a deutero-pauline mystery? 189
proposition: “he has made known to us the mystery of his will, according
to his good pleasure that he set forth in Christ, as a plan for the fullness
of time, to gather up all things in him, things in heaven and things on
earth” (eph 1:9–10).34 the ephesian mystery is Christ and his reconciling
work, encompassing the things in heaven and the things on earth (1:9–10).
in a more narrow sense, corresponding to the earthly reconciliation, the
mystery can refer to the unity of Jews and gentiles in the church.
in the undisputed Pauline epistles, the gospel can be described in a
similar way.35 the coming of Christ and the fact that the believers are
no longer under the Mosaic law result in a new status for the believers.
as a consequence, there is no distinction between Jews and gentiles
(gal 3:25–29).36 in rom 11:11–36, these ideas are expressed with a termi-
nology that resembles that of ephesians. the passage explains how the
stumbling of israel has resulted in the salvation of the gentiles. this salva-
tion is described as the reconciliation of the world (11:15; cf. eph 2:16). the
primary reference is the cross of Christ (cf. the parallel in rom 5:10), but
the resulting new relationship between Jews and gentiles is also in view.37
in the following verses, this new status is described as being grafted into
a cultivated olive tree. as a result, the gentile believers are now partakers
(συγκοινωνὸς, cf. eph 3:6) of the rich olive root (11:17) of israel. the primacy
of israel in this entity is then underscored (11:18–24). the salvation plan of
god is also called a mystery (11:25). Clearly, this passage betrays significant
parallels to the description of the mystery in eph 2:11–3:13. But the signifi-
cant differences should also be observed. the mystery in rom 11:25 does
not refer directly to the incorporation of the gentiles. rather, the primary
reference is to god’s way of bringing salvation to israel by first bringing it
34 Cf. Franz-Josef steinmetz, Protologische Heils-Zuversicht: Die Strukturen des soteriolo-
gischen und christologischen Denkens im Kolosser- und Epheserbrief (Frankfurter theologis-
che studien 2; Frankfurt: Josef Knecht, 1969), 106; Best, Ephesians, 304; o’Brien, Ephesians,
228; sigurd grindheim, “what the ot Prophets did not Know: the Mystery of the Church
in eph 3,2–13,” Bib 84 (2003): 535; contra sellin, Epheser, 101.
35 Cf. also a. van roon, who maintains that the predestined interbelonging of the Mes-
siah and his people is a concept that ephesians shares with the undisputed letters (cf.
rom 8:29) (Ephesians, 352). Moreover, richard hays maintains that there is a distinctively
“ecclesiocentric hermeneutic” that characterizes Paul’s use of the old testament (Echoes of
Scripture in the Letters of Paul [new haven: yale university Press, 1989], 84–121). the eccle-
siological focus in ephesians does not represent so much of an anomaly as it is sometimes
claimed to do. (i am grateful to daniel J. treier for this observation.)
36 roon, Ephesians, 373.
37 similarly, M.-J. lagrange, Saint Paul épitre aux Romains (eBib; Paris: gabalda, 1916),
278; James d. g. dunn, Romans 9–16 (wBC 38B; dallas: word, 1988), 657; C. K. Barrett,
A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (2nd ed.; BntC; london: Black, 1991), 199;
robert Jewett, Romans: A Commentary (hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 681.