Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Colossians 2:18

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshiping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

18. Let no man] Another parallel but distinct caution after that of Col 2:16.

beguile you of your reward ] Rob you of your prize, R.V. The verb is compounded with the noun brabeion (used Php 3:14), an athletic prize. Here, as in Philippians, it means the life eternal, “the crown of life” (Jas 1:12; Rev 2:10). The Colossians were tempted to forsake their position and privilege in Christ, found and retained by faith; and, so far, they were tempted to lose their “hold on the eternal life” (1Ti 6:12; 1Ti 6:19) which is in Him alone (1Jn 5:12). Cp. Rev 3:11. What their Lord would do to save them from the fatal step was altogether another matter; their one duty was not to take the step.

The alien teachers are represented here (having regard to the classical usage of the verb) “not as umpires, nor as successful rivals, but simply as persons frustrating those who otherwise would have won the prize” (Lightfoot).

Tyndale and Cranmer curiously render, “ Let no man make you shote at a wronge marke,” probably influenced by Luther, who has Lasset euch Niemand das Ziel verrcken; an untenable paraphrase. Geneva, “ Let no man beare rule over you.”

in a voluntary humility ] The Greek means, quite literally, “ willing in humility ” ; and some questions arise about the construction. These may be reduced to two main alternatives, ( a) Is “ willing ” to be connected with the verb just previous, and to be rendered, “let no one rob you of your prize willingly,” “meaningly,” “of malice prepense”? ( b) Is “ willing ” to be connected with the words just following, and explained, “ taking pleasure in humility”? Of these ( a) is easier grammatically, but Ellicott urges the grave objection that it attributes a Satanic and almost incredible malice to the teachers in question. It may be answered that St Paul need not be charging them with “meaning” to rob their followers of heaven, but with “meaning” to rob them of a faith with which as a fact the hope of heaven was bound up. Lightfoot advocates ( b), and proves that it is a construction supported by the LXX., where it is not used “only with personal pronouns” (as Ellicott says), but with ordinary nouns; see Psalms 110. (Heb. and Eng. 111.) 1, 146. (Heb. and Eng. 147.) 10. The strong Hebraism, without any N.T. parallel, is certainly startling, however; and we recommend ( a), though doubtfully, with the explanation given above. The rendering would be somewhat thus, in paraphrase: Let no man have his own way in robbing you &c.

humility ] “Humility is a vice with heathen moralists but a virtue with Christian Apostles. In this passage which (with Col 2:23) forms the sole exception to the general language of the Apostles, the divergence is rather apparent than real” (Lightfoot). An artificial, gratuitous, humility is not humility but its parody. And such was the thing in question; an abasement of man before unlawful objects (see next words) of worship; a prostration self-chosen, and also self-conscious.

worshipping of angels ] A practice highly developed in later Judaism, while entirely absent from the apostolic teaching, and indeed clearly condemned here, and Rev 19:10; Rev 22:9, and implicitly in Hebrews 1 It is noticeable that the Council of Laodicea (a.d. 394), so near Coloss, forbids (c. 35) Christians to leave the Church and go away “to name angels” in secret assemblies, calling this a “secret idolatry,” and apparently connecting it with Jewish influences. Theodoret in his Commentary here speaks of the existence in his time (cent. 5) of Oratories ( euctria) to the Archangel Michael in the region of Laodicea and Coloss, and of their popularity, apparently as rivals to the regular Churches. At this day in Abyssinia Michael has his holyday every month. See further Introd., pp. 15, 31, 33.

“Angels,” says the saintly Jansenist Quesnel here, “will always win the day over Jesus Christ despised ( ananti) and crucified, if the choice of a mediator between us and God is left to the vanity of the human mind.”

For a (doubtful) early sanction of angel-worship see a difficult sentence in Justin, Apology, 1. c. 6. Irenus, Justin’s contemporary, says (ii. 57) that the Church “does nothing by the invocation of angels.”

Whatever its origin and details, such a worship inevitably beclouds the Christian’s view both of the majesty and of the nearness and tenderness of Christ his living Head.

“ Worshipping”: thrskeia; a word akin perhaps in etymology to “ tremble,” and denoting religious devotion mainly in its external aspect; a cultus. The word or its cognate occurs elsewhere in N.T. Act 26:5; Jas 1:26-27. Lightfoot quotes a sentence from Philo, the Jewish contemporary of the Apostles, where it is expressly distinguished from piety ( hosiots); and he says that “generally the usage of the word exhibits a tendency to a bad sense.” Such a sense is quite in point here; an unauthorized and abject cultus was the natural expression of a counterfeit “humility.”

intruding into those things which he hath not seen ] Qu vidit ambulans (Old Latin) ; Qu non vidit ambulans (Vulgate) ; “ Dwelling in the things which he hath seen ” (R.V.). Here are serious differences of reading and translation, which must be briefly discussed.

( a) Shall we render “ Intruding into,” or, “ Dwelling in ”? Classical usage of the Greek verb favours the latter rendering; the word is used e.g. of a god’s haunt in a region or a spot. The usage in LXX. and Apocrypha slightly favours the former rendering; the word is used there of the invasion or new occupation of a country (Jos 19:51; 1Ma 12:25 ; 1Ma 14:31 ). The balance must be struck by our conclusions on the rest of the phrase.

( b) “ Things which he hath not seen ” : “ Things which he hath seen.” Is the negative to be omitted or not? “Many authorities, some ancient, insert ‘ not ’ ” (margin, R.V.). Ellicott approves the insertion of “ not ”; Lightfoot advocates the omission. It is difficult to discuss the evidence in a note, and we have attempted to state it in outline in Appendix J. Here it must suffice to say that we venture to recommend the reading which he hath not seen. It seems to us more likely, on a view of the facts, that the negative should have dropped out early than that it should have been deliberately inserted.

If we reject “ not,” the meaning will most probably be that the erring teacher “ dwells in, or dwells on, what he has seen,” his alleged visions and revelations, the “manifestations” which he says, and perhaps thinks, he has witnessed, and which he prefers to the apostolic Gospel. If we retain “ not,” the meaning will be that he invades the region of the Unseen with a presumptuous confidence of assertion, as if he had seen it. In either case he might assert his enjoyment of angelic or other visions; but in the latter case the Apostle denies such a claim if made. Cp. Eze 13:3; “Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing.”

vainly ] The Greek word means “ at random,” without reason or cause. Cp. Rom 13:4 ; 1Co 15:2. (This meaning in some passages glides into that of “ without result ”; Gal 3:4; Gal 4:11.) The true Gospel is not so; its loftiest assertion springs from deepest fact and truth.

puft up ] A present participle, indicating habit and development. For the word in a similar connexion cp. 1Co 8:1.

by his fleshly mind ] Lit., “ by the mind of his flesh.” “The mind ” ( nous) here is the merely reasoning faculty as distinguished from spiritual intuition. “ The flesh ” is, as often in St Paul, the unregenerate state, in which the sinful principle dominates. See Eph 2:3 and note there in this Series. In that verse “ flesh ” and “ mind ” are somewhat similarly collocated; but the word rendered (in A.V.) “ mind ” is lit. “ thoughts ”; “the mind” in particular action. He is “puffed up” by an exercise of thought characteristic of the unregenerate state.

L. THE VARIOUS READINGS OF Col 2:18

Must we read ( a) “ The things which he hath not seen,” or ( b) “ The things which he hath seen? ”

The documentary evidence may be briefly stated thus:

i. For the omission of “ not ”:

Uncial MSS.: ABD, the first three of which are, with C, the oldest copies we possess. B were probably written cent. 4, A cent. 5. D probably belongs to cent. 6.

Cursive MSS.: those numbered 17, 28, 67 in the list of cursive copies of St Paul’s Epistles. These belong to centt. 10 and 12. MS. 67 omits “ not” by correction only; the correction is perhaps as late as cent. 15.

Versions: the Old Latin (perhaps cent. 2) in three of its texts out of the five which contain the Epistle; the Coptic Version called the Memphitic (perhaps cent. 2); and two others.

Fathers: Tertullian (cent. 2, 3); Origen (cent. 3), but somewhat doubtfully [119] ; the commentator Hilary (cent. 4), quoted as Ambrosiaster, as his work is included with the works of Ambrose. Jerome and Augustine (cent. 4, 5) both notice both readings.

[119] He cites the text three times. Two of these occur where his Greek is known only through a Latin Version, and one of these two gives “ not.” In the third, we have the Greek. is inserted by the (last) critical Editor, De la Rue.

ii. For the retention of “ not ”:

Uncial MSS.: C K L P, the first of cent. 5, the others of cent. 9. Besides, the reading (not ) is given by a corrector of , who dates perhaps cent. 7, and by correctors of D, who date perhaps cent. 8.

Cursive MSS.: all with the three exceptions given above; i.e. more than 290 known copies, ranging from cent. 9 to cent. 15 or 16.

Versions: the Syriac Versions (the earliest is probably of cent. 2); one text of the Old Latin; the Vulgate (Jerome’s revision of the Latin); the Gothic, thiopic, and others.

Fathers: Origen (in one place; see further above); Chrysostom; Jerome (with deliberate preference); Augustine (likewise); Theodore of Mopsuestia; Theodoret, “and others” (Lightfoot).

The late Dean Burgon ( The Revision Revised, p. 356, note), thus summarizes the evidence, and remarks upon it:

“We have to set off the whole mass of the copies against some 6 or 7: Irenus (i. 847), Theodorus Mops. ( in loc.), Chrys. (xi. 372), Theodoret (iii. 489, 490), John Damascene (ii. 211) against no Fathers at all (for Origen once has [iv. 655] [120] ; once has it not [iii. 63]; and once is doubtful [i. 583]). Jerome and Augustine both take notice of the diversity of reading, but only to reject it. The Syriac versions, the Vulgate, Gothic, Georgian, Sclavonic, thiopic, Arabic, and Armenian (we owe the information, as usual, to Dr Malan) are to be set against the suspicious Coptic. All these then are with the Traditional Text: which cannot seriously be suspected of error.”

[120] See just above on this point, in our statement of the evidence for “ not ”. (Editor.)

It must be added that Lightfoot ( in loco), and Westcott and Hort ( N.T. in Greek, ii. 127), suspect the Greek text of Col 2:18 of corruption, and suggest or adopt ingenious emendations. The rendering of the clause in question thus altered would be, “ treading the void in airy suspension,” or, “ treading an airy void.” We venture to think the reasons for suspicion inadequate.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Let no man beguile you of your reward – Margin, judge against you. The word used here – katabrabeuo – occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is a word which was employed with reference to the distribution of prizes at the Grecian games, and means, to give the prize against anyone, to deprive of the palm. Hence, it means to deprive of a due reward: and the sense here is, that they were to be on their guard lest the reward – the crown of victory to which they looked forward – should be wrested from them by the arts of others. That would be done if they should be persuaded to turn back, or to falter in the race. The only way to secure the prize was to hold on in the race which they then were running; but if they yielded to the philosophy of the Greeks, and the teachings of the Jews, they would be defrauded of this reward as certainly as a racer at the games would if the crown of victory should be unjustly awarded to another. In this case, too, as real injustice would be done, though the apostle does not say it would be in the same manner. Here it would be by art; in the case of the racer it would be by a wrong decision – but in either case the crown was lost. This exhortation has the more force from this consideration. Against an unjust judge we could have no power; but we may take care that the reward be not wrested from us by fraud.

In a voluntary humility – Margin, being a voluntary in humility. Tyndale renders this, Let no man make you shoot at a wrong mark, which, after his own imagination, walketh in the humbleness of angels. The word used here ( tapeinophrosune) means lowliness of mind, modesty, humbleness of deportment; and the apostle refers, doubtless, to the spirit assumed by those against whom he would guard the Colossians – the spirit of modesty or of humble inquirers. The meaning is, that they would not announce their opinions with dogmatic certainty, but they would put on the appearance of great modesty. In this way, they would become really more dangerous – for no false teachers are so dangerous as those who assume the aspect of great humility, and who manifest great reverence for divine things. The word rendered voluntary here – thelon – does not, properly, belong to the word rendered humility. It rather appertains to the subsequent part of the sentence, and means that the persons referred to were willing, or had pleasure in attempting, to search into the hidden and abstruse things of religion. They were desirous of appearing to do this with an humble spirit – even with the modesty of an angel – but still they had pleasure in that profound and dangerous kind of inquiry.

And worshipping of angels – threskeia ton angelon. This does not mean, as it seems to me, that they would themselves worship angels or that they would teach others to do it for there is no reason to believe this. Certainly the Jewish teachers, whom the apostle seems to have had particularly in his eye, would not do it; nor is there any evidence that any class of false teachers would deliberately teach that angels were to be worshipped The reference is rather to the profound reverence; the spirit of lowly piety which the angels evinced, and to the fact that the teachers referred to would assume the same spirit, and were, therefore, the more dangerous. They would come professing profound regard for the great mysteries of religion, and for the incomprehensible perfections of the divinity, and would approach the subject professedly with the awful veneration which the angels have when they look into these things; 1Pe 1:12. There was no bold, irreverent, or confident declamation, but the danger in the case arose from the fact that they assumed so much the aspect of modest piety; so much the appearance of the lowly devotion of angelic beings. The word rendered here worship – threskeia – occurs in the New Testament only here, in Act 26:5; and Jam 1:26-27, in each of which places it is rendered religion. It means here the religion, or the spirit of humble reverence and devotion which is evinced by the angels; and this accords well with the meaning in Jam 1:26-27.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen – Or inquiring into them. The word used here ( embateuon) means to go in, or enter; then to investigate, to inquire. It has not, properly, the meaning of intruding, or of impertinent inquiry (see Passow), and I do not see that the apostle meant to characterize the inquiry here as such. He says that it was the object of their investigations to look, with great professed modesty and reverence, into those things which are not visible to the eye of mortals. The things which seem here to be particularly referred to, are the abstruse questions respecting the mode of the divine subsistence; the ranks, orders, and employments of angelic beings; and the obscure doctrines relating to the divine government and plans. These questions comprised most of the subjects of inquiry in the Oriental and Grecian philosophy, and inquiries on these the apostle apprehended would tend to draw away the mind from the simplicity that is in Christ. Of these subjects what can be known more than is revealed?

Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind – Notwithstanding the avowed humility, the modesty, the angelic reverence, yet the mind was full of vain conceit, and self-confident, carnal wisdom. The two things are by no means incompatible – the men apparently most meek and modest being sometimes the most bold in their speculations, and the most reckless in regard to the great landmarks of truth. It is not so with true modesty, and real angelic veneration, but all this is sometimes assumed for the purpose of deceiving; and sometimes there is a native appearance of modesty which is by no means an index of the true feelings of the soul. The most meek and modest men in appearance are sometimes the most proud and reckless in their investigations of the doctrines of religion.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Col 2:18-19

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility.

It is evident that humility here is degraded and discoloured by the tinge which is given it by its close connection with the words in a voluntary. This is a rendering in the LXX. of a Hebrew word signifying taking a delight in, having ones own inclination gratified in. is used of that which a man does of his own notion, and passes over into the notion of sheer self-will and arbitrariness. Thus we learn the important lesson that virtues and graces are too delicate for the rough admeasurement of mere hard and fast moral lines. Their beauty and acceptability depart, and may even turn into their opposites. Wilful self-complacency in humility is censured by St. Paul as inconsistent with the sweet unconsciousness of true humility. It becomes the worst pride, or the most abject meanness–the pride or the meanness which apes humility. The word will worship in Col 2:23 shows that a strong sense of , as intense self-will, was present to St. Pauls mind. There as here, self-will imparts a contamination to the virtue with which it is associated. Humility and worship themselves become pride and superstition. Hence in Luk 1:48 the word should be rendered low estate, not humility. One who says, I am humble, is not humble. Mary does not profess humility, she practices it. (Bp. Alexander.)

Speculative and practical error

I. The speculative side of the Colossian heresy. In the Authorized Version the apostle is made to bring a charge of presumption against the false teachers intruding into the things which he hath not seen. But this is a strange argument for one whose whole walk was by faith and not by sight, and who would hardly count it an answer to a professed revelation to say you are intruding into that which you have not seen, and therefore you cannot know with modern materialists. But this difficulty is removed in the Revised Version, which, on high authority, omits the not, and inverts the argument. Again, the Greek word intruding into means dwelling in or taking his stand upon, and the charge now becomes that of self-complacent self-conceit.

1. This man has seen things, the exact equivalent of our a man has views, a phrase of which obscure thinkers are very fond. The Colossian speculator may have professed to see visions and revelations of the Lord, and to bare come back from the third heaven to reveal them; or, if not this, to have seen things in the tone of an arrogant thinker, who gives his notions the style of certainties, verified with the eye of the mind, dwelling in them with complacent satisfaction as the whole of truth.

2. Or we may take the marginal reading, taking his stand upon his views; regarding them as land which he has won with his intellectual bow and spear, and from which he can go on to move or conquer the universe.

3. These new thinkers spoke much of the mind, made knowledge the bait of their enticements, endeavoured to establish an aristocracy of intellect within that Christian society which was free to all comers, and in which the wise and prudent are set side by side with babes. How striking is St. Pauls language, idly inflated with the mind of his flesh. So far from being edified into the spiritual realm it was merely puffed up, and had its moving power in the repudiated sphere of matter. That Paul would so describe all so-called modern thought which sets aside Christ is certain.

II. We pass on to verse 23 to the practical side of the new heresy.

1. Here we have its treatment of matter, how its teachers sought by ceremonial prohibitions (verse 21) to counteract the deadly influence of sense in spirit, and to mortify the body as an enemy of the spiritual life. It was a plausible, and perhaps, in its origin, a well-intentioned effort. It was nobler than that which treats matter as of no moment. But the two perversions have one root. Asceticism and licence both rob the body of its dignity as the servant of the spirit.

2. St. Paul admits that the ascetic rules have a show of wisdom; they speak plausibly, and promise largely by their will worship, i.e., their religion of self-imposed observances; by their humility, i.e., their obsequiousness; and by their severity to the body, i.e., their mortifying restrictions.

3. Thus far both versions agree. But now the Authorized Version says, not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. This leaves out a particle which demands a contrast. But without this is it in accordance with St. Pauls teaching to blame a system for not satisfying the flesh? Indeed, the Greek word is indulgence. But the Revised Version has inserted the particle of antithesis, and reads, but are not of any value against the indulgence of the flesh. The language is borrowed from the medical profession. What is good for it? What is a valuable remedy for such and such a disease? Indulgence of the flesh is the disease; can asceticism cure it? St. Paul says no! It sounds well, professes loudly, but has no real value.

4. Rules of abstinence, regulations as to food or drink–lawful, indeed, but from which it is an act of religion to abstain–have a show of wisdom; they point to a terrible evil and profess to cure it; they are well sounding words, temperance and the like; they talk of the value of humility in bending the neck to discipline. St. Paul does not deny that the conquest of the body is good, and that the means have something to say for themselves; but he declares as a man of large experience who has tried all means, and who is taught of God that all such regulations will fail.

III. The true principle of Christian thinking and living.

1. In Christ Jesus are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. They who do not hold fast the Head therefore, whatever they may think or see or dream, cannot but be puffed up and not edified.

2. In Christ with whom our life is hid in God (chap. 3:1) can alone be found the secret of the victory over the flesh which is the professed object of every system of ethics. If ye are dead what need of touch not, etc.? If ye are risen the chains of flesh shall fall off by the influence of the spiritual life. (Dean Vaughan.)

The angels and the Head

I. The warning.

1. Let no man rob you of your prize. The metaphor is that of the race or wrestling ground; the judge is Christ, the reward is the crown, not of fading bay leaves, but of sprays from the tree of life which dower with blessedness the brows round which they are wreathed. The tendency of the heresy is to rob them of this. No names were mentioned, but the portrait of the robber is drawn with four rapid but accurate strokes of the pencil.

(1) Delighting in humility and the worshipping of angels–

(a) The humility has not a genuine ring about it. Self-conscious humility in which a man takes delight is not the real thing. A man who knows that he is humble and is self-complacent about it, glancing out of the corners of his downcast eyes at any mirror where he can see himself, is not humble at all. The devils darling vice is the pride that apes humility.

(b) So very humble were these people that they would not venture to pray to God. The utmost they could do was to lay hold of the lowest link of a long chain of angel mediators in hope that the vibration might run upwards through all the links, and perhaps reach the throne at last. Such fantastic abasement which would not take God at His word, nor draw near to Him through Christ, was the very height of pride.

(2) Dwelling in the things he hath seen, i.e., by visions, etc. The charge against the false teachers was of walking in a vain show of unreal imaginations.

