Ephesians Chapter 1.

Ephesians Chapter 1.

Introduction to Chapter One.

           

Kenneth Lee. -  It seems to be part of the nature of man to try and find continuity and unity in life.  Man struggles to overcome chaos to attain a cosmos of some kind.  Unity is a universal problem.  Every culture seeks it.

           

In the Old Testament we find that the oneness of God is the common foundation of every other movement towards unity.  The unity of God was impressed upon the minds of the Jews by the daily confession of the Shema - Deut.6:4.  If God is one, the world is consequently a unity.  The world has its origin in the one God.  The unity of the world is therefore a religious conception.

           

Unity in the Old Testament was not based on the idea of the one original substance (Ionian philosophers), nor was it an idea of harmony between the parts that formed the foundation of a unity of the World (Pythagorean), nor was the unity of the world achieved by an immanent cosmic logos (Stoics).

           

In the Old Testament the idea of unity was purely religious.  It was a question of God and of God's will.  According to the Old Testament the unity of the world is broken because it is no longer subject to the one God.

           

The division between the nations and Israel was not primarily political, but due to the distinctive religious beliefs of the Israelites.  Israel was `olaos', the people above other people, while non-Israelites were `ta ethne', Gentiles - a distinction which was based upon the ideas of Election and Covenant.

           

After the Exile it was particularly the Law which formed the great wall of partition between the Jew and the Gentile. The Jews became more and more conscious of the importance of the Law in isolating them, building a wall around them, so that they should not be contaminated by the Gentiles.

           

At the bottom of all these divisions stands Satan.  Because disunity in the Old Testament is a religious conception it is regarded as being a moral peril.  Unity, according to Jewish thought, is not merely a mental requirement as in Greek philosophy, but essential for wholeness of living.

           

Salvation depends on unity and will be realized when the Kingdom of God is established. Such a unity is therefore something that lies in the future.  And it is the mission of Israel to preserve the fact of unity by her own corporate existence, and to prepare for its final realization in the world.  The unity of Israel, like that of the world is dependent upon God.  The Jews are one people because they believe in one God.  In the Amida for Sabbath vespers the Jew confessed, "Thou art One, Thy Name is one, who is one in the world, as thy people Israel."

           

The unity of the people is a consequence of the unity of God.  This is the foundation of Israel's unity, but other factors also contributed to Israel's unity.  They are:  

a.  The conviction that Israel was in a very special way God's People.   

b.  The Cult was an important unifying force.  The Temple was the religious centre of the people.   The unity of the world found an expression in the New Year Festival.  During this Festival God was especially thought of as ruling the whole world.

c.  The Law was a powerful unifying element among the people of Israel.

           

In spite of all these things, we find in the Chosen People the same cleavage that we find between the different nations of the world.  There are Pharisees, Sadducees, divisions between pious and sinners and other religious and social groups. Unity, therefore, is perpetually endangered.  Although unity may be regarded as existing potentially in Israel, the actualization of the unity lies in the future.  The unity of the Old Testament is of an eschatological character and there are three ways by which this unity is thought of as being achieved.  Christ is regarded in Ephesians as the consummation of all things:

           

1/  Representation.   The Messiah is God's representative, Eph.1:10.  "To sum up all things in Christ."  The Greek word translated "to sum up," is the key word.  Abbott and Robinson translated "to gather up in one," as the sum, is the result of addition of all individual factors, so Christ is to become the sum of all things.  Lock holds that the thought is to re-unite all things under one head.  The verbs, he says, denotes a previous unity in the mind of God, a present dispersion of antagonism and final re-union.  E.F.Scott says that the original harmony of the world having been broken, it is God's intention to re-unite in Christ what was divided.  Whatever may be the exact meaning of `ankeohalaiosthai', we may say that it is an expression of cosmic unity in Christ.  By representing the universe Christ is its `kephaliou', the sum, the totality of the universe.  From this it is a similar thought to the conception of `kephale'.  Christ is the `kephale of his `soma', implies that being the Head, represents His Church in totality.

           

2/  Worship.  Unity will be realized in the centralization of worship.  The Jews thought of the Temple as the centre of Israel and the World, John 2:19.  The cleansing of the Temple signified that the Temple worship is to be replaced by the Person of Christ.  Compare Eph.2:20 - the idea of the Church as a building is the pervading theme.

           

3/  Sovereign.  Christ is the Lord of all powers in this age and in that to come.  All is in subjection to Him.  All the characteristics, which we find in the Old Testament representation, centralization of worship, sovereignty - which are calculated to bring about unity in the world, find their fulfilment and enrichment in Christ, who is God's final and all-sufficient word, and whose Name is above every name that is named.  - K.Lee, in Mowbray's Symposium.

