Ephesians 1:4

καθώς : even as. Not “because,” but “according as,” “in conformity with the fact that”. Cf. καθότι, which is used in the NT only by Luke and means both “according as” and “because”; and the Attic καθά, καθό, for which, indeed, καθώς is occasionally used in classical Greek, at least from Aristotle's time. Here καθώς designates the ground of the “blessing” and so is also the note of its grandeur. The “blessing” proceeded on a Divine election, and took effect in accordance with that. It has its foundation, therefore, in eternity, and is neither an incidental thing nor an afterthought of God. So in 1 Peter 1:2, the ἐκλογή has its ground and norm in the πρόγνωσις, the foreknowledge of God the Father, and that “foreknowledge” is not a theoretical but an efficient knowledge. ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς : He chose us (not “hath chosen us”), or elected us. The verb, which occurs in the NT only in the Middle (except, perhaps, in Luke 9:35), is the LXX equivalent for בָּחַר, and expresses the idea of selecting for oneself out of a number. It is sometimes alleged that we are not entitled to give it so definite a meaning in doctrinal paragraphs like the present, because there are passages in which it appears to express nothing more than the general idea of a, choice, without reference either to any special relation to the person choosing or to the leaving of others unchosen. (So, e.g., Abbott.) But the passages adduced in support of this are few in number and by no means bear out the contention. In Luke 9:35, e.g., where ἐκλελεγμένος is said of the Son, the idea of a choice from among others is certainly not an alien idea (cf. Thayer-Grim., Lex., sub voc.); and in Acts 4:5; Acts 15:22; Acts 15:25, the point is a choice for oneself in the form of an appointment to a particular service or office. That the verb denotes the choice of one or more out of others is implied in its compound form, and is made abundantly clear by actual usage, e.g., in the case of the selection of the Twelve (John 6:70; John 13:18; John 15:16), the appointment of a successor to Judas (Acts 1:24, etc.). In not a few passages it is made more certain still by the addition of explanatory terms, e.g., ἀπό τινων (Luke 6:13), ἐκ κόσμου (John 15:19), ἔκ τινων (Acts 1:24), ἐν ἡμῖν (Acts 15:7). That it means to choose out for oneself appears from such passages as Luke 10:42; Luke 14:7. The verb ἐκλέγεσθαι is specially used of God's election of some out of mankind generally to be His own in a peculiar sense, the objects of His grace, destined for special privilege, special relations, special service; cf. Acts 13:17 (of Israel); Mark 13:20; John 15:19; Romans 9:11; Romans 11:5; Romans 11:7; Romans 11:28; 1 Corinthians 1:27 ff.; James 2:5; 1 Peter 2:9 ff. The foundation of the statement is the great OT idea of Israel as a nation chosen by the Lord to be “a peculiar people unto Himself, above all peoples that are upon the face of the earth” (Deuteronomy 14:2; cf. Psalms 33:11-12; Psalms 135:4; Isaiah 41:8-9; Isaiah 42:1). What is meant, therefore, is that the blessing which God bestowed on these Ephesians was not a thing of the time merely, but the issue of an election prior to their call or conversion, a blessing that came to them in accordance with a definite choice of them out of the mass of others by God for Himself. ἐν αὐτῷ : in Him; that is, in Christ, not “through Him” simply. But in what sense? It is true that Christ is the first “Elect” of God, and that our election is contained in His. But His election is not the matter in hand here, and the point, therefore, is not that in electing Christ God also elected us (Calv., Beng., etc.). Nor, again, is it that we are included in Him (Hofm.), for neither is this the point in view here. The immediate subject is not what we are or are made, but what God does His election and how it proceeds. And the idea is that that election has its ground in Christ, in the sense that apart from Christ and without respect to His special relation to us, and His foreseen work, there would be no election of us. An extraordinary sense is attached to the ἐν αὐτῷ by Beys., who takes the point to be that the “divinely conceived prototypes of perfected believers are from eternity posited by God in the One Prototype of humanity acceptable unto Him” (Christ. d. N. T., p. 141). This is a philosophical notion wholly alien to Paul, on which see Meyer, in loc. The ἐν αὐτῷ might mean that God's election of us was in Christ in so far as Christ was contemplated as having the relation of “head and representative of spiritual, as Adam was the representative of natural, humanity” (Ols., Ell.). But it is best taken as expressing again the broad idea that “in Christ lay for God the causa meritoria of our election” (Mey.). πρὸ καταβολῆς τοῦ κόσμου : before the foundation of the world. This is the only occurrence of this particular expression in the Pauline writings, but it occurs also once in John (John 17:24) and once in Peter (1 Peter 1:20). It is akin to the