Scholarly Winds

A proper understanding of missions as central to the local church should show all members that missions is not to be left up to missionaries but is a responsibility for every member in the body of Christ. While giving is essential for missions to take place it cannot be the only avenues by which members of the church work out the great commission.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, global missions must embrace a mission that is rooted in the local church, discipleship, justice, and post-colonialism. Times have changed from the early missionary work that embarked from Europe and America. The landscape of missions has changed and so must its practices and procedures to remain faithful to the gospel and to change the world. While the tension between gospel and culture is a timeless one, it is a tension God has given us to articulate His message. The church must find ways to change in order to reach new and changing cultures with the hope and redemption of the gospel. The church will endure until Christ returns and it will not fail, however it is up to the church to steward the gifts God has given it in every culture and place. By embracing this new framework missions will be able to enter into the post-modern and post-colonial world with a new sense of identity and place amidst competing cultures, nations, and religions. The gospel of Jesus Christ will find its roots in new soil, ready to grow and bloom into the beautiful reality of Gods’ kingdom in a new time and place.

MISSIONS ROOTED IN POST- COLONIALISM
Since the modern era, the church has taken the reverse stance of the early church. Missions is seen in modern times as a movement from the civilized to the uncivilized, from the “haves to the have nots,” from the economically stable to the unstable. The enterprise of western world missions has clearly taken on an imperialistic framework for operations. Christianity itself becomes the problem as “so often Christian empires have taken over the symbol of the kingdom of God to justify the same kind of rule as that of the empires it was forged to oppose.”
It is precisely this attitude of colonialism that western missions must oppose and reject while promoting a post-colonial attitude towards other nations and people groups.

The attitude and position of colonialism is to the detriment and consequence of western missions and has hindered the gospel message. Most missions have adopted a cultural imperialistic mindset of colonialism, where the “Colonizing nations generally dominate the resources, labor, and markets of the colonial territory, and may also impose socio-cultural, religious and linguistic structures on the indigenous population”
Global missions must find a way to rid itself of a colonialist type mindset. They must rid the attitudes and assumptions of superiority in both morals and values and seek to learn from those abroad nationally. The tables must be turned on ideas such as one-way education, where the colonizing nation seeks to instruct or “indoctrinate” another less powerful country. Both countries must seek to learn from one another in a way that brings about change both nations.

Most people from outside the west are rejecting this trend of cultural imperialism. This is played out as Americans coming to bring their American culture, ideas, and even their religion in an attempt to colonize the other nations. America has exported in a sense the good, the bad, and the downright ugly of our culture.

Most nations are rejecting the ideas and culture of America and in turn rejecting their Christian faith as well.

The role of America in missions has drastically changed since it first began. While America was once seen as the dominant powerhouse of civilization, to which all nations wanted to become, their success story has been shattered in the area of world affairs. Instances such as Rwanda and Somalia, and not least in the Middle East to name a few have changed the world’s perceptions of America. According to a BBC pole conducted in 2007, the survey showed that “anti-Americanism is on the rise, and the more the US flexes its hard power – the more it deploys troops abroad or talks tough diplomatically – the more it seems to weaken its ability to influence the world.”
The United States’ attitude of only caring for itself and its own interests has radically changed how the world views the States.

One way this will be seen is by letting other voices come to the table of theological and ecclesiological discussions. Western thought and theology has dominated the discussion of what the church is and what they should believe. It’s not that this was a wrong approach to take, it was at least misguided and in the end incomplete. It was never intended in the mind of God that there would be one; single voice box to speak on His behalf, and it certainly wasn’t his intention that a single voice box would silence all other voices. God intended that all of His creation would declare His mission throughout the world. A community of voices is needed to accurately articulate the message of God.
The western portrait of God and theology is good, but it is incomplete. By its very nature the exclusion of other voices means that the picture is incomplete. Western church leaders and missionaries need to learn from their brothers and sisters in the Eastern Orthodox, South American, African, and the Far East traditions in order to paint a complete picture of God. If God is God of the entire world, then voices from across the globe have a vital and necessary voice to be heard. The notion of theological superiority that is prevalent throughout the West must be dismissed and an attitude of humble orthodoxy must be accepted.

