Well, as many of you know, we are not doing well financially. We have made some poor choices and are now finally done ignoring them and are actually going to do something about them. We talked to the bank about our car and they said that they will defer (sp?) payments until January and in the meantime we will try to sell the car. They said that it will look better on our credit than turning it in and we will get more money for it than they would. If the car doesn't sell before then, they said that they will defer for longer. After the car does sell and we give them the money, we will be able to pay off the remainder of the loan in smaller increments.
We talked to our cell phone provider and we are going to keep the phone as the contract ends in March, but we just won't use it at all. We got rid of all of the special features on our contract so the bill will be smaller.
We have created a form letter to send to the people that we owe money to explaining our circumstances and telling them our plans to pay them off.
This isn't the ideal situation to be in, but we know we are doing the right thing. Yeah, it's gonna suck to not have a car and have to rely on public transportation and be at the mercy of the weather, but it could be worse. (Colorado: If you don't like the weather, wait ten minutes or drive ten miles. We will be counting on the first.)
Monday, November 27, 2006
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Eli
Eli was on his belly tonight and pushed up to all fours! That development means he can sit up now, though still no crawling.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Bad news
I just received word from my family back home that a friend has passed away. We were never very close, but my oldest brother and he were, for a time. "Woody" was only 4 months older than I am so I guess it kinda hit me a little hard. The obit said he "died unexpectadly" What is that? 27 years old, man. We gotta watch it. We gotta know what we believe in and why. This isn't a game we're playing. Sorry Shakespeare but all the world is NOT a stage. There is no second Act. This is it. Tell the people that you love, "I love you." Tell the people that you hate, "I love you." MEAN IT. Make the most of your life. Spend time with your kids. Spend time with your loved ones. Spend as little time at work as possible. Spend your money. Give to charity. Help those who are less fortunate than you. Enrich other's lives. Enrich your own life. Be aware of the world beyond your backyard.
This happened on the heels of another tragedy. My best friend Joe's mother passed away very recently. She and I were very close for a few years. In fact, when I would go to Joe's house to hang out, sometimes I would end up hanging out with her instead. She was a great woman. She will be missed.
Some of this post may have to do with these 2 recent events, but I think these things have been on my mind for longer and just needed a push to let them come out. I am serious about the things written here and hope you are (or will be).
I love you all.
Jeff
This happened on the heels of another tragedy. My best friend Joe's mother passed away very recently. She and I were very close for a few years. In fact, when I would go to Joe's house to hang out, sometimes I would end up hanging out with her instead. She was a great woman. She will be missed.
Some of this post may have to do with these 2 recent events, but I think these things have been on my mind for longer and just needed a push to let them come out. I am serious about the things written here and hope you are (or will be).
I love you all.
Jeff
Cool website
I (Jeff) want to share this website with you all. (Excuse the naughty word in the address.) I think this will make you think that there must be something out there controlling all of this.
http://www.damnfunnypictures.com/html/Universe-in-Perspective.html
I hope this turns up as a hyperlink, but if it doesn't, you can just copy and paste it into your address bar.
bye
http://www.damnfunnypictures.com/html/Universe-in-Perspective.html
I hope this turns up as a hyperlink, but if it doesn't, you can just copy and paste it into your address bar.
bye
Friday, November 24, 2006
WELCOME TO OUR BLOG
Hello from our family. We have set up this blog for a few reasons.
1. To post Jeff's papers as he progresses through College for our family and friends perusal.
2. To keep our family and friends abreast of our life and the changes that occur therein.
3. As a point of contact for our family's miscellaneous ideas, interests, needs, events, etc., ad infinitum.
4. As a means to provide our family and friends with links to some places that are beneficial to us and we hope will be beneficial to others, as well.
5. As a forum for you to say what you want to say without the encumberances ( www.thesaurus.com rules) of face-to-face or voice-to-voice contact.
Please visit frequently. Make comments and suggestions honestly.
When we learn to post pictures, we will do so. :)
God bless you all!
1. To post Jeff's papers as he progresses through College for our family and friends perusal.
2. To keep our family and friends abreast of our life and the changes that occur therein.
3. As a point of contact for our family's miscellaneous ideas, interests, needs, events, etc., ad infinitum.
4. As a means to provide our family and friends with links to some places that are beneficial to us and we hope will be beneficial to others, as well.
5. As a forum for you to say what you want to say without the encumberances ( www.thesaurus.com rules) of face-to-face or voice-to-voice contact.
Please visit frequently. Make comments and suggestions honestly.
When we learn to post pictures, we will do so. :)
God bless you all!
Intro to my paper
Hi this is Jeff. I just wanted to give a little intro to my paper that is posted here and also to give a short apology.
First, the intro: I am taking classes at Nazarene Bible College and this paper was my final project for the class Women of the Bible. It is an exegetical paper on Ephesians 5:21-33. (Exegetical means a critical explanation or interpretation of a text [ www.dictionary.com rules]) It kind of goes against many ideas of what most of us have been taught about this passage.
Another point, the paper has been split up into two sections on this blog. One section is just the main body of the paper. The other section, titled prelims, gives the entire introduction of my paper. The first can be read without the second, but if you read the second first and then don't read the first second, you may miss something. (Did you follow all that :) )
Second, the apology: My college has split up the semesters into tri-mesters. This past trimester saw many changes in our family life. We moved, we took a quick 4-day trip to WI to see my little sister get married, I was trying to adjust going to college full-time and work full-time and all of the challenges that arise from these things with two small children. All this to say that I wrote this paper in 4 days. It ended up being a little rough. I don't mean rough content, but rather rough grammar. I believe the things I wrote are correct, I just don't necessarily like how I wrote them. My wife, the lovely Abbi, can attest to the fact that I am kind of a perfectionist. I'm sorry if you stumble over a few sentences. I truly am sorry.
