Ephesians 4:1–16

Original Meaning

Live Worthy of Your Call Focused on Unity (4:1–3)

THIS SECTION IS a summary statement, almost a heading, on which the rest of the letter will comment. Only one imperative has appeared prior to this in the letter: “remember” in 2:11. The exhortation in 4:1–3 is specific and practical; but almost as if Paul needed to buttress the ethic more, he returns in 4:4–16 to theological concerns. The next specific, practical imperative will not appear until 4:25.7

Similar to 3:1, Paul strengthens his instruction by referring to his imprisonment. Whereas 3:1 had “the prisoner of Christ Jesus,” 4:1 has, if translated literally, “the prisoner in the Lord.”8 He is in prison in the Lord, and from this position of honor he makes his ethical challenge. “Lord” occurs twenty-six times in Ephesians, twenty of them in chapters 4–6 (in keeping with Paul’s tendency to use “Christ” in texts about salvation and “Lord” in texts about ethics).

With the translation “the calling you have received,” the NIV loses the text’s double emphasis on election (lit., “the calling with which you were called”). Paul reminds the reader of the description of salvation in chapters 1–3 and especially of the doxology in 1:3–14. If God’s love is so great, if his salvation is so powerful, if God has granted such reconciliation, then believers should live accordingly. They should value God’s love enough to be shaped by it. Note that “calling” is used of the salvation and responsibility of every Christian, not of the “professional ministry” or an elite group. This one call is for all Christians to live in accord with what God has done.

The English imperatives that follow in 4:2–3 are actually prepositional phrases (“with all humility,” etc.) and participles (“bearing … making every effort”). This is not a series of imperatives of equal rank. Even if the phrases in verses 2–3 are understood imperativally, they are subordinate to the one main imperative—“live worthy of the calling you have received.” They describe a life worthy of God’s calling, which is marked by humility, gentleness, patience, tolerant love, and peacekeeping. Attention goes first to the ego and then to loving relations. An understanding of God’s work is always an attack on the ego, not to obliterate or humiliate the self, but to bring it into relation with God and to redirect its interests. In losing life we find it.

Humility, not surprisingly, is held up in all Paul’s letters as a necessary component of Christian living. Even when the actual word is not used, Paul sought this virtue in his readers.9 In several other letters he links humility and unity at the precise point he starts drawing ethical conclusions (e.g., Rom. 12:3–8; Phil. 2:1–11; Col. 3:12–15).

The word translated “be completely humble” focuses on one’s thinking;10 it means “lowliness of mind” as opposed to haughtiness (cf. Rom. 12:3; 11:20; 12:16). Thinking low was the attitude of slaves and was considered a negative trait among ancient Greeks, but the Old Testament and Judaism viewed it positively. The best commentary on this attitude is found in Philippians 2:5–8, on the self-emptying mind of Christ.

“Gentleness” (prautes), a forgotten virtue, shows up with regularity in Paul’s ethical lists, which demonstrates the value he placed on it11 (cf. Phil. 4:5, which uses epieikes but is concerned with the same ethic). In 2 Corinthians 10:1 Paul uses both these words for gentleness to describe his own demeanor—a gentleness he says is characteristic of Christ.12

“Patience” (makrothymia) is also repeatedly present in Paul’s lists of virtues. With justification, John Chrysostom explained this word from its etymology as meaning “to have a wide and big soul.”13 Patience is the exercise of a largeness of soul that can endure annoyances and difficulties over a period of time.

The NIV’s “bearing with one another in love” sounds archaic and loses the force of the text. A more appropriate translation is “putting up with each other in love.” The Christian life is a life of putting up with other people, and this tolerance finds its ability and motivation in love (cf. Gal. 6:2). “Love” and “putting up with each other” are intertwined and mutually explanatory. Both are ways of valuing the other person.

“Love” (agape) enjoys the other person, but it does not exist for enjoyment. It is not a feeling or emotion, but an act of the will. It exists only in relation to specific people, and it is always costly. The focus on love is an extension of the emphasis on love in 3:17–19. That is, the love experienced in Christ must be extended to others. The noun agape was rarely used outside Jewish sources and the Christian writings. A few secular occurrences are now known, but clearly Christians injected the word with new content to talk about love in relation to God—first love from God, then also love for God and for other people because of God. This love does not have its origin in human motivation; it is a choice made because of the love of God.

The focus on “one another” is significant. This word occurs forty times in Paul’s letters. Christians are part of each other and are to receive one another, think about one another, serve one another, love one another, build up one another, bear each other’s burdens, submit to each other, and encourage each other. Christianity is a God-directed, Christ-defined, other-oriented religion. Only with such direction away from self do we find ourselves.

Living worthy of the call also requires eagerness “to keep the unity of the Spirit.” “Make every effort” (v. 3) translates a word meaning “be zealous or eager.” We are asked to value unity, be attentive to it, and invest energy in it so that it is not threatened. “Unity of the Spirit” means the unity the Spirit gives or brings, but a whole complex of ideas stands behind this phrase as parallels and the verses that follow show. The same Spirit works in all Christians, baptizes them into the same Christ, and nurtures and leads them all (see also 1 Cor. 12:13; Phil. 2:1).

It is important to realize that unity is something given by the Spirit, not something we create. It is based in the oneness of God and the oneness of the gospel, which works the same for all people. While the theme of unity occurs often in Paul’s letters, the actual word (henotes) occurs only here and in 4:13. Comparing 4:3 with 4:13 shows again the now and not-yet character of Christianity: In 4:3 unity is a basis, created by God, from which we start; in 4:13, it is a goal toward which we strive.

“Bond” (syndesmos, elsewhere only in Acts 8:23; Col. 2:19; 3:14) is related to desmos, which is used of prisoners being bound. “The bond of peace” can mean either “the bond that is peace” or “the bond that peace creates.” In either case, we should think of the discussion of peace in 2:14–18. The unity we share in God’s Spirit is based on that peacemaking act of Christ, which has created one new being and links Christians together.14

Bridging Contexts

BRINGING THIS TEXT into our contemporary situation is relatively straightforward. Most of the ideas are familiar and as pertinent for modern readers as for the original ones. Yet both the theology of the text and the clash of its worldview with ours require consideration.

