Authorship. Although scholars often dispute the authorship of Ephesians, most of the so-called non-Pauline words, phrases and stylistic features appear at least occasionally in letters that everyone agrees were written by Paul. Many differences between Ephesians and earlier Pauline letters are insignificant. For example, some note that “the genuine Paul” speaks of *Christ as the head (1 Cor 11:3) and the *church as his body (Rom 12:4; 1 Cor 12:12) only separately. But ancient philosophers sometimes used the body metaphor with the head and sometimes without it, and requiring Paul always to express himself the same way in his few extant letters, although other writers did not, is hardly fair to Paul.
Unlike many of his earlier letters, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians seem to have been written after Paul had experience in presenting Christianity in an ancient academic context, where he would have used some basic philosophic language to communicate to his hearers (Acts 19:9). That Paul could adapt his language to his audience, including those to whom the occasional sort of *Stoic language in Ephesians appealed, is evident elsewhere in his writings (e.g., Rom 1; 1 Cor 8); such language is more common in Ephesians and Philippians, with some more Middle Platonic language in Colossians. Although the dispute over the authorship of Ephesians will continue in scholarly circles, this commentary works from the position that Paul wrote it.
Genre. Paul’s exhortations in the letter cover several main themes, all of which the recipients’ situation seems to have elicited (although he uses standard forms to describe them). This point would argue against the idea that Ephesians is merely a “letter essay” communicating general truths.
The abundant parallelism and repetition in the letter have been compared with Hebrew poetry, but they were also used in epideictic *rhetoric (i.e., in orations of praise concerning gods or humans). Rhetoric could expand statements, sometimes to underline their force; cf., e.g., “power” and “might” in Ephesians 1:19 (also Col 1:11; 2 Pet 2:11; but also, e.g., 1 Chron 29:12). Some compare this more flowery rhetorical style of repetition in Ephesians to what ancient writers called the Asian rhetorical style, which would be appropriate in and around Ephesus. Worship language is more common in the first three chapters of the letter, which elaborate the sort of introductory prayer and thanksgiving that often appeared in ancient letters. To the extent that we can speak of rhetoric in letters (which were usually nonrhetorical, but also usually did not include argumentation as Paul’s letters do), the rhetoric here is mixed: the exhortation parts of his letter are “deliberative,” intended to persuade the readers to a particular course of action; other parts of his letter are “epideictic,” such as where he praises God and praises the church that is to reflect God’s glory to creation.
It is possible that Paul, drafting other letters at the same time (e.g., Colossians), used a *scribe for some letters to help him adapt his basic message for different situations in different churches.
Situation. Paul writes this letter from Roman custody, probably in Rome. As readers in the Ephesian region of Asia Minor would know, he had been arrested on the charge of having brought a *Gentile into the temple (Acts 21:28-29; 28:16). Ethnic and cultural division between Jew and Gentile was a major issue in the Ephesian church (cf. Acts 19:17), and Paul was one of the best-qualified writers of antiquity to address both sides intelligently.
From his detention under Roman authorities (probably in Rome), Paul is also aware of the possibility of imminent persecution and the need for the church to be a good witness in society (cf. especially comment on Eph 5:21–6:9). He is also aware of the struggle of some of the believers with their own background in the occult practices of Asia Minor—*magic (Acts 19:19), astrology and attempts to escape the astrological power of Fate (cf. comment on Eph 1:8-11, 19-23; 3:9-11).
Commentaries. The most thorough and useful are Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002); Markus Barth, Ephesians, AB 34, 34A, 2 vols. (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974); and A. T. Lincoln, Ephesians, WBC 42 (Dallas: Word, 1990). Less technical but useful commentaries include Pheme Perkins, Ephesians, ANTC (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997); Charles H. Talbert, Ephesians and Colossians, Paideia (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007); G. B. Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, New Clarendon Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976); George Johnston, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon, Century Bible (Greenwood, SC: Attic, 1967). Some of my primary sources for my treatment of Ephesians 5:18–6:9 appear in Craig S. Keener, Paul, Women and Wives (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1992), pp. 133-224, 258-79.
As notes in most translations point out, not all manuscripts include “in Ephesus” (v. 1). Many scholars have argued that Ephesians was originally sent to a number of *churches, of which Ephesus was only the most prominent. (Thus it would be a “circular letter,” like imperial edicts.) But because Ephesus (the province’s most prominent city) was one of the cities addressed, and because all these churches would presumably be in the area around Ephesus, the history of the Ephesian church will help us understand the background to this letter (see Acts 19:1-41).
“*Grace” and “peace” were variations of standard greetings and blessings from deity; what is significant here is that they are “from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” See further the introduction to Paul’s letters and comment on Romans 1:1-7.
The opening, or exordium, of Paul’s letter includes a benediction (“Praise be to God”—NIV, or “God be praised”) and a prayer; ancient letters commonly included either prayers or thanksgivings, although Paul’s elaboration of them here is unusual. Many Jewish prayers would begin with “Praise be to God who [helps his people in some way].” In Greek, 1:3-14 is one long praise to God; this one recounts, as Jewish prayers often did, God’s redemptive plans and acts on behalf of his beloved people.
In these verses as many as eleven different terms used for Israel in the *Old Testament are applied to believers in Jesus. Because the church in Ephesus comprised both Jews and *Gentiles (Acts 19:17), and Jews and Gentiles had different cultural practices, the church may have had cultural and ethnic tension. Paul reminds believers that whatever their ethnic or cultural background, they are all one people in *Christ and must work together for God’s purposes (cf. 2:11-22).
1:3. Today we distinguish between “the heavens” in a scientific sense (i.e., the outer atmosphere and the rest of the universe except the earth) and the spiritual place God lives. But in Paul’s day he did not need to make this distinction to communicate to his readers; they divided “the heavenly realms” differently from the way we do. Almost everyone in the ancient world believed that the heavens had numerous levels (often three or seven), that different spiritual beings (various kinds of angels, *demons, stars, etc.) lived in different levels and that God or the purest spiritual beings lived in the highest heaven. In much Jewish teaching, the spirits of the righteous would live with God there after death. “Heavenly realms” (NIV) can thus mean both “where God is” (as here) and “where the angelic powers live” (as often in Ephesians).
1:4-5. Salvation was God’s initiative, because of his love (Deut 7:7-9). The Old Testament declares that God “predestined” or (literally) “chose” Israel (e.g., Deut 14:2) in Abraham to be his covenant people and adopted them as his children, but that his people often fell short of the covenant. Paul explains that in a practical sense one becomes a member of God’s covenant by Christ and what God has done, not by one’s background.