(3) Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind. The self-conscious humility was only skin deep, and covered the utmost intellectual arrogance. The false teacher was like a blown bladder, dropsical from conceit of intellectual ability which was after all only the instrument of the flesh, the sinful self. Of course, such could have no grip of Christ, from whom such tempers were sure to detach.

(4) Therefore, the damning indictment closes with not holding the head.

2. The special forms of these errors are gone; but the tendencies which underlay them are as rampant as ever.

(1) The worship of angels is dead, but we are often tempted to think that we are too sinful to claim our portion of the promises. The spurious humility is by no means out of date, which knows better than God whether He can forgive, and grasps at others as well as Christ, the one Mediator.

(2) We do not see visions and dream dreams, except that here and there some one is led astray by spiritualism, but plenty of us attach more importance to our speculations than to the clear revelation of God in Christ. The unseen world has for many an unwholesome attraction. The Gnostic spirit is still among us which despises the foundation truths of the gospel as milk for babes, and values its baseless artificial speculations about subordinate matters which are unrevealed because they are subordinate, and fascinating to some minds because unrevealed, far above the truths which are clear because they are vital, and inspired because clear.

(3) And a swollen self-conceit is, of all things, the most certain to keep a man away from Christ. We must feel our utter helplessness and need before we shall lay hold of Him; and whatever slackens our hold of Christ tends to deprive us of the final prize. Hold fast that thou hast; let no man take thy crown.

II. The source and manner of all true growth is set forth in order to enforce the warning and to emphasize the need of holding the head.

1. Christ is not merely represented as supreme and sovereign, but as the source of spiritual life.

2. That life which flows through the head is diffused through the whole body by the various and harmonious action of all the parts. The body is supplied and knit together, i.e., the functions of nutrition and compaction into a whole are performed by the joints and bands, in which last word are included muscles, nerves, tendons. Their action is the condition of growth, but the Head is the source of all. Churches have been bound together by other bonds, such as creeds, polity, nationality; but an external bond is only like a rope round a bundle of faggots.

3. The blessed results of supply and unity are effected through the action of the various parts. If each organ is in healthy action the body grows. There is diversity in offices; the same life is light in the eyes, beauty in the cheek, strength in the hand, thought in the brain. The effect of Christianity is to heighten individuality, and to give to each man his own proper gift from God. The perfect light is the blending of all colours.

4. A community where each member thus holds firmly by the Head will increase with the increase of God. There is an increase not of God. These heretical teachers were swollen with dropsical self-conceit. The individual may increase in apparent knowledge, in volubility, in visions and speculations, in so-called Christian work; the Church may increase in members, wealth, influence, etc., and it may not be sound growth, but proud flesh that needs the knife. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

The seductive peril of a false philosophy

A false philosophy–

I. Threatens to rob the reliever of his reward. Many erroneous opinions may be held without invalidating salvation; but any error that depreciates our estimate of Christ, and interrupts the advance of our Christian life, is a robbery.

II. Advocates the most presumptuous and perilous speculations.

1. It affects a spurious humility. God is unknowable to the limited powers of man, so it reasons. But this humility was voluntary, self-induced, and was in reality another form of spiritual pride.

2. It invents a dangerous system of angelolatry.

3. It pretends to a knowledge of the mysterious. Locke says a work in the drawer of a cabinet might as well pretend to guess at the construction of the universe, as man venture to speculate about the unseen world.

III. Ignores the Divine source of all spiritual increase.

1. Christ is the great Head of the Church–the centre of its unity, the source of its life, authority, and influence.

2. The Church is vitally and essentially united to Christ.

3. The vital union of the Church with Christ is the condition of spiritual increase. Lessons: A false philosophy–

1. Distorts the grandest truths.

2. Substitutes for truth the most perilous speculations.

3. Against its teachings be ever on your guard. (G. Barlow.)

Angel worship

I. The apostle brands the seducers and concludes that no regard is to be paid to them.

1. Because in sacred things they arrogated to themselves, by no right whatever, a power of determining as the judges were accustomed in contests. These voluntary umpires decreed the reward of eternal life to none who were unwilling to subscribe to their doctrines. Therefore, as St. Paul struck at this usurpation, we must understand that no such power is granted to man that he should determine anything in religion of his own will; but is bound to judge according to Scripture (Isa 8:20). Hence estimate Romish tyranny which claims this very power.

2. They abused their power to deceive Christians. A director of the games, if he should order any one to run outside the course, would deprive him of his prize; because he would never that way arrive at the goal. So they who direct Christians to seek salvation apart from Christ, endeavour to beguile them of their reward (Heb 3:14). This condemnation rests on all who would lead us from the simplicity of Christ.

II. He shows in what instance they abused their usurped authority. The foolish lowliness of mind which would seek the mediation of angels rather than that of Christ, is rebuked because Christ is more united to us than the angels (Rom 5:2; Heb 4:16; Eph 3:12).

1. Because from this and similar places there arises between us and the Papists a great controversy about the worship of angels and deceased saints who are equal to the angels (Luk 20:36); let us see with whom the truth lies.

(1) Religious worship, whether it be called latria or dulia, is given to God alone, and not to angels or saints. Religion, says Cicero, is that which is comprised in the pious worship of the gods, and Hilary says that religion paid to the creature is accursed. With this Scripture agrees (Deu 6:13; Gal 4:8; Rev 19:10). The foundation of religious worship is infinite excellence apprehended under the consideration of our first cause and chief good; it is not a sufficient reason therefore, for offering to them, that angels and saints are endowed with supernatural gifts, or procure for us many good things, unless they are the first and chief cause to us of our chief good.

(2) The Papists ascribe to angels and even to saints supreme religious worship no less than these seducers here censured.

(a) Prayer is an act of latria or highest worship; for where we pray we acknowledge that its object can hear, deliver, and answer (Psa 50:15). But this is offered to saints.

(b) To make a vow to another is an act of latria, due to God alone (Isa 19:21; Psa 50:14). But vows are made to angels and saints.

(c) To erect a house of prayer, to raise altars and offer incense upon them to any one is to pay Divine honour to him (Exo 30:37; Mat 21:13). But this is done wholesale by Rome to the angels and saints.

2. Paul rejects this doctrine, because

(1) it proceeded from those who are accustomed rashly to invent and speak about matters unknown to them (1Ti 1:7). For they cannot trace angel or saint worship to the Word of God, or learn it from the example of prophets or apostles. Hence we may infer–

(a) That their bold curiosity is not to be endured who intrude themselves into the determining of things, the investigation of which surpasses human wit (Rom 12:3).

(b) Concerning religious matters nothing should be determined without a sure foundation, i.e., the Word of God, for whatever things we see relating to our salvation we find here. He who obtrudes anything not found there, hath not seen it but imagined it.

(c) They, therefore, exercise tyranny over the Church who anathematize all who reject commandments of men for articles of faith.

(2) The authors of this doctrine are puffed up with pride, and thence presume that their inventions are the dictates of truth. The fleshly mind denotes the animal man, or perspicacity, unenlightened by the Spirit (1Co 2:14). (Bp. Davenant.)

False confidences

One of the saddest incidents connected with the disastrous fire at Chicago is that so many trusted not only their goods, but their lives, to buildings that were regarded as fireproof, and that they perished together. Dr. Goodall records similar incidents connected with the great fire at Constantinople in 1831, and makes a suggestive reflection: We, like many others, fared the worse for living in houses which were considered fire-proof. In the great burning day may no such false confidence prove our ruin. (Christian Age.)

Humility before God

Thomas a Becket wore coarse sackcloth made of goats hair from the arms to the knees, but his outer garments were remarkable for splendour and extreme costliness, to the end that, thus deceiving human eyes, he might please the sight of God. (Hoveden.)

How self-will may be lost

A person who had long practised many austerities, without finding any comfort or change of heart, was once complaining to the Bishop of Alst of his state. Alas! said he, self-will and self-righteousness follow me everywhere. Only tell me when you think I shall learn to leave self. Will it be by study, or prayer, or good works? I think, replied the bishop, that the place where you lose self will be that where you find your Saviour.

Not holding the Head.–

The union between head and body

The discoveries of modern physiology have invested the apostles language with far greater distinctness and force than it can have worn to his own contemporaries. Any exposition of the nervous system more especially reads like a commentary on his image of the relations between the body and the head. At every turn we meet with some fresh illustration which kindles it with a flood of light. The volition communicated from the brain to the limbs, the sensations of the extremities telegraphed back to the brain, the absolute mutual sympathy between the head and the members, the instantaneous paralysis ensuing on the interruption of continuity, all these add to the completeness and life of the image. Bearing in mind the diversity of opinion among ancient physiologists, we cannot fail to be struck in the text, not only with the correctness of the image, but also with the propriety of the terms; and we are forcibly reminded that among the apostles most intimate companions at this time was one whom he calls the beloved physician (Col 4:14). (Bp. Lightfoot.)

The Head and the body

I. The head supplies all things necessary to its members. In worshipping angels the seducers diminished the dignity of Christ, for they took away from Him the prerogative of the Head, and incorrectly judged of His virtue and sufficiency. For Christ, the God Man, is Head of the Church. If they acknowledged Him as God they would seek from Him alone grace and salvation; if as man, they would not solicit angels to intercede for them, since Christ, our Elder Brother, sits continually at the right hand of God. Hence we may infer–

1. That they who are concerned about their salvation, ought never to turn their eyes from their Head in whom alone is salvation.

2. Christians are seduced to do so, and do not hold the Head, whenever they embrace new doctrines, worship, means of salvation never prescribed by Christ and His apostles (1Ti 6:3-4).

II. The head binds and knits together the same. To itself and to each other.

1. The effect obtained from cleaving to Christ is that the whole body has by joints nourishment ministered.

(1) The joints are

(a) The Spirit of Christ (Rom 8:9). As that member is not united to the head which is not animated by the same essence as the head itself, neither is that Christian united to Christ who lacks His Spirit.

(b) The gifts of the Spirit, e.g., faith by which as a secondary mean we are united to Christ, and receive the remission of sins and all the grace promised in the gospel (Joh 6:35).

(2) The whole body thus adhering to Christ hath nourishment ministered. The Greeks called him minister who supplied all the apparatus to the leaders of the sacred dances. By a metaphor derived from this he is said to supply the expenditure who furnishes to another the things necessary for any particular object; and the word used by Paul signifies the doing of this copiously and abundantly by Christ, who supplies all the means of salvation. For whether we regard the grace making grateful, or grace gratuitously given, Christ abundantly supplies both to His Church by His Spirit.

(a) Of that grace which has reference to justification and sanctification, Paul testifies (Rom 8:10; 2Co 8:9) that it is ministered to all His members by Christ.

(b) The same with that which relates to the edification of the Church (1Co 12:7, etc.; Eph 4:11).

(3) We may here observe–

(a) That in the whole body of the Church is not a single dry member, but all are watered by streams of grace flowing from the Head.

(b) To adhere to the Pope as a visible head, does not constitute membership, but adherence to Christ. Therefore the ungodly are not true members, to whatever visible Church joined, unless by the joints of the Spirit and faith they are united to Christ.

(c) As to doctrine and salvation the Church is supplied from its. Head, not one member from another.

(d) The Papists err, who will have the Church to draw the doctrine of salvation, not alone from Christ, but from tradition; who will have her receive holiness, merit, etc., not from Christ alone, but the saints. If this be so, the text is not true.

2. By virtue of the Head, the whole body is knit together (Rom 12:5). The bands are the same- the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit. For the same Spirit who unites us to Christ is the principal band by which we are united to each other (1Co 12:13), and after He is infused into all the ligaments of the Church, He enkindles in every one that excellent gift of charity which is also the firmest bond of cohesion. The other ties are diversities of gifts and callings emanating from the same Spirit (Eph 4:11-12).

III. The fruit of this union.

1. While united to Christ by faith, and knit together by love, the whole body of the Church increaseth in faith, love, holiness, and all saving grace. This growth is said to be of God as He is the primary agent (1Co 3:6), and because it tends to His glory as the ultimate end.

2. Observe of this increase–

(1) As there is a growth in the natural body in all its parts, so in the mystical body all the members increase spiritually.

(2) Not every increase is approved. A member of the body is not said to increase when it is inflated with any bad humour. So the piety of a Christian man is not increased when his mind is filled with tradition and will worship, which proceed not from the Spirit, but from the empty mind of ignorance and pride.

(3) Be not deceived by that incongruous mass of opinions of the Romish Church. The kingdom of the Pope may be increased, viz., by temporal things, traditions, superstitions, not by the knowledge of God and piety. (Bp. Davenant.)

(See also on chap. 1:18, and Eph 4:16.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 18. Let no man beguile you] . Let no man take the prize from you which the , brabeus, or judge in the contests, has assigned you, in consequence of your having obtained the victory. This any reader will see, is an allusion to the Olympic and Isthmian games, and to the prizes assigned to these who had obtained the victory in one or more of the contests which there took place. The Colossians had fought and conquered under the direction of Christ, and he, as the sole judge in this contest, had assigned to them the prize; the false teachers, affecting great modesty, humility, and sanctity, endeavoured to turn them aside from the Gospel, and to induce them to end in the flesh who had begun in the Spirit. Against these the apostle warns them.

In a voluntary humility and worshiping of angels] This is a difficult passage, and in order to explain it, I shall examine the meaning of some of the principal terms of the original. The word , to will, signifies also to delight; and signifies not only lowliness or humility of mind, but also affliction of mind; and , Le 16:20; Le 16:31, and in many other places, signifies to afflict the soul by fasting, and self-abnegation; and signifies reverence and modesty. Hence the whole passage has been paraphrased thus: Let no man spoil you of the prize adjudged to you, who delights in mortifying his body, and walking with the apparent modesty of an angel, affecting superior sanctity in order to gain disciples; intruding into things which he has not seen; and, notwithstanding his apparent humility, his mind is carnal, and he is puffed up with a sense of his superior knowledge and piety. It is very likely that the apostle here alludes to the Essenes, who were remarkably strict and devout, spent a principal part of their time in the contemplation of the Divine Being, abstained from all sensual gratifications, and affected to live the life of angels upon earth. With their pretensions all the apostle says here perfectly agrees, and on this one supposition the whole of the passage is plain and easy. Many have understood the passage as referring to the adoration of angels, which seems to have been practised among the Jews, who appear (from Tobit, xii. 15; Philo, in lib. de Somn.; Josephus, War. lib. ii. cap. 8, sec. 7) to have considered them as a sort of mediators between God and man; presenting the prayers of men before the throne; and being, as Philo says, , the eyes and ears of the great King. But this interpretation is not so likely as the foregoing.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Let no man beguile you of your reward: the original compound word, peculiar in the New Testament to Paul, and that in this Epistle only, (and not very frequent in other authors), hath occasioned interpreters here to render it variously, some joining the next following word with it, and some (as we read it) to that which follows after. The simple word is, Col 3:15, read rule, or judge, and it may be rendered intercede. Yet Paul doth not elsewhere use this word simply or in composition where he speaks of judging and condemning, Rom 2:1; however, it is borrowed from those who were judges or umpires in their games, the apostle most likely alluding to those, who through favour or hatred determined unjustly, to the defrauding those victors of their prize or reward to whom it was due. Hence some would have the import to be agreeable to our translation; Be careful these unjust arbiters do not defraud you of gaining Christ, and deceive you, ,{ as Mat 24:4; Eph 5:6; 2Th 2:3} by prescribing false lists and giving you wrong measures, and so judging against you. One renders it: Let no man deceive you with subtle argument, who pleaseth or delights himself in humility; another: Let no man take your prize; others: Let no man master it or bear rule over you at pleasure; let none take upon himself, or usurp to himself, the parts or office of a governor or umpire over you. The apostle labours to fortify the true followers of Christ against such superstitious subtle ones, who by their artifice did assume a magisterial authority (without any sure warrant from God) to impose their traditionary and invented services upon them, and determine of their state, accordingly as the papists do at this day. One learned man thinks the apostle had not used this word here, but for some notable advantage, viz. because the simple word may signify to intercede as well as to judge; it made wonderfully to his purpose in this composition, (as he uses concision, Phi 3:2), to disparage those seducers who did, from some notions of the Platonists, labour to gain credit to that opinion that the angels were intercessors between God and man.

In a voluntary humility, and worshipping of angels; covering their imperious spirit by being volunteers in humility, or by a pretence of voluntary, uncommanded humility, alleging it would be presumption in them to address themselves immediately to God, and therefore they would pay a religious homage to angels, as of a middle nature between God and them, presuming they would mediate for them: an instance to express all that invented worship, which, how specious soever it may seem to be, hath no warrant from Christ, who alone can procure acceptance of our persons and services. He expects that his disciples should assert his rights, and the liberty with which he hath made them free, against the traditions of self-willed men, and no more to solemnize for worship, than teach for doctrines, the traditions of men, Mat 15:2,6,9. We must not, under any pretext of humility, presume to know what belongs to our duty and Gods service better than Christ doth, showing us that he alone is the true and living way, and we may come boldly by him, Mat 11:28; Joh 14:1,6; Eph 3:12; Heb 4:16; Heb 10:19,20. And therefore the adoring and invocating of angels as heavenly courtiers, whatever the papists out of a show of humility do argue, is not after Christ, but against him.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen: yea, and for any one to assert it, and the like, is to be a bold intruder upon anothers possession, a thrusting a mans self into the knowledge and determination of that which is above his reach, Psa 131:1, and he hath no ground at all for, but doth pry or wade into a secret which a man cannot know. The apostle useth a Platonic word against those who did indulge themselves out of curiosity in the opinions of the Platonists about angels, the worshippers of which, amongst those who were professed Christians in Phrygia, were so tenacious of their error that they were not rooted out after the third century, when a canon was made against them under the name of Angelici, in the council of Laodicea near Colosse.

Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind; the first rise of such foolish presumption, was a being rashly puffed up with the sense of their flesh, a deluded mind moved by some carnal principle, setting out things with swelling words of vanity, wherewith in truth they have no acquaintance, and whereof they have no experience, 1Ti 1:7.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

18. beguileTranslate,”Defraud you of your prize,” literally, “to adjudge aprize out of hostility away from him who deserves it” [TRENCH].”To be umpire in a contest to the detriment of one.” Thisdefrauding of their prize the Colossians would suffer, byletting any self-constituted arbitrator or judge (thatis, false teacher) draw them away from Christ,” the righteousJudge” and Awarder of the prize (2Ti 4:8;Jas 1:12; 1Pe 5:4),to angel-worship.

in a voluntary humilitySo”will-worship” (Col2:23). Literally, “Delighting ([WAHL])in humility”; loving (so the Greek is translated,Mr 12:38, “love togo in long clothing”) to indulge himself in a humility ofhis own imposing: a volunteer in humility [DALLUS].Not as ALFORD, “Letno one of purpose defraud you,” c. Not as GROTIUS,”If he ever so much wish” (to defraud you). For theparticiple “wishing” or “delighting,” is one ofthe series, and stands in the same category as “intruding,””puffed up,” “not holding” and the self-pleasingimplied in it stands in happy contrast to the (mock) humilitywith which it seems to me, therefore, to be connected. His”humility,” so called, is a pleasing of self: thusit stands in parallelism to “his fleshly mind” (its realname, though he styles it “humility”), as “wishing”or “delighting” does to “puffed up.” The Greekfor “humility” is literally, “lowliness of mind,“which forms a clearer parallel to “puffed up by his fleshlymind.” Under pretext of humility, as if they durst notcome directly to God and Christ (like the modern Church of Rome),they invoked angels: as Judaizers, they justified this on the groundthat the law was given by angels. This error continued long inPhrygia (where Colosse and Laodicea were), so that the Council ofLaodicea (A.D. 360)expressly framed its thirty-fifth canon against the “Angelici“(as AUGUSTINE [Heresies,39], calls them) or “invokers of angels.” Even as late asTHEODORET’S time, therewere oratories to Michael the archangel. The modern Greeks have alegend that Michael opened a chasm to draw off an inundationthreatening the Colossian Christians. Once men admit the inferiorpowers to share invocation with the Supreme, the former graduallyengrosses all our serious worship, almost to the exclusion of thelatter; thus the heathen, beginning with adding the worship of otherdeities to that of the Supreme, ended with ceasing to worship Him atall. Nor does it signify much, whether we regard such as directlycontrolling us (the pagan view), or as only influencing theSupreme in our behalf (the Church of Rome’s view); because he fromwhom I expect happiness or misery, becomes the uppermost object in mymind, whether he give, or only procure it [Cautionsfor Times]. Scripture opposes the idea of “patrons” or”intercessors” (1Ti 2:5;1Ti 2:6). True Christian humilityjoins consciousness of utter personal demerit, with a sense ofparticipation in the divine life through Christ, and in the dignityof our adoption by God. Without the latter being realized, a falseself-humiliation results, which displays itself in ceremonies andascetic self-abasement (Col 2:23),which after all is but spiritual pride under the mock guise ofhumility. Contrast “glorying in the Lord” (1Co1:31).

intruding into . . . thingswhich he hath not seenSo very old manuscripts and Vulgateand ORIGEN read. But theoldest manuscripts and LUCIFERomit “not”; then translate, “haughtily treading on(‘Standing on’ [ALFORD])the things which he hath seen.” TREGELLESrefers this to fancied visions of angels. But if Paul hadmeant a fancied seeing, he would have used some qualifyingword, as, “which he seemed to see,” not “whichhe hath seen.” Plainly the things were actuallyseen by him, whether of demoniacal origination (1Sa28:11-20), or phenomena resulting from natural causation,mistaken by him as if supernatural. Paul, not stopping to discuss thenature of the things so seen, fixes on the radical error, thetendency of such a one in all this to walk by SENSE(namely, what he haughtily prides himself on having SEEN),rather than by FAITH inthe UNSEEN “Head”(Col 2:19; compare Joh 20:29;2Co 5:7; Heb 11:1).Thus is the parallelism, “vainly puffed up” answers to”haughtily treading on,” or “setting his foot on”;”his fleshly mind” answers to the things which he hathseen,” since his fleshliness betrays itself in priding himselfon what he hath seen, rather than on the unseen objectsof faith. That the things seen may have been of demoniacalorigination, appears from 1Ti 4:1,”Some shall depart from the faith, giving heed toseducing spirits and doctrines of devils” (Greek,“demons”). A warning to modern spiritualists.

puffed upimplying thatthe previous so called “humility” (Greek, “lowlinessof mind”) was really a “puffing up.”

fleshly mindGreek,“By the mind of his own flesh.” The flesh, or sensuousprinciple, is the fountain head whence his mind draws its cravingafter religious objects of sight, instead of, in true humilityas a member, “holding fast the (unseen) Head.”

