36 EPHESIANS I. 10.
dissension and enmity, which is expressed in Col. i. 20 by
oag, which Biihr erroneously separates from dnoKaralMi-ai. True,
the same critic (on Col. i. 20) has chosen to explain the dnoKaraX-
Ufri by the word in our passage, instead of, conversely, our dva^a-
laiuaaodai., by that ; but it has already been remarked, in opposition
to that, on several hands, and recently in particular by Harless, that
the more general expression may recently be explained by the more
special, but not the more special one by the more general Now, if
we consider more nearly that idea which the apostle intends us to
recognize in this passage, it cannot be disputed that in it the resto-
ration of all things (d-KOKardarami; r&v -ndvruv) seems to be again
favoured, a view which Paul in general, as has been already remarked
on Eom. xi. 32 ; 1 Cor. xv. 24, seq. ; Gal. iii. 22, says more to sup-
port than the other writers of the New Testament. (See, however,
in contrast to these passages, 2 Thess. i. 19, and the remarks thereon
in my Comm.) For, even putting the rd re kv rot? ovpavolg quite out
of sight, the words dvaKefiaXaiuoaoOai rd Ttdvra rd KTTI rfe yifi, alone,
seem to express the conversion of all men ; for, to confine the con-
ception of the Trdvra km rrj$ >%, all things on earth, to those on
earth, who are elected to salvation according to God's gracious elec-
tion, seems altogether arbitrary ; the words speak of all without
exception. But, add still the TO re tv rolg ovpavolg, and it is very
conceivable how the defenders of the restoration could understand
rd irdvra of the universe, and rd re tv rolg ovpavolg KOI rd tnt
TTfr y?fc of the two halves of the universe, the spiritual and the ma-
terial world, in such a way that in both halves all beings,* there-
fore also evil spirits, along with their prince, the devil (whom,
as spirits, Paul, at Eph. vi. 12, transfers to the celestial world),
would be yet converted, through the might of the atonement,
and gathered together under Christ as the head.f The various
ways by which interpreters have sought to evade this explana-
tion are but little satisfactory. Some understand the "things in
heaven" of those who died in the hope of salvation, who were con-
verted and atoned for by Christ ; thus Beza, Calixtus, Suicer, Wolf,
and others. Others, as Schottgen, Ernesti, and several others, pro-
posed to understand the Jews by those in heaven, by those on earth
the Gentiles. According to Schleiermacher (in the essay on Col. i. 16,
seq,, of which we shall speak further on that passage), the things in
heaven here denote " all matters relating to Divine worship, and the
* The rabbins distinguish between a familia quse supra, and one quse infra, eat. See
Wetstein on this passage.
t It is especially Origen who first openly announced and spread this interpretation.
That Father, besides this, assumed, altogether arbitrarily, that Christ had suffered sev-
eral times iu the different spheres of the universe, for tho redemption of their respective
inhabitants.
EPHESIANS I. 10. 37
dispositions of mind thereto relating," " the things on earth," on the
other hand, " all that belongs to earthly kingdoms, to civil order,
and legal conditions."
Others, again, understand the good angels hy rd ev rolq ovpavoiq ;
so Calvin, who, without proof, advanced the assertion, that by
Christ's atonement the good angels are established in purity, so that
they can no more fall away ; and Chrysostom, Anselm, Calovius,
who understood our passage as referring to an enmity of the good
angels against men who had become wicked, which Christ had put an
end to. Finally, Bahr, Tholuck, Bohrner, and others, also refer this
to the good angels, but regard the enmity which was appeased, as
not existing in them, but in man, so that, thus, only a restoration of
peace between the two divided parties, of which one alone bears the
guilt, is asserted. Against each of these interpretations, however,
there are so many well-founded objections (as may be seen in detail
in Harless, in his Comm., ad. h. 1.), that we can adopt no one of
them. The universality of the rd -ndvra, and the equally general
division of this collective whole, TO, re iv rolg ovpavolg icdi rd im rr\q
yriq, preclude us from thinking of anything individual, whether in
heaven or on earth. On the contrary, we are, no doubt, to conceive
not of personal conscious beings alone, though of them especially,
but of the whole Kriatg, even the unconscious part of it, which Paul
in Rom. viii. 17, seq., expressly designates as having part in the re-
demption through Christ ; and indeed we have to refer this uriatg
not merely to the earth, but also to the celestial world. The
reconciliation through Christ is, therefore, to Paul, a fact whose
influences pervade the universe, which affects the conscious and the
unconscious creation equally, whether, or not, as in the world of
good angels, they be themselves touched by sin. Most of the in-
terpretations quoted contain, therefore, elements of truth ; they fail
principally from the circumstance that they make these one-sided
elements pass for the whole. Harless, too, maintains in this passage
a reference to the totality as related to the work of redemption.
