Ephesians 4:17-24

3. General Christian Duties

Ephesians 4:17 to Ephesians 5:21.

a. The principle of the new walk, with reference to the contrast of the old and the new man

Ephesians 4:17-24.

17This I say therefore [therefore I say], and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not [no longer walk] as other Gentiles [the rest of the Gentiles]53 walk, in the vanity of their mind. 18Having the understanding darkened [Being darkened54 in their understanding], being alienated from the life of God [,] through [because of] the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness [hardness] of the heart: 19Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness [to wanton-ness], to work all uncleanness with [in] greediness. 20But ye have not so learned 21[did not so learn] Christ; If so be that ye have heard [If indeed ye heard] him, and have been [were] taught by [in] him, as the truth is [as is truth]55 in Jesus: 22That ye put off concerning the former conversation [as regards your former way of life] the old man, which is [waxeth] corrupt according to the deceitful lusts [lusts 23of deceit]; And be [become] renewed in the spirit [or by the Spirit]56 of your mind; 24And that ye put on the new man, which after God is [hath been] created in righteousness and true holiness [holiness57 of the truth].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Ephesians 4:17 a. The connection. This therefore I Say [τοῦτο οὖν λέγω].—Τοῦτο refers to what follows, and with emphasis (Winer, p. 152); οὖν, however, as the subsequent context shows, going back of the digression (Ephesians 4:4-16), which contains the motives of the exhortation (Ephesians 4:1-3), refers to “walk worthy.” Theodoret: πάλιν .58 But the simple “I say” is not enough for the Apostle; he adds: And testify in the Lord, καὶ μαρτύρομαι ἐν κυρίῳ.—He presents himself in his apostolic authority as a witness, not in his own, but in the Lord’s cause. [“By thus sinking his own personality, the Apostle greatly enhances the solemnity of his declaration” (Ellicott).—R.] It is similar to Romans 9:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:1. The Lord is the element in which he lives and in this case bears witness, and at the same time the ground on which he stands in common with the Ephesians; on this account he reckons on their acceptance of his urgent appeal. It is not=πρὸς κυρίου, per Dominum (even the Greek Fathers, and many others).

The heathen walk as a type of the natural walk in general; Ephesians 4:17-19Ephesians 4:17-19Ephesians 4:17-19.

Ephesians 4:17 b. That ye no longer walk [μηκέτι ὑμᾶς περιπατεὶν.—This infinitive is the object of λέγω (it being unnecessary to understand δεῖν) expressing, however, what ought to be (Eadie) more than what is; Ellicott thinks an imperative sense involved (“that ye no longer must walk”), as indeed the context indicates (Alford).—R.] This says negatively what is expressed positively in Ephesians 4:1 : “walk worthy.” “No longer” denotes their once walking, as they should not and dare not now, being Christians.—As the rest of the Gentiles walk.—[See Textual Note!] Καθώς introduces the kind of walk which they should avoid. Καί is joined with emphasis and admonitory force to τὰ λοιπά ἔθνη to which class they belong.59 The heathen are those who remained behind, they no longer belong to the heathen who now “walk,” and how?

In the vanity of their mind, ἔν ματαιότητιτοῦ νοὸς αὐτῶν.—This is the briefest characterization of the natural heathen walk, presenting both its religious and moral side. It is the explanation of Theodoret (τὰ μὴ ὄντα θεοποιε͂ιν) in accordance with Romans 1:21; Romans 8:20; 1 Peter 1:18. This “vanity” [betokening a waste of the whole rational powers on worthless objects (Alford).—R.] is, of course, one brought about through sin, another nature as it were. It has penetrated even the will of the human spirit, corrupting this high faculty, the ἡγεμονικόν in the nature of man.60 Hence there is no special reference to philosophy (Grotius). To this general sketch are added special traits in Ephesians 4:18-19.

Ephesians 4:18. Being darkened in their understanding, ἐσκοτωμένοι τῇ διανοίᾳ ὄντες.—The masculine form indicates the reference to persons, to particular individuals, and not to the whole, τὰ ἔθνη, as such. The verb (σκοτόω), only here and Revelation 16:10, instead of the more usual σκοτίζω, is in the perfect, to denote a state not previously existing, but having come into being, which the present participle, (ὄντες) designates as present. That to which the darkness clings is set forth by τῇ διανοίᾳ,61 which means the intellectual power of the mind, the mode of thought, the character, since the reference is not to the formal faculty, but to its condition. Comp. Romans 1:21 f.; Romans 11:10. It is incorrect to join ὄντες with what follows (Rueckert) [Eadie]; it follows thus in Titus 1:16 also, and τῇ διανοίᾳ forms one conception, together with the participle in its emphatic position.

Being alienated from the life of God, ἀπηλλοτριωμένοι τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ θεοῦ.—See on Ephesians 2:12 : “alienated from the commonwealth of Israel.” The perfect participle must be noted here also; Bengel correctly remarking: participia præsupponunt, gentes ante defectionem suam a fide patrum—fuisse participes lucis et vitæ. Conf. renovari Ephesians 4:23.—Ζωή, the opposite of θάνατος (Ephesians 2:1), is the intensive spiritual, eternal life, belonging to God (τοῦ θεοῦ), vita, quæ accenditur ex ipsa Dei vita (Bengel), qua Deus vivit in suis (Beza), vera vita, qui est Deus (Erasmus); Luther: the life, that is out of God. [Comp. Trench, Syn. § XXVIII; Olshausen, Stier in loco.—R.] See Winer, p. 175. Thus “the vanity of their mind” is designated as to its two sides, the ethically intelligent, and the ethically practical. [This clause sets forth an “objective result of the subjective ‘being darkened’ ” (Alford).—R.] To this corresponds what is immediately added.

