Textual Discrepancies In Colossians 2:18

[Hidden In Him]

18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. (Colossians 2:18-19, KJV).

Greetings all. There has been some debate lately about what are the most reliable Greek manuscripts. For me, answering this question involves examining in particular those places in the texts where the discrepancies present two completely different theological positions. One is found in the verse above, where the received text and a few others include the word "not" in verse 18, while others (including P46, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, UBS and Westcott & Hort) all read simply, "investigating into those things which he has seen," which is an exact opposite reading from that presented in the TR.

So for those interested in discussing it, which is the correct reading? I hold that the TR reading is illogical, as no man can investigate or "intrude" into anything he has not seen. He can only investigate into what he thinks he has.

For all who disagree, present a case for how you think the TR reading makes more sense and communicates more accurately what the writer was trying to say.

Blessings in Christ to all who respond.
Hidden in Him

 

[Enoch111]

So for those interested in discussing it, which is the correct reading? I hold that the TR reading is illogical...

CRITICAL TEXT
Westcott and Hort / [NA27 variants]
μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων, ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων, εἰκῇ φυσιούμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ

RECEIVED TEXT
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἃ μὴ ["not, that" omitted] ἑώρακεν ἐμβατεύων εἰκῇ φυσιούμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ

As you can see, the critical text is almost identical to the TR except for μὴ.

The literal rendering from the interlinear critical text: Let no one disqualify you, delighting in humility and the worship of angels, which [not that] he has seen [but is] intruding, vainly being puffed up by the mind of the flesh of him.

King James Bible
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind
Young's Literal Translation
let no one beguile you of your prize, delighting in humble-mindedness and in worship of the messengers, intruding into the things he hath not seen, being vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh...
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Let no one disqualify you, insisting on ascetic practices and the worship of angels, claiming access to a visionary realm and inflated without cause by his unspiritual mind.

As you can see, because the man is *vainly puffed up in his carnal mind*, and therefore has a false humility (NIV), he has actually intruded into things which he has not seen, but imagined in *a visionary realm* (Holman). The TR was *corrected* rather than allowed to show that this vision of angels was imaginary and led to a false worship of angels (which would be idolatry). So you could call it demonic deception, and the next two translations bring that out.

New International Version
Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. Such a person also goes into great detail about what they have seen; they are puffed up with idle notions by their unspiritual mind.
New Living Translation
Don't let anyone condemn you by insisting on pious self-denial or the worship of angels, saying they have had visions about these things. Their sinful minds have made them proud

 

[DNB]

Hi HIH, great idea, thanks for the invite!
Well, this is odd, I actually find myself agreeing with the TR, to some degree, ...because i checked Sinaiticus and it also includes 'not'.
But also, here's the issue. As far as the discrepancy having a doctrinal impact, that would depend on one's understanding of 'vain imaginations'.
In other words, both thoughts of being seen, or not seen, can justify the delusion that Paul is talking about.

For example, one idea can be that, one speaks in a vain manner from what he has seen, but pretentiously exaggerates its worth, and thus, has a misguided view on what he is talking about. ...This is wrong, but I include it for the sake of argument.

On the other hand, and more correctly speaking, Paul is denouncing those who, also, in a pretentious manner, attempt to speak authoritatively on things that they've never even seen (angels), showing both the frivolity of their imagination, and the deception of their intent, and thus, the senselessness and corruption of the point that they're trying to make.

But the actual reason that both 'Not seen', and 'seen' are correct, is because as far as 'seen' goes, in this context, it sarcastically means a false vision. Like, as today's Ken Copelands, Jeff Dupuis, and Benny Hinns, etc.. that claim to have seen visions.
As far as 'not seen' is concerned, Paul is just expressing the reality of their claims. They say 'seen', but Paul explicitly exposes the fact that they truly haven't seen anything.
I believe that this is why the variance exists, it is because it doesn't change the meaning, both expressions make the same conclusion i.e. their visions are false, one by implication, the other by explication

So, again, if I'm correct about the last two options above, that is, that both are viable illustrations to demonstrate Paul's point, I might say that the variance does not affect doctrine, as either way, Paul is exposing the incompetent manner in which these false apostles are claiming authority and knowledge?

But, either way, because Sinaiticus also includes 'not, and that I prefer the explicit interpretation that i offered of Paul's point, as it better expresses the recklessness and deceit on the part of the heretic, I, uncharacteristically, may side on the TR this time (though, as a rule, I typically favour the critical text).