" Everything," says he, p. 52, " whether in heaven or on earth, has
a share in that fact."
In Col. i. 20, Harless finds a Zeugma, because dnoKara^d^at re-
lates primarily to the things on earth ; " and yet," continues he, " it
cannot be called a Zeugmatic connexion, as undoubtedly also what
is in heaven is reconciled with the rest, in that it is included with
the rest in the final development of the work of reconciliation, which
delivers the whole creation." Paul, therefore, does not mean to
speak " as if there were an actual need of redemption in heaven,
or as making heaven merely a figure of speech ; he would seem for
this reason thus to express himself, because the Lord and Creator of
the whole body, of which heaven and earth are members, has in the
38 EPHESIANS I. 10.
restoration of the one body, restored the whole body ; and the greatest
significance of redemption consists in this, that i
a restoration of the life of this earth, but a restoration of the har-
mony of the universe." But this inteqiretation leaves unresolved
the principal difficulty, viz., how Paul could say that all have a
share in redemption, that it is a restoration of the harmony of the
universe, if he shared the common view that the numberless
hosts of angels who fell, along with the by far greatest part of man-
kind (Matth. vii. 13, 14), are eternally damned, and thus shut out
from the harmony of the universe. The defenders of "universal
restoration" understand " the harmony of the universe" seriously in
its literal meaning, and seem, according to that, to be here in the
right. Certainly, if taken in their isolation, the two passages, Eph.
i. 10 ; Col. i. 20, cannot be explained otherwise. But the interpre-
ter has the task not merely of explaining separate passages, but also
of elucidating the separate passages from the general tenor of the
ideas of the writer to whom they belong, and again of ihroivincj ?/<j/it
on the ideas of the individual writer (of course without encroaching
on his individuality), in connexion with the expressions of the prim-
itive Christian doctrine in all the writers of the New Testament.
According to this, it may perhaps be affirmed that Paul is the
writer in the New Testament who touches on the doctrine of
eternal damnation most rarely, leaves it most in the background,
and contains most of the expressions which, considered per se, seem
to teach a general restoration. Still, we cannot say he teaches that
doctrine decidedly ; partly, because he nowhere enunciates it out-
right, but always in such a way only that we are led to it by infer-
ence ; partly, because the other writers of the New Testament, and
especially in the Gospels our Lord himself, so expressly maintain
the contrary. Now, as regards the two passages (Eph. i. 10, and
Col. i. 20), it might be the most simple plan to make the meaning
we obtain from them harmonize with the general doctrinal type of
the Scriptures, by putting prominently forward in the infinitiveg
dvaKefakaiuaaadai, aTTOKa-aXXat-ai, the purpose of God, which, in the
establishment of that redemption which is furnished with infinite
power, tends to the restoration of universal harmony, and to the re-
covery of all that was lost, so that the sense would be the same 'as
in the passages 1 Tim. i. 4, 6. " God will have all men to be saved,
he has given himself a ransom for all." But that, through the un-
faithfulness and wickedness of man, this purpose is not fulfilled,
and that many men are not benefitted by it, is a subject that the
apostle has no occasion to put forward. It cannot be objected
to this, that surely God, in his omniscience, foreknows that the
fallen angels would not be converted, for he knows that just
as well of men, who continue in unbelief ; but a reference of Divine
EPHESIANS I. 11. 39
grace, which reaches its highest climax in Christ and his work, to
the evil spirits, must, according to God's universal all-embracing
compassion, necessarily be supposed ; although this very grace, in
consequence of their continued resistance, effects the very opposite
of reconciliation, viz., the utmost obduracy. (Lachmann reads em
[for ev] rolg ovpavol$, in which he follows B.D.E. But the connex-
ion of em with ovpavolg is so entirely unusual and unsuitable in itself
that we can scarcely take the reading for anything more than a
copyist's error.)
