Introduction to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesian
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 3
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE
APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
IN many points of view the Epistle to the Ephesians presents a variety of difficulties. A learned man calls it “the most inartificial piece of composition in the universe:” this is not correct if it be intended to convey a censure on the composition itself; for the subject (which is a vindication of the providence and mercy of God, in admitting the Gentiles into his Church, and forming one flock of them and the converted Jews, giving them the same privileges which his peculiar people had enjoyed almost exclusively for 2000 years) has led the apostle to make such a variety of references to the Mosaic economy and its peculiarities, as, without this consideration, will make many parts of the epistle seem obscure to most readers; and this obscurity may be very improperly laid to the charge of inartificial composition: good judges, however, have allowed it to be one of the most sublime compositions of the kind that ever came from the pen of man. This was the opinion of Grotius.
The subject in this and the Epistle to the Colossians is certainly the same; and as it is supposed that they were written about the same time, it is natural to expect a similarity of expression. This subject, and others connected with these epistles, Dr. Paley has discussed with his usual sagacity; the substance of whose reasonings I beg leave to present to the reader.
Section 1.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 3
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 15: “την ενεργειανÈ (source keys requiring collation: energeianÈ)”; “ενεργειαÇ (source keys requiring collation: energeiaÇ)”. paragraph 19: “exactly the same order: αγαπη, love, is also found”. paragraph 21: “επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων; αφηςÇ αυξει; την αυξησινÇ (source keys requiring collation: epicorhgiavÇ, afhvÇ, auxhsinÇ)”. source PDF page 7: “one place it is τους πιστευοντας κατα την ενεργειανÈ in the other δια της πιστεως ενεργειας. Here, therefore, we have (source keys requiring collation: energeianÈ)”; “the same Greek term, ενεργειαÇ in one place it (source keys requiring collation: energeiaÇ)”. source PDF page 8: “together in both places; επιχορηγουμενον answering to επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων αφων to δια πασης αφηςÇ αυξει την αυξησιν to ποιειται την αυξησινÇ and … (source keys requiring collation: epicorhgiavÇ, afhvÇ, auxhsinÇ)”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 3, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 7, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 8. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 3; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 7; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified); Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 1.
This epistle and the Epistle to the Colossians appear to have been transmitted to their respective Churches by the same messenger: “But that ye also may know my affairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, shall make known to you all things; whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts;” Ephesians 6:21, 22. This text, if it do not expressly declare, clearly (I think) intimates, that the letter was sent by Tychicus. The words made use of in the Epistle to the Colossians are very similar to these, and afford the same implication that Tychicus, in conjunction with Onesimus, was the bearer of the letter to that Church: “All my state shall Tychicus declare unto you, who is a beloved brother, and a faithful minister and fellow servant in the Lord; whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that he might know your estate, and comfort your hearts; with Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you. They shall make known unto you all things which are done here;” Colossians 4:7-9. Both epistles represent the writer as under imprisonment for the Gospel, and both treat of the same general subject. The Epistle therefore to the Ephesians and the Epistle to the Colossians import to be two letters written by the same person, at or nearly at the same time, and upon the same subject, and to have been sent by the same messenger. Now, every thing in the sentiments, order, and diction of the two writings, corresponds with what might be expected from this circumstance of identity or cognation in their original. The leading doctrine of both epistles is the union of Jews and Gentiles under the Christian dispensation; and that doctrine in both is established by the same arguments, or, more properly speaking, illustrated by the same similitudes: “one head,” “one body,” “one new man,” “one temple,” are in both epistles the figures under which the society of believers in Christ, and their common relation to him as such, is represented. The ancient, and, as had been thought, the indelible distinction between Jew and Gentile, in both epistles, is declared to be “now abolished by his cross.” Beside this consent in the general tenor of the two epistles, and in the run also and warmth of thought with which they are composed, we may naturally expect, in letters produced under the circumstances in which these appear to have been written, a closer resemblance of style and diction than between other letters of the same person but of distant dates, or between letters adapted to different occasions. In particular, we may look for many of the same expressions, and sometimes for whole sentences being alike; since such expressions and sentences would be repeated in the second letter (whichever that was) as yet fresh in the author’s mind, from the writing of the first. This repetition occurs in the following examples:— Ephesians 1:7: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.”
Besides the sameness of the words, it is farther remarkable that the sentence is, in both places, preceded by the same introductory idea. In the Epistle to the Ephesians it is the “Beloved,” (ηγαπημενω,) in that to the Colossians it is “his dear Son,” (υιου της αγαπης αυτου, the Son of his love,) “in whom we have redemption.” The sentence appears to have been suggested to the mind of the writer, by the idea which had accompanied it before.
Ephesians 1:10: “All things, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him.”
Colossians 1:20: “All things by him, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”
This quotation is the more observable, because the connecting of things in earth with things in heaven is a very singular sentiment, and found no where else but in these two epistles. The words also are introduced and followed by a train of thought nearly alike. They are introduced by describing the union which Christ had effected; and they are followed by telling the Gentile Churches that they were incorporated into it. Ephesians 3:2: “The dispensation of the grace of God, which is given me to you-ward.”
Colossians 1:25: “The dispensation of God, which is given to me for you.”
Of these sentences it may likewise be observed, that the accompanying ideas are similar. In both places they are immediately preceded by the mention of his present sufferings; in both places they are immediately followed by the mention of the mystery which was the great subject of his preaching.
Ephesians 5:19: “In psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”
Colossians 3:16: “In psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”
Ephesians 6:22: “Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts.” Colossians 4:8: “Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that he might know your estate, and comfort your hearts.” In these examples we do not perceive a cento of phrases gathered from one composition and strung together in the other; but the occasional occurrence of the same expression to a mind a second time revolving the same ideas.
2. Whoever writes two letters, or two discourses, nearly upon the same subject, and at no great distance of time, but without any express recollection of what he had written before, will find himself repeating some sentences in the very order of the words in which he had already used them; but he will more frequently find himself employing some principal terms, with the order inadvertently changed, or with the order disturbed by the intermixture of other words and phrases expressive of ideas rising up at the time; or in many instances repeating not single words, nor yet whole sentences, but parts and fragments of sentences. Of all these varieties, the examination of these two epistles will furnish plain examples; and I should rely upon this class of instances more than upon the last; because, although an impostor might transcribe into a forgery entire sentences and phrases, yet the dislocation of words, the partial recollection of phrases and sentences, the intermixture of new terms and new ideas with terms and ideas before used, which will appear in the examples that follow, and which are the natural properties of writings produced under the circumstances in which these epistles are represented to have been composed, would not, I think, have occurred to the invention of a forger; nor, if they had occurred, would they have been so easily executed. This studied variation was a refinement in forgery which I believe did not exist; or if we can suppose it to have been practised in the instances adduced below, why, it may be asked, was not the same art exercised upon those which we have collected in the preceding class?
Ephesians 1:19-2:5: “Towards us who believe according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead; (and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come. And hath put all things under his feet; and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all;) and you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins, (wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience among whom also we all had our conversation in times past, in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,) even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ.”
Colossians 2:12, 13: “Through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead: and you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of the flesh, hath he quickened together with him.” Out of the long quotation from the Ephesians, take away the parentheses, and you have left a sentence almost in terms the same as the short quotation from the Colossians. The resemblance is more visible in the original than in our translation; for what is rendered in one place “the working,” and in another “the operation,” is the same Greek term, ενεργειαÇ in one place it is τους πιστευοντας κατα την ενεργειανÈ in the other δια της πιστεως ενεργειας. Here, therefore, we have the same sentiment, and nearly in the same words; but, in the Ephesians, twice broken or interrupted by incidental thoughts, which St. Paul, as his manner was enlarges upon by the way, and then returns to the thread of his discourse. It is interrupted the first time by a view which breaks in upon his mind of the exaltation of Christ, and the second time by a description of heathen depravity. I have only to remark, that Griesbach, in his very accurate edition, gives the parentheses very nearly in the same manner in which they are here placed; and that without any respect to the comparison which we are proposing.
Ephesians 4:2-4: “With all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling.”
Colossians 3:12-15: “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye: and, above all these things, put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness; and let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body.”
In these two quotations the words ταπεινοφροσυνη, πραστης, μακροθυμια, ανεχομενοι αλληλων, lowliness, meekness,
long-suffering, forebearing one another, occur in exactly the same order: αγαπη, love, is also found in both, but in a different connection; συνδεσμος της ειρηνης, the bond of peace, answers to συνδεσμος της τελειοτητος, the bond of perfectness; εκληθητε εν ενι σωματι, called into one spirit, to εν σωμα καθως και εκληθητε εν μια ελπιδι, one body, even as ye are called into one hope; yet is this similitude found in the midst of sentences otherwise very different.
Ephesians 4:16: “From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body.” Colossians 2:19: “From which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.”
In these quotations are read εξ ου παν το σωμα συμβιβαζομενον, from whom the whole body fitly joined together, in both places; επιχορηγουμενον answering to επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων αφων to δια πασης αφηςÇ αυξει την αυξησιν to ποιειται την αυξησινÇ and yet the sentences are considerably diversified in other parts. Ephesians 4:32: “And be kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another; even as God, for Christ’s sake, hath forgiven you.” Colossians 3:13: “Forbearing one an other, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.”
Here we have “forgiving one another, even as God, for Christ’s sake (εν χριστω) hath forgiven you,” in the first quotation, substantially repeated in the second. But in the second the sentence is broken by the interposition of a new clause, “If any man have a quarrel against any;” and the latter part is a little varied; instead of “God in Christ,” it is “Christ hath forgiven you.” Ephesians 4:22-24: “That ye put on, concerning the former conversation, the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” Colossians 3:9, 10: “Seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of him that created him.”
In these quotations, “putting off the old man, and putting on the new,” appears in both. The idea is farther explained by calling it a renewal; in the one, “renewed in the spirit of your mind,” in the other, “renewed in knowledge.” In both, the new man is said to be formed according to the same model; in the one, he is “after God created in righteousness and true holiness;” in the other, “he is renewed after the image of him who created him.” In a word, it is the same person writing upon a kindred subject, with the terms and ideas which he had before employed still floating in his memory.
In these comparisons we often perceive the reason why the writer, though expressing the same idea, uses a different term; namely, because the term before used is employed in the sentence under a different form: thus, in the quotations under our eye, the new man is καινος ανθρωπος in the Ephesians, and τον νεον in the Colossians; but then it is because τον καινον is used in the next word, ανακαινουμενον, being renewed. Ephesians 5:6-8: “Because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience: be not ye therefore partakers with them; for ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord walk as children of light.”
Colossians 3:6-8: “For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience; in the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. But now ye also put off all these.”
These verses afford a specimen of that partial resemblance which is only to be met with when no imitation is designed, when no studied recollection is employed; but when the mind, exercised upon the same subject, is left to the spontaneous return of such terms and phrases as, having been used before, may happen to present themselves again. The sentiment of both passages is throughout alike; half of that sentiment, the denunciation of God’s wrath, is expressed in identical words; the other half, viz. the admonition to quit their former conversation, in words entirely different. Ephesians 5:15, 16: “See then that ye walk circumspectly; not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time.
Colossians 4:5: “Walk in wisdom towards them that are without, redeeming the time.”
This is another example of that mixture which we remarked of sameness and variety in the language of one writer. “Redeeming the time,” (exagorazomenoi ton kairon,) is a literal repetition. “Walk not as fools but as wise,” (peripateite mh asofoi, allJ wv sofoi,) answers exactly in sense, and nearly in terms, to “walk in wisdom,” (en sofia peripateite.) peripateite akribwv is a very different phrase, but is intended to convey precisely the same idea as peripateite prov touv exw. akribwv is not well rendered “circumspectly.” It means what in modern speech we should call “correctly;” and when we advise a person to behave “correctly,” our advice is always given with a reference “to the opinion of others,” prov touv exw. “Walk correctly, redeeming the time,” i.e. suiting yourselves to the difficulty and ticklishness of the times in which we live, “because the days are evil.”
Ephesians 6:19, 20: “And (praying) for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the Gospel, for which I am an ambassador in bonds, that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.”
Colossians 4:3, 4: “Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds, that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak.” In these quotations the phrase, “as I ought to speak,” (wv dei me lalhsai,) the words “utterance,” (logov,) a mystery,” (musthriov,) “open,” (anoixh and en anoixei,) are the same. “To make known the mystery of the Gospel,” (gnwrisai to musthrion,) answers to “make it manifest;” (ina fanerwsw auto;) “for which I am an ambassador in bonds,” (eper ou presbeuw en alusei,) to “for which I am also in bonds,” (diJ o kai dedemai.)
Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as unto the Lord; for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church; and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word; that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself; for no man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church; for we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband. Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honour thy father and thy mother, (which is the first commandment with promise,) that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live long on the earth. And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men; knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening; knowing that your Master also is in heaven, neither is there respect of persons with him.” Colossians 3:18: “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them. Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God: and whatever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done; and there is no respect of persons. Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.”
The passages marked by Italics in the quotation from the Ephesians bear a strict resemblance, not only in signification but in terms, to the quotation from the Colossians. Both the words and the order of the words are in many clauses a duplicate of one another. In the Epistle to the Colossians these passages are laid together; in that to the Ephesians, they are divided by intermediate matter, especially by a long digressive allusion to the mysterious union between Christ and his Church; which possessing, as Mr. Locke hath well observed, the mind of the apostle, from being an incidental thought grows up into the principal subject. The affinity between, these two passages, in signification, in terms, and in the order of the words, is closer than can be pointed out between any parts of any two epistles in the volume.
If the reader, would see how the same subject is treated by a different hand, and how distinguishable it is from the production of the same pen, let him turn to the second and third chapters of the First Epistle of St. Peter. The duties of servants, of wives, and of husbands, are enlarged upon in that epistle, as they are in the Epistle to the Ephesians; but the subjects both occur in a different order, and the train of sentiment subjoined to each is totally unlike.
3. In two letters issuing from the same person, nearly at the same time, and upon the same general occasion, we may expect to trace the influence of association in the order in which the topics follow one another. Certain ideas universally or usually suggest others. Here the order is what we call natural, and from such an order nothing can be concluded. But when the order is arbitrary, yet alike, the concurrence indicates the effect of that principle, by which ideas, which have been once joined, commonly revisit the thoughts together. The epistles under consideration furnish the two following remarkable instances of this species of agreement. Ephesians 4:24: “And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness: wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour, for we are members one of another.”
Colossians 3:9: “Lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge.”
The vice of “lying,” or a correction of that vice, does not seem to bear any nearer relation to the “putting on the new man,” than a reformation in any other article of morals. Yet these two ideas we see stand in both epistles in immediate connection.
Ephesians 5:20-22: “Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”
Colossians 3:17: “Whatsoever ye do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.” In both these passages submission follows giving of thanks, without any similitude in the ideas which should account for the transition. It is not necessary to pursue the comparison between the two epistles farther. The argument which results from it stands thus: No two other epistles contain a circumstance which indicates that they were written at the same, or nearly at the same, time. No two other epistles exhibit so many marks of correspondency and resemblance. If the original which we ascribe to these two epistles be the true one, that is, if they were both really written by St. Paul, and both sent to their respective destination by the same messenger, the similitude is, in all points, what should be expected to take place. If they were forgeries, then the mention of Tychicus in both epistles, and in a manner which shows that he either carried or accompanied both epistles, was inserted for the purpose of accounting for their similitude; or else, the structure of the epistles was designedly adapted to the circumstance: or lastly, the conformity between the contents of the forgeries, and what is thus directly intimated concerning their date, was only a happy accident. Not one of these three suppositions will gain credit with a reader who peruses the epistles with attention, and who reviews the several examples we have pointed out, and the observations with which they were accompanied.
Section 2.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 13
SECTION 2.
There is such a thing as a peculiar word or phrase cleaving, as it were, to the memory of a writer or speaker, and presenting itself to his utterance at every turn. When we observe this we call it a cant word, or a cant phrase. It is a natural effect of habit, and would appear more frequently than it does, had not the rules of good writing taught the ear to be offended with the iteration of the same sound, and often-times caused us to reject, on that account, the word which offered itself first to our recollection. With a writer who, like St. Paul, either knew not these rules, or disregarded them, such words will not be avoided. The truth is, an example of this kind runs through several of his epistles, and in the epistle before us abounds; and that is in the word riches, (πλουτος,) used metaphorically as an augmentative of the idea to which it happens to be subjoined. Thus “the riches of his glory,” “his riches in glory,” “riches of the glory of his inheritance,” “riches of the glory of this mystery,” Romans 9:23; Ephesians 3:16; Ephesians 1:18; Colossians 1:27; “riches of his grace,” twice in the Ephesians, Ephesians 1:7; 2:7; “riches of the full assurance of understanding,” Colossians 2:2; “riches of his goodness,” Romans 2:4; “riches of the wisdom of God,” Romans 11:33; “riches of Christ,” Ephesians 3:8. In a like sense the adjective, Romans 10:12, “Rich unto all that call upon him,” Ephesians 2:4, “Rich in mercy;” 1 Timothy 6:18, “Rich in good works.” Also the adverb Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.” This figurative use of the word, though so familiar to St. Paul, does not occur in any part of the New Testament, except once in the Epistle of St. James, James 2:5 “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith?” where it is manifestly suggested by the antithesis. I propose the frequent, yet seemingly. unaffected, use of this phrase in the epistle before us, as one internal mark of its genuineness.
Section 3.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 14
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 2: “υμων συστατικωνÈ η (source keys requiring collation: sustatikwnÈ)”. source PDF page 15: “2 Corinthians 3:1 ει μη χρηζομεν, ως τινες, συστατικων επιστολων προς υμας, η εξ υμων συστατικωνÈ η επιστολη ημων υμεις εστε, εγγεγραμυενη εν ται… (source keys requiring collation: sustatikwnÈ)”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 15. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 15; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 3.
There is another singularity in St. Paul’s style which, wherever it is found, may be deemed a badge of authenticity; because, if it were noticed, it would not, I think, be imitated, inasmuch as it almost always produces embarrassment and interruption in the reasoning. This singularity is a species of digression which may probably, I think, be denominated going off at a word. It is turning aside from the subject upon the occurrence of some particular word, forsaking the train of thought then in hand, and entering upon a parenthetic sentence in which that word is the prevailing term. I shall lay before the reader some examples of this, collected from the other epistles, and then propose two examples of it which are found in the Epistle to the Ephesians. 2 Corinthians 2:14, at the word savour: “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. (For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life; and who is sufficient for these things?) For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.” Again, 2 Corinthians 3:1, at the word epistle: “Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or of commendation from you? (Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts known and read of all men; forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.”) The position of the words in the original shows, more strongly than in the translation, that it was the occurrence of the word επιστολη which gave birth to the sentence as follows, 2 Corinthians 3:1: ει μη χρηζομεν, ως τινες, συστατικων επιστολων προς υμας, η εξ υμων συστατικωνÈ η επιστολη ημων υμεις εστε, εγγεγραμυενη εν ταις καρδιαις ημων, γινωσκομενη και αναγινωσκομενη υπο παντων ανθρωπων. φανερουμενοι οτι
Again, 2 Corinthians 3:12, &c., at the word veil: “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished. But their minds were blinded; for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament, which veil is done away in Christ; but even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart; nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away, (now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.) But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.”
Who sees not that this whole allegory of the veil arises entirely out of the occurrence of the word, in telling us that “Moses put a veil over his face,” and that it drew the apostle away from the proper subject of his discourse, the dignity of the office in which he was engaged? which subject he fetches up again almost in the words with which he had left it: “Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.” The sentence which he had before been going on with, and in which he had been interrupted by the veil, was, “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech.”
In the Epistle to the Ephesians the reader will remark two instances in which the same habit of composition obtains; he will recognize the same pen. One he will find, Ephesians 4:8-11, at the word ascended: “Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts into men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles,” &c.
The other appears, Ephesians 5:12-15, at the word light: “For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret: but all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light; (for whatsoever doth make manifest, is light; wherefore he saith, Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light;) see then that ye walk circumspectly:”
Section 4.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 16
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 2: “the more remarkable, as αλυσις (a chain) is no”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 16, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 17. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 16; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 17; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 4.
As our epistle purports to have been written during St. Paul’s imprisonment at Rome, which lies beyond the period to which the Acts of the Apostles brings up his history, and as we have seen and acknowledged that the epistle contains no reference to any transaction at Ephesus during the apostle’s residence in that city, we cannot expect that it should supply many marks of agreement with the narrative. One coincidence, however, occurs, and a coincidence of that minute and less obvious kind, which, as hath been repeatedly observed, is of all others the most to be relied upon. Ephesians 6:19, 20, we read, “Praying for me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the Gospel, for which I am an ambassador in bonds.” “In bonds,” εν αλυσει, in a chain. In the twenty-eighth chapter of the Acts we are informed that Paul, after his arrival at Rome, was suffered to dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him. Dr. Lardner has shown that this mode of custody was in use amongst the Romans, and that whenever it was adopted, the prisoner was bound to the soldier by a single chain: in reference to which St. Paul, in the twentieth verse of this chapter, {Acts 28:20} tells the Jews, whom he had assembled, “For this cause, therefore, have I called for you, to see you and to speak with you, because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain,” την υλυσιν ταυτην περικειμαι. It is in exact conformity, therefore, with the truth of St. Paul’s situation at the time, that he declares of himself in the epistle, πρεσβευω εν αλυσει. And the exactness is the more remarkable, as αλυσις (a chain) is no where used in the singular number to express any other kind of custody. When the prisoner’s hands or feet were bound together, the word was δεσμοι, (bonds;) Acts 26:29. When the prisoner was confined between two soldiers, as in the case of Peter, Acts 12:6, two chains were employed; and it is said, upon his miraculous deliverance, that the “chains (αλυσεις, in the plural) fell from his hands.”
If it can be suspected that the writer of the present epistle, who in no other particular appears to have availed himself of the information concerning St. Paul delivered in the Acts, had, in this verse, borrowed the word which he read in that book, and had adapted his expression to what he found there recorded of St. Paul’s treatment at Rome; in short, that the coincidence here noted was effected by craft and design, I think it a strong reply, to remark that in the parallel passage of the Epistle to the Colossians the same allusion is not preserved; the words there are, “praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds,” δι᾽ ο και δεδεμαι. After what has been shown in a preceding section, there can be little doubt that these two epistles were written by the same person.
Preface to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 18
PREFACE TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE
APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
EPHESUS was a city of Ionia, in Asia Minor, and once the metropolis of that part of the world. The ancient city was situated at the mouth of the river Cayster, on the shore of the Ægean Sea, about 50 miles south of Smyrna. The Ephesus in which St. Paul founded a Church, and which for a time flourished gloriously, was not the ancient Ephesus; for that was destroyed, and a new city of the same name was built by Lysimachus. This most famous of all the Asiatic cities is now a miserable village, composed of mean huts formed out of the ruins of its once magnificent structures; and these huts are now the residence of about forty or fifty Turkish families, without a single Christian among them! For other particulars see the note on Acts 18:19.
It is, however, a doubt with many learned men, whether this epistle was sent to the Church at Ephesus. They think that the proper direction is, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans; and suppose it to be the same which the apostle mentions, Colossians 4:16: “When this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.” Dr. Paley’s arguments in the affirmative are entitled to much regard.
“Although it does not appear to have ever been disputed that the epistle before us was written by St. Paul, yet it is well known that a doubt has long been entertained concerning the persons to whom it was addressed. The question is founded partly in some ambiguity in the external evidence. Marcion, a heretic of the second century, as quoted by Tertullian, a father in the beginning of the third, calls it, The Epistle to the Laodiceans. From what we know of Marcion, his judgment is little to be relied upon; nor is it perfectly clear that Marcion was rightly understood by Tertullian. If, however, Marcion be brought to prove that some copies in his time gave εν λαοδικεια in the superscription, his testimony, if it be truly interpreted, is not diminished by his heresy; for, as Grotius observes, ‘cur in ea re mentiretur nihil erat causæ.’ The name εν εφεσω, in Ephesus, in the first verse, upon which word singly depends the proof that the epistle was written to the Ephesians, is not read in all the manuscripts now extant. I admit, however, that the external evidence preponderates with a manifest excess on the side of the received reading. The objection therefore principally arises from the contents of the epistle itself, which, in many respects militate with the supposition that it was written to the Church of Ephesus. According to the history, St. Paul had passed two whole years at Ephesus, Acts 19:10. And in this point, viz. of St. Paul having preached for a considerable length of time at Ephesus, the history is confirmed by the two epistles to the Corinthians, and by the two epistles to Timothy: ‘I will tarry at Ephesus until pentecost;’ 1 Corinthians 16:8. ‘We would not have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia;’ 2 Corinthians 1:8. ‘As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia;’ 1 Timothy 1:3. ‘And in how many things he ministered to me at Ephesus thou knowest well;’ 2 Timothy 1:18. I adduce these testimonies because, had it been a competition of credit between the history and the epistle, I should have thought myself bound to have preferred the epistle. Now, every epistle which St. Paul wrote to Churches which he himself had founded, or which he had visited, abounds with references and appeals to what had passed during the time that he was present amongst them; whereas there is not a text in the Epistle to the Ephesians from which we can collect that he had ever been at Ephesus at all. The two epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Galatians, the Epistle to the Philippians, and the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, are of this class; and they are full of allusions to the apostle’s history, his reception, and his conduct whilst amongst them; the total want of which in the epistle before us is very difficult to account for, if it was in truth written to the Church of Ephesus, in which city he had resided for so long a time. This is the first and strongest objection. But farther, the Epistle to the Colossians was addressed to a Church in which St. Paul had never been, This we infer from the first verse of the second chapter: ‘For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh.’ There could be no propriety in thus joining the Colossians and Laodiceans with those ‘who had not seen his face in the flesh,’ if they did not also belong to the same description. Now, his address to the Colossians, whom he had not visited, is precisely the same as his address to the Christians to whom he wrote in the epistle which we are now considering: ‘We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints;’ Colossians 1:3. Thus he speaks to the Christians, in the epistle before us, as follows: ‘Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints, cease not to give thanks for you in my prayers; Ephesians 1:15. The terms of this address are observable. The words, ‘having heard of your faith and love,’ are the very words, we see, which he uses towards strangers; and it is not probable that he should employ the same in accosting a Church in which he had long exercised his ministry, and whose ‘faith and love’ he must have personally known. The Epistle to the Romans was written before St. Paul had been at Rome; and his address to them runs in the same strain with that just now quoted: ‘I thank my God, through Jesus Christ, for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world;’ Romans 1:8. Let us now see what was the form in which our apostle was accustomed to introduce his epistles, when he wrote to those with whom he was already acquainted. To the Corinthians it was this: ‘I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Christ Jesus;’ 1 Corinthians 1:4. To the Philippians: ‘I thank my God upon every remembrance of you;’ Philippians 1:3. To the Thessalonians: ‘We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers, remembering without ceasing your work of faith and labour of love;’ 1 Thessalonians 1:3. To Timothy: ‘I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day;’ 2 Timothy 1:3. In these quotations it is usually his remembrance, and never his hearing of them, which he makes the subject of his thankfulness to God.
As great difficulties stand in the way, supposing the epistle before us to have been written to the Church of Ephesus; so I think it probable that it is actually the epistle to the Laodiceans, referred to in the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians. The text which contains that reference is this: ‘When this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea;’ Colossians 4:16. The epistle from Laodicea was an epistle sent by St. Paul to that Church, and by them transmitted to Colosse. The two Churches were mutually to communicate the epistles they had received. This is the way in which the direction is explained by the greater part of commentators, and is the most probable sense that can be given to it. It is also probable that the epistle alluded to was an epistle which had been received by the Church of Laodicea lately. It appears, then, with a considerable degree of evidence, that there existed an epistle of St. Paul nearly of the same date with the Epistle to the Colossians, and an epistle directed to a Church (for such the Church of Laodicea was) in which St. Paul had never been. What has been observed concerning the epistle before us, shows that it answers perfectly to that character.
“Nor does the mistake seem very difficult to account for. Whoever inspects the map of Asia Minor will see, that a person proceeding from Rome to Laodicea would probably land at Ephesus, as the nearest frequented seaport in that direction. Might not Tychicus, then, in passing through Ephesus, communicate to the Christians of that place the letter with which he was charged? And might not copies of that letter be multiplied and preserved at Ephesus? Might not some of the copies drop the words of designation εν τη λαοδικεια, which it was of no consequence to an Ephesian to retain? Might not copies of the letter come out into the Christian Church at large from Ephesus; and might not this give occasion to a belief that the letter was written to that Church? And, lastly, might not this belief produce the error which we suppose to have crept into the inscription?
“And it is remarkable that there seem to have been some ancient copies without the words of designation, either the words in Ephesus, or the words in Laodicea. St. Basil, a writer of the fourth century, speaking of the present epistle, has this very singular passage: ‘And writing to the Ephesians, as truly united to him who is through knowledge, he (Paul) calleth them in a peculiar sense such who are; saying, to the saints who are and (or even) the faithful in Christ Jesus; for so those before us have transmitted it, and we have found it in ancient copies.’ Dr. Mill interprets (and, notwithstanding some objections that have been made to him, in my opinion, rightly interprets) these words of Basil, as declaring that this father had seen certain copies of the epistle in which the words ‘in Ephesus’ were wanting. And the passage, I think, must be considered as Basil’s fanciful way of explaining what was really a corrupt and defective reading; for I do not believe it possible that the author of the epistle could have originally written αγιοις τοις ουσιν, without any name of place to follow it.”
It must be allowed that the arguments of Dr. Paley, the sum of which may be found in Wetstein, that this is the epistle to the Laodiceans, are both plausible and strong; and yet almost the whole of antiquity, with the exceptions which those learned men mention, is in favour of the epistle being sent originally to the Church at Ephesus. Puzzled with these two considerations, some critics have pointed out a middle way. They suppose that several copies of this epistle were directed to no particular Church, but were intended for all the Churches in Asia Minor; and that different copies might have different directions, from this circumstance, that St. Paul, in writing the first verse παυλος αποστολος ιησου χριστου-τοις αγιοις τοις ουσιν, Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the saints which are, left a blank after ουσιν, are, which was in some cases filled up with εν εφεσω, in Ephesus; in others, with εν λαοδικεια, in Laodicea; though there might be one copy expressly sent by him to the Church of the Laodiceans, while he wished that others should be directed to the different Churches through Asia Minor. That there were copies which had no place specified, we learn from St. Basil; and the arguments in favour of Laodicea are certainly the strongest; the circumstance, that the apostle salutes no person, agrees well with Laodicea, where he had never been, Colossians 2:1; but cannot agree with Ephesus, where he was well known, and where, in preaching the Gospel, he had spent three years. See Acts 20:31.
As this point is very dubious, and men of great abilities and learning have espoused different sides of the question, I judge myself incompetent to determine any thing; but I felt it my duty to bring the arguments for Laodicea fairly before the reader; those in favour of Ephesus may be met with every where. The passages in the body of the epistle, alleged by critics who espouse opposite sides of this subject, I have seldom noticed in a controversial way; and the notes on those passages are constructed as though no controversy existed.
Many expositors, and particularly Drs. Chandler and Macknight, have thought that they have perceived a great number of references to the temple of Diana at Ephesus; to the sacred mysteries among the Greeks; to the Hierophants, Mystagogues, Neocoroi, &c., in the temple of the celebrated goddess. It may appear strange that, with these opinions before me, I have not referred to the same things; nor adduced them by way of illustration; the truth is, I have not been able to discover them, nor do I believe that any such allusions exist. I see many allusions to the temple of God at Jerusalem, but none to the temple of Diana at Ephesus. I find also many references to the sacred service and sacerdotal officers in the Jewish temple; but none to Mystagogues, &c., among the heathens. I find much said about, what is to be understood most literally, the mystery which had been hidden from all ages, viz. of uniting Jews and Gentiles in one Church, but no reference to the Eleusinian, Bacchic, or other mysteries in the abominable worship of the Greeks, was suggesting to the mind of the apostle any parallel between their mysteries and those of the Almighty. My reasons for my dissent from these respectable authorities I have given in the notes.
June 20th, 1815.
EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
Chronological Notes relative to this Epistle.
-Usherian year of the world, 4065.
-Alexandrian era of the world, 5563.
-Antiochian era of the world, 5553.
-Constantinopolitan era of the world, 5569.
-Year of the Eusebian epocha of the Creation, 4289.
-Year of the Julian period, 4771.
-Year of the minor Jewish era of the world, 3821.
-Year of the Greater Rabbinical era of the world, 4420.
-Year from the Flood, according to Archbishop Usher, and the English Bible, 2409.
-Year of the Cali yuga, or Indian era of the Deluge, 3163. -Year of the era of Iphitus, or since the first commencement of the Olympic games, 1001.
-Year of the Nabonassarean era, 808.
-Year of the era of the Seleucidæ, 373.
-Year of the Spanish era, 99.
-Year of the Actiac or Actian era, 92.
-Year from the birth of Christ, 65.
-Year of the vulgar era of Christ’s nativity, 61.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to Varro, 813. -Year of the CCXth Olympiad, 1.
-Jesus, high priest of the Jews.
-Common Golden Number, 5.
-Jewish Golden Number, 2.
-Year of the Solar Cycle, 14.
-Dominical Letter, D.
-Jewish Passover, March 22d.
-Easter Sunday, March 29th.
-Epact, or the moons age on the 22d of March, or the Xth of the Calends of April, 14.
-Year of the reign of Nero. Cæsar, the sixth emperor of the Romans, 8. -In the first year of Porcius Festus, governor of the Jews. -Year of Vologesus, king of the Parthians, 11.
-Year of Domitius Corbulo, governor of Syria, 2.
-Roman Consuls; C. Cæsonius Pætus, and C. Petronius Turpilianus.
Joseph Benson
The Epistle to the Ephesians.
BEN_VOL8.PDF, source PDF p. 159
THE EPISTLE TO THE
EPHESIANS.
OF EPHESUS, a city famed for its commerce and riches, and for its being the metropolis of that part of Asia which was a Roman province, the reader will find an account in the notes on Acts 19:1. The apostle, it seems, first visited this city when on his way from Achaia to Jerusalem, as is related Acts 18:19, 20: at which time he preached in the synagogue of the Jews; but did not continue many days, though his preaching was not without fruit, as appears from his being desired by some of his hearers to tarry a longer time with them, that they might be more fully instructed in the doctrines which he taught. The reason why he did not comply with their request, was his believing it to be his duty to attend at Jerusalem at an approaching feast. From the history of the Acts we learn, that the Ephesians were then a very dissolute people, and extremely addicted to the arts of sorcery and magic, taught and practised there; “walking,” as the apostle expresses it, “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit which worketh in the children of disobedience,” Ephesians 2:2. Their city, also, was the very throne of idolatry; the worship of idols being performed in no part of the heathen world with greater splendour than at Ephesus, on account of the famous temple of Diana, which was built between the city and the harbour, at the expense of all Asia, (see note on Acts 19:27,) and in which was an image of that goddess, said to have fallen down from Jupiter, Acts 19:35. This image, as we may well suppose, was worshipped with the most pompous rites, by a multitude of priests, and a vast concourse of votaries from every quarter, who, to gain the favour of Diana, came to Ephesus to offer sacrifice at her shrine. Such being the state of religion and morals among the Ephesians, St. Paul, who was expressly commissioned by Christ to turn the Gentiles “from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God,” resolved, at his departure from their city, to return soon, (Acts 18:21,) that he might have an opportunity of attacking idolatry in this its chief seat. Accordingly, having celebrated the feast of pentecost at Jerusalem, and afterward gone over the country of Galatia and Phrygia, strengthening the disciples, he came to Ephesus, (Acts 19:1,) and preached boldly, first in the synagogue of the Jews, for the space of three months, discoursing concerning the things which related to the kingdom of God, verse 8. But the Jews, who had heard him with pleasure at his former visit, now opposed him violently, when they perceived that he preached salvation without requiring obedience to the law of Moses. They spake also with the greatest virulence against the gospel itself; insomuch that the apostle judged it improper to preach any longer in the synagogue. Separating the disciples, therefore, from the unbelieving Jews, he discoursed daily in the school of one Tyrannus, who either was himself a disciple, or allowed the apostle the use of his school for hire. “And this,” as we learn from Acts 19:10, “continued for the space of two years; so that all they who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.” During this time, so extraordinary were his miracles, that “from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them;” which miracles, together with his preaching, were so blessed of God, that multitudes of the idolatrous inhabitants of Asia embraced the gospel; and, among the rest, many who had practised the arts of magic and divination. These, to show how sincerely they repented of their former evil-practices, brought out the books which contained the secrets of their arts, and burned them publicly, notwithstanding they were of very great value. “So mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed” among the Ephesians. In consequence of this extraordinary success, the apostle had determined to spend a longer season in Asia; but a dreadful riot raised against him by Demetrius, a silversmith, who employed a great number of workmen in making silver shrines for Diana, (of which see Acts 19:23-41, with the notes there,) caused him to alter his resolution, and to proceed immediately toward Macedonia, into which country he had already sent Timothy and Erastus. During the time, however, of the apostle’s stay at Ephesus, a numerous Christian church was formed, chiefly made up of Gentile converts, whose piety and zeal appear, from this epistle, to have been remarkable. To watch over these, and administer to them the word of God, the apostle appointed several elders, or overseers. These, about a year after, when on his way from Macedonia and Achaia to Jerusalem, the apostle sent for, to meet him at Miletus; to whom, when they came, he delivered the pathetic exhortation recorded. Acts 20:17-35, forewarning them both of great persecutions from without, and of divers heresies and schisms, which would arise among themselves. After this it appears that he never visited Ephesus again, nor saw any of the elders whom he now addressed. He wrote, however, this epistle to them for their further instruction and establishment in the faith; and that, it seems, within three or four years from this period; or, as is generally supposed, during the latter part of the time of his imprisonment at Rome. For, from what he himself says, (Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; 6:20,) he was a prisoner when he wrote it, as he was likewise when he wrote to the Colossians, Colossians 4:10. Indeed, there is such a manifest correspondence between these two epistles, both in their subject matter and in the very form of the expression, that it may be justly concluded they were written at the same time, and sent together by Tychicus, who was intrusted with the care of both, but was attended by Onesimus, when he delivered that to the Colossians, Colossians 4:9.
The design of the apostle in this epistle was to establish the Ephesian believers in the doctrine he had delivered; and for that purpose to give them more exalted views of the love of God, and of the excellence and dignity of the Lord Jesus; to show them that they were saved by grace; and that the Gentiles, however wretched they had been once, were now invited to enjoy equal privileges with the Jews; to encourage them, by declaring with what steadiness the apostle himself suffered for the truth, and with what earnestness he prayed for their establishment and perseverance. He also intended to arm them against false teachers, and to build them up in love and holiness, both of heart and conversation. If it be remembered that the most flourishing sects of philosophers had been, or were, settled at Ephesus, and in its neighbourhood; it will not be doubted that the apostle would make use of extraordinary caution in writing; and it is evident that this epistle is full of the sublimest doctrines, and written in a style equal to the nobleness of his sentiments, and the learning of those to whom it was addressed. Though this, perhaps, at first sight may render his meaning a little obscure, yet, by the assistance of the forementioned epistle to the Colossians, written while he was in the same circumstances, upon the same occasion, and to the same purpose, the sense and doctrine of the apostle here may be so clearly seen, and so perfectly comprehended, that there can be hardly any doubt left about it, to any one who will examine them diligently, and carefully compare them together. He begins this epistle, as he does most of the others, with thanksgiving to God, for their embracing and adhering to the gospel. He shows the inestimable blessings and advantages they received thereby, as far above all the Jewish privileges as all the wisdom and philosophy of the heathen. He proves that our Lord is the head of the whole church; of angels and spirits, the church triumphant; and of Jews and Gentiles, now equally members of the church militant. In the last three chapters he exhorts them to various duties, civil and religious, personal and relative, suitable to their Christian character, privileges, assistances, and obligations. To be a little more particular: In this epistle we may observe, I. The inscription, Ephesians 1:1, 2. II. The doctrine pathetically explained, which contains, 1. Praise to God for the whole gospel blessing, verses 3-14, with thanksgiving and prayer for the saints, verse 15 to Ephesians 2:10. 2. A more particular admonition concerning their once miserable, but now happy condition, verses 11-22; a prayer for their establishment, Ephesians 3:1-19; a doxology, verses 20,
21. III. The exhortation. First, general: To walk worthy of their calling, agreeably to, 1. The unity of the Spirit, and the diversity of his gifts, Ephesians 4:1-16. 2. The difference between their former and their present state, verses 17-24. Secondly, particular: To avoid, 1. Lying, Ephesians 4:25. 2. Anger, verse 26. 3. Theft, verse 28. 4. Corrupt communication, verses 29, 30. 5. Bitterness, verse 31 to Ephesians 5:2.
6. Uncleanness, verses 3-14. 7. Drunkenness, verses 15-21. With a commendation of the opposite virtues: To do their duty, as, 1. Wives and husbands, verses 22-33. 2. Children and parents, Ephesians 6:1-4. 3. Servants and masters, verses 5-9. Thirdly, final: To war the spiritual warfare, verses 10-20. IV. The conclusion, verses 21-24.
Joseph Sutcliffe
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians.
SUT_VOL5.PDF, source PDF p. 75
ST. PAUL’S EPISTLE TO THE
EPHESIANS.
EPHESUS, once the glory of all Asia, is now reduced to obscurity. It was built by the Amazones; and its temple, afterwards dedicated to Diana, was reckoned one of the seven wonders of the world, as stated by Ctesiphon. The city was augmented and enlarged by Androcus, son of Codrus, as is noted by Pausanias. Erostratus burned it the night that Alexander was born. Hannibal and Antiochus in this city carried on war against the Romans. It was repeatedly visited by the emperors of Rome, and enlarged and adorned with temples. Its ruin commenced when taken and pillaged by the Persians in the third century; it was also taken by the Scythians, and finally by Mahomet. Smyrna now partially enjoys the glory which Ephesus once possessed.
The Epistle of Paul to the church of Ephesus, is reckoned one of the most valuable treasures of primitive christianity. It is what Paul says of the gospel, a revelation of the mystery hid in ages past. It was written from Rome while the apostle was a prisoner there, and sent by Tychicus, a deacon, about twenty seven years after the death of Christ. So at least Baronius reckons in his Chronicum. But Usher fixes it about five years later.
The church of Ephesus had been planted by St. Paul, as Luke has stated in Acts 19. and 20. At the time of his writing this epistle, there were in that city many learned men, and various sects of philosophers. Some of those were Gnostics, who had crept into the church unawares, and brought moral reproach on the christian name. They were the grievous wolves who spared not the flock, and often drew away disciples after them. Acts 20:29, 30. “They went out from us,” says John, “because they were not of us.” In a word, the apostle contrasts the most deplorable state of the gentile world, with the glory of the christian vocation, to be fellow-heirs with the seed of Abraham of the grace of life in Christ Jesus, according to the good pleasure of the Father from the foundation of the world.
The whole character of the epistle is sublime in thought, excellent in doctrine, rich in figure, and beautiful in expression. It is a composition so consummate in character, that no man can equal it without divine illumination.
Daniel Whedon
Introduction.
WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 349
EPHESIANS
INTRODUCTION.
OF the founding of the Church in Ephesus by St. Paul, a full narrative is given by Luke, Acts 19, where see our notes. The twelve Johnite disciples, the secession from the synagogue and establishment of preaching in the academic rooms of Tyrannus, the contests with sorcery, and more especially the opposition and commotion of the worshippers of Diana, form a series of stirring and striking narrations. Three years, in round numbers, were spent in this great work. See our Outline History commencing this volume.
This is one of the four epistles from the Roman prison, as we have noted on Acts 28:31. Of its genuineness no doubt has ever been entertained in the Christian Church until modern criticism raised the question. De Wette and Bauer maintain it to be not the work of Paul; and Renan places it among the “doubtful.” Their reasonings, too captious for a discussion in our brief space, have been amply answered by Meyer, Eadie, and Alford. A more serious doubt exists whether the epistle was addressed to the Ephesians; or, at any rate, to them alone. This doubt arises from two sources: 1. There are no greetings in the epistle, although Paul had hosts of friends in Ephesus; and the whole epistle is like a religious essay without definite reference to facts or circumstances. To this it is fairly replied, that most of Paul’s epistles are without greetings; and there is no good reason why St. Paul should not write a treatise on a holy model Church in epistolatory form, and send it to his Ephesians. But, 2. Very early manuscripts of the epistle are found without the words “in Ephesus” in the first verse. The Sinaitic manuscripts and one or two others omit. St. Basil and Jerome both say that ancient copies are without it. And hence a large number of our best biblical scholars conclude that this was an encyclical epistle; that is, it was sent by Paul by the hands of Tychicus to Asia with the space left blank that each Church in that section might insert its own name in a copy as its own. But to this there is a mass of objections. How happens it that not a single copy has ever been found with the name of any other Church inserted? The majority of manuscripts and versions with the words “in Ephesus” inserted is overwhelming; and even Basil and Jerome entertain no doubt of its really being an epistle to Ephesus. The omission of the words “in Ephesus,” in a few instances, like the omission of the words “in Rome,” in some copies of the Epistle to the Romans, may have arisen from the desire of some Churches to give to their own copy a character of generality by removing the mention of a particular Church. This question, it will be seen, does not affect the authenticity or value of the epistle. Over this memorable Church, after Paul, a Timothy and an apostle John presided. To it one of the addresses of the Apocalypse was delivered, picturing its spiritual state. For centuries, the temple of Diana, lying in ruins, and splendid Christian cathedrals crowning the city, Ephesus was a great stronghold of eastern Christianity. Subsequently it fell under the power of the Turks, and at present few traces of ancient grandeur remain upon its site.
