Ephesians 第4章 · Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament · 注解書

章別注解

Ephesians 4章

対応言語の状況英韓日中(簡) 中(繁)

英繁體中文 2言語比較

聖書本文を読む原語対訳 32節引照 756件小見出し 4個

EPH 4:1

本文を開く

繁體中文

第四章

關乎合一的勸勉，第1-16節——關乎聖潔與各樣德行的勸勉，第17-32節。

以弗所書四章1-16節

分析

使徒勸勉讀者行事為人當與蒙召的恩相稱。這樣的行事為人當以謙虛、溫柔、忍耐，並促進屬靈合一與和睦的熱心為特徵，以弗所書四章1-3節。教會是一，因為它是一個身體，同有一位聖靈、一個指望、一主、一信、一洗、一神——就是眾人的父，超乎眾人之上、貫乎眾人之中、也住在眾人之內，以弗所書四章4-6節。

然而這合一與恩賜的極大多樣性並不相悖，這些恩賜是基督按自己的旨意分配的，以弗所書四章7節。這由詩篇的一段經文所證實，該段論到彌賽亞將各樣恩賜賞給人；該段經文被證明必是指着基督說的，因為它論到一位神聖的位格升上天堂，這必然意味着先前曾降在地上，以弗所書四章9-10節。基督賜給他教會的恩賜就是各類傳道人——使徒、先知、傳福音的，以及作教師的牧者，以弗所書四章11節。傳道職分的設計是教會的造就，要把其所有成員帶到信仰與認識的合一、並帶到基督長成的身量；使他們不再有孩童的不穩定，而成為一個堅固、緊密、且與其元首基督生命聯合中長進的身體，以弗所書四章12-16節。

註釋

以弗所書四章1-3節

Παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ ὁ δέσμιος ἐν Κυρίῳ。這勸勉是一般性的；它源於上文的教義，並以那賜勸勉者的權柄與受苦來強調。「你們既與基督所買來的救贖有分，所以我勸你們。」我這為主——不是「屬」主，而是「在主裏」——被囚的，ἐν Κυρίῳ。他之所以為囚，是因為他在主裏面、並為主的緣故。他是作為基督徒、為基督的 cause 受捆鎖的。比較常見的說法：συνεργὸς ἐν Χριστῷ、ἀγαπητὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ、δόκιμος ἐν Χριστῷ、ἐκλεκτὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ。他作為囚徒說話，不是為惹人同情，也不僅是為加重他勸勉的分量，而是寧可誇口自己被算為配為基督受苦。這與提阿多勒那美麗的評註相符：τοῖς διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν δεσμοῖς ἐναβρύνεται μᾶλλον ἢ βασιλεὺς διαδήματι——他以他的鎖鏈誇口，勝過君王以冠冕誇口。「我這殉道者保羅、這戴冠冕的使徒，勸你們」云云。如此一切都與標誌着上文那高尚的情感格調相符。

這勸勉是：ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε——行事為人當與他們蒙召的恩相稱。那呼召是成為兒子的呼召，以弗所書一章5節。這包含三件事——聖潔、高升與合一。他們蒙召是要效法基督的形象、有分於他的高升與榮耀、並組成一個家——因為都是神的兒女。與這樣的呼召相稱的為人，因此當以聖潔、謙卑、互相寬容與弟兄之愛為特徵。因此使徒立即加上：「凡事謙虛、溫柔」。不配得的尊榮總是在慷慨之人的心中產生這些效果。從敗壞與痛苦的深淵中被舉起、成為神的兒子、如此被高舉到不可思議的高位與尊嚴，確實且必然產生謙卑與溫柔。哪裏找不到這些效果，我們便可斷定那高升尚未發生。謙卑（ταπεινοφροσύνη）包含因罪惡感與軟弱的意識而有的對自己的低評估，以及隨之而來的情願居低、不被注意、不受稱讚的傾向。它不但與自滿和自負相對，也與自高自大、抬舉自己以吸引從人而來的尊榮相對。羅馬書十二章16節教導了這一點，在那裏 τὰ ὑψηλά（尋求高位）與此處所教導的謙卑相對。謙卑與溫柔之間有自然的聯繫，因此它們在此如在許多別處一樣被連在一起。Πραότης 是柔和、溫和、柔順，當與力量聯合時，乃是我們本性中最可愛的屬性之一。那蒙福的救主論到自己說：「我心裏柔和（πραΰς）謙卑」，馬太福音十一章29節；使徒也論到「基督的溫柔」，哥林多後書十章1節。溫柔是那不抗拒、不抱怨的心靈狀態，使我們能不帶惱怒或怨恨地忍受別人的過錯或傷害。它是那以剪毛人手下默默無聲的羊羔為記號的狀態，也是神兒子一切美德中最奇妙的一項。最崇高的一位乃是最溫柔的。

與我們蒙召之恩相稱的第三項相關美德是忍耐——μακροθυμία，一種導致抑制憤怒的狀態（哥林多後書六章6節；加拉太書三章22節（原文五章22節）；歌羅西書三章12節）；導致推延刑罰的施行，因此常歸於神（羅馬書二章4節、九章22節；彼得前書三章10節）；並對我們同胞有忍耐的寬容（提摩太後書四章2節；提摩太前書一章16節）。它由隨後的話解釋：「用愛心互相寬容」。或者更確切地說，謙卑、溫柔與忍耐這三項美德，都在這互相寬容中得到說明與彰顯。ἀνέχω 是抑制，ἀνέχομαι 是抑制自己，ἀνεχόμενοι ἀλλήλων ἐν ἀγάπῃ 因此意為「在愛中彼此抑制自己」——讓愛促使你們彼此寬容。

我們譯者所採的構造，優於把 μακροθυμίας 與 ἀνεχόμενοι 相連（「用忍耐寬容」），也優於把 ἐν ἀγάπῃ 從本子句拆開而與隨後的子句相連、讀作 ἐν ἀγάπῃ σπουδάζοντες。分詞 σπουδάζοντες 當然與上文相連。他們當行事為人與蒙召的恩相稱，互相寬容，竭力保守聖靈的合一。關於「聖靈的合一」一語，有三種解釋：

教會的合一，如格老丟所言：unitatem ecclesiae, quod est corpus spirituale（教會的合一，這是一個屬靈的身體）。使徒要是以弗所人在教會中彰顯他們被一位靈所感動，以代替如哥林多教會所顯出的那種不和睦——不僅表現於分黨，也表現於那些有屬靈恩賜者之間的「靈」之衝突或爭論。但這不僅與諸字簡單的意義無干，也與上下文無干。
假定「靈」字指人的靈，「靈的合一」意為 concordia animorum——心思的和谐。
唯一與這些字的一般用法及上下文相符的解釋，是使此語意為那以聖靈為創始者的合一。

聖經各處都說聖靈的內住是基督身體合一的原則。這合一可被促進或擾亂。勸勉的是當以最大的熱心來保持它；而保持它的手段便是「和平的聯絡」——即那作為和平的聯絡。從愛、謙卑、溫柔與互相寬容而來的和平，對基督身體各肢體的聯合與交通是不可或缺的，這交通是聖靈同在的果子與憑據。正如基督徒之間的恨惡、驕傲與紛爭使聖靈離開他們，照樣愛與和平確保他的同在。由於他的同在是一切福氣的條件與源頭，他的離開是一切災禍的源頭，這所吩咐之責任的重要性便無論怎樣高估都不為過。我們的主說：「使人和睦的人有福了。」那些在教會中——教會既包括不同國家、風俗、名稱與宗派的人——不協調的分子之間竭力保守那作為聖靈同在條件的和平的人，是有福的。使徒在本書信如同在他的別處書信中一樣，努力使猶太與外邦基督徒達到這互相寬容的靈，並使他們確信我們在基督耶穌裏都成為一了。

正如歌羅西書三章14節說愛是「完全的聯絡」，許多註釋者便理解本段的「和平的聯絡」為愛。本格爾如此說：Vinculum quo pax retinetur est ipse amor（保持和平的聯絡就是愛本身）。但由於這兩段經文並非真正平行，又由於在歌羅西書中提到愛而在此處沒有；也由於不偏離諸字明顯意義時意義便已簡明而良好，因此大多數註釋者採用上述見解。

return to '

英語原文

Chapter IV

An exhortation to unity, vs. 1-16 — an exhortation to holiness and to specific virtues, vs. 17-32.

Ephesians 4:1-16

Analysis

The apostle exhorts his readers to walk worthy of their vocation. Such a walk should be characterized by humility, meekness, long-suffering, and zeal to promote spiritual unity and peace, Ephesians 4:1-3. The church is one because it is one body, has one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father who is over, through, and in all its members, Ephesians 4:4-6.

This unity, however, is consistent with great diversity of gifts, which Christ distributes according to his own will, Ephesians 4:7. This is confirmed by a passage from the Psalms which speaks of the Messiah as giving gifts to men; which passage it is shown must refer to Christ, since it speaks of a divine person ascending to heaven, which necessarily implies a preceding descent to the earth, Ephesians 4:9-10. The gifts which Christ bestows on his church are the various classes of ministers, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors who are teachers, Ephesians 4:11. The design of the ministry is the edification of the church, and to bring all its members to unity of faith and knowledge, and to the full stature of Christ; that they should no longer have the instability of children, but be a firm, compact, and growing body in living union with Christ its head, Ephesians 4:12-16.

Commentary

Ephesians 4:1-3

Παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ ὁ δέσμιος ἐν Κυρίῳ. The exhortation is a general one; it flows from the preceding doctrines, and is enforced by the authority, and the sufferings of him who gave it. As you are partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ, “I therefore beseech you.” I the prisoner, not of, but in the Lord, ἐν Κυρίῳ He was a prisoner because he was in the Lord and for his sake. It was as a Christian and in the cause of Christ he suffered bonds. Compare the frequently occurring expressions, συνεργὸς ἐν Χριστῷ, ἀγαπητὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ, δόκιμος ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐκλεκτὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ. He speaks as a prisoner not to excite sympathy, not merely to add weight to his exhortation, but rather as exulting that he was counted worthy to suffer for Christ’s sake. This is in accordance with the beautiful remark of Theodoret: τοῖς διὰ τὸν Κριστὸν δεσμοῖς ἐναβρύνεται μᾶλλον ἤ βασιλεὺς διαδήματι, he glories in his chains more than a king in his diadem. ‘I, the martyr Paul, the crowned apostle, exhort you,’ etc. All is thus in keeping with the elevated tone of feeling which marks the preceding passage.

The exhortation is, ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε, to walk worthy of the vocation wherewith they were called. That vocation was to sonship; Ephesians 1:5. This includes three things — holiness, exaltation, and unity. They were called to be conformed to the image of Christ, to share in his exaltation and glory, and to constitute one family as all are the children of God. A conversation becoming such a vocation, therefore, should be characterized by holiness, humility, and mutual forbearance, and brotherly love. The apostle, therefore, immediately adds, with all lowliness and meekness. Undeserved honor always produces these effects upon the ingenuous. To be raised from the depths of degradation and misery and made the sons of God, and thus exalted to an inconceivable elevation and dignity, does and must produce humility and meekness. Where these effects are not found, we may conclude the exaltation has not taken place. Lowliness of mind, ταπεινοφροσύνης, includes a low estimate of one’s self, founded on the consciousness of guilt and weakness, and a consequent disposition to be low, unnoticed, and unpraised. It stands opposed not only to self-complacency and self-conceit, but also to self-exaltation, and setting one’s self up to attract the honor which comes from men. This is taught in Romans 12:16, where τὰ ὑψηλὰ, seeking high things, is opposed to the lowliness of mind here inculcated. There. is a natural connection between humility and meekness, and therefore they are here joined together as in so many other places. Πραότης is softness, mildness, gentleness, which when united with strength, is one of the loveliest attributes of our nature. The blessed Savior says of himself, “I am meek (πρᾶος) and lowly in heart,” Matthew 11:29; and the apostle speaks of “the gentleness of Christ,” 2 Corinthians 10:1. Meekness is that unresisting, uncomplaining disposition of mind, which enables us to bear without irritation or resentment the faults or injuries of others. It is the disposition of which the lamb, dumb before the shearers, is the symbol, and which was one of the most wonderful of all the virtues of the Son of God. The most exalted of all beings was the gentlest.

The third associated virtue which becomes the vocation where with we are called, is long-suffering; μακροθυμία, a disposition which leads to the suppression of anger, 2 Corinthians 6:6; Galatians 3:22; Colossians 3:12; to deferring the infliction of punishment, and is therefore often attributed to God, Romans 2:4; Romans 9:22; 1 Peter 3:10; and to patient forbearance towards our fellow men, 2 Timothy 4:2; 1 Timothy 1:16. It is explained by what follows, forbearing one another in love. Or, rather, the three virtues, humility, meekness, and long-suffering, are all illustrated and manifested in this mutual forbearance. Ἀνέχρς, is to restrain, ἀνέχομαι, to restrain oneself, ἀνεχόμενοι ἀλλήλων ἐν ἀγάπῃ, therefore, means restraining yourselves in reference to each other in love. Let love induce you to be forbearing towards each other.

The construction of the passage adopted by our translators is preferable to either connecting μετὰ μακροθυμίας with ἀνεχόμενοι “with long-suffering forbearing,” or detaching ἐν ἀγάπῃ from this clause and connecting it with the following one, so as to read ἐν ἀγάπῃ σπουδάζοντες. The participle σπουδάζοντες is of course connected with what precedes. They were to walk worthy of their vocation, forbearing one another, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit. Of the phrase unity of the spirit, there are three interpretations:

Ecclesiastical unity, so Grotius: unitatem ecclesiae, quod est corpus spirituale. Instead of that discordance manifested in the church of Corinth, for example, not only in their division into parties, but in the conflict of “spirits,” or contentions among those endowed with spiritual gifts, the apostle would have the Ephesians manifest in the church that they were animated by one spirit. But this is foreign not only to the simple meaning of the terms, but also to the context.
The word spirit is assumed to refer to the human spirit, and the unity of the spirit to mean, concordia animorum, or harmony.
The only interpretation in accordance with the ordinary usage of the words and with the context, is that which makes the phrase in question mean that unity of which the Spirit is the author.

Everywhere the indwelling of the Holy Ghost is said to be the principle of unity in the body of Christ. This unity may be promoted or disturbed. The exhortation is that the greatest zeal should be exercised in its preservation; and the means by which it is to be preserved is the bond of peace. That is, that bond which is peace. The peace which results from love, humility, meekness, and mutual forbearance, is essential to the union and communion of the members of Christ’s body, which is the fruit and evidence of the Spirit’s presence. As hatred, pride and contention among Christians cause the Spirit to withdraw from them, so love and peace secure his presence. And as his presence is the condition and source of all good, and his absence the source of all evil, the importance of the duty enjoined cannot be overestimated. Our Lord said: “Blessed are the peacemakers.” Blessed are those who endeavor to preserve among the discordant elements of the church, including as it does men of different nations, manners, names and denominations, that peace which is the condition of the Spirit’s presence. The apostle labors in this, as in his other epistles, to bring the Jewish and Gentile Christians to this spirit of mutual forbearance, and to convince them that we are all one in Christ Jesus.‹12›

As in Colossians 3:14, love is said to be “the bond of perfectness,” many commentators understand “the bond of peace” in this passage to be love. So Bengel: Vinculum quo pax retinetur est ipse amor. But as the passages are not really parallel, and as in Colossians love is mentioned and here it is not; and as the sense is simple and good without any deviation from the plain meaning of the words, the great majority of interpreters adopt the view given above.

return to '

1-16

An Exhortation To Unity, Vs. 1-16.—An Exhortation To Holiness And To Specific Virtues, Vs. 17-32.

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:2

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Chapter IV

An exhortation to unity, vs. 1-16 — an exhortation to holiness and to specific virtues, vs. 17-32.

Ephesians 4:1-16

Analysis

Commentary

Ephesians 4:1-3

Ecclesiastical unity, so Grotius: unitatem ecclesiae, quod est corpus spirituale. Instead of that discordance manifested in the church of Corinth, for example, not only in their division into parties, but in the conflict of “spirits,” or contentions among those endowed with spiritual gifts, the apostle would have the Ephesians manifest in the church that they were animated by one spirit. But this is foreign not only to the simple meaning of the terms, but also to the context.
The word spirit is assumed to refer to the human spirit, and the unity of the spirit to mean, concordia animorum, or harmony.
The only interpretation in accordance with the ordinary usage of the words and with the context, is that which makes the phrase in question mean that unity of which the Spirit is the author.

return to '

EPH 4:3

本文を開く

繁體中文

第四章

合而為一的勸勉，第 1-16 節——聖潔以及各項德行的勸勉，第 17-32 節。

以弗所書 4:1-16

分析

使徒勸勉讀者行事為人要與所蒙的召相稱。這樣的行事為人當以謙虛、溫柔、忍耐，並以促進屬靈合一與和平的熱心為特徵，以弗所書 4:1-3。教會是一，因為它是一個身體，有一位聖靈、一個盼望、一主、一信、一洗、一位超乎眾人、貫乎眾人、在眾人之中的神和父，以弗所書 4:4-6。

然而，這合一與恩賜的大有分別相符——基督按自己的旨意分配這些恩賜，以弗所書 4:7。這由詩篇的一段經文所證實，該段論到彌賽亞將各樣恩賜賞給人；這段經文必是指基督而言，因為它論到一位升上高天的神聖人物，這必然蘊含先前的降下地上，以弗所書 4:9-10。基督賜給他教會的恩賜，就是各類的工人——使徒、先知、傳福音的、以及作教師的牧師，以弗所書 4:11。聖職的目的是建造教會，並把所有成員帶到信仰和認識的合一，以及基督豐滿的身量；使他們不再作小孩子搖擺不定，而是作為一個堅固、緊密而成長的身體，與作為其元首的基督活的聯合，以弗所書 4:12-16。

註解

以弗所書 4:1-3

Παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ ὁ δέσμιος ἐν Κυρίῳ（所以我這為主被囚的勸你們）。這勸勉是一般性的；它源於前述的教義，並藉著賜下這勸勉者的權威和苦難來加強。「你們既是有分於基督所買贖的救贖，所以我勸你們」。我——這為主被囚的——不是主的囚犯，而是 在主裏面 的囚犯（ἐν Κυρίῳ）。他是囚犯，因為他在主裏面、並為主的緣故。正是作為基督徒、為基督的緣故，他忍受了捆鎖。比較屢屢出現的表達——συνεργὸς ἐν Χριστῷ（在基督裏的同工）、ἀγαπητὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ（在主裏蒙愛的）、δόκιμος ἐν Χριστῷ（在基督裏蒙悅納的）、ἐκλεκτὸς ἐν Κυρίῳ（在主裏蒙揀選的）。他以囚犯身分說話，不是為了激發同情，也不僅是為了加重勸勉的份量，而是寧可為自己被算為配為基督受苦而誇口。這與 Theodoret 一段美麗的話相符：τοῖς διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν δεσμοῖς ἐναβρύνεται μᾶλλον ἤ βασιλεὺς διαδήματι（他在鎖鏈中的誇耀勝過君王對冠冕的誇耀）。「我——殉道者保羅、加冕的使徒——勸你們」，云云。這一切都與前文那種崇高的情感語調相符。

這勸勉是 ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε——行事為人與所蒙的召相稱。那呼召是歸於兒子名分（以弗所書 1:5）。這包括三件事——聖潔、高升、合一。他們被召效法基督的形像，有分於他的高升和榮耀，並構成一個家庭——因為都是神的兒女。所以與這樣的呼召相稱的行事為人，當以聖潔、謙卑、彼此包容、弟兄相愛為特徵。所以使徒立即加上：以 一切謙虛、溫柔。不配得的尊榮在赤誠的人身上恆產生這些效果。從敗壞和悲慘的深淵被提拔，成為神的兒女，並因此被高升到不可思議的高貴與尊榮——這確實產生、也必須產生謙虛和溫柔。這些效果若不存在，我們便可斷定那高升尚未發生。謙虛（ταπεινοφροσύνης）包括對自己的低評——建基於對罪咎和軟弱的意識——以及隨之而來甘於卑微、不被注意、不被稱讚的傾向。它不僅與自滿和自誇相對，也與自高以及高抬自己以吸引從人而來的尊榮相對。這教訓見於羅馬書 12:16——那裏 τὰ ὑψηλὰ（追求高位）與此處所教導的謙虛相對。謙虛與溫柔之間有自然的關聯，因此此處如許多別處一樣，兩者並列。Πραότης 是柔和、溫良、溫柔——當與力量結合時，乃是我們本性中最可愛的屬性之一。蒙福的救主論到自己說：「我心裏柔和（πρᾶος）謙卑」（馬太福音 11:29）；使徒論到「基督的溫柔」（哥林多後書 10:1）。溫柔是那不抗拒、不抱怨的心思狀態——使我們能毫無激動或怨恨地忍受別人的過失或傷害。這是在剪毛人手下沉默的羔羊所象徵的狀態，也是神兒子一切美德中最奇妙的一項。那位至高無上者乃是最溫柔的。

