Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Colossians 4:16
And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the [epistle] from Laodicea.
16. this epistle ] Lit., the epistle; as Rom 16:22 ; 2Th 3:14. “ The letter now before you.”
is read ] I.e., shall have been read.
in the church of the Laodiceans ] Hierapolis is not mentioned in this charge. Was Laodicea already beginning to grow “ lukewarm ” (Rev 3:15) as the sister-church was not?
“A similar [and still more solemn] charge is given in 1Th 5:27. The precaution here is probably suggested by the distastefulness of the Apostle’s warnings” (Lightfoot).
the epistle from Laodicea ] I.e., which will reach you vi Laodicea. On the question whether this was our “Epistle to the Ephesians” see Introd., ch. 5.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And when this Epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans – Laodicea was near to Colossae, and the church there was evidently exposed to the same dangers from philosophy and false teachers as the at Colossae. The counsels in this Epistle, therefore, would be equally applicable to both. In 1Th 5:27, the apostle also charges those to whom that Epistle was addressed to see that it be read unto all the holy brethren. It is evident that the apostles designed that the letters which they addressed to the churches should be read also by others, and should become the permanent source of instruction to the friends of Christ. Laodicea, here referred to, was the seat of one of the Seven churches of Asia Rev 3:14; was a city of Phrygia, and was its capital. It was situated on the river Lycus (hence, called Laodikeia epi Luko – Laodicea on the Lycus) and stood at the southwestern angle of Phrygia. Its early name appears to have been Dios polis, changed subsequently to Rhoas. The name Laodicea was given to it by Antiochus Theos, in honor of his wife Laodice. Under the Romans it became a very flourishing commercial city.
It was often damaged by earthquakes, but was restored by the Roman emperors. It is supposed to have been destroyed during the inroad of Timur Leng in 1402. The ruins are called by the Turks Eski Hissar. These ruins, and the ruins of Hierapolis, were visited by Mr. Riggs, an American Missionary, in 1842, who thus speaks of them: These spots, so interesting to the Christian, are now utterly desolate. The threatening expressed in Rev 3:10, has been fulfilled, and Laodicea is but a name. In the midst of one of the finest plains of Asia Minor, it is entirely without inhabitant. Sardis, in like manner, whose church had a name to live, but was dead, is now an utter desolation. Its soil is turned up by the plow, or overgrown by rank weeds: while in Philadelphia, since the day when our Saviour commended those who had there kept the word of his patience, there has never ceased to be a nominally Christian church. The ruins of Laodicea and Hierapolis are very extensive. The stadium of the former city, and the gymnasia and theaters of both, are the most complete which I have anywhere seen. Hierapolis is remarkable also for the so-called frozen cascades, a natural curiosity, in its kind probably not surpassed for beauty and extent in the world. It consists of a deposit of carbonate of lime, white as the driven snow, assuming, when closely examined, various forms, and covering nearly the whole southern and western declivities of the elevation on which the city was built. It is visible for many miles, and has procured for the place the name by which alone Hierapolis is known among the Turks, of the Cotton Castle.
And that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea – In regard to this Epistle, see Introduction, Section 6.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Col 4:16
When this Epistle is read among you, cause it to be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans.
I. The apostle wished his Epistle to be read in the whole Church. Hence observe–
1. That the sacred Scriptures were not written for the clergy, but for all Christian people, and that the ordinary reading of the Scriptures obtained in the primitive Church (1Th 5:27). And that this was in a language understood by the people is plain from Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and other fathers.
2. That they do err who deny that the reading of the Scriptures conduces to the edification of a Christian people unless there be an exposition by the preacher. This is not to detract from the utility or necessity of preaching. Nevertheless, we assert with the Psalmist (Psa 19:7).
II. He ordered them to communicate this Epistle to the Laodiceans.
1. Because the doctrine of the Epistle is general, and on that account was not to be reserved for the private use of the Church, but to be communicated to the whole Church of God, but first to their nearest neighbours, who, having read the autograph, could take copies of them and scatter them abroad.
2. Because Laodicea was infected with the same error as Colossae. Observe, then, that among all the Churches of God, and especially neighbouring ones, there Ought to be a communication of spiritual benefits, so that if one Church should have anything that might contribute to the edification of another, it should not grudge to impart it. (Bishop Davenant.)
The Epistles a common means of edification
The first Churches were edified by the mutual interchange of apostolical Epistles, and by the public reading of them. An Epistle sent to one Church became in reality the common property of all the Churches, and this fact led, at no very long period, to the formation of the canon of the New Testament. These Epistles were eagerly sought after, frequently copied, and devoutly cherished, so that complete collections of them were made. They were carefully distinguished from other writings, and, by the voice of the Churches, to them exclusively was accorded a place in the sacred canon. In this arrangement the wisdom of God was providentially manifested. By such use of the Holy Scripture the first Christians were nourished in their faith, and built up in the love and hope of the gospel. Healthful religion from that time to this, and, indeed, previously, under the Jewish economy, has been connected with a free, frequent, and devout use of Holy Scripture. This alone, by the blessing of God, can preserve the purity and living power of a Church. Shut out the Word of God, and superstition and spiritual death will creep in. It is by the use of the unadulterated milk of the Word that the disciples are to grow (1Pe 2:2)
. It is the engrafted Word which saves (Jam 1:21). It is through the comfort of the Scriptures that we have hope (Rom 15:4). And all Scripture is profitable (2Ti 3:16-17). (J. Spence, D. D.)
General reading of Scripture allowed
Nothing is more condemnatory of the practice of Rome than this plain unequivocal command. Yet Romanists prohibit the general perusal of the Scriptures, and read only small portions, and these in an unknown tongue, in public worship. St. Paul orders his entire Epistle to be read publicly. But if one Epistle, then all Epistles are equally required to be read. The Old Testament was, as we know, constantly recited in the Jewish synagogues, as is manifest by the case of our Lord at Nazareth and St. Paul at Antioch (Act 13:15)
; and in the face of the apostles command respecting his First Epistle to the Thessalonians, Romanism sets up its prohibitions. Can we wonder that all evils and superstitions should follow; that the invocation of saints, the worship of images, the adoration of the Virgin, and the veneration of altars, tombs, and relics should supersede the mediation of Christ; and that a multitude of uncommanded ceremonies and abstinences, and a whole torrent of will-worship, should follow in the train? (Bishop D. Wilson.)
The Epistle from Laodicea.
The connection forbids us to suppose that this means a letter by the Laodiceans. Both letters are plainly Pauline Epistles, and the latter is said to be from Laodicea, simply because the Colossians were to procure it from that place. The from does not imply authorship, but transmission. What, then, has become of that letter? Is it lost? So say some; but a more probable opinion is that it is the Epistle we know as that to the Ephesians. Very weighty authorities omit the words In Ephesus in verse 1 of that Epistle. The conjecture is a reasonable one that the letter was intended for a circle of Churches, and had originally no place named in the superscription, just as we might issue circulars To the Church in–leaving a blank to be filled in with different names. This conjecture is strengthened by the marked absence of personal references in the letter, which, in that respect, forms a striking contrast to Colossians, which it so strongly resembles in other particulars. Probably, therefore, Tychicus had both letters put into his hands for delivery. The circular would go first to Ephesus, as the most important Church in Asia, and thence would be carried by him to one community after another, till he reached Laodicea, from which he would come further up the valley to Colossae, bringing both letters with him. The Colossians are not told to get the letter from Laodicea, but to be sure they read it. Tychicus would see that it came to them; their business was to see that they marked, learned, and inwardly digested it. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 16. Cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans] That is: Let a copy be taken, and sent to them, that it may be read there also. This appears to have been a regular custom in the apostolic Church.
That ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea] Some suppose that this was an epistle sent from Laodicea to the apostle, which he now sent by Aristarchus to the Colossians, that they might peruse it; that thereby they might see the propriety of sending a copy of his epistle to them, to the Laodicean Church. Many eminent critics are of this opinion, which appears to me to be both forced and far fetched. Others think that the Epistle to the Ephesians is the epistle in question, and that it was originally directed to them, and not to the Ephesians. See Clarke on Eph 1:1, c. But others, equally learned, think that there was an epistle, different from that to the Ephesians, sent by St. Paul to the Laodiceans, which is now lost. There was an epistle under this direction in the times of Theodoret and Jerome, for both of them mention it but the latter mentions it as apocryphal, Legunt quidam et ad Laodicenses Epistolam, sed ab omnibus exploditur; “Some read an Epistle to the Laodiceans, but it is exploded by all.” The seventh OEcumenic council, held in 787, states that the ancients allowed that there was an epistle with this direction, but that all the orthodox rejected it as supposititious.
An epistle ad Laodicenses is still extant in the Latin language, a very ancient copy of which is in the library Sancti Albani Andegavensis, St. Alban’s of Anjou. Hutter has translated it into Greek, but his translation is of no authority. Calmet has published this epistle, with various readings from the above MS. I shall subjoin it at the end of this epistle, and give my opinion relative to its use and authenticity. A copy of this epistle stands in this place as a portion of Divine revelation in one of my own MSS. of the Vulgate.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And when this epistle is read among you: the apostle takes it for granted, that, when this Epistle came to their hands, it would be publicly read in a solemn assembly of the church, or brethren, convened to that purpose, as elsewhere usual. For indeed he doth strictly enjoin and adjure the Thessalonians, under the penalty of the Lords displeasure, that the Epistle or letter which he wrote unto them should be read unto all the brethren, 1Th 5:27; it being an indispensable duty of Christs disciples, to search the Scriptures, Joh 5:39, and there solemnly to read them in the assembly for the edification of all ministers and people, old and young, Deu 17:19; Psa 1:2; 119:9; Mar 13:37; Act 13:15; 17:11,12; 18:26-28; Rom 15:4; 1Ti 4:13,15.
Cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans: hence (as it follows) the apostle (who it is likely had not an opportunity at Rome to have a copy of it transcribed) chargeth them at Colosse, to see or take care after the reading of this same Epistle amongst themselves, that, a copy of it being prepared for that purpose, it might, as from him, be also solemnly read or rehearsed in a public assembly of the Christians at Laodicea.
And that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea; and he further chargeth those to whom he wrote at Colosse, that they should take care that the Epistle (as we rightly with the generality of ancients and moderns render it) from Laodicea, be read amongst them. The Ethiopic version (as we have it thence in the Latin) reads, send it to Laodicea, that the Laodiceans also may read it, in the house or congregation of Christians there. The Vulgar Latin, that ye likewise may read the Laodicean Epistle, or the Epistle of the Laodiceans. Whence some of old and of late would have it thought, that St. Paul wrote a distinct Epistle to the Laodiceans. In favour of this opinion, some bad man, out of this Epistle to the Colossians, and that to the Ephesians, patched up and forged a short, but gross and trifling, Epistle, and fathered it on the apostle, though very dissonant from his character and style; whereupon it hath been rejected as spurious and apocryphal by the learned fathers, and the second council of Nice; and since by the learned on all hands, except some few of the papists, and except quakers, who printed a translation of it, and plead for it. Some papists urge this, to argue that the church gives the Scripture authority amongst Christians. But though she is bound to preserve the books of Divine authority, it doth not belong to her to authenticate them, or prescribe them as the rule of faith; that were no less than to outrage the majesty of the Author. Others allege it, as being lost, and thereupon would infer the canon of Holy Scriptures to be defective. But supposing, yet not granting, that Paul had written an Epistle to the Laodiceans, which had not come down to us, it were altogether inconsequent that the canon of Scriptures we have doth not contain all things necessary to salvation. Some, still harping on the Vulgar translation of the Laodicean Epistle, (though that in common speech might argue they wrote it rather than received it), would fancy that it was the Epistle Paul wrote to the Ephesians; but Tertullian did brand the impostor Marctan for changing the title of Pauls Epistle to the Ephesians. Others conceit it may be understood of Pauls Epistle to Philemon, whom Paul calls his fellow labourer, likely exercising his ministry in the neighbour city of Laodicea, which was sent by Onesimus, and for the sake of Onesimus, who was a Colossian, was to be read at Colosse. Others, because Luke is mentioned, Col 4:14, that it was an Epistle of his to the Laodiceans; but of that there is no evidence. Neither is it probable that Paul would in this Epistle to the Colossians have saluted the Laodiceans, had he written a distinct Epistle to them. Wherefore it is most rational to understand it, not of an Epistle of Paul written to the Laodiceans, but as our Bibles, according to an authentic copy, have, with the Greek fathers, faithfully translated and represented it, written from Laodicea. Some conjecture it to be the First Epistle of John, which they conceive was written from the city of Laodicea. Others think it was the First Epistle to Timothy, from the inscription or subscription of a long time put at the end of it, as if written from Laodicea. But against that it may be excepted, there is no mention of Pacatiana, in the writers of the first age, but only in after-times, dividing the Roman empire into provinces; and some say this was first mentioned in the ecclesiastical records in the fifth synod at Constantinople. Further, there be several passages in the Epistle itself do intimate that it was written from some place in Macedonia, if we consult Col 1:3, with Col 3:14; 4:13, not from Laodicea. Some think it to be meant of the Epistle from Laodicea, wherein they would answer the Colossians; how probably I determine not. Wherefore it is most probable, that the Epistle was written from Laodicea, to Paul at Rome; either by the church there, or some of her officers, which (likely he in straits of time enclosed, and) he would have read, as helpful to the edification of the Colossians, for the better clearing of some passages in this Epistle to them, wherein he had obviated such errors as he might hear seducers were attempting to disseminate amongst them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
16. the epistle fromLaodiceanamely, the Epistle which I wrote to the Laodiceans,and which you will get from them on applying to them. Not theEpistle to the Ephesians. See Introductionto Ephesians and Introduction toColossians. The Epistles from the apostles were publicly read in thechurch assemblies. IGNATIUS[Epistle to the Ephesians, 12], POLYCARP[Epistle to the Philippians, 3.11,12], CLEMENT[Epistle to the Corinthians, 1. 47], 1Th 5:27;Rev 1:3, “Blessed is hethat readeth, and they that hear.” Thus, they andthe Gospels were put on a level with the Old Testament, which wassimilarly read (De 31:11). TheHoly Spirit inspired Paul to write, besides those extant, otherEpistles which He saw necessary for that day, and forparticular churches; and which were not so for the Church of all agesand places. It is possible that as the Epistle to the Colossians wasto be read for the edification of other churches besides that ofColosse; so the Epistle to the Ephesians was to be read in variouschurches besides Ephesus, and that Laodicea was the last of suchchurches before Colosse, whence he might designate the Epistle to theEphesians here as “the Epistle from Laodicea.” Butit is equally possible that the Epistle meant was one to theLaodiceans themselves.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And when this epistle is read amongst you, c,] Which the apostle was now writing, and sent unto them and which was to be read publicly, before the whole church; being sent not to any particular person, or persons, but to the whole body, and for their general good and instruction:
cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; his will was, that after it had been read to the church at Colosse, it should be sent, or at least a copy of it, to the church of the Laodiceans, in order to be read there: his reason might be, not only because this church was near them, but because it was in much the same situation, being infested with the same sort of false teachers; and therefore what was said to the one, was pertinent to the other:
and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea; which was not an epistle of the apostle to the Laodiceans, as some have thought, but one that was “written from” thence, as the Syriac version renders it. Marcion, the heretic, called the epistle to the Ephesians, the epistle to the Laodiceans, but without any reason; and others have forged an epistle which bears this name, and appears to be a collection out of others, and chiefly from the epistle to the Philippians; and which being short, and may gratify the curious who cannot otherwise come at it, I shall transcribe it, and is as follows r.
