In my ministry with Mission ONE, I am working on a multi-year project called the Ephesians 2 Gospel Project.
Here’s the big idea: There is a social, horizontal dimension to the gospel of Christ because there is a social, horizontal dimension to the atonement of Christ (Eph 2:13–17).
Hindustan Bible Institute & College(HBI) has invited me and researcher Kristin Caynor to introduce the Ephesians 2 Gospel Project through HBI’s monthly webinar series. You are invited to join us!
Date: Friday, October 8, 2021
Time: 8:30 a.m. USA Eastern Time / 6:00 p.m. Indian Standard Time (Time Zone Converter)
Platform: Zoom video conference
Title:“Ephesians 2 Gospel Project: Does the Atonement Speak to Collective Identity Conflict?”
Format: a) 20-minute presentation by Werner Mischke, b) 20-minute presentation by researcher Kristin Caynor, c) 10-minute response by HBI scholar, d) Questions and discussion
My presentation will introduce the project. I’ll discuss the social/horizontal aspect of the reconciling work of the cross in Eph. 2:11–22. Kristin Caynor’s presentation focuses on how Early Church fathers interpreted Eph. 2:11–22.
We have two goals for the HBI webinar: 1) Describe in brief the research we have done so far in the Ephesians 2 Gospel Project, and 2) invite the HBI scholar community into the learning journey with us. We want the resources that are developed to be by and for the global church.
IN MY LAST POST I began exploring the topic of allegiance as a Christian mindset and practice. Specifically, I am discussing the vital importance for believers to give allegiance to Jesus the Christ, Jesus the Savior-King. We are exploring in this series the significance of allegiance in three Christian dynamics: 1) grace, 2) faith, and 3) baptism.
This is the second post in the series. We examine the dynamic of grace as we consider a few brief excerpts from Prof. John M. G. Barclay’s seminal book Paul and the Gift. We will focus on allegiance to Christ and explore a few implications for believers today. NOTE: This post is lengthy; the topic requires a lot of explanation.
The question we are exploring in this post: What does allegiance have to do with GRACE? Theologian: John M. G. Barclay (bio) Book:Paul and the Gift (Eerdmans, 2015), 656 pages (more)
Perhaps you are new to Prof. Barclay or his book. If so, you can get a sense of the quality and impact of his scholarship here, or in this helpful book review, or in this 25-minute podcast/interview with Prof. Barclay.
A book that took ten years to research and write, Professor Barclay’s Paul and the Gift is considered one of the most significant books on New Testament theology in recent decades. He introduces what he calls the “six perfections” of grace. This means there are different facets of grace, each of which can be perfected or taken to the “nth degree.”
Prof. Barclay names these six “perfections” of grace:
superabundance—how massive, enduring, and eternal is God’s grace,
singularity—the degree to which God is characterized by grace and grace alone,
priority—the sense in which God’s grace as first and before, thus marking God’s freedom to give,
incongruity—the degree to which God gives grace without regard to the worth of recipients,
efficacy—the extent to which grace achieves God’s intentions in those who receive it, and
non-circularity—the degree to which grace is reciprocal; it has “strings attached;” God’s people are obliged to return praise, obedience, allegiance to him.
It is this last of the six “perfections”—non-circularity—that will be the main focus of this blog post. That’s because Barclay contends that Paul’s understanding of grace was not non-circular, but rather, obliging.
In other words, Paul viewed God’s grace as circular or reciprocal. God gives the gift of salvation in Christ to all who believe, although none deserve the gift. Therefore, it is “incongruous.” This was counter-cultural to social norms in the ancient world. At the same time, God expects that those who receive the gift of salvation to return honor and praise, loyalty and obedience—allegiance—to him. Therefore, the gift is reciprocal or circular in nature. This reciprocity was not counter-cultural; it is how grace ‘worked’ in the ancient world.
Understanding patronage to understand grace
To answer the question Why is God’s gift of grace reciprocal?, and before we further explore the writings of Prof. Barclay, we need to answer this question: Why are patronage and grace intertwined in the social context of the Roman Empire? The next few paragraphs borrow material from my book The Global Gospel in the chapter titled “Honor/Shame Dynamic #7: Patronage.”
Here’s a description of patronage from New Testament scholar, David deSilva: “Patronage was a [prevalent] social framework in the ancient Mediterranean basin. Patrons were people with power who could provide goods and services not available to their clients. In return, clients provided loyalty and honor to the patrons. Social inequality characterized these patronal relationships, and exploitation was a common feature of such relationships.” [1]
I want to emphasize two points; the first is this: Patronage is a social dynamic between patron and client characterized by reciprocity. Clients return “loyalty and honor to the patrons,” as deSilva noted. History professor J. E. Lendon adds about the Roman Empire and its emperor: “The emperor was the patron, the benefactor, of his every subject. The subjects, in turn, paid him back for his benefactions with their loyalty; this was the basis of his power. Thus, the empire was a single enormous spider’s web of reciprocal favours.” [2]
The diagram below illustrates this reciprocity or circularity.