1:6. One reason God chose Israel was for them to bring him glory (Is 60:21; 61:3; Jer 13:11); so central was revealing his glory that even his acts of judgment were meant to turn people to him (Ex 7:5; Amos 4:6), the real source of life (Jer 2:13).
1:7-8. God had redeemed Israel (i.e., freed them from slavery) through the blood of the Passover lamb. The Old Testament also connected forgiveness with the blood of animal sacrifices. Paul blends these images here. Closely related terms such as “wisdom” and “insight” were often paired in biblical language (e.g., Ex 31:3; 35:31; Prov 1:2, 7; 2:2, 6).
1:9-12. Jewish people sometimes spoke of the secrets or mysteries of God’s plan, now revealed (e.g., Dan 2:27-30; *Dead Sea Scrolls 1QS 4.6; 11.19). It was a common Jewish belief that history was moving through many stages to its climax, when everything would be put under God’s rule. Some philosophers argued that the whole universe was permeated by God and would be absorbed back into him. Like Jewish writers who adapted the language of such philosophers, Paul believes that history moves toward a climax of subordination to God, not absorption into him. The Old Testament and Judaism recognized that God had a sovereign plan in history to bring it to this climax. On “inheritance” (KJV, NASB, NRSV), see comment on 1:13-14. On God’s ultimate purpose here, see comment on 3:8-11.
1:13-14. A wax seal would have a mark of ownership or identification stamped in it, identifying who was attesting what was inside the container that had been sealed. Because Scripture suggested that the *Spirit would be made especially available in the time of the end (cf., e.g., Joel 2:28), Paul here speaks of the Spirit as a “deposit” (NIV)—a term used in ancient business documents to mean a “down payment.” Those who had tasted the Spirit had begun to taste the life of the future world that God had promised his people.
After God “redeemed” (see comment on 1:7-8) Israel from slavery in Egypt, he led them to their “inheritance” or “possession” in the Promised Land. Later Jewish literature viewed the world to come as Israel’s ultimate “inheritance,” and early Christian writers used this language the same way (Mt 5:5; 25:34; Rom 8:17; 1 Cor 6:9; Jas 2:5). For Paul, Christians are God’s people, redeemed but waiting for the completion of their redemption; as with Israel of old, God’s presence among them is the assurance that he will take them into the land he has promised (cf. Hag 2:5). Writers sometimes repeated a refrain, as here (for God’s praise in 1:6, 12, 14); the repetition of “in whom” (1:7, 11, 13; cf. 2:21-22; 3:12) also reinforces the point (similar to *rhetorical anaphora, repeating an opening phrase).
Ancient letters often included prayers or mention of prayers for the recipients, though these were typically brief.
1:15-16. Like pious Jews, pious Christians apparently had a time set aside for prayer each day. Many pious Jews prayed several times a day, and if Paul continued such a custom we can understand how he could pray for all his churches.
1:17-18. Jewish people commonly prayed for enlightened eyes to understand God’s Word; the *Old Testament also spoke of opening one’s eyes to God’s Word (Ps 119:18) or to other spiritual realities (2 Kings 6:17). Some Jewish sources characterized the Spirit of God as the “Spirit of wisdom” (cf. 1QS 4.3 in the Dead Sea Scrolls; *4 Ezra 5:22; the Old Testament especially emphasizes this: e.g., Ex 28:3; 31:3; 35:31; Is 11:2; cf. Deut 34:9). For blessings about enlightening, see, for example, Numbers 6:25; Psalm 19:8; for enlightening with wisdom, see, e.g., 1QS 2.3 in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
*Rhetorically skilled writers often introduced major themes in their introduction, and Paul is no exception. He is about to explain the points that he has been praying for them to understand. On “inheritance,” see comment on 1:13-14.
1:19-20. A daily Jewish prayer viewed God’s ability to raise the dead in the future as the ultimate example of his power. Paul agrees, but for Paul the decisive event has already begun: the first installment of the future *resurrection has taken place. The position to a ruler’s right was a position of great honor and authority; to be seated at God’s right hand was to be enthroned as ruler of the cosmos, even if not all his enemies had yet been destroyed (Ps 110:1). The piling up of closely related words (such as power, strength and might; cf., e.g., 1 Chron 29:12; Is 40:26; Jer 16:21; *1 Enoch 1:4; 60:16) fit Jewish praise and also the sort of flowery rhetoric valued for praise in Asia Minor; God’s power was experienced through the Spirit (Mic 3:8; Zech 4:6; cf. Eph 1:17). On “heavenly places,” see comment on 1:3.
1:21-23. The subordination of these powers beneath *Christ in this age and the coming one express the confident exaltation above enemies in Ps 110:1 (linked with Ps 8:6; cf. 1 Cor 15:27). Exorcists and magicians tried to manipulate powerful spirits by invoking their names (see comment on Acts 19:13); the supremacy of Jesus’ name above all other names means that he is higher than all the spirit-powers being invoked and could not be exploited.
By Paul’s day Jewish people commonly recognized that demonic and/or angelic powers were at work behind the political structures of the world; these powers were thus thought to direct the earthly rulers and peoples (v. 21; see Deut 32:8 LXX; *Jubilees 15:31-32; 35:17; Dead Sea Scrolls 1QM 15.13-14; 1 Enoch 61:10; esp. Dan 10:13, 20; for angelic ranks, 1 Enoch 69:3).
A growing view among some in Paul’s day was that the world was run by Fate, which was usually expressed by the stars (which were viewed as heavenly beings). Some *mystery cults, such as the cult of Isis, later gained popularity by claiming power to free initiates from Fate. Jewish people often believed that these powers ruled all the nations except Israel (Jubilees 15:32; Sifre Deuteronomy 315.2.1; cf. Dan 10:21; 12:1); later, by the third century, some teachers explained that Israel had been lifted above those heavenly powers in Abraham their ancestor (Genesis Rabbah 44:12; 48:6). Paul says that those united with Christ had also been raised above those powers. His words would be a great encouragement to Christians who had been converted from an occult background (cf. Acts 19:18-20). Some may have expected *eschatological exaltation to the heavens (*Testament of Moses 10:8-10; cf. Dan 12:3).
Jewish teachers came to speak of these heavenly powers that guided earthly rulers as “angels of the nations.” Such beings were the ultimate expression of the spiritual division among different peoples, but Paul says that this distinction has been transcended in Christ—again making a point relevant to a congregation experiencing ethnic or cultural tensions (see introduction to 1:3-14). Thus Christ’s body is “that which is filled by him who fills all”—“all” indicating especially representatives of all peoples in the church (4:6-10; cf. 3:19; 5:18). Rhetoric liked repetition for emphasis, thus the repetition of both filling and “all” here (for two “all” words together for emphasis, cf., e.g., *Philo, Embassy to Gaius 118); rhetoric also liked alliteration, and in Greek these repeated words begin with p. Such language was common in expressing praise for gods or rulers.