We may consider this production of St. Paul to be an epistolary treatise upon a holy Church as accordant with God’s eternal ideal through Christ, and humanly to be realized on earth. So far from being, as De Wette thinks, “rich in words and poor in ideas,” the greatest students of its pages have found it powerful in its combination of language and sublime in its sweep of thought. Dr. Bloomfield applies to it Dr. Johnson’s words in regard to another book: “If the reader have a spark of regard for the gospel it will blow it into a flame.” Grotius and Coleridge characterize it in terms we are almost able to endorse. The former says, “It equals its sublimity of ideas with words more sublime than any human language ever possessed.” The latter calls it, “The divinest composition of man.”
Plan of the Epistle.
WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 351
PLAN OF THE EPISTLE.
PART FIRST.
The Eternal and Divine Side of the Formation, through Christ, of a Holy Church on Earth and in Heaven Ephesians 1:3-3:21
1. To be a holy and efficient Church Ephesians 4:1-16 a. In holy unity of spirit Ephesians 4:1-6 b. And with Christ-given ministries Ephesians 4:7-11 c. To develop into a perfect individual Christian manhood and a compact organic life Ephesians 4:12-16
2. To be a Church in double contrast to the anti-Church of Gentilism Ephesians 4:17-5:21
First Contrast—Sins of the spirit Ephesians 4:17-5:2 a. In contrast to the Gentilism which you have left Ephesians 4:17-19
b. Be renewed from the old to the new man Ephesians 4:20-24 c. By putting off the five Gentile vices Ephesians 4:25-5:2 Second Contrast—Sins of the flesh Ephesians 5:3-21 a. Against Gentile uncleanness, be mindful of God’s judgment Ephesians 5:3-7
b. Against their secret and nightly shame, be children of light and day Ephesians 5:8-17
c. Against their drunkenness and revelry, be filled with the Spirit and with holy hymns Ephesians 5:18-21
IN the present volume I have expounded the third group of St. Paul’s Epistles, those written during his first imprisonment at Rome. It is well that the four Epistles are expounded in one volume. For they are most closely related in thought and expression, and unitedly present a very definite phase of St. Paul’s thought; a marked development of the thought embodied in the great group already annotated. This rich development can be appreciated only by consecutive study of the whole group. The distinctive features of my earlier volumes dominate this new work. As before, my aim has been not merely to reproduce the sense which the Apostle designed his words to convey, but also to use his letters as a means of reproducing his conception of the Gospel and of Christ, in order thus to reach the actual teaching of Christ and those unseen realities which He came to reveal to men. Consequently, as before, my exposition of the Epistles of Paul is a specific contribution to Systematic Theology. And, since these Epistles contain important evidence of the truth of the doctrines so firmly believed by the Apostle, my exposition of them is also a contribution to the Evidences of Christianity. This accounts for my long and full discussion of the authorship of the Epistles now annotated; and for the frequent indication, throughout the exposition, of words and phrases revealing the hand of Paul. For my method of research required me to prove that the doctrines set forth in these Epistles were actually taught by St. Paul. And it accounts also for the somewhat polemic form of the closing Dissertations in which I have embodied the chief results of our study.
For two classes of readers I have written expressly, for students of the Greek Testament and for intelligent readers of the English Bible. The former will find a careful grammatical exposition of the Greek text of the Epistles; and will catch the reason for many English renderings which to others will seem harsh or even ungrammatical. They will notice that at every point, both in my translation and in my frequent paraphrases and summaries of the language of St. Paul, I have endeavoured to reproduce the exact meaning and emphasis of the Greek words written by him. This frequent and careful reproduction of his meaning will also be of use to many who are unable to verify it by comparison with the original, but who wish to grasp, through the medium of their own language, as accurately and fully as possible the thoughts of the great Apostle. My chief helpers have been, as before, Meyer and Hofmann among Germans, and Ellicott and Lightfoot among English commentators. To these I may add the very full and able commentary on the Epistle to the Colossians by Kloepper, and a most accurate and acute exposition of the same Epistle, in The Pulpit Commentary, by Findlay. So good is this last work that, but for the difference of aim noted above, it would have been needless for me to attempt another exposition. Dr. Maclaren’s volume on the same Epistle in The Expositor’s Bible is most excellent. But as a popular exposition for general readers, rather than for students, its aim differs widely from that of my own work. Of another kind, but also good, are the contributions to The Cambridge Bible for Schools by Moule. On the genuineness of the Epistles now annotated, I am glad to refer to the very able and attractive Introduction to the New Testament by Dr. Salmon. On the Christian Ministry, about which I have said something in my Dissertation on “Paul’s Conception of the Church,” I must express my great obligation to the very able Dissertation in Lightfoot’s Philippians. Although published twenty-two years ago, it seems to me to be still the best work on this important subject. Also of great value are a recent volume on the same subject by Dean Lefroy, and Dr. Hatch’s Bampton Lectures on The Organization of the Early Churches. I have also reed with care Gore’s Ministry of The Christian Church; but, for reasons given in my Dissertation, I am compelled to reject the most conspicuous conclusions of the author.
To all Christian readers I commend most earnestly a careful study of these profound Epistles. A commentary is but a guide-post pointing to something far better than itself, or at best a companion leading others along a path the writer has himself trodden. That path each one must tread for himself, if he is to gather the flowers which adorn it and to find the hidden treasures to which it leads. These treasures are beyond the price of rubies. And they are within reach of every one who, guided by the Spirit of the Truth, walks in the steps of the Great Teacher.
WESLEYAN COLLEGE, RICHMOND,
27th September, 1890.
Section 1. — Retrospect and Prospect.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 9
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The clipped dissertation headings belong to the contents list on p. xi: Paul’s Conception of Christ and The Gospel of Paul. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 14.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
INTRODUCTION.
SECTION 1. — RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT.
IN former volumes I have endeavoured to expound the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians. These Epistles we found accepted in the second century throughout the Christian Church without a shadow of doubt as written by the Apostle Paul. And the strong presumption of genuineness thus afforded was raised to absolute certainty by our examination of the contents of the Epistles; especially by comparison, one with another and with the statements of the Book of Acts, of various casual references to matters of fact, and by the harmonious and life-like portrait of the mental and moral character of the writer which we found depicted in clearest lines on the pages of each Epistle. We found that the four Epistles were written within a year, amid the activities and anxieties of Paul’s Third Missionary Journey. His movements during that year, we were able, in the light of these Epistles and of the Book of Acts, to trace with considerable accuracy.
At various points in our course we tried to reproduce, in a fragmentary way, Paul’s conception of the Gospel he preached and of Christ. This reproduced conception we compared here and there with other writings of the New Testament. Our comparison assured us that the doctrines so firmly held by Paul, or doctrines equivalent, were actually taught by Christ, and that Christ actually claimed the supreme dignity reflected so clearly in the entire teaching and thought of Paul. And the confident belief by Paul and others that Christ rose from the dead, taken in connection with its effect upon the entire subsequent history of mankind and with the fitness of the Gospel to supply our own spiritual need, convinced us of the truth of that which the Apostles so firmly believed, and assured us that Jesus of Nazareth actually rose from the dead and that He is in very truth the Uncreated Son of God.
2. These results we shall in the present volume assume, and make the basis of further theological research. Four other Epistles, each claiming to have been written by Paul, now demand attention. Unfortunately, we have not for them the clear historic light which illumined the circumstances, and enabled us to fix approximately the date, of the Epistles already annotated. And the contents of some of them have, rightly or wrongly, given rise in some minds to doubts about their authorship. The evidence of their genuineness, we shall therefore carefully sift.
If, as I hope to prove, we have good grounds for accepting with confidence these Epistles as from the pen which wrote those already expounded, our study of them will greatly enlarge our view of Paul’s conception of the Gospel and of Christ. Thoughts found only in germ in the earlier Epistles, we shall now find fully developed: and we shall find other thoughts not even suggested before, but when once suggested seen to be logically deduced from, or in harmony with, Paul’s earlier teaching. We shall thus be able to trace development in the thought of the Apostle. In the earlier Epistles we felt the earnestness of conflict: we shall now find the serene calm of victory. We shall find also the fulness of mature thought. Captivity of body has set the prisoner’s spirit free for loftier flights than were possible amid the activities of apostolic toil. The narrow limits of prison walls opened to him a vision farther reaching and more glorious than any he had seen while hasting over sea and land to proclaim the good news of salvation. This profounder teaching will greatly strengthen our hold of the fundamental truths already learnt, will quicken and delight our intelligence, and will raise us, amid the tumult and anxiety of earth, ourselves to share the calm which filled the breast of the imprisoned Apostle.
Section 2. — Are the Epistles Genuine?
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 11
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The quoted Colossians, Philemon, and Ephesians section transitions and dissertation headings belong to the contents list on pp. x–xi. The complete division headings include The Truth Concerning Christ, Warning against Errors, Doctrine, and Moral Teaching. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 6; BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 7; BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 13; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 14.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 2. — ARE THE EPISTLES GENUINE?
1. That each of the Epistles before us was accepted without a shadow of doubt throughout the Christian Church in the latter part of the second century as a genuine work of the Apostle Paul, is proved by frequent quotations in the extant works of Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenæus.
2. So TERTULLIAN, Prescriptions against Heretics ch. 36: “the apostolic Churches… in which their authentic letters are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each one. Is Achaia near to thee? Thou hast Corinth. If thou art not far from Macedonia, thou hast Philippi, thou hast Thessalonica. If thou art able to go to Asia, thou hast Ephesus. But if thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome.” Here are omitted only Galatia and Colossæ, places far inland and therefore less accessible than those mentioned. Similarly On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch. 23: “The Apostle teaches, writing to the Colossians, that we were once dead, aliens, and enemies of the mind of the Lord, when we were engaged in the worst works; then, buried with Christ in Baptism, and risen together in Him through faith of the energy of God who raised Him from the dead. And you, when ye were dead in sins and uncircumcision of your flesh, He hath made alive with Him, all sins being forgiven to you. And again, If with Christ ye are dead from the elements of the world, how indeed as if living in the world do ye submit to another’s judgment?… Then, If ye have risen, says he, with Christ, seek those things which are above where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Think about the things which are above, not those which are below… He adds also, For ye are dead, i.e. to sins, not to yourselves, and your life is hidden with Christ in God… When he writes to the Philippians, If in any way, he says, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead: not that already I have obtained or am made perfect… But I follow after if I may lay hold of that in which I am laid hold of by Christ. More fully, Brethren, I do not reckon myself to have laid hold. But one thing I do, forgetting things behind, reaching after things before, I follow after the goal for the prize of blamelessness for which I run. So Against Marcion bk. v. 17 he speaks of “that Epistle sent to the Ephesians, not to the Laodiceans: but Marcion was eager to give it a false title, as though he were a very diligent student of it. But the title is of no importance, since the Apostle wrote as much to all men as to some.” He then quotes in chs. 17, 18 a great part of the Epistle, noting here and there Marcion’s mutilations. “Remembering that ye formerly were Gentiles in flesh. Ye were called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh made by hand, that ye were at that time without Christ, alienated from intercourse with Israel, strangers to their covenants and promise, having no hope and without God in the world… But now, says he, in Christ, ye who were far off have been made near in His blood… How does he prove that women ought to be subject to their husbands? Because man, says he, is head of woman… as also Christ is head of the Church. Similarly also when he says: He loves his own flesh who loves his wife, as also Christ loves the Church… No one, says he, hates his own flesh, unless indeed Marcion alone, but nourishes and cherishes it, as also Christ the Church.” In chs. 19, 20, Tertullian quotes at length the Epistles to the Colossians and Philippians as written by “the Apostle;” and says in ch. 21 that through its shortness the Epistle to Philemon alone escaped mutilation by Marcion.
3. CLEMENT of ALEXANDRIA in the Pædagogue bk. i. 6 (p. 311, ed. Migne) quotes almost word for word Philippians 3:12-15 as written by Paul: and in Miscellanies bk. iv. 13 (p. 1300) he quotes Philippians 1:29; 2:2; 1:7; 2:20, 21, as written to the Philippians by “the Apostle.” So in bk. i. 1 (p. 705) he quotes Colossians 1:28 as written by “the Apostle… in the Epistle to the Colossians;” and similarly Colossians 2:4, 6-8 in ch. 11, p. 748f. The Epistle to the Ephesians he quotes very frequently: e.g. Pædagogue bk. i. 5, p. 269: “Most clearly, writing to the Ephesians, he (the Apostle) revealed the matter sought for, saying in some such way as this; “quoting almost word for word Ephesians 4:13-15. So IRENÆUS in bk. v. 13. 3: “And again to the Philippians he (the Apostle) says; “quoting Philippians 1:20, 21. Also in § 4: “the Apostle in the Epistle to the Philippians says;” quoting Philippians 3:10, 11. As contained “in the Epistle to the Colossians” he quotes in bk. iii. 14. 1, Colossians 4:14, and in bk. v. 14. 2, Colossians 1:21, 22. In bk. v.
2. 3, of which fortunately we possess the original, Irenæus says, “as the blessed Paul says in the Epistle to the Ephesians, Because members we are of the body, of His flesh and of His bones, word for word from Ephesians 5:30. Also in ch. xiv. 3: “as the Apostle says to the Ephesians, In whom we have redemption through His blood, even remission of sins. And again to the same persons, Ye, says he, who once were far off have been made near in the blood of Christ. And again, Making of no effect enmities, in His flesh, the law of precepts with decrees. (Ephesians 1:7; 2:13, 15.) But also in every Epistle the Apostle testifies,” etc.
The short Epistle to Philemon is not quoted by Clement of Alexandria or by Irenæus. But it is three times quoted word for word by ORIGEN as written by Paul to Philemon: On Jeremiah, Homily 19, p. 263; Series of comments on Matthew, § 66, p. 884, § 72, p. 889. JEROME in the Introduction to his commentary upon it defends the genuineness of the Epistle to Philemon against objections based on the unimportance of its matter.
4. In the letter sent in A.D. 177 from the Churches of Vienna and Lyons in Gaul and given at length by Eusebius, (Church Hist. bk. v. 2,) Philippians 2:6 is quoted word for word. In the FRAGMENT of MURATORI are enumerated among. “the Epistles of Paul” those to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. JUSTIN MARTYR, in ch. 85 of his Dialogue with Trypho and again in ch. 138, calls Christ firstborn of every creature; referring evidently in each case to Colossians 1:15. There is an apparent reference to the same in chs. 84, 100. In ch. 3 of the Epistle of POLYCARP to the Philippians, a work probably genuine, we read of “the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you… also when absent wrote to you letters;” or probably “a letter.” In the same Epistle, ch. 1, we read by grace ye are saved, not of works, word for word from Ephesians 2:8.
5. The above quotations, with multitudes similar, are complete proof that each of the three longer Epistles was well known by Christians throughout the Roman Empire before the end of the second century, and was accepted without a shadow of doubt as a genuine work of Paul. The quotations from Tertullian prove that they were accepted as in the main genuine before the middle of the century by Marcion, an avowed enemy of the Gospel. Throughout the literature of the early Church, there is no trace of doubt about their authorship.
It is right to say that the so-called Epistle of Barnabas is several times quoted confidently by Clement of Alexandria (e.g. Misc. bk. ii. 6, p. 965 Migne, and ch. 20, p. 1060, and bk. v. 10, p. 95) as written by the companion of Paul; and is quoted by Origen (Against Celsus bk. i. 63, On First Principles iii. 2. 4) as the Epistle of Barnabas. But it is not referred to by Irenæus: and, though apparently known to Tertullian, nothing is said by him about its authorship. It is reckoned as spurious by Eusebius (Church History bk. iii. 25) and by later writers. This case warns us not to accept, as decisive proof of authorship, the testimony of any one writer. The force of the above quotations lies in the unbroken and confident unanimity thus revealed in Churches widely separated.
This unanimous consent is at once a strong presumption of the genuineness of the Epistles before us. We ask whether it is confirmed or contradicted by their contents.
6. We consider first the Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS.
In Acts 28:31 we leave Paul in prison at Rome, after an appeal to Cæsar; and in Philippians 1:13 we find him in bonds, weighing the possibilities (Philippians 1:20-23) of life and death, and sending (Philippians 4:22) greetings from members of Cæsar’s household. In Philippians 1:1, as in 2 Corinthians 1:1, Timothy, who was present with Paul (Acts 17:14; 18:5) at the founding of the Churches of Philippi and Corinth, is associated with him as joint author of the Epistle. The description of Timothy in Philippians 2:19-22, and his hoped-for mission to Philippi, are in close agreement with 1 Corinthians 4:17. The gift of money from Philippi to Paul at Rome accords completely with the statement in 2 Corinthians 11:8, 9 that when he was in want at Corinth his needs were supplied by money sent from Macedonia, in which province was Philippi; and with the great liberality of another kind of which Paul boasts in 2 Corinthians 8:2. His deep anxiety about the Church at Corinth expressed in 2 Corinthians 2:13 and 7:5 has its counterpart in the loving care for the Christians at Philippi which breathes in Philippians 1:7, 8, 27; 2:19; 4:1. Paul’s reference in Philippians 3:6 to his past life recalls Galatians 1:13. Amid a somewhat changed tone, easily explained by changed surroundings and prospects, the careful student will find innumerable coincidences in theological thought and expression revealing the mind and hand of Paul. Many of these will be noted in our exposition. As examples I may here quote the word righteousness as used in Philippians 3:9 compared with Romans 10:3; 3:21, 22; emptied himself in Philippians 2:7 compared with 2 Corinthians 8:9; the cross of Christ in Philippians 3:18 and Galatians 6:14; the term children of God in Philippians 2:15 compared with Romans 8:16, 17; Galatians 3:26; 4:6, 7. In Philippians 3:14 we have a metaphor from the Greek athletic contests, as in 1 Corinthians 9:24-27. In Philippians 3:17 Paul points to himself as an example: a close coincidence with 1 Corinthians 11:1. Similarly, the boasting in Philippians 3:5, 6 is in close agreement with 2 Corinthians 11:22-33.
This far-reaching coincidence of thought and expression will be the more significant if the Epistle before us be compared with those which do not bear the name of Paul. It is complete confirmation of the belief of the early Church. So convincing is this combined proof that almost all modern scholars, including many who like Renan and Pfleiderer reject the faith so firmly held by Paul, accept the Epistle to the Philippians as written by the great Apostle.
The real significance of the above coincidences can be fairly estimated only by careful and consecutive study of the Epistle itself and by comparison of it with the earlier Epistles of Paul and with other documents not from his pen. For some of these words and phrases are used by other writers. Their value as proofs of common authorship lies in their accumulation in this one short Epistle, and in their relation to the surrounding train of thought. It is right to say that some good scholars, of whom Pfleiderer is perhaps the best representative, deny that the Epistle to the Colossians is from Paul, on the ground that the errors therein combated were not prevalent till long after his death; that it contains teaching not found in his acknowledged Epistles and in part contradicting them; and that it contains words and phrases not used in his earlier letters. The issue thus raised must be decided by judging whether it is more easy, accepting the Epistle as genuine, to explain these three grounds of objection, or, rejecting it as spurious, to account for the coincidences noted above and the universal and confident reception of the Epistle in the latter part, and probably in the middle, of the second century. This alternative we will now consider.
The words and phrases peculiar to this Epistle, when carefully examined, need cause little surprise. Surely a writer so versatile as Paul’s acknowledged Epistles prove him to have been would not exhaust his vocabulary in four epistles. Indeed the new topics now dealt with suggest and require words not used before. And, in spite of differences, the style is closely akin to that of the Epistle to the Philippians, and not far removed from that of the earlier Epistles. It is true that we have in this Epistle elements of teaching not found in the Epistles already annotated. But, as I shall endeavour to show in Diss. i., these new elements are legitimate and most valuable developments of the principles underlying the acknowledged Epistles. Is it not more likely that such developments would take place in the mind and thought of Paul than among disciples removed from him by more than a generation? Indeed the change from active evangelistic labour to the solitude of a prison would naturally suggest, in a man like Paul, profound investigation of the foundations of his faith. The wonder would be if such investigation were barren of results. On the other hand the entire extant literature of the second century presents nothing comparable for a moment to the solid advance in Christian thought embodied in this Epistle. To place it fifty years after the death of Paul, is an utter anachronism. Lastly, any argument based on the supposed later date of the errors here combated is most uncertain. For they were, as we shall see in a special note, an outgrowth of influences at work before the birth of Christ. And, so far as they can be traced in this Epistle, the errors at Colossæ were very rudimentary. Much more developed is the Gnosticism of Cerinthus who is said to have been a contemporary of the Apostle John. We see then that the objections noticed above have little weight as proofs that the Epistle is not from its professed writer.
Take now the other side of the alternative. We shall see that the developments of Paul’s teaching contained in this Epistle are of the utmost value. They are embodied in language which either is from his pen or is a servile imitation of his style. In this last point the Epistle before us presents a great contrast to that to the Hebrews. Could such profound thought and such servile imitation proceed from any one man? Or, again, can we conceive that such a teacher, a worthy successor to the Great Apostle and an illustrious exception to the intellectual barrenness of his age, would hide himself and bury his fame under the mask, and in the grave, of a forgery? Or, lastly, can we conceive a forged letter making its way to distant Carthage and to Gaul, and gaining acceptance everywhere, without a shadow of doubt, as a genuine work of Paul? Certainly, these accumulated improbabilities are infinitely greater than any difficulty in supposing that the Gnosticism of the second century existed in germ in the days of Paul and that the teaching of this Epistle is from the pen of the great thinker who expounded so grandly in the Epistle to the Romans the principles of which it is a logical development. We may therefore accept with confidence the Epistle to the Colossians as a genuine work of Paul.
8. The beautiful Epistle to PHILEMON contains nothing inconsistent with its genuineness, and bears everywhere marks of the hand and character of Paul. Among these last must be reckoned the absence of any request for the manumission of Onesimus. Tact so delicate belongs not to a forger. The names sending greeting to Philemon are a valuable coincidence with the same names in the Epistle to the Colossians.
A genuine mark of authorship, and a conspicuous feature of the Epistle to the Ephesians as compared with the others of the same group, is the reappearance and careful treatment of the distinction of Jew and Gentile so conspicuous in the earlier Epistles of Paul as compared with the works of all other N.T. writers. This distinction meets us in the outburst of praise (Ephesians 1:12, 13) at the beginning of the Epistle. It is silently suggested by the change of pronoun between Ephesians 2:1, 2 and Ephesians 2:3. The inferior position of the Gentiles before their conversion, and their union with Jews as now reconciled to God, are fully expounded in Ephesians 2:11-22. And this union is said in Ephesians 3:6 to have been a part of the eternal purpose of salvation. This language reveals a mind long and deeply occupied with the different relations of Jew and Gentile to the Kingdom of God. How large a place this distinction had in the mind of Paul, we learn from Romans 1:16; 2:9, 10, 25-29; 3:1, 9; 1 Corinthians 1:22-24; 10:32; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 3:11. And indisputably it is a mark of early date. For it is impossible to conceive that, after Jerusalem had been taken and the race scattered and after Gentile Christianity had gained a secure and independent position, any writer would lay so much stress on the equality in spiritual privilege of the Gentiles to the Jews. Jewish Christians who still clung to their ancient prerogatives would not place the Gentles on their own level. A Gentile writer who had witnessed the final dispersion of the Jewish race would consider it but small honour that God has placed the Gentiles on a level with the nation which had murdered the Son of God. Now early date is a strong presumption of genuineness. For it is in the last degree unlikely, while men were living who had known Paul, that the work of some unknown author would have been widely and confidently accepted as his.
Another mark of early date is the enumeration, in Ephesians 4:11, of Church officers as Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and Pastors and Teachers. For, as we learn from the tone of the letters attributed with much probability to Ignatius and as we infer from later writers, monarchical episcopacy was firmly established early in the second century. Had there been in the Church an order of bishops distinct from the elders, whom we may here identify with the pastors and teachers, these could not have been passed over here in silence. On the other hand, this enumeration is in complete accord with 1 Corinthians 12:28. This last passage explains also the phrase apostles and prophets in Ephesians 2:20; 3:5. Against the unanimous and confident acceptance of the Epistle in the latter part of the second century, supported as it is by these internal marks of genuineness or of early date, the words and phrases and grammatical constructions more or less peculiar to this Epistle have no weight. For they are easily explained. Living thought ever clothes itself in new forms. Taken as a whole, the Epistle is incomparably nearer in diction and modes of thought to the acknowledged Epistles of Paul than is any document other than those which bear his name.
As in the Epistle to the Colossians, so in that to the Ephesians, we shall in Diss. i. find new and legitimate and most valuable developments of the principles unfolded in the earlier Epistles. These developments give to each Epistle great and independent worth. In each case they have been put forward as marks of a later hand. But, as we have already seen in the companion Epistle, they reveal the thought and hand of Paul. On the other hand, the argument against the genuineness of the Colossian Epistle based upon the late date of the errors therein combated has no force against the Epistle now before us. For it contains no definite refutation of specific error. Nor can any one say that the style of this latter Epistle is in any way more unlike that of Paul than is the Epistle to the Colossians. One special argument, however, is brought against the Epistle to the Ephesians by not a few who accept its companion as genuine. The many close coincidences in thought and expression are appealed to in proof that it is a later imitation of the Epistle to the Colossians. These coincidences are indisputable. As important elements common to the two Epistles and peculiar to them, I note Christ the Head of the Church in Colossians 2:18 and Ephesians 1:23, in Colossians 2:19 and Ephesians 4:16; dead through trespasses but now made alive with Christ in Colossians 2:13 and Ephesians 2:5; the inward change described in Colossians 3:9, 10 and Ephesians 4:22-24. Compare also Ephesians 4:32-5:2 with Colossians 3:12, 13; Ephesians 5:3-6 with Colossians 3:5-8; Ephesians 5:19 with Colossians 3:16; Ephesians 5:22-6:9 with Colossians 3:18-4:1, a long and close parallel. Since the Epistle to the Colossians has a specific occasion in the definite errors therein refuted, nearly all who reject one of the Epistles as not genuine reject that to the Ephesians. Certainly, the close and sustained similarity proves either that one Epistle is a servile imitation of the other or that they are the twin offspring of one mind. Our choice between these suppositions depends upon our estimate of the Epistle to the Ephesians as compared with that to the Colossians. That it has a distinctive and dominating and all-important mark of its own, Diss. i. will, I hope, make clear to us. The characteristic feature of the Epistle to the Colossians is its exposition of the Person of Christ: the chief matter of that to the Ephesians is the Church. This is very conspicuous in Ephesians 5:22-33 as compared with Colossians 3:18, 19. The question before us turns on our estimate of the Epistle itself and of this independent element in it. It can therefore be answered only by careful study of it. I hope that the exposition before us will convince the reader that in grandeur and worth the Epistle to the Ephesians is unsurpassed by any human composition. Its great and independent value is admitted even by Pfleiderer who denies its genuineness. And its worth proves its genuineness. For we cannot conceive a man capable of the profound thought which breathes throughout this Epistle becoming so servile an imitator even of an Apostle. Independent thought always clothes itself in fitting language of its own.
On the other hand if our judgment be that the Epistle is a worthless imitation, we are at once met by an inexplicable difficulty, viz. the early and unanimous and confident acceptance of it as written by Paul. If the work were from a later hand, is it conceivable that every trace of its origin should have vanished utterly from the memory of the early Church? Certainly this is an historic difficulty which needs to be reckoned with. It is increased by the widespread and uncontradicted tradition which connects with Ephesus the last years of the Apostle John. For he would know whether the Church in which he lived had an Epistle from the hand of his departed colleague. Consequently, if not written by Paul, the Epistle must be a work of the second century. Yet in the middle of the century it was accepted as genuine, even by Marcion an enemy of the Gospel! Some have suggested that the name of Paul was prefixed by some good man to a work of his own, not to deceive, but in order to call attention to sentiments similar to those of the great Apostle. This suggestion is completely overturned by comparison of evidently spurious documents bearing the names of Apostles. All these are worthless in themselves, never gained general reception, and nearly all were expressly rejected by Church writers. A more marked contrast than that between these wretched parodies and the Epistles before us cannot be conceived. The comparison attests the genuineness of the document so familiar and so precious to all Christians.
Another suggestion is that the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians have, one or both, been interpolated, that on the basis of a shorter work actually written by Paul have been erected, probably by one hand, the two documents we now possess. This suggestion will, I hope, be disproved by our study of the text of the Epistles, and by the harmony and order and life we shall find therein. It is also disproved by the complete general agreement of all our early copies. The Epistles attributed to Ignatius were interpolated. For the few existing copies of them reveal different recensions. But it is inconceivable that the original works of the great Apostle, which must have been prized and guarded by the Churches to which they were sent, should pass utterly out of view, and that one single corrupted recension should usurp and retain the place thus vacated. It is worthy of note that these wild suggestions come only from those who have already persuaded themselves that Christ did not rise from the dead, and that Christianity with its mighty effect upon the world is a result of the preaching of men who were in most serious error touching the nature and teaching of their Master.
In view then of their universal and confident reception throughout the Roman Empire, by friends and enemies, in the latter part of the second century, of their deep and broad and minute agreement with the thought and phraseology of Paul, and of their matchless and independent worth, we may accept without a shadow of doubt each of the Epistles before us as a genuine work of the Apostle Paul.
Section 3. — to What Extent Are Our Copies And Versions Correct?
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 23
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 3. — TO WHAT EXTENT ARE OUR COPIES AND
VERSIONS CORRECT?
1. The Greek text of the Epistle to the Philippians presents, touching the correctness of our copies, no difficulties worthy of mention. Of changes adopted without note by the Revisers, only the following have any practical importance:—
15. Philippians 4:23: your spirit for you all. All these are accepted without doubt by all recent critical editors, i.e. by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort; except that about No. 6 Tregelles expresses in his margin a slight doubt. I think that all may be accepted with perfect confidence. On the other hand, no important reading which the editors agree to accept is overlooked by the Revisers. The few readings open to doubt and of any importance whatever are noted in the Revisers’ Margin. They are as follows:—
No variations worthy of attention are overlooked by the Revisers.
2. The Epistle to the Colossians presents more important variations. The following list includes all changes adopted without note by the Revisers and worthy of attention here:—
Of these variations, there is among recent editors some difference about Nos. 2 and 6: about five more of them, the critical editors since Lachmann have been agreed: all the others are accepted by all editors, from Lachmann to Westcott and Hort. The entire list may, I believe, be accepted with perfect confidence.
The readings noted in the Reviser’s margin as open to doubt are:—
In each of these cases the balance of probability seems to me to incline somewhat to the Revisers’ preference; decidedly so in No. 1, a reading of some importance. In No. 4, a most important passage, the complete confusion of the oldest documents renders impossible a reliable decision: but the balance of probability inclines very decidedly to the Revisers’ preference. See note in Lightfoot’s Colossians. In No. 6, the word removed by the Revisers to their margin has been confidently rejected by all critical editors since Lachmann marked it as doubtful. Evidence external and internal seems to me decisive against it. In No. 8, the words noted in the margin as doubtful are supported by a preponderance of ancient documents so great as at first sight to exclude doubt. But they are omitted by the very excellent Vatican MS., and have the appearance of being copied from Ephesians 5:6; and are for this reason confidently rejected by all critical editors since Lachmann marked them as doubtful. Internal reasons seem to me to favour the genuineness of the words. See note. In No. 11, where the variations have considerable interest, the Revisers’ preference seems to me well grounded. The other readings noted in the margin are of little practical importance.
In Colossians 1:20, the words through Him are omitted in some of the best MSS. and versions, and by Lachmann and Tregelles without note and in the margin of Westcott. This omission might fairly claim a place in the Revisers’ margin. No other variation worthy of attention is omitted by them.
On the whole, in the Greek text of the Epistle to the Colossians, the only problems of importance not yet solved for us by Textual Criticism are the various readings in Colossians 1:7; 2:2; 4:15.
3. In the Epistle to PHILEMON, the only changes worthy of mention accepted without note by the Revisers are those in Philemon 1:2, 12, which are also adopted by all recent editors, without note except on Philemon 1:12 in the margin of Tregelles. It may be received with confidence. The only reading of any importance open to doubt is that noted in the margin of Philemon 1:6, where perhaps a slight probability inclines towards the Revisers’ preference: but certain decision is impossible.
4. In the Epistle to the EPHESIANS, the changes adopted without note by the Revisers and worthy of attention are:—
24. Ephesians 6:16: read among all for upon all. All these are accepted without note by all recent editors, except No. 15, a reading of no importance, adopted by all but Lachmann; and No. 20, about which Tregelles, while omitting the words in question, expresses doubt. All may, I think, be accepted with confidence.
The readings noted in the Revisers margin as open to doubt are:—
For Nos. 1 and 2, important and difficult variations, see notes. In No. 3, the oldest and best uncial, viz. the Vatican MS., the accurate Coptic version, and one of the best cursives, support the reading in the margin against all other authorities. But the practical difference is slight. The other marginal readings are unimportant.
No variations worthy of note and of any claim to genuineness are overlooked by the Revisers. In short, the Greek text underlying the four Epistles here annotated may be accepted throughout with full confidence was, within narrow limits, representing correctly the original text of these Epistles.
5. In the renderings of the REVISED VERSION of the Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS, among many improvements I note the following. In Philippians 1:13, the whole prætorian guard is much more accurate than all the palace. The rendering in Philippians 2:6, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God is, in my view, not correct: but in Philippians 2:7 the rendering emptied himself instead of made himself of no reputation is an unspeakable gain, not merely as a more correct reproduction of Paul’s thought but as shedding light on the profound mystery of the Incarnation. In Philippians 3:9 a righteousness of my own is a most happy rendering, instead of the less accurate my own righteousness. Our citizenship, in Philippians 3:20, is much better than the misleading or almost meaningless word conversation: and the body of our humiliation, of his glory, in Philippians 3:21, corrects a serious misrepresentation. In Philippians 4:3, the rendering help these women, for they laboured with me in the Gospel, makes clear Paul’s reference to the two women just mentioned by name. In nothing be anxious (Philippians 4:6) is a good reproduction of Paul’s meaning and emphasis, and replaces a rendering very liable to be misunderstood, be careful for nothing. Even the change in Philippians 4:7 from through Christ Jesus to in Christ Jesus is not without significance. The rendering I have learnt the secret in Philippians 4:12 does something to reproduce the sense completely buried under the A.V. I am instructed. To these might be added many smaller improvements. And I do not know of anything to set against them.
In the Epistle to the COLOSSIANS, the marked improvements are not so many. But the change at the beginning and end of Colossians 1:16 from by Him were all things created to in Him, through Him is very important as stating more accurately the relation of the Son to the work of creation. The Revisers’ rendering of Colossians 2:15, having put off from Himself the principalities, reproduces fairly the meaning of Paul’s words, and thus calls attention to a difficulty quite concealed by the A.V. having spoiled etc. Similarly, in Colossians 2:18 dwelling on the things which he hath seen is much nearer to Paul’s intention than intruding into etc. Severity to the body in Colossians 2:23 is better than neglecting of the body: and not in any value against indulgence of the flesh is intelligible and fairly correct, whereas the A.V. is unintelligible. On the other hand, an aggravated form of the blemish mentioned on p. 541 of my Corinthians is found in Colossians 1:16, where the Revisers have displaced a very correct and idiomatic rendering for Him in favour of the meaningless words unto Him. They have also failed to make clear the evident reference of Colossians 4:11, viz. that the three men mentioned were the only Jews who had been a comfort to Paul. In PHILEMON Philemon 1:12, my very heart is better than mine own bowels. Similarly, in Philemon 1:20. In Philemon 1:13, on thy behalf is more accurate than in thy stead.
The absence of any special errors of rendering in the A.V. of the Epistle to the EPHESIANS has left no occasion for improvements worthy of special mention here. But throughout these four Epistles are a multitude of minor changes (e.g. Ephesians 4:29 speech instead of communication) which, though not individually of great moment, give collectively a much better conception of Paul’s meaning than does the earlier Version.
Section 4. — Philippi, Ephesus, Colossae, and The Churches There.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 29
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 4. — PHILIPPI, EPHESUS, COLOSSÆ, AND THE
CHURCHES THERE.
1. PHILIPPI was situated some eight miles from Neapolis, now Kavala, on the northern shore of the Ægean Sea, in a level and well-watered and luxuriant plain surrounded by mountains and separated from the sea by a ridge of hills from 1,000 to 1,600 feet high. Over this range of hills and through Philippi passed the Egnatian Way, the great road from Asia Minor to the Adriatic and to Rome.
The city was rebuilt by Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great, on the site of an older town called, from the many streams flowing through the plain, Crenides, or Springs of Water. On the plain of Philippi was fought after the death of Julius Cæsar the famous battle, renewed after twenty days on the same field, in which his murderers, Brutus and Cassius, were crushed by Octavius, who afterwards became the Emperor Augustus, and Mark Antony. To commemorate the battle Augustus afterwards made Philippi a Roman colony, and gave to it the further privileges known as the Italic right. On the Roman colonies, see my Corinthians p. 16. By an interesting coincidence, coins of Philippi have been found bearing, as was usual with colonies, Latin inscriptions, in marked contrast to other Macedonian coins with Greek inscriptions.
Philippi was the first European town in which Paul laboured. On his second missionary journey, probably in A.D. 52, (see my Galatians p. 193, {Diss. i.}) he arrived at Troas on the eastern shore of the Ægean Sea. From Troas, Mount Athos on the opposite coast of Macedonia, though distant more than eighty miles, is sometimes seen in the rays of the setting sun. And we can well believe that at Troas Paul’s thoughts went out after the mighty continent of Europe, now nearer to him than ever before. No wonder that in a dream a man of Macedonia besought his help. A rapid voyage of two days brought the little band to Neapolis. Thence, at once apparently, they passed on over the ridge to Philippi. That no synagogue is mentioned, suggests that not many Jews lived there. But Paul found some women, Jewesses or proselytes who were accustomed to meet together for prayer by the river-side. He was soon gladdened by the conversion of Lydia, apparently a woman of position, and later by that of the gaoler, and of their households. From this beginning sprang the Church at Philippi. The reality of the good work thus begun was soon proved. The passing stranger was remembered after his departure by those to whom he had spoken words of life. Not only once but twice, even when he was at Thessalonica, the next city in which he preached, they sent a contribution of money for his support: Philippians 4:16. Nor was this all. During his eighteen months’ sojourn at Corinth, money was sent (2 Corinthians 11:9) to him from Macedonia, doubtless either altogether (cp. Philippians 4:15) from Philippi or stimulated by the liberality of the Philippians.
Paul’s second visit to Philippi was some six years later and along the same route. A fugitive from deadly peril at Ephesus he came to Troas, thinking not of his peril but of Titus whom he hoped to meet there with news about the unfaithful Church at Corinth: 2 Corinthians 2:12, 13. But Titus was not at Troas: and Paul hurried across the Ægean to seek him in Macedonia. Landing at Neapolis he doubtless again pushed on to Philippi. And there or at least in Macedonia the wished-for messenger came, and with good news. In Macedonia Paul laboured for some time, and then went on to Corinth: Acts 20:2. On the return journey, accompanied by Luke who had been with him on his first visit to Philippi, (as we infer from we were and we sailed in Acts 16:12; 20:6,) Paul spent Easter there, and went on his way, probably for the last time and with dark forebodings, to Jerusalem.
The curtain now falls on this most interesting Church until in some measure it is lifted by the Epistle before us. And with the close of this Epistle it falls again. The letter from Polycarp to the Church at Philippi, quoted on p. 5, says nothing about the state of the Church there except that Valens, a presbyter of it, and his wife, had been guilty of avarice. In subsequent history we hear nothing more. And to-day, amid quiet meadows, a few ruins are all that remain to mark the site of what once was Philippi.
2. Far more important than Philippi was EPHESUS, the splendid capital of the Roman province of Asia.
On the western coast of Asia Minor, some 300 miles due east of Corinth, into a bay partly closed by the island of Samos, the river Cayster flows through a plain about five miles across bounded to the north by low hills and to the south by the somewhat loftier range of mount Prion.* (* As these mountains are named by Mr. Wood, who was led by his discoveries to transpose the names previously given to them.) To the south of the river, upon and around a double hill called mount Coressus* {See * above} and upon the northern slopes of mount Prion stood Ephesus, a city built, together with others on the same coast, in the early dawn of the history of their nation, by Greeks from across the Ægean Sea.
Close outside the city, as we now know, from its earliest days stood a temple to the goddess Artemis. Even Herodotus in the fifth century B.C. speaks of the temple of Ephesus as worthy of note: bk. ii. 148. On or near the same site were successively erected and burnt several temples, of which all were famous but each surpassed in splendour its predecessor. One of these is said to have been burnt, apparently soon after its completion, in B.C. 356, on the day of the birth of Alexander the Great. This was followed, on the same site and a few years afterwards, by the temple standing in all its glory in the days of Paul. Of this temple Pausanias speaks as surpassing all buildings raised by men: bk. iv. 31. 8. And everywhere Ephesus was known as the sacristan of the great Artemis: Acts 19:35. From the time of the Persian wars to that of Paul, Ephesus enjoyed great and increasing commercial prosperity. The rich country around supplied to the city abundant produce. And ships from every port filled its market with merchandise, to be exchanged for that borne along the great roads leading from Ephesus to the interior of Asia Minor. So Strabo says, “Owing to its good situation, the city increases day by day, being the greatest emporium on this side the Taurus mountains:” bk. xiv. p. 641. In the bloom of Greek art, Ephesus was famous for its painters and sculptors. And when art had faded, it was widely known as the chosen home of magic. So Clement of Alexandria speaks of “the so-called Ephesian letters,” a kind of charm, as being “far famed:” Misc. bk. v. 8, p. 72. The wealth of Ephesus and the luxuriant climate of the Asiatic coast produced also an unbridled self-indulgence for which the city was long notorious.
When the Roman province of Asia was formed, the commercial and religious importance of Ephesus, and the easy access to it from the west, made it the residence of the Roman Governor and the centre of Roman authority.
Such then was Ephesus when visited by Paul. Its temple, ancient and yet in full glory, was a wonder of the world and the veneration of all heathendom. Its quays and markets were crowded by men of every nation, enriching a city already rich. The soft climate invited to every kind of luxury. And over all the majesty of Rome shed the lustre of its mighty presence. About A.D. 260, Ephesus was plundered and its temple set on fire by barbarian invaders. And from this time the temple passes from our view. It probably shared the fate of others in A.D. 399, when a decree was issued by the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius for the destruction of all temples except such as could be used for churches.
So complete was its destruction that until a few years ago no trace remained, nor was the site known, of the building which had been the glory of Ephesus and of Asia. A careful search for it was undertaken in the year 1863, under the auspices of the Trustees of the British Museum, by an English Architect, Mr. J. T. Wood, whose patient and well directed efforts were rewarded in 1869 by discovery of the long lost temple. During the next five years sufficient remains were found not only to place the site beyond doubt but to give a good and reliable idea of the building itself. These discoveries agree in the main with the scanty notices of Vitruvius, On Architecture bks. i. 2, iii. 1, iv. 1, and of Pliny, Natural History bk. xxxvi. 21. The temple was rectangular, 343 ft by 164 ft, not including the steps which surrounded it on all sides. It consisted of a central chamber, or Cella, containing the famous image of the goddess, with a vestibule in front and a large chamber behind. Around this building were two rows of Ionic fluted columns, about seven feet in diameter at the bottom of the shaft and about fifty-six feet high, supporting the roof of the temple. Pliny says that 36 columns were sculptured. And five drums or parts of drums of columns elaborately sculptured with life size human figures in high relief were found by Mr. Wood and may now be seen at the British Museum. Broken fluted drums in great abundance were brought to light. Portions of the marble pavement of the temple were found; as also parts of the pavements of two earlier temples on the same site. Also, with other inscriptions in the Theatre and other parts of the city, twenty-six inscriptions were found among the ruins of the temple conferring citizenship upon various foreigners who had rendered service to the Ephesians. A careful reprint and translation of these most interesting records of early Ephesian life, and a full account of the excavations, abundantly illustrated, are given in first-rate style in Wood’s Discoveries at Ephesus. Also interesting, and not superseded by Mr. Wood’s volume, is Falkener’s Ephesus.
We must now trace Paul’s connection with Ephesus. From Acts 16:6 we learn that, on his second missionary journey, he was hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia. This suggests that his purpose was, after passing through Phrygia and Galatia, to carry the Gospel to that important province. And, if so, his eye must have rested on its great metropolis. But God had more pressing work for him to do, viz. to carry the Gospel at once to its future home, the great continent of Europe. On his return journey, as recorded in Acts 18:19, Paul paid a flying visit to Ephesus in company with his faithful helpers Aquila and Prisca who remained there, apparently for several years. That no Christians are mentioned, suggests that there was then no Church there. But as usual Paul went to the synagogue of the Jews, by whom he was well received and invited to remain. This he could not do, but promised soon to return. Some time after Paul’s departure, there arrived at Ephesus an eloquent and earnest Alexandrian Jew, Apollos, who eagerly advocated, as he imperfectly understood them, the claims of Jesus. And, while doing so, he learnt from Aquila and Prisca the real significance of the Gospel he endeavoured to proclaim. Shortly afterwards he crossed the Ægean Sea to Achaia, and continued there his earnest work for Christ.
