Chapter 4
4:1- Chapter 4 begins the second half of the letter and is the conclusion to all that Paul has mentioned up to this point. In light of all the theological richness Paul has expounded on in the first three chapters, he goes on to instruct, expound on, and exhort believers in how they ought to live; their response to the objective truths Paul has laid out. John Stott comments, “So he turns from exposition to exhortation, from what God has done (in the indicative) to what we must do (in the imperative), from doctrine to duty." In other words, now that God has raised us from death to life and created the church in which both Jews and Gentiles are part of one body, there are standards that are expected of the Church. As Francis Foulkes puts it, Paul has been making known the purpose of God for His Church, praying that they may know the wonder of His plan and everything that entails, but in the second half of the letter “he is going to write about the quality and kind of life that is demanded of them individually and in the fellowship of Christ’s Church.” He again asserts that he is “the prisoner of the Lord” (cf. 3:1), putting further emphasis on the already emphatic word, parakaleō. The NASB translates this as “implore,” NKJV as “beseech,” and the NLT (perhaps capturing the most dramatic aspect of the word in this context) as “beg.” As one who is a prisoner of the Lord, Paul is pleading with his readers that they live a certain way that is pleasing to God. The same word with similar fervor is used in 2 Cor 5:20 when Paul says: “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” (NASB).
Paul’s desire for his readers is not arbitrary, but his concern can be summed up with what we see in Col. 1:28 “...admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ.”
We are now to “walk” (an idiom for the way in which we conduct our lives–see comments on 2:2; 2:10) in a manner worthy of our calling. We are to be a holy people, different from the pagan world around us and consecrated unto God, like the nation of Israel was to be in relation to the pagan nations around it. The “calling” to which we’ve been called is not a reference to any type of vocation or even in the context of ministry work, but is rather the general call of believers to be children of God, to bring Him glory and to serve Him as a unified body. Ben Witherington III notes that with this calling comes “an exhortation to forsake the past ways and take on new ways.”
4:2-3- This calling involves not only “walking in” good works as in 2:10, but walking in godly and righteous character. Jesus didn’t rebuke the Pharisees for their good works like tithing and giving to the poor, He rebuked them for doing those things with a prideful and wicked heart (Matt. 6:1-6, 23:27-28). Similarly, in 1 Cor. 13:3, Paul speaks of the futility of doing good works (selling all to feed the poor) without love. Our calling involves our character; humility, gentleness, patience, bearing with each other’s faults in love, etc. Referencing the Greek lexicon BDAG, Constantine Campbell lays out the definition of these qualities by writing, “Each of these descriptions involve an element of self-denial and self-restraint: humility involves considering others ahead of ourselves; gentleness is a disposition that resists self-importance and proffers courtesy toward others; patience resists immediate self-gratification and provocation; and bearing with one another in love involves care for the interests of others even if they may bother or upset us.”
Campbell goes on to point out that these virtues “are all ultimately relational characteristics, determining how we will treat others.” This is all necessary to “preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” as verse 3 states. It is the Spirit of God that has united a people into one body (both Jews and Gentiles–2:13-19). It is our responsibility to foster and maintain this unity through the aforementioned virtues, with those attributes flowing from love (cf. Col. 3:12-14). Unity among believers is a common theme pressed by Paul. We see this in Rom. 14-15 and especially in a letter like 1 Corinthianswhere Paul was addressing quite a few issues with unity and immorality in general.
4:4-5- Some see these verses as a very early creed due to their confessional structure, though the use of “you” in verse 4 would seem to suggest otherwise (one would expect “I” or “we” if it were a confession). Nevertheless, these verses are very important and ought to shape how we view the Godhead and our faith. One body and one Spirit- This refers to the unified church body composed of both Jews and Gentiles, indwelt by the same Spirit. Paul writes in 1 Cor. 12:12-13, “For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”
One hope- That is, believers who at one time had no hope (2:12) have a glorious hope in Christ Jesus (see ch. 1 for the glorious hope we have, cf. Col. 1:27). Albert Barnes writes that “Christians have the same hope, and they should therefore be one. They are looking forward to the same heaven; they hope for the same happiness beyond the grave. It is not as on earth among the people of the world, where, there is a variety of hopes - where one hopes for pleasure, and another for honor, and another for gain; but there is the prospect of the same inexhaustible joy.” This is an objective hope. In other words, one might not “feel” like there’s hope in such a fallen world (feelings of hope or hopelessness are subjective to any individual). What Paul means here is that there is an objective truth that will come to pass whether any individual believer realizes it or not (see also, Rom. 8:28-30, 2 Cor. 4:17-18). For the atheist, there is no hope of eternal life lived in the presence of all that is good and righteous (dwelling with God). For the believer, this is our common hope!
Verse 5 continues:
One Lord- That is, Christ Jesus (see 1:2-3, 3:11, cf 1 Cor. 8:6). It is extremely significant that Paul not only calls Jesus “Lord,” (as he commonly does), but goes further to affirm there is only one Lord. With God the Father yet to come in verse 6, here in verse 5 Paul says there is one Lord. One of the central messages of the Old Testament and a common phrase uttered by Jews is in Deut. 6:4, “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!” Knowing the importance of this, we read Thomas exclaim to Jesus in John 20:28, “My Lord and my God!” and in passages like Rom. 10:9, we see that to be saved, one must profess Jesus Christ as Lord. What we consistently see is the NT writers identifying Jesus Christ with the God of Israel. In 1 Cor. 8:6, Paul similarly writes, “yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.” As Campbell (among others) point out here in Eph. 4, “the Spirit (4:3), the Lord Christ (4:5), and God the Father (4:6) are each included in Paul’s oneness list, demonstrating the unifying power of each person of the Godhead.”
One faith- This refers to an objective set of beliefs. Similar to how believers share in the objective hope that comes with the gospel (4:4) there is an objective faith; “the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” as Jude 3 states (see also 1 Tim. 4:1, Gal. 1:23). One cannot experience the objective reality of the hope to come without the objective faith. This is grounded in God’s truth. Barnes writes, “They hold the same system as distinguished from Judaism, Paganism, Mohammedanism, Deism; and they should, therefore, be one. They have the same trust in Christ, as a living, practical principle - and they should, therefore, be one. They may differ in other attachments; in temperament; in pursuit; in professions in life - but they have a common faith - and they should be one.”
One baptism- As there is one Lord and one faith, there is also one baptism (referring in this case to water baptism). Paul is not referring to there being only one “mode” of baptism here (immersion vs. pouring or sprinkling), but rather “the thing itself” (Barnes). Paul says in Gal. 3:27-28, “For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This is the meaning here. Charles Hodge therefore writes, “All the baptized make the same profession, accept the same covenant, and are consecrated to the same Lord and Redeemer. They are, therefore, one body.”
4:6- Paul sums up that there is “one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.” It is absolutely true that everything owes its existence to the God who created all things (John 1:3). The simple fact is, even those who are dead in sin and serve the devil (2:1-3) owe not only their existence but their ongoing existence to God. Col. 1:17 says, “He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.”
Very simply put, the universe continues to exist day after day. The laws of physics continue to impose their will upon matter today just as it did yesterday, all because God not only created it to be so, but actively sustains it to be so. And as Paul says in Acts 17:28, “for in Him we live and move and exist.” He also states in Acts 14:16-17 that despite people forsaking God, God’s graciousness can still be seen “in that He did good and you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness.” Without God’s sustainment of the universe, even those who refuse to acknowledge or worship him would cease to exist.Additionally, God’s omnipresence can be seen in Psa. 139:7-12 and in Jer. 23:24, “Can a man hide himself in hiding places so I do not see him?” declares the Lord. “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” declares the Lord.” Context, however, is key to this specific verse here in Ephesians. What Paul surely has in mind here by the phrase “and in all” is more specifically God’s relation to the church as their Father (as has been the theme of this entire epistle and is the most immediate context). Charles Hodge writes, “It is the relation of God to the church of which the whole passage treats. God as Father is over all its members, through them all and in them all. The church is a habitation of God through the Spirit. It is his temple in which he dwells and which is pervaded in all its parts by his presence.” John Calvin also provides good insight when he states: “Paul is now illustrating the mutual relation of believers, which has nothing in common either with wicked men or with inferior animals. To this relation we must limit what is said about God’s government and presence. It is for this reason, also, that the apostle uses the word Father, which applies only to the members of Christ.”
John 1:12 says, “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God.” It is only those who are in Christ and who have God’s Spirit dwelling in them that can lay claim to God as their Father. Compare, for example, Rom. 8:15b-16, “...but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God.” This is the context in which Paul uses the term in Ephesians in regards to believers (1:2, 17; 2:18-19). Therefore, Stott sums up these last few verses by stating, “We must assert that there can be only one Christian family, only one Christian faith, hope and baptism, and only one Christian body, because there is only one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”
4:7-8- After drilling home the truth that we are all “one body” in Christ, Paul goes on to mention the individuality within the one body. That is, as we see in 1 Cor. 12, there are many parts that make up the one body. To this end, each member has a role to play in how the body operates and functions. Christ, says Paul, is the giver of these gifts to edify the church (4:11-12). Verse 8 has Paul referencing Psa. 68:18 (and altering the wording) to illustrate his point. This may seem odd, but Paul does something similar in Rom. 1:17 when he refers to Hab. 2:4 and again in Rom. 10:6-8 when referencing Deut. 30:12-14. As Frank Theilman points out, "Although in each instance Paul has introduced dramatic changes to the text that he cites, a reasonable case can be made that his overall argument is consistent with the overall argument of the passage out of which his citation comes.” In other words, his application is consistent with the broader context of the passage he’s pulling from. As odd as this seems to modern conventions when quoting sources, this type of thing was conventional in Paul’s day and was common in a Midrash (interpretive commentary on Jewish Scripture).
How exactly is this psalm relevant to Paul’s point here in this chapter and the broader narrative of Ephesians? The immediate context of Psalm 68:18, as Campbell points out, “depicts the Lord ascending to the heights of Mount Bashan, taking away defeated enemies as his captives and receiving gifts from people, likely as tribute in response to his victory (68:18). The psalm concludes with the God of Israel giving power and strength to his people (68:35).” What’s remarkable is that Paul is taking a text that explicitly refers to the victory of God (Yahweh) and applying it to Christ.