Reciprocity in the patron-client relationship. Diagram by Jayson Georges and Werner Mischke, based on dialog from the Patronage Symposium, held at Arab Baptist Theological Seminary, October 2018.
Our second point is this: People of the Greco-Roman world understood that grace (Gk., charis) is at the very center of the patronage dynamic. In fact, according to deSilva, first-century believers understood that “God’s grace (charis) would not have been of a different kind than the grace with which they were already familiar; it would have been understood as different only in quality and degree.”[3]
There was a distinct honor code about how to give and receive. The benefactor was to be wise, not self-serving. Their gifts were to be given only to honorable people—and thus, examples of excellent stewardship. Reciprocally, the client was to show proper gratitude and honor to the benefactor or patron.
According to the ancient writer Seneca, the reciprocal relationship between patron and client was to be characterized by “three graces”:
Some would have it appear that there is one [grace] for bestowing a benefit, one for receiving it, and the third for returning it; others hold that there are three classes of benefactors—those who receive benefits, those who return them, and those who receive and return them at the same time.
As quoted in deSilva, Honor, Patronage, Kinship, Purity, 106.
Seneca compared these three “graces” of giving, receiving, and returning favor to three sisters who dance “hand in hand … in a ring which returns upon itself.” Speaking of the word grace or charis, deSilva says it “encapsulated the entire ethos of the relationship.”
Grace at the center of the patron-client relationship.In the Roman Empire, grace (Gk., charis)was understood to be at the crux of the social practice of patronage. Diagram from Werner Mischke, The Global Gospel, Fig. 2.17, p 126.
So the social practice of patronage and benefaction would have related to the love and grace of God. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Even the giving of God’s Son would have been seen in the light of patronage. A highly honored, magnificent Benefactor is providing a great blessing—the gift of his own Son to many people. Note: this helpful video by New Testament scholar David deSilva makes the point crystal clear—that grace and patronage were integrally relatedin the Roman Empire.
Is allegiance to “the Christ” integral to grace?
In the Roman Empire, clients of patrons—those who received gifts—were obligated to return honor, loyalty, allegiance—to the patron. Accordingly, Barclay frequently uses the word allegiance in his book (55 times, a few examples below) as well as the word loyalty (26 times) to describe the way believers ought to live their lives in following Christ.
Below I summarize in three points the view of Barclay who contends that Paul understood divine grace as being reciprocal:
God the divine Patron gives salvation by grace through Christ without regard to any social capital, moral achievement, or any measure of worth on the part of the recipient (Eph 2:8–9 is an example of this). God’s grace is infinitely greater than what God’s people can ever return to him.
At the same time, this grace has strings attached. The Patron’s clients are receivers of God’s gift. And as believers in Christ they have dignifying obligations to reciprocate to their Patron by living an honorable life of good works in praise to God. (I see Eph 2:10 as one example of this).
Therefore, one of the qualities of God’s grace is its circularity or reciprocity. This is contrary to the view that some Christians hold—that grace is non-circular. (The view that grace is non-circular holds that once a person is saved by grace, there are zero additional obligations. Allegiance to “the Christ” is optional for believers, not required.)
Below are a few excerpts from Paul and the Gift. Following each excerpt I make brief comments about how this applies or what it means.
Excerpts from Barclay’s Paul and the Gift highlighting allegiance to the Christ
The sublime glory of belonging to Christ—this is the heart of Apostle Paul’s entire project. But belonging to Christ also obliges Christians to a purpose—a new humanity marked by counter-cultural love and diversity.
Commenting on Gal 5:13 and the “freedom” of believers to, by love serve other believers, Prof. Barclay writes:
… what counts is allegiance to Christ and adherence to the Spirit. Paul’s paradoxical interpretation of freedom as slavery (“for freedom you have been called … through love be slaves of one another,” 5:13) recalls the opening statement of 1:10–11: Paul is free from human criteria of value (“seeking to please human beings”) because he is a slave of Christ (1:10). For Paul, “freedom” is not autonomy but the product of an allegiance that breaks the power of previously taken-for-granted (and now “alien”) norms. He is dead to the regime of the Law, since his life is derived from and governed by the Christ-event: “it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (2:19–20). All other criteria of value have been discounted by the superordinate worth of belonging to Christ.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (pp. 428-429). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
My comments: The key to this paragraph is the last sentence: “All other criteria of value have been discounted by the superordinate worth of belonging to Christ.” This reminds me of Paul’s words “the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord” (Phil 3:8). Because of this profound honor in knowing Christ, there is of necessity a transformation of value regarding one’s social network. Since believers belong to the incredibly worthy Christ they also belong to the family of believers. And all Christians have identities transformed by relationship with the incredibly worthy Christ.
