|
Introduction
The
purpose of this paper is to examine the meaning of the phrase
to stoicheia tou kosmou (the elementary principles of the
world) as Paul, uses it in Gal. 4:3,9 and Col. 2:8,20. First,
a brief examination of the non biblical and biblical usage
of stoicheion (elementary principles) will be conducted.
Next, the three traditional interpretations of the phrase will
be analyzed. Finally, an interpretation will be adopted and applied.
Extra Biblical
Usage of Stoicheion
By
the fourth century B.C, the verbal form of the root stoicheo
was used to mean, "to be in a line," "to march
in rank and file."1
The New Testament usage of the verb stolcheo retains an
element of this usage in the five times that it is used.2
The
general meaning of the noun form (stoicheion) was "what
belongs to a series."3
It developed five different but related meanings from this same
period (fourth century BC) and later pre Christian literature.
Stoicheion was used to mean variously "the length
of a shadow on the sundial;" "part of a syllable or
a word;" "the essential elements of the cosmos,"
"smallest parts (of anything) which stand in relation to
one another," and "the stars or astral bodies as elements
of fire."4
According to Delling, stoicheion came to be identified
with "stellar spirits associated with those heavenly bodies"
only after the New Testament was written.5
This fact becomes important in the interpretation of the Pauline
passages.
Non Pauline
New Testament Usage
The
noun form stoicheion is used only seven times in the New
Testament. Apart from Paul's use of it in Gal. 4:3,9 and Col.
2:8,20, Peter uses it in 2 Pet. 3:10,12 and the author of Hebrews
uses it in Heb. 5:12. In each of these non Pauline examples,
stoicheion is used in one of its classical meanings. In
2 Pet. 3, it clearly refers to the physical elements of the universe
that will be destroyed by the Lord at the end of the age. The
author of Hebrews uses it to refer to basic or elementary teachings,
either about Jesus or Old Testament religion.6
Ta
Stoicheia Tou Kosmou
See to it that no one
takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according
to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles
of the world, rather than according to Christ . . . If you
have died with Christ to the elementary priciples of the world,
why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself
to decrees such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not
touch!"... (Col. 2:8,20,21)
So we, while we were
children, were held in bondage under the elementary principles
of the world ... But now that you have come to know God, or rather
to be known by God, how is it that you turn hack again to the
weak and worthless elementary thiLgs, to which you desire to be
ensl- ved all over again? You observe days and months and seasons
and years. (Gal. 3:3,9,10)7
Paul
uses the phrase "of the world" (tou kosmou) to describe
"the elementary principles" in three of his four uses
of ta stoicheia. It is obvious that Paul is using the phrase
"of the world" in a negative sense. In the remaining
usage of "the elementary principles" (Gal. 4:9), Paul
clearly intends the same negative meaning as the other three because
he describes them with the phrase "weak and worthless."
In
both letters, Paul is refuting false teachings that have infiltrated
the churches. It seems evident that the Colossian heresy was some
sort of Greek-Jewish synthesis, perhaps a form of proto-gnosticism.
The Galatian heresy appears to be a form of traditional Palestinian
Judaism which insists that the Galatian Christians also take on
the Old Testament law as a requisite for salvation. It is the
view of this author that its advocates were the "Judaizer"
party of the Jerusalem church which was later denounced by the
Jerusalem Council recorded in Acts 15.8
In both cases, Old Testament practices are being prescribed in
a way which undercuts the full sufficiency of Jesus' work on the
cross, thus calling forth some of Paul's clearest written teaching
on the subject of the finished work of Christ (Col.2:10-15; Gal.2:16-21).
The
Three Classical Interpretations
Three
classical interpretations of "the elementary principles of
the world" have been formulated, though each interpretation
has a number of variations. The following is a summary of those
interpretations, their leading advocates, and the main support
and problems for each view.9
The
Law of Israel
The
first view holds that Paul is referring to the Law of Israel.
This view, which is advocated by Lightfoot, Stott and Tenney among
others, stresses the way in which Paul connects being "under
the Law" in Gal. 3:23, 4:5 with being "under the elementary
principles of the world" in Gal. 4:3. It also cites the fact
that in each case, the heretics are prescribing Old Testament
laws (see Col. 2:16,21; Gal. 4:10).
Certainly
there is a connection between these two concepts, but it is overstating
the case to call them synonymous for at least two reasons. First,
it seems unlikely for Paul to call "the world" the origin
of the Law of Israel. In Gal.3:19 23, Paul teaches that God
gave the Law to keep Israel under custody until the coming of
the Messiah. Whatever this may mean, it certainly affirms the
divine origin of the Law and its essential righteousness.
The
biggest problem with this interpretation is that it does not account
for the fact that in both passages, Paul also uses this phrase
to refer to Gentile and/or heretical teachings. In Col. 2:8, Paul
refers to "philosophy and empty deception, according to the
tradition of men, according to `the elementary principles of the
world,' rather than according to Christ." This passage makes
it clear that the phrase refers to something originating from
the sphere of man rather than from Christ. In Gal. 4:9, Paul says
that the Galatians are in danger of returning again to
the stoicheia, when their first involvement with
them was pagan idolatry (vs. 8). Therefore, this interpretation
is inadequate as a full explanation of the phrase.
The
Demonic Spirits
Most
scholars argue that Paul is referring to the satanic demons that
have originated the false teachings that Paul is refuting. Paul
calls them "the elementary principles of the world"
because the heretics were referring to them as the spirit beings
that rule over the heavens. Far from being a superior revelation
from God that will bring them spiritual liberation, Paul ironically
implies that this teaching originates from demons and will therefore
only bring them into bondage. Among the scholars who hold this
view are Boice,10
F. F. Bruce, Vaughn, Guthrie and Carson.11
Support
for this interpretation is found from a number of sources. The
fact most cited by the above authors is that "the elementary
principles" is used in extra biblical literature to
refer to the stellar spirits that were identified with the heavenly
bodies.12
Both passages also make reference to angels in some relationship
to the phrase. In Gal. 3:19, Paul refers to angels as the mediators
through which God gave the Law. In Gal. 4:8, he speaks of "those
which are by nature no gods" which the Galatians formerly
worshiped, and then seemingly applies "the elementary principles"
to them in vs. 9. In Col. 2:18, Paul speaks of "the worship
of angels" as part of the heresy associated with the "the
elementary principles."
There
are, however, several problems with this view. The most formidable
problem is that Paul's usage of "the elementary principles"
definitely includes the Law of Israel (see above). It is very
difficult to see how the worship of stellar spirits could be construed
by Paul to be a part of Old Testament Law when it specifically
prohibits such worship (see Ex. 20:3 5). The references to
dietary laws (Col. 2:16) and calendar observances (Gal. 4:10)
are obviously Old Testament, but many of those who hold this view
try unsuccessfully to prove that they are actually Greek practices.13
This is a serious weakness of the view, especially for the Galatians
passage, because it is impossible that the Judaizers were prescribing
astrological observances.
Delling
deals what seems to be a lethal blow to this view. He claims that
stoicheion was not used to refer to spiritual beings prior
to the fourth century A.D.14
Ladd states that the word was not applied to the astral deities
until the third century A.D.15
If this is the case, this interpretation must be seriously questioned
because it depends upon a meaning for "the elementary principles"
which did not come into use until much later.
Religious
Principles
Ridderbos,
Ladd, Brown, Longenecker, Rendall and Delling16
interpret "the elementary principles of the world" to
refer to religion before and apart from Christ. Understanding
"the elementary principles" in the sense of "rudimentary
principles;' it sees Paul contrasting all religions in a negative
light compared to the way to God opened by Jesus Christ. Christ
has now replaced even Old Testament Judaism, which once had a
limited validity. To return to it is to return to a state of inferior
spiritual status similar in some way to that of pagan idolatry.
This
interpretation has the advantage of being able to apply to both
Old Testament Judaism and the Gentile religions and philosophies,
a major problem with the two previous interpretations. It also
explains why even the Law is cast in a negative light. Apart from
the work of Christ which it foreshadowed, it too can lead only
to slavery (see Gal. 3:22,23). Now that Christ has come, it is
only a "weak and worthless" system (Gal. 4:9), a mere
shadow (Col. 2:17) that should be discarded.
This
view, however, is not without problems. The biggest problem is
that it makes Paul designate even the Old Testament Law as "of
the world" (Gal. 4:3). He likewise seems to say in Col. 2:8
that the "the elementary principles of the world" are
synonymous with "the traditions of men:" This runs counter
to the divine origin of the Law. There are two different ways
in which scholars deal with this problem.
The
Perversion of the Law
Ridderbos
and Ladd contend that Paul is speaking of the perverse on of
the Old Testament Law into a legalistic, humanistic system of
justification and sanctification. These scholars point out that
both the Colossian heresy and the Judaizers in Galatia were in
fact perverting the Law into such a system. This would account
for Paul's designation of it as "according to the traditions
of men" and "of the world." Though God originated
the Law, its misuse originates from the world of fallen man. This
view would also make sense of Paul's description of all these
systems as "weak and worthless" (Gal. 4:9).
The
major problem with this view is that it does not deal adequately
with the language and context of Gal. 4:3 5. Here Paul teaches
that he, other Jews and Jesus Himself were all "under the
Law" and "under the elementary principles of the world"
(he uses the terms interchangeably). While it may be argued that
Paul and other Jews were under a legalistic perversion of the
Law, the same cannot be claimed for Jesus. He definitely
rejected the Rabbinic interpretation of the Law as a means of
righteousness and refused to live under it in that way. Furthermore,
the context of Gal.3:19 23 uses the phrase "under the
Law" in the sense that it was accomplishing God's intended
purpose in shutting up all men under sin and thus preparing them
for their Savior Messiah Jesus. In this author's opinion,
these two problems render this view improbable.
The
Outdated Law
Brown,
Delling, Longenecker and Rendall insist that in addition to human
philosophies and religions, Paul is referring to the Old Testament
Law in its proper sense. The Law was valid because it foreshadowed
the work of Christ and made people aware of their need for forgiveness,
but it is now no longer valid because the New Covenant for which
it made preparation has now come.
This
view has several advantages. It clearly allows for the Jewish
meaning of the prescriptions of Col. 2:16,21 and Gal. 4:10. It
allows for the obvious sense of the phrase "under the Law"
in Gal. 3:19 4:5. It explains why Paul can refer even to
the Law as "weak and worthless" because, as Heb.7:18,19
says, " . . . there is the setting aside of the former commandment
because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing
perfect) . . . '
This
view also explains why Paul can link the Law with human religions.
What validity the Old Testament Law once had is now gone since
its fulfillment has come. To go back to a impersonal religious
system after a personal relationship with God is now possible
through the indwelling Holy Spirit is to go back to a state no
better (in that sense) than paganism (Gal. 4:6 11). While
Paul stops short of calling the Law "false" in the same
sense as pagan religions, he insists that going under it as a
Christian is a reversion as serious as relapse into idolatry (Gal.
4:8 10).
The
major problem with this view is the origin that Paul ascribes
to these "elementary principles:" In Col. 2:8, he appears
to use the phrase "the traditions of men" synonymously
with "the elementary principles of the world." The same
problem exists with the phrase "of the world." While
a fitting description for pagan religions, both phrases imply
a human origin for the Law, even though Paul says elsewhere that
it originates from God.
However,
these problems can be resolved if one realizes that in both passages,
Paul has especially the ritual laws of Old Testament Judaism in
view. Since these laws do not relate directly to spiritual realities
and had only a temporary, foreshadowing function, they could be
called "of the world" in the sense they pertain only
to this world.17
"World" is being used, as Ladd suggests, as " .
. . the whole complex of human earthly relationships . . . (which,
though) . . . not evil in itself . . . can stand between man and
God."18
Upon
closer observation, Col. 2:8 does not necessarily insist that
the "traditions of men" are synonymous with "the
elementary principles of the world:" Paul could be referring
to two different sources of the Colossian heresy: the human religion philosophic
source and the Old Testament ritual laws. At any rate, the grammar
does not demand that the two phrases are synonymous.19
In vs. 16--23, Paul would be referring primarily to the Old Testament
use of "the elementary principles of the world," as
indeed vs. 20 indicates.
