aLeyy MDS My reba ay
Scukitapate aeguaubnmegmbesutsrant anes et SEN sees Naar tap stata
ΒΝ en
ΠΣ
ae Sevan
LIBRARY OF PRINCETON
DEC 1 0 2007
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
le Ν ls “ J > Γ νγ δι a é eS ab s =
ΠΥ ἢν. eRe
ae δι q "
Recensto Spnoptica ANNOTATIONIS SACRA.
IN TWO PARTS.
PAR? sit.
LIBRARY OF PRINCETON DEC 10 2007
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
᾿ 4 ee
φ ΕΑ . A , 4 ~ * 8 r 5
; - ‘ τ ἘΝ 7 - ᾿ ΄ 4 ‘ i ᾿ ; i + A ΄ ς - ᾿
€ » ' J ; r Ἂν ,
7 ? ff.
ἡ. ᾿-
- ε΄
Ἂν"
J. Β. NICHOLS, 25, PARLIAMENT-STREET.
- « « as
| ἔφ ὲ Ξι
3λετεπσίο Spnoptica ANNOTATIONIS SACRE;
BEING A
CRITICAL DIGEST
SYNOPTICAL ARRANGEMENT
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT
ANNOTATIONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT, EXEGETICAL, PHILOLOGICAL, AND DOCTRINAL:
CAREFULL% COLLECTED AND CONDENSED, FROM THE BEST COMMENTATORS, BOTH ANCIENT AND MODERN,
AND SO DIGESTED AS TO FORM ONE CONSISTENT BODY OF ANNOTATION, In which
€ach Portion is spstematical(y attributed to its respective Author,
AND THE FOREIGN MATTER TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH 3
The whole accompanied with
A COPIOUS BODY OF ORIGINAL ANNOTATIONS.
χ᾽
By Tue Rev. 5. T. BLOOMFIELD, M.A.
OF SIDNEY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, VICAR OF BISBROOKE IN RUTLAND, AND RESIDENT CURATE OF TUGBY, LEICESTERSHIRE.
Οὐ σοφισταὶ ἥκομεν, οὐδὲ ἀπιστεῖν ἕτοιμοι, θεαταὶ de μόνον τῶν γεγραμμένων, ἐξετάξομεν τὴν Τραφήν. Philostr. Jun. Icon, 1. 24. Ὅπου οὐκ ἔστι πίστις, ἅπαντα vocel, Kal οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ μάχαι τίκτονται λόγων, τοῦ πιθανοτέρου τὸν ἕτερον ἀνατρέπειν δοκοῦντος: Ἣ πίστις ἠφθαλμό 2 oy ” > ἊΝ \ ὑδὲ ΓΜ ΕΣ ἰλλὸὲ , ὀφθαλμός ἐστιν 6 μὴ ἔχων ὀφθαλμοὺς οὐδὲν εὑρίσκει, ἀλλὰ μόνον Φητεῖ. Theophylact, from Chrysostom.
VOES VL.
LONDON: c. AND J. RIVINGTON, |
62, ST PAUL’S CHURCH-YARD; AND 3, WATERLOO-PLACE, PALL-MALL.
MDCCCXXVIII.
HOA a IO LOY
ὐφορμσζαν “anion ee aT ΑἹ ἢ οὐ ΥῪ ke . ἢ : mgt in NAG “Suh γι ΝΥ Νὴ Tale i νν, τὰ ᾿ ‘S aa us
eT Pi ABS BO. iCute Lanai.
VRaneort! ΠΝ Gk uA wows! nike ΔΑ ΑΘ τι
'-
ARE ois" ae σὰς ¥ Sane ΚΝ ΡΥ τ ΡΝ > Ciao
‘ Ἐν
Meee ΔΙ ΔΛ 1 ες eas Ἐπ ον αὐ ΟΝ SST Ss ‘
‘
j ᾽. »- is i ‘ hy roe
νὰ ἡ ΤΩΝ rp τ δον et
rf ἃ Pare aA | } : \ aoe wie ” Ans Ho aod PARAMS ee RH Ox eR ἀΛΎΦΗΡΗα oust
apc eer ἡ ἊΝ oh ἐκ τε» ὦ a " Bei by to) $y otf ῥῶ ν
ἊΣ
fea a ea Gaye pen Ty Hh.
i
- ΠῚ
a abot alse ἦν, fe Abt ᾿ ᾿
δ ν arts sini a ane e d ἙΝ baie Sie gr ys <a: eer ᾿ Sra ΡΩΝ dina wa Fag sy: ἢ Yee 1st Bory rah:
Mer ie. i Nes att ὯΝ is Pe i,
4 ἢ ΛΩΝ ae Aig } Ma ἢ ΣΝ ἀφ 3) a, ΤᾺ : Δ ἢ Ἶ δ! Ἔδοιν ’ dy ἃ, ΚΣ or
ied EE seth nied ΤΑΝ ὧν ΗΝ pik ie wg Pacts
pate astick bah a via Y thag Sis
Ἐν,
ee ἤν h vag i, ib
di, δὴ. ks ΤΣ
ee ee ; τ in ὁ δον
EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
CHAP. I.
This Epistle, according to the custom of St. Paul, begins with a salutation, ver. 12., then thanks to God for the progress of the church in Christianity, ver. 3—8., and prayers to Him to preserve and confirm it in the same, ver. 9. seqq. (Heinrichs.) ‘The com- mencement of this Epistle is nearly the same as that of the one to the Ephesians, where see the note.
Verse 1. 6 ἁδελφὸς, “ our brother,” i. e. brother minister. See the note on Phil. 4, 21.
2. Κολοσσαῖς. Several antient MSS. read ΚΚολασ- cais, which is probably the true reading, But such points are of difficult decision. Thus, in Thucyd., instead of the common reading Μιτυλήνη and Συρα- κουσίοι and Μυτιλήνη, the best MSS., coins, and in- scriptions, read Συρακοσίοι and Μυτιλήνη.
8. εὐχαριστοῦμιεν----προσευχόμιενοι. ‘The πάντοτε may be joined either with εὐχαριστοῦμεν (as it is done by the recent Commentators), or with προσευχόμενοι, as
{ it is done by the antient and earlier moderns. The
~ former construction is confirmed by 1 Cor. 1, 11.
1 Thess. 1, 2. 2 Thess. 1,3. Yet the latter, which
is supported by Rom. 1, 10., is the more natural.
Πάντοτε may, however, be said to belong to both words.
4. ἀκούσαντες τὴν πίστιν vucv—ayious. Heinrichs explains πίστις accessio ad Christum. And by ἀγάπη he understands palmaria virtus, for omnis virtutis Christiane ambitus. But this is too artificial. It is better to interpret the words in their plain and na-
VOL. VIII. B
4 ΠΎΛΑΣ ΧΑ ed
4 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
tural acceptation ; the former as denoting the pro- fession of the Christian religion: the latter, kindness and charity towards the poor brethren, whether townsmen or strangers. But the full sense of mor. and ἀκούσαντες will depend upon the determination of the question whether the Church at Colosse had been founded by St. Paul or not: a point rather doubtful; since the passages adduced admit of some latitude of interpretation. Yet, upon the whole, the evidence for the latter opinion seems the stronger. The church was probably founded by Epaphras. So the antients and many moderns.
ὃ. διὰ τὴν eprida τὴν ἀποκειμένην ὑμῖν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, The Apostle now proceeds to accumulate period on period; whence in this chapter we find the con- struction not a little embarrassed, and, by frequent additions, the context much protracted ; just as in the Epistle to the Ephesians. (Heinr.)
The words seem connected with the εὐχαριστοῦμεν, &c. at ver. 3.; though some refer them to those immediately preceding, with this sense: ““ because of the felicity which ye know is thereby laid up for you in heaven.” Of both the constructions mention is made by the antients.
By ἐλπ. is meant not so much the hope itself as the thing hoped for; a frequent sense. See the examples of Kypke and Loesn. or Schleus. Lex. in v. Rosenm. observes that this ἐλπ.. is represented under the image of a βραβεῖόν, or ἄθλος, which πρόκειται, ἀπόκειται. See at Hebr. 6,8. And so Joseph. Ant. 8, 12, 3. and Philo 834. p. and often. But here the term is aroxez, in which there cannot be an agonis- tical allusion; but rather one to. money or rich goods laid up in a royal treasury, and to be distri- buted to the deserving. ‘Thus Heinr. cites Plut. 1, 521. τοῖς ἐν βεβαιωκόσιν ἀπόκειται γέρας ἐν ἅδου. The chief intent of the metaphor is to represent the felicity hoped for as sure and certain, like a sum
* So also good offices were metaphorically said to be laid up, i. 6. the reward of them; as in Thucyd. 1, 129. κεῖται σοι εὐεργεσία.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 3
deposited i in a royal treadury, or that of some temple inviolable. So Theophyl. : μὴ οὖν ἀμφιβάλλετε περὶ τὴς ἐλπίδος" ἐν ἀσφαλεῖ γὰρ ἀποκεῖται.
5. ἣν προηκούσατε. By the προ, Commentators, both antient and modern, are agreed, is signified for- merly, at the beginning, namely, of their conversion. This implies that some considerable time had since elapsed. The ἠκούσατε has reference to catachetical and oralinstruction. ᾿Αληθείας, Rosenm. would take as put for the cognate adjective. But I prefer, with Heinr., to regard λόγῳ τῆς ἀληθείας as a periphrasis for the Christian religion (as in 2 Cor. 6,7. and Eph. 1, 13.) ; ἢ and τοῦ alegre for sider μῶν
6. τοῦ παρόντος εἰς ὑμάς--- ἀληθείᾳ. On the sense of παρόντος the Commentators are not agreed, The antients took it for és πάρεστι, κρατεῖ, ἐνεργεῖ. Thus εἰς bas will be for ἐν ὑμῖν. And so several moderns. But this seems very harsh. It appears preferable, with Grot. and most recent Commentators, to take παρόντος in that sense which, especially when followed by εἰς, the word often has in the Classical writers. Raphel adduces some examples from Polyb. (to which several from Thucyd. might be added.) And so 2 Cor. 2, 11. 11, 8. 13,2 & 10. Gal. 4,18 & 20. Though sometimes it is uncertain whether the sense to be, or to go, is preferable. Here come is, by a common idiom, for brought, preached.
Καθὼς καὶ ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ, “as has been the case with all the world.” MHeinr. considers this as put for, “not the Jews only, but all nations.” This method, however, though meant to avoid a difficulty in τῷ κοσμιῷ, taken in the ordinary way, is too harsh. Nor is it necessary. The best Commentators are agreed that it may be regarded as a popular hyper- bole (see Rom. 1, 8.) ; though it is probable that there were few countries of the civilized world into which the Gospel had not been, by this time, intro- duced; and for savages it was not intended, since civilization must necessar ily precede evangelization.
Καὶ ἐστι καρποφορούμιενον. All the Commentators
ΒΩ
4 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. 1.
seem agreed that ἐστι καρποφορούμιενον is for καρποφορεῖ. But why, then (it may be asked) did not the Apostle so write? Because, I apprehend, he meant some- thing more. For ts bearing somewhat differs from bears. So ofa tree, when its fruit is in the bud, we may say καρποφορών ἐστι, OF καρποφορούμενος, but after- wards καρποφορεῖ : and I apprehend that the Apostle meant thus to represent a state of the Gospel in some of the many countries of the world into which it had been introduced. By the fruit is meant, by ἃ com- mon metaphor (as Matt. 13, 23. Mark 4, 20. Luke 8,15. and Rom. 7, 4.) the Saat of reforming and blessing men here, and by the production of good works, as the fruits of faith, making them meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light hereafter. ‘This metaphorical sense of κάρπος is rare in the Classical writers, and the philological Com- mentators adduce no example. The following may therefore be acceptable. Plut. Arat. 10. ἀπεργάϑετε τὴν ἀρεπὴν, ὥσπερ καρπὸν αὐτοφυὴ καὶ ἀγεώργητον.
After καρποφορούμενον several MSS. have καὶ αὐξα- νόμιενον, Which is supported by almost all the Versions, and some Iathers and Greek Commentators, and has been approved by most Critics, and admitted into the text by Griesbach ; but, I think, on insufficient grounds. The reason assigned for its omission, namely, homoioteleuton, is not satisfactory : for how could such an accidental error have extended itself to so many MSS.? It is far more probable, as is the opinion of Wolf, Wets., and Matthei (on the authority of Chrys.), that it was introduced from ver. 10.
Καθὼς καὶ ὑμῖν, “as it has also done among you.” "AQ’ ἧς ἡμέρας---ἀληθείᾳ. The Commentators are not agreed to what to refer the ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, whether to ἐπέγνωσε, taking ἐν ἀληθείᾳ for ἀληθώς (as Joh. 4, 24.), or to χάριν, by hendiadis, for χάριν ἀληθὴ. The former method is far preferable. Other less pro- bable constructions are detailed by Rosenm. and Heinr. Theophyl. well explains thus: οὐκ ἐν ἀπάτῃ
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 9)
καὶ λόγοις εἰκαίοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, τουτέστι, σημείοις καὶ ἔργοις παραδόξοις.
7: 8. καθὼς καὶ ἐμιάθετε. Heinr. rightly refers κα- bars to ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, for ἀληθὼς. Συνδούλ., fellow mini- ster. Ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, “for your advantage ;” a frequent signification of ὑπὲρ. Compare 2 Cor. 4,5. ᾿Αγάπη must be interpreted as at ver. 4., where see the note. ᾿Εν πνεύματι is by some, as Menoch. Beza, and Whitby, interpreted, ‘‘ wrought in you by the spirit.” But this seems not to be the sense here; especially as there is no article. I prefer the interpretation of Grot. and most modern Commen- tators (confirmed also by the antients), who take it to signify “spiritual, sincere, and as becometh the Gospel.” ‘The antients, and some moderns, regard the love in question as that borne by the Colossians towards Paul. But that, if (as it seems) they had not yet seen him, is rather improbable. It is, be- sides, far more natural to take it. of love towards each other, as supra ver. 4.
9. The Apostle now (according to his usual cus- tom), to the rendering of thanks adds prayers for the furtherance of the Colossians in Christianity. Before all things he prays that they may have a progressively better and truer knowledge of this saving doctrine, since on that may be laid the super- structure of true Christian virtue. Now this admo- nition was necessary, on account of the Judaizing and fanatical teachers, who endeavoured to persuade the Colossians that the doctrine of Christ was insuf- ficient to bless men. (Heinr.)
9. ἵνα πληρωθῆτε τὴν. ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ, ‘*that ye may be filled with divine knowledge.” At ἐπίγνωσιν must be understood κατὰ. Of αὐτοῦ the antecedent is Θεοῦ at ver. 6. The θελ. is explained by Rosenm. of the divine precepts; and thus ἐπιγν. τοῦ θελήματος τοῦ Θεοῦ, will be, ““a knowledge of what God would have us know, believe, and do.” But I prefer, with Heinr., to understand it of the divine plans for the salvation of men by Christ. So Theophyl. well explains: θέλημα γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ
6 COLOSSIANS, CHAP, I.
εὐδοκία, τὸ τὸν. Υἱὸν δοθῆναι ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, οὐχὶ τοὺς ἀγγέ- λους. He also observes, that the wang. implies that that knowledge was yet incomplete and imperfect. On the sense of the rest of the verse see the notes on Ephes. 1, 8. and Doddr. in loc. .
10. περιπατῆσαι ὑμᾶς ἀξίως τοῦ Kupiov εἰς πᾶσαν ἀρεσκείαν. At περιπατ. must be understood εἰς τὸ. The preposition here, as often, indicates the end and tendency. Fora life and conduct worthy of Christ and his ,religion was the fruit to be expected from a right knowledge. At εἰς πᾶσαν ἀρεσκείαν subaud τοῦ Θεοῦ, from the next clause. The term ἀρεσκεία sig- nifies the study of pleasing others, and is therefore capable both of a good, anda bad sense. In the Classical writers it is almost always used in the datéer: but examples of the former are found; as Polyb. (cited by Raphel) ἡ τοῦ βασιλέως ἀρεσκεία" and, what is more to the purpose, Philo 33 c. (cited by Loesner) where it is said of Adam: εἰς ἀρεσκείαν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ βασίλεως.
The words following suggest how this ἀρεσκεία may be accomplished, namely, 1st, by perseverance in rendering the fruit of good works; @dly, by pa- tience and constancy in temptation and adversity. On καρποΦοροῦντες, see the note supra ver. 6. ‘There is an enallage for καρποφοροῦντας ; though some refer all the nominatives to πληρωθῆτε. ‘The ἐν παντὶ ἀγαθῷ καρποφοροῦντες, evidently refers to good works; the αὐξανόμενοι εἰς τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ Θεοῦ, to that cor- rect knowledge of God’s will by which alone good works can be produced. ‘The εἰς is rendered by Storr. quod attinet ad. But this is too feeble a sense: and I remember no example of εἰς after αὐξ. in this sense. Heinr. renders it suitably to, which makes a good sense, but not, I think, that which the Apostle in- tended. Besides, it would require κατὰ, The in- terpretation is, however, supported by Theophyl. : νῦν αὖθις ἀπαιτεῖ αὐξάνειν ἐν τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἔργοις, εἰς τὸ ἅμα καὶ τὸν Θεὸν ἀγαθοῖς ἔργοις, εἰς τὸ ἅμα καὶ τὸν Θεὸν ἐπι- γινώσκειν" ἑκάτερον γὰρ ἑκατέρου συστατικόν. After all,
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 7
I see no reason to desert the common interpretation, by which αὐξ. εἰς is taken as synonymous with αὐξ. ἐν, which is found in some MSS., or av§. by itself; which is found in‘many others, and is received by Griesb. (and so 2 Pet. 3, 18.); but (I think) on insufficient grounds. It savours of a gloss, and the common reading is sufficiently defended both by its greater difficulty, and by a similar construction in the Twin Epistle (Eph. 4, 15.) αὐξήσωμεν εἰς αὐτὸν (1. 6. Christ), where see the note. When the nature of the term αὐξάνειν is considered, such a construction will not seem strange. The Apostle has placed the two particulars together, the increase of knowledge and that of virtue, well knowing that they always tend to mutually produce each other.
11. ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμιει δυναμούμιενοι κατὰ τὸ κράτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ, for ἐνδυναμούμενοι. πάσῃ δυνάμει. ‘This very energetic expression ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμει duvapoupevor k.T.k. 0. (where τὴς δόξης is for the cognate adjective) must denote those powerful and extraordinary aids of the holy spirit then vouchsafed to faithful Chris- tians; though the ordinary influences of the same blessed spirit are given to all of every succeeding age to profit withal. j
The words εἰς πᾶσαν ὑπομονὴν καὶ μακροθυμίαν μετὰ χαρᾶς, show the end and purpose of such extraordi- nary aids, namely, that they might bear every sort of temptation and persecution with patience, nay, even alacrity. For such is the sense of this con- densed, and therefore obscure, clause. Μακροθυμία must here denote, not (as the antients say) a slowness to anger, but, as appears from the following words μετὰ χαρᾶς (which stand in the place of a cognate adjective), patience of endurance.
12—14. These verses close (like an epilogus,) what he had thus far said; q. ἃ. “ And if in this manner - you perceive the power of the Christian doctrine, and show it in good works, you will not doubt whether that doctrine points the the and right way to sal- vation, but, persuaded that to it you owe all your
8 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I
happiness, you will assuredly render thanks to God, for having admitted you, though Gentiles, into the Christian society. (Heinr.)
12. edyoapiorouvres—ev τῷ φωτί, “ And that we may return thanks to the Father, who, by this knowledge, hath fitted you to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints,” &c. Such is the general sense of the passage, which, however, from brevity of expression, and idiotical phraseology, i is somewhat obscure.
12. τῷ ἱκανώσαντι. At this word both the antient and the modern Critics have stumbled. Hence the reading καλέσαντι, which was as much a conjecture as that of Bentley, καινώσαντι ; and both equally un- necessary. The best Commentators, antient and mo- dern, are agreed, that the term ix. is here to be taken in a sense, somewhat rare indeed, but of which the nature of the word is very susceptible, namely, meet,
fit. So Theophyl. explains: ἐπιτηδείους. Schleus. defines the word thus: sufficientem reddo, idoneum, aptum facio, facultatem alicujus rei efficiende lar- gior. And he adduces as examples of this sense, 2 Cor. 8, 6. ὃς καὶ ἱκάνωσεν ἡμιᾶς διακόνους καινῆς διαθήκης.
Eis τὴν μερίδα coming after ἱκανώσ., is a locutio pregnans, signifying « fit for (a participation in) the portion of the inheritance,” &c. | Heinr. observes, that ἅγιος, answering to the Hebr. wp, was the sublimior Christianorum appellatio, as it had been that of the Jews. The figure (he adds) here adopted (which is similar to one in Acts 20, 32. 26, 18. and Eph. 1,18.) is that of a state whose citizens have assigned to each of them a pépis, portion, or posses- sion 1 (see Gen. 14, 24.); and all these are supposed to be assigned by dot, κλήρῳ. So that μέρις κλήρου is for ““ an allotted portion.” ‘The above interpretation is confirmed by Theophyl., who explains thus: τῷ μετὰ τῶν ἁγίων κατατάξαντι' καὶ οὐχ οὕτως ἁπλώς, ἀλλὰ καὶ τών αὐτῶν ἀπολαύσαι παρεσχηκότι" ὃ διὰ τῆς μερίδος δηλοῖ" ᾿Εστὶ μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ πόλει καταταγῆς ναι, οὐ μὴν τὴν αὐτὴν μερίδι. ἔχειν' καὶ πάλιν, ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ κλήρῳ εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχειν μερίδα" οἷον, ἐν τῷ
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 9
αὐτῷ κλήρῳ τῆς ἐκκλησίας πάντες ἐσμὲν, ἀλλὰ ἄλλος ἄλλην ἔχειν μερίδα. ᾿Ενταῦθα δὲ καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ κλήρου ἠξίωσε, καὶ τῆς αὐτῆς μερίδος.
The ἐν τῷ φωτὶ is by some taken for διὰ τοῦ φῶτος. (See Rosenm.) But the common interpretation in light, seems preferable. Φώς is, by a common image, put for light, knowledge. Thus Christians are said to be sons of light, πεφωτισμένοι. And the Deity is metaphorically represented as dwelling in light. Theophyl. explains φωτὶ by γνώσει: and he thinks it refers to both the present and the future world: for now God hath enlightened us by a revelation of divine mysteries; and in the future word he will im- part it far more clearly. By us is meant, us Chris- tians, whether Jews or Gentiles.
13. ὃς ἐῤῥύσατο ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σκότους, “who hath liberated us from the power of darkness,” i, e. the dominion of ignorance, sin, and Satan. In this sense ἐξουσία is used in Rom. 13, 1. and else- where. The image in σκότους was evidently sug- gested by that in the preceding verse. It is fre- quently used to designate the state of the Gentiles before their conversion to Christianity ; as 1 Pet. 2, 9. Acts 26,18. The ἐξουσίας and ἐῤῥύσατο suggest the harshness of the tyranny under which they had groaned; and it is well observed by Wets. and Heinr., that under the ἐξουσίας is couched a notion of despotism, or tyranny. ‘The words φώς and σκότος carry with them an adjunct notion of happiness and misery, especially with reference to a future world.
13. μετέστησεν. Heinr. remarks on the aptness of the term; since it is not only used of the transferring of persons from one habitation to another, and of transplanting any by colonization, but also of chang- ing a form of government; as from oligarchy to de- mocracy. So here those who had been under the despotism of ignorance and Satan, are represented as being transferred to the kingdom of knowledge, vir- tue, and Christ, in which they have each their allotted portion.” Τῆς ἀγάπης is plainly for ἀγαπη- μένου.
10 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. 1,
14. ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐ- τοῦ, These words have been explained at Eph. 1, 7.
There are few passages on which the opinions of Commentators are more divided. The antients almost universally and the early moderns taking the terms of the passage in their literal sense, inter- pret it of the natural creation of all things by Christ ; and hence de- duce a strong argument for the divinity of Christ. On the other hand the Jater Commentators, (including Grot. and Whitby, and especially the recent ones,) objecting that the above interpretation is not agreeable to the context, take the passage to refer to the new and spiritual creation by Jesus Christ; which, they maintain, is quite correspondent to the context and the phraseology of many parallel passages, as Eph. 1, 10 and 21. 2, 10 and 15. 3, 9 and 10, 4, 22—24. Col. 3, 10 and 11. Rom. 3, 11 seqq. James 1, 18. 2 Cor. 5,17. They particularly dwell on the similarity of style and sub- ject matter in this and the twin Epistle (to the Ephesians), from _ which (3, 10.) it appears that by the revelation of the plan of re- demption in the Gospel the angelic creation became enlightened as well as subject to Christ. This interpretation has been supported by all the acuteness and erudition which the recent Foreign School could bestow upon it, especially by Ernesti, Justinus, Grulich, Noes- selt, and Heinr., which Jast mentioned Commentator gives the fol- lowing sketch of the subject matter from ver. 15 to 19. “1, Maxima quin divind majestate exsplendescit J. C. in omni creatura morali primus, ver. 15.; 2. Collegit is sibi societatem undique, que ex ipsius mente Deum veneraretur, fundavitque regnum morale, v. 16.; 3. Huic ipse (nemo alius) preest, in omnibus facilé princeps, v. 17—19.; 4. Ex omnibus autem gentibus sine ullo discrimine col- legit sibi cultores, v.20.; 5. Atqui eodem honore dignatus est et vos, ctyjus pretium persentiscetis, dummodo firmos vos geritis et constantes.”’ All this, to say the least, is extremely plausible, and there is much to countenance the opinion. Insomuch that even some very orthodox divines seem inclined to adopt it, observing that other and unexceptionable proofs remain of the divinity of Christ, and that (as Mr. Slade remarks) even from the figurative sense the same inference may be fairly deduced; for he who could so newly. create the heavens and the earth, as to bring them, by his power, ἡ into an universal subjugation to himself, can hardly be imagined as less than divine.’ This may be true; but I cannot without regret contemplate the wanton profusion and recklessness with which important evidences of the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel are squandered, as if our stores were inexhaustible. Let it be remem- bered, that when Commentators admit certain doctrines in a gene- ral way, and yet can scarcely ever find them in any specific passage, their belief in them is, to say the least, very equivocal. As an in- stance in point, I need only refer to the case of the excellent Dr. Macknight, who, though he always continued in the profession of Calvinism, yet hardly any where espouses those peculiar interpreta- tions on which Calvinism is founded. Who, then, can suppose him to have been really a Calvinist? The application is obvious: and
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 11
the spirit with which important evidences are thus thoughtlessly squandered away, is much to be deprecated. I cannot, therefore, but add my humble mite of praise (little as it is needed) to the efforts of one venerable Prelate, who in reference to a long contro- verted passage, has had the courage to make such a stand against the whole phalanx of Verbal Critics (who, in accordance with cer- tain Critical Canons more applicable to Classical than Sacred Cri- ticism, had cancelled the passage,) as has made even the most de- cided and able supporters of the new opinion pause, and others sing their παλινωδία. It is an important remark of Whitby, that this exposition of the passage respecting a true and proper creation of all things by Jesus Christ, is by the Father, from the beginning, laid down as arule to which the Orthodox, keeping close, might show that the Hereticks, who held that the world was created by angels, deviated from the truth. On the present occasion, then, I see no suffi- cient reason to abandon the common interpretation, which yields an unobjectionable sense; and as to the context, it must be remem- bered, that in so irregular a writer as St. Paul even that is a princi- ple of no very certain application. As to the parallel passages which are so confidently appealed to, they are, most of them, not really such, or at least doubtful ; and in the interpretation of them the present passage is appealed to, which is really reasoning in a circle. Besides, the exposition in question, though it may be justified as far as concerns κτέξειν from the usus loquendi, yet in other respects it involves greater difficulties than the commanone. This, however, will better appear from the following examination of the passage in detail.