第三項與我們所蒙之召相稱的相連德行是忍耐（μακροθυμία）——一種導致抑制憤怒的傾向（哥林多後書 6:6、加拉太書 3:22、歌羅西書 3:12）；推遲施加刑罰，因此常歸於神（羅馬書 2:4、羅馬書 9:22、彼得前書 3:10）；以及對同胞有耐心地包容（提摩太後書 4:2、提摩太前書 1:16）。這由隨後的話語解釋：用愛心互相寬容。或者更恰當地說，謙虛、溫柔、忍耐這三項德行，都在這彼此寬容中得著說明和彰顯。Ἀνέχρς 是「約束」；ἀνέχομαι 是「約束自己」；ἀνεχόμενοι ἀλλήλων ἐν ἀγάπῃ 因此意指「在愛中彼此約束自己」——讓愛激發你們彼此寬容。

譯本所採的本段句構，優於「以忍耐彼此寬容」（把 μετὰ μακροθυμίας 與 ἀνεχόμενοι 相連），或把 ἐν ἀγάπῃ 從這子句分出而與下一子句相連（讀作 ἐν ἀγάπῃ σπουδάζοντες）。分詞 σπουδάζοντες（竭力）當然與上文相連。他們當行事為人與所蒙的召相稱、彼此寬容、竭力保守聖靈的合一。對「聖靈的合一」一語，有三種解釋：

教會的合一，Grotius 如是說：unitatem ecclesiae, quod est corpus spirituale（教會的合一——這教會是屬靈的身體）。使徒要以弗所人在教會中彰顯他們受同一位靈所感——而非如哥林多教會那樣，不僅分黨結派，又有「靈」的衝突，或蒙屬靈恩賜者之間的爭競。但這不僅與這些字的簡單意義相違，也與上下文相違。
假定 spirit（靈）一字指人的靈，而「靈的合一」意指 concordia animorum（人心的和諧）。
惟一與這些字的尋常用法和上下文相符的解釋，是把這片語理解為意指「聖靈所成就的合一」。

聖經各處都說聖靈的內住是基督身體的合一原則。這合一可被促進或被擾亂。這勸勉是要人以最大的熱心保守它；而保守它的方式是「和平的聯絡」——即作為和平的那聯絡。由愛、謙虛、溫柔、彼此寬容所生的和平，對基督身體分子的聯合與相通是必要的——這是聖靈同在的果子與憑據。正如基督徒之間的仇恨、驕傲、爭競使聖靈從他們中間退去，照樣愛與和平確保他的同在。而他的同在是一切美善的條件和源頭，他的離去是一切邪惡的源頭，故此處所吩咐之本分的重要性，無論怎樣高估都不為過。我們的主說：「使人和睦的人有福了」。凡在教會內那些不和諧的分子之中——教會包括不同國族、風俗、名稱、宗派的人——竭力保守那作為聖靈同在條件的和平的人，是有福的。使徒在本書信如在其他書信中一樣，竭力使猶太與外邦基督徒達到這種彼此寬容的靈，並使他們確信我們 在基督耶穌裏都成為一了。

由於在歌羅西書 3:14 中，愛被說成是「完全的聯絡」（the bond of perfectness），許多註釋家把本段的「和平的聯絡」理解為愛。Bengel 如是說：Vinculum quo pax retinetur est ipse amor。但由於這兩段並非真正平行，且在歌羅西書中提到愛而此處未提；又由於不必偏離這些字的明顯意義，意義便已簡單而良好，故大多數註釋家採取上述的解釋。

（返回以弗所書 4:3）

英語原文

Chapter IV

An exhortation to unity, vs. 1-16 — an exhortation to holiness and to specific virtues, vs. 17-32.

Ephesians 4:1-16

Analysis

Commentary

Ephesians 4:1-3

Ecclesiastical unity, so Grotius: unitatem ecclesiae, quod est corpus spirituale. Instead of that discordance manifested in the church of Corinth, for example, not only in their division into parties, but in the conflict of “spirits,” or contentions among those endowed with spiritual gifts, the apostle would have the Ephesians manifest in the church that they were animated by one spirit. But this is foreign not only to the simple meaning of the terms, but also to the context.
The word spirit is assumed to refer to the human spirit, and the unity of the spirit to mean, concordia animorum, or harmony.
The only interpretation in accordance with the ordinary usage of the words and with the context, is that which makes the phrase in question mean that unity of which the Spirit is the author.

return to '

EPH 4:4

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:4, Ephesians 4:5

Having urged the duty of preserving unity, the apostle proceeds to state both its nature and grounds. It is a unity which arises from the fact — there is and can be but one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God.

One body, ἓν σῶμα. This is not an exhortation, but a declaration. The meaning is not, Let us be united in one body, or in soul and body; but, as the context requires, it is a simple declaration. There is, one body, viz. one mystical body of Christ. All believers are in Christ; they are all his members; they constitute not many, much less conflicting bodies, but one. “We, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.” Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 10:17; 1 Corinthians 12:27. In Ephesians 1:23, the church is said “to be his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all.” As all true believers are members of this body, and as all are not included in any one external organization, it is obvious that the one body of which the apostle speaks, is not one outward visible society, but a spiritual body of which Christ is the head and all the renewed are members. The relation, therefore, in which believers stand to each other, is that which subsists between the several members of the human body. A want of sympathy is evidence of want of membership.

One spirit, ἓν πνεῦμα. This again does not mean one heart. It is not an exhortation to unanimity of feeling, or a declaration that such unanimity exists. Quasi diceret, nos penitus corpore et anima, non ex parte duntaxat, debere esse unitos. The context and the analogy of Scripture, as a comparison of parallel passages would evince, prove that by spirit is meant the Holy Spirit. As there is one body, so there is one Spirit, which is the life of that body and dwells in all its members. “By one Spirit,” says the apostle, “are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.” 1 Corinthians 12:13. Of all believers, he says, “The Spirit of God dwelleth in you.” 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Romans 8:9, Romans 8:11. There is no doctrine of Scripture more plainly revealed than that the Spirit of God dwells in all believers, and that his presence is the ultimate ground of their unity as the body of Christ. As the human body is one because pervaded by one soul; so the body of Christ is one because it is pervaded by one and the same Spirit, who dwelling in all is a common principle of life. All sins against unity, are, therefore, sins against the Holy Ghost. They dissever that which he binds together. Our relation to Christ as members of his body; and our relation to the Holy Spirit who is our life, demands of us that we love our brethren and live at peace with them.

Even as ye are called in one hope of your calling, καθὼς καὶ ἐκλήθητε ἐν μιᾷ ἐλπίδι τῆς κλήσεως ὑμῶν. Inasmuch as. That is, believers are one body and have one spirit, because they have one hope. The fact that they all have the same high destiny, and are filled with the same expectations, proves that they are one. The unity of their hope is another evidence and element of the communion of saints. The Holy Ghost dwelling in them gives rise to the same aspirations, to the same anticipations of the same glorious inheritance, to a participation of which they had been called. The word hope is sometimes used for the things hoped for, as when the apostle speaks of the hope laid up in heaven. Colossians 1:5. See also Titus 2:13; Hebrews 6:18. Most frequently of course it has its subjective sense, viz. the expectation of future good. There is no reason for departing from that sense here, though the other is intimately allied with it, and is necessarily implied. It is because the object is the same, that the expectation is the same. Hope of your calling, is the hope which flows from your vocation. The inward, effectual call of the Holy Spirit gives rise to this hope for two reasons. First, because their call is to the inheritance of the saints in light. They naturally hope to obtain what they are invited to receive. They are invited to reconciliation and fellowship with God, and therefore they hope for his salvation; and in the second place, the nature of this call makes it productive of hope. It is at once an earnest and a foretaste of their future inheritance. See Ephesians 1:14, and 1 Corinthians 1:22. It assures the believer of his interest in the blessings of redemption, Romans 8:16; and as a drop of water makes the thirsty traveler long for the flowing stream, so the first fruits of the Spirit, his first sanctifying operations on the heart, cause it to thirst after God. Psalms 42:1, Psalms 42:2. Hope includes both expectation and desire, and therefore the inward work of the Spirit being of the nature both of an earnest and a foretaste, it necessarily produces hope.

Another ground of the unity of the church is, that all its members have one Lord. Lordship includes the ideas of possession and authority. A lord, in proper sense, is both owner and sovereign. When used in reference to God or Christ, the word expresses these ideas in the highest degree. Christ is The Lord, i.e. omnium rerum summus dominus et possessor. He is our Lord, i.e. our rightful owner and absolute sovereign. This proprietorship and sovereignty pertain to the soul and to the body. We are not our own, and should glorify him in our body and spirit which are his. Our reason is subject to his teaching, our conscience to his commands, our hearts and lives to his control. We are his slaves. And herein consists our liberty. It is the felix necessitas boni of which Augustine speaks. It is analogous to absolute subjection to truth and holiness, only it is to a person who is infinite in knowledge and in excellence. This lordship over us belongs to Christ not merely as God, or as the Logos, but as the Theanthropos. It is founded not simply on his divinity, but also and specially on the work of redemption. We are his because he has bought us with his own most precious blood. 1 Corinthians 6:20 : 1 Peter 1:1. For this end he both died and rose again, that he might be Lord both of dead and of living. Romans 14:9. Such being the nature and the grounds of the sovereignty of Christ, it necessarily binds together his people. The slaves of one master and the subjects of the same sovereign are intimately united among themselves, although the ownership and authority are merely external. But when, as in our relation to Christ, the proprietorship and sovereignty are absolute, extending to the soul as well as to the body, the union is unspeakably more intimate. Loyalty to a common Lord and master animates with one spirit all the followers of Christ.

One faith. This is the fifth bond of union enumerated by the apostle. Many commentators deny that the word πίστις is ever used for the object of faith, or the things believed; they therefore deny that one faith here means one creed. But as this interpretation is in accordance with the general usage of language, and as there are so many cases in which the objective sense of the word is best suited to the context, there seems to be no sufficient reason for refusing to admit it. In Galatians 1:23, Paul says, “He preached the faith;” in Acts 6:7, men, it is said, “were obedient to the faith.” The apostle Jude speaks of “the faith once delivered to the saints.” In these and in many other instances the objective sense is the natural one. In many cases both senses of the word may be united. It may be said of speculative believers that they have one faith, so far as they profess the same creed, however they may differ in their real convictions. All the members of the Church of England have one faith, because they all profess to adopt the Thirty-Nine Articles, although the greatest diversity of doctrine prevails among them. But true believers have one faith, not only because they profess the same creed, but also because they really and inwardly embrace it. Their union, therefore, is not merely an external union, but inward and spiritual. They have the same faith objectively and subjectively. This unity of faith is not perfect. That, as the apostle tells us in a subsequent part of this chapter, is the goal towards which the church contends. Perfect unity in faith implies perfect knowledge and perfect holiness. It is only as to fundamental doctrines, those necessary to piety and therefore necessary to salvation, that this unity can be affirmed of the whole church as it now exists on earth. Within these limits all the true people of God are united. They all receive the Scriptures as the word of God, and acknowledge themselves subject to their teachings. They all recognize and worship the Lord Jesus as the Son of God. They all trust to his blood for redemption and to his Spirit for sanctification.

One baptism. Under the old dispensation when a Gentile became a Jew, he professed to accede to the covensant which God had made with his people, and he received the sign of circumcision not only as a badge of discipleship but as the seal of the covenant. All the circumcised therefore were foederati, men bound together by the bonds of a covenant which united them to the same God and to each other. So under the new dispensation the baptized are foederati; men bound together in covenant with Christ and with each other. There is but one baptism. All the baptized make the same profession, accept the same covenant, and are consecrated to the same Lord and Redeemer. They are, therefore, one body. “For as many as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. 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 3:27, Galatians 3:28.

return to '

EPH 4:5

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:5

使徒既已敦促當保守合一，便接著說明合一的性質與根基。這是一種由以下事實產生的合一——只能有一個身體、一位聖靈、一個指望、一主、一信、一洗、一神。

一個身體，ἓν σῶμα。這不是命令，而是宣告。意思不是「讓我們聯合成一個身體，或靈與身合而為一」；乃是如上下文所要求的，是一個簡單的宣告。就是有一個身體，即基督的一個奧祕的身體。所有信徒都在基督裏；他們都是他的肢體；他們構成的不是許多身體，更不是彼此衝突的身體，而是一個。「我們這許多人，在基督裏成為一身，互相聯絡作肢體」（羅馬書 12:5；哥林多前書 10:17；哥林多前書 12:27）。在以弗所書 1:23 中說，教會「是他的身體，是那充滿萬有者所充滿的」。既然所有真信徒都是這身體的肢體，而所有信徒又並不都包括在任何一個外在的組織之內，那麼顯然使徒所說的這一個身體，不是一個外在可見的團體，而是一個屬靈的身體——基督是頭，所有重生的人都是肢體。因此，信徒彼此之間的關係，就如同人身體各肢體之間所有的關係。缺乏同情，便是缺乏肢體關係的明證。

一位聖靈，ἓν πνεῦμα。這同樣不是指「一個心」。它不是要我們同心同意的勸勉，也不是宣告這種同意已經存在。Quasi diceret, nos penitus corpore et anima, non ex parte duntaxat, debere esse unitos。上下文與聖經的類比（比較平行經文便可證明）都表明，這裏的「靈」是指聖靈。正如有一個身體，照樣也有一位聖靈，他是那身體的生命，並住在所有肢體之內。使徒說：「我們都從一位聖靈受洗，成為了一個身體，無論是猶太人、希臘人、為奴的、自主的，都從一位聖靈飲於一位聖靈」（哥林多前書 12:13）。論到一切信徒，他說：「神的靈住在你們裏頭」（哥林多前書 3:16；哥林多前書 6:19；羅馬書 8:9、羅馬書 8:11）。聖經中沒有比這更清楚地啟示的真理：神的靈住在所有信徒裏面，而他的同在乃是他們作為基督身體之合一的終極根基。正如人的身體因被一個魂所貫穿而成為一；照樣，基督的身體也因被同一位聖靈所貫穿而成為一——這位聖靈住在眾人裏面，是共同的生命原則。因此，一切破壞合一的罪，都是得罪聖靈的罪。它們割裂了聖靈所聯結的。我們作為他身體之肢體與基督的關係，以及我們與作為我們生命的聖靈的關係，都要求我們愛弟兄，並與他們和睦同居。

正如你們蒙召，同有一個指望，καθὼς καὶ ἐκλήθητε ἐν μιᾷ ἐλπίδι τῆς κλήσεως ὑμῶν——「既然如此」。就是說，信徒是一個身體、有一位聖靈，是因為他們有一個指望。他們既有同一崇高命運、滿有同一盼望這一事實，便證明他們是一。指望的合一是聖徒相通的另一個證據和要素。住在裏面的聖靈引發相同的渴慕、對同一榮耀基業的相同期待——他們正是蒙召得以承受這基業的。「指望」一詞有時指所盼望的事，如使徒說到「為你們存在天上的盼望」（歌羅西書 1:5），並見提多書 2:13；希伯來書 6:18。當然最常見的是其主觀意義，即對未來美善的期待。此處無理由偏離這意義，雖然另一意義與之密切相連，且為必然含蓄。正因為對象相同，期待才相同。「你們蒙召的指望」就是從你們的呼召流出來的指望。聖靈內在有效的呼召之所以產生這指望，有兩個原因。第一，因為他們的呼召是要他們「在光明中同得基業」。他們自然盼望得著所被邀請去領受的。他們被邀請與神和好並與他相交，因此他們盼望得他的救恩；第二，這呼召的性質使它結出盼望。它既是未來基業的憑據，也是其初嚐。見以弗所書 1:14 及哥林多前書 1:22。它使信徒確知自己在救贖福氣中的分（羅馬書 8:16）；正如一滴水使乾渴的旅人渴慕流淌的溪流，照樣，聖靈初熟的果子——他在人心裏頭一次成聖的作為——使人心渴慕神（詩篇 42:1-2）。指望既包含期待，也包含願望；因此聖靈內在的工作既具有憑據又具有初嚐的性質，就必然產生指望。

教會合一的另一根基，乃是其一切肢體都有一主。主權包含擁有與權柄兩個觀念。真正意義上的主，既是擁有者，也是君王。當這字用以指神或基督時，便以最高程度表達這些觀念。基督是那主，即 omnium rerum summus dominus et possessor。他是我們的主，即我們合法的擁有者和絕對的君王。這種擁有權與主權涵蓋靈魂與身體。我們不屬自己，應當在我們的身體和靈魂上榮耀他，因為這二者都是他的。我們的理性順服他的教訓，我們的良心順服他的命令，我們的心思與生活順服他的掌管。我們是他的奴僕。而我們的自由正其中。這就是奧古斯丁所說的 felix necessitas boni。它類似於對真理與聖潔的絕對順服，只是這順服的對象是一位在知識和榮耀上無限的位格。這對我們的主權屬於基督，不僅僅是作為神，或作為道，而是作為神人基督。它不僅建立在他的神性上，也特別建立在救贖之工上。我們屬他，因為他已用自己的寶血買了我們（哥林多前書 6:20；彼得前書 1:1）。他所以死而復活，正是為要作死人活人的主（羅馬書 14:9）。基督的主權既是這樣的性質和根基，就必然將他的百姓結合在一起。同一位主人的奴僕、同一位君王的臣民，彼此之間緊密相連——即使那擁有權和權柄僅僅是外在的。但如在我們與基督的關係中那樣，當擁有權與主權是絕對的、延及靈魂及於身體的時候，這聯合便更加親密得無可言喻。對同一位主和夫子的忠誠，以同一靈激勵基督一切跟隨者。

一信。這是使徒所列舉的第五個聯合的紐帶。許多註釋家否認 πίστις 一字曾用以指信仰的對象或所信的內容；因此他們否認此處的「一信」是指同一信經。但既然這解釋與語言的一般用法相符，並且既有許多例子中此字客觀的意義最適合上下文，似乎便無充分理由拒絕接受。在加拉太書 1:23 中，保羅說：「他傳揚那真道」；在使徒行傳 6:7 中說人「順從了這道」；使徒猶大說到「從前一次交付聖徒的真道」。在這些以及許多其他例子中，客觀意義乃是最自然的。在許多情況下，此字的兩種意義可以合併。可以論到那些只在名義上相信的人，說他們有一信——就他們宣認同一信經而言，無論他們真實的確信如何分歧。英國國教的所有會員都有一信，因為他們都宣稱採納《三十九條信綱》，儘管他們中間存在最大的教義分歧。但真信徒有一信，不僅因為他們宣認同一信經，也因為他們真實而內在地擁抱它。因此他們的聯合不僅是外在的聯合，更是內在和屬靈的。他們在客觀和主觀上都有同一信仰。這信仰的合一並不完全。正如使徒在本章後段告訴我們的，那乃是教會力爭的目標。信仰上完全的合一意味著完全的知識和完全的聖潔。惟有關乎基要教義——那些對敬虔、因此對得救所必需的教義——這種合一才能被肯定於現今在地上存在的整個教會。在這些界限之內，神一切真百姓都是合一的。他們都接受聖經為神的話，並承認自己服從其教訓。他們都承認並敬拜主耶穌為神的兒子。他們都倚靠他的血得救贖，倚靠他的聖靈得成聖。

一洗。在舊約時代，當一個外邦人成為猶太人時，他便宣稱加入神與他百姓所立的約，並接受割禮的記號——這不僅是作門徒的徽章，更是約的印記。因此一切受了割禮的人都是 foederati——因著約的約束彼此聯結的人，這約把他們聯於同一位神，也使他們彼此相聯。照樣，在新約之下，受洗的人也是 foederati——在約中與基督並彼此相聯的人。只有一洗。一切受洗的人都作同一宣認，接受同一約，並歸於同一位主和救贖主。因此他們是一個身體。「你們受洗歸入基督的，都是披戴基督了。並不分猶太人、希臘人、自主的、為奴的、或男或女，因為你們在基督耶穌裏都成為一了」（加拉太書 3:27-28）。

（返回以弗所書 4:5）

英語原文

Ephesians 4:4, Ephesians 4:5

return to '

EPH 4:6

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書四章6節

「一神，就是眾人的父，超乎眾人之上，貫乎眾人之中，也住在眾人之內」——εἷς θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ πάντων, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων καὶ διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν ἡμῖν。教會既為一位聖靈所貫穿、又為一位主所擁有並治理而成為一，也因為它有一位神與父——一位榮耀的存有，教會與之站在受造物與兒女的雙重關係上——而成為一。這位神不僅在我們之上、如遠在天邊的那樣，更是貫乎眾人之中、也住在我們眾人之內——即以他維持並賜生命之同在貫穿並充滿萬有。有許多經文因三位一體的教義而帶有神聖的韻律，雖然該教義本身並未直接斷言。此處便是如此。有一位聖靈、一位主、一位神與父。教會的合一建立在這教義上。它是一，因為對我們而言有一位神與父、一位主、一位聖靈。這是一種真正奧祕的聯合；不僅是意見、利益或感情的聯合；而是一種從共同生命原則而來的超自然事物。這生命不是我們作為受造物所擁有的天然生命；也不是我們作為理性之人所擁有的理性生命；而是屬靈的生命——在別處稱為靈魂中神的生命。由於這生命一方面為基督與他一切肢體所共有，另一方面又為基督與神所共有，所以教會的這種聯合不僅是與基督聯合，更是與三一神聯合。所以聖經說聖靈住在信徒裏面、基督住在他們裏面、神住在他們裏面。也因此我們的主為他的百姓禱告：「使他們都合而為一；正如你父在我裏面，我在你裏面，使他們也在我們裏面合而為一」，約翰福音十七章21節。

從整個聯繫中顯然可見，πάντων（「眾人」與「貫乎眾人」）一字不是中性。使徒不是指神對宇宙的統治，或他貫乎整個自然的護理作為。所指的也不是他對理性受造物或對人類的統治。整段所論的是神與教會的關係。神作為父，是在其一切成員之上、貫乎他們所有人、並在他們所有人之內。教會是神藉着聖靈所居住的所在。它是他的殿，他居住其中，並以其同在貫穿其一切部分。所以介詞 διὰ 在此不是表達工具性，而是擴散。不是神「藉着萬人」運行（διὰ πάντων），而是他貫穿萬人並住在萬人之內。這便是頂峰。被神充滿；被他的同在貫穿、被他管理，便是達到一切受造之卓越、福氣與榮耀的頂峰。

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:6

One God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all and in us all, εἷς θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ πάντων, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων καὶ διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν ἡμῖν. As the church is one because pervaded by one Spirit, and because it is owned and governed by one Lord, so it is one because it has one God and Father; one glorious Being to whom it sustains the twofold relation of creature and child. This God is not merely over us, as afar off, but through all and in us all, i.e. pervading and filling all with his sustaining and life-giving presence. There are many passages to which the doctrine of the Trinity gives a sacred rhythm, though the doctrine itself is not directly asserted. It is so here. There is one Spirit, one Lord, one God and Father. The unity of the church is founded on this doctrine. It is one because there is to us one God and Father, one Lord, one Spirit. It is a truly mystical union; not a mere union of opinion, of interest, or of feeling; but something supernatural arising from a common principle of life. This life is not the natural life which belongs to us as creatures; nor intellectual, which belongs to us as rational beings; but it is spiritual life, called elsewhere the life of God in the soul. And as this life is common, on the one hand, to Christ and all his members — and on the other, to Christ and God, this union of the church is not only with Christ, but with the Triune God. Therefore in Scripture it is said that the Spirit dwells in believers, that Christ dwells in them, and that God dwells in them. And, therefore, also our Lord prays for his people, “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.” John 17:21.

