The "it" and "that" in Ephesians 2:8 what are they?

[Dr Denis O'Callaghan]

What Does "It" and "That" Refer to in Ephesians 2:8?

　

THAT WONDROUS VERSE IN EPHESIANS 2:8 DECLARES: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Paul not only says that salvation is by grace . . . through faith but adds the phrase that not of yourselves. Theologian John Murray states the case very well when he comments on this verse:

When [Paul] says "and that not of yourselves," he is reminding us of the true nature of grace, that its whole urge and explanation reside in God. It may be easy to give formal assent to this text. Every evangelical Christian will do so. But how ready we are to shy away from its implications! In reality we deny the truth here asserted when we introduce at any point in the whole span and process of salvation a decisive autonomy on the part of man. If salvation at any point is contingent upon some contribution which man himself makes, then at that point it is of ourselves, and to that extent it is not of grace. Paul’s definition "and that not of yourselves" is thereby effaced and the true nature of grace is denied.[i]

Indeed, Murray cuts to the heart of the matter. Grace that is not ALL grace is NO grace. Grace means that God has done everything; if He does not do everything, then it is not grace.

There is a common teaching today that says, "Christ’s crucifixion is a proof of our worth." In other words, God could see worth in us so He bought us. But as Ephesians 2:1-3 makes crystal clear, such teaching is patently false and is a heretical distortion of grace. The cross is not proof of our worth but God’s grace. We were undeserving and even dead. Where is the worth in a corpse?

One key, if not the key to this passage, lies in the debate over the words that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. The debate is: to what exactly does it and that refer? Do they refer to grace, faith, or just the whole concept of salvation in general? Perhaps Charles Hodge puts the answer best:

What is said to be the gift of God? Is it [the whole concept of] salvation, or faith? To say that faith is the gift of God best suits the purpose of the passage. The object of the Apostle is to show the unmerited nature of salvation. This is most efficiently done by saying, "Ye are not only saved by faith in opposition to works, but your very faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God." The other interpretation makes the passage repetitive. To say, "Ye are saved by faith; not of yourselves; your salvation is the gift of God; it is not of works," is saying the same thing over and over again without any progress.[ii]

Holding this view, a more contemporary expositor is equally sound and points out the grammar issue that has been raised by some interpreters:

Some have objected to this interpretation, saying that "faith" (pistis) is feminine, while "that" (touto) is neuter. That poses no problem, however, as long as it is understood that "that" does not refer precisely to the noun "faith" but to the act of believing. Further, this interpretation makes the best sense of the text, since if "that" refers to "by grace you have been saved through faith" (that is, to the whole statement), the adding of "that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" would be redundant, because grace is defined as an unearned act of God. If salvation is of grace, it has to be an undeserved gift of God.[iii]

The late Christian philosopher and commentator Gordon Clark concurs:

Grammatically, neuter demonstrative pronouns, even in the more precise classical Greek, often refer to feminized nouns, especially to abstract feminine nouns. Hence it is false to say that touto [that] cannot mean faith."[iv]

J. N. Darby also writes:

I am quite aware of what critics have to say here as to gender; but it is equally true as to grace, and to say, "by grace . . . and that not of yourselves," is simply nonsense; but by faith might be supposed to be of ourselves, though grace cannot. Therefore the Spirit of God adds, "and that [not it] not of yourselves: it is the gift of God." That is, the believing is God’s gift, not of ourselves. And this is confirmed by what follows, "not of works." But the object of the apostle is to shew that the whole thing was of grace and of God. God’s workmanship is a new creation. So far, grace and faith and all go together.

To be fair, I should mention here what scholar Daniel B. Wallace has to say to the contrary in his excellent book, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics:

While it is true that on rare occasions there is a gender shift between antecedent and pronoun, the pronoun is almost always caught between two nouns of different gender. One is the antecedent; the other is the predicate [nominative].[v]

Wallace goes on to cite a couple of examples. While I highly recommend Wallace’s book, I must respectfully disagree here. It is a clearly weak argument when one must say "almost always" simply because it leaves room for exceptions. Theologian R. C. Sproul also disagrees when he writes:

The rules of Greek syntax and grammar demand that the antecedent of that be the word faith. Faith is not something we conjure up in our own effort, or the result of the willing of the flesh. Faith is a result of the Spirit’s sovereign work of regeneration.[vi]

If I might also submit that "faith" being feminine is actually irrelevant, simply because both "grace" and "salvation" are also feminine. The Greek alone, therefore, does not prove the issue, which even Wallace admits.[vii] (In spite of that fact, however, Adam Clark, John Wesley, and other Arminians strenuously held onto this argument simply because to admit anything else would destroy their system.)

At any rate, the main thrust of both the above quotations is that to say that it and that refer to grace or the whole concept of salvation results in the verses being redundant. Paul’s central concept is that we have been saved by grace, which he states plainly in the first clause. Is he then going to just repeat the same thing by saying "grace is a gift of God," or "salvation is a gift of God?" No, he has already said that. What is Paul trying to get across here? He’s emphasizing that even faith is a gift of God.