15. ὃς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ doparov. The best Commentators, antient and modern, are agreed that the sense is: “ who (i. 6. Christ) is (in his human nature) the visible image of the invisible God.” Here the antient Commentators deserve attentive examination, especially Chrys., Theophyl., and Gicu- men. My limits will only permit me to insert a short extract or two. Theodoret: ᾿Εναργεῖς yap φέρει τοῦ γεγεννηκότος τοὺς χαρακτῆρας. And again: ἔστι τοίνυν εἰκὼν δηλοῦσα τὸ ὁμοούσιον" αἱ μὲν γὰρ ἄψυχοι εἰκόνες οὐκ ἔχουσι τὴν οὐσίαν τούτων ὧσπερ εἰκόνες εἰσίν. ἡ δὲ ϑῶσα εἰκὼν, καὶ τὸ ἀπαράλλακτον ἔχουσα, τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχει φύσιν τῷ ἀρχετύπῳ. Theophyl.: τὸ τῆς φύσεως ἔντιμον, καὶ τὸ μεγαλείον τῆς ἀξίας τοῦ μονογενοῦς τίθησιν ἐνταύθα" εἰκὼν, φησίν, ἐστι τοῦ Θεοῦ" οὐκοῦν ἀπαράλλακτος. And again : εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἦν εἰκὼν, εἶχές τι λέγειν, ὅτι y οἰκὼν οὐ φθάνει πρὸς τὸ πρωτότυπον. ᾿Ἐπεὶ δὲ εἰκὼν ἐστιν ὡς Θεὸς καὶ Θεοῦ υἱὸς, ἀπαράλ-
12 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. 1.
AaKTos Kal εἰκὼν ἐπὶ Θεοῦ καὶ ἀοράτου, ἀόρατος δηλαδή. Whitby has here a very masterly annotation, in which, after refuting the frigid and jejune interpretation of the Socinians, who maintain that Christ is called the image of the invisible God, because he, by his Gospel, hath made known to us the will of God, offers the following exposition : «« Christ is the image of God, as making him who is invisible in his essence, conspicuous to us by the Divine works he wrought, they being such as plainly shewed, that in him dwelt the fulness of the God-head bodily ; for an invisible God can only be seen by his effects of power, wisdom, and goodness, by which, says the Apostle, from the Creation of the World the invisible things of God, to wit, his power and- God- head, have been made known by the things that are made, Rom. 1,20. He, therefore, who in the Works both of the Old and New Creation, has given us such clear declarations of the Divine power, and wisdom, and goodness, is upon this account as much an image of God as anything can be; to this sense the image of God here seems necessarily restrained by the connective Particle ὅτι, he is the image of God, for by him all things were created. Moreover, that this place is parallel to that in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the words sufficiently declare ; here he is the image of God, there the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person ; here he is the first-born, or Lord of every creature, there the heir of all things; here it is said that all things were created by him, there that he made the World ; here that by him all things do consist, and there that he supporteth all things by the word of his power ; now, that there he is styled the image of God’s glory, and the character of his person, by reason of that Divine power, wisdom, and majesty, which shined forth in his actions, Schlictingius is forced to confess. It is not, therefore, to be doubted that he is here styled the image of God in the same sense.” The learned Commentator also thinks it highly
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 13
probable that he is called the image of the invisible God, as appearing to the Patriarchs, and representing to them that God, who lives in light inaccessible, to which no mortal eye can approach. And in this sense Christ said to Philip, “ He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.’ And St. Paul elsewhere says of Christ, with respect to the Father, that he is the radiance of His glory. The above opinion was maintained by the Antinicene Fathers, and is some- what countenanced by Chrys., Gicumen., and The- ophyl. But it is involved in some difficulties, on which see the note on Hebr. 9, 2. |
15. πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως. On the interpretation of this word (which the Apostle evidently employs in an unusual sense) there are many difficulties attendant: for the best interpretations have little of actual authority in their favour. The most natural, and probably best founded one, is that of the early Fathers, and the Greek Commentators, who take it to signify begotten before the existence of any created being ; like mpwros in Joh. 1, 15 ἃ 30. So Theo- doret: ἄλλως re οὐδὲ πρωτόκτιστον αὐτὸν εἶπεν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος, ἀλλὰ πρωτότοκον, τουτέστι ποώτον" οὕτω καὶ πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν' πρῶτος γὰρ ἀνέστη. And so Dr. Wells, who paraphrases: “ The same second person in the Holy Trinity may also be styled the first-born of every creature, namely, as in respect of his divine nature, he was begotten of the Father before all creatures, and. as to his human nature, he was the first that was raised from the dead, never to die again.”? Another, and also well founded inter- pretation, is propounded by Whitby, who, after having thoroughly refuted the shailow inference of the Socinians, that from this passage it must appear that Christ is in the number of creatures, maintains that he is so styled as being the Lord of all things. And he compares the phrase in a parallel passage, κληρόνομος πάντων, and proves, from the antients, that Heir and Lord were terms interchangeable. He concludes a long and able defence of this interpreta-
14 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
tion, by saying, that we may conceive the person of whom David was a type, may be also here styled the fast-born, as being Prince over, and high above all creatures, they being all the work of his hands. In the language of the Rabbins, too (as we learn from Michaelis), God is called the first-born of the world. This interpretation is also adopted by Schleus. and Jaspis. And though it has been objected by Bp. Middleton, that thus Christ would be said to be the eldest born of his own creation, which (he observes) would be absurd; yet I here desiderate the usual judgment and good tasie of the learned Prelate ; for it were injudicious, and even unwarrantable to thus press on the consistency of a figure in so little regular a writer as St. Paul.
The truth seems to lie between these two interpre- tations.* Which to prefer I know not. Perhaps they may be united. Bp. Middleton engrafts on the former the following interpretation : ‘He was the first offspring of that great and glorious scheme, formed in the eternal counsel of God for the restoration of a fallen world.’ ‘This may be true in doccrine, but it cannot be proved to be the truth intended by the Apostle.
16. ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. It cannot be denied that κτίϑειν is sometimes used of a moral or evangelical creation. But for the reasons above assigned, and because (as Whitby says) not one instance can be shown where the creation of all things in heaven and in earth, visi- ble and invisible, is ever used in a moral sense, or concerning any other creation than the natural, this cannot be here admitted. Mr. Slade (partly from Abp. Magee and Dr. Nares) truly observes, that the terms are so general and explicit, that they cannot properly be limited in this manner. The Apostle
* Foras to others, they have not the semblance of it; ex. gr. that of Isidore, Erasm., and Michaelis, who accentuate πρωτότοκος, thus taking the word in an active sense; which is liable to. insuper- able objections, both grammatical and doctrinal,
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. 1, 15
may be understood as illustrating and establishing the sovereignty of Christ over the new creation, by the circumstance of his being Creator and King of all the beings and powers in heaven and in earth. The interpretation in question is indeed so frigid, forced, andunnatural, nay, even (as Whitby says) flat and mean, that one would wonder how so many eble Commentators could have been induced to adopt it, except from mere fondness for hypothesis. Whitby has (1 think) unanswerably shewn the felicity of it, and his chief reasons are these: Ist., the Apostle here speaks of the creation of such things as are not capable of a moral creation: since αἰ must compre- hend inanimate substances; and to the Angels, whether the good or the bad, it can by no means apply.* @dly., the words in this sense were far from being true when the Apostle spoke them ; for only a very small remnant of the Jews were then converted to the Christian Faith, and of the Gentiles few, in comparison of those multitudes which afterwards embraced the Faith; and yet the Apostle plainly speaks of a creation wholly past already. 3dly., The Apostle afterwards enters upon the moral creation, at ver. 18, 19 & 90. (as it should seem, engrafting it upon the other Edit.). Now these things being thus connected by the Particle καὶ, to what he had before said of the creation of all things by Christ, demon- stratively show that he was not then speaking of that revelation, which he begins to speak. of in these fol- lowing words.
16. τὰ πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται, ““ created by God through him, as instrumental cause.’ Eis αὐτὸν, “ for his governance, and for the mani- festation of his power and wisdom therein.”
17. καὶ αὐτὸς ἐστι πρὸ πάντων, Kal τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκε. This is evidently ἃ further developement
* So Bp. Pearson on the Creed, who, in his luminous exposition of this text, shows that the verb xri@e.v,as applied to the angels, must be understood of their “original creation ; they could not be said to be created anew.
16 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
of the same thought as that of the preceding verse.
Here the suppoxters of the new interpretation are
put to great straits. First they interpret προ, not of pre-existence but of supereminence, an interpretation,
they think, required by the following words. Doddr.
expresses Goth. But the former interpretation de-
serves the preference. And so Theophyl., who
remarks, that the Apostle does not say, was before
all, but is, as being especially appropriate to the
Deity. Nor can the words καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτώ
συνέστηκε, Without great harshness, be interpreted of the moral preservation, governance of, &c.; q. d. ‘*not
only the Jews and Gentiles are become τὰ ἀμφότερα
ev (Eph. 2, 14, 16.), but all the various orders of beings will together be subject to Christ, as one har-
monized whole:” a sense for which there is no good
authority: whereas of that of create there are
abundance of examples, both in the Scriptural and
Classical writers, which may be seen in the Com-_ mentators, or Schleus. Lex. ‘The sense is: ““ were
created, and are preserved. So Theodoret: Οὐ yap
μόνον ἐστὶν ἁπάντων δημιουργὸς ἀλλὰ καὶ προμηθεῖται wy
ἐποίησε, καὶ κυβερνᾷ τὴν κτίσιν.
18. καὶ αὐτὸς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος. The Apostle now engrafts on the natural creation of all things by Christ another view, in which he alludes to the moral or evangelical creation. So Theophyl. observes, that having spoken of the dignity of the Son, he now speaks of his condescending humanity. And Theodoret remarks: ἀπὸ τῆς Θεολογίας εἰς τὴν οἰκονομίαν μετέβη. :
The sense is: ““ And (moreover) he is the head of the body of the Church (He), who is the beginning, or author of the Church, the first-born, or Lord of the dead.””, The comparison in κεφαλὴ, &c. is fre- quent; as infra ver. 24, 2, 19., Eph. 4, 15 & 16., 1 Cor.11, 3. Christ is here said to be the πρωτότο- kos ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, as at 1 Cor. 15, 20, he is called ἀπαρχὴ Tov κεκοιμημένων. By the ἐκκλησία, is meant
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 17
(Theophyl. observes), the whole race of men. And so Est. andMackn.
13. ἵνα γένηται ἐν πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύων. The recent Commentators take the ἵνα in the eventual sense ; which, however, seems not very necessary. IIgwrevew, in the sense to be first, is frequent both in the Sept. and the Classical writers; and is used of Kings, Princes, and Governors. At πᾶσι, some supply πράγμασι; others, ἀνθρώποις. The latter method is preferable; but both may be included. And so Theophyl. explains: ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς περὶ αὐτὸν θεωρουμένοις. Kal γὰρ καὶ πρὸ πάντων γεγένηται ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ πρώτος πάντων ἐστὶν, ὡς κεφαλὴ τῆς EKKAY- σίας, καὶ πρὸ πάντων ἀνέστη, χαριϑόμινος αὐτοῖς τὴν ἀφ- θαρσίαν, ὡς ἀπαρχή. δ GAO) “SOR
19. ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησε πᾶν τὸ TANLWP.A κατοικῆσαι.
There is some little ambiguity and obscurity about this sentence, which may, perhaps, be imputed to the awful nature of the subject treated on. The recent Commentators here propose several novel modes of interpretation, which, however, effect so considerable a change in what has been, from the earliest ages, the received interpretation, that ἔ cannot venture to place much con- fidence in it. The general rules of Grammarians and Critics ought indeed to be applied with great caution in cases like the present, where there is no reason to think that the Apostle had any thing of that sort in view, and in which the subject matter rather than the words themselves must be attended to. I see no reason to desert the opinion of the antients, and most moderns, that at εὐδόκησε must be suppled ὁ Θεὸς. The sense is: ‘‘ For in him (God) was pleased that all the fullness (of perfection and government) should dwell;”’ as Gal. 1, 15. See also Rom. 15,26. ‘Theophyl. explains: TO πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος; τουτέστιν, εἴτι ἦν 6 Yids καὶ Λόγος, ἐκεῖ ᾧκησεν, οὐκ ἐνέργεία τις, ἀλλ᾽ οὐσία. Οὐκ ἔχει δὲ ἄλλην εἰπεῖν αἰτίαν, εἰ μὴ τὴν εὐδοκίαν καὶ τὴν θέλησιν τοῦ Θεοῦ. Rosenm. (partly from Noesselt) gives the following explanation οὗ πλήρωμα : ““ Plenitudo activé et passive accipitur, i. 6. de iis que implent, dant, docent, aut que capiunt aliquid, possident, eoque ornati sunt vel im- buti, sive de copid quacunque, Joh. 1, 16., Rom. 11, 25 & 12. Hoc loco intelligitur de dotibus, quas Deus Christo concesserat, 1n- primisque de cognitione Dei quam tradere hominibus, doctrinAque coelesti, qua vim monstrare ad veram animi salutem deberet, f. 2, 9.” The subject, however, is more solidly and fully treated on by Whitby, thus: “ The great end of our Saviour’s sufferings was to rescue our bodies, condemned for sin to death, from that mortality, and to bestow on all whom God should give him, eter: life, by raising of
VOL. VIIE. Cc
18 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
their bodies to a state of incorruption. So Hebr. 2, 14 & 15. Therefore the Church which is his body, is represented as the Church of the first-born enrolled in heaven, Hebr. 12, 23.,a Church against which the Gates of Hades, or of Death, shall not prevail to hinder their enjoyment of this resurrection to a life of happiness ; they are the sons of God, and therefore children of the resurrection, Luke 21, 36., therefore heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ, who shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the sons of God, v. 21., shall have the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body, ver. 23 , and they are also represented as persons fore-ordained to be conformed to the image of Christ, by having their vile bodies changed into the likeness of Christ's glorious
body, ver. 29. Note, 2dly., That to this end was Christ raised, that he the first-born from the dead, might raise up his whole body from the dead, he being raised from the dead as the _first-fruits of them that slept, 1 Cor. 15, 20., for to this end Christ both died and rose again, that he might be the Lord both of the dead, and of the living, Rom. 14, 9., and God hath therefore exalted him, that at the name (i. e. the power) of Jesus, every knee should bow, of things in heaven, in the earth, and under the earth, Philip. 2, 10., that is, the bodies of the dead: for by this argument, and from these very words, the Apostle proves the resurrection, and a future judgment, Rom, 14, 10,11, 12. He is, therefore, so the first-born of the dead, as to be the Lord of them, according to our former interpretation of the word first-born, as to have power to raise them up who sleep in him, and bring them with him, 1 Thess. 4, 14., to give eternal life unto them, and raise then up at the last day, Joh. 5, 28, 29., 17, 2. And thus hath he the pre-eminence in all things, being Lord of all creatures, dead and living, and giving both their first and their new being to them, and rendering his members conformable to his glori- ous image, that so they may be joint heirs with him in glory.”
20. καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι--- οὐρανοῖς. Here must be repeated εὐδόκησε ὁ Θεὸς. ‘The words τὰ πάντα —elre τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς have not ἃ little exercised the Commentators. The best founded opinion seems to be that of Hamm. and the most eminent Interpreters since his times, that the neuter
gender is here put for the masculine, as often: and that by te πάντα, as far as regards the τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, may be understood Jews and Gentiles. See the long note of Hamm. They might have added, that yévy is here understood.
᾿Αποκαταλλάξαι is a very strong term, and imports far more than καταλλ. Whether by αὐτὸν be meant God, or Christ, Commentators are are not agreed.
The latter seems to be the best founded opinion ;
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 19
but both may be admitted. This “ complete recon- ciliation,”’ it is said, was effected, and peace restored, by the blood of his cross, i. e. by the blood of his body shed on the cross.
On the meaning of τὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς there is some dif- ference of opinion, on which I beg to refer the reader to Wolf’s Cure. I must confess, that upon the whole, I see no opinion so probable as that of the antient Commentators and Dr. Whitby, which is embraced by Dr. Doddr., the former of whom ren- ders: “ and by him to make all things friendly in him, making peace between them by the blood of his cross.”’ And in his note he observes, that whilst man continued in his obedience to God, angels and men were in a perfect friendship, but when men be- came disobedient to their Sovereign Lord, the angels became averse to them, because their Lord was dishonoured by them: but God being reconciled unto us by the death of his Son, they also became friends and ministering spirits to us,and we became of the same Church and body with them, under the same head Christ Jesus, Heb. 12, 22. And so all things in heaven and earth were gathered into one Christ. Eph. 1, 10.
21. καὶ ὑμᾶς πότε---τοῖς πονηροῖς. What he had said of Jesus Christ the Apostle now applies to the state of the Colossians, as formerly Gentiles, and now Christians. (Heinr.)
᾿Απηλλοτριωμένους, “ aliens from God, and conse- quently alienated or separated from, deprived of, the divine promises and benefits.” Compare Tit. 3, 3. Eph. 2, 12.4, 18. where see the note. ‘The words ἐχθροὺς τῇ διανοίᾳ are exegetical of the preceding. See Rom. 5,10. The διανοίᾳ is justly regarded by the antient Commentators as a strong term denoting deliberate and purposed enmity. It must, at least, indicate that it was deeply seated, namely, in the thoughts as well as the affections, and developing itself in evil works. ’Ev, in, by; like the Hebr. 3.
Q1. νυνὶ δὲ ἀποκατήλλαξεν. The δὲ is by Beza ren-
C2
20 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
dered sanéomnino. I prefer, however, our Common Version yeé; for the participle seems to have what may be called a hypoadversative force.
22, ἐν τῷ σώματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὑτοῦ. These words are by some considered as pleonastic. Yet they impart great energy to the sentence. Besides, there seems to be an allusion to the other and glori- fied nature now enjoyed by Christ in the union of the Godhead. Others explain the cop. as denoting the body of the Church into which they were now incor- porated. But nothing can be more harsh or far- fetched.
At παραστῆσαι must be understood εἰς τὸ, which signifies the end and purpose. ‘Theophyl. compares this with the ἱκανώσαντι ἡμᾶς a little before; q. d. “δ hath not only liberated us from sin, but like- wise bestowed holiness, not of a common sort, but pure and irreprehensible.” Compare Eph. 5, 27. (and the note) and 2, 13—18. and the notes.
28. εἴ ye ἐπιμένετε τῇ πίστει τεθεμελιωμένοι καὶ ἐδραῖοι. The εἴ ye carries with it an éllipsis, as: ‘* And thus it will be with you, if indeed, ἄς. Τεθεμελιωμένοι καὶ ἑδραῖοι, “ grounded and founded, and therefore sta~ ble.” See the note on the parallel passage of Eph. 3, 17., to which I would add, that there is a mas- terly criticism on the passage by Phot. in his Epist. p. 238. Montac. The whole Epistle will repay an attentive perusal, and is highly characteristic of the acuteness and consummate erudition of that ex- traordinary man. :
23. καὶ μὴ μετακινούμενοι ἀπὸ τῆς ἐλπίδος τοῦ εὐαγγε- λίου. This is expressed with popular brevity. ‘The sense is: ““ not shaken or removed from the hope of the benefits revealed by the Gospel.” The μετὰ has reference to the change to other opinions and the taking up of other hopes. Thus in the Classical writers it is applied to the changing of governments, or altering of compacts. And Schleus. remarks that in Theodotion’s translation of 1 Sam. 2, 30. μετακι- νούμιενοι is used of those who suffer themselves to be
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. lI. Qi
drawn this way and that by persuasions, ac aura sunt leviores. It is probable that the Apostle might have that passage in view, and that the word might have place in some copies of the Sept. then extant.
23. κηρυχθέντος ἐν racy τῇ κτίσει. By κτίσ. is, of course, meant the moral creation, i. e. every nation under heaven. This is regarded by most Commen- tators as a popular hyperbole for most nations, or for Jews and Gentiles. Which, however, is little neces- sary. It is probable there was scarcely any one civilized nation of the then known world to which the Gospel had not been promulgated. See the note supra ver. 15.
24—29. Here (Theophyl. remarks,) there may appear an inconsequence, but there is, in fact, none. For, after having said, “ I am a minister of the Gos- pel, from which I conjure you not to swerve,” he shows, that so true is this, that he even suffers for it, nay even rejoices in his sufferings, especially as being calculated for their benefits. Here St. Paul, as in other Epistles sent from Rome, when in captivity, introduces a mention of his bonds. This was, in the present case, suggested by the word διάκονον, that re- calling to his mind the cause for which he was suf- fering this misery, of which he felt proud, and which was the source of great joy; since his doctrines were calculated to reform the morals of, and to con- fer temporal and eternal happiness on all who em- braced them. |
24. νῦν χαίρω ἐν τοῖς παθήμασί μου ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, ‘* Now I rejoice at these my sufferings (which are thus) for you, and your benefit.” Kal ἀνταναπληρώ---αὐτοῦ. Heinr. would take the καὶ for kai γὰρ, But this is too arbitrary. The Apostle seems to have intended the χαίρω to be here understood for χαίρω ἀναπλη- pov, “I rejoice, I say, at filling up,” &c. As to ἀνταναπλ., it is regarded by almost all modern Com- mentators as put for the simple ἀναπλ. But this is a principle which I am always slow to admit, espe- pecially in writers so little pleonastic as St. Paul.
QQ COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I.
Such pleonasms (as I have before observed) are usually to be ascribed to our ignorance. Perhaps the ἀνα may signify vicissim, on my part. See Wolt’s Cure. The verb ἀνταναπλ. is somewhat rare ; yet it has been adduced from some of the later Greek writers by Alberti and Wets.
The words following τὰ ὑστερήματα are very ener- getic, and to be ascribed to the high wrought feel- ings of the Apostle on a subject so interesting to him. In considering them, the antients and the early moderns have (I think) taken a far more cor- rect view than the recent Commentators (whose speculations will be found in Heinr.). See Chrys., Theophyl., Qacumen., and Theodoret, from whom Whitby remarks, that ‘Christ having told usthat what is done to his members, is done to him, Matt. 25, 40 and 45, the afflictions of his members are styled the persecutions and afflictions of Christ, Acts 9, 4 & 5.” «© Now the Jews (continues he) speak much of the afflictions of Christ and his disciples, comprehend- ing both under the name of want san, the afflic- tions of the Messiah.” ‘The Apostle (as Doddr. ob- serves) could not mean that the sufferings of Christ were imperfect as to that fulness of atonement which was necessary to the justification of believers (or re- quire, as the Romanists say, the addition of the suf- ferings of the saints, Edit.) ; but he deeply retained in his mind the impression of that first lesson which he had from his Saviour’s mouth, viz. that he was persecuted in his members (Acts 9, 4.); he therefore considers it as the plan of Providence, that a certain measure of sufferings should be endured by this body, of which Christ was the Head; and he re- joices to think that what he endured in Ais own per- son was congruous to that wise and gracious scheme.” See also Mackn.
25. κατὰ τὴν οἰκονομίαν---μᾶς. The Apostle now drops the image by which the Church is compared to a body, and uses terms suited to a house, to which indeed the Church is compared in 1 Tim. 3, 15.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. 25
Now over this house God presides as supreme οἰκόνο- μος (οἰκονομία Θεοῦ), but also commits this οἰκονομία to others, as here to Paul (τὴν δοθεῖσαν pos), and these are called διακόνοι. (Heinr.)
The sense is, ‘‘according to the dispensation of God given unto me.” Eis suas, “ for your benefit.” This is put instead of a dativus commodi. Or (with Heinr.) it may be construed with πληρώσαι, which must have εἰς τὸ supplied. Many Commentators take πληρῶσαι in the sense διδάσκειν. But it imports something more, namely, fud/y teach and promul- gate; as Rom. 15,19.* ‘The antients rightly consi- dered this as having reference to that fuller instruc- tion which the Gentiles needed.