It is obvious from the whole connection that the word πάντων (”of all,” and “through all“), is not neuter. The apostle does not refer to the dominion of God over the universe, or to his providential agency throughout all nature. Neither is the reference to his dominion over rational creatures or over mankind. It is the relation of God to the church, of which the whole passage treats. God as Father is over all its members, through them all and in them all. The church is a habitation of God through the Spirit. It is his temple in which he dwells and which is pervaded in all its parts by his presence. The preposition διὰ, therefore, does not here express instrumentality, but diffusion. It is not that God operates “through all” (διὰ πάντων), but that he pervades all and abides in all. This is the climax. To be filled with God; to be pervaded by his presence, and controlled by him, is to attain the summit of all created excellence, blessedness and glory.

return to '

EPH 4:7

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書四章7節

教會的這種合一，雖然包含一切信徒本質上的平等，卻仍可與在恩賜、影響力與尊榮上的極大差異相容。按使徒所喜用的比喻，教會如人身體，由許多有不同功能的肢體組成。不是全為眼，也不是全為耳。恩賜的多樣性不僅與合一相容，更是合一所必需的。身體不是一個肢體，乃是許多。使徒問：若全是一個肢體，身體在哪裏呢？「Summa praesentis loci est,」加爾文說，「quod Deus in neminem omnia contulerit; sed quisque certam mensuram receperit; ut alii aliis indigeant et in commune conferendo quod singulis datum est, alii alios mutuo juvent.」此外，每個肢體在身體中的位置不是由它自己決定的，而是由神決定的。眼不是自己造自己為眼，耳也不是。教會中也是如此。其成員的不同位置、恩賜與功能，不是由他們自己決定的，而是由基督決定的。這一切都是使徒說以下話時所教導的：「但是（即儘管教會合一）我們各人蒙恩，都是照基督所量給各人的恩賜。」恩賜有這樣的多樣性，而這些恩賜的分配是在基督手中。此處所論的恩典，包括內在的屬靈恩賜，以及隨之而來的影響力、功能或職任。有人作使徒，有人作先知，有人作傳福音的。使他們如此的恩典，便是內在的恩賜與外在的職分。

賜予者是基督；他是賜予能力的屬靈影響之源頭，也是賜予權威的職任任命之源頭。所以他便是神——因為他是教會內在生命、教會權威及其職員權威的源頭。他在分賜其恩賜上掌有主權。恩賜是κατὰ τὸ μέτρον τῆς δωρεᾶς τοῦ Χριστοῦ——按基督恩賜的度量——分賜的，即按他看為合宜的來賜。這準則不是我們的功勞，不是我們先有的容量，也不是我們的求問，而是他自己的美意。從前是褻瀆者、逼迫者的保羅竟被立為使徒。使徒所教導、由這一切而生出的本分是：各人當滿足於所分配給他的位置——既不嫉妒在他之上的，也不輕視在他之下的。拒絕在教會中佔有分配給我們的位置，便是完全拒絕屬於教會。腳若拒絕作腳，它並不成為手，而是被砍下來滅亡。同情是每個有共同生命之身體的律法。一個肢體受苦，所有的都受苦；一個得榮耀，所有的都一同快樂。所以我們能否告訴自己是否屬於基督的身體，可以藉着查明我們是否對自己的分知足、並對同作肢體的有同情心來斷定。

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:7

This unity of the church, although it involves the essential equality of all believers, is still consistent with great diversity as to gifts, influence, and honor. According to the apostle’s favorite illustration, it is like the human body, which is composed of many members with different functions. It is not all eye nor all ear. This diversity of gifts is not only consistent with unity, but is essential to it. The body is not one member but many. In every organism a diversity of parts is necessary to the unity of the whole. If all were one member, asks the apostle, where were the body? Summa praesentis loci est, says Calvin, quod Deus in neminem omnia contulerit; sed quisque certam mensuram receperit; ut alii aliis indigeant et in commune conferendo quod singulis datum est, alii alios mutuo juvent. The position, moreover, of each member in the body, is not determined by itself, but by God. The eye does not make itself the eye, nor the ear, the ear. It is thus in the church. The different positions, gifts, and functions of its members, are determined not by themselves but by Christ. All this is taught by the apostle when he says, “But (i.e. notwithstanding the unity of the church) unto every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the gift of Christ.” There is this diversity of gifts, and the distribution of these gifts is in the hand of Christ. The grace here spoken of includes the inward spiritual gift, and the influence, function or office, as the case might be, flowing from it. Some were apostles, some prophets, some evangelists. The grace which made them such, was the inward gift and the outward office.

The giver is Christ; he is the source of the spiritual influence conferring power, and the official appointment conferring authority. He, therefore, is God, because the source of the inward life of the church and of its authority and that of its officers. He is sovereign in the distribution of his gifts. They are distributed, κατὰ τὸ μέτρον τῆς δωρεᾶς τοῦ Χριστοῦ, according to the measure of the gift of Christ; that is, as he sees fit to give. The rule is not our merit, or our previous capacity, nor our asking, but his own good pleasure. Paul was made an apostle, who before was a blasphemer and injurious. The duty, as the apostle teaches, which arises from all this is, that everyone should be contented with the position assigned him; neither envying those above, nor despising those below him. To refuse to occupy the position assigned us in the church, is to refuse to belong to it at all. If the foot refuses to be the foot, it does not become the hand, but is cut off and perishes. Sympathy is the law of every body having a common life. If one member suffers, all suffer; and if one rejoices, all rejoice. We can tell, therefore, whether we belong to the body of Christ, by ascertaining whether, we have this contentment with our lot, and this sympathy with our fellow members.

return to '

EPH 4:8

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:8

前一節賦予主耶穌那作為教會一切生命和能力之源的地位，是如此崇高，以致使徒不得不中斷他的話，表明這一陳述與聖經關於此題已有的教訓相符。第七節論到基督賜恩賜。這既是他的職分，聖經便以一個滿載擄物、因勝利而致富、並將恩賜賜給人的征服者來描寫他。詩篇作者所指的乃是彌賽亞，這是明顯的，因為經文論到他的升天。但一個屬神的位格升上天堂，意味著先前曾降臨地上。降下的乃是神的兒子、彌賽亞；因此升上的也是神的兒子，他被這位受默示的作者描寫為因其在地上得勝的工作而致富，並隨己意分發他征服的果子。這似乎是本段在上下文中的大意，雖然其中困難重重。重大的真理是：基督的高升乃是他降卑的賞賜。藉著他的順服和受苦，他征服了這世界的王，救贖了他的百姓，並獲得了賜給他們一切所需之福的權利。他被高升，為要賜下聖靈及他一切的恩賜和恩典，為要賜下悔改和罪的赦免。這重大的真理在舊約聖經中已有預表和預言。「所以他說」，διὸ λέγει——即神或聖經說。「他升上高天的時候，擄掠了仇敵，將各樣的恩賜賞給人。」就是說，我關於基督作屬靈恩賜之分賜者所說的話，與那說升天的彌賽亞要將恩賜賜給人的預言性宣告相符。彌賽亞被詩篇作者描寫為一個征服者——帶著俘虜勝利而行，滿載他分給跟隨者的擄物。基督正是這樣征服的。他敗壞了那掌死權的，就是魔鬼。他釋放那些因怕死而為奴僕的人（希伯來書 2:15）。他既將一切執政的、掌權的擄來，明顯給眾人看，就仗著十字架誇勝（歌羅西書 2:15）。壯士披掛整齊，看守自己的住宅，他所有的都平安無事；但有一個比他更壯的來，勝了他，就奪去他所倚靠的盔甲，又分了他的贓（路加福音 11:21-22）。這就是關於基督之工的熟悉表達方式。他征服了撒但。他擄掠了俘虜。這是以抽象代具體——「擄掠」代「俘虜」——αἰχμαλωσίαν 代 αἰχμά，正如 συμμαχία 代 σύμμαχοι。比較士師記 5:12：「底波拉啊，興起，興起！你當興起，興起，唱歌；巴拉啊，你當興起，擄掠你的俘虜，亞比挪庵的兒子啊。」這樣被帶著勝利而行的俘虜，或是基督的仇敵——撒但、罪和死（死是最後要被毀滅的仇敵）；或是他的百姓——被他權能所救贖、被他恩典所征服。前者也許更符合這比方以及上文所引的平行經文。兩者都是真實的；就是：基督已征服撒但並將他擄去，這是真實的；他救贖他的百姓，使他們順服自己，並引導他們作甘心樂意的俘虜，這也是真實的。在他掌權的日子，他們成為甘心樂意的。因此加爾文合併兩種說法：Neque enim Satanam modo et peccatum et mortem totosque inferos prostravit, sed ex rebellibus quotidie facit sibi obsequentem populum, quum verbo suo carnis nostrae lasciviam domat; rursus hostes suos, h. e. impios omnes quasi ferreis catenis continet constrictos, dum illorum furorem cohibet sua virtute, ne plus valeant, quam illis concedit。然而這引文的子句完全是附屬的。重點在最後的子句：「他將恩賜賜給人。」

這引文有兩個嚴重的難處。第一是：這引文與原文不符。在詩篇 68:18 中，經文是：「你已經在人間受了恩賜。」保羅則作：「他將恩賜賜給人。」為了解決這難處，有人假設使徒不是引用詩篇，而是引用一首以弗所人慣用的詩歌。但這不僅與新約作者的一貫用法相違，也與整個上下文相違，因為使徒是根據所引經文具有屬神權威來論證。另有人假設希伯來文本有誤。唯理派說這是由於記憶錯誤而誤引。另有人主張詩篇作者所用的 ìÈ÷Çç（lqḥ）一字，既意為「取」，也意為「給」。或至少它常意為「帶來」；因此原文可譯為：「你已在人間帶來了恩賜」；其意義便是「你已將恩賜賜給人」。這樣差別便縮減為僅僅字面上的改動，意義則保持不變。對這看法的一個有力證實是：迦勒底意譯本表達了同樣的意義：dedisti dona filiis hominum。Addison Alexander 博士在其對詩篇 68:18 的註釋中說：「一方面領受恩賜，另一方面賜予恩賜，乃是相關的觀念和表達；因此保羅在將這對神治勝利的描寫應用於我們救主的征服時，便以其中一個表達代替了另一個。」這也許是最自然的解法。新約那些受同一位感動古先知之聖靈所感的屬神作者，並不受字面形式的拘束，往往只給出所引經文的大意。征服者總是分發他所奪取的擄物。他領受是為了賜予。因此在描寫彌賽亞為征服者時，無論說「他領受了恩賜」，或說「他賜下了恩賜」，都完全無關緊要。意義是一樣的。他乃是一位滿載擄物、能以富足其跟隨者的征服者。

與本引文相關的第二個難處是：詩篇 68 篇並非彌賽亞詩篇。它不是指彌賽亞，而是指神勝過他仇敵的勝利。然而使徒不僅將之應用於基督，更論證證明它必指他。這難處的解答，在於三項不僅適用於此處，也適用於許多類似經文的原則。第一是舊約的預表性質。它是將來美事的影兒。古代神百姓的經歷——他們下到埃及、從為奴之家蒙拯救、經過曠野的行程、進入迦南——與教會的經歷之間，不僅有顯著的類比，這類比更是預定的預表——神作為古代神治政體之首的作為，乃是他在教會中作為的預表。他拯救百姓、征服他們的仇敵、以擄物使他的跟隨者富足，這一切都是基督更高之工的影子。正如逾越節既記念出埃及的拯救，又預表基督所成就的救贖；照樣，舊約制度下許多關於神作為和勝利的描述，既是歷史的，也是預言性的。因此使徒所引的詩篇，既是神勝過他古代百姓仇敵之征服的歷史，也是彌賽亞征服的預言。

適用於此處及類似情形的第二項原則，是新約之下在肉身中顯現的道或神的兒子，與舊約制度下顯現的耶和華之間的同一性。因此，論到一位的話，便可恰當地假定為論到另一位。所以摩西說耶和華領他的百姓經過曠野，保羅便說基督領他們（哥林多前書 10:4）。以賽亞在聖殿中看見耶和華的榮耀，約翰便說他看見了基督的榮耀（約翰福音 12:41）。如先知書上所記：「我指著自己起誓，耶和華說：萬膝必向我跪拜，萬口必向我承認」（以賽亞書 45:23），保羅說，這證明我們都要站在基督的審判臺前（羅馬書 14:10-11）。詩篇 102:25 等處論到神為造物主、為永恆不變者的話，在希伯來書 1:10 中被應用於基督。根據同一原則，詩篇 68:18 中論到耶和華升上高天、擄掠俘虜的話，此處便被說為是指基督。

還有第三項原則當納入考慮。舊約許多歷史性和預言性的描述，並不被任何一次的應用或應驗所窮盡。雅弗要住在閃的帳棚裏的應許，每一次前者的後裔被使分享後者暫時或屬靈的福氣時，便得了應驗。以賽亞關於以色列蒙救贖的預言，並不因神百姓從巴比倫的擄掠中蒙拯救而窮盡，卻直接指向基督所要成就的那更高的救贖。那些關於彌賽亞降臨所帶來之福氣的榮美描述，不僅關係到他第一次降臨的後果，也關係到他第二次「將來要向那等候他的人第二次顯現，並與罪無關，乃是為拯救他們」之後所要發生的一切。萬膝必向神跪拜、萬口必向他承認的預言，不僅是預言真宗教的普世得勢；如使徒所教導，也是預言末日的普遍審判。照樣，舊約關於耶和華降下和升上、關於他征服仇敵並使百姓富足的話，並不因他在權能上比喻性的降臨而窮盡，也不因西乃山上和聖殿中所發生那些顯著的神顯，或希伯來聖經中所記的勝利而窮盡，也指他在肉身中的親自降臨、他的升天和他屬靈的勝利。因此使徒將詩篇 68 篇中論到耶和華為征服者的話，應用於主耶穌的工作——他作為在肉身中顯現的神，已經升上高天，擄掠了俘虜，將恩賜賜給人——這完全是與整個聖經的類比相符的。

（返回以弗所書 4:8）

英語原文

Ephesians 4:8

The position which the preceding verse assigns to the Lord Jesus as the source of all life and power in the church, is so exalted, that the apostle interrupts himself to show that this representation is in accordance with what the Scriptures had already taught on this subject. The seventh verse speaks of Christ giving gifts. As this was his office, the Scriptures speak of him as a conqueror laden with spoils, enriched by his victories, and giving gifts to men. That the Psalmist had reference to the Messiah, is evident, because the passage speaks of his ascending. But for a divine person to ascend to heaven, supposes a previous descent to the earth. It was the Son of God, the Messiah, who descended, and therefore it was the Son of God who ascended, and who is represented by the sacred writer as enriched by His triumphant work on earth, and distributing the fruits of his conquest as he pleased. This seems to be the general sense of the passage in the connection, although it is replete with difficulties. The great truth is, that Christ’s exaltation is the reward of his humiliation. By his obedience and sufferings he conquered the Prince of this world, he redeemed his people, and obtained the right to bestow upon them all needed good. He is exalted to give the Holy Ghost, and all his gifts and graces, to grant repentance and remission of sins. This great truth is foreshadowed and foretold in the Old Testament Scriptures. Wherefore he saith, διὸ λέγει, i.e. God, or the Scriptures. “Having ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.” That is, what I have said respecting Christ being the distributor of spiritual gifts, is in accordance with the prophetic declaration, that the ascended Messiah should give gifts to men. The Messiah is represented by the Psalmist as a conqueror, leading captives in triumph, and laden with spoils which he distributes to his followers. Thus Christ conquered. He destroyed him that hath the power of death, i.e. the devil. He delivered those who through the fear of death were subject to bondage. Hebrews 2:15. Having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them. Colossians 2:15. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace; but when a stronger than he cometh upon him, and overcometh him, he taketh from him all his armor wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoil. Luke 11:21, Luke 11:22. Such is the familiar mode of representation respecting the work of Christ. He conquered Satan. He led captivity captive. The abstract is for the concrete — captivity for captives — αἰχμαλωσίαν for αἰχμά as συμμαχία for σύμμαχοι. Compare Judges 5:12, “Awake, awake, Deborah, awake, awake, utter a song; arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam.” These captives thus led in triumph may be either the enemies of Christ, Satan, sin, and death, which is the last enemy which shall be destroyed; or his people, redeemed by his power and subdued by his grace. The former is perhaps the more consistent with the figure, and with the parallel passages quoted above. Both are true; that is, it is true that Christ has conquered Satan, and leads him captive; and it is also true that he redeems his people and subdues them to himself, and leads them as willing captives. They are made willing, in the day of his power. Calvin, therefore, unites both representations: Neque enim Satanam modo et peccatum et mortem totosque inferos prostravit, sed ex rebellibus quotidie facit sibi obsequentem populum, quum verbo suo carnis nostrae lasciviam domat; rursus hostes suos, h. e. impios omnes quasi ferreis catenis continet constrictos, dum illorum furorem cohibet sua virtute, ne plus valeant, quam illis concedit. This clause of the quotation is, however, entirely subordinate. The stress lies on the last clause, “He gave gifts to men.“

There are two serious difficulties connected with this citation. The first is, that the quotation does not agree with the original. In the Psalms 68:18, the passage is, “Thou hast received gifts among men.” Paul has it, “He gave gifts to man.” To get over this difficulty some have supposed that the apostle does not quote the Psalm, but some Hymn which the Ephesians were in the habit of using. But this is not only contrary to the uniform usage of the New Testament writers, but also to the whole context, for the apostle argues from the passage quoted as of divine authority. Others have assumed an error in the Hebrew text. Rationalists say it is a misquotation from failure of memory. Others argue that the word ìÈ÷Çç, used by the Psalmist, means to give as well as to take. Or, at least, it often means to bring; and therefore, the original passage may be translated, “Thou hast brought gifts among men;” the sense of which is, ‘Thou hast given gifts to men.’ The difference is thus reduced to a mere verbal alteration, the sense remaining the same. It is a strong confirmation of this view that the Chaldee Paraphrase expresses the same sense: dedisti dona filiis hominum. Dr. Addison Alexander in his comment on Psalms 68:18 remarks, “To receive gifts on the one hand and bestow gifts on the other are correlative ideas and expressions, so that Paul, in applying this description of a theocratic triumph to the conquests of our Savior, substitutes one of these expressions for the other.” This is perhaps the most natural solution. The divine writers of the New Testament, filled with the same Spirit, which moved the ancient prophets, are not tied to the mere form, but frequently give the general sense of the passages which they quote. A conqueror always distributes the spoils he takes. He receives to give. And, therefore, in depicting the Messiah as a conqueror, it is perfectly immaterial whether it is said, He received gifts, or, He gave gifts. The sense is the same. He is a conqueror laden with spoils, and able to enrich his followers.

