Colossians

Lardner notes that:

Colossians stands next after Ephesians in Marcion's Apostolicon. I cannot find that Marcion is accused of altering any passage in this epistle by Origen, Epiphanius, or any other ancient author, except in what follows by implication from a passage of Tertullian before quoted, in which he asserts that the epistle to Philemon was the only one that had escaped his falsifying hands.

Epiphanius also does not comment on any differences between Colossions (Col) and Marcion's version (McCol). Tertullian has comments on many verses, and, despite the comment (above) from Lardner, he does seem to comment on at least one omission by Marcion, although he is not clear regarding the exact difference that he saw:

Colossians 1:5-6

For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; [1:5] Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth: [1:6]

Tertullian quotes vv. 1:5-6a:

This shall now be proved even by the apostle, when he says: "For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; which has come unto you, as it is unto all the world." For if, even at that time, the tradition of the gospel had spread everywhere, how much more now!

Colossians 1:15-17

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: [1:15] 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: [1:16] And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. [1:17]

Tertullian quotes v. 1:15a when noting that Marcion "calls Christ 'the image of the invisible God,'" and uses v. 1:17a to show that vv. 1:15b-16 must be true.

If Christ is not "the first-begotten before every creature," ... if "all things were" not "in Him created, whether in heaven or on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers;" if "all things were" not "created by Him and for Him" (for these truths Marcion ought not to allow concerning Him), then the apostle could not have so positively laid it down, that "He is before all." For how is He before all, if He is not before all things? How, again, is He before all things, if He is not "the first-born of every creature" -- if He is not the Word of the Creator?

Tertullian appears to comment that Marcion should not have retained vv. 1:15b-16, but BeDuhn interpets this differently, and comments instead that “Tertullian appears to say that Marcion’s text lacked vv. 15b-16.” BeDuhn supports this by quoting the above (using a slightly different translation), with the reference to Marcion reading:

– for it was really necessary that Marcion would disapprove of this (haec enim Marcioni displicere oportebat) – then the apostle would not have stated so plainly, ‘and he is before all (people),’

Evans agrees with BeDuhn, stating:

The most significant omission was of 1:15, 16 [the first-begotten of all creation, for in him etc.]. At 1:17 the Marcionite Latin version had ante omnes.

Head also sees Tertullian's words as indicating an omission by Marcion, stating:

The famous christological passages in Colossians 1:15ff. and Philippians 2:6ff. were altered. Colossians 1:15-18 was reformulated through omissions to read: ‘He is the image of the invisible God, and he is before all things’.

The phrases omitted by Marcion from this passage mostly concern the relationship between Christ and creation: ‘the first-born of all creation’ (v. 15b), which clearly links Christ to the Creator; the whole of verse 16: ‘for in him all things were created. . .all things were created through him and for him’, which clearly links Christ to the created cosmos; and v. 17b: ‘in him all things hold together’, which links Christ with the ongoing continuation of the created world. Although Marcion’s distinctive theology was an important factor in these alterations, we should note the christological implications as well.

The omission is also hinted at by Tertullian when he comments regarding Philemon: "To this epistle alone did its brevity avail to protect it against the falsifying hands of Marcion." Against this evidence of an omission there is the (negative) evidence of Epiphanius, who has nothing to say regarding these verses. It does not seem likely that he would fail to comment here if he saw that vv. 15b-16 were not in McCol, but, as his comments on other epistles (e.g. Laodiceans) strongly suggest that his copy of the Apolostolicon was not the same as Tertullian's, it is possible that vv. 15b-16 were in his copy. It is also possible that what Tertullian reports is an early variant, a point on which BeDuhn notes:

While there have been a great many proposals for the original wording of the hymn used by Paul in this part of the letter, and the possibility of various interpolations, I have not been able to find one that exactly corresponds with the form found in the Apostolikon as reported by Tertullian (although suggestions of editorial expansions or interpolations in v. 16 are quite common). For those conditioned by the catholic form of the text, the redundancy of v. 17 with 15b-16 has passed unnoticed; one would expect, at least, a ‘therefore’ (oun) rather than an ‘and’ (kai) at the beginning of v. 17.

Whether or not Tertullian saw vv. 15b-16 in McCol is not certain, but even if he did not there is no evidence that this was an omission by Marcion.

Colossians 1:19-24

For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; [1:19] And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. [1:20] And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled [1:21] In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: [1:22] If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; [1:23] Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church: [1:24]

Tertullian comments extensively on these verses. He quotes from v. 1:19, 21, 24 (in the 3rd person, as he commonly does), appears to see a different version of v. 1:20b and re-orders v. 1:20a, then quotes a shorter version of v. 1:22:

In what way also could it have "pleased (the Father) that in Him should all fullness dwell?" For, to begin with, what fullness is that which is not comprised of the constituents which Marcion has removed from it -- even those that were "created in Christ, whether in heaven or on earth," whether angels or men? ... To whom, again, does He "reconcile all things by Himself, making peace by the blood of His cross," but to Him whom those very things had altogether offended, against whom they had rebelled by transgression, (but) to whom they had at last returned? ... Accordingly, ourselves "who were sometime alienated and enemies in our mind by wicked works" does He reconcile to the Creator, ... here also (the apostle) declares that he "fills up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for His body's sake, which is the Church." But you [here meaning Marcion] must not on this account suppose that on every mention of His body the term is only a metaphor, instead of meaning real flesh. For he says above that we are "reconciled in His body through death;" meaning, of course, that He died in that body wherein death was possible through the flesh.

Head comments on some of these verses:

Col. 1:18 is not attested in the discussions. Marcion’s acceptance of v. 24, and the allusions in Eph. 2:16 & 5:23 belie the impression that is given by the lack of references to the church as the body of Christ in Harnack’s reconstruction (i.e. one cannot find any of the following texts: Rom 12:4, 5; 1 Cor. 10:17; 12:12-24a, 27; Eph. 4:4, 12-16; Col. 1:18; 2:19). Since Tertullian seems to allude to Marcion’s acceptance of the concept (in Adv. Marc. V.8.9 & V.18.8f.) we can conclude that he did accept the idea.

A clear alteration is made in 1:22 where Marcion omits the words tēs sarkos autou from the reference to Jesus’ body. The reason for this is obvious, since for Marcion Christ had no flesh.

Although Head states that Marcion had removed the reference to "his flesh" in v. 1:22, and this phrase is indeed missing from Tertullian's quote, there is no suggestion in what Tertullian writes that Marcion was responsible. Instead, it appears that Tertullian simply did not see these words in his copy of v. 1:22, as his last two sentences in the quote above (addressed to Marcion) indicate.

Colossians 2:5-8

For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. [2:5] As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: [2:6] Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. [2:7] Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. [2:8]

Following the text above, Tertullian continues by referring to v. 2:5, and then quoting (although in a different order) most of v. 2:8:

(therefore he adds,) not through the Church (per ecclesiam), but expressly for the sake of the Church (proper ecclesiam), exchanging body for body -- one of flesh for a spiritual one. When, again, he warns them to "beware of subtle words and philosophy," as being "a vain deceit," such as is "after the rudiments of the world" (not understanding thereby the mundane fabric of sky and earth, but worldly learning, and "the tradition of men," subtle in their speech and their philosophy), it would be tedious, and the proper subject of a separate work, to show how in this sentence (of the apostle's) all heresies are condemned, on the ground of their consisting of the resources of subtle speech and the rules of philosophy.

Colossians 2:13

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; [2:13]

Tertullian quotes 1 Cor 1:27a and part of 1 Cor 19, and then refers to part of Col 2:13:

At this, philosophers, and heretics, and the very heathen, laugh and jeer. For "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" — that God, no doubt, who in reference to this very dispensation of His threatened long before that He would "destroy the wisdom of the wise." ...Then, if God "quickens us together with Christ, forgiving us our trespasses," we cannot suppose that sins are forgiven by Him against whom, as having been all along unknown, they could not have been committed.

Colossians 2:16-17

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: [2:16] Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. [2:17]

Tertullian quotes vv. 2:16-17 in order to ask Marcion a question:

Now tell me, Marcion, what is your opinion of the apostle's language, when he says, "Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath, which is a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ?"

In his first comment in Col, Epiphanius quotes almost all of vv. 2:16-17, and follows this with an Elenchus in which he schools Marcion in the meaning of these verses:

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon and sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come. (Scholion 1 and 39)

Neither Tertulian nor Epiphanius suggest that there was any difference between vv. 2:16-17 in Col and McCol. However, in v. 2:17 Tertullian quotes "which is a shadow," while Epiphanius has "which are a shadow."

Colossians 2:18-22

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, [2:18] And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. [2:19] Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, [2:20] (Touch not; taste not; handle not; [2:21] Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? [2:22]

Tertullian refers to parts of all verses except v. 2:20, and also omits most of v. 2:19 and the last clause of v. 2:21, while actually quoting very little.

But when he blames those who alleged visions of angels as their authority for saying that men must abstain from meats -- "you must not touch, you must not taste" -- "in a voluntary humility," (at the same time) "vainly puffed up in the fleshly mind, and not holding the Head," (the apostle) does not in these terms attack the law or Moses... When, therefore, he speaks of their following "the commandments and doctrines of men," he refers to the conduct of those persons who "held not the Head," even Him in whom "all things are gathered together;" for they are all recalled to Christ...

Colossians 2:23-3:10

Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; [3:9] And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: [3:10]

Tertullian covers the rest of Colossians in the statement below. In addition to quotes from 2 Cor 5:17, Rev 21:5, and Jer 4:3, he refers to vv. 3:9b-10a:

All the rest of his precepts, as we have shown sufficiently, when treating of them as they occurred in another epistle, emanated from the Creator, who, while predicting that "old things were to pass away," and that He would "make all things new," commanded men "to break up fresh ground for themselves," and thereby taught them even then to "put off the old man" and "put on the new."

Colossians 4:10-4:14

Adamantius mentions some of these verses, specificially indicating that he is taking Marcion's version as his source. His quotes include variants found in D, F, G, and some Western versions.

Colossians 4:15-16

Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. [4:15] And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea. [4:16]

It is this reference to another letter that has led various people to believe that Ephesians was originally the letter from Laodicea. Neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius refer to seeing these verses, but in his commentary on Ephesians Tertullian states that Marcion believed it was originally sent to the Laodiceans, while Epiphanius states that he saw an epistle called Laodiceans at the end of Marcion's Apostolicon.

Summary

Although Tertullian directs a number of his comments to Marcion, there is almost no indication that McCol differed in any way from Col. Even if v. 1:22 in the Apostolicon did not contain "his flesh," the likelihood of Marcion making just this one change seem remote. It is not clear whether vv. 1:15b-16 were in the Apostolicon or not.

Next: Philemon