Colossians 1:19

εὐδόκησεν. The correction to the older Attic usage ηὐδόκ. is made by ADP. Cf. Blass, Gram. § 15. 4; W.H. Append. p. 162.

19. ὅτι. Stating the reason for His eventually becoming πρωτεύων ἐν πᾶσιν.

ἐν αὐτῷ. In the front for emphasis. Observe that the resulting collocation of words could hardly fail to recall the Baptism (Mark 1:11, ὁ υἱός μου ὁ�, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα; Matthew 3:17, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα) and the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:5, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα; cf. 2 Peter 1:17, εἰς ὃν ἐγὼ εὐδόκησα), especially as the phrase τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς� (Colossians 1:13) is lying at the back of all these verses in our Epistle.

εὐδόκησεν, “(the Father) was pleased.” The subject may be (1) Christ, (2) πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα, (3) God, or the Father.

Grammatically there is but little to choose, save that there is a slight harshness in understanding “God” or “the Father.” Yet cf. James 1:12. But theologically the decision is not so hard.

(1) If Christ be the subject (Tertullian, adv. Marc. Colossians 1:19, Conyb. and Howson), we have the unparalleled statement of His being the finally determining will, even over the πλήρωμα, and we have the improbable statement of His being not only the means by which, but also the object to which, all things are to be reconciled, Colossians 1:20 (see note there). Contrast 2 Corinthians 5:19, θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑαυτῷ.

(2) If πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα be the subject (R.V.mg., Weiss, Ell., Abb., P. Ewald) more is attributed to what is impersonal than we should expect, Colossians 2:9 is parallel only in form, for there it is only said that the πλήρωμα dwells in Christ, not that the πλήρωμα exercises pleasure and determination, and even reconciles (Colossians 1:20).

(3) But if “God” or “the Father” be the subject (A.V., R.V., Lightfoot), there is no such difficulty.
Further, εὐδοκεῖν is used of God thirteen times in the N.T. against seven times of men, and though it is true that these seven are all in St Paul’s writings, yet he also uses εὐδοκεῖν of God three times, 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 Corinthians 10:5; Galatians 1:15.

The analogy of εὐδοκία in Ephesians 1:5; Ephesians 1:9, when St Paul is speaking of God’s purpose, also tends to confirm the reference of εὐδοκεῖν here to God. Compare Matthew 11:26 (|| Luke 10:21), and probably Philippians 2:13.

Observe that although the infinitive after εὐδοκεῖν, in all the other seven times that the construction occurs in the N.T. (Luke 12:32; Romans 15:26; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Galatians 1:15; 1 Thessalonians 2:8; 1 Thessalonians 3:1), refers to the subject of the finite verb, yet in 2Ma 14:35, as in our present passage, it does not do so (Σύ, Κύριε, … ηὐδόκησας ναὸν τῆς σῆς σκηνώσεως ἐν ἡμῖν γένεσθαι). On the tense vide infra, s.v. κατοικῆσαι.

πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα. (1) On the grammatical meaning of the word see by all means J. A. R. Ephesians, pp. 255–259, against the theories of both Fritzsche and Lightfoot.

(i) He shows that substantives ending in -μα or rather -ματ- are not necessarily passive in meaning, but represent “the result of the agency of the corresponding verb,” and that many words oscillate between two meanings, e.g. βρῶμα may be the food eaten, or the canker that eats.

(ii) He shows that πλήρωμα in particular probably has an active meaning. For instance in reference to manning a ship it = “a crew,” or to lading a ship, its “cargo,” i.e. the result of ναῦν πληροῦν or πληροῦσθαι is in either case πλήρωμα. So too πλήρωμα σπυρίδος (cf. Mark 8:20) = “a basketful,” strictly a “fulness,” in exchange for “emptiness.” Similarly, with reference to Socrates’ statement that six kinds of labourers together with a merchant and a retail dealer are necessary to make up a city, Aristotle says (Polit. IV. 4), “These together form the pleroma of a city in its simplest stage”: ταῦτα πάντα γίνεται πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης πόλεως. And in this connexion, adds the Dean, we have the phrase in Ephesians 1:23, where “the Church is spoken of as that without which in a certain sense the Christ Himself is incomplete.”

(2) But although we may accept both his explanation of the grammatical meaning of πλήρωμα, and also his interpretation of it in Ephesians 1:23 (see particularly his Ephesians, pp. 42 sqq.), the question of its interpretation in our passage is another matter. Light is thrown upon it by Colossians 2:9, ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς, in so far as this suggests that in our passage τὸ πλήρωμα connotes the longer phrase τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος. But this, according to the analogy of the use of πλήρωμα as stated above, seems to mean “that which fills up the deity,” i.e. the sum of the attributes without which God Himself cannot be deemed to be complete[99]. And this suits the context admirably.

[99] Similarly in Ephesians 3:19, ἵνα πληρωθῆτε εἰς πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ θεοῦ, the sum of God’s attributes (and nothing less) represents the limit of the fulness set before us.

(3) πᾶν must not be overlooked, especially as it might appear to be tautological. But in fact, by its correlation with τὰ πάντα, it implies that if it had been possible for less than all the πλήρωμα to dwell in Christ, then some of τὰ πάντα would not have been reconciled. So too, perhaps, in Colossians 2:9 πᾶν implies that otherwise not every rule etc. would have been subject to Christ. Possibly the thought in our passage is that different parts of the beings in the universe owe their origin to different parts in the Divine πλήρωμα, and hence the indwelling of all of it in Christ was necessary if He was to reconcile all.

Whether πλήρωμα was a technical term used by the false teachers at Colossae we have no means of knowing, but that St Paul did not derive it from them is evident from the freedom with which he employs it (twelve times). The Gnostics of course employed it in the second century, but may have taken it from this Epistle and that to the Ephesians.

κατοικῆσαι. Song of Solomon 2:9; compare Ephesians 3:17, and James 4:5; similarly Ephesians 2:22.

Observe that κατοικεῖν = dwell permanently, St Paul thus rebutting any supposition of the πλήρωμα being only temporarily connected with Christ. Perhaps the false teachers at Colossae taught this error. Compare the opinion of Cerinthus.

An important question arises as to the period to which St Paul attributes the dwelling, or rather the commencement of the dwelling, of the πλήρωμα in Christ. Four answers may be given.

(1) After the Resurrection, when the Son’s redemptive work was completed. But the connexion of the following clauses rather implies that the indwelling is a necessary condition of being able to redeem.
(2) At the Baptism, in which case the collocation of words ἑν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησεν (vide supra) would have still more force. But this seems to limit the πλήρωμα to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit upon our Lord, and πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα implies a different thought from the power and work of the Holy Spirit.

(3) At the Incarnation, cf. Colossians 2:9. This is possibly right, but the absence of any limiting word here is against this.

(4) In Eternity, the reference being to the timeless communication of the Godhead from the Father to the Son.
It is because the Son was the recipient of πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα that He was able to accomplish His redemptive work fully.

(5) κατοικῆσαι here and κατοικεῖ in Colossians 2:9 seem hardly consistent with any such meaning of πλήρωμα as causes this indwelling to be realised only in the future.