EPHESIANS - Chapter 2:1-10

Chapter 2:1-10: Salvation by God’s Grace.

This chapter can be divided between verses 1‑10, which speak of the method of our salvation; and verses 11‑22, which speak of reconciliation (first, that of the Gentiles and the Jews brought together in Christ vv. 11‑15, second, both reconciled unto God vv. 16‑22). Both argue from what has already been said in chapter one about the power of Christ in us as our resurrected Lord.

And you has He quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins. If one is going to speak about the grace of God, as Paul does in this section, one cannot ignore the effects of the Fall upon mankind. All men born into the world are dead in trespasses and sins (cf. Col. 2:13). This deadness (the term nekrous is used figuratively not literally - they are children of disobedience!) is total in regards to spirituality. The day Adam disobeyed God was the day God said he would die, and he did; not physically, but spiritually; that is, he was alienated from the life of God. His spirit was separated from its Creator, and his heart and mind were corrupted by sin. “There being nothing of that spiritual life in them [mankind after the fall] which consisteth of the union of the soul with God.” (J. Fergusson, The Epistles of Paul, 144). This is the doctrine known as Total Depravity.¹ It is vital that men understand their plight with God. They are utterly unable to do anything ‘spiritual’ without the Holy Spirit. And since “God is a Spirit” (Jn. 4:24) all an unsaved man’s religion and good works are as filthy rags in His sight (Isa. 64:6). From this spiritually dead condition has He quickened us. This means that Christ has infused His life (by the Spirit) into His redeemed ones.

Ezekiel’s Temple: Premillennial Achilles’ Heel?

This is the outline I used for a presentation at a Conference in 2005.

Let me begin this short study with a quotation from two former DTS graduates who have since abandoned and then rounded on dispensationalism:

The passage most commonly mentioned that presents great difficulty to dispensational literalism is Ezekiel’s temple vision (Ezekiel 40-48). The dispensationalists are looking for a reinstitution of bloody animal sacrifices in a millennial temple built in accordance with the description found in this passage. Dispensationalists are careful to qualify that these sacrifices are merely memorials of Christ’s death and will be the millennial equivalent of the Lord’s Supper. The problem with this is that Ezekiel’s vision refers to these sacrifices literally making atonement (Ezekiel 45:15, 17, 20; Hebrew: “kaphar,” to atone). Of course, a dispensationalist can go to the book of Hebrews to prove that animal sacrifices in the Old Testament never literally atoned for sin (Hebrews 10:4). When the Reformed theologian, however, goes to Hebrews to prove that animal sacrifices were rescinded forever [no memorial sacrifice] by Christ’s once for all offering (Hebrews 10:10-18), then that is “theological interpretation” and “reading the New Testament back into the Old Testament” – two practices which dispensationalists routinely criticize. – Curtis I. Crenshaw & Grover E. Gunn, III, Dispensationalism Today, Yesterday and Tomorrow, (Memphis: Footstool Publications, 1989), 221. Emphasis added.

This is a representative criticism of dispensational writers from people who now find themselves on the other side of the theological fence.

Progressive Dispensationalism and Normative Dispensationalism

Those in the progressive dispensationalist camp are comfortable with disposing of grammatical-historical hermeneutics, whereas normative dispensationalists align themselves closely with it. The fact that Darrell Bock could write a Forward commending William Webb’s controversial X-Y-Z approach shows that they are both influenced by modern hermeneutical theorizing. Bock himself emphasizes the supposed problem with saying that Scripture may be read in a consistently literal manner[1]; Schleiermacher’s warning about imposing a rigid set of rules upon the text before we actually read it[2]; the importance of “preunderstanding”[3]; and sensitivity to literary genres.[4] This is why he, along with his fellow Progressive Dispensationalists, has bid adieu to consistent grammatical-historical interpretation (G-H) and has adopted a “complementary hermeneutic” wherein the passage being read is helped by the rest of the Biblical Canon. The hermeneutical tool chosen to ground this approach is an adaptation of the “already-not yet” hermeneutic.

EPHESIANS -Chapter 1:15-23

Chapter 1:15-23. Paul’s Prayer

Verse 15 is supposed to be proof that Paul did not write this letter to the Ephesians. But as Paul had been away from Ephesus for a number of years, it is not unusual that he writes of having heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints.

Faith in Jesus as Lord produces love between Christians. The fruit that God most desires to see His adopted children bearing is love (cf. v. 4; 1 Jn. 4:7, 8). From the subjective angle, the sign that a person is under the Lordship of Christ is the love they have for the saints. The news of the Ephesians’ love, not only among themselves, but unto all the saints, encouraged the apostle to give thanks (v. 16), and to pray for them. We might ask ourselves, how often do we thank God for faithful saints, and intercede for them?

The content of this prayer is most instructive.

EPHESIANS - Chapter 1:1-14

Chapter 1:1-2: Salutation.

