Project Paper Col 1-15-20 Primacy Christ

Reflection Paper
Pax et Bonum!
Verbum Domini nuntiates in universo mundo
The Christ Hymn of Col 1:15-20: The Primacy of Christ

Harold William Vadney III
St Bernard’s School of Theology and Ministry

40 North Main Avenue
Albany, New York 12203
A301 PAULINE AND DEUTERO-PAULINE WRITINGS

Marcus Gigliotti SSL
Spring 2010
A301 Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings
Christ Hymn of Colossians 1:15-20: The Primacy of Christ
I.
ABSTRACT
Paul’s letter to the Colossians is a remarkable example of Paul’s sensitivity and

proactivity in the face of looming heretical speculation in a hypercritical flock.
His approach to the nascent Gnostic threat to the true faith begins with the
insertion of an ancient hymn, the Christ Hymn, which encapsulates the primacy
and centrality of Christ in Christian thought. This paper elucidates the likely
historical backdrop to the letter, then embarks on a brief formal analysis of the
hymn, engages in a discussion of the hermeneutics of the hymn and its importance
to the Scotian principle of the Primacy of Christ, the Franciscan Thesis, then
presents some observations on the musings of contemporary theological writers
on the Thesis, and ends appropriately with a theological reflection. For practical
reasons the discussion attempts to limit itself to the Christ Hymn (Col 1:15-20)
proper.
II.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Epaphras, a leader in the Church at Colossae, approaches St Paul for advice and assistance.
Epaphras is concerned that, although his people are zealous in their faith and full of caritas, they
were subtle and hypercritical; there were undercurrents of heresy. Colossae was located in
Phrygia, a place filled with demons, Thrones, Powers, Dominions, and Principalities1 and the
sublunary realm was filled with lesser spirits.2 The higher spirits were called the pleroma
(πλήρωμα)or “filling;” the lower spirits, kenoma “ (kenoma) void.”3 Ionia was the birthplace of
philosophy, and in Phrygia all sorts of Gnostic speculation flourished. The apostle apparently
recognized that the area and the people in this place, a demon-filled place, scarred by ravines,
caverns, in which spirits were supposed to cavort, was prone to speculation and errancy.
While the exact nature of the threat cannot be discerned from the letter, it is reasonably clear that
it took the form of a deviant Hebrew-Hellenistic theosophy, an attempt, perhaps, by the Phrygian
Jews to embellish, to color their Judaism with philosophy. They worshipped angels and spirits;
claimed that Christ was one of the angels, therefore he obeyed the law and so Christians, too,
must obey the law. While innocuous at the time, it was a toxic brew of Hebrew, Platonic,
Pythagorean, Orphic, Zoroastrian elements that persisted well into the first several centuries of
Christianity.
1
cf. Col. 2:15
2
cf. Eph 6:12
3
English equivalents
1
The basic thought was that temporal matter was far removed from God, Who is too sublime to be
concerned with it, it would draw Him away from His self-contemplation. And so, He consigned
the task of overseeing creation to the aeons (αἰών)4, an order of lesser spirits. According to the
Colossian quasi-heresy, the human soul is a spark that lost itself in the dark world of matter; on
of the higher aeons, Christ, united himself with the human Jesus by baptism in the Jordan,
decided to save that spark of light. The crucified Christ is not the redeemer, but the aeon Christ
who returned to the pleroma before the Crucifixion. These enlighted ones called themselves
Gnostics; the uninitiated they called Pistics.
Paul, the keen thinker that he was, immediately recognized this movement and its doctrine and
its danger to the orthodox faith. Paul had profound insights into the mysteries of the Christ, the
inner Trinitarian life; he knew that creation was the divine act of God, and that redemption
emanated together with creation from a good and loving God. The Son, the Word, the Logos, the
Christ was the ultimate, fundamental, final cause of all of creation, the universe, the cosmos; all
things are in him, for him, by him – he is the center of the universe:
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα ἐν τοῖς

οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ
τὰ ἀόρατα, εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες εἴτε
ἄρχαι εἴτε ἐξουσίαι· τὰ πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ
καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται·5
The Colossian nascent heresy eliminated the mediatorship of Christ and essentially deprived him
of his central position in the universe; it made Christ a creature among creatures, in other words.6
Paul eloquently proclaims, defends and defines the primacy of Christ:
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα

κατοικῆσαι 7
God poured out his fullness to dwell in Christ; the fullness of divine love is concentrated in the
divine Son. Christ is no mere vicar of the Father, he is the beloved divine Word. Paul is paving
the way for entry and reception of John’s concept of the Logos into Christian thought!
4
This term has a rather colorful history. Plato used αἰών to to denote the eternal world of ideas. The Gnostics use
the term to denote the emanations of God. Aeons bear a number of similarities to Judaeo-Christian angels, including
their roles as servants and emanations of God, and their existence as beings of light.
5
“For by him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth visible and invisible whether they be
thrones or dominions or principalities or powers all things were created by him and for him.”(Col 1:16)
6
St John characterized the notions of Gnosticism as “dissolving” Christ; these speculations ultimately led to the
Arian and Nestorian heresies, which attacked the Christ as the high priest of the universe, his kingship, his primacy.
7
“For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell”(Col 1:19)
2
Initiation into the life that is “hid[den] with Christ in God” (ἀπεθάνετε γὰρ καὶ ἡ
ζωὴ ὑμῶν κέκρυπται σὺν τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ θεῷ)8
is not to be achieved through the strict regimen of mortification, abstinence, a hypocritical
regimen of asceticism as advocated by the Colossian heretics, but Paul pointed out that Christian
unity was more valuable than station or social position, even more valuable than a kinship
relation. Thus Paul preserved the Church from an aceticism that scorned the world and creation,
an exclusive secret cult for only the elect, but a unified body concerned with sacred things than
with the prohibitions of the Old Law, one that forgives9, offers peace and love, united in the
creative image of the Father, in the fullness of the Trinity, Light of Light but still a man among
men, and with whose blood the gap between God and Man was closed.10
Ian Smith, in his revision of his dissertation submitted to the University of Sidney, provides
alternative proposals for the Colossian heresy.
In his Heavenly Perspective11 Smith suggests that it is “possible to determine the nature of an
error by the response that is given.” Accordingly, he suggests that the Colossian letter provides
us with some clues. References in Colossians to Sabbath (2:16), circumcision (2:11), and food
laws (2:21) would indicate that the heresy arose from Judaism.12 With the references to the
activities of angels (2:18), powers and authorities (2:15), and things above (3.2) we have some
indication that the heresy had to do with the supernatural. This would certainly suggest that the
heresy arose within a system of Jewish mysticism, perhaps with the Merkabah mystics with its
interest in heavenly ascents and other worldly beings and activities.13
The letter to the Colossians makes an explicit claim to be authored by St Paul. In Col1:1 thetext
reads, “From Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God…”, and again at 1:23 the
writer refers to himself as “Paul,” a “servant of the gospel”; again, at 4:18, the letter alleges to
have been written by the apostle Paul.
8
“For ye are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God.” (Col 3:3)
9
Bear with one another, forgive one another.” (Col 3:13)
10
For an elegant treatment of Paul see Holzner (1946), esp. pp. 440-446.
11
Smith’s treatment of this subject is interesting and noteworthy, and offers fresh perspective on this much
speculated topic. I found the paper very informative and recommend it to the serious student of the subject matter.
12
Smith (2006) p. 2
13
The nature of Merkabah mysticism is extremely vague; it isn’t even known if the movement actually existed in the
first century, in Paul’s time. Nevertheless, whether Merkabah or another form, one cannot discount the likelihood of
a Jewish mystic base to the heresy.
3
Nineteenth and twentieth century scholarship surrounding the Pauline authorship, however
questioned it on several grounds, including the numerous hapax legomena found in Colossians
and the unusual groupings of synonyms (1:9; 3:16) that are uncharacteristic of Paul.
Edouard Lohse, however, argues that the “language and style of Collosians demonstrate
numerous similarities to the other Pauline letters” and he notes particularly phrases and clauses,
the formal structure of the letter, such as the introduction and conclusion, the beginning of the
thanksgiving prayer, connecting phrases, and the list goes on.14 Moreover, Lohse lists 34 hapax
legomena that appear in Colossians but occur nowhere else in the [Pauline] New Testament
writings.15 Lohse lists twenty-eight words which do reappear in the New Testament, but not in
the other Pauline letters.16 There are ten words that Colossians has in common only with
Ephesians.17 Finally, Eleven words appear only in Col and in the other Pauline letters, and
nowhere else in the New Testament. These statistics are not merely anecdotal, they do support
the notion that Colossians is of Pauline authorship, or at least was dictated by him.
Whereas the previous vv. 13-14 preserve the pattern of the confession (“we”, “us”), the hymnic
unit makes no mention of a confessing community, but only emphasizes the universal validity of
the Christ-event. Lohse asserts that the hymnic unit was inserted and was appropriated from
tradition.18 There are a vast number of observations made by Lohse to support the notion that the
author of the corpus of the letter probably did not write the hymnic unit, but appropriated it from
a primitive Christian hymn celebrating the unique dignity of the Lord, inserting certain
alterations and interpretive additions.
Lohse, citing Ernst Käsemann, notes that if the two presumed additions, the formally problematic
τῆς ἐκκλησίας(the church), and διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ (through the
blood of his cross), were removed, the remaining hymn would no longer exhibit specifically
Christian features. In fact, it could be viewed as a pre-Christian Gnostic text. These observations
notwithstanding, we have the hymn in Colossians as it now stands.
In Margaret MacDonald’s view, Lohse, moreover, believes that the phrase “firstborn before all
creation” characterizes the pre-existent Christ who is the “firstborn” before creation in the
14
Lohse (1972) pp. 85.
15
Ibid.. pp. 85
16
Ibid.pp. 85-86. Lohse does not include here the disputed letters (2 Thess and the Pastorals).
17
Ibid.. 86
18
Ibid..41
4
manner of the Judaic speculation about Wisdom.19 Despite this, Lohse does appear to argue that
the phrase is not about time but about rank:
“The description of the pre-existent Christ as the “firstborn before all creation”
(πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως) is not intended to mean that he was created first and
thereby began the succession of created beings. Rather, it refers instead to his
uniqueness, by which he is distinguisted from all creation (cf. Heb 1:6). The point
is not a temporal advantage but rather the superiority which is due to him as the
agent of creation who is before all creation. As the firstborn of creation he stands
over creation as Lord.”20
The hymn establishes the point that the Gnostics emphatically wanted to deny: that creation and
redemption are can be traced to the same loving origin. Gnosticism viewed creation as evil and
looked to being rescued from it not reconciled with it; the hymn clearly celebrates the goodness
of creation.
The poem presents the overall pattern of Hebrew monotheistic confessions21 known from the
Psalms.22 There is even a convincing suggestion that Col 1:15-20 is a midrash of the book of
Genesis (Gen 1-11, 12-50) which reads that Israel’s God is the creator of the universe.
According to Manus:
First of all, the hymn speaks of the redemption: “Who hath delivered us from the
power of darkness and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son/ In
whom we have redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of sins” (1:13)
