| Prev | Next | Go Up | Japanese Page |
Introduction
Why Submit?
What Does "Submit" Mean?
What Does "Head" Mean?
What Is Authority?
Should Wife Not Teach At All?
Can Wife Speak?
In Everything?
Didn't Paul Say Submit To One Another?
What If Husband Is Bad One?
Conclusions
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.Ephesians 5:21-24 (NIV)
We all like to be equal. We all like to be mutual. After all, aren't we believing in God who does not show favouritism? (Romans 2:11) If so, how can God command a wife to submit to her husband and not a husband to submit to his wife? Throughout the history and still in many parts of the world today, both in so-called civilised or uncivilised culture, women have been oppressed by men. Isn't the command "wives, submit to your husbands" allowing men to abuse women?
I assume that this topic is a very difficult one. Even a suggestion to talk about it is already offensive, because the statement is just so politically incorrect! And yet Christians are called to test and approve what God's will is, not by what the world says, but by renewing our minds to that of God (Romans 12:2).
For this reason, I would like to share in this page what I have come so far to learn what God has taught us through the Scripture concerning this command. There is, of course, a parallel command for husbands, which I have deliberately left out from this page, and intend to put them together in a separate page. I should admit at first that my understanding can be incorrect, misunderstanding God's words, in which case I need your correction. But if we do find what I write in this page is indeed consistent with what God says in the Scripture, then the commandment is God's words and Christians are called to encourage one another to submit to it.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.Ephesians 5:21-24 (NIV)
Before we listen to the commandment, we need to know the reason behind. Why wives are called to submit to their husbands? The word "as" can mean "because", so Paul said, "Because the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands". Why is it that if the church (i.e. the gathering of Christians) submits to Christ, a wife should also submit to her husband?
Some people say that "to become a Christian is like to get married" referring to the relationship of a Christian and Jesus being like that of the relationship between a husband and a wife. But this is only half-true, because to become a Christian is to get married with Christ.
[Quote from Genesis 2:24] "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." [Paul said] This is a profound mystery --but I am talking about Christ and the church.Ephesians 5:31,32 (NIV)
Paul quoted Genesis 2:24 that originally referred to the marriage of a husband and a wife. But Paul revealed that "a man" is Christ and "his wife" is the church, so that the marriage of Christ and the church was planned by God from the beginning. When anyone becomes a Christian, he or she is engaged to Christ, waiting for the final wedding in heaven.
[Paul said] I am jealous for you [Christians] with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.2 Corinthians 11:2, 3 (NIV)
[John's vision about heaven] Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb [Jesus] has come, and his bride [the church] has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear." (Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)Revelation 19:7,8 (NIV)
Jesus said that people are not married to each other in heaven. Of course! We will be all married to Christ! So the earthly marriage is just a temporal one and the heavenly marriage of Christ and the church is the real and permanent one.
[Jesus said] At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.Matthew 22:30 (NIV)
The earthly marriage is just an illumination of the real marriage between the Christ and the church. Some people may be sad to know that our earthly marriage is just a shadow, but our relationship with Christ and with each other in heaven will be greater than any relationship we would experience on this earth!
So why should a wife submit to her husband? In a simple term, because this is what God has designed a marriage to be. But in other words, if a wife submits to her husband, it is an honour and privilege of representing the church's submission to Christ. If she does not, it is to misrepresent the relationship of Christ and the church. This is way, I think, wives are called to submit to their husbands.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.Ephesians 5:21-24 (NIV)
The word "submit" (upotassw) was also used in the following passages:
Then he [Jesus] went down to Nazareth with them [Joseph and Mary] and was obedient [upotassw] to them.Luke 2:51a (NIV)
For he [Christ] "has put [upotassw] everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put [upotassw] under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put [upotassw] everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to [upotassw] him who put [upotassw] everything under him, so that God may be all in all.1 Corinthians 15:27, 28 (NIV)
The fact that X submits to Y does not mean that X is somehow inferior to or less important than Y. Jesus submitted to his earthly parents, and surely Joseph and Mary were not superior or more important than Jesus! Likewise, the fact that a wife is called to submit to her husband does not mean that the wife is somehow inferior to or less important than her husband. Also the fact that Jesus submits to God indicates that the "submission" is nothing to do with status. Both Jesus and God are equally God and yet each has different role. Likewise, a husband and a wife are equally God's children and yet each has different role.
You [Christians] are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.Galatians 3:26-28 (NIV)
What does "submit" mean? Paul and Peter said as follows:
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
Romans 13:1,2 (NIV)
Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.1 Peter 2:13,14 (NIV)
The word "governing" and "supreme" are the same Greek word uperecw, literally means "higher". So when one submits to another, there is a higher authority. A wife to submit to her husband means to recognise the husband's authority and putting herself under it. This is what I think "submit" means. However, please do not confuse this with the idea of "superiority". As we have seen above how Jesus submit himself to his earthly parents and to God the Father, the "higher" authority is nothing to do with superiority. It is just different location in the order of authority that God has assigned to different people.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.Ephesians 5:21-24 (NIV)
Concerning the "head" and the "authority", Paul said the following:
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head --it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice --nor do the churches of God.
1 Corinthians 11:3-16 (NIV)
We are told here that "the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God". As we have seen in the previous section, the fact that X submits to Y does not mean that X is somehow inferior to or less important than Y. Likewise, the fact that X is "head" of Y does not mean that X is somehow superior or more important than Y. Paul said, "the head of Christ is God" and surely Christ is not inferior to God! In fact, Paul said that the one under a "head" is the "glory" of the head; "A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."
At first glance, from the word "covering", we may think that Paul was somehow talking about whether we should wear a scarf on our heads or not in the church. But as he said "For long hair is given to her as a covering" he could be also just talking about the length of men and women's hair. It is to dishonour his "head", that is to dishonour Christ, if a man has a long hair. It is to dishonour her "head", that is to dishonour man, if a woman has a short hair, and this was called a disgrace as if her head were shaved. Now we are told in other parts of the Scripture that God sees people's hearts rather than mere outward appearance.
[To the wives, Peter said] Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight.1 Peter 3:3,4 (NIV)
So the 1 Corinthians passsage cannot mean that mere length of hair matters, but rather what matters is what is in the people's hearts. But what was the intention of the hearts expressed in the length of the hair or wearing of the covering in Corinthian culture? I take it that it was a desire for a man to be like a woman or a desire for a woman to be like a man. In our culture, of course, the length of hair does not always indicate the desire to be an opposite sex.
We all like to be the same, otherwise we think it is unfair. But God had created man and woman different. That "man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man", referring to how Adam and Eve were created in Genesis chapter 2, all points to the differences existed from the beginning. It is not that Paul was explaining one's superiority to the other. To emphasize the equality between man and woman, Paul then went on to say "woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman" and "as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman." Man and woman are equal in that we equally depend on each other and one is not more important than the other. However man and woman are not "identical". Each has different role and different location in the order of authority.
The key to understand the meaning of "head" is the phrase "the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head". In the original Greek, the word "a sign of authority" is exousia, which is simply translated as "power" or "authority" in other parts of the New Testament. King James Version and Darby Translation translate it to "power" and "authority", while New International Version and New American Standard Bible translate it to "a sign of authority" or "a symbol of authority". It seems to me that this is the only occasion, the word exousia was translated to "a sign of authority" rather than "authority" in the New International Version, but I may be wrong. (The word was used more than 100 times in the New Testament and I have not checked all of them). Nevertheless, if it means simply "authority", then the woman ought to have authority not on herself but on her head, that is on the man. This, I think, fits actually well in the context "Because man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man," woman ought to let man have authority over woman. "In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman."
The "head" is the one who has authority over one under the head. This is what I think "head" means. Coming back to the Ephesians passage, "the husband is the head of the wife" means that the husband has an authority over his wife. However, again please do not confuse this with the idea of "superiority". As we have seen above, the head of Christ is God and yet both are equally God! It is just different location in the order of authority.
By the way, I do not know what is the significance of Paul's saying "because of the angles". If anyone has an idea, please let me know.
If to "submit" is to recognise other's authority and to put oneself under it while to be the "head" is to have an authority over another, what is this "authority" thing? Let's go through one of the most controversial passages in the Bible that explains it.
[Paul said] I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.1 Timothy 2:12-14 (NIV)
The above passage was said in the context of how a woman should conduct herself in the church. In this context, it is hardly the case if Paul meant "teaching" to include every forms of teaching. Teaching some technical skills such as how to drive a car or teaching some intellect such as how to solve Mathematics, we generally do not expect to happen in the church. What we do expect to be taught universely in the church is God's words, so what Paul meant was that a woman is not to teach a man God's words in the church. Notice that teaching God's words is closely tied to the concept of having authority. The real teaching involves not just sharing information, or explaining logics, but commanding with authority, and this, Paul said, a woman should not do to a man in the church.
It is so surprising that Paul said the above, who also said "teach and admonish one another" (Colossians 3:16). We also know so many woman missionaries, woman pasters, woman Bible study leaders who teach men in various churches. Aren't they doing just as good as male teachers, or even better? Isn't it God's will that more people can teach God's words?
Several points to note. Firstly, Paul does not seem to assume that every Christian has the gift of teachings. Born as a man or a woman can be seen as a part of receiving a gift from God.
We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.Romans 12:6-8 (NIV)
Clear distinction was made between the candidates of "overseer" (or elder), who should be able to teach, and "deacons", who are not necessarily able to teach. So, I think it is clear that in Paul's mind, some people have the gift of teaching and others do not.
Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect.
Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
1 Timothy 3:2-4, 8, 9, 12 (NIV)
Secondly, I should consider that no matter how many people publicly do not seem to be following a particular God's command, it does not make the particular God's command itself invalid. Please let me be honest. My feeling does tell me that if more people whether male or female teach God's words to anybody, it just seems to be a good thing. But the passage still tells me that a woman is not to teach God's words to a man, and we should know that our God is the good and wise God knowing the best for those who follow him. To take the opposite view, I need somebody to explain it to me why the command is not saying the thing that seems apparently saying. So far, no explanation has convinced me, so I should try to follow what I understand what God says, while I should be open to listen to the arguments of those who take the other view. However, it is certainly not right for any Christian to hear the God's command and just to ignore it without working out what the command is saying.
Thirdly, let's look at the reason of this command and see whether it makes better sense. Paul gave his reason that "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."
When God created the world, he appointed man and woman together as the image of God to have authority over (rule over) the rest of the creation and bring it into submission (subdue it).
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."Genesis 1:26-28 (NIV)
This was a good God order of his creation; indeed God said "very good"!
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning --the sixth day.Genesis 1:31 (NIV)
We may immediately feel negative attitude towards the word "rule over", because we know so many terrible rulers throughout the history and still now on the earth. But to "rule over" does not always mean a bad thing if the ruler is a wise and loving one, just like God himself. Also the command "subdue" does not give fallen men permission to abuse God's creation either, although some people have interpreted it in that way and this is a terrible distort of God's words. In fact, God put us in his creation to "take care of it".
The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.Genesis 2:15 (NIV)
One implication from the above passage is that when one is put in a position of authority, it does not give a permission to abuse one under the authority, but it does give responsibility to take care of it.
From Genesis chapter 1 we can see that God set up an "order" of authority; the top is God, man and woman together in the middle, and the creation under them, and this was "very good".
Genesis chapter 2 explains in detail how God created man and woman. He created Adam first and gave him commandment "not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil." Eve was created after God gave Adam the commandment. Presumably, Eve received God's command from Adam; that is Adam taught Eve God's command, not Eve taught Adam.
And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."Genesis 2:16-18 (NIV)
This flow of command or "ruling" can be pictured as below.
Note that the order that God had set up --the husband teaching his wife-- was not a result of the fall, but rather was a part of God's good creation.
In Genesis chapter 3, we see Eve was deceived and Adam disobeyed God. God gave specific reasons for Adam's guilt.
To Adam he [God] said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life."Genesis 3:17 (NIV)
What was Adam's fault? His fault was this: "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ' You must not eat of it'". Even though they were given an authority to rule the creation, they yielded themselves to what a part of the creation --the serpent-- said. Adam allowed the reverse of God's created order by listening to his wife rather than listening to God, and then they together rebelled against God. This can be pictured as below.
You see? It is not because a woman is more sinner than a man (of course not!), nor she is incapable of teaching (of course not!!), nor somehow she is easy to be deceived (of course not!!!), but because it is God's created order that a man to teach God's words and to have authority over a woman and not the other way around. "The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." said Paul (Romans 13:2).
This order of authority in the church holds equally in a family, since the church is a family of God. So it is a responsibility of a husband to teach God's words and to have authority over his wife and not the other way around.
What if a woman desire to have authority over a man? God declared that a woman desiring to have authority over a man was a part of God's punishment on our sinfulness.
To the woman he [God] said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."Genesis 3:16 (NIV)
What does "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you" mean? The same grammatical structure and the phrase "desire for" and "rule over" were also used in a verse immediately following this chapter.
Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."Genesis 4:6,7 (NIV)
The phrase "desires to have" is the same as "desire for", and "rule over" is the same as "master" in original Hebrew. This helps us understanding what Genesis 3:16 meant; the wife's desire is to "have" her husband so that she can rule over him, just as sin is always desiring to rule over us, and this is an expression of our sinfulness, not a part of good God's creation.
Having said that a wife is not to teach God's words to her husband, does this mean that a wife cannot teach at home at all? I do not think so. Paul instructed Titus to teach older women to teach younger women. In Proverb, a noble wife is said to speak with wisdom and instruct faithfully. Also in Proverb, children are called not to forsake their mother's teaching, assuming mothers teach children. Women should be encouraged to exercise their gift of teaching God's words to other women and to children, but not to other men.
Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.Titus 2:3-5 (NIV)
She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come. She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue. She watches over the affairs of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness. Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her: "Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all." Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.Proverb 31:25-30 (NIV)
Listen, my son, to your father's instruction and do not forsake your mother's teaching.Proverb 1:8 (NIV)
[Paul said] I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.1 Timothy 2:12-14 (NIV)
[Paul said] As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.1 Corinthians 14:33b-35 (NIV)
These again are said in the context of women's conduct in the church, which I regard equally applicable to their conduct at home. Paul said "she must be silent". Does this mean a wife cannot speak a word to her husband? I do not think so. (Of course not!) In the Corinthian church, Paul assumed that women were praying and prophesising and thus speaking in the church. (I think that the prophesy after John the Baptist simply means speaking and explaining God's words).
And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head --it is just as though her head were shaved.1 Corinthians 11:5 (NIV)
So the passages cannot mean that women are not allowed to speak a word. What does it mean then? The "women" in the Corinthians passage are actually "wives" (the same Greek word) because it assumes that they have husbands. The wives are told to "ask their own husbands at home". The opposite may be to ask somebody else public in the church. I take it that if a wife does not recognise the spiritual authority of her husband, does not inquire about something first and foremost to her husband, and ask out laud in the public in church, that is disgraceful. (Shame for her husband indeed!)
The opposite of being silent in both passages is not to be in submission. So I take it that the command meant a wife should not speak to her husband if she is not in submission. This seems very strict, but we should remember the high standard God requires of every Christians. For example:
[Paul said] Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.Ephesians 4:29 (NIV)
Which means we should not speak to anyone if our talk is not helpful for building others up according to their needs! Of course, a wife can just remain in silent without actually submitting herself to her husband, grudging in her heart, which is also not God's way.
Simply put, I consider (or even encourage) that a wife should pray, speak God's words (prophesise), express feeling, encourage, give an advice, etc. (of course in a godly fashion) at home while recognising her husband's authority and submit herself under it.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.Ephesians 5:21-24 (NIV)
Christ's authority is a perfect one, so it is easy to understand that Christians are called to submit whatever he says, that is in everything. In this case, submission means obedience. Does this mean that a wife is called to obey whatever her husband says? I do not think so. There is a situation where a wife cannot obey her husband even though she is willing to put herself under his authority. That is, when a husband's command is against what God says.
Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. "We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood." Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!Acts 5:27-29 (NIV)
While all Christians are called to submit to every authorities instituted by God, the apostles disobeyed authorities in the above passage, because what authorities commanded was against what God said. This does not necessarily mean that the apostles were not submissive to their authorities. When the authorities then forced apostles to be put into a jail, they obeyed, because the apostles were submissive to their authorities. Likewise, a wife is called to be submissive in everything but this does not mean to obey whatever her husband says. When what her husband insists is against what God says, the wife cannot obey her husband but obey God.
Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Ephesians 5:21-22 (NIV)
Just before Paul said "Wives, submit to your husbands", he also said "Submit to one another (allhlwn)". Doesn't, then, "submit to one another" mean reciprocal or mutual? Didn't Jesus surely say "Love one another (allhlwn)" (John 13:14), which should be mutual? I used to think that because of this "one another", husbands are also called to submit to their wives. But this interpretation actually does not hold in its context.
Firstly, we should realise that if Paul meant a mutual submission, Christ should submit to church, as the church submits to Christ! This is obviously not the case. Secondly, if we keep on reading to Epesians 6:9, we should realise that the obedience of children to their parents and the obedience of slaves to their masters were also commanded. Obedience, of course, is a resultant action of full submission. So when Paul meant "one another", it was referring to the submission of wives to their husbands, children to their parents, and slaves to their masters, and not other way around.
Whether the phrase "one another (allhlwn)" means a mutual activity or not depends on its context. "Love one another (allhlwn)" must be mutual, but "slay each other (allhlwn)" (Revelation 6:4) cannot be mutual. If X slay Y, how can Y slay X in return? Likewise, I do not think Paul meant "submit to one another" to be mutual.
Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.
Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.
He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
1 Peter 2:13-3:6
Because the reason for a wife to submit to her husband is to represent the submission of church to Christ, we may think that the command only holds when the husband is doing his part of "being like a Christ". However, Peter made it clear that the commandment holds irrelevant to how the husband is doing his part, even when he does not believe the word, that is even when he is not a Christian. Why? Special reasons for this are given.
One is so that the "behaviour" of a wife should show her non-Christian husband her "purity and reverence". The word "behaviour" (anastrofhor) is also translated in Galatians 1:13, "a way of life". The word "reverence" (foboV) is more commonly translated into the word "fear" as in Acts 9:31, referring to fear of God. The two "word" are both logoV and are the same word as the "Word" the God in John 1:1. It could mean that the "word" is "teaching". The husband does not believe the "teaching" of Christ, and the wife is to win him to Christ without her "teaching" her husband. I do not think that this passage is somehow commanding a wife with a non-Christian husband not to speak a word to him! How can she win him over without teaching? By showing him her "a way of life" with "purity" and "fear" of God. What should her husband see from his wife's life? His own sinfulness which should lead him to repentance.
Another reason is given in the phrase "in the same way". This time "in the same way" does not refer to the submission of the church to Christ, but to the submission of Christ to God; "He [Christ] entrusted himself to him [God] who judges justly." So if a wife submit to her husband and endure the suffering for doing good, this is an honour and privilege of representing the submission of Christ.
How can a wife model Sarah? I do not think the passage is somehow encouraging wives to call their husbands "master", but it does encourage wives to recognise their husbands' authority. Sarah was indeed a physically beautiful one (Genesis 12:14). But because of this, Abraham feared that people might kill him to take her. So Abraham said to Sarah to tell her "lie".
Abraham replied, "I said to myself, 'There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.' Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife. And when God had me wander from my father's household, I said to her, 'This is how you can show your love to me: Everywhere we go, say of me, "He is my brother."'"Genesis 20:11-13 (NIV)
It was a difficult case. Abraham said to Sarah, "This is how you can show your love to me: Everywhere we go, say of me, 'He is my brother'", and indeed it was not exactly a false testimony for Sarah to state "He is my brother". (Although I do think such is a "lie" because it deceived who heard it). If we read Genesis chapter 20, we see God protected both Abraham and Sarah in spite of their "lie". In fact God seemed to bless them through this occasion. But let's say that it was not exactly a godly decision nor clearly something against God for Abraham to ask Sarah to "lie". What did Sarah do? She obeyed Abraham and endured the hardship of being taken by the king Abimelech, even though she might have thought that her husband's request not exactly right. I am actually not so sure whether Peter had this occasion in mind when he referred to Sarah, but Peter's commandment is clear: "do what is right and do not give way to fear." What is "what is right" needs to be worked out case by case, I think.
Just as we all have difficulties in submitting ourselves to our authorities --to parents, governments, teachers, employers, etc.-- it will be a life-long struggle for a wife to submit herself to her husband. Just as we all have difficulties in loving others like Christ loves --loving neighbours, loving strangers, loving unlovable, and loving enemies-- it will be a life-long struggle for a husband to love his wife as Christ loved the church, totally selfless. But, each has his/her own responsibility to do what is right in God's eyes.
I wonder whether God actually considers a wife's life more precious than a husband's life :). How? Suppose there is a husband and a wife both committed to Jesus, and somehow they are put in a situation where only one person can survive. The husband is called upon to love and give his life for his wife and a wife is called upon to submit to her husband. So who will survive? Always the wife!
| Prev | Next | Go Up | Japanese Page |
Produced by Hajime Suzuki
Special thanks to Robert Shaw for his help with Greek
Special thanks to my wife Louise for her constant encouragement and patience