Untitled Sermon (2)
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 9 viewsNotes
Transcript
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to the saints who are in Ephesus and faithful in Christ Jesus:
How would the omission of the bracketed text ἐν Ἐφέσῳ impact our understanding of the audience if it was not tied to a specific location? Pay close attention to the repetition of ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ and its variations in this chapter.
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to the saints who are in Ephesus and faithful in Christ Jesus:
Appositional phrases that list titles or traits are a common feature following Paul’s name in his letters. How does Paul’s characterization of himself here compare to what we find in his other letters?
having predestined us to adoption through Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will,
The preposition εἰς is typically associated with verbs of motion, i.e., movement toward and arrival at/within some specified destination. What is the metaphorical picture that Paul paints here with these three prepositional phrases if we understand “change of state” as a metaphorical change in location? How might you explain this image in a sermon?
to the praise of the glory of his grace that he bestowed on us in the beloved,
Beginning here, most things Paul describes in the following verses are situated ἐν Christ, though the preposition is translated variously despite the fact we find διά and
in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace,
Relative pronouns can be used for what Winer called a “continuative relative” function, but relative clauses like this one are generally translated (and treated exegetically) as if were independent main clauses. What is the exegetical significance of making this (and the coordinate clauses that follow) dependent on a different main clause? What is the main clause on which this one ultimately depends (not just v. 6)? Consider this same question for vv. 11 and 13, which are introduced using the same relative construction, 1st person plural subject, and adverbial καί to connect back to some related proposition.
making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure that he purposed in him,
Paul uses “mystery” language in anticipation of a longer discussion beginning in 3:3. This is one of those significant exegetical crossroads where the identity of the mystery is essentially assumed knowledge the original audience shared with Paul, and likely differs from our modern, Western sense of what it is. The additional details are meant to eliminate incorrect possibilities while also building some anticipation. At this point, what would you say that mystery is that Paul references?
And you, although you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
What can we infer about the role this pronoun plays in the main clause, once we finally get there?
in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit now working in the sons of disobedience,
Does the repetition of κατά in the next phrase, without a connective, suggest these are distinct referents or one and the same? How does the additional descriptive material that follows confirm your answer?
in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit now working in the sons of disobedience,
Note the tail-head linkage between the clauses. What is the metaphorical effect of setting a verb of motion in this spatial frame of reference? What does ποτέ suggest about how this state compares to their current situation? What does use of the relative pronoun as a connective suggest about how this clause contributes to the discourse?
among whom also we all formerly lived in the desires of our flesh, doing the will of the flesh and of the mind, and we were children of wrath by nature, as also the rest of them were.
How might the repetition of ποτε foreshadow a change of some kind? How does reference to focus on desires of the flesh connect back to earlier ideas?
among whom also we all formerly lived in the desires of our flesh, doing the will of the flesh and of the mind, and we were children of wrath by nature, as also the rest of them were.
Much of verse 2 concerned other people or beings, enemies of God. Now Paul loops back to include both his audience and himself in 1st person plural. What does connecting this clause to what precedes using a relative pronoun in a preposition phrase signal about how to relate it to what precedes? What framing role does it play for what follows?
For he himself is our peace, who made both one and broke down the dividing wall of the partition, the enmity, in his flesh,
What clause or range of clauses does this one primarily support?
For he himself is our peace, who made both one and broke down the dividing wall of the partition, the enmity, in his flesh, invalidating the law of commandments in ordinances, in order that he might create the two in himself into one new man, thus making peace,
Some might argue over whether these participles are adverbial or adjectival. How would the use of indicative verbs have impacted identification of this section’s big idea? What is the main thought that they flesh out?
invalidating the law of commandments in ordinances, in order that he might create the two in himself into one new man, thus making peace,
What thought in the reader’s mental representation is this purpose clause modifying? Consider your answer to the previous question.
And coming, he proclaimed the good news of peace to you who were far away and peace to the ones who were near,
What is the effect of stating the indirect object in two statements instead of one in light of the preceding theme of unity? What might be intended by Paul not repeating the personal pronoun in the second part of this compound phrase? How might the outcome described in v. 19 corroborate this?
And coming, he proclaimed the good news of peace to you who were far away and peace to the ones who were near,
How does the change in mood from participle and subjunctive influence your judgement about what level of the discourse this clause is closely connected with? How does the editor’s choice of punctuation correlate?
because through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.
Note the 1st person plural verb. At the beginning of this larger unit Paul frequently references two groups that become united in Christ. Why might he perpetuate that division here through this additional noun phrase?
Levinsohn expects subjects to precede core arguments, but here is comes between the direct and indirect object. What effects are achieved by this ordering?
Consequently, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the saints and members of the household of God,
This expression typically introduces a concluding consequence that may simply summarize or may become the theme or big idea of the next section. Based on the content it conveys, what is your judgement?
built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
How would the contribution of v. 19 to this chunk of the discourse have been interpreted differently had the verbs of v. 20 been indicative instead of participles?
in whom the whole building, joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord,
How does using a relative pronoun instead of a coordinating connective impact how we understand the discourse structure? What does v. 20 contribute to v. 19?
in whom you also are built up together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
Why might Paul have repeated this prepositional phrase as a connective instead of simply replying on καί? Especially consider how v. 21 ends.