The second difficulty connected with this quotation is that Psalm 68 is not Messianic. It does not refer to the Messiah, but to the triumphs of God over his enemies. Yet the apostle not only applies it to Christ, but argues to prove that it must refer to him. This difficulty finds its solution in three principles which are applicable not only to this, but also to many similar passages. The first is the typical character of the old dispensation. It was a shadow of good things to come. There was not only a striking analogy between the experience of the ancient people of God, in their descent into Egypt, their deliverance from the house of bondage, their journey through the wilderness, and their entrance into Canaan, and the experience of the church, but this analogy was a designed prefiguration — God’s dealings as the head of the ancient theocracy, were typical of his dealings with the church. His delivering his people, his conquering their enemies, and his enriching his followers with their spoil, were all adumbrations of the higher work of Christ. As the Passover was both commemorative of the deliverance out of Egypt and typical of the redemption effected by Christ; so, many of the descriptions of the works and triumphs of God under the old economy are both historical and prophetic. Thus the Psalm quoted by the apostle is a history of the conquests of God over the enemies of his ancient people, and a prophecy of the conquests of the Messiah.

The second principle applicable to this and similar cases, is the identity of the Logos or Son manifested in the flesh under the new dispensation with the manifested Jehovah of the old economy. Hence what is said of the one, is properly assumed to be said of the other. Therefore, as Moses says Jehovah led his people through the wilderness, Paul says Christ led them. 1 Corinthians 10:4. As Isaiah saw the glory of Jehovah in the temple, John says he saw the glory of Christ. John 12:41. As it is written in the prophets, “As I live, saith Jehovah, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God,” Isaiah 45:23, Paul says, this proves that we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Romans 14:10, Romans 14:11. What in Psalms 102:25, etc., is said of God as creator, and as eternal and immutable, is in Hebrews 1:10, applied to Christ. On the same principle what is said in Psalms 68:18, of Jehovah as ascending to heaven and leading captivity captive, is here said to refer to Christ.

There is still a third principle to be taken into consideration. Many of the historical and prophetic descriptions of the Old Testament are not exhausted by any one application or fulfillment. The promise that Japheth should dwell in the tents of Shem, was fulfilled every time the descendants of the former were made to share in the blessings temporal or spiritual of the latter. The predictions of Isaiah of the redemption of Israel were not exhausted by the deliverance of the people of God from the Babylonish captivity, but had a direct reference to the higher redemption to be effected by Christ. The glowing descriptions of the blessings consequent on the advent of the Messiah, relate not merely to the consequences of his first advent, but to all that is to follow his coming the second time without sin unto salvation. The prediction that every knee shall bow to God and every tongue confess to him, is a prediction not only of the universal prevalence of the true religion; but also, as the apostle teaches, of a general judgment at the last day. In like manner, what the Old Testament says of Jehovah descending and ascending, of his conquering his enemies and enriching his people, is not exhausted by his figurative descending to manifest his power, nor by such conspicuous theophanies as occurred on Sinai and in the Temple, or in the triumphs recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, but refer also to his personal advent in the flesh, to his ascension and his spiritual triumphs. It is, therefore, in perfect accordance with the whole analogy of Scripture, that the apostle applies what is said of Jehovah in Psalm 68 as a conqueror, to the work of the Lord Jesus, who, as God manifested in the flesh, ascended on high leading captivity captive and giving gifts unto men.

return to '

EPH 4:9

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:9, Ephesians 4:10

Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.

The obvious design of these verses is to show that the passage quoted from the Psalmist refers to Christ. The proof lies in the fact that ascension in the case of a divine person, a giver of spiritual gifts to men, implies a previous descent. It was Christ who descended, and therefore, it is Christ who ascended. It is true the Old Testament often speaks of God’s descending, and therefore, they may speak of his ascending. But according to the apostle, the divine person intended in those representations was the Son, and no previous descent or ascent, no previous triumph over his enemies, included all that the Spirit of prophecy intended by such representations. And, therefore, the Psalmist must be understood as having included in the scope of his language the most conspicuous and illustrious of God’s condescensions and exaltations. All other comings were but typical of his coming in the flesh, and all ascensions were typical of his ascension from the grave.

The apostle, therefore, here teaches that God, the subject of the sixty-eighth Psalm, descended “into the lower parts of the earth;” that “he ascended up above all heavens,” and that this was with the design “that he might fill all things.“

The Hebrew phrase úÇçÀúÄÌéåÉú àÆøÆõ to which the apostle’s τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς, (the lower parts of the earth), answers, is used for the earth in opposition to heaven, Isaiah 44:23; probably for the grave in Psalms 63:10; as a poetical designation for the womb in Psalms 139:15; and for Hades or the invisible world, Ezekiel 32:24. Perhaps the majority of commentators take this last to be the meaning of the passage before us. They suppose the reference is to the descensus ad inferos, or to Christ’s “descending into hell.” But in the first place this idea is entirely foreign to the meaning of the passage in the Psalm on which the apostle is commenting. In the second place, there as here, the only descent of which the context speaks is opposed to the ascending to heaven. ‘He that ascended to heaven is he who first descended to earth.’ In the third place, this is the opposition so often expressed in other places and in other forms of expression, as in John 3:13, “No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man who is in heaven.” John 6:38, “I came down from heaven.” John 8:14, “I know whence I came and whither I go.” John 16:28, “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.” The expression of the apostle therefore means, “the lower parts, viz. the earth.” The genitive τῆς γῆς is the common genitive of apposition. Compare Acts 2:19, where the heaven above is opposed to the earth beneath; and John 8:23.

He that descended to earth, who assumed our nature, is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens. Ὑπεράνω, longe supra, expressing the highest exaltation. As the Hebrew word for heaven is in the plural form, the New Testament writers often use the plural even when the heavens are considered as one, as in the phrase βασιλεία τῶν οὐπανῶν. But often there is a reference to a plurality of heavens, as when the expression “all heavens” is used. The Jews reckoned seven heavens, and Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:2, speaks of the third heavens; the atmosphere, the region of the stars, and above all the abode of God. Above all heavens plainly means above the whole universe; above all that is created visible and invisible; above thrones, principalities, and powers. All things, all created things, are subject to the ascended Redeemer.

He is thus exalted ἵνα πληρώσῃ τὰ πάντα, that he might fill all things. As the word πληρόω signifies to fill, to fulfill, to render perfect, and to accomplish, these words may mean —

That he might fill all things, i.e. the universe with his presence and power.
That he might fulfill all the predictions and promises of God respecting his kingdom.
That he might render all perfect, replete with grace and goodness.
That he might accomplish all things necessary to the consummation of his work.

The first interpretation is greatly to be preferred. Τὰ πάντα properly means the universe; and if taken to mean anything else, it must be because the context demands it, which is not the case here. Secondly, this passage is evidently parallel with Ephesians 1:21, where also it is said of Christ as exalted, that “he fills the universe in all its parts.” Thirdly, the analogy of Scripture is in favor of this interpretation. The omnipresence and universal dominion of God are elsewhere expressed in a similar way. “Do I not fill heaven and earth, saith the Lord.” Jeremiah 23:24. The same grand idea is expressed in Matthew 28:18, “All power is given unto me in heaven and upon earth;” and in Philippians 2:9, Philippians 2:10, and in many other places. It is not of the ubiquity of Christ’s body of which the apostle speaks, as the Lutherans contend, but of the universal presence and power of the ascended Son of God. It is God clothed in our nature, who now exercises this universal dominion; and, therefore, the apostle may well say of Christ, as the incarnate God, that he gives gifts unto men.

return to '

EPH 4:10

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:10

「既說升上，豈不是先降在地下嗎？那降下的，就是遠升諸天之上要充滿萬有的。」

這兩節經文的明顯目的，是要證明所引自詩篇作者的經文是指著基督說的。證據在於：一位屬神位格——那將屬靈恩賜賜給人者——的升天，意味著先前的降下。降下的既是基督，升上的也就是基督。舊約誠然常論到神的降下，因此也可以論到他的升上。但照使徒所言，那些陳述中所指的屬神位格乃是子；而且任何先前的降下或升上、任何先前勝過仇敵的勝利，都未包含預言之靈藉這些陳述所要表達的全部。因此，必須這樣理解詩篇作者：他在自己話語的範圍內，包含了神最顯著、最輝煌的降卑與高升。其他一切的降臨不過是他肉身降臨的預表，其他一切的升上不過是他從墳墓升起的預表。

因此，使徒在此教導：作為詩篇 68 篇主詞的神，曾降下「進入地的下部」；他曾「遠升諸天之上」；而這乃是「為要充滿萬有」。

希伯來片語 úÇçÀúÄÌéåÉú àÆøÆõ（這是使徒的 τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς——地的下部——所對應的），用以指與天相對的地（以賽亞書 44:23）；大概指墳墓（詩篇 63:10）；作為對子宮的詩意稱呼（詩篇 139:15）；以及指陰間或不可見的世界（以西結書 32:24）。也許大多數註釋家採取最後一種為本段的意義。他們假設這是指 descensus ad inferos——指基督「下到地獄」。但第一，這觀念與使徒所註釋之詩篇該段經文的意義完全無關。第二，那裏和這裏一樣，上下文所說的唯一降下，都是與升上天相對的。「升上天的那位，正是先降下到地的那位。」第三，這是在別處以別種表達方式所常常表達的對比，如約翰福音 3:13：「沒有人升過天，除了從天降下仍舊在天的人子」；約翰福音 6:38：「我從天上降下來」；約翰福音 8:14：「我知道我從哪裏來，往哪裏去」；約翰福音 16:28：「我從父出來，到了世界；我又離開世界，往父那裏去。」因此使徒的話意為「下部，即地」。τῆς γῆς 這個屬格是同位屬格。比較使徒行傳 2:19，那裏以在天上與在地下相對；並約翰福音 8:23。

降下到地、取了我們本性的那位，也就是遠升諸天之上的那位。Ὑπεράνω，longe supra，表達最高的高升。由於希伯來文中「天」一字為複數形式，新約作者往往即使將諸天視為一時，仍使用複數，如 βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν 這片語。但往往也指多重的諸天，如使用「諸天」這表達時。猶太人算有七層天，保羅在哥林多後書 12:2 中論到第三層天——大氣層、星辰的區域、以及在其上神的居所。「遠升諸天之上」明明意為遠在整個宇宙之上；在一切受造之物——無論可見的、不可見的——之上；在一切座位、主治、執政、掌權之上。萬有——一切受造之物——都服在這位升天的救贖主之下。

他這樣被高升，ἵνα πληρώσῃ τὰ πάντα——「為要充滿萬有」。由於 πληρόω 一字意為充滿、成全、使之完全並成就，這些字可意為——

他可以他的同在和權能充滿萬有，即宇宙。
他可以成全神關於他國度的一切預言和應許。
他可以使萬有完全，滿有恩典和美善。
他可以成就為完成他工作所需的一切。

第一種解釋遠為可取。Τὰ πάντα 嚴格意為宇宙；若用以指其他事物，必是因上下文要求如此，此處並非如此。第二，本段經文顯然與以弗所書 1:21 平行，那裏也論到基督被高升，「他在萬有之上充滿萬有」。第三，聖經的類比支持這解釋。神的無所不在和普世治權在別處也以類似方式表達。「耶和華說：我豈不充滿天地嗎？」（耶利米書 23:24）。同樣的重大觀念在馬太福音 28:18 中表達：「天上地下所有的權柄都賜給我了」；又在腓立比書 2:9-10 以及許多別處。使徒所說的，並非如路德宗所主張的，是基督身體的無所不在，而是這位升天的神兒子之普世的同在和權能。如今是那位穿上我們本性的神在行使這普世的治權；因此使徒可以恰當地論到基督作為成了肉身的神說，他將恩賜賜給人。

（返回以弗所書 4:10）

英語原文

Ephesians 4:9, Ephesians 4:10

That he might fill all things, i.e. the universe with his presence and power.
That he might fulfill all the predictions and promises of God respecting his kingdom.
That he might render all perfect, replete with grace and goodness.
That he might accomplish all things necessary to the consummation of his work.

return to '

EPH 4:11

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:11

Καὶ αὐτὸς ἔδωκεν, and He gave. He, the ascended Savior, to whom all power and all resources have been given — he gave, some apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers. These were among the gifts which Christ gave his church; which, though implying diversity of grace and office, were necessary to its unity as an organized whole. These offices are mentioned in the order of their importance.

First, the apostles, the immediate messengers of Christ, the witnesses for him, of his doctrines, his miracles, and of his resurrection; infallible as teachers and absolute as rulers in virtue of the gift of inspiration and of their commission. No man, therefore, could be an apostle unless —

He was immediately appointed by Christ.
Unless he had seen him after his resurrection and had received the knowledge of the Gospel by immediate revelation.
Unless he was rendered infallible by the gift of inspiration.

These things constituted the office and were essential to its authority. Those who without these gifts and qualifications claimed the office, are called “false apostles.“

Prophets. A prophet is one who speaks for another, a spokesman, as Aaron was the prophet of Moses. Those whom God made his organs in speaking to men were prophets, whether their communications were doctrinal, perceptive, or prophetic in the restricted sense of the term. Everyone who spoke by inspiration, was a prophet. The prophets of the New Testament differed from the apostles, in that their inspiration was occasional, and therefore their authority as teachers subordinate. The nature of their office is fully taught in 1 Corinthians 14:1-40. As the gift of infallibility was essential to the apostolic office, so the gift of occasional inspiration was essential to the prophetic office. It is inconceivable that God should invest any set of men with the authority claimed and exercised by the apostles and prophets of the New Testament, requiring all men to believe their doctrines and submit to their authority, on the pain of perdition, without giving the inward gifts qualifying them for their work. This is clearly stated by Calvin in his comment on this verse; to a certain difficulty, he says, “Respondeo, quoties a Deo vocati sunt homines, dona necessarie conjuncta esse officiis; neque enim Deus, apostolos aut pastores instituendo, larvam illis duntaxat imponit; sed dotibus etiam instruit, sine quibus rite functionem sibi injunctam obire nequeunt. Quisquis ergo Dei auctoritate constituitur apostolus, non inani et nudo titulo, sed mandato simul et facultate praeditus est.”

And some, evangelists. There are two views of the nature of the office of the evangelists Some regard them as vicars of the apostles — men commissioned by them for a definite purpose and clothed with special powers for the time being, analogous to the apostolic vicars of the Romanists; or to the temporary superintendents appointed after the Reformation in the Scottish church, clothed for a limited time and for a definite purpose with presbyterial powers, i.e. to a certain extent, with the powers of a presbytery, the power to ordain, install and depose. Evangelists in this sense were temporary officers. This view of the nature of the office prevailed at the time of the Reformation.‹13›

According to the other view, the evangelists were itinerant preachers, οἱ περιΐ́οντες ἐκήπυττον, as Theodoret and other early writers describe them. They were properly missionaries sent to preach the Gospel where it had not been previously known. This is the commonly received view, in favor of which may be urged —

The signification of the word, which in itself means nothing more than preacher of the Gospel.
Philip was an evangelist, but was in no sense a vicar of the apostles; and when Timothy was exhorted to do the work of an evangelist, the exhortation was simply to be a faithful preacher of the Gospel. Acts 21:8; Ephesians 4:11; and 2 Timothy 4:5, are the only passages in which the word occurs, and in no one of them does the connection or any other consideration demand any other meaning than the one commonly assigned to it.
Εὐαγγέλισθαι and διδάσκειν are both used to express the act of making known the Gospel; but when as here, the εὐαγγέλιστής is distinguished from the διδάσκαλος, the only point of distinction implied or admissible is between one who makes known the Gospel where it had not been heard, and an instructor of those already Christians. The use of εὐαγγέλισθαι in such passages as Acts 8:4; Acts 14:7; 1 Corinthians 1:17, and 2 Corinthians 10:16, serves to confirm the commonly received opinion that an evangelist is one who makes known the Gospel. That Timothy and Titus were in some sense apostolic vicars, i.e. men clothed with special powers for a special purpose and for a limited time, may be admitted, but this does not determine the nature of the office of an evangelist. They exercised these powers not as evangelists, but as delegates or commissioners.

And some, pastors and teachers, τοὺς δὲ ποιμένας καὶ διδασκάλους. According to one interpretation we have here two distinct offices — that of pastor and that of teacher. The latter, says Calvin, “had nothing to do with discipline, nor with the administration of the sacraments, nor with admonitions or exhortations, but simply with the interpretation of Scripture.” Institutes 4:3, 4. All this is inferred from the meaning of the word teacher. There is no evidence from Scripture that there was a set of men authorized to teach but not authorized to exhort. The thing is well nigh impossible. The one function includes the other. The man who teaches duty and the grounds of it, does at the same time admonish and exhort. It was however on the ground of this unnatural interpretation that the Westminster Directory made teachers a distinct and permanent class of jure divino officers in the church. The Puritans in New England endeavored to reduce the theory to practice, and appointed doctors as distinct from preachers. But the attempt proved to be a failure. The two functions could not be kept separate. The whole theory rested on a false interpretation of Scripture. The absence of the article before διδασκάλους proves that the apostle intended to designate the same persons as at once pastors and teachers. The former term designates them as ἐπίσκοποι, overseers, the latter as instructors. Every pastor or bishop was required to be apt to teach. This interpretation is given by Augustine and Jerome, the latter of whom says: Non enim ait: alios autem pastores et alios magistros, sed alios pastores et magistros, ut qui pastor est, esse debeat et magister. In this interpretation the modern commentators almost without exception concur. It is true the article is at times omitted between two substantives referring to different classes, where the two constitute one order — as in Mark 15:1, μετὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ γραμματέων, because the elders and scribes formed one body. But in such an enumeration as that contained in this verse, τοὺς μὲν ἀποστόλους, τοὺς δὲ προφήτας, τοὺς δὲ εὐαγγελιστάς, τοὺς δὲ ποιμένας, the laws of the language require τοὺς δὲ διδασκάλους, had the apostle intended to distinguish the διδάσκαλοι from ποιμένες. Pastors and teachers, therefore must be taken as a twofold designation of the same officers, who were at once the guides and instructors of the people.

return to '

EPH 4:12

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:12

使徒既已提及基督賜給教會的職分，便陳明賜下這恩賜的目的——乃是 πρὸς τὸν καταρτισμὸν τῶν ἁγίων εἰς ἔργον διακονίας, εἰς οἰκοδομὴν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ——為要成全聖徒，各盡其職，建立基督的身體。

本節中這些字的意義以及各子句的關係都是可疑的。καταρτισμὸς 一字（譯為「成全」）容許不同的解釋。其字根 ἄρω 意為聯合或綑綁在一起。因此 ἄρτιος 意為聯合的、完全的、完美的；動詞 καταρτίζω 字面上意為修補（馬太福音 4:21）；使有秩序、使之完全或完美（路加福音 6:40；哥林多後書 13:11）；預備或使之合用（希伯來書 10:5；13:21）。這名詞可在其意義的各種變化中表達動詞的行動。所以此處它被譯為——

聖徒的成全，即其數目的完成。
他們的更新或恢復。
他們作為一個身體歸於秩序和聯合。
他們的（為服事的）預備。
他們的成全。

最後一個當為優選，因為與這位使徒對該動詞的常用相符，又因為它給出最適合上下文的意義。

διακόνια（服事）一字可表達一人對另一人所提供的服事——路加福音 10:40：「伺候的事多」；或特別指對基督徒所提供的服事——哥林多前書 16:15：「專以服事聖徒為念」；或傳道職分的職務性服事。所以 εἰς ἔργον διακονίας 一語可意為「為彼此服事或善行的工作」，或「為傳道的職分的工作」——按職務意義。後者是常見的解釋，不僅因為這字更常以此意義使用，也因為上下文，此處使徒正論到不同等級的傳道人。

與本節相關的主要難處關乎其各子句的關係。

有人提議把第一和第二子句顛倒，使意義為：「基督設立使徒等，為要作傳道的工夫，這工的計畫乃是成全聖徒、建立基督的身體。」但雖然意義因此良好而恰當，這顛倒卻是任意的。
另有人把各子句視為同等的。「這些職分被賜下，為要成全聖徒，為要作傳道的工夫，為要建立基督的身體。」對此的反對是介詞的變化（πρὸς，εἰς —— εἰς），以及思想的失調——這些表達並不平行。
後兩個子句可作為從屬於第一個。「基督設立傳道的職分，為要預備聖徒去作彼此服事的工作」（比較 εἰς διακονίαν τοῖς ἁγίοις，哥林多前書 16:15），並建立他的身體。然而這假定 διακονία 有一不適合上下文的意義。
另有人把這兩個以 εἰς 開始的子句作為對第一子句的解釋：「基督設立這些職事，為要預備聖徒——有些作傳道的工夫，有些建立他的身體。」但這與本段的結構不一致。這要求引入 τοὺς μὲν —— τοὺς δὲ——「有些為這，有些為那」。
又有人這樣給出意義：「為成全聖徒的緣故，基督設立這些職事去作傳道的工夫，去建立他的身體。」第一子句 πρὸς τόν καταρτισμόν 表達遠程的；εἰς —— εἰς 表達所論設立的近期目的。「傳道的工夫」乃是傳道職分所作的工，即建立基督的身體。這最後一個看法也許是最好的。

「他不能」，加爾文說，「比把這效果歸於傳道之工更高的方式來高舉傳道之工了。因為有甚麼工作比建造教會使它達於完全更高呢？所以那些忽略這方法而盼望在基督裏得以完全的人是瘋狂的，正如那些偽稱有聖靈秘密啟示的狂熱者；以及那些滿足於私自研讀聖經、幻想自己不需要教會傳道之工的驕傲人。」基督若設立了傳道之工為要建立他的身體，那麼盼望這目的以任何別的方式達成便是枉然的。

（返回以弗所書 4:12）

英語原文

Ephesians 4:12

Having mentioned the offices Christ gave his church, the apostle states the end for which this gift was conferred — it was πρὸς τὸν καταρτισμὸν τῶν ἁγίων εἰς ἔργον διακονίας, εἰς οἰκοδομὴν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.