Paul continues to explain God’s gracious exaltation of the Christian with Christ.
2:1-2. Most Jewish people believed that *Satan or the chief of the heavenly angels of the nations ran the whole world except for Israel (cf., e.g., 1QS 3.20-21; 1QM 17.5-6 in the *Dead Sea Scrolls). “Ruler with authority over the realm of the air” was a natural title for his dominion; it was commonly believed that evil spirits circulated especially in the lowest realm of the heavens (i.e., the atmospheric realm), far below the realm of God’s highest angels and his throne. “Air” was the usual term for the atmospheric heaven. Some spoke of nonphysical death: for example, *Pythagoreans considered apostates “dead,” *Philo regarded those who neglected their soul as “dead,” later *rabbis called the wicked “dead,” and so forth.
2:3. Many Jewish people sought to explain all sin as the direct result of demonic activity (cf., e.g., Jubilees 10:8; 12:20; especially the “spirit of error” in the Dead Sea Scrolls, e.g., 1QS 3.19, 24-25). Paul does not see sin as always directly inspired by *demons but thinks that the world is pervaded with the devil’s less direct influence (including in ethnic division—1:21-23); one is not delivered from this influence by one’s Israelite ancestry but (vv. 4-6) through faith in Jesus. “Children of wrath” is a Semitic construction indicating people destined for judgment.
2:4-7. This picture of God’s delighting to bestow his love on his people forever develops *Old Testament pictures of his special love for his people (e.g., Deut 7:6-9).
Scholars have compared the image of the exaltation of the believers in 2:6 with the fairly common Jewish image of the righteous enthroned in the world to come; Christians have begun to experience the life of the coming age in advance (see comment on 1:14). The context would drive an additional point home especially forcefully to readers once enslaved by fear of Fate, the stars, *magic or spirits: to be “seated with Christ” means in 2:6 what it meant in 1:20-21—to be enthroned over the evil powers. Christians need not fear spirits, Fate or anything else; their lives are ruled by God.
2:8-10. Good works flow from what God does in us, rather than God’s work in us flowing from our works. God redeemed Israel before he gave them commandments (Ex 20:1), and did not choose them because of their righteousness (Deut 9:5-6); it was always his purpose for good works to flow from his *grace, even if Israel (like many people today) did not always grasp that point (Deut 5:29; 30:6, 11-14). Most Jewish people in Paul’s day apparently agreed in principle that they were saved by God’s grace in the covenant, but they did not extend this idea to non-Jews, who could not inherit the covenant by virtue of birthright.
2:11-13. Most ancient Jewish people believed that non-Jews could never participate in the fullness of the covenant without circumcision, although they could be saved by keeping some basic commandments. To be circumcised was to be grafted into the community of Israel, to become part of God’s covenant people. That done “by hands” evokes a negative phrase in the Greek version of the *Old Testament (usually associated with idolatry; e.g., Lev 26:1).
2:14-16. Paul writes this letter from prison because he has been falsely charged with taking a non-Jew inside the temple in Jerusalem (Acts 21:28). Taking a non-Jew beyond the specified dividing point in the temple was such an important breach of Jewish *law that the Romans even permitted Jewish leaders to execute violators of this law(*Josephus, Jewish War 5.194; 6.124-26). Paul’s readers in Ephesus and Asia undoubtedly know why Paul is in prison (Acts 21:27, 29); thus for them, as well as for Paul, there can be no greater symbol of the barrier between Jew and non-Jew than “the dividing wall” of verse 14. But Paul says that this dividing wall is shattered in *Christ (cf. 2:20-22). Paul’s message would have been difficult for believers in many cities; a few years after this letter, the *Gentile residents of Caesarea (where Paul had recently stayed, Acts 23:23) slaughtered thousands of its Jewish residents (Josephus, Jewish War 2.457-58); Jews retaliated and attacked other cities (2.458-60); and Syrians then slaughtered thousands of Jews (2.461-68). For “He is our peace,” cf. perhaps the Hebrew of Micah 5:5.
2:17-18. Isaiah 57:19 could be understood as referring to the scattered seed of Israel as those “who were far away,” but not long before this passage God had promised that his house would be for foreigners too (Is 56:3-8). This text thus fittingly expresses Paul’s point concerning the unity of Jew and Gentile in the new temple (cf. also Acts 2:39).
2:19. In many cities, foreigners who settled could remain “resident aliens” for generations, lacking voting rights and other privileges that belonged to citizens. Paul can play on the different senses of “house” in Greek: both “household” (as here) and a building (the temple as God’s house; see 2:20-22).
2:20-22. In the Old Testament, the only division in the temple was between priests and laity, but by Paul’s day architects had added barriers for non-Jews and for women (contrast 1 Kings 8:41-43); Paul says these barriers are abolished in God’s true, spiritual temple. Some other Jewish writers spoke of God’s people as his temple, but only Paul and other early Christians recognized that this new temple included non-Jews. (Paul derived the image of Christ as the cornerstone or capstone from Ps 118:22, probably via Jesus’ teaching; see comment on Mk 11:10.)
The Bible had already taught that God would seek out non-Jews to join his people (Rom 16:26; e.g., Is 19:25); King David and others had welcomed non-Jews into the fellowship of God (e.g., 2 Sam 6:10-11; 8:18; 15:18-22; 18:2; 20:23; 24:18-24; 1 Chron 11:41, 46; 18:17). But to be full members of the covenant, male non-Jews had to be circumcised; by this period, men and women were also usually required to immerse themselves in water to become ritually pure. But the coming of *Christ had made it clear to his *apostles and prophets that by faith in Christ everyone could now approach God on the same terms.
Public speakers and writers frequently used a standard element of persuasion called pathos, an emotional appeal. By reminding his readers of what he, their apostle, had suffered for the ideal, multiethnic people that God was building, Paul appeals to them not to nullify his labors. The universal *church should be all that it is called to be, a united, multiethnic, interracial people in all its glory.
3:1. Being a Roman prisoner was normally a mark of shame but, like wounds (see comment on Gal 6:17), could arouse sympathy among loved ones. Paul’s refusal to compromise the mission to the *Gentiles had precipitated his captivity (Acts 22:21-22; cf. 21:28).
