THE EPISTLES II: Letters to the Early Churches

TIMOTHY: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament
The Pastoral Epistles:“The Pastoral Epistles” is a term used to designate Paul’s two letters to Timothy and one letter to Titus. Two things distinguish these three epistles from Paul’s other letters: (1) They are among the last things Paul wrote, reflecting the sort of concerns which burdened the apostle near the end of his ministry. (2) They are ostensibly addressed not to a congregation but to two young men who were functioning in pastoral roles. This does not mean, of course, that the letters were not read before congregations. The epistles show clear signs that their author intended them to be used widely. Nor does this mean that the epistles are mere handbooks on pastoral duties. There is much of general interest in the letters. Yet 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are distinctive among Paul’s letters. They are highly personal, practical, and unsystematic in nature; and they deal with matters of church order which Paul had not hitherto addressed except in passing. The evolving need for structure in the churches, combined with Paul’s awareness that his own steadying influence would soon be passing from the scene, prompted him to treat certain ecclesiastical and pastoral subjects which have profited the church immensely ever since.

New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
First Timothy was written by Paul to encourage Timothy to take care of the church, the house of the living God , in his absence. Paul directed Timothy to combat false teachers and their teaching anything different from what the apostles had taught. He also gave Timothy instructions about the worship in church meetings, the selection of qualified elders and deacons, the appointment of widows to church care and church service, and his relationships with sisters and older brothers in the church. This is followed by a personal appeal to Timothy, as a man of God, to fight the good fight of faith until the time of the Lord’s appearing.

READ: 1 Timothy 3:8-13, 1 Timothy 6:3-14,2 Timothy 1:3-7, 2Timothy 2:8-26

TITUS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Paul’s Epistle to Titus was written probably from Corinth after his first imprisonment. Therefore, the Epistle to Titus was written between a.d. 63 and 67. This epistle is much like 1 Timothy; both were written from the same place, Corinth, and at dates not widely apart—1 Timothy shortly after coming to Corinth (before he had planned a journey to Epirus) and the Epistle to Titus afterwards. Corrupt elements soon showed themselves in the church similar to those noticed in the Epistles to Timothy: Judaism, false pretensions to science (or Gnosticism), and ungodliness. Paul, on his late visit, had left Titus in Crete to establish church government and ordain elders. Paul then followed up with instructions by letter those he had already given to Titus in person on the qualifications of elders and the graces becoming the old, young, and women.

Titus was a Greek and therefore a Gentile; he was converted through Paul’s ministry. He accompanied the apostle on the deputation sent from the church of Antioch to Jerusalem to consult the apostles about the circumcision of Gentile converts. He was in company with Paul at Ephesus, from where he was sent to Corinth to commence the collection for the Jerusalem saints and to ascertain the effect of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. He next proceeded to Macedonia, where he joined Paul, who had been already eagerly expecting him at Troas. He was then employed by the apostle in preparing the collection for the poor saints in Judea and became the bearer of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians.

READ: Titus 1:5-16, Titus 2:114,

PHILEMON: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Paul’s Epistle to Philemon is closely linked with Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians. Both were carried by the same bearer, Onesimus. Paul and Timothy stand in the headings, and Paul appears as a prisoner. Hence it follows, it was written at the same time and place as the Epistle to the Colossians (which was about the same time as the Epistle to the Ephesians), viz., at Rome, during Paul’s first imprisonment, a.d. 61 or 62.

Onesimus, of Colosse (called “one of you”), slave of Philemon, had fled from his master to Rome after having defrauded him. He was brought to Christ by Paul, and being encouraged by him to return to his master, he was furnished with this epistle, recommending him to Philemon’s favorable reception—as being now no longer a mere servant but a brother in Christ. Paul ends by requesting Philemon to prepare him a lodging, as he trusted soon to be set free from prison and then to visit Colosse. This epistle is addressed also to Apphia, who is believed to be Philemon’s wife because of the letter’s domestic subject matter, and to Archippus (a minister of the Colossian church, who is believed to be a relative of Philemon for the same reason. In the Apostolical Canons (73) Onesimus is said to have been emancipated by his master. Ignatius, Epistola ad Ephesum, 1, speaks of him as an elder of the Ephesian church.

