Truth
On
Tough
Texts
ISSUE 24 –
July/2007
What
Does the Phrase “Led Captivity Captive”
Mean?
Ephesians
3:8-10
WHEREFORE HE SAITH, WHEN HE
ASCENDED UP ON HIGH, HE LED CAPTIVITY CAPTIVE, AND GAVE
gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but
that he also descended first into the lower parts of the
earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended
up far above all heavens, that he might fill all
things.)
At first glance
these verses seem to be an interruption of thought. One
would think that after writing the thoughts of verse 7,
Paul would just go right to the gifts in verse 11, but
He does not do that. Why? Because he thought it
necessary to carefully emphasize exactly Who bestows
these gifts—the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
This point is crucial. All spiritual gifts,
and especially the leadership gifts in this context, are
based upon what God is doing. Paul emphasizes here
how vital leadership is and that it is God alone Who is
appointing and gifting these leaders, not men who just
decide to appoint themselves, not just people in the
church who decide that they would like to teach a little
bit. The point is, are you gifted to do this, are you
called of God and qualified for such leadership?
That is the question, and it is the question that
few today are willing to ask. Men such as Charles
Spurgeon in his classic book Lectures to My
Students, Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his equally enduring
Preaching and Preachers, and
others in the past were aware of this foundation to
ministry, but today it is all but lost. (See Issue 18 of
TOTT, January 2007, Is There a So-Called “Call” to
Ministry?)
So it is for that
reason that Paul writes what he does in verses 8-10. As
the words Wherefore he saith
indicate, verse 8 is actually a “semi-quotation” of
Psalm 68:18 (“Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led
captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men;
yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might
dwell among them”). The scene here is that of a victory
hymn celebrating God’s conquest of the Jebusites and His
ascent (represented by the Ark of the Covenant) up Mount
Zion (II Sam. 6-7; I Chron. 13). At that time of
conquest, soldiers who had been captured by the enemy
became “re-captured captives,” and the spoils of war
became the property of the conqueror to give as he
wished.
There is obviously a
slight discrepancy between Psalm 68:18 and our text. The
Psalm reads “received gifts for men,” but
Paul writes “gave gifts unto men.” The
liberal critic immediately sees a contradiction here,
which he thinks argues against the inspiration and
infallibility of Scripture. But there is no problem
because our Lord did both: He received and
gave. On the one hand, the Son received them from the
Father, and on the other, the Son gave them to the
Church. As a victorious king would first receive the
spoils of war and them distribute them to those who
aided in the conquest, so the King of Kings received of
His Father and distributed to His Church.[i]
So Paul’s words
picture the risen, triumphant Savior going into heaven
after His battle on earth. With Him He takes certain
captives and then gives gifts
to those who remain on earth. What a thrilling
picture!
This does, however,
bring up a question: What is the meaning of that odd
phrase, He led captivity captive? There has been some debate on this phrase. A
common teaching views “captivity” as referring to Old
Testament saints who though saved were held in some sort
of captivity. It is further taught that the Lord Jesus
went into Hades (Hell), retrieved them from their
captivity, and took them to Heaven.
Such a
teaching, however, is rooted in Roman Catholic
tradition,
not Scripture as it claims. The Latin term is
limbus patrum, that is, “limbo of
fathers.” The literal idea of limbus is “fringe
or border,” and the basic idea in the word “limbo” is
“a state or place of confinement.” So the
teaching in the term limbus
patrum, which was chosen in the Middle Ages,
refers to a place on the border of Hell that, as the
Catholic Encyclopedia puts it, was the place
where “the just who had lived under the Old
Dispensation, and who, either at death or after a course
of purgatorial discipline, had attained the perfect
holiness required for entrance into glory, were obliged
to await the coming of the Incarnate Son of God and the
full accomplishment of His visible earthly mission.
Meanwhile they were ‘in prison’” . . . awaiting “the
higher bliss to which they looked forward.”[ii]
We might
also interject that a similar teaching is called
limbus infantium (“children’s limbo”), which is the place where
unbaptized infants go, according to Catholicism; since
they weren’t baptized, they can’t go to heaven, but
because they have done no wickedness, they go a place of
happiness and no “positive pain.” This is why infant
baptism is so strongly emphasized to parents, so that
they will be able to see their children again in
Heaven.
Further,
such teaching does not come even remotely close to the
imagery of the phrase. The Greek (echmaloteusen
aichmalosian)
more literally says, “he
led captive captivity.” Echmaloteusen
is the aorist indicative active of
aichmaloteuo, to
capture, and aichmalosian,
the state of being captive, is a noun from
aichmalotos,
a captive. The picture is rooted in the public triumphs
of conquerors, especially as celebrated by the Romans.
The
language clearly describes the conqueror who took
captives, led them away in chains, and then made them
part of his triumphal
procession.
We find the same
expression elsewhere in the Old Testament. In Judges
5:12, for example, Deborah praises the Lord for giving
victory over Canaan: “Awake, awake, Deborah: awake,
awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy
captivity captive.” The idea is clear, that you will now
lead captive him who held you captive. Also in Amos
1:3-6 we read God’s pronouncement of judgment on the
nations around Israel because they had “carried away
captive the whole captivity, to deliver them up to
Edom,” that is, the Philistines had handed over a large
number of Israelites to the cruel Edomites.
