Let me draw your attention this morning again to Ephesians chapter 6. You will note that we are coming toward the end of this letter that we have spent now a year and half trying to understand, and we have come to where Paul says “Finally.” Sometimes I wonder if you don't say that, “Finally.” I want to begin reading at verse 10. I want to read through verse 17:

Finally, be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of his might.

11 Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

13 Wherefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and, having done all, to stand.

14 Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness,

15 and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace;

16 withal taking up the shield of faith, wherewith you shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the evil one.

17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

18 with all prayer and supplication praying at all seasons in the Spirit, and watching thereunto in all perseverance and supplication for all the saints,

(Eph. 6:10-18 ASV)

I want to deal with this portion that I've just read in your hearing for the second time, and as a matter of fact, for the last time, and that we’re not going to divide this any further than merely these two studies. Last Lord's day we dealt with the first three points of an outline that I suggested:

Dealing with our energy, first of all, Paul says: “Be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of his might.” This remarkable accumulation of words might be translated “be strengthened in the strength of his strength,” or literally “in the power of the power of his power.” Paul uses three words which are so synonymous as to be indivisible almost, and he seems to be saying the same thing over three times, using every word that he had at his disposal. What is required is this energy, this power. It is to be found, as we see, in him.

The second thing we considered is our enemy, our energy, and then our enemy. This we find in verse 12, with that accumulation of statements about those powers, influences which oppose us, whether they are cosmic forces, or political structures, or philosophical systems. There is a miasma of evil having these three faces, and without itemizing them, any power you may wish to mention is to be opposed and stood against by the people of God.

We noted in the third place our effort, and so we have Paul saying “we wrestle not against flesh and blood.” Some have thought that Paul has mixed his metaphors at this point, having been speaking of warfare, or the language of the battlefield, he turns now to the gymnasium, and talks about wrestling. There is not probably a mixed metaphor. It’s just Paul’s fertile mind trying to draw our attention to this in every way considerable.

And so, having dealt with our energy, our enemies, and our effort, we come now to the fourth part of the outline, which I apologize was two weeks ago; it’s a long time to keep an outline in your mind, but we now have the fourth element, and that is our equipment. So, our enemy, our effort, our equipment, and our energy. This morning, let’s then deal with this: our equipment, and that is found in verse 11, where he says, first of all: “Put on the whole armor of God.” He says the exact same thing in verse 13, “Put on the whole armor of God,” and then, of course, he enumerates that armor in terms of the helmet of salvation, the shield of faith, the sword of the Spirit, and so on, and so forth. Now, we're going to look at that this morning. This is our equipment, and the fourth item in our outline.

Now, probably this is one of the parts of the New Testament that anyone who is even nominally biblically literate remembers, because it's memorable. Paul meant it to be so, and we think of the armor that we have, and we can probably enumerate all six pieces of armor, because this has grown to be so familiar in our mind. “Put on the whole armor of God,” and then he lists these six items of armor, and where did he get this idea? Well, remember that Paul wrote this letter from prison. He was in a Roman prison, and there were soldiers marching around in some measure of armor, or their regalia, and he was familiar with it as we are too, even 2000 years later. We have this picture in our mind of a Roman soldier, and a shield, and a sword, and a helmet. We can picture that, can't we? and Paul just says “Look, I can see that picture too. It’s right in front of me. I am in prison, a Roman prison.” And so, his mind began to work on this, these pieces of armor suggesting to him what they might depict for the people of God, and the armor that they need to wear also. I think beyond merely Paul's ability to see the metaphor, and to see it as being useful for God's people, there’s an Old Testament prompt which Paul probably remembered, and that is: it is found in Isaiah 59:17. Here's what it says, “and he,” speaking of Jehovah, and probably the reference is to Christ:

And he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a mantle. (Isa. 59:17 ASV)

So you see, there it is in the Old Testament, and Isaiah, the breastplate of righteousness, the helmet of salvation, and perhaps Paul remembered that, and he says “Well, I can expand on that some,” and so, he being in a Roman prison, thought through the pieces of armor that a soldier would wear, and then made these parallels which we all remember, and they are helpful for us.

