28 EPHESIANS I. 1-4.

Had Paul wished to make both conceptions, " The God of Je-
BUS Christ/' and "the Father of Jesus Christ," prominent and
strictly separate, the article would certainly have been necessarily
repeated before va^p (see Winer's Gr., 19, 5) ; but there was no
reason for so rigorous a separation, and therefore, since further
0eo? and TTdTijp are of the same gender, the article might prop-
erly be left out without weakening the reference of the genitive rov
icvpiov rm&v 'Irjaov Xpiorov to the first substantive. The two mean-
ings of evAoyetv in the language of the New Testament, viz., " to
praise," and " to bless," appear here side by side. The Hebrew 3-3
combines both meanings in the same way. The evAoy/a nvev-
pm/cTj, spiritual blessing, here denotes the effects of God's grace
through the Holy Spirit, obtained by means of Christ's work, in every
form of his agency alike in his moral workings, and in the extra-
ordinary gifts bestowed on the church. The tv roi^ ^ovpm'ioi^
is difficult, for the concluding words, iv Xpiarti, are not connected
with this, but with the evkftyrjacu; 7/^c, representing Christ as the
element in which the blessed exist, and through whose mission
and work they have received the blessing. Ta enovpdvia can be un-
derstood of heavenly gifts only, or of the heavenly locality. In the
former case it would stand parallel with evXoyia Trvev^armri, and then
the article surprises us ; Paul would have written ev tnovpaviou;
merely. Besides, rd enovpdvia always means in Paul absolutely
" heaven, the heavenly world ;" see Eph. i 20, ii. 6, iii. 10, vi. 12.
We shall, therefore, be obliged to keep to this meaning here also,
and in the following sense : the spiritual blessing which is in heaven,
and therefore bears a heavenly nature. But this certainly may be
reduced in meaning to the conception, " heavenly gifts.")

Ver. 4. This Divine agency, so full of blessing, is then more ac-
curately characterized by the declaration that God hath chosen be-
lievers before the foundation of the world with the view that they
may be holy and blameless before his eyes. This t-KAoyT? npb Kara-
/3oA% /cda^ov, election before the foundation of the world (see on
Matth. xxv. 34), cannot be used to establish the pre-existence of
souls, as Origen, in early times, and Benecke recently, have supposed.
The phrase -npo icarafto^ noaiwv (see at Matth. xiii. 35 ; Luke xi.
50 ; John xvii. 14) denotes, in fact, eternity in a metaphysical
sense, not time before the creation of the world, which seems the
primary meaning of the words, but timelessness (i. e. } non-subjec-
tion to the conditions of time). It is equivalent to dnb r&v aluwv,
to 7Tp66eatg T&V aMvw (Eph. iii. 9, 11), or to drr' dpxfc (2 Thess. ii.
13). But tfeAefaro ^zo?, chose us, by no means expresses the real
individual existence of believers before the creation, in the Divine
mind, but merely the timeless act of volition on the part of God who
beholds the future as present. On the other hand, it is undeni-



EPHESIANS I. 5. 29

able that in enkeyeiv is couched a reference to others not chosen,
and that therefore the discourse is of a prcedestinatio sanctorum,
but without asserting, at the same time with that, a reprobatio im-
piorum, or a gratia irresistibilis. (See remarks on Rom. ix. 1.)
The addition iv avr&, i. e., Xpiaru, defines e/c/toy?/ more accurately.
God sees in his election by grace, man in Christ, so that, as Adam
was the representative of natural humanity, so Christ is the repre-
sentative of spiritual humanity. (Kadu>g unites ver. 4 as an ex-
planation to ver. 3, " praised be God, who hath blessed us, as he
indeed hath chosen us, i. e., since he has chosen us." See 1 Cor.
i. 6.) The object of the election is, however, that men should be
holy and unspotted. (In Col. i. 22 avey/cAT/rof also stands along with
both expressions.) It is self-evident, finally, from what follows,
that this is no self- elaborated holiness and blamelessness, attained
by our own righteousness, but Christ's holiness, which is imputed to
faith, but manifests itself likewise in the believer, though only as the
result of the experience of grace, as an actual state.

Yer. 5. The connecting of iv dydn-q with efrhe&ro is too decid-
edly opposed by its position. But it seems uncertain whether iv
dyd-ny should be joined with what precedes or what follows. The
thought, " to be holy and unspotted in love/' is not intrinsically in-
congruous, since love, as the ultimate root of the disposition, deter-
mines holiness itself. Nor can anything be objected to the conjunc-
tion duupog iv dydnq, blameless in love, for designating pure love ;
at 2 Pet. iii. 14 we read damkoi KOI d^wf^-rot iv dprjwy } Jude ver. 24,
a/zwjtiof iv dyaXXidae.1. But, first, critical authorities favour decidedly
the connexion with what follows, as well as the fact that Paul
generally uses ayioi nal dfiwuoi without any addition. (See Eph. v.
2T ; Col. i. 22.) 'Ev dydmj Trpoopioag fad?, therefore, connects itself
with ee/lefaTo as a stricter definition ; God's election manifested
itself in the gracious predestination to adoption, i. e., God pre-
destined us for children of God. (On Trpoopi&iv, also, which appears
in ver. 11, joined to Kara -npoBeoiv, and on vlodeaia, as on tvcAoy^
what was needful has been already observed at Eom. viii. 15,
ix. 1.) Since the possibility of sonship is effected entirely through
Christ's atonement, the addition did 'Irjaov Xpiarov explains itself;
but d$ avrov is difficult, though we should, with Lachmann and
Harless, prefer it to the avrov of Griesbach, as the latter perhaps
arose merely from the wish to mark more definitely the reference to
the Father. No other reason, doubtless, can be assumed for this
added el$ avrov, than the design of Paul to designate Christ as him
who leads men to God, through whom we come to the Father,
according to the words in John, " No one cometh to the Father but
through me ;" so that we might paraphrase the sentence thus : " God
has in love predestinated us unto adoption, that we might through



30



EPHESIANS I. 6.



Jesus come to him, and be led back to him out of our lost state, in
accordance with his gracious will." The annexed a-a -^< rita**
TOV Oetfparos avrov might seem to argue against the connexion of
h dyd-nq with npoopiaaf. For, as eMoicia involves the conception of
love and benevolence, not that of mere decree (see Earless on this
passage), eMoicia TOV fleAi/pm)? seems exactly = dyd^. But, whilst
dydrrr, designates the proper essence of God, as love, etdonia TOV
OetfiMTos renders prominent the benevolence of the individual act of
the will in the election and predestination of believers, so that there
is no tautology.

y er> 6. As the object of this benevolent Divine will, the praise
of God's grace, to which man was meant to be thereby incited, and
with which Paul had set out in ver. 3, is then brought forward. We
need not explain the added dofr TrjsxdpiTo$, which serves to strengthen
the expression, by supposing it = %dptg evdofa, or by referring it to
a Hebraism. (See the pertinent remarks on this passage in Har-
less.) In what immediately follows (vers. 12, 14), we read again d?
g-rraivov TT\<; dofyc avTov without ^aptrof. (See on the import of
%dpig, i. e., the unmerited expression of God's love towards his crea-
tures, the remarks on Rom. iii. 21. Xdpig is never used of Christ and
the Holy Ghost. So far the structure of Paul's sentences proceeds
regularly ; but from v % ^aptraxrev, as far as ver. 14, the discourse
proceeds entirely by means of relatives, which link themselves to the
substantive which stands last, and thus form, as it were, a coronet of
isolated clauses, without any regular period. Similar passages are
found Col. i. 9-20 ; 1 Pet. i. 3-12 ; and in our epistle at i. 20, seq.,
which directly follows, a similar circle of propositions occurs, which
are all united by nai. But the separate propositions themselves thus
connected with each other by relatives, all issue naturally from one
another by the law of association. This structure of his discourse thus
only shews Paul's fulness of ideas, which thronged forward, without
allowing him time to range the isolated propositions into periods.
This unperiodic style, arising from exuberance of ideas, extends into
the fourth chapter of our epistle : it shews itself, however, here most
strikingly. As to the words tv $ tyapi-uaev %a?, the reading fc has, it
is true, important vouchers, especially A. and G., and accordingly
Lachmann has received it into the text. But the preponderating
number of the manuscripts for iv $, and the facility of the altera-
tion, on account of the preceding ^apt-ro^, render the latter reading
preferable. The grace of God is described in the words : iv jj fyap-
iTwoev fifias as the means by which he has made man acceptable to
himself ; and, indeed, as it was said in verse 4 iv avroi, so here
it is iv rw jfyamjftevu, by which, as the gloss vl& av-ov in D.E.F.
G. correctly explains, Christ is designated, in that he, the arche-
type of holiness, is /car' ^o^v the object of God's love, and through



