Ephesians 5:6-14

Ephesians 5:6-14

5.6  μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς ἀπατάτω κενοῖς λόγοις διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ ἔρχεται ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας.

μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς ἀπατάτω – A new command is introduced, but without any connecting particle, perhaps indicating a “solemn warning.” This command is probably connected with what follows, because it supplies the antecedent to αὐτῶν in v. 7. The subject is at the head of the clause giving it prominence. The position of the object prior to the verb places it in the focal position of the clause. The verb is a present active 3rd ps sing imperative. The present tense form suggests a general command.

κενοῖς λόγοις – Dative of means.

διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ ἔρχεται – This is marked as an explanation for the initial imperative. The explanatory nature of the clause is emphasized by the prepositional phrase διὰ ταῦτα. Note another occurrence of a present tense form. Does it refer to something happening in that context or does it have a future sense?

ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦThis is the subject of ἔρχεται. The genitive is probably subjective.

ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας – The preposition has a spatial idea which is linked with the sense of the verb of motion. The genitive is probably attributive. Why does Paul use υἱούς here, but τέκνα in 5.1? (cf. 2:2).

5.7  μὴ οὖν γίνεσθε συμμέτοχοι αὐτῶν·

μὴ οὖν γίνεσθε – This prohibition or warning is introduced by the summarizing particle οὖν. Present middle imperative tense form.

συμμέτοχοι αὐτῶν – Predicate nominative. συμμέτοχοι properly is an adjective, but may be used as a substantive here, with the sense “sharing with.” The genitive indicates with whom something is shared and so might be construed as a genitive of association as at 3:6.

5.8  ἦτε γάρ ποτε σκότος, νῦν δὲ φῶς ἐν κυρίῳ· ὡς τέκνα φωτὸς περιπατεῖτε

ἦτε γάρ ποτε σκότος – Again Paul follows an imperative with an explanation marked by γάρ. This is an equative clause using the imperfect form of εἰμι, an adverb ποτε (at one time), and a predicate nominative.

νῦν δὲ φῶς ἐν κυρίῳ — This second equative clause parallels the first, but lacks the verb. ποτε…νῦν is a frequent contrast in the NT. The additional contrast comes with σκότος…φῶς. These contrasts are emphasized by the particle δέ. The prepositional phrase probably is locative but may be referential (cf. 4:1).

ὡς τέκνα φωτὸς περιπατεῖτε – A second command, once more present tense form, reverses the previous prohibition in v.7. Note the repeated elements expressed in 5:1-2. The comparative construction introduced by ὡς is a clause with an implied repetition of the verb.

5.9  γὰρ καρπὸς τοῦ φωτὸς ἐν πάσῃ ἀγαθωσύνῃ καὶ διακαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ

γὰρ καρπὸς τοῦ φωτὸςAs the punctuation in NA 28 indicates, the editors regard this as a parenthesis. Presumably the prior second person plural imperative and the plural participle beginning v. 10 indicate the intervening parenthesis. The clause in v.9 is third person singular. It is marked by γάρ as an explanatory clause. Does it add explanation to verses 6-7 or does it explain some element in v. 8? τοῦ φῶτος is probably a genitive of production. Note the textual variation that reads του πνευματος, which may arise because of confusion with the abbreviation ΠΝΣ and ΦΩΤΟΣ, and the phrase “fruit of the Spirit” that occurs in Gal. 5:22.

ἐν πάσῃ ἀγαθωσύνῃ καὶ διακαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ — This is a verbless clause, but it is presumed that a form of εἰμι is implied, which would create the phrase εἰμι ἐν. This can have the sense “consist in.” πάσῃ without the article is inclusive – total, complete, every kind of. It modifies all three nouns connected with the preposition.

5.10  δοκιμάζοντες τί ἐστιν εὐάρεστον τῷ κυρίῳ,

δοκιμάζοντες – An adverbial participle probably modifying the previous περιπατεῖτε. Being a present participle, its action is viewed as concurrent with that of the main verb. Is it temporal, causal, or expressing some other relationship? The verb can mean “discern” or “prove/approve.” The walking and discerning/proving seem to be continuing activities.

