Colossians 2 commentary

The soul prospers when we have clear knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus. When we not only believe with the heart, but are ready, when called, to make confession with the mouth. Knowledge and faith make a soul rich. The stronger our faith, and the warmer our love, the more will our comfort be. The treasures of wisdom are hid, not from us, but for us, in Christ. These were hid from proud unbelievers, but displayed in the person and redemption of Christ. See the danger of enticing words; how many are ruined by the false disguises and fair appearances of evil principles and wicked practices! Be aware and afraid of those who would entice to any evil; for they aim to spoil you. All Christians have, in profession at least, received Jesus Christ the Lord, consented to him, and taken him for theirs. We cannot be built up in Christ, or grow in him, unless we are first rooted in him, or founded upon him. Being established in the faith, we must abound therein, and improve in it more and more. God justly withdraws this benefit from those who do not receive it with thanksgiving; and gratitude for his mercies is justly required by God.

There is a philosophy which rightly exercises our reasonable faculties; a study of the works of God, which leads us to the knowledge of God, and confirms our faith in him. But there is a philosophy which is vain and deceitful; and while it pleases men's fancies, hinders their faith: such are curious speculations about things above us, or no concern to us. Those who walk in the way of the world, are turned from following Christ. We have in Him the substance of all the shadows of the ceremonial law. All the defects of it are made up in the gospel of Christ, by his complete sacrifice for sin, and by the revelation of the will of God. To be complete, is to be furnished with all things necessary for salvation. By this one word “complete,” is shown that we have in Christ whatever is required. “In him,” not when we look to Christ, as though he were distant from us, but we are in him, when, by the power of the Spirit, we have faith wrought in our hearts by the Spirit, and we are united to our Head. The circumcision of the heart, the crucifixion of the flesh, the death and burial to sin and to the world, and the resurrection to newness of life, set forth in baptism, and by faith wrought in our hearts, prove that our sins are forgiven, and that we are fully delivered from the curse of the law. Through Christ, we, who were dead in sins, are quickened. Christ's death was the death of our sins; Christ's resurrection is the quickening of our souls. The law of ordinances, which was a yoke to the Jews, and a partition-wall to the Gentiles, the Lord Jesus took out of the way. When the substance was come, the shadows fled. Since every mortal man is, through the hand-writing of the law, guilty of death, how very dreadful is the condition of the ungodly and unholy, who trample under foot that blood of the Son of God, whereby alone this deadly hand-writing can be blotted out! Let not any be troubled about bigoted judgments which related to meats, or the Jewish solemnities. The setting apart a portion of our time for the worship and service of God, is a moral and unchangeable duty, but had no necessary dependence upon the seventh day of the week, the sabbath of the Jews. The first day of the week, or the Lord's day, is the time kept holy by Christians, in remembrance of Christ's resurrection. All the Jewish rites were shadows of gospel blessings.

It looked like humility to apply to angels, as if men were conscious of their unworthiness to speak directly to God. But it is not warrantable; it is taking that honour which is due to Christ only, and giving it to a creature. There really was pride in this seeming humility. Those who worship angels, disclaim Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man. It is an insult to Christ, who is the Head of the church, to use any intercessors but him. When men let go their hold of Christ, they catch at what will stand them in no stead. The body of Christ is a growing body. And true believers cannot live in the fashions of the world. True wisdom is, to keep close to the appointments of the gospel; in entire subjection to Christ, who is the only Head of his church. Self-imposed sufferings and fastings, might have a show of uncommon spirituality and willingness for suffering, but this was not “in any honour” to God. The whole tended, in a wrong manner, to satisfy the carnal mind, by gratifying self-will, self-wisdom, self-righteousness, and contempt of others. The things being such as carry not with them so much as the show of wisdom; or so faint a show that they do the soul no good, and provide not for the satisfying of the flesh. What the Lord has left indifferent, let us regard as such, and leave others to the like freedom; and remembering the passing nature of earthly things, let us seek to glorify God in the use of them.

1. I would have you know. He declares his affection towards them, that he may have more credit and authority; for we readily believe those whom we know to be desirous of our welfare. It is also an evidence of no ordinary affection, that he was concerned about them in the midst of death, that is, when he was in danger of his life; and that he may express the more emphatically the intensity of his affection and concern, he calls it a conflict. I do not find fault with the rendering of Erasmus — anxiety; but, at the same time, the force of the Greek word is to be noticed, for ἀγών is made use of to denote contention. By the same proof he confirms his statement, that his ministry is directed to them; for whence springs so anxious a concern as to their welfare, but from this, that the Apostle of the Gentiles was under obligation to embrace in his affection and concern even those who were unknown to him? As, however, there is commonly no love between those who are unknown to each other, he speaks slightingly of the acquaintance that is contracted from sight, when he says, as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; for there is among the servants of God a sight different from that of the flesh, which excites love. As it is almost universally agreed that the First Epistle to Timothy was written from Laodicea, some, on this account, assign to Galatia that Laodicea of which Paul makes mention here, while the other was the metropolis of Phrygia Pacatiana. After the time of Constantine the Great, “Phrygia was divided into Phrygia Pacatiana and Phrygia Salutaris. ... Colosse was the sixth city of the first division.” — Dr. A. Clarke. — Ed. It seems to me, however, to be more probable that that inscription is incorrect, as will be noticed in its proper place.

2. That their hearts may receive consolation. He now intimates what he desires for them, and shews that his affection is truly apostolic; for he declares that nothing else is desired by him than that they may be united together in faith and love. He shews, accordingly, that it was by no unreasonable affection (as happens in the case of some) that he had been led to take upon himself so great a concern for the Colossians and others, but because the duty of his office required it.

The term consolation is taken here to denote that true quietness in which they may repose. This he declares they will at length come to enjoy in the event of their being united in love and faith. From this it appears where the chief good is, and in what things it consists — when mutually agreed in one faith, we are also joined together in mutual love. This, I say, is the solid joy of a pious mind — this is the blessed life. As, however, love is here commended from its effect, because it fills the mind of the pious with true joy; so, on the other hand, the cause of it is pointed out by him, when he says, in all fullness of understanding. “En toutes richesses de certitude d’intelligence;” — “In all riches of assurance of understanding.” The bond also of holy unity is the truth of God, when we embrace it with one consent; for peace and agreement with men flow forth from that fountain.

Riches of the assurance of understanding. As many, contenting themselves with a slight taste, have nothing but a confused and evanescent knowledge, he makes mention expressly of the riches of understanding. By this phrase he means full and clear perception; and at the same time admonishes them, that according to the measure of understanding they must make progress also in love.

In the term assurance, he distinguishes between faith and mere opinion; for that man truly knows the Lord who does not vacillate or waver in doubt, but stands fast in a firm and constant persuasion. This constancy and stability Paul frequently calls (πληροφορίαν) full assurance, (which term he makes use of here also,) and always connects it with faith, as undoubtedly it can no more be separated from it than heat or light can be from the sun. The doctrine, therefore, of the schoolmen is devilish, inasmuch as it takes away assurance, and substitutes in its place moral conjecture, See Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 1, p. 112, and vol. 2, p. 397. as they term it.

Is an acknowledgment of the mystery. This clause must be read as added by way of apposition, for he explains what that knowledge is, of which he has made mention — that it is nothing else than the knowledge of the gospel. For the false apostles themselves endeavor to set off their impostures under the title of wisdom, but Paul retains the sons of God within the limits of the gospel exclusively, that they may desire to know nothing else. (1 Corinthians 2:2.) Why he uses the term mystery to denote the gospel, has been already explained. Let us, however, learn from this, that the gospel can be understood by faith alone — not by reason, nor by the perspicacity of the human understanding, because otherwise it is a thing that is hid from us.

The mystery of God I understand in a passive signification, as meaning — that in which God is revealed, for he immediately adds — and of the Father, and of Christ — by which expression he means that God cannot be known otherwise than in Christ, as, on the other hand, the Father must necessarily be known where Christ is known. For John affirms both:

He that hath the Son, hath the Father also: he that hath not the Son, hath also not the Father. (1 John 2:23.)

Hence all that think that they know anything of God apart from Christ, contrive to themselves an idol in the place of God; as also, on the other hand, that man is ignorant of Christ, who is not led by him to the Father, and who does not in him embrace God wholly. In the mean time, it is a memorable passage for proving Christ’s divinity, and the unity of his essence with the Father. For having spoken previously as to the knowledge of God, he immediately applies it to the Son, as well as to the Father, whence it follows, that the Son is God equally with the Father.

3. In whom are all the treasures. The expression in quo (in whom, or in which) may either have a reference collectively to everything he has said as to the acknowledgment of the mystery, or it may relate simply to what came immediately before, namely, Christ. While there is not much difference between the one or the other, I rather prefer the latter view, and it is the one that is more generally received. The meaning, therefore, is, that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid in Christ — by which he means, that we are perfect in wisdom if we truly know Christ, so that it is madness to wish to know anything besides Him. For since the Father has manifested himself wholly in Him, that man wishes to be wise apart from God, who is not contented with Christ alone. Should any one choose to interpret it as referring to the mystery, the meaning will be, that all the wisdom of the pious is included in the gospel, by means of which God is revealed to us in his Son.

He says, however, that the treasures are hidden, because they are not seen glittering with great splendor, but do rather, as it were, lie hid under the contemptible abasement and simplicity of the cross. For the preaching of the cross is always foolishness to the world, as we found stated in Corinthians. (1 Corinthians 1:18.) I do not reckon that there is any great difference between wisdom and understanding in this passage, for the employment of two different terms serves only to give additional strength, as though he had said, that no knowledge, erudition, learning, wisdom, can be found elsewhere.

4. This I say, that no man may deceive you. As the contrivances of men have (as we shall afterwards see) an appearance of wisdom, the minds of the pious ought to be preoccupied with this persuasion — that the knowledge of Christ is of itself amply sufficient. And, unquestionably, this is the key that can close the door against all base errors. “Tous erreurs et faussetez;” — “All errors and impostures.” For what is the reason why mankind have involved themselves in so many wicked opinions, in so many idolatries, in so many foolish speculations, but this — that, despising the simplicity of the gospel, they have ventured to aspire higher? All the errors, accordingly, that are in Popery, must be reckoned as proceeding from this ingratitude — that, not resting satisfied with Christ alone, they have given themselves up to strange doctrines.

With propriety, therefore, does the Apostle act in writing to the Hebrews, inasmuch as, when wishing to exhort believers not to allow themselves to be led astray “Qu’ils ne se laissent point distraire ça et la;” — “That they do not allow themselves to be distracted hither and thither.” by strange or new doctrines, he first of all makes use of this foundation —

Christ yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. (Hebrews 13:8.)

By this he means, that those are out of danger who remain in Christ, but that those who are not satisfied with Christ are exposed to all fallacies and deceptions. So Paul here would have every one, that would not be deceived, be fortified by means of this principle — that it is not lawful for a Christian man to know anything except Christ. Everything that will be brought forward after this, let it have ever so imposing an appearance, will, nevertheless, be of no value. In fine, there will be no persuasiveness of speech Pithanologia — our author having here in view the Greek term made use of by Paul, πιθανολογία, (persuasive speech.) See Calvin on 1 Corinthians, vol. 1, p. 100; also Plat. Theaet. 163, A. — Ed. that can turn aside so much as the breadth of a finger the minds of those that have devoted their understanding to Christ. It is a passage, certainly, that ought to be singularly esteemed. For as he who has taught men to know nothing except Christ, has provided against all wicked doctrines, “Toutes fausses et meschantes doctrines;” — “All false and wicked doctrines.” so there is the same reason why we should at this day destroy the whole of Popery, which, it is manifest, is built on ignorance of Christ.

5. For though I am absent in body. Lest any one should object that the admonition was unseasonable, as coming from a place so remote, he says, that his affection towards them made him be present with them in spirit, and judge of what is expedient for them, as though he were present. By praising, also, their present condition, he admonishes them not to fall back from it, or turn aside.

Rejoicing, says he, And seeing, that is — “Because I see.” For and means for, as is customary among the Latins and Greeks. “Go on as you have begun, for I know that hitherto you have pursued the right course, inasmuch as distance of place does not prevent me from beholding you with the eyes of the mind.”

Order and steadfastness. He mentions two things, in which the perfection of the Church consists — order among themselves, and faith in Christ. By the term order, he means — agreement, no less than duly regulated morals, and entire discipline. He commends their faith, in respect of its constancy and steadfastness, meaning that it is an empty shadow of faith, when the mind wavers and vacillates between different opinions. “Quand l’esprit est en branle, maintenant d’vne opinion, maintenant d’autre;” — “When the mind is in suspense, now of one opinion, then of another.”

Colossians 2:6-7

6. As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:

6. Quemadmodum igitur suscepistis Christum Iesum Dominum, in ipso ambulate:

7. Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

7. Radicati in ipso, et aedificati, et confirmati in fide, quemadmodum edocti estis, abundantes in ea cum gratiarum actione.

6. As ye have received. To commendation he adds exhortation, in which he teaches them that their having once received Christ will be of no advantage to them, unless they remain in him. Farther, as the false apostles held forth Christ’s name with a view to deceive, he obviates this danger twice, by exhorting them to go on as they had been taught, and as they had received Christ. For in these words he admonishes them, that they must adhere to the doctrine which they had embraced, as delivered to them by Epaphras, with so much constancy, as to be on their guard against every other doctrine and faith, in accordance with what Isaiah said,

This is the way, walk ye in it. (Isaiah 30 21.)

And, unquestionbly, we must act in such a manner, that the truth of the gospel, after it has been manifested to us, may be to us as a brazen wall Murus aheneus. Our author has probably in his eye the celebrated sentiment of Horace — “Hic murus aheneus esto — nil conscire sibi;” — “Let this be the brazen wall — to be conscious to one’s self of no crime.” — (Hor. Ep. I. 1:60, 61.) See also Hor. Od. III. 3, 65. — Ed. for keeping back all impostures. “Toutes fallaces et astutes;” — “All fallacies and wiles.”

Now he intimates by three metaphors what steadfastness of faith he requires from them. The first is in the word walk. For he compares the pure doctrine of the gospel, as they had learned it, to a way that is sure, so that if any one will but keep it he will be beyond all danger of mistake. He exhorts them, accordingly, if they would not go astray, not to turn aside from the course on which they have entered.

The second is taken from trees. For as a tree that has struck its roots deep has a sufficiency of support for withstanding all the assaults of winds and storms, so, if any one is deeply and thoroughly fixed in Christ, as in a firm root, it will not be possible for him to be thrown down from his proper position by any machinations of Satan. On the other hand, if any one has not fixed his roots in Christ, “Si quelque vn n’ha la racine de son cœur plantee et fichee en Christ;” — “If any one has not the root of his heart planted and fixed in Christ.” he will easily be

carried about with every wind of doctrine, (Ephesians 4:14,)

just as a tree that is not supported by any root. “Que n’ha point les racines profondes;” — “That has not deep roots.”

The third metaphor is that of a foundation, for a house that is not supported by a foundation quickly falls to ruins. The case is the same with those who lean on any other foundation than Christ, or at least are not securely founded on him, but have the building of their faith suspended, as it were, in the air, in consequence of their weakness and levity.

These two things are to be observed in the Apostle’s words — that the stability of those who rely upon Christ is immovable, and their course is not at all wavering, or liable to error, (and this is an admirable commendation of faith from its effect;) and, secondly, that we must make progress in Christ aye and until we have taken deep root in him. From this we may readily gather, that those who do not know Christ only wander into bypaths, and are tossed about in disquietude.

7. And confirmed in the faith. He now repeats without a figure the same thing that he had expressed by metaphors, — that the prosecution of the way, the support of the root, and of the foundation, is firmness and steadfastness of faith. And observe, that this argument is set before them in consequence of their having been well instructed, in order that they may safely and confidently secure their footing in the faith with which they had been made acquainted.

Abounding. He would not have them simply remain immovable, but would have them grow every day more and more. When he adds, with thanksgiving, he would have them always keep in mind from what source faith itself proceeds, that they may not be puffed up with presumption, but may rather with fear repose themselves in the gift of God. And, unquestionably, ingratitude is very frequently the reason why we are deprived of the light of the gospel, as well as of other divine favors.

Colossians 2:8-12

8. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

8. Videte ne quis vos praedetur per philosophiam et inanem deceptionem, secundum traditionem hominum secundum elementa mundi, “Selon les rudimens du monde;” — “according to the rudiments of the world.” et non secundum Christum:

9. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

9. Quoniam in ipso habitat omnis plenitudo Deitatis corporaliter. “Corporellement, ou, essenciellement;” — “Bodily, or, essentially.”

10. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

10. Et estis in ipso completi, qui est caput omnis principatus et potestatis,

11. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

11. In quo etiam estis circumcisi circumcisione non manufacta, exuendo corpus peccatorum carnis, circumcisione, inquam, Christi.

12. Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

12. Consepulti cum ipso per baptismum, in quo et consurrexistis per fidem efficaciae Dei, qui suscitavit illum ex mortuis.

8. Beware lest any one plunder you. He again instructs them as to the poison, which the antidote presented by him should be made use of to counteract. For although this, as we have stated, is a common remedy against all the impostures of the devil, Our Author evidently refers to what he had said as to the advantage to be derived from steadfastness in the faith. See p. 178. — Ed. it had, nevertheless, at that time a peculiar advantage among the Colossians, to which it required to be applied. Beware, says he, lest any one plunder you. He makes use of a very appropriate term, for he alludes to plunderers, who, when they cannot carry off the flock by violence, drive away some of the cattle fraudulently. Thus he makes Christ’s Church a sheep-fold, and the pure doctrine of the gospel the enclosures of the fold. He intimates, accordingly, that we who are the sheep of Christ repose in safety when we hold the unity of the faith, while, on the other hand, he likens the false apostles to plunderers that carry us away from the folds. Would you then be reckoned as belonging to Christ’s flock? Would you remain in his folds? Do not deviate a nail’s breadth from purity of doctrine. For unquestionably Christ will act the part of the good Shepherd by protecting us if we but hear his voice, and reject those of strangers. In short, the tenth chapter of John is the exposition of the passage before us. [John 10]

Through philosophy. As many have mistakingly imagined that philosophy is here condemned by Paul, we must point out what he means by this term. Now, in my opinion, he means everything that men contrive of themselves when wishing to be wise through means of their own understanding, and that not without a specious pretext of reason, so as to have a plausible appearance. For there is no difficulty in rejecting those contrivances of men which have nothing to set them off, “Quand elles n’ont ni monstre ni couleur;” — “When they have neither show nor appearance.” but in rejecting those that captivate men’s minds by a false conceit of wisdom. Or should any one prefer to have it expressed in one word, philosophy is nothing else than a persuasive speech, which insinuates itself into the minds of men by elegant and plausible arguments. Of such a nature, I acknowledge, will all the subtleties of philosophers be, if they are inclined to add anything of their own to the pure word of God. Hence philosophy will be nothing else than a corruption of spiritual doctrine, if it is mixed up with Christ. Let us, however, bear in mind, that under the term philosophy Paul has merely condemned all spurious doctrines which come forth from man’s head, whatever appearance of reason they may have. What immediately follows, as to vain deceit, I explain thus; “Beware of philosophy, which is nothing else than vain deceit,” so that this is added by way of apposition. See p. 148, n. 2.

According to the tradition of men. He points out more precisely what kind of philosophy he reproves, and at the same time convicts it of vanity on a twofold account — because it is not according to Christ, but according to the inclinations of men; “Selon les ordonnances et plaisirs des hommes;” — “According to the appointments and inclinations of men.” and because it consists in the elements of the world. Observe, however, that he places Christ in opposition to the elements of the world, equally as to the tradition of men, by which he intimates, that whatever is hatched in man’s brain is not in accordance with Christ, who has been appointed us by the Father as our sole Teacher, that he might retain us in the simplicity of his gospel. Now, that is corrupted by even a small portion of the leaven of human traditions. He intimates also, that all doctrines are foreign to Christ that make the worship of God, which we know to be spiritual, according to Christ’s rule, to consist in the elements of the world, “Es choses visibles de ce monde;” — “In the visible things of this world.” and also such as fetter the minds of men by such trifles and frivolities, while Christ calls us directly to himself.

But what is meant by the phrase — elements of the world? “Rudimens, ou elemens du monde;” — “Rudiments, or elements of the world.” There can be no doubt that it means ceremonies. For he immediately afterwards adduces one instance by way of example — circumcision. The reason why he calls them by such a name is usually explained in two ways. Some think that it is a metaphor, so that the elements are the rudiments of children, which do not lead forward to mature doctrine. Others take it in its proper signification, as denoting things that are outward and are liable to corruption, which avail nothing for the kingdom of God. The former exposition I rather approve of, as also in Galatians 4:3

9. For in him dwelleth. Here we have the reason why those elements of the world, which are taught by men, do not accord with Christ — because they are additions for supplying a deficiency, as they speak. Now in Christ there is a perfection, to which nothing can be added. Hence everything that mankind of themselves mix up, is at variance with Christ’s nature, because it charges him with imperfection. This argument of itself will suffice for setting aside all the contrivances of Papists. For to what purpose do they tend, “Toutes leurs inuentions;” — “All their inventions.” but to perfect what was commenced by Christ? “Ce que Christ a commencé seulement;” — “What Christ has only commenced.” Now this outrage upon Christ “Vn tel outrage fait au Fils de Dieu;” — “Such an outrage committed upon the Son of God.” is not by any means to be endured. They allege, it is true, that they add nothing to Christ, inasmuch as the things that they have appended to the gospel are, as it were, a part of Christianity, but they do not effect an escape by a cavil of this kind. For Paul does not speak of an imaginary Christ, but of a Christ preached, “D’vn vray Christ;” — “Of a true Christ.” who has revealed himself by express doctrine.

Further, when he says that the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ, he means simply, that God is wholly found in him, so that he who is not contented with Christ alone, desires something better and more excellent than God. The sum is this, that God has manifested himself to us fully and perfectly in Christ.

Interpreters explain in different ways the adverb bodily. For my part, I have no doubt that it is employed — not in a strict sense — as meaning substantially. “Σωματικῶς signifies truly, really, in opposition to typically, figuratively. There was a symbol of the Divine presence in the Hebrew tabernacle, and in the Jewish temple; but in the body of Christ the Deity, with all its plenitude of attributes, dwelt really and substantially, for so the word σωματικῶς means.” — Dr. A. Clarke. — Ed. For he places this manifestation of God, which we have in Christ, to all others that have ever been made. For God has often manifested himself to men, but it has been only in part. In Christ, on the other hand, he communicates himself to us wholly. He has also manifested himself to us otherwise, but it is in figures, or by power and grace. In Christ, on the other hand, he has appeared to us essentially. Thus the statement of John holds good:

He that hath the Son, hath the Father also. (1 John 2 23.)

For those who possess Christ have God truly present, and enjoy Him wholly.

10. And ye are complete in him. He adds, that this perfect essence of Deity, which is in Christ, is profitable to us in this respect, that we are also perfect in him. “As to God’s dwelling wholly in Christ, it is in order that we, having obtained him, may posses in him an entire perfection.” Those, therefore, who do not rest satisfied with Christ alone, do injury to God in two ways, for besides detracting from the glory of God, by desiring something above his perfection, they are also ungrateful, inasmuch as they seek elsewhere what they already have in Christ. Paul, however, does not mean that the perfection of Christ is transfused into us, but that there are in him resources from which we may be filled, that nothing may be wanting to us.

Who is the head. He has introduced this clause again on account of the angels, meaning that the angels, also, will be ours, if we have Christ. But of this afterwards. In the mean time, we must observe this, that we are hemmed in, above and below, with railings, See Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 1, p. 474, n. 2. that our faith may not deviate even to the slightest extent from Christ.

11. In whom ye also are circumcised. From this it appears, that he has a controversy with the false apostles, who mixed the law with the gospel, and by that means made Christ have, as it were, two faces. He specifies, however, one instance by way of example. He proves that the circumcision of Moses is not merely unnecessary, but is opposed to Christ, because it destroys the spiritual circumcision of Christ. For circumcision was given to the Fathers that it might be the figure of a thing that was absent: those, therefore, who retain that figure after Christ’s advent, deny the accomplishment of what it prefigures. Let us, therefore, bear in mind that outward circumcision is here compared with spiritual, just as a figure with the reality. The figure is of a thing that is absent: hence it puts away the presence of the reality. What Paul contends for is this — that, inasmuch as what was shadowed forth by a circumcision made with hands, has been completed in Christ, there is now no fruit or advantage from it. “Maintenant le fruit et l’vsage d’icelle est aneanti;” — “The fruit and advantage of it are now made void.” Hence he says, that the circumcision which is made in the heart is the circumcision of Christ, and that, on this account, that which is outward is not now required, because, where the reality exists, that shadowy emblem vanishes, “Le signe qui la figuroit s’esuanouit comme vn ombre;” — “The sign which prefigured it vanishes like a shadow.” inasmuch as it has no place except in the absence of the reality.

By the putting off of the body. He employs the term body, by an elegant metaphor, to denote a mass, made up of all vices. For as we are encompassed by our bodies, so we are surrounded on all sides by an accumulation of vices. And as the body is composed of various members, each of which has its own actings and offices, so from that accumulation of corruption all sins take their rise as members of the entire body. There is a similar manner of expression in Romans 6:13.

He takes the term flesh, as he is wont, to denote corrupt nature. The body of the sins of the flesh, therefore, is the old man with his deeds; only, there is a difference in the manner of expression, for here he expresses more properly the mass of vices which proceed from corrupt nature. He says that we obtain this “Ce despouillement;” — “This divesture.” through Christ, so that unquestionably an entire regeneration is his benefit. It is he that circumcises the foreskin of our heart, or, in other words, mortifies all the lusts of the flesh, not with the hand, but by his Spirit. Hence there is in him the reality of the figure.

12. Buried with him, in baptism. He explains still more clearly the manner of spiritual circumcision — because, being buried with Christ, we are partakers of his death. He expressly declares that we obtain this by means of baptism, that it may be the more clearly apparent that there is no advantage from circumcision under the reign of Christ. For some one might otherwise object: “Why do you abolish circumcision on this pretext — that its accomplishment is in Christ? Was not Abraham, also, circumcised spiritually, and yet this did not hinder the adding of the sign to the reality? Outward circumcision, therefore, is not superfluous, although that which is inward is conferred by Christ.” Paul anticipates an objection of this kind, by making mention of baptism. Christ, says he, accomplishes in us spiritual circumcision, not through means of that ancient sign, which was in force under Moses, but by baptism. Baptism, therefore, is a sign of the thing that is presented to us, which while absent was prefigured by circumcision. The argument is taken from the economy “Du gouuernement et dispensation que Dieu a ordonné en son Eglise;” — “From the government and dispensation which God has appointed in his Church.” which God has appointed; for those who retain circumcision contrive a mode of dispensation different from that which God has appointed.

When he says that we are buried with Christ, this means more than that we are crucified with him; for burial expresses a continued process of mortification. When he says, that this is done through means of baptism, as he says also in Romans 6:4, he speaks in his usual manner, ascribing efficacy to the sacrament, that it may not fruitlessly signify what does not exist. “Afin que la, signification ne soit vaine, comme d’vne chose qui n’est point;” — “That the signification may not be vain, as of a thing that is not.” By baptism, therefore, we are buried with Christ, because Christ does at the same time accomplish efficaciously that mortification, which he there represents, that the reality may be conjoined with the sign.

In which also ye are risen. He magnifies the grace which we obtain in Christ, as being greatly superior to circumcision. “We are not only,” says he, “ingrafted into Christ’s death, but we also rise to newness of life:” hence the more injury is done to Christ by those who endeavor to bring us back to circumcision. He adds, by faith, for unquestionably it is by it that we receive what is presented to us in baptism. But what faith? That of his efficacy or operation, by which he means, that faith is founded upon the power of God. As, however, faith does not wander in a confused and undefined contemplation, as they speak, of divine power, he intimates what efficacy it ought to have in view — that by which God raised Christ from the dead. He takes this, however, for granted, that, inasmuch as it is impossible that believers should be severed from their head, the same power of God, which shewed itself in Christ, is diffused among them all in common.

Colossians 2:13-15

13. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

13. Et vos, quum mortui essetis delictis et in praeputio carnis vestrae, simul vivificavit cum ipso, condonando vobis omnia peccata:

14. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

14. Et deleto, quod contra nos erat, chirographo in decretis, quod erat nobis contrarium, et illud sustulit e medio affixum cruci,

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

15. Exspolians principatus et potestates, traduxit palam triumphans de his in illa, (vel, in se ipso.)

13. And you, when ye were dead. He admonishes the Colossians to recognize, what he had treated of in a general way, as applicable to themselves, which is by far the most effectual way of teaching. Farther, as they were Gentiles when they were converted to Christ, he takes occasion from this to shew them how absurd it is to pass over from Christ to the ceremonies of Moses. Ye were, says he, dead in Uncircumcision. This term, however, may be understood either in its proper signification, or figuratively. If you understand it in its proper sense, the meaning will be, “Uncircumcision is the badge of alienation from God; for where the covenant of grace is not, there is pollution, “Là il n’y a que souillure et ordure;” — “There, there is nothing but filth and pollution.” and, consequently, curse and ruin. But God has called you to himself from uncircumcision, and, therefore, from death.” “Il vous a donc retirez de la mort;” — “He has, therefore, drawn you back from death.” In this way he would not represent uncircumcision as the cause of death, but as a token that they were estranged from God. We know, however, that men cannot live otherwise than by cleaving to their God, who alone is their life. Hence it follows, that all wicked persons, however they may seem to themselves to be in the highest degree lively and flourishing, are, nevertheless, spiritually dead. In this manner this passage will correspond with Ephesians 2:11, where it is said,

Remember that, in time past, when ye were Gentiles, and called uncircumcision, by that circumcision which is made with hands in the flesh, ye were at that time without Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the promises.

Taking it metaphorically, there would, indeed, be an allusion to natural uncircumcision, but at the same time Paul would here be speaking of the obstinacy of the human heart, in opposition to God, and of a nature that is defiled by corrupt affections. I rather prefer the former exposition, because it corresponds better with the context; for Paul declares that uncircumcision was no hinderance in the way of their becoming partakers of Christ’s life. Hence it follows, that circumcision derogated from the grace of God, which they had already obtained.

As to his ascribing death to uncircumcision, this is not as though it were the cause of it, but as being the badge of it, as also in that other passage in the Epistle to the Ephesians, which we have quoted. It is also customary in Scripture to denote deprivation of the reality by deprivation of the sign, as in Genesis 3:22, —

Lest peradventure Adam eat of the fruit of life, and live.

For the tree did not confer life, but its being taken away was a sign of death. See Calvin on Genesis, vol. 1, p. 184. Paul has in this place briefly expressed both. He says that these were dead in sins: this is the cause, for our sins alienate us from God. He adds, in the uncircumcision of your flesh. This was outward pollution, an evidence of spiritual death.

By forgiving you. God does not quicken us by the mere remission of sins, but he makes mention here of this particularly, because that free reconciliation with God, which overthrows the righteousness of works, is especially connected with the point in hand, where he treats of abrogated ceremonies, as he discourses of more at large in the Epistle to the Galatians. For the false apostles, by establishing ceremonies, bound them with a halter, from which Christ has set them free.

14. Having blotted out the hand-writing which was against us. He now contends with the false apostles in close combat. For this was the main point in question, — whether the observance of ceremonies was necessary under the reign of Christ? Now Paul contends that ceremonies have been abolished, and to prove this he compares them to a hand-writing, by which God holds us as it were bound, that we may not be able to deny our guilt. He now says, that we have been freed from condemnation, in such a manner, that even the hand-writing is blotted out, that no remembrance of it might remain. For we know that as to debts the obligation is still in force, so long as the hand-writing remains; and that, on the other hand, by the erasing, or tearing of the handwriting, the debtor is set free. Hence it follows, that all those who still urge the observance of ceremonies, detract from the grace of Christ, as though absolution were not procured for us through him; for they restore to the hand-writing its freshness, so as to hold us still under obligation.

This, therefore, is a truly theological reason for proving the abrogation of ceremonies, because, if Christ has fully redeemed us from condemnation, he must have also effaced the remembrance of the obligation, that consciences may be pacified and tranquil in the sight of God, for these two things are conjoined. While interpreters explain this passage in various ways, there is not one of them that satisfies me. Some think that Paul speaks simply of the moral law, but there is no ground for this. For Paul is accustomed to give the name of ordinances to that department which consists in ceremonies, as he does in the Epistle to the Ephesians, (Ephesians 2:15,) and as we shall find he does shortly afterwards. More especially, the passage in Ephesians shews clearly, that Paul is here speaking of ceremonies.

Others, therefore, do better, in restricting it to ceremonies, but they, too, err in this respect, that they do not add the reason why it is called hand-writing, or rather they assign a reason different from the true one, and they do not in a proper manner apply this similitude to the context. Now, the reason is, that all the ceremonies of Moses had in them some acknowledgment of guilt, which bound those that observed them with a firmer tie, as it were, in the view of God’s judgment. For example, what else were washings than an evidence of pollution? Whenever any victim was sacrificed, did not the people that stood by behold in it a representation of his death? For when persons substituted in their place an innocent animal, they confessed that they were themselves deserving of that death. In fine, in proportion as there were ceremonies belonging to it, just so many exhibitions were there of human guilt, and hand-writings of obligation.

Should any one object that they were sacraments of the grace of God, as Baptism and the Eucharist are to us at this day, the answer is easy. For there are two things to be considered in the ancient ceremonies — that they were suited to the time, and that they led men forward to the kingdom of Christ. Whatever was done at that time shewed in itself nothing but obligation. Grace was in a manner suspended until the advent of Christ — not that the Fathers were excluded from it, but they had not a present manifestation of it in their ceremonies. For they saw nothing in the sacrifices but the blood of beasts, and in their washings nothing but water. Hence, as to present view, condemnation remained; nay more, the ceremonies themselves sealed the condemnation. The Apostle speaks, also, in this manner in the whole of his Epistle to the Hebrews, because he places Christ in direct opposition to ceremonies. But how is it now? The Son of God has not only by his death delivered us from the condemnation of death, but in order that absolution might be made more certain, he abrogated those ceremonies, that no remembrance of obligation might remain. This is full liberty — that Christ has by his blood not only blotted out our sins, but every hand-writing which might declare us to be exposed to the judgment of God. Erasmus in his version has involved in confusion the thread of Paul’s discourse, by rendering it thus — “which was contrary to us by ordinances.” Retain, therefore, the rendering which I have given, as being the true and genuine one.

Took it out of the way, fastening it to his cross. He shews the manner in which Christ has effaced the hand-writing; for as he fastened to the cross our curse, our sins, and also the punishment that was due to us, so he has also fastened to it that bondage of the law, and everything that tends to bind consciences. For, on his being fastened to the cross, he took all things to himself, and even bound them upon him, that they might have no more power over us.

15. Spoiling principalities. There is no doubt that he means devils, whom Scripture represents as acting the part of accusing us before God. Paul, however, says that they are disarmed, so that they cannot bring forward anything against us, the attestation of our guilt being itself destroyed. Now, he expressly adds this with the view of shewing, that the victory of Christ, which he has procured for himself and us over Satan, is disfigured by the false apostles, and that we are deprived of the fruit of it when they restore the ancient ceremonies. For if our liberty is the spoil which Christ has rescued from the devil, what do others, who would bring us back into bondage, but restore to Satan the spoils of which he had been stript bare?

Triumphing over them in it. The expression in the Greek allows, it is true, of our reading — in himself; nay more, the greater part of the manuscripts have ἐν αὑτῳ with an aspirate. The connection of the passage, however, imperatively requires that we read it otherwise; for what would be meagre as applied to Christ, suits admirably as applied to the cross. For as he had previously compared the cross to a signal trophy or show of triumph, in which Christ led about his enemies, so he now also compares it to a triumphal car, in which he shewed himself conspicuously to view. “En grande magnificence;” — “In great magnificence.” For although in the cross there is nothing but curse, it was, nevertheless, swallowed up by the power of God in such a way, that it “La croix;” — “The cross.” has put on, as it were, a new nature. For there is no tribunal so magnificent, no throne so stately, no show of triumph so distinguished, no chariot so elevated, “Tant eminent et honorable;” — “So lofty and honourable.” as is the gibbet on which Christ has subdued death and the devil, the prince of death; nay more, has utterly trodden them under his feet.

Colossians 2:16-19

16. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath-days:

16. Itaque ne quis vos iudicet “Juge, ou, condamne;” — “Judge, or condemn.” vel in cibo, vel in potu, vel in parte “En partie, ou, en distinction, ou, de la part, ou, au respect;” — “In part, or, in distinguishing, or, of the part, or, in respect of.” diei festi, vel neomeniae, vel sabbatorum:

17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

17. Quae sunt umbra futurorum, corpus autem Christi.

18. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

18. Ne quis palmam eripiat, volens in humilitate et cultu Angelorum, (id facere,) in ea quae non vidit se ingerens, frustra inflatus a mente carnis suae,

19. And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.

19. Et non tenens caput, ex quo totum corpus per iuncturas et connexiones subministratum et compactum crescit increments Dei.

16. Let no one therefore judge you. What he had previously said of circumcision he now extends to the difference of meats and days. For circumcision was the first introduction to the observance of the law, other things “Les autres ceremonies;” — “Other rites.” followed afterwards. To judge means here, to hold one to be guilty of a crime, or to impose a scruple of conscience, so that we are no longer free. He says, therefore, that it is not in the power of men to make us subject to the observance of rites which Christ has by his death abolished, and exempts us from their yoke, that we may not allow ourselves to be fettered by the laws which they have imposed. He tacitly, however, places Christ in contrast with all mankind, lest any one should extol himself so daringly as to attempt to take away what he has given him.

In respect of a festival-day. Some understand τὸ μέρος to mean participation. Chrysostom, accordingly, thinks that he used the term part, because they did not observe all festival days, nor did they even keep holidays strictly, in accordance with the appointment of the law. This, however, is but a poor interpretation. “Mats c’est vne conjecture bien maigre;” — “But this is a very slender conjecture.” Consider whether it may not be taken to mean separation, for those that make a distinction of days, separate, as it were, one from another. Such a mode of partition was suitable for the Jews, that they might celebrate religiously “Estroittement;” — “Strictly.” the days that were appointed, by separating them from others. Among Christians, however, such a division has ceased.

But some one will say, “We still keep up some observance of days.” I answer, that we do not by any means observe days, as though there were any sacredness in holidays, or as though it were not lawful to labor upon them, but that respect is paid to government and order — not to days. And this is what he immediately adds.

17. Which are a shadow of things to come. The reason why he frees Christians from the observance of them is, that they were shadows at a time when Christ was still, in a manner, absent. For he contrasts shadows with revelation, and absence with manifestation. Those, therefore, who still adhere to those shadows, act like one who should judge of a man’s appearance from his shadow, while in the mean time he had himself personally before his eyes. For Christ is now manifested to us, and hence we enjoy him as being present. The body, says he, is of Christ, that is, IN Christ. For the substance of those things which the ceremonies anciently prefigured is now presented before our eyes in Christ, inasmuch as he contains in himself everything that they marked out as future. Hence, the man that calls back the ceremonies into use, either buries the manifestation of Christ, or robs Christ of his excellence, and makes him in a manner void. “Inutile et du tout vuide;” — “Useless and altogether void.” Accordingly, should any one of mortals assume to himself in this matter the office of judge, let us not submit to him, inasmuch as Christ, the only competent Judge, sets us free. For when he says, Let no man judge you, he does not address the false apostles, but prohibits the Colossians from yielding their neck to unreasonable requirements. To abstain, it is true, from swine’s flesh, is in itself harmless, but the binding to do it is pernicious, because it makes void the grace of Christ.

Should any one ask, “What view, then, is to be taken of our sacraments? Do they not also represent Christ to us as absent?” I answer, that they differ widely from the ancient ceremonies. For as painters do not in the first draught bring out a likeness in vivid colors, and (εἰκονικῶς) expressively, but in the first instance draw rude and obscure lines with charcoal, so the representation of Christ under the law was unpolished, and was, as it were, a first sketch, but in our sacraments it is seen drawn out to the life. Paul, however, had something farther in view, for he contrasts the bare aspect of the shadow with the solidity of the body, and admonishes them, that it is the part of a madman to take hold of empty shadows, when it is in his power to handle the solid substance. Farther, while our sacraments represent Christ as absent as to view and distance of place, it is in such a manner as to testify that he has been once manifested, and they now also present him to us to be enjoyed. They are not, therefore, bare shadows, but on the contrary symbols “Signes et tesmoignages;” — “Signs and evidences.” of Christ’s presence, for they contain that Yea and Amen of all the promises of God, (2 Corinthians 1:20,) which has been once manifested to us in Christ.

18. Let no one take from you the palm. “The Latin, ‘seducat,’ correctly gives the intention of καταβραβευέτω which signifies, to cause a competitor to lose his prize, by drawing him aside from the goal, (seorsim ducendo, or seducendo.)” — Penn. — Ed. He alludes to runners, or wrestlers, to whom the palm was assigned, on condition of their not giving way in the middle of the course, or after the contest had been commenced. He admonishes them, therefore, that the false apostles aimed at nothing else than to snatch away from them the palm, inasmuch as they draw them aside from the rectitude of their course. Hence it follows that they must be shunned as the most injurious pests. The passage is also carefully to be marked as intimating, that all those who draw us aside from the simplicity of Christ cheat us out of the prize of our high calling. (Philippians 3:14.)

Desirous in humility. Something must be understood; hence I have, inserted in the text id facere, (to do it.) For he points out the kind of danger which they required to guard against. All are desirous to defraud you of the palm, who, under the pretext of humility, recommend to you the worship of angels. For their object is, that you may wander out of the way, leaving the one object of aim. I read humility and worship of angels conjointly, for the one follows the other, just as at this day the Papists make use of the same pretext when philosophizing as to the worship of saints. For they reason on the ground of man’s abasement, “Car ayans proposé l’indignite de l’homme, et presché d’humilite, de là ils concluent;” — “For having set forth man’s unworthiness, and having preached of humility, they conclude from this.” that we must, therefore, seek for mediators to help us. But for this very reason has Christ humbled himself — that we might directly betake ourselves to him, however miserable sinners we may be.

I am aware that the worship of angels is by many interpreted otherwise, as meaning such as has been delivered to men by angels; for the Devil has always endeavored to set off his impostures under this title. The Pope at this day boasts, that all the trifles with which he has adulterated the pure worship of God are revelations. In like manner the Theurgians The Theurgians were the followers of Ammonius Saccas, who prescribed an austere discipline with the view of “refining,” as he pretended, “that faculty of the mind which receives the images of things, so as to render it capable of perceiving the demons, and of performing many marvellous things by their assistance.” See Mosheim’s, Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1, p. 174. — Ed. of old alleged that all the superstitions that they contrived were delivered over to them by angels, as if from hand to hand. Per manus, (from one hand to another.) The reader will find the same proverbial expression made use of by Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 1, pp. 150, 373, and vol. 2, p. 9. — Ed. They, accordingly, think that Paul here condemns all fanciful kinds of worship that are falsely set forth under the authority of angels. “Lesquelles on fait receuoir au poure monde sous la fausse couuerture de l’authorite des anges;” — “Which they make the world receive under the false pretext of the authority of angels.” But, in my opinion, he rather condemns the contrivance as to the worshipping of angels. It is on this account that he has so carefully applied himself to this in the very commencement of the Epistle, to bring angels under subjection, lest they should obscure the splendor of Christ. “La splendeur de la maieste de Christ;” — “The splendor of Christ’s majesty.” In fine, as he had in the first chapter prepared the way for abolishing the ceremonies, so he had also for the removal of all other hinderances which draw us away from Christ alone. “De seul vray but, qui est Christ;” — “From the only true aim, which is Christ.” In this class is the worship of angels

Superstitious persons have from the beginning worshipped angels, See Calvin’S Institutes, vol. 1, p. 200. that through means of them there might be free access to God. The Platonists infected the Christian Church also with this error. For although Augustine sharply inveighs against them in his tenth book “On the City of God,” and condemns at great length all their disputations as to the worship of angels, we see nevertheless what has happened. Should any one compare the writings of Plato with Popish theology, he will find that they have drawn wholly from Plato their prattling as to the worship of angels. The sum is this, that we must honor angels, whom Plato calls demons, χάριν τὢς εὐφήμου διαπορείας (for the sake of their auspicious intercession.) “A cause de l’heureuse intercession qu’ils font pour les hommes;” — “On account of the blessed intercession which they make for men.” He brings forward this sentiment in Epinomis, and he confirms it in Cratylus, See Calvin’S Institutes, vol. 1, p. 202. and many other passages. In what respect do the Papists differ at all from this? “But,” it will be said, “they do not deny that the Son of God is Mediator.” Neither did those with whom Paul contends; but as they imagined that God must be approached by the assistance of the angels, and that, consequently, some worship must be rendered to them, so they placed angels in the seat of Christ, and honored them with Christ’s office. Let us know, then, that Paul here condemns all kinds of worship of human contrivance, which are rendered either to angels or to the dead, as though they were mediators, rendering assistance after Christ, or along with Christ. “Comme s’ils estoyent mediateurs ou auec Christ, ou en second lieu apres Christ, pour suppleer ce qui defaut de son costé“ — “As if they were mediators either with Christ, or in the second place after Christ, to supply what is wanting on his part.” For just so far do we recede from Christ, when we transfer the smallest part of what belongs to him to any others, whether they be angels or men.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen. The verb ἐμβατεύειν, the participle of which Paul here makes use of, has various significations. The rendering which Erasmus, after Jerome, has given to it, walking proudly, would not suit ill, were there an example of such a signification in any author of sufficient note. For we see every day with how much confidence and pride rash persons pronounce an opinion as to things unknown. Nay, even in the very subject of which Paul treats, there is a remarkable illustration. For when the Sorbonnic divines put forth their trifles “Mettent en auant leurs mensonges;” — “Bring forward their false hoods.” respecting the intercession of saints or angels, they declare, “Ils prononcent et determinent comme par arrest;” — “They declare and determine as if by decree.” as though it were from an oracle, “Perinde atque ex tripode,” (just as though it were from the tripod.) Our author manifestly alludes to the three-footed stool on which the Priestess of Apollo at Delphi sat, while giving forth oracular responses. — Ed. that the dead “Les saincts trespassez;” — “Departed saints.” know and behold our necessities, inasmuch as they see all things in the reflex light of God. “En la reuerberation de la lumiere de Dieu;” — “In the reflection of the light of God.” And yet, what is less certain? Nay more, what is more obscure and doubtful? But such, truly, is their magisterial freedom, that they fearlessly and daringly assert what is not only not known by them, but cannot be known by men.

This meaning, therefore, would be suitable, if that signification of the term were usual. It is, however, among the Greeks taken simply as meaning to walk. It also sometimes means to inquire. Should any one choose to understand it thus in this passage, Paul will, in that case, reprove a foolish curiosity in the investigation of things that are obscure, and such as are even hid from our view and transcend it. “Et surmontent toute nostre capacite;” — “And exceed all our capacity.” It appears to me, however, that I have caught Paul’s meaning, and have rendered it faithfully in this manner — intruding into those things which he hath not seen. For that is the common signification of the word ἐμβατεύειν — to enter upon an inheritance, Thus ἐμβατεύειν εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν is made use of by Demosthenes, as meaning — “to come in to the property.” — See Dem. 1086. 19. — Ed. or to take possession, or to set foot anywhere. Accordingly, Budaeus renders this passage thus: — “Setting foot upon, or entering on the possession of those things which he has not seen.” I have followed his authority, but have selected a more suitable term. For such persons in reality break through and intrude into secret things, “Es choses secretes et cachees;” — “Into things secret and hidden.” of which God would have no discovery as yet made to us. The passage ought to be carefully observed, for the purpose of reproving the rashness “La role outrecuidance;” — “The foolish presumption.” of those who inquire farther than is allowable.

Puffed up in vain by a fleshly mind. He employs the expression fleshly mind to denote the perspicuity of the human intellect, however great it may be. For he places it in contrast with that spiritual wisdom which is revealed to us from heaven in accordance with that statement —

Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee. (Matthew 16:17.)

Whoever; therefore, depends upon his own reason, inasmuch as the acuteness of the flesh is wholly at work in him, “Pource qu’il n’est gouuerné que par la subtilite charnelle et naturelle;” — “Because he is regulated exclusively by carnal and natural acuteness.” Paul declares him to be puffed up in vain. And truly all the wisdom that men have from themselves is mere wind: hence there is nothing solid except in the word of God and the illumination of the Spirit. And observe, that those are said to be puffed up who insinuate themselves “En la grace des hommes;” — “Into the favor of men. under a show of humility. For it happens, as Augustine elegantly writes to Paulinus, by wonderful means, as to the soul of man, that it is more puffed up from a false humility than if it were openly proud.

19. Not holding the Head. He condemns in the use of one word whatever does not bear a relation to Christ. He also confirms his statement on the ground that all things flow from him, and depend upon him. Hence, should any one call us anywhere else than to Christ, though in other respects he were big with heaven and earth, he is empty and full of wind: let us, therefore, without concern, bid him farewell. Observe, however, of whom he is speaking, namely, of those who did not openly reject or deny Christ, but, not accurately understanding his office and power, by seeking out other helps and means of salvation, (as they commonly speak,) were not firmly rooted in him.

From whom the whole body by joints. He simply means this, that the Church does not stand otherwise than in the event of all things being furnished to her by Christ, the Head, and, accordingly, that her entire safety “Toute la perfection de son estre;” — “The entire perfection of her being.” consists in him. The body, it is true, has its nerves, its joints, and ligaments, but all these things derive their vigor solely from the Head, so that the whole binding of them together is from that source. What, then, must be done? The constitution of the body will be in a right state, if simply the Head, which furnishes the several members with everything that they have, is allowed, without any hinderance, to have the pre-eminence. This Paul speaks of as the increase of God, by which he means that it is not every increase that is approved by God, but only that which has a relation to the Head. For we see that the kingdom of the Pope is not merely tall and large, but swells out into a monstrous size. As, however, we do not there see what Paul here requires in the Church, what shall we say, but that it is a humpbacked body, and a confused mass that will fall to pieces of itself.

Colossians 2:20-23

20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

20. Si igitur mortui estis cum Christo ab elementis huius mundi, quid tanquam viventibus in mundo decreta vobis perscribuntur?

21. (Touch not; taste not; handle not;

21. Ne esitaveris, ne gustaveris, ne attigeris:

22. Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

22. Quae sunt omnia in corruptionem ipso abusu, secundum praecepta et doctrines hominum,

23. Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

23. Quae speciem “Espece, ou, forme;” — “Appearance, or form.” quidem habent sapientiae in superstitione, “Superstition, or will-worship.” et humilitate animi, et neglectu corporis: “En mespris du corps, ou, en ce qu’elles n’espargnent le corps;” — “In contempt of the body, or, inasmuch as they do not spare the body.” non in honore aliquo ad expletionem carnis. “Sans aucun honneur a rassasier la chair, ou, et ne ont aucun esgard au rassasiement d’iceluy: ou, mais ne font d’aucune estime, n’appartenans qu’a ce qui remplit le corps;” — “Without any honour to the satisfying of the flesh, or, and they have no regard to the satisfying of it, or, but they hold it in no esteem, not caring as to what fills the body.”

20. If ye are dead. He had previously said, that the ordinances were fastened to the cross of Christ. (Colossians 2:14.) He now employs another figure of speech — that we are dead to them, as he teaches us elsewhere, that we are dead to the law, and the law, on the other hand, to us. (Galatians 2:19.) The term death means abrogation, “Et abolissement;” — “And abolishment.” but it is more expressive and more emphatic, (καὶ ἐμφατικώτερον.) He says, therefore, that the Colossians, have nothing to do with ordinances. Why? Because they have died with Christ to ordinances; that is, after they died with Christ by regeneration, they were, through his kindness, set free from ordinances, that they may not belong to them any more. Hence he concludes that they are by no means bound by the ordinances, which the false apostles endeavored to impose upon them.

21. Eat not, taste not. Hitherto this has been rendered — Handle not, but as another word immediately follows, which signifies the same thing, every one sees how cold and absurd were such a repetition. Farther, the verb ἅπτεσθαι is employed by the Greeks, among its other significations, in the sense of eating, An example occurs in Homer’s Odyssey, (6: 60,) σίτου θ ᾿ ἅπτεσθον καὶ χαρ́ετον. — “Take food and rejoice.” See also Xenoph. Mem. 1. 3. 7. — Ed. in accordance with the rendering that I have given. Plutarch makes use of it in the life of Caesar, when he relates that his soldiers, in destitution of all things, ate animals which they had not been accustomed previously to use as food. “The passage referred to is as follows: — “ ᾿Εβρώθη δὲ καὶ φλοιὸς ὡς λέγεται, καὶ ζώων ἀγεύστων πρότερον ἥ ψαντο.” — “Even the bark of trees, it is said, was devoured, and they ate animals not previously tasted.” — Ed. And this arrangement is both in other respects natural and is also most in accordance with the connection of the passage; for Paul points out, (μιμητικῶς,) by way of imitation, to what length the waywardness of those who bind consciences by their laws is wont to proceed. From the very commencement they are unduly rigorous: hence he sets out with their prohibition — not simply against eating, but even against slightly partaking. After they have obtained what they wish they go beyond that command, so that they afterwards declare it to be unlawful to taste of what they do not wish should be eaten. At length they make it criminal even to touch. In short, when persons have once taken upon them to tyrannize over men’s souls, there is no end of new laws being daily added to old ones, and new enactments starting up from time to time. How bright a mirror there is as to this in Popery! Hence Paul acts admirably well in admonishing us that human traditions are a labyrinth, in which consciences are more and more entangled; nay more, are snares, which from the beginning bind in such a way that in course of time they strangle in the end.

22. All which things tend to corruption. He sets aside, by a twofold argument, the enactments of which he has made mention — because they make religion consist in things outward and frail, which have no connection with the spiritual kingdom of God; and secondly, because they are from men, not from God. He combats the first argument, also, in Romans 14:17, when he says,

The kingdom of God is not in meat and drink;

likewise in 1 Corinthians. 6 13,

Meat for the belly, and the belly for meats: God will destroy both.

Christ also himself says,

Whatever entereth into the mouth defileth not the man, because it goes down into the belly, and is cast forth. (Matthew 15:11.)

The sum is this — that the worship of God, true piety, and the holiness of Christians, do not consist in drink, and food, and clothing, which are things that are transient and liable to corruption, and perish by abuse. For abuse is properly applicable to those things which are corrupted by the use of them. Hence enactments are of no value in reference to those things which tend to excite scruples of conscience. But in Popery you would scarcely find any other holiness, than what consists in little observances of corruptible things.

A second refutation is added “Le second argument par lequel il refute telles ordonnances, est;” — “The second argument by which he sets aside such enactments, is.” — that they originated with men, and have not God as their Author; and by this thunderbolt he prostrates and swallows up all traditions of men. For why? This is Paul’s reasoning: “Those who bring consciences into bondage do injury to Christ, and make void his death. For whatever is of human invention does not bind conscience.”

23. Which have indeed a show. Here we have the anticipation of an objection, in which, while he concedes to his adversaries what they allege, he at the same time reckons it wholly worthless. For it is as though he had said, that he does not regard their having a show of wisdom. But show is placed in contrast with reality, for it is an appearance, as they commonly speak, which deceives by resemblance. “Par similitude qu’elle ha auec la verite;” — “By the resemblance which it bears to the reality.”

Observe, however, of what colors this show consists, according to Paul. He makes mention of three — self-invented worship, “Le seruice forgé a plaisir, c’est a dire inuenté par les hommes;” — “Worship contrived at pleasure, that is to say, invented by men.” humility, and neglect of the body. Superstition among the Greeks receives the name of ἐθελοβρησκεία — the term which Paul here makes use of. He has, however, an eye to the etymology of the term, for ἐθελοβρησκεία literally denotes a voluntary service, which men choose for themselves at their own option, without authority from God. Human traditions, therefore, are agreeable to us on this account, that they are in accordance with our understanding, for any one will find in his own brain the first outlines of them. This is the first pretext.

The second is humility, inasmuch as obedience both to God and men is pretended, so that men do not refuse even unreasonable burdens. “Iniques et dures a porter;” — “Unreasonable and hard to be borne.” And for the most part traditions of this kind are of such a nature as to appear to be admirable exercises of humility.

They allure, also, by means of a third pretext, inasmuch as they seem to be of the greatest avail for the mortification of the flesh, while there is no sparing of the body. Paul, however, bids farewell to those disguises, for

what is in high esteem among men is often an abomination in the sight of God. (Luke 16:15.)

Farther, that is a treacherous obedience, and a perverse and sacrilegious humility, which transfers to men the authority of God; and neglect of the body is not of so great importance, as to be worthy to be set forth to admiration as the service of God.

Some one, however, will feel astonished, that Paul does not take more pains in pulling off those masks. I answer, that he on good grounds rests contented with the simple term show. For the principles which he had taken as opposed to this are incontrovertible — that the body is in Christ, and that, consequently, those do nothing but impose upon miserable men, who set before them shadows. Secondly, the spiritual kingdom of Christ is by no means taken up with frail and corruptible elements. Thirdly, by the death of Christ such observances were put an end to, that we might have no connection with them; and, fourthly, God is our only Lawgiver. (Isaiah 33:22.) Whatever may be brought forward on the other side, let it have ever so much splendor, is fleeting show.

Secondly, he reckoned it enough to admonish the Colossians, not to be deceived by the putting forth of empty things. There was no necessity for dwelling at greater length in reproving them. For it should be a settled point among all the pious, that the worship of God ought not to be measured according to our views; and that, consequently, any kind of service is not lawful, simply on the ground that it is agreeable to us. This, also, ought to be a commonly received point — that we owe to God such humility as to yield obedience simply to his commands, so as not to lean to our own understanding, etc., (Proverbs 3:5,) — and that the limit of humility towards men is this — that each one submit himself to others in love. Now, when they contend that the wantonness of the flesh is repressed by abstinence from meats, the answer is easy — that we must not therefore abstain from any particular food as being unclean, but must eat sparingly of what we do eat of, both in order that we may soberly and temperately make use of the gifts of God, and that we may not, impeded by too much food and drink, forget those things that are God’s. Hence it was enough to say that these “Ces traditions;” — “These traditions.” were masks, that the Colossians, being warned, might be on their guard against false pretexts.

Thus, at the present day, Papists are not in want of specious pretexts, by which to set forth their own laws, however they may be — some of them impious and tyrannical, and others of them silly and trifling. When, however, we have granted them everything, there remains, nevertheless, this refutation by Paul, which is of itself more than sufficient for dispelling all their smoky vapours; “Tous les brouillars desquels ils taschent d’esblouir les yeux au poure monde;” — “All the mists by which they endeavor to blind the eyes of the poor world.” not to say how far removed they “Leurs traditions;” — “Their traditions.” are from so honorable an appearance as that which Paul describes. The principal holiness of the Papacy, “La premiere et la principale honnestete et sainctete de la Papaute;” — “The first and principal decency and sanctity of the Papacy.” at the present day, consists in monkhood, and of what nature that is, I am ashamed and grieved to make mention, lest I should stir up so abominable an odour. Farther, it is of importance to consider here, how prone, nay, how forward the mind of man is to artificial modes of worship. For the Apostle here graphically describes “Peind yci au vif;” — “Paints here to the life.” the state of the old system of monkhood, which came into use a hundred years after his death, as though he had never spoken a word. The zeal of men, therefore, for superstition is surpassingly mad, which could not be restrained by so plain a declaration of God from breaking forth, as historical records testify.

Not in any honor. Honor means care, according to the usage of the Hebrew tongue. Honour widows, (1 Timothy 5:3,) that is, take care of them. Now Paul finds fault with this, that they “Les traditions;” — “The traditions.” teach to leave off care for the body. For as God forbids us to indulge the body unduly, so he commands that these be given it as much as is necessary for it. Hence Paul, in Romans 13:14, does not expressly condemn care for the flesh, but such as indulges lusts. Have no care, says he, for the flesh, to the gratifying of its lusts. What, then, does Paul point out as faulty in those traditions of which he treats? It is that they gave no honor to the body for the satisfying the flesh, that is, according to the measure of necessity. For satisfying here means a mediocrity, which restricts itself to the simple use of nature, and thus stands in opposition to pleasure and all superfluous delicacies; for nature is content with little. Hence, to refuse what it requires for sustaining the necessity of life, is not less at variance with piety, than it is inhuman.

CHAPTER 3

Colossians 3:1-4

1. If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.

1. Ergo si consurrexistis cum Christo, quae sursum sunt quaerite, ubi Christus est in dextera Dei sedens:

2. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.

2. Quae sursum sunt cogitate, non quae super terram.

3. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

3. Mortui enim estis, et vita nostra abscondita est cum Christo in Deo.

4. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

4. Ubi autem Christus apparuerit, vita vestra, tunc etiam vos cum ipso apparebitis in gloria.

CHAPTER 2

Col 2:1-23. His Strivings in Prayer for Their Steadfastness in Christ; from Whom He Warns Them Not to Be Led Away by False Wisdom.

1. For--He explains in what respect he "labored striving" (Col 1:29). Translate as Greek, "I wish you to know how great a conflict (the same Greek word as in Col 1:29, "agony of a conflict" of fervent, anxious prayer; not conflict with the false teachers, which would have been impossible for him now in prison) I have for you."

them at Laodicea--exposed to the same danger from false teachers as the Colossians (compare Col 4:16). This danger was probably the cause of his writing to Laodicea, as well as to Colosse.

not seen my face in the flesh--including those in Hierapolis (Col 4:13). Paul considered himself a "debtor" to all the Gentiles (Ro 1:14). "His face" and presence would have been a "comfort" (Col 2:2; Ac 20:38). Compare Col 1:4, 7, 8, in proof that he had not seen, but only heard of the Colossians. Hence he strives by earnest conflict with God in anxious prayer for them, to make up for the loss of his bodily presence among them. Though "absent in the flesh, I am with you in the Spirit" (Col 2:5).

2. Translate, "That their hearts may be comforted." The "their," compared with "you" (Col 2:4), proves that in Col 2:1 the words, "have not seen my face in the flesh," is a general designation of those for whom Paul declares he has "conflict," including the particular species, "you (Colossians) and them at Laodicea." For it is plain, the prayer "that their hearts may be comforted," must include in it the Colossians for whom he expressly says, "I have conflict." Thus it is an abbreviated mode of expression for, "That your and their hearts may be comforted." Alford translates, "confirmed," or allows "comforted" in its original radical sense strengthened. But the Greek supports English Version: the sense, too, is clear: comforted with the consolation of those whom Paul had not seen, and for whom, in consequence, he strove in prayerful conflict the more fervently; inasmuch as we are more anxious in behalf of absent, than present, friends [Davenant]. Their hearts would be comforted by "knowing what conflict he had for" them, and how much he is interested for their welfare; and also by being released from doubts on learning from the apostle, that the doctrine which they had heard from Epaphras was true and certain. In writing to churches which he had instructed face to face, he enters into particular details concerning them, as a father directing his children. But to those among whom he had not been in person, he treats of the more general truths of salvation.

being--Translate as Greek in oldest manuscripts, "They being knit together."

in love--the bond and element of perfect knitting together; the antidote to the dividing schismatical effect of false doctrine. Love to God and to one another in Christ.

unto--the object and end of their being "knit together."

all riches--Greek, "all the riches of the full assurance (1Th 1:5; He 6:11; 10:22) of the (Christian) understanding." The accumulation of phrases, not only "understanding," but "the full assurance of understanding"; not only this, but "the riches of," &c., not only this, but "all the riches of," &c., implies how he desires to impress them with the momentous importance of the subject in hand.

to--Translate "unto."

acknowledgment--The Greek implies, "full and accurate knowledge." It is a distinct Greek word from "knowledge," Col 2:3. Alford translates, "thorough ... knowledge." Acknowledgment hardly is strong enough; they did in a measure acknowledge the truth; what they wanted was the full and accurate knowledge of it (compare Notes, see on Col 1:9, 10; Php 1:9).

of God, and of the Father and of Christ--The oldest manuscripts omit "and of the Father, and of"; then translate, "Of God (namely), Christ." Two very old manuscripts and Vulgate read, "Of God the Father of Christ."

3. Translate in the Greek order, "In whom (not as Alford, 'in which') mystery; Christ is Himself the 'mystery' (Col 2:2; 1Ti 3:16), and to Christ the relative refers) are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden." The "all" here, answers to "all" in Col 2:2; as "treasures" answer to the "riches"; it is from the treasures that the riches (Col 2:2) are derived. "Are" is the predicate of the sentence; all the treasures ARE in Him; hidden is predicated of the state or manner in which they are in Him. Like a mine of unknown and inexhaustible wealth, the treasures of wisdom are all in Him hidden, but not in order to remain so; they only need to be explored for you to attain "unto the riches" in them (Col 2:2); but until you, Colossians, press after attaining the full knowledge (see on Col 2:2) of them, they remain "hidden." Compare the parable, Mt 13:44, "treasure hid." This sense suits the scope of the apostle, and sets aside Alford's objection that "the treasures are not hidden, but revealed." "Hidden" plainly answers to "mystery" (Col 2:2), which is designed by God, if we be faithful to our privileges, not to remain hidden, but to be revealed (compare 1Co 2:7, 8). Still as the mine is unfathomable, there will, through eternity, be always fresh treasures in Him to be drawn forth from their hidden state.

wisdom--general, and as to experimental and practical truth; whence comes "understanding" (Col 2:2).

knowledge--special and intellectual, in regard to doctrinal truth; whence comes "the full knowledge" (Col 2:2).

4. And--"Now." Compare with "lest any man," &c. Col 2:8, 16, 18. He refers to the blending of Judaism with Oriental philosophy, and the combination of this mixture with Christianity.

enticing words--plausible as wearing the guise of wisdom and humility (Col 2:18, 23).

5. For--argument against their suffering themselves to be beguiled, drawn from a regard to his personal authority as though he were present.

joying and beholding--beholding with joy.

order--your good order; answering to "knit together" (Col 2:2) as a well-organized body; the same Greek as that for knit together, is used of the body" of the Church compacted," in Ep 4:16. Compare 1Co 14:33, 40.

steadfastness--Greek, "the firm (or 'solid') foundation." As "order" expresses the outward aspect of the Church; so "steadfastness" expresses the inner basis on which their Church rested. The Greek literally implies not an abstract quality, but the thing in the concrete; thus their "faith" here is the solid thing which constituted the basis of their Church.

6. "As therefore ye received (once for all; the aorist tense; from Epaphras) Jesus the Christ as your Lord (compare 1Co 12:3; 2Co 4:5; Php 3:8), so walk in Him." He says not merely, "Ye received" the doctrine of Christ, but "Jesus" Himself; this is the essence of faith (Joh 14:21, 23; Ga 1:16). Ye have received once for all the Spirit of life in Christ; carry into practice that life in your walk (Ga 5:25). This is the main scope of the Epistle.

7. Rooted--(Ep 3:17).

built up--Greek, "being builded up." As "rooted" implies their vitality; so "builded up," massive solidity. As in the Song of Solomon, when one image is not sufficient to express the varied aspects of divine truth, another is employed to supply the idea required. Thus "walking," a third image (Col 2:6), expresses the thought which "rooted" and "built," though each suggesting a thought peculiar to itself, could not express, namely, onward motion. "Rooted" is in the past tense, implying their first conversion and vital grafting "in Him." "Built up" is present (in the Greek), implying their progressive increase in religion by union with Him. Ep 2:20 refers to the Church; but the passage here to their individual progress in edification (Ac 20:32).

stablished--confirmed.

as--"even as."

abounding therein with thanksgiving--advancing to fuller maturity (compare Col 2:2) in the faith, "with thanksgiving" to God as the gracious Author of this whole blessing.

8. Translate, "Beware (literally, 'Look' well) lest there shall be (as I fear there is: the Greek indicative expresses this) any man (pointing to some known emissary of evil, Ga 1:7) leading you away as his spoil (not merely gaining spoil out of you, but making yourselves his spoil) through (by means of) his philosophy," &c. The apostle does not condemn all philosophy, but "the philosophy" (so Greek) of the Judaic-oriental heretics at Colosse, which afterwards was developed into Gnosticism. You, who may have "the riches of full assurance" and "the treasures of wisdom," should not suffer yourselves to be led away as a spoil by empty, deceitful philosophy: "riches" are contrasted with spoil; "full" with "vain," or empty (Col 2:2, 3, 9).

after--"according to."

tradition of men--opposed to, "the fulness of the Godhead." Applied to Rabbinical traditions, Mr 7:8. When men could not make revelation even seem to tell about deep mysteries which they were curious to pry into, they brought in human philosophy and pretended traditions to help it, as if one should bring a lamp to the sundial to find the hour [Cauations for Times, p. 85]. The false teachers boasted of a higher wisdom in theory, transmitted by tradition among the initiated; in practice they enjoined asceticism, as though matter and the body were the sources of evil. Phrygia (in which was Colosse) had a propensity for the mystical and magical, which appeared in their worship of Cybele and subsequent Montanism [Neander].

rudiments of the world--(See on Ga 4:3). "The rudiments" or elementary lessons "of the (outward) world," such as legal ordinances; our Judaic childhood's lessons (Col 2:11, 16, 20; Ga 4:1-3). But Neander, "the elements of the world," in the sense, what is earthly, carnal and outward, not "the rudiments of religion," in Judaism and heathenism.

not after Christ--"Their" boasted higher "philosophy" is but human tradition, and a cleaving to the carnal and worldly, and not to Christ. Though acknowledging Christ nominally, in spirit they by their doctrine deny Him.

9. For--"Because." Their "philosophy" (Col 2:8) is not "after Christ," as all true philosophy is, everything which comes not from, and tends not to, Him, being a delusion; "For in Him (alone) dwelleth" as in a temple, &c.

the fulness--(Col 1:19; Joh 14:10).

of the Godhead--The Greek (theotes) means the ESSENCE and NATURE of the Godhead, not merely the divine perfections and attributes of Divinity (Greek, "theiotes"). He, as man, was not merely God-like, but in the fullest sense, God.

bodily--not merely as before His incarnation, but now "bodily in Him" as the incarnate word (Joh 1:14, 18). Believers, by union with Him, partake of His fulness of the divine nature (Joh 1:16; 2Pe 1:4; see on Ep 3:19).

10. And--And therefore; and so. Translate in the Greek order, "Ye are in Him (by virtue of union with Him) filled full" of all that you need (Joh 1:16). Believers receive of the divine unction which flows down from their Divine Head and High Priest (Psa 133:2). He is full of the "fulness" itself; we, filled from Him. Paul implies, Therefore ye Colossians need no supplementary sources of grace, such as the false teachers dream of. Christ is "the Head of all rule and authority" (so the Greek), Ep 1:10; He, therefore, alone, not these subject "authorities" also, is to be adored (Col 2:18).

11. Implying that they did not need, as the Judaizers taught, the outward rite of circumcision, since they had already the inward spiritual reality of it.

are--rather, as the Greek, "Ye were (once for all) circumcised (spiritually, at your conversion and baptism, Ro 2:28, 29; Php 3:3) with a (so the Greek) circumcision made without hands"; opposed to "the circumcision in the flesh made by hands" (Ep 2:11). Christ's own body, by which the believer is sanctified, is said to be "not made with hands" (Mr 14:58; He 9:11; compare Da 2:45).

in putting off--rather as Greek, "in your putting off"; as an old garment (Ep 4:22); alluding to the putting off the foreskin in circumcision.

the body of the sins of the flesh--The oldest manuscripts read, "the body of the flesh," omitting "of the sins," that is, "the body," of which the prominent feature is fleshiness (compare Ro 8:13, where "flesh" and "the body" mutually correspond). This fleshly body, in its sinful aspect, is put off in baptism (where baptism answers its ideal) as the seal of regeneration where received in repentance and faith. In circumcision the foreskin only was put off; in Christian regeneration "the body of the flesh" is spiritually put off, at least it is so in its ideal conception, however imperfectly believers realize that ideal.

by--Greek, "in." This spiritual circumcision is realized in, or by, union with Christ, whose "circumcision," whereby He became responsible for us to keep the whole law, is imputed to believers for justification; and union with whom, in all His vicarious obedience, including His circumcision, is the source of our sanctification. Alford makes it explanatory of the previous, "a circumcision made without hands," namely, "the circumcision brought about by your union with Christ." The former view seems to me better to accord with Col 2:12; 3:1, 3, 4, which similarly makes the believer, by spiritual union with Christ, to have personal fellowship in the several states of Christ, namely, His death, resurrection, and appearing in glory. Nothing was done or suffered by our Mediator as such, but may be acted in our souls and represented in our spirits. Pearson's view, however, is that of Alford. Joshua, the type (not Moses in the wilderness), circumcised the Israelites in Canaan (Jos 5:2-9) the second time: the people that came out of Egypt having been circumcised, and afterwards having died in the wilderness; but those born after the Exodus not having been so. Jesus, the Antitype, is the author of the true circumcision, which is therefore called "the circumcision of Christ" (Ro 2:29). As Joshua was "Moses' minister," so Jesus, "minister of the circumcision for the truth of God" unto the Gentiles (Ro 15:8).

12. Translate, "Having been buried with Him in your baptism." The past participle is here coincident in time with the preceding verb, "ye were (Greek) circumcised." Baptism is regarded as the burial of the old carnal life, to which the act of immersion symbolically corresponds; and in warm climates where immersion is safe, it is the mode most accordant with the significance of the ordinance; but the spirit of the ordinance is kept by affusion, where immersion would be inconvenient or dangerous; to insist on literal immersion in all cases would be mere legal ceremonialism (Ro 6:3, 4).

are risen--rather as Greek, "were raised with Him."

through the faith, &c.--by means of your faith in the operation of God; so "faith of," for "faith in" (Ep 3:12; Php 3:9). Faith in God's mighty operation in raising again Jesus, is saving faith (Ro 4:24; 10:9); and it is wrought in the soul by His same "mighty working" whereby He "raised Jesus from the dead" (Ep 1:19, 20). Bengel seems to me (not as Alford understands him) to express the latter sense, namely, "Through the faith which is a work of the operation of God who," &c. Ep 1:19, 20 accords with this; the same mighty power of God is exercised in raising one spiritually dead to the life of faith, as was "wrought in Christ when God raised Him literally from the dead." However, "faith of" usually is "faith in" (Ro 3:22); but there is no grammatical impropriety in understanding it "the faith which is the effect of the operation of God" (Ep 2:8; 1Th 2:13). As His literal resurrection is the ground of the power put forth in our spiritual resurrection now, so it is a pledge of our literal resurrection hereafter (Ro 8:11).

13. you, being dead--formerly (Ep 2:1, 2); even as Christ was among the dead, before that God raised Him "from the dead" (Col 2:12).

sins--rather as Greek is translated at end of this verse, "trespasses," literally, "failings aside" from God's ways; actual transgressions, as that of Adam.

uncircumcision of your flesh--your not having put off the old fleshly nature, the carnal foreskin, or original sin, which now by spiritual circumcision, that is, conversion and baptism, you have put off.

he quickened--God "quickened together with Him (Christ)." Just as Christ's resurrection proved that He was delivered from the sin laid on Him, so our spiritual quickening proves that we have been forgiven our sins (1Pe 3:22; 4:1, 2).

forgiven you--So Vulgate and Hilary. But the oldest manuscripts read, "us," passing from the particular persons, the Colossians, to the general Church (Col 1:14; Ep 1:7).

all trespasses--Greek, "all our trespasses."

14. Blotting out--Greek, "Having wiped out"; coincident in time with "having forgiven you" (Col 2:13); hereby having cancelled the law's indictment against you. The law (including especially the moral law, wherein lay the chief difficulty in obeying) is abrogated to the believer, as far as it was a compulsory, accusing code, and as far as "righteousness" (justification) and "life" were sought for by it. It can only produce outward works, not inward obedience of the will, which in the believer flows from the Holy Spirit in Him (Ro 3:21; 7:2, 4; Ga 2:19).

the handwriting of ordinances--rather, "IN ordinances" (see on Ep 2:15); "the law of commandments contained in ordinances." "The handwriting" (alluding to the Decalogue, the representative of the law, written by the hand of God) is the whole law, the obligatory bond, under which all lay; the Jews primarily were under the bond, but they in this respect were the representative people of the world (Ro 3:19); and in their inability to keep the law was involved the inability of the Gentiles also, in whose hearts "the work of the law was written" (Ro 2:15); and as they did not keep this, they were condemned by it.

that was against us ... contrary to us--Greek "adversary to us"; so it is translated, He 10:27. "Not only was the law against us by its demands, but also an adversary to us by its accusations" [Bengel]. Tittmann explains the Greek, "having a latent contrariety to us"; not open designed hostility, but virtual unintentional opposition through our frailty; not through any opposition in the law itself to our good (Ro 7:7-12, 14; 1Co 15:56; Ga 3:21; He 10:3). The "WRITING" is part of "that which was contrary to us"; for "the letter killeth" (see on 2Co 3:6).

and took it--Greek, and hath taken it out of the way" (so as to be no longer a hindrance to us), by "nailing it to the cross." Christ, by bearing the curse of the broken law, has redeemed us from its curse (Ga 3:13). In His person nailed to the cross, the law itself was nailed to it. One ancient mode of cancelling bonds was by striking a nail through the writing: this seems at that time to have existed in Asia [Grotius]. The bond cancelled in the present case was the obligation lying against the Jews as representatives of the world, and attested by their amen, to keep the whole law under penalty of the curse (De 27:26; Ne 10:29).

15. Alford, Ellicott, and others translate the Greek to accord with the translation of the same Greek, Col 3:9, "Stripping off from Himself the principalities and the powers: " God put off from Himself the angels, that is, their ministry, not employing them to be promulgators of the Gospel in the way that He had given the law by their "disposition" or ministry (Ac 7:53; Ga 3:19; He 2:2, 5): God manifested Himself without a veil in Jesus. "The principalities and THE powers" refers back to Col 2:10, Jesus, "the Head of all principality and power," and Col 1:16. In the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, God subjected all the principalities, &c., to Jesus, declaring them to be powerless as to His work and His people (Ep 1:21). Thus Paul's argument against those grafting on Christianity Jewish observances, along with angel-worship, is, whatever part angels may be supposed to have had under the law, now at an end, God having put the legal dispensation itself away. But the objection is, that the context seems to refer to a triumph over bad angels: in 2Co 2:14, however, Christ's triumph over those subjected to Him, is not a triumph for destruction, but for their salvation, so that good angels may be referred to (Col 1:20). But the Greek middle is susceptible of English Version, "having spoiled," or, literally [Tittmann], "having completely stripped," or "despoiled" for Himself (compare Ro 8:38; 1Co 15:24; Ep 6:2). English Version accords with Mt 12:29; Lu 11:22; He 2:14. Translate as the Greek, "The rules and authorities."

made a show of them--at His ascension (see on Ep 4:8; confirming English Version of this verse).

openly--Joh 7:4; 11:54, support English Version against Alford's translation, "in openness of speech."

in it--namely, His cross, or crucifixion: so the Greek fathers translate. Many of the Latins, "In Himself" or "in Him." Ep 2:16 favors English Version, "reconcile ... by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby." If "in Him," that is, Christ, be read, still the Cross will be the place and means of God's triumph in Christ over the principalities (Ep 1:20; 2:5). Demons, like other angels, were in heaven up to Christ's ascension, and influenced earth from their heavenly abodes. As heaven was not yet opened to man before Christ (Joh 3:13), so it was not yet shut against demons (Job 1:6; 2:1). But at the ascension Satan and his demons were "judged" and "cast out" by Christ's obedience unto death (Joh 12:31; 16:11; He 2:14; Re 12:5-10), and the Son of man was raised to the throne of God; thus His resurrection and ascension are a public solemn triumph over the principalities and powers of death. It is striking that the heathen oracles were silenced soon after Christ's ascension.

16. therefore--because ye are complete in Christ, and God in Him has dispensed with all subordinate means as essential to acceptance with Him.

meat ... drink--Greek, "eating ... drinking" (Ro 14:1-17). Pay no regard to any one who sits in judgment on you as to legal observances in respect to foods.

holyday--a feast yearly. Compare the three, 1Ch 23:31.

new moon--monthly.

the sabbath--Omit "THE," which is not in the Greek (compare Note, see on Ga 4:10). "Sabbaths" (not "the sabbaths") of the day of atonement and feast of tabernacles have come to an end with the Jewish services to which they belonged (Le 23:32, 37-39). The weekly sabbath rests on a more permanent foundation, having been instituted in Paradise to commemorate the completion of creation in six days. Le 23:38 expressly distinguished "the sabbath of the Lord" from the other sabbaths. A positive precept is right because it is commanded, and ceases to be obligatory when abrogated; a moral precept is commanded eternally, because it is eternally right. If we could keep a perpetual sabbath, as we shall hereafter, the positive precept of the sabbath, one in each week, would not be needed. He 4:9, "rests," Greek, "keeping of sabbath" (Is 66:23). But we cannot, since even Adam, in innocence, needed one amidst his earthly employments; therefore the sabbath is still needed and is therefore still linked with the other nine commandments, as obligatory in the spirit, though the letter of the law has been superseded by that higher spirit of love which is the essence of law and Gospel alike (Ro 13:8-10).

17. things to come--the blessings of the Christian covenant, the substance of which Jewish ordinances were but the type. Compare "ages to come," that is, the Gospel dispensation (Ep 2:7). He 2:5, "the world to come."

the body is of Christ--The real substance (of the blessings typified by the law) belongs to Christ (He 8:5; 10:1).

18. beguile--Translate, "Defraud you of your prize," literally, "to adjudge a prize out of hostility away from him who deserves it" [Trench]. "To be umpire in a contest to the detriment of one." This defrauding of their prize the Colossians would suffer, by letting any self-constituted arbitrator or judge (that is, false teacher) draw them away from Christ," the righteous Judge" and Awarder of the prize (2Ti 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1Pe 5:4), to angel-worship.

in a voluntary humility--So "will-worship" (Col 2:23). Literally, "Delighting ([Wahl]) in humility"; loving (so the Greek is translated, Mr 12:38, "love to go in long clothing") to indulge himself in a humility of his own imposing: a volunteer in humility [Dallæus]. Not as Alford, "Let no one of purpose defraud you," &c. Not as Grotius, "If he ever so much wish" (to defraud you). For the participle "wishing" or "delighting," is one of the series, and stands in the same category as "intruding," "puffed up," "not holding"; and the self-pleasing implied in it stands in happy contrast to the (mock) humility with which it seems to me, therefore, to be connected. His "humility," so called, is a pleasing of self: thus it stands in parallelism to "his fleshly mind" (its real name, though he styles it "humility"), as "wishing" or "delighting" does to "puffed up." The Greek for "humility" is literally, "lowliness of mind," which forms a clearer parallel to "puffed up by his fleshly mind." Under pretext of humility, as if they durst not come directly to God and Christ (like the modern Church of Rome), they invoked angels: as Judaizers, they justified this on the ground that the law was given by angels. This error continued long in Phrygia (where Colosse and Laodicea were), so that the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 360) expressly framed its thirty-fifth canon against the "Angelici" (as Augustine [Heresies, 39], calls them) or "invokers of angels." Even as late as Theodoret's time, there were oratories to Michael the archangel. The modern Greeks have a legend that Michael opened a chasm to draw off an inundation threatening the Colossian Christians. Once men admit the inferior powers to share invocation with the Supreme, the former gradually engrosses all our serious worship, almost to the exclusion of the latter; thus the heathen, beginning with adding the worship of other deities to that of the Supreme, ended with ceasing to worship Him at all. Nor does it signify much, whether we regard such as directly controlling us (the pagan view), or as only influencing the Supreme in our behalf (the Church of Rome's view); because he from whom I expect happiness or misery, becomes the uppermost object in my mind, whether he give, or only procure it [Cautions for Times]. Scripture opposes the idea of "patrons" or "intercessors" (1Ti 2:5, 6). True Christian humility joins consciousness of utter personal demerit, with a sense of participation in the divine life through Christ, and in the dignity of our adoption by God. Without the latter being realized, a false self-humiliation results, which displays itself in ceremonies and ascetic self-abasement (Col 2:23), which after all is but spiritual pride under the mock guise of humility. Contrast "glorying in the Lord" (1Co 1:31).

intruding into ... things which he hath not seen--So very old manuscripts and Vulgate and Origen read. But the oldest manuscripts and Lucifer omit "not"; then translate, "haughtily treading on ('Standing on' [Alford]) the things which he hath seen." Tregelles refers this to fancied visions of angels. But if Paul had meant a fancied seeing, he would have used some qualifying word, as, "which he seemed to see," not "which he hath seen." Plainly the things were actually seen by him, whether of demoniacal origination (1Sa 28:11-20), or phenomena resulting from natural causation, mistaken by him as if supernatural. Paul, not stopping to discuss the nature of the things so seen, fixes on the radical error, the tendency of such a one in all this to walk by SENSE (namely, what he haughtily prides himself on having SEEN), rather than by FAITH in the UNSEEN "Head" (Col 2:19; compare Joh 20:29; 2Co 5:7; He 11:1). Thus is the parallelism, "vainly puffed up" answers to "haughtily treading on," or "setting his foot on"; "his fleshly mind" answers to the things which he hath seen," since his fleshliness betrays itself in priding himself on what he hath seen, rather than on the unseen objects of faith. That the things seen may have been of demoniacal origination, appears from 1Ti 4:1, "Some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils" (Greek, "demons"). A warning to modern spiritualists.

puffed up--implying that the previous so called "humility" (Greek, "lowliness of mind") was really a "puffing up."

fleshly mind--Greek, "By the mind of his own flesh." The flesh, or sensuous principle, is the fountain head whence his mind draws its craving after religious objects of sight, instead of, in true humility as a member, "holding fast the (unseen) Head."

19. Translate, "Not holding fast the Head." He who does not hold Christ solely and supremely above all others, does not hold Him at all [Bengel]. The want of firm holding of Christ has set him loose to (pry into, and so) "tread haughtily on (pride himself on) things which he hath seen." Each must hold fast the Head for himself, not merely be attached to the other members, however high in the body [Alford].

from which--rather, "from whom."

the body--that is, all the members of the body (Ep 4:16).

joints--the points of union where the supply of nourishment passes to the different members, furnishing the body with the materials of growth.

bands--the sinews and nerves which bind together limb and limb. Faith, love, and peace, are the spiritual bands. Compare "knit together in love" (Col 2:2; Col 3:14; Ep 4:3).

having nourishment ministered--that is, supplied to it continually. "Receiving ministration."

knit together--The Greek is translated, "compacted," Ep 4:16: implying firm consolidation.

with the increase of God--(Ep 4:16); that is, wrought by God, the Author and Sustainer of the believer's spiritual life, in union with Christ, the Head (1Co 3:6); and tending to the honor of God, being worthy of Him, its Author.

20. Wherefore--The oldest manuscripts omit "Wherefore."

if ye be dead--Greek, "if ye died (so as to be freed) from," &c. (compare Ro 6:2; 7:2, 3; Ga 2:19).

rudiments of the world--(Col 2:8). Carnal, outward, worldly, legal ordinances.

as though living--as though you were not dead to the world like your crucified Lord, into whose death ye were buried (Ga 6:14; 1Pe 4:1, 2).

are ye subject to ordinances--By do ye submit to be made subject to ordinances? Referring to Col 2:14: you are again being made subject to "ordinances," the "handwriting" of which had been "blotted out" (Col 2:14).

21. Compare Col 2:16, "meat ... drink." He gives instances of the "ordinances" (Col 2:20) in the words of their imposers. There is an ascending climax of superstitious prohibitions. The first Greek word (hapse) is distinguished from the third (thiges), in that the former means close contact and retention: the latter, momentary contact (compare 1Co 7:1; Joh 20:17, Greek, "Hold me not"; cling not to me"). Translate, "Handle not, neither taste, nor even touch." The three refer to meats. "Handle not" (a stronger term than "nor even touch"), "nor taste" with the tongue, "nor even touch," however slight the contact.

22. Which--things, namely, the three things handled, touched, and tasted.

are to perish--literally, "are constituted (by their very nature) for perishing (or 'destruction by corruption') in (or 'with') their using up (consumption)." Therefore they cannot really and lastingly defile a man (Mt 15:17; 1Co 6:13).

after--according to. Referring to Col 2:20, 21. All these "ordinances" are according to human, not divine, injunction.

doctrines--Greek, teachings." Alford translates, "(doctrinal) systems."

23. have--Greek, "are having"; implying the permanent characteristic which these ordinances are supposed to have.

show of wisdom--rather, "a reputation of wisdom" [Alford].

will-worship--arbitrarily invented worship: would-be worship, devised by man's own will, not God's. So jealous is God of human will-worship, that He struck Nadab and Abihu dead for burning strange incense (Le 10:1-3). So Uzziah was stricken with leprosy for usurping the office of priest (2Ch 26:16-21). Compare the will-worship of Saul (1Sa 13:8-14) for which he was doomed to lose his throne. This "voluntary worship" is the counterpart to their "voluntary humility" (Col 2:18): both specious in appearance, the former seeming in religion to do even more than God requires (as in the dogmas of the Roman and Greek churches); but really setting aside God's will for man's own; the latter seemingly self-abasing, but really proud of man's self-willed "humility" (Greek, "lowliness of mind"), while virtually rejecting the dignity of direct communion with Christ, the Head; by worshipping of angels.

neglecting of the body--Greek, "not sparing of the body." This asceticism seems to have rested on the Oriental theory that matter is the source of evil. This also looked plausible (compare 1Co 9:27).

not in any honour--of the body. As "neglecting of the body" describes asceticism positively; so this clause, negatively. Not paying any of that "honor" which is due to the body as redeemed by such a price as the blood of Christ. We should not degrade, but have a just estimation of ourselves, not in ourselves, but in Christ (Ac 13:46; 1Co 3:21; 6:15; 7:23; 12:23, 24; 1Th 4:4). True self-denial regards the spirit, and not the forms of ascetical self-mortification in "meats which profit not those occupied therein" (He 13:9), and is consistent with Christian self-respect, the "honor" which belongs to the believer as dedicated to the Lord. Compare "vainly," Col 2:18.

to the satisfying of the flesh--This expresses the real tendency of their human ordinances of bodily asceticism, voluntary humility, and will-worship of angels. While seeming to deny self and the body, they really are pampering the flesh. Thus "satisfying of the flesh" answers to "puffed up by his fleshly mind" (Col 2:18), so that "flesh" is used in its ethical sense, "the carnal nature" as opposed to the "spiritual"; not in the sense, "body." The Greek for "satisfying" implies satiating to repletion, or to excess. "A surfeit of the carnal sense is human tradition" [Hilary the Deacon, in Bengel]. Tradition puffs up; it clogs the heavenly perceptions. They put away true "honor" that they may "satiate to the full THE FLESH." Self-imposed ordinances gratify the flesh (namely, self-righteousness), though seeming to mortify it.

What great conflict - The word αγων, which we here render conflict, is to be understood as implying earnest care and solicitude, accompanied, undoubtedly, with the most fervent application to the throne of grace in their behalf. The αγωνιζομενος of the preceding verse gave the apostle occasion to use the word αγων here. He agonized with God, and his agony was for them.

Laodicea - A city of Asia Minor, on the borders of Caria, Phrygia, and Lydia. It was originally called Diospolis, or the city of Jupiter, and afterwards Rhoas; but obtained the name of Laodicea from Laodice, the wife of Antiochus. It is now called Ladik. It was formerly celebrated for its commerce, and the fine black wool of its sheep. Colosse, or the city of the Colossians, lay between it and Hierapolis. This Hierapolis was also a town of Phrygia, famous for its hot baths: it is now called Bambukholasi.

As many as have not seen my face in the flesh - From this it has been conjectured that St. Paul had never been at either Colosse or Laodicea, and this, from the letter of the text, appears probable; and yet, his having passed more than once through this country, preaching and strengthening the Churches, renders it very improbable. It is, therefore, most likely that we should understand the apostle as speaking collectively; that he had the most earnest concern, not only for the welfare of those Churches with which he was acquainted, such as Colosse and Laodicea, but also for those to whom he was not personally known.

That their hearts might be comforted - That they might have continual happiness in God, having constant affiance in him.

Being knit together in love - The word συμβιβασθεντων, or συμβιβασθεντες, which is the true reading, but both of equal import here, signifies being united, as the beams or the timbers of a building, by mortices and pins. The visible Church of Christ cannot be in union with God unless it have unity in itself, and without love this unity is impossible.

Unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding - That is, that they might have the most indubitable certainty of the truth of Christianity, of their own salvation, and of the general design of God to admit the Gentiles into his Church. This is the grand mystery of God, which was now laid open by the preaching of the Gospel.

And of the Father, and of Christ - These words are variously written in different MSS., versions, and fathers: The mystery of God - of God in Christ - of God who is in Christ - of God concerning Christ - of God who is Christ - of the God Christ - of God and Christ - of God the Father of Christ - of God the Father, and our Lord Christ - of God and the Father of Christ - of God the Father, in Christ - of the God Christ Jesus, Father and Lord, etc., etc., etc.

This great variety of versions leaves the strongest presumption that the words in question are glosses which have crept into the text, and are of no authority. Griesbach has left them out of the text.

In whom are hid - Or rather in which; referring to the mystery mentioned above. In this glorious scheme of Christianity all the treasures - the abundance and excellency, of wisdom and knowledge are contained. No scheme of salvation, or Divine knowledge, ever equalled in its depth and excellency the Gospel plan. A scheme which the wisdom of God alone could devise, and which his power and infinite mercy alone could accomplish.

Lest any man should beguile you - The word παραλογιζηται means to deceive by sophistry or subtle reasoning, in which all the conclusions appear to be fairly drawn from the premises, but the premises are either assumed without evidence, or false in themselves; but this not being easily discovered, the unthinking or unwary are carried away by the conclusions which are drawn from these premises. And this result is clearly intimated by the term πιθανολογια, enticing words, plausible conclusions or deductions from this mode of reasoning. The apostle seems to allude to the Gentile philosophers, who were notorious for this kind of argumentation. Plato and Socrates are not free from it.

For though I be absent in the flesh - It is hardly possible that such words as these in this verse could have been used to perfect strangers; they argue a considerable knowledge of the people, and a knowledge founded on personal acquaintance. The original is exceedingly soft and musical: - Ει γαρ και τη σαρκι απειμι, Αλλα τῳ πνευματι συν ὑμιν ειμι, Χαιρων και βλεπων ὑμων την ταξιν, κ.τ.λ.

The whole verse shows that this Church was sound in doctrine, and strict in discipline. They had steadfast faith in Christ, and regular order or discipline among themselves.

As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus - Many persons lay a certain stress on the words as and so, and make various fine heads of discourses from them; viz. As ye received Christ in a spirit of humility, so walk in him; as ye received him in a spirit of faith, so walk in him, etc., etc. This may be all proper in itself; but nothing of the kind was intended by the apostle. His meaning is simply this: Seeing ye have embraced the doctrine of Christ, continue to hold it fast, and not permit yourselves to be turned aside by sophistical or Judaizing teachers.

Rooted and built up in him - It is not usual with the apostle to employ this double metaphor, taken partly from the growth of a tree and the increase of a building. They are to be rooted; as the good seed had been already sown, it is to take root, and the roots are to spread far, wide, and deep. They are to be grounded; as the foundation has already been laid, they are to build thereon. In the one case, they are to bear much fruit; in the other, they are to grow up to be a habitation of God through the Spirit. See the notes on Eph 2:21, Eph 2:22 (note); Eph 3:17 (note).

Abounding therein with thanksgiving - No limitation is ever set to the operations of God on the soul, or to the growth of the soul in the knowledge, love, and image of God. Those who are brought into such a state of salvation should abound in gratitude and loving obedience, as they grow in grace.

Beware lest any man spoil you - The word συλαγωγων, from συλη, prey, and αγειν, to lead or carry away, signifies to rob, or spoil of their goods, as if by violence or rapine. Their goods were the salvation they had received from Christ; and both the Gentile and Jewish teachers endeavored to deprive them of these, by perverting their minds, and leading them off from the truths of Christianity.

Philosophy and vain deceit - Or, the vain or empty deceit of philosophy; such philosophizing as the Jewish and Gentile teachers used. As the term philosophy stood in high repute among the Gentiles, the Jews of this time affected it; and both Philo and Josephus use the word to express the whole of the Mosaic institutions. So the former: Ὁι κατα Μωσην φιλοσοφουντες· "Those who embraced the philosophy of Moses;" Phil., De Nomin. Mutand. And the latter; Τρια παρα Ιουδαιοις ειδη φιλοσοφειται· "There are three systems of philosophy among the Jews," (Bell. Jud., lib. ii. cap 8, sec. 2), meaning the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, as immediately follows. The Jewish philosophy, such as is found in the Cabala, Midrashim, and other works, deserves the character of vain deceit, in the fullest sense and meaning of the words. The inspired writers excepted, the Jews have ever been the most puerile, absurd, and ridiculous reasoners in the world. Even Rabbi Maymon, or Maimonides, the most intelligent of them all, is often in his master piece (the Moreh Nevochim, the Teacher of the Perplexed) most deplorably empty and vain.

After the rudiments of the world - According to the doctrine of the Jewish teachers; or, according to the Mosaic institutions, as explained and glossed by the scribes, Pharisees, and rabbins in general. We have often seen that העולם הזה haolam hazzeh, this world, of which του κοσμου τουτου is a literal translation, is frequently used to express the Jewish system of rites, ceremonies, and institutions in general; what the apostle calls the tradition of men, namely, what men, unauthorized by God, have taught as doctrines received from him. Our Lord frequently refers to and condemns these traditions.

Not after Christ - Not according to the simple doctrine of Christ, viz.: He died for our offenses; believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved.

For in him dwelleth all the fullness - This is opposed to the vain or empty doctrine of the Gentile and Jewish philosophers: there is a fullness in Christ suited to the empty, destitute state of the human soul, but in the philosophy of the Jews and Gentiles nothing like this was found; nor indeed in the more refined and correct philosophy of the present day. No substitute has ever been found for the grace of the Lord Jesus, and those who have sought for one have disquieted themselves in vain.

By the Godhead or Deity, Θεοτης, we are to understand the state or being of the Divine nature; and by the fullness of that Deity, the infinite attributes essential to such a nature.

Bodily - Συματικως signifies truly, really; in opposition to typically, figuratively. There was a symbol of the Divine presence in the Hebrew tabernacle, and in the Jewish temple; but in the body of Christ the Deity, with all its plenitude of attributes, dwelt really and substantially: for so the word σωματικως means; and so it was understood by the ancient Greek fathers, as is fully shown by Suicer, in his Thesaurus, under the word. "The fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Christ 'bodily,' as opposed to the Jewish tabernacle, or temple; truly and really, in opposition to types and figures; not only effectively, as God dwells in good men, but substantially or personally, by the strictest union, as the soul dwells in the body; so that God and man are one Christ." See Parkhurst.

And ye are complete in him - Και εστε εν αυτῳ πεπληρωμενοι· And, ye are filled with him. Our word complete quite destroys the connection subsisting in the apostle's ideas. The philosophy of the world was empty, κενη, but there was a πληρωμα, or fullness, in Christ; the Colossians were empty - spoiled and deprived of every good, while following the empty philosophy and groundless traditions of Jewish and Gentile teachers; but since they had received Christ Jesus they were πεπληρωμενοι, filled with him. This is the true meaning of the word, and by this the connection and assemblage of ideas in the apostle's mind are preserved. No fanciful completeness in Christ, of a believer, while incomplete in himself, is either expressed or intended by St. Paul. It is too bad a doctrine to exist in the oracles of God.

The head of all principality - See the notes on Col 1:16-17 (note).

In whom also ye are circumcised - All that was designed by circumcision, literally performed, is accomplished in them that believe through the Spirit and power of Christ. It is not a cutting off of a part of the flesh, but a putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, through the circumcision of Christ; he having undergone and performed this, and all other rites necessary to qualify him to be a mediator between God and man; for, being made under the law, he was subject to all its ordinances, and every act of his contributed to the salvation of men. But by the circumcision of Christ, the operation of his grace and Spirit may be intended; the law required the circumcision of the flesh, the Gospel of Christ required the circumcision of the heart. The words των ἁμαρτιων, of the sins, are omitted by ABCD*EFG, several others, by the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, and Itala; and by Clement, Athanasius, Basil, Cyril, and several others. Griesbach has omitted them.

Buried with him in baptism - Alluding to the immersions practised in the case of adults, wherein the person appeared to be buried under the Water, as Christ was buried in the heart of the earth. His rising again the third any, and their emerging from the water, was an emblem of the resurrection of the body; and, in them, of a total change of life.

The faith of the operation of God - They were quickened, changed, and saved, by means of faith in Christ Jesus; which faith was produced by the operation or energy of God. Believing is the act of the soul; but the grace or power to believe comes from God himself.

And you, being dead in your sins - See the notes on Eph 2:1, etc.

The uncircumcision of your flesh - This must refer to that part of the Colossian Church which was made up of converted heathens, for the heathens alone were uncircumcised.

Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances - By the hand-writing of ordinances the apostle most evidently means the ceremonial law: this was against them, for they were bound to fulfill it; and it was contrary to them, as condemning them for their neglect and transgression of it. This law God himself has blotted out.

Blotting out the hand-writing is probably an allusion to Num 5:23, where the curses written in the book, in the case of the woman suspected of adultery, are directed to be blotted out with the bitter waters. And there can be little doubt of a farther allusion, viz., to the custom of discharging the writing from parchment by the application of such a fluid as the muriatic acid, which immediately dissolves those ferruginous calces which constitute the blackening principle of most inks. But the East India inks, being formed only of simple black, such as burnt ivory, or cork, and gum water, may be wiped clean off from the surface of the paper or parchment by the application of a wet sponge, so as to leave not one legible vestige remaining: this I have often proved.

Nailing it to his cross - When Christ was nailed to the cross, our obligation to fulfill these ordinances was done away. There may be another reference here to some ancient mode of annulling legal obligations, by nailing them to a post; but I do not recollect at present an instance or example. Antiquated laws are said to have been thus abrogated.

And having spoiled principalities and powers - Here is an allusion to the treatment of enemies when conquered: they are spoiled of their armor, so much the word απεκδυειν implies; and they are exhibited with contumely and reproach to the populace, especially when the victor has the honor of a triumph; to the former of which there is an allusion in the words εδειγματισεν εν παρῥησιᾳ, making a public exhibition of them; and to the latter in the words θριαμβευσας αυτους, triumphing over them. And the principalities and powers refer to the emperors, kings, and generals taken in battle, and reserved to grace the victor's triumph. It is very likely that by the αρχας και εξουσιας, principalities and powers, over whom Christ triumphed, the apostle means the נשיאות nesioth and רשות roshoth, who were the rulers and chiefs in the Sanhedrin and synagogues, and who had great authority among the people, both in making constitutions and explaining traditions. The propagation of Christianity in Judea quite destroyed their spiritual power and domination; just as the propagation of Protestantism, which was Christianity revived, destroyed, wherever it appeared, the false doctrine and domination of the pope of Rome.

In it - The words εν αυτῳ refer rather to Christ, than to the cross, if indeed they be genuine; of which there is much reason to doubt, as the versions and fathers differ so greatly in quoting them. Griesbach has left them out of the text.

Let no man - judge you in meat, or in drink - The apostle speaks here in reference to some particulars of the hand-writing of ordinances, which had been taken away, viz., the distinction of meats and drinks, what was clean and what unclean, according to the law; and the necessity of observing certain holydays or festivals, such as the new moons and particular sabbaths, or those which should be observed with more than ordinary solemnity; all these had been taken out of the way and nailed to the cross, and were no longer of moral obligation. There is no intimation here that the Sabbath was done away, or that its moral use was superseded, by the introduction of Christianity. I have shown elsewhere that, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, is a command of perpetual obligation, and can never be superseded but by the final termination of time. As it is a type of that rest which remains for the people of God, of an eternity of bliss, it must continue in full force till that eternity arrives; for no type ever ceases till the antitype be come. Besides, it is not clear that the apostle refers at all to the Sabbath in this place, whether Jewish or Christian; his σαββατων, of sabbaths or weeks, most probably refers to their feasts of weeks, of which much has been said in the notes on the Pentateuch.

Which are a shadow - All these things were types, and must continue in force till the Christ, whom they represented, came; the apostle therefore says that the body - the substance or design of them was of Christ - pointed him out, and the excellent blessings which he has procured. The word σκια, shadow, is often used to express any thing imperfect or unsubstantial; while the term σωμα, body, was used in the opposite sense, and expressed any thing substantial, solid, and firm. The law was but the shadow or representation of good things to come; none should rest in it; all that it pointed out is to be sought and obtained in Christ.

Let no man beguile you - Μηδεις ὑμας καταβραβευετω· Let no man take the prize from you which the βραβευς, brabeus, or judge in the contests, has assigned you, in consequence of your having obtained the victory. This any reader will see, is an allusion to the Olympic and Isthmian games, and to the prizes assigned to these who had obtained the victory in one or more of the contests which there took place. The Colossians had fought and conquered under the direction of Christ, and he, as the sole judge in this contest, had assigned to them the prize; the false teachers, affecting great modesty, humility, and sanctity, endeavored to turn them aside from the Gospel, and to induce them to end in the flesh who had begun in the Spirit. Against these the apostle warns them.