MISSIONS ROOTED IN POST- COLONIALISM
Since the modern era, the church has taken the reverse stance of the early church. Missions is seen in modern times as a movement from the civilized to the uncivilized, from the “haves to the have nots,” from the economically stable to the unstable. The enterprise of western world missions has clearly taken on an imperialistic framework for operations. Christianity itself becomes the problem as “so often Christian empires have taken over the symbol of the kingdom of God to justify the same kind of rule as that of the empires it was forged to oppose.”
It is precisely this attitude of colonialism that western missions must oppose and reject while promoting a post-colonial attitude towards other nations and people groups.

The attitude and position of colonialism is to the detriment and consequence of western missions and has hindered the gospel message. Most missions have adopted a cultural imperialistic mindset of colonialism, where the “Colonizing nations generally dominate the resources, labor, and markets of the colonial territory, and may also impose socio-cultural, religious and linguistic structures on the indigenous population”
Global missions must find a way to rid itself of a colonialist type mindset. They must rid the attitudes and assumptions of superiority in both morals and values and seek to learn from those abroad nationally. The tables must be turned on ideas such as one-way education, where the colonizing nation seeks to instruct or “indoctrinate” another less powerful country. Both countries must seek to learn from one another in a way that brings about change both nations.

Most people from outside the west are rejecting this trend of cultural imperialism. This is played out as Americans coming to bring their American culture, ideas, and even their religion in an attempt to colonize the other nations. America has exported in a sense the good, the bad, and the downright ugly of our culture.

Most nations are rejecting the ideas and culture of America and in turn rejecting their Christian faith as well.

The role of America in missions has drastically changed since it first began. While America was once seen as the dominant powerhouse of civilization, to which all nations wanted to become, their success story has been shattered in the area of world affairs. Instances such as Rwanda and Somalia, and not least in the Middle East to name a few have changed the world’s perceptions of America. According to a BBC pole conducted in 2007, the survey showed that “anti-Americanism is on the rise, and the more the US flexes its hard power – the more it deploys troops abroad or talks tough diplomatically – the more it seems to weaken its ability to influence the world.”
The United States’ attitude of only caring for itself and its own interests has radically changed how the world views the States.

One way this will be seen is by letting other voices come to the table of theological and ecclesiological discussions. Western thought and theology has dominated the discussion of what the church is and what they should believe. It’s not that this was a wrong approach to take, it was at least misguided and in the end incomplete. It was never intended in the mind of God that there would be one; single voice box to speak on His behalf, and it certainly wasn’t his intention that a single voice box would silence all other voices. God intended that all of His creation would declare His mission throughout the world. A community of voices is needed to accurately articulate the message of God.
The western portrait of God and theology is good, but it is incomplete. By its very nature the exclusion of other voices means that the picture is incomplete. Western church leaders and missionaries need to learn from their brothers and sisters in the Eastern Orthodox, South American, African, and the Far East traditions in order to paint a complete picture of God. If God is God of the entire world, then voices from across the globe have a vital and necessary voice to be heard. The notion of theological superiority that is prevalent throughout the West must be dismissed and an attitude of humble orthodoxy must be accepted.

MISSIONS ROOTED IN DISCIPLESHIP
Global missions must utilize the mission of the church as declared by Jesus in the Great Commission is to make disciples of every nation, not converts. The true understanding of Jesus’ command was that His teaching would provide “the structure of discipleship to which he made summons.”

