The Epistle to the Colossians was written, ap parently, in consequence of information received by Paul through Epaphras concerning the internal state of their church (i. 6-8). 'Whether the Apostle had ever himself before this time visited Colossw is matter of uncertainty and dispute. From ch. ii. r, where he says, 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,' etc., it has by some been very confidently concluded that he had not. To this it is replied by Theodoret, Lardner, and others, that Paul does not intend to include the Colossians and Laodiceans among those who had not seen his face, but spe cifics the latter as a distinct class ; as is evident, they think, from his using the third person in v. 2. This latter consideration, however, is of no weight, for the use of the third person here is easily ac counted for on the principle that the pronoun takes the person of the nearer noun rather than that of the more remote (cf. Gal. i. 8) ; and it certainly would be absurd to maintain that all contained in the second verse has no relation to the Colossians and Laodiceans, notwithstanding the reference to them in ver. r, and again in ver. 4. As respects the words in ver. i, they will, in a mere philo logical point of view, bear to be understood in either way. It has been urged, however, that when, in ver. 5, the Apostle says, though I am absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit,' etc., his language is strongly indicative of his having formerly been amongst the Colossians, for the verb tiret,ut is used properly only of such ab sence as arises from the person's having gone away from the place of which his absence is predicated. In support of the same view have been adduced Paul's having twice visited and gone through Phry gia (Acts xvi. 6 ; xviii. 23), in which Colossre was a chief city ; his familiar acquaintance with s) many of the Colossian Christians, Epaphras, Ar chippus, Philemon (who was one of his own con verts, Phil. 13, 19), and Apphia, probably the wife of Philemon [ATTHIA]; his apparent acquaintance with Onesimus, the slave of Philemon, so that he recognised him again at Rome ; the cordiality of friendship and interest subsisting between the Apostle and the Colossians as a body (Col. i. 24, 25 ; ii. r ; iv. 7, etc.) ; the Apostle's familiar ac quaintance with their state and relations (i. 6 ; ii. 6, 7, etc.) ; and their knowledge of so many of his companions, and especially of Timothy, whose name the Apostle associates with his own at 'the commencement of the epistle, a circumstance which is worthy of consideration from this, that Timothy was the companion of Paul during his first tour through Phrygia, when probably the Gospel was first preached at Colossre. Of these considerations it must be allowed that the cumulative force is very strong in favour of the opinion that the Christians at Colossi: had been privileged to enjoy the per sonal ministrations of Paul. At the Caine time, if the Colossians and Laodiceans are not to be in cluded among those of whom Paul says they had not seen his face, it seems unaccountable that in writing to the Colossians he should have referred to this class at all. If, moreover, he had visited the Colossians, was it not strange that he should have no deeper feeling towards them than he had for the multitudes of Christians scattered over the world whose faces he had never seen ? In fine, as it is quite possible that Pau] may have been twice in Phrygia without being once in Colossre, is it not easy also to account for his interest in the church at Colossre, his knowledge of their affairs, and his acquaintance with individuals among them, by sup posing that members of that church had frequently visited him in different places, though he had never visited Colossre ? A great part of this Epistle is directed against certain false teachers who had crept into the church at Colossre. To what class these teachers belonged has not been fully determined. Hein richs (Nov. Test. Koppian. vol. vii. part ii. p. 156) contends that they were disciples of John the Bap tist. Michaelis and Storr, with more show of reason, conclude that they were Essenes. Hug (Thtrod. vol. ii. p. 449, E. T.) traces their system to the Magian philosophy, of which the outlines are furnished by Iamblichus. But the best opinion seems to be that of Neander (lib. cit. i. 374, ff.) by
whom they are represented as a party of specu latists who endeavoured to combine the doctrines of Oriental theosophy and asceticism with Chris tianity, and promised thereby to their disciples a deeper insight into the spiritual world, and a fuller approximation to heavenly purity and intelligence than simple Christianity could yield. Against this party the Apostle argues by reminding the Colos sians that in Jesus Christ, as set before them in the Gospel, they had all that they required—that he was the image of the invisible God, that he was before all things, that by him all things consist, that they were complete in him, and that he would present them to God holy, unblameable, and unre provable, provided they continued steadfast in the faith. He then shews that the prescriptions of a mere carnal asceticism are not worthy of being sub mitted to by Christians ; and concludes by direct ing their attention to the elevated principles which should regulate the conscience and conduct of such, and the duties of social and domestic life to which these would prompt.
