'^2.1, 
 
 3Frnm % ICtbrarg of 
 
 2l?queatl|0b bg I|im to 
 
 \\\t ICtbrarg of 
 
 J^rtttrrtott ®l?pnl09tral ^fmittar^ 
 
^:V:Z PUBUSHEKS' 
 
 coMPUMEirra 
 
 COMMENTARY 
 
 ON 
 
 ST. PAUL'S 
 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
PRINTED BY MORRISON AND GIBB, 
 FOR 
 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 LONDON : SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED. 
 NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS. 
 TORONTO : THE PRESBYTERIAN NEWS CO. 
 
COMMENTAEy 
 
 7" 
 
 ST. PAUL'S 
 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 BY 
 
 Eev. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A. 
 
 EDINBUEGH: 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
 1892. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Ephesians we have the most mature and 
 sustained of all the statements of Christian doctrine which 
 have come down to us from the hand of the great apostle. 
 In almost all his other epistles Paul is now and again, and in 
 some of them very frequently, carried away from the particular 
 argument which he is pursuing, in order to deal with matter of 
 local or temporary interest to his immediate readers. But in 
 this epistle he goes on to utter forth uninterruptedly all that 
 has taken possession of his own mind, in reference to those 
 matters of faith and duty which must always be of utmost 
 concern to the members of Christ's body, who, while living 
 upon earth, seek to have their conversation in heaven. 
 
 A commentary on such an epistle ought to be exegetical, in 
 the fullest and most comprehensive sense of the word. It 
 has been my endeavour in the present work to deal with all 
 questions of textual and grammatical criticism where they 
 arise, in so far as these seem of importance in elucidating the 
 particular and precise meaning of the passages in which they 
 occur. But in treating such an epistle, it has seemed to me 
 the imperative duty of a commentator to endeavour to set 
 forth in detail the meaning of each phrase, and to trace care- 
 fully the progress of the argument and the development of 
 spiritual and experimental truth. In the exposition of this 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 epistle there is less room than in the case of most other 
 portions of Scripture for historical, geographical, or literary 
 illustration. It is distinctly and characteristically doctrinal, 
 with scarcely any trace of local colouring or occasional and 
 incidental reference. It is the task of the expositor to make 
 everything contribute to the elucidation of those great truths, 
 with regard to the Christian creed and conduct, which the 
 apostle here lays down for the instruction of those who no 
 loncrer need to be fed on milk nor to be taught asjain what 
 are the first principles of the oracles of God. 
 
 Owing to the peculiar character of the document, it seemed 
 desirable to give considerable attention in the introduction to 
 several points of interest in connection with the origin and 
 destination of the epistle. Some of these questions have 
 been subjects of long-continued discussion, and upon several 
 of these now, as well as in early times, there prevails a great 
 diversity of opinion. I have sought clearly to state what 
 these different views are, and to give as precisely as possible the 
 reasons which have led me to adopt the conclusions at which 
 I have arrived. The closing section of that introduction has 
 been drawn up with care. The classification of the principal 
 works on the epistle will, it is hoped, make the list more 
 practically useful, and the few remarks made upon each 
 treatise, giving the result of my own personal experience of 
 the books referred to, may prove helpful in guiding students 
 who wish to find their way to treatises in which the epistle 
 is approached from some one special point of view. 
 
 John Macpheeson. 
 
 FiNDHORN, May 1892. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Introduction : — 
 
 1. Ephesus and tlie Ej^liesian Church, . 
 
 2. Authenticity of the Epistle, 
 
 3. Destination of the Epistle, 
 
 4. Character and Type of Doctrine, 
 
 5. Date and Kelation to other Epistles, 
 
 6. Contents and Plan of the Epistle, . 
 
 7. Literature, ..... 
 Commentary, 
 
 PAOE 
 
 1-32 
 32-44 
 45-69 
 69-86 
 86-94 
 94-96 
 96-106 
 107-445 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 IXTEODUCTIOK 
 
 1. EPHESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CHURCIL 
 
 Early The storj of the original founding of the city 
 History, of Ephesus is lost in an extremely remote 
 antiquity. In the eleventh century before Christ, Androc- 
 lus, son of the Athenian Codrus, is said to have estab- 
 lished a Greek colony there/ but at a still earlier period 
 Phoenician emigrants seem to have been attracted to it 
 on account of its convenient situation, and to have con- 
 tributed largely to its material prosperity. Their presence 
 soon made itself felt, by impressing a special stamp upon the 
 habits and customs of the place, and may account for many 
 of the social and religious practices which came to be 
 regarded as characteristic of its culture. The natural situa- 
 tion of the town, within easy reach from behind of the great 
 producing districts of the time, and favoured with a con- 
 veniently central position that allowed ready egress toward 
 Greece and Italy on the one hand, and toward the ports of 
 the Eastern Mediterranean on the other, insured to it com- 
 mercial prosperity, and steady growth in population and in 
 political importance. The enterprising Phoenician traders 
 would find it less difficult to effect a settlement there, inas- 
 much as the deities whom they worshipped were the same as, 
 or at least very similar to, those of the earlier inhabitants of 
 the land, and the religious modes of thought prevalent among 
 botli peoples in general harmonised. The priesthood, 
 
 ^ Pausanias, Description of Greece, vii. 2. 
 A 
 
2 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 numerically large, early won and long maintained a position 
 of unconnnon influence, having from the earliest times 
 secured the sympathy and confidence of both divisions of the 
 population. This powerful party largely controlled the 
 politics of the city, and determined its foreign relations almost 
 invariably in an anti - Hellenic direction. The general 
 tendency favoured by tlie Ephesians in philosophy, in religion, 
 and in the customs of public and private life, was distinctly 
 oriental. Even in historic times, when Ephesus had become 
 an Ionian city, with a dominant population essentially Greek 
 in descent and traditions, that permanent sacerdotal class 
 succeeded in conserving the most characteristic institutions of 
 the primitive race. 
 
 The oriental tincture in the Ephesian culture 
 appears significantly in the sensuousness of its 
 philosophy. The Ionic philosophers, in strict accordance 
 with oriental habits of thought, made much of external sense 
 impressions, brooded over the secrets of outward nature, and 
 gave themselves to tlie study of natural phenomena. 
 Heraclitus of Ephesus not only assumed as the primitive 
 substance that pure ethereal fire reverenced in the Parsee 
 religion, but, more decidedly perhaps than any of his 
 predecessors, exhibited the tendency lingering among his 
 countrymen, down to his own time, to an un-Hellenic and 
 truly oriental sensuous mysticism. While himself an Ionian 
 Greek, he seems to have belonged to the powerful priestly 
 caste, and it is interesting to notice how, from the midst of 
 the class which persistently favoured the Persian supremacy, 
 a theory of speculative philosophy proceeded, tinged with 
 Persian modes of thought. 
 
 Diana of the '^^^^ Ephesian philosophy was but a refining 
 Ephesians. reflection upon the popular religion. If traces 
 of oriental influence are apparent in the speculations of 
 the Ionic natural philosophers, the presence of important 
 elements, transferred bodily from grosser religious systems 
 of the East, is still more conspicuous in the religious 
 institutions of Ei)hesus. The deity most reverenced and 
 invariably conspicuous in the worship of the ancient Phoenician 
 traders, whether of Carthage or Tyre, was Astarte, under one 
 
EPIIESUS AND THE EPIIESIAN CHURCH. 3 
 
 aspect at least the goddess of fruitfulness, and essentially 
 similar in her attributes to the nature goddess Gybele, so 
 prominent in the worship of the earlier inhabitants. It would 
 seem that the Ionian colonists, when they first took posses- 
 sion of Epliesiis, brought witli them the Greek Artemis, and 
 dedicated to her worship a temple in the upper part of the 
 city, which was distinctively their own. Meanwhile, however, 
 clustering around the harbour, the original population of 
 mixed nationalities continued to hold their ground, and 
 celebrated their religious rites in their ov\n sanctuary, 
 dedicated to that goddess of fruitfulness in nature which 
 answered at once to the Semitic Astarte and the native 
 Lydian Cybele. Tradition connects the introduction of this 
 worship into Ephesus with an expedition of Amazons from 
 Cappadocia, and women of Amazonian descent are said to 
 liave been found in later times among the priestesses of the 
 Ephesian goddess. This would associate the religion of the 
 old Epliesians directly with that of Assyria and Phccnicia, 
 and would warrant us in assigning it a place, which its 
 nmin cliaracteristics also seem to justify, among the religions 
 of the heathen Semites. When we thus comprehend the 
 origin and historical development of the Ephesian religion, we 
 shall understand how readily those wlio from time to time, 
 in the pursuit of commerce, settled in this city, would be 
 drawn towards those amongst wliom they came, by affinities 
 of religion if not of race. — At first sight, indeed, it would seem 
 that there was little in common between the pure Greek 
 goddess Artemis, known subsequently under the Eoman 
 name of Diana, and the sensuous oriental goddess of the 
 Ephesians. Yet tiiese two liad at least tliis in common, that 
 they had been originally conceived of as representatives of 
 tlie moon goddess; and many of the diversities in their 
 character and worship are traceable to the prominence given 
 in the one case to one, and in the other case to another of 
 the influences attributed to the moon in the realm of nature. 
 Tlie special temperament of the lonians, too, would predispose 
 them to amalgamate gradually the sensuous rites of the old 
 Ephesians with the more pure and simple cultus which they 
 liad carried with them irom Greece. Light-hearted and 
 
4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 frivolous, as compared with the other Greek tribes,^ they 
 were easily fascinated with the poetic colouring and mystic 
 symbolism of the religion of those among whom they had 
 come to dwell, and were thus the more inclined to see resem- 
 blances between, or even to persuade themselves of the essen- 
 tial identity of, the deities to whom respectively they offered 
 supreme reverence. As years rolled on, the purer remini- 
 scences of the Greek Artemis passed away, and the one 
 prominent object of worship, in the lower and upper city 
 alike, was that Diana of the Epliesians, who bore the name 
 but reflected scarcely any of the attributes of the sister of 
 Apollo. This adoption of the goddess universally honoured 
 throughout the great oriental empires as the patron deity of 
 the city, may also have commended itself to the Ephesians on 
 the grounds of political expediency.- When Croesus of Lydia 
 was preparing to lay siege to Ephesus, the declaration that 
 tlie city was sacred to Diana, the Asiatic nature goddess, was 
 sufhcient to secure from that potentate an immediate con- 
 firmation of all her ancient liberties. Throughout the 
 ])eriods of Lydian and Persian supremacy, Ephesus, as the 
 city of Diana, continued to enjoy exceptional advantages. 
 Under Eoman rule special favour was shown to Ephesus, and, 
 as capital of proconsular Asia, it figures prominently in the 
 history of those later times. Though showing a despicable 
 
 1 Ebrard, in liLs Christian Jpo!oge(ic.<i (3 vols., Ediii. 1886-1887, vol. ii. p. 
 251), marks very emphatically the characteristic distinction in disposition and 
 consequent divergence in history between the Ionic and the Doric Greek. 
 Speaking of the Ionian colonists of B.C. 1000, he says : " In Asia Minor the 
 <lreeks fell in with the heathen Semitic worship of the goddess of birth 
 ( I.ydian, Cybele; Phrygian, Great Mother; Tenciiaii, Idsean Mother; Phoenician, 
 ('ythera or Astarte) ; and they adopted her, changing her, however, with their 
 innate national sense of beauty and decorum, from an obscene goddess of 
 grossness into tlie youthful goddess of love and gracefulness, Aphrodite." This 
 statement referring to so early a period is of course purely hypothetical ; but 
 when we descend to historic time-!, we find that such Hellenic refinements, if 
 ever attempted, had produced no appreciable permanent effect upon the gross 
 orientalism of the worshij) offered to Diana of the E2)hesians. 
 
 ■■'Stark, in his article "Diana" (Schenkel, Blbelkxlcon, i. 606), regards the 
 statement made by the Ej)hesians to Crresus, as to their city having been 
 (•onsecrated to Artemis, as a scheme deliberately contrived, by the advice of 
 their tyrant, to secure their safety in the emergency. He also represents the 
 combination of tlie Greek Artemis and the oriental nature goddess as the 
 result of the adoiition of this proposal. Ephesus was now distinctively a 
 
EPIIESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CHURCH. T) 
 
 servility in their eagerness to accommodate tliemselves to the 
 favoured and fashionable religions of the age, tlie Ephesians 
 continued to glory in their loyal attachment to their great 
 Diana. 
 
 Jewish From the earliest times Jewish colonies had 
 
 Colonies, settled in Asia Minor. This central district, 
 through which all the main highways passed on which 
 was carried the traffic of the world in its transit from 
 east and west, presented peculiar attractions to a people in 
 whom the instincts of trade were already abnormally de- 
 veloped. Special facilities thus afforded by the natural 
 situation of the province were eageily taken advantage of 
 by the crowds of Jewish adventurers, who thronged all the 
 leading cities, and pushed themselves forward in all the 
 professions, trades, and industries that were open to them. 
 The Jews of Asia soon became a W'ealthy community, and 
 were able to purchase for themselves privileges which made it 
 possible for them more rapidly to amass wealth and more 
 securely to hold what they had acquired. In Ephesus, the 
 capital of the province, they found a peculiarly inviting 
 sphere. Those Jews residing there had enjoyed for well nigh 
 three centuries before the time of Paul the full rights of 
 citizens, and were even entitled to call themselves by the 
 name of EjJiesians. And notwithstanding efforts made by 
 the local autliorities, naturally jealous of such extraordinary 
 favour shown to settlers among them, whose presence did not 
 always seem desirable, their case was favourably represented at 
 court by those who, from personal inclination or because of 
 liberal contributions to meet financial embarrassments, were 
 prepared to champion the cause of the Hebrew. By means 
 
 sacred city, and all the inhabitants, realising the condition of their immunity 
 from harassment from without, became united in their devotion to the one 
 distinctively national deity. We should rather say that the jjroeess of 
 amalgamation tending to unification, which had been going on for five hundred 
 years, was by this historical occurrence completed and brought to perfection. 
 Henceforth Ephesus became a widely known and well accredited sacred city, to 
 which pilgrims and devotees from all parts of the world were attracted. 
 Miletus was then the great trade emporium of the colony, and when, amid tlic 
 convulsions of a subsequent age, Miletus fell, its merchants transferred 
 their residence to Ephesus, which soon rose to be the first commercial city of 
 Asia. 
 
G INTRODUCTIOX. 
 
 of large gifts bestowed upon the lioinaii governor, the Jews 
 in Ephesus secured exemption from military service, were 
 excused from attendance as witnesses in court on the Sabbatli, 
 were pei-mitted to erect courts with jurisdiction over members 
 of their own community, and were left in the undisturbed 
 observance of their own religious worshiix Tiiis favour they 
 enjoyed under all the emperors down to Hadrian, for even 
 when temporary severities were exercised upon the Jews of 
 Ivome, no abatement of privilege was experienced by their 
 more fortunate brethren in Ephesus. ]>ut all this long- 
 continued prosperity only intensified the hatred of the 
 surrounding Clreek population, from whom they kept apart, 
 intermingling neither in their joys nor in their sorrows, niain- 
 taiuiug an attitude of indifference and estrangement. The 
 return of the great festivals, which attracted crowds of devout 
 Jews to the Holy City, kept alive the sense of their separate- 
 ness from all other peoples on the earth. Even in the Greek 
 city, the Jewish synagogue constituted the national and religious 
 centre of the Jewish commercial life, and there the events 
 occurring in Palestine, in so far as they might atTect the interests 
 of the race, would be eagerly and ])assionately discussed. 
 Kirst Clnis- IHiriug the early years of the Christian era, 
 tiiiiiCoiivoits. therefore, there were Jews in Ephesus, constituting 
 a large and intluential section of the community, who must 
 have kept themselves regularly informed about the stirring 
 events that had occurred in Jerusalem. It is quite evident 
 that many of them nnist have been aware of the elainis 
 advanced on behalf of " the Trophet of Nazareth," and that 
 most of them would be eager to hear what the missionaries of 
 this new doctrine bad to tell. Even before any Christian 
 evangelist visited Ephesus, Jews from that city had listened 
 in Jerusalem to the preaching of the apostles. Erom Cappa- 
 docia, Pontus, Pb.rygia, Paniphylia, and from the province 
 of Asia itself, there were w'orshippers present in Jerusalem at 
 the great Pentecost, wlien, by the preaching of Peter, three 
 thousand converts were won to the Christian faith. It is 
 in the highest degree probable that Ephesus, the capital of 
 Asia, was largely represented on that occasion, and that the 
 Ephesian .lewish converts of the dav of Pentecost formed the 
 
EniESUS AND THE EPIIESIA.X CHURCH. 7 
 
 nucleus of the Chiistiau Oliurch in that city. It need luit 
 surprise us that, in so large a city as Ephesus, there shouUl 
 have existed alongside of those who had received the gospel 
 from the apostles in Jerusalem, others who, though detached 
 from the unbelieving Jewish community, had no further 
 knowledge of Christian truth than had been shadowed forth 
 by the Baptist's teaching (Acts xix. 1-7). Disciples of John 
 had existed alongside of the disciples of Christ, assuming 
 quite a distinctive position (Matt. ix. 14); and in later years, 
 as Hemerobaptists, Maudeans, and Sabeans, they continued to 
 maintain an anti- Jewish and anti-Christian position, until at 
 last, through the persistence of their opposition to those 
 religious systems based upon a direct divine revelation, 
 they sank back into the dark and degraded superstitions 
 of paganism. Those Hellenist Jews of Ephesus had not 
 apparently taken up any positively anti-Christian attitude. 
 Interpreting more correctly the spirit of their IMaster, they 
 seem rather to have accepted Jesus of Nazareth as the 
 Messiah ; but they do not appear to have learnt more of Him 
 than John had himself taught them. Tt is therefore precisely 
 what we might have expecteJ, that such men would hasten to 
 the first accredited teacher of the new faith, that their 
 instruction might be resumed at that point at which so many 
 years before it had been interrupted. They could not, indeed, 
 have remained ignorant of the facts of Jesus' death and 
 resurrection, but even the converts of the day of Pentecost had 
 evidently failed in making them understand the significance of 
 the outpouring of the Spirit as the inauguration of a new 
 dispensation. 
 
 raul liist at ^^ ^^''^^ ^^ot till near the close of his second 
 Kphesus. ndssionary journey, in A.D. 54, that Paul visited 
 Ephesus (Acts xviii. 19), and even then, beyond addressing a 
 meeting in the Jewish synagogue and leaving behind liim 
 Aquila and Priscilla to confirm and instruct inquirers, there 
 was nothing done to secure this important stronghold for the 
 Christian cause. About a year and a half jirobably passed 
 before Paul was able again to visit Ephesus, but meanwhile 
 the disciples of John, the more advanced Christian converts of 
 the great Pentecost, and the fully instructed lioman Jewish 
 
8 IXTKODUCTIOX. 
 
 believers, Aquila and Priscilla, continued, in their several 
 spheres and according to their proportion of faith, to advance 
 the cause of Christ in the chief city of Asia. Tliat Paul had 
 heen quick to perceive the importance of Ephesus, as affording 
 a vantage ground for Christian activity, cannot be doubted. 
 Lonf' So soon, therefore, as he had, in the beginning 
 
 Residence. Qf jjjg third journey, performed the indispensably 
 necessary task of strengthening the churches already 
 established in Galatia and Phrygia, he hastened straight 
 from tlie last-named province by the great north-eastern 
 high road through Sardis to Ephesus.^ We may well 
 suppose that Paul passed rapidly through the " upper " 
 or properly "inland" districts of Phrygia, inasmuch as the 
 inhabitants spoke a peculiar language of their own, and would 
 therefore find the apostle's Greek unintelligible. Even in 
 tiie parts of Phrygia nearest to the centres of civilisation, 
 Greek did not come into use until well nigh a century after 
 the apostle's journey through these parts. In Phrygia, 
 therefore, just as in Lycaonia, ignorance of the language 
 would make prolonged and successful w^ork on the part of 
 Paul impossible ; and so, after visiting a few of the principal 
 cities where the Jewish colonies might be considerable, the 
 apostle pushed forward to the coast, where he could find 
 Jews and Greeks able to understand his speech, and in some 
 measure prepared for the story and the doctrines which he 
 had to teach and to tell. In Ephesus itself he would be 
 immediately surrounded by those whom his earlier preaching 
 had impressed, and by the fruits of the ministry there of 
 Priscilla and Aquila. The twelve disciples of John having 
 received Christian instruction from Paul, were endowed with 
 gifts of tongues and prophecy, and were thus fitted in an 
 eminent degree to be coadjutors of the apostle in his great 
 work of evangelisation in this heathen city. In accordance 
 with his invariable custom, Paul began to address the Jews in 
 the synagogue, where he was surrounded by all the converts 
 already won to the Christian faith. But when the synagogue 
 became the arena of unfriendly discussion, which evinced a 
 
 ^ See this route described in detail in Prof. Ramsay's Historical Geo'jraphy 
 of Ada Minor, p. 30, 1890. 
 
EPIIESUS AND THE EPIIESIAN CHUECII. 9 
 
 determination on tlie part of tlie Jews to resist tlie power of 
 the truth, the apostle resolved to appeal to a wider audience, 
 which he invited to meet him in a public lecture hall, the 
 school of the rhetorician Tyrannus. 
 
 Advantages The natural situation of the city of Ephesus 
 of Site, made it at once a great commercial centre, where 
 East and West met together, and a principal seat of 
 literary and scientific culture, where Greek philosophy 
 and oriental mysticism, under all their varying phases, 
 found eager and enthusiastic representatives. Every en- 
 couragement was given to eloquent defenders and expounders 
 of the most curious views, by a population whose natural 
 temperament made them welcome, like the Athenians, the 
 announcement of any new thing ; while the geographical 
 position of their city greatly favoured the gratification of such 
 eclectic tastes. The variety of scliools represented, as well as 
 the reputation of individual philosophers and rhetoricians, 
 attracted large numbers of young men from all parts of the 
 world, and the versatility and general culture of the Ephesian 
 schools made Ephesus a favourite resort of tlie cultured youth 
 of Eome. When Paul stepped upon the platform of a lecture 
 room where teachers of philosophy and rhetoric had been 
 wont to address their audiences, he thereby proclaimed that 
 he had some new thing to tell, and courted the attention of 
 those who were seeking after intellectual and spiritual guid- 
 ance. So long as he had confined himself to the obscurity of 
 a Jewish synagogue, the opposition which he met with was 
 only that of dogged and persistent refusal to accept his 
 message ; but now, from pagan devotees, whose whole tend- 
 ency of thought was traversed by his teaching, the apostle is 
 to encounter sharp and direct hostility. For two years, at least, 
 Paul continued to discuss with men of rich philosophic and 
 scientific culture, as also with others sunk in the most vulgar 
 superstition, showing the higher wisdom and the profounder 
 mysteries of the Christian faith. 
 
 Paul and the The sacred historian here puts on record an 
 
 Sorcerers, interesting story of a collision betw^een Paul and 
 
 certain sorcerers, who sought to emulate his power in working 
 
 miracles. Besides the more ordinary forms of disease, cases 
 
1 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of demoniacal possession had been successfully dealt with by 
 the apostle, and those who had given themselves out as 
 exorcists were thus challenged either to do the same publicly 
 as Paul had done, or own themselves and their arts impostures. 
 Degenerate Jews were found in all the principal cities of the 
 empire, in the East and in the West, who had apostatised 
 from the religion of their fathers, and had adopted a stran^^e 
 medley of pagan mythology and theurgical practices, which, 
 fluid and indeterminate as it was, came to be known under 
 the general name of Neo-Pythagoreanism. The lineal de- 
 scendants of this school were the alchemists of the Middle 
 Ages. In Ephesus such men would find a field peculiarly 
 well fitted for the practice of their arts. And just in the 
 first century of the Christian era, when men were wearied of 
 unsuccessful searchings after God, and discouraged by the sad 
 discrepancy everywhere between the ancient ideals of virtue 
 and the gross impurity prevailing around, when the old faiths 
 were crumbling and many were becoming doubtful whether 
 there was any such thing as truth at all, the most fantastic 
 superstitions and the most curious arts of astrology, sorcery, 
 and magic came to be possessed of a wondrous fascination 
 over thoughtful and speculative minds. Most of the thinkers 
 of that age, as we look back upon them, seem to us, like their 
 medieval representatives, half charlatan, half sage. To this 
 Appollonius oi'der belonged Appollonius of Tyana,^ in the south 
 ofTyana. Qf Cappadocia, who had his liome in Ephesus during 
 tlie later part of the first century. He had been educated in 
 Cilicia, and had learned not only philosophy in the schools, but 
 theurgical arts from the priests in the temple of iEsculapius. 
 Attached to the fashionable ISTeo-Pythagorean sect, and with 
 much to tell of the wonders he had seen and done in distant 
 India, he received in Grreece and Asia a flattering welcome as 
 
 ^ Phi/ostrati de vlfa ApoUonii Ti/anei libri octo. — Eusebius contra HierocJem 
 (/ui Tyaneinn ChriMo conferre conatus fnerit. Venice, by Aldus, 1501. — Baur, 
 Appollonins von Tijana und Christns, Tiib. 1832 ; and an effective answer by 
 Ed. Miiller, Waj' Ap. v, Tyana tin Weiser oder ein Betrilger oder ein Schimrmer 
 mid Famitik ? 1861. The question of the credibility of Philostratus is disctissed 
 by I wan MUlltr in his Comm. <pia de Philostrat. in comp. mem. Ap. T.Jidc 
 qiuvritur, 1858. Blount, the English deist, and A^'oltaire sought to exalt 
 Apiiollonius above Clirist. See Newman, Historical Esaay-'^, vol. i. No. 2. 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CllUItCII. 11 
 
 a sage and miracle-worker, and a reformer of religion and 
 morals, in all of which he seemed to manifest the great 
 power of God. The life of Appollonius, written by Philo- 
 stratus in the beginning of the third centnry, is a romance 
 constructed fur a purpose, and written by order of an empress, 
 who hoped by means of it to aid in the revival of ancient 
 paganism, and to glorify the exploits of the wonder-working 
 sages of heathenism. A century later, in a.d. 305, Hierocles, 
 governor of Bithynia, in railing treatises against tliC Christians, 
 deliberately compared the miracles and life of Appollonius 
 with those of Christ, and modern unbelievers of a school now 
 antiquated boldly endeavoured to maintain the parallel. The 
 real Appollonius was but one of many adventurers of that 
 age, with more genius, and probably with nobler impulses, 
 than most of those around him. For one of such a sort, we 
 may easily suppose there were multitudes of self-seeking, 
 greedy impostors, who consciously played upon the super- 
 stition and general credulity of the people. These swindling 
 mountebanks trafficked in magical formulre, to the repetition or 
 simple possession of which was attributed the most wonderful 
 efficacy in securing good fortune and warding off disaster and 
 disease. Such letters, words, or combinations of words, 
 written out on scraps of parchment, were sold to the poor 
 Mno-ic dupes who placed faith in them, at prices varying 
 Fomiulffi. according to the reputation of their author and 
 retailer. The most famous of all these charms was a formula 
 consistimi of words written on the "irdle, feet, and forehead 
 of the goddess. These words are the 'Ecfiiaia ypdfxfiara, 
 Epliesice litercc, which were carried about in little leathern 
 bags as protection against all injuries from gods and men. 
 Clement of Alexandria, by subjecting them to considerable 
 distortion, sought to give to each of them a meaning, 
 on the understanding that they were formed originally 
 out of Greek words ; but it has now been proved that 
 they have much closer resemblance to Semitic roots, and that 
 they most probably owe their origin to the early oriental 
 tincture in the composite religion of the Ephesians.^ In the 
 
 ' Many of these magical formulae were supposed to have been employed by 
 Solomon, and to have been recorded by him. The traditions of Solomon's 
 
1 2 IXTRODUCTIOX. 
 
 pursuit of this base and unholy traffic, each of the motley 
 crew of jugylers, necromancers, soothsayers, and exorcists 
 would use his own device in muttering some long, unin- 
 telligible rigmarole, or in uttering, amid awe-inspiring spells, 
 some single magic word or potent name. That the godless 
 and iinprincipled sons of Sceva used the names of Jesus 
 and Paul in their incantations, was itself a striking tribute to 
 the success of the apostle, and the reputation which he had 
 already won in the city. The success which attended the 
 efforts of these sorcerers was of the sort that came to the 
 magicians of Egypt. Over the evil spirits which came 
 forth at their word they had no further control, and what 
 seemed at first a victory was soon turned into an ignominious 
 defeat. The names of Jesus and Paul were acknowledged, 
 but the pretensions of the magicians were utterly discredited. 
 The case reported is in all probability only one of several of 
 a similar kind which occurred about this time in Ephesus, so 
 as to make a powerful impression upon the hitherto bewitched 
 populace. Many of those who had themselves indulged in 
 the fascinating study of the secrets of nature and of the 
 future, convinced of the folly of their conduct and of the 
 power of Jesus' name, brought forth the books containing 
 what had been regarded as the most potent spells, and long 
 considered by the superstitious as of priceless value, and 
 showed in the most unmistakeable manner, as they committed 
 them to the flames, that they had indeed forsaken all for Christ. 
 Fighting During the long peiiod of the apostle's residence 
 with Beasts. [^ Ephesus, we may be sure he passed through the 
 most varied experiences. After his early struggles with the 
 Jews, which resulted in his quitting the synagogue, we do not 
 hear of any particular hostile demonstration on the part of 
 the Jews or of the heathen, until the grand outburst of 
 popular fury by which Paul was finally driven out of the 
 city. There are just two sentences in Paul's own writings 
 which make it plain that during that time his hardships and 
 
 magical performances are detailed by Joseplnis, Antiquities, viii. 2. 5. With 
 the literature referred to in Acts xix. 19 may be compared the magical forraulre 
 deciphered by Dr. Wessely in the Exj>osUor, 3rd Scries, vol. iv. jip. 194-204, 
 1886. 
 
EniESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CIIUKCII. 13 
 
 dangers were of no ordinary kind. In one passage, written 
 shortly before he quitted Epliesus (1 Cor. xv. 32), he says, " I 
 have fought with beasts at Ephesus ; " and in writing again 
 to the same church from Macedonia immediately after his 
 departure from Asia (2 Cor. i. 8), he speaks of trouble that 
 had come upon him in Asia, which had proved so heavy and 
 serious that his very life had been despaired of. This latter 
 passage might indeed rei'er to treatment at the hands of men 
 similar to that which he had received at Lystra at the close 
 of his first journe}^ when he was stoned and left for dead 
 (Acts xiv. 19). But the question has been much discussed, 
 whether the reference to the fighting with wild beasts at 
 Ephesus must not be taken literally as an allusion to a 
 terrible ordeal in the amphitheatre through which the apostle 
 had passed, the story of which was still fresh in the memory 
 of his readers.^ The literal interpretation seems forced upon 
 us. During some great popular tumult, the Eoman magis- 
 trate, anxious to soothe the excited populace, might easily 
 overlook, or fail to hear, the apostle's claim to Eoman 
 citizenship, and though escape from the arena, where even 
 those left alive by the beasts were despatched by the sword 
 of the executioner, was almost an unheard-of circumstance, 
 the very fact of the solemn mention of it in the place where 
 it is introduced, implies that something very extraordinary 
 happened. Then again, in so solemn a passage, the apostle 
 would never have used a phrase which, if taken in the 
 sense naturally suggested by the words, would make him 
 char<2eable with rhetorical exaggeration. Eiuhtin" with wild 
 beasts was an ordeal with which, in all its literal barbarity, 
 the people of that age were only too familiar ; and, had the 
 apostle's use of the phrase been figurative, he would have 
 
 ^ The most thorough discussion of this question is given h}' Krenkel, Be'itrikje 
 ziir Aufhdlunci der Gesch. v. der Br. d. Ap. Pcndus, pp. 126-152, 1890. His 
 conclusion is in favour of the ligurative interpretation as accepted by most 
 commentators. The literal interpretation is insisted upon and recommended by 
 most convincing arguments by Holsten, Das Evangelium des Paulits, I. i. 
 p. 424, 1880, and by Weizsacker, Das apostoHsche Zeitalter der C'hriailichen 
 Kirclie, p. 837, 1886. See also Godet, Comm. on 1 Cor., vol. ii. p. 393, and 
 Wordsworth in Comm. The latter points out that the literal view suits best in 
 a passage dealing with the resurrection of the body. 
 
14 IN'TKODUCTIOX. 
 
 taken care to make that evident. Having by some signal 
 providence been delivered from a death that seemed inevit- 
 able, we may well suppose that the work to which he 
 returned received a new impulse from the notoriety which such 
 fearful trials and so wonderful a deliverance had brought 
 him. 
 
 Churches During this period apparently the various 
 founded, churches of Asia were established, in some cases 
 possibly by means of the itinerant labours of the apostle 
 himself; in others, and these undoubtedly the more numerous, 
 by means of those who, from various parts of Asia, visited 
 the chief city of the province, and returned to their own 
 home to tell how great things the Lord had done unto them. 
 The seven churches of the Eevelation, and also those of 
 (Jolosse and Hierapnlis, most probably owe their origin to 
 this period of the apostle's ministry. Undoubtedly the 
 apostle's attention was mainly given to the proclamation of 
 the gospel within the limits of Ephesus itself. 
 
 Worship The interests of all classes of the Ephesian 
 of Diana, community, in some way or other, clustered round 
 the temple of Diana and the worship of the great goddess. 
 Philosophy, even when directed against the grosser supersti- 
 tions of pagan mythology, had not penetrated the minds of 
 the masses. Jewish monotheism, though securing occasional 
 proselytes, had not perceptibly affected the prestige of Diana, 
 or diminished to any appreciable extent the number of her 
 votaries. But now it seemed as if, indeed, the honour of 
 the goddess was in danger. So soon, then, as the success of 
 the apostle became evident, and it was seen that his aim was 
 nothing less than the utter overthrow of Diana, the powerful 
 sacerdotal caste was roused ; and though, probably fearing lest 
 a combat with so powerful a dialectician as the lecturer in 
 the hall of Tyrannus might result in discrediting them before 
 the people, they abstained from publicly expressing their 
 hostility, they wrought no doubt upon the cupidity of the 
 craftsmen, and raised through them the cry which resulted 
 in such a tumult as they had been most anxious to excite. 
 Thousands of designers and artificers were directly interested 
 in maintaining the high reputation of Diana of the Ephesians. 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CHURCH. 1 5 
 
 The temple of the goddess, for size and beauty, was regarded 
 
 as oue of the wonders of the world. Tradition reports that 
 
 in succession seven temples of Diana had occupied that one 
 
 site. Of these, five belong to prehistoric times, and may or 
 
 may not have had a material existence. Two are well known 
 
 to us from full and detailed descriptions preserved in the 
 
 pages of classical writers. The edifice whicli occupied the 
 
 site in the days of the apostle had taken the place of an 
 
 earlier structure burnt down on the night on wliich Alexander 
 
 the Great was born (b.c. 356), by a hare-brained Ephesian, 
 
 carried away by the mad resolve to secure notoriety to himself 
 
 at any cost. The loss of such a priceless treasure roused in 
 
 no ordinary degree the enthusiasm of the citizens of Ephesus. 
 
 The resolve at once was made to build immediately another 
 
 temple, vaster in dimensions, and richer in material, than that 
 
 wliich now lay in ruins. So determined were they that the 
 
 work should be their own, tliat the offer made by Alexander 
 
 to complete the work at his own expense, as his gift to the 
 
 far-famed Diana, was refused. The women freely contributed 
 
 their precious ornaments, costly marble pillars were presented 
 
 as free-will offerings by princes of Asia and wealthy citizens, 
 
 whose names may to this day be read on the bases of the 
 
 broken columns, and the whole work was entrusted to the most 
 
 distinguished architect of the time.^ The magnificent build- 
 
 ing thus raised was gradually stored with many precious 
 
 gifts, and by and by became a perfect treasure-house of 
 
 costly jewels and noble works of art. An image of the 
 
 goddess in gold and ivory, wrought with consummate skill, 
 
 adorned the innermost sanctuary. But in that same sacred 
 
 place there lay another image of the goddess, whicl), in the 
 
 eyes of the worshippers of Diana, was of infinitely greater 
 
 value than the beautiful temple and all its riches. To 
 
 outward appearance this figure was an unshapely block of 
 
 wood, rudely representing a female figure with many swollen 
 
 breasts, but with scarcely any other recognisable human 
 
 feature. Preserved in its original freshness by regular 
 
 ^ Wood, Discoveries at Epfiesu.i, Lond. 1877 ; Falkiier, Ephesus and the 
 Temple of Diana, Lond. 1882; Zimmernianii, Ephesos im ersten Christlichen 
 Jahrhundert, 1874; Liglitfoot in Contemporary Review for May 1878, reprinted 
 in Essays on Stiptrnatural ReJicjion, Lund. 1889, and espetially pp. 297-302. 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 anointing with the sacred oil, it was said to have been saved 
 by the priests from the wreck of tlie seven successive 
 temples, and to be itself that very image which fell dowu 
 from Jupiter. This famous temple with its sacred deposit 
 was visited by devotees from all parts, who carried with them 
 on their return home mementoes of their pilgrim.age, in the 
 shape of miniature models in silver of the far-famed 
 sanctuary. Tradespeople, too, trafficking in other articles of 
 commerce, profited greatly by tlie concourse of people on 
 festival occasions. Demetrius the silversmith, at the instiga- 
 tion probably of the priests, raised tlie cry, " Our craft is in 
 danger, and dishonour is threatened to our goddess." The 
 readiness with which the cry was responded to, is a tribute 
 to the success of Paul's labours. And that the apostle's 
 presence had told not only on the humbler classes, the slave 
 element in the population, as we so often hear it confidently 
 asserted, appears from the fact that some in the highest 
 official ranks showed themselves an.xious to preserve the bold 
 preacher from bodily harm (Acts xix. 31). 
 
 It is interesting to notice that Paul had won the 
 favourable consideration of " certain of the chief 
 of Asia." These Asiarchs were the chief priests of the 
 province, who held office, it would seem, for a term of four 
 years, and were thereafter allowed to retain the name, and 
 were ordinarily ranked in a distinct class of honour by 
 themselves. The chief function of the Asiarch consisted in 
 the presidency of the quinquennial festival, the cost of which 
 he was required mainly to bear. His priesthood had 
 reference only to the worsliip of the emperor with which 
 those games were associated. He was properly master of 
 ceremonies, and thus had not necessarily anything in common 
 with tlie sacerdotal caste, whose interest was bound up with the 
 maintenance of the temple and the splendid worship of Diana.^ 
 The interests of the temple and worship of Diana were 
 guarded by a special board consisting of twelve members, two 
 being chosen from each of the six tribes of citizens, elected to 
 hold this office for the space of one year. These keepers of 
 
 ' Lightfcot, /'j)iatiu.s and Pohjcarp, 2nd eJ., vol. iii. pp. 407-415, Loud. 
 1889. 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPIIESIAN CHURCH. , 17 
 
 tlie temple had charge of tlie fabric and of all the treasures 
 that had been gathered together there. It has been con- 
 jectured by Canon Hicks, the greatest living authority on 
 Ephesian inscriptions, that Demetrius the silversmith was 
 president of this board. One Demetrius is named in an 
 inscription as first representative on this temple board of the 
 chief or Ephesine tribe.^ If this be our Demetrius, as is 
 highly probable, he would be entitled, and even called upon, 
 from his official position, to sound the alarm when it appeared 
 that the worship of the goddess was threatened with loss or 
 overthrow ; while, as the leading silversmith, who gave employ- 
 ment to many tradesmen in preparing the miniature copies in 
 silver of the sanctuary of Diana and the statue of the goddess 
 within, which pilgrims carried away with them, he could 
 rouse his own workmen and others belonging to allied guilds 
 by the cry, " Our craft is in danger." The temple board 
 would espouse the cause of the priests, and both combined 
 would easily carry the mob with them; but the Asiarch and 
 those belonging to his order would maintain an attitude of 
 cool indifference. Canon Hicks has clearly shown that during 
 the period with which we deal, the growing popularity of the 
 Cffisar worship, which was directly hostile to the Diana 
 worship, was distinctly favourable to the apostle in Ephesus, 
 
 ^ Canon Hicks has written an extremely interesting and instnictive paper 
 on "Demetrius the Silversmith: an Ephesian Study," in the Expositor, 4th 
 Series, vol. i. pp. 401-422, 1890. There is one conjecture which I venture to 
 say will not generally commend itself. Luke describes Demetrius as one " who 
 made silver shrines for Diana." Hicks supposes that Luke, who was not 
 ])resent with Paul at the time, and was therefore obliged to use the statements 
 of some other person, had misapprehended his document, which characterised 
 Demetrius as no-roio; ty,; 'Aprifulot, member of the board charged with keeping 
 the temple of Diana, and rendered the term by the paraphrase 'roiut laoli 
 apyvpou; ' Apr'if/,i^ii;, maker of silver shrines for Diana. The very able aiid 
 instructive article of Professor Pamsay in the Expositor for July 1890, pp. 1-22, 
 entitled "St. Paul at Ephesus," gives several convincing arguments in favour of 
 the accuracy of the account given in Acts, and suggests that the silver shrines 
 may have been like the terra-cotta shrines of which specimens from Asia Minor 
 are extant, but that they have disappeared simply because of their value. In his 
 icply in "Ephesus: a Postscript," in Expositor for August 1890, pp. 144-149, 
 Canon Hicks explains that he accepts the hi.storical accuracy of the account by 
 Luke, and simply means to emphasise the zealous opposition shown by the 
 temple votaries, in combination with tlie craftsmen whose self-interest had 
 loused them to make the first onslaught. 
 
 B 
 
1 8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and would secure for him the interference of the civil 
 authorities, to prevent any open violence being committed 
 against him on account of neglect or repudiation of the 
 Ephesian goddess. Ephesus, w^hich had before on coins and 
 inscriptions called herself " worshipper," keeper or temple- 
 sweeper of Diana (NecoKopo^ tt}? 'ApTe/jbiho<i), was now officially 
 styled on coins and inscriptions, " the temple keeper of the 
 Augusti." The whole official class of Ephesian civil and 
 municipal dignitaries befriended Paul, and would not be pre- 
 vented by religious prejudice from admiring the courage and 
 ability with which tlie Jewish stranger had maintained his 
 cause against all comers. It would seem, too, as if so im- 
 portant a functionary as the town-clerk or recorder had been 
 impressed by the apostle's powers, and by the favourable 
 reception given to his preaching in the city, to such an extent 
 that he felt the necessity of proceeding in the matter with due 
 deliberation. Paul, the Eoman citizen, was quite entitled to 
 discuss the question of Diana's claims. But this had already 
 been fully done. The apostle's personal labours in Ephesus 
 were at an end. 
 
 Paul's work 1'he result of those three years' work must have 
 ill Ephesus. been great both in extent and in depth. Paul 
 never forgot his apostolic mission, and steadily refused to 
 linger in one place to the deprivation of other places, unless 
 the nature of the work was so peculiarly encouraging as to 
 indicate very distinctly that it was God's will that he should 
 stay. In Ephesus, undoubtedly, his main concern was in 
 conversions from Judaism and paganism to Christianity. He 
 was essentially a pioneer, used by God as the instrument for 
 adding to the Church such as should be saved. Paul was, 
 in ordinary circumstances, an evangelist, constantly moving 
 about, and leaving to otliers, like Aquila and Priscilla, the task 
 of building up the converts and instructing them in the faith of 
 Christ. But when opportunity was granted, through a long- 
 continued, constant residence, of using his great gifts in 
 doctrinal and experimental teaching, we should certainly 
 expect a community so favoured to attain a quite unusual 
 eminence in the knowledge of God and Christian truth. 
 And so, indeed, we find that Paul left behind him in Ephesus 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CIIUUCII. 19 
 
 a church, not only numerically large, but also well instructed 
 in the faith. Those of Asia, more frequently it would seem 
 than the members of any other chui'ch, are found accompany- 
 ing him, or rallying around him, on his visits to the most 
 distant places, and in many of his epistles he speaks of them. 
 Epaenetus, the first-fruits of xisia, does credit to his instructor 
 by faithful work in Uome ; and Onesiphorus, Tychicus, and 
 Trophimus all prove true yoke - fellows in the ministry of 
 the gospel. I'erhaps not less significant of the size and 
 importance of the Ephesian Church, is the fact that on his 
 last journey to Jerusalem the apostle felt compelled to avoid 
 entering the city, knowing that he could not appear there 
 without laying his account to spending time. The organisa- 
 tions were so numerous, the number of Christians engaged in 
 active work so great, the questions agitated so serious, that he 
 clearly foresaw that, should he only begin to look into their 
 affairs, he must abandon that visit to the Holy City on which 
 he had set his heart. The extent to which Christianity had 
 spread in Asia is further witnessed to by the appearance, even 
 during the apostle's lifetime, of some who were attached 
 loosely to the cause, as they showed by their coldness toward 
 him during his imprisonment at Eome (2 Tim. i. 1 5). Already 
 there were, it would seem, in this church some who had been 
 swept into it, and who were kept in it, by the very evidence 
 of success that had attended its establishment. 
 
 Farewell "^^ Miletus, souie thirty miles from Ephesus, the 
 ^ to the ajDOStle had his last interview with the represent- 
 .[j ebiaus. g^i-^^gg Q^ Q^Q Ephesian Church. There is not a. 
 
 vestige of historical evidence to show that the apostle ever 
 again visited Asia, or any of the Eastern churches which he 
 had founded. In support of the very widely adopted theory 
 of a second Roman imprisonment, imaginative descriptions of a 
 later visit paid to Ephesus and neighbouring Christian com- 
 munities have been given, and Lewin in particular, in his 
 Life and Epistles of St. Paul, gives a detailed report of this 
 apostolic expedition, ending with a very circumstantial account 
 of Paul's arrest at Ephesus, and his second journey as a 
 prisoner to Rome. But if by such conjectural manufacturing 
 of history certain dilficulties in the pastoral epistles receive 
 
20 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 apparent solution, it creates, as conjectural history generally 
 does, much more serious difficulties in other directions. The 
 apostle spoke to the Ephesian delegates in accents of con- 
 fident assurance, when he said with solemn emphasis, " And 
 now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone 
 preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more " 
 (Acts XX. 25). To suppose that Paul, without the infallible 
 direction of the divine Spirit, would make such a statement as 
 this, which he well knew would call forth bitter tears and 
 lamentations from his friends, — to suppose that he would 
 harass the minds of those already sufficiently burdened, by 
 'I'ivin" expression to a mere surmise of his own, — is, it seems 
 to me, in direct contradiction to all that we know of the 
 thoughtful considerateness and fine unselfish nature of the 
 apostle. When, just immediately before his visit to Miletus, 
 the apostle wrote to the Eomans, he referred to his intention 
 to make a journey as far as Spain, but his statements with 
 reference to that project are very distinctly hypothetical. 
 He knows only that he is going to Jerusalem. He has had a 
 great desire to go to lionie, and if he be allowed to carry out 
 his proposal to visit Spain, he will see Eome by the way. 
 Meanwhile, he has been told of the bonds and imprisonment 
 that await him, and knows that after Jerusalem he shall no 
 longer have any liberty of movement, either in the East or in 
 the West. He received intimation of the fact that he would 
 never see tlie various Christian churches of his planting again, 
 from the same unening instructor as had informed him of the 
 bonds which in due time were laid upon him. His address 
 assumed a tone of solemnity becoming the occasion. He 
 reminded them of liis long and laborious service among them, 
 and commended for their imitation that humility and earnest- 
 ness aud faithfulness to the truth of God which tliey had seen 
 in him. 
 
 The apostle warns the Ephesian presbyters of 
 
 Warmiigs. , . , , , i i i 
 
 heretical teachers, who seem to have been only 
 waiting for his departure, in order to begin their perverse and 
 corrupting activity. Some of these would come to them from 
 without, but others should rise up from among themselves. 
 That no such heresy did find entrance among the Ephesians 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPIIESIAN CHURCH. 21 
 
 during the apostolic age, is indeed amply proved from canon- 
 ical Scripture. The presbyters of Ephesus had taken to heart 
 the apostle's warning, and offered active and successful 
 resistance to the entrance of all false teachers. Some eight 
 years probably after Paul's visit, we hear of the Church of 
 Ephesus again from the author of the Apocalypse. The 
 Ephesians had meanwhile been engaged in a conflict. False 
 apostles had arisen, but their titles had been challenged and 
 False found defective. What variety of false teachers 
 Teachers, iijf^y have sought entrance into Ephesus we do not 
 know, but one peculiarly offensive and pestilent heresy is 
 named as having called forth special ojiposition, and awakened 
 an emphatic and vigorous protest. The Lord testifies that 
 toward the Nicolaitanes, these Ephesian Christians had mani- 
 fested the same hatred and loathing which He himself enter- 
 tained. This libertine sect seems to have made attempts more 
 or less successful upon the other churches of Asia, and the 
 foul practices of its adherents are quite sufficiently indicated 
 under the symbolical designations of Balaam and Jezebel. It 
 is interesting to observe with what emphasis the Lord of the 
 churclies protests against that special form of heresy which 
 inculcated, or at least apologised for, impurity and corruption 
 in walk and conversation. Other forms of heresy had indeed 
 already appeared in Asia, so that Paul found occasion to 
 contend against the Judaistic-Gnosticism which had crept into 
 Colosse, and to repeat to Timothy the warning he had 
 uttered to the presbyters at JMiletus, lest even in Ephesus 
 such intellectual and doctrinal errors might yet find entrance.' 
 In the period referred to in the Apocalypse, the attitude of 
 the Ephesians in regard to heresy was precisely similar to 
 
 ^ The apostasy of PliygeUus and Herinogenes (2 Tim. i. 15) was fi'om Paul, 
 not from the faith ; and Alexander, Hymeneus, and Philetus (1 Tim. i. 20 ; 
 2 Tim. ii. 17) had thrust away a good conscience, and, simply in consequence of 
 moral depravity, fallen into doctrinal confusion and error. Of purely intellectual 
 and doctrinal heresy in Ephesus itself there is as yet no word. The Nicolaitanes 
 referred to in the Apocalypse are not to be identified with those of that name 
 who figure as Antinomian Gnostics in the post-apostolic age, claiming descent 
 from Nicolas the deacon (Acts vi. 5). Comp. Kurtz, Church History, § 27, 8. 
 The name was used in later times in the most general way to designate all sorts 
 of views and practices among churchmen of an immoral tendency. See Kurtz, 
 § 96, 5. 
 
22 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that represented in tlie Pastoral Epistles. It was moral 
 evil against -svliich they had to contend, and to this 
 they offered an uncompromising resistance. Xevertheless 
 the Lord had something against them. Doctrinal purists 
 though they were, the very chill of death was creeping 
 over them. 
 
 We have now to pass over a period in the history of the 
 Church of Ephesus of somewhere about forty years. The 
 older members of the congregation are those who in their 
 early youth received the Apocalyptic warning and rebuke ; 
 and almost all the members, young and old, owe their religious 
 training to the direct ministry of the Apostle John. Of such 
 Ignatius at ^ Community we would entertain high expectations. 
 Ephesus. A glimpse into the moral and spiritual condition 
 of the Ephesian Church of this period, just such as we would 
 desire, is afforded us by the epistles written to its members 
 from Smyrna by Ignatius of Antioch, as he pursued his 
 journey to receive at Home the crown of martyrdom. By 
 order of the Emperor Trajan, Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, 
 was put in bonds and carried away from the scene of his 
 labours. Travelling under the direction of his soldier guards, 
 who treated him with great harshness on the way, he reached 
 the Phrygian city of Laodicea. At that point the great road 
 leading westward breaks into two — one going in a more 
 southerly direction through Tralles, Magnesia, and Ephesus ; 
 the other, by a more northerly route, through Hierapolis, 
 Philadelphia, and Sardis to Smyrna. The nortliern road, 
 being the shorter of the two, was the one chosen by the 
 commander of the party. After some delay at Philadelphia, 
 they reached Smyrna, and there halted for some time. Prom 
 Laodicea it would seem that intimation had been sent along 
 the southern road to the Christians at Tralles, Magnesia, and 
 Ephesus of the movetnents of the Antiochean bishop, and 
 without delay they arranged to send representatives to confer 
 with the martyr during his detention at Smyrna. Prom 
 Tralles, the most distant of the churches, one delegate was 
 sent, from Magnesia there were four; and from Ephesus, 
 which was but forty miles off, there were five. In each 
 case the bishop formed one of the deputation. The spiritual 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EniESIAX CHURCH. 23 
 
 conversation and loving ministry of the Ephesian bretlireu 
 did much to cheer and sustain the sufferer's heart. Durin<f 
 his stay with Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius wrote letters to 
 the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, and Eomans. The 
 Epistle to the Ephesians is by far the longest and most 
 elaborate of all the seven epistles written by the martyr 
 during his journey to the West. He gives hearty expression 
 to his gratitude to the Ephesians for the thoughtful attention 
 they had shown him, conniiends their faithfulness, and exhorts 
 them to constancy and continued watchfulness. It is for us 
 at this particular point peculiarly interesting, because of the 
 glimpse which it affords into the condition of the Ephesian 
 Church, at a period probably not more than one generation 
 removed from that referred to by the Apostle Paul in his 
 epistle, and by John in his Apocalypse. He refers, in warm 
 and enthusiastic terms, to the brilliant record of this church 
 in earlier days, its intimate relations with the blessed Paul, 
 under whom, with tliem, he desires to sit, whose example he 
 wishes to imitate while he walks in his martyr steps. The 
 present condition of the church is such as also wakens in his 
 heart the purest joy, and calls forth the warmest congratula- 
 tions. He tells of Onesimus, whose visit had been an un- 
 speakable blessing to him, that he had reported well of them, 
 as not only steadfast in maintaining true doctrine, but also as 
 spiritually-minded and warm in their love to God and to the 
 brethren. They had not been without trials. Heretical 
 teachers from without sought to spread among them pestilent 
 heresies regarding the person of Christ, similar, probably, 
 to those which the apostle had argued against when writing 
 to the Colossians. Of his own accord, Onesimus, their bishop, 
 had highly praised their orderly conduct in God, declaring 
 that they all lived according to truth, and that no heresy had 
 a home among them ; that, indeed, they would not so much 
 as listen to any one if he were to speak of aught else save 
 concerning Jesus Christ in truth. " Even those things which 
 ye do after the flesh are spiritual, for ye do all things in Jesus 
 Christ." " So, then, ye are all companions in the way, carry- 
 ing your God and your shrine, your Christ and your holy 
 things, being arrayed from head to foot in the command- 
 
24' IXTRODUCTION. 
 
 ments of Jesus Christ." ^ And not only in regard to its 
 spiritual character, but also in regard to its external and 
 material prosperity, the condition of the church was such as 
 to call forth the hearty congratulations of Ignatius. He 
 describes it as a flourishing church ; its members as a 
 multitude (7roXvjr\')]deia). It has a complete organisation, 
 and enjoys the ministrations of devoted and able office-bearers. 
 Onesimus, Bisho}) of Ephesus, a young man apparently when 
 he met Ignatius, and therefore not to be identified, as tradition 
 sought to do, with the Onesimus of the Pauline Epistles, who 
 must have been at least forty years his senior, won the warm 
 affection of the martyr to whom he ministered. The presby- 
 tery or session of elders under their bishop is declared to be 
 worthy of God and to be working harmoniously together, 
 " attuned to the bishop as its strings to a lyre." The ideal 
 of a prosperous church is realised in that of Ephesus : the 
 members submitting themselves to the bishop and eldership, 
 and by their concord and harm.ony praising Christ. The 
 deacon Burrhus, too, was so helpful, that, by the church's 
 leave, he was retained for a time by Ignatius as his companion. 
 During the fifty or sixty years of its existence, the Church of 
 Ephesus had grown and prospered, so that before the end of 
 the first decade of the second century, it was recognised as the 
 principal Christian church in Asia, and as occupying a conspicu- 
 ous place in the very front rank among the churches of Christ. 
 No reference 1^1 his Epistle to the Epliesians, Ignatius nowhere 
 to St. John, makes any allusion either to the person or to the 
 writings and labours of the Apostle John. Naturally enough, 
 it has been regarded as remarkable that, writing as he 
 did probably not more than ten years after the death of 
 John, Ignatius should make no reference to John's resi- 
 dence in Ephesus, while the more remote ministry of Paul 
 is the subject of frequent reminiscences, in which the writer 
 enthusiastically congratulates those among whom he laboured. 
 This circumstance has been laid hold upon by Keim and others 
 as an argument in favour of their theory that John never 
 M'as in Asia Minor.- The answer to this objection that most 
 
 ' See Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, §§ 6, 8, 9. 
 " Keini, Jesus of Nazara, i. 218, 
 
EPIIESUS AND THE EPHESIAX CHUIiCIT. 25' 
 
 readily suggests itself is the one adopted by Lightfoot/ that, 
 in the circumstances in which he then was, Ignatius naturally 
 limited his references to martyrs who had trod a path similar 
 to that along which he was now himself called to go. His 
 own immediate surroundings, as well as the hopes and fears 
 which now filled his heart, were such as would remind him 
 of Paul and not of John. We have, indeed, no reason to 
 suppose that, during his residence at Ephesus, John in any 
 remarkable measure impressed his mark upon the Christian 
 community resident there. The church, already well grounded 
 in the truth under the more than ordinarily protracted per- 
 sonal labours of the great Apostle of the Gentiles, may well 
 be supposed to have continued distinctively Pauline, under 
 the ministry of officers who faithfully represented the teaching 
 of their master. There are, indeed, some who maintain a 
 very different theory. Among those who cannot agree with 
 John opposed I^eim and Scholten, in their refusal to believe 
 to Paul, that John ever had his residence in Ephesus, there 
 are some who argue that the presence of John in Asia Minor 
 was directly hostile to the interests and to the party of Paul. 
 This theory has been presented in the most complete and 
 detailed manner, and with considerable ingenuity and force, by 
 Hanson.^ He pictures the condition of the churches of Asia, 
 immediately after Paul's departure, as one of continuous 
 confusion and strife. The assumed Judaistic tendencies of 
 John would not allow him, by silence, to give even apparent 
 sanction to the doctrines and practices of the Pauline teachers ; 
 and besides, it is regarded as more than probable that he had 
 been formally deputed by those of Jerusalem to restore unity 
 and enforce discipline, under the authority of the apostles, in 
 a community where Paul had been boldly claiming in- 
 dependence of all human jurisdiction. In support of this 
 circumstantial account of the state of matters in Ephesus, 
 during the period of Paul's Eoman imprisonment, the epistles 
 to the churches in the Apocalypse are called as witnesses. 
 It is assumed that the false apostles, who say they are 
 
 ' Lightfoot, Ignatius, i. 404 ; ii. 64. 
 
 2 Hanson, The Apostle Paul and the Preachimj of Chridianity in the Primi- 
 tice Church, pp. 461-471, Lond. 1875. 
 
2 6 I^'TRODUCTION. 
 
 apostles, and are not, can be no other than Paul and his 
 fellow-labourers. That there was in Ephesus a party keenly 
 antagonistic to the apostle is distinctly stated by Paul 
 himself. "Writing to the Corinthians, in a.d. 58, he declares 
 his intention to abide still in Ephesus ; because a great door 
 and effectual had been opened to him, and there were many 
 adversaries (1 Cor. xvi. 9). And again, when bidding fare- 
 well to the elders of the Ephesian Church at Miletus, he gives 
 confident expression to his belief that after his departure 
 grievous wolves would enter among them, not sparing the 
 flock ; and that even from among themselves would men 
 arise, speaking perverse things and drawing away disciples 
 after them (Acts xx. 29, 30). This, however, was an experi- 
 ence with which Paul was unfortunately only too familiar in 
 other churches and other localities than those of Asia. That 
 these adversaries should be regarded as the adherents of the 
 opposing faction of John and the other original apostles, is a 
 pure creation of fancy, for which history does not afford the 
 slightest vestige of a foundation. "We have no reason to 
 doubt the correctness of the generally prevailing tradition, 
 that during the years that followed the apostle's death, the 
 Church of Ephesus was presided over by Timothy, who would 
 faithfully represent and conscientiously promote the doctrinal 
 and practical tendencies which had characterised the teaching 
 of his honoured father in the gospel. In all probability he 
 was at the head of the Christian community in Ephesus when 
 the Apocalyptic Epistle was written (Rev. ii. 1-7), in which 
 the doctrinal orthodoxy of the church which he governed is 
 heartily recognised, and attention is especially directed to 
 the firm resistance which its office-bearers and members had 
 consistently offered to all who sought entrance into it as 
 bearers of another gospel than that which they had been 
 taught. 
 
 Second We have every reason to suppose that the Church 
 Century. Qf Ephesus throughout the second century con- 
 tinued to present the appearance of a well-organised Christian 
 community, in which true doctrine and a decorous life were 
 strictly maintained under the control of distinguished and 
 faithful ministers. The Church of Ephesus is named by 
 
EniESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CHURCH. 27 
 
 Irenteus, Adv. ITcvr. iii. 3, 1, as a trnstwortliy witness of the 
 jipostolic tradition ; and he does this while referring to other 
 great Christian churches in which this continuity of sound 
 doctrine had been maintained by means of a brilliant 
 succession of celebrated and devoted teachers. He regarded 
 Ephesus as being worthy of being named alongside of Iiome 
 and Smyrna, with their noble roll of confessors and martyrs. 
 It appears also that the Jewish element still bulked largely 
 in the population, and Ephesus was the scene of that famous 
 controversy between Justin ]\Iartyr and the Jew, of which 
 we Iiave a record in that father's Dialogue with Tryplw. 
 Though the treatise itself was not written until somewhere 
 about A.D. 160, the actual conversation in all probability took 
 place in a.d. 135, or shortly after, as implied by a reference 
 to the war, apparently the Jewish one of Hadrian, as just 
 concluded. But while the allusions to E[)hcsus and the 
 Christian Church there during the first half of the second 
 century are thus vague and occasional, we obtain a very 
 distinct and interesting glimpse into the ecclesiastical life of 
 the community toward the close of the century. Who the 
 immediate successors of Onesimus, the Bishop of Ephesus on 
 the occasion of the visit of Ignatius, may have been, and 
 what their special character and standing, we have now no 
 means of ascertaining. Throughout the whole of the century 
 the only other Bishop of Ephesus known to us by name is 
 Polycrates, who may have held office during the 
 ycia es. ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ three decades of the century, and M'as 
 an old man of at least sixty-five years in a.d. 195. In the 
 year just named he comes prominently into view as a staunch 
 champion of the Asiatic mode of celebrating Easter, and in 
 his conduct of the dispute he reveals a character of remark- 
 able strength and unflinching conscientiousness. The Bishop 
 of Eome, Victor I., anxious to secure uniformity in the 
 celebration of the great Christian festival throughout the 
 whole Church, obtained from almost all the provinces synodical 
 resolutions agreeing to the Eoman custom ; but the province 
 of Asia, presided over by its bishop, persistently refused to 
 yield. Obeying the summons of Victor, Polycrates had 
 assembled the bishops of his province in order to discuss the 
 
2 8 INTKODUCTION. 
 
 Easter question, and he answers that unanimously they had 
 resolved to continue the quartodecinian observance as the 
 practice favoured by the apostolic tradition. This rule they 
 had received from the Apostles l*liilip and John, both of whom 
 had long been resident in Asia. According to it, the 14th 
 Nisan, as the anniversary of the institution of the Lord's 
 Supper, had been regularly observed by St. John, and in 
 succession by all those who had been reared under his 
 iniluence. The main objection entertained against this 
 practice, on the part of the other churches, was the recognition 
 of Judaism which seemed to be given by the adoption of the 
 day of the Jewish Passover as the day for celebrating the 
 great Christian feast. It had also been unpleasantly associated 
 with the Ebionite heresy, and the suspicion of Judaism not 
 unnaturally attached to those who maintained what seemed 
 an attitude of compliment and compromise toward distinctly 
 Jewish institutions. Polycrates and his church, however, 
 were quite above suspicion in regard to these doctrinal 
 tendencies. The Church of Ephesus was still distinguished 
 for its attachment to the true apostolic orthodox doctrine. 
 The bishop, Polycrates, must himself have been born vv'ithin 
 about a quarter of a century of the death of the Apostle 
 John. Of his own family already, before himself, seven had 
 held the honourable office of bishop, and though some of 
 these undoubtedly would be contemporary with our author, it 
 is quite evident that the eighth episcopal member of the 
 family, entering on office probably not later than A.D. 180, 
 though possibly still earlier, must have been able to trace a 
 lineal connection by no means remote with the apostolic age and 
 
 , with prominent apostolic men. His letter to Victor, 
 
 Victor in the name of all the bishops, shows Polycrates, in 
 
 of Rome, j-gsppct of principle and courage, worthy of his 
 lineage, and w^ell qualified to rank among the successors of 
 the apostles. After enumerating all the great luminaries of 
 the church in whose light the Christian communities of Asia 
 had walked, — Philip the Apostle at Hierapolis, John at 
 Ephesus, Polycarp at Smyrna, Sagaris at Laodicea, Thraseas 
 at Eumenia, and Melito at Sardis, — as consistent observers of 
 the practice which he and his fellow-bishops continued to 
 
EPHESUS AND THE ErUESIAN CHURCH. 29 
 
 follow, Polycrates declares that he is in no way intimidated 
 by the tlireats of Victor, because greater than he liad said, 
 "We ought to obey (Jod rather than men."^ It is an interesting 
 picture which is presented us here of an Ephesian bisliop, at 
 the close of the second century, boldly affirming the Johannine 
 doctrine and tradition in the face of threatened excommuni- 
 cation, and upheld by the unanimous support of the bishops of 
 liis province, who revere his character, and stand by the leader 
 whose hair has whitened amid his labours on behalf of the king- 
 dom of God in Ephesus and throughout the churches of Asia. 
 T, , f In the elaborate scheme of legislation by which 
 
 Kank or . . 
 
 Bishops of gradations of ecclesiastical rank were carefully 
 Ephesus. apportioned to the more prominent episcopal sees 
 during the fourth century, a conspicuous position was assigned 
 to the Bishop of Ephesus. The ecclesiastical dignitaries who 
 presided over the churches in the three great cities of Eome, 
 Alexandria, and Antioch, received the rank of patriarchs, and 
 exercised authority respectively over Italy, Egypt, and the 
 East. But the sixth canon of the Council of Nictta, a.d. ,"25, 
 which confirmed the jurisdiction of these patriarchs, enjoined 
 that these should respect the rights of the other eparchies. 
 The churches here referred to are those of the provinces of 
 Asia, Pontus, and Thrace. The bishops or archbishops of 
 these provinces are not simple metropolitans, but occupy a 
 position scarcely inferior to that of the three great patriarchs. 
 These three ecclesiastical provinces, known by the name of 
 exarchates, had as their capitals, Ephesus, Ciesarea in Cappa- 
 docia, and Heraclea, afterwards Constantinople. The very fact 
 that Constantinople, originally one of the three eparchies, was 
 elevated to rank next to Eome, shows how nearly equal to 
 the great patriarchates these three eparchies were regarded. 
 The Bishop of Ephesus therefore exercised metropolitan rights, 
 which were practically those of a patriarch, over his suffragans 
 throughout the ecclesiastical diocese of Asia, co-extensive with 
 the civil diocese of Asia, and embracing ten provinces. 
 Bisho f ^^ ^^^® opening years of the fifth century the 
 Fifth Bishop of Ephesus comes to the front in a decidedly 
 Century, unpleasant fashion. Antoninus, who had occupied 
 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccks. v. 27, 1-8, ed. Lienimer, 1862. 
 
30 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the see for some time, was charged by one of his own bishops 
 before Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, with many 
 crimes, mostly of a simonaical character. A century before, 
 the Bishop of Ephesiis could not have been subjected to the 
 supervision and judgment of the Bishop of Constantinople. 
 But the capital of the Eastern empire had already asserted its 
 superiority as the new Rome in the canon of the Second 
 (Ecumenial Council of 381, and its bishop was exercising 
 patriarchal authority, not only in the diocese of Tin-ace, but 
 also in the dioceses of Asia and Pontus. When these claims 
 were first formulated and legally recognised in the Fourth 
 (Ecumenical Council of 451, it was ruled that appeals or 
 references might be made to the Bishop of Constantinople 
 rather than to the metropolitan of the eparchy.^ In the 
 exercise of those high prerogatives claimed for the bishop of 
 the imperial city, Chrysostom went to Ephesus, and in the 
 same year, 400, held a synod there, at which six bishops of Asia 
 were deposed for simony, and a new bishop, Heraclides, conse- 
 crated in the see of i^phesus. This new bishop, who had been 
 deacon to Chrysostom, was bitterly persecuted by the enemies 
 of his patron, and when Chrysostom was finally banished in 
 404, Heraclides was deposed and cast into prison at Nicomedia, 
 where he continued to languish for many years.^ 
 
 p. ., An interesting event in the history of Ephesus 
 
 of P]iiliesus, was the assembling there of the Third (Ecumenical 
 ^"^' Council in 431. The whole church was now 
 agitated by the Nestorian controversy, and churchmen every- 
 where were distinguished as sympathising with or opposing 
 Nestorius and his opinions. The Bishop of Ephesus at this 
 time was Memnon, a man of considerable reputation as an 
 ecclesiastic and a theologian. He showed himself a deter- 
 mined opponent of Nestorius and a powerful ally of Cyril of 
 Alexandria, gathering together in the synod no less than 
 thirty bishops from his ecclesiastical province as supporters of 
 tlie cause which he himself favoured. 
 
 ^ See especially canons of Council of Chalccdon, ix. xvii. xxviii., with explana- 
 tions in Hefele, History of the CounciU of the Church, iii. 393-340, Edin. 
 1883. 
 
 * Stephens, Life of St. John Chrysostom, 3rd cd., pp. 265-279, Lond. 1883. 
 
EPHESUS AND THE EPHESIAN CHURCH. 31 
 
 At the Fourth CEcumenical Council of 451, attention was 
 called to the ecclesiastical affairs of Ephesus by Bassianus, who 
 had been bishop from 444 to 448, when he was violently- 
 dispossessed ou the plea of various irregularities in connection 
 with his consecration. The synod, after considerable vacilla- 
 tion, agreed that both Bassianus and his rival Stephen should 
 be removed from the episcopate of Ephesus, retaining their 
 episcopal rank and receiving pensions from the ecclesiastical 
 revenues. The result was the appointment of Paul, who 
 seems to have favoured Eutychianism, and to have suffered 
 exile and deprivation, from which he was restored by Timotheus 
 Aelurus, at a Eutychian Synod held in Ephesus in a.d. 476. 
 The Bishop of Ephesus also at this time, as a mark of favour, 
 had the jus j)rt^?'tart7«»», hitherto exercised by Constanti- 
 nople, restored to his see. In the year 478, however, after 
 the fall of Basiliscus, the patron of Aelurus, Paul, under 
 the judgment of a Synod of Constantinople, was expelled, and 
 apparently the privileges enjoyed for so brief a period were 
 annulled. 
 
 John of The last name of distinction associated with the 
 
 Ephesus. Church of Ephesus is that of the monophysite 
 bishop, John, who resided mostly at the Constantinopolitan 
 court, where, from the middle of tlie sixth century, under 
 Justinian and his successors, he exercised a powerful influence ; 
 but, long before that time, the church, as a Christian community, 
 had ceased to have any importance, and the name of Ephesus 
 was in repute only because of the ecclesiastical rank of its bishop 
 and the place which he took in directing the affairs of the 
 empire. In Asia, John is said to have secured the nominal 
 conversion to Christianity of 70,000, and to have built 
 ninety-six churches. He wi-ote in Syriac a Church History, 
 from the time of the first lionian emperor down to a.d. 585, 
 of which the third part, from a.d. 571 to 585, is still extant, 
 and affords information regarding various historical occurrences 
 otherwise unknown.^ 
 
 1 Joannis Scripfa Hifitorica, etc. ed. Land, 1S6S; Cureton, Ecclesiastical 
 History of Joh7i of Ephesus [in Syriac], 1853; Payne Smith, T/ie Third Part 
 of the Eccles. Hist, of John, Bishop of Ephrsvs, 18(>0 ; Land, Johannes, 
 Bischof von Ephesos, 1856. 
 
32 INTEODUCTIOX. 
 
 Decline and The conquGst of Epliesus by the Turks, in the 
 Fall. thirteenth century, was speedily followed by the 
 buildin;^ of the town of Ayasaluk, which for a time flourished, 
 while Ephesus was gradually deserted. The new town 
 occupied the site of the great Church of St. John the Divine 
 (a7io? ©60X070?), in which the Council of Ephesus had met in 
 A.D. 431. The modern name of the present wretched little 
 hamlet, with about a score of inhabitants, is simply a cor- 
 ruption of the name of the church, and perpetuates the 
 memory of John's connection with the great capital of Asia.^ 
 
 2. AUTHEXTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 No serious doubt of the Pauline authorship of the Epistle 
 to the Ephesians was entertained till the most recent times. 
 " It is now half a century," says Holtzmann, " since its 
 authenticity was first doubted, and the opinion that it is not 
 the work of Paul has been gaining ground ever since." ^ This 
 opinion rests largely on conclusions drawn from views of " the 
 form, contents, and purpose" of the epistle, which must be 
 subjected to a careful examination. 
 
 Early Meanwhile it will be necessary to consider the 
 
 Witnesses, testimony afforded by ancient Christian writers. 
 The witness of antiquity is strongly in favour of its authenti- 
 city, and no New Testament book is more satisfactorily 
 supported by quotations in the works of the early fathers. 
 Cleme t ^^ could scarcely be expected that Clement of 
 of Rome, Eome, writing to the Corinthians, would make any 
 ^'^' ' very special and pointed reference to the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians. The two churches cannot be supposed to 
 have had much in common. We do, however, find in 
 Clement just that sort of use of the Ephesian epistle which in 
 the circumstances we might have expected. Twice over he 
 speaks of the enlightenment of " the eyes of our hearts," an 
 evident reminiscence of our apostle's peculiar phrases («S'^. 
 
 ' See description of Ephesus in Ramsay, Historical Geography of Asia Minor, 
 pp. 109-111, 1890. 
 
 ^ Short Protestant Commentary on the New Testament, iii. 1 ; Holtzmann 
 on Ephesians. 
 
 i 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 33 
 
 Clement to the Corinthians, §§ 3G, 59). ''Let ecach man be 
 subject unto his neighbour" (§ 38), is a clear reminiscence of 
 Eph. V. 21 ; and "have we not one God and one Christ and 
 one Spirit of grace that was shed upon us ? And is there not 
 one calling in Clirist ? Wherefore do we tear and rend 
 asunder the members of Christ, and stir up factions against 
 our own body, and reach such a pitch of folly as to forget that 
 we are members one of another ?" (§ 4G), is clearly written in 
 view of Eph, iv. 4, 25. Without directly quoting our 
 epistle, or even naming it, the use of those phrases makes it 
 highly probable that it was familiarly known to Clement, 
 lenatius Ignatius, who wrote from Smyrna to the Church 
 
 ofAutioch, of Ephesus, probably in tlie early years of the 
 ^'^' '' second century, little more than forty years after 
 the date usually given for the composition of the Pauline 
 epistle, is the first important witness to be examined on this 
 question of authenticity. Of the seven Ignatian Epistles, now 
 generally recognised as genuine, that to the Epliesians is by 
 far the most elaborate, and in length is nearly twice the size 
 of any of the others. The writer also repeatedly speaks of the 
 extraordinarily high estimate which he had formed of this 
 church, and expresses his intention, if it should be the divine 
 will, to continue in a second treatise that discussion on the 
 doctrine of the incarnation which he liad begun (§ 21). The 
 Church of the Epliesians he declares to be famous to all 
 ages (§ 8), and he can wish nothing better for himself than 
 partnership with the Christians of Ephesus, " who were ever of 
 one mind with the apostles in the person of Jesus Christ " 
 (§ 11). Erom such declarations as these he passes at once to 
 sound the highest note of eulogy. Their supreme distinction 
 lies in their intimate association with Paul, who had before 
 gone on the same martyr route as that which he himself now 
 trod. " Ye are the highroad of those that are on their way 
 to die unto God. Ye are associates in the mysteries with 
 Paul, who was sanctified, who obtained a good report, who is 
 worthy of all felicitation ; in whose footsteps I would fain be 
 found treading, when I shall attain unto God ; who in every 
 letter maketh mention of you in Christ Jesus" (§ 12). Now 
 it seems impossible to deny that the phrase " associal^es iu 
 
 u 
 
34 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the mysteries with Paul" contains a direct allusion to tlie 
 characteristic \ise of the word mystery in our epistle. The 
 apostle tells us that he wrote in order to make his readers 
 understand his knowledge in the mysteiy of Christ (chap. iii. 
 '6, 4). His knowledge wns that of one initiated, and he 
 desires to impart this to them. This is just how Ignatius 
 describes the relation of Paul and the Ephesians. Here we 
 have an important contribution to the proof at once of the 
 Pauline authorship and the Ephesian destination of the epistle. 
 — The figurative expression, which speaks of the Ephesians as 
 the highroad of martyrs on their way to receive the crown, 
 refers certainly to Paul, and probably to others, but only in a 
 general way. It does not at all imply the thought that they 
 had escorted Paul, as by their deputies they were escorting 
 Ignatius, on the way to Kome. It is a turning of the language 
 of figure into that of historical narrative to assume, as Light- 
 foot does (Ignatius, ii. 63), the meaning of the words to be : 
 " Their spiritual position corresponds to their geographical 
 position. As they conducted the martyrs on their way in the 
 body, so they animated their souls with fresh strength and 
 courage." If this were so, we would be obliged to say with 
 Liizhtfoot, that such a reference to Paul could not be satisfied 
 by the interview with the Ephesian elders (Acts xx. 17 sq.), 
 but must refer to some later visit. It would seem, however, 
 that here Ignatius, in his usual liigh-flown rhetorical style, 
 means simply to acknowledge the kindly interest which the 
 Ephesians had always shown in those who suffered for right- 
 eousness' sake. Ignatius evidently thinks only of going in the 
 apostle's footsteps in the way of spiritual imitation, and not of 
 literal reproduction of circumstantial details. — A considerable 
 amount of controversy has arisen over the meaning of the 
 words iv iruar) eiTKnokfi. The translation given above is that 
 of Lightfoot (Ignaihis, ii. 65), who contends that they cannot 
 mean " in all the epistle." We cannot accept his proof as 
 convincing. Pearson, Jacobson, and Hefele, among editors of 
 Ignatius, as also Alford and Westcott {History of the Canon of 
 the New Testament, 1875, p. 47), favour the other translation.^ 
 
 ' Hefele, Patrvm A postolicorum Opera, p. 163, not. 10, Tubingen ISof) : 
 Xon ill oinni, sed in una tola ejiistola, Ignatius articulum t-^ ante ir/a-T^xj) 
 
AUTIIENTICITV OF THE EPISTLE. 8o 
 
 It is interesting to notice the rendering of the compiler of 
 the larger recension, wlio by his paraphrase shows clearly 
 enough what liis nnderstanJiug of the words of the genuine 
 Ignatius was : " Who everywhere in his prayers remembers 
 3'OU." He evidently regarded the rel'erence as being to one 
 particular epistle, and that the Epistle to the Ephesians, wliich 
 is well characterised by his words. This writer, whoever he 
 may have been, seems in this instance to have shown real 
 penetration in his reading of the words of Ignatius. What 
 the original writer evidently wished to call attention to was 
 not Piiurs simple remembrance of the Epliesians, but the 
 manner in which he evidenced that remembrance. Now lie 
 did this in that epistle certainly in his prayers: "Making 
 mention of you in my prayers" (i. 16); "I bow my knees," 
 etc. (iii, 14). Tlien again, the words of the genuine Ignatius 
 expressly reproduce the most distinctively characteristic phrase 
 of the Ephesian epistle in the words, " in Christ Jesus." 
 Thus Ignatius, writing to the Ephesians and referring to their 
 apostle, ingeniously reminds them of its keynote and most 
 memorable expression. 
 
 Polycarp, ^^ the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, 
 etc. which is shorter than that of Ignatius to the 
 Ephesians, we have two express and literal quotations from 
 the canonical Epistle to the Ephesians (§§ 1, 2). In the 
 Epistle of Barnabas : " Thou shalt be subject to tiie Lord and 
 to the other masters as the image of God, with modesty and 
 fear. , . . He came to all men not according to their out- 
 ward appearance " (chap, xix.) — are evident reminiscences of 
 Eph. vi. 5, 9. — In the Epistle to Diognetus (chap, ii.), the 
 sentence about tlie purifying preparation of tlie new man is 
 modelled upon Eph. iv. 21-24. 
 
 Summary ^^ ^^ interesting to notice that each of the 
 
 of External three first- mentioned apostolic fathers — Clement, 
 
 VI ence. j,_,.,jj^(-^^jg^ j^jjj Polycarp — wrote an epistle to a 
 
 church previously written to by Paul. Wiiere those writers 
 
 omisit. Crednerus {Einleituny, i. p. 395) male contendit iv vr«ir>j t^r/o-ToXj? jiou 
 debere verti : in tota epistola, et autnmat, loconim nostrnm sanandnin esse e 
 recensione majori (interpolata'), i^uaj liabet o; 'ravron U rais liiinfftv avT-eZ 
 
 fj.vnit.oti{/ii Yifjian {Jj/iuiv'). 
 
36 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ([uote or imitate any apostolic phrase, they do not name the 
 author, nor use any quotation formula in the modern sense. 
 Each of them, however, makes pointed reference to the 
 previous Pauline epistle written to the particular church 
 addressed. Clement, writintr to the Corinthians, bids them 
 take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle, in which 
 he charged them in the Spirit " concerning himself and 
 Cephas and Apollos." Polycarp, writing to the Philippians, 
 acknowledges his inability " to follow the wisdom of the 
 blessed and glorious Paul, who, when he was absent, wrote a 
 letter unto you," etc. (chap, iii.); and again (chap, xi.) speaks 
 of them as those " among whom the blessed I'aul laboured 
 who were his letters in the beginning," where we have a 
 composite reference to Pauline phrases used in Phil. iv. 15 
 and 2 Cor. iii. 2, And Ignatius, in his Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, as we have seen, says : " Those who are borne by 
 martyrdom to God pass through your city ; ye are initiated 
 into mysteries with St. Paul, who in every part of his letter 
 makes mention of you in Christ Jesus " (chap, xii.y Our 
 epistle is also enumerated among the genuine epistles of 
 I'aul in the Mnratorian Fragment, which dates probably 
 about A.D. 180. It had also been given previously in 
 Marcion's list as Paul's epistle, though under the name of 
 the Epistle to the Laodiceans. About the same time its 
 genuineness is witnessed to by Tertullian (Adv. 3Iarcionein, 
 iv. 5). Before the middle of the third century, Origen 
 ({uotes from it with the formula : as Paul says. 
 
 So far, therefore, as external evidence is concerned, the 
 Pauline authorship of our epistle may be regarded as well- 
 established. 
 
 Critical Though the authenticity of our epistle was 
 
 Objections, witnessed to by an unbroken succession througli 
 eighteen centuries, objections were raised against it by critics 
 of last generation. Those objectors based their suspicions on 
 subjective and internal grounds of contents and style. The 
 presence of un-Pauline words and phrases, the introduction 
 of certain lines of thouglit, unrepresented in the undisputedly 
 
 ' See Westcott, IlMory of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 47, Lond. 
 1875. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 37 
 
 genuine writings of the apostle, references to conditions and 
 circumstances of cliurch life supposed to be later tlian the 
 times of Paul, indications of the work of an imitator modelling 
 his production after the pattern of the l^iuline I'^iistle to the 
 Colossians, — these, and such-like reasons as these, were alleged 
 as grounds for repudiating the Pauline and apostolic author- 
 ship of our epistle. 
 
 The evident connection which subsists between our epistle 
 and that to the Colossians, has led many to entertain doubts 
 regarding the authenticity of one or both. — In regard to the 
 contents of the two epistles, several distinguished com- 
 mentators have maintained that the similarity is so great 
 that it would be an insult to the apostle to suppose that he 
 could be the author of both, since it would imply a sad want 
 of originality on his part, in respect alike of thought and of 
 expression.^ Such critics have argued that the type of 
 doctrine and the general outline of thought is in both epistles 
 the same. But they have altogether failed to show tliat the 
 similarity is greater than might be expected, in two epistles 
 written by the same author, about the same time, to churches 
 not far removed from one another and surrounded to a large 
 extent by similar conditions. It ought to be quite evident 
 that the standpoint of the one epistle is essentially different 
 from that of the other. The Epistle to the Colossians treats 
 in detail of the doctrine of the person of Christ, wliile the 
 corresponding portion of the Epistle to the Ephesians is 
 occupied with a discussion of the doctrine of predestination, and 
 an elaborate statement regarding the unity of the Jewish and 
 Gentile elements in the one Christian Church. Even where 
 the same expressions occur in both, they generally appear in 
 different connections, in the development of distinctive and 
 characteristic lines of thought. Farrar has summed up the 
 outstanding differences in the two epistles, wliicli may be 
 
 ^ "It is impossible," says Holtzmann, in Short Protest. Cumm. iii. 6, " f o 
 suppose that Paul can have copied himself to such an extent, and often in the 
 very smallest details of expression." Von Soden, on the other hand, in his 
 able Commentary (in the Hand-Commentar, iii. 1, 1891, to which Holtzmann 
 and Lipsius contribute) heartily admits the Pauline authorship of Colossians, 
 and re^'arJs the connection between Kjihesians and it to be nothing more than 
 we might look for from one of Paul's most intelligent and appreciative disciples. 
 
3 8 ■ INTRODUCTION. 
 
 said to lie on the surface. The peculiar plirase " th6 
 lieavenlies," used five times in Ephesians, does not occur in 
 Colossians, and five important sections of Ephesians (i. 3-14, 
 iv. 5-15, V. 7-1-4, V. 23-33, vi. 10-17) have nothing in 
 Colossians corresponding to them. " The topic of Colossians 
 is, Christ is all in all : the topic of Ephesians is, Christ 
 ascended yet pi-esent in His Church." ^ 
 
 De Wette, who entertained a very mean opinion of our 
 epistle, regarded it as simply a weak amplification of the 
 Epistle to the Colossians. It is referred to by this critic, and 
 others of that school, as an example of the writing over of 
 the earher epistle by an imitator, who serves up the same 
 contents in a looser and less concise form. But Harless, 
 followed by Meyer, has shown that in several instances the 
 ideas of Colossians are expressed in a terser and briefer style 
 in Ephesians, and so the greater length of the later epistle is, 
 on closer inspection, found to result not from verbose 
 amplification of borrowed thouglits, but from the presentation 
 of fresh and original matter. With reference to the com- 
 pai'ative originality of tlie epistles as they stand, a singular 
 result has been reached by Holtzmann. Apart from the 
 theory regarding authorship, at which he ultimately arrives, 
 tlie critic compares certain passages in Ephesians and in 
 Colossians together, and comes to the conclusion that in an 
 equal number of cases each of the epistles lays claim to the 
 credit of originality. If, then, we maintain the integrity 
 of the epistles, we cannot, upon Holtzmann's showing, charge 
 the one with being an imitation of the other. 
 References to When we consider the contents of these epistles, 
 (Tiiosticisiii. In their relation to the circumstances of the age 
 
 ' Farrnr, Messages of the Books, p. 327, Lond. 1884. The sort of similarity 
 which exists between Epliesians and Colossians is one of which we have 
 previous examples in the case of undisputed ei)istles of St. Paul. This has 
 been well put by Farrar in a note on the page from which the above (piotation 
 has been taken. "The occurrence of two epistles on almost the same themes, 
 \et widely different in detail, is found in the indisputably genuine Epistles to 
 the Romans and Galatians. The relations between these two epistles are 
 closely analogous to the phenomena presented by Colossians and Ephesians. 
 Galatians and Colossians are specific, ini])assioned, polemical ; liomans and 
 Ephesians are calm and independent expositions of the truths involved in the 
 letters which had immediately preceded them." 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 39 
 
 in which, on internal grounds, we must believe them to have 
 been written, in order to determine what that age was, we 
 shall find that there is no necessity for assuming diffei'ent 
 writers, or for doubting tlie Pauline authorship. It is 
 admitted, on purely scientific grounds, by such unprejudiced 
 scholars as Lipsius and Hilgenfeld, that even in the middle of 
 the first century there were already Gnostic teachers, who had 
 so far developed their systems as to form distinctive schools. 
 These would originally have no connection with Christianity, 
 and were wholly uninfluenced by Christian doctrines. Some 
 of these systems were penetrated by Judaic elements, and 
 others were developed on purely pagan lines. The eclectic 
 tendencies of the times favoured the combination of these 
 two, and some of the earliest known Gnostic systems exhibit 
 a strange blending of Judaic, or at least oriental, mysticism 
 with the more practical and prosaic mytiiology of the West. 
 Whatever the religious basis of those systems might be, 
 whether distinctively Judaic or distinctively pagan, the 
 effort was made, by means of speculation upon the elements 
 contributed by faith, to construct a rational system, a mysterio- 
 philosophic doctrine current among the believing brotherhood. 
 This was the Gnosis, built up avowedly on the basis of religious 
 faith. As thus understood, there is certainly a Gnostic 
 element even in the earlier epistles of Paul. Holtzmann ^ 
 candidly recognises this, and shows how in First and Second 
 Corinthians and in Galatians traces of this sort of Gnosticism 
 are unmistakeably present. Paul describes his gospel as a 
 Gnosis (2 Cor. ii. 14, x. 5, iv. 6), distinguishes, after the 
 style of the Alexandrian speculation, the letter and the spirit 
 of the law, and describes the one as overcome by the other ; 
 makes use of allegory, or spiritualising, in order to smooth over 
 the more offensive aspects of his doctrine (1 Cor. x. 1-2 L ; 
 Gal. iv. 21-31), even speaks of a gift of Gnosis which is not 
 objected to, if only it be not divorced from love (1 Cor. xii. 
 8, xii. 1, 8, xiv. 6), and, finally, speaks of the perfect or 
 spiritual and the carnal (1 Cor. ii. 14, 15, iii. 1, 3), and 
 represents the perfect as reaching a higher wisdom (1 Cor. 
 
 • Holtzmann, Kritlk der Epheser-und Kolosserbrief, pp. 293, 294, Leipzig,. 
 1872. 
 
40 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ii. G). This is certainly quite as ranch of a Gnostic element 
 as we should expect to find anywhere in the apostolic 
 writings. Modern criticism, however, professes to discern in 
 those epistles usually assigned to the later period of the 
 apostle's life, traces of a much more highly-developed 
 Gnosticism, which demands the hypothesis of a considerably 
 later date of composition. The Tubingen school, led by Baur, 
 was committed to a theory of the history of the apostolic 
 age, which could admit of such conciliatory tendencies as 
 appear in the Epistle to the Ephesians only after a somewhat 
 protracted period of sharp contention between the rival 
 parties of Peter and Paul. Thus the critics of that school 
 approached the study of our epistle witli preconceptions and 
 prejudices that necessarily affected their critical consideration 
 of its contents. To support their already accepted theory, 
 they sought for materials in the epistle itself that would 
 favour the assigning to it of a date not too early to allow the 
 historical development to have reached the point required. 
 The attempt was therefore zealously made to discover 
 references to heresies and forms of error that did not arise 
 before the second century. Whether, as by Baur himself, 
 Ephesians and Colossians were assigned to one writer, or, as 
 by most of the later representatives of his school, to two 
 different authors, or, as by Holtzraann, a portion of Colossians 
 Avas regarded as Pauline, and the author of Ephesians and the 
 interlopator of Colossians considered to be one, or, as by 
 Pfieiderer, the author of Ephesians and the interpolator of 
 Colossians be regarded as two different men, — in all these cases 
 the epistles as we have them are assigned to the second 
 century, and the allusions to heresy in both are supposed to 
 refer to the errors of that age. 
 Com d ^ow, any plausibility that there may be for such a 
 with theory attaches to Colossians rather than Ephesians. 
 o ossians. rpj^^ Colossian heresy has been carefully examined, 
 according to the materials afforded by the epistle, by Neander, 
 Pressensd, and Lightfoot, with in the main similar results.^ 
 
 ^ Neander, Planting of Christian Church, i. 319 sq., Edin. 1842; Pressensc^, 
 Apostolic Age, pp. 317-330, Lond. 1879 ; Lightfoot, Commentary on Colossians, 
 " The Colos-ian Heresy," pp. 73-113, Loud. 1880. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 41 
 
 The heresy had Judaic and Gnostic elenients, and was 
 evidently closely related to Essenism, from whatever source it 
 may have been introduced into Colossre. There is nothing 
 at all in the epistle that requires us to suppose that the 
 heresy had been developed to such an extent as to be an 
 anachronism in the apostolic age. We find nothing that 
 necessarily suggests the Cerinthian system of the closing 
 decade of the first century, still less the elaborate and highly- 
 wrought system of Valentinus, which reached its climax in the 
 third decade of the second century. On the assumption of 
 the Pauline authorship of Colossians, the representation given 
 of the type of thought then prevailing need cause no difficulty. 
 We have simply that Gnosticism which had, at even an earlier 
 period, been developed outside of the Church, now forming 
 alliance with Christian doctrine, and seeking to modify its 
 development in accordance with its distinctive views and by 
 its characteristic methods. And if this be so in regard to 
 Colossians, then our task is easy with reference to Ephesians. 
 Even Pfleiderer admits that in Ephesians there is no trace of 
 the heresies combated in Colossians. As far as Ephesians is 
 polemical at all, " its conflict is not with Ebionite Jewish 
 Christians, not with a scrupulous asceticism, but with a 
 frivolous libertinism, not with Jewish particularism, but with 
 heathen anti-Jewish arrogance and want of brotherly love." ^ 
 The object of the epistle is not to confute false teachers, but 
 irenically to correct a wrong tendency, and to reconcile two 
 parties, whose exclusiveness was threatening to divide the 
 Church. All that critics can point to in our epistle as 
 indicating the presence of Gnostic views among those to whom 
 it is addressed, is the occasional occurrence of certain words 
 and phrases that ultimately became technical terms in certain 
 Gnostic systems. It need not really surprise us to find that, 
 in a district like Asia Minor, kept in constant ferment by 
 successive invasions of the most diverse philosophies and 
 religions, even in Paul's time such phrases were being already 
 appropriated by thinkers and teachers of special tendencies, 
 and that the apostle regarded it as advisable to recapture the 
 
 ' Pfleiderer, Lectures on the Influence of the Apostle Paul on the Development 
 of Christianittj, pp. 220, 221, Hibbert, Loud. 1885. 
 
42 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 words and to attach to them definite Christian tlieological 
 meanings. But even those words most evidently characteristic 
 of later Gnostic systems, are not used in our epistle in such a 
 way as to imply tha.t they had, in the writer's day, obtained 
 these definite significations. When, for example, the Christian 
 is said to be engaged on tasks which lead him, like those 
 initiated in the Greek mysteries, into further depths of 
 knowledge and fuller degrees of enlightenment, the writer is 
 simply borrowing from the same source as afterwards the 
 Gnostic borrowed from. He turns to the Greek mysteries as 
 affording an apt illustration of the truth which he wishes to 
 enforce. Besides this, all the terms in our epistle which 
 were ultimately appropriated by Gnostic teachers, had been 
 previously used by Paul himself in his earlier epistles, and by 
 the author of the Apocalypse, in many cases in a sense either 
 the same as that in wliich they are used in Ephesians, or at 
 least in a sense that readily suggested the use made of them 
 in our epistle. Tlie description of the Church as the bride of 
 Christ, which is expressly called a mystery (v. 23-3 2), occurs 
 previously in 2 Cor. xi. 2, frequently in lievelation and in the 
 syuojjtic Gospels, and so cannot have been suggested by the 
 Gnostic syzygies. 
 
 It also deserves to be noted, that so soon as the Pauline 
 authorship is disputed, no agreement can be reached as to the 
 date of its composition. Historical, meaning by that tradi- 
 tional, evidence is all in favour of the apostolic origin of the 
 epistle. Criticism, proceeding on internal and subjective 
 grounds, proves here as elsewhere specially weak in its con- 
 structive efibrts. The entire adherents of the Tubingen school 
 referred its composition to the second century, when Gnosticism 
 had received its highest development. Holtzuiann regards the 
 position of the author of Ephesians and the interpolator of 
 Colossians as that of a mediator between Paulinism and later 
 Gnosticism. Von Soden, writing in 1887,^ as the result of 
 a most patient and detailed investigation, fails to see any trace 
 of developed Gnosticism, and feels satisfied with fixing a.d. 70 
 
 ^ Von Soden, Der Epheserbrief in Jahrbiicher filr Wlssensch. Theologie, xiii. 
 103-135, 432-498, 1S87 ; also Hand-Commentar, ed. by Holtzmann, Lipsius, 
 etc. iii. 1, pp. 78-150, 1891, by Von Soden. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 4jj 
 
 as the earliest, and a.d, 90 as t!ic latest, probable date for its 
 origin. And, in his admirable contribution to the Hand- 
 Commcntar, iii. 1, 1891, he firndy maintains the position 
 that the doctrinal contents are essentially Pauline, so that, 
 purely on account of such peculiarities of style and construc- 
 tion as distinguish it from admittedly genuine epistles of Paul, 
 and not on account of doctrinal ditl'erences, does he deny the 
 Pauline authorship. He represents the author as an imitator 
 of St. Paul, probably a younger contemporary, very familiar 
 with the apostle's st}le and cast of thought. The want of 
 apostolic epistles was sorely felt by those who had been so 
 dependent on the personal guidance of Paul ; and to sup])ly this, 
 his disciple, without the remotest intention of acting falsely, 
 but earnestly seeking faithfully to represent the teaching of his 
 revered master, writes carefully on the lines which he might 
 suppose the apostle would have followed. He is not led to 
 do this from any poverty of thonght, for his work, even 
 as thus circumscribed, shows him to be a man of singular 
 freshness and originality of mind. Our critic, then, reaches 
 the conclusion (Hand-Co)mncntar, iii. 1, p. 9 6) that here we 
 have tlie production of an unknown writer among the eai'ly 
 Christians. But the very fact to which he calls attention, 
 that, apart from the name of Paul himself, none of the known 
 writers of the period have ever been suggested in connection 
 with our epistle, should ratber make us sceptical regarding 
 so singular a phenomenon as that of a powerful writer, 
 capable in ordinary degree of original work, not merely 
 writing in Paul's name, but following out so closely the 
 apostle's line of thought. 
 Language Opponents of the Pauline authorship of our epistle 
 and Style, endeavour to show that, in respect of vocabulary 
 and style, it is unlike any of the undoubted productions of 
 the apostle. Klopper,^ for example, who has gone into this 
 question very carefully, gives a list of eighteen words peculiar 
 to the epistle and not occurring elsewhere in the Bible, 
 sixteen not found elsewhere in the New Testament, and fifty- 
 two which are not met with in the other epistles commonly 
 assigned to Paul, excluding the Pastoral Epistles. It is 
 
 ^ Klop23er, Dcr Brief an die Epheser, Gottingen, pp. 9-12, 1891. 
 
44 INTRODUCTIOX. 
 
 frankly admitted that the mere occurrence of liapax legomcna 
 cannot of itself prove the unauthenticity of a document, but 
 the frequent use of phrases in a peculiar sense is regarded 
 as presenting a formidable difficulty. The literary style of 
 the epistle is generally pointed to by critics unfavourable to 
 its authenticity, as entirely different from that of Paul. 
 Klopper describes it as luxurious, and flowing, and overladen ; 
 whereas the style of Paul is terse, simple, and pointed. 
 Argumentation of this kind is generally unsatisfactory, as 
 it so readily admits of being influenced by purely arbitrary 
 and subjective considerations. This at least may be said 
 with confidence, that no proof of divergence of style and 
 language between the writer of Ephesians and that of 
 Philippians and Colossians, or even of Corinthians, can be 
 produced, such as would for a moment shake the confidence 
 of any one who did not think that he had otherwise strong 
 grounds for rejecting the Pauline authorship. 
 
 That certain doctrines should be brought forward in new 
 connections, and that certain truths should be dwelt upon 
 and emphasised in our epistle which had not appeared at all, 
 or at least were only casually referred to, in earlier epistles, 
 is not to be wondered at. The apostle's own spiritual 
 experience was progressive ; and the later requirements of a 
 well organised and established Church were different from 
 those of infant communities. The doctrine of the Church, 
 wrought out on the basis of a sound Christology, is just what 
 might have been expected to form the crown of the apostle's 
 labours as a teacher.^ 
 
 We hold, therefore, that nothinsr has been advanced to 
 shake our confidence in the testimony of tradition, which 
 has unanimously assigned our epistle to St. Paul. The 
 peculiarity of contents and style may be naturally accounted 
 for by the late period of its composition, and the special 
 circumstances of the well-trained and highly-gifted community 
 to which it was sent. 
 
 1 "The idea of the Church," says Rothe, Stitl Hours, p. 299, Lond. 1886, 
 "develops itself only in the later writings of St. Paul, and is a natural conse- 
 quence of the fact that the idea of the near approach of the second advent of Christ 
 was falling into the background, and the idea of a necessary historical develop- 
 ment of the kingdom of Christ was beginning to dawn upon his mind." 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 45 
 
 3. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 
 
 We have now to apply ourselves to the problem as to 
 whether there be sufficient evidence to warrant the belief 
 that the so-called Epistle to the Ephesiaus was written for 
 and addressed to that Church of Ephesus, the history of 
 which was sketched in our first chapter. In regard to no 
 other epistle of Paul has such a controversy arisen, for 
 though critics have disputed the genuineness of many epistles 
 ordinarily ascribed to the apostle, yet in all cases, save the 
 one before us, the text has prevented any uncertainty as to 
 the readers addressed by the writer, whoever he might be. 
 This, however, in regard to an epistle, is a matter calling for 
 careful discussion and patient historical investigation. 
 ^ . . p At a very early date it would seem attention 
 
 Omission or j j 
 
 words, was called to the absence of the words iv 'Ecf^eafo 
 iv K(pi(ry. fj,Qj^ certain important manuscripts. Of the 
 earliest and best uncials that have come down to us, the 
 Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus do not contain the words. 
 According to the statement of Tertullian, it would 
 appear that Marcion, writing probably about A.D. 
 160, referred to our epistle under the name of the Epistle 
 to the Laodiceans, having substituted this title for that 
 which the Church tradition had accepted as the true super- 
 scription {Adv. Marcion. v. 11, 17). The reference, how- 
 ever, is so slight, that we cannot confidently affirm whether 
 Marcion actually had before him a text in which iv 'E4>ea(p 
 did not occur, or whether he arbitrarily ignored or excised 
 the words, and, for some dogmatic reason no longer apparent 
 to us, chose to assign the epistle to Laodicea. Nor can we 
 regard as at all necessary the admission of Meyer, that the 
 style of Tertullian's argument against Marcion requires us 
 
 Tertullian, to assume that the copies which he used, while 
 A.D. 160-240. bearing the title irpo<; 'E(j)6aiov<i had not in the 
 address the words iv 'E^eaw. Certainly as to the destina- 
 tion of the epistle Tertullian had no doubt, for he asserts 
 that the autograph manuscript might even in his own time 
 be found in Ephesus {Dc Prccscrijytione Ilcenticorum, c. 36). 
 
46 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 When we consider the end which Tertullian had before him 
 in liis work against Marcion, we need not be surprised at his 
 confining himself in his reply to the general argument from 
 the Church tradition, even though he had further material 
 for such reply in the presence of the words referred to in 
 the text. In this fifth book he seeks to prove that Paul's 
 epistles, which Marcion professed to value highly, were 
 thoroughly in touch with tlie Old Testament which the 
 heretic repudiated. His allusions to matters of criticism 
 therefore are purely incidental. His object is to support the 
 doctrinal thesis. When he comes to Paul's Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, he remarks that this book of Scripture, while re- 
 cognised by Marcion as genuine, has been tampered with so 
 far as to have a different destination assigned it than that 
 which had been accepted by Church tradition. He does not 
 wait to say whether the text has been interfered with either 
 by interpolations or by omissions. Instead of entering upon 
 the controversy regarding the destination of the epistle, he 
 expressly waived it, saying that the question about titles is 
 of slight importance, seeing that what the apostle wrote to 
 some he meant fur all. Enough for his purpose that the 
 epistle is allowed to be Paul's ; he may therefore use its con- 
 tents to confute his opponent. Whatever other modifications 
 Marcion may have made upon the epistle to make it suit 
 the destination he has assigned to it, are of no present interest 
 to Tertullian. Apart, then, from Marciou's arbitrary departure 
 from the Church tradition which made Ephesus the destination 
 of the epistle, we have up to a.u. 208, the date of TertuUian's 
 treatise against Mnrcion, no hint whatever that any peculiarity 
 in the text, such as the absence from some copies of the 
 words iv ^Ecpearo, gave ground for a suspicion that tiie 
 traditional destination was regarded by any one as doubtful. 
 . .r The hints afforded by the fathers of the third 
 
 taken and fourth centuries do not seem to carry us much 
 absolutely, f^.j^i^gj. qjj ^j^jg point of textual criticism. During 
 the Arian controversy, the orthodox party eagerly sought to 
 appropriate every Scripture saying which might in any way 
 contribute to the support of the doctrine of consubstantiality. 
 In arguing with Eunomius of Cyzicus, a very pronounced 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE ETISTLE. 47 
 
 Basil, adherent of the Avian party, Basil of Cixisarea, 
 A. D. 329-379. ^j.il^ij-,g about A.D. 360, makes reference to the 
 opening words of our epistle. He maintains that Eunomius 
 has no ground for refusing to the Sou of God the predicate 
 wv, since the apostle who describes only idols and their 
 worshippers as /x^ ovTe<i, does not hesitate to designate the 
 Ephesians in writing to them oWe? because of their union 
 with tlie iav, saying to?? a'yloi<i toI<; ovctl koI Triarol'i ev Xptarw 
 'Irjcrov} Basil wishes to maiie of this verse a proof passar'e 
 i'or use in the controversy. But now the awkwardness of 
 the words iv 'Ecpeara following the rot? oiai is apparent ; 
 and so Basil endeavours to substantiate the reading that he 
 has given, omitting the undesirable phrase. This he does on 
 
 Origen, tAvo grounds. (1) First of all, he refers to earlier 
 A.D. 185-253. writers who had given the same interpretation of 
 roL<i ovai. Origen, it would seem, in a commentary on our 
 epistle, no longer extant in its unabridged form, had rendered 
 T0i9 oval absolutely. This is just the soit of interpretation 
 we should have expected I'rom Origen's strongly -marked 
 tendencies as an exegete, and in view of this it is surely too 
 much to say, with Westcott and Hort, that Oi'igen could not 
 
 Jerome, h^^Q given such an interpretation of the passage 
 A.D. 346-420. jf be had before him the reading iv 'E(^eaw. 
 When we take into consideration a passage in the Commentary 
 of Jerome, written about A.D. 390, in which he refers to this 
 interpretation, we shall see how possible it was for patristic 
 exegetes to render xot? ovai absolutely, although accompanied 
 by the w^ords determining the local destination of the epistle. 
 He says that some, indulging in unnecessary refinements 
 (ciiriosius), had, on the basis of the divine name " I am " com- 
 municated to Moses, thought that those who are in Ephesus, 
 saints and faithful, were addressed under a phrase indicating 
 essence, being styled " those who are " as if from " Him who 
 is." Others, he tells us, and with tliem he himself evidently 
 agrees, regarded the epistle as addressed not simply to those 
 who are, but to those who are at Ephesus. There is evidently 
 nothing here to warrant the dogmatic statement of Westcott 
 and Hort (Nciv Testament in Greek, vol. ii. A pp. p. 123), that 
 ' Basil, Contra Eunomlum, ii. 19. 
 
48 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Jerome's remark about the interpretation to which he refers, 
 curiosius quam neccsse est, shows that Jerome was not himself 
 acquainted with the reading iv 'Ecj^eaM. The over-refinement 
 consisted in the treatment given to the words Toi<i overt, and it 
 is only the desire to free patristic exegesis from an evident 
 absurdity (which, however, from the same class of com- 
 mentators CDuld easily be paralleled), that leads modern 
 critics to assume that those giving to rot? ovai an absolute 
 meaniu" could not have read iu ""E^eaw in their text. There 
 is really nothing to support the opinion that either Origen or 
 
 ^ . Jerome used texts in which the words ev 'Ecbiaoi 
 2. Copies PI- ■ 
 
 omitting did not occur, or even knew oi their existence. 
 
 h'Efio-u,. ^2) Basil, however, proceeds further to declare 
 that he himself had seen ancient copies in which the words 
 iv 'E(})ea(p were wanting from the text. This is the first 
 definite statement that we have met with in regard to the 
 textual question. This, coupled with the fact that our oldest 
 extant manuscripts A and B omit the words, is by many 
 apparently regarded as almost conclusive evidence as to the 
 original reading. Let us examine particularly Basil's own 
 words. He says : " Thus have we found in the ancient copies 
 OVTO) yap .... r}/jbeL<i ev rol^' iraXaLol^ rcov avTiypdcjicov euprj- 
 KUfMev." It would be interesting to know what the antiquity 
 of those copies may have been,^ whether they were numerous, 
 and whether they were regarded as authoritative by any 
 other than himself. If very ancient and numerous, they 
 would not probably have been left for Basil to discover ; and 
 even if we should not strictly press Basil's finding as an 
 absolute discovery, these copies, had they been considered 
 authoritative, would have influenced the Church tradition. 
 The exigencies of controversy rendered Basil eager to secure 
 the countenance of any sort of textual authority for a reading 
 that precisely suited his purpose. He hailed the discovery, 
 that in certain oldish copies the undesired words were 
 wanting, and he would not care to inquire whether these 
 
 ^ That tlie epithet •ra.Xaio; was very loosely applied, may be seen from this, 
 that Cyrill of Alexandria (fA.D. 444) speaks of -raXaia. avriypa(pa of the works 
 of Athanasius (tA.D. 373). See Sophocles, Greek Lexicon, s.v.. New York, 
 1887. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 49 
 
 texts might not have originated witli the Marcionites, and 
 have been left in obscurity just because of that origin. He 
 may not have had the means at his disposal, and certainly he 
 had no strong inducement to subject the discovered text to 
 any very severe critical scrutiny. 
 Simmar -^'^^ result, then, of early documentary evidence 
 
 of Early may be stated thus. In the middle of the iburth 
 VI ence. ^gntury, the reading ev 'E(f)ea(p was generally 
 current. In the second century, Marcion, notorious for the 
 liberties which he took with the text of Scripture, differed, 
 on what grounds we know not, from the Church tradition 
 regarding the destination of our epistle. In the fourth 
 century, only one solitary witness appears expressly declaring 
 that he had seen texts, whether of any real value or not we 
 have no means of ascertaining, in which the words iv 'E(^eaip 
 were wanting. The earlier reference to the passage in Origen, 
 as well as the later reference to it in Jerome, can be used only 
 as witnessing to the existence of an absurd and vicious system 
 of interpretation. All that can fairly be deduced even from 
 the statement of Basil, is that he found examples of a reading 
 in which he had a particularly strong dogmatic interest. 
 
 State of Weiss {Introduction to the Ncio Testament, i. 339) 
 Oldest Text, says that " the iv 'E^eaw was unc[uestionably 
 wanting in the oldest text." Is it scientific to say dog- 
 matically what was or was not " unquestionably " in the 
 oldest text ? Are we so precisely sure what really was the 
 oldest text in the case of any disputed reading ? When 
 Tertullian wrote, probably at least one hundred and forty 
 years had passed since the original composition of the epistle. 
 How old might the manuscripts be that were used by him ? 
 Probably he had before him only a copy made by some scribe, 
 a contemporary of his own. This again, or a copy of the 
 same type, may have been the exemplar from which later 
 copies were made, which Origen in the third century, and 
 Basil in the fourth, commonly used, while they may have 
 been able to look back to such a second century text as that 
 of Tertullian with respect and awe as to an ancient copy. 
 All that I wish to deduce from such a hypothesis, and all 
 that is necessary for my purpose, is that modern critics have 
 
 D 
 
50 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 no foundation in history and fact for saying dogmatically, as 
 Weiss does, that because Tertullian seemingly did not read 
 ev 'E(f)e(T(p in the copy he possessed, and because Basil 
 certainly knew of some of the more ancient copies extant 
 in his day which also wanted the phrase, these words were 
 " unquestionably wanting in the oldest text." 
 
 , , , The omission of the words is supported only by 
 
 wanting in the two great manuscripts of the fourth century, 
 *^ and B. j^ ,^^^ j> 'Xhese were contemporary texts of Basil, 
 and evidently represent what he regarded as the more ancient 
 type. There is a tendency, mainly fostered by the enuncia- 
 tion of the principles of textual criticism given by Westcott 
 and Hort, to accord an unquestioning acceptance to all 
 readings supported by these two great authorities. We 
 cannot here enter upon any discussion of these principles, 
 but the reader may be referred to a convenient table drawn 
 up by Godet in his Commentary on First Corinthians, vol. 
 ii. pp. 483-491, Edin. 1887, in which it is shown that 
 exegesis affords evidence of errors in these great documents, 
 such as to suggest the need of some further proof of the 
 primitiveness of any particular reading besides its presence 
 in their texts. As a simple matter of textual criticism, it 
 will not do to reject a reading found in all other uncials, and 
 in all the cursives without exception, merely because it is 
 not found in X and B ; nor can the patristic evidence pre- 
 viously referred to be pressed as unquestionably affording 
 further and independent testimony. The other Alexandrines, 
 A and C, and even the later uncials based upon the Syrian 
 and Byzantine text, may represent in this particular instance 
 a much older reading. This conjecture is greatly strengthened 
 by the fact that the earliest patristic tradition favours the Ephe- 
 sian destination of the epistle, so that in the second century 
 Marcion stood alone in repudiating it. The probability is 
 made yet greater, by the circumstance that all the ancient 
 versions, the earliest of which dates from the second century,^ 
 
 ' There is good reason to suppose that the Peshito, or Old Syriac, is identical 
 with the 'S.Cpos quoted by Melito in a.d. 170, which may therefore be set down 
 as not later than tlie middle of the second century. See Scrivener, Plain 
 Introd. to the. Crltlci&m of the N. T., 3id ed., pp. 312, 313, Cambridge, 1883. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 51 
 
 and was decidedly earlier than Tertullian, have the reading, and 
 so must have been made from a still more ancient Greek text 
 containing the words in question. Any Syrian father, having 
 the contidence of the Church to such a degrea as to secure 
 acceptance for his translation of the Holy Scriptures, would 
 certainly use a Greek text of good repute. We therefore 
 maintain that no case is made out against the readin<T iv 
 'Ej>eaw on the grounds of the principles of textual criticism. 
 Intprpolated '-The question that has here to be decided, rather 
 or Omitted ? jg as to whether we might more easily explain the 
 falling out from, or the insertion in, the text of such a reading. 
 Certain modern critics^ suppose that these words were struck 
 out because of a difficulty early felt, in consequence of the 
 absence of any greetings or personal references in a letter 
 purporting to be addressed to a church with which the apostle 
 had been so intimately associated. Against the supposition 
 that the reading iv 'Ej>ea(p had been dropped from the 
 original text, because it was felt even in the second century 
 that the want of personal references in the epistle presented 
 a ditficulty, it is answered that the churchmen of that early 
 age had not adopted the historico-critical method. But surely, 
 without assuming on behalf of Marcion and Tertullian any 
 tendency towards the anticipation of the critical methods of 
 modern times, we may fairly suppose that not only they, but 
 also their elder contemporaries, without consciously playing 
 the role of critics, by the simple exercise of thoughtful 
 reflection, might have their minds exercised in the presence 
 of such a phenomenon, and might reach the conclusion that 
 such an epistle, void of all personal allusions or greetings, was 
 scarcely like what Paul would have written to a church where 
 he was so well known as he was in that of Ephesus. Other 
 critics,- however, regard the theory of the later insertion of 
 these words as the more natural explanation of their appear- 
 ance. The peculiarly abrupt and seemingly incomplete phrase. 
 
 See, however. Field, Hexapla, i. p. Ixxvii., and Buhl, Canon and Text of 0. T., 
 p. 187, 1891. 
 
 ' Such as Hilgenfeld, Einhitunrj, p. 670 f., and AVoldemar Schmidt iu his 
 edition of Meyer on Ephesians. 
 
 ' Such as HoltzmaiHi, E'mltituvg, 2nd ed., p. 284 ff. 
 
52 INTEODUCTION. 
 
 Tot9 ovaii', would tempt transcribers, in the interest of clear- 
 ness and intelligibility, to insert the name of some particular 
 church with which the epistle had come to be especially 
 associated. Then by combining Eph. vi. 21 with 2 Tin), 
 iv. 12, they might come to the conclusion that iv ^E^eaw 
 ought to be inserted.^ So soon, at least, as the Ephesian 
 destination of the epistle had come to be generally accepted, 
 and the title irpo^ 'E(peaiov<i had found its way into all the 
 copies, those who felt the desirability of interpreting roi? 
 ovcriv by a local designation would have no hesitation in 
 supplying the words iv 'E(jiea(p. 
 ^ . . Here, then, we have before us the alternative 
 
 Omission ' ' 
 
 more answers to the question, whether the insertion or 
 pio a e. ^j^g dropping out of the words eV 'E^ecrw is the 
 more natural hypothesis. What seems to tell most seriously 
 against the theory of the late insertion of the words is just 
 this, that the implied insertion must have taken place at a 
 very early date, before it could have dominated the most 
 primitive tradition so completely as it did ; and yet it is hard 
 to conceive that an insertion of this kind should not have 
 called forth such opposition, on the part of those acquainted 
 with the original terms of the document, as would have 
 prevented the formation of a catholic tradition on the lines 
 of a text that had been thus tampered with. The other 
 hypothesis, which seeks to account for the phenomenon in 
 question by assuming that in certain early copies the words 
 iv 'E^eaui were on theoretical grounds purposely omitted, 
 has not the same difficulty to contend with. The maintainers 
 of this view have not to account for the fact that ecclesi- 
 astical tradition continued unaffected by the change, so 
 that it influenced only some of the Alexandrine texts, 
 leaving absolutely untouched the Syrian and Gra^co-Latin 
 texts. The hypothesis only requires the assumption, 
 that such alteration was made by individual transcribers, 
 whose actual handiwork, or immediate personal influence, 
 secured for their text a limited circulation during a limited 
 period. 
 
 ' Von Soden. Iland-Commentar, III. i. 7S, characterises this combination, 
 suggested by Holtzmann, as too recondite for the second century. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 53 
 
 When, therefore, we have combined the early- 
 Patristic and patristic evidence with that afforded by the earliest 
 Textual extant texts and versions, we find that, thon"h 
 
 XliVlclcilCG 
 
 possibly in Tertullian's time copies were in 
 circulation in which the words iv ^Ecjyeacp were wanting, and 
 such were regarded by Basil as having the authority of 
 ancient copies, one of the most famous of the ancient 
 versions, from a period earlier than that of Tertullian, used 
 a text containing the words, and none of the early fathers 
 ever thought to make even the absence of the words in 
 question a ground for doubting the Ephesian destination of 
 the epistle. With the exception of the heretic Marcion, none 
 of them objects to the title Trpo? ^E(jie(riov<i, and there was 
 absolutely no suspicion that the writing referred to was 
 either an encyclical address or a catholic epistle. 
 
 Ignatius We liave already said all that it is necessary to 
 adEphes. g^y ^f,^l\\x regard to the use of this epistle in the 
 early fathers, when discussing the question of the Pauline 
 authorship of the epistle, and so here we need only refer 
 to the evidence for the Ephesian destination of the letter, 
 afforded by the epistle of Ignatius to that same church. It 
 would naturally be expected that Ignatius, writing to Ephesus 
 probably within forty years of the death of the Apostle Paul, 
 should make special reference to any epistle which that 
 apostle might have sent to that church, as well as to the 
 well-known intimacy that had existed between its members 
 and that apostle. Now, we actually do find that, tliough 
 there are no direct quotations, there is unmistakeable and 
 studied imitation of the phrases and style of our epistle 
 throughout. If we compare the Ignatian Epistle to the 
 Ephesians with the other Ignatian epistles, we shall find that 
 this imitation of the canonical Epistle to the Ephesians is 
 peculiar to the epistle addressed to that church. This copying 
 of the style of Paul's epistle is most marked where we should 
 expect it in the introductory formula. The prologue runs 
 thus : " Ignatius, who is also Tlieophorus, unto her which 
 hath been blessed {evXojrjfiivrj) in greatness (eV /xejedei) 
 through the plenitude (irXrjpcofiaTt) of God the Father ; which 
 hath been foreordained {TrpooopLcrfievr}) before the ages to be 
 
54 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 for ever unto abiding and unchangeable glory (86^a), 
 united and elect {iKXeXey/u^iur)) in a true passion by the will 
 {de\')]iJLaTi) of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God ; even 
 unto the church which is in Ephesus, worthy of all felicita- 
 tion, abundant greeting in Christ Jesus and in blameless joy." 
 Any careful reader will perceive that, besides the use in one 
 sentence of so many words characteristic of our canonical 
 epistle, as are here marked, there is throughout a designed 
 imitation of j^hrase and style, evidently intended as a delicate 
 compliment to the Ephesians, whose much-prized apostolic 
 treasure was so familiar to him who now addressed them. 
 It was not the practice of Ignatius to quote largely. His 
 originality, as compared with Polycarp, is very marked. He 
 can scarcely be said to quote, but he shows clearly his 
 familiar acquaintance with the sacred writings. " This 
 knowledge betrays itself in casual words and phrases, stray 
 metaphors, epigrammatic adaptations, and isolated coincidences 
 of thought. Where there is an obligation, the borrowed 
 figure or expression has passed through tlie mind of the 
 writer, has been assimilated, and has undergone some 
 modification in the process." ^ 
 
 Critical Having thus considered the question about the 
 
 Difficulties, presence in the text of the words iv 'Ecfiiacp, from 
 the standpoint of textual criticism, and also tlie evidence 
 afforded of the Ephesian destination of the epistle from 
 references to it in early Christian writings, we proceed now 
 to inquire what are the difficulties experienced by critics in 
 acquiescing in the traditional opinion that this epistle was 
 addressed to the Church of Ephesus, and what alternatives 
 have been suggested by those who feel the force of those 
 objections ? 
 Absence of Attention has been called to the absence of all 
 
 personal personal allusions, in the way of reminiscences and 
 greetings, such as might have been expected from 
 the apostle had he been writing to the members of a church 
 with whom he was so intimately acquainted, as he must 
 have been with those of Ephesus, among whom he had 
 wrought during a residence of nearly three years. This 
 ^ Lightfoot, Ignatius and Polycarp, 2nd eil. i. 550, 1889. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 55 
 
 phenomenon is adduced as an argument in favour of assign- 
 ing the epistle to a church, or circle of churches, which had 
 never been visited by the apostle. This peculiarity of the 
 epistle, however, may be accounted for by the very circum- 
 stance of the apostle's long residence in Ephesus, and his 
 intimate relations with an unusually large proportion of the 
 members. There would be so many entitled to recognition, 
 that the apostle might find it better to name none, rather than 
 do injustice to those who, owing to the exigencies of time and 
 space, might be passed over. That the omission of personal 
 greetings, and the absence of frank communication of circum- 
 stantial details regarding his own private affairs, did not 
 result from any want of warmth of feeling on the part of the 
 apostle toward the friends to whom he wrote, is shown by 
 this, that he had actually commissioned a man, so well known 
 and so highly honoured as Tychicus, to tell them all about 
 himself, and to bring back a careful and detailed report 
 concerning tliem. Too little importance has been attached 
 to this sending of Tychicus. It seems to me a much more 
 striking proof of the peculiarly intimate and affectionate 
 relations subsisting between the writer and his readers, than 
 could have been afforded by the most particular and extended 
 list of individual names. With the exception of the com- 
 panion Epistle to the Colossians, there is no reference in any 
 other epistle of Paul to any such arrangement. In Colossians 
 it is the same Tychicus who is commissioned to give detailed 
 information as to the apostle's circumstances, and there, in 
 addition, we have sreetinccs sent from Colossians, and others 
 somehow associated with Colossse then resident in Eome, 
 and to the brethren of Laodicea who, like the Colossians, 
 were not personally known to the writer. — Then, again, even 
 if the apostle might, without offence or injustice, have 
 enumerated certain members of the Ephesian Church and 
 some of the very many Ephesians living in Eome, the length 
 of his epistle, and the sustained dignity of thought and 
 diction by which it is characterised, and the peculiar circum- 
 stances in which the writer was placed, which may have 
 necessitated his taking advantage of an opportunity that 
 called for the immediate dispatch of his letter, — all these 
 
56 IXTRODUCTIO:^. 
 
 circumstances, or any one of them, might explain the apostle's 
 procedure in closing his epistle so soon as he had reached the 
 conclusion of his theme. 
 
