...the epistle from Laodicea
At the conclusion of the epistle to the Colossians, the apostle Paul wrote:...when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea. (Colossians 4:16)
Where is this epistle that Paul wrote to the church at Laodicea? Why is it not in the New Testament?
An Uninspired Letter?
It is possible the letter to Laodicea was not given by inspiration, and therefore not included in the Bible. I say possible, but I think unlikely. Paul may have penned uninspired letters, but would he refer to such a document as a "must read" for Christians? Paul stressed the sufficiency of the Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16-17). If the inspired writings were able to make one complete, and the epistle to the Laodiceans was not inspired, then his mention of the letter to the Colossians was nothing short of pride. In essence, he said, "Read the letter, not because God gave it, but because I wrote it!"
Similarly, some have said that Paul wrote an epistle to the Corinthians prior to what is found in the Bible. 1 Corinthians 5:9 is used to support this idea. I see how one might assume this refers to a former epistle, but it could just as easily refer to this letter, for he had just finished telling them not to keep company with sexually immoral people (1 Corinthians 5:1-8). The translators, not the Greek text, have set the tense as past rather than present. The Greek word grapho can be past or present.
It is possible that Paul had written a previous letter to Corinth, but if it was an uninspired work, we are again faced with the prospect that the inspired apostle placed his own uninspired work on par with Scripture. Hear what Paul wrote to the Corinthians:
...my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. (1 Corinthians 2:4-5)
A Lost Letter?
If the Laodicean letter was not uninspired, then it must have been inspired. If so, where is it? Has it been lost?
There are serious implications if an inspired epistle has been lost! If this took place, then we DO NOT have all of God's word today and cannot know for certain if we are doing all that God has commanded His people to do.
If a document received and recorded by God's Spirit has fallen by the wayside, the words of Peter are found to be untrue. He said
...the word of God lives and abides forever ... the word of the LORD endures forever. (1 Peter 1:23-25)
A Laodicean Letter
There is a letter that is considered by some to be the epistle spoken of by Paul. However, this letter cannot be found among the oldest available manuscripts. Those familiar with Pauline style will sense a problem with the Laodicean letter. It reeks of falsehood, drawing content from the Philippian letter, but using phraseology that is uncommon to Paul's writing. [See the supposed epistle to Laodicea HERE.]
“Where is the epistle that Paul wrote to the church at Laodicea?”
Where's The Letter?
If the letter was given by God and His word endures forever, where is the letter? I believe we do have the letter to the Laodiceans in the Bible, but no one calls it that. It is commonly called Ephesians.
Now, I realize that in Ephesians 1:1, it reads:
Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are in Ephesus, and faithful in Christ Jesus...
The address to Ephesus is not in all manuscripts, and without the city being mentioned in 1:1, nothing links this letter to Ephesus.
Tertullian wrote "Adversus Marcionem," an apologetic response to Marcion, a 2nd century heretic. Among his beliefs which were considered to be heresy was the thought that the Ephesian letter was in fact "The epistle to the Laodiceans." Tertullian countered this on the basis of "the true tradition of the Church" and argued that Paul "did in fact write to all."1 The fact that one is a heretic does not mean that everything he believes is heresy. Tertullian's answer is feeble, not grounded in fact, but tradition, even to the point of being evasive with that final comment.
However, it is the lack of internal evidence for this epistle being penned to the Ephesians that stands out in my mind. Paul had worked with the brethren at Ephesus for three years (Acts 20:31). His time with them is mentioned in both his letters to Timothy and the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 16:8; 2 Corinthians 1:8; 1 Timothy 1:3; 2 Timothy 1:18), but oddly, he made no mention of it in the letter he supposedly wrote to the Ephesians. A quick look at Paul's other letters (1 Corinthians 2:1; 2 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 4:11-14; Philippians 1:27, 30; 1 Thessalonians 2:1-2) shows that he tended to speak of his visits with brethren when he wrote to them. Why would he make no mention at all, not even in passing, to the three years he was with them?
Paul was in the habit of mentioning individuals by name in his epistles, in greetings, or at times, sharing news with the brethren about one of their own (1 Corinthians 16:15-17; Philippians 4:2, 18; Colossians 4:12, 17; etc). After spending three years in Ephesus, Paul would have known a lot of folks, and no doubt had close friends there. And yet there is not a single greeting found in the letter which was supposedly written to the church at Ephesus! The only name mentioned is Tychicus, who was sent by Paul to share news about him with them. The lack of a greetings is more consistent with a letter written to a church he'd not visited, like Colossians 1:4, 7-8; 2:1).
Add to these points the fact that the epistles of Colossians and Ephesians compliment each other. Our understanding is enriched by looking at them together, which is why Paul wanted them to be shared. The forged Laodicean letter has no relationship at all to the Colossian letter. Despite its name, evidence seems to lend itself to the conclusion that Ephesians may actually be Laodiceans.
1, Adversus Marcionem, Bk. 5, Ch. 17, vs. 1
Article Navigation:
Answering The Atheist
Complaint:
Traditionally, the Ten Commandments are known as the commandments stated in Exodus 20:1-17. In Exodus 34:1-2, Moses is told to get another set of tablets to rewrite what was on the first tablets. Exodus 34:10-26, Moses was told a number [ten] of things of what to and not to do. In Exodus 34:27-28, God tells Moses to write the words he told him on those very tablets and name them the Ten Commandments. These aren't the same commandments in Exodus 20. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
It is important to note who is writing what, and where it is being written. Moses was to cut the stones and bring them to the LORD. The LORD, not Moses would write on the tablets of stone (Exodus 34:1). And, we are told what He would write on them, "...the words that were on the first..."
Exodus 34:28 tells us that "He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments." He is God. (Exodus 34:1; Deuteronomy 10:2-4) What did He write? The same thing that was on the first tablets, the Ten Commandments.
What about this other list of laws in Exodus 34:10-26? They were not written on the tablets, and it was Moses, not the LORD who wrote them. Where did he write them? Moses wrote the book of the Law, the whole Law, not just the Ten Commandments (Deuteronomy 17:18; 31:9). After he finished writing the Law, it was given to the Levites, and they were commanded,
Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God... (Deuteronomy 31:26)
The Ten Commandments were recorded on the tablets of stone by the finger of God and put into the ark (Deuteronomy 10:5). The Book of the Law Moses wrote was placed next to the ark (Deuteronomy 31:26).
There is no contradiction.
This article is in response to a submission by a web site visitor.