Paul evokes redemption in terms very close to those that the Jewish theologians
used to describe the flight out of Egypt. Thus the Targum of s 18:29 reads: “For
you will light the lamp of Israel that was extinguished in the exile, for you are the
lord of the light of Israel. The LORD my God will bring me out of darkness into
light”23
Manus cites a second motif relating to a Pascal hymn:
A second motif that makes us think that it is a Pesach hymn is the fact that in the
hymn the them of creation is connected to that of the resurrection of the dead.
Jewish theology also brought the creation them into a connection with Pesach.
19
cf. Sir 24:9; Wis 9:49
20
Lohse (1972) pp. 48-49
21
Wright (1990), p. 452.
22
Pss. 95.5; 146:5-6; cf. Is 40:12-31
23
“Tout d’abord le contexte antecedent de l’hymne parle de redemption: Il nous a arracés des téèbres et nous a
transférés dans le royaume de son fils bien-aimé, wn qui nous avons la redemption et la remission des pechés” (1,
13)
“Paul evoke la redemption en des termes très proched de ceux que les théologiaens juifs employaient pour designer
la sortie d’Egypte. Ainsi le Targum du Ps 18,29 disait: “Tu es l’auteur de la lumi`re d’Israël. Le Seigneur me
conduira des ténèbres à la lumière.” Manus (1979) p. 106
5
Moreover, the Pesach feast was presented very early as being the creation of
Israel, the firstborn of God (fn). This emerges from texts like 2 Ezra 6:58 (But we
thy people, whom thou hast called thy firstborn), the Song of Solomon 18:4 which
uses the term protokos, and the Targum of Exodus.4:22 which translates: “Since
Egypt, I called them my sons.” We recall that the link between creation and
deliverance from Egypt is made also in the poem of the four nights contained in
the Targum of Exodus 13(13).
But the Pesach is not only associated with the first creation, it is brought into
relation with the eschatological creation. According to 1 Enoch 91:14-15 the new
creation will follow the judgment of men and angels. According to Jubilees 1:29
“the day of creation until the day of the new creation when the heaven and earth
and all of their creatures shall be renewed according to the powers of heaven and
according to the whole nature of earth and all of the lights will be renewed for
healing and peace and blessing for all of the elect." And likewise that Israel was
called the firstborn at the time of the exodus from Egypt, likewise the Messiah
will be called the firstborn at the time of the new creation. (Ex R 19:7; Pesiqta
Rabati 34:2).
These examples suffice to make the point that the hymn wants to be read not only in the light of
the Hebrew Wisdom tradition, but in the light of the entire Hebrew worldview with its most
characteristic feature of monotheism.. Manus cites other motifs and the reader is referred to his
paper Col 1:15-20: A Christian Midrash.
The whole of the hymn, properly expanded to include the set of verses 12-23, moves from
redemption to creation and back again and so emphasizes the cosmic significance of redemption
through its organic connection with creation itself.24 Isa 40-55 provides many good examples of
this pattern, with the emphasis on the proclamation that Israel’s God is none other than God the
creator of the universe, the covenant God.
Modifying our scheme based on the Wisdom tradition we can set up the table shown below to
assist us in interpreting the hymn on the backdrop of traditional Hebrew theology:
1 15a He is the image (like Wisdom; cf Gen 15a He is the image (ὅς ἐστιν
1.26 εἰκὼν), the firstborn
2 14c He is the firstborn (like Wisdom;
B’reshith (Proverbs 8:2225)
3 17ab He is supreme (πρo πάντων) (reshith as A He is the image, firstborn
the sum-total)
4 18a He is the head (reshith) B He is supreme
5 18c He is the beginning (reshith) B He is the head
24
Wright (1990) p. 454
25
“The Lord begot me, the firstborn of his ways” (Proverbs 8:22), Wisdom existed before all things.
6
6 18d He is the firstborn (like Wisdom; this time A He is the beginning (ἀρχή;
from the dead) reshith)
Robert Karris agrees with Wright that reading the hymn against the backdrop of the Wisdom
literature is not the whole answer. And I, too, agree with Wright when he writes:
“For this worldview, there is one God; he made the world, and is neither
identified with it (as in pantheism and its various pagan cousins) nor detached
from it (as in dualism); he is in covenant with Israel; and he will, in fulfilling the
covenant, reclaim and redeem his whole creation from that which at present
corrupts and threatens it…From this point of view, the important thing about the
analysis of the poem is not how long its lines are, but the fact that, although
written in Greek and with some possible verbal echoes of ideas current in other
worldviews, its overall emphasis belongs within the broad and rich tradition of
Jewish psalmody.”
Although I have little use for anything that sports the word “feminist” anywhere in its title, Mary
Rose D’Angelo26 does present a challenging, albeit “feminist” critique of the theology of
Colossians. But notwithstanding her “feminist” bias, she presents a convincing list of parallels
Wisdom and Colossians: Col 1:15, Wis 7:26; Col. 1:15, Pro 8:22, Sir 24:9; Col 1:16, Wis 7:22,
Prov 3:19-20, Prov 8:23, 30.27 These pericopes are worth further analysis and discussion.
III.
THE CHRIST HYMN
– A Brief Formal Analysis –
The suggestion that Colossians 1:15-20 presents a clear poetic structure is hardly a novel
statement by any means. But interestingly, there does not seem to be a great deal of agreement
on the actual structure of the ‘poem.’ Moreover, there is also the suggestion that the Christ Hymn
is actually an insertion of a Christian hymn that predates the actual letter. Inserting an older,
perhaps familiar hymn into the letter may have proved problematic but it does not make an
interpolation impossible. In view of the various methodological, structural, provenance, etc.
questions posed by myriad authors, it is probably wisest to treat the passage as it stands. So I’ll
deal with what I have.
26
D’Angelo (1994) pp. 313-324
27
Karris (1996) p. 77
7
An obvious and natural starting point will be the parallelisms between words and phrases in the
different stanzas.
Wright notes that taking the parallels, one of the most obvious being
15
ὅς ἐστιν
16
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῶ
δι᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν
17
καὶ αὐτός
18
καὶ αὐτός
ὅς ἐστιν
19
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῶ
20
δι᾽ αὐτοῦ…εἰς αὐτόν.
and is even further strengthened by the repeated πρωτότοκος of 15, 18:
15
ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου, πρωτότοκος
πάσης κτίσεως,
16
καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος, τῆς ἐκκλησίας· ὅς
ἐστιν ἀρχή, πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἵνα γένηται ἐν
πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύων,
and the parallels in 16 and 20:
16
ὰ πάντα
ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς,
20
ὰ πάντα …
εἴτε τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.
These features suggest the pattern of a parallel between two halves of a poetic text.28
Wright suggests that the lines be taken as pairs of couplets:
A 15-16
B 17
B 18(ab)
A 18(c)-20
When this is done, the crucial middle pair (B’s) would look something like:
17
καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων
καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῶ συνέστηκεν.
28
Wright notes that the τῆς ἐκκλησίας of verse 18 destroys the pattern; there is something to be said for
the contentions that the τῆς ἐκκλησίαςdoes nothing to establish a “coherent pattern” but I feel that the
theological question, which is the core of this paper, is not affected by this apparent incoherence.
8
18
καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ
τοῦ σώματος, τῆς ἐκκλησίας
preserving the parallelism between 15-16 and 18(c)-20 and is not excessively remote from a
chiastic scheme in the verses.29
Burney’s emphasis on the key theological elements of the hymn supports the above analysis:
A 15a ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν(***)

