a deutero-Pauline Mystery?
eCClesiology in Colossians and ePhesians
sigurd grindheim
Fjellhaug International University College, Oslo, Norway
the ecclesiological vision of Colossians and ephesians is that the gentiles
are equal members of the people of god. this vision is referred to as
a mystery that was previously unknown (Col 1:26–27; eph 3:5–6). to
modern scholars, the origin of this ecclesiological vision is also something
of a mystery. the ecclesiology of these letters continues to be one of the
most important questions in the debate over the authorship of Colossians
and ephesians. in this essay, i will compare the ecclesiology of Colossians
and ephesians to that of the undisputed letters. while Colossians and
ephesians show clear traces of a later development, i intend to show that
this development represents a complex reapplication of familiar Pauline
terms and themes in a way that is consistent with the logic of the apostle’s
earlier letters. i will argue, therefore, that the ecclesiology of Colossians
and ephesians cannot serve as evidence that the author must have been
someone other than the apostle Paul. the assumption that underlies my
argument is that an imitator would more likely resort to formulaic mim-
icking of familiar Pauline expressions and perhaps introduce his or her
own ideas with their own nomenclature.
Colossians
with respect to the letter to the Colossians, an increasing number of
scholars conclude that it is so different from the undisputed letters that it
must be pseudonymous.1 others argue that these differences result from
1 eduard lohse, Colossians and Philemon (hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971),
177–83; walter Bujard, Stilanalytische Untersuchungen zum Kolosserbrief: Als Beitrag zur
Methodik von Sprachvergleichen (sunt 11; göttingen: Vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 1973);
Joachim gnilka, Der Kolosserbrief (htKnt; Freiburg: herder, 1980), 19–23; helmut Merk-
lein, “Paulinische theologie in der rezeption des Kolosser- und epheserbriefes,” in
Karl Kertelge (ed.), Paulus in den neutestamentlichen Spätschriften: Zur Paulusrezeption
im Neuen Testament (Qd 89; Freiburg: herder, 1981), 25–69; Mark Kiley, Colossians as
Pseudepigraphy (the Biblical seminar 4; sheffield: Jsot, 1986); raymond F. Collins, Let-
ters That Paul Did not Write: The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Pauline Pseudepigrapha
(good news studies 28; wilmington, de: Michael glazier, 1988), 171–208; Petr Pokorný,