CHAPTER 1
I got to give my copy of the Bible some credit here – the
introductory notes to this book notes that modern Biblical scholarship doubts
that this epistle was actually written by Paul. The writing style and words are different. I don’t have the numbers with me, but a lot
of words used in this book aren’t found in other Paul letters. Also, getting into it, the writing style if
very different in two different ways.
First, this is a rather dispassionate writing style, which is unlike the
heated emotions in Paul’s other letters. (Hey – where are the rhetorical
questions that Paul loves to ask?)
Second, boy are the sentences a lot longer. They aren’t always longer,
but they tend to be – that’s for sure.
Upshot: it reads like someone writing like he’s Paul. My Bible acknowledges that, but then
suggests it was written by a secretary of his after he died to encapsulate
Paul’s ideas. Sure, maybe – but Paul
Ehrman would call this a forgery.
Saying it’s a secretary is making the best of a bad situation, but there
we really have no idea who wrote it if it wasn’t Paul.
Clearly, the author wanted to think that was Paul. He begins by saying he’s Paul and keeps
writing from the point of view of Paul throughout. That would give this letter more credibility.
Much of the theology is the same. The first chapter notes we’re saved through Christ, and we get it
through the Holy Spirit.
Oh, there is one sentence in this chapter that goes on for
four verses: 18 through 21. Doing a
rough, quick count – it’s about 100 words long.
Oh, one other quick thing: in our oldest copies of this
Bible book, it doesn’t say “Ephesus” at all.
That word was later added in. It
was originally written sounding like it was a general letter to believers, with
no specific people lined up.
CHAPTER 2
This gives us some standard talk. It’s a more philosophical, less passionate version of things
other letters already said. God is rich
in mercy and great in love, he brought us life with Christ. We are his handiwork. OK, all good to know.
Oh, and Christ abolishes the law of the Old Testament with
all of its legal claims. Well, whoever
wrote this – he at least knows the basics of Paul’s theology.
CHAPTER 3
Paul, er, “Paul” begins this chapter by calling himself “a
prisoner of Christ.” That just sounds weird.
Again, these letters were written in a very different era.
Anyhow, whoever wrote this knows Paul’s story and
writings. He again emphasizes the
primacy of faith. He says that he/Paul
learned of Christ by divine revelation.
The writer tells us that Christ’s love surpasses knowledge. That serves as an interesting contrast to
the Old Testament focus on wisdom as central to God. The New Testament has a
more emotional sense of spirituality – it’s what you feel, not what you know.
Oh, and the chapter ends with the word “Amen.” I could be wrong, but I don’t think I’ve
seen that word yet in the Bible. I
probably have, but I can’t think of when it would be. (checks online). Yeah,
it’s come up earlier – Jeremiah 28:6, for instance. But this time it ends a chapter, which gives a sense of closure.
CHAPTER 4
“Paul” again calls himself a prisoner of God. It still sounds strange. He calls for people to be humble, gentle,
and patient. Those sounds like nice
values. So far, there is really nothing
here that goes against the theology of the actual Paul.
Oh, and we get some good advice as well: “do not let the sun
go down on your anger.” That’s a nice
line to remember.
CHAPTER 5
Well, it finally happened – we finally get some words of
wisdom that doesn’t exactly sound like Paul.
Maybe I’ve giving the historical Paul too much credit, but he’s never
sounded like the sort of person who would write this: “Wives should be subordinate
to their husbands as to the Lord. For
the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church, him
himself the savior of the body. As the
church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their
husbands in everything.”
Especially that last bit – “in everything” – doesn’t sound
like Paul. He’s the guy who wrote how
in the new community there would be neither male nor female. He’s the man who thanks a female minister in
his letter to the Romans. Paul has
always come off rather progressive on gender relations. He even said it was OK to divorce your spouse
if they are of another faith, but it’s not required. The one moment of misogyny we’ve seen from Paul before is
something a scribe later added into a Paul letter (the admonishment for women
to be quiet in church).
Technically, this could reflect Paul’s opinions. He’s never said the opposite. But I can’t say for sure. To be fair, our Paul imitator of a writer
then follows it up by repeatedly telling husbands to love their wives, but
overall this portion of Ephesians doesn’t sound good to modern ears.
Also, we’re given some general advice in this chapter: avoid
immorality, impurity, greed – and obscenity.
Aw man, no obscenity? This
writer is no fun. In fact, we’re also
told to avoid, “suggestive talk.” OK,
that sounds like something Paul – the lifelong proud celibate – might say. I can’t imagine celibates are known as good
flirts.
CHAPTER 6
Last chapter ended with “Paul” giving marital advice. This last chapter has similar advice for
various other people. He tells children
to obey their parents. He tells slaves
to obey their masters. In both cases,
the person in power should be nice to their underling. There is a theme here. The author isn’t looking to upend the status
quo in day-to-day social relations. His
concern is for the next world. Not this one.
This ends with a weird little note, saying how he’s giving
news to some guy named Tychicus, and he’s sending him to the people for
whatever purpose. Well, this does make
it sound like the normal letter ending by Paul. Thus, assuming it’s a forgery (or something by his secretary if
you’d rather), the writer is really committing to the role. He really wants people to think he really is
this guy. That’s a neat trick, but it
makes me think this guy is scamming us.
I just don’t think Paul wrote it.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Yawn. There wasn’t
that much new for me in this book. The
only parts I found interesting were the parts that struck me as non-Paul or
signs that it’s a forgery. Those aren’t
the best distinctive features for an epistle to have.
No comments:
Post a Comment