The distinction between convert and disciple is at best naïve and at worst a failure to fulfill the church’s mission.” A convert is a disciple. The distinction between a convert and disciple is a false distinction. The call to follow Jesus is a call to discipleship. The church is the place where “discipling” (verb) takes place amongst disciples (noun). It is interesting to note that the usual terms for evangelism are not present in the great commission. Words such as “preach”, “win”, “convert”, have their Greek cognates, but Jesus chose to use the word “disciple” a more simple term meaning to make students of. The correct picture of this word to imagine is a student sitting around a teacher, not a person walking down an aisle.

It is this process of “discipleing” that allows the church to fulfill its mission by making students of Jesus from every nation.

This means endeavoring in discipleship as the primary means of missions, where people encounter spiritual transformation, that transforms their lives, families, and communities. Christianity must be rescued back from its privatized and individualized arenas and take center stage in the life and community of the world. A renewed sense of discipleship as essential to global missions is necessary for a successful future.

MISSIONS ROOTED IN JUSTICE
Global missions causes one to be aware of the happenings around the world. Here mission movements in North America are connected to mission movements in Brazil and other parts of the world. These unique missions movements are united under the umbrella of global missions. Being united they are aware, interested, and active in participating with one another. This may mean sharing resources, aiding with training, or standing up for a cause. One such cause that the global mission initiatives must stand up for is justice for all of humanity. For too long the issue of justice has been divorced from the church primarily as a result in reaction to the social gospel. That relied too heavily on the issues of social justice. The western church in its reaction to the social gospel has completely left the arena of social justice. Nothing could be farther from a biblical understanding of the mission of the church.

The life of Jesus shows that issues of social concern are essential to the body of Christ. If that were not enough, the words of His half-brother James, in his epistle states that a true following of God results in the care of orphans and widows, two primary areas of social concern in the first century. The issues of social justice and the gospel should not be played against each other. Social justice is but a means to show that we love those around us. One cannot deny social justice without denying love. The church needs to return to the arena of social justice for the sake of the validity and integrity of the gospel.

Can we truly engage in missions without bringing justice or using discipleship?

MISSIONS ROOTED IN THE LOCAL CHURCH
The church’s mission is to carry forth the missio dei. They are commissioned by the authority of Jesus to declare to all creation that Jesus is Lord and the kingdom is coming, to repent from all other ways of living, and enter into God’s kingdom style living now. This is the message that the church is to spread to all of creation.

The mission of the church can also be summed up as Leslie Newbigin stated in “The Open Secret” as proclamation, presence, and prevenience. As stated previously, the church’s mission involves proclamation that God’s kingship is reigning over all humanity history and the entire world. “Mission is concerned with nothing less than the completion of all that God has begun to do in the creation of the world and of humankind.” The proclamation of God’s kingdom is for the whole world. While the proclamation is global in scope, Christians find themselves in specific places at specific times in history. This is where the global missions find its presence. While God is Lord over all creation, He sent His son to the world, to be confined by time, the first century, and by place, the land of Palestine. While God’s mission and the church’s mission is universal, for all people in all places. The church must enact its mission in the time and place it finds itself in. A church must be bound to its culture in both time and place.

Mission agencies from the west need to be dedicated to training national leaders for ministry in their own countries. This was the model of Paul, himself a missionary, who having stayed a few months in a city, built up the church’s own leadership and then left. This model will be most effective for the western world in the land of missions. It is no secret that the West has a wealth of resources in the areas of finances and education. David Wells aptly states, “If the incarnation was about parting with riches and power in the cause of self-giving love, we surely have a model for thinking about how Western Christians …need to be relating to the majority of Christians, who now live outside the West.”  These resources education and finances must enable and equip leaders from their respective countries to be trained so they can effectively minister in their countries. Today the most effective missions might come from people outside the west. Given the political and social landscape of the world and their attitudes towards Americans, it may be wise to focus energies and efforts on training national leaders who will be able to minister in their culture without the baggage of being an American.

In what ways, positively and negatively, have American shaped missions?

