Footnotes
Footnotes
1. In addition to the standard commentaries and introductions, see A. van Roon, The
Authenticity of Ephesians, SuppNovT 39 (Leiden: Brill, 1974); and the thoughtful review
by A. T. Lincoln, WTJ 40 (1977-78): 172-75.
2."It is difficult to believe that an imitator could have produced a work so like the writings of Paul and yet so splendid and original: difficult to believe some other spiritual genius was to be found in the Church at this time whose mind was so like Paul’s and whose thought was so sublime” (Clogg, p. 96).
3.H. J. Cadbury, "The Dilemma of Ephesians,” NTS 5 (1958-59): 101.
4.Grant, p. 202.
5.Guthrie, p. 511.
6.Johnson finds two major weaknesses in the argument that an imitator of Colossians produced this letter: "If Colossians was followed so assiduously, why does the usage even of the shared vocabulary differ in such interesting ways? And if the forger had available to him other genuine letters, why weren’t they used in a more effective and convincing way?” (p. 369).
7.Most of those who argue for the pseudonymity of Ephesians date the epistle as late as c. A.D. 90, almost thirty years after Paul’s death and not long removed from the most likely date for the composition of the Apocalypse.
8.F. W. Danker, under the heading "Theology,” begins, "Beyond question this Epistle fits within boundaries largely familiar in other Pauline letters”; he demonstrates this with references to Paul’s letters ("Ephesians,” in ISBE 2:113-14).
9.By contrast, some think that Ephesians is too Pauline: it contains reminiscences of too many Pauline letters (see G. Johnston, "Ephesians,” in IDB 2:110-11).
10.P. N. Harrison, The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles (London: Oxford University Press, 1921), p. 20.
11.L. Cerfaux asks how an imitator can "avoid betraying himself by awkward phrases, wordiness, or allusions which correspond to his own interests. The forgers or plagiarists of antiquity have not accustomed us to such skill. As an example of their lack of it, let anyone read the so-called Letter to the Laodiceans !” (Robert/Feuillet, p. 503).
12.Cf. Martin’s view that "it was Luke who published this letter under the apostle’s aegis” (2:224).
13.Markus Barth, Ephesians, AB (New York: Doubleday, 1974), p. 38.
14.Ibid., p. 41.
15.Kummel confidently says, "The superscription comes first from the time of the collecting of the Pauline letters, and therefore merely passes on an early Christian interpretation of those to whom it was addressed” (p. 353). This may conceivably be true, but how can we possibly know? We have no copies of MSS as early as the time of the collection of the Epistles, so we have no information about superscriptions then or before. In any case, should not some respect be accorded a Christian opinion as early as this? This is not to argue that we should accept the assignation to the Ephesians, but simply for care in the use of the evidence.
16."[The] supposition of a letter with a gap in the prescript or a subsequent insertion of the address is without any parallel in antiquity” (Kummel, p. 355).
17.Francis Lyall adduces an argument from the legal allusions he finds in Ephesians.
He points out that Ephesus was a main seat of government, a place where Roman law was known, and notes that "the Epistle to the Colossians, addressed to a smaller church outside Ephesus, does not contain the same measure of legal allusions as Ephesians” (Slaves, Citizens, Sons [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], p. 232).
18.Wikenhauser makes this suggestion (p. 426).
19.Harrison discusses this view, noting some cogent objections (pp. 337-39).
20.Some scholars classify an epistle such as Romans as a "tractate letter”: see Richard
N. Longenecker, "On the Form, Function, and Authority of the New Testament Letters,” in Scripture and Truth, ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), pp. 101-14.
21."Presumably the author has no particular church in mind. He is meditating, and developing certain thoughts—and clothes them in the form of a letter”; "it is not really a letter, but a treatise or a ‘wisdom address’” (Marxsen, p. 192).
22.N. A. Dahl, "Ephesians,” in IDBSup, p. 268. He also says, "Ephesians has been seen as the mature fruit of Paul’s thought, as the beginning of its distortion, or an inspired re-interpretation” (ibid.).
23.T. K. Abbott offers a series of notes "on some readings peculiar to one or two MSS” in which he looks at the most important readings in a selected group of important MSS (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, ICC [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897], pp. xl-xlv).
24.Markus Barth points to passages in Ephesians reflecting traditions in the Old Testament, in intertestamental Judaism, in Jewish worship, in Qumran, in the worship of the early Christians, in early Christian hymns and paraenetic traditions, in traditions of a Gentile origin and character, etc. ("Traditions in Ephesians,” NTS 30 [1984]: 325). Clearly many traditions are reflected in the letter. Peter T. O’Brien finds that much of the language of the prayers in Ephesians can be paralleled in the Qumran literature ("Ephesians 1: An Unusual Introduction to a New Testament Letter,” NTS 25 [1978-79]: 515).
25.Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 2 vols. (London: SCM, 1952-55), 1:175.
26.Ibid., p. 173.
27."There has emerged a growing consensus shared even by its defenders that the interpretation of the traditions underlying Ephesians cannot be restricted to Gnostic influence” (Childs, p. 318).
28.See the bibliography in D. A. Carson, ed., The Church in the Bible and the World (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987).
29.Ernst Kasemann, Jesus Means Freedom (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972), p. 89.
30.Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought, with Special Reference to His Eschatology, SNTSMS 43 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).
31.Chrys C. Caragounis, The Ephesian Μυστήριον. Meaning and Content (Lund: Gleerup, 1977).
32.Markus N. A. Bockmuehl, Revelation and Mystery in Ancient Judaism and Pauline Christianity, WUNT 2.36 (TQbingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1990).
33. χαρις (charis, “grace”) occurs twelve times in Ephesians, a total exceeded in the New Testament only in Acts, Romans, and 2 Corinthians, all of which are considerably longer.
34.Clogg sees this as very relevant to our modern situation. We feel ourselves "in the grip of a vast mechanism and of inexorable laws of physics and the like, and human freedom seems to have no meaning in the face of cosmic forces. We learn from this epistle to believe that all these but subserve a spiritual purpose, and that spiritual purpose is summed up in Christ” (p. 101).