15b τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου
15c πρωτότοκος(*) πάσης κτίσεως,
16a ὅτι(**) ἐν αὐτῶ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα
16b ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς
16c τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα
16d εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες
16e εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι
16f τὰ πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται,
B 17a καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων
17b καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῶ συνέστηκεν.
B 18a καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ
18b τοῦ σώματος, τῆς ἐκκλησίας
A 18c ὅς ἐστιν ἀρχή(***)
18d πρωτότοκος(*) ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν
18e ἵνα γένηται ἐν πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύων,
19a ὅτι(**) ἐν αὐτῶ εὐδόκησεν
19b πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα κατοικῆσαι
20a καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι
τὰ πάντα εἰς αὐτόν
20b εἰρηνοποιήσας διὰ τοῦ αἵματος
τοῦ σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ, [δι᾽ αὐτοῦ]
20c εἴτε τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς
εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.
Here, the connecting words and pronouns dictate the basic structure of the hymn, and allows the
parallels (πρωτότοκος) to assume relative prominence. The two A sections are thematically
parallel, both beginning with a Christ statement, and the amplification of πρωτότοκος(*),
“firstborn”, and explaining it with the ὅτι(**) phrases, relating Christ to the created order
(16a/19a). No problem so far.30
29
As Wright notes, the syllable counts in these lines is acceptably close, too, supporting a rhythmic reading in the
native Greek – despite the obvious fact that we are comparatively ignorant of how a Hellenistic Greek would read
or pronounce it.
30
Despite the fact that the parallelism between the A sections is not perfect.
9
The ant at the picnic is the fact of the imbalanced A sections: εἰκὼν(***) is qualified by an
interposed phrase but ἀρχή(***) is not. There is no parallel at the end of v. 15 to the ἵνα clause
of 18e. Similarly, in v. 16 three lines (16c,d,e) amplify the ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς
γῆς (16a), but such a qualification is absent in v. 20.
There is no parallel in the first A section to 20b. Similarly, according to Wright’s analysis, τοῦ
θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου (15b) (of the invisible God the firstborn of every creature) explains
εἰκὼν ([who is the] image) while the ἵνα-clause of 18e (that in all things he might have
preeminence) does not explain 18c-d (who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead) but sums
them up.31
Smith notes that several scholars divide Col 1:15-20 into two strophes, each of which begins
with ὅς ἐστιν … πρωτότοκος (vv 15 and 18) and includes E. Lohse among the proponents
of this scheme.32
Smith also points out yet another scheme where he places within the “centerpiece” of vv. 17-18
the repetition of καὶ αὐτός at the beginning of vv. 17 and 18 to show parallelism. This
“centerpiece” serves to sum up the two major hymnic themes: the priority of Christ in creation
(v. 17) and the priority of Christ in the Church (v. 18). He proposes a structure of two strophes
with a middle stanza suggesting a chiastic structure of the form:
A 15
ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου, πρωτότοκος
πάσης κτίσεως,
B 16
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῶ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα
C ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ
καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες
εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι· τὰ πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ
καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται,
D 17
καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῶ
συνέστηκεν.
D1 18
καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος, τῆς ἐκκλησίας
A1 ὅς ἐστιν ἀρχή, πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἵνα γένηται
ἐν πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύων,
B1 19
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῶ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα
31
The result, according to Wright, is in each case a three-line introduction (lines of five and eight syllables, followed
by a longer third line) followed by a clause (ὅτι ἐν αὐτῶ…).
32
Smith (2006) p. 154
10
κατοικῆσαι
C1 20
καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα εἰς
αὐτόν, εἰρηνοποιήσας διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ
σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ, [δι᾽ αὐτοῦ] εἴτε τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς
γῆς εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.
The above scheme reflects a Hebrew literary genre in its chiastic structure.
Smith notes that Wright33, noting that the ABBA structure reflects Hebrew monotheistic
confessions (vide supra), wherein the God of Israel is both redeemer and creator.34
Taking the chiastic structure of the hymn we no longer need to quibble over speculations of
omissions or addtions. This presentation of the hymn as a chiasm would most likely find its
origin in a midrashic interpretation of Genesis 1.1, as proposed by Manns:
“Si l’hymne de Col 1,15-20 est construit selon les techniques du midrash, et si sa
diffusion parmi les juifs a provoqué une reaction negative, il est fort probable que
sone auteur soit un judéo-chrétien (fn), formé à la mentalité juive, qui pour faire
admettre la Résurrection de Jésus à ses frères, a repris le midrash de Gen 1,1 pour
le chistianiser.” [If the hymn of Col 1:15-20 is constructed according to midrashic
techniques, and if its distribution among the Jews evoked a negative reaction, it is
quite probable that its author was a Jewish-Christian [fn omitted], formed in the
Jewish mentality, who in order to admit the Resurrection of Jesus to his brethren,
took of the Gen 1:1 midrash to Christianize them.”]35
It is thus a play on the first words of the Hebrew scripture: ‫שית‬
ִׁ ‫( ְּבֵרא‬b’reshith, in the beginning).
The b prefix is represented in the ἐν (αὐτῶ) (v. 16), δι᾽ (αὐτοῦ) (v. 19/20), and εἰς
(αὐτὸν) (v. 19/20).36 The fact that the first A section 16d-e (repeated εἴτε) has links in the
second A section (20c, parallels 16b). We can also find an equivalence of ‫שית‬
ִׁ ‫( ֵרא‬reshith,
beginning) in the sections of the chiastic structure of the hymn : ‫שית‬
ִׁ ‫ ֵרא‬can be rendered by
analogy as πρωτότοκος (firstborn, v. 15), πρὸ πάντων (before all things, v. 17); as ἡ
κεφαλὴ (head, v. 18); and likewise as ἀρχή (beginning, v. 18), each describing, in the
Rabinnic midrashic fashion, the εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ, the image of God, in four ways.
A v. 15 Christ is the firstborn ‫שית‬ ִׁ ‫ֵרא‬ B v. 17 Christ is before all things ‫שית‬
ִׁ ‫ֵרא‬
B v. 18 Christ is the head ‫שית‬ִׁ ‫ֵרא‬ A v. 18 Christ is the beginning ‫שית‬ ִׁ ‫ֵרא‬
33
Wright (1990) p. 452
34
cf. Ps 146:4-5; see also Wright. This dual role is also reflected in Revelation 4 and 5, where in God is worshipped
as creator in 4 and as the Lamb, redeemer, in 5.
35
Manns (1978) p. 110
36
Wright (1990) p. 456
11
(Modified after Smith (2006))
Moreover, 20c at a point comparable to16c-e, explains how the reconciliation of 20a was
effected and so maintains the theology of the whole.
16b and 20c, and 16f and 20a are parallel in content, but not in placement: 16b (in heaven and
that are in earth) qualifies 16a (because by him were all things created); 16f sums it all up (all
things were created by him and for him).
20a (to reconcile all things unto himself), clarified by 20b (having made peace through the blood
of his cross) rounds off the whole hymn by again emphasizing Christ’s universal saving
kingship, while 19 (For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell) and 20c
(whether they be things in earth or things in heaven) containing different thoughts to 20a-b.
One of the recognized problems with the balance between the two As is that, while the second A
is in direct parallelism with the first A, the author appears to have gotten wordier, thus adversely
affecting the stricter discipline expected for such a parallelism. Nevertheless, 20a (him to
reconcile all things unto himself by him) remains close to 16f (all things were created by him and
for him), and 20c (whether they be things in earth or things in heaven) picks up 16b (that are in
heaven and that are in earth).
Without belaboring the formal aspects of the hymn, the above discussion should provide a
feeling for its basic structure and internal relationships. More detailed discussions and analyses
can be found in the works cited here and in the commentaries, particularly Lohse (1972) and
MacDonald (2000).
IV.
DISCUSSION
Karris sums up the Christ Hymn in terms of Wisdom theology when he writes:
By means of a Jewish wisdom theology, the composer of Colossians 1:15-20