Well, I hope you enjoy the paper and I welcome and look forward to any comments, criticisms, or rude remarks you may have.
Christ's servant,
Jeff
First, the intro: I am taking classes at Nazarene Bible College and this paper was my final project for the class Women of the Bible. It is an exegetical paper on Ephesians 5:21-33. (Exegetical means a critical explanation or interpretation of a text [ www.dictionary.com rules]) It kind of goes against many ideas of what most of us have been taught about this passage.
Another point, the paper has been split up into two sections on this blog. One section is just the main body of the paper. The other section, titled prelims, gives the entire introduction of my paper. The first can be read without the second, but if you read the second first and then don't read the first second, you may miss something. (Did you follow all that :) )
Second, the apology: My college has split up the semesters into tri-mesters. This past trimester saw many changes in our family life. We moved, we took a quick 4-day trip to WI to see my little sister get married, I was trying to adjust going to college full-time and work full-time and all of the challenges that arise from these things with two small children. All this to say that I wrote this paper in 4 days. It ended up being a little rough. I don't mean rough content, but rather rough grammar. I believe the things I wrote are correct, I just don't necessarily like how I wrote them. My wife, the lovely Abbi, can attest to the fact that I am kind of a perfectionist. I'm sorry if you stumble over a few sentences. I truly am sorry.
Well, I hope you enjoy the paper and I welcome and look forward to any comments, criticisms, or rude remarks you may have.
Christ's servant,
Jeff
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Submision Revisited
PRESENTATION OF TEXT
Scripture Passage
Ephesians 5:21-33
“21Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30for we are members of his body. 31‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ 32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.” (NIV)
Text Critical Notes
There are only two notes worth mentioning and neither affects the meaning of the passage significantly. In verse 26, the word “cleansing” could be replaced with “having cleansed.” The only impact this could have is simply the tense in which one reads that one line. The other note is about the translation of the word “Now” in verse 24. This word is translated as “Therefore” (KJV), “But” (NASB) or even “Just” (NRSV). The original Greek word is αλλά, which should be translated as either but or however. In explanation to this very subject, F.F. Bruce says that verse 24 is a continuation of the thought from verse 22. Because Paul wants to continue this thought, he uses the word “but” in a context such as “…but—for this is the matter in hand—as the church is…” (Bruce, 385-6).
Outline of Passage
Mutual Submission (v. 21)
Wives’ Submission (vv. 22 – 24)
Husbands’ Submission (vv. 25 – 33)
MUTUAL SUBMISSION
It is imperative to understand that the hierarchical system that seems blatant in these verses is nonexistent when viewed contextually. Many commentators, whose agenda can only be discerned by themselves, seem to have neglected this wider view in favor of focusing on the precise words that Paul had written. When applying this hierarchical system in home life, husbands and wives usually fail at this submission and sacrificial love. If this is the way God wants us to live our lives, why do we continually fall short? The easy answer is that this is not how God created us to act nor expects us to act.
As mentioned above, Genesis 3:16b presents the effects of the Fall on the relationship between husband and wife. This is an effect not God’s will. This is probably the most important idea to comprehend when reading passages like this one in Ephesians.
If God does not want His beings created in His image to live in this way, in what way does He want us to live? Verse 21 encapsulates His desire in one simple sentence: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (NIV). God does not want the husband to rule over his wife nor does He want the wife to rule over her husband. He wants us to act like Christ in our most intimate relationships: our marriages.
The word “submit” is translated from the Greek word “ύποτάσσω” which has the concept of submitting willingly rather than being forced to do things. It is significant to realize that a person does this freely without another person telling or forcing them to do it. Willing submission is what Christ did when He allowed the authorities to arrest and execute Him.
This idea is not popular for the simple fact that it goes against what we have heard preached and taught about this verse all of our lives. This suggestion of a wife submitting to her husband as to Christ and a husband loving his wife as Christ loved the church sounds like a good model to follow. This way of thinking, however, denies the fact that Paul introduces later examples with “Submit to one another…” (emphasis added). This sentence effectively acts as an explanation of what was just stated as well as a preface to what he is about to say.
This sentence, when read in context of what was written prior to it, shows the believer how to live a Christ-filled life with other believers: through honoring God by submitting to one another. When read in context with the rest of the passage, it reads as an introductory statement to be illustrated further by the author (Radmacher, 839).
The word reverence used in this verse requires specific defining because there are so many different definitions of reverence. The word in Greek is φόβος which, when defined by Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, reads
“[R]everential fear of God as a controlling motive of the life, in matters spiritual and moral, not a mere ‘fear’ of His power and righteous retribution, but a wholesome dread of displeasing Him; a ‘fear’ which banishes the terror that shrinks from His presence and which influences the disposition and attitude of one whose circumstances are guided by trust in God through the indwelling Spirit of God” (265 of Greek Dictionary of the New Testament).
At least two points can be drawn from this definition. First, the act of submission first comes out of a love for Jesus Christ. This is crucial to the achievement of true submission. Then, the results talked about below are natural outcomes rather than willful intentions.
