¦ISKaES^ED the colossians

SSSsSsS^

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

CAMBRIDGE GREEK TESTAMENT FOR
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
General Editor: R. ST JOHN PARRY, B.D.,
FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE

THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
COLOSSIANS AND TO
PHILEMON

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
C. F. CLAY, Manager.
&01t&0tt: FETTER LANE, E.C.
(Blaagoto: 50, WELLINGTON STREET.

JUtoia: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
£ti>j lark: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS.
ISomfaH ano Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd.

{All Rights reserved.}

THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
COLOSSIANS AND TO
PHILEMON

Edited by
A. LUKYN WILLIAMS, B.D.
Vicar of Guilden Morden and Examining Chaplain to
the Lord Bishop of Durham

WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

Cambridge :
At the University Press
1907

Cambrtlfif :
PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

PREFACE
BY THE GENERAL EDITOR.
rflHE General Editor does not hold himself respon-
-*- sible, except in the most general sense, for the
statements, opinions, and interpretations contained in
the several volumes of this Series. He believes that
the value of the Introduction and the Commentary
in each case is largely dependent on the Editor being
free as to his treatment of the questions which arise,
provided that that treatment is in harmony with the
character and scope of the Series. He has therefore
contented himself with offering criticisms, urging the
consideration of alternative interpretations, and the
like; and as a rule he has left the adoption of these
suggestions to the discretion of the Editor.
The Greek Text adopted in this Series is that of
Dr Westcott and Dr Hort with the omission of the
marginal readings. For permission to use this Text
the thanks of the Syndics of the Cambridge University
Press and of the General Editor are due to Messrs
Macmillan & Co.
Trinity College, Cambridge.
1 December, 1906.

PEEFACE.
WHEN I accepted the invitation of the late General
Editor (the present Bishop of Ely, Dr Chase) to
write a commentary upon the Epistles to the Colossians
and to Philemon, I hardly realized the difficulty of the
task or the length of time that it would require for its
accomplishment. For not only is the Epistle to the Colossians one of
the hardest of St Paul's writings, but the existence of two
such admirable commentaries as those by Bishop Lightfoot
and Bishop Moule, though affording invaluable help towards
the elucidation of the Epistle, lays a heavy burden on him
who attempts to follow them. It had been comparatively
easy, but, alas, superlatively dishonest, to extract the pith
of their work and knead it into a new form. But this
being out of the question, nothing remained but to use
concordances (Geden for the New Testament, Hatch-
Redpath for the Septuagint), and Grammars (Winer-
Moulton, 1870, Blass, E. Tr. 1898, and latterly J. H.
Moulton's Prolegomena), as thoroughly as possible, and
only after an independent examination of the language
and thoughts of the Epistle to refer to commentaries upon
it. A list of those that have been used will be found
on p. lxv.
But the work would have been much more imperfect
than it still is if the present General Editor had not given
to it much painstaking care, and made many suggestions.
A. L. W.
Advent, 1906.

CONTENTS.

Introductions.

Colossians.

I. Destination. The Church at Colossae
II. Occasion 
III. The False Teaching
IV. The Doctrine and the Worship of Angels
V. Canonicity ...
VI. Genuineness and Integrity
VII. Place and Date. Belation to the other Epistles
of the same Group ...
VLTI. Authorities for the Text ...
IX. Analysis
X. Commentaries
Philemon. I. Canonicity and Genuineness
II. Its relation to Slavery
III. Analysis 
IV. Commentaries

Texts.

IX
xii
xviixxii
xxxviii xl
xlvi liv
lxiii lxv
lxvi
lxviiilxxiv lxxiv

ColossiansPhilemon

Notes.
Colossians 
Philemon  
Indices.
Colossians. Greek words with Tables.
Philemon. Some of the Greek words .

11
172

193
206

INTRODUCTION. CHAPTER I.
Destination — The Chuech at Colossae.
1. Or the two forms Colossae or Colassae the former is
evidently the older, as o alone is found on coins before the third
century a.d. (" even as late as the reign of Gordian a.d. 238 — 244
when they ceased to be struck," Lightfoot), and in the more
trustworthy mss. of writers who lived before that time (Herodotus,
vil 30, and Xenophon, Anab. I. 2. 6, vide infra).
Observe (see Notes on Textual Criticism) that in i. 2 "Coloss.''
is certain, whereas in the Title', which is doubtless not Pauline,
and probably somewhat late, and in any case is more liable to
alteration than the body of the Epistle, the evidence is very
conflicting and is perhaps in favour of the a1.
2. " Colossae was situated at the lower western end of a
narrow glen some ten miles long2. On the north and east the
broken skirts of the great central plateau hem in the glen. On
the south Mount Cadmos rises steep above it. On the west
a low rocky ridge about two miles in breadth divides it from the
lower Lycus valley. This glen forms a sort of step between the
lower Lycus valley, which is an eastern continuation of the long
narrow Maeander valley, and the central plateau, to which it
affords the easiest approach ; and the great highway from the
1 Bamsay thinks KoKaaao.1 is nearer the Phrygian form and was
grecized to suggest a derivation from Ko\o<r<r6s, Cities and Bishoprics,
p. 213.
2 See detailed map in Bamsay, The Church in the Roman Empire,
p. 472.

x INTRODUCTION
western coast to the Euphrates valley traverses it. The river
Lycus flows down through the glen, rising in a series of vast
springs at its upper eastern end1."
Herodotus vn. 30 states that Xerxes on his march west came
to Colossae a great city of Phrygia, in which the R. Lycus falls
into a chasm and disappears, and then after about five stadia re
appears and empties itself into the Maeander2. But although it
is probable that at some remote period the river did again pass
underground when leaving the "glen," this can hardly have been
the case so recently as the time of Herodotus. He seems to
have misplaced the scene of the popular belief referred to in the
preceding note3.
Some six miles nearly due west further down the valley, on
rising ground between two tributary streams, but about a mile
from the R. Lycus itself, was Laodicea, a much richer and
larger city than Colossae. It was not only on the same great
road as Colossae, but formed the junction at which five large
roads met. Hierapolis was some five miles nearly due north of
Laodicea, and seven or eight north-west of Colossae, on the
northern edge of the valley and on the direct road from Laodicea
to Philadelphia and Sardis *.
It is thus clear that Colossae's own position on the great road.
and its proximity to Laodicea in particular, and in some measure
to Hierapolis, made it peculiarly accessible to intellectual and
religious movements. It was no out-of-the-way village or country
1 Bamsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 472.
He proceeds to state the popular belief that the Lycus in reality
finds its source in the salt lake, Anava, some 20 miles east of the
head of the glen, to which it finds its way by an underground passage,
and appears to think that this is probably true (see also his Cities and
Bishoprics, pp. 209—211).
2 aTriKero is KoXo(nrds, tt6\lv fieydXTjv $pvyl-qs, ev rr} A6kos Trorafibs
^s x&a'fm 7^s &r/3d\Xc«jj' d0aWfer<u, threLTa 5ta araSiuiv ws itivre [laKurrd
ktj dva^aLvhfievot iicdido? Kal ovtos is rbv M.aiavdpov.
3 See Bamsay, loc. cit.
4 See especially J. G. C. Anderson's Map 1903 in Murray's Handy
Classical Series. A clear map of the roads is to be found in Bamsay's
article in Hastings' D.B. v. p. 400; on p. 388 he gives details of what
he calls "the Central Boute between Borne and the East," on which
Colossae lay.

POSITION OF COLOSSAE xi
town, to which news travelled late. It was in touch with all
shades of opinion, and was exposed more than most places of
its size to inSuences both from the coast and from the eastern
mainland. 3. It was situated in the old territory of the Phrygians1, and
in the Roman Province of Asia.
4. The history of Colossae is but scanty, and by the time of
St Paul it had lost, apparently, some of what earlier importance
it possessed, for whereas Herodotus mentioning Xerxes' visit
(vide supra) speaks of it as irdXis /icyaX?) *pu-y«jr, and Xenophon as
ttoKis oiKoufieVij, ev!ialpa>v kcu fieyakr) when Cyrus stayed there
(Anab. I. 2. 6), Strabo (c. 24 B.C.) calls it only 7rdXtcr/xa (xn. 8. 13).
Laodicea appears to have outstripped it2, more especially in
political and commercial influence, and Hierapolis, as it seems,
in popularity for its baths. " Without doubt," says Bp Lightfoot,
" Colossae was the least important Church, to which any epistle
of St Paul was addressed."
1 For the limits of "Phrygia" at different times, see Ramsay,
Hastings' D.B. m. p. 864.
2 So also Laodicea, but not Colossae, is addressed in Bev. iii.
14—22.

k*

CHAPTER II.
Occasion.
1. Assuming for the present the Pauline authorship of the
Epistle (see ch. vi.) we can see two immediate causes for his writing
it, one, so to say, accidental, the other inherent, i.e. one the
return of Onesimus, and the other the state of the Colossian
Church. The former compelled (if we may use the word) St Paul
to write a letter to one of the leading Christians at Colossae (see
Phm. 1 note), and made a further letter to the Colossian Church
generally appear but natural, especially as the presence of
Tychicus (iv. 7) would tend to make Onesimus' return more
acceptable ; the latter must have been upon St Paul's mind for
some little time, and have waited only for an opportunity to draw
out his advice and warning.
2. It must be confessed that our knowledge of the state of
the Colossian Church at that time is much less definite than we
could wish. For not only is our direct knowledge of it limited
to the contents of this epistle, but the meaning of those contents
is often uncertain owing to our ignorance of the religious con
dition of the city, and its immediate neighbourhood, as regards
its non-Christian elements, whether heathen or Jewish. In
either direction we feel sadly the need of direct evidence, and
failing it are obliged to resort to probabilities and conjectures.
i. The heathenism of every town in "Asia" was at this time
roughly of two or rather of three kinds, viz. first, the worship of
the Emperor ; secondly, the local cults of individual deities, more
or less similar in kind, and to be grouped under Phrygian or
Anatolian religion, with which may perhaps be classed imported
cults of deities worshipped by foreigners, and so-called mysteries •

RELIGION IN COLOSSAE xiii
and thirdly, the philosophising religions due largely to syn
cretism, i.e. a more or less thoughtful incorporation into specific
systems of religious ideas that were essentially different.
(a) The first kind, that of the worship of Caesar, need not
detain us1. For our epistle does not, as it seems, contain any
direct or indirect allusion to it.
(b) Nor does the second kind throw much light on the
contents of the Epistle, save in connexion with the worship of
angels, vide infra, p. xxxiv. We may assume however that the
rehgion originally proper to Colossae partook of the general
character of the religions of Asia Minor, viz. a strange enthu
siasm, not to say fanaticism; marked in some directions by a
strong ascetic tendency, in others by what we should now call
immorality, together with an inclination to expect supernatural
guidance in every detail of life.
(c) The third kind again does not throw the light upon
our Epistle that might have been expected. Neither philosophy
as such, nor even as connected with heathen religions of varying
forms, readily falls under the description of the errors of the
false teachers at Colossae2.
ii. Jews. The subject of the Jews in Asia Minor is treated
so conveniently and at the same time so succinctly by Schiirer
in Hastings' Diet. v. pp. 93 — 95, that a detailed account here is
quite unnecessary 3.
(a) Antioehus III., the Great, planted 2000 Jewish families from
Mesopotamia and Babylon in Phrygia and Lydia as a safeguard
against native revolts there, also giving them lands for houses
1 On this subject see esp. Westcott's excursus on The Two Empires,
§ m. in his Epistles of St John. In "Asia" it was the special care of
the "Asiarchs," see recent commentaries on Acts, and Bamsay, s.v.,
in Hastings' D.B. ; cf. his Cities and Bishoprics, p. 627, and Letters to
the Seven Churches, eh. x.
2 The most convenient description of the Greek religion both in
its comparative purity and in its more debased and eclectic form is
Bamsay's illuminating essay on "The Religion of Greece" in Hastings'
D.B. v. pp. 109—156.
3 See also Bamsay, Cities and Bishoprics, ch. xv. pp. 667 sqq.;
Letters to the Seven Churches, ch. xn. pp. 142—157, ch. xxrx. pp. 420—
422. Lueken, Michael, 1898, p. 80.
62

xiv INTRODUCTION
and cultivation, and remitting taxes for ten years and assuring
them of protection (c. 197 B.C., cf. Jos. Antt. xil. iii. 4). In
139 B.C. the Roman senate sent a letter to the rulers of the
various parts of Asia Minor (Pergamus, Cappadocia, Caria,
Pamphylia, Lycia, and, as it seems, a part of Pontus) " that
they should not seek the hurt of the Jews, nor fight against
them, and their cities, and their country" (1 Mac. xv. 16 — 24).
After Rome had obtained direct power over Asia Minor she held
the same policy, as may be seen from edicts by Julius Caesar
and others, B.C. 50 — 40, collected by Josephus (Antt. xiv. 10),
permitting the Jews to maintain their customs, and to collect
funds for sacrifices. That some of the Roman officials confiscated
moneys intended to be sent to Jerusalem (Cicero, pro Flaeco,
xxvni.) is only what was to be expected, for to let large sums
of money be sent out of the country seemed a waste — unless
indeed it went to Rome. But Augustus repeatedly reminded
the authorities of Ephesus that they were not to prevent it being
sent to Jerusalem (Jos. Antt. xvi. vi.).
(6) It is indeed true that Colossae is nowhere mentioned as a
place where Jews resided, but Laodicea is expressly named by
Cicero (loc. cit.), and we have a dispatch from the authorities of
Laodicea to the proconsul C. Rabellius (Rabirius) disclaiming
any intention of interfering with the religious freedom of the
Jews (Antt. xiv. x. 20).
Hierapolis also appears to have contained many Jews. Two
inscriptions found there speak of them, and in another money
is left to the guild of purple-dyers and another guild (r&v Kmpo-
dairurrav, weavers (?)), the interest of which is to be applied on
the Feast of Unleavened Bread and on the Feast of Pentecost,
respectively, for the decorating of the donor's tomb. If the
members of these guilds were not themselves Jews, as is
perhaps probable, they must at least have been well disposed
towards them. Compare the 7rop<j>vp6ira>\is from Thyatira,
Lydia the proselyte (Acts xvi. 14).
In view therefore of the fact that there were certainly Jews
living, apparently in some numbers, close to Colossae, it is
reasonable to assume that some lived in this city itself. It is

CHRISTIANITY IN COLOSSAE xv
also evident that its situation on a great road would bring it
a good many Jewish traders. Hence we can hardly be wrong in
supposing that Jewish thought and religion had already some
footing in the town, and probably had already exerted some
influence before the Gospel came there.
iii. The early history of Christianity at Colossae.
(a) If we have little exact knowledge of the nature of the
heathenism at Colossae, and are obliged to assume a good deal
with regard to the presence and influence of Jews, we are not
much better off as regards the early history of Christianity there.
We have no direct information as to how it came. Yet such
evidence as there is suggests that it did not filter through to
them along the highways of communication, but was rather due
to the painstaking efforts of an individual evangelist.
(b) That St Paul ever visited it is exceedingly improbable, in
view of his statement (Col. ii. 1) that the believers in Laodicea
and Colossae had never seen his face in the flesh1. Twice
indeed he passed through Phrygia (in some meaning of the word,
Acts xvi. 6, xviii. 23), but even if it were in both cases the
southern part (which is far from certain) his route in Acts xvi. 6
sqq. is undefined, and in xviii. 23 apparently lay north of
Colossae ; " The apostle did not follow the longer and easier
trade-route by Apamea, Lake Anava, Colossae, and Laodicea
(which led through Lower Phrygia), but took the other more
direct road (less suitable for wheeled traffic, but better for
walking travellers) across High Phrygia, keeping very near a
straight line from Metropolis (some ten miles north of Apollonia)
to Ephesus2." We may therefore affirm as certain that Colossae
was not one of the many places to which St Paul brought the
Gospel. (c) The agent was, as it seems, Epaphras (see i. 7 note), who
was perhaps, and even probably, a native of the place. It is not
certain whether he had previously worked with St Paul (o-vv-
1 It has been suggested that the words do not actually exclude his
passing through the town, but only his staying long enough to preach
there. But the ordinary interpretation is simpler.
2 Bamsay, s.v. "Phrygia" in Hastings' D.B. in. p. 867.

xvi INTRODUCTION
bovKov f/paiv i. 7 may refer only to later conditions), or whether
or not his activity among the Colossians had been at St Paul's
suggestion (see note on vwep rjpav, i. 7). But he evidently stayed
some time among them, teaching them as disciples (ipaBtre,
compare padrjTeva-aTe, Matt, xxviii. 19).
When this took place we are not told. Perhaps it was during
St Paul's long stay at Ephesus (54 — 57 a.d. Lightfoot, 52 — 55
Turner, Acts xix. 1 — xx. 1), or more probably, we may suppose,
after he had been compelled to leave, when therefore his followers
and fellow-workers would feel that there was no special call for
them to remain there, but that they were free to return to their
own homes. If so we may place the evangelisation of the
Colossians c. 57 or 55 a.d.
(d) The result of bringing the Gospel to them was for a time
extremely satisfactory. Their faith was joined with love, and
the future hope was very real to them (Col. i. 4, 5). Their lives
were changed (i. 6), and they had some experience of spiritual
power (i. 11 — 13). They had at least one meeting-place for
worship, the house of Philemon (Phm. 2), and perhaps had a
daughter-church in Laodicea superintended by Archippus (Col.
iv. 15 — 17). Yet before St Paul wrote they had been exposed
to temptations in the form of strange theological speculations
and of arguments in favour of a non-Christian asceticism and of
other non-Christian practices, and they had so far yielded to
these as to make St Paul exceedingly anxious for them. He had
heard of this no doubt through Epaphras, who had visited
St Paul in Rome, and had been with him there for perhaps some
time (Phm. 23), and was staying on there (Col. iv. 12).
Onesimus, however, a converted runaway slave, was now
returning to his master Philemon, in Colossae, and St Paul took
the opportunity of writing to them plainly of their danger.

CHAPTER III.
The False Teaching.
What was the precise nature of the False Teaching promul
gated at Colossae about which St Paul felt so strongly ?
1. The Materials for a Decision1.
i. Direct references.
(a) ii. 4 Trapa\oyijj)Tai iv m6avo\oyiq, "cheat you by false
reasoning in plausible speech."
The arguments though false were, St Paul seems to grant,
specious.
(b) ii. 8. The means by which one would make booty of the
Colossian Christians was his "philosophy," spoken of by
St Paul as "vain deceit"; i.e. empty of all moral power
for practical life.
The standard of this "philosophy" was tradition received
from men (not from God) ; i.e. it put forward no claim
to originality, but rather (as it would seem) to the prestige
of antiquity.
This standard is described contemptuously by St Paul as
really that of merely rudimentary teaching belonging to the
visible world, when compared with Christ the great Teacher
and the great Lesson.
(c) ii. 16 — 19, v. 16. A false teacher would criticise the
behaviour of the Colossian Christians in their diet and in
their attitude towards certain religious days.
v. 18. And would condemn them while himself delight
ing in "humility," and " cult of the angels," spending time
1 On the details mentioned here, see the Notes.

xviii INTRODUCTION
in exploring the meaning of his visions, inflated without any
just cause by his mere thinking power, which was itself
really governed by his flesh.
v. 19. He thus has in reality slackened his hold on
Christ, the one and only source of true nourishment and
growth.
(d) ii. 20 — 23. He had many rules about touching and
tasting things, though, says St Paul contemptuously, the
objects of these prohibitions themselves perish by the very
fact that they are used at all.
These orders, and the reasons alleged for them, come from
men, not Christ.
All such rules have the credit indeed of wisdom acquired
in self-chosen religious service and humility and severity
to the body, not in anything honourable, but (adds St Paul
more contemptuously than ever) the result is only for the
repletion of the flesh.
ii. Indirect references.
Besides possible allusions in i. 9, 12 — 14, St Paul's insist
ence on the following points makes it probable that they
were in some way impugned by the false teachers, either
in so many words or as a logical deduction from their
teaching.
(a) i. 15—20, 23. The present relation of the Son to God
and His supremacy over all Creation (vv. 15 — 17) and the
Church (v. 18a), St Paul laying stress on the position
gained for Him by His Resurrection (v. 18b), and on the
universal extent of the effect of His death (vv. 19, 20).
St Paul closes with a warning that the believers at
Colossae must continue in their present faith (v. 23).
(6) i. 27, 28. Stress on the wondrousness of the fact that
Christ is in the hearts of Gentiles, and on His being the
sphere in which full maturity of the believer's life is
obtained.
(c) ii. 2, 3. Christ is the great revealed secret of God, and in

THE FALSE TEACHING xix
Christ are all treasures of wisdom and knowledge stored up,
to be found by those who search for them.
(d) ii. 6. Christ had been delivered to the Colossians by
Epaphras and other teachers, and they had received Him, who
is indeed the historical Person Jesus and the supreme Lord.
(e) ii. 9 — 15. In the incarnate Christ the fulness of the
Godhead permanently dwells (v. 9).
Believers have received nothing less than fulness of
spiritual blessing in Him (v. 10a).
He is supreme over, and the only source of life to, all
heavenly beings, however high (v. 1011).
False teachers may urge circumcision, but believers (though
uncircumcised, v. 13) already have the reality denoted by it,
as regards both putting off sin and putting on new life, and
this since their baptism, by their faith in the working not of
Powers, etc., but of God Himself.
They have forgiveness of sins (v. 13 end, 14), and are set
entirely free from all laws of ritual observances and from
the Law itself, Christ accomplishing, be it noted, His work
of redemption alone, thus showing up the weakness of
all created Powers and Authorities, leading even them as
captives in His train (v. 15).
iii. Summarising the foregoing statements, we may say that the
False Teaching had the following characteristics :
(a) Its arguments were specious (ii. 4) ;
(b) It was based on a " philosophy " which was traditional
~ (ii. 8);
whose rules came from men (ii. 22) ;
and which had the reputation of wisdom (ii. 23) ;
but Christ is the great source of wisdom (ii. 2, 3).
(c) It criticised Christians as regards their food and their
observance of religious days (ii. 16).
It gave many rules about even touching foods (ii. 21).
It required circumcision (ii. 11) and obedience to rules
(ii. 22).

xx INTRODUCTION
(d) It promulgated a cult of the angels (ii. 18), apparently
failing to put Christ in the right place over Creation
(i. 15—17) and the Church (i. 18) ;
with self-abasement of some kind (ii. 18) ;
and praise of visions which were supposed to have definite
meanings, only to be understood after long thought (ii. 18).
This led to neglect of Christ (ii. 19, cf. i. 23, 27, 28).
(«) It possibly differentiated between Christ and the historical
Jesus (ii. 6) ;
and apparently ignored the fact that the fulness of the
Godhead permanently dwells in Him (ii. 9) ;
and that the fulness of spiritual blessing is in Him
(ii. 10a);
and that He is the one only source of life (ii. 10b) ;
and that Christ alone obtained Redemption for us (ii. 15).
2. While, however, we are able to form some idea of the
False Teaching from the Epistle — and we possess no other
indubitable evidence of its nature — it is a matter of no little
interest, and even importance for the exegesis of the Epistle
itself (if, as is certainly the case, writings cannot be fully under
stood without a thorough understanding of the milieu in which
they find their birth), to discover who and what the False
Teachers were, or rather what was the source of their teaching.
Was it of purely heathen, or of purely Jewish, or of heathen-
Jewish origin, i.e. the product of thinkers who, consciously or
unconsciously, had mingled the two great springs of thought in
one common cup ?
i. It has been urged with no little force that the False
Teaching is essentially Heathen ; that it represents belief com
mon at that time in all parts of the known heathen world, but
recorded for us chiefly in writings that had their origin in Egypt.
This belief was that heavenly Beings, of which the visible sun,
moon, and stars were but, so to speak, the materialisation, ruled
the earth, and that with a rod of iron. Hence the important
thing for man was to worship them fittingly and thus escape as
far as possible from all th§ evil that they might bring upon him.

LARGELY JEWISH xxi
This, it is said, explains why the False Teachers among the
Colossians made so much of the observance of times and seasons
— for, naturally, times and seasons fell under the special cogni
sance of the heavenly bodies1.
But a serious, and indeed fatal, objection to this is the direct
mention of Sabbaths, with the following implication that they
had been useful before Christ came (ii. 16, 17, see notes), and,
above all, of circumcision (ii. 11 — 13). For it does not appear
that any evidence is adduced that the heathen practised circum
cision as a means of freeing themselves from the control of the
heavenly bodies.
ii. But was it purely Jewish ? Much in the epistle tends to
give an affirmative answer. Its dependence on tradition and its
estimate of wisdom, its insistence on dietary laws and on the
value of circumcision, its refusal to grant the uniqueness of
Christ's position and work, point to this. Above all, those who
have read the Book of Enoch and other Jewish pseudepigraphic
writings, and have taken note of the stress laid therein on visions,
and especially of the elaborate Angelology to be found there, are
inclined to accept this solution.
iii. Yet in one vital particular it is unsatisfactory, that of
the worship of angels as contrasted with theories and specula
tions about them. This requires more examination, but it will
be seen, we believe, that the facts point to the third solution
as preferable, that, in other words, the False Teachers derived
their teaching from sources mainly Jewish but not entirely so,
for on this very important matter, the Cult of the Angels, they
had absorbed practices and teaching which did not belong to
orthodox Judaism, but only to such a form, or forms, of it as had
been influenced by non-Jewish thought.
1 See in particular Reitzenstein in his edition of the Poimandres
of "Hermes Trismegistus" (1904, esp. pp. 71—81). On the supposed
meaning of croixem in ii. 8 see the Additional Note on that passage.

CHAPTER IV.
The Doctrine and the Worship of Angels1.
The distinction between these has not been sufficiently re
garded by many who have written upon this Epistle, yet it is
important that they should be considered separately. For they
may stand in all possible grades of relation to each other ; both
may be equally developed, or the second be frequent in ob
servance, and the first but slight and primitive; or the first
be highly developed and the second held in check by other
considerations. 1. The Doctrine of Angels.
Perhaps the most convenient summary of the Doctrine of
Angels mentioned in the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the
Jewish pseudepigraphical writings, and as held by the Essenes
(apparently) and by Philo, is to be found in Mr Fair weather's article
on "Development of Doctrine" in Hastings' D.B. v. pp. 285 — 290.
It will be sufficient here to show the salient features of the An-
gelology of the pseudepigraphical writings only, which, written,
as they seem to have been, between the second century b.c. and
the end of the first century a.d., probably represent the popular
beliefs on the subject held by Pharisaic Jews" at the time when
St Paul was composing his Epistles3. By these writings are
intended (A) The Ethiopic Book of Enoch (its earliest parts before
1 On this subject see Everling, Die paulinische Angelologie und
Damonologie, 1888, and especially Lueken, Michael, 1898.
2 Perhaps some portions of the Apoc. of Baruch (§ xi.) represent
the beliefs of Sadducees.
3 There is, of course, much uncertainty respecting the places of
origin and the dates of these books and their various parts. Those
preferred by Dr Charles will be accepted here.

THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS xxiii
170 B.C. and its latest before the beginning of the Christian era,
and its authors all Palestinian).
(B) The Book of Jubilees or the Little Genesis (written by
a Pharisee between 135 and 105 B.C.).
(C) The Slavonic Book of the Secrets of Enoch (by an ortho
dox Hellenistic Jew between 1 and 50 a.d.).
(D) The Assumption of Moses (by "a Pharisaic Quietist"
between 7 and 30 a.d.).
(E) The Ascension of Isaiah, of which the first part, "The
Martyrdom of Isaiah," is Jewish and probably of the 1st cent. a.d. ;
the second, " The Testament of Hezekiah," is Christian, between
88 and 100 a.d. ; the third, "The Vision of Isaiah," Christian, and,
in its primitive form, of the end of the 1st cent. a.d.
(F) The Apocalypse of Baruch, which is said to contain five
or six independent writings, mostly by Pharisaic Jews, and in
part polemical against Christianity, dating from 50 — 90 a.d.1
i. According to the Book of Jubilees (ii. 2) there are three
well-marked orders, two supreme, viz. the angels of the presence
(cf. also Jvb. ii. 18, xv. 27, xxxi. 14) and the angels of sanctifica-
tion, and a third inferior order, viz. the angels who presided over
natural phenomena.
ii. So we read how " the spirit of the hoar-frost is his own
angel, and the spirit of the hail is a good angel " (Eth. Enoch, lx.
17). iii. The Ascension of Isaiah also contains a short description
of each of the seven heavens2 with the angels that belong to
each, the principal angels in each sitting on a throne and some
times, apparently, themselves called thrones3.
iv. Again, there are four angels higher than all others (Eth.
Enoch, § xL).
1 The quotations from these books are in every case from Dr Charles'
editions. 2 A very full account of the seven heavens is presented in the
Slavonic Enoch, §§ iii. — xxi.
For a critical examination of the various descriptions in Judaism
and early Christianity see Dr Charles in his Introduction to that book,
pp. xxx.— xlvii. Compare also Salmon in Hastings' D.B. n. pp. 321 sq.
3 Compare Col. i. 16 note.

xxiv INTRODUCTION
v. Again, there are seven principal angels :
" And the Lord called those seven first white ones and com
manded that they should bring before Him... all the [sinful]
stars... and He spake to that man who wrote before Him who
was one of the seven white ones, and said unto him : 'Take those
seventy shepherds to whom I delivered the sheep ' (Eth. Enoch
xc. 21, 22 ; cf. for the mention of seven Ixxxi. 5).
vi. These seventy shepherds appear in this passage and
§ lxxxix. 59 to be angels appointed over Israel, but the Book
of Jubilees" speaks rather of angels over the nations and not over
Israel (xv. 31, 32).
vii. Further, some angels are the guardians of individuals
(Jub. xxxv. 17; Eth. Enoch, c. 5).
viii. The two higher classes of angels mentioned in the Book
of Jubilees were created circumcised (xv. 27), and, as well as
God, keep the Sabbath, on which the writer enlarges that he
may strengthen the observance of the Sabbath by Israel (ii. 17,
18, 30).
ix. Parallel to the angelic kingdom is the Demoniac or
Satanic kingdom. Through the fallen angels has come to men
the knowledge of arts. "And he instructed mankind in writing
with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to
eternity and until this day " (Eth. Enoch, lxix. 6, 8, 9).
x. In particular the Watchers taught their wives "charms
and enchantments, and made them acquainted with the cutting
of roots and of woods" (vii. 1). But of the good angels, on the
contrary, we read : " we explained to Noah all the medicines
of their diseases, together with their seductions, how he might
heal them with herbs of the earth " (Jub. x. 12).
xi. The good angels fight [against the evil angels] on behalf
of Israel against its foes.
"Then the hands of the angel (i.e. Michael) will be filled
(cf. Ex. xxviii. 41) and he will be appointed chief, and he will
forthwith avenge them of their enemies " (Assumpt. Moses, x. 2).
xii. They intercede for men. " The third voice I heard pray
and intercede for those who dwell on the earth and supplicate
in the name of the Lord of Spirits " (Eth. Enoch, xl. 6).

THE WORSHIP OF ANGELS xxv
2. The Worship of Angels.
It may be assumed that by this phrase is meant worship paid
to angels, and not, as a few commentators have imagined,
worship paid by them to God (see note in loco). But, while this
is clear, certain questions of interest arise as to the fact of
worship being paid to them. For although it is not uncommonly
assumed that where there is speculation about the angels, and
especially where this speculation busies itself with their various
grades, and the nature of the various offices that they perform
towards God on the one hand, and man on the other, there must
also have been prayer offered to them, this is the very thing that
requires proof. We must therefore consider what evidence we
possess of the fact of worship being paid to angels at the time
when the epistle to the Colossians was written.
i. The evidence for the worship of Angels by the Jews generally.
It is hardly to be disputed that such worship is not consistent
with either the spirit of the Old Testament or the spirit of
Orthodox Judaism.
It seems therefore to be a priori improbable that the Pharisaic
Jews of New Testament times should have worshipped angels.
Neither their Bible history, nor their later history as a whole,
suggests it. Yet, notwithstanding, the particular evidence may
be such as to override all a priori improbability.
Is this the case? Three sources of information are open to
us for investigation (besides the New Testament which is itself
now under discussion) : Jewish Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic
writings dating from the second century B.C. to the end of the
first century a.d. ; heathen and Christian statements of the first
three or four centuries a.d. ; and, lastly, writings that are strictly
and solely Jewish and have been preserved in Hebrew or
Aramaic. (a) The Jewish Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic writings. In
examining these there is a fundamental difficulty which at times
obtrudes itself, viz. that they have come down to us, with hardly
an exception, in a form that has been worked over by Christian
thinkers. Indeed if it had not been for the Christian efforts
that have been expended upon them it is more than doubtful if

xxvi INTRODUCTION
they would have been preserved. The result,' however, is that
there is always some little doubt whether any particular passage
is of purely Jewish origin, or whether it represents something
at least of Christian thought.
(a) 4 Mac. iv. 10—13, whose date is placed somewhere
between Pompey, 63 B.C., and Vespasian, 70 A.D., relates that
when Apollonius (? 187 B.C.) was entering into the temple with
his army to plunder the treasures angels appeared on horseback
from heaven. Apollonius, half dead with terror, fell down and
stretched forth his hands towards heaven entreating the Hebrews
with tears to pray for him, and propitiate the heavenly host.
Onias the High Priest does in fact pray for him, and he is
saved. But this is hardly evidence that the writer of the book knew
of worship of angels1, much less that he sympathised with it.
It expresses the natural impulse of a frightened tyrant to beg
the prayers even of those whom he has oppressed when he sees
supernatural powers coming to their aid.
.(/3) The Ascension of Isaiah, which in its present form belongs
to the end of the second century a.d., contains the following
(c. ix. 35 and 36) : " I saw the Lord and the second angel, and
they were standing. And the second whom I saw was on the
left of my Lord. And I asked : ' Who is this ? ' and he said
unto me: 'Worship Him, "for He is the angel of the Holy
Spirit, who speaketh in thee and the rest of the righteous.' "
But the whole chapter is evidently Christian, and the term
" angel" here refers to the Third Person in the Blessed Trinity.
(y) The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
This interesting book is now generally acknowledged to have
a very large substratum of original Jewish work, even though in
its present form it is undoubtedly Christian (see Charles, Hastings,
iv. pp. 721—725, Encycl. Bibl. pp. 237— 241)2. Perhaps the
1 Lueken, Michael, p. 11, "Vielleicht lasst sich 4 Mac. iv. 10 ff.
als Zeugnis fur ein jiidisches Gebet zu Engeln herbeiziehen."
2 Conybeare considers it proved that the Greek text is " a para
phrase of an old Aramaic midrash, interpolated by generations of
Christians," Jew. Encycl. in. p. 113.

IN PSEUDEPIGRAPHICAL BOOKS xxvii
original was used by an over-zealous Jewish convert to Christi
anity as a means whereby to attract more of his brethren to the
faith. (1) Test. Levi, § 5,
Kupie, ftTre p.01 to ovopd crov, Iva iniKakio-auat <re iv rjpipa
OXiijreas. Here the only doubt is whether the passage is entirely
Jewish (it must be confessed that in itself there is nothing to
suggest the contrary) or whether it has been worked over to some
extent by the Christian editor. Cf. § 3.
(2) Test. Dan, § 6,
eyyi£er€ 8e ra 8ea <a\ ra> dyyiXa tco napaiTovp.iva> (R. 7rape-
7TOfJ.4v(p) vp.as' otl ovtos i<TTi p.eo-tTrjs 8eov kol dvOpwncov (kol) eVt
ttjs clpr)vt)s 'lo-parjX. Even here there is no direct mention of
prayer. Dan bids them draw near to God, and such drawing
near includes nearness to the angel whoever he may be. He as
such is not necessarily spoken of as the object of worship.
(8) The Testament of Solomon1.
This curious book virtually escaped the notice of writers upon
angelology until Mr Conybeare published a translation in 1898.
He places the approximate date of its present form as early as
about the end of the first century of our era. It can, indeed,
hardly be earlier, for the allusions to Christian doctrine are very
marked2, and it may well be at least fifty years later. C. H. Toy
thinks that its date is probably about 300 a.d. (Jew. Encycl.
s.v. xi. p. 448).
But it is important for our purpose in that it is in all proba
bility founded upon an earlier distinctively Jewish work, such
indeed as Josephus implies in his Antt. vni. ii. 5. Its contents
are briefly that by means of a ring Solomon has various demons
brought before him (cf. some of the tales contained in the
1 The English is given by Mr F. C. Conybeare in the Jewish
Quarterly Review for October, 1898, pp. 15 sqq. The Greek may be
found most conveniently in Migne, Cedrenus, vol. n., as an appendix
to Psellus' writings (see M. R. James in Encycl. Bibl. p. 234).
2 E.g. §§ 29, 52, 65 Emmanuel; § 54 Golgotha, "the angel of the
great counsel" (see Isa. ix. 6, LXX.), the Cross; § 65, "The Son of
God is stretched upon the Cross"; § 71 Saviour; § 122, "He that is
to be born of a virgin and crucified by the Jewson a cross."

xxviii INTRODUCTION
Arabian Nights), and he compels each to tell him the name of
the individual angel that meets and subdues him. For each
demon is frustrated by one angel, and if the name of the latter
is only known by a person he is able to completely defend
himself from the attacks of the demons. Thus we find
§ 73. "'I, 0 Lord, am called Ruax... but let me only hear
the words, "Michael, imprison Ruax," and I at once retreat.'"
It will be observed that in this book there is no question
of any worship of angels in the ordinary meaning of the term,
but only of invoking their names as a means of obtaining power
against the attacks, chiefly bodily, of evil spirits ; in other words,
of using their names as exorcisms to either cast out demons that
have already obtained entrance, or to ward off their attacks.
Such passages illustrate Matt. xii. 27, Luke xi. 19, Acts xix. 13, 15.
(6) Heathen and Christian statements during the first three
or four centuries, other than those contained in the New Testa
ment1. (a) The Preaching of Peter.
Quoted by Origen on John iv. 22 (torn. xm. 17) from Heracleon
(to be seen most conveniently in A. E. Brooke, The Fragments of
Heracleon, § 21, Texts and Studies, 1891).
M^ biiv Kad' "EWr/vas irpoarKVvuv, ra rfjs SXrjs irpdyfiara dnoBe-
Xopivovs, nai Xarpevovras £uAois Kat Xidois, prjdi Kara 'lovhaiovs
cifieiv to Seiov, inei7rep Ka\ avroi povoi olopevoi iirlfTTaadai
Bcbv, dyvoovo-iv avrbv, XaTpevovTes ayyikois Kai firjvl Km creXrjvfl.
Clem. Alex. (Strom, vi. 5, p. 635) has the same quotation from
the Preaching of Peter, but, besides other small changes, adds k.
dpxayyiXois after dyyiXots.
(/3) The Apology of Aristides2.
§ 14 (Syriac recension only), " In the methods of their actions
1 Of passages in the N.T. other than Col., Apoc. xix. 10, xxii. 8, 9,
written primarily for Christians not-far from Colossae, alone speak
of such worship, only to condemn it; Hebr. i. ii. show conscious
ness of the need of insisting on the superiority of the Lord Jesus to
all angels, with possibly special reference to powers attributed by the
Jews to Michael. But these chapters contain no hint of worshipping
angels. Much less do Rom. viii. 38; 1 Tim. v. 21; Apoc. i. 4, iv. 5, v. 6.
2 Edn J, Arm, Bobinson, Texts and Studies, 1891.

HEATHEN AND CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS xxix
(i.e. those of the Jews) their service is to angels and not to God,
in that they observe sabbaths and new moons and the passover
and the great fast, and the fast, and circumcision, and cleanness
of meats."
But it will be noticed that this is not a direct statement that
they worship angels, but only a deduction from the unsatisfactory
nature of their worship of God1.
(7) Celsus, as quoted by Origen (c. Cels. 1. 26), says that
" they worship angels, and are addicted to sorcery, in which Moses
was their instructor2." Cf. v. 6. But Origen rightly says (v. 8)
that "although Celsus considers it to be a Jewish custom to
bow down to the heaven and the angels in it, such a practice is
not at all Jewish, but is in violation of Judaism, as it is also to
do obeisance to sun, moon, and stars, as well as images3."
It is clear that although Origen knew of this accusation
against the Jews the whole tone of his remarks suggests that
he did not believe it, save perhaps in connexion with sorcery
(cf. v. 9).
(8) Jerome referring to Col. ii. 18, 19 (Ep. ad Algasiam, § 10,
Migne, xxn. 1032) writes, " ' But God turned, and gave them up
to serve the host of heaven ' (Acts vii. 42). But the host of
heaven means not only sun and moon and glowing stars, but
also the whole multitude of the angels and their troop... God
gave them up to serve the host of heaven, which is here called
by the Apostle the worship of angels4." Cf. in Matt. v. 34 sqq.
(c) Perhaps stronger evidence of the worship of angels is to be
found in the admissions of Jews themselves in purely Jewish booksl
1 So even Lueken, Michael, p. 5.
2 \iywv a&roiis aifieiv dyy£\ovs Kal yorjrda Trpo&Keicrdai, rjs 6 MojiJffTjs
airois yiyovev i^nyrp-ris. The translation of this and the following
passages from the c. Cels. are from Crombie (Aute-Nicene Fathers).
3 KeX<rou vofii^ovTOS 'Ioi/Sai'/cdz' elvai. rb irpoGKVvelv obpav<£ Kal rots iv
ai)rw dyyiXots, oi)/c 'lovdai'icbv fiiv rb toiovtov, TrapafiaTucbv 8i 'lou6cu<r-
p.ov iffnv wtrirep Kal rb irpoffKvvetv rj\lip, Kal (reXjjc-j, Kal aerpois, dXXd
Kal rois dydXpaffiv.
4 Conversus autem deus tradidit eos, ut colerent militiam coeli.
Militia autem coeli non tantum sol appellator, et luna, et astra
rutilantia; sed et omnis angelica multitudo, eorumque exercitus...
tradidit eos deus, ut servirent militiae coeli, quae nunc ab apostolo
dicitur religio angelorum.
c2

xxx INTRODUCTION
Unfortunately the present form of these is not of so indubit
ably early a date that it can be used with absolute certainty.
Also it must be noticed that in those parts of this literature
that are considered to be the earlier there is less mention of
the worship of angels than in those that are later.
In reply to this it has been urged that these later authorities
may be, and in some cases professedly are, compilations from
earlier works1. This is true, but when we are endeavouring to
fasten certain religious practices upon Jews of a certain date, it
is extremely inconvenient to be obliged to assume that the late
evidence is in reality to be considered as early.
(a) Talm. Jer. Berachoth, ix. 1 (p. 13a) :
"If trouble comes on a man he must not cry either to Michael
or to Gabriel but he must cry to Me, and I answer him at once.
That is what is written : Everyone that calleth on the name of
the Lord shall be delivered."
Observe that here the worship of angels is not only forbidden,
but is contemplated as a thing per se impossibile. It is very
hard to see how this passage can be interpreted to mean that
any Jews were accustomed to worship angels.
03) Talm. Bab. Abodah Zarah, 42* :
Mishna. " He who findeth vessels upon which is the image of
the sun, or of the moon, or of the Dragon, let him cast them into
the Salt Sea. R. Simeon, son of B. Gamaliel, saith, When they
are on honourable vessels (' whose use is for honour,' Rashi), they
are forbidden ; when on contemptible they are allowed."
Gemara. It is possible to deduce from this that they (of the
heathen) worship only these specified figures, and others they do
not worship. But against this I would quote the following ;
" He who sacrifices in the name of the seas, or of the rivers, or of
the wilderness, or of the sun or of the moon or of the stars and
planets, or of Michael the great prince, or of the small worm, lo
these are sacrifices of the dead."
This passage shows that to the Jews of that time the worship
of Michael (and presumably other angels) was as possible (neither
1 Lueken, Michael, p. 3.

JEWISH STATEMENTS xxxi
less nor more) as that of parts of earth or the heavens. In
other words it was a purely heathen practice, to which of course
Jews were exposed,
(y) Talm. Jer. Kiddushin, i. end (p. 61d) on Job xxxiii. 23, 24,
speaks of angels pleading against or for a man according to his
works, and urges that even if 999 are against him and only one
for him he will be forgiven ; Nay, that even if in the pleadings
by this one angel 999 of the points enumerated by him are
against the man and only one is for him, he will still be forgiven.
But there is no hint apparently of men praying to angels for
intercession1. The result therefore of our enquiry into the evidence for the
Worship of Angels by the Jews generally would appear to be
that although there has been among the Jews confessedly much
speculation as to the nature and functions of angels, together
with some belief in the intercession by angels for them, yet there
is almost no evidence of the worship of them being recognised in
early times by thoughtful Jews, save indeed in connexion with
exorcism and magic.
In these cases observe that the names of angels are seen to
be of primary importance.
ii. Yet it is evident that those Jews who lived at Colossae
when St Paul was writing his Epistle were accustomed in some
degree to worship angels. To what cause or causes then may we
attribute this practice at that time and in that locality ? They
are probably both general and local.
(a) General causes. Asia Minor was by geographical position,
and still more by commercial intercourse, so closely connected
with Persia, that it is probable that the beliefs and practices of
Persia would spread to it. And Persia was confessedly the heir
of the beliefs and practices of Babylonia.
(a) We shall therefore hardly go wrong in seeing the influence
of ancient Babylonian thought in this later worship of angels.
And this in at least two directions. For the Babylonians of old
worshipped sun and moon and planets, and also, "at an early period
1 But in T. B. Sanhedrin, 44 b, after speaking of Gabriel this is
perhaps implied.

xxxii INTRODUCTION
in the history of their religion," imagined " a divine messenger
or angel who carried the orders of the higher god from heaven to
earth and interpreted his will to men V Nebo was thus regarded
as "the angel or interpreter of the will of Merodach2," and of
course was worshipped.
03) Whatever the relation of Parsism may be to the Baby
lonian religion, its doctrine of angels is much more elaborate and
developed. Every power of nature, as well as every individual,
and every nation, has its own angel3. Not only the Jews (Dan.
iv. 17, x. 13 ; Tob. xii. 15) will have known and to some degree
accepted the doctrine, but also, it may be presumed, the in
habitants of many parts of Asia Minor.
But the Persians not only had an elaborate angelology ; they
also directly worshipped angels.
The Jews (and in particular those who lived in their native
land) may have been protected from such worship to a great
extent by the peculiar nature of their own religion, but other
nations living under less favourable conditions would hardly
escape its influence. It certainly would fall in extremely well
with the animistic religion that prevailed in the greater part
of Asia Minor.
(y) But besides the influence of Persian thought, the Hel
lenism that was now spreading over Asia Minor would tend to
promote such worship. Not indeed directly, but indirectly. For
the philosophical thought of the time was inclined to lay in
creasing stress on the existence of one supreme God who was in
reality far too exalted to have any contact with earth. On
Greeks indeed the old polytheistic gods had lost their hold.
They were regarded as taking, at the most, but little interest in
the affairs of this world. But men needed to believe in some
thing which could form a connecting link between themselves
and the most high God, and they therefore readily came to
believe in intermediate beings to which they gave the name
1 Sayce, Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia, p. 361.
2 Sayce, Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia, p. 456, cf. p. 496.
3 A succinct account may be seen in Dr J. H. Moulton's article on
Zoroastrianism in Hastings' D.B. iv. p. 991.

PARSISM AND HELLENISM xxxiii
of " demons," i.e. semi-supernatural beings affecting everything.
Thus while the thinkers laid more stress upon the supreme God,
the populace thought chiefly of the demons.
So Plutarch speaks of a threefold Providence, first the spirit
and will of the original Godhead, secondly the gods of second
rank, and thirdly the daemons. These last bring down gifts from
above and carry up men's prayers1. Philo appears to have
already taught something of the same kind, though his phrases
are very difficult to reconcile with each other2.
(6) Local causes.
It is remarkable, and surely not accidental, that at a Council
held so close to Colossae as Laodicea about 360 a.d. the worship
of angels should be expressly forbidden. Canon 35, " It is not
right for Christians to abandon the Church of God and go away
and invoke angels and hold conventicles; for these things are
forbidden. If therefore anyone is found devoting himself to this
secret idolatry, let him be anathema, because he abandoned our
Lord Jesus Christ and went after idolatry3." Similarly Theodoret
complains (c. 425 a.d.), commenting on Col. ii. 18, that "this
disease long remained in Phrygia and Pisidia. For this reason
also a synod in Laodicea of Phrygia forbad by a decree the offer
ing prayer to angels ; and even to the present time oratories of
the holy Michael may be seen among them and their neighbours4."
1 See Lucius, Die Anfange des Heiligen Kults, 1904, p. 7, who refers
to Plutarch's De fato, 9 ; de defect, orac. 13 ; Isis and Osiris, 26.
2 See Edersheim in Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biogr. iv. p. 379. See
also Schiirer, E. T. n. iii. 371 sqq.
3 Lightfoot's translation (Colossians, p. 68). oti Sel xplffTia"ov^
iyKarakelireiv rty iKKhrfaiav rod Seov Kal ainivai Kal dyyiXovs bvojxd^uv
Kal <7w<£|«s Troieiv, airep airirybpevrai- e? ns ovv evpeffij ravTr) t-q
KeKpv/ip.4vr) elSuXoXarpeia crxoXd^av,lffrw dvd$ep.a, STiiysaTiXure rbv Klipiov
Tjfi&v 'Inffovv HLpiarbv, rbv vlbv rov deov, Kal etScaXoXarpela irpo<TTJXdev.
4 Lightfoot's Coloss. p. 68 n. Ifieive 8i tovto rb irdBos iv rrj Qpvyla
Kal Hurtdla fJ^XP1 iroXXov' o5 St] x^Plv Ka^ wveXdovaa cvvobos iv AaobtKla
ttjs $pvylas vbpuf KtKwXvKe rb Tots ayyiXois irpoo-eixeaOai ' Kal p.ixPl ^
rov vvv evKTr/pia rod dylov MixavX nap' iKeivois Kal tois 6/j.opois ixeivuv
io-rui ISeiv. The original in notes 3 and 4 is quoted from Lueken,
Michael, p. 73.
Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, p. 541, quotes an inscription (date
not given but apparently not later than the fourth century) at

xxxiv INTRODUCTION
The development and persistence of angel-worship in this
locality indicates a special cause, especially when we bear in
mind the permanence of local superstitions under varying forms
of religion. Nor is there in this case much room for doubt.
The remarkable natural phenomena at and near Colossae must
from remote ages have appealed to the human mind, and pro
vided material to which both primitive and later religions could
cling. These phenomena are of two kinds :
(a) Springs. " The great road from the west (from Ephesus
and from Miletus) ascends the Maeander Valley due eastwards,
until it enters 'the Gate of Phrygia.' In the Gate1 are a remark
able series of hot springs, and warm mud-baths, some in the bed
of the Maeander, others on its banks2."
(/3) There is at Colossae a narrow gorge through which the
Lycus flows, and the Lycus itself appears to have most of its
course underground, coming ultimately from lake Anava, some
twenty miles E. of Colossae, appearing near Dere Kelli, some
five miles away from Colossae, then losing itself in the lake
Kodja Bash, out of which it flows for about two miles before
passing through the gorge3.
These phenomena of hot springs, and a river issuing not
very far away, from a cavern, together with the earthquakes to
which the whole district is liable, might readily suggest to
primitive minds directly Divine operation4. Hence it is not
remarkable that between Laodicea and the 'Gate of Phrygia,'
some thirteen miles west of Laodicea and in the territory of the
city Attouda, lay a famous temple, the home of the Phrygian
Thiounta, which was subject to Hierapolis (though judging from
Anderson's map some 20 miles N.E. of it), Kvpie /3ot;0i AAAAA
Mixt^X E Va^pinX urrpanX pa^ar/X. He adds ' ' five names of angels
seem to be required to correspond to the five "Afyios)."
1 [Some thirty miles west indeed of Colossae itself, a. l. w.]
2 Ramsay, Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 413; cf. Cities and
Bishoprics, pp. 2, 3. For springs at Hierapolis, see Lightfoot, pp.
11, 12.
3 See above, p. x.
4 On this, the belief in Asia Minor generally, see Ramsay, Hastings'
D.B. v. p. 119 ("The religion of Greece and Asia Minor").

LOCAL CAUSES xxxv
god Men Karou, the Carian Men, the original god of the valley1.
He seems to have later been identified with Poseidon, who is
said to have made the hot springs at Laodicea2, or with Zeus3,
and perhaps Asklepios, whose cult was bound up with that of the
serpent4, and even, as it seems, with Osiris-Serapis5.
We have unhappily no direct evidence whereby to bridge over
the interval between the heathen worship at or near Colossae
and that of later times when we find Colossae-Chonae a centre of
the worship of St Michael6.
It seems probable that in this case, as in so many others, the
Christian saint took over the traditional worship of a heathen
deity, and that what was attributed to the saint had formerly
been attributed to the god. If so we must suppose that in
addition to general reasons for the worship of Men at or near
Colossae there was this special reason, that he was supposed to
have delivered the city in some great and sudden inundation.
It is only reasonable to suppose that in the intervening
time, say about the time of St Paul, the inhabitants of Colossae
and its neighbourhood were inclined to pay special honour to
their local deities, and, while not able to absolutely close their
ears to higher teaching brought either by Jews or by Christians,
would be likely to admit any compromise by which they might
still retain their old worship in a different form.
How far this would react upon the Jews in their midst is
little more than a matter of speculation. It might be said
a priori that the presence of heathen worship would make Jews
only the more decided in the worship of the one true God, as
apparently was the case during the Exile in Babylon. But on the
other hand Jews have often shown a certain amount of syncretism
and may not have been disinclined, the more educated from
philosophical and the poorer from superstitious motives, to at-
1 Ramsay, Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 417; Cities and
Bishoprics, pp. 169, 414.
2 Lucius, Die Anfdnge des Ileiligen Kults , p. 268.
3 See Ramsay, Letters to the Seven Churches, p. 417.
4 See Ramsay, Hastings' D.B. v. p. 118.
6 Lueken, Michael, p. 79.
6 Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 470.

xxx vi INTRODUCTION
tribute power to the deities whom their neighbours worshipped,
but regarding these not in any sense as independent powers, but
rather as beings wholly under the direction of the one God and
acting in some sort as His intermediaries. The doctrine of the
existence of such beings and of their use to men was already well
known among Jews. It only needed certain local influences to
draw them on to some sort of worship.
The result therefore of our investigation of the subject would
appear to be, not that the Jews, or even the poorer classes of
Jews, generally paid worship to angels, but that under certain
conditions they might be tempted to do so, especially in attempts
to ward off disease by the use of magic formulae.
Hence of the two theories ; the first, that the worship of angels
was at that time common among Jews, including such Jews
as were not exposed to any specially foreign conditions and
forms of thought, e.g. the Pharisaic party ; the second, that it
was only to be found among Jews in a few circles and these
removed from more orthodox influences, the latter appears to
be the more probable. In other words, not Dr Hort1, but
Bp Lightfoot, the more truly represents the matter. It is how
ever to be observed that Bp Lightfoot's opinion is very frequently
misunderstood, as though he derived the angel worship of Jews
who lived at Colossae from Essene influence, the objection being
evident that the Essenes lived chiefly only in the south-east of
Palestine very far from Colossae in Asia Minor2. But his own
words ought to have guarded his readers against such a mis
interpretation. He says, "When I speak of the Judaism in the
Colossian Church as Essene, I do not assume a precise identity
of origin, but only an essential affinity of type, with the Essenes
1 Judaistic Christianity, p. 122, "The worship of angels was
assuredly a widely-spread Jewish habit of mind at this time"; p. 125,
"In enquiring about the origin of the special form of Judaistic
Christianity which was gaining ground among the Colossians, we
are dispensed from the need of trying to discover for it any peculiar
or extraneous sources. We are apparently on common Jewish
ground." 2 Some however lived in many towns and villages in Judaea, and
as it seems in "Palestine and Syria," Philo, Quod omn. prob. lib. 12
(cf. Josephus, B. J. ii. viii. 4).

EFFECT ON JEWS xxxvii
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 enamoured of and was wedded to
Oriental mysticism, the 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 influences1."
1 Colossians, pp. 94 sq.

CHAPTER V.
Canonicity of the Epistle.
There appears never to have been any doubt in ancient times
as to the Canonicity, and therefore presumably the Pauline
authorship, of the Epistle. The more important evidence is as
follows. The earlier part, as in other cases, consists in verbal
allusions, and only later is there any direct quotation.
1. Orthodox.
There is no certain allusion in Clem. Rom., the Didache, or the
Shepherd of Hermas1.
i. Ignatius perhaps has it in mind when he says in Eph.
§ 10. 2, irpbs Ttjv irXdvrjv avraiv ipels eBpaioi rfj irimei. Cf. Col.
i. 23, ei ye iiripevere rfj ttlo-Tei redepeXuopivoi Kal eBpdiot,. Perhaps
also in Smyrn. § 6. 1, pr/Bels irXavdo-6a>- Kal rd iirovpdvia Kai fj
B6£a t£>v dyyiXayv Kal ol ap^ovres oparol re Kal doparoi. Cf. Col.
1. 16, rd irdvra iv tols oipavols Kal iirl rrjs yi)ff, rd opard Kal Ta
aopara, are 6p6voi e'lre Kvpiornres eire dp%al e'lre i£ovaiaL.
ii. Ep. of Polycarp, § 10. 1 (here extant in Latin only),
perhaps also has an allusion : firmi in fide, cf. Col. i. 23 supra ;
and possibly also in § 11. 1 and 2, moneoitaque, ut abstineatis vos
ab avaritia et sitis casti et veraces  Si quis non se abstinuerit
ab avaritia, ab idololatria coinquinabitur ; cf. Col. iii. 5, iiriBvpiav
KaKTjV, Kal ttjv irXeove^iav rjris iarlv elBaXoXarpia.
iii. Ep. of Barnabas, § 12. 7, referring to the words of Moses
about the Brazen Serpent, perhaps alludes to the Epistle, e^eu
irdkiv Kal iv tovtois rf/v B6£av tou 'I?ycroO, Sri iv avra irdvra Kal els
avTOV. Cf. Col. i. 16, iv avra iKTio-drj rd irdvra. ..rd irdvra Bi
airov Kal els avrdv eKno'Tai.
iv. Justin Martyr, Dial. w. Trypho, § 85, p. 311, Kara yap rov
ovoparos avrov tovtov tov vlov rov Qeov Kal irpcoTOTOKOv irdo-ris
1 The Committee of the Oxford Society of Historical Theology
place all possible quotations of this Epistle by the Apostolic Fathers
in their class d, i.e. as possessing a very low degree of probability
(Apostolic Fathers, 1905).

EARLY QUOTATIONS xxxix
KTto~e<as. Cf. Col. i. 15, o? iortv elKwv tov Qeov tov dopdrov, irpa>-
totokos irdo-r/s KTio-eas. Cf. also § 100, p. 327.
v. Irenaeus, in. 14. 1. The earliest passage (except possibly
the Muratorian Canon) in which the Epistle is quoted by name.
Iterum in ea epistola quae est ad Colossenses ait Salutat vos Lucas
medicus dilectus (iv. 1 4, do-ird^erai ipas Aov/car 6 larpos 6 dyan-qros).
vi. The Muratorian Canon (? by Hippolytus) ad colosensis
quarta, i.e. the fourth of the epistles which St Paul wrote to the
seven churches.
vii. Clement of Alexandria, Strom, vi. 8, says, mo-avTa>s dpa
Kal rols e£ ^'EXXrjvav iirioTpi<povo-i KoXao-o-aeiiai' (3Xen€T€ pi] Tis
vpds eorai 6 o-vXayaywv k.t.X. = Col. ii. 8.
viii. Tertullian argues from the Epistle frequently, e.g. adv.
Marc. v. 19, where the chapter is entitled " de Epistola ad Colos
senses." ix. Origen quotes the Epistle often, and in c. Cels. v. 8 by
name when referring to c. ii. 18, 19.
It is needless to mention later writers, but it is perhaps worth
noting that the Epistle was contained in the Old Latin version,
the only version that has come down to us dating certainly from
the second century.
2. Unorthodox.
i. Peratae (Peratici) according to Hippolytus, Refutation of
all Heresies, v. 7, quote Col. i. 19, mixed with ii. 9, irav to irXrj-
papa evBoKijO-e KaToiKrjaai iv airm acopaTCKas, Kal irdo-a ianv ev
avra> f/ Beorqs rijs ovtco BiijprjpevTjs rpidBos. Compare also Hippo
lytus' summary of their doctrines (x. 6).
ii. Monofmus the Arabian (Hippolytus, viii. 6) similarly
mixes Col. i. 19 and ii. 9, kcu tovto ion to elpiqpevov "On irav to
irXripcopa r)vBoKTjo-e KaroiKijO-ai iv ru via tov dv8pa>irov o-mpanKais.
iii. Valentinus (Hippolytus, vi. 30) writes : koi 6 'Airoo-roXas
To pv<TTT)piov b rais irporipais yeveals ouk iyviopivBrj (Col. i. 26).
iv. The Docetae (Hippolytus, viii. 3) adapt Col. ii. 11, 14, 15,
Iv orav 6 apx^v KaraKpivr) to 'ihiov wXda-pa davdrip, Tea o-ravpa, rj
ilrvxh ««>"? e'" TV tr<iMa™ rpa(peio-a, direKBvcrapevr) to crebpa Kal
¦Kpoo-ijXaxrao-a irpbs to frXov, Kal 6piapfievo-a<Ta BC avrov rds dpXds
Kal rds i£ov<rias pr] evpedfj yvpvrj.

xl

CHAPTER VI.
The Genuineness and the Integrity of the Epistle.
These have been impugned in modern times. It has been
thought by some that St Paul did not write the Epistle, and by
others that he did not write the whole as we now possess it.
1. The Genuineness.
i. The Epistle, of course, claims to be written by St Paul, who
states openly that he had never seen the Christians of Colossae,
or, as it appears, those of the cities in the immediate neighbour
hood (ii. 1). Yet, unlike what we should suppose a forger of the
second century to have written, the author nowhere puts forward
his personal authority. He is content to urge the depth of his
affection for his readers and the interest that he takes in them.
ii. He gives the names of nine other Christians who associate
themselves to some extent in his letter or his greetings, but only
three of these are of any note, Timothy, Mark (Barnabas' cousin),
Luke. The rest are persons hardly known outside this Epistle
and those cognate to it, viz. Epaphras, mentioned only here, who
has evidently taken a leading part in the evangelisation of the
Colossians ; Tychicus, who, as it seems, carried this letter, and
that to " the Ephesians," and is indeed named in Acts xx. 4 as
belonging to Asia, and in 2 Tim. iv. 12 as having to do more
particularly with Ephesus, and in Tit. iii. 12 perhaps with Crete ;
Onesimus, who (as we learn from Phm. 10 — 20) is a slave return
ing to his master ; Aristarchus (mentioned in Phm. and a few
times in Acts) ; Jesus Justus, here only ; Demas (Phm. 24 and
2 Tim. iv. 10). These seem, at least to us in these days, to be
curious names for a forger to introduce.

VOCABULARY xli
iii. He mentions two persons at Colossae or the neighbour
hood, Nymphas and Archippus, though nothing whatever is
known of the former, and extremely little of the latter (Phm. 2).
iv. But it is said that both vocabulary and constructions
indicate the non-Pauline authorship of the Epistle.
(a) As to the vocabulary the student will do well to examine
the Tables of the Index of Greek words in this Epistle (p. 193),
where he will find that, excluding proper names, there are
(a) Thirty- three words found in the N.T. in this Epistle alone,
of which seventeen occur in the second chapter only ;
(/3) Twenty-nine words found elsewhere in the N.T. in
St Paul's Epistles alone (including the Pastorals, and excluding
Hebrews) ;
(y) Twenty words found elsewhere in the N.T., but not in
St Paul's Epistles;
(8) Twenty-one words peculiar to the Third Group (Eph.,
Phil., Phm.);
(1) Eleven absolutely in the N.T. ;
(2) Ten relatively to St Paul's Epistles, though occurring
elsewhere in the N.T.
If it is urged that in any case the actual number of Hapaxle-
gomena in Colossians is against the probability of its being
genuine, the answer is ready. The number stands in no appreci
ably higher relation to the length of the Epistle than does the
number of Hapaxlegomena in any of St Paul's acknowledged
Epistles to the length of that epistle. Lists and details may be
seen in P. Ewald, pp. 36 — 39. His conclusion is, " Turn Lexicon,
or rather Concordance, over and over again, as much as you like,
the result is that with almost ludicrous exactness there is almost
precisely the same percentage in the case of the disputed as in
that of the acknowledged Epistles1."
It is urged also that among the Hapaxlegomena (see Tables)
occur a large proportion of compounds, showing that the author,
1 "Man mag Lexikon oder viel mehr Konkordanz walzen, wie
man will es zeigen sich mit fast komischer Prazision immer fast
genau die' gleicheil Prozentzahlen betr. die angefochtenen wie betr. die
anerkannten Briefe."

xlii INTRODUCTION
unlike St Paul, employed sesquipedalia verba whenever he could.
But Galatians supplies an answer, for we find there such long com
pounds as, with prepositions, irpoo-avarl8ecr8at, avpirapaXapjidveiv
(Acts +), irapeio~aKTOS, avvviroKplveiv, o-vvairdyeiv (Rom., 2 Pet. t),
irpoevayyeXi£eo-8ai, iiriBiaTacro-eiv, i^airoo-reXXeiv (Luke, Acts t),
dweKBixeo-dai (freq.), and, with substantives or the like, ijrevBd-
BeXtpos (2 Cor. t) , dpdoiroBelv, elBcoXoXarpeia (1 Cor., Col., 1 Pet. t),
Bi^oo-rac'ia (Rom. t), Kev6Bo£os (cf. KevoBo£la Phil, t), (ppeva-
7Tardv (cf. (ppevairdrtjs Tit. t)1.
Even though the proportion of long words among the Hapaxle
gomena may be somewhat higher in Colossians than in Galatians,
yet in view of their frequency in Galatians the fact can hardly
be pronounced to be of much importance.
(6) Constructions.
Haupt (Int. p. 27, note) gives a list of peculiar constructions,
for the most part varieties of the genitival relation. From them
may be taken atpa tov o-ravpov (i. 20), 6 vios avSpairos (iii. 10),
dvrairoBoo'is rijs KXrjpovopias (iii. 24), airo8vr](TKeiv dirb (ii. 20, cf.
BiKawvo-dai dirb, Rom. vi. 7), dcpeiBLa craparos (ii. 23), deXeiv iv
(ii. 18), 8ipa rov Xdyou (iv. 3, cf. Bvpa dvemypevrj, 2 Cor. ii. 12),
oi ovTes e'x irepiropfjs (iv. 11, elsewhere without ovres), ioreprjpa
tS>v dXLyjrecov (i. 24).
But on the other hand, P. Ewald (p. 43), shows by some fifty
examples that so generally acknowledged an Epistle as Galatians
has its own peculiar constructions.
(c) Again it is urged that the Epistle is conspicuously lacking
in words and constructions that are often used by St Paul in
writings that are really his. The following words and phrases
are absent : BiKaioavvr), BiKala>o-LS, BtKalcapa, ccorrjpia, diroKaXvyjns,
viraKof}, iriareveiv, Karapyeiv, KaTepyd£eo~8ai, koivos, Kotvavla,
vopos, BoKipdfceiv, BoKiprj, BoKipos, Kavxdo~8ai, Kavxi)pa, neiBeiv,
ireiroidrjcris, BivaoSai, Xotiros, pdXXov, el prj, oiBe, ovre, el ris,
ei xai, el irws, e'lirep, povov, oi povov Be...dXXd Kal, en, oVKeri,
Hi/Ken, re, Bw, Bioti, apa, apa ovv, and especially compounds of
virep. 1 See P. Ewald, p. 39.

DOCTRINAL STATEMENTS xliii
Confessedly a heavy list. But its effect is greatly discounted
by noticing that many of these words and phrases do not occur
even in Galatians, viz. : 8ikoIo>o-i.s, SiKalcopa, o-carrjpia, viraKo-q,
Karepyd^ea-Bat, koivos, BoKiprj, BoKipos, ireiroWr)o-is, el Kai, e'i ira>s,
e'lirep, oil fiovov 8e...dXXd Kal, prjKeTi, re, Bioti, and even of the
twenty-two compounds with virip employed by St Paul, only
one, and that but once, is used by him in Galatians, viz.
virepfioXr) l.
It would then appear that the argument of the absence of
specifically Pauline terms from the Epistle is not in itself very
serious. The general result would appear to be that those arguments
against the genuineness of the Epistle which are based upon the
vocabulary and the constructions will not bear the weight that is
often laid upon them. Change of subject invariably produces
change in language, particularly if there is also change in the
experience and the position of the author. So far there would
appear to be no sufficient evidence against the verdict of tradi
tion that the Epistle was written by St Paul2.
v. It is urged, however, that the doctrinal statements in
the Epistle with regard to the nature and work of the Son are
not such as St Paul could have written, but are the product of a
later age.
But this is to beg the whole question. No one doubts that
the doctrinal statements are in some respects more advanced
than those found in the four Epistles (Rom., 1 and 2 Cor., Gal.)
whose genuineness is accepted by practically all scholars, but the
question is whether the statements peculiar to Colossians and
Ephesians may not legitimately, and even probably, have been
made by the same writer at a later stage in his life and under
different conditions.
It is urged, for example, that Col. i. 17 says that all things
have their subsistence in the Son, a statement to which there is
no parallel in the genuine Epistles. But 1 Cor. viii. 6 (as well as
1 See Haupt, Introd. p. 29, and P. Ewald, p. 41 sq.
2 On the vocabulary see also Nageli, Der Wortschatz des Apostel
Paulus, 1905, pp. 83 sqq.
rol. d

xliv INTRODUCTION
Col. i. 16) says that all things were by means of Jesus Christ
('I. Xp. 6V ov rd irdvra), and this would, without great difficulty,
give rise to the former. Again, Col. i. 16 says that the Son is
the aim of all (els airov), and 1 Cor. viii. 6 the Father, but there
is no greater difference in this than when Rom. xi. 36 says that
all things were by means of God, apparently the Father, and
1 Cor. viii. 6 by means of Jesus Christ. If St Paul were, accord
ing to the usual view, concerned with showing the unique
position of Christ he might (recognising His Divinity) use of Him
terms which elsewhere he had used of the Father. Contradic
tion between the two there is none. And there appears to be no
a priori impossibility, or even improbability, in the supposition
that the latter is the natural and logical result of the former, and
that one and the same mind would be able to see this result, and
under certain conditions be likely to express it1.
2. The Integrity of the Epistle.
i. " Holtzmann's hypothesis is that in Colossians we have a
genuine epistle of Paul to Colossae, which has been expanded by
later interpolations ; the interpolator is the author of the epistle
to the Ephesians, — a Gentile Christian, of Pauline training, who
belonged to the post-apostolic age " (Jiilicher in Encycl. Bibl.
p. 868).
The original epistle, according to Holtzmann2, was roughly
as follows :
u. i. 1—5, 6a, 7, 8, 9a, a few words of 10, 13, a few words of 19,
20, rather more of 21, 22, 23, greater part of 25, 29 ;
c. ii. 1, beginning of 2, greater part of 4, all 5, 6, 7b, greater
part of 8, some words of 9, 11, greater part of 12, of 13, and of
14, 16, 18b, 20, 21, 22a, 23h ;
c. iii. 3, 12, 13, 17 ;
c. iv. greater part of 2—5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 1 1, much of 12, 13, 14, 18.
v. Soden at first (1885) followed Holtzmann so far as to reject
c. i. 15—20 (the great dogmatic passage dealing with the
nature and work of the Son) ;
c. ii. 10b (His headship over all rule and authority) ;
1 Cf. Haupt, Introd. p. 33.
2 Sanday, Smith's Diet. 2 625.

INTEGRITY xiv
c. ii. 15 (His triumph over them) ;
c. ii. 18b (!) ;
but in his Commentary (1891) he rejects only i. 16b — 17, so that,
as Haupt says (p. 26), he may in fact be reckoned as a defender
of the genuineness.
ii. Sanday (Smith's Dict.2 626, s.v. "Colossians"), referring only
to v. Soden's earlier theory, says that his answer to Holtzmann
was excellent as regards the majority of the verses rejected by
the latter, for it was easy to show that Holtzmann's theory
"left abruptness and awkwardness of style and construction,
quite as great as any supposed incoherence in the present text
of the Epistle."
Sanday adds three further reasons for rejecting Holtzmann's
theory, the chief points in which are that
(a) It is often forgotten that the onus probandi lies on the
side of the critic, whose duty it is not "to leave nothing but
what is undoubtedly Pauline," but " to remove nothing but what
is decidedly un-Pauline."
(6) Holtzmann's theory makes the interpolator very chary
of interpolating, yet prodigal in writing a new letter to the
Ephesians, when he might have easily so modified one or other
as to make one effort do instead of two.
(c) Although the interpolation of ecclesiastical writings is a
possibility (see, for instance, the Sibylline Books, 4 Esdras, the
longer Ignatian letters, and even in such instances in Historical
Books in the N.T. as the Pericope Adulterae, the last twelve
verses in St Mark, and compare the shifting place of the
Doxology in Romans), yet no indubitable evidence has yet been
produced in the case of the Epistles for the dogmatic interpola
tion of the kind required by this hypothesis.

d2

xlvi

CHAPTER VII.
Place and Date of Writing, with some Consideration
of the Relation of the Epistle to the other
Epistles of the Third Gkoup.
1. All four Epistles are alike in this, that St Paul was a
prisoner at the time when he wrote them (Phil. i. 7 ; Eph. iii. 1 ;
Col. iv. 18 ; Phm. 9).
2. But, on the other hand, while Philippians has no special
relationship to any of the others, these others are closely united ;,
Colossians to Ephesians, by style, expressions, and subject matter,,
and by the mention of Tychicus the bearer of them both ;
Colossians to Philemon by the mention of several names in
common, particularly Onesimus and Archippus.
We may therefore presume that while Ephesians, Colossians,
and Philemon were written at approximately the same time,
Philippians was written at some little distance of time, either
before or after, the Apostle being in either case in prison.
3. The place and relative date, however, of the writing of the
Epistle to the Philippians is somewhat distinctly indicated.
i. The Apostle was at Rome, for this is by far the most
natural meaning of each of the expressions (and much more of
the combination) iv SXa r<a irpairapla (Phil. i. 13), and oi ck rrjs
Kalo-apos ohlas (Phil. iv. 22), and also supplies the easiest
explanation of the Christian parties in the place where the
Apostle was writing (Phil. i. 14 — 20), and of the possibility of
his being put to death (i. 20 sqq.).
ii. Further, it contains so many hints of thought character
istic of the Second Group of the Epistles, particularly of Romans,
the latest of that Group, that we may reasonably suppose that it

LATER THAN PHILIPPIANS xlvii
stands in closer temporal relation to them than to the other
three. Compare for example Phil. iii. 3, {/pels yap io-pev r/
nepiropri k.t.X. with Rom. ii. 28 sq., especially nepiTopr) KapBlas
iv wvevpari ov ypdppan : also Phil. iii. 9, prj ex<ov ipfjv BtKaio-
o-vvqv ttjv iK vopov dXXd ttjv Bid nia-retos Xptorov with Rom.
passim, e.g. X. 3, dyvoovvres yap ttjv tov Beov BiKaiocrvvrjv, Kal rrpi
IBlav ^rjrovvTes O'Trjo-at k.t.X.
We seem, that is to say, to hear the echoes of the controversy
about Justification by Faith still sounding. Hence it is, no
doubt, that the Epistle to the Philippians is more generally
acknowledged to be Pauline than are Ephesians and Colos
sians. iii. Again in itself Philippians appears to be earlier than
Colossians and Ephesians. That indeed the tone is different is
worth noticing, but it throws little light upon the relative date.
It is to be expected that St Paul would write in a different tone
to the Philippians from that in which he wrote to strangers like
the Colossians (Col. ii. 1). The Philippian Christians were very
dear to him ; he had endured many sufferings in their midst ;
some of them at least had given a very hearty response to his
first preaching among them ; they had shown remarkable steadi
ness of faith, judging from the length of time that had elapsed
since their conversion ; their thoughtfulness for him had been
put into action again and again when he was in need ; they
themselves had been ready to suffer for Christ. The tone of his
letter to such consistent and mature Christians would of course
be affectionate.
But in Philippians there is no trace of the thoughts that are
characteristic of Colossians and Ephesians. The doctrinal diffi
culties that were threatening the Church at Colossae, and to
some degree, as it seems, other Churches in the neighbourhood,
did not exist for Philippi. And, more than that, Philippians
does not suggest that these difficulties had as yet influenced
St Paul's own expressions and modes of thought. It is] very
improbable that, if Colossians and Ephesians had been written
before Philippians, the latter would contain no sign oftthe
consideration that St Paul must have given to the subjects

xlviii INTRODUCTION
brought before him so strongly, to which, too, he had given such
close attention.
We therefore place the writing of Colossians at some months
later, if not more, than Philippians, but while he was still a
prisoner, and therefore still at Rome1.
4. It has, however, been urged that not Rome but Caesarea
was the place where Colossians, Ephesians and Philemon were
written, i.e. during the two years that St Paul spent there as
a prisoner before he was sent to Rome. And it may be freely
granted that if the three Epistles are considered alone, without
any reference to Philippians, there is nothing very decisive upon
the question.
Yet the reasons adduced in favour of Caesarea seem really to
come to only these2 :
i. While in Phil. ii. 24 St Paul intends to proceed from Rome
to Macedonia, in Phm. 22 he implies that he is going straight to
Colossae. But to go to Colossae via Macedonia from Rome
would be but little, if at all, out of his way in point of time,
especially at certain seasons of the year.
ii. Phm. 22 speaks of Philemon preparing a lodging for
St Paul at Colossae, as though his coming was certain3, and it is
urged that when St Paul was in Rome he could hardly so count
upon freedom. But we know little of the circumstances under
which St Paul was writing, and the fact that he was granted his
liberty from Rome (unless we reject the Pastorals) shows that at
some time in his stay there such an expectation of release would
have been justified.
iii. It is said that Caesarea was nearer to Colossae than was
Rome, and that therefore it was easier to go there. But in all
1 On Phm. 22 see below.
- See in particular Hort's consideration in Rom. and Eph. (pp. 103
— 110) of Weiss' reasons ; also Haupt (p. 75) who agrees with Weiss.
3 Hort however thinks that St Paul's words are "but a playful way
of saying to Philemon 'Remember that I mean to come and see with
my own eyes whether you have really treated your Christian slave as
I have been exhorting you'; and then giving the thought a serious
turn by assuring him that 'coming is no mere jest, for he does indeed
hope some day to be set free through their prayers, and then he will
haste to visit them' " (Rom. and Eph. p. 104).

NOT FROM CAESAREA xlix
ages "the longest way round is the shortest way home," and
mere distance as the crow flies is a very poor way of reckoning
the time required for a journey, or the relative ease with which
it can be accomplished.
iv. It has also been thought that Caesarea being nearer to
Colossae and also a smaller place than Rome, Onesimus was
more likely to meet St Paul there. But the reverse holds good.
For Onesimus would not presumably be one of St Paul's friends
(rav IBlav avrov, Acts xxiv. 23), to be admitted to see him at
Caesarea, and the very smallness of Caesarea would make it an
unlikely place of refuge for a slave. On the other hand, if once
Christians from Asia Minor met with Onesimus at Rome — and
his dialect would soon tell them that they had found a fellow-
countryman — they would persuade him to come to see St Paul,
who was able to preach and teach there dKioXirais (Acts
xxviii. 31).
v. Yet it is this last fact which has provided the upholders
of the Caesarean theory with their strongest argument. They
say that St Paul had apparently much more leisure at Caesarea
wherein to think over the deep problems now set before him.
For, it is said (Haupt, pp. 75 sq.), that whilethe had at Rome
controversy with other Christians (Phil. i. 15) and was free to
preach, he had no such opportunity at Caesarea, and that for
a man of his mental energy this would readily result in his
thinking out hard questions connected with the Divine plan of
salvation. We may grant the activity of St Paul's thoughts, but must
acknowledge that we are far too ignorant both of his life at
Caesarea to be able to affirm that he had no other outlet for his
energy, and of his life at Rome to be compelled to deny him time
for such thought. It would seem much more probable that, tied
as he was in Rome to one place, he had perforce quite sufficient
time to decide upon the questions submitted to him arising from
the state of the Colossian Church.
vi. Thus, though we freely grant the possibility of the
Caesarean hypothesis being right if the three Epistles, Colossians,
Ephesians, Philemon are considered alone, we cannot help feeling

1 INTRODUCTION
that the relation in which they stand to Philippians alters the
whole question, and that there is no sufficient reason for sup
posing them to have been written anywhere else than at Rome,
and during the latter part of St Paul's First Imprisonment
there, viz. 62, 63 a.d., according to Lightfoot's chronology, or
60, 61, according to Mr Turner's.
5. We must add a few words on the relation of the two
Epistles, Colossians and Ephesians, to each other. There is so
much matter common to them1 that it might have been supposed
to be a comparatively easy task to show from the turns in the
language which was the later of the two. But in practice this
test has proved to be delusive, for some passages suggest the
priority of the one, others that of the other.
We shall content ourselves with indicating what appear to
have been the probable steps in the writing of the two Epistles.
i. It has been suggested that St Paul had long been thinking,
in fact for many years, about the greater of the subjects dis
cussed in these Epistles. The beginnings of a philosophy of
history are to be traced in the earlier Epistles. For example,
St Paul gives a sketch of the religious, and especially the irre
ligious, development of humanity (Rom. i.); he shows how the
development of sin from Adam and that of salvation in Christ
are parallel, and are governed by the same law (Rom. v. 12 sqq.) ;
and that sin is included in God's plan of salvation (Rom.
xi. 32) ; he is able to incorporate even the unbelief of Israel in
the history of salvation in such a way as to show that it will
call out the faith of the Gentiles, and that this in turn will
react on that of Israel (Rom. xi.) ; he includes the world of
nature in the history of the kingdom of God (Rom. viii. 19 sqq.) ;
he adduces the proof that the resurrection of the body has its
analogy in Creation (1 Cor. xv. 35)2.
ii. No doubt this is so far true that St Paul was accustomed
to think out deep problems with regard to God's government of
the world and His relation to man's needs and sinfulness, and
that St Paul would be the more likely to consider these subjects
1 See full quotations in Westcott's Ephesians, pp. xlii. sqq
2 Cf. Haupt, Introd. p. 77.

