Ephesians 3:3

ὅτι κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν ἐγνώρισέ μοι τὸ μυστήριον : how that by way of revelation he made known (was made known) to me the mystery. The ὅτι is omitted by [207] [208] -lat., Ambros., etc., and is bracketed by [209] and WH, but is retained by most. The ἐγνώρισε of the TR (supported by [210] [211] [212], etc.) must give place to ἐγνωρίσθη, which is the reading of [213] [214] [215] [216] [217] [218] 17, Lat., Syr., Copt., etc., and is adopted by LTTrWHRV. On μυστήριον see under Ephesians 1:9. Here it is the particular μυστήριον or “secret” of the admission of the Gentiles on equal terms with the chosen people a disclosure of the Divine purpose which so often calls forth Paul's adoring wonder. The sentence explains and develops the preceding statement, giving what they heard (ἠκούσατε) of the peculiar dispensation made by God with Paul; and the prominent thing here, as indicated by the emphatic position of κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν, is the way in which the “mystery” was made known to him, viz., the way of revelation. καθὼς προέγραψα ἐν ὀλίγῳ : as I wrote afore in few words. The ἐν ὀλίγῳ is wrongly taken by some as = πρὸ ὀλίγου, “a short time before”. It is equivalent to the διʼ ὀλίγων or the ἐν βραχεῖ, ἐν βραχέσι, of classical Greek and means briefly (cf. Acts 26:28 and the συντόμως in Acts 24:4). But what is the writing referred to? It might be a previous letter now lost (Chrys., Calv., etc.). The aor. might so far favour this, and the ἀναγινώσκοντες of Ephesians 3:4, which Meyer thinks excludes it, is not necessarily inconsistent with it. The δύνασθε ἀναγινώσκοντες νοῆσαι need not be limited to the reading of the present Epistle, but might equally well apply to the act of reading any other letter, and the terms might suggest indeed a fuller statement of the “mystery” in question than is given anywhere in the first part of this Epistle. The reference, however, might also be to something already said in the present letter, in which case the προέγραψο would have the force of “I have written already above”. This is the generally accepted interpretation, the particular statement in view being that in chap. Ephesians 1:9-10, or rather (so Mey., etc.) that in chap. Ephesians 2:11-22, in which the inclusion of the Gentiles is the special topic.

[207] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[208] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[209] Codex Angelicus (sæc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

[210] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[211] Codex Mosquensis (sæc. ix.), edited by Matthæi in 1782.

[212] Codex Angelicus (sæc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

[213] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[214] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[215] Codex Alexandrinus (sæc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[216] Codex Ephraemi (sæc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.

[217] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[218] Codex Augiensis (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., at Trinity College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifications.