1. Final Paper: Preparing the Great Christological Hymn
(Colossians 1:15-20) for Postmodern Recontextualization.
Christopher MacDonald for MA-1000
Introduction to the Colossians Problem
This research paper seeks to explore Colossians 1:15-20 (which became known as the
“Great Christological Hymn”) which places Christ as central in the universe and then allow that
to double back (a true and unapologetic circular argument) in a Christocentric exploration of the
meaning and core implications of the text.
This paper will set the Great Christological Hymn within its context as a core teaching
to a region of churches in Asia Minor composed primarily of Gentile converts who were largely
peasants and, therefore, this was a message not meant to be either hard to grasp or esoteric.
Recontextualization for a postmodern situation will follow once the work of primary
exegesis has been established and made clear. It will be argued that St,. Paul’s Christocentric
understanding of the world in Colossae (which is consistent with his other letters) is at odds
with our current anthropocentric approaches (all of them by nature) and that this is one of the
larger issues facing the Western Church in decline.
Prior commentaries and examinations of the biblical book of Colossians tend to fixate
on the “Colossian Error” which no one has been able to determine (with any certainty) other
than to cite a variety of specific attributes that often point in various concrete directions (Jewish
Mysticism, proto-Gnosticism, pagan rituals, etc). This, while helpful, has tended to ignore the

2. bulk of revolutionary Christocentrc content which makes up the body of the small letter, most
notable housed in the Hymn
As we examine those verses exegetically, and then all together, we will be astounded by
what is being claimed about Christ, the Cosmos and the Church. In that intense burst of
theological discourse, St. Paul not only obliterates the darkness of surrounding errors, he pushes
forward new idea about the Cosmos – where Christ is found supreme (“having first place”) in
all things.
The “problem” we face (and perhaps why commentators have remained fixated on only
the problems in Colossae — as undefined as they have always been — is that the history of the
theological and ecclesiastical enterprise has often been to ignore, side-step or usurp the
Christocentric nature of the Cosmos, leaving it Church-centered and under the supervision of
various Anthropocentric models.
So our first step is to simply re-appropriation the Great Christological Hymn in its own
historical, literary and cultural context. Our methodology is straight-forward exegetical
hermeneutics.
Once we establish — come what may — what is being said in this small, but
theologically dense, section of the letter, we can then turn to our current Postmodern context.
We can then look over the best first rate thinkers and explorers who have addressed whatever
our exegetical “mining expedition” has given us (which will assuredly be Christocentric as
opposed to Anthropocentric — and thus have a much different center of gravity and
navigation). Most often, these thinkers have an area of expertise with cosmological significance
relating back to our initial study.

3. This is a mere 12 page paper, so the annotated bibliography will have to serve as a
potential road map for practical engagement and further study and exploration of these sources.
(This is not my master’s thesis).
The goal of that future exploration is a recontextualization within a postmodern
context that would have the Risen Christ as the gravitational nexus (as “having the supremacy”)
rather than an immediate anthropocentric (culturally accommodated) agenda that shifts with the
wind.
Exegesis of Colossians 1:15-20
The following section is essentially an exegetical verse-by-verse commentary of
Colossians 1:15-20 meant to draw out the riches of the Greek text. Brief comments will be
made for clarity, but this is the ground work for the section that coms after the brief Theological
Outline. Citations are briefly noted with full annotated bibliography at the conclusion of the
paper and all scripture quotations as from the New American Standard Bible (Holman, 1994).
V.15 And He is the image of the invisible God, (“image” is ‘ei:kwn’ [from which
we derive our English word—“icon”] which has two ideas (Wuest). The first is that of
“representation”—“a precise reproduction in every respect” (Lightfoot). The second aspect is of
Christ, who is the image of God.”—2 Cor. 4:4. “He existed in the form of God.”—Phil. 2:6.
“No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father,
He has explained Him.”—John 1:18. “He is the radiance of His glory and the exact
representation of His nature ...”—Hebrews 1:3.
It is literally, “of the God, the invisible”. “Unseen” (Liddell & Scotts Lexicon). “To the
King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God.”—1 Timothy 1:17. “No man has seen God at

