This is one of the most popular of the unpopular arguments to enter into. Especially for a man who is writing to other men, as I am now. To the women reading this, you are welcome to read and encouraged to share your thoughts with all of these stupid boys who need the insight of a God honoring woman.
Should wives submit to their husbands? Let me make this easy. Yes. The Apostle Paul makes this abundantly clear in numerous passages. For more on that and to gain a better understanding of the foundations of this article, feel free to click over to our article on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Go ahead, I will wait here for you.
After understanding the Biblical perspective on Manhood and Womanhood, I would like to discuss the solution to a wife who will not recognize her husband as her leader. How do we, as men and husbands fix this? I can’t provide an answer for every situation, but for the vast majority of these situations, the answer lies in Ephesians 5:22-33.
Husbands, love your wives. There is a lot that could be said here. Men, take the role of leader in your relationship by truly loving and continually expressing that love to your wife. Woo her. Please her. Surprise her. Serve her. Work yourself to the bone to show your love to her. And do it in a way that she best feels loved. Your wife is different than mine. Find out what most touches her heart and do that! All the time! Be cheesy. Pursue her like you still want her, not like you already have her. Aside from the sappy romantic side of that first statement, love her in the way the Bible has instructed. Get into the Word of God and let Him direct your path. Take 1 Corinthians chapter 13 out of your marriage ceremony and inject it into your marriage! God has given this woman to you to love, cherish, and protect, just as he loves, cherishes, and protects you. This is the key to a submissive wife. Become the head of your family by building well-founded trust between the two of you. How? I am so glad you asked.
In Ephesians 5, God, through the work of the Holy Spirit and the Apostle Paul, outlines how we are to love our wives. We are to love our wives in the way that Christ loved the church. Do not brush past this with the same air of familiarity which you adopt as you brush past your wife’s emotional needs. This passage tells us to love our wives in the same manner that Christ loved us. Let’s look more closely at that idea.
Christ pursued us. He left his place on High and descended down to our level. He divested himself of his Glory in order to raise us up. What glory are you holding onto which keeps you from obeying God and loving your wife? Most men should step back from the corporate ladder at work in order to love their wife as Christ loved us. Pursue her instead of your glory.
Christ pursued us when we were unlovable. Actually he pursued us when we were dead to him. If you are having major turmoil in your relationship with your wife, remember that even when you were an unlovable sinner, rebelling against God, he pursued you. Do the same. Pursue your wife even when she does not deserve it.
Christ served us. He came not to be served, but to serve. He came with the intention of serving. The result of his service was the blooming of our love for him and the reciprocation of his love. Serve your wife. Serve her emotionally, physically, and spiritually; do so without complaint or expectation from the object of your affection. Serve her for her own good, in order that she will be glorified by your service.
Christ intercedes for us with his Father. Husbands should be continually interceding in prayer on behalf of our wife. This shows that we are willing to take her well-being to the highest authority on earth or in heaven. Pray continually for her. Pray continually with her. Let her know that you are submitting to your authority and she will honor and respect you for it. Intercede on her behalf.
Christ sacrificed for us. He died for the church in order to bring her to himself. Men, die to your selfish desires and love your wife for who she is, not who you want her to be. Christ tells us that we are to die to ourselves daily and follow him. He showed us how extreme that commandment could be on the days following his betrayal, and Ephesians tells husbands that we should be willing to follow that example on behalf of our wives. Sacrifice your free time, your hobby, and anything else that may be taking you away from her.
That is what is meant by the phrase “husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Love can be ambiguous, but the actions of Christ are not. Follow Him and He will lead you in the way you should go, even in marital issues.
Ephesians 5 also tells us that Christ sanctified the church. He cleansed the church with the Word, almost like he was washing his bride with water. Why did he do this? So that he could lift up his bride in holiness, without stain or blemish.
Husbands must be so filled by the Word of God that it is overflowing from us and washing over onto our bride. We should not seek to cleanse our wives with the washing of the Word if we are not first cleansed ourselves. Men, if your wife will not treat you like the head of your family, perhaps the problem is that you don’t allow God to be your rightful head. If you do allow God to be your authority, you will be a student of his word, obeying him out of love. If you are overflowing with the authority of the Word, your wife will feel as though you are helping to provide for her sanctification, not self-righteously judging her for her faults.
Fixing the husband is the key to helping the wife without a head. Love her like Christ does, and your wife will follow you proudly. Go your own way and you may forever be stuck with a headless woman in your home.
August 10, 2010 at 5:37 pm
This is abundantly clear in the same way that limited atonement vs universal atonement is clear. The same way premillennialism vs postmillennialism vs amillennialism is abundantly clear, the way 7 sacraments vs 2 sacraments vs no sacraments is abundantly clear. The same way covenant theology vs dispensational theology vs and myriad of other theologies are abundantly clear. That is, they are “abundantly clear” to those who are persuaded by them – they are not “abundantly clear” without exception.
I think we should all seek to understand what the Bible is teaching. I think we should all live up to what we believe the Bible is teaching. I also think God is truth and therefore, there is an right and wrong on these issues, though sometimes they become very complicated and difficult to discern; but neither you (nor I nor Calvin nor Luther nor the Pope) are probably going to get it all right.
That being the case, can we stop making such things part of the “gospel and stick to calling “clear” things like God’s transcendence, the Trinity, the humanity and divinity of Christ, the work of the cross, etc, etc?
Again, I’m not saying don’t search the scripture for other truths. And I’m certainly not saying don’t live up to the truth you believe you have found. I’m not even saying don’t share the truth you believe you have found. But CBMW and many others would make this part of defining characteristics of Christianity, just as other groups, present and past, made everything from apostolic succession to an earth centered universe an essential part of what it means to Christian. They were/are not.
August 10, 2010 at 8:07 pm
Ephesians 5:22-23 says, “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church.” I don’t know about you but to me this seems more “abundantly clear” then the doctrine of the Trinity.
I don’t see the point of your comment at all.
August 10, 2010 at 11:53 pm
If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. . Mat 18:9
If you caught your son looking at a Playboy centerfold, would you suggest he pluck out his eye and throw it far away?
Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect. 1 Peter 2:18
Are you saying all black slaves who fled north in years before the American Civil War were sinning? Or that I can move to Dafur and with a clear conscience, get myself a slave to do my work for me (or anything else I want)?
Not trying to be facetious here — yes, I know you have reasons why you think the scriptures in Ephesians re: wives apply in every situation and why the others I mentioned don’t — or mean something else – or are metaphorical — whatever your belief . We all do — but that is exactly my point.
And again, my comment was not intended to tell you and your spouse or anyone else what they should believe about this issue or any other — only that that we should be kind to those who, after searching the sum of scriptures, hold to another view. Be kind and not question their commitment to God and scripture because they see it differently.
Perhaps I should have been more clear that I was not accusing the author of the original post of being unkind. I don’t know him and his article was an articulation of his beliefs and did not speak specifically to those who disagree. I did mention another organization in my post, one which I do think has “drawn a line in the sand,” so to speak and my comment was directed at that and things I hear in the Christian community in general. I could/should have been more clear about that. But in the general context of discussing these topics, I feel my comments had a point, whether it was one you agreed with or not.
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love. That was my point, though I seemed to have failed to convey it.
August 11, 2010 at 8:43 am
ljanes, first of all let me thank you for reading this post with a searching and critical eye; I don’t want to be leading a bunch of lemmings! I could answer each one of your points in turn, but that could be a never ending rabbit trail, so I would like to focus upon the post at hand by asking you two questions.
First, the thesis of this post is that women are unwilling to submit beacuse men do not love their wives as Christ loved the church. I didn’t mention half of the ways this should be worked out. I could add forgiveness; men should forgive as Christ forgave. That means we should not only forgive without holding a grudge or seed of bitterness, but we should also prepare the way of forgiveness, just like Christ did. We should not make our spouse walk over broken glass in order to earn forgiveness. My question is, do you think women would be more willing to entertain the historically accepted interpretation of this text if men loved like Christ?
Second, how do you interpret the decline of the value of marriage in our society? To tip my hat, I think it is directly related to feminism. I think feminism has put women in the terrible position of unfair expectations from both her home and now her society, which tells her she needs to be outside of the home working to have worth.
August 11, 2010 at 10:53 am
ljanes, how do you pick and choose between what to take literally and what to accept with liberty? In your view of Scripture, what is the correlation between Jesus’ saying about “plucking your eye out,” Paul’s statement, “Wives submit to your husbands… husbands love your wives…,” and Jesus’ statement, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” In other words, in your reader response view of Scripture, how do you pick and and choose what you want to take and call the “essentials” and “non-essentials?”
I look forward to your response.
August 13, 2010 at 3:13 pm
I think it’s wonderful to advise men to give themselves sacrificially to loving their wives. The problem is when the injunctions in Ephesians 5 remain tied to authority structures that existed at that time, but which nowhere in Scripture are given as transcendent, divine mandates. It is logical that those who are unable to take care of themselves (ie, children) need parental authority, but Ephesians 5 should not be seen as giving a divine mandate to either slave ownership or husband rule. Adults do not want to be treated like children. Most wives would find it easy to yield to their husbands as part of the give-and-take of mutual submission between Christians, but are less amenable being under male authority from cradle to grave, as if they remained forever children.
I would recommend reading “The Blue Parakeet” by Scot McKnight in addressing the question of what is timeless in the Bible, and what is cultural. My own position is that the Bible ‘s injunctions to love, sacrifice and voluntarily yield are timeless, but male authority over females is cultural.
August 14, 2010 at 10:22 pm
KR, thank you for your comments. Let me address them accordingly.
1. At TVN, we do hold to complementarian gender roles. We believe that men and women are equal in dignity, value, and worth, but different, according to Scripture, in function. We do believe that the man is the head of the home, b/c the Bible prescribes it to be so. There are 2 institutions that God has set up to have timeless structure: the family and the church. The guidelines in Scripture for both the family and the church are timeless and transcend cultural frameworks. For instance, every time that Paul says that the man is the head of the home or that women should work in submission to their husbands he always appeals to the order of creation (i.e., Genesis 1-2; namely, Adam was created first to have dominion over creation, to name the animals, etc., and that Eve was created for Adam as his helper, as we see that he even named her).
A few examples: 1 Timothy 2:11, “Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, rather, she is to remain quiet” (ESV). We see Paul appeal to the order of creation next in saying, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve.” Paul doesn’t say that this is the way it is supposed to be because our culture says it is so but because that is how God created it to be and shows us so when he created Adam and Eve in the Garden. Also, Paul continues a few verses later to give prescriptive qualifications for the elder (pastor) of the church. In verse 2 of chapter 3 he says that an overseer must be a “husband of one wife” signifying that the overseer of a church is also a man, and if God were to state that the leader of the home was a man then why would he not do the same in the second institution, the church, which is in fact made up of families.
Second example: I love that when people state something about the husband and wife relationship of Ephesians 5 being a cultural thing they never state anything about the relationship of Christ and the church being a cultural thing. If we can interpret the wives submit to your husbands as cultural then we should also interpret the proceeding verses as cultural as well (i.e., Christ is the head of the church… the church submits to Christ… etc.)
This “authority” structure found in the family (as it reflects the nature of Christ and the church – see 1 Corinthians 11:3) is not an ego-tystical consumption of male domination. The call for a man to lead his family is reflective of how Jesus leads his church… he gave himself up for her. This call to leadership is humble and should be completely sacrificial. “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Also, the equivalent of Ephesians 6:5-9 today is the boss/employee relationship. The issue here is the respect of authority… note that Paul never appeals to creation or Christ and the church when he discusses slaves and masters.
I would encourage you to continue to think through your position on gender roles. If the submission/respect/lead/serve sacrificially relationship between husband and wife are cultural then so is the relationship between Christ and his church. Both are timeless and both are guidelines given from God to his people so they can live how they are supposed to live according to HIS plan for our lives.
We must remember the concept of double-authorship for Scripture. Yes, Paul wrote the book of Ephesians but it was inspired by God, the Holy Spirit, to be guidelines and instructions for the church and family until Jesus would return.
And when Jesus returns he will again make all things new. There will be no more sin or death or poverty or trials or disease. Everything will be like the Garden of Eden again… man and woman living in perfect relationship with God… with man as the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the man… thankfully, there will be no cultural truths in the New Heavens and New Earth.
-GG
August 13, 2010 at 3:26 pm
BTW, my solution to weak men and non-submissive women is that the woman be freed to fulfill her function as “face-to-face partner and strong aid” to her husband (which is what “help meet” actually means in the Hebrew). My own marriage was vastly improved when my husband and I started viewing one another as equally responsible and equally accountable to one another to fulfill the obligations of the family and household. When he was supposed to be in charge, I tended to abdicate responsibility and he tended to run from it because he felt overwhelmed by it. But in truth, I was given him as his “face-to-face partner and strong help, so that I could stand right beside him in full equality, helping him shoulder the burden in mutual, shared authority over the household. God gave the woman to the man because he needed strong help, so he wouldn’t have to rule the creation alone. The Fall turned this upside down in that the man began to rule over the woman; this relegated her to the same status as the rest of the creation and effectively rendered him alone again.
Now that I’m really acting as my husband’s “help meet” in full equal partnership and responsibility, he no longer feels alone and feels much more capable of handling responsibility. I also, no longer feeling like I can abdicate responsibility for a wrong family decision, am stepping up and acting as a full adult. We make decisions together and take responsibility for the decisions together. It’s a win-win!
August 14, 2010 at 10:28 pm
Also, the “new” way in which we are structuring our families are absolutely failing, and it’s not James Dobson of Focus on the Family who is screaming this from the mountain top, though he is. It is the mainstream most liberal New York Times that is giving the leading statistics about this “equal” structure of the family as creating the most unhealthy marriages, messed up children, and even higher divorce rates. Also, remember that men and women are equal in dignity, value, and worth. We champion that here at TVN. BUT we must remember that we are different in function. Have you seen a man birth a baby lately, or a woman being a body guard for the President?
-GG
August 14, 2010 at 10:30 pm
Also, for further resource see:
1. Biblical Manhood (Summary)
2. Roles of Women in the Church
3. A Biblical Theology of Leadership in the Home and Church
August 15, 2010 at 12:45 am
Believe me, GG, I have heard all of your arguments before, and have studied all this very carefully. I don’t find them any more persuasive than you find mine.
Since this is your blog, I wish you well and will take my leave. But I hope that if you have not already done so, you will also take the time to carefully review the opposing viewpoint as well. Christians for Biblical Equality is the first place to start.
I also don’t think your articles on the supposed problems of egalitarian marriage are telling the whole story. I have read articles that say just the opposite.
Mr. Clayton’s article above about how to truly love your wife doesn’t seem to really be about authority. It’s interesting that nothing Paul said to husbands in Ephesians 5 says anything about “lead your wife” or “exercise authority over your wife.” Mr. Clayton’s article also reflects this– that husbands are to love and give themselves for their wives. If husbands will do this and focus on serving, not being in authority, I have no quarrel.
Be well.
August 15, 2010 at 1:34 am
PS. Here’s a 2010 New York Times article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/fashion/24marriage.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&emc=eta1
A quote:
“Lynn Prince Cooke, a sociology professor at the University of Kent in England, has found that American couples who share employment and housework responsibilities are less likely to divorce compared with couples where the man is the sole breadwinner. ”
I knew I had read this in the New York Times, which was why I was confused by your statement. But I’m not here to hijack your website, so I’ll be going now. The peace of Christ to you.
August 15, 2010 at 6:28 am
KR, thanks again for your thoughts! At TVN, we want to foster discourse like this (even respectful argumentation)… so feel free to state your thoughts and your position as long as you would like.
The foundation of my view, a complementarian view, is found in interpretation… We interpret Scripture in the light of Scripture. This is called the analogia de fide, or, the analogy of faith. For instance, if I’m reading an OT passage on the Torah then I will interpret that in the light of the Old Covenant in which Jesus came abolish and die for as Gal 3 says. Secondly, we interpret Scripture in the light of authorial intent, as opposed to text/literary criticism, reader response, etc.
I will leave a comment below this one with ‘the rule of communication,’ which, I think, should be how we come to the final decision in any interpreting process. When Scripture (or any literary text really) is interpreted this way… as it is intended… then we should come to the same conclusions about what the author is conveying, not how we want to interpret a text in the light of a hermeneutic that breeds our response and how we want to interpret it with our cultural lens.
BTW, to your New York Time’s Article I say AMEN! Women should work and have jobs if they wish and men SHOULD assist in home duties. If you think this Christian/cultural fundamentalist view of women staying home and doing all the work while the man sits in his lazy boy and drinks a diet coke is what I mean by “function” then you are mistaken.
August 15, 2010 at 6:30 am
The Law of Communication: Author, Message, Receiver
Who was the author of the Bible? To effectively answer this question, one must first look at the area of communication and its principles. We must ask these questions, “Who is the communicator? What is the message? Who is the receiver?” In defining these three basic dimensions of the law of communication we will define the communicator as the one behind the text, or the author – the one conveying his/her intentions; the communicated message of the communicator is found inside the text, we will call this the meaning of the text as text; and the receiver as the one who is in front of text. In applying this rule of communication to the Bible, Graeme Goldsworthy says,
The Bible claims double authorship: human and God. Although the main communicator is God, he conveyed his message through the power of the Holy Spirit to human authors. Again, Christian presuppositions include the acceptance that God is there, that he communicated with us through the Bible, and that, therefore he is involved in the authorship of the Bible in such a way that it really does say what he intends. To this we must add the fact of our being created in the image of God, so that we are made to be able to receive and understand God’s communication. Concerning the communication or message from the communication (i.e., God’s word), Goldsworthy again states,
In understanding properly the message of the Bible, God spoke through human authors in the development of his Word to tell the story of the true Word, who is Jesus, who is the Word incarnate, who is the revealer, communicator, and savior. Goldsworthy says this about the receiver of the Bible (i.e., God’s people),
October 4, 2010 at 7:51 am
Paul’s comparison of a husband’s love for his wife to Christ’s love for the church illustrates His self-sacrifice (paradidomi), His nourishing and tender care; NOT His authority (exousia). There is no mention in the passage of authority.
Reading “authority” into the word “head” is very problematic and changes the focus Paul intends to convey.
October 5, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Thank you for your comment Victorious.
The way that we understand what an author is saying is determined by the original context and what the words meant in that original context. To say that “authority” does not mean “head” in this context is the fallacy of semantic obsolescence and the fallacy of appealing to unknown or unlikely meanings.
Although some of the NT metaphorical uses of kephale (head) could be taken to mean “source,” all other factors being equal, in no case is that the required meaning; and in every instance the notion of “headship” implying authority fits equally well or better. The relevant lexica are full of examples, all culled from the ancient texts, in which kephale (head) connotes “authority” (Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 37).
What you have implied is a linguistic fallacy that is common among word-studies.
October 23, 2011 at 7:04 am
“Your wife is different than mine. Find out what most touches her heart and do that!”
You know what really touches my heart? A man able to accept my dominant heart, mind and soul- to embrace it, love it, and compliment it.
You contradict yourself. What if, what touches her heart, is a fully submissive man eager to become completely vulnerable to her and lay at her mercy?
Any how…
For a wife to be submissive Is not for her to be mindlessly obedient, to accept whatever her husband says without justification and reason.
If I was married, I might accept my husband saying “no, you cannot go do XYZ” but I am completely right to question it, to ask “why?” and if my husband does not give me a reason (‘because I say so’ is NOT a reason’) then I should not have to listen.
Some men are naturally submissive, or ‘weak’ as you claim. People telling them that they are not masculine because of their personality may lead to gender confusion and homosexuality. I think a lot of gay men are really just submissive men looking for a strong, sturdy partner- which they feel they cannot find in a woman.
I’m 16, and already smarter than you- you single-minded, incompetent, unintelligent fool. :)