The phrase “criteria of value” refers to the ways that people in all cultures create social hierarchies: Greek elites versus barbarian … free versus slave … insiders versus outsiders … men versus women … Jew versus Gentile … upper class, middle class, lower class … clean versus unclean … one political tribe versus another … literate or non-literate … black versus white, etc. According to Barclay, Paul is saying that any and all criteria of social value is “discounted” because knowing Christ, whose honor and worth is infinite, makes it not just possible—but vital—to have intimate fellowship with all brothers or sisters in Christ. And the emphasis is on all—without regard to social worth being higher or lower, better our worse. In relation to the all-honorable, all-glorious Christ, all believers have honorable insider status.
In is commentary on Galatians 1:6–12 , Barclay writes:
… Paul eschews crowd-pleasing, but the “crowd” whose opinion he dismisses is not the uneducated populace, but humanity as a whole: his arguments do not count for much among human beings, but they count before God. In his rhetoric, as in his practice, Paul’s allegiance is to Christ: “if I were still pleasing human beings, I would not be a slave of Christ” (Gal 1:10). Although Paul will celebrate “the freedom which we have in Christ Jesus” (Gal 2:5; 5:1), it is clear from this early declaration of “slavery” that what he means by freedom is the consequence of an allegiance to norms newly constituted in Christ.
The “good news” thus realigns and recalibrates Paul’s loyalties: announcing the incongruous gift enacted in Christ, he is at odds with the normative conventions that govern human systems of value. Hence the emphatic statement of (Gal 1:11): “I want you to know that the good news announced by me is not in accord with human norms” (οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον). This negation is of central significance to the theology of the letter. It signals a relation of misfit, even contradiction, between the “good news” and the typical structures of human thought and behavior.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (pp. 355-356). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
My comments: The key sentence above is this: “The ‘good news’ thus realigns and recalibrates Paul’s loyalties: announcing the incongruous gift enacted in Christ, he is at odds with the normative conventions that govern human systems of value.” Because Paul’s allegiance is to Christ and his gospel, there is a corresponding recalibration of who and what is worthy. The gospel is not merely that persons can have eternal life by believing Jesus died for their sins. The gospel creates a new humanity (Eph 2:15), a new egalitarian community free of traditional cultural divisions and hierarchies (Gal 3:28–29)—all because of one earth-shattering reality: They are in “the Christ,” they have the astounding honor of being in God’s ancient-and-cosmic story of promise-and-blessing.
The two sentences below from are also from Prof. Barclay’s commentary on the first chapter of Galatians.
As a believer, Paul is a “Jew” who (in his terms) no longer remains “in Judaism”: his ethnicity has not been renounced but subsumed within an identity and an allegiance governed by the event of Christ (cf. Gal 2:19–21). His “ancestral traditions” no longer constitute his salient currency of worth.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (pp. 359–360). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
My comments: I love this—“his ethnicity has not been renounced but subsumed within an identity and an allegiance governed by the event of Christ.” For Paul, his Jewishness ethnically and religiously had been his core identity before Christ. But Christ intervened. (“I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.”) He is still a Jew. But Paul’s core identity has been forever altered. This Jewish part of Paul’s life was relativized—it was “subsumed”—absorbed into the life of King Jesus through “the Christ-event” (Gal 1:20).
These sentences are from Prof. Barclay’s commentary on Galatians 3:26–29:
Neither ethnic nor gender identity could be simply removed, and in the eyes of the [Roman] law everyone counted as either “free” or “slave” (or “freed”). Paul and Peter remained Jews (Gal 2:15; cf. Titus, a “Greek,” Gal 2:3), and Paul was still identifiably masculine and free. What is altered, however, is the evaluative freight carried by these labels, the encoded distinctions of superiority and inferiority. In common solidarity with Christ, baptized believers are enabled and required to view each other without regard to these influential classifications of worth. Jewish believers should not withdraw from shared meals with non-Jews on the basis of their different, “inferior,” ethnicity (Gal 2:11–14). Slaves should not be disdained as “mere slaves,” since their worth as “siblings” is established in Christ (Phlm 16). What now counts for worth is only one’s status in Christ, and the consistency of one’s allegiance to him.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (p. 397). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
My comments:For Paul, allegiance to Christ and his gospel of grace “enabled and required” believers to have community with other believers who would normally be from social groups unlike their own. Humans are generally drawn to people like themselves, and tend to avoid being with people who are “other.” But Christians have something in common that bridges those normally entrenched social divides: the astounding incongruity of God’s grace to every Christian regardless of nationality, morality, social status, race, wealth, education, or other measure of worth.
