“Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to the Saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus.”
INTRODUCTION
The Epistle to the Ephesians is an exquisite piece in both a literary sense and a theological sense. It was John Calvin’s favorite letter.
[1] Armitage Robinson called it “the crown of St Paul’s writings.”
[2] William Barclay calls it, “the Queen of the epistles.”
[3] However, for the purpose of this discussion, I will confine my comments to just the first verse of the letter. The content of this verse will be examined in the body of the paper, and the personal implications for today’s Christians will be considered in the conclusion.
PAUL
At the very beginning of the letter the author is identified as Paul. Even so, there is some debate regarding the apostolic authorship of the letter. C. E. Arnold writes that it is probably the majority opinion among scholars today that the letter was not written by Paul.
[5] Arnold goes on to point out the irony of the contrast between this reality and the kinds of quotes that opened this paper. John Stott takes the stance that the epistle was, in fact, written by the Apostle Paul. John Stott points out that “the Pauline authorship of Ephesians was universally accepted from the first century until the beginning of the nineteenth.”
[6] C. Leslie Milton lists several of the possible alternative origins of the name “Paul” in this letter,
“Some scholars have argued that these personal references to Paul were added later, when what had originally been a spoken address, suited to some liturgical context, was given the form of a letter and then ascribed to Paul. More likely they were inserted by the original compiler who wished to make it clear beyond any doubt that his whole intention in writing Ephesians was to present Paul’s understanding of the Christian gospel . . ..”[7]
However, I am inclined to agree with F. F. Bruce’s evaluation of the epistle and his resulting conclusion that the Apostle Paul is indeed its author. Bruce writes, “The man who could write Ephesians must have been the apostle’s equal, if not his superior, in mental stature and spiritual insight . . . Of such a second Paul early Christian history has no knowledge.”
[8] Having established that, in all probability, the author is the Apostle Paul, a second point of interest with this, the very first word in epistle, is the simple fact that Paul goes by the name “Paul,” rather than his birth name, Saul. “Saul” means “Asked [of God]” while Paul simply means “Little.”
[9] Paul chooses the name that minimizes his own significance.
[10]
AN APOSTLE
After thus naming himself, Paul goes on to identify himself as an Apostle (the title he most frequently gives himself
[11]). The origins of the term apostolos are not clear. P.W. Barnett states that it simply means “messenger,” but commonly held a seafaring context in classical Greek usage.
[12] However, there are numerous papyri collections in which the substantive apostolos is used in a secular context to mean a “commissioned agent.”
[13] In this context, the apostolos would be much more than simply a messenger. Taking this as the primary source for the term “apostle” as used in the New Testament, it is easy to understand it as, “one sent to act authoritatively in the name of another.”
[14]There is a surprising level of correlation between this concept of an apostle and the Old Testament ministry of the prophets. J. S. Holladay writes this about Israel’s prophets,
“[The prophet] was a messenger of Yahweh, God of Israel. He was ‘called’ by Yahweh – the Hebrew איבנ being exactly cognate with the Akkadian nabī’um, ‘the called one,’ found already in its feminine form in the Code of Hammurabi. In other words, he was an officer of the [heavenly] court.”[15]
Holladay’s point is that messengers in the ancient Near East were not mere couriers. They were the official representatives of the sender of the message. Barnett says, “The royal messenger stood in the court of the Great King, participated in the deliberative processes of the court, received the declaration of the king’s wishes from the kings own mouth, and then carried the tablet or sealed role of papyrus to its destination,” (emphasis mine).
[16] This is why Jeremiah writes,
“But which of them has stood in the council of the LORD
to see or to hear his word?
Who has listened and heard his word?”
[17]“I did not send these prophets,
yet they have run with their message;
I did not speak to them,
yet they have prophesied.
But if they had stood in my council,
they would have proclaimed my words to my people
and would have turned them from their evil ways
and from their evil deeds.”
[18]R. D. Nelson comments that the prophets, “play an important supporting role as adversaries and advisors to the king and representatives of God’s opinion’s and viewpoint.”
[19] The Apostles – most noticeably Paul – did indeed represent God before kings. The roots of the term apostolos indicate a person sent to act authoritatively in the name of another just as the Old Testament prophets went as God’s representatives with all the authority of an officer of the heavenly court.
OF JESUS CHRIST Paul makes it a point to indicate that he is an apostle “of Jesus Christ,” not simply an apostle.
