Angeles. Colosenses 2, 18 Con Comentarios

Colosenses 2Reina-Valera 1960 (RVR1960)
2 Porque quiero que sepáis cuán gran lucha sostengo por vosotros, y
por los que están en Laodicea, y por todos los que nunca han visto mi
rostro;
para que sean consolados sus corazones, unidos en amor, hasta

2
alcanzar todas las riquezas de pleno entendimiento, a fin de conocer el

misterio de Dios el Padre, y de Cristo,
en quien están escondidos todos los tesoros de la sabiduría y del

3
conocimiento.
Y esto lo digo para que nadie os engañe con palabras persuasivas.

4
Porque aunque estoy ausente en cuerpo, no obstante en espíritu estoy

5
con vosotros, gozándome y mirando vuestro buen orden y la firmeza de

vuestra fe en Cristo.
Por tanto, de la manera que habéis recibido al Señor Jesucristo, andad

6
en él;
arraigados y sobreedificados en él, y confirmados en la fe, así como

7
habéis sido enseñados, abundando en acciones de gracias.
Plenitud de vida en Cristo

Mirad que nadie os engañe por medio de filosofías y huecas sutilezas,
8
según las tradiciones de los hombres, conforme a los rudimentos del

mundo, y no según Cristo.
Porque en él habita corporalmente toda la plenitud de la Deidad,

9
y vosotros estáis completos en él, que es la cabeza de todo principado

10
y potestad.
En él también fuisteis circuncidados con circuncisión no hecha a mano,

11
al echar de vosotros el cuerpo pecaminoso carnal, en la circuncisión de

Cristo;
sepultados con él en el bautismo, en el cual fuisteis también
12
resucitados con él, mediante la fe en el poder de Dios que le levantó de

los muertos.
Y a vosotros, estando muertos en pecados y en la incircuncisión de

13
vuestra carne, os dio vida juntamente con él, perdonándoos todos los

pecados,
anulando el acta de los decretos que había contra nosotros, que nos
14
era contraria, quitándola de en medio y clavándola en la cruz,
y despojando a los principados y a las potestades, los exhibió

15
públicamente, triunfando sobre ellos en la cruz.
Por tanto, nadie os juzgue en comida o en bebida, o en cuanto a días

16
de fiesta, luna nueva o días de reposo,
todo lo cual es sombra de lo que ha de venir; pero el cuerpo es de

17
Cristo.
Nadie os prive de vuestro premio, afectando humildad

18
y culto a los ángeles, entremetiéndose en lo que no ha

visto, vanamente hinchado por su propia mente carnal,
y no asiéndose de la Cabeza, en virtud de quien todo el cuerpo,
19
nutriéndose y uniéndose por las coyunturas y ligamentos, crece con el

crecimiento que da Dios.
Pues si habéis muerto con Cristo en cuanto a los rudimentos del

20
mundo, ¿por qué, como si vivieseis en el mundo, os sometéis a

preceptos
tales como: No manejes, ni gustes, ni aun toques

21
(en conformidad a mandamientos y doctrinas de hombres), cosas que

22
todas se destruyen con el uso?
Tales cosas tienen a la verdad cierta reputación de sabiduría en culto

23
voluntario, en humildad y en duro trato del cuerpo; pero no tienen valor

alguno contra los apetitos de la carne.
Versión Dios Habla Hoy
18 No dejen que los condenen esos que se hacen pasar por muy humildes y que dan culto a los
ángeles, que pretenden tener visiones y que se hinchan de orgullo a causa de sus pensamientos
humanos
Versión Biblia de Jerusalén
18 Que nadie os prive del premio a causa del gusto por ruines prácticas, del culto de los ángeles,
obesionado por lo que vio, vanamente hinchado por su mente carnal,
Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary
Colossians 2:18
Colossians 2:17 Colossians 2 Colossians 2:19
Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of
the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind,
Jump to: Clarke Commentary • Barne's Notes • Coffman Commentaries • Gill's

Exposition • Geneva Study Bible • Commentary Critical and Explanatory • Robertson's Word
Pictures • Vincent's Studies • Wesley's Notes• Abbott's New Testament • Calvin's
Commentary • Scofield's Notes • Trapp's Commentary • Alford's Commentary • Coke's
Commentary • Burkitt's Notes • Meyer's Commentary • Bengel's Gnomon • Poole's
Annotations • Family Bible New Testament • Cambridge Greek Testament • Eadie's
Commentary • Pett's Bible Commentary • Whedon's Commentary • Schaff's New Testament
Commentary • Expositor's Greek Testament •Haydock's Catholic Commentary • Dunagan
Commentary • Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes • Commentary Critical and Explanatory -
Unabridged • Ellicott's Commentary • Treasury of Knowledge
Other Authors
Range Specific
 Constable's Expository Notes
 Meyer's Commentary
 Godbey's NT Commentary
 Gary Hampton Commentary
 Everett's Study Notes
 Mahan's Commentary
 The Bible Study New Testament
 Ironside's Notes
 The People's Bible
 Kretzmann's Popular Commentary of the Bible
 Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures
 Henry's Complete
 Henry's Concise
 Peake's Bible Commentary
 Preacher's Homiletical Commentary
 Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary
 People's New Testament
 Benson's Commentary
 Spurgeon's Verse Expositions
 Biblical Illustrator
 Expositor's Bible
Chapter Specific
Adam Clarke Commentary
Let no man beguile you - Μηδεις ὑμας καταβραβευετω· Let no man take the prize from you which
the βραβευς, brabeus, or judge in the contests, has assigned you, in consequence of your having
obtained the victory. This any reader will see, is an allusion to the Olympic and Isthmian games,
and to the prizes assigned to these who had obtained the victory in one or more of the contests
which there took place. The Colossians had fought and conquered under the direction of Christ,
and he, as the sole judge in this contest, had assigned to them the prize; the false teachers,
affecting great modesty, humility, and sanctity, endeavored to turn them aside from the Gospel,
and to induce them to end in the flesh who had begun in the Spirit. Against these the apostle
warns them.
In a voluntary humility and worshiping of angels - This is a difficult passage, and in order to
explain it, I shall examine the meaning of some of the principal terms of the original. The
word θελειν, to will, signifies also to delight; and ταπειμοφροσυνη signifies not only lowliness or
humility of mind, but also affliction of mind; and ταπεινουν την ψυχην, Leviticus 16:20, Leviticus
16:31, and in many other places, signifies to afflict the soul by fasting, and self-abnegation;
and θρησκεια signifies reverence and modesty. Hence the whole passage has been paraphrased
thus: Let no man spoil you of the prize adjudged to you, who delights in mortifying his body, and
walking with the apparent modesty of an angel, affecting superior sanctity in order to gain
disciples; intruding into things which he has not seen; and, notwithstanding his apparent humility,
his mind is carnal, and he is puffed up with a sense of his superior knowledge and piety. It is very
likely that the apostle here alludes to the Essenes, who were remarkably strict and devout, spent a
principal part of their time in the contemplation of the Divine Being, abstained from all sensual
gratifications, and affected to live the life of angels upon earth. With their pretensions all the
apostle says here perfectly agrees, and on this one supposition the whole of the passage is plain
and easy. Many have understood the passage as referring to the adoration of angels, which seems
to have been practised among the Jews, who appear (from Tobit, xii. 15; Philo, in lib. de Somn.;
Josephus, War. lib. ii. cap. 8, sec. 7) to have considered them as a sort of mediators between God
and man; presenting the prayers of men before the throne; and being, as Philo says, μεγαλου
Βασιλεως οφθαλμοι και ωτα, the eyes and ears of the great King. But this interpretation is not so
likely as the foregoing.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "The Adam Clarke Commentary".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/colossians-2.html. 1832.
return to 'Jump List'
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible
Let no man beguile you of your reward - Margin, judge against you. The word used here
- καταβραβεύω katabrabeuō- occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is a word which was
employed with reference to the distribution of prizes at the Grecian games, and means, to give the
prize against anyone, to deprive of the palm. Hence, it means to deprive of a due reward: and the
sense here is, that they were to be on their guard lest the “reward” - the crown of victory to which
they looked forward - should be wrested from them by the arts of others. That would be done if
they should be persuaded to turn back, or to falter in the race. The only way to secure the prize
was to hold on in the race which they then were running; but if they yielded to the philosophy of
the Greeks, and the teachings of the Jews, they would be defrauded of this reward as certainly as
a racer at the games would if the crown of victory should be unjustly awarded to another. In this
case, too, as real injustice would be done, though the apostle does not say it would be in the same
manner. Here it would be by art; in the case of the racer it would be by a wrong decision - but in
either case the crown was lost. This exhortation has the more force from this consideration.
Against an unjust judge we could have no power; but we may take care that the reward be not
wrested from us by fraud.
In a voluntary humility - Margin,” being a voluntary in humility.” Tyndale renders this,” Let no
man make you shoot at a wrong mark, which, after his own imagination, walketh in the
humbleness of angels.” The word used here ( ταπεινοφροσύνη tapeinophrosunē) means
“lowliness of mind, modesty, humbleness of deportment;” and the apostle refers, doubtless, to
the spirit assumed by those against whom he would guard the Colossians - the spirit of modesty or
of humble inquirers. The meaning is, that they would not announce their opinions with dogmatic
certainty, but they would put on the appearance of great modesty. In this way, they would
become really more dangerous - for no false teachers are so dangerous as those who assume the
aspect of great humility, and who manifest great reverence for divine things. The word rendered
“voluntary” here - θέλων thelōn- does not, properly, belong to the word rendered “humility.” It
rather appertains to the subsequent part of the sentence, and means that the persons referred to
were willing, or had pleasure in attempting, to search into the hidden and abstruse things of
religion. They were desirous of appearing to do this with an humble spirit - even with the modesty
of an angel - but still they had pleasure in that profound and dangerous kind of inquiry.
And worshipping of angels - θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων thrēskeia tōn angelōnThis does not mean, as
it seems to me, that they would themselves worship angels or that they would teach others to do
it for there is no reason to believe this. Certainly the Jewish teachers, whom the apostle seems to
have had particularly in his eye, would not do it; nor is there any evidence that any class of false
teachers would deliberately teach that angels were to be worshipped The reference is rather to
the profound reverence; the spirit of lowly piety which the angels evinced, and to the fact that the
teachers referred to would assume the same spirit, and were, therefore, the more dangerous.
They would come professing profound regard for the great mysteries of religion, and for the
incomprehensible perfections of the divinity, and would approach the subject professedly with the
awful veneration which the angels have when they “look into these things;” 1 Peter 1:12. There
was no bold, irreverent, or confident declamation, but the danger in the case arose from the fact
that they assumed so much the aspect of modest piety; so much the appearance of the lowly
devotion of angelic beings. The word rendered here “worship” - θρησκεία thrēskeia- occurs in the
New Testament only here, in Acts 26:5; and James 1:26-27, in each of which places it is rendered
“religion.” It means here the religion, or the spirit of humble reverence and devotion which is
evinced by the angels; and this accords well with the meaning in James 1:26-27.
Intruding into those things which he hath not seen - Or inquiring into them. The word used here
(ἐμβατεύων embateuōn) means to go in, or enter; then to investigate, to inquire. It has not,
properly, the meaning of intruding, or of impertinent inquiry (see Passow), and I do not see that
the apostle meant to characterize the inquiry here as such. He says that it was the object of their
investigations to look, with great professed modesty and reverence, into those things which are
not visible to the eye of mortals. The “things” which seem here to be particularly referred to, are
the abstruse questions respecting the mode of the divine subsistence; the ranks, orders, and
employments of angelic beings; and the obscure doctrines relating to the divine government and
plans. These questions comprised most of the subjects of inquiry in the Oriental and Grecian
philosophy, and inquiries on these the apostle apprehended would tend to draw away the mind
from the “simplicity that is in Christ.” Of these subjects what can be known more than is revealed?
Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind - Notwithstanding the avowed “humility,” the modesty, the
angelic reverence, yet the mind was full of vain conceit, and self-confident, carnal wisdom. The
two things are by no means incompatible - the men apparently most meek and modest being
sometimes the most bold in their speculations, and the most reckless in regard to the great
landmarks of truth. It is not so with true modesty, and real “angelic veneration,” but all this is
sometimes assumed for the purpose of deceiving; and sometimes there is a native appearance of
modesty which is by no means an index of the true feelings of the soul. The most meek and
modest men in appearance are sometimes the most proud and reckless in their investigations of
the doctrines of religion.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Barnes' Notes on the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/colossians-2.html. 1870.
Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible
Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the angels, dwelling
in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up in his fleshly mind, and not holding fast the
Head, from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the joints and bands,
increaseth with the increase of God.
This passage is another admittedly difficult one, the rendition of various words and clauses being
variously advocated; but such technical disputations lie without the perimeter of this work; and
we shall content ourselves by undertaking an exegesis of the text as it stands in this version. We
rely in part upon the affirmation of F. F. Bruce to the effect that the most accurate of the versions
is the ASV.
Rob you of your prize ... The prize is eternal life; and the promise of it is jeopardized for everyone
who turns from the worship of the one and only Saviour to worship angels, or any other creatures.
Voluntary humility and worshipping of angels ... As Peake said:
Their humility found expression in angel worship. It is therefore that lowliness that causes a man
to think himself unworthy to come into fellowship with God, and therefore prompts the worship
of angels. Such humility was perverted. [51]
Dwelling in things which he hath seen ... Paul made a sharp distinction between the things "that
are seen" and things "that are unseen," that is, between the visible and the invisible, the latter
being permanent, the other transient, mortal and ephemeral. See full treatment of this in my
Commentary on 2Corinthians under "Seeing the Invisible." The error at Colossae was founded
upon the visible, as contrasted with the invisible. This of course resulted in their being vainly
puffed up in the fleshly mind.
Not holding fast the Head ... The Head is Christ; and any consideration, of any kind whatsoever,
that results in the severance of the Christian from his perfect union with Christ, the same results
immediately in his spiritual death. "Severance from the Head cuts off the supply of spiritual life." [52]
[51]
Ibid., p. 532.
[52]
J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 983.
Copyright Statement
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University
Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Bibliography
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Coffman Commentaries on the Old
and New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/colossians-2.html.
Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
Let no man beguile you of your reward,.... Or prize; the allusion is to the Olympic games, one of
which was running races; in which the stadium, or race plot was fixed, a mark set up to look and
run unto, a corruptible crown proposed to be run for, and which was held by one who sat as judge,
and determined who got the victory, and to whom the crown belonged; these judges sometimes
acted the unfair part, and defrauded the victors of their proper right, and to such the apostle
compares the false teachers: the Christian's reward, or prize he is running for, is the incorruptible
and never fading crown of glory, life, and righteousness; the race plot is the Christian life, spent in
the exercise of grace, and discharge of duty, and in holding fast, and holding out in a profession of
faith unto the end; the mark he looks at, and presses towards, is Jesus Christ; and his great
concern, the apostle by this metaphor suggests should be, lest by false teachers he should be
defrauded of the prize of the high calling of God, through their removing the mark Christ from
him, by denying his person and Godhead; or by intercepting his sight of him, placing other objects
before him, such as angels, to be worshipped and adored; or by darkening of it, joining Moses and
Christ, law and Gospel, works and grace together, in the business of salvation; whereby he might
seem to come short, or be in danger of coming short of the heavenly glory:
in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels; these things the apostle instances in, as in
what lay their danger of being beguiled of their reward, or prize. True humility is an excellent
grace; it is the clothing and ornament of a Christian; nor is there anything that makes a man more
like Christ, than this grace; but in these men here respected, it was only the appearance of
humility, it was not real; it was in things they devised and willed, not in things which God
commanded, Christ required, or the Scriptures pointed at; they would have been thought to have
been very lowly and humble, and to have a great consciousness of their own vileness and
unworthiness to draw nigh to Christ the Mediator immediately, and by him to God; wherefore in
pretence of great humility, they proposed to make use of angels as mediators with Christ;
whereby Christ, the only Mediator between God and man, would be removed out of sight and use;
and that humble boldness and holy confidence with God at the throne of grace, through Christ,
which believers are allowed to use, would be discouraged and destroyed, and the saints be in
danger as to the outward view of things, and in all human appearance of losing their reward:
"worshipping of angels" was a practice which very early prevailed among some that were called
Christians, and for a long time continued in Phrygia and Pisidia; some make Simon Magus, and
others Cerinthus, the author of this idolatry; but was not only a branch of the Platonic philosophy,
and so a part of that philosophy and vain deceit before mentioned, Colossians 2:8, which these
men might have borrowed from the Gentiles, but was a notion and practice of the Jews: before
the Babylonish captivity, the names of angels were not known, nor are they ever mentioned by
name in Scripture; hence they sayF19, that "the names of angels came up with them, or by their
means from Babylon:
after this they began to talk much of them, and to have too high a veneration for them, and
ascribe too much to them; and observing that the law was ordained, spoken, and given by them,
and that the administration of things under the former dispensation was greatly by their means,
they fell to worshipping of themF20; and the believing Jews were hereby in great danger of falling
into the same practice: hence the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, writing to the Jewish
church, largely insists on the proof of Christ being superior to angels; showing that he has a more
excellent name than they had; that he was the Son of God in such sense as they were not the sons
of God; that they were worshippers of him, yea, that they were creatures made by him, and even
ministering spirits to his saints, the heirs of salvation: and very rightly, is worshipping of angels
condemned here by the apostle, since God only is the object of worship; since these are creatures,
and so not to be adored; are worshippers of God and Christ themselves, and have refused
adoration when it has been offered to them: that the Jews did, and do worship angels, and make
use of them as mediators and intercessors, is clear from their liturgy, or prayer books, where they
sayF21.
"‫רחמים‬ ‫מלאכי‬, "O ye angels of mercies", or ye merciful angels, ministers of the most High, entreat
now the face of God for good:
and elsewhereF23,
"they say three times, let Juhach keep us, let Juhach deliver us, and let Juhach help us:
now Juhach was the name of an angel, who they supposed had the care of men, and is taken from
the final letters of those words in Psalm 91:11, "for he shall give his angels charge over thee": so
they speak of an angel whom they call Sandalphon, who they say is appointed over the prayers of
the righteousF24: with this notion the judaizing and false teachers seem to have been tinctured, and
against which the apostle here cautions the saints, lest, under a show of humility, they should be
drawn into it: and to preserve them from it, he observes, that such an one who should spread and
propagate such a notion, was one that was
intruding into those things which he hath not seen; thrusting himself in a bold and daring manner
into an inquiry and search after, debate upon, and affirmation of things he could have no certain
knowledge of; as of angels, whose nature, qualities, works, and ministrations, he had never seen
with his bodily eyes; nor could ever discern with the eyes of his understanding any such things in
the Scriptures, which he ascribed to them; but they were the birth of his own mind, the fruits of
his own fancy and imagination, things devised in his own brain: being
vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind; judging of things not according to the word of God, and with
a spiritual judgment, and according to a spiritual sense and experience, but according to his own
carnal reason, and the vanity of his mind; being puffed and swelled with an high opinion of
himself, of his great parts and abilities, of his knowledge of things above others, and of his capacity
to penetrate into, and find out things which were not seen and known by others: this shows that
his humility was forced, and only in outward appearance, and was not true and genuine,
Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by
Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr,
Paris, AR, 72855
Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/colossians-2.html. 1999.
Geneva Study Bible