EPHESIANS I. 7. 31

himself first makes everything worthy of God's love. Ver. 7 clearly
shews that xapirou relates to the work of Christ, in whom God
views the elect. The use of the aorist K^apir^oK is, therefore, not to
be explained by the assumption that Paul means to say, " God had
already made him (Paul himself), with his believing contemporaries,
acceptable to himself, because they were inwardly reconciled, and
had appropriated grace ;" this proposition, on the contrary, holds
good also of all future generations ; Paul utters the ?)jueZf in the
name of all believers forever. As in ver. 4 fifcMjfoff* denotes the
eternal decree of redemption, so here e^apmocrg denotes the objective
fact of the same, which holds good, not merely for those then living,
but for all mankind. God has in Christ, once for all, had mercy on
mankind, received them into favour, and made them acceptable to
himself. But iv must not be confounded with did Christ is rather, as
already remarked at ver. 4, to be understood as the real representative
of humanity, in whom all exist after the new man, Christ in us, as
they exist in Adam after the old man. (The form ^apt-row is '
found in the New Testament but once more, Luke i. 28 ; else-
where it occurs also Sir. ix. 8, xviii. 17, and in Symmachus, Ps.
xviii. 26. In profane Greek it is found only in very late writers, as
Libanius.)

Ver. 7. Now, as regards Christ, Paul brings redemption through
his blood into prominence, and designates it more closely as
r&v TrapaTTTw^arwv, remission of trespasses. In the words &v
in whom we have, Christ is conceived as the living fountain of re-
demption ; that is to say, although it was actually effected by his
death, still it, in his intercession (see at Rom. viii. 34), works on in-
cessantly as a living power. His work is inseparable from his per-
son ; we have not redemption in his work without his person, but in
his person, with which his work forms a living unity. The import
of dno^vrpuais and the phrase did rov atytarog avrov, have already
been treated at length Rom. iii. 25. The epexegetic rrjv dfaoiv r&v
TTapaTTTvpdTuv only requires a remark here. The phrase, which is
often found in the Gospels and the Acts, occurs in Paul here only, and
in Col. i. 14 the synonymous euf>eat<; r&v dfj,apri&v. In Rom. iii. 25
ndpeoig ajuapr^arwv means something quite different ; see at that pas-
sage. In the Epistle to the Hebrews ix. 22, x. 18, afyf.aiq is found
alone. The phrase denotes, in its literal sense, forgiveness of sins,
i. e., of their guilt, therefore the effect of the atonement (/caraA-
for man. Too much stress is not to be laid on the form Trapa-rr-
dpapriai, trespasses, sins, for not merely sinful deeds, but
also sinful conditions, innate sinfulness, are considered as pardoned.
Td Tfapa-nr^ara denotes absolutely everything sinful, in whatever
form it may present itself. Since, now, redemption (dno^vrpuoig)
and reconciliation (/cara/l/lay?/), are only designations of the same



32 EPHESIANS I. 8.

idea taken from different points of view (see at Kom. iii. 25), and
aW'<T * TrapoTTTwpfTWj; explains more nearly and defines the dM-
TpcwHf, it follows that the phrase designates especially the nega-
tive side of Christ's work, which regards sinful man as pardoned by
God for the sake of Christ's merits. But the appropriation of this
forgiveness of sins cannot be regarded as a fact, without the trans-
formation of man proceeding from it as its consequence.

y er g. In the forgiveness of sins established through Christ

Paul sees again the riches of grace, which he has caused to abound
towards man. But it is a question here, whether iv ndarj oofi? KOI
fyovrioei is to be joined to eTrepiooevaev, or to yvupioas. We must
be guided in our decision on that point by the fact, that neither
ndoa ooQia* nor faovrjcig, nor ftrow/zo? , 0povt>uf, can fitly belaid of
God. The joining it with yvupiaas is, therefore, inadmissible, be-
cause, according to it, both words must necessarily be referred to
God. True, Grotius, Baumgarten, and others, have chosen to refer
the iv -ndatj ao<pia KO! Qpovijou to God, even when joining it with tne-
giaoevae; but, besides the above-cited general reason, a compari-
son with Col. i. 9, where iv irdoy oofyia not oweaei TrvevpariKy must
be referred to man, should have withheld them from that interpre-
tation. Therefore, the clause in ver. 8 is to be paraphrased thus :
fjg eTrepiaaevaev elg ifyds, Iva iv rtday ocxfria KOI typovrjoei Trepi-nar^fiev. But
the definition of the words owftia, Qpovriais, and the kindred ovveau;
(Col. i. 9), which we will here consider at the same time with them,
is not without difficulty. 2o0m, related most closely to yi'dtot?, seems
in the language of the New Testament to be the result of the rightly
applied vov$, i. e., of the faculty by which we perceive that which is
eternal.f But, whilst yv&ois refers only to knowledge, there is con-
stantly couched in oo<pia a reference to the practical application of
knowledge, as in the Hebrew wsth, whilst yvwat? answers to >.
On the other hand, Qpovrjoic; and ovveoif are expressions of the rightly
applied </>pevef, i. e., of the understanding. They answer to our
" prudence and understanding." Both words have also a practical
reference, like ooQia, but with the difference, that in the latter
the practical aim is directed more to great and comprehensive

* Harless remarks very justly that one may say indeed, " God has wisdom," or " in
him is all wisdom," but not, " he does anything in all wisdom," because God possesses all
attributes absolutely. But the phrase " .ill wisdom" is here relative, as it must be thus
paraphrased : " All the wisdom which, under existing circumstances, is imaginable, which
one can suppose in men."

f "We have spoken already on 1 Cor. xii. 8 of aotyia and yvuutf, but as of charismata,
which cannot be meant here (see on ver. 17), not as of natural faculties, which can be
cultivated even without the influences of the Holy Ghost, or awakened through thorn.
But certainly the Divine Spirit ever attaches himself to the human spirit, whence the like
names for the certainly related, but yet different, gifts. There cannot be, from the na-
ture of the thing, a %dptafj.a of <j>povrioif, or of oiivcaif, because these are faculties of the
sovL



