Have You Ever Read Ephesians?

This is sort of changing the subject, but can I ask you another question? Do you think "this grace" in Eph. 3:8 is the same as "the grace of God" in 3:2?How would you describe or explain "this grace" and, especially, "the grace of God"?I think this is related to "the will of God" too.Edited by Richh, : Changed the title

I try to remember that grace is a matter of God both over man and also within man. It is usually easier for us to understand God's grace as a kind of unmerited favor in God toward man. But God's grace working IN man I think is like "power steering" in an automibile.With a little cooperation His own life blends with ours and empowers us. Just like you apply a little turning to the car wheel and "power steering" adds substantial energizing to your moving.The analogy is not perfect, but a little helpful. The grace of God working IN Paul was none other than Jesus Christ working in Paul in a blended and mingled way. To prove this I present two parallel passages: The Grace of Christ Working in Paul - "But by the grace of God I am what I am; and His grace unto me did not turn out to be in vain, but, on the contrary, I labored more abundantly than all of them, yet not I but the grace of God which is with me." (1 Cor. 15:10) Christ Himself Living in Paul "I am crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I [who] live, but it is Christ [who] lives in me; and the life which I now live I live in the flesh I live in faith, the [faith] of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Galatians 2:20) One passage says " ... not I, but the grace of God which is with me." The other passage says " ... no longer I .... but Christ who lives in me." Grace working in man is Christ Himself living in man.
Christ living in man is the grace of God working in man.Christ is risen from the dead and made available in a way that He can blend and mingle into our very being. He can be a kind of "power steering" energizing and empowering us to actually live unto God.Before I make any comment on Ephesians 3:2 and 3:8 I would like to reinforce the above revelation. Christ with the believer is the grace of God with the believer and vica versa.Here Paul says that the grace of Christ is with the Christian's spirit - "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit" (Phil. 4:22) "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen." (Galatians 6:18) But here it is Christ the Lord Himself who is with the believer's spirit - "The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you." ( 2 Timothy 4:22) The Lord Jesus living in the innermost being of the Christian is also the grace of Christ with his innermost being. The Lord Jesus Christ being with his spirit is grace being with him.By receiving Jesus as Lord we receive grace and grace becomes a "Trainer" teaching us to live godly - "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, TRAINING US that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present age,

​

awaiting the blessed hope, even the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." (Titus 2:11,12) So growing in the grace of God is a matter of receiving the training from the Trainer - the grace which is the indwelling Christ Himself - "training us ... we should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present age." In this present age means in the church age even before the second coming and resurrection of the saints.Briefly to the two verses Ephesians 3:2, 3:8: "If indeed you have heard of the stewardship of the grace of God which has been given to me for you." (3:2)

