Robert M. Royalty, «Dwelling on Visions.On the Nature of the so-called ‘Colossians Heresy’», Vol. 83 (2002) 329-357
This paper argues that Revelation provides a social-historical, theological, and ideological context for the reconstruction of the Colossian opposition. The proposal is that the author of the Apocalypse arrived in Asia after the Jewish-Roman war; his "dwelling on visions" and prophetic activity challenged the emerging hierarchy within the churches, provoking a response in Paul’s name from the church leadership. Correspondences and parallels between the description of the opposition in Colossians and Revelation are developed exegetically, showing that eschatology and Christology were key issues in the dispute. This paper reexamines the heresiological rhetoric of Colossians, raising methodological questions about other scholarly reconstructions of the opposition as non-Christian.
necessity imply one of the philosophical schools54. It is significant that the word filosofi/a is absent from the NT and early Christian literature before the second-century apologists, with this one exception in Col 2,855. Philosophy thus had unusual associations within the early Christian community and the author makes it clear that filosofi/a is something to be avoided. Furthermore, these opponents (tij) are not called philosophers. The indefinite pronoun suggests someone with regular access to the community; that is, another Christian56. The evidence does not demand identification with a philosophical school but points to the use of filosofi/a as part of the polemical portrayal of his opponents.
In keeping with the overall tone of Col 2,8, the two kata/ phrases that follow are derogatory descriptions of the opponents57. The first phrase describes the "philosophy and empty deceit" of the author’s opponents as "human tradition" (h( para/dosij tw=n a)nqrw/pwn)58. "Human tradition" at this point would sound a rhetorical warning bell. The characterization of the opponents’ teaching as human tradition was anticipated in the valorization of the author’s own received para/dosij in 1,5-7.23 and 2,6-7, where he prepared for a fight against something new. Now, the phrase kata_ th_n para/dosin tw=n a)nqrw/pwn identifies his Christian opposition as the new threat to the churches. The author then uses his received tradition as a primary theological warrant, portraying it explicitly as divine tradition, kata_ Xristo/n. For the author, teaching kata_ Xristo/n means teaching what has been received (paralamba/nw) rather than what comes from new prophetic revelations. Since the author has both used traditional material and