tion, and at the most the number of these ἅπαξ λεγόμενα is not proportionately greater than in some of the acknowledged Pauline Epistles. In Galatians, e.g., there are thirty-three words used only there and nowhere else in the NT; in Philippians there are forty-one; in 2 Corinthians there are ninety-five ; while in Romans there are no less than one hundred and in 1 Corinthians one hundred and eighty. Further, some of these terms, e.g., those belonging to the description of the panoply of God in chap. vi., are obviously the products of the figure or the occasion. Some, again, are but single occurrences, and in the case of several there are related forms found in others of the Epistles. For example, καταρτίζω, κατάρτισις, ὁσίως, προσκαρτερεῖν appear elsewhere, though καταρτισμός, ὁσιότης, προσκαρ- τέρησις happen to be used only in Ephesians,
In the second place it is objected that there are certain Pauline words which get a new sense in this Epistle. Instances of this are alleged to be found in such terms as μυστήριον, οἰκονομία, περιποί- nots. But with respect to the first of these the only passage in which it can be said to have anything like a novel application is v. 32. In the other four occurrences it is used in reality very much as it is used elsewhere by Paul. The term οἰκονομία, again, as it is handled in this Epistle, has the same general sense of stewardship as it has in 1 Cor, ix. 17, though with a different application. And if περιποίησις, which has the abstract sense in 1 Thess. v. 9, 2 Thess. ii. 14, has to be understood as concrete here in chap. i. 14, that is a variation which appears in the use of other terms in the Pauline writings and elsewhere.
In the third place it is objected that in this Epistle certain ideas are expressed by terms which differ from those employed by Paul elsewhere for the same purpose. To this class are sometimes reckoned such words and phrases as ἀγαπᾶν τὸν Κύριον, ἀγαπᾶν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, δίδοναί τινα τί, ἀγαθὸς πρός τι, δέσμιος, ἴστε γινώσκοντες, εἰς πάσας τὰς γενεὰς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων, πρὸ καταβολῆς τοῦ κόσμου, σωτήριον, αἱ διάνοιαι, τὰ θελήματα, πνεῦμα τοῦ νοός. Little need be said of peculiarities of this kind. Some of them have their explanation in the nature of the subject or in simple variety in style and ex- pression. Others have affinities elsewhere in the Pauline writings. How varied, e.g., is Paul’s way of speaking of understanding, spirit, etc. Is a writer like St. Paul to be shut up to the same stereo- typed forms of expression in one writing after another? Is he to be debarred from using the word ἀγαπᾶν with reference to Christ or to the Church in this Epistle, merely because in other Epistles he uses it with regard to God? And is it impossible for him to