Eph 1:4 exegeted

[Bible Highlighter]

Yes, in verse 13 Paul includes the Gentiles. That is where he switches from first person plural pronouns, us/we/our, to second person personal pronouns, you/ your. Verses 3-12 are the group who 'before hoped in the Christ'. Then in verse 13 Paul says, 'and you' here is begins to include the Gentiles.

No, at the very beginning of the epistle, Paul says in verse 1 that he is addressing the faithful in Christ Jesus.

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus"
(Ephesians 1:1).


....

 

[Butch5]

No, at the very beginning of the epistle, Paul says in verse 1 that he is addressing the faithful in Christ Jesus.

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus"
(Ephesians 1:1).


....

Yes, he is addressing the church in general. However remeber that the leadership was Jewish. Paul was Jewish. 'Blessed be God' is Jewish idom. Peter uses the same phrase in 1.Peter which he clearly addresses to the Jews.

There's a difference between talking to someone and talking about someone. In Eph 1:3-12 Paul talking to the church, everyone, at Ephesus "about" what God Has done for the Jewish people. It's what is called a Hebraism it's a praise to God.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Yes, he is addressing the church in general. However remeber that the leadership was Jewish. Paul was Jewish. 'Blessed be God' is Jewish idom. Peter uses the same phrase in 1.Peter which he clearly addresses to the Jews.

There's a difference between talking to someone and talking about someone. In Eph 1:3-12 Paul talking to the church, everyone, at Ephesus "about" what God Has done for the Jewish people. It's what is called a Hebraism it's a praise to God.

Ultimately Paul is talking to believers. Just as he is ultimately talking to believers in Romans 9 thru Romans 11 even though he is talking about his desire for Israel to be saved. Also, after re-reading this chapter, I am not so sure verse 12 is specifically talking to Jewish believers. For verse 12 simply says, "who first trusted in Christ." In other words, it is a general statement. Verse 12 does not specifically spell it out for us that this is speaking exclusively of the Jews. In fact, who first trusted in Christ? Yes, there were disciples who were Jewish who first trusted in Christ, but there were also Gentiles who ALSO first trusted in Christ during His earthly ministry, too (Like the Canaanite woman and the Romans soldier).

Besides, even if verse 12 is talking exclusively to Jewish believers (i.e. the disciples), this does not mean that the verses before it are talking exclusively to Jewish believers only. First, verse 12 starts a new thought. Also, if your interpretation is Jewish believers for verse 12, then you must interpret verse 13 as talking about the Gentiles (Which also begins a new thought), as well. Second, Paul believes there are no Jews or Gentiles in Christ Jesus.

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28).



...

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"You failed to answer my question.

Here it is again: did the devil give birth to any human being?"

1 John 3:10
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

This verse doesn't answer the question about whether the devil GIVES BIRTH to anyone.

As I knew, there are no verses that make such a statement.

Here is the real issue that I am making:
Gal 3:26 - You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus

It is this PERMANENT RELATIONSHIP that I am speaking about; no other. God tells us that He is our Father in heaven. God tells us that we have been born again by the Holy Spirit.

Your bringing in "children of the devil" is only a distraction and irrelevant to my issue.

The devil gives birth to NO ONE. So it is irrelevant to the discussion.

As is marriage.

Unless you or someone else can show that the physical relationship between birth parent and child can be severed, you have no support for your rejection of eternal security.

It is God who gives the believer a new birth. That is a permanent relationship. Which cannot be refuted. Marriage and children of the devil are irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[EmSw]

I said this:
"You failed to answer my question.

Here it is again: did the devil give birth to any human being?"

This verse doesn't answer the question about whether the devil GIVES BIRTH to anyone.

As I knew, there are no verses that make such a statement.

Here is the real issue that I am making:
Gal 3:26 - You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus

It is this PERMANENT RELATIONSHIP that I am speaking about; no other. God tells us that He is our Father in heaven. God tells us that we have been born again by the Holy Spirit.

Your bringing in "children of the devil" is only a distraction and irrelevant to my issue.

The devil gives birth to NO ONE. So it is irrelevant to the discussion.

As is marriage.

Unless you or someone else can show that the physical relationship between birth parent and child can be severed, you have no support for your rejection of eternal security.

It is God who gives the believer a new birth. That is a permanent relationship. Which cannot be refuted. Marriage and children of the devil are irrelevant to the discussion.

So, how do you propose one is a child of the devil?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"You never proved your claim that the "us" in 1:4 means only Jews. An unsubstantiated claim is all you've done."

This is the typical response. When the evidence shows you're wrong just deny it.

There was no evidence. Just a claim. When did those 2 different words mean the same thing?

I Have shown it. I explained Paul's use of first and second person personal plural pronouns. I also posted a link to a paper that goes into great depth explaining this using English and the Greek text.