In the spring of A.D. 55, according to the reckoning on p. 193 of my Galatians, {Diss i.} Paul, fulfilling his promise, again arrived at Ephesus. Since Aquila and Prisca are referred to in 1 Corinthians 16:19 as with him at Ephesus, we may suppose that they were there to welcome his arrival. He found in the city some twelve disciples of Christ who had received neither Christian Baptism nor the distinctively Christian gift of the Holy Spirit. From his teaching they received the inspiration of a new life. Their Baptism was doubtless an important era in the history of the young Church.
As at Corinth, Paul began his work at Ephesus in the synagogue of the Jews. After three months, opposition arose. But already he had gathered round him a band of faithful men. These he now separated from the synagogue; and found for them a home in the school of Tyrannus, possibly a Greek teacher of philosophy or rhetoric. Here Paul laboured for two years, a longer time than he had before spent in one place; end with great success. From Ephesus as a centre the Gospel became known throughout the whole province. Asiatic superstition was confronted by the most wonderful miracles recorded of Paul. Certain Jews who attempted to use as a charm the name of Jesus were utterly confounded by the evil spirits they tried to exorcise. And many Christians, convicted by the manifested power of God, confessed that they had been secretly practising the magical arts of their former days; and proved their sincerity by bringing out and burning publicly their secret books to the value of some £2000 of our money.
From Ephesus, about Easter of A.D. 58 probably, (see Galatians p. 193, {Diss. i.}) Paul wrote his first extant Epistle to the Corinthians. He was then purposing to start soon for Macedonia and Achaia.
His departure was hastened by the tumult described in Acts 19:23-41: see p. 511 of my Corinthians. I may now add that in the inscriptions reprinted in Wood’s Ephesus the birth-day of Artemis is several times said to be a religious festival, and said to be in the month of May. We have also frequent mention of silver images, which would find work for Demetrius and his companions. The word rendered town-clerk is also frequent as an official title at Ephesus. And the phrase temple-keeper of Artemis and others similar are frequently found (cp. Acts 19:35) as titles of the city. On his return journey, Paul summoned to Miletus the elders of the Church at Ephesus, and gave them the address recorded in Acts 20:18-35. All this reveals the importance of that Church.
Then followed at Jerusalem Paul’s arrest and imprisonment, his voyage to Rome, and his imprisonment there. During that imprisonment, as we shall see, the letter before us was written.
From 1 Timothy 1:3 we learn that Paul had requested Timothy to remain at Ephesus to deal with church-matters there which needed special attention. And his words seem to imply that this request was made when Paul was himself at Ephesus, but starting for Macedonia. A multitude of reasons combine to assure us that this, and the similar request in Titus 1:5, were not earlier than Paul’s arrest at Jerusalem. If so, these Epistles, which I cannot but accept as genuine, prove that after his imprisonment at Rome, Paul was set free and again visited Ephesus. The circumstances of his visit are altogether unknown. But from the letter to Timothy we learn that the fears expressed at Miletus were only too well grounded and that the Church at Ephesus was then beset by many perils. The charges to Timothy and Titus by no means imply that they were permanently settled at Ephesus and in Crete as chief pastors, or bishops. And of any such office we have to hint in the New Testament. See Diss. ii. 10. Nor do we know whether the Second Epistle found Timothy still at Ephesus. Our last glimpse of the Church at Ephesus in the New Testament is Revelation 2:1-7, where as metropolis of Asia it is addressed first among the seven Churches. From this we learn that, while still faithful in the main, the Church had lost something of its early fervour. Beyond the limits of the New Testament a reliable tradition connects with Ephesus the last years of the Apostle John: see Irenæus bk. iii. 3, 4 and Clement of Alexandria. What rich man etc. § 42. It was afterwards the seat of an archbishop. Here was held in A.D. 431 amid much confusion the Third General Council; and, in A.D. 449, amid still greater confusion, a gathering summoned as a general council but afterwards not acknowledged as such and known ever since as the Robber Synod.
With this tumultuous assembly closes practically the history of Ephesus and of the Church at Ephesus. For long centuries the site of the city has been an utter solitude without inhabitant. But, strange to say, the railway from Smyrna to Aidin has a station little more than a mile from its ruins. Between the city and the railway station is the site of the temple. The candlestick (Revelation 2:5) has been removed from its place. And even the splendid metropolis it once illumined has ceased to be counted among the cities of the world. But its name will never die. Throughout the world it is known, chiefly through the labours and letters of a Jewish tentmaker. But that tentmaker was an Apostle of Jesus Christ.
3. We now leave the beautiful coast of the Ægean and the splendid metropolis of the Roman province of Asia, through a gate of which there are still remains, and go inland over the hills to Magnesia and then eastward, some 120 miles in all, almost to the boundary of the province and into what was popularly and indefinitely known as Phrygia. On the banks of the Lycus, a stream flowing into the Mæander and now called the Tchoruk Su, are ruins which have been, with reasonable certainty, identified as those of COLOSSÆ, some three miles north of Chonos, a modern straggling village on the site of a mediæval town known as Chonai. See Hamilton’s Researches in Asia Minor vol. i. pages 509-523. Some ten miles lower down the stream, which here flows somewhat north of east, to the south of the stream and on the slopes of the Cadmus range, are important ruins of a racecourse, gymnasium, theatres, and other buildings, which have been identified as those of Laodicea; and six miles away, north by east, with the stream flowing about midway between the two sites, are the still nobler ruins of Hierapolis on the slope of lower hills bounding the valley of the Lycus on the north. The site of Hierapolis is described by Hamilton as one of special beauty. A weird strangeness is cast over the scene by thick incrustations in all grotesque forms deposited by a small stream strongly impregnated with lime which falls into the Lycus near this point. There is also a hot spring of some 100 degrees Fahrenheit. So near are the ruins of the three cities that all may be visited in one day. COLOSSÆ is mentioned by Herodotus (bk. vii. 30) as a great city through which the army of Xerxes passed on its way to invade Greece. Xenophon (Anabasis bk. i. 2. 6) speaks of it as being, some 80 years later, “populous, prosperous, and great.” But the notices of later writers seem to imply that long before Paul’s time it had sunk into comparative decay. Lightfoot says, “Without doubt Colossæ was the least important church to which any Epistle of St. Paul was addressed.”
LAODICEA, till then an obscure town, had risen into great importance shortly before Paul’s day. So Strabo, bk. xii. p. 578. Under the Romans it became the political capital of the surrounding district. HIERAPOLIS seems to have been, owing to the beauty of its position and the medicinal properties of its springs, a favourite health resort.
The rich pastures around were famous for their large flocks of sheep. All three towns were enriched by their trade in dyed wool. For the rich colours of their dyes, Strabo tells us (bk. xii. p. 578) that Laodicea and Colossæ were specially famous; and that (bk. xiii. p. 630) for this they owed much to the mineral waters of Hierapolis. He says also that the country was specially liable to earthquakes. Of one such, which happened apparently shortly before this Epistle was written and which desolated Laodicea, we read in Tacitus, Annals bk. xiv. 27. From this, he tells us, Laodicea recovered without help from Rome.
From Josephus (Antiq. bk. xii. 3. 4) we learn that Antiochus the Great (B.C. 223-187) transplanted 2,000 Jewish families to Lydia and Phrygia. Doubtless some of these settled in the valley of the Lycus. Cicero says (For Flaccus § 28) that large sums of money were sent from Laodicea to the temple at Jerusalem. This reveals the presence of a large Jewish population. It is not unlikely that among the Phrygians (Acts 2:10) at Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost were some from these three cities.
About the founding of the Churches in these cities, we know nothing except from this epistle. We learn from Colossians 2:1 that Paul had never visited Colossæ or Laodicea. To these we may add by sure inference the neighbouring city of Hierapolis. He twice passed through Phrygia: Acts 16:6; 18:23. But his route, so far as we can trace it, would not lead him near the valley of the Lycus.
Indirectly, however, the Churches of the Lycus were probably results of Paul’s labour. The Colossians received the Gospel from their fellow-citizen, Epaphras: Colossians 1:7; 4:12. The nearness of the three cities assures us that it would at once spread from one to the others. And the earnest interest of Epaphras embraced them all: Colossians 4:13. It is therefore probable that directly or indirectly he was founder of the three Churches. Now Paul laboured for three years at Ephesus: Acts 20:31. Through his continued preaching there all those inhabiting Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks: Acts 19:10. It is not unlikely that from the lips of Paul, on a visit to the metropolis of the province, Epaphras heard and accepted the Gospel which he afterwards preached in his own city and those around it. Possibly Paul charged him to do this. If so, we can the more easily understand his description of Epaphras in Colossians 1:7 as a faithful minister of Christ on our behalf.
Whether Paul paid his hoped-for (Philemon 1:22) visit to Colossæ, we do not know. But if the Pastoral Epistles be genuine, he was set free, and visited Ephesus and Miletus: 1 Timothy 1:3; 2 Timothy 4:20. And if so, he may have extended his journey to the Churches of the Lycus. The only later reference in the New Testament to these Churches is the letter preserved in Revelation 3:14-22. Naturally it was addressed to the most important of the three cities. In Revelation 3:14, the beginning of the creation of God, we have a thought in close harmony with Colossians 1:15, 16.
The subsequent history of these cities and Churches contains little worthy of note. With this Epistle the Church at Colossæ disappears altogether from view, except as here and there the name of its bishop is appended to the decrees of a council. The bishops of the more important sees of Laodicea and Hierapolis were present at the General Councils at Nicæa, Ephesus, and Chalcedon; and, two years before this last, at the Robber Synod at Ephesus. About A.D. 363 was held at Laodicea a provincial council which has left us, in its sixtieth Canon, a list of the books of the New Testament agreeing exactly with our English Bible except that it omits the Book of Revelation, the earliest list so nearly complete. And for some centuries the two sees retained their importance. A thin and scattered population, Turkish with a mixture of Greeks and Armenians, lives around the ruins of these once important cities, and cultivates the soil which still retains its ancient fertility. And, as of old, the country is still occasionally visited by earthquakes.
Section 5. — Time and Place of Writing, and The Occasion, of the Epistles.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 39
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The quoted Colossians sections 5–7 are contents-list entries on p. x, describing Christ’s relation to the Church, the Colossian Christians, and Paul’s relation to the Church. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 6; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 13.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 5. — TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING, AND THE
OCCASION, OF THE EPISTLES.
1. For the first time Paul now writes as a prisoner: Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; 6:20; Philippians 1:7, 13; Colossians 4:3, 18; Philemon 1:10, 13, 22, 23. These frequent references to his bondage reveal the deep mark it had made in his thought and heart, and thus prove that his imprisonment lasted for some time. Now in the Book of Acts no long imprisonment of Paul is recorded earlier than his arrest at Jerusalem. This is a very strong presumption that these Epistles were later than his arrest. And this is the confident judgment of all scholars.
2. After his arrest, Paul remained for more than two years a prisoner at Cæsarea, was then taken to Rome, the journey occupying many months, and remained there in prison for not less than two years: Acts 24:27; 28:30. Whether he was then set free, we have no sure information. This long imprisonment affording abundant leisure for writing letters suggests itself at once as the time when these Epistles of captivity were written. We therefore ask, were they written during the earlier or the later part of it, i.e. from Cæsarea or from Rome? That they were written from Rome, an early and unanimous tradition attests. With such scanty indications as we have, we will now test this tradition.
Cæsar’s household in Philippians 4:22 points very clearly to the imperial palace at Rome. And Philippians 1:13, manifest in the whole prætorium or prætorian guard suggests much more forcibly the pretorian guard at Rome than the narrow limits of the governor’s palace at Cæsarea. Against these indications there is nothing to set. It is therefore generally admitted that probably the Epistle to the Philippians was written from Rome during Paul’s imprisonment there.
That the Epistle to the Colossians was written at the same time as that to the Ephesians, is made almost certain by the reference in Ephesians 6:21 and Colossians 4:7 to Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, as evidently the bearer of each Epistle, taken in connection with the very close similarity of the Epistles in thought, order, and phraseology, a similarity without parallel in the New Testament, and with the proof given in Introd. ii. that both Epistles are from the pen of Paul.
The Epistle to Philemon was apparently (Philemon 1:12) taken by Onesimus, who is said in Colossians 4:9 to be accompanying Tychicus to Colossæ. Moreover, of six men with Paul who send greeting to the Church at Colossæ, we notice that five send greeting to Philemon. These remarkable coincidences prove conclusively that the short letter to Philemon was written and sent at the same time as those to Ephesus and Colossæ.
We now ask, were the three Epistles written from Cæsarea or from Rome? That they were written from Rome, an early and widespread tradition asserts. Meyer and others argue that they were written from Cæsarea, on the ground that it is more likely that a runaway slave would go to Cæsarea than to Rome which was much further and involved a long sea voyage, that from Rome to Colossæ Tychicus and Onesimus would pass through Ephesus and that if so Paul would have commended Onesimus to the Church there as he does to that at Colossæ, and that Paul’s request (Philemon 1:22) for a lodging implying hope of an early journey to Colossæ suggests Cæsarea, from which place, had Paul been set free, he might have travelled through Colossæ to Ephesus and to Rome. These arguments have no great weight. In all ages longer routes to the metropolis have been more easy than shorter routes from one provincial town to another, and fugitives have ever preferred to hide themselves among the multitudes of a great city. Possibly Onesimus’ plan was to leave Tychicus at Ephesus and to pass on without delay to the master he had wronged at Colossæ. Reasons unknown to us may have given Paul hopes of early liberation. And his deep interest in the young Churches on the Lycus, acknowledged in Colossians 2:1, may have prompted him to plan an early visit to them.
On the other side I can adduce only one argument, viz. indications that the three Epistles were written later than that to the Philippians. Although in its tone of triumphant calm and in the absence of serious discussion about Jew and Gentile this last Epistle is closely related to those to Ephesus and Colossæ, it is in teaching and phraseology much more closely related than they are to the earlier Epistles and especially to that to the Romans. Compare Philippians 3:9, not having a righteousness of my own, even that which is from law, but that which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God on the condition of faith: a very close coincidence with Romans 1:17; 3:21, 22; 10:3. Also compare Philippians 3:4-6 with 2 Corinthians 11:21-30; and note other phrases found only in the earlier Epistles. These coincidences seem to me far to outweigh the arguments adduced by Meyer.
Against this earlier date of the Epistle to the Philippians, but not necessarily against the other Epistles being written at Rome, it has been objected that Philippians 4:10 implies a long interval between Paul’s arrival at Rome and the letter to Philippi, an interval long enough for news of his imprisonment to reach Philippi, for delay there, for the journey and illness of Epaphroditus, for news of his illness to reach Philippi, and for Epaphroditus to know this. But probably, even for all this, a year would suffice. For the journey from Rome to Philippi along splendid Roman roads and across the narrow straits would occupy probably not more than a month and could be made at almost any time of the year. And the illness of Epaphroditus may have been on the eastern side of the straits where it might soon become known at Philippi.
Another objection is based on Philippians 1:20-26, which suggests that a crisis of Paul’s trial was near. From this, some have inferred that the letter was written near to the close of his imprisonment. But it is quite possible that in the mismanagement of Nero’s rule Paul’s trial was delayed after its decision had seemed to be near.
Reviewing the whole case, the balance of evidence seems to me to incline somewhat to the earlier date of the Epistle to the Philippians. And this implies that the other letters were written, not from Cæsarea, but from Rome. We may suppose that the letter to Philippi was written within the first year of Paul’s imprisonment at Rome and at a time when the decision of his case seemed to be near; that a further delay arose of more than a year; and that towards the close of it, when Paul was again hoping for liberty, Epaphras arrived with news about the Colossians and the Christians of Asia. This is to me much easier than to suppose that, after the remarkable development of thought embodied in the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, Paul could write the Epistle to the Philippians in which we find no trace of this development. Between the Epistles an interval must be allowed which if not very long was sufficient for a marked growth in the thought of the Apostle. Probably this growth was stimulated by the news brought by Epaphras. In Diss. iii. of my Corinthians we have seen that Paul arrived in Rome probably early in A.D.
62. If so, he may have written to the Philippians early in A.D. 63, and the other three letters a year later.
The occasion of the Epistles is involved in what has just been said. Paul is a prisoner in charge of the Pretorian guard at Rome, expecting an early decision of his case, but utterly uncertain whether it will bring him liberty and further work for Christ or sudden death. A messenger arrives with a contribution in money from the Church at Philippi which has already given several proofs of its care for him. Epaphroditus even apologizes for the lateness of the gift, by saying that circumstances had delayed it. On his way to Rome, he had been dangerously ill: and news of this had reached Philippi. The traveller is eager to return, in order to remove, by his own presence among them again, the anxiety thus caused to his fellow-Christians at home. And Paul sends with him, as an abundant recompense for their kindness to him, this beautiful letter in which he pours out his joy and gratitude for this remarkable proof of the Christian character of his beloved children in the faith.
The expected decision is deferred: and Paul lingers in prolonged bondage. But within the narrow walls of his prison he ponders the grandeur of the Eternal Son and the eternal purpose of salvation. During this long delay, probably near to its close, the Apostle is cheered by the arrival of Epaphras, an earnest Christian worker from the far off valley of the Lycus, who has himself planted the Gospel in its three cities and now narrates all this to Paul. The news fills him with joy. But the joy is mixed with anxiety caused by indications that at least in Colossæ serious error is taking root, error which threatens to undo the good work already begun. That the letter was addressed to Colossæ, suggests that there the danger was greatest. That Paul directs the letter to be read also at Laodicea, implies that this neighbouring city was infected. The one slight reference (Colossians 4:13) to Hierapolis suggests that it was the smallest of the three Churches. Either for other reasons or at Paul’s request, Tychicus is going to Asia, his native province, and to Colossæ. Paul writes and sends with him a letter setting forth, in view of the errors there prevalent, the greatness and sufficiency of the Son of God in His relation to the Church and to the Universe. And since on his way Tychicus must pass through Ephesus and must cross the province of Asia, Paul writes, and sends with him, another letter to the Ephesians and to the various Churches of the province. Before this time, a runaway slave of a Christian at Colossæ called Philemon, who apparently had robbed his master, had come to Rome and come within Paul’s influence and by him had been led to Christ. Already the young convert had been helpful to the imprisoned Apostle. But Paul now sends him back to his defrauded master, in company with Tychicus who was going to the same place, and sends with him a third letter begging his friend to receive back as a Christian brother the returning fugitive. Bearing these documents, familiar now in every land and almost in every home and more precious than diamonds, the strange companions in travel started on their long journey over land and sea, leaving the great Apostle, whose loving and anxious heart and earnest prayers followed their steps, still in bonds at Rome.
In the following exposition, the Epistle to the Philippians is placed first, as being nearest in its teaching and phraseology to the Epistles already annotated. And this seems to me, as I have endeavoured to show, the most likely order of time. The Epistle to the Colossians comes next, as dealing with a specific matter, namely the news brought by Epaphras about the error spreading at Colossæ. Then follows the letter to Philemon, dealing with another specific, but less important, matter. Last of all I have placed the profound Epistle to the Ephesians which treats of no specific matter but sets forth, from its own point of view, the Eternal Purpose of Salvation and its realisation in the One Church of Christ.
Dissertation 1. -- The Epistles Before Us Compared With Those To The Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 182
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 1.
THE EPISTLES BEFORE US COMPARED WITH THOSE TO
THE ROMANS, CORINTHIANS, AND GALATIANS.
1. In my earlier volumes I have endeavoured to show that the Epistles there annotated were written within a year, amid the active evangelistic toil of Paul’s third missionary journey. In Introd. ii. and v. of this volume I have tried to prove that the Epistles just expounded were written by Paul, probably during his first imprisonment at Rome. If these inferences be correct, the two groups of Epistles were separated by a lapse of some years and by a total change of circumstances. We come now to compare the groups, in order to trace in them the effect on the Apostle of this lapse of time and these altered circumstances. Our investigation will also test in some measure the conclusions we have reached about the authorship of the Epistles; thus supplementing the argument of Introd. ii. And it will embody some of the practical gains we have derived from our study of these Epistles.
2. In Philippians 1:1, for the first time in the Epistles of Paul we find definite mention of Church officers; in two orders, bishops and deacons. The former title appears in Acts 20:28 as a description of the elders of the Church at Ephesus, summoned by Paul to Miletus, whom he bids to act as shepherds of the Church. Still earlier, in Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23, we find at Jerusalem a body of elders associated with the Apostles in discussing a most important matter of doctrine. And from Acts 14:23 we learn that Paul appointed elders in the Churches founded during his first missionary journey. With these passages, Philippians 1:1 is an important coincidence. That in the letters to Corinth which deal specifically with Church matters the bishops are not mentioned, but are mentioned in this later letter, reminds us that as times rolled by the officers of the Church would gain an importance they could not have when officers and members were alike new converts. The word deacons reveals a second order of Church-officers. And in Romans 16:1 a lady is called a deacon of the Church at Kenchæa.
In 2 Corinthians 1:8-11; 4:8-11 we traced the deep impression made upon the heart of the Apostle by a recent and deadly peril. With this we now contrast the serene calm with which in Philippians 1:20-26 he contemplates the uncertain issue of his approaching trial before Nero. In active work, Paul clung to life. But in his dungeon at Rome the prisoner had become familiar with the King of Terrors and had learnt to look upon his face without emotion. The secret of this serene calm we learn in Philippians 4:6, 7; and in Philippians 4:11-13. The profound peace which reigns in these passages and throughout this Epistle, brightening here and there into a joy which even the gloom of a prison and the shadow of the gallows cannot dim, belongs to the autumn maturity of the Apostle’s inner life. These words of peace are gems of priceless worth. As in 2 Corinthians 8:9 so in Philippians 2:5-11, the incarnation of Christ is appealed to as an example for us; as an example in the former case, of generosity, in the latter of unselfishness. But the second exposition of the example of Christ is far richer than the first. We have the pre-incarnate Son existing in the form of God and equal to God, contemplating this equality and refusing to use it for His own gratification. We see Him as He emptied Himself, then treading a path of humiliation till it led Him to the cross; and raised by God, as a recompense for His obedient self-sacrifice, till the loftiest in heaven bow the knee in worship and proclaim His majesty. This passage, full of dramatic grandeur, is the most complete exposition in the N.T. of the Incarnation of Christ. The word rendered I-have-learnt-the-mystery in Philippians 4:12 links the cognate word mystery already used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:7; 4:1; Romans 16:25 with the Greek mysteries; and thus gives to the word as used by him a definite reference which sheds important light upon his conception of the Gospel.
The references to Epaphroditus in Philippians 2:25-30 and to the gift from Philippi in Philippians 4:10, 18 rescue from oblivion a most beautiful Christian character and a most interesting incident of Christian life in an apostolic Church.
3. In Colossians 1:9, 10, more emphasis is put on the value of knowledge of God as an element of the Christian life than in the similar prayer in Philippians 1:9, 10. The same thought is prominent in Colossians 2:2, 3; 3:10, 16. It is a feature of the group of Epistles now before us. As compared with 2 Corinthians 4:4, the fuller term in Colossians 1:15, of the invisible God, reminds us that an image is a presentation of that which would otherwise be unseen. The accurate term Firstborn before every creature is an important addition to the teaching of the N.T. about the Son of God. In Colossians 1:16 for the first time Paul traces to the Son the creation of the universe: through Him and in Him and for Him were all things in heaven and earth created; Himself before all things, and all things held together in Him. Once stated, this teaching carries conviction by its close harmony with Paul’s earlier teaching about the relation of Christ to the work Of God. But the explicit statement of what would otherwise be only an inference is of infinite value. In Colossians 1:18; 2:19 Christ is called the Head of the Body, i.e. of the Church: a new and most important development of Paul’s favourite metaphor. So far was it from his thought at an earlier time that he wrote, in 1 Corinthians 12:21, the head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you: a statement utterly inapplicable to Christ. But it is in complete harmony with the original metaphor; of which indeed it is a logical development. As dwelling in each member, Christ is the life-giving Spirit of the Body. But as human and corporeal He is also the highest part of it, the supreme and directive part, essential to the life of the whole. This important development of the metaphor was probably suggested to Paul by his study, embodied in this Epistle, of the grandeur of the Son of God and of His relation to the universe and to the Church.
In Colossians 2:13 we have a new and important conception of the state of the unsaved as not merely dying but already dead by reason of their trespasses, and therefore beyond reach of salvation except by Him who raises the dead. The same thought in germ is found in Romans 7:9, the Law came to life, but I died; and in John 5:24, 25. It is completed by the teaching in Colossians 2:13 that forgiveness of trespasses is life to whose who were spiritually dead. The Law as a handwriting nailed to the cross of Christ and thus made invalid is in complete accord with Paul’s teaching in Romans 7:4, dead to the Law through the body of Christ. But the figure is new, and valuable. Already in Romans 8:38 Paul has mentioned angels of superior rank. But in Colossians 1:16, and in Colossians 2:15, successive ranks of angels come conspicuously into view. And in Colossians 1:20 we learn that the purpose of salvation embraces in some sense even the inhabitants of heaven. The references to Epaphras in Colossians 1:7; 4:12 preserve for us the memory of a worthy member of an apostolic Church. The statements in Colossians 1:6 and more emphatically in Colossians 1:23 that the Gospel preached at Colossæ is preached also throughout the world is more suitable to the later, than to the earlier, part of Paul’s life.
4. An important gain in the Epistle to the Ephesians is that Paul’s teaching about the purpose of predestination in Romans 8:28, 29, the purpose of election in Romans 9:11, and about adoption in Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:5 is combined in Ephesians 1:4-12 into one profound exposition of a purpose earlier than the world and embracing the universe, a purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will. This combination gives unity and vast extension to what was before somewhat fragmentary and limited. Very conspicuous is the threefold refrain of praise in Ephesians 1:6, 12, 14: a remarkable development of a germ found in Philippians 1:11. Already in Philippians 1:9-11, Colossians 1:9-12 Paul has led his readers in prayer to God. But these prayers are left far behind by the mighty intercessions of Ephesians 1:16-23; 3:14-21, in which, pleading for his readers, the Apostle rises step by step to the very throne of God until in the second intercession prayer is lost in a shout of praise. In all ages these great liturgies have been ladders by which the holiest of men have found nearer access to God. A development in the Epistle to the Colossians of an earlier metaphor, viz. Christ the Head of His body the Church, receives now a still richer development. In Ephesians 1:22, Christ, already Head of the universe, is said to be God’s gift to the Church to be its Head. In Ephesians 4:15, 16, the Head is the source of the Church’s compactness and development, and the goal of its growth: all development uniting the members each to the others and all to Christ. And in Ephesians 5:23-31 His relation to the Church as its Head is made a pattern for the relation of husband and wife, and the union of the Church with Christ is represented as a vital union of a living body with its head. The metaphor of the Church as the bride of Christ, so richly expounded in this passage, is but an expansion of a germ already found in 2 Corinthians 11:2. Indeed, throughout the Epistle we have valuable developments not only of the teaching of the earlier group, but of that of the Epistle to the Colossians. For example, we have fuller teaching about the superhuman powers of the unseen world. We read in Ephesians 3:10 that God designs even the bright ones of heaven in their various ranks to learn through the Church the manifold wisdom of God. And in Ephesians 2:2; 6:12 we find in conflict with men superhuman and evil powers, acting under direction of one supreme leader. Ephesians 2:3 is in subtle harmony with Romans 5:12-14. Paul there taught us that through Adam’s sin we were born under the dominion of bodily death, i.e. we were by nature doomed to the grave. He now tells his readers that they were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest, i.e. as all men. This implies that the actual sins through which (Ephesians 5:6) comes the anger of God are done by nature, i.e. in virtue of a condition received at birth. This evil inheritance must have had an evil origin. And this can be no other than the sin of him through whom death passed through to all men. Ephesians 2:3 is thus a most valuable addition to the teaching of the N.T. about the unsaved.
5. Comparing the eight Epistles I have annotated we notice the vivacity and earnestness of the earlier group, and the profound calm, the wider mental vision, and the deeper insight into the nature and purpose of God, of the later group. Each group supplements the other. The orderly exposition of the Gospel in the Epistle to the Romans and the keen defence of its central doctrine, Justification through Faith, in that to the Galatians explain the casual references to faith and to salvation through faith, and to Jews and Gentiles, in the later group. Without this explanation the later Epistles would lack their doctrinal foundation. The glorious ideal of the Church given in the Epistle to the Ephesians rises immensely above anything in the letters to Corinth. But it would not supply the place of the vivid pictures there drawn of actual Church life in the Apostolic Age. All the letters correspond-and the correspondence grows as we examine them-with the circumstances of the writer. In the midst of active evangelical toil Paul gives us in the Epistle to the Romans an account of the Gospel he preached and in that to the Galatians a sample of the arguments with which he defended it to his countrymen. The letters to the Corinthians reflect the actual condition of Churches in which he laboured. The later Epistles give us the mature thought nurtured in the solitude of his imprisonment at Rome. In the letter to Philippi we have an outburst of Christian affection to the purest of the Churches founded by Paul, revealing his inmost spiritual life. That to Colossæ embodies his loftiest thought about the nature and work of his Master. The letter to Ephesus depicts the Church as in the eternal past it presented itself to the loving thought and purpose of Christ; and as it will stand, when the toil and conflict and sorrow of the present life are but a fading dream of the past, in glorious reality before the satisfied eye of Him who loved it and gave Himself for it, the spotless bride of the Eternal Son.
The great and independent worth of each of these Epistles is a complete confirmation of the confident belief of all Churches throughout the world in the second century that they are all from the pen of the greatest of the Apostles.
Dissertation 2. -- Paul’s Conception of the Church.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 188
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 2.
PAUL’S CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH.
1. Already in a note under 1 Corinthians 1:9 I have endeavoured to show that in the N.T. the word church denotes usually the company of the professed servants of Christ living in one city: e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:2, the Church of God which is at Corinth; 1 Corinthians 4:17, as I teach in every Church; 1 Corinthians 7:17, as I give charge in all the Churches.
We notice also that Paul always assumes that they to whom he writes have already personal spiritual life. Even to the Galatians who were (Galatians 1:6; 4:9) turning away to another Gospel… to the weak and poor rudiments, he writes, in Galatians 3:26, ye are all sons of God through faith. And, as sons, they had received (Galatians 4:6) the Spirit of His Son crying in their hearts, Abba, Father. In Galatians 3:2 Paul bases an argument on their inward spiritual experience: was it through works of law that ye received the Spirit or through hearing of faith? The Corinthian Christians, of whom some had once been guilty of gross sin, were now justified: 1 Corinthians 6:11. In them dwells the Spirit of God: 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19. This implies real spiritual life; although it was only the infantile life of babes in Christ. The Roman Christians had already been justified in His blood… reconciled to God through the death of His Son; and this experience was to them the ground of a confident hope that they will be saved in His life: Romans 5:9,
10. Already they had been grafted into the good olive tree: Romans 11:17. The only question now is about (Romans 11:20, 22) their continuance in faith. Similarly, the Colossian Christians had been rescued from the authority of darkness and translated into the kingdom of the Son of His love: Colossians 1:13. So Colossians 2:13: He has made you alive together with Him, having forgiven you all your trespasses. And Ephesians 2:8, By grace ye are saved through faith. Paul never tries to lead his readers to Christ, but always assumes that already by faith they are united to Him.
Similarly 1 John 2:12, I write to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you. In 1 Peter 1:3 the readers are said to be born again… guarded in the power of God through faith.
All this does not imply that there were in the Apostolic Churches no false brethren. Any such, Paul leaves charitably out of sight. Nor does it imply that all had attained a lofty spiritual standard.
The Corinthian Christians were only babes in Christ. But even babes have life. Paul assumes that his readers are what they profess to be, sincere followers of Christ. And his words imply that it is the privilege of all such to enjoy forgiveness of sins and the indwelling presence of the Spirit of God.
Paul assumes also that all his readers have been baptized. So in Galatians 3:27 his argument implies that they who are sons of God through faith have been baptized for Christ. An appeal in Romans 6:1 is based in Romans 6:3 upon the assumed Baptism of the Christians at Rome. Similarly Colossians 2:12. By Baptism the Christians at Corinth had been united to the visible fellowship of the Church of Christ: So 1 Corinthians 12:13, all were baptized into one body. To the Church of God at Corinth the Epistle was written: 1 Corinthians 1:2. The letters of Paul pourtray throughout men joined to Christ by inward spiritual life and joined to each other in a visible community.
2. Although even in the largest towns the Christian community is always spoken of as one Church, the Christian community in a province is never so called. We read of the Church at Corinth and of the Churches of Galatia. Cp. Revelation 1:4, the seven Churches in Asia. The one apparent exception in the N.T. is Acts 9:31, the Church throughout all Judæa and Galilee and Samaria. But in 1 Corinthians 12:28 we read that God put in the Church first Apostles, secondly prophets, etc. The word Church here can mean only the Church universal. This loftier use of the word receives in the Epistles before us a most important development. In Colossians 1:18, 24 the Church is called the body of Christ, the body of which He is Head. ln Ephesians 1:22, 23, the Risen and Exalted Saviour, who is Head above all things, is said to be God’s gift to the Church. God designs (Ephesians 3:10) that through the Church may be known to the successive ranks of angels the manifold wisdom of God. In the Church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) throughout all ages will glory be given to God. In Ephesians 5:23-32 the Church is spoken of as the bride of Christ, object of His special love, and united to Him as a living body is united to its head.
This phraseology and the conception of the Church therein embodied are a conspicuous feature of the Epistles now before us and especially of that to the Ephesians. In his busy apostolic toil Paul’s thought was occupied chiefly by the actual Churches he had planted and their pressing needs. But in his prison at Rome these Churches are far away. And his mind is at leisure to contemplate the ideal Church as in His eternal purpose it stood before the Eye of God, and as in glorious reality and perfection it will stand for ever before the eyes of God and of angels and of men. Already once to the Corinthians he has spoken about the universal Church. That universal Church is now to him the one great and engrossing object of thought. Paul’s conception of the Church is embodied chiefly in five important metaphors. The Church is the temple of God, the body of Christ, and the bride of Christ. The Kingdom of God is once spoken of as an olive tree. And in a reported address of Paul the Church is called a flock. These metaphors claim now our best attention.
3. In Ephesians 4:11 we read that Christ gave to the Church shepherds. And in Acts 20:28 Paul bids the elders of the Church at Ephesus to shepherd the Church; and speaks of coming wolves who will not spare the flock. Similarly in Hebrews 13:20 Christ is the great Shepherd of the sheep. So 1 Peter 2:25; and 1 Peter 5:2-4 where elders are bidden to shepherd the flock of God and Christ is called the Chief Shepherd. All this recalls the teaching of Christ in John 10:1-16 about Himself as the Good Shepherd and about the one flock and One Shepherd.
This metaphor reminds us that Christians are living individuals, and teaches that they need the protection of one greater than themselves, and that for protection and well-being God designs them to be associated together. To leave the flock is to leave the Shepherd.
4. In 1 Corinthians 3:9, 16; 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16, Paul calls his readers a building and temple of God, and justifies this title by saying that in them dwells the Spirit of God. Of that temple Christ is the one Foundation. By preaching Christ, Paul laid that Foundation in the hearts of the men at Corinth: 1 Corinthians 3:10, 11. Similarly, in Ephesians 2:19-22 we have a foundation laid by the Apostles and Prophets, of which Christ Himself is the Corner-stone, and upon which many buildings are rising into one holy temple, destined to be a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit. A similar metaphor is found in 1 Peter 2:4-7, where Christians are called living stones of a spiritual house and Christ the chief Corner-stone. This metaphor may be traced to the lips of Christ in Matthew 16:18, I will build My Church. Cp. Matthew 21:42; Isaiah 28:16; Psalm 118:22.
In a building many stones are united into one immoveable whole, each stone made firm by union with other stones. This metaphor implies that Christ designs His people to be united together in firm and mutually helpful fellowship. Of that temple Christ is the Builder: Matthew 16:18. And, as Himself in His humanity a part of His own Church, He is its Foundation and its Corner-stone. Moreover, this building is the dwelling-place of God. So, emphatically, 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19; Ephesians 2:22. Indeed the Hebrew and Aramaic word rendered temple denotes a palace, the residence of a king: see under 1 Corinthians 3:16. So, after giving directions about the erection of the tabernacle, God says in Exodus 29:45, I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. The chief thought of every Israelite about the tabernacle was that it was the royal tent of the God of Israel. So, but in an infinitely higher degree, Christ spoke in John 2:21 about the temple of His body. For that sacred human form was in a unique sense the dwelling-place of God in which He manifested Himself to men. And from that temple went up to God the incense of ceaseless devotion. In the same sense but in a lower degree the Church is the temple of God. Of this temple the body born at Bethlehem and now glorified is the Holy of holies. The whole temple will stand for ever, purified and completed, revealing even amid the glories of heaven the infinite grandeur and love of God.
5. In Romans 11:16-24 we have an olive tree into which Gentiles have been grafted and from which unbelieving Jews have been broken off. This suggests the continuity of the Kingdom of God in the Old and New Covenants. For the Gentiles were grafted into a tree already growing. And it recalls a similar but more fully developed metaphor from the lips of Christ in John 15:1-7: I am the true Vine… ye are the branches. Cp. Psalm 80:8; Isaiah 5:1-7; Jeremiah 2:21. A tree differs from a building in that its progress is an outworking of its own inner life according to the laws of that life. The Church is not a mere structure rising only by additions from without, but a living tree growing and bearing fruit by its own inherent vitality, each twig growing out of an earlier branch and drawing nourishment and growth through other branches from the root. Of this tree, Christ is Himself the Root and Stem.
6. The metaphor of the Church as the body of Christ, so conspicuous in the teaching of Paul, and in the N.T. peculiar to him, has been already expounded, as used in Paul’s earlier Epistles, in a note under 1 Corinthians 12:30. It receives in the Epistles before us a new and important development. We find the metaphor in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Romans 12:4, 5; and in its richer development in Colossians 1:18, 24; 2:19; Ephesians 1:23; 2:16; 4:12, 16, 25; 5:23, 30.
An animal body differs from a tree in possessing a far greater variety of organs, each endowed with peculiar faculties and all needed for the general good. The use of these faculties gives rise to a varied activity without parallel in plant life. The condition and source of this activity is the inward presence of the mysterious spirit of life, the unseen bond of union and source of harmony to the many members of the body. So in the Church we have a multitude of members, each endowed with capacities peculiar to itself but needful for the good of the whole, and all animated and moved and controlled by the one Spirit of God.
Of this complex living body Christ is, through His Spirit, the life-giving and directing principle. The Church is therefore His Body. Of old He dwelt on earth in a complex human body with its various and variously-endowed members, in order that through human lips He might speak to dying men words of life and might reach out to men sinking into ruin a human hand able to save. So now He dwells on earth in the Church with its various members possessing various capacities all needful for the life and health and growth of the whole, in order that through human lips and hands He may speak to and save the fallen race of man. The Church is thus in some sense a continuation or repetition of the Incarnation.
To this metaphor, so applied, the Epistles before us add an important development. We now learn that Christ is not only the animating Spirit, but also the Head, of the Church. The head is part of the body, consisting as does the rest of flesh and bone. But it is the highest, and immeasurably the noblest, part. As human, Christ is Himself a part of His Church, the Corner-stone of the Temple He is building, and a member of His own Body.
This metaphor is the fullest and richest picture of the Church in the New Testament. And it affords the noblest ideal of the Christian life. In a healthy body every member is active, moved and controlled by one spirit, each member putting forth its powers in harmony with all the others, for the good of the whole. Everything in us contrary to this ideal is spiritual disease tending to death.
7. The metaphor of the body of Christ suggests that the Church is dear to Christ as is a man’s own body to himself. This thought is developed in the metaphor of the Bride of Christ. Already, as recorded in Matthew 22:2, Christ had spoken of a king who made a marriage feast for his son. In Revelation 19:9 we read of the marriage supper of the Lamb. And in Revelation 21:9 the New Jerusalem, the eternal home of redeemed humanity, is called the Lamb’s Bride. Similarly in 2 Corinthians 11:2, Paul wishes to present the Church as a pure maiden to Christ. In Ephesians 5:22-33 this metaphor is further developed, in conjunction with that of the Body of Christ, and is made a basis of important teaching. This last metaphor reminds us that the Church is an object of Christ’s tender love and great delight, and that as Queen she will share His throne. When the Bridegroom found her, she was enslaved and polluted. But He loved her, rescued her from bondage, washed her in His own blood, and will clothe her in royal raiment. And it warns us that injury or insult to the Church is done, in the presence of the Bridegroom, to His affianced and much-loved Bride.
8. In Matthew 16:18 Christ is recorded to have said in words most solemn at a most important turning point (Matthew 16:19) of His teaching: I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. This implies that to erect a Church, i.e. to gather together a community which should be specially His own, was an essential part of the work He came to do. And this is confirmed by the foregoing metaphors, and by the entire teaching of Paul. For each of these metaphors embodies conspicuously the idea of the union of many members into one organized body, a union needful not only for growth and well-being but for life. From them we learn that Christ designs His servants to be not only inwardly and individually united to Himself but united to each other in outward and visible fellowship; in order that the company of His professed followers may be the earthly home of the people of God, in which by mutual help their spiritual life may be sheltered and nourished and developed, and in order that by their mutual co-operation the Gospel may be carried to the ends of the earth. The Church thus embodies in itself the main results already attained by Christ through the Gospel, and is the living organ for the attainment of further results.
This aim has been to a large degree achieved. In the Churches to which Paul wrote, the Christian life found the home it needed, and found suitable embodiment before the eyes of men. And the forces thus embodied, overthrew classic paganism. Even in the darkest ages, the Churches were a visible monument, often fearfully defaced but always recognisable, of the Kingdom of God. They have ever directly or indirectly afforded shelter, often rude and unworthy though valuable, to a vast number of sincere followers of Christ. And to-day, with spiritual power ever increasing, the Churches of Christ, i.e. the people of God associated in visible communities, are the chief agency for carrying out in the world Christ’s purpose of mercy to men. They are the Light and the Life of the world. The pulsations of that life are felt everywhere even to heathen lands: and that light is spreading to the ends of the earth.
9. The Epistles I have annotated say very little about the officers and organization of the Apostolic Churches. This comparative silence reminds us that in a living body every member is endowed with faculties for usefulness. In proportion to the vitality of the whole, the peculiar work of the officers of the Church is less conspicuous. And this would be specially so where all members were alike recent converts.
In agreement with these passages, great prominence is given in Matthew 10:2; Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13 to the Apostles as holding the first rank among the servants of Christ. In the presence of them only Christ ordained the Lord’s Supper, and afterwards gave the command to baptize: Matthew 26:20, 26; 28:16-20. In Acts 1:1-13 we find them in close relation to the risen Saviour: and they seem to have been with Him at His ascension. At once they occupy in the infant Church a place of supreme authority: Acts 1:26; 2:14, 42; 6:2, 6. A pressing need suggested, as recorded in Acts 6:6, the appointment of men to take charge of certain financial matters. They were chosen by the church-members, but were appointed to their work by laying on of the Apostles’ hands. That they were not appointed till the need arose, and that no directions about their appointment are recorded as having been given by Christ, marks a conspicuous difference between the New and Old Covenants. It teaches that Christianity is primarily not an organization but a life, and that Christ designed the necessary organization to arise not by verbal prescription but from a felt need under the guidance of His ever-present Spirit.
In Acts 11:30 we find in authority at Jerusalem a body of elders. To them, in association with the Apostles, was submitted by the Church at Antioch an important doctrinal question: Acts 15:2. The delegates from Antioch were received in open session by the whole Church, in which however the Apostles and elders were conspicuous: Acts 15:4. But the doctrinal question was discussed only by the Apostles and elders: Acts 15:6. And although their decision was accepted by (Acts 15:22) the whole Church, the formal decree came only (Acts 15:23) from the Apostles and elders. This proves that in the Church of Jerusalem was a definite order of men to whom, in conjunction with the Apostles, were committed the highest interests of the Church.
From Acts 14:23 we learn that Paul appointed elders in each of the Churches founded on his first missionary journey. And in Acts 20:17 we read of the elders of the Church at Ephesus. Of these Paul speaks in Acts 15:28 as bishops, as shepherds of the Church, and as appointed bishops by the Holy Spirit. In Philippians 1:1 we have two definite orders of officers: bishops and deacons. Comparison with Acts 20:23, 28 assures us that the former is only another title for elders. In close harmony with Acts 14:23, to a Church just founded, from which he had been suddenly torn away, Paul writes (1 Thessalonians 5:12) about those who labour among, and rule over, and admonish, his readers. This implies that, on the founding of the Church, officers were appointed for its spiritual oversight.
Still further light is cast upon the officers of the Apostolic Churches by the Pastoral Epistles. Each of these was accepted with complete confidence as a genuine work of Paul by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, in the latter part of the second century. And the absence of any reference in them to bishops as superior to elders, in conspicuous contrast to the Epistles attributed to Ignatius, is complete proof of their very early date, and is a strong presumption of their genuineness.
In 1 Timothy 3:1-13 we find stated the qualifications needed by bishops and by deacons: a close coincidence with Philippians 1:1. Light is cast upon the work of a bishop by Paul’s remark in 1 Timothy 3:5: If any one knows not how to rule his own house, how will he care for the Church of God? In 1 Timothy 5:17 we read of elders who rule well and of some who labour in word and teaching. Titus is bidden (Titus 1:5) to appoint elders in every city. In Titus 1:7 the elder is called a steward of God, and must be able to exhort with healthy teaching and to disprove the words of those who contradict.
That there were elders in the various Churches, is assumed in 1 Peter 5:1-4. They are also called shepherds of the flock of God. Similarly in Hebrews 13:17 we find rulers who will give account, and whom Christians are bidden to obey.