Second, this act of submission to one another cannot be done by the power of the individual alone. The Holy Spirit must be working in the life of the believer for them to even have a modicum of success. For this reason very few, if any, mutual submissive relationships are seen. Most people cannot surrender all to the Lord.
WIVES’ SUBMISSION
“… [H]armony, guaranteed by the submissiveness of wives and the love of husbands is paramount” (Houlden, 329). “The Gospel…recognizes and secures man’s responsible leadership” (Moule, 138). “[T]he general principle is that a woman is to bend over backwards to defer to the leadership and authority of her husband” (Sproul, 140). “[Christianity] enjoins…the dutiful observance of the ties of kinship or subservience recognized by the law of nature itself as of cogent validity” (Simpson, 128). “[T]he will of the husband is a law to the wife” (Wesley). These references are only a handful of the ideas that are available on this subject. This apparent lack of respect for women and narrow view are two reasons why this passage must be fully understood.
There are some statements by commentators that try to rectify the damage done by these statements listed above. However, the statements that are available are few and far between. Johnson-Leese and Scholer give a lengthy, but interesting discourse about the fact that there is no main verb in verse 22 and the reasons why and the explanation of how we determine the meaning of the verse. The main verb is found in the preceding verse: submit. They then go on to say that this verb is a modifying verb to the earlier main verb found in verse 18: translated “…be filled with the Spirit” (xxxiii; see also Powell, 701) (NIV). Powell then gives her own translation of how it should be read and understood, “be filled with the Spirit…submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ; wives, to your husbands, as to the Lord” (701).
Another point about women’s submissiveness that bears mentioning is the aspect of woman’s “head” being man. Sproul unashamedly states, “…headship involves leadership” (140). Once again this statement fails to take in the entire context. Paul is not speaking of superior/inferior, but rather equal submission. When he brings the Jesus/church image into the equation, there is little room for doubt. This is meant to create a picture of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross rather than one of “glorious ruling” (Powell, 704).
Moule states that when the text says “…wives should submit to their husbands in everything” (verse 24) this is overruled by “supreme allegiance to Christ” (139). This concept is shared by other commentators as well (see Bruce, 386; Simpson, 129). This idea that there is an unstated, or even purposefully omitted, direction that a wife should follow God’s instruction if her husband’s directions are contrary to what God says deny the fact of the stated intention of the passage. This intention is that this is an ideal model of a married husband and wife who live in Spirit-filled harmony with one another.
HUSBANDS’ SUBMISSION
To the credit of Sproul, he is correct in assuming that most men want to stop reading after verse 24 (141). The reason for this desire to stop reading is that men like the idea of a woman submitting to their “leadership” (read: desire, whim, etc.) without having to reciprocate in any way. Women are different, however, in that they see that if they have to submit to their husbands, they want their husbands to treat them in the way Paul says Christ acted toward His church. Paul’s intention was not to pit men and women against each other, but rather to bring them into a more harmonious relationship with each other and with Christ. He does this by presenting the ultimate act of sacrifice and submission: Christ’s willing crucifixion.
This display of submission by a husband for his wife is, hopefully, the natural outcome of living a life filled with the Holy Spirit. It is important to remember that Paul sets this up as an ideal, not as what will absolutely happen.
Paul uses the analogy of someone who takes care of his own body when referring to how a husband should care for his wife. The meaning behind this strange but appropriate parallel is merely that it should be second-nature to provide for ones wife. A man feeds, clothes, cleans and in all other ways cares for his body mostly without thinking about it. So it should be with his wife. He should be so in tune with his wife’s needs and desires, this happens through total submission, that he provides for them unconsciously and willingly.
In this portrait of the Spirit-filled man, Paul quotes 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” (also Ephesians 5:31) (NIV). This quote is very clear-cut in its purpose: each partner must submit to the other wholly and equally. This leaves no room for one to direct the other. When two people are “one flesh” in Christ, their intentions are identical; there need not be one overriding voice lest it be that of God.
The last thought of this passage has the ability to destroy the argument presented in this paper, if, that is, it is not viewed in context. Verse 33 says that men must άγαπάω (love) his wife and the wife must φοβέω (show reverential fear [note: this is different than the reverential fear mentioned above from verse 21]) to her husband. The word choice of Paul for “love” is interesting when the definition is understood. It means to love in a social or moral sense. In this ideal relationship where the husband has no blame or stain, he is morally obligated to love his wife. This is different than the moral obligations that we as stained humans have because we deny these obligations and go our own way. In this passage the moral obligation has the feel of a Divine moral obligation (i.e. God has a moral obligation to be just because He said He is a just God, “He is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” [Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV]).
The wife is not let off the hook, however. This reverential fear that she holds for her husband is also the ideal action of a woman who, in the same way as her husband, has no blame or stain. She will give him all of the respect he deserves from his submission to her just as she will get the love she deserves from her submission to him, not because of the others submission, but because they themselves have submitted to the other.
Some people may say that Paul does not expect that every reader of this passage will understand all that he is talking about. They would then evidence their argument with Paul’s statement from verse 32: “this is a profound mystery” (NIV). However, Paul is not saying that his personal statement is a “profound mystery,” but rather that God’s ability to make two human beings become one flesh through the sacrament of marriage is the “profound mystery.” In fact, Paul wrote in such a way that almost anyone can understand what he is saying.