I continue to be perplexed about your so-called evidence. When does the word "us" become either a first or second person pronoun? The English word is simply a first person plural pronoun. A "second person" pronoun would be 'you'. Not "us".

You're welcome to keep pretending. You have doctrine that needs protecting.

You may continue to pretend that my doctrine needs protecting.

They tell you who was chosen to walk holy and blameless before the Lord.

Sure. Paul's audience. Who else?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Again, in real life if a son does evil against his father like say... try to kill him or something, he could have him arrested and put in prison. If the son repeatedly tries to kill his own father, then... it makes logical sense that the father could end his life so as to protect himself and the rest of the family.

You're still not understanding the issue. It does NOT matter whether a father kills his son or not. The birth son will ALWAYS be the birth son. That is a PERMANENT RELATIONSHIP, even when the relationship goes to pot and there is zero fellowship.

A dead son cannot spend time with his father.

Unless one can show any Scripture that teaches that God the Father can or has killed spiritually ANY of His children, your view cannot be supported from Scripture.

A son who is an enemy to his father is not going to want to spend time with Him and or have any relation with him (if he is being evil towards him and his other family who are good).

This only speaks of lack of fellowship, not loss of relationship.

God is not immoral; And He does care in how believers behave.

This isn't in dispute.

Also, there are dire consequences to one's soul in the after life if one does evil (Regardless of whether one is a believer or not).

You've failed to prove this theory. The one who has believed has been sealed with the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption, not the "day of condemnation" or "day of judgment".

Even human fathers today would not put up with horrible sins done by their own sons within their home. Sin can destroy homes and break them apart.

These kind of emotional appeals are meaningless from a Scriptural standpoint. God is a God of grace, which I've already pointed out that you don't understand.

And the Bible says there are children of disobedience.

Of course there are. And they will face discipline and loss of reward for it. But not loss of eternal life.

When I first meet a new group of believers in their home to share in the Lord's supper and to study the Scriptures and to praise God, this would be considered fellowship (even if I just met them). No prior relationship needs to be established for me to have fellowship with new believers.

So what? If any of them began to berate, insult, or assault you during that dinner, there would be no fellowship, right?

For John (and his group of believers where he was at) had desired to have fellowship with another group of believers he had written his epistle to. For John says,

"That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us" (1 John 1:3).

Why stop at v.3a? He wrote more: v.3b - And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ
6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus,his Son, purifies us from all sin.

Is one's relationship good or bad? This determines whether or not they will want to spend time with that person and have fellowship with them or not. Why would one expect to be in Heaven for bad behavior against God? Is this any different in the real world?

Just so you know, heaven is the real world. And it's permanent, unlike life on earth, which is just a passing through.

If one believes that a saint's holiness is not important with God in regards to one's salvation, then one has to ask themselves: - Why does Jesus say to certain believers to:

"Depart from me ye that work iniquity (i.e. lawlessness, or sin)."?

I must correct you once again; holiness is ALWAYS important to God. He wants His children to have the family resemblance and act like family. But there are no verses that teach that any believer will lose their eternal life.

Again, the person who stumbles into sin on their road to striving to overcoming sin is like the alcoholic who stumbles on his road to becoming sober free (saved).

Is this just an attempt to defend your own sin? Like a drunk?

What is clear is that you do not understand this verse: Gal 5:17 - For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature.They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want.

This verse shows WHY sinless perfection is not possible during this life.

There are different levels of Eternal Security.

What Scripture would lead one to this conclusion?

Some believe that a saint must generally live a holy life, but dying in one or two horrible unrepentant sins is not going to keep them out of God's Kingdom. They teach that all future sin is forgiven them and that no sin can separate a believer from God. Others believe that a believer can live in as much sin as they want and they will still be saved. Both versions of these groups believe in this mythical "fellowship sins" theory. Granted, there are some Eternal Security Proponents who do not believe in "fellowship sins", but they believe that sin on some level cannot separate them from God (Some believe that it takes a lot of sin to show that one is not saved and others believe that a saint can get away with one or two unconfessed sins).

Oh, so what was really meant wasn't "level" but views. I'm not interested in any view but what the Bible teaches. And the word "eternal life" means just that. When God gives His life to a believer (eternal life resulting in a new creation), that new life is PERMANENT, just as the new child of God has a PERMANENT RELATIONSHIP with God.

Eternal Security Proponents use the excuse of discipline as saying that they will not get away sin.

If one wants to call Biblical teaching an "excuse", that's your freedom.

But what about a person's free will? Can a believer just totally walk away from God and choose their old life of sin again having nothing more to do with the Lord?

It has happened. Yes, they can. Jesus said as much in Luke 8:13 - Those on the rock are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.

