1.
literature it took strange and elaborate forms. But between these and the simple statements of the NT there is no real like- ness, and there is nothing here to point certainly either to an ascending scale or to a descending. Itis held by some indeed (e.g., patsy that the angelic authorities are named here according to the latter scale, beginning with the highest and proceeding to the lower and the lowest. For this two reasons are offered, vis., first that it would be natural for the writer, who has led the reader up to the right hand of God as the position possessed by Christ, to give his enumeration of the powers subject to Christ in the succession of first, second and third in rank; and second, that in the various references made to them, the ἀρχαί, ἐξουσίαι, δυνά- pets are given in the same order. But the former is a very precarious reason; and the latter is not valid, inasmuch as in none of the passages appealed to do we et all these three terms together (Eph. ui. 10; Col. i. 16, ii. 10; 1 Pet. iii. 22). Nor is it possible to establish any clear distinction of sense and application be- tween the four terms introduced here, such as that attempted, ¢.g., by Alford who, including in the list earthly as well as heavenly powers and evil as well as good spirits, regards ἀρχή as the supreme expression of dignity, ἐξουσία as official power in all its forms, primary or dele- gated, δύναμις as might or the “raw material" of power, and κυ » 38 the pre-eminence of lordship, We must take the terms, therefore, not as dogmatic terms either teaching or implying any doctrine of graduated ranks, differentiated func'ions, or organ- ised order in the world of angels, but as rhetorical terms brought together in order to express the unique supremacy and absolute sovereignty proper to Christ, and meaning simply that whatever powers or dignities existed and by whatever names they might be designated, Christ's dominion was above them all. This is suggested also by the further generalisa- tion that follows.—xal πα ὀνομαζομένου : and every name that is named. The ὄνομα here is not to be taken as a title of dignity, but (as the ὀνομαζομένον shows) has the simple sense of name. There is an advance in the statement of Christ’s supreme rank, but it is simply from the idea of a supremacy over all heavenly intelligences to that of a supremacy over all created objects by whatsoever name called.—ot μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ Kal ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι : nut ουν in this world (or age),