra] SC. iroieire, as the following
euxapicrrouvres suggests; comp. ver.
23- e'v dvdpan K.r.X.] This is the great
practical lesson which flows from the
theological teaching of the epistle.
Hence the reiteration of Kvpiw, iv
Kvpia, etc,vv. 18, 20, 22, 23, 24. See
above p. 104.
euxapto"''oGvres] On this refrain see
the notes on i. 12, ii. 7.
to 6e<5 irarpl] 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 Kal irarrjp or ©eds irarrjp.
The Kai before irarpi 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. Ye husbands, love and
cherish your wives, and use no harsh
ness towards them. Ye children, 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. 1 8 — iii. 7,
Tit. ii. 1 sq.; see also Clem. Rom. 1,
Polyc. Phil. 4 sq.
AlyuvaiKcs] ' 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 viii. 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 Bern-
hardy 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 dvbpdaiv] The iSiois of the
received text may have been inserted
(as it is inserted also in Ephes. v. 24)
from Ephes. v. 22, Tit. ii. 5, 1 Pet. iii.
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.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

293

III. 19—22]
Kev iv Kvplw. xgOi dvBpes, dyairaTe Tas yvvaiKas Kal
fit] iriKpalvearQe irpos avTas. 3°Ta TeKva, viraKOveTe
toIs yovevo~iv KaTa iravTa' tovto yap evapecrTov icrTiv
iv Kvplw. "Ol iraTepes, fj.tj ipedi^eTe Ta TeKva vpttov,
tva fjirj d6vput30~iv. 3aOt BovXoi, inraKOveTe Korea iravTa

dvijKev] The imperfect, as Ephes. v.
4 d ouk dvijKev (the correct reading) ;
comp. Clem. Horn. Contest. 3. roGSe
prj perabovvat x^Plvi °>f °v irpoafjKev,
Xen. de Re Equestr. xii. 14 d lirirapx<*
npoorJKev eibevai re Kal irparrciv ; and
see D'Orville on Charito viii. 2 (p. 699
sq). The common uses of the imper
fect eS«, eirpe7rev, etc., in classical wri
ters do not present a very exact
parallel ; for they imply that the thing
which ought to have been done has
been left undone. And so we might
interpret Acts xxii. 22 ov ydp KaBij-
kcv adrdv £rjv (the correct reading).
Here however there can hardly be
any such reference; and the best
illustration is the English past tense
'ought' (=' owed'), which is used in
the same way. The past tense per
haps implies an essential a priori
obligation. The use of xS"lvi ^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 dvfJKeiv, irpoarjKeiv,
KaBrjKeiv, ' aiming at or pertaining to ',
with their ultimate meaning of moral
obligation. The word dvrjKetv occurs
in the New Testament only here and
in the contemporary epistles, Ephes.
v. 4, Philem. 8.
e'v Kupiffl] probably to be connected
with as dvijKev, rather than with dire-
rdaaeaBe; comp. ver. 20 eudpeerrdv
ianv iv Kvpla.
19. prj iriKpalveaBe K.T.X.] ' show no
bitterness, behave not harshly' ; comp.
Lynceus in Athen. vi. p. 242 c iriKpav-
Beiv irpbs nva tov av^dvrav, Joseph.
Ant. V. 7- I Seivios irpds rods tov bi-
Kaiov irpoiarapJvovs imiKpaivopevos,
Plut. Mor. p. 457 A 7rp6s yuvaia 81a-

jriKpaivovrai. So also iriKpaiveaBai iirl
nva in the lxx, Jerem. xliv (xxxvii).
15, 3 Esdr. iv. 31. This verb mKpai-
veaBai and its compounds occur fre
quently in classical writers.
20. koto irdvra] as ver. 22. The
rule is stated absolutely, because the
exceptions are so few that they may
be disregarded.
eudpeo-rov eo-nv] 'is well pleasing,
commendable'. The received text
supplies this adjective with a dative
of reference n5 Kvpia (from Ephes.
v. 10), but ev Kupi<a is unquestionably
the right reading. With the reading
thus corrected eudpeo-rov, like dvijKev
ver. 18, must be taken absolutely,
as perhaps in Rom. xii. 2 rd BiXvpa
rov ©eou rd dyaBbv Kal evdpearov Kal
re'Xeiov : comp. Phil. iv. 8 6'0-a aepvd
...oaa irpoo-<ptXfj. The qualification
iv Kvpim implies 'as judged by a
Christian standard', ' as judged by
those who are members of Christ's
body.' 21. ipeBifcre] ' provoke, irritate' .
The other reading irapopyi£ere has
higher support, but is doubtless taken
from the parallel passage, Ephes. vi. 4.
' Irritation' is the first consequence of
being too exacting with children, and
irritation leads to moroseness (d6V
pio). In 2 Cor. ix. 2 e'pecitfeiv is used
in a good sense and produces the
opposite result, not despondency but
energy. d6Vp<3o-ip] ' lose heart, become spi
ritless', i.e. 'go about their task
in a listless, moody, suljen frame of
mind'. ' Fractus animus ', says Ben-
gel, 'pestis juventutis'. In Xen. Cyr.
i. 6. 13 dBvpla is opposed to irpoBvpia,
and in Thuc. ii. 88 and elsewhere
ddvpeiv is opposed to Bapaeiv.

294

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[III. 23

cos

Toh KaTa adpKa Kvpiois, pitj iv 6<p8aX/J.oBovXeia
dvdpioirdpeo-KOi, dXX' iv dirXoTtjTi KapBias, (popovpevoi
tov Kvpiov. a3 o idv iroitJTe, eK yfsvxijs ipyd^eaue cos

22. iv bipdaXpooovXelais.

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 God and
standing in awe of Him. And in
every thing that ye do, work faithfully
and with all your soul, as labouring
not for men, but for the great Lord
and Master Himself; knowing 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 shall be requited for his wrong
doing. I say not this of slaves only,
but of masters also. There is no par
tiality, 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. Qt 80GX01] 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 explained 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. 1 1.
doi(9aXpo8ouXeia] ' eye- service', as
Ephes. vi. 6 : comp. Apost, Const, iv.

12 prj <bs d<f>0aXpd8ouXos dXX' ds <pi-
Xobiairoros. This happy expression
would seem to be the Apostle's own
coinage. At least there are no traces
of it earlier. Compare iBeXoBpvaKeia
ii. 23. The reading bcpBaXpobovXeia
is better supported than bcpBaXpobov-
Xelais, though the plural is rendered
slightly more probable in itself by its
greater difficulty.
dvclpcoirdpco-Koi] again in Ephes. vi.
6. It is a lxx word, Ps. Iii. 6, where
the Greek entirely departs from the
Hebrew : comp. also dvBpairapeaKeiv
Ign. Rom. 2, dvBpairapiaKeia Justin
Apol. i. 2 (p. 53 b). So bxXoapeaiajs
or dxXodpeo-Kos, Timo Phlias. in Diog.
Laert. iv. 42 (vv. 11.).
dirXbrrjn Kapblas] as in Ephes. vi 5,
i.e. 'with undivided service'; a lxx
expression, 1 Chron. xxix. i7,Wisd. i. 1.
rdv Kupiov] ' the one Lord and
Master', as contrasted with rois koto
o-dpKa Kvpiois: 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^eoBe] i.e. 'do it dili
gently', an advance upon iroi^re.
ouk dvcJpmirois] For the use of od
rather than prj in antitheses, see Wi
ner § lv. p. 601 sq. The negative
here is wholly unconnected with the
imperative, and refers solely to rw
Kvpia. 24. dirb Kupiou] ' However you may
be treated by your earthly masters,
you have still a Master who will 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, vv.
22 — 24, rdv Kupiov, to Kvpia, to Kv
pia. In the parallel passage Ephes.
vi. 8 it is irapd Kupiou : for the differ
ence between the two see Gal. i. 12.

III. 24, 25] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 295
t<m Kvpia, Kal ovk dvdpooirois, 94eiBoTes 6-n diro Kvpiov
diroXtjpuyeo~d6 Ttjv dvTawoBoa'iv Ttjs KXtipovoptias' tco
Kvplip XptarTfS BovXeveTe' *s6 ydp dBiKwv KOfiia'eTai 6

rfjv dvrairdSoo-tv] ' the just recom
pense', a common word both in the
lxx and in classical writers, though
not occurring elsewhere in the New
Testament; comp. avrajrdSopa Luke
xiv. 12, Rom. xi. 9. The double com
pound involves the idea of ' exact re
quital'. rfjs KX7/povopias] 'which consists in
the inheritance', the genitive of appo
sition : see the note on njv pepiba rou
KX7Jpov, i. 12. There is a paradox in
volved in this word : elsewhere the
bovXos and the KXvpovbpos are con
trasted (Matt xxi 35 — 38, etc., Rom.
viii. 15 — 17, Gal. iv. 1, 7), but here
the 8oGXos is the KXvpovbpos. This he
is because, though SoGXos dvBpdirav, he
is direXevdepos Kvpiov (i Cor. vii. 22)
and thus KXvpovbpos Sid SeoG (Gal. iv.
_ 7) ; comp. Hermas Sim. v. 2 tva eruy-
KXrjpovopos yivvrai b SoGXos rd vld
• (with the context).
r^ Kvpia k.t.X.] i.e. 'you serve as
your master the great Master Christ'
This clause is added to explain who
is meant by the preceding dird Kupiou.
For this application of Kdpios com
pare (besides the parallel passage,
Ephes. vi. 6 — 9) 1 Cor. vii. 22 d ydp
e'v Kvpia kXtjcIcIs SoGXos direXeuo'epos
Kvplov iarlv k.t.X. It seems best to
take SouXeuere here as an indicative,
rather than as an imperative; "for (1)
The indicative is wanted to explain
the previous dird Kupiou; (2) The im
perative would seem to require ds ra
Kvpia, as in Ephes. vi. 7 (the correct
text). On the other hand see Rom.
xii. 11.
25. d ydp dSiKfflV K.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 interpre
ters 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 d ydp
dSiKiSv (where ydp, not 8c, is certainly
the right reading) points to the slave.
On the other hand the expression
which follows, rd SiKatov koi rrjv lab-
rnra k.t.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
eKaaros b av iroirjarj dyaBov tovto Kopi-
aerai irapd Kvpiov, etre SoGXos etre
e'Xeud'epos. 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
rjb'iKvaev is used by St Paul to describe
the crime of Onesimus in Philem. 18.
But on the other hand 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
irpoaairdXvp^ia. With Him the claims
of the slave are as real as the claims
of the master.
Koplaerai] 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
foresee e.g. Lev.xx. 17 dpapriav Kopi-
oGvrai, 2 Cor. V. IO Koplavrai eKaaros
rd Sid toG adparos ; comp. Barnab.

296

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 1
tjB'iKtjo-ev, Kal ovk eo~Tiv irpoa-unroXnpi^/ia. I*. xOt
Kvpioi, to BiKaiov Kal Ttjv IcroTtjTa toIs BovXois irape-
X^crde, elBoTes oti Kal vpteh e%6T6 Kvpwv iv ovpavw.

§ 4 d Kvpios dirpoaairdX-npirras Kpivel
tov Koapov' eKaaros, KaBds iiro'vrjaev,
Kopieirai. In the parallel passage
Ephes. vi. 8, the form is certainly ko-
piaerai : here it is more doubtful, the
authorities being more equally divided
between Kopieirai and Koplaerai. See
however the note on yvaplaovaiv iv. 9.
irpoo-<»iroXi;p-v//ia] On this word see
the note Gal. ii. 6. This irpoaairoXvp-
\j/ia, though generally found on the
side of rank and power, may also be
exercised in favour of the opposite;
Levit. xix. 1 5 ou Xij^jrij irpoaairov irra-
Xov ovbe prj Bavpaarjs irpoaairov bvvd-
arov. There would be a tendency in
the mind of the slave to assume that,
because the irpoaairoXvp^jfla of man
was on the side of the master, there
must be a corresponding irpoaairo-
Xtjpijria of God on the side of the
slave. This, assumption is corrected
by St Paul.
IV. I. tt)v labnjra] 'equity', 'fair
ness'; comp. Plut. Sol. et Popl. Comp. 3
vbpav io-dr77.ro irape^bvrav. Somewhat
similarly Lysias Or. Fun. 77 (speak
ing of death) outc ydp rods irovrjpovs
virepopa ovre roils dyaBovs Bavpd^ei,
dXX' 'laov iavrbv irapixei irdaiv.
It seems a mistake to suppose that
labrvs here has anything to do with
the treatment of slaves as equals
(comp. Philem. 16)- When connected
with ro Sikoiov, the word naturally sug
gests an even-handed, impartial treat
ment, and is equivalent to the Latin
wquitas : comp. Arist. Top. vi. 5 (p.
143) d rijv biKaioavvvv (Xe'ycav) e£iv lab-
tijtos iroivriKrjv v biavepvriKqv Toil laov,
Philo de Great. Princ. 14 (11. p. 373)
ean ydp labrvs...prjTvp biKaioavvrjs,
Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 6 (p. 764) perd
biKaioavvvs Kal labrvros rijs irpbs rois
iiriarpicbovTas. Thus in Arist. Eth.
Nic. v. I to bimiov and rd i'o-ov are
regarded as sjnonymes, and in Plut.

Mor. p. 719 the relation of labrvs to
SiKaidrrjs is discussed. The word here
is used in the same sense in which the
adjective occurs in the common ex
pressions to-os SiKaonjs, 1'0-es aKpoarrjs,
etc. Philo, describing the Essene
condemnation of slavery, says, Omn.
prdb. lib. 12 (ii. p. 457) KarayivdaKOvai
re rdv beairorav, ov povov as abUav,
labrnra Xvpaivopivav, dXXa Kal as dae-
fidv k.tA., but he possibly does mean
' equality' rather than ' equity.'
7rapcxco-f9c] ' exhibit on your part.'
The middle irape'xeo-clai, ' 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 Kupiov] as Ephes. vi. 9 ; comp.
I Cor. vji. 22 d iXevBepos KX776V1S SoG
Xos eVnv 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 not us — myself Paul — my fellow-
labourer Timothy — your evangelist
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 Gentiles —
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 dealings with
unbelievers; allow 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.

29;

3Ttj irpocrevxtj irpoo-KapTepelTe, yptiyopovvTes iv
avTtj iv evx^picrTia.' zirpoo'evxo{Jievoi a\xa Kai itepi t\p.cov,
'Iva 6 Qeos dvo'i£t\ t]\xiv 6vpav tov Xoyov, XaXijarai to
pivcrT^piov tov XpiCTOv, Bi 0 Kal BeBepiai' 4ira (pave-

and seasoned with salt. So will you
know how to give a fit answer to each
man, as the occasion demands.'
2. irpoo-Kaprepetre] ' cling closely
to', 'remain constant to' (comp. Mark
iii. 9, Acts viii. 13, x. 7), and so 'con
tinue stedfast in'. This word occurs
.again with rfj irpoaevxjl, rdis irpoaev-
xals, Acts i. 14, ii. 42, vi. 4, Rom. xii.
12. The construction is with a simple
dative both in the New Testament
(11. cc.) and in classical writers, except
where it stands absolutely (Acts ii. 46,
Rom. xiii. 6). The injunction here
corresponds to the dSiaXeiirras irpoa-
¦evxeaBe of I Thess. V. 1 7.
ypi;yopoGvres] 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 literally here, but meta
phorically. In Matt. xxvi. 41 etc., ypr;-
yopeire koi irpoaeixeaBe, the idea is not
quite the same.
e'v eu'xapio-ria] as- the crown of all
prayer; see the notes on i. i2Tii. 7.
3. rjpdv] 'us', 'the Apostles and
preachers of the Gospel', with refer
ence more especially to Timothy (L 1)
and Epaphras (iv. 12, 13). Where
the Apostle speaks of himself alone,
he uses the singular (ver. 3, 4 bibepai,
(pavepdaa). Indeed there is no rea
son to think that St Paul ever uses an
'epistolary' plural, referring to him
self solely : see the note on 1 Thess.
iii. 1.
tva k.t.X.] On the sense of tva after
irpoaevxeaBai etc., see the note on i. 9.
Bvpav tov Xdyou] ' a door of admis
sion for the word', i e. ' an oppor
tunity of preaching the Gospel', as
I Cor. xvi. 9 Bvpa ydp poi dvicoyev
peydXv Kal ivepyrjs, 2 Cor. ii. 12

Bvpas poi dveaypivtjs e'v Kvpito : Comp.
Plut. Mor. p. 674 D dairep iruXrjs dv-
oixBelavs, ovk dvriaxov ...avveiaioi-ai
iravrobairois aKpodpaaiv. Similarly ei'cro-
80s is. used in 1 Thess. i. 9, ii. 1. The
converse application of the metaphor
appears in Acts xiv. 27 17'voi^ev rois
eBveaiv Bvpav irlareas, 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 boBfj Xdyos
e'v dvoi^ei rod arbparos pov) it IS ex
plained 'the door of our speech', i.e.
'our mouth': comp. Ps. cxli (cxl). 3,
Mic vii. 5, Ecclus. xxviii. 25. But tho
parallel passages do not favour this
sense, nor will the words themselves
admit it. In that case for 77'piv clu'pav
toG Xdyou we should require rrjv Bvpav
rav Xdyojv [vpdv]. 'The word' here is
'the Gospel', as frequently.
XaXfjo-ai] 'so as to speak', the in
finitive of the consequence, like elbivai
ver. 6 ; see Winer § xliv, p. 400.
rd pvai-npiov k.t.X.] i.e. the doctrine
of the free admission of the Gentiles.
For the leading idea which St Paul
in these epistles attaches to 'the mys
tery ' of the Gospel, see the note on
i. 26. Si' S] 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 liberty,
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, bi bv,
destroys the point of the sentence.
Kal 8e'Sepat] 2 Tim. ii. 9 pixP1 °W-
pdv, Philem. 9 vuvl Se Kal biapios.
4. iva (pavepdaa K.T.X.] This is
best taken as dependent on the pre
vious clause i'va d 9e'os...rou Xpto-rod.

298

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 5, 6

pcoffta avTO, &y's Be? jue XaXtjo~ai. siv crocbia irepiiraTeiTe
irpos tovs e£a), tov Kaipov i^ayopa^optevoi' 6o Xoyos

For instances of a double iva, where
the second is not coordinated with,
but subordinated to, the first, see the
note on Gal. iii. 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 <ro0i«] Matt. X. 16 ylveaBe
ovv (ppovipoi ws ol ocpeis.
rods 'ii;a] ' those without the pale'
of the Church, the unbelievers ; as in
1 Cor. v. 12, 13, i-Thess. iv. 12. So 01
ZgaBev, 1 Tim. iii. 7. The believers on
the other hand are ol eaa, 1 Cor. v. 1 2.
This mode of speaking was derived
from the Jews, who called the heathen
COIX'nn (Schottgen on 1 Cor. I. c),
translated ol ikrbs Ecclus. Prol. and
oi e£aBev Joseph. Ant. xv. 9. 2.
e'^ayopafdpevot K.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 018a
on Kaipdv vpeis i£ayopd£ere, i. e. ' are
eager to gain time'. Somewhat simi
lar are the phrases rdv xpdvov Kepbai-
veiv, to irapbv Kepbaiveiv. Ill much the
same sense Ignatius says, Polyc. 3
rods Kaipovs KarapdvBave. For this
sense of it-ayopd£a 'coemo' (closely
allied in meaning to avvayopd£a), see
Polyb. iii. 42. 2 i^rjybpaae irap' atirdv
rd re povd£uXo irXoia iravra k.t.X.,
Plut. Vit. Crass. 2. More commonly
the word signifies 'to redeem' (see the
note on Gal. iii. 13), and some would
assign this sense to it here ; but no ap
propriate meaning is thus obtained. In
Mart. Polyc. 2 bid pias wpas ttjv aiai-
viov KoXaaiv e£uyopa£dpevoi it means
'buying off', a sense in which igavei-
aBai occurs several times. The reason
for the injunction is added in Ephes.
V. 16, on al rjpipal irovrjpai elaiv : the

prevailing evil of the times makes the
opportunities for good more precious.
6. e'v xV"] ' with grace, favour',
i.e. ' acceptableness ', ' pleasingness';
comp. Eccles. X. 12 Xdyoi aroparos
aocpov xdpis, Ps. xliv (xiv). 3 i£exvBtj
Xapis iv xdXeai aov, Ecclus. xxi. 16 iirl
XelXovs awerov evpeBrjaerai xdpis. In
classical writers x"-Pls ^oyav is a still
more common connexion ; e.g.Demosth.
c. Phil. i. 38, Dionys. Hal. de Lys.
§§ 10, 11, Plut. Vit. Mar. 44.
dXan] comp. Mark ix. 50 e'dv Se to
aXas dvaXov yivvrai, iv rivi avrb
dprvaere; ?xere iv eavrois dXa. 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 (UpaBrjoerai apros dvev
dXbs ; el be Kal 'ian yevpa iv ptjpaai
Kevois; in which passage the first
clause was rendered by Symmachus
p7Jri ftpaBrjaerai dvdprvrov ra prj
i'xeiv aXa; 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 dXiaBvre iv
avrd iva pr) bia(p8aptj tis iv vpiv,
iirel dirb rijs baprjs eXeyxBijaeaBe.
Hence the Pythagorean saying, Diog.
Laert. viii. I. 35 01 aXes irdv ad^ovaiv
b n Kal irapaXdjUaoi. It may be 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 irds Xdyos aairpbs iK roG o-rd-
paros upcSv pi) iKiropeviafla k.t.X. In
the first application the opposite to
aXan rjpTvpevos 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,
perspcrgatnr omnis oratio'. They

IV. 7]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

299

vpiwv irdvTOTe iv xdpiTi, aXaTi ijpTV/j.evos, elBevai vp.ds
irajs Bel evl eKao~Top diroKptvecrdai.
7Ta KaT e/xe iravTa yvcopicrei vpxiv Ti/^ckos 6 dya-

likewise dwelt on the connexion be
tween xo-Pls an(l <&•** 5 6S- Plut- Mor.
p. 514 p X^Piv Tlva 5ropao-Keudfovres
oXXtJXois, dairep dXal rois Xdyois i<bv~
bvvovai ttjv biarpifirjv, p. 697 D (comp. p.
685 A) ol 7roXXo! xdptras KaXoGo"iv [rdv
aXa], on iirl rd irXelara piyvvpevos
evappoara rfj yevaei Kal irpoarptXij iroiei
Kal Kexapiapiva, p. 669 A 77 Se rav dXaiv
bvvapis. .-xdpiv avrd Kal tjbovi)v irpoa-
rlBvai, Dion. Chrys. Or. xviii. § 13.
Their notion of 'salt' however was
wit, and generally the kind of wit
which degenerated into the curpaTre-
Xla denounced by St Paul in Ephes.
v. 4 (see the note there).
The form SXas is common in the
lxx and Greek Testament. Other
wise it is rare : see Buttmann Gramm.
1. p. 220, and comp. Plut. Mor. 668 p.
eiSevai] 'so as to know' ; see the note
on XaXfjaai ver. 3.
e'vi iKaara] '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 iravros ri-
vds adatj (1 Cor. ix. 22).
7 — 9. 'You will 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 will accom
pany him — a faithful and beloved bro
ther, who is one of yourselves, a Co
lossian. These two will inform you of
all that is going on here.'
7. Td Kar e'pe irdvra] ' all that
relates to me'; see the note on
Phil. i. 1 2, and comp. Bion in Diog.

Laert. iv. 47. So Acts xxv. 14 rd Kara
rbv UavXov.
yvaplaei] On this word see the
note Phil. i. 22.
Tuxikos] 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 deliver iu
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 Tuxikos
and 'Ovijo-ipos occur in proximity in
Phrygian inscriptions found at Alten-
tash (Bennisoa?) Boeckh 38571- sqq.
appx. Tychicus was a native of procor/su-
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 d'xpi rrjs 'Aaias
must be struck out in Acts xx. 4). It
is probable indeed that Tychicus, to
gether with others mentioned among
the Apostle'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-

3oo

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 8

irtjTos dBeXcpos Kal iriCTOs Bicikovos Kal avvBovXos ev
Kvp'iw' bv eirefjt\}sa irpos vpids eh 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 eirai-
i/os ev ra evayyeXla bti iraadv rdv iK-
KXrjaidv (2 Cor. viii. 18) : but this will
depend on the interpretation of the
best supported reading in Acts xx. 5
ouroi Sc irpoaeXBovres epevov rjpds iv
Tpadbi. (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 the first Ro
man captivity a.d. 62, 63 (see Philip
pians p. 3 1 sq.). (3) Once more, at the
close of St Paul's life (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 slight and insignificant, see Act.
Sanct. Boll. April. 29 (in. 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,
[3857 c], 3857 r, (comp. 3865 i, etc.);
and persons bearing it are commemo
rated on the coins of both Magnesia
ad Mseandrum (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. dccccxvii, mcccxciv,
mmlv. Along with several other
proper names similarly formed, this
word is commonly accentuated Tuxikos
(Chandler Greek Accentuation § 255),
and so it stands in all the critical
editions, though according to rule
(Winer § vi. p. 58) it should be Tuxikos.
koI n-io-rds k.t.X.] The connexion of
the words is not quite obvious. It
seems best however to take e'v Kvpia

as referring to the whole clause marbs
biaKovos ko.1 aiivbovXos rather than to
o-uvSouXos alone: for (1) The two sub
stantives are thus bound together by
the preceding irio-rds and the following
e'v Kvplw in a natural way: (2) The at
tachment of e'v Kvpia to marbs biaKo
vos is suggested by the parallel pas
sage Ephes. vi. 2 1 Tuxikos d dyairnrds
dbeXcpbs Kal 7Ticrrds Siokovos ev Kvpia:
The question of connecting e'v Kupia
with dbeXcpbs as well need not be en
tertained, since the idea of dSeXobds,
'a Christian brother', is complete in
itself: see the note on Phil. i. 14. The
adjective irio-rds will here have its
passive sense, 'trustworthy, stedfast',
as also in ver. 9: see Galatians p.
154 sq.
Siokovos] ' minister', but to whom ?
To the churches, or to St Paul him
self? The following o-»v8ouXos sug
gests the latter as the prominent idea
here. So in Acts xix. 22 Timothy and
Erastus are described as- bvo rdv bia-
Kovovvrav avrd. 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 Siokovos has here its strict official
sense, 'a deacon', as in Rom. xvi. 1,
Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 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 Sioko-
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 dea
con. In 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.

;oi

YiVftrre Ta irepl ypicuv ical irapaKaXeo-tj Tas KapBias v/ulwv,
9o~vv 'Ovrjai/mco tw itio-tw Kal dyairt]Tcp dBeX<p/S, bs
io~Tiv eP v/moov. iravTa vpuv yvioptaovo'iv Ta wBe.

8. eirep^a] ' / send,' or ' / have
sent' eirepyjra being the epistolary
aorist; see the note on eypa^a, Gal.
vi. ii. Tychicus appears to have ac
companied the letter itself. For simi
lar instances of the epistolary ewepijra,
iiriareiXa, etc., see 2 Cor. viii. 18, 22,
ix. 3, Ephes. vi. 22, Phil, ii 25, 28,
Philem. 11, Hebr. xiii. 22, Polyc.
Phil. 13.
yvcSre rd irepl rfpoiv] This must be
preferred to the received reading, y v5
rd 7repi upiGv, for two independent
reasons. (1) The preponderance of
ancient authority is decidedly in its
favour. (2) The emphatic els avrd
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 Kar ipe irdvra yvaplaei .vpiv
(ver. 7), and irdvra vpiv yvapiaovaiv ra
dbe. 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 yvdre rd irepl rjpdv to yv<3
rd irepl up<Sv in the author himself is
improbable. On the other hand a
transcriber was under a great temp
tation to substitute yvra for yviSre ow
ing to the following irapaKaXiatj, and
this temptation would become almost
irresistible, if by any chance irepl vpdv
had been written for irepl rjpdv in the
copy before him, as we find to be the
case in some mss. See the detached
note on various readings.
irapaKaXiatj k.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 'Ovtjaipa] See above, p. 33,
and the introduction to the Epistle to
Philemon. ra iriario k.tXT] The man whom the
Colossians had only known hitherto,
if they knew him at all, 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. yvmpio-ouo-iv] This form has rather
better support from the mss than
yvapiovaiv: see also above, iii. 25. On
the Attic future from verbs in -i£a 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; all 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 fellow-
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-

3°2 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. Pv- IO
IO' Acrird^eTai vpias 'ApicrTapxos 6 arvvaiXfia\<OTO<i
had been associated with St Paul in
his earlier 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
earlier desertion; 2 Tim. iv. 1 1 'ianv ydp
p.01 evxPV'TTOS e's biaKovlav.
This notice is likewise 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. 1 3 ; 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 BafivXdv 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. 1. 1; comp.
Papias in Euseb. //. E. iii. 39).
d dvei//-ios] ' the cousin'. The term
dvei^W is applied to cousins german,
the children whether of two brothers
or of two sisters or of a brother and
sister, as it is carefully defined in
Pollux iii. 28. This writer adds that
avTavityioi means neither more nor
loss than dveifrioi. As a synonyme
we find e'£d8eX<f>os, which however is
condemned as a vulgarism; Phryn.
p. 306 (ed. Lobeck). Many instances of
dve-fyioi are found in different authors
of various ages (e. g. Herod, vii. 5, 82,
ix. 10, Thucyd. i. 132, Plato Charm.
154B, Gorg. 471 b, Andoc. de Myst.
§ 47, Isseus Hagn. Her. § 8 sq,
Demosth. c. Macart. § 24, 27, etc.,
Dion. Hal. A R. i. 79, Plut. Vit. Thes.
7, Vit. Cms. 1, Vit. Brut. 13, Lucian
Dial. Mart. xxix. 1, Hegesipp. in
Euseb. H. E. iv. 22), where the rela-

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.'
10. The salutations to Philemon
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.
truvaixpdXiBTds pou] In Philem. 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 bia-
pios, he was not strictly an aixpdXcaros
' a prisoner of war'; nor could he have
called himself so, except by a confu
sion of the actual and metaphorical.
If on the other hand avvaixpdXaros
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 voluntarily shared the Apostle's
captivity by living with him.
MdpKos] doubtless John Mark, who

IV. 10] EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 3°3
piov, Ka\ MdpKos 6 dve\Jsios Bapvdfia, irepl ov iXa/3eTe

tionship is directly defined or already
known, and there is no wavering as to
the meaning. This sense also it has in
the lxx, Num. xxxvi. n. 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 dSeXqiiSoGs ; 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 all 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 xii. 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-
' stie'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 Cotelier on Apost.
Const, ii. 57). Even Tillemont (Mem.
Eccl. 11. 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. n. 43,
having first preached the Gospel in
Alexandria (p. 515). To most persons
however this early date of St Peter's
visit to Rome will appear quite ir
reconcilable with the notices in the
Apostolic writings, and therefore
with them Tillemont'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 likewise
identify them.
Bapvdj3a] 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 living, a. d. 57. The
notices bearing on the biography of
Barnabas are collected and discussed
by Hefele, p. 1 sq.
iXdfiere ivroXds] These injunctions
must have been communicated pre
viously either by letter or by word of
mouth: for it cannot be a question

304 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. [IV. 1 1
ivToXas, 'Eav kXdri irpos v/utds, Be^aarde avTov, "Kai
'Itjcrovs 6 Xeybfievos 'Iovcttos, ol ovtcs eK 7repiTop.fjs'
ovtoi jxovoi avvepyol eh Ttjv f3acriXeiav tov Qeov, oWives

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
Colossse. But what was their tenour ? It
seems best to suppose that this is
given in the next clause e'dv eXBrj
k.t.X. By an abrupt change to the
oratio recta the injunction is repeat
ed as it was delivered; eomp. Ps.
CV (civ). 15 i)Xey|ev uirep aurav /3a-
-triXeis- pv difnjaBe k.t.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 8e'-
£aa8ai 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. koi 'irjo-oCs] He is not men
tioned elsewhere. Even in the Epi
stle to Philemon 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, in. p. 633.
'IoGoros] 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 xviii.
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

(Joseph. Vit. §§ 9, 65), and by a son
of the historian Josephus himself (ib.
§1). It occurs in the rabbinical writ
ings (Nt3DV or »0D1», 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, 11. p. 348 ; Gar-
rucci Dissertazioni Archeologiche n.
p. 182). So also the corresponding
female name Justa (Garrucci I. c p.
180). In Clem. Horn. ii. 19, iii. 73, iv.
1, xiii. 7, the Syrophoenician woman
of the Gospels is named 'loGo-ra,
doubtless because she is represented
in this Judaizing romance as a prose-
lytess (irpoafjXvTos xiii. 7) who strictly
observes the Mosaic ordinances (njv
vdpipov dvabe^apiwj iroXirelav ii. 20),
and is contrasted with the heathen
'dogs' (rd eByrj ioiKOTa Kvalv ii. 1 9)
who disregard them. In some cases
Justus might be the only name of the
person, as a Latin rendering of the
Hebrew Zadok ; while in others, as
here and in Acts i. 23, it is a surname.
Its Greek equivalent, d bUaws, is the
recognised epithet of James the Lord's
brother: see Galatians, p. 348.
01 d'vres k.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
irepiropijs, though without the article,
must be used in a concrete sense,
like rfjs irepiropijs, 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.
pdvoi] i. e. 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.

305

iyevtjdtjcrav fxoi iraptiyopla. ri do-ira^eTai vptds'^irafppds
6 i£ vptcov, BovXos XpiarTov 'Iti&ov, irdvTOTe dywvi^o-
pievos virep v/awv iv Tals irpocrevx^h, 'iva crTa&tJTe re

pressed, as if absolutely no Jewish
Christian besides had remained friend
ly; they will 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 ouSc'va ex<»
lob\jrvxov .. .01 irdvres ydp k.t.X. (with
the note).
ttJv j3ao-iXeiav k.t.X.] See the note on
i. 13.
otnves k.t.X.] * men whom I found
etc.'; comp. Acts xxviii. 15 ous iSwv
d IlaGXos evxapiarrjaas rd 0e<5 eXa|3ev
Bdpaos, and see Philippians p. 17.
For oinves, not specifying the indi
viduals, but referring them to their
class characteristics, see the notes on
Gal. iv. 24, v. 19, Phil. iii. 7, iv. 3.
irapvyopla] ' encouragement ', ' com
fort'. The range of meaning in this
word is even wider than in irapapv-
Bla or irapaKXvais (see the note Phil.
ii. 1). The verb irapvyopelv denotes
either (1) 'to exhort, encourage' (He
rod, v. 104, Apoll. Rhod. ii. 64);
(2) 'to dissuade' (Herod, ix. 54, 55) ;
(3) 'to appease', 'quiet' (Plut. Vit.
Pomp. 13, Mor. p. 737 c); or (4) 'to
console, comfort ' (iEsch. Eum. 507).
The word however, and its derivates
irapvyopla, irapvybpvpa, irapijyopiKos,
iraprjyopvnKbs, 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 eirl rois drvxvpaai
irapvyopias, p. 118 A rois dd)aipovpevois
rds Xviras bia rijs yevvaias Kal aepvijs
irapvyopias, Vit. Gim. 4 e'irl irapvyopla
rov irivBovs. In Plut. Mor. p. 599 B
irapvyopla and avvvyopla are contrast-
COL.