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Let no man beguile you of your reward,…. Or prize; the allusion is to the Olympic games, one of which was running races; in which the stadium, or race plot was fixed, a mark set up to look and run unto, a corruptible crown proposed to be run for, and which was held by one who sat as judge, and determined who got the victory, and to whom the crown belonged; these judges sometimes acted the unfair part, and defrauded the victors of their proper right, and to such the apostle compares the false teachers: the Christian’s reward, or prize he is running for, is the incorruptible and never fading crown of glory, life, and righteousness; the race plot is the Christian life, spent in the exercise of grace, and discharge of duty, and in holding fast, and holding out in a profession of faith unto the end; the mark he looks at, and presses towards, is Jesus Christ; and his great concern, the apostle by this metaphor suggests should be, lest by false teachers he should be defrauded of the prize of the high calling of God, through their removing the mark Christ from him, by denying his person and Godhead; or by intercepting his sight of him, placing other objects before him, such as angels, to be worshipped and adored; or by darkening of it, joining Moses and Christ, law and Gospel, works and grace together, in the business of salvation; whereby he might seem to come short, or be in danger of coming short of the heavenly glory:

in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels; these things the apostle instances in, as in what lay their danger of being beguiled of their reward, or prize. True humility is an excellent grace; it is the clothing and ornament of a Christian; nor is there anything that makes a man more like Christ, than this grace; but in these men here respected, it was only the appearance of humility, it was not real; it was in things they devised and willed, not in things which God commanded, Christ required, or the Scriptures pointed at; they would have been thought to have been very lowly and humble, and to have a great consciousness of their own vileness and unworthiness to draw nigh to Christ the Mediator immediately, and by him to God; wherefore in pretence of great humility, they proposed to make use of angels as mediators with Christ; whereby Christ, the only Mediator between God and man, would be removed out of sight and use; and that humble boldness and holy confidence with God at the throne of grace, through Christ, which believers are allowed to use, would be discouraged and destroyed, and the saints be in danger as to the outward view of things, and in all human appearance of losing their reward: “worshipping of angels” was a practice which very early prevailed among some that were called Christians, and for a long time continued in Phrygia and Pisidia; some make Simon Magus, and others Cerinthus, the author of this idolatry; but was not only a branch of the Platonic philosophy, and so a part of that philosophy and vain deceit before mentioned, Col 2:8, which these men might have borrowed from the Gentiles, but was a notion and practice of the Jews: before the Babylonish captivity, the names of angels were not known, nor are they ever mentioned by name in Scripture; hence they say s, that

“the names of angels came up with them, or by their means from Babylon:”

after this they began to talk much of them, and to have too high a veneration for them, and ascribe too much to them; and observing that the law was ordained, spoken, and given by them, and that the administration of things under the former dispensation was greatly by their means, they fell to worshipping of them t; and the believing Jews were hereby in great danger of falling into the same practice: hence the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, writing to the Jewish church, largely insists on the proof of Christ being superior to angels; showing that he has a more excellent name than they had; that he was the Son of God in such sense as they were not the sons of God; that they were worshippers of him, yea, that they were creatures made by him, and even ministering spirits to his saints, the heirs of salvation: and very rightly, is worshipping of angels condemned here by the apostle, since God only is the object of worship; since these are creatures, and so not to be adored; are worshippers of God and Christ themselves, and have refused adoration when it has been offered to them: that the Jews did, and do worship angels, and make use of them as mediators and intercessors, is clear from their liturgy, or prayer books, where they say u

“Mymxr ykalm, “O ye angels of mercies”, or ye merciful angels, ministers of the most High, entreat now the face of God for good:”

and elsewhere w,

“they say three times, let Juhach keep us, let Juhach deliver us, and let Juhach help us:”

now Juhach was the name of an angel, who they supposed had the care of men, and is taken from the final letters of those words in Ps 91:11, “for he shall give his angels charge over thee”: so they speak of an angel whom they call Sandalphon, who they say is appointed over the prayers of the righteous x: with this notion the judaizing and false teachers seem to have been tinctured, and against which the apostle here cautions the saints, lest, under a show of humility, they should be drawn into it: and to preserve them from it, he observes, that such an one who should spread and propagate such a notion, was one that was

intruding into those things which he hath not seen; thrusting himself in a bold and daring manner into an inquiry and search after, debate upon, and affirmation of things he could have no certain knowledge of; as of angels, whose nature, qualities, works, and ministrations, he had never seen with his bodily eyes; nor could ever discern with the eyes of his understanding any such things in the Scriptures, which he ascribed to them; but they were the birth of his own mind, the fruits of his own fancy and imagination, things devised in his own brain: being

vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind; judging of things not according to the word of God, and with a spiritual judgment, and according to a spiritual sense and experience, but according to his own carnal reason, and the vanity of his mind; being puffed and swelled with an high opinion of himself, of his great parts and abilities, of his knowledge of things above others, and of his capacity to penetrate into, and find out things which were not seen and known by others: this shows that his humility was forced, and only in outward appearance, and was not true and genuine.

s T. Hieros. Roshhashanah, fol. 56. 4. t Vid. Clement. Alex Stromat. l. 6. p. 635. u Seder Tephillot, Ed. Basil fol. 222. 2. w Ib. fol. 335. 1. x Zohar in Gen. fol. 97. 2. & in Exod. fol. 24. 3.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Rob you of your prize (). Late and rare compound (, , Col 3:15) to act as umpire against one, perhaps because of bribery in Demosthenes and Eustathius (two other examples in Preisigke’s Worterbuch), here only in the N.T. So here it means to decide or give judgment against. The judge at the games is called and the prize (1Cor 9:24; Phil 3:14). It is thus parallel to, but stronger than, in verse 16.

By a voluntary humility ( ). Present active participle of , to wish, to will, but a difficult idiom. Some take it as like an adverb for “wilfully” somewhat like in 2Pe 3:5. Others make it a Hebraism from the LXX usage, “finding pleasure in humility.” The Revised Version margin has “of his own mere will, by humility.” Hort suggested (in gratuitous humility), a word that occurs in Basil and made like in verse 23.

And worshipping of the angels ( ). In 3:12 humility () is a virtue, but it is linked with worship of the angels which is idolatry and so is probably false humility as in verse 23. They may have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far removed and so took angels as mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of Christ.

Dwelling in the things which he hath seen ( ). Some MSS. have “not,” but not genuine. This verb (from , stepping in, going in) has given much trouble. Lightfoot has actually proposed (a verb that does not exist, though does occur) with , to tread on empty air, an ingenious suggestion, but now unnecessary. It is an old word for going in to take possession (papyri examples also). W. M. Ramsay (Teaching of Paul, pp. 287ff.) shows from inscriptions in Klaros that the word is used of an initiate in the mysteries who “set foot in” () and performed the rest of the rites. Paul is here quoting the very work used of these initiates who “take their stand on” these imagined revelations in the mysteries.

Vainly puffed up ( ). Present passive participle of , late and vivid verb from , pair of bellows, in N.T. only here and 1Cor 4:6; 1Cor 4:18; 1Cor 8:1. Powerful picture of the self-conceit of these bombastic Gnostics.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Beguile of reward [] . Only here in the New Testament. From kata against, brabeuw to act as a judge or umpire. Hence to decide against one, or to declare him unworthy of the prize. Bishop Lightfoot’s rendering rob you of your prize, adopted by Rev., omits the judicial idea, 199 which, however, I think must be retained, in continuation of the idea of judgment in ver. 16, “let no man judge,” etc. The attitude of the false teachers would involve their sitting in judgment as to the future reward of those who refused their doctrine of angelic mediation. Paul speaks from the standpoint of their claim.

In a voluntary humility [ ] . Render delighting in humility. This rendering is well supported by Septuagint usage. See 1Sa 18:22; 2Sa 14:26; 1Ki 10:9; 2Ch 9:8. 200 It falls in, in the regular participial series, with the other declarations as to the vain conceit of the teachers; signifying not their purpose or their wish to deprive the Christians of their reward, but their vain enthusiasm for their false doctrine, and their conceited self – complacency which prompted them to sit as judges. The worship of angels involved a show of humility, an affectation of superior reverence for God, as shown in the reluctance to attempt to approach God otherwise than indirectly : in its assumption that humanity, debased by the contact with matter, must reach after God through successive grades of intermediate beings. For humility, see on Mt 11:29.

Worship of angels [] . See on religious, Jas 1:26. Defining the direction which their humility assumed. The usage of the Septuagint and of the New Testament limits the meaning to the external aspects of worship. Compare Act 26:5; Jas 1:27.

Intruding [] . Rev., dwelling in. Only here in the New Testament. It is used in three senses : 1. To step in or upon, thence to haunt or frequent. So Aeschylus : “A certain island which Pan frequents on its beach” (” Persae, ” 449). 2. To invade. So in Apocrypha, 1 Macc. 12 25; 13 20; 14 31; 14 40. 3. To enter into for examination; to investigate or discuss a subject. So 2 Macc. 2 30, and so Philo, who compares truth – seekers to well – diggers. Patristic writers use it of searching the heart, and of investigating divine mysteries. Byzantine lexicographers explain it by zhtew to seek; ejxereunaw to track out; skopew to consider. In this last sense the word is probably used here of the false teachers who professed to see heavenly truth in visions, and to investigate and discuss philosophically the revelation they had received.

Which he hath not seen. Not must be omitted : which he imagines or professes that he has seen in vision. Ironical. “If, as we may easily imagine, these pretenders were accustomed to say with an imposing and mysterious air, ‘I have seen, ah! I have seen, ‘ – in relating alleged visions of heavenly things, the Colossians would understand the reference well enough” (Findlay).

Vainly puffed up [ ] . Vainly characterizes the emptiness of such pretension; puffed up, the swelling intellectual pride of those who make it. See on 1Co 4:6; and compare 1Co 8:1. The humility is thus characterized as affected, and the teachers as charlatans.

By his fleshly mind [ ] . Lit., by the mind of his flesh. The intellectual faculty in its moral aspects as determined by the fleshly, sinful nature. See on Rom 8:23. Compare Rom 7:22 – 25; Rom 8:7. The teachers boasted that they were guided by the higher reason. Paul describes their higher reason as carnal. 201

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

WARNING AGAINST MYSTICISM V. 18, 19

1) “Let no man beguile you of your reward “ (medeis humas katabrabeueto) “Let not one give judgment against you,” for your defense that in Jesus Christ only dwells the Godhead bodily; not in Moses, the apostles, the church, or even in angels. To be misled regarding who Jesus is will lead to a loss of rewards 2Jn 1:8.

2) “In a voluntary humility,” (thelon en tapeinophrosune) “Wishing (strongly to do so) in a state or attitude of humility;” this is a feigned (pretence), a fleshly show of humility, both artificial and superficial, that would seek to lead men to worship angels, instead of God, Joh 4:24.

3) “And worship of angels,” (kai threkeia ton angelon) and worship of the angels,” Paul persuaded men to worship God, not angels, not Moses, not the law, Act 18:13. Worshipers of angels are classed as worshipers of devils, demons, and idols, which is condemned, Rev 9:20.

4) “Intruding into those things which he hath not seen,” (ha heoraken embateuon), “Intruding into things which he has (not) seen,” or invading areas he has (not) seen, much like the adage, “fools rush in where angels dare not tread;” Good angels worship God in heaven, but do not receive worship, Heb 1:6.

5) “Vainly puffed up” (eike phusioumenos) “in vain being puffed up;” beguiling men, with feigned humility, who advocated angel worship, while gloating with purported mystical knowledge and piosity, were to be avoided and resisted.

6) “By his fleshly mind,” (hupo tou noos tes sarkos autou) “By the mind or mentality of his flesh;” One with a spiritual mind, never led anyone to worship angels for such was in error, evidenced as follows: Col 3:17; Exo 20:1-4.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

18. Let no one take from you the palm. (389) He alludes to runners, or wrestlers, to whom the palm was assigned, on condition of their not giving way in the middle of the course, or after the contest had been commenced. He admonishes them, therefore, that the false apostles aimed at nothing else than to snatch away from them the palm, inasmuch as they draw them aside from the rectitude of their course. Hence it follows that they must be shunned as the most injurious pests. The passage is also carefully to be marked as intimating, that all those who draw us aside from the simplicity of Christ cheat us out of the prize of our high calling. (Phi 3:14.)

Desirous in humility. Something must be understood; hence I have, inserted in the text id facere , ( to do it.) For he points out the kind of danger which they required to guard against. All are desirous to defraud you of the palm, who, under the pretext of humility, recommend to you the worship of angels. For their object is, that you may wander out of the way, leaving the one object of aim. I read humility and worship of angels conjointly, for the one follows the other, just as at this day the Papists make use of the same pretext when philosophizing as to the worship of saints. For they reason on the ground of man’s abasement, (390) that we must, therefore, seek for mediators to help us. But for this very reason has Christ humbled himself — that we might directly betake ourselves to him, however miserable sinners we may be.

I am aware that the worship of angels is by many interpreted otherwise, as meaning such as has been delivered to men by angels; for the Devil has always endeavored to set off his impostures under this title. The Pope at this day boasts, that all the trifles with which he has adulterated the pure worship of God are revelations. In like manner the Theurgians (391) of old alleged that all the superstitions that they contrived were delivered over to them by angels, as if from hand to hand. (392) They, accordingly, think that Paul here condemns all fanciful kinds of worship that are falsely set forth under the authority of angels. (393) But, in my opinion, he rather condemns the contrivance as to the worshipping of angels. It is on this account that he has so carefully applied himself to this in the very commencement of the Epistle, to bring angels under subjection, lest they should obscure the splendor of Christ. (394) In fine, as he had in the first chapter prepared the way for abolishing the ceremonies, so he had also for the removal of all other hinderances which draw us away from Christ alone. (395) In this class is the worship of angels

Superstitious persons have from the beginning worshipped angels, (396) that through means of them there might be free access to God. The Platonists infected the Christian Church also with this error. For although Augustine sharply inveighs against them in his tenth book “On the City of God,” and condemns at great length all their disputations as to the worship of angels, we see nevertheless what has happened. Should any one compare the writings of Plato with Popish theology, he will find that they have drawn wholly from Plato their prattling as to the worship of angels. The sum is this, that we must honor angels, whom Plato calls demons, χάριν τὢς εὐφήμου διαπορείας ( for the sake of their auspicious intercession.) (397) He brings forward this sentiment in Epinomis, and he confirms it in Cratylus, (398) and many other passages. In what respect do the Papists differ at all from this? “ But, ” it will be said, “they do not deny that the Son of God is Mediator.” Neither did those with whom Paul contends; but as they imagined that God must be approached by the assistance of the angels, and that, consequently, some worship must be rendered to them, so they placed angels in the seat of Christ, and honored them with Christ’s office. Let us know, then, that Paul here condemns all kinds of worship of human contrivance, which are rendered either to angels or to the dead, as though they were mediators, rendering assistance after Christ, or along with Christ. (399) For just so far do we recede from Christ, when we transfer the smallest part of what belongs to him to any others, whether they be angels or men.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen. The verb ἐμβατεύειν, the participle of which Paul here makes use of, has various significations. The rendering which Erasmus, after Jerome, has given to it, walking proudly, would not suit ill, were there an example of such a signification in any author of sufficient note. For we see every day with how much confidence and pride rash persons pronounce an opinion as to things unknown. Nay, even in the very subject of which Paul treats, there is a remarkable illustration. For when the Sorbonnic divines put forth their trifles (400) respecting the intercession of saints or angels, they declare, (401) as though it were from an oracle, (402) that the dead (403) know and behold our necessities, inasmuch as they see all things in the reflex light of God. (404) And yet, what is less certain? Nay more, what is more obscure and doubtful? But such, truly, is their magisterial freedom, that they fearlessly and daringly assert what is not only not known by them, but cannot be known by men.

This meaning, therefore, would be suitable, if that signification of the term were usual. It is, however, among the Greeks taken simply as meaning to walk. It also sometimes means to inquire. Should any one choose to understand it thus in this passage, Paul will, in that case, reprove a foolish curiosity in the investigation of things that are obscure, and such as are even hid from our view and transcend it. (405) It appears to me, however, that I have caught Paul’s meaning, and have rendered it faithfully in this manner — intruding into those things which he hath not seen. For that is the common signification of the word ἐμβατεύειν — to enter upon an inheritance, (406) or to take possession, or to set foot anywhere. Accordingly, Budaeus renders this passage thus: — “ Setting foot upon, or entering on the possession of those things which he has not seen.” I have followed his authority, but have selected a more suitable term. For such persons in reality break through and intrude into secret things, (407) of which God would have no discovery as yet made to us. The passage ought to be carefully observed, for the purpose of reproving the rashness (408) of those who inquire farther than is allowable.

Puffed up in vain by a fleshly mind. He employs the expression fleshly mind to denote the perspicuity of the human intellect, however great it may be. For he places it in contrast with that spiritual wisdom which is revealed to us from heaven in accordance with that statement —

Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee. (Mat 16:17.)

Whoever; therefore, depends upon his own reason, inasmuch as the acuteness of the flesh is wholly at work in him, (409) Paul declares him to be puffed up in vain. And truly all the wisdom that men have from themselves is mere wind: hence there is nothing solid except in the word of God and the illumination of the Spirit. And observe, that those are said to be puffed up who insinuate themselves (410) under a show of humility. For it happens, as Augustine elegantly writes to Paulinus, by wonderful means, as to the soul of man, that it is more puffed up from a false humility than if it were openly proud.

(389) “The Latin, ‘ seducat,’ correctly gives the intention of καταβραβευέτω which signifies, to cause a competitor to lose his prize, by drawing him aside from the goal, ( seorsim ducendo, or seducendo.)” — Penn. — Ed.

(390) “ Car ayans proposé l’indignite de l’homme, et presché d’humilite, de là ils concluent;” — “For having set forth man’s unworthiness, and having preached of humility, they conclude from this.”

(391) The Theurgians were the followers of Ammonius Saccas, who prescribed an austere discipline with the view of “refining,” as he pretended, “that faculty of the mind which receives the images of things, so as to render it capable of perceiving the demons, and of performing many marvellous things by their assistance.” See Mosheim’s, Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1, p. 174. — Ed.

(392) Per manus , ( from one hand to another.) The reader will find the same proverbial expression made use of by Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 1, pp. 150, 373, and vol. 2, p. 9. — Ed.