ST PAUL AND CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY li
if he were, by one cause or another, prevented from carrying on
his active practical work. But it must be remembered that
St Paul never shows any trace of being what we may call a
theoretical thinker. He never shows, that is to say, any desire
to make a doctrinal system of Christianity just because he takes
pleasure in thinking out the inter-relation of various truths. On
the contrary, it was, in every case of which we have cognisance,
the practical diflficulties in which his correspondents found
themselves that drew out from him his doctrinal statements.
Even the Epistle to the Romans is no exception, for it is little
more than the more logical marshalling of the arguments adduced
in the Epistle to the Galatians with reference to the wider out
look of affairs in the Church at Rome.
iii. Hence, while we may suppose that St Paul had been
thinking over many points of what is now called Christian
philosophy, yet his conclusions on the higher mysteries of the
faith had been probably separate and unsystematised. Then
came the news of the state of affairs at Colossae, which sum
moned him to give practical advice, and to crystallise his
thoughts upon certain doctrinal details, in particular upon the
relation of the Son of God to the supernatural beings, and the
consequent attitude of the believer to both Him and them. He
was, in any case, writing to a prominent citizen of Colossae to
plead for Onesimus, and he takes the opportunity of writing
to the Church there such advice as may help them in their
present needs.
iv. But the writing of the Epistle to the Colossians, and the
opportunity that has presented itself of sending a messenger
there, remind him of the needs of the whole body of Churches in
what was, in comparison with Rome, the neighbourhood of
Colossae. The same messenger can take a letter to them also,
and so St Paul writes his Circular Letter known as the Epistle
to the Ephesians.
His thoughts have been dwelling upon the special requirements
of the Colossian Christians, but they have led him to see more
clearly than ever the glory of Christ as being the revelation of
God, and also the greatness of God's wisdom in bringing about

Iii INTRODUCTION
salvation. He has also realised more clearly that individual
believers (not strictly Churches, see Hort, Rom. and Eph.
p. 130) do not stand alone in either their needs or their blessings,
but that all are bound together in one Body under the one Head.
St Paul thus formulates the doctrine of the Church with greater
precision than he had ever formulated it previously.
v. A further reason for the difference of outlook in the two
Epistles is probably that while St Paul had in the one as his
immediate practical object the building up of the local Church
at Colossae and its protection from errors actually pressed upon
them, his desire in the other was rather to strengthen the Church
as a whole by insisting on its unity. Possibly there was the
more need for this in the efforts put forth by the Government to
make the worship of the Emperor the one great religion of the
district (cf. Ramsay, Letters to the Seven Churches, cc. x. and
xxn., and Cities and Bishoprics, p. 53), and in any case it would
be of great assistance to the various Christian individuals (and
therefore of course communities) in the neighbourhood, not to
feel themselves isolated, but corporal parts of one whole. Hence
in the Circular Letter he insists on the truth of the oneness of
the Church, and, though he deals in part wilh the same subjects
as in Colossians, his attitude towards them is different.
Thus while in Col. i. 15 — 18, ii. 9 he brings out emphatically
the relation of the Son to the Father, appending to it that of His
relation to the Church, in Eph. i. 22 sq. the former almost dis
appears, and His relation to the Church is alone emphasized.
So in Col. ii. 14 he speaks of the doing away of any ceremonial
hindrance between us and God, but in Eph. ii. 13 — 15 of the
removal of such a hindrance between Jews and Gentiles ; the
unity of the Church is his absorbing thought. Similarly in
Colossians iii. 18, 19 the reciprocal duties of wife and husband
are enforced only as a practical matter, but in Eph. v. 25 — 32
this leads up to the fact that the relation of wife to husband is
a figure of that between the Church and Christ (see further,
Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p. 395 n.).
vi. It is perhaps worthy of notice, as tending to meet forms
of opinion apt to obscure the real issues of the Christian life.

COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS liii
that St Paul's advance in the intellectual perception of doctrinal
truths appears to have been no hindrance to his advance in
spiritual knowledge ; but that, on the contrary, with his ever-
deepening perception of the spiritual possibilities that exist for
us in Christ, he gained an increasingly clearer perception of both
the character (if the term may be used) of God, and of His rela
tion to the believer, and, accompanying this, of the duties of the
believer and the best way of carrying them out. St Paul, that
is to say, received in himself the answer to his prayer that his
readers might be filled with rfjv iirtyvoacnv tov deXrjparos avrov
iv irdtrjj aocpia Kal avveo-ei irvevpariKj) (Col. I. 9).

liv

CHAPTER VIII.
The Text.
1. The Authorities for the Text of Colossians and Philemon
are practically the same as those for the Pauline Epistles gene
rally. Referring students for detailed information to Scrivener's
Introduction (Miller's edition, 1894), or to Nestle's Introduction
(E. T. 1901), Kenyon's Handbook (1901), Lake, The text of the
N.T. (3rd ed., 1904), and to the articles in Hastings' Dictionary of
the Bible (Nestle, Bebb, Murray), and in the Encyclopaedia Biblica
(Burkitt), and also to Sanday-Headlam, Romans, pp. lxiii. —
lxxiv., it will be sufficient to give here as brief and summary
a conspectus as possible of the authorities for the Text of these
two Epistles. The evidence is generally taken from Tischendorf's
Eighth Edition. i. Manuscripts.
(a) Uncials.

Sign

Name

Sinaiticus

Present Home

St Petersburg

Remarks

Originally contained whole
Greek Bible. CompleteinN.T.
Contains also Ep. Barnabas
and part of Shepherd of
Hermas. Text with strong
" admixture of " Western "
readings. Sa contemporary or
nearly so. Nb prob. 6th cent.
Kcprob. beginning of 7th cent.

MANUSCRIPTS

lv

Cent. ' Sign

Vaticanns

Present Home

Remarks

Borne

Alexandrinus Brit. Mus.

Ephraemi

Paris

Claromon- tanus

Paris

Coishn 202

St Petersburg
and Paris

Originally contained whole
Greek Bible. In N.T. now
complete except Philemon,
Pastoral Epp., Heb. ix. 14 —
end, Apoc. Even in the Epp.
its text is probably less corrupt
than that of any other MS.
Both N and B probably "be
longed to the great library
collected by Pamphilus at
Caesarea " (Burkitt, Enc. Bib.
p. 4987).
Originally contained whole
Greek Bible, adding Ep. of
Clem, and the so-called 2nd
Ep. of Clem. In N.T. com
plete from Matt. xxv. 6 with
lacunae at John vi. 50b — viii.
52", and 2 Cor. iv. 13b— xii. 7a.
Palimpsest, the upper writing
being works of S. Ephraem
in Syriac, copied in the 12th
cent. It originally contained
whole Greek Bible. Now only
in large fragments. Col. is
complete, also Philemon.
Contains thePaulineEpp. only.
Graeco-Latin (see d, infra) in
stichometrical form. Inserts
between Phm. and Heb. a
stichometrical list of the
canonical books of the O.T.
and N.T. Db is said to be of
the 7th cent. D" of the 9 th
or 10th cent.
Fragments of this MS. of the
Pauline Epp. exist at Paris,
Mt Athos, Moscow, St Peters
burg, Kieff, etc., having in all
41 leaves. One leaf at St
Petersburg contains Col. iii.
4 — 11. Other passages, viz.
i. 24 — 26 (vvv...rb pvariipiov
rb), ii. 8 — 11 (koI Kevrjs . . .<rap-

lvi

INTRODUCTION

Sign

10
9 or
10

Sanger-
manensis
Boernerianus

Augiensis

Mosquensis

Angelicus

Porphyrianus

Present Home

Remarks

St Petersburg
Dresden
Trin. Coll.
Camb.

Moscow

Rome

St Petersburg

k6s), ii. 17 — 19 (to Si awpa...
tov Oeov), have been recovered
by Dean J. Arm. Robinson
from stains on opposite leaves
(apparently at Paris) and
published by him in Eutha-
liana (Texts and Studies,
1895). H* = original hand,
H**=the hand that re-inked
the letters.
Graeco-Latin copy of D, there
fore not cited.
Pauline Epp. only. Graeco-
Latin.
Graeco-Latin. Either "in its
Greek text a transcript of G,"
or "an inferior copy of the
same immediate exemplar "
(Hort, Introd. § 203). There
fore not cited except when
the Greek differs from the
Latin text.
Catholic Epp. and Pauline Epp.
Formerly at Mt Athos.
Acts from viii. 10, Cath. Epp.,
Pauline Epp. to Heb. xiii. 10,
thus including Philemon .
Palimpsest, Acts, Cath. Epp.,
Paul. Epp., Apoc, and frag
ments of 4 Maccabees. Its
upper writing contains frag
ments of the commentary of
Euthalius.

11 17

?11

67*

(b) Cursives.
Paris =33 of the Gospels and 13 of
Acts. Contains some of the
Prophets and all the N.T.
except the Apoc.
Vienna The marginal corrector of 67.

LATIN VERSIONS lvii
ii. Versions.
(a) Latin.
(a) Old Latin.
d Latin text of D (i.e. 6th cent.), but more than a mere
translation of the Greek, and often agreeing with quotations
by Lucifer of Cagliari (ob. 371 a.d.).
e Apparently a mere transcript of d (see above).
g Latin text of G (i.e. 9th cent.).
f Not quite only a transcript of g, and is therefore some
times to be quoted.
m 8th or 9th cent. Quotations from all N.T. books except
Philemon, Hebrews, 3 John, found in Liber de divinis Scrip-
turis sive Speculum, erroneously attributed to Augustine (see
H. A. A. Kennedy in Hastings' D.B. in. pp. 51, 52).
r 5th or 6th cent., contains no part of Colossians or
Philemon.
(j3) Vulgate, i.e. Jerome's revision of the Old Latin (N.T.
383—385 A.D.). For a full list of the MSS. see H. J. White
in Hastings' AS. iv. pp. 886 — 890; only the more important
can be named here.
Amiatinus (beginning of 8th cent.). The whole Bible,
written either at Wearmouth or Jarrow, by the order of
Abbot Ceolfrid, and taken by him, 715 a.d., as a present to
the Pope, but, he himself dying on the way, his followers
carried it on to Rome. Now at Florence. Named from
Monte Amiata, where it was when used in the Sixtine
revision. Fuldensis (6th cent.). The whole N.T., " written for Bp
Victor of Capua, and corrected by him a.d. 541 — 546." Now
at Fulda in Prussia; contains Epistle to Laodiceans after
Colossians. Toletanus (probably 8th cent.). Whole Bible. Spanish.
Cavensis (probably 9th cent.). Whole Bible. Written in
Spain, now in the Benedictine Abbey of Corpo di Cava, near
Salerno. Bobbiensis (9th to 10th cent.). Now at Milan, containing
Ohron. — Pauline Epistles. A mixed text.

lv-iii INTRODUCTION (b) Syriac.
See especially Burkitt in Encycl. Bibl. 4998—5006. No MS.
of the Old Syriac version of St Paul's Epistles has yet been
found, though the quotations in Aphraates and the commentaries
of Ephraem prove the existence of a version earlier than the
Peshitta. But, as Mr Burkitt points out (p. 5004), " Readings of
the Armenian Vulgate which differ from the ordinary Greek
text, especially if they are supported by the Peshitta, may be
considered with some confidence to have been derived from the
lost Old Syriac."
(a) Peshitta, or Syriac Vulgate, i.e. "the Simple," perhaps
with reference to the simplicity of its form as distinguished from
"the Hexaplaric version of the O.T. and the Harclean of the
N.T., editions which were furnished with marginal variants and
other critical apparatus." Apparently dating (as distinguished
from the Old Syriac) from the episcopate of Rabbula, Bishop of
Edessa 411—435 a.d.
(j3) Philoxenian. A revision of the Peshitta made in 508 A.D.
for Philoxenus, Bp of Mabbog, but no part of it seems to
exist for the Pauline Epistles. The Versio Philoxeniana, pub
lished by Jos. White between 1778 and 1803, is really the version
next to be mentioned.
(y) Harclean. In 616 a.d. Thomas of Heraclea (Harkel),
Bp of Mabbog, made at Alexandria an elaborate revision of the
Philoxenian. It was edited as above. Its value for textual criti
cism lies partly in its excessive literalness, partly in the critical
notes containing various readings from two (or three) Greek
MSS. collated by Thomas at Alexandria. The text is "almost
invariably that of the later Greek MSS." Thus it is important
to refer to both text and margin.
(8) Palestinian. Written in "a variety of the Western
Aramaic, almost identical with that of the later Galilaean Jews."
" The language in which it is written comes nearest of all known
Christian dialects to that spoken by Jesus' and the apostles "
(Burkitt, Encyc. Bibl. 5005). The version seems to date from the
sixth or the earlier part of the seventh century. It survives only

OTHER VERSIONS lix
in fragments. Of Philemon nothing remains, and of Colossians
only iv. 12—18, printed by Mr G. H. Gwilliam (Oxford, 1893),
from a MS. of probably the eighth century.
(c) Egyptian.
On these versions see Forbes Robinson in Hastings' D.B. I.
pp. 668 — 673, and Burkitt's later article in Encycl. Bibl.
5006 — 5011. They represent the three chief dialects of Coptic.
(a) Sahidic (formerly called Thebaic), the version of Upper
(i.e. Southern) Egypt ; originally of the whole Bible, but now
existing only in large fragments. It can be traced back to the
early part of the 4th cent., and probably dates either from then
or from the end of the 3rd cent. Its text is similar to that of
S and B, though with somewhat more " Western " readings.
(/3) Fayyumic (formerly called Bashmuric), the version of the
Fayyum. Its date is unknown and its relation to the Sahidic
obscure. (y) Bohairic (formerly called Memphitic, or simply Coptic),
the version of the Bohaira (i.e. "Lake"), "a district near
Alexandria between Lake Mareotis and the west arm of the
Nile," therefore almost certainly of Alexandrian origin. It was
formerly assigned to the 2nd cent., but more recent investiga
tions place it as late as the 6th cent. " Its chief allies are
Cod. Regius (L) of the Gospels, a MS. probably written in Egypt
in the 8th cent., and among the Fathers not so much Clement
and Origen as Cyril of Alexandria." It contained originally
the whole Bible, regarding, however, the Apocalypse as un-
canonical. (d) Armenian.
The origin of this version is very uncertain, but it appears to
be fairly clear that the earliest attempts at translating the
Scriptures into Armenian were based on Syriac codices, and also
that the Syriac text employed was not the Peshitta but the Old
Syriac, both in the Gospels and in the Epistles. This primitive
(?? 3rd cent.) version was thoroughly revised from the Greek
about the middle of the 5th cent., the Greek text used being
apparently akin to KB.

lx INTRODUCTION
(e) Ethiopic,
i.e. in Ge'ez, the classical language of the Abyssinians. Not
older than the 5th or 6th cent.
(/) Gothic.
Made by Ulphilas in the middle of the 4th cent. Fragments
more or less extensive of all the books of the N.T. except Acts,
Catholic Epistles, and Apocalypse. Its text appears to be
" largely Syrian and largely Western, with a small admixture of
Non- Western readings" (Hort, Introd. § 218).
iii. Fathers.
It does not seem to be worth while giving any list here.
Every student will of course bear in mind that, valuable though
their testimony is by reason of their time and locality being
known, and, sometimes, by reason of their representing whole
Churches rather than their private opinions, yet in only too
many cases critical editions of their works have not been made.
Hence, speaking generally, their evidence against the Received
Text is of more weight than that in its favour.
2. The Grouping of the Authorities is not so marked in the
Pauline Epistles as in the Gospels, the " Western " text in
particular having far less addition and omission. Mr Lake
(p. 72) gives the following groups :
Neutral— KB [AC] boh [Orig.].
" Western."— DEFG[B] Old Lat. early Lat. Fathers.
Alexandrian. — If anywhere in [AC Orig.].
And also a Caesarean group, K° H. Euthal.
i. The following passages of Binary Groups containing B
(Hort, § 305), are of interest.
Besides the combination KB, which appears to be always right
in Colossians :
i. 12, vp'as,
ii. 2, els irav irXovros,
iv. 12, o-raQrJTe,

BINARY GROUPS WITH B lxi
we have
(a) BC, i. 3, tg> Bern irarpt (right).
(6) B 17, ii. 13, f)pds (hardly right).
iii. 12, dyioi Kal rjyairrfpevoi. They omit Kai (pro
bably wrong).
(c) B 67**, j.18, ^ dpxi, (right).
iii. 15, iv kv\ o-a>pan. They omit evl (possibly
right).
iv. 15, avrrjs (very uncertain, but on the whole
perhaps wrong).
(d) BD (Hort, § 306).
ii. 7, rfj irlo-rei, not iv r. n. (right).
iii. 4, jj £a>Tj rjpibv, not vpS>v (probably right).
iii. 21, ipe8i£ere (probably right).
ii. The following examples of "singular" and " subsingular "
(i.e. with only secondary support) readings of B may be noticed
(Hort, §§ 308—325) :
i. 3, 'lrjo-ov [Xpiorov], B omits (perhaps right).
i. 4, ijv exere, B omits (probably right).
i. 9, Kal ahoipevoi., B omits (wrong).
i. 12, evxapiarovvTes au.a (possibly right).
i. 14, eo^xopev, not 'ixopev (uncertain).
i. 20, eVl ttjs yns, B omits (probably wrong).
i. 22, diroKaTipXXdyrrre (uncertain, but probably wrong).
ii. 2, rov Beov, Xptorov (probably right).
ii. 16, Kal ev iroa-ei (very doubtful).
ii. 23, Kal d<f>ei8ia amparos, B omits (very doubtful).
iv. 3, to pvo-rrjpiov rov 8eoI, B*L (hardly right).
iii. On the other hand the local " Western " element of B has
affected the text (Hort, § 320) in
i. 12, B has the conflate KaXeaavri Kal lKava>o-avTi.
iv. The following cases occur " where BDG or BG with other
chiefly Western documents stand alone among Pre-Syrian docu
ments" (Hort, § 341) :
i. 3, mrep vpS>v (probably wrong).
i. 20, the omission of 8i avrov (2nd) (probably wrong).
ii. 10, '6 io-riv (probably wrong). p. 2

Ixii INTRODUCTION
ii. 12, eV tuv vexpav (very doubtful).
ii. 17, o io-riv (perhaps right).
iii. 16, iv tjj x^PITh KCBD*G (wrong).
iii. 22 iv 6<pBaXpu>8ovXela (sing.), ABDG (wrong).
iv. 3, 8i' 8v, BF^G (hardly right).
v. In Philemon the absence of B would appear to render only
one passage seriously uncertain (cf. Hort, § 343) :
V. 6, iravrbs dyaBov [tov] iv rjpiv.
vi. It is instructive to notice that X alone or in a Binary
Group is generally wrong (cf. Hort, § 307).
(a) "singular" or " subsingular " readings of N :
i. 12, ra Bern irarpi (wrong).
i. 18, i< t&v veKpwv, N* omits 6'k (wrong).
(6) K*D* :
iii. 14, os ianv (wrong).
(C). NP:-
i. 23, Krjpv£ Kal diroo-ToXos (wrong).

lxiii

CHAPTER IX.
A Brief Analysis of the Epistle.
In the case of a writer like St Paul, who is at once so con
densed in style and at the same time so fond of enlarging upon a
subject on which he has previously touched, no analysis can be
perfect and final, but the following summary of the chief thoughts
of the contents of the Epistle may be useful1 :
(A) i. 1, 2. Salutation.
(B) i. 3 — 14. Introduction.
(a) i. 3 — 8. Introductory thanksgiving for their effective re
ception of the Gospel as first taught them.
(6) i. 9 — 14. Prayer for them, with the reason for their
gratitude to God, viz. their emancipation in Christ.
(0) i. 15 — ii. 5. Doctrinal and personal preparation for the
direct subject of his letter.
(a) i. 15 — 23. Christ's office and work described, and the
aim of their emancipation stated.
(6) i. 24 — ii. 5. St Paul's appeal to them is based on his
glad toil for them and his personal interest in them.
(D) ii. 6, 7. Transition. Reception of truth must be put
into life.
(E) ii. 8 — 19. His central subject; direct warning against
the false teachers.
(a) ii. 8 — 15. You have in Christ far more than the false
teachers promise you and demand of you. He is superior
to all spiritual powers.
1 See more fully in the Commentary at each larger division. An
elaborate and minutely articulated analysis may be found in Mr G. W.
Garrod's The Epistle to the Colossians — Analysis and Examination
Notes, 1898.

lxiv INTRODUCTION
(b) ii. 16 — 19. Therefore hold yourselves free as regards
rules of ritual, and do not be led into the worship of
angels, for this means a weaker hold of Christ.
(F) ii. 20 — iii. 4. Transition to detailed practical direc
tions, both negatively and positively.
(G) iii. 5 — iv. 1. Practical duties,
(a) iii. 5 — 17, in the individual,
(b) iii. 18 — iv. 1, in the relations of a household.
(H) iv. 2 — 6. Appendix.
The duty of prayer and of speaking for Christ.
(I) iv. 7 — 17. Personal matters and final words.
(a) iv. 7 — 9. The messengers commended to them.
(6) iv. 10 — 17. Greetings from and to individual believers.
(J) iv. 18. Valediction.

lxv

CHAPTER X.
Commentaries.
The following may be mentioned particularly. An asterisk
has been prefixed to those that have been of special service in
the preparation of this edition. Convenient lists of the earlier
literature may be found in Meyer on Romans and on Colossians,
and of the later in Abbott.
*Chrysostom, Horn., ed. F. F[ield], 1855.
Theodore of Mopsuestia (Lat. version only, with a few small
fragments of Greek), ed. Swete, 1880.
Davenant, Bp of Salisbury, 1627 (E. T. by J. Allport, 1831).
*Wetstein, Nov. Test. 1752.
*Bengel, Gnomon N.T. 1773 (ed. Steudel, 1862).
*Meyer (E. T. 1879).
von Soden, 1891.
Oltramare, 1891.
*Haupt, 1897.
*Weiss, B., 1902.
*Ewald, P., 1905.
Alford, 4th ed., 1865.
*Ellicott, 5th ed., 1888.
*Lightfoot, 1st ed., 1875.
*Moule, 1898.
*Beet, 1890.
*Abbott, T. K., 1897.
Peake, 1903.
Frequent reference has also been made to [Dean] J. A[rmitage]
R[obinson's] Ephesians, 1903.

Ixvi

" Quomodo Christiani res civiles debeant tractare ex principiis
altioribus." Benoel.

INTRODUCTION TO PHILEMON.

Canonicity and Genuineness.
The Epistle is so short and so personal that it does not easily
lend itself to quotation, especially by writers who, as for example
Irenaeus, are chiefly occupied with doctrinal questions.
1. Orthodox :
i. Ignatius possibly has echoes of it in Eph. § 2 koto irdvra
pe dveiravaev (cf. Phm. 7 and 20), and ovaiprjv iipaiv Bid iravTos
(cf. Phm. 20). Compare Magn. § 2 oi yap Svalptjv, and ad Polyc.
§§ 1, 6.
ii. Theophilus ad Autol. i. 1 (? 183— 185 a.d.) too has the same
play upon ev,xP1°-Tos...dxprio-Tos that is found in Phm. 11.
iii. The Muratorian Canon names it before the Epistles to
Titus and Timothy ; " ad filemonem unam."
iv. Tertullian does not quote it, but shows that he received
it by his remark about Marcion (vide infra).
v. Origen appears to be the earliest writer who actually
quotes it. He also ascribes it to St Paul : 6V6p ko.1 6 IlaCXos
iiriardpevos eXeyev iv rfj irpbs $iXrjpova iiriaroXfi t& $iXr)povi irepl
'Ovr/o-lpov Iva pr) kot dvayKr/v to ayaBbv jj, dXXd Ka6' eKoixriov
( = Phm. 14, Horn. xix. on Jer. 2). Cf. Matt. Comm. §§ 66, 72.

PHILEMON: CANONICITY lxvii
vi. Eusebius doubtless includes it among his opoXoyovpeva,
for he does not mention it by name among the dvriXeyopeva
or the v6Ba (HE. iii. 25), and also says tov Be JJavXov npdBrjXoi
Kal O'acpels al 8eKaTearo%apes (iii. 3).
vii. On the other hand there are reasons for thinking that it
was not included in the earliest form of the Syriac Canon, for
(a) Ephraem does not comment upon it, (6) the Armenian
version, which appears to have been based upon the Syriac
(vide supra, p. lix., cf. Zahn, Canon n. pp. 564 n. 1003), does not
show traces of Syriac influence here. Ephraem accepted, and
commented fully upon, the spurious Third Epistle to the
Corinthians, and this is also found in the Armenian Version.
Perhaps the early Syriac Canon made up the recognised number
(14) of St Paul's epistles by including it instead of the Epistle to
Philemon (see J. Arm. Robinson, Euthaliana, 1895, p. 91).
2. Unorthodox :
Marcion included it in his Canon, presumably on account of
its brevity ; cf. Tertullian, soli huic epistolae brevitas sua prof wit,
ut falsarias manus Marcionis evaderet (c. Marc. v. 21).
We thus find that not only is it used by early writers, but
also it is included in the earliest lists of the Pauline Epistles
(Marcion, the Muratorian Canon), and that its absence from
the earliest form of the Syriac Canon may be satisfactorily
explained. The genuineness of the Epistle has not been denied until
recent times, and even so hardly for any other reason than
its close connexion with Col. See a summary of the opinions
of Baur, Pfleiderer, Weizsacker, in van Manen's article in the
Encycl. Bibl. coll. 3693 sq. He himself after urging our ignorance
of Philemon, Apphia, and Archippus, says that the " surprising
mixture of singular and plural both in the persons speaking and
in the persons addressed"1 indicates an unnatural style, and
suggests that "the epistle was written under the influence of
a perusal of ' Pauline ' epistles, especially those to the Ephesians
1 Is this so ? In W.H. the first and the second persons singular
are used throughout, except in vv. 1 — 3, 6, 22, 25, where the reason
for the plural is obvious.

lxviii INTRODUCTION
and the Colossians." It was therefore written in the second
century (see coll. 3634). He further supposes that the author
made use of the incident mentioned in Pliny's letter (see below,
p. lxix.), but changed the freedman into a slave, and idealised
the subject from a Christian standpoint. It was probably
written in Syria (or, it may be, in Asia Minor) about 125 — 130.
This theory is so far valuable that its author perceives that
Phm. is closely connected with Col., but for all else it is
much too fine spun to command the general acceptance of
scholars. He quite fails to show sufficient reason for the forgery
of such a simple and touching letter. Why, if the letter be
genuine, we should be expected to know much about the persons
to whom it was addressed, does not appear.
On the connexion between the Epp. of Col. and Phm. see
the Introduction to Col. p. Ii. and on the presence of Onesimus
in Rome, ib. pp. xlviii. sq.

II.
The Epistle in relation to Slavery.
1. It must not be thought that no progress in right opinion
upon the subject of slavery had been made before the influence
of Christianity. In Rome at least a law issued by Augustus
expressly limited the absolute power of a master over his slaves.
and appointed a judge in cases of serious difference between
them1, and Claudius issued an edict giving "the Latin freedom"
to slaves abandoned by their masters for serious illness. But it
was not until the time of Hadrian (117 — 138 a.d.) that the power
of life and death over slaves was actually taken away from their
masters. "Seneca again urged in the first century that knight and
1 Cf. Zahn, Sclaverei u. Christenthum in der alten Welt, 1879, p. 155.
The reference appears to be to the Lex Petronia, which prohibited
masters from making their slaves fight with wild beasts in mere
caprice without an order from a judge. The state of slaves in Borne
had become much worse in the first century b.c than in earlier
times ; see Triebs, Studien zur Lex Dei, 1905, pp. 188 sqq.

PHILEMON: SLAVERY lxix
freeboru and slave were but names due to vanity or wrong,
and protested against the gladiatorial shows, saying, Man is a
holy thing to man, and he is killed for play and sport ! So also
he praises his friend for treating his slaves in a friendly and
trustful way : " They are slaves, you urge ; nay, they are men.
They are slaves ; nay, they are comrades. They are slaves ;
nay, they are humble friends. They are slaves ; nay, they are
fellow-slaves, if you reflect that fortune has the same power over
both1." And though he recalls the proverb of fearful import in
a community where slaves out-numbered their masters, " so
many slaves, so many enemies," he adds, "We do not have
them as enemies, we make them so," and he bids his reader
"make thyself respected rather than feared2."
The letter of Pliny the younger (Ep. ix. 21) to a friend
pleading for a freedman of the latter is translated in full by
Lightfoot (Philemon, pp. 384 sq.). It is very touching, but the
possibility mentioned is very suggestive : " 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."
2. The true precursor however of Christian teaching upon
slavery is not heathenism, even at its best in philosophic
utterance, but Judaism.
True that slavery of a kind was permitted in the Old Testa-
ment, but it was very different from that prevalent among the
heathen. It was, as regards Israelite slaves, tempered alike by
the remembrance, religiously inculcated and often repeated, that
all Israelites had sprung from one stock, and were all alike under
the special protection of the one God, and also by special legis
lation enjoining the emancipation of Israelitish slaves every
seven years3, and also the emancipation of a slave who had been
seriously injured by his master (Ex. xxi. 26). Slaves of heathen
origin were doubtless included under the command to rest on
the Sabbath, a charge enforced on their masters by the reminder
' Lightfoot's translation in St Paul and Seneca (Phil. p. 280).
2 Zahn, loc. cit.
3 Ex. xxi. 2 ; Deut. xv. 12. See Philo, De Septenario, § 9 (n. p. 286).

lxx INTRODUCTION
that they themselves had once been slaveg_in Egypt (Deut. v.
i 14, 15). There is no trace in Old Testament history of the
I harshness and cruelty which was common in Greece or Rome.
' In fact Job's words, when pressed to their legitimate issue, result
in Christian teaching : " If I did despise the cause of my man
servant or my maidservant... did not He that made me in the
womb make him ? And did not one fashion us in the womb?"
(xxxi. 13—15.)
Further, this element of mercy had been strengthened by the
later teaching of Jewish leaders. Philo speaking of servants
says, " it is not the condition of fortune, but the harmony of
nature, which, in accordance with the Divine law, is the rule
of justice1." He also says that the Essenes possessed no slaves,
for they considered slavery to be contrary to the dignity of man :
" They do not use the ministrations of slaves, looking upon the
possession of servants or slaves to be a thing absolutely and
wholly contrary to nature, for nature has created'all men free2."
3. What was the attitude of the Christian Church towards
slavery? i. It is evident that four courses were open. The Church
might condone and even praise it. This has been the attitude (i)
of individuals, even among the clergy, in times when slavery has
become a prominent question ; or it might take up the cause of
the slave so vehemently as to bring about a social upheaval ;/»¦
or it might put the matter on one side, regarding it as out of its u.
province ; or it might, as it actually did, teach that slavery could
not be defended upon principle, and discourage it as far as i^i
possible, waiting however for time to produce a strong feeling
against it.
For it must be remembered, first, that Christianity does
not profess to improve the world, but does proclaim the re
demption of the world3: It was no more the business of the
1 De Spec. Leg. § 25 (n. p. 323) in Yonge's translation.
2 De Vitd Contemp. § ix. (n. p. 482 Yonge's translation). Cf. also
Josephus, Antt. xvm. 1. 5.
3 " Das Evangelium ist nicht ein Programm der Weltverbesserung,
sondern Verkiinaigung einer Welterlosung." Zahn, op. cit. p. 160.

PHILEMON.- SLAVERY lxxi
Church than it was the business of the incarnate Christ
(Lk. xii. 14) to be a judge in earthly matters. The Church
was to be a great tree, under the shadow of whose legislation
the nations were eventually to take shelter, and it was to be
leaven, ultimately leavening the whole lump of human thought
and action.
ii. Slavery was a question of grave importance to the Church
from the very first. A large proportion of its members must
have belonged to the slave class. But to become a Christian
brought to a slave temptations of a special kind1. If his master
was a believer he might think that because he was equal to his
master both in Divine worship and in relation to the one Master
in heaven, he was therefore justified in considering himself on
an equality with him in all else. Against this St Paul writes
1 Tim. vi. 2.
Again, if his master was still a heathen, and treated him
harshly, he might, with his new learning of the duty of justice
and mercy, be the more shocked at him and feel justified in
trying to resist him (1 Pet. ii. 18) ; or he might feel that he had
as a Christian no right to remain a slave of any mere man, and
endeavour in some way to escape from so galling a condition
(1 Cor. vii. 21).
For it was not only a matter of service and compulsory
obedience ; there was also the question of whether it was
allowable to a Christian to take part, even under compulsion,
in the many practices of heathen daily life that had reference to
religion. " At every turn he must have been called upon to bow
his head in the house of Rimmon, to fetch the incense for his
master to burn, to dress the doors with branches on pagan fes
tivals, to wear clothing embroidered with idolatrous emblems2."
But if he did set his mind on obtaining his freedom, he might
think that fresh opportunities came to him by belonging to a
Christian community. Might not some of the contributions
raised Sunday by Sunday be used to buy him from his master
1 Cf. Bigg on 1 Pet. ii. 18.
2 Bigg, loc. cit.

lxxii INTRODUCTION
and so to set him free ? That this was a real temptation may
be seen from Ignatius' words to Polycarp (§4), " Let them not
long to be set free at the expense of the community, lest they be
found slaves of their own desires1."
{ iii. But the Church (in at least its early days) remained free
from all complicity with slavery. There is no example in the
i Christian literature of the first three centuries of a Christian
selling his own slave, or any Christian slave, to another master2.
And on the other hand no Church office was shut to slaves as
such3. Chrysostom could say with truth, " The Church knows
no difference between slaves and masters4."
4. In the formation of a right Christian opinion the Epistle
to Philemon must have played an important part. It was
written by the greatest of all the apostles on behalf of a slave ;
whom he says he regarded as his own bowels ; for whom he
entreated the sympathy of the very master from whom the slave
had once fled, and whom, as it seems, this slave had robbed ;
without (in all probability) hinting that Philemon should set
Onesimus free, yet implying that he, with the other Christians
who met for worship in his house, should honour Onesimus even
though a slave, and admit him to full Christian privileges. Thus
the letter emphasizes the enormous change that Christianity had
brought to all slaves. It showed by a concrete example the
truth stated in the contemporary letter that in Christ there is
neither bond nor free (Col. iii. 11), and that earthly connexion
or condition is unimportant compared with spiritual relationship
to God. It was the abolition of the slavery of his will, and its
consequent freedom to serve God, that turned Onesimus from a
slave in heart to a free man in Christ. That it was a contra
diction of the ideal of freedom to be enslaved in body when the
1 p^ ipdraaav dirb rov kolvov iXevdepovoSai, tva pr\ SovXoi ebpe8&<nv
iirt&upias. 2 Zahn, op. cit. p. 174.
3 Callistus Bishop of Bome (218— 223 a.d.) had been a slave, and a
runaway slave, of whose manumission we know nothing, but while
Hippolytus rakes up everything against him that he can he never
mentions his Blavery as an objection to him.
4 Zahn, op. cit. p. 176.

PHILEMON: SLAVERY lxxiii
soul was free — however important relatively this latter was —
a very slight philosophical training could readily discover. Men i
might be trusted to see, in other words, that slavery was ideally, )
and therefore fundamentally, opposed to Christianity, even)
though it was not easy to see how the bodily liberty of all!
Christian people could be secured without overthrowing the!
fabric of society.
Nor indeed was the problem solved until society itself became
changed. As men learned that manual labour was in itself no '
disgrace ; as the system spread of paying money for services S
rendered ; as it was perceived with increasing clearness — though;
the vision is far from perfect even yet — that Christian principles^
must pervade every department of life, so was it more and more)
evident that slavery was contrary to the will of God and to the I
rights of man.
5. Into the history of the abolition of slavery in Christian
lands this is not the place to enter. It is more important to
note that while no professing Christian nation now holds slaves
there are still very many millions of slaves in heathen and
Mohammadan countries. It is indeed impossible even to guess
at all accurately at their number. When however it is stated
by an eyewitness that only eleven years ago there were probably
five million slaves in Hausa-land alone1 (though now these are
supposed to have been set free), and we are also told that one
Arab dhow captured in 1902 contained 700 slaves2, we can form
some idea of the vastness of human misery that slavery is still
causing among nations and peoples who have not known the
teaching of Christ, and we can appreciate the better the great
ness of the change already brought about by the Gospel.
1 Canon C. H. Bobinson at the annual meeting of the British and
Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, 1905.
2 Sir William Lee- Warner at the same meeting.

lxxiv INTRODUCTION III.
Analysis.
vv. 1 — 3. Address and greeting.
vv. 4 — 7. Introductory thanksgiving for Philemon's faith and
kindness to the saints.
vv. 8 — 20. The request.
vv. 21, 22. Sure of Philemon's obedience he hopes to come to
him soon.
vv. 23, 24. Salutations from friends.
v. 25. Final benediction.
IV.
Commentaries.
The list for the Epistle to the Colossians applies very closely
to the Epistle to Philemon. In the International Critical Com
mentary however Philemon has been taken by M. R. Vincent
(1897) instead of T. K. Abbott. Quite recently Dr A. H.
Drysdale has issued a suggestive devotional commentary on
our Epistle, with a valuable bibliography (1906).

nP02 K0AAS5AEI2

1 1IIai)\o5 a7roo-To\o9 XpicrTov 'Itjvov Bid OeXrj-
/jLaros Oeov Kal Tt/xo#eo? 6 aoeA<£o? zT0t? iv KoAocro-at?
ayioi'i Kai iTLaTOi'i d8eX<poi<> iv Xpto-Too* ^dpis vp.lv Kal
eipr/vr] airo Oeov iraTpbs r/fiwv.
3JLv%apio-ToviJ,ev tw Oetp irarpl tov Kvpiov i)fiolv
\rjcrov [Xpio-Tov] trdvTOTe Trepl vfiwv irpoaev^ofievoi,
iaKOvo-avT€<; rr/v ttuttiv vfiav iv X.pio~Tm 'I770-OU Kal
ttjv dydirrjv [rjv e%ere] et? iravTas tov? dyiovs 68ia
ttjv iXmSa ttjv diroKeip,ev7]v vp.lv iv Tot? ovpavois, fjv
Trpor/Kovo~aTe iv tg> ~X.oya> tjj? aXr/Oeias tov evayyeXiov
6 tov irapovTof et? v/ias, Ka&ax; Kai iv iravTi ra Koo~/j,cp
ecrTiv Kap7rocpopovfievov Kal aitjavofievov KaOax; Kai iv
bfiiv, a<f> 779 r)p,epa<; rjKOiio-aTe Kal iireyvmTe T17V %dpiv
tov Oeov iv dXr)0eiq' 7KaO<b<; i/iddeTe dirb 'Ei7ra<ppd tov
dyaw7}Tov avvBovXov r)p,wv, o? iaTiv •jtio-to's vnrep r)po3v
Sicikovo<; tov %piaTov, s6 Kal S^XoSo-a? r)pXv ttjv bficov
dydirrfv iv irvevjiaTi. "Aid tovto Kal r/peis, acp' r)<;
r)fiji.pa<i r)Kovo-ap,ev, ov iravofieOa virep vpiwv "irpoaevxp-
fievoi Kal aWovfievoi 'iva TrXrjptoOfjTe ttjv inrvyvwaiv tov
0e\rjp,aTO<; avTov iv irdo-rj cro<pl,a Kal avveaei irvevfia-
tiktj, ^irepnraTrjaai a£toj? tov Kvpiov et? irdaav dpeaKiav
iv TravTi epy(p dyaOm Kapiro<popovvTe<; Kal av^avopievoi
tt) iiriyvooo-ei tov Oeov, uiv Trdo-rj Svvdfiei Svva/iovpevoi
col. A

ETTIITOAH [1 n

KaTa to Kparo? Tr)<; oo£j7? avrov et? iracrav V7rofiovrjV
Kal p,aKpo6vp,iav p,eTa yapa?, 12ei)£apio-T0vvTes t«5
iraTpl too iKavmaavTi vp,a<! et? ttjv piepLBa tov KXijpov
tojv dyicav iv t&> (pari, 13o? ipvcraTo r)/j,d<; e'« tj)? e'foucrta?
tov <tkotov^ Kal p,erecrTi]o-ev et? rr/v f3ao-i\eiav tov
vlov t?j? aydiri)^ avTOV, uiv a> k%pfiev ttjv airoX-VTpoiO'iv,
ttjv dcpecriv twv dfiapTicSv 15o? iaTiv eiKwv tov Oeov
tov aopaTov, irpcoTOTOKO'; irao-i)*; KTicreay;, w6ti iv aiiTW
iKTio-Or) Ta irdvTa iv toi<; ovpavoi<; Kal iirl tj)? 777?, to
opaTa Kal Ta dopaTa, etVe Opbvoi etre KvpioTijTes etVe
ap%al elVe i^ovciaf rd irdvTa Bi avTov Kal et? avTov
eKTio-Tai' 17Kai avTo<> ko~Tiv trpo TravTwv xal Ta irdvTa
iv avT<l> crvveo-TrjKev, I8#at ai/ro? io~Tiv r) Ke<pa\r) tov
o-apaTOS, Tr}<; e'/e/cA/ria-ta? • o? iaTiv \fj] dpyrj, irpmTO-
toko<; eK twv veKpwv, 'iva yivrjTai iv irdcriv ai/To?
irpaTevoav, l*oti ev avTcp evooKi)o-ev irav to TrXr/pwp.a
KaroiKrjo-ai 20«at St avTov diroKaTaXXd^ai Ta irdvTa
et? avTov, eiprj voir oii] era? Bid tov aip,aTO$ tov aTavpov
avTov, [Si avTov] etre Ta iirl Tr)<; yr)$ etVe Ta iv toi<;
ovpavois- 21«<xt vytta? 7tot£ 6Wa? dirrfXXoTpi(o-
pievous Kai i%8poi><; tj} Biavola iv Tot? epyoif rot? ttovi)-
pot?, — vvvl Be diroKaTrjXXu^ev *22eV too o-wp,aTl tjj?
aapKOi avTov Bid tov OavaTov, — TrapaaTrjo-ai v/tas
dyiovs Kal dp.d>p,ov<; Kal dveyKXijTOv; KaTevmiriov avTov,
™ei ye itrip.eveTe tt) ir'iaTei TeOep.eX103p.evo1 Kal eSpaioi
Kal p,r) p,eTaKivovp,evoi dirb tj)? eX^rt'So? tov evayyeXiov
ov r)KOvo-aTe, tov KijpvxOevTO? iv trdo-rj KTiaei Ty virb
tov ovpavov, ov iyevop,r)v iyeb TLavXos BiaKOvo<;.
^Nvv %a'ipm iv Tot? iraOr)p,ao-iv vTrep vp,d>v, Kal
* sic WH edd. 1881, 1895 with A.V., B.V. but edd. 1885, 1887
begin v. 22 at vvvl.

2 8] TTPOS KOAAIIAEII 3
avTavairX'qpai Ta vareprjp.aTa tojv OXiyjrecov tov %pto~Tov
ev ttj aapKi p.ov vtrep tov creo/iaTO? avTov, 6 iaTiv r)
eKKXrjo-ia, ^'r/? iyevoprjv iym SidKovos KaTa Tr/v oikovo-
p.iav tov Oeov ttjv BoOeiadv p.01 et? vp,a<; TrXr/pwaai tov
Xoyov tov Oeov, 26to p.vaTr]ptov to diroKeKpvp.p,evov dirb
toiv aimveov koi airb twv yevea>v,—vvv Be i<j>avepd>Or)
Tot? ayioi? avTov, ^ol? rjOiXrjaev 6 #eo? yvoipicrai ti to
ttXouto? ri)? 80^77? tov p,vaTr]piov tovtov iv tois eOveaiv,
0 ecrTiv X.piaTO<; iv vp.iv, r) eX.7rt? ttj? Bo^rjf ^bv rjp.eis
KaTayyeXXoptev vovOeTovvTes iravra dvOpoiirov Kal Bi-
SaaKOVTes irdvTa dvO poiirov iv Trdcrrj cro<f>la, Iva irapa-
o-TTjo-a)p,ev TravTa dvOponrov TeXetov iv XptfrTCO* Met? o
Kal kottioj dyoovi£6p.evo<; Kara tt)v ivepyeiav avTov ttjv
ivepyovpAvqv iv ep.ol iv Bvvdp,ei. 2 1©e\oj
yap vp,d<i elBevai t/Xikov dywva e^ft) virep vp,o3v Kai tojv
iv AaoBiKia, Kal oaoi ov% eopaKav to irpoawrrov p,ov ev
aapKi, 2iva TrapaKXrjOwaiv ai KapBlai avTwv, avvfiifia-
aOevTe<; iv dydirr] Kal et? trdv ttXovto<; tj)'; ¦7rXripo<popia<;
T97? avveaeeos, et? iir'iyvcoaiv tov p,vaTV)p'iov tov Oeov,
XpiaTov, siv & elalv iravTe<; oi OHCAypoi thc cocpi<\c Kal
yvd>aeoo<s ArroKpycpoi. 4Tovto Xeyco 'iva fir/Sels vp,d<;
TrapaXoyity)Tai iv iriOavoXoyia. 'el yap Kal ttj aapKi
dtreipbi, dXXa Top irvevp.aTi aw vp.iv eip-i, 'yaipmv Kal
jSXeTraiv vfioov ttjv Ta^iv koi to aTepecopia ttj? et? XpiaTov
TTiaTews vpwv.
6'0? ovv TrapeXafieTe tov xpiaTov 'Irjaovv tov Kvpiov,
iv avTw irepiTvaTe'tTe, 7eppi£cop.evoi Kal eTroiKoBop.ovp.evoi
iv avTo3 Kal fte(Haiovp,evoi ttj iriaTei KaOdx; iBiBd^OrjTe,
TrepiaaevovTe<; [iv avTj)] iv ev%apiaTta. 8BXe-
7reT6 p,r) Tt? vp-ds eaTat 6 avXayayoov Bia T77? (piXoaoabia*;
Kal Kevr)<; dirdTr)<i Kara tt}v irapdSoaiv t&v avOpwiroov,
A2

4 EnilTOAH [2 8
KaTa rd aroi^eia tov Koapiov Kal ov KaTa ~X.piaTOV
9oti iv avTa> KaTOiKel irav to irXr)pa)p.a tj;? OeoTrjTo<;
aap,aTiKu><;, 10Kal iore iv avToo ireirXrjpoap.evoi, o? eartv
r} Ke<paXr) irdarj<; dp%f}<; Kal ijjovaias, niv a> Kai irepie-
TpijOrjTe irepiTopfj d.yeipo-Koir)T<p iv rrj direKBvaet tov
amp.aTo<; tt;? trap/eo?, iv tt) irepiToprJ tov \piaTOV,
navvTa<pevTe<; avTa> iv tg> /3aTTTiap.aTi, iv a> Kai avvij-
yepOrjTe Bid tt;? irio~Te<o$ tj?? ivepyeias tov Oeov tov
iyeipavTos avTov eK veKpmv lsKal vp,a<; veKpow 6Wa?
tois irapairTwp.aaiv Kal tt) aKpopvaria tj}? <rap«o?
vp.mv, avve^cooTroiijaev vp.d<; aw avTW' j^aptadp.evo'i
r)piv irdvTa Ta •jrapa-irTwp.aTa, ui^aXei\jra<; to KaO'
i)pSiv %etpoypa(pov Tot? B6yp.aaiv b r)v inrevavTiov
rjpiv, Kal avTo r)pKev e« tov pieaov TrpoavXmaa<i avrb
T(£ aTavpw' ua7reKBvaapevo<; Tas ap^as Kal Tci? i£ov-
crta? iBeiyp.a.Tiaev iv Trapprjala 0piap,j3evaa<s avTov<; iv
a\iT&. 16Mj) ovv ti<; vp.a<; Kpiveroa iv fipwaei
Kal iv iroaei r) iv p,epei eopTr)<; i) veop.r)via<; i) aafifiaTGDV,
17 a iaTiv aKid twv p,eXX6vTcov, to Be au>p,a rov ypiaTov.
18/it7;8et? vpd<; KaraftpafteveTO} OeXcov iv Taireivoqbpoavvr)
Kal OprjaKeia to3v dyyeXwv, a eopaxev ip,f3aTevwv, etKtj
<pvaiovp,evo<; vtto tov vob<; tj;? aapKo^ avTov, wKal ov
Kparaiv Tr)v KeabaXijv, e£ ov irav to awp.a Bid rajv dxpoov
Kal avvSea p.a>v iiriypprjyovpevov Kal avvftifSa^op.evov
av^ei ttjv avgijaiv tov Oeov.
20 Et direOdvere avv Xpto-T&j dirb twv aTotxeiwv tov
Koapov, Tt o>? ^o3vTe? iv Koapw Soyp,aTi£eaOe 21Mj)
d-^ry p.i]Be yevay p,rj8e Olyy<;, 22a iaTiv irdvra et?
(pOopdv rfj diro-^prjaei, Kara rd 6NTaAm<\ta ka'i AiAack&Ai'ac
toon ANOpoSnojN ; 23d,Tivd iariv Xoyov p,ev eyovra ao<pia<s
iv iOeXoOpTjaKia, koi ra-n-eivo^poavvr] [«at] dcpeiBia

3 1 6] TTPOI KOAAISAEIZ 5
aa>p,aT0$, ovk iv Tip.fi rivl 7rpo? irXnapovtjv ttj?
aapKO<i. 3 'Et ovv avvr/yepOvTe rq3 ypiarm,
Ta avoi tyjTeiTe, ov 6 xpiaroi; eariv In AeliA toy 6eoy
ka9hm€noc- ard aveo (ppovelre, p,r) rd eVt t/;? yrjt;, 3<z7re-
OaveTe ydp, Kal r) ^oar) vp,wv KeKpvTTTai avv too %piara>
ev to3 Oem' 4orav 6 ^pto-To? qjavepmOf/, r] %(or) r)p,wv, Tore
koX vp.el<; avv avrS (pavepcoOrjaeaOe iv So^y.
6Ne/cp<»o-aTe ovv Ta peX-rj Ta eVt tj;? 717?, tropveiav,
aKaOapaiav, rrdOo<;, iiriOvp,iav KaKtjv, Kal rr)v irXeove^tav
tJti<; iarlv elScoXoXarpia, 6Bi a epyerai r) opyi) tov Oeov1
7iv oi? Kal vp.el<i •jrepierraTrjaare irore ore e^r/re ev tovtoi<; •
"vvvl Be diroOeaOe Kal vp.el<; Ta irdvra, opyrjv, 0vp.6v,
KaKiav, /3Xaa<pT)p,iaii, aiay^poXoylav iK rov ar6p.aro<;
vp.oov "/at; tyevSeaOe et? dXXr)Xov<>' direKBvadpevoi tov
iraXaiov avOpwnov aw Tat? irpa^eaiv avrov, 10Kal
ivBvadp,evoi tov veov tov dvaKaivovp,evov et? iirlyvwaiv
kat' 6IKONA TOY KTICANTOC avrov, UOTTOV ovk evi "TLXXrjv
Kal 'IouSato?, irepnop.r) Kal aKpoftvaria, /3dp/3apo<;,
%Ki)Qr)<;, SovXo<;, iXev0epo<;, aXXa irdvra Kal iv irdaiv
Xpto-TO?. 12'Ei>St/'cra<7#e ovv a>? e'/eXe/CTOt tou
Oeov, dyiot Kal r)yairvp,evoi, airXdyyva oiKrtpp,ov, XPV~
aroTijTa, Tairetvoqbpoavvrjv, irpavnjra, p,aKpoOvp,iav,
^aveypp&voi dXXr/Xojv Kal yapiC,6p,evoi eavrol<; idv Tt?
7rp6? riva eyji fiop,<pr)v Ka0ob<; Kal 6 Kvpio<; iyapiaaro
vp.lv ovtq)'; koi vyttet?" 14e7rt iraat Be tovtois ttjv
dydirrjv, o iartv ai>vSeap,o<; tj;? TeXetoTJjTO?. 15«at r) '
eipjjvr/ tov ypiarov ftpafieveTco iv Tat? Kap8tai<t vp<bv,
et? r)v Kal iKXrjOrjre iv [ei/t] ad>p,arf Kal evydpiaroi
yiveaOe. 16o X070? tow ypiarov ivoiKeirco iv vp.lv
irXovaiw; iv irdarj aocpia1 SiSdaKovres Kal vovOe-
Tovi'Te? eai/TOu? yfraXp,ol<;, vp,voi<;, cJSat? irvevpariKal^

ETTISTOAH [3 16

iv xdpirt, dBovre<; iv Tat? «apSt'at? vp.&v ra> Oew- 17«at
irav on idv iroirjre iv Xoyoj i) iv epym, irdvra iv ovd-
p,ari Kvpiov 'Irjaov, evxapiarovvres rm Oem irarpi Si
avrov. 18 At yvvatKes, virordaaeaOe Tot? dvBpdatv, to? dvrjKev
iv Kvpiw. 19Ot dvBpe<;, dyairdre Ta? ywoiKa? /cat p.r)
iriKpa'iveaOe 7rpo? aiirds. 20Td reKva, viraKovere
rols yovevaiv Kara irdvra, rovro yap evapearov iariv
ev Kvp'ia. 21Ot irarepe';, p.r) ipeOi^ere rd reKva vp.Stv,
'iva p.r) dOvp-watv. 220t SotlXoi, viraKovere Kara
iravra rol<; Kara aapKa Kvplois, p.v iv ocpOaXfioBovXiatg,
&)? dvOponrdpeaKoi, dXX' iv dirXorijTt KapSta?, (pofiov-
pevoi tov Kvpiov. "o idv iroirjre, e'« ¦^•v^j;? ipyd^eaOe,
a)? Too Kvpia> Kai ovk avopoiiroi<;, Meioore$ on airo Kvpiov
diroXr]p.yfreaOe ttjv avrairoBoaiv ttj? KXvpovop.ia^' t&>
Kvpioi X.piaro} SovXevere' 25o yap dBiK&v Kopiaerai b
ijSiKrjaev, Kal ovk eariv irpoao}iroXvp.y(ria. 4 'Ot
Kvpioi, rb BiKaiov Kal ttjv iaorrjra Tot? BovXoi<i irape-
XeaOe, ei'Sore? 6Vt «at vp.el<; ex€Te Kvpiov iv ovpavai.
2Tj} irpoaevxxi irpoa Kaprepelre, ypijyopovvre<; ev avrr)
iv evxapiarta, 3irpoaevxbpevoi apa Kal irepl rjptwv, iva
o 0eo<; dvoi^rj ijpiiv Ovpav rov Xoyov, XaXrjaai rb p,varrj-
piov rov xptarov, Bi o Kal BeSep,at, 4iva (ftavepooao) airo
&)? oet pie XaXfjaai. 5'Ev ao<f>ia irepiirarelre 7rpo? toli?
e£ft>, rov Kaipbv i%ayopa£6p,evot. 66 X6yo<; vp.S>v irdvrore
iv ^dptrt, aXari r)pTvp,evo<;, elSevai 7r<w? Set v/td? evi
eKaaro) diroKpiveaOat.
'Ta Kar e'/te irdvra yvcopiaet ip.lv Ttr^t/eo? 6 dya-
irrjTos aSeXcpo*} Kal iriarb'i SiaK0vo<; Kal awSovXo<; iv
Kvpiep, sov eirep.yfra 7rpo? w/xd? et? avrb tovto iva yvoore
rd irepl r)p.S)v Kal irapaKaXearj Ta? /capSta? vpidv, 9avv

4 1 8] TTPOI KOAAIIAEIZ ;
Ovijaip,<p tcS irtarw Kal dyairvrm dSeX(poj, o? eariv e£
vp,S>v irdvra vp.lv yvmpiaovaiv rd oSSe.
10 ' Acr7rd£eTat i5/xd? 'Apt'crrap^o? 6 avvaiXpdXar6<;
p.ov, Kal Mdp«o? 6 dvei/rto? BapvaySa, (wept ou eXdfiere
ivroXd<i, idv eXOij 7rpo? 0/id? BeijaaOe avrov,) nKal
'Ij7<rot)? 6 Xey6p,evo<; 'IoOo-to?, ol oWe? iK irepiTop.rj<;,
ovtoi fiovoi avvepyol et? rijv ftaaiXeiav tov Oeov, ot'Vti'e?
iyevrjOvadv p.oi iraprjyopia. ^daird^erai v/id? 'Eira(ppd$
6 if; vp,a>v, BovXos Xpiarov 'It;o"ov, iravrore dyo)vt£6//,evo<;
virep vfioov iv Tat? 7rpoo"eu^at?, iva araOrjre reXeioi Kai
ireirXrjpo(popT)p,ivoi iv iravrl OeXrjpiari tov Oeov. 13piap-
rvpd) yap avroj on e^6' iroXvv irovov virep vp.Sv Kai
toov iv AaoSiKia Kal rwv iv Iepa IldXet. udaird^erat
vp.a<; Aou/cd? o t'aTpo? 6 dyairr]Tb<; Kal Aj;/id?. 15 Acr-
irdaaaOe toii? iv AaoSiKia dSeX<f>ov<; Kai Nvp,<pav Kal
tt)v Kar oXkov avrr)<; iKKXr/aiav. 16«ai orav avayvoaaOfj
trap vp.lv r) iiriaroXrj, iroiijaare 'iva Kal iv rfj AaoBt-
xecov iKKXvaia dvayvojoOfj, Kal ttjv e'« AaoSt«ta? iva
koi vpel<; dvayvdore. 17Kal etirare Apxtirira> BXe7re
rrjv SiaKovtav rjv 7rapeXa/3e? iv Kvpia, 'iva airr/v
TrXwpols. 18<0 dairaap,b<i rfj ip,fj %etpt UavXov. p.vvp.ovevere
p.ov r&v Seaptoov. r) x^Pc<> f16^ vp,wv.

TTP02 <DIAHMONA
1IIat)Xo? oeoywo? Xpiarov 'Irjaov Kal Tip,60eo<; 6
dSeX<f>b<; <£>iXrip,ovi tod ayairrjiai Kal avvepyop fjp,5>v "Kal
Airqbia rj) dSeXcprj Kal 'Apxiirirw rm avvarpaTtwrij
r)p5)v Kal rrj Kar oIkov aov iKKXnaia' "^dpt? vp.lv
Kal eiprjvv dirb Oeov irarpb<; ijp.wv Kal Kvpiov 'Irjaov
Xpiarov. ^EvxapiaToi to> Oeai p,ou irdvrore p,veiav aov iroiov-
pevo<; eirl rwv irpoaevx&v p,ov,BdKovcov aov rrjv aydirrjv
xal tt)v irianv fjv e'^et? et? rov Kvpiov 'Ir/aovv Kal et?
irdvras tov? dyiow, 607Tft)? r) Koivwvia ttj? iriared>% aov
evepyr)<; yevrjTai iv iirtyvioaet iravro<; dyaOo'v [tov] iv
rjp.lv et? X.ptar6v 7x^pav yap iroXXr)v eaxov Kal
irapaKXijaiv eiri rfj ayairrj aov, on rd airXdyxva twv
dyicov dvaireiravrai Bid aov, d8eX<f>i. 8A/o,
iroXXrjv iv Xpiarai irapprjaiav exe0V iirirdaaeiv aoi to
dvijKov, d8td rr/v dydirvv piaXXov irapaKaXm, roiovro<;
(ov a>? IlaOXo? irpeafivrrp; vvvl Be Kal Beaptiot Xpiarov
Irjaov, — 10irapaKaXd> ae irepl tov ipiov reKvov, ov
iyevvrjaa iv toj? 8eap,ol<; 'Ovrjaip,ov, nrov irore aoi
dxprjarov vvvl Be aol Kal ip,ol ei/%pj7<7T0i>, 12w dveirep.yjrd
aoi avrov, rovr eariv rd ip,d airXdyxva' 13bv iyod
i@ovX6p.ijv 7rpo? ipMvrbv Karexeiv, iva virep aov p,oi
SiaKovrj ev toi? Seap,ols tov evayyeXiov, 14^&>pt? Be tji?

ITPOI <PlAHMONA

aijs 7D00/U.T7? ovBev ijOeXijaa iroirjaai, 'iva p.r) to? Kara
avayKijv to dyaOov aov rj dXXd Kara eKovaiov. wraxa
yap Bid tovto ixo)piaOr) irpb<; &pav 'iva aiwviov avrov
oVe^T??, lsovKen o>? BovXov dXXd virep BovXov, dSeXd)ov
dyairijrov, fidXtara ipoi, iroaw Be pdXXov aol Kal iv
aapKi Kal iv Kvpitp. 17et o5V pe e%et? koivojvov, irpoa-
Xafiov avrov a>? ip.e. 18et Be n rjB'iKrjaev ae rj ocpeiXei,
rovro ip,ol iXXoya' wiyoo IlaOXo? eypatya rfj ipr) %etpt,
e'7&j diroriaw 'iva fir) Xeyoo aoi on Kal aeavrbv p.01
TrpocrooSetXet?. wvai, aSeX<pe, iyd> aov ovaipriv iv Kvpi(p'
avairavaov puov ra airXdyxva iv Xpta"T&>.
2ineTrot#&>? tt} viraKofj aov eypayfrd aoi, et8&>? on
Kal virep a Xeya) iroirjaeis. i2dp.a Be Kal eroifia^e p.01
f;eviav, iXiri^co yap on Sid rwv irpoaevx&v vp.wv
XaptaOrjaojiai vp.lv.
^ Aaird^erai ae 'E7rao!>pa? 0 avvaixpiaXooTO1; pov ev
Xpianp Irjaov, MMap/co?, ' Apiarapyps, A?;p:d?, Aowcd?,
01 avvepyoi p.ov.
^'H X^PK T0U KVPi0V Irjaov Xpiarov perd rov
irvevparo<; iip.ao'v.

NOTES.

COLOSSIANS.
CHAPTER I.
Title, irpbs KoXoo-aaeis XBC, Old Lat. Vulg., irpbs KoXao-o-aets AB*K.
2. KoXoo-o-cus X(A hiatus)BD ; KoXao-aais KP.
airo Oeov iraTpos ^|io>v BDKL amiat. fuldensis. Both Origen and
Chrysoatom expressly. Text. Bee. adds Kal Kvpiov 'ItjitoO X/mcttoB with
KAC etc. Clementine Vulg. The addition is so often genuine, Bom. i. 7 ;
1 Cor. i. 3 ; Eph. i. 2 ; Phil. i. 2 ; 2 Thes. i. 2, that the insertion of it
came very naturally to a careless scribe.
3. tu 8eu> Tro/rpl BC*. This difficult reading was corrected by the
insertion either of t<$ before irarpi, D*G and Chrys.372, or of Kal,
KAC2DCK, etc. Cf. iii. 17, also v. 12 infra.
'It\<rov [Xpiirroi!], only B omits.
irepl vfLuv Text. Bee. and W.H. Text, with NACDCK ; iirip ip.wv
W.H.mg. BD*G as in v. 9.
4. i-rjv d'yan-riv [rjv ?X£T£] d* iravras k.t.X. r\v lxeTe NACD*Q, the
versions except Pesh.; ttjv D'KL, Pesh. Chrys., as in || Eph. i. 15. B
omits altogether.
It is hard to decide whether to retain ijv (xere or to simply read ttjv
dydirvv els irdvras k.t.X. , and the question is complicated by Philem. 5
ttjv d-/diri)v Kal tt\v irianv rjv &xeis els rbv Kvpiov 'Xriffovv Kal els irdvras
roiis dylovs. Perhaps on the whole B is preferable, each of the other
readings being an attempt to improve the harsh grammar.
6. ev Travrl tu Koa-|i.a> early Kapirotpopoiinevov. Text. Kec. inserts
Kal after Kaap.^, with Db0GKL, Old Lat. Vulg. Syrr. It is an attempt
to improve » very difficult construction, but is practically limited to
" Western " authorities.
Kal ai|avop.evov, omitted by Text. Bee. with DbcK and many late
MSS. perhaps by a mere error of sight, cf. v. 9. But apart from the
external evidence we might have supposed the words to be added
from v. 10.
9. koI a'iToii(i.6vot omitted by BK, perhaps by error of sight, cf. v. 6.
12. eivapicrToOvTes. B alone adds a/io, thus separating jierd xapds

12 COLOSSIANS [1—
from evxap. There is no precise parallel to this addition in St Paul's
writings (cf. iv. 3, Phm. 22, and cf. Ac. xxvii. 40).
t£ Trorpl. Text. Bee. with ABC*DP amiat., Sy r. H"c]- text ; rep 8e$
Tarpl K, Vulg0101" fuld. Pesh. Syr. Boh. ; 8etp rip irarpi G ; rip Beip Kal
irarpi C3.
The variety in the forms of the additions is instructive. Contrast
the absence of evidence against 8e<p in v. 3 and iii. 17.
t<J iKavcao-avTi. Certain " Western " authorities read Tip KaXi<ravn,
D*G Ambrst. ; and B alone reads both participles rip KaXiaavn Kal
iKaviiffavri. viids, so KB amiat. Syr. H"tel- m« ; i)p.as ACD, etc. It was easy to
make St Paul express gratitude for himself as well as for others.
14. e\0)i,ev KCDG, etc. (A defective) ; tcxo/iev B alone of MSS.
Boh. In || Eph. i. 7 faxop-ev is read by only S*D*er Boh. The reading
is not certain. One tendency to assimilate the tense to the accom
panying aorists is at least balanced by another to insist on the present
possession of redemption. Compare Phm. 7.
15. irpBTOTOKos, etc. to end of v. 16 omitted by Marcion on, as it
seems, purely theological grounds. See Tertull. c. Marc. v. 19.
17. ev airn. The Greek Texts of F and of G omit iv. So also
Origen™'1-89 et omnia Mi constant, and Hilary.
18. [i\] (ipxij. The article is inserted by B alone of the uncials,
and by the cursives 47, 67**, b,or. Its addition is easily accounted
for on subjective grounds, after i) KetpaXr). But see commentary.
A few cursives read dirapxr) with Chrys. 398 and Oecum.
19. evSoKT|(rev. The correction to the older Attic usage vv86k. is
made by ADP. Cf. Blass, Gram. § 15. 4 ; W.H. Append, p. 162.
20. [8i* avroB] (2nd) NACDbeKP, Syrr. Boh. Chrys.; omitted by
BD*GL, Old Lat. vulg. Orig.
, It is difficult to decide, but perhaps the omission is supported too
entirely by " Western " authorities to be satisfactory.
errl t^s \t|S. B and apparently Origen2-760 omit tt)s. Similarly
some cursives in iii. 2 (cf. Heb. viii. 4). In iii. 5 there was not the
same temptation to omit, for the preceding rd p.iXn suggested the
article, and in Eph. i. 10 rd iirl rots oipavols preceded.
22. dTOKarrjXXagev KACDCKL(P), Vulg. Syrr. Boh. ; diroKarvX-
\dyi)re B (17 diroKaTwXXaKrjTai.) appy Hilary of Poitiers ; diroKaraX-
Xayivres D*FsrG, Irenlnt. Ambrst.
The participle is almost certainly due to the analogy of the
preceding dirnXXoTpioip-ivovs. But it is difficult to decide between the
two finite verbs. Lightfoot thinks that diroKarr)\Xa^ev "is probably
a grammatical correction to straighten the syntax " (add. note).

1 1] NOTES 13
Ttjs crapKos, omitted by Marcion for theological reasons.
23. 4710 IlavXas Siokovos. For SiaKovos, N*P read Krjpvl- Kal dirb-
a-roXos (1 Tim. ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 11) ; Aethiop. Kijpv£ Kal SidKovos ; and
characteristically A, with Harclean Syr.mg, Krjpvl- Kai dirbo-roXos Kal
SiaKovos. 24. vuv. Beza's edition of the Text. Bee. 1598 (cf. A.V.) prefixes
8s. This was probably due to the preceding word SiaKovos, but is
found in the purely "Western" group D*Gdfg vulg. Ambrst.
o eoriv. Ss io-nv CD*. Cf. i>. 27 note.
27. 0 lo-riv ABGP, quod est Old Lat. vulg. Ss ionv Text. Bee.
XCDKL. Cf. v. 24 note, and the difficult passage ii. 10.

1, 2. Salutation.
(v. 1) Paul, Christ Jesus' Envoy by God's will, and Timothy, one
of the Brotherhood, (v. 2) to those in Colossae who are at onee con
secrated to God and faithful members of the Brotherhood in Christ —
God, the Father of us believers, give you grace and protection.
In beginning his letter with his own name St Paul is following
the usual custom of his time (for exceptions see P. Ewald on
Eph. i. 1).
1. IlavXos. His Gentile name, used, presumably, in intercourse
with Gentiles even before his conversion, but from the time that
he began his specifically Gentile work (Acts xiii. 9) always em
ployed in St Luke's narrative (contrast Acts xxii. 7, 13, xxvi. 14)
and in St Paul's epistles. Possibly had he written a formal epistle to
Hebrew-Christians he would have used his Jewish name.
d-n-do-ToXos. Both the name and the office of an apostle appear to
be taken from Judaism, although there is no direct reference to Jewish
"apostles" before the time of Christianity. In the LXX. the word
airddToXos is found in the form of 1 Kings xiv. 6 recorded by A (not
B), where it is intended to translate the passive participle shaluah
"sent," Ahijah, of whom the word is used, being regarded as God's
iiroo-roXos. But this is not an example of the use of the word in its
more technical sense.
Possibly 2 Chron. xvii. 7, 8 is a real example of the thing, though
only the verb dirio-reiXev (shdlah) is used, not the substantive. It has
moreover been noticed (Erauss, Jew. Quart. Rev., Jan. 1905, p. 382)
that here Jehoshaphat sends five princes, and with them a body of
ten Levites and two priests (i.e. twelve, representing presumably the
twelve tribes as did the Christian apostles), who are commissioned
to take the Book of the Law and to go round teaching it.

i4 COLOSSIANS [1 1—
In post- Christian times Jewish "apostles" appear to have been
members of the Sanhedrin, chosen to go to various parts of the
Diaspora for the double purpose of giving instruction and of re
ceiving alms, and to have had a certain amount of disciplinary power.
Saul of Tarsus himself very nearly, if not quite, satisfies the description
when he is commissioned to go to Damascus.
On the New Testament conception of both name and office see
Lightfoot's classical note in Galatians (pp. 92—101, edit. 1869).
As a, translation "envoy" perhaps best represents it. St Paul here
of course employs it in its narrower sense, reminiscent as this
doubtless still was of its employment by our Lord when iirolvtrev
SibdeKa, ovs Kal diroo-rb\ovs <bvbp.aoev, 'Iva Sffiv p*r airov Kal 'Iva diro-
o-riXXjj avrovs Ki\pva-aeiv Kal 'ixeiv i^ovalav iKfldXkeiv rd Saip.bvia
(Mk iii. 14, 15).
St Paul has the word also in the same emphatic position in 1 Cor.
(prefixing KXryrbs), 2 Cor., Gal., Eph., 1 and 2 Tim., and in a secondary
place in Bom., Titus. But in Phil., where he is sure of full sym
pathy and has too no need to lay stress on his authority and
privileges, he says only IlaOXos Kal Tip.b8eos doQXoi Xp. 'Ii?<r.; in Philem. ,
where he wishes to draw out sympathy, only 8io-p.ios Xp.'Xno-.; and in
his early letters 1 and 2 Thes. before, perhaps, his authority was
impugned by messengers from Jerusalem (cf. Gal. ii. 12) he adds
no designation at all.
Xpio-roil 'It|o-oi1. The more common order in greetings after dirb-
otoXos, probably because it lays more stress on official as compared
with personal relation.
8id 6eXij|i.aTos 8eov. In salutations 1 Cor., 2 Cor., Eph., 2 Tim.,
cf. Bom. xv. 32, 2 Cor. viii. 5. The phrase is double-edged. On the
one hand it expresses to St Paul's heart his own unworthiness, for
his call to the apostleship was not by the will of man (himself or
another), but by that of God. On the other hand, it gives him
courage, and also invests him with authority in the eyes of others,
cf. Gal. i. 1.
Bid. God's will was the antecedent condition of his call and was
the means of its being made. The words also suggest that even Christ
had not acted arbitrarily, as it were, in commissioning him, but
had carried God's will into effect.
Kal Ti(id8eos. Leaving the Pastorals out of consideration we see
that in all his Epistles, save Bom. and Eph. (the former a semi-
treatise and the latter a circular letter), St Paul joins others with him
in the salutation; viz. Sosthenes (1 Cor.), Timothy (2 Cor., Phil., Col.,
Phm.), Silvanus and Timothy (1 Thes., 2 Thes.), "all the brethren

1 2] NOTES 15
who are with me" (Gal.). St Paul, that is to say, associates some
one with himself in the salutation unless there are special reasons for
the contrary. Timothy would have become known to some Colossians
during his stay at Ephesus with St Paul. Observe that in this Epistle
he maintains the reference to Timothy to the end by the use of the
plural. " The exceptions (i. 28, iv. 3) are rather apparent than real"
(Lightfoot). Moulton (Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 86), however, shows
reasons for thinking that I and we are used without any distinction
in late Greek literature and the papyri. It is hard to believe that
St Paul was equally careless.
6 dSeXtfids, without the article — isolation ; with it — fellowship.
Four other Epistles also have "the brother" ( = Timothy, 2 Cor.,
Philem. ; = Sosthenes, 1 Cor.) or "the brethren " (Gal.) in the first half
of the salutation, i.e. the mention of another with himself in the
salutation frequently leads St Paul at once to think of the brother
hood. In no case (save Ephes. and the Pastorals) is the thought of
the brotherhood put off for more than a few verses, for St Paul likes
to address his readers as d5eX0of (e.g. Bom. i. 13). In Col. alone he
puts ddeXipdis into the second half of the salutation.
"Brother" as a term signifying religious relationship is of course
far from peculiar to Christianity, though its significance was im
mensely developed by it. dSeXtpol was used of members of religious
associations and guilds at least as early as the 2nd century b.o. (see
Deissmann, Bible Studies, 1901, pp. 87, 142 ; see also Bamsay, Cities and
Bishoprics, pp. 96 sqq., 630). Even in the O.T. we may see the privileges
of "brother" extended to all Israelites, and even to foreigners who
claimed the protection of Jehovah (Gerim), cf. Lev. xix. 17, 18, 34.
In the N.T. dSeX(pol is used (a) of Jews as such, Acts ii. 29, 37, iii. 17
(cf. 2 Mac. i. 1), (6) of Christians as such; see (besides in the Epistles)
especially John xxi. 23 ; Acts xi. 1, xv. 23b. Cf. dSe\<pbrtis, 1 Pet. ii.
17, v. 9t, and tpi\ade\<pia, 1 Pet. i. 22 (where see Hort); cf. (pi\d6eX<pos
2 Mac. xv. 14.
2. In the second half of the salutation observe :
(1) The dative saggests the omission either of x<dpeLV (Xiyw),
Acts xxiii. 26, Jas. i. 1, 2 Mac. i. 1, or, more probably, simply
ypd<pw. (2) dSeXipots occurs nowhere else in such a position (vide
supra). (3) A comparison of the other salutations where d-yCois
occurs shows that in 2 Cor. i. 1, Eph. i. 1, Phil. i. 1 certainly, and in
Bom. i. 7, 1 Cor. i. 2 probably, aylois is not a mere epithet, "holy,"
but rather "holy ones," "saints." (4) Hence Kal irurrofs d8. ev
X$. is added by way of further definition ; cf. Eph. i. 1. (5) We
do not find here rij iKk\no-la (as in 1 Cor. i. 2, 1 Thes, i. 1, 2 Thes.

!6 COLOSSIANS [1 2
i. 1, Phm. 2) or rah &KXij<riais (Gal. i. 2)1. St Paul here regards his
readers not as united into one whole, or into several communities,
but primarily as individuals set apart for God. That, however, he
closely connected the thought of oi dytoi with that of i) iKKXvo-la may
be assumed in view of the fact that both are taken over from Jewish
usage (for iKKXncrla, Acts vii. 38, and for oi ayioi cf. Matt, xxvii. 52
with Acts ix. 13, on which last passage Hort remarks, "Members of
the holy Ecclesia of Israel were themselves holy by the mere fact of
membership, and this prerogative phrase is here boldly transferred
to the Christians by the bold Damascene disciple," The Christian
Ecclesia, p. 56). (6) He does not repeat the article before dSe\-
<f>ois lest he should seem to differentiate the persons. He regards.
them first as saints towards God, and then as brethren towards
each other.
irio-Tois. This is almost certainly used in the passive sense of
"trustworthy," proved "faithful," and not in the active sense of
"believing," "trustful."
For (1) in classical literature the active sense "is confined to
half-a-dozen passages from poets, one from Plato, Leg. vn. 824 b
(perhaps a quotation from a poet), and one from Dion Cassius
xxxvu. 12, where iriarbs with a negative = amaros, which often has
the active sense." Also "neither in the LXX. nor in any other
Greek Jewish book (Apocrypha, etc.) does iriarbs have the distinctly
active sense " (Hort on 1 Pet. i. 21).
(2) Further, in every case in the N.T. where it = " believing "
(John xx. 27 ; Acts x. 45, xvi. 1 ; 2 Cor. vi. 15 ; Gal. iii. 9 prob. ;
1 Tim. iv. 3, 10, 12, v. 16, vi. 2 ; Tit. i. 6) it is used either absolutely
or semi-absolutely, predicating belief of those who would not neces
sarily be believers. It never occurs, that is to say, as a mere epithet
of those who are known to be already believing. Thus "believing
brethren " would be tautology. Eph. i. 1 is indeed doubtful,
but is probably to be interpreted passively on the analogy of our
passage. For iriarbs with d8e\<bbs see iv. 9 (cf. v. 7) ; 1 Pet. v. 12. By
calling them "faithful" St Paul wishes to imply that they at least
have not yielded to the temptations against which he is about to
warn them. In 1 Pet. v. 12 us Xoylfrp.ai is added, but it is not

1 It has been suggested (Abbott) that eKKArjai'a is not used in the salutations of
Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, because he had no official relations with the heads
of Churches to which he waB personally unknown. In Philippians he uses what is
perhaps an equivalent, ai/v cukticoitoi? k^ll §io.k6vols.

1 2] NOTES 17
St Paul's way so to modify his statements, especially in the opening
words of an epistle. In Gal. vi. 16, Eph. vi. 24 the exclusion of
others from his greetings is more marked.
iv Xpicmi. In view of the non-Christian, yet religious, use of
ddeX<pol (v. 1 note) such an addition was perhaps necessary. We may
say that while ddeX<pol regards believers externally, and 7r«rToi their
inner disposition tested by behaviour, e*i> Xpiarip both defines that in
which they are brethren, and points to the reality in which alone
true brotherhood takes its rise and is maintained. On the absence
of tois before iv Xpiartp see v. 8 end.
\dpis if.lv. The epistolary formula xalpeiv common among heathen
(2 Mac. ix. 19, Acts xxiii. 26; cf. also the examples given from the
papyri in J. A. B. Ephesians, p. 276) and Jews (2 Mac. i. 1), and even
among Christians (Acts xv. 23; Jas. i. 1) is here ennobled by St Paul.
He wants for his brethren more than greeting and joy, even God's
grace, xdpis here doubtless comprises the fullest sense of the word,
both God's favour and His power freely given.
Kal e'lpijvr). Not, apparently, a heathen formula, though compare
Dan. iii. 98=iv. 1 (LXX. and Theod.) of Nebuchadnezzar and vi. 25
(Theod.) of Darius, but Jewish. Perhaps derived from the high priest's
blessing, Num. vi. 26. It occurs in David's message to Nabal, 1 Sam.
xxv. 5 (iporrfjaare avrbv iirl Tip 6v6p.ari pav els elpijviiv). It is found
with xaipeij' in 2 Mac. i. 1.
As used by St Paul after x<*pis, which assumes that all is right
between the soul and God, it probably refers not so much to inward
peace as to external, the disposition of their affairs by God in such
a way as to bring them quietness and happiness. The Christian
greeting will then chiefly mean : May God's mercies be given to you,
and His protection be ever round youl But of course this protection
will reach to body, soul, and spirit.
diro 8eov -rraTpds -^(loiv. The thought is not of God as the universal
Father (Acts xvii. 28), but as Father of those who are in Christ,
among whom St Paul includes himself. On the omission of Kal
Kvpiov 'Xtioov Xpurrov in the true text see the notes on Textual Criti
cism. The formula " Grace and Peace " is found in every epistle except
Heb., James, 1 and 3 John (Jude), and is increased by "mercy" in
1 and 2 Tim., 2 John. St Paul, save in 1 Thes., always adds the
Source of these blessings, limiting it to the Father here only. His
reason for so limiting it here perhaps lies in the fact that in 0. 3,
and frequently in this epistle, he brings out the special relationship
of Christ to the Father, and he therefore avoids a phrase that, in
itself, might support independence. He thus lays stress on God as
col. B

1 8 COLOSSIANS [1 2—
the Father of believers (v. 2), and in a special sense the Father of
"our Lord Jesus " (v. 3).
3 — 8. Introductory thanksgiving for their effective reception of the
Gospel in the true form of it taught them first by Epaphras.
(v. 3) We both always thank the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ when we pray for you; (v. 4) for we heard of your faith in
Christ Jesus and your continual love towards all the saints ; (v. 5)
these being due to your reception of the news of your glorious future
in the heavens, which you heard of before you were exposed to later
errors, in the message of the Gospel in its integrity which is come
unto you. (v. 6) But indeed you are not alone in this. It is already
even in all the world, continually producing life and the results
of life, and spreading — just as it does with you. For this was so
with you from the very first ; you recognised God's surprising mercy
accurately, (v. 7) This knowledge of yours corresponded to what
you learned by word of mouth from Epaphras, who is our rightly-
loved fellow-servant in the work Christ gave us to do, carrying out
work faithfully for our benefit as a minister sent by the Messiah.
(v. 8) It was he too who told us plainly about your love (as I said in
v. 4) towards others in the new sphere of the Spirit in which you now
live. 3. evxapwrrovaev. In all St Paul's Epistles except Gal. and the
Pastorals he thanks immediately after the salutation, always em
ploying eixapiareiv save in 2 Cor. and Eph. (yet cf. Eph. i. 16). Cf.
ii. 7, iii. 15. The plural is to include Timothy; contrast v. 24.
rip 0taj iraTpl t. Kvp. ^|i» 'Ir|<r. [Xpurrov], See the notes on
Textual Criticism. "We thank the God (and) Father of our Lord
Jesus [Christ]."
Though 8ebs irarrjp is fairly common in St Paul's Epp. t, yet 6 Bebs
irariip occurs only here and iii. 17, and possibly in v. 12, in each of
these three cases following eixapiarelv. Observe that when the
object of eixapiareiv in the N.T. is God the article is invariably used
(e.g. 1 Th. i. 2). Hence the article here appears to be due to the
presence of eixapiareiv, and Beip irarpi is probably the same combined
expression as in v. 2 and wherever else it comes. In other
words, He is here represented as both the Bebs and the irariip of
our Lord. For the double thought compare John xx. 17; Bom. xv. 6;
2 Cor. i. 3, xi. 31 ; Eph. i. 3 ; 1 Pet. i. 3, and perhaps 1 Cor. xv. 24.
Cf. also esp. 2 Pet. i. 17, and for Bebs also Matt, xxvii. 46, Eph. i. 17.
See also the notes on ii. 2 rov $eov, Xpiarov.
Notice that of the two emendations of the text the var. lect. Kal
irarpi gives practically the same sense, while the "Western" reading

1 5] NOTES

r9

T<jj Oetp rip irarpi presumably requires rip Beip to be taken alone—" we
thank God (absolutely), the Father of," etc.
irrivTore, "we thank... always when we pray for you." Probably
with eixapiarovp-ev, notwithstanding the distance. Cf. 2 Th. i. 3,
ii. 13; 1 Cor. i. 4; Eph. v. 20; Phm. 4.
irepl iijjuov irpo<revxd|tevoi. See the notes on Textual Criticism, and
contrast v. 9. Though 7repi vp.uv frequently occurs with irdvrore
(1 Cor. i. 4 ; 2 Thes. i. 3, ii. 13) it is here probably to be taken primarily
with irpoaevx-, which would otherwise stand rather baldly, irepl
bp.. irpoa. defines the times and occasions to which irdvrore refers.
irepl vp.wv thus loses the emphasis it would acquire if irpoo-. were
independent of evxap  iravrore 7repi vp.iov.
4. aKOvtravres, ' for we heard.' Prob. not temporal, but causal.
Cf. Eph. i. 15; contrast Phm. 5.
njv itCotiv vuuv ev Xpiorw 'It|o-oi. The article is often omitted
before eV Xp. 'Xr)a. ; cf. also v. 8. In the spoken language the
absence of the article would be easily supplemented by the tone.
ev — here marking not the sphere, but the object of faith — centred
on Christ and resting in Him, cf. Gal. iii. 26. It is thus rather
fuller in thought than els, ii. 5. Hence perhaps the curious change
from iv to els in Eph. i. 15 if dydirrpi is not genuine there.
Kal -rrjv d-ydirnv. In Eph. i. 15 (W. H.) love is not expressly
mentioned, but is regarded as part of faith.
d7dirt|v. Not found before the LXX., yet in view of the fact that
it occurs with comparative frequency there (perhaps twenty times in
all, of which eleven are in Cant.) it is curious that no certain oc
currence of it seems to be yet found in the papyri, and but once in
Philo (see Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 199). Yet the number of
words supposed to have been coined by the LXX. translators is
diminishing so rapidly that it is very improbable that this will
remain to them.
[rjv e\ere] See notes on Textual Criticism. Apparently unique,
but Phm. 5 is very similar.
els irdvTas tovs A7C0VS, " toward all the saints," B.V. ; cf. Phil. iv.
22 and 2 Thes. i. 3.
5. Sid njv eXirCSa k.t.X. This should be taken with the whole
sentence from tt)v irlariv onwards. Both the faith and the love
of the Colossians are stated to be due to the news of the glorious
future brought to them by the Gospel. We have thus the triple idea
of faith, love, and hope (cf. 1 Thes. v. 8, 9). That hope is objective
here causes but little difficulty, for it implies and includes the sub
jective meaning.
B2

20 COLOSSIANS [1 5—
Observe that " hope " is given a much more important part in the
N.T. than in our popular theology. To the heathen the good news
of a real heaven, a blessed life after death, must have proved a special
means of leading them to faith on Christ. Contrast Eph. ii. 12.
Compare infra, o. 27. For the connexion of hope with faith compare
1 Th. i. 9, 10.
•njv diroKeiaevt]v ip.iv, "the hope that is laid by for you," Luke xix.
20; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Heb. ix. 27+. Frequently in the Classics of money
put on one side so that it may be brought out in due course. Com
pare Luke xix. 20, the talent in the napkin. In Deut. xxxii. 34
Symm. translates DD3+ "laid up in store," B.V., by a7r6KeiTai. For
reference to the glory reserved for the Christian cf. 2 Tim. iv. 8, and
the difficult passage, 2 Mac. xii. 45. For the thought cf. also 1 Pet.
i. 4.
ev rots oupavols, v. 16 note.
t^v irpoT]Koiio-aTet (not in LXX.). The frequent difficulty of cor
rectly interpreting a word not in itself difficult may be seen here,
where the value of the preposition in the compound verb has been
understood in at least seven different ways. Of these only two appear
to be worthy of mention : (1) It may mean " before exercising faith and
love." The words of the truth etc. contained the message of this
" hope." (2) More probably, however, it means " before you heard
the later lessons of the false teachers," cf. 23. See also the next
note. ev t$ Xo-yu xtjs dXr|8eCas tov ei5a-yy«X£ou. Here only, though see
Eph. i. 13. But -h dXijOeia r. evayy. occurs in Gal. ii. 5, 14f, where
it means the Gospel in its integrity as compared with Judaistic per
versions of it. So also here St Paul probably is silently contrasting
a false conception of the Gospel, cf. iv dXrjBela, v. 6.
X670S here is presumably the message spoken by the first preacher
to the Colossians, apparently Epaphras, v. 7. Compare Acts xv. 7 ;
Matt. xiii. 19. Contrast 6 X670S tov Beov, v. 25 note.
6. tov irapdvros els vp,ds, "which (i.e. the Gospel) is come unto
you." irdpeip.i elsi frequently in Classics, e.g. Thuc. vi. 88, cf.
1 Mac. xi. 63. In N.T. with 7rp6s, Acts xii. 20 ; 2 Cor. xi. 8 ; Gal. iv.
18, 20+.
Ka6us. He wishes to bring out the fact that they do not stand
alone. Others, yes even the whole world, are experiencing the vigorous
life of the true Gospel.
Kal ev iravTl iiS Koo-au. 7tos 6 Kbap.os, Bom. iii. 19+, cf. "Mark"
xvi. 15. SXos 6 k., Bom. i. 8; 1 John ii. 2; Matt. xvi. 26 (||Luke), xxvi.
13 (|| Mark)+. An hyperbole (v. 23, 1 Thes. i. 8b; 2 Cor. ii. 14; Bom.

