Letter to the Ephesians, The

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dec 2001 by Arnold, Clinton E

The Letter to the Ephesians. By Peter T. O'Brien. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999, xxxiii 536 pp., $40.00.

Peter O'Brien has long been a highly respected and trusted name in evangelical biblical scholarship. With the publication of this commentary on Ephesians, O'Brien has now completed major commentaries on all four of the so-called "prison epistles." In 1982 he published a commentary on Colossians and Philemon for the WBC series and then in 1991 he wrote a massive exegetical treatment of Philippians for the NIGTC series. If insightfulness, substance, and clarity are the marks of a superb commentary, then this volume is truly superb. In my opinion, this installment is his best yet.

Standing against the current of contemporary critical scholarship, O'Brien argues that it was the apostle Paul himself who wrote this letter. In fact, he questions a fundamental assumption made by many scholars who argue for pseudonymity, namely, that pseudonymity was a recognized and accepted practice in the early Church. Drawing on the recent Oxford dissertation by J. Duff, O'Brien asserts that there was no positive evidence at all that pseudonymity was seen as a literary technique accepted by Christians in the first and second centuries. O'Brien also questions the assumption that a document could be both pseudonymous and canonical. He argues that it was, in reality, the other way around: Ephesians was recognized as apostolic and authoritative and, on that basis, was accepted into the canon.

Although he does not see en Epheso as the original reading of 1:1, he still sees the letter written for churches in and around Ephesus and perhaps also for those on the road to Colossae (where Tychicus would have been traveling with the letter to the Colossians). Paul wrote the letter during his Roman imprisonment sometime in the years AD 61-62. It would have been helpful, however, to get a more thorough explanation of how the grammar of Eph 1:1 could support his view on omission.

O'Brien contends that the main purpose of Ephesians could best be characterized by the expression "identity formation." For O'Brien this is more than simply helping people understand their new nature in Christ. It is broader and "cosmic" in orientation-encompassing earth and heaven and orienting believers into their place in God's plan from creation until the end. O'Brien sees the end-time "summing up of everything in Christ" (Eph 1:10) as determinative of the essence of Paul's thought in Ephesians. This involves the two interrelated themes of (1) unity in Christ (especially the uniting of Jew and Gentile into one body in Christ) and (2) cosmic reconciliation. He makes a compelling case for this as the heart of Ephesians, drawing on the important studies of C. C. Caragounis and T. Moritz. The central message of Ephesians, then, not only involves the Church, but also the theme of how God deals with the rebellion of the demonic powers-and how the Church and the powers relate in terms of conflict and struggle. O'Brien does an exceptional job of developing these themes throughout the course of his exposition.

In developing the theme of the "powers," O'Brien rightly rejects the view that identifies these personal demonic intelligences with structures of thought or political institutions. He claims that such a view "fails to do justice to the historical context of the New Testament in which belief in the spiritual realm was widespread" (p. 469).

Nowhere looming in the background of Ephesians does O'Brien find Gnosticism. Consequently, be does not root pleroma in a Gnostic cosmology, but in the OT idea of God's presence and glory filling the temple. In Ephesians, this "fullness" refers to all of God's attributes and activities-his Spirit, word, wisdom, and glory. Throughout the commentary, O'Brien does an excellent job of providing a concise rundown of the relevant OT and Jewish background to terms, concepts, and literary forms. He rightly sees the OT and Judaism as the principal matrix for interpreting Paul's thought.

On the other hand, O'Brien is also sensitive to matters of contextualization. He regularly helps the reader to understand the impact and relevance of Paul's message for Gentile Christians living on the west coast of Asia Minor.

Although this commentary is meant for a broad readership (many of whom may not know Greek), O'Brien makes ample use of footnotes to explain Greek constructions and to support his interpretation of a particular Greek phrase. O'Brien frequently refers to the more recent studies of Greek grammar by S. E. Porter and K. L. McKay in addition to the traditional grammars (although he appears to be unfamiliar with the important study of the Greek verb by B. Fanning).

This is a clearly written commentary that provides an excellent analysis and interpretation of Paul's letter to the Ephesians. It is the best all-around commentary on Ephesians currently available. Because of the importance of Ephesians for Christian "identity formation," the letter to the Ephesians and this commentary should be consulted regularly by Christian leaders involved in "spiritual formation."