background image
J. L. Terveen ­ Colossians 2
20
6
The single article unites
and
giving the otherwise neutral term "philosophy" a
clearly pejorative sense in this context. Given such negative contexts as this, the term "philosophy"
became stigmatized by the church fathers as anti-gospel. J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistles to the
Colossians and to Philemon (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1961), p.179, recalls this negative attitude citing
Tertullian: "Quid simile philosophus et Christianus?"
7
The first two
clauses are both in turn set in antithetical relationship to the final
clause.
8
The same phrase with negative connotations occurs in the dominical saying of Mk.7:8. The semi-
technical term
expresses the manner in which religious statements were transmitted from
teacher to learner. An essentially neutral term, "tradition" implies dignity, antiquity, and trustworthiness.
In Col.2:8 the matter of the traditions origin becomes the major issue. Col.2:6 uses a related term for the
reception of tradition (
) and sets the stage for the source contrast Paul draws attention to here.
9
For a large bibliography of the related literature on
, see G. Delling, Theological Dictionary of
the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), VII, p.670. For further extended treatments of this
distinctive term (and the full phrase
) see P. T. OBrien, Colossians, Philemon
(Waco: Word, 1982), p. 129-132; E. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), p.
96-99; Bauer, BDAG, p.946. Without delving into the sea of scholarly work on
, a
task far beyond the more limited scope of this work, the present writer accepts the major accepted view that
it refers to the "elemental forces/spirits of the universe," the basic material (earth, air, water, fire) of the
cosmos mythologized and divinized and seen as exercising ruling power over human affairs. In Col.2:8,20
context the notion of angelic heirarchies connected to the "elements" appears significant (2:18). The
translation "basic principles" (NIV) seems to vague, missing the more metaphysical dimension that works
well within the more personalized polemical antithesis in Col.2. The passages in Gal.4:3,9 also seem to
point toward angelic involvement, especially given the reference in Gal.3:19 to angelic involvement in the
giving of the law (Gal.4:3,9). The contexts of other key passages where this term occurs (Gal.4:3,9;
Col.2:20; Hb.5:12; 2Pt.3:10,12) must be consulted for more precise meanings in those various texts.
10
Though it may perhaps be construed as anachronistic to speak of "orthodox" (at least in a technical
sense) teaching in the doctrinally developing phase of the early church, Paul himself surely regards those
who disagree with his teachings about the person and work of Jesus ­ as he goes on to develop more clearly
yet in 2:9-15 especially ­ as teaching a deceptively misleading theology. Those who oppose his "gospel of
Christ" tradition with the "traditions of men" are teaching false doctrine, and in certain extreme cases merit
his declaration of anathema upon them (Gal.1:8,9). In the present work the terms "false teaching/teacher"
and "heterodox" refer to teachings not aligned with the canonical NT scriptures. "Orthodox," if used, will
refer to teachings aligned with those found within the NT canon.
11
governs both major clauses which follow in 2:9 (
) and 2:10a (
).
Syntactically the larger unit of 2:9-12 at least may be seen as governed by the
; indeed it may be
possible to construe the complex grammar of 2:9-15 as a whole (with its sequence of typical Pauline
relative clauses and participial phrases) as ruled by the overarching conjunction
in 2:9a.
12
In the Christ-hymn of Col.1:15-20, however, there is obviously a much more extensive look at the God-
Christ relationship. Even there in the first movement of Pauls thought in Colossians (1:3 ­ 2:5), however,
it could be argued that the postulations concerning the divine person and supreme dignity of Christ are
subservient to Pauls more paraenetic concern with the working spiritual relationship between the believer
and this Christ. The same orientation toward the relationship between the believer and Christ ­ namely
their union with him ­ rules Pauls argument in Col.2:6 ­ 3:17 as well.
13
M. J. Harris, Colossians & Philemon (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 49-50; P. T. OBrien,
Colossians, 50-53.
14
BDAG, 784.
15
BDAG, 829-830. The scholarly literature on the notoriously thorny background of the term
often veers toward a gnostic hypothesis or toward variously conceived syncretistic hypotheses for the
origins of pleroma philosophical constructs. J. D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), p.99-102, makes good sense in looking closer to home in Hellenistic
Judaisms concepts of divine wisdom (e.g. Wis.1:6-7; especially in view of creation, Ps.139:7; Jer.23:24)
and to the LXXs usage of both verb (Ps.23:1 LXX) and noun forms (e.g. Jer.8:16; Ez.19:7; 30:12). In
other words, one need look no further than Judaism and the LXX for likely roots behind Pauls pleroma
thinking and terminology. Gnosticisms developed usage of pleroma as a technicus terminus appears