Why be ethical? Why should anyone be ethical? Parents, schools, and society are supposed to teach what people should or should not do. In many modern societies the effort is now a failure, and Christians and non-Christians alike lament the collapse of ethics at every level. Crime, abuse, and violence are common, and for many sexual ethics do not exist. But why shouldn’t we all satisfy our needs and desires, regardless of who gets hurt? Fear of the police or of retaliation is not sufficient reason, for often the benefit of unethical action is worth the risk. Respectability is no motivation, for our society gives little value to respect. Some suggest we have to be ethical to make the system work, but why should people care about that? For many the system does not work.

As Paul implies in 4:1, all ethics are theologically motivated. Theology motivates application, for it understands the importance of the subject. Paul’s ethic is primarily a Christological ethic, and this text begins to spell out what that means.52 Remember: Christology is soteriology is ecclesiology is ethics. All ethics—and especially Christian ethics—are by necessity ethics of response. God acts in creation, in the Exodus, in Christ, through the Spirit, or in our own lives, and we respond to his grace.

Earlier in our society enough people had theological conviction to motivate ethical living; others assumed the ethic without knowing the theology. Now most know nothing about theology and have thus lost any basis for the ethical behavior. Rules never motivate ethical behavior; awareness of God does. Thus, to bring the ethics of this passage to today we must recover its theology. Pastors and teachers should not merely give Christians a list of do’s and don’ts. They must give direction, but with the direction they must convey a theology that motivates life.

We need to recover a sense of the calling with which we were called. Most Christians have no sense they are called, but every Christian has been called by God as an act of grace and given every endowment needed for life. With the gift comes the responsibility. We must live out the reality of God’s love for us.

In other words, theology is not some arcane subject for academics; it is basic training in understanding the gospel so that we know how to live.

Relations among Christians. All of life is relational—even when we think we are alone and independent. We need respect and attention from other people. Even if we turn away from people, our abilities, views, and often our very existence are dependent on others. Christianity is a relational religion, and this text, while not being a treatise on relations, says much about getting along with each other.

Positive relations are based on several factors: a shared identity in terms of family, culture, subculture, and race; shared experience; shared values; and respect.53 Christian theology offers a strong basis for relations with other human beings purely because they are people created in the image of God. But relations among Christians have a broader foundation. They share an identity in Christ, the experience of Christ, and values determined by Christ. This is what Paul attempts to convey with his focus on unity and on the body. Most of the vices in the New Testament ethical instruction are sins that disrupt community, and most of the virtues promote community.

The ego is the main problem in relations, for therein lies the origin of feelings of inferiority and arrogance, of envy and greed, of prejudice and defensiveness, and of intolerance and abuse. As William Temple noted, pride is always the root of spiritual failure.54 The solution is in a sense of God’s grace, for grace prevents the ego from inflating its own significance.

Like ancient Greek culture, our society often views humility, meekness, and gentleness in negative terms (cf. v. 2). Humility too frequently is misunderstood as passivity and antithetical to success, but this is a distortion. Humility is not about drive, energy, or ability, but about valuing. It is an awareness that all we are and have is from God. The humble person refuses to value self above others or to assign more privilege or importance to self than to others. Humility is essential for good relations and avoiding sin, so much so that Ignatius said, by it “the prince of this world is brought to nothing.”55 Egotism, on the other hand, is an idolatry of the self, the failure to realize that God is the pattern for life, not us.

Unity. Ephesians is the unity letter, but we do not value unity. Rather than making every effort to maintain unity (v. 3), we sacrifice it at the first airing of differences. We value differences more than unity or people. Christians have been more fearful of some ecumenical world structure than of fragmenting the body of Christ. Something about us wants to set ourselves apart from others, but is this too not a form of egotism?

Disunity originates in pride, as the Corinthian letters poignantly show. Denominations and movements are as guilty of egotism and arrogance as individuals. Nearly all denominations have been guilty of arrogance and parochialism and have succumbed to fights that ignore the gospel. Moreover, each denomination is divided into liberals and conservatives—no matter how liberal or conservative the denomination actually is. We do not have unity between groups, within groups, or in local congregations.

Most groups have insiders and outsiders. We talk about unity and community, but we do not have them. Paul Minear’s words ring painfully true when he says we can hardly use Ephesians 4 “as a description of twentieth-century Christianity without crossing our fingers, or stifling a hoot of derision, or angrily challenging the hypocrisy in any church that piously parrots those liturgical phrases: ‘you were called to the one hope that belongs to your calling’ (4:4).”56

How can unity be established? It does not need to be established, for it already exists, given by God. It needs to be valued and maintained. Christ is not divided (1 Cor. 1:13). The community is not the source of its own existence; Christ is. He is the unity of the church, for the church only exists in him. Christology is ecclesiology.

This is not to deny the validity and value of differences among communities, nor should theological and cultural distinctions be ignored. Our concern is not for some organizational unity. Rather, the concern is unity in Christ, which carries with it an assumption of the biblical message about Christ as crucified and risen Lord. Christians do not need to agree on everything to have unity; we need to live the unity of a common commitment to Christ. The formula of Rupert Meldenius popularized by Richard Baxter is still good guidance: “Unity in essentials, liberty in incidentals, and in all things charity [love].”57

The mission of the church is at stake. Unity and mission belong together. In 3:5–10 unity among diverse groups is at the heart of the gospel and evidence of God’s power and wisdom. The mission of the church is crippled by the division among various groups. Unless we evidence unity, our witness does not deserve to be heard.

One baptism? Of all the affirmations of unity in 4:4–6, surely the most difficult to swallow is “one baptism.” Can we even say these words when baptism has been such a cause of division? Yes, for only one baptism exists, baptism into Jesus Christ. Paul was not speaking about the mode or timing of a ceremony; he was saying no other baptism exists except baptism into Christ.58

The most difficult topic is rebaptism. If a person is baptized as an infant and then rebaptized as an adult, is that not a rejection of the validity of the former? On the other hand, if rebaptism is not allowed, is that not a rejection of belief in believer’s baptism? No easy solution exists, but the key is the integrity and respect of the people involved. We do not have to agree on the theology of baptism to accept each other. Both sides need the freedom to state their convictions without demeaning those who disagree. Both should allow the freedom for the person being baptized to follow his or her own convictions. Both should recognize they follow much the same process: They do something at birth (baptism or dedication) and around twelve years of age (confirmation or a push for decision), and both seek the validation of an adult faith around eighteen. It is merely a question of when and how much water is used. Do we value our differences more than our unity in Christ? Paul chose unity.

The ascent-descent motif. One of the difficult sections to apply is 4:8–10, since its relevance is not immediately apparent. The key is in staying with the purpose of this material. Paul quotes Psalm 68:18 to provide verification that the ascended Christ gives gifts for building up his church. Verses 9–10 strengthen this message of the Lord’s equipping his church for ministry.

The purpose of the text is to provide theological basis for Christ’s work in the church. Application will focus on the expectation and obedience that come from this theological conviction about the lordship of Christ, his incarnation, and his investment in the life of his followers. If he is the Lord who gives gifts and fills all things, we should expect his involvement in our work and should be ready to obey.

The work of the church. This passage does not describe all the work of the church, but it does contribute much to a theology of ministry. Most of the concern is for internally building up of church, rather than for mission outside the church. Thus it is incomplete, but no text should be seen as a comprehensive theological statement. For all its emphasis, Ephesians is still not a complete ecclesiology.

The responsibility of the individual. In far too many churches people come, listen to a preacher, and do little else. No wonder the charge has been made that the body of Christ seems to have one big mouth and many little ears! But that is not how Paul viewed the church. While it is true that some have a special responsibility to teach and preach, Paul stresses that every Christian is responsible to build up the church. We have all received grace for ministry and must live worthy of our calling. We are all expected to work to strengthen the church, and only as each person fulfills his or her calling is the church truly strong.

Those with special responsibilities to teach and preach are to equip others to serve, not do the service for them, and these people are not set in a separate category or given tasks that others are prohibited from doing. We must value the service of everyone in the church, and ordinary Christians must accept their responsibility and seek to fulfill their calling.

Gifts for ministry. The discussion of spiritual gifts is enriched by this passage. Some suggest grace is a new capacity for service that is given to each Christian at conversion, which must be discovered and exercised. Usually the argument is that while a gift is not the same as a talent, one finds it the way one discovers a talent: Be attracted to the gift, study it, try it, develop it, and exercise it.59 Spiritual gift inventories supposedly help people find their gift. But this approach is naive and does not do justice to the biblical accounts. In fact, it is a self-centered approach. The New Testament never asks us to identify our gifts.

The New Testament language for gifts is used in surprising ways. Among various uses at least six categories of gifts should be mentioned.

(1) The basic gift (charisma) is eternal life in Christ (Rom. 6:23), and all other gifts exist because of this one.60

(2) The Holy Spirit is also a gift (often dorea) given to every Christian.

(3) One’s own station in life is a gift (charisma), specifically marriage and celibacy (1 Cor. 7:7).

(4) Ministry is viewed as a gift (dorea in Eph. 3:7–8).

(5) People are gifts (domata) to the church (Eph. 4:8, 11).

(6) Various activities are gifts (charismata), such as those listed in 1 Corinthians 12:28, the ones usually thought of as “spiritual” gifts.

This suggests we need a much broader sense of gift than typically is the case. To say a gift is something given at conversion and is different from a talent is wrong. The parallelism in 1 Corinthians 12:4–7 shows that a gift is the same thing as a working or a service; a gift is merely the way the Spirit works through a person for the good of the community. Consequently, no one should assume a gift is a lifelong possession.

In Ephesians 4:11 certain leaders are viewed as gifts to the church, but actually this is true of all Christians. All have received grace and have a responsibility to build up the church. As the Spirit works through each person for the good of the community, each person is a gift to the church. We would do well to have less concern about identifying gifts and more concern about being a gift, that is, about how the Spirit functions through us to strengthen the body.

Christian leaders. This text identifies Christian leaders whose work has to do with proclaiming the Word of God. Although the list is not intended to be exhaustive, questions arise about the importance of 4:11 in shaping the structure of the church in the modern world. Should these four areas be made offices? Are there still apostolic and prophetic offices today?

We should pay careful attention to the purpose of this text, the titles employed, and the differences between the modern church and the first-century church. After the first century “apostle” and “evangelist” were used rarely to describe leaders. In the Apostolic Fathers “apostle” occurs only at Didache 11.3, and “evangelist” does not appear. The word apostle could be used today only if it were stripped of its primary New Testament significance in referring to those who saw the risen Lord and/or helped map out the boundaries for belief. We still need people guarding the content of the faith, but the use of such a word today is pretentious and misleading. No basis exists for excluding prophecy in the modern church, although the use of the title for specific persons is likewise both dangerous and pretentious.

Verse 11 does not lay out a church order, and none of the four categories is a church office. It describes how Christ equips the church for service. The functions listed here overlap, but the important thing is to see that they are all ministries of the Word. Leaders must communicate the message. Any attempt to reproduce the church structure of the early church is bound to fail. No New Testament text lays out a church order, and an investigation of such titles shows no single or fixed order existed in the first century.61 Moreover, the needs of modern churches are different from those in the first century. Churches now are larger, have expanded ministries, and are set in a different cultural context. Much about structure and administration is cultural, and with the Spirit’s guidance we should design structures suitable for our tasks.

A sound understanding of ministry is essential. At the center of all else is the ministry of the Word preparing a community for service. Language creates a community, and those who communicate the message of Jesus Christ create a community with a shared identity and shared values. Preaching creates a power sphere in which and from which people live, for language is the tool we use to shape reality. Preaching is the opportunity every preacher has to bring order out of chaos on the basis of the Word of God.62 This order, an order based on the cross and resurrection, gives people the foundation and direction for service.

The role of the leaders is to serve the people; nothing of a hierarchy of privilege exists. Unfortunately, even though Christians talk about servant leadership, it rarely exists. Pastors do not really believe in servant leadership, for all of us in modern society have a difficult time separating leadership from exercise of the ego. Leadership often ends up being for the leader or the institution, but not for the people. But Christian leadership must be different. If the first part of fulfilling our call is humility (4:2), then this must be true first of leaders.63 The servant leadership Jesus requires is only the application of the gospel to the task of leadership. If leaders cannot apply the gospel to themselves, they are not leaders.64

The body. The body image is difficult to bring into our age because of the complexity of Paul’s thought. He intended more than that Christians are like the body of Christ. He used the body image to express the reality of oneness with Christ. His whole theology of salvation depends on this oneness. In 2:15–16 Paul said that Christ created one new being in himself to reconcile Jews and Gentiles to God in one body; we are members of his body (5:30). This language is an extension of Paul’s “in Christ” thinking.

In Romans 12:5 (a text close to the thought of Eph. 4:16), Paul wrote, “We the many are one body in Christ, and individually members of each other”65 (cf. also Eph. 4:25). “The one and the many” is a phrase we should make part of our vocabulary. We are individuals, but our bond with Christ makes us one with him and one with each other. This is both a striking privilege and a responsibility. Christ fills all things and in the process binds us together. The word “religion,” we should remember, is derived from the root for the word “ligaments” and refers to that which binds together. Unity and efforts to assist each other are necessary conclusions.

The necessity of truth. With truth, we must rebuild the structure from our end, for many of us are all too willing to sacrifice the truth. John’s statement that people love darkness more than light is still true (John 3:19), and song writers, philosophers, and ethicists all lament the failure of people to be truthful. The plaintive chorus to Billy Joel’s song “Honesty” expresses a universal feeling:

Honesty is such a lonely word

Everyone is so untrue

Honesty is hardly ever heard

And mostly what I need from you.

The ancient philosopher Diogenes went on a journey with a lantern looking for an honest man. Blaise Pascal complained that human life is nothing but perpetual delusion and that human relations are based on mutual deception.66 Martin Buber wrote of the uncanny game of hide and seek we play in the obscurity of our souls in which the soul seeks to hide from itself.67 Thomas Merton charged that our minds are deformed with a kind of contempt for reality, but that in defiling the truth we defile our own souls.68 And in keeping with Genesis 3, Scott Peck has pointed out that evil always has to do with lying.69

These analysts do not exaggerate. Both with ourselves and with others we live by distortion. In China, for example, gambling is illegal, but in Beijing they have “horse intelligence tests” at a race track. Betting windows are ticket counters, payout windows are prize ticket exchanges, and gamblers are fun-seekers—all under a huge banner reminding everyone that gambling is strictly prohibited.70

For much of our lives we live “horse intelligence tests.” The government passes out “disinformation,” politicians make empty promises, “spin doctors” distort facts, and lawyers seek a perverted justice that prohibits truth, knowing that if the truth were told they would lose their case. Distortion pervades our society, from what we tell the IRS to what we tell lovers and friends. A recent book even argues truth is morally overrated.71 Lying is so prevalent that it is the central element in TV sitcoms. It is easy to laugh at people living in distortion.

Christians too fall into this discounting of truth, but if evil always has to do with lying, then surely Christians must place an enormous premium on truth. Lying is costly. Lies destroy both a healthy self and healthy relations. Mental and spiritual health depend on our willingness to tell the truth. Several poignant statements about truth merit reflection:

Mental health is an ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs.72

Truth matters…. In fidelity to truth lies human dignity…. In obeying the evidence of truth, no human being is humiliated—rather, he is in that way alone ennobled.73

We make ourselves real by telling the truth.74

The worth and integrity of an institution depends on its willingness to call things by their right names.75

Truth is the only place we live legitimately and freely. We avoid the truth for two primary reasons, two reasons that are the source of all sin: pride and laziness. Pride objects to truth, for it always seeks to present a more self-enhancing picture, and laziness avoids truth because it requires and creates work. The price, however, of avoiding truth is enormous. Lying destroys us, the people around us, and our relation with God and others.

Truth too can hurt, but that is why truth is the second word in Christian living and should not be not taken by itself. The first word is grace, which enables us to face the truth. Together with love, faith, and hope, these five words give a foundation strong enough to deal with life. Truth is not to be applied by itself, nor for that matter is love. Truth and love are wrapped together. They are not antithetical; that thought never occurred to Paul. Rather, love rejoices with the truth (1 Cor. 13:6). When love and truth are kept together, true community comes into being.

Contemporary Significance

TO THIS POINT in the letter the readers have been asked to do nothing except remember their past alienation and present acceptance in Christ (2:11). For three chapters they have been reminded of God’s goodness and the marvelous salvation that is theirs. Now with all the force possible, readers are implored to live worthy of their calling.

Application requires accepting the challenge to live out our faith. So often Christianity is presented as if nothing is required of believers. We place so much emphasis on human weakness, on our inability to do anything profitable, and on the necessity of God’s actions in salvation that no room is left for human responsibility. The New Testament never gives this impression! Human responsibility is wedded to God’s action, but we are responsible. We must expect something of ourselves. If God’s salvation is so good, live like it. This requires an act of the will and a determination to follow through. As Philip Spener said, “It is by no means enough to have knowledge of the Christian faith, for Christianity consists rather of practice.”76

The metaphor “walk” (NIV, “live”) suggests something controlled, enduring, and directed, not something frenetic or aimless. Short term effort is of no value; we need a lifetime of faithfulness mirroring God’s call. None of this suggests we accomplish anything by ourselves, but life with God and by his help is a life of discipline and effort. We want discipleship without discipline; it does not exist. We seek what we can get by with, but the challenge is to do what we should, to live worthy of the call.

Our problem is that we have a million dollar salvation and a five-cent response. We seem unimpressed with God’s salvation. We protest that no one can actually live worthy of this calling and express our fears of perfectionism. The text is anxious about neither; its concern is only that our lives are shaped by God’s salvation. Right theology should lead to right conduct. Why is the process so frequently aborted? Is it because theology is threaded through the brain but never gets to the heart? Such belief is useless. Is our knowledge only a source of pride? Our understanding of our call must be sincere and honest, going to the depths of our being. Then by a determined act of our wills and by the help of God’s Spirit, our lives must be drawn into line with this call. We are called to receive and show grace.

Relational ethics. The virtues Paul lists in 4:2—humility, gentleness, patience, and loving tolerance—are probably not the first we would list in describing a life worthy of God’s calling, but these are exactly what is needed. God’s new society operates differently.77 The key in all four virtues is getting rid of something first.

Humility. In order to have humility, we must renounce self-centeredness. A proper self-understanding is the most crucial ingredient for life. We are neither worms nor God; we are marvelous, relational creations in the image of God, intended for relation with God. Without God we have no meaning. Humans are intended to be something great, but in the process of trying to be that, we have become self-centered and self-seeking. We relive the plot of Genesis 3 each day of our lives. All of life’s energy is directed toward self and its perspectives. We seek respect and want recognition, honor, and authority. We take assertiveness training, strive for superiority, and are encouraged to look out for number one. Our self-seeking evolves into jealousy and disparagement of others. But individualism and self-assertion are foes of Christian maturity.78

Give up self-importance and honor. At every turn Christian faith is an assault on our self-seeking. We are important, but we are not to seek importance. We are not the center, God is. All we are and have is a gift, so why should we boast?79 Imagine how much easier relations would be if people knew from the outset that we sought their best interests and had no desire to belittle them or promote ourselves. Humility, this lowliness of mind, is a habit we develop. There are steps and exercises to humility,80 but in the end humility is a continual awareness of God, of our own sinfulness and frailty, and of the equal value of all other persons.

Nowhere is humility more important and necessary than in pastors. They are to model the attitude for their people, but they are the ones most likely to fail. They are placed “on stage” to perform, are given authority, and are subjected to ongoing critical review. Any defect in self-understanding will be magnified beyond measure. Pastors should be the first in line to learn about and exercise humility.

Gentleness. In order to have gentleness, we must renounce harshness and violence. Rather than harshness, the lack of caring and receptivity, and the violence so often met in our world, we should practice gentleness. Healthy relationships cannot exist under force and threat. Some Christians present themselves as so brittle and hostile that no one wants to be around them. Even if they are right, they are repulsively right.81 Gentleness conveys a sensitivity, a desire not to harm, and a valuing of the other person. With gentleness people can be nurtured.

While gentleness is important in all our relations, including the workplace and church, possibly the arena in which gentleness is most needed is within the family. So much emotional and physical damage is done within the context that should be the most loving. Children and spouses are crushed by harsh, demeaning language and by violence. We can say we meant nothing by it, but the damage will have been irreparably done. “Christian” homes are sometimes among the worst offenders. We need to see family members as if they were marked “Fragile, handle with care.” Gentleness nurtures people, respects them, and allows them to drop defenses and deal more objectively with issues.

Patience. In order to have patience, we must renounce the tyranny of our own agendas. All of us have a sense of timing about when events should happen, one that rarely agrees with anyone else’s sense of timing. Our society has taught us to “want it now” and expect to get it. The idea that we should not have to wait on anything or anyone is merely another form of self-centeredness. A lack of patience reflects a narrowness of soul. Patience is that largeness that values other people enough to give them room and time to fail, learn, and develop. While patience in daily schedules is important, it is especially necessary in allowing people space to mature at their own rate rather than expect them to do everything right and to do it now.

Tolerant love. In order to have tolerant love, we must renounce our rights. We focus on our rights, but rights—even though important—can be another form of damaging self-centeredness. As has been said, “Be careful of standing on your rights, for then God may stand on his.” Insisting on one’s rights never leads to healthy relations. People must be willing to forgo rights and put up with each other in love. Let us recognize that all of us are at times a burden and a pain. Since we are bound to other people in Christ, a choice must be made not to let them go.

Love is a choice, the act of caring enough to give attention to people. As often noted, the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. You love first, then you learn to love. You choose to invest in other people, and this commitment enables putting up with them. We thereby provide a platform for them to grow. More often than not, failure to provide such a platform leaves people with fewer and fewer good choices. How often has our failure to put up with someone driven them over the edge?

Putting up with in love is what families and friends should do. That means tolerating activities, choices, and inconveniences we do not like. No one knows that better than a parent of a teenager. Putting up with in love is also what churches should do. It may well mean tolerating music or worship styles that are not fully satisfying. It may mean going through a trying time with another person, but it will not allow writing the other person off.

Isn’t this a little extreme? All this sounds too passive and weak. Where is the legitimate focus on being strong and aggressive, on having an agenda, and on confronting people that need to be confronted? If we try this humility approach, will we not be crushed and worn out by selfish and burdensome people?

On the contrary, this text tells us exactly what is necessary to fulfill God’s call. A life worthy of the call is a life of fellowship,82 which cannot take place apart from humility, gentleness, patience, and tolerant love. But these four activities have no relation to weakness; quite the opposite, they require strength and a clear-eyed sense of the goal. The refusal to exalt self does not lead to incompetence or passivity; rather, it means a person is strong enough not to require attention and pampering. One has resources from which to give, rather than being so fragile as needing constant support. One has the maturity and ability to care.

Nor is there any suggestion of allowing other people to be selfish, irresponsible, or burdensome. Love seeks justice and cares enough to confront, or it is not really love. The focus on speaking the truth in love in 4:15 (see below) is contrary to the thought that abuses by other people should be merely tolerated. Both speaking the truth in love and putting up with each other in love are required. If the thought occurs that a life such as this is weak and passive, note Paul’s aggressiveness and confidence in telling his converts to imitate him or his strength in confronting Peter at Antioch and the churches of Galatia and Corinth.83

Unity in the body. If Christ has created peace and given us unity, then unity has to be part of our self-understanding. We are one with other people in Christ, like it or not. The exercise of our faith is an exercise of unity. You cannot have Christ to yourself. What we do in relation to each other must grow out of an understanding of unity and be geared to produce unity. Therefore, unity in Christ is both the starting place and the goal (4:3 and 13).

We cannot be mature Christians by ourselves, for we cannot give ourselves everything we need for a life of faith. Christ could supply our needs directly, but instead he has chosen to grace other people so that they contribute to us and we to them. Grace comes from God, but it is also conveyed along horizontal channels.84 Or, as F. F. Bruce put it, “The higher reaches of the Christian life cannot be attained in isolation from one’s fellow believers.”85

An emphasis on unity cannot be left to certain denominations or schools of thought, for unity is part of the gospel (see 2:14–18). Church leaders need to teach and preach about unity and find ways to communicate oneness within local congregations and among congregations. Other people in Christ are part of us and we are part of them (4:25).

At the same time, the individuality and independence of each person must be guarded. Unity does not mean sameness; in fact, unity is achieved through diversity. Nor does unity mean all Christians work under the same structure or always meet together. We must show mutual respect and be willing to engage in conversation, work, and occasions of worship. We all face the same problems in society and in our churches. Should not our common identity in Christ, our shared experience of Christ, our shared values, and mutual respect be given more attention than our differences—differences that in most cases are as much cultural as they are theological?

Reformation and renewal have often led to divisions; we need reformation and renewal that lead to unity. If a person names and follows Christ, I belong to that person, even if I do not like them. It is tough to agree with people and love them when we are alienated culturally, but is our commitment to Christ smaller than our commitment to our culture?

Wrong turn: Unity at any cost. On the other hand, the emphasis on unity does not mean unity at any cost. Unity is not the goal; unity in Christ is, the unity that comes from a shared faith and a shared knowledge of Christ. Therefore, there are limits to unity. The church and its unity are always Christologically and theologically defined.

Many of the divisions in modern Christianity have little to do with theology. Older theological battles have faded in memory so that many denominations no longer reflect the reasons they emerged. Many divisions occur as much for reasons of culture and personality as for theology. In fact, debate about theology would be an improvement! In some churches the theological base has become so diluted or distorted that little is left resembling a biblical faith—not least what has happened when radical feminism has tried to “reimage” the faith. No one should think of unity with heresy or immorality.

Are divisions not a necessary fact? How can we speak of unity when so many divisions exist—divisions that will not go away? Is there not value in divisions because no single group can reach the variety of subcultures in our society?

Yes, there is value in the plurality of groups, and that plurality will continue. At the same time, most Christians have more in common than differences. A single structure is not our goal. In Acts 6–8 the Hellenistic Christians in Jerusalem were not like the Hebraic Christians, and they certainly did not all meet together. Instead, our goal is awareness of a common bond, mutual investment in each other, and linking of arms to evangelize and to address mutual problems. Other Christians are not the enemy; they are part of us and share the same privileges and responsibilities.

Which of our differences actually require separation? Most do not. Even differences in belief about baptism do not require separation.86 The Lord’s Supper could be observed in ways that would allow all of us to be present at the table. The seven areas of theological oneness in 4:4–6 should make our differences pale in significance. It is time to emphasize our commonality.

Some evangelicals often fear discussion in particular with Catholics. As a matter of fact, evangelicals today have more in common with Catholics than they do with many mainline Protestants. Yet efforts of cooperation with Catholics and joint Evangelical-Catholic statements have brought criticism and alarm that cooperation will limit evangelism of Catholics. But do not all groups need evangelism? Southern Baptists—my own denomination, known more for its fights than its grace—have over fifteen million members, half of whom cannot be found. No group should proselytize, but I would not mind if Catholics led Baptists to Christ!

Is any one group really less sinful or more spiritual? Catholics have been guilty of intolerable abuses, but so have Baptists and every other group. Moreover, the lives of our people often differ little from those of non-Christians. Christians of all stripes divorce, commit adultery, have pregnancies outside marriage, are dishonest, and have problems of addiction. Should not all groups who believe in Christ say, “He is our peace,” and live the unity he created by placing all of us in his body? Is it not possible to be both evangelical and ecumenical?

None of our visible churches is the invisible church, the body of Christ. Only God knows who is in the body, and we would do well to consider the picture from God’s side. Does God recognize denominations or does he see people in Christ? Live unity; keep the bond of peace.

Is this theology enough? Are the seven items mentioned in 4:4–6 enough? As long as one sees them within the context of Paul’s writings and his intent, they are not minimalist descriptions. This is a full and mature Trinitarian theology, which focuses both on salvation in Christ and on God. Five of the seven words focus on salvation: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one faith, and one baptism. The cross and resurrection are not mentioned, but these five terms are shorthand for more detailed discussions of both the cross and resurrection in 1:18–22 and 2:14–18. Eschatology and the triumph of God are included in “one hope,” and Paul’s monotheism is clear. God is over all and through all and in all (4:6), and Christ fills all things (4:10).