16
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary a humility and worshipping of
angels, 17 intruding into those things which he hath not seen, 18 b vainly puffed up by his fleshly
mind,
(16) He disputes against the first type of corruptions, and sets down the worshipping of angels as
an example: which type of false religion he refutes, first, this way: because those who bring in such
a worship, attribute that to themselves which is proper only to God, that is, authority to bind
men's consciences with religion, even though they seem to bring in these things by humility of
mind.
(a) By foolish humility of mind: for otherwise humility is a virtue. For these angel worshippers
blamed those of pride who would go straight to God, and use no other means besides Christ.
(17) Secondly, because they rashly thrust upon them as oracles those things which they neither
saw nor heard, but devised by themselves.
(18) Thirdly, because these things have no other ground upon which they are built, but only the
opinion of men, who please themselves immensely in their own devices.
(b) Without reason.
Copyright Statement
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliography
Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/colossians-2.html. 1599-1645.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
beguile — Translate, “Defraud you of your prize,” literally, “to adjudge a prize out of hostility away
from him who deserves it” [Trench]. “To be umpire in a contest to the detriment of one.”
This defrauding of their prizethe Colossians would suffer, by letting any self-
constituted arbitrator or judge (that is, false teacher) draw them away from Christ,” the righteous
Judge” and Awarder of the prize (2 Timothy 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4), to angel-worship.
in a voluntary humility — So “will-worship” (Colossians 2:23). Literally, “Delighting [Wahl] in

humility”; loving (so the Greek is translated, Mark 12:38, “love to go in long clothing”) to indulge
himself in a humility of his own imposing: a volunteer in humility [Dallaeus]. Not as Alford, “Let no
one of purpose defraud you,” etc. Not as Grotius, “If he ever so much wish” (to defraud you). For
the participle “wishing” or “delighting,” is one of the series, and stands in the same category as
“intruding,” “puffed up,” “not holding”; and the self-pleasingimplied in it stands in happy contrast
to the (mock) humility with which it seems to me, therefore, to be connected. His “humility,” so
called, is a pleasing of self: thus it stands in parallelism to “his fleshly mind” (its real name,
though he styles it “humility”), as “wishing” or “delighting” does to “puffed up.” The Greek for
“humility” is literally, “lowliness of mind,” which forms a clearer parallel to “puffed up by his
fleshly mind.” Under pretext of humility, as if they durst not come directly to God and Christ (like
the modern Church of Rome), they invoked angels: as Judaizers, they justified this on the ground
that the law was given by angels. This error continued long in Phrygia (where Colosse and Laodicea
were), so that the Council of Laodicea (a.d. 360) expressly framed its thirty-fifth canon against the
“Angelici” (as Augustine [Heresies, 39], calls them) or “invokers of angels.” Even as late as
Theodoret‘s time, there were oratories to Michael the archangel. The modern Greeks have a
legend that Michael opened a chasm to draw off an inundation threatening the Colossian
Christians. Once men admit the inferior powers to share invocation with the Supreme, the former
gradually engrosses all our serious worship, almost to the exclusion of the latter; thus the heathen,
beginning with adding the worship of other deities to that of the Supreme, ended with ceasing to
worship Him at all. Nor does it signify much, whether we regard such as directly controlling us (the
pagan view), or as only influencing the Supreme in our behalf (the Church of Rome‘s view);
because he from whom I expect happiness or misery, becomes the uppermost object in my mind,
whether he give, or only procure it [Cautions for Times]. Scripture opposes the idea of “patrons” or
“intercessors” (1 Timothy 2:5, 1 Timothy 2:6). True Christian humility joins consciousness of utter
personal demerit, with a sense of participation in the divine life through Christ, and in the dignity
of our adoption by God. Without the latter being realized, a false self-humiliation results, which
displays itself in ceremonies and ascetic self-abasement (Colossians 2:23), which after all is but
spiritual pride under the mock guise of humility. Contrast “glorying in the Lord” (1 Corinthians
1:31).
intruding into … things which he hath not seen — So very old manuscripts and Vulgate and
Origen read. But the oldest manuscripts and Lucifer omit “not”; then translate, “haughtily treading
on (‹Standing on‘ [Alford]) the things which he hath seen.” Tregelles refers this to fancied visions
of angels. But if Paul had meant a fancied seeing, he would have used some qualifying word, as,
“which he seemed to see,” not “which he hath seen.” Plainly the things were actually seen by him,
whether of demoniacal origination (1 Samuel 28:11-20), or phenomena resulting from natural
causation, mistaken by him as if supernatural. Paul, not stopping to discuss the nature of the
things so seen, fixes on the radical error, the tendency of such a one in all this to walk by SENSE
(namely, what he haughtily prides himself on having SEEN), rather than by FAITH in the UNSEEN
“Head” (Colossians 2:19; compare John 20:29; 2 Corinthians 5:7; Hebrews 11:1). Thus is the
parallelism, “vainly puffed up” answers to “haughtily treading on,” or “setting his foot on”; “his
fleshly mind” answers to the things which he hath seen,” since his fleshliness betrays itself in
priding himself on what he hath seen, rather than on the unseen objects of faith. That the things
seen may have been of demoniacal origination, appears from 1 Timothy 4:1, “Some shall depart
from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils” (Greek, “demons”). A
warning to modern spiritualists.
puffed up — implying that the previous so called “humility” (Greek, “lowliness of mind”) was really
a “puffing up.”
fleshly mind — Greek, “By the mind of his own flesh.” The flesh, or sensuous principle, is the
fountain head whence his mind draws its craving after religious objects of sight, instead of, in
true humility as a member, “holding fast the (unseen) Head.”
Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text scanned by Woodside Bible
Fellowship.
This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-Brown Commentary is in the public domain and
may be freely used and distributed.
Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18".
"Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/colossians-2.html. 1871-8.
Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament
Rob you of your prize (καταβραβευετω — katabrabeuetō). Late and rare compound (κατα
βραβευω— kataβραβευς — brabeuō Colossians 3:15) to act as umpire against one, perhaps
because of bribery in Demosthenes and Eustathius (two other examples in
Preisigke‘s Worterbuch), here only in the N.T. So here it means to decide or give judgment against.
The judge at the games is called βραβειον — brabeus and the prize κρινετω — brabeion (1
Corinthians 9:24; Philemon 3:14). It is thus parallel to, but stronger than, τελων εν
ταπεινοπροσυνηι — krinetō in Colossians 2:16.
By a voluntary humility (τελω — thelōn en tapeinophrosunēi). Present active participle

of τελοντας — thelō to wish, to will, but a difficult idiom. Some take it as like an adverb for
“wilfully” somewhat like εν ετελοταπεινοπροσυνηι — thelontas in 2 Peter 3:5. Others make it a
Hebraism from the lxx usage, “finding pleasure in humility.” The Revised Version margin has “of
his own mere will, by humility.” Hort suggested ετελοτρησκια — en ethelotapeinophrosunēi (in
gratuitous humility), a word that occurs in Basil and made like και τρησκειαι των
αγγελων — ethelothrēskia in Colossians 2:23.
And worshipping of the angels (ταπεινοπροσυνην — kai thrēskeiāi tōn aggelōn). In Colossians
3:12humility (α εορακεν εμβατευων — tapeinophrosunēn) is a virtue, but it is linked with worship
of the angels which is idolatry and so is probably false humility as in Colossians 2:23. They may
have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far removed and so took angels as
mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of Christ.
Dwelling in the things which he hath seen (εμβατευω — ha heoraken embateuōn). Some MSS.
have “not,” but not genuine. This
verb εμβατης — embateuō (from κενεμβατευων — embatēs stepping in, going in) has given much
trouble. Lightfoot has actually proposed κενεμβατεω — kenembateuōn (a verb that does not
exist, though αιωρα — kenembateō does occur) with ενεβατευσεν — aiōra to tread on empty air,
an ingenious suggestion, but now unnecessary. It is an old word for going in to take possession
(papyri examples also). W. M. Ramsay (Teaching of Paul, pp. 287ff.) shows from inscriptions in
Klaros that the word is used of an initiate in the mysteries who “set foot in” (εικηι
πυσιουμενος — enebateusen) and performed the rest of the rites. Paul is here quoting the very
work used of these initiates who “take their stand on” these imagined revelations in the mysteries.
Vainly puffed up (πυσιοω — eikēi phusioumenos). Present passive participle

of πυσα — phusioō late and vivid verb from phusa pair of bellows, in N.T. only here and 1
Corinthians 4:6, 1 Corinthians 4:18.; 1 Corinthians 8:1. Powerful picture of the self-conceit of these
bombastic Gnostics.
Copyright Statement
The Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament. Copyright � Broadman Press 1932,33,
Renewal 1960. All rights reserved. Used by permission of Broadman Press (Southern Baptist
Sunday School Board)
Bibliography
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Robertson's Word Pictures of the New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/colossians-2.html. Broadman
Press 1932,33. Renewal 1960.
Vincent's Word Studies
Beguile of reward ( καταβραβευέτω )
Only here in the New Testament. From κατά against βραβεύω toact as a judge or umpire.

Hence to decide against one, or to declare him unworthy of the prize. Bishop Lightfoot's
rendering rob you of your prize, adopted by Rev., omits the judicial idea, which, however, I think
must be retained, in continuation of the idea of judgment in Colossians 2:16, “let no man judge,”
etc. The attitude of the false teachers would involve their sitting in judgment as to the future
reward of those who refused their doctrine of angelic mediation. Paul speaks from the standpoint
of their claim.
In a voluntary humility ( θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ )
Render delighting in humility. This rendering is well supported by Septuagint usage. See 1 Samuel
18:22; 2 Samuel 15:26; 1 Kings 10:9; 2 Chronicles 9:8. It falls in, in the regular participial series,
with the other declarations as to the vain conceit of the teachers; signifying not their purpose or
their wish to deprive the Christians of their reward, but their vain enthusiasm for their false
doctrine, and their conceited self-complacency which prompted them to sit as judges. The worship
of angels involved a show of humility, an affectation of superior reverence for God, as shown in
the reluctance to attempt to approach God otherwise than indirectly: in its assumption that
humanity, debased by the contact with matter, must reach after God through successive grades of
intermediate beings. For humility, see on Matthew 11:29.
Worship of angels ( θρησκείᾳ )
See on religious, James 1:26. Defining the direction which their humility assumed. The usage of the
Septuagint and of the New Testament limits the meaning to the external aspects of worship.
Compare Acts 26:5; James 1:27.
Intruding ( ἐμβατεύων )
Rev., dwelling in. Only here in the New Testament. It is used in three senses: 1. To step in or upon,
thence to haunt or frequent. So Aeschylus: “A certain island which Pan frequents on its beach”
(“Persae,” 449). 2. To invade. So in Apocrypha, 13:20; 14:31; 15:40. 3. To enter into for
examination; to investigate or discuss a subject. So 2 Maccabees 2:30, and so Philo, who compares
truth-seekers to well-diggers. Patristic writers use it of searching the heart, and of investigating
divine mysteries. Byzantine lexicographers explain it by ζητέω toseek; ἐξερευνάω totrack
out; σκοπέω toconsider. In this last sense the word is probably used here of the false teachers who
professed to see heavenly truth in visions, and to investigate and discuss philosophically the
revelation they had received.
Which he hath not seen
Not must be omitted: which he imagines or professes that he has seen in vision. Ironical. “If, as we
may easily imagine, these pretenders were accustomed to say with an imposing and mysterious
air, 'I have seen, ah! I have seen,' - in relating alleged visions of heavenly things, the Colossians
would understand the reference well enough” (Findlay).
Vainly puffed up ( εἰκὴ φυσιούμενος )
Vainly characterizes the emptiness of such pretension; puffed up, the swelling intellectual pride of
those who make it. See on 1Corinthians href="/desk/?q=1co+4:6&sr=1">1 Corinthians 4:6; and
compare 1 Corinthians 8:1. The humility is thus characterized as affected, and the teachers as
charlatans.
By his fleshly mind ( ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ )
Lit., by the mind of his flesh. The intellectual faculty in its moral aspects as determined by the
fleshly, sinful nature. See on Romans 8:23. Compare Romans 7:22-25; Romans 8:7. The teachers
boasted that they were guided by the higher reason. Paul describes their higher reason as carnal.
Copyright Statement
The text of this work is public domain.
Bibliography
Vincent, Marvin R. DD. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Vincent's Word Studies in the New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/colossians-2.html. Charles
Schribner's Sons. New York, USA. 1887.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes
Out of pretended humility, they worshipped angels, as not daring to apply immediately to God. Yet
this really sprung from their being puffed up: (the constant forerunner of a fall, Proverbs 16:18 ) so
far was it from being an instance of true humility.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the
Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.
Bibliography
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole
Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/colossians-2.html. 1765.
Abbott's Illustrated New Testament
A voluntary humility and worshipping of angels. It is plain, from the connection, that these clauses
refer to certain superstitions ideas and practices prevailing among those who insisted so
strenuously upon the obligations of the Mosaic law. Precisely what the nature of these ideas were,
as denoted by this language, it is difficult now to ascertain.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Abbott, John S. C. & Abbott, Jacob. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Abbott's Illustrated New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ain/colossians-2.html. 1878.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible
18.Let no one take from you the palm. (389) He alludes to runners, or wrestlers, to whom
the palm was assigned, on condition of their not giving way in the middle of the course, or after
the contest had been commenced. He admonishes them, therefore, that the false apostles aimed
at nothing else than to snatch away from them the palm, inasmuch as they draw them aside from
the rectitude of their course. Hence it follows that they must be shunned as the most injurious
pests. The passage is also carefully to be marked as intimating, that all those who draw us aside
from the simplicity of Christ cheat us out of the prize of our high calling. (Philippians 3:14.)
Desirous in humility. Something must be understood; hence I have, inserted in the text id facere ,
(to do it.) For he points out the kind of danger which they required to guard against. All are
desirous to defraud you of the palm, who, under the pretext of humility, recommend to you
the worship of angels. For their object is, that you may wander out of the way, leaving the one
object of aim. I read humility and worship of angels conjointly, for the one follows the other, just
as at this day the Papists make use of the same pretext when philosophizing as to the worship of
saints. For they reason on the ground of man’s abasement, (390) that we must, therefore, seek for
mediators to help us. But for this very reason has Christ humbled himself — that we might directly
betake ourselves to him, however miserable sinners we may be.
I am aware that the worship of angels is by many interpreted otherwise, as meaning such as has
been delivered to men by angels; for the Devil has always endeavored to set off his impostures
under this title. The Pope at this day boasts, that all the trifles with which he has adulterated the
pure worship of God are revelations. In like manner the Theurgians (391) of old alleged that all the
superstitions that they contrived were delivered over to them by angels, as if from hand to
hand. (392) They, accordingly, think that Paul here condemns all fanciful kinds of worship that are
falsely set forth under the authority of angels. (393) But, in my opinion, he rather condemns the
contrivance as to the worshipping of angels. It is on this account that he has so carefully applied
himself to this in the very commencement of the Epistle, to bring angels under subjection, lest
they should obscure the splendor of Christ. (394) In fine, as he had in the first chapter prepared
the way for abolishing the ceremonies, so he had also for the removal of all other hinderances
which draw us away from Christ alone. (395) In this class is the worship of angels
Superstitious persons have from the beginning worshipped angels, (396) that through means of
them there might be free access to God. The Platonists infected the Christian Church also with this
error. For although Augustine sharply inveighs against them in his tenth book “On the City of God,”
and condemns at great length all their disputations as to the worship of angels, we see
nevertheless what has happened. Should any one compare the writings of Plato with Popish
theology, he will find that they have drawn wholly from Plato their prattling as to the worship of
angels. The sum is this, that we must honor angels, whom Plato calls demons, χάριν τὢς εὐφήμου
διαπορείας (for the sake of their auspicious intercession.) (397) He brings forward this sentiment in
Epinomis, and he confirms it in Cratylus, (398) and many other passages. In what respect do the
Papists differ at all from this? “But, ” it will be said, “they do not deny that the Son of God is
Mediator.” Neither did those with whom Paul contends; but as they imagined that God must be
approached by the assistance of the angels, and that, consequently, some worship must be
rendered to them, so they placed angels in the seat of Christ, and honored them with Christ’s
office. Let us know, then, that Paul here condemns all kinds of worship of human contrivance,
which are rendered either to angels or to the dead, as though they were mediators, rendering
assistance after Christ, or along with Christ. (399)For just so far do we recede from Christ, when
we transfer the smallest part of what belongs to him to any others, whether they be angels or
men.
Intruding into those things which he hath not seen. The verb ἐμβατεύειν, the participle of which
Paul here makes use of, has various significations. The rendering which Erasmus, after Jerome, has
given to it, walking proudly, would not suit ill, were there an example of such a signification in any
author of sufficient note. For we see every day with how much confidence and pride rash persons
pronounce an opinion as to things unknown. Nay, even in the very subject of which Paul treats,
there is a remarkable illustration. For when the Sorbonnic divines put forth their
trifles (400) respecting the intercession of saints or angels, they declare, (401) as though it were
from an oracle, (402) that the dead (403) know and behold our necessities, inasmuch as they see
all things in the reflex light of God. (404) And yet, what is less certain? Nay more, what is more
obscure and doubtful? But such, truly, is their magisterial freedom, that they fearlessly and
daringly assert what is not only not known by them, but cannot be known by men.
This meaning, therefore, would be suitable, if that signification of the term were usual. It is,
however, among the Greeks taken simply as meaning to walk. It also sometimes means to inquire.
Should any one choose to understand it thus in this passage, Paul will, in that case, reprove a
foolish curiosity in the investigation of things that are obscure, and such as are even hid from our
view and transcend it. (405) It appears to me, however, that I have caught Paul’s meaning, and
have rendered it faithfully in this manner — intruding into those things which he hath not seen. For
that is the common signification of the word ἐμβατεύειν — to enter upon an inheritance, (406) or
to take possession, or to set foot anywhere. Accordingly, Budaeus renders this passage thus: —
“Setting foot upon, or entering on the possession of those things which he has not seen.” I have
followed his authority, but have selected a more suitable term. For such persons in reality break
through and intrude into secret things, (407) of which God would have no discovery as yet made
to us. The passage ought to be carefully observed, for the purpose of reproving the
rashness (408) of those who inquire farther than is allowable.
Puffed up in vain by a fleshly mind. He employs the expression fleshly mind to denote the
perspicuity of the human intellect, however great it may be. For he places it in contrast with that
spiritual wisdom which is revealed to us from heaven in accordance with that statement —
Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee.