The 'falling away' refers to believing. Jesus actually said that some will believe for a while and then fall away.

If not, then one believes in Calvinism or forced salvation.

I don't believe in Calvinism at all, and your phrase "forced salvation" is as silly as saying that one's birth parents are "forced parents".

Are you forced to have the parents that birthed you physically? You'd better answer yes, because that's reality.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So, how do you propose one is a child of the devil?

I don't. Why would I? How do you propose that one is a child of the devil?

Regardless, it doesn't matter. The devil does NOT give birth to humans in a spiritual sense. Only God gives new birth to humans in a spiritual sense. So your example is irrelevant.

 

[FreeGrace2]

No, at the very beginning of the epistle, Paul says in verse 1 that he is addressing the faithful in Christ Jesus.

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus"
(Ephesians 1:1).....

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

Who are the saints? Believers. And Paul clearly addressed ALL believers at Ephesus, as well as "the faithful".

Your argument that he was only addressing the faithful fails.

 

[Butch5]

Ultimately Paul is talking to believers. Just as he is ultimately talking to believers in Romans 9 thru Romans 11 even though he is talking about his desire for Israel to be saved. Also, after re-reading this chapter, I am not so sure verse 12 is specifically talking to Jewish believers. For verse 12 simply says, "who first trusted in Christ." In other words, it is a general statement. Verse 12 does not specifically spell it out for us that this is speaking exclusively of the Jews. In fact, who first trusted in Christ? Yes, there were disciples who were Jewish who first trusted in Christ, but there were also Gentiles who ALSO first trusted in Christ during His earthly ministry, too (Like the Canaanite woman and the Romans soldier).

Besides, even if verse 12 is talking exclusively to Jewish believers (i.e. the disciples), this does not mean that the verses before it are talking exclusively to Jewish believers only. First, verse 12 starts a new thought. Also, if your interpretation is Jewish believers for verse 12, then you must interpret verse 13 as talking about the Gentiles (Which also begins a new thought), as well. Second, Paul believes there are no Jews or Gentiles in Christ Jesus.

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28).



...

You're ignoring the grammar. Verses 3-12 speak of the same group, we/us/ our. Verse 13 switches to a different group, you/your.

In verse 12 "first trusted" in not a good translation. The passage literally reads, "before hoped." The Gentiles had not placed their hope in the coming Jewish Messiah. It was the Jews who had "before hoped" in the Messiah.

In verse 8 Paul said,

8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Now, if this is talking about the Gentiles please tell me why Paul prays that the Gentiles will receive the understanding of the mystery of His will just a few verses later.

16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Additionally, Paul said in verse 11,

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Who had obtained an inheritance from God, the Jews or the Gentiles? It was the Jews.

3 And ye have seen all that the LORD your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the LORD your God is he that hath fought for you.
4 Behold, I have divided unto you by lot these nations that remain, to be an inheritance for your tribes, from Jordan, with all the nations that I have cut off, even unto the great sea westward. (Jos. 23:3-4 KJV)

The Jews had received an inheritance. However, in verse 13 of Ephesians 1 Paul tells the Gentiles that they had received a down payment on their inheritance.

 

[Butch5]

I said this:
"You never proved your claim that the "us" in 1:4 means only Jews. An unsubstantiated claim is all you've done."

There was no evidence. Just a claim. When did those 2 different words mean the same thing?


I continue to be perplexed about your so-called evidence. When does the word "us" become either a first or second person pronoun? The English word is simply a first person plural pronoun. A "second person" pronoun would be 'you'. Not "us".


You may continue to pretend that my doctrine needs protecting.


Sure. Paul's audience. Who else?

First you said there is no evidence and then you say there is so called evidence. That's a typical response when someone presents evidence that refutes one's position. I pointed out the pronouns, for reading what you wrote above, maybe you didn't understand it. The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what evidence is presented, you've chosen what you want to believe and that's the end of it. I think Jesus could come down and you give you some evidence and you'd reject that too!

 

[FreeGrace2]

First you said there is no evidence and then you say there is so called evidence.

I think you are very confused. I said that you have no evidence, and that I had evidence.

That's a typical response when someone presents evidence that refutes one's position.

Which is what I did.

I pointed out the pronouns, for reading what you wrote above, maybe you didn't understand it.

There is only 1 pronoun that is being discussed. It is the pronoun "us". It's found in Eph 1:4 and 1:19. It means "us who believe", as v.19 defines it. It cannot mean some other group since Paul was addressing the same people in v.4 that he was in v.19.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what evidence is presented, you've chosen what you want to believe and that's the end of it.

I believe what the Bible says. And Paul was clear to define what he meant by "us".

I think Jesus could come down and you give you some evidence and you'd reject that too!

And again, your thinking is wrong. But you are free to think whatever you'd like to think.

 

[FreeGrace2]

This is from post #431:

It's different because Paul starts out talking about God blessing the Jews in verses 3-12. Then in verse 13 he includes the Gentiles. His inclusion of the Gentiles in verse 13 would make the us in verse 19 different from the us prior to verse 13.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Paul begins the epistle by addressing the saints in Ephesus. In v.3 he tells the saints in Ephesus that God "has blessed US with every spiritual blessing IN CHRIST". That cannot be referring to Jews who have not believed in Christ. So the claim that Paul was talking about God blessings the Jews in v.3-12 is in error.

In ch 1 and 2, Paul uses the phrases "in Him/in Christ/through him/with Christ" 17 times.

In 1:13 he tells the saints in Ephesus that they were included IN CHRIST when they believed. So all the 17 phrases still refer to the saints in Ephesus.

So, the "us" in v.4 is still the SAME "us" as in v.19, which is "us who believe".

When Paul wanted to describe God's blessings to Jews, we find that in Rom 9. Not Eph 1.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Well, first, I want to say grace, peace, and love to you from the Lord Jesus Christ; And I hope your day is going well. Also, before we get into the debate on this point again with God's Word, I have been meaning to say that I like your avatar. In fact, I want to say I like squirrels a lot, too. They are amazing creatures that God created for us to learn from. When I used to live in Ohio, they used to give me joys of fun in just watching them. Here is an animated gif image of a squirrel having some fun with a kitty.



One of my other favorite creatures (that God created) is the Grasshopper Mouse.



While I have not seen an actual Grasshopper Mouse, I seen a highly produced documentary on them called "Tiny Giants" at my local Science Museum.

If you can't rent it on DVD, I highly recommend buying it; You will not be disappointed.
For I am not a documentary type person (Unless it deals with the Bible). But this documentary (that came out on DVD) is exceptional.

You're ignoring the grammar. Verses 3-12 speak of the same group, we/us/ our. Verse 13 switches to a different group, you/your.

Anyways, to get down to business,

Well, when you read verse 11, that says,

"In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians 1:11).

You also have to read verse 10 that says,

"That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:" (Ephesians 1:10).

Meaning, that thru Christ everyone has an inheritance in Him. Both Jews and Gentiles.

"God gave the promises to Abraham and his child. And notice that the Scripture doesn’t say “to his children,” as if it meant many descendants. Rather, it says “to his child”—and that, of course, means Christ." (Galatians 3:16 NLT).

In verse 12 "first trusted" in not a good translation. The passage literally reads, "before hoped." The Gentiles had not placed their hope in the coming Jewish Messiah. It was the Jews who had "before hoped" in the Messiah.

I am not against the idea that verse 12 can be translated as talking about the Jews. In fact, I agree with the rendering on the New Living Translation for Ephesians 1:12. However, verse 12 begins a new thought. There is no indication that verses 1-11 is talking to Jews exclusively.

In verse 8 Paul said,

8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Actually, the Jews as a whole rejected their Messiah and salvation went out to the Gentiles instead.

27 "For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it."
(Acts 28:27-28).​

Now, if this is talking about the Gentiles please tell me why Paul prays that the Gentiles will receive the understanding of the mystery of His will just a few verses later.

16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Paul says Titus was fully a Greek (Gentile) and that he was with him. For Paul says in Galatians,

"But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised."
(Galatians 2:3).​

And it is believed by scholars that Ephesians was written after Galatians.
In other words, verse 16 is merely Paul talking to the group of believers at Ephesus.

Additionally, Paul said in verse 11,

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Who had obtained an inheritance from God, the Jews or the Gentiles? It was the Jews.

3 And ye have seen all that the LORD your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the LORD your God is he that hath fought for you.
4 Behold, I have divided unto you by lot these nations that remain, to be an inheritance for your tribes, from Jordan, with all the nations that I have cut off, even unto the great sea westward. (Jos. 23:3-4 KJV)

The Jews had received an inheritance. However, in verse 13 of Ephesians 1 Paul tells the Gentiles that they had received a down payment on their inheritance.

Again, Jews and Gentiles have obtained an inheritance of God thru Christ.

"And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, 'Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed." (Acts 3:25).​

This offspring is speaking of Jesus and not "offspring" or "seed" as in "many" as Galatians 3:16 points out. For all the nations of the Earth will be blessed by Abraham's offspring or seed known as Jesus Christ (i.e. "seed" being singular and not plural which would be "seeds").

"For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."
(Galatians 3:26).

For...

28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."
(Galatians 3:28-29).

For when believers will be physically resurrected bodily, both Jews and Gentiles will be resurrected after the body of Jesus Christ.

For Christ is the first fruits of the resurrection.

20 "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."
(1 Corinthians 15:20-22).



...