27. οἷς ἠθέλησεν -- ἔθνεσιν, “to whom God was pleased to make known what are the glorious riches and preciousness of this mystery among the Hea- thens.” ‘The ἠθελ. indicates (as Theophyl. observes) the good pleasure of God in making it known to whom he will. One cannot but notice, with Theo- phyl., the exuberance (éy«os) of the phraseology with which St. Paul expatiates on this interesting point. Thus the terms πλοῦτος τῆς δόξης, which signify richly gloricus, are highly impressive.
Some recent Commentators, as Heinr. and Ro- senm., take the és for 6, and refer it to μυστήριον. It is usually referred to πλοῦτον, which seems prefer- able: but it may refer to both, by the πρὸς τὸ σημαιν., though only accommodated in gender to one. So Theophyl.: ἐρμηνεύων τί τὸ πλοῦτος, καὶ τί τὸ μυστή- ριον, ὃ Χριστὸς, Φησὶν, ἥτοι ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ γνώσις, ὃς ἐστιν ἐν ἡμίν.
The words following are added, Theophyl. ob- serves, μετὰ ἐγκωμίων, and in order thereby to draw them from angel-worship. Χριστὸς is by Theoph. well explained the κ τοῦ Χριστοῦ γνώσις, the Christian doc-
* So Rosenm. explains it, ‘“ perfecté et cum prospero successu docere, que plenior institutio in eo erat, quod Gentiles etiam ad so- cietatem Christianam admittendos et perducendos esse doceret.”’
Q4, COLOSSIANS, CHAP, 1.
trine. The μυστήριον is explained by Theodoret, * that the heathens sitting in darkness have received the riches of divine knowledge, the φιλοτιμίαν τὴν τῆς δόξης. The éamis τῆς δόξης is explained by the recent Commentators the cause of the hope of. But I pre- fer, with the antients, to take ἔλπ. τ. 3. for τὴν προσ- δοκωμένην δόξαν. Of course, δόξ. denotes the felicity laid up for Christians in heaven.
28. νουθετοῦντες πάντα, ἄνθρωπον, καὶ διδάσκοντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον, ** whom, (i. 6. his doctrine,) we preach and promulgate, admonishing every man (of whatever nation) of its claim to attention, and teaching every man who attends to the admonition, the duties it en- joins.” Such appears to be the true sense; for I cannot think with some recent Commentators, that the terms νουθετ. and διδάσκ. are synonymous. Even Heinr. acknowledges that the former may relate to the morals, and the latter to the understanding. So Theophyl.: Νοήσεις δὲ νουθεσίαν μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς πράξεως" διδασκαλίαν δὲ ἐπὶ δογματών. The πάντα is thought to be emphatic, and ἄνθρωπον to be put for men, i. 6. men of every nation. Others take ἄνθρ. to denote man. But perhaps in the Hellenistic and popular style πάντα ἄνθρωπον may be merely a stronger ex- pression than τινα.
The words πάντα ἄνθρωπον after 613. are omitted in several antient MSS., some Fathers, Versions, and early Editions; perhaps rightly: but this is a ques- tion of no easy determination.
28. ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ. in all wisdom. See the note su- pra ver. 9 and infra 2, 3. ‘Theophyl. explains this not only of that of the Scriptures, but of the art of rea- soning and a knowledge of Greek literature. Παρα- στήσωμεν, present; as courtiers do any one to a so- vereign, or great man. See supra ver. 22. Τέλειον ἐν Χριστῷ, 1. 6. (as the best Commentators explain) « possessed of a perfect knowledge of Christ and the Gospel, and exercised in the duties it enjoins.” “ It must be observed (says Photius) that such was his object ; if few comparatively would listen to his ex-
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. I. II. 25
hortations, and still fewer put them in practice to the extent he wished, it was not his fault.” Some recognize in rapacr. and τέλιον sacrificial metaphors. But this is perhaps too fanciful.
29. εἰς ὃ καὶ κοπιώ, ἀγωνιϑόμιενος----ἐν δυνάμει. These are very strong terms; and the passage may be thus rendered: ‘ For which (purpose) also I strenuously labour, according to His energy who operates in me powerfully.” The é&ywug. (which is an agonistical term) is intensive of the κοπιώ. See 1 Tim. 4, 10., and on the whole verse compare Phil. 4, 13.
CHAP. II.
Ceasing to speak of himself, the Apostle now turns to the Colos- sians, admonishing them to abide constantly by the pure and ge- nuine Christian instructions which they had received from Epaphras, and not suffer themselves to be led away by any of the preposterous inventions of fraudulent teachers. An admonition, on account of the many errors of doctrine with which they were carried to and fro (see Prolegomena), especially necessary. Now this the Apostle urges with the greater warmth, as he had not himself instructed them (any more than the Laodiceans, Hieropolitans, &c.), and with his admonitions he now and then mixes detestations of those adver- saries who were striving to lead them away from the true path of Christ. This disputation extends to the end of the chapter, and proceeds in the following order: 1. It has given me much pain to hear how you are carried away with false opinions, and certainly there is nothing I more earnestly wish, than that you, and all whom I have not been able to admonish and instruct in person, may be con- firmed in the doctrine of Christ, so infinitely more sublime than all human inventions, ver. 1—3. 2. Do not, then, commit yourselves to those wily persons, but keep firm and eonstant to Christ, ver. 4—S. 3. For he is worthy of being embraced, and his transcend- ent merits ever held in reverence and admiration, ver. 9—15. Henceforth shun every thing that is abhorrent to the pure doctrine of this Teacher, ver. 16—fin. (Hein.)
Verse 1. θέλω γὰρ---Λαοδικείᾳ. The yap has re- ference to the ἀγωνιϑόμιενος in the preceding verse, and (as Rosenm. observes) it suggests a reason why the Colossians should remain constant in the per- formance of their Christian duties. ἩἩλίκον ἀγῶνα
ἔχω. These words (which are explained by Theoph.
26 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
ἀγωνιῶ περὶ ὑμῶν) express the strong solicitude of the Apostle with respect to the Colossians and Laodi- cans, especially on account of the dangers they were in from the arts of wily seducers, and seem to imply a desire of seeing them, to avert that danger.
On Laodicea, the capital of Phrygia Pacatiana, see Strabo, Pliny, and the other authorities adduced by Wets.
1. καὶ ὅσοι οὐχ ἑωρακάσι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί. These words are well paraphrased by Theodoret : ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑπὲρ πάντων τών μηδέπω με τεθεαμένων. ‘The expression éwp. τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκὶ is a mere Hebraism, which ought not to be too much pressed upon. The ὅσοι, &c. signifies, “ and as many other churches in your province as have not yet seen me.” It is well observed by Theoph., that the Apostle adds Laodiczea and others, to spare their feelings in the censures he has to introduce.
2. ἵνα παρακληθώσιν αἱ καρδίαι αὐτῶν. Some Com- mentators interpret the παρακλ. of consolation ; others, of admonition. Much may be said in support of either interpretation. _ddmonition and confir- mation would be necessary to produce that comfort and tranquillity which had been interrupted by the dissensions introduced by rival teachers; to which purpose it was necessary συμβιβάξειν, “to bring them together,” and thus close up the schism. On cup. see the note on Eph. 4, 16.* For συμβιβασθέντων some MSS. read συμβιβασθέντες. Both expressions are anomalous, but the common one seems the more genuine, as being the harsher. MHeinr. says it may be resolved into ive συμβιβασθῶσιν. But αὐτῶν might rather be repeated. ‘The irregularity arose from the Apostle’s saying “ their hearés,” for they.
The ἐν ἀγάπη is said to be for dv ἀγάπης, as show- ing the bond by which all, being reconciled and
* Of this sense of the word Wets. has numerous examples; as Thucyd. 8, 29. ξυνεβίβασε δὲ τὸν Περδίκκαν τοῖς ἀθηναίοις. Herod. 1,74. οἱ δὲ συμβιβάσαντες αὐτοὺς ἔσαν οἴδε. Dio Exc. p. 617. ἐπέμφη γὰρ ὡς συμβιβάσων αὐτοὺς τοῖς ὁμοχώροι----διαφερομένους.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. oF
brought together, might resist the attacks of adver- saries.
2. καὶ εἰς πάντα πλοῦτον τῆς πληροφορίας τῆς συνέσεως. Heinr. remarks, that as ἐν has shown the instrument, so εἰς denotes the scope and end to which they were to be united, namely, that their minds might be im- bued with knowledge far more elevated than the false teachers devised. And in order to heighten the δεινότης, he, instead of εἰς πάντα Or εἰς πλήρη συν- σιν, says εἰς πληροφορίαν τῆς συνέσεως, and, what is yet more, εἰς πάντα πλοῦτον τῆς πληροφορίας τῆς συνέ- σεως. Then, by apposition, he at εἰς erry. τοῦ μυσ- τηρίου adds the cause for which he could ascribe πλουτ. and πληροῷ. to Christian knowledge, namely, inas- much as it leads us to understand the μυστήριον, or divine decree for blessing men by Christ, hitherto hidden. See supra 1, 26. As an example of πλοῦτος in the above sense I would cite Jambl. de V. Pyth. § 67. πραπίδων πλοῦτον.
᾿Επίγνωσις signifies here, as often, an exacter know- ledge.
2. καὶ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ. From the diversity of readings found in the MSS., the Critics are inclined to regard the whole clause as spurious. A conclu- sion as rash and groundless as such usually are. The true reading it is neither very easy nor very mate- rial to determine. On these words see Wolf’s Cure and especially Whitby.
3. ἐν ᾧ εἰσι πάντες---ἀπόκρυφοι. It is strange that many recent Commentators should refer the ἐν # to μυστηρίου ; which method, indeed, yields a tolerable sense, but (as Wolf observes) not so good a one as arises by referring it to Χριστοῦ, with the antients and most moderns, and recently Heinrichs. It respects (as Whitby observes) the person of Christ as Media- tor, the knowledge of whom, the Apostle says, hath an excellency beyond all other knowledge, Philip. 3, 8. for ἐν ὦ περετμήθητε, t in whom ye are circumcised, ver. 11. and ἐν ᾧ, in whom ye are risen again, ver. 12. plainly relate to Christ’s person and his merits as Me-
28 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
diator; and the whole of the following chapter treats of him, and of the benefits we have received ἐν αὐτῷ by him. ‘The Apostle also applies this to him by say- ing (ver. 6.) as you received the Lord Jesus Christ, so walk in him ; and by warning us against the deceit of vain philosophy, because in Him dwelleth all the Sulness of the Godhead.” Heinr. however takes Xg¢. | to, signify the doctrine of Christ; which, (Whitby observes, ) will make no great difference, since these hidden treasures of Christ’s widom are revealed to us by his Gospel only, and thence alone we obtain all our knowledge of him as our Mediator, and of all the offices he sustains as such.
8. οἱ θησαυροὶ τὴς σοφίας καὶ τῆς γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι. A similitude taken from ἃ money-chest, from whence the cash is taken when needed. See Macc. 1, 24. Oyo. denotes (as Theophyl. remarks) the abundance of the knowledge; and the πάντες its boundlessness. The ἀπόκρ., too implies that he alone knoweth, and therefore from Him we are to seek wisdom and know- ledge. The ἐν ᾧ, too, denotes his self-derived wis- dom and knowledge.*
4. τοῦτο δὲ λέγω---πιθανολογίᾳ. In the preceding verse there seems to be an allusion to the false teachers; as appears plainly from the present verse, which is introduced by the formula τοῦτο λέγω, which always imports an injunction to great attention. Here, however, it has a somewhat different sense; and λέγω seems to be a vox preegnans; 64. d. “ This I say, meaning that,” &c. LTlapaaoyig. is a word often used in the Classical writers; and joined with ἐξαπατᾷν and other similar words ; it signifies to de- ceive and circumvent, to come round (παρὰ) any one by false pretences, and, in a general way, to deceive ;
* As the philological Commentators adduce nothing on these words, the following passages may be acceptable. Eurip. Alcest. 6,14. Wakef. ἐν rots ἀγάθοισι δὲ παντ᾽ ἐνέστι σοφίας (Swpa). I must also subjoin (what is singular) an imitation (for such I take it to be) of this passage by the Apostate Julian, in his Hymn in So- lem 2. ἀναλάβοντι σοφίας ἄνοιξαι θησαύρους.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 29
as here, for πιθαναλογία is added, which signifies a specious and taking sort of address, adapted to per- suade and bring over those with whom it is employed. Theophyl. explains: Ti yap εἰ πιθανῶς λέγει; οὐδὲν οἷδε, παραλογισμός ἐστι TO πᾶν, Kal σοφίσματα. Ο this term may be compared the similar one χρηστολογία at Rom. 16,18. Loesner aptly cites Philo 4, 14. C. οἵτινες ὐήθησαν σοφίαν πιθάνων εἶναι λόγων εὕρεσιν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πραγμάτων ἀληθεστάτην πίστιν" and 888 Ε. τὴν τῶν λύγων πιθανότητα.
Rosenm. thinks these deceivers were persons who mingled together Judaism and Oriental philosophy.
5. εἰ γὰρ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ ἄπειμι, ἀλλὰ τῷ πνεύματι σὺν ὑμῖν εἰμι. Compare a similar sentiment at 1 Cor. 5, 3. where see the note. ᾿Αλλὰ, yet; as 2 Cor. 11, 6. 13, 9.
5. χαίρων καὶ βλέπων. An Hendiadis for, “ rejoicing while 1 see.” So Joseph. Bell. 3, 9, 2. (cited by Wets.) ὑμᾶς πρὸς τὸ παρὸν εὖ ἔχοντας χαίρω καὶ βλέπω. and Galen: ἴδων καὶ χαίρων. Τὴν τάξιν ὑμῶν, © your order. and regularity,” εὐταξίαν (as Theophyl. ex- plains). A military metaphor generally implying discipline, obedience, and constancy. So here, Heinr. thinks, it may have reference to subordination and obedience to the superior teachers, the order with which every thing was done (as in 1 Cor. 14, 40.) ; also the regular management of the funds for the relief of the poor ; and especially constancy in ad- hering to the faith of Christ.” ‘This last particular, however, does not seem adverted to in these words; but it is so especially in the words following, καὶ τὸ στερέωμα τὴς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως ὑμῶν.
6. ὡς οὖν παρελάβετε τὸν X. “I. τ. Κὶ., ἐν αὐτῷ περι- πατεῖτε, ““Α5, therefore, ye have received the doc- trine of Christ, walk, continue in it, and by it regu- late your whole conduct.” ᾿Παραλαμβ. is used of teaching of every kind, both oral, and by letter. See 1 Cor. 11, 23. &c. Περιπατεῖν, as Heinr. re- marks, here denotes not merely the habitual regula-
30 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IT.
tion of the life, but continuance in doctrine; since the whole chapter is not ethical, but doctrinal.
7. ἐῤῥιθωμιένοι καὶ ἐποικοδομιούμιενοι, ““ rooted and well founded* in it;” as Jude 90. Both these ex- pressions are explained by the βεβαιούμενοι. See the note on the parallel passage of Eph. 8,17. Heinr. observes, that καθὼς ἐδιδ. must be closely connected with πίστει ; and περισσεύοντες ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ, imports a progressive increase in faith and in per- formance of good works, as the fruits of it.” But the former seems all that is here intended; and σὺν εὐχαριστία signifies “with thankfulness to God for your conversion.” See 1, 12. and Ps. 100, 4.
8. βλέπετε μὴ τις---ἀπάτης, ““ See, mind lest.” So Matt. 24, 4. βλέπετε μὴ τις ὑμᾶς πλανώση. The verb in this sense has usually after it a negative particle, oran ἀπὸ. Ἔσται 6 συλαγωγῶν, is said to be for συλαγωγῇ, perhaps by a sort of Hebraism. Yet there seems more of energy and emphasis. Συλαγωγεῖν signifies literally to carry off spoils or booty. Making a spoil of you may therefore import either, “treating you as things to be sacked, and spoiling your Christian goods ;” or, ‘* carrying you away with them, as the sacker carries off the inhabitants as a booty.” The former seems preferable. Theophyl. thinks (as also Douneus) that there is an allusion to a thief who privily digs his way into a house, and steals the property.
8. διὰ τὴς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. This is con- sidered by most Commentators as an hendiadis, for ** sophistical and fallacious philosophy.”+ For the
* Like the immense stones without cement which formed the foundations of the edifices of the antients. See the note on Eph. 3, 17., to which may be added a passage of Demophilus, cited by Bulkley on Joh. 15, 5. Ριξωθέντες ἐκ Θεοῦ καὶ φυέντες, ἃς, Having been rooted and sprung up from God, let us adhere to our root ; for like streams of water divided from their fountain, so the plants of the earth, cut off from their root, soon become withered, dry, and rotten.”
1 The same interpretation is adopted by Schoettg., who has here along and able annotation. Grot. observes, that the Apostle uses
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. $1
Apostle (they say) does not absolutely condemn philosophy, but κατὰ τι, comparate, i.e. out of its proper limits, and exercised upon matters which exceed its comprehension. But I rather apprehend that the Apostle means to censure the Grecian phi- losophy in general, which was altogether hostile to the Gospel, and could by no means be mixed with it, but to the detriment of the latter; especially since (as Heinr. observes) the term φιλοσοφία also denoted what we call religion, and is applied as such by Josephus and Philo to the Jewish religion.
As to the persons here meant, some (as Whitby observes) fix on Simon Magus and the Gnostics. Others, on the Jewish Doctors, who then mixed the philosophy of the Heathens with their ceremonial worship, and had learned to allegorize it. Others, again, divide the matter between Jews and Gentiles. “That the Jewish Doctors (continues he) are, in a great measure, adverted to, appears from ver. 14—16. This indeed seems the key of the following, which, may be distributed into two heads: 1. Cautions against the seductions of the Jews zealous for ob- servation of their rites and ceremonies; 2. against the seductions of the Heathens by their vain philo- sophy dressed up by them anew, both as to its doc- trines and morals, and set off with the most specious pretences, styled here πιθανολογία, enticing speech.” See also Mackn. and especially Wolf’s Cure.
On the στοιχεία τοῦ κόσμου, see the note on Gal. 4, 3.
9. ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν TO πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς.
The connexion is thus traced by Whitby : “ (of which philosophy ye can have no need) since,” &c. But this seems too arbitrary. It may
φιλοσοφ. because it was the received term; but by adding τῆς κενῆς ἁπατῆς he expresses its real nature; since it deceived many by professing to be what it was not, and promising what it did not perform. So that though the knowledge of it was not of itself bad, yet it was dangerous ; and certainly after the Jews had studiec philosophy, their antient doctrines were much corrupted,
32 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
be more closely traced thus: ‘ (And yet their philosophizing ought to be κατὰ Χριστὸν; as being Christians,) for in him dwelleth,” ἃς,
On the sense of the words the antient and modern interpreters exceedingly differ. The antients and earlier moderns recognise in them a strong evidence of the Deity of Christ; and they assign the following sense: ‘‘in whom the whole fulness of deity substantially dwells.” Of σωματικῶς there have been,even among the orthodox, three interpretations, which are thus stated by Wolf: 1. corporally, so that the body of Christ as a subject of habitation be signified ; 2. truly, as indicating the mode of habitation; 3. substantially. The first is supported by Theodoret, Gicumen., and many moderns. The second is modified by some, so as to mean solidly, really, in oppo- sition to types and shadows. So Glass, Hamm.,* Hackspan, Vi- tringa, and most Lutherans. The third interpretation is supported by many antients, Thus Theophyl.: τουτέστιν, οὐκ ἐστιν évepyeia τις, ἀλλὰ οὐσία Kal ws σωματωθεὶς Kai μία ἀπόστασις ὧν μετὰ TOU προσλήμματος. Ἡ καὶ οὕτω, κατὰ τὸν ἄγιον Κυριλλον, ὡς ἂν ἐν σώματι ἐνοικήσῃ ψυχή ἐνοικεῖ δὲ αὔτη σώματι οὐσιωδῶς καὶ ἀδιαι- ρέτως, καὶ ἀφυτῶς, substantially, or personally. And so Bochart and Suic., Thes, 2,1217. Wolf (rightly I think) is of opinion that all three interpretations (so that the word Θεὸς be taken of the nature of Christ) are so far from being adverse, that they are reconcilable, and arise one out of another. ‘Thus (continues he) the divine nature of Christ (or the Adyos) is said to dwell; which necessarily supposes a sulject for indwelling, and such is the body, or human nature of Christ. In that the λόγος dwelt, not by shadow, appear- ance, or figure, but truly and in presence. And if so, then not only ἐνεργητικῶς and effectively, but in substance and essence.”’
The above seems, upon the whole, a correct representation of the sense. It is observed by Whitby, that the Apostle does not directly say, that Christ is God, but expresses his divine nature thus, partly to represent to the Jews the divinity of Christ, with allusion to the God of Israel dwelling in the Temple, partly to oppose him to the πλήρωμα Of the Gnostics, and to the partial deities of the Heathens.”
We may (I think) conclude, with Whitby (adopting the words of the Council of Antioch), that the body born of the Virgin, receiving the whole fulness of the godhead bodily, was immutably united to the divinity, and deified, which made the same person, Jesus Christ,
* His words are these: “ In Christ the deity dwells in fulness, so as nothing could be added to it, and so in him bodily, that is, as the sun dwells in the firmament, where the body of it is. The whole divine nature is not only in part, but fully, without absence of any part of it, in Christ; and that not by a species, or image only, but really and substantially: and so consequently, (which is the thing here designed to be proved by it) the will of God must be supposed to be so revealed in Christ or by Christ, that there can be no need of any addition from the Heathen philosophy, or from the Jewish law.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 33
both God and ‘man.” Or (to use the words of Doddr.), as the passage contains an evident allusion to the Shechinah in which God dwelt, so it ultimately refers to the adorable mystery of the union of the divine and human natures, in the person of the glorious Emma- nuel, which makes him such an object of our hope and confidence, as the most exalted creature with the most glorious endowments could never of himself be.” Yet, strange to say, most interpreters for the last century have taken up expositions which approximate more or less to the Arian heresy, or even that of Socinus hiniself, regarding the words as merely signifying that God hath lodged in the hands of Christ a fullness of gifts to be conferred upon men ; or, as only referring to his complete knowledge of the divine will. But there is so little ground for either opinion, that I may be held excused from detailing them, or the chiefarguments brought against them. The former may be found in Heinr. and Rosenm., and the latter in pe and Mackn., or in the abstracts of Mr. Slade.
10. καὶ ἐστε ἐν αὐτῷ πεπληρωμένοι, “ And (so) ye are complete i in him, in all knowledge necessary to salvation.” The interpretation, hoon of πεπλ. will depend upon that adopted in the foregoing verse.
10. ὃς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ πάσης ἀοχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας. This is to be understood as said emphatically, and with reference to some others in whom the _ heretics thought part of the power was vested. So Simon Magus and Corinthus, a statement of whose notions on this subject | may be seen in Whitby.
11. ἐν ᾧ καὶ περιετμήθητε περιτομῇ ἀχειροποιήτῳ. The ἐν is for 3, by. We have here a popular mode of expression for, ‘by him ye have obtained a circum- cision not made with hands and corporeal, but spiri- tual, and consisting in the putting off the sins of the body and the flesh, even by the circumcision (enjoin- ed) of Christ.” As the circumcision Heieanofanes is op- posed to that ἐπ the flesh (see Eph. 2, 11. .)» urged by the false teachers, so is the circumcision ἀχειροποίητος that of the heart, and divinely effected, (which is spoken of in Rom. 2, 29), and of which even the Prophets of the Old Testament make mention. See Deut. 30, 6. Jer. 9, 26.
11. ἐν τῇ ἀπεκδύσει τ. σ. τ. & τ. σ. Heinr. observes, that as ἐνδύσαι signified close connection with, so did ἀπεκδύσαι denote the complete laying aside ‘of any
VOL. VIII. D
34 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
thing, as of a garment (See Eph. 4, 22.); a meta- phor derived, as Schoettg. thinks, from the Hebr. won. By σώμα τῆς σαρκὸς is meant, “the body, which indulges in the corrupt desires so natural to it.” The words τών ἀμαρτιών, if genuine, (though they are omitted in many MSS., Versions, and Fa- thers, are by Matthzi admitted to savour of a gloss, and are cancelled by Greisb.), have the force of an adjective. It is plain that to put off this body of sin signifies, ‘no longer to employ it for sinful pur- poses;” which putting off'is compared to circumci- sion, since thereby sin is mortified, and cut out, and the principle of sin being kept under, we attain unto purity and holiness of life.
12. συνταῷέντες αὐτῷ ἐν τῴ βαπτίσματι. The Apostle illustrates the reformation and purity re- quired of Christians by a fresh image; though em- ployed on other occasions, as in Rom. 6, 3. seqq. where see the notes. On the sense of cuveyeip. see the note on Eph. 2, 5 & 6.
13. καὶ ὑμᾶς, νεκροὺς ὄντας ἐν τοῖς παραπτώμασι. The same moral reformation is now represented by an- other and more forcible figure, similar to the former, but not to be confounded with it. (Heinr.) Here are enumerated other benefits received by Christians from Christ. ‘There is the same sentiment, and in almost the same words, at Eph. 2, 1—5., where see the note. Before ἀκροβυστίᾳ must be repeated ἐν. The sense is: ‘because of that prepuce which is evil concupiscence.” Now this they had cast away on becoming Christians. (ver. 11.) Ἢ ἀκροβυστία τῆς σαρκὸς, may also signify ‘‘the state of a Heathen;” for he who has the prepuce, is a Heathen; α. d. ἐς miserable were you because of the heathenism in which you lived.” (Rosenm.) The former interpre- tation seems preferable. See Slade.
Ἡμῖν, which is found in the best MSS., Versions, and Fathers, and is received by the recent Editors, is undoubtedly the true reading, not from the strength
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 35
of MS. authority, (which, in such minutia, is little or none), but because the words following require it.
It has been observed, by Whitby, that baptism being:a rite of initiation to Christians, as circumcision was to the Jews, it may be inferred that ‘* baptism is Christ’s ordinance for infants of believing parents, as circumcision was of old to the infants of the Jews.” See much more in that Commentator.
14, ἐξαλείψας---τῷ σταυρώ.