Both the meaning of the words and the relation of the several clauses in this verse, are doubtful. The word καταρτισμὸς, rendered perfecting, admits of different interpretations. The root ἄρω means to unite or bind together. Hence, ἄρτιος signifies united, complete, perfect; and the verb καταρτίζω is literally to mend, Matthew 4:21; to reduce to order, to render complete, or perfect, Luke 6:40; 2 Corinthians 13:11; to prepare or render fit for use, Hebrews 10:5; Hebrews 13:21. The substantive may express the action of the verb in the various modifications of its meaning. Hence it has been rendered here —

To the completion of the saints, i.e. of their number.
To their renewing or restoration.
To their reduction to order and union as one body.
To their preparation (for service).
To their perfecting.

This last is to be preferred because agreeable to the frequent use of the verb by this apostle, and because it gives the sense best suited to the context.

The word διακόνια, service, may express that service which one man renders to another — Luke 10:40, “with much serving;” or specially the service rendered to Christians, 1 Corinthians 16:15, “addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints;” or the official service of the ministry. Hence the phrase εἰς ἔργον διακονίς may mean ‘to the work of mutual service or kind offices,’ or to the work of the ministry — in the official sense. The latter is the common interpretation, and is to be preferred not only on account of the more frequent use of the word in that sense, but also on account of the connection, as here the apostle is speaking of the different classes of ministers of the word.

The principal difficulty connected with this verse concerns the relation of its several clauses.

Some propose to invert the first and second so that the sense would be, ‘Christ appointed the apostles, etc., for the work of the ministry, the design of which is the perfecting of the saints and the edifying of the body of Christ.’ But although the sense is thus good and pertinent, the transposition is arbitrary.
Others regard the clauses as coordinate. ‘These officers were given for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.’ To this is objected the change in the prepositions (πρὸς, εἰς — εἰς) and the incongruity of the thoughts — the expressions not being parallel.
The two latter clauses may be made subordinate to the first. ‘Christ has appointed the ministry with the view of preparing the saints, for the work of serving one another,’ (compare εἰς διακονίαν τοῖς ἁγίοις, 1 Corinthians 16:15) and for the edification of his body. This however assumes διακονία to have a sense unsuited to the context.
Others make the two clauses with ei)j explanatory of the first clause, ‘Christ appointed these officers for the preparation of the saints, some for the work of the ministry, and some for the edifying of his body.’ But this is inconsistent with the structure of the passage. It would require the introduction of τοὺς μὲν — τοὺς δὲ, ‘some, for this, and some, for that.’
Others again, give the sense thus, ‘For the sake of perfecting the saints, Christ appointed these officers to the work of the ministry, to the edification of his body.’ The first clause πρὸς τόν καταρτισμόν expresses the remote, εἰς — εἰς, the immediate end of the appointment in question. The “work of the ministry” is that work which the ministry performs, viz. the edifying of the body of Christ. This last view is perhaps the best.

“He could not,” says Calvin, “exalt more highly the ministry of the Word, than by attributing to it this effect. For what higher work can there be than to build up the church that it may reach its perfection? They therefore are insane, who neglecting this means hope to be perfect in Christ, as is the case with fanatics, who pretend to secret revelations of the Spirit; and the proud, who content themselves with the private reading of the Scripture, and imagine they do not need the ministry of the church.” If Christ has appointed the ministry for the edification of his body, it is in vain to expect that end to be accomplished in any other way.

return to '

EPH 4:13

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:13

The ministry is not a temporary institution, it is to continue until the church has reached the goal of its high calling. This does not prove that all the offices mentioned above are permanent. By common consent the prophets were temporary officers. It is the ministry and not those particular offices, that is to continue. The goal of the church is here described in three equivalent forms:

Unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God.
A perfect man.
The measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.
Till we all come to the unity, etc., μέχρι καταντήσωμεν οἱ πάντες. The all here mentioned is not all men, but all the people of Christ. The reference is not to the confluence of nations from all parts of the earth, but to the body of Christ, the company of saints of which the context speaks. The church is tending to the goal indicated.‹14› Our version has in unity, but the Greek is εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα, and therefore should be rendered to or unto, just as in the following clauses, εἰς ἄνδρα τέλειον and εἰς μέτρον, κτλ. The unity of faith is the end to which all are to attain. The genitive υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ belongs equally to πίστις and ἐπίγνωσις. The Son of God is the object both of the faith and of the knowledge here spoken of. Many commentators understand knowledge and faith as equivalent, and therefore make the latter member of the clause explanatory of the former: ‘to the unity of the faith, that is, to the knowledge of the Son of God.’ But this overlooks the καὶ. The apostle says, “faith and knowledge.” Thus distinguishing the one from the other. And they are in fact different, however intimately related, and however often the one term may be used for the other. Faith is a form of knowledge, and therefore may be expressed by that word. But knowledge is not a form of faith, and therefore cannot be expressed by it. Knowledge is an element of faith; but faith, in its distinctive sense, is not an element of knowledge. The Greek word here used is not γνῶσις but ἐπίγνωσις. We have no word to express the distinction as the Germans have in their Kennen and Erkennen. It is not merely cognition but recognition. Faith and knowledge πίστις and ἐπίγνωσις express or comprehend all the elements of that state of mind of which the Son of God, God manifested in the flesh, who loved us and gave himself for us, who died on Calvary and is now enthroned in heaven, is the object. A state of mind which includes the apprehension of his glory, the appropriation of his love, as well as confidence and devotion. This state of mind is in itself eternal life. It includes excellence, blessedness, and the highest form of activity, i.e. the highest exercise of our highest powers. We are like him when we see him. Perfect knowledge is perfect holiness. Therefore when the whole church has come to this perfect knowledge which excludes all diversity, then it has reached the end. Then it will bear the image of the heavenly.

The object of faith and knowledge is the Son of God. This designation of our Lord declares him to be of the same nature with the Father, possessing the same attributes and entitled to the same honor. Were this not the case the knowledge of Christ as the Son of God, could not be eternal life; it could not fill, enlarge, sanctify, and render blessed the soul; nor constitute the goal of our high calling; the full perfection of our nature.

It has excited surprise that the apostle should here present unity of faith as the goal of perfection, whereas in Ephesians 4:6, Christians are said now to have “one faith,” as they have one Lord and one baptism. Some endeavor to get over this difficulty by laying the emphasis upon all. The progress of the church consists in bringing all to this state of unity. But Paul includes all in his assertion in Ephesians 4:6. And if the “one faith” of that verse, and “unity of faith” here are the same, then the starting point and the goal of the church are identical. Others say that “the unity of faith and knowledge” means not that all should be united in faith and knowledge, but that all should attain that state in which faith and knowledge are identified — faith is to be lost in knowledge. The unity, therefore, here intended, is unity between faith and knowledge, and not the unity of believers. But this is evidently unnatural. “We all come to unity,” can only mean, “we are all united.” There is no real difficulty in the case. Unity is a matter of degrees. The church is now and ever has been one body, but how imperfect is their union! Our Lord’s praying that his people may be one, does not prove that they are not now one. It is here as in other cases. Holiness is the beginning and holiness is the end. We must be holy to belong to the church, and yet holiness is the ultimate perfection of the church. The unity of faith is now confined to the first principles; the unity of faith contemplated in this place is that perfect unity which implies perfect knowledge and perfect holiness.

Unto a perfect man, εἰς ἄνδρα τέλειον. This clause is explanatory of the former and determines its meaning. Perfection is the end; perfect manhood. Τέλειος signifies ad finem perductus; when used of a man, it means an adult, one who has reached the end of his development as a man. When applied to a Christian it means one who has reached the end of his development as a Christian, Hebrews 12:23; and the church is perfect when it has reached the end of its development and stands complete in glory. In 1 Corinthians 13:10, τὸ τέλειον stands opposed to τὸ ἐκ μέρους, and there as here indicates the state which is to be attained hereafter when we shall know even as we are known.

The standard of perfection for the church is complete conformity to Christ. It is to attain εἰς μέτρον ἡλικίας τοῦ πληρώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ. These words are explanatory of the preceding. The church becomes adult, a perfect man, when it reaches the fullness of Christ. However these words may be explained in detail, this is the general idea. Whether ἡλικιά means stature or age depends upon the context. Most commentators prefer the latter signification here, because τέλειος in the preceding clause means adult, in reference to age rather than to stature, and νήπιος in the following verse means a child as to age and not as to size.

If the phrase “fullness of Christ,” be explained according to the analogy of the phrases “fullness of God,” “fullness of the Godhead,” etc., it must mean the plenitude of excellence which Christ possesses or which he bestows. And the “age of the fullness of Christ,” means the age at which the fullness of Christ is attained. Compare Ephesians 3:19, where believers are said to be filled unto the fullness of God.

If, however, reference is had to the analogy of such expressions as “fullness of the blessing of the Gospel,” Romans 15:29, which means ‘the full or abundant blessing,’ then the passage before us means ‘the full age (or stature) of Christ.’ The church is to become a perfect man, i.e. it is to attain the measure of the full maturity of Christ. In other words, it is to be completely conformed to him, perfect as he is perfect. This interpretation which supposes πληρώματος to qualify adjectively ἡλικίας, is in accordance with a familiar characteristic of Paul’s style, who frequently connects three genitives in this way, the one governing the others, where one is to be taken adjectively. See Colossians 1:13, εἰς βασιλείαν τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἀγάπης αὐτοῦ, “Son of his love,” for ‘his beloved Son’; “age of fullness,” for ‘full age.’ Colossians 2:2, Colossians 2:18; 2 Thessalonians 1:9.

Commentators are much divided on the question whether the goal, the terminus ad quem of the church’s progress here spoken of, is to be attained in this world or the next. Those who say it is to be attained here, rely principally on the following verse: ‘We are to become men in order that we should be no longer children,’ etc. To determine this question it would seem to be enough to state what the contemplated consummation is. It is perfection, and perfection of the whole church. We are to become perfect men, we are to attain complete conformity to Christ; and we are all to reach this high standard. The Bible, however, never represents the consummation of the church as occurring in this life. Christ gave himself for the church that he might present it to himself a glorious church without spot or wrinkle, but this presentation is not to take place until he comes a second time to be glorified in the saints and admired in all them that believe. The context instead of forbidding, demands this view of the apostle’s meaning. It would be incongruous to say we must reach perfection in order to grow. But it is not incongruous to say that perfection is made the goal in order that we may constantly strive after it.

return to '

EPH 4:14

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書4:14

以上所述，或許已足以指明本節與前幾節經文之間由ἵνα（為要）表明的關聯。本節及下幾節並非從屬於第13節，好像意為「我們當達到完全，為要長進」——乃是平行的——都關係到第12節所提傳道職事的設計。在所要達到的完全成熟與我們現今的狀態之間，是成長的時期——基督設立傳道職事，為要引導教會達到那目標，使我們不再作小孩子，而是不斷長進。這中間目的在本節以消極形式表達，在第15、16節則以積極形式表達。我們不當繼續作小孩子，以弗所書4:13，而當不斷向著成熟邁進，以弗所書4:15、4:16。此處所呈現小孩子的特徵，是他們的不穩定和容易被欺騙、被引誘走偏。前者以將他們比作無舵之船——被波浪拋來拋去、被一切風吹動——來表達：κλυδωνιζόμενοι καὶ περιφερόμενοι παντὶ ἀνέμῳ；或比作兩件不穩定之物——不安息的浪，與被風驅動的某物。使徒在希伯來書13:9用大致相同的比喻，勸信徒「不要被各樣怪異的教訓勾引了去」。使徒雅各把不穩定的人比作「被風吹動、翻騰的海浪」，雅各書1:6。以弗所書4:13所論完全的主要要素之一，是在真理上穩定；因此與之相對的不完全狀態，被描述為一種不穩定、容易被各種教訓之風吹動的狀態。

小孩子不但不穩定，且容易受欺。他們是詭詐狡黠之人的容易獵物。因此使徒加上：ἐν τῇ κυβείᾳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων，藉著（ἐν為工具用法）人的詭計。κυβεία來自κύβος（骰子，方塊），意為擲骰子遊戲；其中詐術甚多，故該詞轉指詭詐或欺騙。它由隨後的片語解釋：ἐν πανουργίᾳ πρὸς τὴν μεθοδείαν τῆς πλάνης——按路德（Luther）譯本，意為Tauscherei damit sie unserschleichen zu verführen（他們用以欺騙、誘惑我們的詭詐）。那詭計（κυβεία）是誘惑人或持異端者所用的詭詐。介詞πρὸς可意為「照著」。「照著錯謬所用之詭詐的狡猾；或錯謬特徵性的詭詐」。或按其通常力量，表示方向或趨勢。「指向錯謬之詭詐的狡猾」，即為誘惑而設計的詭詐。意義相同。μεθοδεία一詞僅見於本處及以弗所書6:11——在後者以複數形式譯作「詭計」；「魔鬼的詭計」。它源於μεθοδεύω（μετ᾽ ὁδοῦ）——跟隨某人，追蹤他，如野獸追蹤獵物。故名詞意為那些想要網羅或捕獲者所用的狡猾或詭詐。

在本上下文中有兩件事不易被忽略。一是使徒對真理的高度評價；二是錯謬的邪惡。沒有對真理的認識與相信，聖潔是不可能的；完全的聖潔意味著（如以弗所書4:13所教導的）完全的認識。因此錯謬是邪惡的。宗教的錯謬源於道德的邪惡，又產生道德的邪惡。「假師傅」在聖經中總是被說成壞人——自私、惡毒或欺騙的。這原則附帶地提供了最可靠的真理判準之一。好人所持守的、屬靈之人所寶貴的、謙卑聖潔之人所珍視的教義，是真的。這是傳統所具有的惟一真實權威。在本段中，使徒把偏離真理歸因於錯謬、或假師傅特徵性的詭詐與欺騙。在羅馬書16:17、16:18；哥林多後書2:17；哥林多後書11:13；加拉太書2:4；歌羅西書2:8、2:18中，那些誘惑人離開信仰的人也被賦予同樣的特徵。因此，錯謬絕不能是無害的，假師傅也絕不能是無辜的。然而，兩項考量當確保在應用這些原則時持守溫和與謙卑。一是，雖然錯謬暗示罪，正統卻不總是暗示聖潔。「以不義抑制真理」是可能的；可能有沒有愛的思辨性信仰。對神對人最冒犯的品格，是一個為真理而發的惡毒狂熱者的品格。另一考量是，人往往比自己信條所表明的好得多。即：他們賴以活著的教義，比他們所宣認的教義更接近真理。他們把錯誤的意義附加在字詞上，從而欺騙自己，看似拒絕真理，其實只是拒絕自己的誤解。一個常見的話是：人的禱告比他們的信條更正統。

返回到 '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:14

What has been said may be sufficient to indicate the connection between this and the preceding verses, as indicated by ἵνα (in order that). This and the following verses are not subordinate to the 13th, as though the sense were, ‘we are to reach perfection in order to grow,’ — but they are coordinate — all relating to the design of the ministry mentioned in Ephesians 4:12. Between the full maturity aimed at, and our present state is the period of growth — and Christ appointed the ministry to bring the church to that end, in order that we should be no longer children but make constant progress. This intermediate design is expressed negatively in this verse and affirmatively in the 15th and 16th. We are not to continue children, Ephesians 4:13, but constantly to advance toward maturity, Ephesians 4:15, Ephesians 4:16. The characteristic of children here presented is their instability and their liability to be deceived and led astray. The former is expressed by comparing them to a ship without a rudder, tossed to and fro by the waves, and driven about by every wind — κλυδωνιζόμενοι καὶ περιφερόμενοι παντὶ ἀνέμῳ — or to two unstable things, a restless wave, and something driven by the wind. In the use of much the same figure the apostle in Hebrews 13:9 exhorts believers not “to be carried away with diverse and strange doctrines.” And the apostle James compares the unstable to “a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed,” James 1:6. One of the principal elements of the perfection spoken of in Ephesians 4:13, is stability in the truth; and, therefore. the state of imperfection as contrasted with it is described as one of instability and liability to be driven about by every wind of doctrine.

Children are not only unstable but easily deceived. They are an easy prey to the artful and designing. The apostle therefore adds: ἐν τῇ κυβείᾳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, through (ἐν being instrumental) the artifice of men. Κυβείᾳ is from κυβός (cube, die) means dice-playing; in which there are many arts of deception, and therefore the word is used for craft or deceit. It is explained by the following phrase, ἐν πανουργίᾳ πρὸς τὴν μεθοδείαν τῆς πλάνης, which, according to Luther’s version, means Tauscherei damit sie uns erschleichen zu verfuhren, the cunning with which they track us to mislead. The artifice (κυβείᾳ) is that craft which is used by seducers or errorists. The preposition πρὸς may mean according to. ‘Cunning according to the craft which error uses; or which is characteristic of error.’ Or it may agreeably to its common force indicate direction or tendency. ‘The cunning which is directed to the craft of error, i.e. that craft which is designed to seduce.’ The sense is the same. The word μεθοδεία occurs only here and in Ephesians 6:11 — where in the plural form it is rendered wiles; “the wiles of the devil.” It is derived from μεθοδεύω (μετὰ ὁδός), to follow anyone, to track him, as a wild animal its prey. Hence the substantive means the cunning or craft used by those who wish to entrap or capture.

There are two things in this connection which can hardly escape notice. The one is the high estimate the apostle places on truth; and the other is the evil of error. Holiness without the knowledge and belief of the truth, is impossible; perfect holiness implies, as Ephesians 4:13 teaches, perfect knowledge. Error, therefore, is evil. Religious error springs from moral evil and produces it. “False teachers” are in Scripture always spoken of as bad, as selfish, malignant, or deceitful. This principle furnishes incidentally one of the surest of the criteria of truth. Those doctrines which the good hold, which are dear to the spiritual, to the humble and the holy, are true. This is the only real authority which belongs to tradition. In this passage the apostle attributes departure from the truth to the cunning and deceit which are characteristic of error, or of false teachers. In Romans 16:17, Romans 16:18; 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 11:13; Galatians 2:4; Colossians 2:8, Colossians 2:18, the same character is given of those who seduce men from the faith. Error, therefore, can never be harmless, nor false teachers innocent. Two considerations however should secure moderation and meekness in applying these principles. The one is, that though error implies sin, orthodoxy does not always imply holiness. It is possible “to hold the truth in unrighteousness;” to have speculative faith without love. The character most offensive to God and man is that of a malignant zealot for the truth. The other consideration is, that men are often much better than their creed. That is, the doctrines on which they live are much nearer the truth, than those which they profess. They deceive themselves by attaching wrong meaning to words, and seem to reject truth when in fact they only reject their own misconceptions. It is a common remark that men’s prayers are more orthodox than their creeds.

return to '

EPH 4:15

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書四章15節

這些話並非與題目無干；因為使徒在定罪一切關乎信仰的不穩定、並在宣告假師傅的詭計之後，隨即加上要在愛心中持守真理的吩咐。他所要求的不是僅僅在純正教義上的穩定，而是與愛相結合的信。唯一能拯救人、使人得益的信，是那藉着愛行事、並潔淨人心的信。

「ἀληθεύοντες δὲ ἐν ἀγάπῃ」——我們的譯本譯作「惟用愛心說誠實話」。但這不適合上下文。這子句與以弗所書四章14節的話相對。我們不可作孩童，被各樣教訓之風吹動，而要在承認並相信真理上堅定。這由聯繫所要求的解釋，為 ἀληθεύειν 一字的用法所證明——這字不僅意指說真理，更意指作 ἀληθής——開放、正直、真實、持守真理——的意義。而此處所論的真理是神的真理、福音的真理——我們當承認並持守的。「ἐν ἀγάπῃ」幾個字通常且恰當地與 ἀληθεύοντες 相連：「在愛中承認真理」。然而它們也可與隨後的字相連，而得「讓我們在愛中增長」之意。但這使分詞過於裸露，且不為字的位置所表明。此外，在下一節——這是同一句的一部分——有 αὔξησιν ποιεῖται εἰς οἰκοδομὴν ἐν ἀγάπῃ，這會是同一觀念的不必要重複。

我們要「凡事長進，到他（寧可作：歸於他）裏面」——εἰς αὐτόν。這當藉着參照以弗所書四章13節的 εἰς ἄνδρα τέλειον、εἰς μέτρον ἡλικίας κτλ. 來解釋。這些是表達「與基督相符是當達到的目的」這觀念的不同形式。我們要增長以致與他相符——τά πάντα——在一切事上。「他」——「就是元首基督」。我們當與我們的元首相符——因為他是我們的元首，即因為他與我們之間的密切聯合。比喻中略有混亂——既把基督呈現為我們當與之相符的模型，又把他呈現為其生命當貫穿我們的元首——這對這解釋不是嚴重的反對，因為這解釋是上下文所要求的。

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:15

These remarks are not foreign to the subject; for the apostle, while condemning all instability with regard to faith, and while denouncing the craft of false teachers, immediately adds the injunction to adhere to the truth in love. It is not mere stability in sound doctrine, but faith as combined with love that he requires. The only saving, salutary faith is such as works by love and purifies the heart.