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 irnpprjaiafrpevav
Kal bibaaKovrav on rd Xuireio-6'ai koi
ran-eivoGv iavrbv iirl iravrl pev axpv
arbv ian k.t.X.
12. 'Eiracjbpas] 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
gelist of Colossse, and perhaps of the
neighbouring towns, see above, pp. 29
sq, 34 sq.
d c| vpdv] 'who belongs to you',
' who is one of you ', i.e. a native, or
at least an inhabitant, of Colossse, 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.
8oGXos 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. dyiovifdpevos] ' wrestling '; comp.
Rom. XV. 30 avvayavlaaaBal poi iv
rals irpoaevxais. See also the great
dyavla of prayer in Luke xxii. 44.
Comp. Justin Apol. ii. 13 (p. 51 b)
Kai euxopevos Kal irappdxas dyavi£b-
pevos. See also i. 29, ii. 1, with the
notes. o-roo'ijre] ' standfast ', doubtless the
correct reading rather than o-rfJTe
which the received text has ; comp.
Matt. ii. 9, xxvii. 11, where also the
received text substitutes the weaker
word.
20

306

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 13

Xeioi Kal ireirXtipoaboptjpLevoi iv iravTi 6eXnp.aTi tov
Qeov. *3 papTvpoo ydp avTco oti e^ec iroXvv irovov virep

ireirXvpodropvpivni] 'fully persuad
ed'. The verb irXriponSopeiv has several
senses. (1) 'To fulfil, accomplish'; 2
Tim. iv. 5 rrjv biaKoviav aov irXvpo-
(pbprjaov, ib. ver. 17 rd Kijpvypa irXv
pocpopvBjj, Clem. Horn. xix. 24 ireirXv
pocpopvpivav viiv rjbv rpidv ijpepdv.
So perhaps Hermas Sim. 2 irXvpo<bo-
povai rbv irXoGrov avrdv... irXrjpocpo-
povai rds i|/uxds aurav, though it is a
little difficult to carry the same sense
into the latter clause, where the word
seems to signify rather 'to satisfy'.
(2) ' To persuade fully, to convince ';
Rom. iv. 21 irXvpo(popv8eis on b iirrjy-
yeXrai bvvarbs ianv Kai iroiijaai, xiv.
5 iv rd Ibla vol irXvpocpopeia&a, Clem.
Rom. 42 irXvpod)opv8ivres bid rfjs dva-
ardaeas k.t.X., Ign. Mapn. 8 eis to
irXvpocpopvBijvai rods direiBovvras, ib. 1 1
ireirXrjpo(poprja8ai iv Ttj yevvijaei k.t.X.,
Philad. inscr. e'v rfj dvaardaei avrov
ireirXvporpopijpevrj iv iravrl iXiei, Smyrn.
I ireirXrjpocpopvpevovs els rbv Kvpiov
ijpav, Mart. Ign. 7 irXrjporpopfjaai rods
ao-oVveis rjpds eVl tois irpoyeyovbaiv,
Clem. Horn. Ep. ad lac. 10 ireirXvpo-
cpopvpevos on iK ©eou biKaiov, ib. xix.
24 avveriBipvv cos irXvpoCpopovpevos. So
too LXX Eccies. viii. 1 1 iirXvpocpopridn
Kapbia roG iroirjcrai rd irovrjpbv. (3) 'To
fill'; Rom. XV. 13 irXvpocpoprjaai vpds
irdavs xaP°-s (a doubtful v. 1.), Clem.
Rom. 54 ris irerrXvpocpopvpivos dyd-
ttijs ; Test, xii Pair. Dan 2 ttj irXc-
ove£ia iirXvpocpoprjBvv rrjs dvaipeaeas
avrov, where it means 'I was filled
with', i.e. 'I was fully bent on', a
sense closely allied to the last. From
this account it will be seen that there
is in the usage of the word no
justification for translating it 'most
surely believed' in Luke i. 1 rav
ireirXrjpodpopvpivav iv ijpiv irpaypdrav,
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) iroXXois Xdyois Kal SpKois
irXvpocpoprjaavres Meyd/3u£bv is not
quoted with verbal exactness. In
lsocr. Trapez. § 8 the word is now
expunged from the text on the autho
rity of the mss. For the substantive
irXrjpocbopia see the note on ii. 2 above.
The reading of the received text here,
ireirXvpapevoi, must be rejected as of
inferior authority.
e'v 7ravrl k.t.X.] 'in every thing
willed by God'; comp. 1 Kings ix. 11.
So the plural rd BeXrjpara in Acts
xiii. 22, Ephes. ii. 3, and several times
in the lxx. The words are best con
nected directly with ireirXvpo(j)opvpevoi.
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 ra
Ibia vot; or (2) The object of the
conviction, as Ign. Magn. 11 e'v rfj
yevvijaei, Philad. inscr. ev rfj dvaard-
aei ; or (3) The atmosphere, the
surroundings, of the conviction, as
Philad. inscr. e'v iravrl e'Xe'et. This
last seems to be its sense here. The
connexion araBijre...iv, though legiti
mate in itself (Rom. v. 2, 1 Cor. xv.
1), is not favoured by the order of
the words here.
13. iroXiv irbvov] 'much, toil', both
inward and outward, though from the
connexion the former notion seems to
predominate, as in dydva ii. 1 ; comp.
Plat. Phmdr. p. 247 B n-dvos re Kai
dydv eaxaros ^rvxfl irpoKeirai. Of the
two variations which transcribers
have substituted for the correct read
ing, ffjXov emphasizes the former idea
and koitov the latter. The true read
ing is more expressive than either.
The word irdvos however is very
rare in the New Testament (occur
ring only Rev. xvi. 10, 11, xxi. 4,
besides this passage), and was there
fore liable to be changed.
koi rav k.t.X.] The neighbouring
cities are taken in their geographical

IV. i4]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

30/

v/idov Kal twv iv AaoBiKia Kal twv iv 'lepairoXei.
^dcrird^eTai vfids AovKas 6 taTpos 6 dyairtjTos, Kai
Atipids.

order, commencing from Colossse ; see
above, p. 2. Epaphras, though a Co
lossian, may have been the evangelist
of the two larger cities also.
AaoSiKia] This form has not the same
overwhelming preponderance of au
thority in its favour here and in vv.
15, 16, as in ii. I, but is probably cor
rect in all these places. It is quite
possible however, that the same per
son would write AaoSiKia and AaobiKeia
indifferently. Even the form Aao-
SiKija is found in Mionnet, Suppl. vn.
p. 581. Another variation is the con
traction of AaoS- into AaS- ; e. g. Aa-
biKtjvbs, which occurs frequently in the
edict of Diocletian.
14. AoukSs] St Luke had travelled
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. 3 1 sq), we
find him in the Apostle's company.
It is not probable that he remained
with St Paul in the meanwhile (Phi
lippians p. 35), and this will account
for his name not occurring in the
Epistle to the Philippians. He was
at the Apostle's side again in his
second captivity (2 Tim. iv. 1 1 ).
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 full Apollonius. On the
frequent occurrence of this name Lu
canus in inscriptions see Ephem.
Epigr. n. p. 28 (1874). The shortened
form Lucas however seems to be
rare. He is here distinguished from
01 bvres i< irepiropijs (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 the seventy (Dial. c. Marc.
§ 1 in Orig. Op. 1. p. 806, ed. De la
Rue ; Epiphan. Ifor. Ii. 1 1). The iden
tification with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts
xiii. 13) is possible but not probable.
Though the example of Patrobius for
Patrobas (Rom.xvi 14) shows that such
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 d dyair?jrds. But
whatever may be thought of these
points, there is no ground for ques
tioning the ancient belief (Iren. iii. 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.
Call. ii. 43). It is worthy of notice
that the two Evangelists are men-
20 — 2

3o8

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 15, 16

'S'Ao-Trdo-ao'de tovs iv AaoBiKia dBeX<povs Kal N17X-
(pdv Kal Ttjv KaT o'ikov avTcov iKKXr)0~iav. I Kai OTav

tioned together in this context, as also
iii Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 11.
d dya7rr)Tos] 'the beloved one', not to
¦ be closely connected with d larpbs, for
d dyan-7;Tds is complete in itself; comp.
Philem. 1, Rom. xvi. 12 (comp. vv. 5,
8, 9), 3 Job. 1. For the form compare
the expression in the Gospels, Matt.
iii. 17, etc. d uids pou, d dya^rds K.r.X. ;
where a comparison of Is. xiii. 1, as
quoted in Matt. xii. 18, seems to show
that d dyain/rds K.r.X. forms a distinct
clause from d uids pou.
Ar/pas] 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 Luke in Philem.
24, as here. In 2 Tim. iv. 10 their
conduct is placed in direct contrast,
Avpas pe iyKariXiirev. . .AovKas iarlv po-
vos per' ipov. There is perhaps a fore
shadowing of this contrast in the lan
guage here. While Luke is described
with special tenderness as d larpbs, b
dyarrvrbs, 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
will 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.'
1 5 . NupoSov] 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. iii. 13) for Zeno-

dorus, Theudas (Acts v. 36) for The
odoras, 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 Amplias (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-kX5s, AvpooBds, Aiopds,
'Eppoyds, NiKopas, 'Ovrjo-ds, Tpod)ds,
etc.; see esp. Boeckh C. I. m. pp. 1072,
1097. The name Nymphodorus is
found not unfrequently ; e. g. Herod.
vii. 137, Thuc. ii. 29, A then, i. p. 19 p,
vi. p. 265 c, Mionnet Suppl. vi. p. 88,
Boeckh C.I. no. 158, etc. The con
tracted form Nupoias however is very
rare, though it appears to occur in a
Spartan inscription, Boeckh C. I.
no. 1240 Eu'rux°s NuvoSa. 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,
Nymphicus, Nymphidius, Nymphodo-
tus, the first and last being the most
common. Those, who read au'rfjs in the fol
lowing clause, take it as a woman's
name (NupoW, not Nupqiav) ; and the
name Nymphe, Nympha, Nympa, etc.,
occurs from time to time in Latin in
scriptions; e.g. Inscr. Hisp. 1099,
!783, 3763, Inscr. As. Prov. etc. 525,
Murator. cmxxiv. 1, mclix. 8, mccxcv.

IV. i6]

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

309

dvayvtaa-dfj irap' vpuv tj iiria-ToXri, iroitja-aTe 'iva Kal

9, mdxci. 3. But a Doric form of the
Greek name here seems in the highest
degree improbable.
nyv kot' oijcov k.t.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
Philemon, whether at Colossse or at
Laodicea is somewhat uncertain (Phi-
lem.2); comp. Acts xii. 12 rrjv oiKiavrijs
Maplas...ov r)aav IkovoI avvvBpoiapivoi
ko.1 irpoaevxbpevoi, and see Philippi
ans p. 56. Perhaps similar gather
ings may be implied by the expres
sions in Rom. xvi. 14, 15 rods o-uv au-
roTs abeXtfiovs, rovs aiiv au'rois 7rdvras
dyious (Probst Kirchliche Disciplin
p. 182, 1873). See also Act. Mart.
Justin. § 3 (n. p. 262 ed. Otto), Clem.
Recogn. x. 71 ' Theophilus . . . domus
suse 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 ' colle
gium quod est in domo Sergise Pau-
linae' (de Rossi Roma Sotteranea 1.
p. 209) ; for the Christians were first
recognised by the Roman government
as 'collegia' 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 tux i. 13 and
Probst p. 181 sq. with a different view.
Hence the places of Christian assem
bly were not commonly called vaol till
quite late (Ignat. Magn. 7 is not
really an exception), but oikoi ©eoG,
oikoi iKKXtjaidv, oikoi evKTijpiot, and the
like (Euseb. H. E. vii. 30, viii. 13,
ix. 9, etc.).
au'rav] The difficulty of this read

ing has led to the two corrections, au-
rou and outtjs, 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, auroG is con
demned by its simplicity, and au'rfjs
has arisen from the form Nup0av,
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 adnov. A sim
ple explanation is that avrdv denotes
'Nymphas and his friends', by a tran
sition which is common in classical
writers ; e.g. Xen. Anab. iii. 3. 7 irpoo--
rjei pev (Mid pibdrv s) ¦¦ -irpbs rous'EXXr)-
vas' eirel 8' e'yyus e'yevovro k.t.X., iv.
5- 33 eVel 8' tjXBov irpbs Xeipiao(j)ov,
KareXdpfiavov Kal iKeivovs aKXjvovv-
ras : see also Kuhner Gramm. § 37 1
(11. p. 77), Bernhardy Syntax p. 288.
Or perhaps rods e'v AaobiKia dbeXaboiis
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 iKKXrjaia is only a section of 77
AaobiKiav iKKXtjaia mentioned in ver.
16. On the authorities for the vari
ous readings see the detached note.
16. 77 cirio-roX^] ' the letter', which
has just been concluded, for these
salutations have the character of a
postscript; comp. Rom. xvi. 22 Tep-
nos d ypd^ras rrjv iiriaroXrjv, 2 Thess.
iii. 14 8id Tfjs iirioToXfjs, Mart. Polyc.
20 ttJv eVio-roXfjv biairep^raaBe. Such
examples however do not countenance
the explanation which refers 'iypa\fVa
upiv e'v ttJ iiriaroXfi 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).
iroirjaare iva] 'cause that'; so John
xi. 37, Apoc. xiii. 15. In such cases
the tva is passing away from its earlier
sense of design to its later sense of
result. A corresponding classical ex-

3io

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

[IV. 17

e«v Ttj AaoBiKecov iKKXtjcria dvayvwcrdti, Kai ty\v ck
' ' \ >l ' A
AaoBiKias 'iva Kal vpteh dvayvcoTe. iy Kai enraTe Ap-
Xt-Tnrco, BAeVe Tt}v BiaKOvlav tjv irapeXapes iv Kvpiw,
'iva avTtjv irXtjpoTs.

pression is iroieiv ds or ottos, e.g. Xen.
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.
rrjv c'k Aao8i«ias] i.e. ' the letter left
at Laodicea, which you will procure
thence'. For this abridged expres
sion compare Luke xi. 13 d irarrjp b
i£ ovpavov bdaei irvevpa dyiov, xvi. 26
(v. 1.) ptjbe oi cKCifiev 7rpds rjpds
biairepdoiv, Susami. 26 ds be rjKovaav
rrjv Kpavytjv iv rd irapabelaa 01 eK rijs
oIkIos, elaeirrjbvaav k.t.X. For instances
of this proleptic use of the preposi
tion in classical writers, where it is ex
tremely common, see Kiihner Gr. § 448
(n. p. 474), Jelf Gr. § 647, Matthise
Gr. § 596 : e.g. Plat. Apol. 32 b rods
ouk dveXopevovs rods iK rrjs vavpaxias,
Xen. Cyr. vii. 2. 5 dpiraabpevoi ra eK
rdv 0'iKidv, Isocr. Paneg. § 187 njv
evbaipoviav rrjv iK rfjs ' Aaias els rrjv
Evpdirrjv biaKoplaaipev. 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
lossse, 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 koi upeis k.t.X.] ' see that ye also
read'. At first sight it might seem as
though this tva also were governed by
7roirjo-are, like the former; but, inas
much as iroirjo-are would be somewhat

awkward in this connexion, it is perliaps
better to treat the second clause as
independent and elliptical, IfiXiirere)
tva k.t.X. This is suggested also by
the position of rrjv iK AaoSiWas be
fore tva ; comp. Gal. ii. 10 pdvov rav
irra\dv tva pvvpovevapev (with the
ncte). Ellipses before ivo are fre
quent; e.g. John ix. 3, 2 Cor., viii. 13,
2 Thess. iii. 9, 1 Joh. ii. 19.
17. Kal ei'mire] 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 delivered by the voice of the
Church. Or the simpler explanation
perhaps is, that Archippus was not
resident at Colossse but at Laodicea :
see the introduction to the Epistle
to Philemon. On this warning itself
see above, p. 42.
BAeVe] 'look to', as 2 Joh. 8 pXiirere
caurous iva prj k.t.X. More commonly
it has the accusative of the thing to
be avoided ; see Phil. iii. 2 (with the
note). rr)v biaKoviav] From the stress which
is laid upon it, the SiaKovia 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 xii. 25 the same
phrase, irXtjpovv njv 8iaxoviav, 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.
irapeXafies] i.e. probably irap' e'poG.
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. 1 8] i8<

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

3"

O da-irao-fjios Tt] ip.rj xeiPl TlavXov. MvtjpioveveTe
piov tcov Beo-pwv. 'H xaPl<s A16^' vfxwv.

charge immediately from St Paul,
though ultimately from Christ. ' Non
enim sequitur', writes Bengel, 'a
Domino (i Cor. xi. 23), sed in Domi
no'. irXr;pois] 'fulfil', i.e. 'discharge
fully '; comp. 2 Tim. iv. 5 rr)v Sioko-
vlav aov irXvpocbbpvaov.
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 datraapbs k.t.X.] The letter was
evidently written by an amanuensis
(comp. Rom. xvi. 22). The final salu
tation alone, with the accompanying
sentence pvvpovevere k.t.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 e'pfj xe'P' HauXou] The same
phrase occurs in 2 Thess. iii. 17, 1 Cor.
xvi. 21. For the construction comp.
e.g. Philo Leg. ad Cai. 8 (n. p. 554)
ipov ian rov MaKpavos epyov Fdios,
and see Kuhner § 406 (11. p. 242), J elf
§ 467- rav beapdv] His bonds establish
an additional claim to a hearing. He
who is suffering for Christ has a right
to speak on behalf of Christ. The

appeal is similar in Ephes. iii. 1 toutou
Xapiv iyd IlaGXos d biapios rov X. 'I.,
which is resumed again (after a long
digression) in iv. 1 irapaKaXd ovv vpds
eyco o biapios iv Kvpia dtjlas irepi-
irarijaai k.t.X. (comp. vi. 20 uVep ov
7Tpeo-/3euG> e'v dXuo-ei). So too Philem.
9 roiouros «Sv ds IlaGXos ... biapios
Xpio-roG 'irjo-oG. 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
roG eu'ayyeXiou (Philem. 13). In Heb.
x. 34 the right reading is not rois Seo--
pois pou, but rois beaplois avveira-
Brjaare (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 Philem.
10, 13.
'H x"p'f k.t.X.] This very short form
of the final benediction appears only
here and in 1 Tim. vi. 21, 2 Tim. iv. 22.
In Tit. iii. 15 irdvrav is inserted, and
so in Heb. xiii. 25. In Ephes. vi. 24
the form so far agrees with the ex
amples quoted, that rj xaP's is used
absolutely, though the end is length
ened out. In all the earlier epistles 77'
xdpis is defined by the addition of rod
Kvplov ^vpav] 'I170-0O [XpioToC]; 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 ij x°P[s m the final benediction
may be taken as a chronological note.
A similar phenomenon has been al
ready observed (rjj <KKX7jcria, rals iK-
KXvalais) in the opening addresses:
see the note on i. 2.

312 _ EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

On some Various Headings in the Epistle1.
Harmon- IN one respect the letters to the Ephesians and Colossians hold a unique
istic read- position among the Epistles of St Paul, as regards textual criticism. They
iugs. 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.
Prepon- In such cases there is sometimes no difficulty in ascertaining the correct
derant reading. The harmonistic change is condemned by the majority of the
evidence Qj^est an(j best authorities ; or there is at least a nearly even balance of ex-
correct ternal testimony, and the suspicious character of the reading is quite suffi-
reading; cient to turn the scale. Thus we cannot hesitate for a moment about such
readings as i. 14 Sid roG atparos avroii (from Ephes. i. 7), or iii. 16 i|/aXpois
Kal vpvois Kal abais irvevpanKais, and to Kvpia (for to ©cm) in the same
verse (both from Ephes. v. 19).
(¦2) against IQ other instances again there can hardly be any doubt about the text,
the correct even though the vast preponderance of authority is in favour of the harmo-
reading. nistic reading ; and these are especially valuable because they enable us
Examples, to test the worth of our authorities. Such examples are :
iii. 6; iii. 6. The omission of the words eVl rods uious ttJs drreiBelas (taken
words in- from Ephes. v. 6). Apparently the only extant MS in favour of the omission
serted. jg g jn j) however they are written (though by the fi.-st hand) in smaller
letters and extend beyond the line (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
iEthiopic (Polyglott). They were also absent from copies used by Cle
ment of Alexandria (Peed. 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
1 The references to the patristic quo- Wilkins being commonly adopted,
tations in the following pages have all though full of errors, and no attention
been verified. I have also consulted being paid to the various readings of
the Egyptian and Syriac Versions in Boetticher's text. Besides the errors
every case, and the Armenian and corrected in the following pages, I
Latin in some instances, before giving have also observed these places where
the readings. As regards the mss, I the text of this version is incor-
have contented myself with the colla- rectly reported ; ii. 7 ev airy not
tions as given in Tregelles and Tisch- omitted; ii. 13 the second upas not
endorf, not verifying them unless I omitted; ii. 17 the singular (0), not the
had reason to suspect an error. plural (d); iii. 4 vp<Sv, not i)/j.dv; iii.
The readings of the Memphitic Ver- 16 rip Qe$, not rip Kvpia; iii. 22 T6v
sion are very incorrectly given even by Kvpiov, not r6v Qebv; iv. 3 doubtful
the principal editors, such as Tregelles whether 81' 0 or Si' 6V; and probably
and Tischendorf ; the translation of there are others.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

313

ed Hartel), by an unknown writer (de Sing. Cler. 39, in Cypr. Op. ill. p. 215),
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. ipeBlCere is only found in B K and in later hands of D (with its in. 21.
transcript E) among the uncial mss. All the other uncials read irapopyifeTe, pe >e
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 ve.rslon
the chief critical editors, Tregelles and Tischendorf. Thus in the Peshito sented.
the word used is the Aphel of V^i, the same mood of the same verb being
employed to translate irapopyifeiv, 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, ^_OV«^iov but in the margin the alternative ^..A^j^a*
is given. White interprets this as saying that the text is ipe8l£ere and the
margin irapopyifere, and he is followed by Tregelles and Tischendorf. But
in this version, as in the Peshito, the former word translates irapopyifciv in
Rom. x. 19, Ephes. vi. 4 ; while in the Peshito the latter word is adopted
to render ipeBlfciv in 2 Cor. ix. 2 (the only other passage in the N. T.
where ipeBlfciv occurs). In the Harclean of 2 Cor. ix. 2 a different word
from either, dvu^Vu, is used. It seems tolerably clear therefore that
irapopylCere was read in the text of both Peshito and Harclean here, while
ipeBi£ere was given in the margin of the latter. The Latin Versions seem Latin
also to have read irapopyiCere ; for the Old Latin has 'adiram (or in iram versions>
or ad iracundiam) provocare , and the Vulgate ad indignationem provo-
care' here, while both have ad iracundiam provocare in Ephes. vi. 4.
The Memphitic too has the same rendering ^-sionT in both passages. Of
the earlier Greek fathers Clement, Strom, iv. 8 (p. 593), reads ipeBlgere :
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 yalue of B.
in extreme cases.
For instance, the parallel passages Ephes. v. 19 and Col. iii. 16 stand Parallel
thus in the received text :
Ephesians.
XaXoGvres eaurois ij/aXpols Kal vp-
vois Kal abais irvevpariKals abovres
Kal i/zaXXovres e'v rfj Kapbia vpav
ra Kvpia.
And A carries the harmonizing tendency still further by inserting e'v
xdpin before aSovres in Ephes. from the parallel passage.
In B they are read as follows :

Colossians. Col. hi. 16,
» »/ * a > Eph. v. iq.
GioaaKovres koi vouoerouvres eou- " y
roils ijraXpols Kal upvois Kal tdSais
irvevpanKals iv xo-PiTt abovres iv Ttj
Kapbia. vpdv rd Kvpia.

XaXoGvres eaurois ev i//aXpois Kal
vpvois Kal abais abovres Kal yjsdX-
Xovres rfj Kapbia vpav rd> Kvpia.

bibaaKovres Kai vovaerovvres eav-
rovs -v/mXpois vpvois abais irvevpa
nKals iv rfj xapm abovres iv rals
Kapbiais vpav ra ©e<u.

3H. EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Altera- Here are seven divergences from the received text, (i) The insertion of ev
tions for before \yaXpois in Ephes. ; (2) The omission of Kai, Kal, attaching T/z-aXpois,
tfhark6n "f"""s' ^als ™ °o1' ' ^ The omission of wveupariKais in Ephes.; (4) The
izine^01 ' insertion of rfj before xdptn in Col. ; (5) The omission of e'v before rfj Kap
bia in Ephes. ; (6) The substitution of rals Kapblais for rtj Kapbia. in Col. :
(7) The substitution of ra 6e<» for ra Kupiw in Col.
Of these seven divergences the fourth alone does not affect the question:
of the remaining six, the readings of B in (2), (6), (7) are supported by the
greats preponderance of the best authorities, and are unquestionably right.
In (1), (3), (5) however the case stands thus :
iv yj/aXpoii. (1) E'v iJ/aXpois B, P, with the cursives 17, 67**, 73, 116, 118, and in
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) irveupariKals omitted in B, d, e. Of the Ambrosian Hilary Tischendorf
xais. says ' fluct. lectio'; but his comment ' In quo enim est spiritus,
semper spiritualia meditatur' seems certainly to recognise the
word. It appears to be found in every other authority.
ttj r.apUa. (5) ttj Kapbia. N* B with Origen in Cramer's Catena,- p. 201.
e'v rfj Kapbia K L, and the vast majority of later mss, the Armenian
and iBthiopic Versions, Euthalius (Tischendorfs ms), Theodoret,
and others. The Harclean Syriac (text) is quoted by Tischen
dorf and Tregelles in favour of e'v rfj Kapbia, but it is im
possible to say whether the translator had or had not the pre
position.
e'v rals Kapbiais H'A D F G P, 47, 8pe ; the Old Latin, Vulgate, Mem-
phitic, Peshito Syriac, and Gothic Versions, together with the
margin of the Harclean Syriac ; the fathers Basil (11. p. 464),
Victorinus (probably), Theodore of Mopsuestia, the Ambrosian
Hilary, Jerome, and others. Chrysostom (as read in the existing
texts) wavers between e'v rfj Kapbia and e'v mis Kapbiais. 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 irveupanKais more especially, where the support is weakest, this
impression must, I think, be very strong.
Excellence This highly favourable estimate of B is our starting-point ; and on the
ol B else- w]10ie' ft wj]j be enhanced as we proceed. Thus for instance in i. 22 and ii. 2
where. W£) ghajj ^^ ^^ Mg a[one (wfth orie 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 ii. 2 irav irXoGros, ii. 7 TV iriarei, ii. 13 rois irapairrapaaiv (omitting e'v),

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 3 IS.
v. 12 aradiJTe, 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 pvanjptov rod Xpio-roG Si' d koI
bibepai1 there can be little doubt that the great majority of ancient autho- False
rities correctly read 81' o, though B F G have 8t' bv : but the variation is • -o
easily explained. A single stroke, whether accidental or deliberate, 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
ii. 10 os eWiv 77 KecpaXrj, the reading of B which substitutes 5 for bs is
plainly wrong, though supported in this instance by D F G 47*, by the Latin
text d, and by Hilary in one passage (de Trin. ix. 8, n. p. 263), though else
where (ib. i. 13,1. p. 10) he reads 0. 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 d for ds F G ; i. 18 o
for os F G ; i. 24 Ss for 5CF etc. ; i. 27 Ss for o « C D K L etc. ; iii. 14 ds
for o N* D. Such readings again as the omission of koI alrovpevoi i. 9 by
B K, or of bi avrov in i. 20 by B D* F G etc., or of 17 imaroXrj in iv. 16 by
B alone, need not be considered, since the motive for the omission is
obvious, and the authority of B will not carry as great weight as it would
in other cases. Similarly the insertion of 77 in i. 18, 77 dpxrj, by B, 47, 67**,
b,cr, and of koi in ii. 15, koI ibeiypdnaev, 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
rfjs before yfjs (i. 20), and of evi in e'v evl o-o>part (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 following de
serve special consideration. i. 3 T(I) 6ecp TTATpi'.
On this very unusual collocation I have already remarked in the notes i. 3 np
(P- J99)- The authorities stand as follows : eev narpl,
(1) to Bed irarpi B C*.
(2) ra Bed rd irarpi 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 iEthiopic, and the
Arabic (Erpenius, Bedwell, Leipzig) Versions ; and of Augustine (de Unit.
Eccl. 45, ix. p. 368) and Cassiodorus (11. p. 1351, Migne).
(3) r<» Bed ko.1 irarpi X 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 Hilary, and
others. A comparison of these authorities seems to show pretty clearly that
to Bed irarpi was the original reading. The other two were expedients
1 In this passage B (with some few expression (ii. -/, 1 Cor. iv. 1, Rev. x.
other authorities) has tou GeoO for rou 7; comp. 1 Cor. ii. 1, v.l.) for a less
Xpicrrou, thus substituting a commoner common (Ephes. iii. 4).

3 1 6 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
for getting rid of a very unusual collocation of words. The scribes have
00^.^fe^ felt the same difficulty again in iii. 17 eu'xapio-roGvTes r<» Bed irarpi 81
¦"'outou, and there again we find koi inserted before irarpi. In this latter
instance however the great preponderance of ancient authority is in
favour of the unusual form rd Bed irarpi.
and i. 12. it js WOrth observing also that in i. 12, where r<3 irarpi has the highest
support, there is sufficient authority for r<5 Bed irarpi to create a suspicion
that there too it may be possibly the correct reading. Thus r&> Bed irarpi
is read in X 37, while Bed rd irarpi stands in F G. One or other must have
been the reading of some Old Latin and Vulgate texts (f, g, m, fuld.), of the
Peshito Syriac, of the Memphitic (in some texts; for others read ra irarpi
simply), of the Arabic (Bedwell), of the Armenian (Uscan), and of Origen
(11. p. 45 1, the Latin translator) ; while several other authorities, Greek
and Latin, read ra Bed ko.1 irarpi.
Unique There is no other instance of this collocation of words, d ©eds irarrjp,
colloca- jn ^he Greek Testament, so far as I remember; and it must be regarded
as peculiar to this epistle. i. 4 thn A|-<yrTHN [hn e'xeTe].
i. 4 Here the various readings are ;
rrjv dydirvv (i) rfjv dydirr/v B.
[fjWxere]. ^ t})v iyi7rriv *v ?x<rr(r a K 0 D* F G P 1 7, 37, 47 5 the Old
Latin and Vulgate, Memphitic (apparently), and Harclean
Syriac Versions; the Ambrosian Hilary, Theodore of
Mopsuestia (transl.), and others.
(3) rrjv dydirvv rrjv. 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 parallel passage Philem. 5 aKoumv aov rrjv dydirvv Kal rrjv ir'ianv rjv
e'xeis, while (3) conforms to the other parallel passage Ephes. i. 15 koi [rrjv
dydn^v] rfjv eis iravros rods dyiovs. Thus, though fjv e'xere is so highly sup
ported and though it helps out the sense, it is open to suspicion. Still the
omission in B may be an instance of that impatience of apparently super
fluous words, which sometimes appears in this ms.
i. 7 "fTTep HMOON AlAKONOC.
i. 7 Here there is a conflict between mss and Versions.
iirip vpdv. (!) jpdv a B K* D* F G, 3, 13, 33, 43, 52, 80, 91, 109. This must
also have been the reading of the Ambrosian Hilary
(though the editorsmake him write ' pro vobis'), for he ex
plains it 'qui eis ministravit gratiam Christi vice Apostoli.'
(2) up<Sv N° C Db 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. 3J7
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 rjpiSv 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 TU> IKANCOCANTI.
Against this, which is the reading of all the other ancient authorities, i- 12
we have l/covio<rovn.
(2) rd> KaXeaavn T>* F G, 17, 80, with the Latin authorities d, e,
f, g, m, and the Gothic, Armenian, and jEthiopic Ver
sions. It is so read also by the Ambrosian Hilary, by
Didymus de Trin. iii. 4 (p. 346), and by Vigilius Thap-
sensis c Varim. i. 50 (p. 409).
(3) TO KaXiaavri Kal iKavdaavn, found in B alone.
Here the confusion between tcoiikancocanti and tcoikaAecanti would
be easy, more especially 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 6N 00 e'xoMeiM.
For exopev B, the Memphitic Version, and the Arabic (Bedwell, Leipzig), i. 14
read eaxopev. This is possibly the correct reading. In the parallel pas- 2x°Pev or
sage, Ephes. i. 7, several authorities (X* D*. the Memphitic and jEthiopic ™/We" ¦
Versions, and the translator of Irenseus v. 14. 3) similarly read eaxopev for
exopev. 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.e. 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 AnOK<SiTHXA<\rHT6.
This reading is perhaps the highest testimony of all to the great value i. 22
0£ t> d7roKari7X-
The variations are; ayiyr .
(1) diroKarvXXdyvTe B. This also seems to be the reading of
Hilary 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) diroKaTvXXaKvTai 1 7.
(3) diroKoroXXaye'vres D* F G, and the Latin authorities d, e, g,

3i8

11. 2
tov Qeov
Xpiarov.

Orifciual
reading.

Varia
tions ;

(a) by in
terpretation,

(b) by
omission,

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
m, the Gothic Version, the translator of Irenseus (v. 14- 3),
and others.
(4) diroKanjXXa|cv, 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 diroKaraXXayivTas. The reading
therefore must lie between diroKaTrjXXdyrjre and d7roKar7JXXa£ev. This latter
however is probably a grammatical correction to straighten the syntax.
In the Memphitic a single letter e.-s' for js.q would make the difference
between diroKarr/XXdyrjre and diroKarrjXXa£ev ; but no variation from the
latter is recorded. ii. 2 toy Qeoy, XPICT0Y-
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 all the rest may safely
be adopted as the original. .
(1) toy 6eoY 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'.
All the other variations are derived from this, either by explanation or
by omission or by amplification.
By explanation we get ;
(2) toy 06OY O 6CTIN ypicTOC,
the reading of D, with the Latin authorities d, e, which have Dei quod
est Christus. So it is quoted by Vigilius Thapsensis c. Varim. i. 20
(p. 380), and in a slightly longer form by Augustine de Trin. xiii. 24 (viii.
p. 944) mysterium Dei quod est Christus Jesus.
(3) toy 6eoY €N XpiCTCO.
So it is twice quoted by Clement of Alexandria Strom, v. 10 (p. 683), ib.
12 (p. 694); or
toy 06OY TOY £N XPICTa>i
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 jEthiopic 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 following variations strive to overcome the difficulty by
omission ;
(5) toy 9eoY,
the reading of D by a second hand, of P, 37, 67**, 71, 80, 116.
(6) toy XPICT°Y>
the reading of Euthalius in Tischendorf 's MS; but Tischendorf adds
the caution ' sed non satis apparet'.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 3*9
All the remaining readings are attempts to remedy the text by ampli- (c) by am-
fication. They fall into two classes ; those which insert iraTpos so as to Plmcation f
make XpioroO dependent on it, (7), (8), and those which separate ©eoG from
Xpio-roG by the interposition of a koi, (9I, (10), (11).
(7) toy QeoY nATpoc xpictoy, (*) DV in-
the reading of K (by the first hand). Tischendorf also adds b"°" and ^artffto
o""; but I read Scrivener's collations differently (Cod. Aug. p. 506) : or govern
TOY 960Y TTATpoc TOY XPICT0Y> Xpiarov;
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 pair is 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 66OY KAI TTATpOC TOY XPICT0Y-
So N (the third hand), b"'*, 0"", and a corrector in the Harclean
Syriac. (9) TOY 960Y kai XpiCTOY, (") by
the simplest form of the other class of emendations by amplification, e^fr^f
It is found in Cyril Thes. p. 287. Xpiarov
(10) toy 66OY TTATpoc kai toy XPICT0Y- ^y a ?on"
So 47, 73, the Peshito Syriac (ed. princeps and Schaaf). And so it
stands in the commentators Chrysostom (but with various readings) and
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spicil. Solesm. 1. 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).
(11) toy 960Y kai TTATpoc kai toy XPICT0Y- The com-
This, which may be regarded as the latest development, is the reading mon text
of the received text. It is found in D (third hand) K L, and in the great ^g^68*
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 Qeov
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. ii. 16 In Bpobcei kaI In rrocei.
In this reading B stands alone among the mss; but it is supported by ii. 16
the Peshito Syriac and Memphitic Versions, by TertuUian (adv. Marc. v. ko.1 or tj"
19), and by Origen (in loann. x. § 11, iv. p. 174). The testimony of Ter
tuUian 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.

