Cheryl Schatz

NN,
Thanks for joining in the discussion so that we can work on clarification on this issue and a sense of unity in our love for the Lord Jesus and each other.

A few points are necessary to clarify the content of what I said and to point out that the logical demonstration which I described regarding a biblical understanding of gender roles in marriage was not even addressed by the above discussion.

My article was on the issues and context of Ephesians 5. I may write another article going into the other epistles but for this article my comments were long enough and the still emphasis on mutual submission must not be missed by moving on to another passage. We have to remember that the Scripture does not contradict itself and when Paul emphasized mutual submission, the other epistles will not contradict this to announce female and slave submission only.

The logical argument is straightforward (and not based primarily on Eph 5):
~Both Peter & Paul explicitly instruct wives to “hupotassoe” their husbands in several places in the epistles.

Your “logical” argument would hold water if you could prove that submission is limited within the marriage unit to wives alone and disallowed for men to practice. The problem that you would have in Ephesians 5 (which is what my article is specifically focusing on) is that submission in marriage and submission in our Christian faith is linked to one verb found only in the verse describing our mutual submission.

So the question begs to be answered – does God forbid men to submit to their wives in marriage? Emphasizing one half of the relationship does not qualify as a prohibition on husbands submitting to their wives.

The next question that begs to be answered – does God model humble submission as an example for all godly Christian husbands and does He desire that husbands go even beyond submission to the point of giving up their male “rights”?

If we see Jesus as the perfect example of husbandly love, the very first thing that we see Him doing in coming to earth is giving up His rights and His authority so that He can live for and die for His bride.

I think I will create a second article to deal with the other instances of submission in the epistles. Watch for it shortly as I get time to put together a new article.

~ This command [to submit] as given explicitly to the wife in the marital relationship, while the husband is not instructed in the same way [but rather to love the wife]. This gives clear indication of hierarchy within the marital relationship is given.

There is no clear “indication” of hierarchy. Is the command to love one’s spouse something given only to men? Obviously not. And the clear indication of mutual submission for all Christians cannot be exempting husbands unless that is explicitly stated. Where is there anyplace in the Scriptures that the apostles stated that husbands are disallowed from submitting to their wives as that would be against their “office” or “rights” as men or husbands? I find it amazing at how much we “read into” the text our own bias. Let’s work hard to unload our own bias so that we can see what the text actually says.

The commentary on Ephesians 5:21 is a secondary issue to the logical proof given above. It is simply meant to clarify the question of “if ‘hupotassoe’ means ‘submit’ then how can it be mutual and how can there be hierarchy within marriage when all christians are instructed to ‘submit’ to each other. The simple answer of course is that within a christian marriage there are at least two distinct aspects to the relationship involved: the people are both christians and they are husband/wife. As christians the relationship is governed by love [agapaoe] and this leads to mutual ‘submission’ however in the marital relationship a second type of love also exists [eros] which is not intrinsic to all christian relationships, and this type of love is naturally hierarchical as established by God.

First of all the establishment of marriage was set up in Genesis. Where is there a hierarchy set up there? I don’t see it at all. The statement that married eros love is “naturally hierarchical” is not supported by God’s Word in the Genesis account. It may be your desire to have hierarchy in your marriage, but it is another thing to claim that Scripture supports that hierarchy.

Secondly agape love transcends any other kind of love and so if there were a competing kind of love in a relationship it must be under agape love not forcing agape love under submission to a lesser love. Agape is God’s kind of love and it is the highest of all.

1 Corinthians 13:13 (NASB) But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love (agape).

Where is the proof that another kind of love will force agape love to be underneath and subordinate to a secondary kind of love? This is an interesting concept that you have come up with, but your proof is sorely lacking. Agape love is the highest love and is not under subjection to eros love.

Two loose ends that I particularly want to address:
– I did not say that the submission of the wife was the same as a master-slave relationship.

You did say that the instructions are the same for both wives and slaves and the same word used. If you are not saying that the submission of women is the same as submission of slaves then why did you link the two? What is the sameness that you are claiming?

This raises a question of why God didn’t say that if the marital relationship contains hierarchy. The answer is the same reason that God did not tell the wife “make sure your husband shows sacrificial love for you.” We are each told our own responsibilities, when we worry about this then the rest is for God to handle.

But the point that I was making is that God gave no “responsibility” for the man to take authority over his wife. We cannot claim a hierarchical right of authority to the man without God giving Him that authority. In fact no authority is legitimate unless God gives it out as a right so that no one can claim an authority for themself. My point still stands that God gave no right of authority of a husband over his wife. It matters not that God didn’t talk to her about His plan for authority of the man. It does matter whether He assigned that authority over the wife to the man. God did not do that so for anyone to claim an authority that has not been God-given is usurping what belongs to God alone.

But even in our daily lives it is plain just how much trouble arises when people are more concerned about how other people aren’t living up to their end of the bargain than in living up to their own responsibilities.

Sure, I can agree with that. But that doesn’t take away the fact that men have claimed something as belonging to them that does not. No man has been given a male-right of authority over a woman. God’s plan is that all should grow up to maturity and learn how to make decisions on their own. To place women under the authority of men would mean that God made women inferior in that they need an eternal supervisor to keep them from failing. This takes away from the place of the Holy Spirit who alone is needed to keep us on track and growing in the knowledge of the Truth.