Colossians 2:8

Take heed lest there be anyone that makes spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Through his philosophy and vain deceit ... It appears that the translators have softened Paul's words in this verse by the insertion of the pronoun "his," thus avoiding a blanket condemnation of philosophy and limiting the warning to the particular philosophy advocated at Colossae. Interlinear Greek Testaments have the following:

Take care that no one make a prey of you through philosophy and empty deceit.[20]

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit.[21]

In keeping with the evident intention of watering down Paul's denunciation here, the following comments are typical of hundreds that are made in this context:

The apostle does not condemn sound philosophy.[22]

Paul is not condemning philosophy properly so-called.[23]

Clearly the apostle condemns false philosophy.[24]

Empty deceit stands in qualifying apposition with philosophy.[25]

Such philosophies as the Jewish and Gentile teachers used.[26]

Isn't it too bad that the apostle just did not know how to make it clear? Despite the temptation to do so, however, this writer does not wish to get on that bandwagon. An incredibly large amount of destructive influences are operative in this very generation, influences which are grounded in human philosophy; and there is no way to deny the gentle words of the immortal Lipscomb, who said:

All the philosophies of men, all the deceits of human wisdom, and all the rudiments of the world discovered by human reason spoil men, ruin their souls, and lead them to everlasting death by leading them away from God and his salvation.[27]

If it be objected that Lipscomb's analysis is harsh or unkind, such an allegation is refuted by the far different tone of what even the most noted philosophers say of each other. Only one of these will be quoted, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, referred to by Will Durant as the most influential of the 18th century philosophers, and one eminently qualified to give an objective and unbiased appraisal of philosophers and philosophy as it existed seventeen centuries after Paul's appraisal. It reads as follows:

I consulted the philosophers ... I found them all alike proud, assertive, dogmatic; professing - even in their so-called skepticism - to know everything; proving nothing, scoffing at one another. This last trait ... struck me as the only point in which they were right. Braggarts in attack, they are weaklings in defense. Weigh their arguments, they are all destructive; count their voices, each speaks for himself alone ... There is not one of them who, if he chanced to discover the difference between falsehood and truth, would not prefer his own lie to the truth which another had discovered. Where is the philosopher who would not deceive the whole world for his own glory?[28]

With deep and poignant sorrow, this student of many modern critics and commentators on the New Testament finds some of them to be like the philosophers consulted by Rousseau. One false premise being exposed, they immediately take refuge in another, exposing themselves as enemies of truth and righteousness. Christianity Today some time ago had an editorial on this which is reproduced in this series of writings see my Commentary on Luke, Luke 21:20.

After the tradition of men ... In this, Paul is in perfect consonance with the repeated denunciations of the Lord Jesus Christ against the Pharisaical keepers of tradition during his ministry. A vast portion of present-day Christianity is not based upon the New Testament at all, but upon human tradition, supported, of course, by vain and empty speculations exactly like that Paul condemned here. See discussion of "Traditions" in my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 15:5ff.

After the rudiments of the world ... The RSV translation of this as "elemental spirits of the universe" simply cannot be correct. As Foy E. Wallace, Jr., pointed out:

The same terminology in Galatians 4:3 refers to the rudiments of Judaism, as the connection of Galatians 3:24-29 very clearly shows ... so here "after the rudiments of the world" refers to the rudiments of heathenism.[29]

See Galatians 3:24-29; Galatians 4:3, this volume.

And not after Christ ... This is the summary of all Paul was saying against the evil teachings and evil teachers of that generation. Whatever human system of thought, religion, politics, or anything else that is not held in reference to the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and in full conformity to his revealed will, must be classified as secondary in the affections of Christians. It is freely admitted that this is not the way it is among countless Christians of this generation; but it is still affirmed that this is the way it should be.

[20] Emphatic Diaglott (Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), p. 677.

[21] Alfred Marshall, The Interlinear Greek-English Testament, The Nestle Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1958), p. 794.

[22] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 526.

[23] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 983.

[24] Ernest G. Ashby, A New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 486.

[25] G. G. Findlay, Colossians in Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 19 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing House, 1950), p. 85.

[26] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (London: Carlton and Porter, 1929), Vol. VI, p. 522.

[27] Foy E. Wallace, Jr., A Review of the New Versions (Fort Worth, Texas: Foy E. Wallace Jr. Publications, 1973), p. 448.

[28] Will and Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1967), p. 183.

[29] Foy E. Wallace, Jr., A Review of the New Versions (Fort Worth, Texas: Foy E. Wallace Jr. Publications, 1973), p. 448.