In a voluntary humility and worshiping of angels - This is a difficult passage, and in order to explain it, I shall examine the meaning of some of the principal terms of the original. The word θελειν, to will, signifies also to delight; and ταπειμοφροσυνη signifies not only lowliness or humility of mind, but also affliction of mind; and ταπεινουν την ψυχην, Lev 16:20, Lev 16:31, and in many other places, signifies to afflict the soul by fasting, and self-abnegation; and θρησκεια signifies reverence and modesty. Hence the whole passage has been paraphrased thus: Let no man spoil you of the prize adjudged to you, who delights in mortifying his body, and walking with the apparent modesty of an angel, affecting superior sanctity in order to gain disciples; intruding into things which he has not seen; and, notwithstanding his apparent humility, his mind is carnal, and he is puffed up with a sense of his superior knowledge and piety. It is very likely that the apostle here alludes to the Essenes, who were remarkably strict and devout, spent a principal part of their time in the contemplation of the Divine Being, abstained from all sensual gratifications, and affected to live the life of angels upon earth. With their pretensions all the apostle says here perfectly agrees, and on this one supposition the whole of the passage is plain and easy. Many have understood the passage as referring to the adoration of angels, which seems to have been practised among the Jews, who appear (from Tobit, xii. 15; Philo, in lib. de Somn.; Josephus, War. lib. ii. cap. 8, sec. 7) to have considered them as a sort of mediators between God and man; presenting the prayers of men before the throne; and being, as Philo says, μεγαλου Βασιλεως οφθαλμοι και ωτα, the eyes and ears of the great King. But this interpretation is not so likely as the foregoing.

And not holding the Head - Not acknowledging Jesus Christ as the only Savior of mankind, and the only Head or chief of the Christian Church, on whom every member of it depends, and from whom each derives both light and life. For a farther explanation of these words see the notes on Eph 4:16, where the figures and phraseology are the same.

If ye be dead with Christ - See the notes on Rom 6:3, Rom 6:5 (note).

From the rudiments of the world - Ye have renounced all hope of salvation from the observance of Jewish rites and ceremonies, which were only rudiments, first elements, or the alphabet, out of which the whole science of Christianity was composed. We have often seen that the world and this world signify the Jewish dispensation, or the rites, ceremonies, and services performed under it.

Why, as though living in the world - Why, as if ye were still under the same dispensation from which you have been already freed, are ye subject to its ordinances, performing them as if expecting salvation from this performance?

Touch not; taste not; handle not - These are forms of expression very frequent among the Jews. In Maccoth, fol. xxi. 1: "If they say to a Nazarite, Don't drink, don't drink; and he, notwithstanding, drinks; he is guilty. If they say, Don't shave, don't shave; and he shaves, notwithstanding; he is guilty. If they say, Don't put on these clothes, don't put on these clothes; and he, notwithstanding, puts on heterogeneous garments; he is guilty." See more in Schoettgen.

Which all are to perish with the using - These are not matters of eternal moment; the different kinds of meats were made for the body, and go with it into corruption: in like manner, all the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion now perish, having accomplished the end of their institution; namely, to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

After the commandments and doctrines of men? - These words should follow the 20th verse, of which they form a part; and it appears from them that the apostle is here speaking of the traditions of the elders, and the load of cumbrous ceremonies which they added to the significant rites prescribed by Moses.

Which things have indeed a show of wisdom - All these prescriptions and rites have indeed the appearance of wisdom, and are recommended by plausible reasons; but they form a worship which God has not commanded, and enjoin macerations of the body, accompanied with a humiliation of spirit, that are neither profitable to the soul, nor of any advantage to the body; so that the whole of their religion is nothing worth.

What is here termed will-worship, εθελοθρησκεια, signifies simply a mode of worship which a man chooses for himself, independently of the revelation which God has given. The whole system of Deism is an εθελοθρησκεια, a worship founded in the will or caprices of man, and not in the wisdom or will of God; and it is just as profitable to body and soul as that of which the apostle speaks. God will be served in his own way; it is right that he should prescribe to man the truths which he is to believe, and the ordinances which he is to use. To refuse to receive his teaching in order to prefer our own fancies, is to light a farthing candle as a substitute for the noonday sun. From the beginning of the world God has prescribed the worship which was best pleasing to himself, and never left a matter of such moment to man. The nations which have either not had a revelation, or refused to receive that which God has given, show, by their diversity of worship, superstition, absurdity, and in many cases cruelty, what the state of the whole would have been, had not God, in his infinite mercy, blessed it with a revelation of his will. God has given directions concerning his worship; and he has appointed the seventh day for the peculiar exercises of spiritual duties: other times he has left to man's convenience; and they abuse the text who say that the appointment of particular times and places for religious service is will-worship. God prescribes the thing, and leaves it to man, except in the case of the Sabbath, to appoint the time and the place; nor is it possible to be too frequent in God's worship, any more than to be too fervent.

How great a conflict - Of care, desire, prayer. As many as have not seen my face - Therefore, in writing to the Colossians, he refrains from those familiar appellations, "Brethren," "Beloved."

Unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, unto the acknowledgment of the mystery of God - That is, unto the fullest and clearest understanding and knowledge of the gospel.

So walk in him - In the same faith, love, holiness.

Rooted in him - As the vine. Built - On the sure foundation.

Through philosophy and empty deceit - That is, through the empty deceit of philosophy blended with Christianity. This the apostle condemns, Because it was empty and deceitful, promising happiness, but giving none. Because it was grounded, not on solid reason, but the traditions of men, Zeno, Epicurus, and the rest. And, Because it was so shallow and superficial, not advancing beyond the knowledge of sensible things; no, not beyond the first rudiments of them.

For in him dwelleth - Inhabiteth, continually abideth, all the fulness of the Godhead. Believers are "filled with all the fulness of God," Eph 3:19. But in Christ dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead; the most full Godhead; not only divine powers, but divine nature, Col 1:19. Bodily - Personally, really, substantially. The very substance of God, if one might so speak, dwells in Christ in the most full sense.

And ye - Who believe. Are filled with him - John 1:16. Christ is filled with God, and ye are filled with Christ. And ye are filled by him. The fulness of Christ overflows his church, Psa 133:3. He is originally full. We are filled by him with wisdom and holiness. Who is the head of all principality and power - Of angels as well as men Not from angels therefore, but from their head, are we to ask whatever we stand in need of.

By whom also ye have been circumcised - Ye have received the spiritual blessings typified of old by circumcision. With a circumcision not performed with hands - By an inward, spiritual operation. In putting off, not a little skin, but the whole body of the sins of the flesh - All the sins of your evil nature. By the circumcision of Christ - By that spiritual circumcision which Christ works in your heart.

Which he wrought in you, when ye were as it were buried with him in baptism - The ancient manner of baptizing by immersion is as manifestly alluded to here, as the other manner of baptizing by sprinkling or pouring of water is, Heb 10:22. But no stress is laid on the age of the baptized, or the manner of performing it, in one or the other; but only on our being risen with Christ, through the powerful operation of God in the soul; which we cannot but know assuredly, if it really is so: and if we do not experience this, our baptism has not answered the end of its institution. By which ye are also risen with him - From the death of sin to the life of holiness. It does not appear, that in all this St. Paul speaks of justification at all, but of sanctification altogether.

And you who were dead - Doubly dead to God, not only wallowing in trespasses, outward sins, but also in the uncircumcision of your flesh - A beautiful expression for original sin, the inbred corruption of your nature, your uncircumcised heart and affections. Hath he - God the Father. Quickened together with him - Making you partakers of the power of his resurrection. It is evident the apostle thus far speaks, not of justification, but of sanctification only.

Having blotted out - in consequence of his gracious decrees, that Christ should come into the world to save sinners, and that whosoever believeth on him should have everlasting life. The handwriting against us - Where a debt is contracted, it is usually testified by some handwriting; and when the debt is forgiven, the handwriting is destroyed, either by blotting it out, by taking it away, or by tearing it. The apostle expresses in all these three ways, God's destroying the handwriting which was contrary to us, or at enmity with us. This was not properly our sins themselves, (they were the debt,) but their guilt and cry before God.

And having spoiled the principalities and powers - The evil angels, of their usurped dominion. He - God the Father. Exposed them openly - Before all the hosts of hell and heaven. Triumphing over them in or by him - By Christ. Thus the paragraph begins with Christ, goes on with him, and ends with him.

Therefore - Seeing these things are so. Let none judge you - That is, regard none who judge you. In meat or drink - For not observing the ceremonial law in these or any other particulars. Or in respect of a yearly feast, the new moon, or the weekly Jewish sabbaths.

Which are but a lifeless shadow; but the body, the substance, is of Christ.

Out of pretended humility, they worshipped angels, as not daring to apply immediately to God. Yet this really sprung from their being puffed up: (the constant forerunner of a fall, Prov 16:18) so far was it from being an instance of true humility.

And not holding the head - He does not hold Christ, who does not trust in him alone. All the members are nourished by faith, and knit together by love and mutual sympathy.

Therefore - The inference begun, Col 2:16; is continued. A new inference follows, Col 3:1. If ye are dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world - That is, If ye are dead with Christ, and so freed from them, why receive ye ordinances - Which Christ hath not enjoined, from which he hath made you free.

Touch not - An unclean thing. Taste not - Any forbidden meat. Handle not - Any consecrated vessel.

Perish in the using - Have no farther use, no influence on the mind.

Not sparing the body - Denying it many gratifications, and putting it to many inconveniences. Yet they are not of any real value before God, nor do they, upon the whole, mortify, but satisfy, the flesh. They indulge our corrupt nature, our self - will, pride, and desire of being distinguished from others.

1 FOR I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you , and for them at Laodicea , and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh .

This causal particle refers to what he had said just before in the former Chapter.

The certainty of which truth for the evidence of his unfeigned affection to them, he heartily wishes they might be certified what a combate he sustain'd for them, by reason of that opposition he met with in his ministerial labours. This filled him with inward fears and cares, and encompass'd him with outward troubles as, 2 Cor. 11.23. to 30. 2 Tim. 2.10. wherein [illegible: 1 letter]e addressed himself to God for them by earnest prayers as, c. 4.12. 2 Thess. 1.11. desiring the assistance of their prayers, Rom. 15.30. Heb. 13.18 these with his travels, writings, &c. might well be called a conflict, Phil. 1.30.

Which he had not onely for the Saints at Colosse, but for their neighbours liable also to the impression of the same or the like seducers at Laodicea definitely, to whom he designed this Epistle might be imparted, c. 4.16.

And indefinitely for as many Christians especially in Phrygia, as had not seen him bodily present amongst them, or heard him preach with a lively voice, whither because 'tis said he twice passed through all Phrygia where Colosse and Laodicea were situate, Act. 1.16. & 18.23. he had been personally at these Cities, is not determinable from the copulative here, (which possibly may be used as a particle to separate these from those who had not conversed with him) neither is it of much importance. It should seem Paul was acquainted with Philemon (a Colossian or Laodicean) his wife and family, Philem. 1, 2.

Marginal references: Or, fear or care.; Phil. 1.30. 1 Thess. 2.2.

2 That their hearts might be comforted , being knit together in love , and to all riches of the full assurance of understanding , to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God , and of the Father, and of Christ .

Whereas false teachers did endeavour to adulterate the Christian institution, the striving of the Apostle's Holy Soul here was as in the former Chapter, v. 28. to this end, that they might be compleat and establish'd Christians to the last.

And as a proper means conducible to this good purpose he would have them be joyned or compacted together, be all of a piece, in the affection and exercise of love.

And to attain to a well-grounded powerfull evangelical faith, which he sets forth lively by an elegant increase of words both in regard of the acts and the object of it which is called a mystery to be believed, 1 Tim. 3.9. upon its being revealed. The sense of that which he heartily desires is that they might have (1) all abundance of understanding with full satisfaction in these main principles of the Gospel, they are called to assent to. Signifying faith is no blind, but a certain intelligent perswasion; to distinguish it from uncertain opinion, Ioh. 6.69. Rom. 4.21. 1 Thess. 1.5. Heb. 6.11. & 10.22.

(2) An inward consent, and vital owning, a cordial embracing of the fundamental truths of the Gospel, Eph. 4.13, 14. Heb. 6.1. in opposition to those vain speculations and traditions which deluded many.

He calls this the mystery of God, or a divine mystery (no humane invention) as before, c. 1.26, 27. and so vindicates the dignity of faith and the excellency of the Gospel, asserting it to be a mystery of God, not onely as the object but revealer of it. For the Father reveals Christ, c. 1.27. Mat. 16, 17. Eph. 3.3. as Christ doth the Father, Mat. 11.27. Ioh. 1.18.

Whereas it is said and of the Father and of Christ. This first and here needs not be rendred as a copulative but as exegetical, or as expletive and may be read even, or to wit, or both, (as a learned man observes) the Greeks and Latins usually do when the copulative is to be repeated, the name of God referring commonly to the Father and the Son (as elsewhere God even the Father, c. 1.3. 1 Cor. 15▪ 24. & 2 Cor. 11.31. Eph. 1.3. Phil. 4.20.) So the former and here may be read, q. d. the mystery not of God, abstractedly considered; but I would have you be united and all one, in the acknowledgment of the whole mystery of God, i. e. both of the Father and of Christ.

Marginal references: 2 Cor. 1.6.; Phil. 3.8.

3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisedom, and knowledge .

This may relate either to the divine mystery, wherein, are in abundance all necessary doctrines to consolation, and salvation stored up, respecting the foregoing verse, compare, 1 Cor. 2.7. Eph. 3.3, 4. in opposition to the vain shew of wisedom seducers did boast of, or (as the most ancient and modern take it) to Christ the immediate antecedent in whom (as we render it) i. e. in Christ; consider either (1) as the object, which being rightly known, we may have all wisedom and perfect knowledge to Salvation: he speaks not here of all that Christ knoweth, he reveals not all that in the Gospel to us, but what we must know of him that we may be sav'd (2) in the subject because all the treasures of wisedom in order to Salvation, are not onely known and found out in Christ,

But also do dwell and abide in him as the fountain what he can give to us for our consolation and perfection. It had been little pertinent for Paul to have said that all these deep things of God, 1 Cor. 2.10. were known to our Lord; but that they are found in him, do dwell in him, are all stored up, displayed and set forth in him to be seen through the veil that is to say his flesh, Heb. 10.20. or the infirmity of his Cross. The Series of the Apostle's discourse comparing, v. 8, & 1. shews it to be thus understood of Christ as the subject and fountain of all saving wisedom in opposition to the comments of humane wisedom which the false Doctours did boast of: continuing the metaphor he shews from what fund the treasures of saving knowledge may be drawn: by treasures intimating the excellency and abundance thereof: there was some store in the Tabernacle of Moses, but very small compared to the abundance, certainly to be found in Christ, all else of no worth to the excellency of the knowledge of Christ for consolation, v. 2. Phil. 3.8. things to be believed and practised are by way of eminency, Christian wisedom and knowledge. The treasures of which how and when hid? is to be well considered, because in our translation, and in almost all others the Greek word we render hid is by trajection put next to the relative whom, whereas it is indeed in the original the last word in the verse, and seems to be expressive rather of what was hid before Christ than what is hid in him. For, as a learned man saith, hidden treasures, as such, seem to be like hidden Musick of no regard; or like the hidden talent, Luk. 19, 20. it not being so easie to think that the Apostle in this Epistle teaching that the secrets which had lain hid from the wise Men of the World, in the ages past, and now were made bare, brought into light, and made known even to babes by Christ, c. 1.26, 27. with Luk. 10.21. and having just before v. 2. spoken of the understanding and acknowledgment of the mystery of the Father and the Son, what should the riches of glory to the knowledge of the mystery be, but the treasures of wisedom now revealed, heretofore hid, of which continuedly a little after he says that all the fulness of the God-head dwells in him bodily, i. e. personally not in a shadow, as it were hid in a cloud, but in flesh that may be really seen and touch'd. So that it should seem best to retain hid as it is placed in the Greek to this sense, q. d. In Christ are and dwell in the greatest fulness, all the treasures of wisedom, hid under the law, which are therefore called a mystery secret, or hidden thing from ages and generations, c. 1.26, 27. now made manifest to his Saints, they are now nor hid in Christ, but made known amongst the Gentiles as God willed: not then hidden riches, h. e. treasures of wisedom and knowledge of this mystery as of hid treasure, but out of Christ, and before Christ amongst the Iews: For Christ himself is that mystery, c. 4.3. not hid after his appearance, but manifested, and manifesting the Father, Ioh. 1.18, however if any will rather choose to read, as if in Christ were at present hid all treasures, 'tis to be understood, stored up, not exposed to the view of every Eye, being as in a rich cabinet not to keep them from being known to men, but rather to make them more pretious and desireable. For Christ came when sent of his Father to spread this heavenly wealth. He is the sun of righteousness, Ioh. 1.9. the unbelieving must thank themselves if where he is truly preached he be hid to them, and his arm be revealed but to a few, Is. 53. 2 Cor. 4.3, 4.1. 'tis their own blinding that they [illegible: 2 letters] not savingly discern what is display'd in Christ Wherefore both may be true in divers respects (1) consider the thing in it self, objectively, so treasures of wisedom, are evidently laid up in Jesus Christ and manifested upon his appearance, 1 Tim. 3.16. Tit. 2.11. but (2) with respect to the eyes and perceptions of men (subjectively) as naturally obscured and corrupted by sin; so natural men, or meer animal men perceive not in Christ the riches of wisedom and knowledge which are in him as our mediatour when they look upon him as having no beauty or comeliness for which they should desire him, Is. 53.2. he as crucified being to the Iews a stumbling block and to the Gentiles fooli[illegible: 1 letter]hness, when he is to those of them, who are called, the power of God and the wisedom of God, 1 Cor. 1.23, 24. the Lutherans in[illegible: 1 letter]erence hence that omnisciency agrees to Christ's humane nature is altogether inconsequent; both (as before) because the Apostle's business here is not to acquaint us what Christ himself knoweth, but that is to be known of us, which may be found treasur'd up in him. Treasures here in him not being considered absolutely but comparatively, to all the knowledge of Men and Angels. Yet from supposal of an infinite knowledge in Christ who is God-man in one Person, it followeth not that the Soul of his Humane Nature knoweth al[illegible: 1 letter] things.

Marginal references: Or, wherein.

4 And this I say , lest any man should beguile you with inticing words .

Here he suggests the ground of his insisting upon the excellent treasures of the saving knowledge of Christ, and the ample description of him.

To this end that he might fortifie them against delusion by paralogisms or sophistical and false reasonings, fallacious arguing (as the word notes, Iam. 1.22.) under a colourable pretence and shew of wisedom, v. 8, 18, 23.

Set off with Rhetorical suasions and imbellishments intimating the prevalency of such blandishments with fair words, and good speeches to seduce the simple (if the heart were not established with grace, Rom. 16.18. & 4.14. Eph. 5, 6. Heb. 13.8, 9.) and therefore esteeming the excellent knowledge of Christ and being found in him, Phil. 3.8, 9. they should beware of whatever under a shew of Religion is introduced to seduce them from the simplicity that is in Christ, 2 Cor. 11.3.

5 For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit , joying and beholding your order , and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ .

To prevent any surmise that his distance at Rome might take him off from minding of them at Colosse, he shews that the great affection he bare to them did oblige him to interess himself in all their concerns (the care of all the Churches being incumbent on him, 2 Cor. 11.28.) and therefore that his bodily con[illegible: 1 letter]inement at Rome, did not hinder his presence with them in spirit. Not that we can conclude by some extraordinary operation of the Holy Ghost, God gave him now and then a clear prospect of what they did, as he did to Elisha of Gehazi's behaviour, 2 K[illegible: 2 letters]g. 5.26. and of Ezekiel in Babylon, of the secret actions of the Iews in Hierusalem; but that he was with them as with the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 5.3. when distant in body his thoughts and affections were exercised about them.

As it follows there as moving of fears lest they should be ensnared, so of joy understanding their order, i. e. their good Estate, constitution and consent in orderly walking and discipline, 1 Cor. 14.40. 1 Thess. 4.1. & 5.14.

And the firmament of their faith in Christ, it being (if genuine) as firm as the firmament it self: stable as the Heavens and heavenly bodies, keeping their constant stations and regular courses and admitting nothing heterogeneous into them: all heavenly truths are as fixt Stars in this Orb, seeing all grace, because divine, hath an establishing property, so faith coming from the eternal mountains, All graces being connected in faith, which is a kind of firmament to them all, it comes to pass that faith in actuating any one grace, gives a strength, and further growth to every other grace.

6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord , so walk ye in him .

Having caution'd them against sophistical seducers, and commended them for that order and sound faith he understood to be amongst them, he here infers, an exhortation to continuance in both, especially in the latter with respect to the person of Christ according as he had before described him; for he doth not say as ye have received the doctrine of Christ or concerning Christ, but as ye have received Christ himself as, Ioh. 1.11, 12. & 1 Ioh. 5.11, 12. in whom is all treasured up for Salvation, he adds not onely Iesus (who came to save his people from their sins) but the Lord, intimamating they should not therefore suffer any rules of faith or life to be imposed upon them by any other whatsoever.

But should be perswaded to abide in him whom they had embraced and order their conversation according to his mind, 1 Thess. 4.1. knowing that he is the way, the truth, and the life, Ioh. 14.6. being led by his spirit, and deriving vertue to go on in this orderly walk and persevere in the faith.

Marginal references: Jude. [illegible: 1 letter].

7 Rooted and built up in him , and stablished in the faith , as ye have been taught , abounding therein with thanksgiving .

Shewing how they should abide and persevere in the faith, by continuing in him as branches do in the root, Ioh. 15.4. and resting upon him as a building upon the foundation, Is. 28.16. 1 Cor. 3.11. Eph. 2.22.

And being firm and setled in the faith as, 1 Pet. 5.10. he adds this, not onely to clear the metaphorical expressions before, but to shew that they should be growing stronger as to the internal habit, Psal. 92.13▪ 14.

He repeats as it were in a parenthesis (as ye have been taught) upon the matter, the same with as ye have received Christ in the former verse, for greater caution to them, who might be apt to have itching ears, that they should not be listening to any novel doctrines but abide in the faith of Christ.

Setting down with themselves according to the superabounding grace they had, Rom. 5.20. with 1 Cor. 4.8. to abound, and increase therein, 1 Cor. 15.58. 2 Pet. 1.8. having herein all the saving knowledge desireable without need of the addition of ought any other way; being thankfull to God that he had revealed such a Christ, his Christ to them; for they could not have a better, or another.

Marginal references: Eph. 2.21, 22. & 3.17.

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit , after the tradition of men , after the rudiments of the world , and not after Christ .

The Apostle after his exhortation, considering their danger from seducing spirits lying in wait to deceive by their sleight and craftiness, 1 Tim. 4.1, 2. he doth here reinforce and enlarge his caution he had before suggested v. 4. to engage to an heedfull avoidance of all seduction from Christ.

Lest their Souls should be made a prey, and they be carryed for a spoil by those worst of robbers that beset Christ's fold, 2 Cor. 11.20. Gal. 6.13.

Through Philosophy either through the abuse of true Philosophy in bringing the mystery of Christ under the tribunal of shallow reason, or rather through erroneous though curious speculations of some Philosophers, as Plato, Pythagoras, Hesiod, &c. then in vogue, which the Gnosticks afterwards (who thinking themselves enriched with the notions of other Hereticks, would be thought the onely knowing persons) drest up Christ with, not like himself. Their Philosophy being a falsely so called science or knowledge, 1 Tim. 6.20. whatever shew of wisedom it might seem to carry along with it, v. 23. 'twas not really profitable.

But a vain deceit or seduction, as several take the next clause appositively and the conjunction expositively; yet if we consider what follows we may understand another general imposture, viz. superstition seeing vain deceit after the tradition of Men, is so like that superstition our Saviour doth rebu[illegible: 1 letter]e in the Pharisees, Mat. 15.9. several branches of whic[illegible: 1 letter] the Apostle doth afterward, in this Chapter dispute against, v. 16. to 23. superstition might well be called deceit, from the cheat it puts upon Men, and the notation of the Greek word, which imports a withdrawing men from the way, Christ, and from his way of worship prescribed in his word: and vain it is as well as a deceit sith it is empty and unprofitable, not accompanied with God's blessing, nor conducing to the pleasing of him, but the provoking of him, Psal. 106.29, 43.

Being led by no other rule than the tradition of men, which is the same with the precepts of Men, Mar. 7, 8. which God likes not, Isa. 8.20. & 28.13. Ioh. 20.31. Act. 26.22. 2 Tim. 3.15, 16. he would not give place to humane traditions in his house.

Nor to the Elements of the World (in allusion to Grammar wherein the Letters are the Elements or rudiments of all literature) i. e. the Ceremonies of the Mosaical law, containing a kind of Elementary instruction, for that seems to be the Apostles meaning comparing this verse with the 20, and 21. of this Chapter and other places, Gal. 3.24. these being but corporeal carnal and sensible ordinances suitable to a worldly sanctuary, Heb. 9.1, 10. not to be imposed in that spiritual one which Christ hath set up, Ioh. 4.23, 24. Gal. 5.2.

Whatsoever Philosophical colours, or Pharisaical paint, they might appear in, they are not after Christ: we say a false Picture of a Man, is not after the man, being not taken from or resembling his person, but clean another; such descriptions of him, as were not taken from the life and truth that was in him. And therefore he who is head of his Church, and likes not to be mishap'd or misrepresented, will not accept of homage from those of his own house, in a live [illegible: 1 letter]y that he hath not given order for, Lev. 10.1. Ier. 7.31. 2 Cor. 5.9. how specious soever it may be in the wisedom of this world and the Princes thereof, 1 Cor. 2.6, 7.

Marginal references: Rom. 16.17. Heb. 13.9.; Mat. 15.2.; Or elements.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily .

The causal particle induceth this as an argument to enforce the caution immediately foregoing against those who did seek to draw from Christ by Philosophy, as well as urging the ceremonial law, else the Apostle's reasoning were not cogent unless against both.

'[illegible: 1 letter]is evident that the Lord Jesus Christ, himself whom he had described and but just now named is the subject, the Person of whom he speaks, and in whom is seated and unto whom he attributes what followeth, c. 1.19. Ioh. 1.14, 1 Tim. 4.16. he doth not say in his doctrine whatever Socinians cavill, as if they would render the Apostle absurd and not to agree with himself in what he asserts of Christ's Person before (as hath been shewed) and after in the context. 'Tis plain this relative him, respects not onely, v. 8. but the 11th. &c. in whom the believing Colossians are said to be compleat as their head, both in the former Chapter, and soon after in this: would it not be absurd to say, Christ's Doctrine is the head of Angels? we are crucified in the doctrine of Christ? buried and quicned together with his doctrine? the hand writing of ordinances was nailed to the Cross of doctrine? Is a doctrine the head of principalities and powers? can a doctrine be buried in Baptism, &c. To silence all the Earth, that they should not restrain it to Christ's doctrine onely, what he asserts of his person, Paul after Christ had been several years in Heaven, put it in the present tense.

Dwelleth, not dwelt (as, 2 Tim. 1.5.) in regard of the person eternally the same, Heb. 13.8. for his argument had not been cogent, to contain Christians in the faith of Christ, and their duty to him, to have alledged in the doctrine of Christ now in Heaven hath dwelt all the fulness of the God-head bodily (could propriety of speech have allowed it) but from the other respect because in their very flesh (the body of Christ now an inhabitant of the Heavens) the very Godhead in the whole fulness thereof personally from the moment of his incarnation doth yet dwell; what will no[illegible: 1 letter] the faithfull perform and work out with their utmost faith that they may never suffer themselves to be rent from spiritual and mystical union with him, in whom they understand that even they themselves shall be also divinely filled, v. 10. i. e. in their measure be made partakers of the divine nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. dwelleth imports more than a transient stay for a few minutes, or a little while, even abiding in him constantly and for ever (as dwelling most usually notes, 2 Cor. 6.16.)

That which doth thus perpetually abide in his person as denominated after the humane nature is all the fulness of the God-head, viz. That rich and incomprehensible abundance of perfections whereof the supream and adorable nature is full; so that indeed there is not at all any perfection, or excellency in the divine nature but is found abiding in him. And after no common, or ordinary way, but by an Hypostatical or personal union, of the God-head, with the manhood in Christ: which is not by way of mixture, confusion, conversion or any other mutation; but.

Bodily to exclude that inhabitation which is onely by extrinsecal denomination. It being an adverb doth denote the manner as well as the subject, wherefore when he speaks of the temple of his body, Ioh. 2.21. that doth not fully reach the Apostle's meaning here: but it must be expounded personally, sith in the Greek that which signifies with us a body, and so our English word body is put for a person, Rom. 12.1. 2 Cor. 5.10. Rev. 18.13. some body or no body; i. e. some person or no person. There is a presence of the God-head general by essence and power; particular in the Prophets and Apostles working miracles; gracious in all sanctified ones; glorious in Heaven; in light which no Man can approach unto, 1 Tim. 6.16. relative in the Church visible and ordinances: typically under the law, and Symbolically in the Sacraments: but all these dwellings or being present in the creature fall short of that in the Text, viz. bodily connoting the personal habitation of the deity in, and union of it with the humanity of Christ. So close and streight, and intimate, that the God-head inhabiting, and the manhood inhabited, make but one and the same person, even as the reasonable Soul and Body in Man, make but one man. The way of the presence of the deity with the humanity of Christ is above all those manners of the presence of God with Angels and Men. The God-head dwells in him personally, in them in regard of assistance and energy: God-head notes the truth of it, Christ was not onely partaker of the divine nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. but the very God-head dwells in him: 'tis not onely the Divinity (as the Socinians, following the vulgar Latin in this, would have it) but the Deity, the very nature and essence of God. Now 'tis observable though in God himself Divinity and Deity being indeed the same, Rom. 1.20. and may differ onely from the manner of our conception and contemplation. Yet here when the enemies to Christ's Deity, might by their cavilling make more use of the word Divinity (as when the Soul of Man is said to be a divine thing) to insinuate as if it here noted onely the divine will exclusive to the other attributes (which exclusion the term all doth signantly prevent) the Apostle puts in Deity or God-h[illegible: 1 letter]ad. Then left Christ might (as by the Arians) be deemed a secondary God or (as some since) a made-God, inferiour to the Father, he saith the fulness of the God-head which speaks him perfect God coequal with the Father: further connoting a numerical sameness of essence betwixt the God-head of the Father and the Son, all the fulness of the God-head dwelleth in him. There is not one fulness of the Father and another of the Son, but one and the same singular God-head in both, Ioh. 10.30. the fulness of the manhood in Adam and Eve were not numerically the same, but the God-head of the Father and the Son is: yet is not the manhood of Christ co-extended and commensurate with the God-head (as some Lutherans conceit) but where the manhood is, or Christ as man is, or hath his existence there the fulness of the God-head dwells bodily: so that this fulness is extended as the manhood onely in which it is, and not as far as the Deity in which this derivative fulness is not as in its seat, though it be all originally from it, but inherently or subjectively in Christ.

10 And ye are compleat in him , which is the head of all principality, and power .

Ye Saints and holy brethren, c. 1, 2. who have received Christ, c. 2.6, 7. and so are mystically united to him, in whom dwelleth all fulness (as you have heard) being in him, having one spirit with him as members with the head, Rom. 8.1, 9. Eph. 1.23.

Are impleat or filled and so mediately and causally compleat from the all-fulness that is in your head, yet not immediately and properly compleat with it (as some have been apt to think.)

But in him, ye have that compleatness and perfection which is reckon'd and made over to you and accepted for you to justification, so that of his fulness ye receive and grace for grace, Ioh. 1.16. 1 Cor. 1.30. 2 Cor. 5.21. Eph. 1.6. Phil. 3.9. derive in and from him all spiritual blessings, Eph. 1.3. so that every one hath grace sufficient, 2 Cor. 12.9. to do all things incumbent on him through Christ enstrengthening him, Phil. 4.13. it is true there is here in this state no being compleat or perfect actually, as to glorification, yet vertually and seminally, that may in a sort be said of true believers, not onely in regard of their head but in regard of their certain hope of being saved in Christ, yea and indeed as to the earnest, the seed, and root of it, having already that life which shall never have an end, Ioh. 3.36. & 4.14. Rom. 5.2. Eph. 4.30. 2 Thess. 2.13. Heb. 9.15. & 10.14. 1 Pet. 1.34. 1 Ioh. 5.12.

The Apostle for consolation of the Saints, and in opposition to those who did endeavour a withdrawing from Christ to the worshipping of Angels, v. 18. doth further infer from the personal union, the dignity of the humane nature of Christ, in regard of the good Angels, which are here meant by principality and power by reason of their excellency by nature and grace, and their authority delegated to them by God over other creatures, Mat. 24.36. 2 Cor. 11.14. 1 Tim. 5.21. Christ having the fulness of the God-head dwelling in him bodily is head unto the good Angels in regard of his excellency and eminency above them, who are far below him in perfection, Eph. 1.21. Heb. 1.4. the best of them are ministring spirits and subject to him, and so under his authority and at his command, Mat. 13.41. & 16. 27. & 24.31. Eph. 3.10. Heb. 1.14. 1 Pet. 3.22. Rev. 1.1. & 22.16.

Marginal references: Chap. 1.16.

11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands , in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh , by the circumcision of Christ .

He removes what they who are addicted to superstition might suggest, as if there were somewhat defective to a compleatness in Christ: by shewing there was no need of any addition to what he required in the Gospel.

For that they might most plausibly urge of circumcision, as being the seal of the old covenant, and an obligation to the whole law, Gal. 5.3. which some pressed as necessary to Salvation, Act. 15.1, 24. he here shews was altogether needless now, that they were sanctified and had the thing signified by it the circumcision of the heart, Rom. 2.28, 29. Phil. 3.3. and were compleat in Christ without it, yea that the urging of that, and other Ceremonies now, was a pernicious errour tending to annihilate the Cross of Christ, and overthrow the whole mystery of his grace. 'Tis true it was appointed to the Iews a figure of a thing absent, they therefore who retain that figure after the coming of Christ, deny that to be compleat which it doth figure, and so abolish the presence of the truth, by stickling for the shadow, they let go the substance, viz. the circumcision not made by the operation of Man, but of God; not with the Knife of Moses, but the word of Christ sharper than any two-edged sword, Heb. 4.12. and if we compare this with the verse following and, Phil. 3.3. the Apostle intimates that baptism is the same to us Christians which circumcision was to the Iews, and that is often ascribed to the external administration, that is onely the internal operation of the spirit, as, Rom. 6.3, 4. Gal. 3.27, 28. Tit. 3.5. 1 P[illegible: 1 letter]t. 3.21. Now though there was during the shadow of it, Heb. 10.1. under the old Testament the circumcision of the heart as well as under the New, Deut. 10.16. & 30.6. Ier. 4.4. yet under the N. T. Christ the substance (who was onely before in the promise) being now exhibited, having abolished the old symbol and instituted baptism in the room of it; that with the hands in the flesh, Eph. 2.11. which they who received not the promise, i. e. the Messiah promised, used, Heb. 11.39. was to be no more urged, now the benefit by the merit of his obedience unto the death of the Cross, whereby he circumciseth from sin might be enjoy'd, as was signified by baptism appointed to this end, Mat. 28.19. Act. 2.38. Rom. 6.3, 4. Gal. 3.27. 1 Pet. 3.21.

Hence he doth illustrate this spiritual circumcision by describing the parts of it, beginning with the mortification of the old man, corrupted nature containing not onely the body and senses, but the soul tainted with the defilements of sin, c. 3.5, Rom. 6.6. Gal. 5.19, 20, 24. Eph. 4.22. The body of sins which do mostly exert themselves in the flesh, every member and power whiles unregenerate being active in the committing of sin, till the new man be put on, Eph. 4.24. and the dominion of it be subdued.

Not by any natural part which a man hath of himself for that purpose, but by the circumcision of Christ, not properly that whereby he himself was circumcised in the flesh the eighth day, but that which he hath indispensably required to have admission into his Kingdom, Ioh. 3.3. and which he himself is the worker of▪ doth procure by his merit, and effect by his spirit, which all the suasion of the sublimest Philosophers, and devotion of superstitious ones cannot doe.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 letter]er. [illegible: 1 letter].4.

12 Buried with him in baptism , wherein also ye are risen with him , through the faith of the operation of God , who hath raised him from the d[illegible: 1 letter]ad .

He shews that in Christ they who are found have not onely the thing signified, but right to the outward sign and seal, viz. baptism, in the room of Circumcision abolished: the death and burial of Christ is not onely the exemplar, but the cause of the death of the old man, signed and sealed in Baptism; or by Baptism into death, Rom. 6.3, 4. Analogically, or symbolically or sacramentally, when the Lord, together with the external sign, conferreth his grace signified by that sign; for even then the sins of such an one are buried with Christ so as they shall appear no more, either to his eternal condemnation, or in their former dominion, Rom. 6.6, 9, 14.

In or by which Baptism becoming effectual, having mortified the body of sin, like as Christ was raised from the dead, ye are quicken'd and rais'd to newness of life, Rom. 6.4. Gal. 3.27, 28, 29. Eph. 4.23, 24. & 5.14, 26, 27. & Chap. 3.10, 11. By virtue of Christ's Resurrection, a spiritual and mystical one is produc'd in you, which hath a resemblance and analogy to his.

Not of your selves but through faith, Eph. 2.8. and that wrought in you by the energy or efficacy of God, Ioh. 6.29. Phil. 1.29. & 2.13. Heb. 12.2.

Who did exert his power in raising up Christ from the dead, comp. Rom. 4.24. with Eph. 1.19, 20. This faith is not onely wrought by God, as the circumcision without hands, but it doth respect that wonderfull power of God put forth in the raising of Christ, as the subject, which he mentions by way of congruity, speaking of our resurrection, and of Christ's. And he specifieth faith rather than love or other graces which are wrought also by God, because in this grace, which is the constitutive part of the new creature, God [illegible: 1 letter]omes in with a greater irradiation upon the Soul, being it hath not one fragment or point of nature to stand upon; carnal reason and mere moral righteousness being opposite to it, whe[illegible: 1 letter]eas other graces are but as the rectifying of the passions, and setting them upon right objects.

Marginal references: Eph. 3.7▪

13 And you being dead in your sins , and the uncircumcision of your flesh , hath he quickned together with him , having forgiven you all trespasses .

He farther shews they had no need of circumcision in the flesh, Eph. 2.11. having all in Christ for justification as well as sanctification, so that though they (as well as the Ephesians, see Eph. 2.1, 5.) were by nature spiritually dead in sins, depriv'd of the life of grace, and separated from the life of glory;

And having the foreskin of their flesh in Paganism, which was true literally, but considering the internal circumcision, v. 11. the Apostle's expression here is to be expounded of the internal corruption of our nature, the uncircumcised heart, original corruption deriv'd unto all by carnal propagation which is predominant in the unregenerate. These being dead as to the life of grace, Matt. 8.22. Ioh. 5.25. Rom. 8.7. 1 Cor. 2.14. 1 Tim. 5.6.

You who were strangers from the life of God, Eph. 4.18. hath he now quicen'd or reviv'd to a spiritual life with him here, and hereafter to eternal life, 1 Cor. 15.22.

Having freely pardon'd to you (the word noting a free affection to give and forgive, 2 Cor. 2.10. Eph. 4.32, all your sins, after as well as before Baptism (which is the sign and seal of it) Psal. 103.3. so that the spirit of Christ doth not onely infuse a principle of grace, and implant a living and abiding seed to work out vitious habits, but God upon the account of Christ's plenary satisfaction doth freely remove all the guilt that binds over to eternal death, and doth not impute to believers any of their sins in whole or in part, but treateth them as if they had committed none at all, Mat. 26.28. Act. 10.43. Eph. 1.7. Heb. 9.15. and w[illegible: 1 letter]ll remember them no more, so that when they are sought for they shall not be found, Ier. 31.34. & 50.20. Heb. 10.17. what the Papists, say of the fault being remi[illegible: 1 letter]ted, when the punishment may be exacted either in whole or in part, that they may have a pretence for humane satisfaction[illegible: 1 letter] (the groundlesness of which was [illegible: 1 letter]inted, c. 1.24.) is a meer figment of the Schools, against scripture and rea [illegible: 1 letter]on.

14 Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances , that was against us , which was contrary to us , and took it out of the way , nailing it to his cross .

Having just before manifested God's grace in the free forgiveness of all their trespasses, he doth here adjoyn the foundation and means of this remission, viz. Wiping out the Bill of decrees (as one reads) or effacing and cancelling the hand-writing that was against us, which was contrary to us in traditions as another, pointing after Chirograph or hand-writing; upon the matter in the explanation there will be no difference from our reading of it. Sin in scripture is frequently accounted a debt, and the acquitting the pardoning of it, Mat. 6.12. Luk. 11.4. & 13.4. as the debtour is oblig'd to payment, so the sinner to punishment, onely 'tis to be remembred, that though a private creditour may forgive his debt, yet unless the conservatour of publick justice do exempt an offender against the law, he is not acquitted, but is still under an obligation, bond or hand-writing, having as they under the Masaic law professed allegiance, Exod. 24.7. which upon default was an evidence of this guilt to avenging justice. That law prescribed by the ministration of Moses was appendaged with many ceremonial ordinances, to the observation of all which circumcision did oblige; this obligation interpretatively was as an hand-writing which did publickly testifie a Man's native pollution, and was a publick confession of his sin and misery, as washings did testifie the filth of his sins, and sacrifices Capital guilt to them, who liv'd under it, and did not perform it, that they were accursed, Gal. 3.10, 19. under a ministration of death, 2 Cor. 3.7, 9. whiles by laying their hands on the sacrifices,

They did as it were sign a Bill or Bond against themselves, whereby conscience of guilt was retained, Heb. 10.2, 3, and a conscience of sin renew'd, so that the heart could not be stablished in any firm peace, & 9.9. Heb. 10.2. but they did confess sin to remain, and that they did want a removal of the curse by a better sacrifice. Upon the offering up of this, the law of commandments was blotted out, cancelled or abolished (saith the Apostle elsewhere) see, Eph. 2.15. even that contained in ordinances, compared with, v. 16, 20.21. of this Chapter and therefore there is no condemnation to them that are circumcised with the circumcision of Christ, being found in him. v. 11. with Rom. 8.1. & 7.4.

So that however the law which was in it self holy, just, and good, through sin became in some sort contrary, or subcontrary to us, in that it did serve to convict, and terrifie with the curse for our default, Rom. 7.5, 9. aggravating all by its ceremonies and shutting the Gate of God's House, against the Gentiles of whose number the Colossians were, strangers to the covenants of promise, Eph. 2.12. yet this obligation was abrogated and annull'd by the death of Christ, as the Apostle expresseth it with great elegancy, having not onely said that the debt was wip'd out, prefac'd by the bloud of Christ being drawn over it, as they us'd to blot out debts or draw red lines cross them; but he adds.

Taken out of the way as the debtors bond or obligation is, being cancell'd, and torn to pieces, so that there is no memorial or evidence of the debt doth remain, all matter of controversie being altogether remov'd. Yet (if it may be) to speak more fully and satisfactorily he annexeth.

And fasten'd it to his Cross, what could be more significant? implying that Christ by once offering himself a sacrifice on the Cross, had disarm'd the law, and taken away its condemning power, Rom. 7.4. Gal. 3.13. It being customary (as learned men say) of old especially in Asia to pierce cancell'd obligations and antiquated writings with nails; Christ by his plenary satisfaction did not onely discharge from the condemnation of the law, Rom. 8.1, 34. but he did effectually with the nails with which he himself was crucified by interpretation fasten the hand-writing of ordinances to his cross, and abolished the ceremonial law in every regard, since the substance of it was come and that which it tended to, was accomplished in giving himself a ransome for all, 1 Tim. 2.6. to the putting away of sin, Heb. 9.26. and obtaining eternal redemption, Heb. 9.12.

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers m, he made a shew of them openly , triumphing over them , in it .

Some render it, seeing he hath stripped or made naked, as runners and racers us'd to put off their cloaths.

Hence some of the ancients read putting off his flesh (possibly by the carelesness of some scribes writing that which signifies flesh instead of that which signifies principalities in all the Authentick Copies) but besides that Christ hath not put off the humane nature, onely the infirmities of the flesh, 2 Cor. 5.16. Heb. 5.7. it doth not agree with what follows. One conceits that by principalities and powers are meant the Ceremonies of the law, because of the divine authority they originally had, and that Christ uncloathed or unveiled them, and shew'd them to be misty figures that were accomplished in his own person. But I see no reason thus to allegorize, for 'tis easie to discern the word is borrowed from conquering Warriers having put to flight and disarm'd their enemies, (as the word may well signifie disarming in opposition to arming, Rom. 13.12. Eph. 6.11, 14.) and signifies here, that Christ disarm'd and despoiled the Devil and his Angels with all the powers of darkness, we have seen by principalities and powers are meant Angels, c. 1.16. with Rom. 8 37. Eph. 1.21. and here he means evil ones, in regard of that power they exercise in this world under its present state of subjection to sin and vanity, Luk. 4.6 Ioh. 12.31. 2 Cor. 4.4. Eph. 2.2. & 6.12. 2 Tim. 2.26. whom Christ came to destroy, and effectually did on his Cross defeat, Luk. 11.22. Ioh. 16.11. 1 Cor. 15.55. Heb. 2.14. 1 Ioh. 3.8. delivering his subjects from the power of darkness, c. 1.13. according to the first promise, Gen. 3.15.

Yea and Christ did as an absolute conquerour, riding as it were in his triumphal Chariot, publickly shew that he had vanquish'd Satan and all the powers of darkness in the view of Heaven and Earth, Luk. 10.17, 18.

Even then and there where Satan, thought he should alone have had the day by the death of the innocent Jesus was he and his adherents triumphed over by the Lord of life to their everlasting shame and torment, what the Papists would gather hence that Christ did in this triumphant shew upon the Cross, carry the Souls of the Patriarchs out of their Limbus, i. e. their appointment to Hell is a meer unscriptural fiction; for those that he made shew of in his victorious Chariot are the very same that he spoiled to their eternal ignominy and confusion.

What follows some render (as in the margin) in himself or by himself, i. e. by his own power and virtue and not by the help of any other; the Prophet saith he trod the wine-press alone, and had not any of the people with him, Isa. 63.3. yet it seems here better to adhere to our own translation in it, consider what went before of his Cross, that he triumphed over Satan on it or by it, because the death that he there suffered was the true and onely cause of his triumphs, there he trod Satan under his feet, there he set his seed at liberty, and they who go about to bereave them of it, and bring them into Bondage do no other than restore to Satan his spoyls.

Marginal references: Psal. 68.19. Isa. 53.12. Math. 12.29. Eph. 4.8.; Or, in himself.

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink , or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath-days .

He infers none should be condemned; none condemns another for exercising Christian liberty: none hath power to judge and censure herein, q. d. Suffer not any one (he excepts none) to impose upon you that, as necessary in the use and practice of it, which is not after Christ, v. 8. not warranted by his law of liberty, Rom. 14.3, 4. Gal. 5.1. Iam. 1.25. Paul himself would not be imposed on, 1 Cor. 6.12. & 7.23. Gal. 2.5, 11.14. &c. he would not (as one of the words doth note) be domineer'd over by any, or suffer any to exercise authority over him, who held the head and owned Christ to be Lord of the conscience, and sole Dictatour of what way he will be served in.

He therefore would not have the practice of ceremonials obtruded, instancing in some, as the difference of meats and drinks in the use or not use of which (how after Christ had nailed those decrees to his Cross) superstitious ones would from the antiquated rites of the Iews and Pythagorean Philosophers place holiness in, and add them to the Christian institution.

Or the difference of festivals and sabbaths whether annual, or monthly, or weekly from the Levitical institutions.

Marginal references: Rom. 14.3, 10, 13.; Or, for eating and drinking.; Or, in part.

17 Which are a shadow of things to come , but the body is of Christ .

Which as they were but obscurer representations or shadowy resemblances of future benefits procured by Christ, Heb. 8.5. & 9.11. & 10.1. whatever temporary glory they had from the former institution, till the time of reformation, Heb. 9, 10. yet that was done away, and they now had none, in respect of the glory that excelleth and remaineth, 2 Cor. 3.9, 10. So that this doth no way gainsay the Sacraments now of Christ's own institution which may be called figures and shadows, not of things future, of Christ (not yet come, but) as already exhibited, whom they manifest to the mind and faith to be present, to those who rightly partake of them: we cannot say he condemns all distinctions of meats and drinks, viz. Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper; or of days, onely the decrees and ordinances of Moses or any other which the false teachers cryed up that were not after Christ.

Who is really the substance and Antitype of all the old Testament shadows which have complement or accomplishment in him, Ioh. 1.17. Rom. 10.5. Gal. 4.10, 11, 12. as all the promises were in him yea and Amen, Dan. 9.24. 2 Cor. 1.20. all was consummate in him, Ioh. 19.30. who came in the place of all the shadows. He is Lord of the Sabbath, Mat. 27, 50. and therefore having broken the Devils Head-plot by his propitiatory Sacrifice, and entred into his rest, ceasing from his own works of redemption by price, as God did from his of creation, Heb. 4.10. he did away, 2 Cor. 3.17, 18. all that was typical and ceremonial of the old Sabbath (as other types of himself,) keeping onely that which was substantial for an holy rest of one day in seven, and appointing that in commemoration of the Fathers work and his to be from his Resurrection observ'd on the first day of the Week for the Edification of his Church; which he honoured by his appearance amongst his Apostles on that day, and that day sevenight after, which proceeded originally from his instituting of that day (to prevent dissension) for publick worship in Christian assemblies. Some have observ'd that the Iewish Doctors did foresay That the divine Majesty would be to Israel in a Iubilee, freedom, redemption, and finisher of Sabbaths: and that four Sabbaths did meet together and succeed each other at the death and the Resurrection of Christ, viz. (1) The sabbatical year of Iubilee, Luk. 4.19. (2) The high Sabbath, Ioh. 19.31. (3) The 7th. day Sabbath, when his Body rested in the grave (4) The first day of the Week when he rose a victorious Conquerour of the Devil, and had all put in subjection to him, unto whom all the rest did refer and therefore they were to disappear, upon his estating his people in a rest which the law could not, whereupon his people are obliged in publick adoration and praise to commemorate him on the first day of the Week or the Lord's day to the end of the world, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. Rev. 1.10.

18 Let no man beguile you ofyour reward , in a voluntary humility , and worshipping of angels , intruding into those things which he hath not seen vainly puff'd up by his fleshly mind .

The original compound word peculiar in the N. T. to Paul and that in this Epistle onely (and not very frequent in other Authours) hath occasioned interpreters here to render it variously, some joyning the next following word with it, and some (as we read it) to that which follows after. The simple word is, c. 3.15. read rule, or judge, and it may be rendered intercede. Yet Paul doth not elsewhere use this word simply or in composition where he speaks of judging and condemning, Rom. 2.1. however it is borrow'd from those who were judges or umpires in their games, the Apostle most likely alluding to those who through favour or hatred determin'd unjustly, to the defrauding those victours of their prize or reward to whom it was due. Hence some would have the import to be agreeable to our translation; be carefull these unjust Arbiters do not defraud you of gaining Christ, and deceive you (as, Mat. 24.4. Eph. 5, 6. 2 Thess. 2, 3.) by prescribing false lists and giving you wrong measures, and so judging against you, one renders it, let no man deceive you with subtile argument who pleaseth or delights himself in humility; another, Let no man take your prize; others, Let no man Master it or bear rule over you at pleasure, Let none take upon himself, or usurp to himself the parts or office of a Governour or umpire over you. The Apostle labours to fortifie the true followers of Christ against such superstitious subtile ones who by their artifice did assume a magisterial authority (without any sure warrant from God) to impose their traditionary and invented services upon them, and determine of their state accordingly as the Papists do at this day. One learned man thinks the Apostle had not used this word here, but for some notable advantage, viz. because the simple word may signifie to intercede as well as to judge, it made wonderfully to his purpose in this composition (as he uses concision, Phil. 3.2.) to disparage those seducers who did from some notions of the Platonists, labour to gain credit to that opinion that the Angels were intercessours betwixt God and Man.

