b=Col. i. 9. pews ἢ ἐν “ ἐπιγνώσει “ αὐτοῦ, 18. “ πεφωτισμένους τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς
c=cb: iv,
13; Col. i. τῆς ‘KapSias ὑμῶν,ὶ 5 εἰς τὸ εἰδέναι Spas” τίς ἐστιν ἡ ἢ ἐλπὶς τῆς
9,10, ii. 2;
1 Tim. ii. 4 al.; Heb. x. 26; 2 Pet. i: 2, 3, 8, ii. 20; Paul and 2 Pet. only. Heb. vi. 4; see x. 32; Ps. xviii. 8. h Ch. iv. 4 only; constr., see Col. i. 23.
always.
e=ch. iii. 9; g Ver. 12 reff.
ἃ obj.-gen. aft. ἐπ. f Here only; see Matt. xiii. 15.
1, οφθ. τ. διανοιας vp. (explany. corrn.), with MSS., Cyr.-Jer., Thdrt., Oec.; text
NABDEFGKLP, most curs., Goth., Syr.,
2 wa οιδατε FG.
in question lies in the sense of the ἀπο- κάλυψις, which has the stated meaning not of understanding mysteries but of disclosing them; and the tenor of the paragraph makes it impossible to suppose that in the one case, that of the σοφία, Paul had in view a gift that was to make themselves wise, and in the other, the ἀποκάλυψις, a gift that was to render them capable of disclosing mysteries to others. How difficult it is to give ἀπο- κάλυψις its proper sense on the subjective view appears from the renderings pro- d, ε.ρ., De Wette’s, Riickert’s, or Abbott's. The first makes it = “ the uality of mind which consists in wis- dons (mediate knowledge) and revelation (susceptibility for the immediate know- ledge of divine truth)"; the second takes it as = "ἃ wise heart and open for His revelation"; the third gives ‘‘a spirit of wisdom,” but leaves the rest unattempted. But ἀποκάλνψις is not a susceptibility for knowledge, nor a mind open to revelation, nor anything like that. It is necessary, therefore, to take πνεῦμα as = the Holy Spirit, with Mey., Ell., Haupt. and most. The fact that the phrase is πνεῦμα and not τὸ πνεῦμα is no objection tothat. The attempts made by Middleton, Harless, and others to make out an established distinction between the two forms, the one referring regularly to the personal Spirit of God and the other to the in- dwelling influence of the Spirit or the spirit of the believers as ruled by the Holy Spirit, cannot be regarded as successful; the terms πνεῦμα, πνεῦμα ἅγιον, πνεῦμα Θεοῦ being free to drop the article as proper names or terms of understood meaning. But what is the particular idea then in each of the two words σοφία and dmoxdAvyis? It can- not be rier the latter refers specifically to the χάρισμα of prophecy (so Olsh., etc.). For that is presented as a gift bestowed only on some, whereas the prayer here contemplates gifts for all those addressed, and there is nothing to indicate that a gift for the time being only is in view. Nor can it well be that the second noun ex-
Cop., vg., Arm., etc. vpwv om. B 17, εἰς,
presses the means by which the gift in- timated by the first noun was to take effect,—the gift of revelation bringing about the gift of wisdom (Harl.); for we should expect the order in that case to be reversed. The distinction between the terms is rather that of the gift of spiritual understanding generally and the gift of special revelations in particular, cf. 1 Cor. ii. 10; and so far the second is the higher idea. What Paul prays for on behalf of these Ephesian converts is that God might continue to bestow upon them the gift of His Holy Spirit already im- parted to them, and that to the effect both of making them wise to understand the things of His grace and of disclosing to them more of the mysteries of His kingdom.—év ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ: in the knowledge of him. The αὐτοῦ refers to God, as the context shows, not to Christ, The term ἐπίγνωσις occurs with special frequency in the Epistles of the Captivity and in 2 Peter with reference to the knowledge of God or of Christ, as in the Pastoral Epistles and Hebrews it is used of the knowledge of the truth. It’ means a knowledge that is true, accu- rate, thorough, a so might be rendered “full knowledge,’ notwithstanding the fact that the simple γνῶσις may be used at times in much the same sense (as possibly in 1 Cor. xii. 8, xiii. 8). The use of γινώσκω and ἐπιγινώσκω in 1 Cor. xiii. 12 points to the intensive sense of the compound form. The ἐν is not to be dealt with as = εἰς (Grot.) or διά (Beza), but must have either the instrumental sense or the Jocal. It was by the know- ledge of God Himself, or, as it may be better put, within the sphere of that knowledge that the gift of enlightenment and the reception of further disclosures of the Divine Counsel were to make themselves good. The only gifts de- sired for these converts were gifts of a spiritual order, meaning a ac- quaintance with God Himself. The clause ἐν ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ is connected by some (Chrys., Lachm., Olsh., etc.) with the sentence which follows, and by