We assume that the apostles and
prophets were envisaged as foundations by virtue of their specific activity,
which consisted of revealing the message entrusted to them. They were regarded
as a foundation on the basis of what they had to say and said, rather than for
their personal attributes.
The prophets mentioned in 2:20
could be the O.T. prophets. In support of this assumption. . . . However, in
3:5 and 4:11, there is renewed talk of prophets. In these places, they are
again mentioned in one breath with the apostles. It is evident that the author
quite definitely has the prophets of the New Testament era in mind here. An
obvious deduction must be that these same prophets should be borne in mind in
connection with 2:20 since it would be fairly inexplicable if there were no
correspondence within such as short span as from 2:20 to 3:5.
Therefore, taking for granted that
both pronouncements pertain to the same source of reference, we are able to
define the message which has been entrusted to the apostles and prophets which
give them the function of a foundation, in greater detail. The content of the message
is intimately related to the mystery mentioned in 3:5. (A. Van Roon, The
Authenticity of Ephesians [Supplements to Novum Testamentum 39; Leiden:
Brill, 1974], 356-57)