 Tj 1 Many liave insisted that the writer of the 
 
 strangers to epistle expressly refers to his readers as strangers 
 ^^ '^^' with whom he personally never had any direct 
 communication. They allege in support of this view, those 
 passages from the text of the epistle (i. 15, iii. 1—4, iv. 21), 
 in which they hold that the writer describes himself as having 
 merely heard of his readers' faith, and speaks of them as 
 having only possibly heard of the special dispensation given 
 him as Apostle of the Gentiles, and as only possibly having 
 heard Christ and been taught by Him. " The writer and his 
 readers," says Holtzmann, " are known to each other only by 
 report. There is no trace whatever of any previous acquaint- 
 ance of the writer with the readers of the epistle, but, on the 
 contrary, he has only heard of them (i. 15, iv. 21) and they 
 of him (iii. 2, 4)." ^ So Harless, Olshausen, and De Wette. 
 The recent commentary of Beet also advocates this rendering 
 in regard to Eph. i. 15; while Weiss, whose treatment of 
 this epistle, in his generally admirable and well-considered 
 Introduction, is singularly reckless and dogmatic, is inclined 
 positively to claim only the otlier two passages. " It is true 
 i. 15 does not state that Paul had only heard of the faith of 
 his readers ; but the way in which he gives it simply as his 
 impression that they had heard of his Gentile apostleship 
 (iii. 2 ff.), and had been instructed in the true doctrine of 
 Christ (iv. 21), makes it impossible for the epistle to have 
 been addressed to a church founded by himself." ^ By all 
 these writers, those passages, as thus interpreted, are regarded 
 as favouring the theory that the epistle was not written for 
 the exclusive and particular use of the Christian community 
 at Ephesus. The meaning of those passages will be discussed 
 in the commentary, but it may be here affirmed that the 
 soundest and most sober exegesis does not regard it as at all 
 
 1 Short ProtcMant Commentary on the New Testament, iii. 1, Lond. 1884. 
 So, too, Vou Soden, writing in 1890, in his H and-Commentar, III. i. 84, 
 insists upon the same interpretation of those passages. 
 
 ^ Weiss, Introduction to the Neio Testament, i. 340, Lond. 18S7. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 57 
 
 necessary to assume that the writer and his readers had not 
 been personally acquainted with one another. The natural 
 interpretation of the first passage is, that the writer had recently 
 received certain intelligence about his readers, without by any 
 means implying that he had not had earlier relations with 
 them of an intimate and personal character. In reference to 
 the other two passages, no expositor, who had not a theory to 
 support at all hazards, would ever think of understanding 
 them in any other sense than that of a supposition intended 
 not to imply a doubt, but in the strongest manner to 
 suggest that they had indeed heard and known the matter 
 spoken of. 
 
 General tone The main difficulty, however, has been felt to arise, 
 of Epistle. jjqJ; so much from the absence of personal greetings, 
 or the presence of express statements declaring the writer 
 and the readers to be strangers to one another, but rather 
 from the general tone of the epistle, which, it has been sup- 
 posed by many, is suitable only for a community differently 
 composed from that of Ephesus. It is pointed out that the 
 earliest members of the Ephesian Church were evidently 
 drawn from the Jewish synagogue, and it has been assumed 
 that the membership of the community probably continued to 
 be mainly composed of Jews. The epistle, on the other hand, 
 it is declared, is addressed, some say chiefly, others say wholly, 
 to a community or to communities of Gentile Christians. 
 Here we are face to face with two questions, one of history, 
 the other of exegesis, both of which have called forth con- 
 flicting answers. — The historical question has to do with the 
 composition of the Ephesian Church. Turning to the his- 
 torical statement regarding the founding of the church given 
 in the Acts of the Apostles, we find it said that after Paul 
 had left the synagogue for the school of Tyrannus, " all they 
 which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, hoth 
 Jews mid Greeks (xix. 10), the Jewish exorcist's defeat became 
 known to all the Jcivs and Greeks dwelling in Ephesus (ver. 
 17), and evidently the " much people " turned away in Ephesus, 
 as well as throughout Asia, whose conversion affected the 
 trade of the silversmiths (ver. 26 ff.), must have been Gentiles 
 and not Jews. The impression left upon the mind of the 
 
58 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 reader of that whole chapter is, that after the close of Paul's 
 three months' activity in the synagogue his converts were 
 drawn mainly from the Gentile section of the population. 
 It may also be noted that those of Asia named in chap, xx., 
 Tychicus and Trophimus, were evidently Gentiles (see also 
 chap. xxi. 29). The earliest converts were Jews, and would 
 keep for a time the pre-eminence in the Christian community ; 
 but after a time the Gentile converts, numerically and perhaps 
 socially important, would come, it may be unduly, to assert 
 themselves. — The exegetical question has to do with the 
 indications afibrded by the epistle itself with regard to the 
 parties to whom it was addressed. Almost all who reject 
 the Ephesian destination of the epistle consider that it is 
 addressed to Gentile Christians, whether of one or of several 
 communities. The passnges relied upon as supporting this 
 view are, Eph. ii. 11 f., 19, iii. 1, iv. 17. From these it is 
 indeed quite evident that the community addressed embraced 
 a large Gentile element, which had apparently been inclined 
 to treat in a somewhat inconsiderate and overbearing manner 
 the smaller Jewish section, whose claims to recognition are 
 insisted upon by the apostle, when he recalls the fact that 
 they had first hoped in Christ, and that, though now the 
 middle wall of partition is broken down, they had been nigh 
 when the Gentiles still were far off. With the exception of 
 those passages referred to in which the Gentile section of the 
 church is addressed, we have no reason to suppose that the 
 epistle is addressed to a community different in composition 
 from the ordinary Christian communities of mixed Jewish and 
 Gentile membership, such as undoubtedly existed at Ephesus. 
 Having thus reviewed the main difficulties experi- 
 enced by those who decline to accept the traditional 
 theory of the destination of our epistle, we now pass on to 
 consider tlie various alternatives that have been suggested. 
 Suggestions of various kinds have been proposed, each designed 
 to obviate some special difficulty, but accomplishing this, as 
 will be seen, only by leaving out of account some other 
 aspect of tlie problem that equally demands an explanation. 
 Epistle to the ^-'l^^ several solutions that have been attempted 
 Laoiliceans. jj^f^y jjg roughly classified under two heads. We 
 
THE DESTIXATIOX OF THE EPISTLE. 59 
 
 have, first of all, the proposal of Mareion to identify our 
 Ephesians with the Epistle to Laodicea of Col. iv. 16, by- 
 si ui ply altering the title. Then we have the theory 
 of a circular letter, first seriously elaborated by 
 Usher in his Annalcs Vctcris ct Novi Tistavunti, 1650. 
 This idea, which has been very widely accepted, is presented 
 by different scholars with considerable variations and modi- 
 fications in detail. According to some, Laodicea was one of 
 the churches for which it was destined, and the copy of it 
 lying at Laodicea was the epistle referred in Col. iv. 16, and 
 this name is there given it simply because the copy lying there 
 was the one most easily procurable by the Colossians. Others 
 regarding Ephesus as the chief city of the district, in which 
 they suppose the epistle to have circulated, refuse to burden 
 their theory with any reference to Laodicea. By others, again, 
 it is regarded as a letter to Gentile Christians generally, with- 
 out any local destination. 
 
 Marcion, as we have seen, in his Canon of Scripture altered 
 the title of the epistle from that which had been by tradition 
 assigned to it, styling it the Epistle to tlie Laodiceans. This 
 is in accordance with the statement of Tei'tullian, Adv. 
 Marcion. v. 11, 17. The account given by Epiphanius, 
 Hceres. xiii. 0, is confused and untrustworthy, according to 
 which Marcion had some parts of an Epistle to the 
 Laodiceans, but yet had the Epistle to the Ephesians ranked 
 as seventh in his list. It is quite evident that, in the drawing 
 up of his Canon of Sciipture, Marcion was guided not by his- 
 torical facts such as determine the question of the genuineness 
 or non-genuineness of particular books, but by purely sub- 
 jective considerations connected with his doctrinal and 
 ecclesiastical scheme. His list has no authority in evidencing 
 the acceptance or rejection by the Church of this or that other 
 writing, and is mainly important on account of the criticism 
 which it occasioned on the part of ecclesiastical authorities of 
 that age. Though it does not appear how, it yet seems 
 certain from the tendencies of the man, that Marcion regarded 
 the transference to Laodicea of the epistle traditionally 
 assigned to Ephesus, as conducive to the advantage of his 
 system. It may have been that the presence of a specially 
 
60 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Strong anti- Judaic j)arty iu Laodicea might give a greater 
 verisimilitude to his exaggerated, ultra-Pauline interpretation 
 of the epistle, when it had been assigned to that particular 
 community. The name was no doubt suggested to him by 
 the reference to an epistle addressed to that church in Col. 
 iv. IG, comljined with the yjrevious statements, chap. ii. 1, 2, 
 about the Church of Laodicea as one in which the apostle 
 was deeply interested, but had never been able in person to 
 visit. By calling attention to those points, he hoped, as 
 Tertullian suggests, to win fame as a very diligent inquirer. 
 The mere transference of the locality of the receiving church 
 from Ephesus to Laodicea does not serve to solve any 
 difficulty, and, like most rash guesses, it somewhat seriously 
 increases the complexity of the problem. Eadie very 
 naturally expresses his astonishment that such an opinion 
 should have been adopted by any succeeding writers. It has 
 been reasserted, however, by Paley in his Hone Paulince 
 (1790), sec. vi. 4, whose statement of the problem is highly 
 creditable iu one writing a century ago. What makes the 
 mere renaming of the epistle utterly unsatisfactory is just 
 this, that were it correct we should certainly have had 
 Laodicea named where tradition puts Ephesus.^ — Very few 
 modern critics seem inclined to revive the theory in the old 
 form. Yet the idea of associating our epistle with Laodicea, 
 and finding iu it the apostolic writing referred to in Col. iv. 
 16, has proved peculiarly fascinating to Biblical critics, and 
 even though the mere substitution of Laodicea for Ephesus is 
 admitted to be insufiicient as the basis of a theory, attempts 
 are made by the most sober and accomplished scholars to 
 prove that Laodicea was the chief of a group of churches for 
 which the epistle was intended. liiibiger {J)e Christologia 
 Paulina, p. 48, Breslau 1852) represents the apostle as 
 liaving written the Epistle to the Colossians on the ground of 
 information received from Tychicus and Onesimus, which 
 accounts for the distinctive and special character of its con- 
 tents. When this had been done, Tychicus gave a further 
 
 ^ Weiss, Introduction to the iVew TtHtament, p. 342. See also an elaborate 
 criticLsm of the theory of Marcion as rendered by Holzhausen in Harless, 
 C'ommentar, EinUltuvg, xxxii.-xxxvii. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 61 
 
 report of the other churclies in tlie same group with Colossic, 
 and successfully urges the apostle to write a more general 
 epistle of an encouraging and instructive cliaracter to that 
 group of which Laodicea was the centre, " which," says liiibiger, 
 " I suspect to be what we call the Epistle to the Ephesians, and 
 what we styled in Col. iv. IG, "the Epistle from Laodicea," 
 T^^ p ,. Before going on to speak of the circular letter 
 
 Ep. to the theory, which is not necessarily connected with the 
 Laodiceans. i,]ei^tiiicatioii of our epistle and that to Laodicea, 
 though many of its advocates do entertain this opinion, we 
 may state what in the earlier ages was said or known about 
 an epistle bearing the designation to the Laodiceans. As 
 Marcion's proposal to alter the title of the canonical Epistle 
 to the Ephesians did not tind any support, a peculiarly tempt- 
 ing opportunity was presented to literary aspirants to exercise 
 their powers ujjon the production of a writing that might 
 pass for the lost Epistle to the Laodiceans. It is certain that 
 a forged epistle under tliis name made its appearance at a 
 very early date. Though by no means free from doubt, tlie 
 reference in the Muratorian Fragment, written about a.d. 170, 
 to the Laodicean Epistle, alongside of an otherwise unknown 
 Alexandrian epistle, as devised in support of the Marcionite 
 heresy, is probably to one of the earliest of the forgeries 
 under this name. If so, this Marcionite Epistle to the 
 Laodiceans, the production probably of a disciple of Marcion, 
 who found that " the Ephesians " v/as holding its old name, 
 and was not, perhaps, sufficiently pronounced in its Marcionite 
 teaching, is no longer extant nor elsewhere mentioned. 
 Jerome, writing in A.D. 392, in his Vir. Illustr. 5, speaks of 
 an epistle to the Laodiceans which was read by some but not 
 accepted as an epistle of Paul. Timotheus of Constantinople^ 
 in A.D. 511, as quoted by Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 293, in a 
 list of apocryphal works, mentions a forgery of the Manicheans 
 which passed under the name of the Epistle to the Laodiceans, 
 If he is right in regard to the doctrinal tendency of this 
 spurious epistle, then it is another production, besides the 
 Marcionite document, which is no longer extant. The so- 
 called Epistle to the Laodiceans which has come down to us 
 is a colourless tract, made up of extracts from canonical 
 
62 IXTllODUCTION. 
 
 epistles. The twenty short verses of which it is coaiposed 
 are mainly copied from Galatians and Philippians. It never 
 received canonical authority, though often printed among the 
 canonical books ; and, strangely enough, we find Gregory 
 the Great and other distinguished teachers of the Western 
 Church, from the sixth to the fifteenth century, maintaining 
 its Pauline authorship, and recommending it as edifying 
 though not authoritative. Such were the attempts made to 
 produce an epistle that would fulfil the conditions of Col. 
 iv. 16. To no one does it seem all that while to have 
 occurred to fall hack upon, or to say anything in support of, 
 the theory of Marcion. 
 
 „. , In quite recent times, it has become a widelv- 
 
 Circiilar i _ _ ' _ " 
 
 Letter accepted opinion that Laodicea was one of a group 
 Tieory. ^£ churches for which the epistle was intended, 
 Godet. j^ijj so the notion of the Laodicean destination of 
 the letter is combined with the circular letter theory. Godet, 
 in his paper on " The Epistle to the Gentile Churches," ^ 
 makes an elaborate attempt in this way to identify the 
 Laodicean Epistle of Col. iv. 16 with an Epistle to the 
 Ephesians. On the basis of what we have already cliaracter- 
 ised as an entirely false exegesis of chap. i. 1-5, iii. 2, iv. 21, 
 as implying that the apostle had never visited those whom he 
 there addresses, and proceeding on a complete misunder- 
 standing of chap. vi. 21, as indicating several churches rather 
 than several saints or believers, the commentator pictures 
 Tychicus arriving at Ephesus with his three letters, one for 
 Colosste, one for Thilemon, and one for tlie Phrygian churches 
 of Laodicea, Hierapolis, Colossa?, etc. At this point in his 
 journey he halts until he has a sufficient number of copies 
 of this third epistle prepared, so that he shall not be detained 
 at any of the churches embraced in his commission, while 
 the epistle, after having been read, is being transcribed for 
 future reference, but may simply leave the copy written ouc 
 for that particular church by the Epliesian scribe. This 
 being done, Tychicus finds that he can afford to leave the 
 Ephesians a copy, but, strangely enough, they will not be 
 satisfied with anything short of the original document from 
 
 1 Expontor, 1887, 3rd Scries, v. 376-381. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 63 
 
 which these transcripts had been made. And so Laodicea, 
 which had been mainly in the apostle's mind, as the metro- 
 polis of the district in which the churches addressed were 
 situated, gets an ordinary copy like any of the other Phrygian 
 churches, and Ephesus, which was not one of the Phrygian 
 churches unvisited by the apostle, and so had not been in 
 the writer's mind at all, gets the precious original. It might 
 have been supposed that Tychicus, having lengthened out his 
 sojourn at Ephesus until he secured so many copies of his 
 circular epistle that he could feel justified in leaving the 
 original behind him there, would have carried away with him 
 a copy for each of the churches intended. Godet, however, 
 informs us that this was not so. He had none for Colossse. 
 And this was not an oversight or miscalculation on the part 
 of Tychicus. It must have been deliberatel}'' done ; for had 
 he not read in the Epistle to the Colossians the apostle's 
 injunction that the Colossians should send to Laodicea for 
 the copy addressed to that church, and make use of it ? He 
 must therefore be careful to put no stumbling-block in the 
 way of the Colossians to prevent them fulfilling the command 
 of the master Paul. This attempt to identify our epistle 
 with the one referred to in Col. iv. 16, and at the same time 
 account for its traditional ascription to the Ephesian Church, 
 like Marcion's theory, removes no previous difficulty, and even 
 more than this, it adds not a few serious complications. To 
 any one who will accept these preliminary hypotheses as 
 honest history, all the rest must be easy. When in later 
 times the epistle came into request in the Western churches, it 
 was to Ephesus, the great emporium of trade, that they applied 
 for copies, and all the more readily would they do so if they 
 knew, as the Ephesians would be very sure to tell them, that 
 the document lying there was the original. Thus the name of 
 Ephesus becomes associated in the early ecclesiastical tradition 
 with the epistle which, in its author's intention, had an alto- 
 gether different destination. 
 
 Lightfoot also believes that the so-called Epistle 
 
 "'^' "^^ ■ to the Ephesians was a circular letter intended for 
 
 the Asiatic churches, and holds that "educated opinion is 
 
 tending, though slowly," in the direction of identifying it with 
 
64 INTKODUCTION. 
 
 the Epistle to Laodicea of Col. iv. IG, and that "ultimately 
 this view will be generally received." ^ He reserved a 
 detailed statement and vindication of this position for the 
 Introduction to his Commentary on Ephesians to which these 
 questions most appropriately belong. The lamented death of 
 this distinguished scholar deprives us of the hope of seeing 
 this theory set forth in its final and most effective form. It 
 would be impossible accurately to surmise the particular 
 positions which Bishop Lightfoot might have adopted, had he 
 been permitted to elaborate his views in the work upon the 
 epistle before us which he projected, and it would be 
 altogether unbecoming and unfair to make any such attempt. 
 We have, however, in his recent treatise on the Ignatian 
 Epistles, a single sentence, from wliich it is clear that he did 
 not contemplate the assigning of our epistle to the Phrygian 
 churches in such a way as to exclude the Church of Ephesus 
 from the circle of its readers. " Though St. Paul's so-called 
 Epistle to the Ephesians," he says, " was probably a circular 
 letter, yet even on this hypothesis Ephesus was the principal 
 church addressed " - Similar to this is the view of West- 
 cott and Hort, who argue for the circular letter theory on 
 the ground of the exceptional generality of the language, 
 and the absence of local and personal allusions by which 
 the epistle is characterised. Those accomplished critics, 
 however, distinctly relieve themselves of the complications 
 and difficulties caused by the identification of the so-called 
 Epistle to the Ephesians with the Laodicean Epistle of 
 Col. iv. 16. "St. Paul might naturally take advantage of 
 the mission of Tychicus, to write a letter to be read by the 
 various churches which he had founded or strengthened in 
 the region surrounding Ephesus during his long stay, though 
 he might have special means for writing separate letters to 
 Colossffi and Laodicea."^ The range of its circulation is thus 
 very considerably narrowed, and the plausibility of the theory 
 correspondingly enhanced. The main difficulty encountered 
 
 1 Lightfoot, Coloasians, 5th ed, pp. 37, 281, Lond. 1880. 
 
 - Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, part ii. ; lonatius and Pobjcarp, ii. 
 23, Lond. 1889. 
 
 ^ Westcott cand Hort, The New Testament in the Ori'jinal Greek, vol. ii. 
 App., p. 124, Cambridge 1882. 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 65 
 
 by the theory, as rendered by Lightfoot, lies in the hctero- 
 geneousness of tlie communities associated as readers of 
 the one epistle. It is easy to understand how, in writing to 
 Colossoe and to Laodicea, which were distant but eight miles 
 from one another, neither of which had been visited by the 
 apostle, in both of which the Jewish element in the popula- 
 tion was particularly large, the apostle would deal with 
 matters of common interest, and express himself in such a way 
 that the two letters might be regarded as common to both. 
 Difficulti ^^^^ circular letter theory, in all its various forms, 
 
 of this is beset M-ith insurmountable difticulties. Most 
 leory. unsatisfactory is that form of it which seeks to 
 maintain the identification of it with the Laodicean epistle. 
 If the epistle lying at Laodicea were the letter carried thither 
 by Tychicus, when on his way to deliver at Colossa; the 
 epistle destined to that church, the messenger must have put 
 into the hands of the Colossians the epistle enjoining them 
 to send to Laodicea for that other epistle on the very day, 
 or, at furthest, on the day succeeding that on which he had 
 left Laodicea. Is it conceivable that Tychicus could have 
 read Col. iv. IG as an injunction to obtain an epistle which 
 he had the day before read in the neighbouring church of the 
 Laodiceans ? Undoubtedly, had it been Paul's intention that 
 the letter written by him at the same time as the Epistle to 
 the Colossians should be read by Tychicus at Laodicea, and 
 should be afterwards read by the members of the church at 
 Colosste, he would have instructed Tychicus to take it with 
 him after reading it at Laodicea, that he might communicate 
 it also to the Colossians. Forming an opinion purely from 
 Col. iv. 16, any one who had no theory to support would 
 certainly think of an epistle written and sent to Laodicea 
 some time previously. On the occasion of his visit to 
 Colossse, Tychicus had evidently not been to Laodicea, other- 
 wise he could have brought the epistle with him, and so the 
 apostle bids the Colossians send for it. No one would have 
 hesitated in asserting that the Laodicean epistle is one of the 
 lost epistles of St. Paul,^ had it not been thought desirable to 
 
 ^Article by Dr. Gloag on "The Lost Epistles of St. Vnul " m British and 
 Foreign Evangelical Review for 1872, pp. 320-323. 
 
 E 
 
66 INTEODUCTIOX. 
 
 secure another destination for the epistle usually assigned to 
 the Ephesians. But even when unencumbered by this 
 reference to Laodicea, this circular letter theory fails to 
 commend itself as a solution of the problem. If the generality 
 of the language and the freedom from personal allusions, 
 which, according to Westcott and Hort, characterise this 
 epistle, make its destination to the Church of Ephesus 
 doubtful or impossible, can we regard the slight extension of 
 its range to a few daughter churches in the immediate 
 neighbourhood, among whom in any case a communication 
 received by the parent church would most likely be circulated, 
 as contributing in any measure to remove the difficulty ? It 
 seems to us that this circular letter theory has force only in 
 the way of obviating the objection presently referred to, when 
 the range embraced is very considerable, and then the 
 heterogeneousness of the different communities included, 
 already spoken of, presents new difficulties from the opposite 
 direction. 
 
 Then, again, those who regard the external and internal 
 evidence against the Ephesian destination of the epistle as 
 more serious than we have found reason to consider it, and 
 consequently agree to the omission of the iv ""E^ecw from the 
 text, find themselves face to face with peculiar difficulties in 
 translating the passage from which the words are withdrawn. 
 They have to choose between joining the words " who are " 
 with the preceding " saints," or with the succeeding " faithful." 
 Those who adopt the former alternative, render the whole 
 clause, " the saints who are really such " (Schneckenburger, 
 etc.). These words given in italics are utterly unwarranted 
 as a translation of the text, and as gratuitous additions, 
 which entirely alter the sense of the clause, cannot be 
 allowed. The necessity for adding them, in order to make 
 translation possible, condemns the theory that deprives the 
 sentence of such terms of local designation as the construction 
 of the sentence clearly requires. Those who adopt the other 
 alternative, render the other clause thus, " the saints who are 
 also believers " (Hofmann), " the saints who are also faithful " 
 (Meier). Against the first form it may be said that believing 
 in Christ does not add anything to the idea of New Testament 
 
THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE. 67 
 
 sainthood. It is advocated by Weiss (Herzog, Had Encijclo- 
 pccdk, 1st ed. xix. 480), on the ground that it is meant to 
 distinguish New Testament from Old Testament saints ; but 
 there is no such contrast suggested by the passage. Then, 
 "faithful or steadfast" is not the meaning of the word here, 
 but " believing," i.e. exercising faith. 
 
 The unsatisfactoriness of all attempted renderings of this 
 form of the text is so apparent, that it is now admitted by 
 most expositors that the words as they stand, without iv 
 'E^eaw or some similar phrase, are untranslateable. 
 
 Blank Those who reject the words in question are there- 
 
 Space. fQj-e jjow for the most part disposed to advocate 
 the theory of a blank space where in our text tV 'E(f)iaco 
 stands, which was filled up in the various copies with the 
 name of the particular church for which it was destined. 
 Xow, such a device as this is neither ancient nor dignified. 
 The only purpose that could be served by it would be the 
 gratification of a little childish desire on the part of little 
 village communities that they should be singled out by the 
 great apostle, and honoured by a special letter from him with 
 their own name upon it. To fill a blank space on a tract 
 with the name of a village or parish, may be a comparatively 
 harmless tribute to the self-importance of the inhabitants, 
 hut recourse to such a trick in order that the Ephesians, the 
 Laodiceans, etc., should each think the epistle the outcome of 
 the writer's interest in themselves peculiarly, is surely much 
 more reprehensible. Paul's uprightness of character was 
 sutficiently well marked to preserve him from any such 
 questionable and undiguified device.^ 
 
 ^ "The hypothesis of a blank space, or the theory of a circular letter, is not 
 only without example in antiquity, other forms to meet such a case being given 
 in 1 Cor. i. and 1 Pet. i. , but is also an unrealisable conce[ition. Who Avould on 
 each occasion fill up the blank ? One who would play the tract distributor 
 going round with this epistle, taking his orders, perhaps, from a list of names 
 supplied by the apostle ? Or the churches that would make a transcript and send 
 it on ? And why, then, did the transcribed text not run either toTs ou(nv 'm . . . 
 or simply toU ayims, with a space between toTs and ayioi;, or after ayiois ? But 
 liow are we to explain the fact, that of all tlie other addresses no trace remains, 
 and that none of tlie other churches concerned have contested with Ephesus its 
 right to the exclusive possession of tlie epistle?" (Von Soden, Hand-Commentar, 
 III. i. 78). Repudiating the circular letter theory and that of the Pauline 
 
■68 INTRODUCTION". 
 
 Pauline ^^' Jiowever, it had really been the apostle's wish 
 
 Cinnilar that this particular epistle should have circulated in 
 pist es. ^j^y special group of churches, he knew well how to 
 indicate this without having recourse to any such nmnceuvre. 
 AVe have specimens from his hand of genuine circular epistles, 
 and from them we see how the apostle could give expression 
 to his intention. The Epistle to the Clalatians is addressed to 
 " the churches of Galatia," which means no doubt that it 
 should be read in each Christian community within the 
 province so named. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians is 
 addressed " to the Church of God which is at Corinth, with 
 all the saints which are in all Achaia." Probably also the 
 " every place " of the address of Fii'st Corinthians applies to 
 the smaller communities which regarded Corinth as their 
 metropolis. Here we see how the apostle could certainly 
 have expressed himself, if he meant to write a general epistle 
 that could be of interest to and be read by the churches that 
 were grouped around Ephesus. 
 
 Difficulties ^^'^ find, then, that no evidence has been adduced 
 may be to shake our confidence in the Ephesian destination 
 
 expdiuei. ^j. ^j^^ epistle. Meyer, who is thoroughly satisfied 
 
 with the proof of the presence of the words eV ""E^eaw in the 
 
 text, admits that l)ut for this he does not think Ephesus would 
 
 have been thought of as tlie church for which the epistle had 
 
 been written. The general tone is felt by him and by many 
 
 others to be less free and familiar than might have been 
 
 expected in correspondence with a community so well known 
 
 to the writer as that of Ephesus. Circumstances may have 
 
 occasioned this, which may have been well understood by the 
 
 receivers of the letter, or easily explained by Tychicus, The 
 
 fervour of his thanksgivings and the unction of his prayers, in 
 
 which the apostle seems here to have excelled himself, surely 
 
 suggests a community personally known rather than one 
 
 known only by report. Then the generality of language, and 
 
 authorship, Von Soden considers it to have been addressed to Gentile Christians 
 in all jilaees, and accounts for its liecoming located in Ephesus, and associated 
 with the church there, by the conjecture that it may have been written in 
 E[)hesns, or that the original was preserved there and regarded as a precious 
 ])osscssion, or that the Ephesians had taken to the epistle, and found it attract- 
 ive and useful to them in a quite peculiar manner. 
 
CHARACTER AND TYl'E OF DOCTRINE. GO 
 
 tlie absence of personal allusions, would call for explanation as 
 well in a circular letter as in an epistle to a particular cliurch, 
 if we consider the tone and style of the genuine circular or 
 provincial epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians. 
 
 In view of the contents, therefore, as well as from what we 
 know of the history of its transmission in the early Church, we 
 do not hesitate to accept the traditional destination of the 
 letter as the Epistle to the Ephesians. 
 
 4. CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 
 
 Generiil From the wealth of ideas and snstained grandeur 
 
 Laudation, of style which characterise this epistle, it has been 
 the subject of enthusiastic admiration on the part of all in 
 every age who had any love for and experience of the deep 
 things of God. " The epistle," says Chrysostora in the Preface 
 to his Homilies on Ephesians, " overflows with lofty thoughts 
 and doctrines. In this scripture the apostle reveals what he 
 had scarcely anywhere else expressed." Coleridge, in his 
 Talle Talk, has pronounced it the divinest composition of 
 man, embracing every doctrine of Christianity. Godet con- 
 siders that in this epistle, as compared with his earlier 
 writings, Paul speaks that wisdom which he declared to the 
 Corinthians could only be uttered among those that are perfect. 
 Westcott classes it along with the writings of St. John as 
 containing " the complete solution of the greatest problems 
 to which tlie thoughts of men are now being turned — the 
 solidarity of humanity and the relation of our world to the 
 whole Kosmos." " In the depth of its theology," says Farrar, 
 Messages of the Books, p. 334, "in the loftiness of its morals, 
 in the way in which the simplest moral truths are based 
 upon tlie profoundest religious doctrines, the epistle is un- 
 paralleled." 
 
 Kostlin and Only a few modern critics whose judgment has 
 Tfleiderer. j^een warped by their theories of the authorship of 
 the epistle, and its relation to the works of Paul, have ventured 
 to speak in a depreciatory manner of its style and contents. 
 On the other hand, several of the most distinguished opponents 
 of the Pauline authorship of the epistle, such as Kostlin and 
 
70 INTRODUCTIOM. 
 
 Pfleiderer, have heartily recognised the charm of its style, and 
 have assigned to it the highest rank as marking the utmost 
 development of the Pauline doctrine. Both of these dis- 
 tinguished tlieologians consider the Epistle to the Ephesians to 
 have heen the work of a later Paulinist, who combined the 
 tendencies of the earlier Paulinism with those of John, and led 
 the way to the development of a generous Catholicism. In 
 order to be in a position to estimate fairly the grounds which 
 those writers have for assigning this epistle, on the score of its 
 advanced doctrine, to a late Paulinist, we shall state as briefly 
 as possible the views of these interpreters regarding the work 
 of the writer of our epistle. We shall now give in order a 
 summary of Kostlin's and Pfleiderer's readings of the doctrinal 
 teaching of the treatise, which they regard as the final 
 development of Pauline dogmatics. 
 Kostlin's According to Kostlin,^ the writer of the Epistle 
 Account of to the Ephesians directs his polemic against teachers 
 
 its Doctrine, j. n . , ■ ■ j ^ 
 
 ot a morally corrupt and paganising tendency 
 (V. 11-14, ii. 2), whose vain words and cunning craftiness 
 (v. 6, iv. 14) are spoken and exercised secretly apart from 
 the public and officially recognised congregational assemblies 
 (v. 12), in defiance of the regular discipline of the Church 
 (v. 6, ii. 2), etc. This threatened to result in something like 
 a schism between the Gentile and Jewish Christian portions 
 of the community, which occasioned the writer's enlarging 
 upon the doctrine of the unity of the Church (iv. 2-16), the 
 extension to the Gentiles of the divine purpose of salvation, 
 the blessings enjoyed by the Gentiles because they had 
 entered upon tlie inheritance and privileges of the Jews 
 (ii. 11-13), and the common salvation uniting Jews and 
 Gentiles accomplished by the death of Christ (ii. 10 ff.). 
 The grand object of the writer is to prevent this threatened 
 breach between the Jewish and Gentile members of the 
 Christian community. He distinctly states and firmly main- 
 
 ^ Kiistlin, Carl Reinhold, Der Lehrhegriff des EccaujeUums und der Briefe 
 Johannis und die venvandten neutestamentUclwn Lehrhegrijfe, pp. 365-378, 
 Berlin 1843. Pfleiderer says {Paulinism, ii. 165, note) that this statement by 
 KiJstlin of the doctrine contained in the Epistle to the Ephesians may be classed 
 among the best writings on the subject. 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRIXE. 71 
 
 tains the prerogatives and advantages of the Jews, but takes 
 occasion therefrom to reflect upon the peculiar dignity of that 
 inheritance on which the Gentiles have entered, by which 
 they are closely and tenderly linked with the Jews. It is 
 to divine tjrace that both Jews and Gentiles owe their 
 advantages, for by nature they were both alike objects of the 
 divine wrath and under condemnation. The purpose of the 
 writer, in insisting upon the fact that the divine election of 
 grace reaches Gentile as well as Jew, and in picturing in such 
 black and horrible colours their natural condition out of 
 Christ, is evidently to counteract the mischief being done by 
 the false teachers, who sought to sow discord and to induce 
 the Gentile Christians to go back to their old heathen modes 
 of life. — Kostlin, having thus determined the main purpose of 
 Relation to ^'^® writer, proceeds to show at what points and in 
 John and what respccts he may be said to represent, at one 
 time the spirit of Paul, and at another that of 
 John. The author of Ephesians, in his estimate of the three 
 religious — heathenism, Judaism, and Christianity — and their 
 relations to one another, occupies precisely the standpoint of 
 Paul. It is only with reference to their special covenant 
 privileges that the Jews differ from others ; viewed simply as 
 men, the Jews, just like the Gentiles, are children of wrath. 
 In consequence of their possession of these privileges, how- 
 ever, tlie Jews were nigh and the Gentiles were far off, 
 strangers and foreigners (ii, 12, 13, 17, 19). But, on the 
 other hand, the sketch of the religious character of heathenism 
 in Ephesians (ii. 2, 12, iv, 18, v. 8) is conceived quite in the 
 spirit and style of John (1 John ii. 8, v. 19, 20, iii. 1, ii. 15, 
 iv. 4). After the manner of John, Christianity is contrasted 
 with heathenism as the word of truth and as light (i. 13, v. 8), 
 though truth and light are not yet, as with John, taken to de- 
 scribe the fundamental principles characteristic of the revela- 
 tion, nor are they yet used in contrasting Christianity with 
 Judaism. Christianity is not represented as occupying the third 
 place alongside of heathenism and Judaism, as in John iv. 21 ff., 
 but as the more perfect development of that which distinguished 
 Judaism from heathenism. That "nearness" which was secured 
 for the Gentiles by the blood of Christ, was beforehand the 
 
IZ INTKODUCTION. 
 
 possession of the Jews as members of the kingdom of God, 
 to whom pertained the divine promises, so that even before 
 Christ came they were called " those that were nigh " (ii. 17). 
 In Christianity this nearness has been made more perfect by 
 the abolition of the law (ii. 15), and has been more widely 
 extended by the receiving of the Gentiles (ii. 13—19, iii, G). 
 What is new in Christianity consists not, as with John, in the 
 abolition of Judaism, but in tlie accomplishment of the hitherto 
 unfulfilled promises, and in the attaining unto a perfect peace 
 with God, and very specially the extension of salvation to the 
 Gentiles (iii. 5, 6). John, on the other hand, while he speaks 
 (xi. 52) of Jesus' death availing for the scattered, does not 
 regard the Jews as a favoured people, but as owing their 
 salvation, just like the Gentiles in Ephesians, to the electing 
 grace of God (John i. 13, vi. 44 IT.). The Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, in showing how Christianity differs from and 
 excels all other religions, assumes an eternal purpose kept 
 secret in God (iii. 5, 9, 11), a mystery made known by 
 apostles and prophets, which is quite in the style of John 
 XV. 26, 27, xvi. 13. The conflict with the false Gnosis, begun 
 in Colossians and fully elaborated in John, also makes its 
 appearance in our epistle, and technical expressions occur 
 (i. 8, 17, 18, iii. 3, 4, 5, 9, iv. 13, v. 10); but this Gnosis is 
 not so clearly expressed as in John, but rather reminds us of 
 the mystical style of the Apocalypse. The contents of the 
 mystery is the purpose of God to gather together in Christ, as 
 Head, all things in heaven and on earth (i. 10). The pre- 
 destination doctrine thus set forth transcends the description 
 of Christ's headship in Col. i. 16-18, and after the style of 
 John bases the historical realisations of God's will on the 
 eternal pre-existence of Christ (i. 10, iii. 9, iv. 8-16). Thus, 
 in the later Paulinism, new elements were introduced which 
 brought the system into touch with that of John. — In his 
 doctrine of God, the author of the epistle makes subordinate 
 the idea of the divine righteousness, and makes prominent 
 the love of God as the moving principle of his work of 
 redemption. — The Christology of Ephesians, in advance of that 
 of Colossians, attaches itself to the doctrine of John in the 
 greater independence of the person of Christ, not only in his 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 73 
 
 coming down from heaven (iv. 9, v. 31), but also in His freely 
 offering Himself on the cross (v. 2, 31, 32), and to the 
 older Pauline view in its representation of Christ as ?; Kec})a\r) 
 Tcov iravTcov, which sets forth Christ as at once the unity 
 and the model of all creation, by the declaration that He fills 
 all things (i. 23, iv. 10), by the description of the Church as 
 a perfect man, after the measure of the stature of the fulness 
 of Christ (iv. 13). — The coming of Christ is the avaKe^a- 
 XaLcoai<; of heaven and earth ; His coming proclaims peace 
 and His death brings it (ii. 15, 17). Thus the separation 
 from and the enmity with God which the law occasioned to 
 both Jews and Gentiles, are removed, and peace is brought 
 to both, peace with God and with one another as members 
 of one body. He who died to accomplish this is raised by 
 God to life and His own right hand and put over all things, 
 and everything under Him is interpenetrated by Himself 
 (i. 23, iv. 10), and at last everything will be actually united 
 in Him (i. 10). In all this, the Pauline view prevails in the 
 description of the reconciliation of heaven and earth in Christ, 
 as Head ; but the account of the love of God as the source of 
 redemption, and of Christ as the Preacher of peace to Jews 
 and Gentiles, and as Priest before God, reminds us of John. 
 God receives Christ, not as one who had declared His righteous- 
 ness as a sin-offering (Rom. iii), but as the free Son of God 
 who had yielded Himself to the Father and reconciled the 
 world. — The close relationship between our epistle and the 
 writings of John is seen in its doctrine of the Spirit. John 
 represents the death of Christ as a gain rather than a loss, 
 since it secures the coming of the Paraclete (xvi. 7, xiv. 16, 
 XV. 26, etc.); and so Ephesians represents the Spirit as the 
 gift to the Church, bringing peace and grace, continuing the 
 presence in it of the ascended Lord, and securing it against 
 false doctrine (iv. 1-16). John, by his hypostasising of the 
 Spirit, gave to it a more concrete existence ; but even in 
 Ephesians the Spirit appears as the independent active 
 principle of knowledge in Christianity (iii. 5, iv, 14, 15). 
 In John and in Ephesians the Paraclete is the prophetic 
 Spirit in the apostles (John xvi. 13, xv. 26, 27; Eph. ii. 20, 
 iii. 5, iv. 11). In the new as well as the old dispensation, 
 
74 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 prophecy ranks as a foundation of the Church. By the 
 Spirit, too, are Christians raised to seats in the heavenlies 
 with Christ (ii. 6, iii, 16, 17), by which may he meant a 
 personal fellowship as in John xiv. 23, since Eph. ii. 22 
 speaks not of the community generally, but of individual 
 
 pv... members of it (ii. 21; 1 Cor. iii. 16; 2 Cor. 
 
 and the vi. 16). — The Church is called a holy temple 
 Church. ^£ (JoiX^ having Christ as the Corner-stone, and 
 apostles and prophets as foundation (ii. 20, 21); but 
 most prominently it is described as the body of Christ 
 (i. 23, iv. 12, 10), which in the end of the world will 
 be the fulness of Him who fills all things, and therefore 
 it. Christ and the Church mutually fill one another : He 
 penetrates it as the living and all-embracing Head of all its 
 members (iv. 15, 16); it fills Him, inasmuch as He in it 
 builds up a body for Hhnself, fitted as nothing else is to be 
 His own (iv. 12, 15). In a thoroughly Pauline manner the 
 Church is thus represented as the body of Christ. On the 
 other hand, the use of the marriage relationship, to illustrate 
 the connection between Christ and His Church as Head and 
 body, reminds us of John (Eph. v. 25 ff. ; John iii. 29). 
 Christ is not only Head of the body subject to Him, but is 
 also Saviour of the body, having loved His Church and given 
 Himself for it, and continues to afford nourishment to the 
 members of that body. The idea of the relation of head and 
 body, as well as that of marriage, is present in Eph. v. 25-31, 
 and, throughout, tlie former relation is more prominent. We 
 have not here, as in John, the substantial unity of several 
 spirits put in place of the organic unity of head and body, 
 but it is a substantial relationship, wliich marriage converts 
 into an organic relationship, in which the Kej>aXi] loves the 
 crco/xa like a second ego, and devotes itself to saving it and to 
 effect an inseparable union with it (v. 31). We may there- 
 ibre say that the Johannine theory of the spiritual, substantial 
 unity of several individuals under this type of marriage here 
 penetrates the Pauline conception of the bodily, organic union 
 between head and body. In Eph. v. 25-27 the new idea is 
 brought forward, that the purifying and sanctifying death of 
 Christ avails pre-eminently for the Church as such, and has 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTKIXE. 75 
 
 for its end the presenting of the Church "holy and without 
 blemish, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing." 
 The cleansing efficacy of Christ's death, excluding all sin as 
 strictly as possible from the Church (v. 3-5), is represented in 
 a manner similar to that in which it appears in John's writings 
 (1 John iii. 3-6, i. 7-ii. 2). This similarity is not casual or 
 accidental. To the Ephesians, as well as to John's writings, 
 the doctrine of justification, and probably also that of tlie 
 vicarious satisfaction, are wanting, and we have in both only 
 the reconciliation (ii. 14), i.e. the restoration of the relation of 
 sons to God (i. 5, ii. 18, iii. 12 ; 1 John iii. 21, iv. 17), the 
 forgiveness of sins (i. 7), cleansing from sin itself (v. 27), and 
 the new creation of man after the image of Christ (ii. 10), and 
 of God (iv. 24). For the author of our epistle, the idea of cleans- 
 ing and sanctifying is so essential, that in v. 26 baptism is 
 described as the cleansing bath for perfecting the Church ; and 
 here again baptism is joined with the death of Jesus (v. 25), 
 just as alixa and v^wp are in the writings of John (1 John 
 V. 6 ; John xix. 34). As the mighty opponent of Christianity 
 appears the devil (vi. 11), o irovrjpo^ (vi. 16, comp. John 
 xvii. 15), the prince of heathenism and heresy (ii. 2), not so 
 individualised as John's cip-^wv lov Koa/xov, but the chief of a 
 host of evil spirits in the air or in heaven (ii. 2, iii. 10, 
 vi. 12). Alongside of the conviction of the unique trutli and 
 grandeur of Christianity, rises that of the concrete reality of 
 the opposing forces of spiritual powers. We are at first 
 inclined to wonder at the almost Manichean hypostasising in 
 John of the mighty principles of evil, but this is explained 
 by a consideration of the gradual development of the doctrine 
 of the devil. The author of the Epistle to the Ephesians 
 seeks to make sin more terrible by a vivid representation of 
 the superhuman might and vast number of the evil spirits 
 (vi. 11, 12, 16), whereas John dwells rather on wickedness 
 and hatred of the truth (viii. 44) ; and so, in place of sub- 
 ordinate demons, we have wicked men of this world forming 
 the army of the prince of darkness (comp. Eph. iii. 10 with 
 John xvii. 21, 23). Eaith is presented under the aspect of 
 steadfastness in resisting the attacks of the devil (vi. 16, comp. 
 1 John iv. 4), and as that which imparts unity to the whole 
 
76 INTEODUCTIOX. 
 
 (iv. 5, 13). Knowledge shows one what he has in Chiis- 
 (, ,. tianity,in order that he may be confirmed in his faith, 
 in Jolin and that nothing of the content of Christianity may 
 andl'aul. ^^ wanting to him (Eph. v. 18, iii. 7, 20 ; John 
 vii. 88, vi. 35, iv. 14). Abiding and growing in the truth 
 are the preservatives against false doctrine (iv. 14, 15, 21, 
 24, 25, v. 9, vi. 14; 1 John ii. 21, 27, iv. 15-17, iii. 17- 
 19). So, too, walking as children of light, with their fruit 
 in all goodness, righteousness, and truth, the doing of God's 
 will (vi. 7 ; 1 John ii. 17), the imitating of God and Christ 
 (v. 1-2 ; 1 John i. 7, ii. 6, 20, iii. 6, IG, iv. 17), are ideas 
 common to Ephesians and the writings of John. On the 
 other hand, more like the early Paulinism is the call to 
 put off the old man, to be renewed in the Spirit, and to put 
 on the new man created after God in righteousness and true 
 holiness (iv. 22—24). A peculiar importance is assigned to 
 good works unknown to the earlier epistles ; for though the 
 writer of Ephesians is quite as emphatically a preacher of 
 free grace and salvation, not of works but as the gift of God 
 by faith and in accordance with God's eternal purpose, lie 
 yet extends this divine purpose to the good works which, as 
 God's workmanship, we are to produce (ii. 10). By this 
 inclusion of good works in predestination, they obtain a like 
 importance with faith, although in the old I'auline view the 
 predestined new creation of man includes this in itself, as in 
 John the being born of God involves the doing of what is right 
 (1 John ii. 20, V. 1, 2). — Again, what our epistle 
 says of love is quite in the style of John. As it 
 is the ground of God's redemption and of Christ's incarnation 
 and sacrifice, so Christians, God's dear children, walk in love 
 as God does (v. 1, 2, iv. 32, quite similarly to 1 John iv. 11, 
 7), as Christ loved us and gave Himself for us (v. 2, 25, 
 quite as 1 John iii. 16 ; John xiii. 34, xv. 9). Love is that 
 which holds the Church together (iv. 16), which establishes 
 the Church itself and each of its members in the truth 
 (iv. 15, ii. 3, 18; 1 John ii. 9-11, iii. 14; 2 John v. 6), 
 though not expressly announced as the first precept of 
 Christianity. So, too, are elpyjvrj and evoriri commended 
 (iv. 3; John xviii, 21-23). Instead of the e^etv ^corjv 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. "77 
 
 alcoi'iov ev eavrco [xevovaav, the Epistle to the P'phesians 
 speaks of the hope of it (i. 12, 18, iv. 4); a7roXvTp(i3ai<i 
 and irepcTrocija-i^; appear first in the end of days (i. 14, ii. 7, 
 iv. 80). The evil day (vi. 13) is probably a special period 
 in the future, when the strufrole with the devil and his hosts 
 is to be fought out, corresponding to the woes before the 
 second coming (Rev. xvi. 4) ; so that here that is placed in 
 the future which in John is ascribed to the victorious death 
 of Christ. These and other doctrines, while retaining much 
 in common with the older Paulinism, show at the same time 
 undeniable departures from it, occasioned by an unmistake- 
 able approach to the teaching of John. The epistle occupies 
 a conciliatory position midway between the doctrine of Paul 
 and of John, yet so decidedly Johannine that a gospel composed 
 on the lines of the epistle would stand nearer that of John 
 than that of Luke, which is distinguished from Matthew and 
 Mark by its distinctly Pauline tendencies. 
 
 This account of the doctrine of the epistle is by far the 
 ablest that has been presented by the opponents of its genuine- 
 ness. Any one who carefully follows its statements, will 
 agree with Pfleiderer in saying that Kostlin's " statement of 
 the doctrine contained in the Epistle to the Ephesians may 
 be classed among the best writings on the subject." We 
 shall have to inquire by and by how far similarity of view 
 and statement between the writer of Ephesians and John 
 suggests a transition from the one to the other, and how far 
 these are consistent with the hypothesis of common author- 
 ship with the earlier acknowledged epistles of Paul. Apart 
 from this, Kostlin's statement of the doctrinal contents of 
 the epistle is of high importance. 
 
 „„ .. , Pfleiderer ^ represents the chief aim of the writer 
 Pneiderer s ^ , . . , 
 
 Account of of the epistle, in a precisely similar manner, as 
 Its Doctrine. ^^^^ prevention of decline on the part of the 
 Gentile Christians toward heathen immorality, and of their 
 tlireatened separation from their Jewish Christian brethren. 
 Paul had to contend against Jewish particularism for the 
 equal justification of Gentile Christians; but here it is the 
 
 1 Pfleiderer, PauUnism, vol. ii. ; The Hidory of Paulinism in the Primitive 
 Chirch, pp. 162-193, Lond. 1877. 
 
78 INTEODUCTION. 
 
 want of love on the part of the Gentile Christians toward 
 those who were the original possessors of those promises 
 which now they shared. So the writer emphasises the fact 
 that a certain precedence belonged to the Jews. His doctrine 
 is distinctly that of Paul, but the state of things by which 
 he is confronted is different. The problem now is, not as 
 with Paul, the possibility of a Gentile Christianity, but the 
 realisation of the universal Church. " The dogmatic views 
 of the Epistle to the Ephesians rest wholly on Pauline 
 foundations, but they have advanced beyond the older 
 Paulinism in the direction of the theology of John. Tliis is 
 shown by the external dependence of this epistle on that to 
 the Colossians, and probably also on the First Epistle of 
 Peter ; as well as the close connection of many of its ideas 
 and turns of thought with the writings of John." ^ This is 
 the thesis which Ptleiderer proceeds, largely on the basis of 
 materials supplied by Kijstlin, to endeavour to make good. 
 He seeks to show that in regard to Christology the object of 
 the author of Ephesians is, like that of John's epistles, to 
 insist upon the continued connection between the exalted 
 Saviour and the community on earth. Precisely like Kostlin, 
 Plleiderer calls attention to the greater independence ascribed 
 to Christ in Ephesians, as compared with earlier Pauline 
 writings ; to the importance of the doctrine of the Spirit in 
 the epistle ; to the peculiar view of Christ's work set forth in 
 it as the reconciliation of those that had been separated, the 
 separated being Jews and Gentiles now made one in the 
 body of Christ, and this act of Christ a sacerdotal act of self- 
 devotion to the community, prompted by love, and so well- 
 pleasing to God ; to the effect of Christ's work and sacrifice 
 in the sanctification of the community ; to the subjective 
 appropriation of salvation by baptism and faith ; to the view 
 given of the life of salvation, as putting off the old and putting 
 on the new, this walk being maintained in love and light, 
 while a warfare is carried on against the powers of darkness ; 
 and finally to the idea of the Cliurch as a community of which 
 tlie characteristic features are its purity and its unity ; — in all 
 this we have the point of view of Kostlin steadily maintained. 
 ^ rfleiderer, Paulinisin, ii. 164, 1C5. 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 79 
 
 In these two treatises we seem to have all that can be 
 said for the theory, that the doctrine of the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians is of a type transcending that of Paul, and 
 marking the transition to that of John. 
 
 We must now look hack upon the representations given of 
 the doctrinal contents of the epistle, to see how far it is a fair 
 rendering of the apostle's thoughts, and whether, even where 
 found accurate, it yields support to the main thesis of the 
 Real Oh'ect C''i^^<^S-^ Kostlin, in his first paragraph, seeks to 
 of the show that the main object of the author of 
 101. Epiiegia^i^g xvas to counteract the influence of false 
 teachers, who were sowing discord between Gentile and Jewish 
 members of the community, and were endeavouring to draw 
 the Gentiles av.-ay to practise the old vices of heathenism. 
 This is faithfully echoed by Plleiderer. Now, if this could 
 be proved, it would indeed go a long way to establish the 
 lateness of the composition of the epistle. The condition of 
 the community as thus represented is undoubtedly post- 
 Gnostic Pauline. The presupposition is that Gnostic 
 Teaching, teaching has made considerable advance in the 
 Ephesian Church, and that under its influence a tendency 
 was manifested on the part of the Gentile portion of the 
 community to depreciate the Jewish element. But this is a 
 large assumption to make without proof. We are fairly 
 entitled to ask. What evidence can be adduced in suppoit of 
 this hypothesis ? Evidently nothing in the way of proof can 
 be satisfactory, save some direct indications from the epistle 
 itself that this was the trouble which the writer sought to 
 heal. But in the epistle we fail to discover any traces of the 
 polemic referred to. The doctrine that before God, in the 
 Jew and matter of salvation, there is no longer any differ- 
 Gentile. gj^gg between Jew and Gentile, is enunciated here 
 just as in the earlier epistles, especially those to the Galatians 
 and to the Piomans. It is the same doctrine, though in the 
 
 ^ A most admirable statement of the doctrine of the epistles of the imprison- 
 ment is given by Weiss, Biblical Theology of the New Testament, ii. 75- 
 124, Edin. 1889. He shows in detail that while certain doctrines pro- 
 minent in earlier epistles may not, owing to circumstances, have tlie same 
 prominence given them, yet the same fundamental principles and the same 
 religious historical points of view are maintained in these later writings. 
 
80 INTRODUCTION". 
 
 one case addressed to communities where Jewish Cliristians 
 were in the majority, or a tendency to Judaism prevailed, 
 and in the other case to a community mainly composed of 
 Gentile Christians. In hotli cases the apostle urges the fact 
 of the abolition of the law, with its ceremonies and dis- 
 tinctions, so that no longer can Jews despise the Gentiles, 
 nor Gentiles feel themselves separated in the way of inferiority 
 or in the Wiiy of superiority from the Jews. Of anything 
 like a schism between Jews and Gentiles, or any tendency on 
 the part of the Gentiles to depreciate the Jews, we find no 
 trace in tliis epistle. And further, in regard to the warnings 
 addressed to the members of this Church against falling back 
 into heathen practices, these seem most natural on the part 
 of a faithful pastor, who remembered so well the depths of 
 wickedness and moral degradation by which they were 
 surrounded, in which before they had lived, and which from 
 their earliest years they had been familiarised with and 
 taught to regard as under the sanction and patronage of 
 religion itself. There is surely no need of assuming the 
 presence among them of regularly-organised heretical teachers, 
 inculcating such views in the form of regular doctrines. No 
 one whose preconceived theory did not require the assump- 
 tion, would ever discover in the epistle any trace of later 
 Gnostic teaching on these points. — In matters of detail we 
 find Kostlin going far beyond his evidence, when he speaks 
 of the doctrine of justification, and probably that 
 Doctrine not of vicarious Satisfaction, as absent, and their place 
 absent. iq]^qi-^ jjy a somewhat vague and mystical doctrine 
 of reconciliation. Kostlin and Pfleiderer simply misinterpret 
 the writer of this epistle, when they represent him as 
 maintaining a theory of reconciliation with God in a 
 merely subjective sense, apart from the idea of sin-offering 
 on the part of Christ, which is admittedly the doctrine 
 of the earlier epistles. In reference to the passage on 
 which they mainly depend for the support of this theory, 
 Eph. V. 2, Weiss has well said : " It is not the giving up 
 of Himself (the irapahovvat eavrov) on the part of Christ 
 which is here designated a sacrifice well-pleasing to God, as 
 it ought to be expressly stated, but what Christ gave Himself 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 81 
 
 for in our behalf, and the words in apposition refer to eavrov, 
 and not to the whole clause. The general idea of a sacrifice 
 (irpoacpopd) is more closely defined by Ovaia, as a bloody 
 sacrifice; and as it implies one offered for the good of another, 
 it is characterised as a sin-offering, a point which Pfleiderer, 
 ii. 181, overlooks."^ That our epistle gives prominence 
 to the relation of sonship, the forgiveness of sins, and the 
 cleansing influences of God's grace upon those who are 
 reconciled to God, by no means favours the idea that this 
 reconciliation is merely subjective. The earlier epistles, in 
 which the objective view of Christ's work is distinctly pro- 
 minent, are not wanting in emphatic insistence upon these 
 same truths. — Kostlin very deliberately maintains that our 
 epistle assigns a place to good works unknown to Paul. 
 Pfleiderer is somewhat more cautious ; but even he, after 
 recognising the thoroughly Pauline type of doctrine in the 
 rejection on the part of our author of all justifying merit in 
 good works, finds the necessity of good works here con- 
 nected in a tliorouglihj original manner with the unconditional 
 nature of grace, by their inclusion in the predetermined pur- 
 pose of grace, " so that they do not indeed form a condition 
 of salvation which precedes or goes with anything else (with 
 faith, according to James ii, 22), but are a task which is 
 set and made practicable by means of the grace which is 
 received freely and without price " (Eph. ii. 10). Kostlin 
 apparently means the same thing when he says that in the 
 earlier epistles these good works are included in the new 
 nature which is the subject of God's eternal purpose, whereas 
 in Ephesians they are included along with faith in the pre- 
 destinating decree. This, Kostlin thinks, makes good works 
 a condition of salvation co-ordinate with faith ; but Pfleiderer 
 feels that this is going too far. Both, however, insist that 
 good works have here a place which Paul would not have 
 yielded them. Is this so ? Can any proof be advanced in 
 support of such a statement ? It does not seem that there is 
 any essential difference between the position assigned to good 
 works in Ephesians, and that assigned to them in Eomans and 
 other earlier epistles. Let us simply compare the language 
 1 Weiss, Biblical Thcoloijy of the New Testament, ii. 82. 
 F 
 
'82 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of our epistle (i. 5, ii. 10), where God is said to have pre- 
 destinated lis to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to 
 Himself, and to have created us in Christ Jesus unto good 
 works, with Eom. viii. 29, where it is said that God pre- 
 destinated us " to be conformed to the image of His Son ;" and 
 it will be seen that the idea in both is precisely the same. 
 As sons of God these good works are set us as a task, to use 
 the words of Pfleiderer, " and made practicable by means of 
 the grace which is received freely." This surely is the 
 doctrine of llomans, as distinctly and as explicitly as it is that 
 of Ephesians. — In regard to other points in which Kostlin 
 and Pfleiderer consider our author to be on Pauline lines, yet 
 with an inclination to Johanniue phrases and turns of thought, 
 and in regard to the nature of the relations subsisting between 
 our epistle and that to the Colossians, we need only say that 
 these are sufficiently explained by what, in treating the 
 question of authenticity, has been said of the apostle's 
 development as a writer and a thinker, and by the historical 
 circumstances of the composition of our epistle. 
 
 We have now before us materials sufficient to 
 
 fu most" enable us to form an estimate for ourselves of the 
 
 developed doctriual contents of the epistle, and of the special 
 
 type of doctrine therein represented. — We can 
 
 have no hesitation in pronouncing the epistle the most 
 
 developed exposition of Pauline doctrine, — the utterance of 
 
 the apostle's own matured Christian experience addressed to 
 
 readers ripe for instruction in the mysteries of the kingdom 
 
 of God. — The parties addressed are the members of the 
 
 Jews and Church of Ephesus, which was composed mainly of 
 
 Gentiles. Gentile Christians. He gives thanks to God on 
 
 their behalf; and inasmuch as they had not been privileged 
 
 with that early religious instruction which Jewish youths 
 
 enjoyed, he seeks to secure their intelligent participation in 
 
 his thanksgiving, by dwelling upon the several steps in the 
 
 history of redemption. In this way he puts them in 
 
 remembrance of his own faithful teachings during the period 
 
 of his own personal ministry among them. He lingers upon 
 
 points which would have been passed over as familiar 
 
 commonplaces liad he been writing to Jews, and yet he deals 
 
CHARACTER AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 83 
 
 with his subject in an ehib oi ate and iliorough manner, such 
 as he would not have adopted toward recently-called and 
 imperfectly-instructed Christians. The character and position 
 of those whom he addresses, lead hi in to give special 
 prominence to what he calls the mystery that had been made 
 known to him. The nnfolding of this mystery occu})ies the 
 attention of the apostle throughout the whole of the distinct- 
 ively doctrinal part of the epistle. The knowledge of this 
 mystery he claims to have himself received by special 
 revelation, and he speaks with confidence of the exposition 
 which he had given of it in this very epistle (iii. 3, 4). It is 
 this making known of the mystery which constitutes the 
 distinctive characteristic of the writing. Elsewhere he had 
 treated polemically the exclusive claims of Judaism ; but here, 
 in a purely didactic style, he gives a manual of direction, 
 doctrinal and practical, for the guidance of the Gentile 
 Christian community. This quite sufficiently accounts for 
 the prominence given to the proclamation of the mystery. 
 The apostle's idea of mystery is that of something which had 
 been kept hidden for ages, and could be made known onl}^ 
 by means of revelation. What human skill and investigation 
 could never have discovered, had been given him by a 
 dispensation of the grace of God (iii. 2, 3). The contents of 
 this mystery are expressly communicated in two passages in 
 the epistle (i. 9, 10, iii. 6, 7). We have, first of all, the 
 broad general statement of the whole mystery, which consisted 
 in the gathering together in one, in the fulness of time, all 
 things, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, in 
 Him in whom Paul and his fellow-Christians had their 
 inheritance, according to God's predestinating grace. It is 
 on the basis of this revelation that the apostle founds his 
 teaching concerning the forthputting of God's power in Christ 
 as the Head, and in believers in Christ as members of His 
 body ; the divine purpose that they should be gathered 
 together in one is accomplished by this, that it is the same 
 ])Ower which works in the one and in the other, — in Christ's 
 resurrection and exaltation, and in the believer's quickening 
 and spiritual restoration. And, further, it is this divine 
 purpose which forms the foundation, not only of the unity 
 
84 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 between the Head and the members, between Christ and 
 believers, but also of the unity of the members among 
 themselves, as members in the one body of Christ, so that 
 the far-off are made nigh, and between Jew and Gentile in 
 Christ there is no longer any difference. This breaking down 
 of the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, as members 
 of the one Church of Christ, constitutes the other part of the 
 mystery now revealed, in regard to which the apostle claims, 
 not indeed exclusive knowledge, for the knowledge of it is 
 shared by the holy apostles and prophets of the new 
 dispensation, but yet a special and pre-eminent degree of 
 knowledge and skill in its exposition (iii. 3, 4). — In the 
 elucidation of this important truth, the apostle elaborates 
 throughout this epistle the idea of the Christian community 
 or Church, with an amplitude of detail and a 
 ■ wealth of illustration such as we find in none of 
 liis other writings. The doctrine of the Church is the 
 characteristic feature of the epistle, and the special contribu- 
 tion which it makes to the development of theological 
 thought. Tliroughout the epistle the idea of the Church is 
 illustrated by two iigures, that of the Temjyle of God and that 
 of the Body of Christ. Both figures are introduced and 
 illustrated in connection with the unfolding of the mystery 
 of God's grace in bringing Jew and Gentile together in one 
 community through the redemption of Christ. — Believers in 
 Christ Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles, are described 
 (ii. 19—22) as stones for the building of the holy temple 
 which is to form a habitation of God, with the gospel of 
 Christ proclaimed by New Testament apostles and prophets 
 as its foundation and Jesus Christ as its chief Corner-stone. 
 In this temple, when completed, made up of every building 
 now in course of construction, all living stones operated upon 
 by the Spirit shall find place, whatever their previous position 
 and quality may have been. — Much more elaborately, how- 
 ever, does the apostle work out the other representation of 
 Body of the Christian community as the Body of Christ 
 Christ, (i. 22, 23, iv. 12-16). The Church is described 
 as the pleroma of Christ. According to this representation, 
 the Church is that which is fdled by Christ as the quickening, 
 
CIIARACTEU AND TYPE OF DOCTRINE. 85 
 
 vivifying Spirit (i. 23), and as the Head from wliieli those 
 influences proceed which afford compactness to the whole 
 body, and supply suitable qualities to the several parts 
 (iv. 15, 16). The perfection of the individual and the 
 perfection of the community alike are reached, when the stage 
 of perfect receptivity for Christ's own fulness has been 
 attained (iv. 13). The Church is Christ's fulness only in 
 proportion as it receives of that fulness. It is not described 
 as His complement, as that which contributes to His fulness, 
 but simply as that which He fills. In the more directly 
 practical and ethical portion of the epistle, the apostle 
 emphasises the ideas of the purity and the unity of the 
 Church, both of these features being very evidently implied 
 in the conception of the Body of Christ. This purity is 
 regarded primarily as that of the community as an organised 
 whole ; but it is altogether a mistake on the part of Plleiderer 
 (ii. 192) to restrict this reference to the general idea of the 
 community as an objective characteristic, and to deny that it 
 may in any sense be considered a subjective ideal for in- 
 dividuals. The very figure of marriage, employed in the 
 passage under consideration (v. 25—31), makes it inevitable 
 that, from the primary reference to the community, we should 
 pass over to the idea of the individuals composing that 
 community. And so, indeed, it happens that while it is the 
 Church that is sanctified and cleansed by the washing of water 
 by the word, the accomplishment of this is seen to depend 
 upon the cleansing of the individual members of the Church. 
 That which cleanses is Christ's giving of Himself to the 
 Church, but this again has its ground in the fact that we, i.e. 
 individual men and women, are members of His body. He 
 cares for and secures the purity of the individual because of 
 the love which He bears to all the members of His own body. 
 This purifying of individual members, which secures a 
 purified community, must surely be a subjective ideal of the 
 individual as well as an objective characteristic of the com- 
 munity. And precisely the same thing is true of the idea of 
 the unity of the Church, as indeed Pfleiderer clearly perceives. 
 It has its objective side in its one foundation on apostolic 
 truth, and its vital connection with a common Lord (iv. 4-6). 
 
8(x INTKODUCTIOy. 
 
 This constitutes its corporate unity. But such unity can be 
 brought about only when and in so far as members entertain 
 in their liearts, and manifest in their lives, such principles as 
 will contribute to the maintaining and strengthening of this 
 bond. The Church is ideally one, and it is the duty of the in- 
 dividual members of the Church, because they are members one 
 of another, by " speaking the truth with one another, by speak- 
 ing this truth in love," by walking in love, by doing that which 
 is good for the use of edifying (iv. 15, 25, sq., v. 2), to contri- 
 bute toward the realisation of that grand ideal, according to 
 which they shall all be one, even as God and Christ are one. 
 
 5. DATE AND RELATION TO OTHER EPISTLES. 
 
 Accepting the epistle as an authentic work of 
 
 One of the -n i i , • -i. v i 
 
 Epistles of "aul, we liave now to assign it its proper place 
 the Imprison- among his writings. It is clearly one of the later 
 productions of his pen, written in a prison 
 (iii. 1, iv. 1, vi. 26), and representing, as we have seen, the 
 most advanced stage of his doctrinal development. The 
 position, therefore, which we must give it is among the 
 epistles of the imprisonment, and the only difference of 
 opinion among those who acknowledge the Pauline author- 
 ship of the epistle arises over the question as to whether it 
 was written during the apostle's detention in Coesarea or 
 during his confinement in Eome. 
 
 Order of "^'^'^ epistles belonging to this period are four — 
 these Pliilippians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, 
 pib es. jj^ .g quite evident that, while the three last- 
 mentioned epistles go together in one group, Philippians 
 stands by itself, whether as written before (Lightfoot, etc.) or 
 at a later period (Weiss, Eeuss, etc.).^ 
 Philippians Without going into detail, which is unnecessary 
 written in for our present purpose, we here express our 
 opinion that Philippians was written in Ctesarea, 
 the earlier vigour of Paul's imprisoment there justifying the 
 
 ' Lightfoot, PhiUpplan-1, ed. 6, p. 31, 1881 ; "Weiss, Dn- Philipperbrief 
 ausgelegt, p. 27, Berlin 1859 ; Reuss, History of the Sacred Scriptures of the 
 2{ew Testament, § 131, p. 129, Edin. 1884. 
 
DATE AND RELATION TO OTHER EPISTLES. 87 
 
 references to severe treatment in the epistle, and the com- 
 parative liberty subsequently granted him giving ground for 
 the statements regarding his ministry and the extent and 
 range of his influence. We may thus assume that it was 
 written in a.d. 59 ; and when thus its composition is brought 
 within a year of that of the Epistle to the Komans, the very 
 remarkable similarity in literary style and doctrinal tone 
 between the two epistles is readily and naturally explained. 
 There is no mention of Luke and Aristarchus, who went with 
 Paul to Eome. During Paul's imprisonment at Ciesarea they 
 were probably resident in Jerusalem, and at most only 
 occasionally visitors of the apostle in Cfesarea ; but in the 
 Ptoman imprisonment, as companions of his eventful voyage, 
 and it may be both of them sharers of his captivity, they 
 are naturally mentioned in the writings proceeding from his 
 pen soon after his arrival in the great city. Then again, 
 Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles, makes no mention of the 
 prffitorium in connection with the Eoman imprisonment, 
 but only in connection with the Cesarean imprisonment, and 
 there is no reason to deny the local signification of the 
 word, unless we are determined at all risks to make it apply 
 to the imprisonment at Eome. 
 Ephesians, 0^ the other hand, we have no hesitation in 
 Colossiaus, maintaining that Eome was the place where the 
 rMlemoii Other three epistles were composed. Just as the 
 at Rome. Epistle to the Philippians is, in respect of doctrine 
 and style, closely associated with the Epistle to the Eomans 
 and the other great doctrinal epistles, so the Epistles to the 
 Ephesians and Colossians and that to Philemon are associated, 
 in respect of matter and form, with the Pastoral Epistles of a 
 yet later period. Eeuss, Meyer, and Schenkel,^ are the leading 
 authorities who persist in referring their composition to the 
 period of the apostle's detention in CiEsarea. The arguments 
 
 « Lightfoot, PhiUppicms, p. 99 ff., "The meaning of prretoriuni," where he 
 argues that because the word, though used of palaces out of Ronie, is not used 
 of such in Rome, it must be understood of " the i)rtetorian guard." 
 
 2 Reuss, History of the Sacred Scriptures of the New Testament, original 
 ed. 1842 ; Meyer, Commentary on Ephesians, original ed. 1843 ; Schenkel, 
 BihtUexikon, 1869. This theory had been started by Schulz in Studien und 
 Kritiken, p. 612, 1829. 
 
88 INTRODUCTIOX. 
 
 used by all are essentially the same : CiBsarea suits the fact 
 of the presence of the runaway Colossian slave Onesimus, 
 better than Eome ; and Tychicus going from Coesarea would 
 reach Colossre first, but from Eome he would reach Ephesus 
 first, and the former route is that which their theory of the 
 order of the Epistles to the Colossians and to the Ephesians 
 requires. As to Onesimus, of course, there is nothing 
 absolutely demonstrable one way or another ; but it seems 
 more likely that such a one would succeed in hiding himself 
 in the vast multitude of mixed nationalities that were found 
 crowded together in Eome, than in the comparatively small 
 Syrian capital, while access to Eome, as the centre of the 
 commercial and political world, would be much more easy 
 than access to other cities greatly nearer in respect of 
 locality. Then, in regard to the route pursued by Tychicus, 
 the statement in Eph. vi. 21, 22, seems to imply that Paul 
 had directed Tychicus not merely to continue his journey 
 from Colossfe to Ephesus, but rather to halt for a little in his 
 journey, in order to give them as well as the Colossians, to 
 whom he was specially destined, particular information about 
 his affairs. That no mention is made of Onesimus, in whom 
 the Ephesians had no interest, and with whom, during the 
 hurried visit of Tychicus, they would have no opportunity of 
 making acquaintance, is just what might be expected. These 
 three epistles are closely connected together : Ephesians and 
 Colossians, by similarity of phrase and style, and expressly by 
 having the one bearer commissioned to each in almost precisely 
 identical terms ; Philemon, as a private letter on a special 
 subject to a member of the Colossian Church, regarding 
 Onesimus, who also was a member of it. We might expect 
 that the apostle, who had now been absent from the churches 
 of Asia for about three years, should seize upon the earliest 
 Soon after Po^siblc opportunity, after his arrival in Eome, to 
 reaching do for them by his pen what he could no longer 
 perform in bodily presence by his living voice. 
 Two eventful years in the history of Paul have passed since 
 he wrote to the I'hilippians. The experiences of Ctesarea, 
 where he had been brought into contact with such men as 
 Felix, Festus, and Agrippa, with all the while long intervals 
 
DATE AND RELATION TO OTHER EPISTLES. 89 
 
 for quiet contemplation and reflection upon the ways and 
 works of God, followed by the exciting adventures of his long 
 voyage, diversified by various detentions and intercourse with 
 men and people of the most diverse cultures and religions, 
 culminating in his introduction to the great city toward 
 which his earlier ambitions had powerfully drawn him, must 
 in their combination have proved abundantly powerful to 
 produce that rich spiritual development and maturity of 
 religious thought and speculation, whicli so conspicuously 
 characterise these writings, as compared with the keen and 
 vigorous controversial and doctrinal epistles of the earlier 
 period. Further, also, the apostle's own ideas in regard to the 
 possibility of release are similar to those which he had 
 entertained at Cffisarea when writing to the Philippians.^ 
 In either case, the entertaining of such hopes is in keeping 
 with the conditions of his captivity only during the earlier 
 periods of his residence respectively in Ctesarea and in Eome. 
 We would, therefore, place the composition of these epistles 
 in the end of a.d. 61 or beginning of a.d. G2. 
 
 The only other epistles ranked among the 
 
 Timothy canonical writings of Paul are those to Timothy. 
 
 later at ^Yq (Jq not include the Epistle to Titus in this 
 
 Rome. mi 1 • 1 1 • (-1 
 
 group. ihe heretical tendencies relerred to in 
 it are quite different from those referred to in the Epistles 
 to Timothy, and suggest a much earlier period. The apostle 
 warns the young missionary against Judaisers, more like 
 tliose wlio liad disturbed the churches of Galatia than those 
 who were at work in Colossre and Ephesus. We suppose the 
 Epistle to Titus to have been written from Macedonia after 
 Paul had left Ephesus (Acts xx. 1-3), and just about the 
 
 ' Reuss, History of the Sacred Scriptures of the Neio Testament, p. 129, 
 says: "It is not correct to say that the keynote of this epistle, quite in 
 contrast with Second Timothy, is joyful, and x"-'F^" the refrain throughout. . . 
 The uncertainty of the result is again expressed in ii. 23, the dreary situation 
 of the present moment in ver. 27." It is quite evident, however, that dark 
 and comfortless as his immediate condition was, he could entertain a hope that 
 was very soon comjiletely overthrown. In writing to Philippi he could 
 entertain the hope of an early visit to Macedonia, and in writing to CoIossk 
 of an early visit to Asia ; hut in writing at last to Timothy he can no longer 
 indulge any such hopes. 
 
9 IXTKODUCTION. 
 
 time when he wrote the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 This would be in the autumn of A.D. 58. He then intended, 
 after visiting Corinth, to return from Greece to Macedonia, 
 and had even made up his mind to winter at Nicopolis, where 
 he wished Titus to join him, promising to send Tychicus, 
 who was with the apostle then, or an otherwise unknown 
 Artemas, to occupy his place in Crete (Titus iii. 12). And 
 possibly enough this plan was carried out. In any case, the 
 interval between the apostle's departure from Ephesus and his 
 visit to Corintli, is the period to which we may most reason- 
 ably assign the composition of the Epistle to Titus. "VVe 
 liave, therefore, here to do only with the First and Second 
 Epistles to Timothy. If, with Eeuss, Sabatier, and others, 
 we insist upon placing the composition of the Epistle to the 
 Philippians in the very latest period of the Eoman imprison- 
 ment, we shall, of course, be obliged to say, like the last- 
 named writer, that " the Pastoral Epistles (so-called) of 
 necessity lie outside the known life of Paul." ^ Indeed, 
 almost all critics and historians, who have regarded it as 
 necessary to find room for all the four epistles in the period of 
 the Eoman imprisonment, feeling, as almost all have done, 
 that a considerable space of time must have elapsed between 
 the composition of the Epistle to the Philippians and that of 
 the other three epistles, whether the first- named be regarded 
 as first in chronological order or last, have been obliged to 
 choose between the alternatives of rejecting the Pastoral 
 Epistles, as outside the range of Paul's life, or conjuring up a 
 purely fictitious release from the imprisonment at Eome, fol- 
 lowed, after an interval of missionary activity, by a second 
 imprisonment, ending in condemnation and death. The differ- 
 ence, in respect of style and contents, between the Epistles to 
 Timothy and those to the Ephesians and Colossians, is not 
 greater than we might expect from the interval of two years 
 which separates the earlier from the later period of the Eoman 
 imprisonment. The errors combated in the later epistles are 
 simply more developed forms of those to which passing 
 allusions and occasional polemical references, of a more or less 
 vague character, are made in the earlier writings. The 
 » Sabatier, Tht Ajjostle Paul, p. 22, Lond. 1391. 
 
DATE AND RELATION TO OTHER EPISTLKS. 91 
 
 associates of the apostle are in part the same. Tychicus had 
 gone to Ephesus, as bearer of the epistles to the Asiatic 
 churches, and was still absent when the apostle wrote on the 
 eve of his martyrdom (2 Tim. iv. 12), The reference to 
 Timothy's commission in 1 Tim. i. 3 is to his original in- 
 structions, and points back to the period spoken of in Acts xx., 
 when he was one of Paul's company, and was then apparently 
 sent for a special purpose to Ephesus. The epistles may 
 have been composed in the beginning and middle of a.d. 64. 
 
 This general survey of the circumstances attending the com- 
 position of the later epistles of Paul will suf&ce to indicate the 
 period during which the Epistle to the Ephesians was written. 
 We have seen that the Epistle to the Ephesians and those 
 to the Colossians and to Pliilemon constitute one group, all of 
 them composed about the same time. 
 
 Relation The relationship between the Epistle to the 
 between Epliesians and the other epistles of Paul, in respect 
 ^\nT"^ hoth of thought and of expression, is admitted by 
 Colossians. ^\]^ whether this be put down to careful and 
 studied imitation, or be accepted as evidence of its Pauline 
 authorship. In quite a special manner, however, the connec- 
 tion in contents and style between Ephesians and Colossians 
 has called forth minute comparisons, upon which the question 
 of the authenticity of one or both have, by many critics, been 
 made largely to turn. It is admitted by Von Soden {Hand- 
 Commcntar, III. i. 94) that the characteristic positions of 
 each epistle are peculiar to each. Thus, from Col. ii. 1-iii. 4, 
 which states the theme and enunciates the special doctrinal 
 contribution of the Colossian epistle, we have in Ephesians 
 only a few unimportant expressions and phrases ; and also 
 from Col. i. 9-23, we have only a few terms reproduced in 
 Ephesians, and even these, not without considerable modifica- 
 tion. Also certain terms, e.g. oUovofxia, fivar/jpiov, TrX^pwfia, 
 common to both, are used in the one in a sense different from 
 that in which they are used in the other. The leading ideas, 
 and the doctrinal and moral tendencies controverted, are 
 different. Some of the favourite and peculiar expressions of 
 Ephesians are not found in Colossians. Our critic, therefore, 
 concludes that the difference of style, of ruling ideas, and 
 
9 2 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 prevailing interest, proves diversity of authors, the writer of 
 
 Ephesiaus purposely employing terms and phrases used in 
 
 Colossians, and even, where his subject allows, copying the A'ery 
 
 language of the older writing. It is quite true that we have 
 
 in Paul a most powerful and original writer, who has shown 
 
 himself capable of treating the same theme without repeating 
 
 himself. But we think a fair comparison of the two epistles 
 
 will prove, that all the similarities which so readily attract 
 
 attention, when considered in light of the many essential 
 
 divergences, are not more than, or different from what, might 
 
 be expected in the case of the practically contemporaneous 
 
 composition of the two letters. Where the theme of the later 
 
 epistle is distinct from that of the earlier, the language of that 
 
 earlier letter is not imitated, for that would be unnatural, 
 
 and would certainly have betrayed the hand of a copier ; but 
 
 where the themes coincide, there is no attempt, which would 
 
 have been pure affectation, to secure the appearance of 
 
 originality by replacing phrases still fresh in the memory by 
 
 others used before, otherwise they would be un-Pauline, 
 
 but not in this one most recent composition. To those 
 
 Ephesians ^^'^'^ maintain the Pauline authorship of these two 
 
 written after Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, 
 Colossians. ,, ,. c l^ • i ■ ■ ■ ■ . 
 
 the question ot their relative priority or posteriority 
 
 is not one of any great importance.^ If we regarded 
 
 Ephesians and Colossians as so similar that the one must be 
 
 the work of an imitator, then it would be of interest to 
 
 determine which was the earlier and therefore the original. 
 
 Those who take this position regard Colossians as Pauline 
 
 (Klopper), or Pauline with interpolations (Holtzmann), and 
 
 Ephesians as the production of a later Paulinist of a more or 
 
 ^ Eadie, Commentary on Ephexlans, p. xxxiv., has spoken of this as a "need- 
 less question." The following are in favour of tlie priority of the Epistle to 
 the Colossians: Harless, Commentar, p. Ix. 1834; Olshausen, Commentary, 
 p. 118,1840 ; Meyer, Commentary, p. 22, 1843 ; Eadie, Cominentary, pp. xxxiv.- 
 xxxvi. 1853 ; EUicott, Covimentary, p. xv. 1855 ; Alford, Greek Testament, 
 vol. iii. 1856; Prolegomena, iv. 39-42. This, too, is of necessity the posi- 
 tion of those who, like Klopper and Von Soden, accept the Pauline authorship 
 of Colossians while denying that of Ephesians. In favour of the ]iriority of 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians : Credner, Einkitung in das Neues Testament, 
 § 157, 1836 ; Anger, Ue.ber d. Laodicenerhrlef, 1843 ; Reuss, History of the 
 Sacred Scriptures of the New Testament, § 118, 119, 1884 (original ed 1842). 
 
DATE AND RELATION TO OTHER EPISTLES. 93 
 
 less developed type. Maintaiuing, however, as we do, the 
 Pauline authorship of both, we can only express an opinion, 
 after comparing the parallel sections in these two epistles, 
 their general style and special doctrinal interest, as to whether 
 the composition of the one may not have determined the 
 writing of the other. There are certain phrases common to 
 both epistles, such as " in whom we have redemption through 
 His blood," " your faith in Christ Jesus and love to all the 
 saints," etc., which seem original in the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, and look in the Epistle to the Ephesians very 
 much like those apt quotations which we use, with the feeling 
 that the sentiment has been expressed once and for ever in 
 words which cannot be improved. Thus we find also in 
 Colossians certain terse and summary statements of truth, 
 which are taken up in Ephesians in a somewhat different 
 connection and wrought out in detail. A good illustration 
 of this will be found in a comparison of Col. iii. 5-17 
 with Eph. iv. 17, 21. And once again, if we compare the 
 section on relative duties in these two epistles, we shall find 
 it more natural to regard the short and rapid statement of 
 them in Colossians as the original, which was before the 
 mind of the wiiter when he penned the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, in which, from the very nature of the composition, 
 he required to linger over the details and allow each section 
 to be coloured by the special character and specific aim of his 
 writing. Thus in Ephesians he opens the division in question 
 with the identical words used in Colossians, " Wives submit 
 yourselves unto your own husbands." In Colossians the 
 introduction of these words had marked a new departure and 
 formed the beginning of a distinctly new division. In 
 Ephesians it occurs in immediate connection with an exhorta- 
 tion to orderliness of behaviour in the Church, where con- 
 stituted authority must be recognised and subordination 
 enforced. The parallel is therefore carried out between the 
 submission of wives to their husbands and the submission of 
 the Church to Christ. Much more of the same sort might be 
 advanced, but this may be enough by way of illustration. 
 What seems to be suggested by such comparison of parallel 
 passages, as well as by the fact that Ephesians deals broadly 
 
94 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 with the 21'eat theme of the Church in its Head and members, 
 while Colossians deals with a special aspect of Church life as 
 affected by particular heretical tendencies in the doctrine 
 of its divine Head, is the priority of the composition of 
 Colossians, and the subsequent origin of Ephesians, while still 
 the inspiration and language of the earlier epistle are fresh in 
 the mind of its author. 
 
 If Meyer's argument, on the hypothesis of the Ctesarean 
 origin of these epistles, that Colossians would naturally be 
 written first, inasmuch as it would be delivered before that 
 other epistle meant for a church or churches to be reached 
 subsequently, had any weight, then, on the hypothesis that 
 these epistles were written at Rome, we would be obliged to 
 assume the priority of Ephesians as addressed to the church 
 that would be first visited by Tychicus. But there is no 
 reason to suppose that the geographical distribution of the 
 ecclesiastical comnnmities must have determined the apostle 
 as to the order of his composition. We do not assume that 
 already, when he began to write, he had fixed the number 
 and destination of his epistles. He begins, we suppose, with 
 Colossians, without a thought as yet of writing any other. He 
 has occasion to address the members of that church on points 
 of vital importance, demanding immediate attention. While 
 thus engaged, his friend Tychicus, who is acting as amanuensis 
 and is to carry the apostle's message, himself probably an 
 Ephesian, imparts some information as to the state of things 
 at Ephesus, which leads the apostle to write also to that com- 
 munity, by the hand of Tychicus, a letter of encouragement, 
 entirely free from controversy, and filled only with matter of 
 edification and instruction. 
 
 The phrase "and you also," in Eph. vi. 21, implies that 
 Colossians was already written, and that the readers of 
 " Ephesians " would know that Tychicus had that epistle in 
 his hand carrying it to Colosste. 
 
 C. CONTENTS AND rL.\N OP THE EPISTLE. 
 
 In this epistle, even more decidedly than in any other 
 epistle of St. Paul, the impassioned character of the com- 
 
CONTENTS AIs^D PLAN OF THE EPISTLE. 95 
 
 position renders it difficult to arrange the contents according 
 to any strictly logical and orderly scheme. Whatever the 
 plan adopted, ideas will make their appearance under one 
 head, which would apparently take rank more appropriately 
 under another ; or at certain points expression will be given 
 to thoughts which, in a slightly different form and connection, 
 have been introduced elsewhere. — Like all Paul's epistles, the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians falls into tM'o main divisions, the 
 one doctrinal, the other practical ; yet even this division holds 
 only upon the understanding that the practical is not lost 
 sight of in the doctrinal, and that the doctrinal is not for- 
 gotten in the practical. It might be more correct to 
 distinguish the first section, embracing chapters i.-iii., as 
 theological ; and the second section, embracing chapters iv.- 
 vi,, as ethical. 
 
 On the basis of that general outline of the doctrine of our 
 epistle which we have already given, we propose the following 
 sketch as affording a convenient plan for the grouping of its 
 principal contents : — 
 
 A. THEOLOGICAL PART— Chaps, i.-iii. 
 
 L Address and Greeting, Chap. i. 1-2 
 
 n. The Operations of Divine Grace, ... ,, i- 3-14 
 
 1. What God the Father has done, Chap. i. 3-6 
 
 2. What God the Son has done, ,, i. 7-12 
 
 3. What God the Spirit has done, . ,, i. 13-14 
 
 IIL The Apostle's First Prayer for tlie Ephesians, . ,, i. 15-19 
 
 IV. Devotional Contemplation of God's great Power, . ,, i. 19-ii. 10 
 
 1. Of God's Power operating in 
 
 Christ, Chap. i. 20-23 
 
 2. Of God's Power operating on the 
 
 believer, . . . . ,, ii. 1-10 
 
 V. The Fulness of the Gentiles, .... ,, ii. 11-iii. 13 
 
 1. What Grace has done for Gentiles 
 
 who believed, . . . ,, ii. 11-22 
 
 2. God's Grace toward Paul as 
 
 Apostle of the Gentiles, . . ,, iii. 1-13 
 VI. The Apostle's Second Prayer for the Ephesians, . ,, iii. 14-21 
 
 B. ETHICAL PART— Chaps, iv.-vi. 
 VII. Transition to more immediately practical part — Unity 
 
 of the Faith, ,, iv. 1-16 
 
 1. The Calling of the Christian, . Chap. iv. 1-6 
 
 2. Means of Grace to make such 
 
 Calling effectual, . . . ,, iv. 7-16 
 
96 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 VIII. The New Life, Chaps, iv. 17-v. 21 
 
 1. Regeneration, . . . Chap. iv. 17-24 
 
 2. Bearing toward others, . . ,, iv. 25-v. 2 
 
 3. Tersonal Holiness, . . . ,, v. 3-21 
 
 IX. he Family Lile, ,, v. 22-vi. 9 
 
 1. Duties of Husbands and Wives, . ,, v.22-33 
 
 2. Duties of Parents and Children, . ,, vi. 1-4 
 
 3. Duties of Masters and Servants, ,, vi. 5-9 
 
 X. Armour for the Life of Temptation and Struggle, . ,, vi. 10-20 
 
 XL Commission to Messenger, and Benediction, . . ,, vi. 21 24 
 
 7. LITERATUKE. 
 
 In presenting a list of the literature bearing upon the 
 exposition of the Epistle to the Ephesians, I propose to 
 attempt a classification, in accordance with the several ends 
 served or sought to be served by the various writers of 
 commentaries, critical treatises, and practical discourses. 
 
 I. Purely CiiiTiCAL Treatises, dealing with questions of 
 introduction, and investigating the historical and philosophical 
 difficulties in detail. Besides the critical commentaries, which 
 are also exegetical : — 
 
 1. Holtzmann, Kritik der Ephcser-und Kolosserhricfe avf 
 Grund ciner Analyse Hires VervMndtschaftverhaltnisscs, Leipzig 
 1872, pp. 338, — discusses with great acuteness the relation of 
 the two epistles to one another, and comes to the conclusion 
 that Colossians, as we have it, is an interpolated epistle of 
 St. Paul, whereas Ephesians is written by a Paulinist of the 
 second century to whom we owe the interpolations of Colos- 
 sians. Apart from the merits of this particular theory, the 
 work is most useful and suggestive in its treatment and pre- 
 sentation of the various debateable matters respecting date, 
 destination, and peculiarities of content. 
 
 2. Von Soden, "Der Epheserbrief " in Jahrlilclur fiir Pro- 
 trstantische Theolorjie, xiii. pp. 103-135, 432-498 (1887), — 
 treats (1) of the composition, (2) of the doctrinal peculiarities, 
 and (3) of the origin of the epistle. He subjects the vocabu- 
 lary and style of the writing to a careful examination, pp. 
 106—132, in which we find many interesting and helpful 
 discussions of particular words and phrases ; then he follows 
 
LITERATURE. 97 
 
 the same course with regard to the meaning of peculiar 
 expressions recurring frequently in the epistle (pp. 432-472) ; 
 and, finally, he discusses the various suggestions that have 
 been made to account for its origin, and the historical and 
 critical facts which speak for or against these (pp. 472-498). 
 He regards Ephesians as a post-apostolic catholic epistle, largely 
 made up of Pauline material, the work of a SiSacr/caXo? " for 
 the edification of the saints" (iv. 12). Together with Iloltz- 
 mann's treatise, these papers of Von Soden's, together with 
 the summary of results, modified in some particulars, in his 
 Hand-Commentar, afford a carefully-methodised presentation 
 of the materials, and a fair discussion of the main questions 
 involved in the critical study of our epistle. 
 
 II. Critical Commentaries, dealing with questions of 
 introduction, and also giving a full exegetical commentary 
 on the text of the epistle : — 
 
 1. Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handhooh to the Epistle 
 to the Ephesians, Edin. 1880. — As a critical and exegetical 
 commentary, the most useful of all. Without going into 
 detailed exposition, or losing sight of the main point by 
 following out details, he combines in admirable proportion 
 thorough grammatical criticism, so far as that is likely to help 
 the exposition, and the most able and sympathetic exegesis of 
 the apostle's thoughts. Without exaggeration, the work may 
 be described as absolutely indispensable to the student. 
 
 2. Ellicott, A Critical and Grammatical Commentarij on 
 St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Lond., 1st ed. 1855, 
 latest ed. 1884. — Exhibits the well-known characteristics of 
 this author's commentaries. As a grammatical commentary 
 it is admirable, but on questions of exegesis and on points of 
 criticism, other than verbal, it is not only meagre, but often in 
 its statements jejune and unsatisfactory. 
 
 3. Harless, Commentar iiher den Brief Pauli an die Ephesier, 
 Erlangen 1834. — This is by far the most elaborate critical 
 commentary that has yet appeared on our epistle. Ellicott 
 has described it as "the admirable exposition of Harless, 
 which for accurate scholarship, learning, candour, and ability, 
 may be pronounced one of the best, if not the very best, 
 
 G 
 
 \ 
 
98 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 commentary that has ever vet appeared on any single 
 portion of Holy Scripture." This encomium, as most readers 
 might be prepared to suppose, is greatly overstrained. The 
 work has many faults. It is painfully prolix, and often 
 pointless, and sadly wanting in vigour alike of thought and 
 style. The author is constantly losing himself in detail, 
 going into grammatical discussions of a pedantic character 
 that only divert attention from the main point. He is also 
 often dominated and biassed by his attachment to Lutheran 
 Church doctrine. Yet, with all these serious drawbacks, the 
 work deserves to rank among the greatest and most thorough 
 expositions of this epistle. 
 
 4. Eadie, Commentary on the Grech Text of tlie Epistle of 
 Paul to the Ephesians, 1st ed. 1854, latest ed. Edin. 1883. — 
 Not always reliable in discussions of grammatical details and 
 in questions affecting the text, and sometimes diffuse and 
 written in a rather exuberant and rhetorical style, but gener- 
 ally sound and sober in its exegesis. Because of the com- 
 prehensiveness of its plan, overtaking as it does, though not 
 with an equal measure of success, the grammatical, critical, 
 exegetical, and practical exposition of the epistle, it will 
 always be found a useful aid to the busy minister and general 
 student, 
 
 5. Hofmann, Eer Erief Eauli an die Epheser, Ncirdlingen 
 1870. — Like all the works of this able theologian, in- 
 genious and subtle in its exegesis, but often perverse and 
 forced. The exposition is stimulating in no ordinary degree ; 
 though generally, perhaps, the views insisted upon must be 
 finally rejected, the discussion is almost invariably interesting 
 and invigorating, and opens up suggestions in various 
 directions. No critic is more acute in discovering and laying 
 bare the weak point in an opponent's argument or theory. 
 As a criticism of all proposed expositions, Hofmann's work is 
 most valuable. 
 
 6. Meier, Kommentar ither den Erief Eauli an die Epheser, 
 Berlin 1834. — An excellent exegeti-cal commentary, not 
 sufficiently well known. The exposition is full and satis- 
 factory, and, in general, the author shows great judiciousness 
 and an admirable sense of proportion in his treatment of the 
 
LITEKATUEE. 99 
 
 tliemes presented by the text. He gives a i)articularly 
 careful and well-balanced exposition of ditficult passages, e.g. 
 i. 23, iii. 19, iv. 13, and v. 11-14. 
 
 7. Von Soden, Hand-Commentar zum Neiicn Testament, 
 Freiburg 1891, iii. 1, pp. 78-150. — The most perfect 
 achievement in the production of a short commentary that 
 has yet been made. In an introduction of twenty pages we 
 have, on the basis of the detailed investigation referred to 
 above, a most lucid and complete presentation of tlie main 
 questions under discussion with regard to the origin, destina- 
 tion, character, and date of the epistle. The commentary 
 on the text, comprised in fifty pages, is most suggestive, giving, 
 generally in a single phrase, the result of the most careful 
 scientific exegesis. The spirit of the author is admirable, 
 and in his work we have one of the very best specimens 
 of the reverent and devout treatment of the contents of the 
 sacred writings by an advanced and free critic of text and 
 histor}'. It is iir every respect, critically as well as spiritually, 
 a very notable advance upon the work of Holtzmann, in a 
 somewhat similar work, translated under the title, Protestant 
 Commentary on tlic Netv Testamc7it, by the Theol. Transl. 
 Fund. It may be confidently recommended to advanced 
 students. 
 
 8. Schnedermann, in Strack and Zockler's KuTzgefasstcr 
 Kommcntar, B. iVmcs Testament, iv., Nordlingen 1888, pp. 
 3-43. — In respect both of introduction and of exposition, 
 the author has confined himself within much too narrow 
 limits. Occasionally even here, and more frequently in his 
 treatment of some of the other epistles, he shows himself 
 thoroughly capable of good work, but his Epliesians is dis- 
 appointing and for the most part useless to the student. The 
 meagre notes, sometimes through a wliole page, do literally 
 nothing more than refer to parallel passages more or less 
 related to the text, and this in a manner in no wise superior 
 to the margin of any good Reference Bible. It is not for a 
 moment to be compared with the work of Von Soden. 
 
 9. Klopper, Dcr Brief an die Epheser, Gottingen 1891, 
 pp. 201 (somewhat of a supplement to the author's elaborate 
 Commentary on Colossians of 1882). — A treatise of first 
 
100 INTRODUCTION^. 
 
 importance in its discussion of questions of introduction, but 
 somewhat meagre and perfunctory in the treatment of purely 
 exegetical questions. Klopper regards the epistle as written 
 by a Paulinist living not more than twenty or thirty years 
 after the death of Paul. He thinks it was addressed by its 
 author formally to the Ephesians, but intended for a wider 
 circle of readers, who were troubled by the presence of 
 teachers of Antinomian and libertine tendencies. 
 
 10. Beet, Commentary on St. PauFs Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 Pliilippians, Colossians, and to Philemon, 'LonA. 1890 {Ephe- 
 sians, pp. 271-389). — The exposition is thoroughly sensible 
 and well-informed, but not particularly striking or suggestive. 
 Questions of introduction are discussed in a somewhat frag- 
 mentary way, and the attempt to deal with all the epistles 
 of the imprisonment together has prevented anything like a 
 tliorough treatment of each. 
 
 11. Beck, Erkldrung des Erirfes Pauli an die Eplieser, 
 Giitersloh 1891, pp. 244. — Usefid exegetical notes, dominated 
 in some instances by the author's peculiar doctrinal views, 
 but specially useful in their presentation of the Pauline use 
 of distinctive doctrinal terms. The earlier part of the ex- 
 position is much more full than the later. On the whole 
 interesting, but not indispensable. 
 
 The best patristic commentaries are those of Chrysostom, 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Jerome. Of modern critical 
 works not mentioned above, we may name : Morus, Explicatio 
 Epistolce Paulinw ad Ephesios, Lips. 179 5, pp. 135— 282,' — 
 good explanatory notes ; and Matthies, ErldciriLvg des Eriefcs 
 an die Eplieser, Greifswald 1834, pp. 187, — with interesting 
 criticism of earlier comm.eutators, but in exegesis vacillating 
 and undependable. 
 
 III. DocTRiXAL Commentaries, in which the critical 
 and exegetical element is distinctly subordinated to the 
 doctrinal interest, the text being made the basis for systematic 
 doctrinal discussion : — • 
 
 1. Boyd, In Epistolam Pauli Ajjost. ad Ephesios Pro'lec- 
 iiones, Hond. 1G52. — A posthumous work of Boyd of Trochrig, 
 containing over two hundred lectures, delivered in Saumur, 
 
LITERATURE. 101 
 
 Glasgow, and Edinburgli. Able, but extremely bulky, occupy- 
 ing twelve hundred and thirty-six large folio pages of double 
 columns, of which, from the standpoint of a true commentary, 
 probably a thousand pages are superfluous. The distribution 
 and exegesis proper are thoroughly good, and have been 
 largely drawn upon by later writers. The lectures are well 
 described on the title-page as Icctionc varia, nniliifaria crudi- 
 tio'iie ct 2)ictate singulari rcfertcc, as giving an accurate analysis 
 and a copious and clear explication of the apostle's words ; 
 appropriate observations on doctrines and practical applica- 
 tion ; besides all this, interspersing discussions on the loci 
 communes, on questions and controversies, and explanations 
 of a great number of Scripture texts. The excursus on 
 PrmclestinatioR, inserted after Eph. i. 13, 14, occupies about 
 eiglity-two of these large double-columned pages. It is, how- 
 ever, an admirable storehouse of good material. 
 
 2. Calvin, Commcntciry on Ephesians (original ed. Geneva, 
 1548), translated and published along with Commentary on 
 Galatians, Edin. 1841. — This commentary possesses the well- 
 known admirable qualities of its great author. It is an 
 excellent specimen of the exegetico-doctrinal method. As all 
 who have nsed Calvin's commentaries are aware, the great 
 dogmatist is singularly fair in his exegesis, and free from the 
 warping influence of doctrinal prejudice. 
 
 3. Eollock, In Epistolam Paidi AjJost. ad Epltcsios, Edin. 
 1590, 4to, pp. 290; Geneva 1593, 8vo, pp. 421. — 
 Characterised by good sense, expressed in a plain and homely 
 way. Eollock had preached over the epistle, and then wrote 
 his commentary. His chief interest is in the doctrines, but 
 these he conceives and expounds in a thoroughly practical 
 and nseful manner. Like Boyd, he has been largely drawn 
 upon by subsequent expositors, and his work, so far as the 
 student is concerned, is rather a curiosity than part of the 
 necessary apparatus. 
 
 4. Zanchi, Commcnfarms in Epistolam Sancti Pauli ad 
 Ephesios, 1st ed. 1594; ed. by Hartog, Amsterdam 1888, 
 2 vols., pp. 350, 415. — The work of one of the most able and 
 accomplished theologians of the sixteenth century, constructed 
 on purely scholastic lines, and affording a specimen of a 
 
102 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 purely Calvinistic theological treatise, distributed so as to bear 
 some resemblance to a commentary. Much useful material 
 is to be found here, which, though quite out of place in a 
 Commentary on Ephesians, would be welcome and appropriate 
 in a work on systematic theology. 
 
 5. Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 Lond. 1856. — This eminent theologian does not appear to 
 advantage as a commentator. His work on Ephesians is not 
 a particularly helpful book. The exegesis is everywliere sub- 
 ordinated to doctrinal statements, which scarcely deserve to 
 be called exposition. The careful exegetical basis on which 
 tlie doctrinal exposition should be immediately reared is 
 wanting, and the notes often wear the appearance of having 
 been bodily transferred from a theological common-place book. 
 
 6. Fergusson, Brief Exjjosition of the Epistle of Paul to the 
 Galatians, Ephesians, etc. (the original dated from Kilwinning, 
 1658), in the seiies of commentaries by David Dickson, 
 George Hutcheson, and other Scottish divines. — In liis dis- 
 tribution and exegesis he closely follows Boyd, but is more 
 independent in the doctrinal notes which he appends to his 
 comments on each verse. It is perhaps the very best 
 doctrinal commentary on the epistle extant and ordinarily 
 accessible. The doctrinal notes are very full, but are scrupu- 
 
 ' lously confined to genuine deductions from the text, the 
 meaning of which has been briefly but accurately stated in 
 the exegetical paragraphs immediately following the text. 
 
 7. Bayne, An Entire Commentary on the whole Ejnstle of 
 St. Paid to the Ephesia7is (originally published in complete 
 form in 1643), Edin. 1866. — May be placed alongside of 
 Fergusson's, as generally of the same order. It is, however, 
 much more diffuse, and many things, especially in connection 
 with the Arminian and Eomish controversies, are needlessly 
 dragged in, and dwelt upon in a tedious manner. Like 
 Hodge, he is apt to forget the limits of his particular text, 
 and to launch out into a general doctrinal dissertation. 
 
 IV. Treatises on Biblical Theology, which discuss the 
 peculiar type of apostolic doctrine set forth in Ephesians, as 
 compared with other types of New Testament theology : — 
 
LITERATURE. 103 
 
 1. Weiss, Biblical Theology of the New Testament, 2 vols, 
 Edin. 1888-89 (especially in vol. ii. pp. 75-124). — 
 Nowhere is the doctrinal development of Pauliuism more 
 admirably set forth than in this work, in the sections that 
 deal with Paul's early preaching, the teaching of the four 
 great epistles, and the epistles of the imprisonment. In 
 tliis third section, there is a very thorough and true presenta- 
 tion of the teaching of Ephesians on justification, fellowship 
 with Christ, true wisdom and knowledge, the cosmical signi- 
 ficance of Christ, the work of salvation in its cosmical 
 relation, realisation of salvation in the Church, and Christi- 
 anity as the principle of fellowship. This analysis of the 
 doctrine of our epistle will be found most helpful, in enabling 
 the student to realise the position reached and represented 
 by the apostle in this highest stage of his spiritual develop- 
 ment. 
 
 2. Kostlin, Dcr Lehrhegriff des Evangeliums und der ver- 
 wandten neutestavientlichcn Lchrhegriffe, Berlin 1843. — The 
 work of a thorough-going adherent of the Tubingen school, 
 in which the Epistle to the Ephesians is represented as the 
 work of a mediator between Paul and John. The portion 
 bearing on this subject (pp. 365-378) has been already 
 summarised. The statement of the doctrinal system of the 
 epistle is presented in a singularly clear and able manner, 
 and is well worth the attention of every student of the types 
 of doctrine presented in the various writings of the New 
 Testament. 
 
 3. Pfleiderer, Paidinism, 2 vols., Lond. 1887, original ed. 
 Leipzig 1873, vol. ii. pp. 162-193, regards the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians as an illustration of Paulinism in the course 
 of its change to Catholicism. The analysis is able and 
 suggestive, recognising the richness and highly-developed 
 form of the dogma presented in the epistle. The discussion 
 of the idea of the Church as here set forth is particularly 
 instructive. 
 
 4. Sabatier, The Apostle Paul, appeared in its first edition 
 some twenty years ago, translated from the third edition, 
 1891, a brilliant sketch, by a liberal French Protestant, of 
 the life and doctrines of the apostle. The doctrinal develop- 
 
104 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ment of I*aul is carefully studied in connection with the 
 movements of his life and the unfolding of his personal 
 experience. In Book iv., 213—249, we have The Asiatic 
 Epistles discussed in a suggestive style. Our author rejects 
 the Epliesian destination of the epistle, and regards it as 
 intended for that group of churches, including Laodicea and 
 Colossal (Col. ii. 1), and identifies it with the epistle which 
 the Colossians were to get from Laodicea (Col. iv. 16). It 
 was not addressed to Laodicea, but to the circle of churches 
 of which Laodicea was one. Sabatier firmly maintains the 
 Pauline authorship of Ephesians and Colossians, and regards 
 it as proved to demonstration that both are from the same 
 author, and must stand or fall together. 
 
 5. Of a somewhat different order from those just named, 
 but of interest mainly for their discussion of the types of 
 doctrine which characterise the several groups of Paul's 
 epistles, are the works of Davies and Irons. — Davies, The 
 Epistles of Paid to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and Philemon, 
 2nd ed. Lond. 1884, undertakes to unfold the central thought 
 of the apostle in those epistles, and to show that creaturely 
 and human life have their centre and key in " the word 
 which is the law and life of universal creation, and the Son 
 who is the head of universal humanity." His notes are 
 intentionally meagre, except on those passages which directly 
 deal with these points. Irons, Christianity as taught hy St. 
 Paid, Lond. 1870, seeks, especially in section 5, to work out 
 a similar idea, but a special twist is given to his whole 
 treatment of the subject by his endeavours to reduce the 
 idea of election to a mere appointment to privilege, afforded 
 first to Jews and then to Gentiles. In furtherance of this 
 idea he, very elaborately but quite unsuccessfully, attempts 
 to show that " we " and " you," " saints " and " faithful," 
 refer respectively to Jews and Gentiles. 
 
 V. Peactical Commentaries and Discourses : — 
 
 1. Graham (Dr. William, of Bonn), Lectures on St. Paid's 
 
 Epistle to the Ep)hesians, Lond. pp. 412. — These lectures are 
 
 not characterised by any special brilliancy of style, but form 
 
 the most thoroughly textual exposition, and the most edifying 
 
LITEKATUKE. 105 
 
 spiritual commentary that we have met with. They afford 
 an admirable specimen of what congregational lectures should 
 be, presenting a careful exhibition of the exact meaning of 
 each clause of the epistle, suitably followed by practical 
 remarks and earnest appeals naturally deduced from and 
 directly based npon the text. 
 
 2. Dale, The l^ptstlc to the JEj^Jtcsians : lis Doctrine and 
 JEthics, Lond. 1882, pp. 446. — This course of lectures is 
 disappointing. There is very evidently a want of proportion 
 in the treatment of topics. In the second lecture (pp. 30-32), 
 the autlior indulges in violent and vulgar abuse of Calvinism, 
 which we have read often enough before in the productions 
 of weak and angry controversialists, but which is quite 
 unworthy of Dr. Dale's reputation as a thinker. He gives an 
 absurdly unfair description, indeed, nothing but an overdone 
 caricature of the doctrinal theory that excites his ire ; while 
 he refutes it by a strained and unsatisfactory, because one- 
 sided, representation of the doctrine of Paul. He is specially 
 successful in his treatment of the ethical part, to which it 
 would have been well if he had given the whole of the space 
 at his command. The style throughout is forcible, and the 
 tone, upon the whole, bracing and healthy. 
 
 3. Stier, Die Gemeinde in Christo ; Auslcgung des Eplieacr- 
 Iriefs, 2 vols., Berlin, 1848 ; or, in abridged form, Der Brief 
 an die Eplieser als Lehre von der Gemeinde filr die_ Gemeinde 
 ausgelegt, 1859. — Though in its large form most provokingly 
 diffuse, this is a really helpful and profitable practical 
 commentary. As in all his other works, so here, the author 
 attempts to utilise, for purposes of edification, all possible 
 meanings of each clause and expression, and because of his 
 indecision is no real guide to exegesis, nor does he build on 
 a trustworthy exegetical basis. His reflections, always good 
 and pious, are not always appropriate and textual. 
 
 4. Pulsford, Christ and His Seed, Central to all Things: 
 leing a Series of Expository Diseourses on Fcml's Ejnstle to the 
 Ephesians, Lond. 1872, 4to, pp. 248. — Very striking and 
 original, full of rich, suggestive, spiritual thoughts ; but 
 unsystematic, and wanting in proportion in its treatment of 
 the doctrines of the epistle. When consulted on particular 
 
106 INTRODUCTIOX. 
 
 expressions, and for the unfolding of the great thoughts of 
 the apostle, regarded as gerrainative ideas, apart from their 
 setting in the epistle, the book will be found by many one of 
 the richest and most stimulating of all the collections of 
 practical discourses on texts from the Epistle to the Ephesians. 
 In some cases he allows himself to drift into a dreamy 
 mysticism. 
 
 5. Goodwin, Exposition of Epistle to the Ephesians, chaps, i. 
 and ii. 1-11, original ed. 1681; Edin. 1861, vols. i. and 
 ii. of Works of Goodwin, with Discourses on other parts of 
 the Epistle. — As Goodwin devotes a volume of five hundred 
 and sixty-four pages to one chapter, it will be readily under- 
 stood that he says much that has no proper connection with 
 his text. He takes advantage of every word or phrase to 
 launch forth into a detailed analysis of all doctrines pre- 
 sented, or even remotely hinted at, by the term in question, 
 and into an examination, often pointless enough and common- 
 place, of an endless array of Scripture passages where similar 
 language happens to be used. If one has time and patience 
 to peruse fifty pages, for what he ought to have had in five, 
 he will find a solid and substantial exposition, the fruit of 
 deep experimental acquaintance with the doctrines of grace 
 as set forth in the epistle. 
 
COMMENTARY. 
 
 ^i— THEOLOGICAL DIVISION.— Chaps. L-III. 
 
 The Epistle to tlie Ephesians, like most of the epistles of 
 Paul, falls into two portions, which are respectively of 
 a predominantly theoretical and of a predominantly practical 
 character. The entire composition, however, as must ever be 
 the case in genuinely epistolary productions, is throughout 
 intensely practical, and so, even in the distinctly doctrinal 
 parts, there are found unmistakeable traces of a directly 
 hortatory intention. AYe prefer to indicate the distinguishing 
 characteristics of the two portions of our epistle by the 
 designations Theological and Ethical. Yet, even when using 
 these distinctive names, we must remember that the differen- 
 tiation is not by any means thoroughgoing. Christian ethics 
 is closely related to Christian dogmatics, so that even in 
 scientific treatises the province of the one cannot be sharply 
 and definitely marked of!' from that of the other. We caimot 
 treat any section of Christian doctrine without admitting a 
 very decided flavour of the ethical element ; and we cannot 
 treat any department of Christian morals without indicating 
 distinctly, not only the doctrines but also the theoretical 
 view of the doctrines on which the principles of true Christian 
 conduct are based. Hence all modern writers on theological 
 encyclopaedia are inclined to consider dogmatics and ethics 
 as departments of systematic theology dealing with the 
 contents of religion, viewed in the one case primarily as a 
 system of beliefs, and in the other primarily as afibrding the 
 principles of conduct for the life. But the faith set forth in 
 Christian dogmatics is living faith, which takes its form and 
 character largely from the experience of its power in actual 
 life ; and the principles of conduct laid down in Christian 
 ethics are principles accepted and acted upon by believers, 
 
108 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 whose faith determines their whole view of life. In this 
 epistle, as in all his epistles, the apostle never loses sight of 
 either of the elements which go to make up a genuinely 
 religious view of man in his relation to God and his fellow- 
 men, and in his relation to time and eternity. We distin- 
 guish the first three chapters as Theological, because this is 
 the writer's point of view throughout ; and his treatment of 
 his theme is worthy of that name just because the ethical 
 interest is never absent. "We distinguish the last three 
 chapters as Ethical, because this indicates the writer's point 
 of view in this part of his work ; and his treatment of his 
 subject here is worthy of that name just because the theo- 
 logical interest is never absent. 
 
 Sect. I. — Addeess and Greeting (Chap. i. 1, 2). 
 
 Yer. 1. Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ. — So Paul styles 
 himself in the opening verses of most of his epistles. The 
 title owes its origin to Christ. It is not to be regarded as 
 the equivalent for any synagogal office. The apostles of 
 Christ were twelve men selected from among His disciples, 
 subjected to a special course of teaching preparatory to their 
 entering upon their great mission, and then at last formally 
 commissioned by the Master, whose disciples they were, to 
 disciple all nations. In the synoptic Gospels the word is 
 used only to designate the Twelve. As it was their privilege 
 to be " with Him," so the functions of their office are similar 
 to^His own, and can be characterised by a common name. 
 As He is, so are they in the world. The writer of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews calls Christ the Apostle and High Priest of 
 our calling (iii. 1). Our Lord Himself often repeats the 
 declaration that He is the Sent of God; and then, of His 
 disciples chosen to be apostles He says : " As Thou hast sent 
 me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the 
 world" (John xvii. 18). — Paul is an apostle in this most 
 honourable sense.^ He continues Christ's work in the world, 
 
 ^ For a thorough and comprehensive examination of the Scripture use of the 
 term "apostle," see Lightfoot, Epistle to the Galatians, pp. 92-101, 10th ed. 
 1890. 
 
CHAP. I. 1. 109 
 
 during the period of tlie founding and forming of the 
 Church. "We cannot wonder at liis evident fondness for the 
 designation. 
 
 By the will of God. — He now proceeds to show that he 
 has good authority for so styling himself. He is an apostle 
 by the will of God. He taketh not this lionour to himself, 
 but is called of (!od. Thus, in the original ground of their 
 calling, agree Aaron, Christ, and Paul. Although not 
 individually included in the above-quoted commission of the 
 Lord, Paul can yet point to unmistakeable proofs of an express 
 divine call to the apostleship. He thinks of the entire course 
 of God's dealings with him, from his mother's womb (Gal. 
 i. 15) to the shining from heaven of the great light (Acts ix. 3), 
 and the bestowal upon him of that grace which the chief 
 apostles recognised in him as qualifying him for the apostle- 
 ship of the Gentiles (Gal. ii. 9). He does not, however, 
 require to defend his apostolic rank among the Ephesians, as 
 he had been obliged to do among the Galatians. He there- 
 fore does not linger over the evidences of his call to be an 
 apostle, but rather, in view of his former position as a 
 persecutor, he calls to remembrance, with thankfulness, the 
 exceeding grace of God in thus entrusting him with the 
 ministry. The churches of Christ have seen and known his 
 manner of life, so as to be able to trace in his career manifest 
 proofs that it was directed by and in accordance with the 
 will of God. That he is indeed an apostle by the will of 
 God, gives ground of confidence to his readers, that what he 
 writes is in accordance with the will of God, and embraces 
 the whole counsel of God (Pom. i. 10, 11, xv. 29-32). 
 Moreover, absolute dependence upon the will of God was 
 characteristic of Paul in regard to all the details of his 
 personal, as well as of his official, life. Only in so far as one 
 consciously subjects himself to God's will can he be God's 
 apostle. In this lay the secret of Paul's strength. He does 
 not falter in presence of difficulties and dangers, because he 
 does not then think of himself at all, either as weak or as 
 strong, but only of that supreme will which he obeys, — the 
 one absolutely strong thing in the universe. Paul does not 
 falter, because this will, with which alone he concerns himself, 
 
110 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 knows no variableness, and is not in the least affected by 
 circumstances. He thus finds that when he is weak, that is, 
 when self is least obtrusive, then is he strong, being most 
 entirely at the bidding of the divine will. 
 
 To the saints v)hich arc at Uphcsus, and faithful in Clirist 
 Jesus. — The designation of those addressed follows im- 
 mediately upon the designation of the writer, in accordance 
 with the usual epistolary style of those times. — The terms 
 " saints " and " faithful," or believing, designate the same 
 parties. There is no substantial ground for understanding by 
 the one term Jewish and by the other Gentile Christians, as 
 is done, for example, by Irons in his Christianity as Taught 
 hi/ St. Paul. Von Soden is driven by the exigencies of his 
 text, from which he excludes the local designation, to insist 
 upon this distinction. He represents the apostle as claiming 
 for the believers in Christ the right to that designation which 
 the Jews had regarded as exclusively their own.^ But while 
 the saints and the believers were the same persons, the 
 employment of the different terms implied that they were 
 regarded from two different points of view. The term " saint " 
 indicates the ecclesiastical standing ; the term " faithful " the 
 spiritual character or attitude of those addressed by the 
 apostle. They are saints by the divine election, and so it is 
 said that they are called to be saints (1 Cor. i. 1) ; God's 
 electing love has separated them unto Himself by the consecra- 
 tion of a special choice. They are believers by the exercise, 
 under gracious divine influence, of their own spiritual powers, 
 in the appropriation of Him who has been sent to reconcile 
 them to God. And then the apostle, in accordance with his 
 doctrine, speaks of them first of all as sai nts, obj ects of the 
 divine electing love, and in the next place as believers, 
 exercising God's gift of faith in receiving His Son. 
 
 Paul generally addresses the members of the churches to 
 which he writes as Saints. The only exceptions are found in 
 the earlier epistles, those to the Thessalonians and Galatians, 
 
 ^ Von Soden, Hand-Commentar, iii. 1, p. 101 : " Inasmucli as the aim of the 
 epistle is to secure recognition for tlie fact that all Christians, whether of Jewish 
 or of Gentile descent, stand precisely in the same position, the address serves as 
 programme. According to it, there are no aymi in the technical sense, for they 
 are all eq^ually ■mmi, and all who are -Tntrroi belong to the uyioi." 
 
CHAP. I. 1. Ill 
 
 Avliere the writer addresses the clmrclies, which, however, are 
 simply the congregations of the saints. It was the oldest 
 name by which Christians were known. Before they had 
 been called Christians at Antioch, they were called saints 
 (Acts ix. 13, 32); and this name was used interchangeably 
 with the designation "disciples of the Lord" (Acts ix. 1, 19), 
 which corresponds precisely with the term " believers." — The 
 idea conveyed by the term " saint " is that of separation in 
 order to consecration. Even in the Old Testament, local 
 separation from impurity had a distinct ideal reference to 
 moral and spiritual withdrawal from evil. God's people, altar, 
 temple, priests, etc., were holy because claimed by Him and 
 separated to Himself. They did not make themselves, nor 
 were they made by others, holy, but were made holy by God. 
 Holiness properly belongs only to God. What, therefore. He 
 separates from other relations, in order to call it into relation 
 with Himself, He brings into connection with holiness ; and 
 if it possesses moral and spiritual capacities it becomes holy 
 in heart and life. Things — God's temple, altar, day, etc. — 
 become ceremonially holy ; individuals — God's priests and 
 people — are destined, in the divine idea, to become personally 
 holy. The object, too, that w\as separated unto God and devoted, 
 had to be without blemish and perfect of its kind. Cere- 
 monial purity had significance only as preparing tlie way and 
 educating man's nature for real personal purity. The ideal 
 was presented in the New Testament, freed from all entangle- 
 ment with the ceremonial, so that it might be directly realised 
 in the individual life and in the life of the community. 
 Sainthood, as characterising the membership of the Christian 
 Church, not only involves, but explicitly postulates, on the part 
 of all, inner purity and likeness to God. The term " saints," 
 viewed in its historical use, means simply God's people, those 
 whom God has separated to Himself, the congregation of God's 
 Israel. It thus indicates a particular visible community, and 
 carries with it a literal suggestion of the idea of locality. 
 This term is therefore peculiarly fitted to designate the 
 membership of a particular Christian congregation. In other 
 epistles of Paul, it is closely attached to the local designation 
 of the church addressed. "All that are in Eome, called to bq 
 
112 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 saints " (Rom. i. 7), "the church at Corinth, those that are called 
 to be saints " (1 Cor. i. 2), " the saints which are in all Achaia " 
 (2 Cor. i. 1), "saints at Philippi " (Phil. i. 1), " saints, etc., at 
 Colossffi" (Col. i. 2). Such examples as these afford a strong 
 presumption in favour of the presence of some local designa- 
 tion, such as " in Ephesus" in immediate connection with the 
 word " saints. ' They are, then, as members of the church at 
 Ephesus, already dedicated or devoted to God, and so destined 
 to holiness. 
 
 The saint's ideal, however, is attainable only through 
 appropriation by faith of the Holy One. And so the apostle 
 proceeds to describe those addressed as saints who are 
 exercising faith in Christ, who are in living contact with the 
 source of all saintliness, — the faithful in Christ Jesus. By 
 this phrase the apostle means " believers," those who have and 
 who exercise faith. The result of faith's possession and use 
 undoubtedly is steadfastness. Those who believe, and continue 
 believing, exhibit thus the grace of fidelity. In the absence, 
 however, of any occasion for polemical reference, the idea of 
 steadfastness is not here made prominent. When the apostle 
 next refers to the graces of the Ephesians (ver. 15), he at 
 once speaks of their faith in the Lord Jesus. — The term is 
 added in this place, in order more exactly to define and 
 characterise those addressed. They are not here spoken of as 
 saints in Christ Jesus, but as saints who are believers in 
 Jesus, as those whose outward profession and inward condition 
 correspond. It is quite in keeping with the definition of 
 " saints " and " believers " given above, that the former term 
 should be immediately connected with the local designation, 
 " i7i Ephesus ; " and that the latter term should be connected 
 with the moral and spiritual designation, " in Christ Jesus." 
 Called to be saints, they are joined in an outward association 
 and constitute a community ; but when described as believers, 
 it is a subjective spiritual character that is pointed to, which 
 can be wrought in them only by contact with the person of 
 Jesus Christ. They are not, therefore, here characterised as 
 saints in Christ Jesus, but as believers in Him. True Chris- 
 tian holiness is reached only where the two are combined : 
 separated unto God in election, united to Clirist by faith. It 
 
CHAP. I. 2. 113 
 
 is undoubtedly true that those who believe in Christ are also 
 saints in Christ, At the same time it is evident that the 
 " in " has quite a different signification in the one case and in 
 the other. Saintliness consists in communion with Christ 
 Jesus. To be in Christ Jesus is to be saintly. But the rank 
 of saints, as intended here, is reached by an external profession, 
 which if genuine implies belief in Him to whom we profess 
 devotion. Bishop Pearson argues that just as St. Matthew 
 calls Jerusalem the " Hohj City" at the very time when the 
 mass of its inhabitants were rejecting the Saviour's gracious 
 invitation, so the catholic Church, while containing many void 
 of saving grace, deserves to be called holy. In this sense 
 " saints " is the designation of professed members of the 
 Church, and " believers in Christ Jesus " are those in the 
 visible Church in whom Christ's loving purpose (Eph. v. 
 25-27) is being accomplished. Personal trust in Christ, 
 and professed adherence to His cause, ought always to go 
 together. 
 
 Yer. 2. Grace to you, and 'peace. — The benediction here given 
 answers to the salutation which Jesus enjoined His apostles to 
 give to those among whom they went (Matt. x. 12, 13). 
 This same greeting occurs in all Paul's epistles, varied only in 
 the Pastoral Epistles, where the circumstance of their being 
 addressed to individuals suggests the addition of the more 
 tender and personal phrase " mercy." Hence it will not do 
 to insist upon making " grace " bear a special reference to 
 " saints," and " peace " a special reference to " the faithful in 
 Christ Jesus." These two terms, grace and peace, occur in 
 greetings where the designations, saints and faithful, are not 
 employed. Nor is there any sufficient ground for associating 
 grace exclusively, or even distinctively, with God the Father, 
 and peace similarly with God the Son. The wish that peace 
 may be enjoyed by the Ephesian Christians, seems rather to 
 define the character of the grace sought. It is grace that 
 produces peace in those unto whom it comes. In the idea of 
 grace, there is, indeed, an unmistakeable reference to what is 
 primary, and in that of peace to what is secondary ; and we 
 are therefore here led to think, on the one hand, of God's 
 electing grace, and, on the other, of that believing which brings 
 
 H 
 
114 EPISTLE TO THE ErHESIANS. 
 
 peace. But, as we shall see, this election is in Christ, and in 
 Him also we have peace. 
 