In Prof. Barclay’s commentary on Romans (Section IV of Paul and the Gift), one chapter is devoted to Romans 11. On page 558 he writes:
Finally, as the preceding and following chapters make clear (e.g., Rom 6:1–23; 12:1–3), Paul’s radical emphasis on the incongruity of grace by no means implies its non-circularity: the following appeal “by the mercies of God” (12:1) may be taken to indicate that grace has “strings attached.” But the absence or lesser significance of these other perfections does not in the least diminish the radicality of the one perfection that is central to these chapters; as we have noted, the various perfections of grace are not a “package deal” (see above, chapter 2). What matters in Romans 9–11, as throughout this letter, is that God’s grace or mercy is operative without regard to worth. It is because this is the core of Israel’s identity and history that it is also the hope for the salvation of the world.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (p. 558). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
Relative to grace being “with strings attached,” Prof. Barclay adds the following in his Conclusion (Chapter 18):
Thus, throughout this book, we have been suspicious of the modern (Western) ideal of the “pure” gift, which is supposedly given without strings attached. We have been able to make sense of the fact that a gift can be unconditioned (free of prior conditions regarding the recipient) without also being unconditional (free of expectations that the recipient will offer some “return”). Paul has provided a parade example of this phenomenon, since he simultaneously emphasizes the incongruity of grace and the expectation that those who are “under grace” (and wholly refashioned by it) will be reoriented in the “obedience of faith.” What has seemed in the modern world a paradoxical phenomenon—that a “free” gift can also be obliging—is entirely comprehensible in ancient terms.
Barclay, John M. G.. Paul and the Gift (pp. 562–563). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
Summary: What does allegiance have to do with GRACE? Apparently, in the ancient world, grace and allegiance was understood as a package deal. You receive undeservedly a magnificent gift (Gk., charis) from a great Patron; you return to the Patron your praise, obedience, loyalty, allegiance. This allegiance is embodied individually and corporately, physically and socially in the cultivation of a new humanity marked by counter-cultural love and diversity.
I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual [reasonable] worship. (Romans 12:1 ESV)
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8–10 ESV)
“I pledge allegiance to the Christ.” In the early church, to confess Jesus as Lord could mean switching allegiance from Caesar to Christ; this was often subversive. What does it mean in your community to make this confession?
Next post: What does allegiance have to do with FAITH?Click here to go to the next post in this series.
NOTES:
David A. deSilva, Honor, Patronage, Kinship, & Purity: Unlocking New Testament Culture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 96. DeSilva’s two chapters on patronage are titled “Patronage & Reciprocity” and “Patronage & Grace in the New Testament.” DeSilva describes in detail how the practice of patronage in the Roman Empire informed the early church’s understanding of the gift of God’s grace in Christ.
J. E. Lendon. Empire of Honour: The Art of Government in the Roman World (p. 12). Kindle Edition.
In my forthcoming book, THE GLOBAL GOSPEL: Achieving Missional Impact in Our Multicultural World, I devote quite a few pages to the premise that honor-status reversal is a motif of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation.
Honor-status reversal as a horizontal/social orientation in the second half of Ephesians 2
In my previous post about honor-status reversal, we explored what this motif means in Eph 2:1–10. We found that the dynamic of honor-status reversal in verses 1–7 refers to the personal and vertical—our relationship as believers with God the Father. In Eph 2:11–22, however, the dynamic is social and horizontal. Let’s take a look.
Verses 11–12 refer to the shameful status of unsaved peoples in relation to God’s people:
Unclean, defiled and without hope of being made clean: “Gentiles in the flesh, called ‘the uncircumcision’ by what is called the circumcision” (2:11)
No access to the honor and benefaction of the Messiah King: “separated from Christ” (2:12)
As aliens in relation to God’s great people Israel: “alienated from the commonwealth of Israel” (2:12)
Unaware of any relational destiny in God: “strangers to the covenants of promise” (2:12)
Living in despair without God’s presence: “having no hope and without God in the world” (2:12)
Disconnected from the most honorable relationship: “far off” … “strangers and aliens” (2:12)
On the other side of “the dividing wall of hostility” (2:12)
Verses 13–22 refer to the reversal of our honor-status in relation to God’s people:
From far away in shame to very near through the honor of Christ’s blood: “you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ” (2:13)
Messiah King himself is our new source of honor—dispelling our compulsion for honor competition and hostility: “For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility” (2:14)
For a completely new kind of kinship group made in peace: “by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace” (2:15)
The shame of Christ’s body on the cross absorbed humanity’s compulsion for honor competition and hostility—to create a new body among humanity—a community of peace: “and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.” (2:16)
Both Jew and Gentile (no superiority for being Jewish) were equally in need of the preaching of this grace and peace: “And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near.” (2:17)
The high honor of access to Holy God is now available to all peoples—further dispelling honor competition: “For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.” (2:18)
Shameful state as strange aliens replaced by multi-dimensional honor of citizens, saints, family members: “So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (2:19)
Entering into the honor of God’s ancient story, the crux of which is the Messiah King and Son of God: “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (2:20)
Brothers and sisters in Christ become the new “sacred space”—wherever they are: “in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.” (2:21)
In Christ your new community is the dwelling for the most honorable, holy presence of God: “In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.” (2:22)
Let’s recall that the crux of the two dimensions of honor-status reversal is “Salvation by grace through faith”
What is located between these two dramatic expressions of honor-status reversal—between verses 1–7 and 11–22? The often-quoted verses about salvation by grace through faith:
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast (Eph 2:8–9).