CONCLUSION
SUMMATION
Paul wrote these words to the body of believers in Ephesus, not to counter some pagan/heretical doctrine that was creeping into the church, but rather to reaffirm Jesus’ prayer, in John 17, for the unity of believers. He also wrote the letter to build up the believers’ faith in Christ Jesus and their subsequent reliance on Him. He wanted to encourage the Christians to continually strive for the perfection that was lost when man first sinned. He did not mince any words in this entire letter and this passage is just one out of many that deal with the topic of unity.
It is clear that we are no nearer the mark of the perfect relationship that Paul talks about than were the believers that this letter was originally intended to hearten. One possible reason is that many people, men and women, have taken the verses out of context and so, in some instances unintentionally but others most definitely intentionally, began a conflict with their spouse that can be difficult to resolve. Men want, consciously or unconsciously, a wife who submits to him in every aspect of their lives together, while women want, again consciously or unconsciously, a husband who is sacrificial in all that he does for her. This cannot and will not happen unless the couple is completely pure and without sin in their lives.
These verses, as with all Scripture, must be read and studied in the proper contexts for their true meaning to be discerned. When these verses are read with the whole context of the Bible taken into consideration, there is no possible implication of inferiority to be found.
APPLICATION
Each person who reads these verses must prayerfully ponder whether God, in His infinite wisdom, would tell husbands that their wives are inferior to them. When God’s intention is discerned in this respect, and indeed all areas, we feel a sense of freedom to live the way God originally intended for us to live. The body of Christian brothers and sisters will be able to live a more Spirit-filled life when it is understood that God does not desire His creation to live a life under a hierarchical system of superiority/inferiority. It is also important to realize that God gives each person different gifts with which to use for His glory. He does not give the gift of leadership ability to only men or to only women, but to certain individuals whom He chooses.
WORKS CITED
Bruce, F.F. “The Epistle to the Ephesians.” The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1984.
Houlden, J.L. “The Letter to the Ephesians.” Paul's Letters from Prison: Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, and Ephesians. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1977.
Johnson-Leese, J.J, and Scholer, David M. Introduction. The IVP Women's Bible Commentary. Eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger and Mary J. Evans. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002. xxxiii.
Moule, H.C.G. Studies in Ephesians. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1977.
Powell, Claire M. “Ephesians.” The IVP Women's Bible Commentary. Eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger and Mary J. Evans. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002.
Radmacher, Earl, Ron Allen, and H. Wayne House, eds. “Ephesians.” Compact Bible Commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
Simpson, E.K. “Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians.” The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
Sproul, R.C. Ephesians. Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 1994.Wesley, John. “Commentary on Ephesians 5.” John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (1765). 12 November 2006..
Scripture Passage
Ephesians 5:21-33
“21Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30for we are members of his body. 31‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ 32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.” (NIV)
Text Critical Notes
There are only two notes worth mentioning and neither affects the meaning of the passage significantly. In verse 26, the word “cleansing” could be replaced with “having cleansed.” The only impact this could have is simply the tense in which one reads that one line. The other note is about the translation of the word “Now” in verse 24. This word is translated as “Therefore” (KJV), “But” (NASB) or even “Just” (NRSV). The original Greek word is αλλά, which should be translated as either but or however. In explanation to this very subject, F.F. Bruce says that verse 24 is a continuation of the thought from verse 22. Because Paul wants to continue this thought, he uses the word “but” in a context such as “…but—for this is the matter in hand—as the church is…” (Bruce, 385-6).
Outline of Passage
Mutual Submission (v. 21)
Wives’ Submission (vv. 22 – 24)
Husbands’ Submission (vv. 25 – 33)
MUTUAL SUBMISSION
It is imperative to understand that the hierarchical system that seems blatant in these verses is nonexistent when viewed contextually. Many commentators, whose agenda can only be discerned by themselves, seem to have neglected this wider view in favor of focusing on the precise words that Paul had written. When applying this hierarchical system in home life, husbands and wives usually fail at this submission and sacrificial love. If this is the way God wants us to live our lives, why do we continually fall short? The easy answer is that this is not how God created us to act nor expects us to act.
As mentioned above, Genesis 3:16b presents the effects of the Fall on the relationship between husband and wife. This is an effect not God’s will. This is probably the most important idea to comprehend when reading passages like this one in Ephesians.
If God does not want His beings created in His image to live in this way, in what way does He want us to live? Verse 21 encapsulates His desire in one simple sentence: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (NIV). God does not want the husband to rule over his wife nor does He want the wife to rule over her husband. He wants us to act like Christ in our most intimate relationships: our marriages.
The word “submit” is translated from the Greek word “ύποτάσσω” which has the concept of submitting willingly rather than being forced to do things. It is significant to realize that a person does this freely without another person telling or forcing them to do it. Willing submission is what Christ did when He allowed the authorities to arrest and execute Him.
This idea is not popular for the simple fact that it goes against what we have heard preached and taught about this verse all of our lives. This suggestion of a wife submitting to her husband as to Christ and a husband loving his wife as Christ loved the church sounds like a good model to follow. This way of thinking, however, denies the fact that Paul introduces later examples with “Submit to one another…” (emphasis added). This sentence effectively acts as an explanation of what was just stated as well as a preface to what he is about to say.
This sentence, when read in context of what was written prior to it, shows the believer how to live a Christ-filled life with other believers: through honoring God by submitting to one another. When read in context with the rest of the passage, it reads as an introductory statement to be illustrated further by the author (Radmacher, 839).