[20] Once again, it is worth noting the similarities between these the roles of apostle and prophet. In many ways the apostle is the New Testament version of the prophet. In fact, the two are strung together in the phrasing of Ephesians 3:5.
BY THE WILL OF GOD
That he is “an apostle of Jesus Christ,” Paul says is “by the will of God.” That is not to say, however, that Paul saw his role as something more significant than other people’s part in God’s plan. Rather, as C. Leslie Milton writes, “Nothing is clearer in Paul’s writings than his awareness that both his conversion to Christ (2 C. 5:18) and his commissioning as a missionary (Rom. 1:1; 1 C. 15:10) were ‘all God’s doing.’”
[21] A. Kevington Wood echoes this opinion when he comments, “Paul does not allude to God’s will in order to draw attention to his own status but to reflect his awareness that his mission did not arise from any qualifications he himself might possess.”
[22] As with his choice to go by the name “Paul” it is his humility that shines through above all.
TO THE SAINTS
The next thing the text communicates is whom the letter is written to, the “Saints.” According to Wood, the Greek word hagioi is “the Normal NT Designation for Christians,” and “denotes inward, personal consecration to God.”
[23] In the LXX, the “congregation assembled for worship, the whole people of Israel, and sometime also the angels,” are all called saints.
[24] The Anchor Bible series points out that the people of Israel in Ephesians 2:19 and the apostles and prophets in 3:5 are all called “holy” or “saint.” The implication of Paul’s usage of the same designation in 1:1 is that he “bestows upon all his pagan-born readers a privilege formerly reserved for Israel, for special (especially priestly) servants of God, or for angels.”
[25] Of course, Exodus 31:13 makes it quite clear that Israel’s holiness is not the result of their own piety. No, the Scriptures are clear on the source of Israel’s holiness: “I am the Lord, who makes you holy.” So, although Paul does, indeed, bestow a privilege formerly reserved for Israel on the gentile recipients of his letter, he also puts them in the same standing he has already placed himself in by the term “by the will of God.” That of a person whose spiritual position is the result of God’s will, not of his or her own efforts.
There is an inference in this train of thought. Paul is an apostle by the will of God, and clearly embodies a person whose life God has used for His own purposes. Likewise, God made Israel holy, but He also used them as a vehicle to bring His blessings to the world. It would follow, then, that in being called “saints” there is an element of commission involved. A saint is not holy in a strange luminescent way. A saint is an active vestal of God’s own choosing and empowering.
It is amazing to see that even in the first verse of Ephesians Paul emphasizes the unity of the Church and creates an equality between the Jewish and Gentile believers. Throughout the letter, this is the constant theme, and that is clearly in Paul’s mind at the very first stroke of the pen.
THE FAITHFUL
L. M. McDonald writes that, “The opening designation ‘in Ephesus’ (Eph 1:1) is lacking in the most important ancient manuscripts of the letter (P46, א and B), and there is little in the letter that shows any familiarity with the readers such as one would expect from one who had ministered three years in that church.”
[26] Wood repeats and expands on much of the same data, but adds that, “Considering all the evidence . . . the majority of recent textual critics are persuaded that the original reading did not contain the words.”
[27] This omission is not without difficulties, however.
Without it, the sentence does not make very good sense. For this reason, many scholars feel that the original manuscript either had the name of some other church or held a blank space in which a name could be inserted. In the latter case, the letter would have been treated somewhat as a circular piece. Some support for this is given in the fact that Marcion quotes from the book but refers to it as “the letter to the Laodiceans.”
[28] Some recipient is best placed in the Greek text here, though. Without one, “an unusual emphasis is thrown on ‘the faithful.’”
[29] There again, the insertion of “in Ephesus” (or any other geographic location) makes the reading of the Greek difficult in that it can be read as distinguishing between “two classes among the Christians.”
[30] That reading of the verse is unlikely, though, given the overall thrust of the book towards unity and spiritual equality of believers. What also makes this understanding unlikely is that, “Even the wild Corinthians are called ‘sanctified’ and ‘perfect’ (I Cor 1:2; 2:6).”
[31] The word “faithful,” or
pistos in the Greek can be either active or passive, thus conveying the sense of being faithful or trustworthy as well as having faith or trusting. These two sides of the same coin are not surprising as, in the words of the great English theologian, John Stott, “it is hard to imagine a believer who is not himself believable, or a trustworthy Christian who has not learned his trustworthiness from him whom he has put his trust in.”
[32]
IN CHRIST JESUS
Milton says that “in Christ” characteristically Pauline and may be rendered in this verse “by some such phrase as ‘in Christian discipleship.’”
[33] Francis Foulkes would probably shudder at so simplistic an explanation. “The phrase in Christ,” he argues, “means much more than alluding to the object of their faith.”
[34] It appears within the New Testament exclusively in the Pauline writings but is especially frequent in Ephesians being found no less than eleven times in Ephesians 1:3-14.
[35] The Anchor Bible says, “According to Eph 1:1, the saints are inseparable from the Messiah Jesus,”
[36] but Foulkes puts it so much more eloquently:
Christians not only have faith in him; their life is in him. As the root in the soil, the branch in the vine (cf. Jn. 15:1ff.), the fish in the sea, the bird in the air, so the place of the Christian’s life is in Christ. Physically his or her life is in the world; spiritually it is lifted up above the world to be in Christ (cf. Col. 3:1-3).”[37]
Rather than being mysticism, Foulke says, the phrase “in Christ” is intended to express the in being faithful to their calling Christians must not attempt to be self-sufficient nor seek to find empowerment in the world; rather, they must look for guidance, inspiration and strength within the limits of the purpose, control and love of Christ. He must be the source of all their satisfaction and met needs.
[38] CONCLUSION
So much is contained in the first verse of Ephesians that if Paul, having completed writing the letter, had thrown it away and, instead, written verse one on the back of a postage stamp and sent that to the churches, the message would still have been both intact and powerful! While that is merely a figurative statement, it is not hyperbole. The book of Ephesians is all about unity – unity in Christ, maintained with humility and identified as His plan from the beginning. All of that is contained in verse one. It is almost as though this verse is the thesis from which Paul writes the rest of the letter.
Now, as in Paul’s day, the clarion call to unity and the theological statement that we are one in Him are much needed. What would Paul have thought of the thousands of denominations seen in today’s Church? How would he have reacted to churches splitting over matters of preaching styles, worship formats or even building programs?
As the world shrinks to the size of the nearest Internet ready computer, the challenge the Church faces in maintaining the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3) continues to grow. And as always, the Church is the sum of its parts. The place unity needs to happen first is between me and my siblings in Christ and between you and your siblings in Him. And, as always, the danger is that we will consider ourselves to be insignificant. Let us avoid this folly and, instead, humbly consider ourselves as being called to a purpose, just as Paul has taught us.
End Notes
[1] John Stott, God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians, Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1979, p 15.
[2] Quoted by John Stott, Ibid.
[3] Quoted by John Stott, Ibid.
[4] Charles J. Robbins says that this length of sentience was by no means abnormal in classical Greek. In fact, it compares favorably with Isocrates’ Panegyricus 47-49. Charles J. Robbins, “The Composition of Eph 1:3-14, Journal of Biblical Literature, 1986, 105.04, p 677.
[5] C. E. Arnold, “Ephesians,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin, Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993, p 240.
[6] John R. W. Stott, God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians, Downers Grove, Illinois:InterVarsity Press, 1979, p 16.
[7] C. Leslie Milton, Ephesians: The New Century Biblical Commentary, Ed. Matthew Black, Grand Rapids: Eerdmanns, 1973, p 38.
[8] F. F. Bruce as quote by John R. W. Stott in God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians, Downers Grove, Illinois:InterVarsity Press, 1979, p 21.
[9] Lewis Foster, “Study Notes on Acts 13:9,” The Compact NIV Study Bible, Ed. Kenneth L. Barker, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1990, p 1636.
[10] It is quite likely that Paul had both names from childhood. After all, as a certain distinguished Professor (to whom this paper is addressed), “Saul” is Hebrew while “Paul” is Greek. Even so, based on the use of the name Saul in the early part of Acts, it seems likely that the Apostle personally elected to use the one rather than the other (“Paul,” The New Compact Bible Dictionary, Ed. Bryant, T. Alton, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967, p 437). G. H. R. Horsley suggests that, “What is implied by all such name changes in antiquity–for which modern analogies will readily come to mind–is a statement about the individuals self perception, or a perception which others may have and which the individual is content to accept” (“Name change as an indication of religious conversion in antiquity,” Numen, Horsley, G H R, 1987, 34, 1.).
[11] Francis Foulkes, Ephesians: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Revised Edition, Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1989, p 51.
[12] P. W. Barnett, “Apostle,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993, p 45.
[13] Francis H. Agnew, “On the Origin of the Term Apostolos,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 1986, 38, p 51.
[14] “One sent to act authoritatively in the name of another,” is Agnews term (“On the Origin of the Term Apostolos,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 1986, 38, p 53). Another possible primary origin for apostolos is that it comes from the LXX. There is only one occurrence of the noun in the LXX where, “apostolos renders the Hebrew word saluah.” Saluah came to be used as a rather technical term in Judaism and referred to synagogue worship leaders, Sanhedrin representatives and the priesthood. There are, however, frequent uses of the verbal cognate, apostellein. This term is used in both the LXX and the New Testament with at least a semi-technical significance in connection with mission (Francis H. Agnew, “On the Origin of the Term Apostolos,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 1986, 38, 50).
[15] J.S. Holladay, Jr., Prophecy in Israel, Ed. D.L. Petersen, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987, p 123.
[16] P. W. Barnett, “Apostle,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1993, p 45.
[17] Jeremiah 23:18
[18] Jeremiah 23:21-22
[19] R.D. Nelson, The Historical Books, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998, p 129.
[20] Paul commonly treats the term “Christ” as almost a nickname for Jesus. It is likely that he used the term primarily because he had “received” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) it as a part of an oral tradition that associated the word christos with the very core of early Christianity, i.e., the crucifixion and resurrection (B. Witherington III, “Christ,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993, p 95). Apparently the term was in wide usage among believers by the time of the writing of Ephesians.
[21] C. Leslie Milton, The New Century Bible Commentary: Ephesians, Gen. Ed. Matthew Black, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973, p 39.
[22] A. Kevington Wood, “Ephesians,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Gen. Ed. Frank E. Gæbelein, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978, p 22.
[23] Ibid.
[24] The Anchor Bible: Ephesians 1-3, Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1974, p 66.
[25] Ibid.
[26] L. M. McDonald, “Ephesus,” The Dictionary of New Testament Background, Ed. Craig A Evans and Stanley E. Porter, Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1995, p 320.
[27] A. Kevington Wood, “Ephesians,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Gen. Ed. Frank E. Gæbelein, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978, p 9.
[28] C. Leslie Milton, The New Century Bible Commentary: Ephesians, Gen. Ed. Matthew Black, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973, p 40.
[29] A. Kevington Wood, “Ephesians,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Gen. Ed. Frank E. Gæbelein, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978, p 22.
[30] The Anchor Bible: Ephesians 1-3, Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1974, p 68.
[31] Ibid.
[32] John R. W. Stott, God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians, Downers Grove, Illinois:InterVarsity Press, 1979, p 22.
[33] C. Leslie Milton, The New Century Bible Commentary: Ephesians, Gen. Ed. Matthew Black, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973, p 41.
[34] Foulkes, Francis, Ephesians: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Revised Edition, Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1989, p 52.
[35] The Anchor Bible: Ephesians 1-3, Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1974, p 69.
[36] Ibid. p 70.
[37] Foulkes, Francis, Ephesians: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Revised Edition, Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1989, p 52.
[38] Ibid. pp. 52-53
Bibliography
Agnew, Francis H., “On the Origin of the Term Apostolos,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 38, 1986.
The Anchor Bible: Ephesians 1-3, Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1974.
Barnett, P. W., “Apostle,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1993.
Foster, Lewis, “Study Notes on Acts 13:9,” The Compact NIV Study Bible, Ed. Barker, Kenneth L., London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1990.
Foulkes, Francis, Ephesians: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Revised Edition, Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1989.
Grudem, Wayne, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Harrison, E. H., “Saint, Saintliness,” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1984.
J.S. Holladay, Jr., Prophecy in Israel, Ed. D.L. Petersen, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987.
Horsley, G H R., “Name change as an indication of religious conversion in antiquity,” Numen, 1987, 34.McDonald, L. M., “Ephesus,” The Dictionary of New Testament Background, Ed. Craig A Evans and Stanley E. Porter, Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1995.
Milton, C. Leslie, The New Century Bible Commentary: Ephesians, Gen. Ed. Matthew Black, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973.
Nelson, R. D., The Historical Books, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998, p 129.
The New Compact Bible Dictionary, Ed. Bryant, T. Alton, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967.
Stott, John R. W., God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians, Downers Grove, Illinois:InterVarsity Press, 1979.
Witherington III, B., “Christ,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1993.
Wood, A. Kevington, “Ephesians,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Gen. Ed. Frank E. Gæbelein, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.
© Copyright 2007, Andrew Sturt