form ἀπὸ καταβολῆς (Matthew 13:35, omitting κόσμου with LTTrWHR marg.), ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου (Luke 11:50; Hebrews 4:3; Revelation 13:8); as also to these phrases: ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς (1 Thessalonians 2:13), πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων (1 Corinthians 2:7), πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων (2 Timothy 1:9). It expresses most definitely the fact that the election in question is not the setting apart of certain persons at a definite period, an act in time, a historical selection, as some (e.g., Beys.) strive to prove, but an eternal choice, a determination of the Divine Mind before all time. The idea of the Divine election in the NT is not a philosophical idea expressing the ultimate explanation of the system of things or giving the rationale of the story of the human race as such, but a religious idea, a note of grace, expressing the fact that salvation is originally and wholly of God. In Pauline teaching the subjects of this Divine election are neither the Church as such (Ritschl), nor mankind as such (Beck), but Christian men and women, designated as ἡμεῖς, ὑμεῖς. It is, as is here clearly intimated, an eternal determination of the Divine Will, and it has its ground in the freedom of God, not in anything foreseen in its subjects. Of a prevision of faith as the basis or motive of the election there is no indication here. On the contrary, the character or distinguishing inward quality of the subjects of the election is presented in the next clause as the object of the election, the end it had in view. (See especially Haupt, in loc.) εἶναι ἡμᾶς ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους : that we should be holy and without blemish. The election, therefore, had a definite purpose before it the making of its subjects ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους. The simple infinitive is freely used to express the idea of purpose or design not only in the NT but in classical Greek (Soph., Oed. Col., 12; Thuc., i., 50, iv., 8; Herod., vii., 208, etc.; cf. Winer-Moult. Gram., p. 399). On the ἁγίους see under Ephesians 1:1. There is a question, however, as to the precise sense of ἀμώμους. The adjective means both “without blame” (inculpatus) and “without blemish” (immaculatus). In the LXX it is a sacrificial term, applied in the latter sense to victims (Exodus 29:1; Leviticus 1:3; Leviticus 1:10; Leviticus 3:1; Leviticus 3:6; Leviticus 3:9-10; Leviticus 22:19, etc.). It has this sense of “without blemish” also in Hebrews 9:14; 1 Peter 1:19; cf. the use of the noun in 2 Peter 2:13. In the Pauline writings it is found, in addition to the present passage, in Ephesians 5:27; Philippians 2:15 (according to the best reading); Colossians 1:22. In the first and third of these occurrences it is rendered by the RV “without blemish,” in the second, “blameless”. On the ground of usage, especially in the LXX, many commentators conclude for the second sense. Light., e.g., takes the point of the two adjectives to be that the former denotes the consecration of the victim and the latter its fitness for the consecration (Notes on Epistles of Paul, p. 313). The Vulg. gives immaculati, and Wycl. “without wene ”. On the other hand, there is nothing in the verse to suggest the idea of sacrifice or a victim. The parallel passage, also, in Colossians 1:22, where we have not only ἁγίους and ἀμώμους but a third adjective ἀνεγκλήτους, is on the whole on the side of “blameless”. That, too, is the meaning of the word in classical Greek (e.g., Herod, ii., 177), and in inscriptions (C. I., 1974). Little indeed depends on the decision between the two senses; for both terms, “without blemish” and “without blame,” may have ethical applications. There is the further question, however, whether in this statement Paul has in view the standing of believers or their character whether he thinks of them as justified or as designed to be sanctified. The arguments in support of the objective relation to God being a view here (Mey., Haupt, etc.) are weighty. It is held, e.g., that γίγνεσθαι would be more appropriate than εἶναι if the personal sanctification of believers was in the writer's mind; that in that case the ἐν ἀγάπῃ would more naturally have come in before the κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ; above all, that the tenor of the section as a whole is on the side of the first view, the idea all through the paragraph (Ephesians 1:3-14) being what God does for us, not what we are now or are meant to be inwardly to Him, and the objective facts of the forgiveness of sin, adoption, etc., being clearly introduced in Ephesians 1:7 ff. On the other hand the ethical sense is strongly advocated by many (Chrys., Theophy., Alf., Ell., Candl., Abb., etc.) on the broad ground that it is so much Paul's way to point us to newness and holiness of life as the great end of the Divine purpose and the Divine call (Philippians 2:15; 1 Thessalonians 4:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; Titus 2:14). This is supported further by the presence of the qualifying ἐν ἀγάπῃ, if it is attached to Ephesians 1:4; and by the weighty consideration that the ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους καὶ ἀνεγκλήτους in the parallel passage in Colossians 1:22 is followed immediately by a reference to continuing “in the faith, grounded and stedfast, and not moved away from the hope of the Gospel”. Something depends, however, on the position of the following ἐν ἀγάπῃ, on which see below. κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ : before Him; that is, before God. Read αὐτοῦ, not (as Harl., etc.) αὑτοῦ; see Winer-Moul., Gram., pp. 188, 189. So, too, in the parallel passage Colossians 1:22. The present approbation of God is in view, not His future judgment. Light, thinks that God Himself is thus regarded as the great μωμοσκόπος, who inspects the victims and takes cognizance of blemishes. But this is to import a priestly notion which is not expressed in the context. This phrase might be specially appropriate to the idea of the standing or relation of believers as supposed to be conveyed by ἀμώμους. But it also suits the idea of character ἀμώμους “in God's sight,” “under the eye of God as Witness and Judge, and so in truth and reality ”. The terms ἐνώπιον, κατενώπιον, κατέναντι are also used in this sense in the NT, and do not appear to occur in profane Greek. They are peculiar to the LXX, the Apocrypha, and the NT. All three are used by Paul, κατενώπιον and κατέναντι sparingly (the former only here and in Colossians 1:22, the latter in Romans 4:17; 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 12:19); most frequently ἐνώπιον (Romans 3:20; Romans 12:17; Romans 14:22; 1 Corinthians 1:29; 2 Corinthians 4:2, etc.), which is also much employed in Luke and Revelation, never in Matthew or Mark. ἐν ἀγάπῃ : in love. What does this qualify? The divine election, say some (Œc.; etc.). But the remoteness of the ἐν ἀγάπῃ from the ἐξελέξατο makes this, if not an impracticable, at least a less likely connection. It is possible, indeed, also to retain the connection of the ἐν ἀγάπῃ with Ephesians 1:4 and yet give it the sense of the Divine love, if we take it to qualify not the ἐξελέξατο alone, but the whole clause which it concludes. In that case the idea would be that the electing act and the object it had in view, namely holiness and blamelessness on our part, were both due to God's love and had their explanation in it. The choice, however, appears to be between attaching the clause to the preceding ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους and attaching it to the following προορίσας. Commentators and Versions are widely divided on the question. The former is the connection in LP, the Goth. and Copt. Vv., the Vulg., the texts of Stephens, WH, and the Revisers, and it is preferred by Eras., Luth., Beza, Calv., Grot., Wetst., Alf., Light. The latter is the connection in the Syr.-P, and is followed by LTTr marg., RV marg., Orig., Chrys., Thdrt., Theophy., August., Beng., Harl., de Wette, Olsh., Hof., Bleek., Mey., Ell., V. Sod., Haupt, Abbott, etc. The propriety of understanding the ἐν ἀγάπῃ as meant to qualify the προορίσας is urged on such grounds as these that the Pauline Epistles furnish no other instance of ἄγιος or ἄμωμος having attached to it any grace or virtue defined by ἐν as the form in which the holiness or blamelessness shows itself (Haupt); that it is befitting that the love which is its principle and ground should get emphatic expression when the Divine προορισμός is first introduced (Ell., etc.); that this connection is most in harmony with the ascription of praise (Mey.), and with the genius of the paragraph as a whole, which is concerned with what God is to us rather than what we are required to be to Him. On the other hand in support of attaching the ἐν ἀγάπῃ to the preceding, it is pointed out that in view of the subsequent κατʼ εὐδοκίαν there is less reason for introducing ἐν ἀγάπῃ in so emphatic a position before the προορίσας; that, if not in the Pauline Epistles themselves, yet elsewhere both within and without the NT we have instances analogous to the connection of ἐν ἀγάπῃ with ἀμώμους here e.g., 2 Peter 3:14, ἀμώμητοι … ἐν εἰρήνῃ; Jude 1:24, ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει; Clem. Rom., 50, ἵνα ἐν ἀγάπῃ εὑρεθῶμεν δίχα προσκλίσεως ἀνθρωπίνης ἄμωμοι (cited by Light., Notes; ut sup., 313), and above all that it is Paul's usual, if not constant, habit to place ἐν ἀγάπῃ after the clause it qualifies (Ephesians 4:2; Ephesians 4:15-16; Ephesians 5:2; Colossians 2:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:13; cf. also, though in association with other terms, 1 Timothy 4:12; 2 Timothy 1:13). On the whole this connection is to be preferred, and the ἐν ἀγάπῃ will then define the holiness and blamelessness, which are the end and object of God's election of us, as having their truth and perfection in the supreme Christian grace of love.