“Paul an Apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ; to the brethren which are of Laodicea, grace be unto you, and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I give thanks to Christ in every prayer of mine, that ye continue and persevere in good works, expecting the promise in the day of judgment: neither let the vain speeches of some that pretend to truth disturb you, so as to turn you from the truth of the Gospel which is preached by me; and now the Lord cause that those who belong to me may be serviceable for the furtherance of the truth of the Gospel, and doing kind actions, which are of salvation unto eternal life: and now my bonds are manifest which I suffer in Christ, in which I am glad and rejoice; and this is to my perpetual salvation which is done by your prayers, the Holy Ghost supplying, whether by life or by death; for me to live is life in Christ, and to die is joy; and he will do his own mercy in you, that ye may have the same love, and be unanimous: therefore, most beloved, as ye have heard of the presence of the Lord, so think ye, and do in fear, and you shall have life for ever; for it is God that worketh in you; and whatsoever ye do, do without sin; and what is best, most beloved, rejoice in the Lord Jesus Christ, and take heed of all filth in all gain; let your petitions be openly with God, be ye steadfast in the sense of Christ: and whatsoever things are sound and true, and chaste and just, and lovely, do; and what ye have heard and received retain in the heart, and peace shall be with you. Salute all the brethren with an holy kiss; all the saints salute you; the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. Cause this to be read to the Colossians, and that which is of the Colossians to you.”
Every one on reading it will easily see that it is a spurious piece, a collection out of other epistles, and very ill put together: however, the apostle here does not speak of any epistle written to the church of Laodicea, but of one that was written from thence; which some think was written by himself, and that he means his first epistle to Timothy, which is said to be written from Laodicea; and the rather, because in that the qualifications of the ministers of the Gospel are given; and also suitable instructions for the discharge of their work, and so very proper to be read in the presence of Archippus; who, from the following verse, seems to have been remiss and negligent, and needed stirring up to the performance of his office: but from Col 2:1 it appears, that the apostle had not been at Laodices when he wrote this, and had not so much as seen any of the faces of the brethren there in the flesh; it therefore seems rather to be an epistle which was sent from Laodicea to him, or to the Colossians; which having something in it very instructive and useful, the apostle desires it might be publicly read.
r Jachasin, fol. 87. 2. & 117. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
When this epistle hath been read among you ( ‘ ). Indefinite temporal clause with ( ) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of . The epistle was read in public to the church (Re 1:3).
Cause that ( ). Same idiom in John 11:37; Rev 13:15. Old Greek preferred for this idiom. See 1Th 5:27 for injunction for public reading of the Epistle.
That ye also read ( ). Second aorist active subjunctive of , to read.
And the epistle from Laodicea ( ). The most likely meaning is that the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians was a circular letter to various churches in the province of Asia, one copy going to Laodicea and to be passed on to Colossae as the Colossian letter was to be sent on to Laodicea. This was done usually by copying and keeping the original. See Eph 1:1 for further discussion of this matter.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The epistle from Laodicaea [ ] . That is, the letter left at Laodicaea, and to be obtained by you from the church there. This letter cannot be positively identified. The composition known as the Epistle to the Laodicaeans is a late and clumsy forgery, existing only in Latin MSS., and made up chiefly of disconnected passages from Philippians, with a few from other epistles. 208
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And when this epistle is read among you” (kai’ hotan anagnosthe par humin he epistole) “and whenever this epistle is read before, (alongside) you all;” you of the Church at Colosse.
2) “Cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans;” (poiesate hina kai en te Laodikeon ekklesia anagnosthe) “you do (whatever is necessary) in order that it be also read in the church of the Laodiceans.” One of the seven churches of Asia to whom the Evangelist John directed a letter, 1Th 5:27; Rev 3:14.
3) “And that ye also read the epistle from Laodicea” (kai ten ek Laodikeias hina kai humeis anagnote) “and the one epistle of Laodicea (do whatever is necessary) in order that you all read it;” Paul thus instructed that these churches share by exchange letters received from him, as circulatory in nature, helpful to each church that might read them; thus, they might help to “bear one another’s burdens” and fulfill the love-law of Christ, Gal 6:2; Joh 13:34-35.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
16. Let it be read in the Church of the Laodiceans. Hence, though it was addressed to the Colossians, it was, nevertheless, necessary that it should be profitable to others. The same view must also be taken of all the Epistles. They were indeed, in the first instance, addressed to particular Churches, but, as they contain doctrine that is always in force, and is common to all ages, it is of no importance what title they bear, for the subject matter belongs to us. It has been groundlessly supposed that the other Epistle of which he makes mention was written by Paul, and those labor under a double mistake who think that it was written by Paul to the Laodiceans. I have no doubt that it was an Epistle that had been sent to Paul, the perusal of which might be profitable to the Colossians, as neighboring towns have usually many things in common. There was, however, an exceedingly gross imposture in the circumstance that some worthless person, I know not who, had the audacity to forge, under this pretext, an Epistle, that is so insipid, (481) that nothing can be conceived to be more foreign to Paul’s spirit.
(481) “ Contrefaire et mettre en auant vne lettre comme escrite par sainct Paul aux Laodiciens, voire si sotte et badine;” — “To forge and put forward a letter as if written by St. Paul to the Laodiceans, and that too so foolish and silly.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(16) When this epistle.In the implied direction to read this Epistle in the Churcha direction expressly given under like circumstances to the Church at Thessalonica (1Th. 5:27)we discern the method of first publication of the Apostolic Epistles; in the direction to interchange Epistles with the Laodicean Church, we trace the way in which these Epistles became more widely diffused, and recognised as authoritative in the Church at large. Thus it was that they were canonised, i.e., accepted as a part of the canon or rule of divine truth. The likelihood, or unlikelihood, of this public reading has an important bearing on the question of the authenticity of some of the books, which were placed among the doubtful by Eusebius and other ancient authorities. The fact that other books (such as our so-called Apocryphal books) were also publicly read was the cause of their being wrongly confused with the books of Holy Scripture.