           

D.E.H.Whiteley writes on 1:10, "It does not mean that all things are to be absorbed into Christ, but that all things are to be brought under one heading, and so under one Head, that the lost unity of creation is to be restored `in Christ'." - Mowbray.   We must understand the doctrine of Christ's person in this Epistle, through a consideration of His work.- Whiteley. "The victory of Christ," is central to the thought of the Epistle.

           

1:10.  Bedale writes - the mystery of God's will, i.e. His purpose to sum up all things in Christ - the process of reducing to order or harmony that which is disordered or discordant, that is, the restoring in Christ the unity of the `kosmos', the created order, which has been broken by sin.

           

Glory.  W.E.Lotfhouse, in E.T., defines `glory' as the full manifestation of the essential properties of God.

           

1:3-14.  Coutts in the N.T.S. argues that behind these verses and 1.Pet.1:3-12 lie forms of liturgical prayer, similar in structure, though not identical in content.  A homily based on a form of prayer lies behind these two passages.  It is a homily connected with baptism.

a.  Both passages open with the same phrase, a phrase of ten words, `eulogetos o theos kai pater ton kurios  emon Iesou Christou'.

b.  The Ephesian passage is divided into three parts.  The structure of the whole is Trinitarian, though the structure is not rigid.   In verses 8-10 we note the distinction between Jew and Gentile, - "that we should be to the praise of His Glory who had hope in the Messiah before you."

           

1:13.  The section begins with `eno', the antecedent of the relative being, `to Christo'.  The `en' in both instances go with `esthragisthete'.  It cannot go closely with `akousantes'.  Nor can it go with `pisteusantes'.  "In the Messiah you were sealed by the Holy Spirit, having, of course, heard the Gospel and having believed."

           

MacGregor (N.T.S.) says that Paul uses `kosmos' of the universe in a few passages.  It may mean the stage on which human life is played, the earth.  More often it means earthly conditions, earthly claims, worldly affairs, also as a description of mankind as subject to such earthly conditions. 

           

Moule discusses `pleroma' in Scot.J.Th.  Col 2:9, the entirety of God's nature dwells in Him.  The whole, the entirety of the Divine attributes dwelleth in Him in a bodily person, i.e. in Jesus of History.

           

1:22-23. R.V.  Nearly all commentators here take "fullness" to refer to the Church and if the verb `filleth' is not transitive, but passive, then one finds the arresting idea that the Church is the completion of Him (Christ), who all in all (entirely, shall we say), is being filled.  Christ is not complete until His body the Church is complete: He awaits His `pleroma', His full growth, His consummation, which is to be the full grown Church.  This idea is worked out by Robinson.  Even if the verb is active (middle), the idea of the Church as Christ's entirety (totality) may still be present.  We are intended to be the completeness of one who provides the whole of things.  But Moule agrees with those who take `pleroma' as here describing Christ, not His Church.  "God gave Christ to be Head over all things to the Church, which is His body, (and to be) the fulness of Him (i.e. God) that filleth all in all."  Eph.1:10.  "The completeness" destined by God's plan.  The meaning is - "to be dispensed as soon as the time was fully ripe."  Moule (S.J.Th.).  1:3, "Blessed." - Macphail says "climax is piled upon climax, one image poured out after another, to cast new light on the Grace of God."

           

1:23.  J.A.Robinson writes the passive or middle must be taken seriously.  There is little justification for the R.V. translation: "the fullness of Him that filleth all in all."  When Paul wishes to speak of Christ's filling all things, he uses the active voice.  4:10. The only real question is by whom Christ is filled or fulfilled.  Armitidges Robinson says it is by Christians, members of His body.  He thus makes `pleroma' the compliment of the Head.  Recently W.L.Knox has advocated that the phrase should run, "that which is filled by Him who is always being filled (by God)."  That is to say, the Church, as the body of Christ, is constantly receiving from Christ the complete fullness which Christ receives from the Father.  This second interpretation appears the more probable.  it agrees also with 3:18 and Col.2:9-10.  The hope of the Christian is nothing less than, that the complete fullness of God, which resides in Christ should in Him become theirs.

           

This can never be true with isolated Christians, but in the "full-grown man," in the new corporiety which is His body, "the measure of the stature of fullness of Christ," is theirs to attain (4:13) - for the Father's decree is that the Divine fullness should dwell in Him, not simply as an individual, but `somatikos' (from "the Body" by J.A.T.Robinson, H.G.Miller - Commentary), 1:1, `dia theleatos theou', - the keynote of the opening section in which everything is traced up to the sovereign will of God.

Ephesians Chapter 1.

1:1-2.  The Greeting.  "We" - probably limited to Jewish Christians in contrast to the Gentile "Ye" in verse 13,

"Were made a heritage," - as Israel of old.  The whole was the result of a deliberate purpose and of a thought-out plan carrying loving kindness with it for each period.  Through the will of God, i.e. by God's grace, not by individual merit.   This is better than the other antithesis, by God's appointment, not by self-assumed title (or human authority), for there is no polemical bearing in the context.

           

`Thelema' is not so much the will as the thing willed, that is, purpose.  "In Christ," - We must be aware of those who speak of a mystical, personal union with Christ.  Paul was a Jew and Jews thought in corporate terms.  To understand "in Christ," we must turn to such passages as Psa.89:38; 20:6; 28:8.  The Messiah, the Christ, is Israel.  This corporate sense of the word Christ, is frequently perceptible in the Epistle.  (See Gal.5:6).

           

The term, "in Christ," connotes a community which owes its existence to the redeeming work of Christ, and of which each member is bound both to Christ, and also by Christ, to every other member.  One cannot be "in Christ" by oneself.

           

1:3.  "Blessing." - Benediction.  Salvation through Grace.  The work of the Trinity, with special reference to the Father.  (Verses 3-6).

           

`Eulogetos' is never applied to man in the New Testament.  Man is never styled `eulogetos' in the N.T., but only `eulogemenos'.  `Eulogetos is used of Christ only once - Rom.9:5, it is in virtue of His essential Godhead.    "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." - This shows that the origin of the blessings of redemption are independent of the category of time, it could not be that the paternal relationship sustained now by God to man be shut out from view, and that paternity alone insisted  on which subsists by an eternal generation.  "In the entire blessing of the Spirit."

           

The line of division between the spiritual in man and the Spirit of God is imperceptible in Paul's writings.    `Eulogia' (singular), marks the blessing as one; `pase' shows its integrity.  We are admitted as it were, into the council-chamber of the Eternal Trinity.

           

Now Paul begins a hymn of praise for God's initiative, and His mighty works.  He blessed us - chose us - foreordained us - bestowed His grace on us, made known the secret of His purpose, made us heirs, gave us sonship, emancipated us, forgave us, poured out on us the Holy Spirit.  All this may be taken to be an expansion of "every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ."

           

Synge dislikes the translation "heavenly places," which suggests a spatial separation between heaven and earth.  Paul means that while on earth we may be in the "heavenlies."  "In the heavenly sphere," "in the Heavenly plane."  He suggests a state of mind or a region of ideas, the plane reached by man at his best.  But Paul is writing of a Divine, not a human heaven.  It is best to translate the Greek literally;  Thus the very unusualness and uncouthness of "in the Heavenlies" warn us that Paul is wrestling with the untranslatable, the supernatural.

           

"Blessed." - "Worthy of all blessings!"  "In Christ," - not in virtue of belonging to a chosen            nation.

           

1:3-6.  The Father's loving purpose.

           

1:3-14.  Praise of the action of God's grace from before creation till the present day.  The whole paragraph rises to a poetical level.  The main thought is the continuity of God's work.  The Church is the expansion and fulfilment of the Jewish nation.  The central word is "in Christ."  Eleven times this in-ness in Him is repeated here.

           

1:4.  "He made selection of."  The "selection" described by the verb is not of certain to receive the blessing, but relates to the manner and measure in which each is made participant of it.  No idea of reprobation is behind the `exelexato'.  The idea is the distinguishing between, rather than distinguishing from.  Verse 4 explains the blessing "in the gift of the Spirit.": the method of its distribution.  Then verse 4 goes on to explain the purpose of its bestowal.

God chose u; and we have nothing to boast about in that.  It was for no merit of our own that He chose us.  The sheer generosity of God is established and man's claim of any right to salvation is denied. 

           

"In love."  The love is God's love to man.  Synge connects "in love" with "before Him."  "In love," - the construction is uncertain, but Lock favours linking it with verse 5.  "In love having foreordained us."  The love of God in His choice and predestination of man.  Thus Election has as its direction the holiness of its objects.

           

1:5.  Miller connects "in love" with "having predestined."  "In love" - a word of reassurance.  "The good pleasure of His will," - it was not a grudging concession to the Son's intercession.  It was granted of a set purpose, and with a whole-hearted delight.  `Kata' marks the continuity of the `eudokia', its accompaniment in unbroken sequence of the steps whereby the adoption purpose passed into an accomplished fact.  The proper alternative is that a man is either predestined to salvation or he is rewarded with salvation. 

           

There is nothing of that matter-of-fact sobriety with which we say, "our Father," in that cry of the early Christians.  They knew that they had not earned sonship, that they had received it as a gift through Jesus Christ.  We are given Sonship, made partakers of Israelhood.  Sonship makes demands on us:  that we live as Sons.