The general scope of the Apostle in these words is sufficiently plain ; but to determine the exact construction is not so easy. This passage may, I think, be reckoned among the δυσγνόητα of the Apostle, mentioned by St. Peter, on which more light is to be desired, though little to be expected. Upon the whole, we must be content with discerning the general sense, and not stumble at some confusion of metaphor. Some assistance towards its illustration, Rosenm. says, has been rendered by Noesselt in two Prolusions on this subject in his Exerc. Script. p. 212—253. Yet I cannot find any thing οὗ much importance and truth, that had not been already discerned by former Commentators.
᾿Ἐξαλείψας. This simply signifies having annulled: but there is (I think) an allusion, not, as most Commentators think, to the “* crossing out an account in a tradesman’s book,” or the “ blotting out or defacing a writing or bond (see Athen. ap. Wets.),” but to “ the abrogating of any law by painting over the tablet on which it was written.” So Lysias, cited by Rosenm.: τοὺς μὲν (νόμους) évéypadge, τοὺς δὲ ἐξαλείφεν. I would observe that ἐξαλείφω in the physical sense, paint over, occurs in Thucyd. 3, 22. Levit. 14, 42 & 48. 1 Par. 29,9. See also Pollux 7, 124., and Eustathius.
14. τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμών χειρόγραφον. The yeigoypud. pro- perly denoted a bond, obligation, syngrapha: but from a comparison of the parallel passage of Eph. 2, 15.it appears to mean a writing generally. Yet there is an allusion to its primitive sense; since, as Theophyl. observes, the law was an ἰδιόγραφον made with Moses, to which the Israelites bound themselves in the following words, Ex. 19, 8. πάντα ὅσα ὁ Θεὸς εἶπε ποιησόμεθα.
At doypa0o1some would understand σὺν ς but others (more properly I think) ἐν; as in the parallel pas- sage of Ephesians. Τοῖς δόγμασι is put, populariter, for ὃ ἦν δόγμ. The καθ᾽ ἡμών is passed over by some Translators ; by others rendered with respect to, or
D2
36 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
concerning. Our Common Version has “ against us,’ which may be admitted, so that the sense be that by which we familiarly say, “ I have an account against you.” By the ddyp. are undoubtedly meant the ordinances, statutes, and external rites of the ceremonial law. Thus the Law of Moses is termed γράμμω at 2 Cor. 3, 6.
The words ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν are explained by Noesselt, Rosenm., and Schleus. (and, indeed, for- merly by Vorst., Grot., and Pierce), as signifying, which law was the cause of disagreement between Jews and Gentiles.”* But I see not how ἡμῖν can mean us Gentiles ; and the above interpretation of ὑπεναντίον seems to be somewhat violent and preca- rious. Neither, however, am 1 satisfied with the common interpretation, “ burdensome to us,” which sense cannot well be elicited from the term.
The phrase ἤρκεν ἐκ τοῦ μέσου is sufficiently plain, and appears to be a Latinism.
14. προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ. The force and scope of the metaphor here is difficult to be deter- mined. The best Commentators are agreed that there is an allusion to the antient custom by which decrees, or writings in general, were cancelled, by having a nail drove through them. ‘They therefore render: ‘ nailing it to his cross, and by this, man- gling the χειρόγραφον, annulling it.” And this is very agreeable to the general use of προσηλόω. For, be- sides Lucian and Demosth. (cited by Wets.), it is used of nailing a person to the cross in Joseph. 1247, 30. προσήλουν δὲ----τοὺς drovras. Some, indeed,
* See Noesselt ap. Rosenm. Whitby, too, explains it not very differently, as being a middle wall of partition, hindering them from coming to God, and putting an enmity between them and God's people, ver. 14 & 15., which Christ hath taken away by abolishing and dissolving the obligation of it, and admitting the Gentiles as fellow-heirs of the same promises and blessings with the Jews with- out it; or it is contrary to us, as being the ministration of death and condemnation, 2 Cor. 3,7 & 9.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 37
as Theophyl., take τῷ σταυρῷ for ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ, “ by his cross,” which yields a far preferable sense, but I see not how this can be permitted by the words, for the Dative τῷ σταυρῷ must be governed of πρὸς.
15. ἀπεκδυσάμιενος τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας ἐδειγ- μάτισεν. Here it is, 4thly, ascribed to Christ’s me- rits, that by the total vanquishment of the enemies of Christianity he hath made our Christian course easy, and our passage safe. (Heinrichs.)
The terms are all military, and derived from a triumph over a conquered enemy, namely, by strip- ping them of arms, vestments, &c. Heinrichs cites Plut. Lucull. 514. ἐκδύσαι rots βασιλεῖς. Rosenm. thinks that the middle has here no force, zmproprie. But it isso used in Plut. 2, 173. (cited by Wets.) ἔταξεν μαστιγοῦσθαι ἀποδυσαμένων τὰ ἱμάτια. Some (with far less probability) take it for an agonistical metaphor.
But who are meant by the apy. and efouc.? Most recent Commentators (after Kypke) think, the de- fenders of the χειρόγραφον just before mentioned, (1. 6. the Mosaic Law), which was the greatest hindrance to the propagation of the Christian religion ; namely, the Jewish rulers and magistrates. (See Whitby and Rosenm.) But this seems too hypothetical and formal. I see no reason to desert the opinion of the antients and most moderns, that the powers here mentioned are those of the Prince of this world and his subordinate agents, the evil demons (so Theo- phyl. τὰς διαβόλικας δυνάμεις λέγει), including Death himself, as personified. See 1 Cor. 15, 25 & δδ. Heb. 2, 14. Joh. 16, 33, &c. And so Heinrichs. Yet the Jewish rulers may be included.
Heinrichs would here understand the destruction of idolatry, and the plucking up of deep-rooted su- perstitions. But all that had not been yet effected; though those particulars may be included, since ido- latry and superstition were chiefly upheld by the ἀρχαὶ in question.
Aciyparigey signifies “ to make one a public ex-
a
38 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
ample, or gazing stock,” to ignominiously expose to triumph; as was done by conquered enemies. So Theophyl.: ἀσχημονῆσαι ἐποίησεν. ᾿Εν παῤῥησίᾳ sig- nifies openly, publicly. (So Theophyl. δημοσίᾳ, πάν- τῶν ὁρώντων) ; as Joh. 7, 4. & 11, 54. (where see the note); or confidenter, as Heinrichs explains. Θριαμ- βεύω, with an accusative of person, signifies to triumph over. Αἱ ἐν αὐτῷ some subaud χριστῷ; others, σταυρῷ, which is greatly preferable. So Theophyl. : ἐν TH σταυρῷ τοὺς δαιμόνας ἡττημένους δείξας. And again: Ἔν τῷ σταυρῷ οὖν τὸ τρύπαιον στήσας ὃ Κύριος. ὥσπερ ἐν δημοσίῳ θεατρῷ ᾿Ελλήνων, Ρωμαίων, ᾿Ιουδαίων, τοὺς δαίμονας ἐθριάμβευσεν.
16. μὴ οὖν---σαββάτων. Theophyl. observes, that hitherto the Apostle has spoken enigmatically on this head; but now he is more explicit, after having enumerated the above benefits. On the foregoing enumeration of the merits of Christ in reforming and saving the world, he engrafts a conclusion, ver. 16—fin., namely, that the praise of Christian virtue is no longer to be sought by the observances of the. Mosaic Law, but in true moral reformation.
16. μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς---σαββάτων, ““ Wherefore (such being the case with the ceremonial law), let no one © judge you (i.e. as you observe,-or not) or condemn you in (respect of any rite connected with) meats,” Χο. The μέρει, Heinrichs observes, either signifies in any part of (so Theophyl.), or it is pleonastic, (and so it is considered by Rosenm. and Schleus.) ; as ἐν παιδίας μέρει in Diog. Laert., and many other exam- ples cited by Wets. But it should rather seem that ἐν μέρει is well rendered in the Εἰ. V. in respect of. And so Beza, Luther, and Wolf. ‘Thus it is much the same with ἐν τῷ μέρει τούτω 2 Cor. 3, 9. 9, 3., in the business of. And see 1 Pet. 4,16. The same ex- planation will hold good of almost all the examples adduced by the Philologists. The Apostle might have written ἐν μέρει βρώσεως ἣ πόσεως, &c., but he has chosen to vary the phraseology.
The other terms can require no explanation, See,
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 39
however, Mackn. on the σαββάτ., who rightly indi- cates the obligation to the observance of the Chris- tian Sabbath.*
17. ἃ ἐστι σκιὰ τῶν μελλόντων, TO δὲ σῶμα τ. X., “which things (as compared to the future benefits to be obtained by Christ) are a mere shadow, but the substance is solely Christ, and the advantages to .be obtained by him.” So it is remarked by Spencer ap. Whitby, that we are not to infer from hence that these and all the ritual constitutions of the Law of Moses, shadowed forth some Christian mystery, but only that they were as mere shadows compared to that solid and substantial truth which Christ, by his Gospel, hath discovered to us.” And such is the interpretation adopted by almost all ju- dicious Commentators, antient and modern. So Theophyl.: Τὰ μὲν παλαιὰ σκιά εἰσι, τὸ δὲ copa, τουτέστιν, ἡ ἀληθεία, Χριστοῦ. “Ὥστε τί δεῖ σκιὰν κρα- τεῖν, τοῦ σώματος παρόντος.
* On which subject I would respectfully refer my younger readers to an instructive treatise recently published by the learned and or- thodox Mr. Holden, entitled, <‘ The Christian Sabbath ;” a work rendered almost necessary by the many frivolous pamphlets and commentationes on this subject, especially a most pernicious one of Gilbert Wakefield. To suchas these the words of Wolf are very ap- plicable: ““ Optandum erat, ut nostratium nonnulli ad illorum ex- emplum (adverting to certain writers who have written in vindica- tion of the Sabbath) Sabbati Christiani moralitatem nunquam in dubium vocassent, otiumque suum rebus et commentationibus pro- ficuis potius et πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν aptis, quam talibus impendissent, que ut rerum argumentis destituuntur, ita bonos offendunt, malos autem cultus divini negligentiores reddunt.” Mr, Bulkley has here much important matter from St. Barnabas, St, Ignatius, Justin Martyr (in his Dialogue with Trypho), Irenzeus, Clemens Alexan- drinus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, and Jerome, which I would recommend to the attention of Mr. Holden for a fu- ture Edition of his work. Of these my limits will only permit me to insert the following from St. Barnabas: ‘‘ The eighth day is the beginning of another world ; therefore we celebrate the eighth day with joy, on which Jesus rose from the dead, and appeared and ascended into the heavens ;” and Ignat. Epist. p. 34, 35. (speaking of the antient Prophets): Eis καινότητα ἐλπίδος ἤλυθον, μήκετι σαβ:- βατίξοντες, ἀλλὰ κατὰ κυριακὴν Guy ξῶντες.
40 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
Of this sense of σκιὰ and σώμα it were needless to adduce any of the numerous Classical examples col- lected by the Philologists. On the words τὸ δὲ σῶμα Χριστοῦ there is some uncertainty. But the best Commentators are agreed that the genitive is put for the dative with ἐν; q.d. ‘the thing (i.e. the truth itself), the future blessings themselves are situated and reside in Christ, from whom alone they are. to be sought.”
18. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω. The term κατα- βραβ. (which is reckoned by Jerome among the Apostle’s Cilicisms (though examples are found in Demosth., Polyb., and Plutarch), has been variously interpreted. It signifies, properly, “ to deprive any one of the βραβεῖον, or prize, which he deserves, by some art or trick (for κατὰ has thus the sense of mapa). Hence it comes to signify, “ exercise unjust and fraudulent judgment upon.” Whence it has here been explained to deceive, circumvent, like wapa- λογίϑεσθαι at supra 4. By others, as Bengel, it is in- terpreted, “‘ exercise despotic and abused authority over.” For other interpretations I must refer the reader to Pole, Wolf, and Heinrichs. Wolf and Hammond explain condemn; Whitby, damnify. The interpretation first mentioned (which is supported by our Common Version) seems to be the most natural. The sense is clear from ver. 16. paris ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ; 4. d. ** Let no man deceive or damnify you, drawing you off from the true doctrine to a factitious one at variance with the Gospel.”
The use of θέλων is very anomalous; and several Commentators render it, “ by a voluntary humility.” And so Beza, Dav., Dath, and J. Capell. See also Wesseling on Herod. 9, 14. But this may be wan- dering too far. Theophyl. renders: θέλουσιν ἡμᾶς καταβραβεύειν διὰ ταπεινοφροσύνης δοκούσης. Others explain, “ delighting in,” i.e. by delighting, or who delights in. So Casaub., Hamm., Vatablus, and Knatchbull. It is not easy to say which deserves
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 41
the preference. Wolf, who carefully examines both, assigns it to the former, and perhaps rightly. Almost all recent Commentators adopt the latter.
On the sense of ταπεινοφροσύνη Commentators are little agreed. Those who take θέλων in the significa- tion dwelling in, render it, “ tenuitas in victu, an ascetic and Pharasaical kind of life.” But this sense seems too arbitrary, and is little authorized. I see no reason to desert that of modestia, which is ac- cordant with the usage of the Scriptural writers ; and, united with θέλων, the term denotes (as Doddr. says) “‘ an affected and fantastic, if not counterfeit, humility and lowliness of mind.”
18. καὶ θρησκεία τῶν ἀγγέλων. Of these words there are two interpretations; Ist, that of the an- tients and most moderns, “ the worshipping of an- gels (this being the genitive of object, on which see Krebs in loc.) and interpreters of men’s prayers, and their intercessors with God.” See Tob. 12, 15. 2dly, that of some eminent moderns, and especially the recent Commentators, “ worship such as angels render to God.” And so the genitive is used in Sapient. 14, 27. But this interpretation is liable to many objections, which are well stated by Heinrichs, who satisfactorily defends the former, which is sup- ported by the unanimous authority of the antients. The words are levelled against persons who (whether they derived their opinions from the Essenes, or from some Heathen philosophers) maintained the existence of angels or δαίμονες, as intercessors and mediators of prayer (not of salvation), under an idea that imme- diate access to the Deity, was unattainable and pre- sumptuous. It is needless for me to enter into this subject, since it has been so fully treated by Dr. Whitby. Grot. well observes (after Theophyl.) that there was an affectation of humility in this, as if they dared not venture themselves to prefer their petitions. It is well remarked by an anonymous writer ap. Wets.: ““ Modestiam simulantes tumidi sunt.”
18. ἃ μὴ ἑώρακεν ἐμιβατεύων, ‘intruding and prying
42 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
into that which he hath not, and doth not under- stand.” Such appears to be the sense of ἐμβ., though Philologists are not quite agreed, Jerome and Erasm. rendering it, ““ tncidens fastuosé,’ by a metaphor taken from the tragic €uBades. But this interpreta- tion (as Beza and Schleus. observe), is neither agree- able to doctrine, nor founded on any authority. The sense ““ prying’? is supported and illustrated by many eminent Critics, as Bos, Raphel, Schleus., and Heinr., who adduce examples from the Classical writers and Lexicographers. As to that of our Common Version, intruding into, it is also well sup- ported by Classical authority (see Schleus. Lex.) : but the sense prying is more apposite; though, in- deed, both may be united. I would render: ‘“ step- ping out of his bounds, and prying into what it is impossible for him to fathom.” ‘Ewpakev, known, understood. A signification common in verbs of seeing, both Greek, Hebrew, and Latin. Rosenm. compares 1 Tim. 1, 7.*
18. εἰκῆ φυσιουμένος, “ vainly puffed up and proud.” This metaphor of inflation to designate pride is per- petual. See the Philological Commentators. Εἰκῆ, causelessly, irrationally, as accompanied with igno- rance. So Matt. 9, 22. and 1 Tim. 6,4. τετύφωται μηδὲν ἐπιστάμενος. ‘This is the simplest method of interpretation. Others are pursued by the Com- mentators. See Pole, Wolf, and Heinrichs. It is observed by Rosenm., that the words of Christ, Luke 11, 5., contain so exact a description of such kind of Jewish teachers, that it will serve as a com- mentary to this passage.
* And he remarks: “ Nempe, qui addicti erant Judaicis insti- tutis, ignorabant, concessa esse in legibus Mosaicis multa, que nec vim tamen preceptorum haberent, omnia autem non nisi ad tem- pus, nullis, nisi Israelitis injuncta, plurima preter hec hominum arbitrio, non Dei mandato, sancita, pretereaque Christianis, a legis Mosaicz vinculo per Christum liberatis, antiquata precepta, et vero etiam iis, qui stirpe de IsrzliticA non essent, hec eadem, que Judeis, religione servanda obtrudebant. Cf. 2 Cor. 3, 13.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 43
19. καὶ οὐ κρατῶν τὴν κεφαλὴν, ““ and not keeping hold of, holding fast by the head (even Christ).’’ ἹΚρατεῖν signifies to hold fast by, keep close to, fol- low. For examples Heinrichs and Schleus. refer to Luke 4, 42. Acts 3, 11. and Apoc.2, 13. Κεφαλὴν, ** only master and moderator.” ’E& οὗ, for ἐξ ἧς, by the πρὸς τὸ σημαινόμενον. On the sense of the rest of the passage, which is almost verbatim the same as Eph. 4, 16.. see the note there, as also the notes of Whitby and Mackn. in loc.
20. εἰ οὖν ἀπεθάνετε σὺν τὼ X. ἀ. τ. σ.τ. κι But if ye be dead with Christ to, and have renounced those elements of the world.” MHeinr. paraphrases : “« Quam parum queso vobis constatis, quam vobis contradicitis, si nuntio elementar ireligioni ceremo- niarumque nugis misso, in eis tamen observandis eque religiosos vos prestatis.’” The τὰ στοιχεῖα Noesselt and Heinrichs explain of signs, ceremonies, affecting the senses only, an external and adumbrated worship of God, such as is described supra ver. 16 and Gal. 4, 10. Somewhat preferable is the exposi- tion of er, by Koppe on Gal. 3, 4. and Schleus. in v. : religio, rudior illa et imperfecta, sensibus omnia sub- jiciens poenisque terrens, qua ad perfectiorem chris- tianam preparandi erant Judai ceque ac Gentiles. See the notes on the above passages of Galat. The Critics just mentioned do not, however, successfully assign a reason for this use of κόσμου, as applied to the Jewish superstition. ‘They think it was so used in order to retaliate on the Jews their own contemp- tuous appellation bestowed on the Heathens. But it perhaps rather denotes what we call the mob, the profanum vulgus. So that by στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου are meant such rude, imperfect, gross, and sensual no- tions of religion, as are suitable to the profanum vulgus, the bulk of mankind.
20. ἀπεθάνετε σὺν Χριστῷ, viz. at baptism; as is plain from supra ver. 13. and Rom. 6, 4., where see the notes. Tw—doyparigerbe, “ why do ye hold opinions as if living in the profession, not of the spi-
44 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
ritual and enlightened doctrines of Christ, but in the gross and grovelling ones of the vulgus, namely, in Judaism.” Δογματίξεσθαι is a word often used by the Philosophers ; as Diog. Laert., Arrian, and Sext. Emp. (See Schleus. and Wets.) Many Commenta- tors explain it here, “ to suffer doctrines to be im- posed upon you.” So Grot. and Schleus. Others, “0 hold dogmas or doctrines.” The former inter- pretation seems preferable, on account of the ἐντάλ- para just after. Andso Theophyl.: ws raidia ἀρτι- μαθῆ Kabyobe, ᾧησι, δογματιϑόμενοι καὶ νομοθετούμενοι τί δεῖ ποιεῖν. ‘The latter, however, may be zncluded.. 21. μὴ aby, μηδὲ γεύση, μηδὲ θίγῃς. Here we have a parenthesis containing a specimen of the hind of δόγματα just adverted to. ‘The words are strangely rendered by Mackn., “Neither taste, touch, nor handle.” Our common translation, if thus pointed, will fully represent the sense: ‘‘ Touch not—taste not—handle not ;” q.d. “ Touch not this—taste not that,” &c. ‘These are (as Heinr. observes) speci- mens of ἐντάλματα expressed imperatorid brevitate. On the distinct sense of the ay, γεύσῃ, and θίγῃς Commentators are by no means agreed. Some, as Crell. and Heinr., regard them as synonymes accu- mulated (by a sort of climax) to show the severity of the interdict,* and all having reference to forbidden meats. But this seems too formal; and θίγῃς will scarcely bear the sense they assign, at least there is no Scriptural authority for it. The same may be said of ἅψη, which though it is often used in the Classical writers, yet I think never in the New Tes- tament. As to Slade’s criticism, that ‘* it never has this except with the addition of a genitive,’ I must confess that in the passages cited by the Commenta- tors (and also a great number which I had myself collected in the course of my reading) I do not find one in which the genitive is omitted; yet I see not
* So Mackn. observes there is here a beautiful gradation ; eating being more than tasting, and tasting more than handling.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 45
why it might not; as in Soph. Aj. 841. γεύεσθε py Φείδεσθε πανδήμου στρατοῦ. In the present passage, however, it could not have been expressed.
Others, as Grot. and Storr, take the ἅψη to mean, “touch not a woman.” But though the Apostle uses the word in that sense at 1 Cor.7, 1., yet it is with γυναικὸς, the omission of which would here be very harsh. Neither is it likely that the Apostle would here introduce swch a subject, which indeed would little correspond to the words following, ἅ ἐστι---ἀποχρήσει. The μὴ ἅψης and μὴ θίγης seem to be interdicts of the same species: but I am not pre- pared to adopt Mr. Slade’s opinion, that “ the former signifies handle not ; the latter, come not into contact with.” For as to ἅπτεσθαι, usually signifying touch with the hand,” that will equally hold good of θιγ.: which does not reach far enough. It should rather seem that ἅπτ. signifies to touch with the hand, lay hands upon (as in Thucyd. 2, 49. τὸ μέν ἔξωθεν ἁπτο- μένῳ σώμα οὐκ ἄγαν θερμὸν ἦν); whereas θίγειν signi- fies something more, namely, contrecto ; whence it is often used in sensu nequiori. Yet, for the reasons above assigned, I would not seek such a signification here, but refer it, together with ἅψη, to the having contact, greater or less, with objects by which cere- monial pollution might be incurred. It is evident that the Apostle intends no great exactness.
22. ἃ ἐστὶ πάντα cis φθορὰν τῇ ἀποχρήσει. It is of importance here to bear in mind what was just said, namely, that the Apostle in the terms μὴ ἅψη in- tended no great exactness. And therefore those Commentators who here tell us that the ἃ ἐστι, &c. has reference to all the above particulars, seem to increase the difficulty very needlessly. On the sense of the words Commentators are divided in opinion. Much depends upon the sense in which ἀποχρήσει is taken, which some, as Hamm., Doddr., Wells, and Schmidt render abuse. Yet the sense they lay down is quite at variance with the context, and, as Heinr.
4.6 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
observes, very jejune. Almost all Commentators, antient and modern, take ἀποχρ. (and, I think, rightly,) in the sense, use, or usmg. And so our common Version, and also Wolf, whose words are these: “ De usu ciborum ipso loqui Apostolum non dubito. Neque enim in eo erat, ut ab abusu tantum cavere juberet suos, qui ritus ejusmodi omnes penitus intercedisse ante tradiderat.” Of this sense the Commentators adduce examples, to which I could add scores which I have noted down. Yet ail those who adopt this sense, are not agreed in interpreta- tion. Schleus. renders: ‘‘ Quarum rerum usus per- niciem et maximas poenas affert.” And so Heinr., who thinks these are the words of a Jewish Doctor ironically repeated by the Apostle. But such a sense cannot fairly be elicited from the words ; and as to Heinrich’s notion, it is too fancifvl. Upon the whole, I see no interpretation so natural and proba- ble as that of the antients, and, of the moderns, Grot., Wolf, Rosenm., and others, namely, ‘‘ which things are all so far from polluting the user, that they rather themselves perish by using, and tend only to corruption,” i. e. animal destruction; con- formably to the words of our Lord, Matt. 15, 17 & 18. So Theophyl., who paraphrases: Φησὶν, ὅτι οὐ μεγάλα τινὰ ταῦτα ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς φθορὰν καταλήγει τοῖς χρωμένοις" φθειρόμενα γὰρ ἐν τῇ γαστρὶ, διὰ τοῦ ἀφεδρώ- νος ὑποῤῥει' Οὔτε οὖν ὠφελοῦσιν αὐτὰ καθ᾽ αὐτὰ, οὔτε βλάπτουσι.
The words κατὰ τὰ ἐντάλματα----ἀὀἀὄνθρώπων are to be joined with doyparigerbe. ‘The sense of the two verses 20-—22. is thus expressed by Rosenm.: ‘ Quid sus- cipitis aut fertis, si quid vobis ingerit, ista decreta (qualia sunt: noli tangere; neve gustare, neve con- trectare hujus rei aliquid, quod est vetitum lege Mosaica veterumque preeceptis, cibos inprimis inter- dictos, quod omne perit tamen 5. conficitur ipso usu ;) que certé decreta proficiscuntur a preceptis doctrinisque humanis.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 47
48, ἅτινα ἐστι---τῆς capkos, * which ἐντάλματα τῶν ἀνθρώπων, &c. By these are meant chiefly those of the Essenes. Aéyov many Commentators interpret a pretext or pretence. See Doddr. and Kypke. But I prefer the sense assigned by the antients and most moderns, speciem, a show, not a reality. So Chrys. and Theophyl. : λόγον---οὐ δύναμιν, οὐδὲ ἀλήθειαν. This is hinted at in the μὲν without de.* Rosenm. (after Noesselt) observes, that σοφία is here the same as φιλοσοφία at ver. 18., or Ψευδωνόμος γνῶσις at 1 Tim. 6, 20.