Covering their imperious spirit, by being Volunteers in humility, or by a pretence of voluntary uncommanded humility, alledging it would be presumption in them to address themselves immediately to God, and therefore,

They would pay a religious homage to Angels, as of a middle nature betwixt God and them, presuming they would mediate for them, an instance to express all that invented worship, which how specious soever it may seem to be, hath no warrant from Christ, who alone can procure acceptance of our persons and services. He expects that his Disciples should assert his rights and the liberty with which he hath made them free against the traditions of self-willed men, and no more to solemnize for worship, than teach for doctrines the the traditions of men, Mat. 15.2, 6, 9. we must not under any pretext of humility presume to know what belongs to our duty and God's service better than Christ doth, shewing us that he alone is the true and living way and we may come boldly by him, Mat 11.28. Ioh. 14.1, 6. Eph 3.12. Heb 4.16. & 10.20. And therefore the adoring and invocating of Angels as heavenly courtiers, whatever the Papists out of a shew of humility do argue, is not after Christ, but against him.

Yea and for any one to assert it, and the like is to be a bold intruder upon anothers possession, a thrusting a Mans felt into the knowledge and determination of that which is above his reach, Psal. 131.1. and he hath no ground at all for, but doth prie or wade into a secret which a man cannot know. The Apostle useth a Platonick word against those who did indulge themselves out of curiosity in the opinions of the Platonists about Angels, the worshippers of which amongst those who were professed Christians in Phrygia were so tenaceous of their errour that they were not rooted out after the third century, when a Canon was made against them under the name of Angelici in the Council of Laodicea near Coloss[illegible: 1 letter].

The first rise of such foolish presumption was a being rashly puffed up with the sense of their flesh, a deluded mind mov'd by some carnal principle, setting out things with swelling words o[illegible: 1 letter] vanity, wherewith in truth they have no acquaintance, and whereof they have no experience, 1 Tim. 1.7.

Marginal references: Or, judge against you.; Greek being a volun [illegible: 3 letters]y in humility.; Ezek. 13.3.

19 And not holding the head , from which all the body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred , and knit together , increaseth with the increase of God .

And here, the Apostle suggests that those things he had before taxed did proceed from hence, that they let go the Lord Christ himself, c. 2.8, 9 from whom all truths are to be derived, and consequently he is all truth it self, Ioh. 14.6. not to adhere to him is the spring of all apostacies he being the head, see Eph. 4.15, 16.

Whence is communicated and distributed such influence to the body, the Church as is necessary to all the sensations and motions thereof.

Being in all its members fitly framed together by the spirit, Eph. 2.21, 22. and united by faith, Eph. 3.17. hath a continual subsidy of life and vigour.

And fastned together in a spiritual union which joyneth all believers to their head, and each of them to the other in him, 1 Cor. 10.17. & 12.12, 20, 25, 27.

Whereupon to mutual edification in love it groweth with a divine growth and spiritual increase, arising from the efficacy of God and tending to his glory, being filled with the influences of his grace, 1 Cor. 3.6. it is established and strengthened by little and little, in light and purity, and all graces till it attain to the measure of its perfect stature in Christ Jesus our Lord; whereas an increase in the traditions of Men, and the inventions of flesh do onely blow it up with wenns and imposthumes, to the disfiguring, deforming and destroying of it.

Marginal references: Eph. 4.15.16.

20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the word : why as though living in the world are ye subject to ordinances ?

Here the Apostle doth further argue against all impositions of superstitious observances, obtruded as parts of divine worship, whether in reviving those abrogated or serting up new ones▪ upon supposition of their union with Christ their head, and their being dead in him as to all beggarly Elements from which he had freed them by his death, Rom. 6.3, 5. & 7.4, 6. Gal. 4.9, 10, 11. with Gal. 2.19. no uncommanded worship or way of worship being after Christ, v. 8. in whom they were compleat, v. 11. being buried with him in Baptism, v. 12. having nailed those ritual ordinances to his Cross, as antiquated or out-dated, v. 14. why should they who held the head, v. 19.

As if they lived in the old World with those Children in bondage, Gal. 4.3. before Christ came, be subject to ceremonial observances, q. d. 'Tis most injurious that they should impose this yoke upon you, (Act. 15.10.) ye are most foolish if ye submit your necks: for God would not have a ceremonial worship which he himself instituted to be abrogated, that a new one should be invented by men. If the head of the Church like not the reviving that worship he hath laid aside, be sure he will not approve of any new one which he never appointed. The Apostle is not here speaking of the Magistrates ordinances about things indifferent in their use for the real good of the civil Government; but of the way of worshipping God by Religious abstinencies, &c.

Marginal references: Or, elements ▪

21 Touch not, taste not, handle not :

Which he doth here by way of imitation upbraiding of them, elegantly recite in the words, phrases, or sense of those imposing Dogmatists whose superstition and lust of domineering over the consciences of Christians is taxed in the gradation which the well skill'd in the Greek judge to be in the original. For though the first and which we render touch not be sometimes so rendred, yet considering here the coincidency or tantology will, so rendred, make with the last, the sense of it, as the most judicious and learned have evidenc'd, seems to be, eat not, as noting they did forbid the eating, i. e. using certain meats at their ordinary meals (against the reviving of which imposition above, v. 16. as well bring in a new one of like import the Apostle elsewhere expresseth himself, Rom. 14.17. 1 Cor. 8.8. 1 Tim. 4.3.) obtaining which, they proceeded to forbid the not tasting, and then the not handling or touching of them with the hand, as if that would defile. It being more not to taste than not to eat, and likewise more not to touch with the finger, than not to taste. Expressing the ingeny of such superstitious imposers, that they heap up one thing upon another to the burdening of consciences, not knowing where to make an end in their new invented external devotions and observances, which, as snares, do first bind fast, and in tract of time strangle. He speaks of these as distinct from those, v. 16. they being for antiquated rites which had been of God's appointment, these for innovasions of man's invention as is apparent from the last verse.

22 Which all are to perish with the using ) after the commandments and doctrines of men l.

He adds his reasons why, under the Christian, institution acceptable worshipping of God doth not consist in such observances, both because meats, drinks, garments, &c. are designed unto the benefit of Man, for the preserving of his temporal life, and are consumed in their use. They cannot in, or by themselves either make a Man holy or render him unclean, Mat. 15.11. Mar. 7.19. Rom. 14.17. 1 Cor. 6.13. 1 Tim. 4.3. they all come to corruption or are consumed in doing us service, they cannot otherwise be of use, which may evince that all the benefit we receive from them doth onely respect this mortal life, it not being imaginable that what perisheth in our use should be of any force to the life of our Soul which is immortal and incorruptible. And therefore to urge the reviving of antiquated ordinances, or bringing in such like new ones, is to corrupt or consume the creatures without any spiritual advantage, whereupon such impositions must needs be destructive; and because of the Apostle's stronger argument, they are not after Christ, but after the precepts and decrees of men, compare v. 8. which is our Lord and Masters argument against the innovations of the Pharesees, Mat. 15.9. agreeing with the Prophet, Isa. 29.13. to bring in additionals of uncommanded worship, or rites and ways of it, is forbidden of God, Deut. 12.32. Ioh. 14.26. & 16.13. Rev. 22.18. who (according to the purport of the second commandment, must be worshipped in a manner peculiar to him and appointed by him, and therefore worship, not appointed, i. e. not commanded, is forbidden by him who will accept of no homage from Christians in the business of Religion, unless it be taught by him, and not by men onely.

Marginal references: Tit. 1.14.

23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisedom , in will-worship , and humility , and neglecting of the body , not in any honour , to the satisfying of the flesh .

By way of confession the Apostle here grants that the precepts and doctrines of men about religious abstinences had a shew of wisedom; and 'twas but a meer [illegible: 1 letter]hew, a bare pretext a specious appearance, a fair colour of wisedom, which is of no worth, not the reality and truth of Christian wisedom, however it might beguile those that were taken more with shadows than substance, v. 3, 4, 8, 17.

(1) In abitrary superstition, or humane invention, or self-will'd Religion rather than divine institutions; as all the Ancients, and almost all the moderns do interpret that word, it having no good, but an ill Character accompting the compound word here which we render will-worship, of no better import, as to the ordainers of worship, than the two simple words of which it is compounded, expressing humane arbitrariness and worship, v. 18. (even as the Apostle doth by a compound word which signifies peace-making, c. 1.20. understand the very same thing which he expressed by the two simple words of which it is compounded, in another Epistle, Eph. 2.15.) it being rational to conceive considering the Apostle's drift in the context that by will-worship he doth connote the same here, that by willing in worship, he doth assunder there. For though a performing those acts of worship willingly, which God himself hath commanded, be necessary, and commendable in his willing people, Psal. 110.3. and they cannot be acceptable otherwise: yet when the will of man, in contradistinction to the will of God is considered as constitutive of that worship which is offered to God of a Man's own brain & devising without God's warrant, then that will worship is hateful to God and the more voluntary the more abominable. It being most just, that not in what way we will and chuse, but onely in that way which he will and chuseth we should worship him with acceptance (which should be our greatest care, 2 Cor. 5.9.) we know, amongst men, those persons of honour that give [illegible: 1 word] to their Servants, would discard such of them as [illegible: 1 span] to attend them in new ones of their own devising, thou[illegible: 1 letter]h [illegible: 1 span] might be so foolish, as to conceit those of their own [illegible: 1 word] wer[illegible: 1 letter] more expre[illegible: 2 letters]ive of their humble respects. Much [illegible: 1 word] worship of mans devising distaste full to the all-wise God who sees through all colours, and though he loves a willing wor[illegible: 1 letter]hipper, yet he hates will-worship.

However it be pa[illegible: 3 letters]ated (2) with a pretended demission of mind, or an affectation of humility, as if more self abasement were designed in such an arbitrary way of worship, like those Hypocrites [illegible: 1 letter]n their fasts, who put on mortified looks and a neglected Garb with disguised contenances, Mat. 6.16. shewing themselves most submi[illegible: 1 letter]sive to the orders of their superiours in that way of m[illegible: 1 letter]ns devising▪

Wherein the more superstitiously devout do labour to outdo others (3) in puni[illegible: 1 letter]hing, not sparing, neglecting, or afflicting the body (as some Monks, at this day in the Papacy in denying it that, with which nature should be supplyed.

Not in any honour, which a learned Man thinks the Apostle would have read as included in a Parenthesis, as conceiving the series of his discourse requires these to be joyned. viz. Neglecting of the body as to what pertains to the satisfying of the flesh. So by (not in honour) is not he[illegible: 1 letter]e meant a sparing of the body in order to real sanctification, temperan[illegible: 1 letter]e and continence in opposition to the dishonouring of the body by Luxury (as, Rom. 1.26. with 1 Cor. 6.18, 19, 20. 1 Thess. 4.4. Heb. 13.4.) That honour of the Body the Apostle doth elsewhere require, he doth here oppose to the seducers pretended mortifications. For their Religious abstinency was not from that, which occasion'd Luxury, onely from some certain sorts of meat, the use of which no way defiles the body, nor violates in any manner the holiness and honour it ought to be kept in. Others read neglecting the body which is in no esteem.

For pampering the flesh. Not in any esteem, i. e. with God, or not in any honour to God, but in a tendency onely to make provision for the flesh (as, Rom. 13. last) others take honour for regard, q. d. in no regard, to the supplying of nature with that which is due to it. Others take honour for having a care of, 1 Tim. 5.3. q. d. neglecting the body in taking no care of it, or not at all valuing the things that are requisite to the due nourishment of it; this is somewhat generally received. Having no care that the body may have that which will satisfie nature, and if the last phrase which we translate to the satisfying of the flesh, seem not so well to express moderate sa[illegible: 1 letter]iety, we should consider 'tis said in a good sense God filleth the hungry w[illegible: 1 letter]th good things, Luk. 1.53. and Christ filled the multitude, Io[illegible: 1 letter]. 6.12. yea the use of the word in Authentick Greek Authours may be found to note a moderate as well as immoderate filling, i. e. in a good sense, for a satiety (or enough) that i[illegible: 1 letter] not vitious.

Marginal references: 1 Tim. 4.8,; Or, punishing, Or, not sparing.

Paul's Concern for the Colossians. (a. d. 62.)

1 For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; 2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; 3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

We may observe here the great concern which Paul had for these Colossians and the other churches which he had not any personal knowledge of. The apostle had never been at Colosse, and the church planted there was not of his planting; and yet he had as tender a care of it as if it had been the only people of his charge (v. 1): For I would that you knew what great conflict I have for you, and for those at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh. Observe, 1. Paul's care of the church was such as amounted to a conflict. He was in a sort of agony, and had a constant fear respecting what would become of them. Herein he was a follower of his Master, who was in an agony for us, and was heard in that he feared. (2.) We may keep up a communion by faith, hope, and holy love, even with those churches and fellow-christians of whom we have no personal knowledge, and with whom we have no conversation. We can think, and pray, and be concerned for one another, at the greatest distance; and those we never saw in the flesh we may hope to meet in heaven. But,

I. What was it that the apostle desired for them? That their hearts may be comforted, being knit together in love, &c., v. 2. It was their spiritual welfare about which he was solicitous. He does not say that they may be healthy, and merry, and rich, and great, and prosperous; but that their hearts may be comforted. Note, The prosperity of the soul is the best prosperity, and what we should be most solicitous about for ourselves and others. We have here a description of soul-prosperity.

1. When our knowledge grows to an understanding of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ,—when we come to have a more clear, distinct, methodical knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus, then the soul prospers: To understand the mystery, either what was before concealed, but is now made known concerning the Father and Christ, or the mystery before mentioned, of calling the Gentiles into the Christian church, as the Father and Christ have revealed it in the gospel; and not barely to speak of it by rote, or as we have been taught it by our catechisms, but to be led into it, and enter into the meaning and design of it. This is what we should labour after, and then the soul prospers.

2. When our faith grows to a full assurance and bold acknowledgment of this mystery. (1.) To a full assurance, or a well-settled judgment, upon their proper evidence, of the great truths of the gospel, without doubting, or calling them in question, but embracing them with the highest satisfaction, as faithful sayings and worthy of all acceptation. (2.) When it comes to a free acknowledgment, and we not only believe with the heart, but are ready, when called to it, to make confession with our mouth, and are not ashamed of our Master and our holy religion, under the frowns and violence of their enemies. This is called the riches of the full assurance of understanding. Great knowledge and strong faith make a soul rich. This is being rich towards God, and rich in faith, and having the true riches, Luke xii. 21; xvi. 11; Jam. ii. 5.

3. It consists in the abundance of comfort in our souls: That their hearts might be comforted. The soul prospers when it is filled with joy and peace (Rom. xv. 13), and has a satisfaction within which all the troubles without cannot disturb, and is able to joy in the Lord when all other comforts fail, Hab. iii. 17, 18.

4. The more intimate communion we have with our fellow-christians the more the soul prospers: Being knit together in love. Holy love knits the hearts of Christians one to another; and faith and love both contribute to our comfort. The stronger our faith is, and the warmer our love, the greater will our comfort be. Having occasion to mention Christ (v. 2), according to his usual way, he makes this remark to his honour (v. 3): In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. He had said (ch. i. 19) that all fulness dwells in him: here he mentions particularly the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. There is a fulness of wisdom in him, as he has perfectly revealed the will of God to mankind. Observe, The treasures of wisdom are hidden not from us, but for us, in Christ. Those who would be wise and knowing must make application to Christ. We must spend upon the stock which is laid up for us in him, and draw from the treasures which are hidden in him. He is the wisdom of God, and is of God made unto us wisdom, &c., 1 Cor. i. 24, 30.

II. His concern for them is repeated (v. 5): Though I am absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying, and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. Observe, 1. We may be present in spirit with those churches and Christians from whom we are absent in body; for the communion of saints is a spiritual thing. Paul had heard concerning the Colossians that they were orderly and regular; and though he had never seen them, nor was present with them, he tells them he could easily think himself among them, and look with pleasure upon their good behaviour. 2. The order and stedfastness of Christians are matter of joy to ministers; they joy when they behold their order, their regular behaviour and stedfast adherence to the Christian doctrine. 3. The more stedfast our faith in Christ is, the better order there will be in our whole conversation; for we live and walk by faith, 2 Cor. v. 7; Heb. x. 38.

The Glory of the Christian Economy. (a. d. 62.)

4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. 5 For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. 6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: 7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

The apostle cautions the Colossians against deceivers (v. 4): And this I say lest any man beguile you with enticing words; and v. 8, Lest any man spoil you. He insists so much upon the perfection of Christ and the gospel revelation, to preserve them from the ensnaring insinuations of those who would corrupt their principles. Note, 1. The way in which Satan spoils souls is by beguiling them. He deceives them, and by this means slays them. He is the old serpent who beguiled Eve through his subtlety, 2 Cor. xi. 3. He could not ruin us if he did not cheat us; and he could not cheat us but by our own fault and folly. 2. Satan's agents, who aim to spoil them, beguile them with enticing words. See the danger of enticing words; how many are ruined by the flattery of those who lie in wait to deceive, and by the false disguises and fair appearances of evil principles and wicked practices. By good words, and fair speeches, they deceive the hearts of the simple, Rom. xvi. 18. "You ought to stand upon your guard against enticing words, and be aware and afraid of those who would entice you to any evil; for that which they aim at is to spoil you." If sinners entice thee, consent thou not, Prov. i. 10. Observe,

I. A sovereign antidote against seducers (v. 6, 7): As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk you in him, rooted and built up, &c. Here note, 1. All Christians have, in profession at least, received Jesus Christ the Lord, received him as Christ, the great prophet of the church, anointed by God to reveal his will; as Jesus the great high priest, and Saviour from sin and wrath, by the expiatory sacrifice of himself; and as Lord, or sovereign and king, whom we are to obey and be subject to.—Received him, consented to him, taken him for ours in every relation and every capacity, and for all the purposes and uses of them. 2. The great concern of those who have received Christ is to walk in him—to make their practices conformable to their principles and their conversation agreeable to their engagements. As we have received Christ, or consented to be his, so we must walk with him in our daily course and keep up our communion with him. 3. The more closely we walk with Christ the more we are rooted and established in the faith. A good conversation is the best establishment of a good faith. If we walk in him, we shall be rooted in him; and the more firmly we are rooted in him the more closely we shall walk in him: Rooted and built up. Observe, We cannot be built up in Christ, unless we be first rooted in him. We must be united to him by a lively faith, and heartily consent to his covenant, and then we shall grow up in him in all things.—As you have been taught—"according to the rule of the Christian doctrine, in which you have been instructed." Observe, A good education has a good influence upon our establishment. We must be established in the faith, as we have been taught, abounding therein. Observe, Being established in the faith, we must abound therein, and improve in it more and more; and this with thanksgiving. The way to have the benefit and comfort of God's grace is to be much in giving thanks for it. We must join thanksgiving to all our improvements, and be sensible of the mercy of all our privileges and attainments. Observe,

II. The fair warning given us of our danger: Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, v. 8. There is a philosophy which is a noble exercise of our reasonable faculties, and highly serviceable to religion, such a study of the works of God as leads us to the knowledge of God and confirms our faith in him. But there is a philosophy which is vain and deceitful, which is prejudicial to religion, and sets up the wisdom of man in competition with the wisdom of God, and while it pleases men's fancies ruins their faith; as nice and curious speculations about things above us, or of no use and concern to us; or a care of words and terms of art, which have only an empty and often a cheating appearance of knowledge. After the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world: this plainly reflects upon the Jewish pedagogy or economy, as well as the Pagan learning. The Jews governed themselves by the traditions of their elders and the rudiments or elements of the world, the rites and observances which were only preparatory and introductory to the gospel state; the Gentiles mixed their maxims of philosophy with their Christian principles; and both alienated their minds from Christ. Those who pin their faith on other men's sleeves, and walk in the way of the world, have turned away from following after Christ. The deceivers were especially the Jewish teachers, who endeavoured to keep up the law of Moses in conjunction with the gospel of Christ, but really in competition with it and contradiction to it. Now here the apostle shows,

1. That we have in Christ the substance of all the shadows of the ceremonial law; for example, (1.) Had they then the Shechinah, or special presence of God, called the glory, from the visible token of it? So have we now in Jesus Christ (v. 9): For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Under the law, the presence of God dwelt between the cherubim, in a cloud which covered the mercy-seat; but now it dwells in the person of our Redeemer, who partakes of our nature, and is bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, and has more clearly declared the Father to us. It dwells in him bodily; not as the body is opposed to the spirit, but as the body is opposed to the shadow. The fulness of the Godhead dwells in the Christ really, and not figuratively; for he is both God and man. (2.) Had they circumcision, which was the seal of the covenant? In Christ we are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands (v. 11), by the work of regeneration in us, which is the spiritual or Christian circumcision. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, Rom. ii. 29. This is owing to Christ, and belongs to the Christian dispensation. It is made without hands; not by the power of any creature, but by the power of the blessed Spirit of God. We are born of the Spirit, John iii. 5. And it is the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit, Tit. iii. 5. It consists in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, in renouncing sin and reforming our lives, not in mere external rites. It is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, 1 Pet. iii. 21. And it is not enough to put away some one particular sin, but we must put off the whole body of sin. The old man must be crucified, and the body of sin destroyed, Rom. vi. 6. Christ was circumcised, and, by virtue of our union to him, we partake of that effectual grace which puts off the body of the sins of the flesh. Again, The Jews thought themselves complete in the ceremonial law; but we are complete in Christ, v. 10. That was imperfect and defective; if the first covenant had been faultless, there would no place have been sought for the second (Heb. viii. 7), and the law was but a shadow of good things, and could never, by those sacrifices, make the comers thereunto perfect, Heb. x. 1. But all the defects of it are made up in the gospel of Christ, by the complete sacrifice for sin and revelation of the will of God. Which is the head of all principality and power. As the Old-Testament priesthood had its perfection in Christ, so likewise had the kingdom of David, which was the eminent principality and power under the Old Testament, and which the Jews valued themselves so much upon. And he is the Lord and head of all the powers in heaven and earth, of angels and men. Angels, and authorities, and powers are subject to him, 1 Pet. iii. 22.

2. We have communion with Christ in his whole undertaking (v. 12): Buried with him in baptism, wherein also you have risen with him. We are both buried and rise with him, and both are signified by our baptism; not that there is anything in the sign or ceremony of baptism which represents this burying and rising, any more than the crucifixion of Christ is represented by any visible resemblance in the Lord's supper: and he is speaking of the circumcision made without hands; and says it is through the faith of the operation of God. But the thing signified by our baptism is that we are buried with Christ, as baptism is the seal of the covenant and an obligation to our dying to sin; and that we are raised with Christ, as it is a seal and obligation to our living to righteousness, or newness of life. God in baptism engages to be to us a God, and we become engaged to be his people, and by his grace to die to sin and to live to righteousness, or put off the old man and put on the new.

The Glory of the Christian Economy. (a. d. 62.)

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

The apostle here represents the privileges we Christians have above the Jews, which are very great.

I. Christ's death is our life: And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, v. 13. A state of sin is a state of spiritual death. Those who are in sin are dead in sin. As the death of the body consists in its separation from the soul, so the death of the soul consists in its separation from God and the divine favour. As the death of the body is the corruption and putrefaction of it, so sin is the corruption or depravation of the soul. As a man who is dead is unable to help himself by any power of his own, so an habitual sinner is morally impotent: though he has a natural power, or the power of a reasonable creature, he has not a spiritual power, till he has the divine life or a renewed nature. It is principally to be understood of the Gentile world, who lay in wickedness. They were dead in the uncircumcision of their flesh, being aliens to the covenant of promise, and without God in the world, Eph. ii. 11, 12. By reason of their uncircumcision they were dead in their sins. It may be understood of the spiritual uncircumcision or corruption of nature; and so it shows that we are dead in law, and dead in state. Dead in law, as a condemned malefactor is called a dead man because he is under a sentence of death; so sinners by the guilt of sin are under the sentence of the law and condemned already, John iii. 18. And dead in state, by reason of the uncircumcision of our flesh. An unsanctified heart is called an uncircumcised heart: this is our state. Now through Christ we, who were dead in sins, are quickened; that is, effectual provision is made for taking away the guilt of sin, and breaking the power and dominion of it. Quickened together with him—by virtue of our union to him, and in conformity to him. Christ's death was the death of our sins; Christ's resurrection is the quickening of our souls.

II. Through him we have the remission of sin: Having forgiven you all trespasses. This is our quickening. The pardon of the crime is the life of the criminal: and this is owing to the resurrection of Christ, as well as his death; for, as he died for our sins, so he rose again for our justification, Rom. iv. 25.

III. Whatever was in force against us is taken out of the way. He has obtained for us a legal discharge from the hand-writing of ordinances, which was against us (v. 14), which may be understood, 1. Of that obligation to punishment in which consists the guilt of sin. The curse of the law is the hand-writing against us, like the hand-writing on Belshazzar's wall. Cursed is every one who continues not in every thing. This was a hand-writing which was against us, and contrary to us; for it threatened our eternal ruin. This was removed when he redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, Gal. iii. 13. He cancelled the obligation for all who repent and believe. "Upon me be the curse, my father." He vacated and disannulled the judgment which was against us. When he was nailed to the cross, the curse was as it were nailed to the cross. And our indwelling corruption is crucified with Christ, and by virtue of his cross. When we remember the dying of the Lord Jesus, and see him nailed to the cross, we should see the hand-writing against us taken out of the way. Or rather, 2. It must be understood of the ceremonial law, the hand-writing of ordinances, the ceremonial institutions or the law of commandments contained in ordinances (Eph. ii. 15), which was a yoke to the Jews and a partition-wall to the Gentiles. The Lord Jesus took it out of the way, nailed it to his cross; that is, disannulled the obligation of it, that all might see and be satisfied that it was no more binding. When the substance came, the shadows fled away. It is abolished (2 Cor. iii. 13), and that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away, Heb. viii. 13. The expressions are in allusion to the ancient methods of cancelling a bond, either by crossing the writing or striking it through with a nail.

IV. He has obtained a glorious victory for us over the powers of darkness: And, having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it, v. 15. As the curse of the law was against us, so the power of Satan was against us. He treated with God as the Judge, and redeemed us out of the hands of his justice by a price; but out of the hands of Satan the executioner he redeemed us by power and with a high hand. He led captivity captive. The devil and all the powers of hell were conquered and disarmed by the dying Redeemer. The first promise pointed at this; the bruising of the heel of Christ in his sufferings was the breaking of the serpent's head, Gen. iii. 15. The expressions are lofty and magnificent: let us turn aside and see this great sight. The Redeemer conquered by dying. See his crown of thorns turned into a crown of laurels. He spoiled them, broke the devil's power, and conquered and disabled him, and made a show of them openly—exposed them to public shame, and made a show of them to angels and men. Never had the devil's kingdom such a mortal blow given to it as was given by the Lord Jesus. He tied them to his chariot-wheels, and rode forth conquering and to conquer—alluding to the custom of a general's triumph, who returned victorious.—Triumphing over them in it; that is, either in his cross and by his death; or, as some read it, in himself, by his own power; for he trod the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none with him.

The Glory of the Christian Economy. (a. d. 62.)

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. 18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. 20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

The apostle concludes the chapter with exhortations to proper duty, which he infers from the foregoing discourse.

I. Here is a caution to take heed of judaizing teachers, or those who would impose upon Christians the yoke of the ceremonial law: Let no man therefore judge you in meat nor drink, &c., v. 16. Much of the ceremonies of the law of Moses consisted in the distinction of meats and days. It appears by Rom. xiv. that there were those who were for keeping up those distinctions: but here the apostle shows that since Christ has come, and has cancelled the ceremonial law, we ought not to keep it up. "Let no man impose those things upon you, for God has not imposed them: if God has made you free, be not you again entangled in that yoke of bondage." And this the rather because these things were shadows of things to come (v. 17), intimating that they had no intrinsic worth in them and that they are now done away. But the body is of Christ: the body, of which they were shadows, has come; and to continue the ceremonial observances, which were only types and shadows of Christ and the gospel, carries an intimation that Christ has not yet come and the gospel state has not yet commenced. Observe the advantages we have under the gospel, above what they had under the law: they had the shadows, we have the substance.

II. He cautions them to take heed of those who would introduce the worship of angels as mediators between God and them, as the Gentile philosophers did: Let no man beguile you of your reward, in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, v. 18. It looked like a piece of modesty to make use of the mediation of angels, as conscious to ourselves of our unworthiness to speak immediately to God; but, though it has a show of humility, it is a voluntary, not a commanded humility; and therefore it is not acceptable, yea, it is not warrantable: it is taking that honour which is due to Christ only and giving it to a creature. Besides, the notions upon which this practice was grounded were merely the inventions of men and not by divine revelation,—the proud conceits of human reason, which make a man presume to dive into things, and determine them, without sufficient knowledge and warrant: Intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind—pretending to describe the order of angels, and their respective ministries, which God has hidden from us; and therefore, though there was a show of humility in the practice, there was a real pride in the principle. They advanced those notions to gratify their own carnal fancy, and were fond of being thought wiser than other people. Pride is at the bottom of a great many errors and corruptions, and even of many evil practices, which have great show and appearance of humility. Those who do so do not hold the head, v. 19. They do in effect disclaim Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man. It is the highest disparagement to Christ, who is the head of the church, for any of the members of it to make use of any intercessors with God but him. When men let go their hold of Christ, they catch at that which is next them and will stand them in no stead.—From which all the body, by joints and bands, having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. Observe, 1. Jesus Christ is not only a head of government over the church, but a head of vital influence to it. They are knit to him by joints and bands, as the several members of the body are united to the head, and receive life and nourishment from him. 2. The body of Christ is a growing body: it increaseth with the increase of God. The new man is increasing, and the nature of grace is to grow, where there is not an accidental hindrance.—With the increase of God, with an increase of grace which is from God as its author; or, in a usual Hebraism, with a large and abundant increase.—That you may be filled with all the fulness of God, Eph. iii. 19. See a parallel expression, Which is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, fitly joined together, maketh increase of the body, Eph. iv. 15, 16.

III. He takes occasion hence to warn them again: "Wherefore, if you be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are you subject to ordinances? v. 20. If as Christians you are dead to the observances of the ceremonial law, why are you subject to them? Such observances as, Touch not, taste not, handle not," v. 21, 22. Under the law there was a ceremonial pollution contracted by touching a dead body, or any thing offered to an idol; or by tasting any forbidden meats, &c., which all are to perish with the using, having no intrinsic worth in themselves to support them, and those who used them saw them perishing and passing away; or, which tend to corrupt the Christian faith, having no other authority than the traditions and injunctions of men.—Which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will-worship and humility. They thought themselves wiser than their neighbours, in observing the law of Moses together with the gospel of Christ, that they might be sure in the one, at least, to be in the right; but, alas! it was but a show of wisdom, a mere invention and pretence. So they seem to neglect the body, by abstaining from such and such meats, and mortifying their bodily pleasures and appetites; but there is nothing of true devotion in these things, for the gospel teaches us to worship God in spirit and truth and not by ritual observances, and through the mediation of Christ alone and not of any angels. Observe, 1. Christians are freed by Christ from the ritual observances of Moses's law, and delivered from that yoke of bondage which God himself had laid upon them. 2. Subjection to ordinances, or human appointments in the worship of God, is highly blamable, and contrary to the freedom and liberty of the gospel. The apostle requires Christians to stand fast in the liberty with which Christ hath made them free, and not to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage, Gal. v. 1. And the imposition of them is invading the authority of Christ, the head of the church, and introducing another law of commandments contained in ordinances, when Christ has abolished the old one, Eph. ii. 15. 3. Such things have only a show of wisdom, but are really folly. It is true wisdom to keep close to the appointments of the gospel, and an entire subjection to Christ, the only head of the church.

CHAP. II. Verſe 1. For I would that ye knew]

LIttle do moſt men know, what unceſſant care and pains their faithfull Miniſters take for their ſouls health. But we would they ſhould know it, and know thoſe that labour among them, and are over them in the Lord, and to eſteem them very highly in love, for their works ſake, 1 Theſſ. 5.12, 13.

Verſe 2. That their hearts may be comforted] Miniſters are ſonnes of conſolation, whiles by them God maketh the heart to hear of joy and gladneſſe, Pſ. 51.8. and createth the fruit of their lips peace, [illegible: 1 letter]eace, &c. Iſa. 57.19.

Being knit together] No ſuch comfort upon the earth, as in the communion of Saints: it differeth from the happineſſe of heaven, but in degrees only.

Of the full aſſurance of underſtanding] Such as was that of S. Luke, chap. 1.3. See the Note there.

Verſe 3. In whom are hid] What ſo great a maker is it then if we be obſcured, and our good parts not ſo noticed?Perſ. Ʋſ que adeone ſcire tuum nihil eſt, &c? Chriſt was content his treaſures ſhould be hid. In maxima ſui mole ſe minimùm oſtendunt ſtellae.

All the treaſures of wiſdome] Out of Chriſt then there is no true wiſdome or ſolid comfort to be found. The depth faith, It is not in me, and the ſea ſaith, It is not ith me, Job 28.14. The worlds wizards cannot help us to it, Ier. 8.9. Neſcio quomodò imbecillior eſt medicina quam morbus, ſaith Cicero concerning all Philoſophicall comforts: The medicine is too weak for the diſeaſe.

Verſe 4. With entiſing words] [non-Latin text not transcribed]. With probable and perſuaſible ſpeeches. It is not ſafe for ſimple men to hear heretikes: for though they may think themſelves able enough to anſwer them, yet they have a notable faculty of perſwading the credulous and leſſe cautelous. The Valentinian-hererikes had an art to perſwade before they taught.Tertull. The locuſts have faces like women. In the year 497. Pope Anastaſius ſecond, ſeeking to reduce the heretike Acacius, was ſeduced by him.

Verſe 5. Your ord[illegible: 1 letter]r, and the ſt[illegible: 1 letter]df[illegible: 1 letter]ſtn[illegible: 1 letter]ſſe] Faith and order, that is doctrine and diſcipline, faith one. Theſe two make the Church fair as the Moon, clear as the Sun, and terrible as an army with banners, Cant 6 10.

The ſtedfastneſſe of your faith] [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Gr. The firmament of your faith. As in the firſt creation, ſo in the new creature there is firſt the light of knowledge: Secondly, The firmament of faith: Thirdly, Repentant tears and worthy fruits, as ſea's and trees, &c.

Verſe 6. So Walk ye in him] Continue well affected, as ye were at your firſt converſion: fall not from your own ſtedfaſtneſſe, 2 Pet. 3.17. Happy is he that can ſay in a ſpirituall ſenſe (as it was ſaid of Moſes) that after long profeſſion of religion his ſight is not waxed dim, nor his naturall ſtrength abated.

Verſe 7. Abounding therein with thanksgiving] Thankfulfulneſſe for ſmaller meaſures of grace, gets more. Eſſicaciſſimum genus eſt rogandi, gratias agere. Plin. Panegyr.

Verſe 8. [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Leſt any man spoil you] A Metaphor either from ſheep ſtealers or plunderers. Seducers plunder men of their precious ſouls. They take them priſoners, 2 Tim. 3.6. They make merchandize of them, 2 Pet. 2.3. or bring them into bondage, ſmiting them on the face, 2 Cor. 11.20.

I brough Philoſophy] In the year of Chriſt 230. the Artemonites, a certain kinde of heretikes, corrupted Scripture out of Aristotle and Theophrastus, turning all into Queſtions, as afterwards the Schoolmen alſo did, that evil generation of dung-hill Divines, as one calleth them. Tertullian not unfi[illegible: 1 letter]ly faith, That the Philoſophers were the Patriarchs of the heretikes. Not but that there is an excellent and neceſſary uſe of Philoſophy truly ſo called: but the Apoſtle meaneth it of their idle ſpeculations and vain deceits, thoſe aiery nothings, as the Apoſtle expounds himſelf. See the Note on Rom. 1.21, 22.

And not after Chriſt] The Gentiles then could not be ſaved by their philoſophy without Chriſt. And yet not only the Divines of Cullen, A[illegible: 1 letter]rippa. B[illegible: 1 letter]laeus. ſet forth a book concerning the ſalvation of Ariſtotle, whom they called Chriſts fore-runner in naturals, as John Baptiſt was in ſupernaturals: but alſo ſome of the School-Doctours, grave men (ſaith Acoſta) do promiſe men ſalvation without the knowledge of Chriſt.

Verſe 9. All the fulneſſe of the God-head bodily] That is, Eſſentially, not in clouds and Ceremonies, as once between the Che[illegible: 1 letter]nb[illegible: 2 letters]s, which the J[illegible: 1 letter]ws called Shechinah; whereunto the Apoſtle here alludeth.

Verſe 10. And ye are compleat] Ye have that true happineſſe of a man, which Philoſophers hunted after in the thicker of car[illegible: 1 letter]hly vani[illegible: 1 letter]i[illegible: 1 letter]s, and loſt themſelves in the chaſe. Varr[illegible: 1 letter] makes report of 288. ſeverall opinions that they had about this ſubject, and were out in all, whil[illegible: 1 letter]ſt they caught at the ſhadow of [illegible: 1 letter]uits in a [illegible: 1 letter]edge of thorns, but could not come at the tree of life, Chriſt Jeſus in whom we are compleat.

Verſe 11. Made without hands] Oh how honourable (ſaith an Interpreter) is the work of mor[illegible: 1 letter]ification, even as to make thoſe huge heavens, &c.

By the ci[illegible: 1 letter]cumciſion of Christ] Which circumciſeth our hearts, pulling off chat wretched fore-skin.

Verſe 12. Buried with him in baptiſme] Which ſucceedeth in the place of circumciſion, and is alſo to us a ſeal of the righteouſnes of faith, Rom. 4.11.

Of the operation of God] In the work of faith God putteth forth the ſame almighty power that he did in raiſing Chriſt from the dead, Epheſ, 1.19, 20. See the Note on that Text.

Verſe 13. And you being dead] See the Note on Epheſ. 2.1.

Hath he quickned] The firſt ſpringing in the womb of grace is precious before God.

Verſe 14. Blotting out the hand-writing] Croſſing out the black lines of our ſins, with the red lines of [illegible: 2 letters]s Sons bl[illegible: 1 letter]nd.

Verſe 15. He made a ſhew of them] A plain alluſion to the Roman triumphs. See the Note on Eph[illegible: 1 letter]ſ. 4.8. Chriſt made the devils a publike ſpectacle of ſcorn and deriſion,Tank hlſtz[illegible: 1 letter]o. as Tamerl[illegible: 1 letter]ne did Ba[illegible: 1 letter]azet the great Turk, whom he ſhut no in an̄ iron c[illegible: 1 letter]ge made like a grate, in fuch ſort, as that he might on every ſide be ſeen: and ſo carried him up and down, as he paſſed thorow Aſia, to be of his own people [illegible: 1 letter]corned and derided, &c.

Verſe 16. Let no man there fore judge you] That is, Set not up any ſuch for a Judge over your conſciences : Or, if any uſurp ſuch an authority, ſlight him, according to that Gal. 5.1. Periculoſum eſt in divinisrebus ut quis cedat j[illegible: 1 letter]re ſuo, Cypr de hor. baptiz. ſaith Cyprian, In things of God we ſhould be tender of our liberty.

Verſe 17. Which are a ſhadow] And ſo a ſign of Chriſt, obſcurely and imperfectly repreſenting him to the old Church, and now aboliſhed by his coming in the fleſh. In the twelfth year of our Saviours age (the ſame year wherein he taught in the Temple, Luk. 2.) the Sanctuary was polluted by the caſting about the bones of dead men thorow every part and porch thereof, at the very feaſt of the Paſſeover in the night time. This Joſephus ſaith was done by the Samaritans out of hatred to the Jewiſh ſervices. But God had ſurely a ſpeciall hand in it, to ſhew that people, that thoſe ſhadows were to vaniſh, now that Chriſt the body was come and ſhewed himſelf.

Verſe 18. Let no man beguile you] Gr. Brave it over you. Confer Exod. [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Tremel. 8.9 Glory over me, Gloriam aſſume ſupra me, as thou haſt done over thy ſorcerers; I gave thee this liberty. See alſo Judg. 7.2. Iſa: 10.15.

In a voluntary humility] A proud humility. They would not dare to worſhip God, but Angels, &c. yet wére vainly puffed up by their fleſhly mindes. And ſomething like this was that of the Baptiſt in refuſing to waſh Chriſt, and of Peter in refuſing to be waſhed by him Ioh. 13.8.

And worſhipping of Angels] Setting them up as Papiſts do for Mediat[illegible: 1 letter]u[illegible: 1 letter]s of interceſſion. Let not us acknowledge any other Maſter of requeſts in heaven, but Chriſt alone, 1 Ioh. 2.1. But what a piece of knavery is that in Surius and Caranza, who rendering that paſſage of the Laodicean Councel, Chap. 35. [non-Latin text not transcribed], Chriſtians may not pray to Angels, they make the words to be, Non oportet Chriſtianos ad angulos Congregatione [illegible: 2 letters]facere. Chriſtians may not be corner creepers: And the title they make, Deys qui angulos colunt, Of thoſe that worſhip (not Angels, but) corners; againſt all ſenſe. What? will they put out the eyes of Goods people? As he ſaid, Numb. 16.14. Or doe they not rather, Festucam quarere unde oculos ſibi cruant, as Bernard hath it, Seek ſtraws to put out their own eyes withall.

Intruding into thoſe things] [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Or invading thoſe things, &c. blinde and bold, buſie about ſuch matters, as whereof there is neither proof nor profit. Of this ſort of ſeducers was that daring Dionyſius, that writeth ſo confidently of the heavenly hierarchy: The Schoolmen alſo with their curious ſpeculations and new niceties, as Scotellus, and others.

Vainly puffed up by his fleſhly minde] Corruption is the mother of pride, as the devil the father. He is the King of all the children of pride. Job 41.34.

Verſe 19. And not holding the hoad] This is worſe then all the former, that they deſpoiled Chriſt of his dignity: as if he alone were not ſufficient to cheriſh and encreaſe his Church.

With the increaſe of God] That proceeds from God, that is, from the Spirit of Chriſt the head: To which growth is oppoſed that vain puffing up, verſ. 18. whereby men do not increaſe, but ſwell.

Verſe 20. Are ye ſubject to ordinances] why doe ye dogmatize: or be burdened with [illegible: 1 letter]ites or traditions, as they now are in the Papacy? Iohn Aunt a Roman Catholike, in his humble appeal to King Iames, in the ſixth Chapter of that Pamphlet thus blaſphemeth God,D. S[illegible: 1 letter]eldens Mak of the beaſ[illegible: 1 letter] ep[illegible: 1 letter]de[illegible: 1 letter]ic. The God of the Proteſtants (whom he knows to be the Father, Son, and holy Ghoſt) is the moſt uncivil and evil manner'd God of all thoſe who have borne the names of God upon earth: Yea, worſe then Pan, God of the Clowns, which can endure no Ceremonies nor good manners at all.

Verſe 21. Touch not, taſte not, &c.] The words of thoſe impoſtours, which are here mimetically, or by way of imitation related. See the like Eccl. 10.14. where the Wiſeman graphically deſcribeth the fools tautologies, A man cannot tall what ſhall be, and what ſhall be, who can tell?

Verſe 22. Which all are to periſh] The very daily periſhing of food and raiment, are types of thy periſhing alſo, faith a Divine.

Verſe 23. And neglecting of the body] Gr. [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Not ſparing of it, as the old and new Baalites, Thoſe Flagellantes: And thoſe alſo amongſt us (good otherwiſe) that pinch their bodies too much with penury or exceſſive faſting, are blame-worthy. The body is the ſouls ſervant, and that it may be, Par negotio, neither ſupra not infranegorium, it muſt have due honour and nouriſhment.

For I would that ye knew. I wish you knew or fully understood. He supposes that this would deeply affect them, if they understood the solicitude which he had had on their account.

What great conflict. Marg., fear, or care. The Greek word is agony αγωνα. It is not, however, the word rendered agony in Lk 22:44 αγωνια--though that is derived from this. The word is rendered conflict in Php 1:30; contention, 1Thes 2:2; fight, 1Timm 6:12, 2Ti 4:17 and race Heb 12:1. It properly refers to the combats, contests, struggles, efforts at the public games; the toil and conflict to obtain a victory. It refers here to the anxious care, the mental conflict, the earnest solicitude which he had in their behalf, in view of the dangers to which they were exposed from Judaizing Christians and pagan philosophy. This mental struggle resembled that which the combatants had at the public games. 1Cor 9:25,27.

And for them at Laodicea. For Christians there, who were exposed to similar danger. Laodicea was the capital of Phrygia, in Asia Minor, and a little south of Colosse. See Intro. p. 1, 6. Col 4:16. There was a church early planted there---the "lukewarm" church mentioned in Rev 3:14. Being in the vicinity of Colosse, the church there would be exposed to the same perils, and the rebuke, in Rev 3:14, showed that the fears of Paul were well founded, and that the arts of the false teachers were too successful.

And for as many as have not seem face in the flesh. That is, evidently, in that region. He had, doubtless, a general solicitude for all Christians, but his remark here has reference to those in the neighbourhood of the church at Colosse, or in that church. On the question which has been raised, whether this proves that the apostle Paul had never been at Colosse or Laodicea, see Intro. p. 2, 4. This passage does not seem to me to prove that he had not been there. It may mean that he had great solicitude for those Christians there whom he knew, and for all others there, or in the vicinity, even though he was not personally acquainted with them. He may refer (1.) to some churches in the neighbourhood formed since he was there; or

(2.) to strangers who had come in there since he was with them; or

(3.) to those who had been converted since he was there, and with whom he had no personal acquaintance. For all these he would feel the same solicitude, for they were all exposed to the same danger. To "see one's face in the flesh" is a Hebraism, meaning to become personally acquainted with him.

(1) "great conflict" "fear" or "care" (a) "Laodicea, and for" Rev 3:14

That their hearts might be comforted. Like all other Christians in the times of the apostles, they were doubtless exposed to trials and persecutions.

Being knit together in love. The same word which is here used, συμβιβαζω occurs in Eph 4:16, and is rendered compacted. Eph 4:16. In Acts 9:22, it is rendered proving; Acts 16:10, assuredly gathering; 1Co 2:16 instruct; and here, and in Col 2:19, knit together. It means, properly to make to come together, and hence refers to a firm union, as where the hearts of Christians are one. Here it means that the way of comforting each other was by solid Christian friendship, and that the means of cementing that was love. It was not by a mere outward profession, or by mere speculative faith; it was by a union of affection.

And unto all riches. On the meaning of the word riches, as used by the apostle Paul, Rom 2:4. There is a great energy of expression here. The meaning is, that the thing referred to--" the full understanding" of the "mystery" of religion--was an invaluable possession, like abundant wealth. This passage also shows the object for which they should be united. It should be in order that they might obtain this inestimable wealth. If they were divided in affections, and split up into factions, they could not hope to secure it.

Of the full assurance of understanding. This word (πληροφορια) means, firm persuasion, settled conviction. It occurs only here and in 1Thes 1:6, Heb 6:11, 10:22; and is rendered by assurance, or full assurance, in every instance. See the verb, however, in Lk 1:1, Rom 4:21, 14:5, 2Ti 4:5,17. It was the desire of the apostle that they might have entire conviction of the truth of the Christian doctrines.

To the acknowledgment. So as fully and openly to acknowledge or confess this mystery.

The mystery. On the meaning of this word, Rom 11:25; Eph 1:9. The meaning is, the doctrine respecting God, which had before been concealed or hidden, but which was now revealed in the gospel. It does not mean that there was anything unintelligible or incomprehensible respecting this doctrine when it was made known. That might be as clear as any other truth.

Of God. Of God as he actually subsists. This does not mean that the mere fact of the existence of God was a "mystery," or a truth which had been concealed, for that was not true. But the sense plainly is, that there were truths now made known in the gospel to mankind, about the mode of the Divine existence, which had not before been disclosed; and this "mystery" he wished them to retain, or fully acknowledge. The "mystery," or the hitherto unrevealed truth, related to the fact that God subsisted in more persons than one, as "Father," and as "Christ."

And of the Father. Or, rather, "even of the Father@;" for so the word και (and) is often used. The apostle does not mean that he wished them to acknowledge the hitherto unrevealed truth respecting "God" and another being called "the Father;" but respecting "God" as the "Father," or of God "as "Father" and as "Christ."

And of Christ. As a person of the Godhead. What the apostle wished them to acknowledge was the full revelation now made known respecting the essential nature of God, as the "Father," and as "Christ." In relation to this, they were in special danger of being corrupted by the prevalent philosophy, as it is in relation to this that error of Christian doctrine usually commences. It should be said, however, that there is great variety of reading in the MSS. on this whole clause, and that many critics (see Rosenmuller) regard it as spurious. I do not see evidence that it is not genuine; and the strain of exhortation of the apostle seems to me to demand it.

(b) "love, and unto" Col 3:14 (c) "full assurance" Isa 32:17, Heb 6:11 (d) "mystery of God" 1Jn 5:7 (*) "and" "even"

In whom. Marg., wherein. The more correct translation is, "in whom." The reference is doubtless to Christ, as his name is the immediate antecedent, and as what is affirmed here properly appertains to him.

Are hid. Like treasures that are concealed or garnered up. It does not mean that none of those "treasures" had been developed; but that, so to speak, Christ, as Mediator, was the great treasure-house where were to be found all the wisdom and knowledge needful for men.

All the treasures. It is common to compare anything valuable with "treasures" of silver or gold. The idea here is, that in reference to the wisdom and knowledge needful for us, Christ is what abundant treasures are in reference to the supply of our wants.

Wisdom. The wisdom needful for our salvation. 1Cor 1:24.

And knowledge. The knowledge which is requisite to guide us in the way to life. Christ is able to instruct us in all that it is desirable for us to know, so that it is not necessary for us to apply to philosophy, or to the teachings of men.

(1) "In whom" "wherein"

And this I say. Respecting the character and sufficiency of the truth revealed in Christ.

Lest any man should beguile you. Deceive you, lead you away from the truth.

With enticing words. Artful words, smooth and plausible arguments, such as were employed by the Greek sophists and rhetoricians.

(a) "with enticing" Mk 13:22

For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit. That is, I seem to see you; I feel as if I were there, and were looking upon you; and I have the same solicitude as if I were there, and saw all the danger which exists that your beautiful order and harmony should be disturbed by the influence of false philosophy. 1Cor 5:3. The word "spirit" here does not refer to the Holy Spirit, or to any inspiration by which the apostle was enabled to see them; but it is equivalent to what we mean when we say, "My heart is with you. He seemed to be beholding them.

Joying and beholding your order. That is, I rejoice as if I saw your order. He had such confidence that everything would be done among them as became Christians, that he could rejoice as if he actually saw it.

As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord. Have received him by faith as your Saviour, or as you were instructed respecting his rank, character, and work. The object here is to induce them not to swerve from the views which they had of Christ when he was made known to them. They had at first probably received their ideas of the Saviour from the apostle himself, (see the Intro.;) and, at any rate, the apostle designs to assure them that the views which they had when they "received him" were founded in truth.

So walk ye in him. Continue in those views of Christ; live in the maintenance of them; let them regulate your whole conduct. The word walk, in the Scriptures, is used to denote the manner of life; and the sense here is, that they should live and act wholly under the influence of the conceptions which they had of the Saviour when they first embraced him. The particle "so" is supplied by our translators, and rather weakens the sense. No stress should be laid on it, as is often done. The meaning is, simply, "Since you have received Christ as your Lord as he was preached to you, hold fast the doctrine which you have received, and do not permit yourselves to be turned aside by any Jewish teachers, or teachers of philosophy."

(b) "walk ye in him" 1Jn 2:6

Rooted--in him. As a tree strikes its roots deep in the earth, so our faith should strike deep into the doctrine respecting the Saviour. See the phrase here used explained in the parallel place in Eph 3:17.

And stablisheth in the faith, as ye have been taught. To wit, by the founders of the church, and by those faithful ministers who had succeeded them. Col 1:7.

Abounding therein with thanksgiving. Expressing overflowing thanks to God that you have been made acquainted with truths so precious and glorious. If there is anything for which we ought to be thankful, it is for the knowledge of the great truths respecting our Lord and Saviour.

(c) "rooted" Eph 3:17 (d) "and stablished" Jn 15:4,5

Beware lest any man spoil you. The word spoil now commonly means, to corrupt, to cause to decay and perish, as fruit is spoiled by keeping too long, or paper by wetting, or hay by a long rain, or crops by mildew. But the Greek word here used means to spoil in the sense of plunder, rob, as when plunder is taken in war. The meaning is, "Take heed lest any one plunder or rob you of your faith and hope by philosophy." These false teachers would strip them of their faith and hope, as an invading army would rob a country of all that was valuable.