So what is Paul saying? As
one expositor puts it,
It is a picture of the
Lord Jesus Christ leading in His triumphal train the
devil and hell and sin and death—the great enemies that
were against man and which had held mankind in captivity
for so long a time. The princes which had controlled
that captivity are now being led captive
themselves.[iii]
What a picture! Our
Lord is, indeed, the Conqueror of Conquerors, the King
of Kings, the Lord of Lords. Those who once held us in
bondage are now captives to the Great Conqueror and
march in chains before Him.
Paul continues the thought
in verses 9-10: (Now that he ascended, what is it but
that he also descended first into the lower parts of the
earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended
up far above all heavens, that he might fill all
things.) Some interpret this to mean that Christ
descended into Hell (Latin, descensus ad
inferos) to accomplish certain things, such as
preaching to Old Testament saints or even preaching to
lost people, such as those before Noah, to give them a
“second chance,” or perhaps to proclaim His victory to
Satan. But, as John Gill puts it, such ideas are
“fictitious and fabulous.” They are, of course, usually
propped up with I Peter 3:19, “By which also he went and
preached unto the spirits in prison.” But when viewed in
its context, the verse obviously does not say anything
of the sort, nor does any other Scripture. The verse is
best understood as referring to our preincarnate Lord
“preaching through Noah to those who, because they
rejected that message, are now spirits in
prison.”[iv]
So, then, to where
is Paul saying our Lord descended? The answer
obviously is the earth itself. After all, can one
“ascend” Who did not first “descend?” This principle is expressed, in fact, in
other Scriptures. Our Lord Himself declared, “And no man
hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from
heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (Jn
3:13), and then again, “For the bread of God is he which
cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world”
(6:33), and still again in 6:38, 41, 42; 50, 51, and 58.
With that in mind,
however, does descended perhaps mean something
even deeper? After all, if all Paul wanted to say was
that Christ came to the Earth, he could have said it in
much simpler terms than referring to the lower parts
of the earth. We submit, therefore, that it is not
just Christ coming to Earth, but His coming to Earth
in the deepest, most profound humiliation
possible. As Philippians 2:7-8
declares:
But made himself of no
reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and
was made in the likeness of men: And being found in
fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became
obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
This is
further substantiated by the Greek for descended
(katabaino), which in
its literal meaning simply means “to go down,” as when
Jesus came down from the mountain after His Sermon on
the Mount (Matt. 8:1) or when the angel of the Lord told
Philip to go down from Jerusalem to Gaza (Acts 8:26).
But as Greek authority Joseph Thayer writes, there is a
figurative meaning of this word, “to be cast down to the
lowest state of wretchedness and shame.”[v]
This meaning is found in Matthew 11:23, where our Lord
said of Capernaum that though it had been “exalted unto
heaven,” since He had chosen it as His headquarters, it
would “be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works,
which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it
would have remained until this day.” It’s interesting
that there is no record that the inhabitants persecuted
Him or even mocked Him, but simply because of their
indifference, their sin was more wretched than even
Sodom’s.
Think, then, of the
humiliation of our Lord. He set aside His heavenly glory
and was born a man, was born of peasant stock in stable,
was born in the less than significant Nazareth (Jn.
1:46), experienced all the weaknesses and temptations of
humanity, was mocked by the masses, scorned by His own
family, rejected by His own nation, nailed to a Roman
cross as the worst of criminals, buried in a borrowed
tomb, and then forgotten by everyone except only a few
loyal followers.
That is the view of
several expositors,[vi] and I am convinced that
it is correct because only against that backdrop could
we then see the true glory of His ascension, for He
ascended up far above all heavens. As Calvin put
it, “If ever there was a time when, after appearing to
lay aside the brightness of his power, God ascended
gloriously, it was when Christ was raised from our
lowest condition on earth, and received into heavenly
glory.” In other words, if there is anything that
illustrates the lowest ascending to the highest, it is
our Lord. Paul here adds to the ascension story told by
Luke (Lk. 24:50-52; Acts 1:9-11) by telling us more
specifically where our Lord went. While John 3:13 (and
the other texts mentioned earlier) declare that He
“ascended up to heaven” and “came down
from heaven,” Paul specifies that He went far above
all heavens, that is, above the atmosphere, above
the stars, beyond the universe, into the third heaven
and to the very Throne of God, where He now sits at the
Father’s right hand (Heb. 8:1; 10:12; 12:2). As one
commentator aptly phrases it, “As His humiliation was so
low, His exaltation is proportionately high.”[vii] As noted earlier, Philippians
2:7-8 speaks of His humiliation, but verses 9-11
immediately go on to
declare:
Wherefore God also hath
highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above
every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and
things under the earth; And that every tongue should
confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God
the Father.