All this proves beyond doubt that in the Apostolic Churches were men called elders or bishops who exercised an authority for which they were responsible to God. At Philippi, at Ephesus, and at Jerusalem we find a plurality of men sharing this authority. On the other hand, in the Church at Jerusalem, James seems to have held a place of unique honour: see note on James under Galatians 2:21. This slight indication is the only trace in the N.T. of authority in any Church exercised only by one man. In the Churches thus constituted we find Paul exercising Apostolic authority. Writing to a Church in which discipline had become lax, he asks (1 Corinthians 4:21) whether he is to come with a rod, a conspicuous badge of authority. Touching one notorious offender in the same Church he has already (1 Corinthians 5:3) pronounced judgment; and gives what is practically a command to the Church to carry out his decision. In 2 Corinthians 13:2 he threatens further punishment unless the unfaithful ones repent; and speaks in 2 Corinthians 13:10 of severe action in accord with the authority given to him by Christ. He forbids (1 Corinthians 14:34) women to speak in the Churches; and gives (1 Corinthians 14:27-30) directions about the conduct of joint worship. About a public contribution (1 Corinthians 16:1) he gave directions to the Churches of Galatia and to that at Corinth. Other matters needing regulation, he leaves (1 Corinthians 11:34) till his own arrival.
All this proves that Paul did not look on the Churches he founded as independent of external control. He never forgets that in them Christ dwells as the Supreme Lord. But this spiritual presence of Christ by no means makes the Church infallible; and therefore does not render superfluous the guidance and authority of superior human wisdom. Such then were the Churches founded by Paul; organized communities of professed and real servants of Christ, each governed by its own officers, and all under the direction of the great Apostle. About the other Churches of the Apostolic age, we have no information.
10. Very little is said in the N.T. about the mode of appointment of these church-officers. In Acts 14:23 we read that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in the Churches founded on their first missionary journey. Timothy is said in 1 Timothy 4:14 to have received a gift by laying on of the hands of the presbytery; and in 2 Timothy 1:6, by the hands of Paul.
In Titus 1:5, we learn that Paul had charged Titus to appoint elders in each Church in Crete. But the complete silence of the N.T. until this late Epistle about any Church there suggests that Paul is writing to Titus, to whom (e.g. 2 Corinthians 8:6) he had already entrusted other important missions, about the organization of new Churches, committing to him a work which he had himself done (e.g. Acts 14:23) in other newly-founded Churches but was unable through lack of time to do in Crete. We have no hint whatever that Titus possessed any abiding prerogative of ordaining elders. To Timothy at Ephesus similar authority seems to have been delegated, as we infer from 1 Timothy 1:3; 3:14, 15; 5:9-11, 19. But these directions by no means imply that he held a permanent position in the Church there. He and Titus seem rather to have been sent as special commissioners to various Churches. So 1 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Corinthians 8:6, Ellicott speaks of Timothy as “overseer and bishop of the important Church of Ephesus;” but without adducing any proof except the passages noted above. Lightfoot says (Philippians p. 197) that “it is the conception of a later age which represents Timothy as bishop of Ephesus and Titus as bishop of Crete. St. Paul’s own language implies that the position which they held was temporary.”
Still less have we any hint that the elders o£ the various Churches were unable to appoint others to fill up vacancies or if needful to increase the number of their elders. Of an order of men possessing an exclusive right to ordain elders we find throughout the N.T. no trace. The direction to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:22, Lay hands quickly on no one, refers probably to reception of new church-members; and therefore has no bearing on the ordination of church-officers. In short, the N.T., while revealing plainly the existence of an order of men to whom were entrusted the most sacred interests of the Church, gives no specific directions about the mode of their appointment.
11. As in the Epistles of Paul so in that of Clement of Rome and in the lately discovered Teaching of the Apostles we find only two orders of ordinary church-officers. In marked contrast to all these, the letters attributed to Ignatius reserve the title bishop for one man exercising supreme authority in his own Church, with whom are associated a lower order of elders. So Ep. to Ephesians ch. iv.: “the presbyter is joined to the bishop as the strings to the harp.” This use of the word bishop reveals the firm establishment of a higher order in the Churches, one not mentioned in the New Testament. And apparently, as we infer from the large number of bishops in the early Church, there was a bishop in each congregation. The origin of these congregational bishops is easily explained. The needs and the dangers of the Churches made needful in each Church a single head. Perhaps imperceptibly in each presbytery the ablest man became its virtual leader. The manifest advantage of having a leader would suggest the appointment of a successor when he was removed. And thus the practice would become universal. This explanation is given by Jerome in his commentary on Titus 1:5, vol. vii. p. 562, ed. Migne. “The Churches were governed by a common council of elders. But after that each one reckoned that those whom he had baptized were his own, not Christ’s, throughout the whole world it was decreed that one elected from the elders should be put over the others, to whom should belong the care of the Church.” Possibly this monarchical and congregational episcopacy was suggested or stimulated by the removal of the Apostles by death. They were, while they lived, a bond of union to the various Churches under their charge. Their departure would create a new need. And, guided by what to me seems to have been a divine instinct, the various Churches endeavoured to strengthen themselves by concentration of authority in each Church in the hands of one man. Diocesan episcopacy was a further and later development in the same direction.
12. The Churches founded by the Apostles were united by common faith, by loyalty to one Master in heaven, and by common perils. This inward unity naturally expressed itself, with increasing definiteness, in one outward organization. The lineal descendants of the Churches founded by the Apostles held together and held in the main the same doctrines, which last were in substantial agreement with the teaching of the Apostles. Around them grew up in the second century the chaos of Gnostic sects, contradicting each other and rejecting the teaching of the Apostles. The discord outside gave emphasis to the unity within. Thus arose the conception of the Catholic Church, the one lineal descendant of the many Churches founded by the Apostles. This conception found conspicuous and appropriate embodiment in the Ecumenical Councils which after the conversion of Constantine assembled from time to time to formulate the belief, and regulate the discipline, of the universal Church. This outward and organic unity exists no longer. Instead of One Catholic and Apostolic Church we see to-day many Churches bearing various names and with distinct organizations. The complete difference between past and present is illustrated by the difference between modern Councils and Synods and that which assembled at Nicæa. However some may try to conceal it, the old order has given place to new, the Church of Christ has entered a new stage of its development.
These divisions are an outworking of forces which none could hinder. The German reformers could not and dared not refrain from proclaiming the Gospel which had made them free. And they who accepted it could do no other than unite in Christian fellowship in order to nourish and develop the new life they had found. In so doing they were imitating the example of the early Christians. Their fellowship was necessarily outside the historic Church of Germany. For the officers of that Church with all the ecclesiastical and secular authority at their disposal rejected the teaching of the Reformers and persecuted the teachers. Luther had no thought, at the beginning of his work, of founding a new Church. But the pressing spiritual need of those whom his word, re-echoed from many lips, had saved, gave him no alternative. The necessities of the case compelled him and his companions to organize the Christian life springing up around them. Thus arose the Protestant Churches of Germany. And, when once the Christian life had begun to organize itself outside the historic Church, return was impossible. For that Church was unable to supply the spiritual need of the Protestants; and required as a condition of return an assertion as true of that which they believed to be false. Thus in Germany, through influences bad and good which none could hinder, the followers of Christ have been divided into different Christian communions. And this revolt against spiritual despotism has been, I cannot doubt, an immense gain to the nation.
In England political causes gave another direction to the development of the Church. For immoral reasons the monarch thought fit to set aside the spiritual authority of the pope, which for ages the Church in England had recognised; and appointed bishops who supported him in this rejection. Elizabeth at her accession swept clear the bench of bishops, except one bishop who bowed to her will, and appointed others ready to obey her. Under this violent compulsion the national Church, retaining in some part its ancient forms, was forced along a new path. The result is a Church possessing a sort of lineal continuity with the historic Church of England, yet broken off, under lay compulsion, from the historic Church of the West, with which previously it had been closely connected. And I cannot doubt that this great separation has been an immense gain to England and to the world.
Other inevitable divisions followed. The Act of Uniformity left to a large body of Christian pastors no alternative except to abandon their pastorate or take a solemn oath which they believed to be false. To their lasting honour they refused to be false to the truth and to themselves. We wonder not that multitudes to whom their word had been the word of life still gathered around them begging for spiritual food. That cry they could not refuse. Nor could they refuse to build folds for the sheep of Christ left without shelter. Thus arose the Nonconformist Churches of England. Similarly, in time of great spiritual torpor, the Wesleys and their companions could not but proclaim the Gospel which had given them peace. Nor could they refuse to the many souls saved by their preaching the spiritual oversight they so greatly needed. Thus arose the Methodist Societies. Wesley had no thought of founding a community outside the Anglican Church; and strongly urged his followers to remain in the ancient fold. But to that Church their spiritual life owed nothing directly: to his ministry they owed everything. In the Anglican Church they could not find the spiritual nourishment they needed. And the spiritual life of many thousands to-day, throughout the world, proves that their separation from the historic Church of England has not separated them from Christ; just as the spiritual life of the Anglican Church proves that separation from the historic Church of the West has not placed it outside the Covenant of God. Thus an irresistible course of events has led the outward forms of modern Christianity away from the Apostolic ideal.
13. We have various recommendations for restoring to the Church visible and organic unity.
Some would sweep away the historic Christianity of nearly nineteen centuries and begin to re-erect the Church, taking the New Testament as a ground-plan and endeavouring to reproduce exactly the forms of life there pourtrayed. But the growth and experience of the centuries are far too precious to be thus set aside. To the Christian life existing at our birth and before we were born we owe our knowledge of God; and our spiritual life. And the outward forms of the Apostolic Churches are as unfit for present needs as are the clothes of childhood to a full-grown man. The Gospel is not a written prescription but a life: and life ever reveals itself in the development of new forms. To ignore the developments of the past, is to throw away the hope of healthy development in the future.
14. Others suggest, as a means of restoring visible unity, that all Christians should join their own communion; that the members of all other Churches should forsake the home in which they have found spiritual life and nourishment and enter the speakers’ own Church. Of those who advocate this suggestion, most or all assert that there is and can be only one legitimate visible Church, the lineal descendant of the Churches founded by the Apostles, that to this alone belongs the Covenant of God, and that to this one Church we are bound at all costs to return.
Let us trace this suggestion to its logical and practical results. ln Germany, if there is only one legitimate Church, that must be the Roman Catholic Church, the only existing communion there older than the Reformation. Consequently, the assertion before us would compel every German to join that Church. But the Roman Church requires, as a condition of admission, a profession of faith (set forth in the bull of Pius IV., Injunctum nobis) which almost all Protestants believe to contain serious error. This belief they cannot surrender till it is disproved. Therefore, in the absence of such disproof, they are compelled to remain outside the one historic Church of Germany. And, if so, their spiritual needs require a church-organization. Even in our own day, inability to accept a new dogma of the Roman Church has compelled many of its most scholarly members to forsake their spiritual birthplace and to organize outside it another communion. If the Old Catholics and Protestants of Germany were right in so doing, there may be in one country more than one legitimate Church.
Not a few Anglicans claim that in England their own is the one and only legitimate Church, on the ground that it is the lineal descendant of the pre-Reformation Church. But, on this ground, it is difficult to deny the legitimacy, even in England, of the Roman Church, which is certainly the lineal descendant in the West of the Churches founded by the Apostles. Nor is it easy to prove that the helpless submission of the Church in England to the violence of Henry and Elizabeth was anything less than a surrender of all ecclesiastical prerogative and monopoly. Strange to say, many who claim that the Anglican Church is the only legitimate Church in England fraternise with the Old Catholics, who have set up and now maintain another organization alongside the historic Church of Germany. Look where we will, similar perplexity surrounds all claims to ecclesiastical monopoly. No one, making such claims, can say which is the one legitimate Church in Scotland, or Ireland, or America, or Madagascar. All claims to be the one, visible, legitimate Church are disproved by the facts of modern Christendom.
The above claim is sometimes stated in another form, viz. that Christ ordained in His Church a priesthood to be handed down by episcopal ordination to all generations, and that the assured possession of the blessings of the New Covenant is conditioned by the ministration of this priesthood. So Gore, The Church and the Ministry p. 71: “But their authority to minister in whatever capacity, their qualifying consecration, was to come from above, in such sense that no ministerial act could be regarded as valid-that is, as having the security of the divine covenant about it-unless it was performed under the shelter of a commission, received by the transmission of the original pastoral authority which had been delegated by Christ Himself to His Apostles.” The writer is prepared for the logical results of this assertion. So on p. 345 he says: “It follows then not that God’s grace has not worked, and worked largely, through many an irregular ministry where it was exercised or used in good faith-but that a ministry not episcopally received is invalid, that is to say, falls outside the conditions of covenanted security and cannot justify its existence in terms of the covenant.”
For this limitation of the New Covenant we may fairly demand proof. We expect to find it in the Book of the Covenant, i.e. in the New Testament, our only reliable authority for the actual teaching of Christ and His Apostles. Instead of such proof we have in the book just quoted a very scanty and unsatisfactory argument on pp. 70, 71, three proofs on pp. 76-82 “that the existence of an Apostolic succession serves several important ends;” and on pp. 83-111 answers to five objections. But throughout the New Testament, as already seen, we have no reliable trace of anything like Anglican episcopacy. In the many statements of the conditions of salvation, the ministration of an episcopally ordained order of men is never suggested. Faith is the unique condition of salvation: He that believes has everlasting life. As commanded by Christ, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are obligatory. But we have no hint that their validity depends on the episcopal ordination of the ministrant. An Apostle reminds (Galatians 3:15) some who were leading his converts astray that even to a man’s confirmed covenant no one adds further conditions. Who is it that dares to add conditions to the Covenant of God?
It is worthy of note that the limitation just combated would not, if maintained, restore unity to the Church. For in many countries, e.g. England and America, are two or more Churches, each claiming Apostolic succession.
Many practical difficulties forbid the sudden removal of the distinguishing and separating features of our modern Churches. For these are forms in which spiritual life has clothed itself. Now life has needs: and these needs determine its outward forms. Roughly to remove the outward forms would greatly endanger the inward life. In all attempts at union the needs of the spiritual life must be carefully kept in view.
15. Another method of reunion, involving no danger, and fruitful of blessing, is open to us. Let us have ever in view Paul’s ideal of One Church and One Lord; and let us work towards it in all practical ways. To do this, is not difficult. For, in spite of its many divisions, the Church is in a very real sense One; and has one interest as it has one life and One Lord. Let us then in the interior working of each denominational Church keep ever in view the interests of the Church Universal. Let no one try to advance his own Church at the cost of another; and let us embrace every opportunity of asserting the universal brotherhood of the people of God and of helping other Churches. Such co-operation will reveal the essential unity underlying the variety of modern Church life. And it is the best possible way to organic unity. Only through One Spirit can the Churches grow into One Body.
The above suggestion will forbid, as contrary to the ideal, the needless multiplication of separate Churches, or the division of existing Churches except in the very rare cases in which such division is necessary to avoid some greater evil. Such an emergency arose not long ago in Scotland. And I cannot doubt that the Disruption of the Established Church and the formation of the Free Church were an outflow of spiritual life and a great gain to the highest interests of the Kingdom of God. Another emergency was caused by the result of the Vatican Council. But such are very rare. It is our happiness to see Christian thought everywhere tending towards reunion of separated Churches.
It is often said that the divisions of the Church are a great hindrance to Christian work and progress. Certainly the rivalry of contending Churches has done much harm. But, as suggested above, there may be plurality and variety without contention. And the needless multiplication of Churches is undesirable. But the main divisions of the Church have been an immense gain to the Church as a whole. This is well shown in reference to the great separation in England caused by the Act of Uniformity, on p. 610 of Green’s Short History of the English People. No Church in modern times has prospered spiritually with undivided sway. Again and again rivalry has provoked spiritual activity. Different Churches embody different types of Christian life: and the types thus embodied are a lesson and an enrichment to the whole. This manifest gain reveals the hand of God even in the divisions of the one Church of Christ. These divisions, caused or made needful by man’s imperfection and sin, are God’s own mode of purifying and perfecting His Church and thus leading it to a higher unity. The sectional Churches may be compared to the chapels of a great cathedral. If at night we examine one of these by candlelight, it may seem to be an independent structure yet a fit and beautiful place in which to worship God. But when daylight floods the sanctuary, the little chapel is seen to be but a part of a more glorious whole. Its distinctive beauty remains and is more clearly seen. But our chief wonder is evoked by the grandeur of the vast structure of which it forms a part. In the rising Church of God, at present the scaffolding obscures to some eyes the work of others. But already from the workers, goes up to God a grand harmony of praise and Christian life. Let us maintain it. Soon the building will be complete, the scaffolding removed, and the one great Temple will appear, the realised conception of the eternal thought of God, radiant in His light, the everlasting and glorious home of the one family of God.
Dissertation 3. -- Paul’s Conception of Christ.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 206
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 3.
PAUL’S CONCEPTION OF CHRIST.
1. From the Church we now pass to its Head and Lord. I shall endeavour to reproduce in scanty outline Paul’s conception of Christ as portrayed in his Epistles, and then compare it with that of the other writers of the New Testament, in order thus to reproduce the impression actually made by Christ on the most intelligent of His early followers. This will supplement the short sketch given in Diss. i. of my Romans.
2. We notice that Paul never compares Christ with other men, even as superior to them. Throughout his letters we have no trace of that sense of human equality which no difference of rank or worth can ever altogether efface. To be Christ’s servant or slave, is to Paul a title of honour; and frees him from the need of seeking the favour of men: Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1; 1 Corinthians 7:22; Galatians 1:10. Every mention of Christ breathes profound reverence as for one infinitely greater than man and infinitely near to God.
In Romans 1:3, 4, 9; 5:10; 8:3, 29, 32; 1 Corinthians 1:9; 15:28; 2 Corinthians 1:19; Galatians 1:16; 2:20; 4:4, 6; Ephesians 4:13; Colossians 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:10, Christ is called the Son of God, evidently in a sense implying a unique relation to God. That He who died for us is God’s own Son, is appealed to in Romans 8:32 as a proof of God’s love to man. This suggests the case of a man who gives up his own son to save others, and thus confirms our inference that this title notes a relation different in kind from man’s relation to God. The same title is found, in an Epistle closely related to those of Paul, in Hebrews 1:2, 5, 8; 3:6; 4:14; 5:5, 8; 6:6; 7:3, 28; 10:29. And in Hebrews 3:6 Christ as the Son is contrasted with Moses who was but a faithful servant. In Romans 8:3 we read that God sent His own Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin. This can refer only to the incarnation of Christ. And it implies that before His birth He was already Son of God; or in other words that before His incarnation He occupied a unique relation to God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 8:9 and Philippians 2:6 imply the pre-existence of Him who emptied Himself and became poor. Colossians 1:15-17 asserts that the Son was earlier than the angels and the universe, and Himself created them; that whereas they were created He is Earliest-Born; and that even the angels and the universe were created not only by His agency but for Him.
In Romans 5:12-19 (cp. 1 Corinthians 15:22) Christ is compared with Adam in his relation to the race. Now Adam’s relation is unique. Not only was he the first man but from him sprang all others. That the later-born Son of man holds a relation to the race superior to that of its one human father, reveals His unique and superhuman dignity.
Christ, who made the world, will judge it: 2 Corinthians 5:10. And He will at the great day change the bodies of His dead servants into the likeness of His own glorious body.
3. A similar but more definite conception of Christ is embodied in the Gospel and First Epistle of John. In John 3:31 the Baptist says that whereas he is from the earth Christ is from above, thus asserting a radical difference. Christ calls conspicuous attention to Himself as the Bread of life, the Light of the world, the Good Shepherd, the one Way by which men may come to God, as the Resurrection and the Life: John 6:35; 8:12; 10:11; 14:6; 11:25. And, while ever distinguishing Himself from His disciples, He unites Himself with the Father under one personal pronoun: John 17:21, 22.
Christ calls Himself and is called by John the Son of God. And this title was understood by His enemies to imply equality with God: John 5:18; 10:33. Yet no hint is added suggesting that the inference was incorrect. In John 3:16; 1 John 4:9 (cp. John 1:14, 18) we read of the Only-begotten Son, a term asserting conspicuously a relation to God shared by none else. All judgment has been committed to the Son; and at His voice the dead will leave their graves and go forth to just retribution: John 5:22, 29, 30; 6:39, 40, 44, 54. Christ claims to be earlier than Abraham and the world: John 8:58; 17:5. By His agency was made whatever has been made: John 1:3. His own existence is traced to the beginning, without any hint, where we most expect it, that He then began to be: John 1:1. In John 20:28 He accepts from Thomas with evident approval the august title My Lord and my God. In John 1:1 we have an explicit assertion that the Word was God. John 1:14 leaves no doubt that the Word is the Person afterwards known to John as his beloved Master. And the usage of the entire New Testament, confirmed by the assertion in John 1:3, assures us that the predicate God denotes that in which the Creator differs from His creatures.
In the three Synoptist Gospels we have a type of teaching differing widely from the teaching both of Paul and of John. But this difference only emphasises the one conception of Christ common to all these documents. In Matthew 11:27 Christ claims that He alone and those taught by Him know God. Again we have the title Son of God as an assertion of unique dignity: Matthew 3:17; 4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 16:16; 17:5. In a parable recorded by all three Synoptists Christ represents Himself as the Son in contrast to all His predecessors who were only servants: especially Mark 12:6, one beloved son. Again and again Christ announces Himself as the Judge of the world, with angels as His attendants, thus asserting His superiority to them: e.g. Matthew 13:30, 41; 16:27; 25:31, 32.
To sum up. All the various writers of the New Testament agree to claim for Christ, or to represent Him as claiming for Himself, a relation to God as much above the greatest men of the Old Covenant as the position of the king’s son is above that of the noblest and highest of the king’s servants. They teach that in the great day, when the best of men will stand guilty before God, Christ will sit on the throne of God and pronounce judgment on all. Even the angels are His servants. Paul and John assert that the carpenter of Nazareth existed before the earliest archangel, the Creator of angels and of the universe. And John gives to Him, and records His acceptance of, the jealously-guarded title, God. Such honour to a contemporary is unique in the history and literature of the world.
4. The above quotations imply a Person distinct from the Father yet sharing with Him those infinite attributes which mark off the Creator from even the greatest of His creatures. For the solemn assertion in Colossians 1:16 that the universe was created by the agency of the Son cannot mean that it was created by the Father, or by some special attribute of the Father. Moreover, He who created is immediately afterwards described as the Head of the Church and the Firstborn from the dead, terms evidently revealing a Person distinct from the Father. Nor can John 1:3. For the Word is said in John 1:14 to have become flesh and to have dwelt visibly among men. These passages thus differ from Proverbs 8:22-31 where we have no indication of anything beyond a bold personification. The same personal and eternal distinction is implied in John 17:5, the glory which I had with Thee before the world was; and in John 17:24, Thou lovedst Me before the foundation of the world. This agreement of writers so different as Paul and John is complete proof that the ablest of the early Christians believed in an eternal Person distinct from the Father. We notice that the titles God and the only God are often given by Paul to the Father even to distinguish Him from the Son. This is explained by the subordinate relation to the Father which with Paul the Son ever occupies. So 1 Corinthians 3:23, Ye are Christ’s: and Christ is God’s; 1 Corinthians 11:3, Of every man Christ is Head… the Head of Christ is God; 1 Corinthians 15:28, Then shall the Son Himself be made subject to Him that subjected all things to Him, that God may be All in all. Thus even in relation to the Eternal Son the Father is supreme. This teaching of Paul receives explanation and supplement in other teaching attributed to Christ in the Fourth Gospel, and especially in John 5:19-30; 6:38, 39. Christ here asserts most plainly that His being is derived from, and His action guided by, the Father; and that His entire activity is unreserved devotion to the Father. And the context forbids us to limit this teaching to the human nature of the Son. Rather the whole picture suggests that, whatever the Son became in time and in visible human form, He already was in His eternal relation to the Father.
While asserting the existence of a divine Person other than the Father, Paul and John speak ever of one God. And this one God is distinctively the Father. So 1 Corinthians 8:6 One God, the Father… and one Lord: and 1 Corinthians 11:3; 12:5, 6. Similarly John 17:3, The only true God and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent. Yet in John 10:30; 17:11, 22 the Father and Son are said to be one thing. [The Greek neuter suggests very clearly unity of nature and relation, not of person. It may be illustrated by 1 Corinthians 3:8, He that plants and he that waters are “one thing.”] And this unity of the Father and Son is held up as a pattern for the mutual unity of believers. This suggests that the unity of Father and Son manifests itself in absolute harmony of character and aim. But this harmony is no mere agreement of two persons. It is manifestly an outflow of an essential relation of the Father and Son; especially of the Son’s eternal derivation from, and devotion to, the Father. We may conceive each Person of the Godhead as being alone in His own sphere: not three supreme Persons, but One, viz. the Father; not three Lords in the Church, but One, our Lord Jesus Christ; not three animating principles guiding men from within, but One, viz. the Holy Spirit, Himself a divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son, bearer of the presence and activity of the Father and the Son. Consequently, in our dealings with these three divine Persons we have to do with only One God.
The above conception of God, although profoundly mysterious, is yet intelligible. And it is involved in the actual words of Paul and John and in Matthew 28:19. To the thought and faith of the writers of the N.T. were present three distinct Persons existing from eternity in closest relation and in mutual intercourse and love: the Father supreme, existing and being what He is because He wills so to be and for no other reason, eternal and underived; the Son sharing to the full all that the Father has and is except only His Fatherhood i.e. His underived and absolute supremacy, being such as He is because the Father wills Him so to be; and the Spirit possessing all the attributes derived by the Son from the Father and going forth from the Father and the Son to be in the servants of God the divine source of a life of unreserved devotion to God. That this conception of God was actually held by the foremost of the immediate followers of Christ and was by them attributed to Christ, the Christian documents compel us to believe.
5. Not very much is said by Paul about the incarnation of the Son of God. But it is plainly referred to in 2 Corinthians 8:9, Because of you He became poor, though He was rich, that ye by His poverty might become rich. For only in reference to the abundance of His divine prerogatives could the Son be spoken of as rich. And this divine wealth is the only counterpart of the wealth with which Christ will enrich His people. This passage, therefore, asserts that at His incarnation the Son laid aside something which He previously possessed. The same is asserted in Philippians 2:7, He emptied Himself, under which passage I have ventured to suggest that for a time and for our salvation the Eternal Son, by a definite act, gave up the full exercise of His divine powers. This suggestion is in harmony with the above passages; and with the teaching that the miracles of Christ were wrought in the strength of the Spirit of God, that He knew not the day of His return, and that the Word not only put on flesh but became flesh.
6. Paul’s teaching about the death of Christ has been expounded on pages 224-228 of my Galatians. {Dissertation VII.} But very remarkable teaching, peculiar to Paul, about the relation of Christ to our salvation now demands careful attention.
Christ is constantly said to be the means or Agent, as of creation, so of our salvation. We are justified through the redemption which is in Christ, and reconciled to God through the death of His Son: Romans 3:24; 5:10. And our salvation is in Him, and He dwells in us. So Ephesians 1:3, 4, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessing in Christ, according as He has chosen us in Him; and Ephesians 2:13, ln Christ Jesus ye… have been made near, and elsewhere frequently. In Ephesians 3:17 we read, that Christ may dwell in your hearts; in Galatians 2:20, Christ lives in me. This language implies that Christ is both the encompassing element in which His people live and move and are safe and an animating principle moving them from within. The new life is also a sharing with Christ all that He has and is. So Romans 8:17, fellow-heirs with Christ; and Ephesians 2:5, risen and enthroned with Him. This being so, Christ is the pattern of the new life and of our future glory. So Romans 6:11, ‘in like manner (as Christ died to sin) reckon yourselves also to be dead to sin and living for God;’ Romans 8:29, predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son; Philippians 3:21, conformed to the body of His glory. Lastly, Christ is the aim and goal, as of creation, so of the new life. So 2 Corinthians 5:15, ‘He died that they who live may live for Him.’ And Colossians 1:16, ‘all things have been created through Him and for Him.’ In short, the new life is through Him, and in Him, and with Him, and like Him, and for Him. This remarkable teaching runs through the Epistles of Paul.
That the new life is in Christ, is almost as conspicuous with John as with Paul; but in the peculiar phrase abide in Him. And this phrase is traced to the lips of Christ. So John 6:56; 15:1-7; 17:21, 23; 1 John 2:5, 6, etc. This remarkable expression and the teaching underlying it are a conspicuous element in the two chief writers of the New Testament. Equally conspicuous, and peculiar to Paul, is his teaching that the great closing events of the life of Christ are reproduced in His people. And this in two ways. In Romans 6:2-11; Galatians 2:19, 20; 6:14; Colossians 2:12, 20; 3:1, 3 believers are said to be dead with Christ to sin, to the Law, to the world; buried with Him, and risen with Him. This can only mean that through the death of Christ they have escaped from the penalty and bondage of sin, from the curse pronounced by the Law, and from the despotism of the present world; and that their new life is a result of His resurrection. On the other hand, in Colossians 2:13 and Ephesians 2:1-6 they are said to have been at one time dead by reason of their sins but now made alive and risen and enthroned with Christ. This phraseology teaches the utter and hopeless ruin of sinners; and teaches that through the life which entered into the dead body of Christ a new life has entered into those who believe in Him.
This conspicuous and peculiar teaching of Paul has no parallel in the literature of the world. And it reveals the deep impression made upon him by the death and resurrection of Christ. Evidently, he believed that in some special sense our salvation comes through Christ’s death upon the cross, that He who died had in very truth risen from the dead, that of His resurrection our new life is a result, and that our life is a sharing of His life and is conditioned by inward union with Him. No one could speak thus in reference to a man. Every line of Paul’s teaching about Christ assumes His divinity.
The foregoing exposition of doctrine has historic worth. For the Christian documents prove that the early followers of Christ, the men who gained for Him the homage of all succeeding ages, agreed in a belief that their Master occupies a relation to God different in kind from, and higher than, that of even the loftiest and earliest creatures. And, as we have seen, this conception of Christ involves a new conception of God, a conception unknown to the speculations of heathen philosophy and to the definite teaching of the Old Testament. This new conception survived the chaos of Gnostic teaching so prevalent in the second century: it was formulated in the fourth century in the Nicene Creed, the great historic creed of the Church of Christ: and in all ages it has been held firmly by an overwhelming majority of the followers of Christ. With scarcely an exception those who during the last eighteen centuries have done most for the highest welfare of men have held firmly the remarkable belief about Christ which we have now traced to the unanimous agreement of His earliest followers.
Whence came this new and strange and persistent belief about Christ and about God? Certainly not from contemporary thought, Jewish or Gentile. For contemporary literature, even the writings of Philo, contains nothing which has more than a slight outward resemblance to it. Its source must be sought elsewhere.
We have only one alternative. Either the conception before us came actually from the lips of Christ, or we are compelled to believe that His earliest disciples, the chief agents of a spiritual revolution which has changed and saved the world, made for Him a claim which He would Himself have rejected with horror as awful blasphemy, and set forth most serious error about the nature of God. This latter suggestion is absurd. We are therefore compelled to believe that Christ actually claimed to be the Eternal Son of God. Thus the Christian documents contain, apart from any special authority of Holy Scripture, complete historical proof that Christ actually claimed the august dignity given to Him by the writers of the New Testament. And the moral grandeur of the picture of Christ therein pourtrayed, together with the effect of Christianity upon the world, forbid the thought that the Great Teacher was Himself in serious error, or knowingly taught error, touching His own relation to God. Decisive as is this argument, it is by no means the whole historical proof of the divinity of Christ. For the homage paid to Him by Paul and his companions can be traced to their confident belief that their Master had risen from the dead. If this belief was false, His disciples were in error not only about His nature but about a matter of fact said to have taken place in their own day and in the city in which the Gospel gained its first great victories. The unlikeliness of this supposition, I have already in my Credentials of the Gospel endeavoured to show. Our only alternative is to believe either that a complicated tissue of delusions without parallel among the errors of mankind has saved the world or to believe that with God in eternity is One who shares to the full, by derivation from Him, and with unreserved devotion to Him, whatever He has and is, the Eternal Son of an Eternal Father. Difficult as is this latter belief, it is much less difficult than the historic impossibilities involved in its denial. We therefore accept it with confidence and with adoring gratitude as an assured result of our study of the writings of Paul compared with the rest of the New Testament and read in the light of the present state and the past history of the world.
Dissertation 4. -- The Gospel of Paul.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 214
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 4.
THE GOSPEL OF PAUL.
1. In Diss. i. of my Commentary on Romans I endeavoured to show that that Epistle was a systematic exposition of the Gospel as Paul understood it, comprising five great doctrines, viz. (1) That God accepts as righteous all who believe the Gospel, this doctrine being put prominently forward as the foundation-stone of the teaching of Paul; and (2) That this salvation comes to us through the death of the Son of God: also (3) That God designed us to be, by union with Christ, sharers of the life of Christ, a life devoted to God; and (4) That this design is realised in each one through faith and in proportion to his faith, (5) Through the agency of the Holy Spirit. In other words, we have here Justification through faith, and through the death of Christ; Sanctification in Christ, through faith, and through the Holy Spirit. I also tried to show that the confidence with which Paul asserted these doctrines, taken in connection with the deep underlying harmony between them and the teaching of the other very dissimilar documents of the New Testament, affords complete historical proof that each of these doctrines was actually taught by Christ. We will now look at them again for a moment in the light cast upon them by the Epistles annotated in this volume; and thus supplement the notes on these several doctrines under Romans 3:22, 26; 6:10, 11; 8:4, 39.
2. A remarkable re-echo of Romans 1:17; 3:21, 22 is found in Philippians 3:9, not having a righteousness of my own, that which is from law, but that which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness from God on the condition of faith. We have here Paul’s foundation doctrine of Justification through Faith expressed in his favourite phraseology. That faith is a condition of salvation, is implied in Philippians 1:27, contend together for the faith of the Gospel; and in Philippians 1:29, to you it is given not only to believe in Him but also to suffer on His be-half. Paul had heard of the faith of the Colossian Christians: Colossians 1:4. A present and conscious salvation, which is involved in the doctrine of Justification through Faith, is implied in Colossians 1:13, 14: who rescued us out of the authority of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of our sins. Similarly, Colossians 1:21, you who were formerly alienated and enemies in your mind in wicked works, now He has reconciled. Salvation through Faith is plainly stated in Colossians 2:12, in whom ye were also raised through faith in the working of God who raised Him from the dead; and a present salvation in Colossians 2:13, having forgiven us all our trespasses. Assured salvation speaks again in Ephesians 1:7, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses; and in Ephesians 2:8, by grace ye are saved through faith. Faith as a condition of salvation is implied also in Ephesians 1:13, having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit; and in Ephesians 1:19, the exceeding greatness of His power towards you that believe. These incidental and unexpected references to faith as a condition and means of salvation are in remarkable agreement with the unique place given to faith in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. And the mention of forgiveness of sins in Colossians 1:1; 2:13; Ephesians 1:7 is a close coincidence with Acts 13:38, 39, where in a recorded address of Paul the same words are used as an equivalent to Justification through Faith.
Under Romans 3:22 and in Dissertations iv.-vi. of my Galatians I have shown that this last doctrine, expressed however in phraseology very different from that of Paul, underlies or is in close agreement with all the various types of teaching found in the New Testament, in a manner which affords complete historical proof that it came from the lips of Christ.
3. The second great doctrine of Paul, viz. that salvation comes to us through the death of Christ, that for this end He died, and that the need for this costly means of salvation lay in our sins looked upon in the light of the justice of God, finds abundant expression in the Epistles now before us. It explains Philippians 3:10, fellowship of His suffering, being conformed to His death. It is plainly stated in Colossians 1:22, now He has reconciled us in the body of His flesh through death; and is suggested by Colossians 1:24, the sufferings of Christ… on behalf of His body, the Church. The same doctrine finds conspicuous and remarkable expression in Colossians 2:14, having blotted out the handwriting against us by the decrees; and He took it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. These words imply clearly that the death of Christ removed an obstacle to salvation which had its root in the Law. Still more clear is Ephesians 1:7, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses; also Ephesians 2:13, ye who formerly were far off became near in the blood of Christ; and Ephesians 2:16, that He might reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.
These quotations may supplement my note under Romans 3:26, and Diss. vii. of my Galatians, where I have shown that the same doctrine in almost the same words runs through the New Testament. And from the Apostles’ days to our own day it has been firmly believed by almost all Christians. This remarkable agreement in so remarkable a doctrine points to a common source. And this can be no other than the Great Teacher whom all Christians worship.
4. That God designs all who are justified through faith to live a new life of unreserved loyalty to Himself like the loyalty of Christ, is plainly taught in Philippians 1:20, 21; 2:5-8; Colossians 1:22; 2:6, 7; 3:10-15; Ephesians 1:4; 2:10; 4:20-24; 5:1, 2, 27; and is implied throughout these Epistles. That this new life is conditioned by faith, we read in Philippians 1:25, 29; Colossians 2:7; Ephesians 1:19; 3:17; and that the Spirit of God is its immediate superhuman source, in Philippians 3:3; Colossians 1:8; Ephesians 1:13, 17; 2:22; 3:16; 4:30. These three doctrines I have further expounded under Romans 6:10, 11; 8:4.
5. We have now, by consecutive study of most of his Epistles, reproduced in outline the Gospel as Paul understood and preached it. And so clearly marked are its main features that we cannot doubt the substantial correctness of the picture. This Gospel, thus reproduced, we have at various points compared with the teaching of other documents of the New Testament. And our comparison, scanty though it has been, has revealed to us a substantial harmony underlying these various types of teaching. This harmony is an historical fact of the utmost importance; and demands explanation. Its importance is increased by the universal reception of these doctrines, almost unknown as they were before the time of Christ, wherever there are Christians; and by the effect of Christianity upon the world, as attested by comparison of Christian and non-Christian nations. The facts just adduced greatly strengthen the argument at the close of Diss. iii. For this Gospel and the unique and superhuman dignity of Christ must stand or fall together. Practically, all who accept or reject the one accept or reject the other. Consequently, either these doctrines are true and Christ is the Eternal Son of God or all His early followers whose writings have come down to us have utterly misrepresented both the Teacher and His teaching and have buried them under a thick tissue of most serious error. Yet these men have rescued their Master’s name from comparative oblivion, have gained for Him the homage of the world, and have initiated a movement which has turned back from the ruin to which it was hastening the entire current of human history and has saved the world. Results so glorious are not born of error. And if not, the Gospel preached and expounded by Paul is indeed good news from God.
Such are the results, up to this point, of our study of the Epistles of Paul. We have found in them a full and harmonious account of his teaching, and of his conception of the dignity of the Great Master from whom he learnt it. This religious teaching and this conception of Christ we have compared with the other documents preserved for us in the New Testament. And this comparison, viewed in the light of the effect of Christianity upon the world, has convinced us that Paul rightly interpreted the teaching and the claims of Christ, and has convinced us that His teaching is true and His claims just. Thus Paul has led us to Christ; and in Christ we have found Eternal Life. The only Epistles of Paul not yet annotated by me are two short letters, the earliest extant, written on his second missionary journey to the lately founded Church at Thessalonica, and three short letters to two of his most valued companions, written apparently after liberation from his first imprisonment at Rome. Of these, the former group contains the fullest account we have of Paul’s teaching about the Second Coming of Christ, and the latter our most complete picture of the organization of the Churches founded by the Apostles. But they do not in any way modify the results we have derived from the Epistles already annotated. —————————————————————————————
Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.
Adam Clarke
Introduction to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesian
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 3
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE
APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
IN many points of view the Epistle to the Ephesians presents a variety of difficulties. A learned man calls it “the most inartificial piece of composition in the universe:” this is not correct if it be intended to convey a censure on the composition itself; for the subject (which is a vindication of the providence and mercy of God, in admitting the Gentiles into his Church, and forming one flock of them and the converted Jews, giving them the same privileges which his peculiar people had enjoyed almost exclusively for 2000 years) has led the apostle to make such a variety of references to the Mosaic economy and its peculiarities, as, without this consideration, will make many parts of the epistle seem obscure to most readers; and this obscurity may be very improperly laid to the charge of inartificial composition: good judges, however, have allowed it to be one of the most sublime compositions of the kind that ever came from the pen of man. This was the opinion of Grotius.
The subject in this and the Epistle to the Colossians is certainly the same; and as it is supposed that they were written about the same time, it is natural to expect a similarity of expression. This subject, and others connected with these epistles, Dr. Paley has discussed with his usual sagacity; the substance of whose reasonings I beg leave to present to the reader.
Section 1.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 3
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 15: “την ενεργειανÈ (source keys requiring collation: energeianÈ)”; “ενεργειαÇ (source keys requiring collation: energeiaÇ)”. paragraph 19: “exactly the same order: αγαπη, love, is also found”. paragraph 21: “επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων; αφηςÇ αυξει; την αυξησινÇ (source keys requiring collation: epicorhgiavÇ, afhvÇ, auxhsinÇ)”. source PDF page 7: “one place it is τους πιστευοντας κατα την ενεργειανÈ in the other δια της πιστεως ενεργειας. Here, therefore, we have (source keys requiring collation: energeianÈ)”; “the same Greek term, ενεργειαÇ in one place it (source keys requiring collation: energeiaÇ)”. source PDF page 8: “together in both places; επιχορηγουμενον answering to επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων αφων to δια πασης αφηςÇ αυξει την αυξησιν to ποιειται την αυξησινÇ and … (source keys requiring collation: epicorhgiavÇ, afhvÇ, auxhsinÇ)”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 3, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 7, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 8. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 3; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 7; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified); Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 1.
This epistle and the Epistle to the Colossians appear to have been transmitted to their respective Churches by the same messenger: “But that ye also may know my affairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, shall make known to you all things; whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts;” Ephesians 6:21, 22. This text, if it do not expressly declare, clearly (I think) intimates, that the letter was sent by Tychicus. The words made use of in the Epistle to the Colossians are very similar to these, and afford the same implication that Tychicus, in conjunction with Onesimus, was the bearer of the letter to that Church: “All my state shall Tychicus declare unto you, who is a beloved brother, and a faithful minister and fellow servant in the Lord; whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that he might know your estate, and comfort your hearts; with Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you. They shall make known unto you all things which are done here;” Colossians 4:7-9. Both epistles represent the writer as under imprisonment for the Gospel, and both treat of the same general subject. The Epistle therefore to the Ephesians and the Epistle to the Colossians import to be two letters written by the same person, at or nearly at the same time, and upon the same subject, and to have been sent by the same messenger. Now, every thing in the sentiments, order, and diction of the two writings, corresponds with what might be expected from this circumstance of identity or cognation in their original. The leading doctrine of both epistles is the union of Jews and Gentiles under the Christian dispensation; and that doctrine in both is established by the same arguments, or, more properly speaking, illustrated by the same similitudes: “one head,” “one body,” “one new man,” “one temple,” are in both epistles the figures under which the society of believers in Christ, and their common relation to him as such, is represented. The ancient, and, as had been thought, the indelible distinction between Jew and Gentile, in both epistles, is declared to be “now abolished by his cross.” Beside this consent in the general tenor of the two epistles, and in the run also and warmth of thought with which they are composed, we may naturally expect, in letters produced under the circumstances in which these appear to have been written, a closer resemblance of style and diction than between other letters of the same person but of distant dates, or between letters adapted to different occasions. In particular, we may look for many of the same expressions, and sometimes for whole sentences being alike; since such expressions and sentences would be repeated in the second letter (whichever that was) as yet fresh in the author’s mind, from the writing of the first. This repetition occurs in the following examples:— Ephesians 1:7: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.”
Besides the sameness of the words, it is farther remarkable that the sentence is, in both places, preceded by the same introductory idea. In the Epistle to the Ephesians it is the “Beloved,” (ηγαπημενω,) in that to the Colossians it is “his dear Son,” (υιου της αγαπης αυτου, the Son of his love,) “in whom we have redemption.” The sentence appears to have been suggested to the mind of the writer, by the idea which had accompanied it before.
Ephesians 1:10: “All things, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him.”
Colossians 1:20: “All things by him, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”
This quotation is the more observable, because the connecting of things in earth with things in heaven is a very singular sentiment, and found no where else but in these two epistles. The words also are introduced and followed by a train of thought nearly alike. They are introduced by describing the union which Christ had effected; and they are followed by telling the Gentile Churches that they were incorporated into it. Ephesians 3:2: “The dispensation of the grace of God, which is given me to you-ward.”
Colossians 1:25: “The dispensation of God, which is given to me for you.”
Of these sentences it may likewise be observed, that the accompanying ideas are similar. In both places they are immediately preceded by the mention of his present sufferings; in both places they are immediately followed by the mention of the mystery which was the great subject of his preaching.
Ephesians 5:19: “In psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”
Colossians 3:16: “In psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”
Ephesians 6:22: “Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts.” Colossians 4:8: “Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that he might know your estate, and comfort your hearts.” In these examples we do not perceive a cento of phrases gathered from one composition and strung together in the other; but the occasional occurrence of the same expression to a mind a second time revolving the same ideas.
2. Whoever writes two letters, or two discourses, nearly upon the same subject, and at no great distance of time, but without any express recollection of what he had written before, will find himself repeating some sentences in the very order of the words in which he had already used them; but he will more frequently find himself employing some principal terms, with the order inadvertently changed, or with the order disturbed by the intermixture of other words and phrases expressive of ideas rising up at the time; or in many instances repeating not single words, nor yet whole sentences, but parts and fragments of sentences. Of all these varieties, the examination of these two epistles will furnish plain examples; and I should rely upon this class of instances more than upon the last; because, although an impostor might transcribe into a forgery entire sentences and phrases, yet the dislocation of words, the partial recollection of phrases and sentences, the intermixture of new terms and new ideas with terms and ideas before used, which will appear in the examples that follow, and which are the natural properties of writings produced under the circumstances in which these epistles are represented to have been composed, would not, I think, have occurred to the invention of a forger; nor, if they had occurred, would they have been so easily executed. This studied variation was a refinement in forgery which I believe did not exist; or if we can suppose it to have been practised in the instances adduced below, why, it may be asked, was not the same art exercised upon those which we have collected in the preceding class?