The third scene of redemption comes bursting onto stage in the person and work of Jesus Christ. God has not abandoned His image bearers; He is not content with the brokenness and chaos. Through Jesus, God has initiated a process to repair the broken image of Himself in humanity and to set the world to right. Jesus is the great reversal to everything that took place in the second scene. Jesus will bring wholeness to where there is brokenness. He will bring shalom to where there is chaos, and He will bring order to disorder. Through the way of Jesus, Humanity will be restored to God through his death and resurrection. We learn from the third scene of redemption that God will take creation from broken to whole, from chaos to shalom, and return order to where there is disorder. Through redemption God will turn the world right side up, beginning with His relationship with Humanity.

The final scene that is awaiting its arrival onstage is consummation. This final scene is where creation and humanity are finally and ultimately restored. This was the goal ever since the fall, to return to the state of original creation where there was wholeness, shalom, and order. Where heaven and earth collide and become one. This consummation is awaited for by all of humanity and creation. Here all of creation will be properly related to God and every part of creation will find its true purpose. In the words of Dallas Willard it is the ““eternal life as limitlessly enhanced life”, in which we are “more intensely alive” in “perfect fulfillment and yet also endless activity and newness””  There will no chaos or brokenness, but only complete shalom of the way things are supposed to be, as God originally intended. God will be able to declare once again that all creation is good.

This worldview of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation is the backdrop to which global missions takes center stage. Without creation, our view of humanity becomes warped and we are not able to see humanity through the eyes of God. Without the fall we cannot properly understand how broken humanity is or the extent to which humanity rejects God. Without redemption, a global mission has nothing to offer anyone. Redemption is the hope that things can change, things can and will be better. Consummation offers global missions their hope, that one day all of the efforts to train disciples of Jesus will find their ultimate goal when heaven meets earth.

It is from this worldview that we can begin to speak about a philosophy of Global missions. It would be helpful to use a metaphor when speaking of global missions. The use of a tree as a metaphor will be extremely helpful in understanding some aspects of global missions. Any good tree has a good root system. These root systems all contribute to allow a tree to flourish and grow. If one cuts away one of the roots, part of the tree may suffer, maybe the leaves will begin to fade and die, or maybe the limbs will not be as strong and not able to be supportive. The root system is incredibly important for any tree. As we begin to compare this metaphor to global missions we will speak of global missions having certain roots. The roots that support the tree of global missons are the local church, discipleship, and justice. These roots are vitally important to the health of global missions. Each of these roots are needed, if a global missions agency or initiative removes one of these roots some aspect of global missions will not flourish in the way its intended.

Are there any areas where you may see current missions initiatives forgetting any of these elements discussed in the last two posts?

I’m going to begin a new series on Global Missions and our interaction with the world at large whether at home or abroad.  As I thought these thoughts this summer they in turn led to this opportunity to travel to Liberia. This series will serve to set the backdrop for my trip to Liberia. There will be questions to interact with at the end.

A global mission finds itself rooted in a story bigger than itself. This is the story of four scenes, two that have been played: creation, and the fall, one that is currently playing: redemption, and a final scene yet to take stage: consummation. The global missions story finds its place in the third ongoing scene of redemption. Like any good story, one cannot just jump into the middle and expect to understand the plot of the story. As the scenes which have gone one before add a depth of information and character that effect the present scene, and a final scene that gives the whole story its plot line and purpose.

The first scene of the story begins with creation. God began by creating the world and everything in it. The pinnacle of His creation was Humanity. Humanity was the pinnacle of creation as they bore the image of God Himself. Humanity not only represented God, they also resembled Him. God created the world with the purpose of humanity of being in relationship with Himself. This was the world that God created and He declared it good. There was shalom and everything was in its proper order and place. Humanity related perfectly to God and the world was characterized by wholeness, peace, and order. This was God’s original intention for humanity and Himself to be together in perfect harmony, in perfect wholeness. From the first scene we learn that all humanity finds its wholeness and purpose in relation to God. Wholeness and shalom are only possible when God and humanity are in proper relationship.

