The Pulpit Commentary — Colossians — Section 218

indicntcs the existence of l\ pilrsone.l link And Nympha (or, Nymp11as), and the ~uroh between the Churches ot Colossm e.nd of (literally, assembly) at her (or, thefr) houae. Lno,licee.. Nol'-4Ja." me.y be either masculine or feminine -· Yer. 14.-Luke the physfoian, the beloved, accusative. The reading "her" ("u.-;js) ie saluteth you (Philem. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11). adopted by Westcott and Hort without This reference to Luke's profession is ex- alternative, and seems on the whole the most tremely interesting. We gather from the probable. 'rile Revised Text follows Tisch- use of tho first person plural in Acts xvi. endorf, Tregelles, Meyer, Alford, Lightfoot, 10-17, and again from xx. 5 to tho end who read "their" ("b,-oiv). "His" ("J.-ov) of the narrative, that he joined St. Paul is evidently o. later correction. Lightfoot on his first Yoyage to Europe aud was left says, indeed, thnt "a Doric form of the behind at Philippi; and rejoined him six Greek name (so. NO/J-</>aJJ for NO/J-</>71") seems years after on the journey to Jerusalem in the higllest degree improbable;" but he which completed his third missionary circuit, allows, on the other hand, the.t Nvi,<pas as a continuing with him during his voyage to contracted mrisculine form (for Nvi,<p&li,.,pos) Ilornc and his imprisonment. This faithful "is very rare." This person was apparently friend attended him in his second captivity, a leading member of the Laodicean Church, and solaced his fast hours ; "Only Luke is at whose house Church meetings were held ,,-ith me" (2 Tim. iv. 11). His being called (comp. Acts xii. 12; Philem. 2; Rom. xvi. 5; "the physician" suggests that he ministered 1 Cor. xvi. 19). "The Church at her house" to the apostle in this capacity, especially as can scarcely have been an assembly distinct " his first appeara11ce in St. Paul's company " from the brethren that are in Laodicea." synchronizes with an attack of St. Paul's Both expressions may relate to the same constitutional m1tlady" (Lightfoot: comp. body of persons, referred first individually, Acts x,i. 10 and Gal. iv. 13-15; the illness then collectively as a meeting gatherecl at referred to in 2 Cor. i. 8-10 and iv. 7- this place. Others suppose a more private v. S may partiy ba,e led to Luke's rejoining gathering to be mee.nt, as e.g. of Coloesio.ns St. Patti in :!.Iacedonia). St. Luke's writings living at Laodicea (Meyer). Many older testify both to his medical knowledge interpreters identified this Chnrch with the and to his Pauline sympathies. His com- household .of N ymphas. If " their" be the panionship probably gave a special colour- true reading, the expression must include ing to the phraseology and cast of thought Nympha and her family. Nympha(orNym- of St. Paul's later Epistles. (On the re- phas), like Philemon and his family, St. Paul btions of St. Luke and St. Paul, see a had doubtless met in Ephesus. valuable Po.per by Dean Plumptre in the Ver. 16.-And when this letter has been Expositor, first series, vol. iv. pp. 134-156.) read among you, see to it (literally, cause) "The beloved" is a distinct appellation. due that it be read also in the Churoh of (the) partly to Luke's services to the apostle, but Laodioeans (1 Thess. v. 27). For these two cl,iefly, one would snppose, to the amiable Churches were closely allied inoriginandcon- and gentle dioposition of the writer of the dition, as well as by situation and acquaint- third Gospel. It is not unlikely that he is anceship (eh. ii. 1-5; iv. 13). 'rho leaven "the brother" referred to in 2 Car. viii. 18, 19. of the Colossian error was doubtless begin- Lucas is a contraction for Lucanus ; so that ning to work in Lo.odicea also. The words he was not the "Lucius" of Acts xiii. I, nor, addrnssed to Le.odicee. in .the Apocalypse certainly, the "Lucius my kinsman" of Rom. (iii. 14-22) bear reference apparently to xvi. 21, who was a Jew. He was probably, the language of this Epistle (i. 15-18); see like many physicians of that period, a freed- Lightfoot, pp. 41, eto. The phrase," Church man; aucl, since freedmen took the name of of Lo.odiceans," corresponds to that used in the house to which thq had belonged, ma.y the salutation of 1 and 2 Thesso.lonians, but ha1·e beeu, as Pluruptre conjectures, con- is not found elsewhere in St. Paul. And nected with the family of the Roman philo- that ye also read the letter from Laodicea, sopher Seneca and t!Je poet Lucan. And What was this letter? Clearly a letter from Dema.s (I'hllem. 24; 2 Tim. iv.10), who alone St. Paul which would be received at Lao- receives no word of commendation-a fact dicea, and which the Colossio.ns were to significant in view of the melancholy sen- obtain from there. 'rhe connection of this teuce pronounced upon him in 2 Tim. iv. 10. sentence-with the foregoing, and the absence His nawe is probably short for Demetrius. of any other definition of the worcls, " the Ver. 15.-Salute the brethren tha.t are in letter (from Lo.odicea)," make this evident. Laodicea. (ver. 13; eh. ii. 1; Rev. i. 11; Nothing further can be affirmed with cer- iii. 14-22). Perhaps the brethren in Hiera- tainty. But several considerations point to polis (ver. 13) were not formed into a dis- the probability tltat this missing Epistle is tinct Church as yet (comp. eh. ii. 1). The none other than our (so-called) Epistle to Church in Laodicea early became a flourish- the Ephesians. For: (1) Both letters were ing and wealthy community (Rev. iii. 17). sent o.t the same time, nnd by the 1111mo UH, IV, 1-18.) THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 215