Ephesians 4:22

An Exegetical Analysis of Ephesians 4:22-24: The Nature of the ‘Old Man’ and its Corruption

This exegetical study of Ephesians 4:22-24 is based on a b-greek discussion from April 5, 2000. The initial discourse revolved around the proper interpretation of the Pauline concept of the “new man” or “new humanity,” particularly in relation to Ephesians 2:15 and Colossians 3:10. The discussion questioned whether the “new humanity” of Ephesians 2:15 should be understood primarily in terms of Gentile-Jew relations or as a broader concept of “new creation” with implications for every aspect of life. Furthermore, a foundational hermeneutical principle was raised regarding the assumption of “technical terms” across Paul’s letters, advocating for interpretation based first on the immediate epistle’s context.

The main exegetical issue under consideration centers on the precise temporal and semantic understanding of the participle φθειρόμενον (“being corrupted” or “perishing”) in Ephesians 4:22, which describes the “old man.” The debate addresses whether this present participle should be interpreted as referring to a past state (coincident with the Ephesians’ initial instruction or salvation event), a present and ongoing state, or a characteristic description without specific temporal emphasis. This question is further complicated by the contrast between the aorist infinitive ἀποθέσθαι (“to put off,” implying a decisive, completed action) and the present infinitive ἀνανεοῦσθαι (“to be renewed,” implying an ongoing process) in the subsequent verses. This analysis delves into the grammatical nuances of participles, the semantic range of related terms, and the theological implications of viewing the renunciation of the old self as a “once-for-all” event versus an ongoing spiritual discipline within the “already-not yet” framework of Christian existence.

Ephesians 4:22-24 (Nestle 1904):
ἀποθέσθαι ὑμᾶς κατὰ τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφὴν τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν φθειρόμενον κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τῆς ἀπάτης,
ἀνανεοῦσθαι δὲ τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ νοὸς ὑμῶν,
καὶ ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν κατὰ θεὸν κτισθέντα ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• Ephesians 4:22: SBLGNT reads τὰς ἐπιθυμίας ἀπάτης (without the article τῆς before ἀπάτης), while Nestle 1904 includes it (τῆς ἀπάτης).
• Ephesians 4:24: SBLGNT reads τὸν κατὰ τὸν θεὸν κτισθέντα (with the article τὸν before θεὸν), while Nestle 1904 omits it (τὸν κατὰ θεὸν κτισθέντα).
• Ephesians 4:24: SBLGNT reads ὁσιότητι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ (two coordinated nouns), while Nestle 1904 reads ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας (a genitive phrase modifying ὁσιότητι).

Textual Criticism (NA28)

The critical apparatus of NA28, while generally aligning with the Nestle 1904 text for this passage, notes significant variants that correspond to the SBLGNT readings. In verse 22, for τῆς ἀπάτης, NA28 includes ἀπάτης (without the article) as a variant (e.g., in P⁴⁶, B, D^*, G, I, P). In verse 24, for τὸν κατὰ θεὸν, NA28 indicates τὸν κατὰ τὸν θεὸν (with the article) as a variant (e.g., in D², Ψ, 𝔪). Most notably, for ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας in verse 24, NA28 lists ὁσιότητι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ as a significant alternative reading (e.g., in P⁴⁶, א^*, B, D, F, G, P, Ψ, 𝔪). These variations primarily involve the presence or absence of articles and the conjunction καὶ, which, while seemingly minor, can subtly influence the semantic emphasis and grammatical relationship between terms. The NA28 preferred readings reflect a majority text tradition, yet the attested variants highlight different early manuscript traditions and their potential theological implications, particularly concerning the precise nature of the “new man” created in “righteousness and holiness of truth” or “righteousness and holiness and truth.”

Lexical Notes

• ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos): In Pauline theology, ἄνθρωπος (man, human being) is often used to denote humanity in a broader sense. BDAG defines it as “a human being, mankind, human nature.” KITTEL (TDNT) extensively discusses Paul’s use of “old man” (παλαιὸς ἄνθρωπος) and “new man” (καινὸς ἄνθρωπος) as theological concepts, referring to the former, unredeemed existence under Adam, and the latter, redeemed existence in Christ. This usage consciously alludes to the Adam-concept from the Old Testament (LXX ἄνθρωπος), signifying a corporate identity that has profound individual implications. The term, therefore, is not merely descriptive of “humanity” or “nature” but carries the weight of a theological anthropology contrasting fallen and redeemed existence.
• φθειρόμενον (phtheiromenon): This is a present middle/passive participle from φθείρω (phtheirō). BDAG gives meanings such as “to corrupt, destroy, ruin” (transitive, often passive) and “to perish, be ruined, decay” (intransitive, often middle). The voice is critical here. If passive (“being corrupted”), it emphasizes an external influence or inherent process of decay. If middle (“perishing” or “decaying”), it emphasizes the old self’s inherent trajectory toward destruction. The present tense indicates ongoing action or a characteristic state. The discussion highlights a tension: if the “old man” was crucified with Christ (Rom 6:6), how can it still “be corrupted” or “perish” in the present? This suggests either a characteristic description of what the old man *is* by nature, or a recognition of an ongoing struggle despite a definitive past event.
• ἀποθέσθαι (apothesthai): This is an aorist infinitive from ἀποτίθημι (apotithēmi), meaning “to lay aside, put off, renounce.” BDAG defines it as “to lay aside, remove, give up.” The aorist aspect typically denotes a punctiliar, completed, or decisive action, without emphasizing its duration. In an imperative context, it functions as a command for a once-for-all commitment. This contrasts with continuous action and is often interpreted as referring to a definitive break with the former way of life at conversion.
• ἀνανεοῦσθαι (ananeousthai): This is a present infinitive from ἀνανεόω (ananeoō), meaning “to renew, make new again.” BDAG defines it as “to renew, be renewed.” The present aspect here indicates an ongoing, continuous process of renewal. This term is distinct from, but semantically related to, Paul’s neologism ἀνακαινόω (anakainoō) and ἀνακαίνωσις (anakainōsis), which emphasize “making new in quality.” The choice of ἀνανεόω might be for stylistic reasons, but it clearly points to a continuous transformation of the mind.