created one of Christianity’s first and loftiest Christologies…This is not the
narrative of Christology of the four gospels, although John’s Gospel, especially
through its hymnic prologue about God’s Logos, provides some parallels to the
Christology of Colossians 1:15-20. We are viewing protology at work, as the
composer takes us behind the scenes, before creation manifested God’s wisdom
and plan for all of creation. Just as wisdom represents God to the outside, that is,
God’s image, so too does Jesus Christ, as God’s image. And Jesus Christ has
12
manifested that wisdom not just at the beginning of his earthly life, not just
through his death and resurrection, but indeed from the very beginning.”37
Indeed, if my interpretation is correct καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος, τῆς
ἐκκλησίας· ὅς ἐστιν ἀρχή, πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἵνα γένηται ἐν
πᾶσιν αὐτὸς πρωτεύων (And he is the head of the body the church who is the
beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have the preeminence.) (Col
1:18).
The absolute primacy of Jesus Christ builds upon the point made in Col 1:18, the lordship of
Christ. This notion was fully articulated by Bl. John Duns Scotus, and insists on the absolute
priority of God’s will and grace and on the secondary role of human sin. In other words, even if
humankind had not sinned, God would have still expressed his love for creation through his self-
communication in the Incarnation.
It is indeed gratifying to note that the Jesuit New Testament Scholar, Jean-Noël Aletti, S.J.,
posits six ways in which Colossians 1:15-20 articulates the primacy of Jesus Christ.38
Firstly, Aletti emphasizes eminence found in the expressions “firstborn” (1:15) and “image”
(1:15); 1:18c supports this proposition: “he himself might be preeminent.”
Secondly, Aletti argues universality and the reference to “all things”: “all creation” (1:15), “all
things” (1:16, 17); before all things (1:17, 1:16); 1:20 (and “whether those o earth or those in
heaven).
Thirdly, uniqueness, meaning that it is solely and uniquely Jesus Christ who is the actor in the
hymn. Phrases like “in him” (1:16; 1:19), “through him” and “for him” (1:17; 1:20); “he
himself” (1:18).39
The fourth way is more subtle and is totality (in all ways, at all levels). For example, on the level
of creation: “were created” (1:16) On the level of modality expressed in prepositions: “in” (1:16
and 1:17); “through” (1:16); “for” (1:16). The glue or sustainer of creation is subsumed in this
notion of totality (1:17). “In all things” expresses Christ’s primacy at all levels, totally and 1:20
is explicit when it sings of the reconciliation of all through and for Christ.
37
Karris (1996) pp. 77-78
38
Aletti argues for an integral, non-redacted nature of the Christ Hymn of Colossians 1:15-20, and for its Wisdom
geneology. For a more detailed discussion please see Aletti (1981) pp. 93ff.
39
Grammatically, for example, in 1:17 and 1:18 αὐτός makes clear that it is only Christ who is the
subject of the verb.
13
The fifth way is that of priority. “Firstborn” (1:15) and “before all things” proclaim Christ’s
primacy. “The beginning” and “firstborn of the dead” (1:18) sing clearly of this aspect of
Christ’s primacy.
Definitive accomplishment is the sixth way. The hymnic unit of Colossians 1 is a proclamation of
celebration of things accomplished. Christ is already the “image of the invisible God” (1:15). He
is already the “firstborn of all creation” (1:15). He is already “the beginning” and the “firstborn
of the dead” (1:18). Christ is already the “head of the body of the church” (1:18), and is the one
in whom reconciliation and peace have been attained (1:20). It is interesting to note how these
definitive accomplishments link together the two stanzas of the hymnic unit.
Colossians 1:15-20 celebrates in poetic hymnic form the absolute primacy of Jesus Christ.
Indeed Christ in his person and work is the actual presence and activity of the living self-
communicating God, and the center of the universe.40
The Christ Hymn, therefore, establishes Christ’s supremacy over all things (Col 1:15-20)
because: He is God (1:15); He is the heir (1:15); He is the Creator (1:16); He is the Sustainer
(1:17); He is the Head of the Church (1:18); He is the Firstborn from among the dead (1:18); He
is Supreme in all things (1:18); He is the divine human Redeemer (1:19-20); the Divine Fullness
resides in Him (1:19); He redeemed all things through the Cross (1:20).
V.
CONTEMPORARY THOUGHTS
VI.
REFLECTION
The Christ Hymn of Colossians 1:15-20 encourages us to retreat into our religious imaginations,
to the beginning, the absolute beginning even before creation, where we find the Principal and
the Word creating and longing to become part of creation through the perichoresis with the
40
14
Spirit; the Godhead is self-diffusing and self-communicating in an unconditional, perfect love

