Ephesians 1:7

ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν : in whom we have the redemption. Here and in the parallel passage in Colossians 1:14 the readings vary between ἔχομεν and ἔσχομεν. In the present sentence, though ἔσχομεν has the support of some good authorities ([26] [27], Copt., Eth., etc.), the weight of documentary evidence is largely on the side of ἔχομεν ([28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38], Vulg., Syr., Goth., etc.). What is in view, therefore, is something possessed now, and the writer describes that as τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν “ the redemption,” i.e., the redemption familiar to every Christian, long expected and now accomplished. This ἀπολύτρωσις is viewed sometimes as a thing of the future (Luke 21:28; Romans 8:23; Ephesians 4:30; and probably also Ephesians 1:14; 1 Corinthians 1:30); sometimes as a present possession (as here; Romans 3:24; Colossians 1:14; Hebrews 9:15). That the ἀπολύτρωσις here is a redemption not from the power or pollution of sin, but from its guilt, its condemnation, its penalty, is made plain by the defining clause which follows, identifying it with the forgiveness of sins. This is not the only aspect in which it is presented in the Pauline Epistles. The verb λυτροῦσθαι is applied there to a redemption from “all iniquity,” Titus 2:14, as in 1 Peter 1:18 it is used of a redemption from a “vain manner of life”. But it is the primary aspect of the word and its cognates, and the one that is at the foundation of the other. The noun ἀπολύτρωσις is of rare occurrence, found only in a few passages in profane Greek (Plut., Pomp., xxiv., 2; Joseph., Antiq., xii., ii., 3; Diod., Frag., lib. xxxvii., 5, 3 (Dindorf.); Philo, Quod omn. prob. lib. sit., § 17); and in the NT itself only ten times in all. The verb ἀπολυτροῦσθαι is not found in the NT at all; the simple λυτροῦν, λυτροῦσθαι thrice (1 Peter 1:18; Luke 24:21; Titus 2:14) and the noun λύτρωσις thrice (Luke 1:68; Luke 2:38; Hebrews 9:12). The proper idea is that of a release, deliverance, or redemption effected by payment of a price or ransom (λύτρον). It is argued indeed that this idea cannot be said to be the essential or primary idea of ἀπολύτρωσις, because it is used in connections in which the notion of a payment is not in view (so Abbott); and that, therefore, we are not entitled to say that it means more than deliverance. It is true that, as is the case with most words, the definite, specific sense passes at times into the more general sense of “deliverance” (Hebrews 11:35; cf. Exodus 6:6). But in profane Greek and in the LXX the primary sense of the verb. the noun, and their cognates is that of a redemption effected by payment of a price, or a release granted on receiving a price (Plut., Pomp., 24; Plato, Leges, 11, p. 919( a); Polyb., xxii., 21, 8; Exodus 21:8; Zephaniah 3:1); and in the Pauline Epistles it denotes the deliverance accomplished at the cost of Christ's death from the Divine wrath and the penalty of sin. So it is understood, e.g., by Origen, in loc., Mey., Alf., Ell., etc.; and as the ἄφεσιν κ. τ. λ. shows that the “redemption” here in view is one in relation to the guilt or penalty of sin, so the διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ shows that it is a redemption by payment of a price. This is consistent with Paul's doctrine of the Divine wrath, redemption, propitiation, expiation, and the curse of the law (Romans 1:18; Romans 3:23; Romans 5:5 ff.; 1 Corinthians 6:20; Galatians 4:4). It has its foundation also in Christ's own declaration of the purpose of His coming, viz., to give His life a λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν (Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45). διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ : through His blood. Christ's “blood,” therefore, is that by which the redemption is effected the price (τιμή, 1 Corinthians 6:20; 1 Corinthians 7:23) of the deliverance, the “ransom” that had to be paid for it (Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45). The same idea appears in the teaching both of Peter and of John (1 Peter 1:18; Revelation 5:9). The term occurs repeatedly in the NT, and in various forms τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ (1 Corinthians 10:16), τοῦ Κυρίου (1 Corinthians 11:27), τοῦ ἀρνίου (Revelation 7:14; Revelation 12:11), τοῦ σταυροῦ (Colossians 1:20). What is its import? It means more than the death of Christ. It means that death in a particular aspect as a sacrifice, a death having a definite efficacy. It is a sacrificial term, based on the use of the blood of victims, offered under the OT Law, for purposes of purification and expiation (Leviticus 17:11; Hebrews 9:7; Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:18-22; Hebrews 9:25; Hebrews 10:4; Hebrews 11:28; Hebrews 13:11). It looks back also to Christ's own words in the institution of the Supper (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:29), and denotes the ratification of a new relation between God and men by a new covenant sacrifice. It is used with reference to the purchase of the Church (Acts 20:28; Revelation 5:9), the grace of access to God (Hebrews 10:19), the admission of the Gentiles on equal terms with the Jews (Ephesians 2:13), the reconciliation of all things to God (Colossians 1:20); but also and most definitely to the changed condition of sinful men, and that most frequently on the objective side, as a new relation. As in the Levitical system there was a purificatory use of blood in the case of certain matters of uncleanness (Leviticus 14:5; Leviticus 14:50), so in the NT the “blood” of Christ is used with reference to the ethical power of Christ's death in purifying or in overcoming (1 Peter 1:19; 1 John 1:7; Revelation 12:11). But its special use is with reference to justification (Revelation 5:9), the position of non-condemnation (Hebrews 12:24), the cleansing of the conscience (Hebrews 9:14), the making of peace between God and the world (Colossians 1:20), the manifestation of the righteousness of God in the passing over of sins (Romans 3:25), the remission of sins (Hebrews 9:22). Its primary idea, as is shown by usage and by OT analogy, is not that of renewing power or moral effect, but that of expiation, the removal of guilt, the restoration of broken relations with God. The important passage indeed in Leviticus 17:11, which speaks of the “blood” as reserved by Jehovah for the altar, for the purpose of “covering” sin or making “atonement” for it, and declares that the atonement is made by the blood by reason of “the life of the flesh” that is in it, has been held by not a few (including Bähr and other distinguished scholars) to express only the idea of self-surrender. On this ground the piacular efficacy of the OT sacrifices, and, therefore, of the sacrifice of Christ, has been denied. But the “covering” of sin or making “atonement” for it by sacrifice, is in many passages of the OT definitely connected with the forgiveness of sin (Leviticus 4:26; Leviticus 5:18, etc.); the passage in Leviticus 17:11 embodies the idea that “life” is the offering by which the transgressor “covers” his sin or finds forgiveness for it; and in passages like the present it is this kind of efficacy that is definitely ascribed to the “blood” of Christ.

