Eph 2:8; Question for those skilled in the greek

[kyredneck]

'for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;'

I believe Paul is saying that faith, because it is a fruit of the Spirit, is the gift of God. Does the greek support or refute that?

May sound odd, but I don't intend this to be a C/A debate, and I wish that it wouldn't turn out to be. Please try to confine the focus to the greek in this verse.

 

[Skandelon]

'for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;'

I believe Paul is saying that faith, because it is a fruit of the Spirit, is the gift of God. Does the greek support or refute that?

May sound odd, but I don't intend this to be a C/A debate, and I wish that it wouldn't turn out to be. Please try to confine the focus to the greek in this verse.

Even when I was a Calvinist I acknowledged, as do some other Calvinistic scholars, that the phrase, "that not of yourselves" is referencing salvation as a whole and not specifically to "faith." Calvin himself even affirms this when he wrote, "Many persons restrict the word gift to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating in other words the former sentiment. His meaning is, not that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God, or, that we obtain it by the gift of God."

However, as a non-Calvinist today, I must add (without intending to derail or start a Cal/Arm debate) that I still affirm the idea that faith is a gift of God. Indeed, all good things come from God. I believe that faith comes by hearing and since God is the one who supernaturally brought us the gospel, then He should be credited for the faith that it produces. I don't believe saving faith is an irresistible gift by which man MUST believe the gospel, but only that faith is made possible for all who hear the truth. A gift doesn't have to be "irresistible" to still be considered a gift. Something doesn't have to be effectually applied for it to still be considered as "from God." For example, the snake staff raised in the dessert for the Israelites to look upon for healing was a gift from God, but the people didn't have to look at it in faith for healing. The scripture today is a gift from God, but that doesn't mean people have to read it or believe it. The ability to love another is a gift of God, but that doesn't mean people have to love others. Faith indeed is a gift of God, whether it's effectually applied or not.

 

[Deacon]

Well that didn't really follow your rules did it. :smilewinkgrin:

Not much to offer of myself but I'd say that researching exegetical commentaries would be your best bet to dealing with your curiosity.

I’m limiting the portions I offer to small quotes out of concern for copyright laws.

One of the best I’ve found is the NICNT volume on Ephesians.

Here’s a snippet that may help.

Interpreters have differed on the precise reference of “this.” [from verse 8] If the Greek pronoun were feminine, agreeing in gender with “faith,” then the reference to faith would be plain. The sense would be: even the faith through which you have been saved is not your own doing; you could not have exercised it unless God had given it to you. But the pronoun is neuter, and does not necessarily refer to faith. Even so, it may refer generally to faith: “the difference of gender is not fatal to such a view” (J. A. Robinson). [underlining added]
Bruce, F. F. (1984). The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament (289). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Another commentary (WBC) supplies some additional help.

Ephesians prefers διὰ πίστεως (cf. 3:12,17). As in Rom 3:22–25, a passage central to Paul’s view of justification, for this writer also “by grace” and “by faith” are inseparable companions which together provide the antithesis to any suggestion of human merit. God’s act of grace is the ground of salvation and faith is the means by which it becomes effective in a person’s life. In Paul’s thinking faith can never be viewed as a meritorious work because in connection with justification he always contrasts faith with works of the law (cf. Gal 2:16; 3:2–5, 9, 10; Rom 3:27, 28).
Lincoln, A. T. (2002). Vol. 42: Word Biblical Commentary : Ephesians. (111). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.

I’ve never been a big fan of Wuerst but he mentions goes into some detail.

(2:8–10) The definite article appears before the word “grace” here, pointing the reader back to the same statement in verse 5, and informing him that the writer is to elaborate upon this previously mentioned statement. The reader of this exposition is urged to go back to the exegesis of verse 5 and refresh his memory as to the total meaning of Paul’s statement, “by grace are ye saved.

The words, “through faith” speak of the instrument or means whereby the sinner avails himself of this salvation which God offers him in pure grace. Expositors says: “Paul never says ‘through the faith,’ as if the faith were the ground or procuring cause of the salvation.” Alford says: “It (the salvation) has been effected by grace and apprehended by faith.” The word “that” is touto (τουτο), “this,” a demonstrative pronoun in the neuter gender. The Greek word “faith” is feminine in gender and therefore touto (τουτο) could not refer to “faith.” It refers to the general idea of salvation in the immediate context. The translation reads, “and this not out from you as a source, of God (it is) the gift.” That is, salvation is a gift of God. It does not find its source in man. Furthermore, this salvation is not “out of a source of works.”
Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament : For the English Reader (Eph 2:7–8). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.”