The epistle from Laodicea.The question, What was this Epistle from Laodicea? has given birth to a crowd of conjectures, of which an admirable and exhaustive examination will be found in Dr. Lightfoots Excursus on this verse. But many of these may be at once dismissed. It seems perfectly clear, from the obvious parallelism of this Epistle from Laodicea with the Epistle to the Colossians itself, that it was a letter not from the Laodicean Church, not from any other Apostle, or Apostolic writer, but from St. Paul himself, either written at Laodicea, or (as is more likely) written to the Laodicean Church, and to be sent from Laodicea to Coloss. Hence the question is narrowed to a single alternative(1) Is it an Epistle which has been lost, or, at any rate, not found in the canon? This is, of course, possible; it cannot be necessary, as it is certainly difficult, to suppose that all St. Pauls Epistles have been preserved to us in Holy Scripture. Now, there is extant an Epistle to the Laodiceans, circulated in the West, and known only in the Latin, although it has been thought to bear traces of translation from a Greek original. This letter (for which see Excursus B.) is obviously a forgery, probably not of early date, being little more than a tame compilation of phrases from St. Pauls Epistles. Putting this unhesitatingly aside, we may suppose the letter to have been lost. But this is a supposition merely arbitrary, and not to be adopted, except in default of something which has a better claim to attention. (2) Is it some other of St. Pauls known Epistles? The only letter which is noticed in our ordinary copies of the Greek Testament as written from Laodicea is the First Epistle to Timothy; but this is put out of the question, both in date and character; and, moreover, the very idea of a letter written from Laodicea at this time is negatived by St. Pauls declaration (Col. 2:1) that the Laodiceans had not seen his face in the flesh. A fourth century tradition declares our Epistle to the Hebrews to have been written to the Laodiceans; but (setting aside all question of the authorship) the whole character and argument of the Epistle make this extremely unlikely. Far the most probable supposition identifies it with our Epistle to the Ephesians. For the reasons for supposing this an encyclical letter, see Introduction to that Epistle. In particular it should not be forgotten that Marcion expressly calls it an Epistle to the Laodiceans. Laodicea lay lower down the valley, and was the larger town: an encyclical letter might well be left there to be sent on to Coloss. The two Epistles, as we have seen, have both strong likeness and marked distinction. Nothing could be more natural than that they should be interchanged, according to the direction of the text.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
16. Cause that it be read This public reading of an epistle is also enjoined in 1Th 5:27. The exchange of epistles, as in the present case, would require a copy to be made, and gives us a glimpse of the multiplication of copies of the gospels and epistles whereby they rapidly spread through the entire early Church. This epistle having been read to the brethren at Colosse, a copy was to be sent to Laodicea, but what was to be received in return is not so clear. It has been supposed to be, (1) An epistle written by the Laodiceans to St. Paul; (2) An epistle written at Laodicea by St. Paul, possibly the first to Timothy; (3) An epistle by Paul to the Laodiceans, as a circular letter, which we now have in our Epistle to the Ephesians; and (4) An epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans, which is now lost. The first and second suppositions need only be mentioned. The third, which originated with Grotius, and has a considerable basis of argument, is considered in the Introduction to Ephesians. We agree with those who hold that a letter is meant, no copy of which is now known to exist. It would be hazardous to say what treasures some future explorer, like Tischendorf, in Oriental monasteries may discover. There is extant in Latin an “Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Laodiceans;” but it is a mere rhapsodical collection of passages from the apostle’s other epistles, and is on all hands admitted to be a clumsy forgery.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The conclusion:
v. 16. And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
v. 17. And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfill it.
v. 18. The salutation by the hand of me, Paul. Remember my bonds. Grace be with you! Amen. Although this apostolic epistle was addressed to the Christians at Colossae, its doctrines and admonitions were not intended for the Colossians alone. Paul expressly tells them that, after they have finished reading the letter, they should cause it to be read also in the congregation at Laodicea, whose interest in their affairs might be expected to be greater than that of any other congregation. In turn, they should take steps to read the epistle from Laodicea. This was either the epistle to the Ephesians, which was forwarded to other congregations from Ephesus, or it is a letter which was lost, probably in the earthquake which destroyed many cities of that region the next year.
Paul includes a message to one Archippus, the man who probably had succeeded Epaphras as bishop, or pastor, of the Colossian congregation: Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfill it. To have charge of any Christian congregation involves great responsibility, and the work should therefore be done at all times with the full realization of this solemn dignity. It is an office which requires zealous, untiring fulfillment, for even today it is given into the hands of the pastor by the action of the congregation in calling him. Both congregations and pastors should at all times remain conscious of this fact.
In concluding, Paul adds his personal greeting with his own hand, as in other letters, 1Co 16:21; 2Th 3:17. Once more he reminds the Colossians to keep his bonds in mind, to remember him, the captive for the sake of the Gospel, in their prayers. As for him, all his love for them is expressed in the one sentence: Grace be with you! The grace of God, which the Savior has earned for all men, is the basis of the faith and the power of the life of the Christians. This grace is not ours by our own reason or strength, it is the free gift of God in Christ Jesus, our Lord. Amen.
Summary
The apostle urges his readers to be diligent in prayer and to make intercession for him; he includes a recommendation of Tychicus and Onesimus; he sends greetings from various companions in Rome; he closes with a charge to Archippus and a final salutation.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Col 4:16. The epistle from Laodicea. The epistle from Laodicea could not have been written by St. Paul from thence, since he had never been there, ch. Col 2:1. It seems probable that it was either his epistle to the Ephesians (see the analysis), or some letter which he had written to those of Laodicea; of which, when the Colossians sent a copy of their letter, the same messengers were to bring a copy from Laodicea. Whatever the letter was, it is lost; that which has appeared in the world being too contemptible a forgery ever to be taken for the writing of St. Paul, by persons of the least degree of sense and judgment.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Col 4:16 . [179] This message presupposes essentially similar circumstances in the two churches.
] is, as a matter of course, the present Epistle now before us; Winer, p. 102 [E. T. 133]. Comp. Rom 16:22 ; 1Th 5:27 .
, ] procure, that . The expression rests on the conception: to be active, in order that something may happen, Joh 11:37 . Comp. Herod, i. 8: , . . ., i. 209; Xen. Cyrop . vi. 3. 18. The following . . . . is, with emphatic prefixing of the object, likewise dependent on , not co-ordinated with the latter as an independent imperative sentence like Eph 5:33 a forced invention of Hofmann, which, besides, is quite inappropriate on account of the stern command which it would yield. [180]
] not: that written to me from Laodicea . So in Chrysostom, who himself gives no decisive voice, as also Syriac, Theodoret, Photius in Oecumenius, Erasmus, Beza, Vatablus, Calvin, Calovius, Wolf, Estius, Cornelius a Lapide, Storr, and others, as also again Baumgarten-Crusius. This is at variance with the context, according to which , pursuant to the parallel of the first clause of the verse, presupposes the Laodiceans, not as the senders of the letter, but as the receivers of the letter, by whom it was read . How unsuitable also would be the form of the message by ! Paul must, in fact, have sent to them the letter. Lastly, neither the object aimed at (Theophylact already aptly remarks: , namely, that alleged letter of the Laodiceans
), nor even the propriety of the matter would be manifest. Purely fanciful is the opinion of Jablonsky, that Paul means a letter of the Laodiceans to the Colossian overseers , as well as that of Theophylact: . So also a scholion in Matthaei In accordance with the context although Lange, Apost. Zeitalt . I. p. 211 ff., denounces the idea as a “fiction,” and Hofmann declares it as excluded by the very salutations with which the Colossians are charged to the Laodiceans we can only understand it to refer to a letter of Paul to the Laodiceans , which not merely these, to whom it was written, but also the Colossians ( ) were to read, just as the letter to the Colossians was to be read not merely by the latter, but also in the Laodicean church. The mode of expression , , is the very usual form of attraction in the case of prepositions with the article (comp. Mat 24:17 ; Luk 11:13 ), so that the two elements are therein comprehended: the letter to be found in Laodicea , and to be claimed or fetched from Laodicea to Colossae . See generally, Khner, II. 1, p. 473 f., and ad Xen. Mem . iii. 6. 11, ad Anab . i. 1. 5; Stallbaum, ad Plat. Apol . p. 32 B; Winer, p. 584 [E. T. 784]. This letter written to the Laodiceans has, like various other letters of the apostle, been lost . [181] In opposition to the old opinion held by Marcion, and in modern times still favoured especially by such as hold the Epistle to the Ephesians to be a circular letter (Bhmer, Bttger, Bhr, Steiger, Anger, Reuss, Lange, Bleek, Dalmer, Sabatier, Hofmann, Hitzig, and others), that the Epistle to the Ephesians is to be understood as that referred to, see Introd. to Eph. 1; Wieseler, Chronol. d. apost. Zeitalt . p. 435 ff.; Sartori, l.c .; Reiche, Comm. crit. ad Eph 1:1 ; Laurent in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol . 1866, p. 131 ff. The hypothesis that the Epistle to Philemon is meant (so Wieseler, also Thiersch, Hist. Standp . p. 424; and some older expositors, see in Calovius and in Anger, p. 35) finds no confirmation either in the nature and contents of this private letter, [182] or in the expressions of our passage, which, according to the analogy of the context, presuppose a letter to the whole church and for it. Even the Epistle to the Hebrews (Schulthess, Stein, in his Comm. z. Luk ., appendix) has been fallen upon in the vain search after the lost! According to Holtzmann, the words are intended to refer to the Epistle to the Ephesians, but . . . . is an insertion of the interpolator; [183] comp. Hitzig.