1 6] NOTES 21
i. 8, cf. i. 18) made easier to St Paul by his habit of choosing im
portant towns as his centres of mission work, and regarding their
several districts as evangelised through them, cf. 1 Thes. i. 8", Acts
xix. 10. St John's letters to the Seven Churches imply a similar
mode of thought.
e<rrlv Kapiro<f>opovp.evov Kal avgavdaevov Ka8us Kal ev vpiv- The
punctuation is exceedingly doubtful.
(1) Consider it first as printed. St Paul in this case purposely
uses the paraphrastic present, 2 Cor. ix. 12, and perhaps Col. ii. 23
(cf. Blass, § 62. 2), " to express continuity of present action " (Light
foot), and then, after still further enlarging the contents of the
analogy in the preceding KaBiis by Kai ab£avbp.evov, doubles back upon
the analogy, and states that even the fuller blessing is found in the
Colossians (KaBiis k. iv 6p.iv).
The construction is intelligible, but very awkward, and it has no
real parallel in the N.T. 1 Thes. iv. 1 has been adduced (KaBiis
irapeXdfleTe xap' r}p.dv rb wws Set vfids irepiirareiv Kal dpiaKeiv Beip, KaBiis
Kal irepiirareTre) , but in that passage the second KaBiis introduces a
fresh fact, that their "walk" corresponded to the lesson in it that
they had " received."
(2) Print iarlv, Kapirotpop. k.t.X. In this case the force of the first
KaBiis stops at iarlv. The Gospel has come as far as you, even as it
is, in fact, in all the world. KapTo<j>op. k.t.X. then becomes an ad
ditional, but loosely appended, thought of the success of the Gospel
in the world. To this very naturally is added the further statement
that it is successful not only in the world but also in the Colossians
(md. k. iv bpXv). This second method of punctuation is perhaps pre
ferable in that it puts less force upon the language.
Kapirotpopovuevov. The middle comes here only in the Greek
Bible. The active, though used of plants in Hab. iii. 17, Wisd. j.. 7,
suits excellently persons (e.g. v. 10) or the ground (Mark iv. 28).
Even in Matt. xiii. 23 (and more clearly in ||s) the thought of the
seed is merged in that of the person. For the middle comprises the
notion of having life in itself, which persons and the earth do not
possess. "The middle denotes the inherent energy, the active the
external diffusion. The Gospel is essentially a reproductive organism,
a plant ' whose seed is in itself " (Lightfoot).
Kal avijavdaevov. av£dvop.ai is connected with Kapirotpopeiv also in
v. 10. Observe that in the parable of the Sower Matt. xiii. 23 reads
&s Si] Kapirocpopet Kai iroiei k.t.X., and Mark iv. 8, iSlSov Kapirbv,
dva^a'ivovra Kal auijavop-eva. St Paul's words are apparently a re
miniscence of our Lord's parable, but he divides the Gospel term,

22 COLOSSIANS [1 6—
" seed," into its component parts, (1) the message (v. 6), and (2)
those who receive the message (v. 10).
Of the two words Kapiroip. implies that the activity of the Gospel is
seen in its effect on life ; believers are changed in character, ail-av.
in its spread ; believers are continually being added. Compare
v. 10 note.
Ka8us Kal ev vpitv, vide supra.
dcp" ^s i]pipas. To be closely connected with the preceding words.
The proper result of the Gospel among you was not postponed for »
single day.
r'Koii<raTe. The object (the Gospel) is understood (cf. v. 9), "since
the day ye heard of it " (A.V.). For though it is possible to connect
i/Kovaare with ttjv xdpiv (' ' since the day ye heard and knew the grace
of God " B.V.), this construction is improbable, because (1) iv dXr]8ela
must go solely with iiriyvwre ; (2) the KaBiis of v. 7, "heard... the
grace... even as ye learned," would be tautological.
Kal eire'YVcoTe. The verb occurs in Colossians here only. Cf. v. 9.
On the much disputed question of the forceof eVi in thiscompound
see J. A. B.'s valuable detached note in his Ephesians, pp. 248 — 254,
where he shows that in the Classics (and he sees no occa»sion to
depart from this in the N.T.) "the preposition is not intensive, but
directive  So that to perceive a particular thing, or to perceive* who
a particular person is, may fitly be expressed by iiriyivtliajceiv. "
Moulton (Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 113) attributes less force to the iirl,
saying only that it makes the aorist morejJecisrve, and in the present
" includes the goal in the picture of the journey there."
ttjv x<£plv T0" 9eov, i-e- -^ls wve *° mau as shown in the Gospel.
Compare Acts xx. 24 SiaaapripaaBai rb ebayyiXiov rijs xdpiros tov Beov
and 32 (both addressed to the Elders of the Church at Ephesus),
Tit. ii. 11 ; 1 Pet. i. 10.
"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&P" Dut Sbyuara (ii. 14) ; not roB deov
but roB Kbapov, rGiv avBpiiirav (ii. 8, 20, 22) " Lightfoot.
In addition to these thoughts there is probably that of the univer
sality of the offer of salvation, whether in contrast to Jewish ex-
clusiveness generally, or, as perhaps with special reference here, to
the apparently esoteric doctrine of the false teachers at Colossae in
particular. J. A. B., Ephesians, pp. 220 — 226, has a valuable detached note upon
xdpis, showing that St Paul used it in part to bring out "the sur-

1 7] NOTES 23
prising mercy of God, by which those who had been wholly outside
the privileged circle [of Israel] were now the recipients of the Divine
favour" (p. 224).
ev dXi)8eCa. Not adjectival with rrp> x^P'" rov Beov, but adverbial
with hreyvoire, cf. Matt. xxii. 16; 2 John 1; 3 John 1. It is more than
"in sincerity," and rather "in right and accurate fashion." See
especially Matt. xxii. 16, with the parallel passages Mark xii. 14,
Luke xx. 21. You knew in proper fashion, you not only heard the
message, but grasped its contents rightly. Observe the undercurrent
of assurance that their first perception of the Gospel was better than
that which the false teachers desired to see in them now.
7. 4ud6ere. To be given its full force, implying some continuance
of instruction. Compare 2 Tim. iii. 14; Phil. iv. 9; Matt. xi. 29.
Compare also infra, ii. 7.
dird 'Eiracppd, iv. 12, Phm. 23+. Doubtless a. short form of the
word 'EiraippbSiros ("lovely," Lat. Venustus); cf. XXapp.evas for XXapp.e-
vlbijs, ' Aprepds for 'AprepASupos, 'AXel-ds for rA\e^avSpos (see Winer,
§ xvi end).
Yet both forms of the name are said to be so common that strong
evidence would be required for us to identify this Epaphras with the
Epaphroditus of Phil. ii. 25, iv. 18+. And, as far as it goes, the'
evidence is the other way. For Epaphroditus is connected only with
Philippi, to which he is sent by St Paul, and from which he brings
back presents ; Epaphras, on the other hand, is connected only with
Colossae, of which he is either a native (as seems most probable) or
an inhabitant of long standing (iv. 12), and which he had evangelised
(here), and the believers of which he greets both generally (iv. 12)
and in the person of one of their leaders (Phm. 23). Both indeed
were at Borne, but, so far as reference is made to them, at periods
many months, or perhaps even one or two years, apart (see Introd.,
p. xlviii).
tov d7a-iri]Tov. iv. 7, 9, 14; Phm. 1, 16; 3 John 1. Hort, on 1 Pet.
ii. 11, says, "Not St Paul only, but all the other writers of Epistles
in the N.T., make use of it. It refers back to our Lord's test of
discipleship to Himself, the mutual love of those who believe in Him
(John xiii. 34 f., xv. 12, 17); and is thus combined emphatically with
iriarol, faithful, in 1 Tim. vi. 2 (q.v.): cf. Col. iv. 9."
Certainly in our passage at least it serves to emphasize the satis
factory character of him who first preached the Gospel to the Colos
sians, and thus strengthens St Paul's argument.
<rvv8ovXou. Elsewhere in St Paul only iv. 7 (Tychicus). Compare
avvepybs, iv. 11, Phm, 24 and avvaixpidXorros, iv. 10,

24

COLOSSIANS [1 7-

If, as it seems, SoBXoj, like 'ebed in the O.T., regards the servant
not merely as a member of the household but as one entrusted with
work, aivdovXos here probably refers to Epaphras not merely as a
fellow-Christian, but as one engaged in work. He shared with St
Paul the privilege of carrying out the duty assigned him by their
common Master.
i)|x«v. Probably including Timothy, avoiding egotism, v. 1, note.
8s jVtiv ttio-tos virep T|u.wv SiaKovos tov xpiorov, " who is a faithful
minister of Christ on our behalf," B.V. On the reading see the notes
on Textual Criticism. The position of virep i)p.Giv is curious, and
apparently lays stress on his faithfulness (not his ministry) on behalf
of us. Probably the ministry is regarded as exercised towards St
Paul. Christian work done among the Gentiles in its measure freed
him from his debt to them (Bom. i. 14).
SiaKovos. Doubtless in its wide and non-official sense. So also
vv. 23, 25, and iv. 7 where see note. Its essential thought is
"activity and subordination." "Epaphras, whatever his church-
office, was the loving worker under Christ for Paul and Colossae "
(Moule). tov xpioTov. The article (contrast 2 Cor. xi. 23, SidKovoi Xpiarov
elalv;) suggests the office and position of our Lord in His relation to
the dispensation to Jew and Gentile rather than His personality.
Therefore also xp'oroC is printed without a capital letter, i.e. it is,
in the opinion of W.H. (ii. § 415), here not so much a proper name
as an appellative, " the Messiah." Compare also Hort, The Christian
Ecclesia, p. Ill sq.
rov'Xriaov would not have been so apposite to St Paul's argument
(contrast Eph. iv. 21) ; St Paul, half unconsciously no doubt, uses
the term that will best meet the claims of the false teachers.
8. 6 Kal &T|Xuo~as. The Kai not only states a fresh fact about
Epaphras but also implies that it was he and no other (qui idem) ; cf.
Matt. x. 4, 2 Cor. i. 22.
tJuiv. See note on the first -hpwv in v. 7.
ti)v v|«3v aYd-m^v. The order is much less common than ttjv
dydiripi iipuv and gives vpi&v a slight emphasis (cf. Bom. xvi. 19,
2 Cor. vii. 7 ter).
Probably their love is to the saints generally, St Paul mentioning it
now as the visible result of their acceptance of Epaphras' teaching,
and also taking up once more the thought of v. 4, and making it
a starting-point from which he begins a fresh exhortation.
ev irveiip.aTi. Not rrpi iv irveipari. Probably the words dydirr)v iv
irvevp.ari are regarded as forming one idea ; cf. 1 Cor. x. 18 rbv

1 9] NOTES 25
'Io-pa^X Kara adpKa, see Winer, § xx. 2 and J. A. B. on Eph. i. 15.
But contrast Phm. 6.
Probably spirit as such, the higher spiritual sphere in which their
thoughts and feelings now worked, the sphere in which God revealed
His truth to them (Eph. iii. 5), in which they prayed (Eph. vi. 18),
and in which they were being made a spiritual House (Eph. ii.
22). Their love was oi aapKiKi), dXXd irvevpariKr) Oeoumen. (in loco,
Migne, cxix. 16). In any case it is a true statement of theology that
such love exercised in the spiritual sphere is ultimately due to the
blessed Spirit Himself (Bom. xv. 30 ; cf. Westcott on Eph. iii. 5).
9 — 14. Prayer for the Colossians, with reason for gratitude on their
part to God, viz. their emancipation in Christ. This forms a transition
to a fuller account of the relation of the Son to the Father, to
Creation, and to the Church.
(Observe that in these verses there are frequent signs that the
Apostle is already conscious of the warnings that he is about to
give them.)
(v. 9) Because of the love you show, we both (Timothy and I), ever
since we first heard (as I said in v. 4) of your faith in Christ, con
tinually intercede for you, and ask for our request to be granted
us that you may be filled with the recognition of what is God's
will for each, in wisdom as needed in every case and spiritual
discernment ; (v. 10) thus walking worthily of our Master — with the
object of pleasing Him in every case, bearing fruit (as I said) in
every good work, and growing by this very knowledge of God ;
(v. 11) being continually strengthened too in God's strength given as
it is needed in proportion to (nothing less than) the supreme might
of His revelation of Himself given with the object of your having
hopeful endurance and quiet forbearance, and these accompanied by
joy ; (v. 12) giving thanks to the Father who made you Gentile
Christians sufficient for admission into your share of the possession
that all saints have in spiritual light ; (v. 13) [the Father] who
delivered us all out of the rule that springs from and is governed by
darkness, and transferred us into the sovereignty of His Son whom
He loves : (v. 14) [the Son] in whom we now have emancipation
from that darkness, consisting primarily in the remission of our sins.
9. Sid tovto. Probably this refers primarily to the immediately
preceding words rrjv ip.dv dydirijv iv irveipari, which however in
themselves sum up an important part of the whole preceding para
graph. For a similar case compare 1 Thes. iii. 5, where did rovro
primarily refers to the troubles of the Thessalonians mentioned in
v. 4, which again uuderlie all vv. 1 — 4. Even in Eph. i. 15 the

26 COLOSSIANS [1 9
immediate reference may well be to the thought of the praise of God's
glory (v. 14) which is underlying all vv. 3 — 14, and in 1 Thes. ii. 13 the
thought of the Thessalonians being called into God's kingdom and
glory, i.e. the possibilities of the Divine call (a thought present in
i. 3, 10), supplied a reason for all St Paul's work among them.
Kal -qpets. We, Paul and Timothy, on our side show our love.
dcp' i}s i]|iepas i]KOvo-ap.ev, cf. v. 6.
virep {pjuv. Contrast v. 3. The apparent absence of any parallel
in the N. T. for iirip, or even Trept, being joined with atrial makes it
probable that birip is governed by irpoaevxbp-evoi only (Matt. v. 44;
James v. 16+). Hence the A.V. "do not cease to pray for you, and
to desire," etc. is preferable in this particular to the B.V. "do not
cease to pray and make request for you."
ai.Toup.cvoi. The middle may be used merely to conform to
irpoaevx-, though its greater strength than the active (see Moulton,
Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 160) was hardly forgotten, or may perhaps
hint to them delicately that he reckoned blessings given to them as
given to himself (cf. Mark vi. 24 with 22, 23 ; James iv. 2, 3 ;
1 John v. 14, 15).
Iva. For similar instances of the weakened Iva after verbs of
asking see ii. 1, 2, iv. 3, 12. Cf. also especially 2 Thes. i. 11.
Tijv eir£-yv<oo-iv. See note on iiriyvuire, v. 6. The usage of the
word iirlyvoiais in the N.T. is remarkable. It does not occur in the
first group of St Paul's Epistles ; and ouly three times in the second,
and that not in its highest connotation (Bom. i. 28, iii. 20, x. 2) ;
but it is used eight times in the third, always (save in Phm. and
perhaps Phil.) of our knowledge of God (Phil. i. 9 ; Eph. i. 17, iv. 13 ;
Col. i. 9, 10, ii. 2, iii. 10 ; Phm. 6) ; and four times in the fourth,
in the phrase els iirlyvaiaiv d\r\Belas (1 Tim. ii. 4 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25, iii. 7 ;
Tit. i. 1 ; cf. also Heb. x. 26). It also occurs four times in 2 Pet., of
our knowledge of God, apparently with some reminiscence of St Paul's
third group.
Its greater frequency in the later groups of St Paul's Epistles is
doubtless due to the greater need experienced by the Church of a right
intellectual and spiritual knowledge of God, especially in view of the
false teaching that claimed to supply this. No doubt also St Paul's
enforced leisure at Caesarea and Borne was a providential means of
his meditation on the subject and his subsequent ability to point out
the truth. On the accusative see Blass, Gram. § 34. 6.
tov BeXijaaTos, v. 1, note. Here not God's will that embraces the
whole scope of His plan and purpose concerning the world for
believers cannot be expected to have iirlyvoiais of this, although they

1 9] NOTES 27
may legitimately pray for its accomplishment (Matt. vi. 10), and they
even know, in a sense, the " mystery " of it (Eph. i. 9), but the will
of God so far as it affects us individually. Compare Matt. vii. 21
(6 iroiuv rb BiX-nna tov lrarpbs p-ov), Eph. v. 17, vi. 6.
avTov, i.e. God the Father, rb 8i\rip.a'Xnaov or Xpiarov never occurs.
In t-6 BiXnpa tov Kvpiov (Acts xxi. 14 ; Eph. v. 17) the genitive doubtless
also refers to God the Father.
ev marks that in which the iirlyvoiais manifests itself. It is very
improbable that a comma should be put at airov and the following
words joined with v. 10 as far as dpearfav, though of course irepiirareiv
easily takes iv (e.g. iii. 7, iv. 5). But a very clumsy sentence would
be the result. See further on iv iravri fpyip ayaBip (v. 10).
irdo-Tj, vv. 10, 11, 15, 28, iii. 16, iv. 12. Distributive ; wisdom in
every case as needed (v. 28). Compare Tra^-ai- SiKaioaivvv, Matt. iii. 15.
For the contrast between TrSo-a and 7rSo-a ii compare 2 Cor. i. 4 6 7rapa-
koXSj' t)pm.s iirl irdav rj 8\l<pei r/p-Qv (totality), els rb SivaaBai ripas
irapaKaXelv robs iv irdav B\l\pei (i.e. any which may arise).
On its connexion with aoipta and avviaei see below s.v. irvevpariKrj.
o-o(pta. Five more times in this Epistle, i. 28, ii. 3, 23, iii. 16,
iv. 5, and three times in Eph., i. 8, 17, iii. 10 ; elsewhere in the
Pauline Epistles, only once in Bomans (xi. 33) and 2 Cor. (i. 12),
but frequently in 1 Cor. It is " mental excellence in its highest and
fullest sense ; Arist. Eth. Nic. vi. 7 17 dKpiPeardrri ran irriarripGiv . . .uairep
Ke<t>a\i)v §xovaa iiriaTr)p.r) rCiv ripAoiTdroiv.... Cicero de Off. 1. 43 ' princeps
omnium virtutum.'...The Stoic definition of aoipla, as iiriar-qp-q Belav
Kal dvBpuirlvwv Kal t&v roiroiv alriuv, is repeated by various writers "
(Lightfoot). Yet we must be careful not to understand it here of wisdom in the
abstract. From the usage of iv irda-n aoipla in v. 28, iii. 16 (cf.
especially the parallel Eph. v. 15 — 19) and even Eph. i. 8, St Paul is
evidently thinking of mental excellence in its application.
Kal o-we'o-ei, ii. 2. aiveais is not found elsewhere with o-o0/a in the.
N.T. (though in 1 Cor. i. 19 the two words are in parallel clauses of a
quotation from Isa. xxix. 14), but see Deut. iv. 6; 2 Chron. i. 10 — 12;
Isa. xi. 2. See also Ex. xxxi. 3 ; 1 Chr. xxii. 12 ; Dan. ii. 20 (Theod.) ;
Bar. iii. 23.
It stands in relation to aoipla as the part to the whole, and
expresses the intellectual grasp, the discernment, of the condition
of affairs in any given instance. Compare 2 Tim. ii. 7 vbei 8 \iyoi •
Siiaei ydp aoi 6 Kipios aiveaiv iv iraaiv. It is "the faculty of putting
together, and reading the significance of, facts and phenomena
around " (Beet). " ' Wisdom ' is the noble faculty of judging and

28 COLOSSIANS [1 9—
acting aright, ' intelligence ' that faculty in application to the living
problems of the hour " (Moule, Colossian Studies), particularly (one
may suppose in the present case) such as those suggested by the false
teaching to which the Colossians were exposed.
Trveup.a-n.Kfj, iii. 16. With the exception of 1 Pet. ii. 5 bis, irvevpariKbs
occurs only in the Pauline Epistles, especially of course in 1 Cor.
A remarkable example of such a combination of aoipla and aiveais
as St Paul means here was seen in Bishop Westcott, who, though
(or rather because) he possessed Christian aoipla in perhaps a higher
degree than any teacher of recent years, was enabled by his aiveais to
bring the great coal strike in the North to a satisfactory termination,
and that without any use of merely worldly means.
10. TrepnraTT|o-ai. Probably epexegetic, see Acts xv. 10; Luke i.
54 ; 1 Sam. xii. 23 ; Pss. Sol. ii. 28. It may be due to the influence
of Hebrew, in which both the construct (e.g. Ps. Ixxviii. 18) and the
absolute (Jer. xxii. 19) forms of the infinitive may be used to expand
a preceding statement. In English we can hardly use the infinitive
in this sense, and must translate "walking."
Observe that irepiirareiv in its metaphorical meaning (also ii. 6,
iii. 7, iv. 5), self-evident as it appears to us, seems never to have
been so used by Greeks uninfluenced by Semitic thought (though in
Thuc. in. 64. 7 we find perd yap 'ABrjvaiiiiv adiKov bSbv Ibvroiv ixoipr\aare,
and parallels for dvaarpiipopai and dvaarpoipT) are quoted in Deissmann,
Bibl. Studies, pp. 88, 194, from the Inscriptions). But in Hebrew it
is very common (e.g. Ps. xxvi. 11) and the metaphor even gives the
name to the strictly legal part of Babbinic lore, the Halacha, i.e.
the " walk."
dijtws. Observe that while irepiirareiv is almost entirely Semitic
d£lus is almost entirely Greek. No Hebrew word quite expresses the
idea (cf. niB> Prov. iii. 15, viii. 11 ; Esth. vii. 4). Therefore Delitzsch
can only render our passage by a free paraphrase, fllNn ,Jl,r3 31t2?
" to walk according to that which is good in the eyes of the Lord and
according to all His good pleasure." Had we nothing else whereby
to tell the nature of the education of the Apostle the combina
tion 7repi7raT7J<rai dfiws would give us the clue to it being Graeco-
Semitic. For d^lus rov Kvpiov compare, besides the passages quoted above,
Wisd. iii. 5 ; Ecclus. xiv. 11 (Greek only), and the phrases dftos, and
dfiws, rov Beov (rdv Be&v) in inscriptions at Pergamum (Deissmann,
Bible Studies, p. 248).
It is perhaps worth noting that the Peshitta here reads " that ye
may walk as is becoming, and may please God," i.e. omitting iraaav

1 10] NOTES 29
and reoombining the other words. Did it mistranslate from the
Latin "ut ambuletis digne Deo per omnia placentes"?
tov KvpCov. Though Theodoret (in Ellicott) understands this of
God (i.e. presumably the Father), and the analogy of 1 Thes. ii. 12
(quoted supra) confirms it, yet " St Paul's common, and apparently
universal, usage requires us to understand 6 Kbpios of Christ "
(Lightfoot). Moule rightly points out that "such alternative
expressions indicate how truly for St Paul the Father and the Son
are Persons of the same Order of being." St Paul is thinking of
the Lord Jesus as the Master in glory, who ought to be worthily
represented by us His servants here, and takes pleasure, or otherwise,
in our behaviour.
els. The final object of knowledge and a godly life is to please God.
irdo-av, i.e. in every case, see v. 9 irdav.
dpeo-Kiavt. dpiaKeiv Beip (t. Kvplip) in Bom. viii. 8 ; 1 Cor. vii. 32 ;
1 Thes. ii. 15, and especially 1 Thes. iv. 1 ; cf. dpearbs John viii. 29,
and 1 John iii. 22.
dpeaxla is not found in classical writers of the best period, but in
Theophrastus, Char. 2 (5), Polybius 31. 26. 5, Diod. 13. 53 it means
" complaisance," " obsequiousness." Yet in an inscription given in
Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 224, X'V'" TVS e^ T71V noXiv dpeaxelas it
evidently has a good sense, and it is repeatedly used by Philo of
pleasing God, as here ; e.g. Quis rer. div. her. 24 (1. p. 490, § 123, Wend-
land) lis dirodexopJvov (rov Qeov) Kal Sexopivov rds ipvxV* eKovalov
dpeaxelas ; de Vict. Off. 8 (11. p. 527) Sid iraa&v livai rGtv els dpeaKelav
bSQv. In dvBptoirdpeaKoi (iii. 22) on the contrary the former meaning
is apparent ; see note there.
Iv iravrl %py<o d-ya8i3. Perhaps to be taken with the preceding
words. So B.V.mg. "to walk worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing,
in every good work." The words would thus expand the thought of
iraaav. But the sentence then becomes heavy and even somewhat
tautological. Hence it is better to take the words closely with
Kapirotpopovvres. The whole phrase is then, no doubt, explanatory of
els iraaav dpeaKlav. So Chrysostom, Ilfis Si, iraaav dpeaKelav ; 'Xiv iravr'
ipyif dyaBip Kapirotpopovvres, Kal ai^avbpevoi iv (sic) Trj iwiyviiaei rov
Beov. KapiroipopovvTes, "bearing fruit in every good work." See v. 6
note. Surely not dependent on irXvpoi8iJTe (Beng., B. Weiss), but on
7repi7raT7;(rai. Kal av|avdpevoi, closely with Kapirotpopovvres, as in v. 6 (see note).
rfj erri-yvwo-ei tov 8eov. "By the knowledge of God." With ai-
£avbp,evoi only, for bearing fruit by knowledge would be too strained a

30 COLOSSIANS [1 10—
metaphor. . It is probably the instrumental dative " representing the
knowledge of God as the dew or the rain which nurtures the growth
of the plant; Deut. xxxii. 2 ; Hos. xiv. 5 " (Lightfoot). It is indeed
possible to take it as the dative denoting the attribute in respect of
which anything takes place, v. 21 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 20 ; Acts xvi. 5 ; Phil.
ii. 8. So B.V. " increasing in the knowledge of God" (verbally like
A.V. which reads els rr)v iirlyvwaiv), but this seems hardly probable
after ir\vpoiBi}re rijv iiriyvuiaiv in v. 9.
11. ev irdo-rj Suvdpet Svvau.ovu.evoi, ' ' being strengthened in all
(needed) strength." It is very uncertain whether Svvdp.ei refers to
(1) Divine power given or (2) power in the act of being exercised by
man. In favour of (2) are the parallels of iv irda%\ aoipla k. trwiaei
irvevp. (v. 9), iv iravrl ipyoi (v. 10), and probably iv Svvdpei, v. 29. But
in favour of (1) is the very similar passage, Eph. iii. 16, where
Swdp.6i evidently refers to the Divine power as the instrument of
their being strengthened. On the whole (1) is preferable. So
Theodoret, rij Beta powrj Kparvvbp.evoi (in loco, Migne, lxxxii. 596).
The iv in this case is usually regarded as "instrumental." Cf.
Apoc. vi. 8, and Matt. vii. 6, but iv in the strictly instrumental sense
is so rare that it here more probably describes God's strength as the ,
element in which they find their strength and apart from which they
are weak (cf. John xv. 5).
Svvau.ovu.evoi. Swapbta in N.T. only in Heb. xi. 34, and perhaps Eph.
vi. 10 (B alone of the great MSS., followed by W.H.mg.). ivSvvapboi
is more common. In the LXX. and Hexapla fragments the reverse is
the case. The tense here expresses the continuous application of the
Divine power.
KaTa. The measure of the strength given is limited (qua God)
only by the sovereign might inherent in God's self-manifestation.
to KpaTos- Sivapis here would apparently mean the power actually
exerted by the Sofa; Kpdros = its general, overwhelming might compared
with all else than God. For both the thought of this verse and also
synonyms of " power " in relation to God see Eph. i. 19 rt rb birep{idXXov
pJyeBos tt}s Swdpeos airov els i/pas robs iriareiovras Kark ti/v eve*pveiav
rov KpaTous rijs lo"xvos airov, where laxis seems to mark God's
indwelling power, shown externally as Kpdros, working in each
recipient with ivipyeia, and effective for him as Siva/us; see also
Eph. iii. 16. In the N.T. Kpdros is used always of God with the one
exception of Heb. ii. 14, where the devil is described as rbv rb Kpdros
ix°vra rov Bavdrov.
ttjs 8o'£t|s avTov. Possessive genitive. By God's 56£a we must
understand here His nature as manifesting itself externally, more

1 12] NOTES 31
particularly towards man. It is nearly synonymous with 6Vo/ia
(Matt. vi. 9; John i. 12), but this rather regards God's revelation of
Himself so far as man is able to receive it. Aofa, on the other hand,
always suggests that God's self-manifestation is too bright for man's
eyes to face (Luke ii. 9 ; 2 Cor. iii. 7 ; Acts xxii. 11).
vttou.ovt)v Kal u.aKpo8vu.(av, " fortitude and forbearance."
(1) For the combination see 2 Cor. vi. 4, 6, 7, iv biropovij TroXXp...
iv p.aKpo8vpla...iv Swdpei Beov, and 2 Tim. iii. 10. Compare also
Jas. v. 10, 11, where the two words are almost contrasted.
(2) viropovrj. More than mere endurance; it is endurance
marked by hope, nearly our "fortitude." See Ecclus. xii. 2, w Bdvare,
KaXbv aov rb xpip.a iarlv dvBpiiirtp...diroXeXioKbri viropovf)V ( Hlpn T3N1),
"who hath lost hope," and ii. 14 oial ipuv rots d7roXeXwK6aw u?ro-
povrjv (Heb. not yet recovered). In the LXX. viropovri always, and
virop.iveiv generally, represent some part of the root Hip (wait, or look
eagerly, for). Compare 1 Thes. i. 3, where work springs from faith,
toil from love, viropovr) from hope. Hence in Tit. ii. 2 it is the third
in the Christian triad, irlaris, dydir-n, biropovi) (cf. Lightfoot on
1 Thes. i. 3).
(3) paKpoBvpla, iii. 12. Hardly classical.
(4) Comparing the two words
biropiovr) lays stress on the person who possesses it not being
affected. Hence it seems to refer only to things, i.e. to trials in
themselves, whether from God or from man. It is thus used of man
only (even in Bom. xv. 5).
paKpoBvpia on the other hand suggests that if the person were
affected it would alter his behaviour to others. Hence it is used
especially with reference to persons (vide supra), and. may be used of
God (e^g. Bom. ii. 4; 1 Pet. iii. 20; cf. Luke xviii. 7; see also Symm.
Eccles. viii. 12).
Thus here birop.ovi) means their endurance of all trials in a hopeful
spirit, such as Christ Himself had, 2 Thes. iii. 5, and p.aKpoBvpla their
evenness of temper, free from all irritation or impatience (cf. Trench,
Synon. § Lin.). They were in need of encouragement (22).
perd xapds. Probably with the preceding clause. This is more in
accordance with St Paul's style, and more suggestive. Fortitude and
forbearance are to be so far from moroseness as to be accompanied
by positive joy (i. 24). Cf. 2 Cor. xii. 8—10 ; 1 Thes. i. 6.
12. evxapio-Tovvres, v. 3. Too distant from oi iravbpeBa (v. 9) to be
coordinate with irpoaevxbp-evoi Kal alroip.evoi, suitable though the
thought of St Paul giving thanks for them in itself is. The word is
either coordinate with Kapirotpopovvres and Swap.oip.evoi, expressing a

32 COLOSSIANS [* 12
third condition of their Christian walk (v. 10), or, as is more probable,
primarily a development of the thought of perd xapds, explaining the
direction which their joy would take.
Tip iraTpl. See notes on Textual Criticism. In v. 3 St Paul
thanked the God and Father of Christ (see note) as the source of all
the blessings that had been given, but here he represents the Colos
sians as thanking Him only as the Father, i.e. as the one who had
admitted them into possession and thus sonship, through, as St Paul
is careful to add (v. 13), Him who was Son in a supreme degree.
The thought closely resembles Gal. iv. 6, 7.
tu iKavcoo-avTi. See notes on Textual Criticism. The verb occurs
elsewhere in the N.T. only in 2 Cor. iii. 6. It is found in the LXX.,
in no case apparently throwing light on our passage, and only in
the middle or the passive.
The not infrequent use of [6] tiavbs in the Greek versions of the
O.T. to translate Shaddai (the Almighty), suggests that this name
for God may have been in St Paul's mind when writing this passage.
Compare especially Gen. xvii. 1, "I am El Shaddai, walk before me"
with our v. 10. With the accuracy of the translation we have no
concern, but the rendering suggests that He who was sufficient for
the needs of the O.T. saints, and who made St Paul and others
sufficient as the ministers of the New Covenant (2 Cor. iii. 6), also
made the Colossians sufficient for the share etc. Observe that iKavoi-
aev implies that besides the general invitation both the personal call
and the grace to accept it came from God. St Paul thus strikes at
the root of the Jewish doctrine of fllDt (merit), even in its more
refined forms of gratia de condigno or de congruo.
The tense probably refers to the time of their conversion, when
they entered upon the privileges which St Paul is about to mention.
ipds- See notes on Textual Criticism. The O.T. colouring of the
verse makes ipds especially suitable, for the Colossian Christians
might well thank God that, though Gentiles, they had been admitted
into what had been the unique privilege of Jews, cf. Eph. ii. 12, 13.
els tt]v p-epiSa. In the LXX. pepls (gen. = p^n) is usually dis
tinguished from pipos (very seldom = p?ri; often i"ISp) as share from
part ; i.e. p.epls connotes that others also have a share. In the N.T.
pepls occurs only five times, but = " share" evidently in 2 Cor. vi. 15
and probably in Luke x. 42. This helps, as will be seen, to fix the
determination of the following genitive.
toB KXr|pov. (1) As to the meaning of the word in itself :
(a) It was originally a lot; (b) thence, presumably from the
primitive practice of redistributing at stated periods the land of the

1 12] NOTES 33
community by lot to the several members, an allotment; (c) then, as
plots of laud were held permanently by individuals, a portion, a pos
session, a piece of land generally. Hence the LXX. uses it frequently
as an equivalent to ?~f\i lot, or allotment, and also for i"l?rU ntS'T
possession, or in certain cases inheritance.
We cannot therefore insist on kXtjpos maintaining its original con
notation of possession acquired by lot, though perhaps it still implies
that it has not been earned by the possessor's efforts. If so tou kXt/pov
carries on the thought of Udvwaev. Compare Eph. i. 11, iv $ iKXvpdi-
Bvpiev (probably=we were given a possession). Neither, be it ob
served, can we insist on the meaning "inheritance" as compared
with "possession1."
(2) Its reference here :
As Mt Seir was given to the sons of Esau iv kXt)poi, Deut. ii. 5
(Heb. "for a possession "), so Canaan was given to the Israelites also
iv KXr)pip, Ex. vi. 8 ; Num. xxxiii. 53; Deut. iii. 18 (Heb. " for a posses
sion," or " to possess it"), although it does not appear to be actually
called their KXrjpos. Yet it is probable that the thought of Canaan as
the KXrjpos of the Lord's people underlies our passage2.
(3) The relation of rou K\r)pov to rijv peplSa :
What then is the relation in which toO KXr/pov stands to the pre
ceding ttji' pepioa ? Two answers have been given.
(a) The genitive is of apposition, " the share, i.e. the possession."
But in this case it is (a) hard to see why both substantives are
employed ; (pi) piipis, as stated above, would then suggest that others
besides ruv aylwv partake of it.
Hence (6) the partitive genitive, "the share in the possession," is
preferable. You have your share in the lot possessed by the saints.
" The KXrjpos iv rip tpoirl is represented as the joint inheritance of the
saints, of which each individual has his pepioa " (Ell.).
tov a7£»v. v. 2 note. Possessive genitive.
ev ™ <paiTi. Defining the sphere of the KXijpos. For the O.T.
worthies it lay in Canaan ; for Christian believers it is iv rip tpoirl.
The Book of Enoch, § 58 (see note below), speaks of the lot of
1 Mr H. St J. Thackeray, Relation of St Paul to Contemporary Jewish Thought,
1900, p. 251, mentions the interesting fact that the Book of Enoch also speaks of
" the lot of eternal life " given to Enoch (xxxvii. 4), of the " portion " predestined for
him (xxxix. 8), of the " lot " of the Son of Man (xlvi. 3), of " the glorious lot " of the
righteous and elect (lviii. ). But the absence of these chapters in the.Greek fragments
forbids a very close comparison.
3 The familiar phrase " the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance " Ps. cv.
11 = 1 Chr. xvi. 18, represents different wordB, a^oiviiTv.a KKypovopias vp&iv (Heb.
" the measure of your inheritance").
COL. C

34 COLOSSIANS [1 12—
the righteous and elect being glorious; "and the righteous will
be in the light of the sun, and the elect in the light of eternal
life," thinking chiefly, it would seem, of physical splendour, but the
contrast of to aKbros in v. 13 shows that (a) St Paul has in mind
chiefly not physical but spiritual light ; and (6) this light is something
already enjoyed. The possession of the saints is not merely a future
heaven but present spiritual privileges iv rip tpurri. Compare 1 Pet.
ii. 9. Eph. v. 8 is even stronger. St Paul's words in Acts xxvi. 18
present several points of close resemblance to our vv. 12 — 14, tou
iiriarpitjiai dirb o-kotovs els <J>ws Kal rijs e£ovcr£as tov Sarapa iirl rbv
Bebv, tov Xafielv airobs dcpeo-iv daapTuov Kai KXfjpov iv tois i\yia<rpJvois
irlarei rj els ipi.
" iv in est quasi praepositio loci. Conferatur oppositum, Matt. iv.
16, ubi bis est in " (Beng.).
13. os k.t.X. = b irar^p, v. 12. " Appositional relative sentence
(Win. § lx. 7), introducing a contrasted amplification of the preceding
clause, and preparing for a transition to the doctrine of the Person,
the glory, and the redeeming love of Christ, vv. 14 — 20 " (Ell.).
epvo-aTo...eK. When believers pray to be delivered from the attacks
of the Evil One they say pvaai i/pas airo rov irovnpov, but when, as
here, stress is laid on the persons delivered having been actually
within the grasp of the enemy, ex is naturally used. So Luke i. 74 ;
2 Tim. iii. 11, iv. 17. For a full discussion of the use of ix and
dvb with verbs expressing deliverance, both in the LXX. and in the
N.T., see Chase, The Lord's Prayer, 1891, pp. 71—85. Theophylact
remarks that in itself the verb implies our having been in servitude,
ovk elire Si e!;if3aXev, dXX' eppiaaro, SeiKvbs tin ws alxpdXwroi eraXanrio-
poipeBa. rjuds. When it is a matter of enumerating God's mercies to
sinners St Paul readily falls back into using the first person, cf.
ii. 13, iii. 4.
¦rijs Igovo-Cas. (1) In the LXX. i^ovala is occasionally concrete,
"dominion," "domain"; 2 Kings xx. 13, oik ijv Xbyos Sv oix iSei(ev
airois 'EfeKias iv rip otKip airov xai iv irdav ttj itfivala airov : Ps. cxiii.
fcxiv.) 2, iyevr)Br\ i) 'XovSala dylaap.a airov, 'XapaijX v igovala airov:
perhaps also Dan. iii. 3 (LXX. and Theod.). So too apparently Luke
xxiii. 7 (hardly iv. 6).
It would be a suitable meaning here, especially by way of contrast
to the ordinary interpretation of fiaoiXela, if there were more examples
of such a use in the N.T. But there, with the above exception, it is,
as it seems, either abstract or at most personified (v. 16, ii. 10, 15).
Personification (as though it = "Prince of darkness") is most im-

1 13] NOTES 35
probable here. We therefore understand it as " authority," the active
ruling principle which finds its source in darkness. Compare Acts
xxvi. 18.
(2) Possibly i^ovala in itself here means lawless, arbitrary, power
in contrast to a well-ordered sovereignty. See Lightfoot, and cf.
perhaps Ecclus. ix. 13, xxv. 25, xxx. 28 ( = xxxiii. 20).
tov o-kotovs. Not personified, but regarded as a state of existence
in which, and so under which, unbelievers live, 1 Thes. v. 4, 5 ; cf.
Bom. ii. 19. In Luke xxii. 53, avrv iarlv bp&v i) oipa Kal i/ i^ovala rov
axbrovs we have a verbal parallel, primarily, as it seems, referring to
the darkness of night, which, by making our Lord's arrest easy, gave
the Jews power to carry it out, yet also hinting at their love for
" darkness " (John iii. 19), and the spiritual forces over it (Eph. vi.
12). For the moral contrast of darkness to light see note on iv rip
tporrl, v. 12.
Kal aeTe'o-njo-ev, " and transferred us." So Josephus, Antt. ix. 11.1;
cf. Tiglath-Pileser's conquest of the northern parts of Israel, toi>s
oliefjropas alxp-aXorriaas pieriarijaev els ttjv abrov fiaoiXelav. There is no
exact parallel in the LXX. or the N.T. The nearest is 1 Cor. xiii. 2,
iriariv ware opv pieBiardveiv , compare Isa. liv. 10, but it is classical,
e.g. Thuc. iv. 57.
els Tt|v pVo-iXeCav, cf. iv. 11. Generally understood as " kingdom,"
"realm " (Apoc. i. 6, v. 10). But since Dalman (The Words of Jesus,
1902, pp. 91 sqq., 134 sqq.) has shown that r\ fiaaiXela ruv oipavuv
(Matt.), or i) fiaa. r. Beov (Mark and Luke), properly means the
"sovereignty" of God, i.e. His rule, not His realm, it seems probable
that we must so interpret y\ flaaiXeia here. Observe the contrast to iK
rijs i^ovalas tov aKbrovs — "out of the power," "into the sovereignty."
Many other passages in the N.T. in which fiaaiXela occurs lend them
selves to this interpretation (e.g. 1 Cor. xv. 24 ; Eph. v. 5).
tov vlov. Here at last the idea of "the Father" (v. 12) is
elaborated. There is probably a tacit contrast to angels (ii. 18), such
as we find explicitly brought out in Heb. i. and ii.
Observe, by the way, how curiously local as regards number are
the references to Christ as the Son. In the Gospels, Bom., Gal.,
Heb., 1 John they occur often ; in each of the other books only once
or twice. Our passage and Eph. iv. 13 are the only places where
Christ is so called in the Third Group of St Paul's Epistles.
ttjs d-ydirns avTov. (1) An attractive theory, originated, as it
seems, by St Augustine, and followed by Lightfoot, understands
aydirns as the genitive of origin, arguing that as love is the essence of
God the phrase here refers to the Eternal Generation of the Son. It
C2

36 COLOSSIANS [1 13—
thus serves, it is said, to introduce the following passage, particularly
the phrases os iariv elKiiv tov Beov tov dopdrov (v. 15), and iv abrtp
eiSbKijaev irav rb irXijpoipuj. KaroiKijaai (v. 19). The phrase thus ap
proaches the word povoyevrjs.
St Augustine's words are "Quod autem dictum est, Filii charitatis
suae, nihil aliud intelligatur, quam Filii sui dilecti, quam Filii
postremo substantiae suae. Charitas quippe Patris quae in natura
ejus est ineffabiliter simplici, nihil est aliud quam ejus ipsa natura
atque substantia.... Ac per hoc Filius charitatis ejus nullns est
alius, quam qui de substantia ejus est genitus " (De Trin. xv. 19
§37). But interesting though this interpretation undoubtedly is it is
extremely precarious, in view of the fact that St John's words 6
Bebs dydirn iarlv (1 John iv. 8) probably describe not the essence of
God (if we may so speak) but rather the sum of His attributes.
Besides, St Paul himself does not so use dydirv of God. Also, there
appears to be no parallel expression in the N.T. ascribing the origin
of the Eternal Son to the Godhead in any other term than " of the
Father" or "of God."
(2) P. Ewald strangely understands it as a kind of genitivus autoris
in the sense that He is the Son whom God's love to us gave us. But
there seems to be no parallel for such a phrase.
(3) Hence it is easier to understand the genitive as possessive —
the Son who is the object of His love, the Son who belongs to the
love of God as its eternal personal object. " The phrase fixes our
attention on the relation of the Son to this unique attribute of the
Father " (Beet).
Observe that St Paul chooses the Semitic mode of expression rather
than the Greek (d-yaTnjTos or rjyairvpivos, Eph. i. 6), because the
former is more vivid and concentrates the thought more strongly
on love, thus suggesting more clearly the relation of love in which
even those who are in Christ's kingdom stand towards the Father
(cf. Eph. ii. 4, 5, Bom. v. 8). Gen. xxxv. 18, vlbs bSivvs pov, is often
adduced as a similar use of the genitive. But there it is probably
objective as regards vlbs, " the son that has brought me sorrow."
14. This verse=Eph. i. 7, save that there we find the addition
after diroXirpoiaiv of Sid toO atparos avrov, and the substitution of
irapairrwpdroiv for apapriuiv.
iv (3, cf. ii. 3 ; more than Si ov, and expressing that only in spiritual
and real union with Christ, as members in the body (1 Cor. xii. 27) or
as branches in the vine (John xv. 4), do we possess rip diroXi
rpoiaiv. Severance from Him would mean loss of the blessings en-

1 14] NOTES 37
sured in Him. St Paul is doubtless already thinking of the effect of
the False Teaching (of. ii. 19).
^Xou-ev. See notes on Textual Criticism.
The marginal reading laxopev is ingressive, " we got " (see Moulton,
Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 110, 145) our privileges. We entered on them
at the time of our baptism (cf. ii. 11 — 14; see also iaxov, Phm. 7).
The text, ixof-1" (°f- l'- 4 note), lays stress on the present possession
of the Colossians and all believers, thus reminding them again of
their privileges in Christ. The thought is taken up and enlarged
in vv. 21», 22\
•njv diroXvTpuio-iv. The force of the article is perhaps possessive
"our redemption," cf. Heb. xi. 35, but more probably by way of de
finition, perhaps expressed idiomatically for us by " Bedemption, " as
contrasted with "redemption." Compare i) aorrvpia, Acts iv. 12.
The meaning that d7roXi)Tpw<ns presented here to St Paul is not quite
certain. In derivation, of course, the thought is of "redemption"
in the strict sense, the payment of something by which the captive is
set free. So Xvrpov, Matt. xx. 28 || Mark x. 45f. But even iu Xvrpbopai,
Xirpaais, XvTpurrjs, the sense of ransom may be very weak (Luke xxiv.
21, i. 68 ; Acts vii. 35), and, in the compound word, d7r6 lays still
more stress on release than on ransom. Compare the only place in the
LXX. where d7roXiiTpwo-is occurs, Dan. iv. 33 ( = 30° Swete, not Theod.),
and also djroXvrpow in Ex. xxi. 8, Zeph. iii. 2 (l)t-
Hence in the case of airoXirpuiais it is even more imperative than
usual to avoid the special temptation of every expositor of Scripture,
interpreting words by their derivation rather than their usage. For
the context alone can decide which was the thought really in the
Apostle's mind. Apparently in Bom. iii. 24, 1 Cor. i. 30 (?) and
perhaps Eph. i. 7 (because of the additional Sid toO alpunros airov),
compare also Heb. ix. 15, he lays stress on the thought of ransom
and the price paid ; but on that of release, "emancipation" (Bobinson),
in Eph. i. 14, iv. 30, Bom. viii. 23; compare Luke xxi. 28; Heb.
xi. 35.
In our present passage d7roXi5Tp«cris seems only to carry on the
thought of release (begun in v. 13), while the thought of redemption
in the strict sense does not appear till vv. 20, 21. For a full
discussion of the meaning of diroXirpoiais see Abbott on Eph. i. 7.
Compare also J. A. B. on Eph. i. 14, Westcott, Hebrews, pp. 295
sqq., Hort on 1 Pet. i. 19.
If it be asked what that is from which we are released, the answer,
judging by the context, is, surely, not " punishment and Divine
wrath" (Ell.), but the authority of darkness (v. 13) and the claim of

38 COLOSSIANS [1 1 *—
sin (vide infra). This corresponds to the bondage of Egypt, to
which Xvrpbopai often refers in the O.T.
The addition in T. R. of Sid ™B a'lparos airov from Eph. i. 7 spoils
the connexion here, for St Paul is about to treat emphatically of
the Divinity of Christ, and does not come to any thought that
involves His humiliation till v. 20. In Eph. i. 8 sqq. there is no
such difficulty, for the stress of the argument falls on the grace of
God towards us.
Tijv d<f>eo-iv k.t.X. Epexegetic of rip> diroXirpoiaiv, bringing out
not the positive side of salvation, final endowment with all moral and
spiritual graces, but its negative side, release from the claims of sin.
This is here mentioned as the primary character of redemption, in
which indeed all else is involved.
Observe that in the LXX. atpeais seems to be never used of the
forgiveness of sins as such, but usually of the Jubilee (72V |£
times) and the liberty (TVY1 W times) connected with it, and also
of the release (HElIX' ,?„ times) every seven years for land and creditors.
Similarly in Egyptian papyri it is used of remission of taxes, or
exemption from them (cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 100 sqq.,
Nageli, Wortschatz d. dp. Paul, 1905, p. 56). Compare too 1 Mac.
xiii. 34, 39, and perhaps Esth. ii. 18.
Thus the idea of forgiveness must probably be supplemented by
that of remission of claims, our sins being regarded as debts. Cf.
the variants in the Lord's Prayer, Matt. vi. 12, 14 ; Luke xi. 4.
It should be noticed that atpeais occurs in St Paul's writings only
here and Eph. i. 7. It is found also in his speeches (Acts xiii. 38, xxvi.
18), but iu view of the fact that it occurs only once in Matt. (xxvi.
28), twice in Mark (i. 4, iii. 29), twice in Heb. (ix. 22, x. 18), and ten
times in the writings of St Luke, it may be due in both these cases to
the narrator.
tov du.apTi.uv. This general and all-embracing word is perhaps
chosen as suggesting the power of apapria (Bom. iii. 9, v. 21, vi. 17
— 22), while it would be impossible to have the singular itself here.
In Eph. i. 7 on the contrary t. irapairTapdrav refers only to specific
"transgressions" as infra ii. 13 bis.
15 — 23. The nature, office, and work of Him into whose sovereignty
they have been removed (vv. 15 — 20), together with a further statement
of the meaning and aim of their emancipation (vv. 21 — 23).
St Paul wishes the Colossians to appreciate Christ as He now is,
the risen and ascended Lord in glory, and to give Him His due.
Attempts were being made to lead them astray, and to persuade
them to find in created beings more help than Christ could give.

1 15] NOTES 39
St Paul, therefore, draws out at length His complete supremacy and
power. He does this by telling them His present relation to God (v. 15a) , and
to all creation (vo. 15b— 17), and to the Church (o. 18E), laying stress on
the position gained for Him by His resurrection (v. 18b), and on the
universal extent of the effect of His death (vv. 19, 20). St Paul
then passes on to remind them once more of what Christ has already
done for them (vv. 21, 22"), and His desire to present them faultless
if they will but stand firm (vv. 22b, 23).
(v. 15) He is the complete and visible expression of the invisible
God, prior to all that has come into being from God; (v. 16)
Because in Him was the creative centre of all things, namely in
the various heavens and on earth, both those visible to our natural
eyes and those invisible, including super-terrestrial beings of
every grade ; of the creation of them all He was the instrument
and He is the final aim. (v. 17) He (and no other) is (eternally)
before all things (in time), and in Him (who ever remains the same)
they all have their permanence, (v. 18) And it is He who is " the
centre of the unity and the seat of the life " of the Church, for He
is the Chief and Beginning of it, who was once among the dead, but
was the first to rise from them, in order that He should take the first
place among all things ; (v. 19) For this was God's good pleasure (to use
the Gospel phrase) ; namely that in Him from all eternity the complete
sum of the Father's attributes should permanently dwell, (v. 20) and
therefore that He (the Son) should be the means by which the
Father should reconcile all things unto Him (the Son), making peace
by His death on the Cross — by Him and no other, whether the
things be on earth or in the heavens, (v. 21) This reconciliation
includes you — you who once were in a state of alienation and enmity
in your thought, showing itself in your worthless deeds ; yet, as facts
really are, He reconciled you (v. 22) in the incarnate Saviour by His
death, that He might present you before Him at the judgment-day
completely holy and without any blemish and unimpeachable, (v. 23)
if only you stay on in your faith (cf. v. 4), set on the sure Foundation,
and firm in character, and resisting all attempts to move you from
the hope brought by the Gospel which you yourselves heard, the
same which was proclaimed in every district, and of the power of
which I myself am a living witness.
15. The student should not neglect the exposition of vv. 15 — 17
given by Bp Pearson, Creed, pp. 114 — 116.
os. Probably not so much giving a reason for the preceding state
ment (P. Ewald) as expanding the meaning of it, showing Who
and What He is into whose Kingdom we have been brought.

40 COLOSSIANS [1 15
Io-tiv. The repetition of iariv in vv. 17, 18 bis suggests that this is
more than the mere copula, and has at least some connotation of
present time. St Paul is not speaking only of the pre-incarnate
Son, but of Him as He is, including necessarily all that He ever
was. elK<iv. The omission of the article identifies the predicate more
completely with the subject. The English idiom does not allow
of this, but requires "who is the image." So also with the follow
ing irpoiTbroKos. Contrast v. 18".
On the meaning of elKiiv here much has been written. The more
important points to notice are perhaps the following. In the N.T. it
means (1) The effigies on a coin, Matt. xxii. 20 || Mark xii. 16 and Luke
xx. 24.
(2) A statue or other representation; so of the Beast in the
Apocalypse, esp. xiii. 15 ter ; cf. v. 14, xiv. 9, 11, xv. 2, xvi. 2, xix. 20,
xx. 4. So often in the LXX. it = idol. Thus too probably Bom. i. 23.
Similarly also in the metaphor of the solid reality of a statue in
contrast to the shadow that it throws, Heb. x. 1 (see Westcott).
(3) From this material sense of elKiiv, the essential part of which
is that eUiiv means no accidental similarity but true representation,
and representation of that which is, at least for a time, absent from
sight, the transition to higher meanings is easy.
(a) Thus it is used of the likeness, primarily, but not wholly,
physical, of men to Adam, and of glorified men to Christ, 1 Cor. xv.
49, and of a man being in some sense a visible representation of God,
1 Cor. xi. 7, dvrjp...elKoiv k. 5<5fa Beov birdpxoiv. Compare of men
Gen. i. 26, v. 3 ; Ecclus. xvii. 3, and especially Wisd. ii. 23. So too
it is used of the representation of God in the new creation, iii. 10.
(6) But if a man, as embodying Divine principles, and as being
the outcome of the Divine character in a degree that is not predicated
of lower stages of creation, can be said to be elKiiv Beov, much more
may eUoiv be used of Christ in relation to God. So 2 Cor. iv. 4, and
our present passage.
(4) Thus the thought here is that Christ is the external ex
pression, if the phrase may be allowed, of God. In this connexion,
therefore, cIkoiv is a metaphor closely akin to X67os, save that the
Word appeals to the mind through the ear, the Image through the
eye. In either case Christ is regarded as being
(a) the outcome of the Father's nature, and hence related to
Him in a wholly unique way; and especially
(6) the means by which the Father manifests Himself to all
that is without. Compare the title given in the Midrash to the Logos,

1 15] " NOTES 41
" the light of the raiment of the Holy One " (quoted in J. Lichtenstein's
Hebrew Commentary on our passage, Leipzig, 1901). Such revela
tion began at the first moment when things external to God came
into being, and will continue for ever, though the Incarnation as
such centred it in human nature and focussed it there for the human
eye. tov 6eov toJ aopaTov. The slightly emphatic position of dopdrov
draws attention to the meaning of eUiiv here as the representation of
God to created beings. God is invisible. His elxtiv may be seen.
Observe that of course "the epithet must not be confined to the appre
hension of the bodily senses, but will include the cognisance of the
inward eye also" (Lightfoot).
From another point of view creation itself is the means by which rd
dbpara Beov are seen, Bom. i. 20. For ddparos of God cf. 1 Tim. i. 17 ;
Heb. xi. 27. In our v. 16 it is used generally, in contrast to bpard,
of things invisible to men.
irpoiTOTOKOs irdo-ns KT£o-ews, "the Firstborn of all creation." On
the absence of the article before irpior. see note on elKuiv.
The unique relation in which the Son stands to all created beings
has been already hinted at in ekoiv, but is now clearly brought out,
first generally in this phrase, and secondly in that all individual
things had their creation in and by and unto Him, and maintain
their existence and coherence only in Him. How, then, St Paul
implies, can you put them into rivalry with Him?
irpiDToroKos. (1) Two meanings are possible.
(a) The primary meaning of the word, according to which the
Son is here regarded as preceding irdira Krtais in point of time. Cf.
"Adam was the Firstborn of the world," bt£> 11133 JlSWin D"lN
cb)V, Num. R. § 4. 6.
(6) The secondary meaning of the higher position and privileges
attached to a firstborn. So perhaps Ex. iv. 22, ab Si ipeis rip Qapati
TdSe Xiyei Kipios Tibs irpoirbroKbs pov 'XaparjX, for Israel was by no
means the eldest of the nations, though first in honour. Yet in that
passage the phrase may merely mean that Israel is as the eldest son,
i.e. in point of time, with very indirect reference to the privileges
belonging to such.
A clearer instance is Ps. lxxxviii. (lxxxix.) 28 of David, and thus of
Messiah, Kay ti irpoirbroKov B-qaopai airbv, btpvXbv irapd rols flaaiXevaiv
rijs yijs, where the reference is to the position He shall hold ; He is to
be as the eldest son enjoying his privileges, as is brought out by the
parallelism of the second clause. Ecclus. xxxvi. 17 (14), 'Io-paijX iv
irpoirorbKip (X0" but irpoiroybvip B) lipoluaas, is only a reference to

42 COLOSSIANS * [1 15—
Ex. iv. 22 as is evident from its original Hebrew, TI33 ?KTKW
nrW'3, "Israel whom Thou didst surname Firstborn." Compare
Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 9 of N. Israel, 'Xitppdip irputrbroKbs poi iariv.
If this be adopted the chief thought of our passage is that the Son
surpasses iraira Kriais in honour.
It will be observed that in none of the above passages is active
sovereignty either stated or even implied. At the very most it is to
be deduced frem primacy in honour.
(2) But the following words 6Vi iv airip k.t.X. suggest that the
primary, temporal, meaning of the word is that which was chiefly in
St Paul's mind here.
And indeed this seems to be the thought in every passage of the
N.T. where irpoirbroKos is used of Christ. If arranged in the order of
their historical reference they are (a) our passage, at the commence
ment of creation, (b) Luke ii. 7 at His birth, (c) Col. i. 18, Bev. i. 5
at the Resurrection, (d) Rom. viii. 29, "among many brethren,"
apparently in heavenly glory (cf. probably Heb. i. 6).
(3) A further and very important question is whether irpurb-
tokos necessarily implies that the one of whom it is used belongs
to the same category as those with whom he is compared. Does it,
that is to say, necessarily mean here that the irpmrbroKos Himself
comes under the category of Kriais'!
(a) The question is not to be solved peremptorily by reading, as
did Isidore of Pelusium, irpoirorbKos in the active, "the First-bearer"
(Ep. in. 31). For such a meaning is never found in the Greek Bible,
nor indeed exactly anywhere else, and further in our passage it
would be inadmissible in view of the fact that SevreporbKos would be
impossible with reference to Tracra Kriais (cf. Abbott).
(6) Assuming then that we must undoubtedly read irpuirb-
tokos in the passive, " the Firstborn," it may be conceded that
ordinarily the irpoirbroKos is in the category of those with whom
He is compared. Yet it must be observed (a) that irpoirbroKos does
not of itself imply that others are born afterwards (for the firstborn
is at once consecrated to God, without waiting to see whether others
are born) ; (/3) that in the present case the various parts of creation
are set (vv. 16, 17) in a position so utterly subordinate to Him that
He cannot be a creature in the sense in which they are creatures ;
and (7) that this suggests that the apostle did not intend to represent
Him as in any sense a Kriais, but as prior to, and therefore superior
to, irdaa Kriais.
A curious, but very late, illustration of this use of the Hebrew
word for "firstborn," "1133, is found in the commentary on the

1 16] NOTES 43
Pentateuoh by R. Bahya (Bechai), died 1340 a.d. (fol. 124. 4,
Schoettgen on Heb. i. 6), who says of God, "He is the Firstborn
of the world," DSlJ> b& "1133 Nine?, and again (fol. 74. 4, Sohoettgen,
loc. oit.) says that God oalls Himself Firstborn, adding in explanation
of Ex. xiii. 2, "sanctify to me every firstborn," as though it were
Sanctify me with all the firstborn1.
After this we cannot be surprised that Jews could call Jacob (pro-
bably = Israel) the Firstborn of the Lord H'3pn btT 11133 (Exod. E.
§ 19, about the middle), or that they applied midrashically Ps. lxxxix.
28 directly to Messiah ; see Exod. R. (same §, near the end) on Ex.
xiii. 2, "B. Nathan Bays, The Holy One, blessed be He, saith to
Moses, As I made Jacob the Firstborn, for it is said (Ex. iv. 22) 'my
son, my firstborn Israel,' so do I make King Messiah Firstborn, for
it is said (Ps. lxxxix. 28) I too will set him as Firstborn."
But that 7tpwt6tokos was a recognised title of MeBsiah among the
Jews, especially among those of St Paul'3 time, there is no sufficient
evidence to prove. Heb. i. 6 is in itself far from enough.
irdo-t]s KTlo-eois. Kriais in the N.T. = (1) act of creation, Rom. i. 20;
(2) creation as the aggregate of created things, Mark xiii. 19; Bom.
viii. 22 ; (3) a single part of creation regarded as space, v. 23; institu
tion, 1 Pet. ii. 13 (where see Hort) ; animate or inanimate beings,
Bom. viii. 39 ; Heb. iv. 13.
The first is evidently out of the question here, but it is very
difficult to decide between the second and the third. In favour of
the third is urged the absence of the article, cf. Blass, Gram. § 47. 9,
Vulg. primogenitus omnis creaturae. Yet Kriais may be here used
anarthrously like Koapms, yij, oipavbs, and " irpurrbroKos seems to
require either a collective noun, or a plural iraaav rOv Kriaeoiv "
(Lightfoot). We therefore translate here "of all creation." Cf. Judith ix. 12
(17) and Apoc. iii. 14.
16. oti. "Because"; justifying the preceding title (irpoirbroKos
irda. Krla.).
ev avV$, stronger than the Si airov in the second part of the verse,
and in John i. 3", and even than xwP's airov iyivero ovSi Iv, John i. 3b.
It is like v. 17, to irdvra iv airtp avviarvxev. We grasp, or think
we grasp, the sense of the latter phrase without much difficulty,
that all things find their coherence in Him alone, but we some
times fail to appreciate its complement, that they must have had
i Schechter, J. Q. K., Ap. 1894, p. 420, referring the first quotation from Bahya to
Ex. xxxiv. 20, says that the title "is not to be found in the older Rabbinic literature,
and seems to be only a later Cabbalistic term."

44 COLOSSIANS [1 16
their immediate origin in Him alone, who is " the creative centre of all
things, the causal element of their existence" (Ell.). Hence He is
called i) dpxv rijs Krlaeus rov Beov, Apoc. iii. 14.
For a similar use of iv, but with reference to the Father, see Acts
xvii. 28. Wisd. ix. lb, 6 iroi-qaas rd irdvra iv Xbyip aov, is parallel in
form alone, for it is a literal translation of the Hebrew ^1313 which
in such a phrase would naturally mean "by Thy word."
eKTio-e-n. Krifa is used in the N.T. only of God's action, and so
almost universally in the LXX., the exceptions being Lev. xvi. 16 of
the tabernacle being set up, 1 Esd. iv. 53 of founding a city (a classical
usage), Hag. ii. 9 apparently of building the temple, and possibly
also Jer. xxxix. (xxxii.) 15 as a var. lect. for KrvBrjaovrai. Aquila
and after him Sym. and Theod. frequently substitute it for a less
exact term in the LXX. when the Hebrew has N13, e.g. Gen. i. 1, 27.
rd irdvTa. See notes on Textual Criticism. Almost certainly to
be separated from the following words, partly because in the right
text no article follows (yet cf . Eph. iii. 15) , partly because rd irdvra
occurs so often alone, both with Krlfa (e.g. the end of this verse,
Eph. iii. 9 ; Apoc. iv. 11 bis ; Ecclus. xxiii. 20) and with other some
what similar phrases (e.g. v. 20 ; Eph. i. 10, 11, 23, iv. 10).
Observe (1) rd irdvra, as contrasted with TdcTa, regards the several
parts as forming a whole, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 27, 28. (2) rd irdvra, after
wards defined as iv oip. k.t.X., not barely rbv oipavbv k. t. yrjv, because
St Paul is laying stress on Christ's relation not to the universe gene
rally but to creatures, particularly sentient creatures, in it. (3) rd
irdvra, not rd &XXa, or rd Xoiira, thus absolutely excluding the lrpoirb-
tokos from being Himself a Kriais (cf. Lightfoot).
ev Tots ovpavols *. e-rrl ttjs "Y^s. "In the heavens and on the
earth," recalling Gen. i. 1 and especially ii. 1, all things whether
above or below. Perhaps oipavoi here (contrast 1 Cor. viii. 5, etre iv
oipavip k.t.X.) to include a reference to the seven stages of the heavenly
regions so frequently spoken of in the apocalyptic literature (cf.
Introd. p. xxiii.), a theory which can hardly have been absent from
the false teaching that St Paul was combating, and one which he
himself accepted in some measure (2 Cor. xii. 2).
Ta opaTat Kal Td dopara, "the visible and the invisible." bparbs
occurs elsewhere in the Greek Bible in this sense only in Job xxxvii. 21.
abparos (see v. 15) is used nowhere else in the Greek Bible or the
Hexapla fragments of invisible things absolutely (contrast Bom. i. 20
in reference to God), but it is used in Isa. xiv. 3, 2 Mac. ix. 5 of
things unseen before a certain time, and in Gen. i. 2 of chaos.
The two words together comprise all existing things regarded from

1 16] NOTES 45
the side of human vision. Compare Plato's rb bparbv and to deiS^s.
They practically correspond to our " material and immaterial " but
avoid the probable error, philosophical and scientific, of such a
division, bpard probably includes both stellar and earthly powers ;
dopaTa perhaps solely super-terrestrial beings, "angels" of every
kind, but hardly souls of men on earth.
Spovoi. Here only in St Paul. The throne, from being the mere
symbol of power (Luke i. 52), easily becomes the synonym for it (e.g.
Bev. xiii. 2 ; cf. 2 Sam. xiv. 9 ; 1 Kings i. 37, 47, ii. 33, etc.).
Here, with the three following terms, it is personified, St Paul
perhaps preferring personifications of abstract terms to direct per
sonal appellations, as more suitable to the vague and mysterious
nature of these exalted beings — if as is probable from ii. 10, 15
beings are intended.
The exact reference of Bpbvoi here (a) cannot be to beings that
merely support God's throne, for this would separate Bpbvoi from the
class of the three following terms, which have a distinctly active
sense ; and (6) can hardly be definitely to those who occupy thrones
surrounding the throne of God, Rev. iv. 4 (Abbott), for we should
then expect some definite reference in the following terms as well ;
but (c) the reference is probably to the beings, whatever they were,
called by this name in the current pseudepigraphical literature.
See Slavonic Enoch xx. 1, and Asc. Isaiah, " worship neither throne
nor angel which belongs to the six heavens " (vii. 21) ; " when I have
raised thee to the seventh heaven... thou shalt know that there is
nothing hidden from the thrones and from those that dwell in the
heavens and from the angels" (vii. 27); "It is He alone to whose
voice all the heavens and thrones give answer " (viii. 8). Testt. XII
Patriarchs, " and in the heaven next to this are thrones, dominions,
in which hymns are ever offered to God " (Levi, iii. Sinker's trans.).
KvpidTnres, dominationes Vulg., dominaciouns Wycl., Eph. i. 21 ;
2 Pet. ii. 10 ; Jude 8f. Not in LXX. or Hexapla fragments. As
Kipios seems to have taken much of its later connotation from the
fact of its being the Greek equivalent of Dominus, the Latin title of
the Roman Emperor (cf. especially Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 330),
so probably Kvpibrvs borrowed part of its meaning from dominatio.
Ii so it probably has the connotation of despotism which is lacking
in Bpbvos. Translated into personal and modern terms the two are
" Kings, Czars." But in this case also the reference is doubtless to
angelic beings : cf. the " Greek Legend " of Asc. Isa. vii. 21, pi)
irpoaKwrjavs prjre dyyiXovs prjre dpxayyiXovs piyre Kvpibrrrras prrre
Bpbvovs (Charles.' Edition, p. 144).

46 COLOSSIANS [1 16—
dpxal, ejjova-Cai, " ether princeheedis, ether powers," Wycl. The
two words frequently come together, ii. 10, 15 ; Eph. i. 21 (inrepdvu
Trdaijs dpxrjs n. i^ovalas K. Svvdfieois n. KVpibrijros K. iravrbs dvbparos
ivopafopivov k.t.X.), iii. 10, vi. 12.
Of the two titles dpxal is doubtless the higher, expressing as it does
a priority of rank and rule, igovalai being more general, contrasting
the possessors of igovala with those, whoever they may be, over whom
it is exercised. For dpxal without il-ovala see Rom. viii. 38, 39. On
i&vaia cf. v. 13 note. For the use of these two words compare the
phrase " all the angels of power and all the angels of principalities "
(Eth. Enoch, lxi. 10). Observe
(1) The terms are in a descending scale, generally but perhaps not
in detail. For in Eph. i. 21 Kvpibfvs follows i£ovala.
(2) The supposition (P. Ewald) that they are in two pairs has no
support either from Eph. i. 21 or from the use of the terms in the
pseudepigraphical books. Hence we have no right to regard the
dpxal and igovalai as standing in closer relation (by opposition or
assistance) to believers than the Bpbvoi and Kvpibrvres.
(3) They include only supernatural powers, for there is no hint
that the Colossians were in danger of worshipping human beings
(contrast ii. 18).
(4) Though St Paul believed in the existence of angels (1 Cor. vi. 3),
and probably in grades of them (because such a belief was very
common in his time), yet he here employs not strictly official, much
less personal, names — contrast e.g. Eth. Enoch, Bk Jub. — but only
personifications of abstract terms. This looks as though here he
purposely expressed himself vaguely. He found the terms in common
use, e.g. among the Colossians, and he uses them, but he neither
affirms nor denies their personality.
On the other hand it is hard to see here any signs of his " impatience
with this elaborate angelology " (Lightfoot).
ra Trdvra. Emphatic repetition, introducing new facts.
&V auTou. Regarding the Son (v. 13) as the means by which all
things have been created. So often, e.g. John i. 3, 10 ; 1 Cor. viii. 6 ;
Heb. i. 2 ; cf. Rom. xi. 36. Compare Philo, de Man. ii. 5 (ii. p. 225),
X670S...S1' 08 aipiras b Kbapios iSvpiovpyeiro. But Lightfoot points out
that Philo regarded the Logos as a passive tool or instrument, and
therefore "frequently and consistently used the simple instrumental
dative ip to describe the relation of the Word to the Creator," e.g.
Leg. All. iii. 31 § 96, Wendland (1. p. 106), 6 Xbyos...tp KaBdirep bpydvip
irpoaxpvadpevos. But this the N.T. cannot and does not do.
Kal els avrov. The Son is here regarded as the final aim to which
all things tend. "The Eternal Word is the goal of the universe, as

1 17] NOTES 47
He was the starting-point. It must end in unity, as it proceeded
from unity : and the centre of this unity is Christ. This expression
has no parallel, and could have none, in the Alexandrian phraseology
and doctrine" (Lightfoot).
In Bom. xi. 36 we find stated of God, without regard to the
hypostatic distinctions, tin i% airov k. SC airov it. els airbv rd irdvra,
and in 1 Cor. viii. 6, expressly of the Father, 6 irar-qp, i( ov rd irdvra
Kai fipeis eis airbv, where, however, the reference is verbally limited to
the Father as the supreme object of the Christian life.
But observe that St Paul could surely not have used els airbv of
God, in one place as such, of the Father in another place, and, here,
of the Sou, unless he had recognised the Son as wholly Divine.
Pearson (Creed, p. 115), after pointing out the testimony that vv. 16, 17
bear to the greatness and the work of the Son, adds that even " if they
were spoken of the Father they could be no way injurious to His
majesty, Who is nowhere more plainly or fully set forth unto us as
the Maker of the world."
eKTio-Tai. The perfect is chosen because he is passing from the
thought of creating (vv. 15b, 16) to that of sustaining (v. 17).
17. Kal avTos. i . 18, note.
eVriv. " Non dicit, f actus est [iyivero] ; neque erat, quorum hoc
tamen angusto sensu dici poterat, coll. John i. 1, sed est, in praesenti,
conf. John viii. 58 " (Beng.). So St Basil, long before (as quoted by
Lightfoot), 6 dirbaroXos eliriiv, nd*ra Si' airov Kai els airbv eVriffTai,
tSipeiXev elireiv, Kai abrbs e-yeWro trpb lrdvraiv, eliriiv Se, Kal airbs 'icrri
irpb irdvroiv, £5ei|e rbv p.iv del dvra ttjv Si Kriaiv yevop,ivijv (adv. Eunom.
iv. vol. I. p. 294).
St Paul, that is to say, here speaks of the existence of the Son
above, and apart from, all time. Cf. irpiv 'Afipadp yeviaBai iyii elpl
(John viii. 58), thus contrasting Him with Td irdvra already summed
up under iKTiarai. Only in such a Being who " is," independently of
all, can all be created and maintain existence.
irpd. Doubtless of time, as apparently always in St Paul, thus
pointing out the special reference of ianv. If it were of rank it
would be superfluous, after the greatness attributed to the Son in
v. 16. It repeats a part of the thought of irpoirbroKos irdavs Kriaeois
[v. 15).
irdvTwv. Certainly neuter because of rd iravra on either side.
Contrast Vulg. et ipse est ante omnes et omnia in ipso constant. If
omnes was not originally due to confusion with the et following
(especially if the original omnia was contracted) it came presumably
from a desire to emphasize the inferiority of the throni, dfimmationes,
principatus, potestates.

48 COLOSSIANS [1 17—
irdvrav, all things considered one by one ; rd irdvra, in their totality.
Kal Td irdvTa e'v avTip. See notes on Textual Criticism. Ellicott,
comparing iv airtp iKrlaBv, says that the change of verb modifies the
meaning of iv : " Christ was the conditional element of their creation,
the causal element of their persistence." Yet even their persistence is
conditioned by the fact of Christ's existence as well as caused by it.
So Chrysostom asks IIws avviarijKev iv rip oix bvn ;
crvve'o"TT]Kev, "hold together," "endure." The perf. act. of
avviarvpi occurs here only in the N.T.
The word would probably be suggested to the Aramaic-speaking
Apostle by the Aramaic D'lpJIN, of which it is a very literal equivalent.
Compare Targ. Job xv. 29, nnn-11? D^JV t>b), " for neither shall his
substance continue" (B.V.). So in Onkelos, Gen. xix. 20, xiii. 18;
Deut. viii. 3 it is used of men continuing in life.
Thus the Son is here spoken of as the One in whom all coheres,
who is the Bond of all. Compare Philo, de Profug. ( — de Fuga et
Invent.) 20 § 112, Wendland I. p. 562, o re ydp rov Svtos Xbyos Seapbs
aiv twv dirdvriav, ws etpvrat, Kai avvixei rd p^pi] irdvra.
Part of the same thought is expressed in the Rabbinic saying,
lDlpD 1d!?1V PK1 D"?1J? h>V IDlpD iY3pn, "The Holy One, blessed
be He, is the place of the world, and not the world His place "
(Gen. R. § 68 middle).
For a slightly different aspect of Christ's preservation of all things
see Heb. i. 3.
18. Kal avTos. In vv. 14 — 20 abrbs occurs twelve times, besides
os three times, in every case (vide infra) referring to Christ. St Paul
will leave no loophole for another to creep in and steal His glory.
In the present verse the thought is — He who is the image of God and
the means and aim of all creation, He, and no other, is the source of
life to believers. See the Letter to Diognetus, § 7, in Lightfoot.
r\ KedtaXi). vv. 15 — 17 seem to enlarge on tou vioC rijs dydirvs
airov, v. 18 on the preceding words tt)x paaiXelav (v. 13).
KetpaXi) is used of Christ only in 1 Cor. xi. 3, 4, where He is
called the Head of an individual man, and here, ii. 10, 19 ; Eph. i.
22, iv. 15, v. 23, where He is regarded as the Head of all spiritual
powers as well as of the Church.
tov o-uuxitos. Had this been omitted KetpaXr) might have appeared
to be a mere figure of speech. Its insertion makes it clear that He
stands to the Church iu the relation of Head to body. He is " the
centre of its unity and the seat of its life " (Lightfoot).
Observe that although St Paul compared the company of believers
(or perhaps the local community of believers, see Hort, The Christian

1 18] NOTES

49

Ecclesia, p. 145) to a body in 1 Cor. xii. 12—27; Rom. xii. 4, 5,
following therein Greek and Roman precedents (for Latin examples
see Wetstein on Rom. xii. 5), yet he now speaks rather of Christ as
its Head ; i.e. in that Second Group St Paul was laying stress on the
relation of Christians to each other, here rather on the dignity of
Christ and their relation to Him (of. Beet).
Observe that "the relation thus set forth under a figure is mutual.
The work which Christ came to do on earth was not completed when
He passed from the sight of men : He the Head needed a body of
members for its full working out through the ages : part by part He
was, as St Paul says, to be fulfilled in the community of His disciples,
whose office in the world was the outflow of His own. And on the
other hand His disciples had no intelligible unity apart from their
ascended Head, who was also to them the present central fountain of
life and power " (Hort, The Christian EccUsia, p. 148). See further
on v. 24.
It is, by the way, somewhat strange that St Paul should here
introduce the simile of the body as though it were well known to the
Colossians. Perhaps Epaphras had heard St Paul use it at Ephesus
about the time 1 Cor. was written.
•rijs eKKXr/o-Cas. In apposition to rov aiiparos and explanatory of it.
Cf. v. 24; Eph. i. 22, 23. For iKKXvala in the Epp. and Apoc. see
Hort, The Christian Ecclesia, pp. 116 — 1 18, Swete on Apoc. xxii. 16.
os edriv, an epexegetic relative clause. " Like the more usual Sans,
the simple relatival force passes into the explanatory, which almost
necessarily involves some tinge of causal or argumentative meaning "
(Ellicott). Only by His resurrection, and all that this meant, did
He enter into this relation to the Church.
[r\] dpxij. See the notes on Textual Criticism. Lightfoot shows by
examples that the article is generally omitted when dpxv is predicate ;
e.g. Tatian, ad Graec. 4, Bebs...p6vos dvapxos uv Kal airbs birdpxoiv rCiv
Skoiv dpxr).
For apxh used of Christ see Apoc. iii. 14, xxi. 6, xxii. 13f, but
hardly Heb. vi. 1.
It has been suggested that iK rS>v veKpwv is to be taken not only
with irpurbroKOS but also with dpxv, thus limiting the reference of
apxr) to the Resurrection.
But the thought is wider. The Son is regarded as the dpxn of all
the beings that are reconciled (v. 20) and presented blameless (v. 22)
in glory, i.e. of what is elsewhere called the new creation (2 Cor. v. 17,
etns iv Xpiarip, Kaivi) Kriais, cf. Gal. vi. 15). Hence airapx^l is avoided
here, for He is more than " first-fruits" as regards the new creation.
POT.. X)

50 COLOSSIANS [1 18—
Contrast 1 Cor. xv. 20. Hence, rather, dpxi is parallel to elxiiv
(v. 15), and irparbroKos ix t&v vexp&v to irpoirbroKos irdavs xrlaeus,
and, as will be seen, Iva yivvrai iv iraaiv airbs irpoireioiv, with its
expansion in vv. 19, 20, to vv. 16, 17.
We must thus attribute to apxi its fullest meaning, including, as in
Prov. viii. 22, 23, and perhaps in Gen. xlix. 3, Deut. xxi. 17, that of
time (which however is but subordinate here), and that of dignity
and worth, Hos. i. 11 ( = ii. 2), besides its connotation of supreme
source and originating power, cf. dpxvyos, Acts iii. 15.
Observe that this full meaning would come more naturally to St
Paul than to a Gentile, accustomed as he would be to the Hebrew
equivalent of dpxi, viz. rWNI. Compare e.g. Bashi's manifold
interpretation of the first word in Genesis, b'reshith.
TrpwTOToKos, v. 15 note; in conformity with St Paul's words at
Antioch in Pisidia that God had fulfilled the promise made unto the
fathers, avdarvaas 'Xvaovv, lis Kal iv rip \j/aXp.ip yiypairrai rip Sevriptp'
vlbs pov el ai, iyii a-fjpepov yeyiwvKd ae (Acts xiii. 33).
kK. Not to be confused with the simple genitive (Apoc. i. 5, 6 irpoi
rbroKos t&v veKpQv), but expressly implying that He was among the
dead, and came up from them leaving them there.
tov veKpuv. ix vexpCiv is very common, but the article is very rare,
the exact phrase occurring only in Eph. v. 14, ko! dvdara ix rCiv
vexpdv, and perhaps in 1 Thes. i. 10, iv rjyeipev ix [tup] vexp&v. Com
pare also dirb t&v veKp&v, Matt. xiv. 2, xxvii. 64, xxviii. 7t, and /ierd
r&v vexpuv, Luke xxiv. 5t- The article has almost the sense of "all."
Contrast ii. 12.
tva. The final object of His inherent supremacy, and His priority
in Besurrection.
¦yevT|Tai, not rj. For this He becomes (contrast preceding iariv),
partly at once on His Resurrection and Ascension (compare Phil.
ii. 9), but completely only at the consummation of all things. Cf.
ib. v. 10.
ev irdo-iv. Certainly neuter, because of rd irdvra in vv. 17, 20.
Compare Phil. iv. 12. Observe that by position the stress is on iv
iraaiv, not on airbs.
avTos, vide supra.
irpwTevwvf, "holding the first place." Vulg. primatum tenens, cf.
3 John 9, 6 0iXo7rpa>Te!)wc air&v Aiorpitpvs. irpareieiv has precisely the
same meaning in Esth. v. 11 (B). Lightfoot quotes appositely from
Plut. Mor. p. 9, aireiSovres robs iraTSas ev irdo-i rdxiov irpuTevaai.
19. oti. Stating the reason for His eventually becoming irpoirebwv
iv iraaiv.