(393) “ Lesquelles on fait receuoir au poure monde sous la fausse couuerture de l’authorite des anges;” — “Which they make the world receive under the false pretext of the authority of angels.”

(394) “ La splendeur de la maieste de Christ;” — “The splendor of Christ’s majesty.”

(395) “ De seul vray but, qui est Christ;” — “From the only true aim, which is Christ.”

(396) See Calvin’S Institutes, vol. 1, p. 200.

(397) “ A cause de l’heureuse intercession qu’ils font pour les hommes;” — “On account of the blessed intercession which they make for men.”

(398) See Calvin’S Institutes, vol. 1, p. 202.

(399) “ Comme s’ils estoyent mediateurs ou auec Christ, ou en second lieu apres Christ, pour suppleer ce qui defaut de son costé “ — “As if they were mediators either with Christ, or in the second place after Christ, to supply what is wanting on his part.”

(400) “ Mettent en auant leurs mensonges;” — “Bring forward their false hoods.”

(401) “ Ils prononcent et determinent comme par arrest;” — “They declare and determine as if by decree.”

(402) “ Perinde atque ex tripode,” ( just as though it were from the tripod.) Our author manifestly alludes to the three-footed stool on which the Priestess of Apollo at Delphi sat, while giving forth oracular responses. — Ed.

(403) “ Les saincts trespassez;” — “Departed saints.”

(404) “ En la reuerberation de la lumiere de Dieu;” — “In the reflection of the light of God.”

(405) “ Et surmontent toute nostre capacite;” — “And exceed all our capacity.”

(406) Thus ἐμβατεύειν εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν is made use of by Demosthenes, as meaning — “to come in to the property.” — See Dem. 1086. 19. — Ed.

(407) “ Es choses secretes et cachees;” — “Into things secret and hidden.”

(408) “ La role outrecuidance;” — “The foolish presumption.”

(409) “ Pource qu’il n’est gouuerné que par la subtilite charnelle et naturelle;” — “Because he is regulated exclusively by carnal and natural acuteness.”

(410) “ En la grace des hommes;” — “Into the favor of men.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES

Col. 2:18. Let no man beguile you of your reward.R.V. let no man rob you of your prize. There seems to be implied some such thought as this: Do not allow these heretical teachers to lay down for you the conditions on which the prize shall be yours; for when they pronounce in your favour, the Lord, the righteous Judge, pronounces against you. In a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels.In acts of self-imposed abasement in the presence of invisible beings. St. John tells us of the rebuke administered by the angel before whom he prostrated himself: See thou do it not: worship God. But there are men who would say, Nay, my Lord, and continue their forbidden worship. Intruding into those things which he hath not seen.The change in the R.V. is considerable: dwelling in the things which he hath seen. The apostle is apparently speaking ironically of the boasted manifestations made to the Gnostic teachers.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Col. 2:18-19

The Seductive Peril of a False Philosophy.

The apostle had warned the Colossians against the dangerous consequences of attaching too much importance to the ceremonial in religion, inasmuch as it was the substitution of the shadow for the substance. He now reveals the peril of being seduced by the theological error that insisted on interposition of angel mediators, which was the preference of an inferior member to the Head. In this verse the writer distinctly warns the Colossian Christians against the peril that threatened them, and exposes the presumptuous speculations of a false philosophy.
I. That the teachings of a false philosophy threaten to rob the believer of his most coveted reward.Let no man beguile you of your reward (Col. 2:18). The Christians career is a race; the present world is the stadium, or racecourse; Christ is the umpirethe dispenser of rewards; eternal life is the victors prize. The Colossians were in a fair way for winning the prize; they had duly entered the lists; they were contending bravely; but the false teachers unhappily crossed their path, sought to impede their progress, and to rob them of their reward. Error is subtle in its influence and pernicious in its effects. Many erroneous opinions may possibly be held without invalidating the salvation of the soul; but any error that in any degree depreciates our estimate of Christ and interrupts the advance of our Christian life is a robbery. It may be said that the dangerous speculations of a false philosophy are confined only to a fewthe higher circle of thinkers. That is bad enough. But what is damaging the higher order of intellects will by-and-by reach the lower and work its mischief there. There is need for uninterrupted vigilance.

II. That a false philosophy advocates the most presumptuous and perilous speculations.

1. It affects a spurious humility. God is unknowable to the limited and uncertain powers of man; He is too high to be accessible, and too much absorbed in loftier matters to concern Himself about individual man. He can be approached only through inferior beings, and their assistance should be humbly sought. So it reasons. But this humility was voluntary, self-induced, and was in reality another form of high spiritual pride. Humility, when it becomes self-conscious, ceases to have any value.

2. It invents a dangerous system of angelolatry.Worshipping of angels (Col. 2:18). The Jews were fond of philosophising about the dignity, offices, and ranks of the angelic powers; and many held the opinion that they were messengers who presented our prayers to God. The false teachers made the most of the authority they could derive from Jewish sources. They would tell how the law was given by the disposition of angelsthat angels conducted the Israelites through the wilderness, and on various occasions appeared to patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. They would dwell on the weakness of man and his distance from God, and insist that homage should be paid to these angelic messengers as necessary mediators. Alas, how fatal has been the influence through the centuries of this delusive angelolatry! The apostle here condemns it, and thus sweeps away all ground for the Christ-dishonouring practices of invocation of saints and the worship of the Virgin.

3. It pretends to a knowledge of the mysterious.Intruding into those things which he hath not seen (Col. 2:18). Man is everywhere circled with mystery. It is one of the saddest moments of life when he first becomes conscious of the limitation of his own powers, and of his utter inability to fathom the mysteries which seem to invite his inquiry while they baffle his attempt. Locke somewhere says, a worm in the drawer of a cabinet, shut up in its tiny enclosure, might as well pretend to guess at the construction of the vast universe, as mortal man venture to speculate about the unseen world, except so far as revealed for purposes of salvation. But fools will rush in where angels fear to tread. The boast of possessing a profound knowledge of the mysterious is one of the marks of a false philosophy.

4. It is inflated with an excessive pride.Vainly puffed up by its fleshly mind (Col. 2:18). The carnal mind, which is enmity against God, rises to a pitch of reckless daring in its inventions, and, revelling in its own creative genius, is vainly puffed up with a conceit of novelty and with a fancied superiority over the humbler disciple. There is no state more dangerous than this or more difficult to change. It is proof against every ordinary method of recovery. The proud man lives half-way down the slope to hell. God only can break the delusive snare, humble the soul, and revoke its threatened doom.

III. That a false philosophy ignores the divine source of all spiritual increase.

1. Christ is the great Head of the Church. He is the centre of its unity, the primal source of its life, authority, and influence. He founded the Church, and gave it shape, symmetry, and durableness. He alone is supremethe Alpha and Omegathe living and only Head. To ignore Him is to forfeit the substantial for the shadowythe rock for the precarious footing of the crumbling shale.

2. The Church is vitally and essentially united to Christ.From which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered and knit together (Col. 2:19). As the members of the human frame are joined to the head, and derive life, motion, and sensation from it by means of arteries, veins, nerves, and other attachments, so the spiritual members of Christ are knit to Him by invisible joints and bands, and depend on Him for sustenance, character, and influence.

3. The vital union of the Church with Christ is the condition of spiritual increase.Increaseth with the increase of God (Col. 2:19). Christ is the divine source of increase, and the Church can grow only as it receives nourishment from Him. The growth corresponds with its natureit is divine; it increaseth with the increase of God. There may be a morbid increase, as there may be an unnatural enlargement of some part of the human body; but it is only the excessive inflation of worldly splendour and ecclesiastical pretension. Like Jonahs gourd, such a growth may disappear as rapidly as it came. The true increase is that which comes from God, of which He is the source, and active, sustaining influence, and which advances in harmony with His will and purpose. Such an increase can be secured only by vital union with Christ.

Lessons.

1. A false philosophy distorts the grandest truths.

2. A false philosophy substitutes for truth the most perilous speculations.

3. Against the teachings of a false philosophy be ever on your guard.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

Col. 2:18. Philosophic Vagaries

I. Making pretence of superior knowledge.

II. Affecting a spurious humility in worship.

III. Inflated with pride.

IV. Dangerous to those sincerely seeking the truth.

Col. 2:19. How a Church lives and grows.

I. The source of all the life of the body.Christ is the Head, therefore the source from which all parts of the body partake of a common life. There are three symbols employed to represent the union of Christ with His Churchthe vine, the body, and the marriage bond.

II. The various and harmonious action of all the parts.

1. From Jesus comes all nourishment of the divine life, even when we think that we instruct or stimulate each other.

2. From Jesus comes the oneness of the body.

III. The consequent increase of the whole.

1. The increase of life in the Church, both as a community and in its separate elements, depends on the harmonious activity of all the parts.

2. Is dependent on the activity of all, and sadly hampered when some are idle.

3. Depends on its vitality within and on the concurrent activity of all its members.

4. Depends not only on the action of all its parts, but on their health and vitality.

5. There is an increase which is not the increase of God.

IV. The personal hold of Jesus Christ which is the condition of all life and growth.A firm, almost desperate clutch in which Love and Need, like two hands, clasp Him and will not let Him go. Such tenacious grip implies the adhesive energy of the whole naturethe mind laying hold on truth, the heart clinging to love, the will submitting to authority.A. Maclaren.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

18. Let no man rob you of your prize, by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the angels, dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19. and not holding fast the Head, from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of God.

Translation and Paraphrase

18. Let no one pass judgment against you (as if he were an umpire), or deprive you of your prize, (while he himself is) delighting in (an outward show of pretended humility (and self-abasement), and in a worship of angels, involving himself in things which he (claims he) has seen, proudly puffed up in his fleshly mind without just cause,
19. and not holding fast unto (Christ) the Head, from whom the entire body (the church), being supplied (with its essential nourishment) and coalesced together through the joints and ligaments (as its individual members have close contact with one another), is growing the growth of God (the growth which God intends).

Notes

1.

A second thing we are to let no one do to us, is to let no one rob us of our prize. Rob here (Gr. katabrabeuo) means to deprive of a prize; or give adverse judgment; or disqualify us as an umpire might disqualify a victory or point in athletic competition. This is somewhat similar to the statement in Col. 2:16; Let no man judge you.

2.

We are disqualified and robbed of our prize from Christ when we let men talk us into making ourselves humble and into falling down to worship angels.

A voluntary humility is a self-willed humility, a humility that is shown by outward acts of self-denial to the body. It is a false humility that covers overbearing inward pride. Col. 2:23. True humility can neither be voluntarily put on nor put off.

3.

Those who insist on outward exhibitions of humility and worshipping of angels are usually those who say a great deal about what they have seen, about their visions. They dwell on these things, investigating them, entering into the study of them, and going into details in narrating them.

4.

Those who insist on outward exhibitions of humility and worshipping of angels are usually those who are vainly puffed up by their fleshly minds. Vainly means without just cause. They have no real basis for pride. Their minds are fleshly, being concerned only with themselves and their fleshly desires for honor.

5.

There are some variations in the ancient manuscripts as to whether Col. 2:18 says what he hath not seen (as in KJV), or which he hath seen (ASV). The explanation probably is that the person who tells about his visions really thinks he has seen them, but is probably deluded. Thus ancient copyists of Pauls letters found it easy to insert not in the clause He hath seen, Probably the visionaries had not really seen what they claimed, but they thought they had. The ASV reading without the not is better supported by manuscript evidence than the other.

6.

Those who insist on outward exhibitions of humility do not hold fast to Christ the Head. (Eph. 1:22). They, imagine that they have seen visions, and this makes Christ less important to them.

The theme of the whole book of Colossians is that Christ is supreme. He is everything to the child of God. False teachers do not hold fast the Head.

7.

To emphasize the importance of Christ as Head, Paul says that from the head (Christ) all the body (the church) increases with the increase of God (literally, is growing the growth of God). In other words if we do not hold on to Christ as head, we cut ourselves off from the marvelous growth that God can cause us to achieve. (Eph. 4:15-16).

8.

In order for the church to grow Christ causes the church to be supplied and knit together through its joints and bands. This is a rather complicated description of the growth process of the church, as compared to a human body.

The church is supplied by Christ with all the essential food and gifts and help it needs, just as a body is supplied by wholesome food. The church owes its entire growth to Christ. There is no other source of strength and nourishment.

The church is knit together, that is, closely joined and coalesced together. Its members, though coming from many backgrounds, are harmoniously joined together in one body, until their relationship is as solid as two pieces of a broken bone that have knit back together.

This process of knitting men together in one body is done through the joints and bands, that is, through the joints and ligaments. Any nutrition that passes to our feet to cause them to grow along with the rest of our body, has to go through the knee joint and ligaments. Similarly any growth that one member of the church makes comes about through his contact with other members. Each member has to function in the measure that is due for the whole body to grow. (Eph. 4:16).

Study and Review

45.

Of what are we to let no man rob (or beguile) us? (Col. 2:18)

46.

What is voluntary humility? (Col. 2:18)

47.

How could a worshipping of angels rob us of our prize?

48.

In Col. 2:18 the Amer. Standard version says dwelling in the things which he hath seen, and the King James version says things he hath not seen. Suggest a reason to account for this variation.

49.

Explain the phrase dwelling in the things which he hath seen.

50.

What is the mental condition of those who do such things as angel worship? (Col. 2:18)

51.

What (or whom) do the angel-worshippers not hold fast? (Col. 2:19)

52.

What does the Head do for the body? (Col. 2:19)

53.

What is the subject of Col. 2:19, and what is the verb?

54.

What sort of increase should the body (the church) make?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(18) Beguile you of your reward.The original is a word used, almost technically, for an unfair judgment in the stadium, robbing the victor of his prize. The prize here (as in 1Co. 9:24; Php. 3:14) is the heavenly reward of the Christian course. In St. Pauls exhortation there seems to be a reference back to Col. 2:16. There he says, Let no man arrogate judgment over you; here, Let no man use that arrogated judgment so as to cheat you of your prize. There is one Judge, who has right and who is righteous; look to Him alone.

In a voluntary humility and worship.This rendering seems virtually correct, though other renderings are proposed. The original is, willing in humility and worship, and the phrase willing in is often used in the LXX. for delighting in. Other translations are here possible, though not without some harshness. But the true sense is shown beyond all doubt to be that given in our version, by the words used below to describe the same process, will-worship and humility.

In this passage alone in the New Testament humility is spoken of with something of the condemnation accorded to it in heathen morality. The reason of this is obvious and instructive. Humility is a grace, of which the very essence is unconsciousness, and which, being itself negative, cannot live, except by resting on some more positive quality, such as faith or love. Whenever it is consciously cultivated and delighted in, it loses all its grace; it becomes either unreal, the pride that apes humility, or it turns to abject slavishness and meanness. Of such depravations Church history is unhappily full.

Worshipping of angels.This is closely connected with the voluntary humility above. The link of connection is supplied by the notice in the ancient interpreters, of the early growth of that unhappy idea, which has always lain at the root of saint-worship and angel-worship in the Churchthat we must be brought near by angels and not by Christ, for that were too high a thing for us (Chrysostom). With this passage it is obvious to connect the emphasis laid (in Hebrews 1, 2) on the absolute superiority of our Lord to all angels, who are but ministering spirits, sent forth to minister to them who are heirs of salvation; and the prohibition of angel-worship in Rev. 22:9, See thou do it not; for I am thy fellow-servant . . . worship God.

It might seem strange that on the rigid monotheism of Judaism this incongruous creature-worship should have been engrafted. But here also the link is easily supplied. The worship of the angels of which the Essenic system bore traces, was excused on the ground that the Law had been given through the ministration of angels (see Act. 7:53; Gal. 3:19), and that the tutelary guardianship of angels had been revealed in the later prophecy. (See Dan. 10:10-21.) For this reason it was held that angels might be worshipped, probably with the same subtle distinctions between this and that kind of worship with which we are familiar in the ordinary pleas for the veneration of saints. It has been noticed that in the Council of Laodicea, held in the fourth century, several canons were passed against Judaising, and that in close connection with these it was forbidden to leave the Church of God and go away to invoke angels; and we are told by Theodoret (in the next century) that oratories to St. Michael (the prince of the Jewish people) were still to be seen. The angels in this half-Jewish system held the same intermediate position between the Divine and the human which in the ordinary Gnostic theories was held by the less personal ons, or supposed emanations from the Godhead.

Intruding into those things which he hath not seen.(1) There is a remarkable division here, both of MSS. and ancient versions and commentators, as to the insertion or omission of the negative. But the balance of MS. authority is against the negative, and certainly it is easier to suppose it to have been inserted with a view to make an easier sense, than to have been omitted if it had been originally there. (2) The general meaning, however, of the passage is tolerably clear, and, curiously enough, little affected by either alternative. It certainly refers to pretensions to supernatural knowledge by which (just as in 1Co. 8:1) the mind is said to be puffed up. We note that, even in true visions of heavenly things, there was danger lest the mind should be exalted above measure (2Co. 12:7). Now the knowledge here pretended to is that favourite knowledge, claimed by Jewish and Christian mystics, of the secrets of the heavenly places and especially of the grades and functions of the hierarchy of heaven. St. Paul brands it as belonging to the mind, not of the spirit, but of the flesh; for indeed it was really superstitions, resting not on faith, but on supposed visions and supernatural manifestations. It intruded (or, according to another rendering, it took its stand) upon the secrets of a region which it said that it had seen, but which, in truth, it had not seen. If we omit the negative, the Apostle is quoting its claims; if we insert it, he is denying their justice.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

b. Caution against angel-worship, Col 2:18-19 .

18. Beguile The marginal judge against you, is more accurate. The allusion is to the judge who, presiding at the games, fraudulently deprives him of the prize to whom it should be awarded. The false teacher would deprive them of their rightful reward of the incorruptible crown by misleading them in the way of attaining it. His character is described in four particulars. 1. He wills, or delights in, a pretended humility which held God to be so unapproachable and incomprehensible that the mediation of inferior spiritual beings was necessary. Worshipping of angels would readily fall in with this theory. Notwithstanding the apostle’s labour and caution, this evil took so deep root in Phrygia and Pisidia, that three centuries later the Council of Laodicea forbade the practice by a special decree, condemning it as idolatry and an abandonment of Christ. 2. He stands upon what he has seen, and pretends to a profound knowledge of the heavenly world by wonderful visions. Most recent critics omit the word not. 3. Believing that he has fathomed the mysteries of the spiritual world, he is, though pretending to humility, really but without reason inflated by his own spiritualized sensualism.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility or worshipping of the supernatural messengers, dwelling in the things which he has seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast the Head, from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God.’

The Christian life is here thought of as an athletic contest (compare 1Co 9:24-27; 2Ti 2:5; Heb 12:1). In order to win the prize everything that could hinder, anything that could ‘slow us down’, must be laid aside. By fixing our eyes on anyone or anything other than Christ we will hinder our growth, for He is our Head, the Great Direct Supplier, and He alone can provide that which makes us ‘increase with the increase of God’. To look to intermediaries is to choke the line of contact and thus prevent maximum benefit. And this is true whether of priests, angels, saints or Mary.

‘Let no man rob you of your prize (or ‘give an unfavourable ruling against you’).’ Paul may have intended us to see Christ as ‘the prize’, God’s response to our faith. Or it may refer to our failing to achieve our future reward because false humility renders us useless. The verb (there is no separate word for ‘prize’) may, however simply mean, ‘give an unfavourable ruling against you’, but the consequence is the same.

‘A voluntary humility and worshipping of supernatural messengers.’ The word for supernatural messengers is ‘angelos’, usually translated ‘angels’. But we must not here think in terms of angels as we see them with our Christian interpretation. It refers to a whole host of supernatural beings, gods, demi-gods, principalities, powers and so on as believed on in the ancient world. The voluntary humility is an attitude of humility that makes a great show of being ‘nothing’ in comparison with these supernatural messengers. It ignores what God has said and debases itself to look to lesser things. They choose what they see as the ‘humble’ position not realising that this is to insult God.

The argument for intermediaries always seems right to the person who is aware of his sinfulness and yet has not come to an understanding of the wisdom of God revealed in Christ. ‘I am not worthy’, he says. But it is a sign of a darkened mind that has not ‘learned Christ’. It demonstrates that he does not understand the free grace of the Gospel. The Gospel is Christ in all His fullness, ‘Christ in you, the hope of glory’ (Col 1:27), offered to men. To accept anything less robs us of Christ and robs us of our prize. The intermediary will not bring us to Christ but will hide Christ from us.

‘Worshipping.’ The particular word denotes the external practise of religion, and is used regularly of false worship.

