Moral clarity and mission in Ephesians

One of the most difficult issues for Christians to navigate in our generation (and in any generation) is how to engage faithfully and constructively with people who don’t share our Christian beliefs. If our approach is too strident, we make enemies unnecessarily, but if we lose our sense of identity and mission while we are immersed in the surrounding culture, the distinctive beauty of our Christian witness is diminished.

Three passages in Ephesians offer help in clarifying how a Christian living in the light can shine within a dark world.

Ephesians 4:17-19 foreshadows teaching on putting off the “old self” and putting on the “new self” by exhorting believers to leave behind the non-Christian attitudes and practices that characterized their former lives. Their old selves were permeated by “the futility of their thinking,” and being “darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God.” They were marked by “ignorance” (of God’s good will), hardened hearts, a loss of “all sensitivity” (to God and his work), and various moral vices.

Ephesians 5:8-14 uses the imagery of light and darkness to highlight the drastic change of the believer’s spiritual situation. “Light” is grouped with belonging to God, living a morally fruitful life, and pleasing the Lord. “Darkness” is associated with fruitless deeds, shame, and hiding. Christians are called to separate themselves from participation in darkness while shining brightly in the dark environment around them.

Ephesians 6:10-12 depicts the Christian struggle to live for God in the world as warfare. Paul is careful to specify that our enemy is not “flesh and blood” though. The devil and all other spiritual rulers, authorities, powers, and forces of evil in “this dark world” are the ones who oppose God’s people. Christians must stand strong in their identity in Christ and all of the divine resources God has made available to us in this supernatural struggle.

Two key truths emerge from these three passages:

1. The light/dark contrast and stark difference between believers and unbelievers alerts us to the need for moral clarity and discernment in our lives. It is a false dichotomy to say that Christians in their relationships and behavior can be either loving or holy. A sloppy line of reasoning among some Christians goes like this: A) it is wrong to be moralistic and legalistic – concerned with only outward behavior and being pure; B) therefore, just love other people and don’t be concerned about moral excellence. Our engagement with the world is characterized by both love and light. It is interesting to note that in 1 John, two things are said about God: “God is love” (4:8,16) and “God is light” (1:5).

2. Spiritual battle is a reality in our lives, but we must be sure to identify the correct enemy: Satan and the forces under him, not the unbelievers we encounter. We need to be spiritually and morally vigilant in our resistance to Satan’s agenda and values. But we should be careful about adopting a cultural warrior attitude against people who don’t believe in Christ. Our posture towards others should be that of an “ambassador” (Eph 6:20), looking for opportunities to represent God well as we share the light of Christ  with those who don’t know him.

Unlike the lizard (at least I think that’s what it is!) in the opening picture, Christians are called to stand out within our environment. We are not driven by hostility towards those around us but motivated with a desire to shine the light of the gospel in dark places.

Nothing new under the sun?

The other day when I was reading George Eldon Ladd’s New Testament Theology (published in 1974) I came across his description of “the old liberal view” of Christianity, represented by Adolf von Harnack (1851-1930).

Ladd begins with a quote from Harnack (page 55): “In the combination of these ideas – God the Father, Providence, the position of men as God’s children, the infinite value of the human soul – the whole Gospel is expressed.”

Ladd then describes Harnack’s understanding of the kingdom of God as “the pure prophetic religion taught by Jesus: the Fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, the infinite value of the individual soul, and the ethic of love” (page 58).

Observations:

1. From my work with Christian college students, I suspect that a number of today’s young evangelical Christians would summarize Christianity similarly and would find this vision of Christianity to be quite appealing.

2. Harnack highlights some important biblical ideas here. God is called Father in a number of places in the Bible, and people are called children of God in certain passages. We do share a common humanity as individuals, and we all have been created in the image of God. Love is central to Christian living.

3. Harnack also leaves out crucial clarifications of these topics. For instance, the Bible reserves the “Father-child” (or “Father-son”) language specifically for believers – those who have been adopted into a new relationship with God through the sacrificial and saving work of Christ on the cross, and by the life-giving and transforming action of the Spirit (see John 1:12-13, Galatians 4:4-6, for instance). In addition, to limit Christianity to the teachings of Jesus (the “pure prophetic religion taught by Jesus”) ignores the purposeful, saving work of Jesus (namely, his sufferings, sacrificial death, resurrection, ascension, session, and return).

4. Harnack’s summary of Christianity basically amounts to an incomplete picture of biblical love: God’s universal love as Father of all and our need to love others by affirming their worth as a valuable part of God’s creation.

5. Once Harnack’s vision of Christianity is embraced (either explicitly or inadvertently), topics such as a final judgment, the distinction between the church and the world, Jesus Christ being the only way to God, the experience of conversion and new birth, and the need for evangelism and church planting seem more and more foreign and unnecessary. How does judgment fit into the picture if all people are children of God? What makes people within the church any different from people outside the church? If Jesus simply teaches about God, couldn’t others fill that role adequately as well? Why do I need to believe in Jesus and be “born again” if I am already a child of God? Isn’t it more loving simply to affirm others as valuable rather than to challenge them to repent and believe?

