Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For those who didn't read post #5, the following is from Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary and the founder and executive director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts. Dr. Wallace presents the arguments for and against Pauline authorship of Ephesians.
For instance, regarding the linguistic argument against the Pauline authorship of Ephesians that ''The language and style are different. Ephesians contains 40 new words,'' to which the OP refers, Dan Wallace states the following.
Linguistic/Literary Arguments
a) Vocabulary. Although it is true that the author employs thirty-five words not found elsewhere in the Pauline corpus, this is comparable to Galatians (31) and Philippians (40), two undisputed books! Not only this, but Ephesians is longer than either Galatians or Philippians, making it proportionately better off than either of them. We might add here that although some of the unique terms in Ephesians show up only in patristic literature (e.g., “in the heavenlies”), this may well be due to the fathers borrowing from Ephesians, rather than the other way around. [Bolding mine]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
