Filed under: Bible | Tags: Church, Colossians, Ephesus, gospel, Grace, Greek, Laodicean, Letter to the Ephesians, Paul, Revelation, Roman Empire, theology
I was asked “Why do you think Paul did not write the Letter to the Ephesians?” Well, there are a series of questions that lead to that one. First, who was the audience? Was it the Church at Ephesus? Possibly not. Why? Because the text “in ephesus” was not in the earliest writings of this letter. This is an important question, because the answer definitely reveals something of the author. The author apparently has no first hand knowledge of Ephesus. (1:15, 3:2, 4:21) There is no reference to Paul’s earlier visit.
Then who was the letter originally addressed to? Was it the Laodiceans (Col. 4:16)? Possibly, but there was no manuscript found with the text “in Laodicea.” Was it a general letter to all the churches? This is very possible. “In Ephesus” could have been added later since it was the third largest city in the Roman empire and letters were often circulated in this way. (Eph. 6:21 & 2 Tim. 4:12) Note that all the “churches” in the book of Revelation were centered around this major city of Ephesus.
So back to our question: Did Paul write the Letter to the Ephesians? If it was addressed to Ephesus, then NO, it was not Paul because it reveals that the author does not know Ephesus.
I’m not a Greek scholar, but I’ve read that the style of Greek is different. Many words and phrases are different from those of Paul. The letter is similar to Colossians though. In fact, the author seems to use Colossians as a reference.
So then, why was Paul’s name on the letter? Apparently custom demanded giving reference to the person whose ideas are being used. Writing in Paul’s name would have been a form of citation of reference common in that period.
If not Paul, then who did write Ephesians? It was likely a follower of Paul. Whether we agree on authorship or not, we can agree that the letter is very useful to learn of Paul’s theology. The author is clearly dedicated to Paul’s message. It was someone who obviously knew Paul’s gospel of grace.
8 Comments
I stumbled upon your blog. I am very confused to the importance of who penned any of the books of the Bible, other than to give them relevance. Obviously we don’t need to know who penned each book: Hebrews.
I didn’t know we were supposed to learn ‘Paul’s theology’. I am not a Bible scholar by any means. However, I do love to learn everything I can about the word. One thing I won’t do is sacrifice learning the Bible over knowing the Lord. Now, that seems like a ‘New Age’ statement, but I hope you understand what I am saying, so you will understand my question fully. I take studying and knowing the Bible very seriously. I believe EVERY word in the Bible. But, what I know is the Bible is a book, filled with Holy, life giving and life changing truth, that can alter atmospheres, environments and people just by being spoken. But, it is a book that points to the One we are to know. Yes, I know that you must study the word to know God (Faith comes from hearing, and hearing from the Word of God. Meaning: The Bible is the foundation to begin to know God.) It says that we err in not knowing the word. I want to make it clear that I know and practice studying the Bible. However, I can see where we in the West sometimes sacrifice knowing the Lord (spiritual relationship) for knowing the Bible (head knowledge). Not a sacrifice I am willing to make.
With all of that said (I hope it is clear why all of that was relevant), I don’t understand why there should be any focus on Paul’s theology, or who penned the book of Ephesians. If you make a copy of a copy, then what you have is a copy that isn’t as defined as the original. There is only 1 Truth, and His name is Jesus, and He sent us the Holy Spirit to comfort and lead us.
I hope you understand that I am not trying to be condescending. Like I said, I am not a Bible scholar, but I take my study of the scriptures very seriously. If there is importance of knowing who penned each word, then I am all for it and would love to know who wrote each of the books. However, I struggle enough with spending as much time with the Lord as I would like, as well as making sure I am always alert and ready to minister to the lost, and saved. And, therefore it seems almost a waste for me to get into who penned each word.
Any clarification is appreciated. I always want to know as much as possible that will give me a better glimpse of the Father and let me see who He is more clearly. One thing is for certain, your post has stirred the atmosphere for conversing about God and His word…that’s never bad!
Blessings!
Comment by aaronjacobs July 15, 2009 @ 12:11 PMAaron Jacobs
Aaron,
Thanks for your comments and question. I am in full agreement with you. When we stumble into conversations that poke us and prod us into thinking deeply about the Scriptures and about the Person of Jesus Christ, we are in a good place. Questioning the authorship is not to deny anything the Scriptures say; it merely helps us put the Scriptures into their proper context. What does it matter who wrote Ephesians? It helps us place the book in the right time and consider the community of believers of that particular time and how they related and responded to the events of that time. Why is that important? It helps us respond as communities of believers to the changes that are occurring in our current cultural milieu.
Ultimately, I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection. I want to know him in his suffering. And I want to glorify him in all I do, say, think, believe. I sense that is your heart intention too. Welcome to the conversation brother.
John
Comment by John July 15, 2009 @ 12:36 PMThanks, John! Whether anyone agrees with your conclusion or not, your reply to me is the perfect answer to my question, and valid for everyone to understand about you and your posts! I still don’t know if I agree with you or not. I will keep digging as the Bureans did (Acts 17:10-12). Keep posting!
Aaron
Comment by aaronjacobs July 15, 2009 @ 1:28 PM1 “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:” You must be a fool that cannot read, and yet what does it matter who? 2 Timothy 3:16
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
Comment by jeremiah17 June 26, 2009 @ 4:13 PMI see your point even though I don’t agree with your conclusion.
For one, the writer of this letter sent Tychicus as its courier. 6:21 . Tychicus was mentioned often by Paul in other places (Ac 20:4; Col 4:7,18; 2Ti 4:12; Tit 3:12) So, it seems that if Tychicus was the real Tychicus that Ephesians would be truly Pauline as well.
Secondly, you stated that you were “not a Greek scholar” but much of your curiosity about this matter seems to hinge on “the earliest writings of this letter.” What MSS do you refer to and why do you suppose them to be more accurate or superior to the accepted rendering?
Thanks,
Comment by Jason June 25, 2009 @ 4:20 PMJason W. Elder
Jason,
Thanks for your thoughtful and courteous questions. The MSS I have used include, but are not limited to:
Achtemeier, P. J., J. B. Green, and M. M. Thompson. Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature and Theology. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001.
-and-
Witherington, B., III. New Testament History: A Narrative Account. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
There are questions that remain and I can’t say my argument is conclusive. However, the question of Paul’s authorship is worth considering.
One decision I have made in the study of the Scriptures. I have decided to let them be what they are and not what I want them to be. Whatever we find as we pursue a better understanding of the Scriptures, it will help us to better understand the earliest churches and how they responded to the movement of the Holy Spirit in their time.
John
Comment by John June 29, 2009 @ 10:31 AMSo…the first verse and the first word of the letter (“Paul”) was either a different Paul or was somehow not the Paul that we know from Acts and the some of the other “Pauline” letters? Is that what you’re saying? Then if that part is not authentic, how do we know the rest of the letter is authentic? The same for 3:1. Was someone using Paul’s life as a way to bring fame to his or her letter? Interesting.
Comment by David June 25, 2009 @ 10:20 AMDavid,
Yes. The use of Paul’s name is likely an attribution to Paul. That was common in those days. Today, we have ghost writers or the writer is listed as a co-author “with” the author. The letter itself is authentic. I’m not questioning that.
Yes. Using an author’s name was done to make the letter more authentic, aligned with apostolic authority and tradition. The apostles, especially eye-witnesses, were a dying breed, so this kind of authority was important. The authors who did not give their own name were doing so out of humility, mostly. Some, however were malicious. There were forgeries too. This letter was not done out of malice. Instead, it is a faithful attribution to Paul’s theology of grace.
Comment by John June 25, 2009 @ 10:43 AM