 From God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. — The 
 apostle has placed God and Christ upon the same level. 
 They are regarded as the common source of the gifts of grace 
 and peace. They are not distinguished in respect of the gilts 
 which they hestow. Both give grace and peace. But they 
 are distinguished in their relation to the recipients of those 
 gifts. God and Christ are thus distinguished by names 
 indicating their respective relations to the members of the 
 Church. God is Father to those who, as saints, are " predes- 
 tinated unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ " (ver. 5), 
 and who, as believers, can call Jesus Christ their Lord, who 
 call Him so, by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. xii. 3). With respect 
 to such as are saints and faithful in reality as well as in name, 
 the apostolic wish reaches to the full height of a comforting 
 assurance of those in possession of those divine gifts. — Christ is 
 Lord, as having received from the Father all power in heaven 
 and in earth (Matt, xxviii. 18), and being made Head over all 
 to the Church (Eph. i. 22) ; and this is recognised by all the 
 saints and faithful, who, as such, acknowledge His authority. 
 
 Goodwin in his works (i. 21) discusses, in an interesting 
 manner, the question, why the Holy Ghost is not mentioned 
 along with the Father and the Son in the apostolic greetings. 
 The answer is, that it is the Spirit's office to reveal and com- 
 municate the grace and peace of Father and Son ; that, while 
 these two divine persons are objects of faith, the Spirit is the 
 Author of this faith. So, too, prayer is addressed to Father 
 and Son, but rather by the Spirit than to Him (Ptom. viii. 26). 
 The apostle's greeting here is just such a prayer. 
 
 Sect. IL — The Operations of Divine Grace: 
 
 What the Father, So7i, and Holy Spirit have done for the 
 Church (chap. i. 3—14). 
 
 The apostle blesses God for the blessings wherewith he has 
 blessed the Church, Those blessings are enumerated in detail 
 in this paragraph, to the praise of God. They are very 
 
CHAP. I. 3. 11 5 
 
 evidently arranged according as they are more immediately 
 brought to us by God the Father (vers. -j-C), by God the Sou 
 (vers. 7-12), and by God the Holy Spirit (vers. 13, 14). 
 Each of those sections ends with a declaration that what has 
 been uttered redounds to the praise, of God's glory. Whatever 
 is aftirnied of one Person of the Trinity implies necessarily 
 the co-operation of the other divine Persons. IJy way of 
 eminence, however, the counsels of eternity are associated 
 with the name of the Father, the accomplishment of redemp- 
 tion in the fulness of time with the name of the Son, and 
 the building up of the Christian life and character with the 
 name of the Holy Spirit. This is the true scriptural method 
 of the doctrine of the Trinity. No encouragement is given to 
 either of tlie contrasted theories of Tritheism or Sabellianism. 
 The tri-personality of God appears in the distinctness of the 
 three operations in man's salvation ; the unity of the divine 
 nature is seen in this, that redemption, in its conception, 
 execution, and completion, has for its highest end the praise of 
 God's glory. 
 
 (1) irhat the Father has done (vers. 3~G). 
 
 Ver. 3. Blessed be God. — The Apostle Peter opens his first 
 epistle with an identical ascription of praise to God. The 
 creature can bless the Creator only by praising Him. This 
 he must do by deed or by word. God's blessedness consists 
 in what He is and in what He does. The creature cannot 
 interfere with this, either for its increase or diminishing. 
 But he may increase his own spiritual wealth by expressing 
 his hearty acquiescence in God's blessedness. It is character- 
 istic of the "saints," then, to bless God (Ps. c.xlv. 10). One 
 of the divine names is " The Blessed " (Mark xiv. 61). Largely 
 used in rabbinical writings, it designates God not merely as 
 the Being who is in possession of all blessedness, but more 
 particularly as the Holy One who inhabits the praises of 
 Israel (Ps. xxii. 3). God is in Himself blessed for evermore, 
 and to this His saints respond with the devout " amen " (Rom. 
 ix. 5). The apostle rejoices in the privilege. To be per- 
 mitted thus to bless God is itself one of the highest spiritual 
 blessings wherewith God blesses His people. 
 
116 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 The God and Fatlier of oiir Lord Jesus Christ. — We have 
 here the designation under which God is addressed by man 
 as he draws near to call Him blessed. He is not to be 
 approached by man in any other name. It is only with 
 God in Christ that we can speak, — with Christ, and then 
 with God as His God and Father, revealed to us as such in 
 Him. God and Father indicates a dual relationship, in which 
 the first Person of the Trinity stands to the second Person 
 become incarnate. He is to Him at once God and Father. 
 There can be no dispute as to the general sense of the passage. 
 It is God in Christ whom we bless. The question, however, 
 has been much discussed as to whetlier the words, " of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ," are to be connected with " the God and 
 Father" or with "Father" only. Luther had translated, 
 " God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Harless 
 vindicates this translation, understanding the apostle here 
 first of all, in the most general way, to bless God, and then 
 specially to bless Him as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ 
 and the Procurer of His saving gifts to us. He argues that 
 the absence of the particle re before Kal renders the attach- 
 ment of the genitival phrase to God as well as to the Father 
 impossible. It has, however, been admitted by Meyer and 
 Ellicott, who favour Harless' rendering, that even without the 
 re the other translation would be quite grammatical. Meyer 
 insists that the genitive " of our Lord Jesus Christ " can only be 
 connected with " Father," because " God and Father " (6 0eo? 
 Kal Trarrjp) had become a stated and recognised designation of 
 God. In support of this, he refers to Eph. v. 20 and 1 Cor. 
 XV. 24. In the passage from Corinthians, the apostle is speak- 
 ing of the end of the present dispensation, when Christ shall 
 have delivered up the kingdom to His God and Father. It 
 is an act of Christ that is referred to, and in this He acts 
 towards God in accordance with His relations to Him. His 
 mediatorial service has reached its consummation, His work 
 as the Incarnate Son is accomplished, and so it is most suit- 
 ably to God, as His God and Father, that He delivers up His 
 delegated power. Then again, in Eph. v. 20, as our exegesis 
 of that passage shows, we have thanks offered in the name of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ to the God and Father, i.e. to the God 
 
CHAr. I. 3. 117 
 
 and Father of Christ. In this phace clearly we cannot expLiiii 
 why thanks are to be given in tire name of Christ to God 
 and the Father, except on the assumption that thanks so 
 rendered are acceptable to Him because He is the God and 
 Father of Christ. Hence both of these passages are found, 
 upon a fair interpretation, to support tlio rendering given to 
 our passage in the English version. The designation of the 
 Father as also the God of our Lord Jesus Christ introduces 
 no doctrinal novelty. In ver. 1 7 of this chapter, the apostle 
 addresses his prayer to " tlie God of our Lord Jesus Christ." 
 This is a relationship that had its beginning with the Incarna- 
 tion. The relation of Father and Son was from eternity. 
 The Man Christ Jesus recognises in the Father also His God. 
 Yet it is not in respect of His divinity alone that God is 
 His Father : the God-man goes about His Father's business 
 (Luke ii. 49). And it is not in respect of His humanity 
 alone that the Father is now His God : it is the Son who 
 cries upon the cross to His God, and enters the eternal world 
 by ascending to His Father and His God (John xx. 17). 
 His equipment as Mediator required that, as the God-man, He 
 should at once be God's Son and subject to God's law. This 
 is the position to which man needs to be restored. He must 
 get this from Christ ; and Christ can give men only what He 
 Himself first has as His own. The right to call God our 
 God and Father can come to us only from One who Himself 
 stands to God in this relation. This sentence also forms 
 a natural transition from the resolve to bless God, to the 
 enumeration and characterisation of the blessings where- 
 with He has blessed us. That He is God and Father 
 to our Lord Jesus Christ constitutes the deepest grounds 
 for our praise. His becoming God and Father to Jesus 
 Christ makes it possible for us to have Jesus Christ as our 
 Lord. 
 
 WJio hath blessed us. — These words set before iis the 
 motive by which saints are constrained to bless God. Observe 
 how carefully the apostle avoids the extremes of human 
 speculation. Scripture allows no advantage either to material- 
 istic modes of thought or to morbid and false spiritualistic 
 tendencies. " We cannot love One whom we have never 
 
118 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIAXS. 
 
 seen," says the materialist ; " nor, indeed, can we form any 
 reasonable conception of such an unseen Being," says the 
 agnostic. " Whom having not seen ye love," fearlessly 
 declares our apostle, animated by the hope, through faith, of 
 yet seeing Him who is now unseen. " It is unworthy of God," 
 says the mystic spiritualist, " to s]ieak of loving God only 
 after we have been assured of God's love to us ; let our love 
 be disinterested ; love Him for love's sake, for His own 
 sake." ^ And yet the very apostle of love himself is content 
 to claim for tlie Christian's love an origin in the love of God 
 revealed to us. Similarly the apostle here calls upon us to 
 bless God because He has blessed us. There can, indeed, be 
 no other order of succession than this. God's deed of blessing 
 must necessarily precede man's sacrifice of thanksgiving and 
 praise. Man's blessing of God is the echo sent back from 
 the heart in which the God that blesses has spoken. God's 
 blessing in the soul, which is nothing else than tliat soul's 
 redemption, must needs continue ever present to the mind 
 and heart of the saint. He has no wish to put away the 
 remembrance of it. The soul which says " Bless God," is 
 already overflowing with memories of God's blessing. And 
 again, as all blessedness dwells in God and so all power to 
 bless is only in Him, we cannot know what blessedness is, 
 and so cannot intelligently acquiesce in God's blessedness, 
 unless He has already shown it to us by blessing us. If, 
 then, we are to be able to say, " Blessed be God," we must 
 also be able to say, " God hath blessed us ; " God's blessing is 
 with us a present experience, a present enjoyment. The 
 aorist here used makes the reference definite. The apostle is 
 thinking of that particular blessing which lies in Christ : the 
 blessing of redemption. He has blessed us by calling us in 
 His electing love to be saints, and we know that we have 
 this blessing if we can call Jesus Christ Lord. 
 
 The three clauses that follow describe and characterise the 
 
 ' This exti'eme doctrine was expressly taught by the Quietists. In Fenelon's 
 work, Maximes des Saints, Paris 1697, Madame Guyon's doctrines were 
 vindicated, and it was affirmed that to love God wo must love Him purely for 
 Ilis own sake, apart altogether from any consideration of the blessedness which 
 we obtain from Him. 
 
CHAP. I. 3. 119 
 
 blessings wherewith God has blessed us. Each of the three 
 is linked on to the preceding clause by the same preposition, 
 and are independent of one another. They describe God's 
 blessings to us (1) according to the agency by which they 
 are wrought or produced, and from which they obtain their 
 distinctive character — they are, all of them in all their variety, 
 blessings of the Spirit ; (2) according to the sphere or atmo- 
 sphere in which they operate, and where they find a genial 
 surrounding, — they are possessed and enjoyed in heavenly 
 places; and (3) according to the procuring or meritorious 
 cause and the personal fount out of which they flow, — they 
 all come to us and can come to us only in Christ. 
 
 With every blessing of the Spirit. — This phrase indicates 
 directly the agency by which the blessing is produced, and, by 
 consequence, the character of the blessing. The immediate 
 attention of tlie apostle is not to affirm the truth that those 
 blessings affect the spiritual part of men's nature. They do 
 this, but are not to be exclusively restricted in that way. " We 
 must not," says Pulsford, " make our inheritance to be more 
 spiritual than shall correspond with the glorified body of our 
 Lord. The spirituality which drops the idea of our true 
 humanity is to be resisted and abhorred. Christ is the 
 restorer and glorifier of our whole nature." The body is not 
 overlooked in the redemption, and whatever capacities the 
 redeemed body may have, these undoubtedly will have their 
 suitable blessings. But whether for the body or for the spirit 
 of the redeemed man, these blessings will all be blessings of 
 the Spirit. The Holy Spirit directly operates, and the blessing 
 experienced is His work. — These blessings being God's, both 
 in design and in execution, are given without reserve. Every 
 kind of blessing belonging to the Spirit, and within His range 
 of operation, is in the heritage of the saints. God has blessed 
 us by giving us a right to every blessing of the Spirit. And 
 every such blessing of the Spirit is spiritual, and as such can 
 be appreciated and appropriated only by the spiritually 
 minded. In a very real sense they are spiritually discerned. 
 
 In heavenly places. — This phrase occurs five times in this 
 epistle (i. 3, 20, ii. 6, iii. 10, vi. 12). It indicates the 
 sphere in which the blessings are enjoyed. " In the 
 
120 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 heavenlies " ' is the exact rendering, but clearly " places " and 
 not " things " must be supplied. It is dependent on the 
 clause " hath blessed us," and not, as Harless, EUicott, and 
 Meyer maintain, on the clause " every blessing of the Spirit." 
 We have here a second defining clause, collateral with tliat 
 which immediately preceded. That blessing of the God and 
 Father of Christ, which is wrought in us and made a real 
 blessing to us by the operation of the Spirit, is enjoyed in the 
 heavenly places. The sphere in which the blessing is 
 p)0ssessed and enjoyed, is in precise and perfect keeping with 
 the blessing itself. The blessing is spiritual, and the world of 
 its birth, development, and consummation is spiritual. It has 
 its place from first to last in the heavens, among things 
 enduring and eternal. In the heavenly places tliose whom 
 the God and Father of Christ have blessed by His eternal 
 heavenly choice will find their ideal residence. The Father's 
 house is the children's home. In that region the Spirit 
 works, and His presence working in us and upon us makes 
 the scene of our lives heavenly. The possession and enjoy- 
 ment of every blessing of the Spirit constitutes heaven. 
 Fitness for this heaven, meetness for continued residence 
 there, is that blessing wherewith the God and Father of 
 Christ has blessed us. In proportion as the blessing accepted 
 by us corresponds to " every blessing of the Spirit " offered to 
 us, will the atmosphere in wliich we live and breathe become 
 heavenly. For us this heaven is at first a state — simply the 
 reflection of our own heavenliness of soul ; at last, it will be 
 realised as a place, where condition and locality perfectly 
 correspond. Meanwhile, we have days of heaven upon earth, 
 in proportion as our conversation, our way of life, is in 
 heaven. 
 
 In Christ. — Here we have a third defining clause. It 
 indicates the personal fount of all the blessings of God. Our 
 blessings are from the God and Father of Christ. He has 
 made His own fulness to dwell in Christ, and this blessing we 
 enjoy only as we draw it from Christ. The spiritual life of 
 the saint, which is made up of all blessings of the Spirit, and 
 
 ^ 'Ev ro7s Woupav'tois. See a striking sermon based on those five texts in 
 Candlish's Epistle to the Ephesians, pp. 1-17. 
 
CHAP. I. 4. 121 
 
 which is lived out in the heavenly phices, has its <;erni of 
 vitality in the life of Christ. The apostle does not here say 
 " through Christ," but " in Christ." He does not say Christ 
 Jesus, but simply Christ. It is not Christ's work of redemp- 
 tion which he emphasises, but union with Him as originating 
 the new life. In Christ we have Christ's God and Father 
 as ours. Thus God blesses us by choosing us in eternity 
 in Christ, and so securing to us the riglit to share in His 
 inheritance. 
 
 The blessings which thus call forth the thanksgiving of 
 the saints, correspond to the character of those who bless God. 
 Just as worldly men — lovers of money, of pleasure, of books 
 — appreciate and feel thankful for gifts that increase the 
 stock of things prized by them ; so also those who have the 
 Spirit of Christ value supremely and bless God for the 
 blessings of the Spirit. These blessings also correspond to 
 the nature and character of the God who bestowed them. 
 The gifts of. God who is a Spirit to His children are spiritual 
 blessings. 
 
 Ver. 4. According as He hath chosen ns in Him. — The apostle 
 thus continues his description of the spiritual blessings 
 bestowed by the Father. From the general statement of the 
 facts that these blessings are spiritual, and have their source 
 in Christ, he proceeds to enumerate them in order, beginning 
 here with the primary and fundamental blessing — God's gracious 
 election of us in Christ. It should be carefully noted, that 
 the apostle here expressly assigns the origin of all spiritual 
 blessings that come to the' saints to their election of God ; and 
 that he regards the saints, "us," as the direct object of His 
 divine choice. It is not said of God, " He hath chosen Christ, 
 and us in Him ; " but He hath chosen us to receive blessing 
 in Christ. The views so passionately and scornfully rejected 
 by Dale are not only those of the Westminster Confession, but 
 also of Paul in his epistle. The Calvinistic doctrine is simply 
 Pauline, that those predestinated to life are chosen by God's 
 mere free grace in Christ without any foresight of faith. The 
 fact emphasised is, that He has chosen us, and that our being 
 in Christ has resulted from that divine act of will. If our 
 election again depended upon any condition of faith on our 
 
122 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 part, the apostle would not have said that God blesses lis by 
 choosing us in Christ to the enjoyment of spiritual blessing ; 
 but rather that He chose us, because He found us already in 
 possession of such blessings. We are not chosen because of, 
 but unto, faith in Christ. — This doctrine, it should be 
 observed, is proclaimed to those who are already saints and 
 faithful. To the anxious inquirer Paul speaks not of it, but 
 simply says, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou 
 shalt be saved." Those who are lioly and beloved of God 
 (Col. iii. 12) are exhorted, as tlie elect of God, to walk worthy 
 of their calling. So Paul speaks to the Thessalonians 
 (1 Thoss. i. 3, 4) of their election, only after he had observed 
 their work of faith, labour of love, and patience of hope. To 
 such he says, " Your faith proves your election, and it is for 
 your encouragement to know that the exercise of your faith 
 is in strict accordance with the eternal counsels of God. 
 True, faith is not your own, and your believing selves are not 
 your own. Your faith is God's gift, and your new selves are 
 God's work, and what is God's must like Himself have an 
 eternal source." — The choice here spoken of is a choice of 
 persons, a choosing out of the mass of mankind. The chief 
 Scripture source of this great doctrine is the record of our 
 Saviour's words, " Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen 
 you " (John xv. 16). This forms a strict parallel to the words 
 of Paul. The ground or sphere of this election is in Him, 
 i.e. in Christ. He is the elect of God (Isa. xiii. 6), and those 
 who are chosen from among men are reckoned in Him and 
 share His favour with God. The choice is still the Father's, 
 for the passage quoted which seems to attribute the choice to 
 the Son must be read in connection with Jolni xvii. 2,6, 9, 
 11, 24. He chooses in time only those who had been chosen 
 of the Father in eternity. We recognise Christ as our 
 spiritual head, as Adam was our natural head. This federal 
 union between Christ and His members is viewed by the 
 apostle as subsisting from eternity. 
 
 Before the foundation of the world. — This is a phrase 
 nowhere else used by Paul, but the idea conveyed is a 
 commonplace in his epistles. The nearest verbal parallel will 
 be found in 2 Tim. i. 9, " before the world began." Outside of 
 
CIIAJ". I. 4. 123 
 
 Paul's writings the phrase occurs twice (Juliu xvii. 24 ; 1 I*et. 
 i. 20); in the one case with reference to the Father's eternal 
 love of the Son, and in the other with reference to God's 
 eternal foreordination of Christ as our Eedeemer. " before 
 Abraham was I am," says Christ ; and, says the apostle, " God 
 hath chosen us in Him." We may therefore understand 
 " before the foundation of the world " as explanatory of that 
 " in Him." — Let ns observe here how quietly the apostle has 
 set forth the truth in opposition to Ephesian superstition. 
 The image of Diana worship[)ed in Ephesus was an unsightly 
 monstrosity, sw^ollen and many-l)reasted, to symbolise, in 
 oriental fashion, the rich and lavish abundance of nature. 
 Diana was thus a nature goddess. Her worship was simple 
 naturalism. The creature was worshipped and served rather 
 than the Creator. In opposition to all this heathen pantheism, 
 Avhich recognised no personal God, Paul preached a God who 
 exercised His eternal will before that world wdiich man thought 
 eternal had its foundations laid. God had in eternity the 
 plan of the world, whicli He realised in time when He laid the 
 foundations of the earth. God had also in eternity the ])lan of 
 man's salvation in Christ, which He realises in time when in 
 the day of grace He visits any soul and blesses him with 
 blessings of the Spirit in Christ. 
 
 Tliat ivc should he lioh/ and tvithout Ucmish before Him in 
 love. — It has been much disputed whether these words, " in 
 love," should be included in this clause or joined to the clause 
 immediately following. But we shall see that the predestina- 
 tion of the fifth verse has its direct object in the adoption, 
 rather than in the persons adopted, whereas the election of the 
 fourth verse refers immediately to the persons chosen. It is 
 surely much more natural to refer the expression " in love " to 
 the term that is directly applied to persons, seeing that it can 
 only be regarded as the expression of the divine disposition 
 toward self-conscious beings. We therefore unhesitatingly 
 join the words " in love " with the phrase " He hath chosen 
 us." The objection to this interpretation, that the phrases so 
 connected are too far apart from one another, has no weight.^ 
 
 ^ Most modern commentators, including Harless, Meyer, Stier, Hofinann, and 
 Ellicott, have argued in favour of connecting tlie plirase with the opening clause 
 
12-i EPISTLE TO THE EPI1ESIA^'S. 
 
 Many expositors have preferred to take the words " in love " 
 as indicating the moral sphere in which the holy and blame- 
 less life moves. God has chosen us to a life of love, which 
 shows itself in holiness and freedom from blemish. This is 
 the interpretation adopted in the practical commentaries of 
 Bayne, Fergusson, and Goodwin, in the expositions of Erasmus, 
 Luther, and Calvin, and, among modern commentators, by 
 Wordsworth and Alford. The objection to tliis view, which 
 seems to me exclusive, is that in the sixth verse, at the close 
 of this division of the paragraph, the Son of God is named 
 " the Beloved," rj^aTrrjiJbivo'i. It is more natural, surely, to 
 understand the ev arjonrri of the fourth verse of the love of God, 
 as in the sixth verse, rather than of the love of the saints. 
 The whole passage is occupied with the declaration of the love 
 of God the Father to man ; and if a reference to the love 
 wrought by grace in the saints were introduced, the transition 
 would certainly be very deliberately marked. — God's purpose 
 in our election is twofold, — His own glory and our holiness. 
 The former is explicitly stated in the sixth verse ; the latter, 
 in the clause before us. He would have us " holy and 
 without blemish." The word a'fitw/xo? is wrongly rendered 
 here, and in Col. i 22, "without blame;" and correctly in 
 Eph. V. 27 ; Heb. ix. 14 ; Jude 24, and Eev. xiv., "without 
 blemish, spot, fault." It is the technical word to describe a 
 sacrificial victim that had passed the ordeal and had been pro- 
 nounced fit to be offered.^ It points to the outward mani- 
 festation of that which, as an inward principle, is holiness. — 
 Tlie reference here is to our sanctification, not to our justifica- 
 tion. Meyer and Harless interpret it as referring to the 
 believers standing in justification ; but Ellicott and Hodge, as 
 well as the older commentators already referred to, rightly 
 refer it to the believer's state and sanctification. So in 
 2 Thess. ii. 13, the apostle thanks God for having from the 
 beginning chosen the believers of Thessalonica to salvation 
 through sanctification of the Spirit. It is also in accordance 
 
 of the fifth verse. Alford has given what seems to me a conclusive answer to 
 their arguments. Wordsworth says: " 'Ev aya^jj seems to ex[)ress a necessary 
 fruit of our incorporation and indwelling b tZ riya'TijfiivM (ver. 6)." 
 
 ^ Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 10th ed., p. 380, Lond. 1886. 
 
CHAP. I. 5. 125 
 
 with the ISTevv Testament usage, to regard the sanctification 
 rather than the justification of tlie Christian as the end of 
 God's calling and choice. Nor is the phrase " before Him " 
 any less appropriate in connection witli sanctifying than with 
 justifying grace. The Ephesians to whom Paul wrote were 
 saints, called to be saints. Their sainthood is meanwhile 
 imperfect, but their title is complete, — it extends to every 
 blessing of the Spirit. Holiness is their destination, and what 
 they are not yet, in so far as it pertains to holiness, they shall 
 be hereafter. Holiness is defined as faultlessness. " Before 
 Him," who looks not on the outward appearance, these attributes 
 in the elect ideally correspond, and His love will perfect 
 holiness in the chosen. — That tlie election spoken of here is 
 not election to privileges merely, but to life and holiness, onght 
 to be evident to every unprejudiced reader. In this verse and 
 the following the apostle quite distinctly declares that believers 
 have been chosen, not to opportunities of grace, but to the 
 enjoyment of grace. The election, as Mozley says {A.iigustinian 
 Doctrine of Frcdcstination, 3rd ed., p. 351, 1883), "is not to 
 the power but to the fact of holiness." The elect are chosen, 
 not to the possibility, but to the realisation of holiness. 
 
 Ver. 5. Having inedestinated us to adoption through Jesus Christ 
 to Himself. — All the verbs used throughout this paragraph to 
 describe the course of God's love in His dealings with us, are of 
 the same tense. We have the three aorists — He blessed, chose, 
 predestinated. Thus priority is not given to any one of those 
 eternal operations of the divine will. Indeed, all time 
 relations are manifestly inappropriate here, and we cannot 
 speak of them as either successive or synchronous. The parti- 
 cipial form of the phrase, " having predestinated " (Trpoopcaa^) 
 shows that predestination is included along with election as a 
 blessing of the Spirit, not that predestination is regarded as 
 prior to election even in the order of thought. Predestination 
 is the plan, and election is the means used for its accomplish- 
 ment. In order that the plan may be carried out, there must 
 be persons upon whom it may operate. P)Ut both the plan 
 and the choosing are put upon the same eternal plane as 
 purposed to be carried out in Christ Jesus. Sometimes it 
 has been attempted too sharply to distinguish those two 
 
126 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 eternal acts of God. The distinction suggested and supported 
 by the passage before us, is that which views predestination as 
 the ordaining of privilege for us in the adoption of sons, and 
 election as the choice of our persons from among many for the 
 enjoyment of that privilege. When thus considered, we see 
 the appropriateness of making holiness the end of election, and 
 adoption the end of predestination. Election provides the 
 persons, and sees to their fitness for the enjoyment of the 
 privilege. The provision is made and the fitness secured by 
 our election in Christ. To be chosen in Christ is to be 
 chosen unto holiness. Life in Christ, the mere being in Him, 
 implies holiness ; as the members of His body, we must be like 
 Him, must be of like kind with Himself. But the privilege 
 and its enjoyment mean something over and above mere 
 existence. Adoption implies the holiness of the adopted, 
 but also their exaltation to special glory and honour. As 
 Goodwin says : " Things must be purposed to have a being 
 ere they can be supposed to have a well being in Christ. . . . 
 Xow, election is that which first gives you a being in Christ, 
 and then God, by the act of predestination, did appoint you a 
 well being through Him." ^ This well being of those who 
 have their being in Christ, is described by the apostle as " the 
 adoption of sons " {ijioOeo-ia). This expression has a very wide 
 meaning. It describes at once a forensic act and a spiritual 
 condition. But this distinction is not brought into pro- 
 minence here. The one theme enlarged upon is the love of 
 God the Father in tliinking upon us and devising means for 
 our salvation in the counsels of eternity. The adoption, 
 therefore, means the divine grace of receiving us into the filial 
 relationship, not the spirit of sons wrought in us. For what 
 the apostle is directly thinking of here is the rank and con- 
 sequent distinction conferred in adoption, which we owe to 
 the God and Father of Christ who has thus blessed us in Him. 
 — It has been pointed out by Merivale, in his Conversion of the 
 Roman Empire, that the use of this figure to represent the 
 believer's relation to God is borrowed from the lioman law, 
 and implies, on the part of the writer, a knowledge of the prin- 
 ciples and terminology of Eoman jurisprudence. It was quite 
 ^ Goodwin, Works, vol. i. p. 85. 
 
CHAP. I. 5. 127 
 
 Tinkiiown among the Jews. The legal process among the 
 llomans secured for the adopted child a right to tlie name and 
 property of him who adopted him, and also endowed the 
 adopter with all the rights and privileges of a father. — In sub- 
 ordination to the grand end of the divine glory, to whicli, 
 indeed, it is a main contributor, the glorifying of the saints, of 
 those chosen unto holiness, by securing to them the adoption 
 of children, is the highest aim of the divine redemption. It 
 is the final result contemplated by the incarnation (Gal. iv. 5) ; 
 it is realised in the redemption of our body (Rom. viii. 23) ; 
 and the Spirit of adoption causes ns to address God as Father 
 (Rom. viii. 15). Sonship, conceived of by John as a spiritual 
 relationship entered upon by a spiritual birth (1 John iii. 1), 
 and by Paul as secured by adoption, is the highest possible 
 expression of God's love to us, and is therefore used to 
 describe the final perfection which we wait for (Rom. viii. 33). 
 — We are adopted " to Himself," that is, to God the Father, 
 to Him whose sons we become ; and this is accomplished 
 " tlirough Jesus Christ," by means of His mediation. Having 
 by grace united us to His own Son, He now glorifies us by 
 raising us together with Him. Through Christ we are brought 
 into the family of God. He alone was the Son of God, and 
 only through Him can any others gain the rank of sons. It is 
 the gaining of this rank and not the rank itself, the adoption 
 as an act of God's grace and not as the blessed experience of 
 the saint, that is emphasised by these clauses.^ — " Through 
 Christ Jesus " does not mean the same as " in Christ." We are 
 chosen in Christ to holiness, — a vital union whereby we 
 became partakers of the divine nature. We are predestinated 
 to adoption throvgh Christ Jesus. By virtue of His sacrifice 
 of Himself for us in His incarnation and atoning death, we have 
 the rights and privileges of sons bestowed on us. In Christ, 
 in union with Him, we obtain the nature, and through Jesus 
 Christ, by His incarnate life and substitutionary sufl'erings and 
 death, we obtain the title, which qualifies us for the household 
 of God. 
 
 According to the good 23lcasurc of His •icill. — The apostle in 
 
 ' So too Hofmann, Die lleilige Schrift Neiien Testaments, iv. 1, p. 11, 1870, 
 clearly perceived, in opposition to Riickert, De Wette, Bleek, etc. 
 
128 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 these words answers the question as to the origin of our pre- 
 destination to sonship. What led to this resolve ? Nothing 
 in us. Even as foreseen from eternity, our rebellion had 
 deprived us of all claim to a servant's place, much more to 
 that of children. Besides, what is here immediately spoken 
 of is predestination to the privilege of adoption, not the 
 election of our persons to its enjoyment. The moving cause 
 must necessarily be in God. Then what in God ? No 
 unsatisfied need of His being. His was not a childless home. 
 He had, from eternity, His own eternal Son. The moving cause 
 was His own good pleasure. We have here what, in the 
 language of the scholastic theology, was called the efficient 
 cause of our salvation. All has resulted from this great cause. 
 It pleased the Father (Col. i. 19), — such is the only 
 explanation the apostle can give of the origination of the 
 plan of man's redemption. The word here rendered " good 
 pleasure" is rendered, in Rom. x. 1, "heart's desire." The 
 most exact rendering would be " what seemed good " (Matt. 
 xi. 2G). Our predestination is an act of God's will, and 
 has no ground outside of His own sovereign exercise of 
 grace.^ 
 
 Ver. 6. To the 'prcdsc of the glory of His grace. — It is not 
 " the glory of His grace " that is the object of the praise. The 
 absence of the article before " glory " (Sol???) makes this trans- 
 lation impossible. It is His grace that is praised as glorious, 
 and so the phrase may be understood as simply equivalent 
 to " His glorious grace." The apostle distinguishes a divine 
 glory as resulting from the display of divine grace. There is 
 a glory of power, a glory of purity, and here a glory of grace. 
 God's grace is praised as affording a distinctive reflection of 
 the divine glory. The act of God in predestinating us to 
 adoption was an act of grace, purely of His own good 
 
 1 For a clear exposition of the Pai;line doctrine of predestination, see Calvin, 
 In-ftitufe-'i, bk. iii. chap. 21, 22 ; Amesius, Medulla, chap. xxv. ; Mozley, 
 Aiigudinian Doctrine of Predefitination, 3rd ed., pp. 350-360, 1883. Also for 
 a practical and popular statement : Elisha Coles, Divine Sovereignty. For an 
 able but perverse criticism of the doctrine, as set forth in the Epistle to the 
 Romans, see Pfleiderer's Paidinism, i. 244-258. For an equally perverse, but 
 less able, treatment of the question, see Dale, Lectures on Ephesians, pp. 
 30-35. 
 
CHAP. I. c. 129 
 
 pleasure. As thus absolutely free and unconditioned it is 
 differentiated from simple love ; and in this its distinguishing 
 glory lies. The resulting praise corresponds to this glory. 
 It is the highest praise of God that He finds His chief glory 
 in the display of His grace. Our utterance of this praise is 
 the final purpose of our predestination. To incite us to 
 render this praise is the end which the apostle has in view 
 in thus setting forth the glory of God's electing grace. — It is 
 the chief glory of His grace that by it He has enclosed and 
 encompassed us. 
 
 Whcrcioitli He has r/raced [or favou7rd] its in the Beloved. — - 
 The adoption of the reading ^9^ instead of eV f/ allows us all 
 the more closely to connect the divine grace and its operation 
 upon us. His grace is tliat which immediately acts upon us. 
 It is not here that instrument whereby, but that aspect of 
 His divine cliaracter, tliat quality of His divine nature 
 wdierewith, He blessed us. It is not a means to an end, 
 but it is means and end together. It not only brings the 
 blessing, but in it, therefore in its contmuance, the blessing 
 consists. The verb 'x^apcTovu, rendered in the Authorised 
 Version "hath made us accepted," only occurs once elsewhere 
 in the New Testament (Luke i. 28). It is first found in 
 Sirach xviii. 17 {jrapa avhpl Ke'^aptToy/jbevco, "with a gracious 
 man "). Hofmann and others suppose that it may be under- 
 stood of a subjective state, a gracious disposition of soul in 
 the elect, who in Christ have become worthy of love and 
 favour. But the Tauline use of the term " grace," %«/3t?, is 
 entirely against this rendering. With Paul grace is always 
 God's grace. What he says here is that God's grace has 
 graced us. He has graced us {■)(apiTwaev) with His grace 
 {')(api<i). This is simply saying in a brilliant, memorable way, 
 that He has bestowed His grace upon us. It is of God's 
 acceptance of us. His favour shown toward us in His pre- 
 destinating us unto adoption, that the apostle here speaks, 
 not of the graciousness of soul wrought in us by the Spirit 
 bestowed upon the favoured. — From the context it is evident 
 that the apostle is here speaking of reconciliation and not of 
 
 ^ This reading, which is that of the MSS. A, B, N, has been adopted by 
 Lachmanu, Meyer, Alford. 
 
 I 
 
130 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 sanctification. It is the praise of God's grace, and not that of 
 the graciousness of tlie Christian, which forms the theme of 
 the apostle in our text.^ — It is "m the Beloved" ihiit we 
 experience and come to enjoy His grace. The Father loveth 
 the Son, and the elect He loves in the Son ; so that every- 
 where the Son is viewed as man's Covenant-Eepresentative 
 "before God. The preposition " in " has here its full signi- 
 ficance (John XV. 4). As in Adam so in Christ (Rom. v., 
 1 Cor. XV. 22). He is the elect in whom God's soul delighteth 
 — the Eepresentative in whom God beholds all His chosen 
 ones. Here we have the true climax in the description of 
 tlie work done directly by the Father in our redemption. 
 The Father's electing love finds its highest glory in making 
 His Beloved the instrument for conferring His grace upon us. 
 The apostle will not pass from his account of tlie work done 
 immediately by God the Father, without showing what 
 comfort we have from the essential character of the divine 
 action. The blessing which we have from God, the favour 
 shown us by Him, is in God's own " Beloved." This title 
 belongs to the Son of God by way of eminence. So in Col. 
 i. 13, He is called the Son of His love. " As God hath put all 
 light into the sun," says Goodwin, " and that diffuseth and 
 communicateth light unto all the stars ; so Jesus Christ hath 
 extracted all the love of God to Himself, and through Him 
 it is diffused upon us." It is the highest glory of God's 
 grace toward us that it is " in Christ." To praise the Father 
 for Christ is to praise " His glorious grace." 
 
 (2) What Christ has done (vers. 7-12). 
 
 "While in ihe previous section (vers. 3-6), the apostle seems 
 
 to have been enumerating the several blessings wrought 
 
 for us by God the Father, he has really mentioned only the 
 
 one gift bestowed on us by God. He closes his ascription of 
 
 ' Chrysostom, followed by many expositors, interprots our passage of the 
 subjective condition of the believer, and regards the apostle as saying that God 
 has made us gracious : "When a child has outward beauty, and has besides a 
 pervading grace in all its sayings, do we not call it a gracious child ? Such as 
 this are the faithful. Look what words the initiated utter ? What can be 
 more gracious than that mouth that breathes those wondrous words," etc. 
 {llomUtts, " Libr. of Fathers," v. 106, 1840). 
 
CHAP. I. 7. 131 
 
 ■praise to (rod by naming that gift in which are I'uund 
 treasured all the particular blessings referred to. If we are 
 chosen, it is in Christ ; if we are adopted, it is through Jesus 
 Christ; if we are accepted or justified, it is in the Beloved. 
 Here, then, in the mention of this one gift of the Father, is 
 the most fitting transition point at whicii to turn I'roin the 
 praise of God, occasioned innnediately by the consideration ol" 
 the eternal counsels of the Father, to the praise of God 
 awakened by a view of the actual work accomplished by the 
 Son. 
 
 Ver. 7. I/i u-hom wc have the redemption through His blood. 
 — The relative clause " in whom " answers directly to the 
 closing words of the formin- verse. Speaking there of the 
 Father's word, the apostle said that God had exercised His 
 grace toward us " in the Beloved." Now he advances to 
 show what the Beloved, as the exponent of the Father's 
 eternal love, does for those — the vje of the text — who ai'e 
 predestinated unto adoption. Hitherto only the past tense 
 had been used ; here we have an emphatic present.' Tlie 
 apostle is not speaking of what we have once for all got from 
 Christ, but of what we have in Him, of what He is and ever 
 will be to us. In regard to the redemption of which He is 
 to speak, he says that we have it in the Beloved. It is a 
 present experience. Tliough His death accomplished in the 
 past is the condition of acceptance, the price required and 
 actually paid, the redemption is conceived of as something 
 that belongs to the whole living Person of Christ, rather than 
 to any isolated act or incident of His life. Christ is the 
 Kedeemer. It is true that His blood, that is, His death on 
 the cross, is properly defined as the redemption. But in 
 order that His death should be our redemption, it niust be 
 preceded by His life of humiliation, and followed by His life 
 
 1 Some manuscripts and early versions (X, D, The Memphitic Version of tiie 
 second century, etc.,) read 'iffx'i^'-^- Tiscliendorf thinks that the same tense 
 must have been used in Col. 1. 14, and in Eph. i. 7 ; hut Light:bot is of 
 opinion that 'itrp^ofnv may have been the reading of the text of C'ol. i. 14, which 
 lay before these early transcribers and traii.slators, ami was by them harmonist- 
 ically introduced into Eph. i. 7. While Westcott and Hort give iV.'^o^sv as a 
 possible reading in Col. i. 14, they unhesitatingly accept 'ix'H''^' as the reading 
 of Eph. i. 7. 
 
132 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 of exaltation. When we speak of the death of Christ as 
 redemption, we mean the death of Him who was made flesh 
 and dwelt among us, and who, having died, became alive 
 a<Tain for evermore. The word redemption as here used is 
 emphatic, and so should be rendered " the redemption," The 
 word does not mean simply deliverance, but deliverance 
 effected by the special means of purchase. Even where this 
 term is used in the New Testament, without any accompany- 
 in'4 statement of the price paid, the idea of a ransom price is 
 still present. When it is here said that the redemption is 
 " through the blood of Christ," this is not to distinguish it as 
 a purchased one, but to indicate precisely the particular price 
 paid. The New Testament idea of redemption is more fully 
 , set forth in Eom. iii. 25 and Heb. ix. 14. There, as here, 
 the blood of Christ is that which redeems, the expiation or 
 propitiation. That it was the apostle's intention to make the 
 idea of an expiatory sacrifice specially prominent here, may 
 be seen from this, that he speaks not simply of Christ's death 
 but of His blood. This is in thorough accordance with the 
 sacrificial language of the Old Testament. It is not the mere 
 death of the victim, but the shedding of its blood, and the 
 sprinkling of the blood upon the altar, that constitutes a 
 sacrifice to God. It is therefore Christ's sacrificial death that 
 constitutes our redemption.^ This one meaning of the word 
 suits all passages in Paul's writings in which it occurs. Even 
 in such expressions as " the day of redemption " (Eph. 
 iv. 30), "the redemption of the body" (Rom. viii. 23), we are 
 to think simply of the consummation secured by Christ's 
 atoning work. What the risen Christ does, returning in 
 •dory, He does as the Christ who had died. There is no 
 
 1 It is essential to the argument of those who, like Kbstlin and Pfleiderer, 
 regard Ephesians as marking an attempt at conciliation between the Pauline 
 and Johannine types of doctrine, to point out restmblances between our epistle 
 and the writings of John. It is curious and instructive to notice that when 
 Kiistlin {Lehrbegriff dcs Bvanfjeliinnn Johannis, p. 375, Berlin 1843) affirms 
 that in Ephesians and John there is no mention of justification and probably 
 none of a vicarious satisfaction, and enumerates the phrases that do occur as 
 describing the work of Christ, he gives restoration of sonship (i. 5), forgiveness 
 of sins (i. 7), etc., but strangely passes over the phrase "redemption through 
 His blood," of which forgiveness of sins is explanatory, and which we have seen 
 undoubtedly presents the idea of expiatory and substitutionary sacrifice. 
 
ciLvr. 1. r. 133 
 
 necessity for supposing, witli Hofniann, two distinct uses of 
 the word "redemption," according as it is directly referred to 
 the suffering or to the glorified Christ. IJedeniption in Christ 
 implies fellowship with Him at once in His sufferings and in 
 the power of His resurrection. It involves not merely the 
 undoing of sin's evil, but the reah'sation of God's eternal 
 purpose concerning man. 
 
 The forgiveness of sins. — This describes the particular char- 
 acter of the redemption here spoken of. The redemption which 
 we have in Christ, iu order that it may secure for us the end 
 of the divine election, that we should be "holy and without 
 blemish " before God, must take the form of forgiveness of 
 sins. This is primarily and fundamentally what we have 
 "in the Beloved." H the term be understood in its precise 
 and restricted sense as the initial act of God's grace in the 
 spiritual experience of the individual, it would not, of course, 
 be co-extensive with the idea of redemption. Iiedemption 
 means nothing less than complete salvation (1 Cor. i. 30). 
 It is the restoration of man to the predestinated position of 
 adoption into God's family. The forgiveness of sins is but the 
 lirst stage in salvation, yet so essential and fundamental that 
 it may be put for all. The reference to it appropriately 
 follows, and was evidently suggested by, the mention of the 
 blood of Christ. For without shedding of blood there is no 
 remission (Heb.lx. 2 2), — the same word being rendered re- 
 mission and forgiveness. As redemption is assigned to the 
 culminating action in the work of Christ, His expiatory 
 death upon the cross, so forgiveness is regarded by Christ 
 Himself as His greatest and most characteristic achievement. 
 The difficulty of forgiveness is emphasised.^ It is easier to 
 make a sick man whole than to forgive a man his sins (Mark 
 
 1 The true doctrine of forgiveness, according to this passage, and in accord- 
 ance with the whole scope of the New Testament teaching, is that God 
 exacts the penalty and remits tlie sin. The word " redemption " is a^aXur^&xr/s, 
 which means the i)ayment of the xCrpov or price set upon the head of the captive. 
 "Ktpiffis is simply the letting off, used either of release from prison or remission 
 of debt. But this act is final in contrast to -Ti-ipKris, which is merely a suspension 
 of jirocedure. See Trench, New Testament Synonyms, pp. 114-119. No- 
 where in Scripture do we read of 'Aipiiva/ XuTfov, but aipsins -Tra.fo.-TtTui/.u.'Toiv, or 
 ai/,ajiTiZv. See Pearson on the Creed, ii. 304, Oxford 1843. 
 
134 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 ii. 9, 10). Forgiveness, in the full and accurate sense in 
 which it is used to describe the act of God, implies a thorough 
 knowledge and due estimation of the offence, and a complete 
 restoration of favour to the offender.^ Man is often said to 
 forgive, but in his case neither of these elements is present 
 in perfection. He has not the absolute holiness of nature 
 necessary for perceiving the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and 
 regarding it with uncompromising aversion ; and he has not 
 tlie perfect goodness of being that would lead him to put 
 away from his heart every trace of resentment and every 
 recollection of wrong. What is impossible with man is 
 possible with God ; but even with God, strictly speaking, 
 this forgiveness is possible only in the person of the God- 
 Man. The God in whom we liave forgiveness is God the 
 Son, who has taken our flesh and shed His blood in one 
 stead for our sins. The death of Christ is the revelation of 
 God's hatred of sin and His love of us. Nothing more is 
 needed for the forgiveness of sins but this combination of 
 perfect holiness and perfect love in the all-wise God. He 
 knows what has to be done and how to do it ; what man's 
 sin is, and what can remove it ; and His acting upon this 
 knowledge is the redemption through the blood of Christ. 
 The forgiveness of sins, when conceived of according to the 
 divine idea of forgiveness, is redemption through Christ's 
 blood. When redemption is thus scripturally defined, there is 
 no danger, as Candlish has acutely remarked, of lapsing into the 
 strange and unfortunate mistake of certain fathers and early 
 schoolmen, who spoke of the redemption price as paid to 
 Satan. Pfieiderer very unfairly associates this erroneous 
 conception with Pauline teaching. In what he regards as 
 the original system of Paul, he admits that " the substantiat- 
 ing in the person of the devil, of that which requires expiation, 
 is not yet completed ; " but he refers to the Epistles to the 
 Hebrews and to the Colossians as already bringing the death 
 of Christ into relation to the devil. This theologian thinks 
 that the early Pauline conception of God's wrath against sin, 
 instead of being viewed as an element in the divine character 
 alongside of His infinite love, came to be thought of by later 
 1 See Westcott, The Historic Faith, pp. 129-134, Lond. 1883. 
 
CILVP. I. 8. 135 
 
 Paulinists, sucli as the writer of our epistle, as a separate 
 entity, personified in the devil, to whom satisfaction had to be 
 made. Our text fairly answers this, and shows its baseless- 
 ness. As God only can forgive sins, the identification of 
 forgiveness with redemption associates directly with God 
 both the act of redemption and the ransom. To God it is 
 paid, by Him it is accepted, and by Him also it is recognised 
 as bringing to those for whom it has been paid the forgive- 
 ness of sins. 
 
 According to the riches of His grace. — It is God's grace in 
 Christ that is here referred to, in accordance with the true 
 biblical mode of dealing with Trinitarian distinctions, one 
 Person being in no case wholly separated from the others. 
 The clause forms a parallel to the close of the fifth verse. 
 It characterises that forgiveness which we owe to divine 
 grace. This is its measure. " It is more than a royal gift ; 
 it is a gift of royalty. To be cleansed by His Son's blood, 
 is to be new creatures in His blood " (Pulsford). Eiches, as 
 applied to the fulness of the divine grace, is a common ex- 
 pression with Paul. Such w^ealth of grace is needed to meet 
 our provocations. The employment here of this whole clause, 
 which elsewhere (ii. 7) is used to describe Christ's own 
 fulness, shows that the apostle attached supreme import- 
 ance to that redemption of which the most characteristic 
 and fundamental manifestation is the forgiveness of sins, 
 
 Ver. 8. Which He made to ahoicnd toioard us. — This transit- 
 ive rendering of the verb is to be preferred to its intransitive 
 meaning, as given in the " wherein he hath abounded " of our 
 Authorised Version. Not only is the grace in itself rich, but 
 the giving of it is liberal, as by a royal giver. He causes 
 the riches of His grace to overflow in our hearts. He lavishes 
 upon us that which, if given at all, even in the smallest 
 measure, would be most precious. 
 
 In all wisdom and prudence. — Some ancient expositors, 
 such as Chrysostom and Jerome, attached this clause to the 
 one followincr, understandins it of God in regard to His dis- 
 covery of the mystery of His will. Certain modern com- 
 mentators, also, whether joining it with the clauses preceding 
 or following, have applied it to God. Our Authorised Version, 
 
136 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 with its rendering of the previous cLinse, no doubt encouraged 
 this application of tlie words. The rendering supported by 
 us naturally associates this wisdom and prudence with the 
 grace which is God's rich gift liberally bestowed upon us ; 
 but if we say, " God hath abounded toward us in all wisdom 
 and prudence," we naturally apply those latter terms to God. 
 But against this application of the clause two reasons may 
 be adduced, either of which is absolutely decisive: (1) This 
 " all " of the text cannot be rendered " supreme," but only 
 " of each and every kind." Its meaning is extensive, rather 
 than intensive. But only supreme wisdom could be suitably 
 attributed to God. We may say of Him that in Him is all 
 wisdom, but we could not fittingly say of Him that He does 
 this or that "in all wisdom."^ (2) The "prudence" of our 
 text, which is the result of the exercise of wisdom, tliat 
 quality and practical facility or insight that comes of experi- 
 ence, and the application of the powers of a wise lieart to the 
 details of life, could not with any sense of propriety be attri- 
 buted to God. Tiie clause, tlierefore, can be properly applied 
 only to characterise the grace wliich God has abundantly 
 bestowed upon His adopted children. We find a sufficiently 
 close parallel in 1 Cor. i. 5, where believers are said to be 
 enriched in Christ " in all utterance and in all knowledge." 
 Wisdom and prudence, regarded as gifts of grace, precisely 
 correspond to the spirit of wisdom and prudence (ver. 18), 
 which is said to be given of God. Wisdom was regarded in 
 Greek philosophy as the highest of all the intellectual virtues, 
 and prudence was defined as the application of wisdom to 
 details in the common life of daily duty. The verb answer- 
 ing to this word prudence is rendered in our Revised Version 
 (Luke i. 17), "to walk in the wisdom of the just." God's 
 grace, therefore, abounds toward us in bestovying a wise heart 
 which moves and persuades us to walk in right ways. And 
 thus in the religious and moral, in the intellectual and ethical 
 spheres, for thought and life, God makes His grace to abound 
 toward us. 
 
 Ver. 9. Having made known the mystery of His will, accord- 
 ing to His good 'pleasure. — In respect of construction, " having 
 
 ■* This clause is examined very carefully by Harless, Kommentar, pp. 32-34. 
 
ciiAr. T. 9. 137 
 
 made known " corresponds to the " having predestinated " of 
 the fifth verse. As the apostle before links together election 
 and predestination, as mutually suggesting and requiring 
 one another, so liere the grace of God, that shows itself in 
 the bestowing of wisdom and prudence, also necessarily 
 manifests itself in the imparting of knowledge. That M'hicli 
 is made known is described as a mystery. This word must 
 have been very familiar to the Ephesians. Among their 
 superstitious rites the mysteries occupied a prominent place, 
 symbolic observances in which only tlie initiated could take 
 part. The apostle's use of the word, however, is fitted to 
 point out one of the characteristic distinctions between the 
 spirit and aims of the n)ost liighly-cultured pagan religions 
 and those of tlie Christian religion. With the pagan 
 religionist a mystery meant something that could be made 
 known only to the favoured few. With Paul it means some- 
 thing that had been hidden, and which must have remained 
 hidden, unless some special revelation should make it known. 
 This was the meaning which the word had in the apocryphal 
 books, where it was of frequent occurrence, used of family 
 secrets, court secrets, and in one passage at least (Wisd. ii. 
 22), just as in the saying of Paul before us, "the secret 
 counsels of God." In a precisely similar way Thedotion uses 
 it in Ps. XXV. 14 to translate the Hebrew niD, " the secret of 
 the Lord." In the sense of "the secret counsel of God" it 
 occurs in the Gospels (Matt. xiii. 11 ; Mark iv. 41 ; Luke 
 viii. 1 0) ; also in Kev. x. 7 ; and very frequently in the 
 writings of Paul (2 Thess. ii. 7 ; 1 Cor. xv. 51 ; Piom. xi. 25, 
 xvi. 25 ; 1 Tim. iii. 9), and with express reference to one 
 particular " secret counsel " of God, the admission of the 
 Gentiles to gospel privileges (Eph. i. 9, ii. 3, 4, 9, vi. 19 ; 
 Col. i. 2G, 27, ii. 2, iv. 3). See also notes on chap. v. 32, 
 where the word is used in another sense. The usage of this 
 word is fully and suggestively treated by Hatch, Essays in 
 Biblical Greek, pp. 57-59, Oxford 1889. What the par- 
 ticular truth referred to may be, must be discovered from the 
 context. The truth hitherto hidden, but now made known 
 by the apostle in the Gospel, is the truth that God has 
 appointed His Son to be the Saviour of all that believe in 
 
13S EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 Hlin, wlietlier Jew or Gentile ; that He makes all one in one 
 salvation, in Christ Jesus, liead the sixth verse with due 
 emphasis on " us," in the light of chap. ii. 11, and compare 
 with chap. iii. 8, 9, where preaching- to the Gentiles the 
 unsearchable riches of Christ is made parallel to making 
 all men see the mystery that had heen hidden. Observe, 
 how, in the other passages in our epistle where the wonl 
 occurs, excepting in v. 32, where it means something in its 
 own nature mysterious, it signifies that which only a divine 
 revelation can make known (iii. 3, 9, vi. 19), Modern 
 sceptical philosophy, and especially the materialistic and 
 semi-materialistic philosophy of our own country, would have 
 us regard the knowledge of God as something unattainable. 
 God, as to being, doing, and will, is, according to this false 
 science, unknowable. According to Paul, God and the things 
 of God are not unknowahle, but they are a mystery. To 
 make them known a divine revelation is necessary. The 
 best commentary on this will be found in 1 Cor. ii. G— 16. — • 
 The imparting of this knowledge is according to God's good 
 pleasure, A revelation was necessaiy if we were to know 
 this mystery, hut there was no reason why we should be 
 made to know it, save that which originated in the gracious 
 and sovereign purpose of God. Of His own good pleasure 
 He has made known to us the mystery. It was the same 
 gracious will in God which formed the general plan pre- 
 destinating unto adoption, which in time made itself known 
 in our redemption. 
 
 Which He jyurjwscd in Himself. - — This good pleasure, 
 which, according to the distinct statement of the fifth verse, 
 is a function of the divine will, here expresses itself in the 
 form of a divine purpose. And this purpose is quite properly 
 regarded as taken "in Himself."^ Hofmann has argued 
 
 ^ The reading h aurai is preferred by EUicott and Meyer, and Iv alrM by 
 Lachmann, Tisuhentlorf, Westcott, and Hort. Meyer thinks that the latter 
 reading would reqnire the reference to be to Christ, rather than the Father ; 
 while Olshausen, with better right, thinks that either leading may be used 
 with reference to the Father. The grammarians have pointed out that in 
 the New Testament the reflexive lauro; seems never to be contracted into 
 alTos. It is also to be remembered that diacritical marks do not appear in 
 New Testament MSS. before the eighth century. The reflexive use of the 
 
CHAP. I. 10. 139 
 
 elaborately in favour of a reference to Clnist. This would, 
 of course, be theologically sound, i'or the purpose of God is 
 elsewhere spoken of as made in Christ (iii. 11) as well 
 as carried out in Him. r>ut ordinarily the eternal purpose 
 of God, so far ns the conception of it is concerned, is con- 
 nected with the Father. Here, too, the reference most 
 naturally is to Him \vhose will is made known. 
 
 The tenth veise seems at first sight fraught with difliculties, 
 but these may in large measure be removed, by keeping 
 clearly before us the intention of tlie apostle in introducing 
 such a statement at tin's jjoint. In forming His gracious 
 purpose, God had in view to give a unity to all His acts of 
 grace. The point of union is found in Christ. He is the 
 centre of that universe in which the divine puipose is 
 harmoniously carried out, and it is He who gives harmony 
 to the whole. The revelation of Christ, therefore, is that 
 revelation of God's purpose which has as its end the re- 
 conciling of all things to Himself. 
 
 Ver. 1 0. JFUh the dispensation of the fulness of times in vicv. 
 — The word " dispensation," or economy, olfcovo/ita, is used 
 again in this epistle (chap. iii. 2, 9), and properly means 
 exercise of an office on the part of an administrator or steward 
 over a household. The reference here is limited to the house- 
 hold of God, in which apostles and their fellow-workers are 
 stewards of the manifold grace of God (1 Pet. iv. 10). The 
 revelation of the mystery of tlie divine will was to proceed 
 in such a way, as to cany out the principle of this administra- 
 tion, which required a gradual unfolding through tlie ages or 
 times, and a consummation when the fulness of times had 
 come (Gal. iv. 4). The " in " of the Authorised Version is 
 inadequate as a translation of the ek, which here points out 
 the fact that the divine purpose, now first made known and 
 realised, has reached that goal toward which it had tended 
 through all the ages. We here meet, for the first time, with 
 the word rieroma, which plays so important a part in this 
 
 auTOi, however, is quite common througliout the Greek Testament. Sec Light- 
 foot on Col. i. 20, and the references there to Buttmann's Grammar. Winer 
 has a preference for avn-'o;, but is very guarded and careful in his remarks 
 {Grammar of New Testament Greek, § xxii. 5). 
 
140 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 epistle, as well as in Colossiaiis. When used with reference 
 to times and seasons, as here and in Gal. iv. 4, it means 
 simply the completeness which is given by means of the 
 dispensation spoken of. Earlier dispensations had, indeed, 
 made their respective contributions, but they were merely 
 preliminary and preparatory, and had fulness imparted to 
 them only by the offering of Christ. It was the completing 
 and fulfilling of the promise and prophecy of those earlier 
 dispensations, which characterised and distinguished that 
 dispensation of which the apostle speaks. The phrase, " when 
 the fulness of the time was come " (Gal. iv. 4), marks the 
 beginning of a new era in the management of this great 
 household, which, after having thus begun, continues unbroken 
 and unchanged. The " dispensation of the fulness of times," 
 therefore, is equivalent to the gospel dispensation introduced 
 into the world by Christ's ministry, the continued proclama- 
 tion of which in His Church constitutes the revelation of the 
 mystery of God's will. 
 
 To (jatlicr together in one all things in the Christ. — This 
 is the object of the divine purpose, the reason for which God 
 made known the mystery of His will. In Christ He had 
 revealed His saving will, and now the apostle shows us why 
 He did so. There is no authority in the text for the transla- 
 tion "in Christ as Head." ^ Afterwards, in ver. 22, the 
 apostle speaks of Christ's Headship over the Church, but here 
 he speaks of Christ's central significance for all creation. 
 Tiie words " to gather up into one " (dva/ce^aXaiova-Oat) is 
 only used elsewhere by Paul in Eom. xiii. 9, where it 
 describes the summing up of all the precepts of the law in 
 one commandment, and so has there precisely the same 
 meaning as in our text. A point of unity is revealed " in 
 the Christ," in whom all things find a common centre, and 
 cease to be a mere multitude of units. This idea of recon- 
 
 ^ Moule, in the Cambridge Bible, tlius translates the clause, and restricts its 
 application to the Church. That such restriction is expressly made toward the 
 close of the chapter, is rather a reason against making the restriction here. 
 The verb used is derived from Ki(paXaiiiv, not from xipax^ ; and these words may 
 be rendered respectively "heading" and "head." All things are summed up 
 under one comprehensive category in Cluist. This at least is God's purpose, 
 which alone here comes into consideration. 
 
CHAP. I. 10. 141 
 
 ciliation, the restoration of a harmony that liad been disturbed 
 and overthrown, is introduced very appropriately in the 
 middle of a paragraph regarding redemption. The ])urpose 
 of redemption is reconciliation, and all objects and beings 
 affected by this redemption are brought into such relations 
 with tlie Eedeemer that they, though disjecta ^nanhra before, 
 become parts of one perfect whole. The figure is borrowed 
 from the art of the rhetorician, who, after having gone over 
 in detail the various points involved in the subject of which 
 he treats, at the close of his discoiu'se, in order to leave on 
 his readers' minds a po.verful impression, recapitulates and 
 brings together in a summary form what had been argued out 
 at length. And so here the apostle says that God resolved 
 to gather up into one all tlie dispensational contributions to 
 His eternal scheme in creation, providence, and grace, and to 
 show in the person of " the Christ " the one purpose of the 
 universe. The emphatic position assigned to the words " in 
 the Christ," is intended to give prominence to the person of 
 Christ as the leading idea of the passage. This is aided 
 further by the repetition of "in Him " after the next clause. 
 
 Those v:liich are in heaven and those which are on earth} — 
 These words determine the range of the " all things" which 
 are the subject of God's reconciliation. The neuter is here 
 used with the evident intention of making the reference 
 universal, and including not only persons but also things. 
 It is to the universe of being that the influence of the divine 
 work extends. Man's sin had brought discoid into God's 
 universe, and in Christ the original and ideal harmony is 
 restored. The reconciliation accomplished has undoubtedly 
 affected inanimate creatures as well as sentient creatures, and 
 the lower creation as well as the rational (Eom. viii. 19-23). 
 If we keep in view the " to, Trdvra," tlie universe of being, 
 as the whole which is made up of " things in heaven and 
 things on earth," we shall see at once the inadequacy and 
 inappropriateness of defining these elements respectively as 
 consisting of Jewish and of Gentile Christians. The same 
 
 ^ The h Tois oLcavoTs adopted by Ellicott, Harless, and others, is to be preferred 
 to the It) toTs ovpccvcTs adopted by Alford, Meyer, etc. In all instances in the 
 New Testament, tv, and not ivi, is joineil with oLpctvoi, 
 
142 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 may be said of the Application of these terms to saints in 
 heaven and saints on earth. We must, evidently, give to the 
 words that unrestricted meaning wliich the plain literal sense 
 of the text requires. 
 
 Ver. 1 1. 1)1 Him, in ivJiom cdso wc have been made possessors 
 of oar lot. — The relative clause here, u'hile, of course, pointing 
 to the same divine person named in ver. 5, " the Beloved," in 
 whom God shows the riches of His grace, must be immedi- 
 ately connected with the Clirist of ver. 10, regarded as the 
 centre of unity in God's universe. And to make this reference 
 emphatic, the "in Him" (eV avTw) resumes the reference to 
 Christ as the centre of unity. In the fifth verse, and the 
 passage dependent on it, the apostle had said that whatever 
 we are we owe to Him, for in His redemption Gid had made 
 His grace abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence. 
 In the tenth verse, and the passage dependent upon it, the 
 apostle says that whatever we have as a possession we owe 
 to Him, for "all things" (ver. 10) being in Him, there is 
 nothing we can have outside of Him. It is " in Him," 
 therefore, tliat we have a portion allotted to us. The verb 
 that is rendered by our translators, " we have obtained an 
 inheritance," literally means we have been made possessors 
 by the lot. The reading of the Authorised Version just 
 quoted is excellent, only that it is well to avoid the word 
 inheritance, and rather to give prominence to the idea of the 
 lot. We have in English no passive voice of the verb " to 
 inherit," though we can say " to be disinherited," and the 
 nearest equivalent of the passive is " to be endowed with an 
 inheritance." Tiiis is the meaning of the words of the 
 apostle, if only, remembering that it is brought about by 
 the use of the lot, we banish the idea of succession by right. 
 In Christ we have our portion allotted. Goodwin makes 
 admirable practical use of the consideration that what comes 
 to us as it were by lot, casually so far as we are concerned, 
 undeserved and unsought for by us, is yet, as the following 
 clause shows, on God's part, assigned definitely and particu- 
 larly to us by His own predestinating grace. The idea was 
 certainly suggested by the story of the division of the land 
 anion cr the Israelites. Their several inheritances were not 
 
CHAP. I. 11. 143 
 
 j]jained by their own strength. The Old Testament saints 
 likewise understood that their real inheritance was in God 
 Himself, and not in any separate gifts coming from Him. 
 "The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance" (Ps. xvi. 5). 
 But while admitting this origin for the particular phrase 
 employed, we must remember that tlie reference of our 
 text is not restricted by Paul to the Jewish Christians. 
 There is no difference to Jew and Gentile ; all receive the 
 inheritance by the same means, and on the same terms. The 
 IJevisers, following many distinguished critics and comment- 
 ators, render the clause, " we were made a heritoge." ^ Put 
 not only is this idea never associated with the use of any of 
 the derivatives of the verb used in our text, but it is quite 
 unsuitable in the present connection, and more particularly 
 as coming before tlie similar phrase in the fourteenth verse. 
 The inheritance is here viewed as our inheritance (see ver. 14 ; 
 also V. 5; Col, i. 12), and specially as consisting in God- 
 bestowed holiness (Acts xx. 82, xxvi. 18); and in every 
 case the inheritance is regarded as constituting part of the 
 kingdom of God's dear Son (Col. i. 13), with whom, according 
 to Rom. viii. 17, we are joint-heirs. 
 
 Having been prcdestmatcd, according to the purpose of Him 
 vjJw u'orketh all things according to the counsel of His own toill. 
 — The word '•'predestinated" was used before in ver. 5, but 
 it is now introduced in quite a different connection. There 
 it was the eternal counsel of grace concerning us that was 
 made pronjinent ; here, on the other liand, tlie subjects of 
 this counsel, those predestinated, are specially in view as 
 those destined to the obtaining of a glorious possession. This 
 inheritance is made sure to us by our being predestinated by 
 God's own purpose to the obtaining of it. Additional 
 assurance is given to the heirs of such an inheritance, when 
 they are reminded that the purposes of Him who has thus 
 
 ^ Grimm renders thus. So also Alfoid, Ellicott, Olshansen, Cremer (who 
 bases the interjiretation on the assumption that ver. 11 refers to Jewish 
 Christians). On the other side, see Harless and Meyer. As this is the only 
 instance of the use of the verb in the New Testament, it is reasonable to consult 
 the usage of the derivative substantive, xXtipovof^ia. This term is invariably 
 used of our inheritance, and never of God's inheritance in u>-'. Compare ver. 18; 
 also Gal. iii. 18 ; Col. iii. 24. 
 
144 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 determined cannot be thwarted. It is His good pleasure 
 to give them the kingdom, and all things are subject to His 
 will, and at His disposal. Compare Ps. xxxiii. 11; Luke 
 xii. '62. The phrase "counsel (/QouX?;) of His own will 
 (deXr]fjia) " indicates that the divine purpose has been the 
 result of what in human language we call deliberation on the 
 part of Goil, and also of hearty and sympathetic volition. 
 But the counsel which God takes is with Himself, just as He 
 has been described as purposing a purpose with Himself, and 
 His act of willing determines the accomplishment of His 
 purpose. The divine wisdom and love are equally involved 
 in the forming and effecting of this eternal purpose. 
 
 Ver. 12. That ivc should he to the praise of His glory. — In 
 Christ we have been made possessors with the end of God's 
 glory in view. Thus the apostle concludes the section concern- 
 ing the redemption wrought by Christ (vers. 7-12), as he had 
 concluded the section concerning the eternal counsels of the 
 Father (ver. G). The final aim of that redemption is the 
 securing of praise to the glory of God. In the former 
 instance, however, it was God's own act considered simply in 
 itself, here it is the result of grace upon us, that yields praise 
 to God. There is, therefore, a development here. God's 
 eternal purpose yields glory to God ; it is glorifying to Him 
 that He should have conceived the gracious thought. A yet 
 higher degree of glory is yielded, when, in the fulness of 
 times, the Incarnate Son gives expression to this thought. 
 
 Who hoped heforc in Christ. — The laboured attempts that 
 have been made to interpret this phrase in such a way as 
 to indicate no distinction between one class emphatically 
 referred to as " we," and another similarly referred to as " ye," 
 bear on the very face of them unmistakeable marks of special 
 pleading. Such an interpretation does indeed at first sight 
 seem to be favoured by the use of " we " in the previous 
 clause. The apostle has used the words " we," " us," " our," 
 already twelve times in these twelve verses, and in all these 
 instances he has undoubtedly employed them simply to 
 include with himself all the saints and believers at Ephesus. 
 At this point, however, in the interests of that unity secured 
 iu Christ, he takes cognisance of a distinction which must 
 
CHAP. I. 13. 145 
 
 have been all the while present to the minds of his readers, in 
 order that he may convince them that even this seemingly- 
 radical distinction is done away in the great Eeconciler. 
 What the following section shows them to have in common 
 redounds to the praise of Him who has brought it about in the 
 fulness of the times. — To have hoped before in Christ, is to 
 have trusted before the actual manifestation of the object 
 of this trust. It designates those who had cherished the 
 Messianic hope. 
 
 Observe how this paragraph begins with the first immediate 
 result of Christ's death, the forgiveness of sins, and ends with 
 the ultimate result, the reconciliation of all things in Christ, 
 the Mediator. This reconciliation is nut that commonly 
 spoken of as universal restoration. The reconciliation in- 
 tended is that effected by redemption, as the forgiveness of 
 sins. Those M-ho are reconciled unto God are indeed to the 
 praise of His glory ; but in order that we, in any sense involving 
 ttue blessedness to ourselves, may contribute to that glory, 
 we must have first believed. " In Christ," as we have seen, 
 is the keynote of this whole section. We have had God's 
 election " in Christ," and here we have our reconciliation unto 
 God " in Christ." Those who believe, who have hoped in 
 Him, who are redeemed by His blood, are brought into mystical 
 union with Christ. In respect of destiny in the divine 
 economy of grace, Christ and the believer are one. But then, 
 again, Christ Himself has said, " I and the Father are one." 
 Thus in Christ all duality ceases, all disharmony is at an end, 
 and all that is redeemable is reconciled unto God. The 
 apostle simply takes no cognisance here of the fate of those 
 who remain unforgiven, without Christ. 
 
 (3) What the Hohj Spirit has done (vers. 13, 14). 
 
 Ver. 13. In lohom ye oho. — Here we enter upon the third 
 division of our first section. The apostle, in vers. 13, 14, 
 renders praise to God for the work specially wrought by the 
 Holy Spirit. This Spirit, however, is the Spirit of Christ, and 
 therefore this division appropriately opens with the familiar 
 phrase "in whom." As in Christ we have redemption, so in 
 Christ through the Spirit we have the continuance cf redemp- 
 
 K 
 
146 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 tion blessings. It is to be observed that the apostle now 
 emphatically contrasts the Gentile with the Jewish Christians, 
 as those who had not previously the Messianic hope, but out . 
 of heathenism embraced the faith of Christ. This contrast is 
 only introduced for a moment. The opening words of the 
 following verse emphasise the fact of their oneness in the 
 possession of the common inheritance. 
 
 Having heard the word of truth. — The word which they 
 heard is called the word of truth, because, on the one hand, 
 it is true, and because, on the other hand, it deals with 
 objective truth. It is the word of Him who cannot lie (Titus 
 i. 2). As the truth, the word is the instrument of sanctifica- 
 tion (John xvii. 17), of regeneration (James i. 18), and the 
 provision committed to the care of God's stewards for dis- 
 tribution (2 Tim. ii. 15). Calvin says, " The gospel is not 
 only certain truth which cannot deceive, but is by way of 
 eminence the word of truth, as if, strictly speaking, there 
 was no truth but itself." This is carefully and temperately 
 expressed. The foolish exaggerations of the Hutchinsonians, 
 who seek to trace all scientific truth to Scripture, receive no 
 countenance when we remember that the apostle is concerned 
 only with what pertains to salvation. Outside of this word 
 there is no truth that has saving power. The truth as it is in 
 Jesus, who is tlie truth, constitutes this word. 
 
 The gospel of your salvation. — These words more explicitly 
 characterise the word of truth which has been heard. In 
 itself considered, it was the word of truth ; in reference to 
 those who believe in it, it is the gospel of tlieir salvation. As 
 many as received it, found in their experience that the 
 essential constituent of its truth lay in its saving power. The 
 gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Their own 
 experience of it would distinguish it from every other message 
 claiming to be a gospel, so that they would feel, with the 
 apostle (Gal. i. 6, 7), that all sncli pretended gospels were 
 really no gospels, but only perversions of the gospel of Christ. 
 The test of the truth of the gospel was that it brought 
 salvation. 
 
 And having believed in it. — So far as the construction of 
 the sentence is concerned, the difficulty lies in this clause. 
 
CHAP. I. 13. 147 
 
 The repetition of the eV w of the earlier clause is ordinarily 
 explained as intended to give emphasis to tlie thought that 
 every step in the process of salvation is taken in immediate 
 relation to Christ. Ellicott, maintaining this view, practically 
 discards the second iv u> in his translation. This is explicitly 
 done by Davies, who regards these words as " repeated for the 
 sake of perspicuity," and then naively goes on to say, " If we 
 omit these words, the sentence proceeds with grammatical 
 smoothness." ^ The translation, thus offered by Ellicott, Davies, 
 and others, is really possible only when we omit the repeated 
 phrase. The sentence is not long enough or complicated 
 enough to require the use of the oratio suspensa ; and even if 
 this were, so uyaeZ? rather than iv t5 would be repeated. 
 Others, again, have broken up the sentence into two by supply- 
 ing a verb alter the first iv u>. This was either borrowed from 
 eK\r]p(jo6i]fiev (Ilarless) or from irporjXTnKOTa'i (Calvin, etc., 
 who would reduce it by omitting the Trpo as unsuitable), or 
 was secured by supplying the substantive verb and reading 
 " in whom ye also are " (Meyer, Alford, etc.). But these are 
 all artificial and needless, even if on other grounds allowable. 
 The question now naturally suggests itself, " Does the second 
 iv oS refer to the same subject as the first ? ' Calvin regards 
 the sealing of the Spirit here spoken of as imparting certainty 
 to the minds of believers regarding the word of God and tlieir 
 own salvation, and Meyer, improving upon this hint, distinctly 
 refers the iv w to the X0709 t?}9 a\r]6eLa<;. To believe in the 
 gospel (Mark i. 15), though not a common phrase, is yet quite 
 allowable. — The hearing intended by the apostle is thus more 
 exactly characterised as followed np by the exercise of faith. 
 What was heard was also believed. The hearing was of such 
 a kind as leads up to faith. — Hearing the word of truth, 
 hearing it as the gospel of salvation, and believing in it, are 
 the conditions to the receiving of the sealing of the Spirit, 
 
 Were scaled with the Spirit of promise, the Holy One. — 
 The Holy Spirit is the seal. It is not said that the Holy 
 Spirit simply applies the seal, but that He is the seal which 
 God applies unto those who are in Christ, " God will be 
 
 ^ Davies, Epistles of PauUo'tht Ephesiaiis, Colomlans, and PInlcmon, 2nd ed., 
 p. 30, Lond. 1884. 
 
148 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS, 
 
 trusted first ; and when 3'e have set to your seal that God is 
 true in His word, God will set to His seal after your 
 believing " (Goodwin). Besides the outward witness to our 
 adoption of God in the word of truth believed, we have the 
 inward witness thereto of the Holy Spirit (Rom. viii. IG). — 
 He is called the Spirit of promise, because His mission is 
 absolutely the fulfilment of the divine promise. The Old 
 Testament is full of the promise of tlie Spirit ; and during His 
 ministry Christ always represents His work as preparatory to 
 the descent of the Spirit, which could take place only after 
 His work on earth had been accomplished. Just as the 
 appearing of Christ fulfilled the purpose of the Father, so the 
 sending by Christ of His Spirit was the fulfilling of the 
 purpose of the Son. The will of God, or the promise of 
 salvation, whether made in terms of the old dispensation or 
 the new, was perfectly given effect to in the mission of the 
 Spirit. — Very emphatic, too, is the appellation " holy " as 
 given here to the Spirit. It is as if the apostle had said, " Ye 
 were sealed with the Spirit, yea, vntli God's oivn Holy Spirit." 
 The Spirit as the Spirit of holiness, therefore, is the seal, in- 
 asmuch as He bears the perfect image of God which is to be 
 reimpressed upon the heart of the believer. The result of 
 the sealing as regards God is this, " The Lord knoweth them 
 that are His," — that is. He recognises in them His own likeness. 
 And the result of the sealing as regards ourselves is this, 
 " Having named the name of the Lord, to depart from all 
 iniquity." God seals us with the Holy Spirit when He gives 
 the Spirit to dwell within us, and thus makes us partakers of 
 the divine nature (2 Pet. i. 4). 
 
 Ver. 1 4. Who is the earnest of our inheritance. — The same 
 idea is expressed by Paul in 2 Cor. i. 22, v. 5, where he uses 
 the same word (dppa^oiv), and in Pom. viii. 23, where he 
 distinguishes believers from others in the world as having the 
 iirst-fruits {cnrapxh) of the Spirit. — The word here rendered 
 " earnest " is distinctly borrowed from the language of com- 
 merce, introduced, as is supposed, by the Pha3nician traders. 
 The Hebrew P^ny is simply rendered in Greek letters in the 
 appa^cov of our text, and this again appears little changed in 
 the Latin Arrhaho, later Arrha. The Scotch word arks, and 
 
CHAP. I. 14. 149 
 
 even the English earnest, are probably connected with the 
 same word. It means more than a pledge. It is a pledge 
 consisting of a sample of that which afterwards will be paid 
 in full. In common transactions it often takes the form 
 of a small coin. This is of the same sort as the larger sum 
 agreed upon ; and so, that which the Spirit imparts now is of 
 the same kind as that hoped for. " The earnest," says Eadie, 
 " is the inheritance in miniature." As days of heaven enjoyed 
 on earth enliven the Christian's thoughts of heaven, and 
 quicken his desires after meetness for it, while at the same 
 time they deepen the conviction that such an inheritance is 
 in store for him ; so the earnest of the inheritance, atlorded 
 by the Spirit impressing Himself upon the believer's heart, 
 intensifies his longings and renders his conceptions more 
 vivid, while it increases his assurance that at last he shall 
 enter upon the full possession of that spiritual inheritance of 
 which he has now received a sample. — The inheritance is the 
 common possession and hope of all believers, both Jews and 
 Gentiles. It is reserved for us in heaven. 
 
 With a view to tlie rcdemj^tion of the 'possession. — The 
 preposition translated in our Authorised Version " uutil " (etV) 
 is here, just as in ver. 10, properly "with a view to," " in 
 order to." It indicates that what follows expresses the end 
 of the Spirit's sealing. — The word rendered in our Authorised 
 Version " purchased possession " (7r€pL7roir]cn<;) is used several 
 times in the New Testament, sometimes with an active, 
 sometimes with a passive signification. Thus, in 1 Thess. 
 V. 9, it is used actively in the phrase, " the obtaining of 
 salvation;" so in 2 Thess. ii. 14, "the obtaining of the 
 glory;" and in Heb. x, 29, "the saving of the soul." But 
 this sense is here evidently inappropriate, and we must have 
 recourse to its passive signification. It is that whieli has 
 been acquired. And here again we have to choose between 
 the two interpretations of the possession or inheritance, as 
 that of the believer or as that of God. In 1 Pet. ii. 9, the 
 context demands the rendering " a people for God's own 
 possession." A similar instance occurs in Acts xx. 28, where 
 the Church of God is described as that which he had 
 purchased {Treptc'TroirjaaTo) with His own blood. But tiie 
 
150 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 same rule of giving weight to the context, which has deter- 
 mined our rendering of these passages, when applied to the 
 passage before us, requires that we should understand the 
 possession as the inheritance of the saints. The apostle is 
 still speaking of that which the sealing of the Spirit effects 
 for us. It is the earnest of our inlieritance wliich we now 
 enjoy, with the prospect of yet obtaining possession of that 
 inheritance itself. — This " redemption " (aTroXvTp&xri?) of our 
 text is to be distinguished from that of ver. 7. The word 
 indicates invariably a complete redemption ; ^ but in its 
 initial form, as the forgiveness of sins, it is only ideally 
 perfect, and we have to look forward to " the day of 
 redemption " (iv. 30), when it shall become really perfect. 
 It is this perfected realisation of redemption that is spoken 
 of in our text, Eedemption by the blood of Christ is the 
 original purchase of our possession. Forgiveness through 
 His blood provides us with our title to tlie inheritance. The 
 Holy Spirit of Christ, as seal, produces in us God's likeness, 
 re-creates in us the divine nature, and the completion of the 
 Spirit's work on us perfects our redemption. 
 
 To the praise of His glory. — This is not to be regarded 
 merely as joint result with redemption of the sealing of the 
 Spirit. The work of the Spirit rather as a whole, upon Jews 
 and Gentiles who have believed in Christ, is directed to this 
 end of the divine glory. Whether, then, it be the Father (vers. 
 0-6), or the Son (vers. 7-12), or the Holy Spirit (vers. 13, 14), 
 whose personality is regarded as prominent, in every aspect 
 of the work of grace before Christ's coming, at His coming, 
 and in view of His second coming, the result is praise 
 glorifying to God. In this concurring tribute of praise to 
 the One God, we liave the divine Unity in Trinity em- 
 phasised. 
 
 1 Trench, Synonyms , of the New Testament, § Ixxvii., calls attention 
 to Paul's preference for a,<7toX("rfi>>tri;. He never uses the simple Xvrpuxrii. 
 The reason for this preference has been supposed by Chrysostom to lie 
 in this, that the a.-ri gave the idea of completeness ; as it does also iu 
 u'jcax.ara.xxa.iTffiiv (Eph. ii. 10), and in other favourite words of the apostle. 
 
CHAP. I. 15. 151 
 
 Sect. III. — The Apostle's Prayer for the Epiiesians 
 (Chap. i. 15-19). 
 
 After his direct expression of thanks to God, the apostle 
 appropriately turns to record the feelings which the evidences 
 of God's work of grace among the Epiiesians had occasioned 
 in him. He was not an unmoved and indifferent spectator 
 of the gracious results which showed themselves in the 
 members of the church at Ephesus, their faith and love (with 
 evident allusion to the words of greeting in ver. 1) ; and he 
 now shows how intense the interest is which he takes in 
 watching their spiritual development, by not only giving 
 thanks to God for what they had become, but also by praying 
 earnestly for their further guidance and help toward perfec- 
 tion. Having in the previous section acknowledged God's 
 goodness in bestowing the blessings of grace, so as to excite 
 his readers to fuller praise, he now makes known to them 
 how his love for them constrains him ever to pray that 
 they may grow in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 Ver. 15. Wherefore I also. — This connects the new section 
 with the whole of the preceding section, and not merely with its 
 closing division. It is the fact of God having blessed (ver. 3) 
 those Epiiesians with such spiritual blessings, that causes the 
 apostle to renew his thanksgiving, and encourages him to 
 continue his prayers on their behalf. Thanksgiving for 
 answers to prayer is incomplete if not followed up by prayers 
 that urge larger requests. Devout meditation on blessings 
 received will afford grounds for continuing instant in prayer. 
 
 Having heard of the faith prcvailinf/ among you in the Lord 
 Jesus, and love to all the saints} — There were, no doubt, fre- 
 
 ^ Westcott and Hort, following the oldest manuscripts, omit rhv ayd-ry.v. 
 Meyer properly characterises this as a copyist's error. The common text reads 
 xai T>!v iyecTfiv rriv. It is easy to see how a copyist might pass from the one 
 T>j» to the other, and thus in an early examplar make an omission which might 
 rule subseiiuent transcriptions. Compare Col. i. 4 ; Philem. 5. Had the re- 
 ceived reading been the result of harmonising tendencies, the Colossian text would 
 have been more exactly copied. Then, again, no suitable meaning can be got 
 from the reading that omits the words. Dale, adopting the Rev'.sers' version, 
 
152 EPISTLE TO THE EPHE3IANS. 
 
 quent comtnunications between Paul and the different Chris- 
 tian communities with which he was connected. In the case 
 before us, the apostle probably refers to cheering accounts 
 which he had received from Tychicus. He had heard that 
 the community as a whole was exercising faith (rrjv /cad' 
 v/jid<i 'jTLariv) in the Lord Jesus, and so proving faithful 
 ver. 1 ; Col. i. 4 ; Philem. 5). They were exhibiting, also, the 
 good points of faith, showing that their faith was not dead, 
 but that, working by love, it approved itself in good works. 
 Faith is the primary grace out of which all the others spring. 
 It unites to Christ, to God (who is love), and so reveals itself 
 in love to God and our fellow-men. The apostle delights in 
 thus bringing together the Christian creed and the Christian 
 life. At the same time, by thus prominently specifying the 
 grace of brotherly love, he may seek to stin)ulate the Ephe- 
 sians to its further exercise. It is just possible, in view of his 
 emphatic words at the close of an address, some years before, 
 to the Ephesian elders (Acts xx. 35), that some harsh and 
 selfish conduct or want of genuine brotherliness had been 
 manifesting itself. If this were so, and if the hint supplied 
 in the passage before us was not taken, the intimate connec- 
 tion between the two great commandments will easily explain 
 how in after years the Ephesian church, which had failed in 
 love to the brethren, was found to have left her first love 
 (Rev. ii. 4). 
 
 Ver, IG. Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of 
 you m my prayers. — This is not to be regarded as an exaggerated 
 expression, signifying merely the apostle's deep thankfulness. 
 The good news so filled his heart that unbroken thankfulness 
 of spirit has continued. It is to be understood in the spirit 
 of the injunctions, " Pray always," " Eejoice always." And so 
 long as the spirit of tliankfulness endures, the spirit of prayer 
 will continue active. That the apostle makes mention of the 
 
 "having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ which is among you and 
 shown toward all the saints," makes this comment, "Tlie reality of that faith 
 was still shown in their spirit and conduct to all saints. Paul means that they 
 recognised the obligations which were created by a common faith." This 
 rendering has to be eked out by supplying the verb "show," and even then 
 the use of the term " faith," to indicate the Christian's duty to his fellow- 
 Christians, which is the fruit of faith, is violent in the extreme. 
 
CHAP. I. 17. 153 
 
 Ephesians in his prayers, is a proof that he ceases not to 
 thank God on their behalf. His prayers indeed are, in the 
 proper sense, devotions ; praise is ever joined witli petition. — 
 The following verse shows that his prayers were not simple 
 requests on their behalf for something as yet not possessed by 
 them, but embraced also devout and grateful reflections on 
 graces already bestowed. 
 
 Ver. 17. That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ. — Here, 
 again, we have that peculiar and profound expression which is 
 previously met with in the third verse. This name is used here 
 partly, no doubt, to keep up the connection between this section 
 and the last, and partly to show that the apostle's prayer is 
 addressed to the God of salvation, the Sender of the Son, in 
 whom we have redemption, and in whom we have that 
 Spirit who secures the completion of redemption. Weiss 
 (JYew Testament Theology, ii. 105) says that this expression 
 seems to stand in peculiar contradiction to the high Christ- 
 ology of the epistle, and insists that it " cannot indicate that 
 God is honoured by Christ as God, . . . but only that the 
 God who has been manifest in Christ is spoken of." A true 
 doctrine of the conditions of the Incarnate Life will remove 
 all such difficulties.^ In reference to the historical salvation 
 wrought by Christ, the relations subsisting between the divine 
 Persons are those of God and God's righteous Servant. In 
 this sense, with respect to the working of the economy of 
 grace, there is a veritable subordination on the part of the 
 Son under the Father. As we have seen before, the Father 
 is also in the relation of God to the Son as man's Piedeemer. 
 — The passage is here appropriately addressed to God under 
 this name. — The apostle prays to God for benefits won by 
 the obedience and sufferings of Him who, by yielding Himself 
 
 1 Attemi)ts have been made to get rid of the desigaation altogether, which 
 Harless rightly says need only now be mentioned as curiosities. Seme proposed 
 to read "the God of glory," and to put "the Father of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ" in a parenthesis ; and others, by divers expedients, sought to reach the 
 same rendering. Fear of Arian abuse of the phrase led Theodoret, and many 
 other patristic and scholastic commentators, to restrict the application of the 
 designation "God" to God's relation to Christ as Man, and that of " Father" 
 to His relation to Christ as divine. But in that case the "glory" (S«?«) 
 would have been distinctly characterised as Christ's. The Father is God of the 
 Lord Jesus Christ in His full incarnate personality as the God-mfJi. 
 
154 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 to God as Servant, became thereby, as thus alone He could 
 become, our Lord, with rightful and effective dominion over 
 us, and Jesus Christ, our Saviour from sin and Communicator 
 to us of the divine nature. 
 
 The Father of glory. — The explanation of this expression 
 may be found in the sixth verse, where that which specially 
 calls forth glory to God is identified with His grace, that grace 
 which showed itself in the destination of the Son to be 
 Saviour of the world. " He is the Father of glory," says 
 Tertullian, "of whom Christ the King of glory sings in the 
 twenty-fourth Psalm." Each stage in the work of Christ's 
 salvation brings its tribute of glory to God. He who is thus 
 glorified by His own eternal counsels of grace, by the redemp- 
 tion of the elect through the death of His Sou, and by the 
 continued work of the Holy Spirit ; He to whose glory the 
 three Persons of the Godhead contribute the undivided praise 
 of all their gracious operations, is fitly called the Father of 
 glory. He is, as Ewald says, " the Father wdio comprehends 
 all glory in Himself" {Old and New Testament Theology, 
 p. 280). The title is peculiarly suitable in this prayer, 
 seeing that here, as in every genuinely Christian prayer. He 
 is asked to carry on a work that will yield Him yet more 
 glory. Though the precise title is not found elsewhere, it 
 may be compared with the phrase, " The glory of the Father " 
 (Rom. vi. 4). The Father is also called " The God of glory " 
 (Acts vii. 2), and Christ "The Lord of glory" (1 Cor. ii. 8). 
 
 May give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the 
 knoivledge of Himself. — Here we have come to the substance 
 of the prayer. The apostle characteristically asks, on behalf 
 of the Ephesians, for gifts already possessed by them, God 
 has abounded toward them in His grace, so that in them 
 again wisdom and prudence have abounded (ver. 8), and the 
 apostle's God-glorifying prayer is that in these things they 
 may be made to abound more and more. It is the highest 
 tribute to the divine grace and wisdom, that nothing new can 
 be thought of or asked, but simply an increase of what He 
 has been giving, or rather an increased capacity for receiving 
 what is already enfolded in the gift bestowed. — The blessing 
 man sought is wisdom, which is to be brought by the Spirit 
 
CHAP. I. 17. 155 
 
 and inwrought in the believers' hearts, so as to become a 
 spiritual possession. Paul does not simply ask for God's 
 wise Spirit. This is already present in the hearts of those 
 Ephesian saints as the seal to them of their spiritual and 
 eternal inheritance. But he asks that the divine wisdom may 
 so identify itself with their spirit, that of their own spirit it 
 may be said, that' it is a wise spirit given them of God. — The 
 apostle further prays that the Ephesian believers, having 
 thus obtained the spiritual capacity, may also have that 
 faculty granted them, whereby tliey sliall be able to avail 
 themselves of further revelations of spiritual truth. To tliose 
 who have the spirit of wisdom God reveals the deep things of 
 God (1 Cor. ii. 7, 10). It is evident that the spirit of revela- 
 tion is just a particular instance of the spirit of wisdom, the 
 same spirit exercised in a special department. So, in Horn, 
 xi. 20, we read of the gifts and calling of God, though the 
 calling is included among the gifts. Here the spirit of revela- 
 tion is just the spirit of wisdom exercised upon the subjects 
 of divine revelation, upon what is before described as the 
 mystery of God's will. — The kind of wisdom gained by the 
 spirit of revelation is further defined as the knowledge of God. 
 This is the subject with which man's spirit, when enlightened 
 by divine wisdom, concerns itself. The word here used (eVt- 
 7fW(xt?) means not simply knowledge (71^000-49), but an exact, 
 thorougldy accurate knowledge, a profound acquaintance with 
 God. The contrast between the two kinds of knowledge is most 
 strikingly expressed in 1 Cor. xiii. 1L\ What the apostle 
 speaks of is no mere barren intellectual speculation about God, 
 such as could be attained alongside of a practical acquaintance 
 with the depths of Satan ; but it consists in the directing of 
 all the human faculties to God — intellect, heart, and will. 
 In Col. i. 10, it is represented as the condition of all faithful- 
 ness and growth in the Christian life. The phrase is used 
 very frequently in the epistles of the imprisonment (Phil. i. 9 ; 
 Col. i. 9, 10; Philem. 6). The prominence given by the 
 apostle to the contemplative aspect of the gospel, may be 
 explained partly hj his own circumstances as the prisoner of 
 the Lord, an ambassador in bonds, and partly by the condition 
 of the Church, where the simplicity of the word of truth, and 
 
156 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIAXS. 
 
 its efficiency as the gospel of revelation, were threatened by 
 the speculative tendencies which were already manifesting 
 themselves. Unable himself, by reason of his bonds, to con- 
 tinue, by the word of preaching, to build up the clmrch at 
 Ephesus, as he had done during a period of nearly three 
 years, and aware of the presence of dangerous elements, even 
 within the membership of the church (Acts xx. 29, 30), he 
 asks on their behalf establishment and confirmation in saving 
 knowledge. — The marginal rendering, " for the acknowledg- 
 ment of Him," is wrong. It is knowledge that is spoken of 
 as profound acquaintance with One who had been acknow- 
 ledged and recognised long belbre. — This knowledge is know- 
 ledge of God, yet only as conceived of by us and revealed to 
 us as the God of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the only 
 aspect of the divine nature and Being in which we can have 
 any adequate knowledge in Him. The higliest attainment in 
 knowledge, on the part of the perfect man, is knowledge of 
 the Son of God (iv. 13). Apart from Christ, out of relation 
 to our Lord Jesus Christ, God must still be the unknown 
 God. 
 
 Ver. 18. Tlie cijcs of your heart being enliglitcnecl. — Enlighten- 
 ment is au immediate result of the gift of the Spirit. The 
 following clauses show what consequences again flow from 
 this spiritual illumination. — The enlightenment is of the 
 heart, not, as our Authorised Version puts it, of the under- 
 standing. The effect of the Spirit's operations becomes 
 apparent in our spirit, in a change wrought upon our nature. 
 God gives us the spirit of wisdom, and our spirit becomes 
 wise, and our whole being reflects the divine brightness. His 
 presence in us is the creating in us of a new heart. The 
 primary idea here is that of enlightenment, and this deter- 
 mines the use of the peculiar figure, nowhere else used, " the 
 eyes of your heart." It is the destination of the Christian 
 to become light in the Lord. Now, if this is to be attained, 
 care must be taken to have the light placed in a fitting 
 situation. Compare Luke xi. 33—36 ; Matt. vi. 23, xv. 19. 
 The heart is the innermost seat of the personal life. It is in 
 the heart of the believer that Clirist dwells (chap. iii. 17). 
 Out of the heart are the issues of the natural life, and out of 
 
CHAP. I. 18. 157 
 
 it are the thoughts, and feelings, and desires wliich constitute 
 the spiritual life. In the physical world its analogue is found 
 in life and light. But here the apostle expressly sets aside, 
 for his present purpose, consideration of the relation of the 
 heart to life, and confines himself to its relation to liglit, by 
 the use of his peculiar phrase, " the eyes of your heart." The 
 eyes of the heart, like the eyes of the body, are both receptive 
 and reflective. As the eye takes in light, and when enlight- 
 ened gazes upon objects in the light, so the eyes of the heart, 
 having received light, exercise reflection upon those things 
 brought by the Spirit of revelation within its range of vision. 
 The figurative expression "blind eyes" was familiar to 
 readers of the Old Testament, as occurring in Isa. vi. 10, 
 xxix. ] ; and very frequently the idea is also repeated in 
 the New Testament, as in Acts xxvi. 18 ; Piev. iii. 17. — This 
 spiritual enlightenment is always regarded as the work of the 
 Holy Spirit. But, as it was said before, that God's Spirit 
 makes man's spirit wise and capable of receiving revelations 
 of truth, till it can be said of the believer that he has a spirit 
 of wisdom and revelation, so here God's Spirit illumines 
 man's spirit, gives vision to the eyes of his heart, till it can 
 be said of the believer that he is light in the Lord. It is 
 within the sphere of divine things, and spiritual experience 
 in the knowledge of God, that such enlightenment is secured. 
 It is quite in keeping with the use of the word in our text here 
 used for enlightenment, which came afterwards to be applied 
 to baptism. " So early as the time of Justin Martyr," says 
 Hatch {Infiucnce of Greek Ideas and Usages iqwn the Christian 
 Churcli), p. 295, 1890, "we find a name given to baptism, 
 which comes straight from the Greek mysteries, — the name 
 ' enlightenment ' (<^wTi9yuo9). It came to be the constant 
 technical term." Those being prepared for baptism were 
 called ol cf)(oTi^6/M€vot, those who were being enlightened ; and 
 the baptised were called (})ci)TiaOepT€<i, the enlightened. The 
 result of baptism, or that spiritual reality set forth by it, was 
 enlightenment. 
 
 In three successive propositions, the apostle shows what 
 the various attainments in knowledge are which the enlight- 
 ened believer wins. The knowledge asked for is personal 
 
158 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 experimeDtal acqr.aiutance with the great facts of the 
 spiritual life. It is a familiar mode of expression in the 
 apostle's writings. He desires " to know Christ," " to know 
 the love of Christ ; " and what he desires for himself he 
 desires for his fellow-believers. Enlightenment of heart and 
 mind springs out of that true and genuine knowledge of 
 God (ver. 17), and leads up to a yet fuller knowledge of 
 what God is to us in the fulness of that redemption (ver. 14), 
 wrought for us in Christ by His Spirit. This knowledge is 
 sought after in contemplation upon those three profound 
 revelations of God's grace toward us in His calling, His in- 
 heritance, and His operations in and upon Christ as our 
 Redeemer. 
 
 That yc may know ivhat is the hope of His calling. — This is 
 the first of the three positions. — The hope may be understood 
 subjectively or objectively, either as a particular condition of 
 soul, or as that which produces this condition and forms its 
 objective basis. It may mean the emotion of hope, or it may 
 mean the thing hoped for. But as the thing hoped for is 
 distinctly the subject of the following clause, it seems better 
 to understand hope here as meaning the emotion. The 
 apostle desires that those who are exercising the graces of 
 faith and love (ver. 15) may also exercise the grace of hope. 
 It is a good thing to hope. It strengthens alike for doing 
 and for enduring. Faith and love will languish if they be 
 not sustained by tlie inspiring influence of hope. — God's 
 calling is the calling wherewith He has called us who believe 
 in Christ. It is a good and all-sufficient ground of hope. 
 It is rightly called God's, though indeed it is ours, for it has 
 its ground in God ; and because it is His, it is sure. Our hope 
 therefore is sure, just because the God of hope in His calling 
 of us fills us, so as to make us abound in hope (Rom. xv. 13). 
 This calling is God's invitation addressed to us, and the 
 means which He takes for drawing men into the citizenship 
 of His kingdom. It is the effectual calling of His Spirit, — the 
 calling of God that is without repentance, the gospel offer 
 from which He will not resile, — that gives us the right to 
 exercise a hope which will be found a good hope through 
 grace (2 Thess. ii. IG). It is only the spiritually enlightened, 
 
CHAP. I. 18. 159 
 
 in whom the Spirit of grace dwells, wlio can thus hope, and iu 
 proportion to the spirituality of a Christian will be the 
 liveliness of the emotion of hope. Compare the precisely 
 similar phrase, "the hope of the gospel" (Col. i. 23), the 
 hopefulness inspiied by the gospel, which is God's invitation 
 and offer in His calling. 
 
 And ivhat the riches of the glory of His inheritance amoi^g 
 the saints. — The Christian ought to exercise a lively hope in 
 regard to those blessings embraced in God's promise to the 
 called, though not yet fully unfolded ; but he ought also to 
 strive after the possession of a present comfortiug knowledge 
 of that inheritance which he now has in God, according to its 
 extent and worth in riches and glory. This is tjie second 
 theme on which the apostle would have the enliglitened fix 
 their attention. — There are here three points for considera- 
 tion : — 1. What and whose inheritance is here spoken of? It 
 seems much better to understand it of the spiritual possession 
 of believers, than of God's ownership of them. Thus the 
 harmony is preserved between the present use of tiie word 
 and its use in vers. 11 and 14, and in chap. v. 12 ; Col. i. 
 12, and, indeed, generally throughout the New Testament. 
 This spiritual possession, as we have seen in ver. 11, if 
 rightly understood, means God's presence in favour and 
 communion, which, when perfectly enjoyed, constitutes heaven. 
 The saint's inheritance is God, the only satisfying portion for 
 man. He who is to have a goodly heritage must be able to 
 say, " The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance." It is here 
 called God's inheritance, either because believers obtain it as 
 heirs of God, or simply because it is in Christ, who is God's. 
 It is His inheritance, just as the calling of the previous clause 
 is His calling. The saint's calling is of God, comes from 
 God, and so the saint's inheritance is of God. — 2. What is 
 the force of the expression " the riches of the glory " ? When 
 we remember that the inheritance is God, we shall not wonder 
 that the resources of human speech are overtaxed in the 
 attempt to give adequate expression to the exceeding abund- 
 ance and fulness of divine grace by which God's gift to us 
 is characterised. Grace manifested is glory, and as thus 
 abundantly manifested it is the wealth or riches of glory. The 
 
160 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS, 
 
 word " riclies " is altogether used five times in this epistle, 
 and always of the grace of God and Christ. The Ephesians 
 who believed and loved, knew the grace and the glory, and 
 now tlie apostle prays that they may know more of the 
 exceeding abundance of that grace. His desire is that God's 
 Spirit, having enlightened their inner being, should direct 
 their spiritually illumined powers to the attainment of a 
 more adequate comprehension of their inheritance in God. 
 He would have them made more fully acquainted with those 
 inexhaustible stores of grace treasured up in Christ, who is 
 God's fulness for us who are God's heirs. The God of glory 
 is ours in Christ, and the riches of His glory are at our 
 disposal. The abundance is inexhaustible, and our title is 
 clear. The believing Ephesians had seen and known this 
 heritage of theirs before, and now, with their improved vision, 
 the apostle trusts that they may discover in it a wealth and 
 fulness not hitherto perceived. — 3. How should we understand 
 the words " among the saints " ? They simply mean that the 
 inheritance is one which the Ephesian believers shall enjoy 
 as fellow-heirs with all other saints. The saints are those 
 consecrated and set apart for God as His possession. We 
 must be among the saints, God's possessions, His inheritance, 
 if He is to be our inheritance. We must be His, if He is 
 to be ours. All His heritage, all His saints, are heirs to the 
 inheritance. This thought would add to their spiritual 
 strength. Hence the apostle on two occasions (Acts xx. 32, 
 xxvi. 18), in the one case reporting our Lord's words of com- 
 mission and encouragement to himself, in the other case 
 himself giving encouragement to the Ephesian elders, 
 emphasises the truth that the Christian's inheritance is held 
 among all those who are sanctified, that is, among the saints. 
 Ver. 19. A7id ivhat the exceeding greatness of His jpov^er to 
 usward wlio helieve. — This is the third particular which the 
 apostle in prayer asks God to give to the enlightened saints as 
 a subject for devout contemplation. The knowledge of the 
 boundless power of Him whose heirs they are, is in the highest 
 degree inspiring to those who believe in Christ. There is here a 
 paradox, not unfamiliar to readers of Paul's epistles, inasmuch 
 as the power exerted by God in the work of grace is in its 
 
CHAP. I. 10. 161 
 
 greatness immeasurable, surpassing calculation or exprcy.iion, 
 and yet the apostle prays that the Ephesians may know it 
 (comp. chap. iii. 19). The divine power, though in its 
 fulness unsearchable, may nevertheless be illustrated, and the 
 contemplation of special instances of the forthputting of it 
 will lead to its more adequate appreciation. Already the 
 Ephesians have experienced it in themselves, as they have 
 been enabled to believe, and to see the wondrous results of 
 their faith, and if now they consider how great the power 
 was which raised Christ from the dead, and think that this 
 is the same power that is \vorking upon them and in them as 
 believers, they will have thus advanced to a truer conception 
 of the greatness of God's power in grace. It is only by 
 means of a due realisation of the greatness of God's power 
 that the believer can firmly maintain his hope awakened by 
 God's calling, consisting in his consciously grasping the riches 
 of his spiritual heritage. 
 
 According to the worling of the strength of His might.- — 
 Here we have not an exact measure of that power proposed ; 
 for the greatness of God's power passes all measure. We 
 have simply a characteristic lingering over the thought of its 
 exceeding greatness. " The working of the strength of His 
 might " is a peculiar phrase, stately and impressive, fitted 
 from its very construction to impress the reader's imagination 
 with a sense of the hopelessness of any attempt at a specifica- 
 tion, of the divine power. God's might is omnipotence. 
 The apostle here, by the accumulation of phrases, charac- 
 terises that instance of power which he is about to cite as the 
 most eminent exercise of that power. 
 
 Sect. IV. — Devotional Contemplation of God's Power 
 (Chap. i. 20-ii. 10). 
 
 It seems better to begin a new section here, though the 
 apostle does not wait to make any grammatical pause. Up 
 to this point the apostle has been reporting the substance of 
 his prayers for the enlightenment of the Ephesians, but now 
 he turns away from that to celebrate the great power of God. 
 He introduces the contemplation of this great theme in direct 
 
 L 
 
162 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 connection with the subject of his prayer, and is at no pains 
 to mark the point of transition from prayer to doctrinal 
 exposition. He has just shown what the subjects were on 
 which he desired the Ephesian believers to be enlightened. 
 He would have them enlightened in everything that would 
 contribute to their more perfect knowledge of God. But for 
 men the knowledge of God is possible only in Christ. And 
 thus the apostle is led to expatiate on Christ and His 
 redemption, in order to set forth the power of God in His 
 work of grace toward us, in regard to which he desires that 
 the Ephesians should be enlightened. There is no break at 
 the end of the first chapter ; but at the beginning of the 
 second chapter, just as at the 20th verse of the first, there 
 is a transition from one aspect of the theme to another. In 
 chap. i. 20—23, the apostle shows how God's power has 
 wrought upon Christ, in securing for Hitn and bestowing upon 
 Him all the power which, as the risen and exalted Saviour, 
 He possesses and exercises on our behalf. In chap. ii. 1-10, 
 he shows how God's power has raised men out of such depths 
 as those into which sin had brought them, and in order to 
 intensify our conception of God's power, which has accom- 
 plished this, he gives a minute and detailed account of the 
 depravity of sinful humanity, in order to lead up to the 
 declaration that what was needed, and what God wrought for 
 us, was a new creation in Christ Jesus. It is in the know- 
 ledge of all this that the apostle would have the Ephesians 
 enlightened. 
 
 (1) Of GolVs Power operating on Christ (chap. i. 20—23). 
 
 Ver. 20. Which He ivrought in Christ ivhen He raided Him 
 from the dead. — Our Authorised Version is here particularly 
 happy in rendering the verb by " wrought," to correspond 
 with the noun " the working " of the previous clause. This 
 is the special instance of that working of divine power 
 adduced by the apostle. This characteristic exercise of 
 power, fitted to yield tliat knowledge of the divine might of 
 grace for which the apostle prayed on behalf of the believers, 
 was exercised "in Cliiist." It is not said simply on Christ, 
 but in Christ as our representative, so that wrought in Him 
 
CHAP. I. 20. 163 
 
 it is wrought iu us. It is tlie resurrection of the race, the 
 establishment of a resurrection kingdom under the rule of the 
 risen King of men. It is the rising of the second Adam, in 
 whom all His seed are also raised. The truth is most admir- 
 ably and impressively set forth by Baldwin Brown in his 
 Risen Christ, the King of Men, p. 168. In this liisen One 
 alone can man fulfil the iilea of his creation. "The resurrection 
 is a further and essential stage in the development of the incar- 
 nation. By the incarnation the divine is born into the sphere 
 (-if the human ; by the resurrection the human is born into the 
 sphere of the divine for ever." The power of God reveals its 
 exceeding greatness as resurrection power. Paul prays that we 
 may know this power. But according to the interpretation 
 given of this profound signification of knowledge, as conceived 
 of by the apostle, the knowledge of the resurrection power 
 of God cannot be learnt in the schools. The content of that 
 knowledge cannot be held as a mere speculative tenet, as a fact 
 which we know from external evidence, of the objective truth 
 of which we are intellectually convinced. To know this 
 resurrection power of God is to experience it iu ourselves. 
 The reference of the apostle evidently is to our spiritual, and 
 not to our bodily resurrection. That Christ's resurrection is 
 the pledge of ours, is the truth set forth in 1 Cor. xv. 12—18. 
 But in Bom. iv. 25, Christ's resurrection is regarded as the 
 condition of our forgiveness and justification. So in Heb. iii. 
 20, 21, it is God, as He who raised Christ from the dead, 
 that is appealed to on behalf of believers, to make them 
 jierfect in very good work. It is precisely in this sense that 
 the apostle speaks in our text.^ The power that raised 
 Christ is that which works grace in us, accomplishes in us a 
 spiritual resurrection. It is supremely comforting to the 
 Christian to know from his own experience that in him 
 that same power is working which wrought in Christ. This 
 vital union subsists between Christ and the believer. That 
 power of God which manifested the greatness of its might in 
 preventing Christ from being held under the power of death, 
 must work with like mightiness in us. To know, then, that 
 Christ our life lives, is to know the power of God " to usward." 
 ^ See Hodge, Systematic Thcologij, ii. G95- 697. 
 
164 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 A7id set Him at His own right hand in heavenly 2)lciccs. — 
 III the resurrection, Christ rose above death ; in His ascension, 
 He rose, not only above earth, but above all heavens to God's 
 right hand. The relation to one another of Christ's humilia- 
 tion, which ends with the state of death, and Christ's exalta- 
 tion, which begins with rising again, and consists in sitting at 
 (lod's right hand, is that of cause and efiect, means and end. 
 The humiliation is the condition of the exaltation. Christ's 
 death gives occasion to the working of the strength of God's 
 might. For the sitting at God's right hand of our Eedeemer 
 is something quite different from the position from eternity of 
 the Son of God on God's throne. He now sits there as the 
 God-man, the Son of Man, at God's right hand (Acts vii. 55), 
 and the raising Him to that height is the crowning act of 
 God's power which exhibits the exceeding riches of His grace. 
 This exaltation, and the life into which it introduces the 
 Eisen One, marked an essential distinction between Christ's 
 resurrection and that of those whom Christ Himself, during 
 his earthly ministry, restored to life. These were restored to 
 the same life which they had before, with all its conditions and 
 limitations ; but the ascension into the new life, as Lord of 
 all, marks out Christ's resurrection as a unique manifestation 
 of the unspeakably great power of God.^ To know this 
 working of God's power, to know the power of Christ's 
 resurrection (Phil. iii. 10), is to know that the same power 
 is working in us. The profound v/ords of this epistle, " in 
 Christ," everywhere either expressed or implied, secures the 
 application of all that is said of Him to those that are in 
 Him. All who are in Christ may reckon with confidence 
 that the same exceeding power of God, which was exercised 
 upon Christ to raise Him, will be exercised upon them to 
 raise them out of the depths into heavenl}'- places. It is the 
 apostle's desire that his readers may know in themselves that 
 this is true. " The heavenly places are the words, as we 
 have seen, that describe the spiritual atmosphere in which 
 saints, the heavenly-minded, have their being. We are not 
 to think of God as removing His Son far from us. To be at 
 
 ' This idea lias l»een -wrouglit out with remarkable force and beauty by Dale, 
 in his Lectures on Ephesinns, pp. 150-156. 
 
CHAP. I. 21. 165 
 
 the right hand of God is to share His divine attributes. To 
 be alongside the omnipotent Jehovah is to " fill all in all," to be 
 in contact with all tilings and all beings " in all places of His 
 dominion." That Christ is raised to God's right hand, there- 
 fore, makes His presence with ns as a spiritual power far 
 more intimate and real. 
 
 Ver. 2 1. Far above allprincipardy, and power, and mujJd, and. 
 dominion. — These four specific terms do not seem to be hert^ 
 used in reference to any particular grades or orders of being. 
 The apostle does not speak here of different ranks, but simply 
 names, imder significant designations, the highest personal 
 existences in the universe. There is no polemical allusion 
 here, as there is in Col. i. 16, to the Gnostic heresies and 
 their fantastic angelologies. The apostle simply seeks to 
 express, in the most impressive way, the greatness of God's 
 work in His exaltation of Christ. 
 
 These names seem to be set down in a regularly ascending 
 order, in accordance with the argument which proceeds from 
 the idea of a Christ just raised from the dead to that of a 
 Christ seated at God's right hand. In Col. i. 16, again, which 
 speaks of Christ's creation, first of things in heaven and then 
 of things on earth, we have a reverse arrangement, where 
 " fhroncs^ indicating the cherubim, as immediate bearers 
 of God's throne, and occupiers, according to the later Jewish 
 theology, of the seventh heaven (" Testam. xii. Patri," in Cod. 
 Ps. Vet. Test, ed. Fabric, p. 548), are named first, followed 
 by the great angelic potentates or archangels, the dominions, 
 and these again by the more subordinate " principalities and 
 powers." We have to do only with the last three of the 
 Colossian group, and with one class not mentioned in 
 Colossians, designated here as "might" (Suvafit<;). Then 
 again, in Colossians they are named in the plural as concrete 
 existences, but here in the singular as abstract powers or 
 (qualities. In our passage they also seem to be intentionally 
 grouped in pairs. The words constituting the first pair (apxh 
 Kal i^ovaia) occur together in the singular in Luke xx. 20, of 
 tiie rule and autlioritij of a governor ; and in the plural in 
 Luke xii. 11 and Titus iii. 1, of the rulers and authorities 
 themselves. These two names are applied in chap. iii. 10 to 
 
166 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 good angels, and in chap. vi. 12 to evil angels, but here 
 probably to both without distinction. In so far as we use 
 the two to describe classes of angelic beings, engaged in a 
 similar form of service, the statement of Martensen, Christian 
 Dogrncdics, p. 128, may be accepted as true: "The Apostle 
 Paul calls the angels principalities and powers, and he thus 
 describes them as reigning in certain definite departments of 
 the economy of God, as rulers to whom different regions in 
 the creation are subjected." We might describe them 
 together as those superhuman beings to whom are assigned 
 distinct provinces in the national and natural life, such as 
 those designated in Dan. x. lo, 20, 21, as the princes of 
 Persia and Greece, and especially in the rendeiing of Deut. 
 xxxii. 8, in certain texts of the LXX. : "When the Most High 
 divided the nations, when He dispersed the sons of Adam, He 
 fixed the boundaries of the nations according to the number of 
 the angels of God." This reading of the passage in Deuteronomy 
 is defended by Lightfoot, Clement of Home, ii. 94. So the Book 
 of Jubilees, § 15, "Many are the nations, . . . and over all 
 hath He set spirits as lords;" and Ecclus. xvii. 17, "For in 
 the division of the nations of the whole earth. He set a ruler 
 over every people." They may be distinguished as respect- 
 ively the executive and the governing officials, the " powers " 
 being the princes, and the " principalities " being those under 
 them carrying out their requirements. The terms used to 
 indicate the second pair "might and dominion" (Svva/jLi<;, 
 Kvpi6T7]<;) refer to angelic beings of a higher order, related to 
 one another just as the former pair are. The hwdfiea carry 
 out the directions of the KvpLOTTjre'i. !N"ow we can have no 
 difficulty in identifying the KvptoT'qre'i with the archangels, 
 who in the later Jewish theology number seven, including 
 Gabriel, Michael, Paphael, and Uriel (comp. Tob. xii. 15 ; 
 Rev. i. 4, iv. 5, viii. 2). These are the highest angelic beings 
 whose service has reference to man, so the thrones or cherubim 
 are simply bearers of the divine throne, in attendance on God 
 Himself. — We thus see in these four terms, as here arranged, 
 a climax. Eadie refuses to see here a climax or anti- 
 climax, and proposes an altogether different arrangement. 
 The climax is reached in those archangels, dominions. 
 
ciiAr. I. 22. 1G7 
 
 " dominations " (Milton). This is the climax of created being-, 
 but far above this is the uncreated Son in His ascent to the 
 place of His glor}'. — See an admirable and suHiciently 
 detailed treatment of Pauline angelology in Klopper, 
 Colossians, -pp. 227-237, 1882. 
 
 And every name that is named, not only in this world, hut 
 also in that which is to conic. — The apostle has just mentioned 
 the very highest order of created being. But should it be con- 
 ceivable that in any other order of things a yet nobler 
 race should emerge, over it also will Christ stand immeasur- 
 ably exalted. His name is above every name (Phil. ii. 9) ; 
 He has obtained a moi^e excellent name than tliey (Heb. i. 4). 
 Christ's supremacy over all forms of being is absolute. — By 
 declaring that this supremacy of Christ is not restricted to the 
 present order of things, the apostle proclaims the truth that 
 it lasts for ever. It matters not how world-periods succeed 
 one another, amid all their changes Christ's position remains 
 unchanged. 
 
 Ver. 22. And 23ut cdl things under ITis feet. — This statement 
 is borrowed from Ps. viii. 6, as in 1 Cor. xv. 27. The primary 
 application of the Old Testament utterance is to man as he 
 came from the Creator's hand. This was man's destiny ; but 
 the entrance of sin prevented its realisation. And it was to 
 this position that God's power raised the Christ who died. 
 In His death He subdued His enemies, and in His new life 
 He exercises the mastery over them. Thus man's dominion 
 over the creatures (Ps. viii, 6) passes over into the God-man's 
 dominion over the powers of the spiritual world that had 
 opposed themselves (Ps. ex. 1). Our text speaks primarily 
 of supreme dominion ; but, as that authority is challenged, it 
 involves the overthrow and subjugation of the rebels. — The 
 actual sovereignty of our Eedeemer is the direct result of the 
 exaltation to God's right hand. The previous expressions 
 which state the fact of that exaltation plainly indicate, as 
 Goodwin points out, the personal worth and excellency of 
 Christ, which is the real ground of His dominion over all 
 things. " The humanity of Jesus," says Pulsford, "is raised 
 to the supreme throne, because it has acquired the higliest 
 virtues and powers. It is raised above all, because it is above 
 
168 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 all." Being thus in personal character worthy of the highest 
 official position, and having worthily finished the work of His 
 state of humiliation, He is now raised to that place from 
 which He may discharge the duties of His office as the Eiseu 
 and Glorified One. '•' That regeneration," says Martensen, 
 Christian Dogmatics,-^. 318, " which mankind and all creation 
 look forward to as the consummation of the world's develop- 
 ment, in which spirit and body, nature and history, are 
 perfectly reconciled, human nature being glorified into a 
 temple for the Holy Ghost, and material nature being brought 
 into the glorious liberty of the children of God, is revealed 
 ideally in the resurrection of the Lord. The resurrection of 
 the Lord is not the mere sign of that regeneration, it is itself 
 the actual heginning. . . . Now that the perfecting of the 
 world is in His person ideally accomplished, He becomes the 
 actual Perfecter of the world, and can replenish this present 
 world with the energies of the future." He has been raised 
 to the place wliere such power can be put forth, and that 
 place is God's right hand, and being there " He must reign," 
 and so long as there are enemies to subdue that rule must 
 be exercised in putting all things under His feet. In 
 contrast to what follows, therefore, this clause naturally 
 refers to Christ's victorious conflict over opposing powers. 
 
 And gave Himself to he Head over all things to the Church, 
 (ver. 23) ichich is His body. — The apostle's special interest, in 
 connection with the main theme of his epistle, is not with the 
 great and blessed truth of our Lord's universal dominion, but 
 more particularly with the thought that His lordship is 
 exercised in fulness of power in and for His Church. He 
 who is the centre of the universe is Head of the Church. — 
 God's act is the bestowing of a gift at once upon the Church 
 in giving her Christ as her Head, and upon Christ in giving 
 Him the Church to be Head over it. As this statement still 
 forms part of the apostle's report of his prayer on behalf of 
 the Ephesians, which had in view an increase of their 
 spiritual knowledge, his twofold reference of the gift to Christ 
 and to the Church must be here maintained. Members of the 
 Church will know the power of this truth as it is first 
 realised in Christ the Head, and then throughout His 
 
CHAP. I. 2-3. 169 
 
 mystical body. Christ is enriched by the gift, and His 
 enrichment is that also of His people. — As exalted to God's 
 right hand, with all things under His feet, — that is, as abso- 
 lutely supreme in the universe, — He belongs to the Church. 
 All things were put under Him, and then, as possessor of all 
 this undisputed authority and power. He is given by the 
 Father as Head of the Church. It is the privilege of the 
 Church to have as its Head this infinitely exalted and 
 sovereign potentate. It is expressly in His capacity as 
 " Head over all," Head over the universe, that He is given 
 to the Church. — The question may naturally be raised, Why 
 does not Christ exercise His universal authority, by bringing 
 all into His Church, so that His victory might consist not in 
 the destruction of any, but in the salvation of all ? The best 
 answer to this is reference to the character and quality of 
 that power which Christ exercises. His reign is one of 
 reason and will, not of constraint and violence. He is King 
 over those only who u-ill have Him to reign over tliem.^ 
 The Church is called " His l)ncly " in order to show that this 
 Headship of Christ is not like that of a ruler over his people, 
 but that it is one which implies a vital union, like that of 
 the head with the body. The name as applied to the Church 
 is most characteristic and suggestive. As Head of the 
 Church, Christ gives it guidance and life in its highest form. 
 " The head," says Hooker, " being of all other parts of the 
 1)ody most divine, hath dominion over all the rest; it is the 
 fountain of sense, of motion ; the throne where the guide of 
 the soul doth reign ; the court from whence direction of all 
 things human proceedeth." As Head of the Church, Christ 
 determines its doctrine by His teachings, He prescribes its 
 ordinances, and appoints and commissions its officers. These 
 are the " all things " in and through which He exercises His 
 Headship over the Church. In 1 Cor. xii. 12, which speaks 
 of the divinity of members and their unity in the body, we 
 have " the Christ " where we would have expected " the 
 Church." The body is there regarded as the collective 
 designation of all the members of the body, and the Christ 
 is regarded as the collective designation of all the members 
 
 ^ Compare Bruce, Training of the Twelve^ 2n(l ed., p. 440, 1877. 
 
170 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 of the Church. Christ is the representative Head of redeemed 
 humanity. He can be distinguished from members of His 
 body as their Head, but He is necessarily included along witli 
 them when they are collectively called His body. They are 
 His body, in the sense that they are the body of which He 
 is the Head. Together they form one organism, which 
 embraces not only the other several members, but also the 
 Head. What Eothe {Still Hours, p. 246) says of the indi- 
 Addual Christian, " The creature will become divine, i.e. made 
 essentially of the same nature as God, but it will not be 
 deified, i.e. will not be made identical with Him," may be 
 likewise said of the Church in its relation to Christ. When 
 the Church is viewed as an organism, there must be assumed 
 a sameness of nature between the Head and the members, 
 but the functions of the Head distinguish it at once from 
 the members collectively constituting the body, and from all 
 the several members. 
 
 Thefidness of Him that filkth all vnth all. — Christ's body, 
 the Church, is more exactly defined as His fulness (7r\/]pa)fjia). 
 The pleroma here means that which is filled. Meyer quotes 
 classical passages to show that not only the cargoes which 
 fill ships, but also the ships themselves which are filled with 
 them, are called TrXTjpcofiaTa. The meaning of the word and 
 its usage have been thoroughly discussed by Lightfoot, 
 Colossians, Y>p- 257-273, 1880. It is shown to.be absolutely 
 certain that substantives of this form, that is, in /xa, are 
 invariably passive, and that wherever we connect irXripcoixa 
 with irXripovv, in the sense of " to fill " rather than " to 
 fulfil," we must translate " that which is filled." Lightfoot, 
 however, insists upon deriving the substantive from the verl) 
 in its sense of fulfils, so as to make it mean " the comple- 
 ment." "The fulness of Him" is thus made to mean "that 
 by which He is filled," that which forms His complement. 
 Lightfoot indeed distinguishes two senses in which the word 
 complement may be used: (1) the full set, (2) what must be 
 added to make complete. He adopts the former sense, and 
 as thus understood the rendering of 'plcroma in our text 
 comes practically to mean the sum of those graces which 
 Christ imparts to His Church, by the possession of which the 
 
CHAP. I. 23. 171 
 
 Church is filled or has her fulness. Xow it is in accordance 
 with Scripture doctrine to say " of His fulness have we 
 received" (Jolm i. 16) ; but to say we are His fulness, or the 
 Church is His fulness, as though it were a matter of 
 equivalence, has no support in Scripture usage. It can only 
 be said, we are filled by His grace ; that which constitutes 
 our fulness, tliat whereby we are filled, is His grace. The 
 other sense of complement, as that which is needed to make 
 complete, is simply equivalent to the active meaning of 
 plerojna, which Lightfoot declares to be in every case gram- 
 matically unallowable. As thus understood, pleroma means 
 that which fills. Harless maintains that invariably pkroma 
 has this active signification ; and many distinguished inter- 
 preters, such as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Calvin, Beza, have 
 understood the phrase in the same or in a very similar sense. 
 This is also the rendering of Baur and Schwegler, who seek 
 to identify the conception of ifX.y'jpwfia in our epistle and in 
 the Gnostic systems. Weiss, Theology of the New Testament, 
 ii. 113, speaks of the apostle as in our verse venturing on 
 " the bold expression that Christ also needs the Church, as 
 the body, as that which belongs to His completeness, makes 
 His being just quite complete." But if we thus understand 
 the word, we shall give an extremely strained and unnatural 
 rendering of the passage. If we take the plcroma as 
 signifying " the complement," that which is required to fill 
 up, to give fulness to Him that filleth all in all, we have a 
 paradox of an exceedingly harsh description. If, on the 
 other hand, we understand the jyleroina to mean " that which 
 is filled," we bring the phrase into harmony with similar 
 expressions in this epistle and in that to the Colossians, and 
 we obtain a thoroughly sober and self-consistent statement of 
 that truth which the apostle has been labouring to unfold. 
 See the admirable exposition of this clause, where the terms 
 are carefully analysed, in Von Soden, Hand'Commcntar, iii. 
 1, pp. Ill, 112. — There is also a noticeable parallelism 
 between the use of the idea of the Head in the former clause 
 and that of the fulness here. He who is Head over all is 
 Head to the Church, and He who filleth all filleth the Church. 
 The members of the Church, which is His body, say, " Of His 
 
172 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 fulness have we received." By the knowledge of the love of 
 Christ, they become filled with the fulness of God. — The use 
 of the middle voice, irXrjpovfievov, serves to indicate the 
 nature of that filling which results from His presence. He 
 fills with Himself. "I will come in to Him " (Rev. iii. 20). 
 It is His own fulness that fills. It is of the nature of His 
 grace to fill man's soul as nothing else can do ; empty till it 
 receives Him, but then filled. Such filling again can result 
 only in the case of those who receive Him. He stands at 
 the door and knocks till the door is opened, and then He 
 goes in and fills the soul. Those who receive Him become 
 members of His body, and then His indwelling presence, the 
 influence issuing from the Head, yields inci'ease in every 
 part.^ 
 
 (2) 0/ God's Power operating in the Believer (chap. ii. 1-10). 
 