‘Dwelling in (taking delight in, devoting himself to) the things which he has seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.’ The verb ‘dwelling’ is difficult to translate. It has been found in inscriptions as a technical term for certain types of ritual response in the mystery religions. It means ‘to set foot on, enter, visit, go into detail, come into possession of ’, thus leading on in context to the translations ‘taking delight in, devoting oneself to, dwelling in’. The idea is partly sarcastic. He takes delight in and is puffed up by what produces his voluntary ‘humility’, demonstrating that it is not genuine.

This probably in context refers to visions which so often result in giving prominence to intermediaries (‘angels’). But if those intermediaries seek honour and veneration for themselves then they are false and must be rejected (Rev 19:10; Rev 22:8-9). Any true vision from the other world would magnify Christ and turn attention from itself to Him. Those who dwell in visions inevitably go wrong, and lead others astray, for in their pride (often seen by themselves as humility) they magnify the subject of the vision rather than Christ Himself.

Visions are always a problem for the godly person. They do not like to denigrate them and recognise that, rarely, there have been genuine visions. Yet if they are wise they will recognise that visions regularly arise from wrong sources, and are often drug induced or arise from a chemical imbalance in the brain. They are the ‘easy way’ to ‘certainty’. There are some whose mental make up is such that they are susceptible to ‘visions’. They ‘see things’ that others do not see, especially when they indulge in asceticism (see Col 2:23), and are thus inevitably very sincere, but they are experiencing mental aberrations rather than contacting spiritual sources (it comes from their ‘fleshly mind’ – compare Rom 8:5-6 – it is the mind controlled by the flesh and pandering to the flesh as opposed to the spiritual mind). So we are right to be wary of them. The general principle must be, if at all in doubt reject them, although treating the visionary gently. In themselves they prove nothing for they can never be substantiated. Personal visions should be retained for personal use. They should never be the foundation for doctrine. That is why Jesus stressed that He referred to what He had actually seen (Joh 3:11; Joh 3:32; Joh 8:38).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Col 2:18. Let no man beguile you This verse is differently understood. Dr. Doddridge translates and paraphrases it as follows: “Let no one, therefore, who may ever so eagerly desire it, or ever so artfully attempt it, deprive you of your great prize, for which, as Christians, you contend, by an [affected] humility, and the worship of angels, which some Jewish zealots, as well as heathen philosophers, so eagerly inculcate; intruding officiously and presumptuously into that which he hath not seen, while pretending to tell us wonderful secrets relating to the various ranks, subordinations, and offices of these angels. This may render a man the admiration of the ignorant and inconsiderate; but it is indeed the result of his being vainly puffed up by his corrupt and fleshly mind, with the conceit of things which it is impossible he should understand, and a desire of introducing novelties into religion.” Mr. Peirce’s paraphrase is this: “And since Christ has thus divested principalities and powers, let no man take upon him to condemn you, while he pleases himself with an humility and worshipping of angels of his own devising; boldly prying into and dictating about matters whereof he knows nothing: and this he is led to by his Jewish temper, which puffs him up with a vain conceit that he knows and is fit to judge of every thing.” It seems much more probable that the Apostle refers to this opinion, than to that of Tertullian, who explains it of “worship taught by angels,” or persons pretending to receive revelations from them. It is uncertain whether the heathens began so early as this to call those celestial spirits angels whom they before had called good demons; but it is evident that very soon after the Apostle’s days, they speak of angels, and archangels, and recommend the worship of them, under those names. Bishop Burnet justly observes, “That if it had been the Apostle’s intention to give the least encouragement to any religious addresses to saints and angels, this would have been a very natural occasion of introducing the subject, and adjusting its proper boundaries.”

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Col 2:18 . [118] Warning against a further danger, with which they were threatened on the part of these false teachers.

] not different from in Col 2:16 , as if the latter emphasized the verb and the former the subject (Hofmann). This would be correct, if in Col 2:16 it were . Comp. on , Col 2:8 , and on , Col 2:4 . Moreover, the words cannot be regarded (with Holtzmann) as a duplicate proceeding from the interpolator, especially as they contain a new warning, and in such a peculiar form ( .).

] Let no one deprive you of the prize. , which is not a Cilician word (Jerome; see, on the contrary, Eustath. ad Il . i. 93. 33: , ), is only now preserved among ancient Greek authors in Dem. c. Mid . 544, ult.: , where it expresses the taking away of victory in a judicial suit, and the procuring of a sentence of condemnation, and that in the form of the conception: to bring it about to the injury of some one, that not he, but another, shall receive the prize from the . Midias had bribed the judges. The intimates that the prize was due to the person concerned, although it has been in a hostile spirit (not merely unrighteously , which would be , [119] Plut. Mor . p. 535 C; Polyb. xxiv. 1. 12) withdrawn from him and adjudged to another . The right view substantially, though not recognising the distinction from ., is taken by Chrysostom ( , , ) and Theophylact, also Suidas: . Comp. also Zonaras, ad Concil. Laod . can. 35, p. 351: , . The conception is: (1) To the readers as true believers belongs the Messianic prize of victory, this is the assumption upon which the expression is based; (2) The false teachers desire to deprive them of the prize of victory and to give it to others, namely, to themselves and their adherents, and that through their service of angels, etc.; (3) Just as little, however, as in the case of the in Col 2:16 , ought the readers to give heed to, or let themselves be led astray by, this hostile proceeding of the , which is based upon subjective vanity and is (Col 2:19 ) separation from Christ and His body, this is implied in the imperatives. Consequently, the view of Jerome, ad Aglas . p. 10, is not in substance erroneous, although only approximately corresponding to the expression: “Nemo adversus vos praemium accipiat;” Erasmus is substantially correct: “ praemium , quod sectari coepistis, vobis intervertat; ” comp. Calvin, Estius, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Ewald, and others; while the Vulgate ( seducat ), Luther (“ to displace the goal ”), and others content themselves with a much less accurate statement of the sense, and Bengel imports into the passage the sense of usurped false leading and instruction , as Beza similarly took it. [120] The , to which . refers, is not Christian liberty (Grotius, who explains it praemium exigere ), nor yet: “ the honour and prize of the true worship of God ” (de Wette), but, in accordance with the standing apostolic conception (comp. Phi 3:14 ; 1Co 9:24 ): the bliss of the Messianic kingdom , the incorruptible (1Co 9:25 ), the . (2Ti 4:8 ), (1Pe 5:4 ), (Jas 1:12 ); comp. 2Ti 2:5 . With reference to the , Elsner, Michaelis, Storr, Flatt, Steiger, and others, including Bhr, Bhmer, Reiche, Huther, and Bleek, following Photius in Oecumenius ( ), have taken . in the sense of to condemn , parallel to the in Col 2:16 , or to refuse salvation to (Hofmann). This rendering is not, indeed, to be rejected on linguistic grounds, since Hesychius and Suidas both quote the signification in the case of ; but it cannot be justified by proofs adduced, and it is decidedly in opposition to the context through the following . . . , which presupposes not a judgment of the opponents, but an action , something practical , which, through their perverse religious attitude, they would fain accomplish .

] sc . : while he desires to do this , would willingly accomplish it (comp. Dissen, ad Pind. Ol . ii. 97) by humility, etc. So rightly Theodoret ( ), Theophylact ( .), Photius in Oecumenius, Calvin, Casaubon, and others, including Huther and Buttmann, Neut. Gr . p. 322 [E. T. 376]. The “ languidum et frigidum, ” which Reiche urges against this view, applies at the most only in the event of . being explained as to condemn; and the accusation of incorrectness of sense (Hofmann) is only based upon an erroneous explanation of the subsequent . . . . The interpretation adopted by others: taking delight in humility, etc. (Augustine, Castalio, Vatablus, Estius, Michaelis, Loesner, and others, including Storr, Flatt, Bhr, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bleek, Hofmann, and Hilgenfeld), is based upon the extremely unnecessary assumption of an un-Greek imitation of , such as occurs, indeed, in the LXX. (1Sa 18:22 ; 2Sa 15:26 ; 1Ki 10:9 ; 2Ch 9:8 ; Psa 146:10 ), but not in the N. T.; for in Mat 27:43 , is used with the accusative , comp. on Rom 7:21 . Moreover, in the O. T. passages the object of the delight is almost invariably (the only exception being Psa 147:10 ) a person. Even in the Apocrypha that abnormal mode of expression does not occur. Others, again, hold that it is to be joined in an adverbial sense to . It would then (see Erasmus, Annot .) have to be rendered cupide or studiose (Plat. Theaet . p. 143 D; and see Reisig, Conject . p. 143 f.), or unconstrained, voluntarily , equivalent to , , (Plat. Symp . p. 183 A, very frequent in Homer, Soph. Phil . 1327, Aesch. Choeph . 19. 790, and the passages from Xenophon quoted by Sturz, Lex . II. p. 21), which sense, here certainly quite unsuitable, has been transformed at variance with linguistic usage into the idea: “ hoc munus sibi a nullo tributum exercens ” (Beza), or: unwarrantably (Bhmer, comp. Steiger), or of his own choice (Luther, who, like Ewald, couples it with ), or: arbitrarily (Ewald), or: capriciously (Reiche), etc.; consequently giving it the sense of , , , or . Even Tittmann, Synon . p. 131, comes at length to such an ultro , erroneously quoting Herod, 9:14, where must be taken as in Plat. Theaet. l.c.

. . . .] is not propter , which is supposed to have the meaning: because . . . . is necessary to salvation (Reiche); nor does it denote the condition in which the takes place (Steiger, Huther); but, in keeping with the , it is the means by which the purpose is to be attained: by virtue of humility and worshipping of angels . Thereby he wishes to effect that the shall be withdrawn from you (and given to himself and his followers). . is the genitive of the object (comp. Wis 14:27 ; Herodian, iv. 8. 17; Clem. Cor . I. 45; see also Grimm on 4Ma 5:6 , and the passages from Josephus in Krebs, p. 339), and belongs only to ., not to . That the latter, however, is not humility in the proper sense, but is, viewed from the perverse personal standpoint of the false teachers, a humility in their sense only, is plain from the context (see below, . . . .), although irony (Steiger, Huther) is not to be found in the word. Paul, namely, designates the thing as that, for which the false teachers held it themselves and desired it to be held by others, and this, indeed, as respects the disposition lying at the root of it, which they sought to exhibit ( .), and as respects the abnormal religious phenomenon manifested among them ( . . . ); and then proceeds to give a deterrent exposure of both of these together according to their true character in a theoretical ( . ) and in a moral ( ) respect. How far the false teachers bore themselves as , is correctly defined by Theodoret: , , , , so that they thus regarded man as too insignificant in the presence of the divine majesty to be able to do without [121] the mediation of angels, which they sought to secure through (comp. 4Ma 4:11 ), thereby placing the merit of Christ (Rom 5:2 ) in the background. It is differently explained by Chrysostom and Theophylact (comp. also Photius in Oecumenius): the false teachers had declared the majesty of the Only-Begotten to be too exalted for lowly humanity to have access through Him to the Father, and hence the need of the mediation of angels for that purpose. In opposition to this view it may be urged, that the very prominence so frequently and intentionally given to the majesty of Christ in our Epistle, and especially as above the angels, rather goes to show that they had depreciated the dignity of Christ. Reiche and Ewald (comp. Hofmann’s interpretation below) find the in the of Col 2:23 , where, however, the two aberrations are adduced separately from one another, see on Col 2:23 . Proofs of the existence of the worship of angels in the post-apostolic church are found in Justin, Ap . I. 6, p. 56, [122] Athenagoras, and others; among the Gnostic heretics (Simonians, Cainites): Epiph. Haer . xx. 2; Tertullian, praescr . 33; Iren. Haer . i. 31. 2; and with respect to the worshipping of angels in the Colossian region Theodoret testifies: (A.D. 364, can. 35) , . The Catholic expedients for evading the prohibition of angel-worship in our passage (as also in the Concil. Laod ., Mansi, II. p. 568) may be seen especially in Cornelius a Lapide, who understands not all angel-worship, but only that which places the angels above Christ (comp. also Bisping), and who refers the Laodicean prohibition pointing to a “ (“ ” . . .), in accordance with the second Nicene Council, only to the cultus latriae , not duliae , consequently to actual adoration, not . In opposition to the words as they stand (for with the genitive of the subject would necessarily be the cultus, which the angels present to God, 4Ma 5:6 ; 4Ma 5:12 ; Joseph. Antt . xii. 5. 4; comp. Act 26:5 ), and also in opposition to the context (see Col 2:19 ), several have taken as the genitive of the subject , and have explained it of a religious condition, which desired to be like that of the angels, e.g . Luther: “ spirituality of the angels, ” comp. Melanchthon, Schoettgen (“habitus aliquis angelicus”), Wolf, Dalmer. Nevertheless, Hofmann, attempting a more subtle definition of the sense, has again taken as genitive of the subject , and joined with it not only , but also . The of the angels, namely, consists in their willingly keeping within the bounds assigned to them as spirits , and not coveting that which man in this respect has beyond them , namely, what belongs to the corporeal world. And the of the angels is a self-devotion to God , in which, between them and Him, no other barrier exists than that between the Creator and His creatures . That and this man makes into virtue on his part, when he, although but partially, renounces that which belongs to Him in distinction from the angels ( .), and, as one who has divested himself as much as possible of his corporeality , presents himself adoringly to God in such measure as he refrains from what was conferred upon him for bodily enjoyment. I do not comprehend how, on the one hand, the apostle could wrap up the combinations of ideas imputed to him in words so enigmatical, nor, on the other, how the readers could, without the guidance of Hofmann, extract them out of these words. The entire exposition is a labyrinth of imported subjective fancies. Paul might at least have written (or , or ) ! Even this would still have been far enough from clear, but it would at least have contained the point and a hint as to its interpretation. See, besides, in opposition to Hofmann, Rich. Schmidt, Paul. Christol . p. 193 f.

] Subordinate to the . . . as a warning modal definition to it: entering upon what he has beheld, i.e . instead of concerning himself with what has been objectively given (Col 2:19 ), entering the subjective domain of visions with his mental activity, by which is indicated the mystico-theosophic occupation of the mind with God and the angels, [123] so that (comp. Tert. c. Marc . v. 19) denotes not a seeing with the eyes, but a mental beholding, [124] which belonged to the domain of the , in part, doubtless, also to that of visionary ecstasy (comp. Act 2:17 ; Rev 9:17 ; in Act 9:10 ; Act 9:12 ; Act 10:3 ; 2Ch 9:29 , et al.; Luk 1:22 ). This reference must have been intelligible to the readers from the assertions put forth by the false teachers, [125] but the failure to observe it induced copyists, at a very early date, to add a negative (sometimes and sometimes ) before . (only used here in the N. T.; but see Wetstein, also Reisig, ad Oed. Col. praef . p. xxxix.), with accusative of the place conceived as object (Khner, II. 1, p. 257), also with the genitive, with the dative, and with , means to step upon , as e.g. , Aesch. Pers . 441; , Eur. El . 595; , Jos 19:49 ; also with reference to a mental domain, which is trodden by investigation and other mental activity, as Philo, de plant. No , p. 225 C, et al.; see Loesner, p. 369 f.; 2Ma 2:30 ; comp. also Nemes. de nat. hom . p. 64, ed. Matth.: , but not Xen. Conv . iv. 27, where, with Zeunius, ought to be read. Phavorinus: . It is frequently used in the sense of seizing possession (Dem. 894. 7; Eur. Heracl . 876; Schleusner, Thes . II. 332; Bloomfield, Gloss. in Aesch. Pers . p. 146 f.). So Budaeus and Calvin ( se ingerens ), both with the reading , also Huther ( establishing himself firmly in the creations of fancy); still the context does not suggest this, and, when used in this sense, . is usually coupled with (Dem. 894. 7, 1085. 24, 1086. 19; Isa 9:3 , et al.; 1Ma 12:25 ). In the reading of the Recepta , ., the sense amounts either to: entering into the unseen transcendental sphere , [126] wherein the assumption would be implied that the domain of sense was the only field legitimately open, which would be unsuitable (2Co 5:7 ; 2Co 13:12 ); or to: entering into things, which (although he dreams that he has seen them, yet) he has not seen a concealed antithetical reference, which Paul, in order to be intelligible, must have indicated. The thought, in the absence of the negative, is not weak (de Wette), but true, in characteristic keeping with the perverseness of theosophic fancies (in opposition to Hofmann’s objection), and representing the actual state of the case , which Paul could not but know. According to Hofmann, the which he reads is to be taken, not with , but with what goes before: of which, nevertheless, he has seen nothing (and, consequently, cannot imitate it). This is disposed of, apart even from the incorrect inference involved in it, [127] by the preposterousness of Hofmann’s exposition of the . ., which the connection, hit upon by him, of with (“ an investigation, which results in nothing ”), also falls to the ground.

. . . ., and then . . ., are both subordinate to the , and contain two modal definitions of it fraught with the utmost danger.

.] for the entering upon what was seen did not rest upon a real divine revelation, but upon a conceited, fanciful self-exaggeration. , , Theodoret. On , temere , i.e. without ground , comp. Mat 5:22 ; Rom 13:4 ; Plat. Menex . p. 234 C; Xen. Cyrop . ii. 2. 22. It places the vanity , that is, the objective groundlessness of the pride, in contradistinction to their presumptuous fancies, emphatically in the foreground. Even if . is not taken absolutely with Hofmann, we may not join it with (in opposition to Steiger, de Wette, Reiche; Bhmer is doubtful), since it is not the uselessness (in this sense would require to be taken, 1Co 15:2 ; Gal 3:4 ; Gal 4:11 ) of the . (or .), but this in and of itself, that forms the characteristic perversity in the conduct of those people a perversity which is set forth by . . . ., and in Col 2:19 as immoral and antichristian.

. ] becoming puffed up by (as operative principle) the reason of his flesh . This is the morally determined intellectual faculty in its character and activity as not divinely regulated, in which unennobled condition (see on Eph 4:23 ) it is the servant, not of the divine , whose organ it is designed to be, but of the materio-physical human nature, of the as the seat of the sin-power, and is governed by its lusts instead of the divine truth. Comp. Rom 1:21 ; Rom 1:28 ; Rom 4:1 ; Rom 6:19 ; Rom 7:14 ; Rom 12:2 ; Eph 4:17 f.; see also Kluge in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol . 1871, p. 329 ff. The does not belong to the essence of the (in opposition to Holsten); but, be it observed, the matter is so represented that the of the false teacher, in accordance with its dominant superiority, appears personified (comp. Rom 8:6 ), as if the , influenced by it, and therewith serviceable to it, were its own . In virtue of this non-free and, in its activity, sinfully-directed reason, the man, who is guided by it, is (Gal 3:1 ; Gal 3:3 ; Tit 3:3 ), loses his moral judgment (Rom 12:2 ), falls into (1Ti 6:9 ), and withstands Christian truth and purity as (2Ti 3:8 ; 2Co 11:3 ), and (Eph 4:18 ).

The puffing up of the persons in question consisted in this, that with all their professed and apparent humility they, as is commonly the case with mystic tendencies, fancied that they could not be content with the simple knowledge and obedience of the gospel, but were capable of attaining a special higher wisdom and sanctity. It is well said by Theophylact: . , Joh 3:16-17 ; Joh 3:19 ; Joh 10:26 f., !

[118] See upon ver. 18, Reiche, Comm. Crit. p. 277 ff.

[119] With which Theodoret confounds it ( ); he makes it the unrighteous awarding of the prize of victory: , .

[120] “Nemo adversum vos rectoris partes sibi ultro sumat.” He starts from the common use of in the sense of regere ac moderari (see Dorvill. ad Charit. p. 404). Comp. on Col 3:15 . But neither the passage of Dem. l.c ., nor the testimony of the Greek Fathers, of Suidas, Eustathius, and Zonaras, nor the analogy of , would justify the adoption of this sense in the case of the compound .

[121] Compare Augustine, Conf. x. 42: “Quem invenirem, qui me reconciliaret tibi? Abeundum mihi fuit ad angelos? Multi conantes ad te redire, neque per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, tentaverunt haec, et inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum, et digni habiti sunt illusionibus.” The (false) was the subjective source of their going astray to angel-worship.

[122] Hasselbach gives substantially the right interpretation of the passage in the Stud. u. Krit. 1839, p. 329 ff.

[123] This fanciful habit could not but be fostered and promoted by the Jewish view, according to which the appearances of angels were regarded as (Gieseler, Kirchengesch. I. 1, p. 153, Exo 4 ).

