Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Ephesians 5:1 - 5:2
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(Eph_5:1-14.)
1) Look above thyself to follow God!
(Eph_5:1-2.)
As beloved children [ ὡò ôÝêíá ἀãáðçôÜ ].—̔ Ùò , “as,” denotes the reality, ôÝêíá ἀãáðçôÜ , “beloved children,” the relation in which they are the objects of the love of God and through Christ His children. Theodoret: õἱïèåóßáò ἠîῖþèçôå , ðáôÝñá ôὸí èåὸí ὀíïìÜæåôå , æçëþóáôå ôïéãáñïῦí ôὴí óõããÝíåéáí . Comp. 1Jn_4:12; 1Jn_4:7-11; Mat_5:48; Luk_6:36. Liberorum est, patrem moribus referre (Grotius).
Eph_5:2. And walk in love.— Êáß , “and,” is epexegetical, in order to define the point of the imitation: ðåñéðáôåῖôå ἐí ἀãÜðç , “walk in love,” “even as God forgave you” (Eph_4:32). ̓ Åí ἀãÜðῃ is God’s characteristic (Eph_1:4-5), our aim (Eph_3:17-19); the former makes the latter possible. On ðåñéðáôåῖí , see Eph_2:2.
Eph_5:2 b. Closer designation. As Christ also loved you [ êáèὼò êáὶ ὁ ×ñéóôὸò ἠãÜðçóåí ὑìᾶò . See Textual Notes.]—“In Christ” (Eph_4:32) is now explained. “As Christ also” binds the Christian walk to Christ and His work. Christ has loved you, in that He became man and dwelt among men, served them, being mighty in word and deed. [While “the Apostle makes no distinction between our being the objects of God’s love, and our being the objects of the love of Christ” (Hodge), it is quite as true that êáß , also, marks an advance “from the love of the Father who gave His Son, to that of the Son, the Personal manifestation of that love in our humanity” (Alford). The force of the aorists should be preserved.—R.] The ὑìᾶò marks the exhortation more strongly than if the reading were ἡìᾶò , permitting the general predicate ( ἠãÜðçóåí ) to become prominent in its independent validity, over against what follows:
And gave himself up for us.— Êáß ðáñÝäùêåí ἑáõ ôüí , over against ἔäùêåí (Joh_3:16) denotes two things: the voluntary giving and the giving Himself up to suffering, that is, to suffering in the general sense, including the special form, death: so has He loved. To this ὑðåñ ἡìῶí , “for us,” also points. [The phrase in itself may or may not imply substitution; Ellicott and most think the context points indisputably in this case to the sense: in our stead.—Comp. Romans (Eph_5:6), p. 164; also Galatians (Eph_2:20, and Doctr. Notes on Eph_3:6-14).—R.] The figure is taken from a conflict, in which, against the enemies thronging over a fallen one, a hero, full of noble courage and of love, protectingly contends; similar to this is the use of ðåñß , which gives prominence to the being encircled by foes. This reference is found also in the closer definition which follows.
An offering and a sacrifice, ðïïóöïñὰí êáὶ èõóßáí —According to Kliefoth [Liturg. Abhandlungen, 4 p. 27 ff.) ÷øְáַê (corban) is the common name for all sacrifices and offerings, bloody and unbloody, while îִðְçָä (mincha) is principally used of the unbloody ( ðñïóöïñÜ ), æֶáַç (zebach) for the bloody offerings ( èõóßá ). Comp. Heb_9:9; Heb_10:5; Heb_10:8, where both words occur, and Heb_10:10; Heb_10:14; Heb_10:18 with Heb_10:12; Heb_10:26, where they are used promiscuously. Still even there ôïῦ áþìáôïò is added to ðñïóöïñÜ , so that in accordance with the context and usus loquendi this distinction is to be maintained, and in the given order also, because He gave Himself here as a ðñïóöïñÜ , and became in death a èõóßá , the former being the soul of the èõóßá æῶóá (Stier).—[Alford, Eadie, Ellicott, all find in the former term a more general reference to the vicarious work of Christ, and in the latter a more special reference to His death. “The great prominent idea here is the one sacrifice, which the Son of God made of Himself in His Redeeming love, in our nature—bringing it, in Himself, near to God—offering Himself as our representative Head: whether in perfect righteousness of life, or in sacrifice, properly so called, at His death” (Alford).—R.] Accordingly it is not necessary to supply åßò èáíáôïí in thought (Harless [Hodge], Schenkel and others); the context includes more.
