Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary

Laremore 1
A Verse by Verse Commentary of Ephesians 4:25 – Ephesians 6:20
Micah Laremore
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for completion of the course,
Greek 401
May 10, 2014

Laremore 2
Preliminary Commentary
1. Authorship. Who wrote the book and how do we know his identify?
The traditional view of the book is that it is a work of Paul. There are severaldifferent reasons given
for this assertion. The first comes simply from the books own assertions. The book asserts not only a
Pauline authorship but also authority as a work of an apostle (Ephesians 1:1). While there are instances
where apostleship is forged, this is at least a preliminary indication that the book/letter eat least appears to
be written by Paul. Paul’s claim to authorship is internally supported by Paul’s language in addressing
the recipients. The author not only engages in a personal discussion about the recipient (including a
personal prayer and discussion of the recent works and activities); he also includes details about himself
(Paul) such as his appointment to ministry and present sufferings (Ephesians 3:1-16). These details give
the impression that the author knew the recipients personally. It would seem unlikely a pseudonymous
work would include such elements as the recipient would easily be able to tell whether the personal
information he conveyed about them or about his false self could easily be checked.1
Aside from the content of the letter, there are various form and stylistic indications for a Pauline
authorship. The structure of the letter is very typical of a Pauline letter. It consists of an opening
greeting, prayer and thanksgiving, doctrinal and ethical exhortations and concludes with easily identified
closing and benediction. The various terms and expressions used in Ephesians also bear resemblance to
other letters in Pauline literature. Ephesians exemplifies Pauline structures such as paradoxical antitheses,
citations of the Old Testament as wells as a vocabulary that is similar to his other letters (even more
similar that Colossians which is widely accepted as authored by Paul) (Ephesians 5:15,20). This includes
phrases such as Paul’s classic greeting of “Grace and Peace” (Ephesians 1:2) as well as many other terms
commonly found in Paul’s other writings. This similarity between Ephesians and other Pauline literature
is especially seen in the very close similarity in writing style to Colossians, a sister work which is widely
accepted as being authored by Paul.2
The last evidence given for a Pauline authorship has to do with the books placement and significance
in history. A later section will deal with this issue more fully, however, it should be noted that there is
substantial evidence given to assume Ephesians was a letter written during the early period of the church.
This would align the book to be in the right time to be a work of Paul. Aside from the writing date of the
book there is substantial evidence for the books acceptance as a genuine and authoritative work of Paul as
early 140 ad when the book was included in one of the earliest forms of the cannon (Canon of Marcion).
It continues to be accepted by the church as a work of Paul and is listed in later versions of the canon
including the canon of Muratorian. Ephesians continues in its canonical place in the Latin and Syriac
versions of the Pauline Epistles and was used by early church fathers such as Valentinians, Ophites and
Balsiliment. Aside from direct reference,the ideas from Ephesians find their way into most of the early
church fathers including Clement of Rome, Ignatius and Polycarp. These references point to the works
preceding these fathers and being written earlier than AD 95. It also points to an early and wide spread
acceptance of the work as an significant work of the church (as one would expect from an epistle of Paul).
2. Place of Writing. Where,geographically, was this book written?
Ephesians was written as a part of the captivity epistles. This group of letters also includes Colossians,
Philippians and Philemon. Due to the language, date and at times explicit statements of the books
scholars deduce that these books were written by Paul from imprisonment. An example of this type of
1. Donald Guthrie. New Testament introduction.(Downers Grove, Ill: Inter-Varsity Press,1990) 479-480
2. See the “Relation to other Biblical Books” section for further analysis, Guthrie, New testament
introduction, 480-481

Laremore 3
language in Ephesians is Paul’s reference to himself as the “prisoner of Christ” (Ephesians 3:1). The
difficulty lies in deciding during which captivity Paul wrote these letters. Scholars quickly rule out Paul’s
captivity in Philippi as being entirely too short for literary work (Acts 16). That being said, most
interpreters narrow down three options for the location of the writing of these letters. Two are mentioned
in Acts. These are Paul’s imprisonment in Caesarean and Paul’s imprisonment in Rome (his first
imprisonment). Some have argued that the books were written from jail in Ephesus. While this is a
possible argument for the location of the writing of the other captivity epistles, it makes little sense for
Paul to write in with the formality and the manner in which he wrote the book of Ephesus if he were
sending a letter to people in his own city (this obviously assumes the destination of the letter is Ephesus,
which will be discussed later). Of the two remaining options: Caesarea and Rome. Rome is considered
the best option here. The imprisonment is long (most believe around two years). He would have been far
from his church plants and eager to catch up with them. Acts also mentions that he was on house arrest
and would have had the easy ability to find peace enough and time enough to write to the church (Acts
28:16-31). A second reason for assuming the letter were written in Rome rather than chaesarea is the
mention of various companions who were with Paul. These lists of companions in the captivity epistles
indicate that representative from various churches had time and means to locate Paul. Paul’s stay at
Caesarea wasshort and unexpected (This is his first stop after being arrested). Rome,on the other hand
would have been more expected which would give representatives from various churches time to hear of
Paul’s appeal to go to Rome and the time needed to send a representative there. Due to these arguments,
the traditional view is that Ephesians was written from Rome while Paul was under arrest there.3
3. Destination. Where,geographically, was the book sent? What can we know about this place
or location?
While the traditional place indicated for the letter is obviously Ephesus, there is a good deal of debate
over the reliability of this claim. Some of the earliest codexes including the Sinaiticus, majuscule B and
papyrus forty-six do not have the phrase “to the Ephesians” in the first chapter. This actually led the book
to be listed as a letter to this Laodiceans in Maricon’s list of epistles (one of its early listings). This has
lead many scholars to believe Ephesus as a destination was simply added to the later text. This would
indicate that either Laodicea or perhaps even a less known place could have been the destination of the
letter. This, however,is unlikely given the multiple early references one has to this letter as one given to
the Ephesians. This includes the church fathers Ireneous and Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian who
goes so far as to defend the letters destination as Ephesus against its Laodicean label in Maricon. Still,
critics have argued that while it is easy to explain the addition of a possible location to a letter for better
understanding purposes, it is hard to conceive of a reason why one would have documents that took the
destination out.4
This criticism has made the way for many various possibilities given for this letters destination. The
first is obviously Laodiciea. Many, however, rule this one out in a similar way they defend against the
traditional view. Scholars argue that it its appearance in one document is easily explained as a copyist’s
misguided attempt to finally find Paul letter to laodcia which is referred to in Colosians 4:16. Other
critics emphasize the early copies one has without the mention of a city. These critics believe that
Ephesians was designed to circulate to many different churches. This view does not make much sense
due to the specificity of the greetings and teachings found in “Ephesians”. It also seems odd to imagine
this letter being made into copies for different churches but never having a churches name put on a copy
besides Ephesus or Laodicia. A fourth view sees Ephesians as an open letter to fellow believers during
the time of Paul’s death and burial. This would require no specific recipient. While Paul is in distressed
during this time, most scholars have Paulnot dying until having a second Roman imprisonment. This
3. Ibid., 472-478
4. Ibid., 508-510

Laremore 4
seems to match the basic lay out of the literatures as books such as second Timothy seem to indicate an
impending death far more so than Ephesians would.5
Even with the removal of “to the Ephesians” in certain documents, it seems most likely that the letter
in question was a letter to the Ephesians. Most other explanations do not seem to be well backed and
while it is significant that “to the Epesians” is left out of certain documents this can be explained. One
explanation for this could be that copiests simply errored in this portion of copying the letter or that they
viewed the phrase as unimportant because they believed most people knew the destination of the letter. It
is also possible that, while the phrase “to the Ephesians” is unathentic, it is still factual. This would mean
that copyists added the phrase to the Ephesians because they correctly knew that Paulwrote this letter to
the believers at Ephesus. Given these possible explanations and the lack of a satisfactory alterative it
seems most reasonable to view the destination of this letter as the city of Ephesus.
As it becomes more clear that Ephesus was the destination of Paul’s letter, it is also important to note
this city’s features as means of gaining a better understanding of the book. Ephesus was a port city with
many merchants using it as a means of distributing goods to Asia Minor. There was,however, some
changes going on with Ephesus’ port during the time of Paul. Romans engineers had tried to narrow the
mouth of the river near Ephesus in hopes of deepening the river for better trade. This, however, had
caused large amounts of silt build up on either side of the natural harbor. This caused a natural shrinking
of the space available for ships to maneuver. While Ephesus would remain a trading center,it seems that
this incident perhaps did hold back certain trading ventures right around the time Paul was doing ministry
in Ephesus. This means Paul’s message was perhaps given to a populous that contained a fair amount of
stressed businessmen who were afraid of the consequences of less harbor space.6
Ephesus was also a very religious city. There is evidence of deeply rooted dark magic that was
practiced by the locals there. While there is not certainty concerning the origin of such a practices,many
believe that this practice can be traced back to the worship of Artemis. Artemis is the major deity of
Ephesus. One can easily tell that she, as a goddess, was highly revered in the city based on the structures
built to her, mainly the temple of Artemis. The temple of Artemis is a tremendous building which is
considered one of the wonders of the ancient world. The building of such a structure, as well as the
rebuilding of the structure after a fire, reveala consistent and zealous following of people in Ephesus of
this goddess. While the cities’ devotion is clear, the characteristics of this goddess are not. Due to
various feminine attributes in her statues some of considered Artemis to be a fertility goddess. Those who
follow such a belief postulate things such as prostitution being a major part of temple worship in the
Ephesian places of worship. While this is possible, there is not certain evidence that points to this. It is
very possible that Artemis was considered the “wife of the city of Ephesus” and here representation was
meant to express that role as wife rather than represent fertility.
It is also important to understand that Artemis may not have had a single identity. Ephesus, as with
many cities in Asia minor, had been through many power changes from Greeks, to Macedonians, to
Persians and finally to Rome. While conquerors would prudently leave the city’s religion in intact, there
would usually be natural cultural fusion in which characteristics of the conquer’s religion would
intertwine with the city’s religion. Due to this fact, it is even possible that Artemis was a fertility God at
one point in time, but later moved away from the issue. There will perhaps never be a consensus on the
Characteristics of Artemis. What is important to understand is that the Ephesians believers would be
fresh out of an intensely religions background and would be experiencing temptations to go back into this
system. This temptation would be especially strong as the Ephesian religious system was interwoven into
the city of Ephesus itself. Its city projects and best architecture were to Gods and goddesses and much of
5. Ibid., 508-512
6. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 79-80

Laremore 5
its commerce was in idols and magic arts material. It was in this sort of setting that Paulbegan ministry
in Ephesus and it was in this sort of setting that his letter to the Ephesians was written.7
4. Recipients. For whom was the book originally written? Were they Christians? Did they have
problems? What bearing did these problems have on the book? What is their past history and present
circumstances? Are they progressing in the Christian life or backsliding? What else?
As seen in the discussion of destination, this recipients of this letter were those who lived in Ephesus.
There has been some debate as to whether Paul is addressing the general public as a whole or specifically
the church within the city. The majority of Paul’s letters are to churches and it seems as if Ephesians is
no different. Paul specifically calls the recipients the “saints” in Ephesus which seems to definitely be
addressing a church or group of believers (Ephesians 1:1). Regardless of the specific group to whom the
letter was sent there is certain backround one must be aware of concerning the Ephesians and their
relationship with Paul. Ephesus was a city of both pride an importance. They were the capital of the
Roman province of Asia and were also one of its centers of both commerce and religion. Due to the high
importance placed on the gods, the Ephesians built the great temple of Diana (one of the seven wonders
of the ancient world). Ephesus was a center of commerce due to its key location as a port city. Due to the
city’s over all importance and wealth many Diaspora Jews settled there. These Jews were zealous for
their religion in the same way the Greeks were zealous for their various pagan gods. While there was
deeply rooted pagan practices as well as public opposition here, Paul’s ministry would be effective. Paul
would used the school of Tyrannus as a base for a ministry which was described as reaching “all that
dwelt in Asia”.8
This ministry not only began a church in Ephesus; it also served as a place to reach those
in the surrounding area due to the city’s significance. Paul seemed to understand Ephesus’ significance
because he stayed at Ephesus for two years. This is longer than any of his other stays along his
missionary journey. While ministry was effective here it was not easy. There was much dissention from
locals including those who were making money off the worship of pagan God by the selling of idols.
They started a riot against Paul in an attempt to stop his ministry. Even with these obstacles the ministry
at Ephesus was effective and one must remember that Paul’s letter is written to a church he spent two
years ministering to as well as one he saw as very important to the ministry of the region.9
5. Occasion of Writing. What caused this particular book to be written? What prompted the
author to record his thoughts in this book?
One’s view on the occasion for writing depends on your view of authorship as well as your view of
destination. As mentioned earlier, those who don’t believe Ephesus was the destination render occasions
such as Paul’s immenent execution as a possible occasion for writing. There is another view which
believes that an some else besides Paul wrote the letter to the various churches around because these
churches were no longer respecting the apostolic authority of Paul and his letters (the Pauline Corpus).
The indication of the book as going to the Ephesians supposedly only came about because this call back
to doctrine was sent to Ephesus first. This view that the letter was written to the church because they had
gone astray from the Pauline Corpus has undergone much scrutiny. First, Ephesians contains many
personal remarks that have no place in a letters whose occasion for writing is purely to call back to
Pauline authority. Second, while there is always false teaching in the church, there is no indication that
the early church ever disputed or dissented against Pauline apostleship/authority. It is far more likely that
the letter of Ephesians was written by Paulunder his own incentive for writing.
Another important item to consider, when investigating the purpose of writing, is Paul’ previous
7. Ibid., 84-86
8. Robert Glenn Gromacki, New testament survey. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974), 242
9. Ibid., 241-245

Laremore 6
missionary journey to Ephesus. Paulhad three journey’s to Ephesus which would set up the backround
for this letter. The first was on Paul’s second missionary journey. During this stay in Ephesus Paul
arrived with Priscilla and Aquinalla in hopes of planting a church. As was a tradition of Paul, he began
ministering by reasoning in the Synagogue with the jews. Paul’s stay was short but he left the Ephesians
in the capable hands of Priscilla and Aquilla. These two would be joined by Apollos. Apollos was a
great leader of the early church as well as a fantastic orator. This would no doubt gain him a great
platform for ministry as the culture in Ephesus seemed to be attracted to great speeches as is evidenced by
their very large amphitheatre.10
While the components of the Ephesian church seemed strong, there was also opposition to the early
church as is evidenced by the incidents of Paul’s second visit to Ephesus. During this visit, silversmiths
band together in an attempted to ruin Paul and his ministry in Ephesus. It seems that ministry in Ephesus
had been fruitful. Paul and Apollos’ teaching had converted many pagan religious people to Christianity.
Due to their conversion, believers backed out of the economic trade of religious works held in Ephesus.
The first way they did this was by burning vast fortunes of religions works. As mentioned earlier, dark
magic was centralpart of Ephesian religion and obviously played an economic role in the city through the
buying and selling of the materials needed for the dark arts. The second way the Ephesian believers
stepped away from their practices was by ceasing their participation in the buying of idols. These idols,
especially of Artemis, had become a major economic source of income for the silversmiths who made
them. Paul obviously had a large enough ministry where the large number of conversions was posing an
economic threat to the silversmiths. These silversmiths caused and uproar against Paul. It is perhaps
because of this that Paulhad to leave Ephesus. While the precise reason is not clear, it is clear the Paul
did not wish to leave so early, but was overruled by the circumstances surrounding his departure.11
The third visit by Paul to the Ephesian church does not involve Paul going to Ephesus at all. Paul
instead meets the Ephesian elders at Miletus (a city nearby). Again, there is not exact documentation as
to why the meeting takes place outside of Ephesus. It is of course possible that Paul was still worried his
presence would stir up dissention among the local businesses. While this possible, it is probably more
likely that the change in location was due to a less significant reason. This could be the fact that Paul’s
ship decided to port in Miletus rather than Ephesus on this journey. Others speculate that this change in
location had to do with the shrinking of Ephesus’ natural harbor. In this theory, Roman engineering had
accidentally filled the Ephesian harbor with so much silt that the ship Paul was travelling in was to large
to maneuver in the harbor’s waters. Either way,in this encounter Paul sees the leaders of the Ephesian
church at Miletus. It is here that Paul is given the prophecy that his journey to Jerusalem will mean his
imprisonment.12
Through these various details of Paul’s previous missionary journey’s one picks up details on his
current desire to write the church in Ephesus. First one sees the Paul has invested interest in the people of
Ephesus. Ephesus was an influential city both economically, politically and religiously. Due to its
importance Paulseeks to continually return to the city for ministry as well as invest powerful leaders for
the church there. Paulalso had a sense of a hastened departure. The last time Paul was in the city
something, probably civil unrest, forced him to leave sooner than he would wish. As such, Paul would
need a letter to finish topics which he sought to teach the Ephesian believers but was unable to due to
these unfortunate events. On a personal level, it is clear through Paul’s meeting with the Ephesian elders
as well as his emotional time spent with them (ie. the learning of his eminent imprisonment) that Paulhad
personal connection with the Ephesian church leaders. Some of these leaders, such as Priscilla and
Aquilla were important friends in Paul’s life. Such a personal connection would prompt Paul to write a
10. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentar, 89-90
12. Ibid., 91-92

Laremore 7
letter as a means of connecting with these friends. This desire for a personal connection would be
enhanced by the fact that these friends were with Paulwhen he learned of this imprisonment. This desire
for personal connection, along with Paul’s value of ministry in Ephesus and his unfinished work there all
led to the writing of this letter to the Ephesians.
6. Purpose. What is the aim or goal or objective of the book?
There have been many differing opinions on the purpose of the book of Ephesians. Some, such as
Dahl, believer the Paul is trying to instruct new converts on the ways and theology of baptism. This,
however, does not seem to align with the concepts the book emphasizes. Baptism is only mentioned in an
indirect manner a few times in the entire work. It does not seem to pervade enough of the content to
warrant it being labeled Paul’s main purpose. Others, such as Derwood Smith, believe that Paul’s letter to
the Ephesians was written with the purpose of correcting heretical Gnostic teaching. This purpose,
however, does not give good explanation to the large portions of the book which speak toward practical
living (such as chapter five of the work). The work also doesn’t seem to directly state any Gnostic
teaching or teachers as Pauldoes in other works aimed primarily at correcting doctrine.
There are still other opinions of the purpose of Paul’s work which seek to explain the book as a
teaching on unity. These authors, such as Barth, argue that there the Jewish believers in Ephesus were
not accepting of new Gentile converts. Barth likens this to the prodigal son Parable in which the older
son, Israel, refuse to accept the newly repentant son (the gentile believers). It is true that a division
between Jews and Gentile believers was a serious issue in the early church. Often in Paul’s writings, Paul
must against a return of Jewish believers to their old practices such as circumcision which would exclude
Gentile believers from the church until they complied with old Jewish laws and traditions. Some argue
that this tension in Ephesus was magnified by the fact that Gentile believers had been confused over
Paul’s message and had fallen into evil practices. Others believe that a new sect of Judaism was growing
in the Ephesian chruch that was much more exclusive and more prone to create a divide between Jew and
Gentile. Under these interpretations, Paul’s letter to Ephesus had the purpose of correcting any wrong
Gentile doctrine while ensuring unity for the Ephesian church across racial lines. While this
interpretation is in-line with much of the struggles of the early church, there is nothing in Ephesians in
particular that necessitates this being the purpose of Paul’s letter. The majority of the letter does not
mention racial division directly and there are many other elements in the book besides discussion on
unity.13
Others, such as Professor Lindermann, believe that Ephesians was prompted by extreme persecution of
the Ephesian Church. This, he believes, explains the use of a military analogy used in Ephesians 6 (ie. the
armor of God). This view is not commonly accepted for two reasons. The first is that the idea of
persecution, while a good explanation of military language in chapter six, is not a prominent theme in
most of the rest of the book. It is far more likely that Paul’s theme would be more evident throughout the
majority of the book, including its earlier sections. The second reason for its rejection, especially among
conservative scholars, is that Lindermann cites the Domitian persecution as the specific instance of
persecution to be addressed. This persecution, however, did not take place until AD 90. This either
leaves Ephesians with a purpose to counter act persecution which would not begin for years,or it puts an
extremely late date on the work. Both advocacies do not hold much weight without substancial evidence
in their favor. The citing of armor in chapter six of Ephesians as well as the various other supports given
for Lindermann’s theory simply do not give weighty enough support to back his rather audacious claim.14
Instead of emphasizing a persecution, some have argued that the characteristics of Ephesus as a city
14. Ibid., 100

