Look how far we’ve come! We’ve read the book of Ephesians, we’ve found the first passage, we’ve sentence diagrammed, and we’ve begun writing down observations by making lists. Well done! The next Bite we’re going to take will help us learn something about the recipients of this epistle so we can know if this contents of the letter could have been written for us or not.
Let’s go back to the actual scripture either in book form or in digital form and find where it talks about the Ephesians. Here is how the ESV renders it:
There is a footnote after “faithful” in the text, do you see that? It digital format, you can hover your mouse over the superscript and it will appear. In paper format, you can look where the footnotes are written in your Bible and read it there. Do you see it says something about some manuscripts “omitting in Ephesus“? That’s funny, isn’t it? Is it there or isn’t it, right? Let’s keep going as we query the text further.
Because we are serious students of the word, we are going to look at another translation. Here is how the NET renders it:
I wonder why the NET Bible has “in Ephesus” written in brackets with that 2 hanging in the air. Did you see that when you compared versions? When you hover over the superscripted 2, there is a huge note. Now we’re getting somewhere! See the “tc” at the beginning of the note? That is an abbreviation for textual criticism which is a vast and fascinating science that studies the ancient manuscripts of scripture that have been discovered. The goal and definition of textual criticism, according to Dr. Daniel Wallace of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, is this:
The study of the copies of any written document whose original, that is the autograph, is unknown or nonexistent for the primary purpose of determining the exact wording of the original.
Dr. Daniel Wallace
There are many volumes written on this subject. However, there are two main things we need to know. First, scientists are even now diligently studying and determining what the biblical authors wrote so that translators have the most accurate Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts from which to translate. And second, none of the variations between the ancient manuscripts cast doubt on the foundations of our faith.
If you were to miraculously hold in your hands the original papyrus Paul had dictated and you knew that papyri only last in good condition for so long, you would want to preserve it in some way, wouldn’t you? When the original text was in someone’s hands, there were no iPhones, copy machines, and no printing presses. What would you do to make sure future generations could read these texts? The people who did hold them in their hands had them copied.
Since all the copies were written by hand, the ones that were copied closest to the originals would most likely be the ones that are the most accurate. The 3 manuscripts we have that are the oldest are the Vatican, the Sinaitic, and the Alexandrian manuscripts. The Vatican and the Sinaitic were both copied in the middle of the fourth century and the Alexandrian was copied in the fifth century. Of the 3, the Vatican and the Sinaitic are considered to be the most important witnesses we have found to date. While the Vatican thankfully contains almost all of the Old and New Testaments, it also is counted as the most exact copy of the New Testament known. The Sinaitic is considered to be the oldest complete manuscript of the New Testament. In addition to these great treasures that contain our sacred texts, there are over 5300 other manuscripts that have been uncovered. Textual criticism is a sound science that endeavors to compare these ancient documents and determine what the original authors actually wrote.
Now that we have a rudimentary idea that different copies of manuscripts (which are what the translators use to take from original ancient languages to our modern languages) have some variant readings, let’s go back to that NET Bible note. You can look at it for yourself here and then we can discuss what it’s talking about.
The note opens by telling us that the oldest and most important manuscripts leave “in Ephesus” out, just like the ESV briefly told us. Two of those manuscripts that are listed there are the Sinaitic (represented by the Hebrew letter aleph) and the Vatican (represented by the capital B). What it says there is that these early manuscripts didn’t have the recipient specifically listed in the text. The note continues to say that there are other pieces of evidence that seem to indicate that this letter was a circulated letter: the absence of personal communication even though Paul had lived in Ephesus for almost 3 years, that Paul said he’d “heard of them” in 1:15, and that Paul made assumptions that they’d “heard of the stewardship of God’s grace…” in 3:2.
Keep reading in the NET Bible note and we find that there are reasons for the text critics to say yes, it is original. And no, it isn’t original based on the volume of later manuscripts. It seems possible that multiple churches in Asia Minor with multiple audiences seem to have been the target for this letter, since several other churches besides Ephesus regarded the letter as their own.
Digging around and finding something I didn’t know thrills me. Even though I’ve studied Ephesians a number of times, I hadn’t noticed this footnote about the recipients. We can’t conclude definitively that the manuscripts didn’t originally have the audience specifically mentioned, but it is a possibility. Whether Paul included it or not doesn’t materially change the purpose for which Paul wrote or his message. Did he write to the congregation in Ephesus? Yes. Is it possible he was also writing to other churches in the region? Sure. What impact do these possibilities have for us as we read? I attend a church that loves Jesus in Colorado. You attend a church that loves Jesus in your town.
Additionally, Paul didn’t know us or our particular issues. Nothing concrete can be said about whether the recipients were identified in the body of the letter, but since it is a distinct possibility that it was left blank originally lets my imagination more readily accept the concept that this potential circulating letter has direct impact in my life. I personally have concluded, after reading and studying the evidence, that Paul did leave the addressee out in the body of the letter. I won’t build doctrine on it, but it’s an opportunity for me to allow the reality that a man wrote this letter wash over me. What was he feeling and thinking? He wasn’t thinking specifically about my church, but in a general sense he could have been.
To the saints who are in __________________ and are the faithful in Christ Jesus.
We will look at the surrounding words in their original languages to understand them better in subsequent Bites, but for now we can identify with these churches that we are saints and we are the faithful. And we live in ______________. Therefore I believe Paul wrote this letter to you, fellow Jesus-lover, and me.
Our Bible Study Bite for today is that there are multiple versions of our modern Bible which can help us get a fuller understanding and there are also ancient biblical manuscripts and people who study them that have been behind the scenes making sure that our modern translations are as close to what the original authors actually intended. Without these ancient treasures and people to decipher them, we wouldn’t have the excellent translations we have today.
