511
God (so Eph. ii. 16, also 2 Cor. v. 18-20, Rom. v. 10). We should also have ex- pected δι᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτόν if Christ had been meant. On the other hand, the reference to Christ is favoured by the fact that elsewhere in this passage αὐτός always refers to Christ, and by the parallel with ver. 16, ἐν αὐτῷ . . . δι αὐτοῦ . . . εἰς αὐτόν. Decision is diffi- cult; it is perhaps safest to let the Paul- ine usage determine the reference, and interpret ‘‘ unto Himself ”'.---εἰρηνοποιή- σας. In Ephesians great emphasis is laid on the peace between Jew and Gen- tile, established by the cross, an emphasis quite to be expected where the unity of the Church is the leading thought; but not to be found here, for the peace is obviously between God on the one side and men and angels on the other ; besides which the thought would have no rele- vance in this connexion,—8.4 τ. αἵματος τ. σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ. The combination of the two terms is perhaps for the sake of insisting on the historical fact of the reconciling death against the tendency to seek peace with God through angelic me- diators.—ra ἐπὶ τ. γῆς, probably governed by ἀποκατ., rather than εἰρηνοπ., since it and the companion phrase seem to be epexegetical of τὰ πάντα.
Ver. 21. For this verse cf. Eph. ii. 1, 12. Usually kat ὑμᾶς is made to begin a new sentence. Even with the reading ἀποκατήλλαξεν the construction is not quite regular, but with the probably cor- rect reading, ἀποκατηλλάγητε, a violent break in the context is involved, since Paul begins with the second person as the object and suddenly makes it the sub- ject. Such an anacoluthon is possible in dictation, but very improbable unless several words had intervened, so that the beginning of the sentence should be forgotten. This is not the case here. Lachmann (followed by Lightf. and others) takes νυνὶ δὲ. . . θανάτου as a parenthesis, in which case παραστῆσαι depends on εὐδόκησε, and ὑμᾶς is repeated ‘to disentangle the construction”. The irregularity is thus avoided. Haupt objects that it is unlikely that Paul should have continued after so long a sentence as ver. 20 with the same con- struction, and also that the thought in this part of the sentence, “to present you holy,” is not co-ordinated to the thoughts in κατοικ. and ἀποκατ. For in the latter the thought is that it is the Son in whom the fulness dwells and through whom reconciliation is effected. But this thought of the pre-eminence of the Son in the work of salvation is not con-
512