320

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The rest have iv fipdaei ij iv irbaei. This may be explained as a very
obvious, though not very intelligent, alteration of scribes to conform to the
disjunctive particles in the context, 77 e'v pipei ioprijs i) veopvvias ij oafipdrav.
In this same context it is probable that B retains the right form veo-
pvvlas (supported here by FG and others) as against the Attic vovpvvlas.
In the same way in iii. 25 Koplaerai and iv. 9 yvaplaovaiv B (with some
others) has resisted the tendency to Attic forms.

ii. 18, the
omission
of the
negative.

The form
ebpaKev.

ii. 23. Is
Kal to be
omitted ?

ii. 18 a edpAKEN.
That this is the oldest reading which the existing texts exhibit, will
appear from the following comparison of authorities.
(1) d idpaKev (ibpaKev) ABS* D* 17*, 28, 67**; the Old Latin au
thorities d, e, m ; the Memphitic, jEthiopic, 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 quce videt) ; Lucifer (De non
conv. c. hmr. p. 782 Migne); the Ambrosian Hilary (ad loc.
explaining it ' Inflantur motum pervidentes stellarum, quas
angelos vocat'). So too the unknown author of Qucest. ex
N. T. ii. 62 in August. Op. in. Appx. p. 156. Jerome (Epist.
cxxi ad Alg. § 10, 1. p. 880) mentions both readings (with and
without the negative) as found hi the Greek text : and Augus
tine (Epist. 149, n. p. 514), while giving the preference to quce
non viclit, says that some mss have quce vidit.
(2) d prj idpaKev (ebpaKev) N" C D*" K L P, and the great majority of
cursives ;
(3) d ouk idpaKev 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. So-
lesm. 1. p. 132 'quse nee sciunt'), Theodoret, and others.
From a review of these authorities we infer that the insertion of the ne
gative was a later correction, and that d idpaKev (or ebpaKev) represents the
prior reading. In my note I have expressed my suspicion that d idpaKev (or
ibpaKev) is itself corrupt, and that the original reading is lost.
The unusual form edpoKcv is found in N B* C D P, and is therefore to be
preferred to idpaKev. ii. 23 [kai] AcbeiAiA ccomatoc.
Here koi' is found in all the Greek copies except B, but is omitted in
these Latin authorities, m, the translator of Origen (In Rom. ix. § 42, iv.
p. 665), Hilary 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. 321
have in religione et humilitate sensus et vexationem corporis, where for
et vexationem we should probably read ad vexationem., as in the Ambrosian
Hilary. There was every temptation for a scribe to insert the Kal so as to
make dcbeibia 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 instauce occurs in iii. 12 ds 6'kXcktoI rod ©eoG, dyioi Kal 77'ya-
mjpivoi, where B omits the Kal with 17 and the Thebaic Version1. In 219
koI dyiot is read for dyioi Kal. 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. rNCoTe ta nepi hmgon.
Of the various readings of this passage I have already spoken (p. 29 sq., iv. 8
note I, p. 301). yvure rd
The authorities are as follows : ve,> '""'"''
(i) yviSre rd irepl rjpdv ABD*FGP, IO, 17, 33, 35, 37, 44, 47, 71,
111, 116, 137; d, e, g; the Armenian and jEthiopic Versions;
Theodore of Mopsuestia1, Theodoret2, Jerome (on Ephes. vi.
21 sq., vn. p. 682), and Euthalius (Tischendorf 's ms). This
is also the reading of K*, except that it has dp<5v for rjpiav.
(2) yv<5 rd 7repl dpoiv K° 0 Db° K L and the majority of cursives;
the Memphitic, Gothic, Vulgate, and both Syriac Versions ;
the Ambrosian Hilary, Jerome (on Philem. I, 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 yvdre rd irepl ijpav. The reading of K by the first hand exhibits a
transitional stage. It would appear as though the transcriber intended it
to be read yv<3 re rd irepl vpdv. At all events this is the reading of 1 1 1 The vari-
and of Io. Damasc. Op. n. p. 214. The variation yv<» rd irepl upiSv is thus ous read-
easily explained. (1) rjpiuv would be accidentally substituted for Gp<3v ; (2)yv<»re m8s ac~
would then be read yv<5 re ; (3) the awkward and superfluous re would be foJ111 e
omitted. In illustration of the tendency to conform the persons of the
two verbs yvw, irapaKaXiatj, (see p. 301) it may be mentioned that 17 reads
yvdre, irapaKoXe'o^re, 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. [ = Kal irapaKaXio-n rds KapSlas vpav],
p. 539, Migne) he is credited with the omnia quae hie aguntur manifesto
later Latin reading ut cognoscat quce 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. c.
vobis nota faciet Tychicus hla quse 2 In the text ; but in the commen-
erga me sunt, propterea a me directus tary he is made to write ha yvip ydp,
est cum Onesimo fratre qui a vobis <t>val, rd irepl vpav, an impossibte
venerat, ut nota vobis faciant qua? reading.
erga nos sunt [ = y vdre rd irepl vpdv]
COL. 21

322 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
iv. 15. KAT oTKON AYTCON.
iv. 1 5 The readings here are:
aurfiv. (!) avrdv SACP, 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 hothi, i.e. oikov aurmv. This seems also
to be the reading of Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spic. Solesm.
!• P- I33) Qum 4W domo eorum est ecclesia; though in Rab.
Maur. Op. vi. p. 540 his text runs qucv in domo ejus est eccle-
siam, and he is made to say Nympham cum omnibus suis
qui in domo ejus sunt.
(2) avrfjs B 67**.
(3) auroC D F G K L and the great majority of cursives ; and so
the Gothic Version, Chrysostom, and Theodoret (the latter
distinctly).
The singular, whether aurou or aurrjs, is the reading of the old Latin
and Vulgate, which have ejus, and of the Armenian. The pronoun is also sin-
Nymphas gular in the Peshito and Harclean Syriac. In this language the same Con
or Nym- sonants express masculine and feminine alike, the difference lying in the
y m ' pointing and vocalisation. And here the copies are inconsistent with them
selves. In the Peshito (both the editio princeps and Schaaf ) the proper
name is vocalised as a feminine Numphe (=Nvp(pv), and yet enou^xs
The Syriac is treated as having a masculine affix Kar' oikov adroG. In the text of the
versions. jjaroieail cni»S is pointed thus, as a feminine aurfjs; while the margin
gives the alternative reading cax>l (without the point) = aurou. The name
itself is writteu Nympha, which according to the transliteration of this version
might stand either for a masculine (as Barnaba, Luka, in the context, for
Bapvafias, AoukSs) or for a feminine (since Demas, Epaphras, are written with
The Latin an s)1. The Latin ejus leaving the gender undetermined, the Latin commen-
author- tators were free to take either Nymphas or Nympha; and, as Nympha was a
lties. common Latin form of Nvp(pv, they would naturally adopt the female name.
So the commentator Hilary distinctly.
It should be added that the word is accentuated as a masculine wp<bdv
in D° L P, and as a feminine vupqW in B° and Euthalius (Tischendorf 's ms.).
1 More probably the latter. In lator doubtless considered the name
Bom. xvi the terminations -a and as to be a contraction for Julianus. The
for the feminine and masculine names proper Syriac termination -a seems
respectively are carefully reproduced only to be employed for the Greek -as
in the Harclean Version. In ver. 15 in very familiar names such as Bar-
indeed we have Julias, but the trans- naba, luka.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 323

On the meaning of nfKrjpwfia.
The verb irXTjpoGv has two senses. It signifies either (1) 'To fill', e.g. The mean-
Acts ii. 2 iirXrjpaaev oXov rbv oikov; or (2) 'To fulfil, complete, perfect, ">!? °f *be .
accomplish', e.g. Matt. xxvi. 56 "iva irXnpadaaiv al yparpai, Rom. xiii. 8 T^r „
vbpov ireirXrjpaKev, Acts Xii. 25 irXr)po)o-avres Ttjv biaKoviav. 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 irXrjpapa, as it occurs in the New Testa- raised
ment, an almost exclusive prominence has been given to the former niean- respecting
ing of the verb; and much confusion has arisen in consequence. The
question has been discussed whether irXrjpiapa 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 ™ tlleo10-
i, t , . , . , -, . , , , . t-, , • - , .. glcal con-
the word has a passive sense 'id quod impletur in Ephes. 1. 23 T77 eKKAvaia sion
77ns cVtIv to adpa avrov, to irXrjpapa rov rd iravra iv irdaiv irXvpovpevov,
and an active sense 'id quod implet' in Ephes. iii. 19 iva irXvpadijre els irdv
rb irXvpdpa tov Qeov. Indeed so long as we see in irXvpovv only the sense
'to fill', 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 irXrjpapa 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 Sarcl 01
passive sense. They may denote an abstract notion or a concrete thing ;
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', dppa °/ substan-
'a knot', dpybpapa 'a silver-made vessel', /3ouXeupa 'apian', biKaiapa 'a _
righteous deed' or 'an ordinance', CvTVPa 'an investigation', Kijpvypa 'a
proclamation', KaXvpa ' a hindrance', bpoiapa ' a likeness', bpapa ' a vision',
1 The meaning of this word irXrjpapa it two main senses, 'id quod imple-
is the subject of a paper De vocis irXtj- tur' and 'id quo res impletur', the
pupa vario sensu in N. T. in Storr's latter being the more common. He
Opusc. Acad. 1. p. 144 sq.,and of anela- apparently considers that he bas sur-
borate note in Fritzsche's Rom. 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 Bom.
persistently active sense to a word xiii. 10 irXijpapa vbpov he concedes an
which has a directly passive termi- active sense ' legis completio ', h. e.
nation: and he himself attributes to ' observatio '.
21—2

324 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
arpdpa 'a carpet', acpalpapa 'a round thing', etc. In many cases the
same word will have two meanings, both however passive ; it will denote
both the completed action and the result or object of the action : e.g.
dpiraypathe 'robbery' or the 'booty', dvrdXXaypa the 'exchange' or the
'thing given or taken in exchange', Btjpevpa the 'hunt' or the 'prey',
irdrvpa the 'tread' or the 'carpet', and the like. But in all 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 apparent exceptions are only apparent. Sometimes this deceptive appear-
exceptions. ance js m the word itself. Thus raXuppa 'a veil' seems to denote 'that
which covers', but it is really derived from another sense and construction
of KaXvirreiv, not 'to hide', but 'to wrap round' (e.g. Horn. II. v. 315 irpbaBe
be ol ninXoio (paeivov irriiyp' cKaXui|/ev, xxi. 32 1 rbaavv ol aaiv KaBvirepBe
KaXvilra), 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 e SrjXiapa roG irpoKoirreiv 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 evSeiypo rrjs biKalas Kplaeas must we
explain evbeiypa 'a thing proving', but 'a thing proved', 'a proof. And
the same is probably the case also with such expressions as avpiroaiav
ipidiapa (Critias in Athen. xiii. p. 600 d), rd£ou pGpa (jEsch. Pers. 147),
and the like; where the substantives in -pa are no more deprived of their
passive sense by the connexion, than they are in GWdS^pa iroScov or arpdpa
kXi'vt/s ; though in such instances the license of poetical construction may
often lead to a false inference. Analogous to this last class of cases is Em-.
Troad. 824 Ztjvbs ep^eis kuXikgov irXrjpapa KaXXiarav Xarpelav, not 'the filling',
but ' the fulness of the cups, the brimming cnps, of Zeus.'
irXrioapa Now if we confine ourselves to the second of the two senses above
connected ascribed to irXrjpovv, it seems possible to explain irXtjpapa in the same way,
with the at all events in all the theological passages of St Paul and St John, without
second doing any violence to the grammatical form. As irXvpovv is 'to complete',
ttXvpovv so rrXrjpapa is 'that which is completed', i.e. the complement1, the full
tale, the entire number or quantity, the plenitude, the perfection.
Its uses in This indeed is the primary sense to which its commonest usages in
Classical classical Greek can be most conveniently referred. Thus it signifies (1)
wri ers. ,^ sjjjp>g crew>: e, g. Xen. Hell. i. 6. 16 Sid rd c'k iroXXdv irXvpapdrav is
(1) 'A dXiyas (vaCs) iKXeXixBai rods dplarovs e'pe'ras. In this sense, which is very
ship's frequent, it is generally explained as having an active force, ' that which
fills the ships'; and this very obvious explanation is recommended by the
fact that irXvpovv vaGv is a recognized expression for ' manning a ship', e.g.
1 The English word complement has complement of an angle, i.e. the angle
two distinct sen3es. It is either (i) by which it falls short of being a
the complete set, the entire quantity complete right angle. In other words,
or number, which satisfies a given it is either the whole or the part. As
standard or cadre, as e.g. the com- a theological term, irXrjpapa corre-
plement of a regiment ; or (ii) the sponds to the first of these two senses ;
number or quantity which, when added and with this meaning alone the word
to a preexisting number or quantity, ' complement ' will be used in the fol-
produces completeness ; as e. g. the lowing dissertation.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 325
Xen. Hell. i. 6. 24. But irXrjpapa 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> S rvv irapovalav rdv irXvpaparav...Ta irpoacbbras irapayeyovbra trXvpa-
luvra, Lucian Ver. Hist. ii. 37, 38, dird 8uo irXvpapdrav e'pd^ovro. . .ire'vre ydp
elxov irXvpdpdra ; 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. n. 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 case:!, 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, e. c. navigium'; but this severance of
meaning can hardly be maintained. On the other hand, if we suppose that
the crew is so called as ' the complement,' (i. e. ' not that which fills the
Bhip,' 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 fully equipped and manned vessel itself becomes natural.
In this sense ' a complement' we have the word used again of an army,
Anstld. Or. I. p. 381 pijre aurdp.Keis eaeaBai irXrjpapa ivbs oikciou arparevparos (2) 'Popu-
irapaaxeoBcu, (2) It sometimes signifies ' the population of a city', Arist. lation.'
Pol. iii. 13 (p. 1284J prj pe'vrot Suvarol irXvpapa irapaaxeoBai irbXeas (comp.
iv. 4, p. 1291). Clearly the same idea of completeness underlies this
meaning of the word, so that here again it signifies ' the complement':
Comp. Dion. Hal. A. R. vi. 51 rod 8' dXiyou koi ouk di-iopdxov irXvpaparos
To irXeiov ian 8r7/ioriKdy K.r.X., Eur. Ion 663 rtSv (plXav irXrjpap,' dBpolaas (3) ' Total
'the whole body of his friends'. (3) 'The entire sum', Arist. Vesp. 660 amount.'
rouroiv irXrjpapa rdXavr' e'yyus biaxiXia yiyverat TJpiv, ' From these sources a (4) ' Entire
total of nearly two thousand talents accrues to us'. (4) ' The full term', term-
Herod, iii 22 dySaiKovra 8' crea fdrjs irXrjpapa dvbpl paKpbrarov irpo<eea8ai. J*' . ,
(5) 'The perfect attainment', 'the full accomplishment', e.g. Philo de Abr.
46 (n. p. 39) irXtjpapux xpT/'o-rmv iXirlbav. In short the fundamental mean
ing of the word generally, though perhaps not universally, is neither ' the
filling material', nor 'the vessel filled'; but 'that which is complete in
itself, or in other words ' plenitude, fulness, totality, abundance'.
In the Gospels the uses of the word present some difficulty. (1) In Use of
Matt. ix. 16 atpei ydp rd irXrjpapa adroG dird roG ipariou Kal ^eipov axiapa nXypupa
yiverai, it refers to the iirlfiXvpa ookovs a'yvdoiou which has gone before; but m tne(j0S-
irXtjpapa need not therefore be equivalent to iirifiXijpa so as to mean the Matt. ix.
patch itself, as is often assumed. The following pronoun aurou is most 16.
naturally referred to iirlfiXvpa; and if so irXrjpapa 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 a'ipei rb irXrjpapa dir' avrov, to Kaivbv rou iraXaiov k.t.X. The received
text omits the preposition before adroG, but a glance at the authorities is
convincing in favour of its insertion. In this case the construction will be
aipei rb irXrjpapa (nom.) dir' auroG (i. e. roG ipariou, which has been men
tioned immediately before), rd Kaivdv (7rXrjp<»pa) roG 7raXaiou (tpariov) ;
' The completeness takes away from the garment, the new completeness

326 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
of the old garment', where the paradox is put still more emphatically'.
Mark vi. (2) In Mark vi. 43 the right reading is koi vpav KXaapdrav SuScko KogSi-
43- vous irXtjpapara, i.e. 'full' or 'complete measures', where the apposition to
Koiplvovs obviates the temptation to explain irXrjpdpara as 'ea quse ira-
Mark viii. plent'. On the other hand in Mark viii. 20 irdo-wv airvpibav irXvpapara
2°- KXaapdrav fjpare ; this would be the prima facie explanation ; comp.
Eccles. iv. 6 dyaBbv ian irXrjpapa SpdKos dva7rauo-eo>s U7rep irXvpapara bvo
8paK<3v pbxdov. But it is objectionable to give an active sense to irXvpdpa
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
p . tend in the same direction. (1) In 1 Cor. x. 26 roG Kvpiov ydp r] yv Kal re!
26. irXrjpapa aurfjs it occurs in a quotation from Ps. xxiv (xxiii). 1. The ex
pressions rd irXrjpapa rfjs yijs, to irXrjpapa Ttjs BaXdoatjs, occur Several times
in the lxx (e.g. Ps. xevi (xcv). 11, Jer. viii. 16), where rd irXrjpapa is a
translation of K?0, 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
Kom. xiii. gome passages, e.g. Cant. v. 13 c'irl irXvpdparavbdrav. (2) In Rom. xiii. 10
I0' irXrjpaipa vopou 77 dydirv, the best comment on the meaning of the word is
the context, ver. 8 0 dya7rc3v rdv erepov vbpov ireirXijpaKev, SO that irXrjpapa
here means the 'completeness' and so 'fulfilment, accomplishment': see
Bom. xv. the note on Gal. v. 14. (3) In Rom. XV. 29 e'v -irXvpapan evXoyias Xpiarov
29- iXevaopai, it plainly has the sense of 'fulness, abundance'. (4) In Gal.
Gal. ly. 4. iy. 4 o'Te Se rjX(9ev rd irXrjpapa rov xpovoi and Ephes. i. 10 els o'lKovoplav rov
p 1- IO' irXvpaparos rdv Kaipdv, its force is illustrated by such passages as Mark
i. 1 5 ireirXrjparai b Kaipbs koi ijyyiKev rj fiaoiXeia k.t.X., Luke xxi. 24 &xpi
ov irXvpaBdaiv Kaipol idvdv (comp. Acts ii- 1, vii. 23, 30, ix. 23, xxiv. 27), so
Eom. xi. that the expressions will mean ' the full measure of the time, the full tale
25' of the seasons'. (5) In Rom. xi. 25 iroopcoo-is dird pepovs rd 'lo-par)X ye'yo-
vev &xpis ov rb irXrjpapa rav idvdv eiaiXdtj, 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 earlier passage in this chapter the same
12. expression occurs of the Jews, xi. 12 ei Se rd irapdrrTapa avrdv irXovros
Koapov Kai rb vrrvpa avrdv irXovros iBvdv, iroaa paXXov rd irXrjpapa avrdv.
Here the antithesis between TJfrrrjpa and irXrjpapa, 'failure' and 'fulness', is
not sufficiently direct to fix the sense of irXrjpapa ; 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 irXrjpapa
has its proper passive force, as a derivative from irXvpovv ' to make com
plete'. It is ' the full complement, the entire measure, the plenitude, the

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 3^7
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 ;
Col. i. 19 ev adroj cuSoktjo-cv irdv rd irXrjpapui KaroiKrjaai. Colossians
Col. ii. 9 e'v avrd KOTotKei irdv rd irXrjpapa rijs Beorvros aapariKds, Kal a. -^P116"
, , > , n x . sians.
core ev avra ire7rA7;po)pcvoi.
Ephes. i. 23 aurdv eScoKev KecpdXrjv virep irdvra Ttj iKKXvala, rjns iarlv rd
adpa aurou, ro irXvpapa tov ra iravra iv irdaiv irXr/poupevou.
Ephes. iii. 19 iva irXvpaBijre els irdv rd irXrjpapa tov SeoG.
Ephes. iv. 13 eis dvSpa riXeiov, els pirpov 77'XiKias roG irXvpaparos tov
Xpiarov. John i. 14, 16 Kal d Xdyos o"dp£ iyivero Kal iaKijvaaev iv vpiv (koI iBea- St. John.
adpeda rrjv 8d£av avrov, bb£av as povoyevovs irapd irarpbs) irXrjpvs x^piros
Kal dXvBeias...iK rod irXvpaparos avrov vpeis irdvres iXdjSopev Kal xo-Plv dvrl
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 Kal 6eo<f)dpos, Ttj evXoyvpevij iv peyiBel Geou
irarpbs irXvpapan* . . .Ttj iKKXvala rtj d^iofUiKaplara rfj ovarj iv 'Erpiaa k.t.X.
Trail, inscr. 'Iyvdnos, d Kal Qeocpbpos... iKKXvala. dyla rfj ovarj iv TpdXXe-
o-iv. ..77V Kal aaira£opai e'v rd irXvpapan, iv diroaroXiKa xaPaKrrjpi.
It will be evident, I think, from the passages in St Paul, that the word The term
irXvpapa ' fulness, plenitude ', must have had a more or less definite theo- has a re-
logical value when he wrote. This inference, which is suggested by the °°snised
frequency of the word, seems almost inevitable when we consider the form Va Ue
of the expression in the first passage quoted, Col. i. 19. The absolute use
of the word, 7r5v rd irXrjpapa ' all the fulness', would otherwise be unintelli
gible, for it does not explain itself. In my notes I have taken d Geds to be
the nominative to cuSokijo-cv, but if the subject of the verb were irdv rd
irXrjpapa, as some suppose, the inference would be still more necessary. The
word however, regarded as a theological term, does not appear to have been
1 The first of the two passages is present Syriac text has et perfects for
contained in the short Syriac recension irXvpdpan ; but there is no reason
of the Ignatian Epistles, though loosely for supposing that the Syriac trans-
translated ; the other is wanting there. iator had another reading before
I need not stop to enquire whether the n;m ^ slight change in the Syriac,
second was written by St Ignatius him- __* \ _ _ w _/ («• »n
self or by an interpolator. The inter- ^"^ f°r «*..\«»1T «WO,
polated epistles, if they be interpolated, would bring this Version into entire
can hardly be later than the middle accordance with the Greek ; and the
of the second century and are therefore confusion was the more easy, because
early enough to afford valuable illus- the latter word occurs rn the lmme-
trations of the Apostles' language. diate context. Or the translator may
2 The common texts read Kai irXVPd- bave indulged in a paraphrase ac-
ttori, but there can be little doubt cording to his wont; just as in the
(from a comparison of the authorities) longer Larin Version irXvpapan here
that koi should be struck out. The is translated repletce.

328 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
adopted, like so many other expressions in the Apostolic writers1, from the
derived nomenclature of Alexandrian Judaism. At least no instance of its occur-
from Pa- rence in this sense is produced from Philo. We may therefore conjecture
lestine and that jt had a paiesti,,ian origin, and that the Essene Judaizers of Colossse,
andria. whom St Paul is confronting, derived it from this source. In this case it
would represent the Hebrew &6d, of which it is a translation in the lxx,
and the Aramaic KlAcV-Sa or some other derivative of the same root,
such being its common rendering in the Peshito.
It denotes The sense in which St Paul employs this term was doubtless the sense
the totality which he found already attached to it. He means, as he explicitly states in
of the Di- the second Christological passage of the Colossian Epistle (ii. 9), the ple-
ers'etc"^ roma> tne plenitude of 'the Godhead' or 'of Deity'. In the first passage
in the Co- ('¦ I9h though the word stands without the addition rrjs Beorvros, the signi-
lossian fication required by the context is the same. The true doctrine of the one
letter. 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, principalities, 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 8uvdp«s, in and by which God manifests
Himself whether in the kingdom of nature or in the kingdom of grace.
Analogy to This application is in entire harmony with the fundamental meaning of
its usage the word. The term has been transferred to the region of theology, but in
elsewhere : 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
in Philo present, and that each appears in its full proportions. Thus Philo, describing
of the the ideal state of prosperity which will result from absolute obedience
family ^ q0(j;s jaw> menti0ns 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 all
those which are used to designate relations, whether in the ascending line,
as parents, uncles, grandfathers, or again in the descending line in like
manner, as brothers, nephews, sons' sons, daughters' sons, cousins, cousins'
and in sons, kinsmen of all degrees2.' So again Aristotle, criticizing the Re-
Aristotle, public of Plato, writes ; ' Socrates says that a city (or state) is composed of
of the four classes, as its indispensable elements (rarv dvayKoiordrwv) : 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 (raGra irdvra yiverat wXtjpapa rrjs irpdrvs irdXeoos);
1 See the notes on Col. i. 15 sq. -f) bvbparos rav oVa eVi^pfferai k.t.X.
2 de Pram, et Pan. 18 (11. p. 425). The construction of the subsequent
The important words are us e/cao-rov. part of the sentence is obscure; and
oXkov irXiipupa elvai iroXvavBpuirov trvy- for bpolovs we should probably read
yeveias, pijdevbs e\\ei<p84vros ij Popovs opoiios.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 329
thus he assumes that a city is formed to supply the bare necessities of life
(riSv dvayKalav xaPlv) etc' x. From these passages it will be seen that the
adequacy implied 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 jr on? ^°"to
aims of the two epistles. While in the former the Apostle's main object jjphe-
is to assert the supremacy of the Person of Christ, in the latter his prin- sians.
cipal theme is the life 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 Corre-
plenitude of Divine graces and virtues which is communicated through spondmg
Christ to the Church as His body. The Church, as ideally regarded, the 0fn\VDUaa
bride 'without spot or wrinkle or any such thing', becomes in a manner to the
identified with Him3. All the Divine graces which reside in Him are Church.
imparted to her; His 'fulness' is communicated to her: and thus she may
be said to be His pleroma (i. 23). This is the ideal Church. The actual
militant 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 collective 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 indwelling of Christ be fulfilled till they attain to the pleroma of God
(iii. 19). It is another way of expressing the continuous aspiration and
effort after holiness which is enjoined in our Lord's precept, 'Te 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 militant 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 (irXrjpvs) 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
'* See the notes on Col. ' ii. 19 (p. on individuals to be the unity and
266). mature growth of the whole, ' the
3 Ephes. v. 27 sq. building up of the body', pexpl Karav-
* The Apostle in this passage rrjaapev ol irdvres els tvv evirijra..^
(Ephes. iv. 13) is evidently contem- eis dvopariXeiov, els pirpov ijAi/tias rou
plating the collective tody, and not irXvpaparos tov Xpiarov. This cor-
the individual believers. He writes ol porate being must grow up into the
Travres, not irdvres, and dvSpa reXeiov, one colossal Man, the standard of
not &Spas reXelovs. As he has said whose spiritual and moral stature is
before evi iK&o-Ta^pMiv e86?v [77] Xop« nothing less than the pleroma of
Kard rb pirpov rijs Sapeas rov Xpi- Christ Himself.
arov, so now he describes the result of 5 Matt. v. 48.

330

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

Ignatianletters.

Gnostic
sects.

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,' i. e. by graces imparted
from the pleroma. To the Trallians again he sends a greeting ' in the ple
roma', where the word denotes the sphere of Divine gifts and operations, so
that e'v rd irXvpapan is almost equivalent to e'v rd Kvpia or e'v r<5 irvevpan.
When we turn from Catholic 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. Irenasus 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-
rinthians. 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 Cerinthus 2. And in a third passage, which links
together the other two, this same father, after mentioning this heresiarch,
again alludes 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 nien-

The Ce-

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

pleroma'. This expression is the con
necting link between the other two
passages. This third passage is quoted
more at length, above, p. 112: but I
ought to have stated there that illi is
referred by several critics to the Va-
lentinians, and that certainly some
characteristic errors of the Valentinian
teaching are specified immediately
after. The probable explanation seems
to be that illi 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
they belong. He goes on to say that

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 33 1
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 tbis use
on other grounds. The term pleroma, we may presume, was common to ^\ ^* d
St Paul and the Colossian heretics whom he controverts. To both alike it wjtn ^e
conveyed the same idea, the totality 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 Him8. 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, ooa z '
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 locality, 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 S,™*,-^ ^
the system of Basilides. Indeed the nomenclature of this heresiarch be- '
longs to a wholly 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 5.ent ln
sight it is somewhat difficult to connect their use of the term with St Paul's, nian;sm.
a few words on this subject may not be out of place.
Valentinus then dressed his system in a poetic imagery not unlike the Poeticteaching
St John in his Gospel desired to ex- irdVu Kal SiboiKe -rds Karb. irpofioXijv t&v
elude 'omnia taha'. 7eyov6™»' oitrlas 6 BatriXeidris. Easi-
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 a spider
tubus i. p. lxxiii 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 Basilideans, apparently in-
of the Pleroma originated with Ce- fluenced by Valentinianism, super-
rinthus'. added to the teaching of their founder
2 See p. ioi sq., and the notes on in tbis respect ; but the strong language
j IQ ' quoted by Hippolytus leaves no doubt
3 p. 107 si- about the mind of Basilides himself.
* Hippol. It. H. vh. 2 2 rpeiyei ydp

332

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

of Valen-
tinus.

Topogra
phical conception
of the ple
roma. Antithesis
of pleroma
and keno
ma.

Pleroma
the abode
of the
iEons.

Different forms of
Valenti-nianism.

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 light 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
alt events is especially prominent in their conception of the relations
between the pleroma and the kenoma.
The pleroma is the abode of the iEons, who are thirty in number.
These JEonn 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 like 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 philosophy. 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 ./Eons 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 Mons themselves, could pass1. The former mode of representa-

1 For the various modes in which
the relation of the absolute first prin
ciple to the pleroma was represented
in different Valentinian schools, see
Iren. i. i. i, i. -l. 4, i. 11. 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 Bi/06s
and Siyij, inoluded within the pleroma
but fenced off from the other reons.
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 thatthis father gives
the original teaching of Valentinus
himself. For (1) this very doctrine of
the monad seems to point to an earlier
date. It is the link 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
silides, whose first principle likewise
was a monad, the absolute nothing,
the non-existent God. The conception

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 333
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 philosophical
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' "?e reS10n
or ' void ' — the kingdom of this world, the region of matter and material me^a
things, the land of shadow and darkness1. Here is the empire of the
Demiurge or Creator, who is not a celestial Mod. at all, but was born in this
very void over which he reigns. Here reside all those phenomenal, decep
tive, transitory things, 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. All things are set off one against another in these two °.f,,tm? au"
... tithesis.
regions" : just as The swan on Btill St Mary's lake
Floats double, swan and shadow.
Not only have the thirty jEons their terrestrial counterparts; but their
subdivisions also are represented in this lower region. The kenoma too
has its ogdoad, its decad, its dodecad, like the pleroma3. There is one
Sophia in the supramundane region, and another in the mundane ; there
is one Christ who redeems the jEons in the spiritual world, and a second
Christ who redeems mankind, or rather a portion of mankind, in the
sensible world. There is an jEon Man and another Mou Ecolesia in the
celestial kingdom, the ideal counterparts to the Human Race and the
Christian Church of the terrestrial. Even individual men and women, as
we shall see presently, have their archetypes in this higher sphere of
intelligible 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 Irensus
of the principle of syzygies which Va- (i. n. i) states that Valentinus re-
lentinus with a truer philosophical con- presented the first principle as a dyad
ception had restricted to the derived ("Appiyros or Hvdbs, and Ziyrj) : 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 Ptolemsus and Marcus. (3) The especially from the Ptolemseans.
sequence of his statement points to 1 Iren. i. 4. 1, 2, ii. 3. 1, ii. 4. 1, 3,
the same conclusion. He gives a con- ii. 5. 1, ii. 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., ii. 20. 5, ii. 30. 3, etc
lentinian schools from this standard 3 Iven. i. 5. 2, ii. 14. 3 ; comp.
and again resuming the main thread Hippol. vi. 34.

334

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The locali
zation of
the plero
ma. carried
out in de
tail.