Because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart, διὰ τὴν ἄγνοιαν τὴν οὖσαν ἐν αὐτοῖς, διὰ τὴν πώρωσιν62 τῆς καρδίας αὐτῶν.—These two clauses are added without a connecting particle, because they refer to the two preceding ones, as their purport requires, and because the one requires and furthers the other. “Because of the ignorance that is in them,” points to an ignorance which has become immanent, is now natural and peculiar (Acts 3:17; Acts 17:30; 1 Peter 1:14), as the ground (διὰ. with the accus., see Winer, p. 372) of the darkening, and which is ever increasing, going from ignorance to ignorance. “Because of the hardness of their heart,” renders prominent in the same way the hardness, unsusceptibility of the heart as the ground of the estrangement from the life of God. The two are ever conjoined in the natural man: There is not intellectual obscuration beside practical estrangement from God, nor ignorance beside hardness of heart; the one conditions the other, working destructively as they reciprocally affect each other. Hence it cannot be affirmed, that the former applies more to the Gentiles, the latter to the Jews (Stier and others); the Gentiles alone are spoken of, as a type of the natural character. But at the same time the “ignorance” is not to be regarded as merely a consequence, and these two clauses (with διά) referred to the last participial clause alone (Meyer).

[This parallelism of construction in which the first and third, second and fourth clauses are connected together is accepted, by Bengel, De Wette, Olshausen, Forbes (Symmetrical structure of Scripture, p. 21), Schenkel and others. It is opposed by Meyer, Hodge, Eadie and Ellicott; but the objection they urge, that “ignorance” is not the cause of “darkness,” loses its force when it is remembered that the Apostle is speaking of a process rather than a condition. Nor is it contrary to the Apostle’s style, in which parallelisms abound, far less so than to explain: “Darkness of mind is the cause of ignorance, ignorance and consequent obduracy of heart are the cause of alienation from God” (Hodge), thus trajecting the third and fourth clauses between the first and second. This is the view of Meyer, who makes the last clause subordinate to the third (though both are introduced by διά): a needless complication, which leads to the removal of the comma, while the view of Braune requires the insertion of one after θεοῦ. See Textual Note2.—R.]

Ephesians 4:19. Who οἵτινες [men who, such as], introduces the explanation, the proof of this condition.—Being past feeling have given themselves over [ἀπηλγηκότες ἑαυτοὺς παρέδωκαν].—Ἀπηλγηκότες; (from ἀπὸ and ἄλγος, ἀλγέω,), unsusceptible of pain, and according to the context, in the heart, the moral consciousness, hence not feeling the unrest and punishment of conscience, the correction of God (Jeremiah 5:3), they have given themselves over, ultro (Bengel); that is the ἀγαισθησία, sponte sese in gurgitem omnium vitiorum præcipitans. Calvin: Homines a Deo relicti, sopita conscientia, exstincto divini judicii timore, amisso denique sensu tanquam attoniti, belluino impetu se ad omnem turpitudinem projiciunt. [The pronoun ἑαυτούς is used “with terrible emphasis” (Meyer).—R.] Self-reprobation is consummated in becoming apathetic, just as Romans 1:24 : “God delivered them over, in the lusts of their hearts.” Our passage marks the freedom and guilt of men, the passage in Romans the rule, will and power of God, but both of them indicate the means: the lust corrupting even unto want of feeling; here prominence is given to the consequence, the condition which has arisen and becomes aggravated (ἀπηλγηκότες),63 there to the ground, the active power (“lusts”).

To wantonness, τῇ άσελγείᾳ.—The term, apparently from θέλγω, schwelgen [allied to the English swell, and meaning to over-eat, carouse, debauch], occurs quite frequently (Mark 7:22; Romans 13:13; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; 1Pe 4:3; 2 Peter 2:2; 2Pe 2:7; 2 Peter 2:18; Judges 4:0), almost always in connection with sensual sins, denoting, however, not special sin, but reckless, unbridled, extravagant and excessive character in general. Comp. Tittmann, I, p. 150 ff., on ἀσέλγεια and ἀκαθαρσία, [Trench, § 16., and Exeg. Notes on Galatians 5:19, in this volume.—R.] It is not to be limited to sensual lasciviousness (Meyer).

To work all uncleanness, εἰς ἐργασίαν .—[The preposition introduces the conscious aim of this self-abandonment.—R.] Ἐργασία marks the managing, the assiduous, connected labor [the working at it as though it were a trade], and ἀκαθαρσία, extended by πάσης,64 sets forth what has come to pass in the service of ἀσέλγεια. We should apply it to all kinds of uncleanness, especially libidinous, but also to the lust of the eye and pride, natural and unnatural, refined and coarse, solitary and social, in thought, word and deed (Romans 1:24-32). Still less is this to be limited to libidinous filthiness (Meyer), or to trade in harlotry, quæstus ex impudicitia (Grotius, Bengel and others). The next phrase will not justify this.

In greediness, ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ.—This word means to want to have more, greediness, avarice, graspingness, limited usually to earthly possession, to money (Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; Mark 7:22; Luke 12:15); but the limitation arises from the context, not from the word itself. The context here does not admit of any such limitation: ἐν, in, marks the ground on which the “uncleanness” moves, and this is not avarice, but greed in general unto insatiableness. Hence the Greek Fathers thus explain it (Chrysostom: ἀμέτρως, Theodoret: ἀμετρία, Œcumenius: κωθ̓ ὑμερβολήν καὶ . Ἐν is not=σύν (Luther: together with avarice); there is not a new special vice, avarice, added to another special one, unchastity (Meyer, Schenkel); neither the context nor the word itself favors the explanation: gluttony (Harless).65

Reminder respecting Christ and Christian instruction; Ephesians 4:20-21.

Ephesians 4:20. But ye, ὑμεῖς δἐ, in opposition to “the rest of the Gentiles” [just described].—Did not so learn Christ.—Οὑχ οὕτως is a very emphatic litotes=entirely otherwise, not at all in such a way that you can live afterwards as you did before. Ἐμάθετε [the historical aorist] τὸν Χριστόν marks Christ as the object, the substance of the preaching of the Apostles and of Christ. Himself; His person we must attain to; He Himself must be accepted and appropriated in us (Ephesians 4:13; Ephesians 4:15; Colossians 2:6; 1 Corinthians 1:23; 2 Corinthians 1:19). Hence it is not=the doctrine of Christ, as was once almost generally thought. [This use of the verb with an accusative of the person is probably unique (Ellicott), and properly so, for in no other learning is a Person so directly and fully the object. Hence the explanation: learnt to know is inadmissible as without lexical authority and insufficient. Beza’s exegesis is totally unwarranted: “Ye are not so—ye have learned Christ.”—R.]