This “salvation verse” sits at the intersection of vertical and horizontal dimensions of honor-status reversal. The vertical dimension refers to a person’s relationship with God. The horizontal dimension refers to the Gentiles’ relationship with God’s people. The drama inherent in these dimensions of honor-status reversal—along with the liberation that this brought spiritually, emotionally and socially —is the context for “salvation by grace through faith.”
And the stunning impact on the gospel? Consider…
If salvation according to the context of Ephesians 2 is more of an honor/shame message than one of guilt/innocence, what does this mean for the way we present the gospel?
Could it be that being saved by grace—that having our sins forgiven—is actually the means for having our honor-status reversed in relation to God and to God’s people?
If salvation is both personal and social, how should this affect the way we live the gospel, and the way we share the gospel?
Could it be that the gospel is just as much about the covering of sin/shame and the gaining of honor—as it is about the forgiveness of sin/guilt and the gaining of righteousness?
Vast numbers of unreached peoples are motivated more by honor/shame than by innocence/guilt; what does this mean for believers who are trying to share with them the gospel of salvation in Jesus?
that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places …And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church.
–Ephesians 1:20, 22 ESV
Consider these words describing the honor of the one reigning as victor—“seated him at his right hand.” Consider also the words of shame describing the ones conquered and put into submission—“he put all things under his feet.” These word meanings belong to a culture dominated by the values of honor and shame.
Observe the two verses in the Psalms from which the words in Ephesians are clearly derived:
The LORD says to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.
–Psalm 110:1
You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;
you have put all things under his feet,
–Psalm 8:6
Now consider how the following Old Testament verses reinforce 1) the honor of being seated at the right hand of the king, or 2) the honor of kingship ordained by God, or 3) the shame of enemies in being ‘put under the feet’ of the conqueror:
So Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her and bowed down to her. Then he sat on his throne and had a seat brought for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right.
–1 Kings 2:19
daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.
–Psalm 45:9
Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king in place of David his father. … And the LORD made Solomon very great in the sight of all Israel and bestowed on him such royal majesty as had not been on any king before him in Israel. –1 Chronicles 29:23, 25
You know that David my father could not build a house for the name of the LORD his God because of the warfare with which his enemies surrounded him, until the LORD put them under the soles of his feet.
–1 Kings 5:3
In the New Testament, the supreme exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ is frequently described by Christ being seated at “God’s right hand;” and that simultaneously, all enemies of Christ are shamed by being “put under his feet.” The passage quoted from Ephesians chapter 1 at the beginning of this post is but one of many verses in the New Testament which reflect this theme.
Jesus said to him, … from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.
–Matthew 26:64
This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.
–Acts 2:32–33
For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For God has put all things in subjection under his feet. …
–1 Corinthians 15:25–27
If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
–Colossians 3:1
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
–Hebrews 1:3
And to which of the angels has he ever said, Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?
–Hebrews 1:13
Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven.
–Hebrews 8:1
But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
–Hebrews 10:12–13
looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.
–Hebrews 12:2
who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.
–1 Peter 3:22
Again, notice the sheer frequency of this theme in the New Testament: Jesus Christ is seated and enthroned at God’s right hand in highest honor—and correspondingly, all enemies, indeed “all things,” have been utterly subdued and shamed—put under his feet. The force of this truth cannot be appreciated without understanding the pivotal cultural value of honor and shame.
… not only in this age but also in the one to come.
–Ephesians 1:21 ESV
What is the significance of Jesus Christ having this highly honored state of being “… not only in this age but also in the one to come”? Surely there are some cultural signals that give perspective to this statement. Why is Paul making this point of Christ’s never-ending Lordship and victory over death?
Could it be that Paul has in mind the stark impermanence of the Greek and Roman deities of his time? When one reads about the petty variableness of the Greek gods, when one considers the tragic deaths of many of the Roman rulers, it seems that Paul is emphasizing that, whereas Greek gods are capricious and Roman rulers both capricious and temporary, Jesus Christ will absolutely remain—permanently!—as the highly exalted one “… not only in this age but also in the one to come.”