Translation Variants

The grammatical and rhetorical analysis of Ephesians 4:22-24, particularly concerning τὸν φθειρόμενον, reveals significant interpretative fault lines. The question of the participle’s temporal force is central. One perspective suggests that participles derive their temporal force from the main verb. If linked to the aorist ἐδιδάχθητε (“you were taught” in v. 21), then φθειρόμενον would imply a past, ongoing state, translatable as “which *was being* corrupted.” This aligns with the idea that the “old man” was crucified with Christ (Rom 6:6) and therefore its corruption was a characteristic of the past, pre-conversion existence. This interpretation emphasizes the definitive, past break from the old life at salvation.

However, an alternative, and more widely accepted, view connects φθειρόμενον not to ἐδιδάχθητε, but to the infinitive ἀποθέσθαι (“to put off”). Here, the participle describes the “old man” as it is *at the moment of renunciation* or as it *is by nature*. In this construction, the participle functions attributively, describing a characteristic rather than a specific time-bound action relative to a finite verb. This allows for a translation like “which *is being* corrupted” or “which *is perishing*,” indicating an inherent, ongoing characteristic of the “old man,” regardless of when the command to “put it off” was given. Carl Conrad suggests interpreting φθειρόμενον as middle, meaning “perishing” or “heading toward annihilation,” characterizing the old self as “wanting things that have no real worth.” This moves beyond a simple passive “being corrupted” to an active state of decay. The Danish translation provided in the discussion, “on the way to lostness,” captures this well.

The contrast between the aorist ἀποθέσθαι (to put off) and the present ἀνανεοῦσθαι (to be renewed) is also crucial. The aorist often implies a decisive, completed action, suggesting a “once-for-all commitment” to renounce the old self, undertaken at conversion. Conversely, the present participle points to an “ongoing process” of renewal. This tension reflects the “already-not yet” eschatological framework of Paul, where the believer has definitively died to the old self in Christ but continues to live out the implications of that new identity through ongoing transformation. The debate also extended to the semantic range of ἄνθρωπος in “old/new man.” While “new humanity” captures a corporate dimension, the theological allusions to Adam (as highlighted by Jürg Buchegger) suggest a more profound, individual, and corporate re-creation, implying that ἄνθρωπος was chosen deliberately for its theological weight rather than merely as a synonym for “humanity” or “nature.”

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegesis of Ephesians 4:22-24 reveals a rich interplay of grammatical nuances and theological concepts. While the “old man” has been definitively dealt with in Christ (Rom 6:6, Col 3:9), the ongoing command to “put off” this old self and “be renewed” in the mind indicates a continuous struggle and transformation in the believer’s life. The participle φθειρόμενον, whether interpreted as passive (“being corrupted”) or middle (“perishing”), best functions as an ongoing characteristic of the old nature, emphasizing its inherent decay and ultimate futility. The contrast between the aorist and present infinitives underscores both the decisive break with the past and the continuous journey of sanctification.

1. You must therefore put off, in accordance with your former way of life, the old self, which is continually decaying through its deceitful desires.
   This translation emphasizes the ongoing, inherent nature of the old self’s corruption, directly linking it to its characteristic deceitful desires. It treats φθειρόμενον as a present participle describing a continuous state, while acknowledging the decisive, initial act of “putting off.”
2. …and you were taught to put off the old person, which was perishing according to the lusts of deceit.
   This alternative connects φθειρόμενον more directly to the past teaching or conversion event. It interprets the participle as reflecting a state that was characteristic of the old self at the time of salvation, implying a definitive break with a past trajectory of decay. The use of “perishing” highlights the middle voice possibility.
3. …that you should lay aside, conforming to your previous conduct, the old human nature, that is oriented towards destruction through deceptive cravings.
   This rendering emphasizes the inherent orientation or characteristic of the “old man” rather than a specific temporal action, treating φθειρόμενον as a descriptive adjective-like participle. It also broadens “old man” to “old human nature” to capture the broader anthropological sense of ἄνθρωπος, while “oriented towards destruction” reflects the middle voice and inherent trajectory.