Ver. 11. The KV avr& concludes the sentence with a retrospect
to ev TW X/MCTTW, on one side, but, with ev w nai, also makes a transi-
tion to what follows. But here the question is, first of all, whether
eKhrjOfinev or &tAsjpw#j$*8* should be read. A.D.E.F.G., and the
Itala (Italic version) are in favour of eK^Or^fiev, which, there-
fore, Lachmann also has received into the text, and, indeed, accord-
ing to his principles, was obliged to do. But KKkrjpudrjpev, though
less supported by critical authorities, is yet favoured by its rareness,
and the difficulty of explaining it. The origin of iKhffiytev in an
explanatory gloss, which was written in the margin on iKfajpaQifttey,
is very simply brought about ; the origin of iid.iyxA&rjpev, on the
contrary, in case it is not genuine, admits no explanation. Now
there is, doubtless, couched in the word nhrjpovadai, as most and the
best interpreters acknowledge, a reference to the Old Testament
phrase n;.n? nVi-i, which the LXX. translate by ttArjpoc; Qeov (Deut. iv.
20, ix. 26, 29). To this we are also led especially by the parallel
passage, Col. i. 12, by which we must certainly be very greatly
guided in the interpretation of our expression, since both were
written at one time, and from one circle of ideas. KXrjpovadai, there-
fore, here denoted the realization, in time, of the e/e/loy?) ev Xptorti,
which was treated of above. But the trpoopiodevreg Kara TrpoOeoiv,
being predestinated according to the purpose, has a reference to
God's eternal decree (see on vers. 5, 9), which, as a decree of the
Almighty (rov rd -rrdvra evepyovvroc), necessarily includes its realiza-
tion also. The prcedestinatio sanctorum, as we defined it on Bom.,
ix. 1, is again quite unmistakably couched in this passage. It might
seem, however, that the rd irdvra led further to a reprobatio impio-
rum also. But the determining clause Kara r^v J3ov^v rov deXrjpa-
rog avrov, according to the counsel of his will, excludes that. Evil,
as such, is against God's will ; it is only in giving it a concrete shape
that God's hand is manifest in regard to it ; in regard to the form
of evil, we cannot hesitate, as has been already said at Bom. ix. 1, to
recognize the Almighty's influence on evil. (The connexion of povkfy
with rov de/^TJfj.arog is to so be explained that the Divine will, in an
active sense, is represented as shewing itself in individual actions ;,
is, therefore, the more general, povXt] the more special.}
40 EPHESIANS I. 12, 13.
Ve r 12 As in ver. 5 so here again too the praise of the Divine
glory is set forth as the object of the calling of men ; but whereas
hitherto ifoieZff in comprehensive generality denoted "all believers and
elect " without reference to their origin, here it appears in opposition
to tyeZf in ver. 13. That Paul by this word does not mean to desig-
nate merely himself and his immediate companions, in opposition
to the readers of the epistle, is unmistakably shewn by the limita-
tion TOU? npo^-iKorag iv rw Xpm3, who had previously hoped in
Christ. But in rrpoelniZeiv we find merely a reference to the position
of the Jews in opposition to the Gentiles. Whilst in the history of
the people of Israel from the very beginning a constant reference to