READ: Philemon

HEBREWS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Since the writer of Hebrews did not identify himself (or, herself), readers throughout the ages have made conjectures about its authorship. Among the candidates who have been named are Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, and Luke.

Clement of Alexandria attributed it expressly to Paul, on the authority of Pantaenus (second century). Clement said that since Jesus is referred to as the “apostle”, Paul, through humility, does not call himself an apostle of the Hebrews. This is especially appropriate since Paul is known as the apostle to the Gentiles. Clement added that Paul prudently omitted his name on it because the Hebrews to whom it was written were prejudiced against him. (Clement also thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and Luke translated it into Greek.) The earliest extant collection of Paul’s epistles in one volume, namely the Chester Beatty Papyrus (P46), dated early third century, includes Hebrews as the second book in the collection, following Romans. Origen quoted Hebrews as being an epistle of Paul; however, in his Homilies, he regarded the style distinct from that of Paul, and as “more Grecian” but the thoughts as the apostle’s—adding that the “ancients who have handed down the tradition of its Pauline authorship must have had good reason for doing so, though God alone knows with certainty who was the actual writer.” In the African church, in the beginning of the third century, Tertullian ascribed it to Barnabas.

The author’s intention in this epistle is to show the superiority of Christ and the new covenant over Judaism and the old covenant. The new covenant was introduced by one far higher than the angels or Moses, through whom the Jews received the law. And the OT priesthood and sacrifices are inferior to Christ’s priesthood and sacrifice. Besides, Christ is the substance of which the former are but the shadow, and type necessarily gives place to the antitype. Now we are no longer kept at a comparative distance from God, as under the law, but have freedom of access through the opened veil, i.e., Christ’s flesh. His readers, Jewish Christians, were in danger of returning to Judaism and the OT economy—and thereby committing apostasy. The writer urges them to see the preeminence of Christ over everything in the old covenant, to not return to Judaism, and to go forward in pursuit of Christ.

READ: Hebrew 3:12-15, 4:14-16, Hebrews 8:1-12, Hebrews 11:1-3, Hebrews 13:1-9

JAMES: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The first mention of James’s epistle by name occurs early in the third century in a writing by Origen, who died c. a.d. 254. None of the Latin fathers before the fourth century quotes it; but soon after the Council of Nicea (a.d. 325), it was admitted as canonical both by the Eastern and Western churches, and was specified as such in the Councils of Hippo and Carthage (a.d. 397). The Epistle of James took a long time to be accepted into the NT canon because of “its untheological nature, its brevity, the question of James’s identity, the fact that it was not written by one of the twelve apostles, and its general address (sent to no specific person or church)” (Burdick). But eventually this epistle (along with 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation) was accepted into the NT canon and read as authoritative Scripture.

Most scholars have identified this James as Jesus’ brother, the prominent elder of the church in Jerusalem. The whole character of the epistle coincides with what we know of this James’s legalism and Jewishness.

As an elder of Jerusalem writing to the twelve tribes of the dispersion, James set forth the gospel in its relation to the law, which the Jews so reverenced. As Paul’s epistles are a commentary on the doctrines flowing from the death and resurrection of Christ, so James’ epistle has a close connection with Christ’s teaching during his life on earth, especially his Sermon on the Mount. In both the Sermon on the Mount and the Epistle of James, the law is represented as fulfilled in love—and the very language is remarkably similar. The whole spirit of this epistle breathes the same gospel-righteousness that the Sermon on the Mount inculcates as the highest realization of the law.

