(4) Time and Place of Composition. But when and upon what occasion did the Apostle write the Epistle? A clue to the answer is fur nished by its relations to the Epistle to the Colos sians. These two letters were carried to their re spective destinations by the same messenger, Tychicus ( Eph. vi :21, 22; Col. iv :7, 8). In fact. the words in which the Apostle announces the fact and manner of sending Tychicus with the letters arc nearly identical. I f we add to this considera tion the fact that the style of language and the cycle of thought in the two writings present strik ingly close resemblances we shall be forced to the conclusion that Ephesians, like Colossians, was written from Rome about the end of the year 62 or the beginning of 63.
(5) Design of the Epistle. The design of the Epistle has also called forth a variety of views. The Tubingen School of critics ascribed to the au thor the desire to lift the church to a sense of her own unity by presenting her to herself as the Body of Jesus Christ and by holding before her at the same time a higher conception of the person of Jesus Christ than had been held hitherto. Such a presentation of unity would repress and cause to vanish all remnants of the conflict between Juda ists and Paulinists. Others with Weiss and Gore hold that the Unity of the Church was more directly and primarily the theme of the Apostle. The occasion and need for emphasizing this idea was furnished by the existence of churches in Asia inor which were planted by Paul alongside of others planted by others. These did not always harmonize with each other. Still others with Holtz mann and Reuss find the theme of the Epistle in the idea of a Divine plan dominating the development of the moral plan of the universe. ln this plan the apparent difference between Judaism and paganism finds its solution and disappears. Saba tier (Apostle Paul) takes the ground that the Epistle had a speculative aim. Hitherto the Apos tle had preached the Gospel as a means of salva tion: in this letter he raises it to the plane of a key to a cosmic philosophy. Ile shows that re demption "is the eternal thought of God embrac ing not only all the ages, but also the entire uni verse." The key to the design of the letter is to be found rather with Code! in iv:1, "I therefore beseech you to walk worthily of the calling where with ye were called." The aim is practical. The appeal to the sense of the greatness of the salva tion enjoyed by believers, of the exaltation of Christ their redeemer, of the dignity and unity of the church, is in order that a desire for pure and dignified living might be fostered thereby. The Christology. Soteriology, and Ecelesiology of the Epistle are seen in the light of this central thought and purpose of it to be not subjects of study for themselves, but means towards the ethically prac tical end of raising the readers to a higher life in holiness.
(6) Relations of Ephesians and Colossians. The similarities between the epistles to the Colos sians and Ephesians have already been mentioned. are striking and call for au explanation. they cover not merely the circle of thought in the two writings, but extend into verbal coincidences. The first theory set forth to account for them was that of DeWette. Assuming the genuineness I If Colossians, this scholar asserted that the writer of Ephesians had borrowed from this letter of Paul's. 1Ioltzmann on the contrary thinks that the priority is on the side of Ephesians. He does not, however, concede the authenticity of either epistle in its present form, but alleges that, Paul having written a short letter to the Colossians, this was used by the author of Ephesians as the basis of his writing. The same writer, however,
later added to and expanded the original Colas Sian Epistle. This view, though not accepted iu its entirety, is thought by many to indicate the line along which a solution of the problem is to be sought. (flausrath, Mangold, Ptleiderer). It is difficult, however, to believe that a writer so well acquainted with the thought of Paul should have limited himself to but a single one of the Apostle's writings, and that a very brief one.
As has already been shown, no theory that pro ceeds upon the assumption of the non-authenticity of this Epistle can be considered correct. Nor is Colossians to he considered non-Pauline (see CoLosstAxs). But if both are Paul's writings the most natural explanation of their resemblances is to be found in the fact that he wrote both about the same time. But if so, he must have written Colossians first. The reasons for this order are the following : First, it would be natural that a specific need such as there was in Coloss:e for a message should receive attention first before the Apostle could think of a more general communica tion such as he gives in Ephesians. Secondly, it is easier to account for the occurrence of the larger and freer working over of the thought in Ephesians if we assume that the Colossians pre cedes than for the more condensed form in Colos sians upon the basis of the precedence of Ephe sians. Progress is generally from the briefer to the more lengthy form. Thirdly, it is more natural that Paul should have used in dealing with the broader and more general theme before him in writing Ephesians the material already in his mind in treating of the narrower and more specific theme of Colossians than the reverse. That the theme of Ephesians was more general may be easily seen from the diversity of view among scholars on this point. The use of the phrase "you also" in Ephesians vi :21 has been alleged as a proof that the Colnssian was writ ten, but the phrase simply implies that the apostle looks upon the Ephesians in connection with all other Christians, not simply the Colossians. Col. iv :16, where the apostle suggests that the epistle from Laodicea (our Ephesians) should he read at Colossas is said to support the supposition that the Ephesian Epistle was in existence when Coins sians was written. But the reasoning is not con elusive. The truth is, as above stated, the two letters were composed so nearly at the same time that either of them might be referred to in the other as already in existence.
(7) Helps to the Study of Epheslans. The large works of Meyer. Alford. Olshausen, and Lange contain good commentaries nil the Epistle to the Ephesians. Of separate treatises for the English reader, Abbott's ( in the Intern:16111.d Critical Series) is the most scientific and thorough in method and scope. Barry's ( in Ellicott's New Testament Cons. for English Readers). Beet's, Eadie's, L. J. Davies', Sadler's, and Mc Pherson's are also all good from the point of view of exegetical and linguistic study. Findlay's ( in the Expositor's Bible), Blaikie's (in time Pulpit Corn Gore's and Moule's (Ephesion Studies) arc poore 1y expository. Nloule has also written the volume on Ephesians in the Cambridge Bible. Hodge's and Dale's works are doctrinal expositions. For the reader of German, I larless and von Soden (in the Hand Korrlxurntar of Holtzmann and Lipsius) may be recommended as good. A. C. Z.