Lastly Charles Hodge, who work is fortunately past copyright protection.

V. 8, 9. These verses confirm the preceding declaration. The manifestation of the grace of God is the great end of redemption. This is plain, for salvation is entirely of grace. Ye are saved by grace; ye are saved by faith and not by works; and even faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. We have then here a manifold assertion, affirmative and negative, of the gratuitous nature of salvation. It is not only said in general, ‘ye are saved by grace,’ but further that salvation is by faith, i.e. by simply receiving or apprehending the offered blessing. From the very nature of faith, as an act of assent and trust, it excludes the idea of merit. If by faith, it is of grace; if of works, it is of debt; as the apostle argues in Romans 4:4, 5. Faith, therefore, is the mere causa apprehendens, the simple act of accepting, and not the ground on which salvation is bestowed. Not of works. The apostle says works, without qualification or limitation. It is not, therefore, ceremonial, as distinguished from good works; or legal, as distinguished from evangelical or gracious works; but works of all kinds as distinguished from faith, which are excluded. Salvation is in no sense, and in no degree, of works; for to him that worketh the reward is a matter of debt. But salvation is of grace and therefore not of works lest any man should boast. That the guilty should stand before God with self–complacency, and refer his salvation in any measure to his own merit, is so abhorrent to all right feeling that Paul assumes it (Romans 4:2) as an intuitive truth, that no man can boast before God. And to all who have any proper sense of the holiness of God and of the evil of sin, it is an intuition; and therefore a gratuitous salvation, a salvation which excludes with works all ground of boasting, is the only salvation suited to the relation of guilty men to God.
The only point in the interpretation of these verses of any doubt, relates to the second clause. What is said to be the gift of God? Is it salvation, or faith? The words καὶ του̂το only serve to render more prominent the matter referred to. Compare Romans 13:11; 1 Corinthians 6:6; Philippians 1:28; Hebrews 11:12. They may relate to faith(τὸ πιστεύειν) or to the salvation spoken of (σεσωσμένους εἰ̂ναι). Beza, following the fathers, prefers the former reference; Calvin, with most of the modern commentators, the latter. The reasons in favor of the former interpretation are,

Charles Hodge, Commentary on Ephesians (page 117)

This stuff should get you started.

Rob

 

[Deacon]

'for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;'

I believe Paul is saying that faith, because it is a fruit of the Spirit, is the gift of God. Does the greek support or refute that?

Interesting how this author fails to locate the origin of faith, from within or without.

God declares, that he owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but unmixed grace. The next question is, in what way do men receive that salvation which is offered to them by the hand of God? The answer is, by faith; and hence he concludes that nothing connected with it is our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all commendation, it follows that salvation does not come from us.

Guess who wrote this! No fair Googling it!!!

Rob

 

[John of Japan]

The word "that" must grammatically refer to the participle "are saved," since their endings agree in gender. As A. T. Robertson points out, "and that" is neuter, but "faith" and "grace" both have feminine endings.

Robertson's NT Word Pictures:
" For by grace (têi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. "By the grace" already mentioned in verse Eph 2:5 and so with the article. Through faith (dia pisteôs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse Eph 2:5 to make it plainer. "Grace" is God's part, "faith" ours. And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautê, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humôn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God's gift (dôron) and not the result of our work."

 

[The Archangel]

The word "that" must grammatically refer to the participle "are saved," since their endings agree in gender. As A. T. Robertson points out, "and that" is neuter, but "faith" and "grace" both have feminine endings.

Robertson's NT Word Pictures:
" For by grace (têi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. "By the grace" already mentioned in verse Eph 2:5 and so with the article. Through faith (dia pisteôs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse Eph 2:5 to make it plainer. "Grace" is God's part, "faith" ours. And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautê, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humôn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God's gift (dôron) and not the result of our work."

This is one case where I think Robertson misses it completely. But that is a discussion for another time.

I'm having trouble following John of Japan in this. The only participle I see in v. 8 "have been saved" in the ESV is not neuter. Unless I'm mistaken, "have been saved" is masculine.

So, while I would agree that--for the most part--the entirety of salvation is in view here, I don't see where "that" and "are saved" are related.

John, could you please elaborate for me. Maybe I need to look back past v. 8?

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[John of Japan]

This is one case where I think Robertson misses it completely. But that is a discussion for another time.

I'm having trouble following John of Japan in this. The only participle I see in v. 8 "have been saved" in the ESV is not neuter. Unless I'm mistaken, "have been saved" is masculine.