23. ἐν ἐθελοθρησκείᾳ. There is here an ellipsis, to be thus supplied: “ as shown, evinced only in ἐθελοθρ. The word is rendered by all our English Translators, will worship (i. e. voluntary worship), which may be defended. (See Grot., and consult the long and instructive, but somewhat rambling, annotation of Hamm.) Yet I prefer the sense assigned to the word, after much critical examination, by the Phi- lologists of the last century (as embodied in Heinr. and Schleus.), namely, “ an excessive, pretended, and affected sanctity.” And this is also supported by some antient Interpreters. ‘Thus Theophyl. ex- plains it τὴν ὑποκρινομένην εὐλάβειαν ἐν τῇ θρησκίᾳ. See also Chrysost. and Gicumen. And in this sense the word is sometimes used by the early Ecclesiastical writers. So ἐθελοπερισσοθρησκεία is cited by Heinr. from Epiphan. de Heres., where it is used of the Pharisees. Heinr. has ingeniously shown how ἐθελο. comes to mean affected.
23. καὶ ταπεινοῷροσύνῃ. On the sense of this word see the note supra ver. 18. From the context it appears to signify that kind of affected humility
* On which it is remarked by Jerome ap. Wets.: ‘‘ Hoc loco quidem conjunctio superflua est, quod in plerisque locis propter im- peritiam artis grammatice Apostolum fecisse reperimus. Neque enim sequitur sed vel alia conjunctio, que solet ei propositioni, ubi quidem positum fuerat, respondere.” The criticism is, however, like many other theological remarks of that Father, ill founded.
48 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II.
under which ever lurks pride,* and which is of all kinds of arrogance the worst. ᾿Αφειδείᾳ cwparos. This is explained by the recent Commentators harsh treatment of ; as if it were said by meiosis, as ἀφει- δεῖν in Thucyd. 2, 43 and 51. It is explained by CEcumen. καταφρόνησιν τοῦ σώματος. And so Theo- phyl. It evidently denotes a neglect of the com- forts, whether of food or clothing, rest, &c. which the body requires. I cannot think, with some, that this includes flagellation.
23. οὐκ ἐν τιμὴ τινι πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκὸς. Mackn. here rashly supplies δὲ, and unwarrantably takes oc- casion to suspend a clause from it, which disfigures the sense of all the rest. The Apostle (I conceive) as hehas shownin what Christian wisdom did πο consist (namely, in unnecessary and affected austerities), so now he shows in what it does consist, or is consistent with, namely, τιμῇ πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκὸς. By τιμῇ is meant ἃ cherishing of the body, (for σώματος must be repeated), a sense found in 1 Cor. 12, 23. 1 Tim. 5, 17. and elsewhere. The words πρὸς πλησ- μονὴν show the kind of care here meant, namely, the satisfying of its wants, so as to keep up its strength for the duties of life (see Elsner), and that the body may thus serve the soul, which an excess either way would prevent. See Chrys. and Theophyl., and also Mackn., who concludes by observing, that ‘* the wisdom which teaches the neglecting of the body, is not wisdom, but folly.” ‘This isso plainly the Apostle’s meaning, that it is strange any should have missed it; and yet many Commentators have so done; for, not to notice the subtilties of Grot. and Heinr., and the harsh constructions of Camer. and Casaub., even the sensible Doddr. renders: ‘to the dishonourable sa- tisfying of the flesh ;” a version entirely founded in error.
* To which purpose may be aptly cited M. Anton. 12, 27. ὑπὸ arugia (read ἀτυφίας) rigos τυφόμενος πάντων χαλεπώτατος. Here. too, the words of our Christian Poet will be applicable :
‘* Pride may be pampered while the flesh grows lean ; Humility may clothe an English dean,”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP, III. 49
CHAP. III.
Having thus far treated on what a true Christian ought not to follow after, (see note on 2, 16.) the Apostle now subjoins what he ought, and on what to fix his affections. That admirable part of the Epistle which now follows abounds in the most excellent moral precepts, and impresses the mind with a deep sense of the dignity and worth of a true Christian. These extend to ver.17. (Heinr.)
VERSE 1 & Q. εἰ οὐν συνηγέρθητε τ. X. τ. &. 8. The sense seems tobe: ‘‘ If then ye have really died with Christ unto the observance of Jewish rites (see 2, 20), and have risen with him to better hopes, and by his example profess to pursue better aims, no longer then grovel in the mire of worldly and fleshly su- perstition, but seek and follow after those purposes which are heavenly, and aim at those blessings which are seated where your Redeemer will dispense them, who sitteth at the right hand of God for ever, and is invested with authority to bless and reward all his faithful servants.” Such seems to be the best ground- ed sense that can be assigned, and it is supported by the authority both of the antients and the most judicious moderns. But the full meaning of the Apostle requires to be developed at far greater length. To which purpose the many excellent Ser- mons of our best English Divines may advantage- ously be consulted, one of which (Bp. Sherlock, 3, 11.) is pointed out by Mr. Slade.
The sentiment in τὰ ἄνω ϑητεῖτε is further de- veloped in τὰ ἄνω φρονεῖτε---γῆς. The φρονεῖτε is well rendered in our English Version, ‘ set your affec- tions on;” from which Doddr. had causelessly de- viated. On the τὰ ἄνω many Commentators have indulged in ingenious, but little solid speculations. Wets. understands it thus; “ Supera studere debe- bant, sed non astra et motus lune, ut Judi et Py- thagorei.” Calvin, with far more probability, takes
VOL, VIII. Ε
50 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.
it of the sublimer doctrines of Christianity, as op- posed to the στοιχεία mentioned at 2, 20. Yet it is objected by Doddr., that those are not in heaven. This, however, seems not very conclusive. It is plain that the words must be taken in their popular acceptation, and in all that extent of signification which a plain Christian would assign to them. And it is well observed by Doddr., that the Apostle pro- ceeds, on the principles he had laid down, to graft a most important practical exhortation, different from any he had advanced before (as he certainly does at ver. 5.); yet nothing could more effectually tend to - take them off from those bigoted attachments of which he was solicitous to cure them.*
3, 4. These verses, Heinr. observes, are to be conjoined, and mutually explained from each other.
᾿Απεθάνετε γὰρ, “ you have, by baptism, professed to bid adieu to your former life, τοῖς κάτω, τῷ Koop,” &c. See the note on 2, 11 and 12. The words ἡ gw - Θεώ admit of more than one sense. Some recent Commentators, as Heinr., take ἡ ϑωὴ to mean ““ your former life now laid aside by spiritual death, the su- perstition and immorality connected with it, and the worldly advantages to be expected from it.” But this is harsh, and unsuitable to the context. The true interpretation seems to be that of Theophyl. (from Chrys.) : πάλιν, ἡ ϑωὴ ὑμῶν ἄνω" ὥστε kal τὰ ἄνω Ppo- νεῖτε' Φιλονεικεῖ γὰρ δεῖξαι αὐτοὺς καθημένους, ἄνω, καὶ ἄλλην ξώντας ϑωὴν, τὴν ἐν τῷ Θεῴ, τὴν μὴ φαινομένην" Μὴ φαίνεται ὁ Χριστὸς" οὕτως οὐδὲ ἡ ϑωὴ ὑμῶν φαίνεται" Τί οὖν ϑητεῖτε τὰ φαινόμενα ; Ταῦτα δὲ προκατασκευά- Set, ἵνα εὐθὺς ἐμπέσῃ εἰς τὸν ἠθικὸν λόγον. And Theo-
* Of the Classical citations in είβ, the most apposite are the following. Heliodor. 7, 23. ὁρῶ yap πῶς κἀκείνην ἄνω καὶ μέγα φρονοῦσαν. Plato de Rep. 7. οὔτε μαθεῖν ἂν πω φήμι αὐτὸν, ἐπιο- τήμην γὰρ οὐδὲ ἔχειν τῶν τοιούτων, οὔτε ἄνω ἀλλὰ κάτω αὐτοῦ βλέ- πειν τὴν ψυχὴν. Seneca Ep. 79. Sursum vocant illum initia sua: erit autem illic, etiam antequam hc custodié exsolvatur, cim vitia disjecerit, purusque ac levis in divinas cogitationes emicuerit. Per- sius 2,61. O curve in terras anime, et ceelestium inanes, Lucian Hermot. 5, ὑψηχὰ ἤδη φρονεῖς καὶ ἄνωθεν.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. [II. δὶ
doret: ἐκείνου γὰρ ἀναστάντος πάντες ἡἠγέρθημιεν" ἀλλ᾽ οὐδέπω ὁρῶμεν των πραγμάτων τὴν ἔκβασιν' κέκρυπται δὲ ἐ ἐν αὐτῷ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀναστάσεως τὸ μυστήριον" ὅταν τοίνον ἐπιφανῇ τὸ δεύτερον, τηνικαῦτα τευξόμεθα τῆς ἀνασ- τάσεως, καὶ ἀπολαυσόμεβα τῆς ἀθανάτου ϑωῆς. And so it is explained by some eminent modern Commenta- tors, as Rosenm.
Ἔν Θεῴ, “ in the mind of God.” Σὺν Χριστῷ, after the manner and example of Christ.””_ “ The life of a Christian (observes Doddr.) is here repre- sented as an invaluable yewe/, and under a double security, reserved in heaven, and laid up with Christ in God; secure, therefore, as the abode of Christ with the Father, or as the fidelity and immutability of the Father himself could make it.” This, however, seems rather ingenious than solid.
4. ὅταν 6 Χοιστὸς---δόξη, “Βα when Christ, who is our life (i. 6. the author of it, Joh. 11, 25.), shall appear, i.e. at his second advent, as Judge, then shall ye appear with him in glory, i. e. happiness.” Theophyl. (from Chrys.) makes the following in- ference: Ὥστε ἐκείνην δητεῖτε τὴν ἡμέραν, μὴ ταύτην" πρὸς ἐκείνην ῥωὴν σπεύδετε' τότε “γὰρ ἡ ἀληθινὴ ϑωὴ ὑ ὑμῶν Φανερούται" ἡ γὰρ YW, θάνατος, ὅ ὅτι καὶ διὰ φθορᾶς συνίς- Taras, τῆς ῥοῆς καὶ ἀποῤῥοῆς.. Μὴ τιμὰς ἐνταύθα ϑητεῖτε καὶ δόξας ἐκεῖ γὰρ ἡ δόξα ὑμῶν. He then subjoins a fine comparison derived from the pearl oyster.
5. νεκοώσατε οὖν τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», “ mortify therefore, and render as dead (so far as sin is concerned), your earthly members.” Τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. “* which are used for the purposes of this life.” Theophyl. explains: τὰ σωματικὰ μέλη. Nexgody isa strong expression, the force of which is too much diluted by the exposition of some recent Interpreters, debilitare. It signifies, ' “ deprive of all force, obtain complete mastery over.” From what follows, how- ever, it should seem that Theophyl. has rightly remarked, that by the ra μέλη ἐπὶ τῆς vis: are meant the τὰ διὰ τῶν μελών τοῦ σώματος ἐπιτελούμενα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἁμαρτήματα. And so Theodoret. ‘Thus the
E2
52 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.
μέλη are put improprie for the lusts worked in those members. ‘The apparent inconsistency between the νεκρώσατε and the expression elsewhere used by the Apostle, συνετάφητε τῷ Χοιστῷ, Theophyl. thus re- moves: ὅτι ἡ μὲν προτέρα νέκρωσις τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἦν δώρον, ἀποκτιννύσα τῆν ἐν ἡμίν ᾿προγεγονυῖον ἁμαρτίαν" ἡ δὲ νῦν ὑποτιθεμένη νέκρωσις" τῆς ἡμετέρας προαιρέσεως, τὰς μετὰ τὺ βάπτισμα ἁμαρτίας ἀφανίξουσα, μᾶλλον de μηδὲ ἀναξῆσαι ἐώσα ὅλως, διὰ τοῦ θανατοῦν τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸὺς.
The terms πορνείαν and ἀκαθαρσίαν, require no ex- planation. The πάθος denotes venereal lust of the most flagitious sort ; as we may infer from Rom. 1, 26., παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς εἰς πάθη ἀτιμίας, With which the Apostie prefaces a description of vices the most abominable. Hence the Latin Pathicus. Here, too, Classical examples are referred to by Schleus. On the terms in question, Theophyl. remarks: Παρῆκεν ἰδικῶς εἰπεῖν ἃ οὐδὲ εἰπεῖν καλόν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀκαθαρσίας καὶ τοῦ πάθους πάντα ἐνέφηνε τὰ τῶν αἰχρών μίξεων εἴδη.
5. ἐπιθυμίαν κακὴν. This is illustrated from 1 Thess. 4, 5., μὴ ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας. ᾿Ἐπιθυμία is, like almost all words of this kind, properly a vox mediz significationis. So Midrasch Cohel: concupiscentia bona subjugavit concupiscentiam malam. See also Theophyl., who cites Dan. 9, 23. On the τὴν πλεονε- ξίαν---εἰδωλολατρεία, see the note on Eph. 5, 5.
7. ἐν οἷς καὶ ὑμεῖς περιεπατήσατε πότε, ὅτε ἐφῆτε ἐν αὐτοῖς, “in which (vices) ye also once (more or less) walked, were habituated to, when ye lived among them,” i. e. the children of disobedience, the Hea- thens. Such is the explanation given by Rosenm., Doddr., and Mackn. The ἐφῆτε ἐ» αὐτοῖς is, how- ever, more usually, and perhaps more rightly, referred to the & Certainly this is supported by the Classical examples adduced by the Philologists. See Wolf and Wets. ‘Thus τοί. explains: “ when ye were moved by such affections and passions.” It is therefore no tautology, as Mackn. objected. Here
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III. 53
may be compared a very similar passage in 1 Cor. 6, 11. |
8. νυνὶ δὲ ἀπόθεσθε καὶ ὑμεῖς τὰ πάντα, * But now that you are become Christians, put ye away them 411. The καὶ signifies vicissim. Under the τὰ πάντα much meaning is comprehended ; i.e. all the vices above mentioned, and also anger, &c. Here, ὀργὴ and θυμὸς are joined, as at Rom. 2, 8., Eph. 4, 31., where see the notes. Κακίαν. See Eph. 4, 31., and the note there. Βλασφημία and αἰσχρολογία are placed together as being vices nearly allied; the former, consisting in injurious and calumnious speaking; the latter, in filthy, lewd, and immodest discourse. ‘The works ἐκ τοῦ στόματος ὑμῶν, are added, to strengthen the sense. It, however, seems a blending of two phrases, “ Jay aside filthy conver- sation, and let it not come out of your mouth.” The latter, occurs in Ephes. 4, 29. where see the note.
9. μὴ ψεύδεσθε εἰς ἀλλήλους ---αὐτοῦ. See the note on Ephes. 4, 2—24., to which I add the following citation. Pindar. Pyth. 4., 177., ἐχθίστοισι μὴ ψεύδεσι καταμιαίναις, 1. 6. καταμιαίνης τὴν γένναν.
9. ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸ παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον. I would compare Pyrrh. ἃρ. Diog. Laert. 2, 66., ὡς χάλεπον εἴη ἐκδύναι ἄνθρωπον (where I would read), τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
10. καὶ ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν νέον----κτίσαντος αὐτὸν, ““ and have put on the new man, who is renewed and reformed unto a knowledge like unto His knowledge who created him,” i. 6. made him:a Christian such as he is. Now, this κτίσις is effected not merely by baptism, and a moral lite (as ‘lkeophy!. says), nor by the doctrine of Christ only (as Rosenm.), but by both these, nay, also by other methods, united with the influence of the Holy Spirit, to dilate on which would be here out of place.
Wets. cites Philo. 15, 45., ἡ δ᾽ εἰκὼν λέλεκται κατὰ τὸν τῆς ψυχῆς ἡγεμόνα νοῦν.
11. ὅπου οὐκ ἔνι Ελλην---ἐλεύθερος. The ὅπου sig- nifies, ““1η which new creation or regeneration.”
54 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.
The οὐκ ἔνι has much sense; q. d. “ there is no enquiry whether any one be Greek or Jew.” See a very similar passage in Gal. 3, 28., and the note. The distribution into Jews and Greeks, circum- cision and uncircumcision, is frequent. On the terms BapBapos, Σκύθης, Heinr. observes, that they are not opposites, like the former; otherwise we should have had Βαρβ. καὶ Ρωμάιος; but there is akind of climax; q. d. barbarous nations, nay, that which is most so, Scythia. The copious Classi- cal illustrations of the Commentators show that Scythian was a proverbial term for barbarian. It is not, however, very necessary to adduce any of them: but I shall lay before my readers a passage which I found in Max. Tyr. Diss. 17, 4., οὐδὲ τὸν ἸΣκύθη οὐδὲ τὸν Ἑλληνα οὐδὲ τὸν Περσὴν, ἢ τὸν ὙὝπερβόφειον. And, a little further on, ταῦτα δὲ ὁ Ἕλλην λέγει, καὶ ὁ βάρ- βαρος, ὃ ἠπειρώτης καὶ ὁ θαλάττιος καὶ ὃ σόφος καὶ ὃ ἄσοφος.
11. ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐν πᾶσι Χριστός. ‘These words have the same sense as those at 1 Cor. 15, 28., where see the note.
12. ἐνδύσασθε οὖν----οἰκτιομών, ‘ Having, then, these glorious hopes on an equal footing with the elect people of God, not only detest and avoid the vices just mentioned, but cultivate those virtues which especially become those to whom God hath shewn such mercy and loving kindness, namely, com- passion,” &c. Such I conceive to be the true con- nection of the passage with the preceding.
The terms ὡς ἐκλεκτοὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἅγιοι καὶ ἠγαπημένοι (as at Hebr. 3, 1., and 1 Pet. 2, 9.), each suggest motives for the exercise of the virtues in question, and they are here accumulated with all the charac- teristic warm-heartedness of the Apostle. Indeed, virtues like these, were especially necessary in a society formed of such discordant materials as that of Colossze. Hence the earnestness of the Apostle’s injunctions.
The metaphor in ἐνδύσασθε σπλάγχνα is not unire- quent. See Rom. 13, 12., and Eph. 6, 11., and the
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. II. 55
notes there. ‘The termimports, * habitual study of, and diligence in, any thing.” See Kypke, who cites Themist. Or. 24., ἐπειδήπερ ἀρετὴν ἀντὶ ἱματίων ἠμφί- ecto. Athenzeus 565., βουλόμενοι ἐνδύεσθαι αὐτὴν αὐταρκείαν. And so Berachoth, fol. 16, 2. (cited by Wets.), Induas te misericordia tua, et cooperias te potentia tua, et circumvolvas te bonitate tua, et cir- cumcingas te miseratione.
The terms ἐκλεκτοὶ, on Ἢ ἅγιοι, and σπλάγχ-
va, have been before explaing@g; as also the others.
13. See the note on Eph. 4, 2 & 32.
14. See the note onthe parallel passage of Eph. 4, 3. ᾿Επὶ πᾶσι τούτοις, * above all these things.” So in the passage of Eph. One may also compare Lucian 3, 142, 44. et. sq.
15. καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ Θεοῦ βραβευέτω ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμών, “And (then) the peace of God,” &c. Several MSS., Versions, and Fathers, have τοῦ Χριστοῦ, which is approved by many Critics, and received by Griesbach ; though on what grounds it is difficult to say: for critical reasons are here very uncertain ; and doctrinal ones are of little use; since either reading yields a good sense. Yet Θεοῦ appears to be preferable, and is defended by a similar passage of Phil. 4, 7.; though the Critics pretend that this reading was introduced from thence; which is more than I can believe would take place in nearly all the MSS. See the note on that passage.
In the interpretation of βραβευέτω it is not necessary to dwell on the primary sense of the term; for though it properly signifies to exercise the office of judge and arbitrator, yet it came to mean simply moderari ; as in Polyb. ap. Raphel: ἽΔπαν τὸ γινόμε- νον ὑπὸ τῶν Γαλατῶν θυμώ μᾶλλον ἢ λογισμῷ βραβέυεται, and in some passages cited by Elsner. The sense then, is: ‘let it be the rule of your feelings and actions.” ‘Thus it differs little from the φρουρήσει in the parallel passage of Philippians. ‘The words are thus explained by Theophyl.: Αὕτη οὖν βραβευέτω ἐν ὑμῖν, μὴ ὁ θυμὸς, wy ἡ Diroverica, px) ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη εἰρήνη"
56 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IIT.
ἐκείνη γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ ἀμύνασθαι γίνεται, ἐκ τοῦ ἀντιδρᾷν' ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἡ βεβαία, ἡ ἀδιάλυτος, ἡ διὰ μηδὲν κοσ- μικὸν ἀγαθὸν γινομένη, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ πρὸς ἡμᾶς διὰ τι ἐγένετο.
15. εἰς ἣν καὶ ἐκλήθητε, “ unto which (peace) also ye were called,” i. e. in becoming Christians, and being initiated into his religion, who preached peace on earth. Besides, as Theophyl. observes, “when Christ called to peace, he made us one body; he being the . Why, then, else are we one body but that, being members of each other, we should preserve this, and not be separated ?”’
15. ev ἑνὶ σώματι is said by the Commentators to be for εἰς ἕν σώμα. But we must also subaud εἶναι. Now this, without the study of peace and concord, would be impracticable. See 1 Cor. 10, 17.
15. καὶ εὐχάριστοι γίνεσθε. Some antients (as Hilary), and many moderns (as Erasm., Vatab., and Wolf, and indeed most recent Commentators) render the edyap. amiable, or mild and gentle. Of this signifi- cation they adduce Classical examples in abundance; and reasons why that interpretation might be received are not wanting. Others may be seen in Schl. Lex. But, after all, I dare not venture to abandon the com- mon one, supported as it is by so consummate a judge of Greek phraseology as Chrysost., and since it is adopted by the other Greek Commentators, and not only by most modern Commentators, but some very eminent Critics, as Grot., Casaub., and recently Heinrichs. Nor does the term signify (as Wolf would have us think) gratitude to men, but gratitude and thankfulness to God, for having called us unto such blessings, as members of his Church. This sense is so natural, and so agreeable to what follows (as εὐχαριστοῦντες), that we may overlook the superi- ority, in point of Classical authority, which the other interpretation can boast.
16. ὁ λόγος τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐνοικείτω ἐν ὑμῖν, ἐν πάση σοφίᾳ. It is observed, by Theophyl.: δείκνυσιν ἡμῖν ὁδὸν Or ἧς εὐχάριστοι ἐσόμεθα. The connection seems
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III. 57
to be: “ And let this gratitude be evinced (among other ways) by often exercising yourselves on the glories of redemption.” In determining the exact sense, much depends upon the force to be assigned to ἐνοικ. Many Commentators, as Rosenm., ex- p:ain: “ Let the doctrine of Christ be frequently and copiously treated of in your society. For (he adds) the doctrine of Christ dwells in such a society, when it is so copiously treated of at all fit times and places that no one want an opportunity of learning.” This indeed is very agreeable to what follows; but is scarcely to be elicited from évox. I therefore prefer the interpretation of some antient and many moderns, namely: ‘ Let the doctrine of Christ, and the truths of the Gospel, be deeply seated in your hearts, and never depart from it, but be exercised as occasion may serve.” Schoettg. compares Tanchu- ma, fol. 24, 3. Lex sedem figat in medio ipsorum. And Mechilta, fol. 19, 1. Lex perfecta sit inter Ipsos.
16. πλουσίως, penitus. “Ev πάσῃ σοφίᾳ is, by some recent Commentators, construed with διδάσκοντες. But the more natural, as well as usual construction, is with the former words. See also Col. 1, 9. and Eph. 1, 8. On the terms here used it is not neces- sary to press, nor take σοφίᾳ for ἀρέτῃ as is done by Theophyl. We must take ἐν for σὺν, and bear in mind (with Grot. and Heinr.) that the Gospel is ac- companied. with true wisdom (1 Cor. 1, 30. ἃ 2, 6. Eph. 1, 8.), and whosoever is occupied with it is exercised in wisdom.
Διδάσκοντες is said to be for διδάσκουσι. Others subaud ἐστι, and take διδάσκοντες for the Imperative διδάσκετε. ‘The former mode is preferable: and yet it may be more simple to regard διδάσκ. as a nomina- tivus pendens. ‘The Apostle seems to intend here to represent the natural effect of this ἐνοικ. πλουσίως. For as ‘‘ out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh,” so a mind thus filled, and fervently exer- cised will, like a full fountain, overflow in praises
38° COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.’
and thanks toGod. Such is, I think, the scope of the words following, on whose sense I have especially treated at the parallel passage of Eph. 5,19 & 20. But I would here add one or two observations. Our use of the Psalms of David, in preference to hymns of human composition, does not rest on any positive command of Scripture, but only on what may be in- ferred from 1 Cor. 14, 27 ἃ 40. Yet, without sub- ordination, how could it be decided what was ac- cording to order, decency, and edification? Power must be vested somewhere ; and where so well as in one spiritual superior? In many respects the pri- mitive mode of worship may be, but in not a few it ought not to be, a model for ours;* and as the Deity adapts both the ordinary and extraordinary dispensations of his Providence to the actual circum- stances of the moral world in different ages and countries, so ought we to imitate that wisdom of the Deity. ‘The extraordinary and miraculous gifts with which even the Laity were then endowed, made it not improper that every one should have liberty of speaking for the edification of the rest, especially when no Minister was present. But afterwards, as
* J may here appositely cite a passage from an Episcopal Visita- tion Sermon of mine, published nearly eleven years ago, p. 27. “ In pure morals, in an humble disposition of the heart, in gratitude to God for having sent his Son into the world, in reverence and love to a crucified Redeemer, the primitive Church is a model for all succeeding ages, Yet it cannot, I think, be denied, that in the weightier matters of the law, in the duties of rendering justice and loving mercy, we have lights before us as clear as had the primitive Christians ; and we have the additional benefit of numerous and holy examples which Ecclesiastical history records, and which have adorned the church of Christ through a long series of ages. Though in the present altered form of society it would be not less burthen- some than it seems unnecessary, to observe literally some Apostolic injunctions ; yet if we cherish a spirit of docility, if we keep in view the same grand end of teaching men to love God with all their heart, mind, and strength, to love their neighbour as themselves, to rest their hopes of salvation, not on their personal merits, but on the efficacy of that redemption which Christ hath accomplished for them, surely we direct Christianity to the noblest purposes, and have no reason to be ashamed as Ministers of God.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III. d9
those extraordinary gifts were gradually withdrawn from the Laity, such a liberty would have been abused to licentiousness: therefore the authority of the Clergy was (most beneficially for the whole com- munity) increased, and on that authority, and the decisions of the universal Church, it was determined that none but the Psalms of David should be used in public worship. It cannot, I think, be proved from the New Testament that any uninspired hymns were used in the public service of the primitive Christians; which is the point on which the contro- versy with the Dissenters hinges.