The apostle Paul, now a prisoner in Rome, addresses the assembly of Christians at Ephesus, whom he had last seen about six years previously.¹ In the opening verse, he states his apostleship as being by the will (thelema) of God. No one could take to himself the title and authority of an apostle of Jesus Christ without the special call unique to an apostle. This calling included sign-gifts (2 Cor. 12:12) and witnessing the resurrected Lord (cf. Acts 1:22; 1 Cor. 9:1). In 2:20, the apostles and New Testament prophets are called the foundation upon which the household of God rests.

In some of his epistles (e.g. Phil.; 1 & 2 Thess.), Paul does not feel the need to state his apostleship at the head of the letter. Here however, where deep teaching about the plan and purpose of God for the Church is being put across, he perhaps saw a need to stamp it with apostolic authority from the start.

Paul writes to, the saints (hagiois - separated [holy] ones), and to the faithful in Christ Jesus. Ephesians is written to all Christians; those at Ephesus, but also, we think, to churches around that city² and, because of its universal character (see esp. 3:15), to all God’s people.

Grace be to you, and peace…(v. 2). Both the words, grace and peace, are important words within this letter.³ The reason we can know peace is because of God’s grace (cf. Rom. 5:1-2).

In the ancient world, letters usually began with a short salutation, not unlike the ones that Paul uses for his epistles. The author’s name and that of the addressee, and a short greeting was the usual way for letters to begin (e.g. Acts 15:23ff, 23:26). However, Paul makes of this characteristic greeting an address from God, the Bestower of a Christian’s blessings.

OBSERVATIONS ON EPHESIANS

INTRODUCTION TO EPHESIANS

Ephesus

The great city of Ephesus lay on the main route between the eastern and western halves of the Roman Empire, and was one of the major cities of the ancient world. By Paul’s time, it had become the capital city of the province of Asia (in modern Turkey). Ephesus was renowned as a “political, commercial, and religious center.” We are also told that “it boasted a 25,000 seat theatre, a race course, and the temple of Diana…one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.” (R. Gromacki, New Testament Survey, 242).

The city’s prosperity was due not only to its being one of the great ports of the Mediterranean, but also to its status as the center of the cult of Artemis (known as “Diana” to the Romans). The goddess Diana was regarded “as queen over both the heavenly powers, including the potent zodiacal powers, and the gods of the underworld.” (M. Turner, New Bible Comm. 21st Century ed. 1228). Local artisans crafted statuettes of the image of Diana in the temple, and these were thought to have magical powers. Diana was believed to have a “magical influence in the unseen world [which] encouraged astrology and sorcery.” (D. E. Hiebert, An Introduction to the New Testament 2.255) It was because of the threat that Christianity posed to this religion that the city was in uproar at Paul’s preaching in Acts 19:23-41.

Faith and Reason in Christian Perspective - Pt. 2

A Case Study: Harold Netland and the Demand for Neutrality

 

As we further consider whether reason should be categorized separately to faith as properly functioning independent of it, I cite the example of an article by Harold Netland entitled, “Apologetics, Worldviews, and the Problem of Neutral Criteria.”[1] In Netland’s 1991 article we see an able but, I believe, misguided critique of presuppositionalist John M. Frame’s epistemology as set forth in his book The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. The overall burden of Netland’s complaint is clear, there must be some mutually shared neutral criteria that all people, whether Theist, Atheist, Hindu, Buddhist, Humanist, or whatever, can use to judge each other’s positions.[2] It is the possibility of this neutral ground that Frame, in common with other biblical presuppositionalists (including the present writer) denies.

The Divine Logos - Pt. 3

D. Jesus as the Word

Even though the teaching of the “Word” or “Logos” appears prominently and explicitly in the prologue to John’s Gospel, the theme runs through the whole of the Gospel.[1]

John stresses the words of Jesus as having special significance as words:

Rhemata is used nine times for His words (5:47; 6:63, 68; 8:20;10:21; 12:47, 48; 14:10; 15:7), and three times for the words of God spoken by Jesus (3:34; 8:47; 17:8).

John employs logos three times in the plural for Jesus words (7:40; 10:19; 14:24).

But it is used eighteen times in the singular (2;22; 4:41, 50; 5:24; 6:60; 7:36; 8:31, 37, 43, 51,52; 12:48; 14:23; 15:3, 20; 18:9, 32). Six times for God’s word and twice for the word of God which Jesus speaks (14:24; 17:14).

According to Gundry[2], John goes out of his way to “multiply references to Jesus” words qua words”, using more than twice as many of these terms as all the synoptics put together (nearly three times if one considers that many of the synoptic instances are repetitions). To these words one should also consider the usage of entole in 14:15, 21; 15:10, 12 with the use of logos as a synonym in 8:51, 52; 14:23, 24; 15:20; 17:6.

 

Then also we should look at martureo and maturia which occur sixteen times for the witness of Jesus (3:11, 32, 33; 4:44; 5:31; 7:7; 8:13, 14, 18; 13:21; 18:37. See also Rev. 19:13 and Rev. 1:2, 9; 20:4). Again John “calls attention to the voice (phone) of Jesus 9 times” (3:29; 5:25, 28; 10:3, 4, 16, 27; 11:43; 18:37). John records Jesus as saying “Amen, Amen” twenty-five times before important assertions. Fifty out of the sixty-one occurrences of laleo; lalo; and lalia (speak) have to do with Jesus speaking, compared with only nine occurrences in the synoptics (see esp. 8:43).