3:2. Instead of immediately finishing the sentence begun in 3:1, Paul digresses concerning his mission for the Gentiles in 3:2-13; *digressions were common in ancient writings. “Stewards” were household managers, often slaves or freedmen, with great responsibility and prestige in a wealthy home.
3:3-5. The term translated “mystery” was used in *mystery cults and elsewhere, but the main background for Paul’s use of the term is in Daniel 2 and in Jewish writings (especially the *Dead Sea Scrolls) that follow Daniel. In the Dead Sea Scrolls it means especially God’s plan for history, encoded in the Scriptures but understandable only to the wise or to those with the *Spirit’s insight. Because most of Judaism believed that full-fledged prophets had ceased after the *Old Testament prophets died, Paul’s claim that God has now actively unveiled his truth through “apostles and prophets” would underline for his hearers the uniqueness of the Christian claim. The content of his teaching would also be striking because of the frequent conflict between Jew and Gentile and frequency of anti-Judaism in antiquity. The “reading” (literally, 3:4) refers to the public reading of his letter in the worship service, necessary because most people could not read.
3:6. “Heirs” refers to the Old Testament idea that the Promised Land was Israel’s inheritance; the “promise” was also a sole possession of Abraham’s descendants (and those who joined that nation by circumcision). To make uncircumcised Gentile Christians part of this same covenant would have sounded like heresy to many Jewish readers, jolting their ethnic sensitivities.
3:7. The Old Testament often spoke of divine empowerment for God’s servants (e.g., Ex 31:3; Judg 15:14); see comment on Ephesians 3:16.
3:8-9. When writers formed an unusual expression, as Paul does here (literally, “leaster”), it reinforced the point. For “stewardship” (NRSV: “administration”; NASB: “plan”), see comment on 3:1-2; for “mystery,” see comment on 3:3-5.
3:10-11. Some pre-Christian Jewish texts also speak of God showing the angels his power and glory through his people, and thus receiving their praise. Because these heavenly “rulers” were viewed as angels of the different nations, the ethnic unity of the church (3:6-8) displayed the rule of God, whose authority transcended that of the angels and all earthly boundaries. The point is that the church, a people destined to bring eternal glory to God, represents God’s ultimate purpose in history (see 1:9-12); all Christians should find their life’s purpose in their role in that ultimate purpose (see 4:11-13).
3:12. “Boldness” often applied to the sort of frank speech appropriate among friends, but in Jewish circles also for prayer; here, conjoined with “confident access” (NASB), it probably relates to the certain place all members have in the household of God (2:18).
3:13. Roman detention was normally a matter of shame; Paul inverts this to honor in view of the reason he is detained. Paul also suffers for the purpose of serving the body of Christ as a whole; cities could view their local athletes as competing on their behalf in regional contests, and some viewed ideal leaders as acting or being used by God for the sake of their people.
3:14. Paul returns to the point begun in 3:1 (writers often repeated some wording to signal that they were returning to their point after a *digression). Jewish prayers were usually offered standing, but kneeling or prostration was sometimes used (in the *Old Testament cf. 1 Kings 8:14, 22, 54; *Gentiles typically prostrated themselves also before rulers). Gentiles sometimes knelt to pray but this was not their usual posture for prayer except in extreme circumstances; like Jewish supplicants, they normally stretched out their arms with hands facing the gods being invoked (in the heavens, in the sea or toward statues).
3:15. Here Paul may mean that all peoples and families (i.e., each group descended from a common progenitor; see notes in NIV, NRSV) reflect God’s own fatherhood over the world (cf., e.g., *Epictetus, Discourses 3.11.5); thus one would have to expect God’s concern for all peoples (e.g., Gen 12:3). (Families “in heaven” may refer to the guardian angels of the nations.) Ancient writers often spoke of God as father in the sense of creator (*Gentiles often spoke of “the father of gods and people”) and sometimes spoke of paternal authority in families as deriving from the example of God. The Roman father was also a supreme authority figure, with the right to rule all descendants as long as he lived.
3:16-17. Although Paul derives some language (“inner person”) from the Greek world (see comment on 2 Cor 4:16), his ideas here are not specifically Greek, and other Jewish people had already adapted this language. Old Testament accounts associated the Spirit especially with prophetic endowment but also with purity, strength and prowess or ability to fulfill whatever God calls one to do; the Old Testament sometimes also presents internalizing the Bible as a way to overcome sin (e.g., Ps 119:11). Israelite piety also recognized God as the source of strength (e.g., Ex 15:2; Ps 18:1-2; 27:1; 59:17; 119:28; Jer 16:19). When Paul speaks of the ability to live rightly because *Christ himself lives in the believer through the Spirit, these points from the Old Testament are probably the closest parallels to his idea in ancient literature; apart from *Qumran texts (depending on the same biblical themes, esp. Ezek 36:25-27), rarely did anyone suggest that one’s moral life would be empowered by the presence and activity of God. Paul advocates total reliance on *grace, even in the believer’s ability to perform righteousness.
3:18-19. Many take “breadth and length and height and depth” to describe how all creation is filled with God’s glory or as a description of the immeasurable vastness of his love. Some have suggested that Paul continues the temple image (2:18-22), describing the perfect cube proportions of the holy of holies in the Old Testament, although the idea is not explicit here. But the text probably applies the language of divine Wisdom (e.g., Job 11:5-9; cf. Job 28:12-28; Sirach 1:3) to God’s love; cf. “manifold” (multifaceted) wisdom in 3:10.
3:20-21. Jewish people customarily ended their prayers with a blessing to God; sometimes the blessings closed with “forever and ever” (cf. 1 Chron 16:36; Ps 106:48). It was likewise customary to respond to prayers and benedictions with “Amen.”
Despite exceptions, most ancient letters simply addressed business or personal issues; many of Paul’s letters, however, “preach.” Persuasive speeches and letters often engaged in a detailed argument, but Paul to this point has mainly used “epideictic,” or “praise,” *rhetoric. He has praised the *church, calling it to be what God had planned for it to be. He now turns to an element characteristic of persuasive rhetoric (as the exhortatio, or exhortations) and more generally found in the advice of moralists and philosophers. Exhortation fills the rest of the book until the closing peroratio, or rousing conclusion, of 6:10-20.
4:1-2. Although gentleness was a recognized virtue even for rulers, Greek writers often viewed “meekness” in the sense of “humility” negatively, unless it was the socially appropriate self-abasement of a social inferior to a superior. On Paul’s captivity (probably in Rome), see comment on 6:20.