The second scene comes dramatically crashing into the first. The fall abruptly and violently stops the first scene. The second scene is characterized by brokenness and a vandalism of shalom. In this scene humanity rejects the loving rule and reign of God and chose to follow their own path apart from God. The fall introduces chaos, brokenness, and disorder. The world has turned upside down from the way it was supposed to be. Humanity’s rejection of God has left them as broken images of God. Now all of humanity’s choices are broken and result in broken actions and relationships. The sin of humanity is the “culpable disturbance of Shalom.” Their brokenness is only part of the fallout, the world itself is now broken and out of order from its original design. This brokenness and vandalism of shalom brings chaos to the world. We learn from the second scene that Humanity as the ability to resist and reject the ways and movements of God. We learn that subsequent to that rejection all choices are conditioned by brokenness. Humans in their brokenness choose not to see or follow God and His ways. Humanity although still carrying the image of God are now cracked and broken. Humanity is in need of restoration; the image of God needs to be restored.

How do the themes of creation and fall affect our understanding of missions? Especially the forgotten one of creation?

Tomorrow, we will look at redemption and consumantion as essential to understanding missions.

THE PROBLEM AT COLOSSAE
The issue of the problem facing the Colossians is just as debated over as the authorship. It is of typical Pauline nature to respond to problems that arise within the early church. Letters such as Galatians and the epistles to the Corinthians showcase Paul’s response to critical issues in the life of the church. Often, Paul is correcting a distorted view or challenging the communities to live in light of the resurrected Lord. Thus, when we come to the book of Colossians many seek to understand the nature of the issue that prompted the response by Paul.

False teaching or a deceptive philosophy (vs. 8), may serve as a better indicator of the problem in Colossae. O’Brian is cautious, and correctly so, to define the problem at Colossae as heresy. Seeing as Paul himself never uses those exact words, it seems as if it might only have been in development and Paul issues his warnings as a precaution. Rather than a full-blown heresy, we can put together the problems at Colossae by Paul’s response in 2:8-23.  Currently, there are three main positions on the source of false teaching at Colossae.  Jewish mysticism, Judaism, and religio-syncretism have all been provided as valid options for the false teaching.

Jewish Mysticism
Jewish Mysticism is thought to describe some of the unique features that are highlighted in 2:8-23. Many who see the Jewish roots, argue that it is a specific strand of Judaism and not Judaism in general. Quite possibly this could have been the Essene group who typically “imply a degree of asceticism not usually associated with Jewish tradition.” As Paul describes the “worship of angels” in verse 18 this would not have been a predominately Jewish feature.   Some commentators see a special emphasis on the role of angels in creation and the giving of the law. This is supported by some intertestamental literature, mainly Philo who references the Jewish worship of angels. The reference of Philo could serve to highlight the interesting argument of Paul in verse 18 on the worship of angels. O’Brien sees the recent scholarly work on Jewish-Christian mysticism as shedding much needed light on the warnings of Paul in 2:8-23.

Judaism
Others however see the problem at Colossae as strictly Judaism. Both Dunn and Wright serve as the main proponents of this view.  Dunn and Wright argue that Paul is describing a problem with Judaism at Colossians. Although many of the features could fit into any religious system, there are some, specifically the reference to circumcision (vs. 11) that highlights the specific Jewish nature of the problem. The issue of circumcision is the most distinctively Jewish feature of the Colossian philosophy.  Any one present during the first century would have regarded the act of circumcision with no other group but the Jews. Other issues such as baptism (vs. 12), and Sabbath (vs. 16), and food purity rules (vs. 16), are difficult to understand outside of a Jewish framework and further strengthen the argument of the nature of a Jewish problem at Colossae.  Although some debate the presence of false teachers at Colossae, it seems to have had roots within the Jewish synagogue system in the region.