Ἀληθεύοντες δὲ ἐν ἀγάπῃ our version renders “but speaking the truth in love.” But this does not suit the context. This clause stands opposed to what is said in Ephesians 4:14. We are not to be children driven about by every wind of doctrine, but we are to be steadfast in professing and believing the truth. This interpretation which is demanded by the connection is justified by the usage of the word ἀληθεύειν, which means not only to speak the truth, but also to be ἀληθής in the sense of being open, upright, truthful, adhering to the truth. And the truth here contemplated is the truth of God, the truth of the Gospel, which we are to profess and abide by. The words ἐν ἀγάπῃ are commonly and properly connected with ἀληθεύοντες, “professing the truth in love.” They may however be connected with the following word, so as to give the sense, “let us increase in love.” But this leaves the participle too naked, and is not indicated by the position of the words. Besides, in the next verse, which is part of the same sentence, we have αὔξησιν ποιεῖται εἰς οἰκοδομὴν ἐν ἀγάπῃ, which would be a needless repetition of the same idea.

We are “to grow up into (rather unto) him,” εἰς αὐτὸν. This is to be explained by a reference to the expressions εἰς ἄνδρα τέλειον, εἰς μέτρον ἡλικίας, κτλ. in Ephesians 4:13. These are different forms of expressing the idea that conformity to Christ is the end to be attained. We are to grow so as to be conformed to him, τὰ πάντα, as to all things. Him, “who is the head, viz. Christ.” We are to be conformed to our head — because he is our head, i.e. because of the intimate union between him and us. The slight confusion in the metaphor which presents Christ as the model to which we are to be conformed, and the head with whose life we are to be pervaded, is no serious objection to this interpretation, which is demanded by the context.

return to '

EPH 4:16

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:16

From whom the whole body fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body to the edifying of itself in love. The church is Christ’s body; he is the head. The body grows. Concerning this growth the apostle says —

It is from him, (ἐξ οὗ) He is the causal source, from whom all life and power are derived.
It depends on the intimate union of all the parts of the body with the head by means of appropriate bonds.
It is symmetrical.
It is a growth in love.

Such is the general meaning of this passage; though there is much diversity of opinion as to the meaning of some of the terms employed, and as to the relation of the several clauses.

First as to the meaning of the words: Συναρμολογέω (ἁρμός and λέγω) to bind together the several parts of any thing. It is used of a building, Ephesians 2:21, and of the human body. In both cases there is a union of parts fitted to each other. It is peculiarly appropriate here, as the church is compared to the body composed of many members intimately connected. Συμβιβάζω, to bring together, to convene, to join; figuratively, to combine mentally. It is properly used of bringing persons together, so as to reconcile them, or to unite them in friendship. It therefore serves to explain the preceding term. The church is figuratively a body composed of many joints or members; and literally, it is a company of believers intimately united with each other. Hence the apostle uses both terms in reference to it. Ἁφή (ἁπτώ) properly means touch, the sense of touch. Hence metonymically feeling. Therefore διὰ πάσης ἁφῆς τῆς ἐπιχορηγίας may mean, ‘by every feeling, or experience of aid.’ The word however is sometimes used in the sense of band or joint. The parallel passage in Colossians 2:19, διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν καί συνδέσμων, by joints and bands, seems to be decisive for that sense here. The word ἐπιξορηγία (χορηγέω, χορός, ἄγω) supply, aid, has no difficulty in itself. The only question is what aid or contribution is meant, and what is the force of the genitive. The word may refer to the mutual assistance furnished each other by the constituent members of the body. Thus Luther, who paraphrases the clause in question — durch alle Gelenke, dadurch eins dem andern Handreichung thut — by every joint whereby one member aids another. Or it may refer to the supplies of vital influence received from Christ the head. “Through every joint of supply,” then means, through every joint or band which is the means of supply. The parallel passage in Colossians 2:19, is in favor of the latter view. There it is said: τὸ σῶμα διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν ἐπιχορηγούμενον, the body receiving nourishment supplies through the joints or bands. The nourishing and sustaining influence, the ἐπιχορηγία, is certainly in this case that which flows from Christ, and therefore the same interpretation should be given to the passage before us. As to the force of the case, it is by some taken as the genitive of apposition. “Joint or band of supply,” would then mean, the band which is a supply. The divine influence furnished by Christ is the bond by which the members of his body are united. This is true, but in Colossians 2:19, which, being the plainer passage, must be our guide in interpreting this, the supply is said to be διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν, through the joints. Here, therefore, the parallel phrase διὰ πάσης ἁφῆς τῆς ἐπιχορηγίας, must mean, ‘through every joint for supply’; that is, which is the means or channel of the divine influence. There is an obvious distinction between “the bands” and “the aid” here spoken of. The latter is the divine life or Holy Spirit communicated to all parts of the church; the former (the ἁφαί) are the various spiritual gifts and offices which are made the channels or means of this divine communication.

The second point to be considered is the relation of the several clauses in this passage. The clause διὰ πάσης ἁφῆς, κτλ. may be connected with the last clause of the verse, αὔξησιν ποιεῖται. The sense would then be, ‘The body by means of every joint of supply makes increase of itself.’ This sense is correct and suited to the context. This however is not the most natural construction. The relative position of the members of the sentence is in favor of referring this clause to the preceding participles. ‘The body joined together and united by means of every joint of supply.’ The parallel passage in Colossians determines this to be the apostle’s meaning. He there refers the union of the body, and not its growth, to the bands (ἁφαί) of which he speaks. He describes the body as συμβιβαζόμενον διὰ τῶν ἁφῶν, and therefore here συμβιβαζόμενον διὰ πάσης ἁφῆς, which are in juxtaposition, should go together.

The clause, “according to the effectual working in the measure of every part,” admits of three constructions. It may be connected with the preceding participles — “joined together by every joint of supply according to the working, etc.,” συμβιβαζόμενον διὰ — κατὰ. Or it may be connected with the preceding words, ἐπιχορηγίας κατ ̓ ἐνέργειαν, — ‘the supply is according to the working of each particular part.’ Or thirdly, it may be connected with αὔξησι ποιεῖται; the increase is according to the working, etc. It is hard to decide between these two latter methods. In favor of the second is the position of the words — and also the congruity of the figure. It is more natural to say that the divine influence is according to the working of every part, i.e. according to its capacity and function; than to say, “the growth is according to the working, etc.” The increase of the body is due to the living influence which pervades it, and not to the efficiency of the several members. In either case, however, the idea of symmetrical development is included.

The body — maketh increase of the body, i.e. of itself. The substantive is repeated on account of the length of the sentence. This increase is an edification in love, i.e. connected with love. That is the element in which the progress of the church to its consummation is effected.

As then the human body, bound together by the vital influence derived from the head through appropriate channels and distributed to every member and organ according to its function, constantly advances to maturity; so the church, united as one body by the divine influence flowing from Christ its head through appropriate channels, and distributed to every member according to his peculiar capacity and function, continually advances towards perfection. And as in the human body no one member, whether hand or foot, can live and grow unless in union with the body; so union with the mystical body of Christ is the indispensable condition of growth in every individual believer. Fallitur ergo siquis seorsum crescere appetit. — Calvin. And further, as in the human body there are certain channels through which the vital influence flows from the head to the members, and which are necessary to its communication; so also there are certain divinely appointed means for the distribution of the Holy Spirit from Christ to the several members of his body. What these channels of divine influence are, by which the church is sustained and carried forward, is clearly stated in Ephesians 4:11, where the apostle says, “Christ gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints.” It is, therefore, through the ministry of the word that the divine influence flows from Christ the head to all the members of his body, so that where that ministry fails the divine influence fails. This does not mean that the ministry as men or as officers are the channels of the Spirit to the members of the church, so that without their ministerial intervention no man is made a partaker of the Holy Ghost. But it means that the ministry as dispensers of the truth are thus the channels of divine communication. By the gifts of revelation and inspiration, Christ constituted some apostles and some prophets for the communication and record of his truth: and by the inward call of his Spirit he makes some evangelists and some pastors for its constant proclamation and inculcation. And it is only (so far as adults are concerned) in connection with the truth, as thus revealed and preached, that the Holy Ghost is communicated. The ministry, therefore, apostles, prophets, evangelists and teachers, were given for the edification of the church, by the communication of that truth in connection with which alone the Holy Ghost is given.

All this Rome perverts. She says that prelates, whom she calls apostles, are the channels of the Holy Spirit, first to the priests and then to the people; and that this communication, is not by the truth, but tactual, by the laying on of hands. No one therefore can be united to Christ except through them, or live except as in communion with them. Thus error is always the caricature of truth.

return to '

EPH 4:17

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書4:17-5:2

解析

本段首先包含一項關於聖潔的一般勸勉，以弗所書5:17-24；其次包含關於具體本分的吩咐，以弗所書4:25起。按使徒的習慣，對聖潔的勸勉先以消極形式表達——不可像外邦人那樣行事，以弗所書4:17-19；其次積極地表達——要照基督所教導的而行，以弗所書4:20-24。外邦人行事虛妄，即在道德與屬靈的虛妄狀態中——不知道自己所作的是甚麼，也不知道自己往何處去，以弗所書4:17；因為他們在心思的黑暗中，因無知、心裡剛硬，與神的生命隔絕，以弗所書4:18；這由他們放縱污穢與貪婪而得著證明，以弗所書4:19。基督徒的行事為人與此相反——因為信徒已經受教。在他們裡面，真理取代了無知——既光照又潔淨。因此他們被引導脫去舊人、穿上新人，這新人越來越照著神的形像更新，以弗所書4:20-24。因此，他們必須避免說謊、說誠實話，以弗所書4:25；遠離怒氣、防備給撒但留地步，以弗所書4:26、4:27。避免偷竊，要勤勞並慷慨，以弗所書4:28。避免一切敗壞人的言語，讓他們的言談造就人，不叫神的聖靈擔憂，以弗所書4:29、4:30。他們不當有惡毒的情感，反當培養並彰顯溫和、仁慈、赦免的情感——在這事上效法神，以弗所書4:31。

註釋

以弗所書4:17

使徒在前段既已教導：基督已經命定他的教會完全像他自己，並為此目的作了安排，那麼作為自然的結果，他鄭重地吩咐那些自稱為基督徒的人，行事為人當與這崇高呼召相稱。「所以我說，且在主裡勸你們，從此以後不要再像外邦人存虛妄的心行事。」在此情形下，「勸」就是鄭重地吩咐，正如一個人請神為他所說之真理與重要性作見證那樣。μαρτυρέω是作見證，而μαρτύρομαι是請求作見證。此處所用的是後者。「在主裡」意為在與主的相交中。保羅說話如同一個能進入基督心意、知道他旨意、因此能奉他名發言的人。這勸勉是不可像外邦人那樣行事。在聖經語言中，「行」包括一切生命的彰顯——內在與外在、可見與不可見。它不僅表達外在可見的舉止。人被說成「與神同行」，這是指靈魂與造物主隱秘的相交，過於指外在的生活。照樣此處使徒勸我們避免的「行」，不僅是外邦人特徵性的外在舉止，更是那以外在舉止為彰顯的內在生活。

他們「存虛妄的心行事」。新約的語言既是猶太人的語言，或多或少受希伯來用法的影響。而希伯來詞語的用法，當然也受使用該語言之民眾的哲學與神學所影響。有兩個原則對一大類希伯來詞的意義有明顯影響，因此也對與之相應的希臘詞的意義有影響。一是靈魂的合一，禁止作我們哲學中所假定的認知官能與情感官能——即悟性與心——之間如此明顯的區分，因此我們的語言也未曾打上這區分的印記。在希伯來文中，同一個詞指我們通常區分為不同官能的事物。聖經論到「聰明的心」（understanding heart），也論到「悟性的願望」，並論到「心裡的思想」。它承認我們的認知中含有情感成分，我們的情感中含有理智成分。心可以敗壞而理智不受影響——按聖經的人觀，這觀念正如「靈魂的一部分快樂而另一部分愁苦、一個官能得救而另一個失喪」一樣不協調。

與前一原則密切相關的另一原則是：真理的道德與屬靈卓越性。真理不僅是思辨性的、認知的對象。它具有道德之美。因此，在聖經語言中，知識包含愛；智慧包含良善；愚妄包含罪；智者就是聖徒，愚人就是惡人。真理與聖潔相連，如同光與熱在同一道光線中。不能有其一而無其二。認識神就是永生；不認識神就是完全敗壞。聖徒是光明之子；惡人是黑暗之子。蒙光照就是蒙更新；眼瞎就是被棄絕。聖經如此一貫地陳述。

因此，本段中的νοῦς（心、心思）不是指理智而排除情感，也不是指情感而排除理智。它包括二者；理性、悟性、良心、情感都包含在這詞之內。有時這些屬靈活動模式中的某一個被特別指出，但在目前情形，所指乃全人。μάταιος所衍生之ματαιότης（虛妄）一詞，按上文所述聖經用法，包含道德與理智上的無價值或虛妄。這虛妄正是歸於νοῦς——悟性與心——之下的一切。因此，下文關於外邦人眼瞎與敗壞的一切，都包括在「虛妄」一詞之內。

返回到 '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:17-5:2

Analysis

This Section contains first a general exhortation to holiness, Ephesians 5:17-24; and secondly, injunctions in respect to specific duties, Ephesians 4:25. The exhortation to holiness is, agreeably to the apostle’s manner, first in the negative form not to walk as the heathen do, Ephesians 4:17-19, and secondly, positive, to walk as Christ had taught them, Ephesians 4:20-24. The heathen walk in the vanity of their mind, i.e. in a state of moral and spiritual fatuity, not knowing what they are about, nor whither they are going, Ephesians 4:17; because they are in mental darkness, and are alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, and through the hardness of their hearts, Ephesians 4:18; as is evinced by their giving themselves up to uncleanness and avarice, Ephesians 4:19. The Christian walk is the opposite of this — because believers have been taught. Instead of ignorance, truth dwells in them, enlightening and purifying. Hence they are led to put off the old man — and to put on the new man, which is more and more conformed to the image of God, Ephesians 4:20-24. Therefore, they must avoid lying and speak the truth, Ephesians 4:25; abstain from anger and guard against giving Satan any advantage, Ephesians 4:26, Ephesians 4:27. Avoid theft, and be diligent and liberal, Ephesians 4:28. Avoid all corrupting language, but let their conversation be edifying, so as not to grieve the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 4:29, Ephesians 4:30. Instead of malicious feelings, they should exercise and manifest such as are mild, benevolent, and forgiving, being in this matter the followers of God, Ephesians 4:31.

Commentary

Ephesians 4:17

The apostle, having in the preceding section taught that Christ had destined his church to perfect conformity to himself, and made provision for that end, as a natural consequence, solemnly enjoins on those who profess to be Christians to live in accordance with this high vocation. “This therefore I say and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as the other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind.” To testify, in this case, is solemnly to enjoin, as, a man does who calls upon God to bear witness to the truth and importance of what he says. Μαρτυρέω is to act as a witness, and μαρτύρομαι to invoke as a witness. The latter is the word here used. In the Lord, means in communion with the Lord. Paul speaks as one who had access to the mind of Christ, knew his will, and could therefore speak in his name. The exhortation is, not to walk as the Gentiles do. To walk, in Scripture language, includes all the manifestations of life, inward and outward, seen and unseen. It does not express merely the outward, visible deportment. Men are said to walk with God, which refers to the secret fellowship of the soul with its Maker, more than to the outward life. So here the walk, which the apostle enjoins us to avoid, is not only the visible deportment characteristic of the Gentiles, but also the inward life of which the outward deportment is the manifestation.

They walk “in the vanity of their mind.” The language of the New Testament being the language of Jews, is more or less modified by Hebrew usage. And the usage of Hebrew words is of course modified by the philosophy and theology of the people who employed them. There are two principles which have had an obvious influence on the meaning of a large class of Hebrew words, and therefore on the meaning of the Greek terms which answer to them. The one is the unity of the soul which forbids any such marked distinction between its cognitive and emotional faculties, i.e. between the understanding and the heart, as is assumed in our philosophy, and therefore is impressed on our language. In Hebrew the same word designates what we commonly distinguish as separate faculties. The Scriptures, speak of an “understanding heart,” and of “the desires of the understanding,” as well as of “the thoughts of the heart.” They recognize that there is an element of feeling in our cognitions and an element of intelligence in our feelings. The idea that the heart may be depraved and the intellect unaffected is, according to the anthropology of the Bible, as incongruous, as that one part of the soul should be happy and another miserable, one faculty saved and another lost.

Another principle nearly allied to the former is the moral and spiritual excellence of truth. Truth is not merely speculative, the object of cognition. It has moral beauty. In scriptural language, therefore, knowledge includes love; wisdom includes goodness; folly includes sin; the wise are holy, fools are wicked. Truth and holiness are united as light and heat in the same ray. There cannot be the one without the other. To know God is eternal life; to be without the knowledge of God is to be utterly depraved. Saints are the children of light; the wicked are the children of darkness. To be enlightened is to be renewed; to be blinded is to be reprobated. Such is the constant representation of Scripture.

The νοῦς, mind, therefore, in the passage before us, does not refer to the intellect to the exclusion of the feelings, nor to the feelings to the exclusion of the intellect. It includes both; the reason, the understanding, the conscience, the affections are all comprehended by the term. Sometimes one and sometimes another of these modes of spiritual activity is, specially referred to, but in the present case the whole soul is intended. The word ματαιότης, vanity, according to the Scriptural usage just referred to, includes moral as well as intellectual worthlessness, or fatuity. It is of all that is comprehended under the word νοῦς, the understanding and the heart, that this vanity is predicated. Everything included in the following verses respecting the blindness and depravity of the heathen is; therefore comprehended in the word vanity.

return to '

17-32

無題

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:18

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:18

Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart. This verse at once explains and confirms the preceding statement. The heathen walk in vanity, i.e. in intellectual and moral darkness, because their understanding is darkened, and because they are alienated from the life of God.

The word διάνοια, understanding, in the first clause, means a thinking through; the mind (quatenus intelligit, appetit et sentit) as opposed to the body; an act of the mind, a thought, purpose, or disposition; the intelligence as opposed to the feelings. We are required to love God, ἐν ὅλῇ τῇ διανοίᾳ, with the whole mind; men are said to be enemies, τῇ διανοίᾳ, Colossians 1:21, as to their state of mind, and proud τῇ διανοίᾳ τῆς καρδίς αὐτῶν. The apostle Peter exhorts us “to gird up the loins of the mind;” and speaks of our “pure mind.” And the apostle John says: “God has given us διανοίαν that we may know.” The word is opposed to σάρξ in Ephesians 2:3, and to καρδία in Matthew 22:37; Hebrews 8:10, and elsewhere. It depends therefore on the connection whether the word is, to be understood of the whole soul, or of the intelligence, or of the disposition. In this case it means the intelligence; because it is distinguished from νοῦς in the preceding verse and from καρδία in the last clause of this one.

“Alienated from the life of God,” means strangers to that life. “The life of God,” means the life of which God is the author. It is spiritual life. That is, the life of which the indwelling Spirit is the principle or source. “Vitam Dei,” says Beza, “appellat vitam illam, qua Deus vivit in suis.” Compare Ephesians 3:16, Ephesians 3:17, and the remarks on that passage.

In the last clause of the verse πώρωσις is rendered blindness, it more properly means hardness. It does not come from πωρός, blind, but from πῶρος a peculiar kind of stone, and then anything hard or callous. The verb πωρόω rendered to harden, Mark 6:52; Mark 8:17; John 12:40, and in all these passages it is used of the heart. So in Romans 11:7, “the rest were hardened.” The noun is rendered “hardness” in Mark 3:5, and “blindness” in Romans 11:25. This is easily accounted for, as the verb is often used in reference to the eyes when covered with an opaque hardened film, and hence πεπώρωται is the same at times with τετύφλωται. The phrase, therefore, πώρωσιν τῆς καρδίας, may be rendered either blindness or hardness of the heart. The latter is the proper meaning, unless the other be required by the context, which is not the case in the present instance.