4. any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained
Him.”—John 1:18. (emphasis mine)
A consistent mistake of theologians in the previous Century was to often attempt to
separate the "Christ" of the Epistles from the "Jesus" of the Gospels. If we are to experience
even a portion of Paul's expansive vision of Jesus Christ in this letter, we must not merely avoid
drawing the artificial distinction between "Christ" and "Jesus", we must make a radical move in
the opposite direction. We must begin to see the reality: the "Jesus who is Christ" in such
expansive terms in Colossians, is the same "Jesus Christ" John talks about in such personal and
elemental terms in his Gospel—and He is the same "Jesus Christ " who is now your risen Lord,
and the same "Jesus Christ" to whom you may have prayed to this morning. There need be no
imposed separation — this is the same Jesus the Christ who is the same "yesterday and today,
yes and forever"—Hebrews 13:8. If one asks why there seem to be differences of
emphasis or perspective between the Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, and the General Epistles, we
might well answer that these differences are simply necessary given the variety of subjects and
differences in audience. What single perspective or revelation could contain the glory and
complexity of Jesus Christ's person? Thus, the Gospels give us four windows through which to
view Christ's ministry; Paul provides another from which to view that ministry after His
resurrection, as do Peter, John and the rest. In much the same way that the glory and diversity
of Christ's character are exhibited in the diversity of the Church (His body), so the New
Testament authors bear witness to this same glory and diversity. ) the first-born (“Take ‘first-
born’ not as a temporal term so much as in the sense of supreme—‘the one who is supreme over
all creation’. In v. 18 below, prwteuwn seems to mean something similar, although in that
verse arkh and prwtotokoj evidently refer to a different conception, namely the

5. conception of Christ as the pioneer for others who were to follow, exactly as in Rom. viii.29,
Heb. i.6, Rev. i.5; and Heb. xii.23, where prwtotokoi are, perhaps, Christians as destined to
lead the way, in Christ, for others ...” (Moule, p. 64). Bruce, following C.F. Burney's lead, says,
“The title ‘first-born’, used of Christ here and in v. 18, echoes the wording of Ps. 89:27, where
God says of the Davidic king: ‘I also will make him my first-born, the highest of the kings of
the earth.’ [cf. on Rev. 1:5] But it belongs to Christ not only as the Messiah of David's line, but
also as the Wisdom of God.”-NICNT, p. 194-195. See commentary on 2:3. ) of all creation. (“It
is worth the effort to recall that these stupendous words [all of these words which follow] apply
... to one who, only some thirty years before (and possibly less), had been crucified. The
identification of that historical person—the Nazarene who had been ignominiously executed—
with the subject of this description is staggering, and fairly cries out for some explanation.”
(Moule, p. 59.)
V. 16 For (“because” referring to “the preceding clause, the first-born.” (Wuest. Lit.,
“For in the first-born are all things created ...etc. ) by Him (“ ‘In’ is not instrumental, but local
... but putting the fact of creation with reference to its sphere and centre.” (Vincent).
The correct rendering is “in Him.”) all things (This "all things" is the "all creation" spoken
of in the previous verse. And this "all things" runs through the context of Paul's whole
explanation of Christ's role in creation. Thus, Vincent summarizes the hymns main points about
Christ and “All Things that they were/are:
created in Him, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible.
created through Him, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible.
created for Him, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible.
came into being after Him, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible.

6. hold together in Him, whether in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible. And are
reconciled through Him, whether things in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible.
(Vincent)
Expositor's comments,“This serves two purposes. First, it tacitly repudiates the notion of
a fundamental division between the spiritual and the material— the pernicious dualism which
lay at the root of all ‘Gnostic’ systems. It asserts that matter and spirit alike are of divine origin
... Second, it leads up to the particular insistence that spiritual existences of every order, no
matter how exalted, are included in the totality of things that ‘were created in Christ.’ The
Colossian angel worship (2:18) is thus condemned by implication as a worship of things created
...(Romans 1:22-25).” ) both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, ( “Not
corresponding to earthly and heavenly. There are visible things in heaven ... and invisible things
on earth.” (Vincent). “The early Church had the authority of their Lord for believing in angels
good and bad.” (F.F. Bruce, p. 198). Paul's understanding of Christ's position in creation
provides no place for the radical dualism typically employed where Satan and God are viewed
as having near equal power— as being two forces who are bound in cosmic battle over the
universe. Paul knows of no such dichotomy. For him, even the rebellious principalities and
powers had Christ as their Creator.) whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
(This is certainly aimed at the angel worship of the false teachers, as they themselves were
created beings, part of that which the Word had spoken into existence. ) — all things have
been created by Him (The accurate translation is "through Him". He is the Agent of creation.
He is the Word of God (Gen. 1; John 1)) and for Him. (“speaks of Christ as the end of the
universe, the goal toward which all existences seek to rise.” (Expositor's). He is the Alpha and
Omega (Rev. 22:13).