[124] Ewald regards as more precisely defined by . . . ., as if it ran . . . . : “while he enters arbitrarily upon that, which he has seen in humility and angel-worship (consequently has not actually himself experienced and known), and desires to teach it as something true.” But such a hyperbaton, in the case of the relative, besides obscuring the sense, is without precedent in the N. T. Comp. on ver. 14. Besides, the thought itself is far from clear; and respecting , see above.

[125] For the sphere of vision of the lay not outside of the subjects, but in the hollow mirror of their own fancy. This applies also in opposition to Hilgenfeld, who now (1873, p. 198 f.) properly rejects the , but takes . . incorrectly: “abiding by the sensuous.” Opposed to this is the very use of the perfect . and the significant expression . The apostle does not mean the , but the (Col 1:16 ), into which they ascend by visions which they profess to have had.

[126] Comp. Chrysostom: they have not seen the angels, and yet bear themselves as if they had seen them.

[127] For even the unseen, which may in any other way have been brought to our knowledge, we may and under certain circumstances should imitate (comp. e.g. Eph 5:1 ). And even the angels and their actions have been included among the objects of the divine revelation as to the history of salvation and its accomplishment.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

Ver. 18. Let no man beguile you ] Gr. , brave it over you. Confer Exo 8:9 ; “Glory over me,” Gloriam assume supra me, as thou hast done over thy sorcerers; I give thee this liberty. See also Jdg 7:2 ; Isa 10:15 .

In a voluntary humility ] A proud humility. They would not dare to worship God, but angels, &c., yet were vainly puffed up by their fleshly minds. And something like this was that of the Baptist in refusing to wash Christ, and of Peter in refusing to be washed by him, Joh 13:8 .

And worshipping of angels ] Setting them up, as Papists do, for mediators of intercession. Let not us acknowledge any other master of requests in heaven but Christ alone, 1Jn 2:1 . But what a piece of knavery is that in Surius and Caranza, who rendering that passage of the Laodicean Council, chap. xxxv., , Christians may not pray to angels; they make the words to be, Non oportet Christianos ad angulos congregationes facere, Christians may not be corner creepers; and the title they make, De iis qui angulos colunt, of those that worship (not angels, but) corners; against all sense. What! will they put out the eyes of God’s people? as he said, Num 16:14 . Or do they not rather, Festucam quaerere unde oculos sibi eruant, as Bernard hath it, seek straws to put out their own eyes also?

Intruding into those things ] , or invading those things, blind and bold, busy about such matters, as whereof there is neither proof nor profit. Of this sort of seducers was that daring Dionysius, that writeth so confidently of the heavenly hierarchy; the schoolmen also with their curious speculations and new niceties, as Scotellus and others.

Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind ] Corruption is the mother of pride, as the devil the father. “He is the king of all the children of pride,” Job 41:34 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

18 23 .] See above warning , 2ndly, with reference to angel-worship and asceticism .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

18 .] Let no one of purpose (such is by far the best rendering of , to take it with . and understand it precisely as in ref. 2 Pet. And thus apparently Thl.: . Mey. pronounces this meaning ‘ganz unpassend, and controverts the passages brought to defend it; omitting however ref. 2 Pet. So also does Ellicott, believing it to “impute to the false teachers a frightful and indeed suicidal malice, which is neither justified by the context, nor in any way credible.” But his own “ desiring to do it ” is hardly distinguishable from that other: nor does it at all escape the imputation of motive which he finds so improbable. But surely it is altogether relevant, imputing to the false teachers not only error, but insidious designs also. Others take with ., keeping however its reference as above, and understanding, as Phot. in c., after it. So Thdrt., , Calv., ‘volens id facere,’ Mey., Eadie, al. This latter, after Bengel, assigns as his reason for adopting this view, that the participles , , , , form a series. This however is not strictly true for would stand in a position of emphasis which does not belong to the next two: rather should we thus expect . . . . I cannot help thinking this rendering flat and spiritless.

Others again suppose a harsh Hebraism, common in the LXX (reff., especially Psa 146:10 ), but not found in the N. T., by which is put for , ‘to have pleasure in.’ So Aug., Est., Olsh., al. The principal objection to this rendering here is, that it would be irrelevant. Not the delight which the false teacher takes in his . &c., but the fact of it as operative on the Colossians, and its fleshly sources, are adduced) defraud you of your prize (see reff. Demosth. Mey. points out the difference between ., a fraudulent adjudication with hostile intent against the person wronged, and , which is merely, as Thdrt. explains this, . So Polyb. xxiv. 1. 12, , , . Supplying this, which Chrys. has not marked, we may take his explanation: , . Zonaras gives it better, in Suicer ii. 49: . , , , . This deprivation of their prize, and this wrong, they would suffer at the hands of those who would draw them away from Christ the giver of the prize (2Ti 4:8 . Jas 1:12 . 1Pe 5:4 ), and lower them to the worship of intermediate spiritual beings. The various meanings, ‘ne quis brabeut potestatem usurpans atque adeo abutens, vos currentes moderetur, perperamque prscribat quid sequi quid fugere debeatis prmium accepturi’ (Beng.), ‘nemo adversum vos rectoris partes sibi ultro sumat’ (Beza and similarly Corn.-a-lap.), ‘prmium, id est libertatem a Christo indultam, exigere’ (Grot.), are all more or less departures from the meaning of the word) in (as the element and sphere of his .) humility ( , , . . Zonaras in canon 35 of the Council of Laodicea, in Suicer i. p. 45. Similarly Thdrt., , . , . . Aug. Conf. x. 42, vol. i. p. 807, says: “Quem invenirem, qui me reconciliaret tibi? abeundum mihi fuit ad angelos? multi conantes ad te redire, neque per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, tentaverunt hc, et inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum, et digni habiti sunt illusionibus.” So that no ironical sense need be supposed) and (explicative, or appending a specific form of the general .) worship of the angels (genitive objective, ‘ worship paid to the holy angels :’ not subjective, as Schttg., Luther, Rosenm., al.: cf. Jos. Antt. viii. 8. 4, . ; Justin M. cohort. ad Grc. 38, p. 35, .

With reference to the fact of the existence of such teaching at Coloss, Thdrt. gives an interesting notice: , . . . . . . . The canon of the council of Laodicea (A.D. 360) runs thus: , . , . , . , . , , . . . . . . , . . See, for an account of subsequent legends and visions of the neighbourhood, Conyb. and Hows., ii. p. 480, note, edn. 2), standing on the things which he hath seen (an inhabitant of, insistens on, the realm of sight, not of faith: as Aug. above, ‘incidens in desiderium curiosarum visionum.’ First a word respecting the reading. The of the rec. and of others, seem to me to have been unfortunate insertions from misunderstanding the sense of . That it may mean ‘prying into,’ would be evident from the simplest metaphorical application of its primary meaning of treading or entering on: but whether it does so mean here, must be determined by the context. And it surely would be a strange and incongruous expression for one who was advocating a religion of faith , whose very charter is . , to blame a man or a teacher for , placing the defect of sight in the very emphatic forefront of the charge against him. Far rather should we expect that one who , , would state of such teacher as one of his especial faults, that he , found his status, his standing-point, in the realm of sight. And to this what follows corresponds. This insisting on his own visual experience is the result of fleshly pride as contrasted with the spiritual mind. Of the other meanings of , that of ‘coming into possession of property,’ ‘inheriting,’ might be suitable, but in this sense it is usually constructed with , cf. Demosth. 1085. 24, 1086. 19. The ordinary meaning is far the best here: see reff., and cf. sch. Pers. 448 , Eur. Electr. 595 (this view I still maintain as against Ellicott)), vainly (groundlessly. must not be joined with ., as De W., Conyb., al., for thus the emphasis of that clause is destroyed: see above) puffed up (no inconsistency with the . above: for as Thdrt. says, , ) by (as the working principle in him) the mind (intent, bent of thought and apprehension) of his own flesh ( , , Chrys. But as usual, this adjectival rendering misses the point of the expression, the is not only , but is the , the ordinary sensuous principle, is the fons of the which therefore dwells in the region of visions of the man’s own seeing, and does not in true humility hold the Head and in faith receive grace as one of His members. I have marked rather more strongly than by ‘ his ’ only: its expression conveys certainly some idea of self-will. On the psychological propriety of the expression, see Ellicott’s note),

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Col 2:18 . This verse gives us our only definite information, apart from which it would have been a highly probable inference, that the false teachers practised angel-worship. . This is commonly translated “rob you of your prize”. The judge at the games was called or , and the prize . But the verb apparently lost all reference to the prize, and meant simply “to decide”. In the two cases in which occurs it means to decide against or condemn. It is best therefore to take it so here, “let no one give judgment against you”; it is thus parallel to, though stronger than, (Col 2:16 ). (Field, Notes on Transl. of the N.T. , pp. 196, 197, discusses the word; cf. also Ol. and Abb. ad loc. ) . This phrase is very variously interpreted. Some assume a Hebraism, and translate “taking pleasure in humility” (Winer, Lightf., Findl., Haupt). The LXX uses this not infrequently (but usually with persons, though otherwise in Psa 111:1 ; Psa 146:10 ); but there is no N.T. parallel for it, and Paul does not employ Hebraisms. For this idea he uses . Moreover it yields no relevant sense here. Others translate “wishing to do so in ( or by) humility” (Mey., Ell., Sod., Weiss). But for this should have been added, and on this interpretation has really little point. The rendering of Alford, Moule and others is not very different from this in sense, but more forcible. It connects . with ., and translates “wilfully,” “of set purpose”. 2Pe 3:5 is referred to for the construction. Oltramare’s view is similar, but he translates “spontaneously,” so apparently the R.V. mg. and Abbott. The unsatisfactoriness of these interpretations suggests that the text may be corrupt. Hort thinks that for we should read . This word is used by Basil, and a similar compound occurs in Col 2:23 . It is, of course, as Haupt says, difficult to understand how the copyists should have altered it into the very strange expression in the text. But this is not a fatal objection, and the conjecture is very possibly correct. It would mean “gratuitous humility,” a humility that went beyond what was required. is frequently explained as ironical. By a display of humility they beguiled their dupes. But the connexion with the following words makes this improbable. Their humility found an expression in angel worship. It is therefore that lowliness which causes a man to think himself unworthy to come into fellowship with God, and therefore prompts to worship of the angels. Such humility was perverted, but not therefore unreal. It was compatible with vanity towards others. : “and worship of angels”. The genitive is objective, though some have taken it as subjective. This has been done most recently and elaborately by Zahn. He takes . . with . as well as with . The former noun is used, he argues, in a non-Pauline sense, therefore it needs a definition, and that . . is intended to define it is made probable by the fact that it is not repeated before . What is meant is a mortification and devotion suitable for angels, but not for men who live in bodies, an attempt to assimilate themselves to angels, who do not eat or drink. The chief ground urged for this view is that Judaism was too strenuously monotheistic to admit of angel worship, and Paul could only have regarded it as idolatry. Against this what is said in the Introduction , section ii., may be referred to. The angels worshipped by the false teachers are the . , . . . If is inserted after , we may translate with Ellicott, in his earlier editions, “intruding into the things which he hath not seen”. This should probably be explained with reference to the invisible world, with which they professed to hold communion, but which really was closed to them. Ellicott still thinks this reading gives the better sense, though adopting the other in deference to the external evidence. But Paul could hardly have brought it against them that they had fellowship with what they could not see. For this was so with all who walked by faith. The negative, therefore, is not helpful to the sense, and is definitely excluded by the external evidence. The text without the negative is very variously explained. means “to stand upon,” then “to come into possession of” a thing, “to enter upon,” “to invade,” then in a figurative sense “to investigate”. Since also lends itself to diametrically opposite interpretations, the exegesis becomes doubly uncertain. It may mean the things which can be seen with the bodily eye, or it may refer to visions; they may be condemned as deluded visionaries, or for their materialism. Alford and Ellicott translate “taking his stand on the things which he hath seen,” and explain that he becomes an inhabitant of the world of sight rather than of faith. But the use of the perfect is against any reference to the circumstances of ordinary life, and the thought would have been far more simply and clearly expressed by . Generally it is supposed that “the things which he has seen” means his visions. Various views are then taken of . Meyer translates “entering upon what he has beheld,” and explains that, instead of holding fast to Christ, he enters the region of visions. Several translate “investigating” (Beng., Grimm, Findl., Ol., Haupt). This is probably the best translation of the words as they stand, for the translation “parading his visions” (Sod. and? Abb.) seems not to be well established. The harshness of the combination, and uncertainty of the exegesis, give much probability to the view that the text has not been correctly transmitted. After it had been conjectured that we should read , Lightfoot independently suggested the latter word, but for suggested . or . [Sod. incorrectly quotes the emendation as ; and in Abb. by a misprint we have . Ellicott not only misreports Lightfoot’s emendation, but does not even mention Taylor’s.] is used sometimes of that which suspends a thing, sometimes of the act of suspension. “In this last sense,” Lightfoot says, “it describes the poising of a bird, the floating of a boat on the waters, the balancing on a rope, and the like. Hence its expressiveness when used as a metaphor.” does not actually occur, but the cognate verb is not uncommon. A much better emendation, however, is that of Dr. C. Taylor ( Journal of Philology , vii., p. 130), , “treading the void of air”. In his Pirqe Aboth , 2 p. 161, he says that the Rabbinic expression “fly in the air with nothing to rest upon” may have suggested the phrase to Paul. This emendation is accepted by Westcott and Hort, and regarded as the most probable by Zahn, who says that the text as it stands yields no sense. It involves the omission of a single letter, and although the province of conjectural emendation in the New Testament is very restricted, yet such a slip as is suggested may very easily have been made by Paul’s amanuensis or a very early copyist. Field urges as a fatal objection that “ is a vox nulla , the inviolable laws regulating this class of composite verbs stamping as the only legitimate, as it is the only existing, form” ( loc. cit. , p. 198). Lightfoot, on the contrary, asserts that it is unobjectionable in itself. Even if Field’s criticism be admitted, it would be better to read than to retain the text. If the emendation is correct, Paul is asserting the baseless character of the false teaching; and all reference to visions disappears. should probably, in accordance with Pauline usage, be connected with the following rather than the preceding words. It may mean “groundlessly” (Mey., Alf., Ell., Ol., Haupt, Abb.) or “without result” (Sod. and others). The latter is the sense in Gal 3:4 ; Gal 4:11 , 1Co 15:2 , Rom 13:4 , but, since it does not suit ., the former is to be preferred here. : cf. 1Co 8:1 , 1Co 13:4 . They were puffed up by a sense of spiritual and intellectual superiority. : “by the mind of his flesh”. The mind in this case is regarded as dominated by the flesh. Soden, followed by Abbott, says that the as a natural faculty is ethically indifferent in itself, and so may stand just as well under the influence of as of . But in the most important passage, Rom 7:22-25 , it is the higher nature in the unregenerate which wages unsuccessful conflict with the . At the same time we see from Eph 4:17 that it could become vain and aimless and even (Rom 1:28 ) reprobate. The choice of the phrase here is probably dictated by Paul’s wish to drive home the fact that their asceticism and angel worship, so far from securing as they imagined the destruction of the flesh, proved that it was by the flesh that they were altogether controlled, even to the mind itself, which stood farthest from it.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

no man. Greek. m edeis.

beguile you of your reward = defraud you of your prize. Greek. katabrabeua. Only here.

in, &c. Lit, willing (App-102) in (App-104), i.e. being a devotee to.

humility. See Act 20:19.

worshipping. See Act 26:5 (religion).

intruding into = investigating. Greek embateuo. Only here.

not. Most texts omit.

seen. App-133.

puffed up. See 1Co 4:6.

by. App-104.

his fleshly mind = the mind of his flesh, i.e. the old Adam nature.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

18-23.] See above-warning, 2ndly, with reference to angel-worship and asceticism.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Col 2:18. , let no man assume the office of umpire to dictate to you [let no man beguile you of your reward[16]]) A word closely connected with judging (), and establishing ordinances or dogmas (), Col 2:16; Col 2:20; for , I guide or regulate [moderor; Engl. Vers. rule], see Col 3:15, note; from which differs, as [abuse] differs from [use]; and the verb itself, which is compounded with , governs the accusative, , you, for the preposition would require the genitive: Hesychius has (read ) , . Therefore Paul means to say, Let no one, usurping the authority of judge [arbitrator] of the prizes, and accordingly abusing it, guide and regulate you in the race which you are running, and mislead you by prescribing what you, about to receive the prize, should follow, what you should avoid. A French interpreter has skilfully used the word maitriser, to domineer; for the apostle is not speaking of a rival snatching the prize of the race before you, but of an odious, perverse, insolent judge (umpire). On this verb depend four participles, through as many sentences, of which the first and third, the second and fourth, have respect to each other. The manifold advantage of this Chiasmus, now noticed, will by and by appear.- ) Often , with following it, is expressed by the word , , , , for example, 1Sa 18:22; 1Sa 18:25; comp. the compound , Col 2:23 : , one who does something with his will [with inclination: a volunteer in doing]. Comp. Mar 12:38, note.- , with humility of feeling (sentiment) and worshipping of angels) A Hendiadys. They worship angels under pretext of humility and modesty, as if they dared not immediately and directly address themselves to God and Christ. This error, says Alexander Morus, had driven its roots so deep into the earth, that not even after three centuries could it be pulled out; for the 35th canon of the Council of Laodicea was framed against it; and this city was the metropolis of Phrygia, where Colosse also was. That canon condemns the Angelici, for so they were called. The Angelici, says Augustine Haeres. 39, are those inclined to the worship of angels. By this authority, the invocation of saints and intercourse with spirits, how plausible soever they may be, are entirely taken away.- , ) Heinsius observes, This language is similar in principle to that of the Greek tragedians, , , intruding into those things at which it is unlawful to look. , saw with the eyes, and , intruding with the feet, are spoken metaphorically of the mind. The foot should not get before the eyes: , I go in, I enter in, I pass through (penetrate). It is used concerning a hostile invasion, 1Ma 12:25. It is figuratively applied to the understanding, and signifies, I pry into or search, I handle, Chrys. de Sac. For how should Christ, , who searches the hearts of all, ask for the sake of learning? On this passage we have made several observations, T. I. p. 376. Moreover, there is a compound, , said of the vain study of abstruse subjects, on which see Suicers Thesaurus; and the same Al. Morus proves by the examples taken from Damascius, that this word was used by Plato. And there is little doubt, that Paul himself had in his mind the word of Plato, when he was refuting those who held the same opinion as Plato concerning angels; comp. , Col 2:8. But yet, when he might have said, , he yet does not say so (for the things into which the intrudes, are not in themselves utterly , vain, but only not seen by him); but he lays down something even more weighty, since the rather expresses the haughtiness of the . On the opposite side, the , to hold the Head, corresponds, which is not done in vain, but tends to increase.-, puffed up) The antithesis is, humility of sentiment (); and yet these two are joined together.

[16] This is the Engl. Vers. Bengel translates it, let no one treat you according to his own whim (pro arbitrio). The verb signifies to decide against any one in adjudging the prizes at the public games. It appears, from a passage in Demosthenes, to imply fraud and injustice in the decision.

Wahl, Clavis N. T., renders the verb, palma or prmio fraudo. Properly it means, to be umpire in a contest to the detriment of some one.-ED.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Col 2:18

Col 2:18

Let no man rob you of your prize-The reward they were to obtain through fidelity to Christ was eternal life. There was danger that the false teachers would so beguile them that they would turn aside from their faithfulness to Christ and lose their reward.

by a voluntary humility-Self-imposed acts of mortification of the body, as service to God, was the outward evidence of false humility, and points to something blameworthy; a false and perverted lowliness, which deemed that God was so inaccessible that he could only be approached through the mediation of inferior beings.

and worshipping of the angels,-This was the outward evidence of false humility, and carries the idea that no man can invent methods of worship of his own, he cannot worship angels. The Lord Jesus when tempted by Satan, said: It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (Mat 4:10).

dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,-[This refers to the false teachers who had sprung up among the Colossians, claiming supernatural knowledge by which the mind is said to be puffed up. The supernatural knowledge to which the pretensions were made was that favorite knowledge claimed by the mystics of the secrets of the heavenly places and especially of the grades and functions of the hierarchy of heaven. Paul brands it as belonging to the mind, not of the spirit, but to the flesh, for indeed it was really superstition, resting not on faith, but on supposed visions and supernatural manifestations. He casts no reflection on the use of ones mind, but on the gullibility and foolish pride of the ignorant victims of the charlatans.]

