When Philemon was later converted and was returning home, the Apostle did not hesitate to send Epaphras with him to those countries and entrust him there with the preaching of the Gospel, which he did, and for which reason he is called a co-worker by St. Paul (cf. Col. 1:7). Philemon's family helped him in this. For this reason, in the Epistle to Philemon, the Apostle calls Philemon his co-worker, and Archippus, his son, a co-soldier (cf. Philemon 1:2).

Having spread the faith, they kept it. Philemon had general meetings of believers in his house, and Archippus governed them, for the Apostle writes about him at the end of the Epistle: "Say to Archippus: Observe the service which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou mayest do it" (cf. Col. 4:17). Epaphras watched over all three cities, passing from one to another and confirming everyone in the faith and life according to the faith.

For this he had much zeal and illness, and always asceticized in prayer (cf. Col. 4, 12 — 13). God blessed the labors of him and his co-workers, and St. Paul testifies about the Colossians that their faith flourished, and their life was holy, and all the orders in the matter of faith and piety were beautiful (Col. 2:5). Probably, the Laodiceans and the Hierapolitans were the same.

Whether St. Paul himself was in those places or not, it is impossible to assert with certainty either one or the other. Those who say that he was not and did not personally see the Christians there, are based on the fact that St. Paul said about their faith: "I have heard your faith" (Col. 1:4), and on what he wrote: "The Imam has fought for you, and for those who are in Laodicea, and in Hierapolis, and who have not seen my face in the flesh" (cf. Col. 2:1).

But neither one nor the other gives a decisive basis for asserting what they want to affirm. Having heard the faith, St. Paul also wrote about Philemon (cf. Philemon 1:5); yet below he says to him: "I owe me to myself" (Philem. 1:19). Why should it be assumed that in both cases the Apostle wanted to say that he had heard about the state of their faith, and not that they had begun to believe?

Epaphras told him in what good condition the faith and life of the faith were among the Colossians; The Apostle also thanks God for this; and that they believed, he could see with his own eyes. Likewise, from the passage where it is said about those who did not see the face of the Apostle, it cannot be directly concluded that the Colossians and their neighbors did not see him either. This passage reads as follows: "I desire to know you, the Imam has fought for you and for those who are in Laodicea, and in Hierapolis, and who have not seen my face in the flesh" (cf. Col. 2:1).

It can also be understood in this way: I have a podvig not only for you, but also for all who have not seen my face; And so: I have a struggle both for you and for those who have not seen My face. According to the first, it will follow that the Colossians and their neighbors did not see the face of the Apostle, and according to the second, that they did. And it must be said that the latter consequence is more direct. Thus Blessed Theodoret admits this.

This passage, according to him, has the following meaning: "I have not only great concern for you, but also for those who have not seen me." "Others want to prove the non-existence of St. Paul in Colossae and neighboring cities by the fact that in the book of Acts it is said twice that the Apostle passed through Phrygia on his second and third journeys; but it is never mentioned that he stopped there to preach.

But in the Acts it is not noticed about Galatia that St. Paul, passing through it, stopped there to preach; and yet in the Epistle to the Galatians he directly says that they were taught the faith by him. And Blessed Theodoret, from what is mentioned in the Book of Acts about the passage of St. Paul through Phrygia, draws the conclusion that he also planted faith in it, and precisely in those places of which we are speaking: for, he says, Laodicea is the chief city of Phrygia, and Colossae (with Hierapolis) is in close proximity to it.

Если, направляясь в Ефес в третье свое путешествие, святой Павел посетил Церкви, насажденные в первое его путешествие, то не мог миновать именно этих городов: они на пути из Иконии в Ефес. — Ничто не мешало ему в них остановиться. Но пусть не останавливался; он мог побывать у них из Ефеса. По дороге не останавливался; но, когда в Ефесе обратились Епафрас с Филимоном и насадили потом веру в своем и соседних городах, тогда и святой Павел побывал у них: и недалеко, и сообщение удобно.

— Говорится, что веру колоссяне уведали от Епафраса (см.: Кол. 1, 7). Так и предполагается, что Епафрас насадил веру, а святой Павел мог посетить те города, когда вера уже распространилась в них. Итак, ни одно из предлагаемых оснований не дает решительного заключения о небытии святого Павла в Колоссах и соседних городах. На это может наводить только то, что в Послании никакого на это не делается указания.

Если б видел их святой Павел, то как-нибудь намекнул бы об этом в Послании. Можно видеть намек в следующих словах: ей же (Церкви) бых аз служитель по смотрению Божию, данному мне в вас исполнити слово Божие (ср.: Кол. 1, 25); но этот намек нельзя счесть определенным, потому что под: в вас — можно разуметь язычников вообще. —- И вообще тон речи всего Послания скорее идет к не видевшему колоссян, чем к видевшему их. На чем же остановиться?

Остановимся на вероятности: кажется, — не был, а может быть, и был. Блаженный Феодорит, утверждающий, что святой Павел был в тех местах и сам насадил там веру, заключает свои о том наведения так: «впрочем, пусть разумеют это, как кому угодно, потому что говорить так или иначе (о сем) не составляет различия в догматах». Так и нам можно поступить.

Впрочем, другие наши толковники полагают, что святой Павел не видел колоссян.   2) Повод к написанию Послания.   Вера верующих колоссян и соседей их была в хорошем состоянии; но ей угрожала опасность от каких-то лжеучителей. Епафрас, не надеясь или видя свое бессилие защитить от них свою паству, прибег за помощию к святому Павлу, учителю своему, когда он находился в узах, вероятно в Риме.