7. V.17 And He is before all things, (“The personal pronoun is used for emphasis—
autou estin — ‘He Himself is’(Wuest). ‘He Himself’ emphasizes the personality, while,
‘is’ His pre-existence”( Lightfoot). He Himself IS before the creation. See John 8:58; 17:5; Phil.
2:6; 1 Cor. 8:6; 2 Cor. 8:9 ) and in Him (In His person) all things hold together ( “Christ not
only creates, but maintains” (Vincent). “... that is, they continue and cohere”(Hendriksen), or to
quote my mentor, the Rev. Dr. Darrell Johnson, “The Center Holds.”
It is Christ in Whom the creation is grounded, and to Whom the creation is pointed. In
the meantime, the elements of creation are continually brought together and made to stand or
hold together in the person of Christ; or perhaps, as Hendriksen says, "It is the Son of God's
love who holds in His almighty hands the reins of the universe and never even for one moment
lets them slip out of his grasp (cf. Rev. chs. 4 and 5).”
“The unity and order of the universe are not accidental or mechanical, but derive
from its vital relationship to Christ.” (Interpreters. Italics mine).
It is noteworthy that all the commentators essentially fall silent here. I mean how do
you comment on this? At the very moment you are writing the entire universe you exist in, the
computer, the table, the air, your body, everything around you Including the rays of sunlight
streaming through the window and the sun that sent them so long ago — all of it is held together
at this very moment by Christ Himself if you decide to believe these words.
It's beyond staggering in its implications in every direction. And any Christian
theologian must seriously consider that it may very well be True.
Later in this short paper we may hazard a few positive possible exploration in light of
this — but there are endless implications in every field of study and every endeavor of life for
there is no aspect of life where Christ is not present given this — whether visible or

8. invisible; nor where He is not vital nor central. "I have been to the Center and it is not
US is an apt saying.
V.18 He is also the head of the body, (Not head in the sense of authority; He is "head
of the body" in a biological sense — the source of life is the head.) the church (The body is the
Church, and Christ is the life-giving head of the Church.
But in what sense is this true today? When and where is Christ allowed to be this living
source of life? When did we lose this sense of Christ as head of the Church? How has it now
come to the point where church leaders have to spend all of their energy and creativity just to
lead a few members of the Church back to the very beginnings of this reality? ); and He is the
beginning, (“The origin”of the Church.) the first-born from the dead; (Christ is the beginning
of the new order, the new creation; He is the second Adam.) so that He Himself might come to
have first place (Pre-eminence) in everything.
V.19 For it was the Father's good pleasure (Matt. 3:17) for all the fullness
(passive— it is filled, as opposed to filling something else. “The fullness denotes the sum-total
of the divine powers and attributes.” (Vincent). This word, “plerwma”—"pleroma" was
used [as above] by the Gnostic teachers [Vincent/Wuest] refering to the “whole body of
emanations” (Interpreters). Of course, Colossians is written too early to be addressing full-
blown Gnosticism, but some of these ideas were already couched in Greek philosophy — most
certainly the dualistic approach where the spirit was “good” and the body” was bad or evil.
Christ, in the fullness (pleroma) of His being, nullified the abstract philosophy of the proto-
Gnostic teachers. It is supposed that they had speculated that the bridge between holy God and
sinful men was embodied by a series of successive emanations —angelic beings who were
mediators between a god of all spirit (goodness) and physical man (who, being flesh, was evil).