(Matthew 16:17.)
Whoever; therefore, depends upon his own reason, inasmuch as the acuteness of the flesh is
wholly at work in him, (409) Paul declares him to be puffed up in vain. And truly all the wisdom
that men have from themselves is mere wind: hence there is nothing solid except in the word of
God and the illumination of the Spirit. And observe, that those are said to be puffed up who
insinuate themselves (410) under a show of humility. For it happens, as Augustine elegantly writes
to Paulinus, by wonderful means, as to the soul of man, that it is more puffed up from a false
humility than if it were openly proud.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/colossians-2.html. 1840-57.
Scofield's Reference Notes
intruding into those things
The errorists against whom Paul warns the Colossians, and against whom, in principle, the warning
has perpetual significance, were called "Gnostics," from gnosis, "knowledge." These Gnostics
"came most keenly into conflict with the exalted rank and redeeming rank of Christ, to whom they
did not leave His full divine dignity, but assigned to Him merely the highest rank in the order of
spirits, while they exalted angels as concerned in bringing the Messianic salvation."--H.A.W.
Meyer. Paul's characteristic word in Colossians for the divine revelation is epignosis, i.e. "full
knowledge." Colossians 1:9; Colossians 1:10; Colossians 3:10as against the pretended "knowledge"
of the errorists. The warnings apply to all extra-biblical forms, doctrines, and customs, and to all
ascetic practices.
angels (See Scofield "Hebrews 1:4").

Copyright Statement
These files are considered public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is
available in the Online Bible Software Library.
Bibliography
Scofield, C. I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Colossians 2:18". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917
Edition)". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/srn/colossians-2.html. 1917.
John Trapp Complete Commentary
18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels,
intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
Ver. 18. Let no man beguile you] Gr. βραβευετω, brave it over you. Confer Exodus 8:9; "Glory over
me," Gloriam assume supra me, as thou hast done over thy sorcerers; I give thee this liberty. See
also 7:2; Isaiah 10:15.
In a voluntary humility] A proud humility. They would not dare to worship God, but angels, &c.,
yet were vainly puffed up by their fleshly minds. And something like this was that of the Baptist in
refusing to wash Christ, and of Peter in refusing to be washed by him, John 13:8.
And worshipping of angels] Setting them up, as Papists do, for mediators of intercession. Let not
us acknowledge any other master of requests in heaven but Christ alone, 1 John 2:1. But what a
piece of knavery is that in Surius and Caranza, who rendering that passage of the Laodicean
Council, chap. xxxv.,ου δει χριστιανους αγγελους ονομαζειν, Christians may not pray to angels;
they make the words to be, Non oportet Christianos ad angulos congregationes facere, Christians
may not be corner creepers; and the title they make, De iis qui angulos colunt, of those that
worship (not angels, but) corners; against all sense. What! will they put out the eyes of God’s
people? as he said, Numbers 16:14. Or do they not rather, Festucam quaerere unde oculos sibi
eruant, as Bernard hath it, seek straws to put out their own eyes also?
Intruding into those things] εμβατευων, or invading those things, blind and bold, busy about such
matters, as whereof there is neither proof nor profit. Of this sort of seducers was that daring
Dionysius, that writeth so confidently of the heavenly hierarchy; the schoolmen also with their
curious speculations and new niceties, as Scotellus and others.
Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind] Corruption is the mother of pride, as the devil the father.
"He is the king of all the children of pride," Job 41:34.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". John Trapp Complete Commentary.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/colossians-2.html. 1865-1868.
Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary
18.] Let no one of purpose (such is by far the best rendering of θέλων,—to take it with καταβραβ.
and understand it precisely as in ref. 2 Pet. And thus apparently Thl.: θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς
καταβραβεύειν διὰ ταπεινοφροσ. Mey. pronounces this meaning ‘ganz unpassend, and
controverts the passages brought to defend it; omitting however ref. 2 Pet. So also does Ellicott,
believing it to “impute to the false teachers a frightful and indeed suicidal malice, which is neither
justified by the context, nor in any way credible.” But his own “desiring to do it” is hardly
distinguishable from that other: nor does it at all escape the imputation of motive which he finds
so improbable. But surely it is altogether relevant, imputing to the false teachers not only error,
but insidious designs also. Others take θέλων with ἐν ταπ., keeping however its reference as
above, and understanding, as Phot. in Œc., τοῦτο ποιεῖν after it. So Thdrt., τοῦτο τοίνυν
συνεβούλευον ἐκεῖνοι γίνεσθαι ταπεινοφροσύνῃ δῆθεν κεχρημένοι,—Calv., ‘volens id facere,’—
Mey., Eadie, al. This latter, after Bengel, assigns as his reason for adopting this view, that the
participles θέλων, ἐμβατεύων, φνσιούμενος, κρατῶν, form a series. This however is not strictly
true—for θέλων would stand in a position of emphasis which does not belong to the next two:
rather should we thus expect ἐν ταπ. θέλων κ. θρ. τῶν ἀγγ. I cannot help thinking this rendering
flat and spiritless.
Others again suppose a harsh Hebraism, common in the LXX (reff., especially Psalms 146:10), but
not found in the N. T., by which θέλειν ἐν is put for ְ‫חָ ֵפץ ּב‬, ‘to have pleasure in.’ So Aug., Est.,
Olsh., al. The principal objection to this rendering here is, that it would be irrelevant. Not the
delight which the false teacher takes in his ταπ . &c., but the fact of it as operative on the
Colossians, and its fleshly sources, are adduced) defraud you of your prize (see reff. Demosth.
Mey. points out the difference between κατα βρ., a fraudulent adjudication with hostile
intent against the person wronged, and παρα βραβεύειν, which is merely, as Thdrt. explains
this, ἀδίκως βραβεύειν. So Polyb. xxiv. 1. 12, τινὲς δʼ ἐγκαλοῦντες τοῖς κρίμασιν, ὡς
παραβεβραβευμένοις, διαφθείραντος τοῦ φιλίππου τοὺς δικαστάς. Supplying this, which Chrys.
has not marked, we may take his explanation: καταβραβευθῆναι γάρ ἐστιν ὅταν παρʼ ἑτέρων μὲν
ἡ νίκη, παρʼ ἑτέρων δὲ τὸ βραβεῖον. Zonaras gives it better, in Suicer ii. 49: καταβρ. ἐστι, τὸ μὴ τὸν
νικήσαντα ἀξιοῦν τοῦ βραβείου, ἀλλʼ ἑτέρῳ διδόναι αὐτό, ἀδικουμένου τοῦ νικήσαντος. This
deprivation of their prize, and this wrong, they would suffer at the hands of those who would draw
them away from Christ the giver of the prize (2 Timothy 4:8. James 1:12. 1 Peter 5:4), and lower
them to the worship of intermediate spiritual beings. The various meanings,—‘ne quis brabeutæ
potestatem usurpans atque adeo abutens, vos currentes moderetur, perperamque præscribat
quid sequi quid fugere debeatis præmium accepturi’ (Beng.),—‘nemo adversum vos rectoris partes
sibi ultro sumat’ (Beza and similarly Corn.-a-lap.),—‘præmium, id est libertatem a Christo
indultam, exigere’ (Grot.),—are all more or less departures from the meaning of the word) in (as
the element and sphere of his καταβραβ.) humility ( αἵρεσις ἦν παλαιὰ λεγόντων τινῶν ὅτι οὐ δεῖ
τὸν χριστὸν ἐπικαλεῖσθαι εἰς βοήθειαν, ἢ εἰς προσαγωγὴν τὴν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους
ὡς τάχα τοῦ τὸν χριστὸν ἐπικαλεῖσθαι πρὸς τὰ εἰρημένα μείζονος ὄντος τῆς ἡμετέρας
ἀξίας. τοῦτο δὲ τάχα ταπεινούμενοι ἕλεγον. Zonaras in canon 35 of the Council of Laodicea, in
Suicer i. p. 45. Similarly Thdrt., λέγοντες ὡς ἀόρατος ὁ τῶν ὅλων θεός, ἀνεφικτός τε
κ. ἀκατάληπτος, κ. προσήκει διὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων τὴν θείαν εὐμένειαν πραγματεύεσθαι. Aug. Conf. x.
42, vol. i. p. 807, says: “Quem invenirem, qui me reconciliaret tibi? abeundum mihi fuit ad
angelos?… multi conantes ad te redire, neque per se ipsos valentes, sicut audio, tentaverunt hæc,
et inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum, et digni habiti sunt illusionibus.” So that no
ironical sense need be supposed) and (explicative, or appending a specific form of the
general ταπεινοφρ.) worship of the angels (genitive objective, ‘worship paid to the holy angels:’
not subjective, as Schöttg., Luther, Rosenm., al.: cf. Jos. Antt. viii. 8. 4, τοῦ ναοῦ κ. τῆς θρησκείας
τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ τοῦ θεοῦ; Justin M. cohort. ad Græc. § 38, p. 35,— ἐπὶ τὴν τῶν μὴ θεῶν ἐτράπησαν
θρησκείαν.
With reference to the fact of the existence of such teaching at Colossæ, Thdrt. gives an interesting
notice:οἱ τῷ νόμῳ συνηγοροῦντες καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους σέβειν αὐτοῖς εἰσηγοῦντο, διὰ τούτων
λέγοντες δεδόσθαι τὸν νόμον. ἔμεινε δὲ τοῦτο τὸ πάθος ἐν τῇ φρυγίᾳ κ. πισιδίᾳ μέχρι πολλοῦ. οὗ
δὴ χάριν κ. συνελθοῦσα σύνοδος ἐν λαοδικείᾳ τῆς φρυγίας νόμῳ κεκώλυκε τὸ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις
προσεύχεσθαι· κ. μέχρι δὲ τοῦ νῦν εὐκτηρία τοῦ ἁγίου ΄ιχαὴλ παρʼἐκείνοις κ. τοῖς ὁμόροις
ἐκείνων ἐστὶν ἰδεῖν. The canon of the council of Laodicea (A.D. 360) runs thus: οὐ δεῖ χριστιανοὺς
ἐγκαταλείπειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ, κ. ἀπιέναι, κ. ἀγγέλους ὀνομάζειν, κ. συνάξεις
ποιεῖν, ἅπερ ἀπηγόρευται. εἴ τις οὖν εὑρεθῇ ταύτῃ τῇ κεκρυμμἐνῃ εἰδωλολατρείᾳ
σχολάζων, ἔστω ἀνάθεμα, ὅτι ἐγκατέλιπε τὸν κύρ. ἡμ. ἰ. χρ. τ. υἱ. τοῦ θεοῦ, κ. εἰδωλολατρείᾳ
προσῆλθε. See, for an account of subsequent legends and visions of the neighbourhood, Conyb.
and Hows., ii. p. 480, note, edn. 2),—standing on the things which he hath seen(an inhabitant
of, insistens on, the realm of sight, not of faith: as Aug. above, ‘incidens in desiderium curiosarum
visionum.’ First a word respecting the reading. The μή of the rec. and οὐκ of others, seem to me to
have been unfortunate insertions from misunderstanding the sense of ἐμβατεύων. That
it may mean ‘prying into,’ would be evident from the simplest metaphorical application of its
primary meaning of treading or entering on: but whether it does so mean here, must be
determined by the context. And it surely would be a strange and incongruous expression for one
who was advocating a religion of faith,—whose very charter is μακάριοι οἱ μὴ ἰδόντες
κ. πεπιστευκότες,—to blame a man or a teacher for ἃ μὴ ἑόρακενἐμβατεύειν, placing the defect
of sight in the very emphatic forefront of the charge against him. Far rather should we expect that
one who διὰ πίστεως περιεπάτει, οὐ διὰ εἴδους, would state of such teacher as one of his especial
faults, that he ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐνεβάτευεν, found his status, his standing-point, in the realm of sight.
And to this what follows corresponds. This insisting on his own visual experience is the result of
fleshly pride as contrasted with the spiritual mind. Of the other meanings of ἐμβατεύειν, that of
‘coming into possession of property,’ ‘inheriting,’ might be suitable, but in this sense it is usually
constructed with εἰς, cf. Demosth. 1085. 24, 1086. 19. The ordinary meaning is far the best here:
see reff., and cf. Æsch. Pers. 448— νῆσος … ἣν ὁ φιλόχορος πἀν ἐμβατεύει, Eur. Electr. 595
— κασίγνητον ἐμβατεῦσαι πόλιν (this view I still maintain as against
Ellicott)), vainly (groundlessly. εἰκῆ must not be joined withἐμβατ., as De W., Conyb., al.,—for thus
the emphasis of that clause is destroyed: see above) puffed up(no inconsistency with
the ταπεινοφρ. above: for as Thdrt. says, τὴν μὲν ἐσκήπτοντο, τοῦ δὲ τύφου τὸ πάθος ἀκριβῶς
περιέκειντο) by (as the working principle in him) the mind (intent, bent of thought and
apprehension) of his own flesh ( ὑπὸ σαρκικῆς διανοίας, οὐ πνευματικῆς, Chrys. But as usual, this
adjectival rendering misses the point of the expression,—the διάνοια is not only σαρκική, but
is τῆς σαρκός—the σάρξ, the ordinary sensuous principle, is the fons of the νοῦς—which therefore
dwells in the region of visions of the man’s own seeing, and does not in true humility hold the
Head and in faith receive grace as one of His members. I have marked αὐτοῦ rather more strongly
than by ‘his’ only: its expression conveys certainly some idea of self-will. On the psychological
propriety of the expression, see Ellicott’s note),
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Alford, Henry. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Greek Testament Critical Exegetical
Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hac/colossians-2.html. 1863-1878.
Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible
Colossians 2:18. Let no man beguile you— This verse is differently understood. Dr. Doddridge
translates and paraphrases it as follows: "Let no one, therefore, who may ever so eagerly desire
it, or ever so artfully attempt it, deprive you of your great prize, for which, as Christians, you
contend, by an [affected] humility, and the worship of angels, which some Jewish zealots, as well
as heathen philosophers, so eagerly inculcate; intruding officiously and presumptuously into that
which he hath not seen, while pretending to tell us wonderful secrets relating to the various ranks,
subordinations, and offices of these angels. This may render a man the admiration of the ignorant
and inconsiderate; but it is indeed the result of his being vainly puffed up by his corrupt and fleshly
mind, with the conceit of things which it is impossible he should understand, and a desire of
introducing novelties into religion." Mr. Peirce's paraphrase is this: "And since Christ has thus
divested principalities and powers, let no man take upon him to condemn you, while he pleases
himself with an humility and worshipping of angels of his own devising; boldly prying into and
dictating about matters whereof he knows nothing: and this he is led to by his Jewish temper,
which puffs him up with a vain conceit that he knows and is fit to judge of every thing." It seems
much more probable that the Apostle refers to this opinion, than to that of Tertullian, who
explains it of "worship taught by angels," or persons pretending to receive revelations from them.
It is uncertain whether the heathens began so early as this to call those celestial
spirits angels whom they before had called good demons; but it is evident that very soon after the
Apostle's days, they speak of angels, and archangels, and recommend the worship of them, under
those names. Bishop Burnet justly observes, "That if it had been the Apostle's intention to give the
least encouragement to any religious addresses to saints and angels, this would have been a very
natural occasion of introducing the subject, and adjusting its proper boundaries."
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Coke, Thomas. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/colossians-2.html. 1801-1803.
Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Our apostle having warned the Colossians against the errors of the Judaizing teachers, comes next
to warn them against the practice of the Paganizing Christians, who were directd by their guides to
worship the angels, covering their error with a plausible shew of humility, pretending it was
presumptuous to go to God immediately, without the mediation of those excellent creatures; but
this the apostle tells them was a bold intruding into things they knew nothing of, God having
neither revealed nor taught any such thing; and argued, that they were vainly puffed up with the
foolish imaginations of their own fleshly minds.
Next he shews, that these angel-worshippers do not acknowledge Christ for the Head of the
church, while they apply themselves to angels as mediators; whereas he alone discharges the
office of the Head, completely giving life and growth to his whole church, and to every member
therof; which members being furnished with spiritual life from him, and knit to him, and one
another by the joints and bands of charity and other graces, they grow and increase with such an
increase of holiness as is from God, and tends to his glory.
Note here, 1. That the nature of man is prone, extremely prone, to idolatry and false worship.
2. That it is a really idolatry to worship an angel, as it is to worship a worm; for divine worship is
only due to a divine person.
Note, 3. That it is a renouncing of Christ, to make use of angels, or any other mediator, besides
Christ, unto the Father: not holding the head. It was a notion that the minds of mankind, that God
was not to be immediately approached to by sinful men; but that their prayers were to be
presented by certain mediators and intercessors, who were to procure for them the favour of God,
and the acceptance of their prayers.
Hence they worshipped angels, and the souls departed of their heroes, whom they canonized, and
translated into the number of their inferior gods, by whom they addressed their supplications to
their superior gods. With this notion Almighty God was pleased to comply so far, as under the
Jewish institution to appoint Moses a mediator betwixt him and them; and now under the
Christian dispensation to appoint Jesus Christ to be the only Mediator betwixt God and man.
Note, 4. That it is usual for idolaters, and false worshippers, to cover themselves sith a more than
ordinary show of humility: Let none beguile you in a voluntary humility.
True it is, that all duties of worship ought to be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed to constrained;
but they must not be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed ot instituted or appointed; God doth no
more approve of that worship we give him according to our will, than he doth approve of our
neglect of that which is according to his own will. But man, vain man, likes any way of worshipping
God which is of his own framing, much better than that which is of God's own appointing.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Burkitt, William. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Expository Notes with Practical Observations
on the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wbc/colossians-2.html.
1700-1703.
Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Colossians 2:18.(118) Warning against a further danger, with which they were threatened on the
part of these false teachers.
μηδείς] not different from μήτις in Colossians 2:16, as if the latter emphasized the verb and the
former the subject (Hofmann). This would be correct, if in Colossians 2:16 it
were μὴ οὖν κρινέτω τις ὑμᾶς. Comp. on μήτις, Colossians 2:8, and on μηδείς, Colossians 2:4.
Moreover, the words cannot be regarded (with Holtzmann) as a duplicate proceeding from the
interpolator, especially as they contain a new warning, and in such a peculiar form ( καταβραβ.).
καταβραβευέτω] Let no one deprive you of the prize. καταβραβεύειν, which is not a Cilician word
(Jerome; see, on the contrary, Eustath. ad Il. i. 93. 33: καταβραβεύει αὐτὸν, ὥς φασιν οἱ παλαιοί),
is only now preserved among ancient Greek authors in Dem. c. Mid.
544, ult.: ἐπιστάμεθα στράτωναὑπὸ ΄ειδίου καταβραβευθέντα καὶ πὰντα πὰντα τὰ δίκαια ἀτιμωθ
έντα, where it expresses the taking away of victory in a judicial suit, and the procuring of a
sentence of condemnation, and that in the form of the conception: to bring it about to the injury
of some one, that not he, but another, shall receive the prize from the βραβεύς. Midias
had bribed the judges. The κατά intimates that the prize was due to the person concerned,
although it has been in a hostile spirit (not merely unrighteously, which would beπαραβραβεύειν,
(119)
Plut. Mor. p. 535 C Polyb. xxiv. 1. 12) withdrawn from him and adjudged to another. The right
view substantially, though not recognising the distinction from παραβραβ., is taken by Chrysostom
( παραβραβευθῆναι γάρ ἐστιν, ὅταν παρʼ ἑτέρων μὲν ἡ νίκη, παρʼ ἐτέρων δὲ τὸβραβεῖον) and
Theophylact, also
Suidas: τὸ ἄλλου ἀγωνιζομένου ἄλλον στεφανοῦσθαι λέγει ὁἀπόστολος καταβραβεύεσθαι.
Comp. also Zonaras, ad Concil. Laod. can. 35, p.
351: τὸ μὴ τὸννικήσαντα ἀξιοῦν τοῦ βραβείου, ἀλλʼ ἑτέρῳ διδόναι αὐτὸ ἀδικουμένου τοῦ νικήσα
ντος. The conception is: (1) To the readers as true believers belongs the Messianic prize of victory,
—this is the assumption upon which the expression is based; (2) The false teachers desire to
deprive them of the prize of victory and to give it to others, namely, to themselves and their
adherents, and that through their service of angels, etc.; (3) Just as little, however, as in the case of
the κρίνειν in Colossians 2:16, ought the readers to give heed to, or let themselves be led
astray by, this hostile proceeding of the καταβραβεύειν, which is based upon subjective vanity and
is (Colossians 2:19) separation from Christ and His body,—this is implied in the imperatives.
Consequently, the view of Jerome, ad Aglas. p. 10, is not in substance erroneous, although only
approximately corresponding to the expression: “Nemo adversus vos praemium accipiat;” Erasmus
is substantially correct: “praemium, quod sectari coepistis, vobis intervertat;” comp. Calvin, Estius,
Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Ewald, and others; while the Vulgate (seducat), Luther (“to
displace the goal”), and others content themselves with a much less accurate statement of the
sense, and Bengel imports into the passage the sense of usurped false leading and instruction, as
Beza similarly took it.(120) The βραβεῖον, to which καταβρ. refers, is not Christian liberty (Grotius,
who explains it praemium exigere), nor yet: “the honour and prize of the true worship of God” (de
Wette), but, in accordance with the standing apostolic conception (comp. Philippians 3:14; 1
Corinthians 9:24): the bliss of the Messianic kingdom, the incorruptible στέφανος (1 Corinthians
9:25), the στεφ. τῆς δικαιοσύνης (2 Timothy 4:8),τῆς δόξης (1 Peter 5:4), τῆς ζωῆς (James 1:12);
comp. 2 Timothy 2:5. With reference to the βραβεῖον, Elsner, Michaelis, Storr, Flatt, Steiger, and
others, including Bähr, Böhmer, Reiche, Huther, and Bleek, following Photius in Oecumenius
( ΄ηδεὶς ὑ΄ᾶς κατακρινέτω), have taken καταβραβ. in the sense of to condemn, parallel to
the κρινέτω in Colossians 2:16, or to refuse salvation to (Hofmann). This rendering is not, indeed,
to be rejected on linguistic grounds, since Hesychius and Suidas both quote the
significationκατακρίνειν in the case of καταβραβεύειν; but it cannot be justified by proofs
adduced, and it is decidedly in opposition to the context through the following θέλων κ. τ. λ.,
which presupposes not a judgment of the opponents, but an action, something practical, which,
through their perverse religious attitude, they would fain accomplish.
θέλων] sc. καταβραβεύειν ὑμᾶς: while he desires to do this, would willingly accomplish it (comp.