READ: James 1:1-11, James 1:19-27, James 2:14-17, James 3:1-12, James 5:13-20

PETER: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The genuineness of Peter’s first epistle is attested by 2 Peter 3:1—also by Polycarp (c. 70-160), who, in writing to the Philippians, quotes many passages. Eusebius states it as the opinion of those before him that this was among the universally acknowledged epistles. The internal evidence is equally strong. The author calls himself the apostle Peter and “a witness of Christ’s sufferings,” and an “elder”. The energy of the style harmonizes with the warmth of Peter’s character; and, as Erasmus says, this epistle is full of apostolic dignity and authority and is worthy of the leader among the apostles.

Peter wrote this epistle to console the persecuted and prepare them for a greater approaching ordeal, and to exhort all—husbands, wives, servants, elders, and people—to live godly lives in the presence of the heathen so that they could not reproach Christianity but rather be won to Christ. Peter himself explained why he wrote this epistle: “I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand”. The expression “exhorting and testifying” refers to Peter’s exhortations throughout the epistle grounded on testimony that he bore to the gospel truth, already well known to his readers by the teaching of Paul in those churches (Alford). Therefore, Peter did not set forth a complete statement of this gospel in this epistle. He reaffirmed it with his own style and expression.

READ: 1 Peter 1:3-12, 1Peter 2:11-17, 1 Peter 5:6-11, 2 Peter 3:8-13,

JOHN: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Our records of early church history show that the first epistle of John was readily received and recognized as John’s writing. Eusebius says of Papias, a disciple of John and a friend of Polycarp: “He used testimonies from the First Epistle of John.” Irenaeus, according to Eusebius, often quoted this epistle.

The similarities between John’s Gospel and John’s epistles are so remarkable that no one could doubt that all four of these writings were done by the same person. The syntax, vocabulary, and the thematic developments are so strikingly similar that even the inexperienced reader can tell that John’s epistles were penned by the writer of the Gospel of John. One reason for this similarity in style is that John probably wrote the epistles shortly after he compiled his Gospel. The Gospel was written c. a.d. 90, and all three epistles were written most likely c. a.d. 90-95.

Many scholars think that John wrote these epistles to certain local churches in Asia—especially to those around Ephesus, the church in which John functioned as an elder in his latter days. One of the reasons that prompted his first epistle was that a heretical faction had developed within the church, a faction that promoted heretical teachings concerning the person of Christ. Scholars have identified this heresy as Docetism. The Docetists denied that Jesus had actually partaken of flesh and blood; they denied that God had come in the flesh. According to Irenaeus, they “represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being”. John refuted this heresy.

John urged his readers (1) to have fellowship with God in the light, (2) to confess their sins, (3) to love God, (4) to love their fellow Christians, (5) to abide in Christ, (6) to purify themselves from worldly lusts, (7) to know God personally and experientially, (8) to appreciate the gift of eternal life, (9) to follow the Spirit of truth (and the anointing) in discerning false teachings, and (10) to esteem Jesus Christ as the true God. Above all these items, John stressed how necessary it was for the early believers to maintain a proper relationship with those who had been with Jesus.

READ: 1 John 1:5-10, 1 John 4:7-12, 2 John 1:7-11, 3 John 1:2-11

JUDE: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The writer of this epistle identified himself as Jude, a brother of James. Most commentators agree that this James is not James, the brother of John and son of Zebedee, but James, the brother of Jesus and prominent elder in Jerusalem. As such, Jude was also Jesus’ brother. In fact, Jude (Greek, “Judas,” from the Hebrew word “Judah”) is named as one of Jesus’ brothers in Matthew.

Jude did not believe that his brother Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, until after Jesus’ resurrection. Instead of introducing himself as the brother of Jesus, he called himself a brother of James (an eminently known figure—especially to Jewish Christians) and “a slave of Jesus Christ”. This shows his humility.

Jude wrote this epistle primarily to Jewish Christians who were being infected by a form of libertine Gnosticism through heretical teachers. Gnosticism had adherents who practiced asceticism and adherents who lived in carnal self-indulgence. The NT apostles wrote various epistles to counter various gnostic teachings and practices. Jude wrote this short polemic to defend the true faith and to reprove the false teachers who promoted their libertine notions and lived lawless lives.