9. But Jesus Christ was fully God and fully Man—yet without sin or blemish—and all the fulness
dwelt and continues to dwell, in Him. The developing Gnostic philosophy was irrelevant and
impotent by implication, and other Gnostic systems which would be developed over the next
three centuries (all of which have been perpetuated to this day) are the same. An example is the
Docetics, a 2nd Century brand of Gnosticism which taught that “the Christ” descended upon the
man Jesus at his baptism, and departed from him before he died on the cross. Paul states that the
fullness of God is permanently home in the man Jesus—making Docetism irrelevant, since holy
God lives as physical man.
But it is always important to keep things in their right place in history. A strong case
has been made by Ian K. Smith that a major part of te problem in Colossae was Jewish
Mysticism ad that a large amount of Paul’s response is a direct reaction to that. Earlier work by
such scholars as F.F. Bruce, ightfot and Dibelius while not necessarily being as strong, would
not be in direct disagreement either as far as I can tell. ) to dwell in Him. (“katoik sai”
meaning “to be at home permanently” (Wuest). “...at home in the sense that this divine fulness
was not something added to his being that was not natural to Him.”(Wuest). This is the climax
of the previous statements —“The image of God” [v.15], “the first-born” of all creation”
[v.15], “creator” [v.16], “eternally preexistent” [v. 17], “Head of the Church” [v.18], “the
victor over death” [v. 18], “first in all things” [v. 18]. )
V.20 and through Him to reconcile all things ( Make a connection with “it was the
Father's good pleasure (v.19) —to reconcile” (Vincent). “The compound preposition” apo“
gives the force of ‘back’, hinting at restoration to a primal unity [pre-fall]” (Vincent). See Eph.
2:12-16 “you who were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ” [v.13]. It seems
clear that this reconciliation is destined to re-align the whole creation with the original intent of

10. God. The “all things” refers to “the whole universe, material and spiritual” (Vincent). J.B.
Lightfoot comments, “The false teachers aimed at effecting a partial reconciliation between God
and man through the interposition of angelic mediators. The Apostle speaks of an absolute and
complete reconciliation of universal nature to God, effected through the mediation of the
Incarnate Word. Their mediators were ineffective because they were neither human nor divine.
The true mediator must be human and divine.” ) to Himself (Gustaf Aulén, in his important
work, Christus Victor, points out that there are two aspects to the atonement: “God in Christ
combats and prevails over the ‘tyrants’ which hold mankind in bondage. On the other hand,
God thereby becomes reconciled with the world, the enmity is taken away, and a new relation
between God and mankind is established. ... God is at once the author and the object of
reconciliation; He is reconciled in the act of reconciling the world to Himself.”—Christus
Victor, p. 55-56. Contrast this with the notion of God buying back or "ransoming" the creation
from Satan. The reality is that God has paid the penalty to God's own self—to bring true and
complete reconciliation.), having made peace (“Lit., ‘to bind together’ — Christ's death on the
cross has ‘bound together again a holy God and sinful man who placed faith in the
Savior.’”(Wuest). Christ's death on the cross has bound together again the Living God and
sinful men. Aulén comments, “Incarnation and Redemption belong indissolubly together ... The
deliverance of man from the power of death and the devil is at the same time his deliverance
from God's judgment. God is reconciled by His own act in reconciling the world to
Himself.”—Christus Victor, p. 59. ) through the blood of His cross; (“But now in Christ
Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He
Himself is our peace who made both groups into one, and broke down the barrier of the
dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the law of commandments

11. contained in ordinances, that in Himself He might create the two into one new man, thus
establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it
having put to death the enmity.”—Eph. 2:13-16. The preceding verses are a perfect companion
to this passage. ) through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven (That
which was created in Christ, through Christ, and for Christ—whether things on earth or heaven
[‘things visible and invisible ... etc.’—v. 16] have now been reconciled to God via the blood of
Christ, resulting in true peace. ).
Theological Outline of the Great Christological Hymn
The supremacy of Jesus Christ as "God with us" (v. 15)
He Himself is the Representation of God.
He Himself is the Manifestation of God.
The supremacy of Jesus Christ in Creation — whether visible or invisible; whether
in heaven or on earth; all of creation. (v.15-18)
All things created in Him. (v.16)
All things created through Him. (v.16)
All things created for Him. (v. 16)
The Preeminence and Pre-existence of Christ (v.15,17,18)
He sustains all things. (v.17)
The supremacy of Jesus Christ in the Church (v.18)
He is the life-giving "head" of the body, the Church.
He is the "beginning" of the Church.
He is the "first born from the dead."
The supremacy of Jesus Christ in His Fulness (v.19)

12. The Father's good pleasure for Christ to have first place in everything.
The Father's good pleasure for all the fullness of deity to reside naturally in Jesus Christ.
The supremacy of Jesus Christ in the Reconciliation of Creation (v. 20)
Reconciliation of the Universe.
Recontextualization in a Postmodern Context
Rarely are so few verses so theologically explosive with such far reaching implication.
Perhaps this is why, for the most part — they have been largely ignored. To orient our core
theological point of view with the risen Jesus as the philosophical, theological and actual
(existential) gravitational Center – or point of reference would have profound effects on both
the trajectory of its outworkings, challenging primary assumptions about goals, methodologies –
and in effect “shake the foundations” far more radically than Paul Tillich ever imagined with his
comfortably accommodated 20th Century psychologically adapted “Gospel” with its utter
Anthropocentric vision. .
With such a dualistic (dare I say “Gnostic”?) system – and you can take your pick last
Century — any exploration of Christ as the divine “Logos” being the actual living ground of all
creation — the One from whom all the patterns and structures (orders) — the "intelligence" of
creation — are all grounded in becomes opaque. And then, left to the Fundamentalists and their
proof-textings (not exactly “explorers”) Jesus ia simply reduced to an essential “cog” in their
salvic system or formula.
Both situations would seemingly have nothing at all to do with this passage and what is
claimed here, would they?

13. J.B. Lightfoot said, “All the laws and purposes which guide the creation and government
of the universe reside in Him, the eternal word, as their meeting point." Yet it seems no one
wishes to pursue what this actually means any farther?
Taking just the simple statements made about Jesus the Messiah in these five verses – in
their context (Christocentric universe) opens tremendous opportunities for theological growth
where non has taken place for hundreds of years (I do not count “Financial seminars” and
“Growing Kids God’s Way” as significant theological advances.
Ecological Exploration
Greening Paul: Rereading The Apostle in a Time of Ecological Crisis by David Horrell,
Cherryl Hunt and Christophe Southgate, is a serious 2010 offering in the right direction with
various new ecotheologians taking a variesty of positons (most quite reasonable. p. 87-116)
Jacques Ellul also called for a Christocentric world view as necessary to avoid
“ecological disaster” (as discussed in Tyson and Tan’s "Ecological Disaster & Jacques Ellul’s
Theological Vision," Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics:
Vol. 2: Issue. 1, Article 3. 2002)
Theological Exploration
Systematc theology is highly suspect if God is, by nature, not systemic, and if the Word
of God does not present itself as systemic. Also,if it is true that Christ has “first place in
everything and it was “the fathers good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him bodily” as
the icon – then this needs to be worked in as a primary lens hermeneutcally – as it is core to the
actually workings of the Cosmos and the Father’s “good pleasure.

14. How such “reality” is packaged for an unbelieving and skeptical world is a great (and
creative) question – but determining what the “IS, is) comes first.
Certanly in a Post or X-Christian world this is good news for people have been
inoculated to all dead forms of Christendom and its marketing ploys an religious theater.
Having “inside knowledge” (what Newbegin called “the Open Secret” – enables
Christian explorers to delve into other sciences with a unique perspective — if they are open.)
For example; when I approach the “New Physics” and listen to scientists I have often
heard them talk of “living systems” and watched them veer extremely close to describing those
systems as possessing relational attributes.
Now I suspect that they do are relational exactly because they are “pattern in” and
being “held together in Christ” — that what these fine scientists are consistently bumping into
in their experiments is simply Him as the Cosmos is created in, through, and for Him. I don’t
have to impose for force that theological construct onto the data – just be aware of it as possibly
showing up.
It is at least wrth more study. It is fascinating.
Ecclesiastical Exploration
The blatant statement is made (concerning Christ’s supremacy) that “He is also head
of the body, the church;” (v. 18). Now we must ask “in what we have we allowed for that? And
in what ways is the Church impoverished by reducing the one who “has first place in all things,”
to the role of someone essentially commemorative or an idea? And what are the ramifications
in a deconstructed Postmodrn landscape in taking the Incarnate One in Whom it was the
“Father’s good pleasure” for all the fullness of deity to dwell bodily – and try to minimize Him
a much as possible?

