↑[(κατὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν)],
↑[ᾧ ἡ δόξα (εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων), ἀμήν].
Verse 1.4c provides a third dependent clause expanding on the standard greeting of 1.3. This time we are told of the agency of God in the apocalyptic rescue of 1.4b, which is in turn the purpose of the self-giving of Christ (1.4a): it is according to the will of our God and Father. As indicated above, this phrase underscores the Trinitarian nature of the apocalyptic rescue that was enacted through the death of Christ for sins. God the Father willed these events, and so was the ultimate ‘agent’ to the ‘instrument’ of Christ. The notion of the agency of the Father expressed through the instrumentality of the Son is commonly found in Paul, and appears elsewhere in this epistle: God called the Galatians by the grace of Christ (1.6); God sent his Son to redeem those under the law (4.4–5).
The phrase τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν is correctly translated of our God and Father, rather than of God and our Father, because of Granville Sharp’s Rule. In this kind of construction—an article followed by two personal nouns joined by καὶ, but without an article before the second noun—the two nouns refer to the same person (see Wallace, 271, for more details). Thus, the personal pronoun ἡμῶν is best understood as qualifying both nouns rather than just the second; hence our God and Father offers the best translation.
Verse 5 reveals that God the Father is not only the ultimate agent of the apocalyptic rescue in 1.4b; his glory is also the ultimate goal of this work. The work of Christ in rescuing us from sin is willed by the Father and results in the Father’s glory, which lasts forever and ever (εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων). This phrase provides a direct contrast to the present evil age of 1.4b (τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ); the evil age is present only; the glory of God is forever.
Posted by Con Campbell
RSS feed - Posts
Subscribe by Email
The point of about the contrast between the ενεστωτος and the later εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων is really fascinating – I hadn’t noticed it before.
Con, any chance you could comment further on ‘the Trinitarian nature of the apocalyptic rescue’? I’m asking because there is no mention of the Holy Spirit in this prologue. Is another conclusion, aside from seeing God the Father’s agency, that the Son is submissive to the will of the Father? However, I don’t want this to negate 1.4a where the Son freely gave himself.
Hi Joshua, you’re right to point out the lack of reference to the Spirit. I think it is still legitimate, however, to point to the Trinity even when we may only see two of the three persons mentioned in a particular context; I believe all three persons are at work in salvation, and if two persons are mentioned this is a partial reflection of what’s going on. However, I don’t want to read into the text what is not there; only affirm Paul’s implicit Trinitarianism.
I’m sure the Father’s agency is related to the Son’s submission, though I haven’t explored that yet.