 Vers. 1-10. Connection and Contents. — This new portion 
 is closely connected with that immediately preceding. The 
 subject of tlie apostle's devotional meditation, into which he 
 
 ^ Meyer, Commentary on Ephesians and Philemon, pp. 82-88, Ediii. 1880, 
 in his usual clear and masterly way, insists upon the rendering of pleroma by 
 " that which is filled." He then enumerates m detail seven different conflict- 
 ing interpretations of our passages that liave been proposi-d, each of them 
 supported more or less by famous and capable exegetes. Meyer also very con- 
 cisely states his objections to each of those varying modes of interpretation. 
 In his essay on "The Gospel of the Creation " in his Commentary on Epistles of 
 St. John, p. 309, Lond. 1883, Westcott expresses himself in favour of taking 
 'irXripauf^Uou as passive. — By far the ablest and most elaborate attempt to estab- 
 lish the other rendering of the word pleroma is made by Pfieiderer, Paulhiism, 
 ii. 172-176, Lond. 1877. His contention is that Colossians and Ephesians must 
 have proceeded from different authors, that apparently Colossians was used by 
 the writer of Ephesians, but that its ideas were modified by him by having 
 new terms and applications given them, and by having its words and phrases 
 often used in entirely different senses. This he illustrates at some length from 
 the use of the word pleroma in Colossians and in Ephesians. In Colossians, 
 Pfieiderer maintains, ple^'oma has a constant meaning given it. There it 
 always means " that which is filled." But in Ephesians its meaning fluctuates. 
 He thinks that Eph. i. 22 evidently refers to Col. i. 18, 19; but while in 
 Colossians pleroma signifies "that which is filled," in Ephesians it signifies 
 " the filling up, the completing " of Him who fiUeth all in all. So again, in the 
 rtlated passages. Col. ii. 9 and E]ih. iii. 19, we have in the one case a 
 dogmatical dcidaration, and in the other an ethical ideal. See a fuller dis- 
 cussion of this question in my article, "The use of the word Pleroma in 
 Ej)hesians and Colossians," in Expositor, 2ud Series, iv. 462-472. 
 
CHAP. ir. 1-10. 173 
 
 passes while reporting to the Ephesians the contents of his 
 prayer on their behalf, without any formal intimation of his 
 change of theme, is the ])o\ver of God exercised toward us. 
 The manifestation of this power is directed, first of all, to 
 Christ, and in vers. 20-2.'> of the first chapter, as we have 
 seen, the apostle shows liow God had given expression to the 
 power in Christ, by raising Him from the dead and exalting 
 Him to tlie place of supreme power in the universe and over 
 the Church. He has ah-eady indicated, in ver. 19, that this 
 power was " to usward who believe ; " and now, after dwelling 
 upon the instances of God's power in His operation in Christ, 
 he resumes his statement regarding the ultimate destination 
 of this work of God's power. The thought of the opening 
 verses of the second chapter is thus immediately connected 
 with that of the 19tli verse of the preceding chapter. The 
 grammatical connection is more difficult. Harless and some 
 others have regarded the relation between the first verse of 
 the second chapter and the last verse of the first chapter as 
 so intimate, that they have felt warranted in removing the 
 full stop from the end of the first chapter and substituting a 
 simple comma.^ But, as Meyer rightly remarks, had the 
 connection been so close as this, we must have had " us " and 
 not " you " in the continuation of the sentence. The change 
 from the first person to the second indicates the beginning of 
 a new period, in which the apostle calls upon his readers to 
 consider that this wonderful exhibition of God's power in 
 Christ is of direct and personal interest to themselves. — In 
 order to heighten their appreciation of the riclies of divine 
 grace, in this forthputting of His power on their belialf, the 
 apostle introduces a digression wdiich breaks up the construc- 
 tion of his sentence. He desires to impress his hearers with 
 a due sense of the t>reatness of Clod's work in them, from a 
 consideration of what had to l)e done in order to raise them 
 
 1 Xot very different from this is the view of Moiiod, Ex/iftcatioi) de L'£pi(re 
 de Saint Paul aux iphtukn-, p. 71, Paris 1867: "One single idea reign.s 
 from i. 15 to ii. 10, and we may say one single sentence down to the end of 
 the seventh verse. That is the first place where we can insert a full stop, 
 according to our ordinary system of punctuation. At the end of i. 19 there 
 ought to have been a simple comma, and at the end of the first chapter a 
 semicolon." 
 
174 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIE3IANS. 
 
 to sucli heights. Even before, in introducing the verb which 
 shall indicate the nature of God's work on the subject of His 
 grace, the apostle gives, in vers. 1—3, an elaborate description 
 of the condition and manner of life of man out of Christ. 
 Then, in vers. 4-7, he reconstructs his sentence in resuming 
 his main theme. So far as the logical development of the 
 apostle's thought is concerned, vers. 1-3 might be thrown into 
 a parenthesis, and ver. 4 immediately joined to i. 23. What 
 God really had in view was our quickening, resurrection, and 
 spiritual exaltation. This was indeed indispensable to us, 
 seeing that we were dead in sins, but it could be accomplished 
 for us only by Christ taking His place alongside of us as we 
 lay under the curse, and taking us up with Him through the 
 successive stages of quickening, resurrection, and exaltation, 
 all of which we can experience and enjoy only together with 
 Him. All this, which is now in process of accomplishment, 
 will, when finished in the future perfected kingdom of God, 
 prove the most glorious exhibition of the riches of divine 
 grace. And finally, by way of supplement, in vers. 8-10, he 
 enlarges upon the thought already present, that all this in us 
 is wholly of God, that the believer owes all to God, and most 
 distinctly that new nature and disposition from which proceed 
 those good works, the performance of which on our part is 
 XDart of God's eternal plan. 
 
 Ver. 1. And you hath He quickened, who were dead in trespasses 
 and sins. — The apostle uses the figure dead, to characterise the 
 condition of man out of Christ. In this connection, too, 
 death is the wages of sin. He does not speak of man's 
 liability to death. It is not said that a sentence is pending, 
 but that sentence has been passed and executed. The apostle 
 does not say that men are dead, and that they continue in the 
 state of death simply because their present life is a sinful 
 one. For the death of which he speaks is spiritual death. 
 The powers and inclinations of man are dead, so far as activity 
 in the direction of God and holiness is concerned. But this 
 is conceived of as evidence of a judicial sentence. It is not 
 said here to consist in, but to result from, sinning. The soul 
 that sins dies. It is sin that kills. — No real distinction can be 
 insisted upon liere between the word trespasses (TrapaTTTw/xara) 
 
CHAP. II. 2. 175 
 
 and sins (a/xapTiai). Attempts have been made to distin- 
 guish those two words. Jerome supposed irapaTrruyfiara to 
 be sinful suggestions occurring to the mind, more or less 
 acquiesced in and welcomed ; d/xapTiai to be tiiose inclina- 
 tions developed into overt acts. Augustine defined the 
 ibrmer as sins of omission or sins of ignorance and rashness ; 
 the latter as sins actually or knowingly committed. Olshausen 
 thinks that d/xapTiac denote not decidedly sinful deeds, like 
 -TTapaTTTcofiaTa, but rather sinful movements of the soul in 
 desires and words. Eadie suggests a reference in irapainct)- 
 fiara to the desires of the flesh, and in dpapriat, to tlie desires 
 of the mind. But it is clear that in Scripture Trapd'Trrcop.a 
 cannot be thus restricted. Of the best known writers on New 
 Testament synonyms, Tittmann distinguishes the words very 
 much in the style of Augustine; while Trench, SynonTjins, p. 247, 
 denies any real difference between them, and calls attention 
 to the equivalence of the two in Heb. vi. 6 {TrapuTreacov) and 
 Heb. X. 26 (afxapravtov). Etymologically, the words are 
 almost identical in their meaning, indicating as they do, in the 
 one case, falling by the side of, and, in the other, missing the 
 mark. As Fritzsche says of TrapaTncofxa and dfjLdprijfia, they 
 differ " in figure not in force," and, as we n)ay see, the differ- 
 ence in figure is not material. The use of the two words in 
 our verse may be regarded as an instance of rhetorical 
 reiteration for the sake of emphasis. In Rom. v. 20 our two 
 words are used in practically the same sense, for the one sin 
 of Adam, and the many sins of his descendants, are regarded 
 simply as similar acts of disobedience to a divine command. 
 
 Ver. 2. Wherein in time past ye ivalkcd. — This phrase de- 
 scribes the sphere in which those out of Christ live. They are 
 dead to God and holiness, but alive and active in the service of 
 sin and Satan. Those trespasses and sins which have killed 
 the soul form the sphere, mark out the range within which, to 
 continue the paradox, the dead soul lives and moves. Walk- 
 ing indicates a continued operation and permament state. It 
 may also suggest the idea of voluntariness, the absence of 
 constraint and compulsion. Inclination goes so much in the 
 same direction, that those who are out of Christ confine them- 
 selves within the limits of the prescribed range, witliout any 
 
176 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 consciousness of effort. No farther proof of spiritual deadness 
 is needed than the fact of such a walk. — Those who thus 
 walk have placed themselves under the direction of two 
 guides, essentially and ultimately one, yet here distinguished. 
 Accordin/j to the course of this uwld. — Thus does the apostle 
 designate the first guide of the natural man. The word 
 " course " {aloiv) is usually rendered " age!' Its original 
 nieaning was duration, a course or period of time, e.g. a life- 
 time. Then it obtained a wider and less definite application 
 to any long period, and, by and by, to a period of unlimited 
 or undefined duration. In the Xew Testament it is employed 
 to denote a dispensation in the wide sense of the term, and, 
 when particularised by the addition of " this " {ovTo<i), or " to 
 come " (fieWcov), must be rendered " this world or age," " the 
 world or age to come." These terms w-ere applied respect- 
 ively to the period that ends at the last judgment, and to 
 the period that follows that great crisis. But as allusions 
 were made to this distinction of ages, usually in order to call 
 attention to the diverse moral characteristics by which they 
 were distinguished from one another, the phrase " this world " 
 or " this age " came to mean a period of moral corruption or 
 depravity, of estrangement from and enmity toward God ; 
 while the phrase " the world or age to come " indicates the 
 period of moral perfection and heavenly piety. Hence the 
 word which had primarily a reference simply to time and 
 duration, and so was rendered " age," came to have a reference 
 to the moral condition of those living in that age, and so was 
 appropriately enough rendered " course." So completely does 
 this spiritual meaning of the phrase take the place of the 
 earlier literal and temporal sense, tliat instead of the contrast 
 of " this world " and " the world to come," we get rather that 
 of " this workl " and Christ's kingdom that is not of " this 
 world," and yet is even here and now set up in the world 
 and is drawing men into it. — In our text, indeed, "this" is 
 joined to " u'orld" (K6(T/j,o<i) and not to "course" (alcov). But 
 these two words form one phrase, which the definite pronoun 
 " this " serves to particularise as the present fashion of the 
 world, which is enmity against God. It is in accordance 
 with " this world's " course, this world's code of maxims and 
 
CHAP. II. 2. 177 
 
 rules, that the man dead in trespasses and sins regulates and 
 orders his walk and conversation. Tliis " course " varies from 
 age to age, and is modified, in regard to details, by surround- 
 ing circumstances ; l)ut it is always true to the essential 
 characteristics of the world which is alienated from God, and 
 stands in opposition to His law of holiness. — This "course of 
 the world " is that according to which the Ephesians had in 
 time past walked. Just as there are laws and ordinances of 
 God ever green in the hearts of men, or written in the book 
 which is the recognised rule and standard for the guidance of 
 those who fear God, so there are maxims and precepts 
 deduced from the corrupt customs of worldly society, and 
 from the wicked practices of godless men, which have come 
 to constitute a code of laws for the regulation and direction 
 of the men of the world. As the phrase is immediately asso- 
 ciated with the following clause, we may admit that the apostle 
 here approaches somewhat toward the conception of a personal 
 Aeon, a spiritual being whose thought and feeling are ex- 
 pressed in the moral and spiritual tendencies of the present 
 age. Thus the way is prepared for the clause that follow.3. 
 But this is something very different from the elaborate and 
 systematised Aeon-doctrine even of the earlier Gnostics. The 
 parallel is rather with chap. i. 21 than with the following 
 clause. 
 
 Accorduig to the prince of the iioicer of the air. — Thus does 
 the apostle designate the other guide of the life of the natural 
 man. "We have suggested a comparison between the course 
 of the world in relation to the worldly, and the sacred Bible 
 in relation to the godly ; and here we may compare the 
 prince of the power of the air, as the natural man's guide, 
 with the Holy Spirit of God as the guide of the believer. — 
 The name here given to the arch-enemy is peculiar. Taking 
 the phrase as a whole, it reminds us of various similar phrases 
 used in the Xew Testament Scripture. The rank of prince is 
 given to Satan very generally, with the addition of certain 
 defining and qualifying terms. He is the prince of demons 
 (Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24, etc.) ; prince of the world, of all that 
 is not in sympathy with God (John xii. ol, xiv. 30, xvi. 11). 
 In the Ignatian Epistle to the Ephesians, xix. 1, and to the 
 
 M 
 
178 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Magnesians, i. 6, he is called the prince of this age or course 
 of things (6 apx^^ '^^^ alcovo'i toutov). The prince of dark- 
 ness was the name given by Manichseus to the God of the 
 Jews as the primal source of evil. — The close connection 
 between this prince and ourselves appears in this, that his 
 domain is that element by which we are closely surrounded. 
 It is, indeed, the lower and denser atmosphere, yet not to be 
 rendered darkness, which is the ultimate abode of devils. It 
 is the atmosphere of death in which the dead walk.^ This 
 domain of the prince of evil is lower than heaven and higher 
 than the earth. Such a region befits the hosts of the spiritual 
 ruler. While under divine control and subservient to His 
 will, so that they share not in the attributes of Deity — omni- 
 potence, omniscience, omnipresence, etc. — they are superior 
 to man in that they are not restrained by the trammels of 
 sense and matter. Their being, however, is represented as 
 something unsubstantial — that is, always craving for a fulness 
 that can be obtained only by entrance into the being of some 
 other creature ; if out of man, then they will rather enter into 
 the unclean swine than go forth into dry and empty places.^ 
 — Their " power " (i^ovaLa) is not only exercised in the air, 
 in the region above and around the earth, but it is of a 
 character corresponding to the atmosphere in which they live 
 and move. They are not pure spirits, but spirit-like as the 
 wind is, and are then described as possessed of a certain 
 physical element. See Hahn, Die Thcologie des New Testa- 
 ment, ip. 327. So Belial is styled in the Testaments of the 
 Twelve Patriarchs (Levi, chap, iii.), to aipvov Trvev/xa. Yet 
 undoubtedly it is the locality rather than the character and 
 being of pure evil spirits that is intended to be made pro- 
 
 1 "Without any perceptible noise or effort, you breathe the air and live 
 thereby ; but more noiselessly, without awaking the slightest suspicion of their 
 presence, designing spirits enter your souls, kindle desire, and lead forth thought 
 according to their will " (Pulsford, Chri'it and His Seed, p. 52). 
 
 2 Martensen, Dogmatics, pp. 186-203, presents a singularly rich and sug- 
 gestive, yet soberly speculative account of superhuman evil. "The demons lie 
 in wait continually for the opportunity to return again to the world of man, 
 and to set up their abode tliere. Or they remain in the air (Eph. ii. 2) in the 
 undetermined, unformed element ; and this mode of expression shows that, 
 apart from the world of man, they have only an empty being " (p. 196). Comp. 
 Punier, System of Doctrine, iii. 91. 
 
CHAP. II. 2. 179 
 
 iiiinent here. The Book of Enoch, chap. xv. 10 Il,phices 
 the spirits of giants and demons in the clouds. Comp. also, 
 Philo, De G'lgantibus, i, 263 ; Ascensio Isaicc, vii. 9, x. 2 9-31, 
 in which the firmaineni is described as the dwelling-place of 
 the chief demon Sammaiil, and a region of demonic strife. 
 Origen, also, Exhortatio ad MarfijritLiu, chap, xlv., })laces the 
 demons in the heavy atmosphere around the earth, where 
 they subsist upon the vapour rising from the blood and 
 incense of heathen offerings. This general idea of the loca- 
 tion of the demons in the immediate proximity of tlie earth 
 and man, is common to Pythagoreanism, later Judaism, and 
 early Christianity. See this clause admirably and fully dis- 
 cussed in Everling, Die Paulinische Angelologie unci DduLonologie, 
 pp. 105-109, 1888. — How Paul came upon this conception 
 has been much debated. Dale and other popular expositors 
 have adopted, apparently without much consideration, the 
 opinion of Meyer, that the apostle carried this conception over 
 from his pre-Christian Jewish rabbinic circle of ideas into 
 the contents of his Chiistian belief. Ellicott, Harless, 01s- 
 hausen rightly reject this supposition. In the writings of 
 the rabbis, we have no settled and generally accepted con- 
 sistent theory on the subject, but only the vaguest and wildest 
 conceivable fancies and gross superstitions.^ Meyer, indeed, 
 claims only that Paul took from the rabbis the name for the 
 prince of the world ; but from what we have said above, there 
 seems no need to assume even this. — The iwwcr in the air 
 over which this prince rules is tiie whole aggregate of demonic 
 beings within the prescribed domain. The same word {e^ov- 
 <TLa) is used in Col, i. 13 in the phrase "the power of dark- 
 ness," where it is evidently placed in opposition to " the 
 kingdom. of God's dear Son." The "^wzrrr," we might say, 
 precisely means here authority or magisterial jurisdiction, the 
 magistracy collectively or as a whole, the host of beings wlio 
 wield authority in that region ruled over by the prince of this 
 world. 
 
 Of the spirit that now worheth in the children of disobedience. 
 — The genitive " of the spirit" is most naturally governed by 
 " the prince " of the preceding clause. Some prefer to make 
 
 ^ Eisenmenger, Eiulec/:te.<< Judenlhutn, ii. 437. 
 
180 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the new clause one purely of apposition, by supposing that 
 the apostle -svould have said " the spirit " in correlation to 
 " the prince," but for the attraction of the preceding genitives. 
 It would then read, " The prince who is the spirit," etc. It 
 seems better to take " of the spirit " as governed by " the 
 prince," and to read, " The prince of the spirit which worketh," 
 etc. In this case we must understand " tlie spirit " in a 
 generic sense, as that spiritual influence or set of influences 
 which operates in the disobedient. The prince there is the 
 active organiser and promoter of all influences and impulses 
 working in the souls of man against God and holiness. The 
 disobedient are thus described as under the dominion of evil 
 spirits. — The word disobedience {inraO^ia) is not mere unbelief, 
 but an aggravated and obtrusive result of it. This is its 
 meaning in all the New Testament passages in which it occurs 
 (Rom. xi. 30, 32; Heb. iv. 6, 11; Eph. ii. 2, v. 6). It is 
 unbelief in opposition to the gracioiiis purpose and word of 
 God. See Cremer, Biblico- Theological Lexicon, p. 476, 1878. 
 It implies obstinacy in evil, and determined refusal to ex- 
 tinguish it. The prince f)f the power of the air makes it his 
 end and aim to work in all his subjects this spirit of defiance 
 and persistent opposition against God. 
 
 Yer. 3. Among whom also we all had our conversation in times 
 jyast. — The apostle now gives to his statement the most general 
 application. Without thinking specially of the distinction of 
 Jews and Gentiles, he simply says that all men, without ex- 
 ception, had their place among the sons of disobedience. All 
 those who are now believer-s had been originally in the same 
 state of condemnation. He speaks here of the personal 
 character and conduct of those who are under the dominion 
 of the prince of the power of the air. " We all had our 
 conversation " (rjfiel'i iruvreq uveerrpdcfi'tj/xev) means precisel}'', 
 " We all behaved or conducted ourselves among the children 
 of disobedience," i.e. our conduct or manner of life was the 
 same as theirs. 
 
 In the lusts of our Jlesk — The word lust (eTridvfxia) is of 
 very frequent occurrence in the writings of St. Paul. It 
 means everywhere a strong, urgent craving for what is for- 
 bidden. In other passages, as well as in the words before us, 
 
CIIAl'. 11. 3. 1 8 L 
 
 it is used in the plural, with a genitive of that which excites 
 the sinful longing. So he speaks, iv. 22, of lusts of 
 deceit (iiridv/jLiai t?/? ttTrar?;?) ; Gal. v. IG, lust of the llesh 
 (eTTidufMLa aapKo<i)} The word Jlcsh (adp^) is often used for 
 the suft material substance that covers tlie bones in the 
 human body, and is thus used to define the body {aco/xa) as 
 material, when referred to in a natural and not a mystical 
 sense. Couip. to a-oy/jua tPj^ aapKo^ (Col. i. 22). While, 
 therefore, we can apply the designation of the body of Christ 
 mystically to the Church, we can use Jlcsli (a-dp^) only of the 
 natural body of his incarnation. When used in an ethical 
 sense, the word flesh, as both Luther and Melancthon clearly 
 perceived, is to be understood of the entire nature of man, 
 apart from God's Holy Spirit, embracing tlie soul and the 
 moral and intellectual faculties as well as the body. In 
 illustration of this, Grimm, in his Lcxikon, p. 5 71, under the 
 word Snp^, calls attention to the two precisely similar state- 
 ments of Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 5, "our flesh had no rest;" and 
 2 Cor. ii. 13, " I had no rest in my spirit."- Here, however, 
 the ethical idea is not present, and even had it been so the 
 case supposed is that of a spiritual man. It nevertheless 
 fairly indicates how " the flesh" is generally conceived of in 
 the New Testament diction. In its ethical use it is practically 
 equivalent to " the natural man." As Weiss, Biblical Theology 
 of the Ncvj Testament, ii. 77, says, " The natural adp^ is 
 human nature untouched by grace in general, and in this 
 sense it is the seat of sin." By the use of the phrase " our 
 flesh," the apostle makes his reference to fallen human nature 
 
 ^ Cremer, Blhlico- Theological Lexicon, p. 288, 1878, seems to me to be right 
 in saying that, as in classical Greek, the moral character of tlie WiHu/aia is 
 determined by its subject, if oidy we remember that it has, in all cases where 
 it is used in an ethical sense, that one subject, the lieshly heart at enmity with 
 God. Hence, where used absolutely, it invariably means a simple lust. 
 
 2 See Delitzsch, Biblical P.^ycholo(jy, pp. 433-4.09, esp. 439 f., Edin. 18G0 ; 
 Beck, Biblical Psychology, jyp. 20-21, Edin. 1877 ; Laidlaw, The Biblical 
 Doctrine of Man, pp. 74 ff., 373 f., Edin. 1879 ; Dickson, St. PauVs Use of the 
 terms Flesh and Spirit, Glas. 1883; Pfleiderer, Paulinism, pp. 47-67, Lond. 
 1877 ; Trench, Synonyms of the Neio Testament, pp. 268-275, 10th ed., Lond. 
 1886 ; Holsten, Zum Evangelium des Paulas und Petrns, Eostock 1867, in 
 a special section on the signification of the word 2a;| in the doctrinal system of 
 Paul, pp. 365-447. 
 
182 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIAXS. 
 
 as wide as possible, comprehending what is hidden and what 
 is manifest, what affects the higher parts of the nature, 
 as well as what affects the lower, both carnal and spiritual 
 sins. 
 
 Fulfillinj the lusts of the ficsh and of the mind. — The 
 change of phraseology in this new clause is brought out in 
 the Eevised Version by the use of a synonym for lusts : 
 " doing the desires {QeKruxara) of the flesh and of the mind." 
 We have met with this word already (i. 11), where we have 
 seen that it means the execution of a decision ai'rived at, or a 
 counsel thoroughly matured and deliberated upon, so as to 
 be ready for execution. Here it means an imperious will 
 urging vehemently to action. — The distinction is here made 
 between desires of the flesh and desires of the mind (hmvnid). 
 By the use of both terms, "flesh" and "mind." the apostle 
 emphasises the fact that the whole nature of man, higher as 
 well as lower, is under the dominion of powerful impulses in 
 a God-ignoring or a God-defying direction. It is the will of 
 the flesh as that of human nature, uninfluenced by God's 
 Spirit, that is being carried out, and to this end all the parts of 
 man's being contribute. The term "flesh" in the present clause 
 has thus a narrower meaning than in the previous clause. It 
 is here used to indicate the sensuous side of man's fallen 
 nature, as mind is used to indicate the spiritual side of that 
 nature. Both are under the same dominion of sin, and 
 together constitute that natural life in the flesh which is 
 enmity against God. The mind {hu'ivoia) is the faculty of 
 reflection intellectual and moral, the organ which receives 
 and expresses moral impulse, and as sucli it is capable of 
 enlightenment and of darkening (i. 18, iv. 18). But 
 the saving grace of God in Christ is that which alone can 
 enlighten it. Under the reign of sin it is darkened, and 
 while this reign continues it does itself contribute to the 
 intensifying of that darkness. All the reformed confessions 
 and catechisms teach, in strict accordance with the divine 
 Word, that the very highest powers of man are not only 
 enfeebled, but also defiled by sin. — It is not necessary to 
 supply " evil " before " thoughts," as Ellicott suggests, nor 
 with Delitzsch {Biblical Psychology, p. 219), to do violence 
 
CHAP. II. 3. 183 
 
 to the construction by saying that the thoughts (Bidvoia), like 
 the lusts (deXi'iiJiaTa), are determined by tlie flesh. The 
 thoughts are evil thoughts, and they are determined by the 
 flesh in the wider sense of that word, as explained above ; 
 but the evil of those thoughts results from this, that the 
 desires which dominate them are the desires of the corrupt 
 fallen nature of man. 
 
 And icerc hi/ nature the children of wrath, even as the rest. — 
 The apostle here simply states explicitly what is already 
 implied in liis previous utterances. In the previous part of 
 the verse the apostle had declared the universal fact of sin 
 as shown in its fruits, here he discovers the cause of that 
 universality in the possession of a common corrupt fallen 
 nature. The possession of such a nature makes us objects of 
 the divine displeasure. If we join together the words reKva 
 6pyy]<; they can have but one meaning, " objects of God's 
 wratli." — We nn'ght almost have proceeded on the assump- 
 tion tliat this combination of the words was nniversally 
 accepted, but another combination has been suggested and 
 commended, with such ingenuity and plausibility, as deserves 
 and will amply repay consideration. Ernesti ^ asserts that 
 the words reKva (pvaeL should be joined and understood as a 
 parenthetical clause, " though by nature children." The state- 
 ment would then be one in itself perfectly scriptural and 
 nnobjectionable, that sonship belonged to the Jews in virtue 
 of the covenant made with their forefathers. But when rjixeda 
 6pyf]<i is rendered " we were objects of wrath," it is evident 
 that some such term as reKva must be supplied. In that 
 case we introduce again the term which we had surrendered 
 for use in another connection, and this recognised need of it 
 here is a valid argument against such a surrender. We also 
 
 1 Ernesti, Dtr Unsprung der S'dnde nach Paulinhchen Leh-gehalte, Gbtt. 
 1862. His theory has met with general disfavour. It is discussed and 
 rejected by Meyer in his commentary on this passage, by Philippi, Kirchliche 
 Glaubenslehre, iii. 217-219, Stuttgart 1867 ; and by Miiller, Christian Doctrine. 
 of Sin, ii. 279, Edin. 1868 ; Davies, Ephesians, Colomam, and Philemon, 
 speaks of the rendering of 'opyr> by "animal impulse " as a tempting interpreta- 
 tion, riKva opytis " children of ungoverned impulse," but feels obliged to dismiss 
 it as at variance with Paul's habitual use of the word, as in v. 6, with 
 reference to the wrath of God because of sin. 
 
184 ' EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 find ourselves obliged to interject here the idea of adoption in 
 antithesis to that of natural descent, in a manner absolutely 
 opposed to the Pauline use of the idea, as illustrated by Rom. 
 ix. 4. Besides, the introduction of the parenthesis in question is 
 extremely awkward, and should be resorted to only if the con- 
 struction absolutely required it. On the contrary, the general 
 drift of the context evidently suggests the combination, not of 
 elvat, op'yfj'i but of TeKva 6pjrj<;, children of wrath, objects of 
 the divine displeasure. This is liow any one would naturally 
 read apart from a strong doctrinal prepossession. — Another 
 curious combination calls for consideration. When the com- 
 bination suggested by Ernesti has been set aside, there is still 
 one possible alternative remaining to set against the one 
 commonly received. When the question is put as to whose 
 wrath is spoken of by tlie apostle, all commentators, with one 
 exception, answer, God's wrath. Holzhausen (Dcr Brief au 
 die Eplicscr ilhersetzst unci erldilrt, 1883) understands this 
 wrath as proceeding from man's corrupt nature against God. 
 He regards nature ((pvat^) as meaning the natural life, making 
 it thus synonymous with the flesh in the sense of the life 
 of man, apart from God's Spirit. It has been shown con- 
 clusively by Harless (p. 174), and Meyer (p. 106) that ^ucri? 
 does not bear this meaning, that if it did it would still have 
 required the article, which is wanting in the text, and that 
 the only translation which even Holzhausen's examples 
 allow would be " wrath pertaining to the nature, or inborn 
 wrath." This combination being rejected, as well as that of 
 Ernesti, we are in a position to reaffirm the traditional group- 
 ing of the words, " by nature children of wrath," by nature 
 objects of the divine displeasure. 
 
 The main battle is waged over the meaning of the word 
 " nature." Special interest and occasional bitterness have 
 been imported into the discussion at this point, because of the 
 use often made of the phrase as a proof-text in favour of the 
 Church doctrine of original sin. — (1) We shall, first of all, seek 
 to settle the meaning of the word nature {(f)va-L<;). It properly 
 means that which forms the ground for the subsequent de- 
 velopment of any being, as opposed to additions that have 
 been made from without. That which has grown is by nature. 
 
CHAP. II. 3. 185 
 
 that which lias been made is by art. But that which is the 
 jiround of development is a presupposition of the earliest dawn 
 of life, and so " nature," as thus understood, means innate 
 qualities inherent in this being. So far as the mere word is 
 concerned, no other meaning seems to be required in all the 
 New Testament passages in which it occurs. Let the student 
 take Grimm's Lexicon and examine all the passages quoted, 
 which form a complete list of all the instances of its use in 
 the Kew Testament, and he will find that modifications of 
 meaning lie in the context, and not in any difference of 
 signification in the word itself. — (2) We next proceed to 
 consider what, according to the context, the nature of that 
 being is which is spoken of in our text. It is described as 
 tlie object of wrath, and that wrath is, as we have seen, the 
 wrath of God. Now it is evident that the nature of a pure 
 creature of God could not be the object of His wrath, but only 
 of His approval. Eut the being described in the passage 
 before us is a child of disobedience, dead through trespasses 
 and sins. The nature of such a being, which constitutes 
 the principle of his sinful development, is the object of the 
 divine wrath. " Nature," as thus contextually modified, is 
 practically equivalent to the sinful condition of fallen man. 
 But for this nature there would be no sinful development. 
 The first actual sin would be a monstiosity, an efiect without 
 a cause, but for the presupposition of the existence of this sin- 
 ful principle, this corrupt nature. — (3) AYhat distinction is 
 intended to be indicated by the use of the phrase "by 
 nature " ? What difference would it make if we were to read 
 simply, " We all were children of wrath as others " ? Many 
 expositors have understood the apostle, by the phrase " we all," 
 to make a pointed reference to himself and his Jewish fellow- 
 countrymen. Jewish Christians, as well as Gentile believers, 
 were formerly in a state of condenmation. I'roceeding on this 
 assumption of the significance of " we all," they explain the 
 phrase " by nature " by a reference to the Jewish national 
 privileges. The Jews had indeed the covenants of promise, 
 and to them had been committed the oracles of God, but even 
 they, until they had yielded themselves to God as members of 
 His spiritual kingdom, were, by reason of their sinful condition, 
 
186 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 objects of the divine wrath. This is tlie converse of Ernesti's 
 theory. He would say that the Jews, like all others, were by 
 nature children, but that they by wicked works had become 
 objects of wrath ; those maintaining tliis view now under con- 
 sideration say, "The Jews by outward privilej^e were children, 
 but by nature, like all others, they were children of wrath." 
 Others might even put it thus, " B}^ natural descent all of us 
 Jewish Christians were formerly in the same condemnation 
 with you Gentiles, from whom we were distinguished only by 
 laws and ordinances outwardly imposed." If this interpretation 
 could be sustained, the passage would, without more ado, be 
 removed from the list of proof-texts for the doctrine of 
 original sin. But we cannot admit the correctness of this 
 interpretation. There is no reason whatever for introducing 
 the distinction of Jews and Gentiles here. It was casually 
 introduced in chap. i. 12, 13, by a reference to the pre- 
 Christian Messianic hope by which the Jews were distinguished 
 from the Gentiles, and it is formally brought to the Iront in 
 vers. 11—22 of this chapter, but in our passage the apostle 
 simply affirms the absolutely universal prevalence among 
 men of the sinful condition. The " you " of ver. 1 are the 
 members of the church addressed, whether originally Jews or 
 Gentiles, and the " we all " of ver. 3 is no more than a self- 
 evident generalising of the earlier " you." ^ — (4) The proper 
 meaning of the whole phrase will be reached if we carefully 
 attend to the antithesis of " we all " and " the rest." The all 
 in the sense of all mankind comprises ''' we all," believers in 
 Christ, and " the rest," unbelievers. What makes " the rest " 
 to differ from '■' we all," is the want of faith. In times past 
 " we all " were like " the rest " in respect of unbelief. The 
 contrast then is that suggested by chap. i. 4, 5, between the 
 
 ^ Eadie stands almost alone in maintaining this view. De Wette under- 
 stands the "we" as referring to those who had been for a considerable time 
 believers in Christ, and so holds by the idea of a contrast between the "we " and 
 the "you." Ellicott understands by "we all" a reference to both Jews and 
 Gentiles — all of us, reclaimed Jews and converted Gentiles. Such emphasising 
 of the different elements seems uncalled for, but the interpretation practically 
 yields that general reference for which we plead. On the other hand, Heirless, 
 Meyer, Olshausen, and other distinguished commentators, refer the " we," 
 in defiance of the added "all," to the Jewish Christians exclusively. 
 
ciiAr. II. 3. 187 
 
 children of God's love and the cliihh'en of God's wrath. The 
 ultimate ground of this contrast lies in God having chosen us 
 in love, and having thus made us to differ from " the rest," 
 who by nature were the same. Up to the time of their con- 
 version there was no diflerence. The contrast then is between 
 nature and grace ; by nature children of wrath, by grace are 
 ye saved (ver. 5). — (5) Starting from this point, Hofmann main- 
 tains that the term " nature " in our text cannot legitimately 
 be regarded as inborn, inherited condition involving guilt 
 apart from any consequent development. As contrasted with 
 grace, nature is indeed nothing more than a sinful condition ; 
 but the fact that it is a universal condition necessitates our 
 assuming a corresponding principle antecedent to any 
 manifestation of sin in the life. This difiiculty besets all 
 who seek to stop short of a full acceptance of the Church 
 doctrine of original sin, by defining nature as a sinful state, 
 and not as a sinful principle originating that state, and 
 present from birth in all men. Thus Meyer, who endeavouis 
 laboriously to prove that the apostle does not here refer to 
 inborn sinfulness and guilt, as exposing man from his birth to 
 God's wrath, maintains that the childship of wrath, by which 
 all in unbelief are characterised, is here defined as their 
 nature (0vo-t<?), which, therefore, means simply natural con- 
 stitution. This, too, is the view of Daehne, Entvjickelung clcs 
 Faulinischen Lchrhcgriffs, p. Q)^, 1835. But it is admitted, 
 both by Meyer and by Daehne, that the fact of universal 
 sinfulness can be accounted for only on the supposition tliat 
 all men are born with a sinful principle in them, by the 
 development of which the whole subsequent sinful life is 
 produced, only they say that the apostle here does not make 
 the possession of this principle, but the actual sins proceeding 
 from it, as detailed in the preceding verses, the object of his 
 wrath. On the other hand, the rationalistic Kiickert, inter- 
 preting, as he says, for no system, the careful and dispassionate 
 Harless, and the penetrating and spiritual Olshausen, all 
 maintain that, unless we do violence to the plain meaning of 
 the apostle's language, we must understand him to teach that 
 we are born into the world with a sinful nature, and that, as 
 bearers of that nature, before we have done any sinful act 
 
18S EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 (that is, any act at all, for every act of such a nature is sinful), 
 we are objects of the divine wrath. This is certainly the 
 natural interpretation of Eom. v. 12—19, and the present 
 passage, and is in harmony with the whole drift of Pauline 
 theology. Nothing whatever seems to be gained by the 
 refinements of Meyer. The real mystery lies not in the 
 attaching of guilt to the presence of the sinful principle, 
 which even Meyer admits to exist in the new-born child, 
 so that it makes its appearance in act so soon as the child is 
 ahlc to sin, but in the very presence of a principle that secures 
 such a history. It appears to us absolutely certain that 
 Paul's teaching here and all through his epistles is that God 
 has concluded all under unbelief, in order that all may he 
 brought within the range of His offered salvation. 
 
 Those styled before " children of disobedience " are here 
 styled in consequence " children of ivrath." Though it is not 
 specificall}^ named in our text the wrath of God, the explicit 
 statement in chap. v. 6, where it is said that the wrath of God 
 Cometh upon the children of disobedience, is suificient proof 
 of the apostle's meaning. There is a strong aversion on the 
 part of many modern theologians, and still more on the part 
 of modern religious writers, to admit the reality of any 
 " wrath of God." The love of God, according to a current 
 superficial view, is supposed to exclude the idea of wrath. 
 Yet the New Testament is full of references to the divine 
 wrath. " He that believeth not is condemned already, and the 
 wrath of God abideth on him " (John iii. 36). The same 
 apostle, too, speaks of the wrath of the Lamb, just because He 
 is the perfect revealer of God, and represents all the aspects of 
 the divine character. It is " a quality essential to a perfect 
 nature," and as such is found in God the Father and in Jesus 
 Christ the Lamb of God.^ That wrath to which the children 
 of disobedience are exposed is the sentence of the just and 
 holy God upon sin. It is equivalent to that death which has 
 passed upon all who have sinned. The children of wrath, 
 when they have sinned away their opportunities, being found 
 finally impenitent, become vessels of wrath (Eom. ix. 22), but 
 
 1 See Nicoll, " The Wrath of the Lamb," The Lamb of God, p. 109 sq.. 
 Loud. 1884. 
 
CHAP. II. 3. 189 
 
 this state is not renched by any one until, by his obdurate 
 refusal to repent and believe, he has " fitted himself to 
 destruction." One of the most complete and judicious 
 expositions of this subject is that of Goodwin in liis Un- 
 regenerate Man's Guiltiness before, God, Bk. xiii. chap. iii. 
 {Works, vol. X, pp. 496-501). An admirable exposition of 
 the apostle's meaning is also given by Weiss, BiUleal Tlteology 
 of the New Testament, ii. 4, in opposition to the misunder- 
 standings of Beyschlag and Pfleiderer. A proper conception 
 of the love of God, the liighteous One, toward the world in 
 which there is unrighteousness, necessarily involves the idea 
 of His wrath, which is nothing else than holy love checked 
 and hindered in its outflow. " This restrained manifestation 
 of love, which in one aspect of it may be designated wrath, in 
 another aspect is called grief or distress in the Holy Spirit of 
 love, and wrath is thus turned into compassion. It is only 
 when this wrath of God is allowed that any mention can be 
 made of his compassion." ^ This distinguishes the Scripture 
 doctrine of the wrath of God from the notions of heathen 
 writers regarding the anger of the gods as mere envy and 
 jealousy of men. In the one case, the constraining was love of 
 holiness, seeking its diffusion and emancipation ; in the other, 
 it was indifference as to the happiness of man or positive 
 hatred of the race. The wrath of God consumes only what is 
 ht for burning and for notliing else, only what has fitted itself 
 to destruction. — Attention is called by Goodwin ( Works, vol. 
 iii. p. 314) to the important difference between a child of 
 vjrath and a child wider wrath, the latter being the case of a 
 child of God, chastised and vexed in his spirit by the Father 
 of his spirit (Heb. xii 9) in the interest of his spiritual life. 
 
 An extremely violent but quite uncalled for attack has 
 been made by Dr. Dale {Epistle to the Ephesians, pp. 162, 
 168) upon the Calvinistic doctrine of the Westminster 
 Confession and the Thirty-nine Articles, in connection with 
 the interpretation of this phrase. Neither the passages 
 which he quotes from those two documents, nor an}' other 
 statements in them, support his sweeping assertion (p. 162), 
 
 ^ Martensen, Chrutian Doffmatics, pp. 303-306, Edin. 186G. Comn. also, 
 Mlillcr, Christian Doctrine of Sin, pp. 247-248, Ediu. 1863. 
 
190 EnSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 that they teach that " by our mure, birth we incur the divine 
 anger, and that, a'part from any vohmtary wrong-doing, we 
 are under the divine curse." Those symbolical writings, like 
 all other similar works, do not consider the case of original 
 sin apart from actual sin. Original sin can have no meaning 
 for us except when thought of in connection with that for 
 which it supplies an origin. What has to be accounted for 
 is the absolute universality of human sin. How is it that 
 every human being born into the world commits sin ? Paul 
 answers this in our text by saying that all alike, Jews and 
 Gentiles, have the same sinful nature. They are thus all of 
 them objects of the divine wrath, not apart from their sinful 
 lives, but as possessors of a nature tliat manifests itself in 
 acts of sin. This, says Dr. Dale, is not the doctrine either of 
 Christ or of Paul. According to Dale, nature in the language 
 of Paul is opposed to grace, as the natural is opposed to the 
 supernatural, and those who are in a state of nature are living 
 their own life without the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. 
 They have broken the law written in their hearts, and by 
 their own acts have separated themselves from God, and so 
 have become " children of wrath." This terrible destiny, he 
 says, was, according to Paul, their inheritance not by birth 
 but by choice. On the contrary, Paul discovers the reason 
 for the universality of sin, and its consequent curse, in the 
 fact that it is the inheritance of all men by birth and by choice. 
 It is quite true to say that every one makes choice of sin. 
 Dr. Dale deliberately refuses to go further, and labours hard 
 to show that Paul refuses to go further. But we hold that 
 in our text Paul does go further, and that he offers an 
 explanation of the fact that the same choice is made by all. 
 They are all dead to God through trespasses and sins, and 
 they have all trespassed and sinned because all have this 
 sinful nature. The nature is, therefore, evidently something 
 antecedent to all sinful acts consequent upon the sinful 
 choice. And hence EUicott, though certainly under the 
 influence of no dogmatic prejudice in favour of a severe appli- 
 cation of the phrase, feels himself obliged in fairness to admit 
 that the connection shows that the doctrinal references must 
 imply M'hat is innate, and that " the clause contains au 
 
CHAP. II. 3. 191 
 
 indirect, and therefore even more convincing, assertion of 
 that profound truth," tlie doctrine of original sin. Dr. Dale's 
 own explanation of Paul's use of the term " nature " is 
 singularly unfortunate and unsatisfactory. If we take his 
 language in its evident sense, it is the adoption on his own 
 part, and the ascription to Paul, of a limited antithetical use 
 of the word " nature," such as a careful reading of the epistles 
 must emphatically refute. All recognised exponents of 
 Pauline doctrine agree that with Paul " by nature " means 
 originating in man's — that is, fallen man's — constitution, 
 with which (in a more or less developed state) he is born. 
 Nature is opposed to grace, not as the natural to the super- 
 natural, but as the first birth to the second. 
 
 One other point in regard to this clause calls for notice. 
 The positicni of the words " by nature " ((fivaei) between the 
 words " children " and " of truth," has been thought by some, 
 e.g. Ellicott, to make this phrase unemphatic, so that it should 
 not be regarded as marking an important addition to the 
 preceding clause. Philippi, Glaiibenslehre, iii. 216, on the 
 understanding tliat the apostle by the " ye " of the first verse, 
 and the " we " of our text, intends to mark the distinction 
 between Gentiles and Jews, thinks that the position of ^vaei 
 indicates its introduction as an after-thought, and that its 
 insertion at the beginning of the clause would have implied 
 that the Jews were by nature only, and not by wicked works, 
 children of wrath. As we have already said, we cannot admit 
 that any such distinction can be found in our passage when 
 rightly interpreted. The contrast is simply believers and 
 unbelievers, we all and the rest. With this connection, we 
 accept Philippi's view of the unsuitableness of placing the 
 phrase " by nature " at the beginning of the clause. The 
 apostle wishes to connect actual and original sin, the fruit 
 and the root, and to show that this connection renders those 
 who are under it the children of wrath. 
 
 The term has been admirably dealt with by Chrysostom 
 and by Augustine. In his Homilies on Uj^fhesians, p. 138, 
 ed. 1840, Chrysostom says, "As he who is a child of man 
 is by nature man, so also were we children of wrath even as 
 others, i.e. no one was free, but we all did things worthy of 
 
192 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 wrath." It was evidently intended as an explanation of the 
 universal fact of sin. He connects the words " by nature," 
 not with " we were," but with '' children," to prevent any 
 concluding that men were by nature under wrath, in the 
 sense that Adam had been so created by God. Nature here, 
 Chrysostom would remind us, is our actual fallen nature as 
 we have it from Adam, who sinned. So too Augustine, 
 Bdrad. i. 15 ; De, Libera Arhitrio, iii. 54. 
 
 Modern science, and a moderate sensible Calvinism, are at 
 one in maintaining the solidarity of the race, and the trans- 
 mission of hereditary characteristics. Though individually 
 we are responsible only for individual acts, these acts are 
 really revelations of the race character which has given a bias 
 to our lives and conduct. " We must begin," it has been 
 said in an admirable and thoughtful book, only too little 
 known {Enigma Vitce, by John Wilson, Lond. 1887, p. 231, 
 comp. generally 220-235, "The Eace-ISTature and New-Christ- 
 Nature "), " we must begin with the perception of personal 
 guilt, and through that we see what human nature is, and 
 what Christ needed to do for it. Conviction of sin goes 
 deeper than the recognition of personal acts of sin ; it makes 
 us see that this race-nature which we have inherited is guilty, 
 condemned, and dead to its true life, the life in God for 
 which it was meant. Into that nature we were born, and we 
 cannot by our own power get out of it." 
 
 Ver. 4. But God being rich in mercy. — We have here the 
 contrast introduced. The apostle has shown what man is, 
 what all men are out of Christ in their natural state, and 
 now he proceeds to show what God has done, and what a 
 change this has produced. A new start is here made with a 
 new construction. The source of all the blessings of salvation 
 is in God Himself. The riches of His mercy explains all 
 that follows. In proportion as the sinfulness of sin, and the 
 misery of lying under the disfavour of God, are seen and felt, 
 will the mercy of God which deals with such sin and misery 
 be recognised as rich. So in Ps. li. 1, where the Psalmist 
 has intense conviction of the greatness of his sin, and in 
 Ps. Ixix. 13-16, where the writer feels keenly the misery 
 pf his isolation amid his cruel enemies, the cry is raised tO' 
 
CHAP. II. 5. 193 
 
 God that He should show " the greatness of His tender 
 mercies." Mercy, eXeo?, is compassion, the special manifesta- 
 tion of love when its objects are the miserable, as grace, 
 %a/3i9, is the exercise of favour towards the guilty. Bengal 
 sa.ys,Gmtia tollit cnlpam miser icordia miseriam. The pitying 
 love of God for sinners is His mercy, and the giving of His 
 Son for their salvation is His (frace. " It is true that the same 
 persons are the subjects of both, by being at once tlie guilty 
 and the miserable ; yet tlie righteousness of God, which it is 
 quite as necessary should be maintained as His love, demands 
 that the guilt should be done away with before the misery can 
 he assuaged ; only the forgiven may be blessed. He must 
 pardon before He can heal ; men must be justified before 
 they can be sanctified." ^ And as the mercy and the grace 
 have the same recipients, so He who is rich in mercy 
 manifests also the riches of His grace (chaps, i. 7, ii. 7). 
 
 Moved l)ij His greed love wlierewith He loved us. — The use of 
 " us " here is fitted to confirm our understanding of the " you " 
 of ver. 1, and the " we " of ver. 3. Also the use in ver. 5 
 of " ye " in the parenthetic clause, supports the idea that the 
 " you " of ver. 1 is intended not to separate them into a 
 special class, but to arouse the personal attention and interest 
 of his readers. The " us " of our text is plainly the whole 
 company of believers. Gnd is not moved to love us by His 
 pity, but He is moved to pity us by His love. In all that God 
 does He is simply satisfying the most characteristic attribute 
 of His being. He glorifies His love, he makes it known as 
 "great'' {hta ttjv TroWrjv ayuTrrjv aurov), when He saves 
 sinners. Precisely the same phrase is used by the Lord in 
 John xvii. 26 of the Father's love to Him, which, by His 
 revelation of God to the disciples, would also be in them. 
 The special display of love meant here is, therefore, the whole 
 work of Christ's atoning sacrifice (so Meyer). God pitied man's 
 misery, and because His love was great, even the unspeakable 
 costliness of the remedy did not lead Him to withhold relief. 
 
 Yer. 5. IVe heivg still dead hy trespasses. — Here we have 
 reiteration of a clause from ver. 1, brought in for the purpose 
 of securing the undivided praise of man's salvation to God's 
 
 1 Trench, Synonyms of the Ntw Testament, lOth ed., p. 171, Lond. 1886. 
 
 N 
 
194 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 grace. Before there was anything attractive in iis His love 
 moved Him. Meyer would mark the connection by a simple 
 " and " {kch 6vTa<i rj/J-a^), understanding the purpose of the 
 clause to be that man's great need was a motive alongside of 
 God's great love for His imparting spiritual life to us by 
 Christ. Ellicott renders "even while wc icere dead," and under- 
 stands the purpose of the clause to be the heightening of the 
 greatness of God's love that quickened even the dead. To this 
 Meyer's objection is fatal, that only the dead need quickening. 
 But Meyer's own interpretation is contrary to the teaching of 
 the whole passage, which evidently is meant to point to God 
 Himself, and nothing outside of Him, as the source of man's 
 salvation. The apostle recapitulates his statement regarding 
 man's spiritual deadness, in order to impress us forcibly with 
 tlie impossibility of man contributing anything to the work.'^ 
 
 Quickened us togetlier ivith Christ. — The most important 
 question here is the determining of the nature of the 
 quickening referred to. The only distinguished conmientator 
 who understands the quickening in a physical sense is 
 ]\Ieyer, He interprets it to mean the immortality which is 
 secured to us by Christ's being made alive ; what is accom- 
 plished in Him is already for that reason accomplished 
 in those who are His. The great majority of commentators 
 rmderstand the statement of our text to refer to spiritual 
 quickening. Lightfoot {Colossictns, ed. 5th, p. 186, 1880, on 
 Col. ii. 13) is inclined to accept and combine both interpreta- 
 tions. " To St. Paul the future glorified life is only the 
 continuation of the present moral and spiritual life. The 
 two are the same in essence, however the accidents may differ. 
 ]\Ioral and spiritual regeneration is salvation, is life." This 
 statement, which is a repetition somewhat less guarded of 
 what Alford had said in his notes on oar passage, is no doubt 
 in itself doctrinally correct, and is in agreement with Ellicott's 
 remark that, along with the principal reference to the impart- 
 
 ^ Compare Weiss, Biblical Theology of the Nov Testament, ii. 110: "The 
 moral condition of heathenism is expressly designated as being dead through 
 sin (Eph. ii. 1, 5 ; comp. ver. 4). Closely connected with this, by a peculiar 
 turn of the image, the idea of a resurrection with Christ is o]iposed not to a 
 dying with Christ, but to tlie former state of death (Col. ii. 12, 13, iii. ] ; 
 Eph. ii. 5, G)." 
 
CHAP. II. 5. 195 
 
 ing of spiritual life, there may be also a secondary reference 
 to the physical quickening. But it does not seem as if the 
 apostle in the passage before us had at all before him the 
 idea of |»hysical revivification with Christ. Fergusson, of 
 Kilwinning, 1ms made a shrewd remark, which dis[)lays true 
 exegetical insight, and slioukl help us here. " There is," he 
 says, " an infallible connection betwixt converting grace and 
 salvation, so that all those who are now converted and 
 quickened shall be undoubtedly saved ; for what the apostle 
 calleth ' quickened ' in the former part of the verse, he calleth 
 ' saved ' in the close, so that he taketh the one for the other : 
 He hath quickened us — by grace ye are saved." There should 
 be no difficulty in deciding here in favour of the spiritual 
 signification of " quickened," if only we hold firmly to the 
 connection with the preceding clause. Those who are at the 
 time spoken of as spiritually dead, require there and then the 
 communication of spiritual life. God's great love moved 
 Him to provide for us a suitable gift, life from the dead. 
 'J'he death inflicted on Christ, as the representative of sinners, 
 if it had fallen on the sinners themselves, would have been 
 spiritual and eternal death. When the sinner dies bearing 
 his own sin, he remains dead under the curse of the still 
 unsatisfied law. God quickened the dead Christ because the 
 demands of His law were satisfied. He, and therefore with 
 Him those who are His, die no more. "When God gave Him 
 life again, tliis was the guarantee (and because God's guarantee, 
 therefore already the gift) to all who believe in Christ, of a 
 life no longer subject^ to the wages of sin. With Him they 
 passed from death unto life, — the transition in His case being 
 representative, in theirs personal. The quickening, therefore, 
 refers primarily to the sinner's justification, and, by con- 
 sequence, to that fellowship of life which all the justified 
 have in communion with • Him who for them was dead, but 
 now for them is alive again. The reading which inserts ev 
 before Christ is without any considerable support, arid 
 evidently resulted frotn a desire to make this passage corre- 
 spond with the following verse. The use of the false reading 
 perhaps led to the strange misunderstanding on the part of 
 Beza and Calvin, which have been repeated in later times by 
 
196. EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Bloomfield, who join " together with " with us, and interpret 
 "of it" of the union of Jews and Gentiles. 
 
 By grace ye arc saved. — These words are introduced paren- 
 thetically as a hurried utterance of the apostle, anxious to 
 prevent his readers from forgetting for a moment that they 
 owe all to God. It is a restatement of the truth, set forth in 
 chap. i. 19, of the greatness of God's power to usward who 
 believe. It is the grace of God, not of Christ, that is referred 
 to, and God has quickened them with Christ, and that quick- 
 ening is their salvation. Saved by Christ's death, their salva- 
 tion is one that has been completed in the past, while its 
 living efficacy continues. 
 
 Ver. 6. And raised us up together. — To be raised up is the 
 immediate consequence of being made to live. The dead 
 made alive proceeds to discharge the functions of life. He 
 is loosed and immediately he will go. The resurrection here 
 spoken of must be interpreted in the same way as the quick- 
 ening of the previous verse. The believer is raised up 
 spiritually with Christ in His resurrection. What God 
 wrought upon Christ is all and wholly done for our spiritual 
 benefit, in order to procure for us and to confer upon us 
 spiritual life. The incarnation and the resurrection are the 
 grand means employed by God to make us know tiie exceed- 
 ing greatness of His power to usward who believe. " The 
 resurrection," says Baldwin Brown in a very noble sermon, in 
 The Risen Christ the King of Men, " is a further and essential 
 stage in the development of the incarnation. By the incar- 
 nation the divine is born into the sphere of the human ; by 
 the resurrection tht; human is born into tlie sphere of the 
 divine for ever." 
 
 And made US sit together. — These words, of course, must 
 be interpreted spiritually, in harmony with those which pre- 
 cede. The patristic interpretation it>enerally inclines to a 
 literal understanding of the words ; some regarding them as 
 referring to a future state of glory in heaven, and others 
 applying them to that spiritual exaltation that is ideally 
 entered on now, but actually enjoyed hereafter. We consider 
 the words as simply carrying out the idea of the previously 
 mentioned quickening and resurrection. He who is made 
 
cnAr. II. 7. 197 
 
 spiritually alive, and who enters upon the exercise of the 
 functions of the new life, necessarily, in the very progress of 
 that life, rises heavenward. Eisen witli Christ, he seeks 
 those tilings which are above, where Christ sitteth (Col. 
 iii. 1 ). 
 
 In heavenly places. — This phrase, we have seen (i. 3), 
 means the sphere of spiritual life and operation. It marks 
 the scene of God's presence in favour. It niarks God's right 
 hand where Christ sitteth, and we with Hiui. Nearness to 
 God is the spiritual blessing indicated by our being seated 
 along with Christ. The right belonging to Him as Son He 
 sliares with us. The atmosphere of tiiese places is the Spirit's 
 breath, which the quickened and raised with Christ breathe, 
 and by which they are inspired. According as we receive of 
 His Spirit, we share His spiritual dominion. \Ve reign with 
 Him as we rise with Him into possession of the love of God 
 the Father (John xvii. 2G). 
 
 In Christ Jesus. — Moule speaks as if these words took the 
 place of the phrase " with Christ " of ver. 5. But each of 
 the three verbs contains in itself the idea, " together with" 
 Christ. The phrase " in Christ Jesus " adds a further 
 thought, that of our mystical union with Christ. It could 
 not have been used along witli the verb " quickened us to- 
 gether witli Christ," for those who are the subjects of this 
 operation were at that time not in union w-ith Christ, but 
 dead in sins. Tliey are now, however, quickened with Christ, 
 and from that moment onwards, are subjects of Christ's 
 resurrection and glorifying power, in consequence of their 
 vital union with Him. 
 
 Ver. 7. That in the ages to come. — The word " age " {alonv) we 
 have already met with in ver. 2, where it is rendered " course," 
 meaning probably a period of indefinite duration, the idea of 
 duration being that which is essential to the world. The 
 wdrole phrase (ot alcoves; ol eTTep-^oixeva) means an indefinite 
 future; it may be near at hand or far off; it is simply "to 
 come." Similar phrases occur in chap. i. 21 {aldiv ixeXkwv), 
 and Luke xviii. 30 (6 auov 6 ipxo/^evo'i). Many have under- 
 stood the previous passage to refer to the calling of the 
 Gentiles (Calvin and many Catholic and lieformed expositors), 
 
198 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 and so have rendered the plirase in our text " future genera- 
 tion," restricting it to this present world. Ellicott, following 
 Wolf, restricts the reference to the age between that of the 
 apostle and the second coming, ^vhich therefore, he suggests, 
 Paul did not regard as near. Others, who restrict the previous 
 context to the literal bodily resurrection (Meyer), understand 
 " the ages to come " to mean " the future life." Harless 
 makes it refer to the experience of believers m'Iio are quick- 
 ened and laised, but still look to the future world for their 
 enthronement with Christ. But we have seen that believeis 
 are seated with Christ in this life. There is no reason for 
 restricting the phrase to either dispensation. It is simply 
 and broadly "future ages," whether in this world or in the 
 next. And so Origen uses the passage in his Commentaiy 
 on John (iv. 40) to prove against Heracleon, the Gnostic, that 
 not only, as Heracleon had admitted, both before and after 
 the passion the union between Christ and His disciples con- 
 tinued, but also throughout still later periods. See Cambridge 
 Tcxis avd Studies, vol. i. No. 4, 1891, TJw Fragments of 
 Heracleon, p. 90. 
 
 He migld prove the exceedinr/ riches of His grace. — God's 
 purpose in saving men with this full salvation, including the 
 spiritual blessings of quickening, resurrection, and exaltation 
 into His own presence, was to demonstrate the incomparable- 
 ness of His grace. This, indeed, was precisely what had to 
 be proved.. The greatness of His power wrouglit in Christ 
 (i. 19), and the riches of His grace displayed toward man, 
 are both of the same transcendent quality. — The word " ex- 
 ceeding" (vTrep^dXXov) does not carry with it this idea of 
 " outbidding " which an ultra-acute German critic has sought to 
 connect with it here and throughout the epistle.^ It is used 
 here and in chap. i. 19 as an adjective heightening the follow- 
 ing substantive to the superlative degree. — The riches of God's 
 grace is proved to all time by what God has done in and 
 
 ^ E. PfleiJercr, " Heraclitsihe Spurcu anf theol. insbes. altctristlichen 
 Woden" in Jahrbiicher filr Prot. Theoloijic, xiii. 194-195, 1887, seeks to show 
 Ihat the idea of outbidding other systems is cliaracteristic of the Epistle to tlic 
 Ephesians, and advances this as a proof of the lateness of the epistle, whose 
 author he supposes to have had the Gnostic systems iu view. This is dealt 
 with in the Introduction. 
 
CHAP. II. 8. 199 
 
 upon Christ. It is not that His dealings with the Ephesiaiis 
 are an example to subsequent generations of the nature and 
 range of God's grace, but that Christ, the sinner's substitute, 
 is made of God the Eesurrection and the Life for all who 
 believe in Him — is the demonstration to all ages, here and 
 hereafter, of the riches of His grace. 
 
 In kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. — The manner of 
 His proof is described as kindness. By His kindness He 
 proves His grace. The word here used (xpvo"^oTr]<;), together 
 with " pliilanthropy," is employed in Titus iii. 4 to describe the 
 contents of the manifested grace of God. The same designa- 
 tion is given to the yoke of Ciirist as easy {'x^pr^aTO'i), and 
 with a play on the name Christ was called " Chrestus " by 
 the enemies of the Christians, with a sneering suggestion of 
 weakness.^— The kindness of His grace is revealed in Christ 
 Jesus. This is not a simple repetition of the statement 
 already made, that God's work on and in Christ as our repre- 
 sentative proves His grace, but is a new statement showing 
 that this demonstration is made only to those who are in 
 vital union with Christ. It is only as in Christ we are sealed 
 together with Christ that we can know the love that passeth 
 knowledge. And only he who himself knows the love of 
 Christ, can fully appreciate the demonstration which God 
 makes of the ricbes of His grace. 
 
 Ver. 8. For hi/ grace are ye saved through faith. — The pre- 
 eminent excellence of God's salvation lies in this, that it 
 proceeds wholly from Himself. But the apostle not only 
 speaks of Him whose work it is, but also of the means 
 whereby it becomes ours. It is appropriated by faith, which 
 of course, as the mere receiving, presupposes the provision 
 already made. — The question then arises here, " What do we 
 receive upon the exercise of faith which we had not before ? 
 Our salvation is God's work, and our destination to it is God's 
 eternal purpose. It is God who has saved us according to 
 His own purpose and grace, which are given us in Christ 
 
 ^ TertuUian, Apologeticm, iii : Christianus vero, quantum interpret alio est de 
 unctione deducitur. Sed et cum perperam Chrestianus pronunciatur a vohis 
 (nam nee nominis certa est notitia penes vos) de suavilate, vel benignitate 
 composHum est. Oditur itaque in hominibus innocuis etiani nomen innocuum. 
 
200 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Jesus before the world began (2 Tim. i. 9). We are saved, 
 then, according to this eternal purpose of God. What does 
 the apostle mean by saying, ' Ye are saved through faith ? ' 
 In 2 Tim. i. 10 he says that Christ's appearing has made 
 manifest God's purpose. Does he mean in one text that, by 
 the exercise of faith, we simply make it manifest that we are 
 sabjects of God's electing grace ? This would be to confound 
 faith with assurance, and to make faith play the part assigned 
 to good works in the system of New Testament doctrine. 
 On the contrary, according to Paul, faith justifies, in contrast 
 to the law which does not (Gal. ii. 16). What was destined 
 to them in eternity they really obtained, when they presented 
 themselves to have it bestowed on them. Goodwin illustrates, 
 by the figure of copyholders, wlio have a right to their land 
 when their fathers die, but must, by an appearance in court, 
 take up their right before they enter on its enjoyment. In 
 Christ, from eternity, the elect have salvation as their right, 
 but they enter on its eternal possession when they believe. 
 The salvation was thus beforehand complete. It was all the 
 work of God's grace; and its destination also was all of grace. 
 The entering upon the possession of it by faith is therefore 
 no work. It gives nothing to the God of salvation. It is 
 only a taking, and in no sense or degree a giving. — " Faith," 
 says Calvin, " brings a man empty to God that he may be 
 filled with the blessings of Christ." "The hands of all other 
 graces," says Goodwin, " are working hands, but the hands of 
 faith are merely receiving hands." 
 
 And this not of yourselves. — " This " (toOto) was, by the 
 older commentators, referred to faith, but most modern ex- 
 positors, such as Harless, Meyer, Ellicott, following Calvin, 
 rightly refer it to the salvation by grace. It is a reinforce- 
 ment, from the negative point of view, of the declaration that 
 God alone is the author of our salvation ; we do not con- 
 tribute to it. 
 
 The gift is God's. — This, again, is from the positive side an 
 emphatic restatement of the same proposition. The phrase is 
 commonly quoted as referring to faith. Graham, for example, 
 looks witli suspicion on the view that salvation and not faith 
 is here designated God's gift, as an interpretation framed by 
 
CHAP. II. 10. 201 
 
 Arminians. It is niucli more natural, more in keeping with 
 Scripture usage, and with the drift of tlie apostle's discourse, 
 to think of Christ as the gift of God, Christ as appointed of 
 God to the work of our salvation. God's gift to us is Christ, 
 designated sometimes by His benefits. Calvin is not turned 
 aside from his work of exposition by fear of Arminianism. 
 " Here," he says, " we must advert to a very common error in 
 the interpretation of this passage. Many persons restrict the 
 word gift to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating in other 
 words the former sentiment. His meaning is, not that faith 
 is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us, that 
 salvation comes to us, by the gift of God." 
 
 Ver. 9. Not of works. — Their faith has utility but no merit ; 
 it is of service to those who exercise it, but not to God. The 
 hand that takes a gift does nothing, performs no work toward 
 the production or purchase of that gift. And God has 
 determined the condition of the enjoyment of His gift. 
 
 In order that no one should hoast. — Boasting would neut- 
 ralise the spiritual discipline of God's method of salvation, 
 which demands from man absolute, self-forgetting surrendei', 
 all the glory to God. 
 
 Ver. 10. For wc are His worhmanshvp. — "We" certainly 
 means believers. The idea of Eiickert that it means men gener- 
 ally,need only be mentioned as an exegetical curiosity. It is only 
 of believers that the apostle is speaking throughout this whole 
 section ; in vers. 1—3 of what they were before conversion, and 
 in vers. 4-10 of what in regard to possession and prospect 
 they owe to grace. — The force of the conjunction " for " {'yap) 
 is to place our clause in immediate connection with the last 
 words of the preceding verse. It is not, as many commen- 
 tators assume, to introduce a reason for the whole statement 
 of the purely gracious origin and destination of our salvation. 
 The latter, as Hofmann says, might rather be advanced not as 
 a reason for, but as an illustration of, the former. Eeally the 
 statements that our salvation is God's gift, and that we, the 
 saved, are God's workmanship, are one and the same, so that 
 the one cannot be advanced as the ground of the other. The 
 apostle simply says : " No believing man can boast of his good 
 works, for he is himself God's workmanship. All that the 
 
202 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 believer is and has he owes to God, who has made tliat new 
 nature which yields those good fruits." God says to the 
 believer, " What hast thou that thou hast not received ? " The 
 believer answers, " By the grace of God I am what I am." — 
 The word " workmanship " {iroi'qiia) occurs only once else- 
 where in the New Testament. In liom. i. 20 it is used of 
 the natural or visible creation. It is used by Athanasius in 
 the sense of " created being." In our text it is certainly used 
 simply with reference to the spiritual creation, God's renewal 
 of man's nature by His grace. Wordsworth and Ellicott 
 regard the word as referring, though not exclusively, to the 
 first creation. Undoubtedly the fact that, as natural beings, 
 we are God's work, forms the ground of His operations upon 
 us in the new creation. It is as our Maker that He has the 
 interest in us to be our liedeemer. But here, as we have 
 said, the apostle speaks only of believers and of what they as 
 believers owe to God, who has made them to differ from the 
 rest. This new nature, which constitutes our true being, we 
 have from Him, and so we are His workmanship as no 
 others are. 
 
 Created in Christ Jesus unto good icorks. — Tliis phrase 
 explains particularly in what way this workmanship of God, 
 as seen in the believer, is distinguished from every other work 
 of God. The distinctive character of that workmanship is 
 described under three particulars: (1) It is according to its 
 nature a creation ; (2) This new creation is effected by means 
 of a vital union formed with Christ Jesus; and (3) It is 
 wrought in order to the production of good works. — The word 
 "created" here corresponds in Scripture usage so clearly 
 with " iPorIcma7iship " of the previous clause (iroLelv and 
 KTi^eLv being both used in the LXX. to translate the Hebrew 
 5<"i3)^ that we can onl}' distinguish the creating as tlie beginning 
 of the process that ultimately produces what is recognised as 
 Christ's workmanship. In this epistle the word is used of 
 God's world-creating power (iii. 9), and here and in ver. 15 and 
 iv. 24 of man's restoration as a new creature in Christ. — ^The 
 relationship with Christ Jesus which effects this new creation 
 must be regarded as a vital one, like that which consummated 
 the act of God in the first creation. As God's breath 
 
CHAP. II. 10. 203 
 
 inspired the first man, so that his natural life depemleJ upon 
 the retention of this divine breath, and the departure of it 
 meant physical dissolution ; even so Christ's breath, which 
 He breathed on His disciples, saying, " lleceive ye the Holy 
 Ghost," gives vitality to the new man, who is preserved from 
 spiritual death by the continued presence of that Spirit which 
 is His and makes His all those in whom it dwells. This in- 
 dwelling Spirit is all-pervasive, and so we live in the Spirit 
 and walk in the Spirit. We are in Christ, as we have the 
 Spirit in us. As tlie Spirit pervades our whole being and 
 assimilates us to Himself, our nature becomes a creation in 
 Christ, the elements constituting our being are ibund in 
 Ciirist and are derived from Him alone. All that the Spirit 
 does is to bring to us the graces of Christ wherewith to build 
 up our spiritual lives. — Tlie end of this creation is that His 
 workmanship should produce good works. This will be the 
 best evidence that the work is His who Himself is good, that 
 the creation is wrought in Him who went about doing good. 
 Man's chief end, in the iirst and second creations alike, is God's 
 glory ; and herein, said Christ to His disciples, " is my Father 
 glorified, that ye bear much fruit." These good works 
 performed by the believer are fruits of his new creation, the 
 proper products of that new nature which the presence of 
 Christ's Spirit has begotten in us. — In this passage, which, by 
 insisting upon the fact that the creation is wholly God's work, 
 is so characteristically Pauline, we see how distinctly present 
 to the apostle's mind was also that aspect of the truth so 
 properly emphasised by James. The believer is God's work- 
 manship, therefore he cannot boast of his faith as though it 
 had been the product of his own will and endeavour ; but the 
 faith that is God's work evidences its divine origin by produc- 
 ing good works in the life, and so the faith that produces no 
 good works is dead and remains alone, because it wants the 
 vitality of tlie Spirit's breath. 
 
 Which God.Jjcforc 'preiKircd that ive should ivalk in titan. — 
 Provision has been made in God's eternal plan for these good 
 works. Just as surely as the believer has an eternal election 
 to faith, so also is there an eternal election of the sphere in 
 which he is to walk. Having created us anew, God does not 
 
204 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 leave ns to work out results which may assume one form or 
 another. " The seed principles and adequate causes of all the 
 good works of God's children were provided for in Christ 
 Jesus, before the foundation of the world." ^ In Christ we 
 have not only the first start in tlie new life in conversion, but 
 also every movement of that new life in the producing of 
 good works. In Hira these good works have an eternal 
 existence. They are pre-existent in Him, and appear in us 
 as we are in Him. What therefore is said of God's fore- 
 ordination of His Son as our Redeemer, is here said of God's 
 preparation in eternity of those divine treasures stored up in 
 the Son, from which the redeemed in time should draw. It 
 is not said that God predestined those works, but He actually 
 prepared them in Christ, and as Christ is before all worlds so 
 also this preparation of good works in Him is " before " any 
 creation activity on the part of God. Our good works are 
 not our own, wrought first by us as individuals, but they are 
 Christ's, and become ours when we are Christ's. They are 
 wrouglit in us who are in fellowship with Christ, because that 
 fellowship is a fellowship of conduct, and if we walk in Him 
 we necessarily walk in good works. So John declares that 
 we have fellowship with God just as we walk in the light, as 
 He is the light (1 John i. 7), and Himself is light. 
 
 Sect. Y. — The Fl'lness of the Gentiles (Chap. ii. 11-iii. 13). 
 
 The apostle finds it necessary to devote a long passage to 
 a careful and detailed examination of the question, as to the 
 relation in which believing Gentiles stand to God as compared 
 with Jewish believers. There was a danger arising in all 
 young Christian communities, of the more numerous and 
 powerful element, in some cases Jewish, in other cases Gentile, 
 boasting itself over the less numerous and influential. In 
 Ephesus, as in all the other churches founded by apostles, the 
 original nucleus was Jewish, but subsequent success had lain 
 among the Gentile population, in which also lay the main 
 hope of all future expansion. It was natural that the first- 
 called Jews should magnify their national privileges, and 
 ' Pulsford, Christ and His seed, p. 68. 
 
CHAP. II. 11. 205 
 
 should endeavour to compensate for their numerical insignifi- 
 cance by the persistent presentation of arrogant and exclusive 
 claims. It was equally natural that the later-called Gentiles, 
 encouraged by the fact that accessions were being made 
 chiefly from their class, shanld regard the slowness to believe 
 on the part of the Jews as evidence of their loss of the divine 
 favour and of the withdrawal from them of all privilege, and 
 that in consequence tliey should imagine that what had been 
 taken away Irom the Jews was now conferred by way of 
 distinction and advantage upon them. The apostle therefore 
 addresses himself, in the latter lialf of chap. ii. and in the earlier 
 lialf of chap, iii., to tlie task of showing that there is no longer 
 Jew nor Greek, but that they are both one in Christ Jesus. 
 AVhat is needed by all men alike is the securing of access to 
 the Father, and this all men can have only in one way and 
 by one Spirit. All assumption of pre-eminence is con- 
 demned, whether it may originate in a Jewish or in a 
 Gentile source. 
 
 The paragraph consists of two parts. In tlie first (ii. 
 11—22) we are told what grace has done for the Gentiles who 
 believed; in the second (iii. 1-13) we are told how the 
 revelation of this was made to I'aul. 
 
 (1) What [/race has done fur Gentiles v'ho believed 
 (chap. ii. 11-22). 
 
 Ver. 11. Wherefore remember, tJuit ye being formerhj Gentiles 
 in the flesh. — All that has been said in the previous section 
 regarding the noble rank to which the believer has been 
 raised by divine grace, as a new creature performing good 
 works, is now conceived of as a motive fitted to arouse pleasant 
 and profitable remembrances. They are called to consider, by 
 comparison of the present with the past, what God has wrouglit. 
 The apostle here for the first time specifically addresses the 
 Gentile portion of the community. Tliey are to understand 
 til at the blessed consequences of redeeming grace will appear 
 in them as surely as in their brethren among the Jews. The 
 remembrance of what their condition was before as " Gentiles 
 in the flesh," should greatly intensify their sense of obligation 
 to God for what He has done in accomplishing so wonderful 
 
206 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 a change in them. They have been lifted into a new sphere 
 of privilege. The phrase by which the apostle reminds them 
 of their past condition is iinmistakeably intended by him to 
 point only to the disadvantages of it, and not to the sinful- 
 ness of conduct by which it was characterised. It was 
 characteristic of the past condition, not only of the Gentiles 
 but also of the Jews, that " they did the will of tlie flesh " 
 (ii. 3). What distinguished tlie Gentiles from the Jews was 
 simply this, tliat they were not in possession of the special 
 advantages and privileges of tlie covenant. And so the apostle 
 does not say here that they were Gentiles " according to the 
 flesh, but in the flesh," as not having there the visible marks 
 (jf the rite of circumcision. They had not the circumcision 
 in the flesh made with hands. The Jew had this, but merely 
 as Jew he had nothing more. Whatever more he had — 
 the circumcision of the heart — was of gi-ace ; and this, the 
 apostle desires now to assure the Gentiles, they may have in 
 the same measure and on the same terms. 
 
 Called uncircumcision hij the so-called circumeision in the 
 Jlesh made hy hands. — Having called their attention to what 
 they were in point of fact as regarded privilege, he now 
 reminds them of the contemptuous manner in which those 
 who boasted of their privilege treated them because of their 
 want of it. Because of the evidence in their flesh, which bore 
 no trace of the sign of this covenant, they were correctly called 
 uncircumcision. The apostle wishes them to understand that 
 they had occupied an unfavourable position at the outside of 
 that circle within which God's covenant-mercies were enjoyed. 
 But while himself recognising, and wishful that his readers 
 should themselves recognise, the disadvantage of their earlier 
 condition, as a special motive for thanksgiving in consideration 
 of their present condition of favour, the apostle now calls 
 attention to the character and standing of those who, in a 
 contemptuous way, were accustomed then to designate them. 
 They called themselves the circumcision, but as such they 
 were self-styled. They arrogated to themselves the title. 
 When one advances a claim on his own behalf, it is natural 
 that others should insist upon an exhibition of the grounds 
 on which such claims rest. Those arrogant Jewish con- 
 
CHAP. II. 12. 207 
 
 temuers of the Gentiles, call themselves the circumcision, and 
 the apostle now asks, " In what does this circumcision con- 
 sist ? " He answers that undoubtedly it is " in the flesh." 
 The marks which are wanting in the Gentiles are found in 
 them. But this sort of circumcision is wrought by hands. 
 The production of it is purely mechanical, and the effect of it 
 upon these men has been literally superficial. Now we 
 should carefully note that Paul is very far from depreciating 
 the national privileges of the Jews. To him the sign of 
 circumcision is " a seal of. tlie righteousness of faith " (Rom. 
 iv. 11); but those who boasted of themselves and despised 
 others, were altogether wanting in that faith whose presence 
 alone could constitute circumcision a sign and seal. They 
 were therefore as little circumcised as the Gentiles, because 
 they had no appreciation of the spiritual significance of the 
 rite, which they had undergone only outwardly. They were 
 merely the circumcision so-called. They had the name, the 
 outward sign, and nothing more. The worthlessness of this 
 is emphasised by the repeated phrases, " in the flesh," " made 
 ])y hands." — The apostle's purpose, in introducing the 
 characterisation of the arrogant despisers of the Gentiles, 
 seem to have been twofold. On the one hand, we cannot 
 doubt that he desires the Jewish members of the community 
 to beware of cherishing a boastful spirit, which, from its very 
 nature, is incompatible with tlie doctrines of grace, and can 
 have its origin only in some lurking remnant of an utterly 
 unevaugelical legalism. And, on the other hand, that such 
 people as those who had the hand-made circumcision, and 
 nothing more, should be able to claim a certain superiority 
 over the Gentiles before they had believed, presents that 
 former state of theirs in a yet darker aspect, and so gives 
 special occasion for thankful remembrances of God's grace, by 
 which they are not only made equal to those who have cir- 
 cumcision in the flesh made by liands, but are raised far above 
 them into perfect equality with those who are circumcised in 
 heart. 
 
 Ver. 12, That at that time ye were without Christ. — The 
 apostle now indicates what it is that the Gentiles should 
 remember. The description of this 12th verse refers to the 
 
208 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 same period in their history as that of the 11th verse; and 
 the phrase " at that time " corresponds to the words " in time 
 past." The account given in the 11th verse of the former 
 position of the Gentiles is not indeed parenthetical, because 
 it really forms pait of the contents of the remembrance urged 
 upon them. Thus, however, what they were to remember 
 was introduced in a participial clause, as indicating broadly 
 and somewhat vaguely the unfavourableness of that position 
 generally, as one notoriously defective in respect of privilege. 
 Here the apostle states clearly what their special disadvan- 
 tages were : first of all, under one compiehensive description, 
 and then by means of four particular clauses in which the 
 detailed contents of that description are set forth. — The com- 
 prehensive description of their former condition, as " without 
 Christ," shows wherein the radical defect of the unbelieving 
 Gentile condition consisted. As Gentiles in the flesh, they 
 were members of a community which followed a course of 
 life that had no relation to Christ, and made no reference to 
 Him. Their lives were lived apart from Christ. It is un- 
 doubtedly quite true that those wdio only had the hand-made 
 circumcision in the flesh were also without Christ, so far as 
 their personal condition was concerned ; but the following 
 clauses, which bring out the particulars of their case, show that 
 the apostle was now thinking of circumcision in the flesh as the 
 doorway to the privileges, which opened up the fields of rich 
 spiritual possibilities. It was under a sense of this that Paul 
 could answer the question, " What advantage then hath the 
 Jew ? He had the oracles of God, the covenants of promise, 
 the law, the service of God, the holy example of the fathers, 
 and, chief of all, the prophecies of the coming of the Messiah 
 within the limits of His race." This the apostle regards as an 
 exceeding great advantage, not detracted from, far less abro- 
 gated, by the fact that many did not believe, and so refused 
 to accept personally the benefit (Itoni. iii. 1, ix. 4, 5). All 
 the Jewish privileges culminate in this, that Christ, according 
 to the flesh, was to be of the seed of Abraham. To belong to 
 the seed of Abraham, to have the mark of circumcision which 
 indicates the existence of sucli a relationship, was of itself 
 inspiring ; and whatever in any measure, even though it might 
 
CHAP. II. 12. 200 
 
 be but slightly and temporarily, directs the thoughts of the 
 mind to Christ, was not a privilege to be lightly esteemed. 
 Just as outward church connection in our own day, while of 
 itself, it may be, nothing more or better than the mere cir- 
 cumcision in tlie flesh made by hands, is not to be despised, 
 even though it should only secure for the ear the sound of 
 the glad tidings of salvation ; so the Jewish privilege, even to 
 those who submitted theuiselves only to its outward operation, 
 made it impossible altogether to remain ignorant of the promise 
 that Messiah should come, or of the guilt of sin which made 
 that coming necessary. To be without this was a distinct 
 disadvantage. To be without anything that pointedly directed 
 the mind to Christ as the foundation of all hope, was the con- 
 dition of the Gentile, relatively lower than that of the Jew, 
 out of which the grace of God now raised him. 
 
 Having become aliens from tlie citizenship of Israel. — In this, 
 the first of the four explanatory clauses, the apostle shows liow 
 it came to pass that they were without Christ. The render- 
 ing in the Authorised Version, " being aliens," is unfortunate, 
 as implying a separation resulting from a difference of original 
 nature. The same word occurs in chap. iv. 18 and in Col, 
 i. 21, and in each case it indicates an alienation brought about 
 by the conduct of the parties themselves. The original unity 
 of the race had been broken up, not by the arbitrary inter- 
 ference of an outside party, but by the falling away into sin, 
 which is essentially disintegrating, so that society had to be 
 saved from utter dissolution by the separation of a holy seed. 
 Men had alienated themselves from God, and not till tliey 
 had done so did God choose for Himself a peculiar people. It 
 was sin that separated, and God's choice was that \\'hich made 
 ultimate reunion possible. Apart from divine interference, 
 all who had alienated themselves must have remained aliens. 
 When God chose Abraham, and gave the promises to him and 
 to his seed. He gave to men a rallying point around which 
 they might gather again and have their lost unity restored. 
 It was there that God would have all nations blessed in 
 Abraham. The apostle describes this rallying point of the 
 race as " the citizenship of Israel." It was characteristic of 
 the position of the Gentiles, that they persisted in remaining 
 
 
 
210 EPISTLE TO THE EPllESIANS, 
 
 in alienation. Most commentators (Ellicott, Harless, Meyer, 
 etc.) render the word, as Authorised Version and Revised 
 Version do, " commonwealth." Harless insists that citizenship 
 can be spoken of only in reference to the individuals com- 
 posing a nation, and not of the nation itself, and that the 
 apostle would not use the idea of Eoman citizenship to 
 represent the theocratic state of Israeh We cannot speak of 
 the Pauline usage of the word, for it does not elsewhere occur 
 in liis writings, and only once again in the New Testament 
 (Acts xxii. 28), where it means citizenship. But when we 
 consider the connection in which our passage occurs, and the 
 emphasis laid by the apostle in the preceding verse upon 
 the possession and want of privilege, we are constrained to 
 agree witli Calvin and other reformed commentators in prefer- 
 ring the rendering " citizenship," which also seems to be the 
 primary meaning of the word. This also makes the following 
 jrenitive more natural. All are agreed that the Israel from 
 which the Gentiles were alienated is a spiritual conception. 
 It is not Israel after the flesh that is thought of; for that 
 would be simply a repetition of the general terms of the pre- 
 ceding verse. But the spiritual conception of Israel consists 
 in the possession of spiritual rights and privileges. The 
 citizenship of Israel is prevalence with God ; what distinguishes 
 the true Israelite is his power with God. The Israelite there- 
 fore is he who knows Christ as the restorer of this power, lost 
 by sin. The Gentiles " without Christ " are still alienated 
 from these rights and privileges. 
 
 And strangers from the covenants of the promise. — The 
 promise is the Messianic promise (Gen. xii. 15, xv. 18, xvii. 
 8), repeated to the patriarchs, and formally extended to the 
 people through Moses. With this the Gentiles had nothing 
 to do, and of it they had no knowledge. It was the Messianic 
 liope that constituted the citizenship of Israel ; alienation from 
 this citizenship was a grievous loss, because it meant the 
 absence of that hope. The covenant and the promises are 
 separately mentioned in Eom. ix. 4 among the privileges which 
 constituted the advantage of the Jew. 
 
 Having no hope. — This was the immediate consequence of 
 what has been described in the previous clauses. Apart from 
 
CHAP. II. 13. 211 
 
 the Messianic hope there was no hope for man. The promise 
 of the Messiah was a promise of good things to come, so that 
 no one possessing it could become utterly hopeless. But the 
 apostle can appeal to the memories of the Gentiles, who had 
 believed that, as unbelievers, they had nothing to hope for. 
 All was blank. It is precisely the same phrase which Paul 
 uses to describe the sad feeling of those who mourn the death 
 of friends who were not in Christ (1 Thess. iv. 13). 
 
 ylnd without God in the world. — To be in the world is de- 
 scriptive of the life of all men in time. To be kept from the 
 evil in the world is the prerogative of those who are in Christ 
 Jesus. Those who are without Christ are without God ; and 
 to be in the world without God is to be without power or will 
 to resist the current of the world, wliich sets toward the 
 destruction of all that reflects any remnant of truth and 
 holiness. The hope of man lies in his being able to stem this 
 current, and for those who are without Christ there is no such 
 hope. It is emphatically in the world that God is needed, to 
 deliver us from the world : the God who is above the world, 
 and separate from, and in his very nature opposed to, all the 
 evil of the world. The gods of the Gentiles were really no 
 gods, for they were the gods of the world — that is, demons, 
 who hurried their worshippers on in their devotion to the 
 corruptions of the world. The same word (dOeoi) is similarly 
 used in Ignatius, Epistle to the IVallians, x., where the Docetce, 
 who denied that Christ really died, are declared to be men 
 without God. They are adeoL because they are diriaToi. Those 
 who deny Christ are without God. We cannot hold aloof 
 from Christ without separating ourselves from God.^ The 
 clause seems naturally to refer back to the statement regarding 
 the Gentiles' alienation from the citizenship of Israel, just as 
 the previous "having no hope" refers to the want of know- 
 ledge of and interest in the promise. To have the citizenship 
 of Israel is to recognise God as King, to submit to His rule, 
 and to enjoy His protection and help. To be alienated from 
 that citizenship is to be without God, self surrendered to the 
 powers of evil that destroy. 
 
 Ver. 13. Bat now, in Christ Jesus. — The apostle here sets 
 
 ^ Compare Liglitfoot, Ignatius, ii. 17^-175, 1S90. 
 
212 EnSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 forth the contrast of the present with the past. The terseness 
 of phrase, the promptness with wliich he presents the other side 
 of the picture, indicates his sense of the sharpness of the 
 contrast and the completeness of the separation of the noiv 
 from the time past. Every particle that went to make up 
 that past, is past, and does not reappear in any form or measure 
 as an ingredient in that which he is now to unfold. — And 
 what hrings about that thorough-goin" cliange, what alone 
 can account for it, is a new relation to Christ. Those who 
 in the past were without Christ are now in Christ Jesus. 
 This is Paul's explanation of the change that has taken place. 
 The double name is given, and emphasis rests upon "Jesus," 
 in order to show that it is the historical Christ, incarnate in 
 Jesus of Nazareth, who has fulfilled the Messianic hope and 
 wrought this change in their state. They have received the 
 promise and laid hold upon the hope. They are in the 
 fellowship of Christ, and therefore former things are passed 
 away and their standing and relations are altogether 
 new. 
 
 Ye vjJio formerhj were far off. — These words sum up the 
 description of the previous condition of the Gentile believers 
 given in the preceding verse, as it is necessary to carry 
 this along with us in order to appreciate the contrast. 
 Similarly, in ver. 5, the apostle summed up his previous 
 description of the unregenerate character in the phrase " dead 
 in sins." 
 
 Are made nirjli. — The phrase is chosen to mark the con- 
 trast with " far off." This is the immediate result of fellow- 
 ship with Christ. Those who were without Christ were 
 consequently without God ; but now those who are in Christ 
 Jesus are made nigh to God. The Word was with God, and 
 therefore those who are in the Word, vitally united to the 
 manifested Messiah, are also with God. Christ Jesus is the 
 efficient cause of this nearness, which, but for Him, could never 
 have been secured. This is the realisation of the benefits 
 of the Abrahamic covenant. The parties in that covenant 
 were brought nigh to one another. Abraham, and those who 
 by their faith proved themselves heirs of Abraham, were by 
 the terms of the covenant brought nigh to God. In Christ 
 
CHAr. II. 14-lG. 213 
 
 Jesus the Gentiles became proselytes in tlie true sense ; 
 they were hrought over into participation in covenant 
 blessings. 
 
 In the hlood of Christ. — The covenant in which the 
 Gentiles are made nigh to God is a covenant of blood, in 
 which the really efficient power for atonement and reconcilia- 
 tion is the blood of the new covenant. There is no essential 
 difference in meaning between the " in the blood " of our text 
 and the " through the blood " of i. 7 ; but here the use of the 
 preposition " in " connects the last clause of the verse with the 
 first. It is in Christ Jesus that the great reconciliation is 
 wrought, and specifically in His blood. This is a point which 
 Paul urgently insists upon his readers remembering, that all 
 their present blessedness, which forms such a contrast to their 
 miserable past, they owe to Jesus Christ as the crucified. 
 
 Vers. 14—16. The apostle first of all presents Christ as, in 
 the fullest and most comprehensive sense, our peace, and then 
 proceeds to distinguish two different forms of the enmity 
 which, in the execution of His office, our peace removes — the 
 enmity between Jews and Gentiles, and the enmity between 
 God and man. In vers. 14, 15, the parties at enmity with one 
 another are Jews and Gentiles, and they are made one, not 
 by Gentiles being made Jews, but by Jews and Gentiles alike 
 being taken out of their several states of existence, and made 
 new creatures in Christ Jesus. Thus Christ, as our peace, 
 abolishes all distinctions among men that separate and keep 
 apart. But this, after all, is itself the consequence of a yet 
 more profound operation of the great Peacemaker. This 
 enmity between Jew and Gentile, according to its ideal 
 significance, represents the existence of enmity between the 
 Gentiles and God, but, according to its actual manifestation, 
 the existence of enmity between man, both Jew and Gentile, 
 and God. Not only the stone-wall barrier between Jew and 
 Gentile, which made the Gentiles relatively to the Jews far 
 off from God, had to be removed, but also the veil which 
 prevented even the Jew having access to the divine presence 
 in the holiest of all. And ver. 16 speaks of the reconciliation 
 of Jew and Gentile to God as that which alone can effectu- 
 ally secure the restoration of unity among men. And as 
 
214 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 this reconciliation is accomplished in the cross, so the 
 abolition of distinctions between man and man is accomplished 
 in the blood of Christ and in His flesh. Thus the peace- 
 making in the one case is essentially the same as in the 
 other. — It is also to he noted that while we have the work 
 ol' Christ on the cross made prominent as that which slew 
 the enmity and reconciled to God, we have also, in ver. 15, 
 recognition of the work of Christ's Spirit in making the new 
 man, which He does in Himself. 
 
 Ver. 14. For Hk is our peace. — The importance of remem- 
 bering that our enjoyment of the blessings of salvation wholly 
 depends upon our relation to the historical Christ, is shown 
 by the emphasis here laid upon the " He " {avro^) with which 
 the verse opens. He it is who is our peace. The promin- 
 ence here given to the power and work of Christ is very 
 noticeable, when viewed in connection with the opening and 
 closing clause of the preceding verse. — Christ is the Prince of 
 peace (Isa. ix. 6), not only as making peace, but also as being 
 peace, in whom, as well as by whom, we have peace. When 
 we keep hold of this truth that He is the peace of those who 
 believe in Him, we are no longer required to answer the 
 question whether the reference is to peace between Jew and 
 Gentile (as Meyer holds), or peace with God (as Hofmann 
 holds). Meyer thinks that his view is necessitated by the 
 context ; but when we consider the emphasis that has just 
 been laid upon the blood of Christ, which was certainly shed 
 for no other purpose than to reconcile man to God, it would 
 rather seem that the immediate context favoured the other 
 view. It is better not to say that the primary reference is 
 to one or other aspect of peace, but to the historical Christ, 
 in whom at once the distinction of Jew and Gentile and th& 
 enmity that separated from God are done away. 
 
 Who made both one. — That this was an immediate result 
 of having Christ as our peace, was shown, even in the preced- 
 ing clause, by the cliange from the second personal pronoun 
 to the first. Ye were far off, the apostle had said of the 
 Gentiles, and now ye are made nigh in Him who is our 
 jDeace. He who unites us to God, in doing so by the one 
 act and not by a separate operation, unites us to one another. 
 
ciiAr. II. 14. 215 
 
 There is, therefore, neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor 
 uncircumcision, where Christ is all and in all (Col. iii. 11). 
 This accurately describes the one that is created in Christ 
 Jesus as a new creation. The Gentiles are not received as 
 proselytes, as strangers from without who have come over to 
 the Jews. " He does not," says Chrysostom, " mean this, 
 that He hath raised us to that higher dignity of theirs, but 
 that He hath raised both us and them to a yet higher. 
 Only that the blessing to us is greater, because to those it 
 had been promised, and they were nearer than we ; to us it 
 had not been promised, and we were farther off than they. 
 He made us one, not by attaching us to them, but by binding 
 both them and us together into one." The new unity is as 
 little Jewish as Gentile. It is a God-made unity, and there- 
 fore will be enduring, not subject to any subsequent rupture. 
 God is one, and now in Christ man is at one with God. But 
 this union with Christ is in His blood, — that is, in His cross, 
 — where the flesh was crucified ; so that in Him who was dead 
 and is alive again to live for evermore, there is no longer any 
 mention of the flesh, with its distinctions of circumcised and 
 uncircuracised. 
 
 And broke down the middle wcdl of imrtition. — The middle 
 wall is itself a barrier, and the reduplication is intended to 
 make it certain and conspicuous that the separation that 
 follows from the existence of the wall is not an accidental 
 result of the presence of a wall that might have been placed 
 there with an altogether different purpose. It was put up 
 in order to effect a partition of the parties referred to. It 
 was intended as a hedge or fence to shut in and to shut out. 
 This precisely was the purpose of the law as given to Israel. 
 In Gal. ii. 1 8 he uses the same phrase " broke down," to 
 describe his treatment of the doctrine of justification by the 
 works of the law. This partition had served its purpose, 
 the exclusiveness of the Jewish dispensation — a certain form 
 and measure of religious development, but it had fulfilled its 
 mission when the Messiah had appeared as the end of the 
 law and the fulfilment of prophecy. To prolong the separa- 
 tion now could only be mischievous, and would frustrate the 
 establishment of the universal kingdom of the Messiah. 
 
216 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 Ver. 1 5. The enmity. — This is the explanation of what the 
 partition wall really was. It is in apposition to the preceding 
 clause, and is governed by the same verb " broke down," or 
 abolished. The apostle here describes in plain language what 
 lie had there figuratively expressed. Our exposition of the 
 partition wall shows how this enmity is to be understood. 
 It is the opposition of Jew and Gentile, the hatred and 
 variance occasioned by the existence of a peculiar people in 
 the enjoyment of exclusive privileges. This enmity served 
 an important purpose in the divine economy. In the 
 beginning enmity was put between the seed of the serpent 
 and the seed of the woman ; enmity was put between the 
 Israelites and the wicked Canaanites. The separation effected 
 by the law given by Moses caused the enmity of Jew and 
 Gentile, and then this enmity perpetuated that separation. 
 Christ abolishes the enmity by removing its cause, and lifting 
 those who had been separated into a higher unity in His own 
 fellowship. 
 
 In Ris flesh. — Here the apostle recurs to the thought of 
 the crucified Saviour. He who in His blood is our peace, in 
 His flesh removes the enmity. It seems better to connect 
 the clause with what precedes rather than with what follows. 
 The addition of this clause, just like that of the expression 
 " in the blood of Christ " in ver. 13, raises the whole discourse 
 into a higher sphere, and gives a premonitory hint of the 
 thought, explicitly set forth in the following verse, of that 
 deeper enmity between Jew and Gentile alike and God, 
 which lies at -the root of all confusion and dispeace. In 
 regard to their relation to God, while the Gentiles needed to 
 have the middle wall that shut them out from privilege removed, 
 the Jews needed to have the veil taken away ; and then, for 
 the one and for the other, by the blood of Jesus there was a 
 new and living way consecrated through His flesh (Heb. 
 X. 19, 20). 
 
 Having abolished the laio of eomvianchnents in authoritative 
 decrees. — In these words the apostle clearly describes and 
 characterises the ceremonial law. Stier, Der Brief an die 
 JiJpheser, p. 123, insists that the law referred to here is not 
 exclusively the ceremonial law, but that of Moses generally. 
 
CHAP. II. 15. 217 
 
 Now it is undouLteclly true that tlie revealed law, as revealed, 
 was a means of separation. The fact of a supernatural 
 revelation oiven to one nation, and withheld from all others, 
 gave to that one so favoured, a position of privilege that 
 separated it from all the rest. But what the apostle clearly 
 describes in the laboured and carefully constructed proposition 
 before us, is the part of the Mosaic law which was of tempor- 
 ary validity. "Whatever in it was of moral significance was 
 transferred into the law of Christ's kingdom, as part of that 
 word of God which cannot pass away. All that supernatural 
 revelation did for the moral law in the Mosaic legislation, was 
 to utter it in a purer and more complete form than that in 
 which it was expressed elsewhere. The part of it which 
 corresponded to the law written on the heart, as distinguished 
 at once from sinful man's reading of that writing, and from the 
 dispensational ceremonial law, is of eternal obligation, and 
 Avas absolutely "holy" and "spiritual" (Eom. vii. 12, 14). 
 If the apostle had intended the law generally, he would simply 
 have called it the law ; but when he calls it the law, which 
 consists in detailed precepts enforced by external authority, he 
 evidently refers to a particular part of the law — to the law of 
 ceremonial purity, which, by detailed regulations, distinguished 
 clean from unclean, and prohibited all contact with the 
 unclean under threatening of punishment. — -This statement 
 corresponds to "having broken down the enmity in his flesh," 
 in the same way that " making both one " corresponds to 
 " breaking down the middle wall of partition." It tells us 
 what is done in order to remove the enmity. The law of 
 commandments in decrees is the middle wall. And so the 
 direct reference here is to the separation of Jews and Gentiles, 
 which was effected by the ceremonial law, and indeed generally 
 by the Mosaic law (though what was moral and therefore of 
 universal obligation in it was more or less perfectly known 
 outside of Israel), as that was given by means of a special 
 revelation. The apostle directs attention to the particularity 
 and multiplicity of the precepts (ivToXal) of which this law 
 consists, which contributed largely to prevent the realisation 
 of that spiritual unity which it was the design of Christ's 
 work to bring about. These precepts were distinctly dis- 
 
218 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 pensational, and from their very nature incapable of universal 
 application ; desii^ned, indeed, for the very purpose of hedging 
 in a particular nation from all other nations besides. Klopper, 
 who wishes to show that the author of Ephesians is here 
 imitating a passage in his Pauline model (Col. ii. 14), accounts 
 for the absence of this word ivro\a[ in Colossians, by saying that 
 its equivalent appears in the " toicch not, taste nut, handle not " 
 of Col. ii. 21. These words undoubtedly indicate the nature 
 of those minute ceremonial decrees. They must be done away, 
 if the limits of Israel are to be overstepped. Something 
 else must take their place if the offer of divine fellowship is to 
 be extended to all men. But that the apostle did not think 
 of effecting this extension by the substitution of any lower or 
 more lax code, is shown by the word whicli he adds to this 
 already somewhat cumbrous phrase. He shows that this law, 
 fitted though it was to the dispensation under which it was 
 applied, was not the highest conceivable. Just as the Mosaic 
 dispensation gave place to the more spiritual dispensation of 
 Christ (2 Cor. iii. 7-11), there is in this dispensation of the 
 Spirit a higher, mightier principle operating than that law 
 which gave character and distinctiveness to the dispensation 
 of the old covenant. This is brought out by the words " ni 
 authoritative decrees " (eV Soyfiaaiv). This Mosaic law, which 
 consisted in separate precepts {ivrdkal), was imposed by 
 external authority. Each of its precepts was enforced by a 
 decree which, like the utterance of an imperial autocrat, could 
 not be questioned. The law as enjoined upon Israel is thus 
 contrasted, not only with that law written in the hearts of 
 men to which the natural conscience bears witness, but also 
 with that law which, according to God's promise under the new 
 covenant, would be written in the hearts and on the minds of 
 the true spiritual Israel. — The whole clause, then, describes 
 the law in that form and under that aspect in which it was to 
 be done away. It had served its purpose, but it was utterly 
 unsuited to the new dispensation of the Spirit, for these two 
 reasons : (1) As consisting of a multitude of detailed precepts, 
 and so being incapable of universal application ; and (2) As 
 resting primarily on outward authority rather than commend- 
 ing itself to the consciences and hearts of spiritual men. Its 
 
ciLvr. II. 15. 219 
 
 removal !>}' the crucifying of Christ's flesh secures tlie removal 
 of the enmity ; for it implies the substitution of a higher 
 principle, the person of Christ, who imparts unity unto all who 
 come to Him, and by His Spirit enforces His authority, not by 
 external prescriptions, but by commending Himself to the 
 heart and conscience. In order that we might draw nigh to 
 God, it was necessary that the commandment, which was weak 
 and unprofitable, should be disannulled, that the law, which 
 made nothing perfect, should be abolished in favour of the 
 better hope (Heb. vii. 18, 19). Instead of the law, which 
 consisted of detailed precepts, and rested for its sanction on 
 external authority, we have in Christ this better hope, which 
 is one, and which has its warrant and guarantee from within 
 and not from without. That this spiritual law in its inward- 
 ness is far more comprehensive than any code of detailed 
 precepts can ever be, is seen from the exposition of it in the 
 Sermon on the Mount, where the great Teacher shows that His 
 law ajjplies to every thought, and feeling, and desire, as well as 
 to every outward action, of the man. The law of command- 
 ment in decrees, which addressed itself exclusively to the Jew, 
 must be abolished, in oider that the law of Christ, which 
 appeals to man as man, may be established. The bringing in 
 of the better hope does away with the middle wall of partition, 
 so that Jew and Gentile are made one. 
 
 In order that in Himsdf He might make of the two one ncio 
 man. — In Col. iii. 1 0, what is here ascribed to Christ is 
 described as the work of God. But it will be observed that 
 the apostle is here speaking, not of Him whose workmanship 
 the new man is (ver. 10), but of Him in and by whom that 
 operation is carried out which results in the new creature. 
 The regenerate man is God's workmanship, but according to 
 God's plan His image is communicated to those who obtain it 
 through fellowship with Jesus Christ, His express image. We 
 liave here the direct object of that breaking down of the 
 middle wall and the making one of Jew and Gentile. They 
 are together lifted into a new and higher sphere of spiritual 
 existence. There ai'e no varieties of the new man. They are 
 all of God, and God is one. This making one can be accom- 
 plished only in one way. It is in Christ, by common 
 
220 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 participation of His benefits, by the fellowship of Ilis death 
 and resurrection, that a unity of centre and aim is for the first 
 time afforded to all men. And the newness of the new 
 creation consists in this, that it is not the reproduction of Jew 
 or of Gentile, nor yet the production of and being made up of 
 elements common to both of tliese, bat the creation of a new 
 being fashioned after the man Christ Jesus. Hence all 
 distinctions applicable to the old man are utterly foreign to 
 the new. The new man is what his ideal is, for meanwhile 
 he is advancing to the realisation of it ; and that ideal is, for 
 all individuals of the new creation, the same, and is reached 
 when every man is presented before God " perfect in Christ 
 Jesus" (Col. i. 28). 
 
 Making i^mce. — The recurrence of this word peace with 
 which ver. 14 opened, is intended to keep prominently in view 
 the great object of Christ's work. The confusion wrought by 
 sin was everywhere. In the history of our race, it was soon 
 made evident that sin, which separates from God, who alone is 
 one and therefore is the only possible centre of unity, must 
 inunediately and inevitably cause strife and disunion among 
 men. What man needed was peace, procurable only by the 
 removal of sin — the cause of its disappearance. He, therefore, 
 who came to bless man, to deal with his distress, must reveal 
 Himself as the maker and introducer of peace, — making it by 
 His death on the cross, and introducing it into the hearts and 
 lives of men by His Spirit. — The peace formally referred to 
 here is that between Jew and Gentile, for the making of peace 
 between man and God is only introduced expressly in the 
 next verse ; but the use of the present participle here, 
 attached to the immediately preceding clause, is meant, like 
 the " He is our peace " of ver. 14, to emphasise the fact of the 
 abiding activity of Christ as in Himself and in His work the 
 source of our peace. 
 
 Ver. 16. And that He might reconcile hoth in one hocly unto 
 God through the cross. — This, together with the latter part of 
 the preceding verse, indicates the design Christ had in break- 
 ing down the middle wall and abolishing the ceremonial law. 
 This new creation — in which Jews and Gentiles, sundered 
 hitherto, escape from their mutual enmity and are at peace — is 
 
CHAP, II. ic. 221 
 
 also the sphere in wliich tliose who are at one with eacli other 
 are at one with God. The nature of the discussion had 
 required the presentation fast of the peace that was introduced 
 between Jew and Gentile, but peace between man and God 
 really lay at the foundation of all. The apostle's previous 
 conchisioiis regarding the abolition of all distinctions between 
 man and man before God, are of importance only as clearing 
 the way for the carrying out of this grand design of Christ's 
 work. The barrier between Jew and Gentile has been removed, 
 so that both may be reconciled to God. The word reconcile, 
 in the form in which it appears in our text (aTroKaraXXuaaeiv), 
 occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only in Col. i. 20, 21 ; 
 but the simpler form of the verb, wanting the diro, occurs 
 also in a similar sense in 2 Cor. v. 18-20; 1 Cor. vii. 11; 
 Itom. V. 8, 10. The question has been raised, whether the 
 word used in Ephesians and Colossians is merely an intensified 
 form of the simpler word, or whether it implies restoration to 
 an original unity that had been broken. Meyer is inclined to 
 favour the former view, and Calvin, Ellicott, Lightfoot, and 
 Weiss hold decidedly by the latter. That the double 
 compound is used with careful discrimination in Ephesians 
 and Colossians, in order to remind the readers that the state 
 of enmity was one into which man had passed out of a primal 
 condition of peace, is surely unquestionable ; but this I should 
 be inclined to regard as an intensifying, in the most powerful 
 way conceivable, of the idea of reconciliation, which not 
 merely brings together those who had been at enmity among 
 themselves in a new peaceful relation to God, but restores 
 both to a primal harmony with one another and with God, 
 which had long been iiidden from view. Ileconciliation 
 means a change from a hostile to a friendly relationship. 
 The passive verb is used of those who are brought over from 
 a hostile to a friendly attitude. The woman who had left 
 her husband, and thus made the breach, is to be reconciled 
 by returning to him whom she had left (1 Cor. vii. 11). The 
 active verb is used of him who brings about this change and 
 makes peace. In the classical passage, 2 Cor. v. 18-20, we 
 have God in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, while 
 those who were enemies bv their wicked works are entreated 
 
222 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS, 
 
 to be reconciled. Now, it was undoubtedly man who put 
 himself at enmity with God by entering into fellowship witli 
 sin. The presence of sin in man created in him that carnal 
 mind which is enmity against God (Eom. viii. 7). When 
 this enmity was taken out of the heart, undoubtedly the man 
 was reconciled to God. It is upon this aspect of the truth 
 that stress is laid, by those who would substitute a restoration 
 to the fellowship of God for a real atonement through which 
 man is reconciled to God, on the basis of God's reconciliation 
 of Himself in Christ with man. But that is only one side 
 of the truth, and that distinctly the secondary and subsidiary. 
 When man, by entering into fellowship with sin, made himself 
 an enemy with God, by doing so he called forth the wrath 
 of God against him, and so placed himself under God's curse. 
 This divine enmity, occasioned by the human enmity, could 
 be removed only by a reconciliation that provides for the 
 removal of its cause. And so, when God in Christ dealt with 
 sin, and by the sin - offering of Christ destroyed sin. He 
 thereby destroyed the enmity and reconciled the world to 
 Himself. The destruction of the enmity in man was the 
 reconciliation, but this was God's work and not man's. Man 
 had made himself an enemy of God, but he could not undo 
 the enmity, and this God did in the cross of Christ. It is 
 God's reconciliation which man receives (Rom. v. 11). 
 Whatever man can or may do follows only as a consequence 
 of the divine act. Iieconciliation, though l)etween two, is not 
 wrought mutually as the act of both. Biedermann's repre- 
 sentation of the Scripture doctrine of the atonement, as 
 beginning with man, who gives up his hostile attitude toward 
 God, and followed up on God's part by His abandoning of 
 His wrath, is altogether contrary to the teaching of Paul. 
 Not God and man jointly, but God alone, reconciles. And 
 nowhere more distinctly than in our text is reconciliation set 
 forth as solely and distinctively the work of God. The 
 Pauline doctrine of reconciliation is summed up in a 
 thoroughly sound and satisfactory manner by Usteri, 
 Entwichelnny dcs Paulinisdien Lchrhcgrifes (Zur. 1851), 
 p. lOG : "The idea of KaTaXXayt] is not to be understood 
 of something that takes place in God quite objectively as 
 
ciiAr. II. iG. 223 
 
 expiatio, and just as little does it mean something merely 
 subjective which men produce out of themselves ; but it is 
 at once objective and subjective. The KaraWajt] proceeds 
 from God : He is the reconciler, and so is active therein ; 
 Christ is mediator of the gracious gift, men the receivers, who 
 in so far are passive ; but it does not take place apart from 
 7rto-Ti9, a personal act, which indeed is a minimum in 
 comparison with what God and Christ have already done ; 
 but it is yet a necessary condition, as appears from the 
 imperative, 'Be ye reconciled' (2 Cor. v. 20)." The Pauline 
 doctrine of reconciliation is also admirably stated by Weiss, 
 Biblical Theology of the New Testament, i. 428— 430. The 
 doctrine of reconciliation set before us by the writer of 
 Ephesians is in no single particular different from that of the 
 writer of Ifomans and Corinthians. In Eom. v. 10, this 
 reconciliation is said to be effected by the death of the Son 
 of God. In 2 Cor. v. 18, 21, it is said that God hath 
 reconciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ, whom He made to 
 be sin for us. And in Col. i. 20, God reconciles all things 
 to Himself by Christ, through the blood of the cross. In 
 Ephesians, the reconciliation is effected through the cross. 
 The closest relationship possible exists between the Colossian 
 and the Ephesian passages. Pfleiderer, however, maintains 
 that though the language of Ephesians is a studied imitation 
 of that of Colossians, the ideas are essentially different 
 {Paulinism, ii. 178-181). He maintains that, while in 
 Colossians the enmity to be reconciled by the death of 
 Christ consists in the estrangement of the world, and especi- 
 ally of the Gentile Christians, from God, in Ephesians the 
 enemies to be reconciled are the Gentiles and the Jews. A 
 careful examination of the whole passage will, on the contrary, 
 show that, while prominence has been given to the abolition 
 of all exclusive privilege, it was only in order that it might be 
 seen how the reconciliation with God, which both needed, was 
 available for both. That the thought of Jew and Gentile 
 was still present to the writer, is clear from his use of the 
 word " both," but his substitution of this term for the " two " 
 of the preceding verse implies their comprehension already 
 under one category, so that conceived of together, and not 
 
224 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 apart, tlieir reconciliation is not now with one another but 
 with God (tw 0ew). — The question still remains as to the 
 parties for whom this reconciliation was wrought. Our 
 understanding of the term " both," — as meaning Jew and 
 Gentile together, embracing all men, the whole world as 
 standing in need of being reconciled, — supplies an answer to 
 the question. The difficulty which has been felt by some 
 arises with the words " in one body." The reference is not 
 to the crucified body of Christ ; for the apostle proceeds to 
 indicate the part performed by the death upon the cross. It 
 is the crucifixion of Christ's body that accomplishes the 
 reconciliation, which involves the inclusion of the reconciled 
 in one body. The terminology must be understood in 
 accordance with that of the whole section. Just as the " one 
 new man " is related to the "two," so also is the "one body" 
 related to the " both " of our text ; the one body, therefore, is 
 the new community into which both Jews and Gentiles are 
 brought through the cross. There is no longer a Jewish Church 
 and a Gentile Church, nor even a Church consisting of Jewish 
 Christians and Gentile Christians, but all the members of 
 this community are raised out of party distractions and 
 conflicts through their membership in this one body, — the 
 mystical body of Christ, — into whicii they are brought by 
 Christ's atoning death. " It is," says Chrysostom, " like 
 persons being in a house, with two chambers below, and one 
 large and grand one above ; they would not be able to see 
 each other till they had got above." It is therefore wrong 
 to say with Eitschl, that this reconciliation is for the com- 
 munity. The apostle does not assume that the community is 
 ibrmed, that the two are first of all combined in one body, 
 and then the reconciliation is wrought. Eather this combina- 
 tion of Jew and Gentile in the one body is regarded as an 
 element in this reconciliation. In Christ's death Jew and 
 Gentile are reconciled to God and to one another, not in 
 successive stages or by separate acts, but that which unites 
 both to God unites also the one to the other. The forming 
 of the community, the creating of the Church as the body of 
 Clnnst, is not a preliminary to, but an integral element in, the 
 reconciliation of God and men. 
 
CHAP. II. 17. 225 
 
 Having slain the enmity in it. — What is here described 
 preceded the reconciliation spoken of in the Last clause, not 
 in order of time, but in order of thouglit. Christ reconciles 
 us in His cross to God, but this involves or implies that the 
 old enmity, which had separated Jews and Gentiles hitherto, 
 has been abolished. Thus the enmity spoken of here is the 
 same as that spoken of in ver. 15, that which existed between 
 Jew and Gentile. It seems strange that any expositor should 
 ever have thought that it could be used of the feeling enter- 
 tained by God with reference to man. It is altogether un- 
 scriptural and offensive to the pious consciousness, to speak 
 of God as entertaining a feeling of enmity against any of His 
 creatures. There is wrath in God against sin, and God is 
 angry with the sinner; but it is only the relation of man as 
 a sinner toward God that can be described as one of enmity. 
 Then, again, the enmity of our text cannot be, as Harless, 
 Hofmann, and others understand it, the hostility of men, 
 Jews and Gentiles, against God, nor even, as Ellicott supposes, 
 primarily this hostility, and secondarily also that between Jew 
 and Gentile ; for the apostle is not in this section referring to 
 the reconciliation of man to God, by the removal of the enmity 
 that is in man's heart, but of the removal of God's anger 
 because of sin, by the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ on the 
 cross. — This destruction of the enmity is described as having 
 been accomplished on the cross. Hofmann, wlio insists that 
 this latter clause of the verse should begin with " through the 
 cross," on which, rather than upon "having slain," he thinks 
 the emphasis should be laid, is obliged to understand " in it " 
 (eV avroi), not of the cross, but of the " one body." But, not- 
 withstanding Hofmann's assertion to the contrary, it seems 
 difficult in that case to understand the body in any other 
 sense than that of the crucified body of Christ, which, as 
 we have seen and as Hofmann allows, is unsuitable in this 
 place. 
 
 Ver. 17. And having come, preached j^cace to you the far off, 
 a.nd iKCLce to the near. — This statement takes us back again to 
 the 14th verse. After setting down there the main proposi- 
 tion : He {avTo<i) is our peace, as the ground of his previous 
 statement (ver. 1 3), that those who had been far off were made 
 
 P 
 
226 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 iiigh, the apostle had, by several subordinate clauses (vers, 
 14-16), explained how Christ had performed His office of 
 Peacemaker, and secured to Himself unchallengeable title to the 
 name, Our Peace ; and now he resumes, from the point gained 
 in the first clause of ver, 14, by saying that He who is our 
 peace came also to proclaim that peace. This peace is not 
 merely peace between Jew and Gentile, but is that which 
 both Jew and Gentile needed. And seeing that tlie need of 
 Jews and Gentiles was the same, namely, to be brought Jiear 
 God, or, as ver. 18 puts it, to obtain access unto the Father, 
 the message preached to the one and to the other was the 
 same. This was really the way in which the separation of 
 Jew and Gentile was abolished, when to both the same 
 gospel was preached, the same message of peace delivered. 
 Before the coming of Christ, there were those vvho were far 
 off, and others who were relatively near; but when He preached 
 peace to both, that distinction ceased. — Many have felt the 
 difficulty of applying these words directly to Christ, inas- 
 much as His own personal ministry did not extend beyond 
 the limits of Israel, so that He consequently preached only 
 to the near. Hence Ambrose among the fathers, and Calvin 
 with most of the reformed commentators, refer them to the 
 preaching of the apostles as the legates and representatives of 
 Christ. The evident connection, however, of this clause with 
 the opening words of ver. 14, would seem to make it abso- 
 lutely necessary to refer them to Christ's own personal act, 
 and not to that of any representatives. Harless refers to two 
 passages (2 Cor. xiii. 3 ; Acts x. 3G) to prove that if any one 
 is thought of as acting in and through another, that other is 
 named. So here, if the preaching were that of the apostles, 
 it would have been said, " He who is our peace came in the 
 person of His apostles, and preached peace." But really no 
 difficulty need be felt in speaking of the proclamation of 
 peace to all men, Jews and Gentiles, as the preaching of 
 Christ at His coming. In the synagogue of Nazareth, Jesus, 
 in the language of Scripture, which He declared to be that 
 very day fulfilled, proclaimed in the very forefront of the 
 programme of His work His preaching of the gospel to the 
 poor (Luke iv. 18-21). Whether this scene actually occurred 
 
CHAP. II. 18. 227 
 
 at the beginning of Christ's ministry, or at a subsequent period, 
 it is admitted by all evangelical expositors that " no better 
 motto could be found for that ministry than the prophetic 
 oracle read in the synagogue of Nazareth " (Bruce, Galilean 
 Gospel, p. 36). " It is a worthy frontispiece, in respect both 
 of tho, grace and of the universality oi the gospel" (p. 31). 
 He preached His gospel to the poor, to all who needed it ; and, 
 seeing that need of peace on the part of man was the only 
 motive of His bringing it, the far-off are mentioned before 
 the near. This was the message which Christ's preaching 
 proclaimed from the very first. The message would not be 
 worthy of His coming, if, when He came, He had only some- 
 thing less than this to preach. 
 
 Ver. 18. For through Him we both have access in one Spirit 
 unto the Father. — What man needed, Jew and Gentile alike, 
 was access to God. Now that it was clearly understood that 
 man's salvation meant his restoration to God's favour and 
 fellowship, the comparative nearness of the Jews, as con- 
 trasted with the far-off Gentiles, was a very small thing. It 
 was of no account at all, and so the distinction is blotted out. 
 Facts have proved that both Jews and Gentiles are all under 
 Him (Rom, iii. 9). Both are separated from God, and so 
 Ions as the "ulf is not bridged, measurements of distance are 
 of no consequence. What both need is access to the Father. 
 It should be noticed that access to God is regarded as the 
 equivalent of that peace spoken of in the preceding verse. 
 And the access is to God as Father, to whom we owe our 
 being, and in whom our being finds satisfaction. When we 
 are brought to God so as to recognise Him as Father, so as 
 to realise and know the privileges and obligations of the 
 relationship, we are at peace. — This access to the Father we 
 liave through Christ. The Apostle Peter uses the same word 
 as is here employed, when he says, " Christ also hath once 
 suffered for sins, the just for tlie unjust, that He might give 
 us access to God " (1 Pet. iii. 18). What is said in ver. 13 
 to be accomplished " by the blood of Christ," is here said to 
 be " through Him." The emphasis is only on these opening 
 words. The salvation is one for all, and makes all one, 
 because it comes through one channel, and by the one divine 
 
■'228 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIAXS. 
 
 Person. " Xo man cometh to the Father but by me " (John 
 xiv. 6). It is Christ's atoning death that prepares for us 
 the way to God — the way that is through His flesh (Heb. x. 
 19-22). — " Dost thou not know how to appear before God, 
 or to come to Him ? Come first to Christ, and He will take 
 thee by the hand, and go along with thee, and lead thee to 
 His Father" (Goodwin, Worhs, iv. 89). — Then, again, this 
 access through the Son to the Father is mediated by the 
 Spirit. This verse is one of the most satisfactory Trinitarian 
 texts in the Xew Testament. As Phillips Brooks puts it, in 
 an able sermon on this text, "We have here man's salvation 
 described as having its end in the Father, unto whom we have 
 access, its method through the Son, and its power in the Holy 
 Spirit." Clearly this " in one Spirit " is not to be connected 
 with " both," as indicating the spiritual unity of those brought 
 by the Son to the Father ; but w^th the words " we have 
 access," as indicating the influence by which we are moved 
 on the way to God. This moving power is the Spirit of 
 Christ. The death of Christ is the making of the way, and 
 the Holy Spirit's influence is the moving principle by which 
 we are led and enabled to make use of the way. The access 
 spoken of is a continued fact in the life of man. It is not 
 an introduction followed by a withdrawal. "We came before 
 God, and we remain with Him, in the same spiritual atmo- 
 sphere, inspired by His Spirit, animated by the Spirit of 
 holiness. He who enjoj's access unto the Father has been 
 justified by the blood of Christ, and is being sanctified by the 
 Holy Spirit. The continuousness of the access which we 
 have (e'x^o/j.ev, icc are having) unto the Holy Father, implies 
 the continuous sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit. This 
 Spirit is sent into our hearts by Father and Son ; and it is the 
 continued indwelling of this Spirit in us, which enables us to 
 call God Father (Rom. viii. 15), and to retain our position as 
 His sons. 
 
 Vers. 19—22. The apostle now proceeds to sum up, by way 
 of conclusion from all that he has said, the privileges of those 
 who have been brought nigh. He does not in those verses 
 go back upon the old distinction of Jew and Gentile, which, 
 as he has just shown, has for ever ceased. It is the entire 
 
CHAP. II. 19. 229 
 
 new community in Christ Jesus of which he now speaks, who 
 before had not that access unto the Father, which now, through 
 Christ's death, they have in His Spirit. 
 
 Ver. 19. So then ye are no longer stramjcrs and foreigjiers. — 
 The apostle does not linger over the description of their earlier 
 condition. He has already drawn out a description in detail 
 of the state of the Gentiles out of Christ in ver. 12, and now 
 he merely suggests a reminiscence of it with a wider applica- 
 tion to all, both Jews and Gentiles, before they had believed in 
 Christ. His only object now is to give point to the descrip- 
 tion, on which he desires to enlarge, of the privileges of their 
 position as Christians, in relation to the things of God and 
 His kingdom. All that he has to say of the past he sums up 
 in two words : strangers and foreigners. Strangers (^evot) 
 are those who find themselves among a people not their own. 
 The old classical usage of the word points them out as those 
 to whom hospitality might be shown. Those Ephesian Chris- 
 tians, before they had believed in Christ, were not of the 
 people of God. Foreigners {irdpoiKot) are those who find 
 themselves in a place that is not their own country. They 
 are without civil rights, without citizenship, sojourners in a 
 strange land, where they have not been naturalised. 
 