15. A recontextualization of Christ as the Center who calls us to “kenosis” (sel-emptying
and service” would be revolutionary.
And it would relieve a generation or two from the haunted burden of Self.
These are only three areas of exploration. There are others begging for attention within
this context: Apologetics, the Arts, Biblical Education, Social/Activist reform,
Devotional/Liturgical communities and irban ministries to name a few.
Conclusion
In light of Jesus’ own words "Whoever seeks to keep his life will lose it, and whoever
loses his life will preserve it.” (Luke 17:33 NASB) we can say the same regarding humanity
and God. Jesus lost His life – though God and saved us all; if we grasp at our life, our theologies
– our anthropocentrism – we lose everything.
It is time to stop ignoring Colossians and its Great Christological Hymn and allow it to
do what Bruggemann elsewhere suggests: become “texts that linger, words that explode.”
Objections
The objections to my recontextualizations in a postmodern situation will most certainly
contain some validity. I have no doubt been, at times, a bit hyperbolic. As an explorer who not
only pushes boundaries, but who is also calling for a “transvaluation” of ideals (calling for a
transposing our philosophical gravitational nexus from an anthropocentric worldview to a
Theocentric or Christocentric one) I can only expect major objections.
My basic is “How is that working for you?” It doesn’t work with the biblical texts –
which while meant to condescend to humanity in love, clearly (as with Colossians) do not
depict a humanity-centered Cosmos where everything we “think” is suddenly golden. Quite the

16. contrary. It is “the fool” who makes up his own rules, the self-righteous who are blind and “our
ways are not His ways, neither are our thoughts His thoughts.”
Thus, while we have our “Re-Imaging God” seminar weekends we have yet to deal with
the God made flesh who alone “has explained Him.” (John 1:14).
No final consensus has ever been reached on the exact source and substance of the
“Colossian Error/s” that St. Paul addresses to that church.
Moreover, in a real sense the exact nature of the “Colossian error” is not nearly as
significant as the radically positive new statements that St. Paul made about Jesus Christ in
relationship to Creation, the Cosmos, the Church and the nature of ultimate reality. By
implication whatever errors that existed in Colossae fell, but a great many others collapse in the
same light most specifically in light of the “Great Christological Hymn.”
Annotated Bibliography
Andrie, Leonard W. The Christ Hymn of Colossians 1:15-20: Drawing from the
Wisdom Tradition in Hellenistic-Judaism, Minnesota: School of Divinity Master’s Theses and
Projects, 2013.
Fr. Andrie argues that Paul took Hellenistic views and ideas concerning “Wisdom”
and reworked them in this grand Hymn to Christ’s supremacy in the Cosmos.
Aulen, Gustav Christus Victor (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2000)
A serious book on the Atonement marking its first 1000 year athen the departure away
from it.

17. Bruce, F.F. “Colossian Problems Part 2: The ‘Christ Hymn’ of Colossians 1:15-20,”
Bibliotheca Sacra 141 (April-June 1984): 99-111.
Bruce’s examination of the “Colossians Error.”
Bruce, F.F. and Simpson. E.K. Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and the
Colossians. NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957).
Simpson takes Ephesians and F.F. Bruce does the exegetical commentary of Colossians.
Always solid and objective, Bruce is a first stop.
Brueggemann, Walter Texts that Linger, Words that Explode (Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing, 2002).
A consideration of tects from the OT, primarily Heremiah – but exemplary
approach worth using at other times and places.
Burns, Dylan “Book Review: Cosmology and Fate in Gnosicism and Graeco-Roman
Antiquity Under Pitiless Skies (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies 81, by Nicola Denzey
Lewis,” Numen Vol. 61 (2014): 301-305
Background materials for study of proto-Gnostism is the Nag Hammadi community.
Campbell, Constantine R. Colossians and Philemon: a handbook on the Greek text,
Waco: Baylor University Press, 2013.
Textual notes from the Greek on Colossians.
Dibelius, Martin “The Isis Initiation in Apuleius and Related Initiation Rites,” Conflict
in Colossae: A Problem in the Interpretation of Early Christianity Illustrated by Selected
Modern Studies, Edited and translated by Fred O. Francis and Wayne A. Meeks. (Missoula:
Society of Biblical Literature, 1973): 61-122.