READ: Jude 1:17-25

REVELATION: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The author of Revelation calls himself John. Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 100-165) in his Dialogue quotes from Revelation, as the work of John the apostle, with respect to the prophecy of the millennium of the saints, to be followed by the general resurrection and judgment. This testimony of Justin is referred to also by Eusebius.

The best authorities among the Fathers state that John was exiled under Domitian (Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria; Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, . Victorinus says that he had to labor in the mines of Patmos. At Domitian’s death, a.d. 96, John returned to Ephesus under the emperor Nerva. He received the Revelation while he was on the island of Patmos. This island is one of the Sporades group of islands. Its circumference is about thirty miles. “It was fitting that when forbidden to go beyond certain bounds of the earth’s lands, he was permitted to penetrate the secrets of heaven” (Bede, Explanations of Apocalypse).

Tregelles well says, “There is no book of the New Testament for which we have such clear, ample, and numerous testimonies in the second century as we have in favor of the Apocalypse. The more closely the witnesses were connected with the apostle John (as was the case with Irenaeus), the more explicit is their testimony. The doubts that prevailed after ages must have originated either in ignorance of the earlier testimony, or else from some supposed intuition of what an apostle ought to have written. The objections on the ground of internal style can weigh nothing against the actual evidence. It is in vain to argue, a priori, that John could not have written this book when we have the evidence of several competent witnesses that he did write it.”

Gregory of Nyssa (fourth century) called Revelation “the last book of grace.” It completes the volume of inspiration, so that we are to look for no further revelation till Christ himself shall come. Appropriately the last book completing the canon was written by John, the last survivor of the apostles. The NT is composed of the historical books, the Gospels and Acts, the doctrinal epistles, and the one prophetical book, Revelation. The same apostle wrote the last of the Gospels, and probably the last of the Epistles, and the only prophetical book of the NT.

After a brief introduction that sets forth the main subject of the book, viz., to “show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass,” Revelation begins with admonitory addresses to the seven churches from the divine Son of man, whom John saw in his vision (chaps. 1-3). From chapter 4 to the end is mainly prophecy, interspersed with practical exhortations and consolations similar to those addressed to the seven churches, and so connecting the body of the book with its beginning. In fact, chapters 4–22 can be seen as containing expansions of many of the important themes introduced in the first three chapters.

Basically, three schools of interpreters exist: (1) the Preterists, who hold that almost the whole prophecy of Revelation has been fulfilled. (2) The historical interpreters, who hold that it comprises the history of the church from John’s time to the end of the world, the seals being chronologically succeeded by the trumpets and the trumpets by the vials. (3) The Futurists, who consider almost the whole prophecy as yet future, and to be fulfilled immediately before Christ’s second coming. The first theory was not held by any of the earliest fathers. The Futurist school is open to this great objection: it would leave the church of Christ without prophetical guidance or support under her fiery trials for 1700 or 1800 years. The Jews had a succession of prophets who guided them with the light of prophecy. What their prophets were to them, the apocalyptic Scriptures have been, and are, to the church. Also, there are schools of interpretation with respect to the coming of Christ and the millennial kingdom. (1) The premillennial interpreters believe Christ will return just prior to establishing a millennial kingdom on earth. (2) The amillennial interpreter does not think there will be a literal millennial kingdom (he takes the language in 20:3-6 to be figurative). (3) The postmillennial interpreter thinks the church age will produce the kingdom on earth—after which time Christ will return.