Ponder it this way a moment. How can two unsaved people sit under the same salvation message, hear the preacher pour out his heart, listen to the Gospel message of sin, wrath, and salvation, and then one person believe and the other not? The answer is simple when we realize that left to themselves neither person would believe, but one does because God gives him the faith to do so. Because they are both dead, neither can respond until God gives them the power.

Further, faith must be of God, for if we say that faith is of ourselves, then faith becomes a human work, as much a human work as partaking of a sacrament or just "being a good person." Faith does not determine salvation; grace determines salvation. God has done it all. As John MacArthur rightly puts it: "When we accept the finished work of Christ on our behalf, we act by the faith supplied by God’s grace."[viii] From where does our faith come? It comes from grace.

Several other Scriptures strongly substantiate this principle:

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. (Jn. 6:65, emphasis added)

For unto you it is given [granted] in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake. (Phil. 1:29, emphasis added)

And when [Apollos] was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace. (Acts 18:27, emphasis added)

Addressing not only this repeated emphasis in Scripture, but the whole issue in general, theologian Lewis Sperry Chafer writes this powerful statement:

So conclusive is this passage relative to man’s inability in the field of saving faith that much has been attempted in the way of exegesis which proposes to make the salvation the gift of God, rather than the faith which receives it. When thus interpreted, the phrase "through faith" is practically eliminated and serves no purpose. The contrast which the passage sets up between faith and works becomes a contrast between salvation and works, for which there is no ground either in Scripture or reason. If the passage stood alone in the Word of God, declaring a truth not elsewhere propounded, some reason might be assigned to such exegetical attempts which divest of its assured meaning; but, when rightly interpreted, it stands out as but one of many of the same general character.

Though much Scripture of an indirect nature might be cited, enough has been presented to establish the doctrine of man’s natural inability to exercise saving faith. Were men able to move themselves toward God, there would be no provision from God for this need.[ix]

Something else that many do not consider is that if our faith is the basis of salvation, what if we one day choose not to believe anymore? Taken to its logical conclusion, this view results in a lack of assurance and security, which may we interject, is exactly what many Christians lack. But if God has done it all, if God gives us faith, there is total security.

Another often quoted verse is John 1:12: "But as many as received him, to them gave he power [i.e., right] to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." Many Gospel preachers quote this verse, but they stop without quoting the very next one: "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." Where did we get the will to believe? In ourselves? No, because we were dead. Rather it was God’s grace that gave us the will to believe. Man’s will has nothing to do with salvation, not even with believing. It is all of God. Were we born again because of our will? No, thank God, we were born again in spite of our will.

That beloved Puritan commentator Matthew Henry (1662-1714), who could read the Bible when he was only three years old, and of whose commentary Spurgeon said, "Every minister ought to read it entirely and carefully through once at least," said it well when he wrote:

We do not become the children of God as we become the children of our natural parents. Grace does not run in the blood, as corruption does. It is not produced by the natural power of our own will. As it is not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, so neither is it of the will of man. It is the grace of God that makes us willing to be His (emphasis in the original).

John Calvin agrees:

Ought we not then to be silent about free-will, and good intentions, and fancied preparations, and merits, and satisfactions? There is none of these which does not claim a share of praise in the salvation of men; so that the praise of grace would not, as Paul shews, remain undiminished.[x]

Still another writer, this time a Greek authority, writes:

God does not merely give to both Jews and Gentiles the possibility of faith; He effects faith in them. Eph. 2:8 makes it especially plain that all is of grace and that human merit is completely ruled out. To understand the Pauline and then the Lutheran doctrine of justification it is essential to make it clear that faith is not a new human merit which replaces the merit of works, that it is not a second achievement which takes the place of the first, that it is not something which man has to show, but that justification by faith is an act of divine grace. Faith is not the presupposition of the grace of God. As a divine gift, it is the epitome and demonstration of the grace of God.[xi]

We can really answer this controversy about faith even more simply: when we read, "By grace are ye saved," is this not enough to show that everything is from God? If everything is not from God, then why do we need grace at all? If I can do something, why does God have to do anything? In the final analysis, then, it really doesn’t matter how you read the verse grammatically. Theologically, salvation, from beginning to end and everything in between, is of God. As R. C. Sproul writes again:

Does [that] refer to salvation? Or does [that] refer to faith. Is Paul saying that salvation is a gift of God? Or is he saying that faith is a gift of God. Although Greek scholars argue about which of these is the preferred rendition of the Greek text, theologically it really doesn’t matter. In both ways of reading that sentence, we have to come to the conclusion that faith is a gift of God. It is not an expression of human achievement, or of human effort, or of human ability. This is why every believer should be praising God daily for the fact that he has received as a gift not only the salvation that comes through faith, but the gift of faith itself.[xii]

Martyn Lloyd-Jones concurs:

It is not a question of grammar, it is not a question of language. . . . And there is a sense in which it really does not matter at all, because it comes down to much the same thing in the end. In other words, what is important is that we should avoid turning faith into "works."[xiii]

To that we must say, "Amen." A common notion on the relationship of grace and faith is that, "Grace is God’s part and faith is man’s part," but such a notion is shallow sentimentality and theologically aberrant. Yes, man believes, but even his faith must originate in God’s power, not his own. Salvation is not partly God and partly you; it is all of God.