Ephesians 4:21. If indeed ye heard him [εἴγε αὐτὸν ἠκούσατε]—̓́Ειγε, as in Ephesians 3:2, marks in a fine turn of expression a definite, undoubted fact (“that he heard him”), particula non miruit, sed auget vim admonitionis (Bengel). It is not however—“so as” (Stier). Αὐτόν is in emphatic position; “heard” denotes the beginning of the discipleship; hence it is not merely, heard of Him (Luther), but heard Him Himself in spirit, even though through the instrumentality of others. He is the subject of the very first instruction. Hence Paul adds:

And were taught in him, καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐδιά χθητε.—The two designations66 correspond to those in Matthew 28:19-20 : “disciple all nations”—“teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” “In,” ἐν, is neither=περί, concerning (Piscator), nor ὑπό (Flatt), nor διά, by (Beza) [E. V.], nor illius nomine, quod ad illum attinet (Bengel), but an instruction not merely having its result, a being or living in Him, but in accordance with the fellowship with Him (Winer, p. 366); in ipso=ipsi insiti and docti are equivalent (Bucer); doceri is inseri.

As is the truth in Jesus [καθώς ἐστιν ].—“As” refers only to the instruction, to its quality; it corresponds to “not go” (Ephesians 4:20); what was there negatively and briefly indicated, is here positively expressed, and then given in detail.67 “Is truth” gives prominence to the agreement of the teaching with the reality: in the instruction they hear Him really, possess Him as He is. Ἐστιν, coming first, denotes the existence, the reality, and that, too, as a present, now valid and continuing reality.

Consequens (τοῦ audire. et τοῦ doceri est τὸ discere Bengel): they have therefore learned, as truth is in Him. “Truth” is here opposed to the heathen “vanity;” as the latter was a self-made foundling, the former is something bestowed, real, excluding the subtleties of human origin or change of any kind. [The notion of the Greek adjective αληθινός is thus included by Dr. Braune. The clause setting forth the manner of the instruction (the substance follows in Ephesians 4:22-24), may be thus explained: If ye were taught so that what you received was according to what is true (true and real) as embodied in a personal Saviour: The literal rendering: “as is truth in Jesus” gives most nearly the exact force.—R.] In the expression ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ, the article is significant, pointing to the known Person, the personal name being chosen instead of the official title, Christ. Bengel: Expressius ponit nomen Ἰησοῦ. Christi, ideam perfectissime et fulgidissime explevit Jesus; this preserves the received instruction from obliteration.—The clause is, therefore, not parenthetical (Beza, Rueckert and others), “truth” is neither agnitio Dei (Bengel), nor true doctrine of Christ (Piscator and others), nor true holiness, goodness (Erasmus, Harless [Hodge] and others). We should not connect “in Jesus” with what follows (Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, II, 2, p. 291).

The Christian walk; Ephesians 4:22-24, a. Negative side; Ephesians 4:22, b. Positive side; Ephesians 4:23-24.

Ephesians 4:22. That ye put off, ἀποθέσθαιὑμᾶς.—This infinitive depends grammatically on the entire thought, that they heard Him and were taught in Him, as the truth in Jesus is (Bleek), although Stier and Bengel are not incorrect in connecting it in sense with “I say and testify” (Ephesians 4:17); they recognise, however, “a certain reference to the nearest words” (Ephesians 4:21). The emphasis rests on the verb, coming first, which has its antithesis in “put on” (Ephesians 4:24). It is incorrect to accept a dependence on the last clause alone (Meyer) and a contrast between “Jesus” and “ye” (Jerome, Harless, and others), which would be indicated by an emphatic position for ὑμᾶς and the insertion of οὕτως.68 In the frequently occurring figures of putting on and off the clothes to represent the external appearance from which the internal state may be inferred, it is not necessary to find an allusion to a race before which, or a baptism (of a proselyte) at which the clothes should be taken off; the context gives no warrant for either. The Lord Himself (Luke 24:49) transferred into the New Testament the usage of the Old Testament in describing an instantaneous, sudden inspiration. Comp. Stier, Words of Jesus, 7 p. 323 f. Paul extended the figure (Ephesians 4:25; Ephesians 6:11; Ephesians 6:14; Romans 13:12-13; Col 3:8-10; 1 Corinthians 15:53-54; Galatians 3:27; 1 Thessalonians 5:8). The verb includes the sense of a decided casting away, not merely a gentle putting off, since this is required of the followers of Jesus, among whom a preserving of the old man and the heathen walk is intolerable.

As regards your former way of life [κατὰ τὴν προτέραν .—Κατά introduces that with respect to which the putting off takes place. The substantive (αναστροφή), like the verb, includes a course of conduct arising from a corresponding disposition, the manifestation of what is within, as Galatians 1:13; 1 Peter 2:11-12; 1 Peter 1:17-18 (Stier), and is more than περιπατεῖν, preparing the way for the mention of the internal disposition which should be put off. It is not enough to put off merely the former heathen (προτέραν) walk.69 Antitheton versus 23 totus (Bengel).

The old man [τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον].—“Man” denotes here the Ego (ἐγώ, Romans 7:9-10; Romans 7:17-21). “Old” designates that it is condemned to be put away, old over against Jesus the second Adam; hence “the old man” (Colossians 3:9; Romans 6:6) means the sinful Ego deranged by sin, the natural man in the corruption of his sin.70 This condition is then described:

Which waxeth corrupt according to the lusts of deceit [τὸν φθειρόμενον κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τῆς ].—The present participle denotes the present condition, which is not however a purely passive one: “which is corrupted,” but in accordance with Ephesians 4:19 : “which corrupts himself.” It is then neither imperfect: which corrupted himself (Bengel), nor to be taken as referring to the future judgment (Rueckert and others); yet it is not merely=morally destroying himself (Harless). The antithesis is creatum (Bengel) and the use of φθορά and φθείρεσθαι (Galatians 6:8; Romans 8:20-21) points to the whole man, body and soul. [Meyer and Hodge refer it to eternal destruction: “which tends to destruction,” but this does not do justice to the present participle, the peculiar force of which, as indicating a process not entirely passive, is brought out by “waxeth corrupt” (Ellicott). Hodge’s objection, that “old” already expresses the idea of corruption, has no force against this description of the progressive character, while his own view introduces an objective element into a delineation which is strictly subjective.—R.]