[179] See Anger, Beitr. zur histor. krit. Einl. in d. A. u. N. T. I.; ber den Laodicenerbrief, Leip. 1843; Wieseler, de epistola Laodicena, Gott. 1844; and Chronol. d. apost. Zeit. p. 450 ff.; Sartori, Ueber d. Laodicenserbrief, Lb. 1853.
[180] Hofmann needed, certainly, some such artificial expedient, wholly without warrant in the words of the text, to favour his presupposition that the Epistle to the Ephesians was meant, and that it was a circular letter. For a circular letter goes through the circuit destined for it of itself, and there is no occasion to ask or to send for it in order to procure , that ( , ) people may get it to read. But the effect of the forced separation of the second from is, that the words are supposed only to affirm that the letter “will come” from Laodicea to Colossae, that it “will reach” them, and they ought to read it. In this way the text must be strained to suit what is priori put into it. This applies also in opposition to Sahatier, l’ap. Paul, p. 201, who entirely ignores the connection with (“la lettre qui vous viendra de Laod.”).
[181] The apocryphal letter to the Laodiceans, the Greek text of which, we may mention, originated with Elias Hutter (1599), who translated it from the Latin, may be seen in Fabricius, Codex apocr. p. 873 ff., Anger, p. 142 ff. The whole letter, highly esteemed, on the suggestion of Gregory I., during the Middle Ages in the West, although prohibited in the second Council of Nice, 787 (to be found also in pre-Lutheran German Bibles), which is doubtless a still later fabrication than that already rejected in the Canon Muratorianus, consists only of twenty verses, the author of which does not even play the part of a definite situation. Erasmus rightly characterizes it: “quae nihil habeat Pauli praeter voculas aliquot ex ceteris ejus epistolis mendicatas.”
[182] For, although it is in form addressed to several persons, and even to the church in the house (see on Phm 1:1-2 ), it is at any rate in substance clear, as Jerome already remarks: “Paulum tantummodo ad Philemonem scribere, et unum cum suo sermocinari. ” Besides, it is to be inferred from the contents of the Colossian letter, that the Laodicean letter meant was also doctrinal in contents, and that the reciprocal use of the two letters had reference to this, in accordance with the essentially similar needs of the two neighbouring churches.
[183] Because, if we annex to , an awkward sense arises, “seeing that the Colossians can only cause that they get the letter to read, but not that they read it.” That is a subtlety, which does injustice to the popular style of the letter. But if we take independently (as Hofmann does), then Holtzmann is further of opinion that the author of Eph 4:29 ; Eph 5:27 ; Eph 5:33 , is immediately betrayed an unfounded inference (comp. Winer, p. 295 [E. T. 396]), in which, besides, only the comparison of Eph 5:33 would be relevant, and that would he balanced by 2Co 8:7 .
REMARK.
It is to be assumed that the Epistle to the Laodiceans was composed at the same time with that to the Colossians, inasmuch as the injunction that they should be mutually read in the churches can only have been founded on the similarity of the circumstances of the two churches as they stood at the time. Comp. Col 2:1 , where the , specially added to , expresses the similar and simultaneous character of the need, and, when compared with our passage, is to be referred to the consciousness that the apostle was writing to both churches. And the expression produces the impression that, when the Colossians received their letter, the Laodiceans would already have theirs. At the same time the expression is such, that Paul does not expressly inform , the Colossians that he had written also to the Laodiceans, but speaks of this letter as of something known to the readers , evidently reckoning upon the oral communication of Tychicus. The result, accordingly, seems as follows: Tychicus was the bearer of both letters, and travelled by way of Laodicea to Colossae, so that the letter for that church was already in Laodicea when the Colossians got theirs from the hands of Tychicus, and they were now in a position, according to the directions given in our passage, to have the Laodicean letter forwarded to them, and to send their own (after it was publicly read in their own church) to Laodicea.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
Ver. 16. Read the Epistle from Laodicea ] Other good books then must be read as well as the Scriptures; yet not idle pamphlets and love toys. These should be burnt, as those curious books were, Act 19:18-20
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
16 .] . , the present letter, reff.
. ] as , Herod. i. 8. 209, , Xen. Cyr. vi. 3. 18.
. ] On this Epistle, see Prolegg. to Eph. ii. 17, 19; and Philem. iii. 2, 3 [and note on the subscription to 1 Tim.]. I will only indicate here the right rendering of the words. They cannot well be taken, as in Chrys., to mean . , (so also Syr., Thdrt., Phot. in c., Erasm., Beza, Calv., Wolf, Est., Corn.-a-lap., al.), both on account of the awkwardness of the sense commanding them to read an Epistle sent from Laodicea, and not found there, and on account of the phrase so commonly having the pregnant meaning of ‘which is there and must be sought from there;’ cf. Khner, ii. 623 . Herod. iii. 6. Thucyd. ii. 34; iii. 22; vi. 32; vii. 70, and other examples there. We may safely say that a letter not from, but to the Laodiceans is meant. For the construction of this latter sentence, again is of course to be supplied.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Col 4:16 . : clearly a letter sent by Paul to Laodicea, which the Colossians are instructed to procure and read. It may be a lost letter, or it may be our so-called Epistle to the Ephesians, to which Marcion refers as the Epistle to the Laodiceans, and which was probably a circular letter. Weiss argues that it cannot be the Epistle to the Ephesians, for that was sent at the same time as this, and therefore Paul could not have sent salutations to Laodicea in this letter. But this is really natural, if Ephesians was a circular letter (and the absence of salutations is difficult to explain otherwise), and if this letter was to be passed on to Laodicea.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
among. Greek para. App-104.
from. Greek. ek. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
16.] ., the present letter, reff.
. ] as , Herod. i. 8. 209,- , Xen. Cyr. vi. 3. 18.
