Ephesians 4.17-Interpretative Problem in Ephesians 4.17
Wenstrom Bible Ministries
Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom
Thursday June 5, 2025
Ephesians Series: Ephesians 4:17-Interpretative Problem in Ephesians 4:17
Lesson # 255
Ephesians 4:17 Therefore, at this particular time I am communicating, specifically, at this particular time I am solemnly and earnestly making a request on the basis of the Lord’s sovereign authority. Namely, that each and every one of you as a corporate unit continue to no longer make it your habit of conducting your lives as in fact the Gentiles are conducting their lives by means of the futility produced by their thinking. (Lecturer’s translation)
Constantine Campbell disagrees with the interpretation that Paul is issuing a prohibition to the recipients of this epistle because he does not believe as most translations that Ephesians 4:17b should be translated as an imperative meaning “you should no longer walk as the Gentiles do” (CSB; cf. NIV, ESV).
He translates it “you no longer walk as the Gentiles do” and thus omits the imperatival “should” from the CSB translation because there is no imperative in the Greek, although most interpreters assume that the infinitival clause functions imperatively.
He asserts that there is little justification for this and cities Wallace who notes only three New Testament instances in which an infinitive functions as an imperative (Rom 12:15 [twice]; Phil 3:16), and even these are debatable, however, Wallace does not include Eph 4:17 as a possible example.
Campbell states “there is little reason to read 4:17b as imperatival. From 4:17 to 4:24, there is no other imperatival content, and the subsection is entirely indicative in tone. On the contrary, imperatival instructions come in full-force in the following subsection at 4:25.”
He also makes the point that the verb “I testify” typically introduces indicative information, not imperatival.
If read in this typical way, the indicative reading 4:17b makes good sense; “I say this and testify in the Lord: You no longer walk as the gentiles do” and Paul thereby testifies that his readers’ have observably turned from their former lives.
He also states that BDAG’s second category of usage for “I testify” is “to urge something as a matter of great importance, affirm, insist, implore.”
Only two New Testament examples are cited, including this text with the other example being 1 Thessalonians 2:12, which he asserts is “probably not a good example of the supposed category, since it is a historical account of Paul’s ministry to the Thessalonians, in which he ‘testified so that you would walk worthy of God’” (Lecturer’s translation).
The apparent imperative in the verse is actually an infinitival purpose clause and not an instruction issued by the verb or in other words, Paul’s testimony was issued for the purpose of their action, but it did not instruct their action.
As such, Campbell states that BDAG’s second category lacks any New Testament examples (if Eph 4:17b is excluded, as argued here).
Campbell writes “To summarize, ‘I testify’ functions as part of a metacomment, used to introduce a significant proposition; it conveys its normal sense of affirming or testifying to something; and infinitives rarely convey imperatival force. As such, it is unlikely that the infinitival phrase ‘you no longer walk’ is imperatival in function. Paul is not issuing an instruction that his readers should no longer walk as the gentiles do. He is testifying to the fact that they already no longer walk this way. As seen in 2:2, 10, and 4:1, walking is a Hebrew metaphor for how a person lives. As BDAG notes, to ‘walk’ in a certain way is ‘to conduct one’s life, comport oneself, behave, live.’ While in their previous lives before Christ, Paul’s readers walked in their sins according to the ways of the world (2:1–2), here in 4:17 they are described as no longer walking as the gentiles do (cf. 2:10).”
I disagree with Campbell because of first of all, as I have noted in this study of Ephesians 4:17, the verbs legō (λέγω) and martyromai (μαρτύρομαι) are modified by the demonstrative pronoun houtos (οὗτος).
The referent of the demonstrative pronoun is identified by the infinitival clause mēketi hymas peripatein, kathōs kai ta ethnē peripatei en mataiotēti tou noos autōn (μηκέτι ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν, καθὼς καὶ τὰ ἔθνη περιπατεῖ ἐν ματαιότητι τοῦ νοὸς αὐτῶν), “Namely, that each and every one of you as a corporate unit no longer make it your habit of conducting your lives as in fact the Gentiles are conducting their lives by means of the futility produced by their thinking.” (Lecturer’s translation).
As we also noted, I interpret the infinitive conjugation of the verb peripateō (περιπατέω) as an appositional infinitive, which stands in apposition to accusative neuter singular form of the demonstrative pronoun houtos (οὗτος), “this.”
This means that the former identifies the referent of the latter.
Therefore, the entire clause introduced by this verb and the negative adverb of time meketi (μηκέτι) identifies the referent of the demonstrative pronoun.