Laremore 8
hold the key to understanding Paul’s purpose for writing Ephesians. As learned from the book of Acts as
well as archeology, worship of Artemis as well as the practice of the dark arts had substantial influence
over the people of Ephesus. Some speculate that Paul’s letter to the Ephesians was prompted by two
main issues raised by such dark influence in the city. The first issue would be in regard to the fear that
the evil spirits and powers of their past practice would come against them. This fear would be addressed
by Paul’s command to take up the armor of God in order that one can stand firm against the powers of
darkness. The second issue would be in regard to people’s tendency to slip back into old practices. In
this situation, Paul seeks to call new believers to stand against the pull of culture and one’s past life and
instead firmly seek Christ. This can most evidently be seen in the book with Paul’s call for love and
unity. A slide to old practices would involve a return of selfish and pagan practices. Paulinstead
emphasizes the believers need to seek the power of the holy spirit through which one can continue in
loving and unifying practices toward one another.15
While this theory does seem to account for a large portion of Ephesians, it does not quite adequately
cover all aspects of the book. There are still various theological doctrines that are espoused in the book
which cannot be explained in the context of speaking against pagan rituals. For example, in chapter three
Paul speaks extensively on the divide between Jews and Gentiles. While the following of the true God
does involve unity, it is a stretch to use a stance against selfish pagan practices as a purpose of an
enumeration of a doctrine of racial unity for believers. This, as well as other points in Ephesians, seems
to point to a much broader purpose of the book. It should also be noted that much of scholars extra
biblical material on pagan practices (such as their self- centered nature etc.) is found from items of a very
late date (such as 4th
century AD). This late date indicates that there is no guarantee that early pagan
rituals were characterized in the same way the one’s found were. Because of the lack of certainty
regarding early pagan rituals and the existence of passages that do not strictly adhere to its theme, it
seems unlikely that Ephesians was written purely for the purpose of standing against pagan rituals.16
It seems more likely that Paul’s purpose would be aligned closely with the books theme of love (see
section on theme). The question is why Paulto speak so extensively on this topic. It seems that based on
the book’s mention analogies such as the body of Christ and reference directly to unity; Paul was
considering unity in the church as a key element to his letter (see section on theme). Ephesians is actually
the only place in the New Testament where one finds the greek word for unity directly used. This seems
to indicate that Paul had a unique purpose for this letter. It seems that this purpose was unity of believers.
This would explain the references and analogies concerning the church as well as the thematic use of
love. Love is what builds the foundation for unity. Because of its explanatory power, many find a desire
for deeper unity at Ephesus to be Paul’s primary purpose for the letter to the Ephesians.17
7. Argument. What thesis or overall point does the book argue for and try to prove? How does
the author do this?
While the theme of the application section is for one to love one another, the theological doctrine
being exposed centers on man’s new position in Christ (justification). The idea centers around the fact
that all men were dead in their sins previously but that the power of Christ has now changed that. This
process of receiving a new position is referred to as justification. Paul argues for this process of
justification by first arguing that man was spiritually dead in sin. Paul argues that man was under the
power of flesh and the devil which put him in no position to reconcile his relationship to God or earn back
a right standing with him. This lack of ability for change is why this position is referred to as being
15. Ibid., 100-101
16. Ibid., 100-101
17. Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic,
2002), 97-100

Laremore 9
spiritually dead. A dead man cannot become undead in his own natural strength.
Paul then shows how in Christ’s power one is made alive again through his death and resurrection.
This new life he gives one is different than the previous one. Christ gives one spiritual gifts and one lives
with an inheritance in eternity. Paul also argues that this new life can and should be see in the church as a
whole as the whole church was justified by Christ as his body/bride. From these arguments on one’s new
position in Christ, Paul introduces his section of exhortation in which he commands and encourgages
believers to live in such a way that their change to new life in Christ is evident. This involve living a life
of virtue and putting off the old dead ways of vice.
8. Theme. Was there, subordinate to the argument, a major theological doctrine or truth
presented in the book?
While there has been many differing arguments for various themes in the book of Ephesians (see
section on Purpose),the overall language and structure of the book seem to epmphasize two main
concepts. The first is the concept of love. The word love is used twenty times in the book of Ephesians.
The vast majority of these times it is used to speak of believers love for each other. This includes
references to love within families such as a husband love for his wife as well as general commands to
believers such as the call to walk in love. Even in the times when love is not stated it there are ways in
which Paulindirectly speaks of it. For example, Paul speaks of believes submitting to one another. This
type of service where one puts others first is an expression of love. The expression of love as a theme in
Ephesians has to do with more than its repetition. Love is referred to at key times in the book to indicate
its underlying association with many elements in the book. For example, Paulexhorts believers to “walk
in love” before entering into a more specific list of virtues and vices one can put on or avoid in order to
fulfill this exhortation. While love itself is not mentioned in each item of the list, love does seem to be
indicated as the underlying idea of each item.18
Unity is also a major thematic point in the book of Ephesians. It does not have the many uses that love
has, howeve, it is one of the only times in the New Testament it is mentioned directly. Unity also plays a
big role in the symbolism of the book. Paul makes multiple references to the “body” of Christ (the
church). Like a body, the church should work together as a unified unit. While this is not the main
theme, it should bear weight on the theme. In the end, perhaps the best thematic statement for the book of
Ephesians is a Christian’s love expressed in admiration toward God and unification among believers.19
9. Date. When was the book written? How do we know? Does the date have any significance for the
interpretation?
The date of this letter has largely to due with its location. Because it is believed this letter written
during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment (see place of writing), the date of this book is believed to be
between ad 60 and ad 62. Most scholars believe Paul’s letters were written during the middle to end of
his imprisonment since he refers to multiple companions with him at this time. These companions would
have had to have time to locate and travel to him which could take extensive time during this era of
history.
10. Relation to other biblical books? What similarity is there,for example, between Ephesians
and Colossians? Hebrews and John? The PastoralEpistles? How much does the book use the Old
Testament,and how?
18. Ibid., 104-106
19. Ibid., 102-103

Laremore 10
Ephesians most remarkable relation is that to Colossians. These books share a great similarity. Over
one third of the terms used in Ephesians are also used in Colosians. The books are so similar that most
scholars agree that either the books were written by the same author or at least an author that was familiar
with both works. Aside from this similarity, Ephesians is also similar to many Pauline works. There is
certainly a Pauline structure of greeting followed by doctrine, exhortation and a closing. The language of
the book is also similar Paul’s other works. These similarities include unique Pauline phrase such as
“word of truth” etc.
11. Overview or Structure. How is the book put together? How can I outline it?
The book of Ephesians begins with Paul’s typical prayer accompanied with thanksgiving and praise to
God. It is then followed by a discussion of theology or more specifically soteriology. This section has
many different avenues, but it concentrates on believers redemption. The concept of this redemption is
Christ’s saving believers and giving one new life. This idea of new life carries to the application section
of the letter as Paul exhorts believers to put off the vices of their old life and put on the new actions that
are proper for a believer in Christ. These actions often come in pairs of a prohibition against a vice and
an exhortation for a virtue. The underlying exhortation for much of this work is for one to love each other
although acting in wisdom and being filled with the spirit are also larger concepts in this section of the
work. Paul then moves on the his closing remarks and benediction before ending his letter to the
Ephesians.
Outline
I. Walk of the Church – Ephesians 4:1 – 6:24
A. Walk of Unity – Ephesians 4:1-16
1. The Foundation for Unity 4:1-6
a. Command for Unity 4:1-3
b. Elements of Unified Walk 4:4-6
2. Command for Unity to be preserved 4:4-6
a. Reason for Unity – One Body 4:4-6
b. Reasons for Unity one Lord 4:5-6
B. Unity Through Preserved Through Gifts of the Spirit 4:7-16
1. Donation of Gifts – Ephesians 4:8-10
a. Quotation 4:8
b. Meaning of Quotation 4:8-10
i. Meaning of Descent 4:9
ii. Meaning of Ascent 4:10
2. Distribution of Gifts 4:11-16
a. Reason for Gift – Equipping 4:12a
b. Reason for Gift – Building Body 4:12b-4:15
i. Purpose of Building Body 4:13b
ii. Result of Building Body –
iii. Firmness in Doctrine 4:14-16
iv. Comparison to Christ 4:16
II. Christian Walk – Ephesians 4:17-32
A. Previous Life – Ephesians 4:17-19
1. Futility of mind - 4:17-18
a. First Reason - Ignorance – Ephesians 4:18b

Laremore 11
b. Second Reason - Hardness of Heart - 4:18c
2. Callous Ways - Ephesians 4:19
B. New Life - Ephesians 4:20-32
1.One’s Sanctified Position: 4:20-24
a. Statement of instruction – Ephesians 4:20-21
b. Content of Instruction– Ephesians 4:22-24
C. Exhortations for sanctified living – Ephesians 4:25-32
1. Removal of falsehood 4:25a
2. Command to speak the truth 4:25b
a. Object of truth 4:25c
b. Reason for truthfulness 4:25d
3. Righteous in anger 4:26a
a. Proper season of anger 4:26b
b. Reason for carefulness when angry 4:27
4. Put aside theft for work. 4:28
5. Command Against worthless or foul speech 29a
6. Command for beneficial words 4:29b
7. Reason to not speak unwholesome words 4:30a
8. Description of the Spirit 4:30b
9. Avoid vice 4:31
10. Virtues to seek 4:32a
a. Manner by which one enacts virtue 3:32b
b. Example to follow 4:32c
D. Walk in Love: Ephesians 5:1-5
1. Exhortation to love 5:1-2
2. Vices to avoid 5:3
E. Engage in Proper Speech 5:4-5
1. Replace improper speech with thanksgiving 5:4
2. Reason to continue in this behavior 5:5
F. Engaging with others 5:6-7
1. Beware of Deception 5:6
2. Avoid joining the wicked 5:7
G. The results of the Spirit 5:8-14
1. Exhortation to live righteously 5:8
2. Display the character traits which come from the Spirit 5:9-10
3. Expose those works that are opposed to the Sprit 5:11
a. Why these works must be exposed 5:12
b. The result of exposing darkness 5:13
4. Paul’s command to those whose darkness is exposed 5:14
H. Living in Wisdom 5:15-117
1. Command through Analogy Ephesians 5:15
2. Reason to walk in wisdom: Limited Opportunities 5:16
3. Command Against Walking in Foolishness 5:17b
I. Living under the Spirit 5:18-21
1. Do not be under the influence of alcohol - 5:18a
2. Be under the influence of the Spirit 5:18b

Laremore 12
c. Be spirit filled in speech 5:19
d. Be spirit filled in thanksgiving 5:20
3. Submit to other believers - 5:21
J. Family and Social Living 5:22-6:1
1. Exhortation to Wives 5:22-24
a. Command 5:22
b. Reason behind Exhortation 5:23
c. Illustration and extent of a wife’s submission 5:24
2. Exhortation and example for men 5:25
a. Example in Christ 5:25b - 27
i. Christ’s Purpose 5:26a
ii. Symbolism in Christ’s sacrifice 5:26b - 5:27
b. Description/reason of love – as their own bodies 5:29-31
i. Statement of description 5:29a
ii. Example in Christ 5:29b-30
iii. Substantiation from Genesis 5:31
c. Mystery found in “becoming one” 5:32
d. Conclusion 5:33
3. Exhortation for Children 6:1-3
a. Imperative 6:1
b. Old Testament reference 6:2-3
4. Exhortation to Fathers 6:4
5. Exhortation to slaves 6:5a-6:8
a. Manner of Obedience 6:5b
b. Motive of Obedience 6:6
c. Way in which one obeys 6:7
d. Reason for obedience 6:8
6. Exhortation to masters 6:9
III. Closing Exhortation to Stand Firm 6:10-20
A. Armor of God 6:10-17
1. Receive Strength 6:10
2. Prepare Oneself in the Armor of God 6:11-13
a. Reason to Prepare 6:11
b. Importance of being Prepared - 6:12
c. Purpose of Armor 6:13
3. Stand Firm through the Armor of God 6:14-18
a. Belt of Truth 6:14a -
b. Breastplate of Righteousness 6:14b –
c. Shoes of Peace 6:15
d. Shield of Faith 6:16
e. Helmet of Salvation 6:17a-
f. Sword of the Spirit 6:17b
B. Prayer 6:18-20
1. Pray for the Saints 6:18

Laremore 13
2. Prayer for Paul – 6:19
3. Paul’s Situation 6:20
C. Final Greeting 6:21-24
1. Sending of Tychicus 6:21-22
2. Grace, Peace and Love be with all 6:23-2420

Laremore 14
Outline with Commentary
C. Exhortations for sanctified living – Ephesians 4:25-32
1. Removal of falsehood - Διὸ ἀποθέμενοι τὸ ψεῦδος 4:25a,- Therefore, having
laid aside falsehood
Before getting into the details of this statement, it is important to note its audience and its
purpose. The audience was the church at Ephesus, which contained both Jewish converts as well
as new Gentile believers.21 For Jewish believers, the command to put off falsehood and seek
truth would not be a new command by any means. Paul even quotes the Hebrew Scriptures (or
Old Testament) in order to make his point.22 There would not have been any such united distain
for falsehood in the Gentile community. Perhaps this command is Paul’s way of insuring all in
the church are aware of the expectations for them to follow. It is perhaps more likely that, even
with their knowledge of God’s commands, both Jews and Gentiles were falling captive to this sin
and needed to be rebuked and exhorted toward righteousness. Regardless of who the specific
audience was for the command, it is clear that this section is used as a exhortation for practical
living. As seen in the outline, this command is one in a list of commands that Paul gives to aid
the Ephesians in their sanctification. While this seems like an obvious point, some
commentators have tried to stretch the simple meaning of the text and imply that falsehood is a
representation of all Gentile culture.23 This overlooks the purpose of the current section which
revolves around practical exhortations for sanctified living.
The content of the phrase Διὸ ἀποθέμενοι τὸ ψεῦδος is pretty straightforward. The participle
is used as a negative command to lay aside falsehood. This will be combined with a positive
command to comprise one of the negative/positive command pairs that characterize this portion
of Ephesians. The command to lay aside falsehood is not an unusual command in the Bible. In
the Old Testament, Proverbs 6 lists a lying tongue as well as a false witness as things which are
abominable to God (Proverbs 6:16-19). The New Testament continues this concept by listing
falsehood as one of the characteristics of those kept outside of heaven (Revelation 21:27). When
describing Satan, John depicts him as the “Father of Lies” (John 8:44). Given these depictions of
falsehood, it would make sense that this is the first in the list of vices that the church is to put off.
The phrase is put in the aorist tense to indicate that this putting off of falsehood occurs before the
speaking of the truth. This probably is indicating that the putting off of falsehood occurred when
one became a believer. This concept parallels that in Ephesians 4:22 which speaks of the putting
off of the old person.24 One should be aware that, while this passage speaks of laying aside
falsehood in the aorist, Paul is not trying to use this verse to demand the perfection of believers
in terms of honesty as prerequisite for salvation. As with all matters of sanctification, the vices
one lay aside must also be continually struggled with as one lives out his new life. This struggle
21. Best, Ephesians, 445-446
22. This quotation comes in 4:25b; there are also many other references in the Old Testament that depict a
high value of truth such as proverbs 4:24; Best, Ephesians,446
23. Best, Ephesians, 445
24. The tenses ofthese verbs are paralleled; Best, Ephesians,615

Laremore 15
was real for the Ephesians believers and was most likely one of the reasons why Paul spoke to
them on this matter.25
2. Command to speak the truth 4:25 b - λαλεῖτε ἀλήθειαν ἕκαστος - speak [the]
truth each one [of you]
This is Paul’s positive command for the believers in the church at Ephesus to speak the truth.
As opposed to the previous phrase λαλεῖτε is in the present tense and depicts a habit that the
believers should continually perform.26 This phrase along with immediately following phrase
“μετὰ τοῦ πλησίον αὐτοῦ “ are a direct quotation of Zechariah 8:16.27 This is an interesting
passage to quote as it contains the prophet Zechariah speaking of how Israel should act after God
has restored the remnant. While the command is specified to Israel, truthfulness is a virtue that
should be practiced by all and there are many parallels between the church and the remnant of
Isreal. Both have been chosen and restored by God and both were then commanded to press on
and live holy lives. While this passages does not directly speak to these parallels, they are
perhaps the reason why Paul chose to use this quotation in the Old Testament rather than other
general exhortations for truth. The ἕκαστος is added to the phrase to emphasize the personal
responsibility of “each” believer to speak the truth.28
a. Object of truth 4:25c - μετὰ τοῦ πλησίον αὐτοῦ, - with his neighbor
This prepositional phrase indicates who one is to speak the truth to. While speaking the truth
is clearly outlined in the Bible as something one should practice at all times toward all people,
Paul is specifically the Ephesians to “his neighbor”. Christ clearly shows that “one’s neigthbor”
extends far beyond the one living next to you or even those of your same nationality. However,
given the later text it seems as if Paul does have a specific group in mind when using this term
neighbor. The later text refers being members “of one another” as a reason for being truthful
toward each other. This will be discussed more in-depth later but its application to this portion
of text seems to indicate that these neighbors who are “members of one another” with those in
the church seem to be fellow believers. While this doesn’t limit the command, as seen in other
passages, it does seem to indicate that Paul specific intent for this passage was to encourage the
church to be truthful to one another. The final point to mention on this phrase is simply a
justification for Paul’s use of preposition “μετὰ”. Paul’s statement on speaking the truth is
clearly a quotation of Zechariah 8:16. All the words used by Paul are identical to the
Septuigent’s rendering of the verse except for “μετὰ”. This is not a significant problem as they
mean similar things in this context. μετὰ is actually seen as the better translation by some
commentators.29
b. Reason for truthfulness 4:25b - ὅτι ἐσμὲν ἀλλήλων μέλη.
because we are members of one another
25. Hoehner. Ephesians: An exegetical commentary, 616; Best, Ephesians, 445-446
26. Hoehner. Ephesians: An exegetical commentary, 616
27. There is a one word descrepency but the words switched carry the similar meaning in this context;
Hoehner. Ephesians:An exegetical commentary, 616
28. Ibid., 616
29. Ibid., 616

Laremore 16
The ὅτι here introduces a the reasoning for why one is to speak the truth. The reason given
here is the “you are members of one another”. This is how one derives the Paul is speaking of
honesty among believers. It seems that Paul would only speak of people being members of one
another if he was referring to believers being members with other believers. The reasoning
behind this reference is somewhat tied to the metaphor of the church as the body of Christ. This
metaphor runs throughout the New Testament. This would mean that while each part in a body
are both members of the larger organism, they are also members of each other because each
needs each other to survive. Because the parts all need each other, it would make no sense for
them to deceive each other. As the eye never lies to the hand so believers should not lie to one
another. Truthfulness is what allows the church “body to survive as well as operate effectively.
Without it, dissention and chaos rule. The avoidance of such chaos and the goal of effectiveness
give the believer a reason to be truthful. This is obviously not the only reason, but it is reason
that Paul chooses to highlight in this passage.30
3. Righteous anger 4:26a - ὀργίζεσθε καὶ μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε·
be angry, and [do] not sin; [do] not let the sun set upon your anger,
Perhaps the most difficult part to translate in this verse is the ὀργίζεσθε. As seen above, this
phrase is most accurately translated as a simple positive command “be angry”. While this seems
like an unusual command, it is not directly contrary to any biblical teaching. God is often
depicted as angry or full of wrath. While man is different from God, there are instances when
man should be angry for instance at injustice etc. It should also be noted that while this phrase is
a command, it does not have to be practiced on every occasion. Perhaps there are only a few
occasions when one should be angry and Paul is trying to ensure that one is angry, and also does
not sin. Many commentators have interpreted this part of the phrase as meaning “if angry” or
“when angry” in order to get rid of any problems with the interpretation of a positive command
to be angry. This however this does not match the context as this section is characterized by a
pairing of negative and positive commands. Also, καὶ as a coordinating conjunction links equal
clauses. This means that ὀργίζεσθε has to be translated as the verb of an independent clause or
command.31
While ὀργίζεσθε is a command, the central message Paul seems to be trying to get across is
how one can maintain his righteousness during anger. Paul communicates this with a simple
command not to sin. Again, his shows again the earlier point that sinning in itself is not always
as sin, but sin takes place when one looses control of himself during anger. This righteous
control of anger would probably also apply to when one would be angry. There are many times
in which believers should refrain from anger and allow God to be the one who administers wrath
and judgment. In these times, Christians should seek reconciliation over anger. It is these
controls that allow Christians to be able to have anger without sinning.32
a. Proper season of anger 4:26b- ὁ ἥλιος μὴ ἐπιδυέτω ἐπὶ παροργισμῷ ὑμῶν,
30. Ibid., 617-618
31. Ibid., 619-620
32. Ibid., 620-621

Laremore 17
be angry, and [do] not sin; [do] not let the sun set upon your anger,
This phrase seems to continue Paul’s commands on the proper limitations and control on
anger. While being angry is not a sin, Paul seems to indicate here that letting anger fester is
something that is a sin or at least would lead to sin. It seems given the following clause that
“letting the sun go down on your anger” gives the devil a foothold, that this is more of a practical
prohibition rather than a indication of a sin. That is to say, while not dealing with one’s anger is
not in itself a sin, it can easily give the devil a foothold in which he can introduce sin into one’s
life. This is further warranted by the fact that the specific parameters of the command are set up
in metaphor rather than explicitly laid out as a prohibition of a direct sin is usually done. For
example, one would see it odd if one were to take this statement literally and seek to make a
hasty and forced resolution in order to avoid the sun setting before an argument was resolved.
However, it would likewise be confusing to try and use a general principle like do not let anger
fester as a means of making a strict judgment on sin. Due to its context and presentation it is
much more likely the phrase is a practical principle to avoid sin rather than a strict outlining of
sin itself. The principle is stated figuratively as “not letting the sun go down on your anger”.
The principle behind this is to have an urgency to resolve the issues causing you to be angry
because anger overtime can cause sin such as hatred and malice toward another. This figurative
statement was obviously not meant to cause people to try to rush for resolution before sunset, but
it was meant for one to be very aware of each day they allow themselves to go to rest without
resolving their anger.33
b. Reason for carefulness when angry 4:27- μηδὲ δίδοτε τόπον τῷ διαβόλῳ.
nor give opportunity to the devil.
This phrase gives a command to not give opportunity to the devil. This command functions
as a warning as well as the reasoning for not letting the sun go down on your anger.34 Some
could interpret this phrase as pertaining to the command to not sin while one is angry. The
reasoning behind such a interpretation would be that the “μηδὲ” would be conjoining two phrases
which function in a parallel ie. both phrases would refer to the earlier command rather than the
latter referring to the former. In this interpretation the second phrase would simply describe
again another command or warning for one when they are angry. While this may be plausible,
there is nothing about “μηδὲ” that would require such an interpretation to be true, and it doesn’t
seem to be the most natural interpretation of the text. Just as the first two phrases, while being
independent, describe one circumstance of being angry and not sinning. It seems plausible that
the last two phrases of the first describe another circumstance in which one chooses not to let
anger fester so they may not give the devil a foothold. As mentioned earlier, this warning shows
that not letting the sun go down is a practical rather than legal command. It is not that letting
anger itself is a sin (there are many instances in the Old Testament in which God has been angry
with Isreal for long periods of time).35 The reason instead for not letting your anger fester is to
avoid giving the devil opportunities to cause one to sin. The idea is the those who have anger
over long periods of time can easily be led into bitterness and hate by a devil who “lurks around”
seeking those who he can lead astray and devour.36
33. Ibid., 621-622
34. Ibid. 617-622
35. Psalm 89:46; 2 Kings 13:3
36. 1 Peter 5:8 Andrew T. Lincoln,. 1990. Ephesians.Vol. 42. Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 302-303

Laremore 18
Aside from matters of interpretation, there is also controversy over Paul’s use of the term
“διαβόλῳ” rather than “satanoς” in this verse. Some scholars have pointed out that “διαβόλος”
is not used any of the epistles that are proven to be written by Paul. It is only used here in
Ephesians as well as in the Pastorals which are critiqued as being written by someone other than
Paul. This objection, however, does not stand because there is not definitive split in the books of
word usage. While Paul uses only “satanoς” in many of this letters, he also uses “satanoς” in
the Pastorals. This would seem to suggest that Paul wrote all the letters and simply used
differing words in differing contexts. Perhaps the biggest reason for term usage not being
sufficient to call into question Pauline authorship is the fact the both the terms for Devil and
Satan are used sparingly in the New Testament. There is really not enough evidence to deduce a
pattern that holds enough weight to render a conclusion. Further more, it is obvious that Paul
was familiar with both terms from their uses in the Septuagint.37 Given this evidence, it seems
much more plausible that Paul, a single common author, used differing terms in different
contexts.38
4. Put aside theft for work. – Ephesians 4:28 - ὁ κλέπτων μηκέτι κλεπτέτω,
μᾶλλον δὲ κοπιάτω ἐργαζόμενος ταῖς ἰδίαις χερσὶν τὸ ἀγαθόν, ἵνα ἔχῃ
μεταδιδόναι τῷ χρείαν ἔχοντι. - Let the stealer, no longer steal; but rather let him
toil, working with [his] own hands what is good, in order that he might have
[something] to share with the [one who] is having a need.
Textual Criticism
Before one looks at this verse in general, one must gain an understanding of the textual
criticism concerning its compilation. The two major formulations of the text deal with the
presence or absence of the term ἰδίαις (his own – used to describe hands that should work in this
text). This word is not found in any of the papyri, and it is absent in paparui 46 (Cheaster Beaty
papyri) and paparyi 49. It is however, present in codex Sinaiticus* which is a well respected
majuscule. While this is favorable, one must remember that evidence does the term is not in
codex Sinaiticus c or codex Vaticanus. Codex Vaticanus is very respected and given the split
between the two different forms of codex Sinaiticus it seems the early papyri evidence as well as
the majuscule evidence which points clearly to early sources both favor omitting the term ἰδίαις,
but this soon changes. While only Vaticanus and Sinaiticus c omit the word ἰδίαις, three other
majuscules (A,D,G) collaborate with Sinaiticus* to favor its inclusion (Majuscule A definitely
bears weight as a fairly well respected majuscule). Manuscriptes including ἰδίαις can be found in
over eight unique miniscules while only three independent forms of minuscules support this
omission of the term. Also, over six early church fathers include the term ἰδίαις while only one
omits it.39
37. Hoehner. Ephesians: An exegetical commentary,622-623
38. Ibid. 622-623
39. Kurt Aland, Barclay Newman, Moon,Institute for New Testament Textual Research (U.S.). The Greek
New Testament. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), 673

Laremore 19
When one looks at internal evidence, it seems the omission of the term ἰδίαις is the rougher
and shorter reading, but one can explain the omission of the word based on a copyist error. The
large amounts of manscript support for the inclusion of ἰδίαις, especially in the miniscules and
early church fathers seems to render its inclusion as the best rendering of the original text. This
is in agreement with the majority of major translations and renders the phrase “working with his
own hands”. This textual criticism is not hugely theologically significant but definitely adds to
the theology of the text by further emphasizing personal hard work rather than theft.40
This is the third pair of commands Paul uses to apply the principle of taking off the old self
and putting on the new self in Christ. The negative command is for those who steal (stealers) to
cease this activity. While some have translated this in more of an active sense (he who used to
steal etc.), the present tense of the participle seems to indicate it is more likely describing a
current practice of someone rather than a past action.41 The term “stealer” is used here instead of
thief in order to associate the description with the verb “κλέπτω” rather than the noun κλέπτης.42
Given Paul ‘s specific indictment of stealing it there must have been a problem with theft in the
church. While no details or given, it seems plausible given the lack of social services for the
poor that there could be huge motivation to steal in order to maintain one’s livelihood during
times of need. Some even speculate that the people of Ephesus were engaged in a form of pre-
emptive stealing in which they stole from their current places of employment in order to ensure
they would have money to sustain themselves if they were ever fired. Both of these instances are
plausible and would be denounced by Paul’s command.43
The positive command of this pair of imperatives is to toil instead of stealing. The word used
for toil (κοπιάτω )can also mean “to tire” or “wear out in work”. It is interesting that all
definitions of this term involve exertion to an uncomfortable point.44 While it may not be the
explicit subject of this passage, this does provide one of a myriad of examples in the Bible in
which following Christ requires hard work (in this case literally). This is a theme one will see
throughout the New Testament as the writers encourage believers to die to self and pick up their
crosses daily. These writers never promise the Christian living will be the easiest or most
comfortable way, but instead encourage believers to look to the end result and reward in heaven.
The use of the word toil here matches this theme. It indicates that following God by working
will take hard, exhausting work which seems to be implicitly contrasted to stealing which allows
one to take from the work of others. This exhaustion will be worth it though because it will
allow the believer to follow God’s commands and receive his eternal blessings. While this is not
the main theme of this particular verse, it seems to be the reason why Paul chooses to use this
particular word here.45
The next phrase, working with his hands what is good is used to emphasize two things about
the command to toil or work. The first is that it involves gaining from one’s own strength or toil.
This contrasts it with stealing which, as mentioned above, is the taking of another’s toil. This is
the reason for the phrase “working with his own hands”. It is not an attempt to set up manual
40. Ibid., 673
41. Hoehner. Ephesians: An exegetical commentary, 624
42. Ibid. 624
43. Ibid 624
44. Ibid 624
45. Ibid 624

Laremore 20
labor (or work centered on what is done with one’s hands) as better than intellectually centered
employment.46 The second thing this phrase emphasizes is the work is good. Good here is taken
in the sense that it is both morally blessed as well as beneficial. This idea of work being good is
seen throughout the Bible. Even in Eden, God gives Adam the task of caring for the Garden.47
Paul uses this to again emphasizes the work as something good.
While work is outlined as good for many reasons, Paul outlines one specific one here. This
reason is that it allows one to help those who are in need. Paul seems to outline compassion as a
potential motivation for honest work. Those who look towards others, rather than their own
selfish gain, will foster a desire for an honest way to help those in need. This statement seems to
clarify two important details. First, while Paul outlines personal work, he obviously does not
take it to the extreme of advocating that one must work for everything they receive. Paul allows
for the concept of gifts and charity to help those who are less fortunate even though these gifts
would not be the direct result of personal labor. The second interesting concept is that if
commentators are correct in proposing that the lack of a social service/welfare program was the
leading cause of theft, than Paul exhortation to help those in need would serve as a way to
prevent future needy people from falling into the sin of theft. Essentially, by following Paul’s
doctrine those in Ephesus who steal could instead work and in that work give to those who need
so they too would not feel coerced into dishonest behavior. Regardless if this was directly
intended by Paul, it does seem clear that Paul sees honest labor and compassionate generosity as
the most effective way to turn from thievery and toward moral living.
5. Command Against worthless or foul speech 29a - πᾶς λόγος σαπρὸς ἐκ τοῦ
στόματος ὑμῶν μὴ ἐκπορευέσθω - Let not any unwholesome word go forth
from your mouth
This next pair of a positive and negative command deals with one’s speech. Speech is an
important issue in many parts of the New Testament, (for example James speaks of the
importance of sound speech), and Paul chooses to address it here.48 While it seems like a very
commonly accepted idea that one should not extremely foul or harmful language, Paul’s
exhortation here is still valuable for three reasons. The first is that the prohibition is in the
present imperative. This is used when the speaker is asking for current cession of an ongoing
activity.49 What this points out is that unwholesome words were a current issue in the Ephesian
church and Paul’s prohibition here is valuable if for nothing else but to exhort the believers to
turn from their sin. The next too reasons why Paul’s command here is valuable indicate specific
nuances about one’s speech that Paul emphasizes. The first is the use of πᾶς. πᾶς is used with
the verb to denote the phrase “do not let any unwholesome talk out of your mouth”. The word
any here means that the prohibition applies to every word one says. While it may be obvious to
assume that some language is unacceptable at certain times, Paul here seems to emphasize that
one should be conscientious of their speech at all times. No matter what the scenario, one, as a
Christian, is obligated to exemplify Christ in his speech.
46. Ibid. 626-627
47. Genesis 1-3
48. James 3

Laremore 21
Word Study
- σαπρὸς
The second emphasis that Paul places on the term is the use of the word σαπρὸς. σαπρὸς
denotes more than simply “evil” speech. In classical Greek, the term referred to food which was
rotten, diseased or stale. It also was used to describe worn out clothing or clothing that looked
like rags due to its age/overuse. When describing people, it usually referred to someone who
was well advanced in years. While there are not examples of this term in the LXX the literature
of the Hellenistic era appears to continue meanings similar to classical greek such as rotten,
withered , foul or useless. In the New Testament, the term carries these same types of meanings.
For example, in Mathew it refers to a withered tee (Matt. 1:17-18). In the current verse the term
describes speech. It seems probable that when referring to speech that Paul would be referring
to useless or unwholesome speech (in the same way rotten fruit has not use). This means one, as
a Christian, should do more that simply avoid blatantly sinful speech. It means one should also
consider the usefulness of the speech as well as its “foulness”. Because of these three reasons,
Paul’s command, while speaking on a well covered topic, has a lot of value both to the hearers as
well as readers today. 50
6. Command for beneficial words 4:29b - ἀλλὰ εἴ τις ἀγαθὸς πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν τῆς
χρείας, ἵνα δῷ χάριν τοῖς ἀκούουσιν - but only what [is] good for the
edification of [others according to the] need [of the moment], that it might
give grace to those who hear.
The next command in this pair is a positive exhortation to speak words which benefit others.
Paul continues his emphasis on each word by using a singular indefinite pronoun. The idea is
that each word one speaks is beneficial in addition to being wholesome (as seen in the previous
verse). Paul indicates that this benefit should apply specifically to the lack or need of the person
hearing. This would have been readily applicable in a church setting in which believers could
uplift fellow believers according to their need. There are differing views on how to interpret the
genitive here. Some interpret the passage as commanding words to be spoken in reference to the
needs of others (genitive of reference) while others believe the words should be applied to the
needs of others(objective genitive). There doesn’t seem to be enough textual support to either
one to make a clear cut decision on how to interpret the phrase. Fortunately, both phrase seem to
carry similar ideas in that both would indicate that one should at least in some way consider the
needs of others before speaking. In this way, textual controversy should not hold one back from
applying at least the general principal of this verse. The last phrase in this verse gives the reason
one is to speak beneficial words. The reason is to give grace, or unmerited favor/enablement to
those around you. This grace is expressed by the beneficial words that a believer speaks to all
those around them even in times when the recipient doesn’t seem to deserve it.51
50. Ibid., 620, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott. A lexicon abridged from liddell and scott's greek -
english lexicon,1583
51. Ibid., 629-630

Laremore 22
7. Reason to not speak unwholesome words 4:30a - καὶ μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ
Ἅγιον τοῦ Θεοῦ - And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God
While some take this phrase to be conjoined with the previous dependent clause as a reason
for speaking beneficial words, it is more likely that the καὶ here is connecting this phrase to
another independent clause. The most likely independent clause would be the command not to
speak unwholesome words as both are in the same tense. This is continuous prohibition (as
shown by the present tense) and acts, in this passage, as a reason why one should not speak
unwholesome words. The reason is that the Holy Spirit will not be grieved. Christians should
always seek to please the Holy Spirit due to his power/authority as one’s God as well as due to
his relationship to the Christians as one’s comforter. Any action which grieves’ him should be
avoided.52 While this text is pretty easy to translation, there is some debate on whether Θεοῦ is a
genitive of possession or of attribute. Given that the Holy Spirit is a person and considered an
equal member of the trinity it is much more likely to be attributive as possessive genitives often
reference inferior persons or objects.
8. Description of the Spirit 4:30b – ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν
ἀπολυτρώσεως. - by whom you were sealed for [the] day of redemption
This phrase adjectivally describes the Holy Spirit as the instrument of one’s redemption.
Sealing should not be confused with the Spirit’s other ministries (such as baptizing one into the
body of Christ etc.). Sealing has the unique function of showing ownership. This is the same
sealing that is referenced in Ephesians 1:13. This sealing happens the instant one comes under
salvation and seems to be indicated as ending at the day of redemption (a temporal understanding
of the clause “εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως”seems more likely given the improbability that God
would seal Christians during all of history for the sole purpose of the day of redemption). The
day of redemption does not indicate the day redemption begins, but the day which the final stage
of redemption occurs, the redemption of believers from the presence of sin. This takes place on
the “day of the Lord”.53
9. Avoid vice 4:31- πᾶσα πικρία καὶ θυμὸς καὶ ὀργὴ καὶ κραυγὴ καὶ βλασφημία
ἀρθήτω ἀφ’ ὑμῶν σὺν πάσῃ κακίᾳ. - Let all bitterness and anger and wrath
and clamor and slander be removed from you, along with all malice.
This section deviates slightly from the pattern of paired commands by listing six things to
avoid followed by three positive things to seek after.54 This list is introduced by πᾶσα as a way
of emphasizing that believers are to put off “any” evil which belongs in these categories. The
first category given is bitterness. This word can be used to describe sharp arrows or a bitter/sharp
taste, as well as a piercing sound.55 In the New Testament the word is almost always used in
reference to temper.56 With reference to temper, word describes a general bitterness or
resentment for another person event etc.
52. John 14:26; Hoehner. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 629-631
53. 1 Thessalonians 5:2; Hoehner. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 239-240 & 632-633
54. , James Montgomery Boice. Ephesians: An expositional commentary.(Grand Rapids, Mich: Ministry
Resources Library [Baker], 1988), 170
55. Hoehner. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 634
56. Ibid., 634

Laremore 23
Word Study - θυμὸς
θυμὸς is translated here as anger. The term had multiple uses in Classical Greek. IT refered
to the soul or spirit of a man as well as a person’s strong feelings or passions. It could also refer
to a man’s mind, temper or will. It could refer to courage or spirit in the face of danger as well
as vigor or performing a task “with all your heart”. θυμὸς could also be used to describe the
source/seat of one’s anger or wrath. Given this usage the term also was used for the emotions
themselves ie. anger and wrath. In the LXX, the term can denote a literal nose (Isa. 2:22), the act
of snorting or human anger (Genesis 49:6). By far the most common use of the term in the LXX,
however, is divine anger (Exod 32:12, Deut 9:19, Isa. 5:25). In the New Testament the term
refers to passion or anger of God as well as other beings such as humans or the devil (Rev 14:8,
Rev. 12:12, Rev 18:3). Paul uses the term similarly to reference the anger of either God or
humans (2 Cor. 12:20, Rom. 2:8). In the current context, the term is listed as a human trait and
most likely refers to anger or an angry temperament. Paul is including this term as something
one should be rid of so it probably doesn’t refer to one’s soul or courage as certain classical
usages would imply. Instead Paul is following the pattern of New Testament writers as well as
his other work and referring to anger.57
The second term ὀργὴ is very straight forward. It is almost always used to refer to the anger or
wrath of God or man (obviously man in this passage). The θυμὸς and ὀργὴ are probably meant as
synonyms. There is a possibility that ὀργὴ indicates a shorter lived anger rather than one that
brews over time (as θυμὸς could indicate), but this is unlikely given the many times in scripture
the terms are used synonymously (Romans 2:8, Colossians 3:8). If these two are synonyms the
use of both is probably simply for emphasis.58
The next two categories of vices both have to do with speech. The first κραυγὴ can refer to
any loud shouting or clamor. This includes public announcements and rejoicing, but given the
context most likely refers to shouting (or clamor) among believers, probably in dissention or
argumentation. The second term, βλασφημία, means slander, cursing or blaspheme (when the
cursing is directed at God). All of these usages have examples in the Bible. However, the next
verse points out that believers should forgive one another, and the passage as a whole is speaking
of the behavior of believers. Given this context it is more likely this term is speaking of cursing
or abusive language toward each other rather than God (it would seem strange for believers to
curse God). Given this fact, the term here should probably be translated as slander which is
usually done toward each other but allows for the possibility of believers directly slandering
God.
The imperative used for these vices is ἀρθήτω. It indicates removing or sweeping something
away. The command is in the aorist, which probably emphasizes that it is something that should
have already been done or is urgent to do immediately. The final vice in the list binds the rest of
them together. The word is κακίᾳ, and it indicates malice or a general evil. An important
function of this word is that, when used, it taints the ideas described around it as evil or dark.
57. Ibid., 635; Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott. A lexicon abridged from liddell and scott's greek -
english lexicon 810
58. Hoehner. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary,635

Laremore 24
This tainting occurs with the terms in this list. When Paul lists these vices he is not indicating
that every form of shouting or even every form of anger (which is specifically denoted as
something which is not directly a sin in verse 26) should be removed. He is instead stating that
every evil or malicious form of anger and clamor should be removed immediately.
10. Virtues to seek 4:32a - γίνεσθε δὲ εἰς ἀλλήλους χρηστοί, εὔσπλαγχνο - but,
become kind and compassionate to one another
Using δὲ Paul contrasts the negative vices to be put off with the positive virtues one is to
become. Γίνεσθε (become or be) indicates that these virtues are something that the church has
not yet obtained, but needs to strive to gain. This is just another reminder that Paul is writing to
the Ephesians about issues they are currently dealing with at the time (which is probably a good
example to be followed by ministers today). The first virtue one is to become is χαριζόμενοι.
This word is in strong contrast to the last vice κακίᾳ. The word can be used to describe people or
objects and has always denoted an over all goodness or genuineness.59 When used to describe
people it usually denotes an honesty or kindness. Kindness would be the preferable definition in
this context due to its direct contrast with actions such as bitterness, anger and malice. The
object of this virtue is “one another”. This indicates that these virtues are to be directed towards
other people (most likely the other believers). The next virtue comes from a word meaning one’s
inward parts and is used to indicate compassion (often used to describe Jesus’ compassion).
While the virtues of compassion and kindness aren’t directly combined, they do seem to form
parallel thoughts. One is an inward care for others while the other is an outward display of that
caring in the form of kindness. Both directly contrast the bitterness, anger or malicious behavior
outlined in the previous verse.60
b. Manner by which one enacts virtue 4:32b - χαριζόμενοι ἑαυτοῖς -
being gracious to each other
This next participial phrase indicates the manner or how one is to be kind and compassionate.
This phrase usually indicates pleasantness or graciousness in action. Here it is translated as
gracious. Some have sought to translate this in a more active sense such as “forgiving each
other”. While this is a possible definition for the phrase it does not fit the context as well as
gracious. First, it is a more specified definition, which takes away some of the nuances of the
term, and should only be used when justified by the context. Second, the context is a participial
phrase of manner which functions better with a more descriptive translation such as gracious
rather than the more active “forgiving”. The context is also a virtuous contrast to the vices of
bitterness, wrath, anger, slander, clamor and malice. Graciousness seems to better contrast these
because gracious speech would not allow for clamor, a gracious attitude would not allow for
bitterness and a gracious demeanor would not allow for anger. Forgiveness as a more action
oriented word would not directly contrast an attitude such as bitterness and would not seem to
speak against things like clamor at all. While directly contrasting is not requited in the verse, it
does give insight to how the word should be used. Even if the evidence in the verse is not
persuasive, as mentioned early, graciousness is the broader and also the more natural usage,
59. Ibid., 638
60. Ibid., 637-639

Laremore 25
which should make it the default translation absent strong contextual evidence to the contrary.61
c. Example to follow 4:32c - καθὼς καὶ ὁ Θεὸς ἐν Χριστῷ ἐχαρίσατο
ὑμῖν. - just as in Christ God also was gracious to you.
The next phrase speaks of Christ’s example as one to follow when trying to be gracious. This
is expressed as a comparative conjunctive phrase introduced with a καθὼς καὶ. Some have
argued this phrase should be translated as causative (that one should be gracious “because”
Christ was gracious). These differing interpretations have caused some dissention among
interpreters but can be sorted out by a deeper look at the phrase’s structure and context. The first
thing one must consider is the structure which is very unique. A καθὼς καὶ adjacent to each
other (or within one word) is found only four times in Pauline literature.62 If one observes other
instances where the καθὼς καὶ are separated they usually give a more comparative idea to the
phrase.63 However, when the terms are adjacent, there are examples of both comparative (see 1
Thessalonians 4:6, Romans 3:8) and causative instances (1 Thessalonians 3:4).64 While the
comparative instances in Pauline literature outnumber the causative, there are far too little
instances to draw any conclusion. Given the split on the structure of the wording, it is best to
look at context. The context is somewhat indecisive, but the next verse directly commands
believers to be imitators of Christ. While these verses are grammatically separated by a οὖν
(therefore), it does seem to at least give some indication to the idea Paul is trying to get across.65
This idea seems to be one of imitation; that believers should look to the graciousness of Christ,
(which he displayed on the cross and through his actions) and try to be gracious in the same way.
Because of this context, it seems best to translate the phrase as comparative.66
D. Walk in Love: Ephesians 5:1-5
1. Exhortation to love 5:1-2 - γίνεσθε οὖν μιμηταὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὡς τέκνα ἀγαπητά,
καὶ περιπατεῖτε ἐν ἀγάπῃ, καθὼς καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἠγάπησεν ὑμᾶς καὶ
παρέδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν τῷ Θεῷ εἰς ὀσμὴν
εὐωδίας. - Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in
love, just as Christ also loved us and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a
sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.
Even with the beginning of a new section, Paul is still continuing the thought from the
previous verses of imitating what is good. Unlike the previous verse, this verse calls believers to
be direct “imitators” (μιμηταὶ) of God. The μιμηταὶ is used throughout classical greek with both
negative and positive connotations. Positively, it means to imitate or impersonate (for example
how an actor impersonates a person or character). Negatively, it would mean to counterfeit (as
in counterfeiting money). This word is usually defined as imitate when translated in the
Septuagint or the New Testament. While it is used multiple times, it is only here that it directly
61. Ibid., 639-640
62. See Attached Gramcord Search 1 specifically the last 3 entries
63. 1 Corinthians 10:8-9
64. See Attached Gramcord Search 1
65. Ephesians 5:1
66. Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic,
2002), 638-640

Laremore 26
refers to God.67 The idea behind this command is that believers should imitate the God’s
gracious response to man in sending Christ (this is an objective translation of the genative
Θεοῦ).68 The idea behind the imitation is for believers to also be gracious or loving towards
others. While this concept is not directly stated in other Biblical passages, it was not a foreign
idea in this time period. Other Hellenistic writers, such as Philo, spoke of this type of imitation.69
This does bring up a slight theological clarification. While it is true that believers should seek to
imitate God’s goodness, virtue, and love; there are obvious attributes of God that should not be
imitated. These would include things like his ultimate authority or position as the object of
worship. It this distinction that can allow a verse such as this to command imitation of God’s
virtues while still maintaining God’s condemnation of those who seek to make “their heart like
God” in sense of obtaining a God-like status.70
The next phrase “as beloved children” (ὡς τέκνα ἀγαπητά) has been the subject of some
debate among commentators.71 Some interpret this phrase as causal. This would indicate that
one is imitate God because they are his children. Others interpret this phrase as one of manner.
This interpretation would indicate the one should imitate God “in the same manner as a beloved
child imitating his father”. Due to the use of the comparative conjunction ὡς, it seems more
probable that this is a phrase of manner. As a phrase of manner this would indicate that the way
in which believers should imitate God is comparable to how a child would imitate his father.
This perhaps solves some of the theological debate over a finite man imitating a an infinite God.
The imitation of a father by a child is one of humility. This type of imitation would indicate a
seeking to become like the father in character, not a desire to usurp his position. When a child
imitates his father, he does not try to take his father’s authority as head of the household. He
instead tries to make his family proud, by displaying the virtues of his father. This is how a
Christian is to imitate God.72
This phrase begins with a καὶ as a way of indicating that this command is a specific way in
which one is to enact the previous principle of imitating God. The command given is to walk in
love. This is one of the three thematic commands of this passage (the first two being to walk
worthy of the call v. 4:1 and walk in holiness v. 4:17). The command to walk should be taken as
a customary present. This means that it is a practice one should habitually do. Walking in love
or living a life characterized by love is a big theme in the New Testament. John goes so far as to
say that if one who does not love does not even know God.73 It should be noted here that the
term used for love is ἀγάπῃ. This term is used for a desire for the good of others regardless of
their merit. It is an unconditional love. The object of this walk of love is not specified in this
verse. However, there are multiple instances in which believers are commanded to love “one
another” as fellow believers as well as those who they regard as enemies or unfamiliar.74
Because of these other verses it seems that walking in love would be a command to live a life
67. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 644
68. Ibid., 644
69. Ibid., 644
70. Ezekiel 28:6
71. Best, Ephesians, 467
72. Ibid., 467.; Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 644-645
73. 1 John 4:7
74. John 13:34; Luke 10 (the story of the good Samaritan)

Laremore 27
which seeks the good of all those around them regardless of their merit or status.75
The next phrase is introduced by καθὼς and indicates how one is to walk in love using a
comparative adverbial clause. The love which Paul uses in his comparison is the love the Christ
displayed when he “gave himself up for us”. This obviously refers to Christ’s death on the cross.
The use of the word ἑαυτὸν as a reflexive pronoun indicates that Christ chose to die on the cross.
While it is true Christ was acting according to God’s will, as indicated by his prayer in
Gethsemane, it is clear in this passage as well as others that Christ had the autonomy to refuse
the cross.76 While the issue of human free will is not in any way mentioned in this passage, it is
interesting to speculate whether humans also have a similar type freedom to choose or not
choose God’s will or whether man is always directed based on God’s desire for the greatest
good.77
The next two nouns προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν stand in apposition to the ἑαυτὸν as a way of
naming who Christ was. The nouns προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν are used to refer to a variety of
sacrifices and offerings (including grain offerings, burnt offerings etc.) that are frequently listed
throughout the New Testament. The purpose of these terms is to show that Christ, through his
death on the Christ, was the once and for all fulfillment of all of these sacrificial practices.78 The
dative τῷ Θεῷ indicates that this sacrifice was given to God (indirect object), and the phrase εἰς
ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας indicates it was for the purpose of being a fragrant aroma for God. This phrase
ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας (translated fragrant aroma) is found many times throughout the Old Testament in
reference to sacrificial practices. Paul’s use of this phrase indicates two things. First it indicates
Christ was a sacrifice in the “Old Testament sense”.79 This means that Christ was given to God
as a means of pleasing him. Secondly, because the phrase indicates a “fragrant” aroma, it was
only used of sacrifices that were accepted and pleasing to God. This means that Christ’s
sacrifice was accepted by God as the final cover for man’s sins.80
These further descriptions of Christ’s death are theologically rich and Paul probably used
them as a way of working in sound theological teaching into his imperatives. One should not,
however, loose the focus of this verse which is the command to walk in love. Christ sacrifice
was the ultimate and fulfilling sacrifice for man’s sins, but it was also a perfect example of love.
Christ willing chose to give up his life on a cross for sinners who were woefully undeserving of
such an act. Christians should walk in a similar way by sacrificing for others first no matter what
their merit.
2. Vices to avoid 5:3 - Πορνεία δὲ καὶ ἀκαθαρσία πᾶσα ἢ πλεονεξία μηδὲ
ὀνομαζέσθω ἐν ὑμῖν, καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις, - But immorality and any impurity
or covetousness must not [even] be named among you, as is proper among
saints;
76. matthew 26:42; john 10:18; Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary, 647-648
78. Ibid., 646
79. Ibid., 651
80. Ibid., 647-648

Laremore 28
Paul now moves from the positive command to love one another to the prohibition of sins.
The word δὲ is used here to introduce a contrast between the positive command and the negative
prohibition. Some commentators see this list as simply a listed of vices which contrast with the
positive way of living outlined in the previous verse.81 Other commentators, however, see more
of a connection in the strain of thought between the two verses. These commentators believe
that the commanding of love brought to mind the illicit uses of love that can be practiced among
believers (such as immorality and impurity).82 These commentators also connect the prohibition
of greed as an indirect contrast to the self –sacrificial attitude of Christ listed in the previous
verses.83 Given these commentators argument, it does seem likely that there is some indirect
contrast or at least thought connection between the specific vices listed in this verse and the
virtue of love command in verses one and two. The vices that Christians are to abstain from are
Πορνεία and ἀκαθαρσία. Πορνεία is translated as immorality and because the context gives not
specification to the type of immorality being spoken of it should be taken in its broadest sense.
In this broad sense, Πορνεία refers to any sexual misconduct under a Judaeo-Christian
perspective (The Judea-Christian perspective is taken because this would be the frame of
reference Paul as a Jew would be working from. Also, Gentile sexual practices varied and were
often condemned as themselves being immoral). These practices include fornication,
homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and incest. The second term ἀκαθαρσία is modified by the
word πᾶσα to indicate every kind of impurity. This term refers to the defilement of the whole
personality and with the πᾶσα serves to reinforce the idea of a broad interpretation the term.84
Paul clearly seems to being trying to exhort the Ephesians to abstain from all sinful practices
concerning sexuality.85
The next sin or vice that Paul exhorts the Ephesians to avoid is covetousness or greed
(πλεονεξία). It seems interesting that Paul would include this with the previous sexual sins as
they seem unrelated. Some believe that this is because covetous can lead to sexual sin. This is
supported by passages such as that of Exodus 20:17 which speak of covetousness as including
the coveting of “your neighbor’s wife”.86 It could also be seen as being supported by the
doctrine that greed or the “love of money” is the root of many kinds of evil.87 It seems that even
with these supports, this is not the strongest argument. The more likely reason this vice is listed
with the vices of sexual misconduct is either that it is simply another sin the Ephesians struggled
with or that Paul saw all these sins as falling under one category of heinous sins. Heinous here
does not necessarily mean worse in degree, but worse as far as being visible or grotesque (one
can easily see and be repulsed by greed/immorality while other sins like pride are more
inconspicuous). Paul strengthens his command to abstain from these by stating that these things
should not even be mentioned among them. Some have hypothesized that this command was
literal. This interpretation would posit that less talk of sexual or monetary matters would
decrease their likelihood of being practiced. This is highly unlikely given Paul’s practice of
81. Ibid., 651-652
83. Ibid., 473-474
86. Exodus 20:17
87. 1 Timothy 6:10

Laremore 29
clearly pointing out immoral actions by talking about them in his letters (even such indiscreet
matters as incest).88 It is far more likely that Paul is using a hyperbole. Paul is exaggerating how
far removed this sin should be by saying that it is so unheard of for the church to have sexual sin
that no one even talks about such things in conjunction with them. Paul’s use of a hyperbole
does not mean that one should not strive for absolute purity in the church, it simply means that
Paul didn’t not really expect the church to silence ever scoffer (scoffers even accuse the
innocent). He was instead trying to emphasize the importance of ridding of the church of these
sins as completely as possible.89 The final phrase of this verse indicates the what should be the
cause of these sins not even being mentioned among believers.90 The cause should be that the
church is made of God’s holy saints who don’t participate in these types of heinous, unholy
acts.91
E. Engage in Proper Speech
1. Replace improper speech with thanksgiving 5:4 - καὶ [ouk γινέσθω ] αἰσχρότης
καὶ μωρολογία ἢ εὐτραπελία, ἃ οὐκ ἀνῆκεν, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον [γινέσθω ]
εὐχαριστία - and [let there be no] obscenity and foolish talking, or crude
joking, which are not fitting, but rather [let there be] thanksgiving.
This next imperative concerns one’s speech. Unlike the previous command, which contained
vices commonly spoken against in the New Testament, this list contains some vices which are
very unique. This is not to say the poor speech isn’t condemned elsewhere in the New
Testament, (James 3, for example, speaks extensively on speech). It should be noted, however,
that many of the adjectives describing foul speech in this passage are uniquely used here. The
passage’s imperative is derived from the early verse which commands the Ephesians not to let
vices concerning sexual misconduct to “even be named among them”. Likewise, these vices of
speech should also be “put off”. The first of these vices is αἰσχρότης. This noun is used in
classical Greek as well as in Paul’s other letters to refer to or describe things which are shameful
or dishonoring. While it is used elsewhere, this is the only time in the New Testament it is used
in reference to speech. The best translation for this word is obscenity. The first reason for this
translation is that obscenity captures the idea of something which is “shameful”, as indicated by
the history of the word (in Hellenistic and ancient Greek this word referred to a variety of acts
and speech but had an underlying theme of “shameful behavior). The second reason this is the
best translation is because the word αἰσχρότης, as used here, probably refers to more than
speech. There is a word, aἰsxrovthς, which would specifically refer to obscene or shameful
speech. Paul chooses not to use this word. This probably indicates he wanted αἰσχρότης to refer
to shameful actions as well as shameful speech. This deviates slightly from the theme of the
verse, but is still a very probable interpretation. Due to this, many translators favor the word
“obscenity” because it has the ability to communicate a reprimand of both shameful acts and
speech. Compared to the first vice, the next two vices listed are much simpler to translate. The
second vice, μωρολογία, refers to speech which is unedifying or distracting from important
88. 1 Corinthians 5; Ernest Best, Ephesians,478-479

Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary

Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary

Similar to Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary (20)

Paul's Letter to the Ephesians Commentary