174 sigurd grindheim
the different rhetorical situation, and they also observe that the personal
tone of the greetings (4:7–18) seems to situate the letter within Paul’s own
lifetime.2 in order to account for this last observation as well as for the
Colossians: A Commentary (trans. siegfried s. schatzmann; Peabody, Ma: hendrickson, 1991),
3–19; Michael wolter, Der Brief an die Kolosser Der Brief an Philemon (ÖtK 12; gütersloh:
gerd Mohn, 1993), 27–33; hans hübner, An Philemon An die Kolosser An die Epheser
(hnt 12; tübingen: Mohr siebeck, 1997), 9–10; udo schnelle, The History and Theology of
the New Testament Writings (trans. M. eugene Boring; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 281–88;
angela standhartinger, Studien zur Entstehungsgeschichte und Intention des Kolosserbriefs
(novtsup 94; leiden: Brill, 1999), 3–10; andrew t. lincoln, “the letter to the Colossians,”
in The New Interpreter’s Bible (vol. 11; nashville: abingdon, 2000), 578–80; Margaret y.
Macdonald, Colossians and Ephesians (sP 17; Collegeville, Mn: liturgical Press, 2000), 6–9;
georg h. van Kooten, Cosmic Christology in Paul and the Pauline School: Colossians and
Ephesians in the Context of Graeco-Roman Cosmology, with a New Synopsis of the Greek Texts
(wunt 2.171; tübingen: Mohr siebeck, 2003), 108–109; Carl r. holladay, A Critical Introduc-
tion to the New Testament: Interpreting the Message and the Meaning of Jesus Christ (nash-
ville: abingdon, 2005), 392–96; r. Mclellan wilson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on Colossians and Philemon (iCC; london: t&t Clark, 2005), 9–35; Vincent a. Pizzuto,
A Cosmic Leap of Faith: An Authorial, Structural, and Theological Investigation of the Cosmic
Christology in Col 1:15–20 (CBet; leuven: Peeters, 2006), 13–93; Charles h. talbert, Ephe-
sians and Colossians (Paideia Commentaries on the new testament; grand rapids: Baker,
2007), 7–11; Jerry l. sumney, Colossians: A Commentary (ntl; louisville: westminster John
Knox, 2008), 1–9; nicole Frank, Der Kolosserbrief im Kontext des paulinischen Erbes: Eine
intertextuelle Studie zur Auslegung und Fortschreibung der Paulustradition (wunt 2.271;
tübingen: Mohr siebeck, 2009), 26–31.
2 For Pauline authorship of Colossians, see ernst Percy, Die Probleme der Kolosser- und
Epheserbriefe (lund: gleerup, 1946), 16–178; Peter t. o’Brien, Colossians, Philemon (wBC 44;
waco, tX: word, 1982), xli–liv; george e. Cannon, The Use of Traditional Materials in
Colossians (Macon, ga: Mercer university Press, 1983), 175–229; F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to
the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians (niCnt; grand rapids: eerdmans, 1984),
28–33; richard Bauckham, “Pseudo-apostolic letters,” JBL 107 (1988): 490; donald guth-
rie, New Testament Introduction (4th ed.; downers grove, il: interVarsity, 1990), 572–77;
Markus Barth and helmut Blanke, Colossians: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (trans. astrid B. Beck; aB 34B; new york: doubleday, 1994), 114–26; stanley e.
Porter and Kent d. Clarke, “Canonical-Critical Perspective and the relationship of Colos-
sians and ephesians,” Bib 78 (1997): 78–81; Markus Bockmuehl, Revelation and Mystery
in Ancient Judaism and Pauline Christianity (1990; repr., grand rapids: eerdmans, 1997),
178–79; luke timothy Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament (rev. ed.; Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1999), 391–94; david a. desilva, An Introduction to the New Testament (downers
grove, il: interVarsity, 2004), 696–701; d. a. Carson and douglas J. Moo, An Introduction
to the New Testament (grand rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 517–21; ian K. smith, Heavenly
Perspective: A Study of the Apostle Paul’s Response to a Jewish Mystical Movement at Colos-
sae (lnts 326; london: t&t Clark, 2006), 6–16; Michael F. Bird, Colossians and Philemon:
A New Covenant Commentary (new Covenant Commentary series; eugene, or: Cascade,
2009), 4–9. Jean-noël aletti concludes that the letter “est très probablement de Paul” (Saint
Paul Épître aux Colossiens [eBib 20; Paris: gabalda, 1993], 22–30, 208–209, 277–80).
in his Introduction, werner g. Kümmel argued for Pauline authorship (Introduction to
the New Testament [trans. howard Clark Kee; nashville: abingdon, 1975], 340–48), but he
later changed his mind (“l’exégèse scientifique au XXe siècle: le nouveau testament,” in
Claude savart and Jean-noël aletti [eds.], Le monde contemporain et la Bible [Bible de tous
les temps 8; Paris: Beauchesne, 1985], 483–84).