Colossians 2:8

Col_2:8

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit.

The spoiler and his implement

See to it, says Paul, lest there be some one--I do not say more, you can guess my meaning--to carry you off as his spoil (not take spoil from you). The expression grasps powerfully the essence of the proselytizing spirit; the proselytizing spoil is the person proselytized. He aims at doing this through that which is at once in its arrogant claims a high philosophy, and in its miserable reality an empty deceit; a philosophy, artful, moulded in accordance with an esoteric system, pervaded by five fatal deficiencies.

I. It is merely traditional, and, therefore, of precarious truth.

II. It is human, and, therefore, deficient in authority.

III. It is elementary, belonging to the outworn creed, to the rudiments of religion, and, therefore, unfitted for Christian manhood.

IV. It is material, not connected with the souls true home and centre, but with the palpable and external, and is, therefore, deficient in spirituality.

V. And being all this, assuredly, and as matter of fact, it is not after christ. (Bp. Alexander.)

The false teachers aimed at making the Colossians their prey, carrying them off body and soul. They had been rescued from the bondage of darkness; they had been transferred to the kingdom of light; they had been settled there as free citizens (Col_1:12-13); and now there was a danger that they should fall into a state worse than their former slavery, that they should be carried off as so much booty (Comp. 2Ti_3:6). (Bp. Lightfoot.)

Philosophy discriminated

Philosophy, taken in its simplest acceptation, is only a higher degree of good sense, which, not pretending to know all things, desires to have a thorough knowledge of those objects, the knowledge of which has been placed within our reach. It sets no value on names and appearances; prejudice is not the basis of any of its judgments; neither number nor time has the effect of transforming error into truth. It believes not, denies not, affirms not, at hazard, or on slight grounds. Not trusting to a first look, it searches for differences under resemblances, and resemblances under differences; alternately uniting what the vulgar separate, and separating what they unite. While all facts are isolated to the inattentive eye, they are connected and linked together by the eye of philosophy, which does what it can to trace the chain which unites them. In every case fixing on what is essential, and throwing aside what is merely accidental, it comes at last to recognize a common nature, a common principle, a common origin, in objects which seemed at first to have nothing in common. It thus reduces the innumerable facts of the moral and physical world to a small number of ideas, and these to a smaller number still, always gravitating towards the unity which it will never reach, but to which a mysterious power constrains it always to aspire. To say all in one word, philosophy differs from vulgar reason, in applying itself to penetrate from the exterior of things or their envelope, to their principle, or at least to the idea which explains the greatest number of possible facts, and before which it is constrained to stop as if out of breath. When shall it stop? What is its legitimate sphere? This question is of more importance than any other. Philosophy does not gain more honour by extending its search, than by recognizing its limits. It reigns in this apparent dethronement. It is its glory to know how to restrict itself, just as in the domain of morality it is the glory of the will to stop in proper time and make an effort upon itself. But in order to know what it is able and what unable to do, it takes account of its processes and instruments, compares its means with its end, and not being able to place all its greatness in knowledge finds part of it in confessing its ignorance, and so to speak, in knowing certainly that it does net know. St. Paul did not repudiate this philosophy, and could have no intention to repudiate it. He knew as well as we, that in matters of religion, and even of revealed religion, there may be either a good or a bad philosophy, but that at all events there is philosophy. We cannot condemn philosophy without condemning ourselves to silence on the subject of religion which presupposes it, and guides it, and would create it if it did not previously exist. Accordingly St. Paul has not condemned it; and when he warns his disciples against a science falsely so called, his words imply the existence of a science that is true. Now philosophy is a part of science, or rather is itself the science of science. Nor, moreover, could he have condemned it, without condemning himself who has made such happy and frequent use of it. It were vain to deny that the writings of St. Paul and of St. John are full of the highest philosophy. Let us be understood. We do not say full of sublime truth, but of that philosophy which we have endeavoured to characterize, which rises from appearances to reality, from accident to essence, from the particular to the general, from variable facts to immutable principles. (A. Vinet, D. D.)

St. Pauls attitude towards philosophy

The apostle does not condemn philosophy absolutely: the philosophy and vain deceit of this passage corresponds to what he says in 1Ti_6:20. But though it is not condemned it is disparaged by the connection in which it is placed. The term was doubtless used by the false teachers to describe their system. Though essentially Greek as a name and an idea it had found its way into Jewish circles. Philo used it in speaking of the Hebrew religion and Mosaic law, and also of Essenism, which was probably the progenitor of the Colossian heresy. So, too, Josephus speaks of three Jewish sects as philosophies. It should be remembered also, that in this later age, owing to Roman influence, the term was used to describe practical not less than speculative systems, so that it would cover the ascetic life as well as the mystic theosophy of the Colossian heretics. Hence the apostle is here flinging back at these false teachers a favourite term of their own--their vaunted philosophy, which is hollow and misleading. The word, indeed, could claim a truly noble origin; for it is said to have arisen out of the humility of Pythagoras who called himself a lover of wisdom. In such a sense the term would entirely accord with the spirit and teaching of St. Paul; for it bore testimony to the insufficiency of the human intellect and the need of a revelation. But in his age it had come to be associated generally with the idea of subtle dialectics and profitless speculation; while in this particular instance it was combined with a mystic cosmogony and angelology which contributed a fresh element of danger. As contrasted with the power and fulness and certainty of revelation, all such philosophy was foolishness (1Co_1:20). It is worth observing that this word, which to the Greeks denoted the highest effort of the intellect, occurs here alone in St. Paul, just as he uses virtue, which was their term to express the highest moral excellence, in a single passage only (Php_4:8). The reason is much the same in both cases. The gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or of practice, which it had introduced. The attitude of the fathers towards philosophy while it was a living thing was various. Clement, who was followed in the main by the earlier Alexandines, regards Greek philosophy not only as a preliminary training for the gospel, but even as in some sense a covenant given by God to the Greeks. Others, who were the great majority, and of whom Tertullian may be taken as an extreme type, set their forces directly against it, seeing in it only the parent of all heretical teaching. St. Pauls speech at Athens, on the only occasion when he is known to have been brought into direct personal contact with Greek philosophers (Act_17:18), shows that his sympathies would have been at least as much with Clements representations as with Tertullians. (Bp. Lightfoot.)

Philosophy true and false

I. True philosophy is not condemned by St. Paul. We cannot under stand this concerning any branch or the whole body, lest God be called into judgment. For philosophy is the offspring of right reason; and this light of reason is infused into the mind by God. We, therefore, judge not the discipline of the Platenists, etc., to be true philosophy, but the principles of every one which agree with truth and morals. The errors of theologians do not pertain to theology, nor do those of philosophers and philosophy. These we are free to condemn, but not truth discovered by natural reason.

II. What kind of philosophy is excluded by the apostle. That which is vain and deceitful, viz., the product of reason carried beyond its bounds. Philosophy is to be listened to when it pronounces about things subject to itself, but when it would determine concerning the worship of God and salvation, etc., which are beyond the grasp of reason and depend wholly on revelation, it brings nothing solid or true. St. Paul alleges the cause of this in 1Co_2:14. As animals can judge very well concerning things which relate to sense, yet cannot judge of human affairs, neither can men pronounce by natural light respecting heavenly doctrine, although they may determine by it what is good and right in human concerns. This was the error of the false teachers who, in speculating about the method of approach to God and of redemption, went beyond the declarations which God had made on these matters.

III. The abuse and use of philosophy.

1. Its abuse.

(1) When it attempts to deduce the fundamentals of religion from its own principles. These principles may be true, but there cannot be elicited from them what is to be determined respecting the Trinity, e.g., which is to be deduced from higher principles, viz., the will of God revealed in His Word.

(2) When it opposes its own principles which are true in the order of nature to theological principles which are above the order of nature. Thus it is true that out of nothing, nothing can be made; but philosophers err when they think they can hence conclude against creation which the Scriptures teach as done not by virtue of natural causes, but by the power of God.

(3) When it obtrudes for legitimate conclusions its errors drawn sometimes by false consequences from true premises.

2. Its uses.

(1) For the clear understanding of many passages of Scripture. Although the principles of our religion are derived from God, yet there are many examples and illustrations which cannot be understood without the aid of human literature. Its references to the heavenly bodies require the knowledge of astronomy; to animals, of natural history, etc.

(2) For discriminating between and treating religious controversies; for appreciating the coherence and mutual establishment of heavenly doctrine, and for determining what is consistent and inconsistent with them. Our faith ascends above reason, but not irrationally. I believe the resurrection, because reason proves the doctrine to be delivered in the Bible. I do not believe in purgatory because reason can collect it from no part of Scripture according to the rules of sound logic. This use of reason in sacred things God approves and requires (Eph_5:17; Eph_4:14; 1Th_5:21; Act_17:11).

(3) For the instruction of those who have not yet embraced Christ, and for resistance if they should oppose religion. He who has lived in darkness is not to be drawn directly into the sunlight lest he should be overpowered rather than enlightened; so they, who have been educated in paganism are first to be awakened by reasons drawn from natural light (Act_17:24). And then it is to be employed as a rampart and weapon against opponents. Julian the apostate said We are caught by our own wings when he saw the philosophers routed by the Christians through the advantages of philosophy.

(4) For Christian education, since the mind is prepared and rendered more acute by philosophical studies, and our discourses on sacred things are much enriched by the good sayings of philosophers.

(5) For the delight of hearers. As Clemens says, The truth which is sought from Scripture is as necessary to the life as bread; but that which is sought from other instruction is as sauce And sweetmeats. (Bp. Davenant.)

Philosophy and its counterfeit

I. The counterfeit of a good thing.

1. The good thing--philosophy. Etymologically it means love of wisdom, but in modern use it stands for a system of knowledge. When applied to any particular department of knowledge, it stands for the collection of general laws or principles under which all the subordinate phenomena of facts relating to that subject are comprehended. It is a good thing because--

(1) Christs spirit is good. Christs spirit is a love of truth, a desire to find out the first principles or reason of things; a desire to penetrate all phenomena and to enter in and study that invisible region where all the hidden forces of the universe are at work.

(2) Its process is good--observation, comparison, generalization. Such a process is soul-quickening, invigorating, and ennobling.

(3) Its results are good. All the arts that bless and adorn the civilized world are but ideas reached by philosophy.

2. The counterfeit. There is a false philosophy, a miserable imitation of the true.

(1) It is deceptive, vain deceit. It is mere fiction, guesses, castles in the air. Its light, such as it is, is a mere ignis fatuus rising out of the muddy marshes of a vain imagination.

(2) It is ill founded after the tradition, etc. It has its origin in mere human guesses, and the rough undigested elements of a mere worldly knowledge. It is built on crudities.

(3) It is anti-Christian--not after Christ. Not after the subject, style, and spirit of His teaching.

II. The counterfeit of a good thing is dangerous. What thousands in all ages have been made a prey of by counterfeit philosophy! They have been plundered and borne away into confusion and ruin by wrong ideas of God, the universe, and man and his nature, obligations, and destiny. Beware of it.

1. It has many forms. It appears--

(1) In natural sciences.

(2) In ontological theories.

(3) In theological creeds.

(4) In ethical enactments.

2. It has fascinating aspects. It often comes in the stateliness of the scholar, in the force of the reasoner, in the grandeur of the rhetorician, in the sublimity of the poet.

3. It works insidiously. It instils its errors quietly; and silently as the laws of nature they often work out their own ends. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The marks of a false philosophy

It is known--

I. By its profitless speculations.

II. By its purely human origin. After the tradition of men.

1. The human mind is limited.

2. All human knowledge is imperfect. If any man think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

III. By its undue exaltation of elementary principles. After the rudiments of the world. A true philosophy, while starting necessarily with elementary principles, conducts to increasing knowledge and spiritual exaltation and liberty. A false philosophy fetters the mind by exaggerating the importance of first principles and insisting on their eternal obligation.

IV. By its Christlessness. And not after Christ.

V. By its destructive influence. Spoil you--not strip off, but carry away as spoil (Gen_14:12-16). Man is never so grievously despoiled as when his soul is robbed by error. The thief cometh not, etc. (Joh_10:10).

VI. Against a false philosophy the Church must be faithfully warned.

1. Because it is seductive in its pretensions.

2. Because it is baneful in its effect. (G. Barlow.)

The bane and the antidote

I. The poison. Take heed implies a real, not an hypothetical danger. Paul is not crying wolf. Any one, i.e., somebody; as if he had said, I name no names--it is not the persons, but the principles I fight against--but you know whom I mean. Maketh spoil of you. He sees the converts taken prisoners, and led away with a cord round their necks, like the strings of captives on the Assyrian monuments. He had spoken in chap. 1:13 of the conqueror who had translated them; now he fears lest a robber horde, making a raid upon the peaceful colonists in their happy new homes, may sweep them again into bondage. The cord whose fatal noose will be tightened round them if they do not take care is philosophy and vain deceit. If Paul had been writing in English he would have put philosophy in inverted commas, to show that he was quoting the heretical teachers own name for their system. For true love of wisdom neither Paul nor Pauls Master have anything but praise. The thing spoken of here has no resemblance, except in name, to what the Greeks in their better days called philosophy, and nothing warrants the representation that Christianity is antagonistic to it.

1. Empty deceit describes this system. It is like a bladder full of wind. Its lofty pretension is that it is a love of wisdom, but if we look at it closely it is a fraud.

2. It is after the traditions of men.

(1) It is significant that the expression is a word of Christs (Mar_7:8). The portentous and smothering under growth of such traditions is preserved in the Talmud, where for thousands of pages we get nothing but Rabbi So-and-so said this, but Rabbi So-and-so said that, until we feel stifled, and long for one Divine word to still all the babble. The oriental element in the heresy, on the other hand, prided itself on a hidden teaching too sacred to be entrusted to books, and was passed hem lip to lip in some close conclave. The fact that all this had no higher source than mans imaginings, seems to Paul the condemnation of the whole system. His theory is that in Christ every man has the full truth. What an absurd descent then to turn away from Him that speaketh from heaven to human voices and thoughts.

(2) These special forms of tradition trouble no man now. But the tendency to give heed to human teachers, and to suffer them to come between us and Christ is deep in us all. There is at one extreme the man who believes in no revelation, but pays his teacher a deference as absolute as that which he regards superstition when rendered to Christ. At the other are the Christians who will not let Christ and the Scripture speak unless the Church be present at the interview, like a jailer, with a bunch of man-made creeds jingling at its belt.

3. It is after the rudiments of the world.

(1) Rudiments means the letters of the alphabet, and hence elements, first principles, the A, B, C, of a science. They boasted of mysterious doctrines for the initiated, of which the plain truths Paul preached were but milk for babes. Paul retorts that the true mystery is the Word he preached, and that the poverty-stricken elements were in that swelling inanity which called itself wisdom and was not. He brands it as rudiments of the world, which is worse, as belonging to the outward and material, and not to the higher region of the spiritual, where Christian thought ought to dwell. Its use in Gal_4:3, points to a similar meaning here. He regards it as a retrogression to childish things, and as a pitiable descent to a lower sphere.

(2) The forms which were urged on the Colossians are long since antiquated, but the tendency to turn Christianity into ceremonial is running with a powerful current to-day. But enlisting the senses as allies of the spirit in worship is risky work. The theory that such aids make a ladder, by which the soul may ascend to God, is perilously apt to be confuted by experience, which finds that the soul is quite as likely to go down the ladder as up. Stained windows are lovely, and white windows are barnlike; but perhaps if the object is to get light these solemn purples and glowing yellows are rather in the way. A lesson for the day is Pauls principle here, that a Christianity making much of ceremonies is a retrogression.

4. Paul sums up his indictment in one damning clause--not after Christ. He is neither its origin, substance, rule, nor standard.

II. The antidote (verses 9-10).

1. These words may be a reason for the warning, take heed for; or they may be a reason for the exclusion of Christless teaching. Anything not after Christ is ipso facto wrong. In Him is placed with emphasis at the beginning, and implies nowhere else. Dwelleth, i.e., has its permanent abode. All the fulness of the Godhead, i.e., the whole unbounded attributes of Deity. Bodily points to the incarnation, and is an advance on Col_1:19. So we are pointed to the glorified humanity of Christ as the abode now and for ever of all the fulness of the Divine nature which is thereby brought very near to us. This truth shivers all the dreams about angel-mediators, and brands as folly every attempt to learn God anywhere but in Him.

2. If He be the sole temple of Deity why go anywhere else to see or possess God? In Him ye are full, which sets forth their living incorporation in Christ, and consequent participation in His fulness. Every one may enter into that union by continuous faith. All the fulness of God is in Him, that from Him it may pass to us. According to our need it will vary itself, being to each what the moment most requires--wisdom, or strength, or beauty, or patience.

3. The process of receiving all the Divine fulness is a continuous one. We can but be approximating to the possession of the infinite treasure, and since the treasure is infinite, and we can indefnitely grow in capacity of receiving God, there must be an eternal continuance of the filling, and an eternal increase of the measure of what fills us. The indwelling Christ will enlarge the place of His habitation, as the walls stretch and the roof soars. He will fill the greater house with the light of His presence and the fragrance of His name.

4. From such thoughts Paul would have us draw the conclusion--how foolish it must be to go to any other source for the supply of our needs. Christ is the Head of all princi pality, etc. Why then go to the ministers when we have access to the King? Why leave the fountain of living water for the broken cisterns? (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

The gospel to be preached in its purity

Astronomers tell us that the light of the sun is pure white light, but when it comes in contact with the atmosphere of our earth it becomes discoloured, simply because the medium through which it passes is impure. So it is with the light of heaven when it passes through the traditions of men. (S. H. Leary, D. C. L.)

The pure milk of Gods Word

is not to be adulterated with the chalk of human opinions. (S. H. Leary, D. C. L.)

The gospel to be preached simply

Of the works of a famous alchymist of the thirteenth century, it is said that, whoever would read his book to find out the secret would employ all his labour in vain. All the gold makers who have written upon their favourite mystery are in the like predicament, no one can comprehend what the secret is which they pretend to divulge. May we not shrewdly guess that if they had any secret to tell they would put it in intelligible language, and that their pompous and involved sentences are only a screen for their utter ignorance of the matter? When we hear preachers talking of Divine things in a style savouring more of metaphysical subtlety than of gospel plainness; when the seeking sinner cannot find out the way of salvation because of their philosophical jargon, may we not with justice suspect that the preacher does not know the gospel, and conceals his culpable ignorance behind the veil of rhetorical magniloquence? Surely if the man understood a matter so important to all his hearers as the way of salvation, he would feel constrained to tell it out in words which all might comprehend. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Col 2:8. Beware lest any man spoil you — Μη τις υμας εσται ο συλαγωγων, lest there be any one who makes a prey of you; through philosophy — The pretended wisdom of the heathen philosophers; and vain deceit — Sophistical and delusive reasonings, and unprofitable speculations. “The apostle,” as Macknight justly observes, “does not condemn sound philosophy, but that kind of it which had no foundation in truth; and, being formed merely from imagination, aided by the pride of human reason, was supported by tradition; that is, by the affirmation of the inventors, handed down from one to another. Of this kind was the philosophy of the Platonists concerning demons, whom they represented as carrying men’s prayers to God, and as bringing back from God the blessings prayed for. They spake of them likewise as governing the elements and all human affairs, by a sort of independent power.” It seems some teachers had crept in among the Christians at Colosse, either of Gentile or Jewish extraction, who endeavoured to blend deceits of this kind with the gospel of Christ, and that this is what the apostle here condemns; 1st, Because it was empty and deceitful, promising wisdom, but giving none. 2d, Because it was grounded, not on truth, or solid reason, but on the vain and false traditions of men. 3d, Because, as the apostle here says, it was after the rudiments, στοιχεια, the elements, of the world — Such as the Jewish ceremonies, or the pagan superstitions. The ceremonies of the Mosaic law have this appellation, (Gal 4:3,) being but a carnal worship in comparison of the more spiritual ordinances of the gospel; and but an elementary kind of institution, (like the alphabet to children, or the first principles of science,) fitted to the infancy of the church; and not after Christ — According to his institution and doctrine, but tending to withdraw the heart from him.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

II. THE PROPOSED “PHILOSOPHY” CONSIDERED, Col_2:8-23.

1. Its characteristics, Col_2:8.

8. Beware… Take heed—Pointing to some well-known person who urged upon them his philosophy, as he termed it, as a substitute for Christ, which the apostle pronounces an empty cheat. To spoil means to carry off as plunder. Thus would the false teacher, if possible, carry them off, body and soul. The caution is not against all philosophy, nor is the Greek philosophy referred to, but a peculiar Colossian system which combined Oriental spiritualistic speculations (Col_2:18) with Jewish ritualism, (Col_2:16,) and set itself in opposition to the gospel. From the apostle’s point of view, its characteristics were, first, positively, it was given by tradition of men, and so was of human origin; it was made up of rudiments of the world; elementary religious ideas gathered from various non-Christian sources; and, second, negatively, it was not according to Christ, as all true philosophy is. Philosophy is a search for the truth. Within the domain of revelation it heartily accepts its authority, and is always in harmony with the truth revealed by Christ.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 2 Part 3

THE BANE AND THE ANTIDOTE

Col_2:8-10 (R.V.)

