Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Ephesians 3:10 - 3:10
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Eph_3:10. Ἵνα ] not ecbatic (Thomas, Boyd, Zanchius, Estius, Koppe, Rosenmüller, Flatt, Meier, Holzhausen), introduces the design, not, however, of τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι , as, in addition to those who understand κτίσ . of the ethical creation, also Harless would take it.[178] The latter sees in Τῷ ΤᾺ ΠΆΝΤΑ ΚΤΊΣΑΝΤΙ ἽΝΑ Κ . Τ . Λ . an explanation “how the plan of redemption had been from all ages hidden in God; inasmuch as it was He who created the world, in order to reveal in the church of Christ the manifoldness of His wisdom.” But the very doctrine itself, that the design of God in the creation of the world was directed to the making known of His wisdom to the angels, and by means of the Christian church, has nowhere an analogy in the N.T.; according to Col_1:16, Christ (the personal Christ Himself) is the aim of the creation of all things, even of the angels, who are here included in τὰ πάντα . But as ΓΝΩΡΙΣΘῇ evidently corresponds to the ἈΠΟΚΕΚΡΥΜΜΈΝΟΥ , and ΝῦΝ to the ἈΠῸ ΤῶΝ ΑἸΏΝΩΝ , we cannot, without arbitrary disturbance of the whole arrangement of this majestic passage, regard ἽΝΑ ΓΝΩΡΙΣΘῇ as other than the design of τοῦ ἀποκεκρ . ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ Θεῷ . This statement of aim stands in exact significant relation to the vocation of the apostle, Eph_3:8 f., through which this very making known to the heavenly powers was partly effected. The less is there reason for taking ἵνα γνωρ . κ . τ . λ ., with de Wette (on Eph_3:11) and Hofmann, Schriftbew. I. p. 361 (who are followed by Schenkel), after earlier expositors, as defining the aim of the preaching of Paul, Eph_3:8 f.; in which case, besides, it would be offensive that Paul should ascribe specially to his work in preaching as its destined aim that, in which the other apostles withal (comp. in particular Act_15:7), and the many preachers to the Gentiles of that time (such as Barnabas), had a share. The joining on to the adjectival element ἀποκεκρ . κ . τ . λ . produces no syntactical incongruity, but is as much in keeping with the carrying forward of the discourse by way of chain in our Epistle, as in accord with the reference of so significant a bearing to Eph_3:8 f.
ΓΝΩΡΙΣΘῇ ΝῦΝ ] The emphasis is not upon ΝῦΝ (Rückert and others), but upon ΓΝΩΡΙΣΘῇ , in keeping with the ἈΠΟΚΕΚΡ .: in order that it should not remain hidden, but should be made known, etc.
ταῖς ἀρχαῖς κ . τ . ἐξουσίαις ] See on Eph_1:21. The angelic powers are to recognise in the case of the Christian church the wisdom of God;—what a church-glorifying design, out of which God kept the μυστήριον from the beginning locked up in Himself! To the heavenly powers (comp. 1Pe_1:12), which therefore are certainly not thought of as abstractions, the earthly institute is to show the wisdom of God; an even, however, is quite arbitrarily inserted before ταῖς ἀρχ . (Grotius, Meier). The explanation of the diabolic powers (Ambrosiaster, Vatablus, not Estius), which Vorstius, Bengel, Olshausen, Hofmann, Bleek at least understand as included, is entirely foreign to the context (it is otherwise at Eph_6:12), even though ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις (comp. Eph_1:3; Eph_1:20) were not added. Throughout the whole connection the contrast of earth and heaven prevails. Wrongly, too, we may add, secular rulers (Zeger, Knatchbull), Jewish archons (Schöttgen, Locke), heathen priests (van Til), and Christian church-overseers (Zorn), have been understood as here referred to (comp. Eph_1:21); while Koppe would embrace “quicquid est vi, sapientia, dignitate insigne,” and would only not exclude the angels on account of ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρ .
ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρ . is, as always in our Epistle (see on Eph_1:3), definition of place: in heaven, not: in the case of the heavenly things, which are to be perceived in connection with the church (Zeltner, comp. Baumgarten), and such like (see in Wolf). It is most naturally to be combined (comp. Eph_6:12) with ταῖς ἀρχ . κ . τ . ἐξουσ ., in which case it was not needful to place ΤΑῖς before ἘΝ ΤΟῖς ἘΠΟΥΡΑΝΊΟΙς , seeing that the ἘΝ ΤΟῖς ἘΠΟΥΡΑΝ ., more precisely fixing the definition of the notion of the ἈΡΧΑΊ and ἘΞΟΥΣΊΑΙ (for even upon earth there are ἈΡΧΑΊ and ἘΞΟΥΣΊΑΙ ), is blended into a unity of notion with those two words (Fritzsche, ad Rom. I. p. 195), so that there is no linguistic necessity for connecting, as does Matthies,[179] ἘΝ ΤΟῖς ἘΠΟΥΡ . with ΓΝΩΡ .