4:3-6. Many Jewish teachers praised the virtue of peace. Paul drives home the point by repeating “one” multiple times (though in Greek it appears in varied forms). Some Jewish texts (especially in *Philo and *2 Baruch) suggested that Israel was united because God was one. These texts would never have united Jew and *Gentile in one people, however, even though all the nations were admittedly joined in common humanity. Paul’s language sounds closer to *Stoic philosophical language about the unity of creation (on the “body,” see comment on 1 Cor 12:12). But even the common Greek rhetorical theme of concord (unity, peace) does not match Paul’s emphasis on the unity that believers in Jesus share and must live out.
4:7-8. Paul adapts the text of Psalm 68:18, as ancient expounders of Scripture often did, to make his point (a later *targum of the Psalms rewords it much the same way that he does). This psalm refers to God’s “going up” at Mount Sinai, as Jewish interpreters recognized, and Paul applies the principle to Jesus. (In some Jewish traditions, Moses ascended all the way to heaven to receive the *law; if Paul or any of his readers knew such traditions, it would make the application of this psalm to Jesus all the more vivid. But it is questionable how widely known this tradition was in Paul’s day.) Paul’s point is in harmony with the image of the psalm, although he changed its language; once a conqueror had received tribute and plunder from the defeated (as in Ps 68:18), he distributed most of these spoils to his soldiers (as here). Jesus’s exaltation positions him to distribute gifts (listed in 4:11) to his people.
4:9-10. Paul interprets and applies the text just cited, the way a good Jewish teacher would. “Lower parts of the earth” probably means the realm of the dead, hence that Jesus had died (Ps 63:9; 86:13; Ezek 32:24; Prayer of Manasseh 13), although it could mean his descent from heaven to become a servant at his incarnation (Phil 2:7; cf. Ps 139:15).
4:11. “*Apostles” were literally commissioned messengers carrying out their sender’s mission; as such, they were backed by the sender’s authority to the extent that they accurately represented that commission. In the *New Testament, the term applies to commissioned agents of *Christ authorized in a special way (more authoritatively than others) to declare and propagate his will. “Prophets” were spokespersons for God, whose role was known from the *Old Testament and continued in the church; apostles were to prophets perhaps as prophetic judges (e.g., Samuel and Deborah) or seminal leaders (e.g., Elijah and Elisha) were to other Old Testament prophets—with special rank and authority.
“Evangelists,” as proclaimers of good news (the message of Christ), were seen as “heralds,” again a type of messenger. “Pastors” were literally “shepherds” (used for overseers in the Old Testament, e.g., Jer 23:2-4; a common image for leaders throughout the ancient Mediterranean world), elsewhere in the New Testament identified as overseers of local congregations (Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Pet 5:1-2; cf. Tit 1:5, 7); they were called to shepherd God’s people, at least partly by declaring his message accurately (cf. Jer 23:18-22). “Teachers” were expounders of the Scriptures and of the Jesus tradition; if they functioned like Jewish teachers, they probably offered biblical instruction to the congregation and trained others to expound the Scriptures as well.
As in many ancient lists, some of these terms may overlap considerably (the Greek indicates an especially strong overlap between “pastors” and “teachers”). They share a common focus and basis of authority as bearers of Christ’s message. The authority is resident in their message and spiritual gifting; as in the case of Jewish teachers of God’s message (as opposed to the chief priests), none represents institutional authority in the sense of a supralocal church hierarchy, which is not firmly attested until the early second century (although the translocal networking of churches certainly is). Together these ministers of God’s Word were to equip all God’s people for their ministry (4:12-16).
4:12. The term for “training” or “equipping” was sometimes used in the Greek world to describe training or discipline, including in the work of philosophers and teachers.
4:13-16. The images of a person growing into maturity and a person in trouble as a ship being tossed about by waves were common in Paul’s day. The image of growing to maturity was not usually applied to an entire community of people as here, but the point would have been no less easy to grasp. Paul’s image is a generic one, lacking standard Jewish images for the end time; he may therefore refer to the church’s need for maturity in general, rather than specifically predicting its completion in the end time.
4:17-19. Ancient thinkers sometimes depicted moral ignorance as blinded or darkened minds. Greek writers often developed their moral exhortation by contrasting opposites, as Paul does here. Literature from this period demonstrates that most Jewish people would have described non-Jews in language similar to that which Paul uses (cf. earlier Lev 18:3, 24-30; 20:23-24; Deut 26:16-19). What is significant is that Paul refuses to call ethnically Gentile Christians “Gentiles” any longer; they may be ethnically Gentile, but they are to be ethically Jewish. Premarital sex, homosexual intercourse and idolatry were considered typically Gentile sins from which nearly all Jews abstained; they expected *proselytes to Judaism to reject this former lifestyle. By contrast, Greeks were raised with this lifestyle; for example, many Greek men had intercourse or affairs with boys on the verge of puberty or with adolescents. “Walk” (KJV, NASB) means “behave”; see comment on Galatians 5:16; “hardness of heart” is common in the *Old Testament (e.g., Ex 4:21; Ps 95:8).
4:20-24. The “new self” (v. 24) is literally “the new person,” who is (literally) “created according to God,” which means according to his image or likeness. Paul presumably alludes to the way God originally made Adam and Eve in his image, and says that the new person that a Christian has become is equipped with moral purity because he or she is made like God morally (cf. comment on Rom 5:12-21). Thus, he points out, one should live accordingly. “Clothing” and “unclothing” provide a natural image, used in the Old Testament and Greek literature, for “putting on” and “putting off” or “removing” some kinds of behavior (Job 29:14; Ps 109:18; especially Is 61:3, 10; see comment on Rom 13:12), other attributes (2 Chron 6:41; Ps 93:1) and so forth.
Jewish wisdom writers and Greek philosophers could have agreed with Paul’s emphasis on “renewing the mind”; they understood that one’s attitudes and values affected one’s lifestyle. They even understood conversion to Judaism or philosophy as adopting a new way of life. But Paul’s basis for renewal differs from theirs; he bases it on the new kind of life available in Christ, a kind of life that most Jewish people expected only in the world to come (after the *resurrection of the dead).
4:25. Except for 4:30 and 4:32–5:2, most of Paul’s moral exhortations in 4:25–5:2 are the sort that most ancient moralists uttered. Exhortations to truthfulness, labor, opposition to slander and so forth were standard. Failures in these areas are not sins attributed only to *Gentiles (cf. 4:17-19) but those with which Jewish people also struggled.
Paul’s way of overcoming moral problems differs from that of other ancient moralists (4:22-24, 32), but he can find common ground with many moralists in his culture who oppose the same wrongs that he does. Despite many points in common with the ethics of his culture, however, Paul often cites the Old Testament as his ethical authority; his exhortation to truthfulness here echoes a line from the commandments listed in Zechariah 8:16-17, where one must speak truth to one another and truthfulness may be opposed to false witness in a legal setting.