The emphases in this foundation for unity should determine the interests and shape of our theology. We should focus on the gospel and on what God has accomplished in Christ and place less stock in our ability to define the truth, for we all see through a glass darkly (1 Cor. 13:12). Humility is required first in doing theology. For too long we have allowed lower order items to cause division. We cherish eschatological timetables and the nuances of systems and lose the focus on God’s redeeming his people. Long ago Luther pointed out that truth is lost by disputing, which profanes the soul and causes neglect of what is important.87 Theological clarity and precision are necessary, but when our explanations become the cause of division, we have not rightly understood our salvation.

Furthermore, that God is over all, in all, and through all (cf. also Acts 17:28) must be taken seriously, along with the focus on Christ’s filling all things. No person or thing is beyond the reach of God. God and Christ are at work in the people with whom we disagree. Even if people are wrong or do not believe, they do not escape God’s presence. God is still at work; he is still God—even if unacknowledged—and is still present and filling all things.

The work of the church. To say the church is ineffective and has lost its influence is an understatement. A drive through a community to look at its churches is rarely comforting. Mainline churches are dwindling away, and reactionary, conservative churches are often unable to deal with the culture. Christ is muted or distorted beyond recognition. More loyalty is paid to the evangelical subculture than the gospel. The pastor’s prominence stifles the work of Christians and encourages self-promotion. This passage offers a blueprint for redesigning the work of the church and its leaders.

To do so, Christians must break the monopoly the clergy has on the tasks of ministry. The body of Christ does not have two classes of members—clergy and laity—or two sets of expectations. Everyone has the same task of building up the body, even though responsibilities vary. Certainly some tasks are more appropriate to pastors and require professional expertise, but even with those tasks pastors should include and train church members. Ministry is the only profession that retains nothing to itself, gives away all its knowledge free, and invites those served to do the same work.88

The church must train people for various levels of ministry. And training is not merely for future clergy; all members are to be trained and enabled to do the work to which God calls them. The failure to train and enlist all believers shortchanges the grace of God (cf. 2 Cor. 6:1). Even baptism and Lord’s Supper are not off-limits for church members, if the church recognizes their leadership and deems their conduct appropriate. The main issue is the integrity of the act.

Enlisting all members into the work of the church should not focus merely on acts of public worship or teaching. To suggest this only shows how narrowly we view ministry. The ministries of the people cover most of life—some of it the unnoticed ministry to family and friends and some of it more intentionally reaching out. Ministry includes quietly nurturing individuals, working with small groups, addressing problems in society, and providing care to people in distress. This is not do-goodism—which is not bad in itself—but an exercise of the grace of the gospel to build up the body. The entire body must be involved in the work of the body.

The work of the leaders. Application of this text also requires that we take more seriously the work of Christian leaders. The clergy cannot possibly do all that is necessary for building up and caring for the body. Our present practice has made ministry an impossible burden. We expect both too much and the wrong kinds of things from pastors, much of which should be done by other church members. Pastors are not hired to do the ministry, but to prepare the people to work, and pastors must be the first to expect work from parishioners. We must also stop viewing pastors as masters of ceremonies who conduct services for others to watch. Abraham Heschel complained of people who pray by proxy, letting their leaders do their praying.89 Worship has not occurred if people only watch someone else do it. Pastors lead in worship, but worship only occurs if the inner beings of the people are engaged, strengthened, and involved.

What we should expect from clergy we rarely receive—the communication of God’s Word to elicit and enlist the souls of people. That is exactly what Paul does in Ephesians: He focuses on the gospel and its effect. Many pastors get involved in all sorts of other activities and do not develop their knowledge and ability to explain the Word. Respect for pastors is low. Often they are no longer perceived to be leaders, for their expertise is not obvious. Pastors must be experts in the gospel—the broadest subject in the world—and its application to life, beginning with themselves. They need to train their people biblically. Without it, it is no surprise that so many have been duped by flashy televangelists. A pastor’s job is to help people be productive with their own Christian work and service.

Doing the truth in love. The importance of truth cannot be overestimated. All three persons of the Trinity are linked with truth, the gospel is the word of truth, we are to speak and do the truth, and we are to worship in truth. Worship is telling the truth about God. Confession is telling the truth about ourselves. Counseling is a process of helping people deal with the truth. In the end we have no other activity but speaking and living the truth in love.

Application of these words focuses first on the gospel itself. We are to live the gospel, God’s truth in Christ under which all other truth is subsumed. As we have seen,90 the gospel expresses reality, so speaking the truth in love involves rejecting the pseudo-reality in which our society seeks to live and embracing what is really real—God and his work in the world. Living the truth in love is a theological act, by which the whole of God’s message is incorporated. Ephesians takes a comprehensive view of God and humanity, moving from God’s eternal electing grace to the fullness of time when all things are summed up in Christ. It has in view the once, the now, and the not yet. This is the reality that living the truth seeks to communicate, and it is the framework within which all other living of truth and love takes place.

Living the truth in love is no abstract exercise; it is personal, practical, and all-embracing. No other foundation exists for healthy living. We as humans prefer to live in delusion, hiding from ourselves and thinking we are better (or worse) than we are. We lie to ourselves, to each other, and to God. The entertainment industry consciously hides reality and creates an illusion in which people seek to live. As one actor said after being caught in a huge indiscretion, “I don’t believe in truth. I believe in style.” With so many lies, it is not surprising that people are like corks in storm-tossed waves, being carried in every direction (4:14). But sooner or later, the delusion falls apart, and we and our relationships suffer. We need to speak truth with God—even if it is to express our doubts and fears—with ourselves, and with other persons, and then we need to live the truth.

People need some place where they can be accepted for who they are and can speak honestly about their fears, frustrations, and hopes. The church, not the local bar, needs to be the place where people can speak the truth in love and hear it spoken to them in love. Christians need to be communications majors. Knowing what to say and how to say it is never easy. Sometimes speaking the truth in love requires confrontation; sometimes it requires giving people room to find out for themselves.

Living the truth in love means embracing people in an unwavering commitment to truth. This commitment has a theological foundation in the gospel and knows as part of its own truth that we see through a glass darkly (1 Cor. 13:12). But in the humility of partial knowledge, what is known is not evaded. Truth is not used to harm, nor is love allowed to distort. Love rejoices with the truth (13:6). Both love and truth are needed for health and all relations.

Every couple should make an unbreakable vow to always speak the truth in love. Every parent and child should make the same unbreakable vow. Love may seem out of place in business ethics, but the guideline for business too is speaking the truth in love. Churches and pastors too have only the same path. Whether dealing with the shallowness of a self-proclaimed “good” person or with someone struggling with cancer, truth in love is all we have.

Speaking the truth in love may require confrontation, which many of us seek to avoid out of concern for our own security. But in a fallen world confrontation is necessary to love. The command to love one’s neighbor as oneself is even preceded by the admonition, “Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in his guilt” (Lev. 19:17–18). Both patience and tolerance also have their roles. Wisdom is required to discern when service to others means speaking or “the ministry of holding your tongue.”91

Living the truth in love requires confronting the lies society hands us. Alcohol is not required for a good time. Pornography does demean women, and no, the majority of people are not promiscuous. Poor people are not necessarily lazy. None of us is independent and self-supporting. All Christians are not hypocrites, and no, you cannot worship God just as well by yourself.

Moreover, church lies need to be confronted. When the Catholic Church annuls a marriage after thirteen years, two children, and a divorce because the man was not baptized, that is a lie that cannot be condoned. When various people seek to cover over sexual indiscretion or harassment by their leaders, they should be confronted. When denominations deny their gospel by vindictiveness and division, someone needs to say they are living a lie. Corruption flourishes because the culture exalts loyalty over integrity. Integrity is all we have worth fighting for.

The fight for integrity can be costly. People may lose their jobs if they speak the truth in love. Evil may resort to violence when its lies are debunked. But discipleship is always costly. Speaking the truth in love is a way to identify with the cross. But even when costly, integrity is still the only thing we have.

Handling conflict. Conflict is unavoidable in life and is never easy or pleasant. No automatically successful procedures exist, but this passage provides guidelines for handling conflict. In short, forget your ego, see to yourself first, and speak the truth in love. Show humility, gentleness, patience, and put up with people in love without an air of paternalism. Love and concern should be so obvious that other people know that they are not conditioned on agreement. Even if people have to go their separate ways, they can do so without violating their Christian character. If Christian attitudes cannot prevail in tense times, they have no claim to be genuine.

Concluding reflection. Application of this passage requires nothing less than a reformation of Christianity. We have strayed from the gospel as surely as if we had sold indulgences. Our individualism, ecclesiastical hierarchies, and lack of integrity do not match the calling with which we were called. We have lost our sense of the body of Christ. Be good stewards of his grace and fulfill your role in his body. Live the truth in love. It is not beyond you, for it is enabled by being attached to Christ.

From the cowardice that shrinks from new truths,

From the laziness that is content with half-truths,

And from the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,

O God of truth, deliver us.92

Original Meaning

Unity Is Motivated by Theological Oneness (4:4–6)

THE CREED IN 4:4–6 may be adapted from a pre-Pauline confession, but it is more likely from a creed used in Paul’s churches or one that Paul composed originally for this letter. Its theology is Pauline, especially since no other New Testament writer makes use of the body image.15 The confession has a threefold triadic structure: (1) body, Spirit, hope; (2) Lord, faith, baptism, (3) one God and Father of all, who is over all, through all, and in all. Again we find material that is both Trinitarian and focused on theology.

Christians must maintain the unity of the Spirit because everything they hold of any significance they hold with other people. Seven items are preceded by the word “one,” and in each case the oneness expresses both the uniqueness of the item and its foundational value for unity. All seven express the reality that there is only one gospel and that to believe that gospel is to enter into the unity it creates. Christianity is a shared faith. No separate or merely individual faith exists, nor is there a different salvation.

Not only does this section relate back to 2:14–18, but to 2:21–22 and 3:6 as well. There are not several bodies of Christ in different locales, but one body of Christ, and each local congregation is representative of that body. Behind the one body-one Spirit language is the theology of 2:16–18 and 1 Corinthians 12:13, in which Christians are joined into one body by the Spirit and given access together to God. In addition to having a common origin in the Spirit’s work and a common existence in Christ’s body, believers share a common hope, the common eschatological destiny of the gospel.

In 4:4 Paul repeats his focus on “the calling with which we were called” (cf. v. 1).16 The similarity of verses 1 and 4 underscores that living worthy of one’s calling will mean living in unity, for all share the same calling and are on the way to the same destiny.

The second triad (v. 5) likewise refers to chapter 2. In Christ the whole building grows into a holy temple “in the Lord” (2:21)—the only occurrence of “Lord” by itself in chapters 1–3. While the world may know numerous “lords” (1 Cor. 8:5–6), Christians know only one, and this implies that the one Lord is not going to give contradictory commands to his followers.

“One faith” looks back to the explanation of the gospel in 2:1–10, but reference here is not to the act of believing. “Faith” is used here by metonymy for that which is believed, the content of the faith. The statement means there is only one gospel.

No other explicit reference to “baptism” occurs in the letter, although an allusion to it appears at 4:22–24 (perhaps also 5:26).17 Paul’s main emphasis here is that the only baptism that exists is baptism into Christ (or into his body) by the Spirit (cf. also 1 Cor. 1:13; 12:13; Gal. 3:27). If people have the same Lord, believe the same gospel, and have experienced the same reality of being baptized into Christ, should they not live out this unity?

An even greater basis for unity exists in God, the “Father of all” (v. 6). The theology is close to that in 3:14–15. Surely the Jewish Shema—the confession that Yahweh is one (Deut. 6:4)—lies behind this verse (cf. also Rom. 3:30; 1 Cor. 8:6). The liturgical expression “who is over all and through all and in all” is paralleled in several texts, most notably 1 Corinthians 8:6 (though this text is different in that all things come through Christ). Variation occurs in the way liturgical expressions are applied.18