RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS

The three issues generally discussed by scholars in relation to these two “Prison Epistles” are their authorship, place of writing, and relative timings of the writings. For the purposes of this short post, I am going to assume, as do most evangelical scholars, that Paul himself was the author of both letters and that both were written at roughly the same time as one another. But which one was composed first?

Many readers would just assume that Paul's letters are arranged in chronological order, but that would be a poor assumption. After all, I Thessalonians is generally believed to be one of the first, if not the first, of his epistles to a specific church and it is listed toward the end of the collection, not the beginning. Instead, it is generally accepted that the Pauline epistles are arranged roughly in order of their length, beginning with the longest and ending with the shortest.

Barth and Blanke compare both epistles in terms of vocabulary, style, structure and doctrine with the conclusion:

“the most sober and plausible explanation of the unity and diversity of C and E may still be found on a simple path leading through the literary and theological thickets: at about the same time, but in addressing different congregations in different situations, one and the same author wrote both letters.”

But the analysis of the material common to both epistles leads, in their hands, to inconclusive results in determining which letter was written first.

F.F. Bruce rehearses some of the close similarities in wording and thought between the two letters and cites Holtzmann who pointed to “the curious phenomenon that, in passages common to Colossians and Ephesians, sometimes the one epistle and sometimes the other seems to be the earlier.” Then, as Childs explains, “He attempted to solve the problem on the literary level by means of a complex theory of interpolations and redactions. According to his theory, the author of Ephesians not only first imitated an original Colossians, but subsequently interpolated Colossians with material from Ephesians. Few have found the theory fully convincing.”

Bruce's own conclusion is that “Paul, having completed his letter to Colossae, allowed his thoughts to run on along the same line until he was gripped by the vision which finds expression in the companion letter, and began to dictate its contents in an exalted mood of inspired meditation, thanksgiving and prayer.”

E.K. Simpson cites the often-mentioned possibility that since the words “in Ephesus” are not present in Ephesians 1:1 of many of the earliest manuscripts, perhaps the letter was in fact the Laodicean letter mentioned in Colossians 4:16. If that is true, then Colossians must have been written after the letter to “the Ephesians.”

R.E. Brown in his Introduction to the New Testament says, “In striking ways Eph resembles Col in overall structure and verbal parallels.” He supports this view with specific numerical data and a table of examples. He concludes by stating, “A plausible theory, then, would be that on the basis of the undisputed Pauline letters and especially of Col...someone in the Ephesian school of Paul's disciples produced Eph as an encouraging portrayal of aspects of Pauline thought.”

F.C. Synge believes that Ephesians is a genuine letter by Paul which had been used as a model for the later Colossians by another author resulting in a pale imitation lacking in style and sentiment and grandeur.

J.D.G. Dunn states that “we cannot ignore the degree to which Colossians and Ephesians overlap, sufficiently often with very similar phraseology, structure, and content...This feature is best explained by Ephesians being written using Colossians as a kind of template.”

N.T. Wright outlines four possible scenarios regarding these two letters:

    1. Paul wrote Colossians first and then Ephesians soon afterward.

    2. Paul wrote Ephesians first and then used some of this material in the later Colossian letter.

    3. Paul wrote Colossians, and then someone else used it as the basis for Ephesians.

    4. An unknown author wrote Colossians in the style of Paul, and then another person copied material in Colossians to write Ephesians.

He rejects the last two options as being improbable, but is undecided between 1 and 2. “Whichever letter came first, there is no evidence of a modification of ideas or change in theology.”

C.E. Arnold accepts the Pauline authorship of both letters and is dubious whether any evidence exists for direct literary dependence of one letter on the other. He agrees with the combined assessment of Moo, Carson and Morris: “The best explanation to many seems to be that the same man wrote Colossians and Ephesians a little later, with many of the same thoughts running through his head and with a more general application of the ideas he had so recently expressed.”

I turned to my own efforts in the field of literary analysis to see if they might have anything to say on the subject. The first thing I noted was that there was a general similarity between the two overall structures, especially when compared to the organization seen in other Pauline letters. In addition, it bears noting that the blocks of common material between parallel passages (such as I and I', II and II', etc.) in Colossians coincide much better with one another than do the parallel units of common material in Ephesians. This may indicate that the former epistle had precedence of composition. This is in agreement with Moritz' contention: “Quite possibly Ephesians is Colossians re-written (perhaps within days or weeks of its completion) for a similar, yet slightly different audience...”

Figure 1: The Structure of Colossians

I. Opening Greetings (1:1-2)

II. Fruit of the Gospel and Prayer (1:3-14)

                                    III. God Who Reconciles (1:15-20)

                                                IV. Our Holiness (1:21-23)

 

V. Christ in You (1:24-2:7)

                                                                    VI. False Teachings (2:8-23)

V'. Raised with Christ (3:1-4)

 

IV'. The Old and New Natures (3:5-17)

III'. Transformed Relationships (3:18-4:1)

II'. Living the Christian Life in Prayer (4:2-6)

I'. Final Greetings (4:7-18)

Figure 2: The Structure of Ephesians

I. Introduction (1:1-2)

II. Position with God through Christ (1:3-14)

III. Power in Christ (1:15-23)

 

IV. Gentiles’ Past and Present Position Contrasted (2:1-22)

V. The Mystery of Christ: Position and Power (3:1-21)

IV'. Gentiles’ Past and Present Behavior Contrasted (4:1-5:20)

II'. Position with Others through Christ (5:21-6:9)

III'. Power in Christ (6:10-20)

I'. Conclusion (6:21-24)

Arnold aptly summarizes the situation when he says, “The precise nature...of the relationship between Ephesians and Colossians continues to stand in need of careful research from a literary, linguistic and theological perspective.”