Yes, the victory which was won when the Father raised Jesus Christ from the dead is permanent, but is also personal for those who follow Christ. It represents an eternal victory over death and hell, pain and tragedy. Therefore, followers of Jesus Christ—those who are His—those who are in Christ—are assured that when they face death, their own resurrection will also be eternal. It is a living hope grounded in the permanence of the resurrected Christ “not only in this age but also in the one to come.” How personal is this for believers? Consider that just as God the Father raised Jesus Christ from the dead (Eph. 1:20), so also God has “raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:6). This constitutes for believers a profound identification with the honor of our Lord Jesus Christ.
What is the affect of this profound honor, this living hope? It is the ability for the Christ-follower to live without guilt, without fear, without shame. When a believer identifies with the honor and righteousness of Christ, he or she is set free from the need to play petty games of one-upmanship.
Jerome Neyrey has a whole chapter in his book Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew, called “Vacating the Playing Field.” Neyrey expounds on The Sermon on the Mount, and explains how Jesus is calling his disciples to vacate the ‘public playing field’ of the ‘honor and shame game.’ Neyrey says:
In regard to the value of honor, several things should be noted. First, Jesus contrasts grants of honor from neighbors (“praised by men,” Matt. 6:2) with grants for honor from God (your heavenly Father will reward you,” 6:4, 6, 18; see John 12:43). As always, people require some acknowledgment of their worth. Second, even in his rhetoric, Jesus himself plays the honor game, challenging others and claiming honor himself. He does not attack the honor system itself; in fact he operates out of it by challenging other versions of it and ranking one grant of honor over another. Far from dismantling the system, he redirects how honor is bestowed and withdrawn. Third, Jesus invites disciples to join his honorable world, where the opinions of neighbors do not count for much and where their expectations do not control one’s behavior. And so he replaces the cultural expectations of the local code with his own expectations. Fourth, Jesus’ subversive commands would not be imaginable to disciples unless an alternative structure for worth, reputation, and respect were put in place, namely, honor from Jesus and reward from one’s heavenly Father. [1]
Do you see from Neyrey’s explanation that discipleship to Jesus Christ may be viewed as an exchange of a human-based source of honor for a Jesus-based one? Criticizing the Pharisees, Jesus said, “for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God” (John 12:43).
Through salvation, one receives the righteousness of Jesus Christ in exchange for condemnation. One also embraces the honor of Christ in exchange for shame. The result is to live courageously, freely, magnanimously, generously, passionately—indeed, gloriously!
O Lord, do I reflect this freedom from the opinions of others, this courage and passion—this honor for you as Lord in my life?
that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places,
far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. –Ephesians 1:20–21 ESV
In verse 21 we have a clearer description of where Christ is “seated.” He not only is seated “at his right hand in the heavenly places;” he is seated “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come.”
What is going on here in this verse? The apostle is expressing the super-exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ after his resurrection. The language here is descriptive of the highest possible honor being given to Jesus Christ following his death on the cross by which Christ endured the greatest possible shame. The power of this passage is easily lost on those who are not from an honor-shame culture. Let’s consider in greater detail the meanings of key words:
“far above all rule”—the Greek word is ‘arche.’ According to Strong’s Concordance, the meaning is: “beginning, origin;the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader, that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause.” Vine’s says, “Begin, Beginning, Beginner: means ‘a beginning.’ The root arch—primarily indicated what was of worth. Hence the verb archo meant “to be first,” and archon denoted “a ruler.” How interesting that the Bible says, Jesus is “far above” whoever one may imagine has the first or highest place of worth or honor.
“far above all … authority”—the Greek word is ‘exousia.’ According to Strong’s, the meaning is “the power of authority (influence) and of right (privilege) … the power of rule or government (the power of him whose will and commands must be submitted to by others and obeyed). So Jesus is far above all power of authority, influence, right and privilege, rule or government.
“far above all … power”—the Greek word is ‘dynamis.’ According to Strong’s, the meaning is “strength power, ability … inherent power, power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, or which a person or thing exerts and puts forth … power for performing miracles … moral power and excellence of soul … the power and influence which belong to riches and wealth.
“far above all … dominion”—the Greek word is ‘kyriotes.’ According to Strong’s, the meaning simply, “dominion, power, lordship.”
From the perspective of the pivotal cultural value of honor and shame, it is helpful to understand that this was a hierarchical society, as opposed to an egalitarian society like the American one. This means that leadership titles—caesar, king, high priest, lord, father, grandfather—were hugely significant. The ascribed honor given to people in high authority was immense. However, for people living in an equality-based society like the West, where people in authority are often viewed with cynicism and even disdain, this idea of great respect and honor for people in places of authority is viewed almost as a weakness, not as a strength. In America especially, we have no king, therefore, we have no social equivalent for kingly rule and royalty.
So to grasp the full weight of Ephesians 1:21, we Westerners and especially, we Americans, must imagine ourselves in a different society—one in which hierarchy trumps equality, and where the currency of honor and shame trumps the currency of money and material things.