1 19] NOTES 51
ev avrai. In the front for emphasis. Observe that the resulting
collocation of words could hardly fail to recall the Baptism (Mark i.
11, b vibs pov 6 dyairvrbs, iv aol eiSbxvaa ; Matt. iii. 17, iv <J eiSbxvaa)
and the Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 5, iv $ eiSbxvaa; cf. 2 Pet. i. 17,
els iv iyii eiSbxvaa), especially as the phrase rov vlov rrjs dydirvs airov
(v. 13) is lying at the back of all these verses in our Epistle.
evSoKijo-ev, " (the Father) was pleased." The subject may be
(1) Christ, (2) 7r£>/ rb irXfjpoipa, (3) God, or the Father.
Grammatically there is but little to choose, save that there is a
slight harshness in understanding "God" or "the Father." Yet cf.
Jas. i. 12. But theologically the decision is not so hard.
(1) If Christ be the subject (Tertullian, adv. Marc. v. 19, Conyb.
and Howson), we have the unparalleled statement of His being the
finally determining will, even over the ir\rjpbip.a, and we have the
improbable statement of His being not only the means by which, but
also the object to which, all things are to be reconciled, v. 20 (see
note there). Contrast 2 Cor. v. 19, Bebs vv t" Xpiarip xoapov KaraX-
Xdaaoiv iavrip.
(2) If irav rb irXr/poip-a be the subject (R.V.mg., Weiss, Ell., Abb.,
P. Ewald) more is attributed to what is impersonal than we should
expect, ii. 9 is parallel only in form, for there it is only said that
the irXTJpoipa dwells in Christ, not that the irXr)poipa exercises pleasure
and determination, and even reconciles (v. 20).
(3) But if "God" or "the Father" be the subject (A.V., R.V.,
Lightfoot), there is no such difficulty.
Further, eiSoxeiv is used of God thirteen times in the N.T. against
seven times of men, and though it is true that these seven are all in
St Paul's writings, yet he also uses eiSoKelv of God three times, 1 Cor.
i. 21, x. 5 ; Gal. i. 15.
The analogy of eiSoda in Eph. i. 5, 9, when St Paul is speaking of
God's purpose, also tends to confirm the reference of eiSoKelv here to
God. Compare Matt. xi. 26 (|| Luke x. 21), and probably Phil. ii. 13.
Observe that although the infinitive after eiSoxeiv, in all the other
seven times that the construction occurs in the N.T. (Luke xii. 32 ;
Bom. xv. 26; 1 Cor. i. 21 ; 2 Cor. v. 8 ; Gal. i. 15 ; 1 Thes. ii. 8, iii. 1),
refers to the subject of the finite verb, yet in 2 Mac. xiv. 35, as in
our present passage, it does not do so (Si;, Ki)pie,...^vSoK57<ras vabv rr)s
arjs aKvviiaeois iv ijplv yivea&ai). On the tense vide infra, s.v. xaroi-
xrjaai. irdv to irXiipiou.a. (1) On the grammatical meaning of the word
see by all means J. A. B. Ephesians, pp. 255 — 259, against the
theories of both Fritzsche and Lightfoot.
D2

52 COLOSSIANS [1 19—
(i) He shows that substantives ending in -pa or rather -par- are
not necessarily passive in meaning, but represent " the result of the
agency of the corresponding verb," and that many words oscillate
between two meanings, e.g. ftp&pa may be the food eaten, or the
canker that eats.
(ii) He shows that irXijpoipa in particular probably has an active
meaning. For instance in reference to manning a ship it= "a crew,"
or to lading a ship, its "cargo," i.e. the result of vavv irXvpovv or
irXvpovaBai is in either case irXtjpojpa. So too irXJipoip.a airvplSos (cf.
Mark viii. 20) = "a basketful," strictly a, "fulness," in exchange for
" emptiness." Similarly, with reference to Socrates' statement that
six kinds of labourers together with a merchant and a retail dealer
are necessary to make up a city, Aristotle says (Polit. iv. 4), " These
together form the pleroma of a city in its simplest stage": ravra
irdvra yiverai irXfjpoipa rijs irpiirvs irbXeois. And in this connexion,
adds the Dean, we have the phrase in Eph. i. 23, where " the Church
is spoken of as that without which in a certain sense the Christ
Himself is incomplete."
(2) But although we may accept both his explanation of the
grammatical meaning of irXtfpoipa, and also his interpretation of it in
Eph. i. 23 (see particularly his Ephesians, pp. 42 sqq. ), the question
of its interpretation in our passage is another matter. Light is
thrown upon it by ii. 9, iv airip xaroiKei irav rb irXrjpwpa rijs Bebrvros
aoipariK&s, in so far as this suggests that in our passage to irXr)poip.a
connotes the longer phrase rd irXvpoipa rrjs Bebrvros. But this,
according to the analogy of the use of irXfipiapM. as stated above, seems
to mean "that which fills up the deity," i.e. the sum of the attributes
without which God Himself cannot be deemed to be complete1. And
this suits the context admirably.
(3) irav must not be overlooked, especially as it might appear to
be tautological. But in fact, by its correlation with Td irdvra, it
implies that if it had been possible for less than all the irXrjpwpa
to dwell in Christ, then some of rd iravra would not have been
reconciled. So too, perhaps, in ii. 9 t&v implies that otherwise not
every rule etc. would have been subject to Christ. Possibly the
thought in our passage is that different parts of the beings in the
universe owe their origin to different parts in the Divine irXtjpapa,
and hence the indwelling of all of it in Christ was necessary if He
was to reconcile all.

1 Similarly in Eph. iii. 19, 1W TrKriptodrjie eis ira-v to ir\rjpiav.a tou deov, the sum of
God's attributes (and nothing less) represents the limit of the fulness set before us.

1 20] NOTES 53
Whether irXijpoipa was a technical term used by the false teachers
at Colossae we have no means of knowing, but that St Paul did not
derive it from them is evident from the freedom with which he
employs it (twelve times) . The Gnostics of course employed it in the
second century, but may have taken it from this Epistle and that to
the Ephesians.
KaToiK-fjo-ai. So ii. 9 ; compare Eph. iii. 17, and Jas. iv. 5 ;
similarly Eph. ii. 22.
Observe that xaroiKeiv = dwell permanently, St Paul thus rebutting
any supposition of the irXrjpoipa being only temporarily connected
with Christ. Perhaps the false teachers at Colossae taught this
error. Compare the opinion of Cerinthus.
An important question arises as to the period to which St Paul
attributes the dwelling, or rather the commencement of the dwelling,
of the irXfipoipa in Christ. Four answers may be given.
(1) After the Besurrection, when the Son's redemptive work was
completed. But the connexion of the following clauses rather implies
that the indwelling is a necessary condition of being able to redeem.
(2) At the Baptism, in which case the collocation of words iv airip
eiSoxvaev (vide supra) would have still more force. But this seems to
limit the irXrjpaipa to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit upon our
Lord, and irav rb irX-qpwpa implies a different thought from the power
and work of the Holy Spirit.
(3) At the Incarnation, cf. ii. 9. This is possibly right, but the
absence of any limiting word here is against this.
(4) In Eternity, the reference being to the timeless communication
of the Godhead from the Father to the Son.
It is because the Son was the recipient of irav rb irXvpoip.a that He
was able to accomplish His redemptive work fully.
(5) KaroiKTJaai here and KaroiKei in ii. 9 seem hardly consistent
with any such meaning of irXr/poipa as causes this indwelling to be
realised only in the future.
20. Kal St* avrov. Still emphatic, cf. v. 18 note.
diroKaTaXXd|ai.. v. 21. Eph. ii. 16f. Not in the LXX. or the
Hexapla fragments, or, as it seems, in profane authors. Notice the
following points.
(1) The additional force of d7r6 to KaraXXdaaoi "reconcile" (Bom.
v. 10 bis; 1 Cor. vii. 11; 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, 20f) appears to be complete
ness, thoroughness. Compare dirixeiv Phil. iv. 18, dwexSixeaBai Bom.
viii. 19. Perhaps however it = "again," "back," compare diroSlSwpi
Bom. ii, 6, diroxaBiarvpi, Matt. xii. 13; if so it only emphasizes the
thought of reconciliation.

54 COLOSSIANS [1 20—
(2) Its subject may be (a) irav rb irXvpapa, to be defended theo
logically by our considering the irXvpoipa of the Father indirectly to
mean the Father in His quality of mercy etc. : (6) God or the Father,
the infinitive being directly dependent on eiSoKnaev. This is not
hard grammatically, and theologically much more satisfactory.
(3) The time to which the reconciliation refers has been disputed.
It may be (a) hereafter, when all are brought in and reconciliation
consummated. But more probably it is (b) at the Passion, reconcilia
tion being regarded as essential and ideal, as is further explained in
the next clause. Cf. Heb. x. 14. In itself the aorist here is probably
timeless. (4) We cannot infer from this verse the final restitution of all
men to blessed communion with God. For St Paul is not thinking
of this question here.
Ta irdvTa. v. 16 note. On the relation of Td irdvra to reconcilia
tion, see infra etre...oipavois.
els avTov. It is extremely difficult to say Who is intended.
(1) The Father. Though airbv prima facie refers to someone
other than the subject of diroKaTaXXd£ai, yet " the oblique cases of the
personal pronoun airbs are used in the N.T. very widely, and in cases
where we should commonly find the reflexive pronoun in classical
authors : e.g. Eph. i. 4, 5, i^eXi^aro vp.as . . .etvai vpds ayiovs Kai dp&povs
Kareviiiriov avTov... irpoopiaas vpds els vioBeaiav Sid 'Xvaov Xpiarov els
avTov....It would indeed seem that airov etc. may be used for iavrov
etc. in almost every connexion, except where it is the direct object of
the verb" (Lightfoot). Lightfoot also points out that reconciliation
is always represented as made to the Father whether the Father or
the Son is said to reconcile, cf. 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, and Eph. ii. 16 ; cf.
Bom. v. 10.
(2) The Son. In favour of this is the continual reference of airos
in this passage from v. 16 onwards, and also the strong presumption
that St Paul is following the lines laid down in v. 16, that as Creation
has the Son both for its means and for its end, so here all things are
reconciled both by means of Him and unto Him.
Neither does there appear to be any a priori objection to this
theologically ; it is only another side of the statement that all things
are to become subject to Christ (1 Cor. xv. 28), and through Him to
the Father.
elpuvoiroitjo-as. Here only in the N.T., cf. elpvvoirotos Matt. v. 9f.
In the LXX. only Prov. a. 10, and in the Hexapla fragments only
Isa. xxvii. 5.
The subject is that of eiSoxvaev and d7roKaTaXXd{ai, viz. the Father,

1 21] NOTES 55
6 Bebs rijs elpr)vvs, Bom. xv. 33, xvi. 20. The time will be that of
dTroKaraXXdJai , dp7ji'07roi7)o'as...o-TaupoO avToO forming a parenthesis.
Sid tov atpaTos tov o-ravpov avTov. In Eph. the two terms are
separate : i. 7, d7roXi5Tpwa-ii' Sid toO atparos ai)roO ; ii. 16, d7roKaTaXXd£fl...
Sid toO crTaupoO. The direct statement that peace is made Sid toO
atparos occurs here only.
tov o-Tavpov avTov. The Incarnation alone was insufficient. But
doubtless the Cross is also mentioned to familiarise the minds of the
Colossians with the fact that however shameful the death of Jesus
was, yet it was by this that their peace with God was made ; cf.
1 Cor. i. 23, 24, and infra ii. 14, 15.
[Si' avrov]. See notes on Textual Criticism. The repetition, if
genuine, lays stress on the fact that it was by the Son, and no other,
that the reconciliation was made.
to eirl ttjs ytjs. See notes on Textual Criticism.
Ta ev tois ovpavols. Contrast the order of these two phrases in
v. 16 where St Paul is giving the order of creation. Here reconciliation
taking place through the crucifixion is regarded as spreading from the
earth to heaven. The addition here of iv rois oipavots has given rise
to much discussion as to how they can require reconciliation.
Probably the answer lies in the universe having moral as well as
physical solidarity. Just as, probably, every physical act affects the
very furthest bounds of space, so is it with every moral act. If so it
cannot but be that sin on earth affected the whole of creation (without
necessarily making all creation strictly sinful), and again that the
reconciliation of things on earth to God should restore even the things
in heaven to that perfect fellowship with God which they once enjoyed.
Compare Heb. ix. 23 — 26, especially auTa St rd iirovpdvia Kpetrroaiv
Bvalais irapa ravras, on which passage Dorner says, ' ' The effect of
sin and guilt reaches into heaven ; it cannot be indifferent to God,
His honour is affected thereby. Sin, whether unpunished or unatoned,
is a stain, as it were, touching the honour of God and of His temple "
(System, in. 420).
Dr Charles (Slav. En. p. xii.) insists that '"the things in the
heavens ' that are to be reconciled to God must be either the fallen
angels imprisoned in the second heaven, or else the powers of Satan
whose domain is the air." But St Paul's language is much too inde
finite to allow us to be dogmatic on this subject. See also J. A. B.'s
note on rd eVoupdi'ia in Eph. p. 20.
21. Kal vpds k.t.X. The construction of this verse in relation to
vv. 20 and 22 is extremely uncertain, and the uncertainty of the
reading diroKarrjXXal-ev or d7roKaTT/XXd7iTTe somewhat increases the
difficulty. Three constructions deserve consideration,

56 COLOSSIANS [1 21
(1) Place a comma instead of a colon at the end of v. 20, and
place a full stop at irovvpois, in v. 21. Then the words Kal ip.ds,
"you also," are dependent on dTroKUTaXXdfai, and a new sentence
begins with vvvl. This requires the reading d7roKaTi?XXd7r;re (Meyer-
Haupt). But it is very unlike St Paul to bring in the personal
reference so brusquely at the very close of a sentence.
(2) The clause vvvl Si...8avdrov is to be treated as a parenthesis
(W.H.), and ipds (v. 21) is governed directly by irapaarrjaai, and is
taken up in the second ipas (v. 22) (cf. Eph. ii. 1, 5), TrapaorTJiTai itself
being dependent on eiSbKvaev (v. 19, "He was pleased... to reconcile
all things... and to present you"). Whether diroxaTijXXa^ev or
diroKarnXXdyvre be right makes little difference in this case.
(3) There is no proper parenthesis, but vvvl Si diroKarfjXXa^ev takes
up the contrast to irort dirvXXorpioipivovs. In this case ip,as (v. 21) is
governed directly by diroKar-fiXXai-ev, and irapaarijaai is also dependent
on it as expressing the result of reconciliation. For vvvl Si with a
finite verb indicating an apodosis after a participle compare vvv Si,
v. 26 (see Blass, § 79. 10 and Winer, § liii. 7 b). According to this
construction the anacolouthon is due to Si, which St Paul inserted
(ex hypothesi) to emphasize the vvvl : "the oppositive Si in the
apodosis being evoked by the latent ' although ' (Donalds. Gr. § 621)
involved in the participial protasis" (Ellicott). Compare Bengel,
" Apodosis refertur ad proxime praecedentia, licet non faciant sen-
tentiam completam."
If diroKarvXXdyvre be right the anacolouthon is very much stronger,
but it is just possible that the construction of irapaarijaai is the same.
Of the three methods the first is very improbable, and in the second
and third the incidence of probability is largely determined by the
reading. If diroKarrjXXa^ev be accepted the third method appears to
be the best.
Observe that in the parallel passage, Eph. ii. 12, 13, the sentences
run smoothly enough. This suggests that Colossians was the earlier
of the two Epistles.
iroTe. For this meaning of "once but no longer so" compare iii. 7 ;
Phm. 11.
oVras. With participle Eph. iv. 18+. Compare Col. ii. 13 ; Rom.
v. 6. It lays stress on the continuance, and, probably, the reality of
their state of alienation and enmity.
dirnlXXoTpi<i>ue'vovs, Eph. ii. 12, iv. 18+, " alienated," i.e. positively
estranged,and not merely designated aliens. Compare Ps. lvii. (lviii.) 4,
lxviii. (lxix.) 9 ; Ezek. xiv. 5 : also Aq., Sym., Theod. in Isa. i. 4.
Kal e\8pous. ixQpots 1S probably not passive (" hateful ") but
active ("hostile"). For although the expression that a man is

1 21] NOTES 57
" hateful " to God may be defended theologically, because there is a
true sense in which sm has caused God to look upon even the sinner in
anger (cf. Sand.-Head. on Bom. v. 10, additional note), and although,
again, the passive meaning of ixBpbs is probably found elsewhere in
the N.T. (Bom. xi. 28, v. 10), yet (1) ixBpbs is generally active
(Phil. iii. 18 ; Gal. iv. 16 ; Acts xiii. 10) ; (2) Ty Siavoia is more
readily explained if ixBpol be active (vide infra) ; (3) the parallel
passage, Eph. ii. 12 — 14, favours the active sense here, for although
ixBpoi does not occur there yet ttjc fyBpav expresses the active hatred
between Jew and Gentile.
The word thus expresses concisely both the negative and the
positive statement of St John, (1) John iii. 19 ; (2) John vii. 7.
tt] Siavoia. Dative of the " side, aspect, regard or property, on
and in which the predicate shows itself," Madv. § 40 (253). So
Matt. xi. 29, irpavs elp,i xai raireivbs t% KapSla. Their active enmity
shows itself in their Siavoia.
If ixBpois be passive this explanation of the dative can hardly be
maintained, for it would limit the sphere in which they were hateful
to God to their Sidvoia. The dative must then be explained as
indicating the catise of God's hatred. But it then becomes somewhat
clumsy. 5id>'oia=the active principle of the mind, nearly our " thought."
Compare Hort on 1 Pet. i. 13, who says that in Eph. iv. 18 "it
belongs to St Paul's exposition of the foolishness, unreality, and
falsehood of the view of the world generally prevalent among the
heathen and to his exhibition of the Gospel as a message of truth
as well as of salvation." So the LXX. use it fairly often in the
Hexateuch (29 times) to translate leb and lebab (but KapSla 80 times),
though only occasionally elsewhere. It is curious that it never occurs
in the Psalms.
ev tois epvois tois irovtipots. The enmity has its seat in their
thought, its sphere of action in their works, and these evil works.
Contrast v. 10, iv iravrl Ipyw dyaBtp. Cf. John iii. 19, vii. 7 ; 2 Tim.
iv. 18 ; 1 John iii. 12 ; 2 John 11+.
The primary notion of irovvpbs appears to be worthlessness, essential
badness (see Chase, The Lord's Prayer, p. 93). Hence the meaning
here is probably that their enmity makes itself felt in works that will
not stand God's test, they are not SUaia (1 John iii. 12).
vvvl Be. Although the MSS. often vary between vvv and vvvl the
latter is confined to the Pauline Epistles (? 15 times), Hebr. (? 2),
Acts (2). It is always followed by Si except in Acts xxii. 1, xxiv. 13.
Also, it should be observed, vvvl Si never elsewhere marks the apodo-

58 COLOSSIANS [1 21—
sis, as probably here (see note at the beginning of verse), but either
begins a fresh sentence (e.g. iii. 8 and even Rom. xv. 25), or by a
fresh epithet indicates a contrast, 2 Cor. viii. 22 ; Phm. 9, 11. It is
apparently a stronger and more argumentative form than vvv, " now,
as the case really stands."
diroKaTTJXXa£ev. See notes on Textual Criticism. For the word
see note on d7roKaTaXXd£ai, v. 20, and for the construction see note at
the beginning of verse. The subject is the same as that of eiSbKvaev
...diroKaraXXdfci (v. 20), viz. the Father, the following words being
parallel to eipvvoiroirjaas Sid rov aXparos rod aravpov airov.
22. ev Tip o-up.aTi ttjs o-apKos avrov. The exact phrase here only,
but compare ii. 11, iv tt/ d7reK5iVei rov aiiparos rijs aapKos, and Ecclus.
xxiii. 16 (23)+.
The addition of ttjs aapxbs airov, "in the body which consisted in
His flesh," lays stress upon His body having passions and the
capacity for suffering, ' ' capacitatem patiendi ac passionem ipsam
Eph. ii. 15 " (Bengel), as all human bodies have. Compare
Heb. ii. 14, 15. The thought is so well suited to meet the opinions
of the false teachers, who were inclined to include angels in the work
of mediation, that probably the desire to distinguish this a&pa from
that of v. 18 had but a small share in his choice of the expression.
Marcion naturally omitted rijs aapKbs, but Tertullian rightly argues
(without mentioning the true text) that a&pa alone cannot here mean
the Church (adv. Marc. v. 19).
iv refers to the sphere in which the act of reconciliation took
place. Sid tov BavaTov. Sid expresses here, as in v. 20, the means of
reconciliation. The article probably="His."
Bavdrov. In view of the frequency of words and phrases in the
N.T. suggesting the death of Christ as the means of our salvation it is
curious how rarely the word Bdvaros appears to be actually used of it.
The following references seem to be complete : Bom. v. 10 ; Heb.
ii. 9b, 14, ix. 15 ; Phil. ii. 8.
irapao-Trjo-ai. Probably dependent on diroKaT-/)XXa%ev (see note at
beginning of v. 21), expressing the purpose and intent of the
reconciliation. In this word 7rapd has the meaning of coram, "before," "in the
presence of," which it has in the Classics, Od. i. 154, r;eiSe 7rapd
pvvarijpaiv. So probably LXX., 1 Sam. v. 2, lrapiarvaav airvv irapd
Aayiiv. But the meaning of definitely presenting, which the verb has
here (so also v. 28 ; Eph. v. 27 ; 2 Cor. xi. 2, cf. Luke ii. 22), seems
not to be found in the LXX, except as a varia lectio in Lev, xvi. 7

1 22] NOTES 59
Kal Xr)p\perai robs Sio x^d-poos Kal ar-fjaei (F. 7rapacrnJ<rei) auroirs tvavn
Kvpiov. Hence the word in itself has no connotation of "present as a
sacrifice," though of course it may be used for this (Bom. xii. 1).
If it has any special connotation here that of presenting before a
judge is more probable. Compare for ?rapd alone Hdt. m. 160, irapd
Aapeiip xpirrj; Rom. ii. 13 ; and for the verb Acts xxiii. 33 ; 2 Cor. iv. 14,
and perhaps 2 Tim. ii. 15.
It has been suggested that the presentation takes place at conversion,
or even repeatedly, but the time of the final Judgment appears to be
much more probable. See also v. 28.
up-ds- Probably taken up from Kai vpas in v. 21. See note there.
dyious. See v. 2 note. Does it here refer to (1) consecration,
Christian standing with its potential possibilities, as in v. 2, implying
the recognised position, from the very first, of all believers ; or to
(2) actual holiness? Is it, in other words, said of justification, or of
ethical effect the result of sanetification ?
Probably St Paul made no such sharp distinction in his use of the
word. Compare iii. 12. Those who are presented as "holy " at the
Judgment Day (vide supra) will be consecrated both potentially and
in ethical fact.
Kal dp.wp.ous. An interesting word, illustrative of the tendency of
translators to give to a foreign term the connotation of a native word
of similar sound.
In Herodotus and Aeschylus it = " without blame," derived, doubt
less, from the root of piopdopai " blame," p&pos " blame," " disgrace."
But in Deut. xvii. 1, " Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy
God an ox, or a sheep, wherein is a blemish (miim)," the LXX. reads,
oi Biaeis Kvpiip rip Beip aov pdaxov rj irpb(3arov iv tp iariv iv airo) p&pos.
Hence in LXX. dp.oip.os frequently translates tamim ' ' perfect " in the
sense of " having no blemish " (e.g. Ex. xxix. 1) as well as in its
purely ethical meaning (e.g. Ps. xiv. (xv.) 2). So in Philo, de Agric. 29
§ 130, Wendland (i. 320) poipoaKdiros = " looking for blemishes" in
sacrificial victims, and papoaxoireiv is used by Clem. Rom. § 41 in a
similar meaning. So also Dan. i. 4, " youths in whom there was no
blemish (mum), but well favoured," etc., is in Theod., veaviaKovs ols
oiK iariv abrois p&pos, and in LXX. veaviaKovs dpiipovs.
In the N.T. dp.oip.os = " without blemish" in probably every passage
in which it occurs, Eph.. i. 4, v. 27 ; Phil. ii. 15 ; Heb. ix. 14 ;
I Pet. i. 19 ; Jude 24 ; Rev. xiv. 5+, and in two of these has a dis
tinctly sacrificial reference : Heb. ix. 14 ; 1 Pet. i. 19. The other
passages appear to have no direct reference to sacrifice.

60 COLOSSIANS [1 22—
Thus the history of apoipjos is (1) blameless, (2) without blemish,
(a) literally, of an animal for sacrifice, (6) metaphorically, of Christ
the true sacrifice, (c) solely metaphorically, without any connotation
of sacrifice. Both our passage and the very similar Eph. v. 27 appear
to come under this last heading, even though in each the sacrificial
reference may appear to be strengthened by the additional presence of
irapaarrjarf and dyios.
Kal dvevKXTJTOvs, " and unimpeachable. '' The thought appears to
be that they cannot be challenged, or pleaded against, cf. Rom. viii. 33,
Acts xix. 38. And so 1 Cor. i. 8, where the impleading denied is ex
pressly referred to the last Judgment. So probably here.
KaTevuTriov avTov, " before him." KarevCnriov does not appear to
be found in secular Greek, though Karev&ira occurs in II. xv. 320 =
"right over against." Certainly to be taken with irapaarijaai and
not with the three adjectives or the last only. For in the LXX. its
construction with the verb is indubitable in every case, as also in
Jude 24. Even in Eph. i. 4 it is probably to be taken with elvai.
23. A ye, "if only." The addition of 7^ lays emphasis on the
importance of observing the condition, but determines nothing as to
whether or not they will do so. Contrast the negative answer in Gal.
iii. 4, with the positive in Eph. iii. 1, 2, and Eph. iv. 21.
It is hard to see that the indicative "converts the hypothesis into
a hope" (Lightfoot). Compare further Monro, Homeric Grammar,
§§ 353, 354, quoted by Sanday-Headlam on Rom. iii. 30.
emu.e'veTe, "ye stay on in." So Phil. i. 24; Rom. vi. 1, xi. 22 and
especially 23. The iirt " is not per se intensive, but appears to denote
rest at a place " (Ell.).
ttj irCorei, "faith," or perhaps better "your faith." Certainly with
iiripivere (see examples quoted in preceding note) in spite of ii. 7.
The force of the article is uncertain. It may denote
(1) "The Faith," the body of doctrine delivered by your first
teachers. So Jude 3, 20 ; Acts vi. 7, xiii. 8, and sometimes in the
Pastoral Epistles, e.g. 1 Tim. iv. 1.
But in these passages the meaning is determined by the context,
and here the immediately following reference to the hope suggests
reality of personal religion rather than orthodox belief.
(2) "Faith" generally, without such stress on "faith" in itself as
would be suggested by the absence of the article. Similarly Eph. iii.
17, KaTOiK?)<rai rbv xpiarbv Sid rijs irlareas iv rats xapSlais ip&v iv dydirv,
iii. 12, vi. 16.
(3) "Your faith." Such doubtless is the force of the article in
Rom. xi. 23. He has already praised their faith in v. 4.

1 23] NOTES 61
Te8eu.cXiuu.eVoi Kal ISpatoi, "founded and stedfast." Both terms
are used absolutely. For the figurative use, as regards believers, of
terms that strictly belong to buildings cf. ii. 7; Eph. iii. 18; Matt.
vii. 25; and especially 1 Cor. iii. It is perhaps derived ultimately
from Isa. xiv. 32, xxviii. 16, liv. 11.
Kal ISpatoi. While reBepieXioipivoi denotes that the Colossian
believers have been laid once for all securely on something, or rather
Someone, as their unfailing support, iSpaios denotes the inner firm
ness of the structure, the steadiness of Christian character that ought
to be found in them. So in 1 Cor. vii. 37, xv. 58+.
On the probable quotation in Ignat. Eph. § 10, see Introd. p. xxxviii.
Kal u.T) p,eTaKivovu.evoi+, "and not being moved away." p^, not
oi, the phrase " (in a sentence beginning with etye) is put as a
condition, consequently as a mere conception " (Winer, § 55. 1 b,
p. 596, ed. 1870). But see Blass, p. 253, Moulton, Gram. Proleg.
p. 170.
A close parallel is 1 Cor. xv. 58 (eSpaioi ylveode, dperaxivriToif), but
that passage lacks the vividness of the present participle, with its
suggestion, of repeated attempts to dislodge them.
dird ttjs eXiriSos tov evayyeXCov. On iXiris cf. v. 5. Here, as there,
it is almost certainly the hope brought and held out by the Gospel,
the sum of things promised by it, and therefore expected by believers.
Cf. Gal. v. 5, and especially Eph. i. 18. Perhaps v. 22b suggested this.
tov evayyeXCov, (v. 5) ov vxoiaare.
This is the first of three statements appealing to them against
being moved away by false teaching. (1) They themselves had
heard the true message; (2) It was this, and no other, that had
been proclaimed everywhere ; (3) The Apostle himself could vouch
for it, as a living example and witness of its power.
tov Kt]pvx8evTos, "which was proclaimed," aloud and openly as by
a herald; cf. Gen. xii. 43, iKT)pv£ev ipirpoaBev airov Kijpvt;. In sharp
contrast to the esoteric methods of most teachers of old time, heathen
and Jewish alike.
The tense maybe (1) timeless "which is proclaimed," but (2) is
probably to be taken strictly, i.e. as contemporaneous with the
preceding rJKoiaare, as though St Paul was going to say " which was
proclaimed among many before you."
(3) Another explanation is that the statement is "ideal." "It
'was' done when the Saviour, in his accomplished victory, bade it be
done, Mark xvi. 15 " (Moule). Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 16, Bom. viii. 30.
ev irdo-Tj KT^rei, cf. v. 15 note.
Apparently " in every district of creation," to which 1 Pet. ii. 13 (viro-

62 COLOSSIANS [1 23—
rdyvre irdav dvBpoiirivn Krlaei) is the nearest parallel. But "in all
creation " (R.V.) may be defended (see on v. 15).
Ell. and others would understand iv to here = coram (cf. 1 Cor. vi. 2,
iv ipiv Kplverai b Kbapos), and translate " in the hearing of every
creature," but such a meaning of iv especially suggests a tribunal,
and a plural noun would therefore have been more natural.
P. Ewald conjectures iv irdav xXlaei, region, clime, for which he
refers to Dionysius Periegetes (c. 300 a.d.), p. 615, ai 5' 'Aol-ns, al
5' avre irepl kKIoiv Xiipoiirelvs.
ttj vird tov ovpavdv, " that is under the heaven," i.e. on earth,
Acts ii. 5, dTr6 iravrbs iBvovs rwv iirb rbv obpavbv; cf. Eccles. i. 13.
ov e-yevdu,T|v, "of which I Paul became a minister." Perhaps he
silently contrasts his former life (Gal. i. 23). Compare Eph. iii. 7, 8.
eyo IlavXos. This emphatic phrase occurs elsewhere only in 2 Cor.
x. 1 ; Gal. v. 2 ; Eph. iii. 1 ; 1 Thes. ii. 18 ; Phm. 19.
He uses it here to further emphasize the fact that he who had before
been a persecutor, and who was now what he was only by the grace of
God (1 Cor. xv. 10), bore this witness.
SiaKovos, v. 7. See notes on Textual Criticism.
No longer lifted up in pride against the Gospel, but a servant, and
an active servant, in its cause.
24 — ii. 5. St Paul's appeal based on (vv. 24 — 29) his own joy in
enduring suffering in order to make known the secret of Christ's
presence in their heart, and (ii. 1 — 5) his personal interest in them.
21 — 29. For myself I rejoice in sufferings endured in order to
carry out the work given me of making known the secret that Christ
dwells in the heart of you Gentiles, and of finally presenting
each before God perfect in Christ. I toil and Christ makes His
work in me effective.
(v. 24) Whatever I once was I now rejoice (cf. v. 11) in my suffer
ings on behalf of you, while I am always filling up (on my side
answering to His) what remain over of Christ's afflictions (part of
which He bore on earth, part of which His followers must bear now)
in my flesh on behalf of His whole body, the Church, (v. 25) Of His
Church I became a minister according to the conditions of the office
in God's household given me at my conversion, to be employed in the
direction of His people and specifically of you, and thus accomplish
the message given me by God, (v. 26) the secret hidden for so many
ages — but now it was suddenly made manifest to His consecrated
believers— (v. 27) for it was to them that God freely chose to make
known what the surpassing character of the abundance of the moral
glory seen in this secret is among the Gentiles — the secret that

1 24] NOTES 63
Christ is in you Colossians, Christ whom you hope to possess still
more fully in glory, (v. 28) It is He whom we (Paul, Timothy,
Epaphras, unlike the false teachers) are proclaiming widely, both by
warning and by teaching each person whom we meet, using wisdom
as each case requires, that we may present before God's judgment-
seat each person fully developed in Christ, (v. 29) with a view to which
object I (not only preach but) also toil, contending according to the
measure of (nothing less than) Christ's working, which is being
carried out into action in me not in thought or word only, but in
manifested power.
24. vvv. See notes- on Textual Criticism.
Probably vvv is here temporal, "now" in contrast to the time
before iyevbpnv (v. 23, cf. v. 25). It thus subserves his general aim,
to magnify the grace of God and the power of the Gospel.
XaCpu. St Paul's prayer (v. 11) was at least accomplished in his
own case, cf. also 2 Cor. xiii. 9, and 1 Pet. iv. 13.
ev tois iraBTJpao-iv, "in (my) sufferings." For such had been fore
told of him, Acts ix. 16. Among his sufferings must be included his
spiritual contest (ii. 1; cf. iv. 12, 13), as well as his imprisonment,
Eph. iii. 1, 13. Compared with the next clause irdBvpa is more sub
jective, suggesting especially the sufferings felt, BXl\pis more objective,
suggesting the outside pressure.
vrrep vpuv, "on behalf of you," cf. v. 9, ii. 1, and 2 Cor. i. 6, xii.
15. Not tois iirip ip&v, for iraBijpara here borrows the construction
irdaxoi iirip ; see Winer, § 20. 2 b (p. 170, ed. 1870).
Kal. Perhaps not merely introducing an independent sentence,
but expanding and elucidating xalpoi-
dvTavairXT|pi3+. This double compound is found here only in the
Greek Bible.
dvairXvpboi comes six times in the N.T., in two of which varipvpa is
its object as here, viz. 1 Cor. xvi. 17, and Phil. ii. 30.
irpoaavairXvpboi occurs twice in N.T., with apparently the meaning
of "helping to fill up," 2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9. Cf. LXX.+ Wisd. xix. 4,
(K) AC.
dvrl here probably represents the correspondence between St Paul
on the one hand and Christ on the other. So Photius, Amphil. 121
(1. p. 709, Migne), oi ydp airXQs tpvaiv ' AvairXfjpoZ, dXX' ' AvravairXvpii,
rovriariv, 'AvtI Seairbrov Kal SiSaaKdXov b SovXos iyii xal pa8vri}S
rijv iKeivov Siaxoviav vireXB&v, Kal rd bareprjpara r&v BXtyeuiv airov
dvravair\i]p&. Compare dvrairoKpivopai, Rom. ix. 20; with this agrees too the
implied contrast of iv rrj aapxl uov virip rov aiipiaros airov.

64 COLOSSIANS [1 24—
Td varTepTJpaTa. Only twice elsewhere in the N.T. does the follow
ing genitive express the thing in which the deficiency consists :
Phil. ii. 30 ; 1 Thes. iii. 10. Cf. Judg. xviii. 10 and xix. 19. The
plural expresses the deficiency as several items. Even St Paul could
not fill up the total sum.
tiov 6XCu/euv tov xpi°"T°v, " of the afflictions of Christ."
A unique phrase which in such a context as this has naturally pro
voked much discussion.
(1) Observe indeed, that nowhere else is J)Xl\pis clearly used of
Christ. Rev. i. 9, avvxoivoivbs ev rrj BXl\pei xal (HaaiXeia xal viropovjj iv
'Xvaov, is, at most, too indirect a reference, even if r% 6Xl\pei is to
be taken with iv 'ItjitoO at all. Ps. xxii. 11, Sri BXlfis iyyis may at
most be applied to- Christ. Nor is even BXlpoi used of Him except
in its literal sense (Mark iii. 9+).
Perhaps iraBnpdToiv (2 Cor. i. 5 ; Phil. iii. 10 ; 1 Pet. iv. 13) would
have been used had it not just occurred.
(2) Yet the word brings out, in a way that irdBvpa would not, the
pressure that daily contact with sin and worldliness meant for Christ
and for St Paul. It is another aspect of the £^-1X07(0 which Christ
endured (Heb. xii. 3, 4). Cf., as regards believers, 1 Thes. iii. 3, 4.
(3) B\i</ns is used, and not any of the words that are especially
employed of Christ's atonement, e.g. aravpbs, alpa, Bdvaros.
(4) toO x/"<ttoO is doubtless here the personal Christ during His
life on earth. His sufferings in His Divine character and for the
atonement could not be imitated or shared by His followers, but
those that are required for the spread of the kingdom, the conversion
of souls, could and must be. It was, from the nature of things,
impossible that He could save His followers such BXlij/eis. He left
many still to he undergone. As these were presented to St Paul
he for his part filled them up. Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 7 — 11.
(5) Other interpretations are less probable.
(a) tov xpiaroD means the ascended Christ who suffers in the
afflictions of His people. So Grotius, Ita amat Christus suos ut
quae ipsi ferunt mala tanquam sibi illata sentiat. Sic Paulo viu-
cula ferente, Christus ea quodam modo ferebat (quoted by P. Ewald).
But beautiful though this thought is, there is, strictly speaking, no
parallel in Scripture, for it would predicate more than sympathy,
actual suffering in His present glorified state. Acts ix. 4, SaoiiX
SaoiiX, rl pie Siiixeis ; identifies Him indeed with His people, but does
not say that He suffers. Isa. lxiii. 9, "In all their afflictions He was
afflicted," even if the right reading, is not a dogmatic statement.
J. A. B. appears to adopt this interpretation in Ephesians, p. 44.

1 25] NOTES 65
(6) rou xpiotou is not to be taken literally, but metaphorically.
St Paul really means that he is filling up the deficiencies of his
own afflictions, but he can call them Christ's because they are like
His ; there is an ethical identity between them. The first meaning
of dvravairXvp& is then to he preferred. But such a use of xpiarbs is
unparalleled. ev ttj o-apKi u.ov, where I can feel. Inclusive, of course, of all that
appertains to human nature, cf. v. 22. Cf. 1 Cor. vii. 28 ; 2 Cor.
iv. 11.
virep tov o-upaTos avTov, "on behalf of His body." More than
virip bp&v of the preceding clause both as regards number, including
all believers (cf. 2 Tim. ii. 10), and cohesion of them all with one
another and with Christ, and also as regards his own ultimate object
in his afflictions — Christ and that which belongs to Him.
8 Iotiv. See notes on Textual Criticism. Perhaps the most clear
(contrast v. 18) and most direct (contrast 1 Tim. iii. 15) way of
identifying His body with the Church. See u. 27, ii. 17, iii. 14.
t) eKKXT|o-Ca, v. 18.
25. r\% eyev6pT|V eyto SiaKovos. He omits the IlaOXos of v. 23
because he has no longer need to suggest the marvellousness of
the fact of his own conversion , but he retains the ^716 because he has
not yet quite left the thought of the contrast in v. 24 between himself
and Christ. A less probable reason for the insertion of iyii is that
by it St Paul begins to point out his distinction from others in his
ministry, viz. to preach to the Gentiles.
KaTa, i.e. his ministry was "conducted in pursuance of, after the
requirements and conditions of" (Alf.).
ttjv oiKovopiav tov 6eov, " the dispensation of God. " On olxovopia
see especially Lightfoot's full note on Eph. i. 10 bringing out the
various meanings of the word, Classical, Biblical, and Patristic.
Here it is sufficient to say that (a) Aristotle uses it of the
administration of the State regarded as » great house: Pol. iii. 14,
p. 1285, oiairep v olxovopuKi] fiaaiXela tis olxlas iariv, oiirois ij (HaaiXela
irbXeois Kai iBvovs ivbs r) irXeibvav olxovopia; and Polybius, vi. 12. 5, of
military government.
(6) The idea of God as the olKoSeairbrvs is common in the N.T.
(e.g. Matt. xiii. 27), with the Church as His oXkos (1 Tim. iii. 15),
believers as His olxeioi (Eph. ii. 19), ministers His oik6j'o,uoi(1 Cor.iv. 1).
(c) olxovopia itself has two meanings in the N.T. :
(a) the mode of administering, as in Eph. i. 10,
(/3) the office of an administrator, up Eph. iii, 2 and here;
compare also Isa. xxii. 19, 21,
COL. E

66 COLOSSIANS t1 35—
tt)v Soeeto-dv poi, "which was given me," at my conversion,
Acts ix. 15.
els vpds, certainly with tt> SoBeiadv poi, see Eph. iii. 2 ; cf. also
Bom. xv. 16. els, i.e. to be employed in your direction.
By ipas we must understand specifically the Colossians. They are
the concrete example of the direction generally.
•jrXnpwo-ai. tov Xd-yov tov Beov. It will be more convenient to
consider the meaning of rbv Xbyov tov Beov first and then to return
to ir\vp&aai.
The analogy of the common phrase in the Prophets, "the word
of the Lord," determines the force of the genitive here as subjective,
i.e. it is not "the word about God" but "the word given by God."
But whereas in the O.T. it is often the specific message given at some
definite time to a particular prophet, this meaning does not seem
to occur in the N.T. Otherwise we might understand St Paul here
to say that he was intended to accomplish the specific message
(Acts xxvi. 16 — 18) delivered to him, which he further unfolds in the
next verse. N.T. usage, however, points to a wider interpretation—
God's message in Christ, the Gospel as such. So often, e.g. Acts viii.
14, xviii. 11; 1 Cor. xiv. 36; Heb. xiii. 7. Cf. Swete on Apoc. xix. 13.
It is thus in this passage a synonym of e6a77e'Xioi< but regards the
good news in its relation not to men but to God ; see Bernard, Ad
ditional note on 1 Tim. iv. 5 in this series. Cf. 6 X67. rov xp- iii. 16.
TrX-npucai, explanatory. The dispensation given to him was to
"fulfil the word of God," i.e. to fill up the full measure of the Gospel,
both in its reception by the Gentiles (v. 27') and in the moral and
spiritual completion of every believer (v. 28). He toils and contends
for nothing less (v. 29).
26. to pvo-Trjpiov. In apposition to rbv Xby. r. 8. It is strange
that St Paul's language does not show more certain traces of the
influence of terms derived from the many esoteric cults of his day.
Wisd. xiv. 15, 23 speaks of the origin of the mysteries and
3 Mac. ii. 30 purports to give a decree of Ptolemy IV. Philopator
releasing those Jews from disabilities who should be initiated into
the (Dionysian) mysteries. But nowhere else, apparently, does the
LXX. certainly give this connotation to p.vari)piov. Judith ii. 2
relates that Nebuchadnezzar tells his servants rb pvariipiov tt)s SovXrjs
airov, i.e. the secret plan he had devised, and Dan. ii. 18 19 27  30
iv. 6 speak only of the secret of the vision. Compare also Ecclus.
iii. 18 (N) and Wisd. ii. 22, the secret counsels of God.
But St Paul's reference to the "mysteries" is, at best, doubtful.
In 1 Cor. xv. 51, iSoii pvarijpiov vpiv Xiya, Jiilicher "feels that here

1 26] NOTES 67
St Paul is a mystagogue speaking to a circle of mystae" (Encycl.
Bibl.), and finds a similar reference in 1 Cor. xiv. 2, xiii. 2, iv. 1, but
he has little else to guide him but the word pvarijpiov which has, as
we have seen, a wider use. Neither in the other passages where
it occurs, e.g. here, ii. 2, iv. 3, Eph. i. 9, iii. 3 — 9, does the con
text make it certain. On the other hand pep-ivpai (Phil. iv. 12+)
is a much more characteristic word and probably does allude to being
taught secrets at an initiation. On ri\eiov, v. 28, see there.
It is hardly necessary to say that pvarfjpiov never has the common
meaning of our English "mystery" — something strange and inex
plicable. It always means "a secret," revealed or not revealed as
the case may be. Here the secret is more than the external ad
mission of Gentiles to the faith on an equality with Jews; it includes
the wonderful privilege of the presence of Christ in individual
believers with its present power and future result. In Eph. iii. 5,
6, 8 the thought is verbally limited to the privileges, both external
and spiritual, common to Gentile and Jewish believers in the present.
On pvarvpiov see by all means the full note in J. A. R. Ephesians,
pp. 234—240.
to diroKeKpvpuevov, "which has been hidden." Luke x. 21; 1 Cor.
ii. 7 ; Eph. iii. 9 + ; contrast diroKpvtpoi ii. 3. The participle lays stress
on the action and effect of concealment, the adjective on preservation
and readiness for use. For the thought, cf. Rom. xvi. 25.
St Paul doubtless says this to bring the Colossians to a due sense
of their privileges; cf. Luke x. 24; Matt. xiii. 11.
dird tiov aliivwv (exact phrase Eph. iii. 9+) Kal airo tov yeveav.
dirb (a) is possibly the dirb after verbs of concealment (cf. Luke x. 21,
xviii. 34, xix. 42, and always in LXX. after diroKpiirTa) ; but (b) is
probably strictly temporal, as almost certainly in Eph. iii. 9; cf.
Matt. xiii. 35; 1 Cor. ii. 7.
aUivav indicates the successive periods of history, either of this
world or throughout the universe ; yeve&v the successive sets of men
living at one time. For yeve&v cf. Acts xiv. 16 ; Eph. iii. 5.
vvv Be. Compare v. 21, note.
aj>avepu8i). St Paul's energy lays stress on the vvv, and this leads
to his use of a finite verb instead of the participle expected (cf. v. 21).
The change to the aorist suggests the suddenness of the manifesta
tion. We might have expected direKaXitpBv (Eph. iii. 5) but the true
contrast to secrecy is publicity, which is perhaps the fundamental
conception of tpavepbs and its derivatives.
For its use with pvar-f/piov cf. also iv. 4. Compare also Mark iv. 22
(|| Luke viii. 17). See also iii. 4.
E 2

68 COLOSSIANS [1 26—
toIs d-yCois avTov. On 01710s, see vv. 1, 22.
27. ots, almost explanatory, "for it was to them that," see on
v. 18, 8s. His saints alone are the recipients of this act of God's
good will.
TJBe'XTio-ev d Beds, "liberrime," Beng. The thought is of the spon
taneous or, rather, unconditioned character of God's love in making
the following known to them. Compare BiXvpa v. 1, and BiXav ii. 18;
also 1 Cor. xv. 38, 6 Si Bebs SISaaiv airo) a&pa xaBois ijBiXnaev.
yvupCo-ai, compare v. 8, 5i;Xi6o-as, note. For this word and the
whole verse compare Rom. ix. 22 — 24.
tC. Probably not including its nature, but only its quantity and
value; cf. Alford, "how full, how inexhaustible; this meaning of ri
necessarily follows from its being joined with a noun of quantity
like irXovros.''
The answer is not 8 eariv xP'o'rbs iv ipiv (Meyer-Haupt), but in
determinate ; compare St Paul's epithets iweppdXXov (Eph. ii. 7) and
dve£ixvlaarov (Eph. iii. 8).
to ttXovtos, "what is the wealth." The neuter is sometimes found,
but in the nom. and ace. sing, only (Blass, Gram. p. 28) ; cf. ii. 2, and
contrast Eph. i. 18; Heb. xi. 26. See also Moulton, Gram. Proleg.
1906, p. 60.
In Eph. iii. 16 ttXovtos has the connotation of the supply from
which to draw ; here, apparently, solely of the abundance displayed,
and so in Rom. ix. 23, and perhaps Eph. i. 18.
tt}s Sdg-ns, "of the glory." On Sofa see v. 11 note. (1) Not to
be identified with the "glory" of the end of the verse, i.e. "the
splendour with which in the great day those initiated on earth into
the Gospel secret will be enriched" (Beet); but (2) the manifestation
of moral glory exhibited by this pvarijpiov, which is another way of
saying the manifestation of God's moral glory (v. 11) seen in it1.
Thus of the three words ttXoDtos, Sbfas, pvarijpiov, the weight falls
on 56{t;s.
tov pvo-TT)pCov tovtov. v. 26 note. What the secret is, in its
essence, he states almost immediately.
ev tois Sflveo-iv. To be joined not directly with toC pvarvpiov roirov,
"this secret among the Gentiles," but rather with the iari understood
in the preceding clause, "what the wealth of the glory of this mystery
is among the Gentiles." St Paul, that is to say, wishes to bring out
the surpassing character of the fact that the Gentiles receive the
. i For a very thoughtful exposition of some meanings- of "glory" in the N.T. see
A. B. Davidson's sermon on the Transfiguration in Waiting upon God, 1901 Cf
his sermon on Mosi:s in Called of God, 1902, p. 136. ¦ - '

1 28] NOTES 69
Gospel. In that is the moral glory of the secret to be perceived.
"Christus in gentibus, summum illis temporibus paradoxon" (Beng.).
o. See notes on Textual Criticism.
0 eo-riv Xpio-rds. The antecedent is hardly rb ttXovtos, for this
would leave pvarijpiov almost without force, but pvarijpiov, and so ii. 2.
Compare the adaptation of the hymn in 1 Tim. iii. 16, to ttjs eiaeftelas
pvaTtjpiov'Os itpavepaB-n iv aapKi k.t.X.
ev. See iii. 16 note. Compare 2 Cor. xiii. 5, Eph. iii. 17.
vpiv, i.e. the Colossians, mentioned partly as the concrete example
of Gentiles, and partly to bring home to them the greatness of their
privileges. r\ eXirls ttjs 8o^t|s. In apposition; cf. iii. 4 for construction and
thought. On i\irls cf. vv. 5, 23 notes. Here it designates Christ as the
object of hope, 1 Tim. i. 1 ; cf. Ignat. Magn. § 11, 'Xvaov Xpiarov rrjs
Att/Sos vpi&v. Observe that before receiving the Gospel Gentiles were
oi p.v (xovres iXirlSa (1 Thes. iv. 13), iXirlSa pit ixovres (Eph. ii. 12).
ttjs Sb^qs, explaining the nature of the hope referred to.
Christ is not only in us, but we hope to possess Him far more fully,
and bound up with that possession is "glory," primarily (as it seems)
the external glory of the heavenly state as seen and enjoyed by in
dividuals. For the twofold use of the word in one verse compare
Bom. ix. 23. The article with S6£7js is generic. " Christus in nobis,
per se laetissimum : sed multo laetius, respectu eorum, quae revela-
buntur" (Beng.).
28. vov8erovvTes..Kal SiSdcKovres, "admonishing and teaching."
Methods by which we Karayyi\Xop.ev, as is indicated in part by the
participial form, in part by the insistence on irdvra dvBpairov. For
vovBereiv compare Acts xx. 31 ; 1 Cor. iv. 14 ; Wisd. xi. 10, and for
both verbs infra iii. 16.
Of the two words the first refers to the more practical, the second
to the more theoretical, side of men's relation to Christ and of His
to them. For SiSdaxoi see also ii. 7, iii. 16.
irdvra dvBpanrov, three times. The thoroughness of the proclama
tion of the Gospel includes the thought of its being brought to every
member of the human race. Here too such individual work forms a
natural transition to St Paul's special efforts for the Colossians.
Compare 1 Cor. *.. 1 — 4 and xii. 29, 30.
4v irdo-rj o-oipCa, " in all (practical) wisdom " (cf. notes v. 9).
tva xapao-TTjo-wpev. See notes on Textual Criticism. " That we
may present," i.e. to God as judge hereafter, see v. 22 note.
TeXeiov, " perfect." (1) In v. 22 stress was laid on the absence of

7o COLOSSIANS [1 28—
faults, here on the perfection of development, consequent on the
training implied in vovBerovvres and SiSdaxovres. Cf. iv. 12 ; also
Jas. i. 4. In a somewhat lower sense it is used of the maturity of
the adult compared with the child, e.g. Heb. v. 13, 14, and perhaps
even Eph. iv. 13.
(2) It should, however, be added that Lightfoot thinks that both
here and 1 Cor. ii. 6, 7 " the epithet riXeios is probably a metaphor
borrowed from the ancient mysteries, where it seems to have been
applied to the fully instructed, as opposed to the novices." He refers
to 1 Chron. xxv. 8, 2 Pet. i. 16.
ev Xpio-T^. Apart from Christ the believer has no spiritual vigour
(John xv. 5), in Him he has all (cf. Phil. iv. 13).
29. els 8. I. e. to present every man perfect in Christ.
Kal, cf. iii. 15. "Beside preaching with vovBeaia and SiSaxr), I
also sustain every form of k6ttos (2 Cor. vi. 5) in the cause of the
Gospel" (Ell.).
Koiriu. The singular may be used partly because St Paul is about
to speak of his own work for the Colossians.
kottio; means " toil " with the connotation of fatigue, which some
times is over-mastering; cf. John iv. 6; Rev. ii. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 10, where
it is connected with the metaphor of the arena. Cf. too Phil. ii. 16.
Compare also Ign. Polyc. § 6, iriryKOTridTe dXX^Xois, ovvaBXeire, avv-
rpixere, and the whole of the remarkable § 7 of " 2 Clem."
Apparently the labour is not primarily spiritual, but rather mental
and bodily, the outcome of all kinds of effort.
d-yuvijjopevos- dy&v (ii. 1) was originally an assembly especially
for seeing "sports," then the arena or stadium, then the contest
itself, dyavlfopai is to take part in such a coutest. Both dytiv and
d7uw(£'0|Uai are frequently used in a metaphorical sense by classical
writers, but the fact that they were metaphors was never forgotten.
St Paul uses the verb literally in 1 Cor. ix. 25, and metaphorically
in c. iv. 12 ; 1 Tim. vi. 12 ; 2 Tim. iv. 7. Compare Ecclus. iv. 28,
and a noble passage in 4 Mac. xvii. 11 — 15.
There is nothing in this verse or even in ii. 1, 2 to make us limit
the exertions referred to under dyavifbpevos to prayer. Contrast
iv. 12; see also Rom. xv. 30.
KaTd. The measure of his contending was His ivipyeia.
tt'v eve*p-yeiav ovtov, "His working." ivipyeia is almost "force,"
the active exercise of power.
In 2 Thes. ii. 9, 11 it is used of the working of fraud and of Satan,
but elsewhere in the N.T. always in a good sense ; Eph. iv. 16 of
apparently individual believers ; in Phil. iii. 21 of Christ ; in c. ii. 12,

1 29] NOTES 71
Eph. i. 19 (and probably iii. 7), of God. Thus in all cases except
Eph. iv. 16 the ivipyeia is considered supernatural, and even there
this is implied. See further J. A. R. Ephesians, p. 242.
ttjv evepyoupev-nv, "which is being made operative." Always passive
outside the N.T. and probably so within it, even in Gal. v. 6, Jas. v.
16, where see Mayor. For the meaning see 1 Thes. ii. 13, and
J. A. R. Eph. pp. 241—247.
ev e"pol. Cf. Eph. iii. 20.
Iv Swdpei. Cf. note on iv irdav Svvdpei, v. 11. Probably not
merely adverbially ("mightily," A.V., B.V., cf. Rom. i. 4) but
describing that in which the ivipyeia is exhibited ; cf. the note on
iv TrdoT; aotpiq., v. 28. It is not in fancy or in word but in power for
whatever service he was guided to undertake ; cf. 1 Cor. iv. 20 ;
1 Thes. i. 5.

CHAPTER II.
2. o-vvPiPao-fleVres. So N*ABCD*P Old Lat. Vulg. -Bivrav is read
by the Text. Rec. with K=DCKL.
tov 9eov, Xpio-Tov. In B Hil. de Trin. ix. 62 only.
This difficult reading was altered in several ways :
(a) tov Beov, 8 iariv Xpiarbs D* Aug.
(b) tov Beov xal Xpiarov Cyr. Alex.
(c) toC Beov DT and a few cursives.
(d) rov Beov irarpbs [toO] xpi-<rrov X*AC vulg.
(e) rov Beov xal irarpbs rov xPLarov H° Syr. Hard. text.
(/) tov Beov xal irarpbs xal tov xpiarov Text. Rec. with D' KL.
(g) rov Beov iv Xpiarif or tov Beov tov iv Xpiarq 17 [Aeth.j Clem.
Alex. Ambrst. See further W.H. Append, p. 126, where Hort thinks that
the original reading was [toO p-varnplov] rov iv Xpiarip. But it seems
improbable that so comparatively simple a reading would have caused
so much trouble.
7. [ev avT-fj] ev evxapio-TCa. The reading is very uncertain, for
though in itself iv airy is more difficult yet its undoubted presence
in iv. 2 makes it possible that it was introduced thence.
It is found in BDCH**KL(P) Syr. Pe"h- ™d Hard, (on the reading
of H see [Dean] J. Aim. Bobinson, Euthaliana, p. 69), but omitted by
S*ACH*, many cursives, amiat. Boh., and apparently Chrys. in his
commentary. iv eixapiaria is omitted by P.
Observe that iv airw is read by S^D* 1 vulg. Syr. Hard.mg. The
external evideuce is too weak for this, but the unique phrase would
not have been readily developed out of iv airij. Cf. iii. 17.
10. 6s 4o-tiv. So NACHKLP Chrys. qui est efg Vulg. Ambrst.
8 iariv is read by BDG, quod est caput d. Hilary988. Possibly the
similarity of the letters ocec led to the omission of the c.
12. iv ™ pairr£o-paTi. So N*ACDCKLP, Chrys.4- 4e7 Thdt.
iv Tip pairriapip is read by N«BD*G, a few cursives. Although the
evidence for pairriapip is suspiciously "Western," yet, in view of the

2] NOTES 73
fact that fidirriapa became the technical word for the sacrament, its
substitution for pairriapbs is readily explicable. Perhaps, therefore,
the latter is right here. If so St Paul is laying stress on the process
rather than the ceremony as such.
4k veKpiuv XACKLP. iK r&v vexp&v Text. Rec. with BDG, as in
i. 18.
' ' In most instances of this or similar phrases ix veKp&v is used
without t&v, and with no variety in codd. (In Eph. i. 20 L and some
twenty-five MSS. prefix r&v.) But in 1 Thes. i. 10 KBDGLP and
many MSS., with Chrys., Theodoret, al., have t&v, ACK and many
MSS. omitting it. It seems, therefore, more probable that t&v was
omitted here in conformity with usage than that it was wrongly
added " (Abbott). Yet BDG form a very suspicious group (see Introd.
p. Ixii.).
16. Kal ev irdo-ei. Kal is read only by B Pesh. Boh. Origen (once),
Tert. (once), r) is read by Text. Bee. with KACD, etc. In spite of the
following threefold 17 the juxtaposition iv fipiiaei xal iv irbaei is so
natural that Kal is very suspicious.
18. a edpaKev. pi] is omitted by N*ABD* Boh. Marc. Ambrst. p.i) is
inserted by Text. Rec. with XCCDCHKLP, etc. 01k by G. The negative
is also found in vulg. Syrr. Chrys., and is so much easier upon a
superficial examination that it is hardly likely to be genuine.
23. [koI] dipeiSia o-apaTos. Kai is omitted by B Origln'. Hil.
Ambrst. Ambr.

Augustine gives a very remarkable exposition of this chapter in his
Epistle to Paulinus (Ep. 149), §§ 23—30 (Migne, 11. 639 sqq.).
1 — 5. I say this because I want you to be cheered, united, and of
assured convictions, advancing in the full knowledge of Christ. My
interest and joy in you make me write.
(v. X) I say this because I want you to know the greatness of my
contest on behalf of you and all others in your neighbourhood, who
have no personal knowledge of me, (v. 2) that all such may be
cheered, by becoming more united (and that in love) and brought
together into all possible conviction in their grasp of spiritual truths,
with the result that they have full knowledge of God's secret, i.e.
Christ and all that He means ; (v. 3) in whom lie all the many
treasures of men's spiritual reasoning and perception, hid indeed
but to be found for the seeking, (v. 4) I speak of this desire of mine
in order that no one may cheat you by false reasouing, however
plausible his arguments may be. (v. 5) For this interest of mine in

74 COLOSSIANS [2 1—
you is the reason why I write : I am indeed absent in body but
ever with you in spirit, as I both see and rejoice in the steadiness
of your ranks and the solid front characteristic of your faith in
Christ. 1. 6e"X<o -ydp upds elSevai. St Paul is becoming more personal.
Having set them thinking about his contest he states the reason
for his mentioning it. Part of it was for them and he wishes them to
know this.
The formula yiviiaKeiv ae Bi\a occurs frequently in the Papyri ; see
reff. in P. Ewald.
For elSivai see also iii. 24, iv. 1, 6.
t|XCkov, "how great." Classical but not in LXX. In N.T. only
Jas. iii. 5 bis, and a var. lect. in Gal. vi. 11.
d-yiiva, see i. 29 note on dyavifbpevos.
i\ta virep vpuv. virip (iv. 12) is certainly right on external evidence ;
he contends on behalf of the Colossians, etc., whereas irepl would
indicate the more immediate subject of the fight ; cf. Ecclus. iv. 28,
e'ws tov Bavdrov dyuiviaai irepl rijs dXvBeias, xal Kipios b Bebs iroXeprjaei
virep aov. Cf. 1 Mac. vii. 21 ; 2 Mac. xiii. 14.
Kal tov ev AaoSiKia, iv. 13, 15, 16; Rev. i. 11, iii. 14+; cf. AaoSi-
Kei>s, iv. 16+. For Laodicea see Introd. p. *.
The cursives 10, 31, 73, 118 and the Harclean Syriac add Kal r&v
iv 'Xepf XXbXet from iv. 13. The fact was doubtless true, but
St Paul included the Hieropolitans as well as others in the following
phrase. Kal oo-oi. Including the two preceding sets of persons, and gene
ralising. So Acts iv. 6.
oi\ edpaxav. "We have ibpaKa beside iapav : in this case, how
ever, the spelling itipaKa is very widely spread both in Attic and in
the N.T." Blass, § 15. 6 (p. 39, ed. 1898). On the 3 pi. perf. in -av,
see Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 52.
to irpdo-uirdv pov. Cf. Gal. i. 22, and 1 Thes. ii. 17.
ev o-apKi. They might indeed have learned his spiritual lineaments
from the teaching of Epaphras, but they had not had him living and
teaching among them, and they would not so easily listen to his
advice. "Vel aspectus Pauli habebat vim paracleticam, v. 2; Acts
xx. 38 " (Beng.).
2. tva. The aim of his contest, "that their hearts may be
cheered. "
irapaKXr|8iao'iv, cf. iv. 8. irapaKaXia includes the thought of
"comforting" in the modern sense, as for loss received, and "bracing
up" as for fresh energy. The nuance in each case is to be derived

2 2] NOTES 75
from the context. Here not so much comfort (Vulg. consolentur)
under trial as encouragement would appear to be prominent. The
Colossians and those in like circumstances were in danger of being
disheartened by the arguments of the false teachers. But St Paul's
aim is that they may be cheered up, partly by knowing his interest
and work on behalf of them (v. 1) ; partly by renewed union among
themselves (avpfi. iv dydirii), and partly too by their being freed from
doubts (Kai els... rijs avviaeas).
ai KapSCai, cf. iii. 15, 16, 22, iv. 8. The heart as the physical part
on which bodily life ultimately depends was readily identified, perhaps
half in metaphor, with the source of all emotions and thoughts.
It is "the seat of the affections (Matt. vi. 21, xxii. 37), and the
understanding (xiii. 15), also the central spring of all human words
and actions (xv. 19); cf. xaBapa xapSla (1 Tim. i. 5; 2 Tim. ii. 22)
which implies something deeper than xaBapd avveiSvais (X Tim. iii. 9 ;
2 Tim. i. 3)" (Author's note in the Pulpit Comm., on Matt. v. 8).
avrov, cf. note on xal 6Voi, v. X. St Paul apparently here employs
abr&v rather than bp&v in order to emphasize the fact that he is
working for others as well as the Colossians, lest these latter should
deem it a strange thing that he should write to them.
o-vvPiPao-8evTes. See notes on Textual Criticism, "they being
knit together."
(1) avpfiifidfa, "bring together," occurs
(a) literally in v. 19; Eph. iv. 16; in both which places the
somewhat stronger figure "knit together" of Tyndale onwards is au
excellent translation; (b) metaphorically of deducing logically either
in thought (Acts xvi. 10) or by word, and thus "proving" (Acts ix. 22)
or "instructing" (1 Cor. ii. 16, and perhaps Acts xix. 33). In the
LXX. and Hexapla fragments (b) alone is found. And so Vulg. here
instructi. The quasi-literal meaning of our passage may be illustrated by
Hdt. i. 74, oi Si avp.fii(3daavTes abrois rjaav o'tSe; Thuc. ii. 29,
awefilfiaae Si xal rbv XXepSlxxav rots 'ABvvaiois, Schol. tplkov iiroiqae
(Wetst.). Chrysostom's paraphrase is 'iva evaB&ai.
(2) For the participle cf. iii. 16 ; see also 2 Cor. ix. 11.
ev d-ydirtj. The community had been divided by the false teaching,
if not openly (cf. v. 5) yet in spirit. St Paul desires that they may be
once more united, and that in the element of love; cf. Eph. iv. 16.
Kal. Not "even" (Etiam, Beng.) but "and (brought unto)," "the
thought being supplied from the preceding avpfiifiaaBivres, which
involves an idea of motion, comp. John xx. 7, ivrervXiypivov ets 'iva
rbirov" (Lightfoot).

76 COLOSSIANS [2 2—
els irdv itXovtos. See notes on Textual Criticism. ttXoutos (i. 27)
connotes not merely the abundance of the irXnpotpopla but also its
essential value. It describes the irXvpotpopia itself (gen. of apposition).
irdv, i.e. all possible, all that can be enjoyed under the circumstances
of the case ; cf . irdav, i. 9.
ttjs irXT]potpopCas, "of the conviction." The substantive occurs
only three times elsewhere in the N.T. Of these, in Heb. vi. 11 and
x. 22, "full development" or "fulness" are perhaps preferable, hut
in 1 Thes. i. 5, the meaning of "confidence," "assurance," seems
necessary. And so in Clem. Bom. § 42, irapayyeXias ovv Xafiivres
xal irXvpotpopvBivres Sid ttjs dvaardaeas rov Kvpiov i}p.&v 'It7O*o0 Xpia-
rov xal iriaraBivres iv rip Xbyip rov Qeov pera irXvpotpoplas irveiparos
dylov O-ijXBov ("with the firm conviction inspired by the Holy Ghost,"
Lightfoot). Hence the Peshitta is doubtless right in translating it
both here and 1 Thes. i. 5 by |rn . o\ "conviction." St Paul is
contrasting their present depressing and divided state of doubt with
happy union and firm conviction. See Chrysostom's excellent para
phrase, tva iirip pv^evbs dptpifidXXaaiv , 'iva iirip irdvrav ireirXrjpotpopvpivo1
aat. For the verb see iv. 12 and note.
ttjs o-vveVews, "of their understanding." On this word see i. 9.
It is their intellectual grasp, their discernment in any specific case,
e.g. any of the doctrinal or practical questions that the false teaching
brought before them.
The stress of the clause lies indeed on "conviction" (cf. S6£t;s, i. 27),
but the addition of rfjs avviaeus not only marks out more clearly the
sphere of t. irXvpotpoplas, but also prevents the Colossians from thinking
that St Paul was urging a merely crass and blind acceptance of truth.
els eirCYVwo-iv. The result of union in love and conviction, as well
as of the encouragement thus brought about, will be their full know
ledge of the mystery, etc. So the R.V., "that they may know,"
cf. iii. 10. On iirlyvaais see i. 9, note.
It is curious that St Paul always omits the article before iirlyvaais
if he employs a preposition (so also 2 Pet. i. 2, ii. 20, but contrast
2 Pet. i. 3, 8) ; was he led to this by the common Hebrew lada'athl
tov pvo-TT)pCov. See i. 26.
tov Oeov, Xpio-Tov. See notes on Textual Criticism. If the text is
right there are three possible interpretations.
(n) Deleting the comma, "the God of Christ." In itself this is
unobjectionable, compare the note on Tip Beip irarpi, i. 3, and the reff.
there given to Matt, xxvii. 46; Eph. i. 17. But it is hard to see why
St Paul should use the phrase here. It would apparently mean the
secret of the God whom Christ made known, thus laying stress on the

2 3] NOTES 77
fact that it is only through Christ that we can know God. But this
is expressed so concisely that we can hardly suppose this interpreta
tion to be true, even though X" evidently understood it so, toO Beov
Kai irarpbs rov xpiarov.
(6) Taking Xpiarov in apposition to 0eoO only, "the secret of God
(I mean) Christ," as seems to be implied in the "isolated" readings
toO Beoii x. Xpiarov (Cyril), and toO Beov iv Xpiartp (Clem. Alex. Am-
brosiaster). This again is in itself unobjectionable, but suggested by
nothing in the context, and is without parallel in St Paul's writings.
It is perhaps hypercriticism to object (with Abbott) that it would
predicate Xpioros of 6 Bebs, thus ignoring the distinction of persons.
On the other hand, to render "of the God-Christ" is intolerable.
(c) Taking Xpiarov in apposition to pvarvpiov or more properly
the whole phrase toO pvarvpiov rod Beov, "the secret of God, even
Christ," so apparently D* and some Latin authorities including
Augustine (see note on Textual Criticism).
If the sentence is then awkward it is intelligible, and suits the
context. In i. 27 the mystery was also stated to be Christ, though
there not Christ regarded by Himself but Christ in believers. Here
the Apostle finds it sufficient to mention Christ (cf. iv. 3), presuming
that his readers will remember what he has already stated to be the
special relation which Christ as God's secret holds to them. The
connexion of v. 3 with Xpiarov does not appear to be so close as to
justify us in considering it to be part of the definition of the secret,
viz., Christ-in-Whom, etc.
3. ev <3; cf. i. 14, ii. 11, 12. The antecedent is XpurroC.
elo-lv. Its position indicates that it is not a mere copula to
diroxpvtpol, "are hid," but is here a substantive verb almost our "lie,"
to which diroxpvtpol is afterwards added as a secondary predicate ;
vide infra, and compare iii. 1, note.
irdvTes. Here with the article, contrast v. 2. Not merely all as
needed or to suit each circumstance, but all in their totality. There
is no wisdom, etc. , apart from Christ, and in Him there is all.
ot Orjo-avpol. F°r the metaphorical use of Bvaavpbs in connexion
with aotpia, etc., see esp. Prov. ii. 3—5. Also Ecclus. i. 25 (26), iv
O-qo-avpois o-o<|>Cas irapafioXi) iiriarrjpvs (Heb. not recovered).
Here the word is probably suggested by ttXovtos in v. 2. "Con
viction," however great its "wealth" may be, is only one of the many
Bvaavpol. On Enoch, § 46. 3, see below s.v. airbKpvtpoi.
rfjs o-o<|>Cas Kal -yvioo-eos. Genitives of apposition, indicating
wherein the treasures consist. Observe that the one article shows
that they are regarded as sub-divisions of one faculty.

78 COLOSSIANS [2 3—
On aotpia cf. i. 9, note.
As regards the two words, yv&ais is the perception and apprehension
of external objects, aotpia the power of forming right decisions
concerning them. "While yv&ais is simply intuitive, aoipla is
ratiocinative also. While yv&ais applies chiefly to the apprehension
of truths, aotpia superadds the power of reasoning about them and
tracing their relations" (Lightfoot).
Observe that thus aotpia bears relation to ttjs awiaeus in v. 2,
as does, of course, yv&ais to iiriyvaaiv also there.
They are regarded as possibilities for man to find and exercise.
See further under dirbKpvtpoi.
diroKpvcpoi, Mark iv. 22 || Luke viii. 17+, "hid." (1) Even if it is
possible, with Bengel, supported by Meyer and Alford, to take this as
attributive to Bvaavpol in spite of the absence of the article, such an
interpretation is opposed to N.T. practice, which uses the article very
carefully. It is also more forcible to take it predicatively, or, rather,
as a secondary predicate to eiirii'..."In whom lie all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge hid." For other exx., cf. v. 10, iii. 1.
dirbKpvtpos regards a thing as out of sight but quite possible to be
found. (2) It is used several times of treasure or its equivalent :
Isa. xiv. 3; Dan. xi. 43 (Theod.) ; 1 Mac. i. 23; cf. Prov. ii. 4, Sym.
and Theod. So also Aquila seems to understand Ezek. vii. 22 of
the Temple treasury, Kai piavovai rbv dirbKpvtpbv pov.
So says St Paul here. In Christ are treasures — all the treasures —
but they do not lie on the surface, so to speak, and therefore are not
perceived by the false teachers; they are hid, to be found only by
those who seek earnestly for them.
(3) It has been supposed, especially by Lightfoot (whose note
by all means see), that dirbxpvtpoi here contains an allusion to the
esoteric teaching of the false teachers, or perhaps even to their esoteric
writings. This is possible but very far from certain. It is worth
noticing that there appears to be no evidence at present discovered
that dirbxpvipos was used of esoteric teaching or writings as early as
the date of this Epistle, though undoubtedly it was employed in that
sense (at least with reference to writings) by the Gnostic and later
teachers. Enoch, xlvi. 3, "The Son of Man. ..who reveals all the
treasures of that which is hidden" (Greek not recovered), is interesting
as suggesting that Messiah will reveal treasures, but comes very far
short of saying with our passage that they are in Him. It seems to
resemble more closely the Samaritan expectation of Messiah discovering
to His followers the sacred vessels of the Tabernacle.

2 5] NOTES 79
4. tovto Xevw. The exaot phrase here only, but with Si [1 Cor. i.
12]; Gal. iii. 17, and o5i< Eph. iv. 17 (cf. 1 Thes. iv. 15), in all of
which cases the reference is to what follows and not, as here,
primarily to what has preceded.
tovto does not designate only v. 3, but vv. X — 3, for St Paul's
reference to himself in v. 5 seems to be based upon vv. 1, 2. On the
other hand toOto would appear to have too particular a reference for
it to include any part of the first chapter. He probably means I tell
you of the trouble I take for you (whatever the false teachers may
urge against me) that, etc. He then (v. 5) shows that his interest
in them, and even knowledge of them, is unabated.
tva, strictly final.
vpds irapoXo-yC£i|Tai. In N.T. Jas. i. 22+. Of (a) false reckoning,
Isoc. 283 r>, (6) false reasoning, and thus (c) cheating by false reason
ing, e.g. 1 Sam. xxviii. 12, (d) cheat generally, and so Gen. xxix. 25 al.
In our passage and Jas. i. 22 there is no occasion to forsake the
stricter meaning; "cheat you by false reasoning." "The system
against which St Paul here contends professed to be a ipiXoaotpla
(v. 8), and had a X670C aotplas (v. 23)" (Lightfoot); compare also
Ignat. Magn. § 3.
iriSavoXo-yCa. Here only in the Greek Bible. '" The use of probable
arguments' as opp. to demonstration (dirb8ei£is), Plat. Theaet. 163 a"
(Lidd. and Scott) ; cf. 1 Cor. ii. 4. Here evidently with some degree
of depreciation (as often in iriBavbs), " in plausibili sermone" (Beng.);
cf. also Bom. xvi. 18. We may suppose that one part of their
argument was the unworthiness of human nature, not only in the
practical life, vv. 18, 23, but also doctrinally as regards Christ,
Among such plausible arguments may have been these : that as men
we are inferior to angels and therefore ought to worship them, and
again that Christ by virtue of becoming man is Himself not superior
to them. "Erant qui Judaismum et philosophiam orientalem com-
miscerent" (Beng.) ; compare Introd., ch. iv.
5. el Yap Kal ttj o-apxl direipi. "For even though I am absent in
my flesh."
¦ydp gives a further reason for rovro Xiya. My interest in you, en
couraged too as I am about you, is a reason for my writing.
dXXd. Strengthening the apodosis in a conditional sentence, as
often, e.g. Rom. vi. 5 ; 2 Cor. iv. 16.
Tip irvevpaTi. Here, as often, contrasted with trdpf, and designating
St Paul's spirit. Yet Meyer-Haupt appears right in saying that
" irvevpM, with at most the exception of 1 Cor. ii. 11, is never in St Paul
a merely psychological but always a religious conception," St Paul is

8o COLOSSIANS [2 5—
with the Colossians not so much in mind and thought as in that
higher spiritual region wherewith we primarily hold communion with
God and with His people.
o"iv vpiv elpC. This perhaps marks "a fellowship far closer and
more intimate " (cf. v. 13) than ped' bp&v, which if used of a person
would seem to chiefly regard nearness of locality ; cf. Gal. ii. 1, 12 ;
2 Tim. iv. 11 (bis).
Xatpcav Kal pXeiriov, "rejoicing and beholding." The analogy of
xpdfrovres Kal Xiyovres, Matt. ix. 27 ; dirorat;dp,evos Kal eliriiv, Acts xviii.
21, suggests that xa^Pav i8 a general statement which Kal fiXiirav
specialises, and, in doing so, explains. It is thus not strictly
causative, " rejoicing because seeing," much less a hendiadys, " cum
gaudio cernens " (Beng.). The two things, his joy and his beholding,
were synchronous, though not coordinate, and each reacted on the
other. upiov. At the beginning and the end of this clause. The threefold
vpiv, bp&v, ip&v indicate that St Paul is thinking especially of the
Colossians, in contrast perhaps to other communities (e.g. Laodicea)
where the false teachers had wrought more actual mischief-. Among
the Colossians serious harm had not yet been done.
tt]v Ta|iv, "your order." The same figure occurs in 2 Thes. iii. 6, 11,
dTdKras, and 7, rjraxrfjaapev. Compare also 1 Cor. xiv. 40.
The word points to there being no breaks in their ranks, as though
they were soldiers drawn up in battle array or on the march.
Kal to o-Tepe'iDpa+, " and the close phalanx (?)."
(1) The LXX. employs arepiapa (a) often to translate raki'a " firma
ment " (Vulg. firmdmentum, as even here), and (6) twice to translate
sela' " cliff " (" the Lord is my sela' "), Ps. xviii. 2, Ixxi. 3. In these
respects "fastness" is exactly parallel, originally being that which is
firm, and employed in Anglo-Saxon to translate " firmamentum,"
and later, of course, often meaning a place of refuge inaccessible to
the enemy.
(2) In Ezek. xiii. 5, LXX. oiK iarvaav iv arepeiip.aTi = a firm and
steady condition, and so apparently in " another " translation in the
Hexapla of Ex. xiv. 27, "the sea returned iirl arepiaua abrrjs." So
also probably 1 Esdr. (3 Esdr.) viii. 82 (78), Sovvai ijpiv arepiap.a iv
T-y'XovSala xal'XepovaaXrjp.
(3) But it is also used of the firm and solid part of an army,
1 Mac. ix. 14, Kai tSev 'XoiSas Sri BaxxiSvs xal rb arepiapa rrjs irapep/3oXi)s
iv tois Se^tois, and ,as rd^iv lends itself so readily to being a military
metaphor it is on the whole probable that arepioip.a is here to be
interpreted in the same way. But no English' rendering is in this

2 6] NOTES 8 1
case satisfactory, " solid formation " or even " close phalanx " being
very imperfect.
Chrys. says, oix elire, ti)v irlariv, dXXd rb arepiapa, xaBdirep irpbs
arpariaras eirdxras iar&ras xal pefialas.
ttjs els Xpiordv irCo-reus vpiv. tt}s irlareas can hardly be possessive
as though arepiapa were a structure raised by their faith, but is in
apposition to arepiapa and epexegetic of it. Your faith itself has
become solid and firm. Cf. 1 Pet. v. 9 ; Acts xvi. 5.
Observe that the peculiar order (contrast i. 4) of the clause
emphasizes both els Xpiarov and bp&v. XXlans els comes here only
in St Paul's epistles, but twice in his speeches, Acts xx. 21, xxvi. 18 ;
cf. xxiv. 24.
6, 7. Transition to direct learning against the false teachers. Bight
reception of truth is well as far as it goes, but truth must be put
into life.
(v. 6) Your faith is sound, therefore live : as you received from
Epaphras the message about this Christ, nay as ye received Christ
Himself, Jesus who is Lord of all, spend your daily life in Him ;
(v. 7) maintaining your condition as of a tree that has been firmly
rooted in Him, and also continually being built up in Him as in a
temple, and being ever made more firm as to your faith, even as you
were at first taught the need of these things, your lives marked by
no narrow scrupulosity as the false teachers would urge, but abounding
in thanksgiving.
6. <Js. Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 14, where however ovrus follows.
o5v. The immediate reference is to the latter part of v. 5, but the
next verse shows that St Paul is going back in thought as far as
events mentioned in i. 4, 7.
irapeXdpeTe. (1) Does this compound here mean (a) "ye took to
yourselves " or (6) "ye took as delivered to you by others " ?
In favour of (a) is the fact that it is the ordinary meaning of
irapaXapfidva when followed by an accusative of the person, e.g.
Acts xv. 39, and even Matt, xxvii. 26, 27 ; John xix. 16, i. 11. So
here it may only mean as ye received Christ, etc. into your heart,
walk, etc.
(6) But everywhere else in St Paul's writings it means " receive
as delivered by others," correlative of irapaSovvai, e.g. iv. 17 and
especially 1 Cor. xv. 3, and although he uses it always elsewhere of
things we are hardly justified in attributing to it a different meaning
here unless this is absolutely necessary. But, so far from that, the
context on the whole suggests the same meaning. For in the next
verse he says Ka0i!>s iSiSdxBvre, and in v. 8 contrasts ttiv irapdSoaiv
nor.. F

g2 COLOSSIANS t2 6~
r&v dvBpairav. Hence (6) is to be preferred. Compare 1 Thes. iv. 1 ;
2 Thes. iii. 6. , ^ iT_ . ,
(2) Observe that St Paul does not merely say that they accepted
the teaching about Christ which had been taught them. His thought
includes that but passes beyond it. For the Christian scholar does
not receive the teaching fully unless he receives Christ Himself.
This the Colossians had done. Christ had been delivered to them by
their teachers, and they had received Him at their hands. John i. 11
is doubtless similar in this respect.
tov xpurrbv "Ii|o-ovv tov Kvpiov. The exact phrase (i.e. with the
article, with the order "Christ Jesus," and without any addition
after xipiov) is unique. The only passage approaching it is Eph. iii. 11,
iv Tip xPlffrV 'Xvaov Tip Kvplip ijp&v.
It raises many questions, viz. (1) the force of the article ; (2) the
connexion of 'Itjo-oDc, whether it is to be taken with xPiaT0V or T0V
Kipiov; (3) the meaning of rbv icipiov.
tov xPt<rT°v. In v. 5 the article was absent, why is it inserted here ?
Probably because it takes up the reference. Compare Acts viii. 1, 3,
SaCXos Si, but Acts ix. 1, 6 Si SaCXos, and Acts ix. 2, eVioroXds els
Aapaaxbv, but v. 3, iyylfeiv ttj Aap.aax$ (see Blass, Gram. § 46. 10).
It thus approaches in meaning to " this Christ."
'Ino-ovv. Is this to be taken (1) closely with rbv xPl°~rbv, or rather
(2) with tov Kipiov ? In favour of (1) is the fact that 6 xPl°~T°s 'Xvaovs
occurs not only in Acts v. 42, xviii. 5, 28 (cf. var. lect. in Matt. i. 18),
but also at least three times in St Paul's writings, Gal. v. 24, oi Si
rov xp'ttoO 'Xvaov, vi. 12, rip aravptp toO xpiarov ['ItjitoC] ; Eph. iii. 1,
6 Siapios tov XPL<7T0^ 'Xvaov, besides 11, iv Tip xPLaTV 'Xvaov Tip xvpia
vp&v. On the other hand 'Xvaovs 6 xipios seems to occur here only, for
in 1 Cor. ix. 1 ; Bom. iv. 24; 2 Pet. i. 2 we have the addition of i)pav.
Yet (2) is almost certainly right. Compare Eph. iv. 20, bpeis Si oix
oiiras ipdBere rbv xpiirroV. For not only is Xpiarbv of v. 5 taken up
more directly if the pause is made at rbv xPlaT^v-. Dut thus 'Xvaovv
rbv Kipiov serves to expand and explain it, and this in precisely such
a way as to deepen in the mind of the Colossians the true character
of the faith. They received the teaching about Christ, yes and
Christ Himself, who is the historical person Jesus (cf. Eph. iv. 21,
KaBiis iariv dXrjBeta iv Tip 'I170-0O) and that the Lord.
tov Kvpiov. Not precisely as predicate, "Christ Jesus as Lord"
(contrast 2 Cor. iv. 5, oi ydp iavrois xvpiaaop.ev dXXd Xpiarbv 'Xvaovv
Kipiov), but further defining the position of Him whom they had
received. He was not only Jesus, but the Lord, who is supreme
over all, and claims practical obedience (cf. i. 10 note).

