Ephesians 4:9

The Descent into the Lower Parts of the Earth: An Exegetical Study of Ephesians 4:9

This exegetical study of The Descent into the Lower Parts of the Earth: An Exegetical Study of Ephesians 4:9 is based on a b-greek discussion from Oct 2 2001. The initial thread centered on a grammatical query regarding Ephesians 4:9, specifically concerning the phrase **τὸ δὲ ἀνέβη** and the function of the definite article **τὸ** in substantivizing the verbal form **ἀνέβη**. The question posed was whether **τὸ** indeed causes the quotation fragment **ἀνέβη** to function as a substantive, allowing for the subsequent interrogative **τί ἐστιν** to relate to it.

The primary exegetical issue, as the discussion evolved and expanded to incorporate later contributions, concerns the precise referent of the phrase **κατέβη εἰς τὰ κατώτερα [μέρη] τῆς γῆς** (Eph 4:9b). This phrase has been subject to considerable scholarly debate, with key interpretations proposing Christ’s incarnation, his descent into Hades or the netherworld, or his death and burial. The debate involves intricate questions of grammatical analysis, the significance of textual variants, historical-cultural context, and intertextual connections to Old Testament passages and ancient cosmological views.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)

Eph 4:8 διὸ λέγει· Ἀναβὰς εἰς ὕψος ᾐχμαλώτευσεν αἰχμαλωσίαν, ἔδωκεν δόματα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. 9 τὸ δὲ ἀνέβη τί ἐστιν, εἰ μὴ ὅτι καὶ κατέβη εἰς τὰ κατώτερα [μέρη] τῆς γῆς;

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The SBLGNT (2010) reads **εἰς τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς** without brackets around **μέρη**, suggesting a higher confidence in its originality compared to critical editions that bracket it.

Textual Criticism (NA28), Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

The critical apparatus of NA28 for Ephesians 4:9 notes that **μέρη** is bracketed, indicating uncertainty about its originality. Manuscripts supporting its inclusion (e.g., P⁴⁶, א¹, A, B, C, D*, F, G, P, Ψ, 075, 33, 81, 1739, 1881, vg, cop) are significant, yet its absence in others (א*, D¹, it^{a, b, d, g}, sy^p, Origen) leads textual critics to question its earliest attestation. The decision to include or omit **μέρη** significantly impacts the grammatical understanding of **τῆς γῆς**.

Lexically, **κατώτερα** is the comparative adjective (neuter plural) derived from **κάτω** (‘down’). BDAG defines **τὰ κατώτερα** in this context as “the lower regions (of the earth), underworld,” explicitly citing Eph 4:9. It notes that **μέρη** may be understood or expressed. KITTEL (TDNT s.v. **κάτω**) elaborates on the use of **τὰ κατώτερα** in Greek literature and the LXX (e.g., Psalm 63:9), where it consistently denotes the underworld (Hades or Sheol). The genitive **τῆς γῆς** (‘of the earth’) can be interpreted in several ways:

• As a partitive genitive, meaning “the lower parts of the earth,” which strongly suggests a region within the earth, often identified with the underworld. This interpretation is bolstered by the inclusion of **μέρη**.
• As an appositional genitive (or epexegetical), meaning “the lower parts, namely the earth” or “the lowest earth.” This would refer to the physical earth itself, potentially pointing to the incarnation (Christ’s descent from heaven to earth) or his burial (descent into the grave). This reading is more plausible if **μέρη** is omitted, allowing **τὰ κατώτερα** to function as a substantive referring to “the lowest (place/state).”

