The Pulpit Commentary — Colossians — Section 103

the ~olitnr11 µ,v in enoh a connection is I\ sparing treatment of (the) body-not in any well-c>slnhlished clnssfoal icliom (see Winer's honour (as) a.g&inst surfeiting of the flesh or A. Duttmann's 'Grnmmar;' also Meyer). (vers. 16, 21, 22; Phil. iii. 19-21; 1 Tim. It i• supc>rlluons, thereforo, as well as con- iv. 3; 1 Cor. vi. 13-20; xii. 23-25; fusing to the order of thought, to seek in 1 Thess. iv. 4). The "nnd" linking this the s,·q nel for the missing hnlf of the olnuse to the lo.at under tho govornmont or rmtithesis. Other renderings of :1.Jyov- "in," is textually doubtful; Lightfoot " show" (English A.V., Bengel, De Wette), oo.ncols it; Westcott and Hort give tho "gTound" or "reason" (Vulgate, Klapper), omission DB a secondnry rea.d.i.ng, Mr. Hort "reputation" (1\fryer, Alford, Ellicott, regards the pnssage, like vor. 181 u hope• Ligiltfoot)-are partly doubtful or excep- lcssly corrupt~'\ verdict which we would tional in point of nsnge, nnd partly o"l'er- fain believe is too despairing. 1£ 1<al be look the pointed reference of vers. 22, 23 struck out, then l11f>E1lid11- must bo a.tta.ohed, to the language of "l'ers. 4 and 8. And the somewhat loosely, to the principo.l predicate ooml,ination of :1.&yov lxovTa. into n sing-le (" are having") o.s an instrumental dative. phrase is scarcely justified here in face On either construction, the sense appear~ of the established Pauline association of to be that it wns its combination of ascetic "word" o.nd "wisdom" (comp. 1 Cor. rigour with religious devotion that gave to i. li-ii. 16, as well as xii. S). Both in this t.he system iu question its undoubted oha.rm, Epistle and in 1 Corinthians the writer and furnished nn adequate field for tho is contending against forms of error which eloquence a.nd philosophico.l skill or its found their aoconnt in the Greek lo"l'e of o.dvocate. 'A</>El~Ela., unsparingness, a.nd eloquence a.nd of dexterous word-play. 1rATJO'µovfi, surfeiting-both found only here 1\'ilile the first part of the predicate, there- in the New Testament-and a.long with them fore, exph•ins the intellectual attracti11eness of " body " a.nd " flesh," stand opposed to the Colossirm error, the clause next follow- ea.eh other. This clause, therefore, contains ing accounts for its religious fascination; a. complete sense, and we must not look a.nd the third part of the "\'erse strikes at outside it for a.n explanation of the included the root of its ethical and practical appli- words, "not in a.ny honour." As we have cations. (Shown) in (or, with) devotion seen. the first clo.use of the predicate to (or, delight in) worship (or, "oluntary (" having word indeed," etc.) needs no such worship) a.nd lowliness of mind ("l'er. 18). complement. The clause "not .... flesh" is The preposition "in" brings us illto the a. comment on the words, "unsparing treat- moral a.nd religious sphere of life in which ment of the body." On this topie the this would-be wisdom of doctrine had its npostle had not yet expressed his mind range a.nd found its application. The sufficiently. He ha.s ill vers. 16, 20--22 prefix J8e:l.o- of l8,:l.u8pTJJl<eia. ordimuily denounced certain ascetio rules a.s obsolete, coDI1otes " w.illin!!llcss" rather than "wil- · or a.s trifling a.nd needless; but he has yet fulness;" nnd th~ "deligilting in worship" to expose the principle a.nd tendency from of ver. 18 (see note) points strongly in this which they sprang. He is the more bound to direct.ion. As against Ellicott a.nd Light- he explicit on this subject inasmuch as there foot on the etymological point, see Hofmann, were ascetic leanillgs in his own teaching, pp. 102, 103. Only so fa.r e.s the worship in a.nd passages in his earlier Epistles such as question (see note, "\'er. 18, on ''worship") is Rom. viii. 13; xiii. 14; 1 Cor. vii 1; ix. 27, e,il, can the 1'aving a will to worship be which the "philosophical" party might evil. The other characteristics of the error n,,t mmaturally WTcst to their own pur• marked in this verse seem to be recom.men- poses. He could not condemn severity to dnlions, and "devotion to worship" ie in the body absolutely, a.nd in every sense. keeping with them. Thie disposition, The Colossian rigorism he does condemn- moreover, has a.n e.ir of "hwnility," which (!) a.s not in keeping with bodily selj-1"espect, does not belong to a eelf-impoaed, arbitrary which is the safoguo.rd of Christian purity; 'IDOr&hip. There ie e. love of worship for and (2) as not in reality directeti against more warship's sake which ie a perversion semual iudulgeflCB, the prevention of which of the religious instinct, a.nd tends to multi- is the proper end of rules of abstinence. ply both the forms a.nd objec!s of devotion. These two objections a.re thrown into a Thie spurious religiousness took the form, single terse, energetic negative clause, in the ColoSBia.n errorists, of worship paid to obscure, like so much in this chapter, from t}.,, angeu. On this particular worship the its brevity a.nd want of connecting particles. 1q,ostle po.saed hie judgment in ver. 18, e.nd In 1 These. iv. 4 the phrase," in honour,'' now prJints ont ihe tendency from wl,ich occurs in a similar coDI1cction: " That ea.oh it springs. In v<:r. 18 "humility" precedes; one of you know how to go.in possession of here it fullows "worship," by way of tran- his own vessel" (i.e. "to become muter si ti,,n frum the religious to the moral aspect of hie bocly:" see Wordsworth and Alford of L,•; r:itiw 1,cacl,i,,g. And (or, wit/,) U.11• on tho vu.ssago; also Mayor's refcrc11ce un OH If, 1--2:J.] THE EPI8'l'LE TO 'l'HE COLOSSIANS. 9'7