An Exegetical Analysis of Ephesians 3:1: The Syntax of τουτου χαριν and the Problem of Anacoluthon
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Ephesians 3:1: The Syntax of τουτου χαριν and the Problem of Anacoluthon is based on a b-greek discussion from May 4, 1999. The initial inquiry posed to the list members centered on the syntactical understanding of τουτου χαριν in Ephesians 3:1, specifically questioning whether an understood copula ειμι should be supplied to complete the sentence. The question highlighted the scholarly debate, referencing Lincoln’s argument for an anacoluthon where the sentence is not resumed until verse 14, in contrast to earlier interpretations like the Peshitta and Chrysostom, who explicitly or implicitly supply a verb.
The main exegetical issue surrounding Ephesians 3:1 revolves around its grammatical completeness and its relationship to the surrounding context. The verse, as it stands in most Greek editions, appears to be a sentence fragment, lacking a principal verb. This leads to two primary interpretative pathways: either an implied verb (such as ειμι) should be understood to complete the statement, making Paul declare his status, or the verse functions as an anacoluthon, a rhetorical device where a grammatical construction is broken off and resumed later, specifically in verse 14. Understanding this syntactical ambiguity is crucial for grasping Paul’s intended emphasis and the structural coherence of the passage, particularly concerning the lengthy parenthetical section that follows in verses 2-13.
Greek text (Nestle 1904)
Τουτου χαριν εγω Παυλος ο δεσμιος του Χριστου υπερ υμων των εθνων
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- SBLGNT includes Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ: Τούτου χάριν ἐγὼ Παῦλος ὁ δέσμιος τοῦ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν. This addition is not present in the Nestle 1904 text.
Textual criticism (NA28), lexical notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
The primary textual difference for Ephesians 3:1 concerns the inclusion of Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ. The NA28 apparatus indicates that the word Ἰησοῦ is omitted by significant early manuscripts (P46, א* B D* F G Ψ 0278 0285 1739 vg syrp,h copbo,sa,ach eth geo arm Slav), while it is present in others (אc A C D1 K L P Ψ 075 M latt syrh). The omission of Ἰησοῦ is often considered the more difficult reading and potentially original, with the addition possibly being an assimilation for clarity or completeness of the common Pauline phrase “Christ Jesus.” Lexically, χαριν (from χαρις) is used here in an adverbial sense, meaning “for the sake of, on account of, because of,” typically followed by a genitive (BDAG 2.a.β). Τουτου, the demonstrative pronoun in the genitive, refers to the preceding context (Ephesians 2:11-22), establishing the “reason” for what follows. Δεσμιος denotes “a prisoner, one in bonds” (BDAG 1), a recurring self-designation for Paul. The genitive του Χριστου could be interpreted as a subjective genitive (prisoner belonging to Christ) or, more probably in context, an objective genitive (prisoner *for* Christ, i.e., for the gospel of Christ). The phrase υπερ υμων των εθνων further clarifies the *on behalf of* nature of Paul’s imprisonment (BDAG 2.a.α.δ), strengthening the objective genitive interpretation for του Χριστου.
Translation Variants
The grammatical analysis of Ephesians 3:1 centers on the absence of a finite verb, creating significant challenges for translation. The phrase τουτου χαριν introduces a causal element, “For this reason,” which typically points back to the preceding theological exposition (Eph 2:11-22) concerning the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles. Paul then identifies himself as εγω Παυλος ο δεσμιος του Χριστου υπερ υμων των εθνων, “I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ on behalf of you Gentiles.” Without an explicit verb, the sentence either implies one or constitutes an anacoluthon.
Rhetorically, if an anacoluthon is present, Paul’s thought process is interrupted by the profound significance of his apostleship to the Gentiles. The very “reason” for his prayer (to be resumed in v. 14) is so overwhelming that he must first explain the “mystery” of his commission in verses 2-13. This creates a powerful rhetorical effect, building anticipation and emphasizing the gravity of the revealed truth. The lengthy parenthetical section then functions as an essential elaboration on the nature of God’s grace to the Gentiles, which undergirds the *reason* for Paul’s forthcoming prayer. If an ειμι were simply understood, the declaration would be complete, yet the subsequent parenthetical still represents a significant digression, making the anacoluthon a more compelling explanation for the rhetorical structure.
The initial discussion highlighted this tension: some propose an understood ειμι (e.g., Peshitta, Chrysostom), while others, such as Lincoln, suggest the sentence is a fragment completed in verse 14. Carl Conrad’s contribution further supports the anacoluthon, arguing that τουτου χαριν and υπερ υμων των εθνων require a verb of action, not merely a copula like ειμι, to fully resolve their adverbial nature and connection within the sentence. He also notes the difficulty of unequivocally linking τουτου to the immediately preceding verses if verse 1 were a complete, stand-alone statement, suggesting it might rather anticipate the content that follows, particularly the prayer in verse 14.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The most robust grammatical and rhetorical analysis supports the interpretation of Ephesians 3:1 as an anacoluthon. Paul commences a sentence, but his thought is profoundly interrupted by the weighty significance of his commission to the Gentiles, leading to the extensive parenthetical explanation in verses 2-13. The original thought, initiated by τουτου χαριν, is then resumed and completed in verse 14, where Paul articulates the *reason* for his prayer. This structure underscores the dramatic importance Paul places on the revelation of God’s mystery concerning the inclusion of Gentiles.
Based on this exegetical understanding, the following translation suggestions are offered:
- For this reason, I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles—
This translation maintains the grammatical incompleteness of the Greek, thereby preserving the anacoluthon and allowing the reader to experience the rhetorical suspense intended by the author. - It is for this reason (which I am about to explain) that I, Paul, am a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles…
This option provides a subtle interpretive bridge for the English reader, acknowledging the parenthetical nature that follows without inserting a verb explicitly absent in the Greek text. - For this reason, I am Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles…
This translation supplies an understood copula for immediate grammatical completeness, aligning with some early interpretive traditions. While providing a smoother read, it may obscure the original anacoluthon and its significant rhetorical impact.