READ: Rev. 1:1-10, Rev 2 &3 (the Seven Churchs), Rev 7:11-17, Rev 21:1-8, Rev 22:1-5, Rev 22:12-21

THE EPISTLES: Letters to the Early Church

CORINTHIANS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume

The authenticity of this epistle is attested by Clement of Rome (Epistle to the Corinthians, 47), Polycarp (Epistle to the Philippians, 11), Irenaeus (Against Heresies, 4.27.45), Clement of Alexandria (Paidagogos, 1.6.33), and Tertullian (Prescription of Heretics, 33). The city to which it was sent was famed for its wealth and commerce, which were chiefly due to its situation between the Ionian and Aegean Seas on the isthmus connecting the Peloponnese with Greece. In Paul’s time it was the capital of the province Achaia and the seat of the Roman proconsul (Acts 18:12). The state of morals in it was notorious for debauchery, even in the profligate heathen world; so much so that “to Corinthianize” was a proverbial phrase for “to live like a Corinthian in the practice of sexual immorality” (Mare); hence, arose dangers to the purity of the church at Corinth, which was founded by Paul on his first visit (Acts 18:1-17).

Paul had been the instrument of converting many Gentiles (12:2) and some Jews (Acts 18:8), notwithstanding the vehement opposition of the countrymen of the latter (Acts 18:5), during the year and a half in which he lived in Corinth. The converts were chiefly of the humbler classes (1:26). Crispus.

According to Greek legend, Sisyphus was a king of Corinth. For defying the gods with his insolent wit he was sentenced to the eternal drudgery of pushing a huge stone up a hill. When he would reach the summit, the stone would roll back to the bottom and force resumption of the task. Camus, a 20th-century philosopher, found in this legend of the Corinthian king a picture of modern man’s condition, the purposeless absurdity of life.

If Camus had read the two biblical letters sent to the Corinthians, he would have gotten a different picture, one with a message of purpose and hope for misdirected people. The attitude of these Corinthians, like their legendary king, smacked of proud self-centeredness. But instead of dealing with a capricious Zeus, these first-century Corinthians interacted with the gracious and loving God and His messenger, the Apostle Paul.

Read 1 Cor 12, 1 Cor 13, 1 Cor 15, and 2 Cor 3, 2 Cor 12:6-10

PHILLIPPIANS: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament

On his second missionary journey Paul visited Philippi. Through his ministry there several people trusted Christ as their Savior. Some of these were Lydia and her family and the Philippian jailer and his family (Acts 16:14-34).

Soon after Paul’s visit a local church was established in Philippi. The church helped the apostle in different ways so this epistle was written to acknowledge their help, as well as to help them.

Philippians is personal and practical in its tone and teaching. Paul emphasized the need for believers to rejoice in Christ. “Joy” (chara) is used four times (Phil 1:4, 25; 2:2; 4:1); “rejoice” (chairō) occurs eight times (1:18 [twice]; 2:17-18; 3:1, 4:4 [twice], 10); and “glad” occurs thrice (2:17-18, 28). (In 1:26 the word “joy” is a different Gr. word; there it is the word “glad,” “boast,” or “glory,” [kauchēma], which also occurs in 2:16 and 3:3.) Paul wrote frequently in this epistle about the mind of a child of God. One’s manner of life is truly a reflection of what occupies his mind.

Read Phil 2:1-11, Phil 4:4-9

GALATIANS: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament

Galatians, though one of Paul’s shorter epistles, is highly esteemed as one of his greatest and most influential. Since both Romans and Galatians teach the doctrine of justification by faith, the former has been considered by some to be an expansion of Galatians and the latter has been called “a short Romans.”

Like 2 Corinthians the Epistle of Galatians eloquently defends Paul’s apostolic authority and contains in summary form what the apostle taught. In particular it contains a clear statement of justification by faith and builds on that foundation a defense of Christian liberty against any form of legalism.

In the early church, as the separation between Judaism and Christianity was taking place, the letter to the Galatians no doubt helped clarify that cleavage. Centuries later it played such a key role in the Reformation that it was called “the cornerstone of the Protestant Reformation.” This was because its emphasis on salvation by grace through faith alone was the major theme of the preaching of the Reformers.