​

"To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given to announce to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel." (3:8) I think so very much could be said about these verses. Let me just say a few observations:1.) Paul had a reputation for the effectiveness, power, ability, wisdom, and skill with which he ministered to the Gentiles in the church life.If you were opened to his speaking, you left his fellowship enlightened, furnished, equiped, and really helped to go on in the Christian life. He could minister all night and keep his listeners probably on the edge of their seats.He had a reputation of such - "If indeed you have heard of the stewardship of the grace of God which was given to me for you." 2.) Paul imparted grace. Paul brought others into the enjoyment of Christ. Paul caused them to be closer to Christ. In short he caused men and women to want to live as he himself lived.3.) He poured out his being and his service on behalf of the believers. All of Christ which he enjoyed was for them - "the stewardhsip of the grace of God which was given to me for you." As Jesus poured Himself out for His disciples and for man as a whole, so His apostles (especially Paul) poured out all the riches of love and service within him on behalf of the disciples. Paul certainly must have felt that all that he had was FOR the church.4.) Paul was genuinely humble. He considered himself less than the least of all saints. He knew that everything he had came from God. He knew he was just a channel. In himself he was only a sinner saved by grace. In Christ he was placed into a service for which he could not boast in anything of his own merit. "To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given ..." 5.) In this regard Paul is simply a model of what a Christian's attitude should be. Paul is simply a most normal disciple. If he was beside himself in his enthusiasm it is only because he was fully unveiled to see reality for what it is.I think the more we see what he saw in truth, the more we also would be excited. Paul saw that Christ was unsearchably rich. Christ's worth was impossible to calculate. His preciousness and value were so extensive as to be beyond what man is able to imagine "To me ... was this grace given to announce the unsearchable riches of Christ ..." 6.) Paul's gospel was not just of being forgiven by God through Christ. It was to go on to live in the grace of God, experiencing the unsearchable riches of Christ. That is riches of Christ's life which were like a fathomless gold mine - "unsearchable". That is treasures too enumerable, too vast, to all-inclusive.This was Paul's gospel - "the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel" (RcV) .7.) Paul is not in an elite group. Rather he portrays a most normal disciple of Jesus - fully consecrated and fully devoted to the Lord's will. "To me, less than the least of all saints ..." I use the word "pioneer." He was simply one of a number of followers of Jesus who pioneered deep into the experience of the resurrected and available Lord Jesus. This Christian brother wrote some 13 books of the 27 New Testament books.8.) The phrase "this grace" is very subjective. This reminds me of Peter writing - "Enter into this grace and stand in it." (1 Peter 5:12) "This grace" indicates that this is an experiencial matter that the speaker is enjoying. He beckons the audience to continue to enjoy or to enter into the enjoyment more so.Paul says "this grace was given". It is the same grace that is with and in all of his audience.In fact the last and closing word of Paul in the New Testament is that the Lord is with the believers' spirit and therefore Grace is with them. "The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you." (2 Tim. 4:22) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I try to remember that grace is a matter of God both over man and also within man. It is usually easier for us to understand God's grace as a kind of unmerited favor in God toward man. But God's grace working IN man I think is like "power steering" in an automibile.

​

With a little cooperation His own life blends with ours and empowers us. Just like you apply a little turning to the car wheel and "power steering" adds substantial energizing to your moving.

​

The analogy is not perfect, but a little helpful. The grace of God working IN Paul was none other than Jesus Christ working in Paul in a blended and mingled way.

​

Grace working in man is Christ Himself living in man.
Christ living in man is the grace of God working in man.

---

Wow - that was a longer answer than I expected. There is a lot to say on this subject. I like your allusion to power steering. I think that is very apt.I guess grace has one source and one essence, but a varied expression. Maybe grace means something different in each case in Eph 3. It seems like in the first instance the revelation of the mystery to Paul was 'the grace' and became a stewardship for him to dispense. In the second instance 'the gift of the grace of God' seems like the gifts in grace mentioned in Ephesians 4, Romans 12 and I Pet. 4:10. Maybe there was some 'operation of His power' given to enable Paul to carry out his stewardship. In the third instance the grace is 'to announce as the gospel' the unsearchable riches of Christ and to enlighten all. It seems like Colossians is a good example of ‘evangelizing’ the unsearchable riches of Christ and both Ephesians 1-3 and Colossians enlighten as to the economy of the mystery.By the way the writer of Ephesians and the writer of the epistle to the Galatians both claim to base their ministry on revelation. The description in Ephesians is much fuller than the description in Galatians. (I also did not include all of the relevant verses in Galatians.)

quote:

---

How about these verses in Epheisans 3 (my bold):

---

When emulating someone's writing one strives to keep in the character of the person they are emulating. What calls attention to an imitation are the things that are not like the original. Sometimes the emulator slips out of character. That's what scholars look for. They look for the author's own personal style or situation to slip through. Personal pronouns and such aren't going to help in proving that it was written by Paul, unless the emulator really messed up.In Message 99, I presented links and quoted some of what Goodspeed considered to be the author's Greekness showing through. One would need to address those things that don't seem to be Paul. Under Law1. The letter is to the congregation in Rome, which is predominantly Gentile believers. Gentiles were not subject to the Mosaic Laws anyway. It doesn't make sense for Paul to tell a group who never were subject to the Mosaic laws that they now are no longer subject to them.2. Paul's term "under law" isn't referring to the Mosaic or Jewish Laws. What Does Paul Mean By "Under Law"?
Paul is very creative in his wording and one needs to take care to try and understand the literary devices he's used to paint a picture for his audience.

quote:

---

The third word in ‘dogma’ in Greek. The word dogma (ordinance) in the New Testament never means anything else than statute, decree, ordinance.’ Word Studies in the Greek New Testament by Wuest. Alford translates it: ‘having done away with the law of decretory commandments.’ So it is hard to take it in any way than referring to the whole law.

