Hēmas (meaning “us”): this word is far more than a simple debate for amusement amongst Greek scholars. Let’s dig into Ephesians 1:
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. — Ephesians 1:4-13
This verse has become a Calvinist staple. To a Calvinist, when Paul says “In love He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will”, it means that God predestined all of our salvations, and the part where Paul says “he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” means that God chose and predestined us individually, even before Adam and Eve fell. It’s understandable why this chapter trips up a lot of people. So then, why didn’t it trip up the early church fathers? Why did all of them have perfect unity for 350 years, while all reading the same letter?
First, I want to clarify that the English word “predestine” is very strong and implies inescapability. “Prepared for”, “anticipated”, or “mapped out” are much better words that both fit the context of other times Paul used this word (I Corinthians 2:7-9), as well as contemporary sources at the time who specifically tell us that this word wasn’t to be meant in an inescapable sense (Origen).
For a deep dive on that word, click here
There are two ways you can read this verse:
- This verse is read on an individual level. God predestined individual souls for Heaven and Hell since before the foundation of the world.
- This verse is read on a corporate level. God predestined, from before the foundations of the world that Jews and Gentiles alike were to take part in this, and wouldn’t just be followers of God, but adopted as sons.
So it’s a bit of a 6 or a 9 conundrum: this verse can be read in two ways depending on your perspective. Put simply, does the Greek word for “us” (hēmas) in this passage mean “you and I individually”, or “both Jews and Greeks alike”?
Now, in order to decipher which way Paul wants us to read this, we need to keep in mind that chapter 1 references four things (highlighted above from verses 8-10):
- A mysterious plan
- Since the beginning of time
- Made known to Paul and the apostles recently
- Uniting things in Heaven and on earth
Most people don’t know that chapter 1 is actually just a brief summary of chapter 3. How do we know? Paul says as much in chapter 3:
“how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.” — Ephesians 3:3-4
Two chapters later, Paul once again brings up:
- A mysterious plan
- Since the beginning of time
- Made known to Paul and the apostles recently
Chapter 3 is a problem for Calvinists. So much so, that Calvin suggests that Paul wrote a long lost epistle to the Ephesians before this and that’s what Paul was referencing when he says “as I have written briefly”:
“If we adopt the view which is almost universally approved, that the Apostle had formerly written to the Ephesians, this is not the only Epistle which we have lost — to another Epistle” — Calvin’s Ephesians commentary
Almost universally approved? This must come from some kind of evidence right? Actually no, there wasn’t a single early church historian that referenced another epistle to the Ephesians. No early father—Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian—hints at such a document. No manuscript tradition supports it. Calvin doesn’t have any reference to back up his claim, and he sounds a little too confident — almost as if he needs it to be true. But there’s simply no way Paul could have been referencing a long lost epistle. Here’s why:
Try to look back to earlier to when I wrote “this word is far more than a simple debate for amusement amongst Greek scholars”. Did you find it? Good! Oh, by the way, when I said “Try to look back to earlier”, I wasn’t referencing this blog, I was referencing the blog I wrote 6 months ago called “Skubalon”. So when you went to look for it, you looked at my previous blog post from 6 months ago right? That kind of absurdity is what Calvin is claiming that Paul did when he says “as I have written briefly”. (and yeah, to illustrate I purposely started this blog with the same phrase as I did in my Skubalon blog)
Paul writes about a mysterious plan, since the beginning of time that was made known to the apostles recently, in Chapter 1. Then he references a mysterious plan, since the beginning of time that was made known to the apostles recently, in Chapter 3 and adds “as I briefly mentioned before” and goes on to expand on the exact same topic with more detail…and somehow Calvin thinks he’s talking about a long-lost epistle?
