[B-Greek] Eph. 1:12 EIS TO EINAI hHMAS ...TOUS PROHLPIKOTAS EN TWiCRISTWi

Harold Holmyard hholmyard at ont.com
Wed May 17 16:34:34 EDT 2006


Dear Webb,

I apologize for sending this twice.

>Responding to Carl Conrad and George Somsel:
>
>There's some exegetical and contextual analysis hiding behind my rendering
>of EINAI...PROHLPIKOTAS. If I try to take the participle the way Carl has
>taken it --"to hope beforehand", then I reminded of the fact that one of the
>main themes of Ephesians is the idea of the Jews supposedly being "near" to
>God and the good things of God, and the Gentiles (and most of the Ephesians
>are Gentiles) being "far", but the bringing of the gospel to the Gentiles
>bringing them close and breaking down the barrier between the two parties.
>Painting with a broad brush, Paul's/the author's general perspective seems
>to be that the original hearers, believers and promulgators of the good news
>are the Jewish Christians who have evangelized the Gentiles including those
>in Asia Minor, to whom this circular letter is sent.
>
>Paul says in 1:11-12, "we...[PROHLPIKOTAS] in Christ...in whom *you also*,
>having heard the good news...believed too". What's the difference between
>"we" and "you"? And why does he concentrate on God's intention--or on the
>result of God's action--that "we" will be for the honor of God's glory? Why
>not everybody? Well, yes, everybody (Jews and Gentiles alike) is for the
>honor of God's glory. But we in particular, otherwise the statement becomes
>insipid. The general answer seems to be that "we" (the original Jewish
>believers) would be to the honor of God's glory because we'd not only
>believe the good news ourselves, but God has worked it out (KATA PROQESIN
>TOU TA PANTA ENERGOUNTOS THN BOULHN TOU QELHMATOS AUTOU) so that "we" would
>turn around and promulgate the good news to "you" (the Gentiles). 
>
>Maybe I'm reading too much from Romans in here, but PROHLPIKOTAS says to me,
>there's a reason in God's plan that "we" Jews received and believed the good
>news first--and that is so that "we" would bring honor and glory to God by
>sharing the good news with the Gentiles. So it's not only "we" as such--in
>distinction from others--but the fact that "we", according to God's overall
>plan, came first to hope in Christ, that ultimately brings (or is intended
>by God to bring) honor and glory to God. That is where my slightly less
>literal rendering comes from: 
>
>That way, our having been the first to put hope in Christ will be for the
>honor of God's glory.
>
>The logic of the sentence falls apart for me if I attempt to take
>PROELPIKOTAS in the general sense that would naturally apply equally both to
>original Jewish believers and later Gentile believers (or equally to
>evangelists and recipients of the gospel). What's the point of "we" being
>for the honor of God's glory, in that case?
>  
>

HH: That's similar to an interpretation that I was taught, among
alterative views of this passage, but there are some questions one can
raise about it, unless I have misunderstood it. The "we" throughout the
first chapter is inclusive of Jews and Gentiles, beginning from verses
2-3. So the idea of trying to make "we" in 1:12 all of a sudden refer
only to the Jews seems difficult, since "we" in verse 11 is still
general spiritual truth for all believers. It may be better to see the
general words of truth, inclusive of all believers, as continuing
through verse 12, so that PROHLPIKOTAS designates a time prior to one's
being to God's glory. We were made heirs (or whatever you do with 1:11a)
so that we might be to God's glory who at an earlier time put our hope
in God. Then verse 13, by moving to "you," would simply stress that the
Ephesians participated in these spiritual realities that apply to all
mankind by themselves believing in Christ at a point in time, with the
consequence that they would be to God's glory with all the rest.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard





More information about the B-Greek mailing list