.] On this Epistle, see Prolegg. to Eph. ii. 17, 19; and Philem. iii. 2, 3 [and note on the subscription to 1 Tim.]. I will only indicate here the right rendering of the words. They cannot well be taken, as in Chrys., to mean . , (so also Syr., Thdrt., Phot. in c., Erasm., Beza, Calv., Wolf, Est., Corn.-a-lap., al.), both on account of the awkwardness of the sense commanding them to read an Epistle sent from Laodicea, and not found there, and on account of the phrase so commonly having the pregnant meaning of which is there and must be sought from there; cf. Khner, ii. 623 . Herod. iii. 6. Thucyd. ii. 34; iii. 22; vi. 32; vii. 70, and other examples there. We may safely say that a letter not from, but to the Laodiceans is meant. For the construction of this latter sentence, again is of course to be supplied.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Col 4:16. , shall be read) publicly, in the church. Comp. 1Th 5:27; Rev 1:3; Deu 31:11.- , the epistle) this very one.-, cause) So also 1 Thess. as above.- , the one from Laodicea) Mill is of opinion that the Epistle to the Ephesians is intended, which was to be got from Laodicea, and to be brought to Colosse. It is certainly not without a reason that Paul mentions the town from which the epistle was to be procured, rather than those to whom he sent it.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Col 4:16
Col 4:16
And when this epistle hath been read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye also read the epistle from Laodicea.-The present epistle was to be read in the assembly of the church at Colossae and a copy sent to Laodicea and similarly read there. Compare the instruction to the Corinthians (2Co 1:1), which implies the sending of copies to neighboring churches. [It is generally believed among Biblical scholars that Ephesians was designed also for the other churches in the same province. This conclusion is based on the belief that, although it is addressed to the saints that are at Ephesus, the metropolis of the Roman province of Asia which included Laodicea and Colossae, it was probably designed for other churches in the same province-the faithful in Christ Jesus. If so, it is quite conceivable that Paul gave orders to Tychicus to leave at Laodicea for the church there a copy of the epistle to the Ephesians. And this copy would be the epistle from Laodicea” which Paul desired the Colossians to read. This desire grew out of the fact that the two epistles, though closely related in thought and phraseology, are quite distinct. Each supports the other. The one to the Ephesians deals chiefly with the church; that to the Colossians expounds the dignity and work of Christ, and rebuts certain special errors. This suggestion is so free from objection, and meets so well all the facts of the case, that with our scanty information we may accept it as probable.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
1Th 5:27
Reciprocal: Exo 24:7 – read Jer 51:61 – read Col 2:1 – at Col 4:13 – Laodicea Rev 1:11 – Laodicea Rev 3:14 – of the Laodiceans
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
(Col 4:16.) , , -And when this epistle has been read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye too read that from Laodicea. The construction belongs to the later Greek. Matthiae, 531, 1. Nor should we say that in such a case is ecbatic, for though result be described in the clause which follows it, design is clearly expressed by the verb which precedes it. The apostle alludes to the public reading of his letter in the churches, and recommends an exchange of epistles. The epistle sent to Colosse and read there was to be sent to Laodicea, and read there too. The words / signify among you, not by you; and is the one which the apostle was at that moment writing. But the difficulty lies in determining what the Colossians were to read in turn, or what document is meant by the phrase -that from Laodicea. The apostle’s language is not explicit, inasmuch as the Colossians would understand at once the reference made by him. But the question is, does point to the origin or authorship of the epistle, or only to its present locality? Was it an epistle which had come to Paul from Laodicea, or would it need only to be brought out of Laodicea in order to be read at Colosse?
The expression is pregnant and idiomatic.
1. Many have taken it to mean a letter which Paul himself had received from the church in Laodicea. Theodoret, Photius, Calvin, Estius, Erasmus, Beza, van Til, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others, hold this view, though they can only conjecture as to the nature and contents of such a document. But the principal support of such a view is the assumed meaning of , in the phrase . It is argued that denotes origin. True, but the texture of the verse shows that the epistle is supposed to be in Laodicea, when they were to try and get it out of that city. It was to be brought from Laodicea to them, and by their own endeavour. Besides, as Dr. Davidson remarks, It is difficult to conceive of the mode in which the apostle’s injunction could have been carried into effect. It is very unlikely that the Laodiceans kept a copy, or that Paul knew of it. Or if it be conjectured that Tychicus and Onesimus, the bearers of the Colossian letter, carried that which the apostle had received from the Laodiceans, the idea is inconsistent with ; implying endeavour to get the Laodicean epistle. Nor is there any hint in the epistle to the Colossians, that it is a reply to any queries or communications, the reading of which might cast light on those of its statements which served the purpose of an answer.
2. Others take it for some epistle written at Laodicea, either supposing it, like Theophylact, to be the First Epistle to Timothy, according to the common subscription; or like Lightfoot, the First Epistle of John; or as Jablonsky opined, an epistle written to the Colossian pastors generally; or as Storr and Flatt would think, one specially addressed to Epaphras. Such suppositions are as easily refuted as they are made. Philastrius of Brescia, Schultess, Stein, in his appendix to his commentary on Luke, and Schneckenburger, suppose the Epistle to the Hebrews to be intended. It cannot be the early uncanonical production now known by the title of the Epistle of Laodicea, a document which Hutter translated out of Latin into Greek, and of which Jerome said-ab omnibus exploditur. Marcion, in his canon, according to Tertullian, gave the Epistle to the Ephesians the title of the Epistle to the Laodiceans. [Commentary on Ephesians, Introduction, p. xxv.]
3. The more probable opinion is, that it is an epistle sent by Paul to Laodicea at this very period. The epistles were to be interchanged. And the interchange is naturally this-that the Laodiceans read the epistle which had been sent to Colosse, and the Colossians the epistle which had been sent to Laodicea. Wieseler argues that the epistle meant is that to Philemon. But it is hard to prove that either Archippus or Philemon was a Laodicean. It would certainly be strange for the Colossian church to send Paul’s charge to the minister of another church, when, according to Wieseler, there was an epistle destined for individuals in the same community. Then, again, as has been observed, what is there in the private letter to Philemon to make it of general use at Colosse? Again, many, as Bhr, Steiger, Bhmer, and Anger, who hold that the Epistle to the Ephesians is a circular letter, believe it to be here meant, while some maintain that its original destination was Laodicea. But how, it might be asked, how did the apostle know that the encyclical epistle should have reached Laodicea just at the time when his letter should arrive at Colosse? The spirit of the injunction in Col 4:16, seems plainly to imply that both letters were despatched at once, and the same might be inferred from the apostle’s desire expressed in Col 2:1, that the Laodiceans as well as the Colossians should be aware of his intense solicitude for them. Tychicus, as Meyer suggests, would travel through Laodicea to Colosse, and he would there impart the oral confirmation that the letter referred to by the apostle was lying at Laodicea. This arrangement being known to the apostle gave precision to his language. One difficulty in our way is the fact that Paul bids the Colossian church salute the brethren in Laodicea. Why do so, it is asked, if he himself despatched a letter at the same time to Laodicea? But the salutation sent through the Colossians would manifest the apostle’s desire that both churches should cherish a sisterly attachment, and the transmission of the apostle’s salutation to Laodicea would be a fitting occasion for the interchange of epistles.
But will the phrase bear such a meaning? There is no doubt that it may, the preposition showing that the letter was there, and to be brought out of that city. The idiom means that the letter was there, or would be found there, and was to be carried thence. Thus, Bhr refers to Luk 11:13 – -where the particle characterizes the descent of a gift out of heaven, and from One who is in heaven. Mat 24:17 has also been referred to- -but the similarity of construction is not so close. The case of , in Heb 13:24, and the reverse one of in Luk 9:61, come under a similar law. Compare 2Co 9:2; Php 4:22. The law is based on what is called the attraction of prepositions, when, for example, instead of a preposition denoting rest being used, the idea of motion is attracted from the verb, which either expresses it or implies it, and a preposition signifying such motion is employed. Khner, 623; Winer, 66, 6. The idea of fetching the epistle out of the city of Colosse was present to the writer’s mind, and so he says -the epistle to be gotten out, and not -the epistle now lying in Laodicea. This ascertained usage puts an end to the objections of the Greek expositors, who affirm that this view would necessitate such a phrase as .
The inference, of course, is that this epistle is lost, like many others of the apostle’s writings. Probably it was wholly of a temporary and local nature, and therefore has not been preserved.
1. Paulus apostolus, non ab hominibus, neque per hominem, sed per Jesum Christum, fratribus qui estis Laodiceae. 1. Paul an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, to the brethren which are at Laodicea. 2. Gratia vobis, et pax a Deo Patre et Domino nostro Jesu Christo. 2. Grace be to you, and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 3. Gratias ago Christo per omnem orationem meam, quod permanentes estis et perseverantes in operibus bonis, promissionem expectantes in die judicii. 3. I thank Christ in every prayer of mine, because ye continue and persevere in good works, looking for that which is promised in the day of judgment. 4. Neque disturbent vos quorundam vaniloquia insimulantium veritatem, ut vos avertant a veritate Evangelii, quod a me praedicatur. 4. Let not the vain speeches of any trouble you, who pervert the truth, that they seduce you from the truth of the gospel which is preached by me. 5. Et nunc faciet Deus, ut qui sunt ex me, perveniant ad perfectum veritatis Evangelii, sint deservientes, et benignitatem operum facientes, quae sunt salutis vitae aeternae. 5. And now may God effect it, that my converts may attain to a perfect knowledge of the truth of the gospel, be beneficent, and doing good works which are connected with the salvation of eternal life. 6. Et nunc palam sunt vincula mea, quae patior in Christo, in quibus laetor et gaudeo. 6. And now my bonds which I suffer in Christ, are manifest, in which I rejoice and am glad. 7. Scio enim quod hoc mihi est ad salutem perpetuam, quod factum est orationibus vestris, administrante Spiritu Sancto. 7. For I know that this shall turn to my salvation for ever, which is secured through your prayer, and the supply of the Holy Spirit. 8. Sive per vitam, sive per mortem, est mihi vivere vita in Christo, et mori gaudium. 8. Whether by life or by death; [for] to me shall be a life in Christ, to die will be joy. 9. Et ipse Dominus noster in nobis faciet misericordiam suam, ut eandem dilectionem habeatis et sitis unanimes. 9. And our Lord Himself will grant us His mercy, that ye may have the same love and be like-minded. 10. Ergo, dilectissimi, ut audistis praesentiam Domini, ita sentite, et facite in timore; et erit vobis vita in aeternum. 10. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have heard of the coming of the Lord, so think and act in fear, and it shall be to you life eternal; 11. Est enim Deus, qui operatur in vobis; 11. For it is God, who worketh in you; 12. Et facite sine peccato quaecunque facitis. 12. And do without sin whatever things ye do. 13. Et quod optimum est, dilectissimi, gaudete in Domino Jesu Christo, et cavete omnes sordes in omni lucro. 13. And what is best, my beloved, rejoice in the Lord Jesus Christ, and avoid all filthy lucre. 14. Omnes petitiones vestrae sint palam apud Deum; estote firmi in sensu Christi. 14. Let all your requests be made known before God, and be firm in the doctrine of Christ. 15. Et quae integra, et vera, et pudica, et casta, et justa, et amabilia sunt, facite. 15. And whatsoever things are sound, and true, and of good report, and chaste, and just, and lovely, these things do. 16. Et quae audiistis et accepistis, in corde retinete, et erit vobis pax. 16. And those things which ye have heard, and received, keep in your hearts, and peace shall be with you. 17. Salutant vos omnes sanct. 17. All the saints salute you. 18. Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi cum spiritu vestro. Amen. 18. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. 19. Hanc facite legi Colossensibus, et eam, quae est Colossensium, vobis. 19. Cause that this Epistle be read among the Colossians, and the Epistle of the Colossians to be read among you.
This interchange of epistles was a salutary custom; it made an epistle sent to one church to become, in reality, the common property of all the churches, and it led in no very long period to the formation of the canon of the New Testament.
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Col 4:16. Laodicea was not far from Colosse, and Paul directed the brethren to read this epistle among themselves first, then pass it on to the brethren at Laodicea to be read by them. There is some uncertainty as to what epistle is meant that was to come from. Laodicea, but whatever it was, the brethren at Colosse were instructed to read it. The common conditions in these two churches were such as to make the two epistles appropriate for both.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Col 4:16. And when this (lit. the) epistle hath been read among you. The tense used must be thus rendered in English; there is no necessary reference to public reading.
Cause, etc. This was a natural injunction, in view of the nearness of Laodicea, and the common danger threatening both churches.
Ye also read that from Laodicea. This phrase has occasioned a multitude of conjectures. All theories that do not refer it to a letter written by the Apostle Paul must be rejected. The language points to him as the author, not to the Laodiceans, nor to some other Apostle or teacher. Renewed investigations of the uncanonical Epistle to the Laodiceans make it even more certain that this cannot have been written by the Apostle, but is a stupid forgery. See especially the full Excursus of Bishop Lightfoot, Colossians, pp. 281-300.
The only theories which are tenable are, (1) that the Epistle to the Ephesians is referred to; (2) that the letter to Laodicea has not been preserved. No other of the known Pauline Epistles can be referred to.
(1.) The first theory is held in three forms: (a.) The Ephesian Epistle was an encyclical letter, and a copy was text by Tychicus at Laodicea, on his way to Coloss. This is the view which is growing in favor, and especially since the weight of Aleph has been thrown against the words in Ephesus in Eph 1:1. (See Introduction to Ephesians, 1.) (b.) That a special copy of that Epistle was made for Laodicea, and to be left there by Tychicus. This is possible, but lacks any positive proof. (c.) That the Epistle to the Ephesians (so-called) was originally sent to Laodicea (so Conybeare and Howson, Lewin, etc.). This seems least probable.
(2.) The other view, that the Epistle to Laodicea has been lost exists in two forms: (a.) That the lost letter was wholly of a temporary and local nature, and hence not of a character to be preserved as canonical Scripture; (4.) that the letter was one which possibly from its similarity to its sister Epistle, it has not pleased God to preserve to us (Ellicott). The Apostle might have written many letters, which have been not preserved, so that this theory is not inadmissible. But as three letters of such a high character were sent at this time, it is unlikely that an unimportant one was added. The fact that the Colossians were to read the other Epistle, is against the theory that it was not preserved on account of its similarity. If different enough to be read, it would have been deemed worthy of preservation. The most probable view is therefore that which accepts the limited encyclical character of the Epistle to the Ephesians, and regards it as here referred to.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Here St. Paul directs to the reading of this epistle themselves, which the Spirit of God had directed him to write unto them, Let this epistle be read amongst you. All holy scripture is to be read and perused by every private Christian; the same Spirit that did indite the scriptures, requires the reading and understanding of them.
And further, St. Paul desires this epistle, being read amongst the Colossians, should next be read in the church at Laodicea; who being their neighbours, received the same poison or errors from the false teachers, crept in amongst them, and consequently directed to some particular church or person, recorded in scripture, was of universal use to them, and may be now, to all particular persons and societies.