Today most scholars agree with me, but here’s why Calvin didn’t want the two chapters to be connected. In verse 6 we get this:
“This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. … the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, … so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places” — Ephesians 3:6-10 (abridged)
So this neatly ties up the 4th point:
- A mysterious plan
- Since the beginning of time
- Made known to Paul and the apostles recently
- Uniting things in Heaven and on earth
The mystery’s core? Gentiles join Jews as co-heirs in Christ. Thus, the most accurate way to translate hēmas in 1:5—“he predestined us for adoption”—would be Jews and Gentiles collectively: “In love he predestined us—Jews like me, Gentiles like you—for adoption as sons.” Predestination here is corporate, a plan to unite both groups, not a roster of pre-chosen individuals. The text’s focus is inclusion, not exclusion.
Even if we don’t use chapter 3…
Ok, so it’s pretty obvious from chapter 3 that “us” refers to “Jews and Gentiles alike” but EVEN IF we decide to play along and say that Paul was in fact speaking about a long lost epistle in chapter 3, chapter 1 still clashes with Total Depravity. Let’s start at the top:
“he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” — Ephesians 1:4
He doesn’t say “He chose us before the foundation”, it adds “in Him”. The Greek “exelexato” here means “he picked us out,” and it’s tied to “in him”—Christ. Perhaps a more straightforward translation can help us here:
“before the foundation of the world, He picked us out of those who are in Christ”
Calvinism’s Unconditional Election claims God’s choice is arbitrary (not based on human action). But “in him” implies a condition: being in Christ. The predestination here is of a plan (uniting all things in Christ, per Ephesians 1:10) rather than individual destinies. God didn’t preselect who would be saved but how salvation would work: through Christ, for all who join Him; Jews and Gentiles alike.
Thus, this isn’t a roll call of individual names etched in eternity; it’s a collective choice rooted in Christ’s body, the church—Jews and Gentiles as one unit, chosen and set apart for God’s purpose.
Also, according to Calvinism, it’s God who chooses and brings us to Christ, not the other way around. So in order to be accurate from a Calvinist perspective, the verse wouldn’t say that God chose us in Christ because that would be putting the cart before the horse.
Verse 12 continues the theme
“so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory” — Ephesians 1:12
If we are unable to choose God, this verse would simply say, “so that we who were the first to believe in Christ”. Instead, we have this phrase “the first to HOPE in Christ”. The Greek proelpizō, “to hope before confirmation” implies active trust, not passive selection. Also, if it’s not us who are even capable of hoping on our own, and God’s leadings are irresistible, wouldn’t “certainty”, or “knowledge” be more appropriate?
Simply put: hope can only be experienced by those who don’t know the future (“Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees?” -Romans 8:24). If we need God to “irresistibly woo us” into having hope, then it’s no longer hope, because God knows the future.
Finally:
“In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” — Ephesians 1:13
The sequence is deliberate: hear, believe, then sealed. However, Calvinism gives a different sequence: we’re sealed before the foundations of the world, then we’re irresistibly woo’d to hear and belief is inevitable after that. It’s in the wrong order for the Calvinist. Also, if grace is irresistible, why list “heard” and “believed” as steps? Calvinism demands God gifts us both—without any human role. But this reads like a response, not a decree.
So even if Paul had this really weird way of writing where he references a long-lost epistle out of nowhere, the actual chapter itself references free will and goes against most of TULIP.
Conclusion
After using the full context and meaning of the words, I think it’s obvious why this chapter never tripped up the early church fathers. They would have read the entire book (not split into chapters or verses) and they would have had a translation that would have matched their native tongue and made it more obvious that Paul was always pairing God’s salvation with man’s free-will response.
Paul is a Jew, excitedly telling a church full of Gentiles that they aren’t excluded from the promises of God. In fact, Jews and Gentiles were both predestined to be a part of it, and wanna know a secret that even angels and demons didn’t know about? God and Christ have been planning this since before the foundations of the world were built!
Standing alone, Chapter 1 still gives us plenty of content to affirm free will, but by combining Chapter 3 as a reference, it becomes incredibly convincing that Paul was referring to the secret plan to include everyone. Gentiles are now “fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel”, and that plan has been hidden from even the angels and predestined since “before the foundations of the world”.
