^{15}Ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς ἐν Λαοδικίᾳ ἀδελφὸυς καὶ Νυμφᾶν καὶ τὴν κατ’ οἶκον
αὐτῶν ἐκκλησίαν. ^{16}Καὶ ὅταν
15–17. ‘Greet from me the brethren who are in Laodicea, especially
Nymphas, and the church which assembles in their house. And when this
letter has been read among you, take care that it is read also in the
Church of the Laodiceans, and be sure that ye also read the letter which
I have sent to Laodicea, and which ye will get from them. Moreover give
this message from me to Archippus; Take heed to the ministry which thou
hast received from me in Christ, and discharge it fully and faithfully.’
15. Νυμφᾶν] as the context shows, an inhabitant of Laodicea. The name in
full would probably be Nymphodorus, as Artemas (Tit. iii. 12) for
Artemidorus, Zenas (Tit. iii. 13) for Zenodorus, Theudas (Acts v. 36)
for Theodorus, Olympas (Rom. xvi. 15) for Olympiodorus, and probably
Hermas (Rom. xvi. 14) for Hermodorus (see _Philippians_ p. 174). Other
names in ας occurring in the New Testament and representing different
terminations are Amplias (Ampliatus, a _v. l._), Antipas (Antipater),
Demas (Demetrius?), Epaphras (Epaphroditus), Lucas (Lucanus), Parmenas
(Parmenides), Patrobas (Patrobius), Silas (Sylvanus), Stephanas
(Stephanephorus), and perhaps Junias (Junianus, Rom. xvi. 7). For a
collection of names with this contraction, found in different places,
see Chandler _Greek Accentuation_ § 34; comp. Lobeck _Pathol._ p. 505
sq. Some remarkable instances are found in the inscriptions; e.g.
Ἀσκλᾶς, Δημοσθᾶς, Διομᾶς, Ἑρμογᾶς, Νικομᾶς, Ὀνησᾶς, Τροφᾶς, etc.; see
esp. Boeckh _C. I._ III. pp. 1072, 1097. The name Nymphodorus is found
not unfrequently; e.g. Herod. vii. 137, Thuc. ii. 29, Athen. i. p. 19 F,
vi. p. 265 C, Mionnet _Suppl._ VI. p. 88, Boeckh _C. I._ no. 158, etc.
The contracted form Νυμφᾶς however is very rare, though it appears to
occur in a Spartan inscription, Boeckh _C. I._ no. 1240 )Έυτυχος Νυνφᾶ.
In Murat. MDXXXV. 6, is an inscription to one _Nu. Aquilius Nymphas_, a
freedman, where the dative is _Nymphadi_. Other names from which Nymphas
might be contracted are Nymphius, Nymphicus, Nymphidius, Nymphodotus,
the first and last being the most common.
Those, who read αὐτῆς in the following clause, take it as a woman’s name
(Νύμφαν, not Νυμφᾶν); and the name Nymphe, Nympha, Nympa, etc., occurs
from time to time in Latin inscriptions; e.g. _Inscr. Hisp._ 1099, 1783,
3763, _Inscr. As. Prov. etc._ 525, Murator. CMXXIV. 1, MCLIX. 8, MCCXCV.
9, MDXCI. 3. But a Doric form of the Greek name here seems in the
highest degree improbable.
τὴν κατ’ οἶκον κ.τ.λ.] The same expression is used of Prisca and Aquila
both at Rome (Rom. xvi. 5) and at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 19), and also of
Philemon, whether at Colossæ or at Laodicea is somewhat uncertain
(Philem. 2); comp. Acts xii. 12 τὴν οἰκίαν τῆς Μαρίας ... ὁῦ ἦσαν ἱκανοὶ
συνηθροισμένοι καὶ προσευχόμενοι, and see _Philippians_ p. 56. Perhaps
similar gatherings may be implied by the expressions in Rom. xvi. 14, 15
τοὺς σὺν αὐτοῖς ἀδελφούς, τοὺς σὺν αὐτοῖς πάντας ἁγίους (Probst
_Kirchliche Disciplin_ p. 182, 1873). See also _Act. Mart. Justin._ § 3
(II. p. 262 ed. Otto), _Clem. Recogn._ x. 71 ‘Theophilus ... domus suæ
ingentem basilicam ecclesiæ nomine consecraret’ (where the word
‘basilica’ was probably introduced by the translator Ruffinus). Of the
same kind must have been the ‘collegium quod est in domo Sergiæ Paulinæ’
(de Rossi _Roma Sotteranea_ I. p. 209); for the Christians were first
recognised by the Roman government as ‘collegia’ or burial clubs, and
protected by this recognition doubtless held their meetings for
religious worship. There is no clear example of a separate building set
apart for Christian worship within the limits of the Roman empire before
the third century, though apartments in private houses might be
specially devoted to this purpose. This, I think, appears as a negative
result from the passages collected in Bingham VIII. I. 13 and Probst p.
181 sq. with a different view. Hence the places of Christian assembly
were not commonly called ναοί till quite late (Ignat. _Magn._ 7 is not
really an exception), but οἶκοι Θεοῦ, οἶκοι ἐκκλησιῶν, οἶκοι εὐκτήριοι,
and the like (Euseb. _H.E._ vii. 30, viii. 13, ix. 9, etc.).
αὐτῶν] The difficulty of this reading has led to the two corrections,
αὐτοῦ and αὐτῆς, of which the former appears in the received text and
the latter is supported by one or two very ancient authorities. Of these
alternative readings however, αὐτοῦ is condemned by its simplicity, and
αὐτῆς has arisen from the form Νυμφαν, which _prima facie_ would look
like a woman’s name, and yet hardly can be so. We should require to know
more of the circumstances to feel any confidence in explaining αὐτῶν. A
simple explanation is that αὐτῶν denotes ‘Nymphas and his friends’, by a
transition which is common in classical writers; e.g. Xen. _Anab._ iii.
3. 7 προσῄει μὲν (Μιθριδάτης) ... πρὸς τοὺς Ἕλληνας· ἐπὲι δ’ ἐγγὺς
_ἐγένοντο_ κ.τ.λ., iv. 5. 33 ἐπὲι δ’ ἦλθον πρὸς Χειρίσοφον,
κατελάμβανον καὶ _)εκέινους_ σκηνοῦντας: see also Kühner _Gramm._ §
371 (II. p. 77), Bernhardy _Syntax_ p. 288. Or perhaps τοὺς ἐν Λαοδικίᾳ
ἀδελφούς may refer not to the whole body of the Laodicean Church, but to
a family of Colossian Christians established in Laodicea. Under any
circumstances this ἐκκλησία is only a section of ἡ Λαοδικέων ἐκκλησία
mentioned in ver. 16. On the authorities for the various readings see
the detached note.
------------------------------------------------------------------------