The word reverence used in this verse requires specific defining because there are so many different definitions of reverence. The word in Greek is φόβος which, when defined by Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, reads
“[R]everential fear of God as a controlling motive of the life, in matters spiritual and moral, not a mere ‘fear’ of His power and righteous retribution, but a wholesome dread of displeasing Him; a ‘fear’ which banishes the terror that shrinks from His presence and which influences the disposition and attitude of one whose circumstances are guided by trust in God through the indwelling Spirit of God” (265 of Greek Dictionary of the New Testament).
At least two points can be drawn from this definition. First, the act of submission first comes out of a love for Jesus Christ. This is crucial to the achievement of true submission. Then, the results talked about below are natural outcomes rather than willful intentions.
Second, this act of submission to one another cannot be done by the power of the individual alone. The Holy Spirit must be working in the life of the believer for them to even have a modicum of success. For this reason very few, if any, mutual submissive relationships are seen. Most people cannot surrender all to the Lord.
WIVES’ SUBMISSION
“… [H]armony, guaranteed by the submissiveness of wives and the love of husbands is paramount” (Houlden, 329). “The Gospel…recognizes and secures man’s responsible leadership” (Moule, 138). “[T]he general principle is that a woman is to bend over backwards to defer to the leadership and authority of her husband” (Sproul, 140). “[Christianity] enjoins…the dutiful observance of the ties of kinship or subservience recognized by the law of nature itself as of cogent validity” (Simpson, 128). “[T]he will of the husband is a law to the wife” (Wesley). These references are only a handful of the ideas that are available on this subject. This apparent lack of respect for women and narrow view are two reasons why this passage must be fully understood.
There are some statements by commentators that try to rectify the damage done by these statements listed above. However, the statements that are available are few and far between. Johnson-Leese and Scholer give a lengthy, but interesting discourse about the fact that there is no main verb in verse 22 and the reasons why and the explanation of how we determine the meaning of the verse. The main verb is found in the preceding verse: submit. They then go on to say that this verb is a modifying verb to the earlier main verb found in verse 18: translated “…be filled with the Spirit” (xxxiii; see also Powell, 701) (NIV). Powell then gives her own translation of how it should be read and understood, “be filled with the Spirit…submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ; wives, to your husbands, as to the Lord” (701).
Another point about women’s submissiveness that bears mentioning is the aspect of woman’s “head” being man. Sproul unashamedly states, “…headship involves leadership” (140). Once again this statement fails to take in the entire context. Paul is not speaking of superior/inferior, but rather equal submission. When he brings the Jesus/church image into the equation, there is little room for doubt. This is meant to create a picture of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross rather than one of “glorious ruling” (Powell, 704).
Moule states that when the text says “…wives should submit to their husbands in everything” (verse 24) this is overruled by “supreme allegiance to Christ” (139). This concept is shared by other commentators as well (see Bruce, 386; Simpson, 129). This idea that there is an unstated, or even purposefully omitted, direction that a wife should follow God’s instruction if her husband’s directions are contrary to what God says deny the fact of the stated intention of the passage. This intention is that this is an ideal model of a married husband and wife who live in Spirit-filled harmony with one another.
HUSBANDS’ SUBMISSION
To the credit of Sproul, he is correct in assuming that most men want to stop reading after verse 24 (141). The reason for this desire to stop reading is that men like the idea of a woman submitting to their “leadership” (read: desire, whim, etc.) without having to reciprocate in any way. Women are different, however, in that they see that if they have to submit to their husbands, they want their husbands to treat them in the way Paul says Christ acted toward His church. Paul’s intention was not to pit men and women against each other, but rather to bring them into a more harmonious relationship with each other and with Christ. He does this by presenting the ultimate act of sacrifice and submission: Christ’s willing crucifixion.
This display of submission by a husband for his wife is, hopefully, the natural outcome of living a life filled with the Holy Spirit. It is important to remember that Paul sets this up as an ideal, not as what will absolutely happen.
Paul uses the analogy of someone who takes care of his own body when referring to how a husband should care for his wife. The meaning behind this strange but appropriate parallel is merely that it should be second-nature to provide for ones wife. A man feeds, clothes, cleans and in all other ways cares for his body mostly without thinking about it. So it should be with his wife. He should be so in tune with his wife’s needs and desires, this happens through total submission, that he provides for them unconsciously and willingly.
In this portrait of the Spirit-filled man, Paul quotes 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” (also Ephesians 5:31) (NIV). This quote is very clear-cut in its purpose: each partner must submit to the other wholly and equally. This leaves no room for one to direct the other. When two people are “one flesh” in Christ, their intentions are identical; there need not be one overriding voice lest it be that of God.
The last thought of this passage has the ability to destroy the argument presented in this paper, if, that is, it is not viewed in context. Verse 33 says that men must άγαπάω (love) his wife and the wife must φοβέω (show reverential fear [note: this is different than the reverential fear mentioned above from verse 21]) to her husband. The word choice of Paul for “love” is interesting when the definition is understood. It means to love in a social or moral sense. In this ideal relationship where the husband has no blame or stain, he is morally obligated to love his wife. This is different than the moral obligations that we as stained humans have because we deny these obligations and go our own way. In this passage the moral obligation has the feel of a Divine moral obligation (i.e. God has a moral obligation to be just because He said He is a just God, “He is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” [Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV]).
The wife is not let off the hook, however. This reverential fear that she holds for her husband is also the ideal action of a woman who, in the same way as her husband, has no blame or stain. She will give him all of the respect he deserves from his submission to her just as she will get the love she deserves from her submission to him, not because of the others submission, but because they themselves have submitted to the other.