[26] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[27] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[28] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[29] Corrections of א introduced by a scribe of the seventh century.

[30] Corrections of א introduced by a scribe of the seventh century.

[31] Codex Alexandrinus (sæc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[32] A reading of Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852 introduced by correctors of the seventh centuries respectively.

[33] A reading of Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852 introduced by correctors of the seventh centuries respectively.

[34] Codex Sangermanensis (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., now at St. Petersburg, formerly belonging to the Abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés. Its text is largely dependent upon that of D. The Latin version, e (a corrected copy of d), has been printed, but with incomplete accuracy, by Belsheim (18 5).

[35] Codex Augiensis (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., at Trinity College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifications.

[36] Codex Boernerianus (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., at Dresden, edited by Matthæi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis (δ) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.

[37] Codex Mosquensis (sæc. ix.), edited by Matthæi in 1782.

[38] Codex Angelicus (sæc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

The attempt has been made to prove that this great phrase, “the blood of Christ,” covers two ideas which ought to be distinguished, namely, that of the blood as shed and that of the blood as offered, or death and life as two different conceptions. Thus the phrase in question is interpreted as setting forth Christ's life in two distinct aspects, namely, as laid down in the act of dying and as liberated by the same act and made available for us, so that we are saved by having it communicated to us. So West., Epistle to the Hebrews, pp. 293 ff.; Epistles of St. John, pp. 34 ff. But neither in the present paragraph nor in any other Pauline passage is there anything to bear this out. Paul, indeed, speaks largely of the Christ who having died is now alive, and of what is effected for us by His life (Romans 5:8-11; Philippians 3:10, etc.). But what the Living Christ does for us in the forgiveness of sin, or in the subjugation of sin, is done as the power of what He did in dying for us. τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν παραπτωμάτων : the forgiveness of our trespasses. The term ἄφεσις, while used occasionally in the general sense of release (Luke 4:18; cf. Isaiah 61:1), expresses statedly the idea of the letting go of sin (ἀφιέναι τὴν ὀφειλήν, Matthew 18:32; ἀφιέναι τὰ ὀφειλήματα, τὰ παραπτώματα, Matthew 6:12; Matthew 6:14, etc.), its dismissal or pardon, in the sense of the remission of its penalty (Matthew 26:28; Mark 1:4; Luke 1:77; Luke 3:3; Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; Acts 5:31; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:38, etc.), and as distinguished from πάρεσις, the praetermission or passing by of sin in simple forbearance (Romans 3:25). The term παράπτωμα describes sin as lapse, misdeed, trespass (nearly equivalent to παράβασις, transgression, and ἁμάρτημα, evil deed, these differing not so much in their use as rather in the metaphors underlying them), as distinguished from ἀνομία, lawlessness or iniquity, ἀδικία, unrighteousness or wrong, and ἁμαρτία, which is applied not only to acts of sin, but to sin as a power, a habit, a condition (cf. Trench, Syn., § lxvi.; Fritzsche, Rom., i. 289; Light., Notes, ut sup., on Romans 5:20). κατὰ τὸν πλοῦτον τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ : according to the riches of His grace. The readings vary between τὸν πλοῦτον (TR, following [39] 3 [40] 3 [41] [42], etc.) and τὸ πλοῦτος (LTTrWHRV, following [43] [44] 1 [45] [46] 1, etc.). The masculine is the usual form, but the neuter is found in the best MSS. in several passages in the Pauline Epistles (2 Corinthians 8:2; Ephesians 1:7; Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:8; Ephesians 3:16; Philippians 4:19; Colossians 1:27; Colossians 2:2). Elsewhere in the NT the masculine prevails. Winer explains the exchange between the two forms as due to the popular language, as ὁ and τὸ πλοῦτος are used indifferently in modern Greek (Winer-Moult., Gram., p. 76). The great word χάρις, “grace,” which has been used twice already in these opening verses, touches the pulse of all Paul's teaching on the redemption of sinful man. It has a large place in all his Epistles, and not least in this one. For here it meets us at every turning-point in the great statement of the Divine counsel, the securities of the forgiveness of sin, the way of salvation. While it has the occasional and subordinate senses of loveliness (Colossians 4:6), favour or good will, whether of God or of man (Luke 2:40; Luke 2:52; Acts 2:47; Acts 4:33; Acts 7:10, etc.), in the Pauline writings it has the particular sense of free gift, undeserved bounty, and is used specially of the goodness of God which bestows favour on those who have no claim or merit in themselves (Romans 3:24; Romans 5:17; Romans 5:20; 1 Corinthians 15:10; Galatians 1:15, etc., etc.), or of that free favour of God as a power which renews men and sustains them in the Christian life, aiding their efforts, keeping them from falling, securing their progress in holiness (2 Corinthians 4:15; 2Co 6:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:12, etc.). The freeness of this Divine favour in the form of grace, the unmerited nature of the Divine goodness, is what Paul most frequently magnifies with praise and wonder. Here it is the mighty measure of the largesse, the grace in its quality of riches, that is introduced. This magnificent conception of the wealth of the grace that is bestowed on us by God and that which is in Christ for us, is a peculiarly Pauline idea. It meets us, indeed, elsewhere (cf. the plenteous redemption of the Psalmist, Psalms 130:7; the multitude of the Divine mercies, Psalms 69:13; Psalms 69:16, and loving kindnesses, Psalms 63:7; the fulness of Christ, John 1:16; Colossians 1:19, etc.); but nowhere so frequently or with such insistence as with Paul. Cf. the riches of God's goodness (Romans 2:4), His glory (Romans 9:23), His wisdom (Romans 11:33), His mercy (Ephesians 2:4), the glory of His inheritance (Ephesians 1:18), the glory of the mystery (Colossians 1:27); also the exceeding riches of His grace (Ephesians 2:7), his riches in glory by Christ Jesus (Philippians 4:19), the riches of the pre-incarnate Christ (2 Corinthians 8:9), the riches of Christ the Lord (Romans 10:12), the unsearchable riches of Christ (Ephesians 3:8). That our redemption cost so great a price, the blood of Christ, is the supreme evidence of the riches of the Divine grace. And the measure of what God does for us is nothing less than the limitless wealth of His loving favour.

[39] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[40] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[41] Codex Mosquensis (sæc. ix.), edited by Matthæi in 1782.

[42] Codex Angelicus (sæc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

[43] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[44] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[45] Codex Alexandrinus (sæc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[46] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.