The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (144 page)

¹⁰⁰
See the discussion below.

¹⁰¹
“At Ephesus” is omitted by key early Alexandrian texts such as p46 a B 424c 1739. Early church fathers such as Basil, Origen, and Gregory the Great also omit the phrase. Some scholars say that Marcion was not familiar with the phrase because he named the letter “The Epistle to the Laodiceans.” Tertullian has the phrase “to the saints who are also believers in Christ Jesus.” See M. Barth,
Ephesians 1—3
, 67. The Western (D, F, G) and the Byzantine (K, L, P) manuscript traditions, along with some Alexandrian texts (A a2 B2 miniscule 33, 81, 104, 175, 1881), support the inclusion of “at Ephesus.”

¹⁰²
Metzger,
Textual Commentary
, 532.

¹⁰³
Ibid.; Bruce,
Colossians and Ephesians
, 250; O'Brien,
Ephesians
, 5, 86—87; M. Barth,
Ephesians 1—3
, 67. For further investigation, see M. Santer, “The Text of Ephesians 1:1,”
NTS
15 (1969): 247—48; E. Best, “Ephesians i.1,” in
Text and Interpretation: Studies in the New Testament Presented to Matthew Black
, ed. E. Best and R. M. Wilson (Cambridge: University Press, 1979), 29—41; id., “ Ephesians 1.1 Again,” in
Paul and Paulinism: Essays in Honour of C. K. Barrett
, ed. M. D. Hooker and S. G. Wilson (London: SPCK, 1982), 276—78; and “Excursus 1: Textual Problem in Ephesians 1:1,” in Hoehner,
Ephesians
, 144-48.

¹⁰⁴
Hoehner,
Ephesians
, 147.

¹⁰⁵
Bruce (
Ephesians
, 250) theorized that the space after the verb “are” was left blank in order for Tychicus to insert the appropriate geographical name to each locale in which he delivered a copy of the circular letter. Bruce made this assertion while admitting that this device is difficult to find in the first century. Bruce cited G. Zuntz (
The Text of the Epistles
[London: British Academy, 1954], 228, n. 1), who pointed to multiple copies of royal letters in the Hellenistic period that were based on a master copy “with the address left blank, and it is most probable that the blank in the address of Ephesians goes back to such an original.” M. Barth has an excellent discussion that traces the historical development of this approach. He identified T. Beza and H. Grotius as the first to suggest this line of thinking. Barth said that J. Ussher defended this solution in his
Annales Veteris et Novi Testamenti
(London: Crook, 1650—54) and also cited Lightfoot, Hort, Haupt, Robinson, Percy, and Schlier as proponents. D. N. Freedman (by letter, cited in M. Barth,
Ephesians 1—3
, 67) compared this text-critical problem with 2 Sam 4:1 and offered a similar solution. But there are significant problems with this approach. Kümmel (
Introduction
, 355) strongly asserted that “there is no parallel in antiquity” to this practice. O'Brien (
Ephesians
, 85—86) rightly pointed out that this practice does not fit in an age when each copy had to be handwritten. He also reminds the readers that no copies have survived that were addressed to a place other than Ephesus.

¹⁰⁶
Arnold, “Ephesians,” 244-45; Hoehner,
Ephesians
, 79.

¹⁰⁷
So also Carson and Moo,
Introduction to the New Testament
, 490.

¹⁰⁸
Best,
Ephesians
, 61-63.

¹⁰⁹
N. A. Dahl, “Gentiles, Christians, and Israelites in the Epistle to the Ephesians,”
HTR 79
(1986): 38.

¹¹⁰
Lincoln,
Ephesians
, lxxv—lxxxvii.

¹¹¹
Schnackenburg,
Ephesians
, 22—35.

¹¹²
Mitton,
Ephesians
, 30-31.

¹¹³
J. A. Robinson,
St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians
, 2d ed. (London: Macmillan, 1907), 10—11.

¹¹⁴
Thielman,
Theology of the New Testament
, 394.

¹¹⁵
Arnold, “Ephesians, Letter to the,” 246.

¹¹⁶
O'Brien,
Ephesians
, 58-65.

¹¹⁷
Carson and Moo,
Introduction to the New Testament
, 491.

¹¹⁸
N. A. Dahl, “Ephesians,” in
Harper's Bible Commentary
, ed. J. L. Mays (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), 1212.

¹¹⁹
Lincoln,
Ephesians
, 46.

¹²⁰
A. C. Mayer,
Sprache der Einheit im Epheserbrief
, WUNT 150 (Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2002), 20.

