Kristen

Mark,
You said, “So if the original marriage was a foreshadow of Christ/Church, adn authority exists in the church/Christ relatioship, why ought we deny the human relationship is different.” By which I must assume you mean, “why ought we deny the human relationship is NO different,” because that it IS different, is what I am asserting.

To which I can only reply as I did before. Worship exists in the church/Christ relationship. Why ought we deny the human relationship is no different?
Eternal salvation exists in the church/Christ relationship. Why ought we deny the human relationship is no different?
Resurrection exists in the church/Christ relationship. Why ought we deny the human relationship is no different?

Which means that if we say a husband is to his wife, everything Christ is to the church, then we have the husband as his wife’s god, worthy of receiving her worship, able to save her and resurrect her from the dead.
This has to be as unacceptable to you as it is to me.
Therefore, we have to limit the analogy. The husband/wife relationship cannot have everything the church/Christ relationship has. The only question, then, is how we limit it.

Do we limit it according to our own preconceived notions? If authority has traditionally been assumed between husband and wife, therefore we can extrapolate that this is part of what Paul was talking about? How about the ability of Christ to discipline His church? If He can tell the church at Ephesus in Rev. 2:5 that unless she repents, He will come and take her lampstand from its place (note that in Rev. 1:20 the “lampstand” is identified as the church itself– so Christ is warning the church that she will cease to exist as one of His churches)– can the husband tell his wife how she has displeased him and how he is going to discipline her if she doesn’t repent? Can he tell her he will remove her as his wife unless she does his will?

I hope you will say no. I have seen complementarians who believe husbands have the power to discipline their wives– but there is nothing, anywhere in Scripture, that gives a husband such power. Between Christ and the church, though, such power certainly exists.

So– how far DO we take the church/Christ analogy? I for one absolutely refuse to worship my husband, look to him for salvation, or in any other way treat him as if he were Christ– not for one minute will I commit such a grievous sin!

I suggest we limit the church/Christ analogy to only those things that Paul mentions in the verses where he makes the analogy itself. The husband is said to be “head” in a head-body metaphor with the wife as Christ is in a head-body relationship with the church– and Christ as “head,” according to Eph. 4:15 and Col. 2:9, means the source of nourishment and life– it is a provisionary function. But the passage goes on to speak of Christ as Savior– and the comparison to the husband is not extended into this function. The husband is then told to “love” the wife as Christ loved the church when He “gave Himself” for her. Then it goes on to say that Christ sanctifies and cleanses and washes the church, and presents her to Himself– again, the comparison to the husband does not extend here. Then it says the husband should “nourish and cherish” the wife as his own body, just as the Lord does the church. But NOT ONCE does it say the husband should lead his wife as Christ leads the church, or that the husband should command his wife as Christ commands the church. Salvation and cleansing are at least mentioned– but only as being Christ’s job, not the husband’s. Authority isn’t mentioned in this passage at all.
When the Scriptures make a comparison like church/Christ to wife/husband, we must be careful, or we’ll end up idolaters. We must be careful to add nothing to what the passage actually says– not even authority.