 But ye are felloio-eitdcns of the saints, and memhcrs of the 
 household of God. — The verb is here repeated for the sake of 
 emphasis, and to show that what follows is the principal pro- 
 position. — Here we have a concise description of the position 
 of believers in Christ, in respect of their relation to God. 
 Only those have access to God who are under the influence 
 of His Holy Spirit. The saints are those who stand before 
 God, and are at peace with Him. They are those out of all 
 nations and of all ages who have washed their robes and 
 made them white. By faith in Christ they are brought into 
 this fellowship. It was by this very title that the apostle 
 greeted the Ephesian believers in the opening words of the 
 epistle. Tiiey are now reckoned among the saints, but this 
 they owe to Christ, for all that is saintly in them has been 
 wrought in them by the Spirit of Christ. Holiness is that 
 which characterises all the citizens of the city of God, into 
 which everything that is glorious and pure is being gathered. 
 
230 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 To be made sharers of this citizenship is to have been made 
 nigh by the blood of Christ. " "Were there a way by which 
 worldly men, as worldly men, could enter the divine city, 
 they would find themselves humiliatingly and wretchedly out 
 of their element. Could any of us gain admission to it in 
 our own nature and spirit, the loneliest sense of being strangers 
 and foreigners would seize and oppress us. But if we are 
 quickened together with Christ, and one nature and spirit 
 with Him, we shall be perfectly at home with all its multi- 
 tudes " (Pulsford, Christ and His Seed, pp. 81,82). Then, again, 
 this city of God is described under the figure of God's house- 
 hold. Its citizens are not merely related to God, as subjects 
 who derive from Him laws and ordinances.and who yield to Him 
 homage and obedience, but they are related to Him as members 
 of His family (ocKeloc rov deov). Those who had been home- 
 less in a strange land are now at home in the household of 
 God. 
 
 Ver. 20. Built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets. — 
 The thought of God's household suggests the idea of God's 
 house. Believers in Christ belong to that household as integral 
 portions of that glorious palace which God has reared as a 
 dwelling-place for Himself. Collectively they are His 
 " spiritual house," of which they are individually the " living 
 stones" (1 Pet. ii. 5). The house is " built up" by success- 
 ive additions ; but all these, if they are to be actual portions 
 of the building, must be laid upon the foundation. We have 
 here two points of interest to examine — (1) Who are the 
 apostles and prophets referred to ; and (2) In what sense 
 are they the foundation of the house of God ? — We may say 
 at once that "prophets" here evidently mean New Testa- 
 ment and not Old Testament prophets. The reference to Old 
 Testament prophets would at this point be utterly out of 
 place, since the writer has now transcended the distinction of 
 Jew and Gentile, and could not thus fall back upon a peculi- 
 arity of a dispensation that was already finally closed. And 
 even had this been allowable, the prophets would in that case 
 certainly have been named before the apostles. The prophets 
 of the apostolic age were closely joined to the apostles (1 Cor. 
 xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11). Both alike were itinerants; the 
 
CHAP. II. 20, 231 
 
 special function of tlie prophets beins to follow up immedi- 
 ately the work of the apostles. It was the duty of the 
 prophet to edify, counsel, and comfort those who had received 
 the messai^e of truth (1 Cor. xiv. 3). The prophet was there- 
 fore the closely attached assistant of the apostle, and the 
 work of both lay among the young Christian communities. 
 The apostle, if opportunity was given, might do the work ot 
 the prophet. Under the old dispensation, the pair of func- 
 tionaries that answered to the Kew Testament apostles and 
 prophets, were that of lawgiver and prophet. The lawgiver 
 was also prophet, and the other prophets were the expounders 
 of the law whose inspired expositions were God's own inter- 
 pretation of His law, in application to the circumstances and 
 requirements of the particular age. What was characteristic 
 of New Testament apostles and prophets was their immediate 
 divine inspiration, which, in the form of supernatural gifts or 
 charisms, was granted them for the use of the Church in the 
 early days of its history. This inspiration fitted them for 
 discovering the future, where the knowledge of it was needed 
 for the spiritual development of the Church. So Agabus of 
 Jerusalem, at Antioch, foretold the coming famine, in order 
 that the saints might be in a position to make provision ior 
 those who would be in distress (Acts xi. 27). Those, then, 
 who in the beginnings of Christianity, as directly called ot 
 God, had to do with the founding of churches, are here 
 described as the foundation on which the believing com- 
 munity is built up.— The more serious question remains, as 
 to the sense in which we must take the word " foundation 
 in our text. The generally accepted explanation is, that 
 this foundation consists of the system of doctrine proclaimed 
 by these founders of churches. The foundation, accordnig 
 to this theory, is not the apostles and prophets, but that laid 
 by them. So Harless, Meyer, Ellicott, Beet, Moule. This 
 interpretation makes the statement easy, and brings it into 
 literal accord with 1 Cor. iii. 11. But against this reading of 
 the passage, Hofmann has called attention to the improbabdity 
 of a doctrine, and not rather persons, being intended here, 
 seeino- that the person of Jesus Christ is spoken of as the 
 corue°-stone, and the persons of believers as the stones con- 
 
232 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 stituting the building. And then, again, Klopper ^ points out 
 that, in the following participial clause, Jesus Christ is not 
 said to lay but to he the corner-stone, and that correspondingly 
 we should here expect it to be said, not that the apostles and 
 prophets laid, but that they are the foundation of the Church. 
 Is it scriptural, is it consistent with the Scripture statements, 
 to call apostles the foundation of the Church ? In 2 Tim. ii. 
 19 we read, "The firm foundation of God standeth," where 
 undoubtedly the true elect of God are intended, who resist all 
 temptations to unfaithfulness. It is God's foundation, laid 
 by Him and not by man. Other foundation can no man lay, 
 foundation laying is not man's work. And so in regard to 
 Christ it is said that God laid Him as a sure foundation (Isa. 
 xxviii. 16), and the making of Him the chief corner-stone is 
 the Lord's doing (Ps. cxviii. 22, 23). In His eternal counsels 
 His own elect are included in the sureness of this foundation. 
 The figure, as physical, is not adequate to unfold the fulness 
 of the spiritual reality. Each stone, by contact with the one 
 living stone, becomes instinct with the same life. But, in the 
 building up, a special rank is given to those who have been, 
 by immediate divine calling and inspiration. His witnesses 
 unto all besides. They, in fellowship with Christ, as forming 
 the first layer, are called the foundation, as the apocalyptic 
 seer beheld on the foundations of the wall of the city of 
 God the names of tlie twelve apostles of the Lamb (Rev. 
 xxi. 14). 
 
 Its head corner-stone heiiuj Christ Jesus. — This foundation, 
 consisting of living persons, is made one and sure by being 
 knit together in Christ. He is corner-stone of the founda- 
 tion. To join the avrov to Christ Jesus, and translate 
 " Christ Jesus Himself," is to make quite a useless addition 
 to the name. What we want to know is how the apostles 
 and prophets came to get such a position in the house of 
 God, and the purpose of this clause is to show that they 
 owe their position to Christ. We therefore join avrov to 
 ^ "We caunot, however, regard Klopper as successful in his attempt to show 
 that the prophets here meant are the Old Testament prophets. He thinks 
 that the foundation, consisting of the representatives of the covenants of 
 promise, and of the j)reachers of its fulfilment, is peculiarly suitable for a 
 community that comprehends believers from among the Jews and Gentiles. 
 
CHAP. II. 21. 233 
 
 difieXioi', and render, " The head corner-stone of the founda- 
 tion." In the LXX., which seems to have been before the 
 apostle, Isa. xxviii. 16 is rendered, "I lay among the, foundations^ 
 of Zion a stone," etc. {I'yui e/x/9aXX&) ei'? ra Oe^iiXia Hitov 
 Xidov). Xo apostle or prophet could ever be called the 
 foundation-stone of the Church, or of any Churcli. Apostles 
 and prophets are the foundation {de^eXiov not de^ekioi \l6ol). 
 The only being Avho can be called foundation-stone is Jesus 
 Christ ; but He is here considered not as the foundation-stone 
 but as the corner-stone, and to speak of Him in connection 
 with our text as foundation-stone is to confuse the apostolic 
 figure. As His ininiediate representatives, apostles and 
 prophets form the foundation. This dignity they owe to 
 Him. He is the corner-stone which binds them together into 
 a foundation, wanting which they would simply be detached 
 and useless stones. Hence the idea of foundation is not far 
 away; and though not here expressed, yet in Isa. xxviii. IG 
 the corner - stone of the foundation is par excellence the 
 foundation-stone. The idea of the apostle is not that of a 
 corner-stone binding two walls together, so as to bring in 
 again the harmonious union of Jew and Gentile, but that of 
 an indispensable and all-essential centre of the foundation 
 on which all else is reared. We have therefore here the 
 apostle's reason for assuring the believing Ephesians that they 
 were recognised as members of God's household ; for Christ, 
 in whom they have believed, is the corner-stone in God's 
 spiritual house. 
 
 Ver. 21. In ivliom each luihling heing fitly joined together 
 groweth into a Temjjic holy in the Lord. — The reference now is 
 not directly to the figure of the corner-stone, but to Him who 
 is represented by it, Christ Jesus ; not " in which " but " in 
 whom." It depends upon our vital union with Him whether 
 the figure of the spiritual building is applicable to us, if 
 thus in Him we may be individually compared to a building 
 in process of construction, in which each component part is re- 
 ceiving its own place. It is not altogether impossible to render 
 iraaa oUohofxr} as our Authorised Version, Ellicott, etc., do by 
 " all the building," but undoubtedly we should, for such a 
 rendering, expect irdaa rj ol/roSo/xi]. The argument 'against 
 
234 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 such a rendering is concisely and convincingly stated by 
 Lightfoot, Ignatius, ii. Qo. After showing that no example of 
 such a use of 7ra? anarthrous has been produced, he refers to 
 our passage. " It is strange that no one has adduced 
 Eph. ii. 21, where iracra olKoSofxy] is the best supported 
 reading ; but even though this reading be accepted, the con- 
 text (especially crvvoiKohoiielade) shows that many oUoSo/jLai 
 are required to make up the one temple (comp. Matt. xxiv. 1 ; 
 Mark xiii. 1, 2), and that, therefore, 'every building' is the 
 right rendering." It has been usual to understand each 
 building of particular churches, but there lias been no 
 reference in the context to separate local communities, such as 
 would be required to justify the introduction here of such an 
 idea. Nor do we find anywhere in the New Testament the 
 figure of a building applied to a local church. In the only 
 other passages in the New Testament in which the word 
 oiKoSo/jir] is used in the sense of a spiritual building, it is 
 applied either to the spiritual body that forms the residence 
 of the disembodied spirit of the redeemed (2 Cor. v. 1), or to 
 the individual believer in Christ who is described as God's 
 building (1 Cor. iii. 9), It should also be observed that in 
 other passages (1 Cor. xiv. 12 ; Eph. iv. 12-16, etc.), where 
 the word means edification, the Church that is edified can 
 only mean the individual members of the Church. This 
 sense admirably suits the purpose of the apostle in our text. 
 In Christ each believer is having the various parts of his 
 being brought into their proper places, and developed in their 
 right proportions. The growth of each depends upon his hevivj 
 joined together with others in the Lord (avvap/jLo\oyov/j,evwv, 
 used only here and in chap. iv. 16, of a process of union now 
 going on). The present condition of each building is that of 
 an incomplete, unfinished structure ; but when completed it 
 will exactly fit into its place in God's plan, having grown 
 exactly in those directions and in that degree required. Each 
 building, when completed, will be a living stone. God's 
 great temple is to be constructed of living stones, each 
 believer having his place according to his life of faith, and 
 not as a mere integral part of any local community or church. 
 The walls of God's temple are not built in sections, which are 
 
CHAP. II. 22, 235 
 
 then lifted into their places, bnt they are built up stone by 
 stone. Fitness for occupying their own place in this glorious 
 structure, is the end which all God's work on the individual 
 members of His Church seeks to accomplish. The city of 
 God and the house of God are co-extensive ; he who has 
 citizenship in the one has membership and place in the other. 
 There is no need of assuming that the apostle had before him 
 the thought, either of the temple of the Ephesian ])iana, or the 
 temple of Jerusalem. Apart from all reference to particular 
 temples, the figure here used is a natural one. There seems 
 no ground for the theory of Mr. Chase {Expositor, 3rd Series, 
 iv. 318), nor anything to be gained from it, that Paul 
 here uses vao^, where he might have been expected to use 
 lepov (as in Matt. xxiv. 1), to indicate that, because of the 
 breaking down of the middle wall of partition, there was no 
 longer the distinction of outer and inner courts, but all had 
 access to the innermost shrine. The fact is unquestionable, 
 that it is one temple in which all living stones will find place, 
 but the statement has been already made, that all have access 
 by Christ to the Father, and this, though necessarily presup- 
 posed, is not here again emphasised. The holiness of the temple 
 results from its being the Lord's, and being built up in Him. 
 
 Hence the last words of the verse, " in the Lord," are joined 
 immediately with " holy." He, therefore, who has access to 
 the Father through the Son, in the Holy Spirit, has his place 
 in the temple that is holy in the Lord. 
 
 Ver. 22. In whom ye also are built vp into a hahitation of 
 God in the Sjnrit. — We have here the second relative clause 
 attached to ver. 20, introduced in the same way as the former 
 clause. As it is in Christ that each individual believer is 
 fitted for his place in the house of God, the apostle lenders 
 his statement more impressive by giving the same declaration 
 an immediately personal application. He reminds them of 
 their calling as believers and saints. "What is new here is 
 the description of the divine residence in men as a reality and 
 not a figure. The designation "temple" (va6<i) had an air of 
 remoteness about it, and a suggestion of formal and occasional 
 appearances and manifestations ; but the word " habitation " 
 (KaroiKrjrijpiov, not elsewhere used by Paul) indicates a place 
 
236 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 of continued residence, a place of constant abode. And this 
 is further explained by the description of its suitability for 
 divine residence, be3ause of its spiritual quality. It is under 
 the influence of the Holy Spirit, that those who are built up 
 in Christ become a fit habitation for God the Father. 
 
 In the twelve verses of this section we are told the story 
 of grace, what it has done for the Gentiles, and how it has 
 made all earlier distinctions disappear, so that they are no 
 longer thought of as Gentiles, but only as believers in Jesus 
 Christ. The doctrines set forth are mainly two: (1) The 
 doctrine of reconciliation (vers. 11-18), where we have the 
 redemptive activity of the three Persons of the Trinity 
 explicitly stated in ver. 18, and implied throughout; for it is 
 to God that men have to be reconciled, since they are, by reason 
 of sin. estranged from and at enmity with Him, and this can 
 be accomplished only by the death of Christ, who makes 
 peace by His blood, which we can share only as we are 
 influenced and controlled by His Holy Spirit: (2) TJlc 
 blessedness of the reconciled (vers. 19-22), where again the 
 mystery of the Trinity underlies the doctrinal exposition ; for 
 we are built up in Christ Jesus as a temple of God, for whose 
 indwelling we are fitted by the inward influence and power 
 of tlie Holy Spirit. 
 
 (2) God's grace toward Paul as Apostle of the Geiitiles 
 (chap. iii. 1-13). 
 
 Ver. 1. For this cause am I, Paid, the ijrisoncr of Jesus Christ 
 for you Gentiles. — There are two possible views of the construc- 
 tion of this clause, one or otlier of which we must adopt. 
 The Syriac translator and Chrysostom, followed by many 
 ancients and moderns, including Meyer, simply supplied the 
 substantiv^e verb so as to read, " I, Paul, am the prisoner," 
 etc. The other theory, which declines to supply anything, 
 and regards the construction as here broken off', to be resumed 
 at ver, 8, or ver. 13, or ver, 14, or at chap. iv. 1, was first of 
 all stated by Theodore t, and has been adopted by many 
 distinguished exegetes of earlier and later times, among 
 others by Luther and Bengel, Harless, Olshausen, EUicott, and 
 Eadie, Klopper and Beck, This notion of a broken construe- 
 
CHAP. III. 1. 237 
 
 tion resumed somewhere or other, or even (as Baumgarten- 
 Crnsius supposes) not resumed at all, should evidently be 
 resorted to only as a desperate expedient. It is decidedly 
 the current view among interpreters, because it has seemed 
 impossible to find in the immediate context anything that 
 Paul did answering to the " for this cause " by which the 
 present statement is introduced. If we shall find ourselves 
 obliged thus to understand the clause, then the style is 
 distinctly not Pauline, and is not to be paralleled by the 
 parenthetical passages that occur in other epistles. The 
 omission of the substantive verb in a clause like this is quite 
 common in the writings of Paul and throughout the New 
 Testament. We unhesitatingly adopt the translation given 
 above. — " For this cause " refers to the immediately preceding 
 context, and calls attention to the fact that his present 
 imprisonment is the consequence of his devotion to the 
 spiritual interests of the Gentiles. Now, if we consider the 
 circumstances of the apostle's arrest at Jerusalem, we see at 
 once how appropriate such an account of his present circum- 
 stances is. He was first of all mobbed in the temple, on a 
 charge of bringing Gentiles into that holy place (Acts xxi. 
 29), a story originating, no doubt, from his well-known 
 interest in the Gentiles ; and then, when he was allowed 
 to address the crowd, he was listened to until he had 
 reported the terms of his commission from God, " Depart, for 
 I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles " (Acts xxii. 
 21). Tlius Paul could declare that, in a very literal and 
 exact sense, he was prisoner for the Gentiles. Then, again, 
 this record of Paul's devotedness to the interests of the 
 Gentiles naturally follows the preceding section (ii. 11-22), 
 which describes what grace has done for them. His 
 imprisonment on account of tlie stand he has taken on their 
 behalf is a historical fact, and he is not ashamed. He is 
 suffering in a good cause. Those Gentiles who liave been 
 blessed by that gospel, for the preaching of which to them 
 Paul is now a prisoner, know that the benefit brought to them 
 is unspeakably great. Hence Paul says exultantly, " For this 
 cause am I prisoner." This also naturally accounts for the 
 direction which the apostle's thought takes in the following 
 
238 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 verses. He lingers over the thought of his special commis- 
 sion, so that those who have been blessed through him may 
 understand and press on to secure full possession of that grace 
 of God of which he is the minister. — Paul here calls himself 
 " the prisoner of Jesus Christ." He regards himself under 
 all circumstances and at all times as the property of Christ. 
 " I am Christ's, and this holds true whether I am bond or free, 
 whether I am going about founding and confirming churches 
 or lying in bonds upon a prison floor." He is now a prisoner, 
 just because he is Christ's property. Had he not confessed 
 his Master, and occupied himself proclaiming the special 
 message on behalf of the Gentiles whicli had been given him, 
 he would not now have been a prisoner. It was the convic- 
 tion that he belonged to Christ that made him persistent in 
 preaching everywhere that gospel, which was to the Jews a 
 stumbling-block and to the Greeks foolishness. As Christ's 
 servant he preached to the Gentiles, and for his service to the 
 Gentiles he is imprisoned ; but while the immediate cause of 
 his imprisonment is the work he has been doing among the 
 Gentiles, he goes back to the fundamental point that it is as 
 the Lord's that he is prisoner for them. This is a thoroughly 
 Pauline style of thought and expression. So in 1 Cor. ix. 23, 
 where he has shown how he sought to mould and fashion his 
 life for the spiritual benefit of all men, he declares that all is 
 done under the constraining influence of a higher end, for he 
 does this " for the gospel's sake." It is not he who is the 
 champion of the spiritual rights of the Gentiles, but Jesus 
 Christ, whose he is and whom he serves. Thus the thought 
 of the closing verses of the last chapter is carried on into this 
 new section. All their spiritual privileges they owe to Christ, 
 and possess in Christ. Whatever Paul has done for them, 
 whatever comfort and help his preaching has brought them, 
 inust also be reckoned to Christ. For who is Paul ? He 
 answers, " I am Jesus Christ's." 
 
 Ver. 2. !/'])& have heard of the dispensation of the grace of 
 God, which was given me to you ward. — This is a passage that 
 has been very frequently quoted in favour of the idea that 
 the epistle is addressed to readers who had never been visited 
 by the writer, and were not personally known to him. Many 
 
CHAP. III. 2. 239 
 
 have understood the words, " if ye have heard," as implying 
 a doubt as to whether the fact of Paul's special commission 
 as Apostle to the Gentiles had ever been even reported to 
 these people. Even witli this interpretation, some have sup- 
 posed it possible still to maintain the Ephesian destination 
 of the epistle. Calvin says, " There is reason to believe that 
 while Paul was at Ephesus he had said nothing on these 
 subjects, no necessity for doing so having arisen ; for no 
 controversy had taken place among them about the calling 
 of the Gentiles. If he had made any mention of them in 
 his discourses, he would have reminded the Ephesians of his 
 former statements, instead of referring generally, as he now 
 does, to common report and to his own epistle." We do not 
 seem to have any reason to believe what is here assumed. 
 In a community like that of Ephesus, where the Christian 
 Church consisted largely of a Gentile element, with a very 
 considerable number of Jewish converts, and an actively 
 hostile Jewish community outside, those were questions 
 which, from the first, must have been well to the front. But 
 we do not see that the words before us contain a general 
 reference to common report. The hearing spoken of is know- 
 ledge, in whatsoever way it may have been obtained. Almost 
 all who read the passage as Calvin does, regard the assump- 
 tion of ignorance on the part of the readers respecting Paul's 
 special commission, as evidence that the Ephesians were not 
 the readers or that Paul was not the writer. But this under- 
 standing of the conditional particle is absolutely erroneous. 
 In all the passages in the New Testament where this particle 
 occurs (2 Cor. v. 3 ; Gal. iii. 4; Eph. iv. 21 ; Col. i. 23), as 
 well as in our text, there is no doubt implied, but a very 
 positive expectation of an affirmative answer, " If, as I am 
 sure is the case." ^ This hypothetical way of putting it is 
 intended to give a peculiarly strong expression to the fact 
 that what he is about to mention is something very familiar 
 to them, which he mentions now only that his readers, by 
 ' See Winer, Treatise on the Grammar of the Neio Testament Greeh, p. 561, 
 Edin. 1882; Grimm, Greek-English Lexicon of the Neiv Testament, p. Ill, 
 Edin. 1886 ; Liglitfoot, Commentary on Galafians, lOtli ed., p. 135, 1890. 
 Meyer and Ellicott hold that not the particle alone but the context determines 
 whether doubt be altogether absent. 
 
240 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 keeping it directly iu view, may feel how authoritatively he 
 can speak about their privileges in the gospel and their 
 standing before God. And even if this were not decisive, 
 the context, unless strained and twisted for a purpose, makes 
 it evident that the writer does not assume the possibility of 
 his readers being ignorant of these things. We surely cannot 
 conceive of a Gentile Christian community, in which such 
 attainments had been made as would render the members 
 capable of appreciating such an epistle as this, being ignorant 
 of the grounds on which the very hope of their calling rested. 
 In the sense of a strong assertion of their knowledge of his 
 calling as the Apostle of the Gentiles, this verse is closely 
 linked on to the preceding verse. Paul, who is Christ's, is 
 prisoner on their behalf, as they must very well know, con- 
 sidering all that they had been taught of God's love for 
 sinners and of the provision that He had made for all, 
 making no difference between Jew and Gentile. 
 
 " The dispensation of the grace of God " is that economy or 
 scheme which is contrived for the exhibition or manifestation 
 of the grace of God. In the Old Testament dispensation 
 God's grace was certainly shown, but the limited range of its 
 application showed that the dispensation represented an early 
 stage in the development. The dispensation in which those 
 limits were removed, was certainly one that more adequately 
 corresponded to the character of God's grace. The gospel 
 which is suited alike to Jew and Gentile, and is offered with 
 equal freedom to both, as compared with earlier dispensa- 
 tions, and when regarded as the final dispensation, is rightly 
 designated the dispensation of the grace of God. This word 
 rendered dispensation, our own word " economy," literally 
 means " the law of the house." Laying hold upon this idea, 
 Graham ^ very beautifully sets forth the meaning and connec- 
 tion of our text : " Ye have heard that God is forming His 
 house, His living temple ; and the law of the heavenly 
 architecture is, that Jews and Gentiles, rich and poor, good 
 and bad, should be built up and cemented together by faith 
 and love, under one Head, Jesus Christ. This I am com- 
 missioned to proclaim to the world, and this is the dispensa- 
 ^ Graham, Lectures on St. PauVs Epistles to the Ephesians, p. 154. 
 
CHAP. III. 3. 241 
 
 tion of grace which is given me for your sakes." This 
 dispensation, therefore, is not, as Meyer and Ellicott and 
 most expositors maintain, tlie special grace given to Paul in 
 giving him the distinctive calling as Apostle of the Gentiles. 
 The " law of the house " is no peculiar grace with which God 
 has favoured Paul as the special administrator. It is in its 
 fullest sense the New Testament or gospel dispensation.^ If 
 the commentators' meaning had been that of the apostle, he 
 would have said, not " the dispensation of the grace," but 
 " the grace given me of God in the dispensation." What 
 marks out the special distinction of Paul is, that he has been 
 made the pioneer in proclaiming this dispensation to the 
 Gentiles. "It was given me," he says, "to you ward." 
 Peter and Paul alike had to do with the administration of 
 the gospel of tlie grace of God, but while Peter was not 
 restrained from declaring it to the Gentiles, nor Paul from 
 declaring it to the Jews, they were called respectively as 
 ministers of the circumcision and the uncircumcision. The 
 dispensation of God's grace was given to both ; but they 
 could say, respectively addressing Jews and Gentiles, " This 
 dispensation was given me to you ward." Had the grace of 
 God spoken of in our te.xt meant God's favour to Paul in his 
 calling as Apostle of the Gentiles, then the statement that it was 
 given him for the Gentiles (to you ward) wovdd be tautological. 
 Ver. 3. How that hy revelation was made known unto me the 
 mystery. — The apostle now proceeds to show how this special 
 commission, which he received to work among the Gen- 
 tiles, was carried out in fact. He was himself practically 
 qualified for executing his commission, by having its terms 
 and contents clearly and fully made known to him. And 
 this knowledge came to him, not by tradition of the fathers, 
 
 ^ That is to say, the genitive following "dispensation" is the subjective 
 and not the objective genitive. See the diifereuce between these two stated 
 in "Winer's Grammar of New Teatamemt Greek, pp. 231-233, 1882. If, with 
 Meyer and Ellicott, we make " of the grace " the gen. ohjecti, we should have to 
 translate " the disjiensation or arrangement made with respect to God's grace 
 given to me." Then, again, the participle "given" is in the genitive by 
 attraction after the preceding genitives "of the grace of God," and because of 
 the prominence of " grace " in this dispensation. It is quite parallel in sense 
 to Col. i. 25, where the genitive " of grace " is wanting, and the participle is iii 
 the accusative, agreeing with "dispensation." 
 
242 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 but hj revelation ; for he received it not of man, and his wis- 
 dom was not of man, but of God (Gal. i. 1 1, 12 ; 1 Cor. ii. 5-6). 
 It was the revelation of God's Son in him (Gal. i. 16) that 
 brought him this knowledge. We have it explicitly stated in 
 the third report of Paul's conversion, given in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, that in that revelation which he then had, he received 
 his commission to the Gentiles, and a full discovery of what 
 was involved in it (Acts xxvi. 17, 18). This revelation was 
 the new element in the apostle's communication. In the 
 previous context he had been unfolding the mystery, but here 
 lie tells them of the manner of its discovery to himself. — 
 What was thus by revelation made known he describes as 
 mystery. By this, as the subsequent context clearly shows, 
 the apostle means, not something in its own nature dark, nor 
 something that we know so far only as to understand that 
 much remains unknown and unknowable, but something that 
 from its nature could only be made known by revelation, and 
 has now under this dispensation of grace been so made known. 
 That of which he speaks, the extension of God's offer of 
 salvation to all mankind, was not discoverable by human 
 reason, but was made known to Paul, as it had also been made 
 known to Peter, by direct and special revelation. It is for 
 the comfort of these Ephesians to know that the statement of 
 this truth, which is of such immediate importance to them, 
 was no theory or deduction of man, in working out of which 
 there might possibly be some vitiating flaw, but a direct 
 revelation from God. What had been a mystery hidden from 
 man, and which, so far as man was concerned, must have 
 remained such, is now known by revelation of God. 
 
 As I vji'ote before in feio words. — It was of the mystery that 
 the apostle had written before, and not of the revelation. He 
 is now, for the first time, telling in detail about the way in 
 which he came to know the mystery, in order to increase his 
 readers' confidence in him ; but the mystery itself he had been 
 discoursing upon in the immediately preceding context. AVe 
 cannot, therefore, translate as Klopper does, "In the form in 
 which I wrote before." It is simply "as," introducing a 
 reference such as will afford an explanation (see Winer, 
 Grammar, § liii. 8). What he wrote before, that is inmie- 
 
CHAP. III. 4. 243 
 
 diately before, contains the substance of that mystery given 
 him by revelation. We do not need to think of a lost epistle, 
 still less of the Epistle to the C(jlossians (i. 25) just com- 
 pleted, for the preceding context contains all that is needed 
 for explanation of the present statement. — The passage 
 referred to is appropriately described as a statement " in 
 brief," " in few words." The phrase is used only once else- 
 where in the New Testament, and in that other passage (Acts 
 xxvi. 28, 29) it is matter of controversy whether it should 
 be rendered " in a short time " or " with little difficulty." 
 
 Ver. 4. By reference to which, %vhcn ye read, ye sliall he able to 
 understand my insiyht in the mystery of Christ. — " That brief 
 statement," says tlie apostle, " is such that you have only to 
 go back upon it and read it again, in order to assure your- 
 selves of my thorough understanding of that mystery which 
 is there unfolded." He had said enough, even in that sum- 
 mary exposition, to prove that he was one who could speak 
 on the subject with authority. AVhat gave him this authority 
 ■was his insight in the mystery of Christ. The word which 
 we render " insight " {(jvveaL<i) is a consciousness of the moral 
 character and worth of any act or course of action which may 
 be exercised critically beforehand, so as to determine our 
 relation to it, or reflectively afterwards, so as to determine our 
 moral judgment upon it. Paul claims that even the little he 
 has said should show that he is endowed with this conscious- 
 ness, which he says revelation brought to him, and that he is 
 morally and spiritually qualified to expound this mystery. — 
 It is called the mystery " of Christy because it is sunnned up 
 in Christ and finds its solution in Christ. " The mystery 
 here," says Lightfoot on Col. ii. 2, "is not Christ, but Christ 
 as containing in Himself all the treasures of wisdom." Accord- 
 ing to the previous context, the special mystery here is the 
 calling of the Gentiles to gospel privilege, but in the parallel 
 passage in Col. i. 27, the apostle shows that the revelation of 
 this mystery was Christ dwelling in the hearts of the Gentiles, 
 and being in them, as well as in the Jews, the hope of glory. 
 — This verse and the latter part of the preceding one are not 
 to be regarded as a parenthesis, for the clauses are closely 
 joined in construction and in the development of thought 
 
244 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 with what goes before and with what follows. Zanchius 
 (Commcntarius, i. 275, ed. 1888), with reference to the repre- 
 sentation which Paul gives of himself here as a steward of 
 the grace of God to the Gentiles, remarks that three things 
 are necessary to a steward. In the first place, he must have 
 given over to him the property which he is to administer. 
 This, Paul says in ver. 3, he has received by revelation, and 
 this the Ephesians may assure themselves of by reading what 
 he has said of the contents of the mystery of God's grace. 
 In the second place, he must have authority to administer 
 conferred upon him. And this authority, says Paul in 
 ver. 7, I received when I was made the minister of Christ 
 by the immediate gift of God in His grace. In the third 
 place, he must have indicated to him the persons on whose 
 behalf he is to dispense what he has received, and the 
 means liy which this dispensation is to be accomplished. 
 So Paul shows, in vers. 6 and 8, that his commission was to 
 the Gentiles, and that the means at his disposal was the 
 gospel, by the preaching of which the Gentiles should be 
 brought into the fellowship of the mystery. 
 
 A^er. 5. Wliich in other generations was not made known unto 
 the sons of men, as it is now, etc. — This mystery of Christ was 
 not absolutely unknown among the generations belonging to 
 the old dispensation, but among them it was not known as a 
 revelation. What was revealed to them was a more or less 
 clear foreshadowing of certain aspects of the person and work 
 of Christ, but there was no revelation of the mystery. In 
 these generations it was not as it is now. The mystery 
 remained hidden, for it was behind a veil that was not yet 
 rent. So long as this veil was unrent a revelation in the 
 proper sense could not be. This, indeed, all generations had 
 in common, that in thein all God spuke. But he who spoke 
 in past generations, notwitlistanding all the variety of sub- 
 stance and form that characterised his speaking, has spoken 
 now as he never did before. He has spoken in His Son, in 
 Christ. And we have seen that Christ is the very sum of the 
 mystery. When God speaks in His Son He reveals the 
 mystery. The preaching of lawgivers and prophets in other 
 generations did not make known the mystery of Christ 2mto 
 
CHAP. III. 5. 245 
 
 the sons of men. By tJte sons of men Jerome understood 
 common men, to the exclusion of patriarchs and prophets, who 
 should rather be styled " sons of God." The same view is 
 taken quite )ecently by Beck, who refers to Ps. viii. 4, xi. 4, 
 excludiiiLj the prophets as prophets from the category, because 
 their visions of the Messianic future were not within the range 
 of their knowledge as ordinary men (1 Pet. i. 10-12). On 
 the other hand, Bengel supposes that, by the sons of men, the 
 apostle meant specially the Old Testament prophets as con- 
 trasted with the apostles and prophets of the New Testament. 
 But Meyer very pertinently points out that the contrast here 
 is between times, and not between persons. The sons of men 
 are simply and without exception the individuals who made up 
 the other generations. None of them, even those who knew 
 most, had revealed to them the mystery of Christ. Their 
 knowledge was not of that kind whicli revelation produced.^ 
 
 As it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and proj/hcts h/ 
 the Spirit. — Tiie gospel is here regarded as the revelation of 
 the mystery, as in Pom. xvi. 25. In contrast to the position 
 of the sons of men in the earlier ages, what was not made 
 known to them is now made known by revelation. Paul goes 
 back thus upon ver. 3 to declare that, in common with him, 
 all the inspired preachers of the gospel have had a revelation 
 making known to them the mystery. The apostles and 
 prophets of our text are evidently the same as those de- 
 signated by these names in chaps, ii. 20 and iv. 11. Beck 
 understands prophets of the Old Testament prophets, and 
 would render, " It is now revealed through the holy apostles, 
 
 ^ "The apostle seems to deny that this mystery of the participation of the 
 Gentiles in the blessing of the promised seed was revenled or made known befoie 
 the time of its discovery in and by the gospel ; and therefore coulJ not be so 
 declared by the prophets under the Old Testament, as we have evinced. But 
 indeed he doth not ahsolutdy deny what is asserted ; only lie prefers the excel- 
 lency of the revelation then made above all the discoveries that were before made 
 of the same thing. The mystery of it was intimated in many prophecies and 
 predictions, though, before their accomplishment, they were attended with great 
 obscurity ; which now is wholly taken away. . . . It is only then the o^ej/rees of 
 the manifestation of this mystery, as to openness, plainness, and evidence, that 
 aie asserted by the apostle above all of the same kind that went before ; but the 
 d'li^covery of it absolutely is not denied." — Owen, Exposition of IIi:hreics, i. 182, 
 Edin. 1854. 
 
246 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 and ihrougli the prophets of the Old Testament, by the mouth 
 of the apostles." This can only be maintained alongside of 
 the same commentator's view of the exclusion of the prophets 
 irom the category of " sons of men." We rather see here, in 
 harmony with the other passages referred to in which the 
 prophets are spoken of, extraordinary office-bearers of the 
 primitive Church, who rank along with apostles, and are witli 
 them contrasted v/ith all the members of the old dispensation 
 as favoured ones who had received a revelation. They behold 
 with open face the glory of the Lord, and by tlieir preaching 
 bring others to behold the same. In relation to the members 
 of their own generation, they occupy tlie place which the Old 
 Testament prophets did in their generations. These other 
 generations, indeed, had not the mystery made known to them 
 by revelation, but what communications God was pleased to 
 make them of other kinds and degrees. He made to them 
 through the prophets. The Old Testament prophets and the 
 New Testament apostles and prophets were, in their several 
 generations, the channels through which God conveyed sanctify- 
 ing influences to mankind. And so the Old Testament 
 prophets are called " holy " (2 Kings iv. 9 ; Luke i. 70 ; Acts 
 iii. 21 ; 2 I'et. i. 21); and the same epithet is here applied 
 to the apostles and prophets of the Xew Testament. They 
 are holy because they are " his " apostles and prophets. 
 They have been chosen and ordained by Him who is holy, for 
 holy service. And further, in order to fit them for their holy 
 office, they have the inmiediate presence and power of the 
 Holy Spirit. This revelation they owe to Him. It is He who 
 has made known the mystery to them. This mysteiy can 
 only be spiritually discerned. It is known only to tliose who 
 have it revealed to them by the Spirit. We would thus join 
 " by the Spirit " with the words " it is revealed," and so have 
 this truth affirmed of both apostles and prophets ; and not, as 
 Klijpper and others prefer, with the word " prophets," so as to 
 be practically equivalent to "inspired prophets." That the 
 prophets as well as the apostles were in possession of extra- 
 ordinary charismatic gifts, is elsewhere made abundantly plain. 
 But what is set before us here is the fact that prophets and 
 apostles alike were recipients of a revelation which was com- 
 
CHAr. III. G. 247 
 
 municated to tliem by tlie Spirit. It is not that tlieir Spirit 
 is a prophetic Spirit ; but that as holy prophets of God, 
 ordained by Him to this office, the Holy Spirit spoke to them. 
 It was not by visions, or dreams, or in an ecstasy, but by the 
 personal communications of God's S[)irit, that this revelation 
 came. " By the Spirit," therefore, does not merely affirm that 
 the apostles and prophets were inspired, for this is already in- 
 volved in their office and designation, but these words indicate 
 the special mode of their inspiration. In this way, too, the 
 new dispensation is characterised as that of the Spirit. The com- 
 munications of God's Spirit to men under the Old Testament 
 dispensation were of another order from His communications 
 nnder the New. It was only after God had spoken by His Son 
 that He sent the Spirit of His Son to be the revealer of His 
 will, and to make known by revelation the mystery of the gospel. 
 
 Ver. 6. That the Gentiles are fellow-heirs. — Here we have 
 the contents of the mystery set forth in detail. What the 
 Gentiles had been before was stated in chap. ii. 12, and our 
 text presents the contrast parallel to chap. ii. 19. The 
 Authorised Version wrongly renders the simple infinitive 
 " should be ; " for the apostle's intention is not to declare the 
 end of the revelation, but the meaning and contents of the 
 mystery. The mystery consists in the revelation of the joint- 
 heirship of the Gentiles in the kingdom and household of God. 
 The word " fellow-heirs " occurs only once elsewhere in the 
 writings of Paul, Hum. viii. 17 ; and in other two places in 
 the New Testament, Heb. xi. 9 and 1 Pet. iii. 7. It is here 
 used absolutely, but we can find the implied complement in 
 chap. ii. 19, in the saints and household of God. Their joint 
 inheritance is that access which both have by one Spirit unto 
 the Father (chap. ii. 18), that is, salvation in its fullest sense. 
 
 And felloio-memhers of the lody. — The apostle uses a word 
 (ava(TQ)fxo<i), found nowhere else in Scripture, and probably 
 coined for the occasion by himself. Ic was used afterwards 
 by Irenpeus and Athanasius. The Gentiles have not only the 
 same inheritance in store, but are members in the one body 
 of Christ. They have equal rights and privileges as Churcli 
 members with the Jews. In the Christian Church tliere is to 
 be no such distinction as prevailed before between Jews and 
 
248 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 proselytes. In the Christian romniunity Jews and Gentiles 
 have a common standing as fellow-members. 
 
 And fclloiv-riartalcers of the j^'^^omise. — The word " fellow- 
 partaker " is only used in the New Testnment here, and in chap. 
 V. 7, and, like the preceding one, was probably coined by Paul, 
 and used afterwards only by a few patristic writers under his 
 influence. The Gentiles have a full share and interest in the 
 promise which was made to the fathers (Gal. iii. 14; Eph. 
 ii. 12). This promise is the whole plan of salvation, with its 
 covenant blessings. 
 
 " There is a necessary concatenation among those three," 
 says Fergusson, " to wit, a right to heaven, union witli Christ's 
 mystical body, and saving interest in the covenant of grace, 
 the enjoying of any one whereof implieth the other two ; 
 and if one of those be wanting, the rest are wanting also ; 
 for the apostle speaketh of them as mutually dependiug one 
 upon another." This is true and wisely expressed. The 
 attempt made by Stier, and afterwards by Beck, to find in 
 those three propositions a reference to the Trinity, so that 
 they can be associated respectively with Father, Son, and 
 Holy Spirit, is fanciful and artificial, and can be vindicated 
 only by a very strained and elaborate exegesis.^ 
 
 In Christ Jesus hy the gospel. — This applies to all the three 
 preceding statements. The Gentiles have that threefold 
 fellowship because they are in Christ Jesus. This is cer- 
 tainly a more natural construction, and gives a much richer 
 meaning than attaching it to the promise as being fulfilled in 
 Christ. If we could connect the words " of the promise " to 
 the three predicates, and not to the last only, then we might 
 fittingly attach " in Christ Jesus " to them ; for the repre- 
 sentation of Christ, as the fulfilment of the divine promise, is 
 a very common mode of speech in the New Testament. But 
 as they can be suitably connected only with the word " fellow- 
 partakers," and are quite unsuitable to " fellow-members of 
 the body," we must understand the words " in Christ Jesus " 
 
 ^ The (TuyKXfipi>v'o//.a. refers to God, to the share in God's household that 
 belongs to the children of God (i. 18, ii. 19 ; comp. Rom. viii. 17 : il rixva xa) 
 x.Xi>ipiiv'of/.oi had). 'S.vtrauifi.a refers to Christ as Head of the Cliurch (i. 23, ii. 16-22). 
 lufifj.irox,"' '■''f X'Trayyixla.; refers to the Holy Spirit (i. 13, ii. 18). — Ijeck, 
 Erkldrumj dcs Brief es Pauli an die Epheser, p. 158, 1891. 
 
CHAP. III. 7. 249 
 
 as indicating the position into which the Gentiles have been 
 lifted, in consequence of which they have become fellow-heirs, 
 fellow-nienibers, and fellow-partakers with all saints. That 
 personal union with Christ is the ground and condition of 
 the enjoyment of all spiritual blessing, is the central idea of 
 this whole epistle (i. 9, etc.). But the proclamation of this, 
 for the acceptance of those who are thus declared eligible, is 
 throvgh the gospel} The messnge of grace as such could know 
 no limits, and its offer must be to all. That which made 
 such an offer to the Gentiles was the gospel, and any other 
 gospel must be something else than the grace of Christ, and 
 so is not worthy to be called a gospel at all (Gal. i. 6-8). 
 
 Ver. 7. Of which I was made a minister. — The apostle again 
 emphasises the part assigned personally to him in coimection 
 with this gospel for tlie Gentiles. He is a minister of the 
 gospel of salvation, with a special commission of which he 
 speaks ]iarticularly in the following verse. The word here 
 rendered minister, our own word deacon (Slukopo';), literally, 
 perhaps, a runner, has special reference to activity in the 
 service, yet this word is also used, as well as vTrrjpeTT]^, even 
 where the service is directly connected with the person of the 
 Lord (1 Cor. iv. 1 ; Col. i. 7).^ Here Paul speaks of him- 
 self as having been made a minister of the gospel, and by the 
 word he uses he calls attention to the activity which he has 
 shown in this work. 
 
 Accordinrj to the gift of the grace of God. — The apostle thus 
 tells how he came into the ministry of the gospel. He does 
 not regard it as a task exacted of him, but as a gift of grace 
 conferred upon him. The office of Apostle to the Gentiles 
 was this gift, and as such he was the administrator of the 
 grace of God. For the execution of his office he had received 
 
 ' The two prepositions used here are respectively b and S;«. Winer, 
 Grammar of New Testament Greek, p. 486, 1882, coriectly states their exact 
 significance : " When h and 'iia, are found in one sentence, S;a expresses the 
 external means, wliile h refers to that which was effected in or on the person of 
 some one, and which cleaves to it as it were." Thus (Eph. i. 7), " in whom we 
 have redemption through His Mood." 
 
 * It is scarcely possible to mark any well-maintained distinction in the use 
 of these words in the New Testament. See Trench, Synonyms of the New 
 Testament, 10th ed., p. 32, 1886. 
 
250 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 a charismatic endowment, whicli made him " an able minister 
 of the New Testament " (2 Cor. iii. 6). 
 
 Given unto me according to the loorking of His power. — The 
 " given unto me " reiers to the grace of God, which is not a 
 mere outward and official call by ordination, but an actual 
 conferring of power such as will fit and qualify him for the 
 discharge of his duties as minister of the gospel. Observe 
 the same preposition " according to " (Kara) is used to describe 
 how he came by the external call, and how he came by the 
 internal spiritual qualification. His ministry was a gift of 
 God's grace to him, and his endowment for that ministry was 
 the operation of God's own power. Wlien the apostle considers 
 what a change has been wrought in him in turning him from 
 a bitter persecutor to an earnest and successful upbuilder of 
 the Church of Christ, he sees that nothing short of the 
 operation of omnipotence was needed to effect it. This 
 "working" of God's power (i. 19) is the operation of God's 
 Spirit within, energising and imparting strength and vigour, 
 and generally making the minister adequate to the work of 
 his ministry (Rom. xv. 10-19; Phil iv. 13 ; 1 Tim. i. 12). 
 
 Ver. 8. Unto vie, vjho am less than the least of all saints. — 
 The apostle has been magnifying his office by showing that 
 the very call to it he had as the gift of the grace of God, and 
 that the inner qualifications needed for its discharge he had 
 wrought in him by no other power than divine omnipotence. 
 And here we have, in a very singular form, a third ground for 
 magnifying that apostolic office. In view of the exceeding 
 dignity of that office, lie feels his unworthiness so great that 
 he has to make a comparative out of a superlative, in order 
 to give some conception of his sense of personal insignificance 
 and unfitness. There is less of the comparative than of the 
 superlative in this word. It is his own incomparable mean- 
 ness, in view of the office conferred on him, rather than his 
 relative position as compared with other saints, that the 
 apostle is thinking of. Still, let it be noted that in the very 
 deepest reach of his humility he claims to be a saint. He is 
 one of the holy apostles, otherwise he would not be able to 
 acknowledge God's gift of grace to him, and the working of 
 God's power in him. 
 
ciiAr, III. s. 251 
 
 Unto me . . . is this grace given, to 2^'}'cc'(-'h to the Gentiles 
 the unsearchalle riches of Christ. — He here goes back upon 
 God's gift of grace, and then proceeds to define it more par- 
 ticularly. The office of preacher, and especially that of 
 preacher to the Gentiles, had been bestowed upon Paul, and 
 here he tells in glowing language what his message was. 
 God, in sending him, had said to him, like a second Jonah, 
 " Preach unto them the preaching that I bid thee." We can 
 very well understand why Paul showed himself at first reluctant 
 to accept the commission to the Gentiles (Acts xxii. 19-21). 
 All his personal sympathies and early associations bound him 
 to the Jews. But when he realised the grandeur of the 
 message given him to proclaim, he could scarcely find words 
 expressive enough to indicate his sense of the supreme 
 nobility whicli this gift of the grace of God had conferred 
 upon him. What he has to proclaim, is the divine fulness 
 of the salvation that is in Christ. He characterises the riches 
 of Christ as "unsearchable," a word which occurs only once 
 elsewhere in Paul's writings. In liom. xi. 33 he uses the 
 expression to characterise the ways of God, which, like 
 Christ's riches, " cannot be traced out." Paul does not make 
 the fact of the incomprehensibility either of God's wajs or 
 of Christ's riches an argument for abandoning the search, but 
 regards it as the crowning recommendation of such a pursuit. 
 The thought of the unsearchableness of the riches of Christ 
 rouses his enthusiasm, who has been commissioned to preach 
 the gospel of that Christ. To preach to the Gentiles the 
 unsearchal)le riches of Christ is to say to them, with that 
 authority which God's revelation to him conferred upon him, 
 that all those riches were laid aside by Christ when He became 
 poor in order that with them — all the more captivating, then, 
 to us because unsearchable — He may make us rich (2 Cor. 
 viii. 9). "You cannot tell them over to all eternity, for if 
 Christ will put forth all His riches, and become poor, on 
 purpose to make men rich, what riches will that be ! " 
 (Goodwin, vol. i. 314). "How rich," says Goodwin, quoting 
 from Augustine, " will His riches make us when we shall 
 meet Him in glory, when His poverty makes us thus rich ! " 
 Paul could say to all believers, Christ is yours with all His 
 
252 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 riches. The fuhiess of divine grace in Christ, which, especially 
 in this epistle and in that to the Colossians, the apostle 
 keeps so persistently in view of liis readers, constitutes those 
 riches, and just because it is God's own fulness, these riches 
 are, like God's ways, inexhaustible, at once a source of study 
 and supply for eternity. Paul had surely good cause to be 
 proud of the gospel given him to preach ! 
 
 Ver. 9. And to make all see what is the (lispcnsation of the 
 mystery. — The apostle had described one part of his duty as 
 minister of the gospel, as consisting in the preaching of the 
 unsearchable riches of Christ. He liere describes another 
 part of his official duty, as that of enlightening all the Gentiles 
 in regard to that special dispensation of grace whereby they 
 were now called to embrace the offer of the gospel. While 
 there is no formal limitation of the " all " to the Gentiles, it 
 is certainly they who are in the writer's mind as the parties 
 immediately concerned. The clause is quite parallel to the 
 preceding one, v/here the sphere of his preaching is desig- 
 nated " among the Gentiles." We should not, therefore, say 
 " all men," as in the Authorised Version, hut simply " all." 
 The word rendered " make to see," or " enlighten," would be 
 rather translated " bring to light," as in 1 Cor. iv. 5, if with 
 Westcott and Hort, as the authority of two MSS., A and N, 
 we sliould omit "all." But the word is well attested, and 
 the meaning assigned by our English Version to the verb is 
 appropriate to the context, and corresponds to tlie use of the 
 same verb in chap. i. 18. It is of spiritual enlightenment 
 that the apostle here speaks. It is a main part of that work 
 assigned to him, which he regards as a gift of the grace of 
 God, to bring to those addressed by his preaching a saving 
 knowledge of God's message. It is, indeed, a consequence of 
 his preaching that the unspeakably rich grace of Christ should 
 bring spiritual light to those who hear. It is as minister of 
 the gospel of Christ, who is the Light of the world, that he is 
 able to bring light into the hearts of men. We should care- 
 fully note that this " making to see " is something different 
 from and more than merely teaching or instructing intellectu- 
 ally. The mystery can be known only in its dispensation 
 or administration. The Gentiles could see it only by having 
 
CHAP. III. 9. 25 3 
 
 personal experience of the grace. This distinction between 
 instruction and illumination is clearly stated by Brooks in his 
 " Unsearcliable Eiches of Christ" (Works, iii. 40, 1866): 
 " Many professors know much of God notionaily, but know 
 nothing of God experimentally ; they know God in the 
 history, but know nothing of God in the mystery." 
 
 Mliich from t/ie ar/cs ha!h been hid in God. — " From the 
 ages" means since time began, since periods began to be 
 reckoned, that is, from the earliest beginning. The same 
 word is used in Col. i. 26, but the idea conveyed in similar 
 phrases is not so frequent in I'aul's writings (Eoni. xvi. 25 ; 
 1 Cor. ii. 7 ; Eph. i. 4). What is especially new in our 
 text is the stateujeut that it was in God that this mystery 
 was hid. It really could not have been hidden anywhere 
 else. The hiding of it was God's reserve. That men should 
 be made to see what was hid in God, what He had kept among 
 His secret things, in recesses which no creature could penetrate, 
 affords a true and worthy idea of His revelation. The vastness 
 of that lading-place, too, must awaken the thought that God's 
 reserves, like Christ's riches, are unsearchable. There are surely 
 many surprises for us yet in store. " The reserve which God 
 used for thousand years after thousand years should suggest 
 to us caution in limiting the purpose of God. God has doubt- 
 less unspeakable things still in reserve" (Pulsford). 
 
 Who created cdl tilings. — This statement concerning God 
 seems to be introduced here in order to cause the reader to 
 dwell upon the thought of God's greatness, and the consequent 
 importance of that which he had reserved in His own keeping 
 so long. Any thought that had place among the thoughts of 
 Him who created the world, must be worthy of so great a 
 Being. In the great Creator's mind, the disclosure now made 
 by revelation must have been part of the original plan. He, 
 too, who showed His omnipotence in creating all things, can be 
 trusted to carry out the purpose which he now makes known. 
 The word rendered " created " is frequently used of God's 
 spiritual creation, His new creation of the soul (Eph. ii. 10, 15, 
 iv. 24), and its compounds in many passages. But here, as 
 in several places (1 Cor. xi. 9; Col. i. 16, iii. 10; 1 Tim. 
 iv. 3, etc.), it is used of the physical creation, God's creating 
 
254: EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the world. Some coiniiientators wish to make the words refer 
 to the spiritual creation, and it was probably the preference 
 for this interpretation that led to the adoption, in the Received 
 Text, of the additional words " by Jesus Christ," which may 
 have been first of all a marginal gloss, but is destitute of all 
 good manuscript support. But even though the readiu"- had 
 been genuine, the reference would still have been to tlie 
 physical creation. 
 
 Ver. 10. With the design of now making known. — The 
 apostle here expresses the purpose of God in Iceeping the 
 mystery hidden in Himself so long. The reserve maintained 
 was all with a view to its revelation at the fit time. That 
 time has arrived noio, as in ver. 5. 
 
 Unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places. — 
 There is some proportion between the long concealment and 
 the open proclamation. What was hidden in God is now 
 made known through all the creation of God. The desiizna- 
 tions of the high intelligences here referred to have been 
 examined in detail and classified, in notes on chap. i. 21. 
 The two classes mentioned here are intended as an exhaustive 
 list of all good angels and celestial beings. In heavenly 
 places, as we have seen, chap. i. 3, 20, especially in view of 
 chap. vi. 12, means a sphere that is superhuman, from which, 
 however, the evil spiritual powers are not excluded. The 
 whole connection, however, excludes the evil angels from our 
 present text. 
 
 Through the Church. — What has been said here is to the 
 glory of the Church, just as what is said in chap. i. 21 is to 
 the glory of Christ. It is the glory of the Church to reveal 
 God's will and to make known the mystery of His grace, and 
 it is its crowning honour to make this known among the 
 higher intelligences. Christ is the revelation of God to the 
 Church ; and the Church is the revelation of Christ to the 
 world, the universe of beings. In His Body is made visible 
 what must otherwise have remained hidden. 
 
 The manifold wisdom of God. — The wisdom of God is here 
 described in regard to its adaptability to all races and condi- 
 tions and circumstances. It is manifold, much varied, capable 
 of manifesting itself under a great diversity of forms. The 
 
CHAP. III. 11. 2 
 
 word is used in Euripides (fyh. Taur. 1149) of the variegated 
 embroidery of a robe; in Orac. Sihyll. vii. 120, of emotion ; 
 in Orphic Hymn, Ixi. 4, of discourse. It is not elsewhere 
 used in Scripture. The manifoldness of God's wisdom is 
 illustrated in His dispensations, according to which the divine 
 wisdom has been unfolding itself. It is manifold, because 
 " He reveals Himself in tlie free progress of the world, which 
 includes an endless variety of independent world-forces and 
 energies, and presents an innumerable, manifold, and com- 
 ]>licated play of free causes."^ Those things that the angels 
 desire to look into make known to them the wisdom of God 
 in the several stages through which He carried His purpose 
 in the ages. The accomplishment of redemption, as seen in 
 the Church, makes it plain to the heavenly intelligences that 
 many things that were dark to them before were designed and 
 brought forth at fitting times and places by the wisdom of 
 God. It is here undoubtedly implied that it was necessary 
 for those high intelligences to recognise and confess the 
 wisdom of God in redemption as shown in the Church of 
 Christ. " Even the heavenly beings," says Ignatius {Epistle 
 to Smyrneans, vi.), " and the glory of the angels, and the 
 rulers, visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood 
 of Christ, judgment awaiteth them also." Yet they are not, 
 like men, partakers of, but only witnesses to, the wisdom of 
 God in redemption.- 
 
 Ver. 11. According to the purpiose of the ages. — It is now 
 made known that all the ages have been working to carry out 
 the purpose of the all-wise God. The purpose to bring all 
 men together in Christ, and thus in one body to reconcile 
 them unto Himself in Him, was present in all the ages, and 
 its accomplishment was being prepared for even in ages, and 
 by means of institutions, that seemed most unfavourable to 
 this end. Though the expression is different, the meaning 
 and scope is very similar to 2 Tim. i. 9. Just because this 
 purpose is part of God's eternal being, it existed before all 
 
 ^ Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, § 114, j). 215. Compare the whole section, 
 which treats in a highly suggestive manner of " The Free Course of the World 
 and the Manifold Wisdom of God." 
 
 -Compare Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, § 70, p. 133. See also Dorner, 
 System of Chiistian Doctrine, iv. 433, Ediu. 1889. 
 
256 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIAXS. 
 
 ages, and lasted through all ages, until, in the fulness of time, 
 X it was perfectly realised. 
 
 Which He made in Christ Jesus our Lord. — Tlie verb here 
 is literally " made," " did," and, so far as that word itself is 
 concerned, we might understand this of the working of the 
 purpose in eternity. And undoubtedly this is true, that the 
 eternal decree was formed or appointed with Christ as the 
 party with whom the Father dealt. ]-)Ut the Christ with 
 whom the eternal decree was made was also He by whom it 
 was to be executed in time. And it is this temporal refer- 
 ence that is specially present to the apostle. It is Christ as 
 Jesus, in His historical incarnation, the AVord made flesh, as 
 He dwelt among us, that is set forth as He in whom God's 
 eternal purpose was in time carried out. It is specially the 
 fact that in our Lord, the historical Christ incarnate, the 
 purpose of the eternal ages has been completely realised, 
 which makes known the manifoldness of God's wisdom to the 
 higher intelligences. " This was it which became the matter 
 of wonderment to them, to see and behold how both their 
 and our Lord Christ was made the centre of them all ; and 
 that the works, yea, the purposes of them in God's heart, 
 about creation, providence, and all sorts of works, wherein the 
 manifold wisdom of God had so appeared, all dispensations to 
 the Jews (the Church of old), and now the calling of the new 
 Church, the Gentiles, were founded all in this one God-man, 
 Jesus Christ." ^ 
 
 Ver. 12. In whom we have boldness and access. — The apostle 
 now concludes his sentence by an appeal to their personal 
 experience of what this Christ Jesus has been and is to those 
 who believe. United to Him, they are brought into a new 
 relation to God. They are conscious now of a liberty before 
 God, and from God, that they were strangers to before. This 
 liberty is described, in the two words of our text, as a liberty 
 of speech and a liberty of approach. Loldness is literally 
 " liberty of speech." The word occurs very frequently in the 
 New Testament ; eight times in the writings of Paul. In 
 this epistle we have it again, chap. vi. 19, where it means 
 
 ^ Goodwin, "The Knowledge of God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ," 
 Works, iv. 522, 1862. 
 
CHAP. III. 13. 257 
 
 absolutely free speech. This is the believer's privilege before 
 the throne of grace (Heb. iv. 16). Liberty of approach is 
 tlie natural conipleuieut to liberty of speech. The way to 
 God is opened to those who are in Christ, for He says, " I am 
 the way, by me unto the Father." Bengel has defined the 
 one as lihertas oris in orando ; the other as lihertas in re. It 
 is the work of God Himself to open the lips that sin had 
 closed (Ps. li. 15), and this He does for us in Christ. It is 
 when God's light and truth lead lis that we are brought to 
 His holy hill and to His tabernacle (Ps. xliii. 3). 
 
 In confidence thi'ongh faith on Him. — We have here the 
 tone and temper produced in the man who exercises the two- 
 fold privilege of the previous clause. Our faith in Christ 
 causes us to place ])erfect confidence in that liberty of speech 
 and approach which we have in Him. The assurance that 
 we are really entitled to exercise those privileges, depends 
 npon the measure and exercise of our faith. "As faith in 
 Jesus Christ is that grace which uniteth us to Ifim, so it not 
 only goeth before our boldness, access, and cunfidence, but 
 also maketh way for and is the cause of those ; and there- 
 fore the more that faith is kept in exercise there will be the 
 more of liberty and boldness, tlie more of access to God and 
 nearness, and the more of a well-grounded persuasion of our 
 acceptation by God, and confidence " (Fergusson). 
 
 The beginning and the ending of the twelfth verse set 
 forth respectively God's procuring and man's accepting of 
 Christ's salvation. God has carried out His eternal purpose 
 in Christ, so that He is qualified in His person, and by Tlis 
 work, to provide redemption for us, and so secure to us the 
 privileges of reconciliation. Then for ourselves, tliat we may 
 individually enjoy these privileges, we must exercise faith in 
 Him. God looked upon us in Christ, and we look upon God 
 in Him. 
 
 Ver. 13. Wherefore, I desire that ye faint not at mij tribidn- 
 tions for you. — In closing the paragraph, the apostle expresses 
 an earnest hope that his readers, on whose behalf he has laid 
 claim to such privileges, may not be so discouraged over his 
 imprisonment and sufferings as to lose the comfort and 
 blessedness of those privileges. There was a danger lest the 
 
 11 
 
258 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS, 
 
 troubles that had fallen upon Paul as the Apostle to the 
 Gentiles, should make those to whom he had preached doubt- 
 ful in regard to that preaching, which led to such sad results. 
 And as those troubles had been instigated and originated by 
 the Jews, we may well suppose that tlie Judaistic party, 
 wliich sought to have Gentiles admitted to the Christian 
 Church only through Judaism, would be ready to insist that 
 this was punishment laid upon Paul in consequence of those 
 advanced and liberal views which he had proclaimed. 
 Against this the apostle earnestly warns the Ephesians. He 
 expresses the desire that they may not lose the benefit of 
 those great Christian privileges which he has been describing 
 as their rightful inheritance. This is the force of the 
 " wherefore." Those privileges are so glorious that failure to 
 use and enjoy them would be a terrible loss. The verb here 
 used literally means to become weary in anything, and so to 
 lose courage and interest, and to flag. It is the same word used in 
 2 Thess. iii. 13 and Gal. vi. 9, "Be not weary in well-doing." 
 Compare 2 Cor. iv. 1—16. It is also used outside Scripture, 
 in that ancient homily commonly called the Secorid Upistle of 
 Clement to the Corinthians, § 2, " Let us not grow weary of 
 offering up our prayers to God." He reminds them that these 
 tribulations are endured for them, and so the last words of 
 the paragraph refer us back to the first. He is prisoner for 
 the Gentiles. It is the apostle's object in the whole section 
 to magnify his office, and he would have them know that he 
 regards those tribulations as affording the best ground for 
 exultation before God. 
 
 Which is your (jlory. — His suffering for them, instead of 
 being a cause of fainting, is their glory. Instead of dis- 
 heartening them, it should encourage them. " Paul charged 
 his friends not to be disheartened by his sufferings for them, 
 but to look upon his joyfulness therein as an argument for 
 the greatness and preciousness of their hope " (Pulsford). To 
 be counted worthy to suffer for Christ is the most assuring 
 token of His favour (comp. 2 Thess. i. 4-7; Phil. i. 28). 
 Seeing that Paul now has his glory as the Apostle of the 
 Gentiles, he would have them regard those honourable suffer- 
 ings of his as their glory. If he takes joyfully all these 
 
CHAP. iiT. 14-21, 259 
 
 tribulations, because of his high conception of the office which 
 he holds, surely they for whom he does tliis may feel 
 honoured. The apostle also feels that the best preservative 
 against fainting, in view of persecution, is the entertaining of 
 right conceptions of the importance and dignity of those 
 privileges of the gospel which he has proclaimed to the 
 Gentiles. Let them exercise the privileges of free speech 
 and open approach to God, and they shall not be offended 
 when days of trial come. It is only of those in whom the 
 seed of the word finds no depth of soil in which to root itself, 
 that it is said that when tribulation or persecution ariseth 
 they are offended (Matt. xiii. 20, 21). Observe, the apostle 
 does not seek to commend his gospel to the Gentiles by any 
 of its incidental benefits. He does not say that it will lay 
 the basis of a noble civilisation for the work!, that it will 
 undermine and by and by overthrow all the pernicious 
 institutions of paganism, that it will secure for them social 
 and economic advantages, and that, therefore, they should 
 regard it as their glory. He points not only to purely 
 ]'eligious and spiritual benefits, but also to their accompanying 
 social disadvantages. He wishes them so to emphasise their 
 religious and spiritual privileges, so to bring themselves to a 
 right appreciation of them by using them, that everything 
 associated with them, even bodily suffering and temporal loss, 
 will be regarded as their glory.^ 
 
 Sect. VI. — The Apostle's Second Pkayer for the 
 Ephesians (Chap. iii. 14-21). 
 
 In the former prayer (i. 17-23), the apostle had sought on 
 behalf of his beloved Ephesians, the gift of the Spirit to 
 enlighten them in the knowledge of God and of their heavenly 
 inheritance, and iu the understanding of the greatness of tiiat 
 work wrought by God in Christ in His resurrection and 
 exaltation to the place of power. lie now prays that God 
 
 ' Dale, in his Lecturer on Epheaians, pp. 235-241, 1SS2, admirably sliow.s 
 what it is that is fitted to rouse enthusiasm with regard to the gospel. It really 
 lies in the hearty conviction that iu it \\t have "the unsearchable riches of 
 Christ." 
 
260 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 would show the greatness of His power, bestowed on Christ, 
 ia the hearts and lives of His disciples, that it may be seen 
 that not only is Christ for them, but that He is also in them, 
 working mightily by His love and grace. In the former it 
 is the objective historical aspect of redemption that is pro- 
 minent ; here it is the subjective experimental aspect of the 
 same fact that is specially emphasised. This difference in 
 •the contents of the prayers is in keeping with that which 
 gave occasion to them respectively. The first prayer was 
 occasioned by the apostle's knowledge of tlieir consistent pro- 
 fession, their strict propriety in walk and conversation (i. 15). 
 His second prayer is occasioned by his enthusiastic apprecia- 
 tion of the greatness of their spiritual privileges, and his 
 desire that they might be so endued with heavenly wisdom, 
 that nothing that could possibly happen would discourage 
 them, or make them ashamed of the gospel of the grace of God. 
 Ver. 14. For this cause I how my knees to the Father. — The 
 majority of commentators regard this as the resumption of the 
 discourse which had been broken off at ver. 1, all the interven- 
 ing verses being treated as a long parenthesis. We have 
 ])referred to treat that passage as a regular consecutive and 
 not parenthetical paragraph. And so we regard the phrase 
 " for this cause " as the independent beginning of a new 
 section, and not as identical with the clause that opens the 
 chapter. We understand it as referring to the substance of 
 the whole preceding section. In it Paul had treated of the 
 greatness and glory of that mystery of God's grace which had 
 been given him to declare. It is his desire that the Ephesians 
 be enabled to avail themselves of the wealth of grace thus 
 put within their reach, and so he prays on their behalf. It 
 is the thought of the unsearchable riches of Christ that 
 constrains him to pray, lest they should, for any reason, fail 
 to appreciate and so to appropriate these. " For this cause," 
 says Paul, " I bow my knees." A familiar phrase to indicate 
 the act of worship (comp. LXX. ; Isa. xlv. 23 ; Pom. xiv. 1 1 ; 
 Phil. ii. 10). "The bodily attitude is here put for the 
 religious exercise itself. Not that prayer, in all cases, 
 requires the bending of the knees, but because this expression 
 of reverence is commonly employed, especially where it is not 
 
CHAP. III. 15. 2G1 
 
 an incidental petition, but a, continued prayer" (Calvin). He 
 to whom the knees are bent in prayer is called "tlie Father." 
 The Authorised Version, following the Tcxtus Eeceptus, adds 
 "of our Lord Jesus Christ," but these words, though present 
 in most of the cursives and in the early versions, the Syr. 
 and V^dg., are wanting in all the best MS8. and oriental 
 versions, as well as in the quotations of the fathers. They 
 appeared, however, as a very early gloss. Certainly the 
 reference to the Father, in the opening words of the next 
 verse, is interrupted by this added clause, and it is just 
 possible that the similarity of the words " father " and 
 " family " in the original, may have led to the dropping out 
 of a clause that seemed to spoil the effect of the play upon 
 the words by keeping the similar words apart. The 
 probability, however, is that they were a marginal gloss early 
 incorporated with the text. It follows, indeed, from all that 
 has been said in the preceding context. 
 
 Ver. 15. Of wliom. — The reference here undoubtedly is to 
 the Father. This is, of course, beyond question with the text 
 which we have adopted. But some who accept, the addition 
 " of our Lord Jesus Christ " make the words " of whom " refer 
 to Christ, Calvin says it may apply equally to the Father 
 and to the Son, objects to Erasmus limiting the reference to 
 the Father, and, while allowing a liberty of choice, thinks the 
 reference to Ciirist more probable. Goodwin, in his treatise 
 " Of the Blessed State of the Saints in Glory " ( Works, vii. 
 396), applies the words positively to Christ. But even if 
 the disputed clause were retained, we should still refer these 
 words to the Father, as it is of God, in His fatherly relation, 
 that the apostle proceeds in this verse to speak. 
 
 Every family in heaven and on earth is named. — The word 
 "family" here is closely connected with the word "father" 
 of the former verse {patria from peder). It means strictly a 
 family, whether of wider or narrower extent; including all 
 who can claim descent from a common ancestor. Tliey are 
 all members of that father's family. The word was used to 
 designate the families in the tribes of Israel, each claiming 
 one of the sons of the tribal head as its father and being 
 called by his name. It was the ancestor whose name was 
 
262 EPISTLE TO THE EI'HESIANS. 
 
 borne by all the individuals in common, who was, in this sense, 
 the father of the family. Here this is claimed for God the 
 Father, as giving His name to all the orders of angels and to 
 idl the generations and races of men. They are regarded as 
 liaving all one Father. That these families are regarded as 
 numerous, follows from the use of the word " every," pointing 
 to the many orders of angelic beings and to the many nations 
 of earth. It is wrong, therefore, witli Goodwin {Works, viii. 
 396) and others, to think of the two families of the redeemed 
 in heaven and on earth, or, with Calvin, of the heavenly race 
 and the human race in their totality. The rendering of the 
 Authorised Version, " the whole family," is objected to as 
 linguistically incorrect, and would resolve itself into one or 
 other of the views mentioned before, which regard the family 
 as consisting of two divisions. — What the apostle here affirms 
 is that the pattern and archetype of all fatherhood is in God. 
 Each tribe or nation that takes its name from an ancestor to 
 whom it traces its origin,, is a miniature picture of all intel- 
 ligent creation in its relation to God. This is the universal 
 Fatherhood of God, which is God's ideal relation to the hosts 
 of heaven and the generations of men, to be realised in Christ, 
 by whom and to whom they were all created (Col. i. 16). 
 The existence among men of such families, called by an 
 ancestral name, is a witness on behalf of God the Father of 
 all. No limitation should be introduced here, as by Harless 
 "true child," or by Beet "adopted children." This limitation 
 is undoubtedly true in regard to the actual ; but the apostle 
 is here dealing with the ideal. Members of those families 
 may, by their conduct, lose their individual riglit to the 
 family name. Men, by their sin, have indeed forfeited all 
 claim to be called sons of God. The apostle has already 
 shown how all families of earth, Jews and Gentiles, may 
 actually in Christ regain their ideal relationship to the Father. 
 But here it is simply of the ideal relation that he speaks. 
 
 Ver. 1 6. That He would grant you to he strengthened vjith 
 might hj His Spio'it in the inner man. — This is the first petition 
 in the prayer, and in asking for strength it strikes the keynote 
 of the whole. The inner man i^ that part of man's nature 
 upon which the Spirit of God can operate. The personal 
 
CHAP. III. 16. 263 
 
 life of man has this inner and outer side, the spiritual and 
 the fleshly, both of which, in man's fallen state, are under the 
 dominion of sin. These two sides of man's nature are dis- 
 tinguished in 2 Cor. iv. IG, but in such a way as to make 
 it evident that the apostle is there, as also in our text and in 
 Rom. vii. 22, concerning himself only with the case of the 
 regenerate. This point has been admirably and conclusively 
 argued by Fraser, in his " Dissertation concerning the general 
 scope of Eomans vii. 14-25," in his Scripture Doctriiu of 
 Sanctification. In itself the term indicates that part of man's 
 being, as distinguished from the physical, unto which God 
 can communicate His will directly by His Spirit. As Beck 
 well expresses it {Biblical PsTjcliology, p. 44), the inner man 
 i_s_thajLpersonal life formed from within by the Spirit in union 
 with the soul. " The apostle does not mean a higher and 
 better self, that is left to man after the fall, but a self that 
 is affected by grace, or, as may also be said, released by 
 grace." ^ But the inner man spoken of by the apostle 
 has already been released ; for the prayer is not for the con- 
 version of the unregenerate, but for the further strengthening 
 of_the^^enerate, so that in their struggle against sin they 
 may be victorious. Both the inner and the outward man of 
 the new man are affected by grace. See the different terms 
 " inner," " hidden," " new " man distinguished and defined, 
 Delitzsch, Biblical Psycliology, iv. § 5, p. 220. The new man 
 is the new creation in Christ Jesus (ii. 10), to which the 
 apostle has before affirmed that these Ephesians belong. 
 In his innermost being, at the seat of life, this new principle 
 is at work, which makes all things new, so that all the powers 
 of understanding, reason, will, and spiritual aspiration, and 
 not merely some of them (and all in their just proportion 
 and proper place) come under its dominion, and are spiritual- 
 ised and ennobled. So now it is in regard to the inner man 
 of those who are new creatures in Christ Jesus that the 
 apostle prays. — Dealing then with this part of the believer's 
 being, directing his attention to his inner man, the apostle 
 prays that God, by His Spirit, would work there so as to 
 strengthen with might the spiritual side of the regenerate 
 1 Delitzsch, Biblical Psychology, p. 447, Edin. 1869, 
 
-G4: EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 man's being. The minute correspondence between this 
 strengthening and the contrasted earlier state of man when 
 he was without strength (Rom. v. 6), as affecting the inner 
 man and as being dependent on the presence or absence of 
 the Holy Spirit, is admirably brought out by Candlish in his 
 sermon on the text.^ What the apostle desires is that all 
 that essentially belongs to the inner man, all that grace can 
 make it, the full development of which it is capable, may be 
 realised. Tlie Ephesian believers have a battle to fight 
 against spiritual foes, and Paul prays that they may be 
 strengthened in that part from which resistance against the 
 attack must be shown. In the only other passage in Paul's 
 writings in which the word occurs (1 Cor. xvi. 13), it means 
 to show a brave spirit. And here the apostle adds " with 
 might," to indicate his sense of the need which believers had 
 of having their courage, and all those powers which would 
 give effect to the courageous feelings of the soul, developed 
 in the highest possible degree. But this can be accomplished 
 for men only by God's Spirit. Only He who began the good 
 work can carry it on. Spiritual power in man is everywhere 
 in Scripture conceived of as immediately dependent on the 
 presence and influence of the Holy Spirit, 
 
 According to the riches of His glory. — These words indicate 
 the apostle's conception of Him to whom he addresses his 
 prayer, and consequently the manner and measure in which 
 he expects his prayer to be answered. He prays for spiritual 
 strength on behalf of the Ephesian believers, and he prays 
 that this gift may be bestowed in a way worthy of God, as 
 he has been enabled to conceive Him in all His wealth of 
 glory. He has prayed that God would grant them strength 
 in a divinely glorious way. The "Father of glory" (i. 17) 
 has " riches of glory." This glory is nothing else than the 
 perfect manifestation of the majesty and excellency of God, 
 as existing from all eternity in Christ, and in the fulness of 
 time revealed in His incarnate Son, in whom we behold 
 God's glory (John i. 14), whose coming again will be the 
 glorious appearing of the great God (Titus ii. 13). Paul there- 
 
 ' Candlish, PauVs Eputle to the Ephesians expotmdtd in a Se7-ies of Dis- 
 courses, pp. 54-57, 1875. 
 
CHAP. III. 17. 265 
 
 fore prays that spiritual strength will so be bestowed upon 
 believers, that those riches of glory that have appeared in Jesus 
 Christ may also appear in them. In Eoni. ix. 23, Paul describes 
 God's purpose of election in this very way : that He might 
 make known the riches of His glory on tlie vessels of mercy.^ 
 Ver. 17. Tliat Christ might dtcdl in your hearts hy faith. — 
 This is not to be regarded as a petition in the prayer parallel 
 to the one expressed in the previous verse. It is not so much 
 an additional petition, but is rather the result of the first 
 petition being answered. It does not depend on " that He 
 would grant," but is explanatory of " strengthened with might." 
 The indwelling of Christ is the secret of all strength. We 
 can be strengthened in no other way than by obtaining the 
 Spirit of Christ as an indwelling presence. There is a certain 
 parallelism between this clause and the preceding one. Theie 
 we are told that it is " by His Spirit " that we are strength- 
 ened ; here, that it is " by faith " that this indwelling of Christ 
 in our heart is secured. It is by the exercise of that grace 
 of faith which they already possess (i. 1 5), that they are to 
 secure Christ's continued presence with them. Thus we 
 have the subjective and objective means whereby spiritual 
 strength is obtained by us. Faith in Christ on our part, and 
 the gift of the Holy Spirit on God's part, bring to us that 
 strength which the inner man needs. But then, again, this 
 spiritual strength which the Spirit produces, and the presence 
 of Christ in the heart which our faith secures, are one and 
 the same thing. The Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and he 
 who has the Spirit has Christ, who is the source of all power. 
 And thus, in accordance with the thought that all power issues 
 from Christ, the special sphere of Christ's dwelling in the 
 believer is described as the heart. Into this central citadel 
 of man's being faith introduces the Christ, The heart, according 
 to the usage of biblical writers, is the seat alike of thought and 
 feeling. When Christ dwells there He rules the whole circle 
 of the inner man. The apostle " points to that part in which 
 Christ peculiarly dwells, in your hearts, to show that it is not 
 enough if the knowledge of Christ dwell on the tongue, or 
 
 ^ Compare Beck, Erlddrung dcs Brie/es Pauli an die Epheser, pp. 165-166, 
 
 1891. 
 
266 EPISTLE TO THE EniESIANS. 
 
 flutter in the brain " (Calvin). Toward the close of a dis- 
 course on Eph. iii. 17, Goodwin {Worhs, ii. 404-406) 
 discusses union witli Christ by faith, which he distinguishes 
 as a union by way of object, faith viewing Christ as the 
 faculty views an oliject. As the object of faith, Christ is 
 said to dwell in us, in so far as we act faith upon Him. So the 
 apostle prays, not that Christ may dwell in them, but that He 
 may dwell in them by faith. This indwelling by faith 
 implies: (1) An operatii'e dwelling; Christ is not only in 
 us, but we are eyeing Him, and directing our hearts and 
 affections to Him, so that His virtue may act upon us : 
 (2) The exercise of faith with reference to all the operations 
 and influences of Christ dwelling in us ; Christ in us does 
 thousands of things for us to which our faith contributes 
 nothing, and the apostle prays that the exercise of faith on 
 our part may become co-extensive witli the workings of the 
 indwelling presence of Christ : (3) The exercise not only of 
 justifying faith, but all sorts of faith in Christ ; for Christ 
 living in us extends not to justification only, but to the 
 whole life of a Christian. 
 
 Ye having hcen rooted and grounded in love. — These words 
 describe the spiritual condition into which those are brought 
 who are strengthened by God's Spirit in the inner man, and 
 have Christ indwelling in their hearts. And they are to 
 be connected with what follows and not with what precedes, 
 inasmuch as they indicate, not the cause or the accompani- 
 ment, but the effect of that indwelling of Christ which has 
 been spoken of. It is a state of permanence and establish- 
 ment that is here described ; for both of those influences 
 which are working in them are fitted to produce an enduring 
 and not a mere temporary result. It is the inner man that 
 is strengtliened, it is the heart that holds possession of Christ. 
 It is not the mere outer fringe of his being that has been 
 wrought upon, but the very centre and citadel of all thought 
 and feeling and will. Hence the presence of God's Spirit, 
 and the exercise of the grace of faith, must have a con- 
 solidating and confirming effect upon the whole man. — In the 
 use of the two participles, " rooted and grounded," there is 
 here the same rapid change of metaphor as we meet with in 
 
CHAl'. III. 17. 
 
 267 
 
 the parallel passage (Col. ii. 7V Compare 1 Cor. iii. 0. The 
 meaning of the figure is practically the same, so that we 
 speak of planting cities or founding them. In using the 
 perfect participle, the apostle shows that he is thinking of 
 a state that shall have been secured when God has granted 
 the strengthening and indwelling asked for. — This establish- 
 ment is realised in the development of love ; not the love of 
 God or Christ to them, but their love as an affection of the 
 soul exercised toward God, and toward all men for His sake, 
 developed within them by the strengthening of the inner 
 man, and the dwelling of Christ in their hearts. Westcott 
 and Hort have joined the words " in love " to the preceding 
 clause, and read, " that Christ may dwell by faith in your 
 hearts in love." This would make the apostle say, " that 
 Clirist may dwell by IViith in your hearts, in the love to Him 
 produced there." Klupper has very properly remarked, in 
 opposition to such a construction, that if this had been the 
 apostle's meaning, we would have expected, instead of " by 
 faith " and " in love," to read " by faith and love." It is 
 manifestly unsuitable to regard " in love " as expressing the 
 mode in which Christ dwells in the heart. The words are 
 evidently used of the believer, not of Christ. Hence they 
 must be joined to the participles "rooted and grounded." As 
 thus connected, they naturally describe the soil in which 
 believers are established and enabled to maintain a firm 
 position. How the soil is provided and prepared is shown 
 by the preceding context. Christ dwelling in our hearts by 
 His very presence produces love there. He is love, and, being 
 appropriated by our faith, those hearts into which by faith 
 He is taken are made loving, and produce the fruits of love 
 in word and deed. Thus he in whose heart this is wrought 
 has that grace which imparts solidity and firmness to his 
 whole spiritual life. Love, as the condition of heart in which 
 those are in whom Christ dwells, is the element in which the 
 rootedncss and groundcdncss of tiie Ciiristian character is 
 shown. For we must remember that the apostle is not 
 speaking here of the beginning of the Christian life, of its 
 origin, but of its strengthening in those in whom it was 
 ^ See Lightfoot, Commentary on Colossians, 5th ed,, p. 176, ISSO. 
 
268 EPISTLE TO THE ErHESIANS. 
 
 already present. " The true meaning is that our roots ought 
 to be so deeply planted, and our foundation so firmly laid in 
 love, that nothing will be able to shake us. It is idle to 
 infer from these words, that love is the foundation and root 
 of our salvation. Paul does not inquire here, as any one may 
 perceive, on what our salvation is founded, but with what 
 firmness and constancy we ought to continue in the exercise 
 of love" (Calvin). 
 
 Ver. 18. Tlcat ye may he ahundantly able to apprehend with 
 all saints. — This expresses the result secured by our being rooted 
 and grounded in love, and the end for which Christ dwells in 
 our hearts. Grammatically, the connection is immediately 
 with the fact of Christ dwelling in our hearts, for the particle 
 " that " here, as generally, means " in order that " (telic) and 
 not " with the result that " (ecbatic).: — The verb " to be 
 abundantly able," literally " to be exceedingly strong," occurs 
 here only in canonical Scripture ; and elsewliere in the Greek 
 Bible only in Ecclesiasticns vii. 6, " Seek not to be judge, not 
 being able to take away iniquity," The word is singularly 
 appropriate in a sequel to the prayer for strengthening. That 
 believers should be made strong by the Holy Spirit and the 
 indwelling of Christ, is the gist of the whole prayer, for all 
 else that is mentioned follows naturally and necessarily from 
 this. And so now the apostle indicates the use to which 
 that strength is to be put. As converted men they were no 
 longer altogether without strength ; but now the apostle prays 
 on behalf of those who have a little strength, that it may be 
 increased, for that which he wishes them to brace themselves 
 to accomplish ' needs great strength. — It is an exercise of 
 spiritual cognition on which the apostle desires the spiritually 
 strengthened to engage, and that in the fellowship of all saints. 
 He would have these Gentile Christians transcend the narrow 
 sectarianism which they, as well as the Jews, were apt to 
 manifest, and in this exercise he would have them associate 
 even with those other members of the family, bearing God's 
 name, that are in heaven. He would have them aspire unto 
 a fellowship in knowledge with all the members of God's 
 family in heaven and on earth. Why should they be a whit 
 behind the very chief of all the saints ! 
 
ciiAr. III. IS. 269 
 
 What is the breadth and length, and dcptli and licvjld. — This 
 is that for the apprehension of which we are to make use of 
 the strength granted. Most grammarians and commentators 
 are agreed that we are not to supply here " of love," as this 
 would make the statement of the following verse purely 
 tautological. Also, these terms of dimension would be scarcely 
 applicable to love, but are much more naturally used as de- 
 scriptive of "the riches of His glory" in ver. 16. Such was 
 the measure proposed at the very opening of the prayer, and 
 it is most fitting that the suppliant should desire for those on 
 whose behalf he prays, that their aspirations should rise to 
 the same height as his on their behalf. It does not seem 
 desirable to attempt any detailed explanation of these several 
 terms. Many expositors have done this with most unsatis- 
 factory results. Calvin speaks of Augustine's application of 
 these terms to the cross, and of Ambrose's attempt to find in 
 them an allusion to the ligare of a sphere, as ingenious but 
 utterly unsuitable exercises of the imagination. Meyer gives 
 some interesting specimens, which may serve as a warning 
 against indulgence in any such purely subjective and arbitrary 
 treatment of emotional and rhetorical utterances. Undeterred 
 by this warning, Klopper ventures on such an attempt. Under- 
 standing the reference of the clause to be to the divine 
 wisdom which discovered the hidden mystery (vers. 9-11), he 
 makes " breadth and length " mean the wide extension of 
 this to all nations of the world ; " depth," its extension also 
 to those under the earth (Eph. iv. 9, etc.) ; and " height," 
 the inclusion of the family in heaven. It is much better, 
 and more in accordance with the glowing poetic eutluisiasm 
 of the writer, to understand the clause quite generally, and 
 not to explain it by a detailed analysis and application of the 
 separate words. It is an apprehension of the divine riches 
 in all their fulness, in every direction, under every conceivable 
 aspect. There may be an allusion to the solid and substantial 
 structure of the spiritual life viewed as a well - founded 
 building, well-proportioned in all its dimensions, without 
 considering particularly what these separate dimensions may 
 correspond to in the spiritual sphere. — Three of the four 
 words here used do not occur elsewhere than in this epistle 
 
270 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 ill the writings of Paul, and of these " height " only once 
 again in this epistle (iv. 8). It is worthy of notice, in 
 opposition to the tendency to seek for traces of Gnostic influ- 
 ence in the use of words in this writing, that the other word 
 " depth " (/3ddo<i), which was the most characteristic term in 
 the Gnosticism of Yalentinus, is used in 1 Cor. ii. 10 ; Kom. 
 viii. 39, xi. 33 ; and, with a very direct reference to Gnostic 
 heretical tendencies of the apostolic age, in Rom. ii. 24.^ 
 In the present passage, the words are used in quite a natural 
 sense, with no reference to Gnostic terminology, 
 
 Ver. 19. And to know the love of Clirid thatpasscth knowledge. 
 — The love of Christ is His love to us, not our love to Him. 
 This is evident from the whole drift of the context. In all 
 other places, too, in the apostle's writings, where the word 
 "surpassing" occurs (2 Cor. iii. 10, ix. 14; Eph. i. 19, 
 ii. 7 ; Phil. iv. 7), it is used only of the attributes and things 
 of God. It is just what might be expected as the result of 
 strengthening by the Spirit, and of Christ's indwelling in our 
 hearts secured by faith, that we sliould greatly advance in our 
 experimental knowledge of Christ's love for us. — This clause 
 is connected as parallel with the apprehending the breadth and 
 length in the previous clause of the sentence. If we be able, 
 as the apostle desires, to apprehend tlie divine wisdom of the 
 decree in its whole extent, then there will be necessarily 
 involved a knowledge of Christ's love to us. The love mani- 
 fested by Christ to us will be the subject of our study, and 
 will be found by us a very fruitful theme. " The love of 
 Clirist contains within itself the whole of wisdom, so that the 
 words may run thus: that ye may he able to comprehend the 
 love of Christ, vjhich is the Ircadih and length, and depth and 
 height, that is, the complete perfection of all wisdom " (Calvin). 
 The love of Christ is the real mystery which the gospel, by 
 the Spirit, reveals. The hidden depths are here, and the 
 unsearchable riches. — The apostle's prayer is that the Ephe- 
 
 1 See Lightfoot, C/ewieni! o/ i?ome, ii. 121, 1890. Clement, Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, xl., speaks of having searched in the depthft of the divine know- 
 ledge, and makes this an argument for the orderly performance of God's com- 
 mands. Thus with the apostle and his early disciples, tlie study of the depths, 
 which heretical Gnostics made an excuse for disorder, is not intermitted, but is 
 employed on behalf of truth and order. 
 
ciiAr. III. 19. 271- 
 
 sians may " hnow " this love of Christ. Those for whom he 
 prays are already experimentally acquainted with this love. 
 It has blessed and saved them. It has called forth responsive 
 love in their hearts. And now Paul prays that they may be 
 enabled intelligently to conceive of that love which has been 
 working such a change in them. Theodore of Mopsuestia 
 pointed out this distinction between what the Ephesians 
 previously had and what the apostle asked for them. It was 
 "knowing" as contrasted with "enjoying," just as in Ps. 
 xvi. 11, "He whose heart is glad in the Lord looks unto God 
 to have made known unto him the path of life." Besides 
 the enjoyment of Christ's love, the apostle would have us 
 attain unto the knowledge of it. A personal interest in 
 Christ's love is the indispensable foundation, and any know- 
 ledge, any so-called gnosis which does not rise out of this, 
 cannot be regarded as knowledge at all. To know Christ is, in 
 its earliest stage, to grasp Him and appropriate Him as our 
 own, and in its further stages, out of the love which this 
 earliest form of knowledge creates, to advance to a study of 
 the contents and relation of Christ's love to us, so that we 
 may abound more and more in knowledge (Phil. i. 9). — This 
 love of Christ is further described as surpassing knowledge. 
 We ought to emphasise the fact tliat in this clause the verb 
 and the noun are one and the same word, and as thus brought 
 together must have one and the same meaning. It seems, there- 
 fore, entirely out of place and wrong when EUicott speaks of 
 the one as being contrasted with the other, the verb in the 
 beginning of the clause referring to that knowledge which 
 arises from the depths of religious experience, and the noun 
 in the latter part of the clause referring to mere abstract 
 knowledge apart from religious consciousness or Christian 
 love, as in 1 Cor, viii. 1, xiii. 8. The knowledge which the 
 love of Christ surpasses is that knowledge in which Paul would 
 have the Ephesian believers advance. When he prays that 
 men may know the love of Christ, it is quite evident that 
 that knowledge must be such as the human faculties are 
 capable of. May they know as far as it is possible for the 
 human understanding to proceed. Though believers are 
 indeed partakers of the divine nature, yet all their powers, 
 
272 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 even those most distinctly spiritual, are restricted within the 
 bounds of fiiiitude. Paul prays that we may know the love of 
 Christ up to the limits of our power of knowledge, enlightened 
 by God's Spirit ; but then he reminds us that even when that 
 limit has been reached, we shall not have attained a complete 
 and exhaustive knowledge of Christ's love. The second word 
 in our clause does not mean a less perfect knowledge than the 
 first, but both refer to that liighest knowledge of which man 
 is capable, which, nevertheless, is not adequate, not perfectly 
 comprehensive of that which to human faculties is incompre- 
 hensible. — We should also notice that what is to be known 
 is the love of Christ, and not merely the fact that the adequate 
 and perfect knowledge of it is beyond our reach. The incom- 
 prehensibility of Christ's love is not the prominent idea here, 
 and is only brought in incidentally to make it plain what sort 
 of knowledge is sought for.^ — And again, the comparative 
 adjective rendered " passing " or " surpassing " simply means 
 that the love of Christ transcends man's powers of under- 
 standing, so tliat it cannot be defined and accurately measured. 
 It is wrong to render it " more excellent," so as to make Paul 
 say that love to Clirist on our part is better than knowledge. 
 This, besides introducing an idea altogether foreign to the 
 context, would require that differentiating of the meaning of 
 the word " knowledge," in the earlier and later part of the 
 clause, which we have seen to be unallowable. 
 
 That yc may he, filled up to the ^uhole fulness of God. — Here 
 we have the end to be served by our being enabled to appre- 
 hend and know the love of Christ. The fulness of God 
 (pleroma, see i. 10, 23) is that which is filled by God, 
 and so the absolute iulness of God is God Himself. And 
 that it is in this absolute sense that it is meant in our text, 
 is shown by the emphatic used of the objective ivholc. The 
 gifts and graces bestowed by God may fill up him. on whom 
 they are bestowed, who may therefore be regarded as, relatively 
 to his measure, filled with some of tlie elements which go to 
 
 ^ In order to get this meaiiiug from the words, the particijde must be treated 
 as an infinitive. "This," says Winer (Grammar, p. 43.5, 1882), "cannot be, 
 -since the participle is too clearly marked as au attributive by its position 
 between the article and the uouu." 
 
CHAP. Ill, 20. 273 
 
 constitute the divine fulness. But here it is the whole 
 fulness of God — a Being who represents perfectly the divine 
 fulness, not merely as having received of that fulness, but as 
 being that fulness. Now, if we compare our text with chap, 
 iv. 13, we shall see that " the whole fulness of God" and 
 " the fulness of Christ " are precisely convertible phrases. 
 In Rather, Son, and Spirit dwell all the fulness of the God- 
 head. Christ, then, is the whole fulness of God. He is that 
 fulness, that which is filled by God. But the apostle is 
 assuming that his prayer has been answered, and that Christ, 
 who is filled with the whole fulness of God, is dwelling in 
 the believer's heart. And so the end is realised which had 
 been aimed at. He who has the Spirit without measure, 
 who hath the seven Spirits of God, dwelleth in us. We are 
 filled, and that which fills us is the fulness of God. Wej 
 could not be filled by one who had simply drawn out of that) 
 fulness, but only by Him who is that fulness. When we 
 have Christ in our hearts, then we are filled up to the measure 
 of God's own fulness, with which we are in immediate connec- 
 tion. This is the highest point possible in any petition ; 
 nothing higher can be sought or conceived. 
 
 By this prayer the apostle would arouse in believers a 
 worthy spiritual ambition. He would not have them linger 
 over " the elements of the first principles of the oracles of 
 God" (Heb. v. 12). His great desire is to see growth in 
 spiritual knowledge and power. " The greatest hindrance to 
 this growth," says Oetinger, Grundhegriffe des Neuen Testaments, 
 i. 350, 1358, "is that so many come to a halt with the 
 doctrine of justification by faith, and do not look beyond into 
 that which Jesus Christ has in store for us at the end." It 
 is Paul's wish that those who are justified should be 
 strengthened by contemplation of the riches that are in Christ, 
 who has justified them. These are not exhausted by His 
 work in justifying the ungodly. He has what it will require 
 eternity for Him to bestow upon " the inner man " of the 
 believer. 
 
 Ver. 20. Now to Him who is able to do beyond all things 
 exceeding abundantly beyond what we ask or think. — The prayer 
 is fittingly closed with a doxology, which is an ascription of 
 
 S 
 
274 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 praise to God for what He is, rather than a thanksgiving for 
 particular gifts and mercies received from Him. Leaving out 
 of account such doxological ejaculations as Gal. i. 5 ; Eom. i. 
 25, ix. 5 ; Eph. i. 4, we liave seven regular and formal 
 doxologies in the Pauline Epistles (Rom.xi. 36, xvi. 27 ; Phil, 
 iv. 20; Eph. iii. 21; 1 Tim. i. 17, vi. 16 ; 2 Tim. iv, 18). In 
 all these the form of the doxology is determined and coloured 
 by the preceding context. God is addressed under that 
 aspect of His character which has been specially prominent 
 in the writing brought to a solemn close by the doxology. 
 The place of the doxology is at the end of a composition, 
 which has been throughout of such a character, or has at least 
 risen to such a point, that a solemn ascription of praise to God 
 might naturally be expected. Each of the books of which 
 the whole Psalter is composed, is fittingly concluded by a 
 doxology. And in every case in which a doxology is 
 introduced in the epistles of the New Testament, the writer 
 has wrought himself up to such a pitch of fervour, that he 
 could not pass on to any other theme, until he had rested his 
 mind and heart, and calmed his emotions, by the utterance of 
 a measured and stately ascription of glory to Him to whom 
 glory is due. So here the apostle in his prayer has risen to 
 the greatest height possible in his petitions, and there is 
 nothing but a doxology that can fittingly follow. He can 
 ask nothing more, for he has asked what will bring into the 
 believer's soul the very fulness of God. He can, therefore, 
 only now turn to Him who is the absolute fulness, and 
 ascribe to Him endless praise. The doxology also, which, on 
 the grounds stated, has become absolutely inevitable, forms 
 an appropriate conclusion to the more distinctly didactic and 
 doctrinal part of the epistle. — As appended to the apostle's 
 prayer on behalf of the Ephesian believers, the doxology is 
 appropriately addressed to him " who is able to do exceeding 
 abundantly beyond what we ask or think." We have seen that 
 in the very utterance of his petitions the apostle felt himself 
 hampered, owing to the poverty of human speech, and still 
 more owing to the limitations and superficiality of human 
 capacities. He has perceived very clearly that the real 
 difficulty lies with man, who does not feel his need in such 
 
CHAP. III. 20. 275 
 
 a way as to ask largely enough, and does not tliiiik, or cannot 
 think, adequately of those stores of grace that are included in 
 God's provision for him. It is therefore witli an infinite 
 sense of relief that he turns to Him whose abilit}^ to give 
 and do is not measured by our ability to ask or think. — 
 The apostle's confidence in God is expressed by a reduplica- 
 tion of expressions indicating the supereminent character of 
 this power. He is able to do hcyond all things. When all 
 has been done His power is still unexhausted. There is 
 absolutely no limit to His power. This is the strongest 
 statement that he can make regarding the transcendent power 
 of God. What follows, therefore, is a particular instance 
 of what has been expressed in the previous general statement. 
 As absolutely nothing could reach to the limits of God's 
 power, it is evident that it far exceeds all that we can 
 ask or imagine. Hence this particular case is put strongly, 
 " exceeding ahundantly heijond." This word occui's in Theo- 
 dotion's Greek translation of Dan. iii. 22, and in the New 
 Testament in 1 Thess. iii. 10, v. 13. It is a compound word, 
 made up of a word which itself means " exceeding " preceded 
 by two prepositions, each intensifying the degree of excess. 
 In Clement, Cor. xx., an almost identical adverb is used in 
 speaking of the great Creator, who does "good unto all things, 
 but /a?' hcyond the rest, to us who have taken refuge in His 
 compassionate mercies, through our Lord Jesus Christ." Thus 
 the apostle used the strongest word possible to express his 
 sense of the surpassing power to do for us that lay in God. 
 However far our thought or imagination of things desirable 
 may reach beyond what we can express or dare to put in 
 words, far beyond all computation, even beyond that utmost 
 stretch of imagination, goes the power of God to do on our 
 behalf 
 
 According to the i^oiuer that ivorketh in us. — Tlie apostle con- 
 cludes that God's power toward us is of the superabundant 
 character described, from what He has seen wrought in 
 himself and in other believers. He who could do what He 
 has done in us could do absolutely anything ; for what has 
 been done required nothing short of omnipotence. Put any 
 power short of omnipotence to work on Christ what God hath 
 
276 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 wroiisht, to work in sinful man what was needed to raise him 
 into heavenly places with Christ, to enlighten the believer 
 and then to strengthen him in the inner man, and we shall 
 at once see how VEiin and absurd it would be to expect any 
 success. But all this has been done by the power working 
 in us, which must therefore be omnipotence. It is thus, as 
 we consider the power that is wrought and is working in us, 
 that we rise to a right conception of the immeasurableness 
 of the divine power. What can not He do, says Paul, who 
 has made me, who am less than the least of all saints, the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles, and the preacher of that gospel which 
 had been a hidden mystery so long ! The verb " worketh " 
 is here not active but middle. In regard to it, Winer 
 {Grammar, p. 323, 1882) remarks, "We find a distinction 
 in usage between the active and middle, the active being used 
 by Paul oi personal (1 Cor. xii. 6; Gal. ii. 6; Eph. i. 11, etc.), 
 the middle of ^w^i-j^ersonal activity (Eom. vii. 5 ; [Eph. iii. 
 20] ; Cob i. 29; 2 Thess. ii. 7, etc.). But while " the power" 
 here is formally non-personal, that power really is the Holy 
 Spirit. 
 
 Ver. 21. Unto Him he glory in the Church in Christ Jesus. 
 — Even when the believer has reached the full measure of his 
 spiritual strength, the glory will belong to God and not to the 
 creature. There will be no occasion for self-glorification, but 
 abundant cause to glorify God. — And this glory is rendered 
 in the Church. This specifies the peculiar kind of glory 
 given to God. It is not merely the declaration that He is 
 glorious, that glory belongs to Him ; but it is the glory arising 
 from the redemption of Christ. The Churcli of the redeemed, 
 by its very existence, the fact that it has been by His grace 
 called into being, is that distinctive glory here ascribed to 
 God. Glory in the Church is that special glory due to His 
 name as the God of salvation. And as this salvation in the 
 Church is wrought in Christ, the apostle adds, in Christ Jesus, 
 to define exactly the way in which such glory is secured to 
 God in the Church. All the oldest extant MSS., and 
 Westcott and Hort following them, give " in the Church and 
 in Christ Jesus." Wordsworth suggests that this variation 
 probably arose from the position of the word " Church " 
 
CHAP. III. 21. 277 
 
 before the words "Christ Jesus." Meyer regards the "and" 
 as an old, unsuitable, connective addition ; and Ellicott 
 considers the proposed reading contrary to critical probability, 
 and thinks that the insertion of the copula may be more 
 readily accounted for as due to emendation than its omission 
 as due to an error in transcription. The meaning is quite 
 evident. Whatever grace we enjoy, the possession of which 
 by us gives glory to God, we owe to Christ. It is the Church 
 in Christ Jesus, because of what it owes to Christ, and 
 because of what it is in Christ, that gives glory to God. 
 " Christ and the Church can no more be divided than God 
 and Christ. God's glory is not hazardous as it was in His 
 first heaven and afterwards in paradise, but sure and steadfast 
 in eternity " (Pulsford). The Church and the glory it yields 
 to God are thus enduring, because they are in Christ 
 Jesus. 
 
 To all the generations of the age of the ages. Ameii. — 
 The apostle employs an accumulation of phrases to indicate 
 the enduring character of that glory rendered to God. It is 
 in the very highest and fullest sense an everlasting glory. In 
 order to express the idea of eternal duration, we have here 
 not only all the parts which go to make up the whole range 
 of time from the beginning to the end, but also the endless 
 age that lies outside of all temporal distinctions, with those 
 eternal periods or epochs of which the human mind has been 
 able to form some glimmering conception. A generation is 
 properly the period during which those live who are of 
 contemporary birth. Its duration has been variously calculated 
 at thirty or a hundred years, according as it was understood 
 of the average or maximum length of man's life. Herodotus 
 reckoned three generations to a century. In Gen. xv. 16, it 
 means a period of a hundred years. "All generations" means 
 the whole range of time as made up of those shorter periods. 
 But what the apostle has to do with here is not time and its 
 divisions, but eternity, which, however, can be made conceiv- 
 able to man only by the use of terms and figures applicable 
 to time. Just as "all generations" can mean nothing less than 
 all time, so "all the generations of eternity" can mean only the 
 absolute fulness or completeness of eternity. — The phrase 
 
278 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 " the age of the ages " is peculiar to this passage. Else- 
 where Paul uses the very similar phrase, " the ages of the ages " 
 (Gal. i. 5; Phil. iv. 20; 1 Tim. i. 17; 2 Tim. iv. 18), as also 
 other New Testament writers (Heb. xiii. 21; 1 Pet. iv, 11; Eev. 
 V. 13, vii. 12). This latter form of the phrase occurs three 
 times in Clement, Cor. xxxviii., xliii., and 1. The formula 
 used in our passage is more strictly in keeping with the use 
 of the word " generations." The more usual form calls 
 attention to the several periods, but the form used in the 
 text calls attention to the eternity which embraces all the 
 ages, since the several parts had been already made prominent 
 in the phrase " all the generations." The cumulative effect 
 of the whole is to present a very strong and forcible 
 representation of the eternal duration of that glory which 
 man's redemption, with all that it involves, brings to God. 
 
 £.— ETHICAL DIVISION.— Chaps. IV.-VL 
 
 In the opening sentences of our commentary, we have in- 
 dicated the sense in which we distinguish between the earlier 
 and later portion of the epistle, and we have shown there 
 how little disposed we are to employ the designations Theo- 
 logical and Ethical as designations of the respective parts with 
 anything like an exclusive application. Erom this point on- 
 ward the apostle assumes a directly hortatory style. This of 
 itself should determine our beginning the second part of the 
 epistle here, and not, as Wordsworth and others are inclined 
 to do, at the 1 7th verse. That the apostle seems to pass from 
 exhortation to doctrinal exposition is only what we might 
 expect, and what we shall meet with in the later part of thi'=:. 
 chapter and in subsequent chapters. " The eucharistic feeling 
 does not at once subside ; the more level movement of practical 
 exhortation is still lifted, as it were, by a kind of ground- 
 swell of spiritual emotion." ^ 
 
 ^ Davies, The Ephtles of Paul to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, 
 2nd ed., p. 24, ISSi. 
 
CHAP. IV. 1. 279 
 
 Sect. VII. — Transition to the more directly Practical 
 Taut — Unity of the Faith (Chap. iv. 1-16). 
 
 The apostle shows how he is keeping in mind the doctrinal 
 conclusions reached in the part just solemnly closed, by 
 coupling immediately his exhortation to maintain a pure 
 walk with an exhortation to maintain the unity, and there- 
 fore the purity, of the faith. This exhortation implies a 
 certain fear, similar to that expressed by the apostle some 
 two' years before, when he met the elders of Ephesus at 
 Miletus. For the sake of their Christian life, he would have 
 them take heed to the doctrine. 
 
 (1) Tlie Calling of the Christians (chap. iv. 1-6). 
 
 Vers. 1-6. In these verses the apostle addresses his exhor- 
 tation directly to the Ephesians, on the ground of all that he 
 had said in the earlier part of his epistle. He has laid a good 
 theological foundation. They now know who God is, and 
 what His thoughts and purposes toward them are. The 
 calling wherewith God calls them is in keeping with His own 
 character. As He is shown specially to them in Christ Jesus, 
 so are they to be in this world. His calling of them has 
 direct reference to Himself, and therefore the end for all is 
 one, even as God is one. All that is of God evidences its 
 divine character by tending toward God ; and this is the basis 
 of that unity in the Church of God and its members which 
 begins within, and, as it advances to perfection, shows itself 
 more and more outwardly. 
 
 Ver. 1. / therefore, the 'prisoner of the Lord, exhort you. — The 
 view of Hofmann and others, who regard these words as the 
 resuming of the thought broken off in chap. iii. 1, has nothing 
 at all to commend it. The " therefore " of our text is not the 
 " for this cause " of the earlier passage. The idea of such a 
 prolonged parenthesis has the special difficulty of requiring 
 to account for the introduction, in such an incidental manner, 
 of two great themes — the mystery of the Gentiles' call, and 
 the profound prayer for their spiritual strengthening — both of 
 which will rank at least alongside of the mightiest passages 
 
280 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 in the epistle. Tiae " therefore " of our text does not refer 
 back to the end of the second chapter, but quite naturally 
 connects the ethical and hortatory part here beginning with 
 the previous doctrinal part, and more particularly with that 
 section in which the apostle had called special attention to 
 his calling as the Apostle of the Gentiles, on account of which 
 he was now in bonds. The prominence given to his own 
 personality and present circumstances is intended to render 
 the exhortation about to be made more peculiarly solemn and 
 impressive. He feels that as Paul, who is now in bonds for 
 them, he has a father's right to speak earnestly and eagerly. 
 So he exhorts Philemon, " being such a one as Paul the aged." 
 He describes himself here as " the prisoner in the Lord." 
 There was no other reason for his being in bonds than the 
 fact of his union with Jesus Christ. He suffers as a Chris- 
 tian. It is always a joy to the apostle to associate himself 
 directly with the Master. Whatsoever his circumstances may 
 be, they can never affect his union with Christ, otherwise than 
 by illustrating the closeness of the uniting bond. He is in 
 the Lord. The accident of freedom or imprisonment cannot 
 affect or change this fact. His present imprisonment, instead 
 of affording a cause for stumbling, is to him a proof of the 
 endurance of his relationship to Christ. It is because he is 
 in the Lord that he is now in bonds. His position gives him 
 a right to speak with all authority in the name of the Lord. 
 In Phil. i. 13, he speaks of his bonds in Christ. Paul always 
 refers to his imprisonment and sufferings with a note of 
 triumph in his voice, because he regards them as " the seal of 
 that embassy with which he had been honoured " (Calvin). 
 Hence he does not consider that in passing at once from the 
 contemplation of the Almighty, to whom he had just been 
 ascribing the praises of eternity, to himself the prisoner, 
 chained to a Pioman soldier, he was making any descent. 
 Because he is " in the Lord " as a subject of redeeming grace, 
 whose sufferings are for the advancement of the gospel, he is 
 really contributing to the praises of the great God. In Eom. 
 xii. 1, a similar exhortation is brought in immediately after 
 the doxology ; and in both passages the verb is more correctly 
 rendered "exhort" than "beseech," as in the Authorised 
 
CHAP. IV. 2. 281 
 
 Version. He exhorts, indeed, with all long-suffering, but also 
 with all authority. It is with the authority of one M'ho 
 magnifies his office that the apostle here exhorts. He does 
 not beseech as one who had to entreat for a favour. 
 
 To walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye are called. — The 
 calling is the invitation of God to share in the salvation of 
 Christ; and, in the case of the Gentiles, it had been shown to 
 be equally free and comprehensive as that which had before 
 been addressed to the Jews. They were called with a calling 
 which was not a whit behind that of the most highly favoured. 
 It is "the high calling of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil, iii, 14). 
 It is " the heavenly calling " (Heb. iii. 1). It is that " calling 
 of God," in regard to which the apostle had prayed that the 
 Ephesians miglit make the hope contained in it the theme of 
 their study and contemplation (Eph. i. 18). It was there- 
 fore something very high and of great importance. The 
 earlier part of the epistle has been largely occupied in 
 showing how sublime the idea was which was embodied in 
 it. And now, says the apostle, " If ye know these things, 
 happy are ye if ye do them." To walk worthy of the calling 
 which God has addressed to us, is to live in a heavenly fashion, 
 to live in Christ Jesus, to live unto God. " To walk worthy 
 of God" (1 Thess. ii. 12; Col. i. 10) is a precisely equivalent 
 phrase. The calling which is wholly of God comes first, and 
 a corresponding life is looked for as the fitting and appropriate 
 fruit of that calling. Their walking can never render them 
 worthy of the calling of God wliich is theirs of free grace ; 
 but having been enlightened and strengthened, as Paul had 
 prayed that they might be, they are to bring forth fruits in 
 the life, which will give evidence of the presence of the Holy 
 Spirit and the indwelling of Christ in their hearts. 
 
 Ver. 2. With all lowliness and meekness. — These words 
 describe the manner of that walk which the apostle regards 
 as becoming on the part of those who have been called by 
 God in Christ.^ The word rendered " lowliness " {Taireivo- 
 ^ See a particularly full and interesting discussion of these two words in 
 Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 10th ed., pp 147-153, 1885. Comp. 
 also Lightfoot, Epistle to the Philippians, 6th ed., p. 109, 1881, and Epistle to 
 the Colossians, 5th ed. , p. 221, 1880. Also Sophocles, Lexicon, and Grimm, 
 Lexicon, s.v. 
 
282 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 (j^poavvrj) is not found in any writing earlier than the canonical 
 Scriptures. " It is not Taireivoc^avLa, but Ta7reivo(f)poavvr) ; 
 not a sJi02'j of humility, but heart lowliness, humility of mind" 
 (Leighton on 1 Pet. v. 5). It occurs in Acts xx. 19 ; Phil, 
 ii. 3°; Col. ii. 18, 23, iii. 12; 1 Pet. v. 5. It means the 
 entertaining of a properly humble estimate of self Its Old 
 Testament equivalent is that word rendered " poor " in the 
 familiar combination in the Psalms, " the poor and needy." 
 It is used in Josephus, IVai's of the Jeios, iv. 9. 2, in a bad 
 sense, of the Emperor Galba, as "pusillanimous." In classical 
 Greek, the simple adjective which forms the first part of the 
 word was almost invariably used of some thing or person that 
 was mean and contemptible. Humility first came to be 
 regarded as a virtue after Christ had hallowed lowliness by 
 the example of His life. Christ describes Himself as " meek 
 and lowly" (Matt. xi. 29), using the simple adjectives from 
 which these two words are formed. The word rendered 
 " meekness " (irpavTrj!;) is the opposite of harshness or 
 severity. The pagan novelists did recognise such a virtue, 
 but their conception of it was superficial, and fell far short of 
 the Christian grace commended in our text. It is a quality 
 of soul possible only to the lowly, and is shown first of all 
 toward God and then toward our fellow-men. Comp. Ecclus. 
 xlv. 4; 1 Cor. iv. 21; Gal v. 23, vi. 1 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25. 
 Hence, as Trench points out, David (2 Sam. xvi. 11) is 
 rendered " meek before the cursing Shimei," because he feels 
 that though this spiteful man had no right thus to act toward 
 him, yet it was of the Lord. Christ showed His meekness, 
 as a man made sin for us, by bearing the contradictions of 
 sinners. " Meekness," says Trench, " if more than mere 
 gentleness of manner, must rest on deeper foundations than 
 its own, on those namely which ' holiness ' has laid for it, 
 and can only subsist while it continues to rest upon these. 
 It is a grace in advance of ' holiness,' not as more precious 
 than it, but as presupposing it, and as being unable to exist 
 without it." These two words are used together in precisely 
 the same sense as in our text in Clement's Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, xxx. : " Lowliness and meekness are with them 
 that are blessed of God." 
 
CHAP. IV. 2. 283 
 
 With long-siiffering, forlcarinr/ one another in love. — This 
 clause is also connected with the exhortation, as a further 
 description of the walk that is worthy of the Christian calling. 
 It is therefore parallel with the preceding clause, but its 
 independence is marked not only by the repetition of the 
 preposition " with," but also by the close connection between 
 the virtue of " long-suffering " and " forbearing one another in 
 love." The latter phrase is little more than explanatory of the 
 preceding. Long-suffering is the virtue opposed to wrathful- 
 ness, or readiness to retaliate any injury or offence committed 
 against us. It presupposes our having the power to take 
 vengeance, and our refusal to exercise it. In the LXX. 
 (Isa. Ivii. 15; Jer. xv. 15; Mace. viii. 4), just as in the New 
 Testament, it always means endurance uf wrongs inflicted by 
 man, and not the endurance of sufferings laid upon man by 
 (lod ; and in Clement, Epistle to the Corinthians, xiii., Ixiv., 
 and in Ignatius, Epistle to the Ei^hcsians, iii., the same dis- 
 tinctive meaning is maintained. Though Grimm, in his 
 Lexicon, distinguishes two applications of the word — to patience 
 under trial and to endurance of injuries, and distributes 
 scriptural examples between the two — it is more correct to 
 recognise only one meaning, that of endurance without retalia- 
 tion under provocation, under which all the biblical examples 
 may be brought without any undue straining. The apostle 
 recognises this bearing a wrong, where it might have been 
 resented, as a Christian grace, the exercise of which goes to 
 make the life consistent with the calling of the gospel. The 
 long-suffering temper of the Christian causes him not only to 
 be slow to anger, but also to be persevering in his endeavours 
 to bless those who have injured him. The phrase " forbearing 
 one another in love " is explanatory of the grace of " long- 
 suffering." The verb, of which the participle is rendered here 
 "forbearing," is similarly used in 2 Cor. xi. 19; Col. iii. 12. 
 In Ignatius, Epistle to Polycarp, i., " Bear with all men," it is 
 used precisely as in our text, and probably with an allusion 
 to it. Paul's idea of that long-suffering, which is a necessary 
 element in the Christian churches, is the resolute refusal on 
 the part of the injured to allow himself to get into such 
 relations with those around him, that he shall not be able to 
 
284 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 fulfil the precept, " to do good unto all men, especially unto 
 them that are of the household of faith" (Gal. vi. 10). The 
 added words, " in love," indicate the spirit in which this 
 forbearance should be shown. Other motives might occasion 
 a display of forbearance toward those who did us wrong — 
 cowardice, or a selfish desire to keep on good terms with the 
 party in view of future advantage. But the motive must be 
 pure. The forbearance must not result from weakness and 
 servility, nor from a mean and calculating covetousness. It 
 must proceed from love of those men in reference to whom 
 we are forbearing. Thus only as followers of God, the great 
 pattern of long-suffering goodness, by forbearing in love, caTi 
 we show ourselves long-suffering, so as to make our walk 
 worthy of our calling. The followers of God must walk in 
 love (Eph. V. 2). The above exposition has explained why 
 we prefer to include the words " in love " in the second clause 
 of the second verse, rather than to attach it to the third verse. 
 Some expositors (Olshausen, Klopper, and others, following 
 the punctuation adopted by Lachmann, after Origen) have 
 joined " in love " to " endeavouring to keep," and thus 
 give it a position of peculiar emphasis. They do this, 
 supposing that, as attached to the previous clause, it is 
 redundant, especially if the words " with long-suffering " be 
 regarded as part of the clause. When, however, we regard 
 " with long-suffering " as an independent clause, parallel to 
 the preceding " with lowliness and meekness," and " forbearing 
 one another in love" as an additional explanatory clause, we 
 see the appropriateness and need of the words " in love " as 
 indicating the motive and spring of the forbearance. 
 
 We are thus presented with a picture of the ideal of the 
 Christian life in accordance with the idea of the imitation of 
 Christ. Walk wortliy of the high calling of God, by copying 
 the lowliness and meekness and long-suffering, showing itself 
 in loving forbearance, of the Son of God. " Walk suitably, 
 namely, in the spirit of Jesus. The love which passeth 
 knowledge is as deep as it is high. The high and lofty One 
 is meek and lowly in heart. . . . Jesus of Nazareth has 
 shown us the spirit and bearing of all the sons of God. . . . 
 ' Learn of me : I am meek and lowly in heart.' Of necessity. 
 
CHAP. IV. 3. • 285 
 
 as heirs of the heavenly kingdom, the vocation wherewith we 
 are called must be to walk before God, in all meekness and 
 lowliness, as Jesus walked " (Pulsford). 
 
 Ver, 3. Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit. — The 
 Spirit here is the Holy Spirit, and not, as Calvin and many 
 others have supposed, the human spirit, nor, as De Wette and 
 others, the spirit of the Christian community. The apostle 
 is speaking here to those who already have i\\Q" one spirit" 
 (chap. ii. 18). He is the Spirit that gives unity, that makes 
 all those one in whom He dwells. The unity of the Spirit 
 is the unity which the Spirit effects. But while it has its 
 origin in the common possession of the one Holy Spirit, this 
 unity must, on the part of individual men, be kept by resistino- 
 all fleshly tendencies, and restraining all selfish suggestions of 
 pride or covetousness, which are in their very nature disruptive 
 and inimical to that unity wrought by the Spirit. The apostle 
 had already met with painful instances of discord wrought 
 in the churches, which threatened the unity of the Spirit — in 
 Galatia and Corinth, and probably to some extent in most of 
 the other Christian communities, though they were all still so 
 young. In all these early Christian churches there were at 
 least the Jewish and Gentile elements, where difference of 
 training, and diverse ways of looking at things, made it 
 extremely difficult to maintain this unity in reality and truth. 
 Yet this was the work specially assigned to the members of 
 the churches. It was the Spirit's work to make them one ; 
 no other power could do this, or assist in doing it. It is 
 our task to keep it. So Jude exhorts believers who have 
 experienced the love of God, " Keep yourselves in the love of 
 God." And in order to keep this unity which the Spirit has 
 wrought, we must put forth immediate and persistent effort. 
 The participle " endeavouring " means to hasten, to show zeal, 
 to exert one's self greatly. It is a work to which we must 
 brace ourselves, and, in performing it, must call forth our 
 utmost endeavours. The word " unity " (kvoTT)^) occurs in 
 Scripture only here and in the loth verse of this same 
 chapter. This word and a similar one (eWcrt?, which is not 
 to be found in canonical Scripture) occurs very frequently in 
 Ignatius, meaning respectively unity and union, the result and 
 
286 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the process ; e.g. in Epistle to the Philaddphians, vii. viii., 
 " Cherish union, shun divisions, be imitators of Jesus Christ, 
 as He Himself was also of His Father. . . . Where there is 
 division and rage, there God abideth not. Now the Lord 
 forgiveth all men when they repent, if, repenting, they return 
 to the unity of God." In order to keep this unity, we must 
 follow God by exercising lowliness of mind, meekness, and 
 long-suffering. The unity will not be broken but by failure 
 to exercise those primary virtues. But to observe those 
 virtues is to have the Spirit of Christ. Only those who are 
 strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man can 
 show in their lives lowliness, meekness, long-suffering, and 
 any other Christian grace. Hence it is that only by the 
 Spirit's presence can our endeavour be made, and be success- 
 ful in maintaining the unity of the Spirit. 
 
 In the bond of peace. — The genitive here is like that of the 
 previous clause. The bond is formed by peace, and consists 
 in peace. We might even read, " in the bond which is 
 peace." In neither case is it desirable to distinguish what 
 grammarians call the genitive of apposition, and the genitive 
 of the subject or author. The unity has the Spirit as its 
 author, and consists in the Spirit, as it is dependent on His 
 presence. The bond is knit by peace, has peace as its author, 
 and consists in peace, has peace for its contents. The peace 
 here spoken of is the peace of Christ, for He is our ppace 
 (ii. 14). The idea of this peace, which is Christ Him- 
 self, present with us by His Spirit, being the bond in which 
 unity is maintained, is equivalent to that of Col. iii. 15, where 
 this peace is described as the umpire in our hearts, which has 
 to decide whenever a conflict arises there, and by its decision 
 prevents schism and division. If we 'are to keep the unity of 
 the Spirit, we must avoid and rid ourselves of those disposi- 
 tions which would rend this bond of peace. " Let nothing be 
 done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind," 
 etc. (Phil. ii. 3, 4). The bond of union really consists in the 
 exercise of those graces which lead him who has them to 
 renounce self, and say, " I am nothing, but I do all for the 
 gospel's sake." 
 
 Vers. 4—6. The apostle now proceeds to show particularly 
 
CHAP, IV. 4. 287 
 
 how this unity is effected. " The three Persons of the 
 Godhead are here remarkably brought out in connection with 
 that unity of the Spirit which you are to endeavour to keep 
 in the bond of peace. The Holy Ghost is in the first of these 
 three verses. The Son is in the second. The Father is in 
 the third." ^ The unity of the Church is described as seven- 
 fold, it may be in order to suggest the completeness and 
 perfection of that unity. " Those seven," says Pulsford, 
 " meet together in the Church of Jesus Christ, and constitute 
 a complex but perfect whole. The scope of each of these 
 is immense, for the greatness of the whole unity attaches to 
 each particular. The sevenfoldness meets in every one of the 
 seven." The absence of the substantive verb from all these 
 verses is probably owing to the apostle's wish to give his 
 utterances in a specially emphatic and memorable form as 
 Christian maxims or proverbs. There is no need to resort 
 to the expediency of supplying the substantive verb, and 
 rendering with Meyer and EUicott, " There is one hody," etc. 
 Taking the words as they stand, we continue, as is fitting, the 
 hortatory style of the passage, and do not abruptly introduce 
 a purely assertive statement. 
 