4:26. The exhortation to avoid sinning while angry is from Psalm 4:4; on the wickedness of those who hold anger overnight, cf. Hosea 7:6; the *Essenes and some Greek philosophers also required that disputes be settled the same day. (For taking care of matters before nightfall, cf. Deut 24:13, 15.) Learning to speak in the most helpful way (4:29) was also stressed.
4:27. The image here might be one of warfare, and that the one who sins surrenders ground to the devil’s side (cf. 6:10-20). Following the Old Testament, Jewish tradition understood the devil (*Satan, Belial) as deceiver, tempter and accuser.
4:28. Judaism valued laboring with one’s hands and sharing with the poor. Although Greek artisans no doubt prided themselves in their work, the aristocracy throughout the Mediterranean world disdained work with one’s hands as the duty of the lower classes.
4:29. Ancient wisdom literature often emphasized learning to speak rightly (cf. 4:25; 5:3-4); many sayings in Proverbs emphasize the idea, including the encouragement to speak gracious, uplifting words (e.g., 12:25; 15:23; 25:11; cf. Zech 1:13).
4:30. “Grieving” the *Spirit reflects a serious offense; in Isaiah 63:10 (one of only two Old Testament texts to use the title “holy spirit”), it refers to Israel’s rebellion in the wilderness, which led to their rejection by God. Similarly, Israel’s rebellion against the Spirit led Moses to sin with his mouth according to Psalm 106:33 (cf. Num 20:10; Deut 3:26). On “sealing” as a sign attesting that no one had tampered with the sealed merchandise or document, see comment on 1:13-14. The Ephesians must preserve their attestation for the day when their redemption would be complete (the Old Testament “day of the Lord,” when he would judge the world and vindicate his people).
4:31. Vice lists were a common literary form in the writings of ancient moralists; sometimes all the vices listed pertained to a particular topic, as here (anger). Piling up related terms reinforced a point.
4:32–5:2. Other moralists, including Greek and Roman non-Christians, appealed to the imitation of God for a standard of ethics. But non-Christian writers of Paul’s day could not cite the example of a god who had lovingly sacrificed himself for his people (4:32–5:2). (Some scholars have appealed to the example of the Titan Prometheus, who suffered for his betrayal of divine secrets to people. But it is not clear that Prometheus expected the severe punishment he received, and the example would not have been prominent; given the punishment of the Titans and wounds inflicted on immortals in Greek mythology [e.g., the wounding of Ares in the Iliad], Prometheus cannot offer a pre-Christian parallel to the Christian idea of Jesus, who, though divine, voluntarily offered himself for humanity. Furthermore, the qualitative difference between Greek and Jewish conceptions of deity makes comparison between the stories of Prometheus and Jesus even less likely.) Earlier Scripture also urged imitation of God (Lev 11:44-45; 19:2), a theme elaborated in Jewish tradition (e.g., *Letter of Aristeas 188, 190, 192, 208, 209, 210, 254, 281; *Philo, Special Laws 4.73; Decalogue 98, 100; Virtues 168; Allegorical Interpretation 1.48; Sifra Qedoshim par. 1.195.1.3).
On God’s accepting someone as a fragrant aroma, cf. Ezekiel 20:41 (his saved people); Ephesians 5:2 means that God accepted Jesus as a pleasing sacrifice (see Gen 8:21; Ex 29:18).
5:3-6. Premarital and other immoral sex, insolent speech and sexual humor were as common in ancient *Gentile society as they are in many societies today. Paul did not water down God’s standards to accommodate the culture; instead he warned that those who engaged in this lifestyle would not be among God’s people in the world to come. Sexual humor was highlighted, for example, in mimes used for entertainment; Paul would not have approved of finding them humorous. On vice lists and “inheriting” the *kingdom of God, see comment on 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
5:7. Here Paul does not advocate total separatism (like that of the wilderness community of the *Dead Sea Scrolls), or even the partial separatism that Judaism’s food and sabbath laws imposed on *Diaspora Jews. But many in Greco-Roman society would have branded Christians as antisocial for refusing to take part in immoral conversation and, even more, in the pervasive civic religious cults that were regarded as a mark of local loyalty.
5:8-13. Jewish texts (most prominently the Dead Sea Scrolls) often used “light” and “darkness” to contrast good and evil, and Paul milks this image here. Taverns often doubled as brothels upstairs, exploiting slave prostitutes; deeds that people wished to perform in secret were often performed at night. Some Greek religious groups known as “*mystery cults” emphasized night initiations, and some of them also developed a reputation for sexual immorality; because some Roman critics of all foreign religions associated Christians with immoral cults, Paul would have all the more reason to wish to dissociate Christianity from cults he already regards as pagan. People could enact deeds in darkness of which they would have been ashamed in public (cf. Is 29:15; 47:10).
5:14. Some commentators have suggested that here Paul cites an expository paraphrase of Scripture, like a *targum on a text such as Isaiah 60:1 or perhaps Daniel 12:2. Others think that Paul cites an early Christian *prophecy or song, composed by either Paul or another prophet (cf. 1 Cor 14:37). Also possible is a combination of the two (a prophecy or song based on biblical texts); in any case the quotation was no doubt familiar to both Paul and the letter’s first hearers.
5:15-17. “Redeeming the time” (KJV, literally) probably means “making the most of the time”; cf. Psalm 90:12; *Letter of Aristeas 256; the idea may resemble “seizing the opportunity.” The *LXX of Daniel 2:8 uses the phrase for trying to gain a delay (“buying time”). (The other possible interpretation is bringing redemption to the present evil age.) That a “time of evils” would affect how the prudent behaved is also expressed in Amos 5:13. In Jewish tradition “wisdom” and “foolishness” had much more to do with morality than they did in pagan thought (e.g., Jer 29:23).
5:18. In Greek, the participles of verses 19-21 flow out of Paul’s command to “be filled with the Spirit” and express the nature of *Spirit-filled living. Jewish tradition regarded drunkenness as scandalous behavior (cf. Prov 23:20-35).
Drunkenness was associated with loss of self-control and was common in the late-night banquets of the rich and the taverns of the poor. Sometimes people also associated it with a sort of inspiration, madness or possession by Dionysus, god of wine. In some settings, Dionysus’s most active worshipers had a reputation for being possessed by him and performing sexual acts or acts full of sexual symbolism (often to the distaste of conservative Romans). Being controlled by drink was a far cry from inspiration by God’s Spirit.