WE come now to the first plain reference to the errors which were threatening the peace of the Colossian community. Here Paul crosses swords with the foe. This is the point to which all his previous words have been steadily converging. The immediately preceding context contained the positive exhortation to continue in the Christ Whom they had received, having been rooted in Him as the tree in a fertile place "by the rivers of water," and being continually builded up in Him, with ever-growing completeness of holy character. The same exhortation in substance is contained in the verses which we have now to consider, with the difference that it is here presented negatively, as warning and dehortation, with distinct statement of the danger which would uproot the tree and throw down the building, and drag the Colossians away from union with Christ.

In these words the Bane and Antidote are both before us. Let us consider each.

I. The Poison against which Paul warns the Colossians is plainly described in our first verse, the terms of which may require a brief comment.

"Take heed lest there shall be." The construction implies that it is a real and not a hypothetical danger which he sees threatening. He is not crying "wolf" before there is need. "Anyone"- perhaps the tone of the warning would be better conveyed if we read the more familiar "somebody"; as if he had said-"I name no names-it is not the persons, but the principles that I fight against-but you know whom I mean well enough. Let him be anonymous, you understand who it is." Perhaps there was even a single "somebody" who was the centre of the mischief. "That maketh spoil of you." Such is the full meaning of the word-and not "injure" or "rob," which the translation in the Authorised Version suggests to an English reader. Paul sees the converts in Colossae taken prisoners and led away with a cord round their necks, like the long strings of captives on the Assyrian monuments. He had spoken in the previous chapter (Col_1:13) of the merciful conqueror who had "translated" them from the realm of darkness into a kingdom of light, and now he fears lest a robber horde, making a raid upon the peaceful colonists in their happy new homes, may sweep them away again into bondage. The instrument which the man stealer uses, or perhaps we may say, the cord, whose fatal noose will be tightened round them, if they do not take care, is "philosophy and vain deceit." If Paul, had been writing in English, he would have put "philosophy" in inverted commas, to show that he was quoting the heretical teachers own name for their system, if system it may be called, which was really a chaos. For the true love of wisdom, for any honest, humble attempt to seek after her as hid treasure; neither Paul nor Pauls Master has anything but praise and sympathy and help. Where he met real, however imperfect, searchers after truth, he strove to find points of contact between them and his message, and to present the gospel as the answer to their questionings, the declaration of that which they were groping to find. The thing spoken of here has no resemblance but in name to what the Greeks in their better days first called philosophy, and nothing but that mere verbal coincidence warrants the representation-often made both by narrow-minded Christians, and by unbelieving thinkers-that Christianity takes up a position of antagonism or suspicion to it. The form of the expression in the original shows clearly that "vain deceit," or more literally "empty deceit," describes the "philosophy" which Paul is bidding them beware of. They are not two things, but one. It is like a blown bladder, full of wind, and nothing else. In its lofty pretensions, and if we take its own account of itself, it is a love of and search after wisdom; but if we look at it more closely, it is a swollen nothing, empty and a fraud. This is what he is condemning. The genuine thing he has nothing to say about here. He goes on to describe more closely this impostor, masquerading in the philosophers cloak. It is "after the traditions of men." We have seen in a former chapter what a strange heterogeneous conglomerate of Jewish ceremonial and Oriental dreams the false teachers in Colossae were preaching. Probably both these elements are included here. It is significant that the very expression, "the traditions of men," is a word of Christs, applied to the Pharisees, whom He charges with "leaving the commandment of God, and holding fast the tradition of men". {Mar_7:8} The portentous undergrowth of such "traditions" which, like the riotous fertility of creepers in a tropical forest, smother and kill the trees round which they twine, is preserved for our wonder and warning in the Talmud, where for thousands and thousands of pages, we get nothing but Rabbi So and So said this, but Rabbi So and So said that; until we feel stifled, and long for one Divine Word to still all the babble.

The Oriental element in the heresy, on the other hand, prided itself on a hidden teaching which was too sacred to be entrusted to books, and was passed from lip to lip in some close conclave of muttering teachers and listening adepts. The fact that all this, be it Jewish, be it Oriental teaching, had no higher source than mens imaginings and refinings, seems to Paul the condemnation Of the whole system. His theory is that in Jesus Christ every Christian man has the full truth concerning God and man, in their mutual relations, -the authoritative Divine declaration of all that can be known, the perfect exemplar of all that ought to be done, the sun clear illumination and proof of all that dare be hoped. What an absurd descent, then, from the highest of our prerogatives, to "turn away from Him that speaketh from heaven," in order to listen to poor human voices, speaking mens thoughts!

The lesson is as needful today as ever. The special forms of mens traditions in question here have long since fallen silent, and trouble no man any more. But the tendency to give heed to human teachers and to suffer them to come between us and Christ is deep in us all. There is at one extreme the man who believes. in no revelation from God, and, smiling at us Christians who accept Christs words as final and Himself as the Incarnate truth, often pays to his chosen human teacher a deference as absolute as that which he regards as superstition, when we render it to our Lord. At the other extremity are the Christians who will not let Christ and the Scripture speak to the soul, unless the Church be present at the interview, like a jailor, with a bunch of man-made creeds jingling at its belt. But it is not only at the two ends of the line, but all along its length, that men are listening to "traditions" of men and neglecting "the commandment of God." We have all the same tendency in us. Every man carries a rationalist and a traditionalist under his skin. Every Church in Christendom, whether it has a formal creed or no, is ruled as to its belief and practice, to a sad extent, by the "traditions of the elders." The "freest" of the Nonconformist Churches, untrammelled by any formal confession, may be bound with as tight fetters, and be as much dominated by mens opinions, as if it had the straitest of creeds. The mass of our religious beliefs and practices has ever to be verified, corrected, and remodelled, by harking back from creeds, written or unwritten, to the one Teacher, the endless significance of Whose person and work is but expressed in fragments by the purest and widest thoughts even of those who have lived nearest to Him, and seen most of His beauty. Let us get away from men, from the Babel of opinions and the strife of tongues, that we may "hear the words of His mouth"! Let us take heed of the empty fraud which lays the absurd snare for our feet, that we can learn to know God by any means but by listening to His own speech in His Eternal Word, lest it lead us away captive out of the Kingdom of the Light! Let us go up to the pure spring on the mountain top, and not try to slake our thirst at the muddy pools at its base! "Ye are Christs, be not the slaves of men." "This is My beloved Son, hear ye Him."

Another mark of this empty pretence of wisdom which threatens to captivate the Colossians is, that it is "after the rudiments of the world." The word rendered "rudiments" means the letters of the alphabet, and hence comes naturally to acquire the meaning of "elements," or "first principles," just as we speak of the A B C of a science. The application of such a designation to the false teaching is, like the appropriation of the term "mystery" to the gospel, an instance of turning the tables and giving back the teachers their own words. They boasted of mysterious doctrines reserved for the initiated, of which the plain truths that Paul preached were but the elements, and they looked down contemptuously on his message as "milk for babes." Paul retorts on them, asserting that the true mystery, the profound truth long hidden and revealed, is the word which he preached, and that the poverty-stricken elements, fit only for infants, are in that swelling inanity which called itself wisdom and was not. Not only does he brand it as "rudiments," but as "rudiments of the world," which is worse-that is to say, as belonging to the sphere of the outward and material, and not to the higher region of the spiritual, where Christian thought ought to dwell. So two weaknesses are charged against the system: it is the mere alphabet of truth, and therefore unfit for grown men. It moves, for all its lofty pretensions, in the region of the visible and mundane things, and is therefore unfit for spiritual men. What features of the system are referred to in this phrase? Its use in the Epistle to the Galatians, {Gal_4:3} as a synonym for the whole system of ritual observances and ceremonial precepts of Judaism, and the present context, which passes on immediately to speak of circumcision, point to a similar meaning here, though we may include also the ceremonial and ritual of the Gentile religions, in so far as they contributed to the outward forms which the Colossian heresy sought to impose on the Church. This then is Pauls opinion about a system which laid stress on ceremonial and busied itself with forms. He regards it as a deliberate retrogression to an earlier stage. A religion of rites had come first, and was needed for the spiritual infancy of the race-but in Christ we ought to have outgrown the alphabet of revelation, and, being men, to have put away childish things. He regards it further as a pitiable descent into a lower sphere, a fall from the spiritual realm to the material, and therefore unbecoming for those who have been enfranchised from dependence upon outward helps and symbols, and taught the spirituality and inwardness of Christian worship.

We need the lesson in this day no less than did these Christians in the little community in that remote valley of Phrygia. The forms which were urged on them are long since antiquated, but the tendency to turn Christianity into a religion of ceremonial is running with an unusually powerful current today. We are all more interested in art, and think we know more about it than our fathers did. The eye and the ear are more educated than they used to be, and a society as "aesthetic" and "musical" as much cultured English society is becoming, will like an ornate ritual. So, apart altogether from doctrinal grounds, much in the conditions of today works towards ritual religion. Nonconformist services are less plain; some go from their ranks because they dislike the "bald" worship in the chapel, and prefer the more elaborate forms of the Anglican Church, which in its turn is for the same reason left by others who find their tastes gratified by the complete thing, as it is to be enjoyed full blown in the Roman Catholic communion. We may freely admit that the Puritan reaction was possibly too severe, and that a little more colour and form might with advantage have been retained. But enlisting the senses as the allies of the spirit in worship is risky work. They are very apt to fight for their own hand when they once begin, and the history of all symbolic and ceremonial worship shows that the experiment is much more likely to end in sensualising religion than in spiritualising sense. The theory that such aids make a ladder by which the soul may ascend to God is perilously apt to be confuted by experience, which finds that the soul is quite as likely to go down the ladder as up it. The gratification of taste, and the excitation of aesthetic sensibility, which are the results of such aids to worship, are not worship, however they may be mistaken for such. All ceremonial is in danger of becoming opaque instead of transparent, as it was meant to be, and of detaining mind and eye instead of letting them pass on and up to God. Stained glass is lovely, and white windows are "barnlike," and "starved," and "bare"; but perhaps, if the object is to get light and to see the sun, these solemn purples and glowing yellows are rather in the way. I for my part believe that of the two extremes, a Quaker meeting is nearer the ideal of Christian worship than High Mass, and so far as my feeble voice can reach, I would urge, as eminently a lesson for the day, Pauls great principle here, that a Christianity making much of forms and ceremonies is a distinct retrogression and descent. You are men in Christ, do not go back to the picture book A B C of symbol and ceremony, which was fit for babes. You have been brought in to the inner sanctuary of worship in spirit; do not decline to the beggarly elements of outward form.

Paul sums up his indictment in one damning clause, the result of the two preceding. If the heresy, have no higher source than mens traditions, and no more solid contents than ceremonial observances, it cannot be "after Christ." He is neither its origin, nor its substance, nor its rule and standard. There is a fundamental discord between every such system, however it may call itself Christian, and Christ. The opposition may be concealed by its teachers. They and their victims may not be aware of it. They may not themselves be conscious that by adopting it they have slipped off the foundation; but they have done so, and though in their own hearts they be loyal to Him, they have brought an incurable discord into their creeds which will weaken their lives, if it do not do worse. Paul cared very little for the dreams of these teachers, except in so far as they carried them and others away from his Master. The Colossians might have as many ceremonies as they liked, and welcome; but when these interfered with the sole reliance to be placed on Christs work, then they must have no quarter. It is not merely because the teaching was "after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world," but because, being so, it was "not after Christ," that Paul will have none of it. He that touches his Master touches the apple of his eye, and shades of opinion, and things indifferent in practice, and otherwise unimportant forms of worship, have to be fought to the death if they obscure one corner of the perfect and solitary work of the One Lord, who is at once the source, the substance, and the standard of all Christian teaching.

II. The Antidote.-"For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and in Him ye are made full, who is the head of all principality and power."

These words may be a reason for the warning-"Take heed, for"; or they may be a reason for the implied exclusion of any teaching which is not after Christ. The statement of its characteristics carries in itself its condemnation. Anything "not after Christ" is ipso facto wrong, and to be avoided-"for," etc. "In Him" is placed with emphasis at the beginning, and implies "and nowhere else." "Dwelleth," that is, has its permanent abode; where the tense is to be noticed also, as pointing to the ascended Christ. "All the fulness of the Godhead," that is, the whole unbounded powers and attributes of Deity, where is to be noted the use of the abstract term. Godhead, instead of the more usual God, in order to express with the utmost force the thought of the indwelling in Christ of the whole essence and nature of God. "Bodily," that points to the Incarnation, and so is an advance upon the passage in the former chapter (Col_1:19), which speaks of "the fulness" dwelling in the Eternal Word; whereas this speaks of the Eternal Word in whom the fulness dwelt becoming flesh. So we are pointed to the glorified corporeal humanity of Jesus Christ in His exaltation as the abode, now and forever, of all the fulness of the Divine nature, which is thereby brought very near to us. This grand truth seems to Paul to shiver to pieces all the dreams of these teachers about angel mediators, and to brand as folly every attempt to learn truth and God anywhere else but in Him.

If He be the one sole temple of Deity in whom all Divine glories are stored, why go anywhere else in order to see or to possess God? It is folly; for not only are all these glories stored in Him, but they are so stored on purpose to be reached by us. Therefore the Apostle goes on, "and in Him ye are made full"; which sets forth two things as true in the inward life of all Christians, namely, their living incorporation in and union with Christ, and their consequent participation in His fulness. Every one of us may enter into that most real and close union with Jesus Christ by the power of continuous faith in Him. So may we be grafted into the Vine, and builded into the Rock. If thus we keep our hearts in contact with His heart and let Him lay His lip on our lips, He will breathe into us the breath of His own life, and ye shall live because He lives, and in our measure, as He lives. All the fulness of God is in Him, that from Him it may pass into us. We might start back from such bold words if we did not remember that the same apostle who here tells us that that fulness dwells in Jesus, crowns his wonderful prayer for the Ephesian Christians with that daring petition, "that ye may be filled with all the fulness of God." The treasure was lodged in the earthen vessel of Christs manhood that it might be within our reach. He brings the fiery blessing of a Divine life from Heaven to earth enclosed in the feeble reed of His manhood, that it may kindle kindred fire in many a heart. Freely the water of life flows into all cisterns from the ever fresh stream, into which the infinite depth of that unfathomable sea of good pours itself. Every kind of spiritual blessing is given therein. That stream, like a river of molten lava, holds many precious things in its flaming current, and will cool into many shapes and deposit many rare and rich gifts. According to our need it will vary itself, being to each what the moment most requires, -wisdom, or strength, or beauty, or courage, or patience. Out of it will come whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, as Rabbinical legends tell us that the manna tasted to each man like the food for which he wished most.

This process of receiving of all the Divine fulness is a continuous one. We can but be approximating to the possession of the infinite treasure which is ours in Christ; and since the treasure is infinite, and we can indefinitely grow in capacity of receiving God, there must be an eternal continuance of the filling and an eternal increase of the measure of what fills us. Our natures are elastic, and in love and knowledge, as well as in purity and capacity for blessedness, there are no bounds to be set to their possible expansion. They will be widened by bliss into a greater capacity for bliss. The indwelling Christ will "enlarge the place of His habitation," and as the walls stretch and the roofs soar, He will fill the greater house with the light of His presence and the fragrance of His name. The condition of this continuous reception of the abundant gift of a Divine life is abiding in Jesus. It is "in Him" that we are "being filled full"-and it is only so long as we continue in Him that we continue full. We cannot bear away our supplies, as one might a full bucket from a well, and keep it full. All the grace will trickle out and disappear unless we live in constant union with our Lord, whose Spirit passes into our deadness only so long as we are joined to Him.

From all such thoughts Paul would have us draw the conclusion-how foolish, then, it must be to go to any other source for the supply of our needs! Christ is "the head of all principality and power," he adds, with a reference to the doctrine of angel mediators, which evidently played a great part in the heretical teaching. If He is sovereign head of all dignity and power on earth and heaven, why go to the ministers, when we have access to the King; or have recourse to erring human teachers, when we have the Eternal Word to enlighten us; or flee to creatures to replenish our emptiness, when we may draw from the depths of God in Christ? Why should we go on a weary search after goodly pearls when the richest of all is by us, if we will have it? Do we seek to know God? Let us behold Christ, and let men talk as they list. Do we crave a stay for our spirit, guidance and impulse for our lives? Let us cleave to Christ, and we shall be no more lonely and bewildered. Do we need a quieting balm to be laid on conscience, and the sense of guilt to be lifted from our hearts? Let us lay our hands on Christ, the one sacrifice, and leave all other altars and priests and ceremonies. Do we look longingly for some light on the future? Let us steadfastly gaze on Christ as He rises to heaven bearing a human body into the glory of God.

Though all the earth were covered with helpers and lovers of my soul, "as the sand by the sea shore innumerable," and all the heavens were sown with faces of angels who cared for me and succoured me, thick as the stars in the Milky Way-all could not do for me what I need. Yea, though all these were gathered into one mighty and loving creature, even he were no sufficient stay for one soul of man. We want more than creature help. We need the whole fulness of the Godhead to draw from. It is all there in Christ, for each of us. Whosoever will, let him draw freely. Why should we leave the fountain of living waters to hew out for ourselves, with infinite pains, broken cisterns that can hold no water? All we need is in Christ. Let us lift our eyes from the low earth and all creatures, and behold "no man any more," as Lord and Helper, "save Jesus only," "that we may be filled with all the fulness of God."

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

2:8 The Greek word philosophia referred to everything from the metaphysics of Plato to the religious teaching of cults. Paul does not condemn philosophy per se, but only empty philosophical speculation that stands opposed to the Good News. • the spiritual powers of this world: or the spiritual principles of the world; also in 2:20): This phrase may refer to elementary teaching that is characteristic of this world (see Heb 5:12), or to spiritual beings who were thought to have a decisive influence on the course of events (see also Col 2:15, 20; Gal 4:3).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Col 2:8. Μὴ τις ἔσται) So, ἵνα ἔσται, Rev 22:14.—συλαγωγῶν) who not only makes spoil out of you, but makes yourselves a spoil. Both to this word συλαγωγῶν, and to the word κενῆς, vain, are opposed fulness, riches, treasures [Col 2:2-3; Col 2:9].—διὰ, by) This expresses the instrument.—φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης, philosophy and vain deceit) a Hendiadys, as Col 2:18. Philosophy is in itself a kind of thing indifferent (midway between good and bad); but its abuse, however, tending to deceit, is more easy [than its use for good], especially in that Jewish philosophy of which they at that time boasted, and which they endeavoured to accommodate to the purity of the faith; for Paul does not say, that we are brought to Christ by philosophy. Paul maintains that what his opponents boasted to be philosophy and ‘wisdom,’ Col 2:23, was vain deceit.—κατὰ, according to) This definitely points out what philosophy is intended, and restricts the general appellation to the Jewish philosophy. This is indicated in the discussion, Col 2:11; Col 2:16; Col 2:20; wherefore the proposition in Col 2:8 ought not to be more widely extended, as if also applying to the Gentile philosophy, although the Jews had taken their philosophy from the Gentiles; and, by parity of reasoning, this remark applies to all philosophy.—τῶν ἀνθρώπων, of men) The antithesis is, of the Godhead, Col 2:9.—τὰ στοιχεῖα, the elements [rudiments]) The antithesis is, bodily, Col 2:9; Col 2:17: comp. elements, Gal 4:3, note.—καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστὸν, and not according to Christ) He ought therefore peculiarly and solely to approve of the dectrine that is according to Christ.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Col_2:8. Be upon your guard, lest there shall be some one carrying you, away as a prey. In that case, how grievously would what I have just been impressing upon your hearts, in Col_2:6-7, be rendered fruitless!

The future ἔσται after μή (comp. Heb_3:12) has arisen from the apprehension that the case may yet actually occur. See Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. p. 451 A; Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 139 f.; Ellendt·, Lex. Soph. II. p. 104. Comp. also on Gal_4:11.

As to the participle with the article, comp. on Gal_1:7 : τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες.

Respecting συλαγωγεῖν, belonging to the later Greek, see Eustath. ad Il. v. p. 393, 52. Very inaccurately rendered by the Vulgate: decipiat. In Aristaen. ii. 22, joined with οἶκον, it means to rob; and is so taken here by Hilary, Chrysostom, Theodoret (ἀποσυλᾶν τὴν πίστιν), Theophylact (τὸν νοῦν), Luther, Wolf, and many others, including Baumgarten-Crusius. But the stronger sense of the word praedam abigere (Heliod. x. 35; Nicet. Ann. 5, p. 96 D) is in keeping with the verb of the previous exhortation, περιπατεῖτε, as well as with the purposely chosen peculiar expression in itself, which is more significant than the classical συλᾶν or συλεύειν, and serves vividly to illustrate the idea of the seduction, through which one falls under extraneous power, as respects its disgracefulness.

διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας κ. κενῆς ἀπάτης] through philosophy and empty deceit. It is to be observed that neither the preposition nor the article is repeated before κενῆς (see Kühner, II. 1, pp. 476, 528; Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 86 [E. T. 100]), because with καὶ κεν. ἀπατ. there is added no further element different from τῆς φιλοσοφ. (in opposition to Hofmann), but only that which the philosophy in its essence is; it is empty deception, that is, having no real contents; the πιθανολογία (Col_2:4), with which it is presented, is a κενεαγορία (Plat. Rep. p. 607 B), and κενολογία (Plut. Mor. p. 1069 C). On the idea of κενός (1Co_15:14; Eph_5:6), comp. Dem. 821. 11.: κενώτατον πάντων λόγων λέγουσι, and on ἀπάτη, Plat. Soph. p. 260 C: ὄντος δέ γε ψεύδους ἔστιν ἀπάτη …, καὶ μὴν ἀπάτης οὔσης εἰδώλων τε καὶ εἰκόνων ἤδη καὶ φαντασίας πάντα ἀνάγκη μεστὰ εἶναι. The φιλοσοφία, however, against which Paul utters his warning, is not philosophy generally and in itself,a view at variance with the addition κ. κενῆς ἀπατ. closely pertaining to it, however much the wisdom of the world in its degeneracy (comp. Herm. gottesd. Alterth. § 12; and Culturgesch. d. Griech. u. Röm. I. p. 236 ff., II. p. 132), as experience was conversant with its phenomena in that age,[87] may have manifested itself to the apostle as foolishness when compared with the wisdom of the gospel (1Co_1:18 ff; 1Co_2:6). Rather, he has in view (comp. Col_2:18) the characteristic speculation, well known to his readers, which engaged attention in Colossae and the surrounding district,[88] and consisted of a Gnostic theosophy mixed up with Judaism (Essenism). This is, on account of its nature directed to the supersensuous and its ontological character, correctly designated by the term philosophy in general, apart from its relation to the truth, which is signalized by the κ. κενῆς ἀπάτης appended.[89] (Plat. Def. p. 414 C: τῆς τῶν ὌΝΤΕΝ ἈΕῚ ἘΠΙΣΤΉΜΗς ὌΡΕΞΙς· ἝΞΙς ΘΕΩΡΗΤΙΚῊ ΤΟῦ ἈΛΗΘΟῦς, Πῶς ἈΛΗΘΈς). Possibly it was also put forward by the false teachers themselves expressly under this designation (comp. the Sophists as the ΦΆΣΚΟΝΤΕς ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΕῖΝ, Xen. Mem. i. 2. 19; and οἰόμενοι πάντʼ εἰδέναι, in i. 4. 1). The latter is the more probable, since Paul uses the word only in this passage. Comp. Bengel: quod adversarii jactabant esse philosophiam et sapientiam (Col_2:23), id Paulus inanem fraudem esse dicit. The nature of this philosophy is consequently to be regarded as Judaistic-Oriental;[90] we are under no necessity to infer from the word φιλοσοφία a reference to Greek wisdom, as Grotius did, suggesting the Pythagorean (Clemens Alexandrinus thought of the Epicureans, and Tertullian of such philosophers as Paul had to do with at Athens). The idea that the sacrarum literarum earumque recte interpretandarum scientia (Tittmann, de vestigiis Gnosticor. in N. T. frustra quaesitis, p. 86 ff.) is meant, is opposed, not to the word in itself, but to the marks of heretical doctrine in our Epistle, and to the usage of the apostle, who never so designates the O. T. teaching and exposition, however frequently he speaks of it; although Philo gives it this name (see Loesner, Obss. p. 364), and Josephus (see Krebs, p. 236) applies it to the systems of Jewish sects, and indeed the Fathers themselves apply it to the Christian doctrine (Suicer, Thes. s.v.); see Grimm on 2Ma_1:1, p. 298 f.

κατὰ τ. παράδ. τ. ἀνθρ.] might beand this is the common viewclosely joined with ἈΠΆΤΗς (Winer, p. 128 f. [E. T. 169]). But the Οὐ ΚΑΤᾺ ΧΡΙΣΤΌΝ would not suit this connection, since ἈΠΆΤΗ is already in itself a definite and proper idea, in association with which a ΚΑΤᾺ ΧΡΙΣΤΌΝ would be inconceivable; whereas the figurative συλαγωγεῖν still admits also the negative modal statement (Οὐ ΚΑΤᾺ Χ.) for greater definiteness. Accordingly ΚΑΤᾺ Τ. ΠΑΡΆΔ. Κ.Τ.Λ. (comp. Steiger, Ellicott) is to be taken as definition of mode to ΣΥΛΑΓΩΓῶΝ. Paul, namely, having previously announced whereby the συλαγωγεῖν takes place, now adds for the still more precise description of that procedure, in order the more effectively to warn his readers against it, that in accordance with which it takes place, i.e. what is the objective regulative standard by which they permit themselves to be guided. He does this positively (κατὰ τὴν … κόσμου) and negatively (κ. οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν). The genitive ΤῶΝ ἈΝΘΡ. is to be explained: ἫΝ ΠΑΡΈΛΑΒΕ ΠΑΡᾺ ΤῶΝ ἈΝΘΡ. (comp. 2Th_3:6), and ΤῶΝ denotes the category, the traditio humana as such, opposed to the divine revelation. Comp. Mar_7:8. What is meant, doubtless, is the ritual Jewish tradition outside of the Mosaic law (comp. on Mat_15:2), the latter being excluded by τῶν ἀνθρ.; but Paul designates the thing quite generally, according to the genus to which it belongs, as human.

κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου] Parallel of the foregoing: according to the elements of the world, i.e. according to the religious rudiments, with which non-Christian humanity occupies itself. The expression in itself embraces the ritual observances[91] both of Judaism and heathenism, which, in comparison with the perfect religion of Christianity, are only puerilia rudimenta (Calvin), as it were the A B C of religion, so that Paul therefore in this case also, where he warns his readers against Judaistic enticing, characterizes the matter according to its category. As to the designation itself and its various interpretations, see on Gal_4:3. Among the latest expositors, Bleek agrees with our view, while Hofmann explains: because it (the philosophy which is described as deceit) permits the material things, of which the created world consists, to form its standard. See in opposition to this on Gal. l.c. Both expressions, τὴν παράδ. τ. ἀνθρ. and ΤᾺ ΣΤΟΙΧ. Τ. ΚΌΣΜΟΥ, have it as their aim to render apparent the worthlessness and unsuitableness for the Christian standpoint (comp. Gal_4:9). Hence, also, the contrast which, though obvious of itself, is nevertheless emphatic: ΚΑῚ Οὐ ΚΑΤᾺ ΧΡΙΣΤΌΝ. The activity of that ΣΥΛΑΓΩΓΕῖΝ has not Christ for its objective standard; He, in accordance with His divine dignity exalted above everything (see Col_2:9), was to be the sole regulative for all activity in Christian teaching, so that the standard guiding their work should be found in the relation of dependence upon Him; but instead of this the procedure of the συλαγωγῶν allows human tradition, and those non-Christian rudiments which the Christian is supposed to have long since left behind, to serve as his rule of conduct! How unworthy it is, therefore, to follow such seduction!

[87] Comp. Luthers frequent denunciations of philosophy, under which he had present to his mind its degeneracy in the Aristotelian scholasticism.

[88] Comp. also Calovius. The latter rightly remarks how ἀφιλοσόφως and ἀθεολόγως men would proceed, who should regard philosophical and theological truth as opposites; and points out that if Greek philosophy do not teach the doctrine of eternal life and its attainment, it is not a κενὴ ἀπάτη, but an imperfectio. Fathers of the Church also, as e.g. Clemens Al. (comp. Spiess, Logos spermat. p. 341), aptly distinguish philosophy itself from the phenomena of its abuse. The latter are philosophy also, but not in accordance with the truth of the conception.

[89] These words κ. κεν. ἀπ., characterizing the philosophy meant, are therefore all the less to be regarded, with Holtzmann, as a tautological insertion; and it is mere arbitrariness to claim the words κατὰ τ. παράδ. τῶν ἀνθρώπ. for the Synoptical Gospels (Mat_15:2 f.); as if παράδοσις (comp. especially Gal_1:14) were not sufficiently current in the apostles writings.

[90] The speculations of Essenism are also designated as philosophy in Philo. Comp. Keim, Gesch. Jesu, I. p. 292.

[91] Calvin well says: Quid, vocat elementa mundi? Non dubium quin ceremonias; nam continuo post exempli loco speciem unam adducit, circumcisionem scilicet.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Col 2:8 . Paul once more (previously in Col 2:4 ) begins to attack the false teachers, but turns aside in Col 2:9 from the direct attack to lay the basis for the decisive attack in Col 2:16-23 . τις . It is not clear that we can infer from the singular that only one false teacher had appeared in the Colossian Church. ὑμᾶς is placed in an emphatic position, and its force is “you whose Christian course has been so fair, and who have received such exhortations to remain steadfast”. ἔσται : the future indicative after μή implies a more serious estimate of the danger than the subjunctive. For the construction, τις followed by a participle with the article, cf. Gal 1:7 , Luk 18:9 . συλαγωγῶν . The sense is disputed. Several of the Fathers and some modern writers think it means “to rob”. It is used in this sense with οἶκον (Aristaen., 2, 22), and Field ( Notes on the Translation of the N.T. , p. 195) says “there can be no better rendering than ‘lest any man rob you’ ”. But, as Soden points out, that of which they were robbed should have been expressed. It is better to take it with most commentators in the more obvious sense “lead you away as prey”. The verb is so used in Heliod., Æth., x., 35 (with θυγατέρα ), Nicet., Hist., 5, 96 (with παρθένον ), and it may be chosen with the special sense of seduction in mind. διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης . The second noun is explanatory of the first, as is shown by the absence of the article and preposition before it and the lack of any indication that Paul had two evils to attack. The meaning is “his philosophy, which is vain deceit”. The word has, of course, no reference to Greek philosophy, and probably none to the allegorical method of Scripture exegesis that the false teachers may have employed. Philo uses it of the law of Judaism, and Josephus of the three Jewish sects. Here, no doubt, it means just the false teaching that threatened to undermine the faith of the Church. There is no condemnation of philosophy in itself, but simply of the empty, but plausible, sham that went by that name at Colossæ. Hort thinks that the sense is akin to the later usage of the word to denote the ascetic life. κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων : “according to human tradition” as opposed to Divine revelation. Meyer, Ellicott and Findlay connect with συλαγ . It is more usual to connect with ἀπ . or τ . φιλ . κ . κεν . ἀπ . The last is perhaps best. It indicates the source from which their teaching was drawn. κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου . [On this phrase the following authorities may be referred to: Hilgenfeld, Galaterbrief , pp. 66 sq. ; Lipsius, Paul. Rechtf. , p. 83; Ritschl, Rechtf. u. Vers, 3 ii., 252; Klöpper, ad loc. ; Spitta, 2 Pet. u. Jud. , 263 sq. ; Everling, Paul. Angel. u. Däm. , pp. 65 sq. ; Haupt, ad loc. ; Abbott, ad loc. The best and fullest account in English is Massie’s article “Elements” in Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible . To these may now be added St. John Thackeray, The Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Jewish Thought , pp. 163 170, and Deissmann’s article “Elements” in the Encyclopædia Biblica .] Originally στ . meant the letters of the alphabet, then in Plato and later writers the physical elements, and lastly (but only from the first century A.D.) the rudiments of knowledge. It has been frequently taken in this sense as the A B C of religious knowledge (so recently Mey., Lightf., Ol., Cremer and many others). This explanation had, however, been attacked by Neander with powerful arguments in his discussion of the parallel passage Gal 4:3 . ( Planting and Training , i., 465, 466, cf. 323 [Bohn’s ed.].) He pointed out that if στ . meant first principles we should have had a genitive of the object, as in Heb 5:12 , στ . τ . ἀρχῆς τ . λογίων . Such an omission of the leading idea is inadmissible. Further, Paul regarded the heathen as enslaved under στ . τ . κός . and their falling away to Jewish rites as a return to this slavery. Therefore the expression must apply to something both had in common, and something condemned by Paul, which cannot be the first principles of religion (to which also ἀσθενῆ would be inappropriate), but the ceremonial observances, which were so called as earthly and material. It has been further pointed out by Klöpper that following κατὰ τ . παρ . τ . ἀνθρ . this term introduced by κατὰ and not connected by καὶ must express the content of the teaching, which is not very suitable if “religious rudiments” is the meaning. Nor is it true that the false teachers gave elementary instruction. If this view be set aside, as suiting neither the expression in itself nor the context in which it occurs, the question arises whether we should return to the interpretation of several Fathers, that the heavenly bodies are referred to. These were called στοιχεῖα (examples are given in Valesius on Eus. H. E. , v., 24, Hilg. l.c. ). This is favoured by the reference to “days, and months, and seasons, and years” in Gal 4:11 , immediately following the mention of στ . in Col 2:10 , for these were regulated by the heavenly bodies. But it is unsatisfactory, for the context in which the expression occurs, especially in Galatians, points to personal beings. In this passage the contrast of στ . τ . κ . with Χριστόν is fully satisfied only if the former are personal. In Gal 4:3 Paul applies the illustration of the heir under “guardians and stewards” to the pre-Christian world under the στ . τ . κ ., and here again a personal reference is forcibly suggested. Still more is this the case with Gal 4:8-9 . In Col 2:8 Paul says ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖς . In the next verse he asks “how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly στ ., to which you wish to be in bondage ( δουλεῦσαι ) over again?” This clearly identifies τ . στ . with τ . φύς . μὴ οὖσι θεοῖς , and therefore proves their personality, which is suggested also by ἐδουλ .; accordingly they cannot be the heavenly bodies or the physical elements of the world. Hilgenfeld, followed by Lipsius, Holsten and Klöpper, regards them as the astral spirits, the angels of the heavenly bodies. That the latter were regarded as animated by angels is certain, for we find this belief in Philo and Enoch ( cf. Job 38:7 , Jas 1:17 ). But it is strange that the spirits of the stars should be called στ . τ . κόσμου . And while they determine the seasons and festivals, they have nothing to do with many ceremonial observances, such as abstinence from meats and drinks. Spitta (followed by Everling, Sod., Haupt, and apparently Abb.) has the merit of giving the true interpretation. According to the later Jewish theology, not only the stars but all things had their special angels. The proof of this belongs to a discussion of angelology, and must be assumed here. στ . τ . κός . are therefore the elemental spirits which animate all material things. They are so called from the elements which they animate, and are identical with the ἀρχαὶ κ . ἐξουσίαι , who receive this name from their sphere of authority. Thus all the abstinence from material things, submission to material ordinances and so forth, involve a return to their service. We need not, with Ritschl, limit the reference to the angels of the law, though they are included. Thus interpreted the passage gains its full relevance to the context, and to the angel worship of the false teachers which Paul is attacking. The chief objection to this explanation is that we have no parallel for this usage of the word, except in the Test. Sol. , ἡμεῖς ἐσμὲν τὰ λεγόμενα στοιχεῖα , οἱ κοσμοκράτορες τοῦ κόσμου τούτου . But this is late. The term is used in this sense in modern Greek. In spite of this the exegetical proof that personal beings are meant is too strong to be set aside. So we must explain, “philosophy having for its subject-matter the elemental spirits”. καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν must be taken similarly, not having Christ for its subject-matter. Χ . means the person of Christ, not teaching about Christ, and is opposed simply to στ ., not to παρ . τ . ἀνθρ . The false teachers put these angels in the place of Christ.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8–15. You have in Christ far more than what the false teachers promise you and demand of you, for He is superior to all spiritual powers

(Col 2:8) Be watchful not to be led astray. Many a false teacher is trying to carry you off as booty for himself by means of that philosophy of his of which you know, which is empty both intellectually and morally, which takes for its standard of conduct human tradition and worldly learning (which is really mere A, B, C), not the standard of the personal Christ. (Col 2:9) (It is a mistake to follow any such teaching) because in Christ, and in Him alone, dwells now and for ever nothing less than the sum of all the attributes of Deity, in Him incarnate, (Col 2:10) and also because you have already received all possible fulness in Him, and can get no more elsewhere than from Him, who is supreme in power over, and the one source of life to, every Power and Authority however high. (Col 2:11) Do they urge you to be circumcised? You received once for all the highest circumcision in Christ, a circumcision made without the touch of human hands, when you stripped off your body with its evil tendencies, when you received the circumcision that Christ gives; (Col 2:12) For you were buried with Christ in your baptism, in which, remember, you were also raised with Him, (not, of course, by baptism as a mere mechanical means, but) by your faith in the working of God to bring about such resurrection-life in you as He brought about in Christ’s resurrection. (Col 2:13) He raised Christ from the dead—did He not? So also did He raise you—you who were long dead, slain by your transgressions and the uncircumcised, unconsecrated, state of your bodies—but He made you alive together with Christ, at the same time forgiving (you, nay, I must say) us all our transgressions; (Col 2:14) blotting out the bond of the Law signed by our conscience, with its requirements of innumerable ritual laws and customs, which was in itself our enemy—and Christ hath taken it from its position separating us and God, nailing it up in triumph, as cancelled, to His cross; (Col 2:15) stripping Himself of all the spiritual powers who had before helped Him, and thus unreservedly showed them up in their real weakness, treating them as mere captives drawn in His train, and this on the scene of His own weakness, on His very cross.

8. βλέπετε μή … ἔσται. A classical author would have written ὁρᾶτε μή, and so St Paul in 1Th 5:15; cf. Mat 8:4 (|| Mar 1:44), Mat 9:30, Mat 18:10, [Mat 24:6]; Rev 19:10; Rev 22:9†.

The abruptness gives force; cf. Heb 12:25, also Col 2:20. For the future indicative cf. Heb 3:12, Mar 14:2. It regards the contingency as of greater certainty than the subjunctive, Mat 24:4. See further Moulton, Gram. Proleg. 1906, pp. 178, 193, who translates ‘take heed! perhaps there will be someone who.…’

μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν, “lest there be any who.” The strange juxtaposition of τίς and ὑμᾶς is for emphasis on both words.

συλαγωγῶν. Here only in the Greek Bible, and once or twice independently in very late Greek, besides in writings influenced by this passage. Its proper meaning seems to be “carry (you) off as booty,” and this suits the context well (cf. Tatian, ad Graec. 22, ὑμεῖς δὲ ὑπὸ τούτων συλαγωγεῖσθε) as in the classical synonym λαφυραγωγεῖν; cf. also δουλαγωγεῖν (1Co 9:27), σκευαγωγεῖν. So in Heliod. Aeth. X. 35, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὴν ἐμὴν θυγατέρα συλαγωγήσας (Lidd. and Scott); cf. συλάω in LXX., Ep. Jeremiah 17 (18), ὅπως ὑπὸ τῶν λῃστῶν μὴ συληθῶσι.

A secondary meaning is to despoil a house (cf. συλάω in 2Co 11:8). And so Field (Otium Norv. III.) here, translating “rob you” (of your treasures); cf. Chrysostom in Field.

St Paul warns the Colossians against becoming the booty of an enemy of Christ. For the figure cf. ἀπαρθῇ in Mat 9:15, also αἰχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια, 2Ti 3:6.

διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας, “through his philosophy.” The article is probably possessive, or perhaps (see Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 119) it has “the normal individualising force of the article ‘that philosophy,’ which we may fill up either as ‘that philosophy of his’ or ‘that philosophy which you know of,’ or best as both together ‘that philosophy of his which you know of’.”

φιλοσοφία here only in the N.T. and only in 4 Mac. (four times) of the LXX. φιλόσοφος is used in the Greek Bible of (1) the professional Epicureans and Stoics (Act 17:18), and (2) the Babylonian enchanters (ashshaphim, Dan 1:20, LXX.), also in 4 Mac. (three times); φιλοσοφεῖν only in 4 Mac. (five times). Thus the words obtained no real footing in Biblical Greek, and in every case (save in 4 Mac.) have some connotation of contempt.

Here the context shows that it would be a grievous mistake to imagine St Paul to be thinking of Greek philosophy strictly so called. Just as Philo could legitimately use the term of the Mosaic Law, ἡ πάτριος φιλοσοφία, de Somn. II. 18 § 127, Wendland, I. 675 (cf. οἱ κατὰ Μωϋσῆν φιλοσοφοῦντες, de Mut. Nom. 39, § 223, Wendland, I. p. 612), and Josephus with less right of the three Jewish sects, Ἰουδαίοις φιλοσοφίαι τρεῖς ἦσαν ἐκ τοῦ πάνυ ἀρχαίου τῶν πατρίων, ἤ τε τῶν Ἐσσηνῶν καὶ ἡ τῶν Σαδδουκαίων, τρίτην δὲ ἐφιλοσόφουν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι λεγόμενοι, Antt. XVIII. i. 2, so doubtless every thinker and pseudo-thinker claimed the word for his own system. Perhaps even “system” suggests too much, for this φιλοσοφία may well have been not theosophic speculation at all but only ethical considerations (cf. Hort, op. cit. pp. 120 sq.).

καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. The absence of the article shows that the term is closely connected with the man’s φιλοσοφία; the two are to all intents and purposes inseparable.

κενῆς, i.e. lacking anything solid however specious it may be. Cf.

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON CHAPTER Col 2:8

κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου.