In the conclusion of the epistle, the Apostle, after sending to the Colossians the salutations of himself and others who were with him, enjoins the Colossians to send this epistle to the Laodi ceans, and that they likewise should read TO be Aaaucelas. It is disputed whether by these con cluding words Paul intends an epistle from him to the Laodiceans or one from the Laodiceans to him. The use of the preposition be favours the latter conclusion, and this has been strongly urged by Theodoret, Chrysostom, Jerome, Philastrius, CEcumenius, Calvin, Beza, Storr, and a multi tude of other interpreters. Winer, however, clearly shews that the preposition here may be under the law of attraction, and that the full force of the passage may be thus given—` that written to the Laodiceans and to be brought from Laodicea to you' (Grammatik d. Neutestamentl. Sprachi dioms, s. 434, Leipz. 1830). It must be allowed that such an interpretation of the Apostle's words is in itself more probable than the other ; for supposing him to refer to a letter from the Lao diceans to him, the questions arise, How were the Colossians to procure this unless he himself sent it to them ? And of what use would such a document be to them ? To this latter question it has been replied that probably the letter from the Laodiceans contained some statements which in fluenced the Apostle in writing to the Colossians, and which required to be known before his letter in reply could be perfectly understood. But this is said without the slightest shadow of reason from the epistle before us ; and it is opposed by the fact that the Laodicean epistle was to be used by the Colossians after they had read that to them selves (6rav K. T. X.) It seems, upon the whole, most likely that Paul in this passage refers to an epistle sent by him to the church in Laodicea at the same time with that to the church at Colossse. It is probable also that this epistle is now lost, though the suggestion of Grotius that it was the same with the canonical Epistle to the Ephesians has found some advocates [EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE]. The extant epistle to the Lao diceans is on all hands allowed to be a clumsy forgery (Michaelis, Introd. vol. iv. p. 124, ff. ; Hug, Introa'. ii. 436 ; Steiger, Colasser6r. in loc.; Heinrichs, in loc. ; Raphel, in loc.) Commentaries—Davenant, Cantab. 1627, fol., translated by the Rev. J. Allport, 2 vols. 8vo, Lond. 1S31-32 ; Storr, in his Opuscu/a, ii. 120 241 ; Biihmer, Svo, Berol. 1829 ; Bahr, Svo, Basel, 183o; Steiger, Svc), Erlangen, 1S35 ; Huther, 2 vols. Svo, Hamb. 1S41 ; Eadie, 8vo, Glasg. 1S56; Ellicott, Svo, Lond. 1858 ; and the Commentaries of De Wette, Olshausen, Meyer, Alford ; and Conyheare and Howson's Life and Epistles of St. Paul, Land. 1850-2. For further information, see the Introductions of Michaelis, Home, Davidson, De Wette, Feilmoser, Reuss, Bleek, and the Pro legomena in Commentaries ; Lardner, Szrppientent to Ike Credibility, Works, 6, p. 327, 377 ; • Schulz in the Theologische Studien tend Kritiken for IS29, p. 612, ff. ; Wiggers, Ibid. for 1838 ; Wieseler, Chronologie des Apostol. Zeitalter ; Neander, Apos tol. Zeitalter, i. 395-405, E. T. i. 319, ff., Bohn's ed. ; Bottger, Beitrlige tire Einleit. in die Paulin. Briefe; Schneckenburger Beitriige sue Einleit. u. s. w.]— W. L. A.