5:19. Both Greeks and Jews commonly believed that music could come by inspiration, an idea that appears in the *Old Testament as well. Paul emphasizes the kind of worship that Jewish people celebrated in the temple (e.g., psalms and hymns); we cannot be sure whether most other Jewish gatherings, such as those in *synagogues, included the singing of psalms and hymns in this period. “Spiritual songs” may refer to Spirit-inspired songs (cf. 1 Chron 25:1-6; Eph 5:18), possibly spontaneous, which would clearly distinguish Christian worship from nearly all worship in antiquity (cf. 1 Cor 14:15).
5:20. The ancient writers (Jewish writers and some Greco-Roman, especially *Stoic, writers) who stressed thanking God for everything were those who believed that God (whether the Stoic Fate or the personal God of Judaism) ruled the course of events.
The section 5:21–6:9 addresses what we call “household codes”; ancients used such codes to express what their culture regarded as virtuous relations within the family. In Paul’s day, many Romans were troubled by the spread of “religions from the East” (e.g., Isis worship, Judaism and Christianity), which they thought could undermine traditional Roman family values. Members of these minority religions often tried to show their support for those values by using household codes, a standard form of exhortations developed by philosophers from *Aristotle on. These exhortations about how the head of a household should deal with members of his family often break down into discussions of husband-wife, father-child and master-slave relationships. Paul borrows this form of discussion from standard Greco-Roman moral writing. Paul is probably concerned with outsiders’ views of Jesus’ movement (cf. 1 Tim 5:14; Tit 2:5). But unlike most ancient writers, Paul undermines a basic premise of these codes: the male head of the house’s assumption of absolute authority.
5:21. The final expression of being filled with the Spirit is “submitting to one another” because *Christ is one’s Lord. All the household codes Paul proposes are based on this idea. But although it was customary to call on wives, children and slaves to submit in various ways, to call all members of a group (including the paterfamilias, the male head of the household) to submit to one another (cf. Mark 10:43-45) was unheard of. A minority of ancient writers did express the value of mutual concern and sensitivity.
5:22-24. Wifely submission remained the ideal (see e.g., *Philo, Creation 167; *Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.255; Marcus Aurelius 1.17.7). Most ancient writers expected wives to obey their husbands, desiring in them a quiet and meek demeanor; some marriage contracts even stated a requirement for absolute obedience. This requirement made sense especially to Greek thinkers, who could not conceive of wives as equals. Age differences contributed to this disparity: husbands were normally older than their wives, often by over a decade in Greek culture (with men frequently marrying around age thirty and women in their teens, sometimes early teens).
In this passage, however, Paul differs from the usual conventions, which normally addressed only the male head of the household. The closest Paul comes to specifically defining submission here is “respect” (v. 33), and in the Greek text, wifely submission to a husband (v. 22) is only one example of general mutual submission of Christians (the verb of v. 22 is borrowed directly from v. 21 and thus cannot mean something different). Note also the difference in 5:25.
5:25. Although it was assumed that husbands should love their wives, ancient household codes typically told husbands not how to love their wives but how to rule them. Although Paul upholds the ancient ideal of wifely submission, he qualifies it by placing it in the context of mutual submission: husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the *church, by willingly laying down their lives for them. At the same time that he relates Christianity to the standards of his culture, he subverts some cultural values by going far beyond them. Both husbands and wives must submit and love (5:2, 21).
5:26. This “washing” might allude figuratively to the bride’s prenuptial washing (of course, washing was natural before any occasion on which one wished to impress another positively). After this washing the bride was perfumed, anointed and arrayed in wedding clothes. The betrothal ceremony in Judaism also came to be called “the sanctification of the bride,” setting her apart for her husband. The “word” naturally refers to the saving *gospel of Christ (1:13).
5:27. After the bride’s preparation (5:26), the next stage in a Jewish wedding was the bride’s removal from her father’s house to the groom’s house, followed by the bride’s introduction into the groom’s home. “In glory” (NASB) or “splendor” (NRSV) also fits the image of the passage, appropriate to the bridal array (5:26).
5:28-32. Although Greek and Roman moralists sometimes alluded to the unity of husband and wife, the image was especially prominent in Judaism, which shared Paul’s and Jesus’ dependence on Genesis 2:24, mentioned explicitly in Ephesians 5:31. The head-body analogy of 5:23 here becomes an image of unity rather than one of authority.
5:33. Writers sometimes closed a book or section with a concluding summary; Paul here summarizes the point of 5:21-32: the wife should respect her husband, and the husband should love his wife.
Jewish and Greco-Roman writers unanimously agreed that children needed to honor their parents, and, at least till they grew up, needed to obey them as well. The command to honor one’s parents was in the *Old Testament (Ex 20:12; Deut 5:16) and included living in such a way as to bring honor on them in a godly society (Deut 21:18-21). Many Jewish writers believed that honoring one’s parents was the most important commandment. Household codes (and thus this passage) particularly addressed minor children.
At the same time, children were often taught through beating, which was standard in child rearing and education; fathers were considered responsible for their education. Paul may be among the minority of ancient writers who disapprove of excessive discipline (6:4). (Greek and Roman society was even harsher on newborn children; because an infant was accepted as a legal person only when the father officially recognized it, babies could be abandoned or, if deformed, killed. Early Christians and Jews unanimously opposed both abortion and abandonment. This text, however, addresses the discipline of minors in the household.)
Household codes (see comment at 5:21-33) told the male householder how to rule his wife, children and slaves. Of these, slaves more often faced the worst abuses, though household slaves could often become free (see comment on 1 Cor 7:21-22).
The slaveholding class had various stereotypes of slaves, for example that they were lazy, especially when no one was looking. Paul encourages hard work but gives slaves a new hope and a new motive for their labor.
Given Christians’ tenuous social situation (cf. 1 Tim 5:14; 6:1), Paul urges Christian slaves, like wives, to submit to the head of the household as if to Christ, but this duty is again reciprocal. Only a few writers in the ancient world suggested that slaves were in theory their masters’ spiritual equals (cf. Job 31:13-15), and so far as we know only Paul goes so far as to suggest that in practice masters do the same for slaves as slaves should do for them (6:9).
When *Aristotle complained about a few philosophers who thought that slavery was wrong because against nature, the philosophers he cited did not state matters as plainly as Paul does here. Paul confronts the practical issue of how slaves can deal with their situation, not whether slavery should be abolished (an issue not relevant to his point in the context of household codes); almost no one discussed the question in his day. In the Roman Empire even slave revolts were meant to free particular slaves, not to end slavery, and these were brutally suppressed anyway. But the way Paul deals with the issue leaves no doubt where he would have stood had we put the question of slavery’s abolition to him: people are equals before God (6:9). Apart from groups that eschewed ownership of everything, others who might have agreed with Paul in principle did not carry the practical advice as far as he (mutual submission). For more on slavery in general, see the introduction to Philemon.