EPHESIANS I. 9. 33

relations, (frpovrjmg and ovveoig, on the contrary, relate to special
and individual cases. As wisdom takes earthly relations in their
totality, and thus estimates them in their reference to the eter-
nal, there can be no false application of wisdom ; false wisdom is
only seeming wisdom ; wisdom is always rightly applied. Prudence,
on the contrary, can, just because it has to do with individual
cases, be, it is true, entirely what it is, viz., a sagacious use of pre-
sent circumstances, and yet be applied to ungodly ends. There-
fore Paul, at Col. i. 9, pertinently adds : iv OWEOEI -nvEv^ariKy,
in order to distinguish real prudence, which is applied to spirit-
ual ends, from the worldly prudence (cjipovrjaig aapKiKrj or rov /cocr^ou),
of which the Scriptures say that the children of the world distin-
guish themselves by it more than the children of light. (Luke xvi.
8, oi viol rov al&vog rovrov (^povi^repoi vnep rovg vlovg rov tyurog etcrt.)
But avveaig and ^povrfoig seem distinguished only as ovveaig denotes
rather the poiver of the understanding, (ppovqaig the application of
that power. It may be said, God has implanted the vovg in the
spirit, and ovveaig in the soul, but not <j)povr]aig (as neither did he
implant yv&aig and oofyia in the vovg), because the latter depends
on the faithful application of the power of the ovveoig. But from
this relation between them it is comprehensible that they can be
used quite synonymously, just as our words, understanding and pru-
dence. (Compare on this point my essay de naturae humanse Tri-
chotomia in my Opusc. Theol. p. 158, seq. I still perfectly approve of
the definition given there, yv&cig KV TGJ voi, Trio-rig ev rq Kapdia, only I
would modify the proposition : oofyia Iv raig (frpeaiv, to the extent of
saying that the oofyia also belongs to the department of the vovg, as
complement of the yvtiaig.')

Ver. 9. The rich manifestation of Divine grace is further more
accurately defined by the yvupioag r'jfuv rb \ivar'(\piov rov Oe^fiarog,
K. r. A., making knoivn to us the mystery of his will, etc. By
this connexion with eTrepioaevoEv it will be clear enough that yvu-
oi&iv is not to be understood of a mere external making* known,
but of such a making known, by which he, to whom anything is re-
vealed, receives at the same time the essence of the thing, here of the
mystery of the Divine will. For that the pvarijotov rov Gekrjparog,,
mystery of his will, is here Christ's incarnation, and the work of re-
demption which depended on it, is clearly shewn by what follows.
This was known as about to happen through the prophecies of the
Old Testament from even Adam downwards, but the aorist (yvuoi-
oag) points to something actual, and, as such the realization of the
prophecies presents itself to us ; by this that mystery was first made
really known, which even the angels desired to look into (1 Peter i.
12). It remains to be said, that we find here fleA^a and evdoida,
separate, whereas in ver. 5 they were fused into one idea. Kara ri\v
VOL. V. 3



34 EPHESIANS I. 10.



avrov, according to his good pleasure, joins itself to
and denotes the yvupgeiv itself as an act of Divine benevolence ; on
account of the following ?> TrpoeOzro, evdoida is to be taken as = to
" gracious decree," because nposdero is not adapted to express the
" grace and favour of God," as permanent conditions ; on the other
hand, rov 0e/ljfriaTo? avrov denotes more closely the mystery of which
mention is here made, as a voluntary act proceeding from the depths
of the Divine being. As such, as an act of the Divine will, which
has its ultimate basis in the being of God himself, Christ's manifesta-
tion and work is, and constantly remains, a mystery (nvar^tov^
whilst, in other points of view, considered in its appearance, it is
an actual revelation, and is hence also presented as a subject of
knowledge. Paul, again connecting what follows with evdonia by a
relative, proceeds to give a more accurate account of God's gracious
decree. In every case (whether we here again, as is most suitable,
with Lachmann and Harless, read v at>ro5, or even iv aurai) the
npoedsro ev avra>, he purposed in him, can only refer to God and
his intentions, and not to Christ, since in what immediately fol-
lows (ver. 11), 7rp66emg refers back to npotdero, If kv avr& meant
to express that God's purpose realized itself in the person of Christ
and in his work, it would have had its place at the close of the
proposition, in this way : dg olKovofiiav rov n^rjfxonaro^ r&v Kaiptiv
iv avr&. ' But as to the import of olnovo^ia, it depends on the con-
text how the general meaning " administration, disposition, arrange-
ment," is to be applied. In the passages 1 Cor. ix. 17 (compared
with iv. 1) and Col. i. 25 olxovofiia denotes the apostolical office.
Here, according to the context, it refers to the dispensation of the
grace of God in Christ, and the word olnovofita for " incarnation" is
quite familiar to the Fathers, perhaps with reference to this pas-
sage. (See Suiceri Thesaur. Eccles. s. v.) But the dg denotes the
object towards which God's purpose (7rp60wf) is directed. This ob-
ject is, finally, with regard to time, more nearly defined by the addi-
tion rov -nXrjpufiarog r&v Kaiptiv, of the fulness of times. One expects,
perhaps, " in the fulness of, times ;" genitive construction (oko-
vonia rov TrA^pw/iarof) denotes the dispensation of God in Christ
but regarded as one that belongs to the fulness of times. On this
phrase itself see the remarks on Gal. iv. 4, where rr^p^a rov %p6vov
stands parallel to it. It implies, of itself, no reference to the I'lvtpa
ioxdnj, last day (although it is true that the apostles looked on
the time of the second advent of the Messiah as, at the same time,
the T% ro5v O/WVMV); the TrAT/pupi rather involves merely a refer-
ence to a pre-established term, up to which the time is considered
as being fulfilled.

Ver. 10. The dvaKe^aXaMaaaOai rd -rrdvra ev r& Xpioru is named
as the ultimate aim of the mysterious Divine decree. In these



EPHESIANS I. 10. 35



words we have first to consider the import of the term
"kaiovv. In Horn. xiii. 9, we had the word in the meaning, " to
comprise under a Ke<t>dkaiov, i. e., to comprehend, sum up, under
a radical idea." Since the question here is concerning a gather-
ing together under the person of Christ, the word can only he
referred to the idea of Kecpakrj, to which indeed its composition
does not primarily lead. Christ, that is to say, here appears to
be described as he, in whom, as the head, God has gathered to-
gether everything, so that he governs all as Lord and Regent of
the world. The elements of rd ndvra are thus distributed : rd
re ev rolg ovpavolg KOI rd em rfjg jfjg, both things in heaven and
things on earth. According to this the dvaKe^a^aiuaaodai would
appear as the result of giving to Christ all power, etc. (e666r] Xpiorti
ndoa egovaia ev oi>pav& aal em yrjg, Matth. xxviii. 18, compared with
Matth xi. 27); and of the -ndvra vnera&v virb rovg irodag avrov of
Paul (1 Cor. xv. 26, with reference to Ps. viii. 7). The passage
would seem, according to this, to have no especial difficulties ; the
neuter rd ndvra, rd re ev rol^ ovpavolg, K. r. A., might be left in all
their indefiniteness, and we might understand by them not merely
persons, but these together with all other forms of the creation, in
one word, the creation as a whole, which Christ rules by his power.
Evil itself, with its representatives, must carry out Christ's almighty
will ; it too is, although repugnant, gathered under Christ as the
head.

But, for several reasons, we are not satisfied with this mode of
taking the passage. First, Paul uses the figure which represents
Christ as the " head of the body," not so as to make the body represent
the universe, but the church (see Eph. i. 22, iv. 15, v. 23 ; Col. i.
18, ii. 19). We should thus be obliged to say that dvaKsfyahaiu-
oaadai is here to be taken, without reference to the metaphor of
the body, merely in the meaning, " to gather together under one's
rule," for which Col. ii. 10, the only passage in which ne^a^ij seems
to have a wider reference than merely to the church, might be
quoted. Again the entire context in our passage seems adverse to
that view. The pvarriptov, of the operation of which Paul here
speaks, is assuredly nothing but redemption through Christ ; this,
'therefore, appears here also to be necessarily prominent in the dvaKe-
(frakaiuaaodai, as the grand aim of the fj-vorij^iov. The parallel pas-
sage Col. i. 20, where d-rroKarakkdZai stands in a like connection, and
the &' avrov is more nearly defined by Sid rov ai/j-arog rov oravpov
avrov raises this supposition to certainty. The meaning of the
apostle must, therefore, here also be taken thus, that God, through
Christ's atonement, has gathered together all things, whether in
heaven or on earth, in him as the head, i. e., knit them together
into living, harmonious unity, in opposition to the present state of