One does wonder at the response of Paul to the problem at Colossae. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul resounds with one of his fiercest and most direct challenges to the problem makers, where he says that the Galatians have been “bewitched” (Gal. 1:7) and condemns his opponents to Hell (Gal. 1:8). Such a response of Paul is absent in the letter to the Colossians. Assuming Pauline authorship of the book, why did Paul not respond in the same way? One can only assume that the problem, however similar, did not pose the same threat as the problem in Galatia. Judging from Paul’s response, this problem at Colossae did not seek to undermine or further convert the Colossians, rather it seeks to mature the believers at Colossae through another agency, Judaism, apart from Christ.

Religious Syncretism
Some see the problem at Colossae as a syncretism between Judaism, Christianity, and other first century Roman religions. The two most influential supporters of this view have been Eduard Lohse, and most recently Doug Moo. Lohse argues in his commentary on Colossians that the aspects of Paul’s warnings in 2:8-23 indicate a varied adoption of religious practices throughout the region. Lohse bases his understanding on the word “philosophy” which would be the broadest term to “describe all sorts of groups, tendencies and points of view and thus had become a very broad term.”
In dealing with the inherent Jewish elements in Paul’s warning, specifically circumcision, Lohse notes that nowhere in the New Testament are circumcision and baptism compared with one another.

Concluding that Paul borrowed the term from the slogans of the group, he argues that circumcision refers broadly to the initiatory rites of mystery cults. While there were certainly initiatory rites associated with many cults, it is hard pressed to see why Paul would choose such a theologically loaded Jewish word to speak of simple initiation into a group. Furthermore nowhere in antiquity is circumcision used with reference to a syncretistic religion and circumcision in the first century was classically identified with Judaism. It is more likely that circumcision stands for a specifically Jewish identity marker and nothing more.

Moo likewise argues from a socio-local point. While noting that there was a rather large minority of Jewish people in the area, He argues that they were just as susceptible to syncretism based on their location in the Roman Empire. Moo argues that Colossae was a “cosmopolitan city exposed to a wide variety of religions and philosophies, were likely quite susceptible to these kinds of mixtures.”  Amongst the vast cults and emperor worship, each religious group found its place in the Roman Pantheon of religions. Some even see the rhetoric of Paul as confronting the imperial cult present at that time, as his readers would have instantly recognized the imperial themes.  Almost every religion was acceptable in the Roman Empire, as long as that religion was accepting of every other religion. Naturally with many religious groups syncretization was bound to occur.  Moo’s point is largely correct in regards to its historical nature.

While syncretism could be a daily temptation on the part of the believers at Colossae, it seems to lose momentum when compared with Paul’s response. Galatians clearly indicates how Paul deals with any form of syncretism and the gospel, whether that is Jewish or any other first century religion. Paul appears persistently antagonistic to syncretize anything with faith and the gospel. Hence we find the biting and abrupt response to the church at Galatia. However, to the church in Colossae, his response is calm and well-mannered. Either Paul in his old age had broadened his stance on these issues, or the issue that presented itself to the Colossians was not a threat to the message of the gospel that Epaphras had delivered to them. Even contemporary sources note that the Jewish worship of a monotheistic God and the emphasis on their special election was offensive to their neighbors which kept the number of proselytes low. While syncretism was a viable option, it does not seem to be the basis of Paul’s warning and argument found in Colossians.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the issues that confront the reader of this book are broad and deep. It seems at every turn the reader is confronted with a new obstacle from which their decision sets them on a new course in the letter. Issues such as authorship, the problem of Colossae, and the date and writing of the letter, force the reader to move between the micro and macro contexts of the letter. The reader is forced to keep the overall message of the book in tension with the chapters they encounter. These issues are not easy, but careful and dedicated study yields great results for the reader who encounters this book.