Through philosophy. The Greek philosophy prevailed much in the regions around Colosse, and perhaps also the Oriental or Gnostic philosophy. See the Intro. They were exposed to the influences of these plausible systems. They consisted much of speculations respecting the nature of the Divine existence; and the danger of the Colossians was, that they would rely rather on the deductions of that specious reasoning, than on what they had been taught by their Christian teachers.

And vain deceit. Mere fallacy. The idea is, that the doctrines which were advanced ill those systems were maintained by plausible, not by solid arguments; by considerations not fitted to lead to the truth, but to lead astray.

After the tradition of men. There appear to have been two sources of danger to which the Christians at Colosse were exposed, and to which the apostle in these cautions alludes, though he is not careful to distinguish them. The one was that arising from the Grecian philosophy; the other from Jewish opinions. The latter is that to which he refers here. The Jews depended much on tradition, Mt 15:2;) and many of those traditions would have tended much to corrupt the gospel of Christ.

After the rudiments of the world. Marg., elements. See this explained Gall 4:3.

And not after Christ. Not such as Christ taught.

(e) "lest any man" Rom 16:17, Eph 5:6, Heb 13:9 (2) "rudiments" "elements"

For in him dwelleth. That is, this was the great and central doctrine that was to be maintained about Christ, that all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him. Every system which denied this was a denial of the doctrine which they had been taught; and against everything that would go to undermine this, they were especially to be on their guard. Almost all heresy has been begun by some form of the denial of the great central truth of the incarnation of the Son of God.

All the fulness. Col 1:19.

Of the Godhead. Of the Divinity, the Divine nature θεοτης. The word is one that properly denotes the Divine nature and perfections. Robinson, Lex. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament.

Bodily. σωματικως. This word also is found nowhere else in the New Testament, though the adjective bodily-- σωματικος --occurs twice: Lk 3:22, "in a bodily shape;" and 1Timm 4:8, "for bodily exercise profiteth little." The word means, "having a bodily appearance, instead of existing or appearing in a spiritual form;" and the fair sense of the phrase is, that the fairness of the Divine nature became incarnate, and was indwelling in the body of the Redeemer. It does not meet the case to say, as Crellius does, that the "whole Divine will was in him," for the word θεοτης godhead does not mean the will of God; and it is as certainly true that the inspired prophets were under the control of the Divine will, as that the Saviour was. Nor can it mean, as Socinus supposes, that the fulness of Divine knowledge dwelt in him, for this is not the proper meaning of the word θεοτης godhead; nor can it mean, for the same reason, that a fairness of Divine gifts was entrusted to him. The language is such as would be obviously employed on the supposition that God became incarnate, and appeared in human form; and there is no other idea which it so naturally expresses, nor is there any other which it can be made to express without a forced construction. The meaning is, that it was not any one attribute of the Deity that became incarnate in the Saviour; that he was not merely endowed with the knowledge, or the power, the wisdom of God; but that the whole Deity thus became incarnate, and appeared in human form. Comp. Jn 14:9, 1:18. No language could, therefore, more clearly demonstrate the divinity of Christ. Of what mere man-- of what angel-could it be used?

(f) "dwelleth" Col 1:19

And ye are complete in him. Having no need, for the purposes of salvation, of any aid to be derived from the philosophy of the Greeks, or the traditions of the Jews. All that is necessary to secure your salvation is to be found in the Lord Jesus. There is a completion, or a filling up, in him, so as to leave nothing wanting. This is true in respect

(1.) to the wisdom which is needful to guide us;

(2.) the atonement to be made for sin;

(3.) the merit by which a sinner can be justified; and

(4.) the grace which is needful to sustain us in the trials, and to aid us in the duties of life. 1Cor 1:30. There is no necessity, therefore, that we should look to the aid of philosophy, as if there was a defect in the teachings of the Saviour; or to human strength, as if he were unable to save us; or to the merits of the saints, as if those of the Redeemer were not sufficient to meet all our wants. The sentiment advanced in this verse would overthrow the whole papal doctrine of the merits of the saints, and, of course, the whole doctrine of papal "indulgences."

Which is the head. Eph 1:21; Eph 1:22.

(a) "complete in him" Heb 5:9 (b) "head of all" 1Pet 3:22 on Eph. i. 21, 22.

In whom. In connexion with whom, or in virtue of whose religion.

Ye are circumcised. You have received that which was designed to be represented by circumcision--the putting away of sin. Php 3:3.

With the circumcision made without hands. That made in the heart by the renunciation of all sin. The Jewish teachers insisted on the necessity of the literal circumcision in order to salvation, (comp. Eph 2:11;) and hence this subject is so often introduced into the writings of Paul, and he is at so much pains to show that, by believing in Christ, all was obtained which was required in order to salvation. Circumcision was an ordinance by which it was denoted that all sin was to be cut off or renounced, and that he who was circumcised was to be devoted to God and to a holy life. All this, the apostle says, was obtained by the gospel; and, consequently, they had all that was denoted by the ancient rite of circumcision. What Christians had obtained, moreover, related to the heart; it was not a mere ordinance pertaining to the flesh.

In putting off the body of the sins of the flesh. That is, in renouncing the deeds of the flesh, or becoming holy. The word "body," here, seems to be used with reference to circumcision. In that ordinance, the body of the FLESH was subjected to the rite; with Christians, it is the body of sin that is cut off.

By the circumcision of Christ. Not by the fact that Christ was circumcised, but that we have that kind of circumcision which Christ established--to wit, the renouncing of sin. The idea of the apostle here seems to be, that since we have thus been enabled by Christ to renounce sin, and to devote ourselves to God, we should not be induced, by any plausible arguments, to return to an ordinance pertaining to the flesh, as if that were needful for salvation.

(d) "Buried with him" Romm 6:4,5 (e) "operation of God" Eph 1:19

Buried with him in baptism. Rom 6:4.

Wherein also. In which ordinance, or by virtue of that which is signified by the ordinance.

Ye are risen with him. From the death of sin to the life of religion. Rom 6:4, Rom 6:5, Eph 2:5, Eph 2:6.

Through the faith of the operation of God. By a firm belief on the agency of God in raising him up; that is, a belief of the fact that God has raised him from the dead. The resurrection of Christ is often represented as the foundation of all our hopes; and, as he was raised from the grave to die no more, so, in virtue of that, we are raised from the death of sin to eternal spiritual life. The belief of this is shown by our baptism, whatever be the mode in which that ordinance is performed, and as well shown in one mode as another.

(d) "Buried" Rom 6:4,5 (e) "operation of God" Eph 1:19

And you, being dead in your sins. Eph 2:1.

And the uncircumcision of your flesh. That is, Gentiles, and giving unrestrained indulgence to the desires of the flesh. They lived as those who had not by any religious rite or covenant brought themselves under obligations to lead holy lives.

Hath he quickened. Eph 2:1.

Together with him. In virtue of his being restored to life. That is, the resurrection of the Lord Jesus was the means of imparting to us spiritual life.

(f) "And you" Eph 2:1,5,11

Blotting out the handwriting. The word rendered handwriting means something written by the hand, a manuscript; and here, probably, the writings of the Mosaic law, or the law appointing many ordinances or observances in religion. The allusion is probably to a written contract, in which we bind ourselves to do any work, or to make a payment, and which remains in force against us until the bond is cancelled. That might be done either by blotting out the names, or by drawing lines through it, or, as appears to have been practised in the east, by driving a nail through it. The Jewish ceremonial law is here represented as such a contract, binding those under it to its observance, until it was nailed to the cross. The meaning here is, that the burdensome requirements of the Mosaic law are abolished, and that its necessity is superseded by the death of Christ. His death had the same effect, in reference to those ordinances, as if they had been blotted from the statute-book. This it did by fulfilling them, by introducing a more perfect system and by rendering their observance no longer necessary, since all that they were designed to typify had been now accomplished in a better way. Eph 2:15.

Of ordinances. Prescribing the numerous rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion.

That was against us. That is, against our peace, happiness, comfort; or, in other words, which was oppressive and burdensome. Comp. Acts 15:10. Those ordinances bound and lettered the soul, restrained the expansive spirit of true piety which seeks the salvation of all alike, and thus operated as a hinderance to the enlarged spirit of true religion. Thus they really operated against the truly pious Jew, whose religion would lead him to seek the salvation of the world; and to the Gentile, since he was not in a situation to avail himself of them, and since they would be burdensome if he could. It is in this sense, probably, that the apostle uses the word "us," as referring to all, and as cramping and restraining the true nature of religion.

Which was contrary to us. Operated as a hinderance, or obstruction, in the matter of religion. The ordinances of the Mosaic law were necessary, in order to introduce the gospel; but they were always burdensome. They were to be confined to one people; and if they were continued, they would operate to prevent the spread of the true religion around the world. 2Cor 3:7,9. Hence the exulting language of the apostle in view of the fact that they were now taken away, and that the benefits of religion might be diffused all over the world. The gospel contains nothing which is "against," or "contrary to," the true interest and happiness of any nation or any class of men.

And took it out of the way. Gr., "Out of the midst;" that is, he wholly removed it. He has removed the obstruction, so that it no longer prevents union and harmony between the Jews and the Gentiles.

Nailing it to his cross. As if he had nailed it to his cross, so that it would be entirely removed out of our way. The death of Jesus had the same effect, in regard to the rites and institutions of the Mosaic religion, as if they had been affixed to his cross. It is said that there is an allusion here to the ancient method by which a bond or obligation was cancelled, by driving a nail through it, and affixing it to a post. This was practised, says Grotius, in Asia. In a somewhat similar manner, in our banks now, a sharp instrument, like the blade of a knife, is driven through a check, making a hole through it, and furnishing to the teller of the bank a sign or evidence that it has been paid. If this be the meaning, then the expression here denotes that the obligation of the Jewish institutions ceased on the death of Jesus, as if he had taken them and nailed them to his own cross, in the manner in which a bond was cancelled.

(g) "Blotting out" Eph 2:15,16

And having spoiled. Plundered; as a victorious army does a conquered country. Col 2:8. The terms used in this verse are all military; and the idea is, that Christ has completely subdued our enemies by his death. A complete victory was achieved by his death, so that everything is now in subjection to him, and we have nothing to fear.

Principalities and powers. Eph 1:21; Eph 6:12. The "principalities and powers" here referred to, are the formidable enemies that had held man in subjection, and prevented his serving God. There can be no doubt, I think, that the apostle refers to the ranks of fallen, evil spirits which had usurped a dominion over the world. Jn 12:31; Eph 2:2. The Saviour, by his death, wrested the dominion from them, and seized upon what they had captured, as a conqueror seizes upon his prey. Satan and his legions had invaded the earth, and drawn its inhabitants into captivity, and subjected them to their evil reign. Christ, by his death, subdues the invaders, and recaptures those whom they had subdued.

He made a show of them openly. As a conqueror, returning from a victory, displays in a triumphal procession the kings and princes whom he has taken, and the spoils of victory. This was commonly done when a "triumph" was decreed for a conqueror. On such occasions, it sometimes happened that a considerable number of prisoners were led along amidst the scenes of triumph. 2Cor 2:14. Paul says that this was now done "openly"--that is, it was in the face of the whole universe; a grand victory; a glorious triumph over all the powers of hell. It does not refer to any public procession or display on the earth; but to the grand victory as achieved in view of the universe, by which Christ, as a conqueror, dragged Satan and his legions at his triumphal car. Comp. Rom 16:20.

Triumphing over them in it. Marg., "or, himself." Either "by the cross," or "by himself." Or, it may mean, as Rosenmuller suggests, that "God Col 2:12 triumphed over these foes in him; i.e., in Christ." The sense is substantially the same, that this triumph was effected by the atonement made for sin by the Redeemer. See the word triumph explained in the 2Cor 2:14. The meaning of all this is, that since Christ has achieved for us such a victory, and has subdued all the foes of man, we should not be led captive, but should regard ourselves as freemen. We should not be made again the slaves of custom, or habit, or ritual observances, or superstitious rites, or anything whatever that has its origin in the kingdom of darkness. We are bound to assert and to use our freedom, and should not allow any hostile power, in the form of philosophy or false teaching of any kind, to plunder or "spoil" us, Col 2:8. The Christian is a freeman. His great Captain has subdued all his enemies, and we should not allow them again to set up their dark empire over our souls. The argument of the apostle in these verses Col 2:13-15 is derived from what Christ has done for us. He mentions four things.

(1.) He has given us spiritual life;

(2.) he has forgiven all our trespasses;

(3.) he has blotted out or abolished the "ordinances" that were against us; and

(4.) he has triumphed over all our foes. From all this he infers Col 2:16, seq. that we should not be made captive or subdued by any of the rights of superstition, or any of the influences of the kingdom of darkness.

(a) "having spoiled" Ps 68:18, Isa 53:12, Lk 10:18, 11:22, Jn 12:31 Heb 2:14 (1) "in it" "himself"

Let no man therefore judge you. Rom 14:10,13. The word judge here is used in the sense of pronouncing a sentence. The meaning is, "since you have thus been delivered by Christ from the evils which surrounded you; since you have been freed from the observances of the law, let no one sit in judgment on you, or claim the right to decide for you in those matters. You are not responsible to man for your conduct, but to Christ; and no man has a right to impose that on you as a burden from which he has made you free."

In meat. Marg., for eating and drinking. The meaning is, "in respect to the various articles of food and drink." There is reference here, undoubtedly, to the distinctions which the Jews made on this subject, implying that an effort had been made by Jewish teachers to show them that the Mosaic laws were binding on all.

Or in respect of an holyday. Marg., part. The meaning is, "in the part, or the particular of a holyday; that is, in respect to it." The word rendered "holyday" --εορτη means, properly, a feast or festival; and the allusion here is to the festivals of the Jews. The sense is, that no one had a right to impose their observance on Christians, or to condemn them if they did not keep them. They had been delivered from that obligation by the death of Christ, Col 2:14.

Or of the new moon. On the appearance of the new moon, among the Hebrews, in addition to the daily sacrifices, two bullocks, a ram, and seven sheep, with a meat-offering, were required to be presented to God, Nu 10:10, 28:11-14. The new moon in the beginning of the month Tisri (October) was the beginning of their civil year, and was commanded to be observed as a festival, Lev 23:24,25.

Or of the sabbath days. Gr, "of the sabbaths." The word Sabbath in the Old Testament is applied not only to the seventh day, but to all the days of holy rest that were observed by the Hebrews, and particularly to the beginning and close of their great festivals. There is, doubtless, reference to those days in this place, as the word is used in the plural number, and the apostle does not refer particularly to the Sabbath properly so called. There is no evidence, from this passage, that he would teach that there was no obligation to observe any holy time, for there is not the slightest reason to believe that he meant to teach that one of the ten commandments had ceased to be binding on mankind. If he had used the word in the singular number --"THE Sabbath"--it would then, of course, have been clear that he meant to teach that that commandment had ceased to be binding, and that a sabbath was no longer to be observed. But the use of the term in the plural number, and the connexion, show that he had his eye on the great number of days which were observed by the Hebrews as festivals, as a part of their ceremonial and typical law-- and not to the moral law, or the ten commandments. No part of the moral law-- no one of the ten commandments -- could be spoken of as "a shadow of good things to come." These commandments are, from the nature of moral law, of perpetual and universal obligation.

(b) "judge you" Rom 14:10,13 (2) "in meat" "for eating and drinking" (3) "in respect" "part" (*) "holyday" "feast"

Which are a shadow of things to come. Heb 8:5. Heb 10:1 They were only a dim outline of future things, not the reality.

But the body is of Christ. The reality, the substance. All that they signified is of or in Christ. Between those things themselves which are in Christ, and those which only represented or prefigured them, there is as much difference as there is between a body and a shadow--a solid substance and a mere outline. Having now, therefore, the thing itself, the shadow can be to us of no value; and that having come which was prefigured, that which was designed merely to represent it, is no longer binding.

(c) "shadow of things" Heb 8:5

Let no man beguile you of your reward. Marg., judge against you. The word here used καταβραβευω occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is a word which was employed with reference to the distribution of prizes at the Grecian games, and means, to give the prize against any one, to deprive of the palm. Hence it means to deprive of a due reward; and the sense here is, that they were to be on their guard lest the "reward"--the crown of victory to which they looked forward--should be wrested from them by the arts of others. That would be done if they should be persuaded to turn back, or to falter in the race. The only way to secure the prize was to hold on in the race which they were then running; but if they yielded to the philosophy of the Greeks, and the teachings of the Jews, they would be defrauded of this reward as certainly as a racer at the games would if the crown of victory should be unjustly awarded to another. In this case, too, as real injustice would be done, though the apostle does not say it would be in the same manlier. Here it would be by art--in the case of the racer it would be by a wrong decision; but in either case the crown was lost. This exhortation has the more force from this consideration. Against an unjust judge we could have no power; but we may take care that the reward be not wrested from us by fraud.

In a voluntary humility. Marg. "being a voluntary in humility." Tindal renders this, "Let no man make you shoot at a wrong mark, which, after his own imagination, walketh in the humbleness of angels." The word used here (ταπεινοφροσυνη) means, lowliness of mind, modesty, humbleness of deportment; and the apostle refers, doubtless, to the spirit assumed by those against whom he would guard the Colossians--the spirit of modesty or of humble inquirers. The meaning is, that they would not announce their opinions with dogmatic certainty, but they would put on the appearance of great modesty. In this way, they would become really more dangerous--for no false teachers are so dangerous as those who assume the aspect of great humility, and who manifest great reverence for Divine things. The word rendered "voluntary" here θελων --does not, properly, belong to the word rendered "humility." It rather appertains to the subsequent part of the sentence, and means that the persons referred to were willing, or had pleasure in attempting, to search into the hidden and abstruse things of religion. They were desirous of appearing to do this with an humble spirit--even with the modesty of an angel--but still they had pleasure in that profound and dangerous kind of inquiry.

And worshipping of angels. θρησκειατωναγγελων. This does not mean, as it seems to me, that they would themselves worship angels, or that they would teach others to do it--for there is no reason to believe this. Certainly the Jewish teachers, whom the apostle seems to have had particularly in his eye, would not do it; nor is there any evidence that any class of false teachers would deliberately teach that angels were to be worshipped. The reference is rather to the profound reverence--the spirit of lowly piety--which the angels evinced, and to the fact that the teachers referred to would assume the same spirit, and were, therefore, the more dangerous. They would come professing profound regard for the great mysteries of religion, and for the incomprehensible perfections of the Divinity, and would approach the subject professedly with the awful veneration which the angels have when they "look into these things," 1Pet 1:12. There was no bold, irreverent, or confident declamation, but the danger in the case arose from the fact that they assumed so much the aspect of modest piety; so much the appearance of the lowly devotion of angelic beings. The word here rendered worship θρησκεια--occurs in the New Testament only here, in Acts 26:6, Jas 1:26,27, in each of which places it is rendered religion. It means here the religion, or the spirit of humble reverence and devotion which is evinced by the angels; and this accords well with the meaning in Jas 1:26,27.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen. Or, inquiring into them. The word used here (εμβατευων) means, to go in, or enter; then to investigate, to inquire. It has not, properly, the meaning of intruding, or of impertinent inquiry, (see Passow,) and I do not see that the apostle meant to characterize the inquiry here as such. He says that it was the object of their investigations to look, with great professed modesty and reverence, into those things which are not visible to the eye of mortals. The "things" which seem here to be particularly referred to, are the abstruse questions respecting the mode of the Divine subsistence; the ranks, orders, and employments of angelic beings; and the obscure doctrines relating to the Divine government and plans. These questions comprised most of the subjects of inquiry in the Oriental and Grecian philosophy, and inquiries on these the apostle apprehended would tend to draw away the mind from the "simplicity that is in Christ." Of these subjects, what can be known more than is revealed?

Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind. Notwithstanding the avowed "humility," the modesty, the angelic reverence, yet the mind was full of vain conceit, and self-confident, carnal wisdom. The two things are by no means incompatible --the men apparently most meek and modest being sometimes the most bold in their speculations, and the most reckless in regard to the great landmarks of truth. It is not so with true modesty, and real "angelic veneration," but all this is sometimes assumed for the purpose of deceiving; and sometimes there is a native appearance of modesty which is by no means an index of the true feelings of the soul. The most meek and modest men in appearance are sometimes the most proud and reckless in their investigations of the doctrines of religion.

(c) "shadow of things" Heb 8:5

And not holding the Head. Not holding the true doctrine respecting the Great Head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ. Eph 1:22. This is regarded here as essential to the maintenance of all the other doctrines of religion. He who has just views of the Redeemer will not be in much danger of erring respecting the other points of religious belief.

From which all the body, etc. This passage is almost word for word the same as in Eph 4:15,16. Eph 4:15; Eph 4:16.

(a) "from which" Eph 4:15,16

Wherefore. In view of all that has been said. If it be true that you are really dead to the world, why do you act as if you still lived under the principles of the world?

If ye be dead with Christ. If you are dead to the world in virtue of his death. The apostle here, as elsewhere, speaks of a very close union with Christ. We died with him; that is, such was the efficacy of his death, and such is our union with him, that we became dead also to the world. Rom 6:2; Rom 6:4; Rom 6:8; Rom 6:11.

From the rudiments of the world. Marg., elements. The elements or principles which axe of a worldly nature, and which reign among worldly men. Gall 4:3.

Why, as though living in the world? Why do you allow them to influence you, as though you were living and acting under those worldly principles? They ought no more to do it than the things of this world influence those who are in their graves.

Are ye subject to ordinances. The rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion. Gall 5:1-4.

(1) "rudiments" "elements"

Touch not; taste not; handle not. These words seem intended as a specimen of the kind of ordinances which the apostle refers to, or an imitation of the language of the Jewish teachers in regard to various kinds of food and drink. "Why are ye subject to ordinances of various kinds, such as this--Touch not, taste not, handle not?" That is, such as prohibit you from even touching certain kinds of food, or tasting certain kinds of drink, or handling certain prohibited things. The rapid succession of the words here, without any connecting particle, is supposed to denote the eagerness of the persons who imposed this injunction, and their earnestness in warning others from contaminating themselves with the prohibited things. Many injunctions of this kind are found in the writings of the Jewish Rabbins; and the ancient Jewish sect of the Essenes Mt 3:7 abounded in precepts of this kind. See Schoetgen, and Pict. Bib., in loc. "They allowed themselves no food that was pleasant to the taste, but ate dry, coarse bread, and drank only water. Many of them ate nothing until sunset, and, if any one touched them who did not belong to their sect, they washed themselves as if they had been most deeply defiled. Perhaps there was at Colosse a society of this kind, as there were in many other places out of Judea; and, if there was, it is not improbable that many Christians imitated them in the peculiarity of their rules and observances." Comp. Jenning's Jew. Ant. i. 471, and Ros. Alt. u. neu. Morgenland, in loc. If this be the correct interpretation, then these are not the words of the apostle, forbidding Christians to have anything to do with these ordinances, but are introduced as a specimen of the manner in which they who enjoined the observance of those ordinances pressed the subject on others. There were certain things which they prohibited, in conformity with what they understood to be the law of Moses; and they were constantly saying, in regard to them, "do not touch them, taste them, handle them." These words are often used as a kind of motto in reference to the use of intoxicating drinks. They express very well what is held by the friends of total abstinence; but it is obvious that they had no such reference as used by the apostle, nor should they be alleged as an authority, or as an argument, in the question about the propriety or impropriety of the use of spirituous liquors. They may as well be employed in reference to anything else as that, and would have no authority in either case. Intoxicating drinks should be abstained from; but the obligation to do it should be made to rest on solid arguments, and not on passages of Scripture like this. This passage could with more plausibility be pressed into the service of the enemies of the total abstinence societies, than into their support; but it really has nothing to do with the subject, one way or the other.

Which all are to perish with the using. This is commonly marked as a part of the parenthesis, or the quotation; and there is considerable difficulty in ascertaining its true meaning. It seems most probable that these are the words of the apostle himself, thrown in the rapidity of composition, and that they are not to be connected with the phrase "touch not," etc. If so, the idea is, that it cannot be of so much consequence as the Jewish teachers supposed, to mark distinctly the difference between meats and drinks. They were all to perish with the use of them. Nothing was permanent about them. It could really then be of no great importance what was eaten, or what was drunk, provided it was not in itself injurious. These ordinances had a value among tile Hebrews when it was designed to keep them as a distinct people; but they had no value in themselves, so as to make them binding on all mankind. To suppose this was the common error of the Jews; and hence the apostle so frequently laboured to show that the Jewish rites had no permanent value. Rom 14:1, also Rom 14:2-6; 1Cor 8:1 and following. Mt 15:17, Mt 15:18. According to this interpretation, the 21st verse should be regarded as expressing the common maxim of the Jewish teachers, and the clause before us as the words of the apostle, and should be marked as a parenthesis. So it is marked in Hahn's Ed. of the New Testament.

After the commandments and doctrines of men. Many of the ordinances on which the Jews insisted were those which were handed down by tradition. They depended on human authority only, and, of course, should not bind the conscience. Others take the words here to mean, "All which things tend to the corruption of religion, (Doddridge,) or are cause of destruction or condemnation, (Rob. Lex,) by the use of these things, according to the commandments and doctrines of these men.

Which things. Which scrupulous observance of the numerous precepts enjoining rites and ceremonies, the observance of days, and the distinctions between meats and drinks.

Have indeed a show of wisdom. Have a great appearance of piety, and of regard for the will of God. They have a show of "wisdom," too, or of a deep acquaintance with divine things. They who insist on them appear to be learned in what constitutes religion, and to have a deep insight into its mysteries. Doubtless they who urged the obligation of these things laid claim to uncommon acquaintance with the nature of religion, and urged the observance of these things on the ground of their tendency to promote piety, just as they always do who insist much on the observance of religious rites and ceremonies.

In will worship. Voluntary worship; that is, worship beyond what God strictly requires--supererogatory service. Probably many of these things they did not urge as being strictly required, but as conducing greatly to piety. The plea doubtless was, that piety might be promoted by service rendered beyond what was absolutely enjoined, and that thus there would be evinced a spirit of uncommon piety--a readiness not only to obey all that God required, but even to go beyond this, and to render him voluntary service. There is much plausibility in this; and this has been the foundation of the appointment of the fasts and festivals of the church; of penances and self-inflicted tortures; of painful vigils and pilgrimages; of works of supererogation; and of the merits of the "saints." A large part of the corruptions of religion have arisen from this plausible, but deceitful argument. God knew best what things it was most conducive to piety for his people to observe; and we are most safe when we adhere most closely to what he has appointed, and observe no more days and ordinances than he has directed. There is much apparent piety about these things; but there is much wickedness of heart at the bottom, and there is nothing that more tends to corrupt pure religion.

And humility. Col 2:18. There is a great show of reverence for divine things in the manner in which they pursue their investigations, and in their humble and meek compliance with painful rites and ceremonies; in fastings, abstinence, and penances. Under all this there lurks often the worst kind of pride; for "Pride may be pampered while the flesh grows lean."

And neglecting of the body. Putting on sackcloth and ashes; subjecting it to painful fastings and penances; appearing in a form of squalid poverty, as if the body were not worth regarding, and as if the attention were so much engrossed by the nobler care of the soul, as to be entirely regardless of the body. Yet, we may observe,

(1.) God made the body as well as the soul, and has shown his care of it by its "being fearfully and wonderfully made," and by all the provision which he has made for its wants.

(2.) Religion pertains to the body as well as the soul, and should teach a man properly to regard it. Man is bound so to take care of the body, as to have the most health and the longest life possible in the service of his Creator, and so as to be able to employ it in the best manner. There is no religion in ragged or squalid clothing, in a dirty face, in offensive personal habits, in filth and defilement, and in setting at defiance the decencies of life.

(3.) Much affected sanctity may exist where there is a most proud and corrupt heart. A long face, a demure countenance, a studied disregard of the decencies of dress and the courtesies of life, as if they were unworthy of notice, may be the exponent of the most hateful pride, and of the basest purposes of the soul. A man should be on his guard always against one who, under, pretence of extraordinary sanctity, professes to despise the ordinary dress and usages of society.

Not in any honour. That is, there is no real honour in these things; there is nothing to ennoble and elevate the soul; nothing that is to be commended.

To the satisfying of the flesh. The only effect is, to satisfy or please the flesh; that is, the carnal and corrupt nature, for so the word flesh is often used in the Scriptures. The effect of these observances, on which so much stress is laid as if they would promote piety, is merely to gratify pride, self-righteousness, the love of distinction, and the other carnal propensities of our nature. There seems to be a great deal of humility and piety in them; there is really little else than pride, selfishness, and ambition.

(1) "neglecting" "punishing" or "not sparing"

REMARKS.

(1.) We should feel a deep interest for the welfare of other Christians, even those whom we have never seen, Col 2:1,2. All belong to the same family, have the same enemies to contend with, are engaged in the same warfare, are travelling to the same heaven. By our prayers and sympathy, we may often do much good to those whom we shall never see till we meet them in heaven.

(2.) We should be on our guard against the seductive arts of false teachers. They are often plausible; they can urge arguments which we may not be able to answer; they may have much more learning than we have; and they may put on the appearance of great humility and of real piety, Col 2:3,4.

(3.) It is, in general, a safe rule for a Christian to abide by the views which he had on the great subjects of religion when he became converted, Col 2:6. Then the heart was tender and soft--like wax--and received the impression which the Spirit made on it. There are some things in which the heart judges better than the head; and in which we are quite as likely to go right if we follow the former as we are the latter. In relation to the performance of many of the duties of life--the duties of kindness and charity--the heart is often a more safe guide than the head; and so in many things pertaining more immediately to religion, a man is more likely to judge right if he follows the promptings of his feelings in the happiest moments of piety, than he is to wait for the more cool and cautious course of argument. The same thing may be true even of many of the doctrines of religion. When a poor sinner trembles on the verge of hell, he feels that none but an Almighty Saviour can deliver him, and he goes and commits himself to Jesus as God--and he is not in much danger of erring in that. He will be more likely to be drawn aside from the truth by the artful reasonings of the advocates of error, than he will by his feelings at that moment.

(4.) Our views of the "mystery of God"---of the Divine nature, and especially of the rank and character of Christ--will determine all our views of theology, Col 2:2. This has been so in all ages; and, however it may be accounted for, the fact is undoubted, that if at any time we can ascertain what are the prevalent views of Christ, we can easily see what is the prevailing character of the theology of that age. The influence of this will be felt on the views which are held of the native character of man; of regeneration, the Divine purposes, the nature of holiness, and the retributions beyond the grave. Hence, the reason why the apostle Paul insisted so much on this, and urged so earnestly the importance of adhering to just views of the Saviour.

(5.) Christ has laid us under the highest obligations to love and serve him, Col 2:11-15. He has enabled us to put off our sins; he has raised us from spiritual death to spiritual life; he has removed the old ordinances that were against us, and has made religion easy and pleasant; he has subdued our enemies, and triumphed over them. He achieved a glorious victory over "principalities and powers," and has led our great enemy captive. He met the enemy of man when on earth, and overcame his power of temptation; expelled him from the bodies of men; laid the foundation for a permanent victory over him on the cross, and triumphed over him when he rose and ascended to heaven. Satan is now an humbled foe. His power is broken and limited, and the Lord Jesus will yet completely triumph over him. He will return from heaven; raise all the dead; and reascend, in the face of the universe, to his native skies, with all his ransomed hosts--the "spoils" of victory. We should not, then, fear what Satan can do to us; nor should we fear that the great enemy of the church will ever be triumphant. Stand up, my soul, shake off thy fears, And gird the gospel armour on; March to the gates of endless joy, Where thy great Captain Saviour's gone.

Hell and thy sills resist thy course; But hell and sin are vanquish'd foes; Thy Jesus nailed them to the cross, And sung the triumph when he rose.

Then let my soul march boldly on; Press forward to the heavenly gate; There peace and joy eternal reign, And glittering robes for conquerors wait.

There shall I wear a starry crown, And triumph in Almighty grace; While all the armies of the skies Join in my glorious Leader's praise. (6.) No individual has a right to appoint ceremonies and ordinances in the church to be binding on the consciences of others; nor is this authority entrusted to any body of men, Col 2:16. What God has enjoined is to be obeyed. What man enjoins beyond that, is of no binding force on the conscience; and it is the solemn and sacred duty of all Christians to resist all such attempts to make ceremonial observances binding on the conscience. Christ has appointed a few ordinances of religion, and they are enough. They are simple, easily observed, and all adapted to promote piety. He appointed baptism and the Lord's Supper; but he appointed no stated festivals or fasts; no days in commemoration of the saints, or of his own birth or death; he enjoined no rites of religion but those which are most simple, and which are easily observed. He well knew how those observances would be abused to the purposes of superstition, and obscure the great doctrine of justification by faith. He knew how ready men would be to rely on them rather than on the merits of the great Sacrifice, and hence he appointed no ordinance where that danger could exist.

(7.) Pride is often united with apparent humility, Col 2:18. It is easy to assume the appearance of humility in the outer deportment, but no such assumed appearance reaches the heart. That remains the same, whatever external appearance is assumed, until it is renewed by the grace of God.

(8.) A meek, modest, and candid demeanour is consistent with great boldness and daring in speculation, Col 2:18. The most daring speculators in religion--they who make the most reckless attacks on the truth--are often, to appearance, eminently candid, and even put on the aspect of angelic devotion. Yet they are bold "where angels fear to tread;" and they declaim with confidence on subjects which must be for ever beyond the grasp of the human mind.

(9.) We should not infer, because a man is modest and humble, and because he appears to be endued with uncommon meekness and piety, that therefore he is a good man, or a safe guide, Col 2:18. The teachers in Colosse, against whom Paul warned the Christians there, appear to have been men just of this stamp; and this is commonly assumed by those who would lead their fellow-men into error. "Satan is often transformed into an angel of light."

(10.) We should not attempt to penetrate into those things which lie beyond the grasp of the human mind, Col 2:18. We should not "intrude into those things which are unseen." There is an outer limit to our investigations on all subjects, and we soon reach it. In life we are to act chiefly on facts; not on the reason why those facts exist. When we have ascertained or established a fact, our feet stand on a solid rock; and there we shall stand securely. We act safely and wisely if we act in view of that fact; we do not act safely or wisely if we disregard that, and act on theory or imagination.

(11.) Many real Christians are in danger of being "beguiled of the reward" which they might obtain, Col 2:18. They are allured by the world; they are drawn into error by the arts of philosophy; they obscure the lustre of their piety by conformity to the world, and thus they lose the high recompense which they might have obtained in heaven. For the rewards of heaven will be strictly in proportion to the measure of our religion here--the zeal, and faith, and love which we evince in the cause of our Master.

(12.) Many persons are in danger of losing the "reward" altogether --for the "reward" of a life of piety is set before all, Col 2:18. Heaven is offered freely to all, and there is no one who might not obtain it. But, alas! how many there are who are drawn aside by the allurements of error and of sin; who are led to defer to a future time the great subject of preparation for death; who spend their lives in disregard of the commands of God and the invitations of mercy, until it is too late to seek salvation, and they sink down to final ruin. Every impenitent sinner is in imminent danger of losing his soul. The great deceiver is endeavouring to blind him, and decoy him down to death, and a thousand snares on every side are spread for his feet, into which he is in constant danger of falling. In a world of allurements, where the work of death from the beginning has been carried on chiefly by deception, with what solicitude should man guard himself lest he be "beguiled of heaven," and sink to a world where heaven will be offered no more!

Observe here, 1. The holy agony which our apostle was in, and the mighty conflict he had with himself, upon the account of the Colossians; I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you; namely, by prayer, care, study, and endeavour to do you good:

Here we see how passionately good men long for the good of those whom they never saw; as members of the catholic church, they wish well to the whole, and to every part.

Observe, 2. What was the ground and occasion of St. Paul's inexpressible agony and concern of spirit, for and on behalf of these Colossians; namely this, there was a number of men risen up who began very early to corrupt the purity and simplicity of the gospel and the Christian religion: a sort they were, partly of Judaizing, and partly Paganizing Christians; the former joined the Jewish ceremonies, the latter the Gentiles impurities, even in worship with the Christian religion.

Now the urgency of this case put the solicitous and concerned spirit of this great apostle into an inexpressible agony, as his words here intimate; I would ye knew what a conflict I have for you and your near neighbours of Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh.

The men of the world little understand, and less consider, what burden of solicitous care lies upon the ministers of Christ, for and on behalf of the whole church of Christ in general, which is continually in danger of being corrupted by false teachers, who everywhere lie in wait to deceive.

Our apostle having discovered, in the former verse, that inward anxiety of mind which he laboured under, on the behalf of these Colossians, doth, in these words, propose an expedient how the threatening danger might be averted, namely, by mutual love one to another, and by a clear and effacious faith of the gospel; by these he reckons they would be so closely compacted together, as that no subtlety or violence could endanger them: If, by faith, they did cleave close to God and Christ, and by love keep close to one another, he firmly believed they would give no enemies an opportunity, either to be the successful authors, or the delighted spectators of their ruin.

Learn hence, That the maintaining of sincere love amongst Christians, and the improving of their faith to greater measure of certainty and efficacy, in reference to the substantials of Christianity, are the best means to unite, establish, and preserve them against the fatal danger of a ruinous apostasy: That their hearts may be comforted, being knit together in love, &c.

That is, in Jesus Christ, and in his gospel, are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, laid up as in a store-house, and from thence are they only to be expected and derived. The knowledge of Christ and his gospel is an extensive and comprehensive knowledge, a rich and enriching knowledge; the chiefest gain is loss, and the richest treasure is dung, when Christ's riches are displayed; and after all that we have or can attain unto, of the knowledge of Christ, his works is unsearchable, no finite understanding can reach the depth thereof; for in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Note here, How exceedingly desirous the apostle was, that the Colossians might continue sound in the Christian faith, and be preserved out of the hands of false teachers, who by false arguments, and ensnaring persuasions sought to beguile them, in matters of religion: We are in greater danger from the subtle seducer, than we are from the fiery persecutor; sophistical arguments, and insinuating persuasions, captivate those persons whom violence could never have brought over to their party; therefore is our apostle so earnest with the Colossians, that none should beguile them with inticing words.

Note farther, How our apostle gives another reason for this his solicitous care for them, namely, his fervent affection towards them, notwithstanding his great distance from them, for though not in body, yet in mind he was present with them, and having received from Epaphras an account of the good order and government of their church, and of the stedfastness fo their faith in Christ, the notices thereof were matter of exceeding joy and rejoicing to him: Though absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the Spirit, joying &c.

Learn hence, That a church's steadfastness in the faith of Christ, and unity amongst themselves in gospel-order, doth render a church a joyful object to all beholders, and particularly to the ministers and ambassadors of Christ, who greatly rejoice therein.

This is, "As you have received the doctrine of Christ Jesus, the Lord, by the preaching of Epaphras, and therein have embraced Christ by faith, so do you constantly adhere to that doctrine, conforming you lives thereunto; and seeing you are thus implanted into Christ, be like trees, well and deeply rooted in him, or like a house, firmly built upon him, as the only sure and abiding foundation."

Learn, That such as have received the grace of God in truth, ought, to labour after stability in grace and establishment in the true religion, that they may stand like a rock, immoveable in assaults, and unshaken amidst all the batteries that may be made upon their faith by heretics and seducers.

Our apostle comes now in a particular and special manner to warn the Colossians, that they beware of all the enemies of Christianity, whether Pagan or Jewish, for Christianity was opposed by both: The heathen philosophers and wise men did amuse the Christians with their vain speculations: The Jewish teachers were for imposing upon them the Levitical rites, which he calls rudiments or elements fitted for the infancy of the church: but these things were not now after Christ, that is, not according to the doctrine and mind of Christ. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, &c.

Where note, That it is not philosophy, as such, which St. Paul warns them against; for true and sound philosophy is the improver of our reason, the guide of our faculties, and teaches us the true knowledge of God, and ourselves, and is no hindrance, but a great help to religion; but it was the philosophy of the Greeks at that day which is here condemned, because it was vain and empty, fallacious and deceitful. It was vain because it conduced nothing to true piety, and making them better; it was deceitful, because it hazarded their souls, and robbed them of happiness.

Note farther, That the Mosaic rites and legal ceremonies, as they were prescribed by God, and adapted to the infant state of the Jewish church, had a goodness ye, an excellency in them; but the observation of them, since the coming of Christ, is sinful, as being an implicit denial, that he is come in the flesh; accordingly, he warns, them to beware of the philosophy of the Greeks and the ceremonial rites of the Jews; neither of which, he tells them, were after Christ, that is, not according to the institution of injunction of Christ, but did draw away the heart from him, therefore, they were both unwarrantable and unsafe.

Here St. Paul gives a reason of the foregoing caution against philosophy; for in him, that is, in Christ, dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; As if he had said, "Let no man impose upon you by a lame and imperfect philosophy, there is no need of that, for now there is introduced an absolute and complete doctrine, namely, that of our Lord Jesus Christ, which has the fulness of all divine wisdom in it, and the fulness of the Godhead dwelling bodily in himself, that is personally and substantially."

Where note, That the apostle says not, that the Godhead is assistant to Christ, but, that it resideth or dwelleth in him; as the Deity dwelt in the the ark symbolically, so it dwelt in Christ bodily.

Note farther, That Christ is not here said to be filled with the fulness of God, as the church is said to be, Eph 1:23 in regard of the gifts and graces which she had received from him; but the whole fulness of the Godhead is here said to reside in him, which can argue him to be no less than really and truly God, his complete essence dwelleth in him. Well might the apostle therefore add, Ye are complete in him Col 2:10, wanting no requisite to salvation; ye need not go to the philosophers for knowledge, for in Christ you have complete wisdom; he is above all Pagan philosophers and Jewish Rabbies; nay, he is the Head of all principalities and powers; that is, above the highest angel in heaven.

Here observe, That it was the opinion of the Paganish, as it is now of the Popish part of mankind, that Almighty God was too high to be immediately approached, and therefore they applied themselves to angels as mediators betwixt God and them; but the apostle acquaints them, that the angel-mediatorship is vain, since Christ is also their Head and Lord.

The apostle had asserted before, that we are complete in Christ: He proves it now, thus; we want not circumcision: Why? Because we have in Christ the thing signified by circumcision, namely, the spiritual circumcision of the heart, which consists in putting off, by the power of Christ's Spirit, the body of natural corruption; which done, there was no need of the outward circumcision made with hands, or the cutting off the flesh of the fore-skin.

Observe, Original corruption is a body, or, as a body to us, it cleaves as close to the soul as the flesh to the bones. This body, with all its members, we must be cutting daily by spiritual circumcision or real mortification; and, where that is done, God is well pleased: He regards not that cirumcision which is outward in the flesh, which is made with hands, but that which is inward, the circumcision of the heart, and of the Spirit, whose praise is not of man, but of God.

Our apostle here compares Christian baptism with the Jewish circumcision, and shews, that the signification and spiritual intention of both was one and the same, obliging all persons who took the outward sign upon them to put off the old man and put on the new; to die unto sin, and live unto God. Accordingly, the ancients made use of divers ceremonies in baptizing adult and grown persons, thereby to represent the death, burial, and resurrection fo Jesus Christ; immersion, or putting the person three times under water, either as our Saviour was under the earth three days, or in allusion to the three persons in the Trinity, in whose name we are baptized; and likewise emersion, their coming up out of the water, resembling our Lord's arising out of his grave.

Note here, 1. That baptism under the New Testament, succeeds circumcision under the Old, and as a right of imitation to Christians as circumcision was to the Jews: For the apostle here proves, that by virtue of our spiritual circumcision in baptism, we have no need of the outward circumcision in the flesh.

Note, 2. That baptism is undoubtedly Christ's ordinance for infants of believing Christians, as circumcision was of old for the infants of believing Jews: For if under the gospel, infants be not received, by some federal rite, into covenant with God, they are in a worse condition than children under the law; and the apostle could not truly have said, we are complete in Christ, that is, as complete without circumcision, as ever the Jewish church was with it, if we had not an ordinance, to wit, baptism, as good as their abrogated ordinance of circumcision. And the Jews would certainly have objected it to the reproach of Christianity had not the Christians had a rite of which sealed the covenant to themsleves, and their little ones, and was the door, by which all persons entered into the Jewish church.

Note, 3. The spiritual fruits and effects of baptism, namely, mortification of sin, and vivification in grace, by virtue of the death and resurrection of Christ, apprehended by such a faith as is of the operation of God, that is, produced by the energy of the gospel, and the efficacy of the Holy Spirit.

Learn hence, That neither sacraments, nor the death or the resurrection of Christ, in themselves, will avail to the mortification of sin, and the quickening of grace, if Christ himself be not applied to by such a faith, as is of the special operation of God, the faith of his working, and of his approving: This alone will effectually enable us to die unto sin and live unto God.

Still our apostle proceeds in proving, that we are complete in Christ, and that the Colossians had no need of circumcision in the flesh, having all in Christ that was necessary for justification as well as sanctification.

To satisfy them herein, observe, 1. He acquaints them with their deplorable condition by nature, you being dead in your sins, without any hope of spiritual life, and by reason of uncircumcision of your flesh, aliens from the church of God (and strangers to all the promises made unto it) hath he quickened and pardoned, having freely forgiven you all your trespasses.

O blessed privilege of justification, to have sin forgiven, trespasses universally forgiven, all trespasses freely forgiven!

Observe, 2. What it cost Christ to purchase pardon for us, to discharge us from our obligation to wrath, and our obnoxiousness to the curse and condemnation of the law; no less then his precious life laid down upon the cross, blotting out the handwriting of ordinances against us, and contrary to us, &c. An allusion to a practice amongst men, who cancel bills and bonds, and all obligations, wherein they stood bound, when once the debt is satisfied.

Now, says the apostle, your debt of sin is paid to the justice of God, by the death of Christ; and seeing the obligation is cancelled, it would be madness and impiety to renew it again, as those do who plead for circumcision and practise the legal ceremonies.

Note here, There was an obligation upon every man to undergo the curse of the law; for violating the commands of the law, there was an handwriting against us. The obligation must be cancelled, before the condemning power of the law can be abolished, and sin pardoned: None but Christ could cancel this obligation? and not he neither, without paying the full sum payable from us; Christ when hanging on the cross, did nail this handwriting to his cross, which shall never be produced in judgment against the penitent believer; but this obligation remains upon the file uncancelled, with respect to all sinners who live and die in their sins, and they shall always lie in prison, ever satisfying, but never able fully to satisfy this obligation.

Observe, 3. That Christ hath not only by his death cancelled this handwriting, and nailed it to his cross, but has vanquished and triumphed over all our spiritual enemies; Satan, and all the powers of hell are led as so many pinioned captives before the triumphant chariot of his cross, making them a spectacle of scorn and shame in the eyes of God, angels and men; having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them, openly, &c.

Note here, 1. Christ's bloody cross was a chariot of triumph unto him. Lord! whilst thou were bleeding and racking upon the gibbet for us, thou wert then rejoicing and triumphing for the benefits redounding to us.

Note, 2. That Satan, that great conqueror, was conquered by Christ, and led in triumph before the chariot of the cross. O Satan, thou wert never thus baffled, befooled, and disappointed before! When thou and thy agents were spoiling Christ, even then was he spoiling principalities and powers, and triumphing over them, when they were insulting over him: The serpent now bruised our Lord's heel, but had his own head and power forever broken; triumphing over them in it, that is, in and by his cross.

Here we have an inference or conclusion drawn by our apostle from the foregoing argument, that seeing the ceremonial law was now abolished, therefore none should take upon them to judge or condemn another for not observing any of the legal ceremonies, either those that related to meats, that is, the difference to be observed in meats, or the other relating to the difference to be observed in days.

Here note, That the days observed amongst the Jews, were of three sorts: Anniversary, which returned every year, called here an holy day; Lunary which returned every month, the first day of every new moon; Weekly, which returned every week, and on the seventh day of every week: All which are abrogated, even the Jewish seventh-day sabbath; and the Lord's day, or the Christian's first-day sabbath, substituted in its place, 1Cor 16:2.

Observe here, 1. That there is both a sinful and a lawful abstinence from meats; that abstinence is sinful, when men abstain from some meats, under pretence of holiness and conscience, as if some meats were unclean, or less holy in their own natures than others, 1Tim 4:4 or as if simple abstinence at any time were a thing acceptable to God in itself, without respect had to the end for which it is sometimes required.

But there is a three-fold abstinence from meats, which is lawful; Political, enjoined by the magistrate for civil ends; Medicinal, prescribed by the physician for health's preservation; Ecclesiastical, when God by his providence, and the voice of his church, calls his people to fasting.

Observe, 2. The reason alledged by the apostle, why Christians should not judge one another, with respect to meats and drinks, times and seasons, namely, because those legal ceremonies were but dark shadows of things to come; but the body and substance, represented by those shadows, is Christ come in the flesh: And consequently, to observe the ceremonies, and regard these shadows under the gospel, is in effect to say, That Christ the body is not yet come.

Here note, 1. The title given to the ceremonial worship, it is styled a shadow, because it was a dark and imperfect representation of the truth: What is a shadow, but the coming of a thick body posed between Christ the true light and us, and so casts a shadow of him.

Note, 2. The title given to Christ with respect to the shadows of the ceremonial law, he is the body and the substance of them; now as the shadow vanishes when the substance is come, so these ceremonial ordinances were to cease upon the coming of Christ; and to observe them now, under the gospel, is in effect to say, that Christ is not yet come in the flesh.

Note, 3. That the Jewish sabbath was a ceremonial ordinance, and a part of that handwriting of ordinances which was to be blotted out by Christ; and consequently the Christian is not obliged to observe it.

As the distinction of meats and drinks and the observation of the new moons were confessedly ceremonial; so was also the Jewish sabbath, which with the rest was equally cancelled by Christ as a part of the handwriting of ordinances; so that to observe the Jewish sabbath, or to condemn the Christian for not observing it, is as much a denial, that Christ is come in the flesh as to observe circumcision, or any other part of the ceremonial law.

Our apostle having warned the Colossians against the errors of the Judaizing teachers, comes next to warn them against the practice of the Paganizing Christians, who were directd by their guides to worship the angels, covering their error with a plausible shew of humility, pretending it was presumptuous to go to God immediately, without the mediation of those excellent creatures; but this the apostle tells them was a bold intruding into things they knew nothing of, God having neither revealed nor taught any such thing; and argued, that they were vainly puffed up with the foolish imaginations of their own fleshly minds.

Next he shews, that these angel-worshippers do not acknowledge Christ for the Head of the church, while they apply themselves to angels as mediators; whereas he alone discharges the office of the Head, completely giving life and growth to his whole church, and to every member therof; which members being furnished with spiritual life from him, and knit to him, and one another by the joints and bands of charity and other graces, they grow and increase with such an increase of holiness as is from God, and tends to his glory.

Note here, 1. That the nature of man is prone, extremely prone, to idolatry and false worship.

2. That it is a really idolatry to worship an angel, as it is to worship a worm; for divine worship is only due to a divine person.

Note, 3. That it is a renouncing of Christ, to make use of angels, or any other mediator, besides Christ, unto the Father: not holding the head. It was a notion that the minds of mankind, that God was not to be immediately approached to by sinful men; but that their prayers were to be presented by certain mediators and intercessors, who were to procure for them the favour of God, and the acceptance of their prayers.

Hence they worshipped angels, and the souls departed of their heroes, whom they canonized, and translated into the number of their inferior gods, by whom they addressed their supplications to their superior gods. With this notion Almighty God was pleased to comply so far, as under the Jewish institution to appoint Moses a mediator betwixt him and them; and now under the Christian dispensation to appoint Jesus Christ to be the only Mediator betwixt God and man.

Note, 4. That it is usual for idolaters, and false worshippers, to cover themselves sith a more than ordinary show of humility: Let none beguile you in a voluntary humility.

True it is, that all duties of worship ought to be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed to constrained; but they must not be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed ot instituted or appointed; God doth no more approve of that worship we give him according to our will, than he doth approve of our neglect of that which is according to his own will. But man, vain man, likes any way of worshipping God which is of his own framing, much better than that which is of God's own appointing.

Our apostle being now in the close of this chapter, returns to expostulate, and argues the case with those who were willing to subject themselves to the observation of the old Jewish rites and ceremonies. He argues thus: "If says he, you profess yourselves in your baptism to be spiritually dead with Christ, and to be freed by his death from the Levitical ordinances, why are ye subject to those ordinances? Such are touch not, taste not, handle not; touch not any unclean thing, taste not any forbidden meat, handle not any consecrated vessel; all which observances were to perish necessarily with the very using: And whereas they were set of with a specious shew of wisdom, as if they were voluntary services and free-will offerings to God, he acknowledges, that they had indeed a shew of wisdom, a shew of humility, and seeming to give any honour to the satisfying of the flesh; but all this had nothing of spiritual devotion and piety in it."