So, while I would agree that--for the most part--the entirety of salvation is in view here, I don't see where "that" and "are saved" are related.

John, could you please elaborate for me. Maybe I need to look back past v. 8?

Blessings,

The Archangel

I'm happy to oblige.

In Greek, there must normally be agreement in gender between an adjective, "that" (Greek touto, "that," a pronominal adjective), and the noun it modifies. If in this case the noun were pistewV (the feminine genitive for "faith") or cariti (the feminine dative for "grace"), then the adjective simply must be feminine. In Greek, if the adjective doesn't agree in gender, there is no way to tell what the modified noun is, since word order is not so important. (My current Japanese Greek student is having a hard time with this!)

Now, you are correct that the participle seswsmenoi is masculine, not the same gender as the neuter pronominal adjective. In that case, our exegesis must be that what the pronominal adjective is modifying is the whole previous clause "salvation by grace through faith" rather than one specific word, and that is why it is neuter.

If you have Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace, he has a good discussion of the various interpretations on pp. 334-335. He comes to the same conclusion I did (though I didn't consult him before doing my exegesis), saying, "More plausible is the third view, viz., that touto refers to the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation" (p. 335). Robertson basically says the same thing in his big grammar, "In Eph. 2:8...there is no reference to pistewV in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before" (p. 704).

Clear as mud? :type:

 

[John of Japan]

This is one case where I think Robertson misses it completely. But that is a discussion for another time.

I'm having trouble following John of Japan in this. The only participle I see in v. 8 "have been saved" in the ESV is not neuter. Unless I'm mistaken, "have been saved" is masculine.

So, while I would agree that--for the most part--the entirety of salvation is in view here, I don't see where "that" and "are saved" are related.

John, could you please elaborate for me. Maybe I need to look back past v. 8?

Blessings,

The Archangel

I just looked back and saw my original mistake. I mis-spoke (mis-wrote?) when I said "that" and "be saved" were the same gender. I knew in my head that they weren't the same gender--don't know how it came out that way.

 

[RAdam]

I was reading John Gill's commentary at ewordtoday.com and saw where an editor had inserted this parenthetic statement after Gill finished his commentary on this verse.

—(I asked the following question from a Greek and Hebrew professor: "In this verse, to what does the word "that" refer to? Adam Clarke, Wesley & company say that it is neuter plural and "Faith" is feminine hence it cannot refer to faith, (Such an admission would destroy their theological system.) However "Grace" is also feminine as is "Salvation.""

His reply was:

"Here you ask a wonderful theological/exegetical question to which I can only give an opinion, and not a definitive answer. The problem is that there is NO precise referent. Grace is feminine. Faith is feminine. And even Salvation (as a noun) is feminine. Yet it must be one of these three at least, and maybe more than one, or all three in conjunction. Since all three come from God and not from man, the latter might seem the more likely. However, it is a tautology to say salvation and grace are "nor of yourselves," and in that case it certainly looks more like the passage is really pointing out that man cannot even take credit for his own act of faith, but that faith was itself created by God and implanted in us that we might believe (i.e. the normal Calvinistic position). In which regard the whole theological issue of "regeneration preceding faith" comes into play. So, that is basically my opinion, though others obviously disagree strenuously, but from an exegetical standpoint, the other positions have to explain away the matter of the tautology."

Whether you accept the reply or not, it is sufficient to show that the Greek is not as definitive in this verse as some scholars would have you believe. Editor)

 

[kyredneck]

...Guess who wrote this! No fair Googling it!!!

Rob

Heheh, I have no idea Rob, and I haven't Googled it. Please tell!

And thanks for those other excerpts from commentators.

 

[kyredneck]

I was reading John Gill's commentary at ewordtoday.com and saw where an editor had inserted this parenthetic statement after Gill finished his commentary on this verse.

Thanks Brother Adam. this statement:

.....the Greek is not as definitive in this verse as some scholars would have you believe......

......seems to be the heart of the matter so far.

I'm anxious to see if other Greek Guys contibute their take on it.


.......and I appreciate the input from J of J and Arch, very much.

 

[The Archangel]

I'm happy to oblige.

In Greek, there must normally be agreement in gender between an adjective, "that" (Greek touto, "that," a pronominal adjective), and the noun it modifies. If in this case the noun were pistewV (the feminine genitive for "faith") or cariti (the feminine dative for "grace"), then the adjective simply must be feminine. In Greek, if the adjective doesn't agree in gender, there is no way to tell what the modified noun is, since word order is not so important. (My current Japanese Greek student is having a hard time with this!)