 Ver. 4. One hody and one Spirit. — We have in this verse 
 a further example of trinitarian distribution ; for " the one 
 body " calls attention to our mystical union with Christ, 
 " the one Spirit " to the indwelling in us of the Holy Spirit 
 which effects that union, and " the one hope of our calling " 
 is from God the Father. — The Church is the body of Christ 
 (chap. i..23, ii. 16, v. 30 ; Col. i. 24 ; 1 Cor. x. 16, xii. 27), 
 and is therefore one as Christ is one, and as it is ruled by the 
 Spirit of Christ (chap. ii. 18; 1 Cor. xii. 13). We have here, 
 therefore, the whole doctrine of the Church's unity, and what 
 follows is an enumeration of consequences resulting from the 
 truth here stated. To say that believers form one body, is 
 equivalent to saying that they are in vital union with Christ 
 their Head. It should be remembered that a dead body is 
 not a body but a corpse. Dead members do not belong to 
 
 1 Candlish, Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians expounded m a Series of Dis- 
 courses, p. 83, 1875. See also Goodwin, "Discourse of Election," Works, 
 ix. 131. 
 
288 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the body. When we say that members of the body of Christ 
 have one Spirit, we say that the Holy Spirit is that vital 
 principle which unites them to Christ and to one another. 
 As the soul animates the bodily organism, so the Spirit 
 animates and inspires the Church by dwelling in the hearts 
 of its members. " The apostle teaches us that there is one 
 body," says Augustine, as quoted by Wordsworth, " but this 
 body lives, does it not ? Yes. Whence ? From the one 
 Spirit. What our soul is to our bodies, that the Spirit 
 is to the members of Christ, to the body of Christ, the 
 Church." 
 
 As also ye were called in one hope of your calling. — A 
 connecting link is found between this and the previous clause 
 in Col. iii. 15, "ye were called in one body," or as members 
 of one body. This calling is the high calling of God in Christ 
 Jesus (Phil. iii. 14). It is one for all who are called. The 
 hope which that calling holds out is the common salvation. 
 The oneness of the body resulting from the oneness of the 
 Spirit animating it, is in keeping with the fact that the hope 
 enjoyed by all its members is one. What this hope is has 
 been fully explained under chap. i. 18. This hope is not 
 the subjective feeling, but its objective ground. So Christ is 
 called our hope (1 Tim. i. 1 ; Col. i. 27), as it is on 
 Him whose victory is ours, that the hope of our souls 
 rests.^ 
 
 Thus from the Father we have all a common hope of 
 heavenly bliss, from the Son we have that work of grace 
 which secures for us personal union with Him who has 
 acceptance with God, and from the Spirit we have that life 
 which makes and keeps us living members in Him who is our 
 Head. 
 
 Ver. 5. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. — Perhaps Stier is 
 not altogether carried away by fancy when he calls attention to 
 the different genders of these three words, which are respect- 
 ively masculine, feminine, and neuter (e/9, fj'ta, ev), and sees 
 in this arrangement a representation of unity in trinity, the 
 manifoldness of gifts in the one Spirit.^ — Tlie apostle had shown 
 
 ^ Compare Harless, Christian Ethics, p. 177, Edin. 1868. 
 
 2 See Stier, Die Gemeinde in Christo Jenu, ii. 29-41, Berlin 1848. 
 
CHAP. IV. 5. 289 
 
 in the previous verse the unity of the Church as an existing 
 institution. The body is there formed of living members, 
 deriving their life from the one Spirit, and looking forward 
 to the realisation of a common hope. Now he turns to its 
 origin to show that tliis unity belongs to its very inception. 
 Its fundamental principles are the same to all : to the one 
 Lord Christ all are bound, subjectively by the one appropri- 
 ative act of faith, and objectively by the sealing of the one 
 holy sacrament of baptism. — The one Lord is here made pro- 
 minent in opposition to the many principalities and powers, 
 whom Jews and Gentiles were alike prone to reverence. They 
 are not supreme, and just because they are many, are unsuited 
 for the place which Christ claims. As in 1 Cor. viii. 5, 6, 
 the apostle puts the one Lord by whom are all things and 
 we by Him, over against the "lords many." All these, if 
 they exist at all, are under Him who is Head over the Church, 
 which now includes all, both Jews and Greeks (chap. i. 7, 8 ; 
 Col. i. 27). He is the unifying principle under whom all 
 things and all beings are brought into one. This oneness 
 belongs to Himself. jNIembers of the Church may entertain 
 different views of Him, yet He Himself is one. In this 
 unique position He exercises authority as King and Ruler, 
 and so as one He is denominated Lord. We who are 
 members of His body have one JNIaster, and from Him as Lord 
 we receive commandments (1 Thess. iv. 2). As compared 
 with the many masters who may claim our bodily service, 
 He is the one Lord to whom we owe the undivided service of 
 our hearts (Col. iii. 22, 24). It is clear that all the saints 
 have this in common, that they acknowledge Christ as Lord, 
 and profess submission to Him. — That which binds them to 
 this one Lord is the same in all. The one faith is not the 
 common faith,in the sense of a creed containing articles accepted 
 by all It is the personal faith of the individual believer 
 appropriating the personal Saviour. It is the obedience of 
 the heart to the command of the one Lord, " Come unto me." 
 It is not strictly correct to call this subjective faith ; for it is 
 an exercise of soul directed to the objective and historical 
 Christ. It is the one means of salvation, because the one 
 means of union with the one Saviour, for both Jews and 
 
 T 
 
290 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Gentiles (Rom. iii. 30), It does not seem, however, tliat we 
 are required here to think of a unity in regard to the contents 
 of faith beyond the exercise of personal faith in the one Lord. 
 Pearson in his Exposition of the Creed, Krt. ix., i, 399, ed. Burton, 
 and Bisliop Harold Browne in his Exposition of tlie Thirty- 
 nine Articles, p. 463, 1858, understand by our text, "the 
 faith once delivered to the saints!' But this, as Pearson himself 
 seems to feel, is rather that unity of the faith spoken of in 
 the 13th verse. — The one baptism gives a visible seal to that 
 inner unity wrought by faith. Baptism presupposed faith, and 
 only faith in the one Lord was required (Acts ii. 38, viii. 36, 
 37). It is the symbol of the indwelling of the Spirit; the 
 outward badge of fellowship in the life of Christ. Pulsford 
 refuses to confine the reference to the ordinance of baptism as 
 a sacrament ; but though Scripture speaks of baptizing in the 
 purely spiritual sense (Acts i. 5 ; Ptora. vi. 3 ; 1 Cor. xii. 13), 
 this is certainly not thought of apart from the administration of 
 the ordinance in the Church. Careless neglect and wilful con- 
 temning of the ordinance show want of faith in the one Lord ; 
 but the fathers teach, says Field (On the Church, 3rd ed., 
 i. 236, 1847), " that faith and the inward conversion of 
 the heart flying unto God in Christ, through the gracious 
 instinct and sweet motion of the sanctifying Spirit, may be 
 reckoned a kind of baptism, because thereby they obtain all 
 that which should have been sought in the baptism of 
 water." — The question keenly discussed by many expositors, 
 as to the absence of any mention of the Lord's Supper in 
 this place, is answered by the hypothesis that here only the 
 initial or inaugural acts are taken into account. 
 
 Ver. 6. One God and Father of all. — The unity which forms 
 the special theme of the whole section, finds its most perfect 
 expression in the doctrine of the Trinity. And now from the 
 Spirit who imparts life, through the Son by whom we have 
 the life-giving Spirit, we rise to the Father who is fount and 
 source of all. The unity is not lost, but most distinctly 
 exemplified, in the tri-personality. We have not to do with 
 three Gods, but with three Persons in the one Godhead. 
 There is one God. We are here presented with the idea 
 of the absolute Deity. The Father is not merely one of the 
 
ciiAr. IV. c. 291 
 
 three Persons, but He is the one God, of whom is the Son, 
 and from both the Spirit. The whole Godhead is in the one 
 God. And it is in this one God that Jews and Gentiles 
 believing in Christ are made one. The i'atnily is one of 
 which the one God is Father. The " all " evidently includes 
 only the members of Christ's body of whose unity the whole 
 passage treats. 
 
 Who is over all, and througJi all and in all. — This is certainly 
 intended as a fuller description of the one God and Tather. 
 We have no need to restrict the application of these words, 
 as Meyer and others do, to the relation in which the one God 
 stands to the all of whou] He is Father. The " all," three 
 times repeated in our clause, is not to be rendered " ail 
 Christians," nor even " all men," but absolutely " all things," 
 all beings, men and things, Nor is it possil^le, without 
 violent contortion, to find in the three phrases any reference 
 to the Trinity. Some expositors — Stier, EUicott, and others — 
 think it possible, and most in keeping with the pervading 
 Trinitarianism of the whole passages, to see in the three 
 ])hrases of this clause distinct references to each of the Divine 
 Persons. The difficulty of this interpretation is well illus- 
 trated in the case of Irenreus, who, in adopting it, feels it 
 necessary to make the " all " in the first two instances mean 
 "all tilings," and in the third "all believers: ' the Father is 
 over all things, the Word is through all things, and the Spirit 
 is in us all.^ Ellicott, following Stier, makes the " over all " 
 refer to the Father as exercising sovereign authority, the 
 "through all" to the Son whose redeeming and reconciling 
 influences pervade all hearts, and tlie "in all" to the Spirit 
 
 ^ The reading "in all" is well witnessed to by the oldest MSS., X, -A-i B, C, and 
 also in the texts nsed by Ensebius and the interpolator of the Iguatiau Epistles, 
 in the beginning and end of the fourth century. But if we make the "all" in 
 each case of the same gender, it will be impossible to carry out the Trinitarian 
 application. Hence, in the interest of this interpolation, the " us "or " yoi; " 
 would be quietlyintroduced into ex.])0sition and translation, and would thence pass 
 into the text. This appears very strikingly in the case of Chrysostom, who had not 
 " us" nor "you" in his text, but simply "in all," and j'et in his commentary 
 iVlt it needful to supply " your," so as to make a diflerence in meaning between 
 " through " and " in." All who accept the common text, as Goodwin ( Works, 
 ix. 117), distinguish between the first two clauses as referring to the universe of 
 being, and the third as referring simply to all saints. 
 
292 El'ISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 as an indwelling presence. One objection to this interpreta- 
 tion that at once occurs is, that nowhere in this epistle, nor 
 indeed throughout the New Testament, are the redeeming and 
 reconciling influences of the Son spoken of as pervading all 
 believers. Chrysostom felt that the " through " could only 
 refer to the Father in respect of His providence. But all 
 such attempts to distribute those prepositional clauses among 
 the three Persons of the Godhead ought to be at once ruled 
 out of court, by insisting upon the appositional relations of 
 the whole clause to the preceding, " One God and Father of 
 all." The general object of the statement in this verse is to 
 describe God in His absolute being as " God and Father of all 
 in every conceivable respect, ruling over all, working through 
 all, dwelHng in all" (Winer, Grammar, p. 521, 1882). The 
 threefold direction in which the absoluteness of God is repre- 
 sented in those three phrases, is very happily indicated and 
 characterised by Beck : ^ 6 eVt irdvrwv indicates the tran- 
 scendent relationship of Creator, corresponding to the word, 
 " Thine is the glory ; " hia ttuvtcou indicates the all as means, 
 that He works by means of it, that all things are at His 
 service, the relationship of universal rule or sovereignty — 
 " Thine is the kingdom ; " iv iraatp indicates the relationship 
 of immanent power, that which quickens and sustains — 
 "Thine is the power." We have thus, instead of a reference 
 to the essential Trinity, a reference in a way to the economic 
 Trinity, inasmuch as we have tlie three aspects of divine 
 activity in creation, providence, and grace, using this last 
 term in the wide sense of general spiritual energy. 
 
 (2) 3Ieans of Grace to make such Calling Effectual 
 (chap. iv. 7—16). 
 
 Vers. 7—16. The apostle had set forth in the preceding 
 verses the motives which should induce his readers zealously 
 to strive to maintain the unity of the Spirit, and he now 
 passes on to show that the manifold gifts which they enjoy, 
 by which one is distinguished from another, need not in any 
 way hinder, but are intended to contribute toward the realisa- 
 tion of this end. What was in Christ Jesus in absolute 
 ^ ErUdramj des Bri<'J'n,s Pauli an die Epheser, p. 182. 
 
CHAP. IV. 7. 293 
 
 personal unity and perfect fulness, cannot be in any individual 
 human member of His Church. Hence there is a distribution 
 among many, and only when all have contributed, according to 
 their special gifts and endowments, will true unity in faith 
 and knowledge be reached, and with it the perfect standard of 
 true manhood, after the pattern of Christ. Not only various 
 gifts, but also various offices, in which those gifts are exercised, 
 liave been ordained with the same object in view — the pre- 
 serving of the unity of the Spirit. In the measure in whicli 
 gifts and offices are rightly employed, baneful influences will 
 be shut out, and everything will be made to work together 
 for good to the individual member of the body of Christ, 
 and for the comely growth and the well-proportioned increase 
 of tlie whole body. 
 
 Vers. 7. Bat to cacli of us the grace vjas given. — The apostle 
 now speaks of the individual, who, just because of his indi- 
 viduality, might be regarded as frustrating the unity spoken of. 
 If that unity had been of an artificial sort, determined from 
 without, the first duty of those interested in preserving it 
 would be to crush everything that could distinguish one man 
 from another, and so bring about a rigid uniformity. The 
 monkish orders, by enforcing uniformity of dress, occupa- 
 tion, etc., have deliberately phmned the suppression of every 
 feature distinctive of the individual. But here tlie apostle 
 recognised that the grace was given to each of us, which is 
 something very different from grace putting each of us into 
 its one mould. The manifoldness is not destroyed by the 
 gift. We remain individuals still. But, individuals as we 
 are, what is true of the all is true of each one of us. We 
 must each, without exception, contribute to the maintaining of 
 the unity, and this just because each of us shares in the 
 grace, the common possession of which constitutes that 
 unity. From what follows, it is evident that " the grace " is 
 not merely grace as appearing in the ,yifts of the Christian 
 personality, but the influences of the divine Spirit, which is 
 the presupposition of all gracious manifestations in this 
 life. The grace is given by Christ, and when appropriated 
 by the individual and put by him to use, as the servants 
 did with the talents in the parable (Matt. xxv. 14), it 
 
294 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 unfolds itself into the distinguishing graces of the particular 
 recipient. 
 
 According to the measure of the gift of Christ. — The relative 
 magnitude of the grace of each is determined by Christ's 
 giving. In distributing the talents, He gave to one five, to 
 another two, to another one. The original endowment is 
 determined by the Lord's will. It is the gift of Christ. As 
 to its contents, it is here described as the grace, but in chap. 
 i. 13, 17, the gift of God through Christ, and to those v^^ho 
 believe in the Holy Spirit. This gift is the one kind of gift 
 to all. It is not merely grace, but the grace of our Lord 
 Jesus Cln'ist that each receives. The measure of the Spirit 
 of Christ, bestowed upon the individual Christian, is the 
 measure of the grace given him. If the origin and author- 
 ship of the gift be remembered, no individual will use his 
 endowment otherwise than for the good of the whole (1 Cor. 
 xii. 7 ; Eom. xii. 3-8). 
 
 Ver. 8. JVJierefore it is said (in Scj^iptarc). — A very simple 
 quotation formula is here employed, the single word Xiyec. 
 It is also similarly used (chap. v. 14; 2 Cor. vi. 2 ; Gal. iii. 
 16; Rom. xv. 10). This word is frequently employed in 
 the fuller fornjula. The Scripture saith, \e<y€L ■>) jpacfir] (Eom. 
 iv. 3, X. 11, xi. 2 ; James ii. 23, etc.); or the name of the 
 writer of the particular sciipture, Esaias, David, the Holy 
 Spirit, the law (Eom. xv. 12; Acts xiii. 35; Heb. iii. 7; 
 1 Cor. xiii. 34, etc.). Of Xiyei, ^rjai, et^T^/ce, and similar words 
 thus used, Winer (Grammar, p. 656, 1882) says that probably 
 in no instance are they impersonal in the minds of the New 
 Testament writers, but that the subject, 6 ^eo<?, is somewhere 
 in the context, and is to be supplied. On the contrary. Light- 
 foot, in his note on Gal. iii. 16, remarks that \iyei,, like the 
 Attic ^rjai, seems to be used impersonally, the nominative 
 being lost sight of. In our passage we have no nominative in 
 the context which we can supply, and it seems better to render 
 the phrase impersonally. It is said. The same word is used 
 very frequently in the Epistle to the Hebrews, but always 
 with God or Christ understood from the immediate context.^ 
 
 ' Coiu{)are Westcott, Commentary on the Einstle to the Hebretvs, 1889 ; 
 EjTii.rsus on Uxe of Old Testament in the Epistle, pp. 469-495. 
 
CHAP. IV. 8. 295 
 
 Westcott very correctly remarks (p. 457) that the use of the 
 formuhx in Eph. iv. 8, v. 14, seems to be of a different 
 kind. — Tlie connection between the Old Testament quotation 
 in this verse and the preceding context is indicated by the 
 particle " wherefore " (Sto). The reference is certainly to the 
 very last words of the previous verse. The apostle does not 
 use the Old Testament passage to prove or even to illustrate 
 the fact of Christ's ascension. It is the thought of the grace, 
 as Christ's gift, that is present in the mind of the apostle. 
 The use of the particle is very much to this effect : What 
 has now been stated is quite in accordance with the saying of 
 Scripture. " As though he had said, Why art thou high- 
 minded ? the whole is of God " (Chrysostom). Hence 
 what is quoted is given, not as an argument in proof, but 
 simply ill illustration of the statement made. It is well 
 to notice here, in anticipation of the looseness of the quotations 
 of which we shall have to speak particularly by and by, that 
 nothing depends upon the reproduction of words. All that 
 the apostle calls attention to is a general coincidence in 
 thought. The fact that Christ gives gifts of grace had been 
 recognised and stated in Old Testament Scripture. But 
 Beck is not justified in assuming that the simple impersonal 
 formula of quotation necessarily implies an inexact reproduc- 
 tion of the passage. Other formuhe are used to introduce 
 quotations no more literally exact than the one before us, and 
 the simple formula of our text would be quite appropriate in 
 introducing the most rigidly literal quotation. Writing to 
 believers, the apostle does not argue for the truth stated, but 
 simply illustrates it by showing that in the Old Testament 
 Scriptures the same line of thought had received expression. 
 
 Having ascended on hir/h, He led caiptivity captive, He gave 
 gifts to men. — As to the source of the quotation, we may at 
 once dismiss, as absolutely without foundation, the idea of 
 Storr, that the apostle uses the words of a Christian hymn 
 well known to the Ephesians, based upon the 68th Psalm. 
 This would be an easy way of accounting for the peculiar- 
 ities of the text ; but besides the fact that there is nothing 
 to support the conjecture, the formula of quotation is one 
 which could only be used of canonical Scripture. Undoubtedly 
 
296 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the apostle intends to quote Psalm Ixviii. 18. How, then, 
 does his rendering compare with the Hebrew original and with 
 the Greek translation of the Septuagint ? The precise English 
 equivalent of the Hebrew is, " Thou hast ascended on high. 
 Thou hast led captives captive. Thou hast received gifts 
 amongst men." The Septuagint rendering is, "Having ascended 
 on high. Thou didst lead captivity captive. Thou receivedst 
 gifts in man." The apostle, in his quotation, changes " Thou 
 hast received gifts among men " into " He gave gifts to men." 
 The modification is quite justifiable, on the ground that Christ, 
 to whom the words are applied, receives gifts among men, only 
 that He may bestow them upon men. But the question 
 remains as to the source, if any, from which Paul derived the 
 form of expression which he employs. It is interesting to 
 refer to the rendering of the passage in the Targum, where 
 the ascent is assumed to be that of Moses on Sinai : " Thou 
 didst ascend to the firmament, Moses the prophet, thou 
 didst take captivity captive, thou didst teach the words of 
 the law, thou didst give gifts to the children of men." The 
 Syriac version of the phrase in question is the same, but it 
 might possibly have been influenced by the Pauline rendering. 
 The Targum rendering must rest on an old Jewish traditional 
 paraphrase of the Hebrew text, which we may very naturally 
 suppose to have been familiar to the apostle, and to have 
 suggested the form which he gives to the Psalm passage in 
 his quotation.^ — The reference of the whole passage in the 
 original seems to be to transactions in the spiritual world. The 
 height is indeed Mount Zion, but this again only as Jehovah's 
 heavenly dwelling-place ; the captives are the hosts of super- 
 human powers of evil. If thus understood, an interesting 
 parallel will be found in Isa. xxiv. 21-23. Just as the 
 prophet, so also the Psalmist, deals with God's victories over 
 His and our spiritual foes; and so the apostle, not by 
 accommodation, but by a legitimate, we might say literal, 
 use of the Psalmist's thought, finds a suitable expression 
 
 ^ See "Notes on Psalm Ixviii," by Canon Driver in Expositor, 3rd Series, ix. 
 20-23, 1889; Gibson, "Source of Paul's Teaching: Eabbinical Training," in 
 Expositor, 2nd Series, iv. 287, 1882. An excellent exposition of the relation 
 of the Pauline quotation to the original is given liy Perowne, in his note on 
 Psalm Ixviii. 18. 
 
CHAP. IV. 8. 297 
 
 for the New Testament dispensation of grace in the gifts of 
 Christ. 
 
 Having ascended on high. — The height in the Psalm passage 
 was not heaven (comp. I's. viii. 8, which Milton, Paradise 
 Lost, \\\. 584, wrongly understands of '' Heaven's high-seated 
 top "), but Mount Zion, into which God ascends to dwell with 
 His people. Jehovah had gone forth to fight for His own, 
 and now He returns in triumph and goes up into His earthly- 
 sanctuary, called the height of Zion (Jer. xxxi. 12), and the 
 height of Israel (Ezek. xvii. 23, xx. 40). But the apostle 
 makes the word refer directly to the eternal dwelling-place of 
 Jehovah in the heavens. The temple was, to every pious 
 Israelite, the type and symbol of heaven, and so this rendering, 
 which alone suits the Messianic reference of the passage, is 
 made without violence to the thought or language of the 
 Psalm. The ascension is viewed as a completed act ; Christ 
 goes up to dwell. Hence its importance in view of all that 
 follows. Christ has ascended into the place of power. It is 
 the fact that He has risen to this height that is of value here, 
 where the main subject is the giving of Christ. 
 
 He led captivity captive. — The word " captivity " (alx/J-a- 
 Xcoaia) is used in the Septuagint version of Num. xxxi. 12, 
 iu 1 Mace. ix. 70, and in Eev. xiii. 10. In the former two 
 passages it means the captives, those forming the captivity ; 
 the abstract term being put for the concrete. — It should be 
 observed that this leading captivity captive is described as 
 the immediate effect and not as contributory cause of Christ's 
 ascension. In nature, though not in time, the ascension pre- 
 ceded the captivity. See Pearson on tJie Creed, i. 292, ii. 218, 
 ed. Burton 1843. — The question then arises. Who are the 
 captives ? Qilcumenias, following Justin Martyr, understands 
 by the captivity those who had been redeemed from the 
 slavery of Satan. He led us captive, a blessed and profitable 
 captivity ; for, conquering the devil in spiritual warfare. He 
 took us as captives, not in order that he might enslave us, but 
 in order that He maght deliver us from the bitter tyranny of 
 the evil one. A similar interpretation of the phrase is also 
 given in The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. On the 
 other hand, Chrysostom and Theophylact understand by the 
 
298 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 captivity the leading captive of Satan ; for Christ took captive 
 tlie devil, death, the curse, and sin. Calvin may be regarded 
 as mediating between these two vi-ews, for, while heartily 
 accepting and clearly expressing the fact that Christ gained a 
 complete victory over the devil and sin and death, and all the 
 power of hell, he also emphasises the fact that it is out of rebeU 
 that Christ forms every day a willing people, when He sub- 
 dues by His word the obstinacy of our flesh. In the original 
 passage, the fact of the previous rebellion of those who receive 
 the gifts of the conquering Prince is explicitly stated in the 
 immediate context, but it scarcely belongs to the phrase 
 quoted here by the apostle. It describes the complete victory 
 secured by Christ over all His enemies, visible and invisible, 
 and the utter overthrow of all beings and influences which 
 oppose themselves to the establishment of the Church of 
 Christ. It seems incongruous and unnatural to speak of a 
 captivity that is advantageous to those led captive, because 
 they are not led into slavery but into a glorious liberty. — 
 There are two kingdoms essentially and persistently in antagon- 
 ism to one another — the kingdom of God and the kingdom 
 of the world. When Christ came in the flesh. His appear- 
 ing called forth the enmity of all the powers of the 
 flesh. The prince of the world came to see if he could find 
 anything in Him, His presence awakened the rage of all the 
 combined forces of the devil, the world, and the flesh. They 
 thought to take Him captive, who was found in fashion as a 
 man, just as they had been in the habit of leading mankind 
 captive. But they found nothing in Him. They made Him 
 suffer, but they could not take Him, or gain any advantage 
 over Him. Instead of allowing Himself to be added to their 
 captives. He took from them the captives whom they had 
 held under their power. His appearing was the opening of 
 the prison to those who were bound. Coinp. Isa. xlix. 9, 
 25, where it is the mighty, and not his captives, that is dealt 
 with. The oppressor is contended with, and the oppressed is 
 delivered. He who kept others captive is made captive, and 
 the deliverance of his captives is the result of his being him- 
 self made captive. 
 
 He gave gifts to men. — Tlie gifts intended in the original 
 
CHAP. IV. 9. 299 
 
 passage are clearly the spoils taken from the enemy, and dis- 
 tributed as gifts among the faithful and the favoured. Under- 
 standing tlie captives as the evil powers conquered by Christ, 
 we regard the gifts given to men as the spoils taken from the 
 enemy restored to uses from which they had been diverted, 
 and so rendered means of spiritual development and growth. 
 Canon Driver maintains that Paul here, in his use of the 
 phrase, substitutes a different sense from that intended by the 
 Psalmist. He thinks that in the original, if we make the 
 leading captives captive prefigure the vanquishing of evil 
 powers by Christ, we must regard the gifts received among 
 men to prefigure the tokens of homage rendered by men to 
 their ascended Lord ; whereas Paul for material gifts received 
 among men substitutes spiritual gifts given to men. He 
 explains this by assuming that Paul followed tlie Targum 
 paraphrase above referred to, as affording a quotation suitable 
 to his context. But this only pushes the difficulty one step 
 farther back, and leaves the question of tlie reason and pro- 
 priety of this alteration unsolved. The substitution of 
 spiritual for material gifts is at once justified, if we admit 
 that there is here a prefiguring, for it is certain that only 
 material things can be used to prefigure spiritual. What 
 most satisfactorily explains the change in Targum and epistle, 
 is the theory of a pregnant construction, which expresses not 
 the immediate but the final attitude of the Conqueror, who is 
 first a receiver of spoils and then a distributor.^ — The gifts 
 are those referred to in ver. 8, the variety of spiritual gifts 
 bestowed upon those who believe, with probably special 
 reference to those special gifts of ministry enumerated in the 
 following verses. The assigning of those gifts to the ascended 
 and glorified Christ is strictly appropriate ; for only after He 
 had been glorified was the Spirit given in that form and 
 measure. 
 
 Vers. 9. Now that "He ascended." — The apostle proceeds to 
 comment upon the terms of the quotation. What had evidently 
 
 ^ The rendering ^'' consisting of men," v!\\\c\\ would make tlie gifts received 
 consist of the persons of those who surrendered themselves rather than their 
 homage or tribute, though favoured by Ewald, Cornill, and other distinguished 
 scholars, is rightly iironounced by Cheyne {The Book of Psalms, p. 189, 1888) 
 "less probable." 
 
300 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 suggested the passage was the mention of the gift of Christ, 
 which he regards as foreshadowed in the gifts of the conqueror 
 to his faithful and favoured ones. And in proceeding now 
 to justify his quotation, and show the appropriateness of it 
 for his present purpose, he lays hold upon the description of 
 tlie giver in the Old Testament passage as one who had 
 ascended. This is that by wliich he will be able to prove 
 that the declaration of the Psalmist is only perfectly realised 
 in Christ. The idea of ascension into such heights is 
 thoroughly fitting only when understood of Him who, from 
 that depth to which He had descended, rose to heights of 
 infinite glory. The ascension intended here is certainly not 
 exclusively the historical ascension of Christ into heaven, but 
 as certainly that is included and implied. The spiritual 
 exaltation consequent upon His humiliation is also present to 
 the mind of the apostle, and so chap. ii. 6, as well as chap. i. 20, 
 is kept in view. It is this comprehensive conception of the 
 glorified Christ that the apostle regards as the most prominent 
 point in the quotation, and as, therefore, calling for exposition 
 and elaboration. 
 
 What is it hut that He also descended. — Even in the Psalm, 
 He who ascended was not David, nor any human king or 
 leader, but Jehovah. The apostle therefore at once assumes 
 the divinity and heavenly original of Him who ascended, 
 which of necessity implies that He liad first descended.^ It 
 would be impossible to think of ascension as the first move- 
 ment on the part of one whose proper dwelling was on high. 
 The converse of this statement is made in John iii. 13, where 
 
 1 Pearson, on llie Creed, i. 290-292, ed. Burton, 1843, discusses fully the 
 meaning of Col. ii. 15 and Eph, iv. 8, 9, and finds that they do not, as most 
 of the fathers supposed, speak of a triumphing of Christ over the powers of 
 hell by His descent. "So that by these two scriptures," he concludes, "no 
 more can be proved than this, that Christ triumplied over principalities and 
 powers at His death upon the cross, and led captivity captive at His ascension 
 into heaven. Which is so far from proving that Christ descended into hell to 
 triumph there, that it is more proper to persuade the contrary. For why 
 should He go to hell to triumph over them, over whom He had triumphed on the 
 cross ? Why should He go to captive that captivity then, which He was to 
 captivate when He ascended into heaven ? " It should also be observed that the 
 article itself was not found in any of the earlier creeds, though the doctrine 
 was held and exjiounded by several of the fatlieis who commented on those 
 creeds. 
 
CHAP. IV. 9. 301 
 
 Christ declares that no man has ascended into heaven, so as 
 to be in a position to descend with a revelation of heavenly 
 things. This revelation was really made by the Sou of man, 
 whose eternal being is in heaven, whose movement as a 
 Eevealer begins, as here, with His descending. He first 
 descended, Tliis idea, but not the word " first," belongs to 
 the text. It was no doubt introduced to secure explicit and 
 emphatic statement for what was clearly the prominent idea 
 of the passage. 
 
 Into the lou'cr 'parts of tlie cartli. — The phrase " lower 
 parts " (ra Karcorepa fxeprj) is evidently intended to form the 
 antithesis to to vy^ro^ of ver. 8. The usage of Scripture and 
 of human speech generally suggests the idea of earth in con- 
 trast to heaven. This would embrace the whole phrase, "the 
 lower parts of the earth." But the question arises, whether 
 we are not here required to distinguish different parts of the 
 earth, some of which are relatively lower than others, in 
 which case " the earth " must be understood of all the lower 
 nniverse as distinguished from heaven ? This interpretation of 
 our passage really turns npon the meaning which we give to 
 " the earth," and that again upon the view which we take of 
 the genitival phrase " of the earth." 
 
 (1) One interpretation very largely adopted is that 
 which understands " the earth " as embracing all that is not 
 heaven, and " the lov^er part of the earth " as the place of 
 the dead. In his later editions Meyer has adopted this view, 
 following Tertullian, Jerome, Bengel, and other older ex- 
 positors, as do also Olshausen, Ellicott, Alford, Wordsworth, 
 Klopper, Moule, and Beet. There is no doubt something 
 fascinating about the thought of Christ's descent into Hades, 
 and somewhat of a divine romance gathers round the fancy 
 scene of His encounter there, upon their own domain, with 
 the mighty powers of sin and death. But it ought to be 
 remembered that this is a creation of the imagination 
 and not a fact of Scripture. It is evidently improper to 
 refer, as Klopper does, to Phil. ii. 10 as affording a parallel 
 to the proposed interpretation of our passage. For there 
 Christ's dominion is described as extending to things in 
 heaven, things on the earth, and things under the earth 
 
302 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 (Karaxdov io)v), in the quite general sense of absolute, all- 
 iuclusive sovereignty, just as, in the verse following our text, 
 far above all heavens means the supreme height, the highest 
 elevation possible or conceivable. Nor is his other reference 
 to Pauline usage in Eom. x. 7 any more satisfactory, for there 
 the abyss, as the place of the dead, is only referred to hypo- 
 thetically as the place to which we do not require to descend 
 in order to find Christ. Ignatius, in his Epistle to the 
 Trallians, ix., uses the three phrases employed by Paul in 
 Phil. ii. 10 (only substituting v7ro-)(^0ovLcov for Kara'^^Oovioov), 
 personifying them as witnesses of Christ's crucifixion, evidently, 
 in a rhetorical style, indicating that Christ crucified was a 
 spectacle to the whole universe. Christ's descent into Hades 
 was not made in order to vanquish the devil and his hosts ; 
 for all His sufferings, which were the means used by Him in 
 securing His victories, were past. And so, after enumerating 
 the passages which refer to this descent of Christ, Dorner 
 very rightly remarks {System of Christian Doctrine, iv. 128), 
 " Eph. iv. 8-10 has no place here." 
 
 (2) The other interpretation of our passage understands 
 " the earth " in the natural and ordinary sense of the place 
 of man's habitation during life, and " the lower parts of the 
 earth " as descriptive of the relatively lower position of the 
 earth in comparison with the heavens. This is the view of 
 Calvin, Harless, De Wette, Eadie, Pfleiderer, and many others. 
 It is also supported, on grammatical and philological grounds, 
 by Winer {Grammar, p. 616, § Ixi. 8«, 1884), and by Grimm 
 {Lexicon, s.v.). Winer understands the genitive " of the earth " 
 as a genitive of apposition, such as we have in the phrase 
 (Rom. iv. 11), the sign of circumcision, i.e. the sign which is 
 or consists in circumcision. According to this view, the 
 apostle in our text speaks of the lower parts, which are the 
 earth, as contrasted with heaven. The proper antithesis is 
 that set forth in Acts ii. 19 : in heaven above and in the earth 
 beneath. And in our passage it is the place to which He 
 descended from which He ascended, and certainly the 
 ascension is always understood historically, and therefore also 
 doctrinally, as an ascent from earth, not from any place under 
 the earth, to heaven. The reference in this passage, as thus 
 
CHAP, IV. 10. 303 
 
 understood, is therefore to tlie incarnation, wliicli involves 
 vicarious suffering, and the death upon the cross. The 
 humiliaiion, which really exliausts the whole meaning and 
 contents of Christ's descending, is completed by the death 
 and burial , and in the descent into Hades we have the trans- 
 ition to the exaltation, for His entrance into tlie regions of 
 the dead produces immediate proof that death has no power 
 over Him, but has been already conquered. The work of 
 Christ, as of Him who has descended, is finished on that 
 earth to which He descended ; and He has there, in His death 
 and burial, reached those utmost depths from which He 
 ascends into the highest heaven. 
 
 As to the peculiar form of the phrase, the word " lower " 
 (KaTcorepa) occurs nowhere else in Scripture. In the LXX. 
 version of Ps. Ixiii. 9, we have " lowest parts of the earth " 
 {to, KarcoTara 7% 7?}?) ; and in Ps. Ixxxvi. 13, "lowest parts 
 of Sheol." In the latter case the meaning is, the lowest 
 regions, i.e. Sheol ; in regard to the former passage, Delitzsch's 
 explanation, the interior of the earth into which Korah and 
 his company passed, is better than Cheyne's, the nether 
 vmrld. 
 
 Ver. 10. He that deseended, He it is also that ascended. — 
 The emphasis is laid strongly on the identity of person in Him 
 who descended and who ascended. The apostle insists upon 
 the continuity of personality in the Christ as manifest in the 
 flesh, and as received up into glory. We cannot say, with 
 Moule, thac the main stress is upon the ascending, nor with 
 Meyer and Ellicott, that it rests upon the descending ; but 
 we must hold that precisely the same importance belongs to 
 both as facts in the history of the one identical personality. 
 It is the apostle's special aim to keep before his readers' 
 ndnds the figure of the historical Christ. Pfleiderer 
 (Paulinism, ii. 170) rightly insists that the context makes 
 it plain that the interest of the author here is to insist upon 
 the identit}' of the gloriously victorious One of the Psalm, 
 who ascends into heaven, with the Logos — Christ, who had 
 appeared in the flesh. It seems, therefore, indisputable that 
 the apostle must have had in view some docetic tendency 
 among the Ephesians, or among those near them ; though 
 
304 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 there is no reason to suppose, as Pfleiderer would have us do, 
 that it presupposes such a developed and advanced Gnosticism 
 as requires the assumption of a post-Pauline data for our 
 epistle. 
 
 Far above all Iteavcns. ■ — We have here a n\ore precise 
 definition of the phrase " on high " of the 8th verse. It 
 evidently means the very highest of all heights. As to 
 whether there may be any reference here to the Jewish notion 
 of the seven heavens, EUicott thinks there is not, while Meyer 
 thinks that there is. It is extremely doubtful whether this 
 notion of a sevenfold heaven was current among the Jews in 
 the apostle's time. He seems to regard the third heaven as 
 the supreme sphere in which God Himself sits (2 Cor. xii. z). 
 We regard the reference of the text to be simply to the fact 
 that Christ ascended to God's throne. Christ passed through 
 and was made higher than the heavens (Heb. iv. 14, vii. 26), 
 and the place He reaches is regarded as the perfect realisation 
 of that which the holiest of all had symbolised (ix. 24). It 
 is the place which He has prepared for His people who are 
 to be with Him, and is so distinguished from other heavens. 
 " There were innocent and holy heavens, and there were 
 thrones, dominions, and powers, with all their multitudes ; 
 but there was no heaven founded on universal conquest ; no 
 heaven that had overcome flesh, world, sin, death, Hades, and 
 the whole power of the enemy. . . . The fulness and unity of 
 Christ's nature are utterly distinct from every previously 
 existing form of being. . . . He has founded a new dominion 
 in His Father's house " (Pulsford). 
 
 That He i) light fill all things. — This is the end contemplated 
 in the descending and ascending of Christ. He first came 
 down and afterward went up, in order that He might fill the 
 universe of being. He raises all with Himself. Thus the 
 meaning of the verb " to fill " is plainly " to give fulness to." 
 Without Him all things would be empty and void. When 
 He rises to the seat of universal authority, then all the 
 departments of being which go to make up His empire are 
 filled by Him, and thus gain substantial reality. Dr. George 
 Matheson, in a very able and suggestive paper, entitled " The 
 Empire of Christ," in the Monthly Interpreter, ii. 144-153, 
 
ClJAl'. IV. 11-16. 305 
 
 1885, describes Paul as looking around him upon the 
 great Roman empire which seemed to fill all things, only to 
 discover that it really did not do so. Nor, again, did he find 
 this all-filling empire in the theocratic institution of Judaism. 
 There he beheld the empire of king, prophet, and priest; but 
 neither of them, nor yet all combined, could be described as 
 filling all things. They were all defective, because the height 
 had not been reached out of the depth, because He that 
 ascended was not the same as He that descended. Christ is 
 Prophet, Priest, and King, but after a new method ; lor with 
 Him judgment, power, and Headship are exercised in virtue of 
 His humiliation. His " lowliness was the source of His great- 
 ness, and His greatness the crown of His lowliness." It was 
 while yet upon earth, but ready to ascend into heaven, that 
 He who had descended, and was now ascending, said, " All 
 power is given unto me in heaven and on earth." His 
 presence in power and glory now, in virtue of His humiliation, 
 filled both earth and heaven, all things and all places con- 
 stituting the universe of that God, whose mission equally by 
 descending and by ascending He fulfilled. 
 
 Ver, 11 — 16. The apostle here resumes and carries out the 
 thought of Christ's gifts, as bestowed upon men in and through 
 the Church. From the general reference to gifts, he passes 
 to an enumeration of those special gifts of ministry which He 
 has conferred upon men for the benefit of His Churcli in 
 administration and ediHcation. He enumerates the various 
 offices established in the Church under a threefold classifica- 
 tion : (1) Extraordinary and temporary — apostles and 
 prophets; (2) Missionary and proj)agandist — permanently 
 needed, but not settled in any one locality, — evangelists ; 
 and (3) residentiary and local — pastors and teachers.^ The 
 
 ^ Lightfoot, in his Commentary on PhlUppians, 6th ed., p 185, 1881, makes 
 the classification twofold, designating apostles, prophets, and evangelists as a 
 class of ministers engaged in pioneer work and the founding of new churches ; 
 and pastors and teachers as constituting the permanent ministry. Bishop 
 Wordsworth, of St. Andrews {Outlints of the Christian Ministry, p. 80), 
 denounces the calling of the apostles, etc., extraordinary officers, as the funda- 
 meutal mistake of the Westminster divines. The threefold classification 
 adopted above is practically that of Godet {Expositor, 3rd Series, vol. v., 
 p. 385, 1887): "First, apostles and prophets, whose work it is to lay the 
 
 U 
 
306 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 apostle then proceeds to show what the grand end of the 
 Christian ministry is. That unity of the faith, which is 
 really the central idea of the whole section, must, above all 
 things, be conserved. Gifts of ministry are bestowed in order 
 that the body of Christ may grow up into the unity of the 
 Head ; and to secure this end pastors and teachers must so 
 edify the individual members of Christ's body, the Church, 
 that they will all severally yield their meed of service, and 
 contribute their part, to the perfecting of the whole. 
 
 Ver. 11. He also it was that gave. — Christ is the giver, for the 
 gift (ver. 7) is according to the measure of His giving. The con- 
 text requires us to emphasise the fact that what is here directly 
 spoken of is simply the gift of Christ in a diversity of endow- 
 ments. This is urged strongly by Eothe, Die Anfdnge der Chr. 
 Kirche, p. 257, 1857. But we must remember that Christ not 
 only gives the endowments, but He also gives the calling 
 consequent upon the possession of the endowment. Meyer 
 very properly points out that the function of those who 
 exercise the right of the Church in choosing ministers, is to 
 examine and test the possession on the part of persons pre- 
 sented of the endowment given by Christ. " Tims Christ gave 
 the persons, and the community gave to them the service." 
 
 Sovie as apostles, and some as iirophcts.- — Apostles and 
 prophets are alike in being extraordinary ministers, with 
 special commission and duties, pertaining to the period of the 
 origin and first planting of Christianity. The apostles and 
 prophets, again, are named in this order, because, as Hooker 
 has well said, apostles had granted unto them the revelation 
 of all truths innnediately from Christ, whereas prophets had 
 knowledge only of some things in this way, having otherwise 
 learnt the gospel, but having bestowed on them by Christ 
 a special gift of expounding scriptures, and foreshowing 
 things to come {Ecclcs. Polity, Bk. v. chap. Ixxviii.). Both 
 speak by immediate revelation, and exercise their ministry 
 without restriction to any particular locality. 
 
 The name apostle is evidently not to be confined to the 
 
 foundation of the church ; evangelists, by whose ministry it is to be extended ; 
 lastly, pastors and teachers, whose ofBce it is to build up that which has been 
 already begun." 
 
CHAP. IV. 11. 307 
 
 twelve immediately called and appointed by Christ as His 
 companions and followers ; for not only, as is popularly 
 understood, were Paul and Barnabas, by some special licence, 
 added to this number, but we find also Silvanus (1 Thess. 
 ii. 6), and Andronicus and Junias (lioni. xvi. 7), reckoned 
 among the apostle?. The fact, also, of the appearance of false 
 apostles (2 Cor. xi. 1.3 ; liev. ii. 2) makes it certain that the 
 term was employed in a much more extended sense. The 
 apostleship of the primitive Church, as represented in our 
 text, was the office of first rank, because it involved endow- 
 ments and spiritual gifts of the highest order. The one 
 absolutely indispensable qualification for the office was the 
 ability to testify, from personal knowledge, as to the fact 
 of Christ's resurrection. Hence such distinguished fellow- 
 labourers with Paul as Apollos and Timothy are never styled 
 apostles in the New Testament, because this condition was 
 wanting in their case; while in regard to those above named, 
 as well as in regard to James, etc., there is every reason to 
 suppose tliat they had been privileged to behold and to have 
 fellowship with the risen Lord. Having this qualification, 
 all that was farther needed was the call to office by tlie 
 Church. The si(/ns of an apodle (2 Cor. xii. 12) were simply 
 the proofs afforded by life and work, that the person called 
 by the Church to the apostleship was the person to whom 
 had been given by Christ apostolic gifts. This is the New 
 Testament usage of the word, and it is only with that usage 
 that we have here to do. In the writings of the apostolic 
 fathers, and those of the following age, the name is used 
 sometimes in this sense, sometimes in a lower and less definite 
 sense. The functions of the apostolic office embraced those 
 of all inferior offices. Wherever he went, the apostle engaged 
 in teaching, administered discipline, and took upon himself 
 the care of all the churches with which he had to do. There 
 is no gift or charism in the Church which the apostle has not, 
 so that to him, in relation to the Church membership, the 
 idea of the head as a member of the body might be applied. 
 See Godet on 1 Cor. xii. 28.^ 
 
 ^ See Lightfoot, Galatians, 10th ed., 1890, "The Xanie and Office of an 
 Apostle," pp. 92 101. Also Eadie, Ephesians, pp. 282, 283, 1854. The name 
 
308 El'ISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 The name prophet we have ah-eady met with (ii. 20, 
 iii. 5). The character of the office and its special functions 
 are most fully set forth in 1 Cor. xii. 28, xiv. 3, 24, 32. 
 The prophet's gift qualifies for an office which naturally holds 
 rank second to that of apostle, for though every apostle was a 
 prophet, every prophet was not an apostle. Tlie Xew Testa- 
 ment prophets were occasionally inspired with a knowledge 
 of something in the future, in regard to which the Christian 
 communities required to he forewarned, as in the case of 
 Agabus (Acts xi. 27, xxi. 10). Their special function, how- 
 ever, lay in the sphere of Christian doctrine, where they were 
 the vehicles of new revelations, and, under the immediate 
 impulse of the divine Spirit, not as interpreters of the written 
 AVord, they afforded direction to the young communities on 
 the many perplexing questions which from time to time 
 arose among them (Acts xiii. 1). The statement of Beck 
 {EfUctrung dcs Br. Fauli an die Ephcs., p. 188), that while 
 apostles liad to do with revelations, the prophets had to do 
 pre-eminently with cxpodtion, especially in pointing out the 
 gospel fulfilments of Old Testament prophecies, is utterly 
 wrong, and quite unsupported by any utterance of Scripture. 
 Just like the Old Testament prophets in their prophesying, 
 doubtless they often worked in much of the materials of their 
 predecessors, yet their work was pre - eminently that of 
 revealers. Whether the New Testament prophets committed 
 to writing and circulated what they received by revelations, 
 we cannot tell. "VVe may not feel altogether convinced of the 
 probability of Plumptre's ingenious suggestion {TJieology and 
 Life, pp. 96-108), that the phrases " jprophctic scriptures" 
 (Eom. xvi. 26), and "prophecy of scripture" (2 Pet. i. 20), 
 may apply to the New Testament writings. But even if this 
 were so, such prophetic writings might have been the woi'k of 
 apostles, as in the case of the New Testament prophecy, the 
 Apocalypse of St. John. 
 
 Some as evangelists. — Here we have a third class of gifts 
 qualifying for a distinctive office. The evangelists were mis- 
 sionaries, subordinate to the apostles, and apparently always 
 
 is only used in the New Testament in quite a difTerent sense, as equivalent to 
 delegate (2 Cor. viii. 23 ; Phil. ii. 25). 
 
CHAP. IV. 11. 300 
 
 immediately associated with them. To this class belonged 
 Timothy and Titus, who were specially commissioned by Paul 
 to carry on work left unfinished by apostles in Ephesus and 
 Crete, and Philip, who is expressly so named (Acts xxi. 8). 
 Timothy is enjoined to do the work of an evangelist (2 Tim. 
 iv, 5). Though it would be altogether wrong to define the 
 evangelists of our text, with Chrysostom and CEcumenius, as 
 writers of the gos2")el rather than preachers, yet we may very 
 reasonably assume that many of the early fragmentary Gospels, 
 which secured currency in certain districts or among certain 
 groups of churches for a time, were tlie written reminiscences 
 of the oral teachings of some of these men. Their preaching 
 would generally consist in the simple telling of the story of 
 Christ's life, death, and resurrection, such as we have summed 
 up in 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4. Highly gifted they might not be, but 
 knowledge of the Scriptures, in which Timothy was proficient 
 (2 Tim, iii. 15), was indispensable.^ 
 
 These three offices, of apostle, prophet, evangelist, for which 
 men are qualified by special gifts of Christ, have been rightly 
 characterised as extraordinary. They were specially needed 
 during a period of planting and formation. And yet, though 
 the offices were not continued, many of the most characteristic 
 of the gifts which qualified for these offices are found to be 
 in the possession of individual holders of the permanent 
 ministerial office. AVe can trace more than a general resem- 
 blance to the apostle in brilliant and heroic missionary 
 pioneers ; we find no unworthy representatives of the early 
 
 ^ There nmy he some truth in the characterisation of Pulsford ; though per- 
 haps he has modern conditions rather too prominently in view, and even then 
 it i3 surel}-^ overdone and one-sided. "Evangelists," he says, "are matter-of- 
 fact men. They are rather inspired by the past than the present. The facts of 
 the gospel are their all in all ; of the laws of tlie facts they know nothing. 
 They are believers, but blind. They are admirably fitted to rouse the attention 
 of plain, unsophisticated persons. For the African mind they are all that you 
 could desire ; to the i)liilosophical Hindu they are useless. In the work of 
 awakening simple men from their sleep of sin, they are perfectly at home ; but 
 as pastors and teachers they are wholly unfitted." Timothy, as compared with 
 Paul and Apollos, may not have been possessed of brilliant gifts, but he was 
 evidently of sufficient capacity to justify the apostle leaving him with a weighty 
 commission amid such a cultured and highly-civilised community as that of 
 Ephesus. 
 
310 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Cliiistiiiii prophets in preachers and divines who break new 
 ground in tlie reahn of religious thought ; and we have still 
 many wlio successfully follow in the steps of those who went 
 about preaching the gospel. In a very real sense, all Christian 
 preachers have a prophecy to declare to the peojde, a message 
 which they have individually received by revelation, and 
 utter forth under the immediate impulse of the Spirit. 
 
 Sovic 2Msto')'s and teachers. — These two, as permanent officers 
 in local congregations, are closely joined together in one class, 
 or may even be regarded as the same persons having in com- 
 bination the twofold function of ruling and teaching. Ellicott 
 thinks that the pastors were perhaps always teachers, but 
 that the teachers were not always pastors. In any case, we 
 have here properly one class — the permanent church officers, 
 among whom by arrangement, on the basis of endowment, 
 there might be a distribution of functions. In regard to 
 rank, at least, there is equality here, while among those 
 previously named there appeared a gradation. " These," says 
 Goodwin, referring to tlie apostles, prophets, and evangelists, 
 "are extraordinary ministers in those times, of differing 
 degrees and order, each particular of them, and therefore each 
 particular is distinguished by the word some. And then he 
 specifies the ordinary standing ministers that were to continue 
 in all ages to the end of the world, ' pastors and teachers,' 
 about whom the present question is. Now observe the differ- 
 ence he puts. Indeed, the word some is set before pastors 
 and teachers to distinguish them from the extraordinary he 
 had spoken of afore, and to show they were of another rank 
 than the former. But observe, again, that he puts no such 
 difference between the pastors and the teachers ; he doth not 
 say some imstors and some teachers. He doth not place the 
 word some afore each, as he had done afore, but says only 
 pastors and teachers, to show they are of equal commission and 
 rank."^ — The word "pastors" {7rot/xei>€<i) occurs, in the sense 
 of ministers of local congregations, in no other passage. It 
 is identical in meaning with irpoia-Tdfievot (1 Thess. v. 12), 
 'rrpeajSvrepoL (Acts xi. 30, etc.), iirlcrKOTroi (Phil. i. 1), rjyov- 
 
 ' In a "Letter on Church Government" in Goodwin's Works, xi. 541-545, 
 1865. 
 
CHAP. IV. 11. 311 
 
 fievoL (Heb. xiii. 7). These names, as rtitsclil (Die Entstehung 
 der altkath. Kirclic, p. 350, 1857) says, describe the original 
 ministerial office as political in the widest sense. The office 
 is that of general oversight, so that tbe pastor stands related 
 to the local church just as the apostle does to the universal 
 Church. It is the function of rule and direction, rather than 
 that of preaching, that is most prominent. This is in accord- 
 ance with the poetic usage of the word in the classics, where 
 kings and princes are styled 7roifi€V€<i Xawv. The name is 
 also applied to Christ as Head of the Church (John x. 16 ; 
 1 Pet. ii. 25; Heb. xiii. 20); and to the Jewish Messiah 
 in the LXX. version of Ezek. xxxiv. 23. Hatch {Organisa- 
 tion of the Early Christian Churches, p. 123, 1880) shows 
 how the term passed from its natural to its metaphorical use 
 among the Hebrews, how constantly it is employed by 
 Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah for ecclesiastical and civil 
 rulers of the people, and how general its use became in early 
 Christian literature.^ — The word " teachers " (SiSdaKoXot), in 
 the sense of officers in the Christian Church, to whom was 
 committed specially the task of imparting doctrinal instruc- 
 tion, occurs also in 1 Cor. xii. 28 ; Acts xiii. 1 ; and in, 
 perhaps, a looser and not altogether official sense, in James 
 iii. 1. It is the Ciiristian equivalent of the Jewish "rabbi." 
 The work of the pastor was to follow up in his own more 
 limited sphere that of the apostle ; the work of the teacher 
 was to follow up in a systematic way the work of the 
 prophet. "If the prophet," says Godet on 1 Cor. xii. 28, 
 " may be compared to the traveller who discovers new 
 countries, the teacher is like the geographer, who combines 
 the scattered results of these discoveries and gives a method- 
 ical statement of them." Paul also claims for liimself the 
 distinctive title of apostle and teacher of the Gentiles (1 Tim. 
 ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 11). The governing officer, pastor, or over- 
 seer must have the teaching gift (1 Tim. iii. 2 ; Titus i. 9 ; 
 Heb. xiii. 7). Calvin seems in error when he insists upon a 
 
 1 The idea and figure, tbough not literally the same, is present in 1 Pet. 
 V. 2, 3 ; John xxi. 16 ; Acts xx. 28. The term is used as in our text in 
 Hermas, Ignatius, Irenfeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Constit. Apost., and the 
 Latin ^' jmstor" in Cyprian. 
 
312 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 distinction of the pastoral and teaching offices, on the basis of 
 this passage. The " teachers " of our text do not " preside in 
 the education of pastors," but simply in the instruction of those 
 over whom the pastor rules. The apostle's expression here 
 does not warrant us in saying anything more than this, that 
 ordinarily the holder of this permanent Church office was 
 pastor and teacher, while in individual ministers, sometimes 
 the pastoral, sometimes the teaching, gifts would be specially 
 developed. 
 
 These diverse spiritual endowments were the gifts of Christ, 
 distributed by Him among the members of His Church. Yet, 
 in the midst of this diversity, unity is preserved. The apostle 
 proceeds to show that they are given, in order that the ideal 
 unity which has not hitherto been realised may be actually 
 attained. There has been no parenthesis and no " going off at a 
 word ;" but the idea of Christian unity, the thought of the entire 
 section, is kept firmly in hand throughout each several clause. 
 
 Ver. 1 2. For the invfeding of tht saints. — This is the first 
 of three clauses, the latter two indicating what must first be 
 secured in order that what is here spoken of may be realised. 
 The relation of the latter clauses to the first we shall discuss 
 when we come to them. Here we have the ultimate purpose 
 of Christ's giving those gifts of ministry in His Church ex- 
 pressed in the most general and comprehensive terms. The 
 word " perfecting " (/caraprto-yLto?) is not used elsewhere in 
 Scripture, but the precisely equivalent word, /caraprto-t?, is 
 used in 2 Cor. xiii. 9, and the verb KarapTi^co frequently, e.g. 
 1 Pet. V. 10; Heb. xiii. 21. The idea is that of making 
 fit to serve the end aimed at, it may be by supplying de- 
 ficiencies or by amending what is wrong (1 Thess. iii. 10; 
 Gal. vi. 1) ; but in one passage, specially the so combining 
 of the various spiritual endowments and powers of the several 
 members of the Church, as to secure for the Church unity of 
 endeavour and unity of result. In this specific sense the 
 word is used in Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephcsians, chap, ii., 
 " being perfectly joined together in one submission," and then 
 in Philadelphia, chap, viii., and Smyrna, chap, i., in the sense 
 of established or settled.^ " These gifts of Christ," says the 
 
 ' See Lightfoot's Note on Ignatius' Ep. to Eplics. cliap. ii., in his Ignatius, ii. 36, 
 
CHAT. IV. 12. 313 
 
 apostle, " are given for the purpose of fitting together into one 
 body all the members of Christ." They are here called 
 " saints," because that is what without exception characterises 
 all, however diversely gifted they may be. 
 
 For the ivork of the miiiistry. — The ^preposition rendered 
 for in the former clause is tt/qo?, that rendered for here and 
 in the following clause is etV In his note on Titus i. 1, 
 Ellicott has very exactly distinguished their significance, at 
 least so far as our passage is concerned. While they are very 
 near one another, we might say " eh rather marks immediate 
 imrpose, 7rp6<; ultimate purpose." So here Paul affirms that 
 Christ gave these gifts to the Church for the work of the 
 ministry, for the edifying of His body, in order that thereby 
 the saints might be perfectly together into tlie one temple of 
 God. — All these gifts must be consecrated to the work of the 
 ministry. Those who have these gifts have them, not that 
 by means of them they may exercise lordship or gratify 
 personal ambition, but in order that they may serve. The 
 object of this bestowal of spiritual endowment is to secure 
 the performance of the ministry (hiaKovia). The ministry is 
 certainly not that merely of deacons, nor is it simply service 
 of any kind, but definitely service in the ministerial office, 
 which Paul regards as a special grace from the Lord. Paul 
 and Apollos are successful ministers, according as the Lord gave 
 to each (1 Cor. iii. 5). The work of the ministry embraces 
 all that apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers 
 as such are required and qualified to do. 
 
 For the edifying of the body of Christ. — This clause is parallel 
 to the preceding, and, together with it, expresses tlie inunedi- 
 ate purpose of Christ's gifts of ministry to the Church. 
 There is also a certain measure of subordination, inasmuch as 
 this work of edification forms a large part of the work of the 
 ministry. Edifying (ockoSo/j,/]) here means the promoting of 
 the spiritual growth of others ; the advancement of God's 
 work of grace by means of Christ's gift of grace. The word is 
 used in its literal sense of huildirig in Matt. xvi. 23 ; 1 Cliron. 
 xxvi. 27; and, as we have seen, in chap. ii. 21, of the 
 
 1889. The proper meaning of the word is "fitting together," either politically, 
 as reconciling of factions, or surgically, as setting of hones. 
 
314 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Christian Church as a whole, under the figure of a building. 
 Here and frequently {e.g. Eom. xiv. 19 ; 2 Coi'. x. 8, etc.), of 
 the furthering of the growth of the members of the Church. 
 The gifts are given, not for the rending apart (Kadaipeai'i, 
 Luke xii. 18), but the building up of Christ's body. "The 
 building of us is nothing but the bringing of us to faith, and 
 the further building of us is the bringing of us from faith to 
 faith, from one degree to another. . . . Paul (Acts xx.) did 
 betake the Ephesians to that word which could furtlier build 
 them up." ^ — The term " BocIt/ of Christ " is here used to 
 designate the Church, in order to emphasise its articulate and 
 organic unity. It also makes it plain that not any local 
 church, but the universal Church of Christ, is meant. It is 
 a favourite figure with the apostle (chap. i. 23, v. 30 ; Col. 
 i. 24; 1 Cor. x. 16, xii. 27). 
 
 Ver. 1 3. Until v:e all have reached. — This indicates the period 
 during which those gifts will continue operative for the ends 
 spoken of. The gifts are given to carry us on to the attain- 
 ment of what is hereafter specified. The end for which they 
 are given is served only when all the saints of every degree 
 have filled up their measure, and so have become fit to fill the 
 place in the body which was destined for them. These gifts 
 will be continued, and the organisation of the Church 
 will last, until its ministry under the Spirit has effected 
 this. 
 
 Until the iinitij of the faith and of the hnowledije of the Son 
 of God. — In the three clauses, of which this is the first, the 
 apostle describes that perfection unto which the members of 
 Christ's body must reach by means of those gifts of ministry 
 given by Christ in His Church. — The attainment here 
 emphasised and put in the foreground is that unity more 
 generally referred to in the opening verses of the section as the 
 unity of the Spirit, and here more particularly defined accord- 
 ing to its contents. It is not unity of faith and knowledge 
 of Christ, but oneness of all in faith and in knowledge. — 
 The faith of the Son of God, as in chap. iii. 12, is faith in 
 Him. And the apostle is speaking here, just as in Gal. ii. 
 20, not of the beginning of the life of justification, but of its 
 
 ' Bayne, Commentary on the whole Epistle to the Ephesians, p. 260, 1866. 
 
CHAP. IV. 13. 315 
 
 continuance, the one as well as the other being ascribed to 
 the agency of faith.^ The knowledge also is that growing 
 perception of tlie fulness of divine power and grace that is 
 in Christ, which is at once the result of increasing faith and 
 the basis of its further increase. Tiie word here rendered 
 knowledge (eTTiyvcoat^) means clear and exact knowledge, " more 
 intensive than 7^wo-i?, because it expresses a more thorough 
 participation in the object of knowledge on the part of the 
 knowing subject, ... a knowledge which very powerfully 
 influences the form of the religious life " (Cremer, Bihlico- 
 TJicological Lexicon, p. 159, 1878). This is the proper 
 nature both of faith and knowledge as directed to the Son of 
 God. It is the distinctive characteristic of both of those 
 exercises of human will and intellect, to unite the subject to 
 the object. He who believes and knows, in proportion to his 
 faith and knowledge, is united to Him whom he knows and 
 in whom he exercises faith. This unity in the Son of God 
 is the basis or guarantee of that unity among the saints 
 intended in our text. Faith and knowledge vary in degree 
 in different individual members of the Church. Not only 
 are some believers young and inexperienced, as compared with 
 others who have been longer under the training and 
 discipline of grace, but the measure which, when filled up, 
 will mean perfection for one, is much less than the measure 
 which must be filled up by another. There never can be 
 unity in the sense of uniformity and equality in the measure 
 of grace. There will be perfect unity in faith and knowledge 
 of the Son of God in the Church, when each member has 
 filled up his own measure of Christ's gift, and has thus secured 
 his own destined place as a member in the body of Christ. 
 This is the sort of unity that is brought about through the 
 ministry of divers gifts, the living unity of an organic body 
 whose members have not all the same office, but accomplish 
 by harmonious action the functions of the body, and 
 act under the direction of the energising and controlling 
 head. 
 
 The object of this faith and knowledge is named " the Sun 
 of God." That unity, which is the aim of the ministry of the 
 ^ See Heurtle}-, "Justification," Bampton Lectures, p. 296, 1816. 
 
316 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Cliurcli, is not attained unless it be the Son of God that we 
 believe in and know. Under this name He is represented 
 according to His official position, and not in respect of his 
 personal character. There is no reason why the recognition 
 of the Lord Jesus, in His official aspect as Christ the Son of 
 God, should bo pitted against the recognition of His personal 
 character as the living and sinless fSon of man. It is wholly 
 pernicious to express preference for the one over against the 
 other, as if they could scarcely be conceived of but as mutually 
 exclusive alternatives. Thus, for example, Eothe says, " It 
 is incomparably more important that we should know Christ 
 in His personal character than in His position and office. To 
 the man who knows Him in this character, Christ naturally 
 becomes what, in the gracious providence of God, He was 
 designed to be for humanity" (Still Hours, p. 225, 1886). 
 We have only to apply the definition of the knowledge of 
 our text given above, in order to see that such a knowledge 
 of Christ in His official pjosition, of necessity involves the 
 knowledge of Him in His personal character, and also that 
 such a knowledge of His personal character cannot be possessed 
 apart from a corresponding knowledge and believing appropria- 
 tion of Him in His offices. 
 
 Unto a perfect man. — Tliis is a clause co-ordinate with the 
 preceding, describing under another figure the point of time 
 up to which the ministerial office must continue in the Church. 
 We have here described the condition which each and every 
 individual member of Christ's body must reach before the 
 end of the ministry shall have been served. The figure must 
 not be unduly pressed, nor should its application be limited 
 to the individual member of Christ's body. The application 
 of the figure may be made, as Ellicott proposes, to the idea 
 of the complete unity of the holy personality spoken of 
 explicitly in tlie next clause. As each believer becomes 
 perfect in his moral and spiritual constitution, and is thus 
 fitted for his place in the body of Christ as a perfectly fitting 
 member, the perfection of that body is being attained. The 
 correct conception of the figure seems to have been grasped 
 by Calvin. Speaking of the immediate and present blessedness 
 of those who are in the kingdom of God, he says, " That 
 
CHAP. IV. 13. 317 
 
 kingdom wholly consists in the building up of the Church, 
 or the progress of believers, who, as described to us by Paul 
 (Eph. iv. 13), grow up, through all the different stages of 
 life, into a 'perfect onan." ^ The "perfect" of our text means 
 full-grown, mature, in opposition to the " babes " of the 
 following verse. The perfect manhood of the Church, reached 
 through the various stages of growth, is that which is 
 aimed at. 
 
 Unto the measure of t/ic stature of the fulness of Christ. — 
 The word here rendei'ed stature (})\iKia) is by many rendered 
 " age." Grimm, as also Meyer in a precisely similar manner, 
 has assigned to the woid in our text this meaning of age : 
 the age in which we are fitted to receive the fulness of Christ. 
 Now, such a rendering must at once be condemned as un- 
 natural in the extreme. If it must be that the word be 
 rendered age, then it would be much more reasonable to adopt 
 the old scholastic notion that all the redeemed will be raised, 
 and that measure and form of mature manly vigour, which 
 characterises the age of thirty-four or thirty-five, which was 
 the age of Jesus at the time of His resurrection, and then it 
 would be a not altogether illogical corollary to assume that 
 in the resurrection all would be of the male sex.^ These 
 absurdities would fairly follow on the adoption of the render- 
 
 ^ " Psycliopannychia," in Calvin's Tracts, iii. 465, Edin. 1851. 
 
 - It may be interesting to see how a sensible modern Roman Catholic com- 
 mentator views this scholastic rendering of the apostle's thought. Bernardiue a 
 Piconio, in his Exposition of St. Paul's Epistles, ii. 273, 1890, after mention- 
 ing the fact that many Latin writers, and especially schoolmen, had adopted the 
 literal understanding of the terms age and stature, thougli Augustine in his De 
 Civ. Dei, xxii. 15, rejects it in favour of the figurative sense, and that some 
 writers so eminent as Basil, Hilary, Athanasius, and Duns Scotus, hold that 
 women, with the exception of the Mother of God, will rise masculine, proceeds 
 with his criticism thus : " But whatever may be the opinion of these writers, 
 the Church has never accepted it, any more than the reason given by Scotus in 
 favour of it, viz. that the female sex is a fault or imperfection of nature. For 
 woman is as perfect as man, though that jierl'ection is on a smaller scale. 
 And her sex can hardly be a fault of nature, since woman was formed by the 
 hands of the Creator from the side of man. And there can be no reason 
 why, if the Mother of God retains her sex, other women may not retain it 
 also. The plenitude of Christ is the perfection of His charity, humility, con- 
 stancy, and other divine graces, in all of which there is no reason why women 
 and men may not equally attain perfection." Piconio himself renders the word 
 " age or' stature." 
 
318 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 ing proposed ; for, when it lias been adopted, the clause 
 cannot be made to bear any otlier meaning without importing, 
 as Grimm and Meyer do, a whole phrase, which certainly 
 cannot be supplied from the immediate context. Dr. Field, 
 in his note on Matt. vi. 27, in Otiuiii Norvicense, iii. p. 4, 
 1881, says : " The word rfkiKia is amhignous, signifying either 
 age or stature : in classical Greek, more frequently age ; in 
 biblical, stature. We have therefore to wait for the conclud- 
 ing word to clear up the doubt. Shall it be a measure of 
 time or of length ? " He finds the answer of the word 
 " cubit " decisive in favour of stature. He thinks the other 
 rendering would never have been given there but for the 
 comparison of man's age or lifetime to a hand's-breadth in 
 Ps. xxxix. 5. Yet in this passage, and also in Luke xii. 25, 
 Grimm, with Meyer and others, insists upon giving the 
 rendering age. This Field ridicules by stating the problem 
 thus, " Find the sum of so many years -|- one cubit;" Grimm, 
 with Godet, Meyer, and almost all commentators, admitting 
 the rendering stature only in Luke ii. 52, xix. 3. All will 
 agree in rendering the word age in John ix. 21 and Heb. xi. 
 11. In Matt. vi. 27 and Luke xii. 25, Field has shown the 
 unnaturalness of any other reading than stature, because of the 
 word culit following. In our text we have a word, which, 
 if not just at once so evidently decisive as the cubit of Matthew 
 and Luke, will be found on examination no less inappropriate 
 when joined to rjXiKia in any other meaning than that of stature,. 
 The word measure (fierpov) is repeated from ver. 7, where it 
 was used to indicate the dimension or amount of the gift of 
 Christ distributed to each believer. It is not a measure of 
 time that is thought of, but a measure of capacity, amount, 
 size. The gift of Christ was not measured out in lengths of 
 days or months or years, but by increasing proportions and 
 growing magnitude. This, too, is in admirable harmony with 
 the immediately preceding phrase.^ The measure is reached 
 when maturity has been gained, and the saint has become a 
 
 * Ellicott, with considerable hesitation, after showing how much may be said 
 for the rendering age, concludes from the use of this word "measure," aud still 
 more such words as TXripu)//.x, au?,riira/niv, etc., that the readrng stature is, upon 
 the whole, more probable and satisfactory. 
 
ciiAr. IV. 14. 319 
 
 full-grown man. He has gone through the various stages of 
 growth, and it is the increase in size, and not the time taken 
 in his development, that the apostle is thinking of. And now 
 he defines more particularly what that measure of full-sized 
 and mature manhood is : it is the stature of Christ's own 
 fulness. 
 
 The real gift of Christ to each is Christ Himself ; and while 
 the measure to each varies, the substance of the gift is the 
 same to all. It is out of the fulness of Christ that all draw, 
 and each one reaches perfection when he is filled according 
 to his capacity with that fulness. It is impossible that any 
 one should receive beyond his measure, and it is equally im- 
 possible that God should withhold His gifts of grace until 
 that measure has been reached. As to the precise meaning 
 of the phrase, " the fulness of Christ," it means that of which 
 the stature spoken of consists. It indicates that store of 
 supply previously described by the apostle as the unscarch- 
 ahle riches of Christ. 
 
 The question has been raised as to whether the perfection 
 treated of in this verse, as the result to be secured before the 
 end of the ministry in the Clnirch shall have been reached, is 
 thought of as attainable in the present life, or only in that 
 which is to come. The distinction between the present and 
 the future does not seem to be in Paul's mind. Perfection 
 for each individual believer is reached when the measure of 
 the gift of Christ destined for him has been secured, and for 
 the Church when all its members severally have gained this 
 position. When and whei'e this shall be is not discussed. 
 
 Ver. 14. In order that ye he no longer children. — The word 
 " children " (vy^irioi) is appropriately used here, as also in 
 1 Cor. ii. 16, iii. 1, xiv. 20 ; Heb. v. 13, in contrast to full- 
 groivn men (reXeioi). The aspect of childhood which it emphas- 
 ised is that of imperfection, and particularly that imperfection 
 which time and training will overcome. It points originally 
 to the inability to speak, for speech must be acquired, as the 
 faculties grow, by application and labour. It was not a 
 position in which there was a continuance. It was a stage 
 through which every one should pass to something higher. 
 This will guide us in regard to the connection of our passage 
 
320 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 with the context. The spiritual progress described in the 
 previous verse has tliis end in view, that the stage of child- 
 hood should be used as a stage, and not rested in as though 
 it were the end. In the ministry, whose functions are 
 described in the earlier part of the section^ we have the 
 means provided for imparting that instruction and producing 
 that development needed in order to enable us to transcend 
 the position and attitude of children. Having this ministry 
 now in the Church, and having the assurance that it will be 
 continued until tlie perfection which it aims at producing in 
 the members of the Church has been reached, it is expected 
 that the result will be regular advance toward spiritual 
 maturity. — Spiritual childhood or immaturity is characterised 
 by faultiness, and discipline must be applied to remove what 
 are really blemishes. In 1 Cor. iii. 1-4, some of those faults 
 are specified — carnal-mindedness, envying, strife, and divisions. 
 Similar faults are ascribed to those who remain spiritually 
 children, in the clauses in our text. 
 
 Tossed (limit like iccives. — The verb KXvScovi^eaOai occurs 
 nowhere else in the New Testament. In Isa. Ivii. 20, where 
 the wicked are compared to the troubled sea, this verb is used 
 in the LXX. In both biblical passages the meaning is tossed 
 like waves, not tossed on the waves. The participle is to be 
 regarded here as used absolutely, and is not to be, as Grimm 
 would have it, joined with the following participle, qualified 
 by the dative of instrument. The substantive kXvBcov, from 
 which the verb is derived, means an agitated mass of waters, 
 as distinguished from the simple Kvfxa, a wave or swell. The 
 figure used in our text therefore indicates a violent pitching 
 about, and an agitation that is widely spread over man's 
 being. The substantive is used in a figurative passage very 
 similar in meaning to the one before us in James i. 6. 
 
 A7id driven about by every wind of doctrine. — Wind {dv€fjLo<i) 
 is air in motion, and is used figuratively to indicate varia- 
 bility. It is also characteristic of the wind that, as it varies 
 the direction of its own course, it changes with its changing 
 currents the course of everything that is not heavy enough 
 to resist its influence. Those who are not well-instructed 
 and established in the faith are at the mercy of any plausible 
 
CHAP. lY. 14. 321 
 
 pretender wlio may come preaching some new gospel. " Every 
 wind of doctrine " might be rendered, " every sort of doctrinal 
 novelty." He who is spiritually childish and immature is 
 attracted by anything new, just as the child throws away 
 what it has for something new, irrespective altogether of the 
 intrinsic worth or worthlessness of that which is presented. — 
 This description is evidently intended to apply not to the 
 pre-Christian state either of Jewish or of Gentile Christians 
 (though Klopper would apply it by preference to that of the 
 latter), but to the undeveloped, infantile condition of those of 
 both classes who did not use aright the gifts of the ministry 
 and the gift of Christ distributed to each individual amonf? 
 them, so as to outgrow that condition in which they were ex- 
 posed to such dangers. The winds of doctrine are not pagan 
 cults, but distortions of Christian truth, and perversions 
 favoured by those whose spiritual development was imperfect 
 and one-sided. This unstable, variable doctrine is the same 
 as that described in Col. ii. 8, as "philosophy and vain deceit 
 according to the tradition of men," against which the members 
 of the Christian Church are warned. 
 
 Consistivg of the deceit of men. — This phrase describes the 
 winds of doctrine according to their content. They consist 
 of the deceit of men (eV tyj Kv^ela rwv dvOpooTTcov). The 
 Authorised Version translates as a clause co-ordinate with 
 " every wind of doctrine," or as describing the method by 
 means of which the driving about is effected. It is better to 
 take the eV as indicating what constitutes the essence of this 
 varying and uncertain teaching, that exercises so fascinating 
 an influence upon unformed minds. The word "deceit" 
 (Kv^eia) occurs only here in Scripture. Its original meaning 
 is dice-playing, of which fraud was a most frequent accom- 
 paniment. Those who childishly yielded themselves to such 
 baseless teaching were the dupes of deceivers. Von Soden, 
 in the Hancl-Commentar zum Neuen Testament, iii. 1, 1891, 
 offers a brilliant and attractive rendering, In the sport of men, 
 understanding by that conduct on the part of those teachers 
 of a frivolous sort, so that they might be said to play with 
 the solemn concerns of men's souls. That this is not more 
 severe an estimate than the apostle would be prepared to 
 
 X 
 
322 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 express regarding the character of these false teachers, the 
 following clause clearly shows. Yet the craftiness charged 
 against them there goes more naturally with the idea of deceit 
 here. In 2 Pet. ii. 13, 14, however, those who "sport 
 themselves with their own deceivings " are also charged with 
 " beguiling unstable souls." 
 
 In craftiness according to the cunning device of error. — Those 
 false teachers skilfully carried out a scheme, cleverly devised, 
 with the object of leading those astray who would give heed 
 to their reasonings. The opening phrase of the clause, " in 
 craftiness" {kv iravovpyla), describes the manner in which 
 the deceivers work upon their dupes. Etymologically, irav- 
 ovpjia means the capacity for doing everything. In its bad 
 sense, as here intended, it conveys the idea that these false 
 teachers are men of ability and daring, and that they are 
 unscrupulous, and will stick at nothing. This craftiness is 
 shown in the cunning device made use of by error. The 
 word which we render here " cunning device " is fiedoheia, 
 the third hapax Icgomenon of this verse, at least it only 
 occurs again in this same epistle (vi. 11). The verb ix^edo- 
 ZeveLv occurs in the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, 
 chap. vii. : " Whosoever shall tamper with or pervert the oracles 
 of the Lord," etc. Lightfoot, in his note on this passage, 
 Ignatius and Polycarp, iii. 334, suggests that this is the 
 meaning of the substantive in the passage in our epistle. 
 This might be regarded as affording a very fair meaning. 
 The craftiness of those teachers lies in the fact that their 
 error is a corruption or perversion of the truth. But it is 
 much simpler and more natural to accept the ordinary 
 meaning of "pursuit of a plan," and so render here, as in 
 chap. vi. 11, by stratagem, cunning device, wile. 
 
 Who the false teachers intended in this verse are is not 
 definitely shown. There is a marked contrast between the 
 way in which the heretical teachers among the Colossians are 
 spoken of, and the way in which those are referred to against 
 Wiom the Ephesians are warned. The wliole tone of the 
 reference leaves upon us the impression, that the apostle means 
 to put the Ephesians on their guard against heretical tenden- 
 cies of a somewhat indefinite and unformed description, which 
 
CHAP. IV. 15. 323 
 
 were making their appearance in the regions around. His 
 wide experience of men who liad erred from the truth, and 
 then assumed the role of teachers^ gave him a right to 
 generalise in estimating their personal character and the 
 moral quality of their teaching. 
 
 Ver. 15. But that, speaking the truth in love. — Having in 
 the previous verse shown, under its negative aspect, Christ's 
 purpose in giving to His Church the gift of the ministry, by 
 describing the dangers from which it was intended to deliver 
 believers, the apostle now proceeds to describe that purpose 
 positively, by showing what blessings the right use of the 
 means so provided would secure for them. The whole 
 passage, therefore, including this verse and the next, is still 
 under the particle " in order that " at the beginning of the 
 14tli verse. The participle aXrjOevovre'i properly means 
 "speaking the truth." It occurs elsewhere in the New 
 Testament only in Gal. iv. IG, where the same meaning is th(, 
 only natural rendering. There seems no occasion for depart- 
 ing from classical usage, and translating, as Grimm does in 
 Ephesians, "to profess the truth," and in Galatians, "to teach 
 the truth." EUicott says that this meaning, which suits well 
 enough in Galatians, is here exegetically unsatisfactory, and 
 so he proposes to translate (with Olshausen) " walking in 
 truth." But the natural meaning of the word need not be 
 regarded as unsuitable in this place. The false teachers had 
 made shipwreck of their own faith, and their speaking lies 
 threatened with danger those to whom they spoke. This 
 could be met only by the speaking of the truth. These 
 others spoke lies because the truth was not in them ; but 
 those who have the truth must guard the deposit by speaking 
 out hi accordance with that which is within. This will be 
 an efficient means of spiritual growth. It is quite a mistake 
 to say with Sadler {Commentary, p. 207, 1891), who adopts 
 Ellicott's rendering, that we have this in ver. 25, for there it 
 is truthfulness as a moral habit, here it is the emphatic 
 assertion of true doctrine in opposition to the false. Aiid 
 just because this speaking of the truth is polemical, uttered in 
 answer to dangerous and deadly error, it is necessary that we 
 be particularly careful to manifest in our utterance a spirit 
 
324 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS, 
 
 becoming one who defends a truth which is Christ. Hence 
 the apostle would have us speak the truth in love. This 
 word, iv ayaTTr), therefore, should be joined to the preceding 
 participle, and not be left, as Beck would have it, to be 
 joined indifferently to this, or to the growing up in Christ. 
 There is no appropriateness in the latter connection. This 
 love is here certainly brotherly love, but as such it has been 
 awakened in us by the loving Spirit of Christ, and so can be 
 exercised and shown only by those who love God.^ 
 
 We may grow up in all things into Him. — Prominence is 
 thus given to the idea of spiritual growth, already set forth 
 in the 13th verse, as the main end for which Christ has 
 given His gifts. And this growth is to be in all directions 
 and in all departments that belong to the being of a fully 
 developed spiritual manhood. In order that the growth may 
 be in all things, that it may not be a morbid growth where 
 certain limbs and members may stretch out of proportion to 
 others, Christ has given a diversity of ministerial gifts, so as 
 to secure in His Church increase in knowledge, in faith, in 
 love. No part of our Maker can be allowed to remain 
 unaffected by those spiritual influences. But there is only 
 one in whom, as the norm or standard, this perfectly-propor- 
 tioned development is seen. It can only be by growing up 
 into that form, and filling up the outline which it presents to 
 us, that we can attain unto the end unto which Christ has 
 destined us. 
 
 Who is the Head, Christ. — Christ is the centre of all 
 spiritual vitality. It is from Him, as Head, that every 
 inspiring, controlling, and sustaining influence proceeds, and 
 His people, as the members of His body, are living and active, 
 in proportion as the channels of communication between Him 
 and them are kept open. Each member will attain full 
 
 ^ Beck, ErkUivuvg, p. 194, says that iv iyd-rYi, as standing betAvecn a.Xr,6c6ovrii 
 and allr,(rut/.iy, is to be referred to both, and signifies not merely brotherly love, 
 hut is the love of Christ spoken of in cliap. iii. 17-19, which embraces God and 
 man. The explanation given above of the connection and meaning of the 
 phrase seems much more natural, as it is certainly much more simple. Those 
 who, like Davies (Epistfe to Ephesians, etc., p. 48, 1884), render ak^huoyn; 
 "observing or being loyal to truth," are led preferentially to attach, h ayaTti 
 to aulr,(ru/^iv, and to translate " but being loyal to truth may in love grow up." 
 
CHAP. IV. IG. 325 
 
 growth when there is no interruption to the flow of spiritual 
 power and influence from the Head. Each member of the 
 body will have grown up into Christ, the Head, and the whole 
 body shall have attained unto this growth, when immediate 
 response is given by each member and by the whole body to 
 every thought, and feeling, and expression of will issuing from 
 the Head. The figure here used to represent Christ's relation to 
 the members of His Church is a favourite one with our apostle. 
 It has been so used already, as we have seen, in our epistle, 
 chap. i. 22, and it occurs again in chap. v. 23, as also in Col. 
 i. 18, ii. 19. Lightfoot, on Col. i. 18, remarks that in the 
 earlier epistles of Paul, the relations of the Church to Christ 
 are described under the same image (1 Cor. xii. 12-27 ; Eom. 
 xii. 4), but there, with the various functions of the members 
 as his starting-point ; whereas in his later epistles he starts 
 from the originating and controlling power of the Head. 
 
 Ver. 16. Fromxoliom. — The apostle shows himself throughout 
 determined to keep the person of Christ to the front. He gives 
 gifts of ministry, not that they may be to men a substitute for 
 Himself, but in order that men may grow up, not merely 
 toward, but into Him. And that we may understand how 
 such a growth is possible. He is represented under the figure 
 of the head, with its vital and formative relation to the body. 
 It now seems necessary to vindicate the use of this figure as 
 applied to Christ. If He is the Head, into which the members 
 of the body must grow up, then out from Him, as Head, must 
 flow those vitalising influences which the members need only 
 receive in order to grow. This closing verse of the section 
 shows what streams of grace flow from Him to us. 
 
 The loliole 'body. — These words form the subject of the 
 principal sentence, which is interrupted by a long and elaborate 
 participial clause. What the apostle deals with here is the 
 growth of the body, which depends upon the supplies furnished 
 by the head, and also upon the presence of adequate and 
 rightly-placed channels for the communication of those supplies 
 to every part of the organism. 
 
 Being fitly joined and closely knit together. — The participial 
 clause begun by those words sets forth the condition which 
 must be presupposed before the growth of the whole body can 
 
326 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 be effected. Free communication must be kept up between 
 the head and the members. The ideal of the Church requires 
 that each member be in contact with the other, each in its 
 place, so that the communication of vital energy from the 
 Head may reach to all. The participles used here are in the 
 present tense, to indicate the continuance of the process 
 whereby the members of Christ's body are being fitted into 
 their places and closely bound together as parts of one grand 
 structure. The first of these participles, (7vvapiuLo\ojovfjb6vo<;, 
 derived from the simple apfio^, a joint, is the same as that 
 which we met before in chap. ii. 24. It only occurs in those 
 two passages. It signifies the harmonious grouping of the 
 different parts that go to make up one whole. Each part finds 
 its place with relation to its adjoining part, so that the whole 
 becomes a regularly articulated system. The other participle, 
 av/jL^i^a!^6fievo<;, occurs in the strictly parallel passage, Col. ii. 
 19, and means closely joined so as to coalesce. It is used of 
 the perfect union of hearts in Christian brotherly love. Col. 
 ii. 2. Together they describe a perfect relationsliip, in which 
 all the parts are brought together into their proper places, and 
 are so attached by contact with one another, that they work 
 together as one organism for a common end. The first part 
 of the participial clause sets forth generally the symmetrical 
 and regularly-articulated structure of the body of Christ, under 
 the figure of the human body, and what follows shows how 
 this is brought about. 
 
 Bi/ means of every supply-communicating joint. — This part 
 of the clause describes what it is that draws and binds the 
 several parts together into one whole. That which holds the 
 different parts of the human body together, and binds them so 
 that united action is possible as that of the whole body, is not 
 any mere system of joints and sockets, ligaments and their 
 attachments, but that current of vital energy which the 
 contact of parts allows to pass through the whole. So, too, in 
 the body of Christ, it is not any mere external shaping and 
 fitting of the different members by any process of adaptation 
 and modification, which may bring about an external corporate 
 union, that constitutes the building up into one body spoken 
 of in the text, but a contact of parts and a spiritual adapta- 
 
CHAP. IV. 10. 327 
 
 tion of one member in relation to another, with the view of 
 communicating freely that spiritual supply which descends 
 from the Head for accomplishing one end in the service of a 
 common Lord. Hence the emphasis does not lie, as indeed 
 our English version itself makes quite evident, on the words 
 " every joint," but on the supply communicated through 
 " every joint." The precise meaning of the word here rendered 
 "joint" (a(f)ri) is touch, contact, and that of a very decided or 
 even violent description. Its meaning may be illustrated 
 from its use in the Greek Bible. It is employed in the LXX. 
 of Lev. xiii. 2, and in the versions of Aquila and Symvi. of 
 Ex. xi. 1, to translate the Hebrew yJJ, a blow, a stroke of 
 God's hand, a plague. It is contact of no merely superficial 
 character, but contact that developes into adherence. Hence it 
 is a term that admirably suits both of the participles in the 
 previous phrase. It implies both the placing together and 
 holding together of the several parts. The verb from which 
 it is derived (aineaOai) is used in Col. ii. 21 together with 
 other two terms indicating operations of the senses. There it 
 evidently means " to touch firmly," so that it might even be 
 rendered " to grasp or lay hold of." It is to touch so as to 
 secure a continued connection. And thus the passage in 
 Colossians gives us a descending scale of sense experiences : 
 Handle not, nor taste, nor even touch (Otyyaveiv). The sub- 
 stantive itself occurs in a passage almost precisely parallel to 
 our text. Col. ii. 19. It is a well-known and frequently-used 
 technical term among ancient Greek writers on physiology, 
 and is used in the works of Hippocrates, Aristotle, Galen, 
 in describing the union of parts in the structure of the human 
 frame by means of contact. Chrysostom led the Greek 
 expositors astray, Theodoret among the rest, by a too restricted 
 interpretation of the word. " What is the meaning of this, 
 1)1/ the siip'ply of the touch ? " he asks ; and answers, " that is to 
 say, by the sensitive faculty." His own commentary following 
 is sound enough, but other expositors went so far as to identify 
 al d(f)ai with the senses. The idea of the apostle is quite 
 general, and refers to contact of every kind whereby a free 
 and open channel is secured for the flood of gracious influences 
 from the head through all the members, so that they may be 
 
328 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 living members in tlie body. The word here rendered 
 "supply" {ein'x^op'q^ia) occurs elsewhere only in Phil. i. 19 ; 
 but various parts of the verb are used in a similar sense in 
 Gal. iii. 5 ; 2 Cor. ix. 10 ; Col. ii. 19, etc. The force of the 
 compound word is " abundant supply." In the passage in 
 Philippians it is used of the Spirit's gift ; and there, as Lightfoot 
 remarks, the bountiful supply is the Spirit Himself, as at once 
 giver and gift. In Galatians it is used of Christ as the sender 
 of the Spirit, who bestows the gift of His Spirit liberally. The 
 simple verb meant originally to furnish the chorus at one's 
 own expense, hence to provide liberally or lavishly. As used 
 in 2 Pet. i. 5, it means " have your faith well furnished with 
 courage, and that courage well I'urnished with knowledge," etc. 
 And so in our text the apostle is thinking of the rich abund- 
 ance of spiritual supply furnished by the head, which only 
 requires an open channel in order to communicate itself to 
 every member which is by that vital current incorporated as 
 a part of the one great structure. This being the meaning of 
 the words and expressions used, we now pass on to inquire 
 as to the special kinds of supply here intended. What are 
 those adjusting and binding agencies and influences tlirough 
 which this spiritual supply is communicated ? We have 
 them set forth surely in those gifts of ministry bestowed by 
 Christ on His Church. The two prominent ideas in the 
 l^assage before us are, as we have seen, that of the fitting and 
 that of the attaching together of the several members of the 
 body. In order that each member may exactly fill the place 
 destined for him, he must grow up to that measure which 
 corresponds with the gift of Christ to him. He must therefore 
 be fed with that spiritual nourishment which the divine Word 
 supplies, and which is communicated by divinely called and 
 qualified teachers. And in order that each member may 
 be joined and brought into contact with the other members, 
 he must be under the direction and control of a common 
 government whose laws and ordinances he obeys. He must 
 therefore recognise Ciiurch officers, whose function it is to 
 administer discipline so as to secure and maintain the unity 
 of the body of Clirist. Thus the supply-communicating 
 joints would be the teaching and ruling officers of the Church 
 
CHAP. IV. IG. 329 
 
 or more generally those in the Church possessed of ruling and 
 teaching cliarisms.^ 
 
 According to the effectual luorlcing in the measure of every 
 part. — The first question to be decided is as to whether this 
 proposition is to be joined to the preceding participles or to 
 what follows. If we were to adopt the latter alternative, tlie 
 meaning would be that the growth of the whole body was 
 effected by means of supplies communicoted from the head, in 
 proportion to the activity shown by each part in its own 
 particular measure. This would seem to involve tlie redupli- 
 cation of the idea of proportion, so that either Kar ivepyeiav 
 (which is actually wanting in F, G, various minusc. and some 
 patristic quotations) or iv [xlrpw would be superfluous.' But 
 for the apostle's purpose both terms are needed. He wishes 
 to emphasise not merely the effectual working of each part 
 of the body, but the obligation lying on each part to work up 
 to that measure provided for by the gift of Christ, not beyond 
 it (2 Cor. X. 13), but up to it. Hence it is better to connect 
 the passage before us with the preceding participles " fitly 
 joined and closely knit together." This union of parts is 
 brought about in no mere mechanical way by outside influence, 
 but by means of those very parts themselves when energised, 
 each of them by the power gifted to them severally by Christ, 
 operating in that measure which marks the limits and 
 dimensions of the gift to each. In regard to each member of 
 the body of Christ, his fitting into his place and his 
 connection with the other members depend upon his reaching 
 unto that measure which was originally applied to the gift of 
 Christ destined for Him. If only each member reached to 
 his own measure he would fit into his place exactly, and 
 would so touch the other members at the precisely proper 
 points of contact, and then the whole building would be 
 complete. We thus treat the whole passage " being fitly 
 joined ... in the measure of every part " as one continued 
 participial clause, and read the principal sentence thus — 
 " The whole body maketh increase," etc. As to the relation 
 of the sub-clauses within this long participial clause, it seems 
 
 ^ Coniiiare Klopper, Brief an die Colosser, p. 454, 1882. 
 ^ Klupper, Brief an die Epheser, p. 137, 1891. 
 
ooO EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 best to regard the second and third as co-ordinate to one 
 another, and both subordinate to the first. The first part of 
 the clause indicates generally the condition of the growth of 
 the body, namely the proper development of each member, 
 and the second and third parts describe this development as 
 consisting in the distribution of supply for the head, and the 
 orderly attention of each member to the discharge of the 
 particular function assigned to it. 
 
 Malcctli increase of the tody unto the edifying of itself in 
 love. — These words with " the whole body " in the opening of 
 the verse constitute the principal sentence. Were it not for 
 the long intervening participial clause, it would run simply thus, 
 " The whole body increaseth unto the edifying of itself in love." 
 The phrase " the body maketh increase of the body " is not 
 to be characterised as a fault of style or an inadvertence, but 
 simply as an unavoidable redundancy, in order to make the 
 sentence perspicuous. A certain inexactness belongs to the 
 phraseology, inasmuch as " the M'hole body," as consisting of 
 head and proportionately developed members, does not exist 
 until this increase has taken place. What is here emphasised 
 is the fact tbat the growth is accomplished from within by the 
 parts of the body, which, on the accomplishment of this increase, 
 really constitute the whole body. The head, from which all 
 those supplies which promote growth proceed, is part of that 
 body, and by tlie supplies sent out diffuses itself over the 
 whole body. The body, to the construction or upbuilding of 
 which those gifts of Christ to the Church have to contribute, 
 has at the same time committed to its several parts or 
 members its own edification by means of perfected relation- 
 ship with Christ. And the apostle adds " in love," to show 
 that there is no selfishness and self-seeking in the personal 
 appropriation of the gift. This is the spirit of the new life 
 in which there is growth ; that all be done " in love," is 
 the indispensable condition of sharing in spiritual increase 
 (iii. 17, iv. 15). The phrase "in love" should be joined not 
 to "maketh increase," but to "the edifying of itself." 
 
 On the whole of this difficult and involved passage the 
 words of Chrysostom are worthy of being quoted. " The 
 apostle," he says, " expresses himself with great obscurity, 
 
CHAP. IV. 17-V. 21. 331 
 
 from liis desire to utter everytliing at once. Wliat lie means, 
 however, is this. In the same way as the spirit or vital 
 principle, which descends from the brain, communicates the 
 sensitive faculty which is conveyed through the nerves, not 
 simply and in the same measure to all the members, but 
 according to the proportion of each member, — to that which is 
 capable of receiving more, more ; to that which is capable of less, 
 less ; for this is root or source, viz. the spirit, — so also is Christ. 
 For the souls of men being dependent upon Him as members. 
 His provident care, and supply of the spiritual gifts according 
 to a due proportion in the measure of every single member, 
 effects their increase. . . . All these expressions he uses as 
 tending to humility. For what, he seems to say, if this or 
 that man receives more than another ? He has received the 
 same Spirit, sent forth from the same Head, effectually work- 
 ing in all alike, communicating itself to all alike." 
 
 Sect. VIII. — The New Life (Chap. iv. l7-v. 21). 
 
 This long passage deals with the new life of the Christians, 
 contrasting it with the old life of heathenism out of which 
 they had passed, warning them against any return to it, or any 
 compromise with its principles and practices, and exhorting 
 them to strenuous endeavour after holiness and the imitation of 
 Christ as the revealer of God's mind and will.^ What strikes 
 us at once as we pass from the earlier chapters of the epistle 
 to this later part, is the contrast in the apostle's treatment of 
 his readers when he turns from dealing with doctrine to deal 
 with questions of morality and particulars of daily conduct. 
 He could speak to those Ephesians freely about the mysteries 
 of the faith, but when the subject is the moral life, he has to 
 begin by laying down the most elementary principles, and 
 warning them against the most evident and even atrocious 
 forms of vice. When we consider that the people to whom 
 he writes were only very recently rescued from paganism of 
 the peculiarly corrupt type of an Asiatic city, and that they 
 were still living in daily intercourse with those who con- 
 
 1 This contrast is remarked upon and aduiirably discussed by Dale, Lectures 
 on Ephesians, pp. 294-307. 
 
332 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 tinued to follow the most debasing customs, we need not be 
 surprised to find that even among those whose intellectual 
 culture was uncommonly high, and who therefore made 
 rapid advance in the understanding of the truths of revelation, 
 the awakening of the moral consciousness and the permanent 
 elevation of the moral tone could only be eftected by means 
 of protracted and laborious inculcation of those foundation 
 principles which, when wrought out and applied in every 
 direction, would bring about a complete revolution of the life. 
 What had to be overthrown were not merely the habits of a 
 lifetime, but the customs of a race and modes of life that 
 had prevailed through generations. There was heredity, as 
 well as personal bent and inclination, to work against. We 
 can scarcely form any conception of the moral pollution 
 which characterised every class of society in those most 
 degenerate days of paganism. Much has been said in these 
 times of the beauty and attractiveness of pagan society, and 
 quite recently an elaborate attempt has been made, by a 
 singular perversion of facts, to show how much the world 
 has suffered by the substitution of the Christianity of the 
 fathers for the pure and elevated teaching of pagan sages.^ 
 On the contrary, all contemporary history substantiates the 
 apostle's estimate of the moral condition of the pagan world 
 of his day. The stinging sarcasms and bitter satires of 
 Juvenal and Persius are proved, by the calm and deliberate 
 statements of the most reliable historians, to be no exacjcjera- 
 tions. When we have read what Tacitus and Suetonius and 
 Seneca and Pliny have to tell of the state of society in their 
 own times, we shall cease to wonder at the eagerness of the 
 apostle's appeal and the plainness of his speech, when he 
 warns his young converts, even those of them who had made 
 most distinguished progress in the knowledge of true Chris- 
 
 ^ Paganism and Christianity, 1891, by J. A. Fairer. Tlie following is a 
 specimen : ' ' The moral teaching of the pagans is on a purer and higher level than 
 that of the fathers, just as the lives of the pagans, Pratextatus, Themistius, or 
 Libanius, rise far above those of their leading Christian contemporaries." He 
 does indeed say that it is not the religion of Christ but the patristic interpreta- 
 tion of it that he repudiates. But his preference of even the most distinguished 
 and worthy pagan sages to the leaders of the Christian Church in the second 
 and third centuries is an utter perversion of history. 
 
CHAP. IV. 17-24. 333 
 
 tian doctrine, against such abominable sins as should not so 
 much as be named among saints. The condition of the 
 age made it indispensable that they sliould be naraed.^ 
 
 (1) Regeneration (chap. iv. 17—24). 
 
 A^er. 17—24. In these verses we have the contrast of the old 
 and new graphically described. On the one hand is the life 
 of alienation from God ; on the other, of reconciliation to God. 
 The fact that man's life in a state of nature is separated from 
 God, is regarded by the apostle as sufficient to account for all 
 the vices that disfigure the lives of the heathen, even in the 
 most abominable and detestable excesses. But the new life 
 is a thorough-going contrast to all this, just because it starts 
 from fellowship with God. It is no mere moral improvement 
 and reform, but a renewal of spirit and a new creation after 
 God ; and therefore it can brook no compromise with the old 
 manner of life, but demands a complete wrench and thorough 
 severance from the very first and all through. 
 
 Ver. 17. Tliis, then, I say and testify in the Lord. — This 
 formula is not found in precisely the same terms elsewhere in 
 Paul's writings ; but we may compare with it 1 Thess. ii. 11, 12. 
 There is an evident resumption of the tliouglit with which 
 the apostle started in ver. 1. When, in the beginning of 
 the chapter, the apostle proposed to enter upon the directly 
 ethical part of his epistle, lie found it necessary to enlarge 
 upon the nature of the Christian calling as from God, who 
 supplies the means for its realisation. Having set down these 
 indispensable preliminaries, he now passes on to the main 
 question. By issuing his exhortation in the name of the 
 Lord, as in the beginning of the chapter he had issued it as 
 
 1 The most readily accessible general description of pagan society in the 
 apostolic age will be found in — Uhlhorn, The Conflict of Christianity, transl. fron: 
 3rd ed., 1880, especially Bk. i. chap. ii. pp. 42-149, "The Moral Condition of 
 the Heathen World ; " Lecky, Hiitory of European MoraU, 3rd ed., vol. i. chap, 
 ii. pp. 161-335, 1877, "The Pagan Empire;" Tholuck, Nature and Moral. 
 Influence of Heathenism (Bibl. Cab.), 1840; Liglitfoot, "Essay on Paul and 
 Seneca" in Gomm. on Epistle to the Philippians, 6th td., pp. 270-328, 1881 ; 
 Schmidt, Social Results of Early Christianity, 1885. For contemporary and 
 unbiassed testimonies, besides Juvenal, Persius, Martial, Seneca, s^e espi cially 
 Pliny, Natural History, xiv. 142 ; and with immediate reference to Ei)hesus, 
 Philostratus, Vita Apollonii, iv. 2. 
 
334 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 the prisoner of the Lord, he gives to it peculiar solemnity and 
 authority. What he says is said in the form of a divinely 
 authenticated commission. It is God's ambassador who 
 speaks, and he speaks officially. 
 
 That yc no longer walk as the Gentiles also vmUc. — It suits 
 the turn that the apostle's thought has taken, that he should 
 now deal with the question first of all from the negative side. 
 What he warns his readers against is conduct after the pattern 
 of that of the Gentiles. The Authorised Version "other 
 Gentiles," or " the rest of the Gentiles," follows a text, 
 defended on internal grounds by Elllcott, which is absolutely 
 without good MS. authority. The term Xocird is not found 
 in X*, B, D*, F, G, etc. The reading as it stands in these was 
 evidently found difficult, inasmuch as to, edvr] was used in 
 chap. iii. 1 to designate " Gentile Christians," and the 
 explanatory addition that made all things plain, would be 
 readily suggested by the w? Kal at Xoiiroi of chap. ii. 3. 
 Here we need have no real difficulty in accepting what at 
 first sight is the more difficult reading, and could never 
 certainly have been substituted for the other. The context 
 would make it plain to all readers that the apostle intended 
 not the Gentile Christians, not the Gentiles generally, includ- 
 ing the Christians, but that society out of which they had 
 come, and from which they professed to have separated them- 
 selves. Hence what the apostle warns the Ephesians against 
 is a mode of life of which most of them had been partakers, 
 and with which all of them had been familiar. The society 
 of Ephesus was pagan, although in the city a large Jewish 
 colony had long been established. The apostle could quite 
 appropriately speak of the Ephesians as walking in the ways 
 and customs of the Gentiles. And now he addresses those 
 who have come out of that society, whether as Jews they 
 were originally onlookers more or less influenced by the 
 sights and sounds around them, or as Gentiles they were 
 by race actually reared in the very atmosphere of that 
 pagan life, and exhorts them all to show themselves separate, 
 and uncontaminated by the evil taint. Besides, the apostle 
 is anxious to obliterate the distinction of Jew and Gentile in 
 the Christian Church, and here in Ephesus, where the Gentile 
 
CHAP. IV. 17. 335 
 
 section seemed inclined to overshadow the Jewish, as in 
 Galatia the Jewish seemed desirous of overshadowing the 
 Gentile, he gives the separatist name of Gentile to that mode 
 of life which he would have them leave behind among the 
 things of the past. 
 
 Li the vanity of their mind. — The word "vanity" 
 (yLtaTatoT7;9) occurs elsewliere in the New Testament only in 
 liom, viii. 20 and 2 Pet. ii. 18, in the general sense of 
 emptiness. So in the LXX. it is used to translate the 
 Hebrew ^^n as applied to the gods and worship of the heathens 
 in Jer. ii. 5, viii. 19, x. 3, xiv. 22; Dent, xxxii. 21. It 
 is the word that occurs throughout Ecclesiastes in the pathetic 
 refrain, " Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." The corresponding 
 adjective /xdraio^i is similarly used in Acts xiv. 15 ; 1 Cor. 
 iii. 20 ; 1 Pet. i. 18. It is quite true that this term is not 
 restricted to what is ordinarily styled idolatry, but the whole 
 circle of vices to which it points is regarded as the con- 
 comitant of idolatry. Where the objects of worship are vain, 
 empty shadows, the morality which characterises the worship 
 will show itself in all departments of the life. Chrysostom 
 makes good use of this clause as a text for denounciug the 
 foolish superstitions whicli find occasions of fear in all sorts 
 of insignificant occurrences. " They were afraid where no fear 
 was ; but the things which they ought to fear those they fear 
 not. Let us regard but one thing as terrible, that is, sin ; 
 and if there be not this, let us scorn all the rest, and him 
 that brought them in, the devil " (comp. Homilies in Lib. of 
 Fathers, V. 239-241, 1843). In contrast to the complete- 
 ness or fulness that characterises those who are in Christ 
 (Col. ii.), is this emptiufss in respect of all true spiritual 
 qualities which characterises the Gentiles alienated from God. 
 The attempt made by Trench (Synomjms of the New Testament, 
 xlix. 180—184, 1888) to distinguish between Kev6<i and 
 fidraios, as meaning respectively empty and aimless, is not 
 successful. In fxaraLorr]^ the idea of aindessness is certainly 
 present and prominent, but only as a necessary element in, or 
 characteristic of, the emptiness. In the apostle's view the 
 idol is nothing, and the worship of it therefore fails in securing 
 the end which worship should serve. Hence all that the 
 
336 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 apostle brings against the idolatry of the Gentiles in this 
 present clause is simply the negative charge that it did not 
 serve to arrest the downward career of the sinner, nor to 
 elevate him above the degradation of a life of sense. — Further, 
 it is said that the highest part of their nature, which was 
 capable of and destined for spiritual exercise, has been debased 
 by being restricted to a sphere in which there is nothing 
 present adequate to its capacities and fitted to satisfy its 
 requirements. What the religion of the Gentiles offered to 
 the spiritual nature of men was distinctly unprojitdblc. Those 
 who follow these vanities become vain, empty in that very 
 part of their being where the glory of their nature should be 
 seen. So in Eom. i. 21 the heathen are said " to have 
 become vain in their reasonings" (comp. 3 Mace. vi. 11; 
 Wisd. xiii. xiv.). 
 
 Ver. 1 8. Being darkened in the understanding. — By this and 
 the following statements the vanity which characterised the 
 pagan manner of life is accounted for. This clause should be 
 connected not with the " ye " but with " the Gentiles " of the 
 preceding verse. The natural state is described as one of 
 darkness (Eom. i. 21, xi. 10; 1 Thess. v. 4), while that of 
 believers is one of enlightenment (chap. i. 18, and 1 .lohn 
 generally). Meyer has correctly pointed out that the mind 
 {vov<i) of the previous verse has a twofold significance, the 
 intellectual and the 'practical. The present clause attaches 
 itself to the intellectual side. The vanity of the mind, as 
 intellectual, is occasioned by the darkening of the under- 
 standing (Sidvota). This term is used to designate the mind 
 as the faculty of understanding. By it we form intellectual 
 conceptions and judgments, and thus we become possessed of 
 those thoughts which constitute the furniture of our minds. 
 " In hidvota the spiritual element in the sensible life comes 
 out as a process of close and thorough scrutiny of outer 
 objects, and as a special outward attitude of the soul. It is 
 the inclinations that lead to thought and will bringing the 
 soul into a moral and intellectual intercourse and connection 
 with the outer world (Heb. viii. 10, x. 16 ; Matt. xii. 37). . . . 
 When vov<i loses its spirituality, a moral stupidity appears in 
 its outward intercourse both of thought and will. It suffers 
 
CHAP. IV. 18. 337 
 
 a corruption at once intellectual and moral" (Beck, Biblical 
 Psychology, p. 71, 1877). False thinking, resulting from 
 moral darkening, must necessarily have in it a moral element. 
 We here touch upon the question of man's moral responsi- 
 bility for his intellectual views and opinions. It is impossible 
 to separate altogether the intellectual and moral elements of 
 man's being, just because together they constitute the one 
 nature. We can form no intellectual judgment which is not 
 more or less affected by the moral state of the thinker. 
 Hence in Col. i. 21 we find that the directly ethical aliena- 
 tion from God, dealt with in the clause following our 
 text, is spoken of as an alienation of the understanding 
 {pidvoia). 
 
 Being alienated from the life of God. — This clause is strictly 
 co-ordinate with the preceding, as further descriptive of that 
 life followed by the Gentiles, against which the apostle warns 
 those who believe. It describes that life according to its dis- 
 tinctive moral character in respect of conduct, as the last 
 clause did in respect of intellectual judgment and belief. 
 But just as the darkening of the understanding involved a 
 decidedly moral element, so also the alienation of the life 
 involves a voluntary act of the mind. The word " being 
 alienated " {airriWoTpiaifjievoi) was used before by the apostle 
 (ii. 12), in a precisely similar way, to describe the natural 
 life as one of estrangement from God (comp. Col. i. 21). The 
 term used implies that they had been originally in a relation 
 of friendship, and had fallen into one of enmity. Its precise 
 force here, as in LXX. of Ps. Iviii. 3; Isa. i. 4; Ezek. xiv. 5, 7, 
 seems to be that of the passive voice ; for the fact that this 
 alienation was brought about by themselves, though true, is 
 not made prominent, but rather the origin assigned to this 
 alienation of life in the subsequent subordinate clauses requires 
 us to translate the verb as a strict passive, which would make 
 the alienation a penal infliction from the hand of God because 
 of sin. — The further definition of this alienation by the men- 
 tion of " the life of God," as that from which the alienated 
 became estranged, maintains the parallel with chap. ii. 12 by 
 supplying an equivalent to the aOeoi of that passage. Their 
 alienation consists in deprivation of all personal vital union 
 
 Y 
 
338 EnSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 with God. They have no share in that life which God lives. 
 The corrupt life of pagan society is a repudiation of the life 
 of God. It is worthy of notice, as strengthening the position 
 that the walk of the Gentile here is primarily that of idolatry, 
 viewed by the apostle as involving and leading to all the 
 vilest enmities of a vicious life, that in Dent. xxx. 20, after 
 the Lawgiver has warned the people of Israel against lapsing 
 into idolatrous practices, he reminds them that to cleave unto 
 the Lord is their life. The Gentiles are without any share 
 in this life that flows from God, The life meant here is 
 certainly the principle and not the manner of life. Goodwin 
 (ii. 17) is wrong in interpreting "the life of God" to mean 
 the life of holiness, for it is not the life which we behold in 
 God's working, but the life which the Spirit inspires and com- 
 municates. At the same time we should keep this in view, 
 that those who are strangers to the Spirit of life imparted by 
 God are also without those fruits of holiness in the life which 
 the presence of this Spirit of life produces. 
 
 Through the ignorance that was in them. — This assigns the 
 cause of the alienation in terms that would not be altogether 
 suitable if applied to the darkening of the mind, which is 
 rather the result of ignorance. The idea of alienation has led 
 the apostle to an ignorance which accounts for, but does not 
 excuse, the assuming of this attitude toward God on the part 
 of men. The use of the word " ignorance " {ar^voia) in Acts 
 iii. 17, xvii, 30 ; 1 Pet. i. 14, points to the absolute want 
 of knowledge ; and the peculiar descriptive phrase appended, 
 " that was in them " {^y]v ovaav ev avrol^), not merely " their 
 ignorance," emphasises the fact that their ignorance had be- 
 come an inherent quality of tlieir nature, inwrought into their 
 inmost being. 
 
 Through the hardening of their heart. — This gives the cause 
 of that ignorance. It w^as self-induced. Their hearts were 
 hardened ; and, as the result of this hardening, they became 
 ignorant. According to Eom. i. 19, men had originally 
 received such a discovery of God in the very constitution of 
 their nature, that, had they not Jteld doion the truth in right- 
 eousness and stifled tlieir convictions by a sinful life, they 
 would not have been ignorant of God. It was this hardening 
 
CHAP. IV. 19. 339 
 
 of the heart which put that ignorance in them. — The word 
 " hardening " (Trw/owo-t?) originally means covering with some- 
 thing callous, a thick skin, and hence came to mean render- 
 ing anything impervious to impression. The repetition of 
 acts of sin renders the heart hard, so that God's truth makes 
 no impression upon it. — Meier is wrong in introducing here 
 the distinction of Jew and Gentile, and making the hardening 
 refer to the former and the ignorance to the latter. The 
 ancient Church rightly regarded ignorance and hardening as 
 ordinarily a progressive departure from God and holiness. 
 Here the apostle understands by hardening, the result of that 
 wilful stifling of convictions from the truth which so encases 
 the heart with armour, impressive proof that their most 
 inward condition is that of ignorance. 
 
 Ver. 19. Being such as, wanting feeling, have given themselves 
 over to lasciviousncss. — The details of actual life which char- 
 acterise those estranged from God are here described. In 
 ver. 18 we had the condition of the sinner's inner being, 
 here we have its outward manifestation described. — The 
 phrase " wanting feeling " {airrfK'yqKore'i from uTraXyelv), not 
 used elsewhere in Scripture (hence the name 'ATvrjX'yTjfievoL 
 given to the Indian fakirs), connects this verse with the close 
 of the preceding verse. The heart which has undergone such 
 a process of induration has lost its sensitiveness, and this loss, 
 inasmuch as it pertains to the heart and spiritual part of 
 man's being, is not physical but moral. They have no longer 
 any sense for the true and the good. The conscience has 
 become callous, seared as if with a hot iron (1 Tim. iv. 2). 
 " The usual symptom of their having been forsaken by God is 
 the insensibility to pain, which is here described being past 
 feeling. Unmoved by the approaching judgment of God, 
 whom they offend, they go on at their ease, and fearlessly 
 indulge without restraint in the pleasures of sin. No shame 
 is felt, no regard to character is maintained " (Calvin). — What 
 was attributed to God's judicial act in Eom. i. 24 is here 
 assigned to man's own conduct. They gave themselves (eav- 
 Tov<i) over to the vilest forms of wickedness. " Lascivious- 
 ncss " (dcreXyeia) means, originally, what is fitted to excite 
 disgust, outrageous and shameless lust (2 Cor. xii. 2 1 ; Gal. 
 
340 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 V. 19 ; 2 Pet. ii. 7). It is wantonness which has thrown 
 all restraint aside. It is precisely the description we would 
 have expected of the conduct of those whose consciences were 
 seared, and who had ceased to have any moral feeling. The 
 restraints of public opinion, conscience, divine threatenings, are 
 no longer of any avail. They have become what, with strict 
 propriety, we call " abandoned characters." 
 
 To the working of every sort of uncleanness with (jreecliness. — 
 The unbridled wantonness of those God-forsaken sinners was 
 shown in the eagerness with which they entered on the per- 
 petration of all manner of wickedness. The description of 
 the zeal with which they engaged in their evil practices as 
 irXeove^ia is somewhat remarkable. As Lightfoot shows 
 (CoL iii. 5), " impurity " and " covetousness " {aKadapaia, 
 irXeove^la) divide nearly the whole domain of human selfish- 
 ness and vice. The word has here only an accidental con- 
 nection with uncleanness. It may be exhibited in the most 
 extreme form, where no charge of impurity can be brought. 
 It is, as Trench well expresses it, " the fiercer and ever fiercer 
 longing of the creature which has forsaken God to fill itself 
 with the lower objects of sense " {Synonyms of New Testament, 
 10th ed., p. 84, 1886); the particular objects of sense upon 
 which the greedy desires of the God-forsaken man is said in 
 our text to fasten themselves to every sort of uncleanness. 
 Hence they work all manner of impurities with the eagerness 
 of those who covet the opportunities, and so with enthusiasm 
 avail themselves of them.^ 
 
 In this terrible description, just as in Eom. i. 24-32, the 
 apostle is not speaking of individual Gentiles but of the pagan 
 world as a whole. The apostle was well aware that among 
 the Gentiles there were and always had been individual 
 examples of noble virtue, men who lived up to the light 
 
 ^ See an admirable use of this statement by Goodwin on "Aggravation of 
 Sinning against Knowledge," Works, iv. 163-187, especially 185. "When a 
 man knows how dearly he must pay for it, there is an expectation of judgment 
 embittering all. Therefore the Gentiles sinned with more pleasure than we. 
 Therefore, Eph. iv. 18, 19, the apostle, speaking of them, says that through 
 their ignorance and darkness and want of feeling they committed sin with free- 
 dom, and so with more pleasure, they not having knowledge or hearts sensible 
 of the evils that attend upon their courses." 
 
CHAP. IV. 20. 341 
 
 which they had, and in accordance with the law of God 
 revealed in their nature. He speaks of the general influence 
 of heathenism upon society as a whole. Even after mention- 
 ing some of the debasing vices, he says to the Colossians, " in 
 which ye also walked aforetime, when ye lived in them " 
 (iii. 0—7 ; comp. Eph. v. 3-8). 
 
 Ver. 20. But ye have not so learned Christ. — The abruptness 
 of the style of this verse is intended to indicate the complete- 
 ness of the contradiction between the Christian life entered 
 npon and that life of nature which had been forsaken. The 
 opposition was so thorough-going ; that there could be no 
 thought of return, or even of the slightest approach to 
 accommodation or compromise. He had drawn the dark 
 picture of the state of pagan society, so that argument might 
 be unnecessary when he proceeded to declare that those who 
 have believed in Christ can have nothing in common with 
 it. — In this statement the apostle shows what it is that 
 constitutes this irreconcilable separateness of the two parties. 
 Believers have learnt a lesson of such a kind and in such a 
 way that they can no longer continue to give any place to 
 these old thoughts and desires and ways. What we learn 
 becomes part of ourselves and is incorporated into our very 
 being. And in this case the lesson learnt is Christ Himself. 
 The believer by his faith appropriates Christ, puts on Christ, 
 so that of all the acts of his spiritual life he can say, " I live, 
 yet not I, but Christ lives in me." If the lesson, Christ, be 
 thus learned, as it ought to be by each believer, the life of the 
 disciple, like that of the Master, must be in direct antagonism 
 to that of the world. Those who thus learned Christ know 
 Him in their personal experience as a resurrection power 
 (Phil. iv. 9). False teachers might come teaching Christ 
 after another fashion, so as to allow continuance in a vicious, 
 immoral life ; but it was not thus they had been taught. 
 The lesson, Christ, had been so taught them that they must 
 know that there is no concord between Christ and Belial. 
 Christ, the very antithesis of all sympathy and tolerance of 
 sensuality in any form, was the subject of all apostolic 
 preaching (Gal. i. 16 ; 1 Cor. i. 23, etc.). Here, as in Titus 
 ii. 11, 12, the apostle answers those who said that the teach- 
 
342 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 ing of salvation by Christ and not by the law led to licence 
 and disregard for the demands of law (Gal. v. 13). 
 
 Ver. 21. If indeed ye have heard Him. — The whole epistle 
 proceeds on the supposition that they had heard and received 
 Christ. " The particle (etVe)," as Bengel says, " does not 
 lessen but heightens the force of the exhortation." If it 
 were so that they had learned Christ in such a way as to 
 admit of their living in their old heathen ways, then it was 
 not really Christ they had heard about and learned at all ; 
 which, on the supposition of the whole letter addressed to 
 saints and believers, is absurd. The statement of ver. 20 
 could be repudiated only upon the acceptance of a theory too 
 outrageous to call for any consideration. It need scarcely be 
 said that the apostle does not assume that his readers had 
 heard the historical Christ during His earthly life personally. 
 And yet we must not make the words " ye have heard Him " 
 merely equivalent to the words " ye have heard of Him." 
 The thought of the apostle is that Christ is an ever-living 
 presence in His Church for the evangelisation of the world, 
 so that every voice heard that leads to God is Christ's voice. 
 And what he specially thinks of here is that first heard 
 sound of the voice divine which differentiates our life now 
 and for ever from what it had been. This is my beloved 
 Son," says God to the soul that first comes into contact with 
 Christ, " hear Him." No one has heard Christ after this 
 fashion, and retained or wished to retain his old sinful ways. 
 And observe, it is simply a question of having heard or not 
 having heard. It is not, if ye have heard aright, but if ye have 
 heard at all. The emphatic word is " Him " (avrov), if it 
 be really Christ whom you have heard. 
 
 And have hee7i taught in Him. — This " in Him " {hv avrco) 
 of our text, which is made prominent by being placed at 
 the beginning of the clause, is the central characteristic thought 
 of the whole epistle. This is the position in which alone 
 any spiritual blessing is possible. It is into this position 
 that we are brought when once we have heard Him. This 
 initial hearing, which brings us into relation with Christ, 
 places us " in Him ; " and then being in Him we receive His 
 teaching. It is Christ's own requirement in reference to His 
 
CHAP, IV. 21. 343 
 
 disciples, "Abide in me." Tlien as "in Him" we are taught. 
 The three verbs learn, liear, teach, are used in a strictly appro- 
 priate manner. The broad comprehensive statement is " ye 
 have learned Christ " (i/xddere). Then under this are em- 
 braced the two subordinate statements, "ye have heard Him" 
 (TjKovcraTe) in the call of converting grace, and "ye have been 
 taught" {i8tBd'x^6i]Te) as converted men, through the instruction 
 of the indwelling Spirit of Christ. 
 
 As is truth in Jesus. — This clause is connected with what 
 precedes and with what follows. It indicates the manner and 
 kind of teaching which the apostle assumes the Ephesians 
 have had, and it characterises the statement immediately 
 afterwards made as to the imperative obligation of believers 
 on the part of those who are in fellowship with Christ. The 
 teacliing which Paul supposes them to have had is according 
 to truth, and that truth is specially defined as truth in Jesus. 
 This truth is not primarily that uprightness of life which is 
 according to divine truth, but rather that truth of the under- 
 standing which rejects what is false, and which, as applied to 
 moral and spiritual things, is necessarily of an essential moral 
 character. The hearing and the teaching of Ephesian believers 
 can be described as true, because He who is truth is the sub- 
 ject upon which they are exercised. All who have heard 
 Christ have heard the truth, and those who are in Him are 
 in the truth, and in that sphere or element they are receiving 
 their instructions. — While in the previous clauses it was 
 Christ that was spoken of, here it is Jesus. By this change 
 from the official to the personal name of our Lord, the apostle 
 means to call the attention of his readers to the historical 
 manifestation of the Christ in Jesus of Nazareth. Those false 
 teachers, who threatened the peace and purity of the Asiatic 
 churches, all preferred to hold by Christ — maintained, indeed, 
 that they only declared the true doctrine of the Christ. 
 Their Christ, however, was not identified with the incarnate 
 Son of God, who bore the name of Jesus. They were either 
 mere ideas, or, if they were represented as having any form 
 or shape, it was a mere phantom, a docetic and not a really 
 hnman manifestation. If that was the Christ they had heard 
 and been taught, it was very possible, nay, it was only too 
 
344 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 certain, from specimens of Gnostic teaching even in the 
 apostolic age, that permission would be given, and even, it 
 might be, an imperative injunction enforced, to continue the 
 practice of pagan vices and to perpetuate their old manner 
 of life. There were most probably even then forerunners of 
 Marcion among Gentile hearers of the apostle's preaching, 
 who had been roused to an exaggerated antagonism by the 
 insolent pretensions of Jewish bigots, so that they were 
 inclined to cast off all allegiance to the God of the Jews, and 
 to repudiate all obligation to observe and obey His laws. 
 The teaching that was in accordance with such a Christ is here 
 set to one side. "What the Ephesians had learned was Christian 
 truth, as set forth in Jesus. In order, then, to answer what 
 is truth, we have to go back to the historical life of the Christ 
 as Jesus of Nazareth. Here we have truth, not in an abstract 
 but in a concrete form, yet not imperfect but absolute. John 
 in his First Epistle (iv, 1-3) distinguishes the false and the 
 true according as they repudiate or acknowledge the Christ 
 incarnate in Jesus. It is in relation to this Jesus that, in the 
 same epistle, John proceeds to say that the Son of God has 
 given us an understanding to know Him that is true, and 
 that we ourselves are in Him that is true, even in His Son 
 Jesus Christ (v. 20). Being in Him that is true, we walk 
 even as He walked, and so we put away and keep away from 
 us all that has no place in Him. 
 
 Ver. 22. That ye put off. — This is the substance of that truth 
 which is in Jesus, Fellowship with Him means separation 
 from sin. The figure used here {airodeadai) is that of 
 divesting one's self of his clothes. It is used in its natural 
 and primary sense in Acts vii. 5S. It is used in precisely 
 the same sense as in our text in Col. iii. 8 ; James i. 2 1 ; 1 Pet. 
 iii. 21 ; Heb. xii. 1. " To put off is not to lay aside for a time 
 and take it up again, for so too many put off sin as appeareth, 
 which at night they lay aside and take up in the morning ; 
 but this doth note all one thing with those phrases, to crucify 
 the flesh (Eom. vi. 6), to mortify our earthly members (Col. 
 iii. 8), to purge out all corruption of flesh and spirit (2 Cor. 
 viii. 1), to offer up ourselves a sacrifice (Rom. xii. 1). So to 
 put off is to forsake and die to our corruptions " (Bayne). 
 