Therefore, this would indicate that the infinitive conjugation of the verb peripateō (περιπατέω) identifies the referent of this demonstrative pronoun as the recipients of this letter continuing to no longer make it a habit of conducting their lives as the members of unregenerate humanity live their lives.
Therefore, the problem of interpreting this verb as an infinitive of purpose is resolved.
In fact, the demonstrative pronoun begs to be defined, thus the need for the infinitive conjugation of this verb to be appositional in function.
Secondly, to interpret the verb martyromai (μαρτύρομαι) as meaning “to make a solemn and earnest request” of the recipients of this letter can be defended by the prepositional phrase en kyriō (ἐν κυρίῳ), “on the basis of the Lord’s sovereign authority,” (Lecturer’s translation) which modifies it.
As I noted, I interpret this prepositional phrase as presenting the basis for the request and that it contains the figure of metonymy which means that the person of the Lord is put for His sovereign authority.
Interestingly, Campbell does not address the function of this prepositional phrase.
If one interprets this verb as meaning “to affirm something with solemnity, testify, bear witness” as Campbell does, it is difficult identifying the meaning and purpose of this prepositional phrase.
However, this is not the case if we interpret the verb as solemnly and earnestly making a request of someone.
It is significant that Paul employs the noun kurios (κύριος), “Lord” alone with the preposition en (ἐν) because it is another indication that he is requiring action on the part of the recipients of this epistle.
Correspondingly, it is significant that Paul does not use the prepositional phrases “in Christ” or “in Christ Jesus.”
As we have noted throughout our study of Ephesians to this point, these prepositional phrases can allude to the believer’s faith in Jesus Christ at justification as well as their union and identification with Him and at times their fellowship with Him.
Paul does not use these prepositional phrases because he is not using the verbs legō (λέγω) and martyromai (μαρτύρομαι) in Ephesians 4:17 to form a thought, which communicates what God as done for the believer through their faith in Jesus Christ or their union and identification with Him.
They are also not used to communicate to them what course of action which requires them to experience fellowship with Him.
The fact that Paul does not employ an imperative in Ephesians 4:17 but rather the indicative mood of these two verbs with this prepositional phrase along with an appositional infinitive to identify the referent of the demonstrative pronoun makes the prohibition more weighty than if he simply used an imperative.
Furthermore, in Ephesians 4:20, Paul asserts that the recipients of this epistle did not learn about Christ like this or in other words, they were taught in the past after their justification as to how they were to conduct their lives as Christians, which he asserts stands stark contrast to the way they lived before their justification.
The contrast could be interpreted as being between unregenerate humanity and the recipients of this letter or between the recipients of this letter prior to justification and their present state as regenerated people.
The latter is better supported by the contents of Ephesians 4:21-32 and so Paul is saying that they use to live like the unsaved.
Therefore, you must no longer go back to that way of living since it is not what they were taught they must do as Christians.
Also, to go back to their pre-conversion lifestyle would be inconsistent with God giving them a new nature, the nature of Christ at justification and placing them in union with Christ and identifying them with Him.
The broader context of the entire letter strongly suggests that Paul is issuing a prohibition in this unusual manner to govern the conduct of the recipients of this letter because as we noted many times, the first three chapters of the epistle contain only “indicatives” whereas the last three chapters contain the “imperatives.”
In other words, the last three chapters present the application of the doctrinal section of the letter contained in the first three chapters.
Lastly, in Ephesians 4:1-3, Paul does not use an imperative even though he is clearly desiring the recipients of this letter to practice the Lord Jesus Christ’s Spirit inspired command in John 13:34 and 15:12 to love one another as He had loved them in order to maintain unity in their community experientially.
Instead, as we noted, in these verses, he is exhorting and encouraging the recipients of this epistle to follow a particular course of conduct and namely, to practice the Lord’s command to love one another as He has loved the believer in order to maintain unity experientially when interacting with each other.
In other words, even though there is no command, he clearly is directing them to this particular course of conduct.
This is what Paul is doing as well in Ephesians 4:17 or in other words, Paul does not need to use a command to direct them to a particular course of conduct.
This time he is solemnly and earnest requesting them to continue to no longer make it their habit of conducting their lives as the members of unregenerate humanity conduct their lives.
So therefore, Paul is solemnly and earnestly making a request of the recipients of this letter based upon the sovereign authority of the Lord.
This request is identified as the recipients of this letter continuing to no longer make it their habit of conducting their lives as in fact the unregenerate conduct their lives.