Now, you are correct that the participle seswsmenoi is masculine, not the same gender as the neuter pronominal adjective. In that case, our exegesis must be that what the pronominal adjective is modifying is the whole previous clause "salvation by grace through faith" rather than one specific word, and that is why it is neuter.

If you have Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace, he has a good discussion of the various interpretations on pp. 334-335. He comes to the same conclusion I did (though I didn't consult him before doing my exegesis), saying, "More plausible is the third view, viz., that touto refers to the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation" (p. 335). Robertson basically says the same thing in his big grammar, "In Eph. 2:8...there is no reference to pistewV in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before" (p. 704).

Clear as mud? :type:

I'm aware of all of this and Wallace is very good on the issue. Mounce, as you may know, says that faith is included in the gift.

Anyway I think Wallace is right and I tend to say that grace-by-faith salvation is the gift so that grace and faith are both included in the gift--like two sides of the same coin.

I just looked back and saw my original mistake. I mis-spoke (mis-wrote?) when I said "that" and "be saved" were the same gender. I knew in my head that they weren't the same gender--don't know how it came out that way.

The answer from you in this above post about the gender agreement is what I wanted clarification on. Thank you....I thought I was going mad and had forgotten how to parse.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[kyredneck]

Originally Posted by Deacon
...Guess who wrote this! No fair Googling it!!!

Rob

God declares, that he owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but unmixed grace. The next question is, in what way do men receive that salvation which is offered to them by the hand of God? The answer is, by faith; and hence he concludes that nothing connected with it is our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all commendation, it follows that salvation does not come from us.

Heheh, I have no idea Rob, and I haven't Googled it. Please tell!

And thanks for those other excerpts from commentators.

Curiousity got the best of me.

John Calvin. Why doesn't that surprise me?

 

[John of Japan]

Anyway I think Wallace is right and I tend to say that grace-by-faith salvation is the gift so that grace and faith are both included in the gift--like two sides of the same coin.

I don't know that I can agree with this for two reasons:

(1) The "by faith" is simply a dative of means (or agency). Therefore, I don't see how you can get that the idea here is that faith is a gift from God. The phrase "by faith" simply gives the agency of salvation, not the source.

(2) The context of the verse is all about salvation versus works. the idea that our salvation is from God. So Paul is contrasting "salvation by faith through grace" with "salvation by works," which leads to boasting. (I don't think you can brag about saving faith.)

The answer from you in this above post about the gender agreement is what I wanted clarification on. Thank you....I thought I was going mad and had forgotten how to parse.

Blessings,

The Archangel

No, 'tis I who am going mad...mwah ha ha. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[The Archangel]

I don't know that I can agree with this for two reasons:

(1) The "by faith" is simply a dative of means (or agency). Therefore, I don't see how you can get that the idea here is that faith is a gift from God. The phrase "by faith" simply gives the agency of salvation, not the source.

(2) The context of the verse is all about salvation versus works. the idea that our salvation is from God. So Paul is contrasting "salvation by faith through grace" with "salvation by works," which leads to boasting. (I don't think you can brag about saving faith.)

Yep....I see what you are saying. And I don't necessarily disagree with your exegesis. I look back to Paul's first statement of "By grace you have been saved" and then I look at his second identical statement in v. 8 and I see, literally, "this is not out of yourself." Can that refer to "faith?" Though it is a hard-sell grammatically, it is technically possible (though highly unlikely). But, I don't push that too far.

As you've shown, it is most likely grace-through-faith salvation that Paul is saying that is not out of us. Here's why I see it as two sides of the same coin:

If all of salvation is in view (which I think it is) and if that salvation involves faith (which it does) and if that salvation is by God's grace (which it is) then grace and faith are in some way both gifts.

But, as I think Wallace suggests in his option #4 (if memory serves), it is possible that Paul is suggesting that faith is not out of ourselves. To read it naturally--allowing for less-than-perfect agreement in the grammar--would suggest that Paul is indeed saying that faith is not out of ourselves. But, again, because of the grammatical issue, I don't push that too far.

So, again, I'm left with the totality of Salvation--the grace aspect and the faith aspect--being the gift.

No, 'tis I who am going mad...mwah ha ha. :smilewinkgrin:

I have my moments too!

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[John of Japan]

But, as I think Wallace suggests in his option #4 (if memory serves), it is possible that Paul is suggesting that faith is not out of ourselves. To read it naturally--allowing for less-than-perfect agreement in the grammar--would suggest that Paul is indeed saying that faith is not out of ourselves. But, again, because of the grammatical issue, I don't push that too far.