18. Important balance to scholars who point solely to proto-Gnosticism or to others
like Ian K. Smith who see only Jewish Mystcism as the culprit. Chances are there
were multiple problems that Paul is addressing.
Gordley, Matthew E. The Colossian hymn in context: an exegesis in light of Jewish and
Greco-Roman hymnic and epistolary conventions, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
A more literary approach.
David G. Horrell, Cherryl Hunt, and Christopher Southgate Greening Paul: rereading
the apostle in a time of ecological crisis, Waco: Baylor University Press, 2010.
A variety of essays re-applying Paul’s teaching regarding environmental issues.
The best ecological reading of Paul evailable.
Gupta, Nijay K. Colossians, Macon: Smyth & Helwys Pub., 2013. (Book and CD Rom).
A unique book and multi-media commentary that also teaches Colossians.
Helyer, Larry R. “Recent Research on Col. 1:15-20 (1980-1990),” Grace Theological
Journal 12.1 (1992): 51-67.
This books covers new advances in research on a subject that had largely remained
dormant for a long time.
Huttner, Ulrich Early Christianity in the Lycus Valley, translated by David Green,
Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2013.
Cultural/Historical examination of the situation in the Lycus Valley that the church
at Colossae took root in and which received this letter and dealt with these sries of
problems.
Jeal, Roy R. “Starting Before the Beginning: Precreation Discourse in Colossians,”
Religion and Theology Vol. 18, Issue 3-4 (2011):287-310.
Tackles the implications of various passages which imply Christ’s pre-existence
before His borth in Bethlehem (such as geing the “agent of Creation”).

19. Lightfoot, J.B. “The Colossian Heresy,” Conflict in Colossae: A Problem in the
Interpretation of Early Christianity Illustrated by Selected Modern Studies, Edited and
translated by Fred O. Francis and Wayne A. Meeks. (Missoula: Society of Biblical Literature,
1973): 13-60.
Lightfoot is able in every area: as commentator, historian and as exegete.
Pizzuto, Vincent A. A cosmic leap of faith: an authorial, structural, and theological
investigation of the cosmic Christology in Col. 1:15-20, Leuven: Dudley; MA: Peeters, 2006.
A fascinating theological exploration that neds much more study.
Smulders, Pieter Frans The Fathers on Christology: the development of Christological
dogma from the Bible to the great councils, translated by Lucien Roy, Wisconsin: St. Norbert
Abbey Press, 1968.
This covers the important link between the problems Paul is addressing in Colossae in
62 a.d. and what they, the Fathers will are dealing with in the 2nd-4th Centuries.
Tyson, Paul and Tan, Matthew John Paul (2012) "Ecological Disaster & Jacques Ellul’s
Theological Vision," Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics:
Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 3. Available at: http://researchonline.nd.edu.au/solidarity/vol2/iss1/3 on
January 7, 2017.
A deeply complex journal article, it is used here to give some simple guidance in
defining Ellul’s use of the word “technology” when he really means “technique” –
the drive for efficiency which became the overriding concern against all other
considerations, and thus, enslaving and leading to “ecological disaster.” Ellul’s
deeply Christian vision is also explored — one which is outside the usual
superficial attempts, partly due ot the dialectical nature of Ellul’s biblical and
sociological approaches.

20. Vincent, Marin Word Studies from the Greek New Testament, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1980)
A verse by verse, often word by word unpacking of significant Greek words or
phrases that have important nuances lost – even in accurate itranslation. Great
resource who never wastes your time.
Walker, William Lowe Christ the creative ideal: studies in Colossians and Ephesians,
Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark; New York: Charles Scribner, 1913. Microform.
Great title – have not had time to read it yet as it is on microform.
Witherington, Ben The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: a socio-
rhetorical commentary on the captivity Epistles, Grand Rapids: William Eerdmans Pub., 2007.
As billed, a socio-rhetorical examination of the letter Paul wrote to Colossae.
Wright, N.T. Paul for everyone: the prison letters: Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians,
and Philemon, London:SPCK; Louisville: Westminister John Knox Press, 2004.
Wright fluid commentary on Colossians. Always some insights.