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Chapter 9 Christ the Antidote to Oriental Mysticism

Col 2:18-19

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. (vv. 18-19)

The natural man is distinctly religious. He does not need to be regenerated in order to feel after God. While it is true of all the unsaved that there is none that seeketh after God in the sense of seeking Him for His own sake, yet it has been well said that man is incurably religious. He must have something to worship. And so Satan has supplied him with cults of all descriptions to suit every type of mind.

One of the oldest systems that has come down even to our own day is that of Parseeism, based upon the Zend Avesta, supposed to have originated with the Persian hero and prophet, Zoroaster, or Zarathustra, as he is called in the Persian scriptures. This system teaches a mystical dualism. Ahura Mazda, or Ormuzd, is the infinite God, the Eternal Light. A lesser deity, Ahriman, the Prince of Darkness, sometimes looked upon as the creator of matter, is in constant conflict with the supreme deity. For twelve thousand years he is destined to wage war against the light and then his kingdom of darkness will be destroyed.

This system permeated various schools of thought, and in apostolic days had been widely accepted throughout the Greek and Roman world under the name Mithraism. Its votaries went everywhere proclaiming it as the great unifying world religion. It was a vast secret society, its initiates going from one mystical degree to another until they became adepts.

This satanic system trembled before the advancing hosts of Christianity, and finally sought to combine certain of its views with a part of the Christian revelation. As we have already seen, by an eclectic combination of Judaism, Greek philosophy, and Oriental mysticism, a new religion was formed, divided, however, into many different sects all alike unsound as to Christ, and all rejecting the inspiration of the Holy Scripture and substituting the vain speculations of the human mind. Yet imitations of almost every Christian doctrine were found in some one or other of these systems, but with certain accretions and contradictions that made them most dangerous.

Justin Martyr wrote some years after the apostle John passed from this scene, Many spirits are abroad in the world and the credentials they display are splendid gifts of mind, eloquence and logic. Christian, look carefully, and ask for the print of the nails. All these systems denied the true Christ of God who gave Himself for our sins upon the cross of shame. Some, like the Docetists, taught that the humanity of Jesus was simply an appearance, unreal and immaterial. The first epistle of John meets this in a very wonderful way.

Another sect, afterward headed up in Cerinthus, the great arch-heretic of the second century, called by Polycarp, the firstborn of Satan, taught that Jesus was the natural son of Joseph and Mary, who died on the cross finally to separate himself from his own sin, but to whom the Christ (identified with the eternal Spirit) came at his baptism and illumination, but left him at the cross. This system seems to be particularly before the mind of the apostle Paul and he combats it in a masterly manner.

In all of these systems knowledge was given the preeminence over faith. The latter, which is confidence in revealed testimony, was repudiated by these theorists who assumed acquaintance with divine mysteries far beyond that of ordinary people and quite in advance of the biblical revelation. In their pride and folly they put a great number of spirit-beings, known as eons, between the soul and the unknowable God. These were all classified and named, as for instance, Reason, Wisdom, Power, and similar divine attributes. All this appeals to the natural man. It sounds like humility to say, In myself I am so utterly ignorant and unworthy, it is not for me to go directly to God the Father or to Christ the Son. I will therefore avail myself of mediating angels and spirits who can present my cause in a more suitable manner than I can myself. But it is really pride of intellect, and is the grossest unbelief, when God has declared that there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time. The lowly man will receive what He has made known in His Word.

Through the infinite mercy of God the early church triumphed largely over these satanic efforts to ally these dying cults and systems with Christianity. The Holy Spirit so clearly exposed that the church repudiated in one council after another these vile theories which would have made man his own Savior. But all down the centuries since there have been those who from time to time have taken up certain elements of these discarded schools of thought and sought to foist them upon Christians as though they were new and wonderful truths.

Romanism, with its doctrine of justification by works, purgatorial purification after death, and mediating saints and angels, has simply adopted much that the apostles refused, and palms it off on its credulous dupes as traditional Christianity. Imagine anyone praying to saints and angels, or adoring their images, with the solemn words before him of this eighteenth verse, Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind. How striking the contrast between the expressions voluntary humility and vainly puffed up.

I recall a friend of my youth, a very gracious and kindly man, who had been brought up from childhood in the Roman communion, with whom I often sought to reason out of the Scripture in order to show him the simplicity of the gospel of Christ. I remember when I asked why he prayed to the blessed Virgin Mary instead of directly to our Lord Jesus how with an air of the greatest humility he answered, Oh, I am too sinful, too utterly unworthy, to go directly to our blessed Lord. He is infinitely above me, so pure and holy. His majesty is so great that I would not dare to prostrate myself before Him. But I know that no one has such influence with a son as his mother. I know, too, that a pure womans tender heart feels for sinners in their sorrows and failures, therefore I go to the blessed Virgin Mary and pour out my heart to her as to my own mother. I plead with her to speak for me to her holy, spotless Son, and I feel sure that she will influence Him as no other could. This sounds like lowliness of mind and humility of spirit. It is really the most subtle kind of pride, for it involves proposing to be wiser than the revealed Word of God.

There, as we have seen, we read of only the one mediator. We learn that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world, that he bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that His tender heart was filled with compassion for sinners here on earth. None were too vile or degraded but that they were invited to come to Him. The worst His enemies could say of Him was, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them. And up there in yonder glory He is the same Jesus that He was when here on earth. We may rest assured that we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but One who was tempted in all points like as we are, apart from sin (authors translation), and who is able to succour those who are tempted.

In His name we are bidden to come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace for [seasonable] help. Why turn aside to angels or saints, however devoted, or even to His blessed mother herself, when we can go directly to Him, assured of His deep interest in all that concerns us? He made intercession for transgressors on the cross; up there at Gods right hand He ever lives to make intercession for those who trust in Him. And so it is not an evidence of humility to say, I am too unworthy to go to Christ. It is only unbelief that would lead one thus to speak. He stands with arms outstretched, pleading with all who are in trouble or distress, Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. What base ingratitude to turn from Him to any other! What amazing folly to think it necessary to have anyone speak for me to Him, when He stands there showing His wounded hands and saying, Peace be unto you. It is only pride and unbelief that would put Him off at a distance and bring angels in between.

This voluntary humility and worshiping of angels is in itself a complete denial of the new creation. It fails to recognize the wondrous truth that all believers are one body with their exalted Head. And so the apostle goes on to say, And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. Holding the Head is recognizing our link with Him, both in life and by the Spirit. He, the exalted One at Gods right hand, is the source of blessing for all His people in this scene. As of old the holy oil poured upon Aarons head went down to the skirts of his garment (Psa 133:2), so now from the Head in heaven blessing in the Spirits power comes down to every member of His body on the earth.

It will be observed that the figure of a body is not merely that of a society or, as we would say, an organization. It is far more wonderful than that. It is a divine organism. Just as truly as all the members of a human body form the complete man, so do all believers in Christ, through the Spirits baptism, form the one new man. See in this connection 1Co 12:12-13 and Eph 2:15. If out of touch with the Head through failure to apprehend the intimacy of our relation to Him we put anything or any creature between ourselves and Him, we are not holding the Head. Satan knows, as one has well put it, that if he could get but the thickness of a sheet of paper between the Head and the body, all life would be destroyed. This, of course, can never be, but it is sadly possible so utterly to misunderstand our relation to the Head, and so fail to avail ourselves of the supplies of grace that might be ours did we but walk in fellowship with Him, that we would be out of communion with Him and therefore not consciously guided by Him.

We are told that from the Head all the body is nourished, and this through the ministry of joints and bands placed in the body for this very purpose by the Holy Spirit, so that all being knit together grows, or increases, with the increase of God. This is most blessedly expanded and elaborated in Eph 4:11-16. There we see how the risen Lord has given various gifts to His church for the perfecting of the saints with a view to the work of the ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ. Note specially verses 15-16 where we are told that He would have us grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: from whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. What a marvelous picture is this, and how strikingly does the one passage complement the other, and what responsibility does it put upon each one of us as members of Christ and members one of another!

There are no useless members in this body. Just as in the human body every joint, every ligament, every hidden part, has some service to perform for the good of the whole, even though as yet physicians and surgeons may not fully understand the need of every gland and organ. Though they may speak, as some do, of certain useless parts or discarded vestiges of earlier forms, yet we may be very sure that God in His infinite wisdom has a use for every member of the body. So in the mystical body of Christ let no believer think of himself as useless, as without any special gift, and therefore as having no part in the building up of the whole.

There is one term used in 1Co 12:28 that is most suggestive. It is the little word helps. Notice how it is sandwiched in between gifts of healings and governments. We may not all have spectacular gifts, but we can all be helps. The apostle writing to one church says, Ye all being helpers together by prayer. Here is a service the feeblest saint may perform for the benefit of the whole body.

If in spiritual health each member will function aright for the edification of all; but just as in the natural order diseased members become a menace to the entire body, so Christians out of fellowship with God, in a low or carnal state, are hindrances where they should be helpers. May each one of us be concerned about our responsibility here. May we be so occupied with our blessed, glorified Head, so careful to see that there is nothing interfering with our communion with Him, that He may be able to use us as joints or bands to minister nourishment and blessing to His people that all may be the more knit together because of our faithfulness in seeking to be helpers of one anothers faith, that thus the body may indeed increase with the increase of God.

And now, in closing, let me say a word to my younger brethren in Christ who seek to preach the gospel or to minister for the edification of believers. Bear in mind that if you would be true ministers of Jesus Christ you are to preach the Word and seek to occupy your hearers with the truth of God. Do not, I beg of you, give way to a very common vanity of preachers-speculation in regard to things not revealed. You are not sent forth to acquaint men with unsubstantiated theories nor to occupy their minds with speculative systems. God has entrusted you with His own holy Word, and He holds you responsible to give that out in all its clearness and simplicity. One Thus saith the Lord is worth a ton of human thoughts and ideas. Unreliable theological disquisitions and philosophical discussions never saved one poor sinner or comforted a discouraged saint. It is the truth of God, ministered in the power of the Holy Spirit, that alone can accomplish this. All else is but wasting precious time and is dishonoring to the Lord who sent you out to proclaim His truth.

This divinely given message ministered in the power of the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven will awaken the careless, quicken the dead in trespasses and sins, give peace to the anxious, comfort the distressed, and sanctify believers. To substitute the empty dreams of carnal or unregenerate men for this, is the utmost folly. Of old, God said, through Jeremiah, The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord (Jer 23:28).

To add to His Word is but to pervert it. Neither tradition, nor the voice of the church, nor yet fancied superior intellectual illumination can complete that which is already perfect-the revelation of the mind of God in His holy Word. The Bible and the Bible alone is the foundation of our faith.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

intruding into those things

The errorists against whom Paul warns the Colossians, and against whom, in principle, the warning has perpetual significance, were called “Gnostics,” from gnosis, “knowledge.” These Gnostics “came most keenly into conflict with the exalted rank and redeeming rank of Christ, to whom they did not leave His full divine dignity, but assigned to Him merely the highest rank in the order of spirits, while they exalted angels as concerned in bringing the Messianic salvation.”–H.A.W. Meyer. Paul’s characteristic word in Colossians for the divine revelation is epignosis, i.e. “full knowledge.” Col 1:9; Col 1:10; Col 3:10 as against the pretended “knowledge” of the errorists. The warnings apply to all extra-biblical forms, doctrines, and customs, and to all ascetic practices.

angels (See Scofield “Heb 1:4”).

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

no: Col 2:4, Col 2:8, Gen 3:13, Num 25:18, Mat 24:24, Rom 16:18, 2Co 11:3, Eph 5:6, 2Pe 2:14, 1Jo 2:26, 1Jo 4:1, 1Jo 4:2, 2Jo 1:7-11, Rev 3:11, Rev 12:9, Rev 13:8, Rev 13:14

beguile you: or, judge against you, Col 2:16

in a voluntary humility: Gr. being a voluntary in humility, Col 2:23, Isa 57:9

worshipping: Dan 11:38,*Heb: Rom 1:25, 1Co 8:5, 1Co 8:6, 1Ti 4:1,*Gr: Rev 19:10, Rev 22:8, Rev 22:9

intruding: Deu 29:29, Job 38:2, Psa 138:1, Psa 138:2, Eze 13:3, 1Ti 1:7

vainly: Col 2:8, 1Co 4:18, 1Co 8:1, 1Co 13:4

fleshly: Rom 8:6-8, 1Co 3:3, 2Co 12:20, Gal 5:19, Gal 5:20, Jam 3:14-16, Jam 4:1-6

Reciprocal: Exo 20:3 – General Exo 20:23 – General Rth 2:12 – recompense 1Sa 6:19 – he smote 2Ch 26:16 – when he was Ecc 7:16 – neither Isa 2:9 – humbleth Mat 15:9 – teaching Mat 24:4 – Take Joh 13:8 – Thou shalt 1Co 3:12 – wood 1Co 4:6 – be puffed Col 3:24 – ye shall 2Th 2:7 – doth 1Ti 6:4 – He 1Ti 6:20 – oppositions

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

(Col 2:18.) -Let no man rob you of your reward. Theodoret explains the peculiar verb as meaning -to confer a reward unjustly. Zonaras, on the 35th canon of the Laodicean Council, has usually been adduced, and he says that the action of the verb is done when this takes place- , , not to reckon one who has conquered worthy of the prize, but to give it to another. Suidas says more distinctly- . The other figure, adopted by Beza, from one of the exceptional meanings of , is not sustained by any certain examples. His idea is, let no one usurp the office of a against you; while in a similar way a-Lapide, Crocius, and Bengel, generally adopt this meaning-let no one assuming such an office domineer over you, and so prescribe to you how you are to act in order to obtain the prize. Such an interpretation has more in derivation to recommend it than the notion of Luther, Castalio, and Calvin-let no one intercept the prize, or get it before you. The apostle warns them to listen to none of these instructors, for their design was to rob them of that prize, which, as the result of their spiritual victory, Christianity set before them. If they yielded to any of the practices referred to in this verse, then they followed the solicitation of one who would rob them of that prize of their high calling for which they had been pressing forward. It is thus a term of far deeper import than the preceding , though Photius, Hesychius, Elsner, Storr, Huther, Bhr, and Olshausen virtually identify them. For there is in it not merely the giving of a wrong judgment, but a judgment which involves in it the loss of all that the gospel promises to the winner, a life of glory on high. It is a tame idea of De Wette, to suppose that the prize is the true worship of God, for it is here looked upon not as a prize, but as the means of obtaining the prize. It may be remarked in passing, that Jerome regards the verb as a Cilicism, or a provincialism of the apostle, but others have shown that the word occurs among the classics, as in Demosthenes and Polybius.

The true connection and meaning of the following word, , are not easily ascertained. The agitated question is, whether it should be joined to , or to the following words, . If it be joined to the former, the meaning will be willingly-let no one willingly seduce you; but this would be a counsel to the false teachers as well as to the Colossians. Or it may be, as Grotius gives it-etiamsi id maxime velit, let no one, although he should set his heart upon it, rob you of your reward. Beza finds in the term a support to the sense which he attached to the verb-let no one assume voluntarily the office of a prize-distributor over you, and thus wrong you. Erasmus gives the term an adverbial sense of cupide, studiose; and others render it ultro. Steiger inclines to a similar opinion, and Tittmann translates-consulto vel ultro.But the usage is not well sustained in the New Testament, and the participle is, as Bengel remarks, the first of a series, , , , , and each of the participles has its independent construction. It must therefore be joined to .-but how? Olshausen, Wahl, Bhr, Bhmer, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Bretschneider, preceded by Hesychius, Phavorinus, Augustine, Estius, Elsner, Storr, and Flatt, take in the sense of , delighting in-affectans humilitatem. Thus they regard it as a Hebraism formed upon the usage 6-1Sa 18:22; 2Sa 15:26; 2Ch 9:8; Psa 111:2; Psa 147:10. Though this usage may be regarded as established in the Septuagint, yet it is not found in the New Testament, nor does it suit here. For the apostle is not wishing to paint the character of the false teacher, b ut to warn against his wiles. He does not mean to say that the false teacher has a special pride in his own humility, but he means to say, that the Colossians must be on their guard against him, for he will seek to entrap them by means of that humility.

We give its common meaning. Let no man beguile you-wishing to do it by his humility. This is the natural view of the Greek Fathers, of Theodoret, and of Theophylact who says- . . So Photius, Calvin, Huther, Meyer, and De Wette. The preposition denotes the means of deception, or the sphere in which the deceiver moves. The humility referred to, as may be seen from the last verse of the chapter, is a spurious humility. Fanatical pride is often associated with this humility, as when, for show, the beggar’s feet are washed; and the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs. And men become proud of their humility-glory in the feeling of self-annihilation. The spirit of the false teacher, with all its professed lowliness, would not bend to the Divine revelation, but nursed its fallacies with a haughty tenacity, and preached them with an impious daring, for he was vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

-And adoration of angels. This is another of the instruments of seduction. The genitive cannot be that of subject, as if the meaning were, a worship like that which angels present, or such as man may learn from them- . Such a view is held by Schoettgen and Wolf, and in its spirit by Noesselt, Rosenmller, Luther, and Schrader. Tertullian says-aliquos taxat, qui ex visionibus angelicis dicebant, cibis abstinendum, etc. Adver. Marcion, 5:19.

The genitive is that of object. The attempt of the false teacher was not to get them into an ecstasy such as that felt by the rapt seraph, who adores and burns, but it was a positive inculcation of angel-worship. is often followed by the genitive of object. Winer, 30, 1. The term, whatever its derivation, denotes devotional service. How angels came to be worshipped we may not precisely know, though, certainly, it might not be difficult to account for it, when one sees how saint-worship has spread itself so extensively in one section of Christendom. The angels occupied the highest place which creatures could occupy under the Theocracy. They held lofty station and discharged important functions. The law was ordained by angels, in the hands of a mediator, nay, the apostle calls it the word spoken by angels. Jehovah descended with ten thousand of His holy ones, when from His right hand went a fiery law. The Jews, said Stephen, in his address, received the law by the disposition of angels. Whatever be the meaning of these declarations, there is no doubt that they indicate some special and important province of angelic operation. Josephus expresses the same opinion-the current one of his nation. No wonder that those beings, so sublimely commissioned by God, and burning in the reflection of His majesty, command human reverence, and are therefore themselves called gods. Psa 97:7, compared with Heb 1:6.

Now, the step from respect to worship is at once short and easy, for it is but an exaggeration. The heart, not content with feeling that a being so near God and so like Him should be held in esteem and admiration, passes into excess, and worships where it had honoured. And to fortify itself in the practice, it perverted the angelic office. It raised those creatures from attendants to mediators-from messengers to interested protectors. It would seem that in the days of the patriarch Job such a feeling existed in the early world. Call now, is the challenge of Eliphaz, if there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the saints wilt thou turn? and in another chapter mention is made of an angel interpreter. In the book of Tobit, the Jewish belief is incidentally brought out-that angels formally present prayers to God. In the imagery of the Apocalypse, we find an angel at the altar, having in his hand a golden censer and much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints. In the Testimony of the Twelve Patriarchs, and in the book of Enoch, the same notion is prominently exhibited. And thus the prayer offered through the angel, was by and by presented to him. It was first offered to him that he might carry it to God, and then it was offered to him without such ulterior reference or prospect. Again, that angels were entrusted with the presidency of various countries and nations, was another Jewish opinion; and it was with a superstitious people a matter of extreme facility to pass from that obeisance, which might be yielded to a representative of Divinity, to that veneration which is due to Jehovah alone. If a ma n bent one knee in loyalty, he soon bent both knees in worship; and asked from the substitute what should be solicited from the principal.

That the worship of created spirits was widespread, thus admits of no doubt. The Fathers abundantly testify to it. Origen affirms it of the Jews, and Clement makes the same assertion; both of them, as well as the treatise called the Preaching of Peter, describing the Jews as . An old Jewish liturgy distinctly contains angelworship, and exhibits one form of it. Celsus also avers it. The Platonic idea of demons-itself, in all probability, a relic of Eastern Theosophy-spread itself, in Asia Minor, and combined with the Jewish superstition. That such practices should take root in Phrygia is no marvel, for there they found a congenial soil. Theodoret testifies to their existence, and that they remained in Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time. The thirty-fifth canon of the Council of Laodicea, a city in the vicinity, solemnly interdicted the practice, but did not wholly eradicate it. In the days of Theodoret, the archangel Michael was worshipped at Colosse; and a was built in his honour, and for a miracle alleged to be wrought by him. Though those historical quotations refer to post-apostolic periods, still they appear to describe the remnants of earlier practices, and they afford at least some analogies that help us to judge of the superstitions which the apostle mentions and reprobates. The Catholic interpreters, Estius and a-Lapide, make a strong effort to exclude this passage, from such as might be brought against the worship of saints.