Theilman writes that “Paul apparently found in Christ’s distribution of various gifts to his people for the unity and maturity of the church the fulfillment of the eschatology that he saw in Ps. 68. He also seems to have believed that this eschatology was consistent with the eschatology that he had developed elsewhere in Ephesians of God’s triumph in Christ over the inimical cosmic powers of the universe (1:20-23; 2:1-7) and the restoration of humanity to its condition prior to its alienation from God (2:15; 3:9; 4:13, 24).” Paul’s “quote” of Psa. 68:18 is therefore a summation of the main thrust of the psalm, but cleverly reworded and applied to Christ.
4:9-10- These two verses are further explanation and commentary by Paul of the psalm referenced in verse 8. Essentially, Paul is affirming Jesus’ incarnation. He “descended” down to earth from on high (Phil. 2:6-11). He also ascended into heaven after His resurrection to be seated at the right hand of the Father (1:20-22; cf. Acts 7:55–56, Rom. 8:34). Paul is pointing out that if “He ascended on high” as the psalm says, this means He had to have previously descended “to the lower regions, namely, the earth” as the NET translates (see also the NLT- “This clearly means that Christ also descended to our lowly world” and the ESV- “he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth”).
Paul then states in verse 10 that Christ, the one who humbled Himself by descending down to earth from transcendent glory with the Father to take on human nature and die a gruesome death has now ascended and has been exalted “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come” as Paul says in 1:21 (again, compare to Phil. 2:6-11).
4:11- The “gifts to men” in verse 8 is now being addressed by Paul, explaining that for the building up of the church, Christ gave some to be apostles (like the Twelve and Paul), some to be prophets and so on. Unlike 1 Cor. 12:4-11 that speaks of the Holy Spirit giving gifts to individuals, the context of gifts here in Ephesians 4 doesn’t refer to abilities given to people, but rather certain types of people that have been given as gifts to the church. These gifts are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Interestingly, the first three (apostles, prophets, evangelists) seem to be roles that go beyond sustaining the local church. That is, they lay the very foundation of the church by delivering “the Faith,” and make converts (grow the church). The last two (pastors/teachers) are localized roles whose job it is to nurture and help the established church grow in the knowledge of God, sanctification and devotion to Christ.
Apostles- The context here refers to “the Twelve” with the addition of a few others (Paul, James, the brother of Jesus, perhaps Barnabas). These are those who saw the risen Christ and commissioned by Christ to lay the foundation of the church (see comments on 2:20, 3:4-6). Stott makes the distinction between “apostles of the church” and “apostles of Christ.” The former being “messengers sent out by a church either as missionaries or some other errand” (2 Cor. 8:23, Phil. 2:25). The latter were “a very small and distinctive group, consisting of the Twelve (including Matthias who replaced Judas), Paul, James the Lord’s brother, and possibly one or two others. They were personally chosen and authorized by Jesus, and had to be eyewitnesses of the risen Lord” (Acts 1:21-22, 10:40-41, 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8-9). It is the latter category that Paul refers to in this context. The qualifications for an ‘apostle of Christ’ as laid out in the aforementioned verses means that by definition there can be no more apostles today (contrary to what some would teach). Stott adds that the authority of the apostles “is preserved today in the New Testament.”
Charles Hodge likewise states that no man, therefore, could be an apostle unless he was immediately appointed by Christ, had seen him after his resurrection, and had the gift of infallible inspiration (resulting in the NT canon). Hodge remarks that those who “without these gifts and qualifications claimed the office are called ‘false apostles’.”
Campbell shares similar thoughts, noting the uniqueness of their role in establishing the church and are therefore not replaceable. Campbell states: “The authorized apostles are gifts to the body of Christ since they represent the teaching of Christ by the Spirit, they serve as witnesses to the historical Jesus–his life, teaching, miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension–and they form the basis for the authentic church of Christ.”
Additionally, A.R. Fausset lays out the qualifications and uniqueness of the apostles as he articulates, “Their marks were a call from Christ Himself (Galatians 1:1): the working of miracles (2 Corinthians 12:12); the superintendence of the churches in all lands (Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 11:28); chiefly the eye-witnessing of Christ's resurrection (Acts 1:22; 1 Corinthians 9:1).”
Prophets- Adjacent to the role of apostle are prophets. Along with the apostles, prophets are seen as a gift given by Christ to help lay the foundation of the church and make known the mysteries of Christ (2:20, 3:4-6). Though subordinate to apostolic authority, their frequent grouping as second after the apostles makes their office one of the more important in the development of the early church (it is impossible for evangelists and teachers to do their work without the revelation of proper doctrine). As with the apostles, these NT prophets who played a role in laying the foundation of the church have no successors. Foulkes writes, “Their work, receiving and declaring the word of God under direct inspiration of the Spirit, was most vital before there was a Canon of New Testament Scripture.” Foulkes goes on to remark that by the second century, “the apostolic writings were coming to be read widely and accepted as authoritative, and this tended to replace the authority of the prophets.”
Evangelists- These are those who boldly proclaim the gospel to the lost. They make converts and grow the church. Missionaries are the shining example of this. A great picture of the heart of an evangelist can be seen in Rom. 15:20 (and specifically the NLT rendering) when Paul says, “My ambition has always been to preach the Good News where the name of Christ has never been heard, rather than where a church has already been started by someone else” (NLT). Perhaps the verse that comes to mind the most when we think of an evangelist is Rom. 10:15, “And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” (NIV).
