“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,”
The first two verses of the book of Colossians comprise the salutation.
“Paul,”
Paul does not begin his epistles with customary introductions of our day. Salutations of our day are irrelevant. We begin a business letter with the term “Gentlemen,” yet we know that there is no gentleman in the whole crowd! We write, “Dear Sir,” when we know that they are neither “dear” nor “Sir!!” We cannot start a letter with “Hey, you” either!!
The name “Paul” means “little.” If there was anyone who could call himself “Mr. big,” it was the apostle Paul. He was the greatest missionary of the first century. He was one of the great men of his day. In Judaism, he had a promising career. He was a Pharisee. He was the outstanding persecutor of the church. He ran out of victims in Jerusalem, so he went to Damascus to capture more Christians, “Then Saul (Paul), still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem” (Acts 9:1-2). He was on his way to murder the disciples in Damascus.
On that road to Damascus, he met the risen Lord and received Jesus Christ as his Savior. As a Christian, he spread the gospel to the Gentile Roman world. The Lord Jesus ruined his previous career of killing Christians! One look at Jesus, and it changed everything in his life. Jesus’ worst enemy became his greatest emissary.
Paul was not one of the 12 original Apostles. One qualification for apostleship was seeing Jesus. He saw the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8-9). God gave him miraculous powers to authenticate his apostleship (2 Cor. 12:12; Heb. 2:3-4).
an apostle of Jesus Christ”
The word “apostle” conveys the idea of a special commission from God. The “apostle of Jesus Christ” was under a divine commission to found the church and write Scripture. This is the highest-ranking gift in the Bible. There are no more apostles today. No one has the right to write Scripture. As all gifts, this gift can only be bestowed by the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation (1 Cor. 12:11,13).
Paul was the human author of Scripture, but the Holy Spirit was the divine author, “For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet 1:20-21). This does not mean that the human author mechanically writes Scripture with little or no input from his person. Instead, it means that the Holy Spirit guides every word he writes to accurately convey what God wants to communicate to man.
Paul was Christ’s apostle. He was not the church’s apostle. He was a special emissary on a specific divine assignment from Christ. He took his marching orders from Jesus Christ.
For further study on the role of an apostle of Jesus Christ, go here: https://versebyversecommentary.com/articles/doctrine/do-apostles-exist-today/
and here: https://versebyversecommentary.com/articles/doctrine/spiritual-gifts/
Principle:
When Jesus Christ fills our horizon, we can do nothing else but serve him.
Application:
When we truly meet the Lord Jesus, we lose interest in pleasing ourselves. The greatest thing that can happen to a young person is to meet the Lord Jesus young enough to give their entire life to the Lord. Boyfriends, girlfriends, cars, careers do not compare with knowing and serving him (Phil. 3:10). When we devote our lives to the Son of God, we live no lives of regret.
Paul makes his commitment clear in 1 Cor. 9:16,17, “Or if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for necessity is laid upon me; yes, woe is me if I do not preach the gospel!” He said, “I must preach the gospel whether I want to do it or not. whether it is convenient or not, I have no choice.” God is no cruel taskmaster. On the contrary, he is a wonderful master who gives us a sense of satisfaction when we serve him. Paul did not quit. He served to the best of his ability, which is all God asks. This kind of commitment gives us direction, point, and purpose. We keep our drive no matter what opposition may come our way.
hello,
“For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (II Pet 1:20) is (II Pet 1:21)
[“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” (II Pet 1:20)]
I Cor. 9:16,17, “Or if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for necessity is laid upon me; yes, woe is me if I do not preach the gospel!” is I Cor. 9:16 “For… ”
[I Cor. 9:16,17, “For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for necessity is laid upon me; yes, woe is me if I do not preach the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.”]
xox ;o)
Dr. Grant,
I noticed in your introduction section that there was no comment on early church fathers supporting that it was Paul's letter. Is this because they did not comment on it, or did you just choose not to include it? If they did support Paul's authorship, which fathers did, and did the heretics (Marcion) support this as well? Thanks!
Jakob
Jakob, it is encouraging to me to observe your blogs–they are usually insightful. 🙂 I have vacillated between making the Introductions simple vs. giving more detail. The debate about the authorship of Colossian is not intense because it is generally accepted as written by Paul.