The con
nexion
with St.
Paul's use
of theterm
obscured,

owing
partly to
the false
antithesis
Ke~vapa

The topographical conception of the pleroma moreover is carried out
in the details 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, shall be redeemed
and received up into the pleroma, while the psychical portion will 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 localization 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 still 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
naturally reminded of the plenum and the vacuum of physical specula
tions. The sense of pleroma, as expressing completeness and so denoting
the aggregate or totality of the Divine powers, seems altogether to have
disappeared. But in fact this antithesis of Kivapa was, so far as we can
make out, a mere after-thought, and appears to have been borrowed, as
Irenseus states, from the physical theories of Democritus and Epicurus6.
It would naturally suggest itself both because the opposition of irXtjpvs and
kcvos was obvious, and because the word Kivapa materially assisted the
imagery as a description of the kingdom of waste and shadow. But in

1 Iren. i. 4. 1 Xe'yovo-iv ev aKiais
[vKias] Kal Keviliparos rbirois iKfiefipd-
a$ai k.t.X. The Greek ms reads Kal
crKvdparos, but the rendering of the
early Latin translation 'in umbra?
[et?] vacuitatis locis' leaves no doubt
about the word in the original text.
TertuUian 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. 2. 6, Hippol. vi. 32.
3 They quoted, as referring to this
descent of the second Christ into the
kenoma, the words of St Paul, Phil.

ii. 7 iavrbv eKcVwcrev ; Clem. Alex. Exc.
Theod. 35 (p. 978).
4 Iren. i. 7. 1 koI tovto elvai vvp-
iplov Kal vbpipvv, vvpipava 5e rd irav
irXvpapa: comp. Hippol. vi. 34 d vvp.
iplos avrijs.
6 This language is so frequent that
special references are needless. In
Iren. ii. 5. 3 we have a still stronger
expression, 'in ventre pleromatis'.
6 Iren. ii. 14. 3 ' Umbram autem et
vacuum ipsorum a Democrito et Epi
cure sumentes sibimetipsis aptaverunt,
quum illi primum multum sermonem
fecerint de vacuo et de atomis '.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 335
itself it is a false antithesis. The true antithesis appears in another, and borrowed
probably an earlier, term used to describe the mundane kingdom. In this fj:om ^r7"
earher representation, which there is good reason for ascribing to Valen- i0sophers ;
tinus himself, it is called not Ke'vcopa 'the void', but varipvpa ' the defi- but 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-
Ke'viopa was not the original idea of the term. They speak of rd irXrjpapa mof phra"
toSv aldvav, rb irdv irXrjpapa r<»v altoviav, ' the whole aggregate of the 6° °8y'
iEons'2. And this (making allowance for the personification of the JEons)
corresponds exactly to its use in St Paul.
Again the teaching of the Valentinian schools supplies other uses The origi-
which serve to illustrate its meaning. Not only does the supramundaue ?al mean-
kingdom as a whole bear this name, but each separate iEon, of which that bng stv.°wn
kingdom is the aggregation, is likewise called a pleroma3. This designa- uses.
tion is given to an iEon, 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 dwells 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 life. Interpre-
The profound moral significance, which underlies the exaggerated Plato- *atlon. of
j, e j.,.. ,. .... John iv.
msm and perverse exegesis of this conception, will be at once apparent. I7 t8.
But the manner in which the theory was carried out is curiously illus
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 KaXeirai 5e opos pev ment used by Hippolytus, plainly de-
ovtos tin dtpopi^ei dird rov irXvpaparos notes the whole mundane region.
2|m rb vo-repiipa- peroxebs Se Sri pere'- Hippolytus does not use the word
Xei Kal tov borepijpaTos (i. e. as standing Kivapa, though so common in Irenseus.
between the irXrjpapa and. vrrripripa)' This fact seems to point to the earlier
vravpbs Se1, 0V1 ire'irTjyev dKXivas koI dfiera- date of the Valentinian document
votjtws, <is pv Svvaaffai prjbev tov vareprj- which he uses, and so to bear out the
paros Karayeviodai iyyiis rdv kvrhs trXv- result arrived at in a previous note
pdparos aldvav. Irenseus represents the (p. 332) that we have here a work of
Marcosians as designating the Demi- Valentinus himself. The word vare'-
urge Kapirbs varep-fiparos i. 17. t, i. 19. PVf-a appears also in Exc. Theod. 22
1, ii. prasf. ±, 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 especially Iren. ii. 7. 3 ' Quoniam
Christ, who was Kapirbs irXvpdparos. enim pleroma ipsorum triginta Aeones
The Marcosians however apparently sunt, ipsitestantur'.
meant Sophia Achamoth by this bari- 3 See the passages from Irenseus
pvpa. This transference from the quoted above, note 1 ; comp. Exc.
whole to the part would be in strict Theod. 32, 33 (p. 977). Similarly
accordance with their terminology : for X6701 is a synonym for the iEons,
as they cahed the snpramundane seons bpavbpas t$ Abya, Exc. Tjieod. 25 (p.
irXvpapara {Iren. i. 14. 2, 5 ; quoted in 975).
Hippol. vi. 43, 46), so also by analogy 4 Heracleon in Orig. in Ioann. xiii,
they might designate the mundane rv. p. 205 sq. The passages are collect-
powers varep-fipara (comp. Iren. i. 16. ed in Stieren's Irenaaus p. 947 sq. See
3). The term, as it occurs in the docu- especiaUy p. 950 oterai [u 'SpaKXiuv] ttjs

336 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' (ttjv
biivapiv ko.1 rfjv evaaiv Kal Ttjv dvaKpaaiv rr)v irpds rd irXrjpapa abrfjs). ' For',
adds Heracleon, ' He did not speak of a mundane (KoapiKov) 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
Paul and dimculty- They intended their philosophy not to supersede or contradict
St John, the 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 only an incongruity or even a contradiction. For instance, their second
i£p? Christ — the redeemer of the spiritual element in the mundane world — was,
views. as we sawi compacted of gifts contributed by all the iEons of the pleroma.
Hence he was called 'the common fruit of the pleroma', ' the fruit of all the
pleroma'2, ' the most perfect beauty and constellation of the pleroma'3; hence
'Sapapelnbos rbv Xeyopevov virb tov aa- participation in this higher region)
rijpos dvbparb irXvpapa elvai avrrjs, but of the spiritual portion thereof.
tva aiiv tudva yevopivrj irpbs rbv oartjpa 1 Origen expressly states that Hera-
Koplaeadai trap avrov tvv obvapiv Kal cleon read S£ for ire'vTe. The number
'rvv ivaaiv Kai ttjv dvaKpaaiv rrjv irpbs six was supposed to symbolize the
rd irXrjpapa avTijs SwrjOij' ov yap material creature: see Heracleon on
irepl dvopbs, cjtrjat, KoapiKov fXeyev  'the forty and six years' of John ii.
Xiyuv airy rbv ccarijpa elpijKe'vai, $w- 20 (Stieren p. 947). There is no reason
v-qabv <rov rbv dvSpa xal e\0e ivddSe' S-ij- to think that Heracleon falsified the
Xovvra rbv dirb rov -irXvpaparos ab- text here; he appears to have found
fuyov. Lower down Heracleon says this various reading already in his
ijv abrijs b dvrjp ev rip Atavi. By this copy.
last expression I suppose he means 2 The expression is d koivos tov irXv-
that the great son Man of the Ogdoad, pdparos Kapirbs in Hippolytus vi. 32,
the eternal archetype of mankind, com- 34, 36 (pp. 190, 191, 192, 193, 196). In
prises in itself archetypes correspond- Irenseus i. 8. 5 it is Kapirbs iravrbs tov
ing to each individual man and woman, irXvpaparos.
not indeed of the whole human race 3 Iren. i. 2. 6 reXeibrarov KaXXos re
(for the Valentinian would exclude the Kal darpov tov irXvpiiparos.
psychical and carnal portion from any

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 337
also he was designated 'AH' (irdv) and 'All things' (irdvra)1. Accordingly,
to this second Christ, not to the first, they applied these texts; Col. iii. n
'And He is all 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 all things in Christ through God'2.
So too they styled him EvboKvros, 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 Apostolic writings, however much
it might conflict with the Apostolic doctrine in its main lines5.
The heretics called Docetse by Hippolytus have no connexion with Use of the
docetism, as it is generally understood, i.e. the tenet that Christ's body J?™i. y
was not real flesh and blood, but merely a phantom body. Their views on t(]Q
this point, as represented by this father, are wholly different6. Of their
system generally 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 localized) the abode, of the iEons. Wkh them,
as with the Valentiuians, the Saviour is the common product of all the
JSonsr; and in speaking of him they echo a common Valentinian phrase
'the pleroma of the entire J5ons'8.
The Ophite heresy, Proteus-like, assumes so many various forms, that aid by _
the skill of critics has been taxed to the utmost to bind it with cords twoOphite
and extract its story from it. It appears however from the notices of se0 s'
Hippolytus, that the term pleroma was used in a definite theological sense
by at least two branches of the sect, whom be calls Naassenes and Peratse.
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. 1. 6, i. 3. 4. dbpara, Bpbvoi, Kvpibrvres, fiatriXelai, Beb-
2 Iren. i. 3. 4. The passages are rvres, Xeirovpylai' Sib Kal b Qebs avrbv
given in the text as they are quoted by virepv\j/aaev k.t.X. (the last words being
Irenaaus 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 rds yeveds rov aldvos rav
31 (p. 977) el b KareXBav evboKla tov aldvav as referring to their generated
8Xov fjv ev avra ydp irdv rd irXrjpapa -rjv aeons: Iren. i. 3. 1. Similar is the
aapariKds. use which they made of expressions in
4 Iren. i. 4. 5 biras ev avrip rd irdvra the opening chapter of St John, where
KriaBrj, rd bpard koX rd djpara, Bpbvoi, they found their first Ogdoad described;
Bebrrjres, Kvpibrvres, 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 Iv avrip iKrloBv rd opard Kal rd 8 ib. viii. io (p. 266).
COL. 22

338 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
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 fully initiated) have tasted, they are freed from subjection to kings (d/3a-
o-tXeurous) and partake of the pleroma.' Here is a plain allusion to Joh.
i. 16. '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 (n-ejrXTJpojrai) 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.
(ii)Perata2. The theology of the second Ophite sect, the Peratse, as described by
Hippolytus, is a strange phenomenon. They divided the universe into
Their three regions, the uncreate, the self-create, and the created. Again the
theology mj^jjg regi0n 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 full 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-
andcorre- tively; and this completeness of His being is implied by St Paul in Col.
sponduig j_ j^ jj_ ^ -which passages are combined in their loose quotation or para-
of irXrjpa- phrase, ' All the pleroma was pleased to dwell in him bodily, and there is
pa. in him all the godhead', i. e. (as Hippolytus adds in explanation) ' of this
their triple division (r^s ovra bitjpvpivvs rpidbos)'2. This application is
altogether arbitrary, having no relation whatever to the theological mean
ing of the term in St Paul. 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 Peratse 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, totality'.
Pistis The extant Gnostic work, called Pistis Sophia, was attributed at one
Sophia. 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
Frequent easily fixed. Early in the treatise it is said that the disciples supposed a
use of the certain 'mystery', of which Jesus spoke, to be 'the end of all the ends'
term- and 'the head (KecpaXvv) 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. 2 B. H. v. 12. Tubingen 1854, P- '85.
3 See Kostlin in Theolog. Jahrb. 4 Pistis Sophia p. 3 sq.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 339
i. e. of intelligible 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 will tell you the whole
mystery and the whole pleroma, and I will 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 things 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 all the perfections'8, where the word must
be used in a more general sense.
One heresy still remains to be noticed in connexion with this word. Monoimus
Hippolytus has preserved an account of the teaching of Monoimus the **?e ¦^ra"
Arabian, of whom previously to the discovery of this father's treatise we
knew little 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 the sense of 'comple-
187, 275. tion'.
2 ib. p. 28 sq.: comp. p. 56. On p. 7 3 Matt. v. 18.
irXtjpapa is opposed to dpxv, ap- 4 R. H. viii. 13.

22-

340 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

The Epistle from Laodicea1.
Different The different opinions respecting the epistle thus designated hy
theories gt paui; WMich have been held in ancient or modern times, will be seen
classified. from tfae following table .
i. An Epistle written by the Laodiceans; to
(a) St Paul;
(/3) Epaphras ;
(y) Colossse.
2. An Epistle written by St Paul from Laodicea.
(a) I Timothy;
(/3) i Thessalonians ;
(y) 2 Thessalonians ;
(8) Galatians.
3. An Epistle addressed to the Laodiceans by
(a) St John (the First Epistle) ;
(b) Some companion of St Paul (Epaphras or Luke);
(c) St Paul himself;
(i) A lost Epistle.
(ii) One of the Canonical Epistles.
(a) Hebrews ;
(/3) 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.
l An 1. The opinion that the epistle was addressed by the Laodiceans to
epistle gfc Paul, and not conversely, found much support in the age of the Greek
written by commen^ators. It is mentioned by St Chrysostom as held by 'some per-
ceans. sons', though he himself does not pronounce a definite opinion on the sub-
¦ Advocates ject2. 'It is eagerly advocated by Theodore of Mopsuestia. He supposes
of this that the letter of the Laodiceans contained some reflexions on the Colos-
theory. gian 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
Laodicener brief (Leipzig 1843), is very monograph by A. Sartori, Ueber den
complete. He enumerates and dis- Laodicenserbrief CLiibeokiSe,^),isro.uah
cusses very thoroughly the opinions slighter and contributes nothing new.
of his predecessors, omitting hardly s ad loc. rives Xiyovaiv on bb\l irjv
anything relating to the literature of JIaiXov irpds airobs direaraXpivvv, dXXa
the subject which was accessible at rijv irap' avrdv TiabXa- ov ydp etire ttjv
the time when he wrote. His expo- irpos AaoSiKe'as dXXd ttjv 4k AaoSi-
sition of his own view, though not less Kei as.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

341

what their neighbours said of them1. Theodoret, though not mentioning
Theodore by name, follows in hi8 footsteps ". The same opinion is also
expressed in a note ascribed to Photius in the GEcumenian Catena.
This view seems to have been very widely entertained in ancient
times. It possibly underlies the Latin Version 'ea quse 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 Calvin6 and
Beza6 and Davenant and Lightfoot7, on the other by Baronius8 and
a Lapide and Estius, besides other very considerable names3. 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, ror i'-
without being obliged 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, tt)v iK AaobiKeias. The whole context however points to a different Objections
explanation. The Colossian and Laodicean Epistles are obviously regarded to lt-
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 quidain falsam epistolam ad
Laodicenses ex nomine beati Pauli
confingendam esse existimaverunt ;
nee enim erat vera epistola. iEsti-
maverunt autem quidamillam esse, quaa
in hoc loco est significata. Apostolus
vero non [ad\ Laodicenses dicit sed
.ex Laodicea; quam illi scripserunt
ad apostolum, in quam aliqua repre-
hensionis digna inferebantuf, quam
etiam hac de causa jussit apud eos
legi, ut ipsi reprehendant seipsos
discentes quse de ipsis erant dicta
(see Spic. Solesm. 1. p. 133) etc'
2 After repeating the argument
based on the expression tijv iK Aaobi
Keias, Theodoret says eUbs Si avrobs v
rb. iv KoXaaaais yevbpeva alridaaaBai
fj to. avrd tovtois vevoavxivai.
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 iK AaoSiKelas,
and complain that the other interpre
tation depends on the erroneous Latin
rendering. 4 Or, 'that which was written from

Laodicea.' The difference depends on
the vocalisation of r** ¦ i-» - 1 \ which
may be either (1) 'Laodicea,' as in vv.
13, 15, or (2) 'the Laodiceans,' as in
the previous clause in this same ver.
16. 6 Calvin is very positive ; ' Bis
hallucinati sunt qui Paulum arbitrati
sunt ad Laodicenses scripsisse. Non
dubito quin epistola fuerit ad
Paulum missa?...Impostura autem
nimis crassa fuit, quod nebulo nescio
quis hoc prtetextu epistolam supponere
ausus est adeo insulsam, ut nihil
a Pauli spiritu magis alienum fingi
queat.' The last sentence reveals the
motive which unconsciously led so
mahy to adopt this unnatural inter
pretation of- St Paul's language".
6 ad loc. 'Multo foadius errarunt
qui ex hoc loco suspicati sunt quan-
dam fuisse epistolam Pauli ad Lao
dicenses  quum potius significet
Paulus epistolam aliquam ad se
missam Laodicea, aut potius qua re-
sponsnri essent Laodicenses Colos-
sensibus.' 7 Works 11. p. 326.
8 Ann. Eccl. s. a. 60, § xiu.
9 e. g. Tillemont Mem. Eccl. p.
576-

342 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 ttjv iK AaobiKeias 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 The vast majority of those who interpret the expression in this way
respecting asgume that the letter was written to (a) St Paul. The modifications of
addressed, this view, which suppose it addressed to some one else, need hardly be
considered. The theory for instance, which addresses it to (j3) Epaphras8,
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 koI vpeis, 'ye also', when they were the only persons who would read it
as a matter of course ?
¦z. A letter 2. A second class of identifications rests on the supposition that it
written was a letter written from Laodicea, though not by the Laodiceans them-
d"icea bv°" se'ves> The considerations which recommend this hypothesis for accept-
St Paul. ance are the same as in the last case. It withdraws all support from the
apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans, and it refrains from postulating a
lost Apostolic epistle. It is not exposed to all the objections of the other
theory, but it introduces new difficulties still more serious. Here a choice
i Timothy, of several epistles is offered to us. (a) The First Epistle to Timothy.
This view is distinctly maintained by John Damascene4 and by Theophy-
Iact5; 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 iypdcpv
dirb AaobiKeias are found in AKL 47 etc., and many of these define the
place meant by the addition rjfris eVrl /irjrpoiroXis 4>puyias T7;s naKartavTjs.
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 Col.
iv. 16, and gave rise to it; but the converse is more probable, and in some
1 See the note on iv. 16. irpbs avrobs iireaTaXp4vijv...a.\\a ttjv
2 e.g. Storr Opusc. 11. p. 124 sq. irap' arlribv nai/Xp ix AaoSmetas ypa-
3 So for instance Corn, a Lapide, as ipeiaav.
an alternative, ' vel certe ad ipsos 5 ad loc. ris Si rjv 17 iK AaobiKeias •
Colossenses, ut vult Theodor.'; but I tj irpbs TipbBeov irpdiTij- avrrj ydp is
do not find anything of the kind in AaobiKeias iypdipv. rivis Si tpaaiv Sri
Theodoret. This view also commends ijv ol AaoSiKeis HavXa eiriareiXav, dXX'
itself to Beza. ovk otba ri av <keZv77s gSei avrols irpbs
4 Op. 11. p. 214 (ed. Lequien) rr)v fieXrtwaiv.
irpbs lipbBeov trpdrvv Xiyei.^ But he 6 ad loc. 'Propter earn qam est ad
adds nvis ipaaiv bri ovxl rtjv IlauXou Timotheum dixit.'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 343
mss (a!cr, 74) the bearing of this subscription on Col. iv. 16 is emphasized,
iSou 817 /tat ij ix, AaobiKeias. This identification has not been altogether
without support in later times1. (0) The First Epistle to the Thessalo- ' Thessa-
nians. A final colophon in the Philoxenian Syriac asserts that it was lomalls-
' written from Laodicea' : and the same is stated in a later hand of d,
'scribens a Laodicea'. Again an iEthiopic ms, though giving Athens as
the place of writing, adds that it was 'sent with Timotheus, Tychicus, and
Onesimus*.' This identification was perhaps suggested by the fact that
1 Thessalonians follows 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 Schaaf3) 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-
nuni et Tychicum', and a Latin prologue 'per Titum et Onesimum'.
Again, an jEthiopic ms points to the same identification, though strangely
confused in its statements. In the superscription wo 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';
while the prolegomena state that it was written and left at Laodicea, and
that afterwards, when St Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians from
Rome, he gave directions that it should be transmitted to the Thessalonians
by the Colossians4. (8) The Epistle to the Galatians6. 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 solutlons-
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 probability 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 Colossse, he could not have despatched a letter recently from
Laodicea. 1 It is adopted by Erasmus in hi3 3 In the editio princeps (Vienna
paraphrase; 'vicissim vos legatis e- 1555) the latter part of this colophon,
pistolam quse Timofheo scripta fuit 'and was sent by the band of Tychi-
ex Laodicensium ui-be'-. but in his eus,' is wanting.
commentary he does not commit him- 4 Catal. Bibl. Bodl. Cod. Althiop.
self to it. For other names see Anger p. 23.
p. 17, note k. 5 Bloch, quoted in Anger p. 17
' ^ Catal. Bibl. Bodl. Cod. JEthiop. note 1.
p. 23.

344
3. A letter
to the Lao
diceanswritten by
(a) St
John. (6) A com
panion of
St Paul.
(c) St Paul.
(i) A lost
letter.

(ii) A Ca
nonical
epistle. (a) He
brews.Philas- trius.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. ¦
3. Thus we are thrown back on some form of the solution which
makes it a letter written to the Laodiceans. And here we may at once
reject the hypothesis that the writer was (a) St John1. The First Epistle
of St John, which has been selected, was written (as is allowed on all hands)
much later than this date. Nor again does St Paul's language favour
the alternative, which others have maintained, that the letter in question
was written by (6) one of St Paul's companions, e. g. Epaphras or Luke3.
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 tbis solution ; and, being easy and obvious in itself, it has found
common 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 probability 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 Grseco-Latin ms G of St Paul's

1 A conjecture of Lightfoot's ( Works
11. 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 Hmr. Ixxxix 'Sunt alii quoque
qui epistolam Pauli ad Hebrasos non
adserunt esse ipsius, sed dicunt aut
Barnabse esse apostoli ant dementis
de urbe Boma episcopi; alii autem
Lues evangelistse aiunt epistolam
etiam ad Laodicenses scriptam. Et
quia addiderunt in ea qusedam non
bene sentientes, inde non legitur in
ecclesia; et si legitur a quibusdam,
non tamen in ecclesia legitur populo,
nisi tredecim epistolte ipsius, et ad

Hebrasos interdum. Et in ea quia
rhetorice scripsit, sermone plausibili,
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 asque. Cum ergo
factum dicit Christum, corpore, non
divinitate, dicit factum, cum doceat
ibidem quod divinaa sit et paternse
substantias Alius, Qui est splendor
glories, inquit, ct imago substantial
ejus [Heb. i. 3]' etc. Oehler punc
tuates the sentence with which we
are concerned thus : ' alii autem Lucaa
evangelistae. 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. 345
Epistles, the Codex Boernerianus, probably written in the ninth century, Supposed
after the Epistle to Philemon, which breaks off abruptly at ver. 20, a testimony
vacant space is left, as if for the conclusion of this epistle : and then follows °f Ms G'
a fresh title ad laudicenses incipit epistola
npoc XaoyAakhcac apxgtai emcToXH
This is evidently intended as the heading to another epistle. No other
epistle however succeeds, but the leaf containing this title is followed by
several leaves, which were originally 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 follow, 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 follow. But what are the facts ? It is plain that the Greek Belation
texts of G and F came from the same original : but it is equally plain that of 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 severally
to the resources of their respective Latin mss. The scribe of F, whose
Greek and Latin texts are in parallel 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
Philemon. On the other hand the Latin text in G is interlinear, the Latin
bricius explains the reference similarly. 1 Laodicenerbrief p. 29 sq.
Such a reference however would be 2 If indeed the Greek text of F was
quite out of place here. The whole not copied immediately from G, as
paragraph before and after is taken has been recently maintained by Mr
up with discussing the Epistle to Hort in the Journal of Philology in.
the Hebrews ; and the interposition p. 67. The divergent phenomena of
of just six words, referring to a the two Latin texts seem to me un-
wholly different matter, is inconceiv- favourable to this hypothesis ; but it
able. We must therefore punctuate ought not to be hastily rejected.
either 'alii autem Lucse evangelistic 3 Volkmar, the editor of Credner's
aiunt epistolam, etiam ad Laodi- Geschichte des Neutestamentliclien Ka-
censes scriptam', or 'alii autem Lucse non p. 299, with strange carelessness
evangelistse 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.

346

The spu
rious Lao
diceanEpistleintended.

This iden
tification
unsatis factory.

(jS) Phile
mon.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
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 likewise gave the title of the epistle which he found next
in his Latin copy, in Greek as well 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 tho Latin by a person who had the very
smallest knowledge of Greek. No Greek in the most barbarous age would
have written AaoyAakhcac for XAoAiKeAC or XaoAikhnoyc The aoy 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 77 \ 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
dissimilar, and they obviously deal with antagonists of a very different
type. The insuperable difficulty of supposing that two epistles so unlike
in style were writteii 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.
03) 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, Laudae-
for Laodac-, which we find in the
Book of Armagh ; see below p. 348.
2 Seep. 352. 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., t, 2 Tim.,
Tit., Philem., Laod.
3 See especially Schneckenburger
Beitrdge p. 153 sq.
4 Some earlier 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 well known
work Chronol. des Apostol. Zeit. p.
450 sq. It may therefore be iden-
tified with hi3 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. 347
as the letter to which St Paul refers in this passage. For this identification
it is necessary to establish two points; (i) that Philemon lived not at
Colossee, 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 Colossus, wherever Archippus
may have resided1, still two opinions may very fairly be held on this point.
But Wieseler's arguments entirely fail to establish his other position. The This epis-
theme, the treatment, the whole tenour of the letter, mark it as private : and tle does
the mere fact that the Apostle's courtesy leads him to include in the open- Ii"4 anf™r.er
ing salutation the Christians who met at Philemon's house is powerless to tions.
change its character. Why should a letter, containing such intimate
confidences, be read publicly in the Church, not only at Laodicea but at
Colossa?, 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 tho 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 sians.
with the Epistle to the Colossians? Unlike tho 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. Meanwhile it is sufficient to say that educated opinion is tending, ^l0u'
though slowly, in this direction, and to express the belief that ulti
mately this view will be generally received2.
(iii) Another wholly different identification remains to be mentioned, (iii) The
It was neither a lost epistle nor a Canonical epistle, thought some, but extant un-
the writing which is extant under the title of the 'Epistle to the Laodi- oan°nleaI
ceans,' though not generally received by the Church. Of the various theLaodi-
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
fall into two classes. 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 Pauline 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 .
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 Philemon.
2 See above p. 37.

34§ 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 t.ie
following. The letters in brackets [ ] give the designations adopted in the
apparatus of various readings which follows.
i. Fuldensis [F]. 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 Em. Ranke, Marburgi et Lipsice 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. A ms of the whole Latin Bible, at the Monastery of La
Cava near Salerno, ascribed to the 6th or 7th or 8th century. SeeVercel-
lone Var. Leet. Vulg. Lat. Bibl. 1. p. lxxxviii. Unfortunately we have no
account of the readings in the Laodicean Epistle (for which it would be the
most important authority after the Codex Fuldensis), except the last sen
tence quoted by Mai Nov. Patr. Bibl. 1. 2. p. 63, 'Et facite Iegi Colossen-
sium vobis.' Laod. here occurs between Col. and 1 Thess. (Mai p. 62).
Dr Westcott (Smith's Diet, of the Bible s.v. Vulgate,\r. 1713) 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 published 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 fol. 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 fol. ms of the whole Bible, defective from
Apoc. xxii. 12 to the end, now in the Grand-ducal library at Darmstadt,
but formerly belonging to the Cathedral Library at Cologne; presented
by Hermann Pins, 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 Pauline 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. 1. 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. 349
Diet, of the Bible, s. v. Vulgate p. 1710, Vercellone Var. Led. 1. p. lxxxiv.
sq. The readings in the Laodicean Epistle are taken from Joh. Mariana
Schol. in Vet. et Nov. Test., where it is printed in full. The edition which
I have used is dated Paris 1620 (p. 831). The text however cannot be
assumed to be strictly accurate, as Mariana had a printed copy of the
epistle before him, from which at all events he supplied in brackets words
wanting in the ms (see Anger p. 144), and which may have influenced his
readings in other ways. In this ms Laod. follows Col.
7. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 3 (formerly 3562)1 [PJ. A Latin Bible, in
one volume fol., called after Anowaretha by whom it was given to the
monastery of Glanfeuille (St Maur), and ascribed in th<j printed Catalogue
to the 9th cent Laod. follows Col. on fol. 379.
8. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 6 [PJ. A ms of the Latin Bible in 4 vols.
fol., according to the Catalogue probably written in the 10th cent. [?]. It
belonged formerly to the Due de Noailles. Laod. follows Col. It contains
numerous corrections in a later hand either between the lines or in the
margin. The two hands are distinguished as P2*, P2**.
9. Parisiensis Reg. Lat. 250 (formerly 3572) [P,]. A fol. ms of the
N. T., described in the Catalogue as probably belonging to end of the 9th
cent. Laod. follows Col. It has a few corrections in a later hand. The
two hands are distinguished as P3* P3**.
These three Parisian mss I collated 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 library there was enriched by
Hartmot who was Abbot from a.d. 872 to 884 or 885. Laod. follows Heb.
and has no capitula like the other epistles.
1 1. Brit. Mus. Add. 10,546 [C]. A fol. 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. Mas. Reg. 1. E. vii, viii [R]. An English ms of the Latin
Bible from Christ Church, Canterbury, written about the middle of the
10th cent. Laod.' follows 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. 3 131 [H,]. 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 Bent\ Crit. Sacr.
p. xxxvii it is 3561.

35° EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
1 5. Brit. Mus, Sloane 539 [S~|. A small fol. of the 1 2th cent, said to be
German. It contains St Paul's Epistles with glosses. The gloss on
Col. iv. 16 'et ea qua? 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) [L2]. 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 1 1 5 C
(its original mark), and of which he gives a collation, 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 Cod. Vindob. Greece
Expressum 11. p. 1040 sq., Denis Cod. MSS Lat. Bibl. Vindob. 1. no. lviii,
Zeuss Grammatica Cellica 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
follows. 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 gandet.
3. Monet Laodicenses apostolus ut sicut sui audierunt praesentia ita
retineant et sine retractu faciant. *
4. Hortatur apostolus Laodicenses ut fide sint firmi et quas Integra et
vera et deo placita sunt faciant. et salutatio fratrum. Expliciunt Capitu
la. Incipit Epistola beati Pauli Apostoli ad Laodicenses.
These capitulations may be compared with those given by Dr Westcott
from Reg. 1. E. viii, 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 while recording the following,
as containing this epistle.
Among the Lambeth mss are (i) no. 4, large folio, 12th or 13th cent.
Laod. stands between Col. and 1 Thess. (ii) no. 90, small 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, 1 5th 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 1 52, 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. 35 1
of these five mss are collated by Dr Westcott (Canon p. 572 sq.). I in
spected them all.
In the Bodleian Library at Oxford belonring to the Canonici collection
are (i) Canon. Bibl. 82 (see Catal p. 277), very small 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 small 4to, mutilated, early part of 15th cent. It contains
a part of St Paul's Epp. (beginning in the middle of Gal.) and the Apoca
lypse. Laod. follows 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. 11. p. 10), 4to, double columns, very small 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), fol., Latin Bible, double columns, 13th
cent. Laod. is between Col. and 1 Thess., but the heading is ' Explicit
epistola ad Colbcenses, et hie incipit ad thesalocenses ', after which Laod.
follows immediately. At the top of the page is 'Ad Laudonenses '.
(iv) Ee. 1. 16 (see Catal. n. 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 like the other
books, except that it has no prologue.
In the College Libraries at Cambridge I have accidentally noticed the
following mss as containing the epistle; for I have hot undertaken any
systematic search, (i) St Peter's, 0. 4. 6, fol., 2 columns, 13th cent., Latin
Bible. The order of the N. T. is "Evv., Acts, Cath. Epp., Paul Epp., Apoc.
The Epistle to the Laodiceans is between Heb. and Apoc. (ii) Sidney A.
5. 11, fol., 2 columns, Latin Bible, 13th cent. The order of the N. T. is
Evv., Paul. Epp., Acts, Cath. Epp., Apoc; and Laod. is between 2 Thess.
and 1 Tim. (iii) Emman. 2. 1. 6, large fol., 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, slight and partial as it is, will serve to show the wide circula
tion of the Laodicean Epistle. At the same time it will 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 Fnlda, La Cava, and Toledo mss, and the Book of
Armagh.

352 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
(ii) Another position is after 2 Thess. So Laud. Lat. 8, Sidn. A. 5. 11,
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; (i) i, 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. 3131. This also
must have been its position in the Latin ms which the scribe of the Codex
Boernerianus had before him : see above p. 346.
(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 Pauline 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. In 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 amplified, even as early as the Book of Armagh, into ' quod-
cunque optimum est ', though there can be little doubt that the expression
represents rb Xoiirbv 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 like 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 amplified text, and I
have therefore added a collation of them. On the other hand some much
later mss, especially L1; preserve a very ancient text, which closely resem
bles that of F.1
1 The epistle has been critically In the apparatus of various readings,
edited hy 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 then colla- or c and t (Laodicia, Laoditia), nor is'
tions of mss. the punctuation of the mss noted.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 353

AD LAODICENSES.
Paultjs Apostolus non ab hominibus neque per hoininem sed per Text of the
Ihesum Christum, fratribiis qui sunt Laodiciae. "Gratia vobis et pax ePistle-
a Deo patre et Domiuo Ihesu Christo.
"Gratias ago Christo per oumem orationem meam, quod perman-
entes estis in eo et perseverantes in operibus eius, promissum ex-
pectautes in diem iudicii. 4 Neque destituant vos quorundam vanilo-
quia insinuantium, ut vos avertant a veritate evangelii quod a me
praedicatur. 5Et nunc faciet Deus ut qui sunt ex me ad profectum
veritatis evangelii deservientes et facientes benignitatem. operum quae
salutis vitae aeternae.
6Et nunc palam sunt vincula mea quae patior in Christo ; quibus
Inc. ad laodicenses F ; Incipit epistola ad laodicenses (laudicenses P2B)
BDPj^PjPjCRHjSV ; Epistola ad laodicenses TM (if this heading be not due to the
editors tliemselves) ; Incipit epistola pauli ad laodicenses GHj ; Incipit epistola
beati pauli ad laodicenses X ; Incipit aepistola ad laudicenses sed hhunhnus
earn negat esse pauli A: no heading in-LjLjHj.
apostolus] om. TM. 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] laodicae T ; ladoicie L ; laudaciae A ; laudiciae B ;
laodiceae B .
2. patre] et patre nostro Lx ; patre nostro HjHjjSM ; nostro A. domino]
add. nostro P2P3BGL2.
3. christo] deo meo BPjPjPgCLj ; deo meo et christo ihesu EX. meam]
memoriam M. permanentes estis] estis permanentes AGE. in operibus
eius] in operibus bonis HjH2S ; om BDTP-^PjCM. promissum expectantes]
promissa expectantes T ; et promissum expectantes M ; promissionem expec
tantes V ; sperantes promissionem AG ; sperantes promissum EX. diem] die
BTDPjPjGCEH^SLjVMX. iudicii] iudicationis GEX.
4. neque] add. enim B. destituant] distituant A ; destituunt Hx ;
destituat M, Spec. ; destituit DPjPgCM ; distituit B ; destitui P3 ; disturbat T.
vaniloquia] vaniloquentia BDTPjP^GCVM ; vaneloquentia, Spec. insinuan
tium] insinuantium se GM ;¦ insanientium H^S ; insimulantium T. ut] sed
ut BA ; sed peto ne B ; seductorum ne X. vos] om. T. avertant] Spec. ;
Bvertant FML2 ; evertent B. evangelii] aevanguelii A (and so below).
5. et nunc... veritatis evangelii] om. L. faciet deus] deus faciet AG.
ut] add. sint G. qui] que (altered from qui) P3* (or P3**). me] add. per-
veniant TM ; add. proficiant V. ad profectum] imperfectum A ; ad perfectum
B ; in profectum G. veritatis evangelii] evangelii veritatis V. deservientes]
'add. sint P2**P3**H1H2S. For deservientes BX have dei servientes. et faci
entes] repeated in Lt. For facientes benignitatem operum T has benignitatem
operum facientes. operum] eorum EX ; 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. et L^
6. nunc] no = non L2. palam sunt] sunt palam G ; sunt (om. palam) A.
COL. 23

