Ephesians 4:25–5:2

Original Meaning

Lying and Anger (4:25–27)

GIVEN THE FOCUS on truth in 4:15, 21, 24, it is no surprise that truth-telling is the first of Paul’s ethical injunctions. The NIV translation makes three choices that merit comment:

(1) The imperative “put off” is actually a participle, which has legitimately been taken as an imperative, but the emphasis is on the main imperative “speak.”

(2) The word “falsehood” is actually “the lie” (singular), understood in the sense “lying.”

(3) The adverb “truthfully” is really the noun “truth,” which makes the focus on truth even stronger than the NIV reveals. In doing so, the focus on truth is lessened.

The main imperative (lit.: “each speak truth with his neighbor”) is a quotation from Zechariah 8:16. The motivation for telling the truth is that we are members of each other. Though the word “body” does not actually occur in this text, the NIV has added it because it is implied. Similar language occurs in 5:30 and in Romans 12:5, describing the body of Christ.

“In your anger do not sin” (v. 26) is a quotation from Psalm 4:4, which if rendered literally is, “Be angry and do not sin.” Most commentators today accept that the first imperative is concessive or conditional: “Although [or if] you get angry, do not sin.” This is the reasoning behind the NIV.4 Some, however, still view this as a double command, placing a moral obligation on believers to be angry if the occasion requires but not to sin in that anger.5 This may be reading too much into the verse since Paul’s concern is the prevention of sin, not the obligation of anger. This verse may presuppose the possibility of anger without sin,6 but its emphasis is not on “righteous anger.” Rather, it is on preventing anger from causing sin. The danger of anger is evident in its being used as a beachhead for the devil, and verse 31 excludes all bitterness, wrath, and anger. Clearly anger does not fit well with the new being.

That the sun is not to go down on our anger is a way of saying that anger must not endure. It must be dealt with quickly and then set aside. The word “foothold” in verse 27 is literally “place.” That is, we must not give the devil room in our lives to operate. Anger is one place of inroad for him, a Trojan horse for his attack.7 In other words, anger usually leads to other sins.

Bridging Contexts

TO BRING THE practical instructions offered here into our day requires no bridging in themselves; rather, they require obedience. As John Calvin noted, all correct knowledge of God originates in obedience.24 Still, the theology of these verses requires reflection. We may need additional information, and we must consider obstacles to application. For example, is it ever permissible to lie? What of righteous anger? How can forgiveness and justice be held together?

How the author describes the new being is compelling: truth, no anger, no stealing, no destructive language, compassion, forgiveness, and love. This may not be the list we would have offered, for it seems rather basic and simple. But with the twin anchors of truth and love the author is on target. Without these life and community are in shambles. Moreover, by prohibiting lying, anger, theft, and destructive language, Paul prohibits the sins that enable most others.

Some Christians worry about such specific directions for living, for they fear it may lead to legalism, but this thinking is far from the New Testament. Texts like this do not endorse legalism; they are descriptions of life in Christ, which is never without content. Christian living requires certain and specific actions. The Christian faith is not a passive religion; it is an aggressive pursuit of the productive and beneficial.

A relational, reflective ethic. Before dealing with the specific commands of this passage, attention must be given to the fact that the Christian ethic is a relational and reflective one. It is about covenant relation with God. God’s Spirit is present in our lives and is grieved when we do not live worthy of the calling (4:1). We are carried along from within by a God who reacts to our behavior.

Relation with God establishes relations with other people. No matter how strenuous the effort, relation with God cannot be separated from relation with other people. The relational ethic is present in the body theology in 4:25 and implied throughout the passage. As Christians we are part of other believers, and we suffer or thrive with them. Until we take this interrelation seriously, we can never be what we are called to be. This perspective undergirds the necessity of building up others in Christ, both in what is said to them and in what we contribute to them materially. Insensitivity and hostility are not allowed.

Although Ephesians addresses primarily relations within the body of Christ, relations with non-Christians follow the same pattern. As pointed out earlier,25 the same ethic applies to all people, even though the relation is different.

Ours is also a reflective ethic: We are to reflect God’s attitude and acts toward us to other people. God is known in the cross and resurrection. He is not “out there” to dream about, but present to change lives. He is the standard for our actions, and that we are his children means we are to copy his acts. We have received grace and forgiveness from him, and we are to show these qualities to others. He loves, and we are to love.

With the allusions to Genesis 1:26–27 in 4:24, clearly Christians are to be image bearers, reflecting the image of God for the world to see. Shall we give self to self or to God? Shall we choose rebellion and attempt to take the place of God or choose obedience and be like God? The temptation in Eden was to be like God, which is strange, for humans already were in God’s image. In this text Christians are called to bear that image and show the world what God is like.

Of course, in many ways we cannot copy God; we cannot, for example, imitate his omnipresence or omnipotence, nor are we asked to. We are asked to imitate God’s character. At issue is our behavior. The standard is high, but so is the privilege. Christians have God’s Spirit with them (4:30) and belong in God’s family (5:1). Such a lofty position requires that God’s character be reflected in the way we treat other people. Copying God only means taking seriously who God says we are.

Truth. First and foremost, the new being tells the truth. Lying is no longer a resource in the Christian arsenal. For Christians truth is not a choice; it is a necessity.26

Lying is destructive both to the self and to relations with others. “By a lie a man throws away, and as it were, annihilates his dignity as a man.”27 The same is true for a woman. But it is not just the self that is destroyed. Since Christians are part of each other, as John Mackay has commented poignantly, “A lie is a stab into the very vitals of the Body of Christ.”28 How strange that one part of the body would deceive another part, as if the eye would lie to the foot about some danger it sees.29 Lies distort reality and accompany every other form of wrongdoing.30 They are usually motivated by self-enhancement or self-defense and usually come in bunches, for it is difficult to tell only one. The evil are people of the lie.31

The only place anyone can live meaningfully is with the truth. Truth is not an option in life. A free society cannot exist without truth, but neither can an individual be free without truth. “To obey the truth is to be free…. We do not ‘have’ the truth, truth owns us….”32 Truth—that which corresponds to the facts and on which we can rely—is both necessary and freeing (cf. John 8:31–32). Truth encompasses the totality of life, including relation with God. If God is real and has sent Christ, then living in truth requires living in relation with God, and speaking the truth includes communicating the reality of life with Christ. The issue is not just words, but an integrity marked by the coherence of word and act.

Truth is particularly important for building community. Communities are based on mutual reliance, that people can be trusted for support. Once that trust is lost, it is difficult to recover. In speaking truth to our neighbor, we are saying, “You can rely on me; our relation will not mislead you or cause you harm. I will help you and my word will correspond to my acts.” Healthy community cannot exist without truth.

Do we have to tell all the truth to everyone? The text is about speaking truth with our fellow believer, but that does not mean we can lie to someone else. Jesus’ consistently rejected boundaries limiting the application of ethics.33 Some religions permit lying to enemies, but Jesus requires disciples to love their enemies, which certainly excludes lying to them.

Philosophers and theologians have debated, however, the permissibility of lying in order to accomplish good, such as preserving life.34 Obviously, who gets to define “good” is a major issue. Usually and appropriately attention is placed on a person’s right to know. A murderer does not have the right to know where his victim is hiding. Therefore, many people would choose to lie to prevent greater sin. On the other hand, others—such as Immanuel Kant—have rejected the morality of all lying. Part of the problem may be our attempt to justify our “necessary” action in a sinful world, but even if one grants that avoidance of greater sin may in extreme cases require a lie, no easing of resistance to lying is legitimate. The lie-to-preserve-life syndrome is a slippery slope that soon permits lying to preserve my life as I want it. Are not nearly all lies based on the attempt to achieve good for someone? Again, a comment from John Mackay deserves reflection: “There is no place in the Christian ethic for the well-intentioned lie.”35

This does not mean that we have to tell all the truth to everyone we meet. Privacy is a legitimate and necessary part of life. People do not have the right to know everything. That position overemphasizes community and ignores the boundaries of the individual. We are required not to lie; we are not required to tell all we know. What we communicate must be truth, and the subject matter and level of detail depend on the nature of the relation and discernment about what is healthy and beneficial. Truth must always be guided by love (4:15), but never sacrificed to it. Yet care is needed, for telling part of the truth can be a way of lying, and withholding necessary information can also be a deception. People can accept not being told information that is none of their business, but they seek trustworthy and beneficial relations. Of primary importance are the motives at work as the relation is lived out. The issue is integrity.

Anger. This passage is frequently used to justify righteous anger. John Stott even argues from this text for more Christian anger.36 His point is legitimate, and as we indicated in reference to God’s anger in 2:3, “the person who does not get angry does not care.”37 Christians ought to get angry about injustice, poverty, racism, lies, and abuse.38 Certainly not all anger is sinful.39 But whether righteous anger is the implication of Ephesians 4:26 is doubtful. The text’s primary intent is not to promote anger or even allow it, but to prevent it.

Human anger is usually destructive, and the New Testament attitude toward it is strongly negative. James 1:20 even says that human anger does not accomplish the righteousness of God. Furthermore, righteous anger is difficult to identify. No one feels his or her anger is unjust. In words similar to verse 27, Romans 12:19–21 counsels: “Give place to [God’s] wrath.” In other words, do not let anger give place to the devil to cause sin, and do not seek vengeance. Rather, give place to God’s vengeance. Your task is to love your enemies.

The reason the New Testament deletes anger as an option is that anger is largely a self-centered emotion. Anger is a means of communicating what we care about—usually ourselves—and is an attempt at punishment. It is a chemical and physiological reaction to our displeasure that the world is not as we wish. It is also a choice we make, for we choose both what we react to and at what level the reaction will occur. “No one else can make us feel anger; we must own it ourselves.”40 We express anger only where it is safe, and virtually never to those we fear or respect highly. More often than not we cause harm when using anger. Seneca, who wrote the first known treatise on anger, said, “No plague has cost the human race more dear.”41 Like lying, anger destroys both the angry person—even physically—and community. Rather than focus on what displeases them, Christians should focus instead on how they will love God and the world.

The text assumes that people will make us angry, but anger must not take up residence. If given place, it infects and mutates into further resentment and hostility. If given place, it becomes the avenue the devil uses to cause sin. For that reason, it must be shown the door rather quickly.

What does this passage teach about the devil? The text here is brief, so thinking must draw on the broader discussions in 2:2 and 6:10–20.42 Focus on the devil lurking to capture could lead to a misguided paranoia. Instead, the main point of the text is not to focus on the devil, but on our own anger, which is the root of the problem. On the other hand, those who ignore the devil gloss over the reality of evil as an enemy seeking an avenue of destruction. Scripture should be our primary guideline for the amount of attention given to any subject. If we follow it, the devil is given limited attention.

Productivity. All of us come into the world for a brief time, and we spend most of it yelling “Pay attention to me!” We feel justified in satisfying ourselves, even at cost to others. From the time we are old enough to recognize objects, we want what the other person has—if for no other reason, so that they will not have it. Ephesians 4:28 ignites a bomb under all our self-centered thinking. Our goal is not enjoyment; it is productivity so that we can give. We do not exist for ourselves, but for relations with other people and with God.

This simple verse is about theft, community, productivity, and stewardship. The Old Testament respect of property is affirmed, but property is to be shared, not held tightly. The community must be a need-discerning community. If a need exists, the community has a responsibility to help meet that need. This verse recognizes human needs as real and legitimate, as opposed to the illegitimate and deceitful desires mentioned in 2:3 and 4:22. Needs are those necessities—material (v. 28) or immaterial (v. 29)—that enable life before God, whereas desires (v. 22) are needs distorted by self-centeredness, pulling us away from God.

We live in a society of takers, one that mocks the “Puritan” work ethic. But we have been created in the image of God to enter into his creative activity, that is, to work. In failing to be productive we fail to live up to our vocation as humans.43 Possibly the strongest witness Christians can make is to become givers. The concern is not about giving money, which is at most ancillary to the text. The concern is working to benefit others.

Speech. Much of this passage is concerned with speech, which is the performance of a godly act. The first act recorded of God in Genesis is speech.44 Speech is itself creative activity, for with it we create worlds—communities of shared discourse—and with it we frame the reality within which we live. Specialists speak of “performative language,” language we use to accomplish tasks or establish realities.45 We fail to realize the power and dignity of language. Nearly all our language does things. Words are commitments,46 and with them we enable and support or diminish and destroy.

Not only should Christians become communication majors, learning all we can about the process;47 we should also be extremely careful how we use language. The assumption of verse 29 is that we either pollute or establish by the way we speak. Our authority is for building people up, not for tearing them down (2 Cor. 10:8).

Is forgiveness too wimpy? Even the secular world knows that forgiveness is one of the main features of Christianity. Two problems occur. (1) A gulf exists between our knowledge and our will. We know God’s forgiveness, but do not have the will to forgive. Christians tend to be no better than other people—in fact, they may be worse. Offense turns to bitterness, callousness, and rejection. “Christians” go for years not speaking to relatives or friends, or churches split. But refusing to forgive is hazardous. Matthew emphasizes that our forgiveness is tied to our forgiving (Matt. 6:12, 14–15; 18:21–35). Moreover, refusal to forgive is a self-centered act and presumes a role in judging that is not ours. It devalues people and destroys relations. In the process, however, we devalue ourselves.

(2) But if we forgive, does not justice evaporate? In fact, isn’t this whole section of the letter too wimpy? If we show kindness and forgiveness, will we not be run over by a hostile world? The text does not encourage naiveté about danger and violence in our world. But that is the precise reason that kindness and forgiveness are necessary. Sin breeds sin, and violence begets violence. Christians are asked to break the cycle by not retaliating, by not placing personal rights over other people. This is part of dying with Christ. Wimpy people should not apply for the job. The weak cannot forgive; only the strong have the resources to forgive, to give up self-defense. The Christian ethic requires strength and wisdom to know how strength is applied.

Nor is justice discounted. Of course, most of us want justice when our rights are violated, but we would like forgiveness for our own wrongdoing. Paul has already indicated how forgiveness and justice are both retained: Speak the truth in love (4:15). Justice is not a rejection of the other person, but a statement of the truth, including an assessment of cost, restitution, and prevention. Forgiveness is not an absence of accountability. It is a refusal to let a past wrong destroy present relations. But is our concern for justice a concern for some external standard or a concern for people? Justice exists for people—even when it assesses punishment. That is why M. Zerwick could say, “Be merciful, if you want to be just.”48

Sacrifice for sin. Perhaps the most difficult part of appropriating this section is the material on Christ’s death. We have no problem agreeing that the human plight is desperate and that we deserve God’s wrath (2:1–3; 4:17–19). But how can Jesus give himself for us, and are the sacrificial ideas valid? These issues have been encountered earlier in Ephesians, especially in 2:14–18.49 The concern here is primarily to motivate the ethic.

The sacrificial ideas are important. Precisely because of the hostility and sin in the world, Jesus identified with the human plight and took on that plight and its punishment. He gave himself and in doing so developed a solidarity with humanity. That was his vocation.

This pattern of sacrifice describes God’s taking away his own anger.50 Our God is not a God who is removed from us, but a God who cares and who identifies with us. We have violated his commands and all he is, but he responds with self-giving love. The Father is not a remote being, appeased by the action of his Son.51 Jesus died in our place (5:2), and we were involved in that death and in his resurrection. This self-giving love is evidence of God’s own favor. The sacrifice is pleasing to God not only because of the obedience of Christ, but also because of what it does in restoring humans into relation with God. The focus on sacrifice is to show that God accomplished for us what we could not accomplish for ourselves.

Contemporary Significance

APPLICATION OF THIS text is straightforward. It requires obedience. We begin with three general points: (1) Keep the pattern in view; (2) reject self-centeredness; (3) activate your will.

(1) If the Christian ethic is a relational, reflective ethic, we must always keep before us both the pattern of God’s character and the reality of our relations. This is why images such as “in Christ” or “the body” are of such practical importance. We will not reflect what is not present to us, and we cannot copy what we do not see. Theology drives the ethic,52 so the theology must be conscious and active. What motivates our obedience is not knowledge of correct action but awareness of God. Imitation of God is an overwhelming idea in the abstract, but experience of God’s forgiving love makes imitation both necessary and natural.

(2) Awareness of our relations both with God and with other people is also the key to rejecting self-centeredness. None of the commands in this passage can be followed as long as the primary interest is oneself. Only when our attention is shifted to something greater than ourselves can we escape the prison of self-interest. If we are conscious that the Spirit is in us, marking us as belonging to God and therefore under his direction, service to self is blocked off. Similarly, awareness of oneness with other people will not permit inattention or mistreatment of them. If other people are diminished, we are diminished; if they prosper, we prosper with them.

(3) Obedience to these commands also requires a conscious choice and discipline, for they are contrary to our nature. Too often we allow our old nature to lead us into disobedience. We must grasp the imperative and choose obedience. This is not “works righteousness,” for we make our choices in response to God and his presence, but human will and discipline are necessary. God works with us, not on us.

Integrity, integrity, integrity. If God is the pattern, integrity is the result. He is characterized by truth, and his people should be as well (see 4:15).53 This means first of all that we discern truth in God. He is the source of truth by which we live. If taken seriously, this should separate us from much of our society, which seeks to live lies. The entertainment industry creates illusion and perversion and seeks to pass them off as truth. Our society asserts that immediate pleasure is the goal and denies the reality of death or judgment for our actions. The lies around us must be identified and challenged. For example, when a man says, “I am not willing to live a lie any more, so I will divorce my wife,” he is not moving toward integrity.

Integrity requires a continual commitment to speak truth even when it is painful. But even in such situations, truth must be spoken in love. We cannot allow ourselves the privilege of deception. Our neighbors are part of us, and lying will only destroy both us and them. Whether in a court of law or at the kitchen table, Christians should not need an oath to insure veracity.

But do we not live by deception, trying to appear better than we are? If people know what we really are, will they not reject us? Maybe, but the depravity we know personally is also a depravity we all share and about which we must be truthful. Otherwise, we hide behind masks of fake purity and never really deal with our sin. The text calls for a transparency, an openness guided by wisdom as to what is appropriate. Death is not a subject from which we can run, so why should we not discuss death more straightforwardly? Our sexuality often possesses us, so why should we not in the right context discuss it and deal with it? Why can’t we be more forthright about our own egos? We do make ourselves real by telling the truth.

One of the ways we lie is by exaggeration. We want the story to sound a little better, our performance to be a little more admired, or the other person to look a little more ridiculous. But by exaggeration we distort reality. Some of the most guilty exaggerators are pastors, who use loud one-sided statements to make God look more wonderful and themselves more powerful. But God does not need exaggeration. People do respond to overstatement, but such language is ego-driven and detrimental to both witness and spiritual health. Pastors should lead the way in integrity of word by speaking the truth in a balanced way that does justice to all the truth, not just the pieces they want to emphasize.

This text pushes for integrity with property as well. You cannot put theft and imitating God in the same sentence. Self-centeredness says, “Take what you can get, no matter the method.” God-centeredness marks out boundaries within which needs may legitimately be addressed. Rationalization is not permitted to justify theft, for no justification exists. Some theft is direct stealing of property, and in our society much of it is shoplifting or theft by employees. Other kinds of theft are closer to deception and lying. People steal by the way they deceive in business, in soliciting funds, in cheating on tests, or in reporting taxes to the government. Christians cannot allow themselves to be involved in any kind of theft, even when no one will ever know. At stake is our own self-understanding and our relation to God, to say nothing of our relation to other people and our ability to be witnesses to the integrity of God.

In many ways integrity is the subject of this whole passage. That is, the purpose of the gospel is to establish integrity in our being.

Helpfulness, not hostility. We live in a hostile world. All of us fear violence or mistreatment, so we tend to be watchful, guarding every inch of our rights. All of us have been wronged, which makes us aggressive in self-defense or so scarred we get revenge by harming someone else. The violations and failures that occur in all our institutions and movements push us to hostility and cynicism. Christians become defensive, suspicious, and vindictive. Talk about theology of the gospel does not root out our self-centeredness. Consequently, the openness the church needs is not there. It does not manifest the magnanimous grace of God.

“Hostile Christian” is an oxymoron. We must replace hostility with helpfulness. The primary place hostility and cynicism appear is in our families, the assumption being that those closest to us are responsible for the problem, have failed to solve it, or are easy targets for revenge. Chapters 5 and 6 of Ephesians will focus on the family, but this passage needs to be applied to families first. Where families are marked by bitterness, anger, shouting, or worse, violence, no one may speak of Christian faith. Usually our anger is in response to small things that do not really matter. And since anger is a choice to express our displeasure where no fear is present, anger is most often directed at the wrong people. The victims of anger are usually not its cause; they are merely people who are present and pose no threat—such as women, children, or people without power, the very people to whom we should guarantee safety.

Bitterness and hostility within the church must also be addressed. Cynicism, the first step toward bitterness, is often a defense against the insanity of the world and a means of coping, but it is also sin because it denigrates and closes off possibilities. Cynicism, it must be said, is one of the largest dangers for pastors and church leaders, for they know the failures of the church too well. Rather than being cynical about superficiality and failure, would it not be better to speak the truth in love and act appropriately? Can we be courageous enough to do that?

Clearly this text seeks the gentleness and tolerant love that were mentioned in 4:2. At bottom the issue is hospitality, the way we receive and care for people. Too often our demeanor communicates harshness and abrasiveness, or at best, indifference. Instead, people need to find in our presence receptivity and goodwill. They need to know that in the church they are safe and that resources can be found for assistance. The body of Christ consists of people who have traded hostility for helpfulness. Christians are builders, not destroyers. They are to be productive, addressing needs other people have. Their speech is beneficial speech,54 and their acts beneficial acts. The goal is investment in people to build up community. We are not permitted merely to take care of ourselves.55

More harm than help? But the attempt to help can make matters worse. People become dependent on help and a drain on resources. Welfare systems become impotent and corrupting, and every church knows parasitic people who leach off the goodwill of Christians. Further, some people seem so broken they cannot be fixed. Does the idealism of this text really work?

Of course, it works. Not all needs will be met, and not all people can be “fixed.” Human depravity and the brokenness of this world are powerful forces present until the day of redemption. Help can be given in unwise ways, but without help no one makes it. God called Christians to mutually edifying unity in Christ. That is both our task and our identity. We are to live productively and beneficially—which means that we must fight for what is right and good. If we do not, we will almost certainly have to fight later against what is wrong.56 You fight for right by helping people.

The goal is not for some Christians to help others, but for all to help each other. All of us have needs the community is to address. Participation in the body of Christ does not allow some to avoid work or to take advantage. Where that occurs, truth must be spoken in love. People must take responsibility for themselves and help others—despite the problems. God cares, and because he does, his people care, even if their only recourse is to weep.

Words are easy; help comes at cost. Sometimes the needs of people are so deep that any thought of help is depressing. How do we help children with fetal alcohol syndrome or adults with neither the skills nor the desire to be self-supporting? Often the only possible avenue is a communal one. We cannot, of course, meet all the needs, but that we are blind to needs or unengaged in addressing them contradicts what it means to be in Christ.

Forgiveness. Forgiveness is grounded in God’s forgiving us in Christ. Yet Christians seem unwilling to forgive, as the numerous divisions and conflicts in churches and families attest. How can Christians go for years holding grudges? Even if forgiveness is granted, we keep the offense available to use in future battles. As a country song puts it: “We bury the hatchet, but leave the handle sticking out!” We are also slow to forgive because it appears to ignore justice and restitution. But most of the time, refusal to forgive does not derive from some lofty sense of justice, but from self-centeredness. How foolish! As one person put it, “He who is unwilling to forgive breaks the bridge over which he too must pass.” Moreover, standing on our rights before God is foolish, for God may then stand on his! The New Testament assures us that those who do not forgive are not forgiven. Ephesians 4:32 changes the “golden rule.” We are asked to do unto others as God has done to us. We show whose we are by the way we act.

Forgiveness, however, does not ignore justice. God certainly did not, and once again the key is in speaking the truth in love. Forgiveness does not necessarily forget the offense—the pain may be too deep to forget—or ignore restitution. The nature of the offense determines the response. What forgiveness does accomplish is the rejection of bitterness, malice, and revenge. We do not control the actions of others, but in choosing to forgive we establish control over our own responses.57 We choose to value the other person despite his or her offense and to desire what is good for that person before God. Forgiveness also restores relations, or at least provides a foundation on which they can be restored. But forgiveness is a process and does not necessarily happen immediately. The nature of the offense and the maturity of the one forgiving will determine the length and character of the process. But forgiveness is necessary, and the process cannot allow bitterness to take hold and grow.

Keep short accounts. Christians are encouraged by this passage and others to keep short accounts with God. These accounts have to do primarily with how we have treated other people, so we need to keep short accounts both with God and other people. J. B. Phillips translated 4:26b as, “Never go to bed angry.”58 This is not only good advice for married couples and families, but for all of us. In short order we need to deal with anger, malice, and the need to forgive. Inattention to problems makes them worse.

Excellence, as defined by business experts, is doing a lot of little things well. Christians need to do a lot of little things well—keeping track, giving attention, and nurturing people. The habit of regular and frequent checks with God is necessary to determine whether we are grieving or pleasing the Spirit. Have we harbored anger and nursed grudges or been quick to forgive? Are we reflecting God’s treatment of us, or do we have different standards for other people than those we require for ourselves? Are we givers and builders or takers and destroyers? To put it another way, if Jesus’ self-giving sacrifice was a pleasing smell to God, do our lives provide such a pleasing smell, or is the smell rather foul?

By way of summary, to apply this text:

(1) Watch your tongue. Make it speak the truth, use it to build, not to destroy.

(2) Watch your hands and feet. Make them respect property and put them to work so you can give.

(3) You are part of those in Christ. Nurture people gently. Do nothing from malice and anger.

(4) You belong to God and his Spirit is in you. Treat others as he has treated you. Forgive and love.

Original Meaning

To Harm or to Help? (4:28–29)

THESE TWO VERSES are bound together not only by the negative-positive contrast, but also by the words “need” and “good” (the latter of which the NIV translates as “useful” and “helpful”). Both verses show the “other” orientation of the new being as opposed to the previous self-centered and abusive character of the old being.

While stealing may have been common among slaves, by no means should verse 28 be thought as addressed to them. Theft then, as now, was a common problem. This verse may be the most striking description of conversion in the New Testament: “The thief is to become a philanthropist.”8 The person who did wrong in order to meet his own selfish desires must now work in order to contribute to someone else’s need. This is a compelling example of dying and rising with Christ. The concern to address communal needs is reminiscent of the early church’s community of goods.9 In 1 Thessalonians 4:11 Paul urged believers to work with their own hands, and he also used this same language of his own efforts to avoid burdening those to whom he preached.10 His goal was for believers to be self-supporting and supportive of those in need. Note the contrast between “need” here and “desires” in 4:22 (cf. “lust” in 4:19).

The word “unwholesome” in verse 29 is used of spoiled fish or rotten fruit, but it is also used to describe stones that crumble. The metaphorical meaning connotes “foul” or “bad.” Although obscene speech may be in mind (see 5:4), the concern for “building up” later in the verse suggests “destructive” language. “Building up” reminds the reader of Paul’s concern in 4:16 to build up the body. With “may benefit” the NIV loses another connection with previous sections. Literally the text is, “that it may give grace to the hearers,” which links especially with the grace given to each person for the benefit of the church (4:7). We receive grace from God for salvation (chaps. 1–2) and ministry (chaps. 3–4) so that we may extend God’s grace to others.