Eph_1:19 ff. After the object of the hope, there is now set forth also that by which it is realized, namely, the infinite power of God shown in the resurrection, etc., of Christ: and what (quanta) is the exceeding (surpassing all measure) greatness of His power in relation to us who believe. The construction is as in the preceding portion, and consequently such, that
εἰς
ἡμᾶς
τοὺς
πιστ
. attaches itself not to
τῆς
δυνάμ
.
αὐτοῦ
(Meier, Harless, de Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bleek, after many older expositors; comp. 2Co_13:4), but to the
ἐστί
to be mentally supplied after
τί
.
From the context preceding (
ἐλπὶς
κληρονομίας
) and following (Eph_1:20 f.) it is clear that Paul is not here speaking of the power of God already in the earthly life manifesting itself as regards believers in their inward experience (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Photius, Theophylact, Erasmus, and others, including Flatt, Matthies, Rückert, Meier, Harless), not even of this as included (Schenkel), but only of the power to be shown as regards believers in future at the Parousia, where this mighty working displayed in Christ’s resurrection, exaltation, and appointment as Head of the church, must necessarily, in virtue of their fellowship with Christ, redound to the fulfilment of the hope, to the
δόξα
τῆς
κληρονομίας
(see Eph_1:20-23). Hence Paul continues:
κατὰ
τὴν
ἐνέργειαν
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] This is indeed connected by many with
τοὺς
πιστεύοντας
(see Erasmus, Calovius, Rosenmüller, Flatt, Rückert, Matthies, and others), in which case the
πιστεύειν
appeared as consequence of the
ἐνέργεια
κ
.
τ
.
λ
., as
ἔργον
Θεοῦ
—a view, which was helped among the older expositors (see, especially, Calovius) by the interest of opposition to Pelagian and Socinian opinions; but in this way the whole course of thought is deranged, and the simple and solemn exposition in Eph_1:20 is made subservient to an expression quite immaterial, which Paul might equally well have omitted (
τοὺς
πιστεύοντας
). It is not the design, according to the connection, to prove the origin of faith. Chrysostom, Calvin, Calixtus, Estius, Grotius, and others, including Meier and Winzer, have found in
κατὰ
τὴν
ἐνέργ
.
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. an amplification (de Wette: the real ground; comp. also Bleek) of
τὸ
ὑπερβ
.
μέγεθος
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. But in this way all that follows would only be destined to hold the disproportionate place of a description, and would be isolated from
εἰς
τὸ
εἰδέναι
ὑμᾶς
, which yet was the definite basis of the discourse hitherto; and this isolation there is no reason to assume. Hence we have to take
κατὰ
τ
.
ἐνέργ
.
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. as the ground of knowledge of the preceding point. What is the exceeding greatness of the divine power towards believers, the readers are to know in virtue of the operation, etc.; in accordance with this operation they were to measure that exceeding greatness. Harless refers it not merely to the preceding point, but to all the three points adduced after
εἰς
τὸ
εἰδέναι
ὑμᾶς
. But, as the
ἐνέργεια
τοῦ
κράτους
τῆς
ἰσχύος
corresponds simply to the notion of the
δύναμις
, we are not entitled to refer farther back than to the point, in which the
δύναμις
was spoken of.
τὴν
ἐνέργ
.
τοῦ
κράτ
.
τῆς
ἰσχύος
αὐτοῦ
] a touching accumulation of terms, presenting the matter in genetic form; for
ἰσχύς
is strength in itself as inward power, as vis or virtus (Mar_12:30; 2Pe_2:11),
κράτος
, might expressing itself in overcoming resistance, in ruling, etc. (Luk_1:51; Act_19:20; Eph_6:10; Col_1:11; Heb_2:14; Dan_4:27; Isa_40:26), and
ἐνέργεια
, the efficacious working, the active exertion of power. For similar combinations of words having a kindred sense, see Lobeck, Paralip. I. p. 534 f. Comp. Soph. Philoct. 590:
πρὸς
ἰσχύος
κράτος
. Job_21:23 (LXX.). The Vulgate aptly renders: “secundum operationem potentiae virtutis ejus,” and Bengel remarks: “
τ
.
ἐνέργειαν
, haec actus est;
τοῦ
κράτους
, hoc in actu est.”