Ephesians 2:11–19 is central to defining the identity of the Christ believer. The “one new humanity” (v. 15)[1] is one of the most fundamental biblical concepts that define the nature of the “in-Christ” identity. While some scholars consider the new “in-Christ” identity as a tertium genus (third race), I contend that the ideology of a “third race” is a jarring imposition on the language of ethnic reconciliation in Ephesians 2. Hoehner (2002, 279) attempts to smooth the expression by reframing it as “a new race that is raceless,” yet, in my opinion, that remains jarring. There is no need to press the metaphor so far as to suggest that converts are stripped of their distinctive identity and brought into a new race. The term “race” holds the real danger of implying superiority and displays a lack of sensitivity to diversity in the church (Campbell 2008, 96–103; Du Toit 2019, 8).
The modern form of the “third race” debate goes back to the term used by opponents of Christianity as early as AD 200, the first race being the Gentiles and the second being the Jews (Harnack cited in Woods 2014, 99).[2] The concept arises from the reference in the pericope that the Christ event rendered the law inoperative, making Jew and Gentile into “one” so that a new anthrõpos (humanity) might be created from the two ethnic entities (Eph 2:14–15). The question is, what is the form of this new anthrõpos? The expression “out of the two” (v. 15) implies the existence of two entities, but do these two entities continue to exist after the uniting, or are they entirely fused into one new entity? It is relevant that Paul did not use the word anēr—man as distinct from a woman—but anthrōpos—[hu]man as distinct from a non-human— the latter can also mean “people” (NLT) as a collective noun, which fits the context best.[3]
Contextually, the identity marker that is crucial to the rhetorical logic of the passage is Gentile Christian identity in terms of movement; this is a movement from alien status (Eph v. 11; “at that time” v. 12, “But now in Christ” v. 13) to citizenship and membership in the household of God (v. 19) brought about by the Christ event (v. 13). A natural reading of the pericope proclaims that “the dividing wall” that alienated Gentiles was demolished. The objective was to reconcile both groups to God and each other in “one” incorporated Christ-believing community so that alienation would give way to reconciliation and hostility to peace (vv. 14–16). The context argues for a new corporate entity, the “body of Christ” consisting of reconciled and united Jews and Gentiles—the universal ekklesia (v. 16). The corporate dimension is central in the text; it is group acceptance and reconciliatory peace that is in view. Does the resultant peace depend on eliminating the categories of Jew and Gentile, or is it a peace that is victorious over their differences? The passage celebrates the latter. Consequently, there is no need to press the metaphor so far as to suggest that converts are stripped of their distinctive identities.
The Jew remained a Jew, and the Gentile a Gentile; what came to an end was the old separatist distinctions for defining membership of God’s people, like biological descent, circumcision, possession of the Law, and dietary restrictions to pave the way for harmonious relations, thus putting an end to the historical religious and sociological hostility. Consequently, Paul is not abolishing ethnic differences but repudiating ethnocentric perspectives as grounds for estrangement and discrimination.
Paul’s gospel of reconciliation presented in Ephesians 2 was not meant to destroy biological, ethnic or social distinctions nor to create a new group without ethnic identity but rather to transform those who are Gentiles into spiritually renewed Gentiles, and Jews into spiritually renewed Jews, in an ecumenical society—equal and united—that transcends ethnic barriers. Paul describes the new creation in 2 Corinthians 5:17; it refers to a spiritual reawakening and walking in the newness of life (cf. Gal 6:15). Paul repeats a concept in Ephesians 4:24 by encouraging his audience to “put on the new self” in restoration of humanity’s original intended state, citing Genesis 1:26–27.
Paul’s writings portray a hierarchy of nested identities; being ‘in Christ’ was his primary identity. Paul’s Jewish identity has been relativised; he is now a Jew circumcised at heart—radically transformed by his personal encounter with the risen Christ and his apostolic commission. Galatians 3 is another passage in the New Testament that defines the new “in-Christ” identity. Galatians depicts Paul’s “in the flesh” or “earthly descent” in sharp contrast with his new “spiritual descent” through faith in Christ and the indwelling Spirit, which are the two primary identity markers of those belonging to Christ (vv. 7, 9, 23, 25–26) and partaking in the Spirit (vv. 3–5, cf. 14). The “in Christ” identity is not an anthropological reality but a theological reality, providing the Christ-believing community with life and identity (Du Toit 2020, 8).[4] The implication is that this reality transcends human modes of identity but does not transmute them because the term is purely theological, not ontological; it refers to a new spiritual existence and walking in the newness of life. However, this spiritual existence is not just an eschatological dimension; it invites the new Christ-believing community into a transformed anthropological reality, a “new self” (Eph 4:24).[5] Consequently, it can be inferred that Paul values ethnicity, but not in an unqualified way; it is redefined by the “in-Christ-new-creation identity” and requires compatibility with the truth of this new reality in the Christ-believing community.
The implication is that self-definition—flesh-and-blood or self-identification—must realign to the new “in-Christ” identity. So, if a conflict arises, all self-definition claims must cede to the gospel imperatives. The central idea is that the gospel redeems culture; some aspects may be appreciated, but others may require realignment.
Bibliography
Du Toit, Philip. 2019. God Saved Israel: Reading Romans 11:26 and Galatians 6:16 in Terms of the New Identity in Christ and the Spirit. Eugene: Pickwick Publications.
Hoehner, Harold. 2002. Ephesians. An exegetical commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Woods, David. 2014b. “Jew-gentile Distinction in the One New Man of Ephesians 2:15.” Conspectus (18):95–135.
[1] Unless otherwise specified, all Scripture references emanate from the NIV 2011 Bible Version.
[2] Jews and Gentiles are not races; only one human race exists. Race is a social invention of relatively recent origin rather than a biological phenomenon. The language of races is inherently prejudicial and anachronistic.
[3] “new person” (NABRE); “new humanity” (NIV 2011); “new man” (ESV); “new people” (NLT).
[4] For discussion on the Messianic Jewish approach to identity, see Woods, David 2014b. “Jew-gentile Distinction in the One New Man of Ephesians 2:15.” Conspectus (18):95–135 and Du Toit, Philip 2016. “Does the New Testament support Messianic Judaism?” Conspectus (22): 82–123.
[5] “new self” is a metaphor for the new life in Christ in contrast to the old fallen Adamic nature. Peter called it “partaking of the divine nature” in 2 Pet 1:4.
Short Bio: Jose was born in Lisbon, Portugal, grew up in Mozambique and South Africa currently living in Johannesburg. He was last employed in the corporate world as a General Manager by Sulzer SA, a Swiss engineering company. Jose holds a master’s in theology from SATS and now serves as an academic. He is an active member of the New Testament Society of Southern Africa (NTSSA). His research interests are in Pauline studies.