　

* * *

By Grace Through Faith

By Charles Haddon Spurgeon

I think it well to turn a little to one side that I may ask my reader to observe adoringly the fountain-head of our salvation, which is the grace of God. "By grace are ye saved." Because God is gracious, therefore sinful men are forgiven, converted, purified, and saved. It is not because of anything in them, or that ever can be in them, that they are saved; but because of the boundless love, goodness, pity, compassion, mercy, and grace of God. Tarry a moment, then, at the well-head. Behold the pure river of water of life, as it proceeds out of the throne of God and of the Lamb!

What an abyss is the grace of God! Who can measure its breadth? Who can fathom its depth? Like all the rest of the divine attributes, it is infinite. God is full of love, for "God is love." God is full of goodness; the very name "God" is short for "good." Unbounded goodness and love enter into the very essence of the Godhead. It is because "his mercy endureth for ever" that men are not destroyed; because "his compassions fail not" that sinners are brought to Him and forgiven.

Remember this; or you may fall into error by fixing your minds so much upon the faith which is the channel of salvation as to forget the grace which is the fountain and source even of faith itself. Faith is the work of God’s grace in us. No man can say that Jesus is the Christ but by the Holy Ghost. "No man cometh unto me," saith Jesus, "except the Father which hath sent me draw him." So that faith, which is coming to Christ, is the result of divine drawing. Grace is the first and last moving cause of salvation; and faith, essential as it is, is only an important part of the machinery which grace employs. We are saved "through faith," but salvation is "by grace." Sound forth those words as with the archangel’s trumpet: "By grace are ye saved." What glad tidings for the undeserving!

Faith occupies the position of a channel or conduit pipe. Grace is the fountain and the stream; faith is the aqueduct along which the flood of mercy flows down to refresh the thirsty sons of men. It is a great pity when the aqueduct is broken. It is a sad sight to see around Rome the many noble aqueducts which no longer convey water into the city, because the arches are broken and the marvelous structures are in ruins. The aqueduct must be kept entire to convey the current; and, even so, faith must be true and sound, leading right up to God and coming right down to ourselves, that it may become a serviceable channel of mercy to our souls.

Still, I again remind you that faith is only the channel or aqueduct, and not the fountainhead, and we must not look so much to it as to exalt it above the divine source of all blessing which lies in the grace of God. Never make a Christ out of your faith, nor think of as if it were the independent source of your salvation. Our life is found in "looking unto Jesus," not in looking to our own faith. By faith all things become possible to us; yet the power is not in the faith, but in the God upon whom faith relies. Grace is the powerful engine, and faith is the chain by which the carriage of the soul is attached to the great motive power. The righteousness of faith is not the moral excellence of faith, but the righteousness of Jesus Christ which faith grasps and appropriates. The peace within the soul is not derived from the contemplation of our own faith; but it comes to us from Him who is our peace, the hem of whose garment faith touches, and virtue comes out of Him into the soul. [Continued on p. 5]

See then, dear friend, that the weakness of your faith will not destroy you. A trembling hand may receive a golden gift. The Lord’s salvation can come to us though we have only faith as a grain of mustard seed. The power lies in the grace of God, and not in our faith. Great messages can be sent along slender wires, and the peace-giving witness of the Holy Spirit can reach the heart by means of a thread-like faith which seems almost unable to sustain its own weight. Think more of Him to whom you look than of the look itself. You must look away even from your own looking, and see nothing but Jesus, and the grace of God revealed in Him.

[Excerpted from Spurgeon’s classic book, All of Grace]

* * *

This is the terror of mercy: God requires of a man that he should believe; now mercy doth help to perform the duty commanded. The Lord, as He requires the condition of thee, so He worketh the condition in thee.

Puritan Thomas Hooker

NOTES

[i] John Murray, Collected Writings of John Murray: Volume 1, The Claims of Truth (Banner of Truth Trust, 1976), p. 120 (emphasis in the original).

[ii] Charles Hodge, Ephesians, p. 63.

[iii] John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Ephesians, p. 61.

[iv] Gordon Clark, Ephesians (Trinity Foundation), p. 73.

[v] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Zondervan, 1996), p. 334.

[vi] R. C. Sproul, Grace Unknown (Baker Books, 1997), p. 156.

[vii] Wallace, p. 335. His full comment reads: "The issues here are complex and cannot be solved by grammar alone. Nevertheless, syntactical considerations do tend toward one of the [other views]."

[viii] MacArthur, p. 61

[ix] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Dallas Theological Seminary, 1948), Vol. III., 216-217.

[x] Calvin’s Commentaries (Ephesians).

[xi] H. Hanse in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. and ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), Vol. IV, p. 2.

[xii] R. C. Sproul, Ephesians, p. 55.

[xiii] Martyn Lloyd-Jones, God’s Way of Reconciliation, p. 135.