Learn hence, 1. That such as do by baptism profess themselves to be dead with Christ to the ceremonial law, may certainly conclude, that the Jewish ceremonies have no more any power over them, or that they ought to yield themselves to the observation of them: If ye be dead with Christ, why are ye subject to ordinances?

Learn, 2. That though God approveth and accepteth willing worship, yet not will-worship, what fair shew soever it may seem to have, either of wisdom, humility, or mortification; whatever is the product of our fancies, is a very fornication in religion, and an abomination in the sight of God, how pleasing soever it may be in the sight of men; and yet men are most forward to that service of God which is of man's finding out and setting up; man likes it better to worship a god of his own making, than to worship the God that made him; and likes any way of worshipping god which is of his own framing, more than that which is of God's appointing. Ah! Wretched heart of man, which, whilst it seems very zealous to worship and honour God, hath not zeal to do it in any other way than in that which reflects the highest dishonour upon him.

II. ^1 Θέλω γὰρ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι, ἡλίκον ἀγῶνα ἔχω ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ τῶν ἐν Λαοδικίᾳ καὶ ὅσοι οὐχ ἑώρακαν τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί, ^2 ἵνα παρακληθῶσιν αἱ καρδίαι II. 1–3. ‘I spoke of an _arena_ and a _conflict_ in describing my apostolic labours. The image was not lightly chosen. I would have you know that my care is not confined to my own direct and personal disciples. I wish you to understand the magnitude of the struggle, which my anxiety for you costs me—for you and for your neighbours of Laodicea and for all who, like yourselves, have never met me face to face in the flesh. I am constantly wrestling in spirit, that the hearts of all such may be confirmed and strengthened in the faith; that they may be united in love; that they may attain to all the unspeakable wealth which comes from the firm conviction of an understanding mind, may be brought to the perfect knowledge of God’s mystery, which is nothing else than Christ—Christ containing in Himself all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden away.’ 1. Θέλω κ.τ.λ.] as in 1 Cor. xi. 3. The corresponding negative form, οὐ θέλω [θέλομεν] ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, is the more common expression in St Paul; Rom. i. 13, xi. 25, 1 Cor. x. 1, xii. 1, 2 Cor. i. 8, 1 Thess. iv. 13. ἀγῶνα] The arena of the contest to which ἀγωνιζόμενος in the preceding verse refers may be either outward or inward. It will include the ‘fightings without,’ as well as the ‘fears within.’ Here however the inward struggle, the wrestling in prayer, is the predominant idea, as in iv. 12 πάντοτε ἀγωνιζόμενος ὑπὲρ ὑμων ἐν ταῖς προσευχαῖς ἵνα σταθῆτε κ.τ.λ. τῶν ἐν Λαοδικίᾳ] The Laodiceans were exposed to the same doctrinal perils as the Colossians: see above pp. 2, 41 sq. The Hierapolitans are doubtless included in καὶ ὅσοι κ.τ.λ. (comp. iv. 13), but are not mentioned here by name, probably because they were less closely connected with Colossæ (see iv. 15 sq.), and perhaps also because the danger was less threatening there. καὶ ὅσοι κ.τ.λ.] ‘_and all who_, like yourselves, _have not seen_, etc.’; where the καὶ ὅσοι introduces the whole class to which the persons previously enumerated belong; so Acts iv. 6 Ἄννας ὁ ἀρχιερὲυς καὶ Καΐαφας καὶ Ἴωαννης καὶ Ἀλέξανδρος _καὶ ὅσοι_ ἦσαν ἐκ γένους ἀρχιερατικοῦ, Rev. xviii. 17 καὶ πᾶς κυβερνήτης καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἐπὶ τόπον πλέων καὶ ναῦται _καὶ ὅσοι_ τὴν θάλασσαν ἐργάζονται. Even a simple καὶ will sometimes introduce the general after the particular, e.g. Acts v. 29 ὁ Πέτρος καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι, Ar. _Nub._ 413 ἐν Ἀθηναίοις καὶ τοῖς Ἕλλησι, etc.; see Kühner _Gramm._ § 521, II. p. 791. On the other hand καὶ ὅσοι, occurring in an enumeration, sometimes introduces a different class from those previously mentioned, as e.g. in Herod, vii. 185. As a pure grammatical question therefore it is uncertain whether St Paul’s language here implies his personal acquaintance with his correspondents or the contrary. But in all such cases the sense of the context must be our guide. In the present instance καὶ ὅσοι is quite out of place, unless the Colossians and Laodiceans also were personally unknown to the Apostle. There would be no meaning in singling out _individuals_ who were known to him, and then mentioning comprehensively _all_ who were unknown to him: see above p. 28, note 84. Hence we may infer from the expression here, that St Paul had never visited Colossæ–an inference which has been already shown (p. 23 sq.) to accord both with the incidental language of this epistle elsewhere and with the direct historical narrative of the Acts. ἑώρακαν] For this ending of the 3rd pers. plur. perfect in -αν see Winer § xiii. p. 90. The received text reads ἑωράκασι. In this passage the ω form has the higher support; but below in ver. 18 the preponderance of authority favours ἑόρακεν rather than ἑώρακεν. On the use of the form in ο see Buttmann _Ausf. Griech. Sprachl._ § 84, I. p. 325. 2. παρακληθῶσιν] ‘_encouraged_, _confirmed_,’ i.e. ‘comforted’ in the older and wider meaning of the word, (‘confortati’), but not with its modern and restricted sense: see παράκλησις Phil. ii. 1. For παρακαλεῖν τὰς καρδίας comp. iv. 8, Ephes. vi. 22, 2 Thess. ii. 17.

αὐτῶν, συμβιβασθέντες ἐν ἀγάπῃ καὶ εἰς πᾶν πλοῦτος τῆς πληροφορίας τῆς συνέσεως, εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ μυστηρίον τοῦ Θεοῦ, Χριστοῦ ^3ἐν ᾧ εἰσὶν πάντες οἱ θησαυροὶ αἱ καρδίαι] They met the Apostle heart to heart, though not face to face. We have here the same opposition of καρδία and πρόσωπον as in 1 Thess. ii. 17, though less directly expressed; see ver. 5. αὐτῶν] where we should expect ὑμῶν, but the substitution of the third person for the second is suggested by the immediately preceding καὶ ὅσοι. This substitution confirms the interpretation of καὶ ὅσοι already given. Unless the Colossians are included in ὅσοι, they must be excluded by αὐτῶν. Yet this exclusion is hardly conceivable in such a context. συμβιβασθέντες] ‘_they being united_, _compacted_,’ for συμβιβάζειν must here have its common meaning, as it has elsewhere in this and the companion epistle: ver. 19 διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν καὶ συνδέσμων ... συμβιβαζόμενον, Ephes. iv. 16 πᾶν τὸ σῶμα συναρμολογούμενον καὶ συμβιβαζόμενον. Otherwise we might be disposed to assign to this verb here the sense which it always bears in the LXX (e.g. in Is. xl. 13, 14, quoted in 1 Cor. ii. 16), ‘instructed, taught,’ as it is rendered in the Vulgate. Its usage in the Acts is connected with this latter sense; e.g. ix. 22 συμβιβάζων ‘proving,’ xvi. 10 συμβιβάζοντες ‘concluding’; and so in xix. 33 συνεβίβασαν Ἀλέξανδρον (the best supported reading) can only mean ‘instructed Alexander.’ For the different sense of the nominative absolute see the note on iii. 16. The received text substitutes συμβιβασθέντων here. ` ἐν ἀγάπῃ] for love is the σύνδεσμος (iii. 14) of perfection. καὶ εἰς] ‘_and brought unto_,’ the thought being supplied from the preceding συμβιβασθέντες, which involves an idea of motion, comp. Joh. xx. 7 ἐντετυλιγμένον εἰς ἕνα τόπον. πᾶν πλοῦτος] This reading is better supported than either πᾶν τὸ πλοῦτος or πάντα πλοῦτον, while, as the intermediate reading, it also explains the other two. τῆς πληροφορίας] ‘_the full assurance_,’ for such seems to be the meaning of the substantive wherever it occurs in the New Testament; 1 Thess. i. 5 ἐν πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ, Heb. vi. 11 πρὸς τὴν πληροφορίαν τῆς ἐλπίδος, x. 22 ἐν πληροφορίᾳ πίστεως, comp. Clem. Rom. 42 μετὰ πληροφορίας πνεύματος ἁγίου. With the exception of 1 Thess. i. 5 however, all the Biblical passages might bear the other sense ‘fulness’: see Bleek on Heb. vi. 11. For the verb see the note on πεπληροφορημένοι below, iv. 12. ἐπίγνωσιν] See the note on i. 9. τοῦ μυστηρίου κ.τ.λ.] ‘_the mystery of God_, even _Christ in whom_, etc.,’ Χριστοῦ being in apposition with τοῦ μυστηρίου; comp. i. 27 τοῦ μυστηρίου τούτου ... ὅ ἐστιν Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, 1 Tim. iii. 16 τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον, Ὅς ἐφανερώθη κ.τ.λ. The reasons for adopting the reading τοῦ Θεοῦ Χριστοῦ are given in the detached note on various readings. Other interpretations of this reading are; (1) ‘the God Christ,’ taking Χριστοῦ in apposition with Θεοῦ; or (2) ‘the God of Christ,’ making it the genitive after Θεοῦ: but both expressions are without a parallel in St Paul. The mystery here is not ‘Christ,’ but ‘Christ as containing in Himself all the treasures of wisdom’; see the note on i. 27 Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν. For the form of the sentence comp. Ephes. iv. 15, 16 ἡ κεφαλή, Χριστὸς ἐξ οὗ πᾶν τὸ σῶμα κ.τ.λ. 3. πάντες] So πᾶν πλοῦτος ver. 2, πάσῃ σοφίᾳ ii. 28. These repetitions serve to emphasize the character of the Gospel, which is as complete in itself, as it is universal in its application.

τῆς σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι. ^4τοῦτο σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως] The two words occur together again Rom. xi. 33 ὦ βάθος πλούτου καὶ σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως Θεοῦ, 1 Cor. xii. 8. They are found in conjunction also several times in the LXX of Eccles. i. 7, 16, 18, ii. 21, 26, ix. 10, where חבכוה is represented by σοφία and דעת by γνῶσις. While γνῶσις is simply _intuitive_, σοφία is _ratiocinative_ also. While γνῶσις applies chiefly to the apprehension of truths, σοφία superadds the power of reasoning about them and tracing their relations. When Bengel on 1 Cor. xii. 8 sq. says, ‘Cognitio [γνῶσις] est quasi visus; sapientia [σοφία] visus cum sapore,’ he is so far right; but when he adds, ‘cognitio, rerum agendarum; sapientia, rerum aeternarum,’ he is quite wide of the mark. Substantially the same, and equally wrong, is St Augustine’s distinction _de Trin._ xii. 20, 25 (VIII. pp. 923, 926) ‘intelligendum est ad contemplationem sapientiam [σοφίαν], ad actionem scientiam [γνῶσιν] pertinere ... quod alia [σοφία] sit intellectualis cognitio aeternarum rerum, alia [γνῶσις] rationalis temporalium’ (comp. xiv. 3, p. 948), and again _de Div. Quæst. ad Simpl._> ii. 2 § 3 (VI. p. 114) ‘ita discerni probabiliter solent, ut sapientia pertineat ad intellectum æternorum, scientia vero ad ea quæ sensibus corporis experimur.’ This is directly opposed to usage. In Aristotle _Eth. Nic._ i. 1 γνῶσις is opposed to πρᾶξις. In St Paul it is connected with the apprehension of eternal mysteries, 1 Cor. xiii. 2 εἰδῶ τὰ μυστήρια πάντα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γνῶσιν. On the relation of σοφία to σύνεσις see above, i. 9. ἀπόκρυφοι] So 1 Cor. ii. 7 λαλοῦμεν Θεοῦ σοφίαν ἐν μυστηρίῳ, τὴν ἀποκεκρυμμένην. As before in τέλειος (i. 28), so here again in ἀπόκρυφοι the Apostle adopts a favourite term of the Gnostic teachers, only that he may refute a favourite doctrine. The word _apocrypha_ was especially applied to those esoteric writings, for which such sectarians claimed an _auctoritas secreta_ (Aug. _c. Faust._ xi. 2, VIII. p. 219) and which they carefully guarded from publication after the manner of their Jewish prototypes the Essenes (see above p. 89 sq.): comp. Iren. i. 20. 1 ἀμύθητον πλῆθος ἀποκρύφων καὶ νόθων γραφῶν, Clem. Alex. _Strom._ i. 15 (p. 357) βίβλους ἀποκρύφους τἀνδρὸς τοῦδε οἱ τὴν Προδίκου μετιόντες ἅιρεσιν _αὐχοῦσι_ κεκτῆσθαι, _ib._ iii. 4 (p. 524) ἐρρύη δὲ αὐτοῖς τὸ δόγμα ἔκ τινος ἀποκρύφου. See also the application of the text Prov. ix. 17 ἄρτων κρυφίων ἡδέως ἅψασθε to these heretics in _Strom._ i. 19 (p. 375). Thus the word _apocrypha_ in the first instance was an honourable appellation applied by the heretics themselves to their esoteric doctrine and their secret books; but owing to the general character of these works the term, as adopted by orthodox writers, got to signify ‘false,’ ‘spurious.’ The early fathers never apply it, as it is now applied, to _deutero-canonical_ writings, but confine it to _supposititious_ and _heretical_ works: see Smith’s _Dictionary of the Bible_ s.v. In the text St Paul uses it καταχρηστικῶς, as he uses μυστήριον. ‘All the richest treasures of that secret wisdom,’ he would say, ‘on which you lay so much stress, are buried in Christ, and being buried there are accessible to all alike who seek Him.’ But, while the term ἀπόκρυφος is adopted because it was used to designate the secret doctrine and writings of the heretics, it is also entirely in keeping with the metaphor of the ‘treasure’; e.g. Is. xlv. 3 δώσω σοι θησαυροὺς σκοτεινοὺς ἀποκρύφους, 1 Macc. i. 23 ἔλαβε τοὺς θησαυροὺς τοὺς ἀποκρύφους, Dan. xi. 43 ἐν τοῖς ἀποκρύφοις τοῦ χρυσοῦ καὶ τοῦ αργύρου: comp. Matt. xiii. 44. The stress thus laid on ἀπόκρυφοι will explain its position. It is not connected with εἰσιν, but must be taken apart as a secondary predicate: comp. ver. 10 ἐστὲ ἐν αὐτῷ πεπληρωμένοι, iii. 1 οὗ ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Θεοῦ καθήμενος, James i. 17 πᾶν δώρημα τέλειον ἄνωθέν ἐστιν, καταβαῖνον κ.τ.λ. 4–7. ‘I do not say this without a purpose. I wish to warn you against any who would lead you astray by specious argument and persuasive rhetoric. For I am not an indifferent spectator of your doings. Although I am absent from you in my flesh, yet I am present with you in my spirit. I rejoice to behold the orderly array and the solid phalanx which your faith towards Christ presents against the assaults of the foe. I entreat you therefore not to abandon the Christ, as you learnt from Epaphras to know Him, even Jesus the Lord, but to walk still in Him as heretofore. I would have you firmly rooted once for all in Him. I desire to see you built up higher in Him day by day, to see you growing ever stronger and stronger through your faith, while you remain true to the lessons taught you of old, so that you may abound in it, and thus abounding may pour forth your hearts in gratitude to God the giver of all.’

#λέγω, ἵνα μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς παραλογίζηται ἐν πιθανολογίᾳ· ^5εἰ γὰρ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ ἄπειμι, ἀλλὰ τῷ πνεύματι σὺν 4. τοῦτο λέγω κ.τ.λ.] ‘I say all this to you, lest you should be led astray by those false teachers who speak of another knowledge, of other mysteries.’ In other connexions τοῦτο λέγω will frequently refer to the words following (e.g. Gal. iii. 17, 1 Cor. i. 12); but with ἵνα it points to what has gone before, as in Joh. v. 34 ταῦτα λέγω ἵνα ὑμεῖς σωθῆτε. The reference in τοῦτο λέγω extends over vv. 1–3, and involves two statements; (1) The declaration that all knowledge is comprehended in Christ, vv. 2, 3; (2) The expression of his own personal anxiety that they should remain stedfast in this conviction, vv. 1, 2. This last point explains the language which follows, εἰ γὰρ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ κ.τ.λ. παραλογίζηται] ‘_lead you astray by false reasoning_’, as in Daniel xiv. 7 μηδέις σε παραλογιζέσθω (LXX): comp. James i. 22, Ign. _Magn._ 3. It is not an uncommon word either in the LXX or in classical writers. The system against which St Paul here contends professed to be a φιλοσοφία (ver. 8) and had a λόγον σοφίας (ver. 23). ἐν πιθανολογίᾳ] The words πιθανολογεῖν (Arist. _Eth. Nic._ i. 1), πιθανολογία (Plat. _Theæt._ 162 E), πιθανολογικός (Epictet. i. 8. 7), occur occasionally in classical writers, but do not bear a bad sense, being most frequently opposed to ἀπόδειξις, as probable argument to strict mathematical demonstration. This contrast probably suggested St Paul’s language in 1 Cor. ii. 4 οὐκ ἐν _πειθοῖς_ σοφίας _λόγοις_ ἀλλ’ ἐν _ἀποδείξει_ πνεύματος κ.τ.λ., and may possibly have been present to his mind here. 5. ἀλλὰ] frequently introduces the apodosis after εἰ or εἰ καὶ in St Paul; e.g. Rom. vi. 5, 1 Cor. ix. 2, 2 Cor. iv. 16, v. 16, xi. 6, xiii. 4 (v. l.). τῷ πνεύματι] ‘_in my spirit_’, not ‘_by the Spirit_’. We have here the common antithesis of flesh and spirit, or body and spirit: comp. 1 Cor. v. 3 ἀπὼν τῷ σώματι, παρὼν δὲ τῷ πνεύματι. St Paul elsewhere uses another antithesis, προσώπῳ and καρδίᾳ, to express this same thing; 1 Thess. ii. 17. χαίρων καὶ βλέπων] ‘_rejoicing and beholding_’. This must not be regarded as a logical inversion. The contemplation of their orderly array, though it might have been first the cause, was afterwards the consequence, of the Apostle’s rejoicing. He looked, because it gave him satisfaction to look.

ὑμῖν εἰμί, χαίρων καὶ βλέπων ὑμῶν τὴν τάξιν καὶ τὸ στερέωμα τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως ὑμῶν. ^6ὡς οὖν παρελάβετε τὸν Χριστόν, Ἰησοῦν τὸν Κύριον, ἐν αὐτῷ περιπατεῖτε, τὴν τάξιν] ‘_your orderly array_’, a military metaphor: comp. e.g. Xen. _Anab._ i. 2. 18 ἰδοῦσα τὴν λαμπρότητα καὶ τὴν τάξιν τοῦ στρατεύματος ἐθαύμασε, Plut. _Vit. Pyrrh._ 16 κατιδὼν τάξιν τε καὶ φυλακὰς καὶ κόσμον αὐτῶν καὶ τὸ σχῆμα τῆς στρατοπεδείας ἐθαύμασε. The enforced companionship of St Paul with the soldiers of the prætorian guard at this time (Phil. i. 13) might have suggested this image. At all events in the contemporary epistle (Ephes. vi. 14 sq.) we have an elaborate metaphor from the armour of a soldier. τὸ στερέωμα] ‘_solid front_, _close phalanx_’, a continuation of the metaphor: comp. 1 Macc. ix. 14 εἶδεν Ἰούδας ὅτι Βακχίδης καὶ τὸ στερέωμα τῆς παρεμβολῆς ἐν τοῖς δεξιοῖς. Somewhat similar are the expressions στερεοῦν τὸν πόλεμον 1 Macc. x. 50, κατὰ τὴν στερέωσιν τῆς μάχης Ecclus. xxviii. 10. For the connexion here compare 1 Pet. v. 9 ἀντίστητε στερεοὶ τῇ πίστει, Acts xvi. 5 ἐστερεοῦντο τῇ πίστει. 6. ὡς οὖν παρελάβετε κ.τ.λ.] i.e. ‘Let your conviction and conduct be in perfect accordance with the doctrines and precepts of the Gospel as it was taught to you’. For this use of παρελάβετε ‘ye received from your teachers, were instructed in’, comp. 1 Cor. xv. 1, 3, Gal. i. 9, Phil. iv. 9, 1 Thess. ii. 13, iv. 1, 2 Thess. iii. 6. The word παραλαμβάνειν implies either ‘to receive as transmitted’, or ‘to receive for transmission’: see the note on Gal. i. 12. The ὡς of the protasis suggests a οὕτως in the apodosis, which in this case is unexpressed but must be understood. The meaning of ὡς παρελάβετε here is explained by the καθὼς ἐμάθετε ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρᾶ in i. 7; see the note there, and comp. below ver. 7 καθὼς ἐδιδάχθητε. τὸν Χριστόν] ‘_the Christ_’, rather than ‘the Gospel’, because the central point in the Colossian heresy was the subversion of the true idea of the Christ. Ἰησοῦν τὸν Κύριον] ‘even _Jesus the Lord_’, in whom the true conception of the Christ is realised: comp. Ephes. iv. 20, 21, ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐχ οὕτως ἐμάθετε _τὸν Χριστόν_, εἴγε αὐτὸν ἠκούσατε καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐδιδάχθητε, _καθώς ἐστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ_, where the same idea is more directly expressed. The genuine doctrine of the Christ consists in (1) the recognition of the historical person _Jesus_, and (2) the acceptance of Him as _the Lord_. This doctrine was seriously endangered by the mystic theosophy of the false teachers. The same order which we have here occurs also in Ephes. iii. 11 ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν (the correct reading). 7. ἐρριζωμένοι] Two points may be noticed here; (1) The expressive change of tenses; ἐρριζωμένοι ‘firmly rooted’ _once for all_, ἐποικοδομούμενοι, βεβαιούμενοι, ‘built up and strengthened’ _from hour to hour_. (2) The rapid transition of metaphor, περιπατεῖτε, ἐρῥιζωμένοι, ἐποικοδομούμενοι, the path, the tree, the building: comp. Ephes. iii. 17 ἐρριζωμένοι καὶ τεθεμελιωμένοι. The metaphors of the plant and the building occur together in 1 Cor. iii. 9 Θεοῦ γεώργιον, Θεοῦ οἰκοδομή. The transition in this passage is made easier by the fact that ῥιζοῦν (Plut. _Mor._ 321 D), ἐκριζοῦν (Jer. i. 10, 1 Macc. v. 51), πρόρριζος (Jos. _B.J._ vii. 8. 7), etc., are not uncommonly used of cities and buildings.

^7ἐρριζωμένοι καὶ ἐποικοδομούμενοι ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ βεβαιούμενοι τῇ πίστει, καθὼς ἐδιδάχθητε, περισσεύοντες ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ. ἐποικοδομούμενοι] ‘_being built up_,’ as in 1 Cor. iii. 10–14. After this verb we might have expected ἐπ’ αὐτῷ or ἐπ’ αὐτόν (1 Cor. iii. 12) rather than ἐν αὐτῷ; but in this and the companion epistle Christ is represented rather as the binding element than as the foundation of the building: e.g. Ephes. ii. 20 ἐποικοδομηθέντες ἐπὶ τῷ θεμελίῳ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν, ὄντος _ἀκρογωνιαίου_ αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, _ἐν_ ᾧ πᾶσα [ἡ] οἰκοδομὴ αὔξει εἰς ναὸν ἅγιον _ἐν_ Κυρίῳ, _ἐν_ ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς συνοικοδομεῖσθε. The ἐπὶ in ἐποικοδομεῖν does not necessarily refer to the original foundation, but may point to the continued progress of the building by successive layers, as e.g. [Aristot.] _Rhet. ad Alex._ 4 (p. 1426) ἐποικοδομοῦντα τὸ ἕτερον ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ ἕτερον αὔξειν. Hence ἐποικοδομεῖν is frequently used absolutely, ‘_to build up_’ (e.g. Jude 20, Polyb. iii. 27, 4), as here. The repetition of ἐν αὐτῷ emphasizes the main idea of the passage, and indeed of the whole epistle. τῇ πίστει] ‘_by your faith_’, the dative of the instrument; comp. Heb. xiii. 9 καλὸν γὰρ χάριτι βεβαιοῦσθαι τὴν καρδίαν. Faith is, as it were, the cement of the building: comp. Clem. Rom. 22 ταῦτα πάντα βεβαιοῖ ἡ ἐν Χριστῷ πίστις. καθὼς ἐδιδάχθητε] i.e. ‘remaining true to the lessons which you received from Epaphras, and not led astray by any later pretenders’: comp. i. 6, 7 ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, καθὼς ἐμάθετε ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρᾶ. ἐν αὐτῇ κ.τ.λ.] The same ending occurs in iv. 2. Thanksgiving is the end of all human conduct, whether exhibited in words or in works. For the stress laid on thanksgiving in St Paul’s epistles generally, see the note on Phil. iv. 6. The words εὐχάριστος, εὐχαριστεῖν, εὐχαριστία, occur in St Paul’s writings alone of the Apostolic epistles. In this epistle especially the duty of thanksgiving assumes a peculiar prominence by being made a refrain, as here and in iii. 15, 17, iv. 2: see also i. 12.

^8 Βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν διὰ 8. μή τις _ἔσται ὑμᾶς_. 8–15. ‘Be on your guard; do not suffer yourselves to fall a prey to certain persons who would lead you captive by a hollow and deceitful system, which they call philosophy. They substitute the traditions of men for the truth of God. They enforce an elementary discipline of mundane ordinances fit only for children. Theirs is not the Gospel of Christ. In Christ the entire fulness of the Godhead abides for ever, having united itself with man by taking a human body. And so in Him—not in any inferior mediators—ye have your life, your being, for ye are filled from His fulness. He, I say, is the Head over all spiritual beings—call them principalities or powers or what you will. In Him too ye have the true circumcision—the circumcision which is not made with hands but wrought by the Spirit—the circumcision which divests not of a part only but of the whole carnal body—the circumcision which is not of Moses but of Christ. This circumcision ye have, because ye were buried with Christ to your old selves beneath the baptismal waters, and were raised with Him from those same waters to a new and regenerate life, through your faith in the powerful working of God who raised Him from the dead. Yes, you—you Gentiles who before were dead, when ye walked in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your unchastened carnal heathen heart—even you did God quicken into life together with Christ; then and there freely forgiving all of us—Jews and Gentiles alike—all our transgressions; then and there cancelling the bond which stood valid against us (for it bore our own signature), the bond which engaged us to fulfil all the law of ordinances, which was our stern pitiless tyrant. Ay, this very bond hath Christ put out of sight for ever, nailing it to His cross and rending it with His body and killing it in His death. Taking upon Him our human nature, He stripped off and cast aside all the powers of evil which clung to it like a poisonous garment. As a mighty conqueror He displayed these His fallen enemies to an astonished world, leading them in triumph on His cross.’ 8. Βλέπετε κ.τ.λ.] The form of the sentence is a measure of the imminence of the peril. The usual construction with βλέπειν μὴ is a conjunctive; e.g. in Luke xxi. 8 βλέπετε μὴ πλανηθῆτε. Here the substitution of an indicative shows that the danger is real; comp. Heb. iii. 12 βλέπετε μήποτε ἔσται ἕν τινι ὑμῶν καρδία πονηρὰ ἀπιστίας. For other instances of μὴ with a future indicative comp. Mark xiv. 2 μήποτε ἔσται θόρυβος, Rom. xi. 21 μήπως οὐδὲ σοῦ φείσεται; and see Winer § lvi. p. 631 sq. τις] This indefinite τις is frequently used by St Paul, when speaking of opponents whom he knows well enough but does not care to name: see the note on Gal. i. 7. Comp. Ign. _Smyrn._ 5 ὅν _τινες_ ἀγνοοῦντες ἀρνοῦνται ... τὰ δὲ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν, ὄντα ἄπιστα, οὐκ ἔδοξέ μοι ἐγγράψαι. συλαγωγῶν] ‘_makes you his prey_, carries you off body and soul’. The word appears not to occur before St Paul, nor after him, independently of this passage, till a late date: e.g. Heliod. _Aeth._ x. 35 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὴν ἐμὴν θυγάτερα συλαγωγήσας. In Tatian _ad Græc._ 22 ὑμεῖς δὲ ὑπὸ τούτων συλαγωγεῖσθε it seems to be a reminiscence of St Paul. Its full and proper meaning, as appears from the passages quoted, is not ‘to despoil,’ but ‘to carry off as spoil’, in accordance with the analogous compounds, δουλαγωγεῖν, σκευαγωγεῖν. So too the closely allied word λαφυραγωγεῖν in Plut. _Mor._ p. 5 πόλεμος γὰρ οὐ λαφυραγωγεῖ ἀρετήν, _Vit. Galb._ 5 τὰ μὲν Γαλατῶν, ὅταν ὑποχείριοι γένωνται, λαφυραγωγήσεσθαι. The Colossians had been rescued from the bondage of darkness; they had been transferred to the kingdom of light; they had been settled there as free citizens (i. 12, 13); and now there was danger that they should fall into a state worse than their former slavery, that they should be carried off as so much booty. Comp. 2 Tim. iii. 6 αἰχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια. For the construction ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν see the notes on Gal. i. 7, iii. 21. The former passage is a close parallel to the words here, εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς κ.τ.λ. The expression ὁ συλαγωγῶν gives a directness and individuality to the reference, which would have been wanting to the more natural construction ὃς συλαγωγήσει. διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας κ.τ.λ.] ‘_through his philosophy which is an empty deceit_’. The absence of both preposition and article in the second clause shows that κενῆς ἀπάτης describes and qualifies φιλοσοφίας. Clement therefore (_Strom._ vi. 8, p. 771) had a right to contend that St Paul does not here condemn ‘philosophy’ absolutely. The φιλοσοφία καὶ κενὴ ἀπάτη of this passage corresponds to the ψευδώνυμος γνῶσις of 1 Tim. vi. 20. But though ‘philosophy’ is not condemned, it is disparaged by the connexion in which it is placed. St Chrysostom’s comment is not altogether wrong, ἐπειδὴ δοκεῖ σεμνὸν εἶναι τὸ τῆς φιλοσοφίας, προσέθηκε καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. The term was doubtless used by the false teachers themselves to describe their system. Though essentially Greek as a name and as an idea, it had found its way into Jewish circles. Philo speaks of the Hebrew religion and Mosaic law as ἡ πάτριος φιλοσοφία (_Leg. ad Cai._ 23, II. p. 568, _de Somn._ ii. 18, I. p. 675) or ἡ Ἰουδαϊκὴ φιλοσοφία (_Leg. ad Cai._ 33, II. p. 582) or ἡ κατὰ Μω"υσῆν φιλοσοφία (_de Mut. Nom._ 39, I. p. 612). The system of the Essenes, the probable progenitors of the false teachers at Colossæ, he describes as ἡ δίχα περιεργείας Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων φιλοσοφία (_Omn. prob. lib._ 13, II. p. 459). So too Josephus speaks of the three Jewish sects as τρεῖς φιλοσοφίαι (_Ant._ xviii. 1. 2, comp. _B.J._ ii. 8. 2). It should be remembered also, that in this later age, owing to Roman influence, the term was used to describe practical not less than speculative systems, so that it would cover the ascetic life as well as the mystic theosophy of these Colossian heretics. Hence the Apostle is here flinging back at these false teachers a favourite term of their own, ‘their vaunted _philosophy_, which is hollow and misleading’. The word indeed could claim a truly noble origin; for it is said to have arisen out of the humility of Pythagoras, who called himself ‘a lover of wisdom’, μηδένα γὰρ εἶναι σοφὸν ἄνθρωπον ἀλλ’ ἢ Θεόν (Diog. Laert. Proœm. § 12; comp. Cic. _Tusc._ v. 3). In such a sense the term would entirely accord with the spirit and teaching of St Paul; for it bore testimony to the insufficiency of the human intellect and the need of a revelation. But in his age it had come to be associated generally with the idea of subtle dialectics and profitless speculation; while in this particular instance it was combined with a mystic cosmogony and angelology which contributed a fresh element of danger. As contrasted with the power and fulness and certainty of revelation, all such philosophy was ‘foolishness’ (1 Cor. i. 20). It is worth observing that this word, which to the Greeks denoted the highest effort of the intellect, occurs here alone in St Paul, just as he uses ἀρετή, which was their term to express the highest moral excellence, in a single passage only (Phil. iv. 8; see the note there). The reason is much the same in both cases. The Gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or of practice, which it had introduced. On the attitude of the fathers towards philosophy, while philosophy was a living thing, see Smith’s _Dictionary of the Bible_ s.v. Clement, who was followed in the main by the earlier Alexandrian fathers, regards Greek philosophy not only as a preliminary training (προπαιδεία) for the Gospel, but even as in some sense a covenant (διαθήκη) given by God to the Greeks (_Strom._ i. 5, p. 331, vi. 5, p. 761, _ib._ § 8, p. 771 sq.). Others, who were the great majority and of whom Tertullian may be taken as an extreme type, set their faces directly against it, seeing in it only the parent of all heretical teaching: e.g. _de Anim._ 2, 3, _Apol._ 46, 47. In the first passage, referring to this text, he says, ‘Ab apostolo jam tunc philosophia concussio veritatis providebatur’; in the second he asks, ‘Quid simile philosophus et Christianus?’ St Paul’s speech at Athens, on the only occasion when he is known to have been brought into direct personal contact with Greek philosophers (Acts xvii. 18), shows that his sympathies would have been at least as strong with Clement’s representations as with Tertullian’s.

τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν κατὰ κ.τ.λ.] The false teaching is described (1) As regards its source–‘the traditions of _men_’; (2) As regards its subject matter–‘the rudiments of _the world_’. τὴν παράδοσιν κ.τ.λ.] Other systems, as for instance the ceremonial mishna of the Pharisees, might fitly be described in this way (Matt. xv. 2 sq., Mark vii. 3 sq.): but such a description was peculiarly appropriate to a mystic theosophy like this of the Colossian false teachers. The teaching might be oral or written, but it was essentially esoteric, essentially traditional. It could not appeal to sacred books which had been before all the world for centuries. The Essenes, the immediate spiritual progenitors of these Colossian heretics, distinctly claimed to possess such a source of knowledge, which they carefully guarded from divulgence; _B.J._ ii. 8. 7 συντηρήσειν ὁμοίως τά τε τῆς αἱρέσεως αυτῶν βιβλία καὶ τὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων ὀνόματα (see above pp. 89, 90 sq., 95). The various Gnostic sects, their direct or collateral spiritual descendants, almost without exception traced their doctrines to a similar source: e.g. Hippol. _Hær._ v. 7 ἃ φησὶ _παραδεδωκέναι_ Μαριάμνῃ τὸν Ἰάκωβον τοῦ Κυρίου τὸν ἀδελφόν, vii. 20 φασὶν εἰρηκέναι Ματθίαν αὐτοῖς λόγους ἀποκρύφους οὓς ἤκουσε παρὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος, Clem. Alex. _Strom._ vii. 17 (p. 898) καθάπερ ὁ Βασιλείδης, κἂν Γλαυκίαν ἐπιγράφηται διδάσκαλον, ὡς αὐχοῦσιν αὐτοί, τὸν Πέτρου ἑρμηνέα· ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ Οὐαλεντῖνον Θεοδᾶ διακηκοέναι φέρουσιν, γνώριμος δὲ οὗτος ἐγεγόνει Παύλου. So too a later mystic theology of the Jews, which had many affinities with the teaching of the Christianized Essenes at Colossæ, was self-designated _Kabbala_ or ‘tradition’, professing to have been handed down orally from the patriarchs. See the note on ἀπόκρυφοι, ii. 3.

τῶν ἀνθρώπων, κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου, τὰ στοιχεῖα] ‘_the rudiments_, _the elementary teaching_’; comp. ver. 20. The same phrase occurs again Gal. iv. 3 (comp. ver. 9). As στοιχεῖα signifies primarily ‘the letters of the alphabet’, so as a secondary meaning it denotes ‘rudimentary instruction’. Accordingly it is correctly interpreted by Clement _Strom._ vi. 8 (p. 771) Παῦλος ... οὐκ ἔτι παλινδρομεῖν ἀξιοῖ ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν φιλοσοφίαν, στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου τάυτην ἀλληγορῶν, στοιχειωτικήν τινα οὖσαν (i.e. elementary) καὶ προπαιδείαν τῆς ἀληθείας (comp. _ib._ vi. 15, p. 799), and by Tertullian _adv. Marc._ v. 19 ‘_secundum elementa mundi_, non secundum cælum et terram dicens, sed secundum literas seculares’. A large number of the fathers however explained the expression to refer to the heavenly bodies (called στοιχεῖα), as marking the seasons, so that the observance of ‘festivals and new-moons and sabbaths’ was a sort of bondage to them. It would appear from Tertullian’s language that Marcion also had so interpreted the words. On this false interpretation see the note on Gal. iv. 3. It is quite out of place here: for (1) The context suggests some _mode of instruction_, e.g. τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων here, and δογματίζεσθε in ver. 20; (2) The keeping of days and seasons is quite subordinate to other external observances. The rite of circumcision (ver. 11), and the distinction of meats (ver. 21) respectively, are placed in close and immediate connexion with τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in the two places where it occurs, whereas the observance of days and seasons (ver. 16) stands apart from either. τοῦ κόσμου] ‘_of the world_’, that is, ‘belonging to the sphere of material and external things’. See the notes on Gal. iv. 3, vi. 14. ‘In Christ’, so the Apostle seems to say, ‘you have attained the liberty and the intelligence of manhood; do not submit yourselves again to a rudimentary discipline fit only for children (τὰ στοιχεῖα). In Christ you have been exalted into the sphere of the Spirit: do not plunge yourselves again into the atmosphere of material and sensuous things (τοῦ κόσμου).’

καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν· ^9ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς, ^{10}καὶ ἐστὲ ἐν αὐτῷ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν] ‘_not after Christ_’. This expression is wide in itself, and should be interpreted so as to supply the negative to both the preceding clauses; ‘Christ is neither the author nor the substance of their teaching: not the author, for they listen to human traditions (κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων); not the substance, for they replace Him by formal ordinances (κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου) and by angelic mediators‘. 9 sq. In explaining the true doctrine which is ‘after Christ’, St Paul condemns the two false principles, which lay at the root of this heretical teaching; (1) The _theological_ error of substituting inferior and created beings angelic mediators for the divine Head Himself (vv. 9, 10); and (2) The _practical_ error of insisting upon ritual and ascetic observances, as the foundation of their moral teaching (vv. 11–14). Their theological speculations and their ethical code alike were at fault. On the intimate connexion between these two errors, as springing out of a common root, the Gnostic dualism of these false teachers, see the introduction, pp. 33 sq., 79, 87, 180 sq. ὅτι κ.τ.λ.] The Apostle justifies the foregoing charge that this doctrine was not κατὰ Χριστόν; ‘In Christ dwells the whole pleroma, the entire fulness of the Godhead, whereas they represent it to you as dispersed among several spiritual agencies. Christ is the one fountain-head of all spiritual life, whereas they teach you to seek it in communion with inferior creatures.’ The same truths have been stated before (i. 14 sq.) more generally and they are now restated with direct and immediate reference to the heretical teaching. κατοικεῖ] ‘_has its fixed abode_’. On the force of this compound in relation to the false teaching, see the note on i. 19. πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα] ‘_all the plenitude_’, ‘the totality of the divine powers and attributes’. On this theological term see i. 19, and the detached note at the end of the epistle. τῆς θεότητος] ‘_of the Godhead_’. ‘Non modo divinæ virtutes, sed ipsa divina natura’, writes Bengel. For the difference between θέοτης ‘_deitas_’, the essence, and θειότης ‘_divinitas_’, the quality, see Trench _N. T. Syn._ § ii. p. 6. The different force of the two words may be seen by a comparison of two passages in Plutarch, _Mor._ p. 857 A πᾶσιν Αἰγυπτίοις θειότητα πολλὴν καὶ δικαιοσύνην μαρτυρήσας (where it means a divine inspiration or faculty, and where no one would have used θεότητα), and _Mor._ 415 C ἐκ δὲ ἡρώων εἰς δαίμονας αἱ βελτίονες ψυχαὶ τὴν μεταβολὴν λαμβάνουσιν, ἐκ δὲ δαιμόνων ὀλίγαι μὲν ἔτι χρόνῳ πολλῷ δι’ ἀρετῆς καθαρθεῖσαι παντάπασι θεότητος μετέσχον (where θειότητος would be quite out of place, because all δαίμονες without exception were θεῖοι, though they only became θεοί in rare instances and after long probation and discipline). In the New Testament the one word occurs here alone, the other in Rom. i. 20 alone. So also τὸ θεῖον, a very favourite expression in Greek philosophy, is found once only, in Acts xvii. 29, where it is used with singular propriety; for the Apostle is there meeting the heathen philosophers on their own ground and arguing with them in their own language. Elsewhere he instinctively avoids a term which tends to obscure the idea of a personal God. In the Latin versions, owing to the poverty of the language, both θέοτης and θείοτης are translated by the same term _divinitas_; but this was felt to be inadequate, and the word _deitas_ was coined at a later date to represent θέοτης: August. _de Civ. Dei_ vii. § 1, VII. p. 162 (quoted in Trench) ‘Hanc divinitatem vel, ut sic dixerim, _deitatem_: nam et hoc verbo uti jam nostros non piget, ut de Græco expressius transferant id quod illi θεότητα appellant etc.’ σωματικῶς] ‘_bodily-wise_’, ‘_corporeally_’, i.e. ‘assuming a bodily form, becoming incarnate’. This is an addition to the previous statement in i. 19 ἐν αυτῷ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα κατοικῆσαι. The indwelling of the pleroma refers to the Eternal Word, and not to the Incarnate Christ; but σωματικῶς is added to show that the Word, in whom the pleroma thus had its abode from all eternity, crowned His work by the Incarnation. Thus while the main statement κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος of St Paul corresponds to the opening sentence ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θὲον καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος of St John, the subsidiary adverb σωματικῶς of St Paul has its counterpart in the additional statement καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο of St John. All other meanings which have been assigned to σωματικῶς here, as ‘wholly’ (Hieron. _in Is._ xi. 1 sq., IV. p. 156, ‘nequaquam per partes, ut in ceteris sanctis’), or ‘really’ (Aug. _Epist._ cxlix, II. p. 513 ‘Ideo corporaliter dixit, quia illi umbratiliter seducebant’), or ‘essentially’ (Hilar. _de Trin._ viii. 54, II. p. 252 ‘Dei ex Deo significat veritatem etc.’, Cyril. Alex. in Theodoret. _Op._ V. p. 34 τουτέστιν, οὐ σχετικῶς, Isid. Pelus. _Ep._ iv. 166 ἀντὶ τοῦ οὐσιωδῶς), are unsupported by usage. Nor again can the body be understood of anything else but Christ’s human body; as for instance of the created World (Theod. Mops. in Rab. _Op._ VI. p. 522) or of the Church (Anon. in Chrysost. _ad loc._). According to these two last interpretations τὸ πλήρομα τῆς θεότητος is taken to mean the Universe (‘universam naturam repletam ab eo’) and the Church (τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πεπληρωμένην ὑπὸ τῆς θεότητος αὐτοῦ, see Ephes. i. 23) respectively, because either of these may be said to reside in Him, as the source of its life, and to stand to Him in the relation of the body to the head (σωματικῶς). But these forced interpretations have nothing to recommend them. St Paul’s language is carefully guarded. He does not say ἐν σώματι, for the Godhead cannot be confined to any limits of space; nor σωματοειδῶς, for this might suggest the unreality of Christ’s human body; but σωματικῶς, ‘in bodily wise’, ‘with a bodily manifestation’. The relation of σωματικῶς to the clause which it qualifies will depend on the circumstances of the case: comp. e.g. Plut. _Mor._ p. 424 E λέιπεται τοίνυν τὸ μέσον οὐ τοπικῶς ἀλλὰ σωματικῶς λέγεσθαι, i.e. ‘ratione corporis habita’, Athan. _Exp. Fid._ 4 (I. p. 81) ἑκάτερα τοίνυν τὰ περὶ τὸ κτίσμα ῥητὰ σωματικῶς εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν γέγραπται, i.e. ‘secundum corpus’, Ptolem. in Epiphan. _Hær._ xxxiii. 5 κατὰ μὲν τὸ φαινόμενον καὶ σωματικῶς ἐκτελεῖσθαι ἀνῃρέθη. 10. καὶ ἐστὲ ἐν αὐτῷ] ‘_and ye are in Him_’, where ἐστὲ should be separated from the following πεπληρωμένοι; comp. John xvii. 21, Acts xvii. 28. True life consists in union with Him, and not in dependence on any inferior being; comp. ver. 19 οὐ κρατῶν τὴν κεφαλήν, ἐξ ὁῦ κ.τ.λ.

πεπληρωμένοι, ὅς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ πεπληρωμένοι] ‘_being fulfilled_’, with a direct reference to the preceding πλήρωμα; ‘Your fulness comes from His fulness; His πλήρωμα is transfused into you by virtue of your incorporation in Him’. So too John i. 16 ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν, Ephes. iii. 19 ἵνα πληρωθῆτε εἰς πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ Θεοῦ, iv. 13 εἰς μέτρον ἡλικίας τοῦ πληρώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, comp. Ign. _Ephes._ init. τῇ εὐλογημένῃ ἐν μεγέθει Θεοῦ πατρὸς πληρώματι. Hence also the Church, as ideally regarded, is called the πλήρωμα of Christ, because all His graces and energies are communicated to her; Ephes. i. 23 ἥτις ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν πληρουμένου. ὅς] For the various reading ὅ see the detached note. It was perhaps a correction made on the false supposition that ἐν αὐτῷ referred to the πλήρωμα. At all events it must be regarded as an impossible reading; for the image would be altogether confused and lost, if the πλήρωμα were represented as the head. And again ἡ κεφαλὴ is persistently said elsewhere of Christ; i. 18, ii. 19, Ephes. i. 22, iv. 15, v. 23. Hilary _de Trin._ ix. 8 (II. p. 264) explains the ὅ as referring to the whole sentence τὸ εἶναι ἐν αὐτῷ πεπληρωμένους, but this also is an inconceivable sense. Again it has been suggested that ὅ ἐστιν (like τουτέστιν) may be taken as equivalent to _scilicet_ (comp. Clem. _Hom._ viii. 22); but this would require τῇ κεφαλῇ, even if it were otherwise admissible here.

ἐξουσίας· ^{11}ἐν ᾧ καὶ περιετμήθητε περιτομῇ ἀχειροποιήτῳ, ἡ κεφαλὴ] The image expresses much more than the idea of sovereignty: the head is also the centre of vital force, the source of all energy and life: see the note on ver. 19. πάσης ἀρχῆς κ.τ.λ.] ‘_of every principality and power_’, and therefore of those angelic beings whom the false teachers adopted as mediators, thus transferring to the inferior members the allegiance due to the Head: comp. ver. 18 sq. For ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας, see the note on i. 16. 11. The previous verses have dealt with the theological tenets of the false teachers. The Apostle now turns to their practical errors; ‘You do not need the circumcision of the flesh; for you have received the circumcision of the heart. The distinguishing features of this higher circumcision are threefold. (1) It is not external but inward, not made with hands but wrought by the Spirit. (2) It divests not of a part only of the flesh, but of the whole body of carnal affections. (3) It is the circumcision not of Moses or of the patriarchs, but of Christ’. Thus it is distinguished, as regards _first_ its character, _secondly_ its extent, and _thirdly_ its author. περιετμήθητε] The moment at which this is conceived as taking place is defined by the other aorists, συνταφέντες, συνηγέρθητε, etc., as the time of their baptism, when they ‘put on Christ’. ἀχειροποιήτῳ] i.e. ‘immaterial’, ‘spiritual’, as Mark xiv. 58, 2 Cor. v. 1. So χειροποίητος, which is used in the N. T. of material temples and their furniture (Acts vii. 48, xvii. 24, Heb. ix. 11, 24, comp. Mark _l.c._), and of the material circumcision (Ephes. ii. 11 τῆς λεγομένης περιτομῆς ἐν σαρκὶ χειροποιήτου). In the LXX χειροποίητα occurs exclusively as a rendering of idols (אלילם, e.g. Lev. xxvi. 1, Is. ii. 18, etc.), false gods (אלהים Is. xxi. 9, where perhaps they read אלילים), or images (חמנים Lev. xxvi. 30), except in one passage, Is. xvi. 12, where it is applied to an idol’s sanctuary. Owing to this association of the word the application which we find in the New Testament would sound much more depreciatory to Jewish ears than it does to our own; e.g. ἐν χειροποιήτοις κατοικεῖ in St Stephen’s speech, where the force of the passage is broken in the received text by the interpolation of ναοῖς. For illustrations of the typical significance of circumcision, as a symbol of purity, see the note on Phil. iii. 3. ἐν τῇ κ.τ.λ.] The words are chosen to express the _completeness_ of the spiritual change. (1) It is not an ἔκδυσις nor an ἀπόδυσις, but an ἀπέκδυσις. The word ἀπέκδυσις is extremely rare, and no earlier instances of it are produced; see the note on ver. 15 ἀπεκδυσάμενος. (2) It is not a single member but the whole body, which is thus cast aside; see the next note. Thus the idea of completeness is brought out both in the energy of the action and in the extent of its operation, as in iii. 9 ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸν παλαιὸν _ἄνθρωπον_.

ἐν τῇ ἀπεκδύσει τοῦ σώματος τῆς σαρκός, ἐν τῇ περιτομῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ^{12}συνταφέντες αὐτῷ ἐν τοῦ σώματος κ.τ.λ.] ‘_the whole body_ which consists _of the flesh_’, i.e. ‘the body with all its corrupt and carnal affections’; as iii. 5 νεκρώσατε οὖν _τὰ μέλη_. For illustrations of the expression see Rom. vi. 6 ἵνα καταργηθῇ τὸ σῶμα τῆς ἁμαρτίας, vii. 24 τοῦ σώματος τοῦ θανάτου τούτου, Phil. iii. 21 τὸ σῶμα τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν. Thus τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκός here means ‘the fleshly body’ and not ‘the entire mass of the flesh’; but the contrast between the whole and the part still remains. In i. 22 the same expression τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκός occurs, but with a different emphasis and meaning: see the note there. The words τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, inserted between τοῦ σώματος and τῆς σαρκός in the received text, are clearly a gloss, and must be omitted with the vast majority of ancient authorities. 12. Baptism is the grave of the old man, and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his corrupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence, he rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life. This it is, because it is not only the crowning act of his own faith but also the seal of God’s adoption and the earnest of God’s Spirit. Thus baptism is an image of his participation both in the death and in the resurrection of Christ. See _Apost. Const._ iii. 17 ἡ κατάδυσις τὸ συναποθανεῖν, ἡ ἀνάδυσις τὸ συναναστῆναι. For this twofold image, as it presents itself to St Paul, see especially Rom. vi. 3 sq. ἐν τῷ βαπτισμῷ] ‘_in the act of baptism_’. A distinction seems to be observed elsewhere in the New Testament between βάπτισμα ‘baptism’ properly so called, and βαπτισμός ‘lustration’ or ‘washing’ of divers kinds, e.g. of vessels (Mark vii. 4, [8,] Heb. ix. 10). Even Heb. vi. 2 βαπτισμῶν διδαχῆς, which at first sight might seem to be an exception to this rule, is perhaps not really so (Bleek _ad loc._). Here however, where the various readings βαπτισμῷ and βαπτίσματι appear in competition, the preference ought probably to be given to βαπτισμῷ as being highly supported in itself (see the detached note on various readings) and as the less usual word in this sense. There is no _a priori_ reason why St Paul should not have used βαπτισμός with this meaning, for it is so found in Josephus _Ant._ xviii. 5. 2 βαπτισμῷ συνιέναι (of John the Baptist). Doubtless the form βάπτισμα was more appropriate to describe the one final and complete act of Christian baptism, and it very soon obtained exclusive possession of the ground in Greek; but in St Paul’s age the other form βαπτισμός may not yet have been banished. In the Latin Version _baptisma_ and _baptismus_ are used indiscriminately: and this is the case also with the Latin fathers. The substantive ‘baptism’ occurs so rarely in any sense in St Paul (only Rom. vi. 4, Eph. iv. 5, besides this passage), or indeed elsewhere in the N. T. of Christian baptism (only in 1 Pet. iii. 21), that we have not sufficient data for a sound induction. So far as the two words have any inherent difference of meaning, βαπτισμός denotes rather the act in process and βάπτισμα the result.