the coming of the Messiah may be traced, the Gentiles lived without
this hope. It was only when they heard the preaching of Christ, who
had then already appeared, that they received the first knowledge of
him. The details of the relative position of the Gentiles to the Jews,
and their fusion into a higher unity in the church of Christ, occupy
Paul afterwards (ii. 11, seq.) But the most difficult question here is
whether the participle rov$ n^o^mKOTag iv TU> Xpt<r-c3 is merely an
apposition to ^juo?, or the predicate of the proposition eJ? TO elvcu
flfiag, K. r. A. The former is the more usual construction, but it is
convincingly proved by Harless that the other deserves the prefer-
ence ; for since mention has already been made above, vers. 5 and 9,
of the TTpoopt&iv and the -rrpodeois in general, it would be strange
to see those ideas repeated here just in the same way. On the other
hand, the connexion presents itself in an entirely different way if
we take the passage thus : " predestined, that we to the praise
of his glory should be those who already beforehand hoped in
Christ." The only objection to this otherwise entirely satisfactory
construction, is, as appears to me, that according to it iv <L KOL KKArj-
ptidrftiev TTpoopiodevreg, in the former sentence, must, according to
Paul's meaning, denote the Jews alone, in which case there is no
transition to them intimated ; whereas, in the other version of the
construction, the transition from the general meaning of JJHEIS to
the special one appears somewhat more strongly marked in rov$'
TrpoT/^mKora?. However, this can be no decisive argument against
that explanation, because the transition to the special meaning of
fi^elq is, at all events, a gradual one.
Ver. 13. With this contrast of Jews and Gentiles, the latter
of whom are here denoted by fyeZf, and the connexion of vers. 11
and 12, we can, at iv o> nai vfiels, only suppply from ver. 11 the
leading term e/cA77pc50??Te. To the Jews, as the first called, the
Gentiles are added, but only by their hearing the preaching of the
word of truth ; whereas the former had previously learnt to hope
through the predictions of the Prophets. It seems, then, unnecessary
to inclose, with Griesbach, the clause aKovaavre^ ow-rjpia$ v/jv in
EPHESIANS I. 14. , 41
brackets, and indeed Lachmann has rightly cancelled them. For in
the KV & teal -ntoTevaavTeg the previous KV & not v^lq is not merely re-
sumed, but the idea is carried out materially further ; that is to
say, moTevetv, together with atypayiodrjvat r<5 Trvev^ari ayio>, is joined
to ditoveiv. (See, on the use of atypayi&tv = (3ef3aiovv } " to con-
firm, corroborate," the remarks on John iii. 33, vi. 27 ; 2 Cor. i.
22.) The Holy Ghost, who is here designated as nvevna -rjg i-nayye-
Ma$, inasmuch as he had been already promised to mankind through
the prophecies of the Old Testament [Joel iii. 1 ; Zach. xii. 10], is
the Author of the sealing of the Faithful.)
Ver. 14. Finally, Paul closes these introductory words, and
that series of propositions which are linked together by means of re-
latives, beginning with ver. 6, with the more accurate characteriza-
tion of the Holy Ghost as an earnest of the inheritance which awaits
the Faithful. Paul calls the Spirit dppapuv in 2 Cor. i. 22, v. 5, also.