The accomplishment of the corruption is more closely defined by the phrase: “according to the lusts of deceit,” The corruption is accomplished in accordance with the lusts, the factors of the corruption; and these are affairs of sin, which are here personified in accordance with the power of deceiving and betraying inherent in it (Romans 7:11; 1 Corinthians 11:3; 2 Thessalonians 2:9). The genitive, which is that of the subject, is not to be resolved into an adjective (Grotius [E. V.] and thus weakened, nor applied merely to error technicus (Bengel). The antithesis is secundum Deum—in justitia et sanctitate veritatis (Bengel).

Ephesians 4:23. And become renewed [ἀνανεοῦσθαι δέ],—The contrast is marked by δέ, which introduces the positive side (Ephesians 4:23-24), The verb in the passive71 points to the fact that a work and operation of God is spoken of (Ephesians 2:10; Ephesians 4:24; κτισθέντα; see Titus 3:5, 2 Timothy 1:9). The present refers to an operation which is not concluded in a moment, but continues. The roots of the word (νέος [recent], new) points to a becoming rejuvenated, to the beginning, the coming into being, of what was not, or not yet, or no longer; καινός [novus] refers to the character of that which exists, as compared with its former condition; άνακαινουν is to put away the ruins of the present condition and to supply new powers, to transfer into a condition of newness, as distinguished from the previous one. Hence we never find νέα κτίσις, but καινή, since νεότης is already implied in κτισις. See Tittmann, Syn. I., p. 60 f. [Trench, Syn. (§ xviii; Colossians, p. 65,) Alford and Hodge in loco.—R.] Ἁνά indicates not merely a setting up, but according to the participles in Ephesians 4:18-19, a restitution of the original creation. The infinitive is in the same dependence as ἀποθέσθαι, although in these infinitives there is latent, a hortatory imperative, which comes out in Ephesians 4:25. Still this inheres in the thought, not in the form.

In the Spirit [or by the Spirit] of your mind [τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ νοὸς ύμῶν].—The renewal, the letting themselves be renewed, is accomplished in this. The dative is one of reference, the genitive that of the subject. Harless says: ψυχή designates the immediateness of the personal life, καρδία the same as the internal life of a human person, νοῦς is the habitus corresponding to this existence and life, πνεῦμα the motive power which calls forth and conditions this habitus. To this the organism of the human spirit corresponds. Bengel: spiritu mentis, 1 Corinthians 14:14. Spiritus est intimum mentis. That inexplicabile coming from God (Oetinger) must be renewed, is seized by the corruption of sin, needs redemption from “the vanity of the mind.” We may not take πνεύματι as instrumental on account of the genitive and understand it of the Holy Spirit (Oekumen, and others), nor can both explanations be combined (Stier: through the Spirit yet living in you); in that case the middle, contrary to the usage which gives it an active sense, and contrary to the Biblical view, which never speaks of men renewing themselves, is taken as reflexive. Nor is the “spirit” of man to be regarded as opposed absolutely to the “flesh,” as if it could never be subject to the latter (Schenkel).

[The view of Braune, which takes τῷ πνεύματι as a dative of reference referring exclusively to the human spirit, is accepted by most commentators. Hodge takes πνεῦμα here as the “interior life—that of which the νοῦς, καρδία, ψυχή are the modes of manifestation,”—a psychological statement inferior to that of Harless, and probably resulting from the desire to avoid any trichotomic opinion.—Meyer has wavered in his views: adopting in the 1James , 3 d and 4th eds. the usual opinion, and in the second that of Fritzsche, Alford, Ellicott and others. This takes the dative as instrumental, and as referring to the human spirit acted upon by the Holy Spirit (see Romans, p. 235), or to the Holy Spirit in a gracious union with the human spirit (Ellicott, 3d ed.). To this view I incline, but not decidedly. The other interpretation is open to objections both of an exegetical and psychological nature. This sense of πνεῦμα is now clearly established, and indispensable in exegesis. In fact as Alford says: “the πνεῦμα a of man is only then used ‘sensu proprio’ as worthy of its place and governing functions, when it is one Spirit with the Lord.” The trouble is, that this πνεῦμα would hardly be spoken of as the instrument; the answer being that a process is described as going on, the agent being “the restored and Divinely informed leading principle of their νοῦς.”—The genitive is their possessive.—R.]

Ephesians 4:24. And that ye put on, καὶἑνδύσασθαι, is an internal act done by us, having an effect upon the walk and thus manifesting itself.—The new man, τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον, we have as present, given, outside of ourselves, in Christ; hence Romans 13:14 : “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Who after God hath been72 created [τὸν κατὰ θεὸν κτισθέντα].—This marks both the reality and the character of the new man. The designation evidently points to Genesis 1:26-27; which is even more prominent in the parallel passage, Colossians 3:10 (“after the image of Him that created”). Comp. 1 Peter 1:15. It should be noticed that this qualification compels us not to take “new man” as exactly=Christ; for He is not “created,” but rather “God, the image of Him who creates,” after whom (κατὰ) the new man is created. Hence we should refer it to the new human personality as respects Christ, which the Christian should become. Thus in the Epistle to the Colossians we find: τὸν νέον τὸν , the young, tender, newly born, which is renewed, developed in contrast with the previous one. The creation of the protoplast is however merely recalled; the expressions are borrowed from it, to designate the new creation taking place in Christ and to put it in relation to the first.73