Some people may say that Paul does not expect that every reader of this passage will understand all that he is talking about. They would then evidence their argument with Paul’s statement from verse 32: “this is a profound mystery” (NIV). However, Paul is not saying that his personal statement is a “profound mystery,” but rather that God’s ability to make two human beings become one flesh through the sacrament of marriage is the “profound mystery.” In fact, Paul wrote in such a way that almost anyone can understand what he is saying.
CONCLUSION
SUMMATION
Paul wrote these words to the body of believers in Ephesus, not to counter some pagan/heretical doctrine that was creeping into the church, but rather to reaffirm Jesus’ prayer, in John 17, for the unity of believers. He also wrote the letter to build up the believers’ faith in Christ Jesus and their subsequent reliance on Him. He wanted to encourage the Christians to continually strive for the perfection that was lost when man first sinned. He did not mince any words in this entire letter and this passage is just one out of many that deal with the topic of unity.
It is clear that we are no nearer the mark of the perfect relationship that Paul talks about than were the believers that this letter was originally intended to hearten. One possible reason is that many people, men and women, have taken the verses out of context and so, in some instances unintentionally but others most definitely intentionally, began a conflict with their spouse that can be difficult to resolve. Men want, consciously or unconsciously, a wife who submits to him in every aspect of their lives together, while women want, again consciously or unconsciously, a husband who is sacrificial in all that he does for her. This cannot and will not happen unless the couple is completely pure and without sin in their lives.
These verses, as with all Scripture, must be read and studied in the proper contexts for their true meaning to be discerned. When these verses are read with the whole context of the Bible taken into consideration, there is no possible implication of inferiority to be found.
APPLICATION
Each person who reads these verses must prayerfully ponder whether God, in His infinite wisdom, would tell husbands that their wives are inferior to them. When God’s intention is discerned in this respect, and indeed all areas, we feel a sense of freedom to live the way God originally intended for us to live. The body of Christian brothers and sisters will be able to live a more Spirit-filled life when it is understood that God does not desire His creation to live a life under a hierarchical system of superiority/inferiority. It is also important to realize that God gives each person different gifts with which to use for His glory. He does not give the gift of leadership ability to only men or to only women, but to certain individuals whom He chooses.
WORKS CITED
Bruce, F.F. “The Epistle to the Ephesians.” The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1984.
Houlden, J.L. “The Letter to the Ephesians.” Paul's Letters from Prison: Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, and Ephesians. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1977.
Johnson-Leese, J.J, and Scholer, David M. Introduction. The IVP Women's Bible Commentary. Eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger and Mary J. Evans. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002. xxxiii.
Moule, H.C.G. Studies in Ephesians. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1977.
Powell, Claire M. “Ephesians.” The IVP Women's Bible Commentary. Eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger and Mary J. Evans. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002.
Radmacher, Earl, Ron Allen, and H. Wayne House, eds. “Ephesians.” Compact Bible Commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
Simpson, E.K. “Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians.” The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
Sproul, R.C. Ephesians. Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 1994.Wesley, John. “Commentary on Ephesians 5.” John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (1765). 12 November 2006.
Submission Reviseted-Prelims
INTRODUCTION
ORIENTATION AND CONTEXT
Significance of Text
Jesus prayed for the unity of all believers in John 17. This may have been on Paul’s mind when he wrote his letter to the church in Ephesus. The entire book of Ephesians is a call to believers to be one within the body of Christ. Ephesians 5, specifically, is an exhortation to living the life of one who has been called out by God to be separate. This call for unity is quite clear in the passage beginning in chapter 5, verse 21 and continuing to the end of the chapter in verse 33.
In this passage the author, generally thought to be Paul, gives a clear definition of what the holy life will look like between a husband and wife. There is some debate on whether Paul or one of his disciples was the author; this argument will be addressed later in the paper.
Many commentators, pastors and even lay readers of this passage seem to treat the submission aspect as one of the most important aspects of biblical understanding, defending it, explaining it, translating then retranslating it, without looking at the verses in the four larger contexts. The larger contexts are 1) the chapter/larger passage the verses are located in, 2) the entire letter addressed to the “saints in Ephesus” (Ephesians 1:1), 3) the New Testament as a whole and 4) the complete revelation of God’s message to mankind. Because our Bibles have been divided into subheadings and even smaller into paragraphs and sentences by well-intentioned yet not divinely inspired writers, it can be difficult to understand God’s full intent.
God did not create humanity to live in a hierarchical social arrangement. This observable system was an outcome of the Fall from Grace when Adam and Eve first sinned as can be seen in Genesis 3:16b, “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Why would God continue to force a hierarchical system on the beings He created in His image if it was not in His original design? Would He not rather give us the tools and encouragement to rise above and break the bonds of this sin dominated system?
Historical and Social Setting
Tradition has stated that Paul is the author of this letter to Ephesus and that he wrote it while in prison in Rome ca. A.D. 60 (Radmacher, 835; Moule, 16, 20). Indeed, the first sentence states that he is the author. Why then have some critics come forward to challenge this claim? The answer could be as long as the years between now and when this epistle was first penned; however, some attempt shall be made to discover the identity of the author.
Of all the sources consulted to write this paper, Houlden’s commentary stands out as the most opposed to Pauline authorship and Moule’s commentary as the most agreeable. Houlden states that given the amount of evidence about style, vocabulary, thought and even situations facing the church as gleaned from other sources, the letter must have been written in the late first century (235-6). He does consent that the author must have been someone very close to Paul and also equally inspired (235). One of the most widely held arguments against Pauline authorship is the fact that this letter does not name any particular person or any particular situation whereas the rest of Paul’s undisputed letters do (Houlden, 235). Another argument against Paul is that the letter is modeled too closely to the style and content of the letter to the church in Colosse (Houlden, 239-40).
