Paul Was Side Tracked...?

[HAMel]

In Ephesians 3:1..., Paul begins with the following. "For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles...,"

...and then it appears that another thought might have crossed his mind and he goes right into another area.

Then, in verse 14 it appears that perhaps Paul came back to his original thought in that he said, "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"

There's nothing wrong with the scripture here but it appears as thought verse 1, could have been intended to read...,

"(1) For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles (14) bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

It seems to me that perhaps in mid sentence another thought crossed his mind and he went into another direction. What say you?

 

[Revmitchell]

What he is saying is that because he was called by God to minister specifically to gentiles God has revealed to him, through specific and direct revelation, this mystery of the gentiles not before explained in past revelations.

So the thing that follows verse one is the mystery of the gospel going to the gentiles. It could also read,

Because of this I received direct revelation from God about the mystery of the gospel now going out to the gentiles which has never before been so clearly revealed or understood.

 

[HAMel]

I 'gree wif' u Rev...,

Accordingly, it might appear Paul stopped in mid stream to tell of the mystery and then came back to bowing his knee to that revelation from God toward the Gentiles.

I'm not saying the scripture is wrong. Not at all. Just saying that as many of us do, we begin to relate to others but often take a side trip to come back to the topic at hand. Often that drives the point home.

No revelation here. Just an observation on my part.

 

[beameup]

Verse 14 starts a new topic (paragraph). "For this cause" Paul prays "that He would grant you" "to be strengthened with might" etc. Verse 15 could be in parenthesis.

 

[Greektim]

This is a long standing debate among scholars of Ephesians. Is chapter 3 a digression or what? How does it flow w/ Paul's argument or discussion? Given Paul's propensity to rabbit trail, is Paul just a wayward writer?

I love how Timothy Gombis dealt with this issue in his article, "EPHESIANS 3:2-13: POINTLESS DIGRESSION, OR EPITOME OF THE TRIUMPH OF GOD IN CHRIST?" in Westminster Theological Journal 66 (2004): 313-323.

He concluded:

Paul's digression in Eph 3:2-13 is not pointless, nor is it merely an explanation of the origin and nature of his apostleship. Rather, it plays a strategic role in the unfolding argument of Ephesians, in that it explains for Paul's readers how his current situation, which appears to contradict the triumph of God in Christ, is actually an epitome—a concrete manifestation—of that triumph. It beautifully captures the paradoxical nature of Christian life and ministry in this present age: God's triumph and power are seen most clearly in working through human agents who occupy positions of weakness and shame.