e2Cor. vi. ἀκούσαντες τὸν "λόγον τῆς “ ἀληθείας, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς σωτηρίας
ἄμ ee " τ
᾿ 15 ὑμῶν," év® ᾧ καὶ πιστεύσαντες ᾿ ἐσφραγίσθητε ὁ τῷ * πνεύματι τῆς ames 1.
18. f=2 Cor. i. 22; ch. iv. it: see Rev. vii. 3 al. g Here only; see Rom, i. 4, viii. 15; xi. 8; 2 Cor. iv. 13; 2 Tim. i.7; Heb. x. 29.
1 τῆς om. FG,
Ξημων K 74, 115, 122, Copt., etc.
Σεν ω kat om. Ambrst.; om. και DEFG, ἆ, e, g, Copt., Goth., Arm., etc.
ἑεσφραγισθη B; -ημεν Did.
11-22 he draws out the distinction de- finitely and with a purpose between two classes who became believers in the Christ in different ways and at different times. Hence it appears simplest (with Μεγ., etc.) to regard Paul as speaking in this clause specially of those who like himself had once been Jews, who had the Messianic prophecies and looked for the Messiah, and by God's grace had been led to see that in Christ they had found the Messiah. In the following ὑμεῖς, therefore, he refers to those who had once been Gentiles and had come to be believers in Christ. This is sup- ported by the explanatory nature of the clause introduced by τούς, by the proper sense of the προηλπικότας, and by the introduction of τῷ Χριστῷ in place of Χριστῷ.
Ver. 13. ἐν ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς : in whom ye also. The reading ἡμεῖς appears in cer- tain manuscripts of importance (Α ΚΙ Ν ε, f, 6, etc.); but the weight of document- tary authority is greatly on the side of ὑμεῖς. Taking, therefore, the καὶ ὑμεῖς, as contrasted with the previous ἡμᾶς, to refer to the readers of the Epistle as Gentiles in distinction from the writer and those whom he couples with himself as having formerly been Fews, we have in this verse and the following a paragraph which gives first a description of the evan- gelical standing and experience of Gentile Christians such as these Ephesians were, and then a statement of the fact that, in their case as in that of the others, God's ultimate end in His gracious dealing with them was the praise of His glory. The opening clause, however, presents some difficulty. The sentence is left with something unexpressed, or its form is disturbed. How is it to be construed? It is natural to think first of explaining it by supplying some verb for the ὑμεῖς, and as the substantive verb is often left to be understood, some intro- duce ἐστέ here = “in whom ye also are,” “tin whom ye also have a part” (Mey., Alf.). But the great Pauline formula ἐν Χριστῷ εἶναι can scarcely be dealt with thus, the εἶναι in it has too
profound a sense to allow of its being dropped and left to be understood as is possible with the ordinary substantive verb. Others, therefore, look to the immediately preceding προηλπικότας for the word that is to be supplied (Erasm. Calv., Beza, Est., etc.; and so AV ‘‘in whom ye also trusted”). But to make this applicable to Gentile be- lievers requires us (unless the Second Advent is supposed to be the object of the hope) to supply only ἠλπίκατε not προηλπίκατε, and to give the verb the modified sense of trusting or believing. Much more may be said in favour of supplying the definite verb ἐκληρώθημεν which rules the larger sentence (Erasm. in his Paraphrase, Cornel. a Lap., Harl., Olsh., etc.) = ‘in whom ye also were made God's κλῆρος, or possession”. The comparative distance of the ἐν ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς from ἐκληρώθητε is no serious objection, especially in view of the fact that it is the definite verb, and not a quali- fying participle, that is in view. There remains, however, yet another method of explanation, viz., to regard the sentence as an interrupted construction, in which the expression of the main wr oe that of the ἐσφραγίσθητε, is delayed by other preliminary ideas, the second ἐν @ being a resumption and continuation of the first (Theod. Mops., Jer., Beng., De Wette, Rick., Bleek, Bisp., Ell., Humphrey, Abb., Von Sod., Haupt). This solution of the difficulty appears on the whole to be the best, and it has been preferred by the majority of interpreters. It seems to be favoured by the Syr., Copt. and Eth, Versions, and is adopted by the RV— “in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation —in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed”. The interruption of the regular construction in the statement of the fact of their having been “sealed” a sto be caused by the introduction of the idea of the primary Christian requirement ot faith after the mention of the hearing. It is objected that the distance between the one ἐν ᾧ and the other is much less than is usual in such cases, and that in a