Ephesians 1:19-2:5: “Towards us who believe according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead; (and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come. And hath put all things under his feet; and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all;) and you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins, (wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience among whom also we all had our conversation in times past, in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,) even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ.”
Colossians 2:12, 13: “Through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead: and you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of the flesh, hath he quickened together with him.” Out of the long quotation from the Ephesians, take away the parentheses, and you have left a sentence almost in terms the same as the short quotation from the Colossians. The resemblance is more visible in the original than in our translation; for what is rendered in one place “the working,” and in another “the operation,” is the same Greek term, ενεργειαÇ in one place it is τους πιστευοντας κατα την ενεργειανÈ in the other δια της πιστεως ενεργειας. Here, therefore, we have the same sentiment, and nearly in the same words; but, in the Ephesians, twice broken or interrupted by incidental thoughts, which St. Paul, as his manner was enlarges upon by the way, and then returns to the thread of his discourse. It is interrupted the first time by a view which breaks in upon his mind of the exaltation of Christ, and the second time by a description of heathen depravity. I have only to remark, that Griesbach, in his very accurate edition, gives the parentheses very nearly in the same manner in which they are here placed; and that without any respect to the comparison which we are proposing.
Ephesians 4:2-4: “With all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling.”
Colossians 3:12-15: “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye: and, above all these things, put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness; and let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body.”
In these two quotations the words ταπεινοφροσυνη, πραστης, μακροθυμια, ανεχομενοι αλληλων, lowliness, meekness,
long-suffering, forebearing one another, occur in exactly the same order: αγαπη, love, is also found in both, but in a different connection; συνδεσμος της ειρηνης, the bond of peace, answers to συνδεσμος της τελειοτητος, the bond of perfectness; εκληθητε εν ενι σωματι, called into one spirit, to εν σωμα καθως και εκληθητε εν μια ελπιδι, one body, even as ye are called into one hope; yet is this similitude found in the midst of sentences otherwise very different.
Ephesians 4:16: “From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body.” Colossians 2:19: “From which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.”
In these quotations are read εξ ου παν το σωμα συμβιβαζομενον, from whom the whole body fitly joined together, in both places; επιχορηγουμενον answering to επιχορηγιαςÇ διατων αφων to δια πασης αφηςÇ αυξει την αυξησιν to ποιειται την αυξησινÇ and yet the sentences are considerably diversified in other parts. Ephesians 4:32: “And be kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another; even as God, for Christ’s sake, hath forgiven you.” Colossians 3:13: “Forbearing one an other, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.”
Here we have “forgiving one another, even as God, for Christ’s sake (εν χριστω) hath forgiven you,” in the first quotation, substantially repeated in the second. But in the second the sentence is broken by the interposition of a new clause, “If any man have a quarrel against any;” and the latter part is a little varied; instead of “God in Christ,” it is “Christ hath forgiven you.” Ephesians 4:22-24: “That ye put on, concerning the former conversation, the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” Colossians 3:9, 10: “Seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of him that created him.”
In these quotations, “putting off the old man, and putting on the new,” appears in both. The idea is farther explained by calling it a renewal; in the one, “renewed in the spirit of your mind,” in the other, “renewed in knowledge.” In both, the new man is said to be formed according to the same model; in the one, he is “after God created in righteousness and true holiness;” in the other, “he is renewed after the image of him who created him.” In a word, it is the same person writing upon a kindred subject, with the terms and ideas which he had before employed still floating in his memory.
In these comparisons we often perceive the reason why the writer, though expressing the same idea, uses a different term; namely, because the term before used is employed in the sentence under a different form: thus, in the quotations under our eye, the new man is καινος ανθρωπος in the Ephesians, and τον νεον in the Colossians; but then it is because τον καινον is used in the next word, ανακαινουμενον, being renewed. Ephesians 5:6-8: “Because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience: be not ye therefore partakers with them; for ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord walk as children of light.”
Colossians 3:6-8: “For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience; in the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. But now ye also put off all these.”
These verses afford a specimen of that partial resemblance which is only to be met with when no imitation is designed, when no studied recollection is employed; but when the mind, exercised upon the same subject, is left to the spontaneous return of such terms and phrases as, having been used before, may happen to present themselves again. The sentiment of both passages is throughout alike; half of that sentiment, the denunciation of God’s wrath, is expressed in identical words; the other half, viz. the admonition to quit their former conversation, in words entirely different. Ephesians 5:15, 16: “See then that ye walk circumspectly; not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time.
Colossians 4:5: “Walk in wisdom towards them that are without, redeeming the time.”
This is another example of that mixture which we remarked of sameness and variety in the language of one writer. “Redeeming the time,” (exagorazomenoi ton kairon,) is a literal repetition. “Walk not as fools but as wise,” (peripateite mh asofoi, allJ wv sofoi,) answers exactly in sense, and nearly in terms, to “walk in wisdom,” (en sofia peripateite.) peripateite akribwv is a very different phrase, but is intended to convey precisely the same idea as peripateite prov touv exw. akribwv is not well rendered “circumspectly.” It means what in modern speech we should call “correctly;” and when we advise a person to behave “correctly,” our advice is always given with a reference “to the opinion of others,” prov touv exw. “Walk correctly, redeeming the time,” i.e. suiting yourselves to the difficulty and ticklishness of the times in which we live, “because the days are evil.”
Ephesians 6:19, 20: “And (praying) for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the Gospel, for which I am an ambassador in bonds, that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.”
Colossians 4:3, 4: “Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds, that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak.” In these quotations the phrase, “as I ought to speak,” (wv dei me lalhsai,) the words “utterance,” (logov,) a mystery,” (musthriov,) “open,” (anoixh and en anoixei,) are the same. “To make known the mystery of the Gospel,” (gnwrisai to musthrion,) answers to “make it manifest;” (ina fanerwsw auto;) “for which I am an ambassador in bonds,” (eper ou presbeuw en alusei,) to “for which I am also in bonds,” (diJ o kai dedemai.)
Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as unto the Lord; for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church; and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word; that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself; for no man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church; for we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband. Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honour thy father and thy mother, (which is the first commandment with promise,) that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live long on the earth. And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men; knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening; knowing that your Master also is in heaven, neither is there respect of persons with him.” Colossians 3:18: “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them. Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God: and whatever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done; and there is no respect of persons. Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.”
The passages marked by Italics in the quotation from the Ephesians bear a strict resemblance, not only in signification but in terms, to the quotation from the Colossians. Both the words and the order of the words are in many clauses a duplicate of one another. In the Epistle to the Colossians these passages are laid together; in that to the Ephesians, they are divided by intermediate matter, especially by a long digressive allusion to the mysterious union between Christ and his Church; which possessing, as Mr. Locke hath well observed, the mind of the apostle, from being an incidental thought grows up into the principal subject. The affinity between, these two passages, in signification, in terms, and in the order of the words, is closer than can be pointed out between any parts of any two epistles in the volume.
If the reader, would see how the same subject is treated by a different hand, and how distinguishable it is from the production of the same pen, let him turn to the second and third chapters of the First Epistle of St. Peter. The duties of servants, of wives, and of husbands, are enlarged upon in that epistle, as they are in the Epistle to the Ephesians; but the subjects both occur in a different order, and the train of sentiment subjoined to each is totally unlike.
3. In two letters issuing from the same person, nearly at the same time, and upon the same general occasion, we may expect to trace the influence of association in the order in which the topics follow one another. Certain ideas universally or usually suggest others. Here the order is what we call natural, and from such an order nothing can be concluded. But when the order is arbitrary, yet alike, the concurrence indicates the effect of that principle, by which ideas, which have been once joined, commonly revisit the thoughts together. The epistles under consideration furnish the two following remarkable instances of this species of agreement. Ephesians 4:24: “And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness: wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour, for we are members one of another.”
Colossians 3:9: “Lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge.”
The vice of “lying,” or a correction of that vice, does not seem to bear any nearer relation to the “putting on the new man,” than a reformation in any other article of morals. Yet these two ideas we see stand in both epistles in immediate connection.
Ephesians 5:20-22: “Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”
Colossians 3:17: “Whatsoever ye do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.” In both these passages submission follows giving of thanks, without any similitude in the ideas which should account for the transition. It is not necessary to pursue the comparison between the two epistles farther. The argument which results from it stands thus: No two other epistles contain a circumstance which indicates that they were written at the same, or nearly at the same, time. No two other epistles exhibit so many marks of correspondency and resemblance. If the original which we ascribe to these two epistles be the true one, that is, if they were both really written by St. Paul, and both sent to their respective destination by the same messenger, the similitude is, in all points, what should be expected to take place. If they were forgeries, then the mention of Tychicus in both epistles, and in a manner which shows that he either carried or accompanied both epistles, was inserted for the purpose of accounting for their similitude; or else, the structure of the epistles was designedly adapted to the circumstance: or lastly, the conformity between the contents of the forgeries, and what is thus directly intimated concerning their date, was only a happy accident. Not one of these three suppositions will gain credit with a reader who peruses the epistles with attention, and who reviews the several examples we have pointed out, and the observations with which they were accompanied.
Section 2.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 13
SECTION 2.
There is such a thing as a peculiar word or phrase cleaving, as it were, to the memory of a writer or speaker, and presenting itself to his utterance at every turn. When we observe this we call it a cant word, or a cant phrase. It is a natural effect of habit, and would appear more frequently than it does, had not the rules of good writing taught the ear to be offended with the iteration of the same sound, and often-times caused us to reject, on that account, the word which offered itself first to our recollection. With a writer who, like St. Paul, either knew not these rules, or disregarded them, such words will not be avoided. The truth is, an example of this kind runs through several of his epistles, and in the epistle before us abounds; and that is in the word riches, (πλουτος,) used metaphorically as an augmentative of the idea to which it happens to be subjoined. Thus “the riches of his glory,” “his riches in glory,” “riches of the glory of his inheritance,” “riches of the glory of this mystery,” Romans 9:23; Ephesians 3:16; Ephesians 1:18; Colossians 1:27; “riches of his grace,” twice in the Ephesians, Ephesians 1:7; 2:7; “riches of the full assurance of understanding,” Colossians 2:2; “riches of his goodness,” Romans 2:4; “riches of the wisdom of God,” Romans 11:33; “riches of Christ,” Ephesians 3:8. In a like sense the adjective, Romans 10:12, “Rich unto all that call upon him,” Ephesians 2:4, “Rich in mercy;” 1 Timothy 6:18, “Rich in good works.” Also the adverb Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.” This figurative use of the word, though so familiar to St. Paul, does not occur in any part of the New Testament, except once in the Epistle of St. James, James 2:5 “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith?” where it is manifestly suggested by the antithesis. I propose the frequent, yet seemingly. unaffected, use of this phrase in the epistle before us, as one internal mark of its genuineness.
Section 3.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 14
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 2: “υμων συστατικωνÈ η (source keys requiring collation: sustatikwnÈ)”. source PDF page 15: “2 Corinthians 3:1 ει μη χρηζομεν, ως τινες, συστατικων επιστολων προς υμας, η εξ υμων συστατικωνÈ η επιστολη ημων υμεις εστε, εγγεγραμυενη εν ται… (source keys requiring collation: sustatikwnÈ)”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 15. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 15; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 3.
There is another singularity in St. Paul’s style which, wherever it is found, may be deemed a badge of authenticity; because, if it were noticed, it would not, I think, be imitated, inasmuch as it almost always produces embarrassment and interruption in the reasoning. This singularity is a species of digression which may probably, I think, be denominated going off at a word. It is turning aside from the subject upon the occurrence of some particular word, forsaking the train of thought then in hand, and entering upon a parenthetic sentence in which that word is the prevailing term. I shall lay before the reader some examples of this, collected from the other epistles, and then propose two examples of it which are found in the Epistle to the Ephesians. 2 Corinthians 2:14, at the word savour: “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. (For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life; and who is sufficient for these things?) For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.” Again, 2 Corinthians 3:1, at the word epistle: “Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or of commendation from you? (Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts known and read of all men; forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.”) The position of the words in the original shows, more strongly than in the translation, that it was the occurrence of the word επιστολη which gave birth to the sentence as follows, 2 Corinthians 3:1: ει μη χρηζομεν, ως τινες, συστατικων επιστολων προς υμας, η εξ υμων συστατικωνÈ η επιστολη ημων υμεις εστε, εγγεγραμυενη εν ταις καρδιαις ημων, γινωσκομενη και αναγινωσκομενη υπο παντων ανθρωπων. φανερουμενοι οτι
εστε επιστολη χριστου διακονηθεισα υφ᾽ ημων, εγγεγραμενη ου μελανι, αλλα πνευματι θεου ζωντος, ουκ εν πλαξι λιθιναις,αλλ᾽ ες πλαξι καρδιας σαρκιναις.
Again, 2 Corinthians 3:12, &c., at the word veil: “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished. But their minds were blinded; for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament, which veil is done away in Christ; but even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart; nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away, (now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.) But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.”
Who sees not that this whole allegory of the veil arises entirely out of the occurrence of the word, in telling us that “Moses put a veil over his face,” and that it drew the apostle away from the proper subject of his discourse, the dignity of the office in which he was engaged? which subject he fetches up again almost in the words with which he had left it: “Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.” The sentence which he had before been going on with, and in which he had been interrupted by the veil, was, “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech.”
In the Epistle to the Ephesians the reader will remark two instances in which the same habit of composition obtains; he will recognize the same pen. One he will find, Ephesians 4:8-11, at the word ascended: “Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts into men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles,” &c.
The other appears, Ephesians 5:12-15, at the word light: “For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret: but all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light; (for whatsoever doth make manifest, is light; wherefore he saith, Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light;) see then that ye walk circumspectly:”
Section 4.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 16
Editorial note: Source collation note — paragraph 2: “the more remarkable, as αλυσις (a chain) is no”. Compared with CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 16, CLA_EPH.PDF PDF p. 17. The source-font or layout comparison does not securely establish every letter, mark or local sequence in these passages. The flagged language readings or layout are retained; the original source pages should be consulted for these specific readings. Additional-source investigation: an automated comparison of surrounding English text located possible corresponding passages in OCR from separately digitized printed volumes. The linked scan pages are research locators; their images have not been collated for this note's flagged readings. OCR agreement does not verify Greek or Hebrew letters, diacritics, word order, or table layout. The flagged readings or layout remain uncertain. CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 16; CLA_EPH.PDF, PDF page 17; Additional printed-scan page locator (OCR context only; flagged reading unverified).
SECTION 4.
As our epistle purports to have been written during St. Paul’s imprisonment at Rome, which lies beyond the period to which the Acts of the Apostles brings up his history, and as we have seen and acknowledged that the epistle contains no reference to any transaction at Ephesus during the apostle’s residence in that city, we cannot expect that it should supply many marks of agreement with the narrative. One coincidence, however, occurs, and a coincidence of that minute and less obvious kind, which, as hath been repeatedly observed, is of all others the most to be relied upon. Ephesians 6:19, 20, we read, “Praying for me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the Gospel, for which I am an ambassador in bonds.” “In bonds,” εν αλυσει, in a chain. In the twenty-eighth chapter of the Acts we are informed that Paul, after his arrival at Rome, was suffered to dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him. Dr. Lardner has shown that this mode of custody was in use amongst the Romans, and that whenever it was adopted, the prisoner was bound to the soldier by a single chain: in reference to which St. Paul, in the twentieth verse of this chapter, {Acts 28:20} tells the Jews, whom he had assembled, “For this cause, therefore, have I called for you, to see you and to speak with you, because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain,” την υλυσιν ταυτην περικειμαι. It is in exact conformity, therefore, with the truth of St. Paul’s situation at the time, that he declares of himself in the epistle, πρεσβευω εν αλυσει. And the exactness is the more remarkable, as αλυσις (a chain) is no where used in the singular number to express any other kind of custody. When the prisoner’s hands or feet were bound together, the word was δεσμοι, (bonds;) Acts 26:29. When the prisoner was confined between two soldiers, as in the case of Peter, Acts 12:6, two chains were employed; and it is said, upon his miraculous deliverance, that the “chains (αλυσεις, in the plural) fell from his hands.”
If it can be suspected that the writer of the present epistle, who in no other particular appears to have availed himself of the information concerning St. Paul delivered in the Acts, had, in this verse, borrowed the word which he read in that book, and had adapted his expression to what he found there recorded of St. Paul’s treatment at Rome; in short, that the coincidence here noted was effected by craft and design, I think it a strong reply, to remark that in the parallel passage of the Epistle to the Colossians the same allusion is not preserved; the words there are, “praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds,” δι᾽ ο και δεδεμαι. After what has been shown in a preceding section, there can be little doubt that these two epistles were written by the same person.
Preface to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians.
CLA_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 18
PREFACE TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE
APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
EPHESUS was a city of Ionia, in Asia Minor, and once the metropolis of that part of the world. The ancient city was situated at the mouth of the river Cayster, on the shore of the Ægean Sea, about 50 miles south of Smyrna. The Ephesus in which St. Paul founded a Church, and which for a time flourished gloriously, was not the ancient Ephesus; for that was destroyed, and a new city of the same name was built by Lysimachus. This most famous of all the Asiatic cities is now a miserable village, composed of mean huts formed out of the ruins of its once magnificent structures; and these huts are now the residence of about forty or fifty Turkish families, without a single Christian among them! For other particulars see the note on Acts 18:19.
It is, however, a doubt with many learned men, whether this epistle was sent to the Church at Ephesus. They think that the proper direction is, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans; and suppose it to be the same which the apostle mentions, Colossians 4:16: “When this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.” Dr. Paley’s arguments in the affirmative are entitled to much regard.
“Although it does not appear to have ever been disputed that the epistle before us was written by St. Paul, yet it is well known that a doubt has long been entertained concerning the persons to whom it was addressed. The question is founded partly in some ambiguity in the external evidence. Marcion, a heretic of the second century, as quoted by Tertullian, a father in the beginning of the third, calls it, The Epistle to the Laodiceans. From what we know of Marcion, his judgment is little to be relied upon; nor is it perfectly clear that Marcion was rightly understood by Tertullian. If, however, Marcion be brought to prove that some copies in his time gave εν λαοδικεια in the superscription, his testimony, if it be truly interpreted, is not diminished by his heresy; for, as Grotius observes, ‘cur in ea re mentiretur nihil erat causæ.’ The name εν εφεσω, in Ephesus, in the first verse, upon which word singly depends the proof that the epistle was written to the Ephesians, is not read in all the manuscripts now extant. I admit, however, that the external evidence preponderates with a manifest excess on the side of the received reading. The objection therefore principally arises from the contents of the epistle itself, which, in many respects militate with the supposition that it was written to the Church of Ephesus. According to the history, St. Paul had passed two whole years at Ephesus, Acts 19:10. And in this point, viz. of St. Paul having preached for a considerable length of time at Ephesus, the history is confirmed by the two epistles to the Corinthians, and by the two epistles to Timothy: ‘I will tarry at Ephesus until pentecost;’ 1 Corinthians 16:8. ‘We would not have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia;’ 2 Corinthians 1:8. ‘As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia;’ 1 Timothy 1:3. ‘And in how many things he ministered to me at Ephesus thou knowest well;’ 2 Timothy 1:18. I adduce these testimonies because, had it been a competition of credit between the history and the epistle, I should have thought myself bound to have preferred the epistle. Now, every epistle which St. Paul wrote to Churches which he himself had founded, or which he had visited, abounds with references and appeals to what had passed during the time that he was present amongst them; whereas there is not a text in the Epistle to the Ephesians from which we can collect that he had ever been at Ephesus at all. The two epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Galatians, the Epistle to the Philippians, and the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, are of this class; and they are full of allusions to the apostle’s history, his reception, and his conduct whilst amongst them; the total want of which in the epistle before us is very difficult to account for, if it was in truth written to the Church of Ephesus, in which city he had resided for so long a time. This is the first and strongest objection. But farther, the Epistle to the Colossians was addressed to a Church in which St. Paul had never been, This we infer from the first verse of the second chapter: ‘For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh.’ There could be no propriety in thus joining the Colossians and Laodiceans with those ‘who had not seen his face in the flesh,’ if they did not also belong to the same description. Now, his address to the Colossians, whom he had not visited, is precisely the same as his address to the Christians to whom he wrote in the epistle which we are now considering: ‘We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints;’ Colossians 1:3. Thus he speaks to the Christians, in the epistle before us, as follows: ‘Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints, cease not to give thanks for you in my prayers; Ephesians 1:15. The terms of this address are observable. The words, ‘having heard of your faith and love,’ are the very words, we see, which he uses towards strangers; and it is not probable that he should employ the same in accosting a Church in which he had long exercised his ministry, and whose ‘faith and love’ he must have personally known. The Epistle to the Romans was written before St. Paul had been at Rome; and his address to them runs in the same strain with that just now quoted: ‘I thank my God, through Jesus Christ, for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world;’ Romans 1:8. Let us now see what was the form in which our apostle was accustomed to introduce his epistles, when he wrote to those with whom he was already acquainted. To the Corinthians it was this: ‘I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Christ Jesus;’ 1 Corinthians 1:4. To the Philippians: ‘I thank my God upon every remembrance of you;’ Philippians 1:3. To the Thessalonians: ‘We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers, remembering without ceasing your work of faith and labour of love;’ 1 Thessalonians 1:3. To Timothy: ‘I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day;’ 2 Timothy 1:3. In these quotations it is usually his remembrance, and never his hearing of them, which he makes the subject of his thankfulness to God.
As great difficulties stand in the way, supposing the epistle before us to have been written to the Church of Ephesus; so I think it probable that it is actually the epistle to the Laodiceans, referred to in the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians. The text which contains that reference is this: ‘When this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea;’ Colossians 4:16. The epistle from Laodicea was an epistle sent by St. Paul to that Church, and by them transmitted to Colosse. The two Churches were mutually to communicate the epistles they had received. This is the way in which the direction is explained by the greater part of commentators, and is the most probable sense that can be given to it. It is also probable that the epistle alluded to was an epistle which had been received by the Church of Laodicea lately. It appears, then, with a considerable degree of evidence, that there existed an epistle of St. Paul nearly of the same date with the Epistle to the Colossians, and an epistle directed to a Church (for such the Church of Laodicea was) in which St. Paul had never been. What has been observed concerning the epistle before us, shows that it answers perfectly to that character.
“Nor does the mistake seem very difficult to account for. Whoever inspects the map of Asia Minor will see, that a person proceeding from Rome to Laodicea would probably land at Ephesus, as the nearest frequented seaport in that direction. Might not Tychicus, then, in passing through Ephesus, communicate to the Christians of that place the letter with which he was charged? And might not copies of that letter be multiplied and preserved at Ephesus? Might not some of the copies drop the words of designation εν τη λαοδικεια, which it was of no consequence to an Ephesian to retain? Might not copies of the letter come out into the Christian Church at large from Ephesus; and might not this give occasion to a belief that the letter was written to that Church? And, lastly, might not this belief produce the error which we suppose to have crept into the inscription?
“And it is remarkable that there seem to have been some ancient copies without the words of designation, either the words in Ephesus, or the words in Laodicea. St. Basil, a writer of the fourth century, speaking of the present epistle, has this very singular passage: ‘And writing to the Ephesians, as truly united to him who is through knowledge, he (Paul) calleth them in a peculiar sense such who are; saying, to the saints who are and (or even) the faithful in Christ Jesus; for so those before us have transmitted it, and we have found it in ancient copies.’ Dr. Mill interprets (and, notwithstanding some objections that have been made to him, in my opinion, rightly interprets) these words of Basil, as declaring that this father had seen certain copies of the epistle in which the words ‘in Ephesus’ were wanting. And the passage, I think, must be considered as Basil’s fanciful way of explaining what was really a corrupt and defective reading; for I do not believe it possible that the author of the epistle could have originally written αγιοις τοις ουσιν, without any name of place to follow it.”
It must be allowed that the arguments of Dr. Paley, the sum of which may be found in Wetstein, that this is the epistle to the Laodiceans, are both plausible and strong; and yet almost the whole of antiquity, with the exceptions which those learned men mention, is in favour of the epistle being sent originally to the Church at Ephesus. Puzzled with these two considerations, some critics have pointed out a middle way. They suppose that several copies of this epistle were directed to no particular Church, but were intended for all the Churches in Asia Minor; and that different copies might have different directions, from this circumstance, that St. Paul, in writing the first verse παυλος αποστολος ιησου χριστου-τοις αγιοις τοις ουσιν, Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the saints which are, left a blank after ουσιν, are, which was in some cases filled up with εν εφεσω, in Ephesus; in others, with εν λαοδικεια, in Laodicea; though there might be one copy expressly sent by him to the Church of the Laodiceans, while he wished that others should be directed to the different Churches through Asia Minor. That there were copies which had no place specified, we learn from St. Basil; and the arguments in favour of Laodicea are certainly the strongest; the circumstance, that the apostle salutes no person, agrees well with Laodicea, where he had never been, Colossians 2:1; but cannot agree with Ephesus, where he was well known, and where, in preaching the Gospel, he had spent three years. See Acts 20:31.
As this point is very dubious, and men of great abilities and learning have espoused different sides of the question, I judge myself incompetent to determine any thing; but I felt it my duty to bring the arguments for Laodicea fairly before the reader; those in favour of Ephesus may be met with every where. The passages in the body of the epistle, alleged by critics who espouse opposite sides of this subject, I have seldom noticed in a controversial way; and the notes on those passages are constructed as though no controversy existed.
Many expositors, and particularly Drs. Chandler and Macknight, have thought that they have perceived a great number of references to the temple of Diana at Ephesus; to the sacred mysteries among the Greeks; to the Hierophants, Mystagogues, Neocoroi, &c., in the temple of the celebrated goddess. It may appear strange that, with these opinions before me, I have not referred to the same things; nor adduced them by way of illustration; the truth is, I have not been able to discover them, nor do I believe that any such allusions exist. I see many allusions to the temple of God at Jerusalem, but none to the temple of Diana at Ephesus. I find also many references to the sacred service and sacerdotal officers in the Jewish temple; but none to Mystagogues, &c., among the heathens. I find much said about, what is to be understood most literally, the mystery which had been hidden from all ages, viz. of uniting Jews and Gentiles in one Church, but no reference to the Eleusinian, Bacchic, or other mysteries in the abominable worship of the Greeks, was suggesting to the mind of the apostle any parallel between their mysteries and those of the Almighty. My reasons for my dissent from these respectable authorities I have given in the notes.
June 20th, 1815.
EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
Chronological Notes relative to this Epistle.
-Usherian year of the world, 4065.
-Alexandrian era of the world, 5563.
-Antiochian era of the world, 5553.
-Constantinopolitan era of the world, 5569.
-Year of the Eusebian epocha of the Creation, 4289.
-Year of the Julian period, 4771.
-Year of the minor Jewish era of the world, 3821.
-Year of the Greater Rabbinical era of the world, 4420.
-Year from the Flood, according to Archbishop Usher, and the English Bible, 2409.
-Year of the Cali yuga, or Indian era of the Deluge, 3163. -Year of the era of Iphitus, or since the first commencement of the Olympic games, 1001.
-Year of the Nabonassarean era, 808.
-Year of the era of the Seleucidæ, 373.
-Year of the Spanish era, 99.
-Year of the Actiac or Actian era, 92.
-Year from the birth of Christ, 65.
-Year of the vulgar era of Christ’s nativity, 61.
-Year from the building of Rome, according to Varro, 813. -Year of the CCXth Olympiad, 1.
-Jesus, high priest of the Jews.
-Common Golden Number, 5.
-Jewish Golden Number, 2.
-Year of the Solar Cycle, 14.
-Dominical Letter, D.
-Jewish Passover, March 22d.
-Easter Sunday, March 29th.
-Epact, or the moons age on the 22d of March, or the Xth of the Calends of April, 14.
-Year of the reign of Nero. Cæsar, the sixth emperor of the Romans, 8. -In the first year of Porcius Festus, governor of the Jews. -Year of Vologesus, king of the Parthians, 11.
-Year of Domitius Corbulo, governor of Syria, 2.
-Roman Consuls; C. Cæsonius Pætus, and C. Petronius Turpilianus.
Joseph Benson
The Epistle to the Ephesians.
BEN_VOL8.PDF, source PDF p. 159
THE EPISTLE TO THE
EPHESIANS.
OF EPHESUS, a city famed for its commerce and riches, and for its being the metropolis of that part of Asia which was a Roman province, the reader will find an account in the notes on Acts 19:1. The apostle, it seems, first visited this city when on his way from Achaia to Jerusalem, as is related Acts 18:19, 20: at which time he preached in the synagogue of the Jews; but did not continue many days, though his preaching was not without fruit, as appears from his being desired by some of his hearers to tarry a longer time with them, that they might be more fully instructed in the doctrines which he taught. The reason why he did not comply with their request, was his believing it to be his duty to attend at Jerusalem at an approaching feast. From the history of the Acts we learn, that the Ephesians were then a very dissolute people, and extremely addicted to the arts of sorcery and magic, taught and practised there; “walking,” as the apostle expresses it, “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit which worketh in the children of disobedience,” Ephesians 2:2. Their city, also, was the very throne of idolatry; the worship of idols being performed in no part of the heathen world with greater splendour than at Ephesus, on account of the famous temple of Diana, which was built between the city and the harbour, at the expense of all Asia, (see note on Acts 19:27,) and in which was an image of that goddess, said to have fallen down from Jupiter, Acts 19:35. This image, as we may well suppose, was worshipped with the most pompous rites, by a multitude of priests, and a vast concourse of votaries from every quarter, who, to gain the favour of Diana, came to Ephesus to offer sacrifice at her shrine. Such being the state of religion and morals among the Ephesians, St. Paul, who was expressly commissioned by Christ to turn the Gentiles “from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God,” resolved, at his departure from their city, to return soon, (Acts 18:21,) that he might have an opportunity of attacking idolatry in this its chief seat. Accordingly, having celebrated the feast of pentecost at Jerusalem, and afterward gone over the country of Galatia and Phrygia, strengthening the disciples, he came to Ephesus, (Acts 19:1,) and preached boldly, first in the synagogue of the Jews, for the space of three months, discoursing concerning the things which related to the kingdom of God, verse 8. But the Jews, who had heard him with pleasure at his former visit, now opposed him violently, when they perceived that he preached salvation without requiring obedience to the law of Moses. They spake also with the greatest virulence against the gospel itself; insomuch that the apostle judged it improper to preach any longer in the synagogue. Separating the disciples, therefore, from the unbelieving Jews, he discoursed daily in the school of one Tyrannus, who either was himself a disciple, or allowed the apostle the use of his school for hire. “And this,” as we learn from Acts 19:10, “continued for the space of two years; so that all they who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.” During this time, so extraordinary were his miracles, that “from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them;” which miracles, together with his preaching, were so blessed of God, that multitudes of the idolatrous inhabitants of Asia embraced the gospel; and, among the rest, many who had practised the arts of magic and divination. These, to show how sincerely they repented of their former evil-practices, brought out the books which contained the secrets of their arts, and burned them publicly, notwithstanding they were of very great value. “So mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed” among the Ephesians. In consequence of this extraordinary success, the apostle had determined to spend a longer season in Asia; but a dreadful riot raised against him by Demetrius, a silversmith, who employed a great number of workmen in making silver shrines for Diana, (of which see Acts 19:23-41, with the notes there,) caused him to alter his resolution, and to proceed immediately toward Macedonia, into which country he had already sent Timothy and Erastus. During the time, however, of the apostle’s stay at Ephesus, a numerous Christian church was formed, chiefly made up of Gentile converts, whose piety and zeal appear, from this epistle, to have been remarkable. To watch over these, and administer to them the word of God, the apostle appointed several elders, or overseers. These, about a year after, when on his way from Macedonia and Achaia to Jerusalem, the apostle sent for, to meet him at Miletus; to whom, when they came, he delivered the pathetic exhortation recorded. Acts 20:17-35, forewarning them both of great persecutions from without, and of divers heresies and schisms, which would arise among themselves. After this it appears that he never visited Ephesus again, nor saw any of the elders whom he now addressed. He wrote, however, this epistle to them for their further instruction and establishment in the faith; and that, it seems, within three or four years from this period; or, as is generally supposed, during the latter part of the time of his imprisonment at Rome. For, from what he himself says, (Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; 6:20,) he was a prisoner when he wrote it, as he was likewise when he wrote to the Colossians, Colossians 4:10. Indeed, there is such a manifest correspondence between these two epistles, both in their subject matter and in the very form of the expression, that it may be justly concluded they were written at the same time, and sent together by Tychicus, who was intrusted with the care of both, but was attended by Onesimus, when he delivered that to the Colossians, Colossians 4:9.
The design of the apostle in this epistle was to establish the Ephesian believers in the doctrine he had delivered; and for that purpose to give them more exalted views of the love of God, and of the excellence and dignity of the Lord Jesus; to show them that they were saved by grace; and that the Gentiles, however wretched they had been once, were now invited to enjoy equal privileges with the Jews; to encourage them, by declaring with what steadiness the apostle himself suffered for the truth, and with what earnestness he prayed for their establishment and perseverance. He also intended to arm them against false teachers, and to build them up in love and holiness, both of heart and conversation. If it be remembered that the most flourishing sects of philosophers had been, or were, settled at Ephesus, and in its neighbourhood; it will not be doubted that the apostle would make use of extraordinary caution in writing; and it is evident that this epistle is full of the sublimest doctrines, and written in a style equal to the nobleness of his sentiments, and the learning of those to whom it was addressed. Though this, perhaps, at first sight may render his meaning a little obscure, yet, by the assistance of the forementioned epistle to the Colossians, written while he was in the same circumstances, upon the same occasion, and to the same purpose, the sense and doctrine of the apostle here may be so clearly seen, and so perfectly comprehended, that there can be hardly any doubt left about it, to any one who will examine them diligently, and carefully compare them together. He begins this epistle, as he does most of the others, with thanksgiving to God, for their embracing and adhering to the gospel. He shows the inestimable blessings and advantages they received thereby, as far above all the Jewish privileges as all the wisdom and philosophy of the heathen. He proves that our Lord is the head of the whole church; of angels and spirits, the church triumphant; and of Jews and Gentiles, now equally members of the church militant. In the last three chapters he exhorts them to various duties, civil and religious, personal and relative, suitable to their Christian character, privileges, assistances, and obligations. To be a little more particular: In this epistle we may observe, I. The inscription, Ephesians 1:1, 2. II. The doctrine pathetically explained, which contains, 1. Praise to God for the whole gospel blessing, verses 3-14, with thanksgiving and prayer for the saints, verse 15 to Ephesians 2:10. 2. A more particular admonition concerning their once miserable, but now happy condition, verses 11-22; a prayer for their establishment, Ephesians 3:1-19; a doxology, verses 20,
21. III. The exhortation. First, general: To walk worthy of their calling, agreeably to, 1. The unity of the Spirit, and the diversity of his gifts, Ephesians 4:1-16. 2. The difference between their former and their present state, verses 17-24. Secondly, particular: To avoid, 1. Lying, Ephesians 4:25. 2. Anger, verse 26. 3. Theft, verse 28. 4. Corrupt communication, verses 29, 30. 5. Bitterness, verse 31 to Ephesians 5:2.
6. Uncleanness, verses 3-14. 7. Drunkenness, verses 15-21. With a commendation of the opposite virtues: To do their duty, as, 1. Wives and husbands, verses 22-33. 2. Children and parents, Ephesians 6:1-4. 3. Servants and masters, verses 5-9. Thirdly, final: To war the spiritual warfare, verses 10-20. IV. The conclusion, verses 21-24.
Joseph Sutcliffe
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians.
SUT_VOL5.PDF, source PDF p. 75
ST. PAUL’S EPISTLE TO THE
EPHESIANS.
EPHESUS, once the glory of all Asia, is now reduced to obscurity. It was built by the Amazones; and its temple, afterwards dedicated to Diana, was reckoned one of the seven wonders of the world, as stated by Ctesiphon. The city was augmented and enlarged by Androcus, son of Codrus, as is noted by Pausanias. Erostratus burned it the night that Alexander was born. Hannibal and Antiochus in this city carried on war against the Romans. It was repeatedly visited by the emperors of Rome, and enlarged and adorned with temples. Its ruin commenced when taken and pillaged by the Persians in the third century; it was also taken by the Scythians, and finally by Mahomet. Smyrna now partially enjoys the glory which Ephesus once possessed.
The Epistle of Paul to the church of Ephesus, is reckoned one of the most valuable treasures of primitive christianity. It is what Paul says of the gospel, a revelation of the mystery hid in ages past. It was written from Rome while the apostle was a prisoner there, and sent by Tychicus, a deacon, about twenty seven years after the death of Christ. So at least Baronius reckons in his Chronicum. But Usher fixes it about five years later.
The church of Ephesus had been planted by St. Paul, as Luke has stated in Acts 19. and 20. At the time of his writing this epistle, there were in that city many learned men, and various sects of philosophers. Some of those were Gnostics, who had crept into the church unawares, and brought moral reproach on the christian name. They were the grievous wolves who spared not the flock, and often drew away disciples after them. Acts 20:29, 30. “They went out from us,” says John, “because they were not of us.” In a word, the apostle contrasts the most deplorable state of the gentile world, with the glory of the christian vocation, to be fellow-heirs with the seed of Abraham of the grace of life in Christ Jesus, according to the good pleasure of the Father from the foundation of the world.
The whole character of the epistle is sublime in thought, excellent in doctrine, rich in figure, and beautiful in expression. It is a composition so consummate in character, that no man can equal it without divine illumination.
Daniel Whedon
Introduction.
WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 349
EPHESIANS
INTRODUCTION.
OF the founding of the Church in Ephesus by St. Paul, a full narrative is given by Luke, Acts 19, where see our notes. The twelve Johnite disciples, the secession from the synagogue and establishment of preaching in the academic rooms of Tyrannus, the contests with sorcery, and more especially the opposition and commotion of the worshippers of Diana, form a series of stirring and striking narrations. Three years, in round numbers, were spent in this great work. See our Outline History commencing this volume.
This is one of the four epistles from the Roman prison, as we have noted on Acts 28:31. Of its genuineness no doubt has ever been entertained in the Christian Church until modern criticism raised the question. De Wette and Bauer maintain it to be not the work of Paul; and Renan places it among the “doubtful.” Their reasonings, too captious for a discussion in our brief space, have been amply answered by Meyer, Eadie, and Alford. A more serious doubt exists whether the epistle was addressed to the Ephesians; or, at any rate, to them alone. This doubt arises from two sources: 1. There are no greetings in the epistle, although Paul had hosts of friends in Ephesus; and the whole epistle is like a religious essay without definite reference to facts or circumstances. To this it is fairly replied, that most of Paul’s epistles are without greetings; and there is no good reason why St. Paul should not write a treatise on a holy model Church in epistolatory form, and send it to his Ephesians. But, 2. Very early manuscripts of the epistle are found without the words “in Ephesus” in the first verse. The Sinaitic manuscripts and one or two others omit. St. Basil and Jerome both say that ancient copies are without it. And hence a large number of our best biblical scholars conclude that this was an encyclical epistle; that is, it was sent by Paul by the hands of Tychicus to Asia with the space left blank that each Church in that section might insert its own name in a copy as its own. But to this there is a mass of objections. How happens it that not a single copy has ever been found with the name of any other Church inserted? The majority of manuscripts and versions with the words “in Ephesus” inserted is overwhelming; and even Basil and Jerome entertain no doubt of its really being an epistle to Ephesus. The omission of the words “in Ephesus,” in a few instances, like the omission of the words “in Rome,” in some copies of the Epistle to the Romans, may have arisen from the desire of some Churches to give to their own copy a character of generality by removing the mention of a particular Church. This question, it will be seen, does not affect the authenticity or value of the epistle. Over this memorable Church, after Paul, a Timothy and an apostle John presided. To it one of the addresses of the Apocalypse was delivered, picturing its spiritual state. For centuries, the temple of Diana, lying in ruins, and splendid Christian cathedrals crowning the city, Ephesus was a great stronghold of eastern Christianity. Subsequently it fell under the power of the Turks, and at present few traces of ancient grandeur remain upon its site.
We may consider this production of St. Paul to be an epistolary treatise upon a holy Church as accordant with God’s eternal ideal through Christ, and humanly to be realized on earth. So far from being, as De Wette thinks, “rich in words and poor in ideas,” the greatest students of its pages have found it powerful in its combination of language and sublime in its sweep of thought. Dr. Bloomfield applies to it Dr. Johnson’s words in regard to another book: “If the reader have a spark of regard for the gospel it will blow it into a flame.” Grotius and Coleridge characterize it in terms we are almost able to endorse. The former says, “It equals its sublimity of ideas with words more sublime than any human language ever possessed.” The latter calls it, “The divinest composition of man.”
Plan of the Epistle.
WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 351
PLAN OF THE EPISTLE.
PART FIRST.
The Eternal and Divine Side of the Formation, through Christ, of a Holy Church on Earth and in Heaven Ephesians 1:3-3:21
I. THE
ETERNAL
DIVINE
ORIGINATION IN
PURPOSE
Ephesians 1:3-23
1. An eternal preference for all believers Ephesians 1:3-8
2. According to a divine ideal of universal reconciliation and headship in Christ Ephesians 1:9 , 10
3. In which election we (all believers) are inheritors Ephesians 1:11, 12
4. Into which ye, Ephesians, entered by faith Ephesians 1:13, 14
5. Thanks, and prayer that they may realize Christ’s glorious headship Ephesians 1:15-23
II. HISTORICAL
INCLUSION OF THE
EPHESIAN’S IN THIS
PURPOSE
Ephesians 2:1-3:21
1. Recapitulation, historically, of their faith and regeneration Ephesians 2:1-10
2. With the unification of Jew and Gentile in one Church Ephesians 2:11-22
3. Under Paul’s Gentile apostleship as divine instrument Ephesians 3:1-13
4. St. Paul’s apostolic prayer for the Ephesian Church Ephesians 3:14-19
5. Closing Doxology Ephesians 3:20, 21
PART SECOND.
Human Side of this Churchdom—Duties of the Elect Church on Earth Ephesians 4:1-6:24
I. IN
CHURCHLY
RELATIONS AND
OBLIGATIONS
Ephesians 4:1-5:21
1. To be a holy and efficient Church Ephesians 4:1-16 a. In holy unity of spirit Ephesians 4:1-6 b. And with Christ-given ministries Ephesians 4:7-11 c. To develop into a perfect individual Christian manhood and a compact organic life Ephesians 4:12-16
2. To be a Church in double contrast to the anti-Church of Gentilism Ephesians 4:17-5:21
First Contrast—Sins of the spirit Ephesians 4:17-5:2 a. In contrast to the Gentilism which you have left Ephesians 4:17-19
b. Be renewed from the old to the new man Ephesians 4:20-24 c. By putting off the five Gentile vices Ephesians 4:25-5:2 Second Contrast—Sins of the flesh Ephesians 5:3-21 a. Against Gentile uncleanness, be mindful of God’s judgment Ephesians 5:3-7
b. Against their secret and nightly shame, be children of light and day Ephesians 5:8-17
c. Against their drunkenness and revelry, be filled with the Spirit and with holy hymns Ephesians 5:18-21
II. IN THE
FAMILY AND
DOMESTIC
SYSTEM
Ephesians 5:22-6:9
a. Wives and Husbands Ephesians 5:22-33
b. Children and Parents Ephesians 6:1-4
c. Servants and Masters Ephesians 6:5-9
Closing Appeal for earnest readiness Ephesians 6:10-24
Joseph Agar Beet
Preface.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 3
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
PREFACE.
IN the present volume I have expounded the third group of St. Paul’s Epistles, those written during his first imprisonment at Rome. It is well that the four Epistles are expounded in one volume. For they are most closely related in thought and expression, and unitedly present a very definite phase of St. Paul’s thought; a marked development of the thought embodied in the great group already annotated. This rich development can be appreciated only by consecutive study of the whole group. The distinctive features of my earlier volumes dominate this new work. As before, my aim has been not merely to reproduce the sense which the Apostle designed his words to convey, but also to use his letters as a means of reproducing his conception of the Gospel and of Christ, in order thus to reach the actual teaching of Christ and those unseen realities which He came to reveal to men. Consequently, as before, my exposition of the Epistles of Paul is a specific contribution to Systematic Theology. And, since these Epistles contain important evidence of the truth of the doctrines so firmly believed by the Apostle, my exposition of them is also a contribution to the Evidences of Christianity. This accounts for my long and full discussion of the authorship of the Epistles now annotated; and for the frequent indication, throughout the exposition, of words and phrases revealing the hand of Paul. For my method of research required me to prove that the doctrines set forth in these Epistles were actually taught by St. Paul. And it accounts also for the somewhat polemic form of the closing Dissertations in which I have embodied the chief results of our study.