2 7] NOTES 83
iv ai'Tii. Bepeated in v. 7 ; cf. v. 3. The force of iv is not to be
weakened. Christ is the element in which they must live and act, not
the detailed precepts. Only here is TrepiTrareij/ found with iv referring
to Christ. Compare 1 Cor. iv. 17, rds bSois pov rds iv Xpiortp ['Itjo-oO].
irepiiraTeiTe, i. 10, note. For irepiirareiv in correlation to irapaXap-
/Sdvu, life the result of teaohing received, compare 1 Thes. iv. 1;
2 Thes. iii. 6.
Observe that it is probably right to see in this charge not only a
desire for their continuance in well-doing as in i. 23 (where a thought
follows which resembles v. 7), but also an admonition against being
satisfied with theory. " He warns them of the danger, amidst
heretical surroundings, of an unapplied orthodoxy. If they would
be both firm and vigorous they must put truth into life " (Moule).
7. eppi£upe'voi. " rooted," rovriari treirvybres, Chrys. This and
the following participles describe the condition and mode of their
daily life (TrepiTraTeire) in much the same way as Kapirotpopovvres, etc.
follow the Trepiirarrjaai in i. 10. Is it, too, wholly accidental that in
both passages the figure of a tree is used, in i. 10 the thought of
spiritual activity, and in our verse that of fixity and immovableness
being severally prominent, according to the claims of the contexts ?
Observe the perfect, an abiding state. Contrast Jude 12.
For the figure of being rooted cf. Ecclus. xxiv. 12 (16), Kai ippi^aaa
iv Xaa SeSo^aapAva, "I (Wisdom) took root in a people that was
glorified," E.V. (Hebrew not extant). It is connected with the figure
of building also in Eph. iii. 17 ; cf. Ecclus. iii. 9 (li), xardpa Si pvrpbs
ixpifat BepeXta (but Heb. J?DJ E'fUn = " plucketh up a plant ").
Kal eiroiKoSopovpevoi, " and being built up." " ippi$. Praeteritum,
pro initio. iiroiKoS. Praesens, etiam in progressu" (Beng.). The
thought of foundation occurs in i. 23, but the process of beiug built
is mentioned only here in this Epistle, and indeed, in its strict sense,
only here and Eph. ii. 20, 21 in St Paul's writings (contrast 1 Cor. iii.
10-14). Elsewhere in the N.T. Acts ix. 31 (of the Church), xx. 32 ;
1 Pet. ii. 5 ; Jude 20. In the last three passages it refers to the
"edification" of individuals, as doubtless here. The iiri apparently
denotes addition to what is already built, our "build up."
Iv avTip. With both ippi£. and iirpiKoS. Cf. Eph. ii. 20 sqq. Christ
is regarded first as the soil in which they are rooted, and secondly
as the ideal temple in whom they cohere (cf. i. 17 for the natural
world). Kal pepai.oup.evoi, " and being made firm." Used of persons only
four times in the N.T., 1 Cor. i. 8 ; 2 Cor. i. 21 ; Heb. xiii. 9, and
our passage. Of these 2 Cor. i. 21 almost certainly, and 1 Cor. i. 8
F2

84 COLOSSIANS [2 7—
possibly, employ it in the sense of " making sure," a legal meaning
found also in Heb. ii. 3 (sim. pepaluais, Heb. vi. 16 ; §ifiaios, Heb. ii. 2,
ix. 17 ; cf. further Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 107), but there is no
trace of this technical connotation here, or in Heb. xiii. 9 ; cf. Ps. xl.
(xii.) 12.
ttj irCo-Tei, "in (your) faith." For the article see i. 23 note on
ttj irlarei. It is not at all easy to determine the force of the dative.
(1) It may be " by (your) faith," the dative of the instrument.
" Faith is, as it were, the cement of the building : compare Clem. Rom.
§ 22, raOra Si irdvra /3e/3aioi i) iv Xpiartp irlans " (Lightfoot). Cf. Heb.
xiii. 9. Yet (2) " in (your) faith," the dative of the " part, attribute,
etc., in respect of which anything takes place " (Blass, Gram. § 38. 2),
is more probable, cf. Acts xvi. 5, and, probably, Jude 20.
For there has been no mention as yet of the means of growth, and
in v. 5 the stedfastness of their faith is already mentioned, so that
it is natural for St Paul to insist on it again.
Ka8. e8iSdx6i|Te. To be taken with all three participles (so ap
parently Lightfoot). The Colossians had been taught that they should
be firmly rooted in Christ and grow in Him, as well as be strengthened
in their faith generally.
irepio-o-evovTes. If iv airy is to be omitted this is subordinate in
thought to the whole clause ippi$....iSi8dxBvre.
If that is to be accepted it is subordinate to Kal pefiaioipevoi tt}
iriarei only.
[ev avT-g]. See notes on Textual Criticism.
Cf. iv. 2, tt/ irpoaevxv TpoaKaprepeire, ypvyopovvres iv air-r) iv eixa-
piarla. That is likely to be a passage often impressed on people's
minds by preachers, so that it would readily suggest the addition
of iv air-g here, even though that passage comes later in this
epistle. In itself, we should be inclined to say, "abounding in faith"
is as suitable an expression as "abounding in hope," Rom. xv. 13,
and yet even there abundance is not predicated of the immediately
preceding "believing." Was there something in irepiaaeieiv which
led St Paul not to speak of it in connexion with faith itself?
ev evxapio-TCa. Observe the important place that thanksgiving
holds in this Epistle, the verb thrice (i. 3, 12, iii. 17), the substantive
twice (here and iv. 2), the adjective once (iii. 15).
Probably Bengel is right in thinking that our passage purposely
contrasts the Christian's thanksgiving over everything (cf. iii. 17)
with the lack of liberty to be found in the false teaching, vv. 16, 21.
Compare 1 Cor. x. 30; 1 Tim. iv. 3, 4.
8 — 16. You have in Christ far more than what the false teachers

2 8] NOTES 85
promise you and demand of you, for He is superior to all spiritual
powers. (v. 8) Be watchful not to be led astray. Many a false teaoher is
trying to carry you off as booty for himself by means of that philo
sophy of his of which you know, which is empty both intellectually
and morally, which takes for its standard of conduct human
tradition and worldly learning (which is really mere A, B, C), not the
standard of the personal Christ, (v. 9) (It is a mistake to follow any
such teaching) because in Christ, and in Him alone, dwells now and
for ever nothing less than the sum of all the attributes of Deity,
in Him incarnate, (v. 10) and also because you have already re
ceived all possible fulness in Him, and can get no more elsewhere
than from Him, who is supreme in power over, and the one source of
life to, every Power and Authority however high. (v. 11) Do they
urge you to be circumcised ? You received once for all the highest
circumcision in Christ, a circumcision made without the touch of
human hands, when you stripped off your body with its evil
tendencies, when you received the circumcision that Christ gives ;
(v. 12) For you were buried with Christ in your baptism, in
which, remember, you were also raised with Him, (not, of course, by
baptism as a mere mechanical means, but) by your faith in the
working of God to bring about suoh resurrection-life in you as He
brought about in Christ's resurrection, (v. 13) He raised Christ
from the dead — did He. not ? So also did He raise you — you who
were long dead, slain by your transgressions and the uncircumcised,
unconsecrated, state of your bodies — but He made you alive together
with Christ, at the same time forgiving (you, nay, I must say)
us all our transgressions; (v. 14) blotting out the bond of the
Law signed by our conscience, with its requirements of innumerable
ritual laws and customs, which was in itself our enemy — and Christ
hath taken it from its position separating us and God, nailing it up
in triumph, as cancelled, to His cross; (v. 15) stripping Himself
of all the spiritual powers who had before helped Him, and thus
unreservedly showed them up in their real weakness, treating them as
mere captives drawn in His train, and this on the scene of His own
weakness, on His very cross.
8. pXe"ireTe p-q...?o-rai. A classical author would have written Spare
pij, and so St Paul in 1 Thes. v. 15; cf. Matt. viii. 4 (||Mark i. 44),
ix. 30, xviii. 10, [xxiv. 6]; Rev. xix. 10, xxii. 9+.
The abruptness gives force; cf. Heb. xii. 25, also v. 20. For the
future indicative cf. Heb. iii. 12, Mark xiv. 2. It regards the con
tingency as of greater certainty than the subjunctive, Matt. xxiv. 4.

86 COLOSSIANS [2 8
See further Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 178, 193, who translates
' take heed 1 perhaps there will be someone who... .'
pd tis vpds So-toi 6 o-vXa-yuyJv, "lest there be any who." The
strange juxtaposition of Ws and ipds is for emphasis on both words.
trvXayayav. Here only in the Greek Bible, and once or twice
independently in very late Greek, besides in writings influenced by
this passage. Its proper meaning seems to be " carry (you) off as
booty," and this suits the context well (cf. Tatian, ad Grace. 22, vpeis
Si birb roirav ovXayayeiaBe) as in the classical synonym Xatpvpayaye'lv ;
cf. also 8ouXa7W7eix (1 Cor. ix. 27), aKevaywyeiv. So in Heliod. Aeth.
x. 35, out6s cVtij' 6 rr\v ipijv Bvyaripa avXayayijaas (Lidd. and
Scott) ; cf. avXda in LXX., Ep. Jer. 17 (18), ottus birb t&v Xvar&v pi)
avXvB&ai. A secondary meaning is to despoil a house (cf. avXda in 2 Cor.
xi. 8). And so Field (Otium Norv. m.) here, translating "rob
you " (of your treasures) ; cf. Chrysostom in Field.
St Paul warns the Colossians against becoming the booty of an
enemy of Christ. For the figure cf. dirapBij in Matt. ix. 15, also
alxpaXarifovres yvvaixdpia, 2 Tim. iii. 6.
Sid ttjs 4>iXoo-od>Cas, " through his philosophy." The article is
probably possessive, or perhaps (see Hort, Judaistic Christianity,
p. 119) it has " the normal individualising force of the article ' that
philosophy,' which we may fill up either as 'that philosophy of his'
or 'that philosophy which you know of,' or best as both together
' that philosophy of his which you know of '."
tpiXoaotpla here ODly in the N.T. and only in 4 Mac. (four times) of
the LXX. tpiXbaotpos is used in the Greek Bible of (1) the pro
fessional Epicureans and Stoics (Acts xvii. 18), and (2) the Babyloniau
enchanters (ashshaphim, Dan. i. 20, LXX.), also in 4 Mac. (three times) ;
tpiXoaotpeiv only in 4 Mac. (five times). Thus the words obtained no
real footing in Biblical Greek, and in every case (save in 4 Mac.) have
some connotation of contempt.
Here the context shows that it would be a grievous mistake to
imagine St Paul to be thinking of Greek philosophy strictly so called.
Just as Philo could legitimately use the term of the Mosaic Law,
V irdrpios tpiXoaotpla, de Somn. n. 18 § 127, Wendland, i. 675 (cf.
ol Kara Maiiaijv tpiXoaotpovvres, de Mut. Norn. 39, § 223, Wendland, i.
p. 612), and Josephus with less right of the three Jewish sects, 'IouSaiois
tpiXoaotplai rpeis ijaav iK rov irdvv dpxalov r&v irarplav, tJ re t&v
'Eaavav xal i) t&v 'ZaSSovxalav, rplrvv Si itpiXoabtpovv ol Qapiaaioi
Xeybpevoi, Antt. mil. i. 2, so doubtless every thinker and pseudo-
thinker claimed the word for his own system. Perhaps even " system "

2 8] NOTES 87
suggests too much, for this oiiXoo-oipia may well have been not theo-
sophio speculation at all but only ethical considerations (cf. Hort,
op. cit. pp. 120 sq.).
Kal Kevr)S dirdTris. The absence of the article shows that the
term is closely connected with the man's tpiXoaotpla ; the two are
to all intents and purposes inseparable.
Kevijs, i.e. lacking anything solid however specious it may be. Cf.
1 Cor. xv. 14; Eph. v. 6; 1 Tim. vi. 20; 2 Tim. ii. 16.
dirdTi)s. With the possible exception of Jas. i. 26, diraTdw and
dirdrn in the N.T. seem to regard not the intellectual but the moral
result on those who are deceived. So Eph. iv. 20 — 22. Cf. also
2 Thes. ii. 10, 2 Pet. ii. 13, and Eph. v. 6.
Probably the same connotation lies also here, for, notwithstanding
the rules for asceticism urged by the false teachers, St Paul does not
believe in their practical value against sins of the flesh, but as it
seems quite the contrary (v. 23). He therefore has to warn the
Colossians strongly against these (iii. 5 sqq.). Observe, however,
that we have no evidence of the false teachers definitely permitting
such sins ; contrast 2 Pet. ii. 18, 19.
tcaTd tt)v irapd8oo-iv rov dvflpuirwv. Not to be taken with truXa-
7U7dV, for "the tradition of men" can hardly be the norm or standard
of capture, but loosely appended to Sid rijs ipiX. k. xev. dwarfs as
further defining the character and origin of the false teaching. Its
standard is tradition received from men, in contrast to the message of
God, i. 25 sqq., cf. v. 22 and Mark vii. 5, 2 Thes. iii. 6. See Mark vii.
8, dtpivres ttjv ivroXvv tov Beov xpareire rrjv irapdSoaiv t&v dvBpiiirav.
The phrase suggests the essentially Jewish character of the error,
for the Jewish leaders always deprecate any supposition of originality,
and, even in developing some startling detail of the Oral Law, claim
that it is involved in what they have heard from their teachers.
Kara Ta o-TOixeia toO Koo-pou. The parallelism of the structure of
the clause to the immediately preceding Kara t. Trap. t. dvffp. leads us
to expect an expansion of that clause. This is obtained by the usual
explanation, viz. that St Paul says that the false teachers teach,
after all, not only according to what they have heard from men, but
also according to the elementary truths taught by the world, the
world's A, B, C. It is thus a contemptuous expression, denoting
his surprise at any one being satisfied with rudiments when he can
have the ideal Master and the ideal Lesson. On the subject see
Additional Note, and cf. especially Deissmann, Encycl. Bibl. s.v.
"Elements." tov Koo-pov. The visible world and its effects so far as these

88 COLOSSIANS [2 8~
are anti-Christian, or, at best, non-Christian. It thus forms a
convenient summary term for all that is outside the Christian
Church; cf. 1 John v. 19, 6 Kbapos oXos iv rip irovvpv Kelrai.
The genitive is probably possessive, the rudiments belonging to
and taught by the world.
Kal ov KaTa Xpiordv. The absence of the article shows that St Paul
is thinking of the personal Christ, rather than of His office. " Christ
Himself, the personal Christ, was the substance, end, and norma, of
all evangelical teaching," Ellicott.
9. oti. The reason for the warning of v. 8.
Hence the emphatic iv airip. The fact has been already stated
in i. 19, which however is here defined by the addition of t. Bebrirros,
and the important word aapariK&s.
iv avTiji, v. 6.
KaToiKel, see i. 19. Observe (1) the compound; the permanence
of the indwelling is emphasized; (2) the tense; this indwelling was
not only during His historic life on earth, but even now.
irdv to irX-rjpwpa, see i. 19. Nothing less than all the fulness would
meet the case. If any were omitted an excuse would arise for the new
and, as was supposed, supplementary teaching.
ttjs OedTrvros, " of the Godhead " or " of deity."
Here only in the Greek Bible, as KvaBbrvs, rpaire^brvs (both coined
by Plato) = the abstract quality of a cup, and of a table, so Beb-
rns=the abstract quality of God, that which makes God what He is
and without which He would cease to be God. A similar word is
Beibrvs (Bom. i. 20+), which, as starting not from the thought of
a person, but from the adjective 0eios, divine, appears at first sight to
be wider, but is in reality weaker, and describes the attributes rather
than (as Bebrvs) the essential nature. Hence in Bom. i. 20 St Paul
says that men can perceive God's tfeioTTrra from nature, not His Bebrirra,
which indeed, as he implies here, can only be known through Christ.
Similarly he uses t6 Beiov when speaking to the Athenians on the
Areopagus (Acts xvii. 29). Had St Paul used Beibrijs in our passage
he would have seemed to the Colossians to include all lower forms of
divinity, and to exclude the highest and, as we know, the only real
form — Deity.
The Vulg. reads divinitas here as in Bom. i. 20, probably being
unaltered in this particular by Jerome, and due to a time before
the Latin Christians, dissatisfied with divinitas, had coined deitas
" nam et hoc verbo uti jam nostros non piget, ut de Graeco ex-
pressius transferant id quod illi Bebrvra appellant," Aug. De Civ.
Dei, vii. 1. See Trench, Synon. § ii.

2 10] NOTES 89
o-upaTiKus, "bodily," i.e. in Christ as incarnate, both during His
historical life on earth and in His present glorified state in heaven
(Phil. iii. 21).
To St Paul the doctrine of the Incarnation, perfect in manhood
(aoiparix&s) and perfect in Godhead (Trap rb wXrjpapia rijs debrvros), is
a sine qua non in all true teaching, and makes tt)v irapdSoaiv r&v
dvBptiirav superfluous.
For St Paul's insistence on the reality of the Incarnation cf. i. 22,
iv rip atipari rijs aapxos airov.
" St Paul's language is carefully guarded. He does not say iv
aiipari, for the Godhead cannot be confined to any limits of space
[IVa pij vopiavs airbv avyxeKXeiaBai, us iv aiipari, Chrys.] ; nor aaparo-
eiS&s, for this might suggest the unreality of Christ's human body ;
but aapariK&s, ' in bodily wise,' ' with a bodily manifestation ' "
(Lightfoot). Other meanings have been suggested for aapariK&s, e.g. "per
sonally" (Oltramare) ; "really" as contrasted with "figuratively,"
cf. i'. 17 (apparently Bengel, and compare Augustine, Ep. 149, § 25,
Migne, rr. 641); "in one organic whole" as contrasted with the
thought of the false teachers that the deity dwelt in angelic beings
as well as in Christ (apparently Meyer-Haupt) ; or, again, " in the
Church" ("others" in Chrys., cf. 1. 24), but even if these sug
gestions can be defended by usage (even the last seems to require
some express reference in its immediate context, contrast i. 18, 24),
there is no necessity here to forsake the more obvious interpre
tation. 10. Kal eo-re ev avTu ireirXTjpope'voi. Probably still under the
government of on (v. 9). A second reason why they should not
be led away by "teaching not according to Christ." Therefore ev
airtp repeated.
lore. . .irerrX-npiopevoi. It is possible to take the eari primarily with
ev airip, " ye are in Him — filled," but the thought of being in Christ
(cf. John xvii. 21) is not suggested by the context, whereas being
filled arises naturally out of v. 9. It is, therefore, preferable to
translate it simply, " and in Him ye are filled," and accent xal
eare. For a similar periphrastic perfect cf. Acts xxv. 10, xxvi. 26. See
Gildersleeve, Syntax, §§ 286, 287. You need no pretended irXrjpaais
from this new philosophy.
Observe (1) St Paul does not say that Christ was filled, but ev airip
KaTOiKei rb irXvp- tov 8., for "to be filled" implies a time when the
filled was empty. (2) St Paul does not define that with which

9o COLOSSIANS [2 10—
believers are filled. This is certainly not to irXi)papa t. Bebrvros,
as Theophyl. understands it, and even Chrys., as it seems, Kai eare ev
airip ireirXvpapivoi. rl ovv iariv ; oh ovSiv iXarrov ixeTe avrov
aairep ev exeivip tpxijaev, ovru xal iv bp.iv. For this, strictly inter
preted, is to attribute to the believer much too great an equality to
Christ. St Paul purposely gives no definition, because he wishes to
include everything that the believer needs. Yes, and even more than
that; the Colossians are so completely filled " that there is no room
left, if they have Christ they have all that anyone not only can need,
but also can have" (Meyer-Haupt). Cf. John i. 16, ex rov irXvpaparos
airov i)peis irdvres eXdfiop.ev.
Thus although "complete" (Tyndale, A.V.) fails to show the con
nexion of thought with tj. 9 (contrast " and ye ben fillid," Wyclif,
"made full," R.V.) in itself it is essentially correct.
ds Io-tiv. See notes on Textual Criticism. The impossible reading
o suggests that iv airtp was understood to refer to irXi)papa. But this
is never called tj xetpaXij.
r\ KeipaXr), cf. i. 18 and infra, v. 19, including the thought both of
His supremacy in power and of His being the source of life.
irdo-t|s dpxijs Kal e£ovo-Cas, cf. i. 16 and infra, v. 15. Under these
summary terms (cf. 1 Cor. xv. 24) St Paul includes all heavenly beings
however high. Even over them Christ is supreme, even to them He
is the source of their original and continued existence (cf. i. 16, 17).
How then can you fall back from Him to them as your false teachers
would fain persuade you? "All the personal Powers of the UnseeD,
however real and glorious, are but limbs (in their order of being) of
this Head; therefore no nearer Him than you are, and no less
dependent on Him. Live then on the Fountain, not on Its streams;
use to the full the fulness which in Christ is yours" (Moule).
Yet observe that, strictly speaking, St Paul does not apply the
image of the body to the relation of the heavenly beings to Christ.
He keeps it for the relation of believers to Him.
11. ev if. He now states in some detail what believers obtained
in Christ.
Kal -n-epuTpije-nTt. The suddenness of the reference to circumcision
can only be accounted for by its being advocated by the false teachers
(who were evidently Jewish), not (at any rate chiefly, cf. v. 14)
because they desired the Law to be observed, as in the ease of
St Paul's opponents in Galatia, but because (a) they regarded it as a
prophylactic against sins (cf. Philo in Haupt), especially sins of the
flesh (cf. t;. 23) as well as probably, (6) they thought that it removed
those who were circumcised out of the power of evil spirits into the

2 11] NOTES 91
jurisdiction of better and higher spirits, and also perhaps because
(c) it was held that the higher angels were themselves created cir
cumcised (Bh of Jubilees, xv. 27), and these their worshippers would
be like them.
But St Paul says that the reality denoted by the symbol of
circumcision already belongs to believers, and he will bring out even
more clearly in v. 15 than in v. 10 the fact that in Christ they are
superior to all spirits, bad or good.
For circumcision, starting, probably, with the thought of the
consecration of the sexual powers, had long symbolised the consecra
tion of the whole of the man to God (hence the metaphor of the
circumcision of ear (Jer. vi. 10), lips (Ex. vi. 12), and heart (Lev.
xxvi. 41) was common in the O.T. writings). But even this reality
(ko! emphatic) believers had in Christ, and St Paul cannot understand
why the Colossians should go back to the symbol when they had this.
Indeed, as he says in Phil. iii. 3, i)pe?s iapev t) irepiroprj, oi irveipari
Beov Xarpeiovres x.r.X.
Observe the aorist, which refers to » definite time, in this case
apparently when the faith of an individual believer was consummated
in baptism.
irepiTopTJ dxeipoiroiTJTO, "with a circumcision made without hands."
dxeip., Mark xiv. 58 (of Christ's resurrection body, compared to the
Temple) and 2 Cor. v. 1 (of the believer's resurrection body, compared
to a building) +. Not in the LXX.
But x^poirolvros occurs 15 times in the LXX. always of idols (except
perhaps Isa. xvi. 12 of an idol's temple). It is also fairly common in
the N.T., in each case with some notion of contempt, Mark xiv. 58
(the Temple) ; Acts vii. 48, xvii. 24 (temples generally; cf. Heb. ix. 24).
In Heb. ix. 11 the tabernacle of Christ's body, or rather perhaps
the antitypical and heavenly tabernacle of which He is High-priest,
is called oi x^poiroivros. In Eph. ii. 11 it is used of circumcision.
ev ttj direK8vo-ei, "in the putting off" or perhaps better "in the
stripping off," see v. 15, iii. 9, notes.
iv marks that in which the irepiropi] consisted. direxS. subst. here
only in the Greek Bible, the verb only in v. 15 and iii. 9. Both subst.
and verb are very rare and do not appear to have been discovered
as yet in any passage earlier than this. ixSia occurs in Matt, xxvii. 28,
31 (|| Mark xv. 20) ; Luke x. 30; 2 Cor. v. 4+. But the compound is
stronger. Cf. Chrys. "Opa ir&s iyybs ylverai rov irpdyparos. 'Ec ttj
drrexSiaei, tpvalv, oix etirev ixSiaei.
A somewhat unnecessary question has been raised as to who
"puts off." For it is urged that as the circumcised person endures,

92

COLOSSIANS [2 11—

not acts, he ought to be said to be stripped of toO aiiparos x.t.X., and
as on the other band dirixSvais must be active not passive in meaning,
the subject must be God. But this is hypercritical. If a man gets
himself circumcised it is he virtually who puts off.
tov o-upaTos ttis o-apKos. " Of th e body of the flesh ," i. 22 +. There
however the phrase has not the connotation of evil that it evidently
has here. For though adp% need not be sinful, yet in the case of all
others than Christ it is so.
Observe that the phrase is very strong. Literal circumcision puts
off a fragment, true circumcision puts off the body (cf. Bom. vii. 5,
viii. 8, 9). But this is what is done at death 1 Quite so, for, as
St Paul will say clearly in the next two verses, the believer passed
through a crisis of no less a magnitude. He has obtained the benefits
of circumcision in the highest degree, for he has put off his old nature
and obtained new life.
iv ttj irepiTopij tov xpi°"tov. A unique and difficult phrase.
(1) In itself its most obvious reference would be to the historical
circumcision of Christ (Luke ii. 21), but this is unsatisfactory here.
Not because (a) as has been urged, irepiropv dxeipoiroifJTw forbids such
a reference to literal circumcision, for this would not affect the
spiritual circumcision of the Colossians "in" it, but because (b) there
is no analogy to the believer sharing, ex hypothesi, in the actions and
sufferings of Christ before His Passion.
Besides, while it is true that the circumcision of Christ was the first
stage in His carrying out the precepts of the Law for us and so freeing
us from them, this thought does not belong to the present context
(contrast v. 14).
(2) Hence we must understand rov xpwrov as the genitive of
cause and origin, and the phrase to be in silent contrast to "the
circumcision of Moses." Thus it nearly = " Christian circumcision,"
but points out more definitely than that the personal relation of
Christ to this spiritual action.
Compare 1 Cor. x. 2 where, in reverse fashion, "baptized unto
Moses" stands in silent contrast to Christian baptism.
The iv is, apparently, precisely parallel to the iv t% direxS., again
defining the nature of the irepiropi).
(3) Other, but very improbable, interpretations are (a) tov
Xpiarov is strictly subjective, meaning that He performs the circum
cision (rather the Spirit, as Chrys.). (b) i) irepir. t. xp. is a metaphor
for Christ's death.
12. o-vvTa<pe'vTes avT<p, "being buried with Him." The participle
is closely subordinate to irepierptjBvre, of which it defines the mode.

2 12] NOTES 93
The figure of death has already been suggested by iv r^ direxSiaei
k.t.X., and perhaps St Paul would have continued "having died with
Him" had not the act of Baptism by its covering waters represented
burial rather than dying. St Paul says that the true oircumcision
of the believer takes place in Christ because he was buried with Him.
Cf. Rom. vi. 4.
ev Tip pain-Co-paTi. See notes on Textual Criticism. Here first
does St Paul definitely mention the occasion on which the Colossian
Christians received their true circumcision. It was in their Baptism.
The article apparently is possessive, iv not 'at,' but 'in' the
ceremony with all its concomitants.
The form of immersion was evidently present to St Paul's mind
(though as early as the DidachS, § 7, affusion was permitted if a full
supply of water could not be had), and suggested the image of burial
and resurrection.
If it appears strange that St Paul attributed so much importance
to the act of Baptism it must be remembered that (a) he was,
primarily at least, thinking of adults, (b) this is in fact not only
the occasion on which the turning point of a convert's faith is visibly
displayed, but also the consummation of his decision to belong to
Christ. All who have had anything to do with the instruction of
non-Christians know that it is only when they dare to confess Christ
publicly by Baptism that any assurance can be felt as to the reality
of their faith. St Paul's twofold requirement (Bom. x. 9) of public
confession of the sovereignty of Jesus as well as heart belief in His
resurrection is fully justified by experience.
St Paul, it will be observed, is here dealing with the normal state
of things. Such a question as whether real faith preceded or only
followed Baptism he does not discuss.
For » valuable quotation from Peter Lombard on this subject see
Moule, Appendix K.
ev a. In spite of the phrases iv airip (v. 10), iv ip (v. 11), the
antecedent is almost certainly Tip fiairrlapari, not Christ, for, besides
other reasons, it would be strange to say that the Colossians were
raised with Christ (rrovvyipBirre) in Him.
Kal, emphasis as well as addition; cf. v. 11. True circumcision
meant not only death but also life, or rather (in view of v. 13) not
only death and its position of burial but also the position of those
that have been raised, and, further (v. 13), actual enjoyment of
life. Kal awny. , that is to say, introduces the positive side of conversion,
marking the beginning of a new life.

94

COLOSSIANS [2 12-

o-vvTrye'p8T]Te. There is no occasion to repeat the airo} from
avvratpivrcs airip.
For the word see iii. 1, and Eph. ii. 6+. Compare also the note on
ovvefaoirolvaev, v. 13.
Sid Tijs irCo-reios, "by your faith." On irlaris cf. i. 4, 23, ii.
5, 7.
In this clause St Paul guards against any misconception of Baptism
having a merely mechanical effect. Faith is the instrument by which
the benefit to be obtained in baptism is received.
Bengel, probably by some remnant of controversial bias, understands
the genitive after irlareas (r. ivepy. r. B.) as subjective, "fides est opus
operationis divinae: et operatio divina est in fidelibus." But it is
certainly objective; cf. Acts iii. 16; 2 Thes. ii. 13; Eph. iii. 12. And
so Chrys., xaX&s eZrre, 'Iliirrews'- irlareas ydp SXov iarlv. iiriareiaare
on Sivarai b Bebs iyeipai, Kal oiiras vyipBvre.
ttjs evep-yeCas tov fleov, "in the working of God"; i.e. in believers.
See the note on ivipyeia at i. 29.
The false teachers urged faith in the "powers and authorities," but
you have faith in the working of God Himself. He raised Christ, and
that is a solid fact on which to rest your faith in His power towards
you, even to raise you with Him. And by means of this your faith
you, in fact, were raised.
tov eveCpaVTOS ovtov eK vexpiGv. See notes on Textual Criticism.
The absence of the article before veKp&v (contrast i. 18) lays the more
stress on the fact that they were dead, "from such people as were
actually dead."
The phrase probably means "from a state of death"; contrast i. 18.
13. St Paul still dwells upon the magnitude of the change wrought
in the Colossians through Christ, though he now ceases to place this
directly under the figure of circumcision.
Kal vpds, "and you too"; cf. i. 21. To be connected closely in
thought with the end of v. 12. God raised Christ from the dead —
and you too when you were dead He quickened with Christ. Thus
the xal primarily contrasts the Colossians with Christ, not with
Jewish believers, who have not been solely or even directly mentioned
at all. That however the Colossians had in fact been Gentiles is
indicated by ttj dxpofSvarltf k.t.X.; vide infra.
vexpovs. Observe the change of thought. In vv. XX, 12, the
Colossian believers are said to have died with Christ. Here the
thought is that before they turned to Christ they were in the truest
sense already dead. For vexpois is not proleptic ("liable to eternal
death," Meyer on Eph. ii. 1) but describes the present state of those

2 13] NOTES 95
who are without Christ as being without eternal life ; cf . Matt. viii. 22 ;
1 John v. 12.
St Paul says this partly to humble the Colossian Christians, partly
to make them the better realise how much they have received in
Christ, and thus to strengthen them against the false teaching. Cf.
Eph. ii. 1, 5.
Tots irapairrwpao-iv. The iv of the Textus Beceptus brought the
phrase into similarity to i. 21 and marked the sphere in which death
showed itself. The dative alone may be (1) the dat. of respect ("in
respect of," Moule, Studies), which suits in particular Kal ttj dxpo/3., or
(2) the instrumental dative; cf. Rom. xi. 20, tt; diriarlq. i^exXdaBvaav .
On the whole the latter is the more probable. They were dead not
only in respect of sins, but wholly, and this condition was caused by
their sins and by their unregenerate nature.
On irapdirTap.a, and the attempts to define it as essentially weaker
than apaprla, see Trench, Synon. § Ixvi.
Kal ttj aKpoPvo-rCa ttjs o-apKds ipuv, cf. iii. 11. " Uncircumcision "
is here primarily physical, but their physical condition was a true
symbol of their spiritual state. They were outside the covenant
of God's people, and unconsecrated to God (cf. v. XX, irepierpvBvre,
note), and were living without Him. St Paul here, apparently,
regards the sinfulness that this implies as the joint instrument with
their actual transgressions of their spiritual death.
ttjs o-apKos, apparently the connotation is not primarily of the
flesh as sinful (v. XX) but of their bodies as such; cf. i. 22.
o-vve£iooiroCi|o-ev. "He made you alive together with Him." The
subject is surely.He whose activity (and that of precisely the same
kind) was last mentioned — rov iyelpavros airbv ix vexp&v, i.e. God.
And this is in accordance with the parallel passage, Eph. ii. 4, 5
(vide supra), and St Paul's uniform mode of speaking elsewhere in
his use of iyelpeiv, avveyelpeiv, faoiroieiv (cf. esp. Bom. viii. 11). Also
abv airip would come in very awkwardly (see i. 20) if the subject of
avve£. were Christ. On the change of subject at vpKev (v. 14) see there.
As compared with awvyipBvre, v. 12, St Paul there mentioned the
transition from burial to resurrection, but here speaks of the contrast
between death and life. There the thought was of the moment of
change; here of the continued energy. Thus although St Paul is
not purposely giving a fresh stage in Christian experience from burial
to resurrection aud on to active life, because the intervening vexpois
does not describe the state included under "burial" (vide supra), yet
practically it comes to mean this, from the abiding character of the
change denoted by avvefaoiroivaev in contrast to vexpois.

96 COLOSSIANS [2 13—
o-vv avTO. avvefaoirotvaev...abv. For a similar redundancy see,
probably, Matt, xxvii. 44, ol avvaravpuBivres abv airQ (\\ Mark xv. 32) ;
cf. avvxaSrjpevos perd, Mark xiv. 54; avveirip^apev Si per airov,
2 Cor. viii. 18. On the use of aiv in preference to perd see v. 5, note.
Xapio-dpevos- W.H. text place a colon at avv airip, and begin at
Xapiadpevos a new sentence which lasts till the end of v. 14, Tip
o-raupip. Presumably this is caused by the desire to understand
Christ as the subject of xaPLaa^lxe'">^ and igaXetyas. But it is ex
ceedingly unnatural for ^apiird/xexos to begin a sentence in this way.
Hence we prefer the usual punctuation of a comma after airo}
(W.H.mg.). Thus the subject of xaPl,r- ani^ i^aXeiyj/as is God : contrast
iii. 13.
XaptfcaBai (iii. 13 bis) is properly to grant a kindness (so e.g.
Luke vii. 21), then to make a present to a man of his debts (so e.g.
Luke vii. 42), then to forgive. Hence Vulg. donans ; cf. our own
"forgive," where "for" seems to be intensive.
The force of the tense is uncertain. (1) It may be synchronous
with avvefaoirolvaev, and describe what takes place in the case of
individuals at baptism ; so Winer, § xlv. p. 430 ; see infra iii. 9.
(2) It may be antecedent, and refer to the Passion in which the
forgiveness of all was virtually obtained. But the former is more
probable, for two aorists naturally refer to the same time, unless
there appears to be a clear reason to the contrary. Cf. also i. 20.
ijpiv. St Paul frequently returns to the first person when he is
speaking of blessings given in Christ, especially such as imply his
own weakness or sinfulness ; cf. i. 13, iii. 4.
irdvTa Ta irapairTiopaTa, " all our transgressions.'- Evidently
taking up the preceding r. irapairrapaaiv. It was impossible for him
as a Jew to take up Kai r% dxpofivarla k.t.X.
14. e£aXeb|/as Td...xeipo7paipov. The mention of forgiveness in
¦v. 13 leads the apostle to the figure of a bond which is first described
as cancelled, then as permanently removed, as it were, from being
between us and God, and then as because settled and being in itself
worthless nailed up in triumph.
e£aXeCt|/as, "blotting out." The word was applied to the process
of obliterating writing on ordinary books or records. In the case of
papyrus, the substance in most common use, this would consist of
washing off, especially if it were to be done on a large scale (contrast
exx. of xe<-pt>yPa,Pa on papyrus scored through and thus cancelled,
referred to in Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 247), for the ink was made
generally of soot and gum, and did not, as with our modern inks,
sink into the texture of the paper (see Kenyon in Hastings, iv. 948,

2 U] NOTES 97
"Writing"). Chrysostom expressly takes it here of complete ob
literation : ityXeiipev, ovk ixdpage pbvov (i.e. he did not only draw
a line through it), uare p.i) tpalveaBai. So of a name being blotted out
of a register, Rev. iii. 5 (cf. Ex. xxxii. 32, 33). Aots iii. 19 is probably
the same use of the figure as here. In the remaining two passages of
the N.T. where the word occurs it is used of wiping away tears, Bev.
vii. 17, xxi. 4.
The translators of the LXX. use it often, generally to translate
iino " wipe out, "literally or metaphorically, but also JinC " destroy,"
and ITlt3 " plaster," e.g. Lev. xiv. 42.
Td Ka8' qpuv xeipo-ypaipov. %eipo7pa0o» in itself does not mean the
Law, even as God's holograph, but probably a bond written by a
person pledging himself to make certain payments. Wetstein rightly
compares Phm. 19, iya IlaOXos (ypa\pa ttj ipri xe'P'> ^7<"> diroTiiru,
although this is not a formal example. Such a xelpbypo.tpov Gabael
had given to Tobit, acknowledging that he held ten talents of his,
and Tobit entrusted to his son Tobias in order that the latter might
receive the money, Tob. iv. 1, 20, with v. 3 ; cf. ix. 2 (N), 5. P. Ewald
indeed shows from the papyri that x- d°es not always mean a bond.
Yet this seems to be the meaning here. Compare Origen's words
immediately following.
What, however, is the reality underlying the figure? First, per
haps, as developed from the thought of xaPlo"^/JLevo5' the debt of sin
incurred by us and owing to God. So Origen, Horn, in Gen. xm.
§ 4, referring to our passage, Istud quidem quod dicit chirographum,
peocatorum nostrorum cautio fuit. Unusquisque etenim nostrum, in
his, quae delinquit, efficitur debitor, et peccati sui literas scribit...Si
vero delinquas, ipse tibi conscribis peccati chirographum.
But, secondly, in any case this passes over almost immediately
into that which gives sin its Sivapis (X Cor. xv. 56), the Law defined
here by tois Sbypaai ; Quia reos Lex faciebat, quae subintraverat ut
abundaret delictum, Aug. Ep. 149, § 26. The assent which the word
" bond " presupposes on our part lies in the acceptance by our
conscience of the Law not only qua tois 567^00-1 but in itself (vide
infra). For whether we be Jews or only Gentiles we have virtually
accepted it, cf. Bom. i. 32.
tois 86vpao-iv. A very difficult phrase. Assuming that it is to be
taken with xCLP°ypatpov we have to decide upon the force of the
dative and the meaning of the word.
I. The force of the dative. This may be (1) instrumental and
closely connected with Ka0' r/pubv. It became a " bond " in force
against us by Td Sby/mra. So Winer, in. xxxi. 10, B. 1 (p. 275).
col. G

98 COLOSSIANS [2 14—
But this is very harsh. (2) Descriptive of that in which the bond
at least primarily consists. In this case the ypdtpeiv appears to retain
something of its original force. Lightfoot suggests that iv has dropped
out ; cf. Eph. ii. 15.
II. The meaning of tois S67,uao-i.
So7jua occurs only three times in the N.T. besides our passage and
Eph. ii. 15, viz. (1) Luke ii. 1 ; Acts xvii. 7, in both of which places
it = decree of Caesar; (2) Acts xvi. 4, where 56yp.ara= orders of the
Apostles, etc. affecting ritual and morals.
Similarly in the LXX. it = (1) royal decree in Esther, Dan. (LXX.
and Theod.), and 4 Mac. (ter), but (2) in 3 Mac. i. 3 and 4 Mac. x. 2
Sbypara seems to mean the ritual laws of the Jews.
In our passage the sense of royal decrees is in itself just tolerable
if God be He who issues them, but the context does not suggest this.
Sbypara seems to mean laws affecting practice, in contrast to both
objective and subjective faith, so also vv. 21 sq. Observe also that
these laws are not necessarily limited to the direct commands of the
Pentateuch. They at least include, and indeed probably have special
reference to, the many items of traditional religious customs and
laws, such as all religions possess, and Judaism in particular. In
these lay the weight of the yoke (Acts xv. 10) of Judaism ; in these
the adverse force of the " bond." And yet the false teachers would
have the Colossian Christians return to them. For a similar use of
Sbypara cf. Suicer, p. 934, "Basilius M. de Spiritu sancto, cap.
xxvii. torn. ii. p. 212, doctrinae Christianae duas facit partes, rd
Kvpiypara, praeconia, et rd Sbypara. Dogmata ea appellat, quae alii
vocant to dirbppvTa, ritus et ceremonias, quarum ratio non omnibus
constat : dicitque, Td Sbypara haberi ex non scripta traditione, Td Si
Kvpiypara, id est, doctrinam fidei, e scripturis Domini." See also his
further quotations. Cf. Westcott on Eph. ii. 15, " The addition of
iv Sbypaaiv defines the commandments as specific, rigid, and outward,
fulfilled in external obedience."
IH. Three improbable constructions of tois Sbypiaaiv may be
mentioned :
(1) With i£aXel\f/as (a) instrumentally, blotting out the bond by
means of the Christian Sbypara, so several of the Greek Fathers, e.g.
Theophylact, to x^poypatpov i^fp\ei\pev 6 xpioTds rots Sbyp.aai, Tovrian,
ttJ irlarei • ov yap ipyois, dXXd tois ttjs Trio-Tews Sbypaai XAurai tovto (in
Suicer, p. 933). And so too Bengel, Haec sunt decreta gratiae ;
(6) blotting out the bond as regards its Sbypara.
(2) With the following relative olause (Erasmus, P. Ewald), "the
handwriting, which, by its ordinances, was opposed to us," a con-

2 15] NOTES 99
struotion whioh lays extraordinary stress on tois Sbypaai, and has no
oertain parallel in the N.T.
8 ^v virevavrCov TJp.lv, " which was opposed to us. " virevavrlos,
Heb. x. 27+. In the LXX. it often = enemy. Perhaps also here,
when St Paul's meaning is that the Law not only is against us qua its
ritual enactments, but also in itself, as a whole and as Law, is our
enemy. It stands up to resist man, like Satan in Zech. iii. 1, toO
dvTiKei<T0ai av>ip.
Kal avrd rjpKtv, "and He hath taken it." A second stage in the
annulling of the bond, He has permanently removed it, so that it no
longer prevents intercourse between us and God.
Observe (1) the change from a participle to the finite verb. This
is due partly to emphasis, and partly perhaps to the semi-conscious
change, beginning, as it seems, here, from the First to the Second
Person of the Trinity. For though it is true that direxSvadpievos can
receive a plausible meaning if the subject be still " God" (vide infra)
both it and the reference to the cross much more readily suggest our
Lord. (2) The change from the aorist (D*G rjpev) to the perfect, thereby
expressing the permanency of the removal.
4k tov peVov. The exact phrase occurs here only in the N.T.
Isa. lvii. 2 affords a verbal parallel, 6 SlKaios...vprai iK tov piaov,
which apparently = has been taken away from his ordinary sur
roundings. Cf. also 1 Cor. v. 2, and 2 Thes. ii. 7. In our passage it
apparently = from between us and God; cf. the parallel passage Eph.
ii. 14, where pieabroixov is the temple balustrade between Jew and
Gentiles taken figuratively.
irpoo-T]Xwras avVd to o-Taupu, "nailing it to the cross." The
figure is not that of cancelling a bond (for which there is no evidence,
see Field, Otium Norv. m.) but of nailing it up in triumph. St Paul
meanB, apparently, that Christ's death on the Cross not only ren
dered the Law useless, but by its publicity showed that it was so.
irpoanXba occurs here only in the N.T. and only once in the LXX.,
3 Mac. iv. 9, in a purely literal sense. For tjXos see John xx. 25 bis+.
Observe St Paul's characteristic repetition of abrb.
15. direKSvo-dpevos. What is the force of the middle? I. Iu
itself it may = stripping for Himself, i.e. despoiling rds dpxds k. rds
££ovalas for His own purposes. But it is not only very improbable
that St Paul should use the same word, and that a rare one, in
one sense here, and in another sense so soon as iii. 9, but also, as it
seems, this meaning is " wholly unsupported by the lexical usage of
diroSia, ixSia, and direKiba " (Ellicott).
G2

ioo COLOSSIANS [2 15
II. Hence it = Christ (see v. 14, notes) stripping Himself of some
thing. But of what ?
(1) Sc. tt)v adpKa. So the Latin Fathers, e.g. Augustine, Ep. 149
(§ 26), exuens se carne, principatus et potestates exemplavit. Also
the Peshitta ' ' and by putting off His body." But this metaphor has no
support from the context nearer than v. 11, which is too far away.
(2) rds dpxds k. rds ii-ovalas, i. 16 note.
(a) They are commonly understood as evil, see Eph. vi. 11, 12.
In this case they are pictured as gathering round Christ, at various
times in His life on earth, and with special force and nearness at the
Passion. But there, at the Cross, "the powers of evil, which had
clung like a Nessus robe about His humanity, were torn off and cast
aside for ever" (Lightfoot). Cf. Chrysostom who sees in direKS. a
metaphor from wrestling.
The weakness of this interpretation is that unless the phrase rd
aroixeia tov xbapov (v. 8) refers to angels there is no hint in this
Epistle that St Paul regards rds dpxds Kal rds i^ovalas as evil. On
the contrary, in i. 16 and v. 10 it is somewhat clearly implied that
they are good, or at least may include the good, and this is confirmed
by dyyiXav in v. 18.
(b) The dpxal and the il-ovalai are spiritual beings generally.
(a) Possibly, but improbably, there is a specific reference to
the angels as God's means of communication with the world before
the Incarnation, especially at the giving of the Law (Gal. iii. 19, cf.
Acts vii. 53), which presumably is regarded as a xei-pbypatpov in
troduced by them. In contrast to that, God "divested Himself of
angelic mediation " in the Atonement. Angels are thus discredited.
This would give an intelligible meaning but would seem to require
" God " as the subject of direKS. There appears to be no evidence of
a belief that angels worked by means of the Law and precept and
thus, as it were, held men in their grip, or the passage might mean
that Christ by freeing Himself, and us, from any such grip showed
His superiority to them.
(§) More probably they represent the spiritual powers that
attended on Christ to help Him, as, in accordance with Jewish
belief, they helped all who tried to do right. The thought will then
be that in the final scene He stripped Himself of these His usual at
tendants. He thus showed up these Powers, to whom the Colossians
were bid submit by the false teachers, as wholly unnecessary and use
less. Even on the Cross Christ could do without them. So far from
availing Himself of them He drew them, as He drew Christian meii
(2 Cor. ii. 14), even in His train.

2 16] NOTES 101
ISeiyuaTio-ev, "made a show of them," " displayed them," Matt. i. 19
only, in the Greek Bible.
It does not=make an example (" exemplum de illis dedit," Aug.
loc. cit.), which is rrapaSeiyparl^a, Matt. i. 19, Text. Bee. ; Heb. vi. 6+ ;
Num. xxv. 4. Apparently here it = showed them in their true character.
ev irapprjo-Ca. The exact phrase only in John vii. 4, xvi. 29. Cf.
Wisd. v. 1. It probably = with freedom of speech, and hardly so loses
its proper force as to merely = openly. Translate perhaps " without
reserve." It is probably to be taken closely with iSeiypdnaev , and
expresses the free and unreserved character of Christ's action in
displaying them.
6piapPevo-as, " leading them in triumph." So also 2 Cor. ii. 14+,
rip 5^ Betp xaPts T(P TrdproTe dpiapfiebovri vpds iv rip xPLffTV' Similarly
Lightfoot quotes Plutarch, of persons being led as captives in the
formal " triumphs " given to victorious generals, as saying, toCtoi'
AlplXios iBpidpfievae and fiaaiXe'is i8pidp.(3evae. Cf. however Field,
Otium Norv. ni. on 2 Cor.
avrovs. The masculine definitely regards the dpxai and i^ovalai as
persons. It is probably to be joined only with Bpiapfteiaas.
ev avTu, " in it." See notes on Textual Criticism.
(a) Not rd xei-p8ypatpov, which has been left long since.
(6) Nor Christ, either by regarding God as the subject of the
verbs (which is improbable, vide supra), or as referring to Him even
though He is the subject ; cf. note on els airbv, i. 20. Cf. G, iv iavrip,
Vulg. in semetipso, followed by Wyclif, Tyudale, " in his awne per-
sone," and the margin of the A.V. "in himself." For this adds but
little to the thought of the passage.
(c) It doubtless refers to the Cross, the thought of which has
been passing under the whole verse and now reappears. Observe the
collocation of ai>rous with iv airip. Even on His Cross, the very
weakest point in His whole earthly existence (2 Cor. xiii. 4), He
showed Himself far superior to all angelic beings. " The convict's
gibbet is the victor's car" (Lightfoot).
16  19. Practical application of vv. 6 — 15 and more especially
vv. 9 — 15.
You have everything in Christ (v. 10), and have been joined to
Him in all His redemptive acts (vv. XX — 13). He has too cancelled
the ceremonial law, doing away with the law itself (v. 14), and has
shown the relative uselessness of spiritual beings (v. 15)— therefore be
not dependent on human criticism as regards ritual rules (vv. 16, 17),
or by worship of spiritual powers have less direct relation to Christ
and so be injured in your growth (vv. 18, 19).

102 COLOSSIANS [2 16
(v. 16) When all this has been done in you and for you you may
disregard the criticism of any person whatever in matters of Jewish
dietary laws and holy seasons ; (v. 17) for all these are in themselves
unsubstantial and only indicate the coming of what they represent —
to mind them is to grasp the shadow and lose the substance, which is
to be found only in Christ, (v. 18) I say " Christ" ; disregard any
decision made against you by one who takes pleasure in so-called
" humility " and cult of the angels, exploring, as he does, the
meaning of his visions, puffed up without any due cause by his
intellect, which (whatever he may suppose) is governed by his flesh ;
(». 19) slackening too, as he does, his hold on the Head, from whom
the whole body of believers (all of whom have their necessary function
in the body just as in a physical body bands and sinews are needful
for vital supply and union) grows with growth from God and in
conformity with His will.
16. o5v refers at least as far hack as v. 9, but with special stress
on vv. 14, 15 ; cf. ovv, v. 6, note, el roioirav TervTrJxare, tpval, rl tois
pixpois iirevBivovs iavrovs iroieire ; Chrys.
prj...Tis, cf. v. 8. Anyone, whatever his position, or whatever his
supposed claims ; more deictic than pvSeis (v. 18).
{ipds KpiveTu. Let no one continue to judge; implying that some
one is doing so. Observe that St Paul takes a far wider view than
that of forbidding the observance of dietary laws and of festival
seasons. He leaves the matter free for the individual person. What
he says is that the observance (or, by implication, non-observance) is
not to form a basis for any one to sit in judgment on the Colossians.
So at length in Rom. xiv. 3 — 23 ; cf. 1 Cor. viii. 8, x. 29.
iv Ppuo-ei, "in eating." For St Paul always carefully distinguishes
pp&ois from pp&pa: cf. Rom. xiv. 17; Heb. ix. 10. Contrast John
iv. 32, vi. 27, 55.
The dietary laws formed, and still form , a very important part of
Judaism. For the Pentateuch see Lev. xi. || Deut. xiv. 3 — 21, and
for the way in which pious Jews abstained, in consequence, from food
provided by heathen see Dan. i. 8, 12; Tob. i. 10 — 12; Judith x. 5,
xii. 2, 19; Esth. Add. xiv. 17; 2 Mac. v. 27. For the practice in N.T.
times see e.g. Acts x. 14, xi. 3 ; cf. Mark vii. 2. But it is probable
that among the Colossians a still stronger form of the question arose
in the form of frequent or stringent fasting, see on v. 23.
Kal ev irdo-ei. See notes on Textual Criticism.
Similarly St Paul means by irbais the action of drinking, not the
thing drunk ; contrast 1 Cor. x. 4.
Although laws forbidding drink are only for special circumstances

2 16] NOTES 103
according to the Pentateuch (Lev. x. 9, xi. 34, 36; Num. vi. 3), yet in
passages quoted in the last note from Daniel, Judith, and Esther
Add. , heathen wine was refused as well as solid food ; and in post-
Biblical times, and presumably at least as early as the time of St Paul
(of. Matt, xxiii. 24), strict laws about drink have been framed.
The prohibition against eating meat with milk by a deduction from
Ex. xxiii. 19 || xxxiv. 26, and Deut. xiv. 21, is perhaps the most notice
able example. For elaborate rules on the subject see the Jewish
Encyclopaedia, s.v. "Milk." But wine also was forbidden if there was
any suspicion of its being connected with idolatrous usage, and "even
after the practice of idolatry lapsed, these prohibitions remained in
force as rabbinic institutions; wherefore the wine of a non- Jew is
forbidden," ibid., s.v. "Dietary Laws," iv. 598.
Lightfoot (Col. p. 104) sees Essene or Gnostic influence in pro
hibitions against drink, rather than Pharisaic or Jewish, but on this
point Hort is right in opposing him (Jud. Christianity, p. 117).
^j ev p^pei. Apparently St Paul here changes from xal to 17 because
he is about to enter on a new group of subjects. But perhaps the
reason is that the sentence is negative ; see Winer, § mi. 6 ; cf. Bom.
iv. 13. Cf. also Blass, § 77. 11.
iv /xepei probably originally denoted the class, the category, but has
become weakened to merely mean "in respect of," so class., to abv
pjpos, " as to thee," Soph., 0. C, 1366. Cf. 2 Cor. iii. 10, ix. 3.
eopTrjs. Since the monthly and weekly holy days are mentioned
immediately after, this doubtless refers to the annual festivals. For
the same gradation, though in reverse order, cf. 1 Chron. xxiii. 31 ;
2 Chron. ii. 3 (4), xxxi. 3 ; also Gal. iv. 10.
-fj veop/nvCas. Here only in N.T. but frequent in LXX. The first
day of the month, Num. x. 10, xxviii. 11, i.e. the first day that the
new moon was seen. For its importance in O.T. times see Amos
viii. 5; Hosea ii. 11; Isa. i. 13, and Ezek. often, e.g. xxvi. 1. For
its observance in post-Biblical times see Isr. Abrahams in Hastings,
D. B. in. 522.
ij o-appdrov, " or of a sabbath day."
The Aramaic Shabbtha' N03B', fern. sing. (Dalman, Gram. 1894,
p. 126, and Lexicon, s.v.), was transliterated into Greek as adBBara
and declined as a plural, a singular adBBarov, e.g. John v. 9, being
even formed from it.
In Acts xvii. 2, iirl adBBara rpla, it has a plural meaning, but every
where else, probably, in the N.T. still the singular, e.g. Mark i. 21,
where see Swete. Cf. Jos. Antt. I. i. 1, -hpets axoXr)v dirb t&v irbvav
xard ravrnv ayopev rr/v vpipav irpoaayopeiovres airrpi adBBara,' SrjXoi Si

io4 COLOSSIANS [2 16—
dvdiravaiv xard tt)v 'EBpalav SidXeKrov roilvopia, and for a curious com
bination of the two forms, in. vi. 6, ev Tip xaXovpiva btp' vp&v 2a£-
Bdrtf ti)v ydp iBSbpvv vpipav AdBBara xaXovpev.
Observe (1) Of the five points mentioned, adBBara referred to exclusively
Jewish days, and, so far as we know, veopvvia also. Presumably
therefore St Paul was thinking only of Jewish customs under the first
three heads as well.
(2) The principle of St Paul's "loosing" these laws has a wide
application, not only to purely ecclesiastical laws about holy days, but
even to the quasi-Biblical laws of fasting and the Sunday. The latter
indeed is far the more important point, for the observance of a day
of rest is certainly pre-Mosaic, and is indirectly enjoined in Gen. ii.,
besides being included in the entirely moral code of the Ten Com
mandments. The logical deduction from St Paul's words would
appear to be that to observe the Sunday solely for the reason that it
is enjoined upon us (i.e. in the fourth commandment by a legitimate
adaptation of the language) is to fall back to the position from which
he was trying to keep the Colossians. But to observe it from other
motives, e.g. the desire to glorify God and to make the best use of our
time and to preserve to others the religious privileges that we possess,
agrees completely with the liberty of the Christian. In these days of
disregard of God's will generally it is very hard to understand how a
religious person can do anything to relax the religious observance of
the Sunday. See Origen, c. Cels. vni. 21 — 23. Compare also Bom.
xiv. 5; Gal. iv. 10, 11. For a convenient summary of Talmudic
laws on the Sabbath see Edersheim's Life and Times, n. Append.
XVII. 17. A reason why these things should not be objects of scrupulous
anxiety on the part of the Colossians.
d. The plural most naturally refers to the five points in v. 16
considered singly, for even the dietary laws served as a preparation
for higher things, and thus may be fairly included under mcid.
The singular would consider the five points as one whole.
io-nv. Not temporal (Meyer) but expressing the abstract nature of
the things, rjv would have implied that they had absolutely ceased
as facts, which of course they had not. Similarly Rom. v. 14, 'ASdp,
8s iari riiros rov piXXovros.
o-Kid. Meyer says rightly "not an outline (axiaypatpla, axiaypatpvpa),
as in the case of painters, who ' non exprimunt primo ductu imaginem
vivis coloribuB et eixovixws, sed rudes et obscuras lineas primum ex
carbone ducunt,' Calvin." For the contrast to a sketch would be at

2 17] NOTES 105
least eixiiv (cf. Heb. x. 1) not aapa. It is properly a shadow, which
indeed gives a certain representation but has in aud by itself no in
dependent existence, nothing real and substantial. The term thus
indicates (a) the futility of these five things considered in and for
themselves, and yet also (6) the reality of something which is repre
sented by them. Thus the suggestion is that if the Colossians have
scruples about these five things they are grasping at the shadow and
forgetting, and therefore losing, the substance.
For a probably similar use of o-Kid cf. Heb. x. 1 and viii. 5.
tov peXXdvruv, "of the things to come," i.e. from the point of
time when the five things were enjoined. The things that were
"future from the standpoint of the Law." So also in Rom. v. 14;
Heb. x. 1, vi. 5 ; cf. also Heb. ix. 8, 9.
Observe (1) possibly St Paul intended to represent rd piXXovra as
throwing a shadow in front of them, so that naturally when they
came up the shadow would pass away. But this is probably an over-
refinement of his metaphor. (2) To understand t&v peXXbvrav of
things still future to Christian times, i.e. of the perfected Messianic
Kingdom, is not only against the general usage of the phrase, but
would apparently nullify St Paul's argument, for the aKid has con
fessedly been useful, and there is then nothing to show that its utility
is over. Hence the Colossians may as well observe it. But St Paul's
argument is that they ought not to do so, or at least that they cannot
be criticised for not doing so.
Td 8e o-upa. In contrast to axid, a&p.a is the substance, the reality.
Cf. Jos. B. J. 11. ii. 5, where Antipater accuses Archelaus at Borne
of having come thither to ask for the kingdom only after having in
fact exercised royal authority, but vvv tJkci irapd rov Seairbrov aKidv
airnabpevos BaaiXelas, r)s rjpiraaev iavrip rb a&pa, Kal iroiav oi rav
irpaypdrav dXXd rav bvopdrav Kipiov Kaiaapa.
So guph, lit. body, is often used in post-Biblical Hebrew as = sub
stance, essential part, e.g. Talm. Jer. Ber. 1. 8 (p. 3C middle), " The
ten commandments are the essential part of the Sbema (guphah shel
shma')." Compare Mishna Pesachim, x. 3 in contrast to the Talmudic
and present custom of only bringing symbols at the Passover Feast
" in the sanctuary they used to bring before him (the person eating)
the very substance of the Passover," i.e. the actual lamb itself
(nDB bv 1S1J VJS-> D'KUO VT\ BHplMD-
There appears to be here no thought whatever of aapa as a, body,
either as being the organised sum of rav peXXbvmv, or as referring in
any way to the Church (i. 18). Through insisting on this last
reference persons mentioned by Chrysostom, without disapproval,

106 COLOSSIANS [2 17—
took to Si aupa tov xp^rov m apposition to ipds in the following
verse, explaining it evidently as Augustine himself explains it (with
out any hint that he finds more difficulty in it than in the rest of the
chapter) , Corpus autem Christi nemo vos convincat : turpe est, inquit,
et nimis incongruum, et a generositate vestrae libertatis alienum, ut
cum sitis corpus Christi, seducamini umbris, et convinci videamini
veluti peccantes, si haec observare negligitis (Ep. 149 § 27, Migne n.
p. 641). The same division is found in ABP aethiop., but it is utterly
improbable. tov xPl<rT°v. (1) The genitive is hardly of apposition (e.g. Bom.
iv. 11). If so it would mean that the reality to which the O.T.
pointed is Christ, Christ in His various aspects according to each type.
But 6 xpiarbs would have been more natural.
(2) It is probably possessive. The reality has to do with Christ,
coming from Him and belonging to Him. Each type points to some
thing brought about by Christ. " 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." (Lightfoot).
Thus the Christian man, as such, receives from Christ, and not
from any other, the reality of which those five points (v. 16) were but
a shadow. 18. pi|Sels. Contrast pij ns, v. 16, note.
vpds KaTappaPeveVoT. An extremely rare word occurring here only
in the Greek Bible, and only twice in profane literature (vide infra).
(1) The compound rrapaBpaBeia is said to = to adjudge »¦ prize
unfairly, and so Chrysostom says of xaraBpaBeieiv here, KaraBpaBev-
Bijval iariv, Srav irap'- iripa piv i) vIkv j), Trap' eripip Si rb BpaBeiov, brav
iirvpedgy vixrjaas (quaudo cum viceris, fraude laederis). But xaraB.
would then probably = to adjudge a prize wrongly, and with hostile
intent to the person injured. Lightfoot enlarges the reference and
understands it as regarding the false teachers simply as persons
frustrating those who otherwise would have won the prize, translating
it with the B.V., "rob you of your prize," the prize being eternal life.
(2) There is indeed " no doubt that the judge who assigned the
prizes at the games was technically called BpaBeis or BpaBevrijs, and
the prize itself BpaBeiov (X Cor. ix. 24 ; Phil. iii. 14+). Hence BpaBeietv
would properly signify to act as BpaBeis or umpire, and award the
prize to the most meritorious candidate. But it so happens that in
the examples that we have of this verb and its compounds, the prize
itself never comes into view, but only the award or decision, and that
not so much in its proper agonistical, as in an applied and general

2 18] NOTES 107
sense" (Field, Otium Norvicense, ed. 1899). Cf. BpaBeieiv, iii. 15+,
Kal i) elp-fivv toO XP- BpaBeviru ev rats xapSiais bp&v, and Wisd. x. 12+,
of Wisdom protecting Jacob, Kal dy&va laxvpbv iBpdBevaev airip, "and
over his sore conflict she watched as judge," B.V.
(3) Hence, if it had not been for the analogy of irapaBpaBeia,
xaraBpaBeiw would naturally mean merely "decide against" without
any necessary connotation of unfairness or of special reference to the
prize. And this in fact is the meaning of it in the only two places in
which it occurs, viz. Eustath. on II. A. 402 sqq. (T. 1. p. 124, 2 ed.
Bom.), and Demosth. c. Mid. p. 544; see Field, loc. cit.
This meaning, "condemn," is that of the Syriao both Pesh. and
Hard., and suits the parallelism of v. 16, pi) ovv ris ipds xpivira. It
is only somewhat stronger. "Let no man judge you... let no one
condemn you."
6eXuv. The construction is very uncertain.
(1) We may take it absolutely, "Let no one condemn you,
willingly and gladly, in," etc. Cf. 2 Pet. iii. 5, XavBdvei ydp abrobs
tovto BiXovras, "For this they wilfully fail to see."
(2) We may understand with it some such phrase as touto
iroieiv, or xaraBpaBeieiv vpds. So Ellicott.
But against both (1) and (2) it may reasonably be urged that the
attitude of the false teachers towards the Colossians seems to come
nowhere into consideration.
(3) We may take it closely with iv, by a Hebraism which is found
fairly often in the O.T., generally indeed with a personal object (e.g.
1 Chron. xxviii. 4, ev ipoi vBiXvaev) ; but twice of things, Ps. cxi.
(cxii.) 1, iv tois ivroXais airov BiXet atpbSpa; cxlvi. (cxlvii.) 10, ovk iv
ttj Swaarela rov tirirov BeXrjaei ; cf. Test. XII. Patr., Asher X, idv oiv
i) \jnixi] BiX-g iv xaXip. It thus = " taking pleasure in " raireivotpp. So
Lightfoot. This gives an admirable sense, and serves to introduce the following
participles, which indeed appear to need some such link. But it is an
objection of some weight that this Hebraism occurs here only in the
N.T. (see W.H. Append, in loc). It also destroys the parallelism of
form between p.r\ olv ris bpas Kpivira iv and pv^els bpas xaraBpaBevira. . .
iv. Yet on the whole this is perhaps the best construction to adopt.
ev Taireivo<ppoo-vvij, " in humility."
The substantive raireivotppoaivv occurs only in the N.T. (Acts xx.
19 ; Eph. iv. 2 ; Phil. ii. 3 ; 1 Pet. v. 5, v. 23 and iii. 12+), clearly in
a good sense always except here and v. 23.
So in itself even here, and v. 23. Perhaps it was a word often on
the lips of the false teachers.

108 COLOSSIANS [2 18
But the context indicates that the humility which they desired was
misplaced. Man is not intended to humble himself in such a way
that he proceeds to worship the angels. " I can speak more safely,"
says an early author, "and more cheerfully to my Jesus, than to any
of the holy spirits of God," tutius et jucundius loquor ad meum
Jesum, quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum, De Vis. infirm, ii. § 2
in Augustine's works, Appendix, Migne vii. p. 1153 (quoted by
Davenant). The adjective raireivbtppav occurs in 1 Pet. iii. 8+ and Prov. xxix.
23+, also in a good sense. So also the verb rawetvotppoveiv in the only
place in which it is found in the Greek Bible, Ps. cxxx. (cxxxi.) 2, and
in Sym. Job xxii. 29.
Precisely the same thought of raireivotppoaivv being necessary for
understanding visions is found in Hermas, Vis. in. x. 6. Hermas on
asking to know the meaning of the revelation of the Church in three
fold form is told by her iratra iparvais raireivotppoaivvs XPV^1' vrjareu-
aov obv, Kal Xrjptpi], 8 aireis irapd rov Kvpiov.
Also notice that after one day of fasting a young man appears to
him in the night, and warns him against injuring his flesh by too
much desire after revelations. *
Kal 6pT]o-KeCa, "and cult." BpvaKela occurs in the N.T. elsewhere
only in Acts xxvi. 5 and Jas. i. 26, 27. It is not found in the LXX.
of the Canouical books, but only in Wisd. xiv. 18, 27 ; Ecclus. xxii.
5 (A) ; 4 Mac. v. 6, 13, and three times in the Symmachus fragments.
Cf. iBeXoSpvada, v. 23+; Bprjaxos, Jas. i. 26, 27 (supra)+; and Bpv-
axeieiv, Wisd. xi. 15, xiv. 16+.
It = the external, sensuous side of religion, worship qua form.
Trench, Synon. § xlviii. quotes from Philo (Quod Det. Pot. Ins. 7.
§§ 20, 21, Wendland, i. 195), saying that "Having repelled such as
would fain be counted among the eiaeBeis on the score of divers
washings, or costly offerings to the temple, he proceeds: TreTrXdvTjTai
yap xal ovros rijs irpbs evaiBeiav bSoii, dpvaxelav dvrl baibrvros ijyoi-
pevos," i.e. as Hatch translates it "with heart set on external obser
vances instead of on holiness" (Biblical Greek, p. 56). Hatch sets
out the various passages where BpvaKela occurs (e.g. in Josephus) in a
very convenient form. Cf. too Mayor on James. From Lightfoot's
quotation from Plutarch, Vit. Alex. 2, Soxei Kal rb BpvaKeieiv Svopa
rais xaraxbpois yevioBai xal irepiipyois lepovpyiais we may suppose that
the substantive as well as the verb would have the connotation
of scrupulosity in " wearisome and elaborate " external rites.
tov ayyiXav. The genitive is surely objective though Zahn and
P. Ewald try to show that it is subjective, and that the clause

2 18] NOTES 109
= mortification and devotion suitable to angels, but not for men who
have bodies.
The article is strange. It shows that the emphasis is not on
angels as such. It may either mean "the angels" generally, or "the
angels " that the false teacher personally worshipped.
On the nature of the angel worship at Colossae, see Introd.
ch. iv.
d edpaxev eppaTevwv, " exploring the things that he hath seen."
On the reading a pi) ibpaxev, see notes on Textual Criticism. ipBa-
reieiv occurs here only in the N.T.
It may mean (a) frequent, haunt; vijaos. ..ijv 6 tpiXbxopos XXdv
ip.Barevei, Aesch. Pers. 449 ; (0) take possession (also classical). To
this the usage of the LXX. is closely akin.
In canonical books of the LXX. only in Josh. xix. 49, 51, Kal
iiropeiBvaav ipBarevaai ttjv yrjv in v. 49, representing nahal, divide
(the land) for a possession, and in v. 51, halleq, divide, or apportion.
In 1 Mac. ipBareieiv els is used of an enemy invading a country
(xii. 25, xiii. 20, xiv. 31, xv. 40), and in 2 Mac. ii. 30 the writer says
rb piv ip.Bareieiv xal irepiirarov iroieiaBai Xbya k. iroXvirpaypoveiv iv
tois Kara pdpos, Tip rijs iaropias dpxvyevirrj xa8rJKei, "to occupy the
ground, and to indulge in long discussions," B.V., where perhaps
"to go into matters" (Rawlinson) is better.
(c) But Chrysostom uses it of God exploring the heart, 6 Tds
aTrdvTwv ipBareiav xapSlas (1. p. 371 e), tov ipBareiovra rais xapSiais
(ix. p. 437 d), and of persons who presume to investigate God's
nature, oi ttjv paxaplav ixeivnv tpiaiv ip-Bareveiv iirixeipovvres (1. p. 472 c).
Similarly Athanasius, roXpvp8v ipBareieiv ri\v direpivbvrov tpiaiv, (1.
p. 152) in Suicer 1. p. 1098, who gives other examples from the Fathers.
So too Hesychius, ipBarevaai — {vrrjaai; and Varinus, ipBarevaai,
iiriBijvat, rd ivSov i^epevvijaai, rj axoirijaai, and there seems to be no
sufficient reason for forsaking this interpretation here. Cf. Field,
Otium Norvicense, 1899. The thought is that the false teacher spends
his time in searching into the meaning of his visions — an error
common to many of the more sensuous forms of religion. Compare
the elaborate explanations given in Hermas, and in Enoch, of the
visions described.
Thus it is not necessary to emend the text, though two conjectures
are historically interesting, (a) iapa or aiiipp xevepBareieiv, "treading
the void in the air," for "though the precise form xevepBareieiv does
not occur, yet it is unobjectionable in itself" (Lightfoot). (b) dipa
xevep-Barebav (C. Taylor) or xevepBar&v, "treading the void of air."
(c) P. Ewald in order to account for the pi) suggests dperpoxevepBa-

no COLOSSIANS [2 18—
reiav or, preferably, dperpa xevepBareiav, "ins Ungemessene Luft-
tritte machend oder auch : masslos ins Leere stechend."
eUfj, "vainly," i.e. "without just cause," Rom. xiii. 4; Prov. xxviii.
25 ; to be taken with tpvaioipevos. It would only weaken ipfiareiuv.
<pvo-iovpevos, "being puffed up," "inflated." Elsewhere only in
1 Cor. (sex.). Cf. 1 Cor. viii. 1, t) yv&ais tpvaidi.
vtto, probably in personification; cf. Mayor on Jas. iii. 4.
tov vods, i.e. the thinking faculty, the intellect, in operation ;
cf. Rom. xii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 14, 15.
ttjs o-apKos ovtov. It ought to have been dominated by the spirit ;
birb aapKiKijs Siavoias, ob lrvevpanKijs' dvBpairivos 6 Xoyiapbs (Chrys.).
Compare Moule on Eph. ii. 3, " This important word [the flesh],
wherever it occurs in the N.T. in connexion with the doctrine of sin,
means human nature as conditioned by the Fall, or, to word it
otherwise, either the state of the unregenerate being, in which state
the sinful principle dominates, or the state of that element of
the regenerate being in which the principle, dislodged, as it were,
from the centre, still lingers and is felt ; not dominant in the being,
but present."
Probably St Paul also bears in mind the claim of the false teachers
to purify themselves by their asceticism from the power of the flesh.
Nay, he says, in reality they are governed by it. If this double inter
pretation be right the ethical and the physical references of adp\ are
both present.
19. Kal ov Kparuv ttJv KecpaX-rjv. Apparently odp£ suggested the
true body to which Christians belong, with its Head. For a fuller
elaboration of the figure of. Eph. iv. 15, 16.
" oil not pi), the negation here becoming direct and objective, and
designed to be specially distinct " (Ell.). Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 8, 9, iv iravrl
BXiBbpevoi dXX' ob arevoxapoipevoi k.t.X. Compare also Moulton, Gram.
Proleg. 1906, pp. 231 sq.
KpaTiSv, " holding fast." So the bride in Cant. iii. 4, iKpdrvaa
abrbv Kal oiK dtpvKa airbv. In Mark vii. 3, 4, 8 ; 2 Thes. ii. 15
it is used of the tenacious grasp of human teaching, evil or good.
The false teachers here combated by St Paul have slackened their
hold on the one and only source of growth, whatever they may them
selves think.
ttjv kbjtoXiJv, see i. 18 and v. 10, notes.
eg oi. Almost certainly masculine, thus interpreting ri)v KetpaXijv
of Christ, as is expressly the case in the parallel, Eph. iv. 15, 16.
Cod. Clarom. and one or two other authorities add xpuriv after
KctpaXrjv. He is the one and only source of supply and so of growth.