---

Paul doesn't use the word decree (dogma) in any of his writings considered authentic. It shows up in Col 2:14, which is also a disputed work.Paul uses various means to show the contrast between those with faith and those without. This follows the marriage illustration. Newness of spirit refers to those with faith and oldness of letter refers to those without faith. This all goes back to the idea that Gentiles are adopted into the family due to their faith, not their behavior.The marriage example even shows that when the husband dies the woman is released from the law concerning the husband, not all law. Paul personifies sin and in 7:14-20 he describes his inner battle. But he consistently expresses that God's Law is spiritual and good. His use of law isn't always about the Mosaic Laws. Of course just after that he says we are "free from the law of sin", not the Mosaic Law or God's law.His use of the word law isn't cut and dried. Even though righteousness isn't gain through obedience to the Mosaic Law, it doesn't negate it either and as I stated at the beginning, Gentiles were not subject to the Mosaic Laws.The author of Ephesians doesn't seem to be using Paul's creative usage of the word law.The commentary under Romans 6:14 is very clear that Paul is dealing with justification through the Mosaic Laws and not that they should be followed.The commentary under Ephesians 2:14 understands the author as saying Christs death did away with the Jewish Ordinances which kept the Gentiles and Jews separate. I don't see that Paul's authentic letters presented the idea that Jews were no longer required to follow any of their ordinances. Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles who were not required to follow the Jewish ordinances anyway. Paul and the Jewish Apostles argued over that issue and came to a decision later for the minimum necessary to help the Gentiles mix with the Jews.Again, the congregation in Rome was predominantly Gentiles.By the time Ephesians was supposedly written, Christianity was predominantly Gentiles.So to me the idea that Christ's death did away with any ordinances hints at a Gentile perspective of the time and not Paul's Jewish perspective.We look for the deviations.

Paul could have mentioned this because other preachers were going around to the churches underminding Paul's teaching.The council in Acts 15 and the book of Galatians indicate the competition Paul was up against. So also Philippians mentions workers teaching essentially to tear down Paul's enfluence.So the mentioning to a large Gentile component of the church in Rome that they are not under the law makes perfect sense.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Romans 6:14 - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." Prior to verse 14 "the law" is not specifically mentioned until we back up to chapter 5 verse 20, as we work our way backwards - "And the law entered in alongside that the offense might abound; ..." What "law" that "entered in" that the offense might abound, logically is the "law" Paul continues to speak of in chapter 6. Don't you think so?Backing up further in chapter 5 Paul says "For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law." (Rom. 5:13). Why is it not logical to understand that Paul is speaking of the Law of Moses ? This law of Moses which came in at the time of the Exodus long after the beginning of man's creation on earth. "For until the law ..." indicates to me some lapse of time PRIOR to the law being officially ordained. And "the law entered" must be speaking of its official ordination.Now we do not hear about "the law" again specifically until Romans 6:14 - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under THE LAW but under grace." (6:14 my emphasis) What other law do you think Paul is speaking of then ?When you get to chapter 7 now, you do definitely have LAW mentioned as relating to probably FOUR different matters. But in chapter 6 I think Paul is definitely continuing his talk about grace and the law of Moses which entered at Mt. Sinai.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This is correct that the law of sin is distinct from the law of Moses. But you should not use that as a rational to obfuscate the fact that Romans 6:14 is speaking of the law which entered in at Mt. Sinai which is the law of Moses.I think you are kind of tossing a lot of dust into the air to cloud issues. You speak of authentic and questionable letters. For the most part I think you are just clouding matters up.Drawing to the Christian's attention that "law" has a number of nuanced conotations in chapter 7 is OK. But this should not be, I think, a rational to obscure its usage in Romans 6:14 - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." (Rom. 6:14) In chapters 7 and 8 - the law of my mind, the law of sin which is in my members, the law of sin and death, the law of the Spirit of life, the law which is good and spiritual and holy - are all nuanced usages of law. I agree. But Romans 6:14 refers to the law he discussed in Romans 5 which entered with Moses at Mt. Sinai.

quote:

---

His use of the word law isn't cut and dried.