You may wonder how long we’re going to take dealing with the armor of God, and you might say “Well, we may have come toward the end of Ephesians, but knowing you, we may never get there, because, if you're going to go through and detail all the armor of God, Ephesians may last the rest of our lives.” This has been done, by the way. William Gurnall, who was one of the Puritans, in 1662 through 1665, preached and wrote a book entitled The Christian In Complete Armor, and I brought it with me. It's this. It's 1189 pages on the Christian in complete armor, and what he did, and there's no shame for him to have done this, but he took each piece of armor, and opened it up as a subject. So, you've got big words, don't you? You’ve got righteousness. You’ve got faith. You’ve got the word of God. You have salvation, and if you were to take all those words, expand them in terms of all that they might suggest as a topic throughout the word of God, we could be here for literally years. Obviously, Gurnall made the case that it could be done. The question, however, is ought that to be done? Is that what Paul intended his readers to do? Because, you notice, all he does is mention them. There is no detail given, and he expected us to see a picture that he's drawing. Have you ever looked at a picture? If you get too close to it, it no longer is a picture of anything. If you see all the little tiny details of brushstrokes or pencil strokes, whatever it may be, they, by themselves, don't give any indication as to what the picture is about. You have to stand back, and then it becomes apparent what this was, and perhaps if we stand too close to all these pieces of armor, we’ll miss the point, and miss Paul's intention.

In fact, John Eadie, I’ve quoted Eadie all the way through our study of Ephesians, he's one of my favorite commentators, I found him saying this: “It is useless to seek out the minutiae of far-fetched resemblances, as done by Gurnall.”

Now, he's writing at the end of the 19th century. Gurnall was writing during the 17th century. He wasn't afraid that Gurnall was going to get angry with him, but notice he says “This is useless.” Now, you can get, still in print, Banner of Truth prints it, The Christian In Complete Armor. You can read all 1189 pages, and say “This is really good stuff,” and you'd be right, but did Paul intend that the readers of this letter to the Ephesians should do that? Probably not. In fact, that would be like placing a book of Romans at the end of Ephesians, and that's not what Paul has done.

Calvin said this: “We must not inquire too minutely into the meaning of each item, for an allusion to a soldier’s kit is all that Paul intended.”

So, we're not going to stand that close, and if you wonder how much time we’re going to spend here, if I can, I’m going to finish this today, and not do what Gurnall did, but merely perhaps do what Paul intended, and that is to get a general impression in terms of the metaphor of armor. Well, having said that, and without pressing too hard on the metaphor, without standing too close to the picture, and I can afford to do this, because these things are not set in cement, let me give you an example. In 1st Thessalonians chapter 5, we read these words, verse 8, it says:

But let us, since we are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; (1 Thess. 5:8 ASV)

“Well, wait a minute. I thought the breastplate was righteousness.” You see, these aren’t set in cement. They’re pictures, and Paul can change the connection if he wishes. He calls it the breastplate of righteousness in Ephesians. Here he calls it the breastplate of faith and love. He goes on to say:

and for a helmet, the hope of salvation. (1 Thess. 5:8 ASV)

which is a little different than the “helmet of salvation,” isn’t it? That could be explained, but you see these things are not exact parallels that always have to be thought of in the same way. However, and recognizing that, Paul says in another place, does he not? that our weapons are not material weapons, but spiritual weapons, albeit they are mighty for the pulling down of strongholds. So, we don't need to materialize these things, but Paul wants us to see the connection in each of them. So, without pressing too hard on the metaphor, there are two general observations that I would like for us to make:

#1. Notice that this armor is a complete outfit, that is, it goes from head to toe. If you were to start at the top, you have the helmet of salvation, and you go on down, the breastplate, and the belt, so on, and so forth, and at the end of the day, although it's not in this order, you can see you end up with the feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, and so you have head to toe armor, and so, at least that we can say without pressing too hard on the metaphor.

The second thing we can say generally is that these are both offensive, as well as defensive, and, as a matter of fact, the defensive aspect really prevails. There are some who want to see the sword as an offensive weapon, but it's equally a defensive weapon, and the rest of the armor is basically defensive, and I think that's where our attentions are, especially because, remember, Paul says four times that the business of this soldier so armed is to stand, not to press forward so much as to stand without being pressed back. So, it's not the offensive idea. This is not jihad. This is merely standing our ground, being clothed with the armor of God. And so, all of these pieces of armor I would see generally as defensive for the protection of the people of God.