that strives for expression.
Colossians 1:15-20 reminds us in hymnic, poetic form that creation is good and reconciliation is
available. The hymn celebrates the Trinity’s self-communication and self-diffusing love.
Christ is the center of the universe and so it follows that creation is more than simply an
expression of love, it is Christic, because it bears the imprint of the one in whose image it was
made – the Incarnate Word.
In his mystical hymn to creation, Canticle of the Creatures, our Seraphic Father, St Francis of
Assisi, bridged the gap between the creature and the Creator; the Poverello in his canticle sings
of creation and re-creation, for which he substitutes “pardon” and “peace”. St Francis does not
alienate creation but embraces all of it as kin, as brother and sister.
Again, I must take issue with those who attempt to savage Scripture by applying liberal
ideologies, specifically the feminists. Whereas I have acknowledged D’Angelo’s finesse in
paralleling the themes of Colossians 1:15-20 with Hebrew scripture and the Wisdom tradition –
while overlooking the feminist agenda in doing so and her insistence that because Sophia is a
feminine noun, so then must Wisdom be a feminine element – she tends to overstate her feminist
case when she writes that the author of Colossians “affirms the patriarchal rule of the masters of
the world,” and that the “Colossians’ code is…the integral consequence of Christ’s universal
lordship.” She appears to lose sight of the multiple meanings of Christ’s universal lordship, that
of the author of Colossians and that of the hymnic unit.
Wayne Meeks, who offers a valuable insight “[t]hat baptism dramatized a cosmic, not merely a
human, restoration of unity is shown clearly by the liturgical composition of quoted in Col 1:15-
20.”41 Meeks asserts that the household code in Colossians “assures that the basic structure of the
Christian household will resemble that which is insisted upon by society at large.” Assuming that
Meeks is on the mark, we can respond to D’Angelo’s critique by proposing to model the basic
structure of the Christian household today so that it will resemble that model which society
would see for its people. Not an easy task but it may, by analogy, help today’s and future
generations from misapprehending Colossians 3:18-4:1 as divine dictum. D’Angelo needs to
understand that Scripture is not some sort of museum piece nor something from the antique past
41
Meeks (1979) p. 211 (pp. 209-221)
15
to which we pay oral homage at liturgy and worship, but imposes awesome responsibilities on us
as theologians, scholars, teachers, and preachers to assist the faithful in vitally assimilating its
meaning for daily life, while avoiding distorting it with liberal ideological misinterpretations.
Reflecting on Wink, Meeks, and D’Angelo, it becomes evident that Colossians 1:15-20 has
social justice implications as well. The “powers” of Colossiae are not merely those of the
pleroma, the kenoma, and the aeons, but today are the institutions, organizations, systems,
structures, hierarchies that are the forces behind good or evil, forces that are beyond the powers
of the individual. Today, we may reflect on Col 1:20 and find reconciliation through Christ is
also available to those powers, and in accord with Colossians, that the powers of good are in
need of reconciliation.42 If the New Testament Christ is the personified Wisdom of Hebrew
scripture as Wink suggests, then Wisdom has been crucified. Let us fairly assume that Christ is
God’s Wisdom and that the “rulers of this age”43 refer to both human and supernatural powers.44
Col 1:16 proclaims that the powers have been reconciled through Christ’s blood on the Cross.
Today’s Christians may name some of the liberal ideologies (e.g. feminism) that inform the
socialization process by which we become social beings and relate to one another. These
ideologies have become the “powers” today.
Acknowledgements
No one fathoms the depths of Scripture, theology, spirituality without the selfless
and generous companionship of spiritual friends and guides. It would be
ungrateful and arrogant if I were not to acknowledge the wonderful gift of
encouragement and support provided by
Fr Regis Gallo O.F.M and Fr Valerian Faugno O.F.M.,
whose support in clarifying questions, providing directional guidance, sharing a
vast armamentarium of knowledge and their intellectual gifts with this humble,
ignorant servant and disciple, have nurtured and enlivened my intellectual
development. Fr Regis and Fr Valerian have emptied themselves in a Christlike
manner to fill me with the desire to perfect my faith seeking understanding.
My grateful thanks go also to Shirley Ricker of the University of Rochester, who
was of immense help in locating and requesting difficult-to-locate primary
sources for this paper. Shirley was remarkable in her diligence, tenacity, and
overall knowledge, a scholar in her own right.