The two nouns, humility and worship of angels, are closely connected, and mean a species of humility connected with angel-worship. It was out of a fanatical humility that service was offered to angels. It was thought that the great God was too majestic and distant to be addressed, and they therefore invented these internuncii. That the heretical party thought the glory of the Only-Begotten too dazzling for approach, and therefore took refuge in angel-worship, is an opinion of Chrysostom and Theophylact, but in opposition to the whole tenor of the rebuke generally, and of the following clause particularly, for it contains the accusation of not holding the Head. The true reason and connection are given, as we have given them, by Theodoret.

. This clause presents a very strange difference of reading, for the negative is omitted in some MSS. of high authority, such as A, B, D1, and by several of the Latin Fathers. It is therefore rejected by Lachmann, and his reading is approved of by Olshausen, Steiger, Huther, and Meyer. Olshausen says that was added because critics thought that they were obliged to insert a negative. His assertion may be turned against himself; for we might reply that the copyists could not discover the propriety of according to their finical notions of grammar; since some, as in F, G, changed it into , and others omitted it altogether. The meaning of the clause is not materially different whichever reading be adopted. If the negative be omitted, the clause must be an ironical description. The words which he has seen will mean, visions which he professes or imagines to have seen-visions which are the result of a morbid imagination or a distempered brain. We prefer the common reading found in C, D111, E, J, K, in the Vulgate, Gothic, and Syriac Versions, and in so many of the Greek Fathers. The negative , and not , is rightly employed. Winer, 55, 3. The participle , found only here in the New Testament, but occurring several times in the Apocrypha, and allied in origin to the similar term , is wrongly supposed by some, such as Erasmus, to signify, to walk in state-as if the expression were taken a tragicis cothurnis. It sometimes denotes, to go into the possession of, as in Jos 19:49. And then it is usually followed by . Buddaeus, Zanchius, and Huther assign it such a meaning here. It also has the sense of-to go into, to penetrate into, or to intrude. It is so used of God, and often of man, both in a literal and tropical sense, and is followed sometimes by the dative and sometimes, as here, by the accusative. Phavorinus defines it- , and Hesychius explains it by the less intense term . The compound is employed, in Plato, to denote senseless speculation. From the verb , there is no need to deduce the idea of mental perception or knowledge, as Heinrichs and Flatt incline to do-quae intellectu percipere nemo potest. The word is often used of visions and visionary representations-Act 11:17; Act 9:10-12; Act 10:3; Rev 9:17; and of a supersensuous view of God-Joh 1:18; Joh 6:46; Joh 14:7; 1Jn 4:12.

The reference in the clause-intruding into what he has not seen-appears to be the worship of angels. The current theosophy spent no little of its ingenuity upon the spirit-world. It wandered not only beyond the regions of sense, but even that of Scripture. It mustered into troops the heavenly orders. [Eph 1:21.] This oriental propensity was a prevalent one. The inquisitive spirit pryed into the invisible world around it and above it. It loved such phantasms, and lost itself in transcendental reveries. The creed of the Zendavesta had its Ormuzd, its six Amshaspands, its eight-and-twenty Izeds, and hosts of Feruers-all of them objects of worship and prayer. Augustine says, with justice, that many had tried the intercession of angels, but had failed; and not only so, but-inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum.How the Jewish fancy strove to penetrate the curtain that conceals the unseen, may be learned from the following quotation from a rabbinical treatise. As there are ten Sephiroth, so there are ten troops of angels, as follows:-the Erellim, Ishim, Benei-haelohim, Malachim, Hashmalim, Tarshishim, Shinanim, Cherubim, Ophanim, and the Seraphim. Captains are set over each of them-Michael over the Erellim, Zephaniah over the Ishim, Hophniel over the Benei-haelohim, Uzziel over the Malachim, Hashmal over the Hashmalim, Tarshish over the Tarshishim, Zadkiel over the Shinanim, Cherub over the Cherubim, Raphael over the Ophanim, and Jehuel over the Seraphim. Tertullian mentions some who professed to divine their asceticism from angelic revelation, a remark which serves at least for illustration.

Some, such as Steiger, have proposed to join the following adverb to , and give it the sense of rashly or uselessly. This notion, however, is already contained in the reproof. But the idea with our exegesis is, that the mental inflation of the errorists, which co-exists with his humility and his angel-worship, and prompts him to pry into what is concealed from him, is -it is without ground. It has no warrant. Mat 5:22; Rom 13:4.

The following clause discovers one prime ground of the heresy, and shows the principal reason why the gospel was not cordially received. It was not intricate enough, it did not deal in any vain speculations, but it claimed and commanded attention to the real and practical, and it showed not the way into the abstruse and recondite. It did not harmonize with current notions of angelology and asceticism, and it was outdone in those respects by Essene Gnosticism. It did not forbid the humble spirit to raise itself to the Divine throne; for it taught that the intervening distance was spanned by the mediatorial nature of Christ. It exhibited the angels as ministering spirits, or fellow-servants; but it held up no eccentric array of visions and phantasms, which might beguile men into fanatical worship and conceited contrition. In the fulness of its revelation it left to no man the claim of discovery, or the merit of invention. He, then, who did not receive it as presented to him, but wished to change its nature and supplement its oracles, so that it might have the air and the aspect of a transcendental theosophy, was puffed up by his fleshly mind,-thought himself possessed of a higher knowledge, and favoured with profounder instruction than our Lord and His apostles.

The participle ,-not from , which, in the classical writers, makes , but from ,-signifies inflated. 1Co 4:6; 1Co 4:18-19; 1Co 5:2; 1Co 8:1. The heretic was blown up with his delusion, verifying the remark- -knowledge puffeth up. He was too proud to learn-too wise to acknowledge any instruction beyond himself. The source of inflation was a fleshly mind, he was puffed up.

-By the mind of his flesh. The expression is peculiar, but darkly emphatic. is mind-not simply intellect, but mind as the region of thought and susceptibility; while is, as in so many other places, the name of unregenerate humanity. The expression denotes something more than mens imbecilla. Nor is it enough to resolve the two genitives into the phrase- , or with Usteri, into . The genitive is not a mere predicate, but is the genitive of possession. The flesh possesses and governs the mind. The mind did not struggle with the carnal principle, but succumbed to it. It was wholly under the sway of a nature unchanged by the grace of God, and which therefore exercised its predominance to serve and please itself. In all these mental efforts and sentiments concerning Christianity, the false teacher was guided not by any pure regard to the Divine revelation, or by a simple desire to bow to the Divine will; but his mind was influenced by motives, and determined by reasonings, which sprung from a nature wholly under the empire of sense and fancy; a nature which was satisfied with an array of external puerilities-which preferred ascetic distinctions to spiritual self-denial-revelled in imaginations that at once sprung from it and lorded over it-and, in short, acting like itself and for itself, coveted and set up a religion of man, but spurned and thrust away that religion which is of God. And thus, in a later century, and in the same country, it was believed that the Holy Spirit communicated to Montanus more and nobler revelations than Christ had delivered in the gospel. The flesh could not but have a sensuous system-one resembling itself; and the mind, acting under its sway, could not but devise a scheme in kee ping with such governing and prompting influence. 1Co 2:14. And, by this means, the abettor of error was vainly puffed up that he possessed a deeper enlightenment than the apostles, and a purer sanctity than the churches; and, in his vanity, he dreamed of being able, by his unhallowed reveries, to supply the defects and multiply the attractions of the gospel. The three participles of this verse, and that of the first clause of the following verse, have a close connection- expressing the desire of the heresiarch to make converts by a specious snare- portraying one special source and feature of his system- indicating his moral temperament-and, lastly, pointing to the lamentable accompaniment and necessary result-not holding the Head-

Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians

Col 2:18. Beguile you of your reward is from a Greek word that is used literally in reference to the athletic contests, where a judge or umpire would decide who is the winner. Thayer defines the word, “To decide as umpire against one, to declare him unworthy of the prize; to defraud of the prize of victory.” As Paul uses it the meaning is, not to let the Judaizers cheat the disciples out of their reward from Christ by means of the evil things mentioned in the rest of this verse and the next. Voluntary humility means a pretended or self-imposed show of humility that is outward only. Worshiping is from THRESKEIA, which Thayer defines, “Primarily fear of the gods; religious worship, especially external, that which consists in ceremonies.” It is used here in reference to some formalities that were claimed to be pleasing to the angelic hosts or beings in the unseen world, which Paul describes as an intruding into those things which he hath not seen. These Judaistic philosophers did all this because their fleshly or carnal mind had puffed them up over their imaginary importance.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Col 2:18. Let no man. The singular number in these warnings does not point to a particular person, but gives emphasis.

Rob you of the prize. The figure, borrowed from the games, suggests an unfair decision of the umpire in awarding the prize; but it need not be pressed further than to mean depriving the Christian of his prize, which is future blessedness, eternal life. The false teachers, by their errors, might prevent their obtaining this.

Of his own will, lit., willing. This expression is very difficult to interpret satisfactorily. Some (among them, Lightfoot) explain: delighting in humility, etc. But this is a harsh and unusual Hebraism, and the word willing rarely, if ever, has the sense of delight Willing, or willingly, as we must express it, a qualification of the verb rob you of the prize, but three senses have been given it. (1.) Willingly, of his own choice or impulse; this is almost equivalent to arbitrarily, and agrees best with the exact sense of the Greek word. The E. V. seems to have endeavored to give a similar thought. (2.) Desiring to do it, which presses the word somewhat. (3.) Purposing to do it; a sense that the word would bear, but not so natural as the first. The context referring to the human origin of the precepts of the false teachers (Col 2:22) and to their will-worship, etc., seems to favor (1), which gives emphasis to the purely human impulse. The methods they adopt to de-fraud you of the prize have their origin in their own choice, not in any objective truth. (On the exact sense of the word willing, comp. my note in Lange, Ephesians, p. 42.)

By (lit., in, pointing to the sphere of the actions) humility. The word, occurring elsewhere always in a good sense, in this chapter (comp. Col 2:23) seems to point to something blameworthy: a false and perverted lowliness, which deemed God was so inaccessible that He could only be approached through the mediation of inferior beings (Ellicott).

And worship of the angels. This was the outward evidence of the false humility. The word worship refers properly to the external rites of religion, and so get to signify an over-scrupulous devotion to external forms (Lightfoot). It was at Colossae that special worship was given in after days to the archangel Michael for an alleged miracle, Jewish influences might have led to this worship of the angels.

Dwelling in, or, taking his stand upon, the things which he hath seen. The weight of authority has led recent editors to reject not; and the sense intruding is inappropriate with the reading. Of the two explanations given above, the former is preferable, both on lexical grounds, and from its aptness in this connection, pointing to the false teacher as continually poring over the visions (which he hath seen), his illusions, but delusions in their influence. The spiritism of modern times naturally suggests an illustration of the meaning.

Vainly puffed up; puffed up with pride despite the show of humility, and that without ground.

By the mind of his flesh. As the flesh has a body, so it has a mind; the unrenewed nature is personified (comp. Rom 8:6), and its mind is represented as causing the pride of the false teacher. There may be a reference to some favorite phrase of the errorists.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Our apostle having warned the Colossians against the errors of the Judaizing teachers, comes next to warn them against the practice of the Paganizing Christians, who were directd by their guides to worship the angels, covering their error with a plausible shew of humility, pretending it was presumptuous to go to God immediately, without the mediation of those excellent creatures; but this the apostle tells them was a bold intruding into things they knew nothing of, God having neither revealed nor taught any such thing; and argued, that they were vainly puffed up with the foolish imaginations of their own fleshly minds.

Next he shews, that these angel-worshippers do not acknowledge Christ for the Head of the church, while they apply themselves to angels as mediators; whereas he alone discharges the office of the Head, completely giving life and growth to his whole church, and to every member therof; which members being furnished with spiritual life from him, and knit to him, and one another by the joints and bands of charity and other graces, they grow and increase with such an increase of holiness as is from God, and tends to his glory.

Note here, 1. That the nature of man is prone, extremely prone, to idolatry and false worship.

2. That it is a really idolatry to worship an angel, as it is to worship a worm; for divine worship is only due to a divine person.

Note, 3. That it is a renouncing of Christ, to make use of angels, or any other mediator, besides Christ, unto the Father: not holding the head. It was a notion that the minds of mankind, that God was not to be immediately approached to by sinful men; but that their prayers were to be presented by certain mediators and intercessors, who were to procure for them the favour of God, and the acceptance of their prayers.

Hence they worshipped angels, and the souls departed of their heroes, whom they canonized, and translated into the number of their inferior gods, by whom they addressed their supplications to their superior gods. With this notion Almighty God was pleased to comply so far, as under the Jewish institution to appoint Moses a mediator betwixt him and them; and now under the Christian dispensation to appoint Jesus Christ to be the only Mediator betwixt God and man.

Note, 4. That it is usual for idolaters, and false worshippers, to cover themselves sith a more than ordinary show of humility: Let none beguile you in a voluntary humility.

True it is, that all duties of worship ought to be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed to constrained; but they must not be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed ot instituted or appointed; God doth no more approve of that worship we give him according to our will, than he doth approve of our neglect of that which is according to his own will. But man, vain man, likes any way of worshipping God which is of his own framing, much better than that which is of God’s own appointing.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

The apostle warns against those who would “defraud” the Colossian brethren of their reward. Weed says the word suggests athletic competition in which one is disqualified. If the Colossian brethren listened to the false teachers, they would be robbed of a prize rightfully theirs. “False humility” may refer to fasts men would require of other men. Perhaps this false humility was outwardly shown by worshiping angels, implying one was not worthy to worship the Father. It is thought that those wanting to be initiated into the false religion were required to tell of visions they saw. Great emphasis was placed on one’s ability to reason and the more knowledgeable were puffed up. All of these false doctrines kept people from yielding to the true head of the church, Christ. That is spiritually fatal because it cuts one off from the one who supplies necessary nourishment and holds the growing body together ( Col 2:18-19 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Col 2:18-19. Let no man beguile you of your reward Of future glory, however eagerly or artfully he may attempt it. According to Pierce, who pleads the authority of Demosthenes, the word , here rendered beguile you of your reward, should be translated condemn you: others, because the verb , without the preposition, is translated to rule, (Col 3:15,) are of opinion that the expression may be translated enslave you. But as the original word comes from , a reward, the compounded verb certainly more properly signifies to hinder a reward from being bestowed, an evil which the worshipping of angels, here guarded against, as more powerful mediators than Christ, would have occasioned. For if on any pretence these Colossian believers had forsaken Christ, and attached themselves to angels, they must have lost the whole benefit of Christs mediation. In a voluntary humility , an expression which Whitby renders, pleasing himself in his humility; or affecting humility, and so not addressing God immediately, but only by the mediation of angels. In proof of which interpretation, the same author refers to several passages of the LXX., in which the word means to be pleased with, or to delight in, a person or thing: there are also passages in the New Testament in which the word seems to bear the same meaning. See Mat 20:26-27; Mar 12:38. And worshipping of angels It evidently appears, from several passages in Philo, to have been the opinion of that learned Jew, that angels were messengers who presented our prayers to God, as well as brought down his favours to us. He represents this view of the matter as most humble and reverential, and there is no doubt but it prevailed among other Jews. See Tob 11:14; Tob 12:12; Tob 12:15. It was undoubtedly because the Jews entertained so great a respect for angels, on account of their supposed agency in human affairs, that the apostle, in this epistle, and in that to the Hebrews, took so much pains to show that the Son of God is greater than all angels. It is justly remarked by Bishop Burnet, that had it been the apostles intention to give the least encouragement to any religious addresses to saints and angels, this would have been a very natural occasion of introducing the subject, and adjusting its proper boundaries. Intruding into things which he hath not seen With great presumption, and pretending to discover wonderful secrets, relating to their various ranks, subordinations, and offices. The apostles meaning, says Macknight, is, that the false teachers, of whom he speaks, presumptuously penetrated into the secrets of the invisible world, and talked of them with an air of certainty, without having any knowledge of the things which they affirmed; particularly that the angels intercede with God for men, and that to worship them is acceptable to God. Vainly puffed up by his fleshly His corrupt and carnal; mind With the conceit of things which it is impossible he should understand, and a desire of introducing novelties into religion. And not holding the Head Not adhering to, and relying on Christ, the Head of his church, by whom all the true members of it are not only guided and governed, but from whom, having spiritual nourishment ministered by joints and bands By various means of instruction and grace, or by the several talents and gifts of its members, employed for the good of the whole; and knit together By love and mutual sympathy; increaseth In knowledge, holiness, strength, stability, and usefulness; with the increase of God That increase which comes from him, is approved by him, and tends to his glory. What the apostle here says against the worshipping of angels, concludes equally against the worshipping of saints. Indeed, it is absurd to suppose that any being can be a proper object of worship, which is not both omniscient and omnipresent, which certainly neither angels nor saints are. It is a just remark of a judicious divine, that the apostles exhortation in this verse is a good caution to us to beware of all refinements in Christianity, which have any tendency to derogate from the authority, office, and honour of Christ, as Head of the church.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 18

A voluntary humility and worshipping of angels. It is plain, from the connection, that these clauses refer to certain superstitions ideas and practices prevailing among those who insisted so strenuously upon the obligations of the Mosaic law. Precisely what the nature of these ideas were, as denoted by this language, it is difficult now to ascertain.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

2:18 {16} Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary {a} humility and worshipping of angels, {17} intruding into those things which he hath not seen, {18} {b} vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

(16) He disputes against the first type of corruptions, and sets down the worshipping of angels as an example: which type of false religion he refutes, first, this way: because those who bring in such a worship, attribute that to themselves which is proper only to God, that is, authority to bind men’s consciences with religion, even though they seem to bring in these things by humility of mind.

(a) By foolish humility of mind: for otherwise humility is a virtue. For these angel worshippers blamed those of pride who would go straight to God, and use no other means besides Christ.

(17) Secondly, because they rashly thrust upon them as oracles those things which they neither saw nor heard, but devised by themselves.

(18) Thirdly, because these things have no other ground upon which they are built, but only the opinion of men, who please themselves immensely in their own devices.

(b) Without reason.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

A second error was mysticism. Whereas Colossian legalism (Col 2:16-17) was primarily Jewish in origin, Colossian mysticism (Col 2:18-19) seems to have been mainly Gnostic and pagan. Paul’s readers were in danger of becoming diverted as they ran the Christian race and not staying on the track. Thus they could lose the prize that God will give those who run the race well (cf. 2Ti 4:7-8). "Self-abasement" is the practice of denying oneself with the idea that this will gain merit with God. Specifically fasting is in view.

The false teachers also advocated the worship of angels probably with the idea that they were the proper mediators of prayer and worship to God. Similarly many Roman Catholics so regard dead Christians, some of whom they have labeled "saints." The basis of such claims was personal experience, not revelation from God.

Some translators added "visions" (Col 2:18) to give the idea of some superior experience. However the contrast intended is between humanly generated ideas and divine revelation. Such ideas gave those who had them a false sense of pride. Rather Christians should get our direction from Christ by divine revelation and enjoy growth that He brings to pass rather than growth that is not genuine. The "joints and ligaments" probably refer to believers in Christ’s body of which He is the Head (cf. Col 1:18; Eph 4:7-16). [Note: See Michael P. V. Barrett, "Complete in Christ," Biblical Viewpoint 13:1 (April 1979):27-32.]

"Precedent for this approach to spirituality in Judaism [that Paul was countering in this epistle] is seen in a movement that came to be known as ’Merkabah mysticism.’ The Merkabah refers to Ezekiel 1 and the throne chariot of God that Ezekiel saw. This teaching spoke of days of fasting to prepare for a journey to the heavens to see God and have a vision of Him and His angelic host in worship (Philo, Die Somniis 1.33-37; De Vita Mosis 2.67-70; 1QH 6:13; 1 Enoch 14:8-25; 2 Baruch 21:7-10; Apocalypse of Abraham 9:1-10; 19:1-9; Ascension of Isaiah 7:37; 8:17; 9:28, 31, 33). One could withdraw and eventually go directly into God’s presence. Thus this false teaching emphasized the humility of ascetic practice, visions, the rigors of devotion, treating the body harshly, and rules about what should not be eaten or what days should be observed (Col 2:16-23). All this activity was aimed to help prepare individuals for the experience that took them beyond what Jesus had already provided, so they could see God and His angels in heaven." [Note: Darrell L. Bock, "A Theology of Paul’s Prison Epistles," in A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, p. 305.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)