If you want a brief introduction. Note this by Samuel Lewis Johnson:
The Authorship of the Epistle
External evidence. There is no historical evidence that the Pauline authorship of Colossians was ever suspect in the early church. Marcion (ca. A.D. 150) recognized the epistle as a genuine letter of Paul. Irenaeus (ca. A.D. 190) was the first
BSac 118:471 (Jul 61) p. 242
to use the epistle definitely. The letter was included among the Paulines in the Chester Beatty codex P46, and there is no textual evidence that it ever circulated under the name of any other person. While the available evidence is somewhat scanty, that which we possess argues for the authenticity of the writing.
Internal evidence. On the basis of internal considerations several objections have been raised against the Pauline authorship.
1. For example, it has been claimed that the vocabulary and style of the epistle betray another hand than Paul’s.8 But why should the presence of rare words or different constructions be taken as sufficient evidence for suspecting the authenticity of an epistle? Surely we must grant Paul the privilege we allow any modern author. The necessities put upon him by the Colossian situation adequately answer this weak argument.9
2. Another objection has arisen from the obvious relationship between Ephesians and Colossians. It has been estimated that three-fifths of Colossians is reflected in Ephesians.10 But if the two epistles have come from the first Roman imprisonment, and if they both are to be dated during the earlier days of it, this is quite understandable.11
3. A final objection has been leveled against the
BSac 118:471 (Jul 61) p. 243
authenticity of the epistle on the grounds of doctrine. For example, it has been said that the heresy attacked in Colossians could not have been in existence until the second century A.D. Modern critics, however, have discovered that the distinguishing features of the heresy were present in pre-Christian movements.12
It has also been said that the author of Colossians subordinates the soteriological to the cosmological,13 or salvation truth to truth about the universe. But the two categories are not parallel. Paul does not subordinate, he extends. He relates the saving truths of Christ’s salvation to a wider sphere (cf. 1:20). The reason for this was seen clearly by Lightfoot, who said, “New forms of error bring into prominence new aspects of truth.”14 That there was development in Paul’s theological thinking, one may admit readily, but it was a development resting upon the old foundations. He advanced, but he advanced while still abiding in the doctrine of Christ (cf. 2 John 9). One can sympathize with the remark of MeNeile: “There are critics who credit St. Paul with no ability to think on a plane other than that of 1, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans.”15 It is revelatory of a deep basic lack of harmony with the mind of Paul to restrict the immense genius of the man. James S. Stewart has put it this way: “Paul was always flinging out scouting parties into unexplored theological territory.”16 New and fresh insights into God’s truth on every page are the rule, not the exception, in the letters of Paul.
8 Among the familiar Pauline words absent here are: revelation, righteousness, law, salvation, to boast, to believe; among the particles or conjunctions are: ara, dio, dioti, eti, oude, etc. (cf. A. H. McNeile, An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament, p. 163; T. K. Abbott, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians (ICC), p. lii. But righteousness does not occur in 1 Thess; salvation is not in 1 Cor or Gal; revelation is not in Phil or 1 Thess, and one could go on and on. Ernest Percy’s Die Problems der Kolosser und Epheserbriefe is a solid refutation of arguments based on vocabulary and style.
9 Just as David slew Samson with his own sword and Haman was hung from his own gallows, so are Paul’s opponents vanquished with their own vocabulary, which has been baptized into Christ.
10 Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Meaning of Ephesians, p. 8.
11 Charles Masson’s argument (cf. Holtzmann, Kritik der Epheser und Kolosserbriefe), namely, that a Paulinist wrote Ephesians and then, using a shorter genuine letter of Paul’s to the Colossians, composed the longer Colossians which we have before us today with the addition of material from his Ephesians, is not convincing at all (cf. L’Epitre de Saint Paul aux Colossiens, p. 86). To contend that the epistle is Pauline, but not Paul’s, only creates further problems, to mention only the historical and textual ones.
12 Francis W. Beare, “The Epistle to the Colossians. Introduction and Exegesis,” The Interpreter’s Bible, XI, 143.
13 Ibid, XI, 144.
14 Lightfoot, op. cit., p. 121.
15 McNeile, op. cit., p. 162.
16 Lecture in New College, Edinburgh, January 19, 1961.
Hi you have a cool website It was very easy to post I enjoyed your site
God bless you, such a helpful resources