Recently I have continued reading Berkhof's venerable ‘Intro to the New Testament’.
Here is my summary of his comments on the Apostle Paul’s letter to the church
at Colossae Asia Minor a.k.a. Turkey
Content-Berkhof divides the epistles in two parts…
1) The Doctrinal Part,
emphasizing the unique Significance of Christ, 1:1—2: 23.
2)
The Practical Part, containing divers Directions and
Exhortations, 3:
1—4:18.
Characteristics-
Berkhof and
others find this letter much like the letter to the Ephesians. Some regard it
as a twin, and the similarity of the two letters have brought some to discredit
Pauline authorship though of course not Berkhof. He writes;
“1. On its formal side this
Epistle differs from that to the Ephesians in its polemical character. It is
not a general exposition of the truth that is in Christ Jesus, without
reference to antagonistic principles, but a statement of it with a special view
to the errors that were gradually creeping into the Colossian church, insidious
errors of which the Colossians, so it seems, little realized the danger. It is
true that we find none of the fiery polemics of the Epistle to the Galatians
here, nor any of the sharp invective of II Corinthians;—yet the controversial
character of this letter is very evident.
Berkhof notes that this
letter has a Christological focus while the letter to the Ephesians is largely
theological. “While that contained in Ephesians is in the main Theological,
that found in Colossians is primarily Christological, the summing up of all
things in Christ, the Head. Essentially the Christology of this letter is in
perfect harmony with that of previous Epistles, but there is a difference of
emphasis. The writer here places prominently before his readers, not only the
Soteriological, but also the Cosmical significance of Christ. He is the Head
both of the Church and of the new creation. All things were created by him, and
find the purpose of their existence in him.”
Berkhof presents some points
on technical verbal content analysis of the epistle contrasted to his other
letters.
Authorship
Berkhof
presents and rebuffs several challenges to Pauline authorship that are based
upon the language use and concepts that could be regarded as anti-deictic e.g
Gnostic concepts.
On challenges to Paul’s
elaboration upon Christology Berkhof writes: “we do not see why the further
development of the Pauline Christology cannot have been the work of Paul
himself. There is nothing in the Christology of this Epistle that conflicts
with the recognized representation of Paul. We clearly find the essence of it
in Rom. 8:19-22; I Cor. 8:6; II Cor. 4:4; Phil, 2:5-11. These passages prepare
us for the statement of Paul regarding the Cosmical significance of Christ,. 1:
16,17. And the representation that all the forces of creation culminate in the
glory of Christ does not necessarily run counter to Rom. 11:
36
and I Cor. 15 : 28, according to which all things exist to the praise of God,
their Creator.”
The
Church at Colossae- Phyrigia is in Asia Minor -the region that is today called Turkey Asia Minor slaughtering one of the tribes of Celt warriors
fighting naked until arrows pinned their feet through to the ground. It was
something of a last redoubt of those politically recalcitrant to Roman rule
before being subdued. Berkhof writes that Paul’s three years at Ephesus Colossae Colossae Lycus Valley Phrygia , situated but a short
distance from Laodicea Hierapolis Phrygia twice, once at the start of his second, and again
at the beginning of his third missionary journey, Acts 16: 6; 18:
23 .
But on the first of these journeys he remained well to the East of Western
Phrygia, where Collosae was situated; and though on the second he may have gone
into the Lycus Valley, he certainly did not find nor found the Colossian church
there, since he himself says in Col. 2: 1 that the Colossians had not seen his
face in the flesh.”
The Apostle Paul could be
regarded as the founder of the churches in Asia Minor that would in time emerge
as the Orthodox Church in the Eastern Roman Empire refounded by Emperor
Constantine as Constantinople at Byzantium Church of Holy
Berkhof writes “In all probability Paul’s prolonged residence at
Ephesus and his preaching there for three years, so that “all those in Asia
heard the word of the Lord Jesus,” Acts 19:10, was indirectly responsible for
the founding of the churches in the Lycus Valley. The most plausible theory is
that Epaphras was one of Paul’s Ephesian converts and became the founder of the
Colossian church.”
Berkhof notes interestingly that Antiochus the Great
moved 2000 Jewish families from Babylonia to a region near Lydia and Phrygia,
why I cannot say. The region has a long history of forced displacements and
relocations of various peoples continuing into the present day. The church was
mostly gentiles though false doctrine did assail it from numerous sources.
I will provide an example of some of Berkhof’s
substantive analysis; “According
to the Epistle the Colossians were in danger of being misled by certain false
teachings. As to the exact nature of the Colossian heresy there is a great
variety of opinion. Some regard it as a mixture of Judaeistic and theosophic
elements; others dub it Gnosticism or Gnostic Ebionism; and still others
consider it to be a form of Essenism. We can infer from the Epistle that the
errorists were members of the congregation, for they are described as those
“not holding the head,” 2:19, an expression that is applicable only to those
that had accepted Christ.”
Jesus Christ is of course
the head of the church.