I. The word στοιχεῖον has a remarkable history, as may be seen from the following summary of its meanings, with the addition of the earliest undisputed authority in each case. Starting from the root idea of στοῖχος, a row, it means besides the line, i.e. shadow, of a sundial (Aristoph.):

(a) A letter of the alphabet (τὸ ῥῶ τὸ στοιχεῖον, Plato), the alphabet, τὰ στοιχεῖα.

(b) The A, B, C, i.e. the rudiments, or elements of a science.

(c) The material elements of the universe (Plato; cf. Wis 7:17; Wis 19:18; 4Ma 12:13).

(d) The stars and heavenly bodies; the signs of the Zodiac, Diog. Laert. 6. 102, τὰ δώδεκα στοιχεῖα.

(e) The spiritual powers at the back of these elements, e.g. in the great Paris magic-papyrus the moon-goddess is στοιχεῖον ἄφθαρτον, and in the Κόρη κόσμου of “Hermes Trismegistus” the στοιχεῖα come as gods before the supreme God and make their complaint of the arrogance of men.

(f) In particular the demons or genii in nature. The Test. of Solomon (see Introd. p. xxvii.) speaks of “the 36 στοιχεῖα, the world-rulers (κοσμοκράτορες) of this darkness” (cf. Eph 6:12) who address Solomon (§ 72).

(g) Tutelary spirits (Byzantine writers). This usage is frequent in modern Greece, where στοιχειό is used of the local spirit of the threshing-floor, the rock, etc. Observe also that στοιχειόω and στοιχείωσις are used of magic at least as early as the Byzantine writers.

II. In the N.T. (b) is undoubtedly the meaning in Heb 5:12, for στοιχεῖα is defined by the following genitives; and (c) is almost necessary for 2Pe 3:10; 2Pe 3:12; but much discussion has arisen over the other passages, Gal 4:3; Gal 4:9 and our Col 2:8; Col 2:20.

(1) It is urged[101] that St Paul, either in his own person or by way of adopting the terminology of his opponents, uses it in the sense of (f) or at least (e); that he is contrasting these genii or spiritual powers with Christ; that in Colossians (with which alone we are concerned) he says that the false teachers teach in accordance with these inferior powers (cf. also Col 2:15) and not in accordance with Christ. If this be right he is also perhaps contrasting the magical use of elements with the true Mystery (Col 1:26 sq.).

[101] P. Ewald (in loco) adduces this as a striking example of the way in which Fashion leads even clear-sighted commentators astray.

The date, however, of the Test. of Solomon is most uncertain, and failing that we have no clear evidence that στοιχεῖον possessed this meaning at all as early as 1st cent. A.D.

(2) The Fathers generally explain the passages in the sense of (d), thinking either of Gentile adoration of the stars, etc., cf. Augustine, dicunt omnia sidera partes Jovis esse et omnia vivere atque rationales animas habere, De Civ. IV. 11, or of the Jewish observance of new moons, feasts, and Sabbaths regulated by the moon, etc. So Chrysostom.

But to both (1) and (2) there is the serious objection referred to in the notes.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The second which is manifestly superstitious and vain, and standeth only upon custom and fained inspirations.

Principles and rulers, wherewith God ruled his Church, as it were under a schoolmaster.

A general confutation of all corruptions is this, that that must needs be a false religion, which addeth anything to Christ.

He bringeth all corruptions to three kinds: The first is that, which resteth of vain and curious speculations, and yet beareth a show of a certain subtle wisdom.

This is a word of war, and it is as much as to drive or carry away a spoil or booty.

The third kind was of them which joined the rudiments of the world, (that is to say, the ceremonies of the Law) with the Gospel.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

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

after--"according to."

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

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

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

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 8. Beware lest any man spoil you] The word συλαγωγων, from συλη, prey, and αγειν, to lead or carry away, signifies to rob, or spoil of their goods, as if by violence or rapine. Their goods were the salvation they had received from Christ; and both the Gentile and Jewish teachers endeavoured to deprive them of these, by perverting their minds, and leading them off from the truths of Christianity.

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

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

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

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

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

Through philosophy. As many have mistakingly imagined that philosophy is here condemned by Paul, we must point out what he means by this term. Now, in my opinion, he means everything that men contrive of themselves when wishing to be wise through means of their own understanding, and that not without a specious pretext of reason, so as to have a plausible appearance. For there is no difficulty in rejecting those contrivances of men which have nothing to set them off, but in rejecting those that captivate men’s minds by a false conceit of wisdom. Or should any one prefer to have it expressed in one word, philosophy is nothing else than a persuasive speech, which insinuates itself into the minds of men by elegant and plausible arguments. Of such a nature, I acknowledge, will all the subtleties of philosophers be, if they are inclined to add anything of their own to the pure word of God. Hence philosophy will be nothing else than a corruption of spiritual doctrine, if it is mixed up with Christ. Let us, however, bear in mind, that under the term philosophy Paul has merely condemned all spurious doctrines which come forth from man’s head, whatever appearance of reason they may have. What immediately follows, as to vain deceit, I explain thus; “Beware of philosophy, which is nothing else than vain deceit,” so that this is added by way of apposition.

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

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

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(8) Spoil you.—Properly, lead you away as a spoil, triumph over you as a captive, and make you a slave. Comp. St. Paul’s language as to the older Judaism at Corinth (2Co_11:20), “Ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face.”

Philosophy and vain deceit—i.e. (like “the knowledge falsely so called” of 1Ti_6:20), a philosophy which is inseparably connected with vain deceit. The warning implied here seems to be two-fold:—(1) First, against considering Christianity primarily as a “philosophy,” i.e., a search for and knowledge of speculative truth, even the highest. That it involves philosophy is obvious, for it claims to solve for us the great problem of Being, in Nature, in Man, and in God. St. Paul, while he depreciates the wisdom of this world, dwells emphatically on the gospel as the “wisdom of God.” (See especially 1Co_2:6-16.) In this Epistle in particular he speaks of “wisdom” again and again (Col_1:9; Col_1:28; Col_2:3; Col_3:16; Col_4:6) as one great characteristic of Christian life. Nor is it less clear (as the ancient Greek commentators here earnestly remind us) that Christianity finds a place and a blessing for all true philosophy of men, and makes it, as St. Paul made it at Athens, an introduction to the higher wisdom. But Christianity is not a philosophy, but a life—not a knowledge of abstract principles, but a personal knowledge of faith and love of God in Christ. (2) Next, against accepting in philosophy the “vain deceit” of mere speculation and imagination instead of the modest, laborious investigation of facts. This is the “knowledge falsely so called”; of this it may be said (as in 1Co_8:1) that it “puffs up,” and does not “build up.” In ancient and modern times it has always confused brilliant theory with solid discovery, delighting especially to dissolve the great facts of the gospel into abstractions, which may float in its cloudland of imagination.

After the tradition of men.—This is the keynote of our Lord’s condemnation of the old Pharisaic exclusiveness and formalism (Mat_15:2-3; Mat_15:6; Mar_7:8-9); it is equally the condemnation of the later Jewish, or half-Jewish, mysticism which St. Paul attacks here. It is hardly necessary to remark that the Apostle often claims reverence for “traditions” (1Co_11:2; 2Th_2:15; 2Th_3:6; see also 1Co_15:3; 2Pe_2:21), but they are traditions having their starting point in direct revelation of God (Gal_1:12), and, moreover, traditions freely given to all, as being His. The “traditions of men” here condemned had their origin in human speculation, and were secretly transmitted to the initiated only.

The rudiments of the world.—See Gal_4:2, and Note there. This marks the chief point of contact with the earlier Judaism, in the stress still laid, perhaps with less consistency, on matters of ritual, law, ascetic observance, and the like. These are “of the world,” i.e., belonging to the visible sphere; and they are “rudiments,” fit only for the elementary education of those who are as children, and intended simply as preparation for a higher teaching.

(8-15) The general exhortation of the previous verses is now emphasised by a solemn warning against deadly speculative error. Now, (1) the character of that error in itself is described with apparently intentional vagueness, as “a philosophy of vain deceit,” “after tradition of men,” after “the rudiments of this world.” Even its Judaic origin, which is made clear below (Col_2:16-17), is here only hinted at in the significant allusion to Circumcision, and perhaps in the phrase “the rudiments of the world,” which is also used of the Judaism of Galatia (Gal_4:3; Gal_4:9). (2) What is brought out vividly and emphatically is the truth which it contradicts or obscures. First, the full indwelling Godhead of Christ and His headship over all created being; and next, as derived from this, our own “spiritual circumcision in Him, i.e., the true “death unto sin and new life unto righteousness” in Him who is the One Atonement for all sin, and the One Conqueror of all the powers of evil. On the relation of the Epistle to Gnosticism see Excursus A.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8–15. Warning against alien teachings: Christ is all for peace and life

8. Beware &c.] Quite lit., “See lest any one shall be your spoiler”; the positive and imminent risk being indicated by the future tense (“shall be”), quite anomalous in such constructions.

any man] “This indefinite [expression] is frequently used by St Paul, when speaking of opponents whom he knows well enough but does not care to name” (Lightfoot). Cp. Rom_3:8; 1Co_11:16; 1Co_14:37; 1Co_15:12; 2Co_3:1; 2Co_10:2; 2Co_10:12; 2Co_11:20-21; Gal_1:7; Gal_1:9; above, Col_2:4, below Col_2:16; 2Th_2:3; 2Th_3:10-11; 1Ti_1:3; 1Ti_1:6; 1Ti_6:3; 1Ti_6:21.

spoil you] Better, with R.V., maketh spoil of you. The Greek word is not known in earlier Greek literature, but its form leaves no doubt of its meaning.—The false teachers would not merely “despoil” the Colossians of certain spiritual convictions and blessings, but would lead them away captives, as their deluded adherents and devotees. Lightfoot compares 2Ti_3:6.

through philosophy … deceit] We may fairly represent the Greek, sacrificing precise literality, thus: through his empty deceit of a philosophy. No doubt the false teachers posed as great intellectualists, and took care to present their “gospel” as something congruous in kind with existing speculations, Greek or Eastern, about knowing and being. They would say little or nothing like “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise … and that repentance and remission … should be preached in His name” (Luk_24:46-47); but rather “Thus the finite stands related to the Infinite; thus spirit is eternally differenced from matter, and thus it secures its emancipation from its material chain.”

Lightfoot in an interesting note traces the word “Philosophy” from its alleged origin in the modesty of Pythagoras (cent. 6 b.c.), who declined the title of “wise” (sophos), preferring that of “wisdom-lover” (philosophos), to its later association with “subtle dialectics and profitless speculation,” as in St Paul’s age. And he remarks on two different views about pagan Philosophy represented among the Fathers; that of e.g. Clement of Alexandria (cent. 2–3), who regarded it as “not only a preliminary training … for the Gospel, but even as in some sense a covenant … given by God to the Greeks”; and that of e.g. Tertullian (at the same date) who saw a positive antithesis between “the philosopher” and “the Christian.” Lightfoot remarks that St Paul’s speech at Athens “shows that his sympathies would have been at least as strong” with Clement as with Tertullian. Can we go quite so far? Surely the main drift of his teaching emphasizes the tendency of independent speculation—not to discover facts destructive of the Gospel; no such timid misgivings beset him; but—to foster mental habits hostile to a submissive welcome to the Gospel. Cp. esp. 1Co_1:17 to 1Co_3:23.

“Folly indeed it is,” says Quesnel, “to seek to establish a science wholly Divine on foundations wholly human. And this is what they do who seek to judge of the things of faith by the principles of philosophy.”

tradition] Paradosis. Cp. 1Co_11:2; 2Th_2:15; 2Th_3:6; for this word used in a good sense, that of apostolic teaching and precept. Strictly, it means what is “handed on,” and so may mean, by connexion, either (as here) an esoteric “deposit,” passed down as it were along the line of the initiated, or simply “teaching,” the conveyance of opinion or knowledge in any way from one mind to another.—It is remarkable that in this latter sense, very commonly, the word “tradition” is used by the Fathers to mean simply Scripture; “evangelic” or “apostolic tradition” denoting respectively the teaching of the Gospels and the Epistles.—Here, however, obviously the word inclines to its worse reference; the more or less esoteric teaching about things unseen, “handed on” in the heretical circles, not published in the daylight.

of men] Whereas the Apostle’s mission and Gospel was “not of men, neither by man” (Gal_1:1) nor “according to man” (ibid., 11). He “neither received it of man, nor was taught it, but by revelation from Jesus Christ” (ibid., 12). Nothing is more emphatic in St Paul than this assertion of the strictly and directly superhuman, Divine, origin of the Gospel as a message.

rudiments] Cp. Gal_4:3.—The Greek word means a first beginning, or principle (see Liddell and Scott’s Greek Lexicon, under στοιχεῖον), for instance, as a simple vocal sound (that e.g. of the letter r) is a first element in speech. Hence it comes to mean “an element” in knowledge, or instruction; and hence, elementary instruction. The same word also denoted the heavenly bodies, regarded as the first grounds of measurement of time; and many ancient expositors saw this meaning here, as if the Apostle had in view the observance of “days, and months, and seasons, and years” (Gal_4:10). But Lightfoot points out that (a) the reference here is to some mode of teaching, (b) the observance of “times” was too subordinate a factor in the errors in question to be thus named as a part for the whole. See his note here and also on Gal_4:3.—The Apostle has in view the pre-Christian ordinances of e.g. sacrifice and circumcision, regarded as temporary, introductory to the Gospel, and now therefore to be laid aside. In their place, they were Divine; out of their place, they are “of the world.”

On the word στοιχεῖον see further Grimm’s N.T. Lexicon, ed. Thayer.

of the world] Belonging to an order not spiritual but only mechanical, material. See the last words of the previous note. For such a reference of the word cosmos cp. 1Co_1:20.

not after Christ] “Christ is neither the author nor the substance of [this] teaching” (Lightfoot). The holy and necessary exclusiveness of the Gospel cannot admit such “traditions” and “elements” even as subordinate allies. They must absolutely give way before it.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Beware lest any man spoil you,.... Or despoil you; rob you of the rich treasure of the Gospel, strip you of your spiritual armour, take away from you the truths and doctrines of Christ, and divest you of your spiritual privileges and blessings; suggesting, that the false teachers were thieves and robbers, and men of prey: or drive and carry you away as spoils, as the innocent harmless sheep are drove, and carried away by wolves, and by the thief that comes to steal, to kill, and destroy; intimating, that such as these were the heretics of those times; wherefore it became them to be upon their guard, to watch, look out, and beware, lest they should be surprised by these deceitful workers, who lay in wait to deceive; were wolves in sheep's clothing, who transformed themselves into the apostles of Christ; and therefore it became them to take heed, lest any man hurt them, be he ever so wise and learned, or be thought ever so good, religious, and sincere; since men of this cast put on such masks and false appearances, on purpose to beguile. The things by which they imposed upon weak minds are as follow, and therefore to be shunned, avoided, and rejected:

through philosophy: not right philosophy, or true wisdom, the knowledge of God, of the things of nature, of things natural, moral, and civil; which may be attained unto by the use of reason, and light of nature. The apostle does not mean to condemn all arts and sciences, as useless and hurtful, such as natural philosophy in its various branches, ethics, logic, rhetoric, &c. when kept within due bounds, and in their proper place and sphere; for with instances of these the Scriptures themselves abound; but he means that philosophy, or science, which is falsely so called, the false notions of philosophers; such as the eternity of matter, and of this world, the mortality of souls, the worshipping of demons and angels, &c. and also such principles in philosophy, which in themselves, and in the things of nature, are true, but, when applied to divine things, to things above nature, the mere effects of divine power and grace, and of pure revelation, are false; as that out of nothing, nothing can be made, which in the things of nature is true, but not to be applied to the God of nature, who has made the world out of nothing; as also that from a privation to an habit there is no return, which is naturally true, but not to be applied to supernatural things, and supernatural agency; witness the miracles of Christ, in restoring sight to the blind, life to the dead, &c. and therefore is not to be employed against the resurrection of the dead: philosophy may be useful as an handmaid; it is not to be a mistress in theological things; it may subserve, but not govern; it is not to be made use of as a judge, or rule in such matters; the natural man, on these principles, neither knows nor receives the things of the Spirit of God; judgment is not to be made and formed according to them; as of a trinity of persons in the Godhead; of the sonship of Christ, and his incarnation; of man's redemption by him, of reconciliation and satisfaction by his blood and sacrifice, of the pardon of sin, of a sinner's justification, of the resurrection of the dead, and such like articles of faith: that philosophy which is right, can only be a rule of judgment in things relating to it, and not in those which are out of its sphere: in a word, the apostle here condemns the philosophy of the Jews, and of the Gnostics; the former had introduced natural philosophy into the worship and service of God, and the things appertaining to their religion; and had made the tabernacle and temple, and the most holy place, and the things belonging thereunto, emblems and hieroglyphics of natural things; as of the sun, moon, and stars, and their influences, and of the four elements, and of moral virtue, &c. as appears from the writings of Josephus (r), and Philo (s); when they were types and representatives of spiritual things under the Gospel dispensation; and the latter had brought in the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, concerning abstinences, purgations, sacrifices, and ceremonies of worship, given to demons and angels: in short, the apostle's meaning is, that philosophy is not to be mixed with the pure Gospel of Christ; it has always been fatal to it; witness the school of Pantaenus in Alexandria, in the early times of Christianity, by which the simplicity of the Gospel was greatly corrupted; and the race of schoolmen a few centuries ago, who introduced the philosophy of Aristotle, Averrois, and others, into all the subjects of divinity: to observe no more, such kind of philosophy is here meant, which may be truly called

vain deceit: that is, that which is vain and empty, and has no solid foundation, even in nature and reason itself; and which being applied to divine things and religious observances, is deceitful and delusory:

after the tradition of men; either of the Gentiles, who had their traditions in religion; or of the Jews, called the traditions of the elders, and of the fathers, which the Pharisees were fond of, by which they transgressed the commandments of God; which the apostle was brought up in, and was zealous of formerly, but now was delivered from, and rightly condemned as idle, trifling, and pernicious:

after the rudiments of the world, or "the elements of the world"; not the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water; or the worship of the sun, moon, and stars, &c. among the idolatrous Gentiles, but the ceremonial laws of the Jews; see Gal 4:8; which were that to them in religion, as the A B C, or letters, are in grammar, the elements and rudiments of it; and though these were to them, when children, useful, but now under the Gospel dispensation are weak, beggarly, and useless, and not to be attended to:

and not after Christ; what he has taught and prescribed, the doctrines and commandments of Christ, the treasures of wisdom and knowledge which are in him; and therefore all such vain and deceitful philosophy, human traditions, and worldly rudiments, are to be rejected; Christ and his Gospel, the revelation he has made, are the standard of doctrine and worship; he only is to be heard and attended to, and whatever it contrary thereunto is to be guarded against,

(r) Antiqu. l. 3. c. 6. sect. 4. 7. (s) De Congressu quaerend. Erud. p. 440. 441. de Vita Mosis, l. 3. p. 665, &c. quod deterius pot. p. 184.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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

Ver. 8. Lest any man spoil you] A metaphor either from sheep stealers or plunderers, συλαγωγων. Seducers plunder men of their precious souls. They take them prisoners, 2Ti 3:6. They make merchandise of them, 2Pe 2:3; or bring them into bondage, smiting them on the face, 2Co 11:20. Constantius the emperor suspecting Julian’s proneness to paganism, sent him to be carefully grounded in Christianity to Nicomedia; but he frequented by stealth the company of Libanus and Jamblichus the philosophers, who warped him fully to their bent; which brake out afterwards.

Through philosophy] In the year of Christ 220, the Artemonites, a certain kind of heretics, corrupted Scripture out of Aristotle and Theophrastus, turning all into questions, as afterwards the schoolmen also did, that evil generation of dunghill divines, as one calleth them. Tertullian not unfitly saith, that the philosophers were the patriarchs of the heretics. Not but that there is an excellent and necessary use of philosophy, truly so called; but the apostle meaneth it of their idle speculations and vain deceits, those airy nothings, as the apostle expounds himself. {See Trapp on "Rom 1:21"} {See Trapp on "Rom 1:22"}

And not after Christ] The Gentiles then could not be saved by their philosophy without Christ. And yet not only the divines of Cullen set forth a book concerning the salvation of Aristotle, whom they called Christ’s forerunner in naturals, as John Baptist was in supernaturals; but also some of the school doctors, grave men (saith Acosta), do promise men salvation without the knowledge of Christ. (Agrippa, Balaeus.)

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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

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

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

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

After the rudiments of the world - Margin, elements. See this explained in the Notes at Gal 4:3.

And not after Christ - Not such as Christ taught.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Let any man impose upon you.[2] In the Greek, make a prey of you, as thieves that steal things. --- There were two sorts of false teachers among them; they who mixed vain errors from heathen philosophy with the principles of the Christian religion, and they who had been Jews, and were for making them retain those rites and customs which the Jews had among them, and were only from their private human traditions. (Witham) This alludes to the traditions and observances which the Pharisees had added to the law of Moses, and which Christ had blamed; but which these false apostles wished to introduce amongst the Colossians. The ceremonial laws were the elementary instructions given by God to the world, but we are to attach ourselves to the doctrines of Jesus Christ, from whom alone we expect light and justice, and sanctity. (Bible de Vence) --- According to the rudiments of the world: by which some expound vain fallacies and false maxims of the first kind of teachers; others the Jewish ceremonies, which are called weak and poor elements, or rudiments. (Galatians iv. 9.) This is neither to condemn in general the use of philosophy, which St. Augustine commends, and made use of, nor all traditions delivered by the apostles. See 1 Corinthians xi. and 2. Thessalonians ii. 14. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Decipiat, Greek: sulagogon, prædam furtive abducens. See St. John Chrysostom, Greek: log. st. p. 118.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Beware: the apostle, after his exhortation, considering their danger from seducing spirits lying in wait to deceive by their sleight and craftiness, 1Ti 4:1,2, doth here reinforce and enlarge his caution he had before suggested, Col 2:4, to engage to a heedful avoidance of all seduction from Christ.

Lest any man spoil you; lest their souls should be made a prey, and they be carried for a spoil by those worst of robbers that beset Christ’s fold, 2Co 11:20; Gal 6:13.

Through philosophy; either through the abuse of true philosophy in bringing the mystery of Christ under the tribunal of shallow reason, or rather through erroneous, though curious, speculations of some philosophers, as Plato, Pythagoras, Hesiod, &c. then in vogue, which the Gnostics afterwards (who, thinking themselves enriched with the notions of other heretics, would be thought the only knowing persons) dressed up Christ with, not like himself. Their philosophy being a falsely so called science or knowledge, 1Ti 6:20, whatever show of wisdom it might seem to carry along with it, Col 2:23, it was not really profitable; but a

vain deceit, or seduction, as several take the next clause appositively, and the conjunction expositively; yet, if we consider what follows, we may understand another general imposture, viz. superstition, seeing vain deceit, after the tradition of men, is so like that superstition our Saviour doth rebuke in the Pharisees, Mat 15:9, several branches of which the apostle doth afterward in this chapter dispute against, Col 2:16-23; superstition might well be called deceit, from the cheat it puts upon men and the notation of the Greek word, which imports a withdrawing men from the way. Christ, and from his way of worship prescribed in his word; and vain it is as well as a deceit, since it is empty and unprofitable, not accompanied with God’s blessing, nor conducing to the pleasing of him, but the provoking of him, Psa 106:29,43. Being led by no other rule than the tradition of men, which is the same with the precepts of men, Mar 7:8, which God likes not, Isa 8:20; 28:13; Joh 20:31; Act 26:22; 2Ti 3:15,16; he would not give place to human traditions in his house, nor to

the rudiments of the world, ( in allusion to grammar, wherein the letters are the elements or rudiments of all literature), i.e. the ceremonies of the Mosaical law, containing a kind of elementary instruction, for that seems to be the apostle’s meaning, comparing this verse with Col 2:20 and Col 2:21, and other places, Gal 3:24, these being but corporeal, carnal, and sensible ordinances, suitable to a worldly sanctuary. Heb 9:1,10, not to be imposed in that spiritual one which Christ hath set up, Joh 4:23,24; Ga 5:2. Whatsoever philosophical colours or Pharisaical paint they might appear in, they are not after Christ: we say a false picture of a man is not after the man, being not taken from or resembling his person, but clean another; such descriptions of him, as were not taken from the life and truth that was in him. And therefore he who is Head of his church, and likes not to be misshaped or misrepresented, will not accept of homage from those of his own house, in a livery that he hath not given order for, Lev 10:1; Jer 7:31; 2Co 5:9, how specious soever it may be in the wisdom of this world and the princes thereof, 1Co 2:6,7.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 8-15. SECTION V THE CHRISTIAN"S COMPLETENESS IN CHRIST. The apostle has first defined his own doctrinal position in the theological deliverance of Col_1:15-20, and has then skilfully brought himself into suitable personal relations with his readers by the statements and appeals of Col_1:23-29; Col_2:1-7. And now, after a general indication in ver. 4 of the direction in which he is about to strike, he unmasks the battery he has been all the while preparing, and delivers his attack on the Colossian error, occupying the rest of this second chapter, he denounces

(1) its false philosophy of religion (vers. 8-15);

(2) its arbitrary and obsolete ceremonialism (vers. 16, 17);

(3) its visionary angel worship (vers. 18, 19);

(4) its ascetic rules (vers. 20-22; ver. 23)

reviewing the whole system in a brief characterization of its most prominent and dangerous features. It will be convenient to treat separately the first of these topics, under the heading already given, which indicates the positive truth developed by St. Paul in antagonism to the error against which he contends a truth which is the practical application of the theological teaching of the first chapter.

Beware lest there shall be some one who maketh you his spoil through his philosophy and empty deceit. (vers. 4, 18, 23; Eph_4:14; 1Ti_6:20; 1Co_2:1, 1Co_2:4; Gal_1:7; Act_20:30) "Beware;" literally, see (to it), a common form of warning. (Col_4:17) The future indicative" shall be," used instead of the more regular subjunctive "should be," implies that what is feared is too likely to prove the case. (comp. Heb_3:12 and (with another tense) Gal_4:11) "Some one who maketh (you) his spoil (oJ sulagwgwn)" is an expression so distinct and individualizing that it appears to single out a definite, well known person. The denunciations of this Epistle are throughout in the singular number (vers. 4, 16, 18), in marked contrast with the plural of Gal_1:17, and that prevails in the apostle"s earlier polemical references. It is in harmony with the philosophical, Gnosticizing character of the Colossian heresy that it should rest on the authority of some single teacher, rather than on Scripture or tradition, as did the conservative legalistic Judaism. Sulagwgwn, a very rare word, hapax legomenon in the New Testament, bears its meaning on its face. It indicates the selfish, partisan spirit, and the overbearing conduct of the false teacher. Against such men St. Paul had forewarned the Ephesian elders. (Act_20:29, Act_20:30) "And empty deceit" stands in a qualifying apposition to "philosophy:" "His philosophy, indeed! "It is no better than a vain deceit." This kind of irony we shall find the writer using with still greater effect in ver. 18. Deceit is empty (kenov: Eph_5:6; 1Th_2:1; taiov, 1Co_15:14; distinguish from ma) fruitless, vain), which deceives by being a show of what it is not, a hollow pretence. From the prominence given to this aspect of the new teaching, we infer that it claimed to be a philosophy, and made this its special distinction and ground of superiority. And this consideration points (comp. Introduction, to some connection between the system of the Colossian errorists and the Alexandrine Judaism, of which Philo, an elder contemporary of St. Paul, is our chief exponent.

The aim of this school, which had now existed for two centuries at least, and had diffused its ideas far and wide, was to transform and sublimate Judaism by interpreting it under philosophical principles. Its teachers endeavoured, in fact, to put the "new wine" of Plato into the old bottles" of Moses, persuading themselves that it was originally there (comp. note on "mystery,". Col_1:27) In Philo, philosophy is the name for true religion, whose essence consists in the pursuit and contemplation of pure spiritual truth. Moses and the patriarchs are, with him, all "philosophers;" the writers of the Old Testament" philosophize;" it is" the philosophical man" who holds converse with God. This is the only place where philosophy is expressly mentioned in the New Testament; in 1Co_1:21 and context it is, however, only verbally wanting. According to the tradition of men, according to the rudiments of the world, and not according to Christ. (vers. 17, 20, 22; Gal_1:11, 12 4:3; 1Co_1:20, 21 3:19-21; Mat_15:2; Mar_7:8; 1Jn_4:5; 1Pe_1:18) This clause qualifies "making spoil" (Meyer, Ellicott) rather than "deceit;" human authority and natural reason furnish the principles and the method according to which the false teacher proceeds. "Tradition" does not necessarily imply antiquity (comp. 1Co_11:2; 2Th_2:15 2Th_3:6) "of men" is the emphatic part of the phrase. These words are characteristic of St. Paul, who was so profoundly conscious of the supernatural origin of his own doctrine. (see Gal_1:11-17; 1Co_11:23; 1Th_4:15: comp. Joh_3:31-35 Joh_8:23; 1Jn_4:5) Similarly, "the rudiments of the world" are the crude beginnings of truth, the childishly faulty and imperfect religious conceptions and usages to which the world had attained apart from the revelation of Christ. (comp. Gal_4:3, Gal_4:9; also Heb_5:12, for this use of stoiceia) It is not either Jewish or non-Jewish elements specifically that are intended. Jew and Greek are one in so far as their religious ideas are "not according to Christ." Greek thought had also contributed its rudiments to the world"s education for Christ: hence, comprehensively, "the rudiments of the world" (comp. 1Co_1:21) The blending of Greek and Jewish elements in the Colossian theosophy would of itself suggest this generalization, already shadowed forth in Gal_4:3. Neander, Hofmann, and Klopper (the latest German commentator) have returned to the view that prevailed amongst the Fathers, from Origen downwards, reading this phrase, both here and in Galatians, in a physical sense, as in 2Pe_3:10, 2Pe_3:12; the elementa mundi, "the powers of nature," "heavenly bodies," etc., worshipped by the Gentiles as gods, and which the Jews identified with the angels (ver. 18; Heb_1:7) as God"s agents in the direction of the world. This interproration has much to recommend it, but it scarcely harmonizes with the parallel "tradition of men," still less with the context of ver. 20, and is absolutely at variance, as it seems to us, with the argument involved in Gal_4:3. Not the doctrine of Christ, but Christ himself is the substitute for these discarded rudiments (vers. 17, 20). His Person is the norm and test of truth (1Co_12:3; 1Jn_4:1-3) The views combatted were "not according to Christ," for they made him something less and lower than that which he is.

Vers. 8-15. Sect. 5.

The Christian"s completeness in Christ.

I A FALSE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. (Vers. 4, 8, 11, 16-23.) "Not according to Christ (ver. 8) is the fatal sentence which the apostle pronounces upon the system of doctrine that was finding entrance at Colossal. However plausible in argument (ver. 4) or lofty in its intellectual pretensions (vers. 8, 23), however skilfully it may avail itself of the venerable rites of ancient faith or of the popular predilections and tendencies of the day (vers. 11, 16, 18), and whatever the apparent sanctity and austerity of its professors (vers. 18, 20-23), the religious system which sets him aside and professes to lead men into communion with God and to the moral perfection of their nature otherwise than "in him," must after all be, at the heart of it, "a vain deceit." For he is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life," the Lord and Life of nature and the Light of men (Col_1:15-17; Joh_1:3, Joh_1:4) the "Beginning" of the "new heavens and the new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness;" he is simply "all things and in all" to the Church of God. All true philosophy, though standing on natural grounds and drawing its premisses from natural experience and intuition, yet, rightly understood, must needs harmonize with the Christian faith, and will be "according to Christ." For no two truths, however differently grounded or expressed, can really be contradictory. And the facts on which philosophy rests, the menial and material constitution of things concerning which it theorizes, "were created" and "consist in him". (Col_1:16, Col_1:17) "In Christ" must lie, therefore, the ultimate rationale of the finite universe. The Colossian error presented itself as philosophy, advanced on rational grounds, and claiming the attention of men of thought and culture within the Church. It inculcated the religious traditions of the Jew under the forms and methods of the Greek intellect, seeking to reanimate both by the aid of the new spiritual fervour and lofty moral aspirations of the Christian faith. There was nothing in itself blameworthy in such an attempt. Endeavours must be continually made, though they can never be final, to harmonize the current philosophy of the age with the Divine revelation as received in the Church. St. Paul himself makes large contributions in this direction. But those who take this work in hand should understand both sides of the question. This the Colossian errorists failed to do. They tried to fit Christ into some place in their preconceived philosophy, instead of allowing themselves to be led, as St. Paul would have taught them, (Col_1:15-20) through Christ to a deeper and more sound philosophy. Hence their teaching, put forward as Christian truth and claiming to be the Christian theory of life, is condemned as "philosophy and empty deceit.

1. It was according to the tradition of men. It could claim only human authority for its principles. They were not found in Christ"s doctrine, and had received no authentication from his lips, (Gal_1:11, Gal_1:12) no Divine attestation or proof of their being "from heaven" (Mat_21:25, Mat_21:26; Heb_1:4) And any scheme of religion, whether calling itself "philosophy" or not, that is in this position, stands self condemned. "The world by wisdom knew not God". (1Co_1:21) What he is, how he is disposed towards the children of men, it is for him to say. They know full well that they have lost his favour and defaced his image in their souls; but how their recovery is possible is to them "past finding out." And therefore, to fix and measure the nature of God and the relations he may assume to us, "according to the tradition of men," is the height of ignorance and presumption. But Christ is "the faithful Witness," "the Word who was in the beginning with God" (Rev_1:5; Joh_1:2) and an authentic voice from heaven declares, "This is my Son, my chosen: hear ye him (Luk_9:35; Joh_1:18)

2. And such systems, leaving the clear and firm ground of obedience to thesupremacy of Christ, are compelled to fall hack, in some form or other, on the rudiments of the world. Their advocates discover that the influence of human names and the force of general reasoning do not command the deference of the conscience or stir the spiritual emotions, are indeed without that "power of God" (1Co_1:24, 1Co_1:25; 1Th_1:5) which attends the word of Christ. They return, therefore, to the dead forms of old religions, putting, as they suppose, a new meaning into them. They are at once "advanced," and reactionary. They dress up the newest rationalism in the cast-off garments of faith"s childhood. They combine a puerile ritualism, borrowing its forms and practices from the mere rudiments of an age of sensuous "feeling after God," with the most bare and abstract, the most arid and joyless, conceptions of his nature, or of a nature that is their substitute for him. The combination of "philosophy" and "circumcision" (vers. 8, 11), of eloquent and subtle reasonings with minute and arbitrary rules as to "eating and drinking," and the physical culture of the soul (vers. 4, 16, 20-23), is after all not unnatural; and is apt to repeat itself, to a greater or less extent, in every attempt at religion that is not essentially spiritual, and that departs from the "one foundation, which is Jesus Christ". (1Co_3:11)

3. We must also mark the arrogant and overbearing temper of the new teachers at Colossae, their exclusiveness and their endeavour to form a personal party within the Church. They are men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. (Act_20:30) They would make simple Christians their booty (ver. 8). They set up to judge their brethren in matters of diet and outward observance (ver. 16). They assume, in this character of judges in the Church, to deny to Christian men, walking in faith and love (Col_1:4) and having Christ"s peace within their hearts, (Col_3:15) "the prize of their calling" (ver. 18), because they will not accept their notions and practices. They issue their decrees, "Touch not, taste not," etc., as if they were the very law of God (vers. 22, 14). They are "humble" before the powers of the invisible world, and zealous to offer them a worship which they repudiate and abhor (Rev_19:10 Rev_22:9) but rob Christ of his honour (vers. 18, 19, 23), and are proud and self willed towards their brethren "whom they have seen." They heap upon the body invented and misdirected severities (ver. 23), while they are governed by "the mind of the flesh" (ver. 18). They aggrandize themselves, while they destroy the Church of God (ver. 19).

II THE COMPLETE CHRIST OUR COMPLETENESS. (Vers. 9-13.)

For the Christian everything depends on what he thinks of Christ and makes him to be. Christ"s glory is his security. His greatness and the greatness of our interest in him are commensurate. For "he gave himself for us". (Gal_2:20) Our salvation is not merely a work of Christ, a something wrought out for us, and (externally) conferred upon us; it is "Christ in us" (Col_1:2; Eph_3:17; Galatians. (Joh_14:20 Joh_17:26) And St. Paul virtually says, "In robbing Christ of his glory, your new teachers are robbing you of your salvation. By so much as his position is lowered, his fulness diminished, by so much is your spiritual life imperilled and impaired. Whatever is taken away from the completeness of his Person and the sufficiency of his mediation, is taken away at the same time from your assurance of pardon (ver. 13; Col_1:14) and your motives for holiness, (Col_3:1, Col_3:2) from the ground of your faith (vers. 6, 7), and the certainty of your heavenly prize. (ver. 18; Col_1:23 Col_3:15) Whatever touches his person touches the centre and vital spring of your life in God, the anchor of your immortal hopes, and the foundation on which rests the whole fabric of the Church" (ver. 19; Eph_2:20-22; Mat_16:15-18)

(1) In him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead. Then he is not a partial, or an approximate, or temporary manifestation of God like previous theophanies a mere phase of the Infinite. He does not rank and share with angels and the various orders of created being in mirroring by scattered, broken rays the glory of God. As the Son, he stands at an infinite distance from, and holds an absolute supremacy over, all creation (Col_1:15; Heb_1:2-4 Heb_3:6) God is what he shows himself to be in Christ, and no other. There, if we could but behold and receive it, is "all the fulness of the Divine nature." In him we know the only true, the real, veritable God . (Joh_17:3) At last we grasp the substance of truth and no longer chase its shadows (ver. 17). Here is nothing transient, to be displaced by further evolution: this fulness dwells in him; we reach finality, truth absolute, determinate; and he who knows and has Christ may say, "This is the true God and eternal life". (1Jn_5:20)

(2) And this fulness dwells in him bodily. For the Divine Word "became flesh," and in a human body "made his tabernacle amongst us". (Joh_1:14) He was "born of a woman, born under the law", (Gal_4:4) suffered our bodily ills and temptations, wrought with human hands, looked through human eyes, and spoke in the language of men; sat as a friendly guest at our tables, and stood as a mourner by our gravesides; died a human death, "in the body of his flesh", (Col_1:22) by the hands of men, and was laid in an earthly grave; he rose, "the same Jesus," in that same body, and ascended into heaven, (Col_1:18, 19 3:1-4) "far above all principality and power" (ver. 10; Eph_1:20-23) where he sits a radiant body, "appearing in the presence of God for, (Heb_9:24) and whom one day we shall see (Php_3:20, 21 1Pe_1:8, 1Pe_1:9; 1Jn_3:2; Act_1:11) Man Christ Jesus," "who is over all, God blessed forever". (Rom_9:5) This was the vision that dying Stephen beheld in the presence of Saul of Tarsus, (Act_7:55-60) which ere long appeared to himself (Act_9:3-6) and was henceforth evermore before his eyes. And since he has assumed it, Christ"s humanity is also permanent. The fulness of the Godhead still dwells in him bodily. He will not cease to be man any more than he can cease to be God. His relationship to his human brethren, and the remembrance of his earthly sorrows, of" the wounds that he received in the house of his friends," are too precious to him for that. He is still "the Lamb, in the midst of the throne," who is" the Shepherd" of his heavenly flock, (Rev_7:17) the "Firstborn out of the dead" among the "many brethren" that have eternal life in him (Rom_8:29) And heaven for us is "to be where he is," "to see him as he is" (Col_3:4; Php_1:23; Joh_12:26 Joh_17:24; 1Jn_3:2) Man Christ Jesus," "the Lord of glory"! "All the fulness of the Godhead, in bodily form! a mystery compared with which the contradictions that so often baffle and vex us are trifles indeed; and yet an indubitable fact, that astonishes heaven (Eph_3:10; 1Pe_1:12) and glorifies the earth, and that fills struggling, sinful mortals with a sense of Divine sympathy, an assurance of forgiveness and help that make all things possible.

2. But Christ"s fulness does not simply "dwell in him," terminating inhimself; it is an active, out flowing fulness, that seeks to make us in turn complete in him (ver. 10; Eph_1:23 Eph_3:19 Eph_4:8-13; Joh_1:14, 16 17:22, 23, 26) The Judaizers of Colossae, as we understand their position, were urging on their Gentile disciples that they should complete their imperfect Christian state by circumcision and the adoption of various ritual observances (including worship of the angels along with Christ) and bodily austerities (vers. 16-23). These requirements they enforced by philosophical reasoning, under considerations of the symbolic meaning of ancient rites and the beneficial effect upon the soul of the regimen prescribed as cleansing and elevating to its proper level man"s spiritual nature. St. Paul acknowledges by implication that, to a certain extent (but see ver. 23 b), the aim of this teaching is right; but the means it inculcates he utterly disallows, being "not according to Christ." The whole tendency of the system was to draw away attention and trust from Christ. Other objections, such as might easily present themselves, he does not care to argue.

(1) In him ye were circumcised. "The inward reality of which this rite was the imperfect and prophetic symbol, the consecration of the present life to God, the putting off of the old sinful nature, the body of the flesh, has already taken place in you. This is the circumcision of Christ, the change from sin to holiness, from moral filthiness to purity; and you know that you have passed through it, if you are in him (1Co_6:11; Gal_3:27 Gal_5:24; Rom_13:14) Do not grasp at the shadow when you have the substance. Be content to believe that in this, the "one thing needful," you are complete in him.