           

"Through Jesus Christ," - through the action of the historic life of Jesus, (better, "through the action of the mediatorial work of Jesus Christ."  (L.H.B.). 

           

`Uiothesian', means adoption not sonship.  `Ten eudokian' - purpose, rather than benevolence.  The central idea of `eudokia' is "satisfaction."  Hence in some contexts, benevolence, but `good-pleasure', in the sense of purpose or desire.

           

1:5-6.  Glory.  - `doxa', signified in the Greek O.T., the manifestation of God.  It is the living and active presence of God.  We stand therefore as sons whose duty is to praise the living and active presence of God, and to be the cause of others praising Him.  In this verse it is God's living presence shown by His grace which we have to proclaim.

           

Grace = The favour of God.   Wrath = The disgrace of God.    If we would understand the generosity of His Grace, we must come expecting His dis-Grace.

           

1:6.  The Glory of God is simply equivalent to His manifestation.  The "magnificent display," "the glorious manifestation."  "His grace i.e. His free gift, His unearned and unmerited bounty."  Herin lies the magnificence, the glory, of God's work of redemption, that it has not the character of a contrast, but a largeness.

           

1:6b-12.  The Father's purpose fulfilled in the Son. 

"In the beloved."  It is applied by the LXX to the nation of Israel (Deut.33:5,26;  Isa.44:2), as a translation of `Jeshurun'.   (Eph., 1.Pet, and John's Gospel thinks of believers as a new and spiritual Israel.  L.H.B.).

           

"His Grace," - grace is primarily the graciousness which is the essential outflowing of a God of love.

           

1:7.  The will of the Father is unhindered in its execution by any poverty of resource.  `Kata', - His purpose sweeps unbrokenly along its ordained course.

           

Redemption is the dismissal, remission of all sins.  The whole object of Paul in this passage is to trace God's will and God's agency in the work of human salvation.  If it be only that God foresees how men will resolve, and according to that foresight of human volition foreordains and predestines, man is the originator, and God but the recorder - man's is the primary part, and God's the secondary, in the work of salvation - and the apostle's whole argument founders at the outset. 

The "fore-knowledge" is evidently a "fore-approval," it denotes the resting of the mind of God beforehand upon the person with complacency and love.  It corresponds to "the good purpose of His will."(v.5), or "the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will." (v.11). The originating act of the Divine grace cannot with any consistency be resolved into one mere prescience.

           

1:8.  An overflow of grace.  As if it were more than His heart could contain - more than heaven itself could hold. "In all wisdom and prudence," - these are not here used of God the dispenser, but of the Christians as recipients.  For:

           

1/  The prediction, this elaborate and definite, would be an unmeaning truism, as applied to God.

2/  The main idea in the context is the knowledge with which the Christian is endowed.

3/  Col.1:9, also bears out the interpretation.  `Wisdom' - the insight into the true nature of things.

           

Prudence - the ability to discern modes of action with a view to their results.  Prudence is practical.   (Lightfoot.).

           

Wisdom   - is theoretical.

           

1:8-10.  Synge attaches "in all wisdom and prudence," with "having made known unto us the mystery of His will."  Most commentators attach "in all wisdom and prudence," to the previous verse (i.e. v.7).  

`Musterion', means `secrete' rather than `mystery'.  Up till now a secret kept, it is now a secret revealed.

 `Oikonomia' - first it meant the business of a steward, the administration of a house, stewardship.  Then it was used of any kind of administration and the working out of a scheme.  "When the flulness of times worked itself out."

           

1:9. Paul brought two words together in Rom.13:9,10 in another context,  "Having made known to us the secret of His purpose according to His great pleasure which He purposed in Him, namely, that the times should work themselves out into harmony and unity and that He should reveal - or rather recreate - the essential harmony of all things in Christ, make Christ the heart and integrating factor of all things."  Christ gives unity, coherence and therefore significance to all things.  The world is dis-united, in Christ its unity is to be restored.  The first indication of the truth of this is that in Christ Jews and Gentiles are united.

           

1:9  A Biblical "mystery" denotes a secrete which asks fellowship with God for possessing it.

           

`Thelema' does not signify `will' as a determination or resolution.  `Thelema' and `eudokia' go together.  It was a cherished resolve.  His plan.  `Eudokia', expresses the sentiment or feeling in which the resolve was held.  `Kata' signifies that the "good pleasure," or emotion of complacency, went with the resolve along the whole line of its development. `En proetheto' - before the realisation of the `thelema' the `theudkia' is felt by anticipation - `purposed.'

