be wary of fine-sounding arguments
- Thread starter robaston
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2004
- Messages
- 17,078
A little more IVP commentary on this. Also, look a bit further at verse 8.
8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
The Deception of Words (2:4)
As Paul introduces the content of the false teaching which he will argue against, he bids his readers remember what he has just said about his divine commission and Gentile mission (1:23—2:3). The opening phrase I tell you this reminds his readers that the commentary that follows comes from one who has been commissioned by God (1:25-26) to "teach and admonish" them (1:28—2:1). His autobiographical statement implies that his instruction (rather than that of the false teacher) should form the theology of Colossian Christianity.
Even in his opening thanksgiving, Paul's petition (1:9-10) hints that the problem facing his readers is that they have trusted outsiders for the "word of truth" about God's grace. Paul has in mind a particular kind of deception—the fast line and smooth talk. People are conned every day by appearances. We are easily deceived by those who seem nice and sincere, who look good or who provide us with appropriate references and credentials. The false teacher in Colosse is a con artist who uses Christian cliches and slogans to deceive immature believers.
The two words Paul selects to introduce the first error, deceive (paralogizomai) and fine-sounding arguments (pithanologia), share a common element, logos, or "word." Paul's first emphasis is what congregational leaders say and teach. Ironically, the second word is usually used in the positive sense to characterize compelling and convincing arguments. Here, however, especially when coupled with deceive, the word takes on a pejorative sense, characterizing arguments that seem persuasive but upon closer analysis are actually facile, lacking in both christological content and spiritual effect (see 2:8).
The validity of such judgments is measured by two criteria: (1) whether the content of the teaching fits with what the apostles teach about Christ, and (2) whether the resulting behavior fits with what the Spirit empowers believers to be and to do. The reports Paul has received about the Colossian situation (whether from Epaphras or some other source) have apparently convinced him that what is being taught there fails on both scores. He makes this clear in what follows.
The Error of Sophistry (2:4-8)
Paul's quarrel is not with academic philosophy per se, nor is it with anyone who drafts persuasive and learned arguments to advance the gospel truth. Paul himself is well educated in these matters and often appeals to philosophical ideas and uses sophisticated arguments to explain the gospel more effectively (see Acts 17:16-34). Rather, Paul opposes those whose learning is used to advance falsehoods as gospel truth. He opposes any philosophy devoid of Christ that claims to teach about the spiritual order of God's creation and reign.
Notice that Paul shapes his initial statement of the problem as an inverted parallelism (ABB'A'), presumably for rhetorical effect. I will follow this same pattern in my exposition of this passage. The problem of sophistry is introduced in verse 4 (A) and repeated in verse 8 (A'), thereby bracketing its essential solution which is introduced in verse 5 (B) and repeated in verses 6-7 (B'). The effect of this parallelism is to relate problem and solution as two integral parts of a coherent polemic, making Paul's argument easy to follow.
8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
The Deception of Words (2:4)
As Paul introduces the content of the false teaching which he will argue against, he bids his readers remember what he has just said about his divine commission and Gentile mission (1:23—2:3). The opening phrase I tell you this reminds his readers that the commentary that follows comes from one who has been commissioned by God (1:25-26) to "teach and admonish" them (1:28—2:1). His autobiographical statement implies that his instruction (rather than that of the false teacher) should form the theology of Colossian Christianity.
Even in his opening thanksgiving, Paul's petition (1:9-10) hints that the problem facing his readers is that they have trusted outsiders for the "word of truth" about God's grace. Paul has in mind a particular kind of deception—the fast line and smooth talk. People are conned every day by appearances. We are easily deceived by those who seem nice and sincere, who look good or who provide us with appropriate references and credentials. The false teacher in Colosse is a con artist who uses Christian cliches and slogans to deceive immature believers.
The two words Paul selects to introduce the first error, deceive (paralogizomai) and fine-sounding arguments (pithanologia), share a common element, logos, or "word." Paul's first emphasis is what congregational leaders say and teach. Ironically, the second word is usually used in the positive sense to characterize compelling and convincing arguments. Here, however, especially when coupled with deceive, the word takes on a pejorative sense, characterizing arguments that seem persuasive but upon closer analysis are actually facile, lacking in both christological content and spiritual effect (see 2:8).
The validity of such judgments is measured by two criteria: (1) whether the content of the teaching fits with what the apostles teach about Christ, and (2) whether the resulting behavior fits with what the Spirit empowers believers to be and to do. The reports Paul has received about the Colossian situation (whether from Epaphras or some other source) have apparently convinced him that what is being taught there fails on both scores. He makes this clear in what follows.
The Error of Sophistry (2:4-8)
Paul's quarrel is not with academic philosophy per se, nor is it with anyone who drafts persuasive and learned arguments to advance the gospel truth. Paul himself is well educated in these matters and often appeals to philosophical ideas and uses sophisticated arguments to explain the gospel more effectively (see Acts 17:16-34). Rather, Paul opposes those whose learning is used to advance falsehoods as gospel truth. He opposes any philosophy devoid of Christ that claims to teach about the spiritual order of God's creation and reign.
Notice that Paul shapes his initial statement of the problem as an inverted parallelism (ABB'A'), presumably for rhetorical effect. I will follow this same pattern in my exposition of this passage. The problem of sophistry is introduced in verse 4 (A) and repeated in verse 8 (A'), thereby bracketing its essential solution which is introduced in verse 5 (B) and repeated in verses 6-7 (B'). The effect of this parallelism is to relate problem and solution as two integral parts of a coherent polemic, making Paul's argument easy to follow.