Dissen, ad Pind. Ol. ii. 97) by humility, etc. So rightly Theodoret
( τοῦτο τοίνυν συνεβούλευον ἐκεῖνοιγίνεσθαι ταπεινοφροσύνῃ δῆθεν κεχρημένοι), Theophylact
( θέλουσιν ὑ΄ᾶς καταβραβεύεινδιὰ ταπεινοφρ.), Photius in Oecumenius, Calvin, Casaubon, and
others, including Huther and Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 322 [E. T. 376]. The “languidum et frigidum,”
which Reiche urges against this view, applies at the most only in the event of καταβραβ. being
explained as to condemn; and the accusation of incorrectness of sense (Hofmann) is only based
upon an erroneous explanation of the subsequent ἐνταπεινοφρ. κ. τ. λ. The interpretation
adopted by others: taking delight in humility, etc. (Augustine, Castalio, Vatablus, Estius, Michaelis,
Loesner, and others, including Storr, Flatt, Bähr, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bleek, Hofmann,
and Hilgenfeld), is based upon the extremely unnecessary assumption of an un-Greek imitation
of ‫חמץ ב‬, such as occurs, indeed, in the LXX. (1 Samuel 18:22 ; 2 Samuel 15:26; 1 Kings 10:9; 2
Chronicles 9:8; Psalms 146:10), but not in the N. T.; for in Matthew 27:43,θέλειν is used with
the accusative, comp. on Romans 7:21. Moreover, in the O. T. passages the object of the delight is
almost invariably (the only exception being Psalms 147:10) a person. Even in the Apocrypha that
abnormal mode of expression does not occur. Others, again, hold that it is to be joined in an
adverbial sense to καταβρ. It would then (see Erasmus, Annot.) have to be
rendered cupide or studiose (Plat. Theaet. p. 143 D and see Reisig, Conject. p. 143 f.), or
unconstrained, voluntarily, equivalent to ἐθελοντί,ἐθελοντήν, ἐθελοντής (Plat. Symp. p. 183 A,
very frequent in Homer, Soph. Phil. 1327, Aesch. Choeph. 19. 790, and the passages from
Xenophon quoted by Sturz, Lex. II. p. 21), which sense, here certainly quite unsuitable, has been
transformed at variance with linguistic usage into the idea: “hoc munus sibi a nullo tributum
exercens” (Beza), or: unwarrantably (Böhmer, comp. Steiger), or of his own choice (Luther, who,
like Ewald, couples it with ἐ΄βατεύων), or: arbitrarily (Ewald), or: capriciously (Reiche), etc.;
consequently giving it the sense of ἑκών, αὐτοθελής, αὐτοκέλευστος, or αὐτογνώ΄ων. Even
Tittmann, Synon. p. 131, comes at length to such an ultro, erroneously quoting Herod, 9:14,
where θέλων must be taken as in Plat. Theaet. l.c.
ἐν ταπεινοφρ. κ. θρησκ. τῶν ἀγγέλ.] ἐν is not propter, which is supposed to have the meaning:

because ταπεινοφρ. κ. τ. λ. is necessary to salvation (Reiche); nor does it denote the condition in
which the καταβραβεύειν takes place (Steiger, Huther); but, in keeping with the θέλων, it is
the means by which the purpose is to be attained: by virtue of humility and worshipping of angels.
Thereby he wishes to effect that the βραβεῖον shall be withdrawn from you (and given to himself
and his followers). τ. ἀλλέλωνis the genitive of the object (comp. Wisdom of Solomon 14:27;
Herodian, iv. 8. 17; Clem. Cor. I. 45; see also Grimm on 4 Maccabees 5:6, and the passages from
Josephus in Krebs, p. 339), and belongs only toθρησκ., not to ταπεινοφρ. That the latter, however,
is not humility in the proper sense, but is, viewed from the perverse personal standpoint of the
false teachers, a humility in their sense only, is plain from the context (see
below, εἰκῆ φυσιούμ. κ. τ. λ.), although irony (Steiger, Huther) is not to be found in the word. Paul,
namely, designates the thing as that, for which the false teachers held it themselves and desired it
to be held by others, and this, indeed, as respects the disposition lying at the root of it, which they
sought to exhibit ( ἐν ταπεινοφρ.), and as respects the abnormal religious phenomenon
manifested among them ( κ. θρησκ. τ. ἀγγέλων); and then proceeds to give a deterrent exposure
of both of these together according to their true character in a theoretical ( ἃ … ἐ΄βατ.) and in a
moral ( εἰκῆ φυσ … τὴνκεφαλὴν) respect. How far the false teachers bore themselves
as ταπεινόφρονες, is correctly defined by
Theodoret: λέγοντες, ὡς ἀόρατος ὁ τῶν ὅλων θεὸς, ἀνέφικτος τε καὶ ἀκατάληπτος, καὶπροσήκει δ
ιὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων τὴν θείαν εὐμένειαν πραγματεύεσθαι, so that they thus regarded man as too
insignificant in the presence of the divine majesty to be able to do without(121) the mediation of
angels, which they sought to secure through θρησκεία (comp. 4 Maccabees 4:11), thereby placing
the merit of Christ (Romans 5:2) in the background. It is differently explained by Chrysostom and
Theophylact (comp. also Photius in Oecumenius): the false teachers had declared the majesty of
the Only-Begotten to be too exalted for lowly humanity to have access through Him to the Father,
and hence the need of the mediation of angels for that purpose. In opposition to this view it may
be urged, that the very prominence so frequently and intentionally given to the majesty of Christ
in our Epistle, and especially as above the angels, rather goes to show that they
had depreciated the dignity of Christ. Reiche and Ewald (comp. Hofmann’s interpretation below)
find the ταπεινοφροσύνη in the ἀφειδία σώματος of Colossians 2:23, where, however, the two
aberrations are adduced separately from one another, see on Colossians 2:23. Proofs of the
existence of the worship of angels in the post-apostolic church are found in Justin, Ap. I. 6, p. 56,
(122)
Athenagoras, and others; among the Gnostic heretics (Simonians, Cainites): Epiph. Haer. xx. 2;
Tertullian, praescr. 33; Iren. Haer. i. 31. 2; and with respect to the worshipping of angels in
the Colossian region Theodoret
testifies: ἔμεινε δὲ τοῦτο τὸ πάθος ἐν τῇ φρυγίᾳ καὶ πισιδίᾳ μέχρι πολλοῦ· οὗ δὴχάριν καὶ συνελθ
οῦσα σύνοδος ἐν λαοδικείᾳ τῆς φρυγίας (A.D. 364, can.
35) νόμῳ κεκώλυκετὸ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις προσεύχεσθαι, καὶ μέχρι δὲ τοῦ νῦν εὐκτήρια τοῦ ἁγίου ΄ιχαὴ
λ παρʼἐκείνοις καὶ τοῖς ὁμόροις ἐκείνων ἐστὶν ἰδεῖν. The Catholic expedients for evading the
prohibition of angel-worship in our passage (as also in the Concil. Laod., Mansi, II. p. 568) may be
seen especially in Cornelius a Lapide, who understands not all angel-worship, but only that which
places the angels above Christ (comp. also Bisping), and who refers the Laodicean prohibition
pointing to a
“ κεκρυμμένηεἰδδωλολαατρεία (“ ὃτι οὐ δεῖ χριστιανοὺς ἐγκαταλείπειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ κ
αὶἀπιέναι καὶ ἁγγέλους ὀνομάζειν” κ. τ. λ.), in accordance with the second Nicene Council, only to
the cultus latriae, not duliae, consequently to actual adoration, not τιμητικὴν προσκύνησιν. In
opposition to the words as they stand (for θρησκεία with the genitive of the subject would
necessarily be the cultus, which the angels present to God, 4 Maccabees 5:6; 4 Maccabees 5:12;
Joseph. Antt. xii. 5. 4; comp. Acts 26:5), and also in opposition to the context (see Colossians 2:19),
several have taken τῶν ἀγγέλων as the genitive of the subject, and have explained it of a religious
condition, which desired to be like that of the angels, e.g. Luther: “spirituality of the angels,”
comp. Melanchthon, Schoettgen (“habitus aliquis angelicus”), Wolf, Dalmer. Nevertheless,
Hofmann, attempting a more subtle definition of the sense, has again takenτῶν ἀγγέλων as
genitive of the subject, and joined with it not only θρησκείᾳ, but alsoταπεινοφροσύνῃ.
The ταπεινοφροσύνη of the angels, namely, consists in their willingly keeping within the bounds
assigned to them as spirits, and not coveting that which man in this respect has beyond them,
namely, what belongs to the corporeal world. And the θρησκεία of the angels is a self-devotion to
God, in which, between them and Him, no other barrier exists than that between the Creator and
His creatures. That ταπεινοφροσύνη and this θρησκεία man makes into virtue on his part, when
he, although but partially, renounces that which belongs to Him in distinction from the
angels ( ταπεινοφρ.), and, as one who has divested himself as much as possible of his corporeality,
presents himself adoringly to God in such measure as he refrains from what was conferred upon
him for bodily enjoyment. I do not comprehend how, on the one hand, the apostle could wrap up
the combinations of ideas imputed to him in words so enigmatical, nor, on the other, how the
readers could, without the guidance of Hofmann, extract them out of these words. The entire
exposition is a labyrinth of imported subjective fancies. Paul might at least have
written ἐν ἐγκρατείᾳ ἐπὶ τῷ ὁμοιώματι (or καθʼ ὁμοίωσιν,
or καθʼ ὁμοιότητα) τῆςταπεινοφροσύνης καὶ θρησκείας τῶν ἀγγέλων! Even this would still have
been far enough from clear, but it would at least have contained the point and a hint as to its
interpretation. See, besides, in opposition to Hofmann, Rich. Schmidt, Paul. Christol. p. 193 f.
ἃ ἑώρακεν ἐμβατεύων] Subordinate to the θέλων κ. τ. λ. as a warning modal definition to

it: entering upon what he has beheld, i.e. instead of concerning himself with what has been
objectively given (Colossians 2:19), entering the subjective domain of visions with his mental
activity,—by which is indicated the mystico-theosophic occupation of the mind with God and the
angels,(123) so that ἑώρακεν (comp. Tert. c. Marc. v. 19) denotes not a seeing with the eyes, but
a mental beholding,(124) which belonged to the domain of the φαντάζεσθαι, in part, doubtless, also
to that of visionary ecstasy (comp. Acts 2:17; Revelation 9:17; ὅρα΄α in Acts 9:10; Acts 9:12; Acts
10:3; 2 Chronicles 9:29, et al.; Luke 1:22). This reference must have been intelligible to the readers
from the assertions put forth by the false teachers, (125)but the failure to observe it induced
copyists, at a very early date, to add a negative (sometimes μή and sometimes οὐ)
before ἑώρακεν. ἐμβατεύειν (only used here in the N. T.; but see Wetstein, also Reisig, ad Oed.
Col. praef. p. xxxix.), with accusative of the place conceived as object (Kühner, II. 1, p. 257), also
with the genitive, with the dative, and with εἰς, means to step upon, as e.g. νῆσον, Aesch. Pers.
441;πόλιν, Eur. El. 595; γῆν, Joshua 19:49; also with reference to a mental domain, which is
trodden by investigation and other mental activity, as Philo, de plant. Noë, p. 225 C, et al.; see
Loesner, p. 369 f.; 2 Maccabees 2:30; comp. also Nemes. de nat. hom. p. 64, ed.
Matth.: οὐρανὸν ἐμβατεύει τῇ θεωρίᾳ, but not Xen. Conv. iv. 27, where, with
Zeunius, ἐμαστεύετε ought to be read.
Phavorinus: ἐμβατεῦσαι·τὸ ἔνδον ἐξερευνῆσαι ἢ σκοπῆσαι. It is frequently used in the sense
of seizing possession (Dem. 894. 7; Eur. Heracl. 876; Schleusner, Thes. II. 332; Bloomfield, Gloss. in
Aesch. Pers. p. 146 f.). So Budaeus and Calvin (se ingerens), both with the reading μή, also Huther
(establishing himself firmly in the creations of fancy); still the context does not suggest this, and,
when used in this sense, ἐμβατ. is usually coupled withεἰς (Dem. 894. 7, 1085. 24, 1086. 19; Isaiah
9:3, et al.; 1 Maccabees 12:25). In the reading of the Recepta,ἃ μὴ ἑώρ., the sense amounts either
to: entering into the unseen transcendental sphere,(126) wherein the assumption would be implied
that the domain of sense was the only field legitimately open, which would be unsuitable (2
Corinthians 5:7; 2 Corinthians 13:12); or to: entering into things, which (although he dreams that
he has seen them, yet) he has not seen—a concealed antithetical reference, which Paul, in order to
be intelligible, must have indicated. The thought, in the absence of the negative, is not weak (de
Wette), but true, in characteristic keeping with the perverseness of theosophic fancies (in
opposition to Hofmann’s objection), and representing the actual state of the case, which Paul
could not but know. According to Hofmann, the ἃ μὴ ἑώρακεν which he reads is to be taken, not
with ἐμβατεύων, but with what goes before: of which, nevertheless, he has seen nothing (and,
consequently, cannot imitate it). This is disposed of, apart even from the incorrect inference
involved in it,(127) by the preposterousness of Hofmann’s exposition of
the ταπεινοφροσύνη κ. θρησκεία τῶν ἀγγ., which the connection, hit upon by him,
ofεἰκῆ with ἐμβατεύων (“an investigation, which results in nothing”), also falls to the ground.
εἰκῆ φυσιούμ. κ. τ. λ., and then καὶ οὐ κρατῶν κ. τ. λ., are both subordinate to

the ἃ ἑώρακενἐμβατεύων, and contain two modal definitions of it fraught with the utmost danger.
εἰκῆ φυσιούμ.] for the entering upon what was seen did not rest upon a real divine revelation, but
upon a conceited, fanciful self-
exaggeration. τὸ δέ γε φυσιούμενος τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ ἐναντίον οὐκἔστι· τὴν μὲν γὰρ ἐσκήπτοντ
ο, τοῦ δὲ τύφου τὸ πάθος ἀκριβῶς περιέκειντο, Theodoret. Onεἰκῆ, temere, i.e. without ground,
comp. Matthew 5:22; Romans 13:4; Plat. Menex. p. 234 C Xen. Cyrop. ii. 2. 22. It places the vanity,
that is, the objective groundlessness of the pride, in contradistinction to their presumptuous
fancies, emphatically in the foreground. Even if ἐμβατ. is not taken absolutely with Hofmann, we
may not join it with εἰκῆ (in opposition to Steiger, de Wette, Reiche; Böhmer is doubtful), since it is
not the uselessness (in this sense εἰκῆ would require to be taken, 1 Corinthians 15:2; Galatians
3:4; Galatians 4:11) of the ἐμβατεύειν ἃ ἑώρ. (or ἃ μὴ ἑώρ.), but this ἐμβατεύειν in and of itself,
that forms the characteristic perversity in the conduct of those people—a perversity which is set
forth by εἰκῆ φυσιούμ.κ. τ. λ., and in Colossians 2:19 as immoral and antichristian.
ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκ. αὐτοῦ] becoming puffed up by (as operative principle) the reason of his

flesh. This is the morally determined intellectual faculty in its character and activity as not divinely
regulated, in which unennobled condition (see on Ephesians 4:23) it is the servant, not of the
divine πνεῦμα, whose organ it is designed to be, but of the materio-physical human nature, of
the σάρξ as the seat of the sin-power, and is governed by its lusts instead of the divine truth.
Comp. Romans 1:21; Romans 1:28; Romans 4:1; Romans 6:19; Romans 7:14; Romans
12:2; Ephesians 4:17 f.; see also Kluge in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol. 1871, p. 329 ff. The νοῦς does not
belong to the essence of the σάρξ (in opposition to Holsten); but, be it observed, the matter is so
represented that the σάρξ of the false teacher, in accordance with its dominant superiority,
appears personified (comp. Romans 8:6), as if the νοῦς, influenced by it, and therewith serviceable
to it, were its own. In virtue of this non-free and, in its activity, sinfully-directed reason, the man,
who is guided by it, is ἀνόητος (Galatians 3:1; Galatians 3:3; Titus 3:3), loses his moral judgment
(Romans 12:2), falls into ἐπιθυμίας ἀνοήτους (1 Timothy 6:9), and withstands Christian truth and
purity asκατεφθαρμένος τὸν νοῦν (2 Timothy 3:8; 2 Corinthians 11:3),
and ἐσκοτισμένος τῇ διανοίᾳ(Ephesians 4:18).
The puffing up of the persons in question consisted in this, that with all their professed and
apparent humility they, as is commonly the case with mystic tendencies, fancied that they could
not be content with the simple knowledge and obedience of the gospel, but were capable of
attaining a special higher wisdom and sanctity. It is well said by
Theophylact: πῶς γὰρ οὐ σαρκικοῦ νοὸς κ. παχέος τὸ ἀθετῆσαι τὰ ὑπὸχριστοῦ λεχθέντα, John
3:16-17; John 3:19; John 10:26 f., καὶ μυρία ὅσα!
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the New Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hmc/colossians-2.html. 1832.
Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament
Colossians 2:18. ΄ηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω, let no man assume the office of umpire to dictate to