2 19] NOTES in
irav with Td o-upa only here and Eph. iv. 16.
St Paul is probably attacking the superior claims of the false
teachers. They profess to be in "the body" indeed, but to have
found a method of growth superior to that available for the oi
iroXXol of Christians. Not so, says St Paul, they are not exempt
from the general law that only from Christ directly all the members
of Christ are nourished.
Sid tov dcpuv k. o-vvSeVpcov, " by the bands and sinews."
dtpi), Eph. iv. 16+, where see J. A. R. He considers that dtprj here
is not derived from dirropai, "touch," but from otttu, "fasten" or
"tie." Thus it is used of a wrestler's grip, e.g. Dion. H., de Dem.
18, tois dSXTjTais ttjs dXvBivijs Xigews laxvpds rds dtpds irpoaeivai Set Kal
dtpvKrobs rds XaBds : and metaphorically of the union of Democritean
atoms, Plut. Moral. 769 f, tois kot' 'ETriKoupoi' atpais Kal TrepiirXoKais.
Further, in the sense of a band or ligament it may have been a
term of ancient physiology, cf. Galen's lexicon of words used by
Hippocrates (Gal. xix. p. 87), atpds' Td dppara irapd to a\j/ai, i.e. bands,
from the verb "to bind." In our passage its close connexion with
the recognised physiological term aivSeap.os would appear to leave no
doubt as to the legitimacy of this interpretation.
Kal o-vvSe'o-pwv. Elsewhere in the N.T. (iii. 14; Eph. iv. 3; Acts
viii. 23+) it = "bond" in a purely metaphorical meaning. But in
Dan. (Theod.) v. 6 as a semi-medical term, Kal oi aivSeap.oi rijs batpios
airov SieXiovro. So in Cant. vii. 2, Aq. (or Sym.) has aivSeapoi,
apparently understanding hammuqe yrehayik (lit. the curved lines of
thy thighs) as meaning the joints or the sinews. So in Eur. Hipp.
199, p-eXiav aivSeapa = sinewB or joints, and in Galen (quoted by
Lightfoot) aivSeapoi are the ligaments properly so called. But it is
hardly probable that St Paul had this more technical and limited
meaning in his mind, if indeed he had heard of it.
eirixopTcyovpevov, "being supplied."
An interesting word. For xopnyeiv instead of meaning " to lead
a chorus" came to mean " defray the cost of bringing out a chorus,"
and hence sometimes " supply freely and bountifully," or even
"supply" and "equip." In Hellenistic Greek the thought of the
Chorus is wholly forgotten, but hardly that of freeness and bountiful-
ness ; cf. 2 Cor. ix. 10 ; also Gal. iii. 5 ; 2 Pet. i. 11 ; Ecclus. xxv. 22 ;
and 3 Mac. vi. 40, eiwxovvro Si irdvB' birb rov BaaiXias x°Pvyo6pevoi.
Aristotle speaks of a&p.a KdXXiora iretpvKos Kai xexopijyvpivov (Pol.
iv. i. 1).
"The force of iirl is not intensive, but directive, pointing to the
accession of the supply" (Ell.).

ii2 COLOSSIANS [2 19—
What is supposed to be supplied by means of the joints and sinews
is not stated. The apostle did not intend his words to be so pressed
as to make him say that nutriment is conveyed to the physical body
directly by such means. Rather he takes these as being the more
evident means of the union of the body — without which it would fall
to pieces — and for this reason the means of its receiving strength.
The latest discussion of the word is in J. A. R. Ephes. iv. 16.
Kal o-vvPiPa£dpevov, "and being compacted," "knit together,"
see v. 2, note.
Of the two participles iirixop. would appear to refer chiefly to atp&v
and avpBiB. to avvSiapav (Beng.). Thus avpBiB. regards especially
the external unity of believers. St Paul could not foresee the
anomaly of Christian communities separated by external organisa
tion, and in any case would have considered such a state of things
a cause of weakness.
ai'gei. For ai^dva cf. i. 6, 10.
Both aflfw and ai^dva are usually intrans. in the N.T. (as here),
e.g. Eph. ii. 21, iv. 15, but not in 2 Cor. ix. 10 ; 1 Cor. iii. 6, 7.
ttjv avf-Tjo-iv. Accus. of the "inner object" or "content" which
generally has, as here, a further definition by means of an adjective
or genitive (see Blass, Gram. § 34. 3) ; cf. Matt. ii. 10.
tov Beov. Primarily increase which comes from God (so probably
even 2 Cor. i. 12) but probably also designating the character of the
true growth. Growth from God, and in conformity with Him, is
only to be obtained by holding fast to Christ.
20 — iii. 4. Transition to the detailed practical directions of the
Epistle (iii. 5— iv. 6). St Paul, first negatively (vv. 20 — 23), and
secondly positively (c. iii. 1 — 4), describes in general terms the right
attitude of the believer to Christ in his daily life. His life is not to
be conducted on the principle urged by the false teachers, submission
to rules (vv. 20 — 23), but on that of directing his attention and will
towards Christ in His risen and ascended state.
(v. 20) If, as I said, you died with Christ, thus completely severing
yourselves with Him from the rudimentary teaching of the world,
why, as though still finding pleasure in the world, are you being
placed under the power of rules, (v. 21) that, for instance, forbid
even the very touching of certain foods, (v. 22) (Though foods as
such — you will remember our Lord's teaching — perish in their very
use !) according to the ordinances and instructions of mere men ?
(v. 23) Rules such as have the credit of wisdom in self-chosen cult
and humility and severity shown to the body, not in anything
honourable (??) — to mere repletion of your flesh I

"2 20] NOTES 113
(iii. 1) If all such rules are useless and you also died with
Christ and were further raised with Christ out of the old life into
the new, make your efforts after the things above where Christ
rightly belongs, and where He now is, seated in the place of honour
and life-giving power, at God's right hand. (v. 2) Fill your mind
and heart with the things above, not with rules that belong to mere
earthly life, (v. 3) for you died (and dead men have no more to do
with earth), and your present true but spiritual life belongs to the
invisible, bound up with Christ, in God. (v. 4) A time will come
when this spiritual life of yours will no longer be hidden. When
Christ (Christ, I repeat), who is our life itself, is publicly made
known, then shall also you with Him — you in your true life with
Him in His — be made known, and that in glory.
20. el. No obv. For the forcible brusqueness cf. v. 8 and con
trast iii. 1,
direfldveTe. As already stated in vv. XX — 13.
Cf. Rom. vi. 8 — 11 where the argument closely resembles our
vv. 20— iii. 4; also 2 Cor. v. 15; Gal. ii. 19.
o-vv Xpiorip. In iii. 3, avv Tip xPiaTV- See on i. 7.
avv, for Christ was, in a sense, under Td aroixeia rov xbapov until
His death, being under law, Gal. iv. 4 ; cf . Gal. iii. 13.
airo. Here only with diroBvijaKeiv. It marks more complete sever
ance than the dative (Rom. vi. 2). Cf. 2 Cor. xi. 3; Rom. vii. 6.
tov o-TOixeCwv tov Koo-pov, see v. 8, note. The rudimentary teach
ing of the world, summed up in law with its rules and ordinances.
tC (Rom. iii. 7, Gal. v. 11), 10s (1 Cor. v. 3), £uvTes, i.e. as if not
dead to the world but still finding energy and pleasure in it. St Paul
could hardly write ovres, even though he said 8re yap i\p.ev iv ttj aapxl,
Bom. vii. 5. For the thought cf. also Gal. vi. 14. Your "life" is
"in God," iii. 3. For f-ijv iv = " finding your interests and pleasures
in," cf. iii. 7.
ev Koo-piu. The absence of the article perhaps accentuates the
contrast to abv Xpiarf, and in any case emphasizes the character of
the xbap.os as compared with anything spiritual.
SoypaTC£eo-6e. Here only in N.T., but with doubtless some refer
ence to tois Sbypaai, v. 14. It occurs occasionally in the Apocrypha,
twice of religious enactments: 2 Mac. a. 8, Judas Maccabaeus and
those with him ^5o7/tdTiirav...TravTl Tip t£v 'XovSaiav iBvei xar' iviavrbv
ayeiv rds Sexdras ripipas; cf. xv. 36.
Whether it is in the passive or in the middle (B.V.) here is very
uncertain, but the former is perhaps preferable as indicating the
strength of the power exerted upon them. In this Epistle not the
non. H

ii4 COLOSSIANS [2 20—
Colossians, as such, but the false teachers are blamed (especially
vv. 18, 19). Efforts were being made to place the Colossians under
the bondage of ritual ordinances. "Paul's question reveals how
inconsistent with their relation to Christ and His death is such
bondage. To try to maintain it, is to try to keep in prison one
whom death has made free" (Beet). The Vulg. translates it as
transitive, " deeernitis," for which there appears to be no parallel,
and to which the context is altogether opposed.
21. Mi) dv/fl prjSe yii<r$ pi]8e 0C7TJS, " Handle not, nor taste, nor
touch." On the force of the aor. subj. in prohibitions, and its infrequency
in St Paul's Epp., see Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 122—126.
The three prohibitions indicate the nature of the Sbypara, and are
on a scale both descending, apparently, in material appropriation
and ascending in religious scrupulosity.
On the relation of airropiai to Biyydvw see Trench, Synon. § xvii.
Apparently foods are the chief object of the prohibition (cf. v. 16),
and it is not impossible that it concerns them exclusively. In this
case " handle" may refer primarily to taking food from the dish as
they still do in the East, " taste " to perhaps eating anything
above the size of an olive, "touch" to even grazing the forbidden
food. Compare Wetstein's quotation from Xen. Cyr. 1. 3. 5, 8rav piv
tov dprov avjfTj, els obSkv ttjv Xefya diroipapevov Srav Si roirav tivos
6C-yTjs9 eiBvs diroKaBaipeis %eipa eis Td xelp8paKrpa.
22. a eariv irdvTa els <|>9opdv ttj diroxpT|o~ei. A parenthesis giving
St Paul's judgment on the things that they are bid avoid. The false
teachers say these must not be even touched and yet in their very
use they perish !
&. The antecedent is readily supplied in the objects of the pre
ceding prohibitions.
eo-Tiv...els, of destination, Acts viii. 20; cf. Bom. xi. 9.
els <p8opdv. Physical dissolution, the present mark on all created
things; Bom. viii. 21.
tt] diroxpTJo-ei, " by their using up."
Here only in the Greek Bible. " The unusual word was chosen
for its expressiveness : the XPV<™ here was an dirbxpv<r^ ; the things
could not be used without rendering them unfit for further use "
(Lightfoot). The dative is of the cause or occasion.
KaTd Ta IvTaXpaTa Kai SiSacrKaXCas tov dv8puir<ov. To be joined
with v. 21, and its preceding question. In this way rav dvBpti-
irav (article probably generic, merely human beings) becomes the
most emphatic part of the clause. Ye died with Christ and receive

2 23] NOTES 115
orders from men I Observe that ivrdXpara *. StSaaKaXtas are under
the one article, Kai SiSaaxaXlas being, apparently, an enlargement
and explanation of ivrdXuara. Of the two words, ivrdXpara (a) lays
more stress on the authority commanding, and (6) refers more to
positive rules ; while SiSaaKaXias suggests instruction and reasons.
It is of even greater interest to notice that the relation of this
verse to our Lord's words in Matt. xv. 9 — 20 (]| Mark vii. 7 — 23)
can hardly be accidental, but suggests knowledge on the part of
St Paul of the incident and sayings recorded in the Gospel narrative.
For (1) both there and here it is » question of insistence on dietary
laws (perhaps the washings in Mark vii. 3 — 5 also include the
thought of pvSi Biyns); (2) The destruction of foods by the natural
processes of their consumption furnishes the same argument as to
their unimportance ; (3) This is connected with the same blame for
being led by the precepts of men based on Isa. xxix. 13.
Observe that in both the Gospel narrative and St Paul use is made
of the LXX. rather than the Hebrew form of the words, but that in
St Paul the LXX. is less modified than in the Gospel narrative (see
Swete on Mark, I.e.).
23. aTiva, " which in fact."
Referring primarily not to rd ivrdXpara k.t.X. but to the precepts
included under SoyparlfeaBe (of which v. 21 is an illustration).
Observe the strict difference between d (v. 22) in its direct and ex
clusive reference to v. 21, and dnva including the whole class of such
rules, and characterising them ; cf. iii. 5, iv. 11. On Sans see Moulton,
Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 91 sq.
eo-Tiv...?xovT°" The periphrastic present, stronger than txei, as
marking "the prevailing character"; cf. 2 Cor. ix. 12; Gal. iv. 24.
Cf. Blass, Gram. § 62. 2; Moulton, op. cit. p. 226. See further on iv
rip.rj tivi.
\6yov. For the phrase X070K ixeiv cf. Hdt. 5. 66, KXeiaBivvs...
Xbyov ixei ttjv XXvdlav dvairelaai, " Cleisthenes has the credit of having
bribed the Pythia."
pev qualifies Xbyov, suggesting that the reputation is in some way
mistaken, but St Paul does not here add the usual Si, which in this
case would directly indicate the imperfection. For a similar sup
pression cf. 1 Thes. ii. 18, where see Lightfoot's note. Chrysostom
says X670V, 017 Sivap.iv, obK dXrjBeiav.
o-o<f>Cas, i. 9, note. Observe that the common Talmudic name for
the Jewish teachers is Hakamim, "the wise." Compare even Jerome
(Ep. ad Algasiam, § 10, Migne, xxn. 1034), "Doctores eorum aotpol,
hoc est sapientes vocantur. Et si quando certis diebus traditkraes
H2

n6 COLOSSIANS [2 23
suas exponunt discipulis suis, solent dicere : oi aotpol Sevrepeiovatv,
h. e. sapientes docent traditiones."
ev, not instrumental, but marking the sphere in which their repu
tation for wisdom was acquired.
e9eXo6pT)o-KCo., " in self-chosen religious service." Here only in the
Greek Bible. On BpvaKela see v. 18.
The prefix e'o'eXo- is found with more than a dozen roots, always
laying stress on the voluntary character of the action suggested, and
sometimes adding the notion of contempt, e.g. iBeXoSovXela, willing
slavery; iBeXoKdKvais, wilful neglect of duty; iBeXoaotpla, would-be-
wisdom ; eBeXoirpbi-evos, one who voluntarily charges himself with the
office of a irpb%evos. Here the suggestion is that the BpvaKela is
gratuitous. The religious ceremonies so gladly and willingly under
taken are, after all, not asked for by the object of them.
Kal TaireivoippocrvVjj, v. 18 note.
[Kal]. See notes on Textual Criticism. If omitted, dtpeibla aiiparos
is a further definition of the two preceding substantives. They in
cluded it as iuseparable from them. If inserted dtp. aiip.. is merely
a further matter in which their reputation was acquired. In any
case dip. aiip. is a very important addition as a transition to the
crushing indictment of the last clause.
doJ>eiSCa o-upaTos, "and severity to the body." R.V. Cf. Arist.
Pol. 5 (8). 11. 31, dtpeiS&s ixeiv iavr&v, "to be unsparing of them
selves." For the thought compare Enoch § 108, 7 — 9 where mention
is made of "those who afflict their bodies, and are (for that) re
compensed by God... who gave over their bodies to torture, and who,
since they came into being, longed not after earthly food" (Greek
not extant). See too Hermas, Vis. iii. 10, where Hermas is warned
that further revelation may injure his flesh.
ovk ev Tip-jj Tivl irpds irXr|o-povTjv ttjs o-apKos. The text is almost
certainly corrupt, the corruption lying probably in the words obx iv
Tiprj rivl, but there is no various reading of importance (except the
addition of et non after rivl in the Latin MS. gigas, see Hort), and no
plausible emendation seems to have been suggested.
It will be best to consider the easier parts of the clause first.
irXiio-povTJv. Here only in N.T. but often in the LXX., generally as
a translation of parts of the root ]}2b "to be satisfied," in the sense
of " satiety." It may have a perfectly good connotation, e.g. Isa. xxx. 23 ;
Judith vii. 21, but more frequently it suggests almost excess, as
perhaps does our "repletion," e.g. Ex. xvi. 3, 8; cf. Ps. lxxvii
(lxxviii.) 25; Hos. xiii. 6; Ezek. xvi. 49; Eccles. v. 11, Sym. t) Si
irXvapovi) toO TrXowiou ovk i$ KaSeiSeiv.

2 23] NOTES 117
Cf. the half technical use of it in Galen, Op. xv. p. 113, as quoted
in Lightfoot, irdvrav eladbrav ob povov larpav dXXd xal r&v dXXav
'BXXtJvwv to ttjs TrXTjo-/iOVT)S Sropa pdXXbv iras iiritpipeiv rais birepBoXais
ttjs avppirpov iroabrqros. Also Philo, De Vit. Cont. § 4 (11. p. 476 sq.),
iaBlovai piv aare pi) ireivyv, irivovai Si aare pi] Siipijv, irXvopov-qv &s
ixBpbv re Kal iirtBovXov \pvxijs xal aiiparos ixrpeirbpevoi (from Wetstein).
So also in our present passage it probably means more than
"satisfying" A.V. and rather "repletion." "Indulgence" R.V. is,
strictly speaking, a paraphrase.
•rijs o-apKds, cf. v. 18, note, a&pa is the bodily organisation, ffdp£
the animal and material side of it in contrast to the spiritual. It is
only the lower part of our nature that receives " repletion."
irpds. Does this mean "against," its neutral sense of "in re
lation to" being defined in a hostile sense by the context? So in
iii. 13, 19; Eph. vi. 11, 12. Cf. John vi. 52. So also many passages
quoted in Lightfoot, e.g. Isocr. Phil. 16 (p. 85), irpos robs BapBdpovs
Xjnjaipov; Arist. H.A. in. 21 (p. 522), avptpipei irpbs rds Siappolas i)
Toiairij pidXtara; Galen, Op. xii. p. 430, avvi8vxav...tpdppaxa irpbs
peobaas rplxas. Our passage contains no such determination of equal
certainty. If it exists at all it must lie in oix iv ti/itj rivl.
ovk ev Tipij Tivl. It may be assumed that rivl agrees with and
depreciates ti/xtj, and cannot be understood as the masculine attached
as an appropriating dative to riprj, "not so that honour accrues to
anyone" (Hofmann, P. Ewald). els rip/qv rivl would have expressed
this without ambiguity. Three interpretations may be considered.
(1) Lightfoot following out, as it appears, suggestions from
seventeenth century writers recorded in Pole's Synopsis, p. 922,
11. 60 — 70, translates "yet not really of any value to remedy
indulgence of the flesh," i.e. their teaching and practice failed in
its chief aim, it was powerless to check indulgence of the flesh. For
this sense of ti/xtj he compares Lucian, Merc. cond. 17, rd xaiva r&v
biroSvpdrav iv ripr) rail xaX iiripieXeia iariv, and Horn. 11. IX. 319,
iv Si lij ripij. But in these examples ripij is hardly "value" but rather
"honour," "estimation." Observe that riprj as = " price" is not
equivalent to "value," 1 Cor. vii. 23 ; Isa. Iv. 1 ; Ps. xliii. (xliv.) 13 ;
Job xxxi. 39.
(2) The whole clause from obK to aapxbs is joined closely to dtpeiblq.
aaparos, expanding it negatively; i.e. the body is treated in an
unsparing way, not in any honour to the satisfaction of the flesh
(viz. the reasonable demands of the body). So apparently Chrysostom
and the later Greek commentators. But this (a) gives irXvapovipi an
improbable meaning (vide supra) ; (b) fails to give sufficient reason

n8 COLOSSIANS [2 23
for the change from a&pa to adpi; (c) is at best a tame conclusion to
what evidently is intended to be a forcible passage.
(3) The iv is regarded as parallel to the preceding iv, the repute
for wisdom is acquired in iBeXoBpvaKltj., etc. , not in anything that is
honourable. And then the Apostle breaks off, contemptuously stating the result
of it all — "for the repletion of the flesh." That is the actual result of
all their trouble and rules — the lower nature is pampered, or as
Hilary the Deacon, i.e. " Ambrosiaster," concisely but bitterly puts
it, "Sagina earnalis sensus, traditio humana est," in his Commentary
to be found in Ambrose's works (vide Bengel who adds "Aurea
sententia. Traditio inflat: sensum coelestem impedit").
This (essentially Meyer) appears to be the best interpretation of
a probably corrupt passage.
Bengel and P. Ewald indeed would take Trpds k.t.X. closely with
iariv at the beginning of the verse, and Alford even with Soypa-
rl^eaBe, v. 20, but either ensuing parenthesis appears exceedingly
improbable. [In this obscure passage it may be permissible to suggest another
interpretation. Paraphrase thus: "which in fact have a specious
look of wisdom (where there is no true wisdom) by the employment
of self -chosen acts of religion and humility (and) by treating the body
with brutality instead of treating it with due respect, with a view to
meeting and providing against over-indulgence of the flesh." The
antithesis is between the "ascetic" view which practically treats the
body as an enemy, and the Pauline view which treats it as a potential
instrument of a righteous life. The object of both methods is to
provide against over-indulgence of the flesh : the former is a specious
but wrong method : the latter by giving the body its due place in the
economy of human nature is really wise and Christian. For this
claim of riprj for the body compare 1 Thes. iv. 4, Bom. i. 24. G. E.]
ADDITIONAL NOTE ON CHAPTEE II. 8.
KaTa to o-Toixeta tov Koo-pov.
I. The word aroixeiov has a remarkable history, as may be seen
from the following summary of its meanings, with the addition of
the earliest undisputed authority in each case. Starting from the
root idea of o-toixos, a row, it means besides the line, i.e. shadow, of
a sundial (Aristoph. ) :
(a) A letter of the alphabet (to p& rb aroixeiov, Plato), the
alphabet, rd OToixeia.

2] NOTES 119
(b) The A, B, C, i.e. the rudiments, or elements of a science.
(c) The material elements of the universe (Plato ; of. Wisd. vii.
17, xix. 18 ; 4 Mao. xii. 13).
(d) The stars and heavenly bodies ; the signs of the Zodiac,
Diog. Laert. 6. 102, rd Si65eKa o-roixeia.
(e) The spiritual powers at the back of these elements, e.g. in
the great Paris magic-papyrus the moon-goddess is aroixeiov dtpBaprov,
and in the K6pTj xbapov of " Hermes Trismegistus " the o-Toixeia come
as gods before the supreme God and make their complaint of the
arrogance of men.
(/) In particular the demons or genii in nature. The Test.
of Solomon (see Introd. p. xxvii.) speaks of " the 36 oroixeia, the
world-rulers (xoapoxparopes) of this darkness " (cf. Eph. vi. 12) who
address Solomon (§ 72).
(g) Tutelary spirits (Byzantine writers). This usage is frequent
in modern Greece, where oroixeio is used of the local spirit of the
threshing-floor, the rock, etc. Observe also that aroixeiba and aroi-
Xelaais are used of magic at least as early as the Byzantine writers.
II. In the N.T. (6) is undoubtedly the meaning in Heb. v. 12,
for oroixeia is defined by the following genitives ; and (c) is almost
necessary for 2 Pet. iii. 10, 12 ; but much discussion has arisen over
the other passages, Gal. iv. 3, 9 and our Col. ii. 8, 20.
(1) It is urged1 that St Paul, either in his own person or by way
of adopting the terminology of his opponents, uses it in the sense of
(/) or at least (e); that he is contrasting these genii or spiritual
powers with Christ ; that in Colossians (with which alone we are
concerned) he says that the false teachers teach in accordance with
these inferior powers (cf. also v. 15) and not in accordance with
Christ. If this be right he is also perhaps contrasting the magical
use of elements with the true Mystery (i. 26 sq.).
The date, however, of the Test, of Solomon is most uncertain, and
failing that we have no clear evidence that aroixeiov possessed this
meaning at all as early as 1st cent. a.d.
(2) The Fathers generally explain the passages in the sense of
(d), thinking either of Gentile adoration of the stars, etc., cf. Augustine,
dicunt omnia sidera partes Jovis esse et omnia vivere atque rationales
animas habere,Z)e Civ. iv. 11, or of the Jewish observance of new moons,
feasts, and Sabbaths regulated by the moon, etc. So Chrysostom.
But to both (1) and (2) there is the serious objection referred to in
the notes.
1 P. Ewald (in loco) adduces this as a striking example of the way in which
Fashion leads even clear-sighted commentators astray.

CHAPTER III.
6. At the end of the verse Text. Rec. adds iirl rois vlobs rijs direiBetas
(from Eph. v. 6) with NAC(D), etc. "In D, however, they are written
(though by the first 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 transcriber" (Lightfoot).
The additional words are omitted by B, Sahid. Clem.-Alex.-MSS.
Cyprian (Ambrst.).
13. KaBiis Kal 6 Kvpios exapCo-aTo vpiv. xipios is read by ABD*G
vulg. xp'ffros by Text. Rec. with K»(vid)'!CDbKLP, etc., Syrr. Egyptt.
Chr. Bebs by X* Apparently xp^rrbs and Bebs are explanatory of
Kvpios. 14. o loriv. So ABCGP. 8s iariv, K*D*. tJtis, Text. Bee. with
S^D^KL, etc. Cf. ii. 17. The feminine is so easy that it gives no
cause for the others. Of them os is easily explicable as an assimila
tion to aivSeapos, whereas 8 is so difficult that it would readily be
altered. 15. t) elpTJVT] tov xPt0T°v. Text. Bee. reads 0eoB with N°CbDcKL,
etc. Chr. Thdrt. Ambrst. Cf. Phil. iv. 7.
ev [evi] o-wpaTi. The numeral is omitted by B 67** sahid.
16. 6 X670S tov xpio"tov. X'BC^GL, etc. vulg. sahid., Syr.Haro1-.
roB Kvpiov, H* memph. Clem. Alex. toC Beov, AC* Thdrt. The fact
that 6 X67. t. xp- is unique doubtless gave rise to the other readings.
21. epeflCJere BDbcK, etc. irapopytfrre is read by NACD*GL from
Eph. vi. 4. (On the Syriac verss. here see Lightfoot, add. note.)
22. cpopovpevoi tov Kvpiov. An apparently unique phrase. Text.
Rec. has the common expression tpoB. rbv Bebv with c^D^K.

1—4. The positive side (see ii. 20, note), both in the reason
adduced (avvvyipBvre) and in the action commanded (rd dva
ivreire), in whicb the only effective method of victory in the holy
life is stated. The vv. thus serve as a, transition to the practical
charges of vv. 5 sqq.

3 1] NOTES

121

1. el, no more suggesting doubt than in ii. 20. It "intro
duces the first member of a conditional syllogism ; of. Rom. v. 15 "
(Ell.). ovv. With special reference to ii. 20 — 23 which included not only
the statement of a false method of victory, but also an appeal based
on the fact that they died with Christ once. But dying with Christ
carries with it the thought of rising with Him, and to this St Paul
now appeals, using a logical argument. The methods of the world
are useless. You died with Christ and you rose with Him. Use
therefore your new position.
Observe that we have a restatement of ii. 11, 12, but from a
different side.
o-vvrrye'p8T|Te, ii. 12. I.e. raised up out of the old life and into full
vigour of a new life, and this not alone but in union with Christ, the
source of life (cf. v. 3).
The aorist points to a definite time, viz. Baptism, see ii. 12, note.
tu xp«rT^. The article takes up the Xpiarbs of ii. 20 (cf. ii. 6,
note). to dvu, "the things above." Whence Christ came; cf. John viii.
23, bp.eh iK r&v Kara tori, iya iK t&v dva eipl. But V. 2 shows that
the force of the plural is more direct here than in the Gospel.
For iva cf. also Gal. iv. 26, tj Si &va 'XepovaaXi)p,.
jT|TeiTe. Implying more normal effort than, e.g., iiriBvpeiTe.
Its complement is ebplaxa, Matt. vii. 7, xiii. 45 sq. Cf. also Phil.
ii. 21, oi Trdvres 7dp to iavr&v fr/Touiriv, oi rd Xpiarov 'Xijaov.
But why does he say ^vreiv at all ? He employs it in direct
command here only, and in indirect only in 1 Cor. x. 24, pvSels to
iavrov ivrelra. Compare the compound phrase in 1 Cor. xiv. 12,
irpbs ttjv oixoSop-hv rijs ixxXvalas fijreiTe iva irepiaaeiirre. See also
x. 33, xiii. 5 ; Phil. h. 21 ; 1 Thes. ii. 6. Presumably the Colossians
had been seeking spiritual victory by false methods, and he would
now show them the true method.
ov d xPl<rr6s eo-riv. It is possible that iariv forms a periphrastic
tense with xaBr/pevos, and if the immediate reference were still to the
superiority of Christ over the angels (who themselves presumably are
in tois dva) this would be the best way of taking it. But St Paul is
now concerned directly with the contrast of rd dva to earthly and
worldly rules, wishing to lead his readers to successful strife with the
"flesh" (ii. 23). His thought therefore is that Christ, with whom
they were raised, is above. Hence it is better to make iariv the full
verb, to which iv Sel-ia r. B. xaB. is appended as an additional, and
glorious, encouragement ; cf. Rom. viii. 34.

122 COLOSSIANS [3 1—
ev 8e£i£ tov fleov Ka9rjpevos, "seated at the right hand of God."
The LXX. of Ps. ex. 1 reads KdBov 4k Se£«3v pov following the Hebrew,
and wherever the N.T. directly quotes the Psalm this reading is retained
(Matt. xxii. 44 || Mark xii. 36 and Luke xx. 42; Acts ii. 34; Heb. i. 13).
But where, as here, merely the fact is stated, with only an indirect
reference to the Psalm, the more natural form is used, Rom. viii. 34 ;
Eph. i. 20; Heb. i. 3, viii. 1, x. 12, xii. 2; 1 Pet. iii. 22t.
The addition of this clause points out the supreme place of power
which He now holds, from which therefore He can supply His people
with all the grace that they require.
Observe also (1) St Paul in Eph. ii. 6 speaks of God having made
believers sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, which
appears to be a development of the thought here. This is promised
in its fulness in Rev. iii. 21.
(2) In Eph. i. 20, 21 he distinctly speaks of the session of Christ
at the right hand of God as the sign of His superiority over all powers.
Similarly also St Peter in 1 Pet. iii. 22 and the author of the Epistle
to the Hebrews, Heb. i. 3 sqq.
2. rd dvu <j>poveiTe. He emphasizes, by repetition, the thought
of rd dva frp-eire but enlarges and deepens it. tppoveiv expresses the
set and purpose of the mind. It "denotes the whole action of the
tppTJv, i.e. of the affections and will as well as of the reason" ( Sanday -
Headlam, on Bom. viii. 5). It therefore distinguishes the spiritual
from the worldly character ; cf. Mark viii. 33 (|| Matt. xvi. 23), where
see, by all means, Dr Swete's note ; Bom. viii. 5. St Paul uses tppoveiv
eight times in Phil., cf. especially ii. 5.
prj to eirl ttjs YT)S. For the phrase see especially i. 20, where
Td iirl t. 7^5 is used, as here, in strict contrast to heavenly things,
but where, unlike our passage, there is no connotation of ethical
inferiority; cf. also v. 5.- This inferiority is clearly expressed in
John iii. 31; cf. also Matt. vi. 19, and Phil. iii. 19.
Most expositors are of opinion that St Paul by this phrase is
speaking quite generally, i.e. of "all things, conditions, and interests,
that belong to the terrestrial," without any reference to the rules of the
false teachers (ii. 20 — 23). But in view of St Paul's habit of dwelling
on a phrase, and using it to pass on to a different but related subject,
it is preferable to regard it as referring primarily to the earthly
methods proposed by the false teachers for combating evil. St Paul
bids his readers to be not taken up with questions of eating, drinking,
and such like, which belong to the earthly life. There is a higher
and better way. But the phrase in itself is so wide that it readily
affords him a. point d'appui from which to pass on to earthly things

3 4] NOTES 123
generally (cf. vv. 3, 4) and in particular to such as are directly op
posed to true religion (vv. 5 sqq.).
3. dira9dvere ydp. To be taken up with things on earth is un
reasonable, for dead men have no more to do with such things. For
the tense cf. ii. 12, 20, notes.
Kal ij £o)ij vpuv. I.e. the life that followed on their death. Therefore
not the future life as such but the real and spiritual life to which
believers have already risen ; cf. v. X, ii. 12, notes.
Ke'xpvrrTai. More like diroKexpvppivos, i. 26, than dirbxpvtpos, ii. 3 (see
notes). For the thought is primarily not that of security but of con
cealment. Your life does not belong to the sphere of the visible (why
then be taken up by the visible ?) but is in God.
"The Apostle's practical aim is to direct the Christian away from
the visible, mechanical, routine of Pharisaic or Essenic observance to
the secrets of holiness which are as invisible to natural sight as is
Christ Himself, in Whom they reside " (Moule).
There seems to be no close parallel to £av...KiKpvirTai. Cf. perhaps
Bev. ii. 17, rov pAwa rov KeKpvppivov.
The perfect of course brings out the abiding state of things, in
contrast to the definite action of dying (direBdvere).
o-vv (ii. 5, 13) t<£ -jfjua-Ta. Not as well as Christ, in the sense that
both believers and Christ have true life in God. But in intimate
fellowship with Christ. Their life is bound up with Christ. He is
invisible, and with Him is their life ; cf. John xiv. 19.
ev Tip 8ei!>. G od is the very antithesis to the material and visible,
and the believer's life is in God ; contrast ii. 20, us f&vres iv
Koaptp. Observe, by the way, the extraordinary rarity of the phrase iv rip
Beip. It seems to occur only here and in Rom. v. 11; 1 John iv. 15, 16
(absolutely); and in Eph. iii. 9; 1 Thes. ii. 2 (with additions);
similarly iv Bey, Rom. ii. 17 ; John iii. 21f ; iv Beip irarpi, X Thes. i. 1 ;
2 Thes. i. 1 ; Jude It.
4. otov d XP10"1^ «pavcpi»9jj k.t.X. The connexion of thought
with v. 3 is as follows : Concealment is necessarily only temporary
(cf. Mark iv. 22) ; a day is coming when Christ will be made known
in His true character and power, i.e. His glory ; but your life is now
concealed with Him ; yes, more than this. He Himself is our life ;
it therefore cannot but be that when He is manifested in glory you
will be also. Observe that this verse not only developes the thought
of xixprnrai, but also by the magnificence of the hope supplies a
further reason against being intent on things of earth. "Haec spes
ahstrahit a terra " (Beng.) ; cf . 1 John iii. 2, 3.

i24 COLOSSIANS [3 4—
oTav. No Si, cf. ii. 20. The very abruptness brings out the hope
more vividly.
d xpio-tos. The fourth time in vv. 1—4. St Paul will do his utmost
to help them to set their thoughts above.
tpavepwBr), i. 26, note.
r\ JioT) ^pwv. " This is an advance on the previous statement, i) tail
vp&v xixpvirrai abv Tip xp^rif, in two respects : (1) It is not enough to
have said that the life is shared with Christ. The Apostle declares
that the life is Christ. Compare 1 John v. 12, d ixav rbv vlbv ixei tt)v
farjv, Ign. Ephes. § 7, iv Bavdra fori; dXT70iKT7 (of Christ), Smyrn. § 4,
'ItjitoDs Xpiarbs rb dXnBivbv ijp&v £rjv ; Ephes. § 3, 'IttitoOs Xpiarbs rb
dSidxpirov ijp&v trjv; Magn. § 1, 'Itto-oD Xpiarov rov Sid iravrbs vp&v tfjv.
(2) For bp&v is substituted i)p&v. The Apostle hastens to include
himself among the recipients of the bounty" (Lightf. ; cf. i. 13, ii. 13).
totc, 1 Cor. xv. 28. "Prius non debemus postulare" (Beng.).
Kal vpets. Here he reverts to the proper form of the argument,
the more readily as he is speaking not of need but of honour.
o-vv avrip. Observe the position of these words, (1) to keep ev
So|tj for final emphasis, (2) to lay stress on the closeness of the relation
of "you" and "Him."
They also take up abv rip xP"rTI? 0I "¦ 3. As surely as your life is
hidden with Christ while He is hidden, so shall you be manifested
with Him when He is manifested ; cf. 1 Thes. iv. 14, 17.
<pavepu>6rjo-eo-8e iv Sof-Tj. See notes on i. 11, 27.
For the thought cf. Rom. viii. 17 ; Phil. iii. 21 ; 2 Thes. ii. 14 ;
Heb. ii. 10; 1 Pet. v. 4, 10. On the nature of the "glory" as regards
believers, see Moule. Even the body shares in it, 1 Cor. xv. 43.
6 — iv. 1. Practical duties.
vv. 5 — 17, in the individual life ;
v. 18 — iv. 1, in the social relations of a household.
5 — 17. The individual life.
vv. 5 — 11. Negatively (together with a general description of the
new life), for sins are inconsistent with the new self.
vv. 12 — 17. Positively, especially love, and knowledge of God's
word, and thanksgiving.
(v. 5) The hidden life which will hereafter be manifested must,
by all logic, take effect now. Put therefore to death your bodies
and their parts, all of which have only to do with earth and are
instruments of sin, thus including immoral actions, and wrong
desires, and greed, for this is idolatry; (v. 6) on account of which
things God's wrath comes down on the ungodly ; (v. 7) and in
these things you too once walked, when you found your interest and

3 5] NOTES 125
pleasure in such things as these ; (v. 8) But, as matters stand with
you now, and in oontrast to your former life, put off as disused
garments all these things, including sins of disposition and speech.
(v. 9) Tell no lies to one another- (lying marks "the old man"), thus
stripping off the old worn-out self together with all the actions that
belong to it ; (v. 10) and putting on the new self, which is maintained
fresh and vigorous with the object of gaining full knowledge (of God
and all that pertains to our relation to Him) with no less a standard
than God's image, in accordance with the original design after which
man was made; (t;. 11) the image in which there do not exist any
differences of either nationality, or ceremonial religion, or culture, or
social standing, but everything means Christ, and in everything
is Christ.
5. vtKpuio-a-e ovv. St Paul here begins the directly "practical"
part of his Epistle, but characteristically (cf. Bom. xii. 1 ; Eph. iv. 1)
joins it to the more doctrinal part by a "therefore." Life is indeed
"hidden," but it is hereafter to be manifested in its true nature, and
must logically be taking effect in the present.
oiv gathers up the logical result of ii. 20 — iii. 4, with probably special
reference to v. 4b, the glorious future. It is inconsistent with this
future to let sins now live in us.
veKpucaTe, "put to death." Cf. Gal. v. 24, and vixpaais in 2 Cor.
iv. 10.
Ta p*Xti Ta eirl ttjs yijs (v. 2). Observe, first, "Our bodies and
all that pertains to them belong to the earth" (Beet); secondly, our
several members which are the instruments of sins are spoken of as
independent agents committing sin. Thus the thought is similar to
our Lord's words, Matt. v. 29, 30. Compare also Rom. vii. 5, 23.
Of course the death is ethical not physical, but it is the physical
limbs that are intended, to which St Paul attributes as it were separate
individualities, rd eVl ttjs yrjs does not differentiate the kind of
members but is a term that excellently suits our members.
There appears to be no reason for thinking that St Paul already
refers to the "old man" v. 9, contrasting the use of the physical limbs
for his earthly purposes with their possible use for Christ.
iropveCav x.r.X. In apposition to rd piXv and giving examples of
the way in which the members work if left to themselves. As included
under the members, as their effects, these sins are of course to be put
to death with them.
Lightfoot puts a colon after 7175 and makes iropveiav k.t.X. "pro
spective accusatives which should be governed directly by some such
word as diroBeaBe" (v. 8). It is true that the contrast between irori

126 COLOSSIANS [3 5—
and vwi has dislocated the sentence in i. 21, cf. 26; cf. Eph. ii. 1 — 5,
but in those examples there is no doubt as to the beginning of the
sentence, whereas here iropveiav would be strangely abrupt. In any
case surely a much stronger term than dirbBeaBe was to be expected
with iropveiav.
iropveCav, aKa9apo-Cav, ird9os, eiri9vpCav KaKir,v. Transition from
the more specific to the more general, in two pairs, the first pair
mentioning actions, the second states of mind, iropvela, fornication,
the common sin, not understood to be a sin, of all heathen peoples.
dxaBapaia, a general term, including all forms of sexual vice, cf.
Eph. v. 3. irdBos, ungovernable desire, see Trench, Synon. § lxxxvii.
iiriBvpta, desire generally, sometimes in a good sense (Phil. i. 23;
1 Thes. ii. 17), and therefore (because St Paul in this of all Epistles
would be the least likely to teach the mortification of all human
desires) defined here as xaxrj. Compare iiriBvpiai aapxixal, X Pet. ii. 11 ;
ai iiriB. (rov aiiparos), Rom. vi. 12, i) iiriB. ttjs aapxbs, X John ii. 16,
and other phrases quoted in Trench, loc. cit.
Kal tt)v irXeove££av tjtis x.t.X. The article is remarkable and its
force is uncertain. (1) Blass, Gram. § 46. 8, says that "the additional
clause tjtis k.t.X. entails its use," and translates "and that prin
cipal vice covetousness." Compare v. 14, rrjv dydirrpi. (2) "The
particles «-ai ttjv show that a new type of sin is introduced with
TrXeove|iav" (Lightfoot), as in Eph. v. 3 the same distinction is
indicated by the change from Kai to ij. (3) Perhaps iropveiav, which
as a concrete action does not so easily take the article, determined
the anarthrous state of dxaBapaia, irdBos, iiriBvpiav KaKi)v, but with
irXeove£la a new and abstract idea is presented and the article comes
readily. (4) Possibly it is nearly parallel to rd p.iXr/ the figure of
which corresponds well to iropvela, etc., but not to TrXeove|ia (apparently
P. Ewald).
In any oase it is most improbable that irXeove£la is regarded as a
species of the general term iwtBvpla, as Meyer-Haupt proposes.
irXeovegCa. Connected with fleshly lusts in Mark vii. 22 ; Rom. i. 29;
Eph. iv. 19, v. 3; 1 Thes. iv. 6; 2 Pet. ii. 3 (perhaps), 14, and
similarly irXeoviKrvs in 1 Cor. v. 10, 11, vi. 10 (perhaps), Eph. v. 5.
Yet nowhere, as it seems, does it directly bear the sense of impurity,
its connexion with this both here and in those passages being probably
due to its representing the second of the two most striking aspects of a
materialistic aim, viz., sexual sin and the undue desire to possess.
Observe that the latter is not necessarily miserliness. irXeove^la
includes all excessive desire to have, whether the object of this be
money, or land, or other means of self-gratification.

3 8] NOTES 127
Lightfoot has many interesting quotations from Jewish and
Christian writers on "the cult of wealth."
tjtis eorlv, "seeing that it is"; cf. Phil. i. 28. More than a relative,
for, by classifying, it adds a reason for the preceding prohibition;
cf. ii. 23, iv. 11.
elSaiXoXaTpCa. By putting the visible before the invisible. For the
connexion of idolatry with TrXeove|(a cf. 1 Cor. v. 11, and esp. Eph.
v. 5. The clause reproduces the thought of our Lord's saying, Matt.
vi. 24.
6. 81' ct, cf. Eph. v. 6.
gpxeTai tj dpyri tov Beov. See notes on Textual Criticism. Not
His feeling or attitude towards sin, but the external manifestation
of that attitude; of. Bom. i. 18, v. 9. This is regarded as coming
with certainty on the ungodly (1 Thes. i. 10), in the final day of
wrath (Rom. ii. 5).
St Paul frequently appends a similar saying to his lists of sins,
Eph. v. 6; Gal. v. 21; 1 Cor. vi. 10. Here it is the more needed
in contrast to the hope of the godly in v. 4. Chrys. says, Sid ttoXXSv
dTnj7a7ev avrois' Sid r&v eiepyeai&v t&v birapl-aa&v, Sid t&v peXXbvrav
i% av dirvXXdyvpev KaK&v.
7. Iv ols. Certainly neuter with the short form of v. 6, and
almost certainly neuter even with the long form, for "irepiirareiv iv is
most commonly used of things, not of persons, especially in this and
the companion epistle, iv. 5; Eph. ii. 2, 10, iv. 17, v. 2" (Lightfoot).
In fact 2 Thes. iii. 11 appears to be the only passage in St Paul's
Epistles where this is not the case, exclusive of course of such phrases
as irepiirareiv iv Xpiartp.
Kal vpeis. In implied distinction from the ungodly among whom
you no longer are.
irepieiraTTJo-aTe, cf. i. 10. irore, i. 21.
o'tc ^JijTe ev tovtois. tovtois neut. emphatic (John ix. 31), and
perhaps contemptuous. For 'crjv iv cf. ii. 20, finding interest and
spending energy in these things, "tanquam in vestro principio,
origine, elemento" (Beng.). Wetstein compares Cicero, Ep. ix. 26,
"Vivas, inquis, in Uteris? Quidquam me aliud agere censes? aut
possem vivere, nisi in literis viverem? "
8. vvvl 8e, see i. 21.
dird8eo-9e. dirorlBeaBai is used of putting off clothing, literally in
Acts vii. 58, and metaphorically in Bom. xiii. 12; Eph. iv. 22 (in
both passages contrasted with ivSieaBai) , also probably in Heb. xii. 1,
and Jas. i. 21. In 1 Pet. ii. 1 Hort (q.v.) thinks that the metaphor
of clothing is not present. In our passage the reference is doubtful,

128 COLOSSIANS [3 8—
but on the whole probable, dvexSvadpevoi (v. 9) apparently carrying
on and further defining the metaphor.
Observe the tense. There is, ideally, to be no half-heartedness,
or any time spent, in such putting off.
Kal vpeis. Probably with a slightly different connotation from v. 7.
"You also" in distinction from what you yourselves once did.
to irdvTa, "them all" (Ell.); cf. i. 16. Primarily "these things,"
of v. 7, but because sins cannot be arranged into separate compartments,
as it were, St Paul proceeds to include under "them all" other sins
of (popularly speaking) a different kind, viz. sins of disposition and
of speech.
dpytjv. Doubtless suggested here by i) bpyi) rov Beov, v. 6, to which
it forms a contrast. For this and the context compare Jas. i. 19 —
21, BpaSvs els dpYTjv, bpyi) ydp dvSpbs Sixdioaivijv Beov ovk ipydferai.
Sib diro9epevoi Trairav pviraplav Kal irepiaaelav KaxCas k.t.X.
8up.ov. Of 607TJ and Bvpibs, bpyi) is the more settled and permanent
feeling, Bvpbs the ebullition and manifestation, which may be but
temporary. So especially Ecclus. xlviii. 10, explaining Malachi's
prophecy of Elijah (iv. 5), 6 Karaypatpels iv iXeypois els xaipois, Koirdaai
bpyi)v Trpo Bvpov (of God, see also Bom. ii. 8). Compare Theodoret
on Ps. lxviii. 25 (lxix. 25), Sid rov Bvp.ov rb Taxu SeSfjXaKe' roiovros ydp
6 Bvpbs' Sid Si ttjs dpyTjs rb iirlpovov ¦ ToiaiJrTj 7ap i) ttjs bpyijs tpiais.
Compare Trench, Synon. § xxxvii.
kokIm, "malice" in the usual sense, "malignity."
pXao-<f>T|pCav, "slander." There can be no thought here of
"blasphemy" against God (Matt. xii. 31), but only of false accusation
against man (Rev. ii. 9). St Paul has the substantive only in two
other of his lists of sins, Eph. iv. 31; 1 Tim. vi. 4, in each case
evidently with the same meaning as here.
alcxpoXo-yCav, "abuse." Here only in the Greek Bible. But
cf. Eph. v. 3, 4, iropveCa Si Kai aKa6apo-Ca Traira tj irXeovetjCa pvSi
bvopa^iaBa iv bpiv, xaBas irpiirei dylois, xal aUrxpoTTjs Kai papoXoyla
rj eirpaireXia. Strictly "turpiloquium," such as ministers to wanton
ness, but if this is its meaning here we should have expected to have
found the word in v. 5. Hence Trench, Synon. § xxxiv., is probably
right in giving to it the wider meaning of abuse generally, quoting
Polybius, e.g. vm. 13. 8, tj Kard r&v tplXav alaxpoXoyla, and xxxi. 10. 4,
alaxpoXoyla xal XoiSopla xard tov BaaiXias. The transition would
be easier in an Oriental land than in our own, for Oriental abuse
is generally foul.
U tov o-TdpoTos vpiSv. Hardly with dirbBeaBe for the phrase cannot
well refer to ipyi),tBvpbs, xaxia. It rather adds a fresh point to

3 9] NOTES 129
alaxpoXoyla, implying that such words ought to be stopped before they
come out of the mouth. It marks, as it were, their final stage.
Cf. Eph. iv. 29.
9. pT] v/evSeo-9e els dXXi|Xovs. That the change to the present tense
suggests that the sin was still existing (cf. Eph. v. 18 mtJ peBiaxeoBe)
see the remarks by J. H. Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 126. The
thought is expressed more fully in Eph. iv. 25.
direKSvo-dpevoi. Compare ii. 15 note, and dirixSvais, ii. 11. The
participle is dependent on /xtj \peiSeaBe. But on the use of participles
in imperatival sentences, see Moulton, op. cit. p. 181. St Paul takes
up the common sin of lying — which heathen, and even those in a
low state of Christian knowledge, hardly reckon as sin — and implies
that it is a specially characteristic mark of "the old man."
The construction of the participles dTreKSuir. and ivSva. is doubtful.
(1) They may state the motive "seeing that ye stripped off."
Compare the thought of ii. 11. (2) They may be, and probably
are, synchronous, "stripping off" (so Lightfoot). In favour of this
are the following considerations (a) the parallel passage, Eph. iv. 22
— 25, is certainly imperative in sense, (b) In v. 12 the imperative
immediately follows. (3) Hofmann and P. Ewald strangely take
dTreKS. as beginning a new period interrupted and resumed in v. 12,
in spite of the ovv there.
On the coincident action of the aorist participle vide supra, ii. 13,
and cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, §§ 339 — 345, and Moulton, Gram. Proleg.
1906, pp. 130 sq.
The participles are in the aorist, because the present would express
a gradual or a repeated action, whereas ideally the action is complete
in' itself and once for all. Even if experience shows that it must
be repeated, yet on each occasion the act should be in itself com
plete. tov iraXaidv. As compared with dpxaios, which has "a suggestion
of nature or original character" (Thayer), TraXai6s thinks only of time
(1 John ii. 7). But in earthly things the old in time becomes worn
out (Matt. ix. 16, 17), and "ready to vanish away" (Heb. viii. 13),
and therefore is a fitting epithet of that which should no longer be
worn by those who have received the new birth.
av9p(mrov. By a curious figure of speech dvBpairos is spoken of as
a vesture. It here almost = character rather than personality. Cf.
Eph. iv. 22, 24, Bom. vi. 6. See Suicer, 1. p. 352. It is "the old
self." There is a similar metaphor in 2 Cor. iv. 16, "ubi Apostolus per
prosopopoeiam ac imaginem fingit, duos homines esse in eodem
col. I

130 COLOSSIANS [3 9—
homine," Suicer, i. p. 351. But there the outer man is the physical,
the inner the spiritual side of our nature.
There can hardly be any reference to the first man Adam, for
vios would then include a reference to the second Adam, Christ. But
Christ is not dvaxaivoipevos els iirlyvaaiv (v. 10).
o-vv Tats irpafjeo-iv ovtov, "together with his doings." In reality,
though not in form, a further definition of rbv iraXaibv dvBpairov ;
the old state with all that this includes ; not merely the old motives
and the prominence of self, but also the various forms of action that
belong to the self-life; cf. Gal. v. 21.
10. Kal evSvo-dpevoi, "and putting on." See note on v. 9.
tov ve"ov. As the unconverted state was described not as a congeries
of separate sinful acts but as a living organism directed by a will,
"the old man," in which "self" determined aB the doings, bo the
state of the Christian is "the new man."
t. viov rbv dv aKO.lv oipevov, cf. Eph. iv. 24, rbv Kaivdv av&pairov,
"of the two words vios and xaivbs, the former relates solely to time,
the other denotes quality also; the one is new as being young, the
other new as being fresh : the one is opposed to long duration, the
other to effeteness" (Lightfoot); cf. Trench, Synon. § lx.
For the thought of "the new man" cf. Dalman, "Just as Paul,
Gal. vi. 15 ; 2 Cor. v. 17 speaks of a Kaivi) Kriais, so, too, Jewish
literature is able to say that God fashions any one into a new creature
(flEHq nn? — fcTfl), Vay. E. 29, 30 ; Pes. Babb. ed. Friedm. 146 b;
Midr. Ps. ii. 9" (Words of Jesus, p. 178).
tov dvaKaivovpevov, "which is being renewed." In contrast to
"putting off" which is done, ideally, once for all, stress is laid on the
continuance of the process of renewal. The new man is perpetually
maintained in vigour and growth. He is thus the very antithesis
to the worn out garment, " the old man." For the similar antithesis
in 2 Cor. iv. 16, the only other passage in the Greek Bible where the
word occurs, see v. 9 note.
For dvamlvaais see Rom. xii. 2, Tit. iii. 5. Compare Trench,
Synon. § xviii.
The force of dvd in the compound may be (1) restoration, as Trench
implies, but not strictly to man's primal state (Calovius), for "this
falls far short of the glorious truth" (Alf.). (2) merely strengthening
the idea of KaivovaBai, emphasizing the contrast to the state that
lately existed. This is perhaps the more probable. Cf. Moulton, op.
cit. p. 112. (3) Possibly dvd suggests that the renewal takes effect
through the series of all the acts that make up the new man.
Plummer (on 2 Cor. iv. 16) suggests that the expressions 6 iaa

3 10] NOTES 131
avBpairos, etc. are of Platonic origin, and points out that " they should
be noted as linking Epistles which are sometimes disputed, as
Ephesians and Colossians, to Epistles whose genuineness is not open
to doubt, as Romans and Corinthians."
els lirC-yvojo-iv. On.e'Trfyvwiris see notes on i. 6, 9.
els marks the final aim of rbv avaKaivoipevov ; cf. ii. 2, and perhaps
2 Pet. i. 8. Contrast in v. 9 the comparatively bald definition "with
his doings," for "the old man" has no future.
Observe that iirlyvaais is here absolute as in Phil. i. 9 (hardly
Rom. i. 28, x. 2), but its exact reference is disputed.
(1) The immediate contrast speaks of solely ethical duties, and
thus iirlyv. may here = practical knowledge in the moral sphere, the
thought being that whereas "the old man" led to a wholly false
perception of duties the result of "the new man" is a wholly right
judgment concerning them.
(2) Yet in view of (a) the fact that St Paul employs iirlyvaais
especially of the knowledge of God; (ty the claim of the false teachers
to supply knowledge ; and (c) the wide suggestion made in xar elKbva
k.t.X., it is surely preferable to see this latter meaning here. The
aim is knowledge, viz. of God, and this knowledge includes all other,
e.g. the knowledge of His will in all the relations of life.
KaT* eiKova tov KTCo-avTos avTov. On elxuv see i. 15, note, and on
xrifu, i. 16.
(1) This difficult phrase is apparently based on Gen. i. 27,
Kar' eUbva Beov iirolvaev airbv, or, as Aq. and Theod. translate, iv
elxbvi Beov ixriaev airrois.
(2) It probably uses the partial likeness of created man to God
as the basis from which to rise to a nobler thought, the final perfect
likeness of the new man to Him.
Thus this final image stands for St Paul as the norm (xard)
according to which the development unto knowledge takes place.
(3) Although it is grammatically possible to join «aTd k.t.X.
solely to iirlyvwaiv (see Winer, § xx. 4) (i.e. a knowledge like God's
knowledge; cf. P. Ewald), yet such a limitation of the elxiiv to
knowledge is in itself improbable, and Eph. iv. 24, rbv xaivbv dvBpairov
rbv Kard Beov KTiaBivra, points to the connexion being chiefly with
rbv avaKaivoipevov.
(4) toO Krlaavros airbv = GotX as such, not Christ, least of all as
Chrysostom quaintly interprets it when, contrasting rbv iraXaibv
dvdpuirov, he says Kar' elKbva Xpiarov. tovto ydp iari, "Kar elKbva rov
Kriaavros airbv," iirel Kal 6 Xpiarbs oi irpbs yijpas ireXeirvaev, dXX' ob'ras
i)v KaXds, us PV^i iariv elireiv. This, of course, is quite consistent 12

i32 COLOSSIANS [3 10—
with the fact that St Paul can elsewhere speak of believers becoming
avppbptpovs rijs elxbvos rov i/ioO airov (Rom. viii. 29). The aorist refers
to the time of the dva7eVvTjtris in Christ; cf. xnaBivra, Eph. iv. 24.
On the improbability of eUiiv here directly referring to Christ
(i. 15), see Lightfoot. Eph. iv. 24 has raTd Biov.
(5) airbv naturally refers to rbv viov (dvBpairov), not to man as
such (Gen. i. 27).
11. oirov. (1) Probably this refers to the eki6v, the image in
which the new man will eventually be. In that future perfected
likeness to God there will be no Greek, etc., but Christ will be all
and in all. (2) Perhaps the direct reference is to the vios dvBpairos
(cf. Matt. xxvi. 57, where the verbal antecedent is Kaidipav), the
state of the new man as such being already opposed to all worldly
distinctions. ovk evi, "there does not exist." ivi (1 Cor. vi. 5 ; Gal. iii. 28 ter;
Jas. i. 17t) "is not a contraction of iveari, but the preposition.. ev,
hi, strengthened by a more vigorous accent, like iiri, irdpa, and used
only with an ellipsis of the substantive verb " (Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 28).
It is stronger than iari, but, in view of 1 Cor. vi. 5, the translation
" there cannot be " (R.V.) would appear to be too forcible.
"EXXr)v koi 'IovSalos. For similar contrasts see Bom. i. 16 ; 1 Cor.
xii. 13 ; Gal. iii. 28. (1) In the other passages 'IouSaios comes first
because the stress is on difference of religion, and the Epistles of the
Second Group had a primary reference to the overweening claims of
Judaism. Here the emphasis on religious distinctions is brought out
by irepiropv Kal aKpoBvaria. Hence we must see in "EXX. x. 'IouS.
chiefly the thought of nationality, and as addressing Colossians St
Paul naturally puts "EXXtjv first. (2) Thus the pairs of words deal
with (a) nationality, (&) pre-Christian religion, (c) culture, (d) social
relationship. Distinctions in all these things have no existence in
the ideal image to which the Christian will be brought.
irepiTopi) Kal aKpoPvo-rCa. In religious matters St Paul naturally
puts first what was to him as a Jew the higher type. Yet "if it is
no advantage to be born a Jew, it is none to become as » Jew ;
compare 1 Cor. vii. 19; Gal. v. 6, vi. 15" (Lightfoot).
pdpPapos, 2kv9t]s. Probably Kai was here omitted because these
two do not, properly, form a contrast. Rather ZkiJStjs is the furthest
type of BdpBapos. Then the Kai having been once omitted it would
not be natural to reintroduce it into the following pair. BdpBapos,
from being the onomatopoeic designation of a man ignorant of the
proper language and speaking only a foreign tongue (Berber is said
to be the same word, but formed independently of Greek, by Egyptians

3 12] NOTES 133
to express non-Egyptian peoples), readily acquired the notion of
uncivilised; cf. dpaBiis Kai BdpBapos, Ar. Nub. 492. See by all
means Lightfoot's note with a noble quotation from Max Muller.
2kv9t]s. While Sym. in Gen. xiv. 1, 9 translates Elam by
aKvB&v (possibly Aq. also in v. 9), and further also in Gen. xiv. 9
Goyim also possibly by aKvB&v (a not unreasonable translation), the
LXX. has the word (besides ZkvB&v ttoXis Beth-Shean) only in
2 Mac. iv. 47, 3 Mac. vii. 5, in each case a synonym for savages.
Compare Jos. c. Ap. ir. 37. It is interesting to notice in Wetstein,
that Polybius, ix. 28, classes Scythians and Galatians together,
and, that we Britons may take our proper position, Cicero, Scythia
and Britain, De Nat. Dear. 11. 34. For details and theories concerning
the Scythians see Schmidt's article in Encycl. Bibl.
SouXos. 4Xev9epos. A distinction always present in every congrega
tion of early Christians, yet abolished for them in Christ. St Paul
would have special pleasure in mentioning this in view of the
accompanying letter to Philemon. On the whole question of slavery
in the early Church see the Introduction to that Epistle. Compare
also, infra, the summary of t;. 22 — iv. 1.
aXXd irdvTa Kal ev irdo-iv Xpiords. Observe the overwhelming
emphasis in the position of XpioT6s. ev iraaiv is probably neuter,
for there is nothing to suggest a change of gender, as there is in
1 Cor. xii. 6, 7, d ivepy&v rd irdvra iv iraaiv. iKdara Si k.t.X.
Observe that " all " hardly expresses the distributive sense of irdvra
and ev iraaiv. Our idiom would be " Christ is everything and in
everything." St Paul says this partly from his enthusiasm of hope
in future perfection ; partly to meet once more the claims of the
false teachers for superiority in their teaching (especially BdpBapos,
T,xiBvs) ; but chiefly to show the inconsistency of any unbecoming
actions towards others. In the true standard of life all such differences
vanish ; every distinction and every relation is satisfied by Christ and
by our common relation to Him.
vv. 12 — 17. The individual life considered positively.
(v. 12) I say put on (for with such an ideal this duty is evident,
and the fact that you have been chosen of God, both consecrated
and beloved, requires it) tender feelings and behaviour towards
others, humility, meekness, patience, (v. 13) bearing the faults and
failings of one another and forgiving each other as too the Lord
forgave you — so, I say, must you. (v. 14) In addition to these put
on love, which binds together all the graces iu perfection, (v. 15) and
let Christ's peace, which you possess, always act as umpire in your
hearts, for it was to inner peace that you were also chosen, and you

i34 COLOSSIANS [3 12
are in fact one body. And, both as result and cause of peace, be
ever more and more thankful, (v. 16) Let Christ's word dwell
within you in abundance and in practical knowledge ; as you teach
and warn each other by holy song, as you express your thanks,
singing in your hearts to God Himself, (v. 17) Do I say "In your
hearts"? Not there alone. Let everything that you do, in word or
in deed, let all things, I say, be done in the name of the Lord Jesus,
giving thanks to your God and Father by means of Him alone.
12. ev8vo-ao-9e. Taking up ivSvadpevoi (v. 10), but applying the
figure to details. Here also is the aorist chosen because the present
would imply an only gradual acceptance of the following virtues (cf.
note on direKSvadpevoi, v. 9).
ovv. Including the argument from direxSvadpevoi, v. 9, but with
special reference (cf. ii. 6, 16, iii. 1, 5) to the immediately preceding
words; i.e. because this active life of godliness is alone consistent
with the ideal set before you.
us. By mentioning their actual state (Eph. v. 8 ; Phm. 16) he
shows the reasonableness of the act commanded".
IkXcktoI tov 9eov. Contrast iKXeKr&v Beov (Rom. viii. 33). Here
toD marks perhaps a slight pause in thought after iKXeKrol, but less
strong than our English " chosen and that of God." St Paul leaves
the thought of the new man and reminds his readers of their having
been chosen by God.
On iKXeKrbs in the N.T. see Lightfoot, and for its relation to the
O.T. see especially Hort on 1 Pet. i. 1 and ii 9, who brings out the
truth that ' ' God's choosing is not for the sake of His chosen alone ;
they are chosen because He has a special ministry for them to perform
towards the surrounding multitude  As is the election of ruler or
priest within Israel for the sake of Israel, such is the election of
Israel for the sake of the whole human race. Such also, still more
clearly and emphatically, is the election of the new Israel. Nor is
the principle of less validity in respect of the individual members of
the new chosen race. Each stone in the spiritual house of God has
its own place to fill, and was chosen by God for that place. Each
member of Christ's spiritual body has its own work to do, and was
chosen by God for that work." So here St Paul evidently employs
this epithet to urge them to greater consistency in their relation to
others. This is not the place to discuss the technical sense of " elect " in
theology. That St Paul used it as meaning more than admission
into the visible Church, and saw in it the actual reception of spiritual
blessings on the part of the " elect," may be inferred from Rom. viii. 33,

3 12] NOTES 135
ris e7KaXeVei Kara ixXexr&v Beov ; Bebs 6 Sixai&v. But he nowhere
seems to say that the ixXeicrol cannot be lost, which is of the essence
of the meaning of the word in Calvin's system. Calvin appears to
have used it in the sense attached to it in the Gospels, e.g.
Matt. xxii. 14. ixXexrbs occurs only here in the third group of the
Epistles. But Eph. i. 4 is somewhat similar in argument, kuBois
iijeXi£aro tjpds iv airrip irpb KaraBoXijs Kbapov, elvai i)pds d-yCovs k.t.X.
ayioi. i. 2, note. This and vyairvpivoi can hardly be (1) vooatives,
for there seems to be uo parallel to such an address (ct. Heb. iii. 1,
dSeXtpol 07101) ; nor (2) substantival expressions to which ixXexrol rov
Beov forms an attribute ; i.e. " as holy and beloved ones elect of God,"
for all the emphasis lies on eVXexroi ; nor (3) certainly predicates
after iKXeicrol, i.e. " chosen of God to be 07. *. vyair.," for there is no
example of such a use of iKXeKrbs. Ct. the infinitive after the verb,
Eph. i. 4. But (4) they are simply fresh epithets unfolding thoughts
included in ekXektoI : and thus strictly speaking subordinate to it,
not co-ordinate; i.e. "chosen, including of course being consecrated
and being loved." Thus 07101 regards the Colossians as set aside for
God's use out of a sinful world, and vyairvpivoi as being the objects
of special divine love. Bengel's note is interesting : " ordo verborum
exquisite respondet ordini rerum : electio aeterna praecedit sanctifi-
cationem in tempore: sanctificati, sentiunt amorem, et imitantur."
But he is surely wrong in his interpretation of vyairvpivoi, St Paul
saying nothing about our realisation of God's love.
Kal. See notes on Textual Criticism.
TJ-yairnpevoi. See note on 07101. Pass, partic. of believers,
1 Thes. i. 4 (e£5oTes, aSeXtpoi TJ-yairqpeVoi ^7r^> \rov\ Beov, ttjv eKXoynv
vp&v) ; 2 Thes. ii. 13 ; Jude If. It indicates ' ' the settlement and
fixity of the Divine love ; on whom He has set His love " (Moule).
It is perhaps not too fanciful to remember that each of the three
epithets is used of Christ (e.g. iKXeKrbs, X Pet. ii. 4 ; 0710s, Mark i. 24 ;
VyairijpJvos, Eph. i. 6). If believers share His privileges, and if
eventually He will be to them everything (v. 11), let them now put
on His virtues.
o-irXd-yxva. Literal, and perhaps in conscious contrast to to piXv
of v. 5. The viscera were considered to be the seat of the emotions,
as "heart" with us. Cf. 1 John iii. 17, Phm. 7, 20. In Phm. 12,
o-TrXdTXva is purely metaphorical. See further Plummer on Luke
i. 78. Strictly a-TrXdTxvo refers to the nobler viscera, "the heart,
lungs, liver, etc., as distinguished from the ivrepa, the lower viscera,
the intestines, e.g. Aesch. Agam. 1221, iruv ivripois re airXdyxva "
(Lightfoot on Phil. i. 8). But in the only two passages in the LXX.

136 COLOSSIANS [3 12—
where it represents a Hebrew word, Pro. xii. 10, xxvi. 22, it has not
this limitation, nor in Aquila and Symmachus, Gen. xliii. 30; Amos
i. 11, nor in Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Isa. lxiii. 15.
olKTippov, sing.f- Apparently a possessive genitive. Contrast Phil.
ii. 1 , and cf . Luke i. 78.
XpT]o-ToTT)Ta, "kindliness," "sweetness" (Bheims in 2 Cor. vi. 6;
cf. Matt. xi. 30). The subst. is used in the N.T. by St Paul only,
e.g. 2 Cor. vi. 6; Gal. v. 22. xp^rbs occurs in the parallel passage
in Eph. iv. 32.
See Trench, Synon. § lxiii., who says it is a grace " pervading
and penetrating the whole nature, mellowing there all which would
have been harsh and austere." oUrippbs may move us to do kind
things but xPV<rr8rvs makes us do them in a kindly way.
Taireivo<ppoo-vvT]V, ii. 18, note. Cf. the list in Eph. iv. 2. Neander,
Plant, i. 483 — 5 (the reference is due to Ell.), has some remarks on
this word all the more valuable from his Jewish experience. He says
e.g. "tott. bears an immediate relation to God alone, and according
to the Pauline views can be transferred to no other being ; men and
created beings in general are not its objects ; for humility is the
sense of dependence on the Creator as such, and places the whole
assemblage of created beings on a level.... Yet he who is rightly
penetrated with the feeling of dependence on God in reference to his
whole existence and conduct, and with the nothingness of everything
human while living only for oneself, will not pride himself in his
abilities, but feel that they are bestowed upon him by God for a
definite object, and must be used in dependence on Him ; in his
intercourse with others, he will bear in mind the defects, the limits,
and imperfection of his own character and abilities, and his dependence,
with that of all other men, on their common Lord."
irpavTT|Ta. Humility leads to meekness, the receptive attitude of
the soul towards another when that other is in a state of activity
towards it. It is exercised primarily towards God, Matt. v. 5, xi. 29,
but, as receiving all things at His hands, issues necessarily in meek
ness towards men. Compare Trench, Synon. § xiii.
paKpoSvpCav. See i. 11, note. "Patience," "forbearance," the
spirit of mind that excludes all irritation at the faults and failings
of others ; cf. 2 Tim. iv. 2.
13. dvexdpevoi dXXrjXuv, " Bearing with one another." Similarly
in || Eph. iv. 2 with the addition ev d7dTTTj. So of Christ (Matt. xvii. 17).
Cf. Acts xviii. 14. So dvoxi of God, Bom. ii. 4, where xpvarbrvs and
paxpoBvpla are also predicated of Him, and iii. 25.
The present poin ts to the continued need of the exercise of paxpoBvpla

3 14] NOTES 137
in this specific form, for, as is implied, we are each in some ways
trying to others.
Kal xapi£dpevoi (ii. 13, note) eavrots. Beng. notes "dvex- in offensis
praesentibus, xaPlt. offensas praeteritas." For we not only tend to
irritate others, but also we all sometimes do positive harm to them.
iavrois perhaps for variety (cf. Blass, Gram. § 48. 9); cf. Eph. iv. 2
with 32, 1 Pet. iv. 9, 10. "But perhaps as though the whole Church
were one person, as it is actually the one Body of Christ, so that
forbearance towards a fellow-Christian is forbearance towards our
selves," Beet ; of. also v. 16. It also readily serves as a transition to
the thought that as Christ forgave us so should we forgive others.
Idv tis irpds Tiva ?xtl l*0ruP1i,'> " cause of complaint." poptprj here
only in the Greek Bible, though found in the poets. " Quarrel,"
A. V., is an archaism, directly from Vulg., "si quis adversus aliquem
habet querelam." Compare the verb in "they were the principal
motives of it, and therefore ought least to quarrel it," The Trans
lators to the Reader (A.V. 1611, 11th paragraph).
Ka9us Kal d Kvpios exapio-axo vpiv. See notes on Textual Criticism.
On xap'f<>A«" see ii. 13, note. 6 xipios almost certainly represents
Christ. Forgiveness is predicated of Christ directly only here, as it
seems, in the Epistles (contrast His claim in the Gospels), yet as
"neither the Father judgeth any man but He hath given all judgment
unto the Son" (John v. 22), His forgiveness is, in its final form,
through the Son, and it is easy to leave out of sight the ultimate
source of forgiveness in the Father and think only of its immediate
source in the Son (cf. Beet). In Eph. iv. 32 the fuller form iB used.
Moule compares Acts v. 31.
ovtos Kal vpeis. For the thought compare the Parable of the
Unmerciful Servant, Matt, xviii. 23 — 35, though there is no evidence
in our passage that St Paul was acquainted with it.
According to the punctuation adopted by WH, a colon after
poptpvv, we are to understand xaP^'Fa<!0e after ipeis, and then of
course a fresh imperative in v. 14. But it is questionable whether
the force of xopifd/jevoi is not carried to the end of v. 13, the words
oiirws koI ipeis being only an emphatic resumption of the vpeis already
included in it; cf. Bengel, "xapii"6/uevoi...Hinc pendet, sic etiam vos."
In this case v. 14 depends grammatically upon ivSiaaaBe (v. 12).
There will then of course be only a comma after poptpijv.
14. eirl irdo-i 8e tovtois. It is tempting to interpret iirl locally
"on all these" (cf. Matt. ix. 16), and if ivSiaaaBe, v. 12 (see last
note) , were not so far off this would perhaps be justifiable. But in view
of Luke iii. 20, irpoaiBvxev xal rovro iwl Trairiv, and Ecclus. xxxvii. 15.

138 COLOSSIANS [3 14
koI err! Train toi)tois SeijBvn 'T^larov (T\\ ^X"^3 00)), it probably = " in
addition to " ; so Blass, Gram. § 43. 3. In any case, of course, a
garment put on in addition to others will be over them. P. Ewald,
however, apparently interprets the phrase as referring to an additional
charge by the Apostle ; in addition to what I have said — Love, etc.
tt)v d.yd.irr\v, i. 4, note. This marks a distinct advance on vv. 12, 13.
For the virtues enumerated there either refer to separate acts, or to
states of mind that have but partial influence on the character.
They can, to some degree at least, be exercised while the heart is
still but coldly affected towards others (cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 3). Therefore
St Paul here demands active love to others which embraces all our
relations towards them ; cf. Bom. xiii. 10.
The addition of the article is due, probably, to its greater importance
than the virtues mentioned in v. 12.
o eo-riv. See notes on Textual Criticism, as also at i. 27, ii. 17.
The neuter cannot refer to the action of "putting on love" (B Weiss),
for this as such is not avvS. r. reXeibrvros, but doubtless refers to
a7dTTTjv, ' ' the antecedent being viewed under an abstract and
generalized aspect " (Ell. ; cf. Meyer). Blass' explanation is hardly
different when he says (Gram. p. 77), " This phrase 8 iari has
become as much a stereotyped formula as the equivalent tout' Iari
(rovriari)." Cf. Eph. v. 5. Barn. xv. 8.
o-vv8eo-pos, ii. 19 ; Acts viii. 23 ; Eph. iv. 3f. In the LXX. it
nowhere refers to clothing. Anarthrous, probably as predicate after
the verb substantive. The article would have implied "the bond
which all recognise as existing," although they may not know that
love is that bond ; cf. Middleton, Gr. Art. in. § 3. 2, cf. 5. Compare
2 Thes. iii. 17. Perhaps it is followed by the article to exclude the
possibility of the TeXeiorijs being a mere quality.
It is hard to determine whether St Paul intended the image to be
that of the outer robe or of the girdle. The former, however,
whether the aroXij of the upper classes or the ipdriov of the traveller
(cf. Hastings' Did. i. 625), could hardly be said to bind anything
together, whereas this is the characteristic of the girdle. This
therefore appears to be the more probable. That fiii'Tj is not used
lies in the wish to express the fact of binding.
To interpret iri>5eir,iios as = aiv8eais, bundle, totality (cf. Ign. Trail.
3, aivSeapov diroarbXuv) suits neither N.T. usage nor the context.
ttjs TeXeidTT)Tos. Heb. vi. If; cf. Ti?Xeios, i. 28, iv. 12.
(1) "Perfection" not "maturity," for the latter is inconsistent
with the image of a bond. (2) Some have supposed that it refers
to the perfection of the community. So, it would appear, the early

3 14] NOTES 139
Western scribe who inserted ivbrvros as a gloss. But we should have
expected some hint that St Paul is passing in thought from the
individual to the community. Such a hint occurs in v. 15", and the
passage is definitely made in v. 15b. (3) Assuming that the perfection
is that of the individual, what is the exact force of the genitive ?
(i) It may be the genitive of apposition. So probably Eph.
iv. 3, iv rip avvSiapup ttjs eipTJvijs. But in our case this would either
(a) make love = bond = perfection, i.e. love itself be perfection,
which, though true in one aspect (Bom. xiii. 8 — 10), is suggested by
nothing in our context ; or (b) it would = love is the bond in which
perfection consists ; but there is then but little force in "bond," for
we should expect to find a clear intimation of what is bound. In
Eph. iv. 3 this is evidently the community.
(ii) It may be the subjective genitive : "love is the bond which
belongs to, is the distinctive feature of perfection " (Ell.) ; or the
genitive of quality, "a perfect bond" (P. Ewald). This is very
similar to (i) (6), and the same objection applies.
(iii) It is probably the objective genitive in one of two senses.
(a) reXeibrvs is a condensed way of expressing the various
graces whose state and interrelation are perfect. Love binds them,
and maintains them bound, in such a way that lacking it they would
cease to have perfection. For such a use of aivSeapos cf. Plato, Rep.
x. 14, p. 616 c, which Chrysostom seems to have known, SiaXtierai
7dp irdvra iKeiva (i.e. v. 12), dv p.i) perd dydirvs yivvrai. irdvra iKeiva
afJnj avatplyyei • birep dv etirjjs dyaBbv, toiJttjs ottoiJo'tjs, obSiv iariv, dXXd
Siappet. Kal 6V rpbirov iirl irXolov, xdv peydXa 7} rd axeiv, rd Si biro£ti-
Jttara pi] tj, obSiv iipeXos k.t.X. The difficulty however is that it gives
to TeXeioTTjs a meaning "which is, no doubt, possible but strained.
(b) A simple explanation, at first sight, is that perfection is
regarded as an abstract quality which love binds on to the virtues.
Love is not perfection but its addition makes all perfect. The force
of aiv in aivSeap.os would then be "binding on perfection with the
virtues." Such is the meaning in avvSia, Heb. xiii. 3f, " as bound
with " the prisoners. But though this interpretation suits reXeiirijs
better, there seems to be no parallel to this use of aivSeapos, which
when followed by a genitive of the object is spoken of as exercising
its conjunctive force on that object.
On the whole (iii) (a) appears to present the least difficulty (cf.
Lightfoot). Before leaving this verse it is proper to notice that it suggests
a curious enquiry as to the language in which St Paul thought.
(1) reXeibrvs mav he expressed in Aramaic' by NfV'IDpB' or

i4o COLOSSIANS [3 U—
t<n.']D'',?ei, which is closely akin to KD^f or tkf, "peace," and
indeed in Syriac often means "peace" (e.g. Pesh. 2 Cor. xiii. 11,
}/n^\'m->n I'sajoJ ]<T1^0, ° »e4s T7> «'>"i7n's rai eipijVTjs).
Hence if St Paul was thinking in Aramaic, " perfection " (in tj. 14)
would readily suggest to him Kal i) elptjvv (in v. 15).
In this connexion it is at least a curious coincidence, if nothing
more, that while in this passage St Paul speaks of "the bond of
perfection," in Eph. iv. 3 the words are "the bond of peace."
Compare for this point especially C. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish
Fathers, i. 19.
(2) If, on the other hand, St Paul thought in Greek, reXeibrvs
may possibly have suggested to him the peculiar word of v. 15,
BpaBevira. For in the Hexaplaric fragments the Thummim of Urim
and Thummim is sometimes represented by TeXeiirijs, either in the
plural, Ex. xxviii. 30, tous tpariapois xal rds reXeibrvras (Aq., Sym.,
Theod.), or the sing., Deut. xxxiii. 8, reXeibrvs aov Kal SiSaxv aov
(Sym.), and the function of the Urim and Thummim appears to have
been precisely that of acting as umpire, i.e. BpaBeieiv ; cf. 1 Sam. xiv.
41, LXX.
15. Kal merely copulative, not " atque ita " (Beng.).
r\ etpTJvr] tov xpio"Tov. See notes on Textual Criticism.
The peace possessed by Christ (elpfjvvv ri\v ipr]v) and given by Him
to His followers (SiSiapi bpiv), John xiv. 27. Not primarily peace
towards others but the rest of the soul that has accepted Christ's
salvation. Hence St Paul at the end of the verse can join to it
thanksgiving. The exact phrase occurs here only, but Phil. iv. 7
approaches it in meaning and effect.
PpaPeveVu, "act as umpire.'' Here only in N.T. For meaning see
note ou KaraBpaBeviru, ii. 18. "Wherever there is a conflict of
motives or impulses or reasons, the peace of Christ must step in and
decide which is to prevail" (Lightfoot).
iv Tals KapSCais vpwv. The addition is necessary to show that St
Paul does not mean that the community is to appeal to the peace of
Christ, but each in his own heart. This reaches further, for "such
settlement of debates there would quite preclude all harsh conflicts in
the community " (Moule).
els rjv Kal eKXT]9Trre. The relative is half causal (cf. i. 18, note), and
the Kai "marks the introduction of an additional motive " (Alf.).
The emphasis is obtained in a different way in 1 Cor. vii. 15.
iv [evi] oriopaTi. . See notes on Textual Criticism.
iv states the result of the call, "into" and now "in" one body.

3 16] NOTES

141

Compare, besides 1 Cor. vii. 15, Gal. i. 6. Eph. iv. 3, 4 illustrates
both this and the connexion of thought in our passage.
If ev aiipari be read St Paul means "in a community," as con
trasted with the merely individual call. If ivl be genuine he em
phasizes the essential oneness of this community ; cf. Bom. xii. 5.
You were called to inner unity and also are in fact in external unity.
Kal evxapio-roi ytvetrie. The connexion is probably as follows :
Your want of love is due in measure to lack of rest in soul, and this
to not realising what has been done for you (cf. i. 12). Thankfulness
has a reflex action on peace in the heart, and on love to others.
eixdpiaros here only in N.T. In the LXX. it is found once,
Prov. xi. 16, in the sense of "winning," "agreeable" (cf. the twofold
meaning of "grateful"). But such a sense here, besides being very
weak, is excluded by the universal use of eixapiareiv and eixapiarla in
the N.T.
16. d Xd-yos tov xP«tov. See notes on Textual Criticism.
As in v. 15 St Paul bade his readers allow the peace of Christ to
decide any conflict of motives, etc., so here he desires that the word of
Christ may dwell in them. Further this indwelling of Christ's word
is closely connected with thanksgiving, of which indeed it is both
cause and effect.
The phrase 6 X670S toO xP'to" is unique, but is so akin to 6 X670S
toO Kvpiov, X Thes. i. 8; 2 Thes. iii. 1, and 6 Xdyos toO Beov, i. 25
(where see note), that the genitive is doubtless subjective as in those
phrases. It is the word uttered by Christ, the revelation that He
brought in speech and act.
evoiKeCTtD. See note on i. 19 (kotouctjo-oi).
ivoixeiv also is used of sin dwelling in St Paul (Rom. vii. 17), of God
dwelling in the believer as in a temple (2 Cor. vi. 16), of " His Spirit "
dwelling in believers (Rom. viii. 11; 2 Tim. i. 14), and of faith
dwelling in Timothy's grandmother and mother (2 Tim. i. 5)t-
The- expression is more personified than 6 Xby. [rov BeOS'] iv bpiv
/level (1 John ii. 14), and more comprehensive than edv...Ta prf/pard
pov iv bpiv peivv (John xv. 7).
ev vpiv. Even though St Paul is about to speak of the oral inter
course that believers are to have with one another, the force of iv is
not to be weakened to mean "in you as a collective body," but must
be taken in its full sense, "in your innermost being." Cf. 0 iariv
Xpiarbs ev vpiv, i. 27.
trXovo-Cus. Cf. Tit. iii. 6, 2 Pet. i. 11.* Here the meaning is, Let
the word be well known by you, and let much of it be well known
by you, so that as you need it there may be abundance of it at your

i42 COLOSSIANS [3 16
disposal. To change the figure, be at home in the Gospel story, and
let it be at home in you, so that it may be always ready for use.
iv irdo-tj o-odiCa. On each part of this phrase see the notes at i. 9.
Commentators are greatly divided upon the question of the refe
rence of these words, whether to the following SiSdaKovres k.t.X., or
to the preceding, i. 28 has been taken to support either way, for
while the phrase there evidently belongs to that which precedes, this
is, in fact, "warning and teaching," which here follows. But Eph.
i. 8, and probably c. i. 9, are in favour of joining it with the preceding
words. The sense then will be that the word of Christ should dwell
in them not only abundantly but in that "knowledge which sees into
the heart of things, which knows them as they really are " (J. A. R.
on Eph. i. 8), and this in every case which requires the exercise of
such knowledge.
SiSdo-KovTes Kal vov9eTovvres- See notes, i. 28.
Observe the loose connexion of these participles with an imperative
having a different subject ; cf. esp. Rom. xii. 9. And see Blass,
Gram. § 79. 10. Cf. Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 180 sqq.
eavTovs, v. 13, note.
v/aXpols, vpvois, ipSais irvevpaTiKais- Cf. Eph. v. 19. " The datives
describe the instruments of the SiSaxv and vovBeaia " (Lightfoot).
Of the three synonyms \paXpbs suggests a musical accompaniment
(cf. the KiBdpai of the Elders in Apoc. v. 8, where see Swete), and
therefore perhaps words composed with special attention to rhythm
and musical cadence, of which the O.T. Psalms and the Songs of
Zechariah, Mary, and perhaps Simeon, are typical examples. Spvos
(here and Eph. v. 19t) suggests praise to God; cf. Heb. ii. 12. ^55tj
on the other hand is a general word, used of secular songs, and there
fore duly limited here by irvevparixv. See further Trench, Synon.
§ lxxviii. Observe (a) The use of hymns and sacred songs would naturally
be taken over by the Christians from the Jews, in whose Prayer-books
sacred songs have always held an important place. For quotations
from Philo see Lightfoot. (6) St Paul is however speaking primarily
of singing not in " Church," but at less formal, and apparently social
meetings. There is nothing in the context to suggest the former.
In order to enter into the meaning of the passage we must suppose
the early Christians to be like persons who have received deep
spiritual blessing at a Mission or in a Revival. Such is the sense
of the greatness of the salvation they have received that all their
thoughts and interests turn to spiritual things, and they readily, and
as it were naturally, speak of them and praise God for His mercies,;

3 16] NOTES 143
and that in more emotional forms than ordinary speech. We indeed
have been accustomed to regard such raptures as abnormal, but
perhaps they are rather the earnest of the full spiritual results here
after to be enjoyed.
ev xaplTl- (1) Probably "in thanksgiving," not exactly "thank
fulness," gratitude, the feeling, but the act of giving thanks, the
utterance itself. So rip S£ 0eip xapis, X Cor. xv. 57 ; 2 Cor. ii. 14 ; cf .
ix. 15 ; Rom. vii. 25. So also probably 1 Cor. x. 30. Cf. also the
var. lect. in Phm. 7. If this interpretation be right the phrase is to
be taken preferably with the preceding words. It then describes the
sphere in which the teaching and warning take place— "by means of
Psalms, hymns, spiritual songs in (your) utterance of praise." The
article, if it had been genuine, would have defined the utterance as
" yours." The following clause then naturally turns to their inmost
feeling. Observe that the phrase indicates the existence of an under
current of thanksgiving that appeared in v. 15 and reappears in v. 17.
(2) Many expositors however, especially those who read iv r%
Xapin, translate "in grace," understanding the article either of the
grace of the Spirit (or the grace brought to them at first, i. 6), or of
the grace that the Colossians enjoyed. But there is nothing in the
context to suggest this special mention of grace, whether it be con
nected with " teaching and warning," or with "singing."
(3) A few have understood xaPL* uere iu the sense of ' ' acceptable-
ness," " sweetness " (cf . iv. 6), joining it either with what precedes
(so Luther, "Lehret und vermahnet euch selbst mit Psalmen und
Lobsangen und geistlichen lieblichen Liedern," and Tyndale, "and
spretuall songes which have favour with them") or with what follows.
So Davenant and Grotius and especially Beiche (quoted by Abbott),
"recte et perspicue ev xap'T1 pSovres ii dicuntur, qui carmina sacra
cantant et modulantur venuste, decore, suaviter, ita ut etiam cul-
tioribus et pulchri sensu praeditis placeant."
But this may be regarded rather as a conceit than a serious inter
pretation ; St Paul was not training a choir.
aSovTts ev Tals KapSCais vpivv. q.8u is found in the N.T., ||Eph.
v. 19 ; Rev. v. 9, xiv. 3, xv. 3 only. Probably it does not, strictly
speaking, qualify SiSdaxovres x.r.X., but adds a fresh and independent
form in which the indwelling of Christ's word shows itself.
ev (1) Perhaps instrumental "singing with your hearts." Such,
apparently, is the meaning of the simple dative in the parallel
passage, Eph. v. 19 ; cf. Judith xvi. 2, $oare rip xvplu iv xvpBdXois. In
that case St Paul lays stress only on the heart-reality of this singing.
(2) But probably local, "singing in your hearts," suggesting not

144 COLOSSIANS [3 16—
only reality but also silence. Observe that if Christ's peace is umpire
there (v. 15) songs will easily arise there.
On xapSiais cf. ii. 2.
t£ 9eu>. In contrast to teaching man by external utterance, as in
the earlier part of the verse. Not rip xvplu (||Eph.), which would have
been ambiguous here. The Father is the final aim of everything,
including praise and thanksgiving, v. 17.
17. Kal irav, " and everything." As he thinks of the song going
up in the heart to God he passes on to the spirit that should animate
the whole life. No detail is to be excluded as common, but each and
all to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus. Parts of this thought
are expressed in v. 23 (tip xvpla), and 1 Cor. x. 31 (els Sb^av Beov).
The construction of irav k.t.X. is probably, to quote Meyer, "the
absolute nominative, placed at the beginning with rhetorical em
phasis, and syntactically independent."
oti idv iroiTJTe. Wider than S e"dv iroirrre, v. 23. Cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 2.
On idv for dv see Blass, Gram. § 65. 7, and in particular Moulton,
Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 42 sq.
Trdvra. (1) This takes up the preceding irav on idv, and regarding
the sense rather than the form is naturally plural.
(2) It is accusative governed by Troieire understood from iroirjre.
Cf. 2 Cor. v. 13 ; Mark xiv. 29. See Blass, Gram. § 81. 1.
ev dvdpaTi KvpCov 'Itjo-ov. The exact phrase appears to occur here
only. (1) It probably means " as representing " Christ. Deissmann,
Bible Studies, pp. 197 sq., quotes a papyrus of 37 a.d. in which
an oath of fealty to the Emperor Caligula taken by the inhabitants
of Assos in Troas is signed by five irpeaBevral, after which group
of names occur the concluding words : oXrives Kal birip ttjs Valov
Kalaapos XeBaarov Teppavixov aarvplas ei^dpevoi Ail XLairiruXlu (sic)
iBvaav rip rijs irSXeus Subpart, i.e. as representing the city. (2) Chry
sostom explains it as in every act calling on Christ for help (ou'tov
KaXfiv BoyBbv).
Observe iv bvop. Kvpiov 'Xvaov. For ev bvbp. xPl<rr°v would not
equally have suggested the personal life of Jesus of Nazareth as our
pattern (cf. St Paul's use of "Jesus" in 2 Cor. iv. 10—14; 1 Thes.
iv. 14), and iv bvbp. 'Xvaov would not have suggested His unique
character and His present claim and power (cf. 2 Cor. iv. 14).
evxapio-TOvvres, i. 3, 12; cf. v. 15.
t£ 9eu iraTpl. Cf. i. 3, note.
Here probably the Fatherhood has no primary reference to Christ
but to the Colossiaus. They are to thank Him who is both God and
Father, the object of all reverence and the source of all love.