In righteousness and holiness of the truth [ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ὁσιότητιτῆς ].—This characterizes the new man and sets forth the distinguishing marks of its character; the preposition adjoining to “created” that in which the created man appears, with which he is endowed, equipped. The Apostle proceeds from without to within. The two notions are united together and applied to God (Revelation 16:5), to men (1 Thessalonians 2:10; Titus 1:1; Luke 1:75), ὄσιος is predicated of God (Revelation 15:4), of Christ (Hebrews 7:26; Acts 2:27; Acts 13:35), of men (1 Timothy 2:8). ̔Οσιότης refers to the inmost nature, the disposition, the immaculate purity of love (Ephesians 1:4; Ephesians 5:27; Hebrews 7:26), δικαιοσύνη to the action and mode of dealing, which keeps all relations within the bounds of truth and right (Stier). Tittmann, Syn. I. 25 ff. Here we may not apply the frequent usage of Plato, who joins both notions, of which Philo says: ὀσιότης μὲν πρὸς θεόν, δικαιοσύνη δὲ πρὸς . Meyer regards δικαιοσύνη as moral rectitude in itself, ὁσιοτης specially in reference to God. Schenkel takes the former as respecting the world, the latter God; the latter is evidently opposed to “uncleanness” (Ephesians 4:19) and the former to “wantonness” and “greediness.” [So Stier and Ellicott]. The genitive sets forth the ground of both; “the truth” is personified, like “love” (Ephesians 4:22), the cause of the righteousness and holiness; out of the eternal Divine basis of truth springs the ethical personal life, which is conditioned by this as true: without this man would lapse into “vanity” (Ephesians 4:17). Luther incorrectly renders the genitive by an adjective: in real righteousness and holiness. [So Calvin, Beza, Holzhausen and the E. V., while Pelagius explains: “in the truth,” καὶ ἐν (the reading of D. F. and some fathers) There seems to be an antithesis between “truth” here and “deceit” in Ephesians 4:22 (Hodge, Eadie and others), which suggests that the notion “real” is prominent here.—R.] It is incorrect to take the preposition as instrumental (Morus), or as=εἰς. The new man is not created by this ethical quality but by God, nor is this the end, but the accompanying gift of this creation, as is manifest in Christ, to whom this belonged from the beginning, not becoming His in the course of His life.

[Olshausen’s remarks are generally accepted: Δικαιοσύνη, betokens a just relation among the powers of the soul within, and towards men and duties without. But ὁσιότης, like the Hebrew תָּמִים, betokens the integrity of the spiritual life, and the piety towards God of which that is the condition. Hence both expressions together complete the moral idea of perfection. As here the ethical side of the Divine image is brought out, Colossians 3:10 brings out the intellectual. The new birth alone leads to ἐπίγνωσις: all knowledge which proceeds not from renewal of heart, is but outward appearance; and of this kind was that among the false Colossian teachers. On the other hand, in Wis 2:23 the physical side of the Divine image is brought out.” Ellicott deems the last reference somewhat doubtful—R.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The nature of the heathen life is “vanity of the mind.” This designates the type of the natural character among Jews and Christians [“The ethical and religious element of their life was unsatisfactory and cheerless, alike in worship and in practice, the same as to present happiness as to future prospect, for they knew not man’s chief end” (Eadie).—R.]

2. The “vanity of the mind” is the result of a fall from a previous possession and enjoyment of original gifts, which is accomplished in a twofold series of acts reciprocally requiring and furthering each other; the intellectual and moral side of man’s nature being in turn solicited, and thus roused in selfishness, it is ever further removed from the truth in God and from the God of truth. Indeed, the result, the vanity of the mind, is itself capable of increase and must develop into extreme corruption, if aid does not come and a retrograde movement begin.3. The intellectual and moral side of man require and promote each other. The Reason cannot remain healthy and clear, or susceptible, as from the beginning, if the will is or becomes warped or weakened. The obscuration, weakening of the Reason necessarily enters with the enfeebling and confusion of the will. The Apostle comprises both under the term πνεῦμα74 (Ephesians 4:23); the former he designates νοῦς (Ephesians 4:17; Ephesians 4:23), δι νοια (Ephesians 4:18); the latter καρδια (Ephesians 4:18). The Apostle Paul places the initiative in the lusts (Ephesians 4:22 : “corrupted according to the lusts of deceit”), as Luther sharply indicates in his incorrect translation (which corrupts itself through lusts in error). The perverted will, executing what is wrong, makes the understanding a sophistical attorney, a crafty counsellor for its unrighteousness.

4. The factors of corruption are three: God, who hardens (Exodus 4:21; Exodus 7:3; Exodus 14:4; Exodus 14:8; John 12:40; Romans 9:18; Romans 1:24), man himself (1 Samuel 6:6; Psalms 95:8; Hebrews 3:8), the surrounding circumstances, through which and under which it takes place (Genesis 7:13; Genesis 8:15; Hebrews 3:13). According to the context man is here described as the cause of the corruption (Ephesians 4:19), because personal guilt and the evoking of self-activity is treated of, while in Romans 1:24 God is termed the Author in the same matter, since there the final and deepest ground is touched upon. Usually its consummation appears as a history, which is pragmatically sketched by the external circumstances, the Power above the man and the concealed doings within him not being brought into prominence. What comes to pass is never loosed from the dealings of God and His holy rule, nor from the consent and opposition of man or without the influences of historical circumstances and persons. Consider, however, that thy guilt is at once God’s punishment and thine own guilt, and forget not that the two appear together as a developing history.

5. The dangerous element of sin is the deceit of lust, which plays the role of pleasure, and is not really ἡδονή, but φθορά and φθεί. ει. This is God’s appointment, that what is unholy should be unwholesome, as wrong is ill; the lustful one, turning away from God, naturally ruins himself, which is possible only in self-deception.

6. Renewal is not accomplished by man in his own strength, but only in the acceptance and use of the vital strength promised and imparted to him with justification, hence in the appropriated power of God, in the strength of Divine life. Comp. notes 8, 10.

7. Renewal too, like corruption, has its history. As the latter proceeds from ἀνομία to ἀνομία, even to the end, θάνατος (Romans 6:19; Romans 6:21), so in the former advance is made from hearing Christ to being taught in Him, from the scholar to the friend, the intimate of Christ, and from the servant of God, who permits himself to be thus termed, to heirship and participation in His kingdom. [Comp. Exegetical Notes on Ephesians 4:23.—R.]

8. The beginning of the Christian walk is the putting off the previous vices (Ephesians 4:28-32), and from resistance, even if with feeble result, advance is made to victorious crucifixion of the flesh and its lusts (Galatians 5:16-17; Galatians 5:24).

9. In this too knowing and willing stand in reciprocal action conditioning each other: learning Christ and putting on Christ, Christian science and Christian life. Theological faculties and the Church of Christ belong together. No knowledge should sunder itself from life, nor the science of Theology from the Christian Church. Where faith in Christ is not active, the scientific culture of individuals and churches will fare badly enough.