6. Back to my work with Christian college students, the topics mentioned in point #5 (judgment, church/world distinction, Jesus as the only way to God, conversion/new birth, evangelism/church planting) are the very topics that I find young Christians expressing misgivings about. There may be a cause and effect relationship here. Love can be defined so generically, apart from the broader biblical story, that the resulting definition no longer leaves room for these other biblical topics.

Evangelicals – those who value the evangel or euaggelion proclaimed by Christ and explained by the apostles – will notice the gospel being flattened or distorted in various ways in the culture around them. As currency specialists point out, the best way to spot a counterfeit is to be well-studied in the real thing. The full, rich gospel of Jesus Christ (regarding his person, teaching, and works) is presented clearly in the Scriptures for those who have ears to hear.

The Anti-Imperial Gospel?

In recent New Testament scholarship a debated issue has been whether Jesus and early Christians proclaimed their message about God’s kingdom with a subtle but intentional critique of worldly rulers and powers. In other words, to what degree was the Christian gospel intended to be subversive against other authority structures?

On the one hand, passages such as Romans 13:1-7 (“submit to governing authorities”) and Mark 12:17 (“give to Caesar’s what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”) suggests that Jesus and his apostles had no interest in challenging the political kingdoms of the world. Jesus’ followers are also told quite clearly to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them (Matthew 5:44).

But on the other hand, the very language that was applied to Jesus by New Testament writers (savior, salvation, gospel) was already in use with reference to Roman emperors (one famous instance of this is an inscription found in Priene in Asia Minor, from just a few years before Jesus’ birth, describing the “good news/gospel” of the appearance/”epiphany” and world-changing effects of the “savior” Augustus).

Recently Daniel 7 has given me additional appreciation for an anti-imperial perspective. In that passage, “one like a son of man” is given an eternal kingdom over all of the world. This eternal kingdom is portrayed in contrast to powerful worldly kingdoms that had already been destroyed or undercut by God (Daniel 7:11-12). God’s reign, appointed to the son of man (Daniel 7:13-14), rises against the backdrop of the fallen political kingdoms of this world. When Jesus at the outset his public ministry in Galilee proclaims the kingdom of God and calls himself the Son of Man, he carries out the kingdom vision so strikingly revealed in Daniel 7. Jesus affirms a view of God’s reign that will involve the establishment of God’s kingdom over all other rival kingdoms. One can understand why Herod the Great felt threatened by Jesus’ status as King of kings.

When our family visited the beach on a trip to see family recently, my son and I spent several hours building an elaborate sand castle (with multiple moats and layers of walls) that we hoped would be able to withstand the approaching tide of the Gulf of Mexico:

Of course, our castle’s defeat was inevitable. The waves were much too powerful for our carefully built structures. In the same way, worldly kingdoms rise and fall. But God is establishing the kingdom of his Son, Jesus Christ, that will stand forever.

What helps resolve the tension between the exclusive authority and power possessed by Christ and the call for Christians to live peacefully under worldly rulers? I believe that the key is in distinguishing between the “already” and “not yet” aspects of God’s agenda. Because Daniel 7 pictures ultimate victory only in the age to come, after a period of suffering under worldly powers, believers are reminded that the fullness of God’s power will be demonstrated only at a future time. In the meantime believers should not take matters into their own hands by contending against worldly authorities. The final victory will be won by Christ one day. He will take care of things as the rightful king. While waiting for this blessed hope Christians are to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them. And we are to honor legitimate leaders and governments, who serve with God-given authority (Rom 13:1-7).

As the apostle Paul reminds the Philippians, many of whom would have been Roman citizens, we should locate our true citizenship in heaven (Phil 3:20), from where a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, is ready to return to the world to claim his rightful dominion for his people. As citizens of heaven, we represent God’s love and mercy to the world around us, while we wait for our victorious king to arrive. May God sustain us and give us love and wisdom for this task.

The Greatest Commandment, part 3

We’re moving on to what is actually more like an addendum to the greatest commandment. In Mark 12:28-31 Jesus continues his answer to the curious scribe’s question about the greatest commandment by identifying a second great commandment: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Jesus isn’t merging two commandments into one (that we love God by loving our neighbor, or that we love our neighbor by loving God), but the two commandments shouldn’t be separated either. As Christians we can’t excuse ourselves from either of these marching orders.   Both of the great commandments function as summary statements of the OT laws. And while many of the commandments in the OT relate to loving and serving God, there are still many others that relate to loving people.

The apostles continued to identify loving others as the focal point of our interaction with others. For instance, Paul says, “The commandments . . . are summed up in this one rule: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ . . . Love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom 13:9-10). James exhorts believers to “keep the royal law found in Scripture, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself'” (James 2:8).

What an attractive idea – that God wants us to be about the business of loving other people. This commandment motivates us to invest ourselves in all sorts of humanitarian efforts through our vocations and our volunteer efforts. Our service to others will have a distinct flavor though, because we must always seek to be faithful to the first commandment (loving God), while we go about the business of advancing the present and future well being of others.

But what a formidable idea too! I’m so naturally self-centered (I know that some people need to be reminded to love themselves a little more, but I’m not one of those people). Only by the power of the Spirit and through consistent choices to set aside our own interests for the interests of others can love for others begin to mark our lives.