St Paul in Rome. 4 The Epistle to the Ephesians

Abstract

The Apostolic Age (London, 1955), p. 133. Cf. S. H. Hooke; " Ephesians, ... if not by Paul, certainly belongs to the Pauline exposition of the glory " (Alpha and Omega (Welwyn, 1961), p. 256). P. N. Harrison adds that the author of Ephesians " knew how to put into words, and so make explicit, thoughts which are implicit in Paul's other letters, but nowhere else so explicit as here " (Paulines and Pastorals (London, 1964), p. 35). See further the two opening papers, " The Case for the Pauline Authorship " by J. N. Sanders (pp. 9 ff.) and " The Case against the Pauline Authorship " by D. E. Nineham (pp. 21 fi.) in F. L. Cross (ed.),

Translating Ephesians 5.33

“…Concerning understanding ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ in v. 22 in the sense of “as for the Lord,” F. F. Bruce discerns that wives are to exhibit deference to their husbands because it is a duty they owe to the Lord, in contrast to the view that wives owe their husbands the same kind of deference they give to the Lord (2012, 119). 11 Paul’s intent is further clarified by his instructions to wives in Col 3.18: “Wives, yield yourselves to your husbands in such a way as is fitting [BDAG, 1103] in the Lord.” Compare CEB: “Wives, submit to your husbands in a way that is appropriate in the Lord” (italics added).…”

‘The Ruler of the Powers of the Air’: Ephesians 2:2 and ‘The Present World Order’.

“…Pauline authorship of the Letter to the Ephesians is asserted by Bruce (1961), Barth (1974) and Robinson (1976, p.69), but denied by Baur (1845Baur ( , 1866Baur ( , 1873Baur ( , 2011, Dibelius (1937), Bultmann (1953Bultmann ( , 1965, Conzelmann (1976), Brown (1997), Ehrman (2000; and Hoehner (2002). Knox (1938) accepts the Pauline authenticity of Colossians and Philemon, but denies that of Ephesians (p.145).…”