Pastors and Teachers- These two roles are grouped together as a single category which indicates some overlap. However, as the translation note in the NET Bible states, “because the nouns are plural, it is extremely unlikely that they refer to the same group, but only that the author is linking them closely together. It is better to regard the pastors as a subset of teachers. In other words, all pastors are teachers, but not all teachers are pastors.”
“Pastor” literally means “shepherd.” A shepherd's job was to watch over a flock of sheep; to lead, protect and feed them. This metaphor is used to describe God’s care for His people (Psa. 23, Isa. 40:11, Zech. 10:8-9). Campbell writes, “Indeed, it is the preeminent biblical image for those who lead God’s people, and it is profoundly instructive for how such leadership is to be manifested.” That is, as someone who leads God’s people, a shepherd spiritually nourishes, guides and protects them. Jesus identifies Himself as the ultimate good shepherd who lays His life down for His flock (John 10:11-16) and in 1 Peter 5:1-4, Peter exhorts the elders to “shepherd the flock of God” in a worthy manner so that when the “Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” Paul, likewise exhorted the elders from the church in Ephesus in Acts 20:28, “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.” The responsibility of pastors is weighty and certainly not to be taken lightly!
Teachers are crucial for spiritual growth in the body of Christ and to protect against false doctrine that would distort God and the gospel (Gal. 1:6-9, Rom. 16:17-18, 2 Tim. 2:16-18, 2 Peter 2:1, Jude 3-4). They are those who “are gifted to explain, extrapolate, and clarify the Scriptures, and the things of God and Christ” (Campbell). Timothy is a prime example of someone who apparently was a gifted teacher (1 Tim. 4:13-16). We even see the importance of teachers in passages like Acts 18:24-28 where Priscilla and Aquila instructed (or taught) Apollos the way of Christ more accurately. Therefore, Apollos “greatly helped those who had believed through grace, for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.” -Acts 18:27b-28. An evangelist is concerned with reaching the lost and making converts, the pastor/teacher is concerned with discipling those converts! Both are vital roles for the building and sustaining of the church.
Excursus: Prophets and Prophecy in the New Testament
I must make a distinction in regards to this topic. This commentary does not speak on the matter pertaining to certain prophetic gifts and whether or not they still continue on in the church today (Rom. 12:6). Rather, it speaks to the authoritative role/office of “prophet” closely connected to the apostles as the ones bringing new revelation from God pertaining to the gospel (what is now enshrined for us in the New Testament). The context in which Paul refers to “prophets” in Ephesians demands this distinction. It is in this context in which the role of a prophet, like the apostle, has ceased.
In the nation of Israel as a theocracy (Old Testament), the penalty for someone who prophesies/speaks for God falsely is death (Deut. 18:20, cf. Deut. 13:1-5). Wayne Grudem says of the OT prophets, “They could say ‘Thus says the Lord,’ and the words that followed were the very words of God. The Old Testament prophets wrote their words as God’s words in Scripture for all time (see Num. 22:38; Deut. 18:18-20; Jer. 1:9; Ezek. 2:7, et al). Therefore, to disbelieve or disobey a prophet’s words was to disbelieve or disobey God (see Deut. 18:19; 1 Sam. 8:7; 1 Kings 20:36 and many other passages).” Grudem points out that in the NT, the people who spoke and wrote God’s very words as Scripture were no longer called prophets, but apostles and were the counterpart to the OT prophets (see 1 Cor. 2:13; Gal. 1:8-9, 11-2; 1 Thess. 2:13, 4:8, 4:15; 2 Peter 3:2). Towards the end of the apostle’s lives, the directive given to the church was to point to the Scriptures for guidance and direction. Grudem remarks, "In no case do we read exhortations to ‘give heed to the prophets in your churches’ or to ‘obey the words of the Lord through your prophets,’ etc.” Rather, as Grudem shows, we see Paul tell Timothy to be a workman who is “accurately handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15) and in 2 Tim. 3:16, the “thing” that is inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and training in righteousness is Scripture. Additionally, Peter, towards the end of his life exhorts his readers to “pay attention” to Scripture as a light shining in a dark place (2 Peter 1:19-20) and reminds them of Paul’s teaching through his letters and refers to them as Scripture (2 Peter 3:16). Thus, the main authority for guidance in the church is Scripture. Specifically, the teaching of the apostles (Acts 2:42).
Having said that, the specifics of NT prophets as to the details of their ministry is somewhat ambiguous and doesn’t seem to be limited to one thing. Not only that, but there is further ambiguity between someone who holds the office or role of “prophet” (those closely connected with the apostles) versus someone who has the gift of prophecy (like in 1 Cor. 14). In Acts 21:10-11, we see Agabus foretelling what would happen to Paul if he went to Jerusalem. This, of course, is not a mystery being revealed to Agabus that is binding for the whole church as would be the context of the role of a prophet in Eph. 3:4-6. The prophecy was only applicable to Paul and had nothing to do with revealing doctrines of the gospel. We also see Agabus prophecy (foretell) a famine that was to hit the empire in Acts 11:27-28. Certainly, this also had nothing to do with doctrines relating to the gospel (like Gentile inclusion into the Kingdom of God). Surely, this kind of prophecy is different from what is being referred to in Ephesians.
In another sense, we see that after Judas and Silas read the letter from the Jerusalem counsel to the Gentiles at Antioch, Acts 15:32 tells us, “being prophets themselves, encouraged and strengthened the brethren with a lengthy message.” I. Howard Marshall says of Judas and Silas, “They were recognized as men with prophetic gifts and they used these in preaching and teaching in the church.” This is something quite altogether different than what Agabus is said to have done as a prophet and certainly seems to fit the description of one who prophesies in 1 Cor. 14:3, “But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort” (NIV). Still yet, in 1 Cor. 14:24-25 a prophet (or at least many who prophesies) can convict men of sin either by revealing secrets of the heart, or by proclaiming the word of God, i.e. Heb. 4:12 (the text of 1 Corinthians is not explicit in this detail, although the latter might seem to fit) thus bringing them to worship God. Even in this case, it is still unclear what constitutes “prophecy.” Is it simply a matter of proclaiming gospel truths of repentance, Christ as Lord and Savior, and Gentile inclusion? During a time in which the New Testament Canon was still being written by God’s chosen apostles, such insight into the mysteries of God as a gift by the Spirit would be crucial in the local church. Or, was it perhaps a “special knowledge” about the secrets of someone’s heart? Was it all these things? In my studies, it has been difficult to pin down exactly how prophets or people with gifts of prophecy operated in the early church and if my research has shown me anything, it’s that I’m not alone in this. This certainly makes me very hesitant to affirm a lot of what I see defined as "prophecy" today. In my opinion, those in the charismatic church attach a lot of assumptions and theological presuppositions to the word and personal experience also makes me highly skeptical of the authenticity of what constitutes the modern idea of prophecy.
*For a deeper and nuanced look at this topic, see Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, 1994 (ch. 53, p. 1049-1061).
4:12-13- The gifts described in verse 11 are given for the express purpose of equipping all the saints for the work in ministry. This is why the NLT translates this verse, “Their responsibility is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ.” Every believer has spiritual gifts that have been graciously bestowed by God for the service of others (Rom. 12:6-8, 1 Cor. 12:7, 11; 1 Peter 4:10). This is important to understand as believers. We often think of only pastors or missionaries as those who are actively involved in ministry, but as Walter Liefeld notes, “Whatever is done for God and in his name for people is a ministry.” Unity of the church has been a big theme of Ephesians, now in verse 13, Paul pairs unity in the faith; that is, “faith as a body of doctrine, not faith as an act of trust, compare v.5” (Liefeld) with maturity in the knowledge of the Lord.
A unified body growing into a mature adult stands over and against remaining as an underdeveloped “child” (as Paul will point out in the next verse). This, of course is not speaking against child-like faith (coming to Christ with the humility of a child), but growing in sanctification (cf. Heb. 5:11-14). In this context, Paul is speaking corporately and envisions all the members of the body growing together so that the church universal is maturing in the Faith. The standard by which we measure and seek to achieve is none other than Christ (“measuring up to the full and complete standard of Christ.”-NLT)! As we will see in the coming verses and chapters, moral conformity to the nature of Christ is what Paul has in mind here. The phrase seems to imply that the consummation of this goal will be at the second coming. Meaning, until the Lord returns, we will always need ministries to build up the church so that it continues to grow in the knowledge of Christ and the faith that was once for all handed down!
4:14-16- Therefore, we are no longer to be like children inasmuch as they are by nature ignorant, gullible and easily deceived. Paul paints a picture of a rudderless ship being tossed by waves and blown around “by every wind of doctrine.” Instead of being firmly planted and rooted in the doctrines delivered by the apostles and taught by the church for nearly two millennia, William MacDonald candidly refers to immature Christians as "susceptible to the grotesque novelties and fads of professional quacks” and “moving to and fro from one appealing fantasy to another.” This comes about “by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming” or as the NLT translates, by people who “try to trick us with lies so clever they sound like the truth.” It’s striking how applicable this is in the church today. There are a multitude of so-called “teachers” or even online “influencers” who peddle lies and deception; leading people astray and into sin. 2 Peter 2 comes to mind as particularly germane, especially Vv. 18-19, “For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for “people are slaves to whatever has mastered them.”’ -NIV
Verse 15 is often translated “speaking the truth in love” but there is some debate around the Greek word alētheuontes which can carry the meaning of “practicing the truth” as the NET translates it (see translation note on Eph. 4:15 in the NET Bible). Given the context of false teaching mentioned in v. 14, “speaking” may be the appropriate translation (so Campbell). In a time where objective truth is more and more questioned by society, the church ought to boldly proclaim the truth; the truth of God, man’s sinfulness and need for a Savior, the objective moral standards of God, what it means to deny self and follow Christ, etc. However, this should all be done out of love (1 Cor. 13:1-3). Albert Barnes states, “When we state truth to others, it should be with love to their souls, and with a sincere desire to do them good.” There is a tendency in our culture either to shout the truth without love, or to “keep the peace and love” to such an extent that they abandon truth to do so. Both extremes are unbiblical. Stott rightly comments, “Truth becomes hard if it is not softened by love; love becomes soft if it is not strengthened by truth.” Holding truth and love together, Stott adds, should not be difficult for the Spirit-filled believer. After all, “the Holy Spirit is himself ‘the Spirit of truth,’ and his firstfruit is ‘love’.” (John 14:17, 15:26; Gal. 5:22). This allows us to grow in Christlikeness and to conform more and more to our Lord who is the head over the church. Verse 16 continues the body metaphor to describe the church growing and maturing. Each part of the body plays a role in how the body functions. The goal is to continue to advance and grow in love.
4:17-19- Paul starts off this next section of discourse (v.17-24) by reaffirming that his audience, unlike the unbelieving Gentiles, have turned to the true and living God through Christ and now live to serve and obey Christ (cf. 1 Thess. 1:9). These verses give the basis (or reason) for this new way of life and in 4:25-5:4, Paul emphasizes and focuses on the practical side of daily living and behavior. He starts v. 17 by emphasizing that he is writing to them by the authority of the Lord. As Christians, they are to no longer “walk” (that is, the manner in which they conduct their life-see 2:2; 2:10) like pagan Gentiles walk. Stott simply writes, “Their new status as God’s new society involved new standards, and their new life in Christ a new lifestyle.” The pagan society around them (of which they were formally a part of) is still living in the sad state Paul describes in 2:1-3 and 2:11-12. Without worshiping the true God, having a darkened understanding of God, Paul describes their minds as futile. Witherington points out that bad theology and wrong thinking leads to bad practices and that “theologies or schools of thought always have ethical consequences. Here Paul discusses debauchery, impurity, and everything done to excess.”
He continues this description in verses 18-19 which resembles how Paul describes the general state of pagan unbelievers in Rom. 1:18-32. In the Romans passage, they had rejected God for idolatry of all kinds, which results in more sin and debauchery, which results in hardened and calloused hearts, which continues the spiral into more sin, and so on. Also in the Romans passage, God gives them over to a debauched lifestyle as a form of judgement upon them. This is the inevitable result of “being excluded from the life of God.” In the context of this chapter here in Ephesians, this means that their darkened understanding and ignorance of God results in an unrighteousness life as opposed to a life lived with the Holy Spirit that produces a harvest of righteousness (spiritual life).
Hodge, therefore remarks that “the heathen walk in vanity, i.e. in intellectual and moral darkness, because their understanding is darkened, and because they are alienated from the life of God.” That is, as the latter half of verse 19 states, they “have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness.” That is to say, they are described as having an insatiable appetite for every kind of impurity. They are “greedy” for more and more sin. This is why the NLT translates, “They live for lustful pleasure and eagerly practice every kind of impurity.” To quote Campbell, “Not only is every kind of impurity pursued, but they are pursued relentlessly.”
4:20-22- Here is the sharp contrast between the pagans who are without God and live for the sinful desires of the flesh and the Gentile converts who now live to serve Christ. What Paul had just previously described of unbelievers is not how they learned Christ. “Hearing” Jesus and being “taught in Him” implies far more than mere knowledge about Him. The Ephesians “heard” Jesus when the apostles brought the gospel (John 17:8, 1 Thess. 2:13, Heb. 1:2) and they were taught what it means to be a disciple of Christ. This, after all, is the great commission Jesus gave the apostles. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you” -Matt. 28:19-20a. What is meant by “truth that is in Jesus” is explained in the proceeding verses. As Hodge points out, “The principle here involved is that knowledge of God is inconsistent with a life of sin, because knowledge implies love, and God is holy. To know him, therefore, is to love holiness.” And as Stott puts it, “To ‘learn Christ’ is to grasp the new creation which he has made possible, and the entirely new life which results from it. It is nothing less than putting off our old humanity like a rotten garment and putting on like clean clothing the new humanity recreated in God’s image.”
That is, as Paul says clearly in verse 22, what we have been taught by Christ is to abandon our old way of life that was being corrupted with sin and deceitful desires; the “old self.” The desires are said to be deceitful because they promise joy and pleasure, but only result in pain and death. This is the crux of human self-centeredness (see Gal. 5:16-21). It should be noted that part of repentance and coming to Christ as Paul’s readers had done presupposes laying aside the old self and putting on the new. As he says in Col. 3:8-10, “But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator” -NIV. So Stott says, “It is because we have already put off our old nature, in that decisive act of repentance called conversion, that we can logically be commanded to put away all the practices which belong to that old and rejected life.” Stott goes on to add that “they had been taught that becoming a Christian involves a radical change, namely “conversion’ (as the human side of the experience is usually called) and ‘re-creation’ (the divine side). It involves the repudiation of our former self, our fallen humanity, and the assumption of a new self or re-created humanity.”
A good example of this is Zaccheus, who was a chief tax collector and was very rich due to this fraudulent occupation. His encounter with Jesus led him to repentance and to “throw off” the old self that defrauded his fellow countrymen. Luke 19:8, “Zaccheus stopped and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, half of my possessions I will give to the poor, and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will give back four times as much.” This stands in stark contrast to the rich, young ruler in Luke 18 who was sad and unwilling to give up something he valued more than following Christ (the idol of wealth and possessions). This is something that needs special attention in our society today. Too many people, it seems, want nothing more than to keep their sin while professing Christ. Instead of becoming a new creation, throwing off the old self to put on the new, dying to self daily and following Christ, they want to keep their sinful lifestyle while having Jesus at the same time. They are like the young, rich ruler who loved his idol of money and possessions more than Christ. Justifying sin is not following Christ.
4:23-24- starting in verse 23, we have the “positive” side of our sanctification. The old is thrown away (the negative) in order to put on the new (the positive). This starts with being “renewed in the spirit of your mind.” “Spirit” in this context “refers to the individual’s human spirit, that part of him which gives him God-consciousness, that makes him a moral agent” as Kenneth Wuest points out (among others). In other words, it’s the part of our human personality that deals with our spiritual and moral disposition (cf. Rom 12:2). We are to align our thoughts and desires with God’s. Unlike the darkened understanding mentioned in the previous verses, we are to love what God loves, and hate what God hates (Psa. 97:10, Rom. 12:9).
The contrast of the “new self” against the old is continued in verse 24. Unlike the old self that was excluded from God, darkened in understanding, ignorant, hard hearted and impure, (Vv. 17-19), this new self “has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.” This can only be because the new self has been created in the likeness of God (2 Cor. 5:17). To quote Barnes, the new man “has new feelings, principles, and desires. He has laid aside his old principles and practices, and, in everything that pertains to moral character, he is new.”
4:25- Paul now moves to specific examples of things that have ceased with the putting off of the old man and the positive actions that come with the new man. Notice how in these verses, a command to refrain from sin is followed by a positive command (Don’t sin. Rather, do righteousness). He starts with what may be a citation of part of Zech. 8:16. Instead of falsehood, we are to speak truth. The broader context of Zech. 8“is concerned with the conduct of Israel in the future when God will restore their fortunes” as Thielman notes. Zechariah is giving an exhortation from God that the people should speak to each other in truth. Zech. 8:16-17 (ESV),“These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace; do not devise evil in your hearts against one another, and love no false oath, for all these things I hate, declares the Lord.” The context of verse 25 centers on how we are to interact with each other as brothers and sisters in the Lord as evident by the ending: “for we are members of one another.” As God was concerned with the ethical conduct of His people in Zech. 8, so also is Paul (thus God) concerned with how we interact with each other as those who make up the body of Christ.
4:26-27- Verse 26 starts with an echo of Psa. 4:4. However, Paul quotes the Septuagint-LXX (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which says “Be angry and do not sin.” This seems to be an odd command Paul gives to the believer. That is, the imperative to “be angry” (NASB, ESV, NKJV, NET). It would be one thing to say “If you get angry, make sure not to sin,” as if Paul was making an allowance for anger, but qualifying it (see NIV). However, this is not how the Greek is constructed. The Greek word used is an imperative; a command to “be angry” (see translation note on 4:26 in NET Bible; Kenneth Wuest: Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, Vol. 1, Eph. 4:26). Paul means here a type of righteous indignation/anger, such as Christ had (Mark 3:5). This, therefore, is not simply an allowance for righteous anger, but a command to possess it. The seemingly conflicting prohibition against anger in verse 31 will be addressed there, but suffice it to say that although the same words are used, the context differs drastically from the present verse. Somewhat adjacent to the command here in verse 26 are multiple verses in Scripture exhorting those that love God to hate/abhor evil (Rom. 12:9, Pro. 8:13, Amos 5:15) and Psa. 97:10a says, “Hate evil, you who love the Lord,” We should absolutely be angered by the wickedness and evil in the world; the things that are opposed to God and hurt those made in His image. To be angered by rape, murder, abuse, lies, etc. is a good thing. Stott candidly remarks that there is even a great need for Christian anger in our world today and that “in the face of blatant evil we should be indignant, not tolerant, angry, not apathetic. If God hates sin, his people should hate it too. If evil arouses his anger, it should arouse ours also.”
This is quickly followed up by a command not to sin in anger. As Campbell points out, “Paul commands righteous anger when appropriate, but quickly warns of its inherent dangers to those who need to avoid the unrighteous anger of 4:31.” If our anger leads to bitterness, wrath, slander, malice and so on, we have sinned. This is to be avoided. Paul ends with a command to “not let the sun go down on your anger.” This does not imply that a resolution must be in place before the day is done, it’s simply a metaphor illustrating that we should not let anger fester. Doing so will inevitably lead to sin. Thielman notes that as Paul had just referenced Psa. 4:4, this phrase may also be an idea taken from the latter half of that verse in which David says, “when you are on your beds, search your hearts and be silent.” -Psa. 4:4b (NIV). Theilman, therefore states that the psalmist advises his enemies not to act on their anger, “but instead to ponder their feelings in silence on their beds.”
Either way, allowing anger to fester only gives the devil an opportunity to creep in and provoke sin as verse 27 says. Sin is always crouching at the door, waiting to pounce (Gen. 4:7) and as Kyle Snodgrass puts it, enduring anger is an inroad for the devil; “a Trojan horse for hisattack.”
4:28-29- A great practical example Paul gives of the “old” being replaced by the “new” involves the 8th Commandment. In this context, it is not enough to cease or refrain from the sin, the act of stealing must be replaced with doing good for the benefit of others. This is what repentance looks like in the life of a believer. As mentioned in verse 22, Zaccheus would be an illustration of this (Luke 19). The key principle is that those who would harm the community must now do good for the community. That which is moral has replaced the immoral.
Similarly is the command in verse 29. The “old” way of unwholesome language is to be replaced with speech that edifies and blesses those in the community. The Greek word translated as “unwholesome” (NASB, NIV, NET) or “corrupt” (NKJV, ESV) is sapros, which carries the definition of being “rotten, worn out, unfit for use, worthless, bad.” (so Wuest). The NLT translates this as “foul or abusive language.” It’s the same word used to describe rotten or bad fruit in Matt. 7:17-18, Matt. 12:33, and Luke 6:43. The idea here is that all speech among each other should be that which edifies, blesses and builds up the body. This certainly includes overtly wicked things like “harsh criticism, gaslighting, gossip, slander, name-calling, lying, boasting–and swearing” as Campbell notes, but Foulkes also points out that our conversation should not simply be a matter of refraining from rotten or foul things, but words that actively minister grace to those who hear (paraphrased). James 3:1-12 certainly comes to mind, but also Matt. 12:34b-37 (ESV), “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” Stott sums up: “If we are truly a new creation of God, we shall undoubtedly develop new standards of conversation. Instead of hurting people with our words, we shall want to use them to help, encourage, cheer, comfort and stimulate them.”
4:30-32- We can certainly grieve the Holy Spirit with our actions. That is, we can cause sorrow and offend God’s Spirit within us. This points to His personhood. There can be a tendency to view the Holy Spirit as an impersonal “force,” but as Campbell rightly shows elsewhere, “the Spirit desires (Gal. 5:17), teaches (1 Cor. 2:13), leads (Gal. 5:17-18), bears witness (Rom. 8:16), speaks (1 Tim. 4:1), intercedes (Rom. 8:27), and dwells among believers (Eph. 2:22).” The background for what Paul says here can be found in Isa. 63:10a. The context of that passage in Isaiah shows how Israel rebelled against God after He showed them mercy, leading God to send them into exile as judgment. God went from being their Savior in 63:8-9 to their enemy in 63:10, “But they rebelled And grieved His Holy Spirit; Therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy, He fought against them.” The implication is clear here, by our actions (rotten speech, bitterness, slander, malice, wrath-i.e v. 31) we can offend God’s spirit. In 1 Cor. 10, Paul even uses the immorality of the Israelites (a people chosen by God) and God’s subsequent wrath and punishment as an example of warning to us.
I’ve heard it said before that “we can never be closer to God than we are right now.” In the context in which it was stated, the sentiment was to show that God will always be close to us and there’s nothing we can do to make Him closer or drive him away. While it’s true that God will never leave nor forsake us (assuming we are in Christ, Heb. 13:5), sin in our lives can absolutely grieve and offend the Spirit, thereby driving a wedge between us and God and damaging the relationship. God’s presence in our lives can turn from sweet fellowship into a heavy hand of discipline like David experienced. “When I refused to confess my sin, my body wasted away, and I groaned all day long. Day and night your hand of discipline was heavy on me. My strength evaporated like water in the summer heat.” -Psalm 32:3-4 (NLT). Rebelling against His Spirit brings about very serious and negative consequences. Paul then says that as believers, we are sealed “for the day of redemption” referring to the return of Christ when our full salvation and restoration will be consummated (see 1:14).
Verse 31 contains a vice list; further “old” things to be replaced with “new” (that come in the next verse). While vice lists aren’t meant to be exhaustive, here it represents the type of attitudes and actions that are to be abandoned. Included in this list is “anger” which seems contradictory with the statement in verse 26 (see comments there). Context is the biggest thing to consider in the two verses. While a type of righteous indignation is what is meant in verse 26, here it is anger that flows from bitterness, malice and so on. As Foulkes remarks, it’s “anger that springs from personal animosity, the flaring up of passion and temper because of personal provocation.”
Verse 32 then provides the types of things that ought to be present in our lives, particularly how we relate to fellow believers in the same community (the entire context of Ephesians). These attributes stand diametrically opposed to the things in the previous verse. Having a heart of kindness, compassion and graciousness ought to be the hallmark of those indwelt with God’s own Spirit and who have been shown much grace and compassion by a loving God. In fact, that’s Paul’s basis for such living. That is, because God has shown us grace, loved and forgiven us in Christ, we ought to do the same (see also 5:1-2).
Bibliography (works cited):
Barnes, Albert- Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible (Ephesians)
Calvin, John- Calvin's Commentary on the Bible (Ephesians)
Campbell, Constantine- The Letter to the Ephesians, PNTC, 2023
Fausset, A. R.- Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Bible Commentary (Ephesians)
Foulkes, Francis- The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, TNTC, 1981
Grudem, Wayne- Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, 1994 (p. 1050, 1055)
Hodge, Charles- A Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, 1856
Liefeld, Walter L.- Ephesians, IVPNTC, 1997
MacDonald, William- Believer’s Bible Commentary, 1995, Ephesians
Marshall, Howard I.- The Acts of the Apostles, TNTC, 1983
Snodgrass, Kyle- NIV Application Commentary, One-Vol. Edition (Ephesians)
Stott, John- The Message of Ephesians, BST, 1979
Thielman, Frank S.- Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament–Beale and Carson (Ephesians)
Translation note- NET Bible, Eph. 4:11
Witherington III, Ben- The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistles
Wuest, Kenneth- Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, Vol. 1 (Ephesians)