           

1:10.  If `anakephalaioomai' is derived from`kephalaion' without reference to `kephale', then there can be no suggestion in it of a headship of Christ over things.  But it seems probable there is some reference to `kephale', so we must ask if the implied headship is the same as the Headship of Christ over the Church.  Best suggests that the passage teaches there are two headships: a headship (soveregnity) of Christ over all things, and a headship (union) over the Church.  Best rejects C.E.D. Moule's explanation who takes `pleroma' in this verse as referring back to Christ :  "God gave Christ to be head over all things to the Church, which is His Body (and to be) the fullness of Him (i.e. God) that filleth all in all."  This is grammatically difficult.

Best favours taking `pleroumenon' as a passive - Best says, Christ is regarded as filling the Body of which He is Head.  He fills it, even as He is filled with the powers and graces which belong to God.  But Christ is not identical with the Body.  Neither is the Body on equality with the Head.  Christ is the initiator of the Churches fullness, yet He is distinct from it.  Christ fills the Church in a static and not in a dynamic fashion; He does not fill it in a sense that it becomes His instrument for work in the world;  He fills it in the sense that He gives sustenance and energy to each member to play his individual part in the whole.  It is the individual who acts in the world and not the whole, but he is never an individual apart from the community.

           

There is little reference in Ephesians and Colossians to the active ministry or witness of the Church.  The emphasis is laid upon the Church as the redeemed community receiving from its Head all that it needs for its growth in love.  In Ephesians, the Church grows.  It is not a growth in size, but in quality.  It is a growth out of individualism into corporateness, in the members the sense of the whole grows, and at the same time the whole is growing in unity.  Members do not grow on their own apart from the whole, but only as the whole grows. (Best).

           

To sum up.  The words for `sum up' suggests two thoughts:

a.  To summerize, to put into a short compass.

b.  To unite under one head, to bring into relation with the head., to establish the relation of Body to Head. The word thus implies a previous unity in the mind of God, a present dispersion of antagonism, and a final reunion.`Gather up'.- here is the one far off divine event, to which the whole creation moves - Green.   Barry - "Philosophy from a Prison."

           

Saints - consecrated, belonging to God.  The distinctive mark of God's ownership must be holiness.   With view to the dispensation to be established at the setting in the fullness of times.  Meyer seems to regard the dispensation of the fullness of times as the Christian dispensation of grace.  The redeeming work of Christ was designed to annul the divided state of the universe and re-establish the Kingdom of God in heaven and on earth.  This gathering together again rests on the central point of union and support.  But the Parousia, this `anakephalaiosis' is still in the course of development.  With the Parousia, there sets in the full realization.

           

1:11-12.  First the Jews were chosen as God's Israel, the initial step in the unity of all things.  They were chosen not of merit, but in accordance with God's purpose.

           

1:12.  "Before hoped," - "before you Gentiles," and before His Incarnation.

           

1:13-14.  Hearing, believing, and sealing are factors of compound result.  The work carried on by the Spirit.  The initiated in the pagan mysteries were also said to be sealed.

           

The story of Cornelius in Acts 10, illustrates this verse.  This then is the first sign of the unity of all things in Christ;  that Jew and Gentile are brought together to form one new Israel, a new creation, as it were, a third race.

           

1:14.  The glory of God is the final aim of the whole unfolding of salvation.- Meyer.  Is this not selfish?  I think the main idea is that the result of all God's grace and love towards us ends in God's Glory, but is not the purpose, but the result.

           

1:15.  "Unto all the Saints," - not the more conspicuous only, or the more attractive. 

            "I also," i.e. "on my part."  "The faith (which ye show) towards all saints," - an unusual phrase.  But see Phil.v.5; Gal. 5:6, "faith working in love," may have accidently dropped out.

           

1:15-16.  Synge thinks it is likely that Paul wrote, "the love towards all the saints," - even though the best MSS omit it.  The faith of the Ephesians was firmly based on the Lord Jesus and was displayed outwardly in action.

           

1:16.  "Making mention." - Thanksgiving for answers is incomplete if not followed up with prayers that urge larger requests.

           

1:17.  "The Father of Glory," expresses the revelation of God in a paternal relation to us which is made in the Gospel.  "The Glory" stands for the fullness of the Christian revelation, and God is called the "Father of Glory," because it was the declared fulfilment of the purpose of Christ's Advent to make men know the Father. 

           

`Epilosis' - not advanced, perfect knowledge, but advancing knowledge, together with the idea of clearness, exactness, truth and reality.    `That' defines the purport of the prayer `of glory' - of all the glory shown in the work of grace, 1:5,12,14.  "A Spirit of wisdom and revelation" - man's insight and God's unveiling of the truth go side by side, in the knowledge (in the knowing) the growing advancing process of knowledge and definite recognition of His action.  "That ye may recognize and recognize again and again."

           

1:18.  See Romans 1:21.  "To the end that ye may know."  It is knowledge:

            1/  Of the glorious destiny of the saints.

            2/  Of their present priceless worth.

            3/  Of the amazing possibilities of their progress. Or:

           

1.  The Prospect.           Christhood :      1.  Resurrection.

           

2.  The Introspect.                                 2.  Ascension.

           

3.  The Retrospect.  (v.19-22).                3.  Sovereignty.   (v.19-22).

           

"In the saints," - the whole body of saints - of the Old Testament as well as the New Testament.

           

1:18-20.  The knowledge of God is not a discovery but a revelation. 

           

"The heart," - the heart means more than the affections and includes the will, judgement, understanding and imagination.  "Do all that is in thy heart." (1.Sam.14:7).  Job says, "I have heart." (12:3). Jesus, "Reasoning in their hearts." (Mk.2:6).  Paul, "Steadfast in his heart," (judgment, 1.Cor.7:37).  `The heart' signifies the whole man moving together.  The heart is the organ of spiritual vision. 

            The resurrection is the crowning and complete act of His great work for us, and faith in it, is faith in Him.

           

1:19-21.  He prays that they may understand the overwhelming greatness of God's power towards those who believe, the energy of the might of His force which He wielded in Christ when He raised Him from the dead etc. 

            `To pleroma tou ta pauta en pasin pleroonmou' is descriptive of Christ, not of the Church.  Paul has given in this passage (19-21) an ascending scale of the honours accorded Christ.  It is hardly credible that the climax, `to peroma' should not also refer to Christ.  It is artistically wrong, it savours of `bathos' that at the peak of a list of honours of Christ should be found an exaltation of the Church.    The doctrine of the passage ends on a blaring discord in the common interpretation.  Again Paul works up to a climax: first the exaltation of Christ, His triumph over death and all powers; then "all things in subjection to Him."  Then the Unity, Wholeness over all things to the Church; finally, He is the Unity of all creation, "in Him all things cohere."  But we are robbed of the final step if `to pleroma' refer to the Church.  An alien note has entered.

           

Synge must take `pleroma' almost as meaning `uniting principles' or that which gives completeness.  Synge actually uses the words "common factor."  I suggest "uniting principles," would represent his meaning.  In Col.1:15,20 is a similar crescendo of honours accorded to Christ.  The climax there is expressed with the same word `pleroma' and undoubtedly `pleroma' there refers to Christ.

    Synge takes "which is His body," in addition by an annotater.  Synge takes `kephale' as Completion, `Whole Unity'.    There is no evidence that `keophale' was ever used in the first century in the sense of `head' of a state.  Paul wrote that Christ was `kephale' and `pleroma'.  Head to the Church and Completion of that which is totally completed. `Pleroma' is the entity, the perfect Unity which emerges from the sum of the parts.

           

God gave Christ to be the integrating Whole to the Church and the Complete Unity which emerges from something totally completed.    In Christ alone can any creature rise to its real stature, fulfil its Divine purpose.  This is the secret, `musterion' of God that He re-creates, the unity of creation in Christ. All things are brought into subjection to Christ and welded in Him into a whole.  Synge says that `kephale' does not mean Chief, Ruler or Leader.  Neither does it mean Intelligence or Control.  `Kephale' when used figuratively is sometimes associated with `pleroma'.    Synge criticizes Robinson's discussion of `pleroma' as used by Aristotle of the requirements for a simple city.  Robinson seems to have failed to see the significance of that passage.  It is this: `to pleroma', the entity which comes into being when all the parts are assembled.  It is that something more which emerges from the sum of all the parts, a new entity, a new unit, as the crew is more than the sum of the members of the crew, a city more than a sum of tradesmen.  So 1:23 may be rendered "the completness of that which is totally complete," or "the Unity which contains (intergrates,or confers Unity upon) the sum of the totality of the parts."

           

Robinson is wrong in arguing that the Church is some way completes Christ.  `Pleroma' does not mean `final item' or `finishing touch'.  It can be said that the eyebrows are the completion of the face in the sense that the face is not complete without them.  But completion of the face in the sense of finishing touch, is not the meaning of `pleroma'.  If Paul did indeed say that the Church was the `pleroma' of Christ, he must have meant that it was the whole of Christ, not a part.  It is in this region of ideas that we find the true interpretation of `kephale'.  In Classical Greek, `kephale' was used as an alternative of `kephalaion, sum, summary, crown, completion, the integrating factor.  See Col.2:19.  Both `pleroma' and `kephale' may be translated Unity, Whole,  or Integrated.  Ephes.4:15 - growing into the Unity of  Wholeness. - (Synge),  E.Best.

           

1:21.  "Name," - the Paphri shows that "Name" means office, dignity and authority.

   

`Dunamis' - expressing inherent power, `kuriotes' the commanding influence and mastery which exercise of such `dunamis' wins Potential Lordship, implied in `dunamis' is  made actual by `exousia'.  Without a rival He is Lord.

           

1:22.  `Edoken' -He was  God's superlative Gift to the  Church.  In fullest sense God gave Him.- H.G.Miller. Christ's Resurrection made him supreme over all the objects of worship.  Adoption as sons - this is the central word for the relation of man to God in this paragraph, 1:3-14.  - Lock.

           

Vaughan - Bible Educator - The opening of the Epistle contains the amplest, though not the most systematic statement of Paul's doctrine of the Christian salvation.

  

F.C.Synge - Commentary:  There is one majestic theme in the Epistle to the Ephesians, Unity.  It is God's purpose to restore through Christ the unity of His Creation.  The working out of this plan in miniature, as it were, is revealed in the Church, the Elect Community, of which Christ is completion and unity.  An immediately recognizable sign of the Purpose in operation is the drawing of Jews and Gentiles within the Israel of God, within the Family of the one Father, the making of the new man out of irreconcilable races, inveterate opponents.

           

Christians as members of the Church are caught up into God's purpose of unity, unity among themselves in their daily lives is their privilege and their vocation.  There is scarcely a verse in the Epistle which is not vibrant with this one theme.

           

1:22-23.  (C.F.D.Moule in Exp.Times). - Robinson took `pleroumenou' as passive (not a middle).  Robinson held that in the mind of Paul, Christ in a true sense still waited for

completion and would find that completion only in the Church. 

           

L.Knox takes the particle as passive, but interprets the phrase along different lines, taking `pleroma' as virtually a passive particle and paraphrasin: "that which is filled by Him who is always being filled."  The Church is filled by Christ, who in turn, is Himself filled by God.  The A.V. and R.V. both translate it as a middle with an active sense.  The A.V. and R.V. seem to regard `pleroma' as in opposition with "the Church, which is His Body."  But Moule prefers to take `pleroma' in opposition with the preceding `anton' of verse 22, - that is Christ, not the Church, His Body.  The participle will then, of course, refer to God and be translated as a middle with an active sense (as in the A.V. and the R.V.).  Hitchcock has argued for this view. 

           

Moule does not think Abbotts objections are valid.  Moule says, the clause "which is His body," is a perfectly natural supplement to the phrase, "appointed Him as supreme head to the Church."  It is not a useless redundancy.  Ephesians is a writing full of noble repetitions. - Moule.  Hitchcock (Exp.T.1910), says, since the days of Chrysostom the interpretation of Ephesians 1:23 has exercised the minds of theologians.  Two main opinions are:

1/  Lightfoot, Westcott and Gore interpret the passage as meaning that the Church is the `pleroma' of Christ,  because all His divine graces are imparted to her.

2/  Hort and Robinson interpret it as meaning that the Church is Christ's `pleroma', because Christ in the purpose of God finds His "completion" in the Church.

3/  Hitchcock favours a third possible interpretation.  He would construe `to pleroma' as in opposition to `auton' in the preceding verse.  In that case `pleroma' would refer to Christ Himself instead of to the Church, and the meaning of the passage is brought into closer harmony with the theology of the Epistle to the Colossians.

           

"And Him (Christ) hath He given to be Head over all things to the Church, which is His (Christ's), I say, who is the fullness of God `who filleth all in all'."  Paul uses the Greek Syntax with freedom.  So it is not a valid objection that `pleroma' is distinct from `auton'.  Hitchcock claims that his interpretation increases the rhetorical effect of this beautiful chapter.  The first chapter of Ephesians is a grand doxology in praise of God and His eternal purpose manifested in Christ.  The closing words of the chapter are a summing up - the `pleroma'' might we say, - of all that has gone before. W.Lock. (Commentary).

           

The Christ is incomplete without His Church - an idea which is amplified in chapter 3. -  F.R.Barry.   "In Christ,"   Best discusses this phrase.  We must preserve the innes of the `en'.  The formula "in Christ" contains two fundamental ideas:

           

*   Believers are in Christ; salvation is in Christ.

*   Believers are "in" Christ - the "local" flavour is preserved. 

           

The place of salvation is Jesus Christ.  He is the area of salvation.  All Paul's readers are "in Christ," they are not told to strive to be in Him; they are in Him.   The individual Christian is in Christ; but it is not only the individual, as an individual who is in Christ; groups of Christians are regarded as in Him,   Gal.1:22;   1.Thess.2:14.  The Christian is not "in Christ" as an isolated believer.  The Christian finds himself with others in Christ.