τί ἐστιν εὐάρεστον τῷ κυρίῳThis subordinate clause is an indirect question. Certain adjectives complete their sense with a dative complement, often indicating advantage. For the use and sense of the predicate adjective compare Rom 12:1-2.

5.11  καὶ μὴ συγκοινωνεῖτε τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς ἀκάρποις τοῦ σκότους, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἐλέγχετε.

καὶ μὴ συγκοινωνεῖτε – This is a prohibition, using a present imperative. If we construe the participle in 5.10 as modifying συγκοινωνεῖτε the καί would have an ascensive sense, as it does in the second clause.

τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς ἀκάρποις τοῦ σκότους – συγκοινωνέω usually has the person in the dative case and the activity is marked by the genitive case. Here, however, the activity is in the dative case. The adjective τοῖς ἀκάρποις is in the second attributive position and this gives it some emphasis, probably contrasting with the previous ὁ καρπός in v. 9. The genitive τοῦ σκότους defines what produces such “fruitless efforts,” or it could be considered a subjective genitive. The meaning of the metaphor “fruitless” has to be discerned from the context.

μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἐλέγχετε – A contrast is expressed in the two verbs and marked by the adverb μᾱλλον and the particle δέ.  καί is ascensive. The contrast indicates what action is to replace what previously is negated. ἐλέγχετε is an imperative, meaning “refute” or “expose.” See the use of the participle in v. 13.

5.12  τὰ γὰρ κρυφῇ γινόμενα ὑπαὐτῶν αἰσχρόν ἐστιν καὶ λέγειν,

τὰ γὰρ κρυφῇ γινόμενα ὑπαὐτῶν – γάρ indicates that this clause functions as an explanation for something that precedes. The substantive participle functions as the object of the infinitive λέγειν. The participle is modified by the adverb κρυφῇ. The prepositional phrase defines the agent. The antecedent of the pronoun probably is the “sons of disobedience” expressed in v.6.

αἰσχρόν ἐστιν καὶ λέγειν – This is an equative clause and αἰσχρόν functions as a predicate adjective. It is neuter singular because it modifies the infinitive (a neuter noun) which is the subject. It is modified by the ascensive καί. The infinitive is the complement of the predicate adjective.

5.13  τὰ δὲ πάντα ἐλεγχόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ φωτὸς φανεροῦται,

τὰ δὲ πάντα ἐλεγχόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ φωτὸς –  δέ may be adversative here. The participle probably is adverbial, related to τὰ πάντα, i.e., “all things, being refuted, are revealed by the light.” The participle may be a play on the previous use of the verb in v. 11.  The prepositional phrase may modify the passive participle or the passive main verb, or both. It defines the agent.

φανεροῦται – Main verb, present passive indicative.

5.14  πᾶν γὰρ τὸ φανερούμενον φῶς ἐστιν. διὸ λέγει· ἔγειρε, καθεύδων, καὶ ἀνάστα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, καὶ ἐπιφαύσει σοι Χριστος.

πᾶν γὰρ τὸ φανερούμενον – Note that the position of πᾶς is different than in the previous verse and has an inclusive sense, i.e., “everything revealed….” This clause also is marked by γάρ as explanatory. The participle is present passive in form.

φῶς ἐστιν – This is another equative clause with the anarthrous φῶς functioning as a predicate nominative and defining or characterizing the subject in some sense.

διὸ λέγει – The particle διό marks an inference. There is no explicit subject and it is debated as to the source of this quotation.

ἔγειρε, καθεύδων – The verb is a present active singular imperative, with the subject addressed (vocative) identified with a substantival present participle. The language of “rising” connected with “sleep” usually references someone who is dead coming to life. This referential sense is confirmed by the following imperative.

καὶ ἀνάστα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν – The verb is an aorist active imperative from ἀνίστημι. It is difficult to discern a difference between the sense of the present and aorist tense forms used here. The prepositional phrase is adverbial and indicates separation.

καὶ ἐπιφαύσει σοι Χριστος – This verb is very rare. It is a future form. The relationship of this action to the previous two is much discussed. Are they to be viewed chronologically? Or is this action considered the basis for the previous two imperatives? The conjunction καί could be explanatory. σοι functions as a dative of direct object.