a deutero-pauline mystery? 179
throughout the ages and generations.” this idea recalls that of 1 Cor 2:7–10,
where Paul explains that he speaks “god’s wisdom, mysterious, hidden”
(naB; θεοῦ σοφίαν ἐν μυστηρίῳ τὴν ἀποκεκρυμμένην). this mysterious wis-
dom is hidden from the rulers of this world, but is revealed to those who
love god.
schweizer notes that there is a development from this Pauline argu-
ment to the expression in Colossians. whereas the mystery in 1 Corin-
thians is the word of the cross (cf. 1 Cor 1:18), the mystery in Colossians
concerns the inclusion of the gentiles (cf. Col 1:27).10 however, there is
considerable fluidity in the use of the term “mystery” in the undisputed
letters as well. it may be a synonym for the gospel (cf. rom 16:25), or it
may refer more specifically to the resurrection (1 Cor 15:51) or the way in
which god saves the gentiles before israel (rom 11:25–26). the descrip-
tion of the mystery in Col 1:26–27 is most closely related to the argument
in rom 11:25–26. in rom 11:25–26, the mystery also concerns god’s plan
to save the gentiles, although the emphasis falls more specifically on the
relative sequence of the salvation of Jews and gentiles. in Col 1:26–27,
the focus is directly on the salvation of the gentiles. there is therefore a
development in the use of the term, a development that continues in the
letter to the ephesians. the decisive step in this development, however,
is between 1 Corinthians and romans, not between the undisputed letters
and Colossians.
A Conflation?
the terminological innovation of Colossians is deeply rooted in the diver-
sity of expression in the undisputed Pauline letters. this kind of devel-
opment and reapplication may very well be the work of a fertile and
creative mind.11 however, e. P. sanders has proposed a completely differ-
ent explanation for this inter-relatedness. he maintains that Colossians
is dependent upon Paul’s earlier letters in such a way that Paul himself
10 schweizer, Colossians, 107–8.
11 according to e. P. sanders, one of the criteria for pseudonymity should be the use of
familiar words to make a different point. he argues that one might well suspect that Paul
would use the same terminology in different letters when he is discussing for example
justification, but that we should not expect him to use that same terminology when he
is discussing a completely different question (“literary dependence in Colossians,” JBL 85
i will argue that exactly the opposite is the case. it is characteristic of Paul that he reap-
plies his core ideas to the practical issues at hand. the entire first letter to the Corinthians
is an example of this rhetorical strategy. on the other hand, an imitator might be expected
to mimic well-known phrases and slogans with little variation.