Not only that, remember in verses 11 and 12, I mentioned this before, there are seven times Paul uses the same preposition. It’s the Greek preposition “pros” προς, which means generally “toward,” or “facing toward.” That is, we are to be facing forward as we confront and are confronted by this whole list of evil opponents that stand against us. We are to face forward toward them in a defensive posture, but facing forward. Pilgrim’s Progress, Bunyan did not miss this in his book, at one point, and I'll read you another passage in a few moments, but he says:

“But now, in this Valley of Humiliation, poor Christian was hard put to it; for he had gone but a little way, before he espied a foul fiend coming over the field to meet him; his name is Apollyon. Then did Christian begin to be afraid, and to cast in his mind whether to go back or to stand his ground. But he considered again that he had no armour for his back; and therefore thought that to turn the back to him might give him the greater advantage with ease to pierce him with his darts.”

Now, some have disputed that the breastplate actually surrounded the chest area on back and front. Don't worry about that. The idea is that it basically presented his frontal armor, and Bunyan took that up, and said he had no armor for his back, so the only way to survive is to face the enemy, and I think that not only do we have a head to toe outfit, but largely we have defensive rather than offensive armor.

Now then, you can look at this. You can make a chart. You have a belt, which is truth. You have a breastplate, which is righteousness. You have boots, which are the preparation. You have the shield, which is faith; the helmet, which is salvation, and the sword, which is the word, these six items of armor. There are some who say there's a seventh item, because they go over into verse 18 and the phrase “with all prayer,” and “with all prayer” they make a seventh piece of armor; the problem is it has no parallel. What is the parallel in the armor of a Roman soldier? The point is, Lenski makes this point, “Paul never allows his illustration to rule what he's saying. He makes the illustration serve what he is saying, rather than it suggest what he ought to say.” And so, Paul says, probably better, we’re to understand it, put on all the six pieces of armor, with prayer, that is, with all, putting them on with prayer, but prayer is not one of the pieces of armor. It's merely the accompaniment of all of them. Well, we’re not going to lose any sleep over whether you take that as a seventh piece or not.

Also notice the order in which Paul lists the armor. He doesn't move from head to toe, or toe to head. He starts with the belt of truth, and then the breastplate of righteousness, and then the boots. This sequence does not necessarily match the sequence in which you would put them on. It would seem to me that the first thing you would put on would be probably the belt, and then your boots, because, if you put the breastplate on, it would be pretty hard to get your boots on. When you guys were young, were you ever so foolish, as most all of us, including myself, to put on your tennis shoes, and then try to put your pants on over them? You tried that, right? It didn't work very well, did it? and you learned your lesson, even though perhaps you were told it was a silly thing to do. You gave it a try. Well, you can't put your boots on when you've got the breastplate on, because it is hard to bend over after that. It's in the way. So, it doesn't seem that Paul is thinking about the order in which these are put on, because it doesn’t seem that, seriatim, that would make much sense.

However, there is this logic: the first three items, belt, breastplate, and boots, are all items that are fastened on the body, right? and the latter three items, the shield, the helmet, and the sword, are put on as not fastened to the body so much as held or donned at the appropriate moment, and so, there may be that logic in Paul's mind. I don't know what was in Paul's mind, but we can at least see that might've been the case.

One thing I would point out, however. Notice that the first one he mentions is truth. Now, whether we take this as an objective or subjective genitive, how much stress we put on the presence or absence of the article on any of these may be a little precarious. However, notice that the first thing he mentions is the belt of truth, and then later on we have a shield, which is a confession of the faith. The article is there, a confession of the faith. The first thing is truth or truthfulness.

My friend Geoffrey Thomas, a Welshman, says “The first thing we have to put on is the belt of truth. Truth is the thing which holds together everything else. A soldier cannot properly fight with his underclothes swinging in the wind, or his trousers falling to his ankles. He’d be dead.”

The first thing you need is the belt of truth. Truthfulness and the confession of the faith, first for emphasis, and for a reason.

Lenski says “Not subjective faith, but the objective content of faith, hence the article. You may believe with all your might, but that will not be a clinching shield. Only the truth will possibly be the armor that you require.”

We live in a day when truth is not first. It’s not even last. It’s not even there, is it? Nowadays, image trumps words; opinions trump confession, and the visual trumps the verbal. Suspicious of labels and logic, definition and dogmatism, religion has degenerated into sharing and caring. The truth lies dying and bleeding in the streets. Paul starts with truth, and he never leaves it. He starts with the belt of truth, and comes almost immediately then to the confession, or the shield, of the faith.

That being said, there are 4 items that we ought to draw from just the two-fold command “Put on the whole armor of God,” just that phrase. As I said at the beginning, I'm not going to ask you to dwell on each article of armor, and take each of them as these broad words, which would take months perhaps to exhaust. No, the picture is drawn, but there are 4 things that I want you to note from just the words:

“Put on the whole armor of God.

#1: It's not any clothing, but armor, not any kind of clothing. The only thing that will do in the warfare is armor. The Greek word for armor is “panoplian” πανοπλίαν. Maybe you've use the word in English, panoply. It means the whole outfit of a soldier's defensive armor, but notice it’s not just clothing of any kind. It's armor, and that tells us two things. The only time you need armor is if there is violence going on. You don’t need armor if there’s nothing violent about to happen. So it suggests that there’s going to be a conflict.

And the second thing that armor implies is vulnerability. “I am in danger. Therefore, I put on protective clothing. Not any clothing will do. I need armor, because the conflict is violent, and I am vulnerable.” That's when you reach for the armor, true? And that is the picture that Paul is presenting.

Now, Arden, I have his notes on Ephesians, he kindly has let me read them, he says in there, I’ve not seeing anyone else say this: “Don't put on the bathrobe of God; nor does it say put on the bathing suit of God; nor does it say put on the business suit of God. He says “Put on the armor of God.” Why? Because violence is going to be encountered, and I see myself as vulnerable. Therefore, armor is all that will do.” So, it’s not any clothing. It's armor.

John Eadie says “This armor is not worn for idle parade, nor as holiday attire. We can see soldiers today dressed up as soldiers for various reasons, but this is armor, and the conflict is upon us.”

Charles Hodge said “This is not just a figure of speech. This combat is not carried on with straws picked up on the wayside. No, its armor. Not any clothing, but armor.”

Secondly, notice that it's not any armor, but the armor of God. All kinds of suggested armor in the world today, “Guard yourself, protect yourself with this, that, or the other thing.” Paul says no, not just any armor, but the armor of God. That's an important thing to notice, not any clothing, but armor, not any armor, but the armor of God.

Again, Charles Hodge says “Instead of relying on the arms which God has provided, men have always been disposed to trust those which they provide for themselves, or which have been prescribed to them by others. This panoply of false religion has substituted for the armor of God.”

Not any armor will do. It must be the armor of God.

#3: Note please that he says not some armor, but the whole armor of God. “Put on the whole armor,” and the reason it’s translated “whole armor” is the Greek word “panoplian” πανοπλίαν, or the “panoply of God,” has the word “pan” παν in it, and that is the Greek word for “all.” “Put on all of this armor.” None of it is an accessory. None of it can be left off where the battle is raging. You can't lay aside any piece and be safe. So, don't put on some of the armor, because you like this item, or that item. You must put on it all, the whole armor of God.

Lloyd-Jones has said “This means that we take the whole body of doctrine. We do not concentrate on particular parts of it, emphasizing one doctrine only. We must take the complete doctrine, the whole armor of God.”

So, not any clothing, but armor, not any armor, but the armor of God, and not some armor, but all of it. “Put on the whole armor of God.”

And fourthly, not admiring or approving the armor, but putting it on. Paul doesn’t say to stand around with your armor hanging in the corner and admire it. “What lovely armor we have. It's made out of the proper materials. It's all nicely shined and ready for use. It fits me perfectly. I'm admiring my armor.” That’s not what Paul says. He says to put it on. “Put on the whole armor of God,” and the tense and the mood of the verb that he uses in both cases, verses 11 and 13, he uses different words, but the idea is put it on, and keep it on.

So then, those four things. As William Gurnall in his book says: “Come not into the field with bravado alone. To cashier this notion from the saint’s camp, he calls for the armor to be worn.” It must be put on,

not any clothing, but armor,

not any armor, but the armor of God,

not some armor, but the whole armor, and

not approving or admiring the armor, but the armor put on.

If you were to continue to think about these pieces of armor, there are a couple of thoughts that we might add before we leave this.