¹²¹
P. S. Cameron (“The Structure of Ephesians,”
Filologia Neotestamentaria
3 [1990]: 3—17) proposed that eight parallel panels demonstrate linguistic links (excluding 6:18—22).

¹²²
J. P. Heil,
Ephesians: Empowerment to Walk in Love for the Unity of All in Christ
, Studies in Biblical Literature 13 (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

¹²³
The sheer complexity of Cameron's proposal casts doubt on its viability and usefulness. Mayer's two-chiasm proposal is marginally better, though still problematic and implausible at points. In particular, one wonders how the readers or hearers could have possibly detected the kind of chiasm proposed by Mayer.

¹²⁴
See the critique of Lincoln's rhetorical outline by D. E. Aune,
The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature and Rhetoric
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 159.

¹²⁵
“Sit”/”seat”
(kathizo;
1:20); “walk”
(peripateo;
2:2,10; 4:1,17 [twice]; 5:2,8,15); “stand”
(histemi;
6:11,13,14). See B. Weber, “‘Setzen’- ‘Wandeln’- ‘Stehen’ im Epheserbrief,”
NTS 41
(1995): 478-80.

¹²⁶
J. Pfammater (
Epheserbrief; Kolosserbrief
, Neue Echter Bibel [Würzburg: Echter, 1987], 22) believed that the author alludes to Isa 57:19 with the use of this schema.

¹²⁷
This text resembles Rom 9:4—5 but fulfills a different purpose: Rom 9:4—5 lists the advantages of being an Israelite, while Eph 2:11—12 describes the disadvantages of being a Gentile. See R. Schnackenburg,
Der Brief an die Epheser
(Zürich: Benziger, 1982), 108-9.

¹²⁸
See the outline in Hoehner,
Ephesians
, 66—68.

¹²⁹
Scholars have wrestled with the apparent verb change (“he received gifts”) in Ps 68:18 (LXX 67:19; MT 68:19) to “he gave gifts” in Eph 4:8. Some believe that Paul drew upon a later targumic reading found in the Peshitta. See E. Nestle, “Zum Zitat in Eph 4,8,”
ZNW 4
(1903): 344—45. Bruce (
Ephesians
, 342) argued that the reading is earlier than the written targum because the readings “often had a long oral prehistory.” For an extensive survey of approaches to this text, see W. Hall Harris III,
The Descent of Christ: Ephesians 4:7—11 and Traditional Hebrew Imagery
, AGJU 32 (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 64—122.

¹³⁰
Paul wanted to see the distinctively Christian solution of “being filled
by the
Spirit.” Greek grammarians note that this specific construction never refers to the content of the filling, so translations such as “filled
with
the Spirit” are grammatically suspect. Most likely, the Spirit here is not the
content
but the
agent
of the filling. With what does the Spirit fill believers? An examination of the use of the Greek word for “fill” in Ephesians reveals that believers are filled by Christ (1:23) and the Spirit (5:18) with the fullness of God (3:19). See especially D. B. Wallace,
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 375. So also O'Brien,
Ephesians
, 391—92; Hoehner,
Ephesians
, 702—4. Cf. G. D. Fee,
God's Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul
(Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 721, n. 196. Fee argued that while the Greek construction signifies the means of filling, “it is but a short step to seeing the Spirit as that substance as well.” J. P. Heil (“Ephesians 5:18b: ‘But Be Filled in the Spirit,’”
CBQ
69 [2007]: 506) contended for the translation “be filled
in
the Spirit,” conveying the sense of “being within the dynamic realm or sphere established and characterized by having been given the Spirit.” For a survey of various proposals, see A. J. Köstenberger, “What Does It Mean to Be Filled with the Spirit? A Biblical Investigation,”
JETS
40 (1997): 231-35; and Heil, “Ephesians 5:18b.”

¹³¹
The five participles convey result. So also Lincoln,
Ephesians
, 345; Wallace,
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics
, 639. Paul's grammar highlights the cause-and-effect relationship between “being filled by the Spirit” (5:18) and the godly characteristics that follow (5:19—21). These are not independent realities believers are called to create by their own willpower; instead, they are dependent on the Spirit's work (cf. the fruit of the Spirit in Gal 5:22—23).

¹³²
See T. G. Gombis, “A Radically New Humanity: The Function of the
Haustafel
in Ephesians,”
JETS
48 (2005): 317-30.