10. The vital power of faith must in the moral life-process prove itself real (τῆς ) and permeate the whole mode of life (ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ) from within to without (ἐν ὁσιότητι) and thus manifest itself in the walk. Faith, in itself a moral act, must prove itself in an ethical life-process.

[11. “This passage is of special doctrinal importance, as teaching us the true nature of the image of God in which man was originally created. That image did not consist merely in man’s rational nature, nor in his immortality, nor in his dominion, but specially in that righteousness and holiness, that rectitude in all his principles, and that susceptibility of devout affections, which are inseparable from the possession of the truth, or true knowledge of God. This is the Scriptural view of the original state of man, or of original righteousness, as opposed, on the one hand, to the Pelagian theory, that man was created without moral character; and, on the other, to the Romish doctrine, that original righteousness was a supernatural endowment not belonging to man’s nature. Knowledge, and consequently righteousness and holiness, were immanent or con-created in the first man, in the same sense as were his sense of beauty and susceptibility of impression from the external world.” Hodge.—R.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Deal earnestly with the conduct of those committed to you, as did the Apostle, and take care that none of your children can say: Father and mother have not told me of it.—Much depends upon this, that every one in his circle and place bears witness against the walk of the natural character and in favor of Christian conduct.—Consider, no one is lost except through his own fault; but perhaps through yours too!—Sin binds the will, so that it is not free, and blinds or darkens the Reason, so that it is not healthy. The two faculties act and react upon each other; it is madness for a sinner to boast of a sound reason. It is a fearful truth however, thou wilt have life, enjoy the world and yet thou destroyest thyself, most certainly thy soul at least. Where God’s life and gift, peace and pure pleasure of the heart is wanting, there man wastes himself away, grasping in darkness for light, in emptiness for fulness, in apathy for life, aiming at these, and yet, at last, comfortless and unsatisfied.—Hold to Christian instruction and constantly try, whether thou art learning Christ: He is the measure of all truth.—Never forget: He is the Light; whoso is athirst, let him come to Him—and drink! You may know everything in the world, but not knowing Him, thy knowledge is nothing; you may know nothing of the world, knowing Him, trusting in Him, thy knowledge is rich.—The toil of self-denial and denial of the world cannot be spared you; but begin in the centre, in thyself, thy will and heart. What avails external alteration: that is by no means growing better. One must not be ever setting the tools and the plough in order; draw furrows through the field of thy heart and sow good seed therein, thus wilt thou reach the harvest and the harvest home. The sun makes the Spring and rejuvenates the earth, not single sunbeams, however, but the sun itself ever mounting higher, ever working longer. So Christ, who renews thee. Look how Peter with his sanguine temper became the rock-man, became constant, and John with his choleric disposition (Mark 3:17; Luke 9:54) was renewed into the Apostle of energetic love.

Starke:—The natural knowledge of God is not the right one, and is far from sufficing for salvation, 1 Corinthians 1:21.—The origin of all our sins is the “vanity of the mind” and the darkened understanding. We do not understand what the true good is, nor how we can attain to it. If we are to be helped, we must be helped in these respects, else a hardening results, and we become at last “without feeling.”—All, even the best, in man is corrupted by nature, accordingly nothing is to be expected from his own strength.—Mark, man, the stripes of thy conscience, they are a favor from God; despise them not, lest thy heart be gradually led by the deceit of sin into obduracy.—He who does not live devoutly has not rightly learned or heard Christ.—In Christ Jesus is the truth, not a doctrine merely, but a righteous life, and this truth consists in a putting off of the old man and a putting on of the new.—He who rightly knows Christ, must, to honor Him, live holily.—It is a sheer impossibility to be a Christian and to be willing to continue walking in heathenish lusts.—Through a long habit of sinning, the understanding at length becomes so darkened, the conscience so insensible, the will so stubborn, that the man no longer perceives the danger of his sinful condition, has no more conscience about sin, and no desire to desist from sin.—Where sin began, there repentance must begin.

Rieger:—The understanding would otherwise be a pre-eminent ornament of man, but it too has suffered much from the inroads of sin.—A proper character begins in us with the knowledge and confession of the might of sin, how it has clung to us from the time of our birth and extended itself as an old man over all our powers and members.

Heubner:—Where the will is corrupt, the understanding is darkened; blindness is the result of hardening.—Heathenism is life without God, Christianity life from God.—The Christian must ever begin anew and at the same time afresh. Daily repentance is needed, if we know the weakness, impurity, inconstancy of our hearts.—We will be ever seeing remnants of the old man appearing and returning here and there, and then a putting off of the old and putting on the new man is at once necessary again, and a purging process must be begun as in the case of sick people.—There is no more certain sign of an unspiritual mind, than the question: What then is so bad in me? Am I then so entirely unlike the image of God?

Passavant:—The history of the heathen of all ages and countries is a history of such vanity of mind, and of vanities; and all this vain character and action is renewed, re-decked and increased in the history of the character and doings of the heathen now-a-day, of the unbelieving and God-forsaken in Christendom. In the latter case the guilt is indeed greater, the injury deeper and the vanity worse.—This story of the origin of all heathen character and action, and of all idolatry in the world, repeats itself in every heart, which permits itself to be led through lustfulness and vanity of the mind away from the only true God into unbelief, disobedience and ingratitude. The will becomes perverted and evil, seducing in its turn the understanding and all the senses of man; and the mind, when it has once become false and vain, seduces in turn the impure heart, which has forsaken truth and faith; and here, in this impurity is the damnable ground and beginning of all ignorance and obduracy. That which is most exalted in us, which shall inherit immortality, our most beautiful, thinking, poetizing, loving, that which moves our whole heart and soul, what is inmost and most intellectual, our most profound life, our “spirit” itself must be renewed within us.

Stier:—The natural man in the vanity of his mind chooses what is void, empty and perishing, instead of what is Divinely real. Lust and deceit are akin.—Hearing, learning, becoming learned, are the three orderly degrees.—Man, corrupt by nature, destroys that which was created, God’s Spirit in our spirit breaks anew the first creation. Once for all in the Person of Christ is that created and prepared for us, which we are to put on.