First of all, it says in verse 15:

and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; (Eph. 6:15 ASV)

Does that strike you a little strange that you're putting on armor, facing a foe because he is violent and you are vulnerable? This is the whole scene that’s being drawn, and yet he says one of your pieces of armor has to do something with peace. It seems to be out of place, doesn’t it? In fact, one author even said “It seems paradoxical that one of the pieces of armor is armor which describes “preparation of the gospel of peace.”” Well. Not only that, but in verse 16, the ASV translates it, “withal taking up the shield of faith.” It doesn't mean “above all,” but the preposition used at this place means “besides these that I just mentioned that are fastened to the body, take these that you are to take up.”

And not only that, another piece of warning about these: notice that the sword is not the Spirit. It’s not what it says. Some people have taken it that way, as if we are to take up the Spirit, like he were a sword, and oppose our enemies with the Spirit, but notice that’s not what Paul says. He says it’s “the sword of the Spirit,” which is what? It’s not the Spirit. It’s the word of God that’s the sword.

“In opposition to all error,” Hodge says, “to all false philosophy, to all false principles, to sophistries, to all suggestions, the sole, simple, and sufficient answer is the word of God.” That’s the sword. He goes on to say “Hoc signo vinces, in this sign conquer.” “And take…the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”

Now, let me return to Pilgrim’s Progress, and, in fact, next Lord's day I have even another quote from Pilgrim’s Progress, where he obviously is referring to Ephesians chapter 6, but this:

“{151} Then Apollyon, espying his opportunity, began to gather up close to Christian, and wrestling with him, gave him a dreadful fall; and with that Christian's sword flew out of his hand. Then said Apollyon, I am sure of thee now. And with that he had almost pressed him to death, so that Christian began to despair of life; but as God would have it, while Apollyon was fetching of his last blow, thereby to make a full end of this good man, Christian nimbly stretched out his hand for his sword, and caught it, saying, "Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy; when I fall I shall arise,” and with that gave him a deadly thrust, which made him give back, as one that had received his mortal wound. Christian perceiving that, made at him again, saying, "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us". [Rom. 8:37] And with that Apollyon spread forth his dragon's wings, and sped him away, that Christian for a season saw him no more.”

Bunyan’s thinking about this, isn’t he? That quote that I'm going to read you next week is that Christian finds himself in the Valley of Humiliation, and he finds that opposing him which did not care for his sword, and so he had to resort to another weapon called “all prayer,” but we’ll deal with that when we come to verse 18.

Well then, I want to conclude with two observations, and if you think that this has sounded a little bit superficial, I’ve done this on purpose. There are only two ways you can go. You can go this way, or you can go the way that I've chosen to go. I have an idea you like my way, because next Lord’s day I hope to end our study in Ephesians. So then, having said what we've said, and just what we've said, these two things I leave you with:

#1: This armor belongs not to a few valiant souls. Paul is speaking not to the elders of the church at Ephesus. He’s not speaking to the deacons of the church at Ephesus. He's not speaking to the particularly valiant personalities in the church at Ephesus. He says “All of you Ephesians, put on the whole armor of God.” So, each of us are to put this on. The armor does not, as many people seem to think, belong to a few valiant souls who have the kind of resolve and personality to move out and face the enemy. No, no. All of us are to put on the whole armor of God. We can't rely upon other armored Christians beside us, although that's helpful, but that's not the command that Paul gives. An unarmored Christian is not envisioned in the New Testament. No. Each of you, if you are the people of God, are called upon to have this armor, and to stand.

The second and last thing that I would have you to note this morning is that this armor must be proved to be serviceable. Again, if you have armor and it's hanging in the closet, you’ve never tried it on, you’ve never tested it, it will do you no good. I’m reminded of 1st Samuel 17. Remember that David comes, and Goliath is out there blaspheming the God of Israel, and David says “Isn’t there a cause here? Isn’t anyone going to do something?” So he determined that he was going to go out, and Saul the King says “Here, David, take my armor,” and David apparently tried it on, and said “This is not going to work. I've never proved it.” Now, I’m not using that Old Testament example to tell you to go out with a sling, and forget the armor. That would be a false application, wouldn’t it? But notice what David said: “I’ve never prove this stuff, and therefore, it would be an impediment to me to try to wear it.” If we don't prove it, if we don't take these things to heart, and know what they're talking about, they won't do us any good.