For two classes of readers I have written expressly, for students of the Greek Testament and for intelligent readers of the English Bible. The former will find a careful grammatical exposition of the Greek text of the Epistles; and will catch the reason for many English renderings which to others will seem harsh or even ungrammatical. They will notice that at every point, both in my translation and in my frequent paraphrases and summaries of the language of St. Paul, I have endeavoured to reproduce the exact meaning and emphasis of the Greek words written by him. This frequent and careful reproduction of his meaning will also be of use to many who are unable to verify it by comparison with the original, but who wish to grasp, through the medium of their own language, as accurately and fully as possible the thoughts of the great Apostle. My chief helpers have been, as before, Meyer and Hofmann among Germans, and Ellicott and Lightfoot among English commentators. To these I may add the very full and able commentary on the Epistle to the Colossians by Kloepper, and a most accurate and acute exposition of the same Epistle, in The Pulpit Commentary, by Findlay. So good is this last work that, but for the difference of aim noted above, it would have been needless for me to attempt another exposition. Dr. Maclaren’s volume on the same Epistle in The Expositor’s Bible is most excellent. But as a popular exposition for general readers, rather than for students, its aim differs widely from that of my own work. Of another kind, but also good, are the contributions to The Cambridge Bible for Schools by Moule. On the genuineness of the Epistles now annotated, I am glad to refer to the very able and attractive Introduction to the New Testament by Dr. Salmon. On the Christian Ministry, about which I have said something in my Dissertation on “Paul’s Conception of the Church,” I must express my great obligation to the very able Dissertation in Lightfoot’s Philippians. Although published twenty-two years ago, it seems to me to be still the best work on this important subject. Also of great value are a recent volume on the same subject by Dean Lefroy, and Dr. Hatch’s Bampton Lectures on The Organization of the Early Churches. I have also reed with care Gore’s Ministry of The Christian Church; but, for reasons given in my Dissertation, I am compelled to reject the most conspicuous conclusions of the author.
To all Christian readers I commend most earnestly a careful study of these profound Epistles. A commentary is but a guide-post pointing to something far better than itself, or at best a companion leading others along a path the writer has himself trodden. That path each one must tread for himself, if he is to gather the flowers which adorn it and to find the hidden treasures to which it leads. These treasures are beyond the price of rubies. And they are within reach of every one who, guided by the Spirit of the Truth, walks in the steps of the Great Teacher.
WESLEYAN COLLEGE, RICHMOND,
27th September, 1890.
Section 1. — Retrospect and Prospect.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 9
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The clipped dissertation headings belong to the contents list on p. xi: Paul’s Conception of Christ and The Gospel of Paul. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 14.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
INTRODUCTION.
SECTION 1. — RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT.
IN former volumes I have endeavoured to expound the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians. These Epistles we found accepted in the second century throughout the Christian Church without a shadow of doubt as written by the Apostle Paul. And the strong presumption of genuineness thus afforded was raised to absolute certainty by our examination of the contents of the Epistles; especially by comparison, one with another and with the statements of the Book of Acts, of various casual references to matters of fact, and by the harmonious and life-like portrait of the mental and moral character of the writer which we found depicted in clearest lines on the pages of each Epistle. We found that the four Epistles were written within a year, amid the activities and anxieties of Paul’s Third Missionary Journey. His movements during that year, we were able, in the light of these Epistles and of the Book of Acts, to trace with considerable accuracy.
At various points in our course we tried to reproduce, in a fragmentary way, Paul’s conception of the Gospel he preached and of Christ. This reproduced conception we compared here and there with other writings of the New Testament. Our comparison assured us that the doctrines so firmly held by Paul, or doctrines equivalent, were actually taught by Christ, and that Christ actually claimed the supreme dignity reflected so clearly in the entire teaching and thought of Paul. And the confident belief by Paul and others that Christ rose from the dead, taken in connection with its effect upon the entire subsequent history of mankind and with the fitness of the Gospel to supply our own spiritual need, convinced us of the truth of that which the Apostles so firmly believed, and assured us that Jesus of Nazareth actually rose from the dead and that He is in very truth the Uncreated Son of God.
2. These results we shall in the present volume assume, and make the basis of further theological research. Four other Epistles, each claiming to have been written by Paul, now demand attention. Unfortunately, we have not for them the clear historic light which illumined the circumstances, and enabled us to fix approximately the date, of the Epistles already annotated. And the contents of some of them have, rightly or wrongly, given rise in some minds to doubts about their authorship. The evidence of their genuineness, we shall therefore carefully sift.
If, as I hope to prove, we have good grounds for accepting with confidence these Epistles as from the pen which wrote those already expounded, our study of them will greatly enlarge our view of Paul’s conception of the Gospel and of Christ. Thoughts found only in germ in the earlier Epistles, we shall now find fully developed: and we shall find other thoughts not even suggested before, but when once suggested seen to be logically deduced from, or in harmony with, Paul’s earlier teaching. We shall thus be able to trace development in the thought of the Apostle. In the earlier Epistles we felt the earnestness of conflict: we shall now find the serene calm of victory. We shall find also the fulness of mature thought. Captivity of body has set the prisoner’s spirit free for loftier flights than were possible amid the activities of apostolic toil. The narrow limits of prison walls opened to him a vision farther reaching and more glorious than any he had seen while hasting over sea and land to proclaim the good news of salvation. This profounder teaching will greatly strengthen our hold of the fundamental truths already learnt, will quicken and delight our intelligence, and will raise us, amid the tumult and anxiety of earth, ourselves to share the calm which filled the breast of the imprisoned Apostle.
Section 2. — Are the Epistles Genuine?
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 11
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The quoted Colossians, Philemon, and Ephesians section transitions and dissertation headings belong to the contents list on pp. x–xi. The complete division headings include The Truth Concerning Christ, Warning against Errors, Doctrine, and Moral Teaching. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 6; BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 7; BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 8; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 13; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 14.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 2. — ARE THE EPISTLES GENUINE?
1. That each of the Epistles before us was accepted without a shadow of doubt throughout the Christian Church in the latter part of the second century as a genuine work of the Apostle Paul, is proved by frequent quotations in the extant works of Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenæus.
2. So TERTULLIAN, Prescriptions against Heretics ch. 36: “the apostolic Churches… in which their authentic letters are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each one. Is Achaia near to thee? Thou hast Corinth. If thou art not far from Macedonia, thou hast Philippi, thou hast Thessalonica. If thou art able to go to Asia, thou hast Ephesus. But if thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome.” Here are omitted only Galatia and Colossæ, places far inland and therefore less accessible than those mentioned. Similarly On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch. 23: “The Apostle teaches, writing to the Colossians, that we were once dead, aliens, and enemies of the mind of the Lord, when we were engaged in the worst works; then, buried with Christ in Baptism, and risen together in Him through faith of the energy of God who raised Him from the dead. And you, when ye were dead in sins and uncircumcision of your flesh, He hath made alive with Him, all sins being forgiven to you. And again, If with Christ ye are dead from the elements of the world, how indeed as if living in the world do ye submit to another’s judgment?… Then, If ye have risen, says he, with Christ, seek those things which are above where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Think about the things which are above, not those which are below… He adds also, For ye are dead, i.e. to sins, not to yourselves, and your life is hidden with Christ in God… When he writes to the Philippians, If in any way, he says, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead: not that already I have obtained or am made perfect… But I follow after if I may lay hold of that in which I am laid hold of by Christ. More fully, Brethren, I do not reckon myself to have laid hold. But one thing I do, forgetting things behind, reaching after things before, I follow after the goal for the prize of blamelessness for which I run. So Against Marcion bk. v. 17 he speaks of “that Epistle sent to the Ephesians, not to the Laodiceans: but Marcion was eager to give it a false title, as though he were a very diligent student of it. But the title is of no importance, since the Apostle wrote as much to all men as to some.” He then quotes in chs. 17, 18 a great part of the Epistle, noting here and there Marcion’s mutilations. “Remembering that ye formerly were Gentiles in flesh. Ye were called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh made by hand, that ye were at that time without Christ, alienated from intercourse with Israel, strangers to their covenants and promise, having no hope and without God in the world… But now, says he, in Christ, ye who were far off have been made near in His blood… How does he prove that women ought to be subject to their husbands? Because man, says he, is head of woman… as also Christ is head of the Church. Similarly also when he says: He loves his own flesh who loves his wife, as also Christ loves the Church… No one, says he, hates his own flesh, unless indeed Marcion alone, but nourishes and cherishes it, as also Christ the Church.” In chs. 19, 20, Tertullian quotes at length the Epistles to the Colossians and Philippians as written by “the Apostle;” and says in ch. 21 that through its shortness the Epistle to Philemon alone escaped mutilation by Marcion.
3. CLEMENT of ALEXANDRIA in the Pædagogue bk. i. 6 (p. 311, ed. Migne) quotes almost word for word Philippians 3:12-15 as written by Paul: and in Miscellanies bk. iv. 13 (p. 1300) he quotes Philippians 1:29; 2:2; 1:7; 2:20, 21, as written to the Philippians by “the Apostle.” So in bk. i. 1 (p. 705) he quotes Colossians 1:28 as written by “the Apostle… in the Epistle to the Colossians;” and similarly Colossians 2:4, 6-8 in ch. 11, p. 748f. The Epistle to the Ephesians he quotes very frequently: e.g. Pædagogue bk. i. 5, p. 269: “Most clearly, writing to the Ephesians, he (the Apostle) revealed the matter sought for, saying in some such way as this; “quoting almost word for word Ephesians 4:13-15. So IRENÆUS in bk. v. 13. 3: “And again to the Philippians he (the Apostle) says; “quoting Philippians 1:20, 21. Also in § 4: “the Apostle in the Epistle to the Philippians says;” quoting Philippians 3:10, 11. As contained “in the Epistle to the Colossians” he quotes in bk. iii. 14. 1, Colossians 4:14, and in bk. v. 14. 2, Colossians 1:21, 22. In bk. v.
2. 3, of which fortunately we possess the original, Irenæus says, “as the blessed Paul says in the Epistle to the Ephesians, Because members we are of the body, of His flesh and of His bones, word for word from Ephesians 5:30. Also in ch. xiv. 3: “as the Apostle says to the Ephesians, In whom we have redemption through His blood, even remission of sins. And again to the same persons, Ye, says he, who once were far off have been made near in the blood of Christ. And again, Making of no effect enmities, in His flesh, the law of precepts with decrees. (Ephesians 1:7; 2:13, 15.) But also in every Epistle the Apostle testifies,” etc.
The short Epistle to Philemon is not quoted by Clement of Alexandria or by Irenæus. But it is three times quoted word for word by ORIGEN as written by Paul to Philemon: On Jeremiah, Homily 19, p. 263; Series of comments on Matthew, § 66, p. 884, § 72, p. 889. JEROME in the Introduction to his commentary upon it defends the genuineness of the Epistle to Philemon against objections based on the unimportance of its matter.
4. In the letter sent in A.D. 177 from the Churches of Vienna and Lyons in Gaul and given at length by Eusebius, (Church Hist. bk. v. 2,) Philippians 2:6 is quoted word for word. In the FRAGMENT of MURATORI are enumerated among. “the Epistles of Paul” those to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. JUSTIN MARTYR, in ch. 85 of his Dialogue with Trypho and again in ch. 138, calls Christ firstborn of every creature; referring evidently in each case to Colossians 1:15. There is an apparent reference to the same in chs. 84, 100. In ch. 3 of the Epistle of POLYCARP to the Philippians, a work probably genuine, we read of “the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you… also when absent wrote to you letters;” or probably “a letter.” In the same Epistle, ch. 1, we read by grace ye are saved, not of works, word for word from Ephesians 2:8.
5. The above quotations, with multitudes similar, are complete proof that each of the three longer Epistles was well known by Christians throughout the Roman Empire before the end of the second century, and was accepted without a shadow of doubt as a genuine work of Paul. The quotations from Tertullian prove that they were accepted as in the main genuine before the middle of the century by Marcion, an avowed enemy of the Gospel. Throughout the literature of the early Church, there is no trace of doubt about their authorship.
It is right to say that the so-called Epistle of Barnabas is several times quoted confidently by Clement of Alexandria (e.g. Misc. bk. ii. 6, p. 965 Migne, and ch. 20, p. 1060, and bk. v. 10, p. 95) as written by the companion of Paul; and is quoted by Origen (Against Celsus bk. i. 63, On First Principles iii. 2. 4) as the Epistle of Barnabas. But it is not referred to by Irenæus: and, though apparently known to Tertullian, nothing is said by him about its authorship. It is reckoned as spurious by Eusebius (Church History bk. iii. 25) and by later writers. This case warns us not to accept, as decisive proof of authorship, the testimony of any one writer. The force of the above quotations lies in the unbroken and confident unanimity thus revealed in Churches widely separated.
This unanimous consent is at once a strong presumption of the genuineness of the Epistles before us. We ask whether it is confirmed or contradicted by their contents.
6. We consider first the Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS.
In Acts 28:31 we leave Paul in prison at Rome, after an appeal to Cæsar; and in Philippians 1:13 we find him in bonds, weighing the possibilities (Philippians 1:20-23) of life and death, and sending (Philippians 4:22) greetings from members of Cæsar’s household. In Philippians 1:1, as in 2 Corinthians 1:1, Timothy, who was present with Paul (Acts 17:14; 18:5) at the founding of the Churches of Philippi and Corinth, is associated with him as joint author of the Epistle. The description of Timothy in Philippians 2:19-22, and his hoped-for mission to Philippi, are in close agreement with 1 Corinthians 4:17. The gift of money from Philippi to Paul at Rome accords completely with the statement in 2 Corinthians 11:8, 9 that when he was in want at Corinth his needs were supplied by money sent from Macedonia, in which province was Philippi; and with the great liberality of another kind of which Paul boasts in 2 Corinthians 8:2. His deep anxiety about the Church at Corinth expressed in 2 Corinthians 2:13 and 7:5 has its counterpart in the loving care for the Christians at Philippi which breathes in Philippians 1:7, 8, 27; 2:19; 4:1. Paul’s reference in Philippians 3:6 to his past life recalls Galatians 1:13. Amid a somewhat changed tone, easily explained by changed surroundings and prospects, the careful student will find innumerable coincidences in theological thought and expression revealing the mind and hand of Paul. Many of these will be noted in our exposition. As examples I may here quote the word righteousness as used in Philippians 3:9 compared with Romans 10:3; 3:21, 22; emptied himself in Philippians 2:7 compared with 2 Corinthians 8:9; the cross of Christ in Philippians 3:18 and Galatians 6:14; the term children of God in Philippians 2:15 compared with Romans 8:16, 17; Galatians 3:26; 4:6, 7. In Philippians 3:14 we have a metaphor from the Greek athletic contests, as in 1 Corinthians 9:24-27. In Philippians 3:17 Paul points to himself as an example: a close coincidence with 1 Corinthians 11:1. Similarly, the boasting in Philippians 3:5, 6 is in close agreement with 2 Corinthians 11:22-33.
This far-reaching coincidence of thought and expression will be the more significant if the Epistle before us be compared with those which do not bear the name of Paul. It is complete confirmation of the belief of the early Church. So convincing is this combined proof that almost all modern scholars, including many who like Renan and Pfleiderer reject the faith so firmly held by Paul, accept the Epistle to the Philippians as written by the great Apostle.
7. We turn now to the Epistle to the COLOSSIANS. And everywhere in it we meet with words, phrases, thought, and arrangement already familiar, and in great part peculiar to Paul. The greeting recalls at once Philippians 1:1, 2; 2 Corinthians 1:1, 2. As in Romans and Galatians, we have first doctrine and argument, then moral teaching. As in Philippians 1:3-11, the letter before us begins with thanks to God for the readers spiritual life, and passes on to prayer for their further progress. Notice the word redemption in Colossians 1:14; Romans 3:24; 1 Corinthians 1:30; reconciled to God in Colossians 1:20, 22, slightly modified from the word in Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:18-20; Christ the Image of God and Firstborn in Colossians 1:15 and in 2 Corinthians 4:4; Romans 8:29; the mystery once hidden but now manifested, in Colossians 1:26; 2:2; 4:3 as in Romans 16:25, 26; 1 Corinthians 2:7; wealth in a metaphorical sense in Colossians 1:27; 2:2, as in Romans 2:4; 9:23; 11:12, 33; the rudiments of the world in Colossians 2:8; Galatians 4:3; buried in Baptism and risen-with Christ in Colossians 2:11, 12; Romans 6:4, 5; puffed up in Colossians 2:18; 1 Corinthians 4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1; 13:4; death with Christ a reason for no longer living the old life, Colossians 2:20; Romans 6:2; lists of sins in Colossians 3:5, 8, as in Romans 1:29-31; 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10; Galatians 5:19-21, the old man in Colossians 3:9 as in Romans 6:6; and everywhere the intensely Pauline phrases in Christ and in the Lord. Paul’s earnest care and prayer in Colossians 2:1 for Christians he has never seen is in close agreement with Romans 1:9-11; as is his request in Colossians 4:3 for his readers’ prayers, with Romans 15:30, 31; 2 Corinthians 1:11; Philippians 1:19. The metaphor, peculiar to Paul, of the Church as the body of Christ; found already in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Romans 12:4, 5, meets us in Colossians 1:18, 24; 2:19, with a new development viz. Christ the Head. The admonition to women in Colossians 3:18 is in close harmony with 1 Corinthians 11:3; as is Colossians 3:15 with Philippians 4:7. In Colossians 4:7 Tychicus is said to have been sent to Colossæ: in Acts 20:4 he is a companion of Paul in travel, and is called a native of the province of Asia in which Colossæ was situated. That Mark was (Colossians 4:10) cousin of Barnabas, helps to explain Acts 15:37: an important coincidence. That Luke, the reputed author (see my Corinthians p. 493) of the Third Gospel, is said in Colossians 4:14 to be a beloved friend of Paul, suggests a reason for occasional points of contact between that Gospel and the theology of Paul. The autograph in Colossians 4:18 recalls Galatians 6:11.
The real significance of the above coincidences can be fairly estimated only by careful and consecutive study of the Epistle itself and by comparison of it with the earlier Epistles of Paul and with other documents not from his pen. For some of these words and phrases are used by other writers. Their value as proofs of common authorship lies in their accumulation in this one short Epistle, and in their relation to the surrounding train of thought. It is right to say that some good scholars, of whom Pfleiderer is perhaps the best representative, deny that the Epistle to the Colossians is from Paul, on the ground that the errors therein combated were not prevalent till long after his death; that it contains teaching not found in his acknowledged Epistles and in part contradicting them; and that it contains words and phrases not used in his earlier letters. The issue thus raised must be decided by judging whether it is more easy, accepting the Epistle as genuine, to explain these three grounds of objection, or, rejecting it as spurious, to account for the coincidences noted above and the universal and confident reception of the Epistle in the latter part, and probably in the middle, of the second century. This alternative we will now consider.
The words and phrases peculiar to this Epistle, when carefully examined, need cause little surprise. Surely a writer so versatile as Paul’s acknowledged Epistles prove him to have been would not exhaust his vocabulary in four epistles. Indeed the new topics now dealt with suggest and require words not used before. And, in spite of differences, the style is closely akin to that of the Epistle to the Philippians, and not far removed from that of the earlier Epistles. It is true that we have in this Epistle elements of teaching not found in the Epistles already annotated. But, as I shall endeavour to show in Diss. i., these new elements are legitimate and most valuable developments of the principles underlying the acknowledged Epistles. Is it not more likely that such developments would take place in the mind and thought of Paul than among disciples removed from him by more than a generation? Indeed the change from active evangelistic labour to the solitude of a prison would naturally suggest, in a man like Paul, profound investigation of the foundations of his faith. The wonder would be if such investigation were barren of results. On the other hand the entire extant literature of the second century presents nothing comparable for a moment to the solid advance in Christian thought embodied in this Epistle. To place it fifty years after the death of Paul, is an utter anachronism. Lastly, any argument based on the supposed later date of the errors here combated is most uncertain. For they were, as we shall see in a special note, an outgrowth of influences at work before the birth of Christ. And, so far as they can be traced in this Epistle, the errors at Colossæ were very rudimentary. Much more developed is the Gnosticism of Cerinthus who is said to have been a contemporary of the Apostle John. We see then that the objections noticed above have little weight as proofs that the Epistle is not from its professed writer.
Take now the other side of the alternative. We shall see that the developments of Paul’s teaching contained in this Epistle are of the utmost value. They are embodied in language which either is from his pen or is a servile imitation of his style. In this last point the Epistle before us presents a great contrast to that to the Hebrews. Could such profound thought and such servile imitation proceed from any one man? Or, again, can we conceive that such a teacher, a worthy successor to the Great Apostle and an illustrious exception to the intellectual barrenness of his age, would hide himself and bury his fame under the mask, and in the grave, of a forgery? Or, lastly, can we conceive a forged letter making its way to distant Carthage and to Gaul, and gaining acceptance everywhere, without a shadow of doubt, as a genuine work of Paul? Certainly, these accumulated improbabilities are infinitely greater than any difficulty in supposing that the Gnosticism of the second century existed in germ in the days of Paul and that the teaching of this Epistle is from the pen of the great thinker who expounded so grandly in the Epistle to the Romans the principles of which it is a logical development. We may therefore accept with confidence the Epistle to the Colossians as a genuine work of Paul.
8. The beautiful Epistle to PHILEMON contains nothing inconsistent with its genuineness, and bears everywhere marks of the hand and character of Paul. Among these last must be reckoned the absence of any request for the manumission of Onesimus. Tact so delicate belongs not to a forger. The names sending greeting to Philemon are a valuable coincidence with the same names in the Epistle to the Colossians.
9. The Epistle to the EPHESIANS bears nearly all the marks of genuineness adduced for that to the Colossians, and some others. We have a similar greeting, arrangement, and general style. Notice again the words redemption in Ephesians 1:7; wealth in Ephesians 1:18; 2:7; 3:8, 16; mystery in Ephesians 1:9; 3:3, 4, 9; Christ the Head of the Church, His body in Ephesians 1:22; 4:12, 16; the old man in Ephesians 4:22; desire for his readers’ prayers in Ephesians 6:19; and the phrases in Christ and in the Lord. As marked coincidences with the earlier Epistles, we notice also in Ephesians 1:4, 5, 11 the words purpose, chosen, predestined, embodying teaching in complete harmony with Romans 8:28, 29; 9:11; adoption in Ephesians 1:5, as in Romans 8:15, 23; 9:4; Galatians 4:5; sealed with the Spirit, the earnest of our inheritance in Ephesians 1:13, 14; 4:30, as in 2 Corinthians 1:22; surpassing in Ephesians 1:19; 2:7; 3:19 as in 2 Corinthians 3:10; 9:14 and its cognates in 2 Corinthians 1:8; 4:7, 17; 12:7, etc.; faith occupying in Ephesians 1:13, 19; 2:8; 3:17; 4:5 its familiar place in the theology of Paul; the covenants in Ephesians 2:12, a close parallel with Romans 9:4; Jews and Gentiles in common ruin and common salvation in Ephesians 2:3, 11-22; 3:6, as in Romans 1:16; 3:9; 10:12; 15:8, 9; the Church as a temple in Ephesians 2:20-22 as in 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; the grace of God given to Paul in Ephesians 3:2, 7, 8 as in Romans 12:3; 15:15; 1 Corinthians 3:10; the less than least of all saints in Ephesians 3:8, compared with 1 Corinthians 15:9; edification in Ephesians 4:12, 16, 29 as in Romans 14:19; 15:2; 1 Corinthians 14:3, 5, 12, 26; 2 Corinthians 10:8; 12:19; 13:10; and many others revealing throughout the Epistle the familiar hand of Paul. [Even the anaculothon in Ephesians 2:1 has a close parallel in Romans 5:12.]
A genuine mark of authorship, and a conspicuous feature of the Epistle to the Ephesians as compared with the others of the same group, is the reappearance and careful treatment of the distinction of Jew and Gentile so conspicuous in the earlier Epistles of Paul as compared with the works of all other N.T. writers. This distinction meets us in the outburst of praise (Ephesians 1:12, 13) at the beginning of the Epistle. It is silently suggested by the change of pronoun between Ephesians 2:1, 2 and Ephesians 2:3. The inferior position of the Gentiles before their conversion, and their union with Jews as now reconciled to God, are fully expounded in Ephesians 2:11-22. And this union is said in Ephesians 3:6 to have been a part of the eternal purpose of salvation. This language reveals a mind long and deeply occupied with the different relations of Jew and Gentile to the Kingdom of God. How large a place this distinction had in the mind of Paul, we learn from Romans 1:16; 2:9, 10, 25-29; 3:1, 9; 1 Corinthians 1:22-24; 10:32; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 3:11. And indisputably it is a mark of early date. For it is impossible to conceive that, after Jerusalem had been taken and the race scattered and after Gentile Christianity had gained a secure and independent position, any writer would lay so much stress on the equality in spiritual privilege of the Gentiles to the Jews. Jewish Christians who still clung to their ancient prerogatives would not place the Gentles on their own level. A Gentile writer who had witnessed the final dispersion of the Jewish race would consider it but small honour that God has placed the Gentiles on a level with the nation which had murdered the Son of God. Now early date is a strong presumption of genuineness. For it is in the last degree unlikely, while men were living who had known Paul, that the work of some unknown author would have been widely and confidently accepted as his.
Another mark of early date is the enumeration, in Ephesians 4:11, of Church officers as Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and Pastors and Teachers. For, as we learn from the tone of the letters attributed with much probability to Ignatius and as we infer from later writers, monarchical episcopacy was firmly established early in the second century. Had there been in the Church an order of bishops distinct from the elders, whom we may here identify with the pastors and teachers, these could not have been passed over here in silence. On the other hand, this enumeration is in complete accord with 1 Corinthians 12:28. This last passage explains also the phrase apostles and prophets in Ephesians 2:20; 3:5. Against the unanimous and confident acceptance of the Epistle in the latter part of the second century, supported as it is by these internal marks of genuineness or of early date, the words and phrases and grammatical constructions more or less peculiar to this Epistle have no weight. For they are easily explained. Living thought ever clothes itself in new forms. Taken as a whole, the Epistle is incomparably nearer in diction and modes of thought to the acknowledged Epistles of Paul than is any document other than those which bear his name.
As in the Epistle to the Colossians, so in that to the Ephesians, we shall in Diss. i. find new and legitimate and most valuable developments of the principles unfolded in the earlier Epistles. These developments give to each Epistle great and independent worth. In each case they have been put forward as marks of a later hand. But, as we have already seen in the companion Epistle, they reveal the thought and hand of Paul. On the other hand, the argument against the genuineness of the Colossian Epistle based upon the late date of the errors therein combated has no force against the Epistle now before us. For it contains no definite refutation of specific error. Nor can any one say that the style of this latter Epistle is in any way more unlike that of Paul than is the Epistle to the Colossians. One special argument, however, is brought against the Epistle to the Ephesians by not a few who accept its companion as genuine. The many close coincidences in thought and expression are appealed to in proof that it is a later imitation of the Epistle to the Colossians. These coincidences are indisputable. As important elements common to the two Epistles and peculiar to them, I note Christ the Head of the Church in Colossians 2:18 and Ephesians 1:23, in Colossians 2:19 and Ephesians 4:16; dead through trespasses but now made alive with Christ in Colossians 2:13 and Ephesians 2:5; the inward change described in Colossians 3:9, 10 and Ephesians 4:22-24. Compare also Ephesians 4:32-5:2 with Colossians 3:12, 13; Ephesians 5:3-6 with Colossians 3:5-8; Ephesians 5:19 with Colossians 3:16; Ephesians 5:22-6:9 with Colossians 3:18-4:1, a long and close parallel. Since the Epistle to the Colossians has a specific occasion in the definite errors therein refuted, nearly all who reject one of the Epistles as not genuine reject that to the Ephesians. Certainly, the close and sustained similarity proves either that one Epistle is a servile imitation of the other or that they are the twin offspring of one mind. Our choice between these suppositions depends upon our estimate of the Epistle to the Ephesians as compared with that to the Colossians. That it has a distinctive and dominating and all-important mark of its own, Diss. i. will, I hope, make clear to us. The characteristic feature of the Epistle to the Colossians is its exposition of the Person of Christ: the chief matter of that to the Ephesians is the Church. This is very conspicuous in Ephesians 5:22-33 as compared with Colossians 3:18, 19. The question before us turns on our estimate of the Epistle itself and of this independent element in it. It can therefore be answered only by careful study of it. I hope that the exposition before us will convince the reader that in grandeur and worth the Epistle to the Ephesians is unsurpassed by any human composition. Its great and independent value is admitted even by Pfleiderer who denies its genuineness. And its worth proves its genuineness. For we cannot conceive a man capable of the profound thought which breathes throughout this Epistle becoming so servile an imitator even of an Apostle. Independent thought always clothes itself in fitting language of its own.
On the other hand if our judgment be that the Epistle is a worthless imitation, we are at once met by an inexplicable difficulty, viz. the early and unanimous and confident acceptance of it as written by Paul. If the work were from a later hand, is it conceivable that every trace of its origin should have vanished utterly from the memory of the early Church? Certainly this is an historic difficulty which needs to be reckoned with. It is increased by the widespread and uncontradicted tradition which connects with Ephesus the last years of the Apostle John. For he would know whether the Church in which he lived had an Epistle from the hand of his departed colleague. Consequently, if not written by Paul, the Epistle must be a work of the second century. Yet in the middle of the century it was accepted as genuine, even by Marcion an enemy of the Gospel! Some have suggested that the name of Paul was prefixed by some good man to a work of his own, not to deceive, but in order to call attention to sentiments similar to those of the great Apostle. This suggestion is completely overturned by comparison of evidently spurious documents bearing the names of Apostles. All these are worthless in themselves, never gained general reception, and nearly all were expressly rejected by Church writers. A more marked contrast than that between these wretched parodies and the Epistles before us cannot be conceived. The comparison attests the genuineness of the document so familiar and so precious to all Christians.
Another suggestion is that the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians have, one or both, been interpolated, that on the basis of a shorter work actually written by Paul have been erected, probably by one hand, the two documents we now possess. This suggestion will, I hope, be disproved by our study of the text of the Epistles, and by the harmony and order and life we shall find therein. It is also disproved by the complete general agreement of all our early copies. The Epistles attributed to Ignatius were interpolated. For the few existing copies of them reveal different recensions. But it is inconceivable that the original works of the great Apostle, which must have been prized and guarded by the Churches to which they were sent, should pass utterly out of view, and that one single corrupted recension should usurp and retain the place thus vacated. It is worthy of note that these wild suggestions come only from those who have already persuaded themselves that Christ did not rise from the dead, and that Christianity with its mighty effect upon the world is a result of the preaching of men who were in most serious error touching the nature and teaching of their Master.
In view then of their universal and confident reception throughout the Roman Empire, by friends and enemies, in the latter part of the second century, of their deep and broad and minute agreement with the thought and phraseology of Paul, and of their matchless and independent worth, we may accept without a shadow of doubt each of the Epistles before us as a genuine work of the Apostle Paul.
Section 3. — to What Extent Are Our Copies And Versions Correct?
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 23
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 3. — TO WHAT EXTENT ARE OUR COPIES AND
VERSIONS CORRECT?
1. The Greek text of the Epistle to the Philippians presents, touching the correctness of our copies, no difficulties worthy of mention. Of changes adopted without note by the Revisers, only the following have any practical importance:—
1. Philippians 1:11: fruit for fruits.
2. Philippians 1:14: the word of God for the word.
3. Philippians 1:16, 17: rearrange the sentence.
4. Philippians 1:16, 17: raise up for add.
5. Philippians 1:23: but instead of for.
6. Philippians 1:23: for it instead of which.
7. Philippians 2:4: not looking for look not.
8. Philippians 2:9: the name for a name.
9. Philippians 2:30: hazard for not regarding.
10. Philippians 3:3: by the Spirit of God for God in the Spirit.
11. Philippians 3:11: from the dead for of the dead.
12. Philippians 3:16: omit rule, let us mind the same thing.
13. Philippians 4:3: Yes, for and.
14. Philippians 4:13: Him for Christ.
15. Philippians 4:23: your spirit for you all. All these are accepted without doubt by all recent critical editors, i.e. by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort; except that about No. 6 Tregelles expresses in his margin a slight doubt. I think that all may be accepted with perfect confidence. On the other hand, no important reading which the editors agree to accept is overlooked by the Revisers. The few readings open to doubt and of any importance whatever are noted in the Revisers’ Margin. They are as follows:—
1. Philippians 2:2: of the same mind or of one mind.
2. Philippians 2:12: omit or insert as.
3. Philippians 2:26: add or omit to see you.
4. Philippians 2:30: the Lord or Christ.
5. Philippians 3:13: omit or insert yet.
All these are uncertain and unimportant.
No variations worthy of attention are overlooked by the Revisers.
2. The Epistle to the Colossians presents more important variations. The following list includes all changes adopted without note by the Revisers and worthy of attention here:—
1. Colossians 1:2: omit and the Lord Jesus Christ.
2. Colossians 1:3: omit and before Father.
3. Colossians 1:6: after fruit insert and increasing.
4. Colossians 1:10: by the knowledge of God for in or for the knowledge, etc.
5. Colossians 1:14: omit through His blood.
6. Colossians 1:16: twice omit that are.
7. Colossians 2:2: omit and of the Father and.
8. Colossians 2:11: omit of the sins of the flesh.
9. Colossians 2:13: through for in the trespasses.
10. Colossians 2:13: forgiven us instead of you.
11. Colossians 2:20: omit wherefore.
12. Colossians 3:5: the members for your members.
13. Colossians 3:15: Christ for God.
14. Colossians 3:16: to God for to the Lord.
15. Colossians 3:20: in the Lord for to the Lord.
16. Colossians 3:22: the Lord for God.
17. Colossians 3:24: omit for before ye serve.
18. Colossians 3:25: read for instead of but.
19. Colossians 4:8: read that ye may know our estate.
20. Colossians 4:18: omit amen.
Of these variations, there is among recent editors some difference about Nos. 2 and 6: about five more of them, the critical editors since Lachmann have been agreed: all the others are accepted by all editors, from Lachmann to Westcott and Hort. The entire list may, I believe, be accepted with perfect confidence.
The readings noted in the Reviser’s margin as open to doubt are:—
1. Colossians 1:7: our or your.
2. Colossians 1:12: us or you.
3. Colossians 1:21: has He reconciled or ye have been reconciled.
4. Colossians 2:2: general disorder.
5. Colossians 2:7: omit or insert in it before in or with thanksgiving.
6. Colossians 2:18: seen nor not seen.
7. Colossians 3:4: our or your life.
8. Colossians 3:6: omit or insert upon the sons of disobedience.
9. Colossians 3:13: the Lord or Christ.
10. Colossians 3:16: Christ or Lord or God.
11. Colossians 4:15: their or her.
In each of these cases the balance of probability seems to me to incline somewhat to the Revisers’ preference; decidedly so in No. 1, a reading of some importance. In No. 4, a most important passage, the complete confusion of the oldest documents renders impossible a reliable decision: but the balance of probability inclines very decidedly to the Revisers’ preference. See note in Lightfoot’s Colossians. In No. 6, the word removed by the Revisers to their margin has been confidently rejected by all critical editors since Lachmann marked it as doubtful. Evidence external and internal seems to me decisive against it. In No. 8, the words noted in the margin as doubtful are supported by a preponderance of ancient documents so great as at first sight to exclude doubt. But they are omitted by the very excellent Vatican MS., and have the appearance of being copied from Ephesians 5:6; and are for this reason confidently rejected by all critical editors since Lachmann marked them as doubtful. Internal reasons seem to me to favour the genuineness of the words. See note. In No. 11, where the variations have considerable interest, the Revisers’ preference seems to me well grounded. The other readings noted in the margin are of little practical importance.
In Colossians 1:20, the words through Him are omitted in some of the best MSS. and versions, and by Lachmann and Tregelles without note and in the margin of Westcott. This omission might fairly claim a place in the Revisers’ margin. No other variation worthy of attention is omitted by them.
On the whole, in the Greek text of the Epistle to the Colossians, the only problems of importance not yet solved for us by Textual Criticism are the various readings in Colossians 1:7; 2:2; 4:15.
3. In the Epistle to PHILEMON, the only changes worthy of mention accepted without note by the Revisers are those in Philemon 1:2, 12, which are also adopted by all recent editors, without note except on Philemon 1:12 in the margin of Tregelles. It may be received with confidence. The only reading of any importance open to doubt is that noted in the margin of Philemon 1:6, where perhaps a slight probability inclines towards the Revisers’ preference: but certain decision is impossible.
4. In the Epistle to the EPHESIANS, the changes adopted without note by the Revisers and worthy of attention are:—
1. Ephesians 1:18: heart for understanding.
2. Ephesians 2:1: insert your before trespasses.
3. Ephesians 2:17: insert peace before to those near.
4. Ephesians 2:19: insert ye are before fellow-citizens.
5. Ephesians 2:21: every building: instead of all the building.
6. Ephesians 3:3: was-made-known for He made known.
7. Ephesians 3:6: the for His.
8. Ephesians 3:8: to the Gentiles for among the Gentiles.
9. Ephesians 3:9: stewardship or dispensation for fellowship.
10. Ephesians 3:9: omit through Jesus Christ.
11. Ephesians 3:14: omit of our Lord Jesus Christ.
12. Ephesians 3:21: insert and before in Christ Jesus.
13. Ephesians 4:6: in all instead of in you all.
14. Ephesians 4:17: omit other before Gentiles.
15. Ephesians 5:2: you instead of us.
16. Ephesians 5:9: light for Spirit.
17. Ephesians 5:21: Christ for God.
18. Ephesians 5:23: Himself Saviour for and He is Saviour.
19. Ephesians 5:27: omit it before to Himself.
20. Ephesians 5:30: omit of His flesh to end.
21. Ephesians 6:9: for your read of them and of you.
22. Ephesians 6:10: omit my brethren.
23. Ephesians 6:12: read this darkness.
24. Ephesians 6:16: read among all for upon all. All these are accepted without note by all recent editors, except No. 15, a reading of no importance, adopted by all but Lachmann; and No. 20, about which Tregelles, while omitting the words in question, expresses doubt. All may, I think, be accepted with confidence.
The readings noted in the Revisers margin as open to doubt are:—
1. Ephesians 1:1: insert or omit at Ephesus.
2. Ephesians 1:15: omit or insert love.
3. Ephesians 2:5: with Christ or in Christ.
4. Ephesians 3:9: insert or omit all before men.
5. Ephesians 4:9: omit or insert first before into the lower parts.
6. Ephesians 4:32: you or us.
7. Ephesians 5:2: for us or for you.
For Nos. 1 and 2, important and difficult variations, see notes. In No. 3, the oldest and best uncial, viz. the Vatican MS., the accurate Coptic version, and one of the best cursives, support the reading in the margin against all other authorities. But the practical difference is slight. The other marginal readings are unimportant.
No variations worthy of note and of any claim to genuineness are overlooked by the Revisers. In short, the Greek text underlying the four Epistles here annotated may be accepted throughout with full confidence was, within narrow limits, representing correctly the original text of these Epistles.
5. In the renderings of the REVISED VERSION of the Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS, among many improvements I note the following. In Philippians 1:13, the whole prætorian guard is much more accurate than all the palace. The rendering in Philippians 2:6, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God is, in my view, not correct: but in Philippians 2:7 the rendering emptied himself instead of made himself of no reputation is an unspeakable gain, not merely as a more correct reproduction of Paul’s thought but as shedding light on the profound mystery of the Incarnation. In Philippians 3:9 a righteousness of my own is a most happy rendering, instead of the less accurate my own righteousness. Our citizenship, in Philippians 3:20, is much better than the misleading or almost meaningless word conversation: and the body of our humiliation, of his glory, in Philippians 3:21, corrects a serious misrepresentation. In Philippians 4:3, the rendering help these women, for they laboured with me in the Gospel, makes clear Paul’s reference to the two women just mentioned by name. In nothing be anxious (Philippians 4:6) is a good reproduction of Paul’s meaning and emphasis, and replaces a rendering very liable to be misunderstood, be careful for nothing. Even the change in Philippians 4:7 from through Christ Jesus to in Christ Jesus is not without significance. The rendering I have learnt the secret in Philippians 4:12 does something to reproduce the sense completely buried under the A.V. I am instructed. To these might be added many smaller improvements. And I do not know of anything to set against them.
In the Epistle to the COLOSSIANS, the marked improvements are not so many. But the change at the beginning and end of Colossians 1:16 from by Him were all things created to in Him, through Him is very important as stating more accurately the relation of the Son to the work of creation. The Revisers’ rendering of Colossians 2:15, having put off from Himself the principalities, reproduces fairly the meaning of Paul’s words, and thus calls attention to a difficulty quite concealed by the A.V. having spoiled etc. Similarly, in Colossians 2:18 dwelling on the things which he hath seen is much nearer to Paul’s intention than intruding into etc. Severity to the body in Colossians 2:23 is better than neglecting of the body: and not in any value against indulgence of the flesh is intelligible and fairly correct, whereas the A.V. is unintelligible. On the other hand, an aggravated form of the blemish mentioned on p. 541 of my Corinthians is found in Colossians 1:16, where the Revisers have displaced a very correct and idiomatic rendering for Him in favour of the meaningless words unto Him. They have also failed to make clear the evident reference of Colossians 4:11, viz. that the three men mentioned were the only Jews who had been a comfort to Paul. In PHILEMON Philemon 1:12, my very heart is better than mine own bowels. Similarly, in Philemon 1:20. In Philemon 1:13, on thy behalf is more accurate than in thy stead.
The absence of any special errors of rendering in the A.V. of the Epistle to the EPHESIANS has left no occasion for improvements worthy of special mention here. But throughout these four Epistles are a multitude of minor changes (e.g. Ephesians 4:29 speech instead of communication) which, though not individually of great moment, give collectively a much better conception of Paul’s meaning than does the earlier Version.
Section 4. — Philippi, Ephesus, Colossae, and The Churches There.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 29
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 4. — PHILIPPI, EPHESUS, COLOSSÆ, AND THE
CHURCHES THERE.
1. PHILIPPI was situated some eight miles from Neapolis, now Kavala, on the northern shore of the Ægean Sea, in a level and well-watered and luxuriant plain surrounded by mountains and separated from the sea by a ridge of hills from 1,000 to 1,600 feet high. Over this range of hills and through Philippi passed the Egnatian Way, the great road from Asia Minor to the Adriatic and to Rome.
The city was rebuilt by Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great, on the site of an older town called, from the many streams flowing through the plain, Crenides, or Springs of Water. On the plain of Philippi was fought after the death of Julius Cæsar the famous battle, renewed after twenty days on the same field, in which his murderers, Brutus and Cassius, were crushed by Octavius, who afterwards became the Emperor Augustus, and Mark Antony. To commemorate the battle Augustus afterwards made Philippi a Roman colony, and gave to it the further privileges known as the Italic right. On the Roman colonies, see my Corinthians p. 16. By an interesting coincidence, coins of Philippi have been found bearing, as was usual with colonies, Latin inscriptions, in marked contrast to other Macedonian coins with Greek inscriptions.
Philippi was the first European town in which Paul laboured. On his second missionary journey, probably in A.D. 52, (see my Galatians p. 193, {Diss. i.}) he arrived at Troas on the eastern shore of the Ægean Sea. From Troas, Mount Athos on the opposite coast of Macedonia, though distant more than eighty miles, is sometimes seen in the rays of the setting sun. And we can well believe that at Troas Paul’s thoughts went out after the mighty continent of Europe, now nearer to him than ever before. No wonder that in a dream a man of Macedonia besought his help. A rapid voyage of two days brought the little band to Neapolis. Thence, at once apparently, they passed on over the ridge to Philippi. That no synagogue is mentioned, suggests that not many Jews lived there. But Paul found some women, Jewesses or proselytes who were accustomed to meet together for prayer by the river-side. He was soon gladdened by the conversion of Lydia, apparently a woman of position, and later by that of the gaoler, and of their households. From this beginning sprang the Church at Philippi. The reality of the good work thus begun was soon proved. The passing stranger was remembered after his departure by those to whom he had spoken words of life. Not only once but twice, even when he was at Thessalonica, the next city in which he preached, they sent a contribution of money for his support: Philippians 4:16. Nor was this all. During his eighteen months’ sojourn at Corinth, money was sent (2 Corinthians 11:9) to him from Macedonia, doubtless either altogether (cp. Philippians 4:15) from Philippi or stimulated by the liberality of the Philippians.
Paul’s second visit to Philippi was some six years later and along the same route. A fugitive from deadly peril at Ephesus he came to Troas, thinking not of his peril but of Titus whom he hoped to meet there with news about the unfaithful Church at Corinth: 2 Corinthians 2:12, 13. But Titus was not at Troas: and Paul hurried across the Ægean to seek him in Macedonia. Landing at Neapolis he doubtless again pushed on to Philippi. And there or at least in Macedonia the wished-for messenger came, and with good news. In Macedonia Paul laboured for some time, and then went on to Corinth: Acts 20:2. On the return journey, accompanied by Luke who had been with him on his first visit to Philippi, (as we infer from we were and we sailed in Acts 16:12; 20:6,) Paul spent Easter there, and went on his way, probably for the last time and with dark forebodings, to Jerusalem.
The curtain now falls on this most interesting Church until in some measure it is lifted by the Epistle before us. And with the close of this Epistle it falls again. The letter from Polycarp to the Church at Philippi, quoted on p. 5, says nothing about the state of the Church there except that Valens, a presbyter of it, and his wife, had been guilty of avarice. In subsequent history we hear nothing more. And to-day, amid quiet meadows, a few ruins are all that remain to mark the site of what once was Philippi.
