a deutero-pauline mystery? 187
the early church, as determined by the conflict over law observance and
the inclusion of the gentiles. But this conflict did not characterize all the
early churches. recent investigations conclude that it is a fallacy to read
this conflict into Paul’s Corinthian correspondence, for example.30
“Before” and “Now”
in fact, the argument in eph 2:11–22 is characteristically Pauline. the pas-
sage develops the contrast between the believers’ past and present (com-
pare 2:11–13 and 2:13, 19–22), so typical of Paul’s letters (rom 6:17–18; 7:5–6;
11:30; 1 Cor 6:9–11). the moment that separated the “before” and the “now”
is usually the time of coming to faith (rom 6:17: “have become obedient
from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted”; 1 Cor
6:11: “you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified”). in eph
2:11–22, the time of coming to faith is also a decisive moment, hinted at
with the reference to the gift of the spirit in 2:18. the emphasis, however,
falls on the moment when Christ died, “abolished the law,” and brought
reconciliation to both Jews and gentiles (2:13–16).31
this intermingling of two temporal perspectives is characteristic of
Paul, as we can see in his letter to the galatians. in his discussion on
30 Jerry l. sumney, Identifying Paul’s Opponents: The Question of Method in 2 Corinthians
( Jsntsup 40; sheffield: Jsot, 1990), 15–42, 177. the only passage in these letters that deals
directly with the relationship between the old and the new covenant is 2 Cor 3:5–18. in this
passage Paul argues that his ministry of the new covenant is essentially different from that
of the old. But the very point that the new covenant is superior to the old is a presupposi-
tion for his argument, a presupposition about which there is no dispute (Carol Kern stock-
hausen, Moses’ Veil and the Glory of the New Covenant [anBib 116; rome: editrice Pontificio
istituto Biblico, 1989], 79, 114; Margaret e. thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Second Epistle to the Corinthians [iCC; edinburgh: t&t Clark, 1994], 1:240–41). sumney
goes even further and argues that there are no clear allusions to opponents in 2 Cor 3:7–18
(Identifying Paul’s Opponents, 140–42).
31 some scholars maintain that the antithesis in ephesians is no longer primarily tem-
poral, as in Paul’s letters, but spatial, between this world and the “powers” (Conzelmann,
“epheser,” 88; J. Paul sampley, “ephesians,” in J. Paul sampley and gerhard Krodel, The
Deutero-Pauline Letters: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1–2 Timothy, Titus [Procla-
mation Commentaries; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993], 3; cf. Peter tachau, ‘Einst’ und ‘Jetzt’
im Neuen Testament: Beobachtungen zu einem urchristlichen Predigtschema in der neut-
estamentlichen Briefliteratur und zu seiner Vorgeschichte [Frlant 105; göttingen: Vanden-
hoeck & ruprecht, 1972], 135–41). the temporal contrast is actually more significant here,
however, than in the comparable “mystery”-passage in 1 Corinthians 2. in 1 Corinthians 2
the mystery is not something that was hidden in the past, but something that is hidden
now, only being received by the perfect (v. 6). Cf. Michael wolter, “Verborgene weisheit
und heil für die heiden: Zur traditionsgeschichte und intention des ‘revelationssche-
mas’,” ZTK 84 (1987): 300–301; sigurd grindheim, “wisdom for the Perfect: Paul’s Challenge
to the Corinthian Church (1 Corinthians 2:6–16),” JBL 121 (2002): 698–99.