Jacob Lollar: “A Well-Known Textual Variant” in the Letter to the Ephesians

Jacob A. Lollar, “The Meaning of Ephesians: Competing Christianities in Second-Century Ephesus,” NovT 67 (2025), 342.

A well-known textual variant exists in the opening line of Ephesians: several early mss lack the inscription ἐν Ἐφέσῳ in the original scribal hand. This variant is particularly noteworthy because, without the address, there is nothing to link this letter specifically to Ephesus. [Edgar] Goodspeed recognized this in the 1930s, saying that the letter “reflects no definite, localized, historical situation which it is intended to meet,” but is rather an amassing of Pauline thought and theology: “it is altogether built up of Pauline materials […] it reads like a commentary on the Pauline epistles.” The missing title is key to the letter and its function: first, it shows there is nothing to explicitly link the letter to Ephesus; second, it reveals important information regarding the date and reception of the letter as “to the Ephesians.”

5 thoughts on “Jacob Lollar: “A Well-Known Textual Variant” in the Letter to the Ephesians

  1. jiuberto monteiro's avatar
    jiuberto monteiro 15 Mar 2026 — 4:51 pm

    Ben, I’m trying to understand how you think James relates to the theology of Job. If James denies that God tempts anyone (James 1:13), and if the prologue of Job seems to present God as initiating the testing of Job through the satan, how do you think James would interpret the book of Job? Do you think James is intentionally correcting the theological implication of Job, or would he be rereading Job in a way that separates God from the temptation (for example by emphasizing secondary agents like Satan)?

    Like

    1. The Amateur Exegete's avatar

      I think James reads Job in light of his own cultural context in which the Satan had become Satan, a more malevolent figure that functions as God’s adversary rather than his servant. So, when James reads Job he doesn’t see God testing Job but Satan doing so, particularly as a foe to Job and the god he worships.

      Like

  2. jiuberto monteiro's avatar
    jiuberto monteiro 16 Mar 2026 — 2:30 pm

    Hi Ben! I have a question about a Bible passage. Do you think Deuteronomy 22:28 is referring to rape, or do you interpret it differently? I’d be interested in hearing your perspective.

    Like

    1. jiuberto monteiro's avatar
      jiuberto monteiro 16 Mar 2026 — 4:23 pm

      I would like to know if there is a well-established consensus regarding this passage.

      Like

  3. jiuberto monteiro's avatar
    jiuberto monteiro 17 Mar 2026 — 2:34 am

    Ben, what do you disagree with in Larry Hurtado’s work, specifically in his book Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity?

    Like

Leave a reply to The Amateur Exegete Cancel reply

search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close