Customer Reviews

The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (Pillar New Testament Commentary)

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Surprisingly, there have been very few substantial and recent commentaries on Colossians from a conservative/evangelical perspective. Somewhat older volumes of importance include those by O'Brien (WBC, 1982); Wright (TNTC, 1986); Dunn (NIGTC, 1996); Garland (NIVAC, 1998); and Thompson (THNTC, 2005). Thus there has been a slight dearth of new in-depth works on Colossians (and Philemon).

This volume nicely fills the gap. Moo, Professor of New Testament at Wheaton Graduate School in Chicago, has already authored several important commentaries, such as his top-rate 1996 volume on Romans (NICNT), and his 2000 work on James (PNTC).

This is a significant commentary in an increasingly significant commentary series. The Pillar New Testament Commentary series now has 10 commentaries available, and it serves as a very workable and substantive mid-range series of commentaries. While not overly technical in nature, the series does offer high-quality commentaries that both students and pastors will greatly benefit from. This volume is no exception.

At 471 pages, it is certainly the most lengthy of treatments thus far on these two books. Dunn and Garland were 388 and 389 pages respectively. So this volume is both the most up to date work to appear, taking into account all the recent scholarship on these epistles, and the most detailed and comprehensive.

Concerning the contentious issues of authorship and dating, Moo spends nearly 20 pages arguing for Pauline authorship and a writing of around A.D. 60-61. The place of writing was most likely Rome, and the occasion of the epistle was to promote a high Christology over against false teaching.

As to some of the hotly debated issues in the epistle, Moo provides careful guidance and discussion. He notes various views, while making clear his reasons for his own preferences. And he notes that on many contentious topics, we are best left with some ambiguity and uncertainty.

As to the false teachers that Paul is rebutting, they are often left unspecified and vague in Paul's writings. In some epistles, such as Galatians and 2 Corinthians, the nature and message of the false teachers is more clearly addressed. But in Colossians we are often unsure as to who exactly these false teachers are, and what exactly their false teaching is.

Moo spends 14 pages of his introduction on this question (plus more discussion in the commentary proper). The three main options concerning the false teaching are: Jewish mysticism, Judaism, or syncretism. The last option (a blend of religious and philosophical traditions) seems most likely, especially as elaborated by Clinton Arnold. Yet Moo recognises problems with this option as well. Moo argues that in the end we must simply be content with a generalised account of this false teaching.

Consider the difficult matter of understanding what Paul means by the "stoichea tou kosmou" (the elements of the world). This phrase, found in 2:8 and 2:20 (and in a somewhat similar form in Gal. 4:3) has occasioned much discussion. What exactly Paul means by it is still very much a matter of lively debate.

Moo looks at the three main views: 1) the fundamental components of the material universe; 2) the essential principles; or 3) spiritual beings. He looks at the pros and cons of each, and opts for the first. While aspects of the other two views can be included in this, the first option seems to best make sense of how this phrase was used during Paul's day.

Also, consider the admonition found in 3:5-11, where we are told to put off the old self and put on the new. The usual evangelical understanding is that the believer has two natures: an old sinful nature, and a new nature in Christ, and that there is a constant battle between the two.

Moo suggests that this may not be what Paul had in mind. Instead, a corporate understanding of this text may best fit the context and related passages. It is really about a new humanity created in Christ (Eph. 2:15) as opposed to the old humanity created in Adam (Rom. 5:12). The old self or old man is Adam and his influence, while the new self or new man is Christ.

This is part of Paul's "already-not yet" paradigm, in which we do live in tension between the influences and power of the old man and the new. We have been transferred from the `lordship' of Adam to that of Christ, but the pull of the Adamic realm still impacts on us.

Other difficult passages are also treated in a fair, judicious and balanced fashion. All in all, this volume makes for a very wise, well-written and well-researched commentary. If one had to choose just one commentary on Colossians, this should take pride of place.

Douglas Moo's fresh commentary on Colossians does not fail to follow in the tradition of the writer's excellent and extensive work on Romans. The volume also contributes to what appears to be a very satisfying trend in the relatively new Pillar Commentary set by Eerdmans - solid conservative scholarship and excellent readability. The Wheaton Professor explains in his preface that the research for this work felt "like coming home" (x). This feeling of the writer's personal fascination and joy in study of the book overflows into its readability. Not even Bruce (see review on The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians (New International Commentary on the New Testament))can match these literary qualities in the mind of this reviewer.