The question why Paul did not write simply ΤΟῖς ἈΓΓΈΛΟΙς is not to be answered, with Hofmann, to the effect, that the spirits ruling in the ethnic world are intended, because such a special reference of the general expression τ . ἀρχ . κ . τ . ἐξουσ . must have been specified (by the addition of τῶν ἐθνῶν , or something of that sort); but to the effect, that the designation of the angels on the side of their power and rank, in contradistinction to the ΔΙᾺ Τῆς ἘΚΚΛΗΣΊΑς , serves for the glorifying of the ἐκκλησία . The Designation corresponds to the fulness and the lofty pathos by which the whole passage is marked. In Eph_1:21, also, an analogous reason is found, namely, the glorifying of Christ. It is to be observed, in general, that the name ἄγγελος does not occur at all in our Epistle.
ΔΙᾺ Τῆς ἘΚΚΛΗΣΊΑς ] The Christian church (i.e. the collective body of believers regarded as one community, comp. 1Co_12:28; 1Co_10:32; 1Co_15:9; Gal_1:11; Php_3:6; Col_1:18; Col_1:24,—hence not betraying the later Catholic notion) is, in its existence and its living development, as composed of Jews and Gentiles combined in a higher unity, the medium de facto for the divine wisdom becoming known, the actual voucher of the same; because it is the actual voucher of the redemption which embraces all mankind and raises it above the hostile contrast of Judaism and heathenism,—this highest manifestation of the divine wisdom (Rom_11:32 f.). To the angels, in accordance with their ministering interest in the work of redemption (Mat_18:10; Luk_15:7; Luk_15:10; 1Co_11:10; Heb_1:14; 1Pe_1:12), the church of the redeemed is therefore, as it were, the mirror, by means of which the wisdom of God exhibits itself to them.
πολυποίκιλος ] Eur. Iph. T. 1149; Eubul. in Athen. xv. p. 679 D; Orph. v. 11, lx. 4. It signifies much-manifold, i.e. in a high degree manifold, quite corresponding to the Latin multivarius. That it signifies very wise (Wolf, Koppe, Rosenmüller) has been erroneously assumed from Aesch. Prom. 1308, where ποίκιλος means crafty. As πολυποίκιλος , the wisdom of God manifests itself to the angels through the church, inasmuch as the counsel of the redemption of the world is therein presented to them in its universal realization, and they thus behold the manifold ways and measures of God, which He had hitherto taken with reference to the Jews and Gentiles, all now in their connection with the institute of redemption,—all uniting in this as their goal. The church is thus for them, as regards the manifold wisdom of God, the central fact of revelation; for the πολυποικίλους ὁδοὺς Θεοῦ , which they before knew not as to their ultimate end, but only in and by themselves (and how diverse were these ways with the Jews and with the Gentiles!), they now see in point of fact, through the church (“haec enim operum divinorum theatrum est,” Bengel), as ΠΟΛΥΠΟΊΚΙΛΟς ΣΟΦΊΑ . Thus by the appearing of the ἘΚΚΛΗΣΊΑ as a fact in the history of salvation, the wisdom of the divine government of the world has been on every side unveiled and brought to recognition. Entirely without warrant, Baur assumes, p. 429, that the Gnostic σοφία , with its heterogeneous forms and conditions (comp. Iren. Haer. i. 4. 1), was present to the mind of the writer.
[178] So also Baur refers it, p. 425, but explains the thus resulting aim of the creation from the doctrine of the Valentinians.
[179] The whole apprehension of our passage by Matthies is mistaken. He refers τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσ . to all that God has either created in the natural reference of the term, or accomplished in a spiritual respect for the salvation of men. According to his view, ἵνα applies to τῷ τὰ π . κτίσ .; the ἀρχαὶ καὶ ἐξουσίαι are “the high and mighty ones who live in the world, or even in an invisible spiritual manner play their part in the same;” τὰ ἐπουράνια is to be taken “as the actually subsisting aggregate of all that is heavenly—as the kingdom of God.” In the heavenly kingdom the wisdom of God becomes manifest by means of the church, and particularly to these high and mighty ones, because these are now, in the heavenly kingdom founded by Christ, brought, by means of the church, to the consciousness of their powerlessness.—Thus, in fact, there are, as well in the notion of κτίζειν as in that of ἀρχαὶ κ . ἐξουσ ., two wholly different conceptions combined, in opposition to the hermeneutic principle of the unity of the sense; τὰ ἐπουράνια is arbitrarily generalized in a spiritualistic way, and the thought that the ἀρχαὶ καὶ ἐξουσίαι are brought to the consciousness of their powerlessness is purely imported, and the more mistakenly, inasmuch as it is God’s σοφία , not His δύναμις , of which it is here said that it is made manifest to the ἀρχαὶ καὶ ἐξουσ .