           

To be "in Christ" is to be in this area with all the duties, relationships and privileges that go with it.  This area is the unit, or whole, formed by those who are in Christ.   To be "in Christ" has social implications.   Best rejects Deissman's comparison of Christ to air.  The comparison to air is false; The comparison to a person is more satisfying: all a man's members can be said to be "in him" and he can be said to be in each of them; his soul or personality does not dwell in any particular part of his body.  To liken Christ to air makes an impersonal illustration unsatisfactory.   To be "in Christ" has an ethical side.  We labour in Christ.  We speak the truth in Christ.  Members "in Christ" have a personal and social relationship to one another.  Believers are "In Christ" because they are "in His corporate personality."  Best is rather hesitant about Schmauch's classification.  Schmouch argues that Paul uses "in Christ Jesus" and "in the Lord" for different purposes.

"In Christ Jesus," denotes a divine event which happens, or happened, independently of the life of the believers;  it is never used of a single believer and all idea of fellowship between the believer and Christ is excluded.  "In Christ," refers to the `New Creation' which comes into being through the event which happens "in Christ Jesus."  These two forms lack any reference to the believing life of the Christian.

           

"In the Lord," in contrast, refers both to the things which the believer does and is said of the believer as an individual. It, however, contains no idea of `mystical' fellowship of the believer with Christ.   Best thinks this is too definite a classification.

           

1:22-23.  `Pleromoumenon'  is elsewhere used as a strict passive, and Paul himself uses the active in this Epistle chapter 4:10.  But the passive "of Him who filled with all in all," (has all fulness in all respects) - does not satisfy us here, for:

           

1/  The tense of `pleroumenon' suggests a gradual or progressive completion, a sense suitable to the human growth of the Saviour, (Luke 2:40), but inappropiate to the plentitude of the Divine perfections, which is the subject in the passage before us.

2/  The `enpasin' becomes, on this supposition, a nearly unmeaning appendage to the `ta panta' with which it is combined.

           

We are driven to the conclusion that Paul has here used, `pleroumenon' in the middle voice, for which there is abundant authority in Greek.  Writers (Plato, Xenophon, Lutarch), but always as far as we have observed, in a tense, the aorist, and with some reflective meaning, as "to man one's (own) ship."

           

Vaughan rejects the reflexive meaning but clings to the active meaning, and assimilates the passage to Ephes.4:10, where it is stated as the object of the ascension of Christ "that He might fill all things."

           

`Pleroma' is sometimes used in the sense of `sum', the total amount of a number of separate items in a reckoning.  See Rom.11:12, "sum," "total," full amount - opposite of `ettema', deficit, defect, reduced condition.  The far commoner meaning of `pleroma' in classical writings in the Greek Testament is "that by which something is filled," the "contents" of a thing, as the crew of a ship.  There is no warrant in the Greek Bible that `pleroma' means "the thing filled by another."  It is always "that by which another thing is filled."

           

Vaughan regards `pleroma' here as an accusative and not a nominative; as agreeing, in care, with `anton'(v.22), and not with `etis' (v.23).  "God gave Him (Christ) as Head over all things to the Church, which is His Body," gave Him, in other words, to the Church, as "the `pleroma' of Him that filleth all in all," - as the Plentitude of the universal Plenisher, as the Person who Himself the very Sum and Substance of God, co-existensive with, and inclusive of, the Infinite, the Incomprehensible Deity.  - Vaughan.

1:23.  The Church is the `pleroma' of Christ, that is to say, the attributes and powers of Christ dwell in it - and the attributes and powers of Christ are the attributes and powers of  God :  so we find in 3:19 that the `pleroma' of God fills Christians.

           

Best rejects Robinson's view of 1:23.  Christ is not in any sense waiting for completeness.  If Christ required the Church to complete Him it would rob Him of His unique position.  Christ is the centre and life of the Church.

           

God gave Christ to the Church, Head over all things.  The meaning is not that God gave Christ as the Head of the cosmos to the Church.  But the idea is that Christ is Head above the heavenly powers to the Church; if they can lay any claim to Headship over the Church, and such a claim is implied in the very names given to them, then the headship of Christ is above, or superior to their headship.  The heavenly powers are not consequently, members of the Church.  The term `Head' must be explained in relation to the Body.  Head and Body are not separate, but form a unity.  Thus Christ and the Church are organically related and are a unity.  But a head is not a member of the body like other members, it is preeminent. The Head fills the Church with the plentitude of divine graces and virtues, which are summed up in 3:19, in `love'.  The Head fills the Church with love.  Love creates fellowship; thus the Head and the Body are united in fellowship, and the members of the Body with one another.  The principle idea here is not the direction of the Body by the Head, but the unity of both in love; and this unity comes from the Head who contributes love to the Body.   God gave Christ to the Church as Head above all; this is an act of grace.  In no sense is the Church necessary to Christ; He is always and in all respects necessary for it.  The Church is His `pleroma', the sphere where his love operates and which fills.