As to the content of the work, Moo devotes 46 pages to an introduction to Colossians, 90 pages to Colossians 1 (30 of which are dedicated to the 6 verse "Christ hymn"), 79 pages to chapter 2, 73 pages to chapter 3, 36 pages to chapter 4, and 85 pages to the Book of Philemon. A thorough index of authors, subjects, scripture, and extra-biblical literature fills the final 28 pages. For the purposes of this review, a focus will be given to the majority of the book - the commentary on Colossians.

Moo's introduction to the book leaves nothing lacking. Initially Moo surveys the recipients and moves on to tackle the question of authorship. With a skillful presentation of the opposing sides of the issue, Moo presents a set of logical criterion which each side must meet and then proceeds to demonstrate how the critical approach fails to meet each criteria and how the conservative interpretation succeeds on each point. Moo narrows his focus to what he believes to be the main criticisms of the Pauline authorship of the book: linguistic and theological. Over the next 14 pages, the writer ably defends each point. Following the discussion of authorship, the date and provenance are discussed (6 pages). The occasion of the book (the Colossian heresy) receives no less than 15 pages of thorough treatment. In the reviewer's opinion, no better analysis of the positions on the Colossian heresy exists in print. Moo discusses the difficult subject with a great deal of humility, admitting that he is "not convinced that the letter provides enough information for us to be even reasonably sure about the identification of the false teaching" (49). Moo begins by quickly passing up the minor view that the Book of Colossians deals not with a real heresy, but a theoretical doctrinal aberration (47) as well as the rapidly diminishing view of Gnosticism (53). The author gives a fair treatment of the 3 major views by weighing in with positive and negative aspects of each one (Jewish mysticism, standard Judaism, and syncretistic philosophy, respectively) before cautiously settling on the final view (58). The final 12 pages of the introduction comprise a theological analysis of the book.

The quality of the exegesis is demonstrated throughout the volume in numerous passages, but for the purposes of this review several highlights will be noted. Moo's diagram (81) and discussion of the opening prayer/thanksgiving is extensive and helpful. As noted above, the discussion of the "Christ hymn" (107-137) is nothing less than impressive. The listing of all imperatives in the book (175-176) is a helpful tool that many commentators fail to include. Also, helpful lexical metaphors are well noted throughout the text (e.g. 180). Another theme that presents itself throughout the commentary is the relationship between Ephesians and Colossians. Moo demonstrates that the relationship is fluid and points out differences in argument between the books as well as points of agreement (e.g. 231-232). The exegesis of 3:3 is of the highest caliber (250), weaving serious lexical and historical arguments into some very practical conclusions. Another aspect of the work that this reviewer particularly enjoys is that the writer is not content to simply abandon the discussion of the authorship of the book following the introduction to the book, but rather proceedes to drive the point home on various passages throughout the text (cf. 245, 333-4, 337, 344). Textual variants are treated as extensively as necessary (e.g. 259-260). The treatment of the Haustafeln (292-317) handles well some of the hermeneutical hurdles of topics such as the relationship of husbands and wives and the institution of slavery. In every section the rhetorical and literary structure is presented carefully (e.g. 318). Overall, the handling of each paragraph is filled with quality exegesis and in-depth analysis.

This analysis is no better demonstrated than by the manner in which the writer deals with the interpretational difficulties throughout the book. Moo argues against Dunn's co-authorship theory (76), holds that "all the world" (1:6) is a rhetorical rather than a historical statement (89), believes that the "spirit" of 1:8 is, in fact, the Holy Spirit (92), attaches "joy" (1:11,12) with "giving thanks" rather than "patience and longsuffering" (100), and cautiously holds to the view that Paul modified an existing Christian (114) hymn in 1:15-20 (110). The challenge of the "firstborn of all creation" is handled with ease (119-120). The writer believes that "faith" in 1:23 is a reference to "your faith" rather than "the faith" (144) and that "now" (1:24) is a transitional marker. The challenge of 1:24 is dealt with reasonably well, but the writer's position is not as clearly articulated as this reviewer would have preferred (151-153). The author argues against Wright's pun theory in 2:8 (185), holds to spiritual circumcision in 2:11 and physical baptism in 2:12 (200-202), views "dead in your sins" (2:13) as causal rather than locative (206), dismisses the various theories regarding the "handwriting" (2:14) in favor of the view of a general IOU dismissed at Christ's crucifixion (210-211), views "having stripped" (2:15) as an intensive middle instead of Wright's true middle (213), and holds that "worshipping of angels" is worship given to angels (226-227). Moo dismisses the idea that the "right hand (3:1) is an Old Testament allusion (247), views the "wrath of God" as eschatological (258-259), holds that the "bond" (3:14) is of the prior virtues rather than a bond of believers (281), sees "rule" (3:15) as both an athletic and an administrative metaphor (283), views "word of Christ" as an objective genitive, explains that the "children" of 3:20 are neither very young or of any age, but rather something of a middle ground (304), treats extensively the ethical challenge of slavery (308-310, 315), translates "serve" (3:24) as imperitive rather than indicative (313), applies 3:25 to slaves only (314), views "grace" (4:6) as either/or, both/and divine grace and human graciousness (330), argues for a literal view of the "fellow-prisoner" in 4:10 (338), and holds that the Epistle to the Laodiceans is an uninspired and unpreserved letter written from Paul to the believers at Laodicea (351).

