> ‎Chapter 1‎ > ‎Chapter 2‎ > ‎Chapter 3‎ > ‎Chapter 4‎ > ‎Chapter 5‎ > ‎Chapter 6‎ > ‎  

 

 

Introduction

Authenticity: The case is very similar to that with Colossians. No one questioned that it was by St. Paul until the late 18th century. The ancient witnesses who say it is by Paul are impressive: St. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and the Muratorian Fragment, plus heretical authors: Marcion, Basilides, and Valentinus. In addition there are illusions in Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp and St. Justin that are likely to refer to Ephesians.

So the external arguments for Pauline authorship are very good. Can the internal arguments outweigh them?

They are very similar to what we saw for Colossians:

a)Vocabulary and Style: The case of Tacitus, Dialogue on Orators, which we saw in connection with Colossians still shows us that the style argument here is far from conclusive. The most impressive feature in Ephesians is the presence of long sentences. But these are also found, to a much lesser degree, in the undisputed Pauline letters. Of course it is possible that Paul told a secretary what ideas he wanted to write, then approved the final copy. The style of the secretary might be rather different.

b)Theological Differences:

(1)The Church: Here, as in Colossians, Paul often speaks of the universal Church, whereas in other letters he speaks more of the local churches. But both things are true. Again, in both Colossians and Ephesians the doctrine of the Mystical Body is more developed, as we saw in detail in the introduction to Colossians. But as we said there, it is not strange if a man with a good mind develops over time.

In chapter 1 Paul speaks of the same predestination to be members of the Church as he did in Romans 8:29-39 and on into the next three chapters of Romans. In Romans, Paul was not referring just to the local church at Rome, but to the universal Church, the whole people of God.

(2)Gentiles: In Romans, Paul looked forward to the conversion of the Jews; and hoped the conversion of the gentiles would make the Jews jealous so they would enter. Here he speaks in chapter 2 of Jew and gentile as being made one in Christ. But the objectors miss something obvious. In Romans Paul speaks of the Jews who still rejected Christ; here he speaks of the Jews who have accepted Christ.

(3)Eschatology: Here Paul does not speak of an imminent end of the world, as he does elsewhere. But again, we answered this problem, if we may call it such, in commenting on First Thessalonians 4:13 ff., and found there is no proof at all that Paul ever expected the end soon. To think he did leads to rejection of the authenticity of Second Thessalonians, where the writer clearly speaks against an imminent end, in chapter 2. But as we said, no need to suppose Paul in First Thessalonians expected the end soon. And then we would have to ignore the strong external witnesses for Pauline authorship of Second Thessalonians.

Again, the objectors say in Ephesians Paul speaks of the present-day sharing of Christians in the resurrection and ascension. In Romans Paul speaks of our sharing in His death. We reply: both are true, both are part of Paul's favored syn Christo theme.

(4)Marriage: Here Paul takes an idealized view of marriage, which is compared to the union of Christ with the Church. In 1 Corinthians 7 he is engaged in a different project so he praises celibacy/virginity instead. But we must not forget that in 1 Corinthians 7:7 Paul speaks of marriage and celibacy as both a grace: one has this one, another has that one. His thrust there is to say that there is a spiritual advantage to be had in celibacy/virginity not to be found in marriage. Please see again our comments on 1 Corinthians 7:1-11.

c)Relation to Colossians: There are large similarities, but these prove nothing as to who wrote Ephesians.

We conclude: the internal arguments we have just seen are all very weak, surely not strong enough to overpower the external witnesses that Paul did write Ephesians. At the most one might consider saying Paul told a secretary what he wanted to write, and let the secretary do the actual composition. Popes often do this with official documents too, and later sign them, making them their own.

Destination of the Epistle: Even though we accept the Pauline authorship, it is a different question to ask if Paul addressed it to Ephesus. There are some significant arguments here:

1)The words "at Ephesus" are missing in some important manuscripts: Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Chester Beatty Papyrus and in Origen. And St. Basil (Against Eunomius 11.19) says he knew of copies without the name of Ephesus. So did St. Jerome in his commentary on Ephesians.

Some have suggested this was a circular letter to churches in that area, with a blank to be filled in by the reader in each place. This is possible.

2)In two places Paul writes as though he had not been to Ephesus, yet he spent time there on his second mission, and about 3 years on his third mission:

In 1:15 he says: "For this reason, I too, having heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and the love you have for all the holy ones. . . ." But he could have heard further reports, and would have been pleased at them.

In 3:1: "I Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you, the gentiles, -- if you have heard of the ministry of the grace of God given to me toward you [namely] that by way of revelation the mystery was made known to me, as I wrote before briefly." This line is harder to explain, if we use the translation "if." Had he perhaps not explained fully before the mystery that the gentiles are part of the people of God? And we note he wrote briefly before . . . Need not be an earlier letter to Ephesus -- could refer to his not so clear mention of this in Colossians 1:25-26, as we have seen. However, the Greek ei ge could be translated also "inasmuch as" or "If as I suppose."

We add this: The heretic Marcion knew a copy of this Epistle addressed to Laodicea.

3)No references here to particular friends: Paul surely knew many, having stayed at Ephesus so long. This would favor the idea of a circular letter.

Place and date: It is likely it was written during Paul's house arrest at Rome, between 61 and 63 A.D.

Opponents: It was not clear who they were in Colossians, nor is it entirely clear here. It may well be the same ones. We note that near the end of chapter 1 Paul speaks again of principalities, powers, virtues and dominations. And he speaks rather often of knowledge and wisdom as he did in Colossians.