you[let no man beguile you of your reward (16)]) A word closely connected with judging ( κρινέτω),
and establishing ordinances or dogmas ( δογματίζεσθε), Colossians 2:16; Colossians 2:20;
for βραβεύω, I guide or regulate [‘moderor;’ Engl. Vers. rule], see Colossians 3:15, note; from
which καταβραβεύωdiffers, as καταχράομαι [abuse] differs from χράομαι [use]; and the verb
itself, which is compounded with κατὰ, governs the accusative, ὑμᾶς, you, for the
preposition κατὰ would require the genitive: Hesychius
has καταβράβεται (read καταβραβεύεται) κατακρίνεται, καταγωνίζεται. Therefore Paul means to
say, Let no one, usurping the authority of judge [arbitrator] of the prizes, and accordingly abusing
it, guide and regulate you in the race which you are running, and mislead you by prescribing what
you, about to receive the prize, should follow, what you should avoid. A French interpreter has
skilfully used the word maitriser, “to domineer;” for the apostle is not speaking of a rival snatching
the prize of the race before you, but of an odious, perverse, insolent judge (umpire). On this verb
depend four participles, through as many sentences, of which the first and third, the second and
fourth, have respect to each other. The manifold advantage of this Chiasmus, now noticed, will by
and by appear.— θέλων ἐνταπεινοφροσύνῃ) Often ‫חפץ‬, with ‫ב‬ following it, is expressed by the
word θέλω, ἐθέλω, εὐδοκῶ,βούλομαι ἐν τινί, for example, 1 Samuel 18:22; 1 Samuel 18:25; comp.
the compoundἐθελοθρησκεία, Colossians 2:23 : θέλων, one who does something with his
will [with inclination: a volunteer in doing]. Comp. Mark 12:38, note.
— ταπεινοφροσύνῃ καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων, with humility of feeling (sentiment) and
worshipping of angels) A Hendiadys. They worship angels under pretext of humility and modesty,
as if they dared not immediately and directly address themselves to God and Christ. “This error,”
says Alexander Morus, “had driven its roots so deep into the earth, that not even after three
centuries could it be pulled out; for the 35th canon of the Council of Laodicea was framed against
it; and this city was the metropolis of Phrygia, where Colosse also was. That canon condemns
the Angelici, for so they were called.” “The Angelici,” says Augustine Haeres. 39, “are those
inclined to the worship of angels.” By this authority, the invocation of saints and intercourse with
spirits, how plausible soever they may be, are entirely taken away.— ἃ μὴ ἑώρακεν, ἐμβατεύων)
Heinsius observes, This language is similar in principle to that of the Greek
tragedians, κεῖνʼ ἐ΄βατεύων, ὅσσα ΄ὴ βλέπειν θέ΄ις, intruding into those things at which it is
unlawful to look. ἑώρακεν, saw with the eyes, and ἐ΄βατεύων, intrudingwith the feet, are spoken
metaphorically of the mind. The foot should not get before the eyes: ἐμβατεύω, I go in, I enter in, I
pass through (penetrate). It is used concerning a hostile invasion, 1 Maccabees 12:25. It is
figuratively applied to the understanding, and signifies, I pry into or search, I handle, Chrys. de
Sac. For how should Christ, ὁ τὰς ἁπάντων ἐμβατεύων καρδίας, who searches the hearts of all, ask
for the sake of learning? On this passage we have made several observations, T. I. p. 376.
Moreover, there is a compound,κενε΄βατεῖν, said of the vain study of abstruse subjects, on which
see Suicer’s Thesaurus; and the same Al. Morus proves by the examples taken from Damascius,
that this word was used by Plato. And there is little doubt, that Paul himself had in his mind the
word of Plato, when he was refuting those who held the same opinion as Plato concerning angels;
comp. κενῆς, Colossians 2:8. But yet, when he might have said,ἃ μὴ ἑώρα κενεμβατεύων, he yet
does not say so (for the things into which the καταβραβεύωνintrudes, are not in themselves
utterly κενὰ, vain, but only not seen by him); but he lays down something even more weighty,
since the ἐμβατεύειν rather expresses the haughtiness of the καταβραβεὑων. On the opposite
side, the κρατεῖν, to hold the Head, corresponds, which is not done in vain, but tends to increase.
— φυσιού΄ενος, puffed up) The antithesis is, humility of sentiment ( ταπεινοφροσὐνῃ); and yet
these two are joined together.
Wahl, Clavis N. T., renders the verb, palma or prœmio fraudo. “Properly it means, to be umpire in

a contest to the detriment of some one.”—ED.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Bengel, Johann Albrecht. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of
the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jab/colossians-2.html. 1897.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible
Let no man beguile you of your reward: the original compound word, peculiar in the New
Testament to Paul, and that in this Epistle only, (and not very frequent in other authors), hath
occasioned interpreters here to render it variously, some joining the next following word with it,
and some (as we read it) to that which follows after. The simple word is, Colossians 3:15,
read rule, or judge, and it may be rendered intercede. Yet Paul doth not elsewhere use this word
simply or in composition where he speaks of judging and condemning, Romans 2:1; however, it is
borrowed from those who were judges or umpires in their games, the apostle most likely alluding
to those, who through favour or hatred determined unjustly, to the defrauding those victors of
their prize or reward to whom it was due. Hence some would have the import to be agreeable to
our translation; Be careful these unjust arbiters do not defraud you of gaining Christ, and deceive
you, ,{as Matthew 24:4 Ephesians 5:6 2 Thessalonians 2:3} by prescribing false lists and giving you
wrong measures, and so judging against you. One renders it: Let no man deceive you with subtle
argument, who pleaseth or delights himself in humility; another: Let no man take your prize;
others: Let no man master it or bear rule over you at pleasure; let none take upon himself, or
usurp to himself, the parts or office of a governor or umpire over you. The apostle labours to
fortify the true followers of Christ against such superstitious subtle ones, who by their artifice did
assume a magisterial authority (without any sure warrant from God) to impose their traditionary
and invented services upon them, and determine of their state, accordingly as the papists do at
this day. One learned man thinks the apostle had not used this word here, but for some notable
advantage, viz. because the simple word may signify to intercede as well as to judge; it made
wonderfully to his purpose in this composition, (as he uses concision, Philippians 3:2), to disparage
those seducers who did, from some notions of the Platonists, labour to gain credit to that opinion
that the angels were intercessors between God and man.
In a voluntary humility, and worshipping of angels; covering their imperious spirit by being

volunteers in humility, or by a pretence of voluntary, uncommanded humility, alleging it would be
presumption in them to address themselves immediately to God, and therefore they would pay a
religious homage to angels, as of a middle nature between God and them, presuming they would
mediate for them: an instance to express all that invented worship, which, how specious soever it
may seem to be, hath no warrant from Christ, who alone can procure acceptance of our persons
and services. He expects that his disciples should assert his rights, and the liberty with which he
hath made them free, against the traditions of self-willed men, and no more to solemnize for
worship, than teach for doctrines, the traditions of men, Matthew 15:2,6,9. We must not, under
any pretext of humility, presume to know what belongs to our duty and God’s service better than
Christ doth, showing us that he alone is the true and living way, and we may come boldly by
him, Matthew 11:28 John 14:1,6 Eph 3:12 Hebrews 4:16 Hebrews 10:19,20. And therefore the
adoring and invocating of angels as heavenly courtiers, whatever the papists out of a show of
humility do argue, is not after Christ, but against him.
Intruding into those things which he hath not seen: yea, and for any one to assert it, and the like,
is to be a bold intruder upon another’s possession, a thrusting a man’s self into the knowledge and
determination of that which is above his reach, Psalms 131:1, and he hath no ground at all for, but
doth pry or wade into a secret which a man cannot know. The apostle useth a Platonic word
against those who did indulge themselves out of curiosity in the opinions of the Platonists about
angels, the worshippers of which, amongst those who were professed Christians in Phrygia, were
so tenacious of their error that they were not rooted out after the third century, when a canon
was made against them under the name of Angelici, in the council of Laodicea near Colosse.
Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind; the first rise of such foolish presumption, was a being rashly
puffed up with the sense of their flesh, a deluded mind moved by some carnal principle, setting
out things with swelling words of vanity, wherewith in truth they have no acquaintance, and
whereof they have no experience, 1 Timothy 1:7.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Poole, Matthew, "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the
Holy Bible. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/colossians-2.html. 1685.
Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament
Of your reward; that which Christ bestows on those who cleave to him, and seek salvation
through him.
In a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels; the apostle apparently speaks of that false
humility which they had who pretended that God was too great to be approached except through
created beings, such as angels. Thus their false teachers sought to draw them away from Christ, as
if they needed ceremonies and mediators not prescribed in the gospel; whereas neither saints nor
angels nor the Virgin Mary can help us as mediators; and Christ, if we trust in him, will do for us all
that we need.
Vainly puffed up; whatever appearances of humility or piety any may have who teach that you
need other mediators besides Christ, or other observances besides those which he has appointed,
they are ignorant or selfish, worldly and wicked, deceivers or deceived. If honest in what they say,
they are blind leaders of the blind. Matthew 15:14. Persons who occupy themselves in matters
beyond the limits of the human mind, are wanting in humility as well as in wisdom and goodness.
They are generally vain and light-minded, superficial and proud.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Edwards, Justin. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Family Bible New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fam/colossians-2.html. American Tract Society.
1851.
Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges
18. μηδεἰς. Contrast μή τις, Colossians 2:16, note.
ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω. An extremely rare word occurring here only in the Greek Bible, and only
twice in profane literature (vide infra).
[1] The compound παραβραβεύω is said to = to adjudge a prize unfairly, and so Chrysostom says
of καταβραβεύειν here, καταβραβευθῆναί ἐστιν, ὅτον παρʼ ἑτέρῳ μὲν ἡ νίκη ᾗ παρʼ ἑτέρῳ δὲ τὸ
βραβεῖον, ὅταν ἐπηρεάζῃ νικήσας (quando cum viceris, fraude laederis). But καταβ. would then
probably = to adjudge a prize wrongly, and with hostile intent to the person injured. Lightfoot
enlarges the reference and understands it as regarding the false teachers simply as persons
frustrating those who otherwise would have won the prize, translating it with the R.V., “rob you of
your prize,” the prize being eternal life.
[2] There is indeed “no doubt that the judge who assigned the prizes at the games was technically
called βραβεύς or βραβευτής, and the prize itself βραβεῖον (1 Corinthians 9:24; Philippians 3:14†).
Hence βραβεύειν would properly signify to act as βραβεύς or umpire, and award the prize to the
most meritorious candidate. But it so happens that in the examples that we have of this verb and
its compounds, the prize itself never comes into view, but only the award or decision, and that not
so much in its proper agonistical, as in an applied and general sense” (Field, Otium Norvicense, ed.
1899). Cf. βραβεύειν, Colossians 3:15†, καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ χρ. βραβευέτω ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν,
and Wisdom of Solomon 10:12†, of Wisdom protecting Jacob, καὶ ἀγῶνα ἰσχυρὸν ἐβράβευσεν
αὐτῷ, “and over his sore conflict she watched as judge,” R.V.
[3] Hence, if it had not been for the analogy of παραβραβεύω, καταβραβεύω would naturally
mean merely “decide against” without any necessary connotation of unfairness or of special
reference to the prize. And this in fact is the meaning of it in the only two places in which it occurs,
viz. Eustath. on Il. A. 402 sqq. (T. I. p. 124, 2 ed. Rom.), and Demosth. c. Mid. p. 544; see Field, loc.
cit.
This meaning, “condemn,” is that of the Syriac both Pesh. and Harcl., and suits the parallelism
of Colossians 2:16, μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω. It is only somewhat stronger. “Let no man judge you
… let no one condemn you.”
θέλων. The construction is very uncertain.

[1] We may take it absolutely, “Let no one condemn you, willingly and gladly, in,” etc. Cf. 2 Peter
3:5, λανθάνει γὰρ αὐτοὺς τοῦτο θέλοντας, “For this they wilfully fail to see.”
[2] We may understand with it some such phrase as τοῦτο ποιεῖν, or καταβραβεύειν ὑμᾶς. So
Ellicott.
But against both [1] and [2] it may reasonably be urged that the attitude of the false teachers
towards the Colossians seems to come nowhere into consideration.
[3] We may take it closely with ἐν, by a Hebraism which is found fairly often in the O.T., generally
indeed with a personal object (e.g. 1 Chronicles 28:4, ἐν ἐμοὶ ἠθέλησεν); but twice of things,
Psalms 111 [112]:1, ἑν ταῖς ἐντολαῖς αὐτοῦ θέλει σφόδρα; 146 [147]:10, οὐκ ἐν τῇ δυναστείᾳ τοῦ
ἵππου θελήσει; cf. Test. XII. Patr., Asher 1, ἐὰν οὖν ἡ ψυχὴ θέλῃ ἐν καλῷ. It thus = “taking pleasure
in” ταπεινοφρ. So Lightfoot.
This gives an admirable sense, and serves to introduce the following participles, which indeed
appear to need some such link. But it is an objection of some weight that this Hebraism occurs
here only in the N.T. (see W.H. Append, in loc.). It also destroys the parallelism of form
between μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ἐν and μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω … ἐν. Yet on the whole this
is perhaps the best construction to adopt.
ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ, “in humility.”
The substantive ταπεινοφροσύνη occurs only in the N.T. (Acts 20:19; Ephesians 4:2; Philippians

2:3; 1 Peter 5:5, Colossians 2:23 and Colossians 3:12†), clearly in a good sense always except here
and Colossians 2:23.
So in itself even here, and Colossians 2:23. Perhaps it was a word often on the lips of the false
teachers.
But the context indicates that the humility which they desired was misplaced. Man is not intended
to humble himself in such a way that he proceeds to worship the angels. “I can speak more safely,”
says an early author, “and more cheerfully to my Jesus, than to any of the holy spirits of God,”
tutius et jucundius loquor ad meum Jesum, quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum, De Vis. infirm.
II. § 2 in Augustine’s works, Appendix, Migne VII. p. 1153 (quoted by Davenant).
The adjective ταπεινόφρων occurs in 1 Peter 3:8† and Proverbs 29:23†, also in a good sense. So
also the verb ταπεινοφρονεῖν in the only place in which it is found in the Greek Bible, Psalms 130
[131]:2, and in Sym. Job 22:29.
Precisely the same thought of ταπεινοφροσύνη being necessary for understanding visions is found
in Hermas, Vis. III. x. 6. Hermas on asking to know the meaning of the revelation of the Church in
threefold form is told by her πᾶσα ἐρώτησις ταπεινοφροσύνῃς χρῄζει· νήστευσον οὖν, καὶ
λήμψῃ, ὃ αἰτεῖς παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου.
Also notice that after one day of fasting a young man appears to him in the night, and warns him
against injuring his flesh by too much desire after revelations.
καὶ θρησκείᾳ, “and cult.” θρησκεία occurs in the N.T. elsewhere only in Acts 26:5 and James 1:26-
27. It is not found in the LXX. of the Canonical books, but only in Wisdom of Solomon
14:18; Wisdom of Solomon 14:27; Sirach 22:5 (A); 4 Maccabees 5:6; 4 Maccabees 5:13, and three
times in the Symmachus fragments.
Cf. ἐθελοθρησκία, Colossians 2:23†; θρῆσκος, James 1:26-27 (supra)†; and θρησκεύειν, Wisdom of

Solomon 11:15; Wisdom of Solomon 14:16†.
It = the external, sensuous side of religion, worship quâ form. Trench, Synon. § xlviii. quotes from
Philo (Quod Det. Pot. Ins. 7. §§ 20, 21, Wendland, I. 195), saying that “Having repelled such as
would fain be counted among the εὐσεβεῖς on the score of divers washings, or costly offerings to
the temple, he proceeds: πεπλάνηται γὰρ καὶ οὗτος τῆς πρὸς εὐσέβειαν ὁδοῦ, θρησκείαν ἀντὶ
ὁσιότητος ἡγούμενος” i.e. as Hatch translates it “with heart set on external observances instead of
on holiness” (Biblical Greek, p. 56). Hatch sets out the various passages where θρησκεία occurs
(e.g. in Josephus) in a very convenient form. Cf. too Mayor on James. From Lightfoot’s quotation
from Plutarch, Vit. Alex. 2, δοκεῖ καὶ τὸ θρησκεύειν ὄνομα ταῖς κατακόροις γενέσθαι καὶ
περιέργοις ἱερουργίαις we may suppose that the substantive as well as the verb would have the
connotation of scrupulosity in “wearisome and elaborate” external rites.
τῶν ἀγγέλων. The genitive is surely objective though Zahn and P. Ewald try to show that it is
subjective, and that the clause = mortification and devotion suitable to angels, but not for men
who have bodies.
The article is strange. It shows that the emphasis is not on angels as such. It may either mean “the
angels” generally, or “the angels” that the false teacher personally worshipped.
On the nature of the angel worship at Colossae, see Introd. ch. IV.
ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων, “exploring the things that he hath seen.” On the reading ἃ μὴ ἑόρακεν,
see notes on Textual Criticism. ἐμβατεύειν occurs here only in the N.T.
It may mean (a) frequent, haunt; νῆσος … ἣν ὁ φιλόχορος Πὰν ἐμβατεύει, Aesch. Pers. 449; (b)
take possession (also classical). To this the usage of the LXX. is closely akin.
In canonical books of the LXX. only in Joshua 19:49; Joshua 19:51, καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν ἑμβατεῦσαι
τὴν γῆν in Joshua 19:49, representing naḥal, divide (the land) for a possession, and in Joshua
19:51, ḥalleq, divide, or apportion.
In 1 Mac. ἐμβατεύειν εἰς is used of an enemy invading a country (1 Maccabees 12:25, 1 Maccabees

13:20, 1 Maccabees 14:31, 1 Maccabees 15:40), and in 2 Maccabees 2:30 the writer says τὸ μὲν
ἐμβατεύειν καὶ περίπατον ποιεῖσθαι λόγῳ κ. πολυπραγμονεῖν ἐν τοῖς κατὰ μέρος, τῷ τῆς ἱστορίας
ἀρχηγενέτῃ καθήκει, “to occupy the ground, and to indulge in long discussions,” R.V., where
perhaps “to go into matters” (Rawlinson) is better.
(c) But Chrysostom uses it of God exploring the heart, ὁ τὰς ἁπάντων ἐμβατεύων καρδίας (I. p. 371
E), τὸν ἐμβατεύοντα ταῖς καρδίαις (IX. p. 437 D), and of persons who presume to investigate God’s
nature, οἱ τὴν μακαρίαν ἐκείνην φύσιν ἐμβατεύειν ἐπιχειροῦντες (I. p. 472 C). Similarly
Athanasius, τολμηρὸν ἐμβατεύειν τὴν ἀπερινόητον φύσιν, (I. p. 152) in Suicer I. p. 1098, who gives
other examples from the Fathers.
So too Hesychius, ἐμβατεῦσαι—ζητῆσαι; and Varinus, ἐμβατεῦσαι, ἐπιβῆναι, τὰ ἔνδον