354 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Textofthelaetor et gaudeo. 7Et 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. 9Et 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 tiniore Dei, et erit vobis vita in aeternum : " Est enim Deus qui
operatur in vos. 12Et facite sine retractu quaecumque facitis.
I3Et 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. 15Et quae integra et vera et
Christo] add. Ihesu (iesu) DPjPaPaCVX. quibus] in quibus TEMP2.
et] ut C.
7. mihi] michi HjS (and so below) ; enim (for mihi) M. factum] fletum
L2M; factum est TP3**H1S. orationibus] operationibus B. vestris] meis
DP1. et] est M : om. TGELjX. administrante spiritu sancto] adminis-
trantem spiritum sanctum FBL2 ; amministrante spiritum sanctum DCPXP2*
(but there is an erasure in Pj). For administrante LXX have amministrante ;
and for spiritu sancto G transposes and reads sancto spiritu. per mortem]
mortem (om. per) H,.
8. est enim] etenim T. mihi] om. M. vivere] vivere vita DTP^PjC
VHjHgS ; vere vita FLjBMX ; vera vita B ; vere (altered into vivere prima
manu) vita L2. gaudium] lucrum et gaudium A ; gaudium ut lucrum HaP2**;
gaudium vel lucrum H,S.
9. et] om. T ; qui (om. et) V. id ipsum] in ipsum FBL2 ; in idipsum L/V ;
ipsum P2GM ; ipse TAH^SBX. in vobis] vobis P2 ; in nobis H2. miseri
cordia sua] misericordiam suam FBDAPJP2P3CHJH2ESVLJXL2 (but written
misericordia sua in several cases). et] om. Lj ; ut V. unianimes] unanimes
BDTPiPjPaGCHiEL^VMSX. 10. ergo] ego H2. ut] et La. praesentia mei] praesentiam ei DP ;
praesentiam G** ; in praesentia mei P3** ; praesentiam mihi M; presenciam
eius L2 ; praesentiam dei A ; pra3sentiam domini (dni) P2**H!H2S. ita] om.
DP1P2**P3CX. retinete] retinere A ; sentite T. in] cum TM ; om. B.
timore] timorem AB. dei] domini H,S. vita] pax et vita BX. in ae
ternum] in aeterno A ; in aeterna G* ; aeterna (eterna) G**PL1.
11. Est enim... vos] om. (?) T. enim] om. B. vos] vobis GAH1H..SBV
P2** (or P2*) P3**MX.
12. retractu] retractatu BPjBL,, ; retractatione AGV ; tractu T ; reatu H^S.
In P2** ut peccato is added; in H2 t peceato. quaecumque] quodcumque TM.
13. quod est rehquum] quod est PBTDP1P2*P3*BCL1L2MX; quod est opti
mum GH^SV; quodcunque optimum est A; quodcunque est obtimum
P2** ; quod bonum est Ps* * : see p. 356. dUectissimi] dilectissime B. christo]
domino DP^sPgCX. sordidos] add. omnes P3**H1H2S; add. homines A.
in] ut Lj. lucro] lucrum BX.
14. omnes] in omnibus. G; homines (attached to the preceding sentence)
TM. sint] omitted here and placed after palam H^. apud] aput F ; ante
AG. deum] dominum A. firmi in sensu christi] sensu firmi in christo .
ihesu B.
15. quae] add. sunt B. integra] intigra ; add. sunt T. vera] add.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 355
pudica et iusta et amabilia, facite. 16Et quae audistis et accQpistis in Text of the
corde retinete ; et erit vobis pax. epistle.
18Salutant vos sancti.
"Gratia Domini Ihesu cum spiritu vestro.
20 Et facite legi Colosensibus et Colosensium vobis.
sunt DP1P2P3CVX. pudica et iusta] iusta et pudica B. iusta] iusta et
casta AGV ; casta et iusta P2**H1H2S. amabilia] add. sunt TH^SM ; add.
et sancta BX.
16. audistis] add. et vidistis L2. accepistis] accipistis A. pax] add.
ver. 17, salutate omnes fratres (sanctos for frsttres GV) in osculo sancto AGP2**
HiHjSEVX. 18. sancti] omnes sancti AGBHjSVX; sancti omnes Ha; add. in christo
ihesu BX.
19. domini ihesu] domini nostri ihesu (iesu) christi DTAPjPgPjGCHjHjS
VMBX. 20. et] add. hanc HjHgSPjj**. legi] add. epistolam LjP,,** colosen
sibus et] om. FTDPjPg'PjCVLiLj. Tliey are also omitted in the La Cava MS;
see above p. 348. colosensium] add. epistolam La. Tlie words colosensibus,
colosensium, are commonly written with a single s, more especially in the oldest
MSS. In Lx the form is cholosensium.
The last sentence et facite etc. is entirely omitted in M. In BX it is ex
panded into ei, 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 P^Hj ; Exp. ad . laodicenses F ; Explicit epistola
ad laodicenses (laudicenses B) DP1GCH2SBVX. There is no subscription in
AL,L2, and none is given for TM.
The following notes are added for the sake of elucidating one or two Notes on
points of difficulty in the text or interpretation of the epistle. JJ16 ePis-
4 Neque] This is the passage quoted in the Speculum § 50 published by e"
Mai Nov. Patr. Bibl. 1. 2. p. 62 sq., ' Item ad Laodicenses : Neque destituat
vos quorundam vaneloquentia (sic) insinuantium, ut vos avertant a veritate
evangelii quod a me praedicatur'. We ought possibly to adopt the reading
'destituat...vaniloquentia' of this and other .old mss in preference to the
' destituant... vaniloquia' of F. ' Vaniloquium' however is the rendering of
paraioXoyia i Tim. i. 6, and is supported by such analogies as inaniloquium,
maliloquium, multiloquium,stultiloquium,etc; see E.ngen Sprachl.Erbrter.
zur Vulgata p. 74, Roensch Das Neue Testament Tertullians 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 perfidiafefellit.' In Heb.ix. 26 eis ddirvaiv ttjs apaprias is trans
lated ' ad destitutionem peccati'. The original here may have been i%aira-
Trjaaaiv or dderrjaaaiv. 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 Handlexicon des
romischen Rechts s.v., Ducange Glossarium s.v. So too 'insinuator' Ter-
tull. ad Nat. ii. 1, 'insinuatrix' August. Ep. no (11. p. 317). In Acts
xvii. 3 it is the rendering of irapanBipevos.
23—2

356 EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
5 ut qui sunt etc.] The passage, as it stands, is obviously corrupt^ ; and
a comparison with Phil. i. 12 ra Kar', ipe pdXXov els irpOKOirrjv TOti evay-
yeXlov iXrjXvSev seems to reveal the nature of the corruption. (1) For
' qui ' we should probably read ' quse ', 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 quse 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 ' quse 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 e'pyav t<5j/ ttjs aarvpias : 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 bia rijs vpav berjaeas Kal iirixopvylas roC irvevparos K.r.X.
12 retractu] 'wavering', 'hesitation'. For this sense of ' retractare',
' to rehandle, discuss ', and so ' to question, hesitate', and even ' to shirk,
decline ', see Oehler TertuUian, index p. cxciii, Roensch N. T. Tertidlian's
p. 669, Ducange Glossariums.Y.: comp. e.g. Iren. v. n. 1 'ne relinqueretur
qusestio 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', 6avdra diro6aveirai. Here the expression
probably represents xapls. . .biaXoyiapdv 'of Phil. ii. 14, which in the Old Latin
is ' sine. . .detractionibus '. All three forms occur, retractus (Tert. Scorp. 1),
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. a). 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. 3 5 2, and
shall have to speak of it again, p. 357. 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
Xoiirbv, dbeXcpoi pov, x^lpere iv Kvpia. See the Vulgate translation of to
Xonrbv in 1 Cor. vii. 29. Later and less trustworthy authorities supply
'optimum' or 'bonum'.
14 in sensu Christi] 'in the mind of Christ' : for in 1 Cor. ii. 16 vovv
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 I
have felt justified in retaining them with other respectable copies, because
(1) The homceoteleuton 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 like the device of a Latin scribe, who would hardly

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 357
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 al- Theory of
together a forgery of the Western Church1; and consequently that the a ^veek
Latin is not a translation from a lost Greek original, but preserves the aigluBs'ed
earliest form of the epistle. Though the forgery doubtless attained its
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. ™"smB
Altogether it has not the run of a Latin original. And, when we come to epistle.
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 quce] sunt ex me ', ol [or ri] e'| ipov ; operum quce
' salutis, epyav r<5i» rijs aarvpias; ver. 6 palam vincula mea quce patior,
(pavepol ol beapol pov oisviropeva ; ver. 1 3 sordidos ill lucro, alaxpoKepbeis ;
ver. 20 et facite legi Colosensibus et Colosensium vobis', Kal iroirjaare 'iva rois
KoXaaaaevoiv dvayvaoOfj Kal 77 KoXaaaaeav 'iva [/cai] 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 justitise super scri-
barum et Plwrisceorum ' is quoted to illustrate the genitive ' Colossen-
sium' ver. 20.3 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 originally in Latin, we should expect to find that the passages were oidLatin
taken directly from the Latin versions. This however is not the case. Thus an(i Vul-
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 slor>s.
sancto' [administratione spiritus sancti'?] with Phil. i. 19 'per vestram
obsecrationem (V. orationem) et subministrationem spiritus sancti'; ver. 9
'ut eandem dilectionem habeatis et sitis unianimes' with Phil. ii. 2 'ean-
dem caritatem habentes, unanimes'; ver. 10 'ergo, dilectissimi, ut audistis
praesentia mei... facite in timore' with Phil. ii. 12 'Propter quod (Y.Itaque)
dilectissimi mihi (V. charissimi mei) sicut semper obaudistis (V. obedis-
tis)... praesentia (V.in praesentia) mei. ..cum timore (V. metu)...operamini';
ver. 11, 12 ' Est enim Deus qui operatur in vos (y.l. vobis). Et facite sine
retractu quaecumque facitis' with Phil. ii. 13, 14 Deus enim estqai operatur
in vobis... Omnia autem facite sme...detractionibus (V '. hassitationibus)' ;
ver. 13 quod est [reliquum], dilectissimi, gaudete in Christo et prwcavete '
with Phil. iii. 1,2'de cmtero, fratres mei, gaudete in Domino... Videte'; ib.
'sordidos in lucro' with the Latin renderings of alaxpoKepbeis 1 Tim. iii. 8
' turpilucros ' (V. ' turpe lucrum sectantes'), alaxpoKepbrj 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 will be tested presently.
ut ha)C epistola apud Latinos extet, 2 Anger, p. 165.
cum nullus sit apud Grascos, ne vote-

358.

Thus in
ternal evi
dence fa
vours a
Greek ori
ginal. External testimonyto the
same ef
fect.
[Murato- rian Frag
ment].

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
lucrum (V. ' turpis lucri cupidum'); ver. 14 'sint petitiones vestrsa
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
quai 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-
drinoa Pauh nomine fincte ad heresem
Marcionis et alia plura quse 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 (=fincta3) 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, the 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 ' aha ad
Alexandrinos'? Is it, as some have
thought, the Epistle to the Hebrews ?
But this could not under any circum

stances be described as 'fincta ad he
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
'Pauh nomine'; and 'finctaa' 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 earher for
gery. 2 See the introduction to the Epi
stle to the Ephesians.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 359
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 ^erome-
also an Epistle to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by all2'- 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 spurious3, it is a reasonable inference Theodoret.
that the same writing is meant. In this he is followed by Theodoret4; and
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 a spurious
epistle which they were anxious to discredit6. Even two or three centuries 2nd Coun-
later the epistle seems to have been read in the East. At the Second Sp
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.'
The Epistle to the Laodiceans then in the original Greek would run The Greek
somewhat as follows7 : restored.
TTPOI AAOAIKEAZ.
aTTAYAOX attoctoAoc oyk att ANepcbnooN oyie Ai' ANQpcbnoy aGal. i. 1.
aAXa Aia 'Ihcoy Xpicrof, toTc AAeXcpoTc TO?C OYCIN fe'N AaoAik6i'a.
2bXApiC YIWN KAI eipHNH ATTO 06OY TTATpOC KAI Kyp\Of 'IhCOY b Gal. i. 3;
v - Phil. i. 2.
ApiCTOY. 1 Timotheus, who became Patriarch irpoarpipovai ireirXaapivvv imoroXrjv.
of Constantinople in 511, while still- a 6 Anger (p. 143) argues against a
presbyter, includes in a hst of apocry- Greek original on the ground that the
phal works forged by the Manicheans ij Eastern Church, unlike the Latin, did
irevreKaiScKdrv [i.e. tov Hav~Xov~\ irpbs not generally interpret Col. iv. 16 as
AaoSiKeisiiriaroXfj, Meursep.i 17 (quoted meaning an epistle written to the Lao-
by Fabricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1. diceans. The fact is true, but the in-
p. 139). Anger (p. 27) suggests that ference is wrong, as the language of
there is a confusion of the Marcionites the Greek commentators themselves
and Manicheans here. I am disposed shows.
to think that Timotheus recklessly 6 Act. vi. Tom. v (Labbe viii. p.
credits the Manicheans with several 1125 ed. Colet.) Kal ydp tov Belov diro-
forgeries of which they were innocent, arbXov irpbs AaobiKels (jtiperai irXaarij
among others with our apocryphal imaroXrj 'iv nai f}l@\ois tov diroarbXav
Epistle to the Laodiceans. Still it is iyKeipivv, vv d irdrepes ijp&v direSoKl-
possible that there was another Lao- paaav ds airov dXXorpiav.
dicean Epistle fqrged by these heretics J A Greek version is given in Elias
to support their peculiar tenets. Hutter's Polyglott New Testament
2 Vir. III. 5 (11 p. 840) ' Legunt qui- (Noreb. 1599) ; see Anger p. 147 note g.
dam et ad Laodicenses, sed ab omni- But I have retranslated the epistle
bus exploditur'. anew, introducingthePauhnepassages,
3 The passage is quoted above, p. of which it is almost entirely made up,
341, note 1. as they stand in the Greek Testament.
4 rives biriXafiov Kal irpbs AaoSiKias The references are given in the mar-
airbv yeypatpivaf avrka roiwv Kal gin.

36d EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
"Phil. i. 3. ScEyxapictoo to) XpicTco In ttach AeHcei moy, 6'ti Ict€ eN aytco
e ^PetV' • M^NONTeC KAI npOCKApT6pOYNT6C TO?C lpr.OIC AYT0Y, dAneKAeXOM£NOI
iii. 7;cf. THN luArTSXlAN e6IC HMepAN Kpi'ceCOC
f^ Tim. if 6. 4MhA6 fMAC elATTATHCOOCIN fMATAIOAOpAI TINOON AlAACKONTOON
»2Tim.iv. 4. fNA BAnocTpeTOiciN YMAC Ano hTfic aXh96i'ac stoy 6YArreM'oY toy
h Col. 1. 5; , ,.,,„< K , « . < n ' " k 'z
Gal. ii. 5, 14. €YArreAic9eNTOC ytt eiwoy. kai nyn noiHcei o Weoc ina ta e±
.9^' J,'/1 Imoy eic npoKOUHN thc aAhGeiac toy eyArreAioY * * * AATpe-foNTec
(Cl. 1. o). ^ ^ f 3( n , _ ,-. „
kPhdl. i. 12. KAI TTOIOYNTec XPHCT0THTA epRJON TCON THC COTTHpiAC [KAIJ THC
iPhil. i. 13. AICONIOY ZOOHC. 6KAI N^N '(pANepo'l Ol AeCMOl MOY, OYC YHOMeNOi 6N
"{^'-y- "! XpiCTCO, In olc mXAl'pO0 KAI ArAAAlfcOMAI. 7kai "toyto Icti'n moi eic
n Phh. i. 19. ' CCOTHpiAN A'i'AlON, 0 KAI AUeBH AlA THC TM0ON AeHCeCOC KAI ETTIXOpH-
° Phil. i. 20. p'ac UN6YMAT0C AriOY, "eiVe Aia zcohc enre aia 9anatoy. 8p6M0i fc\p
"Phh.!. 21. T(j zfiN |N XpiCTtp KAI TO Ano6AN€?N XApA. 9 KAI TO AyTO TTOIHC6I [KAl]
qPhil. ii. 2. eN Y^Tn Xia toy eAeOYC aytoy, "na 9thn aythn a|-atthn e'xHTe, cfw-
* Phil. ii. 12. TYX01 ONTGC. ll>ri5)CT6, ArAUHTOl', KA9d>C YTTHKOYCATe 6N TH TTApOYCIA
° 2 Thess. ii. 5 MOY, OYTCOC SMNHM0N6Y0NTeC MGTA CbOBOY KYpiOY ep|~AZec9e, KAI
(seevulg.). „ < ~ , , , ¦ , - ntT-v ' 1 > ' ' »
* Phil. ii. 13. ecTAI YMIN ZCOH 6IC TON AlfcONA- 'OeOC TAp 6CTIN 0 GNeproON 6N
u -?klL..11- I4- ymTn. I2ka'i unoie?Te yoopk AiaXohcmcon x6 ti €an ttoihtc.
*Col.m. 17,23. ,,.,,„, , , , . , v/
y Phil. iii. i. Kai jto Xoiuon, AfAnHTOi, xAIP6T6 6N XpicTco. BXeneTe Ae
* 1 T}m- m- 8: Toyc 'AlcxpoKepAeTc. ""ttanta ta aith'mata ymoon rNCopizec9co Trpoc
"Phil. iv. 6. TON OeON. KAI beApA?OI riN£C9e 6N CTCO NO'I' TO? XpiCTOY- 15dOCA T6
b 1 Cor. xv. 58. < , , , „ , . , ' . ,
v x Cor. ii. 16. OXOKAHpA KAI AAH6H KAI C6MNA KAI AlKAIA KAI TTpOCCnlAH, TAYTA
d Phil. iv. 8, 9. npACC6T6. 16A KAI HKOYCAT6 KAI TTApeAABeTG, 6N TH KApAlA KpATe?T6, '
KAI H eipHNH 6CTAI M69' yMOON.
e Phil. iv. 22. I8e'AcnA'zONTAI YMAC Ol AriOI.
'Phil. iv. 23. 19f'H X^PIC T0Y Kypi'oY 'Ihcoy XpicToy meta toy ttn6Ymatoc
YMfcON.
BCol. iv. 16. 20gKAI nOIHCATE "NA TOIC KoAACCAEYCIN ANArNCOC9H, KAI H TOON
KoAACCAeooN i'na kai ymTn.
Scanty cir- But, though written originally in Greek, it was not among Greek Christ-
culation in ians that this epistle attained its widest circulation. In the latter part of
the East, the 8th century indeed, when the Second Council of Nicsea 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 the case was different. St Jerome, as we saw, had pronounced very de-
in the cidedly against it. Yet even his authority was not suflBcient to stamp it
1 Quoted above, p. 359, note 6. 2 Sec above, p. 315 sq.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 36r.
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 the-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 sta<lt-
is very short and is not reckoned in the Canon, yet still it has some use2'.
And between two or three centuries later Hervey of Dole (c. a.d. 1130), 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
established 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 (in. p. 433, ed. Gallice.) 'Becte being perhaps reckoned as the 15th;
vita ecclesisB multiphcata per decern see Fabric. Cod. Apocr. Nov.^ Test. _n
et quattuor computatur ; quia utrum- p. 866.
que testamentum custodiens, et tarn 5 Patrol. Lat. clxxxi. p. 1355 sq.
secundum Legis decalogum quam se- (ed. Migne) ' et ea similiter epistola,
cundum quattuor Evangelii hbros vi- qua Laodicensium est, i.e. quam ego
vens, usque ad perfectionis culmen Laodicensibus misi, legatur vobis.
extenditur. TJnde et Paulus aposto- Quamvis et hanc epistolam quintam-
lus quamvis epistolas quiadecim scrip- decimam vel sextamdecimam aposto-
serit, sancta tamen ecclesia non am- lus scripserit, et auctoritas earn apo-
plius quam quatuordecim tenet, ut ex stoliea sicut csetera firmavit, sancta
ipso epistolarum numero ostenderet tamen ecclesia non amplius quam qua-
quod doctor egregius Legis et Evange- tuordecim tenet, ut ex ipso epistola-
Iii secreta rimasset'. rum numero ostenderet etc' At the
3 Patrol. Lat. cxvn. p. 765 (ed. end of the notes to the Colossians he
Migne) 'Et earn quae erat Laodicen- adds 'Hucusque protenditur epistola
sium ideo prsecipit Colossensibus legi, qua? 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 qure
habet'. He uses the expression ' earn est ad Laodicenses directa ; quam, ut
quae erat Laodicensium', because TrjviK diximus, in usu non habet ecclesia.
AaoSiKelas was translated in the Latin Est ergo talis.' Then follows the text
Bible 'earn quaa Laodicensium est'. of the Laodicean Epistle, but it is not
3 See Galatians p. 232 on the au- annotated.
thorship of this commentary.

362

English Church.
Aelfric.

John of
Salisbury,

The epis
tle repu
diated by
Lanfranc.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
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
ally it was forgotten. Thus Aelfric abbot of Cerne, who wrote during the
closing years of the tenth century, speaks as follows 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 follow his doctrine that was teacher of the Gentiles '. He then
gives a list of the Apostle's writings, which closes with ' one to Philemon
and one to the Laodiceans; fifteen in all as loud as thunder to faithful
people1'. Again, nearly two centuries later John of Salisbury, likewise
writing on the Canon, reckons ' Fifteen epistles of Paul included in one
volume, though it be the wide-spread and common opinion of nearly all 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 all, 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
pline. 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. From 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 Italian
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 2Elf rieus Abbas,
p. 28 (ed. W. L'Isle, London 1623).
2 Ioann. Sarisb. Epist. 143 (1. p. 210
ed. Giles) ' Epistolse Pauli quindecim
uno volumine comprehensse, licet sit
vulgata et fere omnium communis
opinio non esse nisi quatuordecim,
decern ad ecclesias, quatuor ad perso-
nas; si tamen ilia qua? ad Hebrssos
est connumeranda est epistolis Pauh,
quod in prsefatione ejus astruere vide-
tur doctorum doctor Hieronymus, illo.

rum dissolvens argutias qui earn Pauli
non esse - contendebant. Caterum
quintadecima est ilia quas ecclesia?
Laodicensium scribitur; et licet, ut ait
Hieronymus, ab omnibus explodatur,
tamen ab apostolo scripta" est : neque
sententia htec de aliorum prasumitur
opinione sed ipsius apostoli testimonio
roboratur. Meminit enim ipsius in
epistola ad Colossenses bis verbis,
Quum lecta fuerit apud vos hac epi
stola, etc'

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 363
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 a„eB an(j
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 later 2. In one
of the three or four extant authorities for the Old Latin Version of the
Pauline Epistles it has a place3. In one of the two most ancient copies of
Jerome's revised Vulgate it is found*. 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,
France, Ireland, England, Germany, Switzerland — all the great nations of
Latin Christendom — contribute examples of early manuscripts in which
this epistle has a place6.
And, when the Scriptures came to be translated into the vernacular Versions.
languages of modern Europe, this epistle was not uncommonly included. Alhigen-
Thus we meet with an Albigensian version, which is said to belong to the sian.
thirteenth century6. 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 lin- German.
guistic pecuharities, 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- English.
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 century9. The prologue prefixed to the commoner of the
two forms runs as follows :
1 Patrol. Lat. cl. p. 331 (ed. Migne) written within a few years' of the Co
on Col. iv. 16 'Haic si esset apostoli, dex Amiatimis.
ad Laodicenses diceret, non Laodicen- 5 The hst of mss given above p. 348
slum ; et plusquam tredecim essent sq. will substantiate this statement.
epistola? Pauh '. We should perhaps 6 An account of this ms, which is at
read xiiii for xiii, ' quatuordecim ' for Lyons, is given by Beuss in the Revue
'tredecim', as Lanfranc is not likely de ThSologiev. 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 1 3th century, and
2 The proportion however is very dates the ms a little 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. t/MFicK/ (i73i)p.99sq.,andinForshall
3 The Speculum of Mai, see above, and Madden's Wycliffite Versions of
p. 348. the Holy Bible (1850) iv. p. 438 sq.
*' The Codex Fuldensis, which was They are also given by Anger p. 168 sq.

364
Englishprologue.

Two Ver
sions of
the epis
tle.

EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
'Laodicensis ben also Colocenses, as tweye townes and 00 peple in
maners. These ben of Asie, and among hem hadden be false apostlis,
and disceyuede manye. Thcrfore the postle bringith hem to mynde, of
his conuersacion and trewo prcching 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'
pistil is not in comyn Latyn bookis, and therfor it was but late translatid
into Englisch tunge1.'
The two forms of the epistle in its English dress are as follows 2. 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 3e be
dwellinge 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 openli ben
my boon dis, 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 his Canon, p. 457
(ed. 4), from Forshall and Madden. •
Of one of these two versions For
shall and Madden give a collation of
several mss; the other is taken from
a single ms (i. p. xxxii). 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
insPepys. 2073 (belonging to Magd. Coll.
Cambridge) from which it was taken by
Forshall and Madden (1. p. lvii) ; since
he elsewhere mentions using this ms
(p. 104). The version is not known to

' Poul,apostle, not of men, neby 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 3ebe
dwelling and lastyng in him, abiding
the biheest in the day of doom. For
neithir the veyn spekyng of suinine
vnwise men hath lettide 30U, the
whiche wolden turne 30U fro the
treuthe of the gospel, that is precbid
of me. And now hem that ben of
me, to the profi3t of truthe of the
gospel, God schal make disseruyng,
and doyng benygnyte of werkis, and
helthe of euerlasting lijf. 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 Holi Goost, either bi
exist in any other. Forshall and Mad
den give the date of the ms as about
1440. 1 From Forshall and Madden, iv. p.
438. The earliest 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
I.e. I am assure"! by those who are
thoroughly conversant with old Eng
lish, 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.

3^5

or bi deeth. It is forsothe to me
lijf into Crist, and to die ioie
withouten eende. In vs he schal
do his merci, that 30 haue the
same louynge, and that 3e be of
0 wil. Therfore, derlyngis, as 3s
han herd in presence of me,
hold 3e, and do 3e in drede of
God ; and it schal be to 3011 lijf
withouten eend. It is forsothe
God that worchith in vs. And do
30 withouten ony withdrawinge,
what soeuere 3e doon. And that
it is, derlyngis, ioie 30 in Crist,
and flee 3e maad foul in clay.
Alle 30ure axingis ben open anentis
God, and be 30 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 3e ; and it schal be to 30U
pees. Holi men greeten 30U weel,
in the grace of oure Lord Jhesu
Crist, with the Holi Goost. And
do 3e that pistil of Colosensis to
be red to 30U. Amen.

lijf, either bi deeth. Forsothe to mo
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 36 in Crist, and
eschewe 30 men defoulid in lucre,
either foul wynnyng. Be alle 30ure
askyngis open anentis God, and be
3e stidefast in the witt of Crist. And
do je tho thingis that ben hool, and
trewe, and chaast, and iust, and able
to be loued ; and kepe 3e in herte
tho thingis that 3e 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 36 that pistil
of Colocensis to be red to 30U.

Thus for more than nine centuries this forged epistle hovered about
the doors of the sacred Canon, without either finding admission or being
peremptorily excluded. At length the revival of learning dealt its death
blow to this as to so many other spurious pretensions. As a rule, Roman
Catholics and Reformers were equally strong in their condemnation of its
worthlessness. The language of Erasmus more especially is worth quoting
for its own sake, and must not be diluted by translation :
'Nihil habet Pauli preeter voculas aliquot ex CEeteris ejus epistolis
mendicatas  Non est cujusvis hominis Paulinum pectus effingere. Tonat,
fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus. At hsec, praeterquam quod brevis-
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 prse
cseteris indignus erat ea contumelia, nempe D. Hieronymi1'.

Bevival of
learning and con
demnation of the
epistle.

Strictures
of Eras-
mus.

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. III. 5 (quoted
above p. 359).

36§ EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Excep- But some eccentric spirits on both sides were still found to maintain its
tions. " genuineness. Thus on the one hand the Lutheran Steph. PrEetorius prefaces
his edition of this epistle (a.d. 1595) with the statement that he 'restores
Prastorius. it to the Christian Church'; he gives his opinion that it was written ' either
by the Apostle himself or by some other Apostolic 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 gradually
to the Apostolic doctrine they may extract thence a flavour sweeter than
Stapleton. 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.
1 Pauli Apostoli ad Laodicenses that proceed of faith.
Epistola, Latins et Germanice, Ham- 2 See Bp. Davenant on Col. iv. 16:
burg. 1595, of which the preface is 'Detestanda Stapletonis opinio, qui
given in Fabricius Cod. Apocr. Nov. ipsius Pauh epistolam esse statuit.
Test. 11. p. 867. It is curious that quam omnes patres ut adulterinam et
the only two arguments against its insulsam repudiarunt : nee sanior con-
genuineness which he thinks worthy clusio, quam inde deducere voluit,
of notice are (1) Its brevity; which he posse nimirum ecclesiam germanam
answers by appealing to the Epistle to et veram apostoli Pauli epistolam
Philemon ; and (2) Its recommenda- pro sua authoritate e Canone exclu-
tion of works ('quod scripsit opera dere'. So also Whitaker Disputation
esse facienda qua3 sunt salutis asternse'); on Scripture passim (see the references
which he explains to refer to works given above, p. 341, note 3).

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE.
THE Epistle to Philemon holds a unique place among the Unique
Apostle's writings. It is the only strictly private letter 0I the i
which has been preserved. The Pastoral Epistles indeed are epistle.
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 writ
ten 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 c6rrespondence, 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 of 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.
COL. 24

370 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Occur- Tiie legend of Philemon and Baucis, the aged peasants who
the name entertained not angels but gods unawares, and were rewarded
g?af hl7" by tneir divine guests for their homely hospitality and their
conjugal love1, 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 his
tory, 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 at least an inhabitant, of Colossse. 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. vii. 626 Sq. 'Jupiter bant'. The familiarity with this
hue, specie mortali, cumque parents beautiful story may have suggested to
Venit Atlantiades positis caducif er alis ' the barbarians of Lystra, whose 'Ly-
etc. caonian speech' was not improbably
2 Acts xiv. ti 0! Bebl bpoiaBivres a dialect of Phrygian, that the same
dvBpdirois Karifivaav irpbs vpds k.t.X. two gods, Zeus and Hermes, had again
There are two points worth observing visited this region On an errand at
in the Phrygian legend, as illustrating once of beneficence and of vengeance,
the Apostolic history. (1) It is a while at the same time it would prompt
miracle, which opens the eyes of the them to conciliate the deities by a
peasant couple to the divinity of their similar mode of propitiation, ijBeXov
guests thus disguised; (2) The im- Bbeiv.
mediate effect of this miracle is their 3 Aristoph. Av. 762 t£ Si rvyxiva
attempt to sacrifice to their divine tis dv $pb£...<ppvylXos SpvisivBdS' tarai,
visitors, ' dis hospitibus mactare para- rov iixijpovbs yivovs.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. .371
announces the restoration of Onesimus to his master, while in
the other he speaks of this same person as revisiting Colossa?1.
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 Colossa? when he wrote2, for traditions of this kind
have seldom any historical worth.
Philemon had been converted by St Paul himself3. 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 Colossa? 4.
Philemon proved not unworthy of his spiritual parentage. His evan-
Though to Epaphras belongs the chief glory of preaching the ZeaC
Gospel at Colossa?6, 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 Colossse
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 and wide
with whom he came in contact spoke with gratitude of his iity.
1 Compare Col. iv. 9 with Philem. designates Philemon's own family (in-
11 sq. eluding his slaves) by this honourable
2 Theodoret in his preface to the title of iKKXvala, in order to interest
epistle says irbXiv Se elxe [0 QiXijpav) them in his petition. This is plainly
ras KoXdaaas' Kal rj oUta 8* avrov wrong. See the note on Col. iv. 15.
pixpi rov irapbvros pepivvKe. This is 9 3 Joh. 5 sq.
generally taken to mean that Phile- 10 I take the view that the Kvpia
mon's house was still standing, when addressed in the Second Epistle of St
Theodoret wrote. This may be the John is some church personified, ag
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 avvepyQ ijpwv. one church from another ; just as in
7 Col. iv. 15. 1 Peter, the letter is addressed at the
8 ver. 2 Tjj tear1 oIkov aov iKKXvala. outset ^/cXe/trofsIIocToi; k.t.X. (i. 1) and
The Greek commentators, Chrysostom contains at the close a salutation from
and Theodoret, suppose that St Paul ij iv TiafivXavi avveKXeKTij (v. 13). , ,
24 — 2

372 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 Colossa? 2, and records how he was martyred in his
native city under Nero 3. But this tradition or fiction is not
entitled to any credit. All that we really know of Philemon is
contained within this epistle itself.
a. Apphia 2. It is a safe inference from the connexion of the names
iswie. ^at 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 Mz&ni and Cotiseum and Doryla?um, 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, Colossa? 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 v. 5, 7. Like other dhect statements of this
1 Apost. Const, vii. 46 rijs Si iv same writer, as for instance that the
&pvylaAaoSiKetas[iirlaKoirosYApxnnros, Colossians sent a deputation to St
KoXaaaaiav Si QiX-qpav, Bepolas Si rijs Paul (L' Antechrist p. 90), this asser-
Karb. MaKeSovlav 'Ovrjaipos 0 ^iXrjpovos. tion rests on no authority.
The Greek Mencea however make Phi- s They speak of 'Airqila as a softened
lemon bishop of Gaza ; see Tillemont form of the Latin Appia, and quote
I. p. 574 note Ixvi. Acts xxviii. 15, where howeverthe form
3 See Tillemont 1. pp. 290, 574, is 'Airirtov. Even Ewald writes the
for the references. word Appia.
* Boeckh Corp. Inscr. 3814 Nek- « 'Airipia, no. 2782, 2835, 2950,
avSpos Kal'Aijxpla yvvv abrov. In the 3432, 3446, 2775 b, c, d, 2837 b, 3902
following inscriptions also awife bear- m, 3962, 4124, 4145 : 'Aipipla, no. 3814,
ing the nameApphia (Aphphia, Aphia) 4i41, 4277, 4321 f, 3827I, 3846Z,
or Apphion (Aphphion, Aphion) is 3846 z1?. So far as I could trace any
mentioned in connexion with her hus- law, the form "Aipipla is preferred in
band; 2720, 2782, 2836, 3446, 2775 the northern and more distant towns
b, c, d, 2837 b, 3849, 3902 m, 3962, hke .Ezani and Cotiaaum, while 'Airipla.
4141, 4277, 4321 f, 3846 z17, etc. prevails in the southern towns in tha
M. Eenan (Saint Paul p. 360) says, more immediate neighbourhood of
'Appia, diaconesse de cette ville'. Colossse; such as Aphrodisias. This

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 373
due merely to the carelessness of the stonecutters1. But, so far Its affini-
as I have observed, it always preserves the aspirate. Its dimi- ies
nutive is Apphion or Aphphion or Aphion a. The allied form
Aphphias or Aphias, also a woman's name, is found, though
less commonly3; 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 6. 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
goes the same modifications of form, Amia, Ammias, Ammion
or Amion, Ammiane or Ammiana, with the corresponding
masculine Ammianos7. With these we may also compare

logies.

accords with the evidence of our mss,
in which 'Airipla is the best supported
form, though 'Aijxpla 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 alhed
from Apphias.
The most interesting of these in
scriptions mentioning the name is no.
2782 at Aphrodisias, where there is a
notice of 3>X. 'Airiplas dpxiepelas 'Aaias,
pijrpbs Kal dSeXtpijs koX pdppvs ovvkXv-
tikuv, tpiXoirdrpibos k.t.X.
1 no. 2720, 3827.
2 "Airipiov or "Aipipiov 2733, 2836",
3295> 3849- 39°? m> 42°7 ; "A0wk
3846 z34 and'A^eiox 3846 z31; and even
" Aipipeiv, 3167, 3278. In 3902m the
mother's name is 'Airipla and the
daughter's "Airipiov:
3 'Aipiplas, 3697, 3983 ; 'Aiplas 3879.
i"Aip<prj 3816, 3390, 4143; "Aircpv
3796, 4122.
5 It is met with at the neighbouring
town of Hierapohs, in the form 'Air-
tpkivos no. 391 1. It also occurs on
coins of not very distant parts of Asia
. Minor, being written either 'Airiplavos
or'A^iptavos; Mionnet in. p. 179, 184,
iv. p. 65, 67, Suppl. vi. p. 293, vn.
P- 3°5-
6 Suidas "Airipif dSeXiprjs Kal dSeX-
Qov biroKbpiapa, and so Bekk. Anecd.
p. 441. Eustath-. 77. p. 565Jeays diripaP

tvv dSeXipi)v 'Attikos pbvv rj dSeXtpv
etiroi av, Kal irdirirav rbv iraripa pbvos
b irais k.t.X., and he adds lariov Si Sn
eK tov <Js ippiBij diripa yiverai Kal -rfl
airipiov, biroKbpiapa ov ipapivvs' rivis
Si Kal t& diripa biroKbpiapa ipaalv 'Atti-
Kbv. These words were found in writers
of Attic comedy (Pollux iii. 74 rj irapi
tois viois Kapabois diripia Kal dirtplov
Kal diripdpiov ; comp. Xenarchus robs
piv yipovras Svras iiriKaXobpevat irarpl-
Sia, robs 5' dirrpdpia, robs vearipnvs,
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 ? 'Airtpdpiov appears in two
inscriptions almost as a proper name,
2637 KXavSla diripdpiov, 3277 diripdpiov
AoXXtavrj. In no. 4207 (at Telmissus)
we have 'EXivrj ij Kal "Aqjtpiov, so that
it seems sometimes to have been em
ployed side by side with a Greek name ;
comp. no. 3912 a Uairias...b KaXoipevos
Aioyivvs, quoted above p. 48. This
will account for the frequency of the
names, Apphia, Apphion, etc. In
Theocr. xv. 13 we have diripvs, and in
Callim. Hym. Dian. 6 dirira, 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. 3S46Z82, 3847k, 38821.

374 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
Latm ^e aspirate so that they are written with a pp., more especially
in Appe3, but not in the word itself; nor have I observed con
versely any disposition to write the Koman name Appia with an
aspirate, Apphia or Aphphia 4. 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 5.
Her share Of this Phrygian matron we know nothing more than can
letter6 ^e ^earnt ^r01n tms 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. Archip- 3. With less confidence, but still with a reasonable degree
of probability, we may infer that Archippus, who is likewise
mentioned in the opening salutation, was a son ' of Philemon
1 On the name Papias or Pappias 4 In the Greek historians of Borne
see above p. 48. for instance the personal name is al-
2 See Boeckh Corp. Inscr. in. p. ways "Airirios and the road 'Airirla; so.
1085 for the names TUdvas, etc. too in Acts xxviii. 15 it is 'Airirlov
3 We have not only the form"Air7n; <&bpov.
several times (e. g. 3827 x, 3846 p, « xne p^t to De 0DServed jg tllat
3846 x, 3846 z46, etc.) ; but siso"Airirijs examples of these names are thickest
3827 g, 3846 n, 3846 z77, Btill 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 Cotiamm fluence becomes weaker, and that they
and .Ezani. I have not noticed any almost, though not entirely, disappear
instance of this phenomenon in the in other parts of the Greek and Boman
names Apphia, Apphion; though pro- world.
bably, where Boman influences were « ver. 2 rjj iSeXipy. See the note.
especiaUy strong, there would be a 1 So Theodore of' Mopsuestia. But
tendency to transform a Phrygian name Chrysostom erepbv nva laas ipiXAv, and
into a Boman, e.g. Apphia into Appia, Theodoret 0 Si "Apx'iiriros rijv SiSaaKa-
and Apphianus into Appianus. Max abruv iimrlarevro.

pus, the
son.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 375
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 parts '.
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' (Siaieovia). 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
Colossa?, when Epaphras left his native city to join the' Apostle
at Rome s ; but the assumption of a regular and continuous
episcopate in such a place as Colossa? 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 'evan
gelists4.' Another question too arises respecting Archippus.
Where was he exercising this ministry, whatever it may have
been ? At Colossse, or at Laodicea ? His connexion with Phi- and abode,
lemon would suggest the former place. But in the Epistle
to the Colossians his name is mentioned immediately after the
salutations 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. than r
Laodicea was within walking distance of Colossa? 6. Archippus ColosstB-
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 in-
1 It occurs in two fimyrnsean in- Mopsuestia. On the' other hand Theo-
scriptions, no. 3143, 3224. doret argues against this view on
2 Col. iv. 1 7 fiXiire ttjx SiaKovtav vv critical grounds ; rivis iipaaav tovtov
irapiXafies iv Kvpia, tva atrijv TrXrjpois. AaobiKeias yeyevrjaBai bibdoKaXov, att'
3 So the Ambrosian Hilary on Col. -ij irp&s QiXrjpova imaroXv SiSdaKei us
iv. 17. iv KoXoaaais ovros ipKef tQ yhp 4>i-
4 Ephes. iv. ir bears testimony to Xtjpovi Kal toOtox awrdTTei: but he
the existence of the office of evan- does not allege any traditional support
gelist at this date. for his own opinion.
* It ia adopted by Theodore of " See above pp. 2, 15.

376 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
ference from the allusion in the Colossian letter,, makes him
bishop not of Colossa?, but of Laodicea \
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-
soldier3,' 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 asi
having suffered martyrdom at Colossse with his father and
mother.
4. Onesi- 4- But far more important to the history of Christianityj
mus' 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 purpose4. Accordingly the inscriptions offer
a very large number of examples in which it appears as the
name of some slave or freedman6; 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 slave6. Indeed it occurs more than once as a
fictitious name for a slave 7, a fact which points significantly to

1 Apost. Const, vii. 46 quoted above
p. 372, note 1.
2 Seep. 42.
3 ver. 2 Tip ovvaTpaTiuTij vpav. See
the note.
4 e.g. Chresimus, Chrestus, One-
siphorus, Symphorus, Carpus, etc. So
too the corresponding female names
Onesime,Chreste,Sympherusa,etc.:but
more commonly the women's names
are of a different cast of meaning,
Arescusa, Prepusa', Terpusa, Thallusa,
Tryphosa, etc.
6 e. g. in the Corp. Inscr. Lat. 111.
p. 323, no. 2146, p. 359, no. 2723, p.
986, no. 6107 (where it is spelled Ho-
nesimus) ; and in Muratori, co. 6,
DXXIX. 5, CMLXVIII. 4, Mill. 2, MDXVIII. 2,
MDXXIII. 4, MDLI. 9, MDLXXI. 5, MDLXXV.
I, MDXCII. 8, MDXCVI. 7, MDCVI. 2, MDCX.
19, mdcxiv. 17, 39; and the corre

sponding female name Onesime in
MCCXXXIX. 12, HDXLVI. 6, MDCXII. 9.
A more diligent search than I have
made would probably increase the
number of examples very largely.
6 e. g. Corp. Inscr. Lat. in. p. 238,
no. I467, D. M. M. AVE • ONESIMO • CAR-
r-ION • AVG • LIB • TABVL ¦ TIL10. In
the next generation any direct notice
of servile 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 (Meineke Fragm.
Com. iv. p. 300), where the 'Ovtjaipos
addressed is a slave, as appears from
the mention of his rpbipipos, i. e. mas
ter; Galen de Opt.Loctr. 1 (1. p. 41
ed. Ktthn), where there is a reference
to a work of Phavorinus in which was
introduced one Onesimus 6 ILXovrdpxov

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 37?
the social condition naturally suggested by it. In the inscrip
tions of proconsular Asia it is found ' ; 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, among the
when Ignatius passes through Asia Minor on his way to mar- ®f ™^?
tyrdom, and is mentioned by the saint in terms of warm af- sular ABia-
fection and respect 3. Another, apparently an influential layman,
about half a century later urges Melito bishop of Sardis to com
pile a volume of extracts from the scriptures ; and to him this
father dedicates the work when completed3. 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 least Position
respectable class in the social scale. He was regarded by phi- cluot o{ "
losophers 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 rights5;
and he had carried the principles of the law to their logical con
sequences. He had declined to entertain any responsibilities.
SoDXos 'EiriKTrjTQ SiaXeybpevos ; Anthol. oBai ; see also §§ 2, 5, 6.
Grce.n.p.161, where the context shows 3 Melito in Euseb. H.E. iv. 26
that the person addressed as Onesimus MeXlTuv 'Ovvatpa rip dbeXipip x<z//jeix.
is a slave; ib. 11. p. 482, where the 'EireiSr) iroXXaKis ij^luaas k.t.X.
master, leaving legacies to his servants, 4 Aristot. Pol. i. 4 (p. 1253) b SovXos
says 'Ovvaipos eUoai irivre | pvds ixira Krrjpd n tptpvxov, Eth. Nic. viii. 13 (p.
Ados 8 elicoai pvds ixirur \ irevrrJKOV- 1161) b yap SovXos Ip'pvxov opyavov, rb
ra SiS/jos- "Zvvirv Sim, k.t.X. See also 0" opyavov dfvxos SovXos. See also the
the use of the name in the Latin play classification of 'implements' inVarro,
quoted Suet. Galb. 1 3 (according to one de Re rust. 1. 17. 1 ' Instrument genus
reading). vocale et semivocale et mutum : vocale,
1 It occurs as near to Colossa? as in quo sunt send ; semivocale, in quo
Aphrodisias ; Boeckh C. I. no. 2743. boves ; mutum, in quo plaustra '.
2 Ign. Ephes.- 1 iv 'Ovvalpa Tip iv B Dig. iv. 5 ' Servile caput nullum
dydirn dSivyrJTf ipuv Si iv aapKl ivi- jus habet ' (Paulus) ; ib. 1. 17 'In per-
BKbiru... ebXbyvros. 0 xa/w(£/«xos bpiv sonam servilem nulla cadit obhgatio'
a'fioit ovaiv toiovtov iirlaKoirov KeKrrj- (Ulpianus).

37»

His en
counter
with St
Paul in
Borne

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 Boman comedy threatens to do,
when he gets into trouble. He had 'packed up some goods
and taken to his heels V 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.
But at Rome the Apostle spread his net for him, and he
was caught in its meshes. How he first came in contact with
the 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 Colossse, 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
oceasiost, rape, clepe, tene, harpaga,
bibe, es, fuge ; hoc eorum opust ' ; Ovid.
Amor. i. 15. 17 'Dum fallax servus'.
2 Cicero speaks thus of Phrygia and
theneighbouring districts ; pr0Flacc.1l
' Utrum igitur nostrum est an vestrum
hoc proverbium Phrygem plagis fieri
solere meliorem ? Quid de tota Caria ?
Nonne hoc vestra voce vulgatum est ;
si quid cum periculo experiri velis,
in Care id potissimum esse faciendum ?
Quid porro in Grsco sermone tarn
tritum est, quam si quis despicatui
ducitur, ut Mysorum ultimas esse di-
catur ? Nam quid ego dicam de Lydia?
Quis unquam Grascus comcediam scrip-
sit in qua servus primarum partium

non Lydus esset' : comp. Alciphr.
Epist. iii. 38 $pirya olKirijv ixa irovij-
pbv k.t.X.; Apollod. Com. (Meineke,
IV. p. 451) oi5 iravraxov <&pii£ elju
k.t.X. This last passage refers to the
cowardice with which, besides all their
other bad quahties, the Phrygians were
credited: comp. Anon. Com. (ib. iv,
p. 652) beiXbrepov Xa7(3 $pvybs, Tertull.
de Anim. 20 ' Comici Phrygas timidos
illudunt': see Bibbeck -Com. Lat. p.
106. 3 Ter. Phorm. i. 4. 13 'aliquid con-
vasassem, atque hinc me protinam
conjicerem in pedes'.
4 Sail. Cat. xxxvii. 5 'Bomam si-
cuti in sentinam confluxerant': comp.
Tac. Ann. xv. 44.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 379
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 ve*slQn-' -
slave of Philemon became the freedman of Christ \ 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 man2; and others had held
still stronger language to the same effect. The , Apostle did
not recognize the philosopher's subtle distinction. For him
the conventional barrier between slave and free had altogether ,
vanished before the dissolving presence of an eternal verity 3.
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 fo/iu^,11
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 heart s.
But there was an imperious demand for the sacrifice. One- Necessityfor Tiifl
simus had repented, but he had not made restitution. He return
could only do this by submitting again to the servitude from
1 i Cor. vii. 22. in. p. 2 sq. (ed. 2, 1854) with the
2 Eth. Nic. viii. 13 (p. 1 161) ipiXla editor K. E. Hermann's references to
3' ovk ian irpbs to &\pvxa obSi SIkoiov the literature of the Bubject, p. 5.
dXX' ovSi irpbs lirirov ij Povv, ovSi irpbs 3 i Cor. vii. 21 sq., Gal. iii. 28, Col.
SovXov y SovXos' ovSiv ydp koivov ianv hi. 1 1. With this contrast the ex-
6 yap SovXos tpipvxov bpyavov, rb S' pression attributed to a speaker in
Spyavov d\f/vxos SovXos' rj fiiv ovv SovXos, Macrob. Sat. i. 11 'quasi vero curent
ovk ian ipiXla irpbs avrbv, -g 8' dvBpairos divina de servis '.
k.t.X. On the views of Aristotle re- 4 Philem. 16.
specting slavery see Becker's Charikles * ver. 12.

380

notwith standingthe risk.

Mediationof Tychi
cus

supplemented by the
Apostle'sletter.

Analysis of the
letter.

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.
By returning he would place himself entirely at the mercy of the
master whom he had wronged. Roman law, more cruel than
Athenian, practically imposed no limits to the power of the
master over his slave1. 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 laid
no claim to forgiveness.
A favourable opportunity occurred for restoring Onesimus
to his master. Tychicus, as the bearer of letters from the
Apostle to Laodicea and Colossa?, 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
countered Philemon alone. But St Paul is not satisfied with
this precaution. He will with his own hand write a few words
of eager affectionate entreaty, identifying himself with the
cause of Onesimus. So he takes up his pen.
After the opening salutation to Philemon and the members
of his family, he 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
dominorum ; quae quidem potestas
juris gentium est : nam apud omnes
psraeque gentes animadvertere possu-
mus dominis in servos vitae necisque
potestatem fuisse '- Comp. Senec. de
Clem. i. 1 8 ' Cum in servum omnia
liceant .
2 So the mistress in Juv. Sat. vi.
219 sq. ' Pone crucem servo. . Meruit

quo crimine servus supplicium? quis
testis adest? quis detulit?... 0 demens,
ita servus homo est ? nil fecerit, esto.
Hoc volo, sic jubeo, etc' Compare
the words of the slave in Plautus Mil.
Glor. ii. 4. 19 'Noli minitari : scio
crucem futuram mihi sepulcrum: Ibi
mei sunt majores siti, pater, avos,
proavoB, abavos'. ,

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 3§*
his own. This is none other than Onesimus, whom Philemon Analysis
will remember only as a worthless creature, altogether untrue ietter.
to his name, but who now is a reformed man. He would have
wished to detain Ouesimus, 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 1 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, Eesult
It is reasonable to suppose however that Philemon would not appeal.

3&2 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
belie the Apostle's hopes; that he would receive the slave as a
brother; that he would even go beyond the expressed terms of
the Apostle's petition, and emancipate the penitent. But all
this is a mere conjecture. One tradition makes Onesimus bishop
of Ephesus l. But this obviously arises from a confusion with
Legendary his namesake, who lived about half a century later2. Another
18 ory' story points to Beroea in Macedonia as his see3. 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
in early against it. 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 Pebr. may be intended. But on the other
(ii. p. 857 sq. ed. nov.) for the autho- hand the language of Ignatius (Ephes.
rities, if they deserve the name. 1 sq. ) leaves the impression that he is
2 If we take the earlier date of the speaking of a person comparatively
Epistles of St Ignatius, A. n. 107, we young and untried in office.
get an interval of 44 years between the 3 Apost. Const, vii.46, quoted above,
Onesimus of St Paul and the Onesimus p. 372, note 1.
of Ignatius. It is not altogether impos- * For these ecclesiastical legends see
sible therefore that the same person Act. Sonet. I.e. p. 858 sq.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.' 3&3
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 it1. 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 Beply
may infer from the replies of Jerome2, of Chrysostom3, 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 modem
depreciation of the ethical as compared with the doctrinal wrlters-
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
1 Hieron. Comm. in Philem. Praf. bere quod sedificare nos possit etc....
vn. P. 743 ' Pauh esse epistolam ad ' sed mihi videntur, dum epistolam sim-
Philemonem saltern Marcione auctore plicitatis arguunt, suam imperitiam
doceantur : qui, quum cseteras epistolas prodere, non intelligentes quid in sin-
ejusdemvel non susceperit vel quasdam gulis sermonibus virtutis et sapiential
in his mutaverit atque corroserit, in lateat'.
hanc solam manus non est ausus mit- 3 Argum. in Philem. dXX' iireiSij rivis
tere, quia sua illam brevitas defende- tpaai irepirrbv elvai rb Kal ra&rvv irpoa-
bat '. St Jerome has in his mind the KelaBai ttjv iiriaroXrjv, elye birip irpdypa-
passage of TertuUian adv. Marc. v. 21 ros piKpov v&uoev, birip ivbs dvbpbs, pa-
' Soli huic epistolas brevitas sua pro- Biruaav Saoi ravra iyKaXovaiv Sri pvplav
fuit, ut falsarias manus Marcionis eva- elalv iyKXvpdrav d\ioi k.t.X., and he
deret'. goes on to discuss the value of the
2 ib. p. 742 sq. ' Qui nolunt inter epistle at some length.
epistolas Pauli earn recipere qua ad 4 Spicil. Solesm. 1. w. 149 ' Quid
Philemonem scribitur, aiunt non sem- vero ex ea lucri possit acquiri, convenit
per apostolum nee omnia Christo in se manifestius explicare, quia nee omni-
loquente dixisse, quia nee humana bus id existimo posse esse cognitum ;
imbecilhtas unum tenorem Sancti Spi- quod maxime heri jam ipse a nobis
ritus ferre potuisset etc... His et csteris disseri postulasti'; ib. p. ig2 'De his
istius modi volunt aut epistolam, non et nunc superius dixi, quod non omnes
esse Pauh quae ad Philemonem scri- similiter arbitror potius se (potuisse ?)
bitur aut, etiamsi Pauli sit, nihil ha- prospicere '.

Calvin.

Laterwriters.

3S4 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',
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.
'The single Epistle to Philemon,' says one quoted by Bengel,
'very far surpasses all the wisdom of the world'1. '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
cant2.' 'A true little chef d'oeuvre of the art of letter- writing,'
exclaims M. Renan characteristically3. '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 spirit'6.
The Epistle to Philemon has more than once been com-
paredwith pared with the following letter addressed to a friend by the
o/piiny younger Pliny on a somewhat similar occasion 6 :
Your freedman, with whom you had told me you were vexed,
came to me, and throwing himself down before me clung to my feet,

The epi
stle com

1 Franke Prcef. N. T. Grac. p. 26, 27,
quoted by Bengel on Philem. 1.
2 Die Sendsc'hreiben etc. p. 458.
3 L'Antechrist p. 96.
4 L'Apbtre Paul p. 194. He goes on
to say ; ' Never has the precept which

Paul himself gave at the end of his
letter to the Colossians been better
realised, b Xoyos vpav irdvrore iv xdpin,
d'XoTi ijprvpivos k.t.X. (Col. iv. 6).'
5 Paulus p. 476.
6 Plin. Ep. ix. 21.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. .385
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, of cha-
Yet, if purity of diction be excepted, there will hardly be any
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
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.
col. 25

386 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Slavery But though the same in name, it was in its actual working
Hebrews, 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 1'.
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
number of . . „ T ...
slaves in diHerent. In our enthusiastic eulogies of free, enlightened,
andBome. 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 *. They were consigned for
the most part to labour in gangs in the fields or the mines
i On slavery among the Hebrews the year 309 b.c. 21,000 citizens,
see the admirable work of Prof. Gold- IO,ooo residents, and 400,000 slaves
win Smith Does the Bible sanction (Ctesicles in Athen. vi p i« B|
American slavery J p. r sq. This would make the proportion of
In Ezra 11 65 the number of slaves slaves to citizens nearly twenty to one.
compared with the number of free is It is supposed however that the num-
a little more than one to six. ber of citizens here includes only
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 all ages. Hence Boeckh's estimate

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 387
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 iEgina, 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 pos
sessed as many as ten or twenty thousand slaves, or even more 2.
We may indeed not unreasonably view these vague and general
statements with suspicion : but it is a fact that, a few years
before the Christian era, one Claudius Isidorus left by will
more than four thousand slaves, though he had incurred serious
losses by the civil war s.
And these vast masses of human beings had no protection Cruelty of
from Roman law \ The slave had no relationships, no con- law to-
jugal rights. Cohabitation was allowed to him at his owner's J^YeaB
pleasure, but not marriage. His companion was sometimes as
signed to him by lot s. The slave was absolutely at his master's
disposal ; for the smallest offence he might be scourged, muti
lated, crucified, thrown to the wild beasts s. Only two or three
which is adopted in the text. For other Gallus 11. p. 99 sq. The practical
calculations see Wallon Histoire de working of slavery among the Bomans
VEsclavage 1. p. 221 sq. is placed in its most favourable light in
1 Athen. 1. c. p. 272 B, d. The state- Gaston Bossier, La Religion Bomaine
ment respecting JEgina is given on 11. p. 343 sq. (Paris 1874).
the authority of Aristotle; that re- 6 Bom. Alterth. I.e. p. 184 sq. ; Gallus
specting Corinth on the authority of 11. p. 144 sq. In this, as in other
Epitimaeus. respects, the cruelty of the legislature
2 Athen. I.e. 'Vwpatav iKaaros ... was mitigated by the humanity of in-
rXelarovs Baovs Kexrvpivos oWras' Kal dividual masters ; and the inscriptions
ydp pvplovs koI Siapvplovs Kal in irXelovs show that male and female slaves in
Si irdpiroXXot KiKrvvrai. See Becker many cases were allowed to live to-
Gallus 11. p. 113 (ed. 3). gether through life as man and wife,
3 Plin. N. H. xxxhi. 47. though the law did not recognise or
4 On the condition of Greek and secure their union. It was reserved
Roman slaves the able and exhaust- for Constantine to take the initiative
ive work of Wallon Histoire de I'Es- in protecting the conjugal and family
clavage dans I'AntiquitS (Paris 1847) rights of slaves by legislature; Cod.
is the chief authority. See also Becker Theod. ii. 25. 1.
and Marquardt Mm. Alterth. v. 1.. p. 6 Wallon 11. p. 177 sq.; Bbm. Alterth.
139 sq.; Becker Chariklcs 11. p. 1 sq., 1. c. ; Gallus 11. p. 145 sq. ; Rein Privai-
25 — 2

388 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
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 law \ Pedanius Secun-
Murderof dus,- a senator, had been slain by one of his slaves in a fit of
Becundus. 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 popu
lace however interposed to rescue them, and a tumult ensued.
The Senate accordingly took the matter into deliberation.
Among the speakers C. Cassius strongly advocated the enforce
ment 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 how
ever, when we have several nations among our slaves, with
various rites, with foreign religions or none at all, it is not pos
sible to keep down such a rabble except by fear.' These senti
ments 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 illus
trates 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 the state of
things. Work came to be regarded as a low and degrading,
because a servile occupation. Meanwhile sensuality in its vilest
recht der B'omer 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 ocoidi vetuit eosque jussit 2 Seneo. Ep. Mor. 47 'Delude ejns-
damnari per judiees, si digni essent'. dem arrogantiae proverbium jactatur to-
For earher legislative enactments which tidem hostes essequot servos' ; comp. Ma-
had afforded a very feeble protection crob.i. 11. 13. See also Festus p. 261
to slaves, see below p. 393. (Ed. Mueller) -Quot tervi tot hostes in
1 Tac. Ann. xiv. 42. This incident proverbio est '.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 389,
forms was fostered by the tremendous power which placed the
slave at the mercy of the master's worst passions1.
With this wide-spread institution Christianity found itself christian-
in conflict. How was the evil to be met ? Slavery was in- **? not
.... J revolu-
woven into the texture of society ; and to prohibit slavery was tionary.
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
perfect 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 insti- St Paul's
tution : the Apostles never command the liberation of slaves as ^e?n™ent
an absolute duty. It is a remarkable fact that St Paul in this ??Be ?f
• ,1 , » .... Onesimus.
epistle stops short 01 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 ference. Dans 1'Sge de la force et dans
elder Seneca Controv. iv. Praef., ' Ira- la plenitude de leurs faculte's, elle 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 ma!- rnaftre, et qui lorsqu'il en e"tait las,
tre : par lui m€me, il n'etait rien, 11 e'taient relSgue'es dans la prostitution
n'avait rien. Voila le principe ; et a son profit. Avant et apres l'&ge du
tout ce qu'on en pent tirer par voie travail, abandonne's a leur faiblesse ou
de consequence formait aussi, en fait, a leurs infirmites ; enfants, ils grand-
l'e'tat commun des esclaves dans la issaient dans le de'sordro ; viellards, ils
plupart des pays. A toutes les epo- mouraient souvent dans la misfere;
ques, dans toutes les situations de la morts, ils e'taient quelquefois delaisses
vie, eette autorit6 souveraine plane sur la voie publique... '
sur eux et modifie leur destined par 2 G. Smith Does the Bible etc. ? pp.
sea rigueura comme par son indif- 95, 96.

390-

His lan
guage re
spectingslavery
elsewhere.

epistle To Philemon.
with ail 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 God1. 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 Colos
sians 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 flow from

1 i Cor. vii. 21 sq.
2 The clause, dXX' el Kal' Sbvaaai
eXevBepos yeviaBai, pSXXov xPV"ai, has
been differently interpreted from early
times, either as recommending the
slave to avail himself of any oppor
tunity of emancipation, or as advising
him to refuse the offer of freedom and
to remain in servitude. The earliest
commentator whose opinion I have
observed, Origen (in Cram. Cat. p.
140), interprets it as favourable to
liberty, but he confuses the mean
ing by giving a metaphorical sense to
slavery, SovXov dvbpaaev ivayxalas rbv
yeyapvKbra. Again, Severianus (ib. p.
141) distinctly explains it as recom
mending a state of liberty. On the
other hand Chrysostom, while men
tioning that 'certain persons' interpret
it el Sbvaaai iXevBepwBrpiai, iXevBepuBijri,
himself supposes St Paul to advise the
slave's remaining in slavery. And so
Theodoret and othera. The balance

of argument seems to be decidedly in
favour of the former view.
(1) The actual language must be
considered first. And here (i) the
particles el Kal will suit either inter
pretation. If they are translated 'even
though', the clause recommends the
continuance in slavery. But koX may
be equally well taken with Sbvaaai, and
the words will then mean 'if it should
be in your power to obtain your free
dom'. So above ver. 11 idv Si Kal
XapioBfj: comp. Luke xi. 18 el Si Kal
0 SaraKos iip' iavrbv SiepepiaBrj, 1 Pet.
iii. 14 dXX' el Kal irdaxoire Sid SiKaioab-
vvv. (ii) The expression pSXXov Xf>V"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 sentence is con
tinuous. If liberty, the clause dXX' el

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 39 *
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 slavery.
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 how
ever widely spread. ' The brotherhood of man, in short, is the
Kal...p£XXov xPViai is 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, xxii. 28). (ii) 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 is difficult to imagine St Paul en-
well to prefer it '. Such a corrective joining him deliberately to forego.
parenthesis ia altogether after St (iii) Throughout the passage the Apo-
Paul'a manner, and indeed inatances stle, while maintaining the indifference
occur in this very context: e.g. ver. of these earthly relations in the sight
11 ikv Si Kal xupiaBjj k.t.X., ver. 15 of God, yet always gives the prefer-
el Si b diriaros xw/>'feTO' k.t.X. This ence to a position of independence,
last passage is an exact parallel, for whenever it comes to a Christian na-
the yap of ver. 16 is connected imme- turally 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 improbability 26, 27 etc.
that St Paul should have recommended l Ephes. vi. 5—9, Col. iii. 22— iv. 1,
slavery in preference to freedom. For

$92 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Its general idea 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 chimeri
cal 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 -A-11^ this beneficent tendency of the Gospel was felt at once
on slavery. jn ^s effects on slavery. The Church indeed, even in the
ardour of her earliest love, did not prohibit her sons from re
taining 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, without
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
andmanu- from whatever cause, as its special charge, which extended its
slaves. 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 Rut even more important than overt acts like these was the
sWemar- moral and social importance with which the slave was now in^-
tyrs. vested. 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. ? p. Apol. ii. ii.
"'• 3 Ignat. Polyc. 4 pv ipdruaav dirb
2 Athenag. Suppl. 35 SoOXof elaiy tov koivov iXevBepovaBai, Apost. Const.
¦bpiv, rois piv Kal wXetovs rois S' iXdrrovs. iv. 9 xa c£ abrav, ds irpoeiprjKapev,
It would even appear that the domes- dBpoi&peva xpvpara Siardaaere Sioko-
tic servant who betrayed Polycarp voSvres els dyopaapobi tdv aylav, j,vb.
{Mart. Polyc. 6) was a slave, for. he pevoi SobXovs Kal ^paXdrovs, Se?
was put to the torture. Comp. Justin, -aplovs, k.t.\.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 393
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 Christ-
influence and private enterprise were her only weapons. But dommant.
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 its tme"
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 religion, 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. 387, 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. Ktthn)
is uncertain) had prohibited masters XaKrlgovai Kal robs bipBaXpobs i£opvr-
from making their slaves fight with rovai Kal ypaipeta Kevrovaiv k.t.X. (comp.
wild beasts in mere caprice and with- ib. p. 584), or Seneca de Ira iii. 3. 6
out an order from a judge (Dig. xlviii. ' eculei et ndiculas et ergastula et eru-
8. 11); and Claudius (a.d. 47), finding ces et circundati defossis corporibua
that the practice of turning out sick ignes et cadavera quoque trahens un-
slaves into the streets to die was on eus, varia vinculorum genera, varia
the increase, ordered that those who pcenarum, lacerationes membrorum,
survived this treatment should have inscriptiones frontis et bestiarum im-
their freedom (Dion Cass. lx. 29, Suet, manium cavea?. '
Claud. 25). For these and similar On the causes of these ameliorations
enactments of the heathen emperors in the law see Biim. Alterth.^. i.p. 199.
gee Wallon in. p. 60 sq., Bom. Alterth. 2 On the legislation of Constan-
v. 1. 197, Bein Privatrecht d. Romer tine affecting slavery see De Broghe

394

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

Subsequentactivityof the
Church.

The con
quests and
hopes of
the pre
sent time.

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 matter2. The emancipation of slaves was
regarded as a principal aim of the higher Christian life3; 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 genera
tion are without a parallel in the history of the world. The abo
lition of slavery throughout the British Empire at an enormous
material sacrifice is one of the greatest moral 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 II., which no time can dim.

L'Eglise et VEmpire Remain, i. p. 304
sq. (ed. 5), Chawner Influence of Chris
tianity upon the Legislation of Con-
stantine the Great,ip. 73sq., Wallon in.
p. 414 sq. The legislation of Justinian
is still more honourably distinguished
for its alleviation of the evils 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 Horn. xl. ad 1 Cor. x. p. 385 he says
of slavery, 'It is the penalty of sin and
the punishment of disobedience. But
when Christ came, he annulled even
this, For in Chtist 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 he then tells
his audience that it they really care for

the welfare of slaves, they 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 Mbhler p. 89 sq.
2 On the influence of Christianity in
this respect see Wallon in. p. 3i4sq.,
Schmidt Essal historique sur la So-
ciete Civile dans le Monde Romain
etc. p. 228 sq. (1853), Mbhler Gesam-
melte Schriften 11. p. 54 sq., G. Smith
Does the Bible etc. ?p. 9ssq., E. S. Talbot
Slavery as affected by Christianity
(1869), Lecky Bationalism in Europe 11.
p. 255 sq., European Morals 11. p. 65 sq.
3 Mbhler p. 99 sq., Schmidt p.
246 sq., Lecky E. M. n. p. 73 sq.

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 395
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 civilisa
tion 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.

nPOS *IAHMONA.

WHERE THE SPIRIT OF 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.

nPOS $IAHMONA.

T~TAYAOS, Seoy«os Xpi(TTOu 'Ijjctou Kat Ti/nodeos o
X JL dde\(pds, QtAtifJiovi tw dya7rt}TW Kai crvvepyu r\[xiLv
%Kai 'Awtpia Ttj ddeXcpfj Kai 'Kp-^nnrta tw o-vva,rpaTiioT^
rjfxwv Kal Tr\ KaT oikov o~ov e'/CKAfjo-ia* 3%dpis v[xiv
i — 3. 'Paul, now a prisoner of
Christ Jesus, and Timothy a brother
in the faith, unto Philemon our
dearly-beloved and fellow-labourer in
the Gospel, and unto Apphia our sis
ter, and unto Archippus our fellow-
soldier in Christ, and to the Church
which assembles in thy house. Grace
and peace to you all from God our
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.'
1. bier poos] 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 Philemon resist
an appeal which was penned within
prison walls and by a manacled hand i
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 to make the acquaintance of
Philemon. For the designation 6
dbeXcpbs applied to Timothy see the
note on Col. i. 1.
QiXrjpovi k.t.X.] On the persons
here addressed, and the language in
which they are described, see the in
troduction p. 369 sq.
awepyy] It would probably be
during St Paul's long sojourn at Ephe

sus that Philemon had laboured with
him : see above p. 3 1 sq.
rjpdv} should probably be attached
to dyairrjrd as well as to ovvepya ;
comp. Rom. xvi. 5, 8, 9, 1 Cor. x. 14,
Phil. ii. 12.
2. Tg dbeXqbrj] For this the re
ceived text has rg dyairvrtj. Internal
probabilities can be urged in favour
of both readings. On the one hand
dyarrvrfj might have been introduced
for the sake of conformity to the pre
ceding dyamjTef ; on the other dbeXcpfj
might have been substituted for dya-
irvrtj on grounds of false delicacy.
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Spicil. So
lesm. 1. p. 154), who had the reading
dyainjTg, 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 rfj
dbeXibrj, because the preponderance of
ancient authority is very decidedly in
its favour.
awarpandTtj] These spiritual cam
paigns, in which Archippus was his
comrade, probably took place while
St Paul was at Ephesus (a.d. 54 — 57).
For the word awarpandrvs see Phil.
ii. 25. The metaphor of arpareia,
arpareveaBai, is common in St Paul.
Ttj Kar' oikov k.t.X.] probably at Co
lossse; see above p. 370 sq. For the

400

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[4,5

Kai elprivt] diro Qeov iraTp6<s tjfxwv Kai Kvpiov 'lrio-ov
Xpio~Tov. 4Ei)%aj0to"rw Ta Qeid fiov iravTOTe, \xveiav o~ov iroiov-
juej/os kirl Tt2v 7rpoo~evx/ov fxov, saKovwv o~ov ty\v dya7rt]V

meaning of the expression see the
note on Col. iv. 1 5.
4 — 7. ' I never cease to give thanks
to my God for thy well-doing, and thou
art ever mentioned in my prayers.
For they tell me of thy love and faith
— thy faith which thou hast in the
Lord Jesus, and thy love which thou
showest towards all 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 (rer. 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 all established
principles of arrangement are defied
in the anxiety to give expression to
the thought which is uppermost for
the moment. The clause dwvav k.t.X.
is separated from evxapiard k.t.X., on
which it depends, by the intervening
clause pvelav aov k.t.X. which intro
duces another thought. It itself in
terposes between two clauses pvelav
aov K.T.X. and oiras ij Koivavia K.r.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-

pdv ydp k.t.X. there is again a recur
rence to a topic which has occurred
in an earlier part of the sentence (tt)v
dydirvv. ..els rrdvras rovs dylovs) but
which has been dropped, before it was
exhausted, owing to the pressure of
another more importunate thought.
4. TLvxapiard] See the note on
1 Thess. i. 2.
iravrore] should probably be taken
with evxapiard (rather than with
pvelav k.t.X.), according to St Paul's
usual collocation in these opening
thanksgivings: see the notes on Col.
i. 3, Phil. i. 3.
pvelav aov k.t.X.] ' making mention
of thee' For pvelav iroieiaBai 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 oiras k.t.X. of ver. 6. See
the note there.
5. aKovav] 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 evxapiard than
with the intervening words, and ex
plains the grounds of the Apostle's
thanksgiving. rrjv dydirvv k.t.X.] i.e. 'the faith
which thou hast towards the Lord Je
sus Christ and the love which thou
showest to all the saints.' The logical
order is violated, and the clauses are
inverted in the second part of the 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 Philemon's love.
This suggests the mention of his faith,

6] EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 4O1
Kai rrjv ttiottiv rjv e'^ets 7rpos tov Kvpiov '\r]o~ovv Kal eis
TravTas tous dyiovs, 07rws r\ KOivwvia Trjs 7T(0"T6<Js crov
evepyris yevrjrai ev eiriyviarei ttcivtos 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 irlanv ko.1 rrjv dyd
irvv — an obvious emendation. Others
would obviate the difficulty by giving
to irlanv the meaning ' fidelity, sted-
fastness': Winer § 1. p. 511 sq. Thus
they are enabled to refer both words,
irlanv koi dydirvv, equally to both
the clauses which follow. But, though
this is a legitimate sense of maris
in St Paul (see Galatians, p. 155),
yet in immediate connexion with fjv
c^eis irpbs rbv Kvpiov 'ivaovv, 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 k.t.X.] The change of prepo
sitions, Trpor rbv Kvpiov ' towards the
Lord' and els tovs dylovs '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 of the sentence. Of the two pre
positions the former (irpo-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
n ] ore common with irlans (iriareveiv),a.s
it is also with dydmj, irpbs being quite
exceptional (1 Thess. i. 8 17 irlans vpdv
1? 7rpor tov Qeov ; comp. 2 Cor. iii. 4).
But where a distinction is necessary,
there is a propriety in using irpbs of '
the faith which aspires towards Christ,
COL.

and tis of the love which is exerted
upon men. Some good copies read
els here in both clauses.
6. oiras k.t.X.] to be taken with
pveiav aov iroiovpevos k.t.X., as giving
the aim and purport of St Paul's
prayer. Others connect it with rjv
exeis, as if it described the tendency
of Philemon's faith, 'ita ut'; but,even
if oiras could bear this meaning, such
a connexion is altogether harsh and
improbable. V Koivavla k.t X.] Of many interpre
tations which have been, or might be,
given of these words, two seem to de
serve consideration. (1) 'Yourfriendly
offices and sympathies, your kindly
deeds of charity, which spring from
your faith': comp. Phil. i. 5 iirl rfj
Koivavla vpdv els to evayyeXiov, Heb.
xiii. 16 rijs eviroitas ko.1 Koivavlas,
whence Koivavla 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. 1 3, 1 Joh. i. 3, 6, 7. The
parallel 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 Kotvwvbs el,
(pval, Kara rrjv irlanv, writes Chrysos
tom, kqi Kara ra aXXa oifieiXeis Koiva-
veiv (comp. Tit. 1.3 Kara koivtjv irlanv):
but it seems quite out of place in this
context. ivepyrjs] 'effective'. The Latin
translators must have read ivapytjs,
for they render the word ecidens or
manifesto. Jerome (ad loc.) speaks
of evidens as the reading of the Latin,
and efficax of the Greek text. The
converse error appears in the mss of
26

402

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[7

Yljmv eU Xpio'Tav. ^xapdv ydp ttoXXtiv €0"%oj/ Kai irapa-
KXrjcriv iirl Trj dydirrj arov, oti Ta anrXdyxva toov ayiiov
dva7rewavTai Bid crov, doeX(pe.
6. iv vpiv els Xpiarbv.