What would the first-century readers and hearers of this letter from Paul have thought as they first encountered these verses describing the greatly elevated honor and super-exaltation of Jesus Christ?
Can we imagine the comfort they would feel in knowing that the Lord and Savior residing in their hearts would be sitting at the right hand of the Father—and given a name above all names?
Can we imagine first-century peasants who have forsaken the honor of their own kinship ties—and the vital loss of wealth and honor that went with that—in order to follow Jesus Christ? Can we imagine how the super-exaltation of their Lord more than compensated for their own loss of honor as they ‘drank in’ the honor of being 1) a child of their heavenly Father, and 2) being in Christ by faith, thus, being with their Savior who is sitting at the Father’s right hand? (see Ephesians 2:6).
Is it possible for Western Christians to even begin to feel the relief, the density, the joy—that the glory of the resurrected Christ gave to destitute, honor-starved believers in the first-century Mediterranean world?
… according to the working of his great might, that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places,
–Ephesians 1:19–20 (ESV)
In the last four verses of Ephesians chapter 1, Paul completes his long prayer for believers by using the strongest possible honor and shame language—to describe the resurrection of Jesus Christ as the foundation of our hope in God. Here is an outline of the honor and shame references in the first two of those four verses … beginning with the end of verse 19 and then verse 20:
“according to the working of his great might, that he worked in Christ:” power and might are inherently honorable. “Power, moreover, always expresses honor in the ancient world” [1]. The greatness of the power displayed is commensurate with the greatness of the honor achieved.
“when he raised him from the dead:” this is an event by which immense achieved honor is accrued both to God the Father and God the Son because of the utterly unique supernatural power necessary to accomplish this. Relatedly, there is great honor in the resounding victory associated with it, for power is never neutral, it is always expressed in relation to an opponent or enemy. The resurrection is, in fact, a phenomenal act for which the greatest honor imaginable ought to be given to God the Father and God the Son.
“and seated him at his own right hand:” this speaks of ascribed honor—in three ways: First, Jesus Christ is “seated. ”This is the place of rest and authority appropriate for kings; others are kneeling, standing, working, bowing before—but Jesus is sitting. Second, where Jesus is sitting—at the Father’s own right hand—is the unique place of singular honor, for only one Person can sit at the right hand of the Almighty Sovereign God. And third, it is at the “right hand.” Neyrey says, “The right hand is deemed honorable both because it is the ‘right,’ not the left, and because it is the weapon- or power-wielding arm” [2].
Can you imagine what this dramatic exclamation of the honor of Jesus Christ might mean to people immersed in a culture of honor and shame? For people in the peasant culture of the New Testament / Mediterranean world to which this letter was addressed—people constantly struggling to avoid shame and maintain their honor in their community—I can only imagine how encouraging, how uplifting and exhilarating this letter must have been.
But there is much more to come concerning honor and shame before the end of Ephesians chapter 1.
that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him,
having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,
and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might
–Ephesians 1:17–19 ESV
For what does Paul pray to the “Father of glory”? He prays that he will give us …
“a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him” (v 17)
“having the eyes of your hearts enlightened” (v 18)
So Paul is praying for believers at Ephesus—he is praying for Christians gathered in a local community—to have profound new understanding and experience together. The assumption here is that there is a vast gulf between a) what God has given to his children in terms of spiritual blessings, and b) what his children actually understand and experience of those spiritual blessings. Paul is serving as a mediator on behalf of the church at Ephesus—doing so through prayer—that this wide gulf would vanish.
The evidences of this “vanished gulf” are that believers would know, experientially:
“the hope to which he as called you” (v 18)
“the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints” (v 18)
“the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might” (v 19)
Now from the perspective of honor and shame, there does not seem to be much in the opening phrase, “the hope to which he has called you.” However, there is a very significant honor and shame element when one digs a little deeper. This correlating verse, Colossians 1:27, adds much clarity: “To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.”
Ah, yes, there is the key: “Christ in you, the hope of glory.” This greatest of all hopes is the avoidance of shame, and the reaching of a destiny “of glory.” And how does one arrive at this “glory”? The secret is simply “Christ in you.”
One could say that for peoples rooted in an honor and shame social system, the gospel is most powerfully and simply, “Christ in you, the hope of glory.” The reason that “Christ in you” is such a great hope for “glory” is explained in Ephesians 1:20–22, in which the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is explained in the language of honor and shame. This will be unpacked in the next entry.
But before we go further, let’s also consider the other two phrases mentioned above from Ephesians 1:18–19 in the light of the cultural values of honor and shame.
First, from verse 18: “what are the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints.” Compare this to Ephesians 1:11 in which we are told, “In him we have an inheritance…”, and verses 13–14, in which “we were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance;” here, the inheritance belongs to believers. But here in verse 18, the inheritance belongs to God. Paul prays that believers will know “what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints.”