The principal difficulty in this verse concerns the relation of its several clauses. First, the participle ὄντες may be connected with the second clause, so as to read, “Dark as to the understanding, being (ὄντες) alienated from the life of God.” This is the view taken by our translators, which supposes that the first clause merely expresses a characteristic of the heathen, for which the second assigns the reason. ‘They are darkened, because alienated.’ But this is not consistent with the relation of this verse to the preceding. ‘The heathen walk in vanity because darkened,’ etc. Besides, according to the apostle, the heathen are not in darkness because alienated from the life of God, but they are alienated from that life because of their ignorance. Secondly, the four clauses included in the verse may be considered as so related that the first is connected with the third, and the second with the fourth. The passage would then read, ‘Having the understanding darkened on account of the ignorance that is in them; alienated from the life of God on account of the hardness of their hearts.’ But this unnaturally dissociates the clauses, contrary to one of the most marked peculiarities of the apostle’s style; whose sentences are like the links of a chain, one depending on another in regular succession. This mode of construction also makes ignorance the cause of the darkness, whereas it is the effect. A man’s being enveloped in darkness is the cause of his not seeing, but his not seeing is not the cause of the darkness. Idiocy is the cause of ignorance and not the reverse. The apostle conceives of the heathen as men whose minds are impaired or darkened, and therefore they are ignorant. Thirdly, the clauses may be taken as they stand, ὄντες being connected with the first clause. ‘The heathen walk in vanity, being (i.e. because they are) darkened as to the understanding, alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, through the hardness of their heart.’ Darkness of mind is the cause of ignorance, ignorance and consequent obduracy of heart are the cause of alienation from God. This is both the logical and theological order of sequence. The soul in its natural state cannot discern the things of God — therefore it does not know them, therefore the heart is hard and therefore it is destitute of holiness. This is what the apostle teaches in 1 Corinthians 2:14, 1 Corinthians 2:16. The blind cannot see; therefore they are ignorant of the beauty of creation, therefore they are destitute of delight in its glories. You cannot heal them by light. The eye must first be opened. Then comes vision, and then joy and love. This view of the passage is in accordance with the analogy of Scripture; which constantly represents regeneration as necessary to spiritual discernment, and spiritual discernment as necessary to holy affections. Therefore the apostle says of the heathen that their understanding is darkened, a film is over their eyes, and they are alienated from God because of the ignorance consequent on their mental blindness.

return to '

EPH 4:19

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書四章19節

「他們」——不是簡單的關係代名詞，而是 οἵτινες，「這樣的人」——「既然」。他們處於上文所描述的狀態，其實際的證據在於：他們既然無感覺，便把自己交給所提的罪。「ἀπηλγηκότες」——不再對痛苦有感受。良心不再責備或約束他們。於是他們放縱自己行邪蕩，去作各樣污穢，「ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ」——貪婪地，即不知足地。平行的經文——彼得後書二章14節，「滿眼是淫色，止不住犯罪」——在意義上會支持這解釋。但 πλεονεξία 一字在別處總是意指貪婪、想要更多的欲望。既然這意義已甚好，便不當偏離其確立的意義。所以「ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ」意為帶着——即連同——貪婪。外邦人放縱自己於污穢與貪婪。這兩樣惡習在別處也如此相連，如以弗所書五章3、5節：「至於污穢、貪婪，在你們中間連提都不可」，「凡污穢的、或貪婪的」等等。又參歌羅西書三章5節；羅馬書一章29節；哥林多前書五章10節。在此處如同在羅馬書一章24節，不道德與不敬虔相連，作為其必然的後果。人在愚妄中以為道德可以離宗教而維持，甚至以為道德就是宗教；但理智、經驗與聖經都證明：人若不愛神、敬畏神，便放縱自己於某種形式的邪惡，通常是污穢或貪婪。這有兩重理由：一是靈魂的本性——它本身沒有獨立的善源，以致若它轉離神，便陷入污穢；另一是神報應的公義。他撇棄那些撇棄他的人。在羅馬書一章24節等處說：「神把不敬虔的人交給污穢」；此處則說他們自己交給自己。這不過是同一真理的兩種說法。人因神的手而受約束不去行惡；他若放鬆，人便自發地奔向毀滅。一切不建立在宗教上的教育制度、社會或政治上的一切改革計劃，按照本段以及全部聖經的教義，都必定導向毀滅。

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:19

Who, not the simple relative, but οἵτινες, such as who. The practical proof of their being in the state described is to be found in the fact that being without feeling they give themselves over to the sins mentioned. Ἀπηλγηκότες, no longer susceptible of pain. Conscience ceases to upbraid or to restrain them. They, therefore, give themselves up to excess, to practice all kinds of uncleanness, ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ, with greediness, i.e. insatiably. The parallel passage, 2 Peter 2:14, “Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin,” would favor this interpretation so far as the idea is concerned. But the word πλεονεξία always elsewhere means, covetousness; a desire to have more. And as this gives a good sense it is not right to depart from the established meaning. Ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ, therefore, means with, i.e. together with, covetousness. The heathen give themselves up to uncleanness and covetousness. These two vices are elsewhere thus associated, as in Ephesians 5:3, Ephesians 5:5, “Let not uncleanness or covetousness be named among you.” “No unclean person, nor covetous man, etc.” See also Colossians 3:5; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:10. Here as in Romans 1:24, immorality is connected with impiety as its inevitable consequence. Men in their folly think that morality may be preserved without religion, and even that morality is religion; but reason, experience and Scripture all prove that if men do not love and fear God they give themselves up to vice in some form, and commonly either to uncleanness or avarice. There is a twofold reason for this; one is the nature of the soul which has no independent source of goodness in itself, so that if it turns from God it sinks into pollution, and the other is the punitive justice of God. He abandons those who abandon him. In Romans 1:24 and elsewhere, it is said ‘God gives the impious up to uncleanness;’ here it is said, they give themselves up. These are only different forms of the same truth. Men are restrained from evil by the hand of God, if he relaxes his hold they rush spontaneously to destruction. All systems of education, all projects of reform in social or political life, not founded in religion, are, according to the doctrine of this passage and of all Scripture, sure to lead to destruction.

return to '

EPH 4:20

本文を開く

繁體中文

Ephesians 4:20

但你們學了基督,卻不是這樣。也就是說,你們對基督的認識,並沒有引導你們像外邦人那樣生活。我們說「學一件事」,卻從不說「學一個人」,故 μαθάανειν τὸν Χριστόν 這用法是絕無僅有的。然而正如聖經說「傳基督」,意思不僅是傳講祂的道理,而是傳揚基督自己,把祂陳明為至高之愛與信靠的對象;照樣,「學基督」也不僅是學祂的道理,更是得以認識基督為神的兒子、取了我們本性的神、神的聖者、救人脫離罪的救主,而認識祂就是聖潔與生命。凡這樣學了基督的人,就不能在黑暗與罪中生活。這樣的知識,按其本性就是光。它一進入,人心就被照亮、被煉淨、被潔淨。Nihil ergo de Christo didicit qui nihil vita ab infidelibus differt; neque enim a mortificatione carnis separari potest Christi cognitio. — Calvin.

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:20

But ye have not so learned Christ. That is, your knowledge of Christ has not led you to live as the heathen. As we are said to learn a thing, but never to learn a person, the expression μαθάανειν τὸν Χριστόν, is without example. But as the Scriptures speak of preaching Christ, which does not mean merely to preach his doctrines, but to preach Christ himself, to set him forth as the object of supreme love and confidence, so “to learn Christ” does not mean merely, to learn his doctrines, but to attain the knowledge of Christ as the Son of God, God in our nature, the Holy One of God, the Savior from sin, whom to know is holiness and life. Any one who has thus learned Christ cannot live in darkness and sin. Such knowledge is in its very nature light. Where it enters, the mind is irradiated, refined, and purified. Nihil ergo de Christo didicit qui nihil vita ab infidelibus differt; neque enim a mortificatione carnis separari potest Christi cognitio. — Calvin.

return to '

EPH 4:21

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:21

如果你們聽過他的道。「聽他」不是指聽見關於他的事。使徒寫信給基督徒時，不可能以假設的形式來表達這一點。他知道以弗所的基督徒曾聽見關於基督的事。聽，在這種語境中，包含明白和順服，正如屢次出現的話語「有耳可聽的，就應當聽」、「你們今日若聽他的聲音」等等，以及在無數其他情況中。因此，聽見神或基督的聲音，不僅是用外在的耳朵感知，更是用悟性和內心領受。εἴγε（若是）這詞不表達懷疑；而是「既然，如我所認定的」。使徒假定他們是順服真理的。「你們學了基督，卻不是這樣，如果你們——如我所認定的——真的聽過他的聲音並受過他的教導。」然而，ἐν αὐτῷ 嚴格來說不意指「被他」，而是「在與他的相交中」。「你們是在他裏面受了教——既然真理是在耶穌裏——脫去舊人。」認識基督、聽見他、與他聯合、他內在的教導，必然與罪的治死相連。

我們譯本中譯作「真理是在耶穌裏」的 καθώς ἐστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ 一句，有多種解釋。上面所暗示的解釋假定 καθώς 有其常見的因果意義：既然，因為；並假定真理意指道德的真理或卓越。這意義該詞常有。它常意指真宗教，並與不義相對使用，如羅馬書 2:8。此處所涉及的原則是：認識神與犯罪的生活是不相容的，因為認識暗示愛，而神是聖潔的。因此，認識他就是愛聖潔。使徒的論證是：「如果你們認識基督，你們就會離棄罪，因為他是聖潔的——真理，即道德的卓越，是在他裏面。如果你們因與他相交而受了任何教導，你們就被教導要脫去舊人。」

另一種解釋假定 καθώς 意指「正如」，表達方式。「如果你們所受的教導正如真理在耶穌裏那樣」，即正確地受了教。但這即使在英文中也需要冠詞——the truth，意指耶穌所教導的那明確的真理體系。然而在希臘文中，給這解釋增添色彩所必需的冠詞是缺失的。此外，「真理在耶穌裏」這說法，若真理意指真實的教義，便是晦暗不合聖經的。更重要的是，這解釋假定藉著基督或與基督相交可能有真假兩種教導。這是不可能的。使徒的假設不是基督曾正確地教導他們，而是他究竟有沒有教導他們。

第三種解釋使下文的不定式成為句子的主語：「真理在耶穌裏就是脫去舊人。」那麼整段的意義便是：「如果你們認識基督，你們就不能像外邦人那樣生活，因為真理在耶穌裏就是除去罪」，即與基督真實的相交就是脫去等。但這違反了本段自然的構造，按其構造，不定式 ἀποθέσθαι 應依賴於 ἐδιδάχθητε：「你們受了教導要脫去」等。而「真理在耶穌裏就是除去罪」這說法本身就是笨拙晦暗的。因此，首先提及的解釋整體而言較為可取。

return to '

英語原文

Ephesians 4:21

If so be ye have heard him. “To hear him” does not mean to hear about him. This the apostle in writing to Christians could not express in a hypothetical form. He knew that the Ephesian Christians had heard about Christ. To hear, in this connection, implies intelligence and obedience, as in the frequently occurring phrase, “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear;” and “Today if ye will hear his voice, etc.,” and in a multitude of other cases. To hear the voice of God or of Christ, therefore, is not merely to perceive with the outward ear but to receive with the understanding and the heart. The particle εἴγε, if indeed, does not express doubt; but ‘if, as I take for granted.’ The apostle assumes that they were obedient to the truth. ‘Ye have not so learned Christ as to allow of your living as do the Gentiles, if, as I take for granted, you have really heard his voice and have been taught by him. Ἐν αὐτῷ, however, does not properly mean by him, but ‘in communion with him.’ ‘ye have been taught in him, inasmuch as truth is in Jesus, to put off the old man.’ The knowledge of Christ, hearing him, union with him, his inward teaching, are necessarily connected with the mortification of sin.

The clause καθώς ἐστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ, rendered in our version as the truth is in Jesus, is variously explained. The interpretation intimated above supposes καθώς to have its frequent causal sense; since, inasmuch as; and truth to mean moral truth, or excellence. This sense it very often has. It frequently means true religion, and is used antithetically to unrighteousness, as in Romans 2:8. The principle here involved is, that knowledge of God is inconsistent with a life of sin, because knowledge implies love, and God is holy. To know him, therefore, is to love holiness. The apostle’s argument is: ‘If you know Christ you will forsake sin, because he is holy — truth, i.e. moral excellence is in him. If you have been taught any thing in virtue of your communion with him, you have been taught to put off the old man.’

Another interpretation supposes καθώς to mean as, expressing the manner. ‘If ye have been taught as the truth is in Jesus,’ i.e. correctly taught. But this requires the article even in English — the truth, meaning the definite system of truth which Jesus taught. In the Greek, however, the article necessary to give color to this interpretation is wanting. Besides, the expression “the truth is in Jesus” is obscure and unscriptural, if truth be taken to mean true doctrine. And more than this, this interpretation supposes there may be a true and false teaching by, or in communion with, Christ. This cannot be. The apostle’s hypothesis is, not whether Christ has taught them correctly, but whether he has taught them at all.

A third interpretation makes the following infinitive the subject of the sentence; ‘Truth in Jesus is, to put off the old man.’ The meaning of the whole passage would then be, ‘If you know Christ ye cannot live as the heathen, for truth in Jesus is to put away sin,’ i.e. true fellowship with Christ is to put off, etc. But this violates the natural construction of the passage, according to which the infinitive ἀποθέσθαι depends on ἐδιδάχθητε, ‘Ye have been taught to put off, etc.’ And the expression, ‘It is truth in Jesus to put away sin’ is in itself awkward and obscure. The first mentioned interpretation, therefore, is on the whole to be preferred.

return to '

EPH 4:22

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:22

成聖包含向罪死、即治死肉體，以及向義而活；或如此處所言，脫去舊人並穿上新人。明顯的暗喻是指更換衣服。脫去，即撇棄、從自己身上移除，如同撇在一邊的衣服。穿上，即採納、據為己有。我們蒙召要脫去黑暗的行為，羅馬書 13:12；棄絕謊言，以弗所書 4:25；脫去忿怒、惱恨、惡毒等，歌羅西書 3:8；除去一切的污穢，雅各書 1:21。另一方面，我們蒙召要穿上主耶穌基督，羅馬書 13:14；加拉太書 3:27；穿上光明的軍裝，羅馬書 13:12；穿上憐憫的心腸，歌羅西書 3:12；又說人要穿上從上頭來的能力，路加福音 24:49；穿上不朽壞等，哥林多前書 15:53。正如人的衣著是眼目所見的，照樣這些表達也用以指整個現象性的生命——一切靈魂內在生命藉以彰顯的行動與屬性；不僅如此，也指那些行動從中流露出來的內在原則本身。因為此處我們被吩咐脫去舊人，即我們已敗壞的本性——它是「舊的」或「原有的」，以與新人——即屬靈生命的原則——相對。比較歌羅西書 3:9，「不要彼此說謊，因你們已經脫去舊人和舊人的行為」；羅馬書 6:6，「因為知道我們的舊人和他同釘十字架」。此處所謂「舊人」，保羅在別處稱之為「自己」，如羅馬書 7:14「我是屬肉體的」、「在我裏頭沒有良善」，羅馬書 7:18；或「肢體中的律」，羅馬書 7:23；或與靈相對的「肉體」，如加拉太書 5:16、5:17。這邪惡的原則或本性之所以被稱為舊，是因為它在新的之前，且因它是敗壞的。被稱為「人」，是因為它就是我們自己。我們要被改變——而不僅僅是我們的行為。我們要釘死自己。這敗壞的邪惡原則在重生中並未被消滅，而是要在一生爭戰中每日加以治死。

如上所言，此處的關聯是與以弗所書 4:21 前一子句相連，ἐδιδάχθητε——ἀποθέσθαι ὑμᾶς。當這類結構中不定式的主語與其支配動詞的主語相同時，通常不表達出來。因此 ὑμᾶς 出現在文本中，被引為反對這一結構的致命理由。然而參考路加福音 20:20；羅馬書 2:19；腓立比書 3:13，便可看出這規則有例外。

其間的子句，κατὰ τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφήν，「關乎從前行為」，屬於動詞而非隨後的名詞。意義不是「從前行為上的舊人」（這需要 τὸν κατὰ τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφήν, κτλ.），而是「就從前行為而言，當脫去舊人」。要脫去的，不是舊本性先前那些表現，而是整個舊原則。由於這原則從前居主導地位，使徒說：就你們從前的生活而言，當脫去舊人。

「漸漸變壞的」，φθειρομένῳ；「趨向滅亡的」。後一譯法較為可取，因為「舊」這修飾語已包含敗壞之意。說「那敗壞的人是敗壞的」便顯得累贅。要撇在一旁、或要持續治死的，乃是那趨向滅亡的舊人或敗壞本性（qui tendit ad exitium.——Grotius）。

它趨向滅亡，κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τῆς ἀπάτης，「照著欺騙的私慾」。ἀπάτης 帶有冠詞，因此不是一個單純的修飾屬格——不是「欺騙所屬的私慾」。使徒在羅馬書 7:11 說罪欺騙了他，在希伯來書 3:13 論到「罪的欺騙」。乃是內住的罪本身，藉著那些趨向滅亡的慾望而行欺騙。

英語原文

Ephesians 4:22

Sanctification includes dying to sin, or mortification of the flesh, and living to righteousness; or as it is here expressed, putting off the old man and putting on the new man. The obvious allusion is to a change of clothing. To put off, is to renounce, to remove from us, as garments which are laid aside. To put on, is to adopt, to make our own. We are called upon to put off the works of darkness, Romans 13:12, to put away lying, Ephesians 4:25; to put off anger, wrath, malice, etc., Colossians 3:8; to lay aside all filthiness, James 1:21. On the other hand, we are called upon to put on the Lord Jesus Christ, Romans 13:14; Galatians 3:27; the armor of light, Romans 13:12; bowels of mercy, Colossians 3:12; and men are said to be clothed with power from on high, Luke 24:49; with immortality or incorruption, etc., 1 Corinthians 15:53. As a man’s clothes are what strike the eye so these expressions are used in reference to the whole phenomenal life — all those acts and attributes by which the interior life of the soul is manifested; — and not only that, but also the inherent principle itself whence these acts flow. For here we are said to put off the old man, that is, our corrupt nature, which is old or original as opposed to the new man or principle of spiritual life. Compare Colossians 3:9, “Lie not one to another, seeing you have put off the old man with his deeds.” Romans 6:6, “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him.” What is here called “the old man” Paul elsewhere calls himself, as in Romans 7:14, “I am carnal,” “In me there dwelleth no good thing,” Romans 7:18; or, “law in the members,” Romans 7:23; or “the flesh” as opposed to the spirit, as in Galatians 5:16, Galatians 5:17. This evil principle or nature is called old because it precedes what is new, and because it is corrupt. And it is called “man,” because it is ourselves. We are to be changed — and not merely our acts. We are to crucify ourselves. This original principle of evil is not destroyed in regeneration, but is to be daily mortified, in the conflicts of a whole life.

The connection, as intimated above, is with the former clause of Ephesians 4:21, ἐδιδάχθητε — ἀποθέσθαι ὑμᾶς. When the subject of the infinitive in such construction is the same with that of the governing verb, it is usually not expressed. The presence of ὑμᾶς therefore in the text is urged as a fatal objection to this construction. A reference, however, to Luke 20:20; Romans 2:19; Philippians 3:13, will show that this rule has its exceptions.

The intervening clause, κατὰ τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφὴν, concerning the former conversation, belongs to the verb and not to the following noun. The meaning is not, ‘the old man as to the former conversation,’ (which would require τὸν κατὰ τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφὴν, κτλ.); but, ‘put away as concerns the former conversation the old man.’ It is not the old nature as to its former manifestations only that is to be put away, but the old principle entirely. And as that was formerly dominant, the apostle says, as to your former manner of life, put off the old man.

“Which is corrupt,” φθειρόμενον; “which tends to destruction.” This latter rendering is to be preferred, because the epithet old includes the idea of corruption. It would be, therefore, tautological to say, ‘the corrupt man which is corrupt.’ It is the old man or corrupt nature which tends to perdition (qui tendit ad exitium. — Grotius), which is to be laid aside, or continually mortified.

It tends to destruction, κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τῆς ἀπάτης, according to the deceitful lusts, or ἀπάτης has the article and therefore is not so properly a mere qualifying genitive — the lusts which deceit has. The apostle says, Romans 7:11, sin deceived him, and Hebrews 3:13, speaks of “the deceitfulness of sin.” It is indwelling sin itself which deceives by means of those desires which tend to destruction.

return to '

EPH 4:23

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:23

In this and the following verse we have the positive part of sanctification which is expressed by “renewing” and “putting on the new man.” The verb ἀνανεοῦσθαι, to be made new, is passive. This renewal is always represented as the work of God. “We are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works,” Ephesians 2:10. It is therefore called “a renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Titus 3:5. Both these phrases “to be renewed” and “to put on the new man” may express either the instantaneous act of regeneration, or the gradual work of sanctification. Thus in Romans 12:2, we are exhorted “not to be conformed to the world, but to be transformed by the renewing of the mind.” So in this place, and in the parallel passage in Colossians 3:9, Colossians 3:10, these terms express the whole process by which the soul is restored to the image of God. It is a process of renewal from the beginning to the end. The apostle says, “his inner man is renewed day by day.” 2 Corinthians 4:16.

The distinction between νέος, young, new as to origin; and καινός, fresh, bright, unused, new as to nature or character, is generally preserved in the New Testament. Thus in Matthew 9:17, οἶνον νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινούς, recent, or newly made wine into fresh bottles. Μνημεῖον καινὸν, new sepulcher, i.e. one which had not been used, however long it may have been prepared. Hence καινός, is an epithet of excellence. In the passage “Until I drink it new with you in the kingdom of God,” Mark 14:25, the word is καινός, not νὲον. The same idea is implied in all the expressions, new creature, new heavens, new commandment, new name, new Jerusalem, etc., etc. In all these cases the word is καινός. The same distinction properly belongs to the derivatives of these words; ἀνανεόω is to make νὲον. and ἀνακαινίζω, ἀνακαινόω, is to make καινός. Hence when reference is had to the renewal of the soul, which is a change for the better, the words used are always the derivatives of καινός, except in this passage. See Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 4:16; Colossians 3:10; Titus 3:5. Still as what is νέος is also καινός, as freshness, vigor and beauty are the attributes of youth, the same thing may be designated by either term. The soul as renewed is, therefore, called in this passage καινός ἆνθρωπος and νέος ἆνθρωπος in Colossians 3:10; and the spiritual change which in Colossians 3:10, is expressed by ἀνακαινόω and in Romans 12:2, and Titus 3:5, by ἀνακαίνωσις, is here expressed by ἀνανεόω.