3 18] NOTES 145
Si' avTov. Thus this clause means that St Paul will have the
joyful tone of the Colossians' lives (v. 16), and their performance of
every act in Jesus' name, united to conscious reference to God who
gives all, this thanksgiving itself being only acceptable by means of
the Lord Jesus. Cf. Heb. xiii. 15.
18 — iv. 1. The social relations of a household.
vv. 18 — 19. Wives and Husbands.
vv. 20—21. Children and Fathers.
v. 22 — iv. 1. Slaves and Masters.
(v. 18) Wives ! subject yourselves to your husbands, as is, after
all, fitting in the Lord ; (v. 19) Husbands ! Love your wives and be
not severe to them.
(v. 20) Children ! obey your parents in all things, for this complete
obedience is well pleasing in the Lord; (v. 21) Fathers! Be not
exasperating to your children, lest they be discouraged.
(v. 22) Slaves ! obey in all things your earthly lords, not in
acts of eye-service as pleasers of men, but with a simple, single,
aim, fearing the one Lord. (v. 23) Whatever ye do, carry it out
willingly as to the Lord and not men, (v. 24) knowing, as you do,
that from the Lord you shall receive as your due the just recompense
of your inheritance above. The Lord, even Christ, I say, serve.
(v. 25) For, even though you are but slaves, he that does wrong to
his earthly lord shall receive back the wrong he did — the Lord above
makes no distinction, whatever your position or privileges may be.
(iv. 1) Ye lords ! Render on your part justice and fairness to your
slaves, knowing well that you as well as they have a Lord in heaven.
18 — iv. 1. Exhortations to the constituent parts of a Household.
In each case the weaker part is mentioned first, as in || Eph. v. 22 —
vi. 9. Compare 1 Pet. ii. 18 — iii. 7 and contrast 1 Tim. ii. 8 — 15.
The reason why St Paul here goes into such detail is not self-
evident. It has been suggested (1) that he wishes to counteract
any misunderstanding of v. 11, as though he were there proclaiming
a social revolution ; (2) that he wishes to show that whereas the false
teachers urged arbitrary asceticism, he finds that " the daily round,
the common task," supplies all that is needed for the manifestation
of the Christian life. But (3) it is obvious that after the high, not
to say transcendental, description of the basis, and the possibilities,
of life in Christ, which he has given us in cc. i. and ii., it is very
natural that he should point out how this life is to manifest itBelf
in the everyday relations of family life. In v. 13 he has already
given an instance of the way in which Christ is our example and
standard. nor,. E

,46 COLOSSIANS [3 18—
18. al yvvaiKes. On the article and nominative used as the voca
tive see Blass, Gram. § 33. 4. Moulton, op. cit. pp. 70, 235. Cf.
Matt. xi. 26 ; Luke viii. 54. This is the typical form of the vocative
in Hebrew, the article lending itself with special ease to the Hebrew
love of pictorial effect.
•viroTdo-o-eo-9e, " subject yourselves.'' To children and slaves he
says biraKoiere (vv. 20, 22), i.e. obey single commands, but here he
speaks of the general attitude (compare Rom. xiii. 1), consistent with
the natural state of things (1 Cor. xi. 3). Compare virordiriTeirSai of
women in 1 Cor. xiv. 34; Eph. v. 24; Titus ii. 5; 1 Pet. iii. 1.
ws dvrJKev, "as is fitting."
In the N.T. peculiar to this group of Epistles, Eph. v. 4; Phm. 8.
In the LXX. it is used figuratively of " coming up to " and " per
taining to" either persons (1 Mac. x. 42, xi. 35 ter) or a moral
notion (Ecclus. Prol. 1. 9, t&v els iraiSelav xal aotplav dvvxbvrav ;
2 Mac. xiv. 8), and then of coming up to an ideal, i.e. being fit
and suitable in the abstract (1 Mac. x. 40, "and I give every year
15,000 shekels of silver from the king's revenues, dirb r&v rbirav t&v
dvvxbvrav "). This last sense alone occurs in the N.T.
Observe that St Paul uses not the present but the imperfect as
in Eph. v. 4 (d oiK dvijKev, W.H.). " The past tense perhaps implies
an essential a priori obligation " (Lightfoot). Gildersleeve, Gk
Synt. § 220, seems to call such an imperfect the " Imperfect of
Sudden Appreciation of Real State of Affairs." In this case the
sentence would mean, " Submit yourselves to your husbands, which
is, after all, fitting in the Lord."
Iv KvpCip, v. 20, iv. 7= in a life ruled by Christ.
19. oi dvSpes. On the article see v. 18.
d-yairaTe Tds vvvaiKas. The command is enlarged in || Eph. v.
25 — 33 and reasons are added.
In this relation above all others is love the fulfilling of the law.
Kal ptj iriKpaCveo-9e irpos avTas, " and be not severe towards
them." iriKp. is used literally in Apoc. viii. 11, x. 9, 10.
Both according to derivation and according to the use of iriKpla
(see J. A. B. ou Eph. iv. 31), "be not bitter" is a natural and even
here possibly right translation. But with us " bitterness " implies
a deep and generally half-cynical resentment, and the usage of
irixpalva, irapairixpalva in the LXX. is far from being so uniform
as to make this meaning necessary, for they are frequently used
to translate Hebrew words signifying " to be angry," " to provoke "
etc., e.g. Ex. xvi. 20; Jer. xxxix. (xxxii.) 32; Deut. xxxii. 16 (irapairiKp.

3 21] NOTES 147
B, hxirtxp. A). Perhaps " be not cross " or " be not severe " would meet
the oase best. Cf. Jos. Antt. v. vii. 1, Abimeleoh acts tyrannically
TrpSs toi>s tou SiKaiov Trpoio-Ta/aevous eKTriKpaivi/ievos.
20. Td Te'Kva. || Eph. vi. 1 — 3.
viraKovere, v. 22. See note on iSTTOTdo-ireir0e, v. 18.
tois Yovevo-iv. In contrast to a mark of the ungodly ^oveDiriv
dTreiSeis) both then, Bom. i. 30, and in the last days, 2 Tim. iii. 2.
KOTd irdvTa. Emphatic. Such a case as that contemplated in
Matt. x. 35 — 37 || Luke xii. 53 would not exist in a strictly Christian
household, and in any case rixva implies an age with which inde
pendent thought and action are hardly consistent. The terms in the
Gospels are &v8puiros, vlbs, Bvydrrip.
tovto ydp, i.e. this complete obedience.
evdpeordv eo-nv, "well-pleasing." The compound adjective, verb
and adverb are peculiar to St Paul and the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Ct. dpearbs in St John (viii. 29 and 1 John iii. 22) and Acts (vi. 2,
xii. 3). In || Eph. vi. 1 obedience is called Slxaiov, here it is regarded
as giving pleasure. To whom is not stated, presumably to any and all
who see it, including of course Him to whom the very springs of our
actions are open, Heb. iv. 12, 13.
ev Kvpfu. Cf. v. 18. It is impossible to follow the Peshitta in
translating "before our Lord" (cf. Heb. xiii. 21, rb eidpearov ivairiov
airov; cf. 1 John iii. 22). It, however, probably read Tip xvplu; cf.
its translation of Eph. v. 10.
21. 01 iraTe'pes. The change from 7oveis (v. 20) seems to forbid
the inclusion of mothers here (contrast Heb. xi. 23), who are too in a
distinctly subordinate position to fathers, and therefore have, strictly
speaking, less effect upon the temper of the children.
f.i\ !pe9i£ere. See notes on Textual Criticism.
Elsewhere in N.T. 2 Cor. ix. 2 only, and there in a good sense. It
is but slightly different from irapopylfeiv, || Eph. vi. 4, which ap
parently signifies irritation of a less deep and more transitory kind.
ipeB. in Aquila (Prov. xv. 18, xxviii. 25) and Symmachus (Prov. xxix.
22) = stir up strife, in 1 Mac. xv. 40 = stir up the people, i.e. to invade
Judah. The only passage in the Greek Bible at all closely resembling
the usage here is 2 Mac. xiv. 27, 6 Si BaaiXevs 'ixBvpos yevbpevos xal
rais tou iravirovTJpov SiaBoXais ipeBiaBels, "and the king, falling into a
rage, and being exasperated by the calumnies of that most wicked
man" (B.V.). Observe the present tense; it is the continuance of
exasperating acts that leads to the result deprecated.
iva pi) d9vp»o-iv. dBvpeiv here only in N.T. Compare Deut. xxviii.
65, Kal Siio-ei iroi Kiipios ixei xapSlav dBvpovaav (A), where B has xapS.
K2

i48 COLOSSIANS [3 21—
iripav dTrei0oe<rav ; Judith vii. 22, ko! ijBipvaev rd vrjiria air&v ;
Symmachus, Ps. ci. (cii.) 1, irpoaevxr] rip irraxv, i" rip dBvpeiv airbv.
It = the deep discouragement that persons have, especially children,
when they find that they can do nothing right. All subsequent
commentators quote Bengel's words : dBvpla, fractus animus, pestis
juventutis. 22 — iv. 1. Slaves and Masters.
AovXoi must have formed a large proportion of the believers in St
Paul's days, and their behaviour to their masters (whether Christians
or not) must have been an important matter, if Christianity was to
show itself capable of winning all classes.
St Paul of course had special reasons for enlarging on this subject
in his Epistle to the Colossians. He did not wish to be thought to
condone Onesimus' fault of running away, much less that of stealing
(as it appears), and yet he desired to show the possible nobility of
even the slave life. Hence the net result of these verses is to main
tain the status quo of slaves (in contrast to any revolutionary scheme
based on such a passage as v. XX, Sirov oiK ivi...SovXos, iXeiBepos)
and indeed to improve the character of the service rendered by
putting each slave (still qua slave) into direct relation to a higher
Master. Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 18—25.
The connexion of the verses is as follows :
(22) He bids them obey thoroughly, because they fear the one
Master, (v. 23) working with free impulse as to Him, (v. 24) knowing
that He (at any rate) will pay fully (in their case the Inheritance).
Therefore (St Paul sums up) serve the true Master, Christ, (v. 25)
For a slave who does wrong shall be punished impartially, (iv. 1) The
reciprocal duties of masters, justice and equity, for they too are under
Christ. 22. oi SovXoi, viraKoveTe, v. 20, note.
tois KaTa o-dpKa KvpCois- For KOTd adpxa, describing earthly
relationships, see Bom. ix. 3. The phrase both insists on the reality
of visible facts (cf. Bom. xiii, 1), and hints at there being something
else, a Master not koto adpxa.
Chrys. explains it only in part, when he says that these masters
are over their bodies only, and that only for a time, rb xpeirrbv aov i)
ipvxi] TJXevBiparai, tpval' irpbaxaipos i) SovXela.
pTJ ev dd>9aXpoSovX£ais. || Eph. vi. 6t, kot' StpBaXpoSovXlav. The
plural suggests various acts of eye-service; cf. Jas. ii. 1, iv. 16. This
is the earliest known example of the word.
(is dv9piDirdpeo-K0i, cf. note on i. 10, dpeaKiav.
||Eph.vi.6t. Earlier than this only Ps.lii. (liii.) 6,6ri60eos SieaKbp-

3 24] NOTES 149
Trio-ev bara dvBpairapiaKav, where the LXX. appears to have read tlJIl
"hypocrite," instead of the Massoretic ^jh, and Pss. Sol. iv. 8, 10,
dvaxaXiif/ai 6 Beos rd ipya dvBpoiirav dvBpairapiaKav. ..iv ripil-alpeaBai...
dvBpairapeaxov XaXovvra vbpov perd SbXov, which brings out the flattery
implied in the word. Mere obsequiousness may conceal contempt
or malice (see Moule). Compare Gal. i. 10.
dXX' ev dTrXoT-nri KapSCas. II Eph. vi. 5.
ottXoGs is strictly " without folds," " single " as contrasted with
"plicate," thus exactly opposed to ttoXiSttXokos ; Job v. 13, BovXvv Si
iroXvTXbxuv igiarvaev. By an easy transition it = in Plato, Rep. vni.
4. 547 e, " non-compound." Thus the substantive brings out the
singleness of aim (cf. Matt. vi. 22), the simplicity of will and purpose
in the heart, in contrast to double motives. So 1 Chron. xxix. 17,
e*v dTrX6njTi xapSlas irpoeBvprjBvv irdvra ravra : Wisd. i. 1, ev dTrXorTjTi
KapSlas fynjaare airbv. Compare an inscription ' ' found near Sunium ,
not earlier than the imperial period," which after warning persons
against sacrificing in the temple without fulfilling certain purifi
cations, adds Koi eieCXaros 7eVoi[T]o b Bebs rois Bepaireiovaiv ottXt; tj
ypvxi (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 258).
ipoBovpevoi tov Kvpiov. See notes on Textual Criticism.
Serving your many earthly masters thoroughly because you fear
the One. Only here has tpoBeiaBai, when used of religious "fear,"
Christ (v. 24) for its object. Compare Eph. v. 21.
23. 8 edv iroiiJTe. This and the two following verses are an explan
ation aud expansion of tpoBoipevoi rbv Kipiov.
Ik v/vxijs. || Eph. vi. 6. Referring not to singleness of purpose (v. 22),
but to ready impulse in contrast to external constraint (cf. Delitzsch
Psychol, p. 241 Eng. Trans.), " Worke ye of will " (Wyclif).
epydgeo-0e. In connexion with iroieiv, also in John vi. 28; 3 John 5.
Of the two iroieiv appears to be the more general word, ipyd^eaBai to
indicate result ("do your work"), not merely toil and fatigue as
such (mHridw, i. 29).
us to KvpCu Kal ovk dv9pioirois. II Eph. vi. 7. The oiK sharply
contrasts men with the Lord. They are of course to be serving
their earthly masters, but these as such are as nothing compared
with Him whom they serve when serving them.
24. elSdTes, cf. iv. 1; Phm. 21; ||Eph. vi. 8.
Especially of what is known long since, known as a fundamental
proposition, e.g. Rom. v. 3; 1 Cor. xv. 58; 2 Cor. i. 7; Gal. ii. 16.
Here giving a reason for hearty work.
oti dird KvpCov, i.e. Christ, as everywhere in v. 18 — iv. 1.

i5o COLOSSIANS [3-24—
|| Eph. vi. 8 has irapd Kvpiov, i.e. receiving at His hands, dirb is
general, the direct agent or means is simply not stated.
The absence of the article is perplexing, (a) Lightfoot interprets
"a master" (iv. 1), calling attention to the fact that the article " is
studiously inserted in the context, vv. 22 — 24, rbv Kipiov, Tip Kvpla, rip
Kvplu." (b) But xipios so easily loses its article (e.g. vv. 18, 20)
when the English translation must still be "the Lord" that this is
perhaps preferable here. Compare 1 Cor. vii. 22.
diroXiipv/eo-9e. Perhaps "receive to the full"; cf. Luke xvi. 25,
but probably ' ' receive as due " ; cf . Luke vi. 34, and, on the whole,
Rom. i. 27.
tt]V dvTairdSoo-iv. Here only in N.T. but dvrairbSopa, Luke xiv.
12 ; Rom. xi. 9t.
" The just recompense... the double compound involves the idea of
'exact requital'" (Lightfoot). Compare the note on dvravairXvp&,
i. 24. The point of this statement is that slaves were not, strictly
speaking, paid for their work, and could have no inheritance.
ttjs KXi)povopCas. Gen. of apposition. The Christian inheritance
is here placed in the future. For its being also present see Hort
on 1 Pet. i. 4. That kXtjp. does not imply hereditary succession,
but ' sanctioned and settled possession,' see (besides Hort) Dalman,
Words of Jesus, p. 125.
to KvpCu Xpio-TO. Observe (1) St Paul here first defines whom he
means by "the Master." (2) In v. 17 appealing to the example of
our Lord's life on earth he said xvpiov 'Xvaov, but here when speaking
of His present majesty and authority he says t. Kvp. Xpiarip.
SovXeveTe. Almost certainly imperative. Recalling uTraKoiieTe (v. 22)
and ipydfraBe (v. 23) with its appended reason (its participial clause).
St Paul sums up his charge in one phrase — ' ' Serve the Master,
Christ." He then appends a reason for this, v. 25.
With the right reading (no 7dp in v. 24, and 7dp instead of Si in
v. 25) SovXeiere if indicative is insipid and even tautological. The
following 7dp would then refer not to SovXeiere but to the general
command, vv. 22 — 24°.
25. d yip dSiKuv KopCo-eTai & ijSCKTjo-ev. Does St Paul here desire
(1) to encourage the slaves by reminding them that if they are ill-
treated their masters will be punished in due course by God, or (2) to
warn them that even if a slave does wrong his ill action will not be
overlooked by God, or (3) to definitely include both objects?
Of these (2) alone seems to carry on the thought of the preceding
verses ; for St Paul has bid them obey their masters according to the
flesh, and that with simplicity of aim and willingness of purpose,

3 25] NOTES 151
with an eye all the time to the great Master, who will reward, and
(v. 25) wUl punish. In this case dSix&v, -hSlxvae = wrong doing, i.e.
towards the master (cf. Phm. 18, el Si n riSlxijoiv ae), though the
object is not expressed. The participle is hardly absolute as in Rev.
xxii. 11. It is quite possible that St Paul's words in Phm. suggested
to him this phrase in what was almost the covering letter.
KopCo-eTai. " KOyidfo/iai often in all Greek and always in the N.T.
means not simply to receive but to receive back, to get what has
belonged to oneself but has been lost, or else promised but kept back,
or to get what has come to be one's own by earning " (Hort on 1 Pet.
i. 9). Cf. 2 Cor. v. 10. Also || Eph. vi. 8. For the thought of v. 25«
we might compare 2 Pet. ii. 12, 13 if we could be sure of the text either
in the T.R. or W.H., ev ttj tpBop^ air&v Kai tpBaprjaovrai, dSixobpevoi
(Kopioipevoi T.R.) pxaBbv dSiKlas, but see Bigg there.
0 tJSCkijo-cv. Aorist as looking back from time of KOyiiiireTai.
Kal ovk lo-riv Trpoa-<i)iroXi)p>|/Ca, " and there is no respect of persons."
He thus clinches his argument as to the need of the most conscientious
obedience. But who are they of whom he is thinking ? Primarily,
as it seems, the various classes and individuals among the slaves.
For slaves throughout the Roman Empire and perhaps especially in
the East were not like the negro slaves of America in a uniformly
low position, but were of all kinds, holding some high, some low,
places in the household. And, again, some were heathen, some
Christian. It is quite intelligible that some might presume on their
earthly position, others on their spiritual privileges, and serve with
less thoroughness. He warns them against doing so.
But having said oiK iariv irpoaairoXvp-^ia the phrase itself reminds
him of its applicability to masters also. He therefore naturally
passes on to iv. 1. In his later epistle to the "Ephesians" he
arranges his material rather differently, and after stating that good
actions shall be repaid to each, whether SoCXos or iXeiBepos (not
Kipios), warns the masters to treat their slaves properly, knowing
that the Master of both parties is in heaven, and is absolutely
impartial (Eph. vi. 8, 9).
On the word irpoaairoXvP'pla see especially Mayor's note on Jas. ii. 1,
who says " in its strict sense the Greek would mean to accept the
outside surface for the inner reality, the mask for the person," thus
giving a secondary meaning to the word irpbaairov. Hence perhaps it
is that the compound has always a bad sense in the N.T. (it does not
occur as a compound in the LXX.), but it is a fair literal translation
of the Hebrew D'JB KB>D, strictly "lifting up" or "accepting the
face," which itself has a bad sense iu 2 Chron. xix. 7+, as has also

iS2 COLOSSIANS [3 25
the verbal phrase in Job xxxii. 21 ; Deut. x. 17, al. Probably in the
first instance the reference was to permitting a prostrate suppliant
to literally lift up his face. The permission in an individual case
would often seem arbitrary, and in many cases would be due in fact
to other reasons than pure justice. Compare Mai. ii. 9, dvd" av bpeis
oi tpvXdaaeoBe rds bSois piov dXXd eXappdvere irpdo-iinra iv vbpip.
Before leaving this verse it is perhaps worth calling attention to
the possibility that vv. 24, 25 contain reminiscences of Ecclus. xxxii.
(xxxv.) 13 — 16 : Sri Kipios dvTairoSiSovs eVnv, Kai eVTOTrXa dvTaTroSiiirei
croi. (14) pi] SapoKbirei, oi ydp irpooSigerai. (15) Kal pi) iirexe Bvala
dSCKia, 8ri Kipios Kpirijs iariv, Kai ovk So-tiv Trap' airov 8b%a irpaaiiirov.
(16) oi XTJpu/eTai irpdo-toirov iiri irraxov, Kai Sivaiv r\h\.Kr\pivov elaaKoi-
aerai. The Greek is a sufficiently close translation of the Hebrew.

CHAPTER IV.
3. 9vpav tov Xoyou. A interprets by adding iv wappvala.
to pvo-Tijpiov tov xpiorov. B*L read toB Beov with a few cursives,
aeth. and this is possibly right, though a commoner expression
(vide Lightfoot, p. 315 n.).
8. tva ¦yvwTe Ta irepl i|p<3v. So (N*)ABD*FKrGP. Eva 7vip rd irepl
vp&v Text. Bee. with XcCDbcKL vulg. Syrr. The external evidence
leaves no doubt that the former is right.
9. to io8e. G vulg. Jer. Ambrst. add irparrbpeva, " a gloss which
looks as if it had originated in the Latin, which could not literally
render to tSSe " (Abbott).
12. ora9TJTe. So H*B. arrrre Text. Rec. with XCACD, etc., the
commoner form.
ireirXT]po<j>opT|p4voi XABCD*G Syr.Harclme. ireirXvpapAvoi Text. Rec.
with DCKLP Pesh. Syr.HarcI- *"** Syr.pa'-Chr. commoner and easier.
13. iroXvv irdvov XABCP SyrP1' (ut vid.). ttoXiiv k6ttov D*G. tfjXov
iroXiv Text. Rec. with KL, etc. Other readings are ttoXiV fijXov Dbl: ;
ttoXiiv irbBov 10. 31 al. ; iroXbv d7wvo 6. 67**. External evidence
determines for the first, and fr/Xov would not have caused such
variations. 15. Nvpipav. See Commentary.
ttjv KaT* oIkov avrijs eKKXT|o-£av. airijs is read by B 67**, ejus Old
Lat. Vulg. SyrP"1. airov Text. Rec. with DFGKL, etc., Pesh. Chr.
The Syriac versions have the singular (see Lightfoot). abr&v NACP
memph (see Lightfoot) . See Commentary.
16. ttjv 4k AaoSixCas. ttjv iv AaoSiKeia is read by G Syrpal.
18. ij \°-Pls r"°" vpwv, K*ABCFerG Ambrst. Text. Rec. adds
dpi)v with K°DKLP, etc., SyrP"1.
Subscription. The simplest and apparently most original form is
Trpos KoXaira-aeTs KB*C. To this A adds dirb 'Pii/XTjs, Bc iypdtpv dirb
'PiijiMjs. The Text. Rec. has Trpos KoXao-iraeis iypdtpv dirb 'Pii/tijs Sid
Tvxikov Kal 'Ovvaipov, with KL, etc. The Boh. adds Kal MdpKov, but
curiously says that it was written at Athens. 37. 116 and a few other
cursives say Sid Tvx'koO ko! VipxiBiov xal 'Ovnalpov.

tS4 COLOSSIANS [4 1—
1. oi Kvpioi. St Paul here addresses the masters. Compare the
parallel passage Eph. vi. 9. For the connexion of this verse with
c. iii. see note on iii. 25.
to SCkuiov. Cf. Matt. xx. 4 ; Luke xii. 57.
Kal ttjv lo-dTiyra. iir6TTjs occurs in the Greek Bible only in two
obscure renderings (due apparently to falsely deriving an uncommon
Hebrew word from an Aramaic root) of Job xxxvi. 29^ Zech. iv. 7,
and in 2 Cor. viii. 13, 14.
(1) In this last passage io-6rTjs seems clearly to mean " equality,"
and Meyer interprets it so in our passage also. According to this
view St Paul bids the masters " regard and treat the slaves as equals,"
not of course socially as though slavery were to be abolished, but
conceding to them ' ' the parity (egalitS) implied in the Christian
dSeX06rTjs. " Cf. Phm. 16, oiKiri u>s SovXov dXXd iirip SovXov, dSeXipbv
ayairvrbv. If labr-ns necessarily meant equality this strained inter
pretation might pass, but this is not the case.
(2) Others have thought that it means impartiality and equality
in the treatment of individual slaves (cf. note on irpoauiroXvp.T'la,
iii. 25), but this also is to read too much into the phrase.
(3) Lightfoot is almost certainly right in translating " equity" or
"fairness" and considering it a synonym of rb Slxaiov. Among his
quotations may be mentioned Philo, de Creat. Princ. 14 (n. p. 373),
iari 7dp labrvs...pj]rvp Sixaioaivvs, and Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 6
(p. 764), perd Sixaioaivvs xal labrvros rijs irpbs robs iiriarpitpovTas.
" Thus in Arist. Eth. Nic. v. 1, to Slxaiov and to iVov are regarded as
synouymes, and in Plut. Mor. p. 719 the relation of iVSttjs to SikoiSttjs
is discussed." Of course observe that to SUaiov alone would not be sufficient.
There are many details of action between master and slave (and
between modern master and servant or workman) which may be
strictly "just," and yet lack that "equity" which is essential to a
thoroughly happy and Christian relation between employers and
employed. tois SovXois irapexeo'Oe, " render on your part." In this " dynamic "
or "intensive" middle "the reference to the powers put forth by
the subject is more distinct than in the active, which simply states
the action" (Ell.). Compare Acts xix. 24.
elSoTes, iii. 24.
oti Kal vpeis, i.e. as well as they.
'i\ert Kvpiov ev ovpavu. Compare 1 Cor. vii. 22.
2 — 6. Prayer (vv. 2 — 4) and speaking for Christ (vv. 5 — 6).
(v. 2) In prayer be persevering, ever alert in it, combining it with

4 3] NOTES 155
thanksgiving ; (v. 3) praying at the same time not for yourselves
alone but also for us, that God may open for us a way for His
message to pass on, that thus we may be able to speak of Christ's
revelation (which man could never have learned, and because of
which I am now lying bound), (v. 4) that I may make it known in
accordance with the commission laid upon me.
(v. 5) But is it only I who must speak? You must do so also.
Walk in practical Christian wisdom towards the many who are outside
the brotherhood, buying back at the expense of your self-denial, etc.,
the present time to its rightful use. (v. 6) As an important part of
such wisdom let your speech be always spoken in God's grace (this is
the salt that must accompany every sacrifice), and thus you will know
how best to answer each person that addresses you.
2. ttj irpoo-evxTj. Generic. Contrast tj. 12. Probably suggested by
the thought of appealing to the one Master in heaven.
irpoo-KapTepeiTe. Bom. xii. 12 ; Acts i. 14, vi. 4.
The "staunchness" of mprepia (cf. Heb. xi. 27t) is modified by
TrpSs to mean " persevering attendance." Thus Mark iii. 9; Acts x. 7.
It is thus the opposite of ivKaKeiv (Luke xviii. 1), and is similar to
(though more vivid than) dSiaXeSrrTOis irpoaeixeoBe, X Thes. v. 17. As
a colloquial translation we might say " Stick to prayer." In ||Eph.
vi. 18 the substantive is employed.
YpiryopovvTes, "alert" ("a l'herte, i.e. on the watch," Skeat).
Often misinterpreted as though it were a charge to be watching for
the answer to prayer. In reality St Paul is warning against drowsiness
(1 Thes. v. 6), inattention, and sluggishness in either the act or the
habit of prayer. || Eph. vi. 18, d7pu7rvo0vTes.
iv evxapicrrCa. On ebxapiorla see ii. 7 and i. 3, notes. Either
marking the state in which they, as vigilant people, must be, or,
more probably, " specifying the particular accompaniment or con
comitant act with which tj Trpoir. was to be associated" (Ell.).
Beet well says " ceaseless prayer combined with ceaseless praise
was the atmosphere of St Paul's spiritual life." Chrysostom on
this passage gives a beautiful prayer of a certain saintly man whom
he knew, which begins with thanksgiving for all kinds of treatment,
good or evil.
3. irpoo-eux.dp.svoi. dpa Kal, i.e. at the same time as you are praying
for yourselves. Other examples of d^a Kai in the N.T. are Acts xxiv. 26 ;
1 Tim. v. 13 ; Phm. 22f.
irepl Tjpwv- Not only St Paul (contrast SiSepai, infra) but also
Timothy (i. 1), and perhaps others working with St Paul, e.g.
Epaphras (vv. 12, 13) and the avvepyol in vv. 10, 11.

iS6 COLOSSIANS [4 3—
For other examples of St Paul begging the prayers of those to
whom he is writing see, besides Eph. vi. 19, 20, 1 Thes. v. 25 ;
2 Thes. iii. 1 ; Rom. xv. 30.
Iva. Not fully final, but weakened after irpoaeixopai ; cf. i. 9.
d 9eos dvoC|fl i]piv tt|v 9vpav tov X6\ou. In view of the || Eph. vi. 19,
it is very tempting to explain the phrase here " that God may open
for us the power of speech," i.e. give us liberty of utterance. But
Bipa in the N.T. is rather the opportunity; cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 9; 2 Cor.
ii. 12; Rev. iii. 8 (on which see Ramsay, Epp. to the Seven Churches,
p. 404). 6 X670S (cf. Gal. vi. 6, al.) will then be the Gospel message,
the meaning of the phrase being that God will open for us a way for
the Gospel to pass on. The immediate reference is probably to his
being now a prisoner and therefore unable to carry out, as he would
like, his work of preaching the Gospel.
XaXijo-ai. Stating the aim of this " opening."
to pvo-TTJpiov (i. 26, 27, ii. 2, notes) tov xpltrTO") Eph. iii. 4f.
See notes on Textual Criticism. Almost certainly not objective,
"the secret about Christ," but subjective, "brought by Christ."
Compare 6 X670S toC xp'ttoC, iii. 16. It nearly = the revelation
brought by Christ, but while that term would have regarded the
fact from the side of God, this is rather from that of the limitation
of human knowledge according to its mere natural powers.
That St Paul uses the term with special reference to the reception
of the Gospel by the Gentiles see i. 27.
Si' 8. His faithfulness in insisting on this pvarijpiov, releasing as
it did men from the obligation of the Law and thus including the
free admission of Gentiles to full religious privileges, was the ultimate
cause of that opposition by the Jews which ended in his being a
prisoner. Kal. Hardly "even," laying stress on the magnitude of the
privation, but " also," marking the correspondence either between
the message and the personal effect of preaching it, or, more probably,
between his wish for liberty (!W...dvoi|Tj k.t.X.) and the state in which
he now is.
8e"Bepai. || Eph. vi. 20.
4. tva ipavepioo-m avTd. Dependent on Iva b Bebs dvol£n k.t.X. but
expressing more finally than XaXijaai the result of the gift of such
opportunity. Chrysostom and Bengel thinking of St Paul preaching as a prisoner
join it with SiSepat, but this is to miss the point of the passage.
tpavepba is chosen as correlative to pvarvpiov. A secret told is
made known. Compare also notes at i. 26, iii. 4. It thus hints at

4 5] NOTES 157
the world's lamentable ignorance of the blessed oontents of the
jBvo-TTJp. tov xp- XoXtjo-oi, v. 3, merely expressed St Paul's act in
itself. us Set pe XaX-fjo-ai. Probably referring to the necessity laid upon
him of preaching the Gospel, 1 Cor. ix. 16. He felt that this com
mission could not be carried out properly so long as he was in prison.
In || Eph. vi. 20 the reference is apparently to his freedom of speech,
and perhaps his use of right arguments, whether he was in prison or
not. 5. In vv. 5, 6 St Paul turns to the thought of their own part in
spreading the knowledge of Christ (a) by life (v. 5), (6) by word (v. 6).
Iv o-o<pCa (i. 9, iii. 16, notes) irepiiraTelTe (i. 10, note). Practical
Christian wisdom must mark their whole attitude towards outsiders.
irpds with irepiiraTeiv, 1 Thes. iv. 12f, which has in this figurative
sense lost all idea of motion. Trpds here marks the attitude towards
robs 0;u.
tovs ?£»• Though oi IfaBev = foreigners in classical Greek (see
references in Lidd. and Scott) this phrase was probably taken over
by St Paul from Judaism. For the Jews distinguished sharply
(1) between cities within the holy land and those outside it. The
latter belong to Y~$? '"'V'^j " *ca'; which is outside the land" ; cf.
Acts xxvi. 11 ; (2) between persons who enjoyed the privileges of
Judaism and those who were outside it. These latter were D'JlS'nn.
So of Jewish heretics, Meg. Mishna, rv. 8 ( = Talm. Bab. Meg. 24b) —
cf. also Swete on Mark iv. 11 — and of non-canonical books, Sanh.
Mishna, xi. (x.) 1.
Similarly oi eVros in Ecclus. Prol. 1. 4. For oi l£a see Mark iv. 11 ;
1 Cor. v. 12, 13 ; 1 Thes. iv. 12. Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 7.
tov Kaipdv. Not " time " generally (xpovos), nor probably "oppor
tunity" (see next note), but " the present time," as in 1 Cor. vii. 29;
Rom. xiii. 11. That this was intended in || Eph. v. 16 seems clearly
shown by the additional words there, on oi vp,ipai irovvpal elaiv.
££a-yopa£dpevoi. Occurring in N.T. only twice in Gal. besides our
present passage and il Eph. v. 16. (1) In Gal. it clearly = redeem,
buy out from another power into (as the connotation is) freedom
(Gal. iii. 13, iv. 5). So here, as in Eph., the thought probably is
"buying back (at the expense of personal watchfulness and self-
denial) the present time, which is now being used for evil and godless
purposes (cf. irovvpal, Eph., with 1 John v. 19), to its legitimate
freedom in Christ."
(2) The other possible rendering is "buying up the opportunity."
Compare Ramsay (Hastings' D.B. v. p. 151), "He sums up in three

i58 COLOSSIANS [4 5—
Greek words his counsel to the Colossians and the Asians generally,
when he urged them to ' make their market to the full of the oppor
tunity which their situation offered them.'" And this suits the
context of Col. but not of Eph. But the sense given to the verb,
though valid in Polyb. in. 42. 2, e'^opaire Trap' aiirfiv rd re p.ovb£vXa
irXoia irdvra k.t.X. (vide Lightfoot), is not that of Gal.
It occurs only once in LXX., Dan. ii. 8, eV dXTjfleias olSa (iyii,
Theod.) Sri xaipbv vpeis i£ayopd£ere, in the sense apparently of buying
out time (generally, i.e. gaining time) at the cost of their questions.
On the phrase see further J. A. B. on Eph. v. 16.
6. d Xo-yos vpwv. A subdivision of the general attitude to be taken
towards unbelievers (v. 5).
irdvTOTe ev xdpiTi. x&P15 when connected with X670S (cf. Eccles. x. 12),
and especially when also connected with dXs, would suggest to an
ordinary Greek reader "pleasingness." But to St Paul (who never,
as it seems, uses it merely in that sense ; on iii. 16 see there) x^/"s
much rather suggested "grace." Hence it is probable that St Paul
here intended his Christian readers to understand his words to mean
"Let your speech be always with grace," clothed in that Divine gift
of spiritual power effective for yourself and others. Cf. J. A. R. on
|| Eph. iv. 29.
dXan ijpTvpevos. Your speech must not be insipid, but pungent,
agreeable to the taste of men in their right mind (Job vi. 6), and
therefore useful. On the form dXas see Blass, Gram. § 8. 6.
elSevai. The aim (cf. XaXijirai, v. 3), or more probably the result,
of speaking iv xdpiri always.
irius. rl would have indicated the matter only, ttws includes matter,
form and manner.
Set. Weaker than in v. 4. Yet moral fitness is really moral
necessity. vpds evi eKao-TO diroKpCveo-9ai. diroxplvopai here only in the Pauline
Epistles. For the thought of the whole verse cf. 1 Pet. iii. 15.
Chrys. (408 a) well says, el ydp larpbs oix bpolas irdai xfii)aerai tois
aiipaai, iroXXip pdXXov SiSdaKaXos.
7 — 17. Personal matters and final words.
vv. 7 — 9. The messengers commended to them.
(v. 7) I said "pray for us," "I am lying bound," but you will want
to know all about me. This Tychicus will tell you, who is a brother,
and dear to me, and a faithful minister, who has served together
with me and that in the Lord. (v. 8) I am sending him for the very
purpose of giving you this information, that you may know about us
and that he may cheer your hearts, (v. 9) He is accompanying

4 7] NOTES 159
Onesimus, also a brother who is faithful and beloved, who belongs to
your own city — these two will tell you everything going on here.
7. Ta KaT* jpe irdvTa, "all my circumstances." The order suggests
that TrdvTa was almost an after-thought.
For to Kar' epi, see, besides ||Eph. vi. 21, Phil. i. 12; Tob. *. 8;
cf. Acts xxv. 14.
yvaplirti vpiv, r. 9, i. 27.
TdxiKos, mentioned five times in the N.T. (a) Acts xx. 4, 5
(c. a.d. 58). (6) our passage (c. a.d. 63). (c) || Eph. vi. 21 (c. a.d. 63).
(d) Tit. iii. 12 (c. a.d. 67). (e) 2 Tim. iv. 12 (c. a.d. 68).
From these passages we learn that he was a native of the Boman
province of Asia, but probably not of Ephesus itself (contrast the
place names in Acts xx. 4, though this is not conclusive in view of
Trophimus, Acts xxi. 29), and almost certainly not of Colossae (contrast
the phrase used of Onesimus, v. 9, os iariv il- bp&v). He and Trophimus
(and possibly the others) met St Paul at Troas on his last journey to
Jerusalem, and presumably accompanied him there (cf. Acts xxi. 29).
Five years later he takes St Paul's letter to the Colossians and the
Circular Letter ("Ephesians") to its various recipients. Five years
later again we find him with St Paul (apparently) at Nicopolis
(probably in Epirus), and about to be sent to Crete. A little later
St Paul in his last letter mentions that he has sent him to Ephesus
again. What we know of him, that is to say, fully bears out St Paul's
further description in our verse. On the occurrence of the name on
inscriptions, and even occasionally in near proximity to that of
Onesimus, see Lightfoot.
d d-yairrrrds dSeXipds. So of Onesimus, v. 9, Phm. 16, and of
St Paul himself in 2 Pet. iii. 15. Compare i. 7, note on rov dyarvrov.
The phrase here brings out (a) that he was a Christian, (6) that he
stood in close intimacy with St Paul and therefore was able to give
them full information about him. Cf. Chrys. el dyairvrbs, irdvra
dlSe, Kal obSiv airbv iKpvirre...el iriarbs, oiSi tpeiaerai' el aivSovXos,
Kexoiviivvxe t&v ireipaap&v aare irdvroBev to d^ibiriarov avvr)yayev.
Kal irio-Tos Suikovos, "and a faithful minister." Stdxovos is hardly
used here in its official sense (Bom. xvi. 1 ; Phil. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 8, 12
and possibly Col. i. 7). It doubtless refers to Tychicus' ministering
to St Paul in evangelistic work ; cf. Acts xix. 22. There seems to be
no reason for carrying the reference of iriarbs beyond Siokovos, see the
two following notes.
Kal o-vv8ovXos (i. 7) iv KvpCio. The personal Christian friendship
(d7air. dS.), and the personal ministration (Stdx.), are glorified by the
addition of common service and that in the Lord.

160 COLOSSIANS [4 8—
8. =||Eph. vi. 22 word for word.
ov eirepv/a irpds vpds. Epistolary aorist, "whom I send"; cf.
Phm. 12.
tva yvwTe Ta irepl qptav. See notes on Textual Criticism. The
alternative reading iva yvtp rd irepl bp&v makes very good sense in
itself as an introduction to the following clause, but (besides the
evidence of the MSS. etc.) seems too contradictory of the els airb tovto.
Observe the progressive character of St Paul's thought about the
information to be given: v. 7, ip,i, St Paul only; v. 8, -hp&v, St Paul
and his fellow workers, especially Timothy; and v. 9, i5Se, the state
of affairs generally at Rome, with special reference of course to the
Christian community there.
Kal irapaKaXeVrj Tas KapSCas vptuv. See note on ii. 2; cf. 2 Thes.
ii. 17. In cheering the Colossians' hearts Onesimus could do little.
9. o-iv *OvT)o-Cpu. See Phm. 10+.
tiu itio-to. Probably not intended to suggest a, contrast to his
character before his conversion, though it does so in fact. For iriarbs
with d7aTTTjr6s cf. (besides v. 7) 1 Cor. iv. 17 ; 1 Tim. vi. 2.
os Iotiv e| vpuv, i.e. belonging to Colossae. Some have strangely
thought it meant a member of the Christian community there. But
this was just what, at present, he was not.
Td cS8e. See notes on Textual Criticism. The phrase seems to
occur here only in the Greek Bible. Added almost as an after -thought
to further define irdvTa.
vv. 10 — 17. Greetings from (vv. 10 — 14) and to (vv. 15 — 17) in
dividual believers.
(v. 10) I send greetings to you from Aristarchus my present fellow
captive, and from Mark Barnabas' couBiu (you have already received
advices about him, if he come unto you receive him), (v. XX) and from
Jesus who is called Justus — these three were originally circumcised
and are the only Hebrew Christians here who have been fellow workers
for the Kingdom of God, men, I mean, who became a help and solace
to me. (v. 12) I send greetings to you from Epaphras who belongs
to your own city, a slave of Christ Jesus, always wrestling on behalf
of you in his prayers, in order that you may stand up mature and
fully convinced in every known part of the will of God ; (v. 13) for
(whatever may have been said) I bear him witness that he has much
toil on behalf of you and of those in Laodicea and of those in Hierapolis.
(v. 14) I send greetings to you from Luke the physician, my beloved
friend, and Demas.
10. do-rrdSeTai vpds. Repeated vv. 12, 14. In each case it intro
duces a fresh class, viz. (a) those of the Circumcision, vv. 10, 11.

4 10] NOTES 161
(b) Epaphras their fellow-townsman, etc, vv. 12, 13. (c) Luke and
Demas who were perhaps Gentile Christians, v. 14. In Phm. 23 the
verb is used once to include all.
Observe that of the six who send greeting here all except Jesus
Justus send greeting also to Philemon. Similar greetings by name
are found in Rom. xvi. 21—23; 1 Cor. xvi. 19; 2 Tim. iv. 21; 1 Pet.
v. 13.
On the frequency of the expression in inscriptions and papyri see
Nageli, D. Wortschatz d. Ap. Paulus, 1905, p. 55.
'Apto-rapxos. A Hebrew-Christian (v. 11), of Macedonia (Acts xix.
29), of Thessalonica (Acts xx. 4), a fellow-traveller of St Paul, seized
with Gaius by the Ephesian mob and carried into the theatre (Acts
xix. 29), who afterwards followed St Paul, apparently from Greece,
on his last journey to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 4). Two years later he
was with St Paul on the ship of Adramyttium between Caesarea and
Sidon, sailing with him as far as Myra, but, as it seems, going on
it towards his own home without being transferred there to the
Alexandrian ship sailing straight for Italy (Acts xxvii. 2, 6, see Lightfoot,
Phil. p. 34, note). Some two years later we find him once more with
St Paul at Rome (Phm. 24), when, as our verse tells us, he is in some
sense St Paul's avvaixpaXaros.
6 o-vvaixpdXaiTds pov, "my fellow captive." So of Andronicus
and Junias, toi>s o-iry7eveis pov xal avvaixpaXiirovs pov, Rom. xvi. 7,
and of Epaphras in Phm. 23, where it has the addition iv Xpiarip
'Xvaov. The fact that in Phm. the title is not given to Aristarchus
but to Epaphras instead, as it seems, suggests that one had been
imprisoned instead of the other. Whether the imprisonment was
compulsory, or voluntarily endured in order to cheer St Paul's
loneliness, cannot be determined. Observe that (a) It cannot pos
sibly refer to the long past incident of Acts xix. 29 ; for that would
not account for Epaphras ; (b) As St Paul was literally a captive
when he wrote this the captivity spoken of in the case of Aristarchus
and Epaphras which they shared with him can hardly be meta
phorical ; (c) The employment of a term which properly means
"captive by war" may possibly be due to St Paul's vivid sense of
the strife between the world and Christ being strictly warfare (cf.
the contemporary Eph. vi. 11 sqq.).
Kal MdpKos. That it is rightly Mapras, the a being long (cf.
MdapKos in certain inscriptions), see especially Swete, St Mark, p. ix.,
following Blass, Gram. § 4. 2.
d dvet|rids+, "the cousin." So in Num. xxxvi. 11, the daughters of
Zelophehad became wives oi their "father's brothers' sons," tois
rim.. L

1 62 COLOSSIANS [4 10—
dvefiois abr&v; cf. Herod, vn. 5, MapSovios 6 TaBpiea, 8s t> Eiipfrj
pev dveipibs Aapeiov Si dSeXtperjs ttois, also VII. 82.
Bapvdpa. Probably originally the word meant "son of Nebo"
(Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 40, Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 307 sqq.),
though interpreted in Acts iv. 36 vlbs irapaKXijaeas as though it were
connected with nabi (prophet).
It is evident that the connexion with so honoured a Christian'
worker as Barnabas is intended to do honour to Mark, and thus
to lead the Colossians to receive him the more readily. To us it
is of interest as explaining the warmth with which Barnabas espoused
his cause and took him with him to Cyprus, Acts xv. 37 — 39.
irepl oi. The antecedent is clearly MdpKos, for the tone of
superiority forbids the supposition that the following words refer to
Barnabas. eXdpeTe IvToXds. "Mandata opponuntur literis," Beng. Perhaps
but not necessarily so. For the phrase see Acts xvii. 15.
This can hardly be the epistolary aorist (v. 8), especially if Ellicott
is right in limiting the epistolary aorist to the first person, but when
and by whom they received the charge is quite unknown. Presumably
it had been sent from St Paul. So also the reference of the plural
ivroXds is purely a matter of conjecture ; perhaps they received one
charge through many persons or perhaps many through one.
idv <:X0tj irpos vpds Slgao-Be avrov. It has been conjectured that
St Mark gave up his plan of visiting Asia Minor and went to Egypt
instead (Swete, St Mark, pp. xiv. sq.). Some unforeseen occurrence
may indeed have brought this about, cf. probably 1 Cor. xvi. 10, but
our passage implies that when it was written he quite expected to be
at least in the neighbourhood of Colossae, and had had this expecta
tion for some time (iXdB. ivr.). X Pet. v. 13 leads us to suppose that
he had some connexion with Asia Minor before that was written.
In 2 Tim. iv. 11 he was at Ephesus or near there.
Bengel interprets idv iXBi] k.t.X. as the sum of the ivroXal. AifaaBe
will then be a sudden change to the oratio recta (cf. Luke v. 14;
Acts i. 4, xxiii. 22). Although those copyists who read SQaaBai
instead of Si^aaBe clearly understood it so, the simpler interpretation,
making it St Paul's present command, is preferable.
The only special reason (with which we are acquainted) for this
charge respecting St Mark is his defection at Perga, Acts xiii. 13,
xv. 38. But that was twelve years earlier and was probably quite
unknown to the Colossian Christians, though important to the his
torian as supplying the occasion for St Paul's independent journeys.
If any special reason is required, it more probably lies in his attach-

4 11] NOTES 163
ment to the conservative party in the primitive Church (St Peter)
rather than to St Paul's. Hence it was possible that some at least of
the Colossians would not greet him warmly, especially after receiving
such an epistle as this, full of warning against Jewish tendencies.
11. Kal *It|o-ovs d Xeydpevos 'Iovo-tos. Nothing is known of him
save from this passage. Besides our Lord the following bear the
name 'Itjo-oOs in the N.T. : (a) the son of Eliezer, Luke iii. 29;
(b) Joshua, Acts vii. 45; Heb. iv. 8; (c) possibly Barabbas, Matt.
xxvii. 17, i.e. according to a few cursives, the Armenian version and
the Latin translator of Origen ; (d) Jesus called Justus.
'Xovaros is used also of (a) 'Xaarjtp rbv xaXoipevov BapaaBBdv, 8s
iTexXijBv 'IoOotos, Acts i. 23 ; (6) a proselyte at Corinth, Tiriou 'Xoiarov,
Acts xviii. 7. Levy (Neuhebr. Worterb. p. 231) gives examples of Justa
as a man's name, e.g. B. Justa bar Shunam; cf. also Dalman, Jiid.
Pal. Aram. Gr. p. 148.
On examples of persons, particularly Jews, having an alternative
name, see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 sqq. At the present
time all Jews have one name for religious purposes and another for
use in daily life.
It is uncertain whether 'IoOotos is here a translation of a Jewish
title, e.g. Zadok (cf. the modern Zaddik in Chassidism) or (as is more
probable) was chosen merely because of its similarity in sound to
'Itjo-oOs (like 'Idtjuv), compare the modern Moses-Moss, Levi-Lewis.
01 dvTes eK irepLToprjs. Not "who are of the group of circumcised
people," i.e. the Jews (cf. Tit. i. 10, oi ix rijs irepiropfjs), but "who
are by origin circumcised"; so Acts x. 45, xi. 2; Gal. ii. 12.
Observe (1) the phrase doubtless includes Aristarchus. Acts xx. 4
is urged against this, but there is no need for all the persons mentioned
there to have been carriers of the collection for the saints at Jerusalem,
or even, if so, for all of such persons to have been Gentiles ;
(2) There is no point in giving the Colossians this information about
Aristarchus, Mark, and Jesus Justus, unless the phrase serves as a
basis, either grammatically or in sense, for the next statement.
ovtoi pdvoi, i.e. of Hebrew Christians, see last note. It would be
glaringly untrue if it included Gentile Christians, in view of St Paul's
statement about Epaphras and indeed Luke (cf. also Phm. 24). In
these words we have a hint of that general opposition of Hebrew
Christians to St Paul at Borne which we find mentioned more at
length in Phil. i.
oTJvepYol. Cf. Phm. 1, and 24. In rruvSouXos the common work is
only implied, in awepybs the fact that it is service is out of sight.
See also Bom. xvi. 3, 9, 21 ; Phil. ii. 25, iv. 3.
L2

164 COLOSSIANS [4 11—
els with avvepybs, 2 Cor. viii. 23, indicating there the persons, here
the cause, which formed the object of the work.
T-nv Pao-iXeCav tov 8eov. See i. 13 note.
ofcrives, classifying (cf. ii. 23, iii. 5) them as men who, etc.
6-yevn8T|o-dv poi. Became by their actions. When is not stated.
irapT)-yopia. Only here in the Greek Bible except 4 Mac. v. 12, vi. 1.
The verb occurs only in 4 Mac. xii. 3, and also not unfrequently
in Symm., e.g. Gen. xxiv. 67, Isaac irapvyopifiv (LXX. Trape-
xkifiv). Lightfoot gives references for the use of the verb and its
derivatives irapvyopla, irapvybpvp.a, irapvyopixbs, irapvyopvriKbs, by
Hippocrates (430 B.C.), Galen (163 a.d.), and Plutarch as medical
terms in the sense of "assuaging," "alleviating" (our English
"paregoric"). So perhaps here St Paul purposely uses a word which
would suggest physical as well as mental help. Perhaps " soothing "
would be nearest in modern English, though in derivation it is
wholly unconnected with any such thought.
12. do-irdJeTai vpds (v. 10) 'Eiraippds (i. 7, Phm. 23). Epaphras
is mentioned separately from the three preceding, perhaps because
he was not so continuously with St Paul, perhaps because he was, as
it seems, a Gentile, or perhaps only because of his special relation to
the Colossians.
SovXos Xpio-Tov 'Ir|o-ov. Doubtless to be taken alone, neither
with 6 il; bp.&v (Weiss), nor with dyavifbpevos (Meyer).
Observe that although the phrase (SoOXos xvplov, SovX. Xp. , SovX. Xp.
1tj<t.) is used sometimes of Christians generally (2 Tim. ii. 24), and
especially of Christians who are also slaves of men (1 Cor. vii. 22 ;
Eph. vi. 6), it is employed by St Paul as a designation of individuals
only of himself, Timothy (Phil. i. 1), and here Epaphras. He
apparently, that is to say, implies by it here a special consecration to
Christ's service.
dyiov^dpevos. See note on i. 29 (notice riXeios, i. 28) and compare
ii. 1 (notice irXvpotpopla, ii. 2) ; " wrestling," though but a partial trans
lation, at least preserves the figure of the athlete.
virep dpiov (ii. 1) ev Tats irpoo-evxais. "Epaphras was Paul's
true scholar in the school of intercession. See i. 9" (Moule). The
article is probably possessive.
Iva. Not the contents of the prayers, but the aim of his wrestling
(ef. ii. 2).
o-ra9rJTe. See notes on Textual Criticism. It = stand up, firm and
unshaken (compare Luke xviii. 11, of the Pharisee with eoriis of the
Publican, 13). What time is meant ? Probably any time that may
be chosen for examination. But possibly with special reference to
the Judgment ; cf. Luke xxi. 36.

4 13] NOTES 165
Te'Xeioi, i. 28, note. Perfect in Christian growth.
Kal ireirXi)poipopT|p^voi. See notes on Textual Criticism. Cf. ttXtj-
potpopla, ii. 2 and note. irXvpotpopia never = " fill " in the N.T. (though
BG read irXvpotpopijaai in Rom. xv. 13, and ireirXvpotpopvpivos dydirvs
in Clem. Rom. § 54 must have this sense), but = (l) fulfil, accomplish,
2 Tim. iv. 5, and 17 ; (2) fully persuade, convince. So Rom. iv. 21,
xiv. 5.
Of these two meanings the latter alone is suitable here. With
some remembrance of the false teaching to which they were ex
posed he wishes them to be free " from all doubts and scrupulosity "
(Ell.). iv iravTl (cf. ev irdo-jj, i. 9, note) 9eXijpaTi tov 9eov. Hardly to be
joined with oTatJTjre, and probably with ireirXvp. only, and not with
T^Xeioi as well.
For BiXvpa meaning not the will of God as a whole, but the
expression of it so far as it is made known in any particular, see
1 Thes. iv. 3. See also 1 Thes. v. 18 and probably Rom. xii. 2, and
compare Acts xiii. 22. " The thought is the attentive obedience which
holds sacred each detail of the Master's orders" (Moule). Observe
that the flesh has its BeXrjpara also, Eph. ii. 3.
13. papTvpu -ydp avT<S. The only parallels to this in St Paul's
Epistles are Rom. x. 2, and Gal. iv. 15, in both of which passages
the phrase contains something of the unexpected under the circum
stances. Here there seems no apparent reason for so strong a phrase.
Perhaps there was something about Epaphras with which we are
not acquainted that made St Paul insist on the fact of his toil
for them.
<Sti e"x€l iroXvv irdvov. See notes on Textual Criticism.
ttovov ixeiv occurs only here in the Greek Bible (contrast kottiw
d7Uvif6uevos, i. 29), but is used frequently of the toil of conflict
from Homer downwards ; cf. II. vi. 525, of Ixovat iroXiv irbvov eiveKa
aeio. "In Pindar also of exertions in the games, N. 4. 1, I. 4. 79
(3. 65)," Lidd. and Scott. It carries on the figure of dyavi^bpevos.
virep upiiv (v. 12) Kal tov Iv AaoSiKCa (ii. 1) Kal tov ev 'Iepd
IldXei. On these two towns and their relation to ColosBae see
Introd. p. x. For the separation 'Iepji IldXei cf. Acts xvi. 11. They
are mentioned here because probably this letter would be read in
both, as it certainly would be in one (v. 16). We have no know
ledge of the relation in which Epaphras stood to Laodicea and
Hierapolis, but probably he had taught in both, perhaps also he
had founded both Churches. In any case as a native of Colossae he
must have been interested in the two neighbouring towns.

1 66 COLOSSIANS [4 14—
14. do-irdJIeTai vpds, v. 10, note.
AovKas- Mentioned by name elsewhere in the N.T. only in Phm.
24 and 2 Tim. iv. 11. Identified since Irenaeus (Haer. in. 14. 1)
with the Evangelist. The name is probably a shortened form of
Lucanus, and is probably also connected with Lucius, although
the Lucius of Rom. xvi. 21 being a Jew was certainly a different
person, as also was presumably Lucius of Cyrene, Acts xiii. 1.
d larpos. On the use in the Third Gospel and the Acts of medical
and semi-medical terms see Hobart, The Medical Language of Luke,
1882. d a7airT|Tds. Probably to be taken not with 6 larpbs but with
Aovxas b larpbs; cf. Phm. 1; Rom. xvi. 12. "Luke the physician,
my very dear friend" (Lightfoot's paraphrase).
KalAi|pds. Elsewhere only Phm. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 10. Thessalonica
was perhaps his home, as it was certainly the home of Aristarchus, next
to whom he is mentioned in Phm. The word is said to be a shortened
form of Demetrius, a name which occurs twice in the list of politarchs
of Thessalonica (see Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p. 247). Though he
ranked among St Paul's avvepyol (Phm.), the absence of any com
mendation here certainly fits in well with the blame in 2 Tim. five
years after. Bengel's suggestion that he is mentioned without praise
because he was St Paul's amanuensis iu this epistle is worth notice.
15 — 17. Greetings to believers at Laodicea (v. 15) and directions
affecting both Laodicea and Colossae (vv. 16, 17).
(v. 15) Greet for us the brethren in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and
the Church that meets at the house of him and his. (v. 16) And
while I am speaking of Laodicea see that when this letter has been
read before you it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans, and
that you too read my letter that will come from Laodicea. (v. 17) And
say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which thou didst receive
in the Lord, that thou mayest fulfil it.
15. 'Ao-irdo-ao-9e, as from St Paul and Timothy.
tovs ev AaoSixCa dSeXcpovs. Probably but few compared with
those in Colossae if they were under the charge of Archippus (vide
infra). Kal Nvptpav. Lightfoot reads Nvptpav (D°LP), a rare masculine
form contracted probably from Nymphodorus. He rejects TSiptpav
(BEuthal0011) the feminine (compare airijs infra) on the ground that
although the name Nymphe, Nympha, Nympa occurs from time to
time in Latin inscriptions, the Doric form of the Greek name here
seems in the highest degree improbable (Martha, John xi. 5, and
Lydda, Acts ix. 38, are, strictly speaking, Shemitic words).

4 lbj NOTES 167
But Moulton (Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 48) thinks that " as pdxaipa
produced paxaipvs on the model of S6£a SSJtjs, so by a reverse analogy,
the gen. Niptpvs as a proper name produced what may be read as
Ni5/irpd Ni)/i0dv iu nom. and ace." He also compares AouXo as a
proper name, and Bipijva iu a Christian inscription. So perhaps we
are warranted in accepting ovtjjs infra, and recognising in Nympha
the lady of the house. Nympha doubtless lived in Laodicea or its
immediate neighbourhood. To suppose that she lived at Colossae,
or even Hierapolis, would involve an awkward insertion between
two references to Laodicea. There is no other reference to Nympha
(or Nymphas) in the N.T. and there are no early traditions. In
the Coptic fragments of the Acts of Paul Hermocrates and his wife
Nympha are mentioned as two of St Paul's converts at Myra
(Hennecke, Handb. zu den N.T. Apokryphen, 1904, pp. 362, 364).
Kal ttjv Kar oIkov ovttjs eKKXi)o-Cav. For the authorities for ovttjs,
outoO, air&v see the notes on Textual Criticism. If air&v were
genuine here, to what would it refer? Hardly to "the brethren in
Laodicea " on the one side and Nymphas (or Nympha) on the other,
for the house would not easily be under such dual control. Probably
therefore to Nymphas (?) and those with him, particularly his wife
(cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 19; Rom. xvi. 5). But the commentators adduce no
indisputable examples of such a usage.
" The Church at their house " will be that section of believers who
found it convenient to use their house as a meeting place for prayer
and praise. " It seems pretty clear that St Paul's language points to
a practice by which wealthy or otherwise important persons who
had become Christians, among their other services to their brother
Christians, allowed the large hall or saloon often attached to (or
included in) the larger sort of private houses, to be used as places of
meeting, whether for worship or for other affairs of the community.
Accordingly the Ecclesia in the house of this or that man, would
seem to mean that particular assemblage of Christians, out of the
Christians of the whole city, which was accustomed to meet under
his roof" (Hort, The Christian Ecclesia, pp. 117 sq.). So besides
Nympha at Laodicea we have Philemon at Colossae (Phm. 2), as
well as Aquila and Priscilla at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 19) and the
same pair later on at Rome (Rom. xvi. 5). Compare Pearson, Ore the
Creed, p. 338.
16. A command to exchange St Paul's letters between Laodicea
and Colossae.
oVav dvaYV»o-9xj Trap' vpiv. Probably at Divine Service, that being
the readiest means of ensuring that it be heard by all, a point on

1 68 COLOSSIANS [4 16—
which St Paul lays special stress in 1 Thes. v. 27. Compare Acts xv.
30, 31, where observe that in v. 32 Judas and Silas, being prophets,
give (apparently public) exhortations. For the dvayvaais see also
1 Tim. iv. 13, and cf. Swete on Apoc. i. 3.
ij eirio-ToXTJ, i.e. this letter. So 2 Thes. iii. 14 ; Bom. xvi. 22.
iroiTJo-aTe Eva, " cause that." Cf. Blass, Gram. § 69. 4. See John
xi. 37. There is no need to suppose any other reason for the phrase
than the trouble involved in getting the letter to Laodicea, and the
Laodicean letter to Colossae (vide infra).
Kal iv tt) AaoSiKeW £kkXt)o-£o. dva-yvoo-Orj. Cf. 1 Thes. i. 1 and
2 Thes. i. 1. In these three passages only is the Ecclesia designated
by " the adjectival local name of its members" (Hort, The Christian
Ecclesia, p. 114). The absence of the second article before AaoS. is
strange, but resembles the passages quoted from 1 and 2 Thes.
Kal tt]v 4k AaoSiKCas. Lightfoot's Additional Note on this phrase
(pp. 340 — 366) is a typical example of his thoroughness and
lucidity. Out of the many interpretations tabulated by him two only are
worth serious attention : (1) that St Paul means a lost letter of his to
the Laodiceans, or (2) that he means the Circular letter known
as the Epistle to the Ephesians, which Marcion actually includes
in his canon under the title "To the Laodiceans."
As to (1) there is of course no reason why a letter by St Paul
should not have been lost (cf. 1 Cor. v. 9), but as Abbott points out
(a) St Paul himself seems to have attached some importance to this
one; (6) the direction in this verse would have ensured it greater
publicity; (c) if the Colossians preserved Phm. how much more
would they have preserved this other [yet, after all, Phm. be
longed to them in a way that this other did not] ; (d) we know that
St Paul sent three Epistles at this time, Eph., Col., Phm., and
we can hardly assume a fourth, except on necessity ; (e) St Paul's
description of it would more naturally have been tV Trpos AaoSiKeus.
As to (2) assuming the circular character of Eph. (a question
which cannot be discussed here) it would naturally be read at
Laodicea before Colossae, because that city lay first on Tychicus'
route, and would have been addressed to Laodicea rather than
Colossae as the more important city of the two ; and again St Paul
would hardly think it necessary to have a separate copy of it made
for Colossae in view of the nearness of the two cities. Yet Eph.
is sufficiently different from Col. to render it advisable that both
Epistles should be read by the Christians at each place.
On the forged letter to Laodicea see Lightfoot, pp. 347 sqq.

4 17] NOTES 169
Observe further (1) that in the phrase ttjv ix AaoSixtas the pre
position is used proleptioally, " that which comes to you " thence ;
of. Matt. xxiv. 17. (2) The phrase is placed before tva for emphasis ;
cf. Gal. ii. 10.
tva Kal vpeis dva-yvcoTe. Perhaps dependent on the preceding
wotijaare. An ellipse of BXiirere (cf. 2 Cor. viii. 7) not only appears
unnecessary in itself, but would impart a sternness into it for which
there appears to be no need (cf. Meyer). But see on v. 17.
17. Kal. Probably continuing the immediately preceding subject
of their relations with Laodicea (vide infra).
etiraTe. " Forms belonging to e?Tra stand without var. in those
persons of the imperative which contain r (e?Trare, eiVdTw, -raaav)"
W.H. Append, p. 164; cf. Blass, Gram. § 21. 1.
There seems to be no parallel in the N.T. for sending a message to
an individual through the community addressed. It suggests there
fore some special responsibility on the part of the community towards
Archippus. But we oan hardly suppose that he was set over the Colossians
spiritually, for, surely, it would be unseemly both for St Paul to give
them, and for the Colossians to deliver, a message that would be
virtually, "Do your duty towards us as our minister." If, on the
other hand, they had entrusted him with spiritual work on their
behalf elsewhere St Paul would naturally be glad to recognise
their zeal by sending the message through them. The mention
of Laodicea in the preceding verse suggests that this work lay
there. 'ApxCiririp. Phm. 2f, where avvaTpaTiorns indicates that he was
engaged in aggressive work for Christ.
He was evidently known personally to St Paul. It may, how
ever, perhaps be assumed that he had had no recent intercourse with
St Paul ; for, from his apparently intimate relations with Philemon,
there would then have been little necessity for St Paul to write so
fully about Onesimus.
pXeire. "Look to the ministry... that thou mayest," etc. The
construction, a direct object with the addition of tva designating the
purpose, is found also in 2 John 8. But perhaps 'iva does not depend
on the preceding words, but takes the place of an imperative, see
Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, p. 178.
•njv SiaKovCav. Its nature is undefined. We are not justified in
limiting so common a term to the technical diaconate at this early
date (cf. v. 7, note).
rjv irap&apes. At whose hands (see note on irapeXdBere, ii. 6) he

170

COLOSSIANS [4 17—

had received it is not stated (for Chrysostom's interpretation see next
note). The fact that St Paul had never been to Laodicea or Colossae
(ii. 1), and, further, the improbability that he had seen Archippus
lately, make it unlikely that Archippus had received this charge from
him. Perhaps he had received it from Epaphras (e.g. when the latter
left for Rome), but even if so etiraTe suggests (see note) that the
Colossian Christians were largely responsible for it. It is therefore
questionable whether the immediate reference of the Trapd be not to
them as a body rather than to any one person.
iv Kvpttp, v. 7, iii. 18, 20. Removing the charge wholly out of the
sphere of any merely mundane duty. "In the Lord" is at once a
mark of holy obligation and a pledge of success. Chrysostom says
curiously (414 b), ttoXiv to, iv, Sid xvpiov iarlv airbs aoi iSuxe, tpvaiv,
aix Tj/ieis. Bengel says rightly " irapiXaBes, quod accepisti vocatione
mediata. Non enim sequitur a Domino, coll. 1 Cor. xi. 23, sed, in
Domino." Xva (see note on BXiire) avTTjv irX-npois, i.e. fill up to its ideal
content (see note on irXvp&aai, i. 25). Cf. Rev. iii. 2; Acts xii. 25 ;
cf. 2 Tim. iv. 5.
18. Valediction.
Greeting by my own hand, Paul's. Remember my present state in
bonds. Grace be with you.
d do-irao-pos tjj epfj X"^ IlavXov. "The salutation by the hand
of me, Paul." Thus in 1 Cor. xvi. 21 ; 2 Thes. iii. 17 only. Both a
guarantee of genuineness and a symbol of affection.
"The gen. nadXov is in apposition to the personal pronoun in
volved in ipij" (Ell.). Compare Soph. Oed. Col. 344, rdpa Svarijvov
xaxd. pvnpoveveTe pov tov Seo-puv. He was perhaps reminded of his
chains by the awkwardness of writing the preceding clause, especially
if the chain was attached to his right hand. The primary reason for
his pathetic utterance lies probably in his desire for their prayers (of.
tj. 3, note on ko! Trepl i)p&v), but it is evident that the remembrance
of his condition would tend not only to make them receive his words
with greater reverence (cf. Phm. 9), but also to brace up their own
faith and energy. For the fact of his chains see v. 3, note, SiSepai.
Chrysostom (pp. 414 d— 416 a) makes a fine appeal to his hearers
for self-denial, sympathy, etc., based partly on this phrase and partly
on St Paul's mention of his tears, Acts xx. 31.
tj X<*Pls I"®' vpwv. The exact phrase only in 1 Tim. vi. 21 ; 2 Tim.
iv. 22. In all the Epistles of the first two groups and in Phil, and
Phm. tj x<fy"S is defined by the addition of rou xvpiov [i)puov] 'Xvaov

4 18] NOTES 171
[Xpio-ToO] (cf. Bev. xxii. 21), but it stands absolutely here and in Eph.,
the Pastoral Epistles and also Heb. xiii. 25. It thus serves roughly as
a chronological guide.
It is characteristic of St Paul's sense of the favour and the
power of God that as he began his Epistle by wishing his readers
'grace' (i. 2), so he should close it by praying for its continuance
with them.
On the d/iTjv of the Textus Receptus and the Subscription see the
notes on Textual Criticism.

NOTES.

PHILEMON.
It will be remembered that this epistle is no longer extant in B.
Title. irpbs *iXij/iova KA, a few cursives, memph., gothic.
257 (f801'=Evan. 543) has iraOXos iiriariXXei rdSe BiBaia 0iXijpovt
iriarip (vide Scrivener's Cod. Augiensis, Appendix, p. 520), which by
correcting BiBaia to Said makes an hexameter, " Paul on a, slender
theme thus writes to the faithful Philemon " (see Moule).
6. ttjv dydiriiv Kal ttjv ttCo-tiv KACGKLP, etc. The order is
changed by D, some cursives, Pesh. Arm. Ambrst. to avoid an
exegetical difficulty (see Commentary).
els tov Kvp. ACD*, appy Ambrst. irpds r. ». Text. Bee. with
NDCGKLP, Syr.Harel- Chr. appy Vulg.
6. dyaBou [tov] ev ijpiv. toO is found in Text. Bee. with
NDFS'GKLP. It is omitted in AC 17 (apparently some Latin MSS.).
i^piv ACDEL ; bp.iv Text. Bee. with NGP.
7. xapw NACDG, vulg. Syrr. xaPlv Text. Bee. (not Beza's nor
Elzevirs' editions) with KLP. For the meaning of xdpis here see Col.
iii. 16.
ttoXXtjv ftrxov XACGP ; ttoXXV iaxopev D* Orig""11, Jerome ; e\opev
toXXt)v Text. Bee. with (DC)K(L), etc. Syrr.
12. ov dveirepu/d <roi (KACD*, vulg. clem. Pesh.) avrov, tovt eoriv Ta
epd o-irXd"yxva (omitting irpoaXaBov X*AFsrGsl' 17). Text. Bee. reads
dv dviirepxpa- ab Si (tteC*[D]aKLF, etc. old Lat. [vulg. Syrr.])1 airbv,
Tovriori rd ipa airXdyxva, irpoaXaBov (S°CDKLP, etc. vulg. Syrr. Chr. ).
This is evidently due to the difficulty of airbv after the relative.
The punctuation adopted by some editors of a comma between <roi
and airbv is to bring out what is probably the right interpretation.
See Commentary.
25. dpijv is added by Text. Ree. with XCDb0, etc., but omitted by
AD*. Subscription. A is defective here. The simplest and apparently
1 N.B. The authorities in this note in square brackets differ from the Text.
Rec. by inserting, in at least some copies of the versions, trot before oil Si.

1] NOTES 173
most original form is Trpos $iXtjmovo NC 17, to whioh various additions
are made in different authorities. The Text. Rec. has ITpds ^iXrjpova
iypdtpv dirb 'Pii/iijs Sid 'Ovvaipov olxirov with K 47 al. The longest
forms may be seen in Nestle's Greek Testament, 1901.

1 — 3. Address and greeting. In the usual form employed by
St Paul with modifications due to the special circumstances of this
letter. 1. LTavXos Seo-ptos, "Paul, prisoner of Christ Jesus." St Paul
uses no title of office (dTrom-oXos) or of service (SoOXos) ; he simply
reminds Philemon of his present condition, that from the very first
Philemon may be moved to sympathy with him and his request.
Cf. Col. iv. 18, note, also v. 9 infra. The appeal is strengthened by
the absence of the article (contrast Eph. iii. 1, iv. 1).
Xpio-Tou 'Ino-ov. His imprisonment is different from that of
criminals. It is Christ who has brought him into prison. Cf. vv. 9,
13 ; Eph. iii. 1. See Winer, § 30. 2 8 and note.
Kal Tipd8eos d dScXipds. See notes on Col. i. 1. Timothy as well
as St Paul was interested in the case of Onesimus. Cf. the following
VP&v. He was probably much at Ephesus with St Paul on his third
missionary journey (cf. Acts xix. 22), and may well have entered into
friendly relationship with Philemon then .
4>iXtjpovi. Here only. The name is not uncommon in Greek
writings and inscriptions. Philemon and Baucis were the aged
peasants in Phrygia who entertained Jupiter and Mercury unawares
(cf. Ovid, Met. vni. 626 sq. ), and a Phrygian named Philemon, and
apparently a slave, became notorious at Athens. " 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" (Lightfoot,p. 370).
That our Philemon was at Colossae when this epistle was written
may be gathered from the facts that the epistle to the Colossians
states that Onesimus belonged to that town and was immediately
returning there (iv. 9), and this epistle (written, as it would seem, at
the same time) speaks of his being sent back to Philemon (v. 12).
Also the connexion of Philemon with Archippus suggests, at the
least, connexion with Colossae (Col. iv. 17). That he was converted
by means of St Paul is, apparently, implied iu v. 19 ; and that he
endeared himself to St Paul and Timothy and was associated with
them in Christian work is stated in the following words. That he
was a man of some substance is implied not only by his 'f owning a

1 74 PHILEMON [1—
slave(I) " (as van Manen satirically puts it, Enc. Bib. 3694), but also by
possessing a house large enough to form the meeting-place of a body
of Christians (v. 2), and further by his hospitality to, as it seems,
even brethren from a distance (vv. 5 — 7). As to the place where
St Paul became acquainted both with him and, as it would seem,
with his wife and son, we have no information, save that it was not
at Colossae (Col. ii. 1); presumably Philemon came to Ephesus or
its neighbourhood, either on a, short visit for business or pleasure,
or possibly to stay some time (cf. Priscilla and Aquila). Of his
nationality we have no hint, but there is nothing to suggest that he
was not a Gentile.
to dyairTiTtp Kal o*vv€pyw TJpwv. i)p.&v doubtless belongs to both.
Because the phrase is unique D* d Ambrst add dSeXtpip after dyairirrip.
For dyairvrip see Col. i. 7, note, and also v. 16 infra. For avvepybs
see Col. iv. 11 note and also v. 24 infra.
2. Kal "AiripCa. Lightfoot (p. 372 sqq.) shows convincingly from
the inscriptions that this is not the Latin Appia, for it and its
congeners always have the aspirate, but a native Phrygian name, of
which the root is apparently a term of endearment or relationship.
It may be assumed that she was the wife of Philemon, and would
therefore take interest in the return of Onesimus. St Paul wisely
includes her name when about to plead for him.
ttj dSeXdvrj, " Therefore under Christian obligations" (Beet).
Kal 'ApxCiriro). Evidently standing in some special relation to
both Onesimus and Philemon, probably the son of the latter.
Whether he lived at Colossae and had spiritual work either in that
town or in Laodicea (see Col. iv. 17, note), or resided ordinarily at
Laodicea, would make little difference in a personal question of the
kind before us. There is little probability in the suggestion that he
was only the leader of the body of Christians that met at Philemon's
house and that this gave him such u, position there that St Paul
would think it well to include his name ; cf . Theodoret, b Si "Apxuriros
tt> SiSaaKoXiav abr&v iireiriaTevro. Chrysostom thinks him a friend
and also a clergyman, but does not definitely connect his clerical
office with Philemon's household.
T<S o-vvo-TpaTiwTtj T]pu>v, " our fellow-soldier." So of Epaphroditus,
Phil.' ii. 25+; cf. 2 Tim. ii. 3.
Observe that Philemon shares the title of avvepybs with Epaphroditus,
but Archippus that of avvarpar. Perhaps the work of the latter as
the younger man was more aggressive. That it was also more
official is implied in Col. iv. 17.
koI ttj kot oIkov o-ov e<f.*.Xr\tTia, Col. iv. 15, note. Observe (1) the

4] NOTES 175
Christians in Colossae did not necessarily, and probably did not in
fact, all meet for worship at one house. For it is improbable that
they would have found any one room sufficiently large. (2) The
apostle when writing to the Colossian Church as a whole commended
indeed Onesimus to them (iv. 9) but did not touch upon the peculiar
circumstances of the case. (3) Yet seeing that some of them met for
worship in Philemon's house he includes these in his salutation,
partly, we may suppose, in order to enlist their sympathy with his
request, and, still more, because it was in that congregation that
Onesimus would have to be recognised as a Christian. Further, some
at least of the worshippers there would be his fellow-servants, with
whom he must be properly reinstated.
aov is of course employed because the house belonged to Philemon.
It is hard to see why it is a stumbling-block to van Manen (Encycl.
Bibl. col. 3695).
3. X^PIS k.t.X. See notes on Col. i. 2.
4 — 7. Introductory thanksgiving for Philemon's faith and kindness
to the saints.
Apart from the Christian courtesy, and the tact under the circum
stances, of such an introduction, St Paul here, as always, felt that
he must first make reference to God, thanking Him for His grace
towards Philemon. Cf. the opening clauses in the Lord's Prayer.
Something similar however may be seen in the many quotations
from the papyri given by P. Ewald in loco, p. 270, e.g. irp6 irdvruv
(ttovtos) e&xopal ae byialveiv Kal rb irpoaxivvpa aov iroi& irapd rip xvpiui
2apdiri8i. i. evxapio-ro. There is no more reference to Timothy, for it was
a personal request that St Paul was about to make. Contrast the
plural in Col. i. 3.
to Beui pov. So Bom. i. 8 ; Phil. i. 3. Philemon's spiritual con
dition is new evidence of God's love towards St Paul.
irdvTore, with eixapiar&, cf. Col. i. 3, note. " I give thanks always,
namely when I make mention, etc."
pveCav cov iroiovpevos, " making mention of thee." pveiav iroteiaBai
occurs three times in the LXX., and in both its possible meanings
(a) to remember, Job xiv. 13, and probably Is. xxxii. 10 ; (b) to cause
remembrance, to make mention of, Ps. cxi. (ex.) 4, where it is a very
literal translation of the Hebrew zeker 'asah. For the classics
references are given by Lidd. and Scott to the second meaning only,
and this is found also certainly in one of the two letters of the
2nd century a.d. from papyri quoted by J. A. R. (Ephesians, pp. 276,
279), and probably in the other. One runs Trpd pAv irdyrav eOxopal ae

t76 PHILEMON [4—
bytalveiv, xal '71b 7dp airbs byialvu, pvlav aov iroioipevos irapd rots ivBdSe
Beois (Berl. Pap. 632), the other ko! oiIttj 5' vylaivov Kal to iraiSlov xal
ol iv olxu irdvres, aov Siairavrbs pvelav iroioipevoi. See also his quotation
from Athenaeus on p. 280. St Paul uses the phrase three times else
where, viz. Rom. i. 9; Eph. i. 16; 1 Thess. i. 2, almost certainly
iu the second sense, for (a) he employs ex"" pvelav to signify
"remember," 1 Thes. iii. 6; 2 Tim. i. 3; cf. Phil. i. 3; (6) in
1 Thes. i. 2 he adds pvnpoveiovres, "remembering." The force
of the middle appears to be intensive; see Col. iv. 1, note.
eirl tov irpoo-evx<3v pov, "at my prayers." St Paul always uses
this phrase with pveiav iroieioBai.
5. dKovuv, "hearing (as I do)." To be connected with ebxapiar&;
cf. v. 7, where again the love shown by Philemon is the cause of the
apostle's joy. The present points to the continued information that
the apostle has received, presumably through Epaphras (Col. i. 7, 8).
That which Onesimus brought was hardly recent, and could only
have represented the impressions of an outsider. Contrast the aorist
dxoiaavres in Col. i. 4, where the reference is primarily to the good
news of the conversion of the Colossians, and dxoiaas in Eph. i. 15.
P. Ewald (p. 272 note) thinks the whole verse may be a postscript
by the apostle, added perhaps between the lines of the original, as
sometimes in the papyri. A copyist could hardly do otherwise than
insert it in the text in the usual way.
o-ov tt^v dvdirnv. 07. here before irlans (contrast Col. i. 4 ;
1 Thess. i. 3; 2 Thess. i. 3), perhaps because St Paul is about to
appeal to Philemon's love.
Kal njv ttCo-tiv ijv 'i\evs els tov Kvpiov "Iijo-ovv Kal els irdvTas tovs
d-yCovs. See notes on Textual Criticism. This ambiguous sentence
has been understood in various ways. It will be observed that the
difficulty lies in the questions of the true antecedent of tjv and of the
meaning of irlans.
(a) tt)v iriariv may be still under the government of rj-oO (thus in
effect placing a comma after iriariv), and tjv refers to both d7dTTTjv and
iriariv, being in concord with the nearest substantive. In this case
the two following clauses, by Chiasmus, refer cross-wise — faith towards
the Lord Jesus, love towards all the saints. So Theodoret, Bengel,
Lightfoot. The chief objection is that the ordinary reader would
almost certainly have run on from iriariv to tjv (as in 6 and c) and
only have discovered his mistake when near the end of the verse.
If this interpretation is right, we may conjecture that its ambiguity
became evident to either St Paul or the amanuensis of Col. i, 4, and
that ii wg,s altered on purpose to the clear expression there.