Clem. Horn, xvii., 5, ivipyeia for ivdp-
yeia. iv iiriyvdaei K.r.X.] ' in the perfect
knowledge of every good thing'. This
iirlyvaais, involving as it does the
complete appropriation of all truth
and the unreserved identification with
God's will, is the goal and crown of
the believer'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
all the epistles of the Roman capti
vity St Paul's prayer for his corre
spondents culminates in this word
iirlyvaais: see the note on Col. i. 9.
This iirlyvaais is the result and the
reward of faith manifesting itself in
deeds of love, oiras v Koivavla rijs irl
areas K.r.X. For the sequence comp.
Ephes. iv. 13 els rrjv ej/orjjra rrjs irl
areas Kal rijs iiriyvdaeas k.t.X., Tit.
i. I Kara irlanv iKXeKrdv Qeov Kal iiri-
yvaaiv dXrj6eias rrjs Kar evoifieiav.
The iirlyvaais 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'.
tov iv vpiv] ' 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 Colossse, but the
meaning must be substantially the
same. Though vpiv has somewhat
better support, we seem to be justi
fied in preferring vpiv as being much
more expressive. In such cases the

mss are of no great authority ; and in
the present instance scribes would be
strongly tempted to alter vpiv into
vpiv from a misapprehension of the
sense, and a wish to apply the words
to Philemon and his household. A
similar misapprehension doubtless led
in some copies to the omission of rou,
which seemed to be superfluous but
is really required for the sense.
els Xpiarbv] 'unto Christ', i.e. lead
ing to Him as the goal. The words
should be connected not with rou iv
Vpiv, but with the main statement of
the sentence ivepyijs yivvrai k.t.X.
7. xaP°-v y<v] 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 evxapiard t$
Bed pov  aKovav aov ttjv dydirvv
..•Xapav yap iroXXrjv eaxov K.r.X. For
xapdv the received text (Steph. but not
Elz.) reads x^Plvi 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.
rd oirXdyxvci] 'the heart, tlie spi
rits'. On ra airXdyxva, the nobler vis
cera, regarded as the seat of the emo
tions, see the note on Phil. i. 8. Here
the prominent idea is that of terror,
grief, despondency, etc.
dvairiiravTai] 'have been relieved,
refreshed', comp. ver. 20. The com
pound dvairaiieadai expresses a tem
porary relief, as the simple rravt a6at
expresses a final cessation : Plut. Vit.
Lucull. 5 irdXXdv avSis dvaKtvovvnov
Tov Mi6pibariKov irbXepov 'iiprj MopKot

¦8,9] EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 403
8 Aid iroXXt}v iv Xpio-Ttv irappncrtav e^wj/ eTnTao-treiv
o~oi to dvfJKOv, 9Sid Tt)v dydrrrjv [UaXXov TrapaKaXw,
toiovtos cov cJs Ilai/Aos •n-pso-fivTW vvvl le Kal Beo-fJtios
9. vvv Si Kal Seapios.

avrbv ov ireiravadai dXX' dvaire-
iravcrScu. Thus it implies 'relaxation,
refreshment,' as a preparation for the
renewal of labour or suffering. It is
an Ignatian as well as a Pauline word;
Ephes. 2,Smyrn. 9, 10, 12, Trail. 12,
Magn. 15, Rom. 10.
ddeXiiie] 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. ' Eucouraged by these tid
ings of thy loving spirit, I prefer to en
treat, 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 wholly 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- 1 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
» 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. Aib] i. e. ' Seeing that I have
these proofs of thy love, I prefer to
entreat, where I might command '.
irappvaiav] ' 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 Xpiard.
to dviJKov] ' what is fitting': see
the note on Col. iii. 18.
9. bid n)v dydirvv] 'for love's sake',
i. e. 'having respect to the claims of
love'. It is not Philemon's love (w.
5, 7,) nor St Paul's own love, but love
absolutely, love regarded as a principle
which demands a deferential respect.
roioOVor dv K.r.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
toiovtos dv to be connected with or
separated from as IlavXos k.t.X.1 If se
parated, roiovros dv will mean 'though
as an Apostle I am armed with such
authority', and toy TlavXos k.t.X. will
describe his condescension to entreaty,
'yet as simply Paul, etc' But the
other construction is much more pro
bable for the following reasons, (a)
toiovtos dv so used, implying, as it
would, something of a personal boast,
seems unlike St Paul's usual mode
of speaking. Several interpreters in-
26 — 2

404

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[io

Xpio'TOv 'Irjcrov. I07rapaKaX<S ere 7repl tov efxov TeKvov,

deed, taking roioOros dv 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.
(6) As roiovror and ds are correlative
words,itismore natural to connect them
together; comp. Plato Symp. 181 e
trpoaavayKa^eiv to toiovtov dairep ko.1
K.r.X., Alexis (Meineke Fragm. Com.
III. p. 399) roiotiro to tjjv eanv dairep
ol Kvfioi. Such passages are an answer
to the objection that rotoCros would
require some stronger word than ds,
such as oTos, 5s, or dare. Even after
such expressions as 6 avrbs, to avrb,
instances occur of as (dairep): see
Lobeck Phryn. p. 427, Stallbaum on
Plat. Phced. 86 a. Indeed it may be
questioned whether any word but ds
would give exactly St Paul's meaning
here, (c) All the Greek commentators
without a single exception connect
the words toiovtos dv ds IlavXos to
gether. (2) Assuming that the words
roiouror dv ds K.r.X. are taken toge
ther, should they be connected with
the preceding or the following sen
tence ? On the whole the passage is
more forcible, if they are linked to the
preceding words. In this case the re
sumptive irapaKaXd (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 roiouroy dv ds IlavXos
K.r.X. 1 Do they lay down the grounds
of his entreaty, or do they enforce his
right to commandl If the view of
irpeafivrvs adopted below be correct,
the latter must be the true interpre
tation ; but even though irpeafivrvs
be taken in its ordinary sense, this
will still remain the more probable
alternative ; for, while irpeafivrvs and
biapios would suit either entreaty or
command, the addition Xpiarov 'irjaov
suggests an appeal to authority.
as HaiiXos] 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, d naOXov aKoi5<ras Trjs
o'iKovpivvs aKovei rbv KtjpvKa, yfjs Kal
6aXdrTvs tov yeapybv, rfjs iKXoyrjs rb
aKevos, k.t.X.
irpeapvTvs] Comparing a passage in
the contemporary epistle, Ephes. vi.
20 virep ov irpeafteva iv dXvaei, it
had occurred to me that we should
read irpeofSevTrjs here, before I was
aware that this conjecture had been
anticipated by others, e.g. by Bentley
(Grit. Sacr. p. 93) and by Benson
(Paraphrase etc. on Six Epistles 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 the same 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^imjs may
have been written indifferently for
irpeaBevrijs 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 01 irpeafiv
repoi (a corruption of 01 irpeafivrat
01, for the common reading is ol irpea-
Pevral 01); in xiv. 22 it reads irpea/3v-
rai lovbaiav ; but in xiii. 2 1 irpcafiev-
ras : though in all passages alike the
meaning is ' ambassadors'. Again the
Alexandrian ms has irpta^vras in xiii.
21, but irpeafievTai in xiv. 22, and 01
irpeafievre ot (i.e. 01 irpeaftevral ol) in
xiv. 21. In 2 Mace. xi. 34 this same
ms has irpeajdvTe, and the reading of
the common texts of the lxx (even
Tischendorf and Fritzsche) there is
irpeafivTai. Grimm treats it as mean
ing 'ambassadors', without even no
ticing the form. Other mss are also
mentioned in Holmes and Parsons
which have the form npeafivrvs in
1 Mace. xiii. 21. In 2 Chron. xxxii.
31 again the word for 'ambassador'

"I

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

405-

ov [eyio] iyevvtjcra iv -rots oW/Jots, 'Ovria-i/Jiov, "tov iroTe

is written thus in the Vatican ms,
though the € is added above the line ;
and here too several mss in Holmes
and Parsons agree in reading irpea-
(jin-ais. Thus it is plain that, in
the age of our earliest extant mss
at all events, the scribes used both
forms indifferently in this sense. So
also Eusebius on Isaiah xviii. 2 writes
d be 'AkvXos irpeaj3vras i£ibaKev
elirdv, 'O diroareXXav iv BaXdaarj irpea-
/3uray. Again in Ignat. Smyrn. 11
6ecnrpeaj3vTvs is the form in all the
mss of either recension,- though the
meaning is plainly 'an ambassador
of God.' So too in Clem. Horn. Ep.
Clem. 6 the mss read d rrjs dXvBelas
irpeafivrvs, which even Schwegler and
Dressel tacitly retain. See also Ap-
pian Samn. 7, where irpeapevTov is due
to the later editors, and Acta Thomce
§10, where there is a v. 1. irpeoflvrvs
in at least one ms. And probably ex
amples of this substitution might be
largely multiplied.
The main reason for adopting this
reading 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 life of unintermittent toil
and suffering, such as he had lived,
would bring a premature decay; and
looking back on a long eventful life,
he would naturally so think and speak
of himself. Thus Roger Bacon (Opus
Majus 1. 10, p. 1 5,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 vm. pp.
327, 357). It is more difficult to

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 cocevum seta-
tis', but this idea is foreign to the
context. The comment of Theophy-
lact is, roioCroy av, (pvai, irpea(3ev-
rijy, Kal ourcus- iii-ios aKoveaBai, ds
eiKos naCXov irpeafivrvv, rovrian Kal
diro roil StSao-KaXiKou d£idparos Kal
tov xPov°v to albiaipov exovra K.r.X.
Does he mean to include both mean
ings in irpeaftvrvs ? Or is he accident
ally borrowing the term ' ambassador '
from some earlier commentator with
out seeing its bearing ?
Kal biapios] 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. Here the addition of
Xpio-roO 'Irjaov 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 'Ii/croC belongs to
irpeafivrvs as well as to biapios, and
in both cases describes the person who
confers the office or rank.
10. TrapaxaXiB ae K.r.X.] St Chrysos
tom 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; too-oiJ-
tois be irpoXedvas avrov tvv tyvxijv,
ovbe evdeas ivifiaXe to ovopa, dXXd
roaavrvv iroajadpevos a'lrvaiv dva/3dX-
Xerai k.t.X. The whole passage de
serves to be read.
bv iyivmjaa k.t\!] So too 1 Cor. iv.
15. In Gal. iv. 19 he speaks of him
self as suffering a mother's pangs for
his children in the faith. Comp. Phil.
Leg. ad Cai. 8 (11. p. 554) ipov ian
Toil MaKptovos epyov rdi'os' paXXov avrbv
V ovx VTT0V rdv yoviav yeyivvvKa.
iv rois beapois] He was doubly-

406 .EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. [12
o~oi dxpqo'TOV, vvvl Be \icai\ crol Kal ifxol ev^prjO'TOV' bv
dve7re/j.yjsa croi. I2avTov, TOVTecTiv Ta ifid trirXayxya,

dear to the Apostle, as being the child
of his sorrows.
'Ovrjaipov] for 'Ovvaipov by attract
ion, as e.g. Mark vi. 16 bv iyd drreKe-
cpdXiaa 'ladvvrjv, oirds ianv. Hence
forward he will be true to his name,
no longer dvbvvros, but bvrjaipos : comp.
Ruth i. 20 ' Call me not Naomi (plea
sant) but call me Mara (bitter) etc'
The word dxpvaros is a synonyme for
dvbvvros, Demosth. Phil. iii. § 40 (p.
I2l) airavra ravra a^p7/o"ra airpaKra
dvbvvra k.t.X.: comp. Pseudophocyl.
37 (34) XPV°"T0S bvrjaipbs ian, (piXos
8' dbiKav dvbvvros. 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 : Oic.
de Div. i. 45, Plin. N. H. xxviii. 2. 5,
Tac. Hist. iv. 53. On the value at
tached to names by the ancients, and
more especially by the Hebrews, see
Farrar Chapters on Language p. 267
sq., where a large number of instances
are collected. 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 d Elpvvaios (pepawpbs ris
av ttj irpoavyopia, avrd re r<u rpd-
ira elpvvbiroios.
1 1, axpvarov, evxpv<rrov] Comp. Plat.
Resp. iii. p. 41 1 a xPri<nP0V «£ dxpv-
arov . . .iiroirjaev. Of these words, dxPV
aros is found only here, evxpv<TTOi
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 dxpeios. For the mode of
expression comp. Ephes. v. 15 pi) ds
ilaoqboi dXX' ds abcboi. Some have dis
covered in these words a reference to
Xpiarbs, as commonly pronounced xpv
arbs; comp. Theoph. ad Autol. ). 12
rb xPlo~TOV V°*v <al evxpvarov k.t.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 'Ovrjaipos.
Kal ipoi] An after-thought; comp.
Phil. ii. 27 tjXivaev avrbv, ovk avrbv
be pbvov dXXd Kal ipi. This accounts
for the exceptional order, where ac
cording to common Greek usage the
first person would naturally precede
the second.
dviirepijra] ' I send back', the epis
tolary aorist used for the present : see
the notes on Phil. ii. 25, 28. So too eypa-
¦vsa, 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. auYdi' K.r.X.] The reading of
the received text is av bi avrbv, tovt-
ian rd. ipd airXdyxva, irpoaXa[$ov,
The words thus supplied 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 till
ver. 17 7rpoo-Xaj3oB avrbv ds ipi, the
grammar having been meanwhile dis
located. For the emphatic position
of avrbv comp. John ix. 21, 23, Ephes.
i. 22. ru ipd airXdyxva] ' my very heart',
a mode of speech common in all lan
guages. For the meaning of airXdyxva
see the note on Phil. i. 8. Comp.
Test. Patr. Zab. 8, Neph. 4, in both
which passages Christ is called to
airXdyxvov of God, and in the first it
IS said e'xere evairXayxviav...iva Kal b
Kvpios els vpds airXayxviaBels eXerjatj
vpas' oti Kalye iir iaxdrav tjpepdt'
0 Qeos airoariXXei rd airXdyxvov av
rov iirl rijs yijs k.t.X. Otherwise
rd ipd airXdyxva has been interpreted
'my son' (comp. ver. 10 bv iyivvvaa.
k.t.X.), and it is so rendered here in

13. H]:

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

407

13 ov eyta i/3ovX6iuit]v 7Tj0os e/navTov fcare^eji/, 'iva vTrep
aov jd.01 BiaKOvij iv Toh Seoyxots tov evayyeXiov H)(wpk

the Peshito. For this sense of orrXdy-
xva comp. Artemid. Oneir. i. 44 04
jratfifs OTrXdy^va Xeyovrai, ib. V. 57
ra fie airXdyxva [iavpaive] rbv jraiSa,
ovrw yap Kal rbv traiba KaXeiV eBos ian.
With this meaning it is used not less
of the father than of the mother;
e.g. Philo de Joseph. 5 (11. p. 45) %>-
alv evaxla Kal Bolvv yiyovas yevaapi-
vois...rdv ipav airXdyxvav, Basil. Op.
III. p. 501 d pev irporeiverai ra o-jrXd-y-
Xva riprjv rdv rpocpdv. 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 bv iyiwrjaa k.t.X., and (what
is a more serious objection) it is
wholly unsupported by St Paul's
usage elsewhere, which connects
cmXdyxva with a different class of
ideas : see e.g. vv. 7, 20.
13. iPovXbpv"]'Iwasofamind',
distinguished from jOeX-no-a, which
follows, in two respects; (1) While
fiobXeaBai involves the idea of 'pur
pose, deliberation, desire, mind', 8i-
Xeiv denotes simply 'will'; Epictet. i.
12. 13 fiovXbpai ypd(j>eiv, ds BeXa, to
Aiavos ovopa; ov' dXXd btbdaKopai Be-
Xeiv ds bei ypdqSeaBai, iii. 24. 54 rou-
row BeXe opav, Kal bv /3oi5Xet otyei. (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 inclinations 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 ifiovXbpvv pev ouk
ipiCeiv ivBdbe, Antiph. de Herod, cad.
I (p. 129) iftovXopv" p*v...vvv be K.r.X.;
Isseus de Arist. hcer. 1 (p. 79) *P°vX6-

PV" pev, . . . vvv be ovk i£ iaov k.t.X.,
jEsch. c. Ctes. 1 (p. 53) ifiovXbpvv
pev o^v, a 'A8vva1oi...iireibrj be irdvra
k.t.X., Lucian Abd. 1 i(3ovXbpvv pev
ovv rrjv larpiKrjv K.r.X.. ..vvvl be K.T.X.;
see Kiihner § 392 b (11. p. 177). So
Acts XXV. 22 ifiovXbpvv Kal avrbs
tov dvBpdirov aKovaai, 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
vBeXov Gal. iv. 20, vvxdpv" Bom. 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'. Karixeiv] 'to detain' or 'retain',
opposed to the following dirixvs, ver.
virep aov k.t.X.] Comp. Phil. ii. 30
iva avairXvpdaij rb vpdv varipvpa rr)s
wpdy pi Xetrovpyias, I Cor. xvi. 17 rd
vperepov varipvpa aiJrol dv«rXjjp<»a-ai>.
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.
iv rois beapiols] An indirect appeal
to his compassion: see w. 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 roO evayye
Xiov, describing the origin, comp. Col.
i. 23 rrjs iXiribos ro{i 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 irapaKaXei
vpas Ta beapd pov, Philad. 7 pdprvs

4o8

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[IS, 16-

Bi Ttjs a-rjs yvtojuiris ovBev rjQeXtjcra iroincai, "iva jW] a;s
KaTa dvdyKrjV to dyadov arov rj, dXXa KaTa eKOVCiov
*5Ta%a ydp Bid tovto i^pio-Bri wpos wpav, 'iva aicoviov
avTov aVe^Jjs, l6ovKeTi w's BovXov, dXXa virep BovXov,

be poi iv a bibepai, Ephes. II iva (i.e.
Xpiard 'Ivaov) ra be a pa irepicoipa,
tovs irvevpariKovs papyapiras, Smyrn.
Io dvTityyxov vpdv rb rrvevpd pov Kai
to beapd pov, Magn. I iv ois irepKpipa
beapols aba rds iKKXvaias ; see also
Ephes. 1, 3, 21, Magn. 12, Trail. I, 5,
10, Smyrn. 4, 1 1, Polyc. 2, Rom. 1, 4,
5, Philad. 5.
14. xapi* K.r.X.] 'without thy ap
proval, consent'; Polyb. ii. 21. 1, 3,
X°>pls TVS arperipas yvdpvs, ^toplr rfjs
avrov yvdpvs : similarly avev [rrjs]
yvdpvs, e.g. Polyb. xxi. 8. 7, Ign.
Polyc. 4.
ds Kara avayiajv] St Paul does not
say Kara dvdyKvv but ds Kara dvdyKvv.
He will not suppose that it would
really be by constraint; but it must
not even wear the appearance (ds) of
being so: comp. 2 Cor. xi. 17 as iv
drppoavvtj. See Plin. Ep. ix. 2 1 ' 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 dyaBbv 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'.
koto iKovawv] as in Num. xv. 3. The
form KaB' iKovaiav is perhaps more
classical : Thuc. viii. 27 koB' iKovaiav
rj irdvv ye dvdyKij. The word under
stood in the one case appears to be
rpdn-oK (Porphyr. de Abst. i. 9 KaB'
iKovaiav rpbtrov, coinp. 'Eur. Med. 751
eKovala rpbira) ; in the other, yvdptjv
(so iKovaia, i£ ixovaias, etc.) : comp.
Lobeck Phryn. p. 4.
15. rdxa ydp k.t.X.] The yap 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'.
ixapiaBv] 'He does 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 dpav] '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 all time and for
eternity'. The sense of aldviov must
not be arbitrarily limited. Since he
left, Onesimus had obtained eternal
life, and eternal life involves eternal
interchange of friendship. His ser
vices to his old master were no longer
barred by the gates of death.
dirixvs] In this connexion dirixeiv
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 Phil. iv. 18 dirixa 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 Karixeiv in verse 13 and
by ixapiaBv in this verse.
16. ds bovXov] St Paul does not
say bovXov but ds bovXov. It was a

17—19] EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 409
dBeX<pov dyairtiTov, /naXia'Ta ifioi, irocrta Be fidXXov
crol Kal iv o~apKl Kal iv Kvpity. 17ei ovv fxe e^ets koi-
voovov, 7rpoo-Xa/3ov avTov ws ejtie* l8e: Be ti rtBiKfja-ev ere
il otpeiXei, tovto i/moi iXXoya. 19iyto IlauAos kypayjsa

matter of indifference whether he
were outwardly fioOXoy or outwardly
eXevBepos, since both are one in Christ
(Col. iii. 11). But though he might
still 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
P/Ke'rt, but ovKin. The negation is
thus wholly independent of lva...diri-
Xijs. 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 Philemon
chooses to recognise it or not.
dbeXcpbv dyairvrbv] Kal ra XP°va> K€~
xipbaKas Kal ttj itoiotttti, writes Ghry-
sostom, apostrophizing Philemon.
irbaa be pdXXov K.T.X.] Having first
said 'most of all to me', he goes a
step further, ' more than most of all
to thee'.
Kal iv aapKi k.t.X.] ' In both spheres
alike, in the affairs of this world and
in the affairs of the higher life.' In
the former, as Meyer pointedly says,
Philemon had the brother for a slave ;
in the latter he had the slave for a
brother: comp. Ign. Trail. 12 Kara
irrdvra jie dveiravaav aapKt re Kal irvev-
pan. 17. *x€ls Koivavbv] 'thou holdest
me to be a comrade, an intimate
friend'. For this use of ?xf'v comp.
Luke xiv. 18 e^e pe iraprjTvpevov, Phil.
ii. 29 rovs toiovtovs ivnpovs exere.
Those are Koivavol, who have common
interests, common feelings, 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— Paw'— 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 compli
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. el bi n] The case is stated
hypothetically 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 6(j>elXei] defining the offence which
has been indicated in ijbiKvaev. But
still the Apostle refrains from using
the plain word eKXe^ev. He would
spare tho penitent slave, and avoid
irritating the injured master.
eXXdya] 'reckon itin', 'set it down'.
This form must be adopted instead of
cXXdyei which stands in the received
text, as the great preponderance of
authority shows. On the other hand
we have eXXoyeirat Rom. v. 13 (though
with a V. 1. eXXoyarat), iXXoyovpiivaP
Boeckh C. I. no. 1732 a, and ivXoyei-
aBai Edict. Diocl. in Corp. Inscr. Lat.
in. p. 836. But the word is so rare
in any form, that these occurrences of
eXXoycu' afford no ground for exclud
ing iXXoydv as impossible. The two
forms might be employed side by side,
just as we find iXedv and iXeeiv, £vpdv
and $opeiv, ipardv and ipareiv (Matt.

4io

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

[20

tv] ijjiri XeiPL' 67^ d7TOTio-w 'iva jj.rj Xeyto o~oi, oti Kai
creavTOV fxoi 7rpoa-o(peiXeis. a0 vat, dBeXcpe, e'yo) o~ov ovai~
ixrjv ev Kvplcp' dvairavcrov fJtov Ta a-TrXayxya iv Xpio-Tw.

xv. 23), and the like; see Buttmann
Ausf. Gramm. § 112 (11. p. 53). The
word Xoyav, as used by Lucian Lexiph.
1 5 (where it is a desiderative ' to be
eager to speak', like (povdv, Bavardv,
qbappaKav, etc.), has nothing to do with
the use of c'XXoyac here.
19. iyd riaOXof] The introduc
tion of lus 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 mediseval times
would commonly take this form iyd b
beiva, — '/so and so'; where we should
omit the marks of the first person.
eypaijra] An epistolary or docu
mentary aorist, as in ver. 2 1 ; so too
dviirep^ra ver. ii. See the note on
eypa^ra Gal. vi. ii. The aorist is the
tense commonly used in signatures;
e.g. viriypa^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 prj Xiya] '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 (bqbeiXe is) as much as this', on which
the1 iva prj k.t.X. is dependent. Hence
irpoaocpeiXeis ' owest besides'; for this
is the common meaning of the word.
aeavrbv] 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 ds Bepis 6(peiXovra dirorlveiv

ra 7rp<»Td re Kal piyiara ocpeiXvpara...
vopi£eiv be, a KiKTrjrai Kal exei, irdvra
elvai rdv yewvadvTav...apxopevov
dirb rijs ovalas, bevrepa to rou aaparos,
rplrard rijs ^vxijs, dirorivovra ba-
velapara k.t.X.
20. vai] introducing an affectionate
appeal as in Phil. iv. 3 vol ipard k<u
ai. dbeXqbe] 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. iii. 15, vi. 1, 18; and
comp. ver. 7.
iyd] ' I seem to be entreating for
Onesimus; but I am pleading for my
self: the favour will be done to me';
comp. ver. 17 irpoaXafiov avrbv ds ipi.
The emphatic iyd identifies the cause
of Onesimus with his own.
o-ou bvaipvv] 'may I 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 dvaipvv would suggest the
thought of filial offices; e.g. Arist.
Thesm. 469 ovras ovalpv" rdv reK-
vav, Lucian Philops. 27 irpbs rrjv
b\jriv rdv vliav, ovras dvaipvv, e(j>v,
Tovrav, Ps-Ignat. Hero 6 dvaipvv aov,
iratbiov iroBeivbv, Synes. Ep. 44 ovra
rijs lepas (piXoao(pias dvaipvv Kal irpoa-
in rav iraiblav rdv ipavrov, with
other passages quoted in Wetstein.
So too for bvaoBai, ovvais, compare
Eur. Med. 1025 sq. irplv a(pdv ova
aBai... iiXXas ap' vpds, a riKv', i£e-
8pevjdpvv> Ale. 333 dXu be iraibav'
rdvb' ovv a iv e^X°Pal Beois yeviaBai,
Philem. Inc. 64 (iv. p. 55 Meineke)
ereKes pe, prjrep, koi yivoirb aoi riK-
vav ovvais, dairep Kal bUaibv ian
aoi, Ecclus. xxx. 2 d iraibevav tov
vlov aurou bvvaerai in avrd (the

!I, 22]

EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

4"

"Ue7roidws Ttj viraKOt, o~ov 'eypayfsa aoi, eiSois 'oti Kal
virep a Aeyw 7rotJjo-6ts. ^djia Be Kal eTOifia^e fiot
pevlav' eXir'i^co yap oti Bia twi/ Trpoaev^oov v/jloov %a-
piak6t]0'Ofxai v/mlv.

only passage in the lxx where the
word occurs). The prayer dvaipvv aov,
dvaipvv vpdv, etc., occurs several times
in Ignatius; Polyc. I, 6, Magn. 2, 12,
Epfies. 2. It is not unlikely that dvai
pvv 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 allusion at
least possible.
iv Kvpia] Ashe had begotten Phil
emon ev Kvp/o) (comp. i Cor. iv. 1 5, 17),
so it was iv Kvpia that he looked for
the recompense of filial offices.
dvdiravaov K.r.X.] Seethe note ver. 7.
21. Eypaip-a] 'I write': see the note
on ver. 19.
virep a Xeyto K.r.X.] What was the
thought upmost in the Apostle's mind
when he penned these words ? Did
he contemplate the manumission of
Onesimus ? 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. d>a be k.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 Philippians
shortly ; while here he contemplates a
visit to the Churches of the Lycus
valley. There is a gentle compulsion in this
mention of a personal visit to Colossse.
The Apostle would thus be able to

see for himself that Philemon had not
disappointed his expectations. Simi
larly Serapion in Eus. H.E. vi. 13
irpoaboKdri pe iv ra^ci.
%evlav] 'a lodging'; comp. Clem.
Horn. xii. 2 irpod£ aaiv rds £evlas iroi-
pdCovres. 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 £evla is probably the
place of entertainment: but in such
phrases as KaXeiv iirl £eviq, irapaKaXeiv
iirl ^ev.iav, cppovrl^eiv £evias, and the
like, it denotes the offices of hospital
ity. The Latin hospitium also in
cludes both senses. The gcvla, 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 C jrapd Kpiriav
irpbs rbv t-evdva, ov Kal KaraXvopev,
drpiKopeBa. 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£ea8at) ,of
one person to another, may be for
purposes either (1) of destruction, as
Acts XXV. 1 1 ovSflj pe bvvarai avrois
XapiaaaBai (comp. ver. 16), or (2) of
preservation, as Acts iii. 14 ijrrjaaaBe
dvbpa (povia xaPlo~@Vval */*'"i and
here. 23 — 25. ' Epaphras my fellow-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

4r2 EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. [23—25
a3Ao-7ra^6Tat are 'F.7ra(ppas 6 crvvatxfxaXwTO^ pov iv
XpicrTtS '\r}0~ov, 2*MapKOs} 'AplaTap^os, Arifxds, AovkSs,
ol awepyoi fxov.
*5'H xa'jOts tov Kvpiov [ypuiv] 'lri<rov XpicrTod fieTa
TOV TTVeV/UaTOS VjUWV.

is mentioned first because he was a
Colossian (Col. iv. 12) and, as the evan
gelist of Colossse (see p. 29 sq.), doubt
less well known to Philemon. Of the
four others Aristarchus and Mark be
longed to the Circumcision (Col.iv. 1 1),
while Demas and Luke were Gentile
Christians. All these were of Greek
or Asiatic origin and would probably
be well 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.
d ovvaixpdXaros] On the possible
meanings of this title see Col. iv. 10, ¦
where it is given not to Epaphras but
to Aristarchus.
25. 'H xdpis K.r.X.] The same form
of farewell as in Gal. vi. 18; comp.
2 Tim. iv. 22.
vpdv] The persons whose names
are mentioned in the opening saluta
tion.

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

p. 6, 1. 12. On Polemo and his family see Epliemeris Epigraphica I. p. 470 sq.
(i8?3).
p. 38, note 1. The investigations of M. Waddington respecting the chronology
of this period (see below) require a modification of the dates here given
for the earthquakes in the second century. He enumerates three:
(1) One at Ehodes, from A.r>. 138 — 142; (2) One which destroyed
Mitylene and did considerable damage to Smyrna, a.d. 151 — 152; (3) Ona
which destroyed Smyrna a.d. 180. These two last have been confounded
together by previous writers. See M. Waddington' a MSmoire, pp. 242 sq.,
267 sq.
p. 48, note 1. On the names Ammias, Tatias, whioh are feminine and not
masculine, see below p. 373.
p. 49, note. I have here given the commonly received date for the martyrdom
of Polycarp; for I had not then seen M. Waddington's investigations.
This writer seems to have proved conclusively that it took place several
years earher, a.d. 155: see his MSmoire sur la Chronologie du BhSteur
sElius Aristide p. 232 sq., in the Memoires de I'Academie des Inscrip'
tions, &o. xxvi. (1867).
PP- 51) 53- ¦ia these remarks respecting the silence of Eusebius will seem to
be directed against the opinions expressed in a recent work, it may be
worth while stating that the early sheets of this commentary were struck
off nearly twelve months before Supernatural Beligion was published.
The expression in p. 53, note 1, 'numerous and patent quotations,' is
too strongly worded, though the references to St James in Clement's
Epistle seem to me to be clear. I might however have chosen other
more palpable illustrations from that epistle.
p. 63, L 12. The Proconsulate of Paullus, under whom this martyrdom took
place, is dated by Borghesi (CEavres viii. p. 507) somewhere between
A. D. 163 — 168, by Waddington (Fastes des Provinces Asiatiques p. 731, in
Le Bas and Waddington Voyage ArcMologique etc.) probably a.d. 164—
166. This rests on the assumption that the Servillius Paullus here
named must be identified with L. Sergius Paullus of the inscriptions.
The name Sergius is elsewhere confounded with Servius (Servillius)
owing ta the use of contractions (see Borghesi iv. p. 493, viii. p. 504).
The mistake must have been introduced very early into the text of
Eusebius. AU the Greek mss have Servillius (Servilius), and so it is
written in the Syriac Version, Euffinus however writes it correctly
Sergius.

