and second, prophets,’ it is obvious that these are the classes of teachers here referred to. 2. The statement here made that the apostles and prophets are, or have laid, the foundation of that house of which the Gentiles are a part, is more obviously true of the New, than of the Old Testament prophets. 38. The passage in ch. 8, 5, in which it is said, “The mystery of Christ is now revealed to holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit,” is also strongly in favour of this interpretation.
On account of the omission of the article before προ φητῶν some render the clause thus: ‘The apostle- prophets—or apostles who are prophets.’ But this is unnecessary, because the repetition of the article is often dispensed with, when the connected nouns belong to one category, and constitute one class. Both apostles and prophets belong to the class of Christian teachers. This interpretation is not only unnecessary, it is also improbable; because apostles and prophets were not identical. There were many prophets who were not apostles. The latter were the immediate messengers of Christ, invested with infallible authority as teachers, and supreme power as rulers in his church. The pro- phets were a class of teachers who spoke by inspira- tion as the Spirit from time to time directed.
The principal difference of opinion as to the inter- pretation of this clause, is whether “the foundation of the apostles and prophets” means the foundation which they constitute—or, which they laid. In favour of the latter view, it is urged that Christ, and not the apostles, is the foundation of the church; that Paul, 1 Cor. 3,