CHAP. IV. 22. 345 
 
 By the use of the word " ye " Paul emphasises the fact that 
 this truth is a matter of personal experience, realised by 
 personal struggle after a life of holiness. 
 
 As concerns the former conversation. — This indicates more 
 precisely what it is that is dealt with in this putting off. It 
 has reference not to something merely hypothetical, or to some 
 merely conceivable state of matters, but to the actual setting 
 aside of that which had formerly characterised their lives. 
 What, in the language of the figure used, had been their daily 
 garb in time past is now to be laid aside. The word here 
 used for conversation or manner of life (avaarpocpi]) occurs in 
 a similar sense in Gal. i. 13 ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; 1 Pet. i. 15, 18, 
 ii. 12, iii. 1,16, etc. The adjective former {irpoTepo^;) does 
 not occur elsewhere in Paul's writings, but we have the 
 adverb irporepov in 2 Cor. i. 1 5 ; Gal. iv. 1 3.^ This former 
 manner of life has been described in the previous verses, and 
 embraces the entire compass of the moral life of man before 
 conversion. It is with this, with all of it, that the apostle 
 insists a complete and lasting breach be made. 
 
 The old man. — This phrase describes the nature or state of 
 being in which that former conversation or manner of life was 
 carried on. It forms a convenient descriptive denomination 
 of the whole range of principles and habits that went to make 
 up the being of the unregenerate man. The name occurs 
 in Ptom. vi. 6 ; Col. iii. 9. This " old man " (6 iraXaio^ 
 avOpairo'^) does not mean man's original nature, which would 
 have been more exactly described as ap-^ato'i or original, but 
 simply that sinful condition which in time preceded the 
 renewed condition of the regenerate. As Theodoret has well 
 said, " It is not the body but the spotted garment of sin that 
 he who is baptized must put off." This condition, as con- 
 cerns the Christian, has become antiquated. It was crucified, 
 it died, when Christ, who died to sin on the cross, was 
 accepted as Picdeemer (Pom. vi. 5, G). So, in Heb. viii. 13, 
 the law is described as antiquated ; and in Ignatius, Epistle to 
 Magnesians, viii. and x., reference is made to antiquated fables 
 
 1 This same phrase is used by Heracleon {Extant Fragments in Texts and 
 Studies, i. 4, p. 83, 1891) in reference to the life of the woman of Samaria before 
 her conversion. 
 
346 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 (iraXatol avco^eXel^;) and to Judaism, whicli is described as 
 vile leaven that has v^axed stale (TraXaKodeadai). Thus the 
 believer is to regard his former manner of life as something 
 that he is entirely done with. Calvin expounds the phrase of 
 original sin. " In two persons, Adam and Christ, the apostle 
 describes to us what may be called two natures. As we are 
 first born of Adam, the depravity of nature which we derive 
 from him is called the old man ; and as we are born again in 
 Christ, the amendment of this sinful nature is called the new 
 man. He M'ho desires to put off the old man must renounce 
 his nature." In the idea of the apostle this is certainly 
 included, but also somethino; more. Writing to believers, Paul 
 seeks to show them that all the doings which marked the 
 unregenerate life in the world must be set aside as elements 
 in, and characteristics of, this old man. 
 
 Which ivaxeth corrupt according to the lusts of deceit. — 
 Here the apostle first of all describes the condition of the old 
 man and the direction in which he is moving, then he shows 
 what the influences are which impel the old man in that 
 direction, and finally he tells what the nature of these 
 influences is. — As to the condition of the old man and the 
 direction toward which he tends, the apostle says, he waxeth 
 corrupt ((f)detp6/ji,evo<i). The old man is represented under the 
 figure of a living organism. It grows, but its growth is in 
 corruption. The elements that are growing in strength from 
 day to day are destructive in character, and as they increase 
 they bring the day of utter destruction nearer and nearer. 
 It is the spread of decomposition in the body that can only 
 end in death. Sin is the leprosy of the soul ; " it eats as 
 doth a canker." — This progress in corruption is carried on by 
 means of the lusts or passionate desires (eVt^u/itat) of the 
 unrenewed nature.^ The direction toward corruption and 
 ultimate destruction is determined " in accordance with " those 
 lusts. Those motive powers of the ungodly life are the 
 passionate impulses which should be under control, but which, 
 in the inverted state of matters, have been allowed to assume 
 the control. The corruption is thus appropriately described 
 as originating and operating within. The corrupting process 
 1 See Trench, Synonyms of the New Te-itament, § Ixxxvii. 
 
CHAP. IV. 23. 347 
 
 goes on under the influence of those lusts in which the flesh 
 finds expression. — Then, again, those lusts which are allowed 
 to assume control of the life are described as " lusts of 
 deceit." Just as the apostle speaks of " vile affections " {ttuOt) 
 aTifiia^, Horn. i. 26), meaning lusts by which those who 
 practise them dishonour themselves ; so here " lusts of deceit " 
 (eTriOu/iiLat t?}? dirdT7}<;) mean lusts which deceive those who 
 give way to them. The lust makes promise of pleasure or 
 benefit of some kind, but when it has been yielded to the 
 result is disappointment. What we do under the impulse of 
 those unruly desires gives neither the life nor the liberty 
 which was promised, but only adds its contribution to the 
 corruption that is preparing the whole being for destruction. 
 Compare the expression in Heb. iii. 13, "the deceitfulness of 
 sin" (rj diruTT] T7]<; dfxaprias:). " These desires are, as it were, 
 the tools and instruments by which deceit betrays and mocks 
 men ; the weapons used by illusions and lies to corrupt and 
 mar the soul. They are strong, and their nature is to pursue 
 after their objects without regard to any consequences beyond 
 their own gratification ; but, strong as they are, they are like 
 the blinded Samson, and will pull the house down on them- 
 selves if they be not watched. Their strength is excited on 
 false pretences. They are stirred to grasp what is after 
 all a lie.i " 
 
 Ver. 23. And tJiat ye he reneivccl. — This is the positive expres- 
 sion of the truth over against the negative of the previous verse. 
 The word dvaveovadai has here a passive significance, as ren- 
 dered in the translation, and is not middle, which in this verb 
 has never a reflexive but only an intransitive sense. The 
 meaning of the antithesis here is similar to that of 2 Cor. 
 V. 4, " not that we would be unclothed but clothed upon ; " 
 and the meaning of the term itself is like that employed in 
 chap. iii. 16, "strengthened," and like that in 2 Cor. iv. 16 ; 
 
 ^ Maclaren, Sermons, 3rd Series, Lond. 1873. Three sermons, entitled re- 
 spectively "The School of Christ," "A Dark Picture and a Bright Hope," and 
 " The New Man," giving the best popular exposition of vers. 20-24 Avhich we 
 have. He shows the protitlessness of the purely wilful life under three heads : 
 1. Because the object only satisfies for a time ; 2. Because the desire grows and 
 the object of it does not ; and 3. Because, after all, these desires are each biit a 
 fragment of the whole nature. 
 
348 EPISTLEcTO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Col. iii. 10, "renewed" {avaicaivovadai). As characterising 
 the new man which is to be put on, in contrast to the old man 
 which is to be put off, the " being renewed " {avaveovfievos:) 
 stands opposed to the " growing corrupt " {(^9up6fievo<i). That 
 we have here a verb compounded from i/eo?, and in Colossians 
 a participle compounded from Katv6<i and attached to the 
 adjective veo<;, calls attention to the different shades of mean- 
 ing in those two words. As explained by Cremer, veo<i " does 
 not in itself displace or supplant the old, but simply excludes 
 oldness and what pertains to age." ^ Hence in Col. iii. 1 
 the " new man " {veo<i avOpo)7ro^) implies simply distinc- 
 tion and separateness from the old, whereas the renewing 
 (avaKacvovfxevo<i) implies the excluding of these qualities and 
 characteristics which belong to the old. Here it is not the 
 excluding of the old, which was previously insisted on in the 
 aiToOeadaL, but the production of the new as something 
 different. 
 
 In the spirit of your mind. — These words describe the 
 sphere in which the renewal is carried on. It is a renewal 
 that affects the innermost being of the man, so that he who is 
 thus renewed becomes in reality a new man. Beck would 
 make the verb middle because he cannot conceive of the 
 TTvevfjua as mere subject of renewal, but as actively producing 
 this change upon the mind. But Eom. xii. 2, to which he 
 refers, supports rather the contrary view, for there we have 
 the passive " be ye transformed by the renewing of your 
 mind," where the renewing is naturally thought of as carried 
 on in, and not by, the mind. All turns upon the meaning of 
 TTvev/xa, whick Beck insists means here the Holy Spirit. He 
 does not succeed in showing that the New Testament any- 
 where speaks of the Holy Spirit in the regenerate as to 
 TTvev/jba v/jb(ov or '^/jlwi^. Certainly he is wrong in saying that 
 in Ilom. viii. 16, "the Spirit Himself beareth witness with 
 07cr spirit," our spirit is God's Spirit in us. In our text the 
 whole phrase " the spirit of your mind " indicates the subject 
 of renewal. It is not said, " Get a new Spirit, i.e. the Holy 
 Spirit, into your mind," but " Get the spirit of your mind 
 
 ' Crenier, Bihiko- Theological Lexicon of Xem Te.-itumenl Greek, p. 428,1878 
 (couip. p. 323). 
 
CHAP. IV. 23. 349 
 
 renewed." The phrase does not in itself, as Beck would have 
 it, form a direct contrast to the phrase " the vanity of your 
 mind" (ver. 17). The contrast is brought out only when the 
 spirit of the mind has been renewed, and this contrast is 
 brought about by tlie renewing and not simply by the presence 
 of the "TTvevfxa. The irvevfxa was there before unrenewed, 
 and then, notwithstanding the presence of the irvevixa, the 
 vov<i was still in vanity. The 'jrvevfia of the old man was the 
 irvevjxa rov Koa/jiov (1 Cor. ii. 12 ; comp. Rom. xi. 8 ; Isa. 
 xix. 14 ; Hos. iv. 12, v. 4), and as such needs renewal.^ The 
 ablest and most satisfactory exposition of our text is to be 
 found in Delitzsch, Biblical Psychologij, chap. iv. § 5, pp. 217- 
 221, 1869. The spirit of the mind is the innermost sanctuary 
 of the heart. " There is not only a vov<i, which according to 
 its nature belongs to the irvevfia, and in the natural man is 
 yoO? T/}? aapKO<; (Col. ii. 18), instead of vov'i rod Trvev/xaro^, 
 but, moreover, a irvev^ia, which according to its nature belongs 
 to the vov'i, and is therefore inversely called irvev/xa rov 
 vo6<;. What kind of irvevfia this is, is to be gathered from 
 1 Cor. xiv." What, then, tlie renewal does is to make the 
 vov'i spiritual again by relieving it from the dominion of the 
 flesh, and giving to the TTveu/na the place of control as governor 
 of mind and heart. The mind as renewed receives all its 
 impulses from the Trvev/uLa, so that it is rightly called the spirit 
 of the mind as that which animates and directs its thoughts 
 and counsels. " The seat of grace and its chief dominion is 
 the spirit of the mind, termed therefore the inner man, the 
 hidden man, the law of the mind, which, giving forth laws and 
 impressions to the outward, rules and commands it." ^ — All 
 that can be said in favour of the view that the " spirit " in our 
 text means " the Holy Spirit," is said by EUicott ; but neither 
 he nor Meyer, who maintains the same view, are at all con- 
 
 ^ See Klopper, Der Brief an die Epheser, p. 145, 1891. Pfleiderer (Pav/in- 
 ism, ii. 188, 1877) renders the phrase "with respect to the spirit of the 
 mind," though he pronounces it an un-Pauline term of thought. He cannot, 
 however, absolutely declare the doctrine of the renewal of tlie -rvtu/ua of man by 
 the TviZf/.a of God to be un-Pauline, but remarks simply that tlie exjjression does 
 not occur in the older epistles. Comp. Weiss, Biblical Theolor/y of New 
 Testament, ii. 77. 
 
 2 Goodwin, "Work of the Holy Ghost," Works, vi. 174. 
 
350 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 vincing. The dative here is not, as they hokl, the dative of 
 instrument, indicating the spirit by whom, but, as Winer 
 {Grammar, § xxxi. ^a) rightly maintains, the dative denoting 
 that in which, or in reference to which, an action or a state 
 exists. And further, the apostle's use of the verb avaveovaOau 
 in preference to avaKaivovaOai, and his employing in doing so a 
 word probably here introduced for the first time, shows that he 
 wished to make the thought of the identity of the personality 
 prominent. There is the irvev^a of the vov<i in the new man 
 as well as in the old. What constitutes the regenerate a new 
 man is not the presence of the irvev^ia, as would have been 
 the case if TrvevfMa meant God's Holy Spirit, but its renewal, 
 which can be conceived only of the human irvev/jba. 
 
 Ver. 24. And ^nU on the neio man. — The word evhvaaaOai, 
 as well as airoOeodai and avaveovaOai, is dependent upon the 
 ehihaxOv^e of ver. 21. This is the positive teaching which 
 those receive who are in Christ and have learned Christ, as 
 conceived of and presented by the apostle in his preaching. 
 " The new man " (6 KaLv6<; avOpooiro^) is contrasted with " the 
 old man " (o TraXaco'i av6pcoTro<^), and so means the regenerate 
 man, in whom the new nature is produced after the pattern 
 of Christ. The same idea is presented in " the new creation " 
 {Kaivj] KTiai^) of 2 Cor. v. 17; Gal. vi. 15. In Eom. xiii. 14; 
 Gal. iii. 27, instead of the new man it is Christ Himself that 
 is said to be put on. This should show the close relationship 
 that subsists between Christ and the regenerate. This new 
 nature consists in their real union with Him. So too 
 Ic^natius, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, xx., promises in a 
 second tract to speak further with reference to the new man, 
 Jesus Christ (el^ rov Kaivov avOpcorrov 'Irjaouv Xpiarov). The 
 next clause shows that it is neither Christ nor the individual 
 man, but the man who has appropriated Christ. 
 
 Which after God has been created. — This clause describes 
 how the new man has come into being. It has not been gradu- 
 ally evolved out of a previous condition, but is created, called 
 into being, to take the place of that which had become old and 
 vanished away. " The new man is, as it were, a holy garb or 
 personality, not created in the case of each individual believer, 
 but created once for all (as Bengel says, initio rei Christians), 
 
CHAP. IV. 24. 351 
 
 and then individually assumed " (Ellicott). This follows from 
 the tense of the verb, which is aorist, KxtaOevja, not is 
 created, but has been created. Our passage, together with 
 the parallel passage in Col. iii. 10, was regarded by the older 
 Protestant divines as atfording the most important evidence in 
 support of their doctrine of the divine image in man. Taken 
 together, the passages seemed to show that God's image was 
 first wrought in man when he had been renewed in redemp- 
 tion; and so they agreed that the image of God had been 
 lost in the fall. But the ncvj man of our text is evidently 
 not man before the fall, but man after his second creation in 
 Christ. The phrase " after God " in our text is interpreted 
 by the phrase " after the image of Him that created him," of 
 Col. iii. 10. Our kutcl 0e6v may be compared to the Kara 
 ^laaaK of Gal. iv. 28, "children of the promise lil-e Isaac," 
 and here, created like God, after His likeness. Hence we 
 have a close parallel to the original creation narrative in 
 Gen, i. 26. But Mliller (Christian Doctrine of Sin, iv. 3, ii. 
 352, 1868) is right in saying that we have no ground for 
 concluding that the new creation in Christ, and the original 
 creation in Adam, are the same, but rather that from the 
 nature of tlie new relationship they cannot be identical. See, 
 in opposition to this, Ellicott's note and his quotation from 
 Irenffius, Har. iii. 30, as indicating the doctrinal view wliich 
 has most widely prevailed in the Church, that precisely what 
 was lost in Adam was restored in Christ. 
 
 In riijlitcousness and holiness of truth. — These words show 
 in what respects the new man was made lil^e God. In 
 keeping with the general purpose of the apostle in this part 
 of his epistle, prominence is given to ethical characteristics. 
 And, indeed, it is just in regard to moral qualities that 
 likeness between God and man is possible. Even when 
 knowledge is added to the righteousness and holiness of our 
 text, as it is in Genesis, we feel at once that it is knowledge 
 gained and exercised in the moral sphere. In the parallel 
 passage. Col. iii. 10, only knowledge is maintained; and in 
 Wisd. ii. 23 it is said, " God created man to be immortal, 
 and made him to be an image of His own essential being." 
 Olshausen correctly enough characterises this last utterance 
 
352 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 as presenting the physical aspect of the divine image in man, 
 while that of Colossians presents the intellectual, and that of 
 Ephesians the ethical. But the intellectual of Colossians 
 embraces the ethical of Ephesians. Eighteousness is distin- 
 guished from holiness as relatively more external. Holiness 
 is the root out of which rectitude, as the strict conformity of 
 life to the requirements of the law, must spring. There can 
 he no righteousness in the life where there is not holiness in 
 the heart. " The SLKatoavvrj denotes the right relation 
 inwardly between the powers of the soul, outwardly to men 
 and circumstances. On the other hand, 6at6Ti]<; denotes the 
 integrity of the spiritual life, and the piety toward God 
 which it supposes " (Olshausen). This walk becoming the 
 gospel, consisting in righteousness and holiness, is conducted 
 in the region of truth. The expression is here carefully 
 constructed, so as to present a contrast to ver. 22 of such a 
 direct kind as readily to attract attention. As the instruments 
 of death in the old man are lusts of deceit, so the instruments 
 of life in the new man are righteousness and holiness of 
 truth. There is also here a reference back to ver. 21, for 
 the truth is that which received a concrete form as embodied 
 in Jesus, whose righteousness and holiness the new man 
 put on, 
 
 (2) Bearing toward Others. 
 
 Chap. iv. 25-v. 2. — The apostle now proceeds, from describ- 
 ing^ the moral and spiritual characteristics of the subject of 
 re<7eneration, to show how the new man acts in reference to 
 those around him. As a member of society, the Christian must 
 show that his faith in Christ has made him a new creature. 
 He must put off and put on. Everything calculated to dis- 
 integrate society — falsehood, angry passions, dishonesty — 
 must be put away. That such things had to be mentioned, 
 reflects severely upon the state of that society to which those 
 Christians had before belonged. Selfishness and self-seeking 
 had everywhere prevailed. The Christian, having put on the 
 new man, must model his life with reference to others after the 
 ima^fe of Him who created him. In Christ we see how God 
 loved us, and as He loved us so must we love our fellows, 
 
CHAP. IV. 25. 353 
 
 putting away selfishness, which for personal ends would 
 deceive, hurt, defraud others. The rule is not merely, "Do to 
 others as you would have others do to you," but " Do to others 
 what Christ has done for you." 
 
 Ver. 25. Wherefore having put off falsehood. — The apostle thus 
 connects his special with his general ethics. He has described 
 generally the ethical condition of the new man, and now, on 
 the basis of that, he proceeds to enunciate special precepts. 
 The essential characteristic of the constitution of the new 
 man was truth. The old man was under the control of lusts 
 of deceit. This old man is put off {aTToOkaOai), and now, 
 resuming with the same verb, he assumes that falsehood has 
 been put off, as something for which there is no place in the 
 new nature. Only he who, as the slave of sin, is under the 
 dominion of selfishness, can live in falsehood. He who puts 
 off the old man puts off lying alike in word or in deed. 
 
 Speak ye truth each with his neighbour. — This is an exact 
 quotation of Zech. viii. 16, and differs from the LXX. only 
 by the substitution of fierd for 7rp6<i. Jerome rightly gave 
 the evident sense to the word neighbour as meaning " fellow- 
 man ; " Meyer and most commentators, on account of the 
 following clause, restrict it to " fellow-Christian." If we look 
 to the biblical use of the word, we shall find that according 
 to Jewish exclusiveness it meant a fellow - Hebrew, but 
 according to the teaching and example of Christ a fellow- 
 man, of whatever race or religion he might be. It would, 
 indeed, be very strange if, after requiring the absolute and 
 unreserved abandonment of falsehood, any colourable excuse 
 should be given for restricting the performance of that precept 
 within a limited range. 
 
 Because we are members one of another. — The restricted 
 application of the precept of our text has resulted from the 
 interpretation given to this clause. It was very natural for 
 Harless, Meyer, and Ellicott to connect the term " members " 
 used here with the idea of the body of Christ employed in 
 the earlier part of the epistle. But surely it is better to 
 argue that the preceding context, with its reference to the 
 neighbour as conceived of in the light of the gospel, widens 
 the reference of the present clause to a similar universalism, 
 
 z 
 
354 EPISTLE TO THE EPHE3IANS. 
 
 rather than to argue that this clause narrows, contrary to all 
 New Testament usage, the application of the word neighbour 
 in the preceding clause. There is enough said in this same 
 epistle of the supremacy of Christ, as Head over all creation, 
 to warrant us in interpreting the members (fieXv) of our text, 
 after Chrysostom, as members of the body generally, and so 
 used figuratively, not of the Church but of the human race. 
 At first sight it would seem as if our text supported the idea 
 of Fichte, that falsehood is denounced because of the outrage 
 which it commits against the members of the community, 
 whom it uses as means for selfish ends ; and this aspect of 
 the blameworthiness of falsehood certainly receives promin- 
 ence here, rather than Kant's derivation of it as an offence 
 against man's own moral dignity. But we have only to carry 
 along with us the " wherefore " of the first clause of the verse, 
 connecting the whole precept with the religious ethical prin- 
 ciples of the preceding sections, in order to see that the 
 ultimate ground is neither the individual man himself, nor 
 the other members of his race, but God as absolute truth. In 
 any case, it would be impossible for the true Christian to lie to 
 those without, any more than to those within, seeing that he 
 himself is in Christ, who is the truth. 
 
 As to the application of the precept against lying in 
 difhcult circumstances, where it would seem that serious evils 
 would result from the telling of the truth, see a remarkably 
 interesting and instructive discussion on " the lie of exigency " in 
 Martensen, Christian Ethics, ii. 206-226, 1888 ; the calm and 
 judicious statement of Harless, Christian Ethics, pp. 388-390, 
 1868, in which he reconsiders his own earlier opinions with 
 reference to " the necessary lie ; " and also a subtle and 
 penetrating discussion of the same question in Eothe, Theo- 
 logische Ethik, vol. iv. § 1065, pp. 346-372, 1870. In the 
 closing note to section referred to, Eothe says that it cannot 
 be doubted that lioly scripture of the Cld and New Testa- 
 ments unconditionally condemns lying. After giving a list of 
 instances in which saints are said to have lied, which were 
 mostly cases of the kind just mentioned, he says that the 
 sacred writers show evidently considerable sympathy with the 
 offenders, though not approving of the act. It is surprising 
 
CHAP. IV, 20. 355 
 
 to find a Puritan like Bayne making exceptions, " lest we 
 should condemn of lying things that have no untruth." He 
 makes four such exceptions: (1) Allegories, fables, etc.; 
 
 (2) concealments, e.g. Abraham saying Sarah was his sister; 
 
 (3) refusing or promising, and afterwards changing one's 
 mind, e.g. angels in Sodom to Lot ; (4) fictions or ironies, 
 e.g. seeing a child with knife, I draw back of it over his head, 
 and say I will cut his head oif. It is quite evident that no 
 defence should be made of cases 2 and 4. 
 
 Ver. 26. Be ye angry and sin not. — These words are an exact 
 reproduction of the LXX. rendering of Ps. iv. 4. They are 
 not given, however, as a quotation, and are simply used as a 
 familiar form of expression to convey the idea intended by 
 the apostle. As to the Hebrew original, Delitzsch thinks 
 that this Greek rendering is quite satisfactory; but Perowne, 
 Phillips, and Cheyne rightly decide in favour of the reading 
 of our own version, " stand in awe or fear." The original 
 word undoubtedly means to be agitated in mind, which may 
 be from fear or from anger, and the context requires the 
 emotion of fear rather than of anger. But Paul uses the 
 familiar Greek phrase as expressing his present thought. He 
 desires to see among the Ephesian believers a wholesome 
 anger against sin. What seemed threatening was a tendency 
 to an easy, indulgent estimate of moral evil and prevalent 
 vices. He wishes to see them stirred up to enthusiastic and 
 even violent opposition to what is bad. He would rather 
 have fanatical resistance than supine indifference and com- 
 placent acquiescence. He warns them against heathenish 
 want of feeling, spiritual insensibility {airaX^T^o-La, ver. 19), 
 which the conscience-seared exhibits in presence of sin. He 
 will encourage neither stoical apathy nor epicurean indiffer- 
 ence.^ Instead, therefore, of rendering the passage as some 
 are inclined to do, " If you cannot rid yourself of anger alto- 
 gether, suppress it as much as possible, so that it be not 
 reckoned sin," we find in it rather an express command to 
 ^ See a particularly good note, by much the fullest in his commentary, in 
 Wordsworth, in which he discusses at length the views of Butler, as set forth in 
 his Sermon viii. on "Resentment," and in his "Sermons on Human Nature." 
 Compare also Paul's statement, 2 Cor. vii. 11, and the ascription of anger to 
 Christ in Mark iii. 5. 
 
356 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 manifest sucli anger, as otherwise they would be chargeable 
 with sin. Be angry against sin, if you would not be held 
 partakers in it. Not only may you be angry and yet avoid 
 sin, but you must be angry if you would not be held the 
 friend and patron of sin. 
 
 Let not the sun go dovm upon your irritation. — What is 
 condemned here is not anger (opy-^), but exasperation or 
 exacerbation {nrapop'yicrfio'i, a word not used elsewhere in the 
 New Testament), which consists in anger cherished and 
 nursed until it is in danger of becoming pure vindictiveness. 
 The verb Trapopji^etv is used in precisely the same sense in 
 chap. vi. 4. Even anger against sin, or rather against some 
 particular sinful act, if retained long and brooded over, is apt 
 to degenerate into bitterness. The word "irritation," sug- 
 gested by Ellicott, perhaps indicates most satisfactorily the 
 point of transition where honest anger is just about to pass 
 over into bitter hate. To prevent any such transition from 
 taking place, the apostle proposes a time limit for tlie reten- 
 tion and expression of his anger. Probably the apostle was 
 acquainted with some saying of the Pythagoreans, which 
 suggested the peculiar form of expression. His meaning 
 plainly is : In no case, however justifiable your anger, let it 
 be of long duration. 
 
 Ver. 27. Neither give place to the devil. — By the name given 
 to our great enemy here (Sta^oXo^), he is represented as the 
 accuser, whose business it is to rouse strife, awaken jealousies, 
 and embitter feuds between man and man. Wherever a 
 spirit exists in which there is present any tendency in that 
 direction, he obtains a habitation, a point from which he 
 can carry on his malicious work. He cannot work in the 
 world except through the agency of men. If he comes 
 to us and finds nothing in us, as he did when he went to 
 Christ, then we shall be doing something to thwart his evil 
 activity. So the apostle exhorts, Do not give scope to the 
 devil, by providing him an angry spirit in which and through 
 which he may carry on his work. " When we walk in the 
 spirit of the world, in vanity and the lusts of the flesh, when 
 we are self-important, when we are heated with covetous 
 desires, when we are irritable and impatient, we give place 
 
 i 
 
CHAP. IV. 28. 357 
 
 to the devil, and he is seated in the house of the soul " 
 (Pulsford). 
 
 " Be at enmity," says Chrysostoui, " but be so with the 
 devil, and not with a member of thine own. For this pur- 
 pose it is that God has armed us with anger, not that we 
 should thrust the sword against our own bodies, but that we 
 should plunge the whole blade into the devil's breast." 
 
 Ver. 28. Let the stealer steal no more. — It is indeed startling 
 to find that among those reckoned within the Christian Church 
 were some who not only had been but still were thieves. 
 Yet Paul had to teach the Corinthians (1 Cor. vi. 10) that 
 thieves could not inherit the kingdom of God. The stealer 
 (6 KkeiTTciiv) of our text is probably intended to characterise 
 one in whom the habit had been formed, and in whom the 
 tendency existed, whether he had given way to it after his 
 calling to Christianity or not. In any case his duty is plain, 
 he must cease stealing. 
 
 But rather let him labour, ivorMng ivith his hands that 
 vjhich is good. — While we are certainly to understand by 
 stealing in this passage just ordinary theft, we see from this 
 injunction that the apostle would embrace in his exhortations 
 others than common thieves. The thief does not labour, but 
 takes without labouring what God lias given as the reward of 
 labour. " The force of the divine prohibition. Thou shalt not 
 steal," says Mtzsch {System of ChrisiiaM Doctrine, § 177), 
 "must, according to Eph. iv. 28 ; 1 Cor. vi. 8 ; 2 Thess. iii. 
 6-12, go so far as to make the Christian purify himself from 
 all habits and acts of the parasite, beggar, or sluggard, as well 
 as from the sins of carelessness, breach of trust, and imposition. 
 The w^ord Koiriav means to fatigue one's self with hard work ; 
 ipyd^eadai means to work continuously, and especially in some 
 particular appointed office. These two verbs occur together 
 in 1 Cor. iv. 12, while we have the latter phrase in its present 
 sense in 1 Thess. iv. 11. This is what the apostle proposes, 
 as at once prevention and cure with reference to the thievish 
 spirit. Martensen (Christian Ethics, iii. 134) calls attention 
 to the honour and prominence given to labour during the 
 middle ages, where trade guilds were the centres and dis- 
 pensaries of all benevolence, as contrasting with the scorn 
 
358 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 shown by the ancient pagan world to all toilsome work and 
 manual labour, which was wholly relegated to slaves, who were 
 denied the rank and the rights of men. — That which is good, 
 the ajadov, is here evidently the honest and honourable, as 
 contrasted with the shameful gains of dishonesty. 
 
 That he may have to give to him that hath 7iecd. — One must 
 labour first of all to provide an honest maintenance for 
 himself and his household (1 Thess. iv. 11, 12 ; 2 Thess. iii. 
 12), but the characteristic end proposed to the labourer by 
 Christianity is that he may help others. The unselfishness 
 of the Christian is shown, not in neglecting personal and 
 family obligations, but in the endeavour, at the expenditure 
 of toil, to provide a surplus, after meeting these, which may 
 be used in benefiting a wider circle. The latter ground for 
 labour is alone emphasised here, as that which might be least 
 readily taken into consideration. The circle within which 
 such kindness is to be shown is not restricted here, but 
 extends to the whole range of neighbourhood. Yet the order 
 in which such benevolence should be dispensed is indicated in 
 Gal. vi. 10 as beginning with those of the household of faith. 
 How this principle of Christian love manifested itself in early 
 times in deeds of active charity, may be seen well stated in 
 such books as Uhlhorn's Christian Charity in the Ancient 
 Church, 1883, and Brace, Gesta Christi, 1883. 
 
 Ver. 29. Every sort of corrupt word let it not go forth out of 
 your mouth. — The peculiar manner in which this verse begins 
 seems to indicate, as Klopper suggests, that the apostle when 
 he started to write it had not decided whether to make it an 
 affirmative or a negative sentence. In regard to meaning, the 
 negative particle attached to the verb makes the opening 
 " every " equivalent to " no." As it stands, the prohibition is 
 made all the more emphatic by opening with Tra? X0709 
 a-a7rp6<i, and so applying to every sort of foul or polluting 
 expression, whether the foulness lay in the literal phrase or 
 in its suggestions and associations. The word aairpof, which 
 means literally 7vtten, putrid, does not occur elsewhere in 
 Paul's writings, but is used by the evangelists of trees, fruits, 
 fishes, which are useless (Matt, vii. 17; Luke vi. 43; Matt. xiii. 
 48). Chrysostom says, " Everything that does not fulfil its 
 
CHAP. IV. 20. 359 
 
 own proper use is called aa7rpo<; ; and so in his homily on 
 this verse he renders it " unseasonable conversation," and 
 makes it include "idle back-biting, filthy communication, 
 jesting, and foolish talking." So, too, the Latin translator of 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia renders the word by oicqiiam, which 
 readily passes from the negative worthless to the positive vile. 
 The X070? aaiTp6<;, then, is a word tliat had better be left 
 nnsaid, whether it be merely silly or actually filthy. The 
 best commentary on it, as indicating the wide range to which 
 it applies, is afforded by Col. iv. 6. The effect of the X0709 
 cra7rpo9 on the community would be disintegrating, tending 
 to sap its very foundations ; at best it would be worthless, 
 good for nothing, like salt that had lost its savour, and, in its 
 worse form, actually hastening on moral decomposition and 
 decay. Speech not seasoned with the salt of grace corrupts, 
 because it does not preserve. 
 
 But if there he any good word [let it go forth] for edifying 
 where there is 7iced. — If one should have the capacity and 
 opportunity for speaking a good word, he should use it. The 
 good word is contrasted with the word that is good for 
 nothing. Good conversation is that which is seasoned with 
 grace. If one has such a word to communicate, let him utter 
 it in case there be a call for it. To justify speech, it is not 
 enough that it is of a generally edifying character, but it must 
 be fitted to meet some special need in the community 
 addressed. This seems to be the meaning of a somewhat 
 obscure and difficult expression. The rendering given here 
 is practically that of the Eevised Version, " for edifying as the 
 need may be," which again is based upon Tyndal's " to 
 edifye withall when nede ye." The Authorised Version, " that 
 which is good for the use of edifying," is a translation of 
 TT/oo? j(_peiav rrj'; otKoSofjbTJf;, and not of the Trpo? oIkoSo/jLtju 
 tt}? %peta9 of our text.^ The difficulty of the phrase led to 
 the substitution in some old texts and versions of iriarew^ for 
 Xpeia<;. The word %/>eia is undoubtedly suggested by the 
 closing phrase of the preceding verse. It is for him who is 
 in need that the Christian should care by act and word, 
 
 ^ See an interesting note on this passage in Dr. Field's Otiuni Norvicense, 
 pt. iii. 117, 1881. 
 
360 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 that he may provide for his physical and moral well- 
 being. 
 
 So that it maij impart grace to the hearers. — The meaning 
 of %api9 here is "grace," as in Col. iv. 6, and the clause describes 
 the end served by the sending forth of a good word, on an 
 occasion and in circumstances where it is needed. That 
 word becomes the channel of divine grace to those who hear 
 it. Olshausen, with Harless, Meyer, Ellicott (the last-named 
 would make it expressly spiritual benefit or blessing) thinks 
 X^-P'-'^ should be rendered " benefit," because SiSoi/at does not 
 suit the idea of " grace." But chap. vi. 1 9 offers a convenient 
 example of a similar use of this verb. On the other hand, 
 Klopper is wrong in defending the interpretation " grace," on 
 the ground that, from the context, it is evident that there can 
 be no reference here to persons outside of the Church. 
 The hearer is the neighbour in need, whom a good word 
 may benefit, and the benefit thought of is nothing else 
 than the grace of God that bringeth salvation. Equally 
 objectionable is Klopper's understanding of the " grace " of 
 our text, in accordance with CoL iv. 6, as suavitas, grace- 
 fulness imparted to the hearer — sweet, gracious affections 
 awakened in his soul. What the apostle here contemplates 
 is the utterance of gracious words in season, so that he who 
 sends them forth may not only save himself but also him that 
 heareth (1 Tim. iv. 16). It can be a word of salvation only 
 as conveying God's grace. 
 
 Ver. 30. And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God. — This hort- 
 ative entreaty is closely connected with the preceding. Chry- 
 sostom aptly quotes 1 Thess. iv. 8, "He that despiseth, despiseth 
 not man but God." The sins against the Holy Ghost are not 
 all of the deliberate and final sort described as blasphemy (Luke 
 xii. 10), for which there is no forgiveness. The use of a X0709 
 aairpo^ by one who has the Spirit dwelling in him is here 
 said to grieve (kuiretv) that Holy Spirit. The same ider. is 
 expressed in Isa. Ixiii. 10, where the ingratitude and dis- 
 obedience of Israel, by grieving God's Spirit, turned Him into 
 an enemy, until they remembered the ancient days, and turned 
 back in heart to God. Similarly, in Ps. Ixxviii. 40, cvl 33, 
 the people are said to have defied God's Spirit. In the 
 
CHAP. IV. 30. 361 
 
 Shepherd of Hermas, II. x. 3, grief, as arising from doubt and 
 anger, is said to grieve the Spirit : " Wherefore reniove grief 
 from thee, and offend not the Holy Spirit, who dwells in thee, 
 lest He entreat God to depart from thee." He is offended by 
 any unfit, unbecoming word, any X0709 o-aTrpo?, because it 
 jars upon His holiness. The very compass of the idea aairpo'i, 
 varying from idle and worthless to filthy and vile, gives us 
 some conception of the comprehensiveness of the holiness 
 attributed to God's Spirit, which resents, because opposed to, 
 all frivolity and lack of earnestness, as well as to that which 
 is positively and actively base. 
 
 In vjJiom ye were scaled. — In relation to the preceding 
 clause, this shows plainly that the residence of the Holy 
 Spirit is in those who are warned against speaking corrupt 
 words. Klopper thinks that He is regarded as residing in 
 the hearers, and is grieved by the utterance of any such word, 
 as the Spirit dwelling in them. This undoubtedly sets forth 
 an important scriptural truth, somewhat similar to the 
 warning against giving occasion of stumbling to a weak 
 Christian in whom the Spirit is present (Luke xvii. 1, 2). 
 But it is clearly not the meaning of our apostle. It is the 
 uttering with the mouth, and not the hearing with the ear, 
 of which he is here thinking. Whatever the result of the 
 hearing be, whether in the direction of strengthening the old 
 man's love of sin, or of weakening it by awakening disgust and 
 revulsion with reference to it, in any case he who utters it 
 grieves the Spirit that dwells in him. And the grieving of 
 Him is for us a very serious matter ; for it is in Him that we 
 have the seal of confirmation and establishment in grace. 
 Whenever we offend against His holiness, we thereby turn 
 Him into an enemy, so that He fights against us (Isa. Ixiii. 
 10). The Christian then loses his peace and joy which come 
 from his assurance of the divine favour. The Spirit who is 
 grieved, no longer witnesses with his spirit (Eom. viii. 16). 
 If we would have His sealing, we must not grieve Him in 
 whom we were sealed. This sealing is spoken of as some- 
 thing experienced in the past, which, as a living experience, 
 should continue with us. 
 
 Unto the day of redemption. — This describes the limit of 
 
362 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 that sealing, and the end which it secures unto those who have 
 it. The day of redemption is the great day, the day of the 
 general resurrection, when those who have risen into a new 
 life by the regeneration of grace will be raised into the new 
 life of heaven. See Wordsworth's note. Those who are 
 sealed in the S]3irit have a divine guarantee that all that is 
 contained in the idea of redemption will be realised by them 
 and in them. We have redemption (i. 7) as an ideal or 
 potential state, but we are sealed in the Holy Spirit for its 
 perfect realisation as an actual state. Upon this Spirit the 
 believer is dependent for all spiritual growth and development, 
 and this dependence will continue until the work of grace 
 upon him and in him is complete. 
 
 The latter half of the verse is clearly intended to make 
 the restraint against sinning on the part of the child of God 
 stronger, by showing how God must afflict Himself to afflict 
 His child. The force of the appeal is, " Put not the Lord 
 into these straits, if you have any love in you " (Goodwin, 
 iii. 416). " For when a believer takes notice that the Spirit 
 hath done all this for him, wrought all the grace he hath, and 
 brought in all his comfort, he will have a respect to Him, and 
 have a distinct tenderness to Him in that relation, as well as 
 to Christ and to the Father" (Goodwin, viii. 470). "A sin 
 is properly against the Spirit, when against that which is His 
 proper work, which is to excite to good, to restrain from 
 evil ; and then we grieve Him when we sin against such a 
 working of His, as wherein, like a father and as a friend. He 
 gives counsel and direction to the contrary " (Goodwin, vii. 
 321). "Let this seal abide upon thy mouth, and never 
 destroy tlie impression. Thou hast a mouth that hath the 
 Spirit. Think what thou art saying, the moment thou 
 givest birth to a word, — what words beseem a mouth like 
 thine " (Chrysostom). 
 
 Ver. 31. Let all hitterness he taken away from you. — Every 
 sort of bitterness {iraaa rrriKpla), in every expression of feeling 
 and act as well as word. This word indicates that fretful, 
 irritable condition that arises from the studious cherishing of 
 angry passions, and from the continued brooding over real or 
 imagined wrongs. It manifests itself in venomous speeches, 
 
ciiAr. IV. 31. 363 
 
 and in a persistent sourness and unamiability of disposition. 
 It can only be seen where the counsel of ver. 26 is dis- 
 regarded, and occasions of annoyance allowed to rankle in 
 the heart from day to day. Aristotle describes the TVLKpoi as 
 ]iard to melt, and as cherishing anger long, because they keep 
 fast hold upon their wrath (^u/to?). The condition of mind 
 and heart described is thus brought about by retaining what 
 God had commanded to put away, and is therefore a sinful 
 state resulting from sinful acts. 
 
 Aiid turath and anger. — These are the immediate fruits of 
 the bitterness spoken of. Wrath {6vijl6<;) is the violent ex- 
 citement and agitation of mind which the retention of angry 
 feelings occasions. The bitterness may be concealed from 
 others, but it causes an inward upheaval that shows itself in 
 a violent explosion. This 6vfio<i is iriKpia, a bursting all re- 
 straints, boiling over, blazing up in rage. Anger, again {opyy]), 
 is this same emotion allowed to settle down into a more 
 regular disposition and habit of mind. Eadie is quite wrong 
 in describing it as the violent outburst of 6v/j,6<i. Jerome 
 defines opyj] correctly : Ira, qucc furore extindo dcsidcrat 
 ultionem, ct cum qucm noaiisse ptitat vult Icedcrc. Hence, in 
 Eevelation, 6vix6<i is used of God in order to represent the 
 fierceness of His anger (6 Ou/xo'i t>}? op7?}? avrov, chap. xvi. 
 ID): while the calm, settled habit of soul described by 6py^, 
 occasioned by irreconcilable hatred toward sin, is everywhere 
 in Scripture ascribed to God. In our text it is an aggravated 
 display of bitterness, because not a sudden and transitory 
 ebullition of rage, but a permanent disposition of anger. In 
 a eulogy of Elias, the author of Ecclus. xlviii. 10 says that 
 the prophet was ordained " to pacify God's anger " (opyt]) 
 before it burst forth in fury (KondaaL opyrjv irpo 6v/xov), 
 where it is correctly perceived that God's ways are not as 
 man's ways. Not as with man at the beginning, but only in 
 the end, does God express His anger in fury, when the 
 patience of His holiness has been exhausted by persistent 
 abuse, so that He must proceed to execute doom. The right 
 order of derivation of these faults has been indicated as in 
 our text in the Shepherd of Hermas, II. v. 2 : " Of bitterness 
 is begotten wrath, and of wrath anger." 
 
364 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 And clamour and evil-speaking. — Kpavyr] is anonomatopoetic 
 word meaning croahing, uttering harsh and shrill cries, giving 
 vent to feelings in an unrestrained manner, as of anguish on 
 the part of our Saviour (Heb. v. 7), joyful surprise (Luke i. 
 42 ; Matt. xxv. 6), grief (Kev. xxi. 4) ; but here giving way 
 to rage in violent and boisterous speech. The first of this 
 second pair is thus closely connected with the first of the 
 previous pair, " Clamour," says Chrysostoni, " carries anger 
 as a horse his rider ; tie the horse's feet, and you will throw 
 the rider. . . . Never cry aloud at all, and then wilt thou 
 never be angry at all." Along with the idea of loudness 
 there is also probably that of inarticulateness, as implied in 
 the unrestrained expression of ungovernable rage. B\aa- 
 (}>T]/LLia, related to Kpavyq as 0/377 is to 6vix6<;, is that style of 
 utterance which the sour and bitter of heart use after the 
 fury that had expressed itself in clamour has assumed a 
 calmer but more fixed and permanent form. It is evil- 
 speaking systematically, and with calculation of effects, 
 addressed to the compassing of another's hurt. It is used 
 here — as also in Eom. iii. 8, xiv. 16 ; 1 Cor. iv. 13, x. 30 ; Col. 
 iii. 8; Titus iii. 2 — of slandering our fellow-men; while in Matt. 
 xii. 31; Mark ii. 7; Eev. xiii. 6, etc., it means blasphemy in the 
 ordinary sense, as reproachful speech or bearing toward God. 
 
 With all malice. — By iraaa KaKca the apostle seems to 
 understand all sorts of wickedness directed to the injury of 
 our neighbour. It is this disposition that finds gratification 
 and shows eagerness in scheming mischief against others. 
 " By this term," says Calvin, " the apostle expresses that 
 depravity of mind which is opposed to humanity and justice, 
 and which is usually called malignity." Compare Lightfoot 
 in Col. iii. 8, and Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 
 § xi., pp. 37-39, 1886. Malice will result as the hateful 
 state of soul in the man who does not remove from his heart 
 that bitterness which produces wrath, anger, clamour, and 
 evil-speaking ; but also this malignity of spirit will reflect upon 
 and greatly intensify any further manifestation of bitterness. 
 
 Ver. 3 2. But become ye kind to one another, tender-hearted. — 
 The apostle proceeds to describe the state of mind and feeling 
 which he desires to see formed in the professed believers in 
 
CHAP. IV. 32. 365 
 
 Christ. The becoming of our text {'yiveaOe) is related to 
 the removing away of the previous verse {dpd/jTco), as the 
 putting on of the new man to the putting off of the okl. 
 Having laid aside the spirit of bitterness and its fruits, we 
 are to receive the Spirit of love, that it may produce its fruits 
 in our lives. Thus men who had been hateful and hating 
 one another, hccomc loving and helpful, doing good unto all 
 men. They become " kind to one another " (et? aXXtjXov; 
 ')(p7}a-T0L) instead of manifesting bitterness. The epithet is 
 used of Christ's yoke, in which there is no harshness, and 
 because this so characterised the ministry of Christ, ^^pT/o-ro? 
 and 'x^picTTO'; were often interchanged (Tertullian, Ajwlog. iii.) 
 They become " tender-hearted " (eva-TrXayvot,), literally, havintj 
 strong howcls, instead of giving way to " wrath and anger." 
 This word occurs again in the New Testament only in 1 Pet. 
 iii. 8. It is also used in the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh 
 as an attribute of God, " of great compassion." The airXdy- 
 'Xya were regarded as the seat of merciful dispositions. See 
 Lightfoot on Phil. i. 8. 
 
 Forgiving each other, even as God in Christ forgave you. — 
 This is closely parallel to Col iii. 13, with the addition of 
 the words " in Christ " (eV Xpiaro)). As Klopper remarks, 
 Paul does not indeed elsewhere ascribe a 'x^apl^eaOao to Christ, 
 but in many places — 2 Cor. viii. 9, xii. 9, xiii. 13 ; Eom. v. 15 ; 
 Gal. i. 6 — ascribes a %a/3i9 to Him. — We have here, then, the 
 explicit statement of the manner in which the kindness and 
 compassionateness are to be shown, which suggests the 
 renunciation of what is evidently the presupposition of that 
 statement. "We are to show our compassion by forgiving one 
 another, which implies that forgiveness is generally needed. 
 We and those around us are subjects for forgiveness, and 
 God has treated us as such. There is some doubt as to the 
 exact force of kavToh in the phrase ')(api^6[xevoi eavroU. 
 Origen maintains that, from its reflexive force, it implied that 
 what they did to others was really done to themselves. 
 EUicott thinks this doubtful ; and Harless, Meyer, and most 
 expositors make eavTOi<i equivalent to dXXijXoi^. Comp. Col. 
 iii. 13, dve-^ofievot aXX-^Xcov, koX "^api^ofievoi eavTol<i. See 
 Lightfoot's note, and Westcott on Heb. iii. 13, where we 
 
366 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 liave the injunction, "Exhort your ownselves " (nrapaKaXelTe 
 eavToix;). The meaning seems to be. Forgive those who, like 
 yourselves, are in need of forgiveness. Forgive, and think 
 when doing so that thou art thyself one of that class needing 
 to be forgiven. — The meaning thus given to the first part of 
 the clause naturally suggests the addition — even as God 
 forgave you. This also makes the meaning of %apt^eo-^at 
 quite plain. It is not merely to show one's self kind, as the word 
 often means, but to pardon offences, and so to go beyond mere 
 goodness and compassionateness. — God's forgiving is in Christ, 
 as in Him He reconciles the world to Himself (2 Cor. v. 19). 
 
 The apostle puts his appeal in the form of a comparison, 
 requiring us to do to others as God has done to us. " And 
 yet," as Chrysostom says, " there is no comparison. For if 
 thou shouldest indeed at this moment forgive any one, He 
 will forgive thee again in return ; whereas to God thou hast 
 neither given nor forgiven anything. And thou indeed art 
 forgiving a fellow-servant ; whereas God is forgiving a servant, 
 and an enemy, and one who hates Him." 
 
 Chap. v. 1. Become ye, then, imitators of God. — The ylveade 
 ovv takes up and continues the thought of the last sentence. 
 Also, as there, it is fitted to remind his readers that they had 
 abandoned their proper position and had ceased from their 
 rightful calling. Now, as forgiven in Christ, they had been 
 received back into that household which they had by their 
 disobedience forsaken. They are once again under the 
 fatherly rule and direction of God. The Father, as dis- 
 tinfTuished from the mere administrator of law. Himself lives 
 among His children, and presents before them His example of 
 holiness, which, when imitated by them, will be for them a 
 life of obedience to His holy law. The word /ji,ifjLr]rij<: occurs 
 altogether five times in the writings of Paul, and should be 
 rendered not folloioer merely but strictly imitator. Klopper re- 
 marks that Paul never speaks of imitators of God but fitfit^Tal 
 fxov (1 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 1 ; 1 Thess. i. 6) and (TVfM/jLifj.r]Tal fiov 
 (Phil. iii. 17); but this does not hinder his using the ex- 
 pression here any more than it prevents him describing 
 himself as a yni/iT^r?;? of Christ (1 Cor. xi. 1). In Heb. xiii. 
 7, we are enjoined to imitate, in the sense of reproducing, the 
 
CHAP. V. 2. 367 
 
 Spirit which animated those who have lived the life of faith. 
 So the imitation of God is the reproduction in our lives, by 
 the grace of God's Spirit, of the life of God. The previous 
 sentence, however, indicates the particular aspect of the divine 
 character, and that particular mode of its manifestation, in 
 which it will be found imitable by us, and the apostle proceeds 
 to define his exhortation, in accordance with this point of view. 
 
 As dear children. — Describing more particularly the ani- 
 mating spirit of those who will be imitators of God. Various 
 motives might induce men to play the role of imitators of 
 God — ^just as flatterers, office-seekers, etc., might become imi- 
 tators of a prince or any other man of influence. We are to 
 become imitators of Crod, for the love which we bear Him as 
 children, who have had abundant proof of the Father's love. 
 We are beloved children (ayaTrrjrd), and in view of the 
 Father's love to us we are called now to imitate Him. We 
 do not imitate Him in His love because there was previously 
 love in us to Him. It is the revelation of His love, the 
 discovery that we make of it, that makes our imitation of 
 God possible. So it is not said, " as loving children," but 
 " as children who have been loved." We love Him, because 
 He first loved us (1 John iv. 10), and love thus begotten 
 shows itself in imitation. 
 
 Ver. 2. And walk in love, as Christ also loved us. — The walk- 
 ing in love is similar in meaning to the phrase of chap. iv. 15, 
 "speaking the truth in love." It answers to Col. iii. 14, as 
 the closing verse of the last chapter does to Col. iii. 12. 
 This walking in love is co-ordinate with imitating God. If 
 we are to be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect (Matt. 
 V. 48), then it must be by our walking in that love which is 
 the bond of perfectness. This walk will also prove our 
 possession of those graces named in chap, iv. 32. — The pattern 
 for us in this walk of love is Christ, and that in His mani- 
 festation of love toward us. In his earliest epistle Paul sets 
 forth the self-sacrifice of Christ in a precisely similar way 
 (GaL i. 4, ii. 20). 
 
 And gave Himself up for us. — We have here a literal re- 
 production of Gal. ii. 20, only we being changed into us. 
 The introduction of " us " here may very probably, as You 
 
368 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 Soden suggests, be due to the reminiscence of a familiar 
 liturgical formula. This surrender of Himself, not merely of 
 His possessions, was the supreme proof of His love, which gave 
 it an altogether unique significance. It implies certainly " unto 
 death," as it admits of no reservation. Comp. Eoni. iv. 25. 
 The phrase virep rjjjLwv means " in our stead," as in Eom. viii. 
 31 ; Gal. ii. 30 ; Eph. v. 25 ; Titus ii. 14. See the attempt 
 of Usteri, Entivichclung des Paulinischen Lehrhegriffcs, p. 115, 
 1851, to water down the meaning of the preposition, so as to 
 eliminate from the passage the doctrine of substitution. A 
 yet more elaborate endeavour in the same direction is made 
 by Jowett, " Dissertation on Atonement and Satisfaction," in 
 Epistles of Paul to Thcssalonians, Galatians, and Romans, ii. 
 547-595, 1859.1 
 
 An offering and sacrifice unto God. — These words indicate 
 yet more distinctly the substitutionary character of Christ's 
 self-surrender, describing it as sacrificial, and thus explicitly 
 stating what the former clause implied, that He gave Himself 
 even unto death for us. The irpoacfiopd is the more general 
 
 1 Pfleiderer {Paulinism, i. 97, 1877), speaking of Rom. v. 8-10, says: "The 
 words v'TTip rifiuv wliicli occur here, and are repeated in many other passages, 
 signify primarily indeed simply ' for our good ; ' but the connecting thought, 
 both in this and the other passages, is that of a vicarious act. . . . One can 
 hardly help further giving to ucrs/> ri/^av in this passage the meaning ' in our 
 stead,' especially as the words v'^ip XpKrTov, which occur twice pr£viously, can 
 scarcely be rendered otherwise than in Christ's stead ; ii'^ip is thus precisely 
 equivalent to avr/." See also an interesting quotation on the different senses 
 of substitution from Eaur, given by Pfleiderer as a note on p. 110. In Craw- 
 ford, The Doctrine of Holy Scripture concerning the Atoneimnt, pp. 17-30, 
 1871, we have a careful examination of passages which speak of Christ as dying 
 for sinners and /or our sins. After showing that in many passages the preposi- 
 tion v'TTip can only mean "instead of," he concludes: "It cannot be denied 
 that the preposition v'rip may fitly enough convey the idea of substitvtion. And 
 though we can hardly venture to say that, taken by itself, it necessarily has 
 this sense in all the passages in which it is used of the suff"erings of our Lord, 
 we may safely affirm that in some of these passages the nature of the case and 
 the tenor of the context clearly enough show that such is its signification " 
 (p. 21). See also classical illustrations from Eaphelius and Valckenarius, in 
 Crawford's Appendix, p. 471. Baur, too, Neutcstamentliche Theologie, p. 155, 
 as quoted by Crawford, p. 473 : "From the preposition ii-rip by itself the notion 
 of substitution cannot indeed be inferred ; but just as little can this notion be 
 excluded from it. . . . It is not the vague /or, which may stand in all possible 
 relations, but it is the inmost immediate entering into another and putting one's 
 self in his place." 
 
CHAP. V. 3. 369 
 
 term, designating oEferiugs of all kinds, any sort of presenta- 
 tion to God, whereas dvaia signifies what is specifically a 
 sacrifice offered by the priest upon the altar. These two 
 terms are again found in combination in Heb. x. 5, in quota- 
 tion from the LXX. of Ps. xl. 7. 
 
 For a savour of a sweet smell. — An exact reproduction of 
 the statement regarding the acceptableness of JSToah's sacri- 
 fice (Gen. viii. 21 ; comp. also Exod. xxix. 18, 25). With 
 reference to the phrase regarding Noah's sacrifice, Delitzsch, 
 after quoting from the cuneiform account of the flood, " The 
 gods sucked in the scent, the gods sucked in the well-smelling 
 scent ; the gods gathered like flies over the sacrificer," adds 
 that the scriptural expression is also anthropomorphic, but 
 more worthy of God, who accepts with favour the thankfulness 
 of the rescued, manifested in the heavenward streaming sacri- 
 fices.^ In Phil. iv. 18, the apostle makes use of the same 
 figure to describe the acceptableness before God of true con- 
 sistent Christian conduct. 
 
 This description of the manner in which Christ showed His 
 love, and the statement of the Father's acceptance of it as 
 indicating its perfection, are introduced here in order to make 
 the believers addressed feel how serious the task is to which 
 they set themselves as imitators of God after the pattern of 
 Christ. 
 
 (3) rersonal Holiness (chap. v. 3-21). 
 
 Vers. 3-21. — Having shown the principle of the new life 
 in regeneration (iv. 17-24), and having enlarged upon those 
 faults which appear in the relations of men to one another, 
 and are inconsistent with the new gracious nature (iv. 25, 
 V. 2), the apostle now proceeds to enumerate and condemn 
 those faults of the personal life, as affecting personal holi- 
 ness (v. 3-21). 
 
 Ver. 3. But fornication and all uncleanness, or covetonsness, let 
 it not he once named among you. — That the apostle should begin 
 his warnings against faults of personal conduct by the mention 
 of fornication (iropveia), is not to be wondered at, when we 
 recall the state of matters in the Corinthian church (1 Cor. 
 ^ Delitzsch, New Commentary on Genesis, i. 281, 1888. 
 2 A 
 
370 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 vi. 13—18), where evidently such sins of impurity were by 
 some classed with necessary operations of the physical being 
 of men, such as eating of meats. It is just because paganism 
 had taught them to think lightly of this, and similar sins of 
 the flesh, that Paul finds it necessary to make prominent how 
 absolutely intolerable all such things are, and how certainly 
 they must exclude the doers of them from the kingdom of 
 God. Besides this special form of impurity, he proceeds to 
 denounce unclcanncss {uKadapaia), whicli includes impurities 
 of all sorts. By this combination of the special and the 
 general, the apostle makes his injunction at once pointed and 
 comprehensive. These two terms are similarly combined, 
 Gal. V. 19 ; Col. iii. 5 ; in the reverse order, 2 Cor. xii. 21 ; 
 and in the same section, Eom. i. 29, 24; 1 Thess. iv. 3, 7. 
 Together, they represent the whole class of fleshly sins of 
 impurity. To them is joined another class of sins, under the 
 general designation of covetousness {prXeove^ia), which in Col. 
 iii. 5 is joined to those just named by koI, and not by rj, as 
 here. The effect of the " or " in our text is not to attach 
 what follows as explanatory of what precedes, but to distin- 
 guish it as a new class of offences. Jowett, in admitting that 
 ifkeove^ia may mean "lust" in Eom. i. 29, seems to assume 
 that it does mean this in Eph. v. 3 and Col. iii. 5. This 
 could only follow if we made " or " introduce an explanation 
 of UKadapaia, which is too plain a word to require this ; for 
 indeed this would be explaining a word which must mean 
 uncleanness, by a word which usually means covetousness, 
 and only may possibly mean lust. It is much more natural 
 to take it here, as in chap. iv. 19, to mean covetousness, 
 greedy desire. In that passage, as we have seen, it is used to 
 characterise the eager, selfish, grasping manner in which lust 
 is gratified, regardless of the rights of others. The selfishness 
 of man's sin shows itself in impurity and covetousness (see 
 Lichtfoot on Col. iii. 5). From all this Paul would have 
 Christians keep themselves absolutely separate. That these 
 things might not be in their thoughts, he would have them 
 not even mention their names. Here the contrast is thorough- 
 going ; what pagans tolerated the doiiiff of, Christians must 
 not tolerate the very speaking of. The word ovoixd^eaOat 
 
CHAP. V. 4. 371 
 
 seems to refer to things known by name, because not only- 
 existing but also actually present. Hence Chrysostom 
 explains the phrase thus : " Let them not anywhere be so 
 much as seen." If each member of the community puts 
 things away, the very names by which, when present, they 
 were known, will pass out of use and remembrance. 
 
 As hecometh saints. — They are to live under a sense of 
 the dignity of their calling. They are called to holiness ; 
 let them beware of doing anything inconsistent with their 
 heavenly vocation. The title of " saints " makes prominent 
 their relation to God. The apostle thus employs a term that 
 brings out the peculiar unfitness of the slightest approach to 
 impurity on the part of those who profess to be related to the 
 God of holiness (comp. 1 Cor. vi. 15). 
 
 Ver. 4. And shanicfid conduct, and foolish talkiwj, or fjrace- 
 less wit. — Here we have another threefold list, arranged and 
 connected in a precisely similar way to the last, and included, 
 like that list, under tlie injunction, "Let them not be once 
 named among you." In reference to their connection with the 
 vices before mentioned, they may be described as particular 
 acts which have the tendency to produce those evil habits of life 
 before condemned. Shameful conduct (ala^p6T')]<i) means any 
 procedure or manner of life that is base and dishonourable. 
 Its contextual position sliows that it means here " filthiness," 
 as the Authorised Version gives it. We do not meet the word 
 elsewhere in Scripture. The ala'^poXoyia of Col. iii. 9 is 
 shamefulness of conduct, as shown in obscene or filthy speech. 
 The foolish talking (ixwpoXo'yia) of our text is a somewhat 
 wider term than the aia')(^poXoyla, though, from its connection, 
 probably meaning very much the same thing here. This 
 term also occurs nowhere else in Scripture.^ It applies to all 
 talk that is not seasoned with grace, whether it be merely 
 idle or positively filthy. The third term, which is also a 
 hapax legomenon, is connected with the second by " or," inas- 
 much as both are sins of the tongue. Thus we have, on the 
 one hand, shameful conduct, and, on the other, shameful talk, 
 
 ^ Dr. Field, Otium Norvicense, pt. iii., pp. 1-3, has shown that /j-wpi in 
 Matt. V. 22 is the Greek fiupis, "a I'odl," and not, as Stanh^y had tnggested, a 
 Hebrew or Syriac word meaning " rebel." 
 
372 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 whether it be of the silly or of the highly-polished kind. 
 The difference between fiaypoXoyta or evrpairekia seems to be 
 that between rudeness and refinement in the presentation of 
 the same thini:. The "jesting" is probably here graceless 
 wit, commonly ill-natured, with a sting in it, and generally 
 carrying with it some corrupting innuendo, which serves 
 directly to connect it with that impurity of speech condemned 
 in the preceding phrase. Aristotle, Rhct. ii, 12, as quoted by 
 Trench, ^i/nonpns of Ncvj Testament, defines evrpanreXia as 
 ireTTacSevfMevr] i//3/oi9, which Sir Alexander Grant, with reference 
 to its cultured, polished form, happily renders " chastened 
 insolence." ^ These two words together bring under one con- 
 demnation all liglitness, which indicates an inability to realise 
 the seriousness and solemnity of life, and all mockery of 
 goodness, which reveals a diabolical hatred of the good. 
 
 Which are not becoming. — The correct reading, as adopted 
 by Tischendorf and AYestcott and Hort, is a ov/c avrjKev. The 
 imperfect - indicative, which is scarcely translateable in 
 English, means ut oportehat, which was not becoming, and 
 continues to be unbecoming. See Winer, Grammar, p. 338. 
 It presents the complete antithesis to " as becometh saints " 
 of the previous verse. They are not, as the pagan world 
 supposed, adiaphora, indifferent and harmless modes of enter- 
 tainino; one's self, but sins which disgrace and dishonour those 
 who practise them. Further, these words seem intended to 
 characterise the whole group of vices, and not the two last 
 only. 
 
 Bat rather giving of thanJ^. — This ev-^apicrTia is what 
 
 ^ It is one of those words which has passed , from high respectability to 
 infamy. In respect of its bitterness, Cbrysostom says : "The man who plays 
 the jester {iirpa'riX'.uo/^.ivii;) must of necessity incur the signal hatred of the 
 objects of his random ridicuh^ whether they be present, or absent and hear of it. 
 If the thing is creditable, why is it left to mountebanks ? . . . Far be it from a 
 generous, far be it from a high-born soul, aye, far too even from slaves. " 
 Trench, Synoniims of New Testament, p. 124, refers to the profligate old man 
 in Plautus, Alile--i Gloriosns, in. '1, 42-45, as illustrating precisely the character 
 of the ilTpa-ffiXoi, and calls attention to the fact that this character says of 
 himself, as explaining his profligate wit : Post Eiihesi sum natus. Also P. 
 Volumnius, friend of Cicero, as a notable wit and man of the world, bore the 
 name " Eutrapelus." In the thought of Paul, as even among the writers of his 
 age generally, the word was coming to mean wit wedded to the service of sin. 
 
ciiAr. V. 5. 373 
 
 becometh saints, which, as such, should take the place of 
 these condemned heathenish vices. In Col. ii. 7, iii. 15, iv. 2, 
 the duty of thanksgiving is pressed, as Klopper thinks, upon 
 those who were being misled into a sour, peevish asceticism ; 
 here upon those in danger of falling back into the dissolute 
 ways of heathenism. The recollection of what they owe to 
 God should save from both dangers. He who thanks God for 
 His blessings cannot turn back to jind his joy in tliat which 
 lies under God's curse. Such thanksgiving, as the substitute 
 of what is becoming for what is unbecoming, must flavour 
 alike the conduct and the conversation. It is devout, sincere 
 reflection on that God who has loved us, and on that Christ 
 who has given Himself up for us. Tiiis is invariably Paul's 
 ultimate counsel with regard to the displacement of evil 
 in thought, or word, or deed. Let evil be replaced by good. 
 Have thoughts of God, thoughts of His love and goodness, 
 filling your hearts, and they will keep your hearts and lives 
 from sin and shame. 
 
 Ver. 5. For tins ye are avxirc of, knowing. — He assumes that 
 he has now said enough on a point of which they cannot be 
 ignorant. They are aware of this, viz. the incongruity be- 
 tween their Christian profession and the practice of those 
 vices which he has been condemning. He does not need, 
 therefore, to go farther into the proof of his proposition. And 
 he makes this assumption, because he is assured that they 
 know what the penalty of continuance in the practice of such 
 sins is. His reiteration is with a view of keeping this truth 
 to the front amid all the temptations of life. He thus says 
 to them in effect, " Ye know these things, see therefore that 
 ye win the happiness which comes to those who do them." 
 
 That no fornicator, nor unclean person, nor covetous jjerson, 
 who is an idolater. — We have here given again these words 
 as applied to persons guilty of sins, which correspond to the 
 words just before used to describe those sins {iropvo^, uKaOap- 
 ro<;, 7rXeov6KTrj^). The peculiar element here is the defining of 
 the covetous n)an as an idolater (etScoXoXar/o?/?). Also in Col. 
 iii. 5, it is said of irXeove^ia : ^rt? iarlv elScoXoXarpeia. Covet- 
 ousness is mammon- worship (Matt. vi. 24). In his Evistlc to 
 the Philippians, § xi., Poly carp refers to Yalens, a presbyter 
 
374 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 who had fallen through avarice, and says, " If a man refrain 
 not from covetousness, lie shall be defiled by idolatry ; " si 
 quis non se ahstinuerit ah avarUia, ah idolatria coinquinahitur. 
 " Covetousness," says Chrysostom, " is idolatry and worse 
 than idolatry. Idolaters worship the creatures of God ; but 
 thou art worshipping a creature of thine own. For God made 
 not covetousness, but thine own insatiable appetite invented 
 it. And look at the madness and folly. They that worship 
 idols honour also the idols of worship ; and if any one speak 
 of them with disrespect or ridicule they stand up in their 
 defence ; whereas thou, as in a state of intoxication, art 
 worshipping an object which is so far from being free from 
 accusation, that it is even full of impiety. If even they are 
 in the highest degree without excuse, yet art thou in a far 
 higher, who art for ever censuring covetousness, and reviling 
 those who devote themselves to it, and who serve and obey it." 
 Has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. — 
 The kingdom here, as in 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, xv. 50; Gal. v. 21, is 
 tliat of Christ as the Eisen One. Tlie expression KXrjpovo/uLt'av 
 ex^i, though not elsewhere used by Paul, just like in the verb 
 K\7)povofMelv in Galatians and 1 Corinttiians is to be understood 
 in allusion to the inheritance by Israel of the earthly Canaan, 
 as foreshadowing the blessedness of the heavenly state. This 
 kingdom is a condition of holiness into which enters nothing 
 that defileth. Such evil courses as those named absolutely 
 bar the way of entrance into that kingdom^ — This character- 
 istic of the kingdom, the absolute exclusion of everything 
 defiling, is made yet more evident by the distinctive name 
 given to it. It is the kingdom of Christ and God. A 
 considerable discussion has been raised over this passage, as 
 well as over Titus ii. 13; 2 Pet. i. 1, as to whether the name 
 God is here applied to Christ or whether it refers to the 
 Father. Apart from the dogmatic interest, the question has 
 been discussed in connection with the grammatical principle 
 of the use of the article. As the article is used only 
 before Christ and not again before God (too Xpiarov koI 
 Geod), Middleton {The Doctrine of the Greek Article, 1808), 
 supported by many distinguished scholars, maintained that 
 Christ alone is here spoken of and described as God. The 
 
CHAP. V. 5, 375 
 
 discussion has been conducted mainly in connection with Titus 
 ii. 13. See Winer, Grammar, p. 162 ; Fairbairn, Pastoral 
 Epistles, pp. 282-285, 1874. The conchision now generally 
 acquiesced in is, that grammatically we may render such a 
 passage as that before us, either " the kingdom of Christ and 
 of God," or " the kingdom of Christ who is God." On the 
 ground of the grammatical admissibility of the rendering 
 " of Christ and of God," we must certainly receive this as 
 by far the more natural interpretation. As thus understood, 
 the stately and full designation of the kingdom in which 
 inheritance is desired, is fitted very impressively and solemnly 
 to indicate the impossibility of anything impure securing 
 entrance. It is not merely the kingdom of Christ, in such a 
 way that it can be separated in thought or reality from that 
 of God. What the kingdom of God has ever been — the abode 
 of holiness, which flesh and blood could not inherit — that also 
 now, without any modification whatever, is the kingdom of 
 Christ. This undoubtedly is the point emphasised here by 
 the apostle. The influence of paganism was making itself 
 felt in the young Christian Church, in the direction of 
 lowering the conception of the holiness of the kingdom. 
 Paul bids the Ephesians remember that Christ's kingdom is 
 God's kingdom, and that no abatement in the requirement of 
 absolute holiness has been or can be made. It is now called 
 the kingdom of Christ, not to distinguish it from the kingdom 
 of God, with which, on the contrary, it is identical, but to 
 show that the only way of entrance into it is by and through 
 Christ. In the use of the two names we have also here a 
 solemn reference to the exhortation with which the chapter 
 opens, where we are called to imitate God and to walk in 
 love like Christ. It is Christ's love that opens for us God's 
 kingdom, in which we can dwell only as imitators of Christ 
 and God.^ 
 
 ^ It may seem strange that the apostle did not denounce such sins in much 
 more vehement language, in respect of their shamefulness and of their injurious- 
 ness to society, instead of confining himself to the one point of their distinctive 
 influence upon the spiritual life of the transgressor. But we must remember 
 that he had no public opinion against those sins to which he could appeal. He 
 must first create this by producing, by religious means and on religious founda- 
 tions, a purer morality. It is only a religious code of morals that will supply 
 
376 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 Ver, 6. Ld no one deceive you with vain words. — From the 
 context it is evident that the apostle had in view a particular 
 form of deceit that was being practised with ruinous effect 
 among the young Christian communities. Apologists for vice 
 were found everywhere, who represented the excesses of 
 paganism as matters of indifference, or even as necessities of 
 man's nature, the suppression of which would be a reflection 
 upon the Creator. He warns the Ephesians against such 
 sophistries.^ Such words are empty, devoid of truth. Those 
 speaking them would be unconverted heathens,againstwhom the 
 Gentile converts are now warned. The word deceive (cnraiav) 
 refers us back to the deceit of chap. iv. 22 {airaTrj), and 
 reminds us that as the lusts are lusts of deceit, so those who 
 say that they aie of no consequence are deceivers. 
 
 For on account of these things comes the lorath of God iqjon the 
 children of disobedience. — " These things" according to the 
 analogy of Col. iii. 6, are not the " vain words," but the vices 
 condemned in the previous verses. This was just what those 
 vain words denied, and what those deceived by vain words 
 would be kept ignorant of to their undoing. In spite of all 
 such miserable sophistries, God is angry with the wicked 
 every day, and the wicked are not being allowed to pass 
 unpunished. " These things " are not and never can be 
 indifferent in His sight. — What " these things " call forth is 
 described as " the wrath of God." This does not mean merely 
 the punishments of sin in this world, though certainly those 
 are included, and, as elements in that wratli, even suggested 
 by the use of the verb " comes " in the present. It is the 
 coming wrath that now is and will be yet more fiercely 
 revealed against all who are not delivered from it by the 
 Saviour (1 Thess. i. 10). There is just the alternative — 
 having inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God, or 
 
 a basis for the proliibition and suppression of such sins. See Jowett, Epistles of 
 Paul, i. 86-89, ]859, "Evils of the Apostolic Age," in which he describes 
 admirably Paul's mode of dealing with the sin of licentiousness. 
 
 ^ With reference to a similar warning in 1 Cor. vi. 9, Godet in his Com- 
 mentary, i. 303, 1886, savs : "It is perfectly obvious that some at Corinth 
 ■were indulging in strange illusions as to the consequences of salvation by gi-ace, 
 and even went the length of piitting the practice of vice under the patronage of 
 the principle of Christian liberty." 
 
CHAP. V. 7, 8. 377 
 
 exposure to the wrath of God. — Those who are exposed to 
 the wratli of God are described as " the children of disvhcdience" 
 {viol T/}? (i7r€ideia<;). Those who experience God's wrath, 
 according to Eom. ii. 8, are they who obey not the truth but 
 obey unrighteousness. They are rebels against God's holy law. 
 The precise form of the designation may fairly be pressed. 
 Disobedience is, as it were, personified, and those who do such 
 things as those before named are regarded as His sons. 
 
 Ver. 7. Become not then partakers with them. — The form of 
 this exhortation, beginning with 'yiveade, attaches it to the 
 exhortations of chap. iv. 32 and v. 1 ; the contents of it, by 
 way of contrast, with the exhortations to the imitation of 
 God, Christ, and the saints in chap. iv. 32, v. 2, 3.^ If we 
 pursue the imitation of God, Christ, and the saints, we shall 
 thus, and only thus, escape being reckoned among " the 
 children of disobedience" (comp. 1 Cor. v. 9-11; 2 Cor. vi. 
 11). The thought that listening to the vain words of those 
 deceivers would lead away from such fellowship, should make 
 us pause. We have already met the word partaker (av/ji/jLe- 
 To^o<i) in chap. iii. 6, the only other passage in Scripture in 
 which the word is used. It implies a close confederacy, with 
 community of aims, and not that unavoidable social inter- 
 course which even the apostle himself admits (1 Cor. v. 9) we 
 must have with fornicators of the world, unless we would leave 
 the world altogether. Fellowship in conduct, or any toleration 
 of their evil ways, is strictly forbidden (comp. ver. 11). 
 
 Ver. 8. For ye were formerly darkness. — We have here the 
 reason why there should be no partaking with the children 
 of disobedience. That would be a falling back upon the 
 position which they occupied before they had been re- 
 generated. — The figurative expression (cr/coro?) is now used 
 to describe their unregenerate life of disobedience. This was 
 not merely the element in which they lived, but it penetrated 
 their being, and characterised it ; so that they were not merely 
 in darkness, but they were darkness. The understanding and 
 heart being dark, they were ignorant of the truth of God, and 
 under the influence of the lusts of deceit. They must see to 
 it that all this has been left behind. 
 
 ^ Compare Von Soden, p. 140. 
 
3 78 EriSTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 But now arc yc light in the Lord. — What tliey were they 
 were in themselves, but what they are they are in the Lord. 
 He is the light of the world, the light and the life of men. 
 It is in Him that they become radiant. The light has shined 
 into their hearts, and they are not merely enlightened, but the 
 very substance of light has penetrated their being, so that 
 they have become light. " Everything outside of Christ," says 
 Calvin, " is held by Satan." 
 
 Walk as children of light. — That which is the inner 
 principle of the life must show itself in the outward conduct. 
 Show what you are, and that you are not what you were. 
 Christ commands us to let our light shine for God's glory 
 (Matt. v. 16) ; here it is in order that we may not be ranked 
 among the children of disobedience upon whom God's wrath 
 is coming. The best commentary on this walking in the light 
 is 1 John i. 5-7, ii. 8-11. 
 
 Ver. 9. For the fruit of the light. — The light ripens the fruit, 
 and brings it to perfection. The light of grace, by its shining, 
 causes the springing and ripening of very precious fruit. If 
 ye do not walk as children of light, then the light will be 
 fruitless. There will be no evidence of its presence or 
 apology for its existence. In Gal. v. 22 we read "the fruit 
 of the Spirit," which led to the substitution of " spirit " for 
 " light " in the common text of our passage. 
 
 Consists in all kinds of goodness and righteousness and 
 truth. — These are indeed the fruits of the Spirit, for His grace 
 is the light under which they have grown and ripened. — 
 ^AjaOcoavvT] is not active goodness or benevolence, as Light- 
 foot defines it, nor is it exactly goodness or probity, as Jowett 
 puts it. It is integrity of heart and disposition, the right 
 relation and proportion of the parts of one's own inner being 
 (2 Thess. i. 11 ; Gal v. 22). This goodness or integrity of 
 nature shows itself in just and righteous treatment of others, 
 BcKaioavvT], as in chap. iv. 24. Then to such a one, upright 
 in lieart and just in conduct, it will be a necessity of his 
 being "to speak the truth in love" (iv. 15). If we are 
 light in the Lord, then these fruits which appear in Him will 
 be brought forth, under His light, in us. 
 
 Ver. 10. Proving vjhat is wcll-jplcasing to the Lord. — This 
 
CHAP. V. 11. 379 
 
 verse connects immediately with ver. 8. When ye walk as 
 children of light, then ye shall be able rightly to judge what 
 in each particular would be well-pleasing to the Lord. So 
 walk that ye may know God's will. It is the renewed will 
 alone that can exercise discrimination, so as to discern what is 
 well-pleasing (eudpeaTov) to God (comp. Eom. xii. 2). This 
 is the great moral task of the Christian in this world. He 
 that walks in the Lord does what is well-pleasing to the 
 Lord. 
 
 Ver. 1 1. Aiid have no share in the unfruitful works of dark- 
 ness. — The verb a-vjKOivcovelv here, as in Phil. iv. 14, means 
 to become partners with others in doing something. The 
 apostle warns Christians against conniving with unbelievers 
 in doing what belongs to the unregenerate state, and ought 
 therefore to be among the believer's former things. These 
 evil deeds are here designated by way of contrast to the 
 fruits of light. As in Gal. v. 19, 22, the products of the 
 flesh, or darkness, are styled works, because darkness does not 
 bring forth fruit, and only the products of the Spirit or light 
 are styled fruits ; so also here we have the " works " not the 
 "fruits" of darkness. These works are " unfruitful," uKapira. 
 The word is used by Paul in 1 Cor. xiv. 14, where the 
 understanding of him who speaks with tongues is said to be 
 unfruitful, producing nothing for the benefit of others. In 
 our text the word seems too mild, and so it has been corrected 
 into aKaddpro<i (unclean) and dTdKTO<; (disorderly). It affords, 
 however, the real contrast to the fruit-producing influences of 
 the light. This is all that is needed here. Elsewhere (Eom. 
 vi. 21, 23, vii. 5), the apostle describes the works of darkness 
 as fruit of which those who had wrought them are ashamed, 
 and as having their end in death. They are not in themselves 
 without fruit, but only in respect of securing inheritance in 
 the kingdom of God. Compare Klopper, Dcr Brief an die 
 Epheser, p. 165. 
 
 But rather 2^'>^otest against them. — Not only avoid taking 
 part in such proceedings, but positively express your disap- 
 proval, and bring them to the light that they may be judged 
 and condemned. This will be best done by setting up over 
 against them that course of conduct wliich stands the test as 
 
380 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 well - pleasing to Christ, and seeking to have this standard 
 accepted by others so that it may come to be generally 
 applied. The word iXey^eiv is used before by Paul only 
 once, 1 Cor. xiv. 24, and there in precisely the same way as 
 here (conip. Jolm iii. 20). This exposing is with a view to 
 the bringing into the light those who had been in darkness. 
 
 Ver. 12. For the things done hj them in secret ^ it is shainefid 
 even to speak of. — This gives the reason why we must expose 
 and denounce the deeds of darkness, so as to free ourselves 
 of all suspicion of complicity in them. Yet it shows how 
 delicate the task of such exposure is. Our denunciation of 
 them must keep in view their foulness, and make us careful 
 lest we extend a knowledge of infamous proceedings that may 
 have a demoralising influence on those who hear. In this 
 verse, coupled with the preceding, the apostle sets before us 
 the two sides of a difficult problem, which has considerably 
 exercised the public mind in our own day. On the one 
 hand, the Christian fails in his duty if he allows vicious 
 practices, of which he has come to know, to be continued 
 without protest on his part and active opposition, even to 
 the extent of public action and prosecution, if by these means 
 it may be possible to stamp out a moral pestilence. Then, 
 on the other hand, lie must be careful not to advertise 
 infamous vice by bringing it under the notice of those who 
 may be influenced unfavourably by it. The frivolous or 
 scurrilous depicting of vice, such as we have in the Koman 
 poets, even in the Satirists, and in much of the so-called 
 realistic fiction and dramatic writing of our own times, 
 neglects the caution of our text. There is no doubt that 
 many viciously inclined persons have made a false use of this 
 counsel of caution. They have emphasised the shamefulness 
 of the mention of these things, though they regard not the 
 shamefulness of their practice so long as that can be kept 
 secret. According to the apostle's view, which is the common 
 sense of all true morality, the shamefulness of these things 
 must be arrested at all hazards. The shamefulness of the 
 mention of them serves only to bring into view the unspeak- 
 
 ^ The adverb xpv^ri is \ised only here in the New Testament, but is quite 
 equivalent to the xpvrra of 1 Cor. iv. 5 ; 2 Cor. iv. 2. 
 
CHAP. V. 13. 381 
 
 able shamefulness of the doing of them, and warns against 
 incurring the guilt that any measure of connivance with the 
 doers of them must necessarily involve. Consider, also, how 
 the thought of the condition of such offenders, doing things 
 shameful even to name, should affect the Christian so as to 
 make him, for the sake of his fellow-men, ready to show up 
 the evil, and, if possible, convince the sinner of his sin. 
 " So that the necessity of the rebuke is founded on the 
 magnitude of the offences. The nmgiiitude of the sin is 
 meant to move pity in the hearts of the faithful, and that 
 is to incite them to save the lost ones " (Olshausen). At 
 the same time, from the apostle's special point of view, what 
 really forms the determining motive of the exhortation is 
 the spiritual life of the believers addressed. Paul writes to 
 convince them that any connivance with such shameful 
 doings must sap the very foundations of their own life, and 
 endanger, as nothing else could do, their obtaining of tlie 
 inheritance. 
 
 Ver. 13. But all things that are 'protested against are made 
 manifest hi/ the light. — The prominent idea here is the mani- 
 festation of those things committed in secret. If those secret 
 vices be subjected to scrutiny, not in a frivolous way, nor 
 for the gratification of a prurient curiosity, but under the 
 light, then what was concealed is made manifest. The light 
 which thus manifests is the gr-ace that shows itself in those 
 who are light in the Lord. Under the light of their con- 
 sistent conduct and their maintenance of principles that 
 admit of no acquiescence in or compromise with the secret 
 deeds of shame, nor with any of the works of darkness, the 
 liorridness and shamefulness of those secret vices of heathen- 
 ism are made manifest. They can no longer be winked at, 
 or regarded as things that can on any account be tolerated. 
 When placed under the light of Christian truth and know- 
 ledge, they are seen to be what they are. They are now 
 broiight into full consciousness ; they are brought within the 
 range of conscience. It is something gained when the works 
 of the flesh are become manifest (Gal. v. 19). But observe, 
 it is emphatically said that it is the light that does this. No 
 such manifestation of shameful things is possible on the part 
 
382 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 of those who are in darkness, and who therefore can treat 
 these matters only frivolously or scurrilously. 
 
 For everything whicJi is made mayiifest is light. — The verb 
 (JDavepovadat is here passive, and not middle. We cannot 
 translate, as Authorised Version, what makes manifest, but 
 what is made manifest. Hence we must join this clause, 
 not to the immediately previous one, but to the fidWoif Be 
 i\e<y)(^6r€ of ver. 11. It is the natural property of light to 
 diffuse itself. It belongs to light to impart visibility. What 
 is shone upon is seen. Whatever is cpavepovfjcevov, therefore, 
 is no longer in (TK6ro<i, not among things done Kpv^fj. That 
 light is there which alfords the knowledge of good and evil, 
 and the ability to distinguish the two. While enveloped in 
 a mask, so that they seemed not what they were, these evil 
 practices were unchecked, but now light has been flashed upon 
 them, and they stand condemned in the light. The doers of 
 these things, after this exposure, may continue to do them, 
 but they will then be sinning against light. 
 
 Ver. 14. Wherefore lie saith. — This quotation formula {hio 
 Xeyec) is precisely the same as that used in chap. iv. 8. The Slo 
 points back to the urgent need that exists for bringing into 
 light those hidden evils, flashing upon them the light of 
 gospel truth. That the phrase here used is intended as a 
 formula of quotation, ought to be beyond dispute. But we 
 may see at once, from the connection, that nothing will 
 depend upon the literal exactness of the quotation. It is 
 only an illustrative reference that is required, and not the 
 proof of any statement that has been made. The apostle 
 simply wishes to impress upon Christians the duty of letting 
 their light shine, by referring to an Old Testament passage in 
 which the duty is enforced. He can, therefore, deal freely 
 with the language by accommodating it to the times and 
 circumstances of the new dispensation under which he writes. 
 As himself an inspired prophet, he reproduces freely, in terms 
 of the Christian revelation, what, under the inspiration of God, 
 had been said before. As to the original of this quotation, 
 Von Soden thinks that it cannot possibly be found in Ps. 
 xliv. 24; Isa. xxvi. 19, li. 7, Ix. 1. These, he thinks, 
 may have supplied the inspiration to some Christian poet, 
 
CHAP. V. 14. 383 
 
 who produced what the apostle here quotes as a solemn 
 formula or hymn, used possibly in the Christian service 
 after baptism, and quoted as scripture because taken from 
 some apocryphal book or apocalypse. It does seem strange 
 that the apostle should take a passage familiar to his readers, 
 from its liturgical use, as an exiiortation to Christians, and 
 apply it, as the context of our passage requires, to the 
 children of disobedience. Its suitableness for the apostle's 
 purpose is quite apparent ; but if the theory of its place in 
 a Christian liturgy were correct, its use would not seem 
 happy or appropriate to those who were familiar with it 
 in that other connection. As belonging to an apocryphal 
 book, it would not have been quoted by Paul as scripture, 
 unless we suppose, with Meyer, a lapse of memory on the 
 part of the apostle. Even the theory of a Christian hymn, 
 suggested by Origen, and, according to Theodore, Theodoret, 
 and Severianus, entertained by many of the ancients, must be 
 rejected as admitting of no justification for the use of the 
 formula that could have been used only to introduce a quota- 
 tion from a canonical book. The only legitimate hypothesis 
 seems to be that already hinted at. The apostle, with his 
 mind steeped in Old Testament modes of expression, had 
 before him such passages as those above named. Especially 
 the words of Isa. Ix. 1 are in his memory ; but these 
 suggest to him, not the language, but only the general tone 
 of the impassioned appeal, which, as the first and chief of 
 Christian missionaries, he addresses to the masses of the 
 Gentile world, morally dead, yet capable of being stirred 
 up into a new and glorious spiritual life. The thought 
 common to the old and to the new versions of the appeal 
 is the gospel truth, that tlic light has come. 
 
 Up, thou that sleepest, arise from the dead. — Here we have 
 a specimen of a protest and rousing shout {eXey^^^'i), such as 
 he would have those who are light in the Lord address to the 
 children of disobedience. It is evidently these last who are 
 addressed here, and not believers, for they have already risen 
 with Christ (chap. ii. 6). On the contrary, those addressed 
 are still in the sleep of sin (1 Thess. v. 6), and spiritually 
 dead (chap. ii. 1, 5). The absence of light is implied by 
 
384 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 sleep, which is befitting the night, and by death, which exists 
 in the absence of life-giving light. 
 
 And Christ shall sJdne upon thee, — Instead of shine upon thee 
 (iTTK^avaei (tol), which does not occur elsewhere in the New 
 Testament, some ancient copies read, touch thee {ein^^avaei 
 aot). This latter reading was known to Chrysostom, Theo- 
 dore, Jerome, and other ancient writers, who rightly rejected 
 it. Jerome accounts for its origin by the tradition that the 
 words were addressed to Adam, whose body, lying under the 
 cross of Christ, was restored to life by the touch of the Lord's 
 body and blood.^ He who is shone upon by Christ is not 
 merely enlightened, but is, in the full sense, made light itself. 
 " The sleeper has no sensibility of the light till he awakes, nor 
 has the eternal soul in man any sensibility of Christ till he 
 wakes and rises from his state of death. . , . God would 
 not mock man by bidding him to ' awake ' out of death, and 
 to arise to a new life, if the awakener were not in the very 
 midst of his soul to help him. God calls man from within 
 himself. The resurrection and the life stirs in him, saying, 
 'Arise from the dead !' and the man is already at the dawn of 
 the heavenly life. As sunrise pricks the sleeper, and says to 
 him, Arise ! even so the hour cometh when the dead soul 
 hears the voice of the Son of man, and hearing lives " 
 (Pulsford). This is truly a blessed message of life, which 
 the children of light are commissioned to deliver to the dark 
 dead world, on behalf of Him who is the Light of the world. 
 
 Ver. 15. Consider carefully, then, how ye wcdk. — The adverb 
 cLKpi^co^ means accurately, exactly. Here the apostle says, 
 " Your conduct is a matter of extreme importance, calling for 
 your most earnest and unflagging attention." The conjunctive 
 then, ovv, refers back to the scope of the whole paragraph 
 about children of light. Seeing that, as such, your responsi- 
 
 ^ Jerome gives the words of a preacher who offered this explanation of the 
 text with the reading leferred to : — "Surge Adam qui dermis, et exsurge a 
 mortuis, et non ut legimus iTKpavtru <roi Xpia-ros, id est, orietur tibi Christus, sed 
 l-ri-^avtrii, id est, continget te Christus, quia videlicet tactu sanguinis ipsius et 
 corporis dependentis vivificetnr atque consurgat." Chrysostom, on John xix. 
 17, also mentions the tradition. See Chase, Chrysostom: A Study in the 
 History of Biblical Interpretation, pp. 84, 85, 1887 ; also, Swete's edition of 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia's ITi/Jor ^'/iwi^f^s o/ PctM^, i. 180, note, 1880. 
 
CHAP. V, 16. 385 
 
 bilities toward the children of disobedience are so serious, 
 walk, direct your lives, under a solemn sense of these responsi- 
 bilities. 
 
 Not as unwise, hut as ivisc. — The addition of this charac- 
 terisation of the walk comes in more naturally when we 
 adopt the reading of the last clause given above, aKptjSm 
 7rw9, in preference to ttw? aKpL/3(t)<i, which would make 
 uKpi,/3(b<i a qualification, not of the considering but of the 
 walk. It would not be natural, after defining the walk as 
 punctilious, exact, to insist that it should be conducted, 
 not unwisely but wisely. The word " unwise " (acxo^o?) is not 
 found elsewhere in the New Testament. The passage is an 
 amplification of the iv aoipia Trepiirarelre of Col. iv. 5. Those 
 would show themselves umvisc, who would arouse needless 
 opposition against themselves and the truth, by the violence 
 and recklessness of their onslaught upon the children of 
 darkness. Those would show themselves wise, who, while 
 unflinchingly maintaining the truth and carefully guarding 
 against all complicity with sin, would so reprove as to 
 disarm opposition, and win for Christ and for God those 
 who had been the children of disobedience. This is the 
 application of these terms which the Colossian passage would 
 naturally suggest. Apart from this, with reference to the 
 preceding context, the unwise would be those who allowed 
 themselves to be deceived by empty words, ver. 6 ; and the 
 wise, those who protested against the secret deeds of vice, 
 ver. 11. 
 
 Ver. 16. Making a wise use of the time. — These words are 
 identical with those of Col. iv. 5, and are introduced there, 
 as here, in immediate connection with an exhortation to walk 
 wisely toward those without. The phrase e^ayopa^ofiemi, rov 
 Kaipov is a very obscure one. The verb e^ayopdt,(o means to 
 redeem, buy off; also to buy up; and i^ayopd^eiv Kaipov 
 (Dan. ii. 8), to gain time or delay. Our phrase seems to mean, 
 " making the most of the time at our disposal." 
 
 Because the days are evil. — This assigns a special reason for 
 making a diligent use of our time and opportunity. The 
 character of the time is such as to present peculiar difficulties 
 and occasion sore trouble to believers. Abounding wicked- 
 
 2b 
 
386 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 ness calls for special diligence and zeal, and the careful use of 
 every precious moment on the part of Christians. Evil days 
 call for wise walking ; they allow of no time for vain words 
 or unfruitful works. They make it specially necessary that 
 Christians look accurately (aKpi^ws:) to their walk. The 
 danger of Christians, in times of abounding wickedness, 
 against which they must guard themselves by vigorous 
 occupation, is that their love to God and Christ should 
 grow cold (Matt. xxiv. 12). An almost exact parallel to 
 our text is found in Sirach iv, 20 : " Observe the opportunity 
 and beware of evil {avvTiiprjaov Kaipov koX ^vka^ai, airo 
 nrovTjpov)." The word iT0V7]p6<i is derived from 7rovo<;, " toil," 
 in the passive sense of causing trouble to others. If, e.g. 
 farming operations were thought of as, under the curse, a 
 toil, fyfj TTovTjpd would mean " soil requiring immoderate 
 labour, i.e. worthless soil " (Chase, " The Lord's Prayer in the 
 Early Church," in Texts and Studies, I. iii. 90, Camb. 1891). 
 The word thus came to mean intrinsic and irredeemable bad- 
 ness. This is quite reconcilable with the view of Dr. Hatch 
 {Essays on Biblical Grccli, pp. 77—79, 1889), that the word 
 means not so much passive badness as active harmfulness or 
 mischief. The being in whom the exercise of such a spirit 
 and the practice of such acts have become habitual, has surely 
 developed into a wicked and malicious being, so that when 
 TTovrjpo^ comes to be employed as a personal designation, it 
 is applied to the devil, as the concentration of all inherent 
 wickedness and malice. See chap. vi. 16. 
 
 Ver. 1 7. For this cause show not yourselves senseless. — The refer- 
 ence here evidently is to the exhortation to maintain a wise and 
 consistent course of conduct, such as is described in the two 
 preceding verses. The reference certainly includes the closing 
 statement of the last verse, though it should not be regarded 
 as having it exclusively in view. He had said, " Be not un- 
 wise, but wise." And now he says, " Ye will certainly show 
 yourselves unwise, if you do not use your intelligence aright." 
 The word d(f)pcov means senseless or stupid — a much stronger 
 word than dao<po<;. It does not mean " without mind," but 
 the conduct of one who has a mind and does not use it, or uses 
 it in a wrong way. So the man that has been misusing his 
 
CHAP. V, 18. 387 
 
 reason in arguing against the resurrection by advancing silly 
 and inconsiderate objections, is called by Paul a(f>pct)v (1 Cor, 
 XV. 36), The intention of the apostle in our text seems to 
 be to warn against such sophistical and captious exercise of 
 wit and reasoning, as might be used to obscure the fact of the 
 indispensable and supreme necessity for maintaining a fault- 
 less walk and conversation on the part of all who believe 
 in Christ. Any one who reasons thus is not <})p6vcfjL0<i but 
 d(f)p(ov. 
 
 But understand what the will of the Lord is. — The will of 
 Christ is that which is according to His will (comp. Eom. 
 xii. 2.) This we are to understand by having practical ex- 
 perience of it, conforming our lives and guiding our practice 
 by it. It was already described in ver. 10 as that which is 
 well-pleasing to the Lord. The will of the Lord is the law 
 of the Christian life, which has taken the place of the Mosaic 
 law. Paul declared himself (1 Cor. ix, 21) under law to 
 Christ. It is the primary duty of the Christian to inform 
 himself what the will of the Lord is. This is what he must 
 exercise his understanding upon. If he does not do this he 
 is a(f)pwv. The word " understanding " here is the imperative 
 of avvievai, answering to the <yivea9e of the previous clause, 
 and meaning " give attention to," " put things together and 
 weigh their import so as to reach a conclusion," Thus to 
 know the will of the Lord, in regard to the various details 
 and circumstances of life, we must exercise our moral judg- 
 ment upon its requirements. We must show ourselves (ppovcuoc 
 and ao^oi, in order to bring ourselves into accord with the 
 divine mind. It is a matter that calls for the exercise of our 
 critical faculty. We must take life seriously, and give our 
 mind to estimating the significance of each several act by 
 bringing it into the light, and Considering how it agrees with 
 what we have learned to regard as the will of the Lord. 
 According as we seriously engage in such investigations shall 
 we become expert in understanding the Lord's will. 
 
 Yer. 18. And make not yourselves drunk with laine. — Here 
 the apostle adduces a particular vice which characteristically 
 produces senselessness and obscures the understanding. To 
 understand the Lord's will we must have our senses and 
 
388 EPISTLE TO THE ErHESIANS. 
 
 powers of moral and spiritual discernment clear and active. 
 Those vices already referred to are evidently calculated to 
 dull and stupefy the moral sense; but even if we perceive this 
 and avoid these, here is another vice, that of drunkenness, 
 which is no less inimical to the maintaining of a consistent 
 Christian walk. The man who makes himself drunk makes 
 himself a(f)p(i)v. Apart from the question of its inherent sin- 
 fulness, drunkenness will have the effect of preventing those 
 who indulge in it from discovering the Lord's will in reference 
 to the detailed circumstances of life. 
 
 In ivJiich there is prodigality. — " In which " refers not 
 simply to " wine," but to " making one's self drunk with wine." 
 Drunkenness is prodigality (do-oiria). The rendering of the 
 Authorised Version, " excess," is perhaps not quite sufficiently 
 strong, but indicates the sense correctly. The word dacoTia 
 is derived from the verb aw^eiv, with the negative particle. 
 According as it is taken in an active or a passive sense, it 
 will mean reckless extravagance, the conduct of a spend- 
 thrift who does not save, or the condition of one who is past 
 redemption, who cannot be saved. The former meaning is 
 most natural and appropriate here. The Vulgate renders it 
 by luxuria ; and Chrysostom paraphrases it by saying " that 
 drunkenness not only does not preserve but destroys." Such 
 indulgence is the result of a recklessness of spirit which 
 overthrows the balance of reason, and, by obscuring our per- 
 ception of the Lord's will, opens the door to all other forms 
 of vice. 
 
 But he filled ivith the Spirit. — This indicates the only means 
 whereby a true understanding of the will of the Lord is 
 possible. The apostle has not been denouncing all sorts of 
 excitement, but only false excitement. He does not condemn 
 enthusiasm, but he bids his readers make sure that their 
 enthusiasm arises from the proper source. Some of the 
 earliest heretics, even those of the apostolic age, seem to have 
 encouraged bacchanalian orgies, and simulated religious fer- 
 vour among their fellows by drunken excitement. Now the 
 apostle says, " By all means get thoroughly aroused, conduct 
 yourselves like those that are possessed, but see to it that the 
 influence constraining you is that of the Holy Spirit." The 
 
CHAP. V. 19. 389 
 
 contrast between this and the former clause lies in this, that 
 while in both cases there is excitement, in the one case it 
 is intoxication, and in the other it is inspiration. — The ev 
 TTvevixan of our text should certainly be rendered " with the 
 Spirit," as the Spirit is both instrument and content of the 
 filling, which sufficiently explains the use of ev. The render- 
 ing of Beck, " Secure to yourself fulness in the Spirit as the 
 source of power and joy," with a reference to an interpretation 
 of chap. iv. 23, which we have seen cause to reject, is not 
 grammatically necessary. Still more objectionable is the sug- 
 gestion of the margin of the Eevised Version, " Be filled 
 in spirit." These renderings destroy utterly the evidently 
 intended opposition of the two clauses of our verse. The 
 contrast is really between the stimulation of much wine and 
 the stimulation of a large measure of the Spirit. There is a 
 filling with wine in the one verse, and a filling with the 
 Spirit in the other. How superficial observers might mistake 
 the one for the other, is shown by Acts ii. 15. As in that 
 case Peter reproves the mocking, cynical spirit that puts the 
 worst construction on what appears, here Paul warns Chris- 
 tians against giving occasion for such a charge. 
 
 Ver. 19. Speaking to one another. — What intoxication would 
 prevent, inspiration would further, viz. mutual intercourse by 
 means of articulate speech for the purpose of spiritual edifica- 
 tion. The single term " speaking " (XaXovvTes:) represents the 
 two words " teaching " and " admonishing " (hthda Kovre<i koX 
 vovOerovvres:) of Col. iii. 16, not as Von Soden suggests, be- 
 cause meanwhile the teaching office had assumed a distinct 
 place of its own, but because in Colossians tlie statement is 
 introduced in immediate connection with the indwelling 
 word of Christ which imparts wisdom, whereas here it is 
 introduced in connection with the stimulating, impulsive 
 influence of the Spirit. We have to think here of a thrill and 
 rush of enthusiasm, rather than of a calm, didactic, and hortat- 
 ory service. The spiritual excitement and fervour which is 
 here presupposed determines the form which this speaking 
 takes. This " speaking to one another " (kavroZ^) indicates 
 responsive or antiphonal singing. Further, there is no ex- 
 clusive reference here to regular and formal exercises of public 
 
390 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 worship, though, on the other hand, there is no reason to 
 exdude these. 
 
 Inijsalms and hymns and spiritual songs. — It seemed natural 
 for those under the supreme control of spiritual impulses to 
 express themselves in the richest forms of human speech, 
 either in the ancient psalms in which saints of many genera- 
 tions had found fit utterance to those glowing thoughts and 
 feelings of the Cliurch, or in the improvised effusions in 
 which their own surcharged feelings sought vent. The thret^ 
 words used here may not perhaps be intended to indicai* 
 carefully marked-off kinds of composition. It is, however, too 
 much to say that we are to see no distinction, but simply a 
 multiplication of synonymous terms. In combination these 
 three terms cover the whole range of expressive Christian 
 praise. We cannot for a moment suppose that there is any 
 ^suggestion of a collection of pieces for use in the public 
 gatherings of Christians, an idea which could only occur to 
 one who was finding difficulty in obtaining support for his 
 thesis of post-apostolic authorship. — In addition to those 
 passages in which mention is made of the Book of Psalms, 
 the word " psalm " is used three times in the New Testament 
 (I Cor. xiv. 26; Col. iii. 16; Eph. v. 19), these last two 
 being parallel and equivalent passages. In 1 Cor. xiv. 26, 
 it seems to be used of an original improvised composition, in 
 whicli the inspired gives expression to his spiritual experiences. 
 With this meaning, in the only other New Testament instance 
 of the use of the word, it would be hazardous to assume that 
 in Colossians and Ephesians the reference is to Old Testament 
 Psalms. Equally hazardous would it be to exclude reference 
 to these. The most reasonable conclusion seems to be that 
 the apostle here means sacred poetical compositions, whether 
 old or new, of a style similar to the Old Testament Psalms. 
 It is certainly a very curious reason that Trench, who would 
 give the same restricted meaning even to the passage in 
 Corinthians, urges for his belief that the ^aXfioi of our text 
 are strictly the Old Testament Psalms, " above all, seeing that 
 the word seems limited and restricted to its narrowest use 
 by the nearly synonymous words with which it is grouped " 
 {Synony7ns of Nciv Testament, § Ixxviii.). Perhaps the close 
 
CHAP. V. 19. 391 
 
 conjunction of "doctrine" and "psalm" in 1 Cor. xiv. 26 
 may give ground for a surmise that the psalm was more 
 distinctly doctrinal than the other compositions, and that in 
 it, whether old or new, the Christian prophet conveyed some 
 special revelation of truth. — " Hymns " {v^ivoi) " were poetical 
 addresses of thanksgiving and praise to God; qui fortitndinem 
 d mojcstatem 'prwdiccmt Dei, et cjusdem semper vel henefica, 
 vcl facta, mirantur" {Jerome). So too Augustine (-E';i«?t. in 
 Ps. Ixxii. 1) indicates three indispensable elements in a hymn : 
 " It must be praise, the praise of God, and it must be sung." 
 Many, e.g. Lightfoot, Trench, etc., point to Eph. v. 14 as a 
 specimen of an early Christian hymn. As we have seen, this 
 theory has difficulties in the way of its acceptance that have 
 not been overcome. Possibly 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; 2 Tim. ii. 
 11-14, may be quotations from such hymns. The songs of 
 Zacharias and Mary are scarcely to be reckoned in this class. 
 In the New Testament the word only occurs here and in Col. 
 iii. 16 ; but the verb vfxveu), to sing a hymn, is found in Acts 
 xvi. 25 and Heb. ii. 12, as also in Matt. xxvi. 30 and Mark 
 xiv. 26, where it refers to the use of Old Testament Psalms. 
 The carmen sung by the early Christians to Christ as God (Pliny, 
 Upistle, X. 97) was certainly such a hymn, fulfilling literally 
 the requirements of Augustine's definition. — " Songs " {coZal) 
 were poetical compositions not conforming to that strict 
 definition. They are distinguished from odes generally, which 
 might be of the most varied character and fitted for the most 
 diverse occasions, by the epithet " spiritual " (Trvev/xarLKai.), 
 not as inspired compositions, but as the work of spiritual 
 men. We may take the word as indicating songs of a 
 spiritual and edifying character of all descriptions, such as 
 might not fall under the strict category of psalms or hymns, 
 e.g. poetical descriptions of personal experiences, etc. It is 
 wrong to say that they might be spoken rather than 
 sung. Trench from this point of view has endeavoured to 
 distinguish them from hymns by means of a reference to many 
 of the poems in the Christian Year, and such-like volumes 
 of sacred poetry, which are not adapted for singing, but rather 
 for devotional reading and reflection. Elsewhere in the New 
 Testament the word occurs in Eev. v. 9, xiv. 3, xv. 3. In 
 
392 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 these three passages they are distinctly songs of praise sung 
 by the redeemed to Christ. Upon the whole, we regard 
 psahns and hymns as capable of being fairly differentiated. 
 Then the apostle adds, " spiritual songs," as though he said, 
 "And if under the influence of the Spirit you be led to 
 express yourselves in any other way, let free scope by all 
 means be given to the promptings of the Spirit." 
 
 Singing and ^j/a?/M?^ in your heart to the Lord. — These 
 words indicate a qualifying condition, or more particular 
 definition of that exuberance of spirits, or excitement of feel- 
 ing, which may legitimately be expressed by the Christian 
 brethren. As, on the one hand, it is not to be induced by 
 such stimulation as is used in bacchanalian orgies and such- 
 like, so neither, on the other hand, is it to be produced by 
 any false or forced excitation of nerves and emotions. It 
 must not be merely a contagious spasm of religious fervour, 
 created or quickened by the singing of sentimental songs by 
 one in such a way as to challenge the answering by another 
 in yet more ecstatic utterances. It must, in short, be seen to 
 that there is no put-on or sham. This responsive singing 
 must be rendered by those who have had and who have the 
 spirit of melody and praise within their hearts. The two 
 words " singing " (aheiv) and " playing " {y^aXkeLv), indicate 
 the different forms which a thankful praising spirit may 
 assume. They are terms that naturally apply to outward 
 vocal expressions, the former being the word from which coS?;, 
 " song," is derived, and the latter that from which i/raX/A09, 
 " psalm," is derived. But here they signify the deep inward 
 condition of spirit which finds expression in these ways. If 
 we are to sing and play to the Lord with voice and finger, we 
 must first sing and play to the Lord in the heart (t^ Kaphla). 
 The addition of this clause may also afford comfort to those who 
 have not the gift of song, and who cannot give expression to 
 their feelings in intense spirit-stirring phrases. If their 
 silence does not arise from indifference, nor yet from reluct- 
 ance for any reason to confess their Lord, he will hear and 
 accept the silent singing of the heart. 
 
 " God's Spirit in the renewed heart is a secret, intense joy. 
 The origin of son" is divine. The songs of hell and of the 
 
CHAP. V. 20. 393 
 
 wicked are but disgusting caricatures. The devil encourages 
 his children to cloak their misery by an affectation of mirth. 
 The unchaste and the intemperate drink of the delirious spirit 
 of the abyss, and sing their filthy songs one to another. The 
 children of God drink into them the Holy Spirit, and sing forth 
 their heavenly delights. . . . From eternity to eternity the 
 Spirit of God singeth the song of God. His song is an ever- 
 changing variety of the infinite harmony and joy of the 
 divine nature. The poetic utterances of all inspired psalmists 
 and poets, and the compositions of inspired musicians, only 
 record for us the vibrative effects produced on them by the 
 song of God, the song of His being and purpose " (Pulsford). 
 
 Ver. 20. Giving thanks alivays for all things. — We have here 
 a third clause, indicating, along with the two preceding ones, 
 how the being filled with the Spirit manifests itself. There 
 is also a noticeable broadening of the conception with each 
 successive clause. Thanksgiving lies at the root of all 
 acceptable praise. The presence of snch a feeling in the 
 soul fills the heart with melody, so that grace flows from the 
 lips. This Spirit also is the one permanent and constant 
 element. The actual exercise of praise in singing and play- 
 ing, from its very nature, cannot be without intermission. But 
 in an earlier epistle we are exhorted to pray without ceasing 
 (1 Thess. V. 17), and here to give thanks always {irdvTOTe). 
 Amid all manner of occupations, which demand attention and 
 prevent expression being formally given to the feelings and 
 the heart in words, the spirit of prayer and of thanksgiving 
 need not and should not be lost even for a moment. The 
 always of the text is not a rhetorical exaggeration, but is to 
 be understood literally and exactly. Then not only the 
 constancy but also the universality of this exercise is emphasised : 
 thanks always for all things. The words vTvep irdvTwv, just 
 like irdvTore, are to be taken in their full extent. Give 
 thanks not merely for iall blessings, but literally for all things. 
 That is to say, just as we must maintain at all times the thankful 
 spirit, so we must seek to cultivate it amid all the varieties 
 of experience. What God sends should be accepted with 
 thankfulness as the gift of His wisdom, whether in itself, 
 apart from the thought of His giving, it would seem pleasing 
 
394 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 or grievous. If our thanksgiving is to be always, it must 
 necessarily be for all things. Evidently, if for anything we 
 did not give thanks, we would not be giving thanks always. 
 The nrdvTOTe and the imep irdvToov, therefore, stand or fall 
 together. The combination is a favourite formula with 
 the apostle. Comp. 1 Thess. ii. 2 ; Col. i. 3 ; Phil. i. 3 ; 
 1 Cor. i. 4. 
 
 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. — Here again we have 
 the characteristic form of expression, so often met with in 
 this epistle, which introduces, by the preposition " in," an 
 important clause indicating the sphere of operation or experi- 
 ence. It is not to be reduced to mean simply "to the 
 honour of " Christ. Eadie has rightly enough said, " These 
 thanks are rendered not ' to the honour of His name,' for the 
 phrase is not eh to bvo/xa. To do anything ' to the name,' 
 and to do it ' in the name ' of another, are widely different." 
 But he is wrong when he distinguishes these meanings thus : 
 The former implies honour and homage ; the latter, authority 
 and commission. It is no doubt a scriptural and a blessed 
 truth that we have Christ's authority in coming to God with 
 our praises. But this does not convey, in its full extent, the 
 idea of our text. According to the central thought and figure 
 of the epistle, we who believe are " in Christ Jesus." This 
 is our permanent position. We are in Him always ; and also 
 all things are to us occasions for giving thanks, because of 
 our relation to Him and our position in Him. Hence it is 
 as we are in Him, identified with Him, bearing His name, 
 that we can give thanks, and that we can do this as required 
 always and for all things. 
 
 To God, even the Father. — Thanks thus given are ascribed 
 to God as Father, first of our Lord Jesus Christ, and then, 
 through Him, of all believers. He is the ultimate source of 
 all grace (i. 3, iii. 21); and it is to Him, through Christ, 
 that all prayer and praise must be offered. 
 
 In those three forms of expression we have ample vent 
 afforded to that exuberance that arises from being filled with 
 the Spirit. " Any one of them, taken separately, might possibly 
 lead to extravagance. The social element might, by sympathy 
 and contagion, prompt fanatical outcries and wild physical con- 
 
CHAP. V. 21. 395 
 
 vulsions. The secret devotion might become morbid, self- 
 eating, and therefore self-destructive. And the fond idea of 
 making all work worship, might end in there being no worship 
 but work. But let the three unite and coalesce in one. This 
 threefold sluice will suffice for any fulness. There is no 
 danger of any excess here" {Ca.nd\ish, Discoitrscs on Ephcsians, 
 p. 252, 1875). 
 
 Ver. 21. Suhnitting yourselves one to another. — This must not 
 be regarded as having the force of an imperative, but as a fourth 
 participial clause subordinote to " be filled with the Spirit," 
 and co-ordinate with the three immediately preceding clauses. 
 In these three we have a description of the modes of expres- 
 sion to the fact that the soul is filled by the Holy Spirit, in so 
 far as the direct relation of the soul to God is concerned. 
 Here we have a description of the bearing of such a Spirit- 
 filled soul toward those around. This bearing is described as 
 one of mutual submission. How this suggested itself to the 
 apostle in this connection is quite evident, if we go back 
 again to ver. 18, The effect of excessive indulgence in the use 
 of wine would be to produce proud swelling thoughts, and to 
 cause each to entertain a quite exaggerated idea of his own 
 individual importance. He had had very painful experience 
 of this in the church of Corinth (1 Cor. xi. 21, xiv. 26-33). 
 And so he made it a note of a man being a prophet and 
 spiritual (xiv. 37), that he should observe order and give way 
 to others. A spirit of mutual concession, the overcoming of 
 all that self-assertiveness which is so characteristic of the 
 drunken and self-indulgent, must characterise those who 
 are filled with the Spirit of Him who gave Himself up for 
 us (ver. 2). 
 
 In the fear of Christ. — This is the grand motive of all such 
 submission. It must be rendered under a deep reverence for 
 Christ. We call Him Master, and so we must not encroach on 
 His prerogative. As we yield Him our own obedience, we must 
 remember that others occupy this same position with ourselves. 
 We must, from the reverence that we have for Christ, serve 
 others, if thereby we can serve Christ, by rendering those 
 whom we serve serviceable to Him. That this is the primary 
 idea here attaching to " the fear of Christ " {(po^o^ XpLarov) is 
 
396 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 almost certain from the whole context. It is here the element 
 in which those live who believe in and love Christ and God. 
 The fear or terror of the Lord (^o/3o? rov Kvpiov) of 2 Cor. 
 V. 11, as shown by way of warning to impenitent sinners, 
 is quite different. 
 
 Sect. IX. — The Family Life (Chap. v. 22-vi. 9). 
 
 In this section the duties of family and social life are 
 discussed on the same general lines as in Colossians, yet with 
 some very notable and important differences. In Ephesians a 
 transition is secured by the introduction of the thought of 
 submission into the close of the preceding section, while iu 
 Colossians we pass, without any such preparation, quite 
 abruptly into a new theme. Thus, whereas in Colossians the 
 duties of wives and husbands are treated summarily, each 
 being disposed of in a single verse (Col. iii. 18, 19), in 
 Ephesians these duties are viewed, not only as those of sub- 
 mission and love respectively, but as teaching under these 
 respective qualities the true mutual relation that should 
 exist between the Church and Christ (v. 22—33). In the 
 following exhortations to children and fathers, and to servants 
 and masters, while in Ephesians we have considerable and 
 important amplifications, the same general lines are pursued 
 as in Colossians. 
 
 (1) Duties of Husbands and Wives (chap. v. 22-33). 
 
 Vers. 2 2-3 3. This section has a predominant dogmatic interest 
 that overshadows the original ethical purpose. "We have here 
 the fullest systematic treatment of the doctrine of the Church 
 found anywhere in Scripture. Under the figure of marriage 
 are introduced the ideas of Christ as Head and of the Church 
 as the body, already incidentally referred to in the epistle 
 (i. 23, iv. 15). But from this the apostle again proceeds to 
 take up the figure of marriage, appropriate to the section, in 
 which the Church is the bride and Christ the Bridegroom. 
 
 Ver. 22. Wives, suhmit yourselves to your otun husbands. — The 
 submission here enjoined is that renunciation of self-seeking 
 and self-assertiveness which is required of all those who fear 
 
CHAP. V. 23. 397 
 
 the Lord. And the closeness of the connection between this 
 section and the preceding one is shown in this, that the verb 
 has to be supplied here from the preceding verse. But when 
 this exhortation is addressed to wives, it is urged under the 
 sanction of a further powerful motive. Those towards whom 
 they are to manifest tliis spirit are " their own husbands " 
 (comp. 1 Pet. iii. 1). The apostle does not mean sharply 
 to distinguish these husbands from other men, but to strengthen 
 his claim on their behalf for self-forgetful surrender on the 
 part of the wives. If Christians generally, in the fear of 
 Christ, are to manifest this spirit of self-abnegation, how 
 much more when those on whose behalf this submission is 
 called for are their own husbands ! If they look at the matter 
 aright, they will acknowledge the obligation without requiring 
 that it should be enforced by enactment. — It is because of 
 this idea of subjection that the order in each of the three 
 correlated groups is the reverse of that which is usual. We 
 have wives and husbands, not husbands and wives, because the 
 apostle starts with the idea of subjection, and in his figurative 
 use of the relationship rises from the Church to Christ. 
 
 As to the Lord. — Their subjection to Christ is the pattern 
 according to which their bearing toward their husbands is to 
 be determined. The husband stands to the wife in the same 
 relation as Christ to tlie Church, and the subjection called for 
 in the one case and in the other is the same. " When thou 
 obeyest thy husband, think thou obeyest him as serving the 
 Lord " (Chrysostom). This is the rule that ought to deter- 
 mine us in the discharge of every duty (comp. Col. iii. 23). 
 
 Ver. 23. For a husband is the head of his wife. — Here we 
 have expressed what was implied in the statement of the 
 previous verse. It is on the basis of this relationship between 
 husband and wife that the wife is required to be in subjection. 
 The same statement is made, though in a different connection, 
 in 1 Cor. xi. 3. There is in both the one life, and yet tliere 
 is relative inequality. 
 
 Hvcn as Christ is Head of the Church. — Though in 1 Cor. 
 xi. 3 Christ is described as Head of the man, this does not 
 imply, as Sabatier and others insist, that the view taken of 
 marriage by the writer of Ephesians is higher than that of 
 
398 EPISTLE TO THE EPilESIANS. 
 
 Paul in Corinthians. Yon Soden speaks of this verse as a 
 reminiscence of 1 Cor. xi. 3, corrected hy Eph. i. 22, iv. 15. 
 In that earlier epistle, as Godet points out, highest honour is 
 put upon the marriage union when it is compared to the 
 union of Christ to the believer and of God with Christ, and 
 when it is said (vers. 11, 12) that the man is not without the 
 woman, nor the woman without the man. 
 
 He the same is Saviour of the hody. — This is an added clause, 
 bringing in a new idea. There is no verb in the clause, but 
 emphasis is laid on avro'i. He who is Head the same is 
 Saviour. The person of Christ is thus represented as combining 
 the two functions of Head and Saviour, and that in the order 
 in which they are here laid down. As Saviour or Redeemer 
 of His body the Church, He has assigned to Him the rank of 
 Head, and has, in tlie exercise of His mediatorial office, all 
 power and authority given to Him of His Father (comp. ver. 25). 
 The comparison between the relation of husband to wife on 
 the one hand, and Christ to the Church on the other, is 
 limited to the figure of the Head which is common to both, 
 and does not extend to that of Saviour, which is peculiar to 
 the relation of Christ to the Church. 
 
 Ver. 24. But as the Church is subject to Christ. — This final 
 summing up of the matter goes back upon the statement of 
 Christ's relation to the Church as Head. The Church is sub- 
 ject to Christ in recognition of this relationship. The " but " 
 (aWd) is employed to make it plain that the Saviour relation 
 is not to be brought in here ; yet though in this respect the 
 relationships are not comparable, let it not be forgotten that 
 in respect of relative subordination the comparison holds. 
 
 So let wives he to their husbands in everything. — The iv 
 Travrl is evidently to be interpreted on the understanding 
 that the subjection claimed is such as is claimed by Christ 
 for the Church. Obedieuce can be required only when the 
 demand is Christ-like. This verse does not imply that 
 Christian wives had been renouncing their position of sub- 
 ordination on the plea of Christ's redemption ; but the apostle 
 lays down a principle of Christian ethics, so that no mis- 
 understanding may at any time arise. 
 
 Ver. 25. Husbands, love your wives. — Here we have a state- 
 
CHAP. V. 25. 399 
 
 ment of the duty of Imsbauds, in terms closely resembling those 
 in which the duties of wives are expressed. The husband's love 
 is to be the ground of the wife's submission. The possession 
 and manifestation of this love make the man worthy of the 
 name and rank of husband, so that he is in a position to 
 expect submission from the wife. His claims upon her should 
 never be such as are inconsistent with love ; they rather ought 
 all to have their origin in love. It is only so long and so far 
 as the wife's submission is pu.rely under the constraint of 
 love that her position is free from all degradation and bondage ; 
 and only in the measure in which the husband loves his wife 
 can his authority be free from all harshness and injustice. 
 
 As Christ also loved the Church. — Christ is the pattern of 
 the husband's love, as he had been set as the ultimate object 
 of the wife's obedience (ver. 22). Here, as in the previous 
 verses, the collective term " the Church " {r] iKKXrjala) is 
 employed, whereas in ver. 2 the concrete term " us " is used 
 to describe the object of Christ's love. These two terms are 
 exactly equivalent in respect of contents. " The word Church 
 must not impose upon us, as though Christ loved the Church 
 because she had put away her sins and robed herself in His 
 beauty. Not for her beauty, but because she was destitute of 
 beauty, and not for her righteousness, but because she needed 
 righteousness. He devoted Himself to her. If the love of 
 Christ to the Church is the pattern of a husband's love to his 
 wife, his love must rather spring from what he can do for 
 her, rather than from what she is to him " (Pulsford). 
 
 And gave Himself up for it. — Christ's self-surrender on 
 behalf of His people is stated here precisely as in ver. 2. It 
 involves the giving of Himself up to death. "What was in 
 the earlier passage declared of Christ's relation to individual 
 believers, is here said of His relation to them collectively in 
 the Church. The apostle does not, indeed, in any other 
 epistle represent " the Church " as the object of Christ's self- 
 sacrificiug love. In Gal. ii. 20 he regards himself, individually, 
 as the one on whose behalf Christ gave Himself up. In other 
 passages in which a similar idea is expressed, individual 
 sinners, and not a saved community, are represented as calling 
 forth Christ's self-surrender (not virep iKKXTjcrlwi, as here, but 
 
400 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 vTrep d(T€/3o)v, Eom. v. 6 ; virep rj/jbMv, Horn. v. 8 ; virep 
 TrdvTcov, 2 Cor. v. 14). Yet this need not be used as an 
 argument against the Pauline authorship of our epistle, 
 seeing that in this same chapter, ver. 2, the very same state- 
 ment is made, with vTrep tj/mmv, as in the earlier epistles. 
 Evidently the vTrep rjfxcov of ver. 2 and the vTrep aur?}? 
 [€KK\7](TLa<;] of ver. 25 mean the same. Those for whom 
 He gave up Himself are all sinners who believe in Christ, 
 and the Church is simply the whole company of believers in 
 Christ, Jews and Gentiles, embracing all the generations of 
 mankind. 
 