In rebuttal to the argument against Pauline authorship, Moule cites four different early church fathers, St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and St. Ignatius, all of whom seem to secure a pro-Pauline stance as the author of this epistle. In Moule’s own eloquent words, “[T]he extant writings of the Fathers of the first two centuries, to say the least, shew no trace of the existence among them of such a personage as would be thus required on the theory that the Epistle is not St. Paul’s” (24). Given the unintentional defense by the early church fathers of Pauline authorship, one would be hard-pressed to find concrete evidence to deny it. In simple defense of this letter’s apparent similarities to the letter to the Colossians, Powell suggests, “…that Paul was writing the two letters around the same time, to differing groups, which may account for the similarities and the differences” (695).
Another argument is whether this letter was meant for the Ephesians alone or was meant to be passed along between many different churches. The evidence for this argument is more conclusive than the previous argument, but still has some leaps of logic that may not be necessary. Sproul gives a very concise definition of textual criticism when presenting the evidence of the debate. He concludes his presentation by saying, “The majority viewpoint today is that, in all probability, the epistle to the Ephesians was written originally as a circular letter” (11). It is the opinion of the author of this paper that this epistle was divinely inspired, penned by the apostle Paul, written while he was in prison in Rome ca. A.D. 60. The debate on whether or not it was originally meant to go to Ephesus alone is simply a waste of time given the fact that Ephesus needed a letter such as this as much as, perhaps more than, the other churches in Asia. It will be assumed from here on that this letter was written to Ephesus.
At the time of Paul’s writing, the city of Ephesus had a very colorful and exciting past. The beginnings of the city are clouded in myth and mystery with as many different opinions as there are people to possess them. A few things can be discerned from this history that had a direct impact on Paul’s interaction with the people and his subsequent writing of this letter.
Ephesus was a city of great value to commerce and travel due to its location which is now on the far western edge of the modern country of Turkey which borders the Aegean Sea. Not only was it significant to commerce, but it was also of great importance to politics. Ephesus was then the capital of the Roman province of Asia (Houlden, 255). Goods would come in to Ephesus from all over by ship and then begin the journey inland and vice versa. There were many different people groups who lived in the city because of its economic magnitude; and with many different people groups come many differing religious views. Paul certainly had his work cut out for him when he came to preach the Word of God in Ephesus as can be evidenced from Acts 19 beginning in verse 23 where a riot breaks out and Paul, Gaius and Aristarchus are almost murdered because Paul is hurting the sale of idols.
It is usually hard for people, once they accept Christ, to give up completely all sin they held onto for so long. This is probably the reason for Paul writing this letter. He wanted to encourage the believers to continue on the path that would bring them closer and closer to the attitude and actions of Christ.
Literary Context
To properly understand the passage to be exegeted, one must first understand that this was originally written as a letter to the believers in Ephesus. However, Houlden claims that the letter reads more as a homily or dissertation (235). (This is yet another argument that Houlden grasps to pronounce this as an un-Pauline letter.) Second, one must look at the passage as it appears first in the entire Bible, second in the New Testament, third in the book of Ephesians and fourth in the chapter and immediate contexts.
First, God’s message throughout the Bible is one of redemption. God wants His people to come back to Him. This can be seen in the story of the Flood (Genesis 6-9), the entire account of Israel beginning with Abraham and continuing through such people as Moses, Joshua, the various judges, the various kings and ending with the various major and minor prophets, and finally in the New Testament with the coming of Christ.
Second, the New Testament lays down the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies of a Savior in the person of Jesus. Jesus came to further God’s attempt at redemption and to make it easier for His people to know Him and trust Him.
Third, the book of Ephesians is a divinely inspired letter from Paul to believers to become united against evil and united in holy living, not for the acquiring of grace, but rather as a fulfillment of Christ’s power within them. Throughout the letter Paul gives many examples of what the outward show of inward Christianity will look like.
Fourth, the immediate context of this passage is exactly what was mentioned in the previous paragraph: A snapshot of what grace looks like working in the lives of believers.
ORIENTATION AND CONTEXT
Significance of Text
Jesus prayed for the unity of all believers in John 17. This may have been on Paul’s mind when he wrote his letter to the church in Ephesus. The entire book of Ephesians is a call to believers to be one within the body of Christ. Ephesians 5, specifically, is an exhortation to living the life of one who has been called out by God to be separate. This call for unity is quite clear in the passage beginning in chapter 5, verse 21 and continuing to the end of the chapter in verse 33.
In this passage the author, generally thought to be Paul, gives a clear definition of what the holy life will look like between a husband and wife. There is some debate on whether Paul or one of his disciples was the author; this argument will be addressed later in the paper.
Many commentators, pastors and even lay readers of this passage seem to treat the submission aspect as one of the most important aspects of biblical understanding, defending it, explaining it, translating then retranslating it, without looking at the verses in the four larger contexts. The larger contexts are 1) the chapter/larger passage the verses are located in, 2) the entire letter addressed to the “saints in Ephesus” (Ephesians 1:1), 3) the New Testament as a whole and 4) the complete revelation of God’s message to mankind. Because our Bibles have been divided into subheadings and even smaller into paragraphs and sentences by well-intentioned yet not divinely inspired writers, it can be difficult to understand God’s full intent.