6] NOTES 177
(6) tt)v iriariv may be entirely separate from <ro0, and i)v refers to
it alone. In this case faith is exerted towards both the Lord Jesus
and all the saints. The foroe of the last olause would appear to lie in
the value of trust on the part of Christian workers, particularly those
who work among Jews or heathen, towards converts. The imper
fections of these are often so manifest that it is only by faith, faith in
Christ's work upon them (i.e. faith in them as believers), that older
Christians are led to show them sueh kindnesses as are here implied.
The objection to this is that iriaris in the sense of " trust," " confi
dence," nowhere else has man for its object, except in the doubtful
passage Eph. i. 15, on which however see J. A. R. Eph. pp. 295 sq.
(c) With the same construction as in (b) to iriariv may be given
the meaning of faithfulness (e.g. Gal. v. 22). The very serious
objection is that nowhere has irlans this meaning when followed by
a phrase like els rbv Kipiov 'Xvaovv.
(d) P. Ewald (see especially Eph. p. 94) would give to Trirms here
and Eph. i. 15 both its possible meanings, viz. faith on the Lord
Jesus and faithfulness to all the saints (Glaube und Treue).
On the whole (a) is the most probable interpretation.
els tov Kvp. See notes on Textual Criticism. Trpos is found so
much more rarely with irlans, iriareia, apparently only in 1 Thess. i. 8
(cf. with ireirolBvais, 2 Cor. iii. 4), that if internal evidence alone be
considered it is probably genuine here. " Of the two prepositions
the former (lrpo — s) signifies direction ' forward to,' ' towards ' ; the
latter (ev — s) arrival and so contact ' in- to,' ' unto.'... Where a dis
tinction is necessary there is a propriety in using irpbs of the faith
which aspires towards Christ, and els of the love which is exerted
upon men" (Lightfoot). In any case the difference of prepositions
would tend to give some indication of the fact (apparently) that the
first clause refers to irlans and the second to dyairn.
irdvras tous d-yious, Col. i. 2, 4, notes.
6. The key to the interpretation of this verse lies in the fact that
in each of the other three epistles of the First Roman Captivity
(Phil. i. 9 ; Col. i. 9, 10; cf. ii. 2; Eph. i. 17) St Paul's prayer for his
correspondents culminates in this word iirlyvaais. Hence by the
analogy of those epistles, two of which were written almost at the
same moment as this, we should expect to find here an expression of
St Paul's hope that Philemon (not those on whom Philemon had
influence) would advance in the iirlyvaais of divine things.
It will conduce to clearness if we first interpret the verse positively
upon this basis, and reserve to the end of it all notice of other methods
of exegesis. M

178 PHILEMON [6—
oirws. To be connected with the whole clause pvelav aov iroioipevos
iirl r&v irpoaevx&v pov, but not as representing the contents of
the prayer, for which there is no parallel in St Paul (contrast tva
Col. i. 9, note), though examples may probably be seen in Matt. viii.
34, ix. 38 ; Luke vii. 3 al. It states the aim and result, as
in 2 Thes. i. 11, 12. To connect it with vv ixeis, even with the
connotation of God's providence overruling all (cf. Haupt), gives
undue prominence to what is probably a subordinate clause (vv...
dylovs). r) KOLvwvia ttjs irCcrreios (rov. Probably tj xoivuvla is here absolute,
and means the spirit of fellowship and communion, almost our
" brotherliness." So Gal. ii. 9, and probably 2 Cor. vi. 14 and
xiii. 13 (" the true sense of membership which the One Spirit gives
to the One Body," J. A. E. in Hastings' D. B. i. 460). Thus ttjs
irlareas is the subjective genitive. It produces brotherliness, which
is shown in the way described in the preceding verse. This is
exercised towards all the saints as they need it. Observe that we
must not exclude even St Paul, and indeed he himself appears to
allude to the xoivavla felt by Philemon in v. 17 (see there).
Although in every other case in the N.T. the genitive of the thing
is objective ("partnership in thy faith," ef. 1 Cor. x. 16; Phil. ii. 1)
this is impossible here if iirlyvaais refers to Philemon.
ivepyrjs Ye'vrrrai, " may become effective." ivepybs (of which -tjs is
said to be a later form) is used of land productive as contrasted with
dp7os (Xen. Cyr. 3. 2. 19) ; cf. 2 Pet. i. 8. On the verb see Col. i. 29,
note. The adj. occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in 1 Cor. xvi. 9;
Heb. iv. 12. The aim of St Paul's prayer is that the brotherliness
which Philemon feels and shows (in itself the result of his faith) may
not rest content but prove itself effective in producing eVf/yvwiris.
eiriyvurrei, Col. i. 9, note.
iravTos dyaOov. Certainly neuter. The full knowledge of every
good thing that in reality is in the present possession of the Christian
presupposes an extraordinary advance in his spiritual life. There may
be a special reference to that principle of brotherhood in Christ
which indicates to Philemon the true attitude towards Onesimus.
[tov]. See notes on Textual Criticism. If tou is omitted the
construction is very harsh. For then there seems to be no exact
parallel for the clause meaning ' ' every good thing that is in us "
(even 1 Thes. i. 1 ; 2 Thes. i. 1 are not quite the same, for iKKXijala
there has already been defined). Would its omission suggest that
"every good thing" does not properly belong to us, but only comes
into being in the course of our Christian life ?

7] NOTES 179
iv ljpiv. See notes on Textual Criticism. Of Christians gene
rally. els Xpiordv. The final aim and object of all. The phrase is
probably not to be rigidly confined to ivepyiis yivvrai, but is to be
understood of each part of the last clause. Both the activity in
knowledge, and the presence of every good thing in us, is " unto
Christ " ; cf . Col. i. 16.
Other interpretations of this verse are many, and it would perhaps
be hard to find two commentators who wholly agree in their exposition
of it. The principal divergence from that which is given above is due
to the failure to perceive that the iirlyvaais is Philemon's. Hence
the verse is understood to mean (a) " that the partaking of others in
thy faith (thanks to thy love, eto.) may produce in them full know
ledge," etc. With this is sometimes combined the reading bpiv
suggesting the possibilities that there are for the Christians in
Philemon's town. (6) Similar to (a) with the alteration of "faith"
to " fidelity." (c) Similar to (a) but making v. 6 dependent on rjv
exeis and seeing in it the overruling providence of God. (d) Chrysostom
indeed sees that the iirlyvaais is Philemon's but understands the
xoivavia to be that of Philemon's faith with his own (cf. v. 17), xal
oix eT-rrev, i) irlans aov, dXX', tj xoivavia rijs irlareas aov, awdirrav airbv
iavrtp. But the context does not suggest this limitation of the sphere
of xoivavia.
7. xaPav 1°-P- See notes on Textual Criticism, ydp states the
reason for vv. 4 — 6, viz. his thanksgiving, prayer, and expectation of
Philemon's progress.
iroXX-tjv. The sense is carried on to irapdKXvaiv.
?o-xov. See notes on Textual Criticism. In dxoioiv (v. 5) he
represents the news as still continuing, contemporary with eixapiaru ;
here as all past, in order to emphasize the immediate effect that it
had upon him.
Kal irapcucXi]o-iv, "and encouragement"; cf. 2 Cor. vii. 4. For
the verb cf. Col. ii. 2, iv. 8. As a prisoner (vv. 1, 9) he needed
TropdKXTjrris. Compare irapvyopla, Col. iv. 11.
eirl ttj dydirrj o-ov. St Paul was trusting to this to obtain his
request for Onesimus.
Td <nrXdyxva, vv. 12, 20, and Col. iii. 12, note.
tov dy£«v. Not necessarily those immediately benefited by
Philemon. Perhaps even all Christians who heard of him.
avaireVavTai. v. 20 probably has the same relation to this word
as v. 17 to xoivavia, v. 6. Elsewhere in St Paul only 1 Cor. xvi. 18 ;
2 Cor. vii. 13. It connotes not mere rest from toil (much less
M2

180 PHILEMON [7—
permanent cessation from work, iraia) but refreshment, rest issuing
in fresh energy. Thus it is fittingly used of the rest of soldiers on
the march (Xen. Cyr. 2. 4. 3, cf. 6. 1. 11). Lightfoot quotes Plut.
Vit. Lucull. 5, TroXXffiv aiBis dvaKivoivrav rbv MiBptSariKbv irdXepov
itpv MdpKos avrov oi ireiravaBai dXX' dvaTreTraOo"f?ai.
Sid crov. " He was the agent for his Lord " (Moule).
dSeXtpe*. Emphatic. A note of St Paul's affection rather than of
Philemon's faith, see Gal. vi. 18 ; cf. v. 20.
8 — 20. The Request.
8. Aid. An application of the preceding statement (vv. 4 — 7),
particularly of that of the effect produced by Philemon'B love.
Probably expanded by Sid ttjv dydirvv, and iu any case to be taken
closely with TrapaKaXw.
iroXX^v ev Xpio-rip irappuo-Cav ?xuv' '-e- though having, he will not
use it. On irappvaia see Col. ii. 15, note. Here it means freedom of
speech towards Philemon based on the consciousness of right.
Similarly, as it seems, in 1 Tim. iii. 13 (cf. 2 Cor. vii. 4). He could
speak strongly if he chose, and if he were to do so no fault could be
found with him. For it would be no matter of personal feeling.
He possesses this freedom of speech "in Christ." He speaks as
Christian to Christian. Whether he is thinking of his apostolic
position in this phrase is very doubtful.
4iriTdo-o-eiv o-oi, " to charge thee." He is thinking of his com
mission (Acts xxvi. 16 sqq. ; Gal. i. 1).
to dviJKov. Col. iii. 18, note. French convenable (Moule), i.e. for
thee to do what I ask.
9. Sid rr\v dydirriv. Probably Philemon's. After expressly saying
croO ttjv dydirijv (v. 5) and eVi ttj dydirij rrou (v. 7) it was not necessary
for St Paul to repeat the personal pronoun once more. The love
that Philemon has shown warrants St Paul in not commanding but
in making request. Other interpretations are (a) St Paul's love;
(6) "our love," i.e. the reciprocal love of St Paul and Philemon;
(c) "love" absolutely, " Christian love in abstracto, conceived of as
a power, 1 Cor. xiii. " (Meyer).
pdXXov, v. 16, i.e. rather than command ; cf. 1 Tim. vi. 2.
irapaKaXiS, " appeal." Hardly absolute here because it is taken up
again in v. 10, irapaKaXu ae. It is used of appealing to God in
2 Cor. xii. 8, and in the Gospels of appeals made to the Lord Jesus
for help, Matt. viii. 5, xiv. 36 al. In Phil. iv. 2 St Paul probably
rather "appeals to" than "exhorts" the two ladies.
toiovtos flv cSs. The regular correlatives of toioOtos are oTos
(2 Cor. x. 11 al.), ottoios (Acts xxvi. 29t), bans (1 Cor. v. 1+), and, as

9] NOTES 181
it seems, tls is never undoubtedly employed as its correlative, though
uo-Trep is found, e.g. Alexis (Meineke, Fragm. Com. in. p. 399), toioOto
rb fijv e'oriv uairep oi xiBoi (quoted in Lightfoot). Hence Meyer and
many others join toioOtos ivv to the preceding clause, and lis NaOXos
k.t.X. closely to v. 10, TrapaKaXu rre.
But besides the ensuing strangeness of toioOtos av (for such an
ending to a clause can hardly be Pauline) this separation is not
really necessary. toioOtos has summed up the description of him
(cf. oi toioOtoi, 2 Cor. x. 11) and lis ratifies it ; " being such a man
as may be described by the terms naOXos irpeaB." So in the passage
of Alexis, " Life may be described as a game of dice." " All the
Greek commentators without a single exception connect the words
toioOtos i3v lis IIoOXos together " (Lightfoot).
On the question whether the phrase toioOtos uv lis k.t.X. adds an
argument in the appeal (TrapaKaXu, vv. 9, 10) or supplements irappvalav
i%av x.t.X. (v. 8), see below.
irpeo-pvTTjs. There is, as it seems, no various reading in this
passage, but Lightfoot has shown by abundant evidence that the
words irpeaBirvs (old man), irpeaBevrTjs (ambassador) were often con
fused by copyists, e.g. 1 Mace. xiv. 22, where for irpeaBevral 'XovSalav
the Sinaitie and Venetus read irpeaBirai. Hence it is possible that
St Paul or his amanuensis (if he employed one for this letter)
originally wrote irpeaBvrvs (sic), intending it to have the meaning of
wpeaBevTijs, or, preferably, that irpeaBevrvs was the original and was
altered by a very early copyist to irpeaBirvs (cf. W.H. Appendix).
In itself either meaning gives excellent sense.
(1) In favour of "Paul (the) old man" (Lk. i. 18; Tit. ii. 2f;
cf. Tit. ii. 3) is the important fact that, with the possible exception
of Theophylact in the eleventh century toioOtos av, tpnai, irpeaBevrvs,
Kal oOtos dfios dxoieaBai (in Lightfoot), all writers accepted this ren
dering, until (as it seems) Bentley. So Chrysostom continues the
words quoted in the last note d7rS ttjs tjXikios, 6Vi irpeaBirvs. If this
be right the sentence toioOtos... 'ItjitoO must almost certainly be taken
with TrapaKoXS, " I appeal to you, and remember that I am old and
also a prisoner" ; or possibly " I appeal, for it is not so fitting for an
old man and a prisoner to command."
(2) But it must be confessed that "ambassador" makes » far
stronger sentence. The words toioOtos... 'ItjitoO then go closely with
Trapp. ixuv iirtrdaaeiv, expanding the thought of his power to com
mand. He is an ambassador (probably " Christ's ambassador" (see
below)), even though in bonds (for the thought cf. the contemporary
Eph. vi. 20), and yet he does not use his power. Observe however

x.82 PHILEMON [9—
that, after all, this strengthens his appeal and therefore is rightly
placed by St Paul after TrapaKaXiS.
vvvl 8e, " but as the case stands now," vvvl (not vOv). Its argu
mentative force (Col. i. 21 note) is felt more if "ambassador" be
right. Kal Sea-purs Xpiorov 'Ino-ov, v. X, notes. Xp. 'Itju. is probably to be
joined also with irpeaBirvs if this has the meaning of " ambassador."
10. irapaKaXu ere. The appeal is enhanced by the repetition
of the verb.
irepl tov epov t^kvov, " about my own child." Stronger than toO
rixvov pov, cf. vv. 12, 19, Col. iv. 18, and esp. 3 John 4. So St Paul
calls Timothy his rixvov (1 Cor. iv. 17 ; Phil. ii. 22; 1 Tim. i. 2 al.),
and also Titus (Tit. i. 4).
iyivviyra.. So in 1 Cor. iv. 14, 15. But in Gal. iv. 19 he speaks
as though he were the mother, in 1 Th. ii. 7 as though the nurse, of
his converts. For his metaphor here cf. Talm. Bab. Sanhedrin 19b
" B. Samuel son of Nachmani reported that B. Jonathan said, Every
one that teacheth his neighbour's son Torah, the Scripture reckons it
to him as though he begat him, for it is said, Now these are the
generations of Aaron and Moses (Num. iii. 1), and it is written,
Now these are the names of the sons of Aaron (Num. iii. 2), mean
ing that Aaron begat them and Moses taught them ; therefore they
were called by his name."
ev toIs Seo-pois. Probably suggesting that he was the more dear
to him as born to him at such a time. Observe that " for the third
time Philemon is made to hear the clanking of the prisoner's chain "
(Beet). 'Ovrjo-ipov, Col. iv. 9t. At last he brings out the name which he
knew would not recall to Philemon pleasant associations. On the
importance attributed to names by the ancients see Lightfoot.
St Paul plays upon the name in vv. XX, 20.
11. tov TroTe" croi dxpi)0"rov, "who onee was useless to thee."
dxpvaros here only in N.T. occurs a few times in LXX., but in no
instance illustrating our passage. In Mt. xxv. 30; Lk. xvii. 10
dxpetos is used of worthless slaves. According to Tittmann quoted
by Trench Synon. § c. 17 dxpetos is the more negative word of the
two, dxpvaros suggesting positive hurtfulness. All the modern com
mentators quote Plato Resp. in. p. 411 a xpi<".^ov i% dxptjfTov...
irolvaev. vvvl 8e o-ol Kal Ipoi euxpuarov. Onesimus "erit nomini suo
respondens servus utilis" (Wetstein), and will presumably act in
accordance with Col. iii. 22 sqq. It is curious that the Greek

13] NOTES 183
commentators do not notice the play on the name. P. Ewald indeed
doubts it here, saying that St Paul might have employed more
closely related terms such as dvovTjros and ovtjtos. For eflxpTjoros
see 2 Tim. ii. 21, iv. lit and in LXX. Prov. xxxi. 13 (31) ; Wisd.
xiii. 13+.
ko! ipoi is, as Lightfoot points out, striotly an afterthought (of.
Phil. ii. 27) and therefore (contrary to Greek usage) the second
person precedes. Observe that as his usefulness to Philemon must
lie in the same range as the uselessness, i.e. in material service, so
also presumably his usefulness to St Paul. The latter, that is to
say, is not thinking of Onesimus' conversion representing the gain
and recompense of his labour (cf. Phil. i. 22, ii. 16), but of the
practical assistance that Onesimus was to him in the things of daily
life. The words thus serve to introduce the thought of v. 13.
12. Sv dveirep.v|/a, " whom I send on," as stated in Col. iv. 9.
Epistolary aorist, cf. eypaxj/a, vv. 19, 21, lirepnpa, Col. iv. 8. The
force of dva is probably " on " to a higher or more proper quarter,
Ac. xxv. 21; Lk. xxiii. 7, cf. Deissmann Bible Studies p. 229, but
perhaps it means "back," Lk. xxiii. 11, 15.
0-01. See notes on Textual Criticism.
avrov. Hardly a " Hebraism " with 8v, for this construction no
where occurs in St Paul's writings. Even Gal. ii. 10 is so only in
appearance. It was probably added for emphasis (cf. the threefold
avros in John ix. 21). Its object is to bring Onesimus vividly before
the reader, and thus prepare the way for the strong contrast toOt'
eVTiv to ipa airXdyxva.
Lightfoot somewhat strangely places a full stop at aol, and makes
airbv a suspended accusative governed ultimately by irpoaXaBov in
v. 17. Meyer had already done so, but his adoption of the false
reading rri> Si left him no choice.
tovt* eomv (Rom. vii. 18, x. 8) Ta epd o-irXdyxva, "that is, my
very heartstrings." Pesh., Theodoret, and perhaps even Chrysostom,
understand airXdyxva as equivalent to rixvov (v. 10). For such a use
of airXdyxva and viscera see many quotations in Wetstein. But not
only is this tautological after v. 10, but the frequent use by St Paul
of airXdyxva to express emotion (v. 7, 20; Col. iii. 12) makes it
extremely improbable.
On irpoaXaBov in the Text. Rec, see notes on Textual Criticism.
13. 8v eyio, emphatic, cf. vv. 19, 20.
ePovXdpr|v, " was minded," of. 2 Cor. i. 15. Apparently BoiXopai
expresses greater deliberation and less emotion than BiXa, but in
St Paul the feeling of love to Philemon conquered. The imperfect

1 84 PHILEMON [13—
is of durative and here completed action; the aor. (v. 14) of punc-
tiliar and here completed action.
Trpos epavTov, apud, cf. 1 Thes. iii. 4; 2 Thes. ii. 5.
KaTexew, "detain," Lk. iv. 42.
Iva virep orov, cf. Col. i. 7. " In thy behalf " ; cf. Chrysostom Bupes
oiras diroSips rr/v irpbs ipi Xeirovpyiav Si' abrov. While however this
is in itself the most probable interpretation of virip, and agrees
most closely with St Paul's distinction of dvrl and birip, it is possible
that he uses iirip here in the same sense that occurs in the papyri
iypaipev birip avrov N N Sid rb pi] elSivat airbv rd ypdfipara, where
writing on behalf of so and so is very nearly equal to writing in his
stead (see P. Ewald).
Iv tois Seo-pots (v. 10, note).
St Paul could not say precisely "in prison," for he was still
apparently in his hired lodging (Ac. xxviii. 30), but Onesimus'
ministry had to be exercised in a condition of things represented
by bonds (cf. Ac. xxviii. 16), therefore the more trying to both
agent and recipient.
tov evayyeXCov. Probably genitive of cause, cf. note on XpirrroO
'Itjo-oO, tj. 1. Yet the very mention of " gospel " must have cheered
St Paul, and Lightfoot fittingly compares St Ignatius' references to
his bonds, e.g. Ephes. § 11, ev ip (i.e. Xpianp 'Xvaov) rd Seapd irepitpipa,
tovs irvevpariKobs papyapiras.
14. \ap\i Se ttjs o-rjs yvwpTjs. "But apart from (Rom. x. 14)
thy judgment." For yvapv see esp. 1 Cor. i. 10 with Lightfoot's
note there, o-jjs (not ttjs yvtipv* <r°v) f°r emphasis.
tva prj ios KaTa dvdyKijv. For KOTd dvdyKVvf cf. 2 Mac. xv. 2 t&v Si
Kara dvdyKvv aweiropivav aOrip 'IouSaiwv. Cf. i£ dvdyKvs 2 Cor. ix. 7;
Heb. vii. 12+. i!>s that there might not be even an appearance of
constraint. t8 dya9dv o-ov ij. (a) The usual meaning of d7a0dv is passive,
au advantage or blessing received, cf. v. 6. So also even Rom.
xiv. 16, where it = the blessing of Christian liberty. But here it
would hardly be gracious of St Paul to refer again to 0Trr>p o-oO (v. 13)
and speak of the advantage that Philemon would have received through
Onesimus. (6) Hence we must attribute to it an active sense, either
(a) specifically, thy kind action in this case, or, and more probably,
(8) generally "thy kindness." It thus approaches the meaning of
dyaBaaivv, but perhaps is more abstract.
The exact direction in which the kindness is here supposed to be
shown has been disputed. (1) v. 15 suggests that it is his kindness
towards Onesimus, For bad St Paul retained him Philemon would

15] NOTES 185
have been compelled to recognise his Christian membership.
Whereas now that he is returning to Colossae Philemon will be free
to do as he likes. (2) But probably the thought of v. 13 is continued,
and St Paul means that he did not wish to compel Philemon to show
to himself the kindness of ministry by means of Onesimus. Could
St Paul have retained Onesimus' services without this apparent
constraint on Philemon he might indeed have done so. But he would
not under the circumstances.
dXXd KaTa Ikovo-iov+. Probably, " but as a freewill offering."
So Num. xv. 3+ p.eyaXOvai eixrjv tj KaB' iKoiaiov " to accomplish a
vow, or as a freewill offering." Similarly a Greek translator has for
the same phrase (b'Wdabah) els iKoiaiov in Lev. xxii. 21, and
imiaiov for "freewill offering" alone (nedabah) in verse 23. Iu
Lev. vii. 6 (16), xxiii. 38; Num. xxix. 39, the LXX. (cf. also
Dt. xii. 6 A), and in Deut. xxiii. 24 (23) Aquila, Symmachus and
Theodotion, translate nedabah sing, or plur. by iKoiaiov, iKoiaia (cf.
Ezek. xlvi. 12). No example seems to be forthcoming of its use
merely in the sense of "willingly," though we find KaB' iKoiaiov
TpoTrov (Porphyr. De Abst. 1. 9) and KaB' iKovalav (sc. yviipvv, Thuc.
vm. 27). Compare also iKovaias X Pet. v. 2; Heb. a. 26+.
15. Ta\a ydp. 7ap states another reason for St Paul not retaining
Onesimus, viz. that God in permitting his flight may have had
Philemon's own interests in view, rdxa (Rom. v. 7+) shows that
this is merely a suggestion. He could not pretend to see clearly into
God's counsels.
Sid tovto. Defined by the following tva, 2 Cor. xiii. 10;
1 Tim. i. 16.
ex<opCo-8T), prob. "he departed."
Chrysostom may be right in dwelling on the passive form and
seeing in it the statement that Onesimus "was parted" from
Philemon by the all-wise providence of God, and in comparing
Joseph's words (Gen. xiv. 5) "God did send me," but as there
is no passage in the N.T. where xwjtiCfojtuu certainly has a passive
sense, and some where it indubitably only = depart (Ac. i. 4, xviii. 1, 2),
it is safer to understand it so here. Iu any case notice St Paul's
tact in avoiding a word which would immediately suggest "flight,"
or lay stress on Onesimus' self-determination iu leaving Philemon ;
eitpvpas Si Kal ttjv tpvyvv xupiapbv KaXei, tva pi] rip bvbpan rijs tpvyijs
irapo^ivj} rbv Seairbrvv (Theoph.).
Jva alwviov avTov. aliivios predicating a person only here, where
however its properly adverbial meaning has only taken the adjectival
form. Compare the use of the Latin frequens. Bengel says aeter-

186 PHILEMON [15—
nam in hac vita, Ex. xxi. 6, et in coelo, rightly feeling that the inci
dent of the slave when his ear is bored belonging to his master " for
ever" does not exhaust the connotation of the aliivios to St Paul.
To him it suggested eternal relationship, as he explains in v. 16.
direxns. Wherever else in the N.T. dirixa governs'an accusative
it = "have to the full," Mt. vi. 2, 5, 16; Lk. vi. 24; Phil. iv. 18+.
And so probably here with the durative present (cf. Moulton op. cit.
p. 110), that you may hold him for ever in full possession.
16. ovKeTi. Not pvxin as though it would depend on the reception
of him by Philemon. "The 'no more as a slave' is an absolute
fact, whether Philemon chooses to recognise it or not" (Lightfoot).
cos. SoOXos Onesimus is and will remain, hut not lis SovXos.
SovXov. He has kept the word back till he has been able to put
oixin &s before it, and until he has hinted that Onesimus and
Philemon have entered into everlasting relations.
dXXd virep SovXov, " but beyond a slave." Cf. v. 21, Mt. x. 24 bis,
37 bis. For the thought, but from the point of view of the slave, see
1 Tim. vi. 2.
dSeX<|>dv dyairr|Tdv. See Col. iv. 7, note. The additional ttio-tSs of
Col. iv. 9 has been already implied in our epistle (e.g. v. XX).
pdXurra epoC. Doubtless referring to the compound thought " a
brother beloved." Many commentators have remarked on the
oxymoron of /xdXitrTa...Tr6rrip Si pdXXov, with which rlXaxiaroTepos
(Eph. iii. 8) might be compared. But it is hypercriticism to insist
that pAXiara must have its full exclusive force. In all languages
superlatives become weak. Here it is no more than " especially," or
even "very greatly," cf. Ac. xxvi. 3.
irdertp 8e pdXXov o-ol. ttiJV. pdX. elsewhere in St Paul's writings
only Eo. xi. 12, 24.
Kal iv crapKl. Of earthly as contrasted with spiritual relations
(iv xvpla), cf. Col. iii. 22.
Kal ev KvpCu. v. 20, see Col. iii. 18, 20, iv. 7, 17.
17. el oiv. oDv sums up the preceding argument fr. vv. 10 — 16
and embodies it in the following direct request.
pe, the emphasis is not on this but on xoivavbv.
?X41S- Probably = hold, reckon, cf. Mt. xiv. 5.
Koivuvdv, "partner." Not to be weakened (with Chrysostom) to
mean little more than tpiXov. Probably even " comrade " and " asso
ciate" are too weak here, for xoivavbs implies more or less formal
partnership. In Lk. v. 10 it has probably its strictest meaning, and
the business terms in the two following verses are quite in accord
ance with this meaning here. But of course the partnership between

19] NOTES 187
Philemon and St Paul was in spiritual matters, i.e. the Gospel, with
all that it means of both blessings and duties. Similarly of St Paul
and Titus, 2 Cor. viii. 23.
irpoo-XaPov. Elsewhere in St Paul's Epp. only Ro. xiv. 1, 3,
xv. 7 bis. It implies receiving into full fellowship, as God received
us. It would be a fitting term, one would suppose, to be used of a
firm admitting a fresh partner, but the actual usage is more general ;
see esp. Ac. xviii. 26, xxviii. 2 ; 2 Mac. viii. 1.
avrov ws Ipe*, cf. v. 12.
18. el 8e ti. The Si states an objection which Philemon might
raise against the reception of Onesimus. The hypothetical term is
probably due to a desire to avoid all irritation, "Attic politeness"
(Mey.), St Paul knowing from Onesimus' confession that such was
really the case. Possibly however St Paul was in some doubt as to
the fact, owing to the matter presenting itself to Philemon and to
Onesimus in different aspects.
ijSCKi]o-e'v o-e, " did thee an injury."
See Col. iii. 25 for the use of dSixeiv in reference (probably) to a
slave. Though a general word in itself it must here refer to money,
for otherwise St Paul could not pay it back (tj. 19). For a similar
connotation see (probably) 1 Cor. vi. 8. The aor. marks only the
time when Onesimus committed the act, and does not say whether
this was when he was still with Philemon or when he went away.
tj dipeCXei. Not merely epexegetic of fjSlxvaiv ae and indicating the
present result of that act, but wider. He may have "injured"
Philemon by directly robbing him, he may be " owing " him some
thing partly by that and partly by not having repaid moneys expended
on him. Hence f) rather than xal.
tovto epol eXXdya, "reckon this to me." "Hesychius iXXbyei,
KaTaX67Tjo-ai " (Beng.) ; almost "ledger it." Onesimus would have long
since spent anything he took. For the form see Bom. v. 13+. Exx.
of eXXoyeiv (text Bee. here and Rom.) on monuments are given in
Lightfoot. See also Blass Gram. § 22, 2, for other cases of confusion
between verbs in -iu and in -da.
19. e'yw IlavXos. For these two words see Col. i. 23, note.
It is very precarious to argue that this verse makes it probable
that the whole Epistle was written by St Paul himself, for although
the position of the autograph is certainly unique (cf. Col. iv. 18 and
note), yet he would hardly have said ttj iprj xetpi so emphatically in
reference to repaying if in fact the whole epistle had been written by
him. It is at least as likely that he took up the pen for a minute
and wrote this verse only.

188 PHILEMON [19—
eypav/a. Epistolary, v. 21. Cf. also dviirepyj/a v. 12.
"The aorist is the tense commonly used in signatures; e.g. bri-
ypa\pa to the conciliar decrees" (Lightfoot).
ttj epij x£lP'> *Y™- The repetition of the iyti is very fine, both in
argument and in proof of love.
diroTCo-w. Here only in the N.T. but often in LXX. For the
meaning " pay back," as doubtless here, see Ex. xxi. 19, 34 ; 2 Sam.
xii. 6 ; Ps. xxxvi. (xxxvii.) 21.
If it be asked whence St Paul would pay back the debt, the
answer may lie either in his having some property of his own (cf.
Bamsay on his imprisonment at Caesarea St Paul the Traveller,
c. xiii.), or in the gifts of the Philippian Christians (Phil. iv. 10 — 18),
or in the possibility of his asking friends to help him.
tva. pi) Xiya o-oi 8ti k.t.X., "not to say to thee that." The
figure of speech known as paraleipsis or praeteritio, in which
the speaker pretends to pass over something which in reality he
mentions (see Blass Gram. § 82, 9), ef. 2 Cor. ix. 4.
A perversely ingenious interpretation takes iyii XXavXos...dirorlaa
as a parenthesis, and contrasts iroi with ipoi iXXbya. "Put it down
to me. ..not to say thee (as I might fairly say, i.e. to work off part of
the debt to me), because " thou owest me much more. But St Paul
would surely not have wrecked his sentence by putting his autograph
between the two contrasted words.
Kal o-eavTov poi irpoo-oipeCXeis. irpoaotpeiXeiv here only in Biblical
Greek. Thou owest me already as much as Onesimus' debt, and in
addition even thyself. For through St Paul's means (evidently) he
had passed out of the state of spiritual death into full existence,
and full ownership of himself.
20. vaC. In Phil. iv. 3 it similarly "introduces an affectionate
appeal." Possibly it = " yes, you owe so much. " But far better as
accepting the situation (Mt. xi. 26) that he has proposed. It thus =
"yes, I am sure that you will welcome Onesimus back, freely and
without payment from me."
dSeXd>e, v. 7. " It is the entreaty of a brother to a brother on
behalf of a brother " (Lightfoot).
lyio o-ov dvaCpi|v. iyii is emphatic. Thou wast once profited by
me, now may I get profit from thee by thy treatment of Onesimus.
bvlvvpi here only in the N.T. and in the LXX. of the Hebrew
canonical books. But twice in the Apocrypha, viz. Tob. iii. 8 (B),
Ecclus. xxx. 2. This unique use of the verb by St Paul makes the
allusion to the meaning of Onesimus (v. XX) practically certain. For
the possibility that it also especially oonnotes the benefits that a

22] NOTES 189
father receives from a son (here Paul from Philemon) see many quott.
in Lightfoot, among them the passage in Ecclus.
iv KVpllp. (tj. 16.)
avairavcrdv pov Ta cnrXdyxva. Bepeat in my case what you have
so often done to others (v. 7). Some have curiously understood
a-TrXdTxva here as in tj. 12 and supposed that St Paul prays that
Onesimus may be refreshed.
ev Xpio-Tiji, with dvdTraurrov. The phrase is added both as stating
the only sphere of true refreshment (cf. Mt. xi. 28), and as carrying
with it a solemn appeal.
21, 22. Sure of Philemon's obedience, he hopes to come to him
soon. 21. ireiroi9us ttj viraKoij crov, "trusting to thy obedience." There
is no exact parallel in the N.T. to this use of iriiroiBa, with the
dative of the thing trusted ; cf. 2 Thes. iii. 4, for a similar assurance
as to obedience, iiraxoi) is a little strange here, after the very tender
and gentle way in which he has been speaking. It is probably due
to the deep consciousness of right (cf. tj. 8, note on ttoXXtjv x.t.X.) that
he had in making his request. Hence he felt that Philemon ought
to "obey" it. Compare Chrysostom 6Vep xal dpxbp.evos etire XXappv-
alav ixuv, tovto xal ivravBa els rb iiriatppaylaai tt]v iiriaroXfjv.
In 2 Cor. St Paul writes much as here, but with more connota
tion of personal authority, due to the circumstances of the case ;
so vii. 15. But in x. 6 viraxoi) is probably used in a wider sense.
P. Ewald understands viraxoi) in our passage to be not strictly
"obedience" but merely "attention" ("im Vertrauen darauf, dass
du ein offenes Ohr hast!").
eypauj/d 0-01. tj. 19, note.
elSus. Col. iii. 24, note.
oti Kal virip a Xeyco iroiTjo-eis. uTrep tj. 16, cf. also 1 Cor. iv. 6.
St Paul is sure that Philemon (a) will do what he suggests, i.e. receive
him back, and this as a brother in Christ (tj. 16), and also (probably)
into full partnership in Gospel privileges and duties (tj. 17) : (6) will
do even more, the nature of this further kindness being purposely
left undefined. It can hardly have been manumission (see note tj. 16),
but rather kindness shown in many details of act and feeling. In
any case it cannot mean that St Paul hoped that Philemon would
send Onesimus back to minister to him (v. 13), for he was expecting
his release.
22. apa Se Kal. Col. iv. 3.
Simultaneously (see Meyer) with the carrying out of my request
and more (tj. 21), be making arrangements for seeing me. Observe

190 PHILEMON [22—
that the mention by St Paul of his coming soon to Colossae would in
itself tend to ensure the welfare of Onesimus (cf. Chrysostom).
cVoCpage' poi. The aorist would have suggested greater urgency,
as though he were coming at once ; the present is consistent with
some delay. On Hort's interpretation of this verse see the Introduc
tion to Colossians, p. xlviii.
£evCav. Elsewhere in the N.T. Ac. xxviii. 23 only, of the apart
ment or house in which St Paul stayed when he first came to Rome.
It was presumably different from the i'Siov piaBapa oi verse 30, "his
own hired apartment. In the LXX. Ecclus. xxix. 27 B* only.
The classical usage of the word is rather "hospitality," but, apart
from the Biblical evidence in favour of the other meaning (slight
though it is), St Paul would hardly like to ask for this. On the
other hand a "lodging," or rather a "guest chamber," would be
much less to ask for, even though payment would not be expected,
since it would be compatible with the guest finding his own food.
St Paul probably, but not certainly, implied that it would be in
Philemon's house.
Sid tov irpoo-evxoiv vpuv. Cf. of St Peter Ac. xii. 5 sqq. Observe
ip&v, returning to tjtj. 1 — 3 (possibly also v. 6). St Paul knew that
the prayers of all his friends, and indeed of all the Church, were
going up for his release.
Xapio-OTicopai vpiv. In Col. ii. 13, iii. 13 bis xap. =" forgive,"
but in Ac. iii. 14, xxv. 11, 16, xxvii. 24, "grant" as here.
Observe that the stress is not on possession by those to whom the
person is given, but on the free kindness of the Giver ; cf. Aquila in
Gen. xxxiii. 5.
23, 24. Salutations from friends.
23. 'Ao-irdiJeTaC. Col. iv. 10, note.
o-e. Philemon as head of the household. Perhaps he was known
personally to most or some of those about to be mentioned.
Probably only Epaphras knew others of those addressed in tjtj. 1 — 3.
'E-n-arppds. Col. i. 7, iv. 12+. He is mentioned first, as belonging
to Colossae, and also perhaps as being now by St Paul's side.
d o-vvaixpdXcoTds pov. Col. iv. 10; cf. Rom. xvi. 7+. In Col. of
Aristarchus, not Epaphras ; see note there.
ev Xpicrrip 'Ii|o-ov. Almost certainly not with davd^erai (e.g.
1 Cor. xvi. 19) but with avvaixpdXaros. Cf. tjtj. 1, 9, and esp.
Eph. iv. 1. It suggests that Epaphras had taken on the imprison
ment with Paul for Christ's sake ; cf. Chrysostom ev X. 'I., ovt! tov,
Sid Xpiarbv.
24. MdpKos, 'ApCo-Tapxos. On these two names see Col. iv. 10,

25] NOTES 191
notes. In Col. also they precede Demas and Luke, though in the
reverse order. They are there expressly said to be of the circumcision,
and are, as here, included among St Paul's avvepyol.
Ar|p.ds. Aoukos. See Col. iv. 14, notes. There appears to be no
reason why the order is different here from that in Col. Chrysostom
says prettily but fancifully, 6 pivroi Aovxds iaxaros av, iyivero
Trparos. 01 o-vvepyoC pov. Col. iv. 11. Here of Mark, Aristarchus, Demas,
Luke. In Col. only of Aristarchus, Mark and Jesus Justus.
Why the last name is not added in this private letter can only be
conjectured. Possibly he was not present at the moment, or possibly
he alone (being perhaps a Jew of Rome) had had no connexion at all
with Philemon.
25. Final Benediction.
r) \aPlS- Col. iv. 18, note.
tov KvpCov 'Itjctov Xpio~rou. See notes on Textual Criticism.
perd tov irvevpaTos ipuv. Phil. iv. 23 ; Gal. vi. 18+ ; cf. 2 Tim.
iv. 22. See Col. ii. 5, note.
The reversion once more (v. 22) to vp&v is due to the width of
St Paul's sympathy. On this verse Chrysostom writes EOxr] tt)v
iwiaroXvv xarixXeiaev. 'H Si eixi) piya piv dyaBbv xal aartjptov, xal
rav \j/vx&v t&v vixeripuv tpvXaxnjpiov.
On the d/xTjv, and the Subscription, of the Text Rec, see notes on
Textual Criticism.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS WITH TABLES.

COLOSSIANS.

a=aTraf Xeybpevov in N.T.
i=In N.T. occurring in St Paul's Epistles only.
c = Not elsewhere in St Paul, but elsewhere in N.T.
d= Peculiar to the 3rd Group of St Paul's Epistles—
a, absolutely in N.T.; 8, in St Paul's writings.

iyuBbs, i. 10
ityaTrdw, iii. 12, 19
d7dTTTj, i. 4, 8, 13 ; ii. 2 ;
iii. 14
ayairirrbs, i. 7 ; iv. 7, 9,
14
dyyeXos, ii. 18
£7105,1.2,4,12, 22, 26;
iii. 12
dyav, ii. 1 

[Phil., 1 Thes.,
1 & 2 Tim. +
Heb. xii. 1+]
dyavlfapai, i. 29 ; iv. 12
dSeXtpbs, i. 1, 2; iv. 7,
9, 15
dSiKia, iii. 25 bis
fSa, iii. 16  Eph. v. 19/3
dBvpia, iii. 21
dlpa, i. 20
afpw, ii. 14
jj g +=all the passages are mentioned where the word occurs in
the N.T.
+ = all the passages are mentioned where the word occurs in
the Greek Bible.
Words omitted— abrbs, Si, all parts of iyii except the nom sing., elpl,
els iK iv, Kal, Kara with accusative, mtj, the Article, 8s, 8re, 8ri, ov,
oiVovTos, aiv, ipeis. It is believed that with these exceptions the
™^N«T& included in the Index are not noticed in the
Ta Westcott and Hort's Text has been taken as the standard
throughout.

194

COLOSSIANS

a b

c

d

++

alria, i. 9
aliiv, i. 26
dxaBapaia, iii. 5
dxoia, i. 4, 6, 9, 23
dxpoBvaria, ii. 13; iii. 11
Syn. Gospp.+
dXrjBeia, i. 5, 6
dXXd, ii. 5 ; iii. 11, 22
dXXijXwv, iii. 9, 13
apa, iv. 3
apapria, i. 14
dvayivaaxu, iv. 16 ter
Eph., Phil. B
dvaxaivba, iii. 10 
. 2 Cor. iv. 16 J
dve7/c\ijTos, i. 22 
. 1 Cor., 1 Tim.,
Tit.+
dvixopai, iii. 13
^
d
Eph. v. 4,
Phm. 8+ a
dvTjp, iii. 18, 19
dvBpairdpeaxos, iii. 22 . . . .
d
Eph. vi. 6+ a
dvBpaTos, i. 28 ter; ii.
8, 22; iii. 9, 23
dvoiya, iv. 3
dvravairXvpba, i. 24 ... :
dvTOTrSSoiris, iii. 24  •)
Ira, iii. 1, 2
d£iws, i. 10
dbparos, i. 15, 16 
. [Rom., 1 Tim.
+ Heb.+]
dTraXXorpioo/^ai, i. 21 
d
Eph. ii. 12,
iv. 18+ a
dirdrv, ii. 8
1 Cor., 2 Cor.,
Phil.+
direKSiio/jai, ii. 15; iii. 9 J
dirixSvais, ii. 11  J
ottXAttjs, iii. 22 
Rom., 2 Cor.,
Eph.+
dTr6,i. 2, 6, 7,9,23,26;
ii. 20; iii. 24
diroBvijaxa, ii. 20 ; iii. 3
dTroKOTaXXdrrrrw, i. 20,
21 
d

Eph. ii. 16+ a
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

195

dTTOKetjiiai, i. 5
diroxplvop.ai, iv. 6

aTTOKpiim-u, i. 26
dTr6Kpvrpos, ii. 3 
diroXap.8dva, iii. 24
dTroXvYpwo-is, i. 14
ottoittoXos, i. 1
dirmlBep.ai, iii. 8
dirbxpriois, ii. 22 
dirTopai, ii. 21
dpeaxla, i. 10 
'Apiirrapxos. iv. 10
dpriu, iv. 6 

freq. Gospp.
& Acts, Rev.
semel+
Mark iv. 22,
Luke viii. 17+

dpxv,i-XG, 18; ii. 10,15
."ApXlTTTTOS, iv. 17
do-Trdfojiwu, iv. 10, 12,
14, 15
dairaapbs, iv. 18
arjfdvw, i. 6, 10; ii. 19
aflfTjrris, ii. 19 
drpeiSia, ii. 23 
atpeais, i. 14 

Mark ix. 50,
Luke xiv. 34 %

dipi), ii. 19 
dxeipoTroiTjTOS, ii. 11
Bdirnapa, ii. 12
BdpBapos, iii. 11
BapvdBas, iv. 10
BaaiXeta, i. 13; iv. 11
BeBaiba, ii. 7
BXaatpvpla, iii. 8
BXiira, ii. 5, 8 ; iv. 17
BpaBeia, iii. 15 
Bp&ais, ii. 16
7dp, ii. 1, 5 ; iii. 3, 20,
25; iv. 13
7<?, i. 23
7eved, i. 26 

Eph. iv. 16+ a
Eph. i. 7/3
(+Heb.)
Eph. iv. 16 + a

yevopai-

ii. 21 .

freq. + Heb.

Eph., Phil./?
(+Heb. iii. 10)
N 2

ig6

COLOSSIANS

ttj, i. 16, 20; iii. 2, 5
ylvopai, i. 18, 23, 25;
iii. 15; iv. 11
yivtiaxa, iv. 8
yvuplfa, i. 27 ; iv. 7, 9
7vwo-is, ii. 3
7ovei5s (plur.), iii. 20
ypvyopia, iv. 2
7111/1}, iii. 18, 19
Sei, iv. 4, 6
Seiyparlfa, ii. 15 
Se£i6s, iii. 1
Seapbs, iv. 18
Sixopai, iv. 10
Sew, iv. 3
SvXba, i. 8
Avpas, iv. 14
Sid w. gen., i. 1, 16, 20
ter, 22 ; ii. 8, 12, 19 ;
iii. 17
Sid w. ace, i. 5, 9; iii.
6 ; iv. 3
Siaxovia, iv. 17
5idKoxos,i.7,23,25; iv.7
Sidvoia, i. 21 

SiSarrsaXia, ii. 22
SiSdaxa, i. 28 ; ii. 7 ; iii.
16
SISapi, i. 25
SUaios, iv. 1
Sbypa, ii. 14 

Soypari^opai, ii. 20 
Sdfa, i. 11,27 bis; iii. 4
SovXeia, iii. 24
SoOXos,iii.ll,22;iv.l,12
Sivapis, i. 11, 29
Svvapba, i. 11 

idv, iii. 13 ; iv. 10
idv = av, iii. 17, 23
iavrov, iii. 13, 16
iyelpa, ii. 12
iydi, i. 23, 25

Matt. i. 19±

Heb. xi. 34+

Eph. ii. 3, iv.
18/3 ( + Heb.)

Eph. ii. 15,
Luke, Acts + /3:

[Eph. vi. 10)
marg.]

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

197

eSpoios, i. 23

iBeXoBpnaxla, ii. 23 
Iflvos, i. 27
el, i. 23; ii. 5, 20; iii. 1
elSivai (olSa), ii. 1; iii.
24; iv. 1, 6
elSaXoXarpla, iii. 5
ekij, ii. 18 

eiKiiv, i. 15; iii. 10
eiTrov, iv. 17
elprjvv, i. 2; iii. 15
elpvvtnroiiu, i. 20 
els, iii. 15 ; iv. 6
etre, i. 16 quat., 20 bis
ixaaros, iv. 6
ixxXvala, i. 18, 24; iv.
15,16
ixXexrbs, iii. 12
iXeiBepos, iii. 11
"BXXtjv, iii. 11
eTwris, i. 5, 23, 27
ipBareia, ii. 18 
ipbs, iv. 18
ivSia, iii. 10, 12
ivipyeia, i. 29 ; ii. 12 . . .
ivepyia, i. 29
ivi, iii. 11
ivoixia, iii. 16 

hraXpa, ii. 22.

1 Cor. vii. 37,
xv. 58 J

Rom., 1 Cor.
Gal.+

[freq. +
1 Pet.+]

Eph., Phil.,
2 Thes.+

Rom., 2 Cor.,
2 Tim.+

ivroXi], iv. 10
i$ayopd£u, iv. 5 
f?jaXe£0w, ii. 14 
ifovaia, i. 13, 16; ii.
10, 15
i%u, iv. 5
iopri], ii. 16 
'EiraoSpas, i. 7 ; iv. 12
iirl w. gen., i. 16, 20;
iii. 2, 5
iirl w. dat., iii. 14

Gal., Eph.+

Matt. xv. 9,
Mark vii. 7+

Acts, Rev.+

Gospp., Acts+

198

COLOSSIANS

iiriyivtiaxa, i. 6
iirlyvaais, i. 9, 10; ii.
2; iii. 10
iiriBvpia, iii. 5
iiripiva, i. 23
iiriaroXrj, iv. 16
iirixopvyiu, ii. 19
iiroixoSopia, ii. 7
ipydfopai, iii. 23
?P7ov, i. 10, 21 ; iii. 17
ipeBlfr, iii. 21 
ipxopai, iii. 6 ; iv. 10
eva77Aiov, i. 5, 23
eudperjTos, iii. 20 

eiSoxia, i. 19
eixapiaria, i. 3, 12; iii.
17
eixapiaria, ii. 7; iv. 2
eixdpiaros, iii. 15 
exfyos, i. 21
iXa, l 4, 14 ; ii. 1, 23 ;
iii. 13; iv. 1, 13
fdw, ii. 20; iii. 7
fyria, iii. 1
fur], iii. 3, 4
tj, ii. 16 ter; iii. 17
ijXixos, ii. 1
¦hpipa, i. 6, 9
Bdvaros, i. 22
BiXvpa, i. 1, 9; iv. 12
WXw, i. 27; ii. 1, 18
BepeXiba, i. 23
Bebs, i. 1, 2, 3, 6, 10, [12],
15, 25 bis, 27; ii. 2,
12,19; iii. 1, 3, 6, 12,
16, 17; iv. 3, 11, 12
Bebrvs, ii. 9 
Bvaavpbs, ii. 3
Biyydva, ii. 21 

[freq. + Heb.,
2 Pet.+]

2 Cor. ix. 2 +

[Rom., 2 Cor..
Eph., Phil.,'
Tit. +Heb.+]

BXltpis, i. 24

Heb. xi. 28,
xii. 20 +

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

199

Bpvaxela, ii. 18
BpiapBeva, ii. 15 —
Bpbvos, i. 16
Bvpbs, iii. 8
Bipa, iv. 3
larpbs, iv. 14 

['IepdiroXis, iv. 13]
iepSs, iv. 13
'Itjo-oOs, i. 1, 3, 4; ii. 6;
iii. 17 ; iv. 12
'Itjo-oOs ('IoOotos), iv. 11
Ixavba, i. 12 
Hva,i.9,18, 28; ii. 2;iv.
3, 4, 8, 12, 16 bis, 17
tva pi), ii. 4 ; iii. 21
'IovSatos, iii. 11
'IoOotos, iv. 11
frroTTjs, iv. 1 

tariipi, iv. 12
xdBvpai, iii. 1
Ka0iis, i. 6 bis, 7 ; ii. 7 ;
iii. 13
xaipbs, iv. 5
xaxia, iii. 8
xaxbs, iii. 5
xaXia, iii. 15
KapSla, ii. 2 ; iii. 15, 16,
22; iv. 8
xapirotpopia, i. 6, 10
Kard w. gen., ii. 14
KaraBpaBeiu, ii. 18 
xarayyiXXa, i. 28
Karevinriov, i. 22 

KaroiKia, i. 19 ; ii. 9 . •
Kevbs, ii. 8
KetpaXrj, i. 18; ii. 10, 19
Kijpiaaa, i. 23
KXTjpovopiia, iii. 24
kXtjpos, i. 12 

2 Cor. ii. 14 J

2 Cor. iii. 6+

2 Cor. viii. 13,
14+

Matt., Mark,
Luke+

Gospp., Acts,
1 Pet.+

Eph. i. 4,
Jude 24+ B
Eph. iii. 17 B
( + Heb.)

COLOSSIANS

KoXoaaai, i. 2
xopi^a, iii. 25
KOTTldu, i. 29
xbapos, i. 6; ii. 8, 20 bis
xparia, ii. 19
xpdros, i. 11
xptva, ii. 16
xpiirra, iii. 3
KTifw, i. 16 bis ; iii. 10
Kriais, i. 15, 23
xipios, i. 3, 10; ii. 6;
iii. 13, [16], 17, 18,
20, 22 bis, 23, 24 bis;
iv. 1 bis, 7, 17
xvpibrvs, i. 16 

XaXia, iv. 3, 4
XapBdva, iv. 10
AaoStKei/s, iv. 16
AaoSiKia, ii. 1; iv. 13,
15, 16
Xiya, ii. 4; iv. 11
X670S, i. 5, 25; ii. 23;
iii. 16, 17; iv. 3, 6
Aoukos, iv. 14
paxpoBvpta, i. 11 ; iii. 12
pavBdvu, i. 7
MdpKos, iv. 10
paprvpia, iv. 13
peBlarvpi, peBiardva, i.
13
piXXa, ii. 17
/4f;Xos, iii. 5
jxe'v, ii. 23
pepls, i. 12
pipos, ii. 16
p,iaos, ii. 14
/xerd w. gen., i. 11 ; iv.
18
peraKivia, i. 23 
/xTjSe', ii. 21 bis
pvSeis, ii. 4, 18
pvvpoveia, iv. 18
popxpi], iii. 13 

Eph. i. 21,
2 Pet. ii. 10,
Jude 8 J 8

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

pbvos, iv. 11
pvarijpiov, i. 26, 27 ; ii.
2 ; iv. 3
vexpds, i. 18; ii. 12, 13
vexpbu, iii. 5 

veo/xTjvia, ii. 16 
veos, iii. 10
vovBeria, i. 28; iii. 16

voOs, ii. 18
THipupa or 'Svpupds, iv.
IS
vvv, i. 24, 26
vvvl, i. 21; iii. 8
olxovopia, i. 25
oIkos, iv. 15
olxnppbs, iii. 12 
'OvTjrri/xos, iv. 9
ovopa, iii. 17
oirov, iii. 11
bparbs, i. 16 
bpdu, ii. 1, 18
o/ryrj, iii. 6, 8
oaos, ii. 1
dims, ii. 23; iii. 5, 17;
iv. 11
otov, iii. 4; iv. 16
o8v,ii. 6, 16; iii. 1, 5, 12
ovpav6s,i. 5, 16, 20, 23;
iv. 1
oStws, iii. 13
StpBaXpioSovXla, iii. 22. . .
irdBi]pa, i. 24
Trdflos, iii. 5 

TraXaios, iii. 9
TrdvTore, i. 3; iv. 6, 12
Trapd w. dat., iv. 16

[Rom.iv.l9 +
Heb. xi. 12 J]

[Rom., 1 Cor.,
1 & 2 Thes.
+ St Paul's
speech in
Acts xx. 31+]

[Rom., 2 Cor.,
Phil. + Heb. +]

Rom. i. 26,
lThes.iv.5 +

Eph. vi. 6J a

COLOSSIANS

irapdSoais, ii. 8
irapaKaXia, ii. 2; iv. 8
irapaXapBdvu, ii. 6 ; iv.
17
TrapaXrryi^OjUai, ii. 4 
irapdirrapa, ii. 13 bis
irdpeipi, i. 6
irapixu, iv. 1
irapvyopla, iv. 11 
irapiarvpi, i. 22, 28
irappvaia, ii. 15
Tras, i. 4, 6, 9, 10 bis,
11 bis, 15, 16 bis, 17
bis, 18, 19, 20, 23,
28 quat.; ii. 2, 3, 9,
10, 13, 19, 22 ; iii. 8,
11 bis, 14, 16, 17 bis,
20, 22 ; iv. 7, 9, 12
irarvp, i. 2, 3, 12; iii.
17, 21
HoOXos, i. 1, 23; iv. 18
iraiopai, i. 9
iripira, iv. 8
Trepi w. gen., i. 3; iv.
3, 8, 10
irepiirariu, i. 10; ii. 6;
iii. 7 ; iv. 5
irepiaaeiu, ii. 7
irepiripvu, ii. 11
wepiropiT], ii. 11 bis; iii.
11; iv. 11
iriBavoXoyla, ii. 4 
iriKpalvu, iii. 19 

Trir/Tis, i. 4, 23; ii. 5, 7,
12
iriarbs, i. 2, 7; iv. 7, 9
TrXeove£ia, iii. 5
irXvpotpopia, iv. 12 
irXvpotpopia, ii. 2 
irXvpba, i. 9, 25; ii. 10;
iv. 17
irXijpapa, i. 19; ii. 9
irXvapovi), ii. 23 

[Rom., 2 Tim.,
+Luke i. 1+]
[1 Thes. i. 5
+ Heb. bis J]

Jas. i. 22+

Rev. viii. 11,
x. 9, 10+

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

203

irXovalus, iii. 16 ...

ttXoOtos, i. 27; ii. 2
irvevpa, i. 8; ii. 5
irvevpariKbs, i. 9, iii. 16
wotia, iii. 17, 23 ; iv. 16
ttSXis, iv. 13
ttoXiJs, iv. 13
rrovvpbs, i. 21
irbvos, iv. 13 

iropvela, iii. 5
irbais, ii. 16
ttot<?, i. 21; iii. 7
Trpaifis, iii. 9
irpavTijs, iii. 12
Trpo, i. 17
lrpoaKoia, i. 5 
irpbs w. ace. , ii. 23 ; iii.
13, 19; iv. 5, 8, 10
irpoaevxv, iv. 2, 12
irpoaeixopai, i. 3, 9;
iv. 3
Trpo(7TjX6w, ii. 14 
irpoaKaprepiu, iv. 2
irpoaaToXrip.T'la, iii. 25
irpbaairov, ii. 1
irpareia, i. 18 
irparbroKOS, i. 15, 18
Trfis, iv. 6

[ITim.vi. 17,
Tit. iii. 6 +
2 Pet. i. 11 J]

[freq. + 1 Pet.
ii. 5 bis J]

Rev. xvi. 10,
11, xxi. 4 +

[Rom., Eph.,
+ Jas. ii. 1J]

pi^bopai, ii. 7 
biopai, i. 13
adBBarov, ii. 16
rrdpl, i. 22, 24 ; ii. 1, 5,
11,13,18, 23; iii. 22
axid, ii. 17 

axbros, i. 13
2ki)0tjs, iii. 11
o-o0£o, i. 9, 28; ii. 3,
23; iii. 16; iv. 5

Syn. Gospp.,
Acts, Heb.+

Eph. iii. 17 + a

204

COLOSSIANS

airXdyxvov, iii. 12
aravpbs, i. 20; ii. 14
arepiapa, ii. 5 
aroixeiov, ii. 8, 20
arbpa, iii. 8
in/Xa7iiJ7e'w, ii. 8 
avvaixpdXaros, iv. 10...
avvBiBdfa, ii. 2, 19
aivSeapos, ii. 19; iii. 14
inivSouXos, i. 7; iv. 7 ...
avveyeipa, ii. 12; iii. 1
avvepybs, iv. 11 
aiveais, i. 9; ii. 2
avvfaoiroiia, ii. 13 
avvBdirropai, ii. 12 
avvlarvpi, avviardva, i.
17
rjfi,u.a, i. 18, 22, 24; ii.
11, 17, 19, 23; iii. 15
aapanx&s, ii. 9 
rdfis, ii. 5
raireivoippoaivv, ii. 18,
23; iii. 12
rixvov, iii. 20, 21
rriXeios, i. 28; iv. 12
reXeibrvs, iii. 14 
ripij, ii. 23
TipbBeos, i. 1
ris, i. 27; ii. 20
tis, ii. 8, 16, 23; iii. 13
Tore, iii. 4
T^xikos, iv. 7
vlbs, i. 13
iipvos, iii. 16 
iiraxoia, iii. 20, 22
iirevavrios, ii. 14 
virip w. gen., i. [3], 7, 9,
24 bis; ii. 1; iv. 12,
13
0tt6 w. gen., ii. 18
birb w. ace, i. 23
vrropovTj, i. 11

Rom. xvi. 7,
Phm. 23 J

d
[freq. +
3 John 8+]

Rom. vi. 4J

Matt., Rev.+

Eph. ii. 6+ a

Eph. ii. 5 J a

Heb. vi. 1 +

Heb. x. 27+

Eph. v. 19+ a

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

2°5

birordaaa, iii. 18
baripvpa, i. 24 ..

tpavepba, i. 26 ; iii. 4 bis ;
iv. 4
pa, ii. 22 

tpiXoaotpla, ii. 8 
tpoBiopai, iii. 22
tppoviu, iii. 2
tpvaiobi. ii. 18 
rpffis, i. 12
Xaipa, i. 24; ii. 5
Xapd, i. 11
Xapltopat, ii. 13; iii.
13 bis
Xapis, i. 2, 6; iii. 16;
iv. 6, 18
Xeip, iv. 18
Xeipbypatpov, ii. 14 
XprjirTOTTjs, iii. 12 

Xpi-arbs, i. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7,
24,27,28; ii. 2, 5, 6,
8,11,17,20; iii. Ibis,
3, 4, 11, [13], 15, 16,
24; iv. 3, 12
faXpbs, iii. 16
TpeiSopai, iii. 9
ipvxv, iii. 23
tlSe, iv. 9
ipSTj, iii. 16 

[1 & 2 Cor.,
Phil., 1 Thes.
-t-Lk. xxi. 4+]

[Rom., 1 Cor.
Gal. +2 Pet.
quat.+]

1 Cor. sex. J

d;s, adv., ii. 20; iii. 12,
18, 22, 23; iv. 4
dis, conj., ii. 6

Rom., 2 Cor..
Gal., Eph.,
Tit.+

Eph. v. 19,
Rev.f /3

INDEX OF SOME OF THE WORDS IN
THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

d7o#6s, 6, 14
d7dTTTj, 5, 7, 9
d7aTTTjTr5s, 1, 16
0710s, 5, 7
dbeXtpi), 2
dSeXtpbs, X, 7, 16, 20
dSiKiu, 18
aldivios, 15
dxoia, 5
apa, 22
dva7KTj, 14
dvoTrai!«, 7, 20
dvairipira, 12
dviJKU, 8
dirixa, 15
dirorlva, 19
'Airtpia, 2
'Aplarapxos, 24
Apxiiriros, 2
daird^opai, 23
BoiXopai, 13
7evvdw, 10
yviipv, 14
ypdtpa, 19, 21
Siapios, X, 9
5er//i6s, 10, 13
Avpas, 24
Siaxovia, 13
SoOXos, 16
e/pTj>Tj, 3
iKKXvala, 2
e^KoiJirios, 14
r/XXrrydw, 18
riXTrifw, 22
ivepyTJs, 6
'Eirar/ipas, 23

eVfyvKcris, 6
iirirdaaa, 8
iroipafa, 22
ei)a77e'Xiov, 13
eixapiaria, 4
eSxpvaros, 11
WXw, 14
iW, 13, 14, 15, 19
xarixa, 13
xoivavia, 6
xoivavbs, 17
Xifyw, 19, 21
Aovkos, 24
/tdXirrra, 16
yoaXXov, 9, 16
MdpKos, 24
Mveia, 4
va/, 20
oTkos, 2
'Ovfjaipos, 10
bvlvapai, 20
6V«s, 6
ocJeiXw, 18
irapaxaXiu, 9, 10
irapdxXvats, 7
irappvaia, 8
irartjp, 3
HoOXos, 1, 9, 19
TreW&i, 21
irlans, 5, 6
irvevpa, 25
7roie<o, 4, 14, 21

irpeaBirvs, 9
irpotrevx^i 4, 22
rrdpl, 16
OTrXd7Xvov, 7, 12, 20
rjuvaiXMdXwTOS, 23
avvepybs, X, 24
aw ar panares, 2
rixvov, 10
ItpbBeos, 1
toioOtos, 9

INDEX

biraKOl), 21
fyiXijpuv, X
Xapd, 7
Xapi£opai, 22
Xdpu, 3, 25
xei/>, 19
Xapl$a, 15
Xupls, 14
wpa, 15

207

O^bItD^eTp^^BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVEBSITY PRESS.

THE PITT PRESS SERIES
AND THE
CAMBRIDGE SERIES FOR SCHOOLS
AND TRAINING COLLEGES.
Volumes of the latter series are marked by a dagger +.
COMPLETE LIST.

Author
Aeschylus Aristophanes

Demosthenes Euripides

Herodotus

Homer

Lucian

Plato

GREEK.
Work
Prometheus Vinctus
Aves — Plutus — Ranae
Vespae
Acharnians Nubes
Olynthiacs Heracleidae Hercules Furens
HippolytusIphigeneia in Aulis
Medea
Hecuba
Helena
Alcestis OrestesBook iv
., v
„ VI, VIII, IX
„ vni i — 90, ix 1 — 89
Odyssey ix, x
» XXI XI
Iliad VI, xxn, xxm, xxiv
Iliad ix, x
Somnium, Charon, etc.
Menippus and Timon
Apologia Socratis
Crito Euthyphro Protagoras I

Editor
Rackham Green
Graves

Glover Beck & Headlam
Gray & Hutchinson
Hadley
Headlam

Price 2/6
3/6 each 3/6 oh
3/62/6 3/6 «/- »/-
2/62/62/6 3/6
2/64/6

Hadley
Pearson Hadley Wedd Shuckburgh In the Press 3/-
„ 4/- each
2/6 each
2/6 each 2/- */-
2/- each 2/6 3/6 3/62/6 2/6
Adam 4/6

Eil wards
Nairn Edwards
Lawson Heitland Mackie
Adam

J. & A. M.

THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.

GREEK continued.

Author

Work

Editor

Price

Plutarch

Demosthenes

Holden

it

Gracchi

i,

61-

Nicias

11

si-

Sulla

ii

6Jr

Timoleon
11
61.
Sophocles
Oedipus Tyrannus
Jebb
4"
Thucydldes
Book in
Spratt
si-
Book vi
„ In the Press
"
Book vii
Holden
si-
Xenophon
Agesilaus
Hailstone
2/6
Anabasis Vol. I. Text
Pretor
3/-
„ Vol. II. Notes
11
4/6
I, "
11
4/"
„ I, HI, IV, V
IT
it- each
i/6 each
„ II, VI, VII
II
t ','¦
„ I, II, III, IV, V, VI
Edwards
i/6 each
(With complete Vocabularies)
Hellenics I, II
11
3/6
,,
Cyropaedeia I
Shuckburgh
2/6
,)
n
>»
2/-
t>
III, IV, V
Holden
5/-
„ VI, VII, VIII
>)
5/-
t<
Memorabilia I
Edwards
2/6
11
LATIN.
M
i/6
Bcda
Eccl. History m, IV
Lumby
7/6
Caesar
De Bello Gallico
t „
Cicero
t >,
Com. i, hi, vi, vni
Peskett
1/6
each
„ ii— m, and vii
tt
'/-
each
n I— m
11
3h
ii iv-v
tt
i/6
„ I, II, III, IV, V,VI,VH
Shuckburgh
i/6
each
( With complete Vocabularies)
De Bello Civili. Com. I
Peskett
il-
„ ,, Com. hi
n
2/6
Actio Prima in C. Verrem
Cowie
i/6
De Amicitia
Reid
3/6
De Senectute
ii
3/6
De Officiis. Bk m
Holden
*/-
Pro Lege Manilia
Nicol
i/6
Div. in Q. Caec. et Actio
Prima in C. Verrem
Heitland & Cowie
3/"
Ep. ad Atticum. Lib. II
Pretor
3/"
Orations against Catiline
Nicol
2/6
In Catilinam I
Flather
i/6
( With Vocabulary)
Philippica Secunda
Peskett
3/6
Pro Archia Poeta
Reid
J
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.

LATIN continued

Author

Work

Editor

Price

Cicero

Pro Balbo

Reid

1/6

11

„ Milone

>>

2/6

it

„ Murena

Heitland

3/-

„ Plane io
Holden
4/6
„ Sulla
Reid
3/6
Somnium Scipionis
Pearman
'/-
Cornelius Nepos Four parts
Shuckburgh
1/6 each
Erasmus
Colloquia Latina
G. M. Edwards
1/6
Horace
Epistles. Bk i
Shuckburgh
2/6
n
Odes and Epodes
Gow
, 5'"
Odes. Books I, m
ii
2/- each
IS
„ Books II, iv ; Epodes „
1/6 each
Satires. Book I
IT
¦ti
Juvenal
Satires
Duff
ll-
Llvy
Book I H
J. Edwards In the Press
n
» ii
Conway
2/6
>)
„ IV, IX, XXVII
Stephenson
2/6 each
t>
¦ > VI
Marshall
2/6
i. v
Whibley
2/6
,, XXI, XXII
Dimsdale
2/6 each
,, (adapted from) Story of the Kings of Rome
G. M. Edwards
1/6
ti >'
Horatius and other Stones
,,
1/6
Lucan
Pharsalia. Bk I
Heitland & Haskins i/6
i>
De Bello Civili. Bk vn
Postgate
»/-
Lucretius
Book m
Duff
*/-
35
.. v
ii
*
Ovid
Fasti. Book vi
Sidgwick
11
Metamorphoses, Bk I
Dowdall
1/6
11
„ Bk vm
Summers
1/6
t„
Selections from the Tristia
(With Vocabulary)
Simpson
1/6
tPhaedrus
Fables. Bks I and n
( With Vocabulary)
Flather
i/6
Plautus
Epidicus
Gray
3/-
Stichus
Fennell
2/6
Trinummus
Gray
3/6
Pliny
Letters. Book vi
Duff
2/6
Quintus Curtius
Alexander in India
Heitland & Raven 3/6
Sallust
Catiline
Summers
2/-
Jugurtha
11
2/6
Tacitus
Agricola and Germania
Stephenson
3/-
Hist. Bk I
Davies
2/6
91
Bk m
Summers
2/6
1 J
Terence
Hautontimorumenos
Gray
, 3/-
Vergil+ „
Aeneid I to xii
Sidgwick
1/6 each
„ i, n,v,vi,ix,x,xi,
XII „
1/6 each
( With complete Vocabularies)
Bucolics
>)
. ''?
ii
Georgics 1, II, and III, iv
»!
2/- each
ii
Complete Works, Vol. I, Text „
3/6
n
„ Vol. II, Notes „
4/6
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.

FRENCH.
The Volumes marked * contain Vocabulary.

Authot
About *Biart
Boileau
Corneille

De Bonnechose

Work
Le Roi des Montagues
Quand j'etais petit, Pts I, II
L'Art Poetique
La Suite du Menteur
PolyeucteLeCid Lazare Hoche
Bertrand du Guesclin
„ Part n
Louis XI
Les Enfants d'Edouard
Jeanne d'Arc
La Canne de Jonc
La Fortune de D'Artagnan
Le Chien du Capitaine

Delavigne 11
De Lamartine
De Vigny
*Dumas
*Enault
Erckmann-Chatrian La Guerre
,, Waterloo

Editor
Ropes
Boi'elle
Nichol Smith
Masson
BraunholtzEve Colbeck
Leathes 11
Eve 11
Clapin & Ropes
Eve Ropes
Verrall
Clapin Ropes

9]

Le Blocus

„

15

Madame Therese

II

Histoire d'un Consent

ii

Gautier

Voyage en Italie (Selections

Payen Payne

Oulzot

Discours sur l'Histoire de la

Revolution d'Angleterre

Eve

Hugo

Les Burgraves

It

*Malot

Remi et ses Amis

Verrall

#

Remi en Angleterre

ii

Merimee

Colomha (Abridged)

Ropes

Michelet

Louis XI & Charles the Bold

Moliere
Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme
Clapin
11
L'Ecole des Femmes
Saintsbury
11
Les Precieuses ridicules
Braunholtz
ii
„ (Abridged Edition)
ii
ii
Le Misanthrope
ii
,,
L'Avare
*Perrault
Fairy Tales
Rippmann
Plron
La Metromanie
Masson
Ponsard
Charlotte Corday
Ropes
Racine
Les Plaideurs
Braunholtz
n
„ (Abridged Edition)
ii
ii
Athalie
Eve
Salntine
Picciola
Ropes
Sandeau
Mdlle de la Seiriiere
Scribe & Legouve Bataille de Dames
Bull
Scribe
Le Verre d'Eau
Colbeck
Sedaine
Le Philosophe sans le savoir
Bull
Souvestre
Un Philosophe sous les Toits
Eve
Le Serf & Le Chevrier de Lorraine Ropes
Price 2/-
2/- each 2/6 2/.2/-
2/-
./-
i| 2/-
*l-
1/6 ¦/6 2/.
«/¦ol'
3/- 3/-
2/6 2/6 ti-ii-
2/6 i/6
2/6 2/- •/¦
2/62/6 i/6 V-till- 'I-
»/¦ »/¦*/¦»/-
H'2-
7. ¦/¦
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.
FRENCH continued.

Author

Work

Editor

Price

"Souvestre

LeSerf

Ropes

1/6

Spenoer

A Primer of French Verse

3/-

Stael, Mme de Le Directoire

Masson & Prothero

2/-

11

Dix Annees d'Exil (Book n

chapters i— 8)
11
«/-
Thierry
Lettres sur l'histoire de
France (xm — xxiv)
n
2/6
»•
Recits des Temps M^rovin-
giens, I — m
Masson & Ropes
3/-
Villemaln
Lascaris ou les Grecs du XV" Si&cle Masson
2/.
Voltaire
Histoire du Siecle de Louis
XIV, in three parts Masson & Prothero 2/6
each
Xavier de
I La Jeune Siberienne. Le)
| Lepreuxde la Cited' Aostej
Masson
,/6
Maistre
GERMAN.
The Volumes marked * contain
Vocabulary.
"Andersen
Eight Fairy Tales
Rippmann
2/6
Benedix
Dr Wespe
Breul
ol-
Freytag
Der Staat Friedrichs des
Grossen
Wagner
«/¦
11
Die Journalisten
Eve
2/6
Goethe
Knabenjahre (1749 — 1761)
Wagner & Cartmell
«/¦
¦i
Hermann und Dorothea
11 11
3/6
,,
Iphigenie
Breul
3/6
•Grirara
Selected Tales
Rippmann
3/"
Gutzkow
Zopf und Schwert
Wolstenhohne
3/6
Hacklander
Der geheime Agent
E. L. Milner Barry
.(/-
Hauff
Das Bild des Kaisers
Breul
3/-
n
Das Wirthshaus im Spessart
Schlottmann
& Cartmell
3/-
11
Die Karavane
Schlottmann
3/-
11
Der Scheik von Alessandria
Rippmann
2/6
Immermann
Der Oberhof
Wagner
3/-
*Klee
Die deutschen Heldensagcn
Wolstenholme
3/-
Kohlrausch
Das Jahr 18 13
Cartmell
7l-
Lessing
Minna von Barnhelm
Wolstenholme
3/-
Lessing & Gellert Selected Fables
Breul
3/-
Mendelssohn
Selected Letters
Sime
3/-
Raumer
Der erste Kreuzzug
Wagner
«/-
Riehl
Culturgeschichtliche
Novellen
Wolstenholme
3/"
*
Die Ganerben & Die Ge-
11
rechtigkeit Gottes
11
3/-
Schiller
Wilhelm TeU
Breul
2/6
11
,, (Abridged Edition)
11
i/6
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.

GERMAN continued.
Author Work
Schiller Geschichte des dreissigjah-

Editor

rigen Kriegs. Book III.

Breul

t

Maria Stuart

ii

3/6

Wallenstein I. (Lager and

Piccolomini)
n
3/6
Wallenstein II. (Tod)
ii
3/6
Sybel
Prinz Eugen von Savoyen
Quiggin
1/6
Uhland
Ernst, Herzogvon Schwaben
Wolstenholme
3/6
Ballads on German History
Wagner
ti
German Dactylic Poetry
n
ll-
SPANISH.
Le Sage & Isla
Los Ladrones de Asturias
Kirkpatrick
3/"
Galdos
Trafalgar
ENGLISH.
ii
4/-
Bacon
History of the Reign of
King Henry VII
Lumby
3/-
11
Essays
West
3/6 & sl-
New Atlantis
G. C. M.
Smith 1/6
Burke
American Speeches
Innes
3/-
Cowley
Essays
Lumby
4/-
Defoe
Robinson Crusoe, Part I
Masterman 2/-
Earle
Microcosmography
West
3/- & 4/-
Goldsmith
Traveller and Deserted Village Murison
1/6
Gray
Poems
Tovey
4/- & sl-
+ ,>
Ode on the Spring and The Bard „
Sd.
t„
Ode on the Spring and The
Elegy „
Sd.
Kingsley
The Heroes
E. A. Gardner 2/-
Lamb
Tales from Shakespeare. 2 Series Flather
1/6 each
Macaulay
Lord Clive
Innes
1/6
11
Warren Hastings
11
1/6
11
William Pitt and Earl of Chatham ,,
2/6
1 „
John Bunyan
John Milton
,,
1/-
t „
Flather
1/6
> J
Lays and other Poems
11
1/6
Mayor
ASketchof AncientPhilosophy
from Thales to Cicero
3/6
t»
Handbook of English Metre
*l-
More
History of King Richard III
Lumby
3/6
it
Utopia
11
3/6
Milton
Arcades
Verity
1/6
It
Ode on the Nativity, V Alle
2/6
gro, 11 Penseroso & Lycidas 5 "
+ ,.
Comus & Lycidas
. ,,
2/-
ii
Samson Agonistes
D
2/6
1 1
Sonnets
13
1/6
, ,
Paradise Lost, six parts
II
2/- each
Pope
Essay on Criticism 6
West
2/.
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.
ENGLISH continued.

Author

Work

Editor

Price

Scott

Marmion

Masterman

2/6

ii

Lady of the Lake

2/6

if

Lay of the last Minstrel

Flather

2/-
2/6

• i

Legend of Montrose

Simpson

ii

Lord of the Isles

Flather

l/-

ii

Old Mortality

Nicklin

2/6

„

Kenilworth

Flather

2/6

The Talisman

A. S. Gaye

*

Shakespeare

A Midsummer-Night's Dream

Verity

11

Twelfth Night

ii

i/6

i

Julius Caesar

ii

i/6

i
The Tempest
ii
i/6
¦
King Lear
ii
i/6
Merchant of Venice
ii
i/6
i
King Richard II
ii
i/6
As You Like It
ii
i/6
i
King Henry V
n
i/6
Macbeth
ii
i/6
Shakespeare tc Fletcher Two Noble Kinsmen
Skeat
3/6
Sidney
An Apologie for Poetrie
Shuckburgh
3/-
Wallace
Outlines of the Philosophy of Aristotle
4/6
West
Elements of English Grammar
2/6
u
English Grammar for Beginners
,, '/"
11
Key to English Grammars
3/6 net
Carlos
Short History of British India
%
Hill
Elementary Commercial Geography
Bartholomew
Atlas of Commercial Geography
il-
Robinson
Church Catechism Explained
il-
Jackson
The Prayer Book Explained. Part I
216
ii
„ Part II In preparation
MATHEMATICS.
Ball Elementary Algebra 4/6
tBlvthe Geometrical Drawing
Part I 1/6
Part II s/-
Enclid Books 1— vi, xi, xii Taylor 5/.
„ Books 1 — vi ,, 4/.
Books I— iv „ 3/-
Also separately
Books I, & 11 ; in, & IV; v, & vi; xi, & XII 1/6 each
Solutions to Exercises in Taylor's
Euclid W.W.Taylor 10/6
And separately
Solutions to Bks I — IV „ 6/-
" Solutions to Books vi. xi ,, 6/-
THE PITT PRESS SERIES, ETC.

MATHEMATICS continued.
Author Work
HobsonS Jessop Elementary Plane Trigonometry
Loney

Editor

-(Sanderson
Smith, C.

Hale, G.

Elements of Statics and Dynamics
Part I. Elements of Statics
„ n. Elements of Dynamics
Elements of Hydrostatics
Solutions to Examples, Hydrostatics
Solutions of Examples, Statics and Dynamics
Mechanics and Hydrostatics
Geometry for Young Beginners
Arithmetic for Schools, with or without answers
Part I. Chapters I — vm. Elementary, with
or without answers
Part n. Chapters IX — xx, with or without
answers
Key to Smith's Arithmetic

Price 7/6
4 2
ft Sl-
4/6 1/4
3/6

»/- ,/-
7/6

EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE.
tBidder & Baddeley Domestic Economy
(The Education of the Young)
I from the Republic of Plato )
Aristotle on Education
Life and Educational Works
Three Lectures on the Practice of
Education :
I. On Marking ¦>
II. On Stimulus
III. On the Teaching of Latin
Verse Composition
General Aims of the Teacher 1
Form Management \
tHope & Browne A Manual of School Hygiene
Locke Thoughts on Education
+MacCunn The Making of Character
Milton Tractate on Education
Sidgwick On Stimulus
Turing Theory and Practice of Teaching

IBosanquet
tBurnet Comenius

Eve SidgwickAbbott

S. S. Laurie

vol.

Farrar Poole

vol.

R. H. Quick
O. Browning

4/62/6 2/6 3/6

2/.

1/63/6
$ i
4/6

tShuckburgh tWoodward

A Short History of the Greeks 4/6
A Short History of the Expansion of
the British Empire (1500 — 1902) 4/-
t 1, An Outline History of the British
Empire (1500 — 1902) 1/6 net
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
C. F. CLAY, Manager.
ftotltloii: FETTER LANE, E.C.
0UBgo>»: so, WELLINGTON STREET.
1.

7004