---

In chapter 7 and 8 law has some different meanings. Many of us can see that.Now leaping from that to insisting Romans 6:14 is on something beside the law of Moses, I think is a mistake.

quote:

---

Even though righteousness isn't gain through obedience to the Mosaic Law, it doesn't negate it either and as I stated at the beginning, Gentiles were not subject to the Mosaic Laws.

---

The Judiazers WANTED to bring the Christians who came from a Gentile backround UNDER the law of Moses.Paul admits latter in an epistle that all in Asia turned away from him. "This you know, that all who are in Asia turned away from me, of whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes." (1 Timothy 1:15) This could indicate that those teams of preachers working to undermind and tear down Paul's enfluence did eventually achieve some substantial success. They may have gotten congregations to turn away from Paul's presentation of the Gospel in favor of some more legalistic enfluence of a Law of Moses keeping Christianity.I hear you arguing that the Gentiles were not under that Law of Moses anyway. However, I think your analysis will not stand up to careful scrutiny.The Gospel came out of the Jews' community, so to speak. Jesus was the Jewish Messiah. So many Jews upon seeing non-Jews turn to their Messiah sought to bring them also under the Law of Moses.If I had been a Jew in those days, without revelation from God I probably would have done the same thing. Paul had revelation from God. And Peter also was told by God to not consider the Gentiles as unclean animals. They too should be saved by grace through faith. With as much inventiveness I could make a case that the poster Purpledawn today is probably not the same person Purpledawn who wrote something say two years ago on another discussion.My, my, just look at the differences. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Purpledawn is correct that "law" is not so cut and dry in its usage especially in Romans 7 and 8. I fully agree that we have to be careful how "law" is being used.The same might be said for "died" or "death." Careful consideration to context has to be observed.But the issue at hand is whether or not Romans 6:14 about the believers in Rome no longer being under law is about something beside the law which came through Moses. Romans 5:13 - "For until the law sin was in the world ..." I think he means that sin was in the world even before the giving of the law of Moses at the time of the Exodus. Of course sin was in the world. God judged the world of Noah because of the sin that was in the world. Romans 5:20 - "And the law entered in alongside that the offense might abound ..." There is a principle of rebellion in man's being. If you tell him not to do something, it seems that something evil spontaneously rises up to transgress on some general principle.I once met a man who said "I just cannot stand for people to tell me what I can and cannot do!"This is something like the sin in man's fallen flesh. If he hears "Thou Shalt NOT ..." something in us rises up and declares "Oh YEA ? You are going to tell ME not to do this or that. On general principle I will do it anyway." "And the law [ie. of Moses] entered in alongside that the offense might abound ..." The sin was there already. The entering in of the law caused the sin to ABOUND. Anybody out there raise kids ?Look, the law was like the drink a cancer patient drinks. This special drink causes the X-Ray machine to better highlight where the disease of cancer is ravaging the insides. The law of Moses caused the sin to rise up as a personified evil thing and abound in man.The law God gave to Moses was good. But it exposed the sin nature, made it abound, and caused sin to become exceedingly sinful - " ... Did that which is good become death to me? Absolutely not! But sin [did], that it might be shown to be sin by working out death in me through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful." (7:13) To make matters a little more intricate Paul speaks of - a law of his mind which agrees with the law of God.To make matters a little more complex Paul speaks of a law in his fallen members of his body working against his own will and his better law in his mind which agrees with the law of God.That is three laws already in chapter 7.Then there is "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" as the strongest law of all. That is the law of the life of Christ. Every life has its law. And Christ Jesus has in His life a law which can get into man as Christ gets into man. It is powerful. It is more powerful that the law of sin and death.That is a whole discussion which continues on until the new heaven and new earth and probably beyond. We could say a lot about that.Right now I want to suggest that the law of Romans 6:14 is simply that law which entered in to make sin abound more and to expose the sin in man's fallen flesh.The Christians whether from the Gentiles or the Jews, are not under the law. They are under grace. The are placed in Christ as a living dynamic spiritual realm - an available Person. That is an unusual resurrected and approachable Person that they can be incorporated with, blend with, merge with, interweave with, mingle with and live through.Not only are they justified by what Christ has done on His cross. They are practically justified before man by living in this realm. Christ is seen manifested from within them as they learn to walk step by step in union with this indwelling Lord and Savior. "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." We could be reminded of John's word - "For the law was given through Moses; grace and reality came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17) The law of Moses was given.
Grace and reality CAME.
When Jesus came - grace and reality came.The Christians in Rome are no longer under the law of Moses (as Jews) and are not to be brought under the law of Moses by the Judaizers. They are in the realm of the Lord Jesus who is the coming to them of grace and reality. The living Jesus is the sphere within which they live and must remain to live.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

omans 6:14 - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace."

​

Prior to verse 14 "the law" is not specifically mentioned until we back up to chapter 5 verse 20, as we work our way backwards -

---

The phrase is "under law", not "under the law". That was the point of the article. The two words together had a meaning to Paul that didn't refer to the Mosaic Laws.The word "the" isn't in all translations and from what I can tell, since I don't read Greek, it isn't in the Greek compared to places where it is in the Greek. Romans 6:14 - GreekThe word "the" seems to be added in many cases.Romans 2:14 (Parallels) - Greek

quote:

---

Prior to verse 14 "the law" is not specifically mentioned until we back up to chapter 5 verse 20, as we work our way backwards -

​

"And the law entered in alongside that the offense might abound; ..."

---

quote:

---

Backing up further in chapter 5 Paul says "For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law." (Rom. 5:13).

---

The word "the" still isn't in front of law.

quote:

---

But in chapter 6 I think Paul is definitely continuing his talk about grace and the law of Moses which entered at Mt. Sinai.

---

I still disagree. I'm assuming most nations had legal systems, so making these specific to the Mosaic Laws that the Gentiles weren't even required to follow wouldn't make sense. Anyone trying to be justified by following any legal system would be incorrect. I feel Paul is speaking more generically and the phrase "under law" has a meaning that isn't really associated with a legal system.

-Romans *:** - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace."-The letter as originally written is referring to the sin against the One in Heavenand that sin is the subjection to religiosity [ reverence paid to religious denominations and subjection under spirits of men ].-Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

-"For until the law *sin was in the world,* ( The sin against Heaven occurs whenever people work up a belief and pay reverence to who ever they call ‘authority in matters to the spirit’)but * sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law."* ( when there is no imposition of law then there's no sin since the sin against Heaven occurs whenever the beliefs impose a law or rule for people to be put in subjection under the man. )-

I would like to think, that by now perhaps you might expect that I know that some translations would leave out the "the" in Romans 6:14.But if you don't that is ok. But I have been aware that not all English translations supply the "the" there. Thankyou for bringing this to the forefront.The version which I usually quote, the Recovery Version even changed in its second revision. The first edition had this - "For sin shall not lord it over you, for you are not under law but under grace." The more recent revision had the "the" - "For sin will not lord it over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." The habit of the RcV is to put supplied words in italics. Since in the second addition the word "the" is not in italics I am not sure which is more proper "under law" or "under the law"I do not fluently read and write NT Greek.I want to look into the passage further as it is expounded by a few expositors that I trust. You have succeeded in making me some more curious and cautious.I could be wrong. If I get convinced that I am wrong you'll receive an apology and a retraction. If not, you'll just get my honest opinion as to how I think Romans 6:14 should be understood.Latter.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Welcome to the discussion. Let me digest your contribution here for awhile.

And the reason for your disagreement is chiefly that the audience is of Gentiles who have turned to Christ ?Is that the main reason you don't think the Mosiac law is indicated there, because Gentiles were not required to keep the law of Moses ?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And the reason for your disagreement is chiefly that the audience is of Gentiles who have turned to Christ ?

​

Is that the main reason you don't think the Mosiac law is indicated there, because Gentiles were not required to keep the law of Moses ?

---

No the wording is the chief reason.