God did not create humanity to live in a hierarchical social arrangement. This observable system was an outcome of the Fall from Grace when Adam and Eve first sinned as can be seen in Genesis 3:16b, “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Why would God continue to force a hierarchical system on the beings He created in His image if it was not in His original design? Would He not rather give us the tools and encouragement to rise above and break the bonds of this sin dominated system?
Historical and Social Setting
Tradition has stated that Paul is the author of this letter to Ephesus and that he wrote it while in prison in Rome ca. A.D. 60 (Radmacher, 835; Moule, 16, 20). Indeed, the first sentence states that he is the author. Why then have some critics come forward to challenge this claim? The answer could be as long as the years between now and when this epistle was first penned; however, some attempt shall be made to discover the identity of the author.
Of all the sources consulted to write this paper, Houlden’s commentary stands out as the most opposed to Pauline authorship and Moule’s commentary as the most agreeable. Houlden states that given the amount of evidence about style, vocabulary, thought and even situations facing the church as gleaned from other sources, the letter must have been written in the late first century (235-6). He does consent that the author must have been someone very close to Paul and also equally inspired (235). One of the most widely held arguments against Pauline authorship is the fact that this letter does not name any particular person or any particular situation whereas the rest of Paul’s undisputed letters do (Houlden, 235). Another argument against Paul is that the letter is modeled too closely to the style and content of the letter to the church in Colosse (Houlden, 239-40).
In rebuttal to the argument against Pauline authorship, Moule cites four different early church fathers, St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and St. Ignatius, all of whom seem to secure a pro-Pauline stance as the author of this epistle. In Moule’s own eloquent words, “[T]he extant writings of the Fathers of the first two centuries, to say the least, shew no trace of the existence among them of such a personage as would be thus required on the theory that the Epistle is not St. Paul’s” (24). Given the unintentional defense by the early church fathers of Pauline authorship, one would be hard-pressed to find concrete evidence to deny it. In simple defense of this letter’s apparent similarities to the letter to the Colossians, Powell suggests, “…that Paul was writing the two letters around the same time, to differing groups, which may account for the similarities and the differences” (695).
Another argument is whether this letter was meant for the Ephesians alone or was meant to be passed along between many different churches. The evidence for this argument is more conclusive than the previous argument, but still has some leaps of logic that may not be necessary. Sproul gives a very concise definition of textual criticism when presenting the evidence of the debate. He concludes his presentation by saying, “The majority viewpoint today is that, in all probability, the epistle to the Ephesians was written originally as a circular letter” (11). It is the opinion of the author of this paper that this epistle was divinely inspired, penned by the apostle Paul, written while he was in prison in Rome ca. A.D. 60. The debate on whether or not it was originally meant to go to Ephesus alone is simply a waste of time given the fact that Ephesus needed a letter such as this as much as, perhaps more than, the other churches in Asia. It will be assumed from here on that this letter was written to Ephesus.
At the time of Paul’s writing, the city of Ephesus had a very colorful and exciting past. The beginnings of the city are clouded in myth and mystery with as many different opinions as there are people to possess them. A few things can be discerned from this history that had a direct impact on Paul’s interaction with the people and his subsequent writing of this letter.
Ephesus was a city of great value to commerce and travel due to its location which is now on the far western edge of the modern country of Turkey which borders the Aegean Sea. Not only was it significant to commerce, but it was also of great importance to politics. Ephesus was then the capital of the Roman province of Asia (Houlden, 255). Goods would come in to Ephesus from all over by ship and then begin the journey inland and vice versa. There were many different people groups who lived in the city because of its economic magnitude; and with many different people groups come many differing religious views. Paul certainly had his work cut out for him when he came to preach the Word of God in Ephesus as can be evidenced from Acts 19 beginning in verse 23 where a riot breaks out and Paul, Gaius and Aristarchus are almost murdered because Paul is hurting the sale of idols.
It is usually hard for people, once they accept Christ, to give up completely all sin they held onto for so long. This is probably the reason for Paul writing this letter. He wanted to encourage the believers to continue on the path that would bring them closer and closer to the attitude and actions of Christ.
Literary Context
To properly understand the passage to be exegeted, one must first understand that this was originally written as a letter to the believers in Ephesus. However, Houlden claims that the letter reads more as a homily or dissertation (235). (This is yet another argument that Houlden grasps to pronounce this as an un-Pauline letter.) Second, one must look at the passage as it appears first in the entire Bible, second in the New Testament, third in the book of Ephesians and fourth in the chapter and immediate contexts.
First, God’s message throughout the Bible is one of redemption. God wants His people to come back to Him. This can be seen in the story of the Flood (Genesis 6-9), the entire account of Israel beginning with Abraham and continuing through such people as Moses, Joshua, the various judges, the various kings and ending with the various major and minor prophets, and finally in the New Testament with the coming of Christ.
Second, the New Testament lays down the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies of a Savior in the person of Jesus. Jesus came to further God’s attempt at redemption and to make it easier for His people to know Him and trust Him.
Third, the book of Ephesians is a divinely inspired letter from Paul to believers to become united against evil and united in holy living, not for the acquiring of grace, but rather as a fulfillment of Christ’s power within them. Throughout the letter Paul gives many examples of what the outward show of inward Christianity will look like.
Fourth, the immediate context of this passage is exactly what was mentioned in the previous paragraph: A snapshot of what grace looks like working in the lives of believers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)