 

[Hidden In Him]

As you can see, because the man is *vainly puffed up in his carnal mind*, and therefore has a false humility (NIV), he has actually intruded into things which he has not seen, but imagined in *a visionary realm* (Holman). The TR was *corrected* rather than allowed to show that this vision of angels was imaginary and led to a false worship of angels (which would be idolatry). So you could call it demonic deception, and the next two translations bring that out.

New International Version
Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. Such a person also goes into great detail about what they have seen; they are puffed up with idle notions by their unspiritual mind.
New Living Translation
Don't let anyone condemn you by insisting on pious self-denial or the worship of angels, saying they have had visions about these things. Their sinful minds have made them proud

Ok, thanks for the reply Enoch. My problem with the interpretation that visions are specifically being discussed here is that it must be read into the text. There is no direct reference to them, and IMO the context lends itself more to what they were "seeing" mentally, given that he references being puffed up in their fleshly minds and not holding fast to Christ the Head when it comes to forming doctrines, nor to the teachings of the church. About the expression "delighting in the worship of angels," what do you attribute this to be referring to specifically?

But to me, if these were visions created by his own imagination, he wouldn't be "intruding" upon them (which is the translation the KJV chose to go with), they would be his to do with as he pleased. I think "investigating" is the better translation, and again refers to mental activity of searching out a theory, i.e. a doctrine he came up with that did not conform to church doctrine.

 

[Hidden In Him]

But, either way, because Sinaiticus also includes 'not, and that I prefer the latter interpretation that i offered of Paul's point, as it reflects an even greater shallowness and recklessness on the part of the heretic, I, uncharacteristically, may side on the TR this time (though, as a rule, I typically favour the critical text).

LoL. I appreciate your honesty. I favor Vaticanus, but in my next thread I will probably treat a verse that exposes IT as being corrupt, and the authorized as being correct, LoL. Goes to point that the Spirit must ultimately be our guide in discerning accuracy from falsehood (a contention I'm guessing ReChoired will utterly despise).

On the other hand, Paul is denouncing those who, also, in a pretentious manner, attempt to speak authoritatively on things that they've never even seen (angels), showing the frivolity of their imagination, and thus, the senselessness of the point that they're trying to make.

About this, I would ask you the same thing I asked Enoch. What do you believe "the worship of angels" constituted in practical terms where this heresy was concerned? It goes to point of establishing exactly what was being discussed in this passage.

 

[DNB]

LoL. I appreciate your honesty. I favor Vaticanus, but in my next thread I will probably treat a verse that exposes IT as being corrupt, and the authorized as being correct, LoL. Goes to point that the Spirit must ultimately be our guide in discerning accuracy from falsehood (a contention I'm guessing ReChoired will utterly despise).


About this, I would ask you the same thing I asked Enoch. What do you believe "the worship of angels" constituted in practical terms where this heresy was concerned? It goes to point of establishing exactly what was being discussed in this passage.

Hi HIH, ...sorry, if possible, please re-read my first post as I needed to re-edit it somewhat since you responded.

I believe that Paul's denunciation included more than one heresy, that is, asceticism (false humility) and worship of angels.
Asceticism is considered false humility, as it only submits the body but not the mind. For, it is from the mind that these desires initiate, and where true humility is derived. So, keeping the body in submission does nothing for the spirit, it's only a pretentious way to appear pious.
...and sorry HIH, I do not know exactly what the worship of angels consisted of, outside of just appreciating its misguided reverence?
Mind you, I would be hesitant to accept conclusively any explanation offered, as the NT just does not divulge any more information on this issue.
Was it a form of Gnosticism, possibly?

But, that wasn't your point, was it? I thought that it was between the 'Not seen', and the 'seen', in regard to visions about angels, determining the significance of the variances between TR & Critical?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Mind you, I would be hesitant to accept conclusively any explanation offered, as the NT just does not divulge any more information on this issue.
Was it a form of Gnosticism, possibly?

Not a problem. I do actually believe the evidence in the epistle points very strongly to one theological system in particular, but I'll wait to go through all that for later maybe. I can at least say with certainty it was not Gnosticism, nor even any form of supposed synthesis between Gnosticsm and Judaism, since the two were diametrically opposed to each other and utterly incompatible where the issue of Jewish law was concerned. But I'll save that for later as well maybe.

But, that wasn't your point, was it? I thought that it was between the 'Not seen', and the 'seen', in regard to visions about angels, determining the significance of the variances between TR & Critical?

