Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Ephesians 2:17 - 2:17
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Eph_2:17. After Christ has established peace, He has come and has also proclaimed it, to the Gentiles and the Jews. This proclamation, namely, cannot be regarded as preceding the fact by which the peace was established, so that ἐλθών would apply to the bodily advent of Christ upon earth (Chrysostom, Anselm, Estius, Holzhausen, Matthies, Harless), and the connection with Eph_2:14 would be: “Christ is peace in deed (Eph_2:14) and word (Eph_2:17); He not only is peace, but He proclaimed it Himself at His appearing on earth,” Harless. For, when it is said in Eph_2:14, αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν , the time thought of is, as Eph_2:14-16 show, the time after the crucifixion of Christ, through which and since which He is our peace, so that καὶ ἐλθὼν κ . τ . λ . does not merely attach itself to αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν and leave all that intervenes out of view; but, on the contrary, this intervening matter is so essentially bound up with αὐτὸς γ . ἐ . ἡ εἰρ . ἡμ ., that now καὶ ἐλθὼν κ . τ . λ . can introduce not a πρότερον , but only a ὕστερον of the crucifixion, annexing as it does the further course of the matter. Rightly, therefore, most expositors have understood in ἐλθών an advent following the crucifixion of Christ, in connection with which either the resurrection of Christ has been thought of (Bengel, Rückert), or His having come in His Spirit (Olshausen), or in the preaching that took place through the apostles (so most), in which latter view ἐλθών is wrongly by many, as Raphel, Grotius, Wolf, Zachariae, Koppe, Rosenmüller (comp. Meier), regarded as without significance; it is in truth an “insigne verbum,” Bengel. The correct explanation (comp. Eph_2:18) is given by Olshausen; comp. Baumgarten-Crusius and de Wette, also Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 475, and Bleek. In the Holy Spirit, namely, not only according to John (Joh_14:18, al.), but also according to Paul, Christ Himself has come (in so far as it is Christ’s Spirit) from heaven to those who have received the Spirit, and dwells and rules in them (Rom_8:9-10; 2Co_3:17; 2Co_13:5; Gal_2:20), and this proclamation has taken place at the instance of the Spirit (Rom_8:16), and through the Spirit Himself (Rom_15:18; comp. 2Co_13:3). The point of time expressed by εὐηγγελίσατο is the conversion of the persons concerned, at which they received the Spirit (Gal_3:2; Eph_1:13). Accordingly the apostle could, without writing at variance with history, name first the readers as original Gentiles ( ὑμῖν τοῖς μακράν ), and then the Jews; for when the Ephesians became Christians, there had already long since been converted not merely Jews, but Gentiles and Jews. Had he, on the other hand, meant the actual coming of Christ upon earth and His oral preaching, the historical necessity would have presented itself of mentioning first those that were near and then those that were afar off.
We may add that the concrete and vividly depicting expression ἐλθὼν εὐηγγ ., can the less occasion surprise, as the whole passage bears the impress of emotion. Comp. also Act_26:23.
εἰρήνην ] has been, from the time of Chrysostom, ordinarily explained of peace with God, while only a few, as Estius and Koppe, suppose peace with each other to be included; but Olshausen rightly understands the latter alone, as does also Bleek. Only this is in keeping with the whole connection (see, moreover, the immediately preceding ἀποκτ . τὴν ἔχθραν , and comp. Eph_2:19), and, moreover, has Eph_2:18 not against it, but in its favour (see on Eph_2:18).
ὑμῖν τοῖς μακράν and τοῖς ἐγγύς ] (both to be explained in accordance with Eph_2:12, and comp. Isa_57:19) are dependent on εὐηγγελίσατο ,—the view which immediately and most naturally suggests itself. Harless would attach both very closely to εἰρήνην ,—a course to which he was impelled by his explanation of ἐλθὼν εὐηγγ ., in order not to present the apostle as saying what is inconsistent with history (Mat_15:24, comp. Mat_10:5 f.; Joh_10:16; Mat_21:43, al.). But the inconsistency with history would still remain.[156]
The repetition of εἰρήνην (see the critical remarks) has rhetorical emphasis, Joh_14:27; Buttm. neut. Gr. p. 341 [E. T. 398]. This ἐπιμονή of the expression, however (Nägelsbach on Hom. Il. i. 436), excludes the view of Wieseler, p. 444, that τοῖς ἐγγύς also is in apposition to ὑμῖν , and means specially the Jewish-Christians in Ephesus.
[156] If Paul had understood ἐλθ . εὐηγγ . in the sense of Harless, he must at all events have written εἰρ . τοῖς ἐγγὺς κ . εἰρ . ὑμῖν τοῖς μακράν . Harless himself has paraphrased (comp. Erasm. Paraphr.): “The contents of his message was a peace which availed for all, Jews as well as Gentiles.” Evidently under an involuntary sense of the historical relation, but in opposition to the words, according to which Harless ought to have paraphrased: “availed for all, Gentiles as well as Jews.”