1:7 is, that there the blood of Christ is spoken of specifically, as the

medium of our apolutrosis (redemption) -- here inclusively, as

representing the apolutrosis'.

Ellicott on the other hand, reckons that en here has its instrumental

force.  However we translate the words, we should be aware of the repetition of

this preposition en in the context, and to see it in the outworking of the

apostle's argument will compel us to use care in its rendering.  Let us tabulate

the use of en in this section (Eph. 2:11-19), and for the sake of clarity, we

will render en by the word `in', in each passage.  In the flesh; in the world;

in Christ Jesus; in the blood of Christ; in His flesh; in ordinances; in

Himself; in one body; in it, or in Himself (thereby verse 16); in one spirit.

With all this insistence upon sphere, in the flesh, in the world, in the spirit,

etc., it seems wrong to lift the words `in the blood of Christ' out of this

category, by translating the phrase `by the blood of Christ'.  It would appear

therefore that the apostle would expand the words `now in Christ Jesus' by the

added words `nigh in the blood of Christ' in order that there shall be no chance

of misunderstanding the sacrificial basis of this mighty change.  When he came

to write on this subject of alienation and reconciliation in Colossians, he puts

the matter thus:

`And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to

reconcile all things unto Himself ... you, that were sometime alienated

and enemies ... in the body of His flesh through death ...' (Col. 1:20-

If we allow the apostle to be his own interpreter we shall read together

the two passages:

`But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off'.

`You, that were sometime alienated'.

The `aliens' from the commonwealth of Israel, were those who had become

`alienated from the life of God'.  They could not merely refer to the `lost

tribes of the house of Israel', for Paul's reference to `things in earth, or

things in heaven', or `every creature which is under heaven' is too wide for

such a limitation.

When addressing the people of Israel, the prophets and Peter spoke of some

indeed who were far off, but of others who were nigh.  These Gentiles however

were all far off, and all needed to be `made nigh'.  The word engus `nigh' is

used in the LXX for the next of kin `his kin, that is near unto him' (Lev.

21:2), and so of the Kinsman-Redeemer.  `If his father have no brethren, then ye

shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next of kin to him

of his family' (Num. 27:11).  Job uses the word in that chapter where he

declares `I know that my Redeemer (Kinsman-Redeemer) liveth', for in Job 19:14

he complained `my kinsfolk have failed'.  It is with some feeling that we see in

the immediate context of these words of Job such expressions as hope removed,

counted as enemy, brethren far from me, estranged, stranger and alien, showing

how the absence of the Kinsman-Redeemer was associated, as in Ephesians 2, with

alienation and enmity.  Just as Job, however, found his complete satisfaction in

the Kinsman-Redeemer, so the Gentile addressed by Paul was made nigh only `in

the blood of Christ'.