So, again, I'm left with the totality of Salvation--the grace aspect and the faith aspect--being the gift.

Alas for your view, Wallace's #4 is that kai touto is adverbial, and your memory is faulty since he doesn't say that Paul is suggesting that faith is not of ourselves. He writes,

"If adverbial, kai touto is intensive meaning 'and at that, and especially,' without having any antecedent. It focuses on the verb rather than on any noun.... If this is the force in Eph., 2:8, the text means 'for by grace you are saved through faith, and [you are saved] especially not by your own doing ; it is the give of God'" (p. 335--all emphases by Wallace). Where I have an elipsis he discusses 3 John 5 which has this usage.

So the adverbial view would eliminate faith as the gift of God which is meant.

 

[The Archangel]

Alas for your view, Wallace's #4 is that kai touto is adverbial, and your memory is faulty since he doesn't say that Paul is suggesting that faith is not of ourselves. He writes,

"If adverbial, kai touto is intensive meaning 'and at that, and especially,' without having any antecedent. It focuses on the verb rather than on any noun.... If this is the force in Eph., 2:8, the text means 'for by grace you are saved through faith, and [you are saved] especially not by your own doing ; it is the give of God'" (p. 335--all emphases by Wallace). Where I have an elipsis he discusses 3 John 5 which has this usage.

So the adverbial view would eliminate faith as the gift of God which is meant.

Thanks for the correction of my faulty memory. But, the adverbial force is kind of what I was referring to--the idea that our salvation is "especially" not our own doing.

Logically speaking, I don't see any way we "contribute" our own faith and that makes God's grace come to us. In that sense, it is as if we get grace as a reward for having faith--something that must be rejected if grace is to be grace.

So, again, I am more in line with Wallace's 3rd option--the grace-by-faith salvation and I still think the package (Salvation and Grace and Faith) are part and parcel of the gift.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[John of Japan]

Logically speaking, I don't see any way we "contribute" our own faith and that makes God's grace come to us. In that sense, it is as if we get grace as a reward for having faith--something that must be rejected if grace is to be grace.

I'll remind you of the grammar of "by grace" as being a dative of means and "through faith" as being a genitive of agency. I think it's a mistake to single out either the grace or faith as being gifts here or not being gifts here. They simply modify "having been saved."

Your paragraph here sounds like a pre-understanding, not exegesis of the passage. Eph. 2:8 says nothing about who contributes the faith or what makes God's grace come to us. It simply states the grace as the means of "having been saved" and the faith as the agency of being saved.

 

[The Archangel]

I'll remind you of the grammar of "by grace" as being a dative of means and "through faith" as being a genitive of agency. I think it's a mistake to single out either the grace or faith as being gifts here or not being gifts here. They simply modify "having been saved."

Your paragraph here sounds like a pre-understanding, not exegesis of the passage. Eph. 2:8 says nothing about who contributes the faith or what makes God's grace come to us. It simply states the grace as the means of "having been saved" and the faith as the agency of being saved.

Thanks for the reminder and I'm well aware of the details. Again, as I said "having been saved" is the gift--a gift with the details, for lack of a better term, of grace and faith.

Logically, again, with the participle "having been saved" being a perfect passive it shows that this is something we have not done or contributed to. Therefore, God's grace is the ultimate cause of us having been saved. Do we demonstrate faith? Yes. Is faith required of us? Yes. Is the faith that we exhibit and demonstrate inherent to us or not? That is the question. I say it is not inherent to us and is supplied as part of the gift of salvation. I think the grammar, while not explicit, allows room for that interpretation.

But, you are correct, the passage does not necessarily identify who supplies the faith. A more systematic understanding of the Scriptures, in my opinion, leaves little doubt.

Blessings!

The Archangel

 

[John of Japan]

Thanks for the reminder and I'm well aware of the details. Again, as I said "having been saved" is the gift--a gift with the details, for lack of a better term, of grace and faith.

Logically, again, with the participle "having been saved" being a perfect passive it shows that this is something we have not done or contributed to. Therefore, God's grace is the ultimate cause of us having been saved. Do we demonstrate faith? Yes. Is faith required of us? Yes. Is the faith that we exhibit and demonstrate inherent to us or not? That is the question. I say it is not inherent to us and is supplied as part of the gift of salvation. I think the grammar, while not explicit, allows room for that interpretation.

But, you are correct, the passage does not necessarily identify who supplies the faith. A more systematic understanding of the Scriptures, in my opinion, leaves little doubt.

Blessings!

The Archangel

And we've come to an agreement on the verse in question, without exploring the wider theology, just as the OP requested.

God bless from Japan.