The subject of this renewal, that as to which men are to be made new, is expressed in the clause τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ νοὸς ὑμῶν, i.e. as to the spirit of your mind. This combination is unexampled. Grotius says: Spiritus mentis est ipsa mens; as Augustine before him had said: Spiritum mentis dicere voluit eum spiritum, quae mens vocatur. But here spirit and mind are distinguished. The spirit of a man is not that spirit which is a man; but which man has. Others take the word spirit here to be temper, disposition. “Renewed as to the temper of your mind.” This is a very unusual, if not doubtful meaning of the word in the New Testament. Others, again, say that the word spirit means the Holy Spirit, and that the passage should be rendered, “by the Spirit which is in your mind.” But this is impossible. The “spirit of the mind” is here as plainly distinguished from the Spirit of God as in Romans 8:16, where the Spirit of God is said to bear witness with our spirit.

It may be remarked in reference to this phrase: —

That although the passage in Romans 12:2, “renewal of your mind,” obviously expresses the same general idea as is here expressed by saying, “renewed as to the spirit of the mind,” it does not follow that “mind” and “spirit of the mind,” mean exactly the same thing. The one expression is general, the other precise and definite.
The words πνεῦμα, νοῦς, καρδία, ψυχή, spirit, mind, heart, soul, are used in Scripture both for the whole immaterial and immortal element of our nature, that in which our personality resides; and also for that element under some one of its modes of manifestation, sometimes for one mode and sometimes for another; as νοῦς sometimes designates the soul as intelligent and sometimes the soul as feeling.
Though this is true, yet predominantly one of these terms designates one, and another a different mode of manifestation; as νοῦς, the understanding, καρδία, the feelings, ψυχή, the seat of sensation.
Of these terms πνεῦμα is the highest. It means breath, wind, invisible power, life. The idea of power cannot be separated from the term; τὸ πνεῦμα ἐστι τὸ ζωοποιοῦν. John 6:63.

It is, therefore, applied to God, to the Holy Ghost, to angels,, to Satan, to demons, to the soul of man. The “spirit of the world,” 1 Corinthians 2:12, is the controlling, animating principle of the world, that which makes it what ii is. The spirit of the mind therefore is its interior life; that of which the νοῦς, καρδία, ψυχή, are the modes of manifestation. That, therefore, which needs to be renewed, is not merely outward habits or modes of life; not merely transient tempers or dispositions, but the interior principle of life which lies back of all that is outward, phenomenal. or transient.

return to '

EPH 4:24

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:24

Καὶ ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καινὸν ἆνθρωπον, and that ye put on the new man. As we are called to put off our corrupt nature as a ragged and filthy garment, so we are required to put on our new nature as a garment of light. And as the former was personified as an old man, decrepit, deformed, and tending to corruption so the latter is personified as a new man, fresh, beautiful, and vigorous, like God, for it is τὸν κατὰ θεὸν κτισθέντα, κτλ., after God created in righteousness and holiness of the truth. In the parallel passage it is said to be renewed “after the image of God,” Colossians 3:10. “After God,” therefore, means after his image. That in which this image consists is said to be righteousness and holiness. The former of these words, δικαιοσύνῃ, when it stands alone often includes all the forms of moral excellence; but when associated with ὁσιότης, the one means rectitude, the being or doing right; and the other, holiness. The one renders us just to our neighbors; the other, pious towards God. The two substantives are united in Luke 1:75; the adjectives, just and holy, in Titus 1:8; and the adverbs holily and justly, in 1 Thessalonians 2:10. The Greeks made the same distinction, πρὸς θεούς ὅσιον καί πρὸς ἀνθρώπους ἐστι. In our version this clause is rendered, “in righteousness and true holiness”; but the word ἀληθείας stands in the same relation to both nouns, and if taken as a mere qualifying genitive the translation should be, “in true righteousness and holiness.” Most modern commentators, however, consider “the truth” here as opposed to “the deceit” spoken of in Ephesians 4:22. “Righteousness and holiness of the truth” would then mean that righteousness and holiness which the truth has, or which the truth produces. If the principle of indwelling sin is there personified as ἀμάτη, deceit, producing and exercising those lusts which lead to destruction; the principle of spiritual life is here personified ἀληθείας, truth, which produces righteousness and holiness. Truth is spiritual knowledge, that knowledge which is eternal life, which not only illuminates the understanding but sanctifies the heart. The Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of truth as the author of this divine illumination which irradiates the whole soul. This truth came by Jesus Christ, John 1:17. He is the truth and the life, John 14:6. We are made free by the truth, and sanctified by the truth. The Gospel is called the word of truth, as the objective revelation of that divine knowledge which subjectively is the principle of spiritual life. Taking the word in this sense, the passage is brought into nearer coincidence with the parallel passage in Colossians 3:10. Here the image of God is said to consist in righteousness and holiness of the truth; there it is said to consist in knowledge. “The new man is renewed unto knowledge after the image of him that created him.” These passages differ only in that one is more concise than the other. Knowledge (the ἐπίγνωσις τοῦ Θεοῦ) includes righteousness, holiness, and truth. Nothing, therefore, can be more contrary to Scripture than to undervalue divine truth, and to regard doctrines as matters pertaining merely to the speculative understanding. Righteousness and holiness, morality and religion, are the products of the truth, without which they cannot exist.

This passage is of special doctrinal importance, as teaching us the true nature of the image of God in which man was originally created. That image did not consist merely in man’s rational nature, nor in his immortality, nor in his dominion, but specially in that righteousness and holiness, that rectitude in all his principles, and that susceptibility of devout affections which are inseparable from the possession of the truth, or true knowledge of God. This is the scriptural view of the original state of man, or of original righteousness, as opposed, on the one hand, to the Pelagian theory that man was created without moral character; and on the other, to the Romish doctrine, that original righteousness was a supernatural endowment not belonging to man’s nature. Knowledge, and consequently righteousness and holiness, were immanent or concreated in the first man, in the same sense as were his sense of beauty and susceptibility of impression from the external world. He opened his eyes and saw what was visible, and perceived its beauty; he turned his mind on God, perceived his glory, and was filled with all holy affections.

return to '

EPH 4:25

本文を開く

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:25

既要人履行聖潔——或被改變成為神的形像——的一般本分，使徒便堅持各種特殊的本分。當注意，幾乎每一個情形中，先是消極的陳述，繼而是積極的本分宣告，然後是動機。例如此處：不要說謊，要說實話，因為我們是互相為肢體。所以，即基於被改變成為神形像的一般本分，你們要棄絕謊言，作為屬於老人污穢衣服的一部分；各人要與鄰舍說實話。鄰舍（ὁ πλησίον），聖經教導我們，是任何與我們相近的人——任何信仰或國籍的同胞；對這一切人我們都當說實話。但上下文顯示，保羅此處是對基督徒說話，並且支持這本分的動機顯示他在此所說的鄰舍是指同作基督徒的，正如羅馬書 15:2 一樣。所論的動機是信徒彼此之間所持的親密關係。他們都是同一身體的肢體，彼此之間並與他們共同的頭基督密切聯合——正如他在以弗所書 4:16 所教導的。正如手欺騙腳、眼欺騙耳之不自然和荒謬；照樣一個基督徒欺騙另一個基督徒便違反了他們聯合的定律本身。以宗教的考量來支持道德本分，是使徒以及一般聖經的特徵。這方法雖然呈現更高而特有的本分根據，卻無意排除其他根據。誠實的本分根基於真理的內在卓越、神的命令、以及我們同胞的權利。他們對我們不欺騙他們所持的權利，與我們不欺詐他們所持的權利相同。但這一切並不阻礙本分當藉著提到信徒因聖靈內住而被聯合為基督奧祕身體所持有的特殊關係來支持。

（返回以弗所書 4:25）

英語原文

Ephesians 4:25

Having enforced the general duty of holiness, or of being conformed to the image of God, the apostle insists on specific duties. It will be observed that in almost every case there is first a negative, then a positive statement of the duty, and then a motive. Thus here: lie not, but speak truth, for ye are members one of another. Wherefore, i.e. on the ground of the general obligation to be conformed to the divine image, putting away lying, as one part of the filthy garments belonging to the old man; speak every man truth with his neighbor. A neighbor, ὁ πλησίον, the Scripture teaches us, is any one near to us, a fellow man of any creed or nation; and to all such we are bound to speak the truth. But the context shows that Paul is here speaking to Christians and the motive by which the duty is enforced shows that by neighbor he here means a fellow Christian, as in Romans 15:2. The motive in question is the intimate relation in which believers stand to each other. They are all members of the same body intimately united, as he taught in Ephesians 4:16, with each other and with Christ their common head. As it would be unnatural and absurd for the hand to deceive the foot, or the eye the ear, so there is a violation of the very law of their union for one Christian to deceive another. It is characteristic of the apostle and of the Scriptures generally, to enforce moral duties by religious considerations. This method, while it presents the higher and peculiar ground of obligation, is not intended to exclude other grounds. The obligation of veracity rests on the intrinsic excellence of truth, on the command of God, and on the rights of our fellow men. They have the same right that we should not deceive them as that we should not defraud them. But all this does not hinder that the duty should be enforced by a reference to the peculiar relation of believers as united by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit into the mystical body of Christ.

return to '

EPH 4:26

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:26, Ephesians 4:27

His next exhortation has reference to anger; with regard to which he teaches —

Not to allow anger to be an occasion of sin.
Not to cherish it.
Not to give Satan any advantage over us when we are angry.

The words ὀργίζεσθε καὶ μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε, be ye angry and sin not, are borrowed from the Septuagint version of Psalms 4:4 and admit of different interpretations:

As the original text in Psalms 4:4 admits of being rendered Rage and sin not, i.e. do not Sin by raging‹15› — so the words of the apostle may mean, do not commit the sin of being angry. To this it is objected, that it makes the negative qualify both verbs, while it belongs really only to the latter. It is not necessary to assume that the apostle uses these words in the precise sense of the original text; for the New Testament writers often give the sense of an Old Testament passage with a modification of the words, or they use the same words with a modification of the sense. This is not properly a quotation; it is not cited as something the Psalmist said, but the words are used to express Paul’s own idea. In Romans 10:18, “Their sound is gone into all the earth,” we have the language of the 19th Psalm but not an expression of the sense of the Psalmist.
Others make the first imperative in this clause permissive and the second commanding, ‘Be angry and (but) do not sin.’
Or the first is conditional, ‘if angry, sin not.’ That is, sin not in anger; let not your anger be an occasion of sin. Repress it and bring it under control that it may not hurry you into the commission of sin. The meaning is the same as would be expressed by saying, ὀργιζόμενοι μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε, being angry sin not. This is perhaps the most satisfactory view of the passage.

It is indeed objected that the apostle is here speaking of sins, and that in Ephesians 4:31, he forbids all anger, and therefore any interpretation which assumes that anger is not itself a sin is inadmissible. But it is certain that all anger is not sinful. Christ himself, it is said, regarded the perverse laws “with anger.” Mark 3:5. The same generic feeling, if mingled with holy affections, or in a holy mind, is virtuous; if mingled with malice it is sinful. Both feelings, or both combinations of feeling, are expressed in Scripture by the term anger. Nothing in itself sinful can be attributed to God, but anger is attributed to him. Ephesians 4:31 is not inconsistent with this interpretation, for there the context shows the apostle speaks of malicious anger — just as “all hatred” means all malice, and not the hatred of evil.

Let not the sun go down upon your wrath. The word is here παροργισμός, paroxysm or excitement. Anger even when justifiable is not to be cherished. The wise man says: “Anger resteth in the bosom of fools.” Ecclesiastes 7:9.

Neither give place to the devil. — “To give place to” is to get out of the way of, to allow free scope to; and therefore to give an occasion or advantage to any one. We are neither to cherish anger, nor are we to allow Satan to take advantage of our being angry. Anger when cherished gives the Tempter great power over us, as it furnishes a motive to yield to his evil suggestions. The word διάβολος is rendered by Luther, Lästerer, slanderer. It is used as an adjective in that sense in 1 Timothy 3:11; 2 Timothy 3:3, and Titus 2:3, but with the article (ὁ διάβολος) it always means Satan — the great accuser — the prince of the demons or fallen angels, who is the great opposer of God and seducer of men — against whose wiles we are commanded to be constantly on our guard.

return to '

EPH 4:27

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:26, Ephesians 4:27

His next exhortation has reference to anger; with regard to which he teaches —

Not to allow anger to be an occasion of sin.
Not to cherish it.
Not to give Satan any advantage over us when we are angry.

The words ὀργίζεσθε καὶ μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε, be ye angry and sin not, are borrowed from the Septuagint version of Psalms 4:4 and admit of different interpretations:

As the original text in Psalms 4:4 admits of being rendered Rage and sin not, i.e. do not Sin by raging‹15› — so the words of the apostle may mean, do not commit the sin of being angry. To this it is objected, that it makes the negative qualify both verbs, while it belongs really only to the latter. It is not necessary to assume that the apostle uses these words in the precise sense of the original text; for the New Testament writers often give the sense of an Old Testament passage with a modification of the words, or they use the same words with a modification of the sense. This is not properly a quotation; it is not cited as something the Psalmist said, but the words are used to express Paul’s own idea. In Romans 10:18, “Their sound is gone into all the earth,” we have the language of the 19th Psalm but not an expression of the sense of the Psalmist.
Others make the first imperative in this clause permissive and the second commanding, ‘Be angry and (but) do not sin.’
Or the first is conditional, ‘if angry, sin not.’ That is, sin not in anger; let not your anger be an occasion of sin. Repress it and bring it under control that it may not hurry you into the commission of sin. The meaning is the same as would be expressed by saying, ὀργιζόμενοι μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε, being angry sin not. This is perhaps the most satisfactory view of the passage.

return to '

EPH 4:28

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:28

The next exhortation relates to theft — we are not to steal — but to labor, that we may not only honestly support ourselves, but be able also to give to those who need.

The word ὁ κλέπτων does not mean one who stole, but one who steals, the thief. But how, it is asked, could the apostle assume that there were thieves in the Ephesian church, especially as he is addressing those who had been renewed, and whom he is exhorting to live agreeably to their new nature? To get over this difficulty Calvin says, Paul does not refer merely to such thefts as the civil law punishes, but to all unjust acquisition. And Jerome says, Ephesios monet, ne sub occasione emolumenti furti crimen incurrant, furtum nominans, omme quod alterius damno quaeritur. This enlargement of the idea of theft, though it transcends the limits assigned the offense in human laws, does not go beyond the law of God. As the command, “Thou shalt do no murder,” includes the prohibition of malice; so the command, “Thou shalt not steal,” forbids everything that doth or may unjustly hinder our neighbor’s wealth or outward estate. It is very certain that many things tolerated by the customs of men; many modes of getting the property of others into our own possession practiced even by those professing to be Christians, are in the light of the divine law only different forms of theft, and will be revealed as such in the judgment of the last day. The spirit of the apostle’s command no doubt includes all the forms of dishonesty. Still it may be questioned if this principle gives the true explanation of the passage. Others say, that as in the Corinthian church fornication and even incest was tolerated, See 1 Corinthians 6:1-6, — it is not incredible that theft should be disregarded in the church of Ephesus, or at least not visited with discipline. It is however probable that our version, which agrees with the Vulgate and with Luther’s translation, expresses the true sense. Not that ὁ κλέπτων means the same with ὁ κλέψας, but as “murderer” means one guilty of murder, however penitent, so “thief” may mean one guilty of theft. Certain inmates of the prisons are called thieves because of their past, and not because of their present conduct.

The positive part of the apostle’s injunction is, instead of sustaining himself unjustly on the labor of others, let him labor, working with his hands the thing that is good. As he used his hands to steal, let him use them in doing what is right — i.e. in honest labor. Paul elsewhere lays down the general principle, “if any would not work neither should he eat.” 2 Thessalonians 3:10. No one is entitled to be supported by others, who is able to support himself. This is one great principle of scriptural economics. Another, however, no less important is, that those who cannot work are entitled to aid — and therefore the apostle adds as a motive why the strong should labor — that they may have to contribute to him that hath need. No man liveth for himself; and no man should labor for himself alone but with the definite object to be able to assist others. Christian principles, if fairly carried out, would speedily banish pauperism and other cognate evils from our modern civilization.

return to '

EPH 4:29

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:29, Ephesians 4:30

Forbid corrupt communication — enjoin profitable discourse, assign as a motive the good of others and reverence for the Holy Spirit.

Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth. Πᾶς λόγος σαπρὸς, any foul word. The word σαπρὸς means literally putrid, and then figuratively offensive and injurious. But that which is good to the use of edifying, ἀγαθὸς πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν, adapted to edification. The words οἰκοδομὴν τῆς χρείας, edification of the necessity, means the edification the necessity calls for — or which is suited to the occasion. This is the common and satisfactory interpretation. Our version “to the use of edifying” — transposes the words. That it may give grace to the hearers. The phrase χάριν διδόναι, to give grace, is one of frequent occurrence, and always means — to confer a favor — i.e. to give pleasure or profit. There is no necessity for departing from this sense here. The meaning is, ‘that it may benefit the hearers.’ And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, i.e. by such corrupt language. Under the head of πᾶς λόγος σαπρὸς the apostle includes, as appears from Colossians 3:8, all irreligious, malicious and impure language, which not only injures others, but grieves the Holy Spirit. As a temple is sacred, and everything that profanes it is an offense to God, so the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the people of God is made the reason why we should treat them with reverence, as this apostle teaches when he says, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him will God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.” 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 3:17. To pollute, therefore, the souls of believers by suggesting irreligious or impure thoughts to them, is a profanation of the temple of God and an offense to the Holy Ghost. This is one phase of the truth here presented. Another, and the one more immediately intended in this clause is, that the blessed Spirit who condescends to dwell in our hearts is grieved and offended whenever we thus sin. Thus in 1 Corinthians 6:19, Paul says, “What! know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?” Reverence, therefore, for the Holy Spirit who dwells in others, and for that same Spirit as dwelling in ourselves, should prevent our ever giving utterance to a corrupting thought. The Spirit, says the apostle, is grieved. Not only is his holiness offended, but his love is wounded. If anything can add to the guilt of such conduct, it is its ingratitude, for it is by him, as the apostle adds, We are sealed unto the day of redemption. His indwelling certifies that we are the children of God, and secures our final salvation. See Ephesians 1:13. To grieve him, therefore, is to wound him on whom our salvation depends. Though he will not finally withdraw from those in whom he dwells, yet when grieved he withholds the manifestations of his presence. And a disregard for those manifestations is proof that we have not the Spirit of Christ and are none of his.

The apostle next exhorts his readers to put away all malicious and revengeful feelings, to be kind and forgiving. This exhortation is enforced by the consideration of the mercy of God, and the great love of Christ, Ephesians 4:31.

return to '

EPH 4:30

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:29, Ephesians 4:30

Forbid corrupt communication — enjoin profitable discourse, assign as a motive the good of others and reverence for the Holy Spirit.

return to '

EPH 4:31

本文を開く

繁體中文

英語原文

Ephesians 4:31

Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking, be put away from you. These are intimately related evils. Bitterness, a word transferred from the sphere of sensations to that of the mind. The adjective πικρός means sharp, as an arrow, then pungent to the taste, disagreeable, and then venomous. The poisonous water given to the woman suspected of adultery, Numbers 5:18, is called the “bitter water.” The word bitterness, therefore, in its figurative sense means what is corroding, as grief, or anything which acts on the mind as poison does on the body, or on the minds of others as venom does on their bodies. The venom of the serpent lies harmless in his fang; but all evil feelings are poison to the subject of them as well as venom to their object. The command, therefore to lay aside all bitterness, is a command to lay aside everything which corrodes our own minds or wounds the feelings of others. Under this head are the particulars which follow, viz. wrath; θυμὸς, (from θύω, to burn) means the mind itself as the seat of passions and desires — then the mind in the commotion of passion. Ὀργή, anger, is the passion itself, i.e. the manifestation of θυμὸς, as clamor and evil speaking are the outward expression of anger. The context shows that βλασφημία is neither blasphemy as directed against God, nor merely slander as directed against men; but any form of speech springing from anger, and adapted either to wound or to injure others. With all malice. Κακίᾳ is a general term for badness or depravity of any kind. Here the context shows that it means malevolence, the desire to injure. We are to lay aside not only wrath and anger but all other forms of malevolent feeling.

return to '

Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament · Ephesians 第4章

Ephesians 4章

EPH 4:1

繁體中文

英語原文

An Exhortation To Unity, Vs. 1-16.—An Exhortation To Holiness And To Specific Virtues, Vs. 17-32.

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:2

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:3

繁體中文

第四章

以弗所書 4:1-16

分析

註解

以弗所書 4:1-3

英語原文

EPH 4:4

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:5

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:5

英語原文

EPH 4:6

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:7

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:8

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:8

英語原文

EPH 4:9

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:10

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:10

英語原文

EPH 4:11

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:12

繁體中文

以弗所書 4:12

英語原文

EPH 4:13

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:14

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:15

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:16

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:17

繁體中文

英語原文

無題

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:18

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:19

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:20

繁體中文

英語原文

EPH 4:21

繁體中文

英語原文