42
cf. Col 2:9, 15
43
cf. 1 Cor 2:6-8
44
Wink (1984) 44-45
16
I hold them in my prayers and approach our Seraphic Father and Founder, St
Francis of Assisi, with my personal intention that he always hold them, his
beloved brothers, close, that he always accompany and guide them, and
consistently present their intentions before our Lord Jesus Christ.
St Francis of Assisi Pray for Us
Pax et Bonum
17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works Cited or Consulted
Aletti, Jean-Noël. Colossiens 1,15-20: Genre et exégèse du texte; Fonction de la thèmatique
sapientielle. Analecta Biblica 91. Rome: Biblical Institute Press (1981)
Berkouwer, G.C. "The Motive of the Incarnation." In The Work of Christ, by G.C. Berkouwer,
19-34. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965.
Berry, George R. The Classic Greek Dictionary. Chicago, IL: Follett Publishing (1941)
Branick, Vincent. Understanding Paul and His Letters. New York: Paulist Press, 2009.
Brown, Raymond. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday, 1997.
Bruns, J. Edgar. "Cosmolatry." The Catholic World 191 (1960): 284-287.
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeil. Translated by Ford
Lewis Battles. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960.
Carol, Juniper B. Why Jesus Christ? Thomistic, Scotistic and Conciliatory Perspectives.
Manassas, VA: Trinity Communications, 1911.
D’Angelo, Mary Rose. Colossians. Searching the Scriptures. Volume Two: A Feminist
Commentary. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza ed. New York: Crossroad (1994).
Delio, Ilia. "Christ and Extraterrestrial Life." Theology and Science 5, no. 3 (2007): 249-265.
—. Christ in Evolution. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008.
—. Crucified Love: Bonaventure's Mysticism of the Crucified Christ. Quincy, IL: Franciscan
Press, 1998.
Delio, Ilia. "Is Creation Eternal?" Theological Studies 66 (2005): 279-303.
Delio, Ilia. "Revisiting the Franciscan Doctrine of Christ." Theological Studies 64 (2003): 3-23.
—. The Humility of God: A Franciscan Perspective. Cincinnati, OH: St Anthony Messenger
Press, 2005.
Dettloff, W. "Die Geistigkeit des hl. Franziskus in der Theologie der Franziskaner."
Wissenschaft und Weisheit 19 (1956): 197-211.
Dillard, Peter S. "A Minor Matter? The Franciscan Thesis and Philosophical Theology."
Heythrop Journal 5 (2009): 890-900.
Donahue, John R. "Model of Persuasion." America 199, no. 15 (2008): 12-15.
Feyerabend, Karl. Handy Dictionary of the Greek and English Languages. New York: David
McKay Company, Inc., 1914.
Finlan, Steven. The Apostle Paul and the Pauline Tradition. Collegville, MN: Liturgical Press,
2008.
Garvey, Colin. "Book Review: Poverty and Joy: The Franciscan Tradition." Irish Theological
Society, 2000: 383-384.
Habets, Myk. "On Getting First Things First: Assessing Claims for the Primacy of Christ." New
Blackfriars 90, no. 1027 (2008): 343-364.
18
Harrington, Daniel. Meeting St. Paul Today. Chicago, IL: Loyola Press, 2008.
Hayes, Zacchary. "Christ, Word of God and Exemplar of Humanity: The roots of Franciscan
Christocentrism and the implications for today." The Cord 47, no. 1 (1996): 3-17.
Hays, Richard B. "The God of Mercy Who Rescues Us from the Present Evil Age. Romans and
Galatians." In Forgotten God: Perspectives in Biblical Theology, by Andrew Das and Frank
Mater, 123-143. Louisville, KY: Wesminster John Knox, 2002.
Herrick, Greg. The Letter to the Colossians. Biblical Studies Foundation. 2001.
http://www.bible.org (accessed February 20, 2010).
Holzner, Joseph. Paul of Tarsus. Translated by Frederic C. Eckhoff. St Louis: B. Herder Book
Co., 1946.
Horrell, David. An Introduction to the Study of Paul. New York: T&T Clark, 2006.
Husinger, G. "Mysterium Trinitatis: Karl Barth's Conception of Eternity." In Disruptive Grace:
Studies in the Theology of Karl Barth, by G. Husinger, 186-209. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.
Iammarone, Giovanni. "The Timeliness and Limitations of the Christology of John Duns Scotus
for the Development of a Contemporary Theology of Christ." Miscellanea Francescana 88
(1988): 277-299.
Johnson, L.T. The Writings of the New Testament. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress (1999).
Karris, Robert J. "V. Movement 2. Colossians 1:15-20--Christ Jesus as Cosmic Lord and
Peacemaker." In A Symphony of the New Testament Hymns, by A Symphony of the New
Testament Hymns, 62-93. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press (1996).
Koonten, George H. van. Cosmic Christology in Paul and the Pauline School. Colossians and
Ephesians inthe Context of the Graeco-Roman Cosmology, with a new synopsis of the Greek
texts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Layton, Richard A. "Recovering Origen's Pauline Exegesis: Exegesis and Eschatology in the
Commentary on Ephesians." Journal of Early Christian Studies 8, no. 3 (2000): 373-411.