Gerlach:—The lusts paint joy for us and then bring misery, place man in opposition to his Creator, his eternal destiny, himself, making out of the whole character a lie.

Ziel: The heathenish nature in our Christian congregations of to-day. From the text (Ephesians 4:17-32) we may perceive as in a mirror: 1) In what inward character of the heart (Ephesians 4:17-19), 2) in what outward form of the conduct it still manifests itself among us (Ephesians 4:25-32). Conclusion: To extirpate it by the roots, each one for himself, puts and must put it away from him.

On the Epistle for the 19th Sunday after Trinity, Ephesians 4:22-28.—Langbein: How it is chiefly shown in social life, that something really new is born within us? When there is found, 1) in our mouth, instead of a lie, the truth, 2) in our heart, instead of wrath, placability, 3) in our hands, instead of unjust property, the gift of mercy.

Tholuck: The virtue of Christian love of truth. 1. How does it manifest itself a) toward God, b) toward our neighbor, c) towards ourselves? 2. How do we attain to it? a) Through the consciousness of the continued presence of that eye, which sees in secret and to which a lie is an abomination, b) by taking the right standard, the Word of God.

F. A. Wolf: On the proper conduct of all in authority for the promotion of fidelity and probity in their subordinates. 1. Strict love of truth. 2. Forbearing earnestness in discipline and admonition. 3. Zeal for the public good in our own place and calling.

Florey:—A new man, a new life! 1) In words of truth, 2) mastery over the passions, 3) blamelessness in walk, 4) turning away from what is unjust, 5) activity in one’s calling, 6) brotherly love in the heart.—Some principles for Christian parents in the education of their children. 1. To convince them of the evil nature of their hearts. 2. To be helpful to the renewal of their mind in the Holy Ghost (Baptism, Home, School, Church). 3. To contend against their darling sins (lying, quick temper, slandering, purloining, tattling) and to help to the opposite virtues.

Brandt: The new man in Christ. 1. Truthfulness his ornament. 2. His heart breathes love. 3. He allows himself to be guided by benevolence and trustfulness. 4. Faithful and honorable, is his watchword.—A rich harvest blessing is an urgent demand to put off the old man and to put on the new. Without this 1) we do not fulfil the design of God in bestowing this blessing, 2) with all our thanksgiving we cannot please God; 3) we are in danger of turning the blessing into a curse.

Spitta: Believing and pious Christians should not walk as the heathen. 1. How the heathen walk. 2. Why Christians should not walk thus? 3. How they show proper earnestness in this.

Genzken (Preparatory discourse): The blessed barter (after Matthew 9:16 f.). The old ragged mantle of the old man is cast away (the web of lust and error); 2. The Lord Jesus is put on (the garment of righteousness and honor).

[Eadie: Ephesians 4:17. In the case of the heathen, all the efforts and operations of their spiritual nature ended in dreams and disappointment.

Ephesians 4:18. Deep shadow lay upon the Gentile mind, unrelieved save by some fitful gleams which genius occasionally threw across it, and which were succeeded only by profounder darkness. A child in the lowest form of a Sunday School, will answer questions with which the greatest minds of the old heathen world grappled in vain.—There could be no light in their mind, because there was no life in their hearts, for the life in the Logos is the light of men.

Ephesians 4:19. Self-abandonment to deeper sin is the Divine judicial penalty of sin.—Self was the prevailing power—the gathering in of all possible objects and enjoyments on one’s self was the absorbing occupation. This accompaniment of sensualism sprang from the same root with itself, and was but another form of its development.

Ephesians 4:20. Once dark, dead, dissolute and apathetic, they had learned Christ as the light and the life—as the purifier and perfecter of His pupils.

Ephesians 4:22. This deceit is not simply error. It has assumed many guises. It gives a refined name to grossness, calls sensualism gallantry, and it hails drunkenness as good cheer. It promises fame and renown to one class, wealth and power to another, and tempts a third onward by the prospect of brilliant discovery. But genuine satisfaction is never gained, for God is forgotten.

Ephesians 4:24. While this spiritual creation is God’s peculiar work—for He who creates can alone recreate—this truth in Jesus has a living influence upon the heart, producing, fostering, and sustaining such rectitude and piety.—R.]

[Schenkel:—The characteristic marks of heathenish disposition: 1. Darkening of the mind, where the knowledge of what is Divine is concerned; 2. Hardening of the heart, where the repression of their own evil lusts is concerned.—Lust and greed the two fundamental sins of the natural man: 1. Their internal connection; 2. Their external difference.—To learn Christ 1) the Christian’s first duty, 2) his highest wisdom.—The seal of true Christianity is the new birth; for 1) where this is wanting, all good works are but seeming, and 2) where it is present the life with good works must really he teeming.—The deceit of sin and the truth of redemption: 1. Sin corrupts man under the deceitful representations of evil lust; 2. Redemption heals man by restoring his original truth, in righteousness and holiness.—R.]

Footnotes:

Ephesians 4:17; Ephesians 4:17.—[The reading is doubtful: א3 D.2 3 E. K. L., most cursives, Syriac, Chrysostom (Rec., Tischendorf, Meyer, Eadie, Braune), sustain λοιπά; it is wanting in א.1 B. D.1 F. G., 5 cursives, Vulgate and other versions, and rejected by Lachmann, Alford, Ellicott. The external evidence against it is slightly preponderating, but internal grounds are in its favor. It was probably misunderstood, and the omission further confirmed by 1 Thessalonians 4:5.—R.]

[54]

Ephesians 4:18.—[א. A. B.: ἐσκοτωμένοι, which, as more rare, is preferred by most recent editors to ἐσκοτισμένοι (Rec., D. F. K. L.). The comma after “God,” is required by the view taken of the construction as a parallelism:

a Being darkened in their understanding,b Being alienated from the life of God,

a Because of the ignorance that is in them,

b Because of the hardness of their heart.

The first and third, second and fourth members correspond, the alternation being probably due to the reciprocal interaction which is also implied.—R.]

Ephesians 4:21; Ephesians 4:21.—[This rendering is literal, see Exeg. Notes.—The aorists in Ephesians 4:20-21 are best rendered by the English past tense.—In is substituted for by, as is so often necessary.—R.]