2. Far more important than Philippi was EPHESUS, the splendid capital of the Roman province of Asia.
On the western coast of Asia Minor, some 300 miles due east of Corinth, into a bay partly closed by the island of Samos, the river Cayster flows through a plain about five miles across bounded to the north by low hills and to the south by the somewhat loftier range of mount Prion.* (* As these mountains are named by Mr. Wood, who was led by his discoveries to transpose the names previously given to them.) To the south of the river, upon and around a double hill called mount Coressus* {See * above} and upon the northern slopes of mount Prion stood Ephesus, a city built, together with others on the same coast, in the early dawn of the history of their nation, by Greeks from across the Ægean Sea.
Close outside the city, as we now know, from its earliest days stood a temple to the goddess Artemis. Even Herodotus in the fifth century B.C. speaks of the temple of Ephesus as worthy of note: bk. ii. 148. On or near the same site were successively erected and burnt several temples, of which all were famous but each surpassed in splendour its predecessor. One of these is said to have been burnt, apparently soon after its completion, in B.C. 356, on the day of the birth of Alexander the Great. This was followed, on the same site and a few years afterwards, by the temple standing in all its glory in the days of Paul. Of this temple Pausanias speaks as surpassing all buildings raised by men: bk. iv. 31. 8. And everywhere Ephesus was known as the sacristan of the great Artemis: Acts 19:35. From the time of the Persian wars to that of Paul, Ephesus enjoyed great and increasing commercial prosperity. The rich country around supplied to the city abundant produce. And ships from every port filled its market with merchandise, to be exchanged for that borne along the great roads leading from Ephesus to the interior of Asia Minor. So Strabo says, “Owing to its good situation, the city increases day by day, being the greatest emporium on this side the Taurus mountains:” bk. xiv. p. 641. In the bloom of Greek art, Ephesus was famous for its painters and sculptors. And when art had faded, it was widely known as the chosen home of magic. So Clement of Alexandria speaks of “the so-called Ephesian letters,” a kind of charm, as being “far famed:” Misc. bk. v. 8, p. 72. The wealth of Ephesus and the luxuriant climate of the Asiatic coast produced also an unbridled self-indulgence for which the city was long notorious.
When the Roman province of Asia was formed, the commercial and religious importance of Ephesus, and the easy access to it from the west, made it the residence of the Roman Governor and the centre of Roman authority.
Such then was Ephesus when visited by Paul. Its temple, ancient and yet in full glory, was a wonder of the world and the veneration of all heathendom. Its quays and markets were crowded by men of every nation, enriching a city already rich. The soft climate invited to every kind of luxury. And over all the majesty of Rome shed the lustre of its mighty presence. About A.D. 260, Ephesus was plundered and its temple set on fire by barbarian invaders. And from this time the temple passes from our view. It probably shared the fate of others in A.D. 399, when a decree was issued by the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius for the destruction of all temples except such as could be used for churches.
So complete was its destruction that until a few years ago no trace remained, nor was the site known, of the building which had been the glory of Ephesus and of Asia. A careful search for it was undertaken in the year 1863, under the auspices of the Trustees of the British Museum, by an English Architect, Mr. J. T. Wood, whose patient and well directed efforts were rewarded in 1869 by discovery of the long lost temple. During the next five years sufficient remains were found not only to place the site beyond doubt but to give a good and reliable idea of the building itself. These discoveries agree in the main with the scanty notices of Vitruvius, On Architecture bks. i. 2, iii. 1, iv. 1, and of Pliny, Natural History bk. xxxvi. 21. The temple was rectangular, 343 ft by 164 ft, not including the steps which surrounded it on all sides. It consisted of a central chamber, or Cella, containing the famous image of the goddess, with a vestibule in front and a large chamber behind. Around this building were two rows of Ionic fluted columns, about seven feet in diameter at the bottom of the shaft and about fifty-six feet high, supporting the roof of the temple. Pliny says that 36 columns were sculptured. And five drums or parts of drums of columns elaborately sculptured with life size human figures in high relief were found by Mr. Wood and may now be seen at the British Museum. Broken fluted drums in great abundance were brought to light. Portions of the marble pavement of the temple were found; as also parts of the pavements of two earlier temples on the same site. Also, with other inscriptions in the Theatre and other parts of the city, twenty-six inscriptions were found among the ruins of the temple conferring citizenship upon various foreigners who had rendered service to the Ephesians. A careful reprint and translation of these most interesting records of early Ephesian life, and a full account of the excavations, abundantly illustrated, are given in first-rate style in Wood’s Discoveries at Ephesus. Also interesting, and not superseded by Mr. Wood’s volume, is Falkener’s Ephesus.
We must now trace Paul’s connection with Ephesus. From Acts 16:6 we learn that, on his second missionary journey, he was hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia. This suggests that his purpose was, after passing through Phrygia and Galatia, to carry the Gospel to that important province. And, if so, his eye must have rested on its great metropolis. But God had more pressing work for him to do, viz. to carry the Gospel at once to its future home, the great continent of Europe. On his return journey, as recorded in Acts 18:19, Paul paid a flying visit to Ephesus in company with his faithful helpers Aquila and Prisca who remained there, apparently for several years. That no Christians are mentioned, suggests that there was then no Church there. But as usual Paul went to the synagogue of the Jews, by whom he was well received and invited to remain. This he could not do, but promised soon to return. Some time after Paul’s departure, there arrived at Ephesus an eloquent and earnest Alexandrian Jew, Apollos, who eagerly advocated, as he imperfectly understood them, the claims of Jesus. And, while doing so, he learnt from Aquila and Prisca the real significance of the Gospel he endeavoured to proclaim. Shortly afterwards he crossed the Ægean Sea to Achaia, and continued there his earnest work for Christ.
In the spring of A.D. 55, according to the reckoning on p. 193 of my Galatians, {Diss i.} Paul, fulfilling his promise, again arrived at Ephesus. Since Aquila and Prisca are referred to in 1 Corinthians 16:19 as with him at Ephesus, we may suppose that they were there to welcome his arrival. He found in the city some twelve disciples of Christ who had received neither Christian Baptism nor the distinctively Christian gift of the Holy Spirit. From his teaching they received the inspiration of a new life. Their Baptism was doubtless an important era in the history of the young Church.
As at Corinth, Paul began his work at Ephesus in the synagogue of the Jews. After three months, opposition arose. But already he had gathered round him a band of faithful men. These he now separated from the synagogue; and found for them a home in the school of Tyrannus, possibly a Greek teacher of philosophy or rhetoric. Here Paul laboured for two years, a longer time than he had before spent in one place; end with great success. From Ephesus as a centre the Gospel became known throughout the whole province. Asiatic superstition was confronted by the most wonderful miracles recorded of Paul. Certain Jews who attempted to use as a charm the name of Jesus were utterly confounded by the evil spirits they tried to exorcise. And many Christians, convicted by the manifested power of God, confessed that they had been secretly practising the magical arts of their former days; and proved their sincerity by bringing out and burning publicly their secret books to the value of some £2000 of our money.
From Ephesus, about Easter of A.D. 58 probably, (see Galatians p. 193, {Diss. i.}) Paul wrote his first extant Epistle to the Corinthians. He was then purposing to start soon for Macedonia and Achaia.
His departure was hastened by the tumult described in Acts 19:23-41: see p. 511 of my Corinthians. I may now add that in the inscriptions reprinted in Wood’s Ephesus the birth-day of Artemis is several times said to be a religious festival, and said to be in the month of May. We have also frequent mention of silver images, which would find work for Demetrius and his companions. The word rendered town-clerk is also frequent as an official title at Ephesus. And the phrase temple-keeper of Artemis and others similar are frequently found (cp. Acts 19:35) as titles of the city. On his return journey, Paul summoned to Miletus the elders of the Church at Ephesus, and gave them the address recorded in Acts 20:18-35. All this reveals the importance of that Church.
Then followed at Jerusalem Paul’s arrest and imprisonment, his voyage to Rome, and his imprisonment there. During that imprisonment, as we shall see, the letter before us was written.
From 1 Timothy 1:3 we learn that Paul had requested Timothy to remain at Ephesus to deal with church-matters there which needed special attention. And his words seem to imply that this request was made when Paul was himself at Ephesus, but starting for Macedonia. A multitude of reasons combine to assure us that this, and the similar request in Titus 1:5, were not earlier than Paul’s arrest at Jerusalem. If so, these Epistles, which I cannot but accept as genuine, prove that after his imprisonment at Rome, Paul was set free and again visited Ephesus. The circumstances of his visit are altogether unknown. But from the letter to Timothy we learn that the fears expressed at Miletus were only too well grounded and that the Church at Ephesus was then beset by many perils. The charges to Timothy and Titus by no means imply that they were permanently settled at Ephesus and in Crete as chief pastors, or bishops. And of any such office we have to hint in the New Testament. See Diss. ii. 10. Nor do we know whether the Second Epistle found Timothy still at Ephesus. Our last glimpse of the Church at Ephesus in the New Testament is Revelation 2:1-7, where as metropolis of Asia it is addressed first among the seven Churches. From this we learn that, while still faithful in the main, the Church had lost something of its early fervour. Beyond the limits of the New Testament a reliable tradition connects with Ephesus the last years of the Apostle John: see Irenæus bk. iii. 3, 4 and Clement of Alexandria. What rich man etc. § 42. It was afterwards the seat of an archbishop. Here was held in A.D. 431 amid much confusion the Third General Council; and, in A.D. 449, amid still greater confusion, a gathering summoned as a general council but afterwards not acknowledged as such and known ever since as the Robber Synod.
With this tumultuous assembly closes practically the history of Ephesus and of the Church at Ephesus. For long centuries the site of the city has been an utter solitude without inhabitant. But, strange to say, the railway from Smyrna to Aidin has a station little more than a mile from its ruins. Between the city and the railway station is the site of the temple. The candlestick (Revelation 2:5) has been removed from its place. And even the splendid metropolis it once illumined has ceased to be counted among the cities of the world. But its name will never die. Throughout the world it is known, chiefly through the labours and letters of a Jewish tentmaker. But that tentmaker was an Apostle of Jesus Christ.
3. We now leave the beautiful coast of the Ægean and the splendid metropolis of the Roman province of Asia, through a gate of which there are still remains, and go inland over the hills to Magnesia and then eastward, some 120 miles in all, almost to the boundary of the province and into what was popularly and indefinitely known as Phrygia. On the banks of the Lycus, a stream flowing into the Mæander and now called the Tchoruk Su, are ruins which have been, with reasonable certainty, identified as those of COLOSSÆ, some three miles north of Chonos, a modern straggling village on the site of a mediæval town known as Chonai. See Hamilton’s Researches in Asia Minor vol. i. pages 509-523. Some ten miles lower down the stream, which here flows somewhat north of east, to the south of the stream and on the slopes of the Cadmus range, are important ruins of a racecourse, gymnasium, theatres, and other buildings, which have been identified as those of Laodicea; and six miles away, north by east, with the stream flowing about midway between the two sites, are the still nobler ruins of Hierapolis on the slope of lower hills bounding the valley of the Lycus on the north. The site of Hierapolis is described by Hamilton as one of special beauty. A weird strangeness is cast over the scene by thick incrustations in all grotesque forms deposited by a small stream strongly impregnated with lime which falls into the Lycus near this point. There is also a hot spring of some 100 degrees Fahrenheit. So near are the ruins of the three cities that all may be visited in one day. COLOSSÆ is mentioned by Herodotus (bk. vii. 30) as a great city through which the army of Xerxes passed on its way to invade Greece. Xenophon (Anabasis bk. i. 2. 6) speaks of it as being, some 80 years later, “populous, prosperous, and great.” But the notices of later writers seem to imply that long before Paul’s time it had sunk into comparative decay. Lightfoot says, “Without doubt Colossæ was the least important church to which any Epistle of St. Paul was addressed.”
LAODICEA, till then an obscure town, had risen into great importance shortly before Paul’s day. So Strabo, bk. xii. p. 578. Under the Romans it became the political capital of the surrounding district. HIERAPOLIS seems to have been, owing to the beauty of its position and the medicinal properties of its springs, a favourite health resort.
The rich pastures around were famous for their large flocks of sheep. All three towns were enriched by their trade in dyed wool. For the rich colours of their dyes, Strabo tells us (bk. xii. p. 578) that Laodicea and Colossæ were specially famous; and that (bk. xiii. p. 630) for this they owed much to the mineral waters of Hierapolis. He says also that the country was specially liable to earthquakes. Of one such, which happened apparently shortly before this Epistle was written and which desolated Laodicea, we read in Tacitus, Annals bk. xiv. 27. From this, he tells us, Laodicea recovered without help from Rome.
From Josephus (Antiq. bk. xii. 3. 4) we learn that Antiochus the Great (B.C. 223-187) transplanted 2,000 Jewish families to Lydia and Phrygia. Doubtless some of these settled in the valley of the Lycus. Cicero says (For Flaccus § 28) that large sums of money were sent from Laodicea to the temple at Jerusalem. This reveals the presence of a large Jewish population. It is not unlikely that among the Phrygians (Acts 2:10) at Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost were some from these three cities.
About the founding of the Churches in these cities, we know nothing except from this epistle. We learn from Colossians 2:1 that Paul had never visited Colossæ or Laodicea. To these we may add by sure inference the neighbouring city of Hierapolis. He twice passed through Phrygia: Acts 16:6; 18:23. But his route, so far as we can trace it, would not lead him near the valley of the Lycus.
Indirectly, however, the Churches of the Lycus were probably results of Paul’s labour. The Colossians received the Gospel from their fellow-citizen, Epaphras: Colossians 1:7; 4:12. The nearness of the three cities assures us that it would at once spread from one to the others. And the earnest interest of Epaphras embraced them all: Colossians 4:13. It is therefore probable that directly or indirectly he was founder of the three Churches. Now Paul laboured for three years at Ephesus: Acts 20:31. Through his continued preaching there all those inhabiting Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks: Acts 19:10. It is not unlikely that from the lips of Paul, on a visit to the metropolis of the province, Epaphras heard and accepted the Gospel which he afterwards preached in his own city and those around it. Possibly Paul charged him to do this. If so, we can the more easily understand his description of Epaphras in Colossians 1:7 as a faithful minister of Christ on our behalf.
Whether Paul paid his hoped-for (Philemon 1:22) visit to Colossæ, we do not know. But if the Pastoral Epistles be genuine, he was set free, and visited Ephesus and Miletus: 1 Timothy 1:3; 2 Timothy 4:20. And if so, he may have extended his journey to the Churches of the Lycus. The only later reference in the New Testament to these Churches is the letter preserved in Revelation 3:14-22. Naturally it was addressed to the most important of the three cities. In Revelation 3:14, the beginning of the creation of God, we have a thought in close harmony with Colossians 1:15, 16.
The subsequent history of these cities and Churches contains little worthy of note. With this Epistle the Church at Colossæ disappears altogether from view, except as here and there the name of its bishop is appended to the decrees of a council. The bishops of the more important sees of Laodicea and Hierapolis were present at the General Councils at Nicæa, Ephesus, and Chalcedon; and, two years before this last, at the Robber Synod at Ephesus. About A.D. 363 was held at Laodicea a provincial council which has left us, in its sixtieth Canon, a list of the books of the New Testament agreeing exactly with our English Bible except that it omits the Book of Revelation, the earliest list so nearly complete. And for some centuries the two sees retained their importance. A thin and scattered population, Turkish with a mixture of Greeks and Armenians, lives around the ruins of these once important cities, and cultivates the soil which still retains its ancient fertility. And, as of old, the country is still occasionally visited by earthquakes.
Section 5. — Time and Place of Writing, and The Occasion, of the Epistles.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 39
Editorial note: Additional printed-edition collation — Beet (1890): The quoted Colossians sections 5–7 are contents-list entries on p. x, describing Christ’s relation to the Church, the Colossian Christians, and Paul’s relation to the Church. This alert was generated from preliminary source pages and attached here; it does not identify a missing Greek or Hebrew word in the surrounding commentary. The printed source resolves the kind and location of the quoted material. The complete body text and every character of the preliminary apparatus were not collated in this check. BEET_EPH.PDF, PDF page 6; Beet, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon (1890), scan leaf 13.
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
SECTION 5. — TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING, AND THE
OCCASION, OF THE EPISTLES.
1. For the first time Paul now writes as a prisoner: Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; 6:20; Philippians 1:7, 13; Colossians 4:3, 18; Philemon 1:10, 13, 22, 23. These frequent references to his bondage reveal the deep mark it had made in his thought and heart, and thus prove that his imprisonment lasted for some time. Now in the Book of Acts no long imprisonment of Paul is recorded earlier than his arrest at Jerusalem. This is a very strong presumption that these Epistles were later than his arrest. And this is the confident judgment of all scholars.
2. After his arrest, Paul remained for more than two years a prisoner at Cæsarea, was then taken to Rome, the journey occupying many months, and remained there in prison for not less than two years: Acts 24:27; 28:30. Whether he was then set free, we have no sure information. This long imprisonment affording abundant leisure for writing letters suggests itself at once as the time when these Epistles of captivity were written. We therefore ask, were they written during the earlier or the later part of it, i.e. from Cæsarea or from Rome? That they were written from Rome, an early and unanimous tradition attests. With such scanty indications as we have, we will now test this tradition.
Cæsar’s household in Philippians 4:22 points very clearly to the imperial palace at Rome. And Philippians 1:13, manifest in the whole prætorium or prætorian guard suggests much more forcibly the pretorian guard at Rome than the narrow limits of the governor’s palace at Cæsarea. Against these indications there is nothing to set. It is therefore generally admitted that probably the Epistle to the Philippians was written from Rome during Paul’s imprisonment there.
That the Epistle to the Colossians was written at the same time as that to the Ephesians, is made almost certain by the reference in Ephesians 6:21 and Colossians 4:7 to Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, as evidently the bearer of each Epistle, taken in connection with the very close similarity of the Epistles in thought, order, and phraseology, a similarity without parallel in the New Testament, and with the proof given in Introd. ii. that both Epistles are from the pen of Paul.
The Epistle to Philemon was apparently (Philemon 1:12) taken by Onesimus, who is said in Colossians 4:9 to be accompanying Tychicus to Colossæ. Moreover, of six men with Paul who send greeting to the Church at Colossæ, we notice that five send greeting to Philemon. These remarkable coincidences prove conclusively that the short letter to Philemon was written and sent at the same time as those to Ephesus and Colossæ.
We now ask, were the three Epistles written from Cæsarea or from Rome? That they were written from Rome, an early and widespread tradition asserts. Meyer and others argue that they were written from Cæsarea, on the ground that it is more likely that a runaway slave would go to Cæsarea than to Rome which was much further and involved a long sea voyage, that from Rome to Colossæ Tychicus and Onesimus would pass through Ephesus and that if so Paul would have commended Onesimus to the Church there as he does to that at Colossæ, and that Paul’s request (Philemon 1:22) for a lodging implying hope of an early journey to Colossæ suggests Cæsarea, from which place, had Paul been set free, he might have travelled through Colossæ to Ephesus and to Rome. These arguments have no great weight. In all ages longer routes to the metropolis have been more easy than shorter routes from one provincial town to another, and fugitives have ever preferred to hide themselves among the multitudes of a great city. Possibly Onesimus’ plan was to leave Tychicus at Ephesus and to pass on without delay to the master he had wronged at Colossæ. Reasons unknown to us may have given Paul hopes of early liberation. And his deep interest in the young Churches on the Lycus, acknowledged in Colossians 2:1, may have prompted him to plan an early visit to them.
On the other side I can adduce only one argument, viz. indications that the three Epistles were written later than that to the Philippians. Although in its tone of triumphant calm and in the absence of serious discussion about Jew and Gentile this last Epistle is closely related to those to Ephesus and Colossæ, it is in teaching and phraseology much more closely related than they are to the earlier Epistles and especially to that to the Romans. Compare Philippians 3:9, not having a righteousness of my own, even that which is from law, but that which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God on the condition of faith: a very close coincidence with Romans 1:17; 3:21, 22; 10:3. Also compare Philippians 3:4-6 with 2 Corinthians 11:21-30; and note other phrases found only in the earlier Epistles. These coincidences seem to me far to outweigh the arguments adduced by Meyer.
Against this earlier date of the Epistle to the Philippians, but not necessarily against the other Epistles being written at Rome, it has been objected that Philippians 4:10 implies a long interval between Paul’s arrival at Rome and the letter to Philippi, an interval long enough for news of his imprisonment to reach Philippi, for delay there, for the journey and illness of Epaphroditus, for news of his illness to reach Philippi, and for Epaphroditus to know this. But probably, even for all this, a year would suffice. For the journey from Rome to Philippi along splendid Roman roads and across the narrow straits would occupy probably not more than a month and could be made at almost any time of the year. And the illness of Epaphroditus may have been on the eastern side of the straits where it might soon become known at Philippi.
Another objection is based on Philippians 1:20-26, which suggests that a crisis of Paul’s trial was near. From this, some have inferred that the letter was written near to the close of his imprisonment. But it is quite possible that in the mismanagement of Nero’s rule Paul’s trial was delayed after its decision had seemed to be near.
Reviewing the whole case, the balance of evidence seems to me to incline somewhat to the earlier date of the Epistle to the Philippians. And this implies that the other letters were written, not from Cæsarea, but from Rome. We may suppose that the letter to Philippi was written within the first year of Paul’s imprisonment at Rome and at a time when the decision of his case seemed to be near; that a further delay arose of more than a year; and that towards the close of it, when Paul was again hoping for liberty, Epaphras arrived with news about the Colossians and the Christians of Asia. This is to me much easier than to suppose that, after the remarkable development of thought embodied in the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, Paul could write the Epistle to the Philippians in which we find no trace of this development. Between the Epistles an interval must be allowed which if not very long was sufficient for a marked growth in the thought of the Apostle. Probably this growth was stimulated by the news brought by Epaphras. In Diss. iii. of my Corinthians we have seen that Paul arrived in Rome probably early in A.D.
62. If so, he may have written to the Philippians early in A.D. 63, and the other three letters a year later.
The occasion of the Epistles is involved in what has just been said. Paul is a prisoner in charge of the Pretorian guard at Rome, expecting an early decision of his case, but utterly uncertain whether it will bring him liberty and further work for Christ or sudden death. A messenger arrives with a contribution in money from the Church at Philippi which has already given several proofs of its care for him. Epaphroditus even apologizes for the lateness of the gift, by saying that circumstances had delayed it. On his way to Rome, he had been dangerously ill: and news of this had reached Philippi. The traveller is eager to return, in order to remove, by his own presence among them again, the anxiety thus caused to his fellow-Christians at home. And Paul sends with him, as an abundant recompense for their kindness to him, this beautiful letter in which he pours out his joy and gratitude for this remarkable proof of the Christian character of his beloved children in the faith.
The expected decision is deferred: and Paul lingers in prolonged bondage. But within the narrow walls of his prison he ponders the grandeur of the Eternal Son and the eternal purpose of salvation. During this long delay, probably near to its close, the Apostle is cheered by the arrival of Epaphras, an earnest Christian worker from the far off valley of the Lycus, who has himself planted the Gospel in its three cities and now narrates all this to Paul. The news fills him with joy. But the joy is mixed with anxiety caused by indications that at least in Colossæ serious error is taking root, error which threatens to undo the good work already begun. That the letter was addressed to Colossæ, suggests that there the danger was greatest. That Paul directs the letter to be read also at Laodicea, implies that this neighbouring city was infected. The one slight reference (Colossians 4:13) to Hierapolis suggests that it was the smallest of the three Churches. Either for other reasons or at Paul’s request, Tychicus is going to Asia, his native province, and to Colossæ. Paul writes and sends with him a letter setting forth, in view of the errors there prevalent, the greatness and sufficiency of the Son of God in His relation to the Church and to the Universe. And since on his way Tychicus must pass through Ephesus and must cross the province of Asia, Paul writes, and sends with him, another letter to the Ephesians and to the various Churches of the province. Before this time, a runaway slave of a Christian at Colossæ called Philemon, who apparently had robbed his master, had come to Rome and come within Paul’s influence and by him had been led to Christ. Already the young convert had been helpful to the imprisoned Apostle. But Paul now sends him back to his defrauded master, in company with Tychicus who was going to the same place, and sends with him a third letter begging his friend to receive back as a Christian brother the returning fugitive. Bearing these documents, familiar now in every land and almost in every home and more precious than diamonds, the strange companions in travel started on their long journey over land and sea, leaving the great Apostle, whose loving and anxious heart and earnest prayers followed their steps, still in bonds at Rome.
In the following exposition, the Epistle to the Philippians is placed first, as being nearest in its teaching and phraseology to the Epistles already annotated. And this seems to me, as I have endeavoured to show, the most likely order of time. The Epistle to the Colossians comes next, as dealing with a specific matter, namely the news brought by Epaphras about the error spreading at Colossæ. Then follows the letter to Philemon, dealing with another specific, but less important, matter. Last of all I have placed the profound Epistle to the Ephesians which treats of no specific matter but sets forth, from its own point of view, the Eternal Purpose of Salvation and its realisation in the One Church of Christ.
Dissertation 1. -- The Epistles Before Us Compared With Those To The Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 182
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 1.
THE EPISTLES BEFORE US COMPARED WITH THOSE TO
THE ROMANS, CORINTHIANS, AND GALATIANS.
1. In my earlier volumes I have endeavoured to show that the Epistles there annotated were written within a year, amid the active evangelistic toil of Paul’s third missionary journey. In Introd. ii. and v. of this volume I have tried to prove that the Epistles just expounded were written by Paul, probably during his first imprisonment at Rome. If these inferences be correct, the two groups of Epistles were separated by a lapse of some years and by a total change of circumstances. We come now to compare the groups, in order to trace in them the effect on the Apostle of this lapse of time and these altered circumstances. Our investigation will also test in some measure the conclusions we have reached about the authorship of the Epistles; thus supplementing the argument of Introd. ii. And it will embody some of the practical gains we have derived from our study of these Epistles.
2. In Philippians 1:1, for the first time in the Epistles of Paul we find definite mention of Church officers; in two orders, bishops and deacons. The former title appears in Acts 20:28 as a description of the elders of the Church at Ephesus, summoned by Paul to Miletus, whom he bids to act as shepherds of the Church. Still earlier, in Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23, we find at Jerusalem a body of elders associated with the Apostles in discussing a most important matter of doctrine. And from Acts 14:23 we learn that Paul appointed elders in the Churches founded during his first missionary journey. With these passages, Philippians 1:1 is an important coincidence. That in the letters to Corinth which deal specifically with Church matters the bishops are not mentioned, but are mentioned in this later letter, reminds us that as times rolled by the officers of the Church would gain an importance they could not have when officers and members were alike new converts. The word deacons reveals a second order of Church-officers. And in Romans 16:1 a lady is called a deacon of the Church at Kenchæa.
In 2 Corinthians 1:8-11; 4:8-11 we traced the deep impression made upon the heart of the Apostle by a recent and deadly peril. With this we now contrast the serene calm with which in Philippians 1:20-26 he contemplates the uncertain issue of his approaching trial before Nero. In active work, Paul clung to life. But in his dungeon at Rome the prisoner had become familiar with the King of Terrors and had learnt to look upon his face without emotion. The secret of this serene calm we learn in Philippians 4:6, 7; and in Philippians 4:11-13. The profound peace which reigns in these passages and throughout this Epistle, brightening here and there into a joy which even the gloom of a prison and the shadow of the gallows cannot dim, belongs to the autumn maturity of the Apostle’s inner life. These words of peace are gems of priceless worth. As in 2 Corinthians 8:9 so in Philippians 2:5-11, the incarnation of Christ is appealed to as an example for us; as an example in the former case, of generosity, in the latter of unselfishness. But the second exposition of the example of Christ is far richer than the first. We have the pre-incarnate Son existing in the form of God and equal to God, contemplating this equality and refusing to use it for His own gratification. We see Him as He emptied Himself, then treading a path of humiliation till it led Him to the cross; and raised by God, as a recompense for His obedient self-sacrifice, till the loftiest in heaven bow the knee in worship and proclaim His majesty. This passage, full of dramatic grandeur, is the most complete exposition in the N.T. of the Incarnation of Christ. The word rendered I-have-learnt-the-mystery in Philippians 4:12 links the cognate word mystery already used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:7; 4:1; Romans 16:25 with the Greek mysteries; and thus gives to the word as used by him a definite reference which sheds important light upon his conception of the Gospel.
The references to Epaphroditus in Philippians 2:25-30 and to the gift from Philippi in Philippians 4:10, 18 rescue from oblivion a most beautiful Christian character and a most interesting incident of Christian life in an apostolic Church.
3. In Colossians 1:9, 10, more emphasis is put on the value of knowledge of God as an element of the Christian life than in the similar prayer in Philippians 1:9, 10. The same thought is prominent in Colossians 2:2, 3; 3:10, 16. It is a feature of the group of Epistles now before us. As compared with 2 Corinthians 4:4, the fuller term in Colossians 1:15, of the invisible God, reminds us that an image is a presentation of that which would otherwise be unseen. The accurate term Firstborn before every creature is an important addition to the teaching of the N.T. about the Son of God. In Colossians 1:16 for the first time Paul traces to the Son the creation of the universe: through Him and in Him and for Him were all things in heaven and earth created; Himself before all things, and all things held together in Him. Once stated, this teaching carries conviction by its close harmony with Paul’s earlier teaching about the relation of Christ to the work Of God. But the explicit statement of what would otherwise be only an inference is of infinite value. In Colossians 1:18; 2:19 Christ is called the Head of the Body, i.e. of the Church: a new and most important development of Paul’s favourite metaphor. So far was it from his thought at an earlier time that he wrote, in 1 Corinthians 12:21, the head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you: a statement utterly inapplicable to Christ. But it is in complete harmony with the original metaphor; of which indeed it is a logical development. As dwelling in each member, Christ is the life-giving Spirit of the Body. But as human and corporeal He is also the highest part of it, the supreme and directive part, essential to the life of the whole. This important development of the metaphor was probably suggested to Paul by his study, embodied in this Epistle, of the grandeur of the Son of God and of His relation to the universe and to the Church.
In Colossians 2:13 we have a new and important conception of the state of the unsaved as not merely dying but already dead by reason of their trespasses, and therefore beyond reach of salvation except by Him who raises the dead. The same thought in germ is found in Romans 7:9, the Law came to life, but I died; and in John 5:24, 25. It is completed by the teaching in Colossians 2:13 that forgiveness of trespasses is life to whose who were spiritually dead. The Law as a handwriting nailed to the cross of Christ and thus made invalid is in complete accord with Paul’s teaching in Romans 7:4, dead to the Law through the body of Christ. But the figure is new, and valuable. Already in Romans 8:38 Paul has mentioned angels of superior rank. But in Colossians 1:16, and in Colossians 2:15, successive ranks of angels come conspicuously into view. And in Colossians 1:20 we learn that the purpose of salvation embraces in some sense even the inhabitants of heaven. The references to Epaphras in Colossians 1:7; 4:12 preserve for us the memory of a worthy member of an apostolic Church. The statements in Colossians 1:6 and more emphatically in Colossians 1:23 that the Gospel preached at Colossæ is preached also throughout the world is more suitable to the later, than to the earlier, part of Paul’s life.
4. An important gain in the Epistle to the Ephesians is that Paul’s teaching about the purpose of predestination in Romans 8:28, 29, the purpose of election in Romans 9:11, and about adoption in Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:5 is combined in Ephesians 1:4-12 into one profound exposition of a purpose earlier than the world and embracing the universe, a purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will. This combination gives unity and vast extension to what was before somewhat fragmentary and limited. Very conspicuous is the threefold refrain of praise in Ephesians 1:6, 12, 14: a remarkable development of a germ found in Philippians 1:11. Already in Philippians 1:9-11, Colossians 1:9-12 Paul has led his readers in prayer to God. But these prayers are left far behind by the mighty intercessions of Ephesians 1:16-23; 3:14-21, in which, pleading for his readers, the Apostle rises step by step to the very throne of God until in the second intercession prayer is lost in a shout of praise. In all ages these great liturgies have been ladders by which the holiest of men have found nearer access to God. A development in the Epistle to the Colossians of an earlier metaphor, viz. Christ the Head of His body the Church, receives now a still richer development. In Ephesians 1:22, Christ, already Head of the universe, is said to be God’s gift to the Church to be its Head. In Ephesians 4:15, 16, the Head is the source of the Church’s compactness and development, and the goal of its growth: all development uniting the members each to the others and all to Christ. And in Ephesians 5:23-31 His relation to the Church as its Head is made a pattern for the relation of husband and wife, and the union of the Church with Christ is represented as a vital union of a living body with its head. The metaphor of the Church as the bride of Christ, so richly expounded in this passage, is but an expansion of a germ already found in 2 Corinthians 11:2. Indeed, throughout the Epistle we have valuable developments not only of the teaching of the earlier group, but of that of the Epistle to the Colossians. For example, we have fuller teaching about the superhuman powers of the unseen world. We read in Ephesians 3:10 that God designs even the bright ones of heaven in their various ranks to learn through the Church the manifold wisdom of God. And in Ephesians 2:2; 6:12 we find in conflict with men superhuman and evil powers, acting under direction of one supreme leader. Ephesians 2:3 is in subtle harmony with Romans 5:12-14. Paul there taught us that through Adam’s sin we were born under the dominion of bodily death, i.e. we were by nature doomed to the grave. He now tells his readers that they were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest, i.e. as all men. This implies that the actual sins through which (Ephesians 5:6) comes the anger of God are done by nature, i.e. in virtue of a condition received at birth. This evil inheritance must have had an evil origin. And this can be no other than the sin of him through whom death passed through to all men. Ephesians 2:3 is thus a most valuable addition to the teaching of the N.T. about the unsaved.
5. Comparing the eight Epistles I have annotated we notice the vivacity and earnestness of the earlier group, and the profound calm, the wider mental vision, and the deeper insight into the nature and purpose of God, of the later group. Each group supplements the other. The orderly exposition of the Gospel in the Epistle to the Romans and the keen defence of its central doctrine, Justification through Faith, in that to the Galatians explain the casual references to faith and to salvation through faith, and to Jews and Gentiles, in the later group. Without this explanation the later Epistles would lack their doctrinal foundation. The glorious ideal of the Church given in the Epistle to the Ephesians rises immensely above anything in the letters to Corinth. But it would not supply the place of the vivid pictures there drawn of actual Church life in the Apostolic Age. All the letters correspond-and the correspondence grows as we examine them-with the circumstances of the writer. In the midst of active evangelical toil Paul gives us in the Epistle to the Romans an account of the Gospel he preached and in that to the Galatians a sample of the arguments with which he defended it to his countrymen. The letters to the Corinthians reflect the actual condition of Churches in which he laboured. The later Epistles give us the mature thought nurtured in the solitude of his imprisonment at Rome. In the letter to Philippi we have an outburst of Christian affection to the purest of the Churches founded by Paul, revealing his inmost spiritual life. That to Colossæ embodies his loftiest thought about the nature and work of his Master. The letter to Ephesus depicts the Church as in the eternal past it presented itself to the loving thought and purpose of Christ; and as it will stand, when the toil and conflict and sorrow of the present life are but a fading dream of the past, in glorious reality before the satisfied eye of Him who loved it and gave Himself for it, the spotless bride of the Eternal Son.
The great and independent worth of each of these Epistles is a complete confirmation of the confident belief of all Churches throughout the world in the second century that they are all from the pen of the greatest of the Apostles.
Dissertation 2. -- Paul’s Conception of the Church.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 188
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 2.
PAUL’S CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH.
1. Already in a note under 1 Corinthians 1:9 I have endeavoured to show that in the N.T. the word church denotes usually the company of the professed servants of Christ living in one city: e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:2, the Church of God which is at Corinth; 1 Corinthians 4:17, as I teach in every Church; 1 Corinthians 7:17, as I give charge in all the Churches.
We notice also that Paul always assumes that they to whom he writes have already personal spiritual life. Even to the Galatians who were (Galatians 1:6; 4:9) turning away to another Gospel… to the weak and poor rudiments, he writes, in Galatians 3:26, ye are all sons of God through faith. And, as sons, they had received (Galatians 4:6) the Spirit of His Son crying in their hearts, Abba, Father. In Galatians 3:2 Paul bases an argument on their inward spiritual experience: was it through works of law that ye received the Spirit or through hearing of faith? The Corinthian Christians, of whom some had once been guilty of gross sin, were now justified: 1 Corinthians 6:11. In them dwells the Spirit of God: 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19. This implies real spiritual life; although it was only the infantile life of babes in Christ. The Roman Christians had already been justified in His blood… reconciled to God through the death of His Son; and this experience was to them the ground of a confident hope that they will be saved in His life: Romans 5:9,
10. Already they had been grafted into the good olive tree: Romans 11:17. The only question now is about (Romans 11:20, 22) their continuance in faith. Similarly, the Colossian Christians had been rescued from the authority of darkness and translated into the kingdom of the Son of His love: Colossians 1:13. So Colossians 2:13: He has made you alive together with Him, having forgiven you all your trespasses. And Ephesians 2:8, By grace ye are saved through faith. Paul never tries to lead his readers to Christ, but always assumes that already by faith they are united to Him.
Similarly 1 John 2:12, I write to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you. In 1 Peter 1:3 the readers are said to be born again… guarded in the power of God through faith.
All this does not imply that there were in the Apostolic Churches no false brethren. Any such, Paul leaves charitably out of sight. Nor does it imply that all had attained a lofty spiritual standard.
The Corinthian Christians were only babes in Christ. But even babes have life. Paul assumes that his readers are what they profess to be, sincere followers of Christ. And his words imply that it is the privilege of all such to enjoy forgiveness of sins and the indwelling presence of the Spirit of God.
Paul assumes also that all his readers have been baptized. So in Galatians 3:27 his argument implies that they who are sons of God through faith have been baptized for Christ. An appeal in Romans 6:1 is based in Romans 6:3 upon the assumed Baptism of the Christians at Rome. Similarly Colossians 2:12. By Baptism the Christians at Corinth had been united to the visible fellowship of the Church of Christ: So 1 Corinthians 12:13, all were baptized into one body. To the Church of God at Corinth the Epistle was written: 1 Corinthians 1:2. The letters of Paul pourtray throughout men joined to Christ by inward spiritual life and joined to each other in a visible community.
2. Although even in the largest towns the Christian community is always spoken of as one Church, the Christian community in a province is never so called. We read of the Church at Corinth and of the Churches of Galatia. Cp. Revelation 1:4, the seven Churches in Asia. The one apparent exception in the N.T. is Acts 9:31, the Church throughout all Judæa and Galilee and Samaria. But in 1 Corinthians 12:28 we read that God put in the Church first Apostles, secondly prophets, etc. The word Church here can mean only the Church universal. This loftier use of the word receives in the Epistles before us a most important development. In Colossians 1:18, 24 the Church is called the body of Christ, the body of which He is Head. ln Ephesians 1:22, 23, the Risen and Exalted Saviour, who is Head above all things, is said to be God’s gift to the Church. God designs (Ephesians 3:10) that through the Church may be known to the successive ranks of angels the manifold wisdom of God. In the Church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) throughout all ages will glory be given to God. In Ephesians 5:23-32 the Church is spoken of as the bride of Christ, object of His special love, and united to Him as a living body is united to its head.
This phraseology and the conception of the Church therein embodied are a conspicuous feature of the Epistles now before us and especially of that to the Ephesians. In his busy apostolic toil Paul’s thought was occupied chiefly by the actual Churches he had planted and their pressing needs. But in his prison at Rome these Churches are far away. And his mind is at leisure to contemplate the ideal Church as in His eternal purpose it stood before the Eye of God, and as in glorious reality and perfection it will stand for ever before the eyes of God and of angels and of men. Already once to the Corinthians he has spoken about the universal Church. That universal Church is now to him the one great and engrossing object of thought. Paul’s conception of the Church is embodied chiefly in five important metaphors. The Church is the temple of God, the body of Christ, and the bride of Christ. The Kingdom of God is once spoken of as an olive tree. And in a reported address of Paul the Church is called a flock. These metaphors claim now our best attention.
3. In Ephesians 4:11 we read that Christ gave to the Church shepherds. And in Acts 20:28 Paul bids the elders of the Church at Ephesus to shepherd the Church; and speaks of coming wolves who will not spare the flock. Similarly in Hebrews 13:20 Christ is the great Shepherd of the sheep. So 1 Peter 2:25; and 1 Peter 5:2-4 where elders are bidden to shepherd the flock of God and Christ is called the Chief Shepherd. All this recalls the teaching of Christ in John 10:1-16 about Himself as the Good Shepherd and about the one flock and One Shepherd.
This metaphor reminds us that Christians are living individuals, and teaches that they need the protection of one greater than themselves, and that for protection and well-being God designs them to be associated together. To leave the flock is to leave the Shepherd.
4. In 1 Corinthians 3:9, 16; 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16, Paul calls his readers a building and temple of God, and justifies this title by saying that in them dwells the Spirit of God. Of that temple Christ is the one Foundation. By preaching Christ, Paul laid that Foundation in the hearts of the men at Corinth: 1 Corinthians 3:10, 11. Similarly, in Ephesians 2:19-22 we have a foundation laid by the Apostles and Prophets, of which Christ Himself is the Corner-stone, and upon which many buildings are rising into one holy temple, destined to be a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit. A similar metaphor is found in 1 Peter 2:4-7, where Christians are called living stones of a spiritual house and Christ the chief Corner-stone. This metaphor may be traced to the lips of Christ in Matthew 16:18, I will build My Church. Cp. Matthew 21:42; Isaiah 28:16; Psalm 118:22.
In a building many stones are united into one immoveable whole, each stone made firm by union with other stones. This metaphor implies that Christ designs His people to be united together in firm and mutually helpful fellowship. Of that temple Christ is the Builder: Matthew 16:18. And, as Himself in His humanity a part of His own Church, He is its Foundation and its Corner-stone. Moreover, this building is the dwelling-place of God. So, emphatically, 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19; Ephesians 2:22. Indeed the Hebrew and Aramaic word rendered temple denotes a palace, the residence of a king: see under 1 Corinthians 3:16. So, after giving directions about the erection of the tabernacle, God says in Exodus 29:45, I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. The chief thought of every Israelite about the tabernacle was that it was the royal tent of the God of Israel. So, but in an infinitely higher degree, Christ spoke in John 2:21 about the temple of His body. For that sacred human form was in a unique sense the dwelling-place of God in which He manifested Himself to men. And from that temple went up to God the incense of ceaseless devotion. In the same sense but in a lower degree the Church is the temple of God. Of this temple the body born at Bethlehem and now glorified is the Holy of holies. The whole temple will stand for ever, purified and completed, revealing even amid the glories of heaven the infinite grandeur and love of God.
5. In Romans 11:16-24 we have an olive tree into which Gentiles have been grafted and from which unbelieving Jews have been broken off. This suggests the continuity of the Kingdom of God in the Old and New Covenants. For the Gentiles were grafted into a tree already growing. And it recalls a similar but more fully developed metaphor from the lips of Christ in John 15:1-7: I am the true Vine… ye are the branches. Cp. Psalm 80:8; Isaiah 5:1-7; Jeremiah 2:21. A tree differs from a building in that its progress is an outworking of its own inner life according to the laws of that life. The Church is not a mere structure rising only by additions from without, but a living tree growing and bearing fruit by its own inherent vitality, each twig growing out of an earlier branch and drawing nourishment and growth through other branches from the root. Of this tree, Christ is Himself the Root and Stem.
6. The metaphor of the Church as the body of Christ, so conspicuous in the teaching of Paul, and in the N.T. peculiar to him, has been already expounded, as used in Paul’s earlier Epistles, in a note under 1 Corinthians 12:30. It receives in the Epistles before us a new and important development. We find the metaphor in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Romans 12:4, 5; and in its richer development in Colossians 1:18, 24; 2:19; Ephesians 1:23; 2:16; 4:12, 16, 25; 5:23, 30.
An animal body differs from a tree in possessing a far greater variety of organs, each endowed with peculiar faculties and all needed for the general good. The use of these faculties gives rise to a varied activity without parallel in plant life. The condition and source of this activity is the inward presence of the mysterious spirit of life, the unseen bond of union and source of harmony to the many members of the body. So in the Church we have a multitude of members, each endowed with capacities peculiar to itself but needful for the good of the whole, and all animated and moved and controlled by the one Spirit of God.
Of this complex living body Christ is, through His Spirit, the life-giving and directing principle. The Church is therefore His Body. Of old He dwelt on earth in a complex human body with its various and variously-endowed members, in order that through human lips He might speak to dying men words of life and might reach out to men sinking into ruin a human hand able to save. So now He dwells on earth in the Church with its various members possessing various capacities all needful for the life and health and growth of the whole, in order that through human lips and hands He may speak to and save the fallen race of man. The Church is thus in some sense a continuation or repetition of the Incarnation.
To this metaphor, so applied, the Epistles before us add an important development. We now learn that Christ is not only the animating Spirit, but also the Head, of the Church. The head is part of the body, consisting as does the rest of flesh and bone. But it is the highest, and immeasurably the noblest, part. As human, Christ is Himself a part of His Church, the Corner-stone of the Temple He is building, and a member of His own Body.
This metaphor is the fullest and richest picture of the Church in the New Testament. And it affords the noblest ideal of the Christian life. In a healthy body every member is active, moved and controlled by one spirit, each member putting forth its powers in harmony with all the others, for the good of the whole. Everything in us contrary to this ideal is spiritual disease tending to death.