Translation Variants and Analysis

The interpretation of Ephesians 4:9 revolves significantly around the grammatical and rhetorical understanding of **κατέβη εἰς τὰ κατώτερα [μέρη] τῆς γῆς**. The discussion highlights divergent approaches to exegesis:

Grammatical Analysis

• The initial grammatical point concerning **τὸ δὲ ἀνέβη** clarifies that the article **τὸ** nominalizes the aorist verb **ἀνέβη**, turning “he ascended” into a substantive phrase, akin to “that he ascended” or “the act of his ascending.” This grammatical construction sets up the question: “Now what is ‘he ascended’?”
• The core grammatical debate centers on the genitive **τῆς γῆς**. If **μέρη** is understood as part of the original text (supported by many manuscripts and SBLGNT), the phrase **εἰς τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς** most naturally functions as a partitive genitive: “into the lower parts of the earth.” This interpretation aligns with the traditional view of a descent into the underworld (Hades/Sheol), as found in various ancient cosmologies and Jewish intertestamental literature.
• Conversely, some scholars propose an appositional genitive, interpreting **τῆς γῆς** as explicative of **τὰ κατώτερα**, meaning “the lowest parts, namely, the earth.” This could refer to Christ’s incarnation (descent from heaven to the lowest state of humanity on earth) or his burial (descent into the grave). The argument for incarnation often references Psalm 139:15 in the LXX, where **ἐν τοῖς κατωτάτω τῆς γῆς** is understood metaphorically for gestation in the womb, linking it to the humility of Christ’s earthly birth. However, this application to Eph 4:9 requires a significant semantic shift.

Rhetorical and Contextual Analysis

• The passage is part of Paul’s adaptation of Psalm 68:18. His alteration from “you received gifts among humanity” to “he gave gifts to human beings” is a deliberate rhetorical move to emphasize Christ’s role as the divine giver of spiritual gifts. This highlights Paul’s freedom in using and reinterpreting Old Testament texts to serve his Christological argument.
• The overarching rhetorical contrast between **ἀναβὰς** (ascended) and **κατέβη** (descended) is central. The descent is presented as a necessary counterpart or precondition to the ascent, emphasizing a comprehensive journey. Interpreting this descent as merely to earth (incarnation) or burial, while valid possibilities, may dilute the symmetrical impact of the ascent “to on high” (**εἰς ὕψος**).
• The importance of a broader “semantic framework” or “historical-cultural context” (as advocated by Arnold) is stressed. Understanding the cultural presuppositions of the Ephesians, including their familiarity with ancient Mediterranean cosmological views and “Hadean gods,” is crucial. This perspective suggests that Paul’s audience would readily understand “the lower parts of the earth” as a reference to the underworld, aligning with the “traditional reading” of early Church Fathers. Neglecting this broader context in favor of a purely syntactical analysis can lead to an incomplete understanding of the text’s intended meaning and impact on its original audience.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

While the interpretation of Ephesians 4:9b remains a point of scholarly discussion, the grammatical strength of the partitive genitive, especially with the inclusion of **μέρη**, combined with the compelling historical-cultural evidence for a robust understanding of Christ’s descent into the underworld in early Christianity, supports the traditional reading. This interpretation provides a coherent theological narrative of Christ’s triumph over death and the powers of the netherworld, fitting within the broader context of Ephesians’ emphasis on Christ’s cosmic lordship. The rhetorical antithesis between ascent and descent further reinforces a significant, profound downward movement.

1. “Now what does ‘he ascended’ mean except that he also descended into the lower regions of the earth?”
   This translation emphasizes the spatial descent into the realm of the dead, reflecting the partitive genitive and the strong cultural understanding of **τὰ κατώτερα** as the underworld.
2. “Now what does ‘he ascended’ mean except that he also descended into the lowest parts, namely, the earth?”
   This rendering accommodates the incarnation or burial interpretation, viewing **τῆς γῆς** as appositional or explicative of **τὰ κατώτερα**, which here denotes the physical earth or its depths (the grave).
3. “Now what does ‘he ascended’ mean except that he also descended to the deepest places of the earth?”
   This offers a more ambiguous translation, acknowledging a profound descent to the lowest levels associated with the earthly realm (including burial), without explicitly naming the underworld, but not precluding it. It maintains rhetorical force while allowing for varied interpretations of the exact ‘location’.