In
conclusion, the view that explains "the elementary principles
of the world" as pertaining to all religion (including
the Old Testament Law and especially its ritual system) before
and outside of Christ is the most tenable position.
Application
Paul's
use of "the elementary principles of the world" obviously
warns against syncretism of the gospel with any other human philosophic
or religious system. This is the application most commonly pursued
by preachers and expositors today. But another important application
of this phrase lies in the way Paul views Old Testament ritual
and the role of ritual in general.
Imposition
of Old Testament Ritual
Clearly,
these two passages warn against the imposition of Old Testament
rituals on the believer in Christ. It is not just looking to those
rituals as a means of justification before God that is condemned.
The observance of them as a sign "spirituality" is inappropriate
for the Christian because those rituals merely foreshadowed the
"substance;" or reality, that Christians now enjoy in
the person and work of Jesus.
It
is true that Paul calls for patience with and even temporary deference
to Christians who do not yet understand the anachronism of Old
Testament ritual law (Rom.14; 1 Cor. 8).20
But note that he calls them "weak in faith;" they need
to grow in their understanding of their freedom in Christ. On
the other hand, those who already have that understanding21
are severely warned and censured for looking to Old Testament
ritual observance as a means of salvation or spiritual growth.
The result of this, Paul insists, will be not spiritual
growth, but rather spiritual regression.
In
view of these passages, it is difficult to understand how much
of the church today can defend its reliance on Old Testament ritual.
Both direct and indirect implementation of this ritual law pervades
much of the church.22
Church members are told that such observances are mandatory and
that they constitute an essential (and in some cases, the primary)
expression of Christian spirituality. Paul completely denies the
legitimacy of such commands (Col. 2:16) and rejects the description
of it as "spirituality" because it has no power over
the flesh (Col. 2:23). This author is convinced that a proper
application of these passages would insist on an eradication of
such practices from the church.
New
Testament Ritualism
These
two passages also warn in principle against the danger of ritualism
even when the New Testament can justify the rituals involved.
"Ritualism" is being used here in the sense of making
ritual observance a primary focus of the Christian life and means
of its expression. Water baptism and communion are the two rituals
most often employed in such "New Testament" ritualism,
although footwashing and other practices are sometimes also included.
The
Galatian passage in particular, pits the religion of ritual observance
against the great privilege of personally relating to God through
the agency of the Holy Spirit. Ritualism was legitimate during
the Old Testament economy because this kind of personal
relationship with God was not possible. But now God has
made it possible to relate to Him as Abba. The work of
Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit have made it possible for
us to be adopted into God's family. To go back to relating to
God primarily through ritual observance is to reject God's assessment
of this gift. This is spiritual regression that is reprehensible
enough to make Paul fear that he had labored in vain (vs. 11)!
While
the New Testament rituals remain a legitimate aspect of Christianity,
ritualism as the means of relating to God has been "outgrown"
and rejected. This is also the argument of the book of Hebrews
(especially chapters 7-10). No church that focuses on ritualism
can claim to be a valid representation of Pauline Christianity.
It
is important to note that Jesus prescribed very few rituals compared
to the number in the Old Testament economy. It is also noteworthy
that the way in which these rituals are to be observed is not
explained in detail, again a sharp contrast to the Old Testament
period. Since we live in the period of fulfillment of salvation
rather than in the period of promise, ritual takes on a lesser
role. This fact, together with Paul's warning in Ga1.4:1 11,
should teach the believer that ritual plays a relatively minor
role in the Christian life compared to his/her personal relationship
with Christ.
NOTES
1
Colin Brown, ed. The New International Dictionary of New
Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1976), Vol. 2, p. 452.
2
Acts 21:24 James wants Paul to take a Nazarite
vow, thus showing the Jews that he "walks orderly (stoicheis),
keeping the Law. . :" Phil. 3:16 Paul urges
the Philippian Christians to "keep living to that standard
(stoicheion) to which we have attained:" Gal. 6:16
Referring to the new creation, Paul says, "To those
who walk by (stoichesousin) this rule, peace and mercy
be upon them. . :' Gal. 5:25 "If we live
by the Spirit, let us also walk by (stoichomen) the Spirit"
Rom. 4:12 Specifying to whom the promise was given,
Paul says, ". . . those who follow in the steps (stoichousin)
of the faith of Abraham. . ." Delling is careful to
point out that stoicheo is not used synonymously with
the other verbs meaning "to walk;" but rather retains
the stricter meaning of "to be closely regulated by."
