Again, there is the singular absence of the apostle's personal salutations, though he is writing to those who had known his presence and labors amongst them for three years—quite inexplicable if the letter was one indeed, sent only to the saints at Ephesus, and containing neither greetings from, nor greetings to, any one there by name. On the other hand, when writing to the Colossians, whom he had not even visited (Colossians 2:11For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; (Colossians 2:1)), we do meet with salutations—from Epaphras who, now at Rome with the apostle, is named as “one of you”; from others also, and finally from the writer himself. Further, there are two amongst these “saints and faithful brethren” at Colosse, who are singled out, viz., Nymphas and Archippus, so that we are in no way left in doubt as to the destination of this Epistle.
Then further, in considering the general character of the teaching in these two writings, we see that—whilst in Colossians we are in face of specific dangers (chap. 2) against which these saints are warned, and the essential and relative glories of the Lord Jesus are anticipatively presented (chap. 2) as the safeguard, and the true corrective to “not holding the Head,” etc.—in the Epistle to the Ephesians we have brought before us the eternal purposes and counsels of God, revealed for the common blessing of all that now believe “the word of truth, the gospel of... salvation.” Is not this meant for all saints? And there is, as it appears to us, this remarkable propriety in eliminating everything from this epistle that would in the slightest degree tend to restrict the wonderful blessings here unfolded to a special or favored class. What is true for the Ephesians is also for “all the saints” to “comprehend” likewise (3:18).
This may then suffice in confirmation of the view we have taken as to the Epistle to the Ephesians being sent, at least as specifically, to Laodicea as to Ephesus.
It may be interesting to some to know that Beza appears to have been the first to suggest this probability of the share of other assemblies in the receipt of this same Epistle. For in his first and second editions (1559, 1565) of his folio Greek Testament no comment is made, but in his third (1582) he is inclined to think that this epistle was sent (as he says) to Ephesus, rather than to the Ephesians, in order that it might be passed on to the other churches of Asia. Deans Howson and Alford are scarcely correct therefore in attributing the first start of this “hypothesis” to Archbishop Usher, as his “Annals” did not appear till seventy years later. (To be continued)
.(Continued)