Ephesians 4:23; Ephesians 4:23.—[The two leading interpretations are suggested by the two readings given above. See Exeg. Notes.—Became renewed is adopted (from Ellicott) to indicate the force of the present, which here marks a continuing process.—R.]

Ephesians 4:24; Ephesians 4:24.—[א.1 gives: ὁσιότητι καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ.—The hendiadys of the E. V. here (and at the close of Ephesians 4:22 : “deceitful lusts”) must be guarded against.—Hath been created is preferable here to was created, for though the Greek aorist is historical, the latter rendering “tends to throw the κτίσις further back than is actually intended; the reference being to the new κτίσις in Christ” (Ellicott).—R.]

[58][The οὖν is resumptive rather than illative, but as Alford says: “The digression is all in the course of the argument. The fervid style of St. Paul will never divide sharply into separate logical portions—each runs into and overlaps the other.” Eadie defends the connection with what immediately precedes.—R.]

[59][If λοιπά be rejected, there is still an allusion in καί to the fact that they were once thus walking, i. e., were once Gentiles. The only point of difference is, that the fuller reading implies they are so still. “Though the Ephesians did not walk so now, their returning to such a course is made the logical hypothesis” (Alford).—R.]

[60][So Eadie and most; Hodge however takes νοῦς as the whole soul, just as on the other hand in Romans 7:23-25, he refers it to the renewed nature, in both cases sacrificing exactness to doctrinal considerations.—R.]

[61][This is a dative of reference, giving the sphere or element m which. On the difference between it and the accusative it may be said that the latter is more objective, denoting that the darkness extended over the mind, the former more subjective, denoting that it has its seat in the mind. The word itself is here=the understanding (Verstand).—R.]

[62][On the etymology and meaning of πώρωσις. See Fritzche, Romans 11:7. It undoubtedly means hardness, obduracy (not blindness), used by medical writers of the “callus” at the extremity of fractured bones.—R.]

[63][Some textual variations occur, but not sufficiently supported to raise any question. From ἀπηλπικότες (D. and others) the sense desperantes seems to have come. But it is incorrect; the semi-technical term πώρωσις suggests a continuation of the figure.—R.]

[64][The unusual position of πάσης leads Ellicott to render: “uncleanness of every kind.”—R.]

[65][Hodge renders: “together with covetousness,” “which is doubly objectionable. The wider sense of πλεονεξία is accepted by Eadie, Alford and Ellicott. The last named, however, properly objects to obliterating the underlying notion of covetousness and self-seeking which seems bound up in the word. Comp. Colossians 3:5, p. 64; and Trench, Syn. §24, who links it most closely with sins of lust.—R.]

[66][Alford renders: “If, that is, it was Him that ye heard and in Him that ye were taught” following Meyer in regarding both as included in “ye learned Christ,” the first clause referring to the first reception, the second to further instruction. So Ellicott. Perhaps Alford restricts the meaning too much when he explains “heard Him,” “if ye really heard at your conversion the voice of the Shepherd Himself calling you as His sheep.”—R.]

[67][This view properly excludes the interpretation “inasmuch,” which Dr. Hodge here, as elsewhere, attaches to καθώς.—R.]

[68][Meyer insists that ὑμᾶς forbids the dependence on ἐδιδάχθητε, but Ellicott suggests that it marks a contrast, not with “Jesus,” but with the “Gentiles” and their own previous condition as implied in the next phrase. The infinitive has, not in itself, but from its independence, an imperative force, as in “walk” (Ephesians 4:1): “that ye must put off.” As an aorist it probably refers to the speedy and single nature of the act. The dependence on the entire preceding thought is a satisfactory solution: The substance of what you heard, were taught, when yon heard Him and were taught in Him in the correct way “as is truth in Jesus,” was “to put off,” “that you must put off,” etc.—R.]

[69][Alford) thus indicates the train of thought: “for you were clothed with it (the old man) in your former conversation.” The phrase qualified the verb, not the substantive: “That as regards your former way of life you put off.”—R.]

[70][The reader is referred to Romans, p. 203; comp. pp. 235–244. The opinions there advocated are expressed in Ellicott’s notes on “the old man:” “personification of oar whole sinful condition before regeneration, opposed to the καινος or νέος ἄνθρωπος (Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10) and the κὰινὴ κτίσις (Galatians 6:15), or, if regarded in another point of view to the ἔσω ἄνθρωπος (Ephesians 3:16; Romans 7:22).”—R.]

[71][The middle form of the verb is active in meaning (Harless), so that we must insist on the passive here. Stier objects that “to be renewed” is not a proper subject of exhortation. But the Apostle is giving the substance of the teaching (Ephesians 4:21), and as Alford well remarks: “we have perpetually this seeming paradox of God’s work encouraged or checked by man’s co-operation or counter-action,” He renders: “undergo renewal.”—R.]

[72][“Not created in the case of each individual believer, but created once for all (initio rei Christianæ, Bengel) and then individually assumed” (Ellicott). Comp. Textual Note 5.—R.]

[73][The doctrine of the restoration to us of the Divine image in Christ, as here implied, is not to be overlooked. Mueller, Lehre von der Sünde, ii. p. 485 ff., denies any allusion to it here, but on insufficient grounds, as indeed he himself virtually allows. Not the bare fact of Genesis 1:27, but the great truth which that fact represents is alluded to. The image of God in Christ is a far more glorious thing than Adam ever had, or could have had: but still the κατ̓ εἰκονα θεοῦ κατᾶ θέόν, is true of both” (Alford). Comp. Colossians, p. 68.—R.]

[74][Whatever view may be taken of Ephesians 4:23, or whatever psychological distinctions may be allowable in the exegesis of the New Testament, there is nothing here or elsewhere to indicate that man has a “spirit” unsubdued by the “flesh,” unaffected by the fall. The natural state is the more awful, because the “spirit,” the higher part, the point of connection with Divine influences, is under the dominion of sin.—R.]

Ephesians 4:26; Ephesians 4:26.—[Ye is omitted for the sake of euphony, and is inserted in Ephesians 4:25 for the same reason.—On the other changes Bee Exeg. Notes.—R.]