See Gerhard, Friedrich, ed. Theological Dictionary of the
New Testament. Vol. VII. pp. 667.668.
3
Gerhard Friedrich, ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. VII, p. 670.
4
Gerhard, Friedrich, ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. VII, pp. 670 682.
5
Gerhard, Friedrich, ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. VII, pp. 682,683.
6
It is unclear whether the description of the stoicheion in
Heb. 6:1,2 refers to rudimentary theological concepts of Old
Testament Judaism, or to basic Christian teachings.
7
Scripture quotations are from the New American Standard Bible,
The Lockman Foundation, 1963.
8
Both the Southern Galatian theory and the pre-council theory
make the best sense of the data in Galatians and Acts. See Ralph
P. Martin, New Testament Foundations (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1978), pp. 110,148-152, and John Drane, Paul (New York:
Harper and Row, 1985), pp. 37-39.
9
See James M. Boice, The Expositor's Bible Commentary
Galatians (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976),
Vol. 10, pp. 471,472 for a concise summary of each interpretation.
10
James M. Boice, The Expositor's Bible Commentary- Galatians,
Vol. 10, p. 472.
11
F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977), pp. 182,183,192,414, and The
New International Commentary: Ephesians and Colossians (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,), pp. 231,232,254; Curtis Vaughn,
The Expositor's Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1978), Vol. 11, pp. 198,207. He acknowledges the validity
of the "religious principles" interpretation on p.
207; Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove,
Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1981), p. 144; H. M. Carson,
Tyndale New Testament Commentaries Colossians and Philemon
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), pp. 63,77.
12
So James M. Boice, The Expositor's Bible Commentary- Galatians,
Vol. 10, p. 472), F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set
Free, pp. 182,183, and Curtis Vaughn, The Expositor's Commentary,
Vol. 11, p. 198.
13
The reference to "food or drink or in respect to a festival
or a new moon or a Sabbath day" in Col. 2:16 is definitely
referring to Old Testament ritual law. Likewise, in view of
the historical background of Galatians, the phrase "days
and months and seasons and years" is an obvious reference
to Old Testament ritual law. For a very unconvincing
denial of this, see R. Alan Cole, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries
Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), p. 118.
14
Gerhard Friedrich, ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. VII, pp. 682,683.
15
George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975), p. 402.
16
Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975), pp. 148,149,210,302,
and The New International Commentary: Galatians (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., ), pp. 153154,161,162; George
E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, pp. 402,403;
Colin Brown, ed. The New International Dictionary
of New Testament Theology, Vol. 2, pp. 451 453; Richard
N. Longenecker, Paul: Apostle of Liberty (New York: Harper
and Row, 1964), pp. 154,155; Frederic Rendall, The Expositor's
Greek Testament-Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing
Co., 1979), pp. 176,177; Gerhard Friedrich, ed. Theological
Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. VII, pp. 683 686.
17
Both Col.2:22 and Mk. 7:18,19 draw attention to the "this worldliness"
temporality of the dietary Laws. Col. 2:17 implies the same
"this worldly" status of the Old Testament religious
calendar; it was only an earthly "shadow" of the spiritual
"substance" of Jesus.
18
George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, p. 399.
19
See Colin Brown, ed. The New lnternational Dictionary of New
Testament Theology, Vol. 2, p. 453.
20
I am aware that pagan superstition may have also been a part
of the thinking of some who wre "weak in faith." But
especially Rom. 14:5,6 imply a Jewish Sabbath observance.
21
I.e., the Galation and Colossian Christians, who were converted
under Paul's ministry.
22
Direct implementation would include viewing the church building
as the "house of God," and instituting a clergy of
"priests" who mediate between God and the "laity"
and employ washings. Indirect implementation would include the
liturgical calendar, liturgical worship services, and infant
baptism when justified by appealing to infant circumcision.
|