Composition
1) Occasion and
Purpose- Berkhof illuminates some points that are a little obscure to moderns,
though interesting enough still to historians and others on what people
believed in error that departed from the gospel and doctrine of The Lord. The
belief in the mediation of angels in everything as if they were the animistic
spirits of pagan Romans-(i.e. Janus the Door goddess whose temple was only open
during times of war) was theologically made anachronistic. Politically however
the concept is still significant for the evolutionist camp often regards
Christians as evolving from an animistic paradigm and generally still having
that although in a consolidated monotheistic context. That is a somewhat shaky
anti-philosophical, anti-God intellectual edifice obviously.
Quoting Berkhof; “Epaphras, the founder and probably also the
minister of the congregation, had evidently seen the danger, gradually
increasing, that was threatening the spiritual welfare of the church. The
errorists did not directly antagonize him or Paul; yet their teaching was a
subversion of the Pauline gospel. Hence he informed the apostle of the state of
affairs, and this information led to the composition of the Epistle. The object
Paul has in view is the correction of the Colossian heresy. Hence he clearly
sets forth the unique significance of Christ, and the all-sufficient character
of his redemption. Christ is the image of the invisible God, the Creator of the
world, and also of the angels, and the only Mediator between God and man. He in
whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwells, has reconciled all things to God
and has delivered men from the power of sin and death. In his death He
abrogated the shadows of the Old Testament and terminated the special ministry
of the angels that was connected with the law, so that even this vestige of a
supposed Biblical foundation for the worship of angels has been removed. In him
believers are perfect and in him only.’
2) Time and
Place- Berkhof dates Paul’s writing to A.D. 61 or 62
Canonical Significance
Berkhof
writes “The canonical character of
this Epistle has never been doubted by the Church. There are slight but
uncertain indications of its use in Clement of Rome, Barnabas and Ignatius.
More important references to it are found in Justin Martyr and Theophilus.
Marcion gave it a place in his canon, and in the Muratorian Fragment it is
named as one of the Pauline Epistles. With Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and
Tertullian the quotations increase both in number and definiteness. That the
Epistle is not quoted as often as Ephesians is probably due to its polemical
character. The permanent value of this letter is found primarily in its central
teaching, that the Church of God is made perfect in Christ, its glorious Head.
Since He is a perfect Mediator and the complete redemption of his people, they
grow into him, as the Head of the body, they find the fulfillment of all their
desires in him, as their Saviour, and they reach their perfection in him, as
the Goal of the new creation. His perfect life is the life of the entire
Church.”
It is somewhat miraculous,
or perhaps an illustration of the divine ordering of history that the
foundation of the churches of Asia Minor and Paul’s opportunity to write to the
Colossian church from gaol before martyrdom occurred in a region that would be
and remain Hellenized and infused with the thought of Plato and his work the
Republic with it’s description of the realm of forms and metaphysical ideas in
general that would become inspiration to Plotinus later. Plotinus, a
neo-Platonist in essence develops Paul’s Christology from Colossians and
explains the nature of the Universe and of cosmology emitted from the One in 54
tractates called The Enneads.
From my pointy of view the worldview of Plotinus is
very much like a paradigm for contemporary physical cosmology with a theistic
understanding. Forms of matter were and are a [perennial philosophical and
scientific question, and Universal forms occur in the quantum world and also in
gravitational characteristic such as drawing matter together. The mystery about
The One that Plotinus wrote about pertain to God as well; why did the perfect
One actualize anything at all. Even a thought implies less than omniscience I
suppose for God has the answer to every question. The extension of anything
into temporal form is a great mystery. Some physicists speculate that for
practical purposes the Universe may be regarded as a hologram. Steady states of
mass are quantum entanglement of waveforms in a Higgs field (that remind me of
the sacrificial sheep being found by AVRM caught in a bush). With that thought
I guess one could consider that our reality is God’s thought, and that all
thought exists for God with all things existing even an infinite multiverse,
without need for physical dimensions or scale in order to be, for those would
all be contingent so it is best to use General Relativity as a metric for
regarding the physical realm.
Jesus Christ as the Creator of the Universe and Head
of the Church is represented by Plotinus as The Intelligence who brings
everything into existence. Imperfection and sin were considered by Plotinus to
be broken forms. Writing a couple of centuries after Paul it is easy enough to
discern the development of Plotinus’ ideas in the history of ideas. Plotinus was
something of a mystic himself, was condemned b y the Orthodox Church as a pagan
representing a heresy and sort of marginalized.
Today the concept of continuing direct revelation
from God is controversial for good reason. Heyschasm was the term for Plotinus’
direct encounter with the goodness of God, and that was something like that
written of in The Cloud of Unknowing. Christian mysticism aside, as if they
were investigating transcendent quantum cosmology issued by God within a
holograph or Bishop Berklean pure-idea paradigm, the elucidation by Plotinus of
cosmological concepts implicit in the Christology of the Epistle to the Colossians
is worth a comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment