Vince Deagler

hi out there. as you know, we are working our way through the book of ephesians and have come to a very important passage…not just in ephesians, but the whole of scripture. i say that because it is one of the most detailed of all passages offering instructions on the family in all the bible. this is important because the family is the basic building block of any society. as goes the family, so goes the society. no further explanation is needed to explain what is happening all around us. the family has been under attack for some time, the consequence is now quite evident in our social dysfunction. thankfully we can turn to scripture and find everything we need to get back on track. but as soon as we do, at least as far as this passage is concerned, we are greeted with a very controversial statement. ephesians 5:22 clearly states “wives, submit to your husbands…”. are you kidding me??? do you expect me to say that out loud??? do you know how that’s gonna make me look??? how that sounds??? how politically incorrect that kind of “hate speech” is??? now, i could go on, i think you get the point. but let me ask what i think is a simple question, why is that so controversial? i would suggest it is because we are taking a concept that paul expressed in the ancient greek language, translating it into a suitable english term, and then reacting to the meaning of the english word in our modern context. the problem is we tend to read more into the english word than we should. who hasn’t been exposed to some misinformed, well meaning individual whose general world view is that men are superior to women. the corresponding idea is women are inferior to men. to them this explains why women are to submit to their husbands…or in some cases women are to submit to men in general. makes you conjure up images of cavemen with clubs dragging women around by their hair. the reaction to this, or should i say the over reaction to this is the oft repeated accusation against the church, namely the church is an institution that wrongly enslaves and represses women. as such it should be rejected. now, i do not deny there have been many misinformed “chistians” who used this passage and others like it to repress women. but, they do not accurately reflect the teachings of christ or christianity. so before you head down the path of rejecting christianity, make sure you accurately understand what you are rejecting. and guess what? when you check out the scriptures, and what they actually say about women, you find that in a culture where women were little more than possessions, with virtually no rights, they were elevated to an equal status with men in christ. rather than repressing or enslaving as the accusation says, the church liberated, elevated women. that is a whole seperate discussion that i would love to have with any of you who are interested. drop me a line and we can talk about it. my point in saying that is lets have an honest discussion of what the scriptures actually say, instead of what we project onto the scriptures. to do that we must understand what that ancient greek word translated “submit” actually means. its a compound word with a loose meaning of “to place under, to place by”. it is often used in a military context where the soldier is to recognize his rank/role/duty/position and fulfill it. it has nothing at all to do with inferiority/superiority. it has to do with the functioning of a military unit. what kind of army would you have if the soldiers did not understand their role, accept it, and fulfill their duty? can anyone say france…i’m sorry, i could not resist, please forgive me because that was unkind. anyway, since baseball season is upon us, would anyone object to the idea that third basemen are to play third base, catchers are to catch, pitchers are to pitch, etc. of course not, we understand that is how a team works. but that is exactly what a marriage is, its a team. it has a wife and a husband. and the idea of submit is simply a statement that the wife should recognize her role and fulfill it. no negativity, repression, inequality, inferiority is in that concept unless we project it there because of some preconcieved ideas. it is not inherent in the scripture. but leads to the obvious question, what is her role? according to genesis 2:18 god said she was created as a “helper” for adam. again, that can conjure up images of inferiority and enslavement. but, i would suggest that can only occur if we do not understand what god is actually saying. you see, genesis 2 is set in the context where everything has been created up through adam, but eve has not yet been created. here god pauses and says “it is not good that the man should be alone”. there are at least 2 reasons for the “not good statement”. first, this is the first time in all eternity there has ever been aloneness. we believe in an eternal god who exists in what we refer to as the trinity (father, son, and holy spirit). this triune god is still only one god, but he lives in perfect relationship as father, son, and holy spirit. because of this, aloneness has never existed till this point in time, and because it is contrary to gods nature, god immediately saw this as a “not good” scenario. the second reason is more to the point of our discussion. man, since he was alone, could not fulfill gods plan. we could say things like he was incomplete, inadaquate, incompetent, etc. he needed help. now before you see that help as an inferior position, please recognize that it is a simple statement of fact. man was incomplete, uncapable, inadaquate, he really did need help. so god made him a helper (eve) as a counterpart, one corresponding to him and his neediness in this alone state. one suitable for him, who would stand by his side and complete him for the task at hand. her role was to stand by her man and in so doing complete him. now, i do not see how you can insert any kind of notion of inferiority into that model. the man alone is incomplete, just as if the woman was alone she would be incomplete. the beauty of the plan is when you bring adam and eve together you form a team that is now capable of fulfilling the mission god has for them. this is still the model for marriage today, check out vs. 18-25 to see this. the point is when you put these two passages together you begin to see a clearer picture of god’s intent. he is not about subjugating women into inferior, repressive, enslaving roles. but he is into relationships where we (whether we be male or female) serve each other. this includes husbands and wives. he knows the greatest threat to any marriage is selfishness which could be defined as either partner insisting the other serve them. that is not a biblical model. the biblical model, (we will flesh this out with greater detail in the coming blogs), is when the wife utilizes all her giftedness to serve her husband just as the church serves christ. (as i said we will get to the role of the husband in the coming weeks and see his role is virtually the same being based on christ giving himself up for the church) i think we get too hung up on “authority” issues, and miss the functional reality of how god intends marriage to work. i do not serve christ because he bosses me around. i do not serve him out of obligation or duty. i serve him because he first loved and served me. he has invited me into relationship with him. in this relation he has already given me all he can give. i respond to all this by loving and serving him, and i see that as a privilidge. i see that as an opportunity to say to the one who so clearly loves me, that i love him back. this is how god wants marriage to work. it is unfortunate our modern translations use a word that so quickly distracts us from this model. i guess we’ll just have to get over it, because it really is a great recipe. i’ll build on this…maybe tomorrow. thanks for reading, give me some feedback. blessings. vince