ἐξερευνῆσαι, ἢ σκοπῆσαι, and there seems to be no sufficient reason for forsaking this
interpretation here. Cf. Field, Otium Norvicense, 1899. The thought is that the false teacher spends
his time in searching into the meaning of his visions—an error common to many of the more
sensuous forms of religion. Compare the elaborate explanations given in Hermas, and in Enoch, of
the visions described.
Thus it is not necessary to emend the text, though two conjectures are historically interesting,
(a) ἐώρᾳ or αἰώρᾳ κενεμβατεύειν, “treading the void in the air,” for “though the precise
form κενεμβατεύειν does not occur, yet it is unobjectionable in itself” (Lightfoot). (b) ἀέρα
κενεμβατεύων (C. Taylor) or κενεμβατῶν, “treading the void of air.” (c) P. Ewald in order to
account for the μή suggests ἀμετροκενεμβατεύων or, preferably, ἄμετρα κενεμβατεύων, “ins
Ungemessene Lufttritte machend oder auch: masslos ins Leere stechend.”
εἰκῇ, “vainly,” i.e. “without just cause,” Romans 13:4; Proverbs 28:25; to be taken

with φυσιούμενος. It would only weaken ἐμβατεύων.
φυσιούμενος, “being puffed up,” “inflated.” Elsewhere only in 1 Cor. (sex.). Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:1, ἡ
γνῶσις φυσιοῖ.
ὑπὸ, probably in personification; cf. Mayor on James 3:4.
τοῦ νοὸς, i.e. the thinking faculty, the intellect, in operation; cf. Romans 12:2; 1 Corinthians 14:14-
15.
τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ. It ought to have been dominated by the spirit; ὑπὸ σαρκικῆς διανοίας, οὐ
πνευματικῆς· ἀνθρώπινος ὁ λογισμός (Chrys.).
Compare Moule on Ephesians 2:3, “This important word [the flesh], wherever it occurs in the N.T.
in connexion with the doctrine of sin, means human nature as conditioned by the Fall, or, to word
it otherwise, either the state of the unregenerate being, in which state the sinful principle
dominates, or the state of that element of the regenerate being in which the principle, dislodged,
as it were, from the centre, still lingers and is felt; not dominant in the being, but present.”
Probably St Paul also bears in mind the claim of the false teachers to purify themselves by their
asceticism from the power of the flesh. Nay, he says, in reality they are governed by it. If this
double interpretation be right the ethical and the physical references of σάρξ are both present.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
"Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cgt/colossians-2.html. 1896.
John Eadie's Commentary on Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Philippians
(Colossians 2:18.) ΄ηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω—“Let no man rob you of your reward.” Theodoret
explains the peculiar verb as meaning τὸ ἀδίκως βραβεύειν-to confer a reward unjustly. Zonaras,
on the 35th canon of the Laodicean Council, has usually been adduced, and he says that the action
of the verb is done when this takes place- τὸ μὴ τὸν νικήσαντα ἀξιοῦν τοῦ βραβείου, ἀλλ᾿ ἑτέρῳ
διδόναι αὐτό, “not to reckon one who has conquered worthy of the prize, but to give it to
another.” Suidas says more distinctly- τὸ ἄλλου ἀγωνιζομένου ἄλλον στεφανοῦσθαι λέγει ὁ
ἀπόστολος καταβραβεύεσθαι. The other figure, adopted by Beza, from one of the exceptional
meanings ofβραβεύω, is not sustained by any certain examples. His idea is, let no one usurp the
office of aβραβευτής against you; while in a similar way a-Lapide, Crocius, and Bengel, generally
adopt this meaning-let no one assuming such an office domineer over you, and so prescribe to you
how you are to act in order to obtain the prize. Such an interpretation has more in derivation to
recommend it than the notion of Luther, Castalio, and Calvin-let no one intercept the prize, or get
it before you. The apostle warns them to listen to none of these instructors, for their design was to
rob them of that prize, which, as the result of their spiritual victory, Christianity set before them. If
they yielded to any of the practices referred to in this verse, then they followed the solicitation of
one who would rob them of that “prize of their high calling” for which they had been pressing
forward. It is thus a term of far deeper import than the preceding κρινέτω, though Photius,
Hesychius, Elsner, Storr, Huther, Bähr, and Olshausen virtually identify them. For there is in it not
merely the giving of a wrong judgment, but a judgment which involves in it the loss of all that the
gospel promises to the winner, a life of glory on high. It is a tame idea of De Wette, to suppose
that the prize is the true worship of God, for it is here looked upon not as a prize, but as the means
of obtaining the prize. It may be remarked in passing, that Jerome regards the verb as a Cilicism, or
a provincialism of the apostle, but others have shown that the word occurs among the classics, as
in Demosthenes and Polybius.
The true connection and meaning of the following word, θέλων, are not easily ascertained. The
agitated question is, whether it should be joined to καταβραβευέτω, or to the following words, ἐν
ταπεινοφροσύνῃ. If it be joined to the former, the meaning will be “willingly”-let no one willingly
seduce you; but this would be a counsel to the false teachers as well as to the Colossians. Or it
may be, as Grotius gives it-etiamsi id maxime velit, “let no one, although he should set his heart
upon it, rob you of your reward.” Beza finds in the term a support to the sense which he attached
to the verb-let no one assume voluntarily the office of a prize-distributor over you, and thus wrong
you. Erasmus gives the term an adverbial sense of cupide, studiose; and others render
it ultro. Steiger inclines to a similar opinion, and Tittmann translates-consulto vel ultro.But the
usage is not well sustained in the New Testament, and the participle is, as Bengel remarks, the first
of a series, θέλων, ἐμβατεύων, φυσιούμενος, κρατῶν, and each of the participles has its
independent construction. It must therefore be joined to ἐν ταπεινοφρ.-but how? Olshausen,
Wahl, Bähr, Böhmer, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Bretschneider, preceded by Hesychius, Phavorinus,
Augustine, Estius, Elsner, Storr, and Flatt, take θέλων in the sense of εὐδοκῶν, “delighting in”-
affectans humilitatem. Thus they regard it as a Hebraism formed upon the usage 1-‫ ְב‬ 6‫ֵפ‬ ¶ ָ‫ח‬
Samuel 18:22; 2 Samuel 15:26; 2 Chronicles 9:8; Psalms 111:2; Psalms 147:10. Though this usage
may be regarded as established in the Septuagint, yet it is not found in the New Testament, nor
does it suit here. For the apostle is not wishing to paint the character of the false teacher, b ut to
warn against his wiles. He does not mean to say that the false teacher has a special pride in his
own humility, but he means to say, that the Colossians must be on their guard against him, for he
will seek to entrap them by means of that humility.
We give θέλων its common meaning. Let no man beguile you-wishing to do it by his humility. This
is the natural view of the Greek Fathers, of Theodoret, and of Theophylact who says- ὅτι θέλουσιν
ὑμᾶς καταβραβεύειν διὰ ταπεινοφρ. δοκούσης. So Photius, Calvin, Huther, Meyer, and De Wette.
The preposition ἐν denotes the means of deception, or the sphere in which the deceiver moves.
The humility referred to, as may be seen from the last verse of the chapter, is a spurious humility.
Fanatical pride is often associated with this humility, as when, for show, the beggar's feet are
washed; and the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs. And men become proud of
their humility-glory in the feeling of self-annihilation. The spirit of the false teacher, with all its
professed lowliness, would not bend to the Divine revelation, but nursed its fallacies with a
haughty tenacity, and preached them with an impious daring, for he was “vainly puffed up by his
fleshly mind.”
καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων—“And adoration of angels.” This is another of the instruments of
seduction. The genitive τῶν ἀγγέλων cannot be that of subject, as if the meaning were, a worship
like that which angels present, or such as man may learn from them- θρησκεία ἀγγελική. Such a
view is held by Schoettgen and Wolf, and in its spirit by Noesselt, Rosenmüller, Luther, and
Schrader. Tertullian says-aliquos taxat, qui ex visionibus angelicis dicebant, cibis abstinendum,
etc. Adver. Marcion, 5:19.
The genitive is that of object. The attempt of the false teacher was not to get them into an ecstasy
such as that felt by the “rapt seraph, who adores and burns,” but it was a positive inculcation of
angel-worship.θρησκεία is often followed by the genitive of object. Winer, § 30, 1. The term,
whatever its derivation, denotes devotional service. How angels came to be worshipped we may
not precisely know, though, certainly, it might not be difficult to account for it, when one sees how
saint-worship has spread itself so extensively in one section of Christendom. The angels occupied
the highest place which creatures could occupy under the Theocracy. They held lofty station and
discharged important functions. The law was “ordained by angels, in the hands of a mediator,”
nay, the apostle calls it “the word spoken by angels.” Jehovah descended with ten thousand of His
holy ones, when “from His right hand went a fiery law.” The Jews, said Stephen, in his address,
“received the law by the disposition of angels.” Whatever be the meaning of these declarations,
there is no doubt that they indicate some special and important province of angelic operation.
Josephus expresses the same opinion-the current one of his nation. No wonder that those beings,
so sublimely commissioned by God, and burning in the reflection of His majesty, command human
reverence, and are therefore themselves called “gods.” Psalms 97:7, compared with Hebrews 1:6.
Now, the step from respect to worship is at once short and easy, for it is but an exaggeration. The
heart, not content with feeling that a being so near God and so like Him should be held in esteem
and admiration, passes into excess, and worships where it had honoured. And to fortify itself in
the practice, it perverted the angelic office. It raised those creatures from attendants to
mediators-from messengers to interested protectors. It would seem that in the days of the
patriarch Job such a feeling existed in the early world. “Call now,” is the challenge of Eliphaz, “if
there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the saints wilt thou turn?” and in another
chapter mention is made of an angel interpreter. In the book of Tobit, the Jewish belief is
incidentally brought out-that angels formally present prayers to God. In the imagery of the
Apocalypse, we find an angel at the altar, having in his hand a golden censer and much incense,
that he should offer it with “the prayers of all saints.” In the Testimony of the Twelve Patriarchs,
and in the book of Enoch, the same notion is prominently exhibited. And thus the prayer offered
through the angel, was by and by presented to him. It was first offered to him that he might carry
it to God, and then it was offered to him without such ulterior reference or prospect. Again, that
angels were entrusted with the presidency of various countries and nations, was another Jewish
opinion; and it was with a superstitious people a matter of extreme facility to pass from that
obeisance, which might be yielded to a representative of Divinity, to that veneration which is due
to Jehovah alone. If a ma n bent one knee in loyalty, he soon bent both knees in worship; and
asked from the substitute what should be solicited from the principal.
That the worship of created spirits was widespread, thus admits of no doubt. The Fathers
abundantly testify to it. Origen affirms it of the Jews, and Clement makes the same assertion; both
of them, as well as the treatise called the “Preaching of Peter,” describing the Jews as λατρεύοντες
ἀγγέλοις. An old Jewish liturgy distinctly contains angelworship, and exhibits one form of it. Celsus
also avers it. The Platonic idea of demons-itself, in all probability, a relic of Eastern Theosophy-
spread itself, in Asia Minor, and combined with the Jewish superstition. That such practices should
take root in Phrygia is no marvel, for there they found a congenial soil. Theodoret testifies to their
existence, and that they remained in Phrygia and Pisidia for a long time. The thirty-fifth canon of
the Council of Laodicea, a city in the vicinity, solemnly interdicted the practice, but did not wholly
eradicate it. In the days of Theodoret, the archangel Michael was worshipped at Colosse; and
a ναὸς ἀρχαγγελικός was built in his honour, and for a miracle alleged to be wrought by him.
Though those historical quotations refer to post-apostolic periods, still they appear to describe the
remnants of earlier practices, and they afford at least some analogies that help us to judge of the
superstitions which the apostle mentions and reprobates. The Catholic interpreters, Estius and a-
Lapide, make a strong effort to exclude this passage, from such as might be brought against the
worship of saints.
The two nouns, “humility and worship of angels,” are closely connected, and mean a species of
humility connected with angel-worship. It was out of a fanatical humility that service was offered
to angels. It was thought that the great God was too majestic and distant to be addressed, and
they therefore invented these internuncii. That the heretical party thought the glory of the Only-
Begotten too dazzling for approach, and therefore took refuge in angel-worship, is an opinion of
Chrysostom and Theophylact, but in opposition to the whole tenor of the rebuke generally, and of
the following clause particularly, for it contains the accusation of “not holding the Head.” The true
reason and connection are given, as we have given them, by Theodoret.
῝α μὴ ἑώρακεν ἐμβατεύων. This clause presents a very strange difference of reading, for the
negative is omitted in some MSS. of high authority, such as A, B, D 1, and by several of the Latin
Fathers. It is therefore rejected by Lachmann, and his reading is approved of by Olshausen, Steiger,
Huther, and Meyer. Olshausen says that μή was added because critics thought that they were
obliged to insert a negative. His assertion may be turned against himself; for we might reply that
the copyists could not discover the propriety of μή according to their finical notions of grammar;
since some, as in F, G, changed it into οὐκ, and others omitted it altogether. The meaning of the
clause is not materially different whichever reading be adopted. If the negative be omitted, the
clause must be an ironical description. The words “which he has seen” will mean, visions which he
professes or imagines to have seen-visions which are the result of a morbid imagination or a
distempered brain. We prefer the common reading found in C, D 111, E, J, K, in the Vulgate, Gothic,
and Syriac Versions, and in so many of the Greek Fathers. The negative μή, and not οὐκ, is rightly
employed. Winer, § 55, 3. The participle ἐμβατεύων, found only here in the New Testament, but
occurring several times in the Apocrypha, and allied in origin to the similar term ἐμβαίνω, is
wrongly supposed by some, such as Erasmus, to signify, to walk in state-as if the expression were
taken a tragicis cothurnis. It sometimes denotes, to go into the possession of, as in Joshua 19:49.
And then it is usually followed by εἰς. Buddaeus, Zanchius, and Huther assign it such a meaning
here. It also has the sense of-to go into, to penetrate into, or to intrude. It is so used of God, and
often of man, both in a literal and tropical sense, and is followed sometimes by the dative and
sometimes, as here, by the accusative. Phavorinus defines it- τὸ ἔνδον ἐξερευνῆσαι ἢ σκοπῆσαι,
and Hesychius explains it by the less intense term ζητήσας. The compound κενεμβατεύειν is
employed, in Plato, to denote senseless speculation. From the verbἑώρακεν, there is no need to
deduce the idea of mental perception or knowledge, as Heinrichs and Flatt incline to do-quae
intellectu percipere nemo potest. The word is often used of visions and visionary representations-
Acts 11:17; Acts 9:10-12; Acts 10:3; Revelation 9:17; and of a supersensuous view of God-John
1:18; John 6:46; John 14:7; 1 John 4:12.
The reference in the clause—“intruding into what he has not seen”-appears to be the worship of
angels. The current theosophy spent no little of its ingenuity upon the spirit-world. It wandered
not only beyond the regions of sense, but even that of Scripture. It mustered into troops the
heavenly orders. [Ephesians 1:21.] This oriental propensity was a prevalent one. The inquisitive
spirit pryed into the invisible world around it and above it. It loved such phantasms, and lost itself
in transcendental reveries. The creed of the Zendavesta had its Ormuzd, its six Amshaspands, its
eight-and-twenty Izeds, and hosts of Feruers-all of them objects of worship and prayer. Augustine
says, with justice, that many had tried the intercession of angels, but had failed; and not only so,
but-inciderunt in desiderium curiosarum visionum.How the Jewish fancy strove to penetrate the
curtain that conceals the unseen, may be learned from the following quotation from a rabbinical
treatise. “As there are ten Sephiroth, so there are ten troops of angels, as follows:-the Erellim,
Ishim, Benei-haelohim, Malachim, Hashmalim, Tarshishim, Shinanim, Cherubim, Ophanim, and the
Seraphim. Captains are set over each of them-Michael over the Erellim, Zephaniah over the Ishim,
Hophniel over the Benei-haelohim, Uzziel over the Malachim, Hashmal over the Hashmalim,
Tarshish over the Tarshishim, Zadkiel over the Shinanim, Cherub over the Cherubim, Raphael over
the Ophanim, and Jehuel over the Seraphim.” Tertullian mentions some who professed to divine
their asceticism from angelic revelation, a remark which serves at least for illustration.
Some, such as Steiger, have proposed to join the following adverb εἰκῆ to ἐμβατεύων, and give it
the sense of “rashly” or “uselessly.” This notion, however, is already contained in the reproof. But
the idea with our exegesis is, that the mental inflation of the errorists, which co-exists with his
humility and his angel-worship, and prompts him to pry into what is concealed from him, is εἰκῆ-it
is without ground. It has no warrant. Matthew 5:22; Romans 13:4.
The following clause discovers one prime ground of the heresy, and shows the principal reason
why the gospel was not cordially received. It was not intricate enough, it did not deal in any vain
speculations, but it claimed and commanded attention to the real and practical, and it showed not
the way into the abstruse and recondite. It did not harmonize with current notions of angelology
and asceticism, and it was outdone in those respects by Essene Gnosticism. It did not forbid the
humble spirit to raise itself to the Divine throne; for it taught that the intervening distance was
spanned by the mediatorial nature of Christ. It exhibited the angels as “ministering spirits,” or
fellow-servants; but it held up no eccentric array of visions and phantasms, which might beguile
men into fanatical worship and conceited contrition. In the fulness of its revelation it left to no
man the claim of discovery, or the merit of invention. He, then, who did not receive it as presented
to him, but wished to change its nature and supplement its oracles, so that it might have the air
and the aspect of a transcendental theosophy, was “puffed up by his fleshly mind,”-thought
himself possessed of a higher knowledge, and favoured with profounder instruction than our Lord
and His apostles.
The participle φυσιούμενος,-not from φύσις, which, in the classical writers, makes φυσιάω, but
fromφύω,-signifies inflated. 1 Corinthians 4:6; 1 Corinthians 4:18-19; 1 Corinthians 5:2; 1
Corinthians 8:1. The heretic was blown up with his delusion, verifying the remark- ἡ γνῶσις φυσιοῖ
—“knowledge puffeth up.” He was too proud to learn-too wise to acknowledge any instruction
beyond himself. The source of inflation was a “fleshly mind,” “he was puffed up.”
῾υπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ—“By the mind of his flesh.” The expression is peculiar, but darkly
emphatic. νοῦς is mind-not simply intellect, but mind as the region of thought and susceptibility;
whileσάρξ is, as in so many other places, the name of unregenerate humanity. The expression
denotes something more than mens imbecilla. Nor is it enough to resolve the two genitives into
the phrase- σαρκικῆς διανοίας, or with Usteri, into νοήματα σαρκικά. The genitive is not a mere
predicate, but is the genitive of possession. The “flesh” possesses and governs the “mind.” The
mind did not struggle with the carnal principle, but succumbed to it. It was wholly under the sway
of a nature unchanged by the grace of God, and which therefore exercised its predominance to
serve and please itself. In all these mental efforts and sentiments concerning Christianity, the false
teacher was guided not by any pure regard to the Divine revelation, or by a simple desire to bow
to the Divine will; but his “mind” was influenced by motives, and determined by reasonings, which
sprung from a nature wholly under the empire of sense and fancy; a nature which was satisfied
with an array of external puerilities-which preferred ascetic distinctions to spiritual self-denial-
revelled in imaginations that at once sprung from it and lorded over it-and, in short, acting like
itself and for itself, coveted and set up a religion of man, but spurned and thrust away that religion
which is of God. And thus, in a later century, and in the same country, it was believed that the Holy
Spirit communicated to Montanus more and nobler revelations than Christ had delivered in the
gospel. The “flesh” could not but have a sensuous system-one resembling itself; and the “mind,”
acting under its sway, could not but devise a scheme in kee ping with such governing and
prompting influence. 1 Corinthians 2:14. And, by this means, the abettor of error was “vainly
puffed up” that he possessed a deeper enlightenment than the apostles, and a purer sanctity than
the churches; and, in his vanity, he dreamed of being able, by his unhallowed reveries, to supply
the defects and multiply the attractions of the gospel. The three participles of this verse, and that
of the first clause of the following verse, have a close connection- θέλων expressing the desire of
the heresiarch to make converts by a specious snare- ἐμβατεύων portraying one special source
and feature of his system- φυσιούμενος indicating his moral temperament-and,
lastly, κρατῶν pointing to the lamentable accompaniment and necessary result—“not holding the
Head”-
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Eadie, John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". John Eadie's Commentary on Galatians, Ephesians,
Philippians and Colossians. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jec/colossians-2.html.
Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
‘Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility or worshipping of the supernatural
messengers, dwelling in the things which he has seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not
holding fast the Head, from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the
joints and bands, increases with the increase of God.’
The Christian life is here thought of as an athletic contest (compare 1 Corinthians 9:24-27; 2
Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 12:1). In order to win the prize everything that could hinder, anything that
could ‘slow us down’, must be laid aside. By fixing our eyes on anyone or anything other than
Christ we will hinder our growth, for He is our Head, the Great Direct Supplier, and He alone can
provide that which makes us ‘increase with the increase of God’. To look to intermediaries is to
choke the line of contact and thus prevent maximum benefit. And this is true whether of priests,
angels, saints or Mary.
‘Let no man rob you of your prize (or ‘give an unfavourable ruling against you’).’ Paul may have
intended us to see Christ as ‘the prize’, God’s response to our faith. Or it may refer to our failing to
achieve our future reward because false humility renders us useless. The verb (there is no
separate word for ‘prize’) may, however simply mean, ‘give an unfavourable ruling against you’,
but the consequence is the same.
‘A voluntary humility and worshipping of supernatural messengers.’ The word for supernatural
messengers is ‘angelos’, usually translated ‘angels’. But we must not here think in terms of angels
as we see them with our Christian interpretation. It refers to a whole host of supernatural beings,
gods, demi-gods, principalities, powers and so on as believed on in the ancient world. The
voluntary humility is an attitude of humility that makes a great show of being ‘nothing’ in
comparison with these supernatural messengers. It ignores what God has said and debases itself
to look to lesser things. They choose what they see as the ‘humble’ position not realising that this
is to insult God.
The argument for intermediaries always seems right to the person who is aware of his sinfulness
and yet has not come to an understanding of the wisdom of God revealed in Christ. ‘I am not
worthy’, he says. But it is a sign of a darkened mind that has not ‘learned Christ’. It demonstrates
that he does not understand the free grace of the Gospel. The Gospel is Christ in all His fullness,
‘Christ in you, the hope of glory’ (Colossians 1:27), offered to men. To accept anything less robs us
of Christ and robs us of our prize. The intermediary will not bring us to Christ but will hide Christ
from us.
‘Worshipping.’ The particular word denotes the external practise of religion, and is used regularly
of false worship.
‘Dwelling in (taking delight in, devoting himself to) the things which he has seen, vainly puffed up
by his fleshly mind.’ The verb ‘dwelling’ is difficult to translate. It has been found in inscriptions as
a technical term for certain types of ritual response in the mystery religions. It means ‘to set foot
on, enter, visit, go into detail, come into possession of ’, thus leading on in context to the
translations ‘taking delight in, devoting oneself to, dwelling in’. The idea is partly sarcastic. He
takes delight in and is puffed up by what produces his voluntary ‘humility’, demonstrating that it is
not genuine.
This probably in context refers to visions which so often result in giving prominence to
intermediaries (‘angels’). But if those intermediaries seek honour and veneration for themselves
then they are false and must be rejected (Revelation 19:10; Revelation 22:8-9). Any true vision
from the other world would magnify Christ and turn attention from itself to Him. Those who dwell
in visions inevitably go wrong, and lead others astray, for in their pride (often seen by themselves
as humility) they magnify the subject of the vision rather than Christ Himself.
Visions are always a problem for the godly person. They do not like to denigrate them and
recognise that, rarely, there have been genuine visions. Yet if they are wise they will recognise that
visions regularly arise from wrong sources, and are often drug induced or arise from a chemical
imbalance in the brain. They are the ‘easy way’ to ‘certainty’. There are some whose mental make
up is such that they are susceptible to ‘visions’. They ‘see things’ that others do not see, especially
when they indulge in asceticism (see Colossians 2:23), and are thus inevitably very sincere, but
they are experiencing mental aberrations rather than contacting spiritual sources (it comes from
their ‘fleshly mind’ - compare Romans 8:5-6 - it is the mind controlled by the flesh and pandering
to the flesh as opposed to the spiritual mind). So we are right to be wary of them. The general
principle must be, if at all in doubt reject them, although treating the visionary gently. In
themselves they prove nothing for they can never be substantiated. Personal visions should be
retained for personal use. They should never be the foundation for doctrine. That is why Jesus
stressed that He referred to what He had actually seen (John 3:11; John 3:32; John 8:38).
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible ".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/colossians-2.html. 2013.
Whedon's Commentary on the Bible