16. ἐν χάριτι ἄδοντες. This is susceptible of more than one mode of interpretation. Some, as Hein- richs, takes it to mean animo grato. But that sense can hardly be admitted. Others, as Grot. and Ro- senm. (with more probability), take it to be equiva- lent to JN χαριεντώς, amabiliter, jucunde. But this is somewhat frigid. Zanch and Gomar understand it of “ the delight and profit of the hearers.” So Theo- phyl.: μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς πνευματικῆς, as opposed to the pro- Jane songs of the Heathens. And this mode of in- terpretation seems to deserve the preference.
Ἔν καρδίαις is usually explained ex animo, i.e. not with the voice only, but with the heart. That, however, would require the singular. It should seem that this is closely connected with the preceding. The sense appears to be: “ with spiritual and heart- felt joy.” It may, however, with some antients, and, of the moderns, Dr. Mackn., be understood of the spiritual gifts.
17. καὶ πᾶν 6,71—Kupiov ᾿Ιησοῦ. On account of the πάντα following, πᾶν is treated by the Commen- tators as a nominative absolute. It may, however, be an accusative dependent on κατὰ, quod attinet ad. Grot. remarks that ποιεῖν, like the Heb. Mwy, though sometimes applied to εἴπειν, is often, as here, taken in a laxer sense, so as to comprehend saying as well as doing: for he who saith, acts.”. The words πᾶν ὅ,τι are paraphrased by Theophyl.: ἐὰν ἐσθίης, ἐὰν πίνης
60 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.
ἐὰν ἀποδημίῇῆς, πάντα ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ Θεου πρᾶττε, τουτέσ- τιν, αὐτὸν καλών βοηθὸν, πρότερον αὐτῷ εὐχόμιενος, καὶ οὕτως ἅπτου τῶν ἔργων.
17. ἐν ὀνόματι ἰζ. Ἶ., “agreeably to [151], and suitably to his doctrine.” Compare 1 Cor. 10, 31.
17. εὐχαριστοῦντες τῷ Θεῴ καὶ Πατρὶ dv αὐτοῦ. The δι᾽ αὐτοῦ is variously explained. By Rosenm., “ prop- ter Christum.” Heinr. thinks it is pleonastic. But this cannot be admitted; and the interpretation above mentioned is too limited. The expression must include a reference to the mediatorial office of Christ. So Theophyl.: ὥσπερ ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ὁ Tibs τῷ Πατρὶ προσήγαγεν, οὕτω καὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν ἡμών αὐτὸς προσάγει τῷ ΠΠατρὶ, πάντων τῶν ἀγαθών μεσίτης ἡμάν ὧν.
18. Having concluded the general, the Apostle now proceeds to particular precepts.
Ὥς ἀνῆκεν, “Sas it is right and just.” So Eph. 6, 1. τοῦτο γὰρ ἐστι δίκαιον. Rosenm.) And so Theophyl. interprets. See Eph. 5, 22, 24. and the note.
19. Compare Eph. 5, 25—fin. ΠΙκραιν. in a pas- sive or reciprocal sense signifies to carry oneself bitterly, and is used with πρὸς τινα, or ἐπι τινὶ. (Heinr.) And sometimes with a dative withouta preposition; as in Philo 584. (cited by Wets.) ἑτέροις πικρ. and also 2,135. ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀπειθοῦσι πικραίνεται. See Kypke and Loesner. [844 Joseph. 314, 15. ἐδεῖτο συγγνώναι περὶ τῶν εἰς αὐτὸν ἡμαρτημένων, καὶ μὴ γενέσθαι πικρὸν αὐτώ. Soph. Phil. 254. πικρὸς θεοῖς" where the Schol. ex- plains ἔχθρος. Dionys. Hal. 1, 599, 25. πικρὸν ἄνδρα καὶ μισόδημον. ‘The word signifies to indulge a spirit (whether carried into effect or not) of irritability and exacerbation not easily appeased. From the παροργίϑετε Of Eph. 6, 4. ; some here confine it to provocation ; which is, however, far too great a limi- tation. The extent of sense above detailed is re- quired by the opposite ἀγαπᾶτε. Much more has been, and might be said; but as all is trite and un-
necessary, I forbear. ~ 20. τὰ τέκνα, ὑπακούετε. Compare Eph. 6. 1—3.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III. 61
and the notes. Rosenm. observes that this general command is to be restricted by the ἐν κυρίῳ under- stood, which is expressed at Eph. But this is too precarious a principle. It is better to say that as ἐν κυρίῳ occurs in the next clause, so it is zmplied here. Evapecroy answers to the δίκαιον in Eph.
Q1. μὴ epebigere τὰ τέκνα ὑμῶν. Compare Eph. 6, 4. Epebigere answers to the wapopyivere there. See 2 Cor. 9, 2. The verb is often found united with others expressive of what usually follows irritation, as λοιδορεῖν, τύπτειν, &c. See the philological Com- mentators. “Iva μὴ abupwow, “lest they lose all heart, and despair;” since excessive severity de- stroys all alacrity of obedience, and induces a de- sponding, stupid, and hardened spirit. So Wets.: ‘‘ne, spe tam morosis placendi parentibus abjecta, obedire negligant.” This sense of ἀθυμεῖν is of such perpetual occurrence in the classical writers (see Wets.) that one might wonder how any Commen- tator could have thought of so forced and frigid a sense as “ ne vobis et ipsi irascantur,”’ a signification in which the word is used in some passages of the Old Testament; than which nothing can be more precarious evidence.
22. οἱ δοῦλοι---τὸν Θεόν. Compare, Eph. 6, 5—8. It is observable that the Apostle enlarges more on the duties of masters and servants, and for an ob- vious reason, since there more is to be done from a sense of religious duty and accountableness to God. The Apostle seems to leave the duty of the ser- vant unlimited at κατὰ ravra, not adding ἐν κυρίῳ, Or the like ; but he 2m fact limits it by a direct injunction to the master, at ver. 25. On the sentiment see Mackn.
I am surprised that Griesb. should not have re- ceived ὀφθαλμοδουλείᾳ, which is supported by many excellent MSS. and the parallel passage of Ephes. The v undoubtedly arose from the w following; as in a thousand other cases. On the other hand, I should hesitate, with Greisb., to receive Κύριον for
62 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III.
Θεόν ; since there are not merely critical, and per- haps fancied reasons (a concurrence of recensions) to be pleaded in its favour ; whereas Κύριον somewhat savours of emendation, and seems to have been in-~ troduced to make the antithesis between the human master and the divine Master the stronger. But such niceties the Apostle little heeded.
23. καὶ πᾶν 0,74 ἐὰν ποιῆτε. “and whatsoever ye do,” viz. in your service. “Ex ψυχῆς ex animo. ‘Qs τῷ κυρίῳ, &c. ‘‘and regard your service as rendered to the Lord, and not. unto men.”
24, εἰδότες---τῆς κληρονομίας. The Apostle now states the strongest of all motives for their doing this; anticipating the objection,—what shall we gainfrom our masters by such fidelity and diligence? little or nought. To which the answer is: “ That may be; but from the Lord ye will receive τὴν ἀνταπόδοσιν τῆς κληρονομίας," Where the Commentators remark, the genitive is exegetical, i. e. “ which con- sists in inheritance (in heaven). See ὦ, 17. and Rom. 8, 17.
Q5. 6 δὲ ἀδικῶν κομιεῖται ὃ ἠδίκησε. In the interpre- tation of this verse the Commentators are divided in opinion as to what the ἀδικῶν is to be referred. Some say, to the servant; others, to the master. Others make it general. (See Doddr.) But the last method can by no means be admitted. Of the two first the former is supported by the context, and seems pre- ferable. Yet in the προσωποληψία it is (1 think) hinted that if the master do wrong, he shall receive punishment for it. So Theophyl.: ἀλλ᾽ οὖν καὶ οἱ δεσπόται ὑποδεχέσθωσαν τοῦτο Kal ὡς αὐτοῖς ἁρμιόβον. See also Theodoret. In this we may observe great delicacy; and the former is particularly mentioned, be- cause, as Heinr. remarks, ‘‘ mean persons often think they ought to be spared, because of their poverty and ignorance; which is here expressly denied, since God no more spares bad servants than bad masters.”
The expression Kop. 6 70x, has been explained at
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. III. IV. 63
Eph. 6, 8. and 2 Cor. 5,10. ‘The term κομ. is used of evil as well as good. See Levit. 2,17. Mackn. has of all our English Commentators best seen the sense. On προσωποληψία see Ephes. 6, 9. Gal. 2, 6. and James 2, 1.
CHAP. IV.
Ver. 1. οἱ Κύριοι---παρέχεσθε. Compare Eph. 6, 9. The Apostle here expressly states (what at 3, 25. he only hinted at), the corresponding duty of masters to servants. ‘The οἱ has here (as in some other phrases) the force of the pronoun personal. Παρέχεσθε, preestate, yield in return. So a Lexico- grapher ap. Wets. ἰθυντήριον τὸ κανονίϑον καὶ ἰσότητα παρέχον. The τὸ δίκαιον and τὴν ἰσότητα are said to besynonymous. Yet ἃ distinction might be made ;* though it is not necessary, since the two terms are often so united, by a kind of popular idiom; as we say, “what is jusé and right.” Of the passage cited by Wets. the most apposite are the following: Thucyd. 2, 44. οὐ γὰρ οἷοντε ἴσον τὸ ἢ δίκαιον βουλεύεσθαι. Epis- tola Philippi, πως ἐστι τοῦτ᾽ ἴσον ἢ δίκαιον ; Demosth. ἴση καὶ δικαία εἰρήνη.
What is meant by the τὸ δικ. καὶ τὴν ioor. magéy. (with which compare, “40. as you would be done by,” and “ with the same mete that ye measure it shall be mea- sured to you again,”) is very obvious; and the force of this popular phrase was too well understood to make it necessary for the Apostle to add any thing expla- natory of its sense. Heinr. cannot conceive why the Apostle should be so brief on the reciprocal duty of masters. But it seems that the phrase suggests all that was necessary (see the Commentators) ; and it requires no Qidipus to see why the Apostle
* Thus Grot., after observing that there is a jus even between
those who are not equals, says, that the δικ, answers to the Hebr. ΡΥ, the igor, to wo.
64 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV.
should be brief and delicate on this head, considering that slaves formed so very considerable a part of the population, in some places far exceeding the free persons, as in our West India islands.
2—6, The Apostle now subjoins some more ge- neral precepts, on praying (which correspond to Eph. 6, 18. sq.), and a wise and prudent regulation of our lives, answering to Eph. 5, 15. sq. (Heinr.)
Here, all Commentators remark, ch. 4. ought to have commenced.
Προσκαρτερεῖν signifies to assiduously persevere in any thing, and is used of prayer in Acts 1, 14 & 46. 6,4. Compare Rom. 12, 12. 18, 6. The phrase yeny. ἐν αὐτῇ, Which denotes watchful diligence in or about any thing, is added, to strengthen the sense. So 1 Pet. 4, 7. νήψατε, εἰς τας προσευχὰς.
2. ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ. Here ἐν 15 for σὺν ; and εὐχαριστία signifies thanksgiving. Yor as Davison and Grot. remark, “ conjungi debet grata exacti temporis (et acceptorum beneficiorum) memoria cum futuri postulatione.” It is observed by Theophyl. that that is true prayer which unites thanks for all the events which have befallen us, whether prosperous or ad- verse. ‘No one (says Rosenm.) can neglect the duty of prayer, who often thinks of the benefits he has received, and returns thanks to God for them.”
3. προσευχόμιενοι ἅμα καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν. With prayer the Apostle conjoins a mention of himself, as at Eph. 6, 15., desires their prayers ; chiefly (as it should seem) to hint to them the duty of prayer for each other, as well as for themselves, and how much they ad/ stood in need of it. On the efficacy of such prayer the Apostle often treats as at Phil. 1, 19. and Hebr. 13, 19. This passage (Mackn. observes) affords instruction both to ministers, and to their people: to ministers, not to despise an assistance which even an inspired Apostle thought useful to him. And to the people, to be careful to assist their mi- nisters with an help which in the end will greatly redound to their own benefit.”
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV. 65
3. ἀνοίξη ἡμῖν θύραν τοῦ λόγου. On θύρα in this Sepa sense see Acts 14, 27. 1 Cor. 16, 9. and 2 Cor. , 12., and the notes. The phrase must sig- nify ri the Lord would give him an opportunity (i.e. a further and more favourable opportunity) of preaching the Gospel of Christ,* namely, by being set at liberty. That such is the sense (though the Commentators have not distinctly seen it) is clear from what follows.
On μυστήριον, as applied to the Gospel, and espe- cially that most profound part of it, the calling of the Gentiles, I have before treated. See 1, 26. and elsewhere.
4, ἵνα φανερώσω airs, ὡς δεῖ με λαλῆσαι. Pav. has the sense of declare, teach; as in Rom. 1,19. But it is hére appropriate to the μυστήριον. The words ὡς δεῖ με λαλῆσαι are susceptible of more than one meaning. Rosenm. renders it, ‘ suitably to my office :” and Davison and Gomar, optimo modo, vere, constanter, prudenter. But this cannot be the sense. Preferable is the exposition of Grot.: ‘* non tantum ut magnum mihi det Deus auditorium, sed et forti- tudinem animi, et eloquendi copiam.” And he re- fers to 1 Cor. 9, 16. It should, however, seem that the Apostle is alluding to that liberty which would give him an oppor tunity of preaching the Gospel in such a way as he was bound to do, being Apostle of the Gentiles, and chiefly by having the ,παῤῥησία. Theophyl. well explains thus: ἵνα παῤῥησίαν μοι δῷ, οὐχ ὅπως ἀπαλλαγώ τῶν δεσμών, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως λαλήσω τὸ μυστήριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὡς δεῖ με λαλῆσαι" τουτέστι, μὴ μετὰ ὑποστολῆς, ἀλλ᾽ εὐπαῤῥησιάστως. Πώς δὲ dede- μένος ἑτέρους. παρακάλει καὶ ἄξιοι λαβεῖν ὃ ὃ εἶχεν;
5. ἐν σοφίᾳ περιπατεῖτε πρὸς τοὺς ἔξω. By the τοὺς ἔξω are plainly meant “all who are not of the fold of
* Wets. here compares Pind. Olymp. 6. χρὴ τοίνυν πύλας ὕμνων ἀναπίπταμεν αὐταῖς" and Clem. Strom. 6. οὐδὲ γάρ ῥᾷστον ἔπεων πύλας ἐξευρεῖν. And 50 Οἷς. Ep. 13, 10. (cited by Heinr.) amicitia fores aperiuntur. ς
VOL. VIII. Ε
66 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV.
Christ,” whether Jews, or Heathens. See 1 Cor. 12, 13. The scope of the admonition, taken in connec- tion with what precedes, seems to be to enjoin the exercise of prudence in avoiding whatever may give unnecessary offence. On the τὸν καιρὸν ἐξαγοραξ. I have copiously treated at Eph. 5,16. But the in- terpretation which I have there adopted will (I grant) not be suitable to the present passage, which seems rather to require that of Grot., Hamm., and Whitby on that passage. See, however, Chrys. and Theo-
6. The Apostle seems here to mean to give them an admonition as to the mode in which any conver- sation with the Heathens should be maintained. Their discourse, he says, is to be ἐν χάριτι, ἅλατι. ἠρτυμιένος, on which words Commentators are by no means agreed. Many uuderstand χάριτι of divine grace. But that would here seem harsh. The an- tients interpret ἐν χάριτι by ἐπίχαρις. And so the most judicious moderns, courteous, agreeable, not morose and melancholy. But on ἅλατι ἠρτυμένος they are divided in opinion. Most antients take it of spiritual wisdom. ‘Theophyl. paraphrases thus: ἐχέτω μὲν χαριεντισμὸν ὃ λόγος ὑμῶν" πλὴν μὴ εἰς ἀδιαφορίαν ἐκπιπτέτω καὶ ἔκλυσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἔστω καὶ στύφων' τοῦτο γὰρ τὸ ἅλας δηλοῖ" μήτε πέρα τοῦ μέτρου ἐπίχαρις ἔσο, μήτε αὖ αὐστηρός. But, however agree-. able to the intention of the Apostle, I see not how such a sense can be elicited from the words. It is evident that the Apostle is here speaking of moral qualities, prudence and discretion, not religious ones. Considering, then, the context, I agree with those eminent moderns, who interpret the ἅλιτι ἠρτυμένος of that prudence and discretion which regards place, time, and persons. Yet there may be, too, an allusion to that kind of neatness of phraseo- logy which the Apostle deemed it not unworthy of Christians to aim at in their conversation with Heathens, in order to procure greater respect to the Gospel. ‘Thus the words following admit of an easy
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. Iv. 67
connexion, where at εἰδέναι must be supplied εἰς τὸ, or ὥστε; ‘* Thus (i. 6. by the exercise of this pru- dence and wisdom) will ye be able to know when and how to give an answer to every Heathen en- quirer, or objector, and that suitably to his station, or knowledge ; and by the cultivation of this neatness of phraseology your answers will be better pointed, and produce greater effect.”” Such appears to be the real and complete sense of the passage on which the notions of the Commentators seem very confused.
7. Now comes the last section of the Epistle, which corresponds to Eph. 6, 21. (though longer), and in which (as he usually does at the conclusion of his Epistles) the Apostle speaks of himself, or gives a special injunction with respect to certain persons, concluding with benedictory and valedic- tory phrases. (Heinr.) Rosenm. observes, that we may hence infer that Tychicus had been to take a journey through Phrygia. On ἀγαπητὸς ἀδελφὸς and σύνδουλος, see supra 1, 7. and Phil. 2, 25.
8. ἵνα γνῷ τὰ περὶ pov, ‘ That he may obtain a knowledge of your affairs, and make report to me.” This anxiety of the Apostle to have that knowledge appears from supra 2, 1. On the sense of παρακαλ. τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν see supra 2, 2.
9. σὺν ᾿Ονησίμῳ ---ὖς ἐστιν ἐξ ὑμῶν. The σὺν ’Ov. connects with ἔπεμψα. Ὅς ἐ. ἐ. u., ‘ who is de- scended from your nation, who is your countryman.” See the Epistle to the Philipp., where Theodoret says that Onesimus (which, however, was’ a very common name) was a Phrygian. See also Mackn. in loc.
9. πάντα ὑμῖν γνωριοῦσι τὰ ὧδε, 1. 6. “ they will tell you the state of our affairs, both as respects myself and others.” The τὰ ὧδε, however, may iaclude every sort of intelligence which would be interesting to them as Christians. On the similar words of ver. 7. Chrys. and Theophyl. remark on the wisdom of the Apostle in not inserting every thing in his Epistle that those whom he addressed would wish to F2
68 COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV.
know, but leaving the minuter and secular matters to the letter-bearers. That this was usual in antient times I have before shewn. And, we may observe, there was in the case of Paul a delicate propriety, and a kindness and respect to the letter-bearers, by leaving them something to say. So Theophyl. re- marks that the Apostle adopted this course, first, that his Epistles might not be too long; secondly, that he who went with them might have something to relate, and be on that account looked upon more respectfully ; thirdly, that he might show his good opinion of such persons, and the regard he had for them, by this confidence placed in them; and be- cause he might have some things to communicate, not so proper for being committed to writing.”
10. ᾿Αρίσταρχος. See Acts 19, 29. 20, 4. 27, 2. and Philem. 24. And not uncommon name in Greece, and rendered celebrated by having been borne by the great Grammarian. On this person see the instructive note of Mackn.
10. ὁ συναιχμοαλωτός pov. ‘The Commentators here raise a difficulty, because in this place Aristarchus is called prisoner; but in Philem. 23, Epaphras. Yet both might be in bonds; and surely St. Paul was at liberty to mention in one Epistle the bonds of the former, and in another the bonds of the latter. ( Heinr.)
10. Μάρκος 6 ἀνεψιὸς Βαρνάβα. Ανεψιὸς, as we learn from Phrynichus, was by the Attics applied to any one’s ἐξάδελφος, 1. 6. either patruelis, or amitinus, or consobrinus ; for by these three words the one in question is rendered in the Glosses. Marcus, it may be observed, had now become more courageous since what is related in Acts 15, 39. and therefore was now in great regard with Paul. (Comp. Tim. 4, 11.) (Rosenm.) See Whitby.
10. περὶ οὗ ἐλάβετε ἐντολάς, “ as to whom (1. 6. Mar- cus) ye have received my directions.” What these were we know not. Pearce thinks that évroa. may import urgent requests. See Acts 17,15. and 2 Tim.
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV. 69
4,11. Yet Iagree with Mackn., that these were orders given with Apostolical authority; but whether verbal (as he thinks), or in writing, 1 would not venture to determine. Δέξασθε αὐτὸν͵ “ receive him with the respect due to a faithful minister of Christ.” So in 3 Joh. 8. it is said of itinerant ministers : Ἡμεῖς οὖν ὀφείλομεν ἀπολαμβάνειν τοὺς τοιούτους, ἵνα συνεργοὶ γινώμεθα τῇ ἀληθεία.
11. ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 λεγόμινος Ἰοῦστος, ‘* Jesus, who is called Justus, also saluteth you.” A common name among the Jews. Grot.and Rosenm. think that the ὁ λεγόμενος ᾿Ιοῦστος signifies that he was so called by the Romans. On which custom of adding to the Jewish name a Roman one similar to it, see Grot. on Acts 18,9.
11. οἱ ὄντες ἐκ περιτομιῆς, ‘ all of whom are of the circumcision,” i.e. Jewish Christians. The Apostle then adds, οὗτοι μόνοι---παρεγορία, where the phraseo- logy is brief and idiotical, and consequently some- what obscure. οὗτοι is for οἱ kal. By μόνοι is meant, as Chrys. and almost all Commentators think, “ of the Jews alone ;” and perhapsrightly ; at least Luke and Timothy were then at Rome.
11. συνεργοὶ ε. τ. 8. τ. Θ. can require no explana- tion. Οἵτινες ἐγενήθησάν μοι παηρηγορία. This seems to be a brief mode of expression for, ** and who have indeed been such, and a great comfort to me.” Now they might have been fellow-labourers without being personally a comfort to the Apostle; which is here implied. ‘The Jewish Christians in general were too wedded to prejudice and bigotry to cordially pro- mote the Apostle’s views, or be any comfort to him; though they might be, in a certain sense, his fellow- labourers.
12. ἀσπάξεται ὑμᾶς Exadpas 6 ἐξ ὑμῶν, “ Epaphras your countryman (see the note supra ver. 9, and therefore not the same, as some say, with the Epa- phras mentioned at Philipp.) salutes you.” Πάντοτε aywviSopevos ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ταῖς προευχαῖς, ““ continually offering up fervent prayers in your behalf.” See the
7O COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV.
note supra 2, 1. Ἵνα στῆτε τέλειοι καὶ πεπληρωμένοι, &e. The στῆτε is thought by Heinr. to be equiva- lent to ἦτε. But there rather seems to be a blend- ing of two metaphors. ‘The force of στῆτε is the same as at Eph. 6, 18. καὶ πάντα κατεργασάμενοι στῆ- ναι" Στῆτε οὖν, &c. See also Philipp. 1, 27 and 28. Gal. 5, 1. So Theophyl.: ἐπειδὴ δὴ ἔνι τέλειον μὲν εἶναι, pr ἐστάναι δὲ, ὥσπερ ὅταν τις πάντα μὲν εἰδῇ, μοὴ ἑσήκοι δὲ βεβαίως, διὰ τοῦτὸ φησιν, ἵνα στῆτε τέλειοι, ἕν τε τῷ δόγματι δηλαδὴ, καὶ ἐν τῷ βίῳ: On τέλειοι see 1 Cor. 2, 6. and Eph. 4, 13. and the notes. Πεπληρω- μένοι, * filled and thoroughly prepared with all spiri- tual gifts and graces and divine aids.” See Schleus. Lex. on πληρόω: Ἔν παντὶ θελήματι is for εἰς τὸ πᾶν θέλημα. So Eph. 3, 19. ἵνα πληρωθῆτε εἰς πᾶν τὸ πλή- pop τοῦ Θεοῦ. The sense is: ‘ the will of God, and that only.” For, as Theoph. observes, τοῦτο τὸ πε- πληρῶσθαι καὶ τὸ τελειῶσθαι.
18. μαρτυρῶ γὰρ αὐτῷ ori ἔχει ϑῆλον. It is strange that Heinr. and others should think πόνον instead of ϑῆλον is the true reading; and that Griesb. should have edited it. The various readings, πόθον, ἄγωνα, κύπον, and πόνον are all but glosses on ϑῆλον : whereas had πόνον been the original reading, it is difficult to see how the rest could have arisen. Besides, the common reading is confirmed by a kindred passage of Rom. 10, 2. μαρτυρῶ yap αὐτοῖς ὅτι ϑῆλον Θεοῦ ἔχουσιν. The phrase ἔχειν ϑῆλον ὑπὲρ τινὸς, signifies to be de- sirous to promote any one’s interests, accompanied with exertions to do it. See 2 Cor. 7, 7.
With respect to Laodicea and Hierapolis, they are both in Phrygia. On the latter, which was in the vicinity of Loadicea, Wets. has collected many pas- sages from the Classical writers, especially the Geo- graphers, to which I would add a very curious one from an Orator of Procopius Gaz. ap. Villois Anecd. H.41. πόλις ἐστὶν ἱερὰ, τὸν πρὸς ἥλιον ἀνισ χόντων, πο- λυάνθρωπος, ἐκ τῆς εὐσεβείας φέρουσα γνώρισμια. καὶ ταὶς θείαις τελεταῖς τών ἄλλων προβεβλημένη" ὅθεν εἰς ταύτην φοιτῶσιν ᾿Ινδοὶ, καὶ Πέρσαι, καὶ Φοίνικες, καὶ Σκυθῶν
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV. 71
γένη, καὶ τὰ σεμνὰ τῆς Ελλάδος, Ἰωνία τε πᾶσα" καὶ ὥσπερ τοῦ τῶν ἀνθρώπων γένους κοινήν τις ἂν εἴποι πατρίδα" αὕτη τῶν ὑδάτων ἐνδείᾳ, μετὰ τῶν οἰκητόρων καὶ τοὺς παν- ταχόθεν ὄντας ἐλύπει τοσαῦτα γὰρ παρεῖχεν, ὅσα. τῶν ὄμβρων ἡ τύχη" καὶ ἀντ’ ἄλλου τινὸς, ὑδάτων θησαυροὺς ἐπεποίηντο,
14. ἀσπάϑεται ὑμᾶς Λουκᾶς ὁ ἰατρὸς ὁ ἀγαπητὸς. Τί has been the almost unanimous opinion of Commen- tators both antient and modern, that this is Luke the Evangelist, who is from this passage alone, Rosenm. says, supposed to have beena physician. But this I should be inclined to doubt: and I can by no means agree with those who, as Calvin, Heuman, and Ro- senm., think that if St. Paul had here meant his well known companion, he would have simply called him Luke ; as at 4 Tim. 4, 12., from which they infer that the ἰατρὸς indicates that this was another Luke ; as the name was not uncommon. But how inclusive is such an argument it is needless for me to point out. Thus even Heinr. (sufficiently prone to innovation) admits that Luke the Evangelist is meant.
Demas, Bengel observes, is the only one sine elo- gio. There are several such at Rom. 16.
15. Νυμφάν, καὶ τὴν κατ᾽ οἶκον αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησίαν. Grot. thinks that Νυμῷ. is a contract name for Nymphodo- rus. Compare 2 Tim. 4, 10. ‘This person had a church or congregation in his house, of which men- tion is made at Rom. 16, 5. 1 Cor. 16, 19. and Philem. 2. where see the notes. From the xa} Grot. would infer that Nymphas lived not at Laodicea, but in the vicinity. This, however, seems precari- ous. (Heinr.)
16. καὶ ὅταν---ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀναγνωθῆ. There has been some difference of opinion respecting the force of the τὴν ἐκ Λαοδικείᾳ. On which it may be sufficient to refer my readers to the notes of Whitby and Doddr., (both being Commentators whom I presume few of them are without): and I will offer only one or two remarks.
There is no reason to conclude that the words
te COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV.
refer to a lost Epistle to the Laodiceans; and I am surprised Doddr. should maintain so precarious, not to say dangerous, a position as that “all the Epistles of the Apostles are not preserved, any more than all the words and actions of our Lord.” ‘The two cases are quite different; andthe position is not only un- founded, but (as I said) dangerous. Here we need only suppose, (with the most eminent Commentators, down to Heinr.,) that the Epistle in question is that to the Ephesians, and that that was what is called an encyclical one. And although this does not admit of proof, yet it is so highly probable that we may very well acquiesce in it.
17. καὶ εἴπατε ᾿Αρχίππω, 1. 6. “ say to Archippus in my name.” This person had discharged the office of Evangelista sometimes at Ephesus, sometimes elsewhere. See Philem. 2. He seems to have last resided, and to have been then resident at Colosse, and there to have discharged the office of President, ruling Presbyter, now called κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν, Bishop. (Grot.) Some, as Heinr., think he was now dis- charging that office in the place of Epaphras. From the words of the address it has been by most Com- mentators supposed that he had been inattentive to the duties of his station, and that they are intended to convey areproof. But this is so inconsistent with the commendatory manner in which he is mentioned by the Apostle to Philemon, that it cannot (I think) be admitted. Nor is such a conclusion at all neces- sary. We might as well suppose the admonition to Timothy at 2 Tim. 1, 6. to ““ stir up the gift of God in him,” implies reproof for negligence. Such lan- guage as this is only to be understood as exciting to renewed activity, for which, considering the then state of the Colossian Church (beset with false teachers) there would be especial need.
With respect to the phraseology, it is by many thought to savour of Hebrew pleonasm. But simi- lar modes of expression are sometimes found in the Classical writers. ‘The words may be simply ren-
COLOSSIANS, CHAP. IV. 73
dered: “ Look to* thy office which thou receivedst at the hands of the Lord, and for the promotion of his glory.” Thus, we may observe, a Bishop or Priest may (by the medium of those who conse- crate him) be said to receive his office from the Lord, the Head of the Church. So Theophyl.
Of πληροῦν and fungi, joined with words denoting office, Wets. and Kypke adduce numerous examples, none of which (as the phrase is so very frequent) need I select.
18. ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου, Hence it is plain, that all that precedes was written by the hand of a scribe, and this clausula alone by the hand of the Apostle. So1 Cor. 16,21. 2 Thess. 3, 17. (Rosenm.) Yet he thus acknowledges the preceding to his own. (Heinr.)
18. μνημονεύετε μου τῶν δεσμῶν. Some explain: “ Be mindful to relieve me while under these bonds.” But nothing can be less accordant to the spirit of the Apostle than this. The expression is similar to that in Hebr. 13, 3.; and the sense (as the best Com- mentators antient and modern are agreed) is: “ Be mindful of, feel love for, pray for me, and imitate the courage with which 1 bear persecution for the Gospel’s sake.”
* So Arrian Diss. Epict. L.3, ch. 23. (cited by Rosenm.) ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο μᾶλλον βλέπετε.
71
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. *
CHAP. I.
Of the contents of this Epistle Schoettg. gives the following plan. 1. Proeme, ch. 1. 2. A commen- dation for the facility with which they were con- verted, ch. 2. 8. A commendation for their stead: fastness in their Christian profession, ch. 3. It is true the Apostle here and elsewhere introduces such commendatory matter, for the purpose of both of making the greater impression on the minds of his readers, and confirming them the more in their con- stancy. 4. Practical matter, 4, 5, 12—22. 5. A treating on the times of future things, 5, 1—11.
VERSE 1. Biaovaves καὶ Tipobecs, Silvanus. A not unfrequent name among the Romans. This Silvanus (i. e. the Silas of the Acts,) was Paul’s companion in his journey through Asia Minor and Greece (see Acts 15, 22. 16,19. 17, 1 and 10); and also took Timothy with him when he went into Macedonia. Both their names are, therefore, united by the Apos- tle with his own,,as being well known to the Gentile converts at Thessalonica. (Rosenm.) Grotius thinks they had relations in Thessalonica. But that is mere conjecture.
1. τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλονικέων, ἐν Θεῷ Πατρὶ, x. K. J. X. Rosenm. here supposes an ellipsis of “ qui perductus est ad finem:” and he takes in the sense of per. But this is too arbitrary. The common and
* Or rather, as Markland has fully proved, Thessaloniczans.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I. 75
best founded opinion is, that there is an ellipsis of οὔσῃ. But to render it by és, is being too literal and inartificial. Mackn. interprets it subject to; which is too arbitrary. ‘The sense seems to be, “ who are founded in and joined to Christ.” See 1 Joh. 5, 20. Some antients and moderns, as Grot., think no men- tion is made of Presbyters and Deacons, because the congregation as yet consisted of but few. But that (as Koppe observes) is refuted by the Introductions of the other Epistles, where he addresses churches fully constituted without any mention of such.
2,3. εὐχαριστοῦμεν ----ἡμιῶν. ‘The same is expressed at Rome 1, 8.and 9. Eph. 1, 16. where see the notes. It is observed by Koppe, that the plural throughout the Epistle is to be referred to Paul only; though Timothy and Silvanus are joined in the salutation. Compare 3,1 and2. The πάντοτε and ἀδιαλείπτως are to be taken populariter, like our perpetually, i.e. at every return of prayer. ᾿Αδιολείπτως μνημιο- νεύοντες ὑμών τοῦ ἔργου τῆς πίστεως “as often as we re- member your work of faith.” The recent Commen- tators take ἔργου τῆς πίστως for πίστεως. But it ra- ther has reference to the zeal and diligence which they had evinced in attaining unto this faith, and their constancy in persevering in it. So Theophyl. explains it ἐνστάσεως ὑμῶν τὸ στεῤῥῶς ἴστασαι. And so Theodoret: τὸ ἐν κινδύνοις βέβαιον. See Joh. 6, 29. and Phil. 1, 6. Benson thinks it denotes the practice of all those good works required in consequence of embracing the Christian faith. But this seems un- founded.
3. καὶ τοῦ κόπου τῆς ἀγάπης, καὶ τῆς ὑπομινῆς τῆς ἐλ- πίδος. On the exact sense of these words Commen- tators are not agreed. Koppe avoids the difficulty, by regarding them as simply put for τῆς ἀγάπης and τῆς ἐλπίδος. But against this slovenly method of wrapping up matters I can never cease to protest. It is only a decent way of shuffling off the difficulty. Tod κόπου τῆς ἀγάπης is well explained by Schleus. * ardentissimum mutuz benevolentiz studium.” Of
76 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I.
this (as Theophyl. observes) they had given a proof in the circumstances narrated at Acts 17. And itis remarked by Grot., that love is much, but labour is more. In the present clause the first substantive stands for an adjective. ‘Thus ὑπομονὴ τῆς ἐλπίδος sig- nifies, “ your long and patient enduring hope,” spez certce et inconcusse, as Schleus. explains. We shall see the significance and propriety of this expression, when we consider the many temptations they under- went to abandon the faith, both from Jews and Gentiles.
3. τοῦ Kugiov, Vorst. observes, denotes partly the efficient cause; partly the object of the preceding virtues.
3. ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς ἡμῶν. This for- mula must be referred to the πίστεως, ἀγάπης, and ἐλπίδος, and (as some antients and most moderns think) is meant (by a Hebraism taken from ™ mab) to denote that they are sincere and zealous. Rosenm. refers to Vorst. de Hebr. p. 399 and 463. Fisch.
4. εἰδότες, ἀδελφοὶ ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ Θεοῦ, τὴν ἐκλογὴν ὑμῶν. ΤῈ 15 strange that many modern Commenta- tors (as Eras. and Zeger) should refer the εἰδότες to the Thessalonians, as if they knew that they were elected of God: which is supposing a harsh anaco- luthon very needlessly : whereas if it be referred (as the context requires) to Paul (since the participle is used both before and after), all is natural and straight forward. So all the antients, and most of the moderns, even some Calvinists, as Doddr. See the note on 3,5. ‘The election spoken of (says Whitby) is the election to be a church.” (See his note.) As to the notion of absolute election of indi- viduals, it is refuted by 3, 5. 5, 14. 2 Thess. 3,11. And so the antients took the words. See Chrysost., Theophyl., and Gicumen.
On the construction Commentators are not quite agreed. Some join ὑπὸ rod Θεοῦ with the preceding ; others, with the following. The former seems. pre-
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I. Vi
ferable, and is not only supported by the authority of some antient Versions and Commentators, but is adopted by the best moderns. Propriety of lan- guage, too, seems to require this: for otherwise (as Benson says) we should have had τῶν ὑπὸ Θεοῦ ἐκλο- γὴν ὑμῶν. A yet stronger argument is deduced from 2 Thess. 2, 15. and Col. 3, 12.
5. ὅτι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ---- πληροφορίᾳ moray. ‘The terms here employed are very strong, and ought not to have been lowered and explained away, as they are done by most recent Commentators, whose in- terpretation indeed yields a tolerable sense,* but with a far less natural construction, and with vio- lence to the plain and obvious sense of the passage, which had been distinctly seen by the antients, and was admitted by the moderns up to the last half century.
5. τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν, “our preaching of the Gos- pel.” ᾿Εγενήθη, “ was not affected.” Eis ὑμᾶς, for ὑμῖν: ᾿Αλλὰ καὶ ἐν δυνάμει, καὶ ἐν Π]Ίνευμ. ey. These three particulars are opposed to the bare λόγῳ unac- companied with any thing more. The δυνάμει has reference (as the best Commentators are agreed) to ministry worked by Paul; and the πν. ey. (I should conceive) to the spiritual gifts which were imparted by him to some members of the Thessalonian Church; as at Corinth and Galatia. So Theoph., who ex- plains: ‘‘ from this it is plain that ye are elect, from God’s glorifying the preaching of the word among you. lor we did not simply preach, but there were also signs of God’s approving that faith.” See also Benson. Some take δυνάμει in conjunction with zy. ay. to denote the supernatural power of Paul’s preaching, and its efficacy on the heart. But this may be included in the preceding. -
5. ἐν πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ. On the sense of this
. * Thus Rosenm. renders: ‘ Nam doctrinam nostram persuasi- mus vobis non tantum institutione, sed etiam demonstratione insig- nis vis divine, et multis firmissimis argumentis.”
78 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I.
clause Commentators are not agreed. Some, as Grot., would unite it with the preceding ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, supposing an hendiadis. But this seems paring down the sense. Others refer it to Paul’s παρῥησία. But this cannot be tolerated. It must be referred to the Thessalonians ; and I think (with Theophyl., Cicumen., Hesych., and, of the moderns, Zanch, Benson, Rosenm., and Schleus.), that it is equivalent to βεβαιώτης ; and that σὺν is understood ; q.d. ““ it was accompanied with certain assurance of the truth of the Gospel.” The force of the metaphor is de- rived from a ship under full sail, and may therefore well express full assurance and complete conviction. So Heb. 6, 11. πληροῷ. τῆς ἐλπίδος: and 10, 22. ὁ πληροῷ. τῆς πίστεως.
5. καθὼς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν ἐν ὑμῖν. ‘The scope of this clause, which is indistinct, has not been well perceived by the Commentators. The Apostle (I conceive) meant to advert to another evidence of the truth of the Gospel, namely, from the conduct of the preacher of it. The καθὼς may be rendered espe- cially as. Oios here, as almost always, is used ina good sense. It is well explained by Theophyl.: πῶς ἀνεστράφημεν. The Apostle alludes to purity, dis- interestedness (even working with his hands, 2, 9.), and other moral virtues by which his sincerity and the truth of the Gospel was proved. What is here only hinted at in οἷον éyev., is fully expressed infra 2, 10. ὑμεῖς μαρτύρες ὡς ὁσίως καὶ δικαίως καὶ ἀμεμπτῶς ὑμῖν ἐγενήθημεν. In ἐν ὑμῖν δι’ ὑμᾶς Pisc. thinks there isa polyptoton. But it is rather (I conceive) ἃ paro- nomasia. The force of δ ὑμᾶς (which is not well discerned by the Commentators) is, ‘‘ for your sakes, for your good, not our own private interest.” Mackn. well contrasts this disinterestedness with the covetousness and profligacy of the philosophers of that age.
6. καὶ ὑμεῖς μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε καὶ τοῦ Kupiov. There is here plainly an ellipsis of some clause, which must be supplied, to indicate the connection.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP, I. 79
Benson offers the following: “ (And we can bear witness to your amiable behaviour) for,” &c. Mack.: « And, being exceedingly struck with our miracles and virtues, ye became,” &c. I would propose (partly from Menoch.) the following: ‘* (Nor was our labour fruitless, or our example set you in vain) for ye were imitators,” &c. The force of the μιμηταὶ is, by most Commentators, confined to the bearing afflictions, as Jesus Christ and Paul had done. But I cannot help thinking, with Zanch, Grot., and Doddr., that a general imitation of Christ and the Apostle is meant, (as in 1 Cor. 4, 16. & 11, 1.), though consisting chiefly in that stedfast faith and endurance of persecution for the truth’s sake, which is the stamp of all other Christian virtues; 4. d. “ ye were imitators of me and the Lord in the general holiness of your lives, and especially in that patient endurance of persecution, to which, after having re- ceived the word, ye were exposed.” See infra 2, 14.
The clause δεξάμενοι----ἁγίου, from the flexibility of the phraseology, admits of two or three renderings, though with no great diversity of sense. Much de- pends upon the mode in which δεξάμενοι is to be taken. IPfit be taken (with Pisc.) for ἅτε ἐδέξασθε, ‘* inasmuch as ye received,” it will supply a proof of their being true imitators of Christ. But if it be taken (with most Commentators, antient and mo- dern) for “ having received the Gospel,” the scope will be somewhat different ; and the phrases ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ and μετὰ χαρᾶς [Πνεύματος ay. must be intro- duced with an although and a yet; which is harsh (see Doddr. and Mackn.); q.d. having embraced the Gospel, though it brought on you much afflic- tion, yet mitigated by the joy of the Holy Ghost.” The former method seems preferable, and the con- struction may be thus traced: δεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον μετὰ χαρᾶς πνεύματος ἁγίου ἐν θλίψει πολλῆ. I cannot, however, agree with some recent Commentators who render μετὰ χαρᾶς libentissime; as Acts 2, 41. ἀσμένως ἀποδεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον. There is, doubtless
80 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. 1.
(as the antient and the best modern Commentators are agreed) an allusion to the joy of the Holy Spirit which accompanied and rewarded their alacrity in receiving the word, and their firmness in adhering to it, and which was (as Benson and Mackn. observe) an evidence of their election, and a pledge of their title to a happy immortality.
7. ὥστε γενέσθαι ὑμᾶς τύπους, ““ Insomuch that ye became exemplars and models to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia.” On tux. see 1 Cor. 10, 6 & 11. Phil. 3, 17. and the notes. Koppe observes that Macedonia and Achaia were the two provinces into which Greece was divided when brought under the Roman yoke, one of which comprehended Ma- cedonia proper, with Illyricum, Epirus, and Thes- saly ; the other Greece proper, i.e. antient Greece.
8. ἀφ᾽ ὑμών yap ἐξήχηται---ἐξελήλυθεν, “ For not only from you sounded forth the word of the Lord unto Macedonia,” &c. ‘The οὐ μόνον (per hyperbaton) must (as Grot., Rosenm., and Koppe are agreed) be united with ἐξήχηται (see Rom. 4, 12. and Heb. 11, 3.), the comma being removed after Κυρίου. It is remarked by Koppe, that the formulas ἀφ᾽ ὑμών ἐξήχηται caroyosand πίστις ὑμῶν ἐξελήλυθεν are placed in opposition. Compare Joel 8, 14. and Sir. 40, 18.
᾿Ἐξήχηται, “ sounded like atrumpet.” So Pollux 1, 118. ἐξήχησε βροντὴ, and Hesych. ἐξήχηται" ἐκηρύχθη. ᾿Αφ᾽ ὑμῶν does not denote (as Storr thought) the efficient cause ; but it signifies commencing from you. Nor has the sounding forth any relation (as Koppe supposes) to the Apostle’s own progress through the district, which would destroy the propriety and beauty of the passage ; but the meaning is, that the truths of the Gospel were disseminated from ‘Thes- salonica, which, from its dignity as capital of one of the two provinces of Macedonia, and its extensive commerce, would have communication with far dis- tant regions (for that is, by hyperbole, the sense of ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ, and not, as Koppe renders, “" wherever I go”), and the same intercourse would spread the
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I. 81
news of the conversion of the Thessalonians far and wide.
8. καὶ πίστις ὑμών ἡ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ἐξελήλυθεν, ‘ se di- vulgavit,” “ has been carried.’? Benson has an ex- cellent note on this going out of the Gospel from any place, as being the greatest honour it could have. Compare Ps. 19,4. and Rom. 10, 18. He shows how highly honoured in that respect was Antioch, and especially Jerusalem; as had been prophesied. See Is. 2, 3. and Macc. 4, 2. So St. Paul at 1 Cor. 14, 36. ‘ What, came the word of God out from you?” i.e. are you the first Church in the world? Theophyl. paraphrases thus: ἡ περὶ τῆς ὑμῶν φήμη ἀρετῆς ἐποίησεν ἐξάκουστον γενέσθαι πᾶσι τὸ κήρυγμια, καὶ πάντων ὑμᾶς παιδευτὰς δειχθῆναι.
9. αὐτοὶ γὰρ περὶ ἡμῶν ἀπαγγέλλουσιν ὁποίαν εἴσοδον ἔχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. By αὐτοὶ Grot. and Rosenm. un- derstand persons every where. But the nature of amoyy. seems rather to show that αὐτοὶ must mean the Fhessalonians who sounded out the word of God every where. As to the construction, it is the κατὰ τὸ σημιαινόμιενον. Περὶ ἡμῶν, ““ concerning us.” Ὅποιαν, qualem, how successful; for that is implied in ὅποιαν (as often insuch kind of words), and not, as Rosenm. supposes, in εἴσοδον ; as is clear from 2, 1., which is closely connected with this passage; the words καὶ πώς ---ἐρχομένης being in some degree pa- renthetical.
9. πῶς ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν, ‘ how promptly.” (So Theophyl. εὐκόλως, μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς σφοδρότητος) ye turned from the worship of idols to that of the true God. ’Emsorp. has here (as Koppe and Rosenm. observe) a reciprocal force, as at Luke 17, 4. Acts 3,19. And so our verb to ¢urn admits of both an active and a reciprocal. To turn any one unto God, or to turn oneself unto, denotes what is called conver- sion, the abandonment of any religion, and the em-, bracing of another, or the passing from Atheism to religion. The words following are exegetical, and show the intent of this.émiorp., namely (εἰς τὸ) δου- λεύειν Θεῴ ϑῶντι, 1. 6. to worship and obey, &c. ; for
VOL, VIII. G
82: 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. I. '
such is the sense of δουλεύειν, derived from the Heb. Tay, from whence the Latin obedio. ‘The expression living and true God, as opposed to dumb idols and fictitious Gods, is of very frequent occurrence both in the Scriptures and also Josephus and Philo. Theophyl. observes that this is meant to hint an ad- monition to a conduct worthy of such a wonderful conversion ; and (as Benson observes) “ the remind- ing them of this would be a motive to them to go on as they had begun.” |
10. καὶ ἀναμένειν----Ἰησοῦν. The ἀναμένειν depends upon εἰς τὸς Koppe and Rosenm. notice the hyper- baton for ᾿[ησοῦν, ὅν ἥγειρεν, and the use of ῥύομεν for ῥυσόμενον. But the former criticism is precarious ; and the latter unnecessary. It may mean “ who is to free us.” Ὁργῆς imports punishment ; for wrath can only be ascribed to God ἀνθρωποπαθώς. See Benson. As to Koppe, he here, as often, abuses his knowledge by seeking needless refinements, and indulging in foolish and dangerous speculations.
No Commentator has sufficiently seen the force of the εἰς τὸ ἀναμένειν, which seems meant to show the other fundamental article of Christianity, namely, to receive Jesus Christ as the Saviour. Now this is ex- pressed by waiting for him, and expecting his advent from heaven; which is beautifully put for the re- ceiving himas the Saviour, obeying his precepts, and living in the profession of his religion. ‘This, it may be observed, is here especially appropriate, with re- ference to the trials and calamities with which they had had to struggle, and under which “ the patient waiting for of their Saviour” and deliverer was their only support. So Gal. 5,5. “we wait for the hope.” Rom. 8, 19. ““ waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.” Rom. 8, 25. ‘‘ we groan, waiting for the adoption.” 1 Cor. 1, 7. ‘‘ waiting for the coming of our Lord.’”’ 2 Thess. 3, 5. “ unto the patient waiting for of Christ.” It is well observed by Theo- phyl.: ἐπειδὴ τὰ μὲν δεινὰ ἐν χερσὶ, τὰ δὲ χρηστὰ ἐν ἐλπίσι, μεγάλην αὐτοῖς προσμαρτυρεῖ πίστιν, εἴγε ἀναμιέ- yours καὶ ἐλπίϑουσι βεβαίως τὰ μέλλοντα.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 83
CHAP. II,
VER. 1. αὐτοὶ γὰρ oldare—yeyover. The connexion is here not well traced by the Commentators; and Koppe and Rosenm. recognize none, by taking the γὰρ as aparticle of transition. But this is precarious and unnecessary; and the connexion will be clear, if (as I observed at 1, 9.) the words καὶ πῶς---ἐρχο- μένης be regarded as in some measure parenthetical. The yap refers to the ὅποιαν εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν. And the sense may be thus expressed: “ (I need scarcely have said it) for you yourselves know,” &c.
The Hellenism i in οἴδατε τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν ὅτι γέγονεν for οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ εἴσοδος, &c., is trite. On the sense of the κενὴ, which, from its flexibility, admits of various senses, Commentators are not agreed. Many an- tients interpret it, ‘‘ free of danger and fear.” But this sense is inapposite. Most moderns, as Grot. and Hamm., explain it false, lying. But this inter- pretation is harsh; as is also that of Rosenm. and Koppe, who take it for μάταιον, and render: “ non vero honoris vel opum acquirendarum studio ad vos venimus; Veni ad vos eo consilio et studio ut vobis prodessem, non ut otiosé inter vos viverem.” If the connexion above traced be the true one, it must be taken, with Menoch., Est., and Gomar, in the sense sine fructu, inutile. And that that is the real con- nection, and this the sense, I am the more inclined to believe, since I find the very acute and able Benson has anticipated all that I have said, and come to the. same conclusion. He rightly ascribes the variety of interpretations to the solicitude of Com- mentators to preserve a connection with what follows, and from their supposing that the Apostle is there explaining what he means by his saying our coming unto you was not in vain.” ‘The meiosis in οὐ κένη is very obvious. Benson confirms the above interpre- tation from 1, 5. 2,13 & 14. 3,5. 2 Thess. 3, 1 s. 12, 4. 55, 11. Jer. 2, 30. 8,8 & 9. 1 Cor. 15, 10, 14 & 58. 2 Cor. 6, 1. Gal. 2, 2. Phil. 2, 16. ‘
G2
84. 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II.