 

John refers to believing Jesus’ word or words (2:22; 4:50; 5:47; cf. 3:12; 10:25; 12:38), and abiding in His word (or it abiding in us) in 5:38 and 15:7. In 8:51, 52; 14:15, 21, 23, 24; 15:10, 20 John refers to keeping Jesus’ commands, word or words in a way not duplicated in the synoptics. Finally, (in this study) see 4:26 (cf. 4:10) and Jesus’ emphasis upon Jesus own words.

The Divine Logos - Pt. 2

 

C. The Roles of the Logos
Although the wording is brilliantly simple, an examination of the Prologue furnishes for us a great deal of help concerning what might be called the “roles” of the Logos. To begin with, the prologue places in front of us these facts:

 

Ÿ The Logos is a Person (1:3, 4, 14).

Ÿ There are three relations of Christ the Logos recorded in these opening verses. First, there is His relation with the Father “In the beginning” (1:1-2). Second is His relation to the world (1:3, 10). The third relationship of the Logos is that which He bears to humankind (1:11-14).

Ÿ The Logos was active with (Gk. pros) God (the Father). Ridderbos says that this designation “is intended as an indication not only of place but also of disposition and orientation.”^[1] Thus, in all respects the Eternal Logos was and is to be identified with God (1:1-2), though not the Father but the Son (1:18).

Ÿ This means that God, in the Person of the revealing incarnate Son (1:14, 18), is the Subject of John’s Gospel.

 

In addition to the above, three readily identifiable roles can be located within the Prologue. They center upon the great schemes of creation, revelation, and redemption.

 

Creation^[2]

The link with creation is established right off with the very first words of John’s Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word” The Apostle is taking the reader back to the creation account in Genesis 1:1ff., and showing that the Logos was directly involved in the creative process. To those who assert that John’s stress is not upon creation as such, but upon the pre-existence of the Logos prior to the creation, we do not think we are forced into a choice between the two. The Genesis narrative implies a creatio ex nihilo doctrine which would necessitate a complimentary doctrine of Divine pre-existence and perlocutory action. John is telling us that the Logos is this same creative God (1:1-2). Then in the third verse comes a clear statement about the creative role of the Logos: “All things were created by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.” (1:3). The Logos is a Person (N.B., “by Him…without Him”), not an organizing principle or a personified divine utterance. He is the cause of the ontological status of everything, and nothing which came into existence in the creative week owes its being to anything else.[3]

The Divine Logos - Pt. 1

It may sound somewhat unseemly for any theologian to refer to the Lord Jesus Christ as “the Logos of God,” but to conceive of Him (momentarily) in this abstract way opens up new lines of inquiry that are harder to see under His personal name. And, after all, the Apostle John was the first to do it.

If one comes to the term “Logos” with the mindset of the ancient Greek philosophers, the best thing that could be extracted from the prologue to John’s Gospel would be a personification but not a Person. But clearly John is not content with a personification. He has something extremely profound in mind; something that I believe provides a helpful fillip for a fully Christo-doxological motif.

Before we can expound a motif we must clear away the mound of misunderstandings that has been built up over the meaning of John’s Logos.

A. Meaning of the Term

The basic meaning of the word logo“ in Greek may be summarized as, “the expression of thought - not the mere name of an object - (a) as embodying a conception or idea, (b) a saying or statement, (c) discourse, speech, of instruction etc.”^[i] Thus, the idea of rationality, of a reasoned message of some sort, is central to the term.^[ii] Yet, at first glance it seems far from clear why the Apostle chose this designation.

It is clear that the concept of the Divine Logos that one encounters in the opening verses of John’s Gospel is of great importance to his doctrine of Christ. The main verses are given below:

 

In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word [Logos] was with God, and the Word [Logos] was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were created by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not. (John 1:1-5)

 

He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. (John 1:10).

 

And the Word [Logos] was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld Him… (John 1:14a).

 

No man hath seen God [the Father] at any time; the only begotten Son,[iii] which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. (John 1:18).

 

 

We have isolated these verses, not because the other verses in the Prologue (vv. 1-1 are unimportant, but solely for the purpose of definition. These are the essential verses for the Logos teaching. We see a connection between the Word and God, the created order, and man.[iv] Clearly, in these passages John is very deliberately linking the Logos who became Christ in the flesh with the Creator God. We know that the Christ was named “Jesus” at the time of His birth (Lk. 2:21). But John is reaching far back before the creation to the relationship of the Logos/Son with God the Father from everlasting (Jn. 1:1-2, 18; cf. 17:5). Therefore, John is facing us with the implication that He who was to be known as Jesus of Nazareth in “the days of His flesh,” is the eternal Logos or Word of God. It is made clear that three great pillars of the Christian world and life view, Creation (1:1, 3), Revelation (1:4, 9, 14, 17-18), and Redemption (1:12-13), are bound to His Person. But we must turn to the question of ancient parallels before exploring these things further.