b. Caution against angel-worship, Colossians 2:18-19.
18. Beguile—The marginal judge against you, is more accurate. The allusion is to the judge who,
presiding at the games, fraudulently deprives him of the prize to whom it should be awarded. The
false teacher would deprive them of their rightful reward of the incorruptible crown by misleading
them in the way of attaining it. His character is described in four particulars. 1. He wills, or delights
in, a pretended humility which held God to be so unapproachable and incomprehensible that the
mediation of inferior spiritual beings was necessary. Worshipping of angels would readily fall in
with this theory. Notwithstanding the apostle’s labour and caution, this evil took so deep root in
Phrygia and Pisidia, that three centuries later the Council of Laodicea forbade the practice by a
special decree, condemning it as idolatry and an abandonment of Christ. 2. He stands upon what
he has seen, and pretends to a profound knowledge of the heavenly world by wonderful visions.
Most recent critics omit the word not. 3. Believing that he has fathomed the mysteries of the
spiritual world, he is, though pretending to humility, really but without reason inflated by his own
spiritualized sensualism.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Whedon's Commentary on the Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/colossians-2.html. 1874-1909.
Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Colossians 2:18. Let no man. The singular number in these warnings does not point to a particular
person, but gives emphasis.
Rob you of the prize. The figure, borrowed from the games, suggests an unfair decision of the
umpire in awarding the prize; but it need not be pressed further than to mean depriving the
Christian of his ‘prize,’ which is future blessedness, eternal life. The false teachers, by their errors,
might prevent their obtaining this.
Of his own will, lit., ‘willing.’ This expression is very difficult to interpret satisfactorily. Some
(among them, Lightfoot) explain: ‘delighting in humility,’ etc. But this is a harsh and unusual
Hebraism, and the word ‘willing’ rarely, if ever, has the sense of delight ‘Willing,’ or ‘willingly,’ as
we must express it, a qualification of the verb ‘rob you of the prize,’ but three senses have been
given it. (1.) Willingly, of his own choice or impulse; this is almost equivalent to ‘arbitrarily,’ and
agrees best with the exact sense of the Greek word. The E. V. seems to have endeavored to give a
similar thought. (2.) ‘Desiring to do it, which presses the word somewhat. (3.) ‘Purposing to do it;’
a sense that the word would bear, but not so natural as the first. The context referring to the
human origin of the precepts of the false teachers (Colossians 2:22) and to their ‘will-worship,’
etc., seems to favor (1), which gives emphasis to the purely human impulse. The methods they
adopt to de-fraud you of the prize have their origin in their own choice, not in any objective truth.
(On the exact sense of the word ‘willing,’ comp. my note in Lange, Ephesians, p. 42.)
By (lit., ‘in,’ pointing to the sphere of the actions) humility. The word, occurring elsewhere always
in a good sense, in this chapter (comp. Colossians 2:23) seems to point to something
blameworthy: ‘a false and perverted lowliness, which deemed God was so inaccessible that He
could only be approached through the mediation of inferior beings’ (Ellicott).
And worship of the angels. This was the outward evidence of the false humility. The word
‘worship’ refers properly to the external rites of religion, and so get to signify an over-scrupulous
devotion to external forms’ (Lightfoot). It was at Colossae that special worship was given in after
days to the archangel Michael for an alleged miracle, Jewish influences might have led to this
worship of the angels.
Dwelling in, or, ‘taking his stand upon,’ the things which he hath seen. The weight of authority
has led recent editors to reject ‘not;’ and the sense ‘intruding’ is inappropriate with the reading. Of
the two explanations given above, the former is preferable, both on lexical grounds, and from its
aptness in this connection, pointing to the false teacher as continually poring over the visions
(‘which he hath seen’), his ‘illusions,’ but ‘delusions’ in their influence. The ‘spiritism’ of modern
times naturally suggests an illustration of the meaning.
Vainly puffed up; puffed up with pride despite the show of humility, and that without ground.
By the mind of his flesh. As ‘the flesh’ has a body, so it has a ‘mind;’ the unrenewed nature is
personified (comp. Romans 8:6), and its ‘mind’ is represented as causing the pride of the false
teacher. There may be a reference to some favorite phrase of the errorists.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/colossians-2.html. 1879-90.
The Expositor's Greek Testament
Colossians 2:18. This verse gives us our only definite information, apart from which it would have
been a highly probable inference, that the false teachers practised angel-worship.
— ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω. This is commonly translated “rob you of your prize”. The judge at the
games was called βραβεύς orβραβευτής, and the prize βραβεῖον. But the
verb βραβεύω apparently lost all reference to the prize, and meant simply “to decide”. In the two
cases in which καταβραβεύω occurs it means to decide against or condemn. It is best therefore to
take it so here, “let no one give judgment against you”; it is thus parallel to, though stronger
than, κρινέτω (Colossians 2:16). (Field, Notes on Transl. of the N.T., pp. 196, 197, discusses the
word; cf. also Ol. and Abb. ad loc.)— θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ. This phrase is very variously
interpreted. Some assume a Hebraism, and translate “taking pleasure in humility” (Winer, Lightf.,
Findl., Haupt). The LXX uses this not infrequently (but usually with persons, though otherwise
in Psalms 111:1; Psalms 146:10); but there is no N.T. parallel for it, and Paul does not employ
Hebraisms. For this idea he uses εὐδοκεῖν. Moreover it yields no relevant sense here. Others
translate “wishing to do so in (or by) humility” (Mey., Ell., Sod., Weiss). But for
this τοῦτο ποιεῖν should have been added, and on this interpretation θέλων has really little point.
The rendering of Alford, Moule and others is not very different from this in sense, but more
forcible. It connects θέλ. with καταβραβ., and translates “wilfully,” “of set purpose”. 2 Peter 3:5 is
referred to for the construction. Oltramare’s view is similar, but he translates “spontaneously,” so
apparently the R.V. mg. and Abbott. The unsatisfactoriness of these interpretations suggests that
the text may be corrupt. Hort thinks that for θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ we should
read ἐνἐθελοταπεινοφροσύνῃ. This word is used by Basil, and a similar compound occurs
in Colossians 2:23. It is, of course, as Haupt says, difficult to understand how the copyists should
have altered it into the very strange expression in the text. But this is not a fatal objection, and the
conjecture is very possibly correct. It would mean “gratuitous humility,” a humility that went
beyond what was required. ταπεινοφροσύνῃ is frequently explained as ironical. By a display of
humility they beguiled their dupes. But the connexion with the following words makes this
improbable. Their humility found an expression in angel worship. It is therefore that lowliness
which causes a man to think himself unworthy to come into fellowship with God, and therefore
prompts to worship of the angels. Such humility was perverted, but not therefore unreal. It was
compatible with vanity towards others.— καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων: “and worship of angels”.
The genitive is objective, though some have taken it as subjective. This has been done most
recently and elaborately by Zahn. He takes τ. ἀγγ. with ταπειν. as well as with θρησκείᾳ. The
former noun is used, he argues, in a non-Pauline sense, therefore it needs a definition, and
that τ. ἀγγ. is intended to define it is made probable by the fact that it is not repeated
before θρησκ. What is meant is a mortification and devotion suitable for angels, but not for men
who live in bodies, an attempt to assimilate themselves to angels, who do not eat or drink. The
chief ground urged for this view is that Judaism was too strenuously monotheistic to admit of
angel worship, and Paul could only have regarded it as idolatry. Against this what is said in
the Introduction, section ii., may be referred to. The angels worshipped by the false teachers are
theστοιχεῖα τ. κόσμου, ἀρχαὶ κ. ἐξουσίαι.— ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων. If μὴ is inserted after ἃ, we
may translate with Ellicott, in his earlier editions, “intruding into the things which he hath not
seen”. This should probably be explained with reference to the invisible world, with which they
professed to hold communion, but which really was closed to them. Ellicott still thinks this reading
gives the better sense, though adopting the other in deference to the external evidence. But Paul
could hardly have brought it against them that they had fellowship with what they could not see.
For this was so with all who walked by faith. The negative, therefore, is not helpful to the sense,
and is definitely excluded by the external evidence. The text without the negative is very variously
explained. ἐμβατεύειν means “to stand upon,” then “to come into possession of” a thing, “to
enter upon,” “to invade,” then in a figurative sense “to investigate”. Since ἃ ἑόρακεν also lends
itself to diametrically opposite interpretations, the exegesis becomes doubly uncertain. It may
mean the things which can be seen with the bodily eye, or it may refer to visions; they may be
condemned as deluded visionaries, or for their materialism. Alford and Ellicott translate “taking his
stand on the things which he hath seen,” and explain that he becomes an inhabitant of the world
of sight rather than of faith. But the use of the perfect is against any reference to the
circumstances of ordinary life, and the thought would have been far more simply and clearly
expressed by τὰ ὁρατά. Generally it is supposed that “the things which he has seen” means his
visions. Various views are then taken of ἐμβατεύων. Meyer translates “entering upon what he has
beheld,” and explains that, instead of holding fast to Christ, he enters the region of visions. Several
translate “investigating” (Beng., Grimm, Findl., Ol., Haupt). This is probably the best translation of
the words as they stand, for the translation “parading his visions” (Sod. and? Abb.) seems not to
be well established. The harshness of the combination, and uncertainty of the exegesis, give much
probability to the view that the text has not been correctly transmitted. After it had been
conjectured that we should read ἃ ἑώρα κενεμβατεύων, Lightfoot independently suggested the
latter word, but for ἃ ἑώραsuggested ἐώρᾳ. or αἰώρᾳ. [Sod. incorrectly quotes the emendation
as αἰῶρα; and in Abb. by a misprint we have αἰώρα. Ellicott not only misreports Lightfoot’s
emendation, but does not even mention Taylor’s.]ἐώρα is used sometimes of that which suspends
a thing, sometimes of the act of suspension. “In this last sense,” Lightfoot says, “it describes the
poising of a bird, the floating of a boat on the waters, the balancing on a rope, and the like. Hence
its expressiveness when used as a metaphor.” κενεμβατεύειν does not actually occur, but the
cognate verb κενεμβατεῖν is not uncommon. A much better emendation, however, is that of Dr. C.
Taylor (Journal of Philology, vii., p. 130), ἀέρα κενεμβατεύων, “treading the void of air”. In
his Pirqe Aboth,2 p. 161, he says that the Rabbinic expression “fly in the air with nothing to rest
upon” may have suggested the phrase to Paul. This emendation is accepted by Westcott and Hort,
and regarded as the most probable by Zahn, who says that the text as it stands yields no sense. It
involves the omission of a single letter, and although the province of conjectural emendation in
the New Testament is very restricted, yet such a slip as is suggested may very easily have been
made by Paul’s amanuensis or a very early copyist. Field urges as a fatal objection that
“ κενεμβατεύων is a vox nulla, the inviolable laws regulating this class of composite verbs
stamping κενεμβατεῖν as the only legitimate, as it is the only existing, form” (loc. cit., p. 198).
Lightfoot, on the contrary, asserts that it is unobjectionable in itself. Even if Field’s criticism be
admitted, it would be better to read ἀέρα κενεμβατῶν than to retain the text. If the emendation is
correct, Paul is asserting the baseless character of the false teaching; and all reference to visions
disappears.— εἰκῇ should probably, in accordance with Pauline usage, be connected with the
following rather than the preceding words. It may mean “groundlessly” (Mey., Alf., Ell., Ol., Haupt,
Abb.) or “without result” (Sod. and others). The latter is the sense in Galatians 3:4; Galatians
4:11, 1 Corinthians 15:2, Romans 13:4, but, since it does not suit φυς., the former is to be
preferred here.— φυσιούμενος: cf. 1 Corinthians 8:1 ἡ γνῶσις φυσιοῖ, 1 Corinthians 13:4. They
were puffed up by a sense of spiritual and intellectual superiority.
— ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ: “by the mind of his flesh”. The mind in this case is regarded as
dominated by the flesh. Soden, followed by Abbott, says that the νοῦς as a natural faculty is
ethically indifferent in itself, and so may stand just as well under the influence of σάρξ as
ofπνεῦμα. But in the most important passage, Romans 7:22-25, it is the higher nature in the
unregenerate which wages unsuccessful conflict with the σάρξ. At the same time we see
from Ephesians 4:17 that it could become vain and aimless and even (Romans 1:28) reprobate.
The choice of the phrase here is probably dictated by Paul’s wish to drive home the fact that their
asceticism and angel worship, so far from securing as they imagined the destruction of the flesh,
proved that it was by the flesh that they were altogether controlled, even to the mind itself, which
stood farthest from it.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". The Expositor's Greek
Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/egt/colossians-2.html. 1897-1910.
George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Seducat, Greek: katabrabeueto. See Mr. Legh's Crit. Sacra.
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Volens, Greek thelon; religione, Greek: threskeia. --- Walking, ambulans, Greek:

embateuon, superbe se ingerens.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Haydock, George Leo. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "George Haydock's Catholic Bible
Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/colossians-2.html. 1859.
Mark Dunagan Commentary on the Bible
Colossians 2:18 Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the
angels, dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
"LET NO MAN"-"the present tense, as in vers. 4,8,16,20, implies a continued attempt." (P.P.
Comm. p. 92)
"ROB YOU OF YOUR PRIZE"-"beguile you" (KJV); "to cheat you" (Knox). 2603. katabrabeuo {kat-ab-
rab-yoo"-o}; from 2596 and 1018 (in its original sense); to award the price against, i.e.
(figuratively) to defraud (of salvation): -beguile of reward.
-"from..against..to act as a judge or umpire. Hence to decide against one, or to declare him
unworthy of the prize..The attitude of the false teachers would involve their sitting in judgement
as to the future reward of those who refused their doctrine of angelic mediation." (Vincent p. 495)
-"Let no ritualist tell you, "Since you, Colossians, are not following my rules and regulations, you
are not in the race or contest at all. You are unfit, unworthy." (Hendriksen p. 125)
-In addition, the Colossians would be robbed of their prize if they allowed themselves to be
convinced that they needed to go back to the Law of Moses (Galatians 5:1-4). To give up the real
for the ritual, and to abandon true spiritual freedom for an religion of obsolete externals (Hebrews
8:13); would be a major rip off.
GOD"S INSIGHT INTO THESE FALSE TEACHERS:
"BY A VOLUNTARY HUMILITY"-"false humility" (Knox).
Points to Note:
1. The humility under consideration is a false or fake humility. It is when men and women begin to
take pride in their humility. As Eadie says, "as when, for show, the beggar"s feet are washed; and
the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs." (p. 179) When people begin to glory in
their self-sacrifices (Luke 18:9-14); and make sure others know how much they are giving up for
God (Matthew 6:1-18).
2. "Some people love to make a parade of exceptional piety." (Bruce p. 117)
3. Christians need to take special note of this expression. Often false teachers and false doctrine
comes clothed in extreme self-sacrifice. People try to intimidate us into thinking that we aren"t
right with God, because, we aren"t making the sacrifices that they are. The Jehovah Witnesses are
famous for trying to make people feel small, because other groups don"t go door to door.
Question: Where do the Scriptures teach that knocking on doors is the only or most effective form
of Evangelism? Beware when someone approaches you with the attitude, "We must be right,
because we are making more sacrifices for God than any other group." Always stand back and ask
the question, "Are they making the sacrifices, which God demands, or are they making the
sacrifices which they have invented?" (1 Samuel 15:22-23)
4. False humility is still a problem among God"s people. Unfortunately often people will say, "I
know that so and so is in sin or teaching error, but I can"t condemn them, because I have my own
faults." Brethren, that is a false humility. God expects Christians, even imperfect Christians, to
rebuke those in sin (Matthew 18:15-17). There is nothing humble, pious or spiritual about allowing
your brother to walk straight into the jaws of hell, without warning him.
"AND WORSHIPPING OF THE ANGELS"-
Points to Note:
1. I think writers are on the right track when they suggest that the previously mentioned false
humility is connected with and is a motivating factor behind the angel worship mentioned in this
passage.
2. Barclay writes, "the Gnostics and Jews would have justified it (angel worship) by saying that God
is so great and high and holy that we can never have direct access to him and must be content to
pray to the angels." (p. 146)
3. "It was expressed in "worshipping..angels" as the representatives of God, and was thus alleged
to be less presumptuous than the direct worship of God, as though he were too high to be
worshipped by men. Yet to refuse God"s appointed way of approach through Christ was really
presumptuous pride." (Erdman p. 81)
4. The False Teachers may have said something like, "We are too humble to dare presume that
lowly men like ourselves could ever worship God. Rather, we acknowledge our weaknesses, our
short-comings, and are content to merely worship God"s representatives instead."
5. Again, the same false humility exists today. People say they are too "humble" to teach the
concept of the true church, or that baptism is the line between lost and saved, or that essential
biblical doctrines can be settled. All of us need to watch out for this, especially in our own lives,
because spiritual cowardice can often hide behind an air of humility. We need to ask ourselves,
"Am I really being humble or am I just afraid to stand up for the truth?"
6. Some writers suggest that the expression "worshipping of the angels", may also have reference
to the false claim that some supposed spiritual "high" or worship experience found among angelic
beings can be gained by Christians.
7. The Jehovah Witnesses who regard Jesus as an angel, are thus forced to conclude that the
apostles contradicted themselves. For the apostles condemned the worship of angels (Revelation
22:8-9). And yet they called upon Christians to worship Jesus (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:17).
8. Robertson notes, "They may have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far
removed and so took angels as mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of
Christ." (p. 497)
"DWELLING IN THE THINGS WHICH HE HATH SEEN"-"taking his stand on visions he has seen"
(NASV)
"DWELLING"-1687. embateuo {em-bat-yoo"-o}; from 1722 and a presumed derivative of the base
of 939; equivalent to 1684; to intrude on (figuratively): -intrude into.
-"They pretend to have found the way to a higher plane of spiritual experience." (Bruce p. 117) "In
this last sense the word is probably used (to seek, to track out, to consider)...of the false teachers
who professed to see heavenly truth in visions, and to investigate and discuss philosophically the
revelation (supposedly) they had received." (Vincent p. 496)
"VAINLY PUFFED UP"-1500. eike {i-kay"}; probably from 1502 (through the idea of failure); idly, i.e.
without reason (or effect): -without a cause, (in) vain(-ly).
Points to Note:
1. The word "vainly" (without reason or cause), immediately informs us that these "visions" never
really happened. These false teachers had actually seen nothing.
2. Which contains a number of tremendous insights for our own times: (a) People do lie about
seeing visions, encounters with God, being contacted by UFO"s, being miraculously healed, etc...
(b) People can convince themselves that they have really seen something, when they didn"t see
anything (Jeremiah 23:16-22). (c) God doesn"t expect Christians to immediately believe any claim.
He commands us to examine everything by the Scriptures (Acts 17:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22; 1
John 4:1). (d) It isn"t spiritual or wise to immediately believe even the most sincerely sounding
stories of encounters with God or what have you. (e) God doesn"t speak to everyone directly. (f)
God doesn"t reveal different truth to different people. And God doesn"t miraculously guide each
individual into their own distinct understanding of His truth.
3. The word "puffed up" reveals that such claims of supposed visions were not the product of
divine inspiration, but of human arrogance and pride. "The Gnostic prided himself upon special
visions of secret things which were not open to the eyes of ordinary men and women...there is
always danger when a man begins to think that he has attained a height of holiness which enables
him to see what common men--as he calls them--cannot see." (Erdman p. 145)
4. Carefully note: Claiming to have seen a vision or the claim to some supposed encounter with
God, is often a subtle form of arrogance. It is often the wedge that people use to liberate
themselves from the Word of God and to cover their own unbelief. Many people that I have met,
who claim that God has said something to them or reassured them in some mysterious way (i.e. I
felt the hand of God on my shoulder, I felt as if God was saying to me, Mark I am with you, etc..),
are the very same people who aren"t very impressed with what a verse in the Bible actually says.
You see, many people have convinced themselves, that their supposed experience proves that
they are somehow "above" the Bible, somehow on a different level, somehow in a closer
relationship with God, than any Bible passage, or church could possibly bring them. They almost
seem to have the attitude, "Preacher, don"t talk to me about God, I already know Him better than
you do."
"BY HIS FLESHLY MIND"-"inflated without cause by his fleshly mind" (NASV); "The teachers
boasted that they were guided by the higher reason. Paul describes their higher reason as carnal."
(Vincent p. 496) "by an unspiritual imagination" (Phi).
Points to Note:
1. God doesn"t stop. Not only are these false teachers liars and arrogant. But far from being
spiritually minded, they are immature, carnal, worldly and unspiritual in their thinking (1
Corinthians 3:1-3).
2. "Hence the apostle"s sarcasm, "Exalted are they? say rather, inflated: lifted high by Divine
reason? nay, but swollen high by the reason of their flesh." (P.P. Comm. p. 93)
3. And Hendriksen gives an observation, that should be included in the observation hall of fame:
"It is important in this connection to observe that for the mind to be "fleshly" or "of the flesh" it is
not necessary that it be "fixed on purely physical things". On the contrary, it is "of the flesh" if it
bases its hope for salvation on anything apart from Christ..It is "the mind of the flesh" all the
same." (p. 128) What an insight!
Brethren, listen up. The above false teachers claimed to be Christians, they claimed to
be "spiritual", they claimed to serve God, and serve Him better and more faithfully than most, and
Paul says, that they are "fleshly minded"!!!! Their whole day was spent in the pursuit of "heavenly
things" and they were carnal! Applications must be made: (a) People who claim direct revelation
from God, even though the Bible teaches us that the Bible is complete (Jude 1:3), are carnally
minded people. (b) Religious people who want some "spiritual" experience other than what the
Bible promises, are earthly minded people. (c) You can roll on the floor, shout Praise God to the
ends of the earth, cry and weep at some rally, etc...and still be carnal in your thinking. (d) In
addition, we cannot say that everyone involved in false religion is a liar and deceiver, and yet
brethren, neither can we say that everyone in the denominational world is sincere either! (e)
Many people who want visions, miraculous healings, or some experience, have little desire to do
God"s will. Their motivation is selfish and their aim is self-glorification (i.e. see how great and
humble I am--God did this for me).
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Dunagan, Mark. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Mark Dunagan Commentaries on the Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dun/colossians-2.html. 1999-2014.
E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes
no man. Greek. m edeis.
beguile you of your reward = defraud you of your prize. Greek. katabrabeua. Only here.
in, &c. Lit, willing (App-102) in (App-104), i.e. being a devotee to.
humility. See Acts 20:19.
worshipping. See Acts 26:5 (religion).
intruding into = investigating. Greek embateuo. Only here.
not. Most texts omit.
seen. App-133.
puffed up. See 1 Corinthians 4:6.
by. App-104.
his fleshly mind = the mind of his flesh, i.e. the old Adam nature.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "E.W. Bullinger's Companion bible
Notes". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/colossians-2.html. 1909-1922.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels,
intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
Beguile you of your reward , [ katabrabeuetoo (Greek #2603] - literally, 'to adjudge a prize out of
hostility away from him who deserves it' (Trench). This defrauding of their prize the Colossians
would suffer, by letting any self-constituted judge (i:e., false teacher) draw them away from
Christ, "the righteous Judge"and Awarder of the prize (Philippians 3:14; 1 Corinthians 9:25; 2
Timothy 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4), to angel-worship.
In a voluntary humility , [ theloon (Greek #2309) en (Greek #1722) tapeinofrosunee (Greek

#5012)]. So [ ethelothreeskia (Greek #1479)] 'will-worship and humility' [ tapeinofrosunee (Greek
#5012)] (Colossians 2:23). Literally, 'delighting in humility' [Hebraism, chapeets b
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18".
"Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/colossians-2.html. 1871-8.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(18) Beguile you of your reward.—The original is a word used, almost technically, for an unfair
judgment in the stadium, robbing the victor of his prize. The prize here (as in 1 Corinthians
9:24; Philippians 3:14) is the heavenly reward of the Christian course. In St. Paul’s exhortation
there seems to be a reference back to Colossians 2:16. There he says, “Let no man arrogate
judgment over you;” here, “Let no man use that arrogated judgment so as to cheat you of your
prize. There is one Judge, who has right and who is righteous; look to Him alone.”
In a voluntary humility and worship.—This rendering seems virtually correct, though other
renderings are proposed. The original is, willing in humility and worship, and the phrase “willing
in” is often used in the LXX. for “delighting in.” Other translations are here possible, though not
without some harshness. But the true sense is shown beyond all doubt to be that given in our
version, by the words used below to describe the same process, “will-worship and humility.”
In this passage alone in the New Testament “humility “is spoken of with something of the
condemnation accorded to it in heathen morality. The reason of this is obvious and instructive.
Humility is a grace, of which the very essence is unconsciousness, and which, being itself negative,
cannot live, except by resting on some more positive quality, such as faith or love. Whenever it is
consciously cultivated and “delighted in, ”it loses all its grace; it becomes either unreal, “the pride
that apes humility,” or it turns to abject slavishness and meanness. Of such depravations Church
history is unhappily full.
Worshipping of angels.—This is closely connected with the “voluntary humility” above. The link of
connection is supplied by the notice in the ancient interpreters, of the early growth of that
unhappy idea, which has always lain at the root of saint-worship and angel-worship in the Church
—“that we must be brought near by angels and not by Christ, for that were too high a thing for us”
(Chrysostom). With this passage it is obvious to connect the emphasis laid (in Hebrews 1, 2) on the
absolute superiority of our Lord to all angels, who are but “ministering spirits, sent forth to
minister to them who are heirs of salvation;” and the prohibition of angel-worship in Revelation
22:9, “See thou do it not; for I am thy fellow-servant . . . worship God.”
It might seem strange that on the rigid monotheism of Judaism this incongruous creature-worship
should have been engrafted. But here also the link is easily supplied. The worship of the angels of
which the Essenic system bore traces, was excused on the ground that the Law had been given
through the “ministration of angels” (see Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19), and that the tutelary
guardianship of angels had been revealed in the later prophecy. (See Daniel 10:10-21.) For this
reason it was held that angels might be worshipped, probably with the same subtle distinctions
between this and that kind of worship with which we are familiar in the ordinary pleas for the
veneration of saints. It has been noticed that in the Council of Laodicea, held in the fourth century,
several canons were passed against Judaising, and that in close connection with these it was
forbidden “to leave the Church of God and go away to invoke angels”; and we are told by
Theodoret (in the next century) that “oratories to St. Michael (the ‘prince’ of the Jewish people)
were still to be seen.” The “angels” in this half-Jewish system held the same intermediate position
between the Divine and the human which in the ordinary Gnostic theories was held by the less
personal Æons, or supposed emanations from the Godhead.
Intruding into those things which he hath not seen.—(1) There is a remarkable division here, both
of MSS. and ancient versions and commentators, as to the insertion or omission of the negative.
But the balance of MS. authority is against the negative, and certainly it is easier to suppose it to
have been inserted with a view to make an easier sense, than to have been omitted if it had been
originally there. (2) The general meaning, however, of the passage is tolerably clear, and, curiously
enough, little affected by either alternative. It certainly refers to pretensions to supernatural
knowledge by which (just as in 1 Corinthians 8:1) the mind is said to be “puffed up.” We note that,
even in true visions of heavenly things, there was danger lest the mind “should be exalted above
measure” (2 Corinthians 12:7). Now the knowledge here pretended to is that favourite knowledge,
claimed by Jewish and Christian mystics, of the secrets of the heavenly places and especially of the
grades and functions of the hierarchy of heaven. St. Paul brands it as belonging to the mind, not of
the spirit, but “of the flesh;” for indeed it was really superstitions, resting not on faith, but on
supposed visions and supernatural manifestations. It “intruded” (or, according to another
rendering, it “took its stand”) upon the secrets of a region which it said that it “had seen,” but
which, in truth, it “had not seen.” If we omit the negative, the Apostle is quoting its claims; if we
insert it, he is denying their justice.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "Ellicott's Commentary for English
Readers". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/colossians-2.html. 1905.
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of

angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
no
4,8; Genesis 3:13; Numbers 25:18; Matthew 24:24; Romans 16:18; 2 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians

5:6; 2 Peter 2:14; 1 John 2:26; 4:1,2; 2 John 1:7-11; Revelation 3:11; 12:9; 13:8,14
beguile you
or, judge against you.
in a voluntary humility
Gr. being a voluntary in humility.
23; Isaiah 57:9
worshipping
Daniel 11:38; *Heb:; Romans 1:25; 1 Corinthians 8:5,6; 1 Timothy 4:1; *Gr:; Revelation

19:10; 22:8,9
intruding
Deuteronomy 29:29; Job 38:2; Psalms 138:1,2; Ezekiel 13:3; 1 Timothy 1:7
vainly
8; 1 Corinthians 4:18; 8:1; 13:4

fleshly
Romans 8:6-8; 1 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:19,20; James 3:14-16; 4:1-6
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Colossians 2:18". "The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/colossians-2.html.

Angeles. Colosenses 2, 18 Con Comentarios

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Angeles. Colosenses 2, 18 Con Comentarios

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Colosenses 2Reina-Valera 1960 (RVR1960)

para que sean consolados sus corazones, unidos en amor, hasta

alcanzar todas las riquezas de pleno entendimiento, a fin de conocer el

en quien están escondidos todos los tesoros de la sabiduría y del

Y esto lo digo para que nadie os engañe con palabras persuasivas.

Porque aunque estoy ausente en cuerpo, no obstante en espíritu estoy

con vosotros, gozándome y mirando vuestro buen orden y la firmeza de

Por tanto, de la manera que habéis recibido al Señor Jesucristo, andad

arraigados y sobreedificados en él, y confirmados en la fe, así como

habéis sido enseñados, abundando en acciones de gracias.

Plenitud de vida en Cristo

según las tradiciones de los hombres, conforme a los rudimentos del

Porque en él habita corporalmente toda la plenitud de la Deidad,

y vosotros estáis completos en él, que es la cabeza de todo principado

En él también fuisteis circuncidados con circuncisión no hecha a mano,

al echar de vosotros el cuerpo pecaminoso carnal, en la circuncisión de

resucitados con él, mediante la fe en el poder de Dios que le levantó de

Y a vosotros, estando muertos en pecados y en la incircuncisión de

vuestra carne, os dio vida juntamente con él, perdonándoos todos los

era contraria, quitándola de en medio y clavándola en la cruz,

y despojando a los principados y a las potestades, los exhibió

públicamente, triunfando sobre ellos en la cruz.

Por tanto, nadie os juzgue en comida o en bebida, o en cuanto a días

de fiesta, luna nueva o días de reposo,

todo lo cual es sombra de lo que ha de venir; pero el cuerpo es de

Nadie os prive de vuestro premio, afectando humildad

y culto a los ángeles, entremetiéndose en lo que no ha

nutriéndose y uniéndose por las coyunturas y ligamentos, crece con el

Pues si habéis muerto con Cristo en cuanto a los rudimentos del

mundo, ¿por qué, como si vivieseis en el mundo, os sometéis a

tales como: No manejes, ni gustes, ni aun toques

(en conformidad a mandamientos y doctrinas de hombres), cosas que

todas se destruyen con el uso?

Tales cosas tienen a la verdad cierta reputación de sabiduría en culto

voluntario, en humildad y en duro trato del cuerpo; pero no tienen valor

Versión Biblia de Jerusalén

Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary

Colossians 2:17 Colossians 2 Colossians 2:19

Jump to: Clarke Commentary • Barne's Notes • Coffman Commentaries • Gill's

 Constable's Expository Notes

 Gary Hampton Commentary

 Everett's Study Notes

 The Bible Study New Testament

 The People's Bible

 Kretzmann's Popular Commentary of the Bible

 Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures

 Peake's Bible Commentary

 Preacher's Homiletical Commentary

 Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary

 People's New Testament

 Spurgeon's Verse Expositions

Adam Clarke Commentary

return to 'Jump List'

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

return to 'Jump List'

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

Voluntary humility and worshipping of angels ... As Peake said:

return to 'Jump List'

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

Geneva Study Bible

return to 'Jump List'

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

in a voluntary humility — So “will-worship” (Colossians 2:23). Literally, “Delighting [Wahl] in