2. ἀλλὰ καὶ προπαθόντες---ἀγῶνι. Compare Acts 16, 22 seqq. Προπαῇ. simply signifies ‘‘ after having suffered,” &c. ‘The verb is often used by Thucyd. and the best writers. The ὑβρισθέντες refers to his being scourged; which was an intolerable insult to a Roman citizen. See Benson. ᾿Ἑπαῤῥησιάμεθα λα- λῆσαι may be well rendered by our idiom, ‘‘ took the liberty to speak; mustered up the courage to speak.” ‘The term often carries with it a verb of speaking, either expressed (as Eph. 6, 20. and Acts 13, 46.), or understood ; as in Acts 9,27. At ἐν Θεῳ ἡμῶν some verb is omitted, and mustbe supplied. We may compare ἐπαῤῥ. ἐπὶ τῴ Κυρίῳ at Acts 14, 3.
2. ἐν πολλῴώ ἀγώνι. The aya may either be ren- dered, with the early moderns, solicitous and painful care and study: as in Col. 2, 1., and the Sept. ;* or (with the antients, and, of the moderns, Grot., and almost all later Commentators) peril, danger; as in Phil. 1, 30. and Arrian Exp. Alex. 3, 15, 1. drs & ἀγῶνι ξυνέχεται τὸ κατὰ ohas, καὶ βοηθεῖν δεῖ. And this latter sense seems more agreeable to the words following ; though, indeed, both may be united.
8. ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν---δόλω. Παράκλησις must here (as Koppe observes) signify teaching, and com- prehend the whole of the Apostle’s religious instruc- tion; as Acts 13, 15. 15, 31. See also Loesner’s examples. The construction, he thinks, is Hebraic. But it seems rather popular. Οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης. The πλανὴ may denote either imposture and seduction ; as Eph. 4, 14. 2 Thess. 2, 11. 1 Joh. 4, 6. 2 Pet. 3,
* To which may be added Thucyd. 2, 45. ὁρῶ μέγαν τὸν ἀγῶνα (where [ shall adduce many more examples), and also Thucyd. 7, 71. ὁ δὲ πεξὸς---πολὺν τὸν ἀγῶνα καὶ ξύστασιν τῆς γνώμης εἶχε, where many eminent Critics read from Plutarch ξύντασιν (i.e. with agonizing intentness of mind). AndI would add that so Valla seems to have read. And this reading is supported by an imitation of Dio Cass. 367. Yet, strange to say, in another still plainer imita- tion at 575 ἃ 576., he reads ξύστατσιν, which is, moreover, defended by many other passages which I shall adduce in my note on that passage. I must therefore regard the common reading as the true one.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 85
17.; or error, self-deceit, enthusiasm; as Rom. 1, 27. James 2, 18., and sometimes in the Sept. The former interpretation is here adopted by Benson, whom see; the latter, by Koppe, Mackn., Schleus., Rosenm., and most Commentators. Οὔτε ἐξ ἀκαθαρ- σίας, nor from impure and corrupt motives, desire of wealth, honours, &e., nor founded in a desire of sensual gratification.” In this sense, as denoting moral impurity, the word is used in Rom. 6, 19. 1 Thess. 4, 8., and in the Sept. See Schleus. Lex., V. T., and Trommius. So also Arrian, cited by Koppe: ψυχῆς ἀκαθαρσία, δόγματα πονηρά. Benson takes it for physical impurity, i.e. lewdness. But in this I cannot assent to the learned Commentator.
8. οὔτε ἐν δόλῳ. “ As their doctrine (says Benson) did not proceed from imposture or impurity, so nei- ther did they preach it in guile. ‘They used no craft or artifice in the preaching of it; did not artfully conceal some parts, and mix or adulterate others ; did not assert the necessity of the Gentile Christians observing the law of Moses in order to please the Jews; did not model Christianity according to the old heathen religion, or contrive methods to make them easy in their vices, in order to draw in great _ numbers of the Gentiles.” See 1 Pet. 2, 1. and 3, 10. Δόλος, which has so much perplexed the Ety- mologists, seems to be derived from the Heb. nds, to draw out, make fine ; and thus literally signifies finesse.
4. ἀλλὰ καθὼς----λαλοῦμεν. This is exegetical of the preceding ἐν δόλῳ. The sense is: ‘* We adulte- rate nothing (so Rosenm.); we preach nothing but what we have been divinely taught ; we use no base arts, but only obey the Divine will.” Others think that καθὼς and οὕτω do not refer to the mode in which the Gospel was taught, but merely mean sicut and sic. The construction is rather unusual, and the Commentators say it is for ἐδοκιμάσε ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς, ὥστε πιστευεῖν ἡμῖν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον. ‘There is, I think,
80. 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. If.
a blending of two clauses into one; q.d. “ as we are approved by God, and put in trust with the Gospel.” Or we may supply οὕτω, corresponding to the ellip- tical οὕτω before πιστευθῆναι. In the active, indeed, oxi. is far more usual, and in the sense approve, choose, &c. it occurs in Rom. 14, 22. and 1 Cor. 16, 3. Yetit does occur in the passive in this sense at 2 Macc. 4, 3, and Xen. Mem. 3, 5. cited by Schleus. The sense is clear from the preceding verse.
4. οὐκ ὡς ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες, i. 6. (as Pisc., Me- noch., Koppe, and Rosenm. explain) ‘‘ studying to please men.” But it rather seems to be put for ws avlowraperkos; aS in Eph. 6, 6. The former ex- pression, however, is used, for better adaptation to the antithesis ἀλλὰ τῷ Oew. I would compare Soph. Phil. 1445. and Ignat. ad Rom. (Ὁ. 2. οὐ γὰρ θέλω ὑμῖν (1 conjecture ὑμᾶς) ἀνθρωπαρεσκησαι, ἀλλὰ Θεώ ἀρέσαι. Why this should be done is beautifully suggested by Soph. Antig. 74. as follows: ἐπεὶ πλείων χρόνος ὃν δεῖ μ᾽ ἀρέσκειν τοῖς κάτω, τῶν ἔνθαδε.
The ὁ δοκιμάϑων τὰς καρδίας is a perpetual epithet of God, both in the Old and New Testament. Thus Acts 1, 24. 15, 6. and Rom. 8, 27., where see the notes. See an excellent Sermon on the above two verses by Dr. Maltby, vol. 2.
5, 6. On the sentiment contained in these verses, which are to be joined, compare 2 Cor. 2, 17. So Koppe, who (after Vatab.) says that οὐκ---ἐγενήθημιεν is for οὐκ ἐκολακεύσαμεν ; and he cites Classical ex- amples of ἐν λόγῳ εἶναι and γενέσθαι for λέγειν, ἐν πράγ- ματι εἶναι for πράττειν, ἐν παράβασει γινεσθαι for πα- ραβαίνω, and such like. ‘This savours of Hebraism ; λόγῳ κολακείας being for κολακείᾳ ; aS λόγος πορνείας at Matt. 5,28. At least, ἐν is strongly expressive of habit and plan of life. Thus ἐν δόλῳ at ver. 4. Koppe well remarks that by this is denoted the agendi ratio. See Grot. As to Hammond’s inter- pretation, ‘ to be talked of for flattery,” it is entirely refuted by Benson.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 87
The ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας Loesner, Koppe, Ro- senm., and Schleus., take for ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ, and ad- duce examples of the pleonasm from Philo. But to this summary way of wrapping up matters I can never give praise. Philo is a pleonastic writer ; St. Paul is not : and the nature of pleonasms (as they are called) of this sort I have often before explained. They will usually be found to be two phrases blended into one. I therefore most approve of the version of Benson, “ nor carried on any covetous design under a fair pretence.” See also Mackn. IIaeove§. per- haps does not so much signify avarice, or covetousness, as a greediness for self-gratification, including even that of glory and fame.* But, in order to make this the plainer, the Apostle adds, οὔτε ϑητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώ- πων δόξαν, ““ not seeking glory from men.” ‘The par- ticiple is thought to be for the verb égytycapev. At least this is convenient, in order to hang thereon the particle δυνάμενοι; for the words οὔτε---ἄλλων are in some measure parenthetical.
6. δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι. On the meaning of ἐν βάρει Commentators, both antient and modern, have been divided in opinion. Thus Theophyl.: ἢ ἐν Tiny, καὶ δόξη, καὶ ὄγκῳ, ἢ δυνάμενοι λαμβάνειν καὶ τρέ- ῴεσθαι, καὶ βαρεῖς ὑμῖν εἶναι. Kal γὰρ τὸ ἀξίωμα ἡμῶν τουτοὸ ἀπαιτεῖ, λαμβάνει Tap ὑμῶν. ‘Lhe former inter- pretation, to be in great dignity and authority, is adopted by many modern Commentators ; as Pisc., Zanch, Hamm., Vitringa, Benson, and others; and is also supported by the Syr. Version. ‘This also is thought to best agree with what precedes. The common punctuation, too, by which these words are connected with the former, is favourable to it. But in other editions these words commence the 7th verse; and Koppe observes that that interpretation
* Thus Milton, in a fine passage of his exquisite Lycidas: Fame is the spur that the clear spirit doth raise, (That last infirmity of noble minds,) To scorn delights, and live laborious days. See also Paradise Regained, L. ILI. sit. init. and the notes of Dr. Jortin. οὐ
88 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II.
is scarcely permitted by propriety of language: at least it cannot be proved from 2 Cor. 4, 17. Many eminent Interpreters, both antient and modern, as Beza, Grotius, Gomar, our English Translators, Doddr., Koppe, and Rosenm. (rightly, I think), prefer the latter ; and it is ably defended by Wolf. Certainly it is more agreeable to the context. Com- pare ver. 9 & 11. and 2 Cor. 11,9., where the Apostle says he preserved himself ἀβαρῆ. See aiso 2 Thess. 8,7. 1 Tim. 5, 11. It is plain that ἐν βάρει εἶναι, is for βαρὺς εἶναι, ἐπιβαρεῖν.
Thus it would appear that the words οὔτε ϑητοῦντες ---ἄλλων are parenthetical; though it is not neces- sary to suppose so. After all it is not impossible that the Apostle has in view two significations of ἐν βάρει εἶναι to be burdensome by accepting a stipend, and to be, as we say, hard upon them, by assuming the full authority of an Apostle. So Diczarchus, cited by Wets.: διὰ τὸ βάρος ἢ τὴν ὑπερηφάνειαν τών κατοικούντων" and Hor. Ep. 2, 1, 13.*
7. ἀλλ᾽ ἐγενήθημεν ἥπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν. The ἀλλὰ is thought, by Rosenm., to be pleonastic: but, I think, without reason. The sense is: “ Yet (this we were not, but) were mild among you.” The epithet is often, in the Classical writers, applied to parents, and therefore to Kings, as being figuratively fathers. (See Wetstein’s examples.) This sort of spiritual paternity the Apostle alludes to in the words ws ἂν τροφὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα : and this is sufficient to defend the common reading; though several antient MSS., some Versions, Fathers, and Commentators read νηπίοι, which is preferred by Calvin, and not disapproved of by Whitby. But that, as Benson observes, would require ὦ νηπίοι. Besides (I would add) the Apostle no where employs νηπίος in this sense. He would have thus written τέκνα. But it is needless to dilate on such a point;
* To which I add Joseph. p. 35. οὐδὲ yap ἔσεσθαι βαρὺς. Ach. Tat. 660. φορτικοὶ εἶναι" & 302, 13. βαρὺς αὐτῷ γένοιτο. Xenoph, Hist. 3, 2, 1. ἐβουλεύετο---ὅπως ἂν μὴ ἐν τῇ φιλίᾳ χειμάξων, βαρὺς «ἴη τοῖς Euppaxors.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 89
since the ν has plainly adhered from the preceding word, as in a thousand other cases.
The ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν is a Hebraism (derived from t5951NA) for ἐν ὑμῖν, “ among you.” Τρόφος here denotes one who suckles a child, whether a mother, or, as we say, a wet-nurse. Thus it is sometimes in the Sept. and the Classical writers used for a mother. Θάλπω, whatever be its origin (for here all etymolo- gists are in the dark; the word being, it seems, derived from some other language), certainly signi- fies, properly, to warm, cherish, as a hen who sits on her chickens. See Deut. 22, 6. and Job 39, 10. It is also used of the wite taken by David in his old age. See 1 Kings 1,2&4. Schleus. also refers to Soph. Antig. 427. Hence it comes to denote any sort of care by which a mother provides for the nou- rishment and comfort of her children. See Eph. 5, 19. and the note.
The ἑαυτῆς is, in our common versions, rightly omitted; as is often the case with the personal pro- nouns, and ἴδιος. So that Benson and Mackn. have done wrong in expressing it, and making it em- phatical.
8. οὕτως ἱμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν, “ thus being aftection- ately desirous of promoting your interest.” It is strange that so many Critics should have preferred the reading ὁμειρόμενοι, from several MSS., some early Editions, and ‘Theophyl.: and that it should have been received into the text by both Griesbach and Matthei. Itisa word of no authority whatever, and formed contrary to all analogy. As to Theophylact’s defence of it, it is too weak to bear examination. The principle on which the Critics have preferred it, namely, as being the more difficult, really will not apply to words, like the present, formed contrary to analogy, and destitute of authority ; and especially if we can account for them from mere error ; which is the case here ; for the o arose, doubtless, from the c preceding ; and the oie. would easily pass into oper. especially as ὀμειρ. or ὀμηρ. was familiar; ine.
90 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II.
less so; and yet the latter word is used by the best writers, not only Poets, but also prose writers, as Herodot., Demosth., A@lian, Polyb., Plutarch, and others, cited by the Philological Commentators.
8. εὐδοκοῦμεν μεταδοῦναι----Ψυχὰς, “ we were ready and willing,” &c. Μεταδοῦναι, to impart, has pro- perly the genitive and dative, but here, as elsewhere, the accusative and dative. The accusative, however, is used because no one can be supposed to give ano- ther part of his life, The truth is, there is (as Grot. observes) a syllepsis: for μεταδοῦναι is used of the Gospel proprié ; of life improprié, or by metonymy. On the sentiment, which is inexpressibly affection- ate, see Benson.
9. μνημονεύετε yap—rto εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, Com- pare 2 Thess. 8, 7—9. ‘The μνημονεύετε is well ren- dered by Koppe memineritis. Benson renders it, “ye must remember.” Τὸν κόπον pov καὶ Tov μόχθον. These words are nearly synonymous; though the latter is the stronger term; so that there is a kind of climax. The νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας is treated by most Commentators as put populariter, for assidué; and Koppe refers to 3,10. But that passage is not to the purpose ; nor does the idiom apply here. For I apprehend the Apostle here adverts to his exces- sive application to his handicraft labour, at some times almost toiling night and day, in order to allow himself opportunity, at other times, to pursue his evangelical labours. Or perhaps he may allude to his custom of making up for the loss of time by day at his trade, by might labour: and of this I have observed hints in the foregoing Epistles.
On ἐπιβαρῆσαι τινα compare ver. 7. and 2 Cor. 12, 16. Εἰς ὑμᾶς is for ὑμῖν.
10. ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες---ἐγενήθημεν. The words ὁσίως, δικαίως, and ἀμέμπτως, are treated by Koppe and Rosenm. as synonymes, but combined, to strengthen the sense. ‘The os., however, regards duty towards God; the d«. that towards men; ἀμεμπτ. both ; (though Theophyl. explains, ἀπροσκοπῶς, ἀσκανδαι-
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 91
λίστεως.) Yet, I grant, non argutandum est in verbis, :
11, 12. παρακαλοῦντες ὑμᾶς καὶ παραμυθούμενοι. The participles wapox. and παραμ. stand for verbs; or ἐσμεν is understood ; or ἐγενήθημεν may be supplied (with Wolf) from the preceding verse. The terms παρακ., Tapay., and μαρτυρούμ. are said by Koppe and Rosenm. to be synonymous. But there seems rather to be a climax: certainly μαρτ. in this sense is stronger than either of the two former ones (so Theophyl.: πληκτικωτέρως διδασκαλίας ἐστιν), and signifies obtestart; as in Deut. 32, 16. So papru- ρομαι, Eph. 4, 17. and Thucyd. 6, 80. and also Pro- cop. 248, 40. μαρτύρεσαι γέτιγιν. And παραμ.. seems to be a stronger term than zwapax. It is not well rendered console. The best modern critics observe, that the term may here have the same sense found sometimes in Homer (as II. 6. 417 & 680. See Damm. Lex.). Xenoph. Venat. 6, 25. (to which may be added Appian 2, 892. μαρτύρομαι καὶ rapaKarod) by which it signifies to counsel, urge, swadeo.
At εἰς τὸ περιπατ. &c. compare Col. 1, 16., where see the note. The image at πατὴρ corresponds to that at τροφὸς, ver. 7. Wets. compares Hom. Od. a. 308. In the ἕνα ἔκαστον ὑμῶν παρακαλούντες (with which I would compare Thucyd. 7, 69. τῶν τριηραρ- χῶν ἕνα ἕκαστον ἀνεκάλει) some recognise an allusion to the teaching from house to house. See Acts 2, 20. It simply signifies (I think) that he taught them individually as well as collectively. Βασιλείαν καὶ δόξαν. A common hendiadis for βασιλείαν ἔνδοξον. See Benson.
13. ὅτι παραλαβόντες---πιστεύουσιν. Παραλάμβανω is ἃ term often used of receiving instruction, either oral, or by letter. So Phil. 4, 9. & ἐμάθετε καὶ παρε- λάβετε καὶ ἀκούσατε" where see the note. Inthe words παραλάβοντες---Θεοῦ there is a trajectio. The παρα- AaB. λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τοῦ Θεου, and λόγον ἀκοῆς are said to be for λόγον or ἀκοὴν; as Hebr. 4, 2. I should regard this as a Hebraism. (answering to \27) often
92 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP, II.
joined to pleonasms. There may be (as Morus thinks) an allusion to Is. 53, 1. τις ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν.
"EdéEacbe, received, admitted, approved, embraced it. So Theophyl.: προσέιχετε. Rosenm. cites He- rodot. 2. ἐδέχοντο τοὺς λόγους. I add Thucyd. 1, 95. ἐδέξαντο τοὺς λόγους, Kal πρόσειχον τὴν γνώμην. The earlier Commentators seem nut to have perceived this sense of ἐδεξ., but to have confounded the term with παραλ.
13. ὃς καὶ ἐνεργεῖται, “ which is operative.” The ὃς is by some referred to Θεοῦ; by others to λόγου. The latter method is adopted by the most eminent mo- dern Commentators. And so some antients, as CEcumen. αὔξει διὰ τοῦ ὑμετέρου βίου. And Theo- phyl.: ἐκ τῶν ἐργῶών δείκνυται, “has an operative in- fluence on your hearts and lives, producing the fruits of good works.” Other antients, however, and moderns refer it to Θεοῦ. So Theodoret: προφητικῆς γὰρ καὶ αὐτοὶ χάριτος ἀπολαύσαντες, καὶ προεφήτευον, καὶ γλωσσαῖς ἡλάλουν, καὶ θαύματα ἐπετέλουν παράδοξα. And if that construction be true, it must have re- ference to the χαρίσματα, also called ἐνεργήματα, 1 Cor. 12, 6. 10, 11. and Eph. 3, 20., such as were vouchsafed not only to the Corinthians, but to the Galatians and Ephesians, and also the Thessalonians. (1 Thess. 5, 19 & 20. and 1 Thess. 1, 5.) See Whitby, who, among other modern Commentators, adopts this interpretation. The former seems to deserve the preference: but perhaps the Apostle had in mind both the above senses.
14. ὑμεῖς yeag—X. I. Mackn. supposes the Apostle here introduces a reply to an objection against the truth of Christianity, founded in the disbelief of the Palestine Jews, and their bitter persecution of Christ and his disciples; which, he means to say, is reputed by their treatment of their own Prophets, of whom there was scarcely one that they had not at least persecuted. See Acts 7, 52. A very ingenious, but perhaps not well founded, and too hypothetical, a view; at least there can only be a faint allusion in
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP, II. 93
the words following, τῶν καὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἀποκτεινάντων Ἰησοῦν καὶ τοὺς ἰδίους προφήτας. Here the Apostle seems to intend an allusion to the proofs of divine ἐνέργημα upon them, namely, in enabling them to bear persecution and calamity. That such an ἐνέργημα of the holy spirit was thought necessary to produce that effect, we learn from various passages of the New Testament.
The plain sense, therefore, is: ‘Such an ἐνέργημα ye had; for ye showed exemplary fortitude and patience,” &c. This, however, the Apostle expresses in a more refined way, by saying: ‘‘ ye were imitators of the Palestine church,” &c.; just as at 1, 6. “ye were μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε καὶ τοῦ Kupiov, δεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ" where see the note.
On the expression ἐκκλησιών---Χριστῷ I. see 1, 1. and the note. Such churches or congregations had been founded in various parts of Judea by those who had fled from the persecution after the murder of Stephen. See Acts 8, 1—4. The Jews were every where the bitterest persecutors of Christians ; and thus the Palestine ones suffered most from that baleful spirit. See Benson.
Συμφυλετών, literally, fellow clansmen, and in a general way countrymen.
15. καὶ τοὺς ἰδίους προφήτας. On the ἰδίους there has been some difference of opinion. Being omitted in a few Versions and Latin Fathers, it is regarded as spurious by many critics, and has been cancelled by Griesb.; but (1 think) on insufficient grounds. One can hardly suppose that a marginal gloss should have crept into nearly all the MSS. It is far more probable that it was cancelled in a few copies, from a groundless fear lest it might countenance the heresy of Marcion, that the Jewish Prophets were not the Prophets of the true God ; and as an excuse for the omission, they would be likely to plead a corruption of the text ; and to cast that on Marcion himself would clench the argument. It is certain that the common reading, supported by nearly all the
94 1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II.
MSS., the most antient Versions, and the unanimous consent of the Greek Fathers and Commentators, must be retained. It is ably defended by Whitby and Benson, and its emphasis must not, with Koppe, be explained away by taking it for ἑαυτών. When the Prophets of the Old Testament are so called, it must be observed they are called according to the opinion of the people in question: a figure often used by the best writers. And it is frivolous to object that these Jews did not themselves kill the Prophets of old. For (as Benson observes) they were actu- ated by the same spirit, and formed, as it were, the same people, and are so considered by our Lord, Matth. 23, 29—37. Nay, had the Prophets of old lived in their days, and so freely rebuked their vices, they would have slain them like their forefathers. Hence they are often charged with the murder of their own Prophets. See 1 Kings 19, 10 & 14. Neh. 9, 26. Jer. 2, 30. Luke 6, 23. 23, 33 & 84. ᾿Εκδιωξάντων, i. 6. literally, ‘* chased away by persecution, or, in a general sense, persecuted. Καὶ Θεῴ μὴ ἀρεσκόντων. Some take ἀρεσκ. in the sense seek to please; as 2, 4. and Gal. 1,10. It should rather seem to be said, by meiosis, for “ are in dis- favour with God.” So Koppe explains Θεοστυγεῖς, And so Theophyl. See also Wakef. on Eurip. Alc. 65. On the words καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐναντίων, which indicate that antipathy to all other nations (called by Tacitus the adversus omnes alios hostile odium), which raised ‘“ their hand against every man’s hand, and every man’s hand against theirs,” the Commentators adduce copious proofs and illustra- tions. It may be sufficient to note Diod. Sic. p. 5, 25. μόνους γὰρ ἁπάντων ἐθνῶν ἀκοινωνήτους εἶναι τὴς πρὸς ἄλλο ἔθνος ἐπιμιξίας, καὶ πολεμίους ὑπολαμβάνειν πάντας. The passage οἵ Juvenal Sat. 14, 103. will readily occur to my readers: “ Non monstrare vias, eadem nisi sacra colenti; Quesitum ad fontem solos dedu- cere verpos.” On the spirit by which the Jews were actuated towards the Christians see Benson.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAP. II. 95
16. κωλυόντων ἡμᾶς τοῖς ἔθνεσι λαλῆσαι ἵνα σωθώσιν. The κωλ. is rightly rendered by Benson and Mackn. hindering. So Theophyl.: ἐμποδιϑόντων. It, how- ever, includes forbidding. At λαλῆσαι the Com- mentators understood τὸν λόγον, the Gospel. But the unbelieving Jews could not approve of the Gos- pel being preached to the Jews. Therefore by λαλῆσαι 1 would understand instruction in religion generally, by withdrawing them from Heathenism.
16. ἵνα σωθῶσιν. ‘The Commentators rightly remark that the ἵνα is eventual, like the Hebr. 2, or jyo?, “in order to their being saved.” <‘* Thus (says Theophyl.) they are the common enemies of the human race, by hindering the common salvation.”
16. εἰς τὸ ἀναπληρῶσαι αὐτών τὰς ἁμαρτίας πάντοτε. This is rendered by Benson and Mackn., “ whereby they are filling,’ &c. A sense, however, scarcely permitted by the force of the εἰς τὸ, which is well explained by Phot. ap. Gicumen.: ἵνα πάντοτε ἀνα- πληρωθῶσιν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι αὐτῶν" adding, ἐπειδὴ γὰρ πάντοτε ταῦτα ἔπραττον" πάντοτε ἀνεπλήρουν τὰς ἀμαρ- τίας αὐτών. And Theophyl.: ἵνα δεικνύωσιν ἑαυτοὺς τὰ τελειότατα ἁμαρτάνοντας, καὶ φθάνοντας τὸ πλῆρες μέτρον τῆς κακίας καὶ ἀκρότατον. So Doddr. “as if they desired to fill up,” &c. And so Koppe, who renders: “ita fit, ut peccatorum suorum vim semper magis Magisque augeant, eorumque pcenas eo atro- ciores sibi contrahant.” He adds that this is agree- able to the Scriptural opinion concerning sins and their punishment, namely, that God indeed per- mits men to fill up a certain number of evil deeds, and until then spares them and delays the punish- ment; but if this number should be completed, then the punishment is inevitable. See Gen. 15, 16. ᾿Αναπληρώσαι τ. a. signifies