The Text of Eph 5.22 and the Start of the Ephesian Household Code

Abstract

The widespread disagreement about where the Ephesian household code begins is largely based on an equally widespread agreement that the original text of Eph 5.22 has no verb. This article addresses the former by challenging the latter. Treating the textual problem as a choice between three rather than two readings means that ὑποτασσέσθωσαν emerges as the reading that is best attested, the more difficult, and the one that best explains the others. The result is a smooth flow throughout this section of Ephesians.

The Intrinsic Probability of τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν ὑποτασσέσθωσαν in Eph. 5.22

“…General stylistic considerations also militate against the shorter reading. While some commentators have claimed that the shorter reading fits the ‘succinct style’ of Pauline admonitions (Abbott 1897: 165, followed by Metzger 1994: 541, and Hering 2007: 131 n. 66), Gurry points out that all other admonitions in the Haustafel explicitly include their imperative verbs, and more generally, that succinctness is not at all characteristic of the style of the author of Ephesians (Gurry 2021: 575). Factors related to the author’s style and argument, therefore, favor the inclusion of an explicit imperative.…”

“…While both the second-person ὑποτάσσεσθε and the third-person ὑποτασσέσθωσαν find support in different contextual factors, more immediate factors favor ὑποτασσέσθωσαν. In particular, the language used for the object of the imperative, τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν, fits a third-person imperative better than a second-person imperative (Gurry 2021: 578). More common phrases like τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ὑμῶν and τοῖς ἑαυτοῖς ἀνδράσιν would be readily available for a second-person imperative.…”

“…Recently, however, in an article revisiting this textual variant, Peter J. Gurry has shown that the case is far from closed (Gurry 2021). In terms of external evidence, he demonstrates that the support for the shorter reading, though early, is also sparse, while the reading τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν ὑποτασσέσθωσαν enjoys an early and broad attestation among manuscripts, versions, and patristic quotations.…”

“… 2. For reasons of space and simplicity, the collation data in this table consists of a representative subset of the frequently cited witnesses in the twenty-eighth edition of the Nestle-Aland critical text (NA 28 ). A more exhaustive collation of the Greek manuscripts at this variation unit is available in the Text und Textwert volume for Ephesians (Aland 1991), and corrections to errata in this collation are offered in Gurry (2021: 568). For further reference, the International Greek New Testament Project has prepared over 150 manuscript transcriptions in Ephesians for the future Editio Critica Maior of the Pauline Epistles; the transcriptions are accessible at https://itseeweb.cal.bham.ac.uk/epistulae/. …”

“… 3. A survey of the historical support for different readings is given in Gurry (2021: 561–68). The following prominent editions print the shorter reading in their main text: Tischendorf (1869–1872); Westcott and Hort (1881); Holmes (2010); Aland et al (2012).…”