Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 141:563 (Jul 1984)
Article: Colossian Problem Part 3: The Colossian Heresy
Author: F. F. Bruce

---

BSac 141:563 (Jul 84) p. 195

Colossian Problem
Part 3:
The Colossian Heresy

F. F. Bruce

[F. F. Bruce, Emeritus Professor, University of Manchester, Manchester, England]

A Human Tradition

By “the Colossian heresy” is meant the “philosophy and empty deceit” against which the Colossian Christians are put on their guard in Colossians 2:8. Did this “philosophy and empty deceit” denote some specific form of false teaching which was finding acceptance at Colossae? Or was the church there being warned against certain ideas which were “in the air” at the time and which its members might conceivably find attractive if ever they were exposed to them?

Perhaps one need not ask these questions if Morna Hooker, in whose eyes not even the most “assured” result of biblical study is sacrosanct, had not ventilated it 10 years ago in a paper entitled “Were There False Teachers in Colossae?” She did not return a dogmatic “no” to her own question, but suggested that the data could be accounted for if Paul was guarding his readers against the pressures of contemporary society with its prevalent superstitions, more or less as a preacher today might feel it necessary to remind his congregation that Christ is greater than any astrological forces.1 Paul’s language, however, points to a rather specific line of teaching against which his readers are warned, and the most natural reason for warning those readers against it would be that they were liable to be persuaded by it. So to Hooker’s question this writer is disposed to give the answer, “Yes, there were false teachers in Colossae.”

BSac 141:563 (Jul 84) p. 196

The only source of information about their false teaching is the Epistle to the Colossians itself. Paul does not give a detailed account of it, because his readers were presumably familiar with it already; he contented himself with pointing out some of its defects and assessing its character in the light of the gospel.

Some scholars suggest that Paul’s polemic was not always well informed, that he was prone to misunderstand the positions he attacked. The implication is that those modern scholars who charge him with misunderstanding are better informed than he was about this or that position which he attacks, whether it be the Corinthian disbelief in future resurrection or the Galatian reliance on works of a certain kind as the ground of their justification.2 On this it can simply be said that even those scholars are dependent on what Paul says about the controverted positions. So if he was misinformed, no more trustworthy source of informatio...

visitor : : uid: ()