The author of the Epistle to the Colossians is often interpreted as an anti-Gnostic writer. Despite being a somewhat disjointed movement, several authors of the early CE era reflected the growing philosophy of Gnosticism, emerging from Judeo-Christian ideals, and thus spurred early Church fathers to write against the burgeoning heresies. Leaving aside questions of authorship which are prominent in many modern discussions of the epistle, I argue that Colossians is not a direct attack on a specific sin or heresy, but a more general letter to a people who would have been familiar with the works of the Stoics, and thus are capable of deriving new meaning from familiar terms.  Furthermore, I will argue that the current works defending Colossians as a response to Gnosticism fail to consider the reality of rabbinic schooling at the time of its most likely writing. For example, a consideration of στοιχεῖον through a historical Gnostic lens reveals a sense of the universe as an active deity, while from a Stoic or general view depicts these ‘elements’ as non-autonomous (i.e. created, not creator). However, I will argue that to some degree this language was intended to further a general defense of Christian philosophy rooted in Stoic ideology in response to divergent beliefs appearing immediately after Jesus’ death.