4^4 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.
p. 71, line 1. We may conjecture that it was tha earthquake under GaUienus
(a.d. 262) which proved fatal to Oolossea (see above p. 38, note i). This
is consistent with the fact that no Colossian coins later than Gordian
(a.d. 2 38 — 244) are extant. When St Chrysostom wrote, the city existed n-o _
longer, as may be inferred from his comment (xi. p. 323) ''H iroXa ttjs
Qpvylas rjv Kal SrjXov iK rov rrjv AaoSiKeiav irXvalov elvai. '
On the other hand M. Benan (L'Antechrist p. 99) says of the earth
quake under Nero, 'Colosses ne sut se relever; eUe disparut presque du
nombre des Sglises;' and he adds in a note 'Colosse3 n'a pas de
monnaies imperiales [Waddington].' This is a mistake, and he must
have misunderstood M. Waddington.
p. 77, note t. To this hst of works add Mansel's Gnostic Heresies of the First
and Second Centuries (London 1875).
p. 112, note 2. See p. 330, note 3.
p. 160, 1. 4. For 'argument for silence' read 'argument from silence.'
p. 205, col. 1, 1. 30. Strike out rov before irepiirarijaai.
p. 210, col. 1, 1. 2. The dissertation to which reference is here made is deferred
to a later volume.
p. 250, col. 2, 1. 21. Strike out the words in brackets.
p. 270, col. r. dnvi ianv k.t.X. Oomp. Seneca de Vit. beat. 7 'in ipso Usu sui
periturum.'
p. 280, -col. 1, 1. 23. For 'Ammianus' read 'Ammonius.'

INDEX.

Abercius (Avircius), Bp. of Hierapohs,
p. 54 sq.
Acts of the Apostles; passages ex
plained, p. 23 (xiii. 4, xvi. 6) ; p. 95
(xix. 13, 19); p. 370 (xiv. 11).
tedifioatorise, the sufferings of Christ
as, p. 232
JJlfric on the Epistle to Laodiceans,
p. 362
Alasanda or Alasadda, p. 152
Alexander of TraUes on charms, p. 92
Alexandria, a supposed Buddhist es
tablishment at, p. 151
Andrew, St, in Asia, p. 45
Angelolatry condemned, p. 10 1, 103,
184, i. 16, ii. 1 o, 15, 18; forbidden
by the Council of Laodicea, p. 68
angelology of Cerinthus, p. no; of
Essenism, p. 96 ; of the Jews, ii. 18
Angels, orders of, i. 16
Anselm of Laon, p. 361
Antiochus the Great, colony of, in Asia
Minor, p. 19
Antiochus Tkeos refonnds Laodicea,
P-5
aorist, epistolary, iv. 8, Ph. 11, ig,
21; contrasted with perfect, i. 16
Apamea, p. 19, 10; 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 Apollinaris
ApoUo Archegetes worshipped at Hie
rapohs, p. 12
Apostolic Fathers, Christology of, p.
1 go

Apostolic Writings, Christology of, p.
1 89
Apphia, wife of Philemon, p. 372 ; the
name Phrygian, 372 sq.
Archippus, iv. 17; son of Philemon,
374; office and abode, 375; rebuke
to. 43
Arian heresy in Hierapohs and Lao
dicea, p. 64
Arian use of the expression 'First
born of aU creation,' i. 15
Aristarchus, iv. 10
Aristion, p. 45
Aristotle, on slavery, p. 379 ; definition
of 'knowledge,' ii. 3; of 'wisdom,'
i. 9
Armagh, Book of, p. 348, 352
article, omission of the definite, i. 4
asah, a supposed derivation of Essenes,
p. 126
Ascents of James, p. 168
asceticism among the Jewish sects, p.
87 ; Colossian heretics, p. 104 ; Es
senes, p. 173; a result of Gnostic
ism, p. 79
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 : how divided
under the Bomans, 7 : a modern hy
pothesis about Christianity in, p. 50
Asideeans, p. 120
asya', a supposed derivation of Essene,
p. 125
Athanasius, on 'Firstborn of all Crea
tion,' i. 15

4i6

INDEX.

Athens, aBuddhistburntaUveat, p. 155
Augustine, on 'Firstborn of aU Crea
tion,' i. 15; on 'wisdom and know
ledge,' ii. 3
dydirv, 0 vlbs ttjs iydirvs abrov, i. 13
dyios, i. 2
dydv, ayavla, dyavlfeaOai, i. 29, ii. 1,
iv. 12
dSeXipos (0), i. 1
ddvpeiv, iii. 21
alaxpoXoyta, iii. 8
aKaBapala, hi. 5
&Xas, iv. 5
dXvSela, ij dXvBela rov ebayyeXlov, i. 5 ;
iv dXvBelq., i. 6
dXXd, after el or el xal in St Paul, ii. 5
dpapos, i. 22
dvarabeaSai, Ph. 7
dvairXvpovv, p. 230
dV^7ffXi7Toy, i. 22
dve-ipibs, iv. 10
a^Ked*, hi. 18; to dvrjKOV, Ph. 8
and pair dpea koi, iii. 22
dj'Taj'a7rXi7/JoO*', i. 24
dvrairiSoais, iii. 24
dbparos i. 16
direKSbeadai, ii. 15
direKSvats, ii. 11
ci^xe"'. Ph. 15
dirijXXorpiwpivoi, i. 21
dvoBvijCKeiv, ii. 20
diroKaraXXdaaeiv, i. 20, 21
drrbKpvipos, ii. 3
dn-oXi)rpwcris, i. 14
diroxpvais, ii. 22
dirreadai, ii. 11
ApiaKeia, i. 10
°PX^) applied to Christ, p. 41 ; I. 16, 18
aiSifdrai', i. 6
Atfrds ianv, i. 17
dipeiStia, ii. 23
d0T7, h. 19
dxeipoirotvros, ii. it
&XPvaroS, Ph. 1 1
B (Cod. Vaticanus), excellence of^p.
314
Banaim, the, p, 132-
Banus not an Essene, p. 161

Bardesanes, on Buddhists, 154; his
date, p. 155
Barnabas, hfe of, iv. 10; epistle as-
oribed to, ib.
basiMca, iv. 15
Basilides, p. 331
Baur, p. 77, 81, 384
Bene-hakkeneseth, p. 130
Brahminism, p. 154, 155
Buddhism, assumed influence on Es
senism, p. 151 sq.; supposed estab
lishment of, in Alexandria, p. 151 ;
unknown in the West, p. 153 sq.,
four steps of, p. 157
Buddhist at Athens, p. 155
fidirriapa, fiairnapbs, p. 250
fidpfiapos, hi. n
fiXaaipvpla, iii. 8
fiovXeoBai, Ph. 13
Sebeiv, hi. 15

Cabbala, see Kabbala
Cainites, p. 79
Calvin, hi. 8, p. 341, 384
Canonical writings and Papias, p, 52
Carpocratians, p. 79, 80
Cataphryges, p. 98
Cavensis, codex, p. 348 *
cehbacy, p. 173
Cerinthus, p. 107 sq. ; Judaism of, p.
108; Gnosticism of, ib.; cosmo
gony of, p. 109; Christology of, p.
in sq. ; pleroma of, p. 330
chaber, p. 128
Chagigah, on ceremonial purity, p. 128
Chalcedon, counch of, p. 65
chasha, chashahn, a derivation of Es
sene, p. 119
chasi, chasyo, a derivation of Essene,
p. 118; connexion with chasid, p. 124
chasid, a false, derivation of Essene,
P> H5
Chasidim, p. 120; not a proper name
for the Essenes, p. 122
chasin, chosin, a false derivation for
Essene, p. 116
chaza, chazya, a derivation of Esaene,
P- 117
Chonos or Chonte, p. 15, 71

INDEX,
Christ, the Person of, p. 34 ; St Paul's
doctrine about, p. 41, 181 sq., i. i5_
20, ii. 9—15; the Word Incarnate,
p. 101, 102 ; the pleroma in Him
p. 102, i. 19, ii. 9) Io; Life in Him'
the remedy against sin, p. 34j 186
sq.; His teaching and practice not
Essene, p. 170 sq.
Christianity, not an outgrowth of Es
senism, p. 159; in relation to Epie
tetus, p. 1 3 ; to Gnosticism, p. 80 ; to
slavery, p. 389, 391 sq.
Christianity in Asia Minor, p. 50
Christianized Essenes, p. 89, 90, 135
Christians of St John, p. 165
Christology of Ep. to Col. p. 101, 188;
of other Apostolic writings, p. 189;
of succeeding ages, p. 190
Chronicon Paschale, p. 48, 61
Chrysostom, i. 13, 15, iii. 16, p. 340,
Ph. 15, p. 383
Cibotus, p. 21
Cibyratic convention, p. 7
Circular Letter — the Ep. to the Ephe
sians — p. 37
Claudius, embassy from Ceylon in the
reign of, p. 156
Claudius Apolhnaris, the name, p. 57
sq.; his works, p. 58 sq.
Clement of Alexandria, p. 79, 98, 154,
168, i. 9, 15, ii. 8, hi. 5, 16
Clement of Borne (§ 7) Col. i. 3 ; (§ 58)
»• "5 (§33) i-'5; (Ep- ii- §9). P-
104
Clementine Homilies, p. 136, 168
Clementine Becognitions, p. 164
Clermont, p. 3
collegia, iv. 15
Colossa?, orthography of, p. 16, i. 2 ;
situation, etc., p. 1 sq.; distance
from Laodicea, p. 376; 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 the epistle was written,
P- 23; Epaphras the evangelist of,
p. 29 ; intended visit of Mark to, p.
4o; visit of St Paul to, p. 41; ob
scurity of, p. 70 ; a suffragan see of
COL.

417

Laodicea, p. 69; the Turkish con
quest of, p. 71
Colossian heresy, nature of, p. 73 sq.,
89, ii. 8 ; writers upon, p. 74 ; had
regard to the Person of Christ, p.
112; relation to Gnosticism, p. 98 ;
St Paul's answer to, p. 181 sq.
Colossians, Epistle to, p. 33 ; bearers
°f. P- 35; salutations in, ib.; charge
respectirig Laodicea, p. 36; written
by an amanuensis, iv. 18; Christo
logy of, p. 188; style of, p. 191;
analysis of, p. 192 ; various read
ings, see readings
colossinus, p. 4
community of goods, p. 176
Conoord of the Laodiceans and Ephe
sians, etc., p. 31
Congregation, the holy, at Jerusalem,
P- 131
Constantine, legislation of, p. 393
Constantinople, Council of, p. 65
conventus (Boman), p. 7
Corinth, visit of St Paul to, during his
residence at Ephesus, p. 30
Corinthians, Fhst Epistle to ; passages
explained: (i. 19) i. 9; (ii. 6, 7) i.
28; (v. 9) iv. 16; (vii. 21) p. 390;
(viii. 6) p. 188; (ix. 24) ii. 18; (x.
26) p. 326; (xi. 7) i. 15; (xiii. 3)
p. 156; (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. n;
(viii. 9) i. 6; (ix. 12) ib.; (xiii. 5)
i. 27
Cornelius a Lapide, p. 342
Creation, Gnostic speculations about,
p. 78 sq. ; Essene do., p. 90
Cyril of Alexandria, p. 154
KaBas Kal, i. 6, iii. 1
Kal in both members of a comparison,
i. 6
Kal baoi, ii. 1
Kaivtn,nb\ vios, ii. 10
KaKla, iii. 8
KapiroipopeioBai, i. 6
KaTafipafiebeiv, ii. 18
27

4i8

INDEX.

Karevuiriov avrov, 1. 22
KarotKeiv, i. 19
Kevepj3arebeiv, ii. 18
KetpaXij, i. 18
KXvpovopla, hi. 24
KXrjpos, i. 12
kXvt6s, iii. 12
Koivavla, Ph. 6
Koplfeiv, hi. 25
Koiridv, i. 29
Kopal-bs, p. 4
Kbapos, ii. 8
Kpareiv, ii. 19
Kparos, i. 1 1
Kplveiv, ii. 16
Kriais, i. 15
Kupios, d, (Christ) i. 10; (Master), iii. 24
Kvpibrvs, i. 16
XapaKTijp, i. 15
XaplgeoBai, ii. 13, hi. 13, Ph. 22
Xa/><s, i. 2, (^) ih. 16; ^ X"P" r"" 0«>O,
i. 6
Xeipoypaipov, ii. 14
Xpvarbrvs, iii. 12
Damascene : see JbAn Damascene
Darmstadiensis Codex, p. 348
dative (of instrument), h. 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. 81, 153
Diospolis, on old name of Laodicea,
p. 68
Divinity of Christ, p. 101 sq., 182 sq.,
i- IS
Doceta?, use of pleroma by, p. 337
dualism, p. 78, 87, 149
dyes of Colossa? and the neighbour
hood, p. 4
Seiypari^eiv, ii. 15
Siapios, Ph. 1, 10
Seapbs, Ph. 13
Sid with gen., used of the Logosfc p.
188, i. 16, 20
SiaKovla, SidKovos, iv. 7, 17
SibdaKtiv, i. 28

SioUvais, p. 7
Sbypa, ii. 14
Soypari^eiv, ii. 20
66£a, i. 11, 27
SoGXos, Ph. 16; SoOXos 'Ljfl-oO Xpiarov,
iv. 12
Sbvapis, i. 16
Svvapovv, i. 11

Earthquakes in the valley of the Ly
cus, p. 38
Ebionite Christology of Cerinthus, p.
no
economy of revelation perfected, p.
185
Elchesai, founder of the Mandeans, p.
167
Elchesai, Book of, p. 137
elders, primitive, p. 132
Eleazar expels evil spirits, p. 91
English Church on the Epistle to Lao
dicea, p. 362
English versions of the Epistle to Lao.
dicea, p. 364
Epaphras, p. 34; evangelist of Co
lossa?, p. 29, 31; mission to St Paul,
p. 32, iv. 12, Ph. 23
Epaphroditus, p. 34
Ephesians, Epistle to ; a circular letter,
p. 37 ; readings in, harmonistic with
Epist. to Col., p. 312 sq.; passages
explained, i. 18 (i. 23) ; i. 21 (i. 16) ;
i. 23 (i. 18) ; ii. 3 (iii. 6); ii. 4 (ih.
1); ii. 4, 5 (ii. 13); ii. 12 (i. 21);
ii. 14 (i. 17); ii. 15 (ii. 14); ii. 16
(i. 20); ii. 20 (ii. 7); hi. 17 (ii. 17);
hi. 21 (i. 26); iv. 10, 11 (i. 17); iv.
18 (i. 21) ; iv. 19, v. 3 (hi. 5) ; v. 32
(i. 26)
Ephesus, Council of, p. 65
Ephesus, St Paul at, p. 30, 95; exor
cists at, p. 95
Epietetus, p. 13
Epiphanius, account of Cerinthus, p.
107 ; on the Nasareans, p. 136
epistolary aorist, Ph. n, 19, 21
epulones of Ephesian Artemis called
Essenes, p. 96

INDEX.

419

Erasmus on the Epistle to Laodicea,
P-365
Essene, meaning of term, p. 94 ; the
name, p. 114 sq. ; Frankel's theory,
p. 121 sq.
Essenes, p. 82, ii. 8 ; hst of writers
upon, p. S3 ; localities of, p. 93 ;
asceticism of, p. 85 ; speculations of,
p. 87 ; exclusiveness of, p. 92 ; Jo
sephus and Philo chief authorities
upon, p. 134; oath taken by, p. 127;
their grades, p. 129 ; origin and af
finities, p. 119 sq.; relation to Chris
tianity, p. 158; to Pharisaism, p.
101, 120; to Neopythagoreanism, p.
143; to Hemerobaptists, p. 166; to
Gnosticism, p. 92 ; to Parsism, p.
149 ; to Buddhism, p. 157; excused
by Herod the Great from taking the
oath of allegiance, p. 176; fortune
tellers, p. 178 ; silence of New Test.
about, p. 159; in relation to John
the Baptist, p. 160; to James the
Lord's brother, p. 168 ; Christianized
Essenes, p. 135
Essenism, p. 82 ; main features of, p.
83 sq.; compared with Christianity,
p. 170 sq. ; the sabbath, p. 170;
lustrations, p. 171 ; avoidance of
strangers, p. 172; asceticism, ceh
bacy, p. 1 73 ; avoidance of the Tem
ple, p. 174; denial of the resurrec
tion of the body, p. 175; certain
supposed coincidences with Christ
ianity, p. 175
Eusebius, on the earthquakes in the
valley of the Lycus, p. 39 ; his mis
take respecting some martyrdoms,
p. 48 ; silence on quotations from
Canonical writings, p. 52 ; on tracts
against Montanism, p. 56 ; the Thun
dering Legion, p. 61; on Marcellus,
i. 15
evil, Gnostic theories about, p. 78
exorcists at Ephesus, p. 95
iavrov and avrov, i. 12 ; and aXX-fjkav,
hi. 13
iyii, Ph. 19
iBeXoBpvaKeia, ii. 23

etye, i. 23
eiKav, i. 15, hi. n
elvai Kapirotpopovpevov, i. 6
els, i. 6, ii. 22, Ph. 6
iK AaoSiKlas (rrjp), iv. 16
iKKXvala, iv. 15
iKXe/crbs, iii. 12
iXXoydv, Ph. 18
iXirls, i. 5
iv, iv. 12; denoting the sphere, i. 4;
iv abrlp, i. 16; iv pipei, ii. 16; iv
iravrl BeX-Zjpari, iv. 12 ; iv irdaiv, i. 18;
iv rois ipyois, i. 21; iv bplv, i. 27,
hi. 16; iv 'Kpiortp, i. 2
ivepyelv, ivepyeiaOai, i. 29
evi, hi. 11
iZayopdfcaBat, iv. 5
e£aXeltpeiv, ii. 14
i^ovala, i. 13, 16
H»> (ol), iv. 5
ioorij, ii. 16
iiriyiviiaKeiv, iirlyvaais, p. 100, i. 6, 9,
Ph. 6
eiriBvpia, hi. 5
iwipiveiv, i. 23
iirioToXij (ijj, iv. 16
eirixopvyeiv, ii. 19
iiroiKoSopelv, ii. 7
epydfeoBai, ih. 23
epeBifav, hi. 21
ippi^apivoi, ii. 7
SpXeaBai, iii. 6
ebdpeoros, hi. 20
ebSoria, ebSoKeiv, i. 19
ebxapiareiv, ebxapiarla, ii. 7, i. 3 ; evxd-
piaros, hi. 15
'TZtpiaia ypdppara, p. 95
ixeiv, Ph. 17
ixBpol, i. 21
F (Codex Augiensis) relation to G, p.
345
Firstborn of all Creation, i. 15
Flaccue, p. 20
Frankel on the Essenes, p. 121 sq.
G (Codex Boernerianus) relation to F,
P-345

420

INDEX.

Galatia, meaning of, in St Paul and St
Luke, p. 24
Galatian and Colossian Judaism com
pared, p. 105, i. 28
GalatianB, 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, 127 sq.
Gnostic, p. 80 sq.
Gnostic element in Colossian heresy,
p. 73 sq.
Gnostic sects, use of pleroma by, p.
33°
Gnosticism, list of writers on, p. 77 ;
definition of, p. 76 sq.; intellectual
exclusiveness of, p. 77; speculations
of, p. 77 sq.; practical errors of, 79
sq.; independent of Christianity, p.
80; relation to Judaism, p. 81; to
Essenism, p. 93; to Colossian heresy,
p. 98
grades of Essenes, p. 129
Gratz, p. 123, 160, 161, 170
Greece, slavery in, p. 386
Gregory the Great on the Epistle to
the Laodiceans, p. 36 1
guild of dyers, p. 4
Vappdvas, p. 153
yvaois, i. 9, ii. 3
yvaoriKos, p. 81
Hamartiology of the Old Testament,
p. 185
Haymo of Halberstadt, on the Epistle
to the Laodiceans, p. 361
Hebrew slavery, p. 385 sq.
Hebrews, Epistle to the ; passages ex
plained, i. 11 (Heb. xi. 34); i. 15 (i.
2, 3. 6)
Hefele on the date of Claudius Apolli
naris, p. 185
Hemerobaptists, p. 162
Herod the Great excuses the oath of
allegiance to the Essenes, p. 176
Hervey of Dole, on the Epistle to the
Laodiceans, p. 361
Hierapohs, p. 9 ; modern name, p. 9;
physical features of, p. 10 ; a fa

mous watering place, p. n; the
Plutonium at, p. 12 ; birthplace of
Epietetus, p. 13; political relations
of, p. 18; attractions for Jews, p. 22;
a Christian settlement, p. 45 ; Phihp
of Bethsaida at, p. 45 sq. ; Counch at,
p. 59; Papias, bishop of, p. 48 sq. ;
Abercius, bishop of, p. 54 sq. ;
Claudius Apollinaris, bishop of, p.
57 sq.; dyes of, p. 4
Hilgenfeld, p. 75 ; on the Essenes, p.
150 sq.
James the Lord's brother, p. 167
Jerome, p. 29 ; on St Paul's parents,
p. 35 ; on the Epistle to the Laodi
ceans, p. 359 sq.
Jesus Justus, iv. 1 1
Jews, sects of the, p. 82
imperfect, hi. 18
indicative after fiXiireiv prj, ii. 8
infinitive of consequence, i. 10, iv.
3,6
John (St) in Asia Minor, p. 41 ; Apoca
lypse, passages explained, p. 41 (hi.
1.4— 21); Gospel, p. 163 (i. 8, v. 35);
Second Epistle, p. 371 ; Third Epi
stle, ib.
John the Baptist, not an Essene, p.
160 ; disciples of, at Ephesus, p. 163
John St, Christians of, p. 165
John Damascene , p. 1 5
John of Sahsbury on the Epistle to the
Laodiceans, p. 362
Josephus on Essenism, p. 133 sq.
Judaism and Gnosticism,, p. 81
'iva, iv. 16
'IoGoros, iv. n
labrvs, iv. i
Kabbala, p. 93, i. 16, ii. 8
Lanfranc on the Epistle to the Laodi
ceans, p. 363
Laodicea, name and history, p. 5 ; con
dition, p. 6 ; political rank and rela
tions, p. 7, 18; religious worship at,
p. 8; Counoil of, p. 66; ecclesiastical
status, p. 69; dyes of, p. 4; sur.

INDEX.

421

named Trimetaria, p. 18 ; the vaunt
of, p. 44
Laodicea, the letter from, iv. 16; p.
340 sq.
Laodiceans, apocryphal Epistle to the,
p. 347 sq.; hst of mss of, p. 349
sq.; Latin text of, p. 353; notes on,
P- 355 SQ- i theory of a Greek ori
ginal, p. 357 ; restoration of the
Greek, p. 359; circulation of, p. 360
sq. ; English prologue and versions,
p. 364; strictures of Erasmus on,
p. 365; genuineness maintained by
some, p. 366
Latrocinium, see Robbers' Synod
Legio Fulminata, p. 61
legislation of Constantine on slavery,
P- 393
Logos, the, i. 15
Luke, St, iv. 14; his narrative of St
Paul's third missionary journey, p.
24 sq. ; makes a distinction between
Phihp the Apostle and Phihp the
Evangehst, p. 45, 59
lukewarmness at Laodicea, p. 42
lustrations of the Essenes, p. 171
Luther's estimate of the Epistle to
Philemon, p. 383
Lycus, district of the ; hst of writers on,
p. 1 sq.; physical features of, p. 2
sq. ; produce of, p. 4 ; subterranean
channel of the, p. 14 ; earthquakes
in, p. 38 sq.
Lycus, Churches of the, p. 1 sq. ; evan
gelised by Epaphras, p. 29 sq. ;
ecclesiastical status of, p. 69
AaoSixla, iv. 13
Xbyov (xeiv nvbs, ii. 23

Magic, forbidden by Council of Laodi
cea, p. 69 ; among the Essenes, p.
140
magical books at Ephesus, p. 95 ; ma
gical charms among the Essenes, p.
90 sq.
Mandeans, p. 165
Marcosians, p. 335
Mark (St) iv. 10; visits Colossa;, p. 40

marriage depreciated by the Essenes,
P-I39
Matthew (St) Gospel of, accepted by
Cerinthus and the Ebionites, p. 108
Megasthenes, p. 153
monastioism of the Essenes, p. 157
Monoimus, the Arabian, p. 339
Montanism, Claudius Apollinaris on,
p. 59 ; Phrygian origin of, p. 98
morning bathers, p. 132
Muratorian Fragment on the Epistle
to the Laodiceans, p. 358
paKpoBvpla, i. n, hi. 12
pepls, i. 12
pvelav TOielaBai, Ph. 4
popipv, hi. 13
povoyevrjs, i. 15
pvarvpiov, i. 26
Naassenes, p. 337
Nasoreans, p. 138, 165
Neander on Cerinthus, p. 108
Neopythagoreanism and Essenism, p.
146 sq.
New Testament, relation of, to the Old
Testament, p. 184
Nicasa, Bishops of Hierapolis and Lao
dicea at the Council of, p. 65
Nicetas Choniates, p. 71
nominative with definite article for
vocative, hi. 18
Novatianism in Phrygia, p. 98
Nymphas, iv. 15, p. 31
veopvvia, ii. 16
vios, hi. 10
vovBerelv, i. 28
jw-with aorist, i. 21
Observance of the Sabbath by the Es
senes and our Lord, p. 170
Onesimus, p. 377, Ph. 10; at Borne,
p. 33; encounters St Paul, p. 378;
returns to Philemon, p. 35, 379 sq. ;
legendary history of, p. 382
Ophites, the, p. 81, 98, 337
Oracle, see Sibylline Oracle
olKovopla, i. 25
oTkos, ri)v Kar' oTkov, iv. 15
bpoiapa, i. 25

422

INDEX.

tvaaBai, bvatpvv, Ph. 20
bpyij, ih. 8
bans, iii. 5, iv. 11
bipBaXpoSovXela, iii. 22
ipS-fj, ih. 16
ds, Ph. 14, 16

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.;
silence of Eusebius, p. 52 ; views in
ferred from his associates, p. 53
Parsism, resemblances to, in Essen
ism, p. 149 sq.; spread by the de
struction of the Persian empire, p.
150; influence of, p. 151
participle used for imperative, iii. 16
Paschal controversy, p. 59, 63
Paul (St) visits Phrygia on his second
missionary journey, p. 23; had not
visited Colossae when he wrote, p.
23 sq. ; visits Phrygia on his third
journey, p. 24; silence about per
sonal relations with Colossa?, p. 28 ;
at Ephesus, p. 30, 95 sq. ; at Borne,
p. 32; mission of Epaphras to, ib. ;
meets with Onesimus, p. 33, 378;
despatches three letters, p. 33 ; visits
Colossa?, p. 41; his plans after his
release, Ph. 22 ; uses an amanuensis,
iv. 18; his signature, iv. 18, Ph. 19;
coincidences with words of our Lord,
ii. 22; his teaching on the univer
sality of the Gospel, p. 99; on the
kingdom of Christ, i. 13 sq.; on the
orders of angels i. 16 sq.; on phi
losophy, ii. 8; on the Incarnation,
ii. 9; on the abolition of distinc
tions, hi. 11 ; on slavery, hi. 22 sq.,
p. 389 sq. ; his cosmogony and the
ology, p. 101 sq. ; his answer to the
Colossian heresy, p. i8r sq. ; his
Christology, p. 188, i. 15 sq.; his
relations with Philemon, p. 370 sq. ;
connects baptism and death, ii. n,
20, iii. 3; makes use of metaphors

from the mysteries, i. 26, 28; from
the stadium, ii. 18, ih. 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. 353
Pedanius Secundus, execution of his
slaves, p. 388
Person of Christ, St Paul and St John
on, p. 41 sq. ; St Paul's answer to
the Colossian heresy, p. 181 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 Colossa?, p. 15
Pharisees, p. 82; relation to Essenes,
p. 82, 120, 141
Philemon, p. 31, 370 sq.; legendary
history of, p. 371; his wife, p. 372;
his son, p. 374
Philemon, Epistle to ; Introduction to,
p. 369; character of, p. 370; analy
sis of, p. 380 sq.; different estimates
of, p. 382 sq. ; compared with a letter
of Pliny, p.. 384.
Phihp the Apostle, in Asia, p. 45 sq. ;
confused with Phihp the Evangehst,
P-45
Philippopohs, synod of, p. 64
Philo, on the Essenes, p. 133; his use
of Logos, i. 15
Phrygia, p. 17 sq. ; meaning of the
phrase in St Luke, p. 23; religious
tendencies of, p. 97 sq. ; see Paul (St)
Pistis Sophia, p. 339
Pliny the younger, a letter of, p. 384 sq.
pleroma, detached note upon, p. 323
Plutonium, at Hierapohs, p. 12
Polycarp, martyrdom of, p. 49
poverty, respect paid to, by Essenes
and Christ, p. 177
Pra?torius accepts the Epistle to the
Laodiceans as genuine, p. 366

INDEX.

423

Pythagoreanism andEssenism, p. 144;
disappearance of, p. 146
irdBos, iii. 5
irapaKaXeiv, ii. 2
irapaXappdveiv, ii. 6
irapdirrapa, ii. 13
irapelvai els, i. 6
rapixeaBai, iv. 1
Taptjyopla, iv. 11
irappvala, iv irappvala, ii. 15, Ph. 8
iras, irds b Koapos, i. 16; irdav Kriais,
i. 15; rb. irdvra, i. 16
irarijp, b Bebs irarrjp, i. 3 ; -rrarvp VP&v,
i. 2
iraiWSai, Ph. 7
7ri(?ai'o\o-)-t'a, ii. 4
iriKpalveoBai, ih. 19
marbs, iriarol aSeXtpol, i. 2
irXeove^a, hi. 5
irXvpotpopeiv, iv. 12
irXvpoipopla, h. -z
irXijpoOo, i. 25, iv. 17
irXvpapa, i. 19, ii. 9, p. 323 sq.
TrXva/wvv, h. 23
irXovros, i. 27
iropvela, hi. 5
irpavrvs, ih. 12
irpeafievrvs, irpeaftvrvs, Ph. 8
irpd irdvrav, i. 17
irpoaxobeiv, i. 5
71730s, ii. 23, Ph. 5
rrpoaKaprepeiaBai, iv. 2
irpoauiroXvpijila, hi. 25
Trpwrdro/cos, i. 15, 18
ipikocroipta, ii. 8
ipOopd, ii. 22
ijtpbvvais, i. 9
ipvXaKTijpiov, p. 69
tpaXpos, hi. 16
Quartodeciman controversy, p. 59, 63
Quinisextine Council, p. 68
Eeadings, harmonized with corre
sponding passages in the Epistle to
the Ephesians, p. 312 (hi. 6); p.
313 (ii. 21, v. 19)
readings, various, p. 315 (i. 3); p. 316
(i. 4, 1.7); p. 317 (i- ", i. 14, i. 22);

p. 318 (ii. 2); p. 319 (ii. 16); p. 320
(ii. 18, ii. 23); p. 321 (iv. 8); p. 322
(iv- 15)
Eenan, on the meaning of Galatia in
St Paul and St Luke, p. 25 ; his esti
mate of the Epistle to Philemon, p.
3»4
Eestoration, under Ezra, p. 119
resurrection of the body denied, p. 88,
175
Bevelation ; see Apocalypse
Bobbers' Synod, p. 65
Eoman slavery, p. 387
Borne, Onesimus at, p. 378; St Paul
at, p. 32
j)ifavv, ii. 7

Sabbath, observance of, by Christ and
the E3senes compared, p. 170
Saba?ans, p. 165
sacrifices prohibited by Essenes, p. 89,
134
Sadduceeism, p. 82
Sagaris, Bishop of Laodicea, p. 63
Samanaei, p. 154
Sampsa?ans, p. 137
Sarmanse, p. 153
satisfactoria?, sufferings of Christ re
garded as, i. 25
Secundus, see Pedanius Secundus
Sibylline Oracle, p. 96
silence of Eusebius, p. 52 sq.; of the
New Testament about the Essenes,
P- "59
slave martyrs, p. 392
slavery, Hebrew, p. 385; Greek, p. 386;
Boman, p. 387 ; St Paul's treatment
of, p. 389 sq. ; attitude of Christian
ity towards, p. 391 sq. ; prohibited
by Essenes, p. 177; legislation of
Constantine, p. 393; of Justinian,
p. 394 ; abohtion of, p. 394
Socrates on Novatianism in Phrygia,
p. 98
soUdarity of the Church in the second
century, p. 62
Sophia of Valentinus, p. 333; Sophia
Achamoth, p. 334

424

INDEX.

soteriology of the New Testament, p.
stadium, metaphor from the, ii. 18
Stapleton receives the Epistle to the
Laodiceans as genuine, p. 366
Strabo on Buddhism, p. 153
Sunworship, p. 87, 137 sq., 149
adpjSara, ii. 16
adp%, tS adpa Tijs aapKbs, i. 22
2k6Bvs, hi. ii
aoipia, i. 9, 28, ii. 3, hi. 16
airXdyxva (ra), iii. 12, Ph. 7, 12
arepiupa, ii. 5
aroixeia (ra), ii. 8
avXayayelv, ii. 8
cvpf}ifSdl;eiv, ii. -t, 19
avvaixpdXuros, iv. 10
avvSeapos, ii. 19, hi. 14
abvSovXos, i. 7> iv. 7
avveais, i. 9, ii. -^
avarpandrvs, Ph. 2
adpa, rb adpa rrjs aapKos, ii. 1 1
aapariKds, ii. 9
Tacitus on the earthquake at Laodicea,
P- 39
Talmud, supposed etymologies of Es
sene in, p. 116 sq., 125 sq. ; supposed
aUusions to the Essenes, p. 128
Temple, avoidance of the, p. 174
Testaments, Old and New, p. 185
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
on the orders of angels, i. 16
theanthropism of the New Testament,
p. 185
thundering legion, p. 61
Thyatira, dyes of, p. 4
Timotheus, his position in these epi
stles, i. i, Ph. 1 ; 'the brother,' i. 1
Tivoli compared with the vaUey of the
Lycus, p. 3
travertine deposits in the vaUey of the
Lycus, p. 3
Trimetaria, asurnameof Laodicea, p. 18

Tychicus, iv. 7, p. 35, 380
Taireivorjipoabvv, hi. 12
rd^is, ii. 5
riXeios, i. 28
ris (indef.), St Paul's use of, ii. 8
toiovtos dv, Ph. 9, 12
BiXeiv, Ph. 13 ; 8e\eiv iv, ii. 18
BiXvpa Beov, i. 1
BepeXiovv, i. 23
Bebrvs, rb Beiov, ii. 9
Biyydveiv, ii. 21
BvijaKeiv, diroBvijaKeiv, ii. 20
BpiapjUeveiv, ii. 15
Bvpbs, hi. 8
Bvpa tov Xbyov, iv. 3
vpvos, hi. 16
virevavrios, ii. 14
viropovrj, i. II
varepipa, i. 24, p. 335 sq.
Valentinianism, different forms of, p.
332 sq.
Valentinians accept St Paul and St
John, p. 336
Valentinus, use of pleroma by, p. 331
versions of the Epistle to the Lao
diceans, Latin, p. 357 ; Bohemian,
German, and English, p. 363 sq.
Vethikin, p. 131
¦Word, the, p. 101, see Logos, Christ
Wycliffe excluded the Apocryphal
Epistle to the Laodiceans from his
Bible, p. 363
Yavana or Yona, p. 152
Zeller on Essenism, p. 143 sq.
Zenda-vesta, p. 149
Zoroastrianism and Essenism, p. r .g
sq.

A

CAMBRIDGE : PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PREgs.