It plays in, in that when what the expression "delighting in the worship of the angels" is properly understood to be referring to, the specific heresy being introduced to the Colossians becomes much easier to identify, and hence the interpretation of what was meant by "investigating into things he has seen" becomes easier to identify as well, since the idea that "visions of angels" were in view here gets subsequently dispelled.

 

[DNB]

Not a problem. I do actually believe the evidence in the epistle points very strongly to one theological system in particular, but I'll wait to go through all that for later maybe. I can at least say with certainty it was not Gnosticism, nor even any form of supposed synthesis between Gnosticsm and Judaism, since the two were diametrically opposed to each other and utterly incompatible where the issue of Jewish law was concerned. But I'll save that for later as well maybe.


It plays in, in that when what the expression "delighting in the worship of the angels" is properly understood to be referring to, the specific heresy being introduced to the Colossians becomes much easier to identify, and hence the interpretation of what was meant by "investigating into things he has seen" becomes easier to identify as well, since the idea that "visions of angels" were in view here gets subsequently dispelled.

Ok, thanks, I will wait to see then what you consider to be further evidence, as to what the worship of angels constituted, before i reply further.
...but, just for the record, because I believe that both 'seen' and 'not seen' are correct, in that they are both making the same accusation of a deluded knowledge on the part of the heretics, i'm wondering how much impact on the translation, knowing exactly what is meant by the worship of angels, would have?
Let's see....

 

[Nancy]

I wonder, is the OP's post referring to humans worshiping angels or Angels worshiping humans?

 

[DNB]

I wonder, is the OP's post referring to humans worshiping angels or Angels worshiping humans?

Hi Nancy, the context is that humans are worshiping angels. It is these false apostles or heretics, that are disqualifying other believers of their prize, by persuading them to practice both, asceticism (false humility), and the worship of angels. As in, 'don't let anyone who does theses things...'

Colossians 2:18 (NIV)
2:18. Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I wonder, is the OP's post referring to humans worshiping angels or Angels worshiping humans?

That would be another possible interpretation if the expression were actually talking about giving adoration to others, Nancy, but "delighting in the worship of the angels" is actually a reference to humans joining in with the worship of the angels going on in Heaven, something the Essenes sought to attain to during their worship. It was sort of an ecstatic experience of participating in Heavenly worship while still on earth.

 

[DNB]

That would be another possible interpretation if the expression were actually talking about giving adoration to others, Nancy, but "delighting in the worship of the angels" is actually a reference to humans joining in with the worship of the angels going on in Heaven, something the Essenes sought to attain to during their worship. It was sort of an ecstatic experience of participating in Heavenly worship while still on earth.

So sorry, HIH, is it that the humans are worshiping the angels themselves, or joining in with the angels, in the angel's exaltation of God?
Thanks!

 

[Hidden In Him]

So sorry, HIH, is it that the humans are worshiping the angels themselves, or joining in with the angels, in the angel's exaltation of God?
Thanks!

The latter.
And thanks for asking. I'm not always as clear as I think I'm being.

 

[DNB]

The latter.
And thanks for asking. I'm not always as clear as I think I'm being.

Thanks, ...no, you were clear, but my predisposition made me question it. Thx!

 

[justbyfaith]

I think that both of them taken together ought to be considered.

So that it should be rendered thus:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not (really) seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

In other words, the person thinks that he has seen something but really hasn't.

Now if this be accurate:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

then the person is claiming to have seen something when he really hasn't; as in the case of false prophets who ran when the Lord did not send them.

I would say that there are instances where a person really has seen something, as in the case of visions and dreams (Joel 2 and Acts 2). And in these instances, the verse does not condemn their vision; and therefore I would say that texts that render it thus:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

would be inaccurate.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I think that both of them taken together ought to be considered.

So that it should be rendered thus:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not (really) seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

In other words, the person thinks that he has seen something but really hasn't.

Now if this be accurate:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

then the person is claiming to have seen something when he really hasn't; as in the case of false prophets who ran when the Lord did not send them.

I would say that there are instances where a person really has seen something, as in the case of visions and dreams (Joel 2 and Acts 2). And in these instances, the verse does not condemn their vision; and therefore I would say that texts that render it thus:

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.

would be inaccurate.

Ok. Thanks for the reply, JustByFaith.