Much controversy has arisen in the church about this epistle from Laodicea; some have affirmed that it was written by St. Paul to the Laodiceans, but lost; from whence they would infer, that the canon of the scripture is not entire: But supposing it were so, yet it follows not but that we have all things necessary to salvation in the holy scriptures.
It is very probable that St. Paul himself, and several other apostles, wrote more epistles than are in the Bible: What then? We have what the wisdom of God thought fit to hand down to us, and what is sufficient to make the serious reader of it wise unto salvation. Surely Almighty God was not bound to bring down all that they wrote to us, but only what his own wisdom saw fit and necessary for us. Others understand it of an epistle from Laodicea to St. Paul, and that he answered it fully in this epistle to the Colossians, and sending it back, desired the Colossians might read it, for better clearing of some passages in this epistle to them.
Lastly, Some understand it of the epistle ot the Ephesians, Ephesus being the metropolis, or the chief city of Laodicea; and accordingly some called the epistle to the Ephesians, the epistle to the Laodiceans: The truth is, there is a very great affinity betwixt the epistle to the Ephesians, and this to the Colossians; the doctrines, exhortations, and many expressions are the very same; so that it is no wonder if he desired they should be both read at Colosse, to let them see that he wrote the same doctrine to other churches which he had done to them.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Closing Exhortations and Blessings
Paul urged the circulation of this letter and another which was written to the Laodiceans. Not only might some of the problems be the same, but the truth is always able to build up any who will listen ( Act 20:32 ). He also instructed the brethren to encourage Archippus in the faithful fulfillment of the work he was performing in the Lord’s service. Archippus may have been the son of Philemon. ( Phm 1:2 ) He apparently had worked with Paul before and certainly was a proclaimer of God’s word.
This letter was probable written by a secretary (amanuensis) as dictated by Paul. In the last verse, the apostle added a closing in his own writing. He asked them to pray for him in his imprisonment and expressed his prayer for God’s grace to be upon them ( Col 4:16-18 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Col 4:16. When this epistle is read among you It appears by this, that the apostolic epistles were read publicly in the churches to which they were addressed; and probably not once, but often: copies of them were likewise taken, and translations of them made very early into different languages, and sent to different countries, where Christian churches were formed, that they might be read in them: a great proof this of the genuineness of these epistles: for they could not have been corrupted but the corruption must have been detected, by comparing different copies with each other. Cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans The members of the church at Laodicea having, before their conversion, entertained the same principles, and followed the same practices with the Colossians, and the dangers to both churches, from the attempts of false teachers, being nearly the same, it was proper that the same spiritual remedies should be applied to both. And therefore the apostle ordered this letter, which was designed for the instruction of the Colossians, to be read in the church of the Laodiceans also: and no doubt it was read there, agreeably to the apostles injunction; by which means, in that church, as well as in the church at Colosse, the false teachers and their idolatrous practices were for a while repressed. And that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea Some think the letter here referred to was one which the apostle wrote to the Laodiceans, but which is now lost. But as the ancients mention no such letter, nor indeed any letter written by St. Paul which is not still remaining, others judge it more probable that the letter to the Ephesians is intended, and that the apostle directed the Ephesians, by Tychicus, who carried their letter to them, to send a copy of it to the Laodiceans, with an order to them to communicate it to the Colossians.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
16. This verse enjoins the reading of this epistle in the Church of the Laodiceans, which was near; also that the Loadicean epistle should be read in the Church at Colosse. We are sorry the epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans was lost. It may yet be found, as the explorations in the Bible lands are this day moving vigorously. When I was at Jerusalem in 1895, Dr. Bliss was excavating in Mt. Zion without the walls, down toward the Valley of Hinnom. The great manuscript of Tischendorf, which I hold in my hand, containing the whole New Testament, flooding the world with light on the inspired text, lay hidden in the convent of St. Catharine, on Mt. Sinai, until 1859. So it is not too late for the Laodicean epistle yet to come to light.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 16
The epistle from Laodicea. We have no other information, in respect to this Epistle, than what is implied in this allusion.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
“And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the [epistle] from Laodicea.”
This was an instruction to the church so many years ago, but we can know a couple of items from it.
First of all there was a letter from Paul to Laodicea – wouldn’t you love to know what he said to them? It was not included in Scripture – we know not why, it could be that it was lost before the Canon was discussed, or it may not have been up to the standard of the books of the Canon.
Secondly we can know that the heresy present at Colosse was also present at Laodicea.
Thirdly by implication we might assume that the heresy was not present at the church at Hieropolis since Paul did not tell them to circulate the letter to them. Laodicea was just a short distance to the northwest of Colossae and Heiropolis (4:13) was just to the north. The three cities make a nice equilateral triangle. Most likely the churches were quite familiar with one another.
—
Concerning the book of Ephesians possibly being the letter to the Laodiceans:
From the Net Bible at http://www.bible.org
“… yet the opening line of this epistle makes little sense without them (“to the saints who are and are faithful…”? or perhaps “to the saints who are also faithful,” though with this sense the ousin [ousin] is redundant and the kaiv [kai] is treated somewhat unnaturally). What is interesting is Marcion’s canon list which offers the letter to the Laodiceans among Paul’s authentic epistles. This, coupled with some internal evidence that the writer did not know his audience personally (cf. 1:15; 3:2; absence of personal names throughout), suggests that Ephesians was an encyclical letter, intended for more than one audience. Does this mean that the shorter reading is to be preferred? Yes and no. A plausible scenario is as follows: Paul sent the letter from Rome, intending it first to go to Ephesus. At the same time, Colossians was dispatched. Going counterclockwise through Asia Minor, this letter would first come to Ephesus, the port of entry, then to Laodicea, then Colossae. Tychicus’ instructions may well have been for each church to “fill in the blank” on the address line. The church at Ephesus would have certainly made the most copies, being Paul’s home base for nearly three years. Hence, most of the surviving copies have “in Ephesus” in v. 1. But one might expect a hint of evidence that Laodicea also made a few copies: both Marcion’s list and Col 4:16 may well imply this. What is to account for the early Alexandrian evidence, then? These mss were probably made from a very early copy, one reflecting the blank line before each church filled it in. Although it is of course only speculation (as is necessary in a historical investigation lacking some of the pieces to the puzzle), this scenario accounts for all of the data: (1) “in Ephesus” in most mss; (2) Laodicea in Marcion’s list and Col 4:16; (3) the lack of an addressee in the earliest witnesses; (4) why the earliest witnesses’ reading must be rejected as too hard; and (5) why Paul seems not to know the readership. In sum, is “in Ephesus” original? Yes and no. Some address belongs there; ejn *Efevsw/ (en Efesw) is the predominant address; but several other churches also received this circular letter as their own. For this reason the phrase has been placed in single brackets in the translation.”
Schofiled’s note that introduces Ephesians:
“Col 4:16 mentions an epistle to the Laodiceans. It has been conjectured that the letter known to us as Ephesians is really the Laodicean letter. Probably it was sent to Ephesus and Laodicea without being addressed to any church. The letter would then be “to the saints and the faithful in
Christ Jesus” anywhere.”
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
Paul’s letter to the Laodiceans was probably not an inspired one and has evidently been lost (cf. 1Co 5:9). This seems more likely than that Paul was referring to the Epistle to the Ephesians here. [Note: For discussion of this theory, see the introductions to the New Testament and commentaries on Eph 1:1.]