(2) From this point the apostle goes a step further back, exactly on the line of his previous teaching in Romans 6., respecting the connection of sanctification with justification, when he adds, "having been buried with him in your baptism, wherein also ye were raised with him." For a state of sinfulness is a state of death. The sinner lies immediately under the wrath of (Col_1:21 Col_3:6; Eph_2:3; Rom_5:10) and that anger, with the sense of alienation it brings and the shadow of condemnation it casts upon the conscience, is virtually death, is the death of death. (comp. Rom_7:24, 25 8:1, 2) There is no cleansing of the soul of a dead sinner till this sentence is repealed, and "the love of God" is again "shed abroad in his heart". (Rom_5:5) Christ gives life that he may give purity (Col_1:21, Col_1:22; Rom_6:13; Tit_2:14 1Pe_2:24) purity with life. And life comes through his resurrection; by the same law, the same power, which "raised Jesus our Lord from the dead," are our souls also raised from their death of sin. The operation in both cases is equally supernatural and Divine. The first event is the warrant and the pledge of" the second. The return of our Surety and Champion from the grave assures us that his sacrifice is accepted and his victory complete (Col_1:18; Rom_4:25; Act_2:32-36 Act_13:34-39; Joh_20:19, Joh_20:20) On this fact our faith in him as Lord and Saviour rests (Rom_4:24 Rom_6:7-11 Rom_10:9; 2Co_4:14) it is a "faith in the working of God who raised him from the dead." Through this faith we are justifiedforgiveness becomes curs (ver. 13; Col_1:14; Rom_5:1) and in this consciousness of pardon sinful man first comes to know the life of God (Eph_2:1; Rom_6:7-11) he is reconciled, and a new existence of peace and purity is born within him, (2Co_5:17-21) to culminate in his final presentation perfect in Christ. (Col_1:21, Col_1:22, Col_1:28)

(3) Of this passing from death to life, not circumcision, but baptism, is the appointed and proper Christian symbol. Therein the believer is "buried with Christ" in his grave (ver. 12; Rom_6:3, Rom_6:5) his old self, his former condemned existence, is put off and washed away forever. He emerges from the cleansing stream, "a new creature in Christ Jesus." All this baptism sets forth and sets forward, so far as the picturing and outward acting of the matter may. And being the authoritative public sign of the grace of a new life, it seals that life on the consciousness and memory of the believing and understanding recipient, and binds its obligations upon him before God and man; so that henceforth he can only "reckon himself to be dead. unto sin, but living unto God in Christ Jesus". (Rom_6:11)

III THE BAR REMOVED: THE VEIL LIFTED. (Vers. 14, 15.) What the individual Christian now realizes for himself in Christ his new life in God and the cleansing and sanctifying of his nature is but the personal appropriation of that which was revealed to the whole world and addresses itself to the wants of human nature everywhere. It meets the conditions brought about by God"s previous dealings with mankind (Col_1:23, Col_1:26-28; Rom_1:2-5 Rom_16:25-27; Act_14:15-17 Act_17:26-31; Heb_1:1, Heb_1:2) In two respects the apostle signalizes the earlier relations of men to God as imperfect: two hindrances there were to that "access to the Father" now secured (Eph_2:18; Rom_5:2; Heb_7:19 Heb_10:19-22) hindrances congruous in nature and effect., felt in the quick and instructed religious consciousness of Judaism more keenly than elsewhere that are "taken out of the way" in Christ. There was the law with its condemning voice for the conscience, and the angelic mediation with its terrors and its mysteries for the heart and understanding. The first guilty pair "hid themselves from the presence of the Lord among the trees of the garden"; (Gen_3:8) and a sinful, weak-hearted people, chosen to be brought near unto him, said, "Let not God speak with us lest we die". (Exo_20:19) And God in mercy and in justice heard their prayer. He veiled himself behind his laws and his providence, behind the forms of nature, and the oracles of prophecy, and the progress of history, and the flashing forth of his glory in the angels of his presence, until Law, the paidagwgov, ordained through angels," should have done its work, "and the fulness of the times should be come" (Gal_3:19-24; Rom_5:20)

1. Till then it was increasingly felt that the law with its decrees was against us. It "wrought wrath". (Rom_4:15) It brought us "under a curse". (Gal_3:10) It stirred up and brought to its crisis in an agony of self despair the conflict between the better nature and the worse in man. (Rom_7:7-25) It invoked death with its anticipatory terrors as the seal to its authority and the witness to our guilt (Rom_5:12-14, Rom_5:21; 1Co_15:56) The list of its commandments is but a catalogue of our offences, a tale of debts, not one of which we are prepared to meet, and yet which must be discharged "to the uttermost farthing." In Christ"s cross, God has, at a stroke, wiped out the whole bill of our offences. He has removed it from between us and himself; and nailed it, with Christ"s body, to the cross, where he bids us read, "There is now no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus". (Rom_8:1 Rom_3:26) This the apostle had taught already, and it is the glory of his earlier Epistles, addressed to Churches infested with Pharisaic Judaism and its teaching of salvation by works of law, to have established this truth in the understanding and the faith of the Church for all time.

2. But the philosophic Judaism with which he has now to deal requires himto insist more strongly on the immediate revelation of God himself to the world that is made in Christ. Now that One has been "manifested at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself" (Heb_9:26; Isa_59:2) it is possible to behold God by a nearer vision. With the revelation of his pardoning mercy and sin-avenging justice in Christ, "the Son of his love" (Eph_2:4; Rom_3:26) he makes known his inmost name and nature. To Israel, in comparison with other nations, "God was nigh" (Deu_4:7; Lev_20:26) and yet even Israel complains, "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself". (Isa_45:15) He "came with ten thousand of his holy ones, and from his right hand went a fiery law for them"; (Deu_33:2) and "the earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God". (Psa_68:8) "He made the clouds his chariot; "his" way was in the sea, and his path in the great waters, and his footsteps were not known". (Psa_77:19, Psa_77:20) The mystic veil that screened his presence was as splendid as the law by which he ruled the consciences of men was stern and terrible. But in Christ, he "laid his glory by." God appeared in the Babe of Bethlehem, in the Man of sorrows, in Christ crucified, as the Father of the children of men. He bids all his angels worship and wait upon the lowly form of the Son of man, and the elements of nature (more closely linked with the angelic powers, perhaps, than we can imagine) are made to do his bidding, "that all may honour the Son, even as they honour the Father". (Joh_5:23) "They shall call his name Immanuel, God with us. (Mat_1:23) None had "seen God at any time;" the angels that had been his ministers, the glories of the created world in which he robed himself, (Psa_102:26 Psa_104:2) these could not utter his Name: "the only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, the Word made flesh, he declared him. (Joh_1:14, Joh_1:18) "The veil is done away in Christ." But "the same veil," which in St. Paul"s day hung between the Jewish mind and the true knowledge of God, "remaineth unlifted" for those who will not behold "the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ". (2Co_3:14 2Co_4:3-6) God at once "reconciled the world unto himself" and unveiled himself to the world in him. This is the sum of these two verses.

A warning against speculative deceivers.

heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Mark

I THE NATURE OF THE PHILOSOPHY HERE CONDEMNED. It is philosophy inseparably connected with "vain deceit." There is a philosophy which is highly serviceable to religion, as it is the noblest exercise of our rational faculties; but there is a philosophy prejudicial to religion, because it sets up the wisdom of man in opposition to the wisdom of God.

1. The apostle refers to the Judaeo. Gnostics who regarded Christianity mainly as a philosophy that is, as a search after speculative truth, and not as a revelation of Christ and a life of faith and love in him. The apostle claims for the gospel that it is thus "the wisdom of God.

2. He refers to the speculative result of such a philosophy. It tends to "vain deceit;" it is hollow, sophistical, disappointing, misleading. It is the "science falsely so called" which "puffs up" and cannot edify. It always tends to undermine man"s faith in the Word of God.

II THE ORIGIN OF THIS PHILOSOPHY. "After the tradition of men." It had its source in mere human speculation, and could not appeal to inspired books. Our Lord condemned the Pharisaic attachment to traditions (Mat_15:2, Mat_15:3, Mat_15:6; Mar_7:8, 9) This later mystical tendency was strong in its traditions, which it reserved for the exclusive use of the initiated.

III THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS PHILOSOPHY. "After the rudiments of the world." This seems to point to ritualistic observances worthy only of children, but not adapted to grown men. They belonged "to the world to the sphere of external and visible things. These rudiments were "beggarly elements," done away in Christ.

IV ITS NEGATIVE WORTHLESSNESS. "And not after Christ.

1. It had not Christ for its Author; for it followed "the tradition of men.

2. It had not Christ for its Subject; for it displaced him to make way for ritualistic ordinances and angelic mediators. No philosophy is worthy of the name that cannot find a place for him who is the highest Wisdom. (1Co_1:30)

V THE DANGERS OF THIS PHILOSOPHY. "Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you." It would have an enslaving effect, tartly by its ritualistic drudgeries and partly by its false teaching. There are worse losses than the loss of property or even children. This false philosophy would involve:

1. The loss of Christian liberty. (Gal_5:1)

2. The loss of much of the good seed sown in Christian hearts. (Mat_13:19)

1. The loss of what Christians had wrought. (2Jn_1:10)

2. The loss of first love. (Rev_2:1)

3. The loss of the joys of salvation. (Psa_51:12) T.C.

Vers. 8-15.

Christ our All.

Having laid down the truth about the Trinity as the great want of the race, Paul proceeds to warn the Colossians against the so called philosophers. "There are certain men," it has been well observed, "who, because they possess somewhat more learning than others, think, when they become converts to the gospel, that they are great acquisitions to the cause; they officiously extend the shield of their learning over their more unlearned brethren, and try to prove where others believe; but, while they think they promote the cause, they generally spoil what they touch." Against such philosophers God"s people in all ages require to be warned.

I THE PHILOSOPHY IS TO BE SUSPECTED WHICH LEADS MEN AWAY FROM CHRIST. (Ver. 8.) Paul warns the Colossians against a philosophy which led men back to rudimentary forms and ceremonies instead of forward to Christ. Now, every argument which leads to a ceremony for hope instead of to Christ has some flaw in it. It may be a subtle flaw, not easily detected, but we may be quite sure it is there. There is no better rule, then, than this. Christ is the embodied truth, and we have missed the road if we are not led to him. (Joh_14:6)

II As THE EMBODIMENT OF THE DIVINE FULNESS, HE IS THE FOUNTAIN HEAD OF ALL TRUTH AND PERFECTION. (Ver. 9.) In Jesus Christ Divinity has expressed itself in human form. We can see, hear, and handle the Divine Being in the person of Christ. The Incarnation gives to men the true philosophy they long after. Christ is all and in all. Hence we are resistlessly drawn to him for the solution of our doubts and difficulties as well as for the salvation of our souls. No wonder that an acute writer entitled one of his volumes "The Knowledge of Jesus the Most Excellent of the Sciences.

III CHRIST AFFORDS US ALL PROVISION FOE OUR ACCEPTANCE. (Ver. 10.) The great question which man must ask is, "How can sinful man be accepted with God?" Philosophy replies, "By certain solemn ceremonies, by sacrifices, by circumcision, by baptism," etc. The gospel replies, "Acceptance is secured in Christ; we are complete in him," or, as the Revised Version has it, "In him are ye made full." Now, it has been insinuated that merit cannot in the nature of things pass from one person to another. The fact is, however, that we are constantly being kindly treated for the sake of others. Children, for example, receive consideration for the sake of respected parents: individuals receive consideration for the sake of respected friends; and the whole array" of letters of introduction, vicarious influence, and the like, is based upon the recognition of the fact that the merit of others can overshadow and benefit those in whom they are interested. The acceptance which we receive from the Father for the sake of Jesus is on the line, therefore, of natural law. It is the application of a principle upon which men are acting every day.

IV FROM CHRIST WE RECEIVE THE TRUE CIRCUMCISION. (Ver. 11.) Circumcision was among the false teachers the initial ceremony which secured a Jewish standing for the Gentile proselyte. Their insinuation was that Gentiles who remained uncircumcised could not possibly be saved. It was this which Paul combatted constantly. Hence he shows, in this eleventh verse, that the real circumcision is secured in Christ for all who trust in him. It is a circumcision not made with hands, a circumcision of the heart, a circumcision which secured "the putting off of the body of the sins of the flesh." If the Gentile converts realized this, then they need not concern themselves about the outward circumcision. It surely teaches us that, not by mechanical, but by spiritual means we may vanquish the power of sin within us. It is said that circumcision circumscribes lustful tendencies and keeps them within mechanical bounds. Whatever truth may be in this, it is certain that Jesus can so restrain us by his indwelling and grace as to deliver us from the whole body of the sins of the flesh.

V CHRIST HAS ALSO CANCELLED THE CEREMONIES UPON THE CROSS, SO THAT WHEN WE RISE WITH HIM INTO NEWNESS OF LIFE WE ARE FREED FROM THEIR OBLIGATION. (Vers. 12-15.) The ritual of Judaism typified in its various aspects the atoning work of Jesus Christ. The sacrifices pointed to the one great sacrifice on Calvary. The long list of ordinances, therefore, conducted the intelligent mind to Christ"s cross and received their fulfilment there. Hence it was that those who by faith passed through resurrection with Christ became as free from the obligation of these ceremonies as the risen Jesus was himself. Could any one have gone to Jesus after his resurrection and asked from him, with any show of reason, a fulfilment of the ceremonial Law? Is it not felt by every intelligent thinker that Jesus had so fulfilled the ceremonies in the actualities of atonement that more ceremony from him would be unmeaning? A similar emancipation, Paul here insists, from the obligation of ceremonies is the property of Christ"s believing people. A careful study of the cross is the great protection, therefore, against improper emphasis being laid on ceremonials. R.M.E.

Vers. 8-15.

Philosophy.

I FALSE PHILOSOPHY. "Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit." It was a real danger (as the expression bears) against which the apostle warns the Colossians. He refers indefinitely to the teachers (any one), but he strikingly describes what their work would be. The work of the Christian teachers on them in their heathen state, as described in Col_1:13, Col_1:14, had been a deliverance, a redemption; the work of those teachers on them in their Christian state would be a leading them into captivity, a making a booty of them. He does not define what this teaching was, but he characterizes the substance of it (as distinguished from the form, which is characterized in the fourth verse) as a philosophy which was a vain deceit. This is not a characterization of all philosophy, but only of the philosophy with which these teachers would have made spoil of the Colossians. A philosopher is literally a lover of wisdom, and in that sense a Christian is a philosopher. The origin of the name, as given by Cicero, is as follows: Pythagoras once upon a time, having come to Phlius, a city of Peloponnesus, displayed in a conversation which he had with Leon, who then governed that city, a range of knowledge so extensive that the prince, admiring his eloquence and ability, inquired to what art he had principally devoted himself. Pythagoras answered that he professed no art and was simply a philosopher. Leon, struck by the novelty of the name, again inquired who were the philosophers, and in what they differed from other men. Pythagoras replied that human life seemed to resemble the great fair held on occasion of those solemn games which all Greece met to celebrate. For some, exercised in athletic contests, resorted thither in quest of glory and the crown of victory; while a greater number flocked to them in order to buy and sell, attracted by the love of gain. There were a few, however and they were those distinguished by their liberality and intelligence who came from no motive of glory or of gain, but simply to look about them, and to take note of what was done and in what manner. "So, likewise," continued Pythagoras, "we men all make our entrance into this life on our departure from another. Some are here occupied in the pursuit of honours, others in the search of riches; a few there are who, indifferent to all else, devote themselves to an inquiry into the nature of things. These, then, are they whom I call students of wisdom, for such is meant by philosopher." The philosophy in question in Colossae was no humble endeavour to ascertain the nature of things, but a pretentious system without any basis in observed facts, or in reason applied to them (certainly without any basis in revelation), and therefore only vain. It had two marks of a false system.

1. It was purely traditional. "After the tradition of men." Our sacred books have been handed down to us, but we do not rest their authority on mere tradition. There is evidence (to which we make our appeal) that they do not owe their origin to men, that they are a Divine revelation, that they have been first handed to men by God. Tradition has been a frequent device in connection with systems that have imposed on the human mind. The answer to questionings has been that it was so handed down from remote antiquity (occultly, for the traditional and occult generally go together). A remarkable instance was a later development named cabbala, or tradition. The mystic elements in this were not essentially different from those which were operating around the Colossian Church. The primary substance, the Cabbalists said, is an ocean of light. There was a primitive emanation, named Adam tadmon, from which proceed decreasing stages of emanations, named Sephiroth. Matter is nothing but the obscuration of the Divine rays when arrived at the last stage of emanation. This (and much besides) was to be received on the ground that it had been secretly handed down from Moses. But it is no sufficient evidence of a system being true that it has been handed down; we must submit it to farther examination, and such examination the philosophy at Colossae could not stand.

2. It was purely mundane. "After the rudiments of the world." What was handed down had no high genesis. Very crude were the first attempts to solve the riddle of the universe. Empedocles taught that all things were formed out of the four elements, fire, air, earth, and water, by a process of mingling and of separation, set in motion by the two principles of love and hate. The postulation of intermediate agents in a descending series down to one who could create matter was very rudimentary. The apostle was sorry that such meagre and earth born philosophizings should be palmed upon men as all that was needed to make them perfect. The standard of condemnation. "And not after Christ." What is tradition when we have Christ to give form to our thoughts? What are the rudiments of the world (all that earth can produce of a philosophy) when we have the perfect revelation from heaven?

II THE TRUE PHILOSOPHY. There are two cardinal points.

(1) The fulness of God in Christ. "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." By the pleroma of the Godhead we are to understand the totality of the Divine attributes, the sum of the Divine perfections. We are to think of the pleroma as residing first in God and then in Christ (just as we think first of Father and then of Son, first of original and then of copy). The pleroma resides in the Second Person necessarily and eternally, but nineteen hundred years ago (such is our creed) it began to reside in him bodily wise, that is to say, a connection was mysteriously formed between the pleroma in him and (what was far removed) a human body. In the body he took to himself he tabernacled on earth, and not only so, but in it now glorified he permanently resides (such is the force of the Greek word), that is to say, the time will never come when there will be a separation of the pleroma in him from our humanity. Such is the apostolic teaching, but on it reverence forbids that we should dwell.

(2) The fulness of Christ in us. "And in him ye are made full." It is an advantage in the Revised translation that "full" is carried forward from the preceding thought (not "fulness" and then "complete," when the word is the same). The pleroma in Christ is communicated to us. Out of his pleroma have all we received. Christians collectively are called the pleroma of Christ. This is no mere refinement of thought. The comfort of it is that Christ in his redemptive work, in the fulness of his atoning merits, has made it possible for us to have more than mere beginnings or husks. There must be allowance for difference of essence, but, allowance being made for that, then all that is in Christ can be communicated to us. We can think out the Divine thought. We can be under the impulse of the Divine love. We can have strength to perform the Divine purpose. We can come out into the Divine liberty. It is only Christ actually working in us that can remove all moral impediments, and educe to the full the God-given tendencies of our being. And, therefore, the truest philosophy is to preserve a state of openness towards him. This philosophy is all sufficient.

1. It enables us to dispense with what intermediate agents may besupposed to do for us. "Who is the Head of all principality and power." Christ is not only placed over all that can be called principality and power, but he is the Source of all the vital force that belongs to them. What of the pleroma may be dispersed, fragmentary in them, is undispersed, unbroken in him. There is no need, therefore, of supplementing what he can supply.

2. It enables us to dispense with circumcision. It would seem that in the false philosophy with which the Church at Colossae was threatened, there was a Judaistic as well as a mystic element. The combination of the two was called Essenism.

(1) Circumcised with Christ in his circumcision. "In whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, "n the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ." They had no need of the circumcision made with hands (the material circumcision); they had been circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands (a spiritual circumcision). They had got the inward reality corresponding to the outward rite. This is presented here as the putting off of the body of the flesh. There was the putting off as of a garment. The word in the original, being intensive, points to a complete putting off. The putting off applied to the body as a whole. The body of the flesh points to our old impure condition (in which the flesh is the dominating principle). It could only be ideally that we were thus circumcised, for there is still actual impurity in our condition that needs to be put off. When in the past are we to understand this circumcision as timed? The general opinion is that we are to take the time from the baptism referred to in the next verse. It seems more natural to interpret the circumcision of Christ as the circumcision undergone by Christ, and to take the time from that event. It is not unnatural to pass from the spiritual circumcision described to the circumcision of Christ so understood, unless its spiritual significance is left out. That event was more than a mere honouring of the Mosaic rite, it pointed to (though it did not actually effect) its fulfilment. Did it not point to Christ putting off in his death the body with which our sin was associated? It could be said then that when Christ was circumcised we were spiritually circumcised in his circumcision. A cogitate thought is added for the purpose of further elucidation.

(2) Baptized with Christ in his baptism. As we interpret the circumcision of Christ of the circumcision undergone by Christ, so we interpret baptism here of the baptism undergone by Christ (not their baptism). It could be said that when he was baptized we were baptized in his baptism. There are two sides of baptism.

(a) A going down into the water. "Having been buried with him in baptism." There is similar language employed in Rom_6:4. We were buried with him through baptism into death. The language is evidently taken from immersion. It is said of Jesus that he came up out of the water, so we are to understand that he went down into the water. There was, as it were, a burial under the waves. And as the coming up out of the water is connected in what follows with the resurrection of Christ, so we are to understand that the burial in baptism is connected with the burial of Christ. In baptism we are represented as burying what Christ may be said to have put away in his grave the old state of sin. The language employed here tells in favour of immersion as a scriptural mode. There is every reason to believe that it was the mode followed in Palestine in our Lord"s day. It has an advantage over sprinkling in pointing so strikingly to the burial of the old nature as in the grave of Christ. The only reason that can be urged against it is that it is not suitable in a cold climate. The use of water being all that is essential, the mode may be accommodated to altered conditions. On the other hand, there is an identification of baptism with circumcision. What is the putting off and laying aside of the body of the flesh in the one, is the burial in the other: And thus the language of the apostle seems to tell in favour of infant baptism.