When attempting to find negative elements of a massive tome such as this, one would initially believe that such a task would be relatively easy; however, Moo leaves the reviewer quite a challenge in this area. A handful of small challenges can be presented though. First, Moo's choice of the TNIV was not the best in the mind of the reviewer. At numerous occasions the writer finds himself defending or explaining some of the more "interpretative" elements of the translation (e.g. 345-346). The ESV would have been a much better translation for the purposes of this commentary. Second, it seems that Moo at times grants too much credibility to some of the more questionable views of the text (e.g. 123). Third, a more thorough explanation of his views in regard to circumcision and baptism could be warranted (202). Finally, some textual variants seem to get swept under the rug rather than actually wrestled with (e.g. 335-336). In perspective, these flaws are minor and they do not weigh heavily enough to influence the reviewer's high ranking of the commentary.

In light of the commentary's literary qualities, extensive treatment of the text, helpful and thorough introduction to the book, quality exegesis, and solid handling of exegetical difficulties, this reviewer would without hesitation or qualification recommend this volume as the single best exegetical commentary on the Book of Colossians.

Doug Moo's new commentary on Colossians is a wonderful addition to NT scholarship. I have used this work to address scholarly discussions, especially regarding the Colossian heresy, and in Bible study and sermon preparation. It has great depth and is balanced with great insights that serve as good applications. I highly recommend this work. It offers more discussion and range than N. T. Wrights smaller but handier commentary on the same book. He presents viewpoints that would fall in line with more mainline evangelicalism.

I have several commentaries, both academic and non-academic on Colossians, but I saw this relatively recent work by Moo on Colossians/Philemon and purchased it.

First, I absolutely enjoy the structure and work of Pillar New Testament Commentary. It does not waste the reader's time in wild speculation or endless conjecture or attempting to write a review of everyone's work on each verse.

Second, I think Moo's work is highly usable for preaching and teaching. Good background information and easy to follow exegetical development (with more detailed work in the footnotes) are what I find appealing.

Finally, I plan to purchase all the commentaries in this series (something I have seldom if ever done) because of the serious commitment to Scripture that follows in every treatment of Scripture.

After 25 years of buying commentaries, I'd buy this one again and give it away to friends!

Blessings,

Pastor Jon
[...]

'Above, then, is another way of referring to heaven, the abode of God and the sphere to which believers truly belong by virtue of their identification with Christ.' p 246

Paul never visited Colossae. The founder of the church at Colossae, Epaphras (1:7), some years later joined Paul in prison at Rome (4:12-13; Acts 28) informing the apostle of the fact that his church was departing from the truth. The Christian gospel itself is a truth claim, and Paul identified it in 1:5 as 'the word of truth'.

'A word of truth then, is a word, or message, than can be relied upon.' p 87

Whatever the Colossians had come to believe had lost is christological touch. Moo sees as a corrective to this that christology forms the theological heart of the letter to the Colossians. A number of notable studies have battled to identify the exact nature of the Colossian heresy, but they have been useful in showing that a high christology is likely to reduce the risk of theological error, as a low christology is to be associated with a high error incidence. 'Whatever the false teaching, Paul responds with arguments about the cosmic significance of Christ and the conception of the church as the body of Christ that are generally thought to be something of an advance of the theology we find in other Pauline letters.' p 45 In evidence of Paul's commitment to express total, and therefore, cosmological christology, no OT citations are found in Colossians (although GK Beale itemizes several allusions in Commentary on the NT use of the OT).

