Parallel structure in Ephesians 2

Ephesians 2:1-10 had long been a nice "power" passage for me, but it wasn't until about the 95th read through/study of it a few months ago that I noticed a nice parallelism in Paul's writing (also, I have a hard time remembering how to spell words with a mix match of single and double consonants. parralel? paralell? parrallell? accomodate? accooomadayteee?).

In verses 1-3, we have these indictments of we used to be before Christ:

• Dead through trespasses and sins. The word for dead is νεκρος - you are spiritually without a pulse. Grammatically I like to point out that this verse still applies even if you throw out half the Bible and don't believe in original sin; it's because of our individual sins we are dead, not because we are dead, therefore we sin. The law indicts us all.
• Following the course of this world, the prince of the air, ie, the devil. Notice Paul says this is an indictment of "all", even himself.
• Children of wrath. This is pretty intense, we were born dead, and into the family of wrath.

But then in one of Paul's usual epic, divine contrasts, "but God" steps in verse 4 and flips everything:

• Even while we were dead, God made us alive. I call grace the "spiritual defibrillator." You can't yell "clear" and throw on the pads yourself when your heart's stopped, God did that for you.
• Raised up with Christ and seated in the heavenlies - this is an interesting phrase which we can ponder the meaning of, but it stands directly opposite our previous position; instead of following this world and the prince of the "air," we now follow Christ who is in the heavenly places.
• We will be shown the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness, no longer bearing God's wrath. Praise Him who gives such grace to those who do not deserve it!

After a transitional statement about our workmanship and our purpose in God (v8-10), Paul presents another amazing study in contrast about the Gentiles place in Christ. He does not the inclusive "we" in this section since he was born into Judaism, but I think it's safe in most theological circles to assume that Jews post-Christ, unless they make a personal decision for Jesus, are no longer in the family (even if the Israelite nation is one day brought back to prominence in God's kingdom, its members will all be Christian), so this passage now applies equally well to all present day men and women.

We start with the before, v11-12:

• Separated from Christ.
• Alienated from the nation of Israel (God's chosen kingdom), strangers to the covenant.
• Having no hope, without God (literally, atheist).

And, the amazing after, v13 and following:

• Brought near. What brought us near? (Singing) "Nothing but the blood of Jesus."
• In peace, made us all one; the "dividing wall" is referring to the inability of Gentiles to enter the sacred parts of the temple in Jerusalem. We are now fellow citizens and saints in the household/body/building/temple of God.
• We have access now in one Spirit to the Father, through Jesus. What an amazing work of the Trinity!

Meanwhile, religiosity in the Middle East

http://www.barnabasfund.org/Said-Musas-handwritten-letter.html


Yesterday I wrote about a teenager who stood up for his faith and his conscience (though there is debate among Christians about the wisdom and actual piety of his decision) and his biggest consequence, outside of the bad PR? He had to forfeit a high school match. Meanwhile, in other parts of the world we see stories about men like Said Musa, a convert to Christianity in (still US-occupied, mind you) Afghanistan. He is a physician for the local Red Cross and has a family, but for months now he has been stuck in prison, without a lawyer and with much torture from his fellow inmates and prison guards. He stands to be executed in the near future, all because he will not renounce his stance that Jesus Christ is Lord and Son of God.


His response, in a letter sent to the US: "I also agree with the sacrifice [of] my life in public, I will tell the faith ... and other believers will take courage and be strong in their faith."


What a Pauline response! I desire to be touched by the gospel as this man, who can so strongly echo Philippians 1:12-14 I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ. And most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.

Religiosity in (post)Modern Times

"Wrestling with Conviction" is the title of a new editorial on Espn by blogger/magazine columnist extraordinaire Rick Reilly. He talks about the story of a high school wrestler who, out of his family's deep religious conviction for treating women with respect, decides not to compete against a girl in his Iowa state tournament. Reilly touts back: 


"Does any wrong-headed decision suddenly become right when defended with religious conviction? In this age, don't we know better?"


This is an interesting argument coming from ESPN, not exactly an organization known for its great philosophical repartee. The whole of Reilly's article does little more than energize the typical pro-feminist position: Let the women take on any man, any time; it's no matter that the girl in question actually did lose her next two matches handily.


Going back to Reilly's rhetorical questions, the answer to the second is easy: no we don't, actually we generally assume the opposite. The battle cry of this generation is "Do what's right for you and I'll do what's right for me and we'll both be better for it." On the other hand, the message of orthodox Christianity has always been "Do my decisions line up not with my personal feelings and motivations, but with the authority and commands of God's Holy Word?"