Read Gal 2:15-21, Gal 3:34-39, Gal 5:16-26

ROMANS: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament

This letter is the premier example of the epistolary form of writing, not only in the Pauline body of material and in the New Testament but also in all of ancient literature. It stands first in every list of the Apostle Paul’s writings though it was not first in time of composition. This bears witness to the importance of the work both in its theme and in its content. It may also reflect the significance of the location of the letter’s first readers, the imperial capital of Rome. In addition a possible tie grows out of the fact that the Book of Acts ends with Paul in Rome so that his letter to the Romans follows naturally in the order of Bible books.

That Paul is the author of this letter is denied by almost no one. Even the ancient heretics admitted Romans was written by Paul. So do the modern (19th century and later) radical German critics, who deny many other facts in the Scriptures. Paul identified himself as the author by name, of course; but that is no guarantee of the acceptance of his authorship, since he did that in all his letters, including those for which his authorship is questioned or denied. In Romans Paul referred to himself by name only once, in contrast with several of his other letters; but a number of other internal details support Paul’s authorship.

Read Rom 2: 1-4, Rom 7:14-25, Rom 8:26-30, 36-39, Rom 12,

EPHESIANS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume

The headings (1:1 and 3:1) show that this epistle claims to be that of Paul. This claim is confirmed by the testimonies of Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5.2.3 and 1.8.5; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 4.65, and Paidagogos, 1.8; Origen, Against Celsus, 4, 211. It is quoted (3:14-18) by Valentinus (a.d. 120), as we know from Hippolytus’s Refutation of Heresies. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, chapter 12, testifies to its canonicity. So does Tertullian, Against Marcion, 5.17. Ignatius, in Ephesians, 12, alludes to the frequent and affectionate mention made by Paul of the Christian state, privileges, and persons of the Ephesians in his epistle.

This epistle was addressed, most probably, to several churches in the district around Ephesus—namely, Asia. The Epistle to the Ephesians, so-called, was not really intended to be only for the church at Ephesus. Most modern scholars are convinced that it was an encyclical that went to several churches in Asia, including Ephesus. There are several reasons to affirm this. First, the earliest manuscripts (the Chester Beatty Papyrus—P46, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus) do not contain the words “in Ephesus” in Ephesians 1:1. It appears that Paul purposely left the name of the locality out, so as to be filled in later as the letter circulated to each locality. Since Ephesus was the leading city of Asia, it was quite natural for scribes to assign this epistle to the church at Ephesus. Second, the Epistle to the Ephesians has all the marks of being a general treatise rather than an epistle to a specific local church. Paul had lived with the saints at Ephesus for three years (Acts 20:31). He knew them intimately. And yet in this epistle there are no personal greetings or specific exhortations. When we consider Paul’s manner in many of his other epistles, it would be quite unlike him to have excluded these personal expressions. Quite the contrary, Paul speaks to the saints whom he has only heard about and who have only heard about him. It is possible that this epistle was the one sent to Laodicea, and several scholars since have affirmed the same.

Twice in this epistle Paul referred to himself by name as the author of the book Yet the Pauline authorship of Ephesians has been greatly disputed in recent years. Some critics think that the book reflects aspects of vocabulary, style, and doctrine that differ from Paul’s writings. Though the book has a close affinity with Colossians, critics claim that Ephesians is uncharacteristic of Paul. They suggest that the book was pseudonymous, that is, it was written by someone who did not use his own name but who instead claimed to be Paul.

However, pseudonymity was not practiced by the early Christians. Also this book is regarded by many as the crown of all Paul’s writings. Thus it seems strange that a disciple of Paul would be greater than Paul in theological and spiritual perception. Furthermore, Ephesians was extensively and undisputedly accepted in the early church as Paul’s letter. There is no strong reason for rejecting the Pauline authorship of Ephesians.

Read Eph 3:14-21, Eph 4, Eph 5:21-33, Eph 6:10-20

COLLOSIANS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume

Colosse was a city of Phrygia, on the river Lycus, a branch of the Meander. The church there was mainly composed of Gentiles (cf. 2:13). Alford infers from 2:1 that Paul had not seen its members and therefore could not have been its founder. Colossians 1:7, 8 suggests the probability that Epaphras was the founder of the church there. The date of its foundation must have been subsequent to Paul’s visitation, “strengthening in order” all the churches of Galatia and Phrygia (Acts 18:23); for otherwise he must have visited the Colossians, which 2:1 implies he had not. Had Paul been their father in the faith, he would doubtless have alluded to the fact.