Although Paul does not follow a formal *rhetorical outline in Ephesians, 6:10-20 could resemble a peroratio, a rousing conclusion to his case. Philosophers and other speakers sometimes described their conflict with wicked ideas as wrestling in an athletic contest or a war; they also used lists of virtues, the general idea of which Paul incorporates here. Some compare aspects of Paul’s conclusion to the exhortations that generals gave to their armies before battle.
The *Old Testament has many pictures of Israel as God’s warriors, and God himself appears as a warrior in full armor, dealing out his justice (Is 59:17; cf. Wisdom of Solomon 5:17-20). But although Paul borrows his language from the Old Testament, the image Paul’s words in this paragraph would have evoked for most of his hearers is that of a Roman soldier ready to do battle. Most adults who heard his letter read would have seen Roman soldiers and could relate this image to their spiritual warfare against the demonic powers at work in the world; God who fought for them had supplied them his armor.
Paul omits some pieces of the Roman soldier’s armor in his description; for instance, since he mentions only one offensive weapon, he uses the sword but omits the lance (the pilum) and dagger. (Usually soldiers had two pila; they could imbed the first into an enemy shield, making it unwieldy, and then strike with the second.) Paul probably has no particular purpose in correlating specific strengths of the Christian with specific armor body parts (cf. 1 Thess 5:8); rather, he wants his readers to know that they need all these strengths to be victorious.
6:10-11. Ancient exhortations regarded retreat and wounds in the back as disgraceful (note that none of the following armor covers the back). In the day of battle, Roman soldiers were to stand their ground, not retreat. As long as they stood together on a flat, open field and did not break ranks, their legions were considered virtually invincible.
6:12. Some people in the Old Testament learned that the nature of their battle was spiritual (cf. Gen 32:22-32; Dan 10:10-21), although in both Daniel and Paul the battle was fought by prayerfully submitting to God and doing his will, not by directly addressing the hostile powers in the heavens (Dan 10:12-13, 21). Some pagan deities were called “world rulers,” and terms for high ranks of good and evil angels were becoming popular in this period (see comment on Eph 1:21-23); “spiritual beings of wickedness” is idiomatic Greek for “evil spirits,” a Jewish and *New Testament term.
6:13. The “evil day” could refer generically to any time of judgment or testing (cf., e.g., Amos 5:13; 6:3; 2 Maccabees 1:5; Sirach 51:11-12; Eph 5:16), though some scholars think it applies specifically to the period of intense tribulation Jewish people expected prior to the end of the age (cf. Dan 12:1), which some scholars believe Paul elsewhere regarded as present (cf. Rom 8:22-23). For “stand,” see comment on 6:10-11.
6:14. The “belt” or “girdle” may refer to the leather apron beneath the armor or to the metal belt over the tunic protecting the lower abdomen. The “breastplate” normally consisted of leather overlaid with metal, and it protected the chest in battle; like the helmet (6:17), it was used only in battle, not for normal wear. Roman soldiers were to face forward in battle, side by side, so the armor needed to protect only their front. In view of Isaiah 59:17 (cf. Wisdom of Solomon 5:18), this “breastplate of righteousness” is truly “God’s armor” (6:13).
6:15. Soldiers needed to wear sandals or boots (technically the Roman caliga, a half boot) so they could advance toward the enemy undistracted about what they might step on; this gear was essential to their “preparation” for battle. Paul takes the image especially from the herald of Isaiah 52:7 who announces good news: sharing the message of *Christ advances God’s army against the enemy’s position.
6:16. Roman soldiers were most commonly equipped with large rectangular wooden shields, four feet high, the fronts of which were made of leather. Before battles in which flaming arrows might be fired, the leather would be wetted to quench any fiery darts launched against them. After Roman legionaries closed ranks, the front row holding shields forward and those behind them holding shields above them, they were deemed virtually invulnerable to any attack from flaming arrows.
Because the Greek and Roman god of passion (called Eros and Cupid, respectively) was said to strike with flaming arrows, some of Paul’s readers may have thought specifically of the temptation of sexual desire in this verse, although Paul probably intended the image to cover more than that danger (cf. Ps 11:2; 57:4; 58:3-7; 64:3; perhaps 120:1-4; Prov 25:18).
6:17. The bronze or iron helmet, equipped with cheek pieces, was necessary to protect the head; though essential garb for battle, it was normally not worn outside battle. For the phrase “helmet of salvation,” see Isaiah 59:17; cf. comment on Ephesians 6:14. The double-edged sword (gladius, 20–24 inches long) was a weapon used when close battle was joined with the enemy and the heavy pikes that frontline soldiers carried were no longer practical. Thus Paul implies that the battle is to be joined especially by engaging those who do not know God’s word (the *gospel) with its message, after one is spiritually prepared in the other ways listed here. Paul’s ministry was thus particularly strategic, because it included close-range battle advancing into enemy ranks (vv. 19-20).
6:18-19. It is not clear that prayer for one another (v. 18) continues the figurative image of warfare in the preceding context, but if it does it might relate to how the soldiers had to stand together in their battle formation, covering one another by moving as a solid unit. A Roman soldier by himself was vulnerable, but as a unified army a Roman legion was considered virtually invincible. “Watching” or “being alert” may also be military language (suggested by Jesus; cf. Mk 14:38). Prayer in the *Spirit probably implies inspired prayer (cf. 1 Cor 14). In Greek, the alliteration of multiple p- words could appeal to Paul’s hearers as rhetorically sensitive.
6:20. Ambassadors were to be received with all the respect due the ones who sent them; as heralds, they were to be immune from hostility even if they represented an enemy kingdom. Paul, an “ambassador” of the greatest king and the greatest *kingdom (6:20) is instead chained in Rome for his mission of peace (6:15). In Greek literature, a true philosopher was characterized by his “boldness,” or frank speech.
Like 3:1-13, this section adds pathos, or feeling; although its most important function is to solicit prayer, it also sets an example for the *church. Chains were normally deemed a mark of great shame.
6:21-22. Mail and other news were normally carried by travelers, because the Roman Empire had no official postal service except for imperial business.
6:23-24. The *Old Testament promised God’s covenant love to all who loved God (Ex 20:6; Deut 5:10; Neh 1:5; Dan 9:4; cf. 1 Kings 8:23); here the promise applies specifically to those who love the Lord Jesus Christ.