Colossians is a genuine letter.
In my opinion, Colossians is a genuine letter for the following reasons:
Failure of Liberal Theologians to Put Colossians Theology into Question
One tactic liberal theologians have tried to use in order to assert the pseudigraphical nature of Colossians is to say that its theology differs from the genuine epistles. We will discuss and disprove all of their theological arguments.
-One criticism is that Paul calls Jesus: (Col 1:18) the head of the body, the church. In Romans, Paul says that the saints (followers of the Gospel) are the Churchs body. I am surprised that scholars are so bothered that Paul would alter the metaphor and add Jesus to it. After all, after reading the verse before it, it makes sense in the context.
To be clear, Paul several times in the genuine letters brings up notions that are considered not Pauline in isolated instances. One such example is the pre-existence of Christ and His creative power as the Word of God. Paul extends the metaphor of Jesus wisdom of God to being the image of God, existing before creation compare Colossians 1:16, Ephesians 1:4, and Hebrews 1:2 to 1 Corinthians 8:6).
So Christs head-of-church metaphor is different than the other body part metaphors in genuine letters, it by no means contradicts them (especially 1 Corinthians 11:3). It is not a contradiction and it is not problematic. Thus, it is a poor criticism.
-Scholars also question the idea Paul writes in Col 2:13: He forgave us all our sins, because Paul elsewhere preaches freedom from the law, not forgiveness of sins. This too is a bad criticism, because scholars are being overly critical of one line. Read in the correct context, it sounds genuinely Pauline:
He forgave us all our sins, 14having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.
The underlined is in line with the freedom from sin idea. Implicit in forgiveness of sin is the idea that the sin condemns everyone to death. This, as seen in Romans, is a very Pauline concept. The use of sin as the plural sins is also found in genuine letters (1 Corinthians 15:3, 1 Cor 15:17, 2 Cor 5:19, and Galatians 1:4).
-Scholars seem to jump on anything Paul says that can be misogynist. However, Paul was a 1st century man, so this should not surprise us. Scholars believe that Colossians 3:18 reveals that the letter is not authentic. However, read the full context:
18Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
19Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.
How is this much different from 1 Corinthians 7:3-4, 34, 39? Furthermore, for first century standards, there is a gender equality implied by that quotation. Of course, scholars will claim that 1 Corinthians 7:3-4 is a later interpolation. However, the lack of textual evidence to support this makes that less than likely and merely a baseless presumption.
-Lastly, scholars take issue with Colossians 2:13:
13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins,
Scholars believe that the idea that the resurrection happens after repentance is not Pauline. They would be right. Paul frequently refers to an end of times when the resurrection only then will occur (example: 1 Thess 4:13-18.)
However, I believe scholars are misunderstanding Pauls point. The Christian repentant according to Paul live in Christ, and more importantly are not dead in sin. These ideas are repeated in Romans 8:6, 8:10-11. Romans 8:11 goes as far as to say he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit. Does this mean that the resurrection was in the present? No, not according to Paul.
Paul believes the resurrection is spiritual (1 Corinthians 15:50,) so what does he mean in Romans 8:11? The same exact thing he means in Colossiansthat repentance also improves ones Earthly life. No one disagrees that Paul states this, so what is the problem with Colossian 2:13?
Furthermore, Paul speaks of a separate resurrection that will happen in the future:
(Col 3:4)
4When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.
This criticism is also weak.
Failure of Liberal Theologians to Put Colossians Written Nature Into Question
Liberal scholars claim textual evidence reveals Colossians was not written by Paul. Their evidence is sorely lacking.
One claim is that the Greek is too long and flowy instead of short and concise. However, this could be due to an unnamed scribe or the way Timothy was writing. Furthermore, Colossians is a short letter so while other longer letters have both short and concise, and long winded parts; Colossians is a short letter. That means, the lack of space decreases the possible diversity is Pauls writing, so all you see are the long sentences (while if Paul wrote a longer letter, shorter sentences would find their way in perhaps).
Incorrect Historical Assumptions from Liberal Theologians
Liberal theologians have asserted that Colossians has evidence of post-Pauline Church practice. The Pastoral Epistles are good examples of this.
However, Colossians does not concern itself with Church hierarchy like the Pastoral epistles or even the unquestionably genuine Philippians. Instead, it is much more in line with 1 Corinthians, which describes worship as random singing and people teaching each other by the spirit. This is evident in the Colossae church:
(Col 3:16)
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.