This epistle was written at Rome, during Paul’s first imprisonment there (Acts 28). In the Introduction to the Epistle to the Ephesians, it was shown that the three epistles, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, were sent at the same time, viz., during the freer portion of his imprisonment Colossians 4:3, 4 and Ephesians 6:19, 20 imply greater freedom than he had while writing to the Philippians,. This epistle, though carried by the same bearer, Tychicus, who bore that to the Ephesians, was written before that epistle; for many phrases similar in both appear in the more expanded form in the Epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 6:21).

The reason Paul wrote Colossians was to counteract various theological errors that had crept into the church at Colosse. From the text of Colossians we can infer that the Colossians were infiltrated by a system that combined elements of legalistic Judaism, asceticism, and Gnosticism. The gnostic element was the most pronounced and most ardently fought against by Paul.

It is essential to understand Gnosticism if one is to comprehend what lies behind many of Paul’s statements in this epistle. Curtis Vaughn has provided an excellent summary of Gnosticism, especially as it relates to the Colossian heresy:

Gnosticism, in all its forms, was characterized by belief in the evil of matter, in mediating beings, and in salvation through knowledge. Beginning with the assumption that all matter is evil, the Gnostics argued that God didn’t create this world and that he has absolutely no contact with it. However, intellectual necessity did not permit them to break completely the bond between divinity and the material world. They therefore taught that God put forth from himself a series of “aeons” or emanations, each a little more distant from him and each having a little less of Deity. At the end of this chain of intermediate beings there is an emanation possessing enough of Deity to make a world but removed far enough from God that his creative activities could not compromise the perfect purity of God. . . . Belief in the inherent evil of matter made it impossible for the Gnostics to accept the real incarnation of God in Christ. Some of them explained it away by denying the actual humanity of Jesus, holding that he only seemed to be human. The body of Jesus, they taught, was an illusion, a phantom, only apparently real. . . . Other Gnostics explained away the incarnation by denying the real deity of Jesus.

Paul combated this denigration of Christ’s deity by presenting the preeminent, all-inclusive, and all-sufficient Christ.

Read Col 1:15-23, Col 3:1-25,

THESSALONIANS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume

At the time Paul wrote this epistle, Thessalonica was the capital of the Roman second district of Macedonia (Livy, 45. 29). It lay on the bay of Therme and has always been, and still is, under its modern name Thessaloniki, a place of considerable commerce. After his imprisonment and scourging at Philippi, Paul went to Thessalonica; and in company with Silas (Acts 17:1-9) and Timothy founded the church there. The Jews, as a whole, rejected the gospel when Paul preached it for three successive Sabbaths; but a few “believed and consorted with Paul and Silas, and of the devout [i.e., proselytes to Judaism] Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.” The believers received the word joyfully, notwithstanding trials and persecutions from their own countrymen and from the Jews. Paul’s stay at Thessalonica was probably not limited to the three weeks specified in —for his laboring there “with his hands” for his living, his receiving supplies there more than once from Philippi, his making many converts from the Gentiles, and his appointing ministers all imply a longer residence. As at Pisidian Antioch, at Corinth, and at Ephesus, after having preached the gospel to the Jews who rejected it, Paul then turned to the Gentiles. He most likely held Christian meetings in the house of Jason, perhaps “the kinsman” of Paul mentioned in His great subject of teaching seems to have been the coming of Christ to establish his kingdom, and that they should walk worthy of it. When Paul was in Thessalonica he must have preached about Jesus’ kingship, for the charge which the assailants of Jason’s house brought against him and the other brethren was, “These do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus”

Read 1 Thess 4:9-12, 1 Thess 5:1-11, 2 Thess 2:13-17, 2 Thess 3:1-5,