τῷ βαπτισμῷ, ἐν ᾧ καὶ συνηγέρθητε διὰ τῆς πίστεως τῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν ἐκ [τῶν] 12. τῷ βαπτίσματι. ἐν ᾧ] i.e. βαπτισμῷ. Others would understand Χριστῷ for the sake of the parallelism with ver. 11 ἐν hῷ καὶ ... εν ᾧ καί. But this parallelism is not suggested by the sense: while on the other hand there is obviously a very close connexion between συνταφέντες and συνηγέρθητε as the two complementary aspects of baptism; comp. Rom. vi. 4 sq. _συνετάφημεν_ αὐτῷ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἵνα ὥσπερ _ἐγέρθη_ Χριστὸς ... ὅυτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ... εἰ γὰρ σύμφυτοι γεγόναμεν τῷ ὁμοίωματι _τοῦ θανάτου_ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ καὶ _τῆς ἀναστάσεως_ ἐσόμεθα, 2 Tim. ii. 11 εἰ γὰρ _συναπεθάνομεν_, καὶ _συνζήσομεν_. In fact the idea of Χριστῷ must be reserved for συνηγέρθητε where it is wanted, ‘_ye were raised together with Him_’. διὰ τῆς πίστεως κ.τ.λ.] ‘_through your faith in the operation_,’ ἐνεργείας being the objective genitive. So St Chrysostom, πίστεως ὅλον ἐστίν· ἐπιστεύσατε ὅτι δύναται ὁ Θεὸς ἐγεῖραι, καὶ οὕτως ἠγέρθητε. Only by a belief in the resurrection are the benefits of the resurrection obtained, because only so are its moral effects produced. Hence St Paul prays that he may ‘know the _power_ of Christ’s resurrection’ (Phil. iii. 10). Hence too he makes this the cardinal article in the Christian’s creed, ‘If thou ... believest in thy heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved’ (Rom. x. 9). For the influence of Christ’s resurrection on the moral and spiritual being, see the note on Phil. _l.c._ Others take τῆς ἐνεργείας as the subjective genitive, ‘faith which comes from the operation etc.’, arguing from a mistaken interpretation of the parallel passage Ephes. i. 19 (where κατὰ τῆν ἐνέργειαν should be connected, not with τοὺς πιστεύοντας, but with τί τὸ ὑπερβάλλον μέγεθος κ.τ.λ.). The former explanation however yields a better sense, and the genitive after πίστις far more commonly describes the object than the source of the faith, e.g. Rom. iii. 22, 26, Gal. iii. 22, Ephes. iii. 12, Phil. i. 27, iii. 9, 2 Thess. ii. 13. 13. In the sentence which follows it seems necessary to assume a change of subject. There can be little doubt that ὁ Θεὸς is the nominative to συνεζωοποίησεν: for (1) The parallel passage Ephes. ii. 4, 5 directly suggests this. (2) This is uniformly St Paul’s mode of speaking elsewhere. It is always God who ἐγέιρει, συνεγέιρει, ζωοποιεῖ, συνζωοποιεῖ, etc., with or in or through Christ. (3) Though it might be possible to assign σὺν αὐτῷ to the subject of συνεζωοποίησεν (see the note on i. 20), yet a reference to some other person is more natural. These reasons seem to decide the subject of συνεζωοποίησεν. But at the same time it appears quite impossible to continue the same subject, ὁ Θεός, to the end of the sentence. No grammatical meaning can be assigned to ἀπεκδυσάμενος, by which it could be understood of God the Father. We must suppose therefore that a new subject, ὁ Χριστός, is introduced meanwhile, either with ἦρκεν or with ἀπεκδυσάμενος itself; and of the two the former seems the easier point of transition. For a similar instance of abrupt transition, which is the more natural owing to the intimate connexion of the work of the Son with the work of the Father, see e.g. i. 17 sq. καὶ ὑμᾶς] i.e. ‘you Gentiles’. This will appear from a study of the parallel passages iii. 7, 8, Ephes. i. 13, ii. 1 sq., 11, 13, 17, 22, iii. 2, iv. 17; see the notes on Ephes. i. 13, and on τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ just below.

νεκρῶν· ^{13}καὶ ὑμᾶς νεκροὺς ὄντας τοῖς παραπτώμασιν καὶ τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν, συνεζωοποίησεν τοῖς παραπτώμασιν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_by reason of your transgressions etc._’ The παραπτώματα are the actual definite transgressions, while the ἀκροβυστία τῆς σαρκός is the impure carnal disposition which prompts to them. For the dative comp. Ephes. ii. 1, 5, where the same expression occurs; see Winer _Gramm._ § xxxi. p. 270. On the other hand in Rom. vi. 11 νεκροὺς μὲν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, ζῶντας δὲ τῷ Θεῷ, the dative has a wholly different meaning, as the context shows. The ἐν of the received text, though highly supported, is doubtless an interpolation for the sake of grammatical clearness. τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ κ.τ.λ.] The external fact is here mentioned, not for its own sake but for its symbolical meaning. The outward uncircumcision of the Gentiles is a type of their unchastened carnal mind. In other words, though the literal meaning is not excluded, the spiritual reference is most prominent, as appears from ver. 11 ἐν τῆι ἀπεκδύσει τοῦ σώματος. Hence Theodore’s comment, ἀκροβυστίαν (ἐκάλεσεν) τὸ περικεῖσθαι ἔτι τὴν θνητότητα. At the same time the choice of the expression shows that the Colossian converts addressed by St Paul were mainly Gentiles. συνεζωοποίησεν] It has been questioned whether the life here spoken of should be understood in a spiritual sense of the regeneration of the moral being, or in a literal sense of the future life of immortality regarded as conferred on the Christian potentially now, though only to be realised hereafter. But is not such an issue altogether superfluous? Is there any reason to think that St Paul would have separated these two ideas of life? To him the future glorified life is only the continuation of the present moral and spiritual life. The two are the same in essence, however the accidents may differ. Moral and spiritual regeneration is salvation, is life. ὑμᾶς] The pronoun is repeated for the sake of emphasis. The omission in some good copies is doubly explained; (1) By the desire to simplify the grammar; (2) By the wish to relieve the awkwardness of the close proximity between ὑμᾶς and ἡμῖν. This latter consideration has led a few good authorities to substitute ἡμᾶς for ὑμᾶς, and others to substitute ὑμῖν for ἡμῖν. For instances of those emphatic repetitions in St Paul see the note on i. 20 δι’ αὐτοῦ. σὺν αὐτῳ] ‘with Christ’, as in Ephes. ii. 5 συνεζωοποίησεν τῷ Χριστῷ. On the inadmissibility of the reading ἁυτῷ see the note on εἰς αὐτὸν i. 20. χαρισάμενος] ‘_having forgiven_’, as in Luke vii. 42 sq., 2 Cor. ii. 7, 10, xii. 13, Ephes. iv. 32; see also the note on iii. 13 below. The idea of sin as a debt incurred to God (Matt. vi. 12 τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν, comp. Luke xi. 4) underlies this expression, as it does also the commoner term for pardon, ἄφεσις ‘remission’. The image is carried out in the cancelled bond, ver. 14. ἡμῖν] The person is changed; ‘not to you Gentiles only, but to us all alike’. St Paul is eager to claim his share in the transgression, that he may claim it also in the forgiveness. For other examples of the change from the second to the first person, see i. 10–13, iii. 3, 4, Ephes. ii. 2, 3, 13, 14, iv. 31, 32, v. 2 (the correct reading), 1 Thess. v. 5, where the motive of the change is similar. See also Gal. iii. 25, 26, iv. 5, 6, where there is the converse transition.

ὑμᾶς σὺν αὐτῷ, χαρισάμενος ἡμῖν πάντα τὰ παραπτώματα, ^{14}ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς 14. ἐξαλέιψας] ‘_having cancelled_’. The word ἐξαλέιφειν, like διαγράφειν, signifying ‘to blot out, to erase’, is commonly opposed to ἐγγράφειν ‘to enter a name, etc.’; e.g. Arist. _Pax_ 1181, Lysias _c. Nicom._ p. 183, Plato _Resp._ vi. p. 501 B. More especially is it so used in reference to an _item_ in an account, e.g. Demosth. _c. Aristog._ i. p. 791 ἐγγράφονται πάντες οἱ ὀφλισκάνοντες ... ἐξαλήλιπται τὸ ὄφλημα. τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_the bond standing against us_’. The word χειρόγραφον, which means properly an autograph of any kind, is used almost exclusively for a note of hand, a bond or obligation, as having the ‘sign-manual’ of the debtor or contractor: e.g. Tobit v. 3 (comp. ix. 5) ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ τὸ χειρόγραφον, Plut. _Mor._ p. 829 A τῶν χειρογράφων καὶ συμβολαίων. It is more common in Latin than in Greek, e.g. Cic. _Fam._ vii. 18 ‘Misi cautionem chirographi mei’, Juv. _Sat._ xvi. 41 ‘Debitor aut sumptos pergit non reddere nummos, vana supervacui dicens chirographa ligni’ (comp. xiii. 137). Hence chirographum, chirographarius, are frequent terms in the Roman law-books; see Hesse _Handlexicon zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts_ s.v. p. 74. In the case before us the Jewish people might be said to have signed the contract when they bound themselves by a curse to observe all the enactments of the law (Deut. xxvii. 14–26; comp. Exod. xxiv. 3); and the primary reference would be to them. But ἡμῖν, ἡμῶν, seem to include Gentiles as well as Jews, so that a wider reference must be given to the expression. The δόγματα therefore, though referring primarily to the Mosaic ordinances, will include all forms of positive decrees in which moral or social principles are embodied or religious duties defined; and the ‘bond’ is the moral assent of the conscience, which (as it were) signs and seals the obligation. The Gentiles, though ‘not having a law, are a law to themselves’, ὅιτινες ἐνδείκνυνται τὸ ἔργον τοῦ νόμου _γραπτὸν_ ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν, _συμμαρτυρούσης_ αὐτων τῆς συνειδήσεως, Rom. ii. 14, 15. See the notes on Gal. ii. 19, iv. 11. Comp. Orig. _Hom. in Gen._ xiii. 4 (II. p. 96). τοῖς δόγμασιν] ‘_consisting in ordinances_’: comp. Ephes. ii. 15 τὸν νόμον τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δόγμασιν. The word δόγμα is here used in its proper sense of a ‘decree’, ‘ordinance’, corresponding to δογματίζεσθε below, ver. 20. This is its only sense in the N. T.; e.g. Luke ii. 1, Acts xvii. 7, of the Emperor’s decrees; Acts xvi. 4 of the Apostolic ordinances. Here it refers especially to the Mosaic law, as in Joseph. _Ant._ xv. 5. 3 τὰ κάλλιστα τῶν δογμάτων καὶ τὰ ὁσιώτατα τῶν ἐν τοῖς νόμοις, Philo _Leg. All._ i. 16 (I. p. 54) διατήρησις τῶν ἁγίων δογμάτων, 3 Macc. i. 3 τῶν πατρίων δογμάτων. Comp. Iren. _Fragm._ 38 (p. 855 Stieren) where, immediately after a reference to our text, τοῖς τῶν Ἰουδαίων δόγμασι προσέρχεσθαι is opposed to πνευματικῶς λειτουργεῖν. In the parallel passage, Ephes. ii. 15, this is the exclusive reference; but here (for reasons explained in the last note) it seems best to give the term a secondary and more extensive application. The dative is perhaps best explained as governed by the idea of γεγραμμένον involved in χειρόγραφον (comp. Plat. _Ep._ vii. p. 243 A τὰ γεγραμμένα τύποις); as in 1 Tim. ii. 6 τὸ μαρτύριον καιροῖς ἰδίοις, where καιροῖς depends on an implied μεμαρτυρημένον. Otherwise it is taken as closely connected with καθ’ ἡμῶν, ‘the bond which was in force against us by reason of the ordinances’: see Winer § xxxi. p. 273, A. Buttmann p. 80. Possibly an ἐν has dropped out of the text before τοῖς δόγμασιν, owing to the similar ending ==χειρογραφονεν== (comp. Ephes. ii. 15); but, if so, the omission must date from the earliest age, since no existing authorities exhibit any traces of such a reading; see the note on ver. 18 ἃ ἑόρακεν, and comp. Phil. ii. 1 εἴ τις σπλάγχνα. A wholly different interpretation however prevails universally among Greek commentators both here and in Ephes. ii. 15. They take τοῖς δόγμασιν, ἐν δόγμασιν, to mean the ‘doctrines or precepts of the Gospel’, and so to describe the instrument by which the abrogation of the law was effected. So Chrysostom, Severianus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret, followed by the later commentators [OE]cumenius and Theophylact. Strangely enough they do not allude to the correct interpretation; nor (with the exception of the passage ascribed to Irenæus which is quoted above) have I found any distinct traces of it in any Greek father. The grammatical difficulty would be taken to favour this interpretation, which moreover was characteristic of the age when the battle of creeds was fought. But it has been universally abandoned by modern interpreters, as plainly inappropriate to the context and also as severing the substantive δόγμα here from the verb δογματίζειν in ver. 20. The Latin fathers, who had either _decretis_ or _sententiis_ in their version, were saved from this false interpretation; e.g. Hilar. _de Trin._ i. 12 (II. p. 10), ix. 10 (II. p. 265 sq.), Ambros. _Apol. Dav._ 13 (I. p. 698), _de Fid._ iii. 2 (II. p. 499), August. _de Pecc. Mer._ i. 47 (X. p. 26): though they very commonly took τοῖς δόγμασιν, ἐν δόγμασιν, to refer to the decree of condemnation. Jerome however on Ephes. ii. 15 (VII. p. 581) follows the Greeks. The later Christian sense of δόγμα, meaning ‘doctrine’, came from its secondary classical use, where it was applied to the authoritative and categorical ‘sentences’ of the philosophers: comp. Just. Mart. _Apol._ i. 7 (p. 56 D) οἱ ἐν Ἕλλησι τὰ αὐτοῖς ἀρεστὰ δογματίσαντες ἐκ παντὸς τῷ ἑνὶ ὀνόματι φιλοσοφίας προσαγορεύονται, καίπερ τῶν δογμάτων ἐναντίων ὄντων, Cic. _Acad._ ii. 9 ‘de suis decretis quæ philosophi vocant δόγματα’, Senec. _Epist._ xcv. 10 ‘Nulla ars contemplativa sine decretis suis est, quæ Græci vocant _dogmata_, nobis vel _decreta_ licet adpellare vel _scita_ vel _placita_’. See the indices to Plutarch, Epictetus, etc., for illustrations of the use of the term. There is an approach towards the ecclesiastical meaning in Ignat. _Magn._ 13 βεβαιωθῆναι ἐν τοῖς δόγμασιν τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων, Barnab. § 1 τρία οὖν δόγματά ἐστιν Κυρίου (comp. § 9, 10).

δόγμασιν, ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν· καὶ αὐτὸ ἦρκεν ἐκ ὃ ἦν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_which was directly opposed to us_’. The former expression, τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν, referred to the _validity_ of the bond; the present, ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν, describes its _active hostility_. It is quite a mistake to suppose that the first preposition in ὑπεναντίος mitigates its force, as in ὑποδήλωσις, ὑπόλευκος, ὑπομαίνομαι, ὑποσημαίνειν, etc. Neither in classical writers nor in the LXX has the word any shade of this meaning. It is very commonly used for instance, of things which are directly antagonistic and mutually exclusive: e.g. Aristot. _de Gen. et Corr._ i. 7 (p. 323) Δημόκριτος ... φησὶ ... τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ ὅμοιον εἶναι τό τε ποιοῦν καὶ τὸ πάσχον ... ἐοίκασι δὲ οἱ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον λέγοντες ὑπεναντία (i.e. self-contradictory) φαίνεσθαι λέγειν· αἴτιον δὲ τῆς ἐναντιολογίας κ.τ.λ., [Plato] _Alcib. Sec._ 138 C ΣΩ. Τὸ μαίνεσθαι ἆρα ὑπεναντίον σοι δοκεῖ τῷ φρονεῖν; ΑΛ. Πάνυ μὲν οὖν.... 139 B ΣΩ. Καὶ μὴν δύο γε ὑπεναντία ἑνὶ πράγματι πῶς ἂν εἴη; (i.e. how can one thing have two direct opposites?), where the whole argument depends on this sense of ὑπεναντίος. In compounds with ὑπὸ the force of the preposition will generally be determined by the meaning of the other element in the compound; and, as ἐναντίος (ἔναντι) implies locality, a local sense is communicated to ὑπό. Thus ὑπεναντίος may be compared with ὑπαλλάσσειν, ὑπαντᾶν, ὑπαντιάζειν, ὑποτρέχειν (Xen. _Cyrop._ i. 2. 12 ληστὰς ὑποδραμεῖν, ‘to hunt down’), ὑπελάυνειν (Xen. _Anab._ i. 8. 15 ὑπελάσας ὡς συναντῆσαι, ‘riding up’), ὑφιστάναι (Polyb. i. 50. 6 ὑπέστησε τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ναῦν ἀντίπρωρον τοῖς πολεμίοις, ‘he brought up’ his own ship). With this meaning, ‘over against,’ ‘close in upon,’ the preposition does not weaken but enhance the force of ἐναντίος, so that the compound will denote ‘direct,’ ‘close,’ or ‘persistent opposition.’ καὶ αὐτὸ ἦρκεν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_and He_, i.e. Christ, _hath taken it away_’. There is a double change in this clause: (1) The participles (χαρισάμενος, ἐξαλέιψας) are replaced by a finite verb. (2) The aorists (συνεζωοποίησεν, χαρισάμενος, ἐξαλέιψας) are replaced by a perfect. The substitution of ᾖρεν for ἦρκεν in some copies betrays a consciousness on the part of the scribes of the dislocation produced by the new tense. As a new subject, ὁ Χριστός, must be introduced somewhere (see the note on ver. 13), the severance thus created suggests this as the best point of transition. The perfect ἦρκεν, ‘He hath removed it’, is suggested by the feeling of relief and thanksgiving, which rises up in the Apostle’s mind at this point. For the strong expression ἄιρειν ἐκ [τοῦ] μέσου, ‘to remove and put out of sight’, comp. LXX Is. lvii. 2, Epictet. iii. 3. 15, Plut. _Mor._ p. 519 D; so 2 Thess. ii. 7 ἐκ μέσου γένηται.

τοῦ μέσου, προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ· ^{15}ἀπεκδυσάμενος προσηλώσας κ.τ.λ.] ‘The abrogation was even more emphatic. Not only was the writing erased, but the document itself was torn up and cast aside.’ By προσηλώσας is meant that the law of ordinances was nailed to the cross, rent with Christ’s body, and destroyed with His death: see the notes on Gal. vi. 14 δι’ οὗ [τοῦ] σταυροῦ ἑμοὶ κόσμος (the world, the sphere of material ordinances) ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ, where the idea is the same. It has been supposed that in some cities the abrogation of a decree was signified by running a nail through it and hanging it up in public. The image would thus gain force, but there is no distinct evidence of such a custom. 15. ἀπεκδυσάμενος κ.τ.λ.] This word appears not to occur at all before St Paul, and rarely if ever after his time, except in writers who may be supposed to have his language before them; e.g. Hippol. _Hær._ i. 24 ἀπεκδυσάμενον τὸ σῶμα ὃ περικεῖται. In Joseph. _Ant._ vi. 14. 2 ἀπεκδὺς is only a variation for μετεκδὺς which seems to be the correct reading. The word also appears in some texts of Babrius _Fab._ xviii. 3, but it is merely a conjectural emendation. Thus the occurrence of ἀπεκδύεσθαι here and in iii. 9, and of ἀπέκδυσις above in ver. 11, is remarkable; and the choice of an unusual, if not a wholly new, word must have been prompted by the desire to emphasize the _completeness_ of the action. The force of the double compound may be inferred from a passage of Lysias, where the two words ἀποδύεσθαι and ἐκδύεσθαι occur together; _c. Theomn._ i. 10 (p. 117) φάσκων θοιμάτιον ἀποδεδύσθαι ἢ τὸν χιτωνίσκον ἐκδεδύσθαι. Here however the sense of ἀπεκδυσάμενος is difficult. The meaning generally assigned to it, ‘having spoiled, stripped of their arms’, disregards the middle voice. St Jerome is chiefly responsible for this common error of interpretation: for in place of the Old Latin ‘exuens se’, which was grammatically correct, he substituted ‘exspolians’ in his revised version. In his interpretation however he was anticipated by the commentator Hilary, who read ‘exuens’ for ‘exuens se’ in his text. Discarding this sense, as inconsistent with the voice, we have the choice of two interpretations. (1) The common interpretation of the Latin fathers, ‘_putting off_ the body’, thus separating ἀπεκδυσάμενος from τὰς ἀρχὰς κ.τ.λ. and understanding τὴν σάρκα or τὸ σῶμα with it; comp. 2 Cor. v. 3 ἐνδυσάμενοι. So Novat. _de Trin._ 16 ‘exutus carnem’; Ambros. _Expos. Luc._ v. § 107 (I. p. 1381) ‘exuens se carnem’, comp. _de Fid._ iii. 2 (II. p. 499); Hilar. _de Trin._ i. 13 (II. p. 10) ‘exutus carnem’ (comp. ix. 10, p. 265), x. 48 (p. 355) ‘spolians se carne’ (comp. ix. 11, p. 266); Augustin. _Epist._ 149 (II. p. 513) ‘exuens se carne’, etc. This appears to have been the sense adopted much earlier in a Docetic work quoted by Hippol. _Hær._ viii. 10 ψυχὴ ἐκέινη ἐν τῷ σώματι τραφεῖσα, ἀπεκδυσαμένη τὸ σῶμα καὶ προσηλώσασα πρὸς τὸ ξύλον καὶ θριαμβεύσασα κ.τ.λ. It is so paraphrased likewise in the Peshito Syriac and the Gothic. The reading ἀπεκδυσάμενος τὴν σάρκα καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας (omitting τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ), found in some ancient authorities, must be a corruption from an earlier text, which had inserted the gloss τὴν σάρκα after ἀπεκδυσάμενος, while retaining τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ, and which seems to have been in the hands of some of the Latin fathers already quoted. This interpretation has been connected with a common metaphorical use of ἀποδύεσθαι, signifying ‘to strip’ and so ‘to prepare for a contest’; e.g. Plut. _Mor._ 811 E πρὸς πᾶσαν ἀποδύομενοι τὴν πολιτικὴν πρᾶξιν, Diod. Sic. ii. 29 ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν ἀποδύντες. The serious objection to this rendering is, that it introduces an isolated metaphor which is not explained or suggested by anything in the context. (2) The common interpretation of the Greek fathers; ‘_having stripped off and put away the powers_ of evil’, making ἀπεκδυσάμενος govern τὰς ἀρχὰς κ.τ.λ. So Chrysostom, Severianus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret. This also appears to have been the interpretation of Origen, _in Matt._ xii. § 25 (III. p. 544), _ib._ § 40 (p. 560), _in Ioann._ vi. § 37 (IV. p. 155), _ib._ xx. § 29 (p. 356), though his language is not explicit, and though his translators, e.g. _in Libr. Ies. Hom._ vii. § 3 (II. p. 413), make him say otherwise. The meaning then will be as follows. Christ took upon Himself our human nature with all its temptations (Heb. iv. 15). The powers of evil gathered about Him. Again and again they assailed Him; but each fresh assault ended in a new defeat. In the wilderness He was tempted by Satan; but Satan retired for the time baffled and defeated (Luke iv. 13 ἀπέστη ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ). Through the voice of His chief disciple the temptation was renewed, and He was entreated to decline His appointed sufferings and death. Satan was again driven off (Matt. xvi. 23 ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου, Σατανᾶ, σκάνδαλον εἶ ἐμοῦ: comp. Matt. viii. 31). Then the last hour came. This was the great crisis of all, when ‘the power of darkness’ made itself felt (Luke xxii. 53 _ἡ ἐξουσία_ τοῦ σκότους; see above i. 13), when the prince of the world asserted his tyranny (Joh. xii. 30 _ὁ ἄρχων_ τοῦ κόσμου). The final act in the conflict began with the agony of Gethsemane; it ended with the cross of Calvary. The victory was complete. The enemy of man was defeated. The powers of evil, which had clung like a Nessus robe about His humanity, were torn off and cast aside for ever. And the victory of mankind is involved in the victory of Christ. In His cross we too are divested of the poisonous clinging garments of temptation and sin and death; τῷ ἀποθέσθαι τὴν θνητότητα, says Theodore, ἣν ὑπὲρ τῆς κοινῆς ἀφεῖλεν εὐεργεσίας, ἀπεδύσατο κἀκείνων (i.e. τῶν ἀντικειμένων δυνάμεων) τὴν αὐθεντείαν ᾗπερ ἐκέχρηντο καθ’ ἡμῶν. For the image of the garments comp. Is. lxiv. 6, but especially Zech. iii. 1 sq., ‘And he showed me Joshua the high-priest standing before the angel of the Lord and _Satan standing at his right hand to resist him_. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan.... Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments.... And He answered and spake unto those that stood before Him saying _Take away the filthy garments_ from him. And unto him He said Behold, _I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee_’. In this prophetic passage the image is used of His type and namesake, the Jesus of the Restoration, not in his own person, but as the high-priest and representative of a guilty but cleansed and forgiven people, with whom he is identified. For the metaphor of ἀπεκδυσάμενος more especially, see Philo _Quod det. pot. ins._ 13 (I. p. 199) ἐξαναστάντες δὲ καὶ διερεισάμενοι τὰς ἐντέχνους αὐτῶν περιπλοκὰς εὐμαρῶς _ἐκδυσόμεθα_, where the image in the context is that of a wrestling bout. This interpretation is grammatical; it accords with St Paul’s teaching; and it is commended by the parallel uses of the substantive in ver. 11 ἐν τῇ ἀπεκδύσει τοῦ σώματος τῆς σαρκός, and of the verb in iii. 9 ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸν πάλαιον ἄνθρωπον κ.τ.λ. The ἀπέκδυσις accomplished in us when we are baptized into His death is a counterpart to the ἀπέκδυσις which He accomplished by His death. With Him indeed it was only the temptation, with us it is the sin as well as temptation; but otherwise the parallel is complete. In both cases it is a divestiture of the powers of evil, a liberation from the dominion of the flesh. On the other hand the common explanation ‘spoiling’ is not less a violation of St Paul’s usage (iii. 9) than of grammatical rule.

τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας ἐδειγμάτισεν τὰς ἀρχὰς κ.τ.λ.] What powers are especially meant here will appear from Ephes. vi. 12 πρὸς τὰς ἀρχάς, πρὸς τὰς ἐξουσίας, πρὸς τοὺς κοσμοκράτορας τοῦ σκότους τούτου, πρὸς τὰ πνευματικὰ τῆς πονηρίας κ.τ.λ. See the note on i. 16. ἐδειγμάτισεν] ‘_displayed_’, as a victor displays his captives or trophies in a triumphal procession: Hor. _Epist._ i. 17. 33 ‘captos ostendere civibus hostes’. The word is extremely rare; Matt. i. 19 μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι (where it ought probably to be read for the more common word παραδειγματίσαι), _Act. Paul. et Petr._ 33 ἔλεγε πρὸς τὸν λαὸν ἵνα μὴ μόνον ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Σίμωνος ἀπάτης φύγωσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ δειγματίσουσιν αὐτόν. Nowhere does the word convey the idea of ‘making an example’ (παραδειγματίσαι) but signifies simply ‘to display, publish, proclaim’. In the context of the last passage we have as the consequence, ὥστε πάντας τοὺς εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρας βδελύττεσθαι Σίμωνα τὸν μάγον καὶ ἀνόσιον αὐτὸν _καταγγέλλειν_, i.e. to _proclaim_ his impieties. The substantive occurs on the Rosetta stone l. 30 (Boeckh, _C. I._ 4697) τῶν συντετελεσμένων τὰ πρὸς τὸν δειγματισμὸν διάφορα.

ἐν παρρησίᾳ, θριαμβεύσας αὐτοὺς ἐν αὐτῷ. ἐν παρρησίᾳ] ‘_boldly_’, not ‘_publicly_’. As παρρησία is ‘unreservedness, plainness of speech’ (παν-ρησία, its opposite being ἀρρησία ‘silence’), so while applied still to language, it may be opposed either (1) to ‘fear’, as John vii. 13, Acts iv. 29, or (2) to ‘ambiguity, reserve’, Joh. xi. 14, xvi. 25, 29; but ‘misgiving, apprehension’ in some form or other seems to be always the correlative idea. Hence, when it is transferred from words to actions, it appears always to retain the idea of ‘confidence, boldness’; e.g. 1 Macc. iv. 18 λήψετε τὰ σκ^υλα μετὰ παρῥησίας, _Test. xii. Patr._ Rub. 4 οὐκ εἶχον παρῥησίαν ἀτενίσαι εἰς πρόσωπον Ἰακώβ, Jos. _Ant._ ix. 1O. 4 ὑπ’ αἰσχύνης τε τοῦ συμβεβηκότος δεινοῦ καὶ τοῦ μηκέτ’ αὐτῷ παρῥησίαν εἶναι. The idea of publicity may sometimes be connected with the word as a secondary notion, e.g. in Joh. vii. 4, where ἐν παρρησίᾳ εἶναι ‘to assume a bold attitude’ is opposed to ἐν κρυπτῷ ποιεῖν (comp. xviii. 20); but it does not displace the primary sense.

^{16}Μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ἐν βρώσει καὶ ἐν πόσει ἢ > 16. ἢ ἐν πόσει. θριαμβεύσας] ‘_leading them in triumph_’, the same metaphor as in 2 Cor. ii. 14 τῷ πάντοτε θριαμβεύοντι ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ κ.τ.λ., where it is wrongly translated in the A. V. ‘causeth us to triumph’. Here however it is the defeated powers of evil, there the subjugated persons of men, who are led in public, chained to the triumphal car of Christ. This is the proper meaning and construction of θριαμβεύειν, as found elsewhere. This verb takes an accusative (1) of the person over whom the triumph is celebrated, e.g. Plut. _Vit. Arat._ 54 τοῦτον Αἰμίλιος ἐθριάμβευσε, _Thes. et Rom. Comp._ 4 βασιλεῖς ἐθριάμβευσε: (2) of the spoils exhibited in the triumph, e.g. Tatian _c. Græc._ 26 παύσασθε λόγους ἀλλοτρίους θριαμβεύοντες καί, ὥσπερ ὁ κολοιός, οὐκ ἰδίοις ἐπικοσμούμενοι πτεροῖς: (3) more rarely of the substance of the triumph, e.g. _Vit. Camill._ 30 ὁ δὲ Κάμιλλος ἐθριάμβευσε ... τὸν ἀπολωλυίας σωτῆρα πατρίδος γενόμενον, i.e. ‘in the character of his country’s saviour’. The passive θριαμβεύεσθαι is ‘to be led in triumph’, ‘to be triumphed over’, e.g. _Vit. C. Marc._ 35. So the Latins say ‘triumphare aliquem’ and ‘triumphari’. ἐν αὐτῷ] i.e. τῷ σταυρῷ: comp. Ephes. ii. 16 ἀποκαταλλάξῃ τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους ... διὰ τοῦ σταυροῦ. The violence of the metaphor is its justification. The paradox of the crucifixion is thus placed in the strongest light—triumph in helplessness and glory in shame. The convict’s gibbet is the victor’s car. 16–19. ‘Seeing then that the bond is cancelled, that the law of ordinances is repealed, beware of subjecting yourselves to its tyranny again. Suffer no man to call you to account in the matter of eating or drinking, or again of the observance of a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are only shadows thrown in advance, only types of things to come. The substance, the reality, in every case belongs to the Gospel of Christ. The prize is now fairly within your reach. Do not suffer yourselves to be robbed of it by any stratagem of the false teachers. Their religion is an officious humility which displays itself in the worship of angels. They make a parade of their visions, but they are following an empty phantom. They profess humility, but they are puffed up with their vaunted wisdom, which is after all only the mind of the flesh. Meanwhile they have substituted inferior spiritual agencies for the One true Mediator, the Eternal Word. Clinging to these lower intelligences, they have lost their hold of the Head; they have severed their connexion with Him, on whom the whole body depends; from whom it derives its vitality, and to whom it owes its unity, being supplied with nourishment and knit together in one by means of the several joints and attachments, so that it grows with a growth which comes from God Himself.’ 16 sq. The two main tendencies of the Colossian heresy are discernible in this warning (vv. 16–19), as they were in the previous statement (vv. 9–15). Here however the order is reversed. The practical error, an excessive ritualism and ascetic rigour, is first dealt with (vv. 16, 17); the theological error, the interposition of angelic mediators, follows after (vv. 18, 19). The first is the substitution of a shadow for the substance; the second is the preference of an inferior member to the head. The reversal of order is owing to the connexion of the paragraphs; the opening subject in the second paragraph being a continuation of the concluding subject in the first, by the figure called chiasm: comp. Gal. iv. 5. κρινέτω] not ‘_condemn you_’, but ‘_take you to task_’; as e.g. Rom. xiv. 3 sq. The judgment may or may not end in an acquittal; but in any case it is wrong, since these matters ought not to be taken as the basis of a judgment. ἐν βρώσει κ.τ.λ.] ‘_in eating and in drinking_’; Rom. xiv. 17 οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ βρῶσις καὶ πόσις, ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνη κ.τ.λ., Heb. ix. 10 ἐπὶ βρώμασιν καὶ πόμασιν καὶ διαφόροις βαπτισμοῖς, δικαίωματα σαρκός, comp. 1 Cor. viii. 8 βρῶμα δὲ ἡμᾶς οὐ παραστήσει τῷ Θεῷ κ.τ.λ. The first indication that the Mosaic distinctions of things clean and unclean should be abolished is given by our Lord Himself: Mark vii. 14 sq. (the correct reading in ver. 19 being καθαρίζων πάντα τὰ βρώματα). They were afterwards formally annulled by the vision which appeared to St Peter: Acts x. 11 sq. The ordinances of the Mosaic law applied almost exclusively to meats. It contained no prohibitions respecting drinks except in a very few cases; e.g. of the priests ministering in the tabernacle (Lev. x. 9), of liquids contained in unclean vessels etc. (Lev. xi. 34, 36), and of Nazarite vows (Num. vi. 3). These directions, taken in connexion with the rigid observances which the later Jews had grafted on them (Matt. xxiii. 24), would be sufficient to explain the expression, when applied to the Mosaic law by itself, as in Heb. _l.c._ The rigour of the Colossian false teachers however, like that of their Jewish prototypes the Essenes, doubtless went far beyond the injunctions of the law. It is probable that they forbad wine and animal food altogether: see the introduction pp. 86, 104 sq. For allusions in St Paul to similar observances not required by the law, see Rom. xiv. 2 ὁ δὲ ἀσθενῶν λάχανα ἐσθίει, ver. 21 καλὸν τὸ μὴ φαγεῖν κρέα μηδὲ πιεῖν οἶνον κ.τ.λ., 1 Tim. iv. 2, 3 κωλυόντων ... ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων ἃ ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισεν κ.τ.λ., Tit. i. 14 μὴ προσέχοντες ... ἐντολαῖς ἀνθρώπων ... πάντα καθαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς. The correct reading seems to be _καὶ_ ἐν πόσει, thus connecting together the words between which there is a natural affinity. Comp. Philo _Vit. Moys._ i. § 33 (II. p. 110) δεσποίναις χαλεπαῖς συνεζευγμένου βρώσει καὶ πόσει, Ign. _Trall._ 2 οὐ γὰρ βρωμάτων καὶ ποτῶν εἰσὶν διάκονοι.

ἐν μέρει ἑορτῆς ἢ νεομηνίας ἢ σαββάτων, ^{17}ἅ ἐστιν σκὶα 17 ὅ ἐστιν σκιὰ. ἐν μέρει] ‘_in the matter of_,’ etc.; comp. 2 Cor. iii. 10, ix. 3 ἐν τῷ μέρει τούτῳ. The expression seems originally to mean ‘in the division or category’, and in classical writers most commonly occurs in connexion with such words as τιθέναι, ποιεῖσθαι, ἀριθμεῖν, etc.: comp. Demosth. _c. Aristocr._ § 148 ὅσα ... στρατίωτης ὢν ἐν σφενδονήτου καὶ ψιλοῦ μέρει ... ἐστράτευται, i.e. ‘in the capacity of.’ Hence it gets to signify more widely, as here, ‘with respect to’, ‘by reason of’: comp. Philo _Quod det. pot. ins._ § 2 (I. p. 192) ἐν μέρει λόγου τοῦ προκόπτοντος κατὰ τὸν πάτερα κοσμοῦνται, _in Flacc._ 20 (II. p. 542) ὅσα ἐν μέρει χάριτος καὶ δωρεᾶς ἔλαβον. But Ælian _V. H._ viii. 3 κρίνοντες ἕκαστον ἐν τῷ μέρει φόνου, quoted by the commentators, is a false parallel: for φόνου is there governed by κρίνοντες and ἐν τῷ μέρει means ‘in his turn’. ἑορτῆς κ.τ.λ.] The same three words occur together, as an exhaustive enumeration of the sacred times among the Jews, in 1 Chron. xxiii. 31, 2 Chron. ii. 4, xxxi. 3, Ezek. xlv. 17, Hos. ii. 11, Justin _Dial._ 8, p. 226; comp. Is. i. 13, 14. See also Gal. iv. 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς, where the first three words correspond to the three words used here, though the order is reversed. The ἑορτή here, like the καιροί there, refers chiefly to the _annual_ festivals, the passover, pentecost, etc. The νεομηνία here describes more precisely the _monthly_ festival, which is there designated more vaguely as μῆνες. The σάββατα here gives by name the _weekly_ holy-day, which is there indicated more generally by ἡμέραι. νεομηνίας] See Num. xxviii. 11 sq. The forms νεομηνία and νουμηνία seem to be used indifferently in the common dialect, though the latter is more common. In the Attic νουμηνία alone was held to be correct; see Lobeck _Phryn._ p. 148. On the whole the preference should perhaps be given to νεομηνίας here, as supported by some authorities which are generally trustworthy in matters of orthography, and as being the less usual form in itself. σαββάτων] ‘_a sabbath-day_’, not, as the A.V., ‘_sabbath days_’; for the coordinated words ἑορτῆς, νεομηνίας, are in the singular. The word σάββατα is derived from the Aramaic (as distinguished from the Hebrew) form שבתא, and accordingly preserves the Aramaic termination in α. Hence it was naturally declined as a plural noun, σάββατα, σαββάτων. The general use of σάββατα, when a single sabbath-day was meant, will appear from such passages as Jos. _Ant._ i. 1. 1 ἄγομεν τὴν ἡμέραν, προσαγορεύοντες αὐτὴν σάββατα, _ib._ iii. 10. 1 ἑβδόμην ἡμέραν ἥτις σάββατα καλεῖται, Plut. _Mor._ 169 C Ἰουδαῖοι σαββάτων ὄντων ἐν ἀγνάμπτοις καθεζόμενοι, _ib._ 671 F οἶμαι δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν σαββάτων ἑορτὴν μὴ παντάπασιν ἀπροσδίονυσον εἶναι, Hor. _Sat._ i. 9. 69 ‘hodie tricesima sabbata’. In the New Testament σάββατα is only once used distinctly of more than a single day, and there the plurality of meaning is brought out by the attached numeral; Acts xvii. 2 ἐπὶ σάββατα τρία. On the observance of days and seasons see again Gal. iv. 10, Rom. xiv. 5, 6. A strong anti-Judaic view on the subject is expressed in the _Epist. ad Diogn._ § 4. Origen _c. Cels._ viii. 21, 22, after referring to Thucyd. i. 70 μήτε ἑορτὴν ἄλλο τι ἡγεῖσθαι ἢ τὸ τὰ δέοντα πρᾶξαι, says ὁ τέλειος, ἀεὶ ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ὢν καὶ τοῖς ἔργοις καὶ τοῖς διανοήμασι τοῦ τῇ φύσει κυρίου λόγου Θεοῦ, ἀεί ἐστιν αὐτοῦ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις καὶ ἀεὶ ἄγει κυριακὰς ἡμέρας, and he then goes on to explain what is the παρασκευή, the πάσχα, the πεντεκοστή, of such a man. The observance of sacred times was an integral part of the old dispensation. Under the new they have ceased to have any value, except as a means to an end. The great principle that ‘the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath’, though underlying the Mosaic ordinances, was first distinctly pronounced by our Lord. The setting apart of special days for the service of God is a confession of our imperfect state, an avowal that we cannot or do not devote our whole time to Him. Sabbaths will then ultimately be superseded, when our life becomes one eternal sabbath. Meanwhile the Apostle’s rebuke warns us against attributing to any holy days whatever a meaning and an importance which is alien to the spirit of the New Covenant. Bengel on the text writes, ‘Sabbatum non laudatur, non imperatur; dominica memoratur, non præcipitur. Qui profundius in mundi negotiis hærent, his utilis et necessarius est dies definitus: qui semper sabbatizant, majori libertate gaudent’. Yes: but these last are just they who will most scrupulously restrict their liberty, so as ἀπρόσκοποι γίνεσθαι. 17. Two ideas are prominent in this image. (1) The contrast between the ordinances of the Law and the teaching of the Gospel, as the shadow and the substance respectively; Philo _de Conf. ling._ 37 (I. p. 434) νομίσαντας τὰ μὲν ῤητὰ τῶν χρησμῶν σκιάς τινας ὡσανεὶ _σωμάτων_ εἶναι, Joseph. _B.J._ ii. 2. 5 σκιὰν αἰτησόμενος βασιλείας ἧς ἥρπασεν ἑαυτῷ τὸ σῶμα; comp. Philo _in Flacc._ 19 (II. p. 541) σκιὰ πραγμάτων ἄρ’ ἦσαν, οὐ πράγματα. (2) The conception of the shadow as thrown before the substance (ἡ δὲ σκιὰ προτρέχει τοῦ σώματος, says a Greek commentator), so that the Law was a type and presage of the Gospel; Heb. x. 1 σκιὰν ἔχων ὁ νόμος τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν (comp. viii. 5). Thus it implies both the _unsubstantiality_ and the _supersession_ of the Mosaic ritual. ἅ] ‘_which things_’, whether distinctions of meats or observances of times. If the other reading ὅ be taken, it will refer to the preceding sentence generally, as if the antecedent were ‘the whole system of ordinances’.

τῶν μελλόντων, τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. ^{18}μηδεὶς τὸ δὲ σῶμα κ.τ.λ.] As the shadow belonged to Moses, so ‘_the substance belongs to Christ_’; i.e. the reality, the antitype, in each case is found in the Christian dispensation. Thus the passover typifies the atoning sacrifice; the unleavened bread, the purity and sincerity of the true believer; the pentecostal feast, the ingathering of the first fruits; the sabbath, the rest of God’s people; etc. 18. The Christian’s career is the contest of the stadium (δρόμος, Acts xx. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 7); Christ is the umpire, the dispenser of the rewards (2 Tim. iv. 8); life eternal is the bay wreath, the victor’s prize (βραβεῖον, 1 Cor. ix. 24, Phil. iii. 14). The Colossians were in a fair way to win this prize; they had entered the lists duly; they were running bravely: but the false teachers, thrusting themselves in the way, attempted to trip them up or otherwise impede them in the race, and thus to rob them of their just reward. For the idea of καταβραβεύετω compare especially Gal. v. 7 ἐτρέχετε καλῶς· τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν κ.τ.λ.

ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ καὶ καταβραβευέτω] ‘_rob of the prize, the_ βραβεῖον’; comp. Demosth. _Mid._ p. 544 (one of the documents) ἐπιστάμεθα Στράτωνα ὑπὸ Μειδίου _καταβραβευθέντα_ καὶ παρὰ πάντα τὰ δίκαια ἀτιμωθέντα, which presents a close parallel to the use of καταβραβεύειν here. See also Eustath. _in Il._ i. 403 sq. (p. 43) καταβραβεύει αὐτόν, ὥς φασιν οἱ πάλαιοι, ib. _Opusc._ 277, etc. The false teachers at Colossæ are not regarded as umpires nor as successful rivals, but simply as persons frustrating those who otherwise would have won the prize. The word καταβραβεύειν is wide enough to include such. The two compounds καταβραβεύειν and παραβραβεύειν (Plut. _Mor._ p. 535 C οἱ παραβραβεύοντες ἐν τοῖς ἀγῶσι) only differ in this respect, that _deprivation_ is the prominent idea in the former word and _trickery_ in the latter. Jerome, _Epist._ cxxi. _ad Algas._ (I. p. 879), sets down this word, which he wrongly interprets ‘bravium accipiat adversum vos’, as one of St Paul’s Cilicisms. The passages quoted (whether the document in the Midias be authentic or not) are sufficient to show that this statement is groundless. θέλων ἐν] ‘_taking delight in_’, ‘_devoting himself to_’. The expression is common in the LXX, most frequently as a translation of חפץ ב״, 1 Sam.חפץ xviii. 22, 2 Sam. xv. 26, 1 Kings x. 9, 2 Chron. ix. 8, Ps. cxi. 1, cxlvi. 10, but in one passage of רצה ב״, 1 Chron. xxviii. 4. So too _Test. xii. Patr._ Asher 1 ἐὰν οὖν ἡ ψυχὴ θέλῃ ἐν καλῷ. Comp. also 1 Macc. iv. 42 θελητὰς νόμου, and see ἐθελοθρησκεία below. Against this construction no valid objection has been urged. Otherwise θέλων is taken absolutely, and various senses have been assigned to it, such as ‘imperiously’ or ‘designedly’ or ‘wilfully’ or ‘gladly, readily’; but these are either unsupported by usage or inappropriate to the context. Leclerc (_ad loc._) and Bentley (_Crit. Sacr._ p. 59) conjectured θέλγων; Toup (_Emend. in Suid._ II. p. 63) more plausibly ἐλθών; but the passages quoted show that no correction is needed. ταπεινοφροσύνῃ] Humility is a vice with heathen moralists, but a virtue with Christian Apostles; see the note on Phil. ii. 3. In this passage, which (with ver. 23) forms the sole exception to the general language of the Apostles, the divergence is rather apparent than real. The disparagement is in the accompaniments and not in the word itself. Humility, when it becomes self-conscious, ceases to have any value; and self-consciousness at least, if not affectation, is implied by θέλων ἐν. Moreover the character of the ταπεινοφροσύνη in this case is further defined as θρησκεία τῶν ἀγγέλων, which was altogether a perversion of the truth.

θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων, ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων, εἰκῇ φυσιούμενος θρησκείᾳ] This word is closely connected with the preceding by the vinculum of the same preposition. There was an officious parade of humility in selecting these lower beings as intercessors, rather than appealing directly to the throne of grace. The word refers properly to the external rites of religion, and so gets to signify an over-scrupulous devotion to external forms; as in Philo _Quod det. pot. ins._ 7 (i. p. 195) θρησκείαν ἀντὶ ὁσίοτητος ἡγούμενος, Plut. _Vit. Alex._ 2 δοκεῖ καὶ τὸ θρησκεύειν ὄνομα ταῖς _κατακόροις_ γενέσθαι καὶ _περιέργοις_ ἱερουργίαις: comp. Acts xxvi. 5, and see the well-known remarks of Coleridge on James i. 26, 27, in _Aids to Reflection_ p. 14. In the LXX θρησκεύειν, θρησκεία, together occur four times (Wisd. xi. 16, xiv. 16, 18, 27), and in all these examples the reference is to idolatrous or false worship. Indeed generally the usage of the word exhibits a tendency to a bad sense. τῶν ἀγγέλων] For the angelology and angelolatry of these Colossian false teachers, more especially in its connexion with Essene teaching, see the introduction, pp. 89 sq., 101 sq., 110, 181 sq. For the prominence which was given to angelology in the speculations of the Jews generally, see the _Preaching of Peter_ quoted in Clem. Alex. _Strom._ vi. 5 (p. 760) μηδὲ κατὰ Ἰουδαίους σέβεσθε, καὶ γὰρ εκεῖνοι ... οὐκ ἐπίστανται λατρεύοντες ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἀρχαγγέλοις, Celsus in Orig. _c. Cels._ v. 6 (i. p. 580) πρῶτον οὖν τῶν Ἰουδαίων θαυμάζειν ἄξιον, εἰ τὸν μὲν οὐρανὸν καὶ τοὺς ἐν τῷδε ἀγγέλους σέβουσι κ.τ.λ., comp. _ib._ i. 26 (p. 344). From Jews it naturally spread to Judaizing Christians; e.g. _Clem. Hom._ iii. 36 ἀγγέλων ὀνόματα γνωρίζειν, viii. 12 sq., _Test. xii. Patr._ Levi 3 (quoted above on i. 16). The interest however extended to more orthodox circles, as appears from the strange passage in Ignat. _Trall._ 5 μὴ οὐ δύναμαι τὰ ἐπουράνια γράψαι; ... δύναμαι νοεῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια καὶ τὰς τοποθεσίας τὰς ἀγγελικὰς καὶ τὰς συστάσεις τὰς ἀρχοντικάς κ.τ.λ. Of angelology among Gnostic sects see Iren. ii. 30. 6, ii. 32. 5, Orig. _c. Cels._ vi. 30 sq. (I. p. 653), Clem. Alex. _Exc. Theod._ p. 970 sq., _Pistis Sophia_ pp. 2, 19, 23, etc. ἃ ἑόρακεν κ.τ.λ.] literally ‘_invading what he has seen,_’ which is generally explained to mean ‘parading’ or ‘poring over his visions’. For this sense of ἐμβατεύειν, which takes either a genitive or a dative or an accusative, comp. Philo _de Plant. Noe_ ii. 19 (i. p. 341) οἱ προσωτέρω χωροῦντες τῶν ἐπιστημῶν καὶ ἐπὶ πλέον ἐμβατεύοντες αὐταῖς, 2 Macc. ii. 30 τὸ μὲν ἐμβατεύειν καί περὶ πάντων ποιεῖσθαι λόγον καὶ πολυπραγμονεῖν ἐν τοῖς κατὰ μέρος. At a later date this sense becomes common, e.g. Nemesius _de Nat. Hom._ p. 64 (ed. Matthæi) οὐρανὸν ἐμβατεύει τῇ θεωρίᾳ. In Xen. _Symp._ iv. 27 ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ βιβλίῷ ἀμφότεροι ἐμβατεύετέ τι, the reading may be doubtful. But though ἃ ἑόρακεν singly might mean ‘his visions’, and ἐμβατεύων ‘busying himself with’, the combination ‘invading what he has seen’, thus interpreted, is so harsh and incongruous as to be hardly possible; and there was perhaps some corruption in the text prior to all existing authorities (see the note on Phil. ii. 1 for a parallel case). Did the Apostle write )έωρᾳ (or αἴωρᾳ) κενεμβατεύων? In this case the existing text ==αεωρακενεμ βατευων== might be explained partly by an attempt to correct the form )εώρᾳ into αἰώρᾳ or conversely, and partly by the perplexity of transcribers when confronted with such unusual words. This reading had suggested itself to me independently without the knowledge that, so far as regards the latter word, it had been anticipated by others in the conjecture ἃ ἑώρα (or ἃ ἑώρακεν) κενεμβατεύων. The word κενεμβατεῖν ‘to walk on emptiness’, ‘to tread the air’, and so metaphorically (like αἐροβατεῖν, αἰθεροβατεῖν, αἰθερεμβατεῖν, etc.) ‘to indulge in vain speculations’, is not an uncommon word. For its metaphorical sense especially see Plut. _Mor._ p. 336 F οὕτως ἐρέμβετο κενεμβατοῦν καὶ σφαλλόμενον ὑπ’ ἀναρχίας τὸ μέγεθος αὐτῆς, Basil. _Op._ I. p. 135 τὸν νοῦν ... μυρία πλανηθέντα καὶ πολλὰ κενεμβατήσαντα κ.τ.λ., _ib._ I. p. 596 σοῦ δὲ μὴ κενεμβατέιτω ὁ νοῦς, Synes. _de Insomn._ p. 156 οὔτε γὰρ κενεμβατοῦντας τοὺς λόγους ἐξήνεγκαν. Though the precise form κενεμβατεύειν does not occur, yet it is unobjectionable in itself. For the other word which I have ventured to suggest, ἐώρᾳ or αἰώρᾳ, see Philo _de Somn._ ii. 6 (I. p. 665) _ὑποτυφούμενος_ ὑπ’ αἰώρας φρενῶν καὶ _κενοῦ_ φυσήματος, _ib._ § 9 (p. 667) τὴν ἐπ’ _αἰώρας_ φορουμένην _κενὴν_ δόξαν, _Quod Deus immut._ § 36 (I. p. 298) ὡσπερ ἐπ’ αἰώρας τινὸς ψευδοῦς καὶ ἀβεβαίου δόξης φορεῖσθαι _κατὰ κενοῦ βαίνοντα_. The first and last passages more especially present striking parallels, and show how germane to St Paul’s subject these ideas of ‘suspension or balancing in the air’ (ἐώρα or αἰώρα) and ‘treading the void’ (κενεμβατεύειν) would be, as expressing at once the spiritual pride and the emptiness of these speculative mystics; see also _de Somn._ ii. 2 (p. 661) ἐμφαίνεται καὶ τὸ τῆς _κενῆς_ δόξης, ἐφ’ ἣν, ὡς ἐφ’ ἅρμα, διὰ τὸ κοῦφον _ἀναβαίνει, φυσώμενος_ καὶ μετέωρον _ᾐωρηκὼς_ ἑαυτόν. The substantive, ἐώρα or αἰώρα, is used sometimes of the instrument for suspending, sometimes of the position of suspension. In this last sense it describes the poising of a bird, the floating of a boat on the waters, the balancing on a rope, and the like. Hence its expressiveness when used as a metaphor. In the received text a negative is inserted, ἃ μὴ ἑώρακεν ἐμβατεύων. This gives a very adequate sense ‘_intruding into those things which he has not seen_’; οὐ γὰρ εἶδεν ἀγγέλους, says Chrysostom, καὶ οὕτω διάκειται ὡς ἰδών: comp. Ezek. xiii. 3 οὐὰι τοῖς προφητεύουσιν ἀπὸ καρδίας αὐτῶν καὶ τὸ καθόλου μὴ βλέπουσιν. But, though the difficulty is thus overcome, this cannot be regarded as the original reading of the text, the authorities showing that the negative was an after insertion. See the detached note on various readings. For the form ἑόρακεν, which is better supported here than ἑώρακεν, see the note on ii. 1.

ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, ^{19}καὶ οὐ εἰκῇ φυσιούμενος] ‘_vainly puffed up_.’ Their profession of humility was a cloke for excessive pride: for, as St Paul says elsewhere (1 Cor. viii. 1), ἡ γνῶσις φυσιοῖ. It may be questioned whether εἰκῇ should be connected with the preceding or the following words. Its usual position in St Paul, before the words which it qualifies (Rom. xiii. 4, 1 Cor. xv. 2, Gal. iv. 11; there is an exceptional reason for the exceptional position in Gal. iii. 4), points to the latter construction. τοῦ νοὸς κ.τ.λ.] ‘_the mind of his flesh_’, i.e. unenlightened by the Spirit; comp. Rom. viii. 7 τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός. It would seem that the Apostle is here taking up some watchword of the false teachers. They doubtless boasted that they were directed ὑπὸ τοῦ νόος. Yes, he answers, but it is ὁ νοῦς τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν. Compare Rev. ii. 24, where the favourite Gnostic boast γινώσκειν τὰ βαθέα is characterized by the addition of τοῦ Σατανᾶ (see _Galatians_ p. 298 note 3). Comp. August. _Conf._ x. 67 ‘Quem invenirem qui me reconciliaret tibi? Ambiendum mihi fuit ad angelos? Qua prece? quibus sacramentis? Multi conantes ad te redire, neque per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, tentaverunt hæc et inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum et digni habiti sunt illusionibus. Elati enim te quærebant doctrinæ fastu, etc.’ 19. οὐ κρατῶν] ‘_not holding fast_.’ This is the most common construction and meaning of κρατεῖν in the New Testament; e.g. Mark vii. 8 _ἀφέντες_ τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ _κρατεῖτε_ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων; comp. Cant. iii. 4 ἑῦρον ὃν ἠγάπησεν ἡ ψυχή μου, ἐκράτησα αὐτὸν καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκα αὐτόν.

κρατῶν τὴν κεφαλήν, ἐξ οὗ πᾶν τὸ σῶμα διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν τὴν κεφαλήν] ‘_the Head_’ regarded as a title, so that a person is at once suggested, and the relative which follows is masculine, ἐξ οὗ; comp. the parallel passage, Ephes. iv. 16 ὅς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλή, Χριστὸς ἐξ οὗ πᾶν τὸ σῶμα κ.τ.λ. The supplication and worship of angels is a substitution of inferior members for the Head, which is the only source of spiritual life and energy. See the introduction pp. 34, 78, 101 sq., 181 sq. διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_through the junctures and ligaments_.’ Galen, when describing the structure of the human frame, more than once specifies the elements of union as twofold: the body owes its compactness partly to the _articulation_, partly to the _attachment_; e.g. _Op._ II. p. 734 (ed. Kühn) ἔστι δὲ ὁ τρόπος τῆς συνθέσεως αὐτῶν διττὸς κατὰ γένος, ὁ μὲν ἕτερος κατὰ _ἄρθρον_, ὁ δὲ ἕτερος κατὰ _σύμφυσιν_. Similarly, though with a more general reference, Aristotle speaks of two kinds of union, which he describes as ἁφή ‘contact’ and σύμφυσις ‘cohesion’ respectively; _Metaph._ iv. 4 (p. 1014) διαφέρει δὲ _σύμφυσις ἁφῆς_· ἕνθα μὲν γὰρ οὐθὲν παρὰ τὴν ἁφὴν ἕτερον ἀνάγκη εἶναι, ἐν δὲ τοῖς συμπεφύκοσιν ἐστί τι ἓν τὸ αὐτὸ ἐν ἀμφοῖν ὃ ποιεῖ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἅπτεσθαι συμπεφυκέναι καὶ εἶναι ἓν κ.τ.λ., _Phys. Ausc._ iv. 6 (p. 213) τούτοις ἁφή ἐστιν· σύμφυσις δέ, ὅταν ἄμφω ἐνεργείᾳ ἓν γένωνται (comp. _ib._ v. 3, p. 227), _Metaph._ x. 3 (p. 1071) ὅσα ἐστιν ἁφῇ καὶ μὴ συμφύσει. The relation of contiguous surfaces and the connexion of different parts together effect structural unity. This same distinction appears in the Apostle’s language here. Contact and attachment are the primary ideas in ἁφαί and σύνδεσμοι respectively. Of the function of ἁφή, ‘contact’, in physiology (περὶ ἁφῆς τῆς ἐν τοῖς φυσικοῖς) Aristotle speaks at some length in one passage, _de Gen. et Corr._ i. 6 (p. 322 sq.). It may be mentioned, as illustrating St Paul’s image, that Aristotle in this passage lays great stress on the mutual sympathy and influence of the parts in contact, describing them as παθητικὰ καὶ ποιητικά and as κινητικὰ καὶ κινητὰ ὑπ’ ἀλληλῶν. Elsewhere, like St Paul here, he uses the plural αἱ ἁφαί; _de Cælo_ i. 11 (p. 280) τὸ ἄνευ φθορᾶς ὁτὲ μὲν ὂν ὁτὲ δὲ μὴ ὄν, οἷον τὰς ἁφάς, ὅτι ἄνευ τοῦ φθείρεσθαι πρότερον οὖσαι ὕστερον οὐκ εἰσίν, _de Gen. et Corr._ i. 8 (p. 326) ὄυτε γὰρ _κατὰ τὰς ἁφὰς_ ἐνδέχεται διιέναι διὰ τῶν διαφανῶν ὄυτε διὰ τῶν _πόρων_, _ib._ § 9 (p. 327) εἰ γὰρ διακρίνεσθαι δύναται

καὶ συνδέσμων ἐπιχορηγούμενον καὶ συνβιβαζόμενον κατὰ τὰς _ἁφάς_, ὥσπερ φασί τινες, κἂν μήπω ᾖ διηρημένον, ἔσται διηρημένον· δυνατὸν γὰρ διαιρεθῆναι: comp. [Plat.] _Axioch._ p. 365 A συνειλεγμένον τὰς ἁφὰς καὶ τῷ σώματι ῥωμαλέον. It is quite clear from these passages of Aristotle, more especially from the distinction of ἁφαί and πόροι, that αἱ ἁφαί are the joinings, the junctures. When applied to the human body they would be ‘joints,’ provided that we use the word accurately of the relations between contiguous limbs, and not loosely (as it is often used) of the parts of the limbs themselves in the neighbourhood of the contact. Hippocrates indeed used ἁφαί as a physiological term in a different sense, employing it as a synonyme for ἅμματα i.e. the fasciculi of muscles (see Galen _Op._ XIX. p. 87), but this use was quite exceptional and can have no place here. Thus αἱ ἁφαί will be almost a synonyme for τὰ ἄρθρα, differing however (1) as being more wide and comprehensive, and (2) as not emphasizing so strongly the _adaptation_ of the contiguous parts. The considerations just urged seem decisive as to the meaning of the word. Some eminent modern critics however explain αἱ ἁφαί to be ‘the senses’, following Theodoret on Ephes. iv. 16 ἁφὴν δὲ τὴν ἄισθησιν προσηγόρευσεν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ αὕτη μία τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ μέρους τὸ πᾶν ὠνόμασε. St Chrysostom had led the way to this interpretation, though his language is less explicit than Theodoret’s. To such a meaning however there are fatal objections. (1) This sense of ἁφή is wholly unsupported. It is true that touch lies at the root of all sensations, and that this fact was recognised by ancient physiologists: e.g. Aristot. _de Anim._ i. 13 (p. 435) ἄνευ μὲν γὰρ ἁφῆς οὐδεμίαν ἐνδέχεται ἄλλην ἄισθησιν ἔχειν. But here the connexion ends; and unless more cogent examples not hitherto adduced are forthcoming, we are justified in saying that αἱ ἁφαί could no more be used for αἱ αἰσθήσεις, than in English ‘the touches’ could be taken as a synonyme for ‘the senses.’ (2) The image would be seriously marred by such a meaning. The ἁφαί and σύνδεσμοι would no longer be an exhaustive description of the elements of union in the anatomical structure; the conjunction of things so incongruous under the vinculum of the same article and preposition, _διὰ τῶν_ ἁφῶν καὶ συνδέσμων, would be unnatural; and the intrusion of the ‘senses’ would be out of place, where the result specified is the supply of nourishment (ἐπιχορηγούμενον) and the compacting of the parts (συμβιβαζόμενον). (3) All the oldest versions, the Latin, the Syriac, and the Memphitic, explain it otherwise, so as to refer in some way to the connexion of the parts of the body; e.g. in the Old Latin it is rendered _nexus_ here and _junctura_ in Ephes. iv. 16. συνδέσμων] ‘_bands_,’ ‘_ligaments_.’ The Greek σύνδεσμος, like the English ‘ligament,’ has a general and a special sense. In its general and comprehensive meaning it denotes any of the connecting bands which strap the body together, such as muscles or tendons or ligaments properly so called; in its special and restricted use it is a ‘ligament’ in the technical sense; comp. Galen _Op._ IV. p. 369 σύνδεσμος γάρ ἐστιν, ὁ γοῦν ἰδίως, οὐ κοινῶς ὀνομαζόμενος, σῶμα νευρῶδες ἐξ ὀστοῦ μὲν ὁρμώμενον πάντως διαπεφυκὸς δὲ ἢ εἰς ὀστοῦν ἢ εἰς μῦν. Of the σύνδεσμοι or ligaments properly so called Galen describes at length the several functions and uses, more especially as binding and holding together the διαρθρώσεις; _Op._ I. 236, II. 268, 739, III. 149, IV. 2, etc., comp. Tim. Locr. _de An. Mund._ p. 557 συνδέσμοις ποττὰν κίνασιν τοῖς νεύροις συνᾶψε τὰ ἄρθρα (_Opusc. Mythol._ etc. ed. Gale). In our text indeed σύνδεσμοι must be taken in its comprehensive sense; but the relation of the ἁφαί to the σύνδεσμοι in St Paul still remains the same as that of the διαρθρώσεις to the σύνδεσμοι in Galen. ἐπιχορηγούμενον κ.τ.λ.] The two functions performed by the ἁφαί and σύνδεσμοι are _first_ the supply of nutriment etc. (ἐπιχορηγούμενον), and _secondly_ the compacting of the frame (συνβιβαζόμενον). In other words they are the communication of life and energy, and the preservation of unity and order. The _source_ of all (ἐξ οὗ) is Christ Himself the Head; but the _channels_ of communication (διὰ τῶν κ.τ.λ.) are the different members of His body, in their relation one to another. For ἐπιχορηγούμενον ‘bountifully furnished’ see the note on Gal. iii. 5. Somewhat similarly Aristotle speaks of σῶμα κάλλιστα πεφυκὸς καὶ κεχορηγημένον, _Pol._ iv. 1 (p. 1288). For examples of χορηγία applied to functions of the bodily organs, see Galen _Op._ III. p. 617 ἐν ταῖς εἰσπνοαῖς χορηγίᾳ ψυχρᾶς ποίοτητος, Alex. _Probl._ i. 81 τὸ πλεῖστον τῆς τροφῆς ἐξυδαρούμενον χορηγεῖται πρὸς γένεσιν τοῦ πάθους. For συνβιβαζόμενον, ‘joined together, compacted’, see the note on ii. 2. In the parallel passage, Ephes. iv. 16, this part of the image is more distinctly emphasized, συναρμολούμενον καὶ συνβιβαζόμενον. The difference corresponds to the different aims of the two epistles. In the Colossian letter the vital connexion with the Head is the main theme; in the Ephesian, the unity in diversity among the members.

αὔξει τὴν αὔυξησιν τοῦ Θεοῦ. ^{20}εἰ ἀπεθάνετε σὺν Χριστῷ αὔξει τὴν αὕξησιν κ.τ.λ.] By the two-fold means of contact and attachment nutriment has been diffused and structural unity has been attained, but these are not the ultimate result; they are only intermediate processes; the end is _growth_. Comp. Arist. _Metaph._ iv. 4 (p. 1014) _αὔξησιν ἔχειδ’_ ἑτέρου τῷ _ἅπτεσθαι_ καὶ _συμπεφυκέναι_ ... διαφέρει δὲ σύμφυσις ἁφῆς, where growth is attributed to the same two physiological conditions as here. τοῦ Θεοῦ] i.e. ‘which partakes of God, which belongs to God, which has its abode in God.’ Thus the finite is truly united with the Infinite; the end which the false teachers strove in vain to compass is attained; the Gospel vindicates itself as the true theanthropism, after which the human heart is yearning and the human intellect is feeling. See above p. 183 sq. With this conclusion of the sentence contrast the parallel passage Ephes. iv. 16 τὴν αὔξησιν τοῦ σώματος _ποιεῖται εἰς οἰκοδομὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἐν ἀγάπῃ_, where again the different endings are determined by the different motives of the two epistles. The discoveries of modern physiology have invested the Apostle’s language with far greater distinctness and force than it can have worn to his own contemporaries. Any exposition of the nervous system more especially reads like a commentary on his image of the relations between the body and the head. At every turn we meet with some fresh illustration which kindles it with a flood of light. The volition communicated from the brain to the limbs, the sensations of the extremities telegraphed back to the brain, the absolute mutual sympathy between the head and the members, the instantaneous paralysis ensuing on the interruption of continuity, all these add to the completeness and life of the image. But the following passages will show how even ancient scientific speculation was feeling after those physiological truths which the image involves; Hippocr. _de Morb. Sacr._ p. 309 (ed Foese) κατὰ ταῦτα νομίζω τὸν ἐγκέφαλον δύναμιν πλείστην ἔχειν ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ... οἱ δὲ ὀφθαλμοὶ καὶ τὰ οὔατα καὶ ἡ γλῶσσα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες καὶ οἱ πόδες, οἷα ἂν ὁ ἐγκέφαλος γινώσκῃ, τοιαῦτα ὑπηρετοῦσι ... ἐς δὲ τὴν σύνεσιν ὁ _ἐγκέφαλος_ ἐστὶν ὁ διαγγέλλων ... διότι φημὶ τὸν ἐγκέφαλον εἶναι τὸν ἑρμηνεύοντα τὴν σύνεσιν, αἱ δὲ _φρένες_ ἄλλως ὄνομα ἔχουσι τῇ τύχῃ κεκτημένον ... λέγουσι δέ τινες ὡς φρονέομεν τῇ _καρδίῃ_ καὶ τὸ ἀνίωμενον τοῦτο ἐστι καὶ τὸ φροντίζον· τὸ δὲ οὐχ οὕτως ἔχει ... τῆς ... φρονήσιος οὐδετέρῳ μέτεστιν ἀλλὰ πάντων τουτέων ὁ ἐγκέφαλος αἴτιός ἐστιν ... πρῶτος αἰσθάνεται ὁ ἐγκέφαλος τῶν ἐν τῷ σώματι ἐνεόντων (where the theory is mixed up with some curious physiological speculations), Galen _Op._ I. 235 αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ ἐγκέφαλος ὅτι μὲν ἀρχὴ τοῖς νεύροις ἅπασι τῆς δυνάμεώς ἐστιν, ἐναργῶς ἐμάθομεν ... πότερον δὲ ὡς αὐτὸς τοῖς νεύροις, οὕτω ἐκέινῳ πάλιν ἕτερόν τι μόριον ἐπιπέμπει, ἢ πηγή τις αὐτῶν ἐστίν, ἔτ’ ἄδηλον, _ib._ IV. p. 11 ἀρχὴ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῶν (i.e. τῶν νεύρων) ὁ ἐγκέφαλός ἐστι, καὶ τὰ πάθη εἰς αὐτὸν φέρει, οἷον εἰς ἄρουράν τινα τῆς λογιστικῆς ψυχῆς· ἔκφυσις δ’ ἐντεῦθεν, οἷον πρέμνου τινὸς εἰς δένδρον ἀνήκοντος μέγα, ὁ νωτιαῖός ἐστι μυελὸς ... σύμπαν δ’ οὕτω τὸ σῶμα μεταλαμβάνει δι’ αὐτῶν πρώτης μὲν καὶ μάλιστα κινήσεως, ἐπὶ τάυτῃ δ’ αἰσθήσεως, XIV. p. 313 hάυτη γὰρ (i.e. ἡ κεφαλή) καθάπερ τις ἀκρόπολίς ἐστι τοῦ σώματος καὶ τῶν τιμιωτάτων καὶ ἀναγκαιοτάτων ἀνθρώποις αἰσθήσεων οἰκητήριον. Plato had made the head the central organ of the reason (_Tim._ 69 sq.: see Grote’s _Plato_ III. pp. 272, 287, _Aristotle_ II. p. 179 sq.), if indeed the speculations of the Timæus may be regarded as giving his serious physiological views; but he had postulated other centres of the emotions and appetites, the heart and the abdomen. Aristotle, while rightly refusing to localize the mind as mind, had taken a retrograde step physiologically, when he transferred the centre of sensation from the brain to the heart; e.g. _de Part. Anim._ ii. 10 (p. 656). Galen, criticizing his predecessors, says of Aristotle δῆλός ἐστι κατεγνωκὼς μὲν αὐτοῦ (i.e. τοῦ ἐγκεφάλοὐ τελέαν ἀχρηστίαν, φανερῶς δ’ ὁμολογεῖν αἰδούμενος (_Op._ III. p. 625). The Stoics however (Ζήνων καὶ Χρύσιππος ἅμα τῷ σφετέρῳ χορῷ παντί) were even worse offenders; and in reply to them more especially Galen elsewhere discusses the question πότερον ἐγκέφαλος ἢ καρδία τὴν ἀρχὴν ἔχει, _Op._ V. p. 213 sq. Bearing in mind all this diversity of opinion among ancient physiologists, we cannot fail to be struck in the text not only with the correctness of the image but also with the propriety of the terms; and we are forcibly reminded that among the Apostle’s most intimate companions at this time was one whom he calls ‘the beloved physician’ (iv. 14). 20–23. ‘You died with Christ to your old life. All mundane relations have ceased for you. Why then do you—you who have attained your spiritual manhood—submit still to the rudimentary discipline of children? Why do you—you who are citizens of heaven—bow your necks afresh to the tyranny of material ordinances, as though you were still living in the world? It is the same old story again; the same round of hard, meaningless, vexatious prohibitions, ‘Handle not,’ ‘Taste not,’ ‘Touch not.’ What folly! When all these things—these meats and drinks and the like—are earthly, perishable, wholly trivial and unimportant! They are used, and there is an end of them. What is this, but to draw down upon yourselves the denunciations uttered by the prophet of old? What is this but to abandon God’s word for precepts which are issued by human authority and inculcated by human teachers? All such things have a show of wisdom, I grant. There is an officious parade of religious devotion, an eager affectation of humility; there is a stern ascetic rigour, which ill-treats the body; but there is nothing of any real value to check indulgence of the flesh.’ 20. From the theological tenets of the false teachers the Apostle turns to the ethical—from the objects of their worship to the principles of their conduct. The baptism into Christ, he argues, is death to the world. The Christian has passed away to another sphere of existence. Mundane ordinances have ceased to have any value for him, because his mundane life has ended. They belong to the category of the perishable; he has been translated to the region of the eternal. It is therefore a denial of his Christianity to subject himself again to their tyranny, to return once more to the dominion of the world. See again the note on iii. 1. εἰ ἀπεθάνετε] ‘_if ye died_, when ye were baptized into Christ.’ For this connexion between baptism and death see the notes on ii. 11, iii. 3. This death has many aspects in St Paul’s teaching. It is not only a dying _with_ Christ, 2 Tim. ii. 11 εἰ γὰρ συναπεθάνομεν; but it is also a dying to or from something. This is sometimes represented as _sin_, Rom. vi. 2 ὁίτινες ἀπεθάνομεν τῇ _ἁμαρτίᾳ_ (comp. vv. 7, 8); sometimes as _self_, 2 Cor. v. 14, 15 ἄρα οἱ πάντες ἀπέθανον ... ἵνα οἱ ζῶντες μήκετι _ἑαυτοῖς_ ζῶσιν; sometimes as the _law_, Rom. vii. 6 κατηργήθημεν ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου ἀποθανόντες, Gal. ii. 19 διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον; sometimes still more widely as the _world_, regarded as the sphere of all material rules and all mundane interests, so here and iii. 3 ἀπεθάνετε γάρ. In all cases St Paul uses the aorist ἀπέθανον, never the perfect τέθνηκα; for he wishes to emphasize the one absolute _crisis_, which was marked by the change of changes. When the aorist is wanted, the compound verb ἀποθνήσκειν is used; when the perfect, the simple verb θήσκειν; see Buttmann _Ausf. Gramm._ § 114. This rule holds universally in the Greek Testament.

ἀπὸ τῶν στοιχέιων τοῦ κόσμου, τί ὡς ζῶντες ἐν κόσμῳ ἀπὸ τῶν στοιχείων κ.τ.λ.] i.e. ‘from the rudimentary, disciplinary, ordinances, whose sphere is the mundane and sensuous’: see the note on ver. 8. For the pregnant expression ἀποθανεῖν ἀπὸ comp. Gal. v. 4 κατηργήθητε ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ (so too Rom. vii. 2, 6), 2 Cor. xi. 3 φθαρῇ ... ἀπὸ τῆς ἁπλότητος, and see A. Buttmann p. 277 note.

δογματίζεσθε; ^{21}Μὴ ἅψῃ μηδὲ γεύσῃ μηδὲ θίγῃς ^{22}ἅ δογματίζεσθε] ‘_are ye overridden with precepts, ordinances_.’ In the LXX the verb δογματίζειν is used several times, meaning ‘to issue a decree,’ Esth. iii. 9, 1 Esdr. vi. 33, 2 Macc. x. 8, xv. 36, 3 Macc. iv. 11. Elsewhere it is applied most commonly to the precepts of philosophers; e.g. Justin _Apol._ i. 7 οἱ ἐν Ἕλλησι τὰ αὐτοῖς ἀρεστὰ _δογματίσαντες_ ἐκ παντὸς τῷ ἑνὶ ὀνόματι _φιλοσοφίας_ προσαγορεύονται (comp. § 4), Epict. iii. 7. 17 sq. εἰ θέλεις εἶναι φιλόσοφος ... δογματίζων τὰ αἰσχρά. Here it would include alike the δόγματα of the Mosaic law (ver. 14) and the δόγματα of the ‘philosophy’ denounced above (ver. 8). Both are condemned; the one as superseded though once authoritative, the other as wholly vexatious and unwarrantable. Examples are given in the following verse, μὴ ἅψῃ κ.τ.λ. For the construction here, where the more remote object, which would stand in the dative with the active voice (2 Macc. x. 8 ἐδογμάτισαν ... τῷ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἔθνει), becomes the nominative of the passive, compare χρηματίζεσθαι Matt. ii. 12, 22, διακονεῖσθαι Mark x. 45, and see Winer § xxxix. p. 326, A. Buttmann p. 163, Kühner § 378, II. p. 109. 21. Μὴ ἅψῃ κ.τ.λ.] The Apostle disparagingly repeats the prohibitions of the false teachers in their own words, ‘Handle not, neither taste, neither touch.’ The rabbinical passages quoted in Schöttgen show how exactly St Paul’s language reproduces, not only the spirit, but even the form, of these injunctions. The Latin commentators, Hilary and Pelagius, suppose these prohibitions to be the Apostle’s own, thus making a complete shipwreck of the sense. So too St Ambrose _de Noe et Arca_ 25 (I. p. 267), _de Abr._ i. 6 (I. p. 300). We may infer from the language of St Augustine who argues against it, that this was the popular interpretation in his day: _Epist._ cxix. (II. p. 512) ‘tanquam præceptum putatur apostoli, nescio quid tangere, gustare, attaminare, prohibentis.’ The ascetic tendency of the age thus fastened upon a slight obscurity in the Greek and made the Apostle recommend the very practices which he disparaged. For a somewhat similar instance of a misinterpretation commonly received see the note on τοῖς δόγμασιν ver. 14. Jerome however (I. p. 878) had rightly interpreted the passage, illustrating it by the precepts of the Talmud. At a still earlier date Tertullian, _Adv. Marc._ v. 19, gives the correct interpretation. These prohibitions relate to defilement contracted in divers ways by contact with impure objects. Some were doubtless reenactments of the Mosaic law; while others would be exaggerations or additions of a rigorous asceticism, such as we find among the Essene prototypes of these Colossian heretics, e.g. the avoidance of oil, of wine, or of flesh-meat, the shunning of contact with a stranger or a religious inferior, and the like; see pp. 85 sq. For the religious bearing of this asceticism, as springing from the _dualism_ of these heretical teachers, see above pp. 79, 104 sq.

ἐστιν πάντα εἰς φθορὰν τῇ ἀποχρήσεἰ, κατὰ τὰ ἅψῃ] The difference between ἅπτεσθαι and θιγγάνειν is not great, and in some passages where they occur together, it is hard to distinguish them: e.g. Exod. xix. 12 προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς τοῦ ἀναβῆναι εἰς τὸ ὄρος καὶ _θιγεῖν_ τι αὐτοῦ· πᾶς ὁ _ἁψάμενος_ τοῦ ὄρους θανάτῳ τελευτήσει, Eur. _Bacch._ 617 οὔτ’ _ἔθιγεν_ οὔθ’ _ἣψαθ’_ ἡμῶν, Arist. _de Gen. et Corr._ i. 8 (p. 326) διὰ τί οὐ γίγνεται _ἁψάμενα_ ἕν, ὥσπερ ὕδωρ ὕδατος ὅταν _θίγη_|; Dion Chrys. _Or._ xxxiv. (II. p. 50) οἱ δ’ ἐκ παρέργου προσίασιν ἁπτόμενοι μόνον τοῦ πράγματος, ὥσπερ οἱ σπονδῆς θιγγάνοντες, Themist. _Paraphr. Arist._ 95 τὴν δὲ ἁφὴν αὐτῶν ἅπτεσθαι τῶν αἰσθητῶν _ἀναγκαῖον_· καὶ γὰρ τοὔνομα αὐτῆς ἐκ τοῦ _ἅπτεσθαι_ καὶ _θιγγάνειν_. But ἅπτεσθαι is the stronger word of the two. This arises from the fact that it frequently suggests, though it does not necessarily involve, the idea of a voluntary or conscious effort, ‘to take hold of’–a suggestion which is entirely wanting to the colourless word θιγγάνειν; comp. Themist. _Paraphr. Arist._ 94 ἡ τῶν ζώων _ἁφὴ_ κρίσις ἐστὶ καὶ ἀντίληψις τοῦ _θιγγάνοντος_. Hence in Xen. _Cyrop._ i. 3. 5 ὅτι σε, φάναι, ὁρῶ, ὅταν μὲν τοῦ ἄρτου ἅψῃ, εἰς οὐδὲν τὴν χεῖρα ἀποψώμενον, ὅταν δὲ τούτων τινὸς _θίγῃς_, εὐθὺς ἀποκαθαίρει τὴν χεῖρα εἰς τὰ χειρόμακτρα κ.τ.λ. Thus the words chosen in the Latin Versions, _tangere_ for ἅπτεσθαι and _attaminare_ or _contrectare_ for θιγεῖν, are unfortunate, and ought to be transposed. Our English Version, probably influenced by the Latin, has erred in the same direction, translating ἅπτεσθαι by ‘touch’ and θιγεῖν by ‘handle’. Here again they must be transposed. ‘Handle’ is too strong a word for either; though in default of a better it may stand for ἅπτεσθαι, which it more nearly represents. Thus the two words ἅψῃ and θίγῃς being separate in meaning, γεύσῃ may well interpose; and the three together will form a descending series, so that, as Beza (quoted in Trench _N. T. Syn._ § xvii. p. 57) well expresses it, ‘decrescente semper oratione, intelligatur crescere superstitio’. On the other hand ἅψῃ has been interpreted here as referring to the relation of husband and wife, as e.g. in 1 Cor. vii. 1 γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι; and the prohibition would then be illustrated by the teaching of the heretics in 1 Tim. iv. 3 κωλύοντων γαμεῖν. But, whatever likelihood there may be that the Colossian false teachers also held this doctrine (see above p. 85 sq.), it nowhere appears in the context, and we should not expect so important a topic to be dismissed thus cursorily. Moreover θιγγάνειν is used as commonly in this meaning as ἅπτεσθαι (see Gataker _Op. Crit._ p. 79, and examples might be multiplied); so that all ground for assigning it to ἅπτεσθαι especially is removed. Both ἅπτεσθαι and θιγγάνειν refer to defilement incurred through the sense of touch, though in different degrees; ‘Handle not, nor yet taste, nor even touch.’ 22. ‘Only consider what is the real import of this scrupulous avoidance. Why, you are attributing an inherent value to things which are fleeting; you yourselves are citizens of eternity, and yet your thoughts are absorbed in the perishable’. ἅ] ‘_which things_’, i.e. the meats and drinks and other material objects, regarded as impure to the touch. The antecedent to ἅ is implicitly involved in the prohibitions μὴ ἅψῃ κ.τ.λ. ἐστιν εἰς φθορὰν] ‘_are destined for corruption_’. For similar expressions see Acts viii. 20 ἔιη εἰς ἀπωλείαν (comp. ver. 23 εἰς χολὴν πικρίας καὶ σύνδεσμον ἀδικίας ... ὄντἀ, 2 Πετ. ιι. 12 [Γρεεκ: γεγεννημένα ... εἰς ἅλωσιν καὶ φθοράν. For the word φθορά, involving the idea of ‘decomposition’, see the note on Gal. vi. 8. The expression here corresponds to εἰς ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκβάλλεται (ἐκπορεύεταἰ, Matt. xv. 17, Mark vii. 19. τῇ ἀποχρήσει] ‘_in the consuming_’. While the verb ἀποχρῶμαι is common, the substantive ἀπόχρησις is extremely rare: Plut. _Mor._ p. 267 F χαίρειν ταῖς τοιάυταις ἀποχρήσεσι καὶ συστολαῖς τῶν περιττῶν (i.e. ‘by such modes of consuming and abridging superfluities’), Dion. Hal. _A. R._ i. 58 ἐν ἀποχρήσει γῆς μοίρας. The unusual word was chosen for its expressiveness: the χρῆσις here was an ἀπόχρησις; the things could not be used without rendering them unfit for further use. The subtlety of the expression in the original cannot be reproduced in any translation. On the other hand the clause is sometimes interpreted as a continuation of the language of the ascetic teachers; ‘Touch not things which all lead to ruin by their abuse’. This interpretation however has nothing to recommend it. It loses the point of the Apostle’s argument; while it puts upon εἶναι εἰς φθοράν a meaning which is at least not natural. κατὰ κ.τ.λ.] connected directly with vv. 20, 21, so that the words ἅ ἐστιν ... τῇ ἀποχρήσει are a parenthetical comment.

ἐντάλματα καὶ διδασκαλίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων· τὰ ἐντάλματα κ.τ.λ.] The absence of both preposition and article before διδασκαλίας shows that the two words are closely connected. They are placed here in their proper order; for ἐντάλματα describes the source of authority and διδασκαλίας the medium of communication. The expression is taken ultimately from Isaiah xxix. 13, where the words run in the LXX, μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με, διδάσκοντες ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων καὶ διδασκαλίας. The Evangelists (Matt. xv. 9, Mark vii. 7), quoting the passage, substitute in the latter clause διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων. The coincidences in St Paul’s language here with our Lord’s words as related in the Gospels (Matt. xv. 1–20, Mark vii. 1–23) are striking, and suggest that the Apostle had this discourse in his mind. (1) Both alike argue against these vexatious ordinances from the _perishableness_ of meats. (2) Both insist upon the indifference of such things in themselves. In Mark vii. 19 the Evangelist emphasizes the importance of our Lord’s words on this occasion, as practically abolishing the Mosaic distinction of meats by declaring all alike to be clean (καθαρίζων; see the note on ver. 16). (3) Both alike connect such ordinances with the practices condemned in the prophetic denunciation of Isaiah.

^{23}ἅτινά ἐστιν λόγον μὲν ἔχοντα σοφίας ἐν ἐθελοθρησκείᾳ 23. ‘All such teaching is worthless. It may bear the semblance of wisdom; but it wants the reality. It may make an officious parade of religious service; it may vaunt its humility; it may treat the body with merciless rigour; but it entirely fails in its chief aim. It is powerless to check indulgence of the flesh.’ ἅτινα] ‘_which sort of things_’. Not only these particular precepts, μὴ ἅψῃ κ.τ.λ., but all precepts falling under the same category are condemned. For this force of ἅτινα as distinguished from ἅ, see the notes on Gal. iv. 24, v. 19, Phil. iv. 3. The antecedent here is not ἐντάλματα καὶ διδασκαλίας κ.τ.λ., but the prohibitions given in ver. 21. λόγον μὲν κ.τ.λ.] ‘_having a reputation for wisdom_’, but not the reality. The corresponding member, which should be introduced by δέ, is suppressed; the oppositive clause being postponed and appearing later in a new form, οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ τινι κ.τ.λ. Such suppressions are common in classical writers, more especially in Plato; see Kühner § 531, II. p. 813 sq., Jelf § 766, and comp. Winer § lxiii. p. 719 sq. St Jerome therefore is not warranted in attributing St Paul’s language here to ‘imperitia artis grammaticæ’ (_Epist._ cxxi, _Op._ II. p. 884). On the contrary it is just the license which an adept in a language would be more likely to take than a novice. In this sentence λόγον ἔχοντα σοφίας is best taken as a single predicate, so that ἐστιν is disconnected from ἔχοντα. Otherwise the construction ἐστιν ἔχοντα (for ἔχει) would be supported by many parallels in the Greek Testament; see Winer § xlv. p. 437. The phrase λόγον ἔχειν τινος, so far as I have observed, has four meanings. (A) Two as applied to the _thinking subject_. (i) ‘To take account of, to hold in account, to pay respect to’: e.g. Æsch. _Prom._ 231 βροτῶν δὲ τῶν ταλαιπώρων λόγον οὐκ ἔσχεν οὐδένα, Demosth. _de Coron._ § 199 )έιπερ ἢ δόξης ἢ προγόνων ἢ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος εἶχε λόγον, Plut. _Vit. Philop._ 18 πῶς ἄξιον ἐκέινου λόγον ἔχειν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς κ.τ.λ. (ii) ‘To possess the reason or account or definition of’, ‘to have a scientific knowledge of’; Plato _Gorg._ p. 465 A τέχνην δὲ αὐτὴν οὔ φημι εἶναι ἀλλ’ ἐμπειρίαν, ὅτι οὐκ ἔχει λόγον οὐδένα hῶν προσφέρει, ὁποῖα ἄττα τὴν φύσιν ἐστίν, and so frequently. These two senses are recognised by Aristotle, _Eth. Nic._ i. 13 (p. 1102), where he distinguishes the meaning of the expressions ἔχειν λόγον τοῦ πατρὸς ἢ τῶν φίλων and ἔχειν λόγον τῶν μαθητικῶν. (B) Two as applied to the _object of thought_. (iii) ‘To have the credit or reputation of’, as here. This sense of ἔχειν λόγον, ‘to be reputed’, is more commonly found with an infinitive: e.g. Plato _Epin._ 987 B αὑτὸς Ἀφροδίτης εἶναι σχέδον ἔχει λόγον. (iv) ‘To fulfil the definition of, to possess the characteristics, to have the nature of’; e.g. Philo _Vit. Cont._ 4 (II. p. 477) ἑκάτερον δὲ πηγῆς λόγον ἔχον, Plut. _Mor._ p. 637 D τὸ δὲ ὢον οὔτε ἀρχῆς ἔχει λόγον, οὐ γὰρ ὑφίσταται πρῶτον, οὔτε ὅλου φύσιν, ἀτελὲς γάρ ἐστιν, ib. 640 F δεῖ πρὸς τὸ ἐμφυτεύομενον χώρας λόγον ἔχειν τὸ δεξόμενον. The senses of λόγον ἔχειν with other constructions, or as used absolutely, are very various, e.g. ‘to be reasonable’, ‘to hold discourse’, ‘to bear a ratio’, etc., but do not come under consideration here. Nor again does such an expression as Plut. _Mor._ p. 550 C μήτε τὸν λόγον ἔχων τοῦ νομοθέτου, ‘not being in possession of, not knowing, the intention of the legislator’; for the definite article removes it from the category of the cases considered. καὶ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ [καὶ] ἀφειδείᾳ σώματος, οὐκ ἐν ἐθελοθρησκείᾳ] ‘_in volunteered_, self-imposed, officious, supererogatory _service_’. One or both of these two ideas, (i) ‘excessive readiness, officious zeal,’ (ii) ‘affectation, unreality,’ are involved in this and similar compounds; e.g. ἐθελοδουλεία, ἐθελοκάκησις, ἐθελοκίνδυνος, ἐθελοκωφέιν, ἐθελορήτωρ, ἐθελοπρόξενος: these compounds being used most frequently, though not always (as this last word shows), in a bad sense. This mode of expression was naturalised in Latin, as appears from Augustine _Epist._ cxlix. 27 (II. p. 514) ‘Sic enim et vulgo dicitur qui divitem affectat thelodives, et qui sapientem thelosapiens, et cetera hujusmodi’. Epiphanius, when writing of the Pharisees, not content with the word here supplied by St Paul, coins a double compound ἐθελοπερισσοθρησκεία, _Hær._ i. 16 (p. 34). ταπεινοφροσύνῃ] The word is here disparaged by its connexion, as in ver. 18 (see the note there). The force of ἐθελο- may be regarded as carried on to it. Real genuine ταπεινοφροσύνη is commended below; iii. 12. ἀφειδείᾳ σώματος] ‘_hard treatment of the body_’. The expression ἀφειδεῖν τοῦ σώματος is not uncommon, being used most frequently, not as here of ascetic discipline, but rather of courageous exposure to hardship and danger in war, e.g. Lysias _Or. Fun._ 25, Joseph. _B.J._ iii. 7. 18, Lucian _Anach._ 24, Plut. _Vit. Pericl._ 10; in Plut. _Mor._ p. 137 C however of a student’s toil, and _ib._ p. 135 E, more generally of the rigorous demands made by the soul on the body. The substantive ἀφέιδεια or ἀφειδία does not often occur. On the forms in -εια and -ία derived from adjectives in -ης see Buttmann _Ausf. Gramm._ § 119, II. p. 416 sq. The great preponderance of manuscript authority favours the form ἀφειδείᾳ here: but in such questions of orthography the fact carries less weight than in other matters. The καὶ before ἀφειδείᾳ should probably be omitted; in which case ἀφειδείᾳ becomes an instrumental dative, explaining λόγον ἔχοντα σοφίας. While the insertion would naturally occur to scribes, the omission gives more point to the sentence. The ἐθελοθρησκεία καὶ ταπεινοφροσύνη as the religious elements are thus separated from the ἀφείδεια σώματος as the practical rule. ἐν τιμῇ τινὶ πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκός. οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ κ.τ.λ.] ‘yet _not_ really _of any value to remedy indulgence of the flesh_.’ So interpreted the words supply the oppositive clause to λόγον μὲν ἔχοντα σοφίας, as the presence of the negative οὐκ naturally suggests. If the sentence had been undisturbed, this oppositive clause would naturally have been introduced by δέ, but the interposition of ἐν ἐθελοθρησκείᾳ κ.τ.λ. has changed its form by a sort of attraction. For this sense of ἐν τιμῇ comp. Lucian _Merc. cond._ 17 τὰ καινὰ τῶν ὑποδημάτων ἐν τιμῇ τινι καὶ ἐπιμελείᾳ ἐστίν: similarly Hom. _Il._ ix. 319 ἐν δὲ ἰῇ τιμῇ κ.τ.λ. The preposition πρός, like our English ‘_for_’, when used after words denoting utility, value, sufficiency, etc., not uncommonly introduces the object to _check_ or _prevent_ or _cure_ which the thing is to be employed. And even though utility may not be directly expressed in words, yet if the idea of a something to be _remedied_ is present, this preposition is freely used notwithstanding. See Isocr. _Phil._ 16 (p. 85) πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους χρήσιμον, Arist. _H. A._ iii. 21 (p. 522) συμφέρει πρὸς τὰς διαρῥοίας ἡ τοιάυτη μάλιστα, _de Respir._ 8 (p. 474) ἀνάγκη γίνεσθαι κατάψυξιν, εἰ μέλλει τεύξεσθαι σωτηρίας· τοῦτο γὰρ βοηθεῖ πρὸς τάυτην τὴν φθοράν, Lucian _Pisc._ 27 χρήσιμον γοῦν καὶ πρὸς ἐκέινους τὸ τοιοῦτον, Galen _Op._ XII. p. 399 χρωμένῳ γε τίνι πρὸς τὸ πάθος ἀρκτέιῳ στέατι, π. 420 [Γρεεκ: τοῦ δόντος αὐτὰ πρὸς ἀλωπεκίας φαλακρώσεις κ.τ.λ., p. 430 συνέθηκαν ... φάρμακα πρὸς ῥεούσας τρίχας, p. 476 βραχυτάτην ἔχοντι δύναμιν ὡς πρὸς τὸ προκέιμενον σύμπτωμα, p. 482 τοῦτο δὲ καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ σώματι ἐξανθήματα σφόδρα χρήσιμόν ἐστιν, p. 514 χρηστέον δὲ πᾶσι τοῖς ἀναγεγραμμένοις βοηθήμασι πρὸς τὰς γινομένας δι’ ἕγκαυσιν κεφαλαλγίας, p. 601 κάλλιστον πρὸς αὐτὴν φάρμακον ἐγχέομενον νάρδινον μύρον. These examples from Galen are only a few out of probably some hundreds, which might be collected from the treatise in which they occur, the _de Compositione Medicamentorum_. The language, which the Colossian false teachers would use, may be inferred from the account given by Philo of a Judaic sect of mystic ascetics, who may be regarded, not indeed as their direct, but as their collateral ancestors (see p. 86, note 246, p. 94), the Therapeutes of Egypt; _de Vit. Cont._ § 4 (II. p. 476 sq.) τρυφῶσιν ὑπὸ _σοφίας_ ἑστίωμενοι πλουσίως καὶ ἀφθόνως _τὰ δόγματα_ χορηγούσης, ὡς καὶ ... _μόλις_ δι’ ἓξ ἡμερῶν _ἀπογεύεσθαι_ τροφῆς ἀναγκαίας ... σιτοῦνται δὲ ... ἄρτον εὐτελῆ, καὶ ὄψον ἅλες ... πότον ὕδωρ ναματιαῖον αὐτοῖς ἐστίν ... _πλησμονὴν_ ὡς ἐχθρόν τε καὶ ἐπίβουλον ἐκτρεπόμενοι ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος. St Paul apparently has before him some similar exposition of the views of the Colossian heretics, either in writing or (more probably) by report from Epaphras. In reply he altogether denies the claims of this system to the title of σοφία; he disputes the value of these δόγματα; he allows that this πλησμονή is the great evil to be checked, the fatal disease to be cured; but he will not admit that the remedies prescribed have any substantial and lasting efficacy. The interpretation here offered is not new, but it has been strangely overlooked or despised. The passages adduced will I trust show the groundlessness of objections which have been brought against it owing to the use of the preposition; and in all other respects it seems to be far preferable to any rival explanation which has been suggested. The favourite interpretations in ancient or modern times divide themselves into two classes, according to the meaning assigned to πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκός. (1) It is explained in a good sense: ‘to satisfy the reasonable wants of the body’. In this case οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ τινί is generally interpreted, ‘_not_ holding it (the body) _in any honour_’. So the majority of the fathers, Greek and Latin. This has the advantage of preserving the continuity of the words οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ τινι πρὸς πλησμονὴν κ.τ.λ.: but it assigns an impossible sense to πλησμονὴ τῆς σαρκός. For πλησμονή always denotes ‘repletion’, ‘surfeiting’, ‘excessive indulgence’, and cannot be used of a reasonable attention to the physical cravings of nature; as Galen says, _Op._ XV. p. 113 πάντων εἰωθότων οὐ μόνον ἰατρῶν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων τὸ τῆς πλησμονῆς ὄνομα μᾶλλόν πως ἐπιφέρειν _ταῖς ὑπερβολαῖς τῆς συμμέτρου ποσότητος_: and certainly neither the Apostle nor the Colossian ascetics were likely to depart from this universal rule. To the long list of passages quoted in Wetstein may be added such references as Philo _Leg. ad. Cai._ § 1 (II. p. 546), _Clem. Hom._ viii. 15, Justin _Dial._ 126, Dion. Alex. in Euseb. _H.E._ vii. 25; but they might be increased to any extent. (2) A bad sense is attached to πλησμονή, as usage demands. And here two divergent interpretations have been put forward. (i) The proper continuity of the sentence is preserved, and the words οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ τινὶ πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκός are regarded as an exposition of the doctrine of the false teachers from _their own point of view_. So Theodore of Mopsuestia, οὐ τίμιον νομίζοντας τὸ διὰ πάντων πληροῦν τὴν σάρκα, ἀλλὰ γὰρ μᾶλλον αἱρουμένους ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν πολλῶν διὰ τὴν τοῦ νόμου παράδοσιν. This able expositor however is evidently dissatisfied, for he introduces his explanation with the words ἀσαφὲς μέν ἐστι, βούλεται δὲ εἰπεῖν κ.τ.λ.; and his explanation has not been adopted by others. Either the sentence, so interpreted, becomes flat and unmeaning, though it is obviously intended to clinch the whole matter; or the Apostle is made to confirm the value of the very doctrines which he is combating. (ii) The sentence is regarded as discontinuous; and it is interpreted, ‘_not of any real value_’ (or ‘_not_ consisting _in anything commendable_’, or ‘_not_ holding the body _in any honour_’) but ‘_tending to gratify the carnal_ desires’ (or ‘mind’). This in some form or other is almost universally adopted by modern interpreters, and among the ancients is found in the commentator Hilary. The objections to it are serious. (α) The dislocation of the sentence is inexplicable. There is no indication either in the grammar or in the vocabulary that a separate and oppositive clause begins with πρὸς πλησμονὴν κ.τ.λ., but on the contrary everything points to an unbroken continuity. (β) The sense which it attaches to πλησμονὴ τῆς σαρκός is either forced and unnatural, or it makes the Apostle say what he could not have said. If πλησμονὴ τῆς σαρκός could have the sense which Hilary assigns to it, ‘sagina carnalis sensus traditio humana est’, or indeed if it could mean ‘the _mind_ of the flesh’ in any sense (as it is generally taken by modern commentators), this is what St Paul might well have said. But obviously πλησμονὴ τῆς σαρκός conveys a very different idea from such expressions as τὸ φυσιοῦσθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκός (ver. 18) or τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός (Rom. viii. 6, 7), which include pride, self-sufficiency, strife, hatred, bigotry, and generally everything that is earth-bound and selfish. On the other hand, if πλησμονὴ τῆς σαρκός be taken in its natural meaning, as applying to coarse sensual indulgences, then St Paul could not have said without qualification, that this rigorous asceticism conduced πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκός. Such language would defeat its own object by its extravagance.

III. ^1Εἰ οὖν συνηγέρθητε τῷ Χριστῷ, τὰ ἄνω ζητεῖτε, οὗ ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Θεοῦ καθήμενος· III. 1–4. ‘If this be so; if ye were raised with Christ, if ye were translated into heaven, what follows? Why you must realise the change. All your aims must centre in heaven, where reigns the Christ who has thus exalted you, enthroned on God’s right hand. All your thoughts must abide in heaven, not on the earth. For, I say it once again, you have nothing to do with mundane things: you _died_, died once for all to the world: you are living another life. This life indeed is hidden now: it has no outward splendour as men count splendour; for it is a life with Christ, a life in God. But the veil will not always shroud it. Christ, our life, shall be manifested hereafter; then ye also shall be manifested with Him and the world shall see your glory’. 1. εἰ οὖν συνηγέρθητε κ.τ.λ.] ‘_If then ye were raised_’, not ‘_have been raised_’. The aorist συνηγέρθητε, like ἀπεθάνετε (ii. 20), refers to their baptism; and the εἰ οὖν here is a resumption of the εἰ in ii. 20. The sacrament of baptism, as administered in the Apostolic age, involved a twofold symbolism, a death or burial and a resurrection: see the note on ii. 12. In the rite itself these were represented by two distinct acts, the disappearance beneath the water and the emergence from the water: but in the change typified by the rite they are two aspects of the same thing, ‘like the concave and convex in a circle’, to use an old simile. The negative side—the death and burial—implies the positive side—the resurrection. Hence the form of the Apostle’s resumption, εἰ ἀπεθάνετε, εἰ _οὖν_ συνηγέρθητε. The change involved in baptism, if truly realised, must pervade a man’s whole nature. It affects not only his practical conduct, but his intellectual conceptions also. It is nothing less than a removal into a new sphere of being. He is translated from earth to heaven; and with this translation his point of view is altered, his standard of judgment is wholly changed. Matter is to him no longer the great enemy; his position towards it is one of absolute neutrality. Ascetic rules, ritual ordinances, have ceased to have any absolute value, irrespective of their effects. All these things are of the earth, earthy. The material, the transitory, the mundane, has given place to the moral, the eternal, the heavenly. τὰ ἄνω ζητεῖτε κ.τ.λ.] ‘Cease to concentrate your energies, your thoughts, on mundane ordinances, and realise your new and heavenly life, of which Christ is the pole-star’. ἐν δεξιᾷ κ.τ.λ.] ‘_being seated on the right hand of God_’, where καθήμενος must not be connected with ἐστιν; see the note on ἀπόκρυφοι, ii. 3. This participial clause is pertinent and emphatic, for the session of Christ implies the session of the believer also; Ephes. ii. 4–6 ὁ δὲ Θεός ... ἡμᾶς ... συνεζωοποίησεν ... καὶ συνήγειρεν καὶ _συνεκάθισεν_ ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ κ.τ.λ.; comp. Rev. iii. 21 ὁ νικῶν, δώσω αὐτῷ καθίσαι μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐν τῷ θρόνῳ μου, ὡς κἀγὼ ἐνίκησα καὶ ἐκάθισα μετὰ τοῦ πατρός μου ἐν τῷ θρόνῳ αὐτοῦ, in the message addressed to the principal church of this district: see above p. 42. Βαβαί, says Chrysostom, ποῦ τὸν νοῦν ἀπήγαγε τὸν ἡμέτερον; πῶς φρονήματος αὐτοὺς ἐπλήρωσε μεγάλου; οὐκ ἤρκει Τὰ ἄνω εἰπεῖν, οὐδὲ, Οὗ ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ τί; Ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Θεοῦ καθήμενος. ἐκεῖθεν λοιπὸν τὴν γῆν ὁρᾶν παρεσκεύαζε.