6 gengwall,

I also agree with truthseeker that “unbelieving” may have a broader idea in mind, and that is of any husband whose behavior is “unscrupulous, unfair or dishonest”, whether he is a Christian or not.

I can heartily agree with this! There are many men who are saved but in essence they are not “obedient to the word”. For example men are called to initiate a sacrificial attitude (even all of us are to serve one another), but if the husband refuses to love his wife as Christ loves the church, she can refrain from responding to his lack of sacrificial love with a negative reaction. She can chose to model a proper Christian attitude and lead by example. This godly example may spur her husband onto a godly response and while he may fail to lead in a sacrificial love, he may get there through seeing her model a Christlike spirit.

You said:

So, when did Sarah “listen” to Abraham and treat him as a superior at a time he was behaving badly?

First of all Sarah called Abraham “lord” in her own mind as she thought about her inability to have a child. Secondly I do not believe that Christian submission means treating a person as a “superior”. After all we are all brothers in Christ and we are to treat each other as brothers. Treating one another as “superiors” seems to me to be against our unity in the brotherhood. Perhaps a better word would be “respect”. We can treat each other with “respect” without treating another as being a “superior”. The idea of superiority was got many in trouble as they divided over the lines between “clergy” and “laity”. This separates the sheep when we are to be brothers.

At no other time was Sarah MORE respectful and honoring when she had every right to be otherwise. It was in those circumstances where Sarah’s example is doubly meaningful where “unbelieving” husbands are concerned.

I agree. However I wonder if Sarah should have stood up to her husband in these times when he wanted to have her pass as his sister and it nearly got her married off to another man. It seems to me that Abraham at those times was walking in the fear of man more than the fear of God. But then who am I to judge? I am not living in the treacherous times as they did.

Sarah’s example alludes to the Proverbs 31 woman, who’s “value” or “praiseworthiness” is not wrapped up in outward looks and charm, but in her fear of God.

Amen!

The instructions to husbands have an eerie parallel to Malachi 2:13-17. Although many focus on “I hate divorce”, and rightly so, the other message in that section is that if you treat your wife poorly, if you do not honor her and “live with her in an understanding way”, your prayers will not be heard.

A double amen!!

I am not fond of the translation of “honor” in 1 Peter 3:7 because that English word is very closely related to “respect”… I would prefer “reverential” in vs. 2 and “cherish” or “value” or something along those lines in vs. 7.

The word used as “honor” in 1 Peter 3:7 is basically, the worth ascribed to a person or the value ascribed to a thing – Analytical lexicon of the Greek New Testament. In the active form it means honor, reverence, respect. It certainly could mean to cherish because of the value of a person. The respect in verse 2 means:
Fear, terror, reverence, respect, honor. Reverential would also be a good term for word in verse 2.

Verse 7, while being the only verse addressed to husbands, is still full of meaning. Most importantly, it completes obliterates any thought that male “rule” is somehow godly design.

Excellent thoughts!