#4. Acknowledgment, the spirit of
wisdom and revelation (Eph. i. 17, 18).
The first fourteen verses of the epistle to the Ephesians contain a revelation of the distinctive truth of the Mystery, as entrusted to the Apostle Paul in his capacity of the prisoner of Jesus Christ for us Gentiles. In this opening revelation the Apostle makes known some unique features of this dispensation. Its blessings are “spiritual”; its sphere “heavenly places”; its association with the age-purpose, “before the overthrow of the world”; its pre-eminence in this exalted sphere indicated by the word elsewhere translated “adoption”, and its hope is said to be “prior”. At verse fifteen, the Apostle ceases to add further teaching, and turns to prayer. If epignosis meant simply piling knowledge upon knowledge, the Apostle could have gone on, regardless of the moral and spiritual response or lack of response of these Ephesian saints, but at verse seventeen he prays:
“That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him . . . . . that ye may know what is the hope of His calling . . . . .” (Eph. i. 17, 18).
The margin of the A.V. reads for the acknowledgment in place of in the knowledge. The preposition en occurs more than one hundred and twenty times in Ephesians and is translated “in”, “by”, “with”, “through” and “at”; it is only translated “for” in iv. 32, where it is translated “for Christ’s sake”, an exceedingly free rendering and which the R.V. renders “in Christ”.
Accepting, as we have in this series, the translation of epignosis as “acknowledgment” or “recognition”, we still have to ponder the Spirit’s meaning. Does the apostle mean that the gift of a spirit of wisdom and revelation leads to and enables “acknowledgment”. That is, shall we accept the A.V. marginal reading “for the acknowledgment”? or, while returning the new rendering of the word epignosis, shall we leave unaltered the preposition en and read “in the acknowledgment”? Should anyone ask what difference such a rendering would indicate, we reply that in the first translation the spirit of wisdom and revelation leads to acknowledgment, whereas in the second the spirit of wisdom and revelation is found in the acknowledgment, and will not be granted, where acknowledgment is withheld. This is a serious difference, and we believe that the second translation expresses the truth. How is it that we have to say of one and another believer: “He did run well, he appeared to be quite convinced, both of the general application of the principle of right division, and of the particular application to the present dispensation of the mystery—yet, somehow, he seems to have drawn back, his testimony is silenced. If he preaches or speaks in public, it is painfully evident to those who know the truth that he is not emulating the apostle, who, by manifestation of the truth, commended himself to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”
If we have personal acquaintance with any of these brethren we soon become convinced that it is not lack of “knowledge” that hinders. They may have ability to read the Word in the original tongue, they may be level-headed and able to follow an intelligent proposition. In fact, we feel that some have seen all too clearly the logical conclusions of standing by such unpopular teaching as that which is associated with the testimony of the Lord’s prisoner. In such circumstances growth ceases.
If, after we have received a knowledge of the truth; if, after the eyes of our hearts have been enlightened; if, after that, we would receive “a spirit of wisdom and revelation” so that we may “see” (eideo) what is the hope of His calling, that spirit must be received “in the acknowledgment of Him”. The eyes of our heart may be enlightened, but we may not “see” for all that. Prejudice, fear of man, a too careful pondering of consequences, all these may have a blinding effect, or if not blinding, a dimming and distorting influence. We may still “see”, but see “men as trees walking”.
When we hear and read some of the things that are advanced under the aegis of Paul the prisoner, we cannot help but feel that such must be the explanation. Let us take this message to heart. Let us “acknowledge” the truth that we have seen. Let us not hide it out of fear, or dissimulate because of advantage. The clear perception as to what is the hope of our calling is largely associated with this acknowledgment, and where there is no acknowledgment a blessed foretaste of the glory of our inheritance must be forfeited. A realization of the source of all power to usward who believe will never be obtained where there is not frank and full acknowledgment.
If in the fulfillment of our stewardship, The Berean Expositor had made no statement about the Lord’s Supper; if it had not made a clean cut at Acts xxviii.; if it had included the hope of I Thess. iv. in the doctrine of the mystery; if it could have retained the ecclesiastical position of the first epistle to the Corinthians, while holding to the teaching of Ephesians; if it could blend the New Covenant with the Mystery, it might have “prospered” as the world or Christendom counts prosperity. Its readers might have been multiplied, our spiritual pride fed, our creature comforts increased, but how poor in all essentials we should have been! If this witness is comparatively “unknown” yet the Lord acknowledges it. If we are comparatively “poor” we have proof that we have “made many rich”, and if in the eyes of the world we “have nothing”, yet, with the eyes of our heart enlightened, we are conscious that we “possess all things”.
May every reader, together with the writer and his colleagues, be numbered among that blessed company who thus “acknowledge Him”.
-------------
--------------
No comments:
Post a Comment