The apostle's strategy was simple. In answer to their questioning the sufficiency of Christ he re-wired their Christian experience (ch 3) by re-laying the foundation of Christ's Person and work (chs 1-2). So Paul first took to reminding them in his letter of Christ's victory and universal reign over all things, with the early church hymn of 1:15-20 designed to elicit the correct Christian response to the supremacy of Christ. Dick Lucas held a captive audience when he commented on our union with Christ, 'Christ in you, the hope of glory' (1:27): 'The ministry of the Spirit is nothing less (or more) than to bring us to Christ and Christ to us. Here, then, Paul answers the demand for the richest experience of God that is permissable for human beings to have.' Colossians & Philemon p 75 The present reality of the Spirit as down payment lived in light of the full future glory, served to motivate Paul in his desire to present every one mature in Christ (1:28): 'The verse is remarkable for its universality...Particularly striking is the threefold 'every person' [Gk: panta anthropon].' p 159 Moo signals apostolic perseverance in the face of opposition (1:29): 'Only here and in 1 Tim 4:10 does Paul use the two verbs - labor/toil [Gk: kopaio] and strive/contend [Gk: agonizomai] - together to denote his apostolic ministry, and it surely is no coincidence that both contexts deal with false teaching.' p 162 Of the accompanying grace, 'all His energy' which so mightily worked within Paul, John Calvin marked: '...on good grounds he ascribes his endeavors, inasmuch as they exceeded human limits, to the power of God, which, he declares, is seen working powerfully in this matter.' Commentary on Colossians 1:29

The most disturbing news that reached Paul in Rome was that over at Colossae, where the spiritual battle raged fierce and strong, the heretics seemed to be boasting of a secret knowledge, a harbinger to 2nd century Gnosticism. Thus Paul's emphasis on Christ 'in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge' (2:3). 'He also occupies himself not only with the further unfolding of the gospel and with the combatting of false doctrine, but with the institution and maintenance of right order (taxis in Col 2:5) in the church.' Herman Ridderbos, Paul p 450 Paul went on to elaborate the all-comprehensiveness of the Christian salvation. While there awaits a future perfection that Paul knew belonged to every believer, nevertheless, they are already 'filled in Him' (2:10). In Christ's penal substitutionary atonement 'Paul seems to imply in the sequence of vv. 14-15 a relationship between the forgiveness of our sins and the disarming of the powers.' p 215 Paul's implicit polemic countered that apostolic revelation, and not revelation received through other mediums such as angels and visions (2:18) should function as the authoritative revealer of our source of growth, Christ Jesus (2:19). 'Will-worship' (2:23) implies that not all Christians have come to terms with the lordship of Christ. As a result Charles Spurgeon commented on this verse: 'One is our Master, even Christ'. John Calvin maintained: 'If all will-worship, which we devise without authority, is abomination to God, it follows that no worship can be acceptable to Him save that which is approved by His Word.' Institutes 4:13:2 Calvin hereby signified a mode of worship which men choose for themselves, independent of the revelation which God gave, and not in the wisdom or the will of God. This unique word occurs nowhere else and Moo concurs 'that it is the false teachers own worship that is in view', p 241. Moo neatly summarizes that this self-imposed worship, which embraces ascetic [Gk noun: asketes 'monk'] disciplines such as fasting, lacks any real value in restraining sensual indulgence.

As noted earlier by Moo, a new additive to the Pauline gospel found in Colossians is that we are raised with Him (3:1), even now hidden with Christ in God (3:3). The key theological concept is that a believer's participation is based on their union with Christ. Moo relishes in introducing the feel-good factor which immediately makes Christ's presence felt: 'He begins, appropriately, with an overall summons to adopt a mind-set that reflects our new identity in Christ (3:1-4).' p 243 This Pauline pericope is replete with literary devices and rich in meaning. 'Two parallel commands constitute the heart of this brief paragraph: set your hearts on things above (v 1)/ set your minds on things above (v 2).' The redemptive circle was thereby further widened to extend even beyond salvation history to a monarchy more broadly conceived of as complete cosmic subjection. Paul labored to demonstrate to the Colossians the cosmological proportion of Christ's rule by uniting it to the proclamation of the gospel, thoroughly equalizing it to an all-inclusive church wherein Christ is all, and is in all (3:11). Paul followed the rule of Christ over the church to its logical conclusion, seen as a reign over every new Spirit-filled life which he underwrote with imperatives to 'putt off' found in the vice list of 3:5-11, and the Christian virtue list to 'put on' found in 3:12-17. All of which was intended to keep Christ Jesus as Lord, 'who is your life' (3:4), at the center of Christian experience.

Like O'Brien, Moo is detailed in his exegesis and thoughtful in his explanation of critical issues. As with his other commentaries, Moo is at his best when he is walking through difficult issues and weighing various views on the Scriptural scales. You can't go wrong with this one. Highly recommended.

Surely there will be someone else writing about this book, so I'm going try to help you in another way.

When you start reading biblical commentaries you will need to be aware that the thoughts expressed by the author deal with facts and speculations that should of happened. You can NEVER rely on only one commentary to affirm something about the Bible. You need at least three good commentaries.

Try to read biblical commentaries from different confessions of faith (e.g., Calvinism vs. Arminianism; Pentecostal vs. non-Pentecostal; Catholic vs. Protestant; Egalitarian vs. Complementarian; Amillennialism vs. Premillennialism vs. Postmillennialism; etc). Look for their arguments: What do they agree or disagree on? Which of them is closest to the biblical text? It's not a sin to read commentaries written from other points of view. You will notice that what is fact or solid argument will be seen over and over on different commentaries, so you will start learning what is speculation and what is not.

As Haddon W. Robinson said in his book, Biblical Preaching, (second edition, page 22), "In approaching a passage, we must be willing to reexamine our doctrinal convictions and to reject the judgments of our most respected teachers."

Remember, a commentary is not the biblical text. Do not replace the authority of the Bible with a commentary. The same apply for Study Bibles. The study notes there are not written by "apostles and prophets," so never confuse the "gospel" with the teacher or preacher. Learn to separate it.

Commentaries are important because nobody can get a poem from one language and translate it with the same structure to another language. This simply does not exist. Words, phrases, and sentences are rooted in a specific time, culture and custom. About Bibles, the best way is to check different translations, but be cautious about a very loose translation.

For you to appreciate any biblical commentary you need to know what level of reading you are. I'm going call them beginner, intermediate and advanced. I recommend the following biblical commentaries that you can start from. All of them have both Old Testament and New Testament. (If you're thinking of buying the whole set, look for the CD edition; it's cheaper and you can take it with you where you go.)

Beginner - NIV Application Commentary (NIVAC) by Zondervan.
(or) The Bible Speaks Today Series (BST) by IVP (This is a growing series and not yet complete.)

Intermediate - New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) and New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT) by Eerdmans

Advanced - Word Biblical Commentary (WBC) by Thomas Nelson

These are basic commentaries on their own level, but there are a lot of commentaries today, so don't forget to look for more information. Maybe you can get information from one of these: (1) Commentary and Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources by John Glynn, (2) New Testament Commentary Survey by D. A. Carson, (3) Old Testament Commentary Survey by Tremper Longman.

There are good and expensive commentaries such as the Anchor Bible (AB); International Critical Commentary (ICC) or Hermeneia (HERM). [Do not forget of Calvin and Luther].

I don't know about catholic commentaries, but you can check reviews on "Sacra Pagina" and "Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture."

Other than those mentioned above (NIVAC; BST; NICNT; WBC; AB; ICC; HERM) you can also check: Expositor Bible Commentary (EBC); New American Commentary (NAC); Pillar New Testament Commentary (PNTC); New International Greek Testament Commentary (NIGTC); Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (BECNT); and others.

Another thing, it can be a very good commentary, but it does not mean that you will agree with everything in it. Remember, "new" does not mean it's updated, and "updated" does not mean it's better.

Purpose - You can read a book to get information, even if you are not interested in a deep study of the biblical text. In this case it's better to start reading something from your own confession of faith and always on your level of reading. If after some time you become interested in more, go check other commentaries, but please, do not skip "How To Read A Book" by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren.

Responsibility - It is your responsibility study the biblical text before checking a commentary. Sometimes this is not an easy task so I'm giving you some other references that you can check at the end of this review. If I had read a review like this before, I would know how to prevent some mistakes.

Do not let you knowledge kill your faith! - "For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith." Hebrews 4:2 NIV - (Read also 1 Corinthians 1:21-24; 2:13-14; 3:18-23; Jude 1:3).

I can't leave without suggesting some other tools to help you: (1) How To Read A Book by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren; (2) Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation by Henry Virkler and Karelynne Ayayo; (3) New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors by Gordon Fee; and (4) Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors by Douglas Stuart. [Although book #3 and 4 deals with Biblical languages (Greek and Hebrew), you can learn a lot from them even if you do not know the languages]. (5) "Basics of Biblical Greek" Grammar by William D. Mounce [after you start reading it maybe you can add "Biblical Greek Survival Kit" and "Sing and Learn New Testament Greek" audio CD by Kenneth Berding]; (6) "English Grammar in Use" by Raymond Murphy (Third Edition with Cd-Rom). (7) Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History: Complete and Unabridged. - All of these will help you to understand HOW a good commentary must be written. Good Luck!