(See the Comm. on those passages.) But here it is at the same
time more definitely declared of loliat he is the earnest viz., of the
inheritance (/cA^pow^f'a) . That by this Paul understands final salva-
tion, and especially the kingdom of God, has been already remarked
on Gal. v. 21. (See also Eph. v. 5.) Then the believer becomes en-
tirely an element of the spiritual life, of which what he receives
here from the Spirit is only the foretaste ; then will the earthly
sphere be covered by the Spirit as the waves of the sea. The two
concluding parallel clauses beginning with el$, point to the ultimate
aim of all spiritual activity, to the final redemption of the people of
the possession, and to the praise of the glory of God. (Cf. vers. 5,
12.) That redemption here does not denote the beginning of the
new life, as in ver. 7, is clear from the context ; it, is the final, com-
plete redemption, not only of the individual, but also of the whole,
just as at Rom. viii. 23 ; 1 Cor. i. 30. It is best to take the addi-
tion T?Jf 7repi7rot?/(Te6)f passively, and to assume that the abstract is
put for the concrete, Tcepi-rroirjois, possession, for nepiTroirjOKVTe^, those
possessed. There is couched, no doubt, in the choice of the word
a reference to the Old Testament denomination of the people of
Israel >>' rtao. See Exod. xix. 5 ; Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2 ; Tit. ii. 14 ;
1 Pet. ii. 9. ("Of in the beginning of ver. 14 refers not to Christ,
but to TTvevfta ayiov. The masculine stands with reference only to
the following dppaj36v, and also, we may suppose, as in John xiv. 26
[on which see the Comm.], to the Holy Spirit regarded as a person.)
42 EPHESIANS I. 15-17.
2. THANKSGIVING FOE THE FAITH OF THE READEKS.
(i. 15 ii. 10.)
Yers. 15, 16. Whilst the section from ver. 3 to ver. 14 was pro-
perly only an effusion of love annexing itself to the usual thanks-
giving at the beginning of the epistle, Paul only comes now to the
formal commencement of the epistle, as the parallel passage, Col.
i. 3, 4, 9, shews. He expresses himself, however, as to the faith and
love of his readers in such a way, that we see he did not know many
of them personally. (See Introd. 1.) To attribute to dicoveiv the
meaning " to know of one's-self, to know by one's own observation,"
is, of course, entirely inadmissible. Col. i. 4 shews that duoveiv is
rather opposed to personal knowledge, for Paul had certainly not
been in Colossae. Faith and love are, we may add, named here as
the two chief utterances of religious life, to which hope is further ,
joined at 1 Thess. i. 2, 3. Finally, the beginnings of the epistles in
1 Cor. i. 4 ; Phil. i. 3 ; 2 Thess. i. 2, 3, are just like that of this
epistle. (In ver. 15 the Kayu is to be referred to the prayer of all
other believers, whom Paul supposes to exist, " as all thank, so do
I also thank." We might expect in the first clause, TIJV a0' vpds
nioTiv, a repetition of the article before lv r& Kvptw, as in rtjv dyd-
irr)v rf,v el$. See on this point Harless, p. 84. Similar instances are
found Rom. iii. 25 ; 2 Cor. vil 7 ; Col. i. 4. Love is here described
primarily as 0tAade/l0ia, but true brotherly love in general love of
man is necessarily implied. See 2 Pet. i. 7.)
Ver. 17. The theme then of the prayer for the readers is, that
God may vouchsafe them the spirit of wisdom and of revelation,
i. e., that God may call forth among them the highest and noblest
fruits of the Spirit. As just before (ver. 14), believers are repre-
sented as being sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, and possess-
ing him as an earnest of the future inheritance, the Iva 6^ v/uv
TTvevfia, that he may give to you the Spirit, cannot be here under-
stood of the Spirit being given to them for the first time ; but
only of his working in them in a peculiar and deeper way. There-
fore, when wisdom is again named here (as in ver. 8), it seems to
be used of the charisma of wisdom, which we could not suppose at
ver. 8, for this ^reason, if for no other, that there is not, and can-
not be, a charisma of prudence (Qpovyms). (See on 1 Cor. xii. 8.)
But the two words, awtfa and faovTjmg, are in ver. 8 so united that
either both or neither must be understood of a charismatical work-
ing of the Spirit. But here Spirit of wisdom (Trvevpa <ro#o?) seems,
like " word of wisdom," 1 Cor. xii. 8, to stand for the charisma.
EPHESIANS I. 18. 43
Paul, therefore, distinguishes the ordinary influences of the Holy
Spirit, as they are even now active in the church, which rouse,
heighten, and sanctify all men's powers, from their particular char-
ismatical efficiency, which was exhibited only in the earliest times
of the church. (Hvevpa occurs directly for charismata in 1 Cor.
xiv. 12 also.) This interpretation of Iva 66-r] vfuv Trvevfia aotyiag is
also the only way of explaining the difficult use of /cat, scil. -rrvevfia
d7roKa/U;i/>W, which otherwise cannot be expounded at all satisfacto-
rily. For the charisma of dTTOKdkinjjig, revelation, is here, as at 1
Cor. xiv. 6, 26, the capacity for receiving revelations, therefore for
being a prophet. Would we, on the contrary, take dnoKaXv^ig here
in the entirely general meaning, " revelation of God to man," the
following collocation of the words would be necessarily required :
6(^7] vfuv aTToicdhvipiv irvevfiarog oofaag. To resort to hendiadys can
plainly not soften the harshness of the collocation.
Harless thinks Eom. xi. 29 most like our passage : no doubt the
KXrjmg, which occurs further on in that passage, contains the basis of
the %apianara,})u.i the d-rroKdhv^ig here does not so contain the ground
for the aofaa, ; on the contrary, according to this interpretation,
TTvevpa is limited and determined by dnondhvifjig. That this can be
thus brought in afterwards is certainly not established by any exam-
ple. ("Iva with the following (5w?? is not to be taken reAt/cwf, but to be
explained by the later less forcible use of the particle after words
of commanding, begging, etc. See Winer's Gr. 44, 8. On
6 Qebg rov nvpiov see at ver. 3. The addition TrarTjp rrj$ 66^, father
of glory, is explained, as to the sense, by the fact that the sub-
sequently named charismata are precisely operations of the Divine
glory ; but the form is unusual. We find in Acts vii. 2 the phrase
6 Qsbg rjjg do?7f, which is found Ps. xxix. 3, also, in the LXX. for
the Hebrew -tissn-Vi*. On the other hand, there is found Ps. xxiv. 7
6 0aaitei)$ rrjg 66^, the king of glory, for the Hebrew -nasrj ^^ but
our phrase 6 ncm/p rrjs 66^ is without analogy. The assumption of
a hendiadys, rendering it = Trarrjp evdogog, is not very probable ; the
purpose is not here to add a laudatory epithet of God, but to express
that the do& proceeds from God, that he is the source of it. It is
therefore fittest to take -narr\p here in the more extended sense
of auctor,fons, just as at 2 Cor. i. 3, -narr\p r&v olnnp^v. In like
manner, at John viii. 44, the devil is called 6 TraTrjp rov ijievdovs, be-
cause lies proceed from him. The assumption of the Fathers, to
which Bengel also assents, that 66%a is here a name of Christ, re-
quires no refutation, since it will scarcely find further approval.)
Yer. 18. After the reference of -rrvev/j,a cofyiac; teal dnoKaXviljeug
to the gifts of wisdom and prophecy, iv imyvuoei avrov cannot,
of course, be joined with what precedes (as those are wont to sup-
pose, who take ver. 17 to allude only to the general working of
44 EPHESIANS I. 18.
the Spirit), but to what follows, so that the meaning of the words
is this : " that he may give you spiritual gifts of wisdom and of
revelation ; eyes enlightened with the knowledge of him." Now it is
evident from the collocation, that the latter phrase denotes not some-
thing different or higher, along with the gifts of wisdom and revela-
tion (were that so, KM would not be wanting), but describes the
subjective state of him, in whom the gifts of wisdom and revela-
tion are operative. The following clauses, viz., d$ TO ddevu fyof,
riq ioTiv, K. r. A., contain the special enumeration of the different
ways in which the gifts of wisdom and revelation diffuse light in the
inner man. For $uT%eaQai involves a reference to the Spirit, as the
principle of light (see on John i. 4, 9), which enlightens man's soul
(see Ps. xiii. 4). The proper connexion, however, of KV t-rr/yrw<7
avrov is questionable. It has been proposed to take iv in the