Could it be that there is a facet of the glory and honor of God Almighty by which He derives pleasure and worth from his inheritance—His relational bounty—in the saints?
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
–Ephesians 1:17 ESV
Here are some considerations about the fact that Paul’s prayer is to “the Father of glory” …
In verse 17 is this phrase: “the Father of glory.” One meaning of this phrase is simply that God is glorious.
Glory is perhaps the most honor-laden word in Scripture. It speaks of renown and fame, weightiness and density, beauty and extreme value. The Hebrew word for glory is kabod, and includes the meaning of weight. Paul is praying to “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory…”
Paul is saying that God is glorious; this is His most prominent feature. Could it be that by using the word, glory, Paul is saying that all of the attributes of God … holiness, love, righteousness, justice, omnipotence, omniscience, mercy, and so on … are all wrapped up under the banner of “glory?”
Here is a second possible meaning: Could it also be that Paul is saying that since God is the “Father of glory” that he begets glory in those who are created in his image? Since God is the “Father of glory,” and as the second Person of the Godhead, his Son Jesus Christ is equally glorious, therefore all who are part of his family, who are part of the body of Jesus Christ—are also made with the potential for glory. The “Father of glory and honor” begets glory and honor to his children.
The “Father of glory” is a great Patron and benefactor, revealing his immense honor. According to scholar Jerome Neyrey, in the ancient world, there existed a “code of patronage” [1] as part of the social system of honor and shame. In the “code of patronage,” the patron is honored by giving to his clients, while at the same time, the client’s honor is elevated.”
According to the code of patronage, it belongs to the patron to show exceptional favoritism to select individuals. “This is expressed clearly in the stories of both Old and New Testament persons, including Abraham, David, and Jesus.
God chooses to bless Abraham through land, protection, and descendants (Genesis 12:1–3); near the end of his life, David sings the praises of his Patron in 2 Samuel 22; and in Matthew 3:17, God speaks to Jesus saying, “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.” In all of these cases, God is the wealthy, honorable Patron who is demonstrating his honor and wealth by choosing to bless the “client.”
Neyrey writes, “The terms patron and client do not appear, but only a person unfamiliar with the culture would fail to recognize the singular favoritism David enjoys with God. Thus, when it says that God is “well pleased with him,” this declares for all to hear that God has elected Jesus, shown him special favor, and entered into a unique patron-client relationship with him.”
1. For a discussion about the patron-client relationship that pervaded the honor-shame culture of the New Testament, see Jerome Neyrey: Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew (Louisville: Westminster Press, 1998), p. 37–39.
For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints,
I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, –Ephesians 1:15–16
So Paul prays for the saints. In the original Greek, verses 3 through 14 are one sentence. There seems to be a massive set of blessings represented by that fact that believers—followers of the most honored Beloved One, Jesus Christ—are, spiritually speaking, in Christ.
The honor that comes from this myriad of blessings is vast and bends the imagination of the most mature and intelligent Christian. As stated above, these glorious blessings stretch from eternity past into the present moment, and on into eternity future—to the praise of God’s glory.
While words are used by Paul to describe the reality of this multifaceted diamond of blessing and honor and glory, Paul is keenly aware that there is a huge gap between the transcendent cosmic spiritual reality of the honor that believers possess in Christ … and the actual understanding and experience of these transcendent blessings in the life of a Christian. Paul knows that the mere use of words does not guarantee their understanding.
And so he prays. Interestingly, verses 15 through 22 consist of a one-sentence prayer in the original Greek, as though mirroring the vast blessings of the one-sentence panorama in verses 3 through 14.
And how may Paul’s prayer be described? What will we discover, looking through the lens of the cultural value of honor and shame?
==================
“Honor and shame” quote of the day, from Bruce J. Malina:
… Thus the king of the nation (or the father of the family) simply cannot be dishonored within the group; he is above criticism. What he is guarantees the evaluation of his actions. Any offense against him only stains the offender.
Further, the king in his kingdom (like the father in his family) can do no wrong because he is the arbiter of right and wrong. Any criticism apart from the conventional, usual protests (such as that taxes are too high) is rated an act of disloyalty, a lack of commitment. No one has a right to question what the king decides to do, just as no individual in the group has any right to follow what he or she might personally think is right or wrong. The king (father) must be followed and obeyed; he is sufficient conscience for all concerned. … [1]
Think about this quote in regards to Paul’s prayer in verses 15–22, acknowledging that Jesus Christ is far above all rule, power, authority, dominion … the head of the church … the absolute Lord of all. The honor of Jesus Christ is without equal. I will have much more on this in upcoming posts.
Honor-status reversal as a horizontal/social orientation in the second half of Ephesians 2
Let’s recall that the crux of the two dimensions of honor-status reversal is
“Salvation by grace through faith”