 Ver. 26. In order that He might sanctify it hy the ivord. — 
 We have here the immediate purpose of Christ in giving Him- 
 self up for the Church. He loved the Church, not for any 
 holiness that was originally in it, not because the individuals 
 who came to hold place and rank in it were originally in any 
 respect well-pleasing to God, but in order to produce those 
 qualities in them. His purpose was to make those holy who 
 were not holy, to sanctify (dyid^eiv) the Church. This is the 
 term commonly used to describe the effect of the sacrifice of 
 Christ. As applied to the Levitical sacrifices (Heb. ix. 1 3 sq.), 
 it not merely signifies the bringing of the offerer into the 
 ranks of those who belong to God, in terms of the covenant, 
 but has also reference to the putting away of sin by moral 
 renovation, whereby the sinner is fitted for the presence of 
 God. In the case of Christians, this sanctification is not 
 merely the cleansing of the conscience from the consciousness 
 of o-uilt, but the memory of that which brings guilt.^ This 
 our text describes as the immediate object of Christ's sacrifice 
 of Himself. Whenever the sinner is brought into relation to 
 Christ, so as to have a personal interest in His death, he is 
 not only justified, but he is sanctified. He is placed in 
 immediate connection with God as belonging to Him, con- 
 secrated to God under the influence of purifying agencies, 
 which will ultimately produce in him that perfect holiness 
 and fitness for God's presence described in the next verse as 
 the ultimate aim of Christ's sacrifice. It is the initial con- 
 
 1 See the contrary view presented and insitsted upon in Pfleiderer, Pauliimm, 
 ii. 68, 1877. 
 
CHAP. V. 26. 401 
 
 secration, the setting apart unto God, that is here specially 
 intended, as is indicated by the use of the aorist, cf^iaari, 
 which marks the historic fact. In His own sacrifice of 
 Himself, in which He consecrated Himself to God, He also 
 consecrated His Church (comp. Heb. xiii. 12).^ That the 
 ethical sense of sanctification is present, will be seen from the 
 following clause in its connection with the present ; but 
 aycd^eir, as applied to the effect of Christ's sacrifice upon the 
 Church, can only be in the religious or sacrificial sense. If 
 it were used in its ethical sense it would be applied to indi- 
 viduals. The prominence here given to the idea of sanctifica- 
 tion, as the immediate and inevitable effect of Christ's sacrifice 
 on all who have an interest in it, is doubtless intended, as is 
 also the placing of sanctification before justification in 1 Cor. 
 vi. 11, to point out the contrast between the moral position 
 of the Christian and that of paganism, and that pagan state of 
 mind and feeling which was seeking to secure entrance into 
 the Church. There has been considerable difficulty ex- 
 perienced in determining where the phrase " by the word " 
 {ev f)i]fiaTi) is to be brought in, and to what clause it is to 
 be attached. It is evident that it mi^ht be attached (1) to 
 ayidar], or (2) to " the washing of water," or (3) to " purifying " 
 or the participial clause as a whole. For a good summary of 
 these three possible arrangements, see EUicott, who rejects 
 the first two proposals in favour of the third. Without going 
 into an examination of the three, we shall indicate briefly 
 why we prefer the first, and join the phrase " by the word " 
 to the clause " that he might sanctify it." Winer {Grammar, 
 p. 172, 1882) rightly accounts for the absence of the article 
 by attaching it to the verb, though he wrongly explains the 
 relation of the participial clause to the principal clause pre- 
 ceding. " The word " is not, as Chrysostom supposes, the 
 naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the baptismal 
 formula, but the gospel, which comes as a message of salva- 
 tion and as the terms of the new covenant by which men are 
 brought into connection with God, as those consecrated to 
 Him. Hence the apostle does not introduce an idea scarcely 
 
 ^ See Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 1880, additional note on x. 10 ; 
 Tlie Effects of Christ's Sacrifice, pp. 344-347, also notes on xiii. 12, p. 440. 
 
 2c 
 
402 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 tenable in respect of doctriue (as Ellicott objects) in connect- 
 ing ev p^fxari with ajLaar], but would really do so by connecting 
 it with Ka6apvaa<i, where the ethical idea of sanctification is 
 made prominent. It is just in connection with cv^iaaij, 
 presenting the idea of consecration and separation unto God, 
 that iv prjixaTi is appropriate, as describing the means 
 whereby it is accomplished (comp. Eom. x. 17). Those who 
 respond to the icord of God (prj/jia rod Geov) are sanctified 
 unto God, and so by the word Christ sanctities the Church. 
 
 Cleansing it hy the icasliing of water. — The aorist participle 
 Ka9apLaa<i we render here by the present, in order to present 
 in English what seems to be its true relation to the preceding 
 clause. It has been usual to represent the participial clause 
 as referring to something antecedent to that set forth in the 
 words already commented on. It is assumed that the 
 cleansing precedes, in time or in thought, the sanctifying just 
 spoken of. And so we have the clause commonly translated 
 thus, " after having cleansed it," etc. It seems certainly very 
 strange to assume priority on behalf of the ethical cleansing 
 over the formal and ritual act of consecration. We should 
 expect, first, setting apart, and then the beginning and con- 
 tinuance of the actual purifying of those thus set apart. 
 This, too, is the meaning which we obtain from a careful and 
 exact grammatical construction of the sentence. An aorist 
 participle coming after an aorist finite verb, just as KaOaplaa'i 
 follows aytdari, describes the way in which what is men- 
 tioned in the former clause has been carried out.^ Christ 
 sanctified His Church through the instrumentality of the 
 word of the new covenant, and this consecration is made a 
 reality by His cleansing that so set apart by the washing of 
 water. In order of thought the sanctification or setting 
 apart comes before the cleansing, the ethical sanctification, 
 but in history and experience they are contemporary acts. 
 The apostle rightly describes them by the use of the same 
 tense, the aorist verb being followed by the aorist participle. 
 If we translated hamng cleansed, this would imply priority 
 in the cleansing ; and so, to express the true relation of the 
 clauses, we render cleansing. 
 
 ^ Hofaiann. Die Heilige Schri/t Neuen Teslavients, iv. 1, p. 228, 1870. 
 
CHAP. V. 27. 403 
 
 As to the meaning of tm Xovrpw rov vharo^, the use of the 
 word Xourpou in the New Testament (only liere and in 
 Titus iii. 5) and in the Apocrypha (Sirach xxxi. 30), leaves it 
 quite undetermined whether it should he rendered in the 
 active sense, washing or bathing, or in the passive, the laver, 
 the hath, as the place where the washing is done. It does not 
 seem at all necessary to assume here, or in Titus, that the refer- 
 ence must be to baptism. That the word came in patristic 
 literature to be exclusively so applied, is no proof that this 
 was the New Testament meaning of the term. So far as our 
 passage is concerned, there is nothing said in the whole con- 
 text to lead us to expect any allusion to that ordinance. It 
 seems, then, more natural to speak of the cleansing as effected 
 by the bathing rather than in the bath, all the more so when 
 here the phrase " of water " is added to describe the material 
 employed to produce the cleansing. The reference is most 
 probably to the bath of the bride before marriage, which is 
 in keeping with the whole style of the passage, and specially 
 with the language of the following verse. 
 
 Ver. 27. In order that He Kimself might inc8e)it to Himself the 
 Clmrch. — We have in this clause a second " in order that" (tW), 
 introducing here the ultimate purpose of Christ's sacrifice, as the 
 first in the previous verse introduced the immediate purpose. 
 The sanctifying and purifying referred to, as resulting from 
 Christ's giving up of Himself, are now viewed as themselves 
 a means to a yet higher end. The Church is sanctified that 
 it may be presented to and find acceptance with Him who 
 takes her as His bride. Thus a peculiarity of procedure is 
 here made distinctly prominent. In ordinary marriages the 
 bride was given away by her own nearest relatives, after 
 they had bathed and adorned her. But the heavenly bride- 
 groom takes to Himself the bride whom He has made ready 
 for Himself. It is His own atoning sacrifice that has pre- 
 pared the bride for her husband, and so there is no room 
 for an intermediary, as there is no work that an intermediary 
 can do. The peculiar and elaborate phraseology (amo^ 
 eavTO)), as well as the detailed account of the minute pre- 
 parations and the perfection that characterises them, show 
 how deep and personal is the interest which Christ takes in 
 
404 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 the members of His Church. He will do all for them and 
 upon them Himself alone. 
 
 Glorious, not having spot or wrinUe, or any such thing. — 
 An account of the condition into which His cleansing had 
 brought the Church, in order that it might be fit to be pre- 
 sented to Him as His bride. " Glorious " (evho^o^) occurs in 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 10. The definition of Bengel is happy, " Saoiditas 
 est gloria interior, gloria est sanditas cmicans." " Not having 
 spot " is a figure peculiar to our passage ; while the word 
 " spot " (o-7rZXo9) occurs elsewhere in the New Testament in 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 13 (comp. also Jude 23). "Wrinkle" {pvri^), 
 nowhere else in Scripture, means a drawing together, a sign of 
 decay. This description is meant to contrast with what was 
 said before of the moral state of heathenism (ii. 1-5, iv. 17, 
 V. 14). 
 
 But in order that it might he holy and blameless. — The same 
 words, 07409, aixo)p.o<;, occur in the same order in chap. i. 4 ; 
 Col. i. 22. In point of construction, the clause is dependent 
 upon " present " {irapaarrjcrrj). 
 
 The object of the whole statement is to give a powerful 
 impression of Christ's great love for the Church ; hence there 
 is no attempt to determine when this perfection will be 
 reached, or how far it is attainable here. 
 
 Ver. 28. Thus ought hushands to love their oivn ivives as their 
 own bodies. — " Thus " (outw?), i.e. after the pattern of Christ's 
 giving up of Himself, which has in view solely the salvation 
 of His Church. As Christ regards the Church as His own 
 body, so, too, should husbands their wives. 
 
 He that loveth his luife loveth himself. — The wife being 
 represented as the body of which the husband is head, the 
 two are indissolubly one. Whatever is done to one is done 
 to both. This is not an appeal to the selfish principle of 
 self-love, but the laying down of the law of community of 
 interests. The idea is taken up and carried out in the follow- 
 ing verse. 
 
 Ver. 29. For no one has ever hated his own fie sh. — Husband 
 and wife are one flesh, they constitute one body ; hence any 
 injury done by one to the other is a schism, within the one 
 body, one part warring against the other. 
 
CHAP. V. 30. 405 
 
 But nourisheth and chcrisheth it. — Every one is anxious to 
 provide food for his own body and to keep it warm (comp. 
 1 Cor. xii. 23). The word "nourisheth" {eKrpe^ei) occurs 
 again in the New Testament only in chap. vi. 4 ; and 
 " cherisheth " {doKiretv) again only in 1 Tliess. ii. 7. " Flesh " 
 is here evidently synonymous with " body," which word is 
 avoided because of its metaphorical use in the passage. In 
 regard to the " flesh " in the ethical sense, Paul urges (Rom. 
 xiii. 14) that no provision be made for it (t?;? aap/co^ 
 irpovotav). 
 
 In like manner also Christ the Church — Christ is thus 
 represented as directing all His energies to the preserving 
 and furthering of the purity of the Church. This statement, 
 as Meyer beautifully says, " is the sacred refrain of the whole 
 Christian ethics of marriage." 
 
 Ver. 30. For wc are members of His hody, of His ficsh, and 
 of His hones. — In these words the apostle gives the ground of 
 his last statement concerning Christ's interest in the Church. 
 Christ thus deals with the Church, because we its members 
 are the members of His body. The question must be 
 examined as to the authenticity of the last part of the clause, 
 " of His flesh and of His bones." These words are not found 
 in ^*, A, B, and are rejected by Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischen- 
 dorf (in his last edition), and Westcott and Hort.^ It is quite 
 evident that the words in question were suggested by the 
 passage in Genesis from which the following verse is quoted. 
 AVhat has to be decided is whether the suggestion was acted 
 upon by the author of the epistle or by some later inter- 
 polator. This can be determined only on internal grounds, 
 by considering whether the quotation of ver. 31 follows more 
 naturally after the simple statement " we are members of His 
 body," or after the further clause now under discussion. It 
 
 ^ The words do indeed occur in a large number of good uncials. Tliey are of 
 interest just now as witnessed to by the "Western texts, of which Codex Bezce 
 and Codex Cleromontanus are the princijial representatives. In regard to this 
 Western text, Westcott and Hort declare that its two chief characteristics are 
 boldness of paraphrase and readiness to adopt extraneous matter, and as an 
 illustration of its paraphrastic tendency they adduce what they regard as the 
 addition to the true text in the verse before us (iVew Testament in Greek, vol. ii., 
 " Introduction," pt. iii. chap. ii. § 173, ed. 1S82, p. 123). 
 
406 . EriSTLE TO THE EPHESIAXS. 
 
 seems to us, as will appear from the exposition of the follow- 
 ing verse, that the words " for this cause," with which that 
 quotation opens, have nothing in that first part of our text on 
 which to fasten, and can be made intelligible only by the 
 acceptance of the concluding phrase, " 6f His flesli and of His 
 hones." Then, again, the omission of these words is easily 
 explained, either from the accidents of transci'iption (each of 
 the three phrases of our text ends with the same word, uvtou, 
 so that the scribe may easily have taken the first for the 
 third), or from the doctrinal prejudices of the transcriber, 
 who may have taken offence at what might seem a material- 
 ising view of Christ's person in the use of the words flesh 
 and bones.^ It is not so easy to account for the insertion of 
 the words, in consequence of any antignostic tendency, or in 
 opposition to any form of ascetic heresy. We feel entitled, 
 therefore, to retain the words. The whole verse puts, in a 
 very strong way, the reason why Christ manifests such love 
 to the Church. It does not go back to the proper origin of 
 that love, which can never be explained or expressed in 
 human language. It assumes the existence of the Church, 
 the calling of sinners to union with Christ through faith, and 
 shows why toward thetn, in the Church, Christ shows such 
 love, and for them makes such ample provision. They are 
 part and parcel with Himself in His incarnation. From this 
 point of view, tlie lingering over the several constituents of 
 His human form and being is peculiarly impressive. Be- 
 lievers are of Him just as really as Eve was of Adam. As 
 she owed her physical being literally to her husband, so also 
 the believers owe their spiritual and real being to Christ. 
 And as Adam said of Eve, " She is bone of my bone and flesh 
 of my flesh," so Christ says of tliose who believe in Him, 
 " They are members of my body, and of my flesh, and of ray 
 bones." 
 
 Ver. 31. Fo7' this cause shall a man leave fa the 7^ and mother, 
 and cleave to his ivife. — This is an exact quotation of Gen. ii. 24, 
 
 ^ See Kliipper, Der Brief an die Epheser, pp. 182-L83, 1891, who suggests 
 that an Alexandrian theologian, with his doctrine of the Xayos clffapxo; might 
 naturally be offended at having the Church described as the (rafi% kxi ia-Tia, of 
 Christ. 
 
CHAP. V. 31. 407 
 
 made with almost exact literal precision from the LXX., and 
 introduced without any sort of quotation formula. Tlie 
 absence of any such formula may be accounted for by the 
 fact that all the readers of the epistle might be expected to be 
 familiarly acquainted with its source. " For this cause " (dvrl 
 TovTou in our text, eveKev rovrov in the LXX., 1?"''^ in the 
 Hebrew), in the original pointed back to the preceding verse, 
 " And Adam said. This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of 
 my flesh," etc. (where in the LXX. the words are oarea and 
 o'cip^). Unless such words as these had been used by the 
 apostle in ver. 30, he would naturally have omitted tlie 
 phrase " for this cause " in his quotation. That phrase could 
 not mean, " because they are members of my body," but only, 
 " because they are taken out of Christ spiritually, as Eve was 
 out of Adam physically, — this constitutes a relationship so 
 close, that because of it a man shall leave," etc.^ — In our 
 text the Old Testament words are adopted by the apostle, and 
 used by him in a mystical sense. Just as men after the type 
 of Adam leave all their nearest relations, in order to form 
 with their wife the new relationship of marriage, so Christ, 
 the second Adam, leaves His heavenly associations and 
 relationship to enter into union with His bride, the Church, 
 which owes its being spiritually to Himself.- It should thus be 
 distinctly observed, that this verse does not refer to marriage 
 of man and woman, as Gen. ii. 24 does, but to the mystical 
 relation of Christ and the Church. 
 
 And the two shall he one flesh. — These words have no 
 special fitness in reference to the mystical application of the 
 
 ^ The attempt made by Von Soden to make avTi rovrov refer back to the 29th 
 verse, "no man ever yet hated," etc., and so to make the reference of ver. 30 
 primarily to marriage and not to the mystical relation of Christ and the 
 Church, is far-fetched and unnatural ; but those who insist on leaving out the 
 latter part of vei-. 30 cannot very well explain the connection in any other 
 way. 
 
 * The singularly jejune remark of Beet, " The Son of Mary did not leave His 
 mother in order to be ,united to the Church," misses the point in quite a 
 ludicrous way. Equally objectionable is the attempt made by Goodwin to carry 
 out into all details the mystical significance of the figure, by representing Christ 
 as leaving His Father in heaven and His mother on earth (on occasions during 
 His life and at last on the cross). See Goodwin's Worhs, ii.. Sermon on Eph. 
 v. 30-32, pp. 415-425, especially 424. 
 
408 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 passage, and are not to be pressed further than as indicating 
 the closeness of the connection between Christ and the 
 Church. 
 
 Ver. 32. This mystery is great. — If the previous verse had 
 referred simply or even primarily to marriage, such a state- 
 ment as this would be exaggerated and unreal. Beyond the 
 mystery of being itself, there is no special mystery here in 
 the case of the marriage relationship. Only the understand- 
 ing of what has been said in a mystical sense can justify our 
 regarding it as a great mystery. To make the word apply to 
 what follows, as Von Soden does, and say, " This mystery is 
 great, i.e. the mystery which I am now about to call attention 
 to, in respect of the mystical interpretation of that natural 
 relationship of which I have spoken," is not in accordance 
 with the grammatical construction of the clauses of this 
 verse, and the reference to chap. iv. 17 is not in point. — The 
 word fivo-TTJptov has been used before in this epistle, as we 
 have seen, with reference to the divine counsel of grace 
 toward the Gentiles, which was first fully revealed only to the 
 apostles. In our text it is used in almost the same sense, 
 but with a special application. It is here not merely some- 
 thing made mysterious by having been kept hidden, but 
 something in its own proper nature mystical, transcendental, 
 and not fully comprehensible. So also in 1 Cor. xv. 51. It 
 is in both these passages distinctly the mystical sense and 
 interpretation of an Old Testament saying as contrasted with 
 its literal meaning. The relation between this meaning of 
 the word, and that which it bears in the earlier passages, is 
 evident, and it seems unnecessary to go further by rendering 
 it "symbol," as Hatch, in Essays on Biblical Greek, ^. 60, 
 proposes to do in this passage, as well as in Eev. i. 20, xvii. 
 7. — The Vulgate rendering, sacramentum, though repudiated 
 by distinguished Catholic scholars, has been even recently 
 made use of in authoritative Church documents as a proof- 
 text in favour of the doctrine that marriage is a sacrament. 
 Here we have the twofold error of understanding /xvari^pcov 
 of marriage rather than of the mystical union of Christ and 
 the Church, and of rendering the word by sacramentum in a 
 sense that it cannot bear. It will be seen that Dr. Hatch, 
 
CHAP. V. 33. 409 
 
 in the passage above referred to, makes tlie same mistake in 
 failing to see that /jLvaTt]pLov should be understood of the 
 mystical union and not of marriage as a symhol of that 
 union. 
 
 But I speak concerning Christ and concerning the Church. — 
 The construction of this clause (Xe'ya) et9 Xp.) is precisely- 
 similar to Acts ii. 25 {Aavelh yap Xejei ek avjov). The 
 plain meaning of the words is, " The greatness of the mystery 
 consists in this, that I speak of Christ and the Church." It 
 implies that had he spoken of the natural relationship there 
 could have been no great mystery. 
 
 Ver. 33. But tins apart. — By the use of the phrase irXi^v 
 Kat, the apostle turns from that aspect of the subject which 
 had been engaging his thoughts to present another side of 
 the truth. He now for the first time turns from the mystical 
 view of the relationship in the three preceding verses. He 
 desires to conclude with a practical counsel to husbands and 
 wives. He would not have them suppose that the mystical 
 view is the whole truth contained in the words. They 
 must make application to themselves of the literal 
 meaning. 
 
 Let each one of you so love his own luife as himself. — On 
 the peculiar phrase "each one of you" (vixeU ol Kad' eva 
 €KaaTo<;) see the similar phrase in 1 Cor. xiv. 31. The 
 apostle, passing over his spiritualising reflections, goes back 
 upon ver. 28, and presses upon the husbands the duty and 
 fitness of loving their wives as really one in being and in 
 interests with themselves. The careful way in which the 
 counsel is addressed to each individual among them without 
 exception, shows that no plea whatever can exempt them 
 from the discharge of this obligation. 
 
 And the wife that she reverence her husband. — Here the 
 construction is changed. An example of the oratio variata. 
 See Winer, Grammar, § Ixiii. 2. 1, p. 722. The construction 
 is elliptical, and requires something supplied ; e.g., " Let the 
 wife see that," etc. The same verb {(^o^elaOat) is used by 
 the apostle in Col. iii. 22 with reference to the relations of 
 slaves to Christ as their Lord. But it is not fair to say with 
 Von Soden that wives are here put in the rank of slaves. It 
 
410 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 is the fear becoming in a wife, not in a slave. When the 
 apostle appends the word " husband," he qualifies the (f)6^o^ 
 and determines its character, just as that described as ^o^o'i 
 Xptarou is distinguished from all other sorts of fear. 
 
 (2) Duties of Parents and Children (chap. vi. 1-4). 
 
 Vers. 1-4. Having treated of the innermost centre of family 
 life, in the relation of husband and wife, the apostle now 
 proceeds to deal with the children, as the other members of 
 the family group in its narrower sense, and their relation to 
 the parents. Here again, as in the previous section, the 
 position and duties of those in subjection, who owe obedience, 
 are first considered, and then the corresponding obligations 
 of those in authority. The general exhortation is based upon 
 the fifth commandment. As given here, the fullest passage 
 in Col. iii. 20, 21, is considerably amplified, by important 
 additions under both heads of filial and parental duty. See 
 two admirable and comprehensive sermons in Candlish's 
 Discourses on Ephesians, pp. 283—315. 
 
 Ver. 1. Children, obey your parents in the Lord. — To "obey" 
 is to listen (vTraicovetv) ; to hearken respectfully and reveren- 
 tially to the commands of one whose authority is recognised. 
 Obedience is the salvation of the child. The sorest disaster 
 that could befall any one would be to miss in youth the 
 lesson of submission to authority. The position of parents 
 is that of authority. As Christ is Head of the Church, and 
 the husband the head of the wife, so are the parents the 
 head of tlie family, rulers in the household, to enforce 
 obedience. This obedience is to be rendered eV Kvptw. This 
 term, just as everywhere throughout the epistle, indicates the 
 sphere within which the prescribed duty must be performed. 
 It is, of course, joined to " obey " and not to " parents." It 
 may be assumed that those parents here referred to are 
 members of the Church, and so regarded as " in the Lord ; " 
 but it is of the obedience that the apostle here speaks. It 
 is to be rendered as a Christian duty ; these children are to 
 feel that, in obeying their parents, they are obeying and 
 serving Christ. — Then, again, the children are addressed as 
 evidently in the Church and recognised as members. It may 
 
CHAP. VI, 2. 411 
 
 fairly be assumed that tliey are thought of as members by 
 baptism. Hence it is not the obligation of nature that is 
 laid on them, but that of religion and faith (comp. 1 Cor. 
 vii. 14). 
 
 For this is rigid.- — In the parallel passage (Col. iii. 20) we 
 have evapearov, and here SiKaiou. In the word used here 
 we may probably find a reference to chap. v. 9, where the 
 fruit of the light is hiKaLoavvrj, and also to the command of 
 the law in the following verse. It is right, as a Christian 
 duty rendered in the Lord. Those children who obey from 
 this motive are walking as children of the light. 
 
 Ver. 2. Honour thy father and thy mother. — Literal render- 
 ing of the fifth commandment as given in LXX. (Ex. xx. 12 ; 
 Dent. V. IG). The requirement of the Lawgiver is found to 
 be exactly in accordance with the counsel of the Gospels. 
 Nature, law, and grace demand the fulfilment of this duty. 
 The recognition of woman's position in the family, and the 
 mother's right to obedience alongside of the father, not 
 generally acknowledged by antiquity, nor even generally in 
 the Mosaic institutions, is here, happily, well to the front. 
 It is an evidence of the non-revolutionary character of 
 apostolic preaching and teaching, that here, just as in the 
 case of slavery, no direct conflict with prevailing customs is 
 inaugurated. Beyond quoting the Mosaic precept which 
 named mothers along with the fathers as rulers in the house, 
 to whom obedience must be rendered, no effort is made to 
 raise woman's status ; and in the following exhortations to 
 parents only fathers are named. The principle, however, had 
 been laid down in the doctrine of the community of interests, 
 and, as we might even say, the unipersonality of husbands 
 and wives, that would most surely and effectually secure due 
 recognition of the mother's place and rights and duties in 
 the family circle. 
 
 Which is the first commandment in respect of promise. — This 
 commandment has first rank in this, that it has a definite 
 promise attached to it. The fact of the Lawgiver lingering 
 over this injunction, and giving explicit expression to a special 
 promise in connection with it, gave it a certain pre-eminence 
 in the code. It is not necessary to define more particularly 
 
412 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 whether that code is the Decalogue or the whole Mosaic 
 legislation. All that the apostle says is, that in respect of 
 having a promise attached to it this commandment holds the 
 first rank, without taking into consideration whether or not 
 there may be others of a like sort. It is commonly said, in 
 objection to giving such prominence to this commandment, 
 that even among the laws of the Decalogue it is not by any 
 means the most important. It is perhaps improper even to put 
 the matter thus, as though it involved comparison between one 
 law of God and another, where all is great and nothing small. 
 But in respect of its importance in the construction of the 
 basis of all moral order in the world it will rank second to 
 none. In the family the parent stands in the place of God, 
 and so the principle underlying the fifth commandment is the 
 same that underlies the first. But the promise is specifically 
 attached to the fifth rather than the first, because it refers to 
 a sphere and a set of relations that might seem to be within 
 the province of human rather than of divine law. On the 
 principle that if a man loves not his brother whom he hath 
 seen he will not love God whom he hath not seen (1 John 
 iv. 20), the promise was attached to the fifth commandment, 
 so that it might have peculiar prominence given it, and that 
 the discipline of family rule and order, and obedience to 
 parents on earth, might train heart and will to obey the 
 unseen Father in heaven. 
 
 Ver. 3. lliat it may he ivcll luith thee, and that thou mayest live 
 long on the earth. — The promise referred to in the last verse is 
 here given almost literally from the LXX. of Exod. xx. 1 2 ; 
 Deut. V. 16, with omission of the particularising clause which 
 identified the earthly dwelling-place with Canaan as the good 
 land of promise. This omission is no lapse of memory, nor yet 
 from the assumption that the whole is known by the readers, 
 but intentional, in order to apply the exhortation to all Chris- 
 tian children. It is practically the same promise that is 
 made in Deut. v. 33 to tliose who will keep the whole law. 
 And here we have the lesson, that he who keeps one com- 
 mandment keeps all. The same reward, therefore, is offered 
 for the keeping of the fifth commandment as for keeping all 
 the commandments. The special blessing promised may seem 
 
CHAP. VI. 4, 413 
 
 merely temporal and earthly, but the fact that it is in fulfil- 
 meut of God's promise changes it completely. It is thus 
 simply the visible and tangible pledge and assurance of His 
 favour and good-will. Hence, when one who has obeyed the 
 command does not apparently and literally secure the fulfil- 
 ment of the promise, it can only be because God is fulfilling 
 it to him in a far richer and more enduring way. " This, as 
 all other promises of temporal things, is ever to be taken with 
 that condition, without which they might change their quality, 
 and prove rather punishments ; but God always bestows them 
 upon His own, and therefore ought to be understood so to 
 promise them, in so far as they are fit for them, and may be 
 truly good in their particular enjoyment, and as they conduce 
 to a greater good " (Leighton, Exposition of the Ten Com- 
 mandments). 
 
 Ver. 4. And ye fathers do not provolie your children to wrath. 
 — The substantive 'Trapop'yt(T[x6<^, derived from the verb used in 
 our text, 'Trapopji^etv, has been considered already in the 
 only New Testament passage in which it occurs (iv, 26). 
 The idea present in noun and verb is violent anger, wrath, 
 fury. Parents are here commanded to abstain from conduct 
 that would have the effect of kindling such wrath in the 
 hearts of their children (comp. Eom. x. 19 ; also Sirach 
 ill. 16, iv. 2, 3). In the parallel passage (Col. iii. 21) 
 epedl^ere is preferred by all recent editors to Trapopji^ere, 
 which is thought to have been copied into the common text 
 from Ephesians. In Colossians, ddvfiLa, discouragement, is 
 given as the result of irritating exactions on the part of 
 parents. Here the consequence is not stated, but the fathers 
 are exhorted to the exercise of a wise, well-directed discipline. 
 The exhortation may even be understood in a wider sense, to 
 discourage any manifestation of temper before, as well as in 
 the treatment of, children, as may lead to the creation or 
 strengthening of a wrathful spirit in them. The father who 
 shows to his children an example of querulous, ill-natured, 
 venomous criticism of persons and opinions, is provoking his 
 children to wrath, rousing in them the wrathful spirit. The 
 immediate reference, however, undoubtedly is to undue and 
 unwise restraint, which tempts to revolt. 
 
414 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 But hring them, up in the discipline and admonition of the 
 Lord. — This presents the positive over against the, negative 
 side of the exhortation. Fathers are not only to avoid doing 
 anything to offend, but they must actively seek to supply their 
 children with that which shall effectually prevent them from 
 offending. It is the duty of fathers to nurture their children 
 (eVr/^e^ety, used only here and chap. v. 29, in the Nev/ Testa- 
 ment, to supply nourishment that the children may attain full 
 growth and maturity). They are not merely to see that they 
 have nourishment supplied, but they are to supply it them- 
 selves. What follows shows what form the administration of 
 nourishment is to take, what the moral and spiritual nourish- 
 ment is, and how it is to be conveyed to the children. 
 Fathers are to do everything possible by deed and by word to 
 further the moral and spiritual well-being of their children 
 and secure their growth in grace. In this obligation of 
 parents is included everything that will help their children to 
 grow up toward the standard of the perfect man. The two 
 departments, the one complementary of the other, in which 
 parents must labour for that end, are described in our text by 
 the terms TracBela and vovOeala, signifying respectively train- 
 ing by act and training by word. The meaning of these two 
 words is discussed by Trench, Synonyms of the New Testa- 
 ment, § xxxii. pp. 111-114, 1886.^ In classical Greek 
 iraiSeia means simply " education," but in Scripture it has the 
 deeper meaning of chastisement or correction as the essential 
 basis of all true and beneficial instruction. In our text it 
 should be rendered not " nurture," which is too weak, but 
 " discipline," indicating, as Trench rightly observes, " the laws 
 and ordinances of the Christian household, the transgression of 
 which will induce correction." In vovOecria we have a milder 
 term, applying as it does to words rather than acts ; but the 
 word may be one of strong and firm remonstrance where 
 words of encouragement have failed. According to its deriva- 
 tion {vov<i TidTj/xi), it means laying to heart, and so implies 
 that the duty which is being enforced by exhortation has been 
 
 ' On the difTercnce of ■zai'Sivciv and li'hdffKuv, see Westcott on Hob. xii. 7 
 [EpiHtle to the Hebrews, p. 400, 1889). On the difference of vouff'.nTy and 
 S;Sa<rx£(v, see Lightfoot on Col. i. 28 {^Epistle to the Colossians, p. 170, 1880). 
 
CHAP. VI. 5. 415 
 
 forgotten or is in danger of being forgotten. — The prevailing 
 ruling character of this training by deed and by word is in- 
 dicated by the words " of the Lord." They who would exercise 
 discipline and administer admonition, so as to bring up their 
 children in the sense of the apostle's exhortation, must be 
 themselves animated by the Spirit of Christ, so as to do and 
 say like Him and for Him. Whatever else in the education of 
 children may and must be relegated to those who have been 
 trained to the work and give themselves to it, the parent, as 
 the Lord's representative in his family, cannot assign to 
 another, in the sense of relieving himself, the duty of impart- 
 ing religious instruction. 
 
 (3) Duties of Masters and Servants (chap. vi. 5-9). 
 
 Vers. 5-9. The whole question of slavery in the early ages 
 of Christianity and the relation of the Christian religion to it 
 has been discussed with much keenness of interest in modern 
 times. The most fitting place for a detailed examination of 
 the relation of the inspired founders of the Christian churches 
 and writers of the New Testament Scriptures to the institution 
 of slavery is in connection with the Epistle to Philemon. 
 Here it is enough to say that, in the exhortations given in our 
 text and in Col. iii. 22, iv. 1, the apostle deals with the 
 existing state of matters, simply laying down principles which 
 the enlightened Christian conscience, in endeavouring honestly 
 to carry out, must in time so apply as to overturn all 
 injustice. Meanwhile, the apostle is specially concerned about 
 the preserving of a true Christian spirit in slaves and masters, 
 that will check the development of those faults by which 
 these classes respectively are wont to be characterised, those 
 evil passions which their respective positions are calculated to 
 produce and foster. He would have both slaves and masters 
 put themselves under the control of the Lord's Spirit, that 
 service may be rendered as to the Lord and not to men, and 
 that authority may be exercised in submission to the Lord and 
 after the pattern of the Master, who was amongst us as one 
 that serveth. 
 
 Ver. 5. Ye slaves, ohey your masters according to the flesh. — 
 The qualification Ka-ra adpKa here, as in Col. iii. 22, was fitted 
 
416 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 to comfort those whose masters made their service irksome 
 and hard, by the thought which it awakened of the temporary 
 character of the relation. But even in cases where such a 
 thought alone could give comfort, the injunction to obey 
 was imperative. 
 
 With feci}- and tremUing. — Similar in expression and 
 meaning to 2 Cor. vii. 15 ; Phil. ii. 12, and equivalent to 
 the "fearing the Lord" of Col. iii. 22. The idea expressed 
 in these and that of our text are brought together in the 
 Epistle of Barnabas, xix., " vTrorayrjar} Kvplca, Kvploa co? tvtto} 
 &60V, ev ala-)(vvri koi (f)6^Q)." In view of those other passages, 
 we may assume that these words do not mean a terror- 
 stricken dread of the master's severity, but an anxious care 
 to perform to the utmost the duties of their office. The 
 apostle would condemn the tendency, bred in slaves by the 
 treatment to which they were often subjected, to consider 
 deliberately how little they could do for their masters 
 without incurring punishment, and would encourage a 
 spirit of clieerful and hearty service to the utmost of their 
 powers. 
 
 In singhyiess of your heart, as to Christ. — Singleness of 
 heart (aTrXor???) is in contrast to a characteristic vice of 
 slavery — hypocrisy — which would assume the appearance of 
 zeal in a master's service. The eye-service condemned in the 
 next verse, and singleness of heart here enjoined, are given in 
 Colossians in the reverse order. The word is of frequent 
 occurrence in Paul's epistles, to indicate that openness that 
 comes from a consciousness of truth and honesty. And this 
 sincerity is to be shown in obedience rendered " as to Christ." 
 He who, in all his service, is aiming at serving Christ, can 
 give no place to duplicity or hypocrisy in any form. He lives 
 under the influence of " the fear of Christ" (ver. 22) ; and so 
 his solicitude is real, and not assumed. 
 
 Ver. 6. Not in the way of eye-service, as men-pleasers. — This 
 condemns the contrary of what was commended in the last 
 clause. The word " eye-service " {6cf)da\/j,ooov\eia) occurs 
 only here and in Col. iii. 22, and is probably a word coined 
 by Paul for the occasion, to give forcible expression to his 
 idea of service done only because the master's eye was upon 
 
CHAP. VI. 7. 417 
 
 the slave. The other word " men-pleasers" (avOpcoTrdpea-Kot) 
 occurs ill LXX. of Ps. liii. 5. It is precisely the same in 
 meaning as the previous phrase. " The vice was venial in 
 slaves ; it is inexcusable, because it darkens into theft, in 
 paid servants ; and it spreads far and wide. All scamped 
 work, all productions of man's hand and brain which are got 
 up to look better than they are, all fussy parade of diligence 
 when under inspection, and slackness afterwards, and all their 
 like, which infect and infest every trade and profession, are 
 transfixed by the sharp point of this precept " (Maclaren on 
 Col. iii. 22). 
 
 But as slaves of Christ. — It is Christ whom they seek to 
 please, and not man. This position of slaves or bondmen of 
 Christ they have in common with those who are free, and 
 have no master according to the flesh (1 Cor. vii. 22). There 
 is an empliatic contrast indicated between pleasing oncyi and 
 serving Christ; and this is dwelt upon in the following 
 verse. 
 
 Domg the will of Gucl from the so?/7.— These words define 
 particularly the nature of the service and the manner in which 
 it is rendered. " The will of God " here means that which God 
 would liave them do in their position as slaves. This they 
 must do if tliey are slaves of Christ, for that work can mean 
 nothing else than the possession of the desire to do this. And 
 we can claim to be His only if we are moved in what we do 
 by the innermost impulses of our being. 
 
 Ver. 7. With good will rendering service as to the Lord and not 
 to men. — A precisely parallel clause to the conckiding clause of 
 the previous verse, describing further the nature of the service 
 of the slaves of Christ. Their service is given with " good- 
 will ; " evvoia is in Scripture used only here and in the 
 common text of 1 Cor. vii. 3 (where, however, we should 
 read ocfyeiX/]); but the verb evvoelv is found in Matt. v. 25, 
 " to be well-disposed toward one." This, then, is the dis- 
 position which slaves are to show to their masters by the 
 way in which they do their work. It is not enough to do 
 faithfully what is absolutely required in the master's absence 
 as well as in his presence ; but they must show goodwill to 
 and take an interest in their work, so as to do it well. Now, 
 
 2 D 
 
418 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 this might be impossible if they had only their masters 
 according to the flesh to think of or to look to. But just 
 here the powerful motive is introduced by the thought and 
 presence of the heavenly Master. 
 
 Ver. 8. Since yc know that whatever good each one shall have 
 do7ie, this he shall get hack from the Lord. — At the close of his 
 exhortations, the apostle introduces the grand encouragement 
 which in all ages has been found by all oppressed and ill- 
 treated believers in Christ. He reminds them of that which 
 they knew as a well-established and heartily accepted article 
 of the faith : they shall all stand before the righteous Judge at 
 last. In view of the judgment, no good deed shall be lost 
 sight of. In 2 Cor. v. 10 we have a close parallel in sense 
 and expression. There, as here, emphasis is placed on the 
 fact that each one {€KaaTo<i) shall be dealt with according to 
 his own doing, and that the Judge's sentence will be a giving 
 back {KOfjLL^eaOaC), a repaying of his own doing, good or bad. 
 Tiie verb KOfxl^eaOat is properly used here and in Col. iii. 25 
 of tlie receiving in judgment what was done in life. Each 
 one receives the fruit of what he has done ; but it is simply 
 said that he receives that itself. Winer, Grammar, § Ixvi. 
 1. 6, p. 775, happily compares it to our own phrase : he will 
 reap the good or the wrong that he hath done. Similarity 
 rather than identity of reward and deed is laid down in the 
 Epistle of Barnabas, iv^, "e/cao-To?, Kadoo^ eirolrjae, KOfiLelrai " 
 (each will receive as he has done). What has been done by 
 the servant of Christ in singleness of heart to Him, has 
 been laid up as a deposit (Ellicott), and is received again 
 without loss by the doer as he enters into the joy of his 
 Lord. 
 
 Whether slave or freeman. — This is precisely equivalent to 
 the declaration made in this connection in Col. iii. 25, and in 
 the verses following our text, in the exhortation to masters, 
 that with God there is no respect of persons. This, of course, 
 is the fact which brings comfort to the oppressed bondmen. 
 In the really critical and all-determining moment, they shall 
 suffer no disability because they have been slaves. Before 
 God, such distinctions have no existence. There is no hint 
 given that Paul had any expectation that, before the Lord 
 
CHAP. VI. 9. 419 
 
 came to judgment, slavery would be abolislied. It may be, 
 as Meyer suggests, that the expectation of the speedy advent 
 of the Lord, which prevailed during the apostolic age, pre- 
 vented the apostle considering the possibility of this, or 
 raising the question even in his own mind. 
 
 Ver. 9. jlnd ye masters, do the same tilings towards them. — 
 Comprehensive statement of corresponding obligations of the 
 masters. The fulness of treatment given to the duties of 
 slaves allows the apostle to deal with the masters briefly, 
 inasmuch as what was said to the slave was fitted to impress 
 upon the master his corresponding duty. From the strong 
 and reiterated affirmation of God's impartial treatment of all 
 classes, the apostle proceeds, to show that, as a teacher of 
 ethics, he is an imitator of God. The sanie rule is applied 
 to masters and slaves ; toward one another, in their respective 
 spheres, they must do the same things. Though this same- 
 ness of conduct is not restricted to any one department of 
 duty or mode of action, it is interesting to notice that evvoia, 
 " goodwill " (ver. 7), is a term which, according to the use of 
 Greek writers, applies equally to the conduct of inferiors 
 toward superiors, and of superiors toward inferiors. In this 
 particular, by way of specimen, we may say, masters and 
 slaves are to do the same thing toward one another. 
 
 Giving up threatening. — The reference is to an unhappily 
 prevalent method of urging slaves in their labours. The 
 article before uTreiXr) is used, as Ellicott rightly perceives, to 
 indicate the prevalence of such procedure. The word itself 
 occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only in Acts iv. 29, 
 and the verb cnreiXew only in Acts iv. 17 and 1 Pet. ii. 23. 
 It means the terrorising efforts of a stronger party to make the 
 weak do his will. In the passages in Acts especially, it 
 corresponds to our word " bullying." This is its force in 
 our text. 
 
 Knowing that the Master, both theirs and yours, is in 
 heaven. — " Knowing," as in ver. 8, introduces the motive which, 
 though differently expressed, is practically the same there 
 and here. They are reminded by their very calling that they 
 are men under authority, having men under them whom they 
 command. They hold their rank as representatives of God : 
 
420 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 oi Kvpioi, Laving delegated to them an authority from o Kvpio<i, 
 bat not in such a way that o hov\o<i ceases to be in every 
 respect as directly as his Kvpio<i Kara a-dpKa directly under 
 the rule and protection of 6 Kvpioi ev ovpavol^. In presence 
 of the heavenly Master, bond and free have equal rights and 
 equal obligations. Masters remembering this will act justly 
 and kindly to their slaves. 
 
 And there is no respect of persons with Him. — What has 
 been implied throughout, and in various connections pretty 
 distinctly stated, is here put in the most explicit language. 
 It is given in Col. iii. 25 as the closing word to the slaves; 
 here as the final solemn appeal to masters. This illustrates 
 the principle that masters and slaves are to do the same things, 
 since the same motives are presented to both. Tliey are both 
 to live under a sense of the just and impartial procedure of 
 the God with whom they have to do, who will be their Judge, 
 and whom they are both alike called upon to imitate. 
 
 An interesting parallel to this whole verse is found in 
 the Epistle of Barnabas, xix., where "The Way of Liglit" is 
 described : " Thou shalt not issue orders with bitterness to 
 thy maid-servant or thy man-servant, who trusts in the same 
 God, lest thou shouldst not reverence that God who is above 
 both ; for He came to call men, not according to their out- 
 ward appearance, but according as the Spirit hath prepared 
 them." 
 
 Sect. X. — Armouk for the Life of Temptation and 
 Struggle (Chap. vi. 10-20). 
 
 Vers. 10-20. The apostle abruptly passes to his closing ex- 
 hortation. Yet though there is no attempt made to mark the 
 connection, and indicate in words the transition from what he 
 lias been saying, it is quite evident that there is a connection 
 in thought, and that our section is not unconnected with the 
 preceding context, but comes in most naturally just at this 
 point. We have seen that the epistle is entirely occupied 
 with descriptions of the old nature and the new, and with 
 warnings against any recurrence to the old and exhortations 
 to the cultivation of the new. The idea of struggle against 
 
CHAP. VI. 10-20. 421 
 
 old sinful habits, of resistance to temptations to unfaithful 
 compromise with the world and sin, has been kept to the 
 front throughout the whole epistle. What more fitting con- 
 clusion could we have for such a writing, than just this vivid 
 picture of the fight in which we are engaged, the enenues that 
 rage against us, and the armour in which we encase ourselves 
 for protection against their attacks, and for tlie sla3'ing of 
 those who otherwise would slay us ? There is no passage 
 corresponding to this in Oolossians. There the section on 
 relative duties is immediately followed by that exhortation to 
 prayer which forms the close of our passage. The same idea 
 of the Christian life as a warfare is found, however, elsewhere 
 in Paul's epistles, e.g. 1 Thess. v. 8 ; 2 Cor. vi. 7, x. 4 ; Rom. 
 xiii, 12. In the present section there is a combination of 
 the ideas of soldier and wrestler. Yet it can scarcely be said 
 that what is described is an armed wrestler or gladiator. 
 This theory has been presented and argued in an ingenious 
 and interesting manner in a recent number of the Expositori/ 
 Times} But there is an evident incongruity in the intro- 
 duction of a gladiatorial contest in our passage. The prominent 
 idea of the passage is the bitterness of the enmity of those 
 who oppose the Christian in this fight, as arising out of their 
 contrary nature. The opponents are not like gladiators set 
 to fight against one another in a deadly combat. It is a con- 
 flict between children of light and powers of darkness. The 
 combatants are by nature opposed, and wherever and whenever 
 they meet they must fight because of this essential opposition, 
 without any other party being required to set them against 
 one another. It seems better to regard the apostle as having 
 before his mind simply the idea of conflict, which he describes 
 indifferently as a wrestling or as a fighting in battle, while 
 the pieces of armour mentioned are simply those of the soldier 
 which most readily lend themselves to the representation of 
 the several parts of the spiritual equipment of God's warriors. 
 — In vers. 10-12 we have a general description of the nature 
 and conditions of the conflict. In vers. 13-20 we have a 
 particular account of the means to be used and the weapons 
 
 1 Expository Times for May 1891, pp. 181, 182, paper on Eph. vi. 12 by 
 Rev. J. Rutherfurd. 
 
422 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 required in the conflict, the climax being reached in the ex- 
 hortation to prayer, personal and intercessory. 
 
 Ver. 10. Henceforth, he strengthened in the Lord and in the 
 power of His might. — The adverbial phrase tov Xotirov occurs 
 elsewhere in the New Testament only in Gab vi. 17. In his 
 closing exhortation the apostle desires to show the Ephesians 
 how he would have them conduct themselves, what attitude 
 he would have them maintain, in the time to come. — The 
 exhortation is given here in its most general form. What is 
 needed is the maintenance and increase of spiritual strength 
 to fit us for holding our ground. " Be strengthened " {ev8v- 
 va/xovade, Rom. iv. 20 ; Heb. xi 34, etc.), be made strong, 
 which can be accomplished only in the Lord. In union with 
 Christ this strength is obtained. For all that follows this is 
 the indispensable pre-requisite, the condition of all successful 
 employment of the weapons of the Christian warfare. — In 
 regard to the second phrase in this clause, the words Kpara 
 and la-^v<i have been explained in the note on chap. i. 19. 
 By his union with Christ the Christian soldier has at com- 
 mand the inexhaustible resources of omnipotence. He has 
 fellowship with Christ in that victorious exercise of power 
 (Kpara) which results from the existence of that inward 
 strength (icr;^i;?), Vv'hich obtains expression in such successful 
 strivings for the mastery. The courageous disposition owes 
 its origin to, and is dependent for its maintenance upon, union 
 with Christ. Natural courage and daring do not contribute 
 to success in this spiritual contest. It is, therefore, an 
 instance of Bunyan's deep spiritual perception, when we find 
 him representing many of the most unflinching and persistent 
 of his pilgrims as naturally timid and anxious to avoid con- 
 flict. All that contributes to victory is got from Christ, and is 
 lield by continued fellowship with Christ (comp. 2 Cor. 
 xii. 19). 
 
 Ver. 11. Fut on the whole armour of God. — " Tiie whole 
 armour" (?/ TravoTrXia) means the armour in all its parts. The 
 word occurs again in the New Testament only in ver. 13, and 
 in Luke xi. 22; but is found frequently in LXX. and Josephus. 
 It occurs in Wisdom of Solomon, v. 18, where we have a 
 singularly close parallel to this passage ; which, however, is 
 
ciiAi'. VI. u. 423 
 
 itself an imitation of Isa. lix. 17, which probably suggested 
 to Paul the use of this figure here, and in 1 Thess. v. 8. 
 The passage in Wisdom, v. 18-20, runs as follows : " He shall 
 take to Him His jealousy for complete armour (TravorrXia), and 
 make the creature His weapon for the revenge of His enemies. 
 He shall put on (ii'Suaerai) righteousness as a breastplate, 
 and true judgment instead of a helmet. He shall take holi- 
 ness as an invincible shield. His severe wrath shall He 
 sharpen into a sword." What is said in the writing of the 
 prophet, and after him in the Apocrypha, of God as the God 
 of Hosts, is said by the apostle of those who have made 
 God's strength their own. The idea of the apostle again is 
 imitated, with variations in detail, by Ignatius in his Epistle 
 to Polycarp, vi. : " Let your baptism abide with you as your 
 shield ; your faith as your helmet ; your love as your spear ; 
 your patience as your hodi/ armour {TravoTrXia)." This armour 
 is called God's (?; TravoTrXia tou Qeov), because it is provided 
 by God, and is in each of its parts something pertaining to God, 
 belonging to His being, which in Christ He shares with those 
 who believe. It is to be put on, in the sense in which the 
 new man is put on (chap, iv, 24), and the Lord Jesus Christ 
 (Rom. xiii. 14). It all exists in God, is provided for us by 
 Him in Christ, and needs only to be appropriated by us to 
 ourselves as our own.. We have only to put it on. 
 
 That ye may he able to stand against the wiles of the devil. — 
 The reason for putting on the armour is here stated. What 
 is needed is strength on the part of the saints, strength of 
 heart and will and understanding. Tiiis can be secured 
 only by their putting on the whole armour of God. When 
 this has been put on they will be able to stand, to hold their 
 ground against all comers. It is a military term. Thus, e.g., 
 Xenophon uses aTrjvat in opposition to (f)euyetv, of holding as 
 opposed to deserting the field. The word rendered " wiles " 
 {/jbedoSeiai) we have met with already in chap. iv. 14, and it 
 is found nowhere else in sacred or profane literature, except 
 in patristic and later writings. In Justinian it is used of 
 occupation, business. The verb fiedoSeveiv means to follow 
 up by a crafty plan, to lay cunning schemes. So LXX., 
 2 Sam. xix. 26, where Mephibosheth complains of having been 
 
424 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 fleceived by Ziba, who had slandered him. It is also used 
 by Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians, vii., " Whosoever 
 shall pervert (/uLeOoSevrj) the oracles of the Lord," etc. Its 
 general meaning is to tamper with, to lay deliberate schemes 
 to turn aside. There can, therefore, be no uncertainty as to 
 the meaning of the word in our text. They are the wiles, 
 the stratagems, the machinations of the devil that we have 
 to hold our ground against. In meaning the woi^d is quite 
 equivalent to the voyjfiara rov Xarava of 2 Cor. ii. 11. 
 
 Ver. 12. For our ■wrestling is not with flesh and blood. — The 
 apostle here gives the reason for insisting upon such prepara- 
 tion. The conflict is of no ordinary kind. The enemy is 
 one whose skill in stratagem demands that no precaution be 
 neglected. Had he been a man like ourselves, human devices 
 and i^rovision might be quite sufficient to oppose to his pre- 
 parations. But it is not with one " of flesh and blood " that 
 we are challenged to fight, hence the source of our prepara- 
 tion must be outside of and above tlie human sphere. By 
 " flesh and blood " he does not mean the fleshly, sensuous 
 desires of our own corrupt nature, but simply humanity 
 viewed as weak and liable to decay, in contrast to the hosts 
 of spiritual powers of which he proceeds afterwards to speak. 
 The word " wrestling " {•nakrf) means a contest in which the 
 one combatant shakes the other in the endeavour to throw 
 him. This is the only place in Scripture where it occurs. 
 The reference to the wrestling here is merely incidental. As 
 we have indicated, in the introduction to this section (see also 
 Meyer on this passage), the apostle, after telling us, in terms 
 of the wrestling match, what the struggle of the Christian is 
 not, immediately passes on to speak of what that conflict is, 
 in terms of a battle or fight between armed soldiers. But 
 while this is a fight between armed combatants, it is on our 
 part a personal engagement, single combat, for which we 
 must individually prepare ourselves, just as the wrestler had 
 to do. 
 
 But with the principalities, with the potvers. — These names, 
 which are here evidently given to our spiritual enemies, to agents 
 and emissaries of Satan the great adversary, were used, as we 
 have seen, in chap. i. 20, to indicate special classes of good 
 
CHAP. VI. 12. 425 
 
 angels. An extremely interesting investigation of the angelo- 
 logical statements of Colossians has been made by Klopper in 
 his able commentary on that epistle, followed up by Von 
 Soden in the introduction to his commentary, and elaborately 
 examined in an able monograph by Everling {Die Faulinische. 
 Anyelologk und Ddmonologie, pp. 84-112, 1888). "Princi- 
 palities and powers " {ap-^ai and e^ova-iai) are regarded as 
 orders of angelic beings, in themselves neitlier good nor evil, 
 but relatively in opposition to God, and at the disposal of 
 Satan. This theory is not reconcilable with the modes of 
 scriptural representation. The principalities and powers here 
 mentioned are regarded as occupying in Satan's kingdom a 
 similar place to that which those mentioned in chap. i. 20 
 occupied in Christ's kingdom. In the one case they are 
 subject to Satan, in the other to Christ. In both cases they 
 mean beings that, in might and influence, come next in rank 
 and significance to their respective princes. As surely as 
 the one is good, the other is evil. That they have given 
 them the same names as the most exalted princes in the 
 kingdom of God, is certainly meant to indicate that these 
 beings are worthy of being compared in respect of strength 
 only with those strong angels of God. It is this equivalence 
 of power which is emphasised here by the use of the same 
 names, and this it is that gives point to the exliortation to 
 see to it that we omit nothing of the complete armour pro- 
 vided for us of God. 
 
 With the vjurld-mdcrs of the darkness.- — This very peculiar 
 clause (tt/jo? tov<; KoafJbOKpdTopa<i rod aKorov; tovtov) describes 
 apparently the same foes referred to in the former clause with 
 respect to their activity in a special sphere. This name 
 (KoafjiOKpaTcop) was used by Marcion for the Demiurgus, the 
 God of the Jews ; while in the Valentinian system he is the 
 devil proceeding from the hylical substance. In its literal 
 and natural sense, it was applied to the Roman emperor. 
 In the Tcsfamentum Solomonis, the seven spirits appearing to 
 Solomon say, " r]pLel<i e/c TpLuKovra rpicov aroi'^Laiv rov Kocr/j,o- 
 KpdTopo<; Tou aKorovi. In the plural, as in our text, they 
 are the hosts of the KoafxoKpdTwp. As used by the apostle, 
 it seems to have been suggested by the Jewish notion that 
 
426 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 the Gentile nations had been portioned out among the angels, 
 whom later Judaism had more particularly characterised as 
 evil angels or demons. The character of the rulers is indi- 
 cated quite unniistakeably by the description given of the 
 world as subject to their rule. They have made it a world 
 of darkness because they rule it as spirits of darkness 
 (comp. 2 Cor. iv. 4). 
 
 With spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places. — The 
 name nrvev^ariKa., which has been evidently assumed in the 
 descriptions given of the enemies whom we have to stand 
 against, is now explicitly given. " Ta irvevfiariKd are not 
 merely ra irvevixara, but, in accordance with the force of the 
 collective neuter adjective, denote the bands, hosts, or con- 
 fraternities of evil spirits " (Ellicott). These hosts are not 
 mere elements or personifications of physical movements, e.g. 
 winds, storms, eaithquakes, lightnings, etc. They are not to, 
 aapKLicd, but ra TTvevfiaTtKa. They are under the control of 
 a powerful spirit as their prince, but their own nature is 
 similar to his, each a miniature of himself. This gives a 
 reality and significance to the plural form KoafjiOKpdTop6<i. 
 The god and prince of this world has around him hosts, 
 whose nature, like his own, is spiritual, and who are capable 
 of ruling and of severally advancing, in their different pro- 
 vinces, the interests of the kingdom of darkness. They are 
 not merely a multitude of forces at the prince's command, 
 but they are a host of spiritual powers. At the same time, 
 they are called rrvev/jLariKd rather than irvevpuara, because 
 they are not merely like men wrought upon by him as to 
 TTveu/xa, etc. (ii. 2), but they are essentially manifestations 
 of himself, modes of expression for his own very being. 
 They are described, in respect of character and working, as 
 " spiritual hosts of wickedness " (rd irvevfiaTiKd t^9 Trovqpia^). 
 They are in nature essentially wicked. In 2 Thess. iii. 3, 
 and in ver. 1 6 of our chapter, the devil is called 6 7rovr]p6<i. 
 The leader and his myrmidons are of one character, one dis- 
 position ; and so the work of wickedness in which they 
 engage is the natural expression of their very being, and to 
 the doing of it they lend all their powers without grudging 
 or intermission. It is the superhuman might, as well as the 
 
CHAP. VI. 12. 427 
 
 unceasing activity of these spiritual hosts of wickedness, that 
 is here emphasised. The contrast is between them and mere 
 weak flesh and blood. The expression in this clause which 
 lias occasioned most discussion is iv rot? i'rrovpavloL';. The 
 translation of the Authorised Version " in high places " is 
 evidently an attempt to avoid offence by the use of the word 
 " heavenly " to describe a region in which a conflict is carried 
 on, and where hosts of evil are represented as still present. The 
 same phrase is literally rendered in the other places in our 
 epistle, where it occurs, i. 3, 20, ii. 6, iii. 10. In the Ilevised 
 Version our text is rightly conformed to the others. Tlie 
 phrase undoubtedly indicates the region in which those 
 spirits dwell who carry on the contest, rather than the region 
 in which the contest is conducted. Those explanations which 
 make iv equivalent to vTrep or Sid, so as to make our text 
 refer to a conflict about heavenly or spiritual things, may 
 be dismissed at once. As thus understood of locality, ra 
 eiTovpdvia must be regarded as practically synonymous with 
 TO drjp of chap. ii. 2. The previous description of the enemy's 
 domain served to indicate their nearness and the ready access 
 which they had to mankind. Their region is above that of 
 men, yet closely surrounding it. The same idea is presented 
 in an intensified form in the figure of our text. The iirovpdvia 
 are still more distinctly regions which afford to the dwellers 
 in them points of vantage for attack upon the dwellers upon 
 the earth. The idea of the superhuman might of the spiritual 
 hosts of wickedness is set forth with peculiar em}>hasis by 
 thus locating them in heavenly places.^ And such an inter- 
 change of dijp and eTTovpdvca would not be regarded by the 
 reader of the epistle as in any way unnatural or unallowable. 
 The use of both words in such works as The Testaments of 
 the Twelve Patriarclis and The Ascension of Isaiah, to indicate 
 the residence of the evil spirits, shows that no offence or 
 misunderstanding was likely to arise from the interchange of 
 
 ^ " The reason why Paul does not here say Iv rZ alpi is, that he wishes to brin^ 
 out as strongly as possible the superhuman and superterrestrial nature of the 
 hostile spirits, for which purpose to name the air as the place of their dwelling 
 might he less appropriate than to speak of the heavenly regions, an expression 
 which entirely accords with the lively colouring of his picture " (Meyer). 
 
428 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 the terms. The iirovpavca, then, are not the higher regions 
 of heaven, but the lower regions of our own atmosphere, near 
 us and yet above us, and affording to those dwelling in them 
 facilities for movement that we have not. Under this figure 
 the dangerous character of our enemy is impressively set 
 before us. The spiritual beings lurking there are not 
 messengers of God sent to discipline and chastise, but agents 
 of the wicked one who tempt to sin. An altogether different 
 meaning has been given to eirovpavia by Eadie, and set forth 
 in a singularly powerful and graphic manner by Dr. Candlish 
 in his sermon " On the Heavenlies," Discourses on Epkesians, 
 pp. 11—15. The heavenlies are regarded as forming the 
 contrast to the darkness of this world. In that latter region 
 the evil spirits have their domain, and there they rule as 
 principalities ; but in the heavenlies they are intruders, and 
 so can act there only as powers. But this distinction between 
 principalities and powers is purely fanciful, and the conception 
 of TCL eTTovpdvia, as applying to a state rather than a place, 
 does not suit the context, which requires the indication of 
 locality. It is no doubt quite true that in the world Satan 
 has sway, and that if he finds believers there he has an 
 advantage over them, so that their only safety lies in fliglit 
 back into their own spiritual domain ; and it is quite true that 
 Satan follows them into this spiritual region only to be 
 defeated by the Prince of that country, who fights for us. But 
 these are not the truths presented in this verse. The idea 
 here is that of the superhuman might of the spiritual hosts of 
 wickedness, which is described as lying, not only in their rank 
 and authority, but also in the superior advantages and oppor- 
 tunities afforded by their superterrestrial abode. 
 
 Ver. 13. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God. 
 — The apostle here reiterates what he had enjoined in ver. 1 1, 
 but now on the ground of what had been said. " For this 
 cause " {hia tovto), seeing that it is an enemy of tliis sort, so 
 powerful, possessed with so many advantages over you, stronger 
 in himself beyond all comparison, and occupying a position 
 from which he can at all times and from all sides sweep down 
 upon you, nothing else can save you than the possession and 
 use of the panoply God has provided. The word dvaXajx^dveLv 
 
ciiAr. VI. 13. 429 
 
 means to take up, to assume, and was the usual military 
 term for putting on armour for use. It is employed by ecclesi- 
 astical writers, e.g. Justin, Theodoret, etc., of Christ's assuming 
 the human form. 
 
 In order that ye may he ahle to withstand. — These words 
 indicate the attitude that has to be assumed and maintained, 
 and how alone this is possible. The past tenses active of the 
 verb dvOiaTrjixL, which properly means to set against, as well 
 as the middle, mean to set ones self against, to withstand. The 
 duty of the Christian, in presence of his spiritual foes, is 
 resistance (James iv. 7); and this can be offered only by those 
 who have put on God's armour. If one be foolhardy enough 
 to attempt to stand without any particular piece of this 
 equipment, he must soon fall. 
 
 In the evil day. — This is added in order to call attention to 
 the absolute indispensallencss of the preparation here com- 
 mended. In V. 16 the fact that the days are evil is advanced 
 as a reason for making a wise and diligent use of the time. 
 At that place the precise meaning of irov7]p6'i has been 
 carefully discussed. The meaning of the words " in the evil 
 day " {ev rfj rj/xepa rrj irovTjpa) is, " in the season of abounding 
 wickedness, in the day v/hen the spirits of wickedness sweep 
 down upon you with a malignant rush, endeavouring to 
 overwhelm and carry you away before them." Very many 
 expositors, both in ancient and in modern times, have been 
 disposed to regard the apostle as thinking of a particular 
 season in the history of the world and the Church, when the 
 forces of Satan were massed together and concentrated in 
 order to engage in one great decisive conflict, which would 
 determine once and for ever whether God or Satan should 
 have the mastery. It was thought of as that day of struggle 
 which would immediately precede the millennial reign of 
 Christ. But it is evidently addressed to believers as such, 
 and the context supplies no hint that the apostle was think- 
 ing of any such great final crisis. Nor did Paul speak 
 differently in his earlier epistles. In Gal. i. 4, " the pi'eseut evil 
 world " (o alwv 6 evecnoi^ irovrjpo^) is certainly that period of 
 conflict which life in this world, throughout its whole duration, 
 must prove to all those who will live godly in it. The 
 
430 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 definiteness of it, as shown by the repeated use of the article, is 
 undoubtedly intended to indicate tbat, while the whole period 
 of life in this world, just because it is in the world that lieth 
 in the wicked one, is the evil day, special periods will recur 
 in which the attack is made with peculiar violence. To be 
 ready for these we must be ready always. The whole day is 
 evil, full of trouble and anxiety, for we know not when or 
 how the attack may be made. 
 
 And, having done all, to stand. — The ultimate result 
 following the warrior's appropriating and using the armour. 
 Encased in that armour he has been able to ivithstand each 
 several attack ; and then, after he has passed through these, 
 so that it would seem that he has borne all sorts of attacks, 
 and has been thoroughly proved on every side, he must still 
 continue to wear the armour in order that he may stand, that 
 he may hold the field. The assumption is that the victory 
 has been very decidetl. The verb KUTepyd^ea-daL means to 
 complete, to finish, and airavra implies that everything, to the 
 minutest detail, has been accomplished ; that every part of 
 the conflict has been gone through with ; that all the varieties 
 of the fMedoBlaL of the devil have been met and baffled. Then 
 comes the temptation to throw off armour, and rest. But, so 
 soon as this is done, proof comes that the evil day is still 
 present. When victory has been gained the field must be 
 kept. " Having done all, there is the grace of victory ; to 
 stand, there is the grace of constancy. Having done all, the 
 idea is that of success amid the strain of the battle ; to stand, 
 the idea is that of perseverance amidst the monotony and 
 temptations of the succeeding peace. Having done all, the 
 expression denotes the fortitude that wins ; to stand, the 
 expression means the patience, the heedfulness, and the 
 humility that keep a man in possession of the ground he has 
 won." ' Tiie arijvai of our text is not the same as that of ver. 
 11, for the word in that former verse was used of the prepara- 
 tion for the fight, but in this of the attitude maintained after 
 the fi'dit. It is also contrasted with the withstanding, whicli 
 
 ^ See a most admirable illustration of this text in a post-communion sermon 
 on the danger of reaction, by Rev. "VV. A. Gray of Elgin, in The Shadow of the 
 Hand and Other Sermons, pp. 111-132, 1885. 
 
CHAP. YI. 14. 431 
 
 corresponds to that previous duty. To withstand {KaOiaTiqiii) 
 is clearly the same as to stand against {arrival Tvpo^). 
 Chrysostom, after having wrongly interpreted arravTa of all 
 passions and evil lusts, proceeds rightly to explain what is 
 implied by standing. " Even after the victory we must 
 stand. An enemy may be struck, but things that are struck 
 revive again. If we stand not, they are even now rising up, 
 though fallen. So long as we waver not, the adversary rises 
 not again." 
 
 Ver. 14. Stand, therefore, havirig girt your loins about with 
 tnith. — These words describe the attitude of those who, having 
 taken up the panoply, are ready for the fight. — The description 
 of the several parts of the armour begun here is not to be 
 regarded as a thoroughly complete enumeration of all the 
 parts of the Christian soldier's equipment. For this reason 
 it is not safe to indulge in minute spiritualising upon each 
 several article in all its possible uses. The apostle confines 
 his enumeration to those graces that are distinctively called 
 into requisition in defending ourselves against the attacks of 
 our spiritual enemies, and represents them under the best 
 known and most conspicuous of the pieces that formed the 
 coat of mail of the Eoman soldier, adding simply one offensive 
 weapon, to show that we must not merely stand, in the sense 
 of refusing to give way before the adversary's onslaught, but 
 that we must be prepared to drive the intruder away. — The 
 first piece of armour referred to is the girdle. The name 
 " girdle " {^mvij), though not expressly used here, is implied 
 in the participle (Trepi^coad/j.evo'i). We have a close parallel 
 in Isa. xi. 5 : " Eighteousness shall be the girdle of His loins, 
 and truth the girdle of His reins." The use of the girdle is 
 to impart firmness to the body, and to keep in place all the 
 other parts of the armour. Having it on is regarded as an 
 indication and evidence of preparedness (Luke xii. 35). With 
 precisely the same idea before him, Peter, using another 
 compound of this same word, exhorts to watchfulness : " Gird 
 up the loins of your mind" (1 Pet. i. 13). That Christian 
 grace which proves to the Christian soldier what the girdle 
 around his loins does to the man who has to fight in the 
 ranks, is truth {ak-qOeia). The distinction commonly made 
 
432 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 here between objective and subjective truth is not appropriate. 
 It is clearly subjective, in the sense that it is a Christian 
 grace, and therefore an inner spiritual possession ; but it is 
 also objective, inasmuch as it is the appropriation of the 
 truth as it is in Jesus (iv. 21). It should rather be 
 described, " Tlie truth of God in Christ used defensively, for 
 personal nourishment and edification." It thus gives stability 
 and firmness to the whole spiritual being. His conviction 
 that he has Him that is true (1 John v. 20), that the Spirit 
 of truth is shed abroad in his heart, imparts to the Christian 
 soldier a nimbleness of movement, and an agility in the use 
 of all his weapons, which the man who cannot trust himself, 
 is not sure what manner of spirit he is of, can never 
 have. 
 
 And having i^ut on the hreastplate of righteousness. — The 
 6copa^ is properly the breast, from the neck to the lowermost 
 rib, and then secondarily the breastplate for covering that 
 part of the body. In Isa. lix. 17 and Wisdom v. 19, the 
 figure occurs in precisely the same form as in our text; but 
 in 1 Thess, v. 8, faith and love, and not righteousness, are 
 described as the breastplate. The righteousness meant in 
 our text is evidently not, as in the Old Testament and 
 apocryphal passages, the rectoral justice of God ; nor is it 
 the righteousness of justification through faith in Christ, for 
 faith is introduced in ver. 16. It is rather righteousness, in 
 the general sense of uprightness and integrity of life. This, 
 as a Christian grace, is the fruit of the Spirit's indwelling. — 
 The two pieces of armour first named are evidently closely 
 related — indeed, inseparably associated. Just as in the 
 description of the new man (iv. 24), hiKaioavvr) and 
 dXrjOeia are brought together, so also here. These are the 
 indispensable elements in Christian holiness, without which 
 no man can hold or wield any of the other weapons of the 
 Christian warfare. The enemy deals in deceit, and works by 
 wiles. In his own province he is master. Only those who 
 are not themselves deceivers will not be deceived by him. 
 He can find no entrance into the heart encased in truth and 
 righteousness. 
 
 Ver. 15. And having yoicr feet underhoand ivith the py-epara- 
 
CHAP. VI. 15. 433 
 
 Hon of the gospel of peace. — The " preparation " (eToifjuaata) is 
 by some understood of preparedness for the spiritual conflict 
 which secures to the Christian soldier the enjoyment of 
 eternal peace. It is compared by Von Soden to the Pauline 
 idea of irapprjaia. By others it is understood to mean a 
 firm foundation ; and the clause is rendered, " with the firm 
 ground which the gospel of peace affords." The use of this 
 word in the LXX., the Hexapla, and the New Testament, has 
 been carefully traced by Dr. Hatch (Essays in Biblical Greek, 
 pp. 51-55, 1889). He finds that as used to translate the 
 Hebrew '^^, " to set up, to make firm," eTotfidl^etv, which in 
 classical Greek meant " to prepare," in Hellenistic Greek 
 came to be identified in meaning with the Hebrew word 
 which it was commonly used to translate. In the New 
 Testament, in many passages, the context shows that the 
 original meaning is that intended. In our text, the only New 
 Testament passage in which eTOCfxaa-ia occurs, Dr. Hatch 
 thinks it should be rendered, as in certain Old Testament 
 passages, " firm foundation," or " firm footing." Perhaps 
 tlie best parallels are: Ps. Ixxxix. 15, SiKuioavvr] koI 
 Kpi'fia iroLfjiacria rou Opovov crov \ Zech. v. 11, eirl rrjv 
 eTOLixaaiav avTuv (upon her own base). This meaning is 
 certainly allowable, if demanded by the context and in 
 accordance with the language of figure employed. It seems, 
 however, absolutely impossible to give any natural sense to 
 the figure of our text by this explanation of the word. The 
 figure is that of a soldier preparing himself for the battle 
 by binding under {vTroBeiadai) his feet the military sandals 
 (viroBijfiara), soles bound under the feet by thongs, and thus 
 fitting himself to take part in the fight. Surely such an act 
 is much more naturally described as a preparation, or the 
 making of one's self prepared, than by the introduction of the 
 idea of stability and firmness of foot ! If we keep before us 
 the figure of the battle, we shall see that no other idea than 
 that of preparedness will suit. The soldier who has his 
 sandals bound upon his feet is nimble in his movements on 
 the battle - field, and is ready for any change of position 
 required by his enemies' tactics. This preparation, in the 
 equipment of the Christian soldier, is fittingly described as 
 
 2 E 
 
434 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 consisting in his possession of the gospel of peace. This 
 gospel, which has the peace of God for its contents, is that 
 which affords preparedness to the Christian soldier. He who 
 is to fight his spiritual enemies must have the peace of God 
 ruling in his heart. He who is at war with God and with 
 himself cannot fight his spiritual foes. He is like an unshod 
 soldier ; the painfulness and difficulty of his movements occupy 
 his attention and take his mind off the conflict which should 
 have his undivided attention. — The interpretation favoured by 
 many earlier expositors, and repeated by Klopper, which sees 
 in the text an exhortation to heartiness of zeal in spreading 
 the gospel among others, is not in the very least in keeping 
 with the idea of the combat urged against spiritual foes, 
 preparation for which is the one subject treated of in the 
 whole section. 
 
 Ver. 16. In all cases taldiig ujj the shield of faith. — The read- 
 ing 6v TTCLcnv (accepted by Lachmann, Westcott and Hort, on the 
 authority of i<, B, etc.) is better suited to the context than the 
 common reading eirl irdaiv (defended by Meyer, Ellicott, etc.). 
 The reading of the common text properly means not " over 
 all " in the sense of being superimposed, nor " above all " in 
 the sense of superior importance, but " over and above all " 
 in the sense of addition. This could only have been used 
 appropriately if it had been employed regarding the last- 
 named article of armour, i.e. at the earliest, in connection 
 with the last clause of the following verse. It was in all 
 probability introduced as a correction from Col. iii. 14. The 
 reading now generally accepted serves simply to call special 
 attention to the importance of faith to the Christian soldier, 
 which is as indispensable to him on all occasions as the shield 
 was to the Eoman legionary. It does not imply that in any 
 case any of the other parts of armour may be dispensed with ; it 
 simply affirms that in all cases this one is necessary. The 
 indispeusableness of this one article may even be seen in this, 
 that if that faith which is the shield be rightly understood, 
 its possession will necessarily involve the possession of all those 
 other graces represented figuratively under the other parts of 
 the panoply. — The 6vpe6<; mentioned here is the large shield, 
 scutum, of the heavy-armed soldier, as distinguished from 
 
CHAP. VI. 10. 435 
 
 ao-TTi'?, chjpeus, the smaller shield, and does not occur elsewhere 
 in the New Testament. Compare Ps. xxxv. 2 in LXX., iiriXa- 
 ^ov ottXou Kal Ovpeov. The suitableness of the comparison is 
 evident. Faith in God, especially as faith in Christ, makes 
 the Christian soldier invulnerable, so that only steadfastness 
 in faith (1 Pet. v. $) is needed in order to repel all attacks. 
 But this faith secures union with Christ, and so brings His 
 Spirit to make righteous and true, and that gospel of peace 
 which imparts nimbleness of movement and alacrity of 
 spirit. 
 
 Whercioith ye shall he able to quench all the fiery darts of 
 the evil one. — The shield of faith will prevent the burning 
 darts of the enemy from piercing the child of faith who holds it, 
 so that they will fall harmless. In Ps. vii. 13, flaming arrows, 
 and in Ps. xviii. 15,lxxviL 18, the lightnings are the weapons 
 of God for scattering His enemies and proclaiming His power. 
 The /9c'Xt; Treirvpoifieva of the text are characterised as 
 rov TTovripov. These fiery darts are not mentioned elsewhere 
 in Scripture. The participle is indeed occasionally used of 
 inflamed passions (2 Cor. xi. 29; 1 Cor. vii. 9); but that 
 meaning is evidently unsuitable here. It scarcely needs to 
 be proved that tov iTovrjpov is masculine and not neuter. The 
 idea of conflict on the part of armed soldiers implies a 
 personal antagonist. The whole question of the use of the 
 word o TTcvripo'^ is admirably discussed in detail, in support of 
 the rendering " the evil one " in the last petition of the 
 Lord's Prayer, in Chase's treatise. Texts and Studies, I. iii. 
 71-161, 1891.^ Tlie darts are not man's own inflamed and 
 burning passions, but weapons wielded against man and 
 hurled against him by the adversary. These burning darts, 
 malleoli, were very commonly used in the wars both of 
 Eomans and of barbarians, and are very frequently referred 
 to in classical writers, e.g. Livy, xlii. 64: Cicero, in Cat. i. 13, 
 32, etc. They were formed by twisting tow dipped in pitch 
 round about the shaft that was to be hurled amid the ranks 
 
 ^ See also Lightfoot, On a Fresh Eevision of the New Testament, 1891, 
 Appendix II., on the last clause of the Lord's Prayer, pp. 269-323; and in 
 favour of the neuter rendering, Canon Cook, Deliver us from evil, — two 
 pam^jhlets, 18S1, 1882. 
 
436 EPISTLE TO THE EPIIESIANS. 
 
 of the enemy. Ammianus Marcelliuus, xxiii. 14, describes 
 them as cane arrows, with a head in the form of a distaff 
 filled with lighted material. The figure thus describes Satan's 
 attacks as deliberately made and skilfully devised, so as to be 
 as destructive as possible. There may be also a reference to the 
 panic which the showering of such missiles among the soldiers 
 was fitted to produce. Thus the great enemy of man seeks 
 to cause panic and confusion, and to arouse such alarm as 
 will paralyse effort and unnerve the attacked, so that they 
 may offer ineffective or no resistance. Against such panic- 
 causing flaming darts of Satan, whether in the form of 
 temptations or of persecutions, the only protection is the 
 shield of faith. By it we are able to quench {(r/3evvvfMi, used, 
 and that in the figurative sense, elsewhere only in 1 Thess. v. 
 19) those fiery darts. When the spirit of faith meets them 
 they lose all their power to work harm to the soul. Thus 
 it was Christ's faith in God and His word that foiled Satan's 
 temptations. 
 
 Ver. 17. And receive the helmet of salvation. — Though the 
 construction is here changed from that with the participle to 
 that with a finite verb, the clause is, in respect of the order 
 of thought, still subordinate to the " stand ye" of ver. 14, 
 and co-ordinate with the several clauses immediately pre- 
 ceding. The helmet which is here said to be salvation, that 
 is the present possession of salvation, is described in 1 Thess. 
 V. 8 as the hope of salvation, which means precisely the 
 same (comp. Isa. lix. 19). This consciousness of salvation, 
 which is a gospel hope, in the sense of a sure expectation, 
 is the guarantee and pledge of victory. Theodore of Mop- 
 suestia happily paraphrases the words of the apostle : " Ilorum 
 diligcntiam adhibentes, hahebitis illam saliUcm qua; est a Deo, 
 quce et progalea communiet vos ; ita ut vulnevi a diabolo in 
 locis vivacibus minivie jicrcipiatis." Just as the helmet pro- 
 tects that part of the body upon which the blow of an 
 assailant would be most likely to prove mortal, so the assured 
 possession of salvation, the recognition of the fulness of 
 Christ's redemption, as affording to us complete salvation, 
 banishing as it does all doubts that would unnerve our spirits 
 and bring the very chill of death into our hearts, will be a 
 
CHAP. VI. 17. 437 
 
 sure protection against the blows aimed with deadly intent 
 by our spiritual foe. This salvation, which imparts such con- 
 fidence and such security, must be God's salvation. So the 
 apostle says, " Receive ye (Si^aaOe) the helmet which is 
 salvation ; " not merely take up or take to yourselves, but 
 receive from the hand of another, that is, God. 
 
 And the svjord of the Spirit, which is the ivord of God. — 
 Here we come upon the first and only weapon of attack in 
 the whole list. All those previously named are weapons of 
 defence. By the use of these we may hold our ground and 
 prevent any attack of the enemy from inflicting any wound 
 upon our own spiritual being. But while that is much, it is 
 not enough. " The helmet, the shield, the breastplate, the 
 belt, may be a protection for ourselves ; but we belong to an 
 army, and are fighting for the victory of the divine kingdom, 
 and for the complete destruction of the authority and power 
 of the spiritual hosts of wickedness over other men ; it is not 
 enough that our personal safety is provided for " (Dale). We 
 have also, on our own behalf, to use measures whereby the enemy 
 may be so disabled that he will not attempt, in that way at 
 least, to renew his attack upon us. — The weapon with which 
 we are to attack our enemy is the word of God. In the 
 story of our Lord's temptation we see how, by His use of the 
 word of God, He put an end to each particular temptation, so 
 that by means of that word, as the sword of the Spirit, the 
 tempter, in so far as the use of that form of temptation was 
 concerned, was slain. — It is called the sword of the Spirit, 
 because we receive it from the hand of the Spirit, and yet it 
 is ever still in the hand of the Spirit. He it is who gives it 
 to us, and He it is, by His indwelling presence, whose hand 
 is with ours in the handling of this sword. — Those who 
 regard " of the Spirit " as in apposition to " the sword," 
 naturally understand " which " of the Spirit and not of the 
 sword. According to this view, the apostle here speaks of 
 the Holy Spirit in relation to man, as finding expression in 
 the word of God. It is much simpler and more natural to 
 connect it with " sword," and to interpret the phrase " of the 
 Spirit," as we have done. This, too, is in accordance with 
 the language of Heb. iv. 12. There is certainly no other 
 
438 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 example of the identification of the Spirit and the word of 
 God ; but that tlie Spirit should convey that word to us and 
 guide us in our use of it, is the universal teaching of Scrip- 
 ture. — It may be observed that prjjxa Geov means some 
 particular utterance of God's word, and not, like 6 X0709 
 Tov ©eov, the whole message of the gospel. It is here the 
 special utterance of God's word fitted for use, and so made 
 use of on some particular occasion and to meet some special 
 emergency. 
 
 Ver. 18. Bi/ mccuis of every form of prayer and supplication, 
 -praying at every season. — The apostle thus introduces a 
 second subordinate section under the o-T^re of ver. 14, 
 parallel with the passage, vers. 14-17. If we are to stand 
 against the enemy, we must put on the armour described in 
 detail, but we must also be careful to maintain our relation- 
 ship with the God from whom we obtain the armour. We 
 cannot use those weapons except in His fellowship, and this 
 fellowship can be maintained only by the exercise of prayer. 
 The injunction is to the cultivation of a spirit of prayer, 
 which will find for itself expressions suitable for all 
 occasions, whether of thanksgiving or confession, or petition 
 or intercession. Of the two words used here, irpoaev^rj is a 
 general term indicating prayers of every sort ; BerjaL^ is 
 prayer in the special form of petition. Thus Calvin dis- 
 tinguishes them as respectively precatio and rogatio ; and 
 Bengel as oratio and iniploratio (comp. Phil. iv. 6; 1 Tim. 
 ii. 1, V. 5). See Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 
 § IL, pp. 188-189, 1886. If this spirit of prayer is to be 
 maintained, it must be unceasing. If it were called into 
 exercise only in time of need, then it would be only one 
 kind of prayer, viz. supplication. Prayer must be at every 
 season. 
 
 In the Spirit. — The reference of iv irvevfiarc is to the Holy 
 Spirit and not to the human spirit. The apostle could 
 scarcely have deemed it necessary to pause at that point to 
 say that this prayer must be hearty and sincere, and no mere 
 lip utterance. This is already not only implied but really 
 expressed in the requirement of every form of prayer at every 
 season. But the apostle here adds something new when he 
 
CHAr. VI. 19. 439 
 
 says that all prayer must be in the Holy Spirit. He must 
 be the author in us of all true prayer ; it must be His living 
 truth. Our crying to God, as Father, depends on our having 
 received the Spirit of adoption (Eom. viii. 15). " Praying in 
 the Holy Ghost " (Jude 20). 
 
 To this end luatching vnth all perseverance and supiolication 
 for all the saints. — The words ei? avro refer back to the 
 previous clause. The end to be served by the watching is 
 the maintaining of the spirit and exercise of prayer just 
 insisted upon. The urgent need of prayer is thus strikingly 
 indicated by the extraordinary efforts to be made to secure 
 that it be not intermitted. Be intent, says the apostle, upon 
 this duty and exercise of prayer (comp. Col. iv. 2). This 
 watchfulness is to be maintained by constantly living in an 
 atmosphere of prayer, and by unfailing remembrance of our 
 fellow-Christians. The word 'jrpoa-Kapreprjcri'i occurs nowhere 
 else in Scripture. The verb irpoaKaprepeiv in Col. iv. 2, etc., 
 means to continue steadfast in. He who is diligent and per- 
 sistent in the exercise of prayer, as personal devotion, will be 
 mindful of the needs of his fellow-saints and the interests of 
 the kingdom of God. — " Be stirred up to care prayerfully 
 and practically for the advancement everywhere of the Lord's 
 kingdom. Be concerned, he busy for the Lord. Let Satan 
 find you ever pre-engaged, doing a great work, so that you 
 cannot come down" (Candlish, Discourses, p. 356). 
 
 Ver. 19. And for me that idtcrance he given in opening of my 
 mouth. — Supplication is to be not only for all saints, but 
 especially and particularly for the apostle. There seems no 
 reason to say, with Klopper, that this is not what Paul would 
 himself have claimed had he been himself the author of the 
 epistle. He regards himself as representative of the mis- 
 sionary enterprise, and as having resting on him the care of 
 all the churches. As thus considered, his claim cannot fairly 
 be regarded as extravagant. In this clause the apostle shows 
 what petition he would have constantly and fervently offered 
 on his behalf. He desires that speech, or the faculty of 
 speech, utterance (X0709), may be given him of God, and that 
 no hindrance may be permitted to check the liberty of his 
 utterance. His opportunity will be found in this unhindered 
 
440 EPISTLE TO TEIE EPIlESIAxXS. 
 
 opening of his mouth (eV avoi^ei arofiuTo^) to give expression 
 to his mind, and his desire is that then God would be a 
 mouth and wisdom to him, so that he may fully take advan- 
 tage of his opportunity. ''Avoi^i'i occurs nowhere else in the 
 New Testament. Compare 2 Cor. vi. 11; 1 Cor. xvi. 9 ; 
 2 Cor. ii. 12. 
 
 To make known ivith holdness the mystery of the gosjjel. — 
 The mystery of the gospel is the mystery of which the gospel 
 is the revelation. The gospel is that which was kept hidden 
 through the ages, the truth of God's love for the world, which 
 was never fully revealed until Christ came. Hence the 
 coming of Christ was the revelation of the mystery, and by 
 the preaching of the gospel the hidden mystery was made 
 known. It was only as the mystery of the gospel that the 
 mystery could be made known ; and hence Paul's request is 
 that the Ephesians should pray for him, that he should have 
 liberty to preach the gospel as the proclamation of God's love. 
 He further asks that they would petition on his behalf the 
 removal of every hindrance to this work that might arise from 
 any cause within himself. In the former clause his thought 
 was about the removing of outward obstructions ; here it is 
 about restrictions from his own timidity and backwardness. 
 " With boldness " {ev irapprjaiq) describes the attitude he 
 desires to be able to maintain in presence of those who 
 would stop his mouth. He would not be found yielding to 
 intimidation, so as to cease preaching, or so as to modify the 
 character of his preaching to meet the wishes and prejudices 
 of men. He desires that he may be strengthened so as to 
 declare unreservedly the whole counsel of God. 
 
 Ver. 20. For which I am doing the work of an amhassador in 
 a chain. — The verb irpea^evco is found elsewhere in the New 
 Testament only in 2 Cor. v. 20. He does not speak of his 
 authority as being sent, but of the mission on which he is 
 sent. He calls attention to the business about which he has 
 to treat. His present position is that of the representative of 
 an unpopular cause, for which he is made to answer (2 Tim. 
 iv. 16). He was the representative of the mystery of the 
 gospel. The treatment which he now endured was fitted to 
 try his constancy and shake his confideuce, and affords a 
 
CHAP. VI. 21-24. 441 
 
 special reason for his request that the believers should pray- 
 that he might be able to speak with loldness. His position is 
 one of honour. He is quite alive to the dignity which his com- 
 mission gives him ; and so in Philem. 9 we find him appeal- 
 ing to his rank as irpea^vTTj'i (which, as Lightfoot shows, was 
 a recognised f^rm of rrpea^evTr]^ in the sense of ambassador) 
 as giving him a claim to deference and respect. His being 
 in chains (eV aXixret) does not in the least detract from his 
 dignity, but it caused timid and half-hearted professors to 
 withdraw their countenance from him, and he himself needed 
 much grace to enable him to think of his ambassadorship 
 rather than of his bonds. How precious and helpful the 
 sympathy of prayerful, faithful men was to the apostle, is 
 shown by his own grateful petition on behalf of Onesiphorus, 
 who had not been ashamed of his chain {ri-jv akvalv [xov ovk 
 eiraia'^vvOrj). 
 
 That in it I may speak holdly, as I ought to spcaJc. — The iv 
 auTU), " in it," should not be referred, as is commonly done, to 
 the preaching of the mystery of the gospel, but to the fulfil- 
 ling the office of an ambassador. Prayer is to be made for 
 him, that, being an ambassador, he may acquit himself well in 
 his office by acting and speaking as he ought. If it were 
 referred to tlie preaching, then the irapp-qcndo-wp.aL of this 
 clause would be a tautological repetition of the iv irapprjala 
 of the previous verse. His present position was that described 
 in 2 Tim. i. 16. He was to be called upon to plead for a 
 great cause, and most naturally he asked to be supported 
 in this difficult task, on the right discharge of which so much 
 depended, by the prayers of the faithful. They were to pray 
 that this imprisonment, and Paul's bearing and defence when 
 on his trial, might all be for the furtherance of the gospel 
 (Phil. i. 12). 
 
 Sect. XI. — Commission to MessenCxEk akd Benediction 
 (Chap. vi. 21-24). 
 
 Ver. 21—24. The apostle has now finished his letter. He 
 finds it necessary, in closing, to explain what he felt would be 
 regarded as singular, viz. the absence of all information 
 
442 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 regarding his personal condition and circumstances. As might 
 have been supposed, he was not overlooking this natural 
 curiosity on the part of his friends, but had made provision, 
 by means of a special trusty messenger, for affording them 
 much ampler and more satisfactory information about his 
 a hairs than could possibly have been given in a letter. He 
 commends Tychicus to them as the bearer of personal greetings, 
 and the well-informed reporter who will be able to tell them 
 about the apostle all that they may wish to know. Finally, 
 he pronounces upon them a full and fervent benediction, in 
 the prayer for spiritual increase in love and faith from God 
 and Christ. 
 
 Ver. 21. Bat that ye also may he informed of my affairs and 
 how I fare. — Other churches had been in direct communication 
 with Paul during the course of his imprisonment, and had 
 been kept informed of all that befell their teacher from time 
 to time, but the apostle now undertook to place the Ephesians 
 in possession of the same information. " Ye also " may 
 thus be fairly interpreted as referring to those who might 
 have had better opportunities of receiving tidings from time to 
 time of the circumstances of the apostle, and especially of the 
 prospects of the cause of the gospel as represented by him. 
 "I have made arrangements," says Paul, "whereby ye Ephesians 
 will obtain this desired intelligence." The Kai, " also," is 
 almost invariably explained as referring to Col. iv. 7. But 
 this is quite gratuitous, seeing that no other allusion of any 
 kind to the Colossian letter is found in our epistle, and, without 
 further explanation, such an allusion as is thus supposed, 
 depending as it does on our acquaintance with the Epistle 
 to the Colossians, would be utterly unintelligible to the 
 Ephesians. 
 
 Tychicus, the beloved brother and faithful servant in the Lord, 
 shall make all things known to you. — Tychicus, a native of 
 Asia, and probably an Ephesian, is mentioned besides in Acts 
 XX. 4; Col. iv. 7; 2 Tim. iv. 12; Titus iii. 12. The description 
 of Tychicus here is precisely the same as in Col. iv. 12, with 
 the exception that the term o-vvSov\o<i there used is here 
 omitted. AVe need not, with Von Soden, suppose that the 
 writer, being himself a disciple of Paul, found that by the 
 
CHAP. VI. 22. 443 
 
 use of this title he might be putting Tychicus too much on 
 an equality with the apostle. Paul's use of the word led to 
 its being employed by bishops in later times, as, e.g., by 
 Ignatius, to describe the status of a deacon. Its omission in 
 our text may rather be accounted for by the supposition that, 
 as one of themselves, Tychicus did not require the same 
 full and formal recommendation to the Ephesians as he did 
 to the Colossians. 
 
 Ver. 22. Wliom I have sent to you for this very purpose, that 
 you may know our affairs. — The purpose of the sending of 
 Tychicus is expressed in exactly the same terms as in Col. iv. 8. 
 It is a reiteration of the statement made in introducing the 
 name of Tychicus, with this addition, that this was the 
 express object in view in his mission. This emphasis (ei? 
 avTo Tovro) is intended to assure the Ephesians of the very 
 special interest which the apostle had in them, and of his 
 belief that they were interested in no ordinary degree in 
 what concerned him. It would have been most unnatural 
 to expect that scattered communities of diverse churches, 
 some of them possessing only a very slight acquaintance with 
 the apostle, perhaps no personal acquaintance at all, should be 
 so eager and concerned to know all the details about his 
 circumstances and expectations. That he should write this 
 to the Ephesians, anxious to prevent any suspicion of indiffer- 
 ence toward them, or the idea that he entertained any fear 
 that they had become indifferent towards him, is just what we 
 might have expected. 
 
 And that he may encourage your heart. — Just as in Col. 
 iv. 8 and 2 Thess. ii. 17, so also here, TrapaKokiar) means to 
 encourage to perseverance by the news which he brought of 
 the apostle's work and spirit. In the sense of imparting 
 strength, TrapuKaXecv is used in LXX. of " weak hands " and 
 " feeble knees " (Job iv. 3 ; Isa. xxxv. 3). It does not mean 
 " to impart consolation." The tale of Paul's sufferings, when 
 told in connection with the unfaltering courage which he every- 
 where displayed, and his unfailing maintenance of faith in God, 
 would restore their courage and confirm their faith. For this 
 end, and not for personal glorification, Paul would have his 
 story told. 
 
44:4 EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 Ver. 23. Peace to the Iretltrcn, and love luith faith. — The 
 apostle is writing to the faithful, and so, in his closing greeting, 
 he assumes that they have faith, but expresses the wish that 
 their faith may be accompanied, as it should be, by the graces 
 of peace and love. It is evident that the peace here intended is 
 peace among themselves as brethren, and that love is not the 
 love of God manifested toward them, but the Christian grace 
 of brotherly love, which is the only true basis of peace in the 
 community. By faith in Christ they are members of one 
 body, and as such they are ideally one in love, and are at peace 
 among themselves. The apostle's benediction is his wish for 
 the realisation, on the part of the Ephesians, of this ideal. 
 
 From God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. — These 
 words describe, like chap. i. 2, the source of all the graces of 
 the Christian life. We have here the primary source in God 
 the Father, then the Lord Jesus Christ, who is Head over all 
 things to the churches (i. 22). 
 
 Grace he with all ivho lore our Lord Jesus Christ. — This final 
 greeting stands alone in this respect, that it is expressed in the 
 third person. It cannot, however, be said to imply that the 
 epistle is addressed not to a particular community but to 
 believers generally. In Colossians and the Pastoral Epistles, 
 grace, as here, is the blessing invoked, to be interpreted 
 undoubtedly of the grace of God in Christ, as in most other 
 epistles. It is invoked on behalf of those who are in a 
 position to receive and enjoy it. The grace of God is known 
 of those who are redeemed and who are looking for the 
 coming of the Saviour (Titus ii. 11-14). Those who do not 
 love the Lord Jesus Christ are anathema (1 Cor. xvi. 22). The 
 crown is for those who love His appearing (2 Tim. iv. 8). 
 
 Incorruptihly. — The words kv d(f)6apaLa have caused con- 
 siderable difficulty. They have been connected by some with 
 the principal proposition, " grace be with all," as characterising 
 the grace ; by others with " the Lord Jesus Christ ; " and by 
 others with " all who love." It seems much more natural 
 to attach these words to the participial phrase, fiera tmp 
 ayaircovToov, as characterising the love which can be recognised 
 as worthy of the grace. It seems unnecessary to add any- 
 thing to grace in order to define its nature ; for it is a term 
 
CHAP. VI. 23. 445 
 
 already distinctly understood by all the readers of the epistle, 
 and with them there was not the slightest danger of confusion 
 in their understanding of it. The same, too, may be said of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ. It would be most unsuitable in the 
 closing words of such an epistle, in which so much had been 
 said of the grace of God and of the person of Jesus Christ, to 
 introduce a qualifying phrase like ev cK^dapaia to characterise 
 the one or the other. But what would be distinctly in- 
 appropriate in either of those places, is precisely what is 
 needed to remove all uncertainty and determine accurately 
 the range to which this benediction extends. It is pronounced 
 upon all those who love the Lord Jesus Christ, but this love 
 is not in word, and it is not the fleeting emotion of excited 
 feeling, but it is an imperishable affection. — Then as to the 
 meaning of the word dcpOapcria there should be little trouble. 
 It occurs altogether six times elsewhere in the New Testament 
 (1 Cor. XV. 42, 50, 53, 54; Eom. ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 10; the 
 correct reading in Titus ii. 7 is d(f}6opla), and in all these 
 places it means a condition secured against decay and dis- 
 solution. This is clearly the meaning in the passage before 
 ns. The benediction is upon those who love Christ with an 
 incorruptible love. They love Him who first loved them ; and 
 this love, which they have experienced and which has pro- 
 duced their love, has imparted to them and to their love that 
 same incorruptibility which belongs to Him and to His love. 
 Their love is not of the earth earthy. It is heavenly, of 
 heavenly origin and of heavenly quality. That love which is 
 of Christ and in Christ can know no decay. 
 
 MORRISON AND QIBB, TRINTEBS, EDINBURGH. 
 
T. and T. ClarJc s Publications. 
 
 WORKS BY 
 Rev. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A., Findhorn. 
 
 [In the series of ' Handbooks for Bible-Classes and Private Students,' edited by 
 Professor Marcus Dods, D.D., and Alexaxder Whyte, D.D.] 
 
 In crown 8t'o, price 2s., 
 
 THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 
 
 SSSi'tf) ]IntrotJuction anti ISTotcs. 
 
 ' This volume is executed with learning, discrimination, and ability.' — British 
 
 ' A work of great ability, giving a vast amount of information alike as to the history 
 and meaning of that venerable Presbyterian sj-mbol, and explaining its successive sec- 
 tions in the light of modem attacks upon its doctrine.' — Young Mens Christian Magazine. 
 
 In crown Svo, price Is. &d., 
 
 PRESBYTERIANISM. 
 
 ' A solid piece of workmanship, remarkable for the vast amount of information pre- 
 sented in a small compass, and so clearly set forth.' — Christian Leader. 
 
 ' A wise and learned discussion of Presbyterianism, marked everywhere by calm and 
 lucid statement.' — Aberdeen Journal. 
 
 ' To any person who desires information, concise and well-arranged, regarding the 
 doctrine, discipline and polity, of the Scottish Churches, this handbook should prove 
 very acceptable.' — Scotsman. 
 
 In crown Sro, price Is. 6cZ., 
 
 THE SUM OF SAVING KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 ^itlj Entrotiuction an^ Xotcs. 
 
 ' We welcome this handbook. It is a singularly useful outline of Calvinistic doctrine, 
 and will, we trust, be of much service to those who are willing to learn.'- — Sword and 
 Trowel. 
 
 ' Cannot fail to bo of the greatest utility where it is diligently used.' — Clergyman's 
 Magazine. 
 
 ' Kead in the Sum of Saving Knowledge, the work which I think first of all wrought 
 a saving change in me.' — M'Cheyne's Diary. 
 
 EDIXBURGH : T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 ^^ORKS TRANSLATED BY 
 Rev. JOHN MACPHERSOlSr, M.A., Findhorn. 
 
 Just published^ in demy 8yo, price 7s. Gd., 
 
 CANON AND TEXT 
 OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 By Dr. FEANTS BUHL, 
 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT LEIPZIG. 
 
 Translated by Rev. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A. 
 
 *^* Professor Buhl is successor to the late Prof. Franz Delitzsch, at Leipzig. 
 
 'It would be difficult to find a more comprehensive, succinct, and lucid digest of the 
 results of recent study of the Old Testament canon and text than is given in this 
 volume. Instead of bewildering us with a crowd of discordant opinions, the author 
 sifts the evidence and indicates the right conclusion. His tone is eminently free and 
 impartial. He is no slave to tradition, and no lover of novelty for its own sake. The 
 discussion in the text is kept clear by the relegation of further references and quotations 
 to supplementary paragraphs. These paragraphs are a perfect mine of exact, detailed 
 information.' — Prof. J. S. Banks in The Critical Review. 
 
 'A book of high merit.' — Canon Cheynk, D.D. 
 
 In Three Vols., demy 8vo, price 31s. Qd., 
 
 APOLOGETICS; 
 
 OR, 
 
 THE SCIENTIFIC VINDICATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 By J. H. A. EBRARD, Ph.D., D.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IX THE UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN. 
 
 Translated by Rev. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A. 
 
 'The author of this work has a reputation which renders it unnecessary to speak in 
 words of general commendation of bis "Apologetics." . . , Dr. Ebrard takes nothing 
 for granted. He begins at the beginning, laying his foundations deep and strong, 
 and building upon them patiently and laboriously, leaving no gaps, no loose work, 
 but adjusting each stone to its place and use.' — Church Bells. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 WORKS TRANSLATED BY 
 Rev. JOHINJ MACPHERSQN, M.A., Findhorn. 
 
 In Two Volumes, demy 8vo, price 21s., 
 
 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THEOLOGY. 
 
 By J. F. RABIGER, D.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OP THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BRESLAU. 
 
 S^ranslateti from i\)z ffircrman, 
 
 And Edited, with a Review of Apologetical Literature, 
 By Rev. JOHN MACPHERSON, M.A. 
 
 'One of tbe most important additions yet made to theological erudition.' — 
 Independent. 
 
 'Rabiger's Encyclopasdia is a Look deserving the attentive perusal of every divine. 
 ... It is at once instructive and suggestive.' — Athenceum. 
 
 'A volume which must be added to every theological and philosophical library.'— 
 British Quarterly Review. 
 
 Now complete in Five Vols., 8vo, price lOs. 6d. each 
 (Division I., and Index, translated by Rev. John Macpherson, M.A.), 
 
 HISTORY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN THE 
 TIME OF OUR LORD. 
 
 By EMIL SCHURER, D.D., M.A., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF KIEL. 
 
 *,,* Prof. Schtirer has prepared an exhaustive INDEX to this wort, to which 
 he attaches great value. The Translation is now ready, and is issued in a 
 separate Volume (100 pp. 8vo). Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 ' Under Professor Schiirer's guidance, we are enabled to a large extent to construct a 
 social and political framework for the Gospel History, and to set it in such a light as to 
 see new evidences of the truthfulness of that history and of its contemporaneousness. 
 
 . . . The length of our notice shows our estimate of the value of his work.' Enylisk 
 
 Churchman. 
 
 'We gladly welcome the publication of this most valuable work:— Dublin Review. 
 
 'Most heartily do we commend this work as an invaluable aid in the intelligent study 
 of the New Testament.' — Nonconformist. 
 
 'As a handbook for the study of the New Testament, the work is invaluable and 
 unique.' — British Quarterly Review. 
 
 2 F 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publicatio7is. 
 
 In demy 8vo, price 10s. 6cZ., 
 
 DELIVERY AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
 CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. 
 
 By ROBERT RAINY, D.D., 
 
 PRINCIPAL, AND PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND CHURCH HISTORY, NEW COLLEGE, EDIN. 
 
 'We gladly acknowledge the high excellence and the extensive learning which these 
 lectures display. They are able to the last degree, and the author has, in an unusual 
 measure, the power of acute and brilliant generalisation.'— Z,ite»-aJ*2/ Churchman. 
 
 ' It is a rich and nutritious book throughout, and in temper and spirit beyond all 
 praise.' — British and Foreign Evangelical Review. 
 
 ' The subject is treated with a comprehensive grasp, keen logical power, clear analysis 
 and learning, and in devout si)int.'— Evangelical Magazine. 
 
 In demy 8?'o, price 9s., 
 
 LECTURES ON PAUL'S EPISTLES TO THE 
 THESSALONIANS. 
 
 By Rev. JOHN HUTCHISON, D.D., 
 
 BONNINGTON, EDINBURGH. 
 
 ' We have not — at least amongst modern works — many commentaries on these epistles 
 in which the text is at once treated with scholarly ability, and turned to popular and 
 practical account. Such is the character of Dr. Hutchison's work— his exegesis of 
 crucial passages strikes us at once as eminently char.'— Baptist. 
 
 'Certainlv one of the ablest and best commentaries that we have ever read. The 
 style is crisp and clear, and the scholarship is in no sense of a superficial or pretentious 
 order.' — Evangelical Magazine. . 
 
 By the same Author. 
 
 In demy 8ro, price Is. 6d., 
 
 LECTURES ON PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE 
 PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 ' This book has one great merit which separates it from the mass of commentaries and 
 expository lecturt-s— it is not only instructive, but it is also delightfully interesting. . . . 
 The author's moral and spiritual tone is lofty, and these sermons are characterised by a 
 sweet and sunny grace, which cannot but charm and make better those who read them.' 
 — Literary World. 
 
 By the same Author. 
 
 .lust puhUshed., in demy 8ro, price 7s. Gd., 
 
 OUR LORD'S SIGNS IN ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL. 
 
 Discussions, chiefly Exegetical and Doctrinal, on the Eight H/liracles 
 in the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 'We have reed it with thorough enjoyment. The subject is one of intrinsic 
 importance, and in this volume are presented the ripe fruits of most careful, accurate, 
 and sympathetic study.'— United Presbyterian Magazine. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 Cljt |ntcnTati0u;iI Q^Ijtobgical l^ibnim 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 STEWART D. F. SALMOND, D.D., 
 
 Professor of Systematic Theology and New Testament Exegesis, 
 Free Church College, A berdeen ; 
 
 CHARLES A. BRIGGS, D.D., 
 
 Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical Theology, Union Theological Seminary, 
 New York. 
 
 \. CANON DRIVER'S INTRODUCTION to the LITERATURE of the OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 Noiv ready. Third Edition, post 8i'o, price \2s., 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERATURE 
 OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 By S. E. DEIVEE, D.D., 
 
 KEGIUS PEOFESSOR OF HEBREW, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM THE PREFACE. 
 
 ' I ought, in the first instance, to guard against any misapprehension as to the scope of the 
 work. It is not an Introduction to the Theology, or to the History, or even to the Stvdy, of tlie 
 Old Testament ; in any of these cases, the treatment and contents would have been veiy different. 
 It is an Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament ; and what I conceived this to include 
 was an account of the contents and structure of the several books, together with such an indication 
 of their general character and aim as I could find room for in the space at my disposal. . . . 
 
 ' Criticism in the hands of Christian scholars does not banish or destroy the inspiration of the 
 Old Testament ; it presupposes it ; it seeks only to determine the conditions under which it 
 operates, and the literary forms through which it manifests itself; and it thus helps us to frame 
 truer conceptions of the methods which it has pleased God to employ in revealing Himself to His 
 ancient people of Israel, and in preparing the way for the fuUer manifestation of Himself in 
 Christ Jesus.'— S. R. D. 
 
 ' The appearance of Professor Driver's book has been eagerly looked forward to by scholars 
 interested in Old Testament subjects. And now that the volume has been given to the world, we 
 hasten to assure our readers that however high their expectations may have been raised, they are 
 not likely to be disappointed. He has succeeded in giving by far the best account of the great 
 critical problems connected with the Old Testament that has yet been written. . . . It is a perfect 
 marvel of compression and lucidity combined. It is a monument of learning and well-balanced 
 judgment, which does honour to the chair which Professor Driver holds, and the university to 
 which he belongs.' — The Guardian. 
 
 ' The author's plan is excellent. First he gives an outline of the book he is dealing with. Then 
 follows a literary analysis of it, the various parts being assigned, with as near an approach to 
 exactness as is possible, to the different sources ; and finally, the date of the sources and of the 
 book in its present form is inquired into. All this is executed with much learning, great candour, 
 every consideration for the opinions of others, but firm assertion of his own right to judge. . . . 
 The projected series of Manuals could not have been opened more worthily. The work contains 
 everything required by students.' — Prof. A. B. Davidson, D.D., in The Bookvian. 
 
 ' One need have no hesitation in saying that it is out of sight the most valuable contribution 
 which English scholarship has yet made to the Pentateuch.'— Prof. A. R. S. Kennedy, M.A., in 
 The Expository Times. 
 
 ' Upon few theological works has such general interest been concentrated as upon this 
 important work from the pen of Canon Driver. Few books, I venture to think, will have rendered 
 such signal service to the cause, so dear to all Christian students, of the reverent, thorough, and 
 painstaking study of Holy Scripture. Messrs. Clark may well be congratulated upon having been 
 able to open their "International Theological Library" with a volume of such remarkable merits. 
 In e_\'ery respect its appearance at the present time Is most opportune.'— Prof. H. B. Ryle, M.A., 
 in The Critical Review. 
 
 Detailed Prospectuses of the ' International Theological Library ' free on application. 
 
T. and T. Clark' s Publications. 
 
 In demy 8vo, price 10s. 6d., 
 
 BOOKS WHICH INFLUENCED OUR LORD 
 AND HIS APOSTLES: 
 
 Bet'ntj a Critical 3at£&ic&j of ^pocalgptt'c 3c$bis|) 3Lit£ratur£. 
 By JOHN E. H. THOMSON, B.D., Stirling. 
 
 ' This is a clever, imaginative, scholai-Iy, interesting volume. Mr. Thomson has the 
 gift of making the old world times and personages live again ; and his book, being 
 written with unflagging spirit, is likely to prove of value by investing the apocalyptic 
 writings with an attractiveness they have not always seemed to possess. ... A book 
 which is a credit to Scottish scholarship. ... It is a volume worthy of the attention 
 both of scholars and of the public' — Prof. Marcus Dods, D.D., in The Expositor. 
 
 In post 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 
 
 PSEUDEPIGRAPHA : 
 
 AN ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN APOCRYPHAL SACRED WRITINGS 
 OF THE JEWS AND EARLY CHRISTIANS. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 Rev. WILLIAM J. DEANE, M.A., 
 
 RECTOR OF ASHEN, ESSEX; 
 
 AUTHOR OF * THE BOOK OF WISDOM, WITH PROLEGOMENA AND COMMENTARY ' 
 
 (oxford: CLARENDON PRESs), ETC. ETC. 
 
 CONTENTS : — Introduction. — I. Lyrical— The Psalter of Solomon. — II. 
 Apocalyptical and Prophetical — The Book of Enoch. The Assumption of 
 Moses. The Apocalypse of Baruch. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. 
 — III. Legendary — The Book of Jubilees. The Ascension of Isaiah. — IV. 
 Mixed— The Sibylline Oracles. 
 
 ' It is the most complete book on the subject in the English language, and contains 
 the most ample infonnation on these writings. It is indispensable to every scholar who 
 wishes to be acquainted with this class of literature, and should occupy a place in the 
 library of every theologian.' — Eev. Dr. Gloag in The Theological Monthly. 
 
 ' A very much needed introduction to a literature which is too little read. , . . Mr. 
 Deane has not only spent much time and scholarship in securing accuracy, biit he pre- 
 sents his material in an attractive form, in an admirable style. . . . Full knowledge of 
 the literature of his subject, a sound and fair judgment, a clear perception, a style full of 
 life, and above all, long familiarity with his subject, constitute Mr. Deane our best 
 guide to the Pseudepicrapha.' — The Expositor. 
 
 In post 8vo, price Is. 6d., 
 
 MESSIANIC PROPHECY: 
 
 ITS ORIGIN. HISTORICAL GROWTH, AND RELATION 
 
 TO NEW TESTAMENT FULFILMENT. 
 
 By Dr. EDWAED RIEHM. 
 
 New Edition, Translated by Rev. LEWIS A. MUIRHEAD, B.D. 
 
 With an Introduction by Professor A. B. DAVIDSON, D.D. 
 
 ' No work of the same compass could be named that contains so much that is instructive 
 on the nature of prophecy in general, and particularly on the branch of it specially 
 treated in the bock.' — Professor A. B. Davidson, D.D. 
 
 ' I would venture to recommend Riehm's "Messianic Prophecy "as a summary account 
 of prophecy both reverent and critical.' — Principal Gore in Lux Mundi. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 GRIMM'S LEXICON. 
 
 Just publisJied, SECOND Edition, Revised, demy Ato, price 36s., 
 
 GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE 
 NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 BEING 
 
 (Krimm's W.i\hz'& Clabis Nobi SEestamentu 
 
 TRANSLATED, REVISED, AND ENLARGED 
 By JOSEPH HENRY THAYER, D.D., 
 
 BUSSEY PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION IN THE 
 DIVINITY SCHOOL OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM PREFACE. 
 
 TOWARDS the close of the year 1862, the " Arnoldische Buchhandlung " 
 in Leipzig published the First Part of a Greek-Latin Lexicon of the 
 New Testament, prepared, upon the basis of the " Clavis Novi Testamenti 
 Philologica" of C. G. Wilke (second edition, 2 vols. 1851), by Professor 0. L. 
 WiLiBALD Grimm of Jena. In his Prospectus, Professor Grimm announced it 
 as his purpose not only (in accordance with the improvements in classical lexico- 
 graphy embodied in the Paris edition of Stephen's Thesaurus and in the fifth 
 edition of Passow's Dictionary edited by Rost and his coadjutors) to exhibit the 
 historical growth of a word's significations, and accordingly in selecting his 
 vouchers for New Testament usage to show at what time and in what class of 
 writers a given word became current, but also duly to notice the usage of the 
 Septuagint and of the Old Testament Apocrypha, and especially to produce a 
 Lexicon which should correspond to the present condition of textual criticism, 
 of exegesis, and of biblical theology. He devoted more than seven years to his 
 task. The successive Parts of his work received, as they appeared, the out- 
 spoken commendation of scholars diverging as widely in their views as Hupfeld 
 and Hengstenberg ; and since its completion in 1868 it has been generally 
 acknowledged to be by far the best Lexicon of the New Testament extant.' 
 
 ' I regard it as a work of the greatest importance. ... It seems to me a work show- 
 ing the most patient diligence, and the most carefully arranged collection of useful and 
 helpful references.' — The Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. 
 
 ' The best New Testament Greek Lexicon. ... It is a treasury of the results of exact 
 scholarship.' — Bishop Westcott. 
 
 ' An excellent book, the value of which for English students will, I feel sure, be best 
 appreciated by those who use it most carefully.' — Professor F. J. A. Hort, D.D. 
 
 ' This work has been eageiiy looked for. . . . The result is an excellent book, which 
 I do not doubt will be the best in the field for many years to come.' — Professor W. 
 Sanday, D.D., in The Academy. 
 
 ' This is indeed a noble volume, and satisfies in these days of advancing scholarship 
 a very great want. It is certainly unequalled in its lexicography, and invaluable in its 
 literary perfectness. ... It should, will, must make for itself a place in the library of 
 all those students who want to be tlioroughly furnished for the work of understanding, 
 expounding, and applying the Word of God.' — Evangelical Magazine. 
 
 ' Undoubtedly the best of its kind. Beautifully printed and well translated, with 
 some corrections and improvements of the original, it will be prized by students of the 
 Christian Scriptures.' — Atkenceum. 
 
 ' It should be obtained even at the sacrifice of many volumes of sermons and homi- 
 letical aids. There is nothing so intellectually remunerative in ministerial life as 
 foundation work of this kind. Without it no ministry can be solid and strong, nor can 
 its results be profound and abiding. Earely have Messrs. Clark laid our British 
 Churches under deeper obligations than they have done by the issue of this noble 
 and scholarly work.' — Baptist Magazine. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 In crown 8vo, price 6s., 
 
 PRE-ORGANIC EVOLUTION 
 AND THE BIBLICAL IDEA OF GOD. 
 
 AN EXPOSITION AND A CRITICISM. 
 
 By Principal C. CHAPMAN, M.A., LL.D., 
 
 WESTERN COLLEGE, PLYMOUTH. 
 
 ' A volume which will take an important position among Theistic, not to say 
 Christian apologetics, and which, in the present growth of scepticism, we may well be 
 thankful for.' — Literary Churchman. 
 
 ' One of the ablest expositions and criticisms of the evolutionary theory with which 
 we have yet met.' — Westminster Review. 
 
 In crown 8vo, price 3s. 6d., 
 
 DECLARATIONS AND LETTERS 
 ON THE VATICAN DECREES, 1869-1887. 
 
 By IGNAZ von DOLLINGER. 
 AUTHORISED TRANSLATION. 
 Dr. Alfred Plummer says — ' This intensely interesting collection of Declarations 
 and Letters gives us in a short compass the main historical facts which Dr. Dollinger 
 considered to be absolutely fatal to the truth of the dogma respecting the infallibility of 
 the Pope, and the reasons which for nineteen years prevented him from "submitting" 
 even to the Pope •with the whole of the Roman episcopate at his back. . . . Indispens- 
 able to every one who would have an intelligent grasp of the infallibility question.' 
 
 WORKS BY DR. C. VON ORELLI, Basel. 
 
 Translated by Eev. J. S. BANKS, Headingley College, Leeds. 
 
 In demy 8w, 'price 10s. Qd., 
 
 THE PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH. 
 
 ' The characteristics of this admirable commentai-y are brevity, separation of the more 
 grammatical from the more expository notes, and general orthodoxy combined with first- 
 rate scholarship.' — The Record. 
 
 ' This volume will be specially welcome to students who have come to appreciate the 
 author's other valuable works on prophecy and the prophetical books of the Old Testa- 
 ment. . . . Charactei-ised by consummate ability throughout, this work will undoubtedly 
 take high rank among the expositions of the ' ' Evangelical Prophet." ' — The Christian. 
 
 In demy 8vo, price 10s. 6d., 
 
 THE PROPHECIES OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ' Will be found a most trustworthy aid to the study of a book that presents many 
 difficult problems.' — John Bull. 
 
 In demy 8vo, price 10s. 6d., 
 
 THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY OF THE 
 CONSUMMATION OF GOD'S KINGDOM. 
 
 Traced in its Historical Development 
 
 ' Cannot fail to be regarded as a standard work upon the subject of Old Testament 
 prophecy.' — Sword and Trowel. 
 
 ' We have enjoyed this book very much ... it is full of information, and is clear and 
 lucid in style.' — The Rock. 
 
 ' An unusually interesting work for the critical student . . . it possesses that intrinsic 
 quality which commands attention and inquiry such as scholars delight in.' — Clergyman's 
 Magazine. 
 
T. and T. Clark's Publications. 
 
 FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY. 
 
 ' No preacher who values his ministry can afford to be a non-subscriber to the " Foreign 
 Theological Library." The subscription is almost ridiculously small in comparison to 
 the value received.' — Homilist. 
 
 MESSRS. CLARK beg to invite the attention of Clergymen and educated 
 Laymen to this Series. 
 
 Forty-five years have now elapsed since the commencement of the Foreign 
 Theological Library, and during that time Four Volumes annually (or 180 
 in all) have appeared with the utmost regularity. 
 
 It is now, however, difficult to preserve this regularity ; and, whilst the 
 Publishers will continue to issue translations of the best German and French 
 works, they will do so as occasion offers, and thus the publications will be even 
 more select. 
 
 In completing the Foreign Theological Library as a series, they desire 
 anew to express their grateful thanks to the Subscribers for their support. 
 
 They trust and believe that the whole series has exercised, through the 
 care with which the books have been selected, a healthy influence upon the 
 progress of theological science in this country and the United States. 
 
 In order to bring the Foreign Theological Library more within the reach 
 of all, it has been decided to allow a selection of 
 
 EIGHT VOLUMES at the Subscription Price of TWO GUINEAS 
 
 (or more at the same ratio), from the works issued previous to 1888, a complete 
 list of which will be found on the following page. 
 
 N.B. — No duplicates can be included in such selections. 
 
 TTie Volumes issued during 1888-1890 icere : — 
 
 ,— CASSEL'S COMMENTARY ON ESTHER. 
 
 EWALD'S OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 
 KEIL'S BIBLICAL ARCH/EOLOGY. Vol. II. (completion). 
 DELITZSCH'S NEW COMMENTARY ON GENESIS. Vol. I. 
 
 2555.— DELITKSCH'S NEW COMMENTARY ON GENESIS. Vol. II. (completion). 
 ORELLIS COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH. 
 ORELLFS COMMENTARY ON JEREMIAH. 
 LUTHARDTS HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS. Vol. I. 
 
 i550.— SCHURER'S HISTORY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN THE TIME OF JESUS 
 CHRIST. First Division. 2 Vols. 
 DELITZSCH'S COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH. New Edition. 2 Vols. 
 
 N.B. — To complete Sets, any of the above Yearly Issues may be had at the Subscription 
 Price of Twenty- one Shillings. 
 
THE FOREIGN THEOLOGIC AL LIBRARY. 
 
 The following are the Works from which a Selection of Eight Volumes for £2, 2s. (or more at the 
 same ratio) may be made. (Non-subscription Price withm brackets) :— 
 Alexander— Commentary on Isaiab. Two Vols. (17s.) -,,, ,, , z,,^ x 
 
 Baumgarten— The History of the Church m the Apostolic Age. Three Vols. (27s.) 
 Bleek— Introduction to the New Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 Christlieb— Modern Doubt and Christian Belief. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Delltzsch— Commentary on Job. Two Vols. (21s.) New Edition shortly. 
 
 Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on the Proverbs of Solomon. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on Song of Solomon and Ecclesiastes. One Vol. (los. ba.) 
 
 Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on Epistle to the Hebrews. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 A System of Biblical Psychology. One Vol. (12s.) ^ „„„ „^„ ^ ir , /7„ c^ , 
 
 DSUinger-Hippolytus and Calllstus; or, The Church of Rome : A.D. 20&-250. One Vol. (7s. 6d.) 
 Domer— A System of Christian Doctrine. Four Vols (42s.) „ _. . ^ „. ,, i r<;9o Kn ^ 
 
 __ History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ. Five Vols. (52s. 6d.) 
 Ebrard— Commentary on the Epistles of St. John. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 The Gospel History. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Apologetics. Three Vols. (31s.6d.) nnc Rri ^ 
 
 Ewald— Revelation : Its Nature and Record. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Frank— System of Christian Certainty. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Gebhardt— Doctrine of the Apocaljrpse. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Gerlach— Commentary on the Pentateuch. One Vol. (10s. 6tt.) 
 Gieseler— Compendium of Ecclesiastical History. Four Vols. (42s.) 
 Godet— Commentary on St. Luke's Gospel. Two Vols. (2is.) 
 
 Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on 1st Corinthians. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Goebel— On the Parables. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Hagenbach— History of the Reformation. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 History of Christian Doctrines. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) 
 
 Harless— A System of Christian Ethics. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 Haupt-Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John. One Vol. (10s 6d,) 
 Havernick-^General Introduction to the Old Testament. One Vol. (10s. bd.) 
 Hengstenberg— Christology of the Old Testament. Four Vols. (42s.) 
 
 Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (33s.) 
 
 On the Book of Ecclesiastes, etc. etc. One Vol. (9s.) 
 
 Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on Ezekiel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) ^ ,, , „„ ^ 
 
 Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel, etc. One Vol. yj-^) 
 
 The Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Keil— Introduction to the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on the Pentateuch. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. One Vol. (10s. 6a.) 
 
 Commentary on the Books of Samuel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 . Commentary on the Books of Kings. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. One Vol. (10s. ea.) 
 
 Commentary on Jeremiah and Lamentations. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentary on EzekieL Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Commentai-y on the Book of Daniel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Biblical Archaeology. Two Vols. (21s.) „ , . 
 
 Kurtz-History of the Old Covenant ; or, Old Testament Dispensation Three Vols (31s. 6d.) 
 
 LSe-Commlntary on the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) 
 
 Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Two Vols. (18s.) 
 
 Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Luthardt— Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Three Vols (31s. btt.) 
 
 Macdonald— Introduction to the Pentateuch. 1 wo Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Martensen-Christian Dogmatics. „One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Christian Ethics. General— Social— Individual. Three Vols. (31s. btt.) 
 
 Muller— The Christian Doctrine of Sin. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Murphy-Commentary on the Psalms. To co,,ut as fivo lolnmc^. One Vol. (i^s.) 
 
 Neander-General History of the Christian Religion and Church Nine Vols. (67s. 6d.) 
 
 Oehler— Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Olshausen— Commentary on the Gospels and Acts. Four Vols. (4Zs.) 
 
 Commentai-y on Epistle to the Romans. One Vol. (10s. bd.) 
 
 Commentary on Epistles to the Corinthians. One Vol. (9s.) 
 
 Commentary on Philipplans, Titus, and 1st Timothy. One \ ol. (10s 6tt.) 
 
 Orelli— Prdphecy regarding Consummation of God's Kingdom. One Vol. (los. ba.) 
 
 Philippi— Commentary on Epistle to Romans. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 RXbiger- Encyclopaedia of Theology. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 Ritter— Comparative Geography of Palestine. Four Vols. (26s.) 
 
 Sartorius-The Doctrine of Divine Love. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) pnrh ) 
 
 Schtlrer-The Jewish People in the Time of Christ. Division II. Three Vols. (10s. 6d. each.) 
 Shedd— History of Christian Doctrine. Two Vols. (21s.) ^ , ^ ,. i Mns Rri i 
 Steinmeyer-History of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord. One vol. (lus. ba.; 
 
 The Miracles of our Lord in relation to Modern Criticism. One Vol. (^s. ba.) 
 
 Stier— The Words of the Lord Jesus. Eight Vols. (10s. 6d. per vol.) n^.Vni nos Gd 1 
 
 The Words ofthe Risen Saviour, and Commentary on Epistle of St. James. One Vol. (10s. ba.) 
 
 The Words of the Apostles Expounded. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) 
 
 Tholuck— Commentary on the Gospel of St. John One Vol. (9s.) 
 UUmann— Reformers before the Reformation. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 Weiss— Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) 
 
 The Life of Christ. Three Vols. (3is. <-d.) 
 
 Winer— Collection of the Confessions of Christendom. One Vol. (10s. 6a.) 
 
Date Due