¹³³
Moritz,
Profound Mystery
, 181—83; O'Brien,
Ephesians
, 457; Lincoln,
Ephesians
, 438—39. Lincoln (“‘Stand, Therefore…’: Ephesians 6:10—20 as
Peroratio,” BibInt
3 [1995]: 99—114) identified the climax in rhetorical terms as the
peroratio.
This rhetorical category was used at the end of the speech, and it sought to sum up the main themes and move the listener to action. O'Brien (
Ephesians
, 459—60) rightly noted that this passage fulfills the function
of a peroratio
, but this does not necessarily justify the use of the rhetorical category since any good writing would attempt to summarize the argument and conclude with a passionate plea for action.

¹³⁴
See D. R. Reinhard, “Ephesians 6:10—18: A Call to Personal Piety or Another Way of Describing Union with Christ?”
JETS 48
(2005): 521-32.

¹³⁵
This theological theme and the division of the two spheres is becoming somewhat of a consensus viewpoint. See O'Brien,
Ephesians
, 58; Lincoln and Wedderburn,
Theology, 96—97;
M. Turner, “Mission and Meaning in Terms of ‘Unity’ in Ephesians,” in
Mission and Meaning: Essays Presented to Peter Cotterell
, ed. A. Billington, T. Lane, and M. Turner (Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1995), 138—
66;
Thielman,
Theology of the New Testament
, 394.

¹³⁶
See the excellent treatment by C. C. Caragounis,
The Ephesian Mysterion: Meaning and Content
(Lund: Gleerup, 1977), 144-46.

¹³⁷
Hoehner (
Ephesians
, 106—7) said that “Ephesians is known as the Trinitarian letter.”

¹³⁸
See especially the excellent sermon on this two-word text by D. M. Lloyd-Jones,
God's Way of Reconciliation
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1972), 59-69.

¹³⁹
See T. R. Schreiner
(Paul, Apostle of God's Glory in Christ
[Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001], 246): “Grace is not merely unmerited favor in the sense that one may choose to receive or reject a gift. Grace is the impartation of new life. Grace is a power that raises someone from the dead, that lifts those in the grave into new life. Grace is not merely an undeserved gift, though it is such; it is also a transforming power. Grace imparted life when we were dead, and grace also raises us and seats us with Christ in the heavenlies (Eph 2:6).”

¹⁴⁰
On the meaning of being “seated with Christ,” see especially H. N. Ridderbos,
Paul: An Outline of His Theology
, trans. J. R. de Witt (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 347; Lincoln,
Ephesians
, 105—7, and his more sustained exposition of inaugurated eschatology in
Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul's Thought with Special Reference to This Theology
, SNTSMS 43 (Cambridge: University Press, 1981).

¹⁴¹
I. H. Marshall, “Salvation, Grace and Works in the Later Writings in the Pauline Corpus,”
NTS
42 (1996): 339-58, especially 342—45.

¹⁴²
Genitive of the producer (i.e., “unity of the Spirit” = “unity produced by the Spirit”). See Wallace,
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics
, 105.

¹⁴³
J. R. W. Stott (
The Message of Ephesians: God's New Society
, BST [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1979], 151) agreed with this assessment. “Is there only one God? Then He has only one church. Is the unity of God inviolable? Then so is the unity of the church. The unity of the church is as indestructible as the unity of God Himself. It is no more possible to split the church than it is possible to split the Godhead.”

¹⁴⁴
T. Moritz, “Ephesians,” in
New Dictionary of Biblical Theology
, ed. T. D. Alexander and B. S. Rosner (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000), 317.

¹⁴⁵
Arnold, “Ephesians,” 247.

¹⁴⁶
D. G. Reid, “Principalities and Powers,” in
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters
, 749.

¹⁴⁷
The church militant “advances from a position of power founded on the ‘already’ of the defeat of the devil and his forces” (ibid., 751).

¹⁴⁸
O'Brien (
Ephesians
, 460, n. 84) rightly corrected Neufeld's (
Put on the Armour of God
, 111) false dichotomy. Neufeld took the plural as proof that Paul gave a corporate call, which should not be understood “in individualistic terms.” Yet O'Brien noted that the plural conveys “common action”; believers individually and corporately must stand “together as one” against the Devil.

¹⁴⁹
M. E. Gurdorf (“The Use
of pale
in Ephesians 6:12,”
JBL
117 [1998]: 334) made the same point when claiming that Paul used the picture of a fully armed soldier and wrestler to portray “close-quarter struggling.” Cf. Arnold,
Ephesians: Power and Magic
, 116—17, for background information drawn from inscriptions.