Lohse, Eduard. Thanksgiving & Hymn, Excursus; Christ Jesus the Lord, Excursus. in Colossians
and Philemon. Augsburg: Hermeneia/Fortress (1972)
MacDonald, Margaret Y. Colossians and Ephesians. Sacra Pagina Series. Edited by Daniel J.
Harrington. Vol. 17. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000.
MacDonald, Margaret Y. Colossians and Ephesians. Sacra Pagina Series, Vol. 17. Daniel J.
Harrington S.J., ed. Collegeville: Liturgical Press (2000)
Manns, F. "Col 1,15-20: Midrash Chrétien de Gen. 1,1." Revue des sciences réligieuses 53
(1979): 100-110.
Matera, Frank J. "Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: A study in the diverse unity of New
Testament theology." Theological Studies 67 (2006): 237-256.
Meeks, Wayne A. In One Body: The Unity of Humankind in Colossians and Ephesians in God’s
Christ and His People: Studies in Honor of Nils Alsturp Dahl. Jacob Jervell and Wayne A.
Meeks, eds. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget (1979).
19
Mulholland, Séamus. "Christ: The Haecceitas of God. The Spiritualityof John Duns Scotus'
Doctrine of Haecceitas and Primacy of Christ." Cord: A Franciscan Spiritual Review 40 (1990):
165-172.
Niccacci, Alviero. "Analyzing Biblical Hebrew Poetry." JSOT 74 (1997): 77-93.
Osborne, Kenan B., ed. The History of Franciscan Theology. St Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan
Institute, 1994.
Pius XI, Pope. "Quas Primas (On the Feast of Christ the King)." Encyclical. Rome: Eternal Word
Television Network, December 11, 1925.
Rahner, Karl. Christology within an Evolutionary View of the World. Vol. 5.08, in Theological
Investigations, by Karl Rahner, 157-192. Baltimore: Helicon, 1966.
Rahner, Karl. "Experiment: Man." Theology Digest XVI, no. Sesquicentennial (1968): 57-69.
Rahner, Karl. The Two Basic Types of Christology. Vol. XIII, in Theological Investigations, by
Karl Rahner, translated by Bourke, 213-223. New York: Seabury Press, 1975.
Rops, Daniel. Saint Paul. Translated by Jex Martin. Chicago, IL: Fides Publishers Association,
1953.
Schweitzer, Albert. The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle. Translated by William Montgomery.
New York: Seabury Press, 1931.
Scoti, B. Ioannis Duns Scoti. Opera Omnia. Edited by Studio et Cura Commissionis Scotisticae.
Vol. XXI. Vatican City: Typis Vaticanis, MMIV.
Scoti, Joannis Duns. Opera Omnia. Vol. IV. Paris: Apud Ludovicum Vivès, Bibliopolam
Editorem, MCCCCXCIV.
Short, William J. Poverty and Joy: The Franciscan Tradition. London: Darton, Longman and
Todd, 1999.
Short, William J. "The Changing Face of Christian Spirituality: The Franciscan Tradition."
Spiritus 8 (2008): 129-134.
Smith, Ian K. Heavenly Perspective: A study of the apostle Paul's response to a Jewish mystical
movement at Colossae. Vol. Library of New Testament Studies 326. London: T&T Clark, 2006.
Still, Todd D. "Eschatology in Colossians: How Realized is It?" New Testament Studies 50
(2004): 125-138.
Trethowan, Illtyd and Frank J. Sheed. The Philosophy of St Bonaventure. Translated by Etienne
Gilson. Paterson, NJ: St Anthony Guild Press, 1965.
van Nieuwenhove, Rik. "In the Image of God: The Trinitarian Anthropology of St Bonaventure,
St Thomas Aquinas and the Blessed Jan Van Ruusbroec." Irish Theological Quarterly 66 (2001):
227-237.
Weinandy, Thomas. "The Cosmic Christ." The Cord 51, no. 1 (2001): 27-38.
White, Benjamin L. "Reclaiming Paul: Reconfiguration as Reclamation in 3 Corinthians."
Journal of Early Christian Studies 17, no. 4 (2009): 497-523.
20
Wink, Walter. Naming the Powers: The language of Power in the New Testament. Philadelphia:
Fortress (1984).
Wright, N.T. "Poetry and Theology in Colossians 1.15-20." New Testament Studies 36 (1990):
444-468.
Yancey, Philip. "Ongoing Incarnation: Would Christmas have come even if we had not sinned?"
Christianity Today, 2008: 72.
Yates, Phillippe. "The Primacy of Christ in John Duns Scotus: An Assessment." FAITH 39, no. 7
(2008): 22-29.
21

Project Paper Col 1-15-20 Primacy Christ

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Paper Col 1-15-20 Primacy Christ

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reflection Paper

The Christ Hymn of Col 1:15-20: The Primacy of Christ

St Bernard’s School of Theology and Ministry

A301 PAULINE AND DEUTERO-PAULINE WRITINGS

Paul’s letter to the Colossians is a remarkable example of Paul’s sensitivity and

ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα ἐν τοῖς

Paul eloquently proclaims, defends and defines the primacy of Christ:

ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα

Wright suggests that the lines be taken as pairs of couplets:

A 15a ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν(***)

(Modified after Smith (2006))

By means of a Jewish wisdom theology, the composer of Colossians 1:15-20

Spirit; the Godhead is self-diffusing and self-communicating in an unconditional, perfect love

You might also like