About this, much of what the prophets received they received thru dreams and visions, only with the false prophets either the dream or the interpretation was false, or both. So again you have them actually seeing something, if visions and dreams are what’s being referred to here. I do actually hold that false dreams and visions could have potentially been what Paul was referring to, but if so they would likely not have been visions encouraging them to worship angels. Even Christians today know better than to do such a thing, let alone a New Testament congregation operating under the leading of the Holy Spirit.

 

[justbyfaith]

I am referring to those false prophets who ran even though the LORD didn't send them. Such would be claiming to see a vision; when in all reality they have seen nothing.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I am referring to those false prophets who ran even though the LORD didn't send them. Such would be claiming to see a vision; when in all reality they have seen nothing.

I’m having to use my iPhone to reply right now because power is out, and will be tomorrow as well. That makes looking up your source text and studying it a little tough. Think you can cite me your verse/ verses for this, and more importantly how you equate it to the prophets prophesying when they have seen no vision/dream at all? I’d like to look at the text.

Much obliged, and thanks for the post.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jer 23:13, And I have seen folly in the prophets of Samaria; they prophesied in Baal, and caused my people Israel to err.
Jer 23:14, I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness: they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.
Jer 23:15, Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts concerning the prophets; Behold, I will feed them with wormwood, and make them drink the water of gall: for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth into all the land.
Jer 23:16, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.
Jer 23:17, They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you.
Jer 23:18, For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it?
Jer 23:19, Behold, a whirlwind of the LORD is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind: it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked.
Jer 23:20, The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly.
Jer 23:21, I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.
Jer 23:22, But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.
Jer 23:23, Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off?
Jer 23:24, Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.
Jer 23:25, I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.
Jer 23:26, How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;
Jer 23:27, Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.
Jer 23:28, The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.
Jer 23:29, Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?
Jer 23:30, Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour.
Jer 23:31, Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.
Jer 23:32, Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:33, And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, shall ask thee, saying, What is the burden of the LORD? thou shalt then say unto them, What burden? I will even forsake you, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:34, And as for the prophet, and the priest, and the people, that shall say, The burden of the LORD, I will even punish that man and his house.
Jer 23:35, Thus shall ye say every one to his neighbour, and every one to his brother, What hath the LORD answered? and, What hath the LORD spoken?
Jer 23:36, And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.
Jer 23:37, Thus shalt thou say to the prophet, What hath the LORD answered thee? and, What hath the LORD spoken?
Jer 23:38, But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;
Jer 23:39, Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence:
Jer 23:40, And I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Jer 23:13, And I have seen folly in the prophets of Samaria; they prophesied in Baal, and caused my people Israel to err.
Jer 23:14, I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness: they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.
Jer 23:15, Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts concerning the prophets; Behold, I will feed them with wormwood, and make them drink the water of gall: for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth into all the land.
Jer 23:16, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.
Jer 23:17, They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you.
Jer 23:18, For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it?
Jer 23:19, Behold, a whirlwind of the LORD is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind: it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked.
Jer 23:20, The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly.
Jer 23:21, I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.
Jer 23:22, But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.
Jer 23:23, Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off?
Jer 23:24, Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.
Jer 23:25, I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.
Jer 23:26, How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;
Jer 23:27, Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.
Jer 23:28, The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.
Jer 23:29, Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?
Jer 23:30, Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour.
Jer 23:31, Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.
Jer 23:32, Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:33, And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, shall ask thee, saying, What is the burden of the LORD? thou shalt then say unto them, What burden? I will even forsake you, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:34, And as for the prophet, and the priest, and the people, that shall say, The burden of the LORD, I will even punish that man and his house.
Jer 23:35, Thus shall ye say every one to his neighbour, and every one to his brother, What hath the LORD answered? and, What hath the LORD spoken?
Jer 23:36, And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.
Jer 23:37, Thus shalt thou say to the prophet, What hath the LORD answered thee? and, What hath the LORD spoken?
Jer 23:38, But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;
Jer 23:39, Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence:
Jer 23:40, And I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten.

Thanks for this. I have a bunch to say here, and unfortunately very little juice left in my iPhone, which I really need to save for calls. But let me just touch on one thing then until I have more of a chance to respond to the entire passage: I know it mentions “false dreams” but I think you may be interpreting this to mean dreams they didn’t actually have, whereas the text has them saying, “I have dreamed, I have dreamed.” This suggests they had actual dreams, only the dreams they had were not from God but generated by the flesh.
Is this the way you understand the passage or no?

Thanks again for the citation. I love discussing these sorts of passages.

Until I can post in more detail, blessings in Christ.