To God for a savour of sweet smell [ ôῷ èåῷ åἰò ὀóìὴí åὐùäßáò ].—This is= øֵéçַ ðִéçåֹçַ ìַéäåָֹä (Exo_29:18, LXX.: ôῷ êõñßῳ åἰò ὀóìὴí åὐùäßáò ; comp. Lev_1:9; Lev_3:16), where êõñßῳ in correspondence with the original text is placed last. Hence “to God,” which is inserted for the sake of clearness, is not to be joined to the verb (Meyer). The two substantives (both derived from ὄæù , ὀóìὴ denoting the smell in so far as it is inhaled, and åὐùäßá its quality, Winer, p. 562, or its effect, pleasure) give prominence to the fact that God the Father is well-pleased in the self-sacrificing love of the Crucified One, in order to strengthen, through the reference to this, the exhortation, that we too can become well-pleasing to the Father only in self-devoting love. Php_4:18; Rom_12:1-2; 2Co_2:15.
2. God is the original, Christ the express image of the Father, and the ensample of His people, the Christian the likeness and copy. As the imitation of God cannot be absolute, but is to be limited to loving, to forgiving love, so the imitation of Christ cannot be directed toward expiatory sufferings, but only to self-sacrificing love for our fellows, well-pleasing to God.
3. As we are able to walk in love only as beloved of God and as vouchsafed sonship with Him, so we can only, when reconciled to God through Christ, follow Him in filial and hence in fraternal devotion; in His grace we first can walk as well-pleasing to Him. The error of the Socinians and the Rationalists who see in Christ and His self-sacrifice a mere example and nothing more, is great and pernicious. See Exeg. and Doctr. Notes on Eph_2:16. As the Bible highly estimates the icarious sufferings of Christ, which are taught, not in the ὑðὲñ ἡìῶí , but in the èõóßá and the whole Scripture (Mat_20:28; 1Ti_2:6), so it occurs in the entire life of human society: the child lives by the mother’s sacrifice, and he for whom no one suffers is miserable. So we too should live for others and suffer in their stead; though we cannot make atonement, we can still live and love self-sacrificingly in the strength imparted to us.
Starke:—Wilt thou become like God hereafter, and see Him as He is, then must thou in this life be holy, even as He is holy.—No one can rightly boast himself of sonship with God, who does not imitate Him.—Christ’s example is the proper mirror in which to see the true and natural form of love.
Rieger:—The moral instruction of the Apostles is everywhere deduced from the marrow of the gospel, nor can it be put in practice by any one who does not stand in this gospel of peace. It is the character of love, to imitate as it may the Beloved.
Heubner:—This is a powerful precept: who can satisfy its demands? We cannot become like Him, but we can strive to follow Him in holiness and love. Imitating Christ and God is the same thing.—Christ is and remains the original, but we should be copies, the more faithful, the better.
Stier:—The Father gives His children but one command: Love!
Gerlach:—The thank-offering Christ brought for us, that we too might now offer ourselves to God; the sin-offering, that we need not suffer the same punishment.
Footnotes:
Eph_5:2—[The better attested reading is ὑìᾶò ( à .1 A. B., cursives, versions and fathers). The Rec. has ἡìᾶò ( à .3 D. E. F. K. L., most cursives and versions); so Lachmann, Ellicott. See text note.—R.]
Eph_5:2—[B., with some minor authorities, reads ὑìῶí instead of ἡìῶí , which is well supported. The connection with the last clause complicates the critical question however. Tischendorf, Alford and others accept: ὑìᾶò — ὑìῶí ; Lachmann, Ellicott and most (Rec.): ἡìᾶò — ἡìῶí . If a uniformity in the person of the pronoun is indispensable, then the latter is preferable but Braune, with Meyer and others, still more correctly accepts the variation (“loved you and gave himself for us), which is lectio difficilior, accounts best for the various readings, and in detail is better supported by diplomatic authority.—R.]
[Both Eadie and Ellicott seem disposed to regard the verses in this light, but Alford takes them as transitional, accepting the view of ïὖí suggested by Stier and here upheld by Braune.—R.]
[The point suggested by the adjective is obscured in the E. V.: “dear;” “as children beloved,” they should imitate God in love, see Eph_5:2.—R.]
[Alford, Ellicott and others prefer to connect ôῷ èåῷ as dat. commodi. This alters the sense very little, and is favored by the position of the words, though the Old Testament allusion strongly sustains the view of Braune, which is accepted by many commentators. The connection with the verb is out of the question.—R.]
[Eadie remarks: “To warrant the application of the term ‘sacrifice’ to the death of Christ, it must have been something more than the natural, fitting, and graceful conclusion of a self-denied life—it must have been a violent and vicarious decease and a voluntary presentation.” See his full doctrinal note in loco. At the same time Alford is perhaps justified in terming the question, as usually discussed, an “irrelevant one here.” “It is not the death of Christ which is treated of, but the whole process of His redeeming love. His death lies in the background as one, and the chief, of the acknowledged facts of that process: but it does not give the character to what is predicated of Him.” This exegetical view does not however favor any theory of the death of Christ which denies its vicarious, propitiatory character as an atoning sacrifice.—R.]