(b) A coming up out of the water. "Wherein ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead." The language is taken from the coming up out of the water which is associated with our Lord"s baptism, but none the less truly does it point to the fact of Christ"s resurrection, which is clearly referred to. Christ went down into the grave, but came up again. So the believer disappears under the waters of baptism, but comes up to sight again. This is a side that is not presented in circumcision. In baptism there is an impressive exhibition of the fact that we are regenerated. This new life we get in union with Christ. The working of God was signally displayed in raising Christ from the dead. But that was more than a display of omnipotence. It is to be taken in connection with the removal of the cause that operated in Christ"s death and burial, viz. sin. Christ rose from the dead the possessor of a new and endless life. And if we take as the object of our faith the working which raised Christ from the dead, we shall become sharers with him in the same new and endless life.

3. Parenthetical application of the being raised with Christ to the Colossians and to the Gentiles generally. "And you, being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he quicken together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses." There is a difficulty started here regarding the subject of the remainder of the paragraph. Meyer, Alford, and Eadie make God the subject; Eilicott makes it Christ. Lightfoot makes it a case of a sudden change of, subject. It can be said in favour of Christ being "subject, that he has been prominent in the apostle"s thought in the context as in the Epistle as a whole. It can also be said that the putting off from himself the principalities and powers is language which can only be applied to Christ. On the other hand, it is unnatural, with Ellicott, to pass from the thought of Christ being raised by God to the thought of Christ quickening himself. Nor is it satisfactory simply to say that there is a sudden change of subject. The most natural solution of the difficulty seems to be to regard this verse as parenthetical. The apostle applies the thought of being raised with Christ, and, having done so, he proceeds with Christ as the subject as though the application had not been interjected, The Colossians had been in a state of deadness. Their deadness was caused by their trespasses. There is nothing of the pantheistic element here that was so prevalent in the East. They had committed personal trespass against a personal Lawgiver, and thus were thrown into a state of deadness. Their deadness through trespasses is associated with the uncircumcision of their flesh. They had not the sign of circumcision on them. And so they had that deadness which in circumcision is represented as being put away. Being dead, God quickened them together with Christ, gave them the reality of circumcision or the reality corresponding to the coming up out of the waters of baptism. This presupposed the exercise of forgiveness toward them. They (and not only they) had been forgiven their trespasses. And thus, the cause of deadness being removed, they could be quickened.

(1) How circumcision can be dispensed with. "Having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross." Our obligation to keep the Law of God (so we are constituted) is compared to a bond. It is as though we had subscribed it with our own hand. The word is handwriting.

In the case of the Jews it was in the form of well-known ordinances (of which circumcision was one). In the case of the Gentiles the public sense of right also found expression in ordinances. The bond was against us in this sense, that it contained obligation which had to be met by us. It was not only against us in that sense (which it was from its very nature), but in its actual incidence on us in our fallen condition it was contrary to us. It could, as it were, be brought into a court of law to effect our conviction. There it was with our autograph. We had not met our obligation and had no manner of meeting it. What Christ did with the bond was to cancel it. His pen, as it were, was drawn through it. Or the writing was erased that it could never again be brought as evidence against us. To make it more emphatic, it is added that he took it out of the way (so that it could never again be found). "He took it out of the midst," it is literally, so that it could never be produced between us and God. And to make it still more emphatic, it is added that he nailed it to his cross. It was so affixed to the cross that when he was crucified it was treated similarly and completely made an end of. His crucifixion was a meeting the bond, discharging all our obligations to the broken Law. There is thus, therefore, no bond that can be produced for our conviction, but there is a discharged bond which can be produced for our justification.

(2) How the help of intermediate agents can be dispensed with. "Having put off from himself the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it." The principalities and powers were those that sought to thwart Christ in his great undertaking, to prevent the salvation of men. They began to gather around him at his temptation. Especially at the close did they obtain power. These evil principalities and powers clung to him like a garment. It was only by his thus allowing them to come into close contact with him that they could forver be put off from men. It is said, regarding Hercules, the most celebrated of all heroes of mythology, that he came by his end by putting on a robe that had been steeped in the blood of Nessus, whom he himself had shot with a poisoned arrow. When it became warm round him the poison penetrated into his system. He attempted to wrench it off, but it tore away his flesh. And he hastened his end by placing himself on a burning pile. It was sin that made the principalities and the powers like a poisoned clinging robe. But he put them off from himself. So complete was his victory that he held them up publicly to view as spoils. This triumph he obtained on the cross. It was there that the principalities and the powers had him at a terrible disadvantage. They had, as it were, power given them against him. But he, trusting in God, threw them off. And thus the symbol of weakness became the symbol of triumph. R.F.

Vers. 8-15.

The complete man.

The one thought around which we may let the many, varied, and some of them strange ideas of this paragraph gather, is the conception of the complete man. The words teach us

I THAT THE COMPLETE MAN IS NOT LED AWAY BY ERROR IN THOUGHT OR BY EVIL IN LIFE. Any one who is so led is incomplete. And the apostle is here warning his readers to be on their guard, test, having once been emancipated from such captivity, they should be insidiously captured again and taken away as prey into such slavery. His words here show:

1. How error in thought and evil in life are closely connected. (Vers. 8, 18.)

1. The two common causes of such error and evil. "Traditions of men," mere superstitions, are the "rudiments of the world mere beginnings of knowledge. All such are to be condemned when they are not "after Christ;" that is, when they are not

1. doctrines of which he is the Teacher, or

2. doctrines of which he is the ultimate Theme.

II THE COMPLETE MAN DERIVES HIS COMPLETENESS FROM CHRIST. "Ye are complete in him," or we might paraphrase it, "Ye are filled up from him." This paragraph shows what Christ has done for such a man.

1. By Christ he is separated from evil. (Vers. 11, 12.) Circumcision was the great symbol of the separation of the Jews; baptism of the separation of the Christians. The complete man is as one "circumcised without hands" by Christ, baptized as in a burial by Christ.

2. By Christ he is made alive to goodness and to God. (Vers. 12, 13). Such a man is "risen with Christ." He is a man marked by pre-eminent livingness.

(1) The type of his livingness is here: the risen Christ; he who was gloriously alive.

(2) The means of his livingness are here: through faith in the mighty power of God, which was triumphantly manifested in the raising of Jesus.

3. By Christ he is emancipated from guilt. (Vers. 14, 15.) Most vivid and full are the metaphors describing emancipation from the guilt and from the power of sin. "Blotting out handwriting," etc. And all this work of Christ was consummated on Calvary. He like a conqueror nailed to his cross "the writings" that were against us; on his cross he openly triumphed over evil.

III CHRIST THUS MAKES MEN COMPLETE BECAUSE OF WHAT HE IS IN HIMSELF. The life of God must be wafted in upon man; borne in upon him. Whence? From Christ, "in whom dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." There are three thoughts here about Christ.

1. All the fulness of God is in him; he is not a mere emanation of God; nota mere flash of the light, but its Brightness; not a mere tone of the truth, but the Word.

2. All the fulness of God is permanent in Christ. In him "dwelleth. He is a reservoir whose waters never fail; he does not say he has bread or he has water to bestow, but he is the Bread of life, he is the Water of life; the Holy Ghost abode on him.

3. All the fulness of God was incarnate in his humanity. It dwelt in him "bodily." The purity, righteousness, wisdom, compassion, love, of God was gathered up in that human life. He was Immanuel, and from his fulness, thus complete, lasting, human, we are fed. U.R.T.

Vers. 8-10.

Christ"s fulness the Christian"s safeguard.

While thus abiding and walking in Christ (vers. 6, 7), the Colossians still needed the warning, "Be on your guard;" "Take heed," etc. In the words that follow we find

I A SUGGESTIVE SKETCH OF THE FALSE TEACHING THAT ASSAILED THE COLOSSIANS.

1. It came in the garb of philosophy. Real philosophy is nowhere condemned by the apostle. The term itself warns against its abuse. It is attributed to Pythagoras, who taught that no man was truly wise but God only, but he claimed to be a lover of wisdom. The false teaching at Colossae was rather a theosophy than a philosophy. As such it was "vain deceit" (Job_11:7-9; 1Co_1:19-21 1Co_3:18-20) It was part of that "knowledge which is falsely so called". (1Ti_6:20)

2. It claimed respect because of human authority and antiquity. It was "after the tradition of men." So far as the error was of Jewish origin, we can imagine something of its nature from the references to it in the Gospels (Mat_15:2-9; Mar_7:3-5) These traditions had an attraction for many religious minds. (Gal_1:14) Grafted upon the genuine commandments of God, they had a semblance of authority, and some of them an undefined antiquity. The false teaching that was of Gentile origin could bring forward in its support names eminent in the philosophical world. But the authority was merely of men and could not appeal to "Scripture inspired of God.

3. It prescribed services and ceremonies pleasing to the unspiritual mind.

The rite of circumcision (ver. 11), the strict observance of feasts or fasts, and the distinction of meats (ver. 16), might form important parts of a religion which would be easy to a mind religious but not truly spiritual. (Rom_14:17, Rom_14:18)

4. It was probably recommended by the personal influence of one or more popular teachers in their midst. This is an inference from the words, "Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy," etc. (Revised Version). A devout and pure heresiarch is a source of peculiar peril. Hence the vehement warning in Gal_1:8. But it was alien from the doctrine and Spirit of Christ. "Not after Christ." Paul had absolute confidence that the good news he proclaimed was Christ"s own gospel, by which he was prepared to test any teaching, and if needs be to condemn it as "a different gospel which is not another gospel. (Gal_1:6) There are points of resemblance between the heresy at Colossae and the most prominent errors of the present day that are suggestive. Rationalism, in its various degrees of anti-supernaturalism, bases itself on philosophy and science (so-called); it speaks in tones of authority, and teaches as truths the thoughts and traditions and alleged discoveries of men quite irrespective of whether we have a revelation of the thoughts of God. It is recommended by the personal influence of exemplary men. "Science and Christ have nothing to do with one another except in as far as the habit of scientific investigation makes a man cautious about accepting any proofs" (from a letter by the late Charles Darwin to a student at Jena, June 5, 1879). But it is "not after Christ," the Christ of history and of apostolic doctrine. Sacerdotalism boasts of antiquity, bases itself on the tradition of the early Fathers and the "development" of apostolic doctrine rather than on "the Scriptures of truth." Its ritual, though helpful to some devout minds, involves the danger of spiritual truths being hidden behind sacramental symbols and religious ceremonies. It makes religion easy to an unspiritual man. And sacerdotal errors are commended to us by the influence of men illustrious both in talent and character, Nevertheless, the most attractive sacerdotalism is "not after Christ.

II AN ASSURANCE THAT THE FULNESS OF CHRIST CAN SUPPLY ALL THAT WE NEED, (Vers. 9, 10.)

1. The fulness of the Godhead dwelt in the eternal Word from the beginning. This is one of the superhuman truths revealed by God"s Spirit and which stands or falls with Christianity (Joh_1:1; 1Jn_1:2)

2. That fulness now dwells in" the Man Christ Jesus, the Word made flesh," "bodily. The Incarnation is the grandest supernatural fact in the world. It is a "present truth," for Jesus Christ still lives, and the "fulness of the Godhead dwelleth in him" still. No wonder that mysteries and miracles should gather around our incarnate God. The transfiguration and the resurrection are natural to him. His dying rather than his rising is miraculous.

3. His sufficiency as Mediator renders us independent of all othermediation. His one sacrifice as an atonement takes the place of all the elementary lessons of Jewish symbolism, and makes the sacrifices of a so-called Christian priesthood a practical denial of his work on the cross (Hebrews 9. and 10.). Since he is" the Head of all principality and power," we need neither saints nor angels as intercessors (1Ti_2:5; Heb_7:25) nor can we degrade ourselves to receive God"s absolution from an intrusive priest.

4. The fulness of blessing that flows direct from Christ can satisfy all thenecessities of the human heart. Let us not make light of churches, ministries, sacraments, or other means of grace. But let us hold fast to the truth that Christ himself can immediately supply all our needs, so that we may be "in him made full." We are thus reminded of man"s emptiness and (Joh_15:5; Rev_3:17) of his capacity for receiving blessings indefinitely great ("filled with all the fulness of God"); of "the exceeding abundant grace of our Lord" (Joh_1:16; Eph_3:17-21; Php_4:13) and of the need of union with Christ by faith ("in him")as the necessary condition of spiritual life. E.S.P.

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADNENEY Ver. 8.

Christ the Treasury of wisdom.

I WISDOM IS A TREASURE for THE GREATEST TREASURY. St. Paul agrees with Solomon. Both exalt wisdom. It is a mistake to suppose that the gospel discourages knowledge and sets a premium on folly. It disregards worldly wisdom just because it brings a higher wisdom. It uses what the world calls the foolishness of preaching in order that it may confound the worldly wise and enlighten the ignorant with the true wisdom of God.

1. The treasury of wisdom is a jewel-chamber. Knowledge is good in itself. It is a treasure worth possessing for its own sake. The truly wise man would rather lose his money than his knowledge. Knowledge has these advantages over other possessions:

1. it cannot be stolen;

2. it is not lessened by being shared by many;

3. it does not suffer corruption;

4. it is a pure, calm, and elevating source of delight.

5. This treasury is a granary. Knowledge is good for the soul. The mind lives and grows upon ideas. The soul is nourished by the Word of God, which is the revelation of his wisdom. To know God is eternal life.

6. This treasury is a bank. True knowledge is like money. It is the means for procuring many other good things. It has a far larger purchasing power than gold and silver. Knowledge is power, just because it shows us how to use many things which are useless to ignorance. The knowledge of Divine truth helps us to the use of Divine grace and the performance of Divine Law.

II CHRIST IS THE TREASURY OF WISDOM. The Gnostics looked elsewhere. St. Paul says that, not only some wisdom, but all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, are in Christ. They are part of the unsearchable riches of Christ. Nature is a mitre in which science discovers numberless treasures of knowledge, but it is knowledge about Nature herself, not about the supernatural, the Divine, and the spiritual. Speculation soars in search of knowledge. But what it flatters itself to have discovered as mountain heights of knowledge often turns out to be but the shadows of cloudland. All the highest and best knowledge is in Christ.

1. The knowledge is in Christ himself. It is not simply in his teaching, much less is it in doctrines about him. To know him in his life and character and nature is to have the treasure of the best wisdom.

2. The knowledge covers the most important subjects of inquiry. We may include these in three questions.

(1) Theological: What is God? Christ says, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." To know Christ is to know God.

(2) Anthropological: What are man and his destiny? In his earthly life Christ revealed the true nature and glory of humanity, and in his resurrection its great destiny.

(3) What is duty? The example of Christ is the answer to this question. Our duty is to follow him.

III LOVE IS THE KEY TO THIS TREASURY OF WISDOM.

1. The treasure is hidden. A superficial glance at Christ will not reveal it. The merchantman seeks for goodly pearls; the purchaser of the field digs for the hidden treasure.

2. Nothing but love will open up the treasury. Gnostics thought intellectual enlightenment would do this; theologians in all ages have tried various keys the rusty key of old world learning, the ponderous key of argumentationwith its intricate wards; too often they have forgotten the golden key of love.

3. Love opens up the treasury of wisdom in Christ. St. Paul" desires the Colossians to be "knit together in love" (ver. 2) in order that they may "know the Mystery of God, even Christ," etc,

(1) This love must be love to Christ, that we may be in sympathy with man and so know him; and

(2) love to one another, that we may be in sympathy with Christ"s way of regarding God and man. W.F.A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Through philosophy and empty deceit - That is, through the empty deceit of philosophy blended with Christianity. This the apostle condemns,

1. Because it was empty and deceitful, promising happiness, but giving none.

2. Because it was grounded, not on solid reason, but the traditions of men, Zeno, Epicurus, and the rest. And,

3. Because it was so shallow and superficial, not advancing beyond the knowledge of sensible things; no, not beyond the first rudiments of them.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

world

kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield "Mat 4:8").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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

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

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

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. Spoil you through philosophy. Make spoil of you and carry you off as booty through some philosophical speculation, or empty deceit. After the tradition of men. By appealing, not to the Scriptures, but to human traditions. These traditions probably referred mainly to the matters spoken of in verse 18 below. Rudiments of the world. Paul uses this expression elsewhere of Jewish ordinances (Gal. 4:3). Verse 16 below shows what it refers to.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Paul urges the believers to be careful not to turn to the words and rules of others because nothing can add to the fullness of God that believers have in Christ.

See that

"Make sure that"

captures you

Paul speaks of the way a person can believe false teachings (because they believe false things or love the wrong things) as if someone had physically caught and held that person by force. (See: Metaphor)

philosophy

religious doctrines and beliefs that are not from God's word but are based on man's thoughts about God and life

empty deceit

Paul speaks of false ideas that produce nothing and so are without value as though they are containers with nothing in them. (See: Metaphor)

the tradition of men ... the elements of the world

Both Jewish traditions and pagan (Gentile) belief systems are worthless. "The elements of the world" perhaps refers to evil spirits that claimed to rule the world and that were adored by people. But some interpreters view "the elements of the world" as people's basic teachings about the world.

in him all the fullness of God lives in bodily form

"God's total nature lives in physical form in Christ"

translationWords

tradition

sin

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

8-15.] See summary, on ver. 1—general warning against being seduced by a wisdom which was after men’s tradition, and not after Christ,—of whose perfect work, and their perfection in Him, he reminds them.

8.] Take heed lest there shall be (the future indicative expresses strong fear lest that which is feared should really be the case; so Aristoph. Eccles. 487, περισκοπουμένη κἀκεῖσε καὶ τἀκ δεξιᾶς, μὴ ξυμφορὰ γενήσεται τὸ πρᾶγμα. Hartung, ii. 138: see reff. and Winer, § 56. 2. b a) any one Who (cf. τινὲς οἱ ταράσσοντες, ref. Gal. and note. It points at some known person) leads you away as his prey (Mey. connects the word in imagery with the foregoing περιπατεῖτε—but this perhaps is hardly necessary after the disregard to continuity of metaphor shewn in vv. 6, 7. The meaning ‘to rob’ (so with τὸν οἶκον, Aristæn. ii. 22), adopted here by Thdrt. (τοὺς ἀποσυλᾷν τ. πίστιν ἐπιχειροῦντας), ‘to undermine,’ Chrys. (ὥσπερ ἄν τις χῶμα κάτωθεν διορύττων μὴ παρέχῃ αἴσθησιν, τὸ δʼ ὑπονοστεῖ), hardly appears suitable on account of the κατὰ … κατά, which seem to imply motion. We have (see Rost and Palm’s Lex.) συλαγωγεῖν παρθένον in Heliod. and Nicet., which idea of abduction is very near that here) by means of his (or the article may signify, as Ellic., the current, popular, philosophy of the day: but I prefer the possessive meaning: see below) philosophy and empty deceit (the absence of the article before κενῆς shews the καί to be epexegetical, and the same thing to be meant by the two. This being so, it may be better to give the τῆς the possessive sense, the better to mark that it is not all philosophy which the Apostle is here blaming: for Thdrt. is certainly wrong in saying ἣν ἄνω πιθανολογίαν, ἐνταῦθα φιλοσοφίαν ἐκάλεσε,—the former being, as Mey. observes, the form of imparting,—this, the thing itself. The φιλοσοφ. is not necessarily Greek, as Tert. de præscr. 7, vol. ii. p. 20 (‘fuerat Athenis’)—Clem. Strom, i. 11, 50, vol. i. p. 346, P. (οὐ πᾶσαν, ἀλλὰ τὴν Ἐπικούρειον), Grot. al. As De W. observes, Josephus calls the doctrine of the Jewish sects philosophy: Antt. xviii. 2. 1,—Ἰουδαίοις φιλοσοφίαι τρεῖς ἦσαν, ἥ τε τῶν Ἐσσηνῶν κ. ἡ τῶν Σαδδουκαίων, τρίτην δὲ ἐφιλοσόφουν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι. The character of the philosophy here meant, as gathered from the descriptions which follow, was that mixture of Jewish and Oriental, which afterwards expanded into gnosticism), according to the tradition of men (this tradition, derived from men, human and not divine in its character, set the rule to this his philosophy, and according to this he ἐσυλαγώγει: such is the grammatical construction; but seeing that his philosophy was the instrument by which, the character given belongs in fact to his philosophy), according to the elements (see on Gal 4:3: the rudimentary lessons: i.e. the ritualistic observances (‘nam continuo post exempli loco speciem unam adducit, circumcisionem scilicet,’ Calv.) in which they were becoming entangled) of the world (all these belonged to the earthly side—were the carnal and imperfect phase of knowledge—now the perfect was come, the imperfect was done away), and not (negative characteristic, as the former were the affirmative characteristics, of this philosophy) according to Christ (“who alone is,” as Bisp. observes, “the true rule of all genuine philosophy, the only measure as for all life acceptable to God, so for all truth in thought likewise: every true philosophy must therefore be κατὰ χριστόν, must begin and end with Him”):

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8-15.

he apostle has reason to know (having, no doubt, been so informed by Epaphras) that there are amongst the Colossians teachers who are propagating mischievous heresies, dangerous to the faith, and inculcating precepts not consistent with their position as members of Christ’s kingdom. These teachers make a professsion of philosophy, but it is a mere system of deceit and of human origin, and so far is it from being an advance on what they have been taught that it really belongs to a more elementary stage of progress. Ye, he tells them, have been already made full in Christ, in whom dwells the whole fulness of the Godhead, and who is therefore far above all these angelic beings of whom they speak. Ye need no circumcision of the flesh, for ye have received in Christ the true circumcision of the spirit. By Him ye have been raised from death to life, and His work is complete; He has wholly done away with the bond that was against you.

8. βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται. “Beware lest there be anyone,” etc. For τις with the participle and article, cf. Gal 1:7, εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς. As it gives prominence to the person and his action, it appears to point to some particular person whom the apostle has in view but does not wish to name. Compare Ignat. Smyrn. 5, ὅν τινες ἀγνοοῦντες ἀρνοῦνται … τὰ δὲ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν … οὐκ ἔδοξέ μοι ἐγγράψαι. The future indic. ἔσται indicates the reality of the danger, cf. Mar 14:2, μήποτε ἔσται θόρυβος, and Heb 3:12, βλέπετε μήποτε ἔσται ἔν τινι ὑμῶν, κ.τ.λ. ὑμᾶς before ἔσται is somewhat emphatic: “you who are such persons as I have thus commended.”

This order, ὑμᾶς ἔσται, is that of B C K L P; but א A D have ἔσται ὑμᾶς, which, as the more obvious order, was more likely to be written in error.

ὁ συλαγωγῶν. A later Greek word (not indeed found till after St. Paul) used by Aristaenetus (2:22) with οἶκον in the sense “plunder,” in which sense it is understood here by Chrys., Theodoret, and some moderns. Theodoret supplies τὴν πίστιν, Theophyl. τὸν νοῦν. If this were the sense here, the object could hardly be omitted. But the proper meaning of the word seems to be “to carry off as spoil.” So Heliodorus, Aeth. x. 35, ὁ τὴν ἐμὴν θυγάτερα συλαγωγήσας. And this meaning corresponds with that of the analogous compounds, δουλαγωγεῖν, σκευαγωγεῖν, λαφυραγωγεῖν. Von Soden remarks that it also corresponds better with the idea of a destroyed bond in ver. 14 to suggest that they might again be brought into bondage; cf. Gal 5:1. The Vulgate “decipiat” is very inadequate.

διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας. A term not occurring elsewhere in the N.T., and no doubt adopted here because it was used by the false teachers themselves. The combination of it here with κενὴ ἀπάτη indicates that the sense is nearly “his philosophy, so called, which is a vain deceit.” Compare ψευδώνυμος γνῶσις, 1Ti 6:20. Chrysostom remarks: ἐπειδὴ δοκεῖ σεμνὸν εἶναι τὸ “τῆς φιλοσοφίας” προσέθηκεε καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. That the word φιλοσοφία was in use in Jewish circles appears from Philo and Josephus. The former applies the word to the religion of the Jews and the law of Moses, perhaps for the purpose of giving dignity to them in the eyes of Gentile readers. He speaks of ἡ κατὰ Μωϋσῆν φιλοσοφία (De Mut. Nom. 39), ἡ πάτριος φιλοσοφία (Leg. ad Cai. 23), ἡ Ἰουδαϊκὴ, φιλοσοφίο (ib. 33). Josephus calls the three Jewish sects τρεῖς φιλοσοφίαι (Ant. xviii. 1. 2). It is clear from the connexion with κενῆς ἀπάτης that St. Paul is not condemning philosophy in general, which, indeed, would be quite beside his purpose.

καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. The absence of the article shows that this is not a different thing from ἡ φιλοσοφία, but is a characteristic of it. ἀπάτη is opposed to λόγος τῆς ἀληθείας, 1:5, and to σοφία καὶ γνῶσις, 2:3.

κατὰ τὴν παρὰδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων. Probably to be connected with the immediately preceding words rather than with συλαγωγῶν. The teaching of the Colossian false teachers was essentially traditional and esoteric. The Essenes, their spiritual predecessors, as well as the Gnostics, subsequently claimed to possess such a source of knowledge. The oath taken by the full members of the former sect bound them not to communicate any of their doctrines to anyone otherwise than as he himself had received them, and, further, to guard carefully the books of their sect and the names of the angels (Josephus, Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 7; Lightfoot, pp. 89, 90). Compare the designation Kabbala, “tradition,” applied by the Jews to their later mystic theology.

κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου. “According to the rudiments of the world” (?). This κατά with the following κατὰ Χριστόν may perhaps be best connected with συλαγωγῶν, as the ideas they introduce have a different logical relation to the main idea, and οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν is too brief to form the antithesis to the other two κατά clauses.

τὰ στοιχεῖα (= Gal 4:3) (originally = “letters of the alphabet”) is generally understood by modern commentators as meaning “elementary teaching,” “the A B C of religious instruction”; compare παιδαγωγός in Gal. Then τοῦ κόσμου would mean having reference to mundane, or material, not spiritual things (Alford, Lightfoot, al.). But De Wette takes κόσμος as = “humanity,” as the subject of this instruction (Joh 3:16; 2Co 5:19). So Oltramare. Meyer, on the other hand, understands by it “the non-Christian world,” “rudiments with which the world concerns itself” ( = Bleek, Weiss, al.).

Neander judges that a comparison of all the Pauline passages and the Pauline association of ideas favour our understanding the phrase as denoting the earthly, elsewhere termed τὰ σαρκικά. Hence, 2:20, στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου and κόσμος may, he thinks, be considered as synonymous.

An entirely different interpretation has been adopted by several recent commentators. According to this, τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου are the personal elemental spirits. According to Jewish ideas, not only were the stars conceived as animated by spiritual beings,1 but all things had their special angels. In the Book of Enoch, 82. 10 ff., it is said with reference to the angels of the stars that they keep watch, that they may appear at their appointed times, in their proper orders, etc. There are, first, the four leaders who divide the seasons, then the twelve leaders of the orders (taxiarchs), who divide the months; and for the 360 days there are heads over thousands (chiliarchs), who divide the days. Anyone who is curious about the matter may learn the principal names in the book itself. In 18. 15 we read of stars which suffer punishment because they have transgressed the commandment of God as to their appearing. In the Book of Jubilees, cap. 2, amongst the creations of the first day are the Angels of the Presence, but also the angels of the winds, of clouds, of cold and heat, of hail, hoarfrost, thunder, etc. Perhaps Psa 104:4 may have some relation to this conception; certainly it seems to be illustrated by the Apocalypse, vii. 1, 2, xiv. 18, xvi. 5 (τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων), xix. 17; and by the interpolation in Joh 5:4. It is obvious that the term properly used of the elements ruled by these spirits might readily be applied to the spirits themselves, especially as there was no other convenient term. It agrees with this that in Gal 4:1 ff. those who were δεδουλωμένοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου are compared to those who are under ἐπίτροποι καὶ οἰκονόμοι,—a comparison which suggests personality in the former. And again, ib. 8, 9, δουλεύειν τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσιν θεοῖς appears to be equivalent to δουλεύειν τοῖς στοιχείοις, κ.τ.λ.

In the present passage the observance of times and seasons, etc., is κατὰ τὰ στ.τ.κ., not κατὰ Χρ., a contrast which does not agree well with the conception of στ. as elements of instruction. This view of τὰ στοιχεῖα gives special pertinence to the proposition which follows, ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ, κ.τ.λ., and ver. 10, ὅς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας. Ritschl defends this personal interpretation of στοιχεῖα at length (Rechtfertigung u. Versöhnung, 3rd ed. ii. p. 252), but needlessly limits the meaning to the angels of the lawgiving. Spitta adopts the more general reference (Der Zweite Brief des Petras u.der Brief des Judas, 1885, 263 ff.). He quotes from the Test. Levi, c. 4, a passage which speaks of the burning up of τὰ ἀόρατα πνεύματα, just as 2Pe 3:10 speaks of the burning up of στοιχεῖα. This view is unreservedly adopted by Kühl, the recent editor of the Epistles of Peter and Jude in Meyer’s Kommentar, and by v. Soden in his comment on the present passage.2

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Beware [βλεπετε] . Lit., see to it.

Lest any man spoil you [μη τις εσται υμας ο συλαγωγων] . The Greek is more precise and personal : lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil. So Rev. Sulagwgew to carry off booty, only here in the New Testament. A very strong, expression for the work of the false teachers; make you yourselves a booty. The A. V. is ambiguous, and might be taken to mean corrupt or damage you.

Philosophy and vain deceit [της φιλοσοφιας και κενης απατης] . Rev. gives the force of the article, his philosophy : kai and is explanatory, philosophy which is also vain deceit. Hence the warning is not against all philosophy. Filosofia, philosophy, only here in the New Testament. It had originally a good meaning, the love of wisdom, but is used by Paul in the sense of vain speculation and with special reference to its being the name by which the false teachers at Colossae designated not only their speculative system, but also their practical system, so that it covered their ascetic practices no less than their mysticism. Bishop Lightfoot remarks upon the fact that philosophy, by which the Greeks expressed the highest effort of the intellect, and virtue [αρετη] , their expression for the highest moral excellence, are each used but once by Paul, showing "that the Gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or practice, which it had introduced."

After the tradition. Connect with the whole phrase philosophy and vain deceit, as descriptive of its source and subject matter. Others connect with make spoil. The term is especially appropriate to the Judaeo - Gnostic teachings in Colossae, which depended for their authority, not on ancient writings, but on tradition. The later mystical theology or metaphysic of the Jews was called Kabbala, literally meaning reception or received doctrines, tradition.

Rudiments [στοιχεια] . See on 2Pe 3:10. Rudimentary teachings, as in Heb 5:12; applicable alike to Jewish and to Gentile teaching.

Ceremonialism - meats, drinks, washings, Essenic asceticism, pagan symbolic mysteries and initiatory rites - all belonged to a rudimentary moral stage. Compare vers. 11, 21, and Gal 4:9.

Of the world. Material as contrasted with spiritual.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

8–15. ‘Be on your guard; do not suffer yourselves to fall a prey to certain persons who would lead you captive by a hollow and deceitful system, which they call philosophy. They substitute the traditions of men for the truth of God. They enforce an elementary discipline of mundane ordinances fit only for children. Theirs is not the Gospel of Christ. In Christ the entire fulness of the Godhead abides for ever, having united itself with man by taking a human body. And so in Him—not in any inferior mediators—ye have your life, your being, for ye are filled from His fulness. He, I say, is the Head over all spiritual beings—call them principalities or powers or what you will. In Him too ye have the true circumcision—the circumcision which is not made with hands but wrought by the Spirit—the circumcision which divests not of a part only but of the whole carnal body—the circumcision which is not of Moses but of Christ. This circumcision ye have, because ye were buried with Christ to your old selves beneath the baptismal waters, and were raised with Him from those same waters to a new and regenerate life, through your faith in the powerful working of God who raised Him from the dead. Yes, you—you Gentiles who before were dead, when ye walked in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your unchastened carnal heathen heart—even you did

God quicken into life together with Christ; then and there freely forgiving all of us—Jews and Gentiles alike—all our transgressions; then and there cancelling the bond which stood valid against us (for it bore our own signature), the bond which engaged us to fulfil all the law of ordinances, which was our stern pitiless tyrant. Ay, this very bond hath Christ put out of sight for ever, nailing it to His cross and rending it with His body and killing it in His death. Taking upon Him our human nature, He stripped off and cast aside all the powers of evil which clung to it like a poisonous garment. As a mighty conqueror He displayed these His fallen enemies to an astonished world, leading them in triumph on His cross.’

8. Βλέπετε κ.τ.λ.] The form of the sentence is a measure of the imminence of the peril. The usual construction with βλέπειν μὴ is a conjunctive; e.g. in Luke xxi. 8 βλέπετε μὴ πλανηθῆτε. Here the substitution of an indicative shows that the danger is real; comp. Heb. iii. 12 βλέπετε μήποτε ἔσται ἕν τινι ὑμῶν καρδία πονηρὰ ἀπιστίας. For other instances of μὴ with a future indicative comp. Mark xiv. 2 μήποτε ἔσται θόρυβος, Rom. xi. 21 μήπως οὐδὲ σοῦ φείσεται; and see Winer § lvi. p. 631 sq.

τις] This indefinite τις is frequently used by St Paul, when speaking of opponents whom he knows well enough but does not care to name: see the note on Gal. i. 7. Comp. Ign. Smyrn. 5 ὅν τινες ἀγνοοῦντες ἀρνοῦνται ... τὰ δὲ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν, ὄντα ἄπιστα, οὐκ ἔδοξέ μοι ἐγγράψαι.

συλαγωγῶν] ‘makes you his prey, carries you off body and soul’. The word appears not to occur before St Paul, nor after him, independently of this passage, till a late date: e.g. Heliod. Aeth. x. 35 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὴν ἐμὴν θυγάτερα συλαγωγήσας. In Tatian ad Græc. 22 ὑμεῖς δὲ ὑπὸ τούτων συλαγωγεῖσθε it seems to be a reminiscence of St Paul. Its full and proper meaning, as appears from the passages quoted, is not ‘to despoil,’ but ‘to carry off as spoil’, in accordance with the analogous compounds, δουλαγωγεῖν, σκευαγωγεῖν. So too the closely allied word λαφυραγωγεῖν in Plut. Mor. p. 5 πόλεμος γὰρ οὐ λαφυραγωγεῖ ἀρετήν, Vit. Galb. 5 τὰ μὲν Γαλατῶν, ὅταν ὑποχείριοι γένωνται, λαφυραγωγήσεσθαι. The Colossians had been rescued from the bondage of darkness; they had been transferred to the kingdom of light; they had been settled there as free citizens (i. 12, 13); and now there was danger that they should fall into a state worse than their former slavery, that they should be carried off as so much booty. Comp. 2 Tim. iii. 6 αἰχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια.

For the construction ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν see the notes on Gal. i. 7, iii. 21. The former passage is a close parallel to the words here, εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς κ.τ.λ. The expression ὁ συλαγωγῶν gives a directness and individuality to the reference, which would have been wanting to the more natural construction ὃς συλαγωγήσει.

διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας κ.τ.λ.] ‘through his philosophy which is an empty deceit’. The absence of both preposition and article in the second clause shows that κενῆς ἀπάτης describes and qualifies φιλοσοφίας. Clement therefore (Strom. vi. 8, p. 771) had a right to contend that St Paul does not here condemn ‘philosophy’ absolutely. The φιλοσοφία καὶ κενὴ ἀπάτη of this passage corresponds to the ψευδώνυμος γνῶσις of 1 Tim. vi. 20.

But though ‘philosophy’ is not condemned, it is disparaged by the connexion in which it is placed. St Chrysostom’s comment is not altogether wrong, ἐπειδὴ δοκεῖ σεμνὸν εἶναι τὸ τῆς φιλοσοφίας, προσέθηκε καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης. The term was doubtless used by the false teachers themselves to describe their system. Though essentially Greek as a name and as an idea, it had found its way into Jewish circles. Philo speaks of the Hebrew religion and Mosaic law as ἡ πάτριος φιλοσοφία (Leg. ad Cai. 23, II. p. 568, de Somn. ii. 18, I. p. 675) or ἡ Ἰουδαϊκὴ φιλοσοφία (Leg. ad Cai. 33, II. p. 582) or ἡ κατὰ Μω"υσῆν φιλοσοφία (de Mut. Nom. 39, I. p. 612). The system of the Essenes, the probable progenitors of the false teachers at Colossæ, he describes as ἡ δίχα περιεργείας Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων φιλοσοφία (Omn. prob. lib. 13, II. p. 459). So too Josephus speaks of the three Jewish sects as τρεῖς φιλοσοφίαι (Ant. xviii. 1. 2, comp. B.J. ii. 8. 2). It should be remembered also, that in this later age, owing to Roman influence, the term was used to describe practical not less than speculative systems, so that it would cover the ascetic life as well as the mystic theosophy of these Colossian heretics. Hence the Apostle is here flinging back at these false teachers a favourite term of their own, ‘their vaunted philosophy, which is hollow and misleading’.

The word indeed could claim a truly noble origin; for it is said to have arisen out of the humility of Pythagoras, who called himself ‘a lover of wisdom’, μηδένα γὰρ εἶναι σοφὸν ἄνθρωπον ἀλλ’ ἢ Θεόν (Diog. Laert. Proœm. § 12; comp. Cic. Tusc. v. 3). In such a sense the term would entirely accord with the spirit and teaching of St Paul; for it bore testimony to the insufficiency of the human intellect and the need of a revelation. But in his age it had come to be associated generally with the idea of subtle dialectics and profitless speculation; while in this particular instance it was combined with a mystic cosmogony and angelology which contributed a fresh element of danger. As contrasted with the power and fulness and certainty of revelation, all such philosophy was ‘foolishness’ (1 Cor. i. 20). It is worth observing that this word, which to the Greeks denoted the highest effort of the intellect, occurs here alone in St Paul, just as he uses ἀρετή, which was their term to express the highest moral excellence, in a single passage only (Phil. iv. 8; see the note there). The reason is much the same in both cases. The Gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or of practice, which it had introduced.

On the attitude of the fathers towards philosophy, while philosophy was a living thing, see Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible s.v. Clement, who was followed in the main by the earlier Alexandrian fathers, regards Greek philosophy not only as a preliminary training (προπαιδεία) for the Gospel, but even as in some sense a covenant (διαθήκη) given by God to the Greeks (Strom. i. 5, p. 331, vi. 5, p. 761, ib. § 8, p. 771 sq.). Others, who were the great majority and of whom Tertullian may be taken as an extreme type, set their faces directly against it, seeing in it only the parent of all heretical teaching: e.g. de Anim. 2, 3, Apol. 46, 47. In the first passage, referring to this text, he says, ‘Ab apostolo jam tunc philosophia concussio veritatis providebatur’; in the second he asks, ‘Quid simile philosophus et Christianus?’ St Paul’s speech at Athens, on the only occasion when he is known to have been brought into direct personal contact with Greek philosophers (Acts xvii. 18), shows that his sympathies would have been at least as strong with Clement’s representations as with Tertullian’s.

κατὰ κ.τ.λ.] The false teaching is described (1) As regards its source–‘the traditions of men’; (2) As regards its subject matter–‘the rudiments of the world’.

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

τὰ στοιχεῖα] ‘the rudiments, the elementary teaching’; comp. ver. 20. The same phrase occurs again Gal. iv. 3 (comp. ver. 9). As στοιχεῖα signifies primarily ‘the letters of the alphabet’, so as a secondary meaning it denotes ‘rudimentary instruction’. Accordingly it is correctly interpreted by Clement Strom. vi. 8 (p. 771) Παῦλος ... οὐκ ἔτι παλινδρομεῖν ἀξιοῖ ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν φιλοσοφίαν, στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου τάυτην ἀλληγορῶν, στοιχειωτικήν τινα οὖσαν (i.e. elementary) καὶ προπαιδείαν τῆς ἀληθείας (comp. ib. vi. 15, p. 799), and by Tertullian adv. Marc. v. 19 ‘secundum elementa mundi, non secundum cælum et terram dicens, sed secundum literas seculares’. A large number of the fathers however explained the expression to refer to the heavenly bodies (called στοιχεῖα), as marking the seasons, so that the observance of ‘festivals and new-moons and sabbaths’ was a sort of bondage to them. It would appear from Tertullian’s language that Marcion also had so interpreted the words. On this false interpretation see the note on Gal. iv. 3. It is quite out of place here: for (1) The context suggests some mode of instruction, e.g. τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων here, and δογματίζεσθε in ver. 20; (2) The keeping of days and seasons is quite subordinate to other external observances. The rite of circumcision (ver. 11), and the distinction of meats (ver. 21) respectively, are placed in close and immediate connexion with τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in the two places where it occurs, whereas the observance of days and seasons (ver. 16) stands apart from either.

τοῦ κόσμου] ‘of the world’, that is, ‘belonging to the sphere of material and external things’. See the notes on Gal. iv. 3, vi. 14.

‘In Christ’, so the Apostle seems to say, ‘you have attained the liberty and the intelligence of manhood; do not submit yourselves again to a rudimentary discipline fit only for children (τὰ στοιχεῖα). In Christ you have been exalted into the sphere of the Spirit: do not plunge yourselves again into the atmosphere of material and sensuous things (τοῦ κόσμου).’

J. B. Lightfoot, St Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon: a revised text with introductions, notes and dissertations (London: Macmillan, 1875) — public domain. Electronic text from Project Gutenberg (ebook #50857). Covers Colossians and Philemon only (the verse-by-verse notes; introductions and dissertations are omitted); Lightfoot's companion Galatians and Philippians volumes are not included, as the available public-domain scans carry garbled Greek that cannot be faithfully reproduced.