7. The metaphor of the body of Christ suggests that the Church is dear to Christ as is a man’s own body to himself. This thought is developed in the metaphor of the Bride of Christ. Already, as recorded in Matthew 22:2, Christ had spoken of a king who made a marriage feast for his son. In Revelation 19:9 we read of the marriage supper of the Lamb. And in Revelation 21:9 the New Jerusalem, the eternal home of redeemed humanity, is called the Lamb’s Bride. Similarly in 2 Corinthians 11:2, Paul wishes to present the Church as a pure maiden to Christ. In Ephesians 5:22-33 this metaphor is further developed, in conjunction with that of the Body of Christ, and is made a basis of important teaching. This last metaphor reminds us that the Church is an object of Christ’s tender love and great delight, and that as Queen she will share His throne. When the Bridegroom found her, she was enslaved and polluted. But He loved her, rescued her from bondage, washed her in His own blood, and will clothe her in royal raiment. And it warns us that injury or insult to the Church is done, in the presence of the Bridegroom, to His affianced and much-loved Bride.
8. In Matthew 16:18 Christ is recorded to have said in words most solemn at a most important turning point (Matthew 16:19) of His teaching: I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. This implies that to erect a Church, i.e. to gather together a community which should be specially His own, was an essential part of the work He came to do. And this is confirmed by the foregoing metaphors, and by the entire teaching of Paul. For each of these metaphors embodies conspicuously the idea of the union of many members into one organized body, a union needful not only for growth and well-being but for life. From them we learn that Christ designs His servants to be not only inwardly and individually united to Himself but united to each other in outward and visible fellowship; in order that the company of His professed followers may be the earthly home of the people of God, in which by mutual help their spiritual life may be sheltered and nourished and developed, and in order that by their mutual co-operation the Gospel may be carried to the ends of the earth. The Church thus embodies in itself the main results already attained by Christ through the Gospel, and is the living organ for the attainment of further results.
This aim has been to a large degree achieved. In the Churches to which Paul wrote, the Christian life found the home it needed, and found suitable embodiment before the eyes of men. And the forces thus embodied, overthrew classic paganism. Even in the darkest ages, the Churches were a visible monument, often fearfully defaced but always recognisable, of the Kingdom of God. They have ever directly or indirectly afforded shelter, often rude and unworthy though valuable, to a vast number of sincere followers of Christ. And to-day, with spiritual power ever increasing, the Churches of Christ, i.e. the people of God associated in visible communities, are the chief agency for carrying out in the world Christ’s purpose of mercy to men. They are the Light and the Life of the world. The pulsations of that life are felt everywhere even to heathen lands: and that light is spreading to the ends of the earth.
9. The Epistles I have annotated say very little about the officers and organization of the Apostolic Churches. This comparative silence reminds us that in a living body every member is endowed with faculties for usefulness. In proportion to the vitality of the whole, the peculiar work of the officers of the Church is less conspicuous. And this would be specially so where all members were alike recent converts.
In 1 Corinthians 12:28; Romans 12:6; Ephesians 4:11 we find not only various special endowments but official rank: apostles, prophets, teachers. And in Philippians 1:1 a greeting is sent to bishops and deacons.
In agreement with these passages, great prominence is given in Matthew 10:2; Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13 to the Apostles as holding the first rank among the servants of Christ. In the presence of them only Christ ordained the Lord’s Supper, and afterwards gave the command to baptize: Matthew 26:20, 26; 28:16-20. In Acts 1:1-13 we find them in close relation to the risen Saviour: and they seem to have been with Him at His ascension. At once they occupy in the infant Church a place of supreme authority: Acts 1:26; 2:14, 42; 6:2, 6. A pressing need suggested, as recorded in Acts 6:6, the appointment of men to take charge of certain financial matters. They were chosen by the church-members, but were appointed to their work by laying on of the Apostles’ hands. That they were not appointed till the need arose, and that no directions about their appointment are recorded as having been given by Christ, marks a conspicuous difference between the New and Old Covenants. It teaches that Christianity is primarily not an organization but a life, and that Christ designed the necessary organization to arise not by verbal prescription but from a felt need under the guidance of His ever-present Spirit.
In Acts 11:30 we find in authority at Jerusalem a body of elders. To them, in association with the Apostles, was submitted by the Church at Antioch an important doctrinal question: Acts 15:2. The delegates from Antioch were received in open session by the whole Church, in which however the Apostles and elders were conspicuous: Acts 15:4. But the doctrinal question was discussed only by the Apostles and elders: Acts 15:6. And although their decision was accepted by (Acts 15:22) the whole Church, the formal decree came only (Acts 15:23) from the Apostles and elders. This proves that in the Church of Jerusalem was a definite order of men to whom, in conjunction with the Apostles, were committed the highest interests of the Church.
From Acts 14:23 we learn that Paul appointed elders in each of the Churches founded on his first missionary journey. And in Acts 20:17 we read of the elders of the Church at Ephesus. Of these Paul speaks in Acts 15:28 as bishops, as shepherds of the Church, and as appointed bishops by the Holy Spirit. In Philippians 1:1 we have two definite orders of officers: bishops and deacons. Comparison with Acts 20:23, 28 assures us that the former is only another title for elders. In close harmony with Acts 14:23, to a Church just founded, from which he had been suddenly torn away, Paul writes (1 Thessalonians 5:12) about those who labour among, and rule over, and admonish, his readers. This implies that, on the founding of the Church, officers were appointed for its spiritual oversight.
Still further light is cast upon the officers of the Apostolic Churches by the Pastoral Epistles. Each of these was accepted with complete confidence as a genuine work of Paul by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, in the latter part of the second century. And the absence of any reference in them to bishops as superior to elders, in conspicuous contrast to the Epistles attributed to Ignatius, is complete proof of their very early date, and is a strong presumption of their genuineness.
In 1 Timothy 3:1-13 we find stated the qualifications needed by bishops and by deacons: a close coincidence with Philippians 1:1. Light is cast upon the work of a bishop by Paul’s remark in 1 Timothy 3:5: If any one knows not how to rule his own house, how will he care for the Church of God? In 1 Timothy 5:17 we read of elders who rule well and of some who labour in word and teaching. Titus is bidden (Titus 1:5) to appoint elders in every city. In Titus 1:7 the elder is called a steward of God, and must be able to exhort with healthy teaching and to disprove the words of those who contradict.
That there were elders in the various Churches, is assumed in 1 Peter 5:1-4. They are also called shepherds of the flock of God. Similarly in Hebrews 13:17 we find rulers who will give account, and whom Christians are bidden to obey.
All this proves beyond doubt that in the Apostolic Churches were men called elders or bishops who exercised an authority for which they were responsible to God. At Philippi, at Ephesus, and at Jerusalem we find a plurality of men sharing this authority. On the other hand, in the Church at Jerusalem, James seems to have held a place of unique honour: see note on James under Galatians 2:21. This slight indication is the only trace in the N.T. of authority in any Church exercised only by one man. In the Churches thus constituted we find Paul exercising Apostolic authority. Writing to a Church in which discipline had become lax, he asks (1 Corinthians 4:21) whether he is to come with a rod, a conspicuous badge of authority. Touching one notorious offender in the same Church he has already (1 Corinthians 5:3) pronounced judgment; and gives what is practically a command to the Church to carry out his decision. In 2 Corinthians 13:2 he threatens further punishment unless the unfaithful ones repent; and speaks in 2 Corinthians 13:10 of severe action in accord with the authority given to him by Christ. He forbids (1 Corinthians 14:34) women to speak in the Churches; and gives (1 Corinthians 14:27-30) directions about the conduct of joint worship. About a public contribution (1 Corinthians 16:1) he gave directions to the Churches of Galatia and to that at Corinth. Other matters needing regulation, he leaves (1 Corinthians 11:34) till his own arrival.
All this proves that Paul did not look on the Churches he founded as independent of external control. He never forgets that in them Christ dwells as the Supreme Lord. But this spiritual presence of Christ by no means makes the Church infallible; and therefore does not render superfluous the guidance and authority of superior human wisdom. Such then were the Churches founded by Paul; organized communities of professed and real servants of Christ, each governed by its own officers, and all under the direction of the great Apostle. About the other Churches of the Apostolic age, we have no information.
10. Very little is said in the N.T. about the mode of appointment of these church-officers. In Acts 14:23 we read that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in the Churches founded on their first missionary journey. Timothy is said in 1 Timothy 4:14 to have received a gift by laying on of the hands of the presbytery; and in 2 Timothy 1:6, by the hands of Paul.
In Titus 1:5, we learn that Paul had charged Titus to appoint elders in each Church in Crete. But the complete silence of the N.T. until this late Epistle about any Church there suggests that Paul is writing to Titus, to whom (e.g. 2 Corinthians 8:6) he had already entrusted other important missions, about the organization of new Churches, committing to him a work which he had himself done (e.g. Acts 14:23) in other newly-founded Churches but was unable through lack of time to do in Crete. We have no hint whatever that Titus possessed any abiding prerogative of ordaining elders. To Timothy at Ephesus similar authority seems to have been delegated, as we infer from 1 Timothy 1:3; 3:14, 15; 5:9-11, 19. But these directions by no means imply that he held a permanent position in the Church there. He and Titus seem rather to have been sent as special commissioners to various Churches. So 1 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Corinthians 8:6, Ellicott speaks of Timothy as “overseer and bishop of the important Church of Ephesus;” but without adducing any proof except the passages noted above. Lightfoot says (Philippians p. 197) that “it is the conception of a later age which represents Timothy as bishop of Ephesus and Titus as bishop of Crete. St. Paul’s own language implies that the position which they held was temporary.”
Still less have we any hint that the elders o£ the various Churches were unable to appoint others to fill up vacancies or if needful to increase the number of their elders. Of an order of men possessing an exclusive right to ordain elders we find throughout the N.T. no trace. The direction to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:22, Lay hands quickly on no one, refers probably to reception of new church-members; and therefore has no bearing on the ordination of church-officers. In short, the N.T., while revealing plainly the existence of an order of men to whom were entrusted the most sacred interests of the Church, gives no specific directions about the mode of their appointment.
11. As in the Epistles of Paul so in that of Clement of Rome and in the lately discovered Teaching of the Apostles we find only two orders of ordinary church-officers. In marked contrast to all these, the letters attributed to Ignatius reserve the title bishop for one man exercising supreme authority in his own Church, with whom are associated a lower order of elders. So Ep. to Ephesians ch. iv.: “the presbyter is joined to the bishop as the strings to the harp.” This use of the word bishop reveals the firm establishment of a higher order in the Churches, one not mentioned in the New Testament. And apparently, as we infer from the large number of bishops in the early Church, there was a bishop in each congregation. The origin of these congregational bishops is easily explained. The needs and the dangers of the Churches made needful in each Church a single head. Perhaps imperceptibly in each presbytery the ablest man became its virtual leader. The manifest advantage of having a leader would suggest the appointment of a successor when he was removed. And thus the practice would become universal. This explanation is given by Jerome in his commentary on Titus 1:5, vol. vii. p. 562, ed. Migne. “The Churches were governed by a common council of elders. But after that each one reckoned that those whom he had baptized were his own, not Christ’s, throughout the whole world it was decreed that one elected from the elders should be put over the others, to whom should belong the care of the Church.” Possibly this monarchical and congregational episcopacy was suggested or stimulated by the removal of the Apostles by death. They were, while they lived, a bond of union to the various Churches under their charge. Their departure would create a new need. And, guided by what to me seems to have been a divine instinct, the various Churches endeavoured to strengthen themselves by concentration of authority in each Church in the hands of one man. Diocesan episcopacy was a further and later development in the same direction.
12. The Churches founded by the Apostles were united by common faith, by loyalty to one Master in heaven, and by common perils. This inward unity naturally expressed itself, with increasing definiteness, in one outward organization. The lineal descendants of the Churches founded by the Apostles held together and held in the main the same doctrines, which last were in substantial agreement with the teaching of the Apostles. Around them grew up in the second century the chaos of Gnostic sects, contradicting each other and rejecting the teaching of the Apostles. The discord outside gave emphasis to the unity within. Thus arose the conception of the Catholic Church, the one lineal descendant of the many Churches founded by the Apostles. This conception found conspicuous and appropriate embodiment in the Ecumenical Councils which after the conversion of Constantine assembled from time to time to formulate the belief, and regulate the discipline, of the universal Church. This outward and organic unity exists no longer. Instead of One Catholic and Apostolic Church we see to-day many Churches bearing various names and with distinct organizations. The complete difference between past and present is illustrated by the difference between modern Councils and Synods and that which assembled at Nicæa. However some may try to conceal it, the old order has given place to new, the Church of Christ has entered a new stage of its development.
These divisions are an outworking of forces which none could hinder. The German reformers could not and dared not refrain from proclaiming the Gospel which had made them free. And they who accepted it could do no other than unite in Christian fellowship in order to nourish and develop the new life they had found. In so doing they were imitating the example of the early Christians. Their fellowship was necessarily outside the historic Church of Germany. For the officers of that Church with all the ecclesiastical and secular authority at their disposal rejected the teaching of the Reformers and persecuted the teachers. Luther had no thought, at the beginning of his work, of founding a new Church. But the pressing spiritual need of those whom his word, re-echoed from many lips, had saved, gave him no alternative. The necessities of the case compelled him and his companions to organize the Christian life springing up around them. Thus arose the Protestant Churches of Germany. And, when once the Christian life had begun to organize itself outside the historic Church, return was impossible. For that Church was unable to supply the spiritual need of the Protestants; and required as a condition of return an assertion as true of that which they believed to be false. Thus in Germany, through influences bad and good which none could hinder, the followers of Christ have been divided into different Christian communions. And this revolt against spiritual despotism has been, I cannot doubt, an immense gain to the nation.
In England political causes gave another direction to the development of the Church. For immoral reasons the monarch thought fit to set aside the spiritual authority of the pope, which for ages the Church in England had recognised; and appointed bishops who supported him in this rejection. Elizabeth at her accession swept clear the bench of bishops, except one bishop who bowed to her will, and appointed others ready to obey her. Under this violent compulsion the national Church, retaining in some part its ancient forms, was forced along a new path. The result is a Church possessing a sort of lineal continuity with the historic Church of England, yet broken off, under lay compulsion, from the historic Church of the West, with which previously it had been closely connected. And I cannot doubt that this great separation has been an immense gain to England and to the world.
Other inevitable divisions followed. The Act of Uniformity left to a large body of Christian pastors no alternative except to abandon their pastorate or take a solemn oath which they believed to be false. To their lasting honour they refused to be false to the truth and to themselves. We wonder not that multitudes to whom their word had been the word of life still gathered around them begging for spiritual food. That cry they could not refuse. Nor could they refuse to build folds for the sheep of Christ left without shelter. Thus arose the Nonconformist Churches of England. Similarly, in time of great spiritual torpor, the Wesleys and their companions could not but proclaim the Gospel which had given them peace. Nor could they refuse to the many souls saved by their preaching the spiritual oversight they so greatly needed. Thus arose the Methodist Societies. Wesley had no thought of founding a community outside the Anglican Church; and strongly urged his followers to remain in the ancient fold. But to that Church their spiritual life owed nothing directly: to his ministry they owed everything. In the Anglican Church they could not find the spiritual nourishment they needed. And the spiritual life of many thousands to-day, throughout the world, proves that their separation from the historic Church of England has not separated them from Christ; just as the spiritual life of the Anglican Church proves that separation from the historic Church of the West has not placed it outside the Covenant of God. Thus an irresistible course of events has led the outward forms of modern Christianity away from the Apostolic ideal.
13. We have various recommendations for restoring to the Church visible and organic unity.
Some would sweep away the historic Christianity of nearly nineteen centuries and begin to re-erect the Church, taking the New Testament as a ground-plan and endeavouring to reproduce exactly the forms of life there pourtrayed. But the growth and experience of the centuries are far too precious to be thus set aside. To the Christian life existing at our birth and before we were born we owe our knowledge of God; and our spiritual life. And the outward forms of the Apostolic Churches are as unfit for present needs as are the clothes of childhood to a full-grown man. The Gospel is not a written prescription but a life: and life ever reveals itself in the development of new forms. To ignore the developments of the past, is to throw away the hope of healthy development in the future.
14. Others suggest, as a means of restoring visible unity, that all Christians should join their own communion; that the members of all other Churches should forsake the home in which they have found spiritual life and nourishment and enter the speakers’ own Church. Of those who advocate this suggestion, most or all assert that there is and can be only one legitimate visible Church, the lineal descendant of the Churches founded by the Apostles, that to this alone belongs the Covenant of God, and that to this one Church we are bound at all costs to return.
Let us trace this suggestion to its logical and practical results. ln Germany, if there is only one legitimate Church, that must be the Roman Catholic Church, the only existing communion there older than the Reformation. Consequently, the assertion before us would compel every German to join that Church. But the Roman Church requires, as a condition of admission, a profession of faith (set forth in the bull of Pius IV., Injunctum nobis) which almost all Protestants believe to contain serious error. This belief they cannot surrender till it is disproved. Therefore, in the absence of such disproof, they are compelled to remain outside the one historic Church of Germany. And, if so, their spiritual needs require a church-organization. Even in our own day, inability to accept a new dogma of the Roman Church has compelled many of its most scholarly members to forsake their spiritual birthplace and to organize outside it another communion. If the Old Catholics and Protestants of Germany were right in so doing, there may be in one country more than one legitimate Church.
Not a few Anglicans claim that in England their own is the one and only legitimate Church, on the ground that it is the lineal descendant of the pre-Reformation Church. But, on this ground, it is difficult to deny the legitimacy, even in England, of the Roman Church, which is certainly the lineal descendant in the West of the Churches founded by the Apostles. Nor is it easy to prove that the helpless submission of the Church in England to the violence of Henry and Elizabeth was anything less than a surrender of all ecclesiastical prerogative and monopoly. Strange to say, many who claim that the Anglican Church is the only legitimate Church in England fraternise with the Old Catholics, who have set up and now maintain another organization alongside the historic Church of Germany. Look where we will, similar perplexity surrounds all claims to ecclesiastical monopoly. No one, making such claims, can say which is the one legitimate Church in Scotland, or Ireland, or America, or Madagascar. All claims to be the one, visible, legitimate Church are disproved by the facts of modern Christendom.
The above claim is sometimes stated in another form, viz. that Christ ordained in His Church a priesthood to be handed down by episcopal ordination to all generations, and that the assured possession of the blessings of the New Covenant is conditioned by the ministration of this priesthood. So Gore, The Church and the Ministry p. 71: “But their authority to minister in whatever capacity, their qualifying consecration, was to come from above, in such sense that no ministerial act could be regarded as valid-that is, as having the security of the divine covenant about it-unless it was performed under the shelter of a commission, received by the transmission of the original pastoral authority which had been delegated by Christ Himself to His Apostles.” The writer is prepared for the logical results of this assertion. So on p. 345 he says: “It follows then not that God’s grace has not worked, and worked largely, through many an irregular ministry where it was exercised or used in good faith-but that a ministry not episcopally received is invalid, that is to say, falls outside the conditions of covenanted security and cannot justify its existence in terms of the covenant.”
For this limitation of the New Covenant we may fairly demand proof. We expect to find it in the Book of the Covenant, i.e. in the New Testament, our only reliable authority for the actual teaching of Christ and His Apostles. Instead of such proof we have in the book just quoted a very scanty and unsatisfactory argument on pp. 70, 71, three proofs on pp. 76-82 “that the existence of an Apostolic succession serves several important ends;” and on pp. 83-111 answers to five objections. But throughout the New Testament, as already seen, we have no reliable trace of anything like Anglican episcopacy. In the many statements of the conditions of salvation, the ministration of an episcopally ordained order of men is never suggested. Faith is the unique condition of salvation: He that believes has everlasting life. As commanded by Christ, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are obligatory. But we have no hint that their validity depends on the episcopal ordination of the ministrant. An Apostle reminds (Galatians 3:15) some who were leading his converts astray that even to a man’s confirmed covenant no one adds further conditions. Who is it that dares to add conditions to the Covenant of God?
It is worthy of note that the limitation just combated would not, if maintained, restore unity to the Church. For in many countries, e.g. England and America, are two or more Churches, each claiming Apostolic succession.
Many practical difficulties forbid the sudden removal of the distinguishing and separating features of our modern Churches. For these are forms in which spiritual life has clothed itself. Now life has needs: and these needs determine its outward forms. Roughly to remove the outward forms would greatly endanger the inward life. In all attempts at union the needs of the spiritual life must be carefully kept in view.
15. Another method of reunion, involving no danger, and fruitful of blessing, is open to us. Let us have ever in view Paul’s ideal of One Church and One Lord; and let us work towards it in all practical ways. To do this, is not difficult. For, in spite of its many divisions, the Church is in a very real sense One; and has one interest as it has one life and One Lord. Let us then in the interior working of each denominational Church keep ever in view the interests of the Church Universal. Let no one try to advance his own Church at the cost of another; and let us embrace every opportunity of asserting the universal brotherhood of the people of God and of helping other Churches. Such co-operation will reveal the essential unity underlying the variety of modern Church life. And it is the best possible way to organic unity. Only through One Spirit can the Churches grow into One Body.
The above suggestion will forbid, as contrary to the ideal, the needless multiplication of separate Churches, or the division of existing Churches except in the very rare cases in which such division is necessary to avoid some greater evil. Such an emergency arose not long ago in Scotland. And I cannot doubt that the Disruption of the Established Church and the formation of the Free Church were an outflow of spiritual life and a great gain to the highest interests of the Kingdom of God. Another emergency was caused by the result of the Vatican Council. But such are very rare. It is our happiness to see Christian thought everywhere tending towards reunion of separated Churches.
It is often said that the divisions of the Church are a great hindrance to Christian work and progress. Certainly the rivalry of contending Churches has done much harm. But, as suggested above, there may be plurality and variety without contention. And the needless multiplication of Churches is undesirable. But the main divisions of the Church have been an immense gain to the Church as a whole. This is well shown in reference to the great separation in England caused by the Act of Uniformity, on p. 610 of Green’s Short History of the English People. No Church in modern times has prospered spiritually with undivided sway. Again and again rivalry has provoked spiritual activity. Different Churches embody different types of Christian life: and the types thus embodied are a lesson and an enrichment to the whole. This manifest gain reveals the hand of God even in the divisions of the one Church of Christ. These divisions, caused or made needful by man’s imperfection and sin, are God’s own mode of purifying and perfecting His Church and thus leading it to a higher unity. The sectional Churches may be compared to the chapels of a great cathedral. If at night we examine one of these by candlelight, it may seem to be an independent structure yet a fit and beautiful place in which to worship God. But when daylight floods the sanctuary, the little chapel is seen to be but a part of a more glorious whole. Its distinctive beauty remains and is more clearly seen. But our chief wonder is evoked by the grandeur of the vast structure of which it forms a part. In the rising Church of God, at present the scaffolding obscures to some eyes the work of others. But already from the workers, goes up to God a grand harmony of praise and Christian life. Let us maintain it. Soon the building will be complete, the scaffolding removed, and the one great Temple will appear, the realised conception of the eternal thought of God, radiant in His light, the everlasting and glorious home of the one family of God.
Dissertation 3. -- Paul’s Conception of Christ.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 206
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 3.
PAUL’S CONCEPTION OF CHRIST.
1. From the Church we now pass to its Head and Lord. I shall endeavour to reproduce in scanty outline Paul’s conception of Christ as portrayed in his Epistles, and then compare it with that of the other writers of the New Testament, in order thus to reproduce the impression actually made by Christ on the most intelligent of His early followers. This will supplement the short sketch given in Diss. i. of my Romans.
2. We notice that Paul never compares Christ with other men, even as superior to them. Throughout his letters we have no trace of that sense of human equality which no difference of rank or worth can ever altogether efface. To be Christ’s servant or slave, is to Paul a title of honour; and frees him from the need of seeking the favour of men: Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1; 1 Corinthians 7:22; Galatians 1:10. Every mention of Christ breathes profound reverence as for one infinitely greater than man and infinitely near to God.
In Romans 1:3, 4, 9; 5:10; 8:3, 29, 32; 1 Corinthians 1:9; 15:28; 2 Corinthians 1:19; Galatians 1:16; 2:20; 4:4, 6; Ephesians 4:13; Colossians 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:10, Christ is called the Son of God, evidently in a sense implying a unique relation to God. That He who died for us is God’s own Son, is appealed to in Romans 8:32 as a proof of God’s love to man. This suggests the case of a man who gives up his own son to save others, and thus confirms our inference that this title notes a relation different in kind from man’s relation to God. The same title is found, in an Epistle closely related to those of Paul, in Hebrews 1:2, 5, 8; 3:6; 4:14; 5:5, 8; 6:6; 7:3, 28; 10:29. And in Hebrews 3:6 Christ as the Son is contrasted with Moses who was but a faithful servant. In Romans 8:3 we read that God sent His own Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin. This can refer only to the incarnation of Christ. And it implies that before His birth He was already Son of God; or in other words that before His incarnation He occupied a unique relation to God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 8:9 and Philippians 2:6 imply the pre-existence of Him who emptied Himself and became poor. Colossians 1:15-17 asserts that the Son was earlier than the angels and the universe, and Himself created them; that whereas they were created He is Earliest-Born; and that even the angels and the universe were created not only by His agency but for Him.
In Romans 5:12-19 (cp. 1 Corinthians 15:22) Christ is compared with Adam in his relation to the race. Now Adam’s relation is unique. Not only was he the first man but from him sprang all others. That the later-born Son of man holds a relation to the race superior to that of its one human father, reveals His unique and superhuman dignity.
Christ, who made the world, will judge it: 2 Corinthians 5:10. And He will at the great day change the bodies of His dead servants into the likeness of His own glorious body.
3. A similar but more definite conception of Christ is embodied in the Gospel and First Epistle of John. In John 3:31 the Baptist says that whereas he is from the earth Christ is from above, thus asserting a radical difference. Christ calls conspicuous attention to Himself as the Bread of life, the Light of the world, the Good Shepherd, the one Way by which men may come to God, as the Resurrection and the Life: John 6:35; 8:12; 10:11; 14:6; 11:25. And, while ever distinguishing Himself from His disciples, He unites Himself with the Father under one personal pronoun: John 17:21, 22.
Christ calls Himself and is called by John the Son of God. And this title was understood by His enemies to imply equality with God: John 5:18; 10:33. Yet no hint is added suggesting that the inference was incorrect. In John 3:16; 1 John 4:9 (cp. John 1:14, 18) we read of the Only-begotten Son, a term asserting conspicuously a relation to God shared by none else. All judgment has been committed to the Son; and at His voice the dead will leave their graves and go forth to just retribution: John 5:22, 29, 30; 6:39, 40, 44, 54. Christ claims to be earlier than Abraham and the world: John 8:58; 17:5. By His agency was made whatever has been made: John 1:3. His own existence is traced to the beginning, without any hint, where we most expect it, that He then began to be: John 1:1. In John 20:28 He accepts from Thomas with evident approval the august title My Lord and my God. In John 1:1 we have an explicit assertion that the Word was God. John 1:14 leaves no doubt that the Word is the Person afterwards known to John as his beloved Master. And the usage of the entire New Testament, confirmed by the assertion in John 1:3, assures us that the predicate God denotes that in which the Creator differs from His creatures.
In the three Synoptist Gospels we have a type of teaching differing widely from the teaching both of Paul and of John. But this difference only emphasises the one conception of Christ common to all these documents. In Matthew 11:27 Christ claims that He alone and those taught by Him know God. Again we have the title Son of God as an assertion of unique dignity: Matthew 3:17; 4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 16:16; 17:5. In a parable recorded by all three Synoptists Christ represents Himself as the Son in contrast to all His predecessors who were only servants: especially Mark 12:6, one beloved son. Again and again Christ announces Himself as the Judge of the world, with angels as His attendants, thus asserting His superiority to them: e.g. Matthew 13:30, 41; 16:27; 25:31, 32.
To sum up. All the various writers of the New Testament agree to claim for Christ, or to represent Him as claiming for Himself, a relation to God as much above the greatest men of the Old Covenant as the position of the king’s son is above that of the noblest and highest of the king’s servants. They teach that in the great day, when the best of men will stand guilty before God, Christ will sit on the throne of God and pronounce judgment on all. Even the angels are His servants. Paul and John assert that the carpenter of Nazareth existed before the earliest archangel, the Creator of angels and of the universe. And John gives to Him, and records His acceptance of, the jealously-guarded title, God. Such honour to a contemporary is unique in the history and literature of the world.
4. The above quotations imply a Person distinct from the Father yet sharing with Him those infinite attributes which mark off the Creator from even the greatest of His creatures. For the solemn assertion in Colossians 1:16 that the universe was created by the agency of the Son cannot mean that it was created by the Father, or by some special attribute of the Father. Moreover, He who created is immediately afterwards described as the Head of the Church and the Firstborn from the dead, terms evidently revealing a Person distinct from the Father. Nor can John 1:3. For the Word is said in John 1:14 to have become flesh and to have dwelt visibly among men. These passages thus differ from Proverbs 8:22-31 where we have no indication of anything beyond a bold personification. The same personal and eternal distinction is implied in John 17:5, the glory which I had with Thee before the world was; and in John 17:24, Thou lovedst Me before the foundation of the world. This agreement of writers so different as Paul and John is complete proof that the ablest of the early Christians believed in an eternal Person distinct from the Father. We notice that the titles God and the only God are often given by Paul to the Father even to distinguish Him from the Son. This is explained by the subordinate relation to the Father which with Paul the Son ever occupies. So 1 Corinthians 3:23, Ye are Christ’s: and Christ is God’s; 1 Corinthians 11:3, Of every man Christ is Head… the Head of Christ is God; 1 Corinthians 15:28, Then shall the Son Himself be made subject to Him that subjected all things to Him, that God may be All in all. Thus even in relation to the Eternal Son the Father is supreme. This teaching of Paul receives explanation and supplement in other teaching attributed to Christ in the Fourth Gospel, and especially in John 5:19-30; 6:38, 39. Christ here asserts most plainly that His being is derived from, and His action guided by, the Father; and that His entire activity is unreserved devotion to the Father. And the context forbids us to limit this teaching to the human nature of the Son. Rather the whole picture suggests that, whatever the Son became in time and in visible human form, He already was in His eternal relation to the Father.
While asserting the existence of a divine Person other than the Father, Paul and John speak ever of one God. And this one God is distinctively the Father. So 1 Corinthians 8:6 One God, the Father… and one Lord: and 1 Corinthians 11:3; 12:5, 6. Similarly John 17:3, The only true God and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent. Yet in John 10:30; 17:11, 22 the Father and Son are said to be one thing. [The Greek neuter suggests very clearly unity of nature and relation, not of person. It may be illustrated by 1 Corinthians 3:8, He that plants and he that waters are “one thing.”] And this unity of the Father and Son is held up as a pattern for the mutual unity of believers. This suggests that the unity of Father and Son manifests itself in absolute harmony of character and aim. But this harmony is no mere agreement of two persons. It is manifestly an outflow of an essential relation of the Father and Son; especially of the Son’s eternal derivation from, and devotion to, the Father. We may conceive each Person of the Godhead as being alone in His own sphere: not three supreme Persons, but One, viz. the Father; not three Lords in the Church, but One, our Lord Jesus Christ; not three animating principles guiding men from within, but One, viz. the Holy Spirit, Himself a divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son, bearer of the presence and activity of the Father and the Son. Consequently, in our dealings with these three divine Persons we have to do with only One God.
The above conception of God, although profoundly mysterious, is yet intelligible. And it is involved in the actual words of Paul and John and in Matthew 28:19. To the thought and faith of the writers of the N.T. were present three distinct Persons existing from eternity in closest relation and in mutual intercourse and love: the Father supreme, existing and being what He is because He wills so to be and for no other reason, eternal and underived; the Son sharing to the full all that the Father has and is except only His Fatherhood i.e. His underived and absolute supremacy, being such as He is because the Father wills Him so to be; and the Spirit possessing all the attributes derived by the Son from the Father and going forth from the Father and the Son to be in the servants of God the divine source of a life of unreserved devotion to God. That this conception of God was actually held by the foremost of the immediate followers of Christ and was by them attributed to Christ, the Christian documents compel us to believe.
5. Not very much is said by Paul about the incarnation of the Son of God. But it is plainly referred to in 2 Corinthians 8:9, Because of you He became poor, though He was rich, that ye by His poverty might become rich. For only in reference to the abundance of His divine prerogatives could the Son be spoken of as rich. And this divine wealth is the only counterpart of the wealth with which Christ will enrich His people. This passage, therefore, asserts that at His incarnation the Son laid aside something which He previously possessed. The same is asserted in Philippians 2:7, He emptied Himself, under which passage I have ventured to suggest that for a time and for our salvation the Eternal Son, by a definite act, gave up the full exercise of His divine powers. This suggestion is in harmony with the above passages; and with the teaching that the miracles of Christ were wrought in the strength of the Spirit of God, that He knew not the day of His return, and that the Word not only put on flesh but became flesh.
6. Paul’s teaching about the death of Christ has been expounded on pages 224-228 of my Galatians. {Dissertation VII.} But very remarkable teaching, peculiar to Paul, about the relation of Christ to our salvation now demands careful attention.
Christ is constantly said to be the means or Agent, as of creation, so of our salvation. We are justified through the redemption which is in Christ, and reconciled to God through the death of His Son: Romans 3:24; 5:10. And our salvation is in Him, and He dwells in us. So Ephesians 1:3, 4, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessing in Christ, according as He has chosen us in Him; and Ephesians 2:13, ln Christ Jesus ye… have been made near, and elsewhere frequently. In Ephesians 3:17 we read, that Christ may dwell in your hearts; in Galatians 2:20, Christ lives in me. This language implies that Christ is both the encompassing element in which His people live and move and are safe and an animating principle moving them from within. The new life is also a sharing with Christ all that He has and is. So Romans 8:17, fellow-heirs with Christ; and Ephesians 2:5, risen and enthroned with Him. This being so, Christ is the pattern of the new life and of our future glory. So Romans 6:11, ‘in like manner (as Christ died to sin) reckon yourselves also to be dead to sin and living for God;’ Romans 8:29, predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son; Philippians 3:21, conformed to the body of His glory. Lastly, Christ is the aim and goal, as of creation, so of the new life. So 2 Corinthians 5:15, ‘He died that they who live may live for Him.’ And Colossians 1:16, ‘all things have been created through Him and for Him.’ In short, the new life is through Him, and in Him, and with Him, and like Him, and for Him. This remarkable teaching runs through the Epistles of Paul.
That the new life is in Christ, is almost as conspicuous with John as with Paul; but in the peculiar phrase abide in Him. And this phrase is traced to the lips of Christ. So John 6:56; 15:1-7; 17:21, 23; 1 John 2:5, 6, etc. This remarkable expression and the teaching underlying it are a conspicuous element in the two chief writers of the New Testament. Equally conspicuous, and peculiar to Paul, is his teaching that the great closing events of the life of Christ are reproduced in His people. And this in two ways. In Romans 6:2-11; Galatians 2:19, 20; 6:14; Colossians 2:12, 20; 3:1, 3 believers are said to be dead with Christ to sin, to the Law, to the world; buried with Him, and risen with Him. This can only mean that through the death of Christ they have escaped from the penalty and bondage of sin, from the curse pronounced by the Law, and from the despotism of the present world; and that their new life is a result of His resurrection. On the other hand, in Colossians 2:13 and Ephesians 2:1-6 they are said to have been at one time dead by reason of their sins but now made alive and risen and enthroned with Christ. This phraseology teaches the utter and hopeless ruin of sinners; and teaches that through the life which entered into the dead body of Christ a new life has entered into those who believe in Him.
This conspicuous and peculiar teaching of Paul has no parallel in the literature of the world. And it reveals the deep impression made upon him by the death and resurrection of Christ. Evidently, he believed that in some special sense our salvation comes through Christ’s death upon the cross, that He who died had in very truth risen from the dead, that of His resurrection our new life is a result, and that our life is a sharing of His life and is conditioned by inward union with Him. No one could speak thus in reference to a man. Every line of Paul’s teaching about Christ assumes His divinity.
The foregoing exposition of doctrine has historic worth. For the Christian documents prove that the early followers of Christ, the men who gained for Him the homage of all succeeding ages, agreed in a belief that their Master occupies a relation to God different in kind from, and higher than, that of even the loftiest and earliest creatures. And, as we have seen, this conception of Christ involves a new conception of God, a conception unknown to the speculations of heathen philosophy and to the definite teaching of the Old Testament. This new conception survived the chaos of Gnostic teaching so prevalent in the second century: it was formulated in the fourth century in the Nicene Creed, the great historic creed of the Church of Christ: and in all ages it has been held firmly by an overwhelming majority of the followers of Christ. With scarcely an exception those who during the last eighteen centuries have done most for the highest welfare of men have held firmly the remarkable belief about Christ which we have now traced to the unanimous agreement of His earliest followers.
Whence came this new and strange and persistent belief about Christ and about God? Certainly not from contemporary thought, Jewish or Gentile. For contemporary literature, even the writings of Philo, contains nothing which has more than a slight outward resemblance to it. Its source must be sought elsewhere.
We have only one alternative. Either the conception before us came actually from the lips of Christ, or we are compelled to believe that His earliest disciples, the chief agents of a spiritual revolution which has changed and saved the world, made for Him a claim which He would Himself have rejected with horror as awful blasphemy, and set forth most serious error about the nature of God. This latter suggestion is absurd. We are therefore compelled to believe that Christ actually claimed to be the Eternal Son of God. Thus the Christian documents contain, apart from any special authority of Holy Scripture, complete historical proof that Christ actually claimed the august dignity given to Him by the writers of the New Testament. And the moral grandeur of the picture of Christ therein pourtrayed, together with the effect of Christianity upon the world, forbid the thought that the Great Teacher was Himself in serious error, or knowingly taught error, touching His own relation to God. Decisive as is this argument, it is by no means the whole historical proof of the divinity of Christ. For the homage paid to Him by Paul and his companions can be traced to their confident belief that their Master had risen from the dead. If this belief was false, His disciples were in error not only about His nature but about a matter of fact said to have taken place in their own day and in the city in which the Gospel gained its first great victories. The unlikeliness of this supposition, I have already in my Credentials of the Gospel endeavoured to show. Our only alternative is to believe either that a complicated tissue of delusions without parallel among the errors of mankind has saved the world or to believe that with God in eternity is One who shares to the full, by derivation from Him, and with unreserved devotion to Him, whatever He has and is, the Eternal Son of an Eternal Father. Difficult as is this latter belief, it is much less difficult than the historic impossibilities involved in its denial. We therefore accept it with confidence and with adoring gratitude as an assured result of our study of the writings of Paul compared with the rest of the New Testament and read in the light of the present state and the past history of the world.
Dissertation 4. -- The Gospel of Paul.
BEET_EPH.PDF, source PDF p. 214
PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, EPHESIANS
DISSERTATION 4.
THE GOSPEL OF PAUL.
1. In Diss. i. of my Commentary on Romans I endeavoured to show that that Epistle was a systematic exposition of the Gospel as Paul understood it, comprising five great doctrines, viz. (1) That God accepts as righteous all who believe the Gospel, this doctrine being put prominently forward as the foundation-stone of the teaching of Paul; and (2) That this salvation comes to us through the death of the Son of God: also (3) That God designed us to be, by union with Christ, sharers of the life of Christ, a life devoted to God; and (4) That this design is realised in each one through faith and in proportion to his faith, (5) Through the agency of the Holy Spirit. In other words, we have here Justification through faith, and through the death of Christ; Sanctification in Christ, through faith, and through the Holy Spirit. I also tried to show that the confidence with which Paul asserted these doctrines, taken in connection with the deep underlying harmony between them and the teaching of the other very dissimilar documents of the New Testament, affords complete historical proof that each of these doctrines was actually taught by Christ. We will now look at them again for a moment in the light cast upon them by the Epistles annotated in this volume; and thus supplement the notes on these several doctrines under Romans 3:22, 26; 6:10, 11; 8:4, 39.
2. A remarkable re-echo of Romans 1:17; 3:21, 22 is found in Philippians 3:9, not having a righteousness of my own, that which is from law, but that which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness from God on the condition of faith. We have here Paul’s foundation doctrine of Justification through Faith expressed in his favourite phraseology. That faith is a condition of salvation, is implied in Philippians 1:27, contend together for the faith of the Gospel; and in Philippians 1:29, to you it is given not only to believe in Him but also to suffer on His be-half. Paul had heard of the faith of the Colossian Christians: Colossians 1:4. A present and conscious salvation, which is involved in the doctrine of Justification through Faith, is implied in Colossians 1:13, 14: who rescued us out of the authority of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of our sins. Similarly, Colossians 1:21, you who were formerly alienated and enemies in your mind in wicked works, now He has reconciled. Salvation through Faith is plainly stated in Colossians 2:12, in whom ye were also raised through faith in the working of God who raised Him from the dead; and a present salvation in Colossians 2:13, having forgiven us all our trespasses. Assured salvation speaks again in Ephesians 1:7, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses; and in Ephesians 2:8, by grace ye are saved through faith. Faith as a condition of salvation is implied also in Ephesians 1:13, having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit; and in Ephesians 1:19, the exceeding greatness of His power towards you that believe. These incidental and unexpected references to faith as a condition and means of salvation are in remarkable agreement with the unique place given to faith in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. And the mention of forgiveness of sins in Colossians 1:1; 2:13; Ephesians 1:7 is a close coincidence with Acts 13:38, 39, where in a recorded address of Paul the same words are used as an equivalent to Justification through Faith.
Under Romans 3:22 and in Dissertations iv.-vi. of my Galatians I have shown that this last doctrine, expressed however in phraseology very different from that of Paul, underlies or is in close agreement with all the various types of teaching found in the New Testament, in a manner which affords complete historical proof that it came from the lips of Christ.
3. The second great doctrine of Paul, viz. that salvation comes to us through the death of Christ, that for this end He died, and that the need for this costly means of salvation lay in our sins looked upon in the light of the justice of God, finds abundant expression in the Epistles now before us. It explains Philippians 3:10, fellowship of His suffering, being conformed to His death. It is plainly stated in Colossians 1:22, now He has reconciled us in the body of His flesh through death; and is suggested by Colossians 1:24, the sufferings of Christ… on behalf of His body, the Church. The same doctrine finds conspicuous and remarkable expression in Colossians 2:14, having blotted out the handwriting against us by the decrees; and He took it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. These words imply clearly that the death of Christ removed an obstacle to salvation which had its root in the Law. Still more clear is Ephesians 1:7, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses; also Ephesians 2:13, ye who formerly were far off became near in the blood of Christ; and Ephesians 2:16, that He might reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.
These quotations may supplement my note under Romans 3:26, and Diss. vii. of my Galatians, where I have shown that the same doctrine in almost the same words runs through the New Testament. And from the Apostles’ days to our own day it has been firmly believed by almost all Christians. This remarkable agreement in so remarkable a doctrine points to a common source. And this can be no other than the Great Teacher whom all Christians worship.
4. That God designs all who are justified through faith to live a new life of unreserved loyalty to Himself like the loyalty of Christ, is plainly taught in Philippians 1:20, 21; 2:5-8; Colossians 1:22; 2:6, 7; 3:10-15; Ephesians 1:4; 2:10; 4:20-24; 5:1, 2, 27; and is implied throughout these Epistles. That this new life is conditioned by faith, we read in Philippians 1:25, 29; Colossians 2:7; Ephesians 1:19; 3:17; and that the Spirit of God is its immediate superhuman source, in Philippians 3:3; Colossians 1:8; Ephesians 1:13, 17; 2:22; 3:16; 4:30. These three doctrines I have further expounded under Romans 6:10, 11; 8:4.
5. We have now, by consecutive study of most of his Epistles, reproduced in outline the Gospel as Paul understood and preached it. And so clearly marked are its main features that we cannot doubt the substantial correctness of the picture. This Gospel, thus reproduced, we have at various points compared with the teaching of other documents of the New Testament. And our comparison, scanty though it has been, has revealed to us a substantial harmony underlying these various types of teaching. This harmony is an historical fact of the utmost importance; and demands explanation. Its importance is increased by the universal reception of these doctrines, almost unknown as they were before the time of Christ, wherever there are Christians; and by the effect of Christianity upon the world, as attested by comparison of Christian and non-Christian nations. The facts just adduced greatly strengthen the argument at the close of Diss. iii. For this Gospel and the unique and superhuman dignity of Christ must stand or fall together. Practically, all who accept or reject the one accept or reject the other. Consequently, either these doctrines are true and Christ is the Eternal Son of God or all His early followers whose writings have come down to us have utterly misrepresented both the Teacher and His teaching and have buried them under a thick tissue of most serious error. Yet these men have rescued their Master’s name from comparative oblivion, have gained for Him the homage of the world, and have initiated a movement which has turned back from the ruin to which it was hastening the entire current of human history and has saved the world. Results so glorious are not born of error. And if not, the Gospel preached and expounded by Paul is indeed good news from God.
Such are the results, up to this point, of our study of the Epistles of Paul. We have found in them a full and harmonious account of his teaching, and of his conception of the dignity of the Great Master from whom he learnt it. This religious teaching and this conception of Christ we have compared with the other documents preserved for us in the New Testament. And this comparison, viewed in the light of the effect of Christianity upon the world, has convinced us that Paul rightly interpreted the teaching and the claims of Christ, and has convinced us that His teaching is true and His claims just. Thus Paul has led us to Christ; and in Christ we have found Eternal Life. The only Epistles of Paul not yet annotated by me are two short letters, the earliest extant, written on his second missionary journey to the lately founded Church at Thessalonica, and three short letters to two of his most valued companions, written apparently after liberation from his first imprisonment at Rome. Of these, the former group contains the fullest account we have of Paul’s teaching about the Second Coming of Christ, and the latter our most complete picture of the organization of the Churches founded by the Apostles. But they do not in any way modify the results we have derived from the Epistles already annotated. —————————————————————————————
Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.