The letter is also very concerned with Judiazers, a sect that was an enemy of Pauls in almost every genuine letter he written. Contrawise, in the Pastoral Epistles, the Judiazers are non-existent. This is discussed in more detail later.
Odd Use of Specific Details Found in Genuine Epistles
For a fake letter, the supposedly fraudulent writer sure puts a lot of effort into making pointless fake details. Colossians 2:1 shows Pauls concern for possibly losing authority in Laodicea, because he did not found their Church.
Colosians 4:7-18 is chock full of details. The letter was sent by Tychicus, only mentioned in Ephesians (which almost ad verbatim rips off parts of Colossians, which means that Colossians existed before Ephesians and was considered worthy enough to copy), Acts, and all three of the pastoral Epistles. Tychicus either got around a lot, Colossians copies Acts and mentions no other details that reveal a late date, or the most likely, Acts copied Colossians/Acts was written by someone who knew of accurate historical details reflected in Colossians.
4:9 mentions that Onesimus, the slave from Philemon, is coming with Tychius. This is a strange detail, because from reading Philemon, one is lead to believe that Onesimus went directly back to his master. Did the real writer of Colossians think it was funny to add such a detail? Did Onesimus earn freedom from his master and return to Paul? Did Paul write Philemon about the same time as Colossians, because he is imprisoned and has contact with Onesimus? This would make sense, because Onesimus could have been making a 2 stop journey, and Tychius could have as well, taking a separate letter to Laodicea (Col 4:15, which in itself is a strange detail.) To make it even more complicated, Paul states in 4:16 that there is a different letter he sent to Laodicea that he would wants those at Colosse to read. Why mention yet another letter? Why has the fraudulent author failed to make a fake Laodicea letter too?
Back to Onesimus. In Philemon, Paul writes 23Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings. 24And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers. In Colossians Paul calls Aristarchus a fellow prisoner and says the Epaphras is praying for them. Did he withhold information off Epaphras imprisonment so as not to worry the Colissians or did he not say it because it was already yesterdays news?
Paul mentions a guy names Jesus Justus in Colossians. The fact he calls him by his last name shows that Paul did not want people to get confused between Jesuses. Again, for a fake detail, this would be very original. He calls Luke a doctor. He mentions that Barnabas cousin Mark might stop by, and that the Colossians have instructions on how to treat him. Paul even adds a personal message to a guy named Archippus.
Some scholars have concluded, which I agree, that Philemons church was the Church at Colossae. Onesimus was making an one-stop trip with 2 letters. This explains Pauls identical (but different) greetings and the fact that Archippus, though not owner of the slave, is the only guy specially picked out in both letters. He was no doubt important to Paul. Thus, the letters were written during Pauls same imprisonment.
The letters lack a copycat feel of a forger, have different but non-contradictory details, and the details are typical of someone who is trying to orchestrate the exchange of several different letters between several different people while trying to avoid punishment for Onesimus. It is far too intricate to be the work of a creative author.
Paul attacks Jewish Christians (Col 2:11-17)
In 5 of 8 Paul's letter that we know to be genuine (if Colossssians is included,) Paul seems to be under constant attack from Jewish Christians. This seems to mean that the "False Teachers" are more mainstream than Paul lets on.
Romans (Disagreement with dietary law(Romans 14:14),) 1 Corinthians (General disagreement with the applicability of the law,) 2 Corinthians (General disagreement with the applicability of the law,) Galatians (Circumcision and dietary rules,) Phillipians (Circumcision).
1 Thessalonians lacks such concern. However, Paul was there only briefly (1 Thes 2:1-2 and 17) and Timothy (who founded the Church) just returned to give good news of the Churchs success (1 Thes 3:6.) This leads me to believe that this is an early letter, composed just after Timothys founding of it. Thus, word of the Jewish-Christian version of the Gospel did not reach them yet and Paul would have no reason to denounce them. Scholars generally agree that Thessalonians is the earliest of Pauls writings.
Philemon is Paul begging a rich Christian to be merciful to a returning slave. The purpose of the letter does not cover Church business generally.
Colossians thus shares much more in common historically with genuine Pauline epistles than epistles such as the Pastorals, or those from other writers.