AUTHORSHIP OF COLOSSIANS
The book of Colossians poses an interesting challenge to student and scholar alike. As any person accustomed to reading Pauline literature there is a noted difference in theme, style, and even theology of Colossians.  Colossians in current scholarship finds itself within the “deutero-Pauline” camp and is there with books such as Second Thessalonians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. A debate has raged on over the book of Colossians since F.C Baur rejected the traditionally held position of Pauline authorship. In the wake of Baur’s rejection many scholars have followed his path. Showcasing this stark change, scholar Raymond Brown notes that “at the present moment 60 percent of critical scholarship holds that Paul did not write the letter.” Many of the rejection find their basis in the unique vocabulary and the absence of the typical theological images and themes frequently used by Paul.  Currently there are three camps for the authorship of Colossians.  There is the group that accepts Pauline authorship, the group that rejects Pauline authorship, and the group that holds a student or companion was the author under the authority of Paul.

Most notably, Colossians differs from accepted Pauline literature in vocabulary. Colossians boasts 87 words that are not used in Pauline literature, and 34 of those are hapax legomena only found in the letter of Colossians. A question is then posed as to why an author would dramatically change his vocabulary from his other writings. This argument is not thoroughly convincing as accepted books like Philippians employs some 70 words that are not found within Pauline literature. Furthermore, the difference in vocabulary is easily understandable when one recognizes that the situation at Colossae was strikingly different than anything Paul had previously encountered, thus it would require the use of new vocabulary to deal with the new problem that arose at Colossae.  Therefore a dismissal of Colossians on linguistic usage seems to be on shaky ground. Many commentators have thus seen that the Greek of Colossians offers little to the issue of authorship

More pressing however is the absence of typical Pauline theology. Colossians seems to portray a very high Christology (1:15-20) and absent are the typical Pauline themes of righteousness and justification. Should such issues trouble the modern reader in regards to Pauline authorship? Many have sought to seek a more developed Pauline theology in the letter of Colossians, arguing that as it was written later, we begin to see a more developed theology. The absence of typical Pauline language can be misleading. Although certain theological terms are absent does not mean that the theology of those terms are absent from the discussion. Although not explicitly present, Wright argues that the principle of justification is within 3:10-13. Furthermore if one accepts that justification is not Paul’s center of thought then this argument seems to fail when scrutinized with the emphasis on the person of Christ, which is throughout Colossians.

In conclusion, the issue of authorship is a highly debated issue with many entangled aspects. It is in this author’s opinion that Paul is the author of Colossians and that written late, reveals a development in the Pauline style and theology. The uniqueness in linguistics and theology is due to the fact that church at Colossae faced a specifically unique situation not seen by the other churches, thus needing a specific and unique response by Paul.

DATE AND PLACE OF ORIGIN
While not carrying the weight of authorship or theme, the time and place of Colossians is as difficult to prove as the other features. We learn much about the location of the letter from Paul’s own words, where in 4:3 he describes himself as “in chains.” This refers to his imprisonment, and groups Colossians with the epistles of Philippians, Ephesians, and Philemon, classically known as the “prison epistles.”  While many agree this is referring to the imprisonments of Paul, they disagree as to where these imprisonments took place. Traditionally the imprisonment was thought to have taken place from Rome.  Others have offered that the imprisonment took place in Ephesus, although these are not the only possibilities. The choice on location really hinges on the issues of Pauline authorship and the dating of the letter.

The date of the writing of Colossians is just as difficult as the location. Much of the dating depends on the issue of authorship. If the letter to the Colossians is pseudepigraphical then the letter could have been written at any time.  Assuming Pauline authorship, one must rely on the information in Acts to provide a background.  This however brings up another tangled issue, as the city of Colossae is not mentioned in Acts. Only two imprisonments are found in the book of Acts, Caesarea (Acts 24), and Rome (Acts 28).  The imprisonment in Ephesus is inferred from the book of Second Corinthians. From the dating in Acts the letter would need to have been written later, unless Luke decided not to include a different imprisonment. I would be inclined and somewhat obligated to accept a Roman origin of the letter and to date it later, between 60-61 AD.  This allows for the development of Pauline theology that we see in Colossians, although it does present some problems for travel with Onesimus. Judging from the information within the book of Colossians it would seem that Paul wrote the letter from Rome in the early 60’s.