And what
was the purpose of this? Paul tells us that Christ did
it to fill all things. Fill is
pleroo, “to render full, to complete.” He did it all to
complete God’s plan of salvation and to fulfill God’s
plan for the Church. And what a completion it is! Our
Lord descended to the lowliest state and suffered
the lowliest death, but then He rose again, led our
enemies into captivity, ascended gloriously into
Heaven, and left behind great gifts that His redeemed people can use to carry on
ministry.
We emphasize this in
dramatic contrast to today’s emphasis on spiritual
gifts. There are many today who teach that every
believer must “seek their spiritual gift.” We hear such
things as, “Here are four principles on how to find your
spiritual gift,” or, “You have got to find your gift
before you can ever serve God.” But we would humbly
submit that this emphasis is quite wrong. Nowhere in
Scripture are we instructed to “seek our gift.”
Spiritual gifts are not to be sought; they are to
be received. Receiving a spiritual gift is like
receiving any other gift; we do not solicit it or expect
it, rather we receive it when the giver decides to give
it. The single key to understanding this is found in the
word yieldedness. We are to
be totally yielded to Christ. When we are yielded, God
will then give the gift or gifts (in the amounts He
wills) that will glorify Him and edify the Church the
most.
Dr. J. D.
Watson
Pastor-Teacher
Grace Bible
Church
*
* *
“The Papists, therefore, make
themselves guilty, who eke out Scripture with their
traditions, which they consider equal to it. The Council
of Trent says, that the traditions of the church of Rome
are to be received pari pietatis affectu, with the same
devotion that Scripture is to be received; so bringing
themselves under the curse. Rev xxii:18. ‘If any man
shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the
plagues that are written in this
book.’”
Puritan Thomas Watson,
A Body of Divinity
The Banner of Truth
Trust, 1992 reprint, p.
30
NOTES
[i]
This seems further indicated by the reading of the
ancient Syriac Peshitta (a 2nd Century Bible
version), which translates the Hebrew word as “gave.” As
John R. W. Stott writes, “Evidently this was already a
traditional interpretation” (God’s New
Society [Downers Grove: IL: Intervarsity Press,
1979), p. 157).
F.F. Bruce is even more
significant: “An early targumic rendering [Targums are
oral paraphrases of the OT committed to writing in
2nd and 3rd Century A.D.] is found
in the Peshitta:
‘Thou hast ascended on
high;
thou hast led captivity
captive;
thou hast given gifts to
men.’
“A later amplification appears in
the traditional Targum on the Psalter, which provides
the text with a life-setting far removed from Jerusalem
under the monarchy:
‘Thou hast ascended to the
firmament, prophet Moses;
thou hast led captivity
captive;
thou hast taught the words of the
law;
thou hast given gifts to
men.’
“Paul and other NT writers
occasionally give evidence of using targumic renderings
(or renderings known to us nowadays only from the
Targums), especially where such renderings are better
suited to the argument to which they are applied than
the Hebrew or Septuagint wording would be. Even when a
written Targum is quite late, the renderings it presents
often had a long oral prehistory. However far “thou hast
given gifts to men” deviates from “thou hast received
gifts among (from) men,” it circulated as an acceptable
interpretation in the first century A.D.” (F. F. Bruce,
The Epistles to the Colossians, to
Philemon, and to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1984).pp.
342-3).
In the typical liberal fashion of
modern textual critics, Andrew Lincoln prefers to call
the Peshitta reading a possible “corruption, which makes
its value as evidence precarious” (Word
Biblical Commentary: Ephesians [Dallas: Word
Publishing, 1990], p. 242).
[ii] “Limbo” in Catholic Encyclopedia, Classic 1914
Edition (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen).
[iii] Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Christian Unity: An Exposition of
Ephesians 4:1-16 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), p.
153.
[iv] Ryrie Study
Bible (NASB). John Gill expands, “The plain and easy
sense of the words is, that Christ, by his Spirit, by
which he was quickened, went in the ministry of Noah,
the preacher of righteousness, and preached both by
words and deeds, by the personal ministry of Noah, and
by the building of the ark, to that generation who was
then in being; and who being disobedient, and continuing
so, a flood was brought upon them which destroyed them
all; and whose spirits, or separate souls, were then in
the prison of hell, so the Syriac version renders it . .
. in hell . . . so that Christ neither went into this
prison, nor preached in it, nor to spirits that were
then in it when he preached, but to persons alive in the
days of Noah, and who being disobedient, when they died,
their separate souls were put into prison, and there
they were when the apostle wrote: from whence we learn,
that Christ was, that he existed in his divine nature
before he was incarnate, he was before Abraham, he was
in the days of Noah; and that Christ also, under the Old
Testament, acted the part of a Mediator, in his divine
nature, and by his Spirit discharged that branch of it,
his prophetic office, before he appeared in human
nature; and that the Gospel was preached in those early
times, as unto Abraham, so before him” (John Gill’s
Exposition).
[v] Thayer’s Greek –
English Lexicon of the New Testament, p.
329
[vi] Albert Barnes, John Calvin, John
Gill, William Hendrickson, William Kelly, Martyn
Lloyd-Jones.
[vii] John Eadie, A
Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to
the Ephesians (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock
Publishers, 1998; reprint of 2nd Edition, 1861), p.
296.
