gengwall

First – of course vs. 21 is mutual. It can’t be understood any other way, unless you add a whole lot to scripture that isn’t there…oops, Grudem seems to have done just that.

To assume that husbands don’t have to submit to their wives would lead to the parallel conclusion that wives don’t have to love their husbands. “What’s good for the goose….” Such a conclusion completely ignores Paul’s purpose – he is addressing gender related deficiencies or problems in marriage that have gender specific remedies in marriage. There is absolutely no justification in isolating Ephesians 5:22-24 from Ephesians 5:25-30, and vss. 31-33 make it intellectually impossible. It is all one passage and any “doctrine” applied to one part must be applied throughout. Moreover, it has a direct bridge to vs. 21 (even Grudem agrees that submission is only implied in vs.. 22 and 24) which summarizes a lengthy teaching on unity (not hierarchy) within the body.

Grudem ignores one other well documented fact. Paul loves to mess with Greek. He not only makes up new words but also deploys others in direct contrast to their conventional usage. His very application of hupotasso in vs. 21 defies conventional wisdom because, regardless of Grudem’s revisionism, no authority structure is present. (In fact, it hasn’t existed at all in relation to the body in the entirety of Ephesians leading up to this passage) As the same thought then leads directly into vs. 22, there is no reason to believe Paul doesn’t have the same non-authoritarian concept in mind when turning his attention to wives.

Again, the answer to Grudem’s question is staring him right in the face.