I will start a new series on my blog, starting with this post. I will be working through an introduction to the Letter to the Colossians. I wrote this paper as part of a New Testament Exegesis class I was in last semester. This first post will introduce us to the letter as well as detailing some important aspects of the city. More posts to follow!

INTRODUCTION TO COLOSSIANS

The letter to the Colossians is one of the sleeping giants of New Testament literature. What appears to be a rather simple and short letter is pregnant with pressing textual and theological issues. Issues such as authorship, the character of the false teaching, the time and place of writing are all thorny issues for biblical scholars to try to understand, more difficult however is the uniqueness of the letter when compared with other Pauline literature. While much of scholarly Pauline literature has been spent on his major letters, Corinthians and Romans, the giant of Colossians has been left sleeping. Only recently, has a renewed importance and wonder with the book of Colossians wakened it from its sleep.

What is prominent in biblical scholarship is a wealth of data on the options available for interpretation. While most have spun their wheels in well made ruts, some are pushing forward into a new horizon. Only recently in biblical studies has Colossians regained a renewed interest by scholars. This interest comes through the avenue of Paul’s relationship to the imperial cults of his day. The pressing issue for scholars today is the way in which the letter would have been received by an audience surrounded by an imperial cult devoting themselves to the gospel of Rome and the worship of Caesar.

This introduction will survey the scholarship available at the time of writing. Surveying the issues of the geographical setting of Colossae, the issue of authorship, the date and place of origin, as well as the problem at Colossae. This introduction will work through the strengths and weaknesses of the available positions and allow for my interpretation of the issue to be stated.

COLOSSAE THE CITY

The city of Colossae finds itself located in the province of Asia Minor on the Lycus River. It is situated in a commercial hub with Laodicea and Hierapolis on a major trade route between the major cities of Antioch and Ephesus. This location on the river provided these cities with the most accessible route from the central region to the coast, and thus became a major communication hub between the east and west during the Greek and Roman periods.

The city had a tumultuous turning of events a few centuries before the time of the New Testament. Colossae had once been a major city within the Roman Empire, most likely due to its production of purple textiles. It had grown tremendously in size and wealth due to its position on a major trade route between Ephesus and Sardis. It was however surpassed in the early years of the Roman Empire by its neighbors, Laodicea, which had a major financial center, and Hierapolis with its hot springs. During Roman times, Laodicea was rising in importance as Colossae was decreasing and thus was the least important church to which any epistle of St. Paul was addressed. The Roman historian Tacitus describes an earthquake that devastated the area, although the cities were eventually rebuilt.

The population of Colossae was just as diverse as any Roman city and included many different ethnic groups. Being located on a major trade route brought many different cultures into the region. While most of the region was predominately Gentile, ancient sources contemporary to the writing of the letter indicate that there may have been a rather large population of Jews in Colossae. Between the works of Josephus and the Letters of Cicero there is enough extant information to build a profile of the city. Josephus records that Antiochus III settled nearly 2,000 families in the area around 213 B.C. Likewise, Cicero also refers to a large seizure of money by the Roman Army around the first century for a temple tax.This combination of multiple ethnicities, a Jewish population, and a rather small and upcoming Christian community would provide for the new believers at Colossae an interesting world within which to proclaim the message of Jesus. Perhaps, some of the problems we read of in Colossians are in direct result to the melting of the multiple cultures present in Colossae at the time of the writing of the epistle.

Paul seems to never have visited the city, having concentrated on the major population centers of the Roman Empire. They were thus dependent on the servant hood of Epaphras who would be a mediator between Paul and the Colossians.Most likely, Paul who had spent nearly two years at Ephesus, about 120 miles west of Colossae, had sent messengers into the surrounding areas to work on his behalf. Paul relied on Epaphras to be his liaison between the church at Colossae and himself.