Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Ephesians 1:13 - 1:13
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Eph_1:13, so that ἐν ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς leads over to the second constituent element (you Gentile-Christians).
As regards the construction, it is regarded by Wolf, Bengel, Morus, and others (comp. already Jerome), including Rückert, Matthies, Holzhausen, de Wette, Bleek, Bisping, as anacoluthic; the ἐν ᾧ of the second half of the verse is held to resume the first. Incorrectly, since in the resumption καὶ ὑμεῖς would have been essential. As Paul has written the passage ( καὶ πιστεύσ .), there is added to what has previously been affirmed of the ὑμεῖς ( ἀκούσαντες ), a new affirmation; hence ἐν ᾧ κ . πιστ . κ . τ . λ . is the continuation, not the resumption of the discourse. The verb after ἐν ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς is therefore to be supplied; not, however, ἠλπίκατε (Erasmus in his version, Beza, Castalio, Calvin, Estius, and others), since in fact the preceding προηλπικότας —which, besides, was only an appositional constituent element of the discourse—would yield προηλπίκατε , which is inapplicable to the Gentile-Christians; nor yet ἐκληρώθητε (Erasmus, Paraphr.; Piscator, Zanchius, Cornelius a Lapide, Boyd, Vorstius, Zachariae, Koppe, and others, including Meier, Harless, Olshausen), since ἐκληρώθημεν , Eph_1:11, already embraced the Jewish and Gentile Christians, and with εἰς τὸ εἶναι ἡμᾶς κ . τ . λ . a new portion of the development sets in. The right course is merely to supply mentally the substantive verb, in accordance with the current expression ἐν Χριστῷ εἶναι , to belong to Christ as the element of life, in which one exists. Hence: in whom also ye are. Thus Paul paves the way for his transition to the Gentile-Christians, in order, after first specifying how it was that they had become such (Eph_1:13-14), finally to assert of them also the εἰς ἔπαινον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ (Eph_1:14).
ἀκούσαντες τὸν λόγ . τῆς ἀληθ .] after ye have heard the word (the preaching) of the truth; for after this hearing there set in with them the ἐν Χριστῷ εἶναι . The truth κατʼ ἐξοχήν is the contents of the λόγος . But a contrast to the types and shadows of the O. T. (Chrysostom), or to heathen error (Cornelius a Lapide, Baumgarten; Grotius thinks of both), is not implied in the context. Comp. Col_1:5; 2Ti_2:15.
τὸ εὐαγγ . τ . σωτηρ . ὑμ .] descriptive apposition to λόγος τῆς ἀληθ . The genitive here also denotes the contents; that which is made known in the gospel is the Messianic salvation. Harless takes both genitives as genitives appositionis, inasmuch as the gospel is the truth and the σωτηρία . The gospel, however, is not the salvation, but an exertion of the power of God, which leads to salvation (Rom_1:16; 1Co_1:18); the analogous combinations, too, of τὸ εὐαγγ . with a genit. abstract., as τὸ εὐαγγ . τῆς χάριτος τ . Θεοῦ (Act_20:24), τῆς εἰρήνης (Eph_6:15), τῆς βασιλείας , are opposed to the assumption of a genit. apposit. Comp. on Mar_1:1. Finally, the context also, by ἀκούσαντες and πιστεύσαντες , points not to what the doctrine is, but to what it proclaims. Comp. Rom_10:14.
ἐν ᾧ καὶ πιστεύσαντες κ . τ . λ .] A further stage of the setting forth how they became what they were, in order to reach its goal εἰς ἔπαινον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ , Eph_1:14. Precisely with regard to the Gentile-Christians, who had previously been aloof from all theocratic connection (no προηλπικότες ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ ), the apostle feels himself impelled not to be content with the simple “in whom also ye are, after ye have heard the gospel,” but specially to bring into relief the sealing of the Holy Spirit.
ἐν ᾧ ] is referred not merely by those who regard it as resumptive (see above), but also by many others with Luther (including Harless, Meier, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Schenkel), to Christ; but why should we pass over the nearest antecedent? The καί finds its reference, agreeably to the context, in the accession of the faith to the hearing (Rom_10:14; 1Co_15:1). Hence ἐν ᾧ is to be referred, with Castalio, Calvin, Beza, Erasmus Schmid, and others (comp. Erasmus, Paraphr.), to τὸ εὐαγγέλιον , and to be joined, with Castalio, to πιστεύσαντες , not to ἐσφραγίσθ . (as usually), according to which πιστεύσ . would be superfluous,[105] and the periodic flow of the discourse would be injuriously affected. Hence: in which ye having become believers, were sealed through the Holy Spirit. As to πιστεύειν ἐν (Mar_1:15), see on Gal_3:26.
πιστεύσαντες ] is not to be taken, with Harless, as contemporaneous with ἐσφραγ . (see on Eph_1:5; Eph_1:9); but it contains that which was prior to the σφραγίζεσθαι . The order of conversion was: hearing, faith, baptism, reception of the Spirit. See Act_2:37; Act_8:12; Act_8:17; Act_19:5-6; Rom_6:3-4; Tit_3:5 f.; Gal_3:2; Gal_4:6. Certainly even the becoming a believer is not the work of human self-determination (see Act_16:14; Php_1:29; Rom_12:3 relates to the measure of faith of the baptized); yet this divine operation is only preparatory, and the effusion of the Spirit, properly so called, ensued only after baptism:[106] hence water and Spirit (Joh_3:5).
ἐσφαγίσθητε ] were sealed, i.e. confirmed, namely, as κληρονόμοι of the Messianic kingdom. See what follows. Comp. Eph_4:30, and see on 2Co_1:22; Joh_3:33. This sealing is the indubitable guarantee of the future Messianic salvation received in one’s own consciousness (Rom_8:16) through the Holy Spirit, not the attestation before others ( ὥστε εἶναι δῆλον , ὅτι Θεοῦ ἔστε λάχος κ . κλῆρος , Theophylact; comp. Chrysostom, Cornelius a Lapide, Flatt, Holzhausen, and others). An allusion has been arbitrarily found in ἐσφραγ . to circumcision (Rom_4:11), or to the στίγματα of heathen ceremonies (Grotius assumes both: “non extra signati estis in cute, quomodo Judaei circumcisi et Graecorum idolorum punctis notati”), nay, even to the σφραγίς Dianae, with which those initiated into her mysteries were marked (Amelius; comp. note on Gal_6:17).
τῷ πνεύματι τῆς ἐπαγγελ .] Dativus instrumentalis, and τῆς ἐπαγγ . is genitivus qualitatis, denoting the promise as characteristic of the Holy Spirit, for He is, in fact, the Spirit promised in the O. T. (Act_2:16 ff.; Joe_3:1-5; Zec_12:10; Isa_32:15; Isa_44:3; Eze_36:26 f., Eze_39:29. Comp. Luk_24:49; Act_1:4; Gal_3:14). Others (Calvin, Beza, Castalio, Piscator; and as early as Chrysostom and Theophylact, alongside of the former correct view): the Spirit, who confirms the promise (of salvation). But how wholly imported, since in πνεῦμα itself there is implied nothing at all of the notion of confirmation! No, the Old Testament promise belonged to the Spirit; He is specifically the Spirit of promise, and by that very fact He became for the recipients the sealing of Messianic blessedness.
τῷ ἁγίῳ ] is not added accidentally, nor yet because the sanctificatio of the Spirit would be the confirmatory element (Pelagius, Lombard), for in τῷ ἁγίῳ there is implied the quality, not the effect of the Spirit; but Paul desires to bring out very emphatically and solemnly that, by which the σφραγίζεσθαι has been accomplished; hence he says, with corresponding pathos: τῷ πνεύματι τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῷ ἁγίῳ . We may add that we are not to think, with Grotius, Estius, and others, of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, since, in fact, the ὑμεῖς generally are the σφραγισθέντες , but rather of the outpouring of the Spirit, which all experienced after their baptism (Act_2:38; Gal_3:2 ff.). See also Eph_1:14.
According to Schwegler in Zeller’s Jahrb. 1844, p. 383, the πνεῦμα τῆς ἐπαγγελ . is to be held as pointing to the later period, to which the doctrine of the Paraclete in the (not genuine) Gospel of John belongs. But comp. Gal_3:14.
[105] If ἐν ᾧ belongs to ἐσφραγ ., we must, in the event of ᾧ applying to the Gospel, explain: “by means of which ye also, after ye became believers (or ye, after ye also became believers), were sealed.” Comp. Beza. But if ᾧ is to apply to Christ, the sense would be: “in whom (being) ye also, after ye became believers (or: ye, after ye also became believers), were sealed.” How utterly superfluous πιστεύσαντες is in either case, will be at once felt. Harless regards ἐν ᾧ as more precisely defined by τῷ πνεύματι , inasmuch as the Spirit of God is also the Spirit of Christ (Rom_8:9; 2Co_3:17; Gal_4:6). But even thus πιστεύσαντες : remains unnecessary, since